[00:00:01]
SO PLEDGE OF, YEAH,[Work Session meeting on March 24, 2025]
I'M START WITH THE PLEDGE OF THE FLAG.THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS.
ONE NATION ON UNDER BEHALF INDIVISIBLE DISPR.
ALL RIGHT, CLERK, WANNA DO THE ROLL CODE? SORRY.
COUNCIL MEMBER C****R CLERK PRESENT.
COUNCIL MEMBER ALKI IS COUNCIL MEMBER BALKI.
UM, SO TODAY I HAVE HAND IN FRONT OF MY PRESENTATION.
I HAVE TWO THINGS MOST I'M GONNA FOCUS ON TO THESE FOR THE COMMUNITY CENTER.
AND THEN THERE ARE TWO APPROVAL RESOLUTION ON'S, BOARD MEETING THAT I WANT THE SESSION.
JUST COMFORTABLE HAVING THE VOTE ON THOSE, UH, WAS JUST DURING THE REGULAR MEETING.
UM, SO AS YOU GUYS KNOW, FOR THE TOWN COMMUNITY CENTER, WHICH IS PUBLIC NOW, UM, UH,
JUST FOR CLARIFICATION FOR LISTEN, WE WEREN'T A PART OF CHOOSING THE SITE OR ANY OF THE SPECIFICS OF IT.
WE HAVE JOINED ON JUST TO HELP WITH THE SEE AND HELPING THE TOWN BOARD GET THROUGH SEEKER AND PROVIDE OUR EXPERTISE WITH EVERYTHING THAT'S COME UP WITH ANY OF THE SECRET COMMENTS.
AS YOU GUYS KNOW, YOU AUTHORIZED ME TO DO A REVIEW, MEANING THAT I SENT OUT THE MATERIALS FOR THE COMMITTEE CENTER AND PART ONE TO INTERESTED IN INVOLVED AGENCIES, AND WE GOT COMMENTS FROM THREE AGENCIES IN THE 30 DAY WINDOW HAS NOW CLOSED.
SO I'M GIVING THIS UPDATE TO PROVIDE YOU GUYS ON THE COMMENTS THAT WE RECEIVED, UM, TO GET SOME NEXT STEPS ON REGARDING SECRET PROCESS AND THAT, UH, AS WELL.
UM, SO IN ORDER OF THE PACKAGE THAT I GAVE BEFORE, YOU SHOULD SEE, UM, ONE OF THE PAGES IS, UH, AN EMAIL MESSAGE FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION.
UH, WE SENT OUT THE REVIEW MORE SO AS A COURTESY LAKEVIEW ROAD WHERE CENTER GONNA GO, COUNTY ROAD, WE SENT IT COURTESY, UM, THEIR PROMISE THAT THEY LEAVE BACK OR THAT THEY CONCUR AGENCY, WHICH, WHICH BE EXPECTED.
UM, THEY ALSO, UH, PROVIDED INFORMATION SAYING THAT A HIGHWAY OR PERMIT IS NOT NEEDED FOR THE PROJECT STATE ROAD.
UM, THEY DID SAY THAT THEY WOULD LIKE, UH, AN BRIDGE TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY NEED BE ONCE AGAIN BECAUSE THE NOT APPLICABLE TO THIS PROJECT.
UM, SO WE HAVE NO CONCERN AND CONCERN, UM, ABOUT COMMENTS.
SO WERE, WERE FINE WITH THOSE COMMENTS.
UM, ANY QUESTIONS ON DOT'S, COMMENTS, IMPACT ON THE
SO WE DID SEND ACCOUNT, UH, THE COMMENTS TO, UH, ERIE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND THEIR DEPARTMENT OF WORKS, UH, UH, THE DEPARTMENT OF WORKS, AND WE DIDN'T GIVE ANY COMMENTS FROM THEMING.
SO IF YOU, IF THIS BOARD FEELS LIKE IT'S WORTH WORTHWHILE TO HAVE MATT GO OUT THERE AND TALK TO THEM, UH, YOU CAN DO SO.
UM, IN MY OPINION, ANY DIFFERENT, YOU DON'T HAVE ANY STRONG FEELINGS ABOUT REACHING OUT ABOUT, UM, BUT IF, AND IT WOULD ALWAYS BE AN OPTION IN THE FUTURE AS WELL, IF YOU FOUND ONCE YOU HAD THE COMMUNITY CENTER THERE AND TRAFFIC WAS COMING IN AND OUT.
I KNOW I'VE GONE TO THE SITE MULTIPLE TIMES AND LAKEVIEW IS IS USUALLY MOSTLY EMPTY.
VERY EASY TO NAVIGATE THAT TURN.
IT'S A VERY WIDE DRIVEWAY WHEN YOU TURN IN, IT'S VERY EASY TO COME IN AND OUT.
UM, SO I WOULD, YOU KNOW, MAYBE DO IT AS PART OF LIKE RESIDENT INTEREST AND ONCE YOU SEE HOW MUCH TRAFFIC YOU REALLY EXPERIENCE AT A SITE, IT MAY BE SOMETHING WE HAVE A GREATER APPRECIATION FOR TOO ONCE WE HAVE CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC THERE.
IT COUPLED WITH REGULAR ACTIVITY TRAFFIC, IT MAY GIVE US A SENSE AS TO WHAT THE COMMUNITY IMPACT MAY BE.
AND THERE'S DEFINITELY SEASONAL CONSIDERATIONS.
WITH THE DIFFERENT ACTIVITIES THERE, DEPENDING ON WHAT IS BEING USED IN THE SUMMER VERSUS A BUSY TIME WHEN THE ICE CREAM IS VERY ACTIVE, YOU KNOW, IT FLUCTUATES A GREAT DEAL.
SO, OR IF THE SOCCER FIELDS ARE ACTIVE, WE MIGHT GET A DIFFERENT, AND I BELIEVE THE SPEED LIMIT REDUCTION DOESN'T GENERALLY TAKE TOO LONG TO FLIP THROUGH.
SO WE HAVE SOME TIME TO THINK ABOUT IT, BUT IT'S A GOOD CONSIDERATION, DAN.
SO THE, THE NEXT COMMENTS THAT I WANT TO TALK ABOUT ARE
[00:05:01]
THE UH, STATEMENT AT THE TIME.SO THESE ARE THE OFFICIAL THAT WE RECEIVED FROM COUNTY DEPARTMENT PLANNING.
UM, SO JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, THIS WAS NOT A 2 39 ADMIR REFERRAL.
SO WHEN WE SEND OUT A TWO NINE ADMIR REFERRAL, WE'RE ASKING THE COMMENT FROM COUNTY PERSPECTIVE, FROM A REGIONAL PERSPECTIVE.
WE SENT OUT THESE MATERIALS AS A SECRET COORDINATING REVIEW.
SO WE WERE ASKING THE COMMENT SPECIFICALLY ON, UM, AND THE COMMENT THAT WE GOT BACK FROM THE COUNTY, AS I'M SURE YOU ALL HAVE READ, THAT THEY ASKED FOR THE TOWN TO CONSIDER A MORE CENTRAL CONNECTED AREA, BASICALLY ASKING FOR IF THE TOWN HAD LOOKED AT ANY OTHER AREAS WHERE COMMUNITY CENTER BE LOCATED, UM, AND OUR OPINION THAT TOWN.
UM, WE DO WOULD RECOMMEND THAT THE TOWN DO PROVIDE SOME SORT OF A RESPONSE TO THE COUNTY, NOTHING OR ANYTHING WHAT HAPPENED SAYING THAT THE DID DUE DILIGENCE THAT THE TOWN CONSIDERED A NUMBER OF LOCATION CENTER WHERE IT'S FOR X, Y, AND Z REASON, JUST PROVIDE THAT TO THE COUNTY JUST SO THAT THEY HAVE AN UNDERSTANDING OF WHY LOCATION A LIST, THERE'S A LIST OF THEM.
AND JOSH, IS THAT SOMETHING THAT YOU AND CAMMY COULD PREPARE AND THEN SUBMIT? IT WOULD PROBABLY COME FROM THE, THE SUPERVISOR THEN, BECAUSE I KNOW, UM, CAMMY ESPECIALLY WAS INTIMATELY INVOLVED THROUGHOUT THE WHOLE PROCESS AND WAS A KEY PART OF OUR ASSESSING NUMEROUS, UM, EXISTING FACILITIES AND LAND OPPORTUNITIES OR AVAILABILITY THROUGHOUT THE TOWN.
SO I THINK IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE FOR BOTH OF YOU TO PREPARE THAT FOR THE SUPERVISOR ON BEHALF OF THE TOWN BOARD TO SUBMIT TO THE COUNTY.
AND THEN LIKE I SAID IN THE, IN THE OPINION OF TOWN, UM, MORE COME FROM REGIONAL STANDPOINT.
SO I, YOU KNOW, BUT ALSO REMIND THAT, YOU KNOW, TOWN FOLKS GOT THE LOCATION FOR NUMBER REASONS.
I DO HAVE TO SAY IMMEDIATELY UPON RECEIVING THE LETTER IT WAS DEFINITELY OUT OF CHARACTER FOR WHAT I'VE SEEN FOR SEEKER LETTERS IN MY EXPERIENCE OVER THE PAST SIX OR SEVEN YEARS LOOKING IN SECRET LETTERS PRETTY IN DEPTH.
SO IT'S DEFINITELY OUTSIDE THE NORMAL SCOPE AND THE THINGS THAT WE WOULD BE LOOKING FOR THEIR INSIGHT AND I DO APPRECIATE ANY INSIGHT ON THE ACTUAL SEEKER PROCESS.
BUT YEAH, I APPRECIATE CAMMY IF YOU COULD CLUE THEM IN THAT START A A LETTER.
YEAH, I MEAN ONE OF THE BIGGEST THINGS, AND I DON'T EVEN KNOW IF I ALL OF IT, BUT I'M AWARE OF MULTIPLE THINGS THAT WERE LOOK AT MULTIPLE LOCATIONS, MULTIPLE PIECES OF PROPERTY
NO, THERE WAS A LOT OF DIFFERENT THINGS.
SO THAT'S, DON'T CAREFULLY CHOOSE WHAT WE SHOULD AND ENOUGH TO SHOW THAT THE, I THINK THAT SUFFICES RIGHT? AND ONE OF THE FACILITIES IS JUST BIG ENOUGH MEETINGS AND SITE VISITS AND EVERYTHING THAT WENT WITH IT WORKED WITH THE REAL ESTATE AGENT, RIGHT? THAT MADE OTHER SUGGESTIONS, MADE OTHER INQUIRIES TO SOME OF THE LARGER AVAILABLE PROPERTIES AND JUST, YOU KNOW, ALL THE FACTORS THAT CAME IN TO DECIDE.
IT DEFINITELY WAS NOT A DECISION THAT THE BOARD CAME TO LIGHTLY OF LET'S JUST PICK THIS, IT WAS AN EXHAUSTIVE SEARCH SINCE THAT'S NOT SECRET, IT'S NOT LIKE WE INCLUDED THAT KIND OF INFORMATION IN THE SECRET DISTRIBUTION.
THE COORDINATED REVIEW DIDN'T INCLUDE THE HISTORY OF ALL THE SITES.
THE TOWN LOOKED AT IT, IT WAS ABOUT THE PROJECT SPECIFICALLY.
IT, YEAH, THE LETTER DEFINITELY RANG OF A LITTLE BIT MORE OF THEIR PERSONAL OPINION AND DEFINITELY OUTSIDE THE SCOPE OF SEEKER, WHICH COMPLICATES EVERYTHING FOR US OF REALLY TRYING TO MAKE SURE WE'RE DOING RIGHT.
WELL, AND THEN DOCUMENT, WELL ESPECIALLY DOCUMENT THAT WE DID, DIDN'T JUST TAKE THEIR COMMENT AND THEM, WE PROVIDED THEM WITH AN UNDERSTANDING.
WE'RE IT ON TOWN OWNED PROPERTY, YOU KNOW, I MEAN THAT'S, THAT'S KEY RIGHT THERE.
SO WHAT DO YOU SAVING A MILLION DOLLARS FROM THE, YOU KNOW, FROM THE BEGINNING, YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S SHOVEL READY, YOU KNOW.
LAST WE, UH, A LETTER AT THE TOP DEPARTMENT ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION.
SO WE GOT A LETTER FROM DC, UM, WITH THIS COMMENT LETTER.
UM, BECAUSE OF THE WETLAND REGULATIONS OR STATE CHANGE AS FIRST OF THIS YEAR, WHAT WE'VE BEEN SEEING, NOT ONLY HERE PLANNER, BUT ANOTHER WORK WE MUNICIPALITIES IS THAT, UM, THESE C HAS SET OUT SOME STANDARD LANGUAGE THAT THEY PUT IN ALMOST EVERY LETTER WHERE THEY CONSIDER AN AREA TO HAVE WETLANDS OR THEY CAN ADJACENT TO WETLANDS OR THEY THERE MAY BE AN IMPACT ON WETLANDS.
SO FOR THIS PROJECT, UH, THEY SET OUT A LETTER, SEE NUMBER ONE SAID, KIND OF DESCRIBE THOSE WETLAND REGULATIONS THIS YEAR.
UM, WE HAVE KIND OF COME UP AND KIND OF EXPLAIN WHAT WE'RE LOOKING TO DO IN TERMS OF
[00:10:01]
HOW WE'RE GONNA ADDRESS THIS COMMENT.BUT WHAT WE'RE GONNA DO ABOUT, SO, UM, BOTH MYSELF, JOSH, UH, TOWN STAFF EVEN HAVE SAT IN ON THESE TRAINING SESSIONS THAT THE, UH, DEC HAS BROUGHT ABOUT THE NEW WETLANDS REGULATIONS AND UM, THEY'RE CONVOLUTED AND CONFUSING IN A GREAT DEAL OF WAYS.
BUT WE HAVE BOILED IT DOWN TO A SORT OF, TO TWO OF A FEW ITEMS. FIRST OF ALL, THE MUNICIPALITY SHOULD LOOK AT A SITE AND JUST SEE IF, LIKE BASED ON CURRENT INFORMATION, IF THERE'S ANY POTENTIAL FOR WETLAND.
SO THE DEC HAS UPDATED THEIR MAPPING TO WHAT THEY CALL INFORMATIONAL WETLAND, POTENTIAL WETLAND AREA.
AND WE HAVE BEEN TOLD NOT TO TAKE THOSE AS GOSPEL.
WE HAVE BEEN TOLD THAT IS VERY GENERAL, BUT IT HAS LARGELY INCREASED THE AREA THAT IS FOR CONSIDERATION.
SO THE FIRST THING YOU WOULD DO IS SORT OF JUST LOOK AT THE SITE AND AVAILABLE DATA AND HISTORY OF THE SITE AND SAY, IS THERE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR WETLAND THERE? AND YOU CAN BASE THE DECISION BASED ON THAT.
YOU CAN ALSO HAVE A WETLAND EXPERT, YOU JUST A WALKTHROUGH, PROVIDE YOU A LETTER THAT STATES IN THEIR MORE EXPERT OPINION, DO THEY THINK THAT THERE'S A CHANCE FOR WE MASKS THE NEXT STEP, WHICH INVOLVES THE DEC IS ASKING THEM FOR JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION.
SO THEY WOULD DO THAT SAME KIND OF REVIEW, LOOK AT AVAILABLE MAPPING, LOOK AT AVAILABLE INFORMATION ON THE SITE AND MAKE A DETERMINATION.
THE ISSUE WITH THAT IS THAT IT ALLOWS THEM 90 DAYS CHECK.
OKAY? IT ALLOWS THE DEC 90 DAYS TO REVIEW THAT JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND THEY ARE INUNDATED AND THAT'S PROBABLY NOT EVEN A STRONG ENOUGH WORD TO EXPLAIN HOW MANY REQUESTS FOR THESE JDS THEY HAVE RECEIVED SINCE JANUARY 1ST BECAUSE MOST SITES AREN'T SURE WHAT TO DO.
SO THEY'VE ALL PUT IN FOR THIS JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION.
SO WE HAVE A FEW THOUGHTS ON THIS.
UH, THROUGH OUR DESIGN ENGINEER CARMINA WOODS, THEY HAVE, UH, AGREED TO PROVIDE A WETLANDS EXPERT TO DO A BASIC WALKTHROUGH.
UH, THEY HAVE SAID THAT THE COST IS GOING TO BE BETWEEN A THOUSAND TO $1,500 TO GET A PROFESSIONAL LETTER FROM A WETLANDS EXPERT WHO WILL STATE WHAT THEY THINK OF THE SITE AND IF THEY THINK THERE IS A CHANCE OF WETLANDS IN THE MEANTIME, WE ARE SUGGESTING TO PUT IN FOR THAT JUST JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION.
WE DON'T BELIEVE IT WILL SLOW DOWN, WE SHOULDN'T STOP ANY PROGRESS ON THE PROJECT BECAUSE THE SIMPLE FACT IS THESE ARE LACROSSE FIELDS.
THESE HAVE BEEN DISTURBED, THESE HAVE BEEN PLAYED ON.
I WOULD BE SHOCKED IN MY PROFESSIONAL OPINION HAVING WORKED WITH WETLANDS EXPERT BUT NOT BEING ONE.
I WOULD BE SHOCKED IF SOMEONE COULD FIND A WETLAND ON THE LACROSSE FIELD.
AND THERE'S BASICALLY THREE FACTORS THAT THEY LOOK FOR, TYPE OF SOIL, WATER, AND PLANT LIFE.
THERE IS VERY LITTLE WATER ON THESE.
THE PLANT LIFE IS LAWN AND CRAFTS AND THE SOILS WOULD BE THE ONLY QUESTION IF UNDERNEATH THE FIELDS IT HAD THE PERFECT SOILS TO CREATE A WETLANDS AND SOMEHOW, SOMEHOW PRODUCE THAT.
THERE IS A TINIEST SHOT AT EVER THERE EVER BEING WETLANDS DETERMINED ON THESE LACROSSE FIELDS.
SO FROM MY OPINION, YOU'RE GOING TO GET A WETLAND EXPERT WHO'S GONNA WALK THE SITE AND CLEARLY GIVE YOU A LETTER THAT SAYS THERE ARE NO WETLANDS ON THIS PROPERTY.
WHEN, WHEN THEY DID THE SOIL SAMPLE FOR THE UM, SEPTIC, WOULD THAT HAVE DETERMINED ANYTHING OF THAT NATURE OR ARE THEY JUST LOOKING FOR CONTAMINATION? UM, I'D HAVE TO LOOK AND SEE WHAT THEY, THEY PULLED FROM THAT.
UM, SOIL BORINGS ARE SOMETIMES A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT THAN CATEGORIZING IT FOR AS HYDRO SOILS AND WETLAND SOILS.
I KNOW YOU TOUCHED ON IT A LITTLE BIT WHEN WE WERE LOOKING AT THE HILBERT SITE AND THE CHANGES.
SO WE WANNA DO OUR DUE DILIGENCE.
SO OUR RECOMMENDATION IS TO HAVE A WETLAND EXPERT GIVE YOU AN OFFICIAL LETTER PUT IN FOR THE JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FROM THE DEC, BUT TO CONTINUE WITH THE PROJECT AS YOU ARE GOING AND NOT WAIT FOR THEIR DETERMINATION.
BECAUSE THE TRUTH IS YOU WILL PROBABLY GET IT ON DAY 89 OR 90 BECAUSE THEY ARE SO SWAMPED WITH REQUESTS AND WE REALLY BELIEVE IT WILL COME UP CLEAR.
IS THAT SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE, UH, A RE UH, A VOTE ON THE BOARD OR CAN WE JUST YEAH, IT'S A RESOLUTION STATE.
WELL, THAT'S WHAT I MEANT, LIKE VOTING ON OR OR CAN WE JUST SAY, SUBMIT THE PROJECT FOR I DON'T SUBMIT SOMETHING.
UM, IT'S LITERALLY JUST IT SITE PLAN.
UM, IT GOES INTO THEIR QUEUE AND THEN UH, THEY SEND AN EMAIL WITH THEIR RESPONSE.
AS FAR AS THE COST, DAN, AS YOU WERE REFERRING TO THE COST, THE COST IS INCLUDED IN THE RESOLUTION.
AND FOR THE BOARD IS A RESOLUTION TO ADD TO CARMINA WOODS TWO ITEMS. ONE BEING THE WETLAND EXPERT AND
[00:15:01]
TWO BEING THE DETAILED COST ESTIMATE, UM, PREPARED BY A THIRD PARTY EXPERT TO BE SURE THAT WE HAVE A FULL SCALE OF THE CONSTRUCTION COST WE'RE LOOKING AT FOR THE COMMUNITY CENTER AS A WHOLE.'CAUSE IT IS A VERY LARGE PROJECT AND WE FEEL LIKE GOING FORWARD THE TOWN NEEDS A CLEARER NUMBER ON THAT.
UM, BUT THEN PART OF THAT IS ALSO THE WETLAND EXPERT.
ARE THEY GONNA DO LIKE THE WHOLE AREA, SO IF WE PUT ANOTHER FACILITY ONTO THIS ONE THAT WE DON'T HAVE TO COME BACK AND GO THROUGH THIS AGAIN? NO, THIS IS SITE SPECIFIC, RIGHT? I BELIEVE IT WAS SITE SPECIFIC SPECIFIC, BUT LET ME, YOU KNOW, SEE HOW FAR WE CONSTRUC DEVELOP, RIGHT? BECAUSE IF WE'RE GONNA ADD A FIELD HOUSE ON TODAY, I'M NOT SO SURE THAT THAT'S THE BEST APPROACH SPECIFICALLY IN RELATION TO THE HISTORY THERE.
BEFORE THERE WERE SOME WETLANDS AT A LOCATION.
BUT WETLANDS CAN CHANGE OVER TIME AND ALL KINDS OF THINGS.
AND WE WERE UNDER I WHICH OUT, SO I THINK MAYBE WE'LL STICK TO THE PROJECT.
WITHIN THE REASONABLE MARGIN IN CASE WE GO 10 FEET IN ONE DIRECTION OR ANOTHER, BUT NOT, NOT GOING OUTSIDE OF THAT.
WELL, WELL, BECAUSE IF IT IS DECLARED WETLANDS, YOU HAVE TO HAVE THAT A HUNDRED FOOT BUFFER, RIGHT? YES.
JUST TO BE CLEAR, THERE STILL ARE FEDERAL EQUIPMENTS, ALTHOUGH THE, THE, THE STATE WETLAND WAS GONNA BE BEHIND MY HOUSE.
SO IN, IN CONCLUSION, UH, WHAT WE'RE, WHAT I'M LOOKING FOR IS JUST AUTHORIZATION FROM THIS BOARD TO THEN SUBMIT THAT DESKTOP REVIEW FOR DEC.
UM, AND THEN GOING FORWARD IN TERMS OF NEXT STEPS FOR SEEKER, THE 30 DAY WINDOW HAS CLOSED FOR COMMENTS FROM DIFFERENT AGENCIES.
UM, WITH YOUR GUYS' BLESSING, WE WILL DO A PART TWO, PART THREE AND AN EXTEND, UH, EXPEND EXPANDED PART THREE, UM, THAT GOES OVER ALL THE SEEKER IMPACTS.
AND THEN WE WILL PRESENT THAT AT, UH, FUTURE TOWN BOARD WORK SESSION FOR THEN, UH, WITH YOUR BLESSING, UH, APPROVAL OF SEEKER, UM, AT A FUTURE TOWN BOARD MEETING.
AND THEN AS WE'RE GOING THROUGH THE WETLANDS THINGS AND EVERYTHING, WE CAN KIND OF UPDATE YOU WHERE WE ARE AND YOU CAN LET ME KNOW WHAT WHAT TOWN BOARD MEETING WORKS BEST FOR THIS BOARD AND WE'LL HAVE IT PREPARED BY THEM.
SO THAT WAS, THAT WAS THE, THE COMMUNITY CENTER ASPECT.
UM, THE LAST, UH, PORTION THAT I HAVE FOR YOU GUYS, YOU SHOULD SEE A INMATE OR A PIECE OF PAPER WITH A, A SITE PLAN ON IT PREPARED BY CARMINA WOOD DESIGN.
UM, ON TONIGHT'S UH, TOWN BOARD MEETING, UH, THERE ARE TWO RESOLUTIONS.
ONE FOR SEEKER AND ONE FOR APPROVAL OF A REZONING FOR A PROJECT AT ZERO RILEY BOULEVARD.
UH, THAT'S LOOKING TO GO FROM C TWO TO ME ONE.
UM, IF YOU GUYS RECALL, YOU'VE SEEN THIS OVER, UH, DECEMBER AND A COUPLE MEETINGS IN JANUARY.
WE'VE ALREADY HELD OPEN AND CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS PROJECT.
JUST AS A REMINDER, THIS PROJECT IS AT A 0.79 ACRE PARCEL AT RILEY BOULEVARD ON THE BEND AT RILEY BOULEVARD.
UM, THE APPLICANT IS LOOKING TO DO PRIMARILY A GYM WITH FITNESS FACILITIES AND TO HAVE FOUR APARTMENT UNITS ABOVE, WHICH IS WHY HE NEEDS THE ME ONE ZONING DESIGNATION.
UM, WE DIDN'T RECEIVE ANY NEGATIVE COMMENTS FROM ANY AGENCIES WHEN WE DID THE COORDINATED REVIEW AND WE DIDN'T RECEIVE ANY NEGATIVE COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC WHEN WE HAD THE PUBLIC HEARING.
UM, SO WE'RE, WE'RE PREPARED NOW TO, TO GO OVER THOSE, UH, APPROVAL AND SGA RESOLUTIONS TONIGHT.
UM, AND I JUST WANTED TO TAKE THE TIME TO GO OVER THE WORK SESSION TO SEE IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT IT.
UM, IN THE APPROVAL RESOLUTION IN THE, THE TOWN BOARD, UH, RESOLUTION THAT YOU'LL SEE IS THAT ONE OF THE BIG THINGS IS THAT TYPICALLY IN THE MU ONE ZONING DESIGNATION, UH, THERE'S EXPRESSLY NO PARKING, UH, ALLOWED, UH, IN THE FRONT.
AND AS YOU CAN SEE ON THE SITE PLAN, THERE'S PARKING IN THE FRONT AND THEN THE BUILDING IS IN THE BACK.
WHAT WE HAVE IS A CONDITION ON THE TOWN BOARD RESOLUTION TONIGHT IS FOR, UH, THE TOWN BOARD HAS THE AUTHORITY TO WAIVE AND MODIFY, UH, REGULATIONS WITHIN DIFFERENT ZONING DISTRICTS.
AND WE HAVE A CONDITION THAT THIS TOWN BOARD WOULD WAIVE THAT, UH, REQUIREMENT OF PARKING IN THE FRONT BECAUSE, UH, IF YOU LOOK AT THIS BUILDING, IF YOU WERE TO BRING THE BUILDING UP TO THIS BEND AND HAVING PARKING IN THE FRONT, THAT WOULD CREATE A SEVERE TRAFFIC AND HAZARD AND ISSUE OF PEOPLE ARE DRIVING BY THIS BEND AND SEE THE BUILDING IN THE FRONT AND PARKING'S ALL IN THE BACK.
THAT WOULD, ESPECIALLY ON A BEND AND A CORNER LIKE THIS, THAT CREATES SUCH A SAFETY HAZARD.
SO IT ONLY MAKES SENSE TO HAVE THE PARKING IN THE FRONT AND HAVING THE, THE BUILDING IN THE BACK JUST SO THAT PEOPLE ARE ABLE TO SEE, UM, AS THEY'RE ROUNDING THAT BEND.
AND THAT'S A CONDITION THAT WE HAVE ON THIS TOWN BOARD APPROVAL RESOLUTION THAT THIS BOARD WAVES THAT REQUIREMENT OF THE ME ONE TO HAVE PARKING IN THE FRONT, UM, FOR OUR SAFETY HAZARD.
AND YOU'LL SEE THAT, THAT LANGUAGE IN THERE, UM, DURING THE APPROVAL RESOLUTION.
OTHER THAN THAT, WE HAVE OUR STANDARD, UH, CONDITIONS ON THERE, DARK SCAR COMPLIANT LIGHTING, UM, THEY'LL COMPLY WITH ANY TYPE OF DEC STANDARDS.
UM, SO I JUST WANT TO PRESENT THAT FOR YOU BEFORE YOU VOTE AND TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU'RE UP TO SPEED ON IT AND ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS, UH, BEFORE YOU TAKE A VOTE ON THAT LATER TONIGHT.
[00:20:01]
THE FRONT MAKES PERFECT SENSE, ESPECIALLY FOR THAT LOCATION.RIGHT? AND WITH THAT, THAT'S, UH, THAT'S ALL I GOT.
OKAY, WE NEED A, A MOTION TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION.
GOT ONE MORE WHERE? TOMMY VOLPE, TOM VOLPE.
UM, WE'RE SEARCHING FOR CLARIFYING LANGUAGE FOR AN AMENDMENT TO A RESOLUTION FROM FEBRUARY 5TH.
UH, IT WAS FROM QUARTER CORNER OF ABBOTT AND MILES REZONE FROM R TWO TO C ONE IN THE USE IS NOT PERMITTED.
UH, AND AS WE STARTED WITH THE SHOP THAT'S FOR A TENANT, WE'VE KIND OF BEEN STRATEGIZING INTERNALLY SAYING, OKAY, WHAT DOES THAT DRIVE THROUGH MEAN? WE AGREE THAT HAVING LIKE A, A RESTAURANT DRIVE THROUGH OR A COFFEE SHOP DRIVE THROUGH WOULD BE A BIT OF A, A TRAFFIC NIGHTMARE THERE.
UM, BUT WE WANTED TO EXPLORE ALLOWANCE FOR LIKE A BANK DRIVE UP ATT M OR ALLOWING, ALLOWING US TO DRIVE LANE FOR PICK UP, DROP OFF, STUFF LIKE THAT.
SO WE WE'RE LOOKING TO GO THROUGH THAT PROCESS, LOOKING TO HEAR ANY COMMENTS.
I THOUGHT WHEN WE, AT THE TIME, UM, AND I'LL DEFER TO OUR PLANNING CONSULTANTS, BOTH JOSH AND DREW, I THOUGHT THAT WE ACTUALLY HAD DISCUSSED THIS AT THE TIME AND THAT WAS PART OF IT THAT WE WERE NOT INTERESTED IN AND THAT'S WHY IT SAYS NO DRIVE THROUGHS.
SO JUST TO GIVE A LITTLE BIT OF HISTORY, THIS REZONING WAS DONE END OF 2023 AND IT WENT TO THE PLANNING BOARD FOR RECOMMENDATION AND WHICH WAS THEN GIVEN BACK TO THE TOWN BOARD AND THEN THE PLANNING BOARD'S RECOMMENDATION AT THAT TIME, UM, THEY LISTED USES THAT THEY FELT SHOULD NOT BE PERMITTED AND ONE OF THE USES SAYS DRIVE-THROUGHS, ALCOHOL SALES, OUTDOOR STORAGE DRIVE, CLEANING FACILITIES, HOTELS AND MOTELS.
WE DIDN'T SPECIFY DRIVE THROUGH, WE JUST PUT DRIVE-THROUGHS.
TYPICALLY WHEN WE JUST SAY DRIVE-THROUGHS, WE'RE INCORPORATING ALL DRIVE-THROUGHS.
UM, BUT BECAUSE OF THE UNIQUENESS OF THIS SITE, ONE THING THAT THIS BOARD CAN CONSIDER IF, IF YOU WANT TO, IS THAT THERE IS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN DRIVE THROUGH RESTAURANTS AND DRIVE THROUGH BANKS OR DRIVE UP ATMS. SO IN THE REZONING REPORT ITSELF FROM THE PLANNING BOARD AND WHAT THIS TOWN BOARD APPROVED IN THE REZONING, IT DOES SAY NO DRIVE THROUGHS.
UM, BUT IT'S UP TO THIS, IT'S UP TO THIS BOARD.
IF IF, YOU KNOW, IF YOU THINK AN ATM OR A DRIVE THROUGH BANK MAKES SENSE IN THIS, IN THIS AREA OF THE TOWN OR AT HIS PARCEL, THEN WE CAN, WE CAN AMEND THE REZONING.
BUT IT DOES SAY NO DRIVE THROUGHS FROM THE PLANNING BOARD AND FROM FROM THE TOWN WHERE IT JUST WASN'T SPECIFIED BANKS VERSUS RESTAURANTS VERSUS DRIVE THROUGH OF ATMS BECAUSE I DON'T THINK ANYONE HAD A THOUGHT AT THE TIME OF A DRIVE THROUGH BANK.
I THINK IT JUST GOING FROM MY, MY CONCERN WITH DOING A DRIVE THROUGH AT TM IS WONDERING WE EVENTUALLY REPURPOSED THE PROPERTY IF THE BANK DOES NOT STAY THERE.
THEY DO BECOME DRIVE THROUGH FOOD AND THAT WAS THE NO DRIVE THROUGH WAS IN RESPONSE TO SIGNIFICANT NEIGHBOR CONCERN ABOUT REZONING.
AND THAT WAS ONE OF THE CONCESSIONS THAT WAS MADE IS WE WOULD BE OKAY WITH THE REZONING, BUT WE WERE GOING TO RESPECT THE NEIGHBOR'S OPINION THAT THEY DID NOT WANT THAT IN THAT AREA.
UM, THAT AND THE ALCOHOL YEAH.
WAS THE OTHER NEIGHBORHOOD CONCERN.
AND SO I, I HAVE SOME HESITATION ABOUT GOING ALONG WITH A DRIVE THROUGH JUST BECAUSE IT MAY START AS A BANK DRIVE THROUGH AND THEN A YEAR FROM NOW BECOME A MIGHTY TACO DRIVE THROUGH.
NOT THAT WE DON'T LOVE MIGHTY TACO, BUT THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT THE NEIGHBORS ASKED US NOT TO PUT THERE.
NO, I UNDERSTAND COMPLETELY IS THERE'S SOMETHING WE CAN PUT IN THE RESOLUTION THAT, SORRY, THAT WILL DISALLOW THAT THAT FUTURE USE OF, WELL IT SAYS NO DRIVE THROUGHS OF FOOD, RIGHT? I THINK THE THE IDEA TOO IS THAT A DRIVE THROUGH ALLOWS ACCESS TO THE BUSINESS AT EXTENDED WHAT WOULD BE TYPICAL BEYOND WHAT WOULD BE TYPICAL BUSINESS HOURS.
AND AGAIN, IT GOES BACK TO THAT CONSIDERATION OF THE NEIGHBORS, THAT THIS WAS EVERYTHING THAT WAS DONE.
THERE WAS A BALANCING ACT OF BEING THE RESPECT FOR THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS AND WHAT COULD GO THERE.
SO THE CONCERN IS THAT ANY TYPE OF DRIVE THROUGH, UM, YOU KNOW, BRINGS IN A LEVEL OF ACCESS TO THE AREA AT TIMES THAT A TYPICAL BUSINESS WOULDN'T EVEN NECESSARILY BE OPEN.
AND THAT, UH, OUR CONCERN WOULD BE FOR THE NEIGHBORS NEIGHBORING AREAS.
IT WAS ORIGINALLY ZONED RESIDENTIAL, WASN'T IT, JOSH? YEAH.
SO JUST WITH THE COMBINATION OF LOTS.
SO I THINK GETTING A ZONING OTHER THAN RESIDENTIAL, YOU HAVE A PLETHORA OF USES.
IT MAY NOT BE THE USE YOU WANT RIGHT NOW, BUT I'M HESITANT TO PUT DRIVE THROUGH IT.
SO IS THERE ANYTHING WE CAN DO TO CLARIFY JUST FOR THE DRIVE UP? JUST HAD A QUESTION.
UM, SO I GUESS THE WAY THAT YOU PHRASED THE QUESTION, UM, YOU PHRASED IT IN WHAT I WOULD CONSIDER TO BE A HYPOTHETICAL.
YOU'RE SAYING, UM, I DON'T KNOW, YOU SAID LIKE A BANK, ATM OR LIKE A DROP OFF.
SO I THINK I'M TRYING TO KEEP AN OPEN MIND
[00:25:01]
ON IT.UM, BUT IT WOULD BE HELPFUL IF FOR EXAMPLE, WE KNEW, I KNOW ONE OF THE BOARD MEMBERS SAID TACO BELL OR MIGHTY TACO DON'T WANT THAT, BUT DO YOU HAVE SOMETHING IN MIND AS FAR AS A TENANT THAT YOU'VE TALKED TO SOMEONE MEAN, WHY, WHY ARE YOU COMING TO US? LIKE, WHAT IS IT THAT YOU REALLY WANT? WE, WE DON'T, WE DON'T HAVE A TENANT IN MIND.
THE ONLY REASON IS BECAUSE WE'RE, WE'RE BEGINNING TO SHOP IT AROUND.
THERE'S INTEREST FROM BANKS, THERE'S INTEREST FROM OTHER TENANTS.
SO WE FIGURED WE WOULD TRY AND GET IN FRONT OF IT RATHER THAN KIND OF GET DOWN THE ROAD OF OH, SOMEONE'S QUITE INTERESTED, THEN THEY HAVE TO COME IN IN FRONT OF HERE AND DEAL WITH IT.
SO MAYBE WE COULD GET THAT USE OF PROOF.
LIKE I SAID, WE AGREE THAT A MIGHTY TACO SHOULDN'T BE THERE RIGHT.
BUT FOR, FOR THE TRAFFIC NIGHTMARE.
BUT YOU KNOW, IN THE INSTANCE OF A BANK, YOU UNION HAVE ONE OR TWO CARS COMING THROUGH, RIGHT? BUT THERE ARE PAST THE BUSINESS HOURS AND BANKS THAT HAVE CLOSED THAT THEN BECOME FAST FOOD ESTABLISHMENTS BECAUSE THEY ALREADY HAVE THE DRIVE THROUGH FEATURE THERE.
AND THAT'S MY CONCERN IS WE'RE BUILDING SOMETHING THAT WE'RE GIVING THE INITIAL OWNER, OKAY, WE'LL LET YOU DO THIS, BUT THEN THE NEXT ONE THAT COMES IN WE'RE THEN SAYING, BUT NO, YOU CAN'T HAVE IT.
SO I WOULD RATHER JUST BE CONSISTENT AND STICK WITH THE CONCESSIONS.
THE THINGS THAT WERE PUT IN PLACE IS STIPULATIONS BECAUSE IT WAS, THE NEIGHBORS AGREED TO THE REZONING AND THEY WERE OKAY WITH IT GOING FROM RESIDENTIAL TO COMMERCIAL.
IF WE COULD MAKE THEM THESE FEW CONCESSIONS AND I THOUGHT THEY WERE REASONABLE, ESPECIALLY CONSIDERING IT WAS RESIDENTIAL.
IF WE TO EXPLORE A USE OF, OF JUST ALLOWING A DRIVE UP ATM IS THAT, HOW IS A DRIVE UP VERSUS A DRIVE THROUGH? I DON'T SEE THE DIFFERENCE.
WELL I'M, I'M IMAGINING LIKE KIND OF YOUR, YOUR STANDALONE ATM SITUATION WITH JUST A, A SMALL DRIVE LANE ON THE BACK OF THE, THE PROPERTY.
HE'S TALKING ABOUT ONE LIKE AT BEHIND, LIKE NOT, NOT A COVERED STRUCTURE, RIGHT.
WITH THE, WITH THE PILLARS OFF TO YOUR RIGHT AND A WINDOW AND ALL THAT PERMISSION TO GO BACK TO THE PLANNING BOARD AND THEN PUTTING IN THAT RESOLUTION, YOU KNOW, NO, NO, NO FURTHER USE FOR, FOR FAST FOOD.
I THINK I WOULD PREFER AT LEAST YOU'RE ASKING FOR US TO KIND OF GIVE THIS PERMISSION NOW VERSUS WAITING TO AN INDIVIDUAL PROJECT AS IT COMES FORWARD.
I WOULD FEEL MORE COMFORTABLE WAITING TO THE, FOR THE PROJECT RATHER THAN GIVING A CAR BLANCHE CHANGE TO WHAT WE'VE ALREADY PASSED.
I WOULD, I WOULD AGREE WITH THAT.
THAT WAS WHY I ASKED THE QUESTION, YOU KNOW, LIKE, SO IF YOU CAME FORWARD AND SAID, YOU SAID DROP OFF, I, I HAVE, YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S TOUGH FOR ME TO SAY AND THEN SOMEONE MIGHT INTERPRET IT MORE BROADLY AND SAY, WELL, YOU KNOW, WE COULD USE IT TO DROP OFF GRUBHUB OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT AND THAT, SO I, FOR ME PERSONALLY, I, I MEAN, AND I THINK YOU'VE PROBABLY HEARING SOME SIMILAR SENTIMENTS FROM MY COLLEAGUES ON THE BOARD THAT I WOULD PREFER IF WE KNEW WHAT IT, WHAT IT WAS AND THEN MAYBE I WOULD, MAYBE IT'S A GREAT IDEA.
MAYBE NOT, WE DON'T LIKE IT, I DON'T KNOW, BUT I WANT, I WANNA KNOW WHAT IT WAS BEFORE I, I WOULD VOTE OR RECOMMEND IT VOTE.
AND THERE WAS, THERE WAS A LOT OF THOUGHT AND PROCESS THAT WAS WHEN WE, WHEN THIS WENT THROUGH ORIGINALLY.
SO I WOULD NOT BE INCLINED TO MAKE AN ALTERATION AT THIS TIME.
WELL THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS GUYS.
WE'LL WE WILL WAIT UNTIL WE'RE A LITTLE FURTHER DOWN THE ROAD.
LIKE, YOU KNOW, DO THEY HAVE THE DRIVE UP THE TO GO BEER, YOU KNOW,
I'D LIKE TO MAKE A, UM, MOTION TO ADJOURN TO EXECUTIVE SESSION FOR MATTERS REGARDING PERSONNEL CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS.
IS THERE ANYTHING I MISSED? ONE LITIGATION MATTER AND TWO MATTERS REGARDING PURCHASE SALE OR LEASE OF
SECOND PURCHASE AND SALE OF REAL PROPERTY.
OKAY, WE GO ON EXECUTIVE SESSION.