[00:00:07]
GOOD EVENING.I'D LIKE TO CALL THE MAY 7TH, 2025, UM, PLANNING BOARD MEETING TO ORDER.
PLEASE RISE FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.
SECRETARY, WOULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLE? YES.
DO WE HAVE, HAS EVERYONE HAD A CHANCE TO REVIEW THE MINUTES? YES.
WOULD SOMEBODY LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION? KIM FINLEY.
I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES AS IS, IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND.
IT'S BEEN MOVED BY MEMBER FINLEY.
UM, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? OH, ONE ABSTENTION.
I'M ALSO ABSTENTION 'CAUSE I WASN'T HERE.
WILLIAM MEMBER CLARK AND, UM, MEMBER SHAMARA.
THREE ABSTENTIONS MEMBER VALENTI AS WELL.
SO WE HAVE, UM, MEMBER FINLEY, MEMBER GROIN AND MEMBER JOY C VOTING ON THE METS, JUST FOR, TO CLARIFY IN THE RECORD THOSE THREE IN FAVOR.
NONE OPPOSED MINUTES OF PA MINUTES FOR THE, UM, APRIL MEETING HAVE PASSED.
[1. Sturdi-Built Sheds – Requesting Site Plan Approval of a proposal for the retail sale and display of sheds to be located at 5200 Camp Road]
OUR FIRST MEETING, OR OUR FIRST CASE, SORRY, IS STURDY BUILT SHEDS REQUESTING SITE PLAN APPROVAL OF A PROPOSED RETAIL SITE AND DISPLAY OF SHEDS TO BE LOCATED AT 5 2 0 0 CAMP ROAD.IS THE APPLICANT HERE? OBJECT, MADAM CHAIRMAN, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.
COREY AUERBACH, UH, FROM BARLEY GAMON ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT'S STUR BILL SHEDS.
COREY, I'M JUST GONNA ASK THAT YOU MOVE CLOSER TO THE MIC PLEASE.
YOU CAN TAKE IT OUT AT, THERE YOU GO.
UH, AS THE BOARD IS WELL AWARE, WE'VE MADE SEVERAL APPEARANCES BEFORE YOU.
THIS IS A, UH, STORAGE SHED AND DISPLAY LOT AT 5,200 CAMP ROAD.
UM, WE HAVE DESIGNED AND LAID OUT THE SITE IN STRICT COMPLIANCE WITH THE TOWN'S ZONING REGULATIONS.
AFTER TWO MEETINGS AGO, WE, UH, RELOCATED THE PORTABLE FACILITIES TO THE BACK OF THE SITE AS REQUESTED.
I DON'T OH, IT IS SHOWN ON THIS PLAN.
IT'S THE LITTLE BOX DOWN IN THE BOTTOM LEFT HAND CORNER.
UM, I DON'T BELIEVE THERE WERE ANY UNRESOLVED ISSUES OTHER THAN THAT FROM OUR LAST MEETING, BUT WE CERTAINLY HAPPY TO TAKE ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE.
PLANNING DEPARTMENT, UH, WHAT YOU GUYS HAVE BEFORE YOU TONIGHT IS A DRAFT RESOLUTION.
UM, CONDITIONS ON THIS RESOLUTION WILL BE INTERESTING TO PUT IN THERE.
UH, 'CAUSE THIS IS THE FIRST PROJECT THAT WE HAVE IN OUR NEW CRI DISTRICT.
SO, UM, I HAVE THE, THE DRAFT RESOLUTION ALSO UP ON WORD FORM.
SO AS THIS BOARD WANTS TO GO THROUGH IT, IF THERE ARE ANY CHANGES, WE CAN MAKE THEM IN REAL TIME AND YOU CAN VOTE ON 'EM IF YOU, IF YOU WANT TO THANK YOU.
DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING MORE TO OFFER? NOTHING.
UM, BOARD MEMBERS, DO YOU HAVE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS, ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS, REQUESTING MORE INFORMATION? NO, I DON'T THINK SO.
THE ONLY THING THAT, OH, MADAM CHAIR.
I DO HAVE A QUESTION REGARDING THE TEMPORARY NATURE OF THE STRUCTURES.
UM, YOU MAY HAVE TO GET CLOSER WHEN READING WITHIN THE CODE.
THE TEMPORARY STRUCTURES, NINE MONTHS, THEY HAVE TO BE PUT IN PLACE UNLESS THEY'RE PERMANENT STRUCTURES.
SO I KNOW THAT YOU HAD MENTIONED THAT THERE WAS AN EXTENSION IN HOW YOU WERE GOING TO BE OPERATING VERSUS COMPARED TO HOW YOU ORIGINALLY, UM, PROPOSED PROJECT.
SO I JUST WAS WONDERING HOW YOU GUYS ARE WORKING WITHIN THAT PART OF THE CODE.
SO THE ONLY SEASONAL NATURE OF THE OPERATION NOW IS WHEN THE ACTUAL SALES, UH, OF THE SHEDS ARE GONNA TAKE PLACE.
[00:05:01]
SO THE, THE STRUCTURES WILL REMAIN ON THE SITE.ONE STRUCTURE IS GOING TO BE A PERMANENT STRUCTURE, WHICH WILL BE THE OFFICE.
THE OTHERS ARE PART OF THE INVENTORY, WHICH IS THE, THE RETAIL SALES COMPONENT OF THE PROJECT.
SO WHILE THE ACTIVITY WILL ONLY TAKE PLACE FOR THAT NINE MONTH PERIOD, WHILE THERE WILL ACTUALLY ONLY BE SOMEBODY AT THE SITE ACTIVELY, UM, CONDUCTING THE SALES OPERATION, THE ACTUAL STRUCTURES WILL REMAIN THERE.
SO THEN IF THEY'RE TEMPORARY IN NATURE, I'M ASKING THE QUESTION OF THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, DO THEY THEN NEED TO BE REMOVED AFTER IN ORDER TO NOT EXCEED THAT NINE MONTH TIMEFRAME? NO, THEY DON'T.
THEY DON'T NEED TO BE REMOVED.
YOU MAY HAVE TO MOVE UP TO YOUR BIKE 'CAUSE NOBODY'S GONNA HEAR YOU.
SO I, CAN I JUST SAY SOMETHING? UM, I THOUGHT THAT CODE HAD ALREADY GONE THROUGH THIS AND THEY DETERMINED THAT THIS BUSINESS FITS WITHIN THIS.
SO THE ONLY CODE PROVISIONS THAT WE'RE LOOKING UNDER ARE THE CRI DISTRICT PROVISIONS OF, BECAUSE THAT'S THE ZONING DISTRICT OF WHICH THIS USE IS UNDER.
SO UNDER CRI, IT'S THE CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER, UH, INTERPRETED THIS AS THE RETAIL USE.
SO WE'RE ONLY LOOKING AT IT UNDER THE CRI DISTRICT.
SO THE TRANSIENT MERCHANT AND TEMPORARY STRUCTURES AND ALL THOSE OTHER CODES DON'T APPLY TO THIS PROJECT BECAUSE WE'RE LOOKING UNDER THE CRI DISTRICT.
BUT THEN THE CRI CODE DOES, DOES END UP BRINGING UP THE SUPPLEMENTAL CODES, WHICH THEN REFERENCES THEN THIS TEMPORARY STRUCTURE SITUATION.
AND THIS PLANNING BOARD HAS THE ABILITY TO WAIVE SUCH REQUIREMENTS OR CAN MAKE A CONDITION SAYING THAT IT'S BECAUSE OF THE UNIQUENESS OF THE PROJECT, THAT IT DOESN'T APPLY.
YOU HAVE A NUMBER OF OPTIONS OF WHAT YOU WANNA DO IN RELATION TO THAT SUPPLEMENTAL PART OF THE CODE.
WITH RESPECT TO THE, WHAT YOU WERE DETERMINING AS A PERMANENT STRUCTURE, HOW ARE YOU CLASSIFYING THAT AS A PERMANENT STRUCTURE? WE WERE TOLD BEFORE THAT THERE WAS NO WATER.
THERE WAS NO, NO PERMANENT WATER, ELECTRIC PERMANENT UTILITIES.
HOW IS IT THEN DETERMINED AS A PERMANENT STRUCTURE? THERE WILL BE WATER, THERE WILL BE ELECTRIC AT THE SITE.
THERE WILL BE A FOUNDATION FOR THAT STRUCTURE.
SO IT WILL FOLLOW ALL THE BUILDING CODE REQUIREMENTS.
WE'VE DISCUSSED THEM THOROUGHLY WITH JEFF AND THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT.
WE'VE GOT HIM COMFORTABLE WITH IT.
SO IT WILL FOLLOW, IT WILL HAVE THOSE FORMALITIES.
ANYTHING ELSE? MEMBER SHAMARA? NOT AT THIS TIME.
UM, ANYONE ELSE? THE ONLY THING I DO WANNA VERIFY OR BRING UP AGAIN FOR THE RECORD, AND THIS IS THE CHAIR, UM, SAYING THAT THE PERMANENT STRUCTURE WAS DISCUSSED IN PREVIOUS, AT PREVIOUS GATHERINGS AND WE ALSO CLARIFIED WITH, UM, JEFF, UM, CODE ENFORCEMENT THAT THIS MEETS THE CRI.
I DO LIKE THE IDEA OF, UM, ADDING WHATEVER WE HAVE TO IN THE RESOLUTION.
SO IF SOMEBODY WANTS TO START WITH THAT, WE FIRST HAVE THE SEEKER RESOLUTION.
SO BEFORE WE READ IT, CAN WE GO INTO THE CONDITIONS OF THE ACTUAL APPROVAL ITSELF, JUST SO THAT WHEN WE ARE READY TO READ IT, IT'S ALL, IT'S ALL READY? YES.
SEE, YOU'LL SEE THERE ARE SOME QUESTION MARKS ON THE ACTUAL SITE PLAN APPROVAL OF, UH, THE STURDY BUT SHOULD'S APPROVAL RESOLUTION.
UM, THE FIRST ONE IS, UH, APPROVALS CONTINGENT.
IS THERE AN ENGINEERING LETTER FOR THIS CAMBI? UH, DO YOU KNOW THE DATE? JOSH? YOU MAY WANNA MAKE THAT LETTER A LITTLE BIGGER.
I DIDN'T BRING THE SEEING EYE DOG.
JOSH CAMMIE, GERALDTOWN ENGINEER.
THE ENGINEERING LETTER IS DATED, UH, 5 2 25, SO MAY 2ND.
UH, BUT IT DOES NOTE THAT NO FINAL ENGINEERING, UH, APPROVAL WILL BE NEEDED.
WE WILL SIGN THE SITE PLAN AS IT STANDS.
THE SECOND CONDITION IS THAT SITE ARE NOT WARRANTED AS THEY ALREADY EXIST ON CAMP ROAD.
UH, THREE REFERENCES TO THE ACTUAL CRI DISTRICT ARTICLE TWO 80 DASH 2 20 20.
UM, AND IT BRINGS UP THE REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE IN THE CRI DISTRICT FOR LANDSCAPING.
UM, SO THOSE ARE ACTUALLY RIGHT OUT OF THE CODE.
THAT ENHANCED LANDSCAPING WILL BE ON FRONTAGES ALONG CAMP ROAD.
THERE WILL BE SCREENING PROVIDED A PROJECT BOUNDARIES, ABUTTING RESIDENTIAL AREAS, UH, THEN THERE WILL BE TREE LINED ENTRANCEWAYS REQUIRED.
ARE THERE ANY THAT YOU WANT TO TAKE OUT, WAVE THINK AREN'T, UH, RELEVANT TO THIS PROJECT?
[00:10:02]
WELL, WE'VE ALREADY DISCUSSED THE LANDSCAPING.AND THAT'S ALL BEEN HASHED AND REHASHED AND WE'RE GOOD WITH THIS IS THE APPLICANT.
SO YOU'VE GOT THE LANDSCAPING PLAN SET.
DO WE HAVE IT HERE? DO WE HAVE A, A COPY OF THE LANDSCAPING PLAN? WE HAVE A HARD COPY, I BELIEVE.
THE LAND, THE LAND, THE LANDSCAPING THAT WE DISCUSSED AND THAT'S GENERALLY BEEN PROVIDED IS A PICKET FENCE AND FAUX JUNIPER THAT WE ARRANGE AROUND THE SHED DISPLAY.
IT'S NOT A PLANTED LANDSCAPE PLAN.
UM, THIS IS A HARDSCAPE FORMER, UM, LAY DOWN AREA FOR THE DOT.
AND, AND AS A RESULT, THERE WAS NO PLAN TO ACTUALLY, UM, PLAN AND MAINTAIN LIVE LANDSCAPING AS PART OF THE SITE PLAN.
SO IT'S GONNA BE FULL, UM, LANDSCAPING, CORRECT? CORRECT.
SO WE NEED TO INDICATE THAT IN THE, UM, IN THE RESOLUTION.
BOARD MEMBERS, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO, ANY COMMENTS ON THAT? THAT DOESN'T? THIS IS, UH, MEMBER VALENTI FOR THE RECORD AND FOR THE RECORD, I HATE THESE, BUT I'M GONNA DO IT FOR YOU CINDY.
SO UNDER THE LANDSCAPING THOUGH, THERE'S A REQUIREMENT THAT ENHANCED LANDSCAPING FOR ANY FRONTAGE ALONG CAMP ROAD WITH A FOCUS ON TREES, RIGHT? AND TO GET A TREE LINE DRIVEWAY, RIGHT? SO FAUX JUNIPER DOES NOT MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THIS, RIGHT? SO WHAT DO WE DO? YOU HAVE THE ABILITY AS THE BOARD TO WAIVE CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS.
UM, YOU CAN SAY THAT THE FOE LANDSCAPING WILL SUFFICE FOR, BECAUSE OF THE UNIQUENESS OF THIS SITE.
YOU HAVE SOME OPTIONS ON LANGUAGE, ON HOW YOU WANT TO BASICALLY SAY THAT THE APPLICANT IS MEETING THE LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS EVEN THOUGH IT'S NOT REAL, REAL PLANTS, REAL TREES.
BUT YOU HAVE, YOU HAVE SOME OPTIONS IN TERMS OF THE LANGUAGE OF HOW YOU WANNA WORD IT.
THIS PROPERTY IS GONNA BE REDEVELOPED AT SOME POINT FOR AN ACTUAL, YOU KNOW, COMMERCIAL REDEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITY.
THERE IS NO CURRENTLY EXISTING, WE ARE LEASING THIS LAND.
UM, AND, YOU KNOW, WE WOULD RESPECTFULLY REQUEST A WAIVER FROM THIS REQUIREMENT MM-HMM
IN LIGHT OF THE FACT THAT THIS IS NOT THE PERMANENT COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT THAT'S GONNA TAKE PLACE ON THIS SITE.
YEAH, I WAS, I WAS GONNA SAY THE SAME THING, THAT WE SHOULD WAIVE THIS BECAUSE I'M, I'M NOT GONNA LET PLASTIC PLANTS MEET THIS.
RIGHT? SO I THINK OUR ONLY OPTION IS TO WAIVE THIS IF EVERYONE AGREES.
YOU CAN ALSO HAVE A, YOU CAN ALSO HAVE A CONDITION THAT FUTURE DEVELOPMENT WILL MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE LANDSCAPING SECTION OF CRI AND PUT THAT IN THERE SO THAT IF THEY DO SELL IT OR SOMEONE ELSE COMES ON THE SITE, THAT THEY WILL BE REQUIRED TO MEET THE LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS UNLESS THEY HAVE A WEIRD USE AS WELL.
AND, AND BILL CLARK, I THINK WE SHOULD SPECIFICALLY PUT THAT BECAUSE IT'S TEMPORARY IS THE REASON FOR WAIVING IT, RIGHT? MM-HMM
THE VERBIAGE THAT I WAS COMING UP WITH, AND THE, AGAIN, THIS IS, UM, CHAIRMAN GROIN, UM, DUE TO THE UNIQUENESS OF THE, UM, LOT AND THE TYPE OF BUSINESS THAT IS BEING PRESENTED, WHICH IS IN ESSENCE TEMPORARY.
THIS IS NOT A PERMANENT BUSINESS.
UM, LANDSCAPING AS DEFINED IN SECTION 2 80 20 20 DASH 20 SHOULD BE WAIVED FOR THIS PROJECT ONLY AT THIS ADDRESS ALL.
SO YOU SAID, SO YOU SAID DUE TO THE UNIQUENESS, DUE TO THE UNIQUENESS
SO DUE TO THE UNIQUENESS AND BASED ON THE TEMPORARY STATUS OF THIS BUSINESS AND, AND THE NATURE OKAY.
AND THE, AND THE TEMPORARY NATURE OF THE BUSINESS.
DO YOU WANNA READ IT BACK TO, BASED ON THE TEMPORARY, THE NATURE, BASED ON THE NATURE OF THE BUSINESS, WHICH INTENT IS TEMPORARY, WHICH INTENT
[00:15:03]
DUE TO THE UNIQUENESS? AND WE WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO WORDSMITH THAT A LITTLE BIT BETTER.CINDY, I THINK I HAVE SOME IDEAS TO LOSE, GO AHEAD.
LOSE A LOT OF WORDS AND JUST BE A LITTLE MORE, UM, DEFINITIVE.
SO WHAT IF WE JUST SAID, UM, LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS UNDER TWO 80 DASH TWO 20 ARE WAIVED DUE TO THE TEMPORARY NATURE OF THE BUSINESS.
AND THEN WE CAN ADD WHATEVER ELSE NEEDS TO GO IN THERE.
BUT I'M AFRAID THAT THINGS LIKE THEY INTEND IT TO BE TEMPORARY SUGGESTS THAT IT MAY OR MAY NOT BE TEMPORARY.
AND I DON'T WANNA GET IN A SITUATION WHERE A BOARD FIVE YEARS FROM NOW HAS TO DETERMINE WHAT WE THOUGHT WE MEANT BY THE WORD UNIQUE.
LIKE I'D RATHER JUST KEEP IT AS STRAIGHTFORWARD AS POSSIBLE.
UM, WORDSMITHING AS WELL AS ALSO A POTENTIAL CONDITION THAT, HANG ON, LET HIM, LET HIM FINISH THIS.
SO LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS ACCORDING TO TWO 80 DASH 2 20 20 ARE WAIVED AND THEN DUE TO WHATEVER REASONING THIS BOARD IS COMFORTABLE WITH, THAT THE TEMPORARY NATURE OF THE BUSINESS OF THE BUSINESS DUE TO THE TEMPORARY NATURE OF THE BUSINESS.
I THINK THAT'S WHAT I ORIGINALLY SAID, BUT NOBODY WAS TYPING MEMBER SHAMARA HERE.
WHAT ABOUT TEMPORARY NATURE OF THE PROJECT? SURE.
INSTEAD OF THE BUSINESS, I, I DON'T KNOW.
IT'S GOT A NAME AND THEY'RE LEASING IT, SO IT'S NOT A PROJECT.
THAT'S THE ONLY THING WE'RE GONNA HEAR FROM.
MAYBE I COULD HELP OUT A LITTLE ATTORNEY.
JOSEPH GOGAN, UH, ATTORNEY FOR THE PLANNING BOARD.
UM, SO YOU MENTIONED THAT THIS WAS A LEASE THAT YOU'RE LEASING THE PREMISES FROM THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY.
HAS THE LEASE BEEN SIGNED YET? IS IT CONTINGENT UPON THE APPROVAL FROM THE BOARD? YES, IT IS.
AND THEN HOW LONG IS THE LEASE? IS IT A TERM OF YOURS OR AN AUTOMATIC RENEWAL? IS IT IT'S YEAR TO NOVEMBER 15 AND YEAR.
WE HAVE TO GET HIS NAME AND I I CAN NAME.
IT'S, IT'S CURRENTLY A ONE YEAR LEASE THAT WOULD BE SUBJECT TO A RENEWAL.
AUTOMATIC RENEWAL UNLESS PARTY CANCELS WITHIN 60 DAYS NOTICE.
AND IT, IS THAT A, A PERPETUAL RENEWAL TERM IN THE LEASE OR IS THERE A, A CAP ON IT? RIGHT NOW? IT'S PERPETUAL.
JUST WANT TO GIVE THE THE BOARD SOME BACKGROUND TO WHAT THE, WHAT THE, THE BUSINESS ARRANGEMENT IS FOR THE LOT.
SO I THINK THE WORD BUSINESS INSTEAD OF PROJECT THEN NUMBER SHAMARA AGREES.
SO LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS ACCORDING TO ARTICLE TWO 80 DASH 2 20 20, OUR WAIVE DUE TO THE TEMPORARY NATURE OF THE BUSINESS.
DO YOU WANT A CONDITION SAYING ALL FUTURE DEVELOPMENT W WILL BE REQUIRED TO MEET THE STANDARDS OR WHATEVER WORD YOU WANT TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF WILL BE TWO 80 DASH 2020 0.2.
MEMBER SHAMARA HERE, ARE YOU ABLE TO THEN THAT FUTURE DEVELOPMENT SHALL BE REQUIRED TO FIT THE REQUIREMENTS, NOT JUST OF THE LANDSCAPING, BUT OF THE INTENT OF THE CAMP ROAD INTERCHANGE WITH ALIGNING WITH THE ARCHITECTURAL ENHANCEMENTS AND, AND OTHER COMPONENTS THAT ARE A PART OF THAT? I FEEL LIKE THAT DEPENDS ON THE USE.
WHAT IF WE GET ANOTHER USE THAT'S SIMILAR TO A SHEDS THAT WE DIDN'T INTEND IN THE CRI DISTRICT, BUT WE GET IT SHOWN TO CODE ENFORCEMENT AND THEY SAY IT'S AN APPROVED USE.
'CAUSE WITH THE SHEDS PROJECT, WE KNOW WHEN WE WROTE THE CRI, WE DIDN'T INTEND THE SHEDS PROJECT TO COME IN, BUT WE SHOWED IT TO CODE ENFORCEMENT AND THEY INTERPRETED IT AS A RETAIL USE.
SO IF WE GET ANOTHER USE THAT WE DIDN'T INTEND AND DOESN'T REALLY MEET CRI DISTRICT AND SOME PEOPLE'S EYES, BUT CODE ENFORCEMENT FEELS THAT IT DOES.
IF WE PUT THAT REQUIREMENT IN THERE, THEN BUT THEN ISN'T IT T HERE ISN'T THEN THE PROPERTY ITSELF THEN TIED TO BEING A PART OF THE CRI DISTRICT AND A NEXT PROJECT WOULD THEN BE REVIEWED ACROSS THE INTENT OF THAT CODE? CORRECT.
SO DOES IT MATTER IF WE PUT SHALL MEET OR NOT SHALL MEAT IF IT'S GONNA BE
[00:20:01]
REVIEWED AGAIN? SO ALL WE'RE SAYING WITH THIS IS THE, SO DOT TWO ZERO IS JUST LANDSCAPING.SO ALL WE'RE SAYING IS THIS IS, WE WAIVED LANDSCAPING NEXT TIME WE'RE NOT WAIVING LANDSCAPING.
THE REST OF THIS IS ALL CHAPTER TWO 80 ARTICLE.
FAR TOO MANY ROMAN NUMERALS FOR ME TO READ OUT LOUD.
UM, SO IT WOULD LIKE, TO YOUR POINT, THE, THE WHOLE THING WOULD ALREADY APPLY.
WE'RE JUST TRYING TO WRITE BACK IN WHAT WE WAIVED, WHICH IS JUST LANDSCAPING.
SO ARTICLE TWO 80 DASH 2 20 21 SPEAKS TO ARCHITECTURAL REQUIREMENTS.
SO THAT HAS A QUESTION MARK BECAUSE WE ALSO TALKED ABOUT THE CRI DISTRICT HAS SOME ARCHITECTURAL REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE IN THE CODE.
THIS IS BEING A SHEDS PROJECT.
IS THAT ANOTHER CONDITION THAT THIS BOARD WANTS TO WAIVE? IS THAT A CONDITION THAT THIS BOARD WANTS TO UPHOLD? WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS ON THE ARCHITECTURAL REQUIREMENTS OF THE CRI DISTRICT? I I THINK THAT IT, GO AHEAD.
MEMBER CLARK, THEY'RE NOT BUILDING ANYTHING.
SO I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY ARCHITECTURAL REQUIREMENTS THAT APPLY.
SO I THINK WE MIGHT JUST WANNA LEAVE IT ALONE.
LEAVE IT ALL OUT BECAUSE I MEAN, WHAT WE PUT IN THERE, THE ONE WE WAIVED, WHY WE WAIVED IT AND THAT WE'RE NOT WAIVING IT NEXT TIME.
AND THE REST OF 'EM, I THINK WE JUST IGNORE THAT WORKS.
THIS IS MEMBER MAY ASK A CLARIFYING QUESTION.
SO ISN'T THIS THE ARCHITECTURAL REQUIREMENTS, THE CRUX OF WHAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT WITH, UM, PERMANENCY OR NOT ANYMORE? BECAUSE CODE HAS SEPARATED THE TWO ZONING CODES FOR US.
BECAUSE WASN'T THAT THE ISSUE IS THAT SINCE THE ONE STRUCTURE IS TECHNICALLY PERMANENT WITH RUNNING WATER, IT SHOULD MEET THE ARCHITECTURAL REQUIREMENTS AND THAT'S WHERE WE'VE KIND OF BEEN STUCK FOR THE LAST COUPLE OF WEEKS.
I BELIEVE THAT'S LY WE HAVE A CLEAR ANSWER ON THAT.
DO YOU WANNA SPEAK TO THAT CONVERSATION THAT THEY HAD ABOUT THE ONE BUILDING TECHNICALLY BEING PERMANENT AND MEETING THE ARCHITECTURAL REQUIREMENTS OF THE CODE? I AGREE WITH YOUR INITIAL THOUGHT ABOUT ARCHITECTURE.
THESE SHEDS ARE BUILT OFFSITE.
THEY'RE DELIVERED TO THE SITE.
THEY ARE DISPLAYS FOR PEOPLE TO COME LOOK AT AND SELECT THE SHED WHEN THEY SELECT IT.
THE SHED THAT IS BUILT OFFITE AND DELIVERED TO THEIR HOME BECAUSE BUSINESS WILL BE TRANSACTED IN ONE OF THE SHEDS, WHICH IS SERVING AS THE OFFICE WE'RE REQUIRED TO MEET THE FORMALITIES OF THE BUILDING CODE.
SO IT'S JUST ANOTHER ONE OF THE SHEDS THAT'S GONNA BE OUT THERE.
THAT'S GONNA ALSO BE A DISPLAY THAT PEOPLE CAN LOOK AT.
BUT FOR THE RETAIL USE, WE HAVE TO HAVE AN OFFICE.
AND SO THAT WILL BE AN OFFICE THAT WILL COMPLY WITH THE FORMALITIES OF THE BUILDING CODE SEPARATE AND APART FROM ANY ARCHITECTURAL REQUIREMENTS IN THE ZONING CODE.
BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, IT'S JUST ANOTHER ONE OF THE PREFABRICATED SHEDS.
CAN I ASK YOU A COUPLE QUESTIONS? YES.
DOES THE SHED HAVE A PITCHED ROOF? YES.
IS IT MADE OF HIGH QUALITY MATERIALS? YES.
THOSE ARE THE ARCHITECTURAL REQUIREMENTS? YEAH.
SO JUST FOR CLARIFY, WE'RE REMOVING MENTION OF THE ARCHITECTURAL REQUIREMENT.
I WOULD REMOVE IT 'CAUSE THEY ARE GONNA MEET IT, RIGHT? YES.
DO WE WANNA SAY THAT THEY'RE MEETING IT? I WOULDN'T TOUCH IT.
SO THAT'S HOW THE RESOLUTION READS.
ANY OTHER ADDITIONS? I DON'T BOARD MEMBERS.
ARE WE ALL IN AGREEMENT THAT THIS IS WHAT WE'RE COMFORTABLE WITH? EVERYBODY'S SHAKING THEIR HEADS.
ARE YOU ABLE TO PUT A TIME IN WHICH THE PROJECT IN RESOLUTION GETS REVISITED? I I JUST HAVE ANGST ABOUT HAVING SHEDS ON CAMP ROAD IN A DISTRICT THAT IS INTENDED FOR LARGER, BIGGER PROJECTS.
BUT I UNDERSTAND THE NATURE OF THE PROJECT COMING IN AND ITS IMPROVEMENT AT THE CURRENT CONDITION.
BUT YET DON'T NECESSARILY WANT TO JUST HAVE IT HAVE A PERPETUAL SHED USE, UM, CHAIR, CHAIR, GONICK AND TEMPORARY NATURE OF THE BUSINESS.
WELL, AND THAT'S MY MY FEELING IS BECAUSE IT IS TEMPORARY.
I MEAN, IF SOMEBODY COMES BY, I AM.
'CAUSE THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY IS IN THE AUDIENCE.
CORRECT? IS THE PERSON NO, YOUR CLIENT IS IN THE AUDIENCE.
SO, UM, I THINK THAT THE OWNER IS PROBABLY, IF HE GOT AN OFFER, IT'S GONNA SOMETHING MORE PERMANENT.
SO I MEAN WE CAN, BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT WE HAVE IN THE PAST WHERE WE'RE LOOKING AT SOMETHING.
I REALIZE THAT THIS IS A NEW DISTRICT AND IF THE BOARD IS COMFORTABLE, MAYBE WE CAN FOR THIS ONE LOOK AT IT IN A YEAR, TWO YEARS.
I MEAN, WHAT, WHAT, WHAT'S THE FEEL? MY QUESTION WOULD BE IF YOU PUT THAT CONDITION, WHAT ARE YOU LOOKING FOR AFTER THAT YEAR? LIKE WHAT'S
[00:25:01]
THE, WHAT'S THE ACTION THAT HAPPENS AFTER THAT YEAR? IS THERE AN UPDATE ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF, OF THE PROPERTY SO THAT IT'S NOT JUST IGNORED AS BEING IN A PERPETUAL SHED, TEMPORARY SHED RETAILER.HOW WOULD WE ENFORCE THAT CONDITION? SO AFTER A YEAR, THEY COME TO WHO? THE PLANNING BOARD AGAIN, OR THEY COME TO COURT.
WHO DO THEY GO TO AFTER THAT YEAR TO THEN FOLLOW UP ON, IS THERE ANY PRECEDENT OF REVISITING PROJECTS? NO, NOT REALLY.
I THINK ABOUT LIKE WE'VE GOT SOME THINGS MEMBER CLARK.
WE'VE GOT SOME THINGS IN THE JEFFREY BOULEVARD INDUSTRIAL PARK.
YOU MAY WANNA BRING THAT MIC UP CLOSER 'CAUSE YOU'RE NOT GONNA BE HEARD, UH, ON FOR TODAY.
AND THAT INDUSTRIAL PARK WAS LAID OUT DECADES AGO AND WE'RE JUST STARTING TO GET DEVELOPMENT IN IT NOW.
SO WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE MARKET'S GONNA DO WITH THIS ZONE.
AND WE DON'T KNOW HOW LONG THE SHEDS ARE GONNA BE THERE.
I MEAN, THE MARKET MAY GO IN A DIRECTION WHERE THEY'RE GONE IN A YEAR BECAUSE THERE'S SOMETHING BIGGER AND BETTER.
THEY MAY BE THERE FOR A DECADE, WE DON'T KNOW.
BUT I MEAN, I LIKE THAT THAT'S TEMPORARY AND IF WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY FOR SOMETHING NICER, WE CAN PUT IT THERE.
BUT WE HAVE NO IDEA HOW LONG WE'LL BE.
THERE COULD BE A LONG TIME COULD BE SHORT.
IT'S ALL GONNA DEPEND ON A LOT OF FACTORS THAT WE CAN'T CONTROL AND THE OWNER CAN'T CONTROL AND THE SHED COMPANY CAN'T CONTROL.
AND IF WE CAME BACK IN TWO YEARS AND WE SAID, HEY, HAVE ANY PROGRESS IN SELLING IT AND THEY SAY NO, THEN WHAT DO WE DO? RIGHT.
I'VE VOICED MY OPINION ON THE PROJECT
UM, ANY OTHER COMMENTS? OKAY, JOSH, ARE WE READY? YEP.
WOULD SOMEONE LIKE TO, UM, MAKE A MOTION MEMBER CLARK
IN ACCORDANCE WITH NEW YORK STATE SEEKER LAW, THE TOWN OF BURY PLANNING BOARD HAS REVIEWED THE STURDY BUILT SHEDS PROJECT, WHICH INVOLVES THE RETAIL SALE OF SHEDS WITH A RESTROOM ON SITE, ALONG WITH ASSOCIATED PARKING AND LANDSCAPING IMPROVEMENTS AT 5 2 0 0 CAMP ROAD AND HELD THE REQUIRED PUBLIC HEARING ON MARCH 19TH, 2025.
BASED ON THIS REVIEW OF THIS UNLISTED ACTION, THE PLANNING BOARD HAS DETERMINED THAT THE PROJECT'S ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ARE NOT ANTICIPATED TO RESULT IN ANY SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT.
AND A NEGATIVE DECLARATION IS HEREBY ISSUED.
I I'D LIKE TO MAKE A CHANGE TO THAT BEFORE WE VOTE.
CAN WE STRIKE LANDSCAPING IMPROVEMENTS AGAIN FOR THE PURPOSES OF SEEKER? A PLASTIC JUNIPER IS NOT A LANDSCAPING IMPROVEMENT.
IT CAN DO NO HARM WITHOUT US TELLING IT.
ALRIGHT, SO I'LL REDO THAT PARTICULAR SENTENCE.
SO THE AMENDMENT MEMBER CLARK.
SO THE AMENDMENT, UH, WAS TO THE FIRST SENTENCE IN ACCORDANCE WITH NEW YORK STATE SEEKER LAW.
THE TOWN OF HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD HAS REVIEWED THE STURDY BUILT SHE SHEDS PROJECT, WHICH INVOLVES THE RETAIL SALE OF SHEDS WITH A RESTROOM ON SITE ALONG WITH THE ASSOCIATED PARKING AT 5 2 0 0 CAMP ROAD AND HELD THE REQUIRED PUBLIC HEARING ON MARCH 19TH, 2025.
IT'S BEEN MO MOVED BY MEMBER CLARK.
SITE PLAN PLAN APPROVAL BASED ON THE REVIEW OF THE STURDY BUILT SHEDS PROJECT MATERIALS.
AND HAVING COMPLETED THE SEEKER PROCESS, THE HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD HEREBY APPROVES THE PROJECT WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS AND DETERMINATIONS.
ONE APPROVAL IS CONTINGENT UPON THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT COMMENT LETTER DATED MAY 2ND, 2025.
TWO SIDEWALKS ARE NOT WARRANTED AS THEY ALREADY EXIST ON CAMP ROAD.
THREE LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS ACCORDING TO SECTION 2 8 0 20 22 ARE WAIVED DUE TO THE TEMPORARY NATURE OF THE BUSINESS FOR ALL FUTURE DEVELOPMENTS WILL BE REQUIRED TO MEET SECTION 2 8 0 20 22 2.
IT'S BEEN MOVED BY MEMBER CLARK FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL.
IS THERE A SECOND MEMBER FINLEY SECONDS.
[2. Public Hearing – 7:00 P.M., Brian Becker – Requesting Site Plan Approval of a mixed- use development on vacant land, east side of Riley Boulevard (SBL #171.05-1-11)]
OUR NEXT, UM, CASE IS BRIAN BECKER REQUESTING SITE PLAN APPROVAL OF A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT ON VACANT LAND ON THE EAST SIDE OF RILEY[00:30:01]
BOULEVARD.AND THIS EVENING IS A PUBLIC HEARING.
IS THE APPLICANT HERE? IS THE APPLICANT, UM, BRIAN BECKER HERE? I DON'T THINK SO.
BUT WE CAN HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING WITHOUT HIM HERE.
STILL HAVE THE PUBLIC HEARING? YEP.
SO, UM, MEMBER SHAMARA, WOULD YOU LIKE TO READ THE PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE? YES.
LEGAL NOTICE TOWN OF HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD SITE PLAN APPROVAL PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN TO THE TOWN OF HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD.
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE TOWN OF HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD WILL CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING ON A REQUEST BY BRIAN BECKER TO CONSTRUCT A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT CONSISTING OF A GYM AND APARTMENTS ON VACANT LAND EAST SIDE OF RILEY BOULEVARD.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD ON MAY 7TH, 2025 AT 7:00 PM IN ROOM SEVEN A SLASH SEVEN B OF HAMBURG TOWN HALL.
THE UM, FOLLOWING THAT I'M GONNA READ IS FOR CASES TWO THROUGH SIX, A PUBLIC HEARING IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE COMMUNITY TO SHARE INFORMATION ON HOW YOU'RE IMPACTED BY A PROJECT.
A THREE MINUTE RULE WILL APPLY DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING TO ENSURE THAT ALL RESIDENTS ARE HEARD DURING A REASONABLE HOUR.
IT IS NOT A QUESTION AND ANSWER PERIOD.
ALL STATEMENTS MADE DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING AS WELL AS WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED REGARDING THE PROJECT SENT TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT ARE REVIEWED BY THE BOARD AND THE APPLICANT.
SO IS THERE ANYONE HERE, THIS IS MY FIRST CALL FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING TO SPEAK ON IN REGARDS TO THE PROJECT OF, FOR BRIAN BECKER ON THE EAST SIDE OF RILEY BOULEVARD.
IS ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE THAT HAS COMMENT IN REGARDS TO THIS PROJECT? SECOND CALL.
IS THERE ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WISHES TO MAKE A A COMMENT ON BRIAN BECKER ON THE EAST FOR THE VACANT LAND ON THE EAST SIDE OF RILEY BOULEVARD.
THIRD AND FINAL CALL FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING.
THERE'S NO ONE IN THE, UM, ROOM THAT IS, UH, SHOWING, SHOWING ANY INTEREST FOR THE, UM, PUBLIC HEARING.
THEREFORE, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND WE'LL POSTPONE TILL, UH, YEAH, YOU CAN TABLE THEM UNTIL THE 21ST.
UM, THE PUBLIC HEARING IS CLOSED.
ARE YOU AUTHORIZING US TO PRODUCE DRAFT APPROVAL RESOLUTIONS? I DON'T KNOW THAT THE BOARD HAS ANYTHING FURTHER TO, UM, DISCUSS BOARD MEMBERS.
DO WE HAVE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSIONS TO FEEL THE WETLAND? WE HAVEN'T SEEN ANYTHING CONCERNING THIS PROJECT OTHER THAN WHAT IT'S GONNA, WHAT IT'S GONNA BE.
YOU GOTTA USE YOUR MIC PLEASE.
WE HAVE NOT SEEN ANYTHING OTHER THAN THE PROPOSAL ON THE PROJECT, BUT, UH, AS TO WHAT IT'S GONNA BE FOR THE FUTURE PARKING ACCESS TO THAT.
I MEAN, IT'S A CORNER SECTION OF THAT O'REILLY BOULEVARD PROPERTY.
I THINK WE SHOULD TABLE IT UNTIL THE 21ST AND LET THE APPLICANT BE HERE.
ARE YOU PREPARE, ARE YOU AUTHORIZING US TO PRODUCE DRAFT APPROVED RESOLUTIONS? I YOU CAN OR YOU CAN, UM, PREPARE THE DRAFT RESOLUTION.
[3. Public Hearing – 7:00 P.M., Les Draudt – Requesting Preliminary Approval of a two- lot subdivision to be located on vacant land, west side of South Abbott Road, south of Armor Drive]
OUR NEXT CASE IS, UM, PUBLIC HEARING FOR LESS DROUGHT REQUESTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL FOR A TWO LOT SUBDIVISION TO BE LOCATED ON VACANT LAND WEST SIDE OF SOUTH ROAD, SOUTH ABBOTT ROAD, SOUTH OF ARMOR DRIVE.YOU MAY WANNA PICK UP THAT MIC AND, OKAY.
WHAT DO YOU HAVE TO OFFER TO US THIS EVENING? UH, WELL THE SAME THAT I OFFERED THE FIRST TIME, I, UH, WANT TO GIVE MY DAUGHTER TWO ACRES TO BUILD A HOUSE ON THE OTHER END OF OUR FARM.
UM, WOULD YOU LIKE TO READ THE PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE LEGAL NOTICE TOWN OF HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE TOWN OF HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD WILL CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING ON A TWO LOT SUBDIVISION PROPOSED BY LES DROUGHT TO BE LOCATED ON
[00:35:01]
THE WEST SIDE OF SOUTH ABBOTT ROAD, SOUTH OF ARMOR DRIVE.THE PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD ON MAY 7TH, 2025 AT 7:00 PM IN ROOM SEVEN A SLASH SEVEN B OF HAMBURG TOWN HALL.
YOU COULD HAVE A SEAT WHILE I CALL FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING.
IS THERE ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WISHES TO SPEAK IN REGARDS TO THIS PROJECT? CALLING FOR A SECOND TIME? IS THERE ANYONE HERE, UM, WISHING TO SPEAK ON THE VACANT LAND SOUTH OF, UM, ABBOTT ROAD THIRD AND FINAL CALL.
THERE'S NO ONE IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WISHES TO MAKE COMMENT ON THIS PUBLIC HEARING FOR LESS ROUTE.
REQUESTING A PRELIMINARY PLAT OF TWO LOT SUBDIVISION LOCATED ON VACANTLY AND WEST OF SOUTH ABBOTT ROAD.
SEEING NONE, UM, WE'RE CLOSING THE PUBLIC HEARING BOARD MEMBERS PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
WHERE ARE WE AT AT THIS POINT? WE JUST NEED SAME THING AGAIN.
IF YOU FEEL COMFORTABLE, TABLE IT TO THE 21ST AND HAVE US PRODUCE SEEKER AND APPROVAL RESOLUTIONS FOR THE SUBDIVISION.
ARE WE, DO WE HAVE ANY WETLAND ISSUES ON THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY OR, I DON'T BELIEVE SO, NO.
DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE? ANY OTHER INFORMATION THAT YOU NEED? NO, JOSH, GO AHEAD AND DRAFT THE RESOLUTION FOR THE 21ST.
WE'LL SEE BACK HERE ON THE 21ST OF MAY.
[4. Public Hearing – 7:00 P.M., Cannaspace Inc. - Requesting a Special Use Permit and Site Plan Approval of a proposal to operate a cannabis dispensary at 4169 McKinley Parkway]
NEXT CASE IS CAN SPACE REQUESTING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT AND SITE PLAN APPROVAL OF A PROPOSAL TO OPERATE A CANNABIS DISPENSARY AT 4 1 6 9 MCKINLEY PARKWAY.I AM THE REPRESENTATION FOR CAN SPACE INCORPORATED.
UH, I'M BRENDAN CARRUM, I'M ONE OF THE OWNERS, UM, RAYMOND BATISTA, THE OTHER OWNER.
UH, WE CAME BEFORE THIS BOARD A FEW WEEKS AGO IN REGARDS TO AN APPROVAL FOR THE CANNABIS DISPENSARY, BOTH FOR A SITE PLAN APPROVAL AS WELL AS A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR THE LOCATION OF 41 69 AKA 41 51.
UM, SOUTHWESTERN BOULEVARD AND MC, I'M SORRY, IT'S MCKINLEY BOULEVARD, RIGHT? YEAH.
SO THE MAILING ADDRESS THOUGH IS 41 51.
SO FOR PURPOSES WE CAN, IF WE CAN CALL IT LIKE AKA 41 51 SOUTHWESTERN BOULEVARD.
WAIT, 41 51 SOUTHWESTERN BOULEVARD OR 41 51 MCKINLEY PARKWAY.
IT GETS, YEAH,
DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE TO OFFER BEFORE WE START THE PUBLIC HEARING? UH, I'D BE HAPPY JUST TO KIND OF SUMMARIZE, 'CAUSE I KNOW THERE WERE A FEW BOARD MEMBERS THAT WEREN'T PRESENT, UM, IN, IN THE, THE PAST MEETING.
UM, THIS IS A BUSINESS THAT'S ALREADY BEEN LICENSED BY THE STATE OF NEW YORK.
WE'RE HERE AS KIND OF THE LAST STEP IN THE PROCESS OF GETTING THE CANNABIS DISPENSARY OPEN.
BOTH BRENDAN AND RAY HAVE BEEN IN THIS PROCESS FOR NOW, CLOSE TO ABOUT A YEAR AND A HALF.
UM, THEY'VE BEEN IN THE, UH, ANCILLARY BUSINESS BEFORE.
SO SOME MIGHT BE FAMILIAR WITH HEADSPACE, WHICH IS ACTUALLY LOCATED DIRECTLY NEXT TO IT.
THEY'VE BEEN IN THE BUILDING FOR 10 YEARS.
THEY'RE NOW MOVING FORWARD INTO A LEGALIZED BUSINESS.
UM, THE HOURS ARE GOING TO BE PURSUANT TO THE HAMBURG TOWN QUOTE.
UM, VERY MINIMAL, UM, CONSTRUCTION WOULD BE HAPPENING.
IT'S FLOORING, IT'S SHELVING AND IT'S PAINT.
SO, UM, ONCE THIS IS APPROVED AT THE LOCAL LEVEL HERE, WE HOPE TO IMMEDIATELY, YOU KNOW, GET MOVING AND, AND HAVE THIS OPEN DURING THE SUMMERTIME.
BOARD MEMBERS, NO, SORRY, PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE TO OFFER? UH, REALLY QUICKLY, JUST FOR CLARIFICATION PURPOSES, I KNOW I ASKED YOU THESE QUESTIONS LAST TIME, BUT FOR OTHER BOARD MEMBERS AND MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC, CAN YOU JUST QUICKLY SPEAK TO THE SECURITY MEASURES THAT YOU'LL HAVE AT THIS SPACE JUST SO THAT EVERYONE IS AWARE? SURE.
SO, UH, NEW YORK STATE HAS VERY EXPLICIT GUIDELINES ON, UH, BACKUP BATTERIES, SECURITY MEASURES WHERE CAMERAS ARE LOCATED.
UH, CURRENTLY A SECURITY COMPANY HAS BEEN ENGAGED AND THEY ARE, UH, WORKING TOWARDS PURSUANT TO ALL THE REQUIREMENTS AND REGULATIONS OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK.
UM, DO YOU GUYS KNOW WHICH SECURITY COMPANY YOU'RE USING? POWERED PROTECTION.
POWERED PROTECTION IS THE COMPANY THAT THEY'VE ALREADY ENGAGED WITH.
UM, MEMBER SHAMARA, WOULD YOU PLEASE READ THE UM, PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE LEGAL NOTICE, TOWN OF HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD SITE PLAN APPROVAL PUBLIC HEARING, SPECIAL USE PERMIT APPROVAL PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT
[00:40:01]
THE TOWN OF HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD WILL CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING ON A REQUEST BY CAN SPACE INC.TO OPERATE A CANNABIS DISPENSARY AT 4 1 5 1 MCKINLEY PARKWAY.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD ON MAY 7TH, 20 2025 AT 7:00 PM IN ROOM SEVEN A SLASH SEVEN B OF HAMBURG TOWN HALL.
OKAY, IF YOU'D LIKE TO HAVE A SEAT FOR A MINUTE, IS THERE ANYONE HERE THAT WISHES TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF THIS, UM, PROJECT CAN SPACE REQUESTING SPECIAL ONLY USE PERMIT AND A SITE PLAN? THIS IS THE OPENING OF THE PUBLIC HEARING.
IS THERE ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WISHES TO MAKE COMMENT CALLING FOR A SECOND TIME? ANYONE TO MAKE COMMENT ON THIS? UM, PROJECT FOR CAN SPACE CALLING A THIRD AND FINAL TIME AND CLOSING THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR CAN SPACE AT, UM, 4 1 6 9 MCKINLEY PARKWAY.
UM, JOSH, THIS IS THE SAME THING FOR THE 21ST TO DO THE RESOLUTION.
I DON'T THINK WE HAVE ANYTHING OUTSTANDING ON THIS PROJECT.
YOU CAN TABLE IT AND AUTHORIZE US TO DO DRAFT APPROVAL OF RESOLUTIONS.
I'M JUST RUNNING IT BY BECAUSE SOME OF YOU WERE NOT HERE.
DO YOU HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS OR COMMENTS? 'CAUSE I KNOW YOU GUYS ALL WATCHED THE MEETING.
UM, MEMBER SHAMARA, I JUST HAVE ONE QUESTION.
WHAT IS THE, I NOTICED THAT YOUR LICENSE EXPIRES IN NOVEMBER OF 2026.
SO THE NEXT, WHAT IS THE RENEWAL PROCESS? SURE.
SO, UM, IT'S A TWO YEAR LICENSE.
UM, WHAT ENDS UP HAPPENING IS YOU GET, UH, AN OCM UH, NOTICE ABOUT SIX MONTHS PRIOR, WHICH WILL SAY, ARE YOU RENEWING? AND THEN AT THAT POINT YOU GO THROUGH THE PROCESS, THEY DO UH, A COMPLIANCE CHECK, MAKE SURE THAT EVERYTHING'S UP TO SPEED.
AND THEN YOU GET YOUR LICENSE RENEWED WITH AN ADDITIONAL FEE FOR THE THE LICENSE.
UM, WHICH AT THIS POINT IS $7,000.
AND THEN THE RENEWAL, THE NEXT RENEWAL, IS THAT ALSO A TWO YEAR YES.
SO IT'S A KIND OF A SEQUENTIAL TYPE OF CHECK AND BALANCES? YES.
UM, UH, OUTSIDE OF A CONDITIONAL ADULT USE CANNABIS DISPENSARY LICENSE, WHICH IS A THREE YEARS.
UH, EVERY OTHER LICENSE IS TWO YEARS.
UM, I'M GONNA GO AHEAD AND AUTHORIZE THE DRAFTING OF THE RESOLUTION AND POSTPONE OR CARRY OVER TO THE NEXT MEETING.
ALRIGHT, WE'LL YOU'RE BACK ON THE 21ST.
[5. Public Hearing – 7:00 P.M., Benderson Development – Requesting Site Plan Approval of a proposal for parking adjustments at 3670 McKinley Parkway]
SO OUR NEXT PUBLIC HEARING IS FOR BENDERSON DEVELOPMENT REQUESTING SITE PLAN APPROVAL OF A PROPOSED PROPOSAL FOR PARKING ADJUSTMENTS AT 3 6 7 0 MCKINLEY PARKWAY.ALL MEMBERS OF THE BOARD SHOULD HAVE A HARD COPY IN FRONT OF THEM AS WELL.
MATTHEW OATS WITH BENDERSON DEVELOPMENT, UM, WAS WITH THE BOARD A COUPLE WEEKS AGO.
WE ARE REQUESTING APPROVAL TO REDO THE PARKING FIELD AT MCKINLEY PLAZA IN THIS AREA.
CURRENTLY THERE'S AN EXISTING CANOE, SO WHEN YOU COME IN, YOU HAVE TO MAKE A LEFT OR A RIGHT.
WE'RE LOOKING TO EXTEND THE EXISTING ISLANDS DOWN FROM DISCUSSIONS WITH THE BOARD.
THERE ARE TWO CHANGES FROM THE LAST SET OF PLANS.
WE SHIFTED THIS STOP BAR FURTHER OVER TO PULL IT IN FRONT OF THIS DRIVE LANE TO ALLOW THIS CAR TO QUEUE THERE.
AND THEN WE ALL, WE MODIFIED THE LANDSCAPING IN THE ISLANDS TO HAVE LOW LEVEL LANDSCAPING INSTEAD OF THE TREES THAT WERE THERE.
'CAUSE IT WAS REQUESTED THAT WE REMOVE THE TREES TO OPEN UP THE VIEW CORRIDOR.
OVERALL, WE ARE ABLE TO PICK UP 19 PARKING SPACES AND WE ALSO INCREASE THE OVERALL LANDSCAPING ON THE SITE BY ABOUT 1500 SQUARE FEET AS WELL.
SO WE'RE ABLE TO GET ADDITIONAL PARKING AND ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPING WITH ADDING IN ALL THE ADDITIONAL ISLANDS, EVEN THOUGH THE EXTRA PARKING AND THE WORK IS JUST HERE.
WE HAVE CARRIED ADDITIONAL ISLANDS OVER TO HERE AND THEN ALSO CARRIED ADDITIONAL ISLANDS DOWN HERE PAST WHERE WE WERE REQUESTING THE CHANGE IN PARKING.
JUST TO ADD MORE LANDSCAPING OVERALL, THE PLAZA, UM, PLANNING DEPARTMENT, SORRY, I WAS ENGAGED WITH THE, UH, PHOTO, UH, THE OTHER, UH, ADJUSTMENTS THAT THEY MADE WERE, I KNOW I ASKED A QUESTION ABOUT, UH, FROM THE LAST MEETING.
SO I'M, UH, COMFORTABLE WITH THE, THE REVISIONS THAT THEY MADE.
UM, YOU CAN OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING IF THERE ARE NO OTHER, NO OTHER QUESTIONS.
[00:45:01]
I ASK? THANK YOU.SO YOU ARE ADDING 19 SPACES, CORRECT? WE'RE NOT LOSING ANY.
AND THEN WE'RE ADDING ISLANDS.
ARE WE KEEPING THE SPEED BUMPS THAT ARE THERE? AREN'T THERE SOME SPEED BUMPS SOMEWHERE IN THERE AT POPEYES? YEAH, THERE DEFINITELY IS ONE OR TWO.
WE WON'T BE ELIMINATING THOSE.
AND HOW MANY ISLANDS ARE THERE NOW? DO WE HAVE THAT UP? THERE ARE ZERO ISLANDS.
ALL THERE IS, THERE IS THE CANOE.
SO THERE'S ACTUALLY NO END ISLANDS ON ANY OF THOSE PARKING ROWS.
I'VE BEEN SICK FOR LIKE A MONTH.
JUST MAKE THIS MAKE SENSE TO ME.
SO CURRENTLY WHEN YOU, WHEN YOU, SO WHEN YOU CURRENTLY COME INTO THE PLAZA, YOU'LL COME IN AND THERE'S AN EXISTING LANDSCAPE ISLAND THAT RUNS ALL THE WAY ACROSS.
SO YOU CAN'T ACTUALLY, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT ON THE SCREEN.
THAT'S WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT AT THE SCREEN.
SO YOU'RE FORCED TO MAKE A RIGHT AND THEN A LEFT TO COME IN OR COME ACROSS LEFT.
SO WE WERE LOOKING TO OPEN THIS UP.
SO ALL THE PARKING THEN IS THE PERPENDICULAR ROWS AWAY FROM THE BUILDING.
THIS ALLOWS US TO GAIN MORE PARKING IN THIS AREA.
WE FELT MAKE BETTER TRAFFIC FLOW WITH NOT HAVING THOSE S-CURVES.
WE'RE ALSO BRINGING THIS STOP BAR CLOSER OVER TO HERE.
AND THEN WE WERE EXTENDING THE LANDSCAPING DOWN IN THIS AREA AS WELL.
SO IF YOU LOOK UP NEAR THE POPEYE'S, THERE'S NO ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPING THERE.
SO PARKING ROWS WERE NOT TOUCHING, WE'RE STILL ADDING LANDSCAPING TREATMENT TO THE END OF THOSE ROWS.
UM, SO AT THE ENTRANCE HERE THEN, CAN YOU JUST WALK ME THROUGH THE INTENDED TRAFFIC FLOW? YES.
SO, SO PEOPLE PULL IN AND RIGHT NOW THEY HAVE TO MAKE A LEFT OR A RIGHT? CORRECT.
BUT IT LOOKS LIKE UNDER THE NEW ISLANDS NEW PLAN CANOES, WHAT'S THE WORD I NEED TO USE? UM, THE NEW PLAN.
THEY CAN SHOOT STRAIGHT ACROSS IF THEY'RE FEELING FEISTY OR THEY CAN MAKE A RIGHT OR A LEFT, IF CORRECT.
SO THERE'S A RIGHT TURN LANE, A DEDICATED RIGHT TURN LANE HERE.
AND THEN THERE'S A DEDICATED STRAIGHT OR LEFT TURN LANE HERE.
SO THE PLAN IS, IT'S A, IT'S A STOP CONTROLLED INTERSECTION HERE.
SO THEN DO THE PEOPLE COMING OUT OF THE PARKING LOT LANE TOWARD THE EXIT ALSO HAVE A STOP SIGN? YES.
IN THE PLACE THEY CAN GO STRAIGHT, CORRECT? YES.
THEY, THEY ARE EVERY, SO EVERYTHING IS STOP CONTROLLED YES.
ANYONE ELSE? MADAM CHAIR? CAITLIN SHAMARA.
SO WITH THE STOP MEASURES, IS IT SOLELY PAVEMENT MARKINGS? WE ARE PROPOSING THE PAVEMENT MARKINGS HERE.
WE CAN, IF THE BOARD WOULD LIKE, WE CAN ADD ADDITIONAL STOP SIGNS.
THERE WILL BE STOP SIGNS ON THE MAIN DRIVE.
SO THERE'LL BE A STOP SIGN THERE AND THERE'LL BE AN ADDED STOP SIGN THERE AS WELL.
WE WERE NOT GONNA TYPICALLY HAVE THE STOP SIGNS AT THE END ISLANDS AND IT WOULD JUST BE THE PAVEMENT MARKETS THERE.
IT LOOKED, WE LOOKED LIKE A BUNCH OF LOLLIPOPS ALL ALONG THE LINE.
UM, I DO HAVE CONCERNS THAT I THINK MEMBER VALANTE WAS KIND OF GETTING TO WITH THE FACT THAT THERE ARE SO MANY WAYS TO GET THROUGH THAT SPACE, BUT YET I ALSO REALLY APPRECIATE KIND OF BREAKING UP AND HAVING MORE ISLANDS AND SO FORTH AND WONDERING IF YOU END UP COMBINING ONE OR TWO OF THEM.
SO YOU STILL HAVE YOUR STRAIGHTAWAY, BUT YET YOU'RE NOT CREATING THESE EXTREMELY CONFUSING INTERACTIONS WHERE YOU HAVE THEM COMING IN AT LIKE, WHERE YOU HAVE TWO STOPS COMING IN LIKE THIS, BUT THEN YOU ALSO HAVE CROSS TRAFFIC COMING THROUGH THAT'S AT LIKE A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT CADENCE TO THE ROAD.
WELL THE, THE PLAN IS, SO IT'S ALL, IT'S ALL STOP CONTROLLED SO THE CARS WON'T BE FREE FLOWING, COMING ALL THE WAY THROUGH.
SO YOU'LL ON PAPER, YES, ON PAPER.
UN UNFORTUNATELY WE DO HAVE, YES, WE DO HAVE TO DESIGN AND LOOK ON PAPER, BUT YES, I, I UNDERSTAND THAT.
BUT YES, THE PLAN WOULD BE, SO THE TRAFFIC IS MOVING SLOW RIGHT NOW.
YOU HAVE THE ENTER AND GOING STRAIGHT THAT ALIGNS WITH THE DRIVE LANE DIRECTLY ACROSS.
AND ALLOWS YOU TO HAVE THE ACCESS TO, YOU KNOW, THE OTHER AREAS AND AND SO FORTH.
MY CONCERN IS WITH THE STOP INTERSECTIONS THAT ARE ON EITHER SIDE OF THAT KIND OF THROUGH DRIVE LANE, WHERE THERE IS SO MUCH THAT CAN HAPPEN WITH, AS YOU KNOW, PEOPLE WHO ARE SHOPPING AND IN THAT AREA ARE NOT NECESSARILY THE ONES WHO ABIDE BY A STOP SIGN ON THE PAVEMENT.
THIS IS, UH, MEMBER VALENTI AND I AGREE WITH MEMBER TURA THAT THE STRAIGHT, THE STRAIGHT ONE YOU CAN SELL ME ON, BUT THE
[00:50:01]
FIRST RIGHT.AND THEN QUICK LEFT THAT IN FRONT OF THE PERSON WHO STOPPED AT THAT SORT OF THIRD ISLAND.
THAT FEELS A LITTLE CHAOTIC TO ME.
DO YOU SEE WHAT I'M SAYING? SO IF YOU PULL IN AND YOU MAKE A RIGHT AND THEN YOU WANNA MAKE A QUICK LEFT INTO THAT FIRST ISLAND, THAT'S NOT THE STRAIGHTAWAY.
BUT IT ALSO BUTTS UP TO THE PERSON STOPPED AT THAT ISLAND.
I JUST FEEL LIKE THAT'S A PRETTY SHORT, QUICK TURN.
AND WE KNOW FROM THE TURN FROM WEGMANS INTO THE STARBUCKS THAT THE, THE QUICK LEFTS AND THE CARS BACKING UP.
SO MAYBE THOSE TWO COULD BE COMBINED.
SO WE CAN, WE CAN TAKE A, WE CAN TAKE A LOOK AND SEE WHAT WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO DO IN THAT AREA.
AND IF ANYONE DISAGREES THAT, THAT'S FINE WITH ME.
I'M JUST TRYING TO LIKE MAKE SENSE OF THIS.
NO, THAT WAS GOING TO BE MEMBER SHAMARA.
THAT WAS GOING TO BE MY RECOMMENDATION IS IF, IF YOU END UP ELIMINATING THOSE TWO KIND OF SIDE ONES AND JUST COMBINE THE ISLAND.
SO EVEN THOUGH IT'S NOT EXACTLY ISLAND, ISLAND, ISLAND, BUT YET IT ALSO HAS A CALMING MEASURE WITH RESPECT TO ALL OF THE DIFFERENT TRAFFIC PATTERNS THAT ARE GOING IN.
AND YOU'RE STILL ABLE TO GET THAT THROUGH TRAFFIC MOVING STRAIGHT WITHOUT EXTRA CONFUSION.
THE, THE ISSUE THEN BECOMES WITH THAT IS YOU WIND UP LOSING SO MUCH MORE OF THE PARKING.
THERE'S ALMOST, THERE WOULD BE ALMOST NO ACTUAL NET GAIN IN PARKING.
JUST BE I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
SO LIKE, IF YOU WERE TO CLOSE OFF THESE SPACES, YOU CAN'T JUST HAVE A DEAD END PARK AND ROAST, THEN WE HAVE TO OPEN IT UP ON BOTH SIDES.
AND TO DO THAT YOU WIND UP LOSING 12 PARKING SPACES HERE BECAUSE YOU WOULD LOSE, WELL THE DEAD ON SITUATION SIX ON BOTH SIDES.
AND THEN IF WE DID THE SAME THING HERE, THAT WOULD ACTUALLY BE 24 AND ALL OF A SUDDEN WE'RE NOW ACTUALLY LOSING PARKING VERSUS TRYING TO GAIN IT IN THIS, IN THIS AREA.
ONE THING WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO, TO LOOK AT DOING IS ALMOST WHAT WE'VE DONE HERE.
SO WHAT WE DID FROM THE BOARD'S SUGGESTION AT THE LAST MEETING, WE PREVIOUSLY HAD THE STOP BAR HERE.
WE PULLED IT FORWARD SO THE TRAFFIC ON THIS DRIVE LANE COMES IN AND IT IS STILL STOPPED CONTROLLED HERE.
WE COULD LOOK AT TAKING THIS, PULLING THIS FORWARD.
SO IT'S IN FRONT OF THIS DRIVE LANE.
SO ANYONE COMING OUTTA HERE IS STOP CONTROLLED VERSUS THEY'RE FREE FLOWING THEN OUT OF THERE TO REDUCE THAT.
SO WE CAN TAKE A LOOK AT THAT AND JUST SEE IF THERE'S OTHER, OTHER OPTIONS THAT I, THIS IS THE CHAIR.
UM, I I, MY CONCERN WHEN I WAS LOOKING AT THIS IS, UM, IF EVERYBODY'S CON, IF EVERYBODY'S FAMILIAR WITH, UM, THE TOPS ON MCKINLEY IN 20 MM-HMM
AND IT'S SHORT AND THEN WHEN YOU GO TO PULL IN, IF THERE'S A LOT OF TRAFFIC, EVERYBODY'S BUNCHED UP RIGHT AT THAT, AT THAT INTERSECTION.
THE GOOD THING ABOUT IT IS BECAUSE IT DOES HAVE A FOUR-WAY STOP MM-HMM
SO WHEN YOU'RE COMING IN, PEOPLE ARE STOPPED SO YOU CAN GET IN AND I THINK THAT'S WHAT YOU GUYS ARE SAYING.
YOU'RE THINKING THAT MAYBE PEOPLE ARE JUST GONNA COME SHOOTING THROUGH.
IS THAT WHAT THE CONCERN IS? THIS IS NUMBER VALENTI.
I WAS THINKING ABOUT PEOPLE SHOOTING STRAIGHT THROUGH, BUT MEMBER SHAMARA HAS MADE ME FEEL BETTER ABOUT IT.
MY CONCERN IS THAT THE PERSON PULLING IN HAS TO STOP.
BUT THEY'RE GONNA MAKE A RIGHT AND THEN THE PERSON AT THE STOP SIGN ON THEIR RIGHT IS JUST GONNA GO.
BUT MEANWHILE THE PERSON MAKING A RIGHT IS ACTUALLY GONNA HANG A QUICK LEFT AND THEY'RE GONNA RUN INTO EACH OTHER.
BUT MAYBE IT'S BIGGER IN REAL LIFE AND IT JUST LOOKS SMALLER ON THIS PAPER.
BUT THAT'S MY, THAT'S MY CONCERN.
AND THAT'S WHAT I IS THE RIGHT QUICK LEFT.
WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO, SO REWORK IT KIND OF LIKE THIS SIDE.
SO THE STOP BAR STOPPING THE PERSON COMING HERE IS IN FRONT OF THAT LEFT TURN.
SO THERE WOULD BE ROOM REALLY HERE TO BE, TO MAKE THE TURN THE STOP BAR BECAUSE YOU REALLY KIND OF NEED THE STOP BAR TO ALIGN WITH THE LANE COMING IN.
SO WE HAVE ROOM TO PULL THIS FORWARD HERE.
SO THERE WOULD ACTUALLY BE STOPPING IN FRONT OF WHERE THAT LEFT TURN ACTUALLY IS.
AND WE COULD LOOK AT, AT REMODIFY HOW THE TRAFFIC IS STOPPED THERE ON THAT SIDE.
BUT THEN YOU RUN THE RISK OF THE CARS BACKING UP, NOT BEING ABLE TO MAKE THE LEFT AND BACKING UP INTO THE TURNING LANE FROM MCKINLEY.
AND I LIKE, I'M, I'M NOT NOT SUPPORTIVE OF THIS BECAUSE THE PARKING LOT NEEDS MORE MM-HMM
SPACES AND I APPRECIATE THE CREATIVITY HERE.
I JUST AM NOT UNFAMILIAR WITH THIS PARKING LOT AND THERE IS ALWAYS AN ABUNDANCE OF TRAFFIC AND CARS
[00:55:01]
BACKED UP AND THERE'S, THERE'S NEVER A TIME THAT YOU GO HERE THAT YOU'RE NOT THREE DEEP BEHIND A STOP SIGN MM-HMMWHICH IS ONE OF THE THINGS WE'RE TRYING, WE'RE WE'RE HOPING TO ALLEVIATE WITH THE EXTRA PARKING.
SO THE CONCERN THEN IS CARS COMING IN TO MAKE A LEFT HERE MM-HMM
AND I CAN TELL YOU LIKE ON THE OTHER SIDE, YOU CAN'T, I GUESS YOU CAN KIND OF SEE IT HERE.
YOU SEE THE WEGMAN'S PARKING LOT.
AND THE ENTRANCE BY, IF YOU WERE TO MAKE A RIGHT OUT OF THAT ENTRANCE BY STARBUCKS, YOU CAN NEVER MAKE A LEFT INTO WEGMAN'S BECAUSE THE CARS ARE STACKED UP AT THE STOP SIGN.
SO I KNOW IT HAPPENS IN THIS, IN THIS PARKING LOT OR THEY'RE STACKED UP AT THE LIGHT.
THE ONLY, THE ONLY THING I WOULD SAY IN THAT REGARD IS IF SAY THERE'S CARS BLOCKING THIS, YOU THEN HAVE THE NEXT, YOU DO HAVE ADDITIONAL DRIVE LANES COMING DOWN THERE WHERE YOU CAN JUST THEN CONTINUE ON DOWN INTO THE PARKING LOT, UNDERSTAND THAT IT COULD BE BLOCKED AND THEN THERE, THERE WOULD BE THE NEXT ROW TO GET TO IN THAT REGARD.
UM, BILL CLARK IS THERE PEOPLE WHOSE PROFESSION IS TO FIGURE OUT WHAT PEOPLE WILL DO IN PARKING LOTS BECAUSE I, I FEEL REALLY UNCOMFORTABLE HAVING TWO LAWYERS AND LAY PEOPLE AGREED.
AND I, AND I, ONE OF THE ONES I THINK ABOUT ALL THE TIME IS THE ONE NEAR THIS WHERE THE HOME DEPOT WHERE THE CARS ARE LINED UP AND IT'S LIKE JUST IMPOSSIBLE TO GET IN AND OUT OF.
AND WHEN YOU LOOKED AT IT ON A MAP, EVERYTHING SEEMED FINE.
BUT THEN IN REAL LIFE IT DOESN'T WORK.
THIS MAY WORK FINE, IT MAY WORK WORSE.
AND I DON'T FEEL COMFORTABLE TRYING TO FIGURE IT OUT AND LIKE, OKAY, MOVING THE STOP SIGN.
MAYBE THAT WORKS, MAYBE THAT MAKES IT WORSE.
AND AGAIN, I DON'T FEEL COMFORTABLE BEING THE PERSON MAKING THAT DECISION.
IS THERE SOMEBODY LIKE WHO DESIGNED IT THE ORIGINALLY? SO I MEAN, NOT, NOT UNDERSTAND YOUR QUESTION AND NOT FOR NOT FOR NOTHING.
I'M A LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK.
SO THIS, THIS IS LITERALLY, AND I UNDERSTAND I WORK, IS THERE LIKE SOME MODELING OR SOMETHING THAT YOU CAN SHOW US CAN, WE CAN GET, YOU CAN GET A TRAFFIC ENGINEER INVOLVED.
THERE'S SIM TRAFFIC YOU CAN DO THAT ACTUALLY MODELS OUT HOW THE CARS TURN, THINGS OF THAT NATURE.
WE CAN DEFINITELY, DEFINITELY DO THAT.
I MEAN, HAVING THIS, AND I UNDERSTAND THE CONCERN WITH CARS COMING THROUGH AND AS, AND TAMMY CAN ATTEST THIS, AS WE'VE GOTTEN FARTHER INTO MORE TECHNOLOGY, IT, IT'S GOTTEN WORSE IN REGARDS TO TRAFFIC CONTROL AND, AND WHEN PEOPLE JUST, THEY DISREGARD THINGS.
EVERYONE'S LOOKING AT THEIR PHONE AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
SO IT'S, IT'S DIFFICULT TO COME UP WITH EVERY SCENARIO, WHICH IS WHY WE TRY AT TIMES TO, TO DO THE BEST MM-HMM
AND WE DEFINITELY PUT A LOT OF THOUGHT AND EFFORT INTO DOING THIS TO TRY TO COME UP WITH WHAT WE THOUGHT WAS THE BEST TO GAIN PARKING AND GAIN LANDSCAPING WHILE STILL LOOKING AT THE OVERALL TRAFFIC CIRCULATION FOR IT.
THAT'S, I WILL SAY AN UNDERSTANDING, BUT LIKE IT'S WHAT I DO.
SO I AM, I CONSIDER MYSELF AN EXPERT, BUT THERE ARE ALSO OTHER TRAFFIC ENGINEERS THAT WE CAN ACTUALLY MODEL IT.
WE COULD COME UP WITH TRAFFIC COUNTS.
THERE'S OTHER INFORMATION YOU CAN DO AS WELL.
LIKE MAYBE SOME MODELS OR SOMETHING TO HELP US UNDERSTAND WHY WHAT THE SAFEST WAY TO GET THE MOST PARKING IS.
I THANK YOU FOR SAYING THAT OUT LOUD.
I ALSO HAVE THE WRONG DEGREE FOR ENGINEERING.
UM, BUT I MAYBE IF WE COULD GET SOME TRAFFIC COUNTS OR SOMETHING TO ACTUALLY PLAY THIS OUT IN REAL TIME WITH THE VOLUME IN THIS PARKING LOT.
UM, BECAUSE IT IS VERY, VERY BUSY ALL THE TIME.
I AM GONNA SAY SOMETHING AND I'M PROBABLY GONNA GET BOOED AT, BUT, UM, I WOULD RE-LOOK AT THAT, THE AMOUNT OF ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPING, IF IT'S GONNA HELP WITH THE PARKING, BECAUSE THIS IS ONE BUSY SECTION I, AND I DON'T KNOW THAT WE NEED ALL THAT LANDSCAPING.
IF THEY'RE ADDING THAT MUCH LANDSCAPING AND WE NEED THE PARKING AND WE NEED THE DISTANCES AND WE NEED THE CLEARANCES TO GET IN, IN THIS PARTICULAR INSTANCE, I THINK THAT THE, THAT THAT NEEDS TO LOOK AT IT.
SO WHEN YOU'RE BRINGING YOUR TRAFFIC PEOPLE IN, I I, THAT'S WHAT I WOULD WANT LOOKED AT AS WELL.
WE COULD DE YEAH, WE COULD DEFINITELY, WE CAN REANALYZE THE WHOLE THING.
BECAUSE IT'S, YOU KNOW, IT'S JUST, IT'S AMAZING.
PEOPLE FORGET THAT THEY'RE IN A PARKING LOT.
SO, UM, I LIVED OUT IN THE MIDWEST TOO LONG.
I CAME BACK HERE AND PEOPLE, I, YOU KNOW, I THOUGHT IT WAS PART OF NASCAR.
I THOUGHT IT WAS A REQUIREMENT TO GET YOUR NEW YORK LICENSE, THAT YOU HAVE TO BE ABLE TO DO 50 IN A PARKING LOT.
SO, UM, I'M JUST SAYING THAT I THINK IT NEEDS TO TAKE A, A LONGER LOOK AT IT, UM, FOR SAFETY REASONS.
AND NONE OF US ARE, YOU KNOW, I'M A PROFESSIONAL TAP DANCER, SO I DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT TRAFFIC.
AND SINCE WE'VE, WE'VE PURCHASED THIS, WE PUT A LOT OF TIME AND EFFORT INTO THE EXPANSION ON ONE END IN THE STARBUCKS AS WELL.
SO LIKE, AND IT SHOWS AND WE'RE COMMITTED TO IT.
SO YEAH, WE CAN DEFINITELY TAKE OUR TIME.
[01:00:01]
LOOK AT IT FOR SURE.YEAH, THAT'S ABSOLUTELY SOMETHING WE CAN DO FOR SURE.
ON THAT NOTE, WE STILL HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING.
WE STILL HAVE TO DO THE PUBLIC HEARING.
SO WOULD YOU LIKE TO READ THE, UM, NOTICE PLEASE.
LEGAL NOTICE TOWN OF HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD SITE PLAN APPROVAL PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE TOWN OF HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD WILL CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING ON A REQUEST BY BENDERSON DEVELOPMENT TO MAKE ADJUSTMENTS TO THE EXISTING PARKING LOT AT 3 6 7 0 MCKINLEY PARKWAY.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD ON MAY 7TH, 2025 AT 7:00 PM IN ROOM SEVEN A SLASH SEVEN B OF HAMBURG TOWN HALL.
THIS IS THE FIRST CALL FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR BENDERSON DEVELOPMENT.
IS THERE ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WISHES TO SPEAK? COME ON UP AND GIVE US YOUR NAME AND WE DO HAVE A SIGN IN SHEET.
WELL, THEY DON'T HAVE TO, BUT THEY CAN, YOU CAN SIGN YOUR NAME.
ARE YOU IN HERE IN AN OFFICIAL CAPACITY? I SURE CAN BE.
WE, YOU ANOTHER WE'LL GET YOU.
UH, TOM SCHICK, UH, PRESIDENT OF THE TOWN OF HAMPER FIRE CHIEFS ASSOCIATION.
UM, THE ONLY THING THAT I WOULD LIKE TO KIND OF LOOK AT HERE IS JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE ENOUGH ROOM FOR FIRE AFTER ASKED TO MOVE AROUND.
I'M HEARING WE'RE THROWING ADDITIONAL PARKING SPOTS IN, WE'RE PUTTING IN ISLANDS, WE'RE MOVING STOP SIGNS AND EVERYTHING.
I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR FIRE TRUCKS CAN MANEUVER AROUND THERE.
SO, OTHER THAN THAT, UM, LOOKING AT IT NOW, I MEAN, IT, IT LOOKS A LITTLE BIT BETTER THAN WHAT I WAS ENVISIONING IN THE BACK.
BUT, UM, JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WHEN YOU GUYS DO THE TRAFFIC STUDIES, UM, THAT WE HAVE, UH, SOME DECENT TURNING RADIUSES FOR THE FIRE TRUCKS BECAUSE LET'S FACE IT, DON'T TURN ON A DIME.
ANYONE ELSE IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WISHES TO MAKE COMMENT ON THIS CASE? FINAL CALL FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR BENDERSON DEVELOPMENT AT 3 6 7 0 MCKINLEY PARKWAY.
UM, DO YOU NEED SOME TIME TO GET, WILL YOU BE READY BY THE 21ST OR WOULD YOU LIKE TO COME BACK? WOULD YOU LIKE A LITTLE MORE TIME? UM, YOU COULD HAVE TO COME UP TO THE MICROPHONE 'CAUSE THEY CAN'T HEAR YOU.
DO YOU WANNA LOOK AT IT? CAN I LET, I GUESS, CAN WE COME BACK FOR THE 21ST? AND IF WE CAN'T MAKE IT IN TIME, WE CAN REQUEST TO BE TABLED.
CAN HE BE PUT ON THE AGENDA? YEAH, PUT ON THE AGENDA BECAUSE IT'S GOTTA BE PUT ON THE AGENDA AND THEN IT CAUSES A DELAY FOR SOMEBODY ELSE TO, UM, WHAT DO WE HAVE FOR THE 21ST SO FAR? FIVE.
ALRIGHT, SO THEN WE CAN GO TO THE NEXT ONE.
THEN LET'S TABLE IT TO THE JUNE MEETING.
THEN WE'LL SEE YOU ON JUNE 4TH.
AND THEN WE CAN MAKE THE FIRE DEPARTMENT HAPPY AS WELL.
I DID CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, BY THE WAY.
[6. Public Hearing – 7:00 P.M., BJ Muirhead Company – Requesting Site Plan Approval of a proposal to construct a two (2) story office, training, sales, and warehouse building, two (2) rental storage buildings, five (5) private storage buildings, and other site improvements on a 10.4-acre parcel at Jeffrey Boulevard (SBL: 159.12-2-4)]
FINAL PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS EVENING IS FOR BJ MUIRHEAD COMPANY REQUESTING SITE PLAN APPROVAL OF A PROPOSAL TO CONSTRUCT A TWO STORY OFFICE, TRAINING, SALES AND WAREHOUSE BUILDING, TWO RENTAL STORAGE BUILDINGS, AND FIVE PRIVATE STORAGE BUILDINGS AND OTHER SITE IMPROVEMENTS ON A 10.4 ACRE PARCEL AT JEFFREY BOULEVARD.DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE TO OFFER OTHER THAN YOUR PAST PRESENTATIONS? 'CAUSE THAT'S PART OF OUR RECORD AND TONIGHT IS THE PUBLIC HEARING.
DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ADDITIONAL? NO, NOTHING'S CHANGED.
UM, PLANNING DEPARTMENT, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING? UH, WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING AT THIS TIME, NO.
THEN, UM, I'M GONNA ASK FOR THE NOTICE TO BE READ.
LEGAL NOTICE TOWN OF HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD SITE PLAN APPROVAL PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE TOWN OF HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD WILL CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING ON A REQUEST BY BJ MUIRHEAD COMPANY TO CONSTRUCT A TWO STORY OFFICE
[01:05:01]
TRAINING, SALES AND WAREHOUSE BUILDING, TWO RENTAL STORAGE BUILDINGS, AND FIVE PRIVATE STORAGE BUILDINGS ON A 10.4 ACRE PARCEL ON THE EAST SIDE OF JEFFREY BOULEVARD.THE PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD ON MAY 7TH, 2025 AT 7:00 PM IN ROOM SEVEN A SLASH SEVEN B OF HAMBURG TOWN HALL.
THIS IS THE FIRST CALL FOR THE, UM, PUBLIC HEARING FOR BJ MUIRHEAD COMPANY.
IS THERE ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WISHES TO MAKE COMMENT? COME ON DOWN.
IF THERE'S ANYONE ELSE, JUST COME ON UP AND THEN WE CAN, WE'LL MOVE ALONG.
UM, YOU DON'T HAVE TO SIGN IN.
JUST IDENTIFY YOURSELF BEFORE YOU COME AND HAND THAT OUT PLEASE.
I AM THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR APPENDIX E FOSSIL PARK AND NATURE RESERVE.
AND YOU HAVE SOME INFORMATION THAT YOU WANT TO GIVE TO US, CORRECT? YES.
I HAVE A COUPLE OF NOTES AS WELL AS A SMALL MAP.
I AM THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF HAMBURG NATURAL HISTORY SOCIETY, BETTER KNOWN AS, UH, APPENDIX SEA FOSSIL PARK.
UM, AND, UM, THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO SPEAK HERE TONIGHT.
UM, I JUST WANTED TO, YOU KNOW, START BY SAYING THAT, UH, I'M NOT HERE TO, UH, EXPLICITLY SUPPORT OR OPPOSE THIS PROJECT.
UH, I JUST WANTED TO SHARE WITH THE PLANNING BOARD SOME CONCERNS, UM, INVOLVING THE PROJECT.
UM, AND THERE'S, THERE'S REALLY FOUR HERE.
UM, THE FIRST ONE IS, UM, THAT THERE WAS A LOSS OF VEGETATION, UM, DUE TO THE UNPERMITTED CUTTING ACTIVITY.
UH, AND THAT CREATED AN ACCESS POINT FOR TRESPASSING AND OTHER CRIMINAL ACTIVITIES ON OUR PROPERTY.
UM, NOW SNOW FENCING WAS INSTALLED BY THE APPLICANT AS A TEMPORARY SOLUTION, UM, BUT WE ARE ASKING FOR A MORE PERMANENT WAY TO KEEP, UH, FOUR WHEELERS AND DIRT BIKES FROM ENTERING OUR PROPERTY.
UM, THE SECOND ITEM IS THAT, UH, THE, THE BOUNDARIES ON THE PROPERTY, THE, THE PROPERTY UNDER DEVELOPMENT, UH, WERE NOT MARKED BY THE TREE CUTTING CONTRACTOR.
UH, AND THE CUTTING WAS HAPHAZARD, WHICH RESULTED IN SOME VEGETATION LOSS ON HNHS PROPERTY.
UM, AT THE SAME TIME I WAS OUT THERE TALKING TO THE CONTRACTOR, UH, THEY MADE SOME THREATS WHILE DIRECTING PROFANITY, UH, AT ME, THE EMPLOYEE, UM, WHEN I RAISED CONCERNS ABOUT THE UNPERMITTED ACTIVITIES.
UM, NOW SINCE THEN, I HAVE RECEIVED, UH, AN APOLOGY FROM THE OWNER, UH, JOE.
HE WAS, UH, VERY, UH, UH, UNDERSTANDING OF THE SITUATION, UH, AND HE REGRETTED THE ACTIONS OF, OF THE CONTRACTOR.
UM, THIRD, UM, WANTED TO MENTION THAT, UH, THE PLANNED ACTIVITIES, WHICH INCLUDE PUBLIC ACCESS TO STORAGE FACILITIES, UH, DO PRESENT FURTHER EXPOSURE FROM CLIENTELE.
UM, WE'RE CONCERNED ABOUT THE RISK OF TRESPASSING AS WELL AS ILLEGAL DUMPING OF HOUSEHOLD WASTE IN THE WOODS BEHIND THE STORAGE SITE.
UM, AND OUR FOURTH CONCERN IS, YOU KNOW, WE'RE IN OUR 30TH YEAR HERE, BUT REALLY, UM, PEN DIXIE STARTED.
BEFORE THAT, WE WERE A COMMUNITY-BASED MOVEMENT TO, UH, REHABILITATE A FORMER QUARRY.
UM, AND WE HAD A LOT OF TRASH THAT WE HAD TO CLEAN UP IN THE EARLY YEARS AND REALLY HAD TO STRUGGLE TO KEEP OUT ILLEGAL ACTIVITIES, WHETHER IT BE, UH, SHOOTING, UH, PARTYING, FOUR WHEELERS, UH, DUMPING OF VEHICLES AND TIRES, THINGS LIKE THAT.
UM, AND SO WE'VE REALLY TAKEN ALL THOSE STEPS TO IMPROVE SECURITY.
UM, AND NOW WE WELCOME, YOU KNOW, 30 YEARS IN.
WE WELCOME AROUND 15,000 VISITORS EACH YEAR, INCLUDING MANY YOUNG CHILDREN.
AND WE JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THERE'S NO WAY THAT VEHICLES OR PEOPLE, UH, FROM EITHER THE BJ MUIRHEAD PROPERTY OR FROM THE ADJACENT AREA WILL CROSS THE BJM HEAD PROPERTY AND CREATE SAFETY ISSUES FOR OUR VISITORS.
AND SO WE HAVE THREE REQUESTS FOR THE PLANNING BOARD.
UM, WE ARE ASKING FOR, THE FIRST REQUEST IS WE'RE ASKING FOR FENCING ON THE EAST AND SOUTH SIDES OF THE DEVELOPMENT ADJACENT TO HNHS LAND TO ENCAPSULATE THE PROPOSED PUBLIC STORAGE AND PARKING AREAS.
UH, AND I REFER TO FIGURE ONE HERE, WHICH IS ON THE BACK.
IT'S A MAP SHOWING, UH, THE PROPERTIES I'VE SHOWN, UH, PROPOSED FENCING IN BLUE AND PROPOSED VEGETATION IN GREEN.
[01:10:01]
ITEM TWO IS WE ARE ASKING FOR THE PROPERTY LINES TO BE CLEARLY MARKED, UH, SO THAT, UM, THERE ARE NO FURTHER INCIDENTS.AND WE ASK THAT CONTRACTORS FOLLOW THE PROPERTY LINES TO PREVENT FURTHER DAMAGE TO HNHS LAND.
UM, AND NOTE MAYBE IT'S, MAYBE IT'S NOT WITHIN THE SCOPE OF PLANNING BOARD, UH, JURISDICTION, BUT WE ARE HOPEFUL THAT THERE WILL BE PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT BY CONTRACTORS TOWARDS OUR EMPLOYEES, VOLUNTEERS, AND VISITORS.
UM, AND THEN LASTLY, WE'RE ASKING, UH, WE'RE SUPPORTING THE TOWN OF HAMBURG'S, UH, CONSERVATION ADVISORY BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS, UH, TO INSTALL AND MAINTAIN VEGETATION, UM, CONSISTENT WITH THE LANDSCAPING PLAN THAT'S CURRENTLY IN DEVELOPMENT.
UM, AND ESPECIALLY IN THE AREAS ON THE EAST AND SOUTH SIDES OF THE DEVELOPMENT ADJACENT TO HNHS LAND, WHICH WERE, WOULD PROVIDE AN ADDITIONAL DETERRENT FOR TRESPASSING, AS WELL AS A VISUAL BARRIER BETWEEN THE PROPERTIES.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO MAKE COMMENT ON THIS CASE? COME ON DOWN.
PLEASE REMEMBER TO IDENTIFY YOURSELF, UM, PRIOR TO SPEAKING.
I'M A LONG TIME VOLUNTEER AT PEN DIXIE.
UH, I WAS RECRUITED TO BE A BOARD MEMBER AT PEN DIXIE ABOUT 20 YEARS AGO, UH, SPECIFICALLY TO WORK ON BUILDING A VISITOR CENTER.
WELL, 20 YEARS WE'RE GETTING CLOSER.
IT, UH, WE HAVE A WAYS TO GO YET.
UM, WE PURCHASED THE FIVE ACRES AT JEFFREY SO THAT, UH, WE COULD CREATE A PARKING LOT FOR STARTERS AND, UH, BRING IN ALL OF OUR VISITORS OFF OF JEFFREY BOULEVARD INSTEAD OF THE RESIDENTIAL STREET THAT THEY, UH, COME IN NOW.
SO IT, IT'S, IT'S BEEN A LONG PROCESS, UH, FOR A WHOLE LOT OF US.
AND, UH, WE'VE DONE OUR BEST OVER THOSE YEARS TO, UH, FOLLOW ALL THE GUIDELINES OF THE TOWN OF HAMBURG.
UH, AND, UH, TO THE POINT WHERE
UM, AND IT'S DISCONCERTING TO ME, UH, THAT A DEVELOPER CAME IN AND MADE A MISTAKE.
I, UM, OKAY, THE MISTAKE WAS MADE.
UH, I WOULD HOPE THAT THE TOWN OF HAMBURG WILL BE VERY DIGI DILIGENT ABOUT MAKING SURE THAT THINGS ARE MADE RIGHT AS BEST THEY CAN.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE? THIS IS THE FINAL CALL FOR PUBLIC HEARING ON BJ MUIRHEAD COMPANY REQUESTING SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR THIS PROJECT.
SEEING NONE, I'M CLOSING THE PUBLIC HEARING.
UM, JOSH, WE CAN, WE'RE GONNA HAVE, WE'RE GONNA PUT THIS ON THE 21ST, CORRECT? YEAH, YOU CAN PUT IT ON THE 21ST.
I WOULD ASSUME THAT THIS BOARD WILL WANT TO HEAVILY DISCUSS POTENTIAL CONDITIONS MITIGATIONS FOR ANY TYPE OF APPROVAL FOR THIS PROJECT.
SO, UH, WITH YOUR AUTHORIZATION, WE CAN PUT OUR THOUGHTS TOGETHER BASED OFF OF THE CONVERSATIONS THAT WE'VE HAD, THE PUBLIC HEARING COMMENTS, AND PUT TOGETHER SOME DRAFT THOUGHTS.
AND THEN YOU CAN KIND OF, WHAT WE DID WITH STURDY BUILD SHEDS, KIND OF HAVE A DISCUSSION ON WHAT THOSE CONDITIONS AND MITIGATIONS WILL BE.
OR YOU CAN ASK FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.
IT'S, IT'S REALLY UP THIS BOARD.
BEFORE WE GO THERE, I'M GONNA, I, I, I FEEL LIKE I, I DON'T, I WANNA STAY IN MY LANE AS THE HEAD OF THE PLANNING BOARD.
AND I KNOW THAT THE RESIDENTS, I'M ALL ABOUT RESIDENTS AND PROTECTING EVERYBODY.
AND SOMETIMES YOU JUST CAN'T DO IT.
WE'RE NOT, WE'RE NOT, UH, GOD, SO TO SPEAK.
AND I DO KNOW THAT THIS APPLICANT IS DEEPLY REGRETS HIRING THE PERSON THAT HE HIRED.
AND, UM, IT IS UNFORTUNATE, IT IS UNFORTUNATE WHAT PENN DIXIE WENT THROUGH AND WHAT THEY EXPERIENCED.
BUT I DO UNDERSTAND, AND CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, THAT YOU ARE WORKING WITH PENN DIXIE.
IS THAT STILL GOING ON? CORRECT.
[01:15:01]
IN CORRESPONDENCE WITH THEM, CORRECT? YES.SO BECAUSE THE PUBLIC IS HERE AND PEOPLE AT HOME ARE WATCHING, I WANT THEM TO KNOW THAT THIS APPLICANT AND PEN DIXIE HAVE BEEN IN, UM, IN THE WORK, SO TO SPEAK.
THIS BOARD IS WELL AWARE OF WHAT WAS PRESENTED TONIGHT.
I'M GLAD IT WAS, I'M GLAD THAT PEN DIXIE CAME IN FRONT OF US TO, UM, REITERATE WHAT THEY, WHAT THEIR VISION IS FOR THEIR PROTECTION OF THEIR PROPERTY.
THIS BOARD WILL TAKE IT UNDER, UM, CONSIDERATION, BUT IN NO WAY DO I WANNA BE BEATING ANYBODY UP.
AND I FEEL LIKE WE'VE HAMMERED THIS CONTRACTOR WHO, UM, DID IT WRONG AND WE'RE BLAMING THE APPLICANT AND I'M, AND I, AND I WANNA LET THAT GO.
I MEAN, IT IS UNFORTUNATE EVERYBODY SAID THERE ARE APOLOGIES AND NOW WE HAVE TO MOVE FORWARD.
MY PLAN WITH THIS BOARD IS TO MOVE FORWARD AND I HOPE THAT THE APPLICANT KNOWS THAT WHEN YOU GUYS COME BACK HERE, THERE WILL BE RESTRICTIONS AND THERE WILL BE SOME OF THE THINGS THAT THEY, YOU KNOW, TALKED ABOUT.
UM, SO HAVING SAID THAT, I JUST WANTED TO GET THAT ON THE RECORD.
UM, BECAUSE I DO KNOW THAT THIS APPLICANT IS WORKING WITH AND HAS WORKED WITH PEN DIXIE.
I RECEIVED, WE RECEIVED MORE CORRESPONDENCE FROM PEN DIXIE, UM, AND I'M HAPPY THAT THEY'RE HERE TONIGHT.
AND SO IT MAKES US MORE AWARE OF WHAT WE NEED TO DO AS A BOARD.
UM, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING SHORT TO OFFER? UM, BESIDES WHAT I JUST REITERATED? NO, I JUST WANTED TO PUT ON THE RECORD THAT THERE'S NO AFFILIATION WITH THE OTHER CONTRACTOR ANYMORE.
AS WE'VE DISCUSSED, WE'VE TACKLED AND ATTACKED EVERY QUESTION, EVERY REQUEST.
WE'VE WORKED WITH EVERY TOWN DEPARTMENT.
ME PERSONALLY AND MY COMPANY HAVE A 30 YEAR HISTORY IN THE TOWN OF HAMBURG THAT'S SUCCESSFUL WORKING WITH JEFF AND KURT ALLEN AND NEVER HAD AN ISSUE.
SO WE, WE PLANT NOTHING MORE THAN A SUCCESSFUL COMPLETION OF THE PROJECT AND ABIDING BY ALL THE, THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE TOWN.
BOARD MEMBERS, DO YOU HAVE ANY OTHER ADDITIONAL REQUESTS, INFORMATION QUESTIONS, MEMBER CLARK? YEAH, I HAVE A CLARIFICATION.
UM, SO, SO ON THE, THE THING WE GOT FROM THE PEN DIXIE GUIDE NUMBER THREE IS VEGETATION CONSISTENT WITH THE TOWN OF HAMBURG CONSERVATION ADVISORY BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS IN THE FILE ON SHAREPOINT.
I'VE GOT A CAB MEMO DATED MARCH 17TH, BUT THAT MEMO DISCUSSES THE STUFF THAT HAPPENED IN THE PAST AND SOME WETLANDS.
I DON'T SEE A RECOMMENDED LANDSCAPING PLAN.
SO I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S A DIFFERENT FILE FROM A DIFFERENT SOURCE OR IF THERE WAS A DIFFERENT MEMO FROM THE CAB MEMBER SHAMAR HERE.
THERE IS A PLANT, A LANDSCAPING PLAN RIGHT ON FILE.
SUBMITTED THAT CAME FROM THE DEVELOPER.
SO IS THAT, IS THAT THE ONE THEY'RE REFERRING TO AND THEY CAN RESPOND TO THIS, UH, AFTER THE MEETING OR IN WRITING OR WHATEVER, IF, IS THAT THE PLAN THEY'RE REFERRING TO IN NUMBER THREE AS FAR AS THE VEGETATION CONSISTENT WITH, WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, SIR, WE, WE'VE AGREED TO WORK WITH CAB AS THE PROJECT DEVELOPS.
SO THERE'S NOT AN OFFICIAL LANDSCAPING PLAN.
I GUESS MEMBERSHIP RIGHT HERE, THAT WAS MY QUESTION, IS THAT THERE WAS DISCUSSION ABOUT YOU GUYS WORKING WITH THE CAB AND WITH THAT SUBMISSION OF THE LANDSCAPING PLAN WITH THE LIST AND THE CALIBERS AND EVERYTHING, WAS THAT DEVELOPED IN COORDINATION WITH THE CAB? IT'S GOING TO BE DEVELOPED WITH COORDINATION OF THE CAB AND GARDNER.
UH, SPECIFICALLY IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT YOU'VE WALKED THE SITE WITH CAB.
AND THEN THERE'S BEEN A PRELIMINARY REPORT THAT WE HAVE NOT GOTTEN YET.
UM, 'CAUSE IT'S STILL IN, IT'S STILL IN THE DEVELOPMENT FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND.
WE SUBMITTED SOMETHING, WE MET WITH CAB, CAB REVIEWED IT, THEY WANTED TO MAKE SOME CHANGES TO IT WITH REGARD TO NOT JUST TREES.
THEY WANTED SOME SHRUBBERY AND SOME NATURAL VEGETATION.
SO THEY, THEY HAVE COMMITTED TO WORKING WITH US.
WE'VE COMMITTED TO WORKING WITH THEM AS THE PROJECT DEVELOPS BECAUSE WITHOUT SITE PLAN APPROVAL WE CAN'T, WE CAN'T MOVE ON SELECT WHERE TO PUT THE TREES.
OR WHERE THEY CAN RE REFOREST.
IT SOUNDS LIKE THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE REFERENCING.
NUMBER THREE IN THE REQUESTS, THAT WAS, IT SOUNDS LIKE THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE REFERENCING IN NUMBER THREE IN THE REQUESTS MEMBER SCH.
JUST TO CLARIFY, THE LANDSCAPE SUBMISSION PACKAGE DOCUMENT THAT IS, THAT WE HAVE ON FILE IS NOT TO BE CONSIDERED.
I MEAN, I KNOW THERE'S NO LANDSCAPING PLAN, BUT THIS IS GOING TO STILL BE DEVELOPED.
IT'S STILL IN THE WORKS WITH CAB.
ANY IDEA WHEN THAT'S GONNA BE CLOSER TO DONE UPON SITE PAN
[01:20:01]
SITE PLAN APPROVAL AND WE CAN START DETERMINING WHERE THE BUILDINGS ARE GOING TO ACTUALLY ACTUALLY START AND STOP AND WORKING WITH GARDNER.THEN WE CAN FIGURE OUT WHERE WE CAN PUT THE, THE REFORESTATION AND, AND THE TYPES OF PLANTS THAT HE'S SELECTING AND SUGGESTING.
WELL THE, THE REASON I ASKED IT THAT WAY IS 'CAUSE IT'S SIMPLE FOR US TO DO A RESOLUTION THAT SAYS CONDITION UPON THIS PLAN.
IF WE HAVE THE PLAN AND WE'VE LOOKED AT IT, BUT IF WE HAVEN'T LOOKED AT IT AND WE ONLY, IT'S STILL IN THE WORKS, IT'S A LOT HARDER FOR US TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO WRITE THAT.
I MEAN, YOU WERE HERE WHEN WE SPENT HALF AN HOUR THIS MORNING ABOUT WHETHER THE FAKE TREES AND HOW THAT FIT IN WITH LANDSCAPING.
UM, OH, THIS, I HATE TO TIE IT, BUT IT WAS, IT WAS, THIS EVENING WAS A GREAT, THAT WAS A GREAT JOKE BILL.
SO, AND THIS IS GONNA BE A LOT MORE IN DEPTH THAN THAT ONE.
SO I'M JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT, YOU KNOW, IF WE HAVE IT PRESENTED A CERTAIN WAY, IT'S GONNA BE A LOT EASIER FOR US TO WORK THROUGH NEXT TIME.
UM, AND MEAN WE'LL GET THROUGH IT EITHER WAY.
IT'S JUST, THERE'S AN EASY WAY AND A HARD WAY, I GUESS IS TO SAY IT.
WELL, IF WE APPROVE OUR SITE PLAN, WE CAN GO AHEAD AND WORK ON THAT PRIOR TO THE NEXT MEETING ALSO.
SO BILL, TYPICALLY NO, IT'S GONNA BE A CONDITION TO THE SITE PLAN.
SO WE, THAT'S WHY IT'S, IT HAS TO BE A CONDITION TO THE SITE PLAN.
TYPICALLY, BILL, ON A LOT OF THESE PROJECTS, AS YOU KNOW, WE DO SITE PLAN APPROVAL.
THE LANDSCAPE PLAN IS CONTINGENT ON PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND CONSERVATION BOARD OF RECOMMENDATION.
SO IT SOUNDS LIKE ONE OF YOUR SUGGESTIONS WOULD BE THAT THE BOARD AS A WHOLE APPROVED THE LANDSCAPE PLAN AND PUTTING, INSTEAD OF PUTTING IT IN OUR PURVIEW OR SWITCHING THAT OR HOW DO YOU WANNA GO ABOUT THE LANDSCAPING PLAN? DO YOU WANT TO SEE IT FLUSHED OUT BEFORE YOU GIVE SITE PLAN APPROVAL? I MEAN, I WANT AT LEAST DEFENSE.
I MEAN, THIS IS JUST ME PERSONALLY AS ONE PERSON ON THE BOARD, BUT I DON'T KNOW AT LEAST DEFENSE.
BUT I, I THINK I HAVE A LITTLE BIT STRONGER OPINIONS ON WHAT I WANT FOR BUFFERING THAN SOME OTHER PROJECTS, GIVEN WHAT'S GOING ON BETWEEN THE NEIGHBORS.
SO I, I THINK I MIGHT, I'M JUST SPEAKING FOR MYSELF AS ONE PERSON.
I MIGHT WANT SOMETHING A LITTLE BIT MORE THAN WE USUALLY PUT IN THAT SECTION.
I GUESS THAT'S WHERE I'M, I'M TRYING TO GET TO MEMBER OR CHAIR GROIN.
UM, I AGREE WITH THAT AND I THINK THAT WE SHOULD HAVE A PRELIMINARY PLAN OF SOME SORT.
I WOULD, MY, THIS IS GONNA BE MY RECOMMENDATION.
I DON'T THINK IT SHOULD BE ON THE 21ST.
I THINK WE SHOULD MAKE IT, WHAT'S THE DATE IN JUNE? UH, JUNE 4TH.
I THINK THAT, UM, MUIRHEAD AND CAB SHOULD GET TOGETHER AND GET US SOMETHING FOR THAT MEETING.
I THINK THAT ANOTHER MEETING SHOULD BE HELD WITH PEN DIXIE TO GET WHAT THEY WANT IN TERMS OF FOR THEIR PROPERTY AND, AND A FENCE.
AND THEN HAVE IT ALL COME HERE ON THE FOURTH INSTEAD OF US SPENDING TWO HOURS TRYING TO CREATE RIGHT.
YOU KNOW, A MOUNTAIN OUT OF A MOLEHILL AND HAVE IT ALL DOCUMENTED AND THEN WE'D BE DONE.
BUT WE MET WITH, WE MET WITH PREFER TO SEE SOMETHING AND BE ABLE TO SAY, YES, I LIKE THAT.
BUT WE MET WITH THESE DEPARTMENTS AND IT WAS AGREED UPON AMONGST ALL OF US THAT THE BETTER WAY TO CHALLENGE TO, TO TACKLE THIS IS IS THROUGH THE DEVELOPMENT AFTER SITE PLAN APPROVAL.
WELL, THAT COULD BE THE DEPARTMENTS, BUT THE, YOU'RE HEARING THAT, WHERE ARE WE WITH THE BOARD MEMBERS MEMBER SHAMARI HERE? THE ONE HESITATION I HAVE WITH RESPECT TO A FENCE IS THAT WHEN YOU LOOK AT HOW THE, THE ACTUAL SITE IS DEVELOPED AND THE CIRCULATION OF IT, THE, THE CONCERN IS HAVING, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE COMING OR COMING STRAIGHT THROUGH AND INTO THE PIXIE PROPERTY.
BUT YET BY VIRTUE OF HOW THIS SITE IS DESIGNED, THERE IS A DRIVEWAY WITH A HUGE BIOSWALE AND A BUILDING AND THEN YOU GET A LITTLE BIT FURTHER AND THERE IS A RETAINING WALL WITH A CODE ACCESS GATE.
SO YOU ESSENTIALLY HAVE A WHOLE FENCE, A WHOLE BARRIER THAT GOES ACROSS THAT GOES ACROSS THE WIDTH OF THE PROPERTY.
BUT YET BY VIRTUE OF PUTTING A FENCE IN THE BACK, THERE IS NOT NECESSARILY THE CONNECTION TO WHICH THERE'S GOING TO BE MORE DETERRENCE.
I THINK BY VIRTUE OF THE WAY THAT THE SITE IS DEVELOPED AND THE PLANTINGS WITH THE BUFFERING, THAT THAT IS A DETERRENT WITHIN THE APPLICANT'S PROPERTY AREA FOR ACT FOR PEOPLE THAT IT CAN GET THROUGH AND INTO THE PEN DIXIE PROPERTY WITH THE GRADING AND THE RETAINING WALL WOULD BE A FENCE IN A WAY.
IF YOU GO TO THE MUIRHEAD, UH, DOCUMENT
[01:25:01]
THAT SAYS REVISED APPLICATION, SO YOU HAVE THOSE ELEVATIONS OF THE DIFFERENT BUILDINGS AS WELL AS ALSO THE ELEVATION OF THE MASONRY RETAINING WALL AND GATE.YOU'LL SEE THAT THERE IS LITERALLY A FENCE ALL THE WAY ACROSS.
ALL THOSE CONSIDERATIONS HAVE BEEN TAKEN INTO PLACE JUST THROUGH THE NATURAL DESIGN OF THE PROPERTY ITSELF.
SO I WOULD SAY THAT GIVE THIS TO BILL BEING ABLE TO, I AGREE THAT HAVING A DRAFT LANDSCAPING PLAN WITH A CONDITION THAT WE'VE USED IN MULTIPLE OTHER PROJECTS, THAT FINAL LANDSCAPING IS DETERMINED BY VIRTUE OF COORDINATION WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND WITH THE CAB, I THINK ALLOWS FOR THE PROJECT TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE CONDITIONS THAT ARE, IS RAISING ANGST WITH BEING TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S GOING TO FIT WITHIN WHAT IS REQUESTED, NEEDED, WANTED WITH THE CAB.
IS THEN REFERENCING AND WORKING WITH PEN DIXIE.
BUT THE ADDITIONAL FENCING, I JUST DON'T SEE, I MEAN THERE'S ALSO LIKE WITH RESPECT TO ANIMALS, RIGHT? LIKE YOU JUST DON'T PUT UP, YOU KNOW, JUST A RANDOM FENCE TO ALLOW FOR LIKE, THE NATURAL FLOW OF HOW THIS FORESTED AREA IS SUPPOSED TO BE WORKING.
IF I CAN ADD ONE MORE THING, WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT WITH CAB, WITH THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT AND WITH PLANNING IS THE NA THE NATURAL LAYOUT OF THE WAY JEFFREY BOULEVARD.
BOULEVARD IS LAID OUT WITH THE UTILITIES.
A LOT OF THE UTILITIES COME FROM THE BACK.
SO FOR US TO DO A LANDSCAPE PLAN WITHOUT YES THEY DO, THE POWER COMES THROUGH.
THE MAIN POWER FOR THIS PROPERTY COMES FROM THE BACK TELEPHONE POLES.
SO FOR US TO BE PUTTING VEGETATION AND ALL THAT ALONG THERE WITHOUT KNOWING THAT PLAN, THAT'S WHY WE AGREED WITH CAB TO WAIT UNTIL AFTER THE SITE PLAN, THE SITE WAS APPROVED SO WE CAN GET THE UTILITY COMPANIES INVOLVED TO BRING THE UTILITIES DOWN THE RIGHT CORRIDOR OR BACK AND NOT PLACE VEGETATION OVER THE TOP.
SO IF WE GO AHEAD AND CREATE A SU A A A LANDSCAPE PLAN EARLY, THE UTILITIES MAY NOT ALLOW THAT TO HAPPEN.
UM, MEMBER CLARK, DOES THAT ADDRESS SOME OF YOUR CONCERNS OR RESOLVE SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT YOU WERE CONCERNED ABOUT? SO I GUESS THE, THE POINT IS THE, THE 12 INCH DIAMETER PERIMETER SILT STOCK PER DC REQUIREMENTS WOULD, WOULD IN EFFECT BE A FENCE? IS THAT WHAT WE'RE GETTING AT? NO, THAT'S THROUGH CONSTRUCTION.
THAT'S THE CONSTRUCTION THAT'S FOR YOUR STORM WATER MANAGEMENT DURING CONSTRUCTION.
IF YOU, BECAUSE RIGHT NOW THERE'S A SNOW FENCE.
BUT IF YOU GO TO, WELL, HANG ON ONE SECOND.
THE REASON WHY THE SNOW FENCE IS UP IS, IF YOU RECALL, IS BECAUSE WHEN THE TREES ARE TAKEN DOWN, THERE WAS RIGHT, THERE WAS ALL OF THE VANDALISM GOING IN THERE.
SO THEY DID THAT AS A TEMPORARY STOP GAP BECAUSE OF IT'S SO OPEN UP THERE WHEN THE PERMANENT FENCE, WHERE THE SNOW FENCE IS STILL SERVE THAT PURPOSE.
I DON'T THINK THAT SNOW FENCE COULD BE THERE.
NO, THERE'S A FENCE THAT'S GOING ALL IN FRONT OF PHASE TWO, THAT IN FRONT THAT WHOLE SECTION.
BUT THAT'S NOT WHERE THE SNOW FENCE IS.
NO, THE SNOW FENCE IS THE SNOW FENCE IS JUST PUT THERE CURRENTLY TO KEEP PEOPLE FROM DRIVING.
BUT A SO, SO THAT'S A TEMPORARY FENCE TO KEEP PEOPLE FROM GOING THROUGH IT BECAUSE IT'S NOT BUILT.
BUT ONCE IT'S BUILT RIGHT, IT WON'T BE ABLE TO GO THROUGH IT.
DO YOU SEE THE ELEVATION WITH THE RIGHT.
SO IT GOES WITH THE, WITH THE SUPER STEEP PART ALONG THE BACK.
THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT IS THAT'S GONNA IN EFFECT THE, A PHYSICAL BARRIER THAT WOULD KEEP PEOPLE, THIS IS GOING TO BE A PHYSICAL BARRIER THAT'S IN THE FRONT.
NO, I KNOW, BUT IF YOU LOOK AT THE ENTIRETY OF THE SITE, RIGHT, IT GOES, YOU ALREADY HAVE A FENCE RIGHT HERE.
WHAT THERE THE, THE TRESPASSERS AREN'T NECESSARILY GONNA WANT TO COME THROUGH THE FRONT.
SO IS THERE A DIFFERENT WAY AND, AND IF YOU'RE GONNA SAY WITH THE GR, 'CAUSE I, I, YOU KNOW, I SEE THE GRADING PLAN AND IT LOOKS LIKE VERY STEEP.
DOESN'T LOOK LIKE A DIRT BIKE WOULD BE ABLE TO GO UP BACK HERE.
SO THAT MAKES SOME SENSE WHY YOU WOULDN'T NEED A FENCE WITH THIS GRADE.
AND IF THAT'S ENOUGH THEN THAT'S ENOUGH.
BUT I DON'T KNOW IT'S ENOUGH EVERYWHERE.
UM, SEE I'M SEEING DIRT BIKES GO UP FOR YOUR, SAY THEY CAN'T GO UP.
THESE KIDS REMEMBER JACY DIRT BIKE ARE DEADLY.
AND UM, AND THEY USUALLY GO THROUGH AFTER FOUR O'CLOCK WHEN THERE'S THE BUSINESSES ARE CLOSED OR ON THE WEEKENDS.
THAT'S NOTORIOUS ON WEEKENDS FOR DIRT BIKES GOING IN AND OUT OF THERE.
SO I, I COULD HEAR IT FROM THE BACK OF
[01:30:01]
MY HOUSE.THE DIRT BIKES RUNNING THROUGH THERE ON WEEKENDS.
AND I'VE DRIVEN THERE A COUPLE TIMES AND I, THESE KIDS ARE DAREDEVILS WHAT THEY DO WITH THESE DIRT BIKES AND THESE INCLINES AND EVERYTHING AND YOU GOTTA SEE THEM IN ZIGZAGGING AND AROUND ALL THE TREE STUMPS.
UM, AND SO FAR, KNOCK ON WOOD, NOBODY TO MY KNOWLEDGE, NOBODY'S GOTTEN HURT.
SO I GUESS FOR ME PERSONALLY, IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE A FENCE, BUT THERE HAS TO BE SOMETHING THAT IT SEEMS LIKE EVERYBODY WOULD BE COMFORTABLE IS GOING TO MITIGATE THE ISSUE OF PEOPLE TRESPASSING ON THE OTHER PROPERTY.
AND WE'VE COMMITTED WITH CAB TO PUT PLANTING, WHETHER IT'S TREES OR SHRUBBERY, GARDNER HAS RECOMMENDED SOME, SOME PARTICULARS THAT HE WOULD LIKE LOW, LOW GROWING BLOCKING.
SO THEY'RE NOT GONNA BE ABLE TO DRIVE THROUGH IT.
IT'S, IT'S NOT GONNA BE OPEN A TREE HERE, A TREE THERE.
THERE'S GONNA BE SHRUBBERY THAT GOES THROUGH THERE AND IT'S ALL BASED ON THE, THE REFORESTATION THAT THE CAB WAS LOOKING FOR.
SPECIES TYPE STYLES, WHICH IS MORE OF A REASON FOR US TO SEE MORE OF WHAT THEY WANT, WHAT THEY'RE LOOKING FOR BEFORE WE JUST SAY WHATEVER THEY WANT.
EITHER WE'VE GOT A CHICKEN AND EGG TYPE SITUATION WHERE, UM, YOU KNOW, WE'RE HAVING A HARD TIME DOING WHAT WE NEED TO DO UNTIL WE SEE WHAT THEY WANNA DO AND THEY DON'T WANT TO DO WHAT NEXT UNTIL WE DO WHAT WE DO.
WELL, UNFORTUNATELY, WE'VE BEEN, BEFORE ALL THE BOARDS WE'VE SAT WITH ALL THE, THE TOWN OR ALL THE DEPARTMENTS AND THIS WAS THE, THIS WAS THE SUGGESTED PATH THAT WE TAKE.
UM, IT WAS, IT WAS BASED ON A, A ROUND TABLE WITH CAB THAT IT'S PREMATURE TO CREATE THAT BECAUSE WITH THE UTILITIES COMING OFF THE BACK POLES, UM, THEY HAVE TO COME AROUND THAT BACK SECTION.
SO I, THIS IS MEMBER, I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THAT THEN.
I'M, I'M WITH MEMBER CLARK HERE AND I'M TRYING TO PUT ALL THE PIECES TOGETHER, BUT LIKE MEMBERS CHAMARA SAID, YOU'VE GIVEN US A LANDSCAPE PLAN THAT HAS SPECIES HEIGHTS, NUMBERS OF TREES.
HOW COULD YOU PROVIDE THAT INFORMATION IF YOU'RE TELLING ME YOU DON'T KNOW WHERE THOSE CAN GO ON THE SITE? LIKE I'M, I'M HAVING TROUBLE MAKING THE TWO FIT TOGETHER BECAUSE THAT WAS PRESENTED EARLY ON MM-HMM
PRIOR TO US BEING REQUESTED TO GO MEET WITH CAB.
SO YOU GUYS ARE KEEPING THAT AS PART OF THE PROGRAM.
THAT WAS OUR SUGGESTED TREES AND SPECIES WITHOUT PLACING LOCATION.
WHEN CAB REVIEWED THAT BASED ON OUR ROUND TABLE, GARDNER LOOKED AT IT AND SAID HE WOULD PREFER DIFFERENT TREES AND SPECIES AND A DIFFERENT REFORESTATION PROGRAM THAT WE WOULD SIT TOGETHER ONCE THE PLANNING, UH, SITE PLAN APPROVAL WAS GIVEN ON WHERE BEST TO PLACE THOSE TREES, ONE TO KEEP 'EM ALIVE, A WATERING PLAN.
MM-HMM
BUT THIS LANDSCAPE PLAN DOES IDENTIFY LOCATIONS.
YOU'RE GONNA PLACE CERTAIN TREES ON THE RIGHT SIDE, PROPERTY LINE AND THEN CERTAIN TREES ON THE LEFT SIDE PROPERTY LINE.
AND THERE IS ALSO A WATERING PLAN THAT SAYS YOU'RE RELYING ON RAIN AND WATERING BAGS.
SO ALL OF THAT IS LAID OUT AND YOU DID NOT COME TO US WITHOUT LOCATION AT ALL.
AND I'M, I'M TOTALLY FOLLOWING THAT.
THE LOCATION MAY NOW CHANGE BECAUSE OF THE CAB OR IT MAY NOW CHANGE BECAUSE OF THE UTILITIES, BUT IF THE UTILITIES WERE ALWAYS, UH, A PREDICAMENT, YOU WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN ABLE TO GIVE US THE LOCATIONS OF NORWAY, EIGHT FOOT TALL NORWAY SPRUCE TREES THAT ARE GOING TO BE ON THE RIGHT SIDE.
IF YOU DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT THE UTILITIES, WELL THE UTILITIES BASED ON THE REQUIREMENT IS WHEN WE FOUND OUT THAT IT'S GOTTA COME OFF THE BACK POLE.
SO THE, THE LAND, THE FIRST LANDSCAPE PLAN CAME FIRST WAS BASED ON, THEN YOU GOT FURTHER INFORMATION FROM THE UTILITY COMPANY, CORRECT.
WAS BASED THEN WE ADDED THE CAB LAYER.
SO I'M STILL IN A CAMP WITH MEMBER CLARK.
I THINK WE NEED, UM, A MORE ROBUST LANDSCAPE PLAN BECAUSE OFTEN WHEN WE DO SITE PLAN IT HAS A LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE LAYER.
THE, THE, THE, YOU KNOW, UM, TREES AND THINGS ARE, THE LOCATIONS ARE LAID OUT.
AND THAT'S ACTUALLY MY MAJOR DISCOMFORT IS THIS IS NOT A SMALL PROJECT AND I DON'T WANT THIS BOARD SETTING A PRECEDENT THAT WE ARE JUST GONNA RELY ON THE CAB FOR LANDSCAPE PLANS AND ARE NO LONGER SETTING OURSELVES UP FOR SOMEBODY ELSE TO MAKE A CASE.
SO WE DON'T HAVE A LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE LAYER.
I'M NOT COMFORTABLE WITH THAT WHEN WE ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE STATE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW.
AND I UNDERSTAND THE DIFFICULTY, BUT WE HAVE CERTAIN ENVIRONMENTAL DUTIES AS WELL.
BILL CLARK, UH, IT SOUNDS LIKE THE PEOPLE IN THAT ROUND TABLE ARE ALL PART OF DIFFERENT ADVISORY COMMITTEES AND IT'S UP TO, IN MY OPINION, IT'S UP TO US WHETHER OR NOT WE WANNA DELEGATE THOSE RESPONSIBILITIES TO THEM.
AND ON CERTAIN PROJECTS WE DO THIS ONE BECAUSE OF THE
[01:35:02]
REMOVAL OF THE LANDSCAPING AND BECAUSE OF THE ISSUES WITH TRESPASSING, WHICH DON'T COME UP VERY OFTEN IN OTHER PROJECTS.MY PERSONALLY, AS ONE MEMBER OF THIS BOARD, AM NOT COMFORTABLE WITH DELEGATING THAT WITH THE INFORMATION WE HAVE RIGHT NOW.
IF THEY HAD SOMETHING SAYING, HERE'S WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT, SOMETHING A LITTLE BIT MORE ALONG THE LINE, THAT MIGHT CHANGE MY OPINION.
BUT RIGHT NOW WITH NOTHING, I'M, I'M NOT COMFORTABLE DELEGATING THAT ON THIS PROJECT.
AND THEN, AND I SAID I'M JUST ONE PERSON, IT'S UP TO THE MAJORITY OF THE BOARD, BUT THEY'RE AN ADVISORY COMMITTEE.
WE ARE THE ONES THAT HAVE TO MAKE THAT ULTIMATE DETERMINATION.
AND IF WE'RE NOT COMFORTABLE, THAT'S ON US, NOT THEM.
WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, WE'VE BEEN BEFORE, YOU KNOW, HANG, HANG ON.
BOARD MEMBERS DO, ARE THERE ANY OTHER BOARD MEMBERS THAT HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD IN THIS DISCUSSION? ANY OPINIONS, ANY IDEAS, ANY SUGGESTIONS? I HAVE JUST ONE QUESTION.
I JUST HAVE ONE QUESTION FOR THE GENTLEMAN FROM PEN DIXIE PENN.
DIXIE, THE LAND THAT YOU CLAIM THAT YOU HAVE PURCHASED OFF OF? JEFF JEFFREY, CAN YOU COME UP HERE FOR A SECOND? AGGIE MAY WANNA GET CLOSER TO YOUR MIC 'CAUSE WE'RE HAVING A HARD TIME HEARING.
THE LAND THAT YOU MENTIONED THAT YOU'VE PURCHASED OFF OF JEFFREY LANE TO HAVE ACCESS TO PEN DIXIE, WHICH I THINK IS A GREAT IDEA, WHERE IS IS APPROXIMATELY, WHERE IS THAT LOCATED TO THE AREA THAT'S BEEN CLEARED TO THE FOREST, THE TREES TO THAT? IS THAT THIS? YES.
SO, UH, IF YOU LOOK ON THE SITE PLAN THAT'S ON THE SCREEN, IT WOULD BE TO THE RIGHT, WHICH IS IN THE SOUTHERLY DIRECTION.
UH, IT'S IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT.
AND THEN ON THE MAP THAT I PROVIDED, IT'LL BE BELOW IT.
MEMBER FINLEY, DO YOU HAVE SOMETHING TO ADD? NO, I JUST AGREE WITH, UH, MEMBER CLARK AND MEMBER VALENTI ON WANTING TO SEE THE PLAN.
OKAY, WELL I'M GONNA MOVE THIS ALONG IF, IF I CAN ASK JUST ONE QUESTION PRIOR.
THE RECOMMENDATION WAS TO WORK WITH CAB BUT THEN PRIOR IT WAS THAT THEY DON'T HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO GUIDE US.
EITHER THAT, OR I'M MISUNDERSTANDING 'CAUSE WE'VE BEEN BEFORE YOU THREE TIMES AND WE WERE ASKED TO WORK WITH CAB.
THAT WAS THE RECOMMENDATION OF CAB.
SO NOW WE'RE ASKING FOR THAT INFORMATION TO BE PRESENTED TO US BEFORE WE CAN MOVE FORWARD BECAUSE OF THE VAST SIZE OF THIS PROJECT AND OF THE SITUATION THAT'S GOING ON WITH THE NEIGHBORS, WITH THE, WITH THE, THE, THE LEVEL OF EXPOSURE, IF YOU WILL.
SO I CONCUR WITH MY BOARD MEMBERS WHAT THEY'RE SAYING.
AND IT IS UNUSUAL PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
WE DON'T USUALLY GET THE PLANNING, THE, THE FULL, UM, LANDSCAPING PLAN IN FRONT OF US.
THIS PROJECT IS TOO VAST FOR US TO MAKE A GUESS.
THE BOARDS THAT YOU'VE BEEN WORKING WITH ARE ADVISORY BOARDS.
I AGREE WITH MEMBER CLARK, BUT I THINK THAT WE NEED SOMETHING MORE CONCRETE SO WE CAN SAY YES, WE CAN MOVE FORWARD AND WE, WE DON'T HAVE A VISUAL WITH THE LANDSCAPING.
AND IT'S ALL ABOUT THE VISUAL FOR US.
AM I RIGHT BOARD MEMBERS? YES.
TO, TO GET AN IDEA OF WHAT WE'RE SAYING YES TO.
I CAN APPRECIATE WHERE YOU STAND, BUT WE CAN'T JUST DO THE SITE PLAN AND THEN HAVE SOMEBODY ELSE SAY, OH YEAH, THIS IS A GOOD PLANNING WITH THE AMOUNT OF ISSUES, THE AMOUNT OF DISCUSSION AND THE AMOUNT OF TIME THAT WE'VE HAD ON THIS CASE.
SO HERE'S GONNA BE MY SUGGESTION AGAIN.
JUNE 4TH IS THE NEXT MEETING AFTER, AFTER THE 21ST.
I THINK THAT CAB SHOULD GET THE PRELIMINARY INFORMATION TO YOU.
YOU SHOULD WORK WITH CAB AND GET IT TO US.
AND I I WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE A PLAN OF WHATEVER TO A LANDSCAPING PLAN, NOT A PLAN, WHATEVER, I'M SORRY, BUT A LANDSCAPING PLAN SO WE CAN PUT IT TOGETHER.
IT CAN BE PRELIMINARY, BUT AT LEAST WE CAN GET SOME SORT OF LOCATION AND FENCES OR RETAINING WALLS OR WHATEVER SO WE CAN GET AN IDEA.
IT MAY CHANGE, WE MAY SAY, OH NO, YOU DON'T NEED TO DO THAT.
OR YOU MAY, YOU MAY HAVE TO DO THAT.
BUT WE'RE THE FINAL RESTING PLACE HERE.
IT'S NOT CAB THAT'S GOT THE FINAL SAY SO.
AND I CONCUR WITH MY OTHER BOARD MEMBERS AND I'M SORRY THAT IF ANYBODY MISLED YOU THAT WAY, BUT WE SENT YOU WITH THEM.
AND I, AND I DON'T WANNA RECAP THIS, BUT BECAUSE IT WAS ALL CUT OUT AND I HAVE BEEN TO THAT SITE SEVERAL TIMES.
[01:40:01]
AND NOW HEARING THAT PEOPLE ARE ARE, YOU KNOW, MOTORCYCLING OVER THE TREE STUMPS IT, IT JUST, IT, IT BLOWS MY MIND THAT ANY OF THIS IS GOING ON.SO I'M GONNA MAKE THAT STATEMENT.
ARE, IS THE BOARD IN FAVOR OF, DO I HAVE SUPPORT ON MY DECISION FOR THE FOURTH? YES.
CAN YOU PLEASE SAY YES INTO THE MIC SO WE CAN GET IT INTO THE MINUTES? YES, YES.
SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE GONNA DO.
SO WE'LL GO ONTO, WE'LL POSTPONE TO THE FOURTH AND YOU CAN GET WITH CAB, HAVE THEM GET THE PRELIMINARY INFORMATION WHERE EVERYTHING'S GONNA GO, AND THEN WE CAN MOVE FORWARD AND ALONG WITH THE FINAL SITE PLAN, ARE WE OKAY WITH THAT? ARE YOU DRAFTING, ARE YOU AUTHORIZING DRAFT APPROVAL RESOLUTIONS AS WELL FOR THE FOUR? OH BOY, I DON'T KNOW.
MR. MURA, IF WE HAVE A PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPING PLAN, SO FOR CLARIFICATION, IT IS THE SITE PLAN AS PROPOSED WITH PROPOSED LOCATIONS AND IDENTIFICATION OF PLANTINGS BASED UPON YOUR CONVERSATIONS WITH THE CAB.
THEN THERE IS A REVIEW AND COMMENTS BASED UPON, YOU KNOW, BUFFERING CONSIDERATIONS, CONSIDERATIONS WITH RESPECT TO, YOU KNOW, THE ACCESS INTO THE, UH, NORTHERN END OF THE, NOT SAYING NORTHERN, BUT SHEET TOP OF THE SITE.
THEN SIMILARLY INCONSISTENT WITH OTHER PROJECTS.
WE HAVE CONDITIONS OF HOW, NO, THIS MAY BE A DIFFERENT WAY OF SAYING IT, BUT FINAL PLANTING PLANS ARE WITHIN COORDINATION WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND THE CAB.
AND SO I KNOW THAT WE DON'T WANNA DELEGATE THAT, BUT I ALSO DO THINK THAT THERE ARE SOME THINGS THAT MAY END UP MOVING AND SHIFTING, BUT YET IF THE PRELIMINARY PLAN THAT CAN BE PRE PRESENTED AT THE JUNE MEETING, WE COULD THEN MOVE, POTENTIALLY MOVE FORWARD CORRECT.
SO I WOULD THEN ASK THAT DRAFT RESOLUTIONS I JUST SAID YES AFTER ALL THAT.
I HAD SAID THAT JUST BEFORE YOU SAID I SAID YES.
SO WE NEED, THAT'S WHAT I WAS GONNA ASK.
DO WE HAVE TO MAKE A MOTION TO TABLE TO THE 4TH OF JUNE WITH THE EXPECTATION OF THOSE REQUIREMENTS BEING MET ON THE 4TH OF JUNE SO SOMEBODY CAN MAKE THE MOTION.
DO WE KNOW IF CAB MEETS BETWEEN NOW AND THE 4TH OF JUNE? I THINK THEY MEET AT THE FOURTH TUESDAY AND MAY.
IT LOOKS LIKE THEY DO MEET YES.
WHO WANTS TO MAKE THE MOTION? I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE TABLE THIS UNTIL JUNE 4TH.
THAT WELL WE, WE NEED THE I OH, I'M SORRY.
I, I WANT THE SPECIFICS ON THERE.
OKAY, BILL YOU CAN, ALL RIGHT, MAKE A MOTION.
CLARK TABLE BJ MUIRHEAD TO JUNE 4TH WITH THE SPECIFICS.
UH, MAKE MOTION TO AUTHORIZE THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO DRAFT RESOLUTIONS RETURNABLE ON JUNE 4TH AND TO TABLE BJ MUIRHEAD TO JUNE 4TH FOR A LANDSCAPE AND FOR A LAND AND SITE PLAN.
AND WE ALSO WOULD LIKE AT THAT POINT IN TIME LANDSCAPE AND PLAN, WELL WE HAVE A SITE PLAN, SO THE RESOLUTION SITE PLAN IS FOR SITE PLAN, BUT BETWEEN NOW AND THEN WE'D HOPE THAT THE CONSERVATION ADVISORY BOARD CAN GET US AN UPDATE LANDSCAPING PLAN.
IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND IT'S BEEN MOVED.
AND WHO SECONDED? AGGIE JURY C.
WE'LL SEE YOU BACK ON THE FOURTH.
JUST FOR THE RECORD, I WANNA STATE THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT WILL COORDINATE THE EFFORTS BEFORE BETWEEN THE APPLICANT AND THE CONSERVATION BOARD TO MAKE SURE THEY'RE ON THE SAME PAGE.
JUST SO THAT, UH, THEY CAN ATTEND THE MEETING AND GET ALL THE INFORMATION SO THAT ON THE FOURTH THEY CAN PROVIDE WHAT YOU ASK FOR.
[7. RMV Holdings LLC – Requesting Preliminary Plat Approval of a 2-lot subdivision to be located at 4091 Jeffrey Boulevard ]
OKAY.OUR NEXT CASE IS, UM, RMV HOLDINGS, LLC REQUESTING PRELIMINARY PLATE APPROVAL ON A TWO LOT SUBDIVISION TO BE LOCATED ON 4 0 9 1 JEFFREY BOULEVARD.
UM, JOSH, UM, CAN I JUST GO BACK TO, UM, YOUR HEAD? WILL YOU MAKE SURE THAT THE FIRE DEPARTMENT RECEIVED THE LETTER? YEP.
CO OUR BACK FROM THE LAW FIRM OF MARKLEY DAMON ON BEHALF OF RMV HOLDINGS FOR THEIR TWO LOT SUBDIVISION 40 91 JEFFREY BOULEVARD.
OKAY, WHAT DO YOU HAVE TO OFFER TONIGHT? SO, UH, RMV HOLDINGS IS THE CONTRACT PURCHASER OF APPROXIMATELY 8.6 ACRES OF VACANT LAND, WHICH IS A LITTLE MORE THAN HALF OF THIS, UH, 16 AND A HALF ACRE PARCEL.
THE, UH, PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY IMPROVED BY THE ADVA FORMER ADVANCED AUTO PARTS WAREHOUSE.
UH, THE INTENT OF THE SUBDIVISION IS TO FACILITATE THE SALE OF BOTH PARCELS.
[01:45:01]
SO THE SELLER HAS A CONTRACT TO SELL THE EXISTING WAREHOUSE AND A SEPARATE CONTRACT WITH ANOTHER PURCHASER, MY CLIENT, FOR THE VACANT LAND.SO THIS TWO LOT SUBDIVISION IS WHAT'S HOLDING UP THE FINALIZATION OF THIS PURCHASE.
UM, THERE IS NO PRESENT PLAN OR, UM, PROPOSAL FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THIS VACANT LAND.
AGAIN, THE PURPOSE OF THE SUBDIVISION IS TO AUTHORIZE THE SALE TRANSACTION.
SO THEY CAN'T PROCEED WITH CLOSING UNLESS AND UNTIL THEY OBTAIN THE SUBDIVISION.
IT IS A CONTINGENT PURCHASE AGREEMENT.
UM, WE'VE PROVIDED AN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM.
WE'VE BEEN TO A COUPLE MEETINGS ALREADY.
MY COLLEAGUE FROM CARMINA WOOD DESIGN WAS PRESENTLY, UH, REPRESENTING THE PROJECT.
AND AGAIN, THERE IS NO PLEASANT PR, EXCUSE ME, PRESENT PLAN OF DEVELOPMENT OF THE VACANT LAND.
SO WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT SEEKER AND THE POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS, THERE IS NO PROPOSAL PRESENTLY TO DEVELOP THE VACANT PARCEL.
WHAT WE'RE REALLY ASKING IS TO PUT IN AN INVISIBLE BOUNDARY LINE THAT'S GONNA SEPARATE THE EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE, THE EXISTING, UH, PARKING, THE EXISTING BUILDING FROM THE VACANT PORTION OF THE PARCEL.
WHAT WILL RESULT IS TWO PARCELS THAT STRICTLY COMPLY IN EVERY WAY WITH THE TOWN'S UNDERLYING ZONING REQUIREMENTS.
THIS IS A SPLIT ZONED PROPERTY.
IT IS OWNED BOTH M1 AND M TWO.
UH, THE M1 PORTION IS, UM, ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE SITE, UH, AND ALONG BAYVIEW ROAD AND BIG TREE.
THE INTERNAL PORTION OF THE PARCEL IS ZONE M TWO AND THE M1 CREATES A NATURAL TRANSITION FROM THE R TWO AREA THAT IS TO THE EAST.
SO THE ZONING MAP HAS ALREADY PUT IN A BUFFER FROM THE R TWO TO THE MM ONE TO THE M TWO.
UM, SO THESE PARCELS ARE SPLIT ZONED.
THE M1 ZONING REQUIREMENTS REQUIRES ONE ACRE MINIMUM.
LOTS WITH A 100 FOOT LOT WIDTH.
WE FAR EXCEED THAT MINIMUM REQUIREMENT.
AND IN FACT AN M TWO THERE IS NO MINIMUM LOT REQUIREMENTS.
SO WE HAVE MORE THAN ENOUGH LOT AREA TO ACCOMMODATE THE FRONT SIDE AND REAR SETBACKS OF THE EXISTING BUILDING.
SO WHEN WE PUT THE LOT LINE IN BETWEEN, UH, THE PROPOSED VACANT LOT AND THE EXISTING LOT, THAT LOT LINE STRICTLY COMPLIES WITH THE SIDE YARD SETBACK.
THIS RESULTS IN TWO COMPLETELY COMPLIANT, UH, BUILDABLE LOTS.
AND JUST WANNA UNDERSCORE, UH, THE RISK OF BEATING A DEAD HORSE THAT THERE IS NO PRESENT PLAN OF DEVELOPMENT FOR THE VACANT LOT.
SO WHEN YOU'RE EVALUATING THAT FOR SECRET PURPOSES, UM, IF AT SOME POINT IN THE FUTURE THERE BECOMES A PLAN, OF COURSE THEY WILL HAVE TO COME BACK AND THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF THAT DEVELOPMENT CAN BE REVIEWED AT THAT TIME.
HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU HAVE.
WELL WE'RE DEFINITELY NOT THE BA BOARD TO BE BEATING DEAD HORSES.
DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE TO OFFER? I KNOW FOR THIS PROJECT WE PREVIOUSLY TALKED ABOUT, WE HAVE A EMAIL FROM CAME OUR TOWN ENGINEER REGARDING WETLANDS REGARDING THIS PROJECT.
AND I KNOW THAT WE HAVE A MEMO FROM OUR CONSERVATION ADVISORY BOARD REGARDING THIS PROJECT.
UH, WITH THE QUESTION OF, OF WETLANDS, AND I KNOW WE'VE TALKED ABOUT IT A LITTLE BIT BEFORE THIS BOARD AND I'VE THOUGHT IT ABOUT IT A LITTLE BIT MORE.
UM, SIMILAR TO WHAT COREY SAID, THIS PROJECT IS A SUBDIVISION.
UM, SO WE'RE LITERALLY HAVING INVISIBLE LOT LINES.
THERE IS NO PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT RIGHT NOW AT THIS TIME.
UM, AND PER CAMMIE'S EMAIL, THE WETLANDS THAT WERE QUOTE UNQUOTE FOUND FROM THE CAP, WERE INFORMATIONAL.
AND AS WE KNOW, THE NEW WETLANDS REGULATIONS, STATE MAP WETLANDS, WE DON'T GO OFF OF THOSE ANYMORE.
WE CAN ASK THE APPLICANT TO DO A JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION IF WE WANT TO.
UM, BUT FOR THIS ESSENTIALLY TWO LOT SUBDIVISION, I'M NOT SURE IF THAT IS THE WAY TO GO BECAUSE THERE IS NO PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.
IT'S LITERALLY MOVING INVISIBLE LOT LINE.
SO THAT'S KIND OF MY INPUT ON THE WELLINS ISSUE THAT I DON'T KNOW IF THE CAB WAS GONNA COMMENT ON THAT OR NOT, BUT I KNOW THAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT WETLANDS ON THIS SITE AND I'M NOT SURE THAT THE WETLANDS HAVE A DETRIMENTAL EFFECT ON THIS PROJECT 'CAUSE IT'S, IT'S MOVING LOT LINES ESSENTIALLY.
UM, CAN EVERYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE PLEASE REFRAIN FROM COMMENTS WHILE THE MEETING'S GOING ON? THANK YOU.
UM, DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE TO OFFER? UH, CAME, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANTED TO KIND OF SPEAK TO YOUR EMAIL AND I KIND OF SUMMARIZED IT, BUT THAT'S KIND OF THE GIST THAT I GOT FROM JUST ALL THE CONVERSATIONS WE HAD ABOUT IT.
UM, YEAH, I THINK THAT AGAIN, IF ANY DEVELOPMENT WERE TO COME BEFORE THIS BOARD AT THAT TIME, UH, A WETLAND JURISDICTION OR DETERMINATION, UH, MAY BE APPLICABLE AND THAT'S WHEN IT SHOULD BE ADDRESSED.
BECAUSE THE ISSUE OF WETLANDS IS INTENDED TO DETERMINE IF THERE ARE BUILDABLE, UH, DISTURBANCE MM-HMM
UH, PERMITTING REQUIREMENTS AND SO ON.
AND THE LOT LINE DOES NOT DISTURB A WETLAND RIGHT.
SO I WOULD DISAGREE WITH THAT REASONING ACTUALLY BECAUSE OF
[01:50:01]
THE POTENTIAL MAYBE, MAYBE THERE'S NOT PRESENCE OF WETLANDS.THE SPLIT DOES AFFECT THAT BECAUSE WHAT IF THERE DO TURN OUT TO BE WETLANDS AND ONE SIDE OF THE SPLIT, TWO THIRDS OF IT IS A WETLAND AND IT'S NO LONGER BUILDABLE.
I DO THINK IT IS PART OF THIS CONVERSATION TO FIGURE OUT WHERE AND IF THERE ARE WETLANDS, BECAUSE IT DOES FOLD INTO THE BUILD BUILDABILITY OF THE, THE SPLIT, I MEAN, CAN BE GERALD TOWN ENGINEER, IT WOULD NOT BE THE ONLY LOT IN THE TOWN THAT HAS WETLANDS ON IT.
AND THAT DOES NOT NECESSARILY MAKE IT UNKNOWABLE.
ABSOLUTELY JUST REQUIRES A PERMIT DETERMINING HOW MUCH OF THE WETLAND IS DISTURBED AND WHETHER THEY CAN GET A WETLANDS PERMIT.
UH, TYPICALLY BUILDABLE LOT IS NOT DEFINED BY A POTENTIAL OR INFORMATIONAL WETLAND.
IT REALLY CAN ONLY BE DEFINED IF YOU ACTUALLY HAVE FULL KNOWLEDGE OF IT.
UH, I MEAN MY, MY RECOMMENDATION IS THAT WE HAVE MULTIPLE LOTS THROUGHOUT THE TOWN.
IF YOU LOOK AT THE INFORMATIONAL WETLANDS MAP, IT LOOKS LIKE SOMEBODY SPILLED PAINT ACROSS THE TOWN MAPS.
THERE IS POTENTIAL, UH, FOR THESE INFORMATIONAL WETLANDS EVERYWHERE.
IF WE HAD TO LOOK AT EVERY SINGLE SUBDIVISION OF EVEN A TWO LOT SUBDIVISION, WE HAD TO GET A JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FOR ANY OF THOSE.
UH, THAT IS AN EXTREMELY ARDUOUS PROCESS, I GUESS.
BUT THE, THE END DECISION IS THIS BOARDS OTHER BOARD MEMBERS COMMENTS, NO OPINIONS, NO.
MEMBER CLARK, YOU'RE THINKING, I I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S WETLANDS OR NOT.
I DON'T LIKE CREATING A NON BUILDABLE LOT.
THERE HAVE BEEN PLENTY OF TIMES IN THE PAST WHERE WE'VE HAD SUBDIVISIONS WHERE WE'VE DETERMINED THAT THE OTHER LOT WOULD NOT BE BUILDABLE AND THEN DECIDED AGAINST DOING THE SUBDIVISION TWO LOT SUBDIVISION FOR THAT PARTICULAR REASON.
UM, BUT AGAIN, I DON'T, DID JEFFREY BOULEVARD HAVE A SEEKER WHEN THE INDUSTRIAL PARK WAS CREATED? AND IS THIS PAR PARCEL PART OF THAT? YES, THEY DID.
AND YES, IT WAS THE FINAL GENERIC ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT WAS COMPLETED ON AUGUST 26TH, 1992.
AND INTERESTINGLY, THE, UH, THE GEIS THAT WAS DONE FOR THIS AS IT RELATED TO THINGS LIKE LOT SPLITS INDICATED THAT THE LOT CONFIGURATIONS WOULD BE SET AS THE PARCELS ARE LEASED OR SOLD.
SO THEY CONTEMPLATED THAT THERE WOULD BE SOME PARCELING OF THE LANDS INSIDE OF THE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT.
UM, THERE'S A DECLARATION OF RESTRICTIONS ASSOCIATED WITH THAT.
IT, YOU KNOW, IT'S REALLY WAS TO FACILITATE FUTURE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT, NOT TO INHIBIT IT.
SO IN MY OPINION, I DON'T FEEL LIKE I HAVE ENOUGH INFORMATION TO SAY THAT THE SUBDIVISION WOULD CREATE A NON BUILDABLE LOT.
THE, THE ZONING REGULATIONS AS IT RELATES TO WHETHER A LOT IS A BUILDABLE LOT TAKE IN, IN NO WAY, SHAPE OR FORM WHETHER OR NOT THERE ARE WETLANDS FROM ZONING PURPOSES.
IT'S SIMPLY LOT AREA LOT WIDTH, UM, ET CETERA.
AND THIS, THIS TWO LOT SUBDIVISION IS TO FACILITATE, UM, BRINGING THIS WAREHOUSE BACK IN ONLINE AGAIN.
IT'S PRESENTLY NOT OCCUPIED AND EVEN SEEKER, ALTHOUGH I BELIEVE THERE ARE ABSOLUTELY NO POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH PLACING AN INVISIBLE LOT LINE.
BUT EVEN SEEKER REQUIRES YOU TO WEIGH ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AGAINST SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC IMPACTS.
AND REALLY THIS AND THE FACT THAT WE'VE MISSED SOME MEETINGS THAT MEETINGS HAVE BEEN CANCELED THAT WE HAVEN'T HAD A QUORUM IS HOLDING UP THE SALE THAT WILL FACILITATE BRINGING THE WAREHOUSE PROJECT BACK ONLINE.
PEOPLE SOMETIMES BUY LOTS, UM, THAT HAVE WETLANDS ON THEM.
AND THAT'S KIND OF A CAVEAT MTOR SITUATION FOR THE BUYER.
AND YOU CAN REST ASSURED THAT IF THERE IS A FUTURE DEVELOPMENT, THEY'RE GONNA HAVE TO COME BACK AND THOSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ARE GONNA BE EVALUATED AT THAT TIME.
WELL, AND TO, TO CAMMY'S POINT FOR THE RECORD TOO, AGAIN, THE PRESENCE OF A WETLAND IS NOT DENOTE THAT YOU WON'T GET A PERMIT TO, TO FILL IT AND, AND BUILD.
I JUST, I DON'T LOVE THAT WE DON'T HAVE ALL OF THE INFORMATION BECAUSE AS MUCH AS I AM, YOU KNOW, IN FAVOR OF THE NEW WETLAND DRAGS, IT'S REALLY PUT THE ONUS ON THE, THE STATE.
WE DON'T HAVE AS MUCH INFORMATION AS A A BOARD.
WE KIND OF HAVE TO HAVE DEC TELL US EVERYTHING NOW, WHICH IS GREAT, BUT, BUT NOT SO, UM, I'M, I MEAN I'M WILLING TO BE FLEXIBLE IF I NEED TO, BUT I'D LIKE TO HEAR OTHER MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.
I I ALSO UNDERSTAND WHERE YOUR DELAY AND THAT IS, YOU KNOW, WINTER SEASON TOOK THIS BOARD OUT.
UM, BUT IS, IS THERE ANY EVEN POTENTIAL OPPORTUNITY
[01:55:01]
TO GET, IF, IF NOT A JD BECAUSE THE STATE WILL DO IT AN EXPERT OPINION, UM, TO EITHER, WHAT'S THE WORD I'M LOOKING FOR? IT'S NINE AT NIGHT NOW TO SUPPORT THE CAB'S FINDINGS OR TO REFUTE THE CABS FINDINGS.LIKE LESS THAN LESS THAN A JD, BUT A EARTH DIMENSIONS WALKTHROUGH OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, SO EVEN IF THERE ARE DETERMINED TO BE WETLANDS ON THE SITE, RIGHT? MM-HMM
THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WILL BE EVALUATED AT THE TIME OF FUTURE DEVELOPMENT.
ALL WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS CREATE A LOT THAT STRICTLY COMPLIES WITH THE UNDERLYING REQUIREMENTS OF THE ZONING CODE.
THERE'S AN ISSUE THAT'S HOLDING UP THE TRANSFER OF THIS PROPERTY, WHICH IS THE PARCEL DIVISION.
AND I I, WHAT I WANNA KEEP IMPRESSIVE UPON YOU IS THAT THERE IS NO PRESENT PLAN OF DEVELOPMENT AT THIS TIME FOR THAT PARCEL.
AND WHEN, IF THERE EVER IS, THAT WILL COME BEFORE YOU FOR A FULL EVALUATION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AT THAT TIME.
IF IT TURNS OUT THAT THIS PRO, THIS SITE ENDS UP BEING UNDEVELOPABLE, WELL THEN THE BUYER WILL HAVE TO DEAL WITH THAT AT THE TIME.
MAYBE THEY'LL MAKE A DECISION TO SELL IT BACK TO THE WAREHOUSE PERSON.
I MEAN, IT'S OBVIOUS THAT THE WAREHOUSE, THE PERSON BUYING THE WAREHOUSE IS NOT BUYING THE VACANT LAND.
UM, AND SO IF A DECISION IS MADE IN THE FUTURE WHERE SOMETHING CHANGES, THAT'S KIND OF ON THE PURCHASER, RIGHT? WE ARE A CAVEAT IN, INTO OUR STATE.
YOU ARE REQUIRED TO DO YOUR DILIGENCE BEFORE YOU BUY PROPERTY.
THIS LOT DIVISION DOES NOT ALLOW THEM TO DEVELOP THAT LAND.
THEY HAVE TO COME BACK HERE IF ANY TIME IN THE FUTURE THEY DECIDE TO DEVELOP IT, AT WHICH TIME THE FULL SUITE OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW WILL BE COMPLETED.
I UNDERSTAND YOU FEEL LIKE, UH, THERE'S A RISK OF CREATING A LOT THAT CAN'T BE DEVELOPED, BUT THAT LOT WILL MEET THE UNDERLYING ZONING REQUIREMENTS.
AS KAMI SAID, THERE ARE PLENTY OF LOTS IN THE TOWN THAT FACE THE SIMILAR CIRCUMSTANCE.
AND SO JUST TO CLARIFY FOR, FOR THE RECORD AND, AND THE BOARD, THE SUB, THE SUBDIVISION HERE IS ESSENTIALLY TO, TO TAKE THE EXISTING WAREHOUSE MM-HMM
OFF OF THE VACANT LOT THAT MAY OR MAY NOT CONTAIN A WETLAND OF SOME TYPE THAT MAY OR MAY NOT BE PERMITTED BY AN AGENCY AT AN UNKNOWN TIME IN THE FUTURE.
SO THERE, THERE IS SOME UTILITY TO JUST CARVING OFF THE, THE EXISTING BUILDING.
IT WILL BRING THE PROPERTY BACK INTO VIABLE ECONOMIC USE AGAIN.
THANK YOU FOR WALKING THROUGH THAT WITH ME.
I, I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THE SPLIT.
I DON'T THINK THAT WE ORDER WETLAND DETERMINATIONS ON ANY OTHER LOT SPLIT AND THEREFORE, UM, I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THIS.
I MEAN, I UNDERSTAND, I'VE HEARD BOTH OF THE BOARD MEMBERS, I UNDERSTAND YOUR CONCERN, BUT GIVEN THE TOWN OF HAMBURG AND THE PROCESSES THAT WE HAVE AND THE STEPS THAT WE TAKE FOR EACH DEVELOPMENT, I DON'T SEE THAT WE SHOULD BE HOLDING UP THE SPLIT FOR THAT.
I DIDN'T SAY WE SHOULD HOLD IT UP.
I MEAN, I SAID WITH THE INFORMATION WE HAVE, WE CAN'T SAY IT'S NOT BUILDABLE.
AND IF WE CAN'T SAY IT'S NOT BUILDABLE, THEN I GUESS BE WE CAN'T WORRY ABOUT IT.
AND I THERE'S ALREADY AN EXISTING BUILDING ON THE PREMISE.
WELL, IT'S THE OTHER, IT'S THE OTHER LOT.
AND I YEAH, DEBORAH RIGHT THERE THAT, THAT'S A BUILDING IN EXISTENCE.
SO, SO AGIE, THE REASON WHY IT'S A WORRY IS IF THAT OTHER LOT, IF YOU CAN'T BUILD ANYTHING ON IT, WHAT COULD HAPPEN IS THE PERSON WHO OWNS IT, SINCE IT'S NOT WORTH ANYTHING, THEY CAN'T BUILD ANYTHING, THEY STOP PAYING TAXES, IT GOES BACK TO THE TOWN AND IT'S SOMETHING THAT BECOMES THE TOWN'S PROBLEM.
THAT'S WHY WE DON'T LIKE CREATING, AT LEAST THAT'S WHY I DON'T LIKE CREATING LOTS THAT YOU CAN'T BUILD ON.
BUT AGAIN, WITH THE INFORMATION WE HAVE, I CAN'T SAY THAT YOU CAN'T BUILD ON THAT LOT.
SO IT'S, I'M, I'M NOT GOING TO TAKE AN ACTION BASED ON MAZE AND MITES.
MM-HMM
AND JUST TO ADD TOO, THIS IS MEMBER VALENTI.
MY, UM, YOU KNOW, PURPOSE ON THIS EARTH IS TO BE AS DIFFICULT AS I CAN ABOUT PROTECTING AS MANY WETLANDS AS HUMANLY POSSIBLE.
UM, AND I GOT A LAW DEGREE TO DO IT, BUT I THINK BECAUSE THERE IS AN EXISTENCE OF THE BUILDING AND THERE ARE SUFFICIENT PROTECTIONS ON THE WHAT WILL BECOME AN EMPTY LOT IN THE FUTURE, I CAN BE OKAY WITH, WITH THE SUBDIVISION.
WE'VE, I THINK WE'VE WALKED THROUGH IT APPROPRIATELY AND I DON'T THINK THAT THE EXISTING BUILDING LOT POSES AN ENVIRONMENTAL RISK BECAUSE IT'S, IT'S ALREADY THERE.
IT HAVING SAID THAT WE HAVE A, UM, RESOLUTION TO DO YOU WANNA PULL IT UP AND MEMBER CLARK, SINCE YOU DID SUCH A WONDERFUL JOB ON THE PREVIOUS RESOLUTION, UM, WOULD YOU LIKE TO DO THIS MOTION FOR US PLEASE? ALRIGHT, SO WE DIDN'T MAKE ANY CHANGES, RIGHT? WE DID NOT.
ALRIGHT, SO I'LL READ IT FROM HERE AND BEFORE YOU, I'M SORRY THERE
[02:00:01]
ARE NO CHANGES TO THE RESOLUTION.OH, SIDEWALKS NOT WARRANTED BECAUSE THEY EXIST, RIGHT? SIDEWALKS ARE NOT WARRANTED BECAUSE THEY DO EXIST, CORRECT? WELL THIS IS IN, THIS IS AN INDUSTRIAL PARK.
WE DON'T WANT, WE DON'T WANT SIDEWALKS JEFFREY ANYWHERE? NO, NO.
DO YOU WANT ME TO ADD TO THE CONDITION THAT IT, BECAUSE IT'S IN AN INDUSTRIAL PARK.
DO YOU WANT ME TO LEAVE IT AS THEY'RE NOT WARRANTED? YOU COULD ADD BECAUSE IT'S AN INDUSTRIAL PARK THAT WOULD JUST FOR CLARIFICATION.
SEEKER IN ACCORDANCE WITH NEW YORK STATE SEEKER LAW, THE TOWN OF HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD HAS REVIEWED THE TWO LOT SUBDIVISION PROPOSED BY RMV HOLDINGS, LLC TO BE LOCATED AT 5 0 9 1 JEFFREY BOULEVARD.
THIS PROJECT IS LOCATED WITHIN THE RAVENWOOD NORTH INDUSTRIAL PARK, WHICH WAS THE SUBJECT OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT BASED ON THE PRELIMINARY PLAT REVIEW OF THE SUBMITTED MATERIALS AND INPUT FROM OTHER DEPARTMENTS AND REVIEW OF THE PREVIOUSLY COMPLETED EIS, THE PLANNING BOARD HAS DETERMINED THAT THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION IS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FINDINGS AND IS NOT ANTICIPATED THE RESULT IN A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT.
AND THAT A NEGATIVE DECLARATION IS HEREBY ISSUED AND THE PLANNING BOARD CHAIR IS AUTHORIZED TO SIGN THE EAF, WHICH WILL ACT AS THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION.
YOU SAID 5 0 9 1 FOR THE TO CORRECT THE ADDRESS.
DO YOU ACCEPT MY AMENDMENT, MY FRIENDLY AMENDMENT? I DON'T ACCEPT IT.
THERE'S NO, THERE'S NOTHING IN BETWEEN THE EYES AND MY TONGUE.
IT HAS TO BE EXACTLY HOW IT CAME OUT ON THERE.
UM, ALL RIGHT, WE CAN PLAY THE TAPE.
UM, IT'S, THE MOTION HAS BEEN MADE.
IS THERE A SECOND? I SECOND IT.
THE HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD HEREBY GRANTS PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL FOR THE RMV HOLDINGS, LLC TWO LOT SUBDIVISION WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS AND WAIVERS.
ONE, BECAUSE THIS IS IN AN INDUSTRIAL PARK, THE INSTALLATION OF SIDEWALKS IS NOT WARRANTED.
TWO SEEKER WILL BE COMPLETED ON ANY PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IN THE FUTURE ON THE VACANT PART PARCEL CREATED BY THE SUBDIVISION.
UH, FINALLY, THE HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD CHAIR, OR THE HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD WAVES THE COMPLETION OF A FINAL PLAT AND THE HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD CHAIR IS AUTHORIZED TO SIGN THE PRELIMINARY PLAT ONCE THE TOWN ENGINEER SIGNS OFF ON THE PLAT.
SO IT'S BEEN MOVED BY MEMBER CLARK.
NONE OPPOSED? YOUR RESOLUTION HAS BEEN GRANTED.
I THINK WE MAY HAVE STUDENTS WHO HAVE PATIENT WE SAT FOR TWO HOURS OF MEETING.
SHOULD WE LET THEM GO BEFORE WE MOVE ON? WELL, WE ONLY HAVE ONE LAST ONE, SO, AND IT'S GONNA BE QUICK.
SO YOU THINK IT'S GONNA BE QUICK? OKAY.
NO, THIS ONE IT WILL BE QUICK.
[8. Lardon Disposal Services – Requesting Site Plan Approval of a proposal to operate a C & D transfer facility on the west side of Woodlawn Avenue, north of 1st Street a8. Lardon Disposal Services – Requesting Site Plan Approval of a proposal to operate a C & D transfer facility on the west side of Woodlawn Avenue, north of 1st Street ]
LARDEN DISPOSAL SERVICES REQUESTING SITE PLAN.APPROVAL OF A PROPOSED PROPOSAL TO OPERATE C AND D TRANSFER FACILITY ON THE WEST SIDE OF WOODLAWN AVENUE.
AND JOSH, DO YOU WANNA TELL THE BOARD AND THE AUDIENCE WHY? IT'S GONNA BE QUICK, YOU CAN COME ON OUT, BUT 'CAUSE IT HASN'T BEEN APPROVED.
UH, YEAH AND I'LL KIND OF LET CHARLOTTE KIND OF BREAK DOWN THE PARTICULARS, BUT FOR THIS PROJECT WE SUBMITTED SECRET MATERIALS ON APRIL 18TH, SO WE'RE STILL UNDER OUR 30 DAY TIME FRAME.
AND UH, THIS PROJECT IS ACTUALLY GOING BEFORE OUR LOCAL WATERFRONT REVITALIZATION PROGRAM, OUR LWRP COMMITTEE TOMORROW TO HOPEFULLY GET A COASTAL CONSISTENCY RECOMMENDATION.
SO THERE ARE STILL SOME PROCEDURAL THINGS BEFORE THIS PROJECT WE'LL MOVE FORWARD.
BUT, UH, WE HAVE THE, THE APPLICANT HERE BEFORE YOU TO ALSO PRESENT SOME INFORMATION THAT YOU MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE RECEIVED THAT WAS PRESENTED TO THE LWP COMMITTEE, UM, SO THAT THIS BOARD CAN, CAN GET THE SAME INFORMATION.
SO THAT'S KIND OF WHERE WE ARE IN THE, IN THE PROCESS.
UH, CHARLOTTE CLARK WITH RU, IS THIS ON? YOU'RE FINE.
WE WERE THINKING WE WERE GOING TO WAIT FOR THE LRP AND THEN COME BACK.
SO I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING OTHER THAN WE'RE KIND OF GONNA ATTEND TOMORROW'S ZOOM MEETING, KIND OF STRESS THE POINT THAT'S AN INDUSTRIAL FACILITY AND NOISES AND YEAH.
CAN YOU QUICKLY, UM, I KNOW NOT JUST FROM THE LWRP COMMITTEE, BUT FROM THIS BOARD AS WELL, THERE
[02:05:01]
HAVE BEEN CONCERNS RAISED ABOUT THIS PROJECT'S PROXIMITY TO RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS, SPECIFICALLY OVER IN WOODLAWN.UM, AND I KNOW THAT YOU KIND OF TOUCHED ON IT AT THE LWP COMMITTEE, BUT FOR THIS BOARD AND FOR THE PUBLIC, JUST KIND OF SPEAK ON THE PRO THE LOCATION OF THE PROJECT, WHY IT'S NOT GONNA HAVE, IN YOUR OPINION, A DETRIMENTAL EFFECT ON THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD AND WHAT KIND OF MITIGATION MEASURES, IF ANY, THAT YOU'RE GONNA PUT ON THE PROJECT.
YEAH, SO THE FACILITIES CAN BE LOCATED IN INDUSTRIAL FACILITY THAT IS ALREADY OPERATIONAL.
UM, THERE'S ALREADY, YOU KNOW, SOME NOISE LEVELS PRESENT.
UH, WE DID DO A NOISE MODEL ANALYSIS FOR THE PERMIT AND YOU KNOW, THEY FELL BELOW THE NEW YORK STATE DEC EQUIVALENT SOUND LEVELS FOR AN URBAN AREA.
UM, IN TERMS OF MATERIAL, I KNOW IT'S, YOU KNOW, ODORS HAVE BEEN BROUGHT UP AS A CONCERN.
UH, THE FACILITY'S GONNA BE STRICTLY C AND D WE'RE NOT, THERE'S NO FOOD WASTE, UM, NO REASON TO ATTRACT ANIMALS.
ANY FOUL ODORS COMING FROM THE SITE.
UM, IT'LL BE MOSTLY C AND D DECREE.
SO WITH THAT GOES, THERE'LL BE NO LEE EIGHT, NO CONTAMINATED LEACHATE FROM THE MATERIAL AS WELL.
AND JUST FOR THE RECORD, THIS APPLICANT HAS PROVIDED BOTH NOISE LEVEL STUDIES AND UH, A DOCUMENT THAT DETAILS THE QUANTITY OF WASTE, THE TYPE OF WASTE, WHICH IS IN SHAREPOINT AND HAS ALSO BEEN PRESENTED TO THE LWP COMMITTEE.
SO THEY HAVE PROVIDED SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION REGARDING ODOR, UM, AND, AND TYPE OF WASTE.
SO AT THIS TIME IT'S PROBABLY BEST JUST TO WAIT UNTIL THEY GET THEIR DETERMINATION FROM THE LWRP AND WE HAVE ROOM FOR THEM ON THE 21ST.
WOULD YOU LIKE TO SCHEDULE A PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE 21ST? UH, YES WE CAN.
SO WE'LL SCHEDULE, WE'LL SEE YOU BACK HERE ON THE 21ST WITH THE PUBLIC HEARING.
AND, UM, WE'LL WAIT TO HEAR AND ONCE YOU GET YOUR DETERMINATION, YOU CAN LET US KNOW AND THEN THEY'LL, THE BOARD WILL PROCEED AS FOLLOWS.
I ALSO WANNA STRESS TO THIS BOARD JUST TO PUT IT ON RECORD THAT THE LWRP COMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATION IS A RECOMMENDATION.
SO OBVIOUSLY THIS BOARD TAKES IT INTO ACCOUNT, BUT IT IS A RECOMMENDATION.
DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE? OKAY, THAT'S IT.
THAT CONCLUDES THIS EVENING'S OF FUN AND GAMES.
IS THERE ANYTHING THAT THE BOARD NEEDS TO ADD EXCEPT FOR ONE MORE MOTION MEMBER SCHUR MAKES A MOTION TO DISMISS.
PLEASE REMEMBER TO TAKE, TURN OFF YOUR MICS.