[WORK SESSION] [00:22:37] COMMENT THAT THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT MAKES IS JUST A GUESS UNTIL UNTIL THE MEASUREMENT IS [00:22:42] CHALLENGED. IF WE READ IT AND WE THINK IT'S ONE THING, IT DOESN'T MEAN WE'RE RIGHT. AND I DON'T [00:22:48] KNOW IF THE TOWN ATTORNEYS, I MEAN, IF WE CARRY ANY WEIGHT IN OUR OPINION ON WHAT THESE MEAN, [00:22:54] IT'S JUST OUR OPINION UNTIL THERE'S SOME JUDICIAL OR QUASI JUDICIAL DECISION THAT THAT SETS [00:23:00] FORTH WHAT IT REALLY MEANS. AND BECAUSE IT'S SO NEW, I'M, I'M SURE NOT A LOT HAS MADE ITS WAY THROUGH THE LEGAL PROCESS YET TO KNOW EXACTLY WHAT THESE DEFINITIONS MEAN. SO AT THIS POINT, IT'S REALLY JUST A GUESS. LET ME ASK OSM. I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY THIS IS CHAIR GRONINGEN. CAN WE IS THERE ANYONE AT OSM THAT WE CAN TALK TO GET A CLARIFICATION. I YEAH I, I DEALT WITH THEM. WE DID A ADULT USE CANNABIS LAW IN THE TOWN OF WHEATFIELD. SO WE, WE HAVE SOME CONTACTS WITH THAT WE CAN REACH OUT TO. OKAY. DO WE HAVE ANYTHING ELSE TONIGHT? WELL YEAH. WE HAVE ONE MORE CODE TO GO OVER. OH, SORRY. SO THE OTHER DOCUMENT THAT YOU HAVE IN FRONT OF YOU IS THE MU ONE CODE. AND I'LL CUT TO THE CHASE. WE ALREADY TALKED ABOUT IF YOU LOOK AT 428407B, THAT JUST REFERENCES THE CORRECT AREA OF THE CODE SO IT REFERENCES CORRECTLY WHEN YOU CLICK ON IT. ONE OF THE QUESTIONS MARK, I'M GLAD YOU BROUGHT UP M2 OR M3 AT THE TIME. IF YOU HAD LOOKED AT THE PREVIOUS DOCUMENT, IT WAS ML AND MB, WHICH WERE THE ACRONYMS FOR OUR INDUSTRIAL DISTRICTS. WE HAD A PUBLIC INPUT MEETING ON SOME OF THOSE ZONING CODES ON MONDAY, AND WE HAVE CHANGED IT TO LEE AND GI LIGHT INDUSTRIAL, GENERAL INDUSTRIAL. SO IN THIS CODE WE REFERENCE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL AND GENERAL INDUSTRIAL TO MAKE THAT VERY SIMPLE. THE IF YOU LOOK AT 15 UNDER 280 407, THAT'S ONCE AGAIN JUST REFERENCING PART OF THE CODE THAT WAS INCORRECT AT THE TIME. AND THEN THE MAJOR CHANGES IN THE CODE THAT WE HAD TALKED ABOUT ARE, IF YOU LOOK AT 284 09E3 SO WE HAD TALKED PREVIOUSLY ABOUT SETBACKS TO ALLOW PARKING IN FRONT OF THE PRINCIPAL BUILDING. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I HAD BROUGHT UP WAS THAT LOOKING AT THE TWO OFFICIAL AREAS IN THE TOWN THAT HAVE BEEN ZONED MU ONE, BOTH HAD ISSUES WITH PARKING. ONE ACTUALLY GOT THE TOWN BOARD TO WAIVE SOME OF THESE REQUIREMENTS BECAUSE OF THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES OF [00:25:05] WHERE THE PROJECT HAD BEEN LOCATED. AND I KNOW WE TALKED ABOUT POTENTIALLY MAYBE REMOVING LANGUAGE OR, YOU KNOW, ADDING SOME LANGUAGE. SO IF YOU GUYS RECALL, ORIGINALLY MY PROPOSAL WAS TO REMOVE THREE ENTIRELY WHERE IT HAD SAID A SETBACK TO ALLOW PARKING IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED. ORIGINALLY, I HAD TAKEN THAT OUT ON ADVICE FROM MEMBER CLARK. HE SUGGESTED MAYBE WE CHANGE LANGUAGE, SO INSTEAD OF REMOVING IT ENTIRELY, WE SAY SOMETHING LIKE A SETBACK TO ALLOW PARKING IN FRONT OF THE BUILDING IS GENERALLY DISCOURAGED, BUT MAYBE ALLOWED GIVEN UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES HAZARD TO PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, WELFARE, ETC. THIS IS JUST MY IDEAS. IT'S SOMETHING I PULLED TOGETHER TO USE AS A DISCUSSION POINT THAT WE CAN CHANGE AS NEED BE. BUT BILL, I GUESS MY QUESTION FOR YOU IS I KNOW WE TALKED ABOUT NOT ENTIRELY MOVING OR REMOVING, YOU KNOW, THAT LANGUAGE, BUT DOES THIS KIND OF GET ON THE RIGHT TRACK OF WHAT YOU'RE THINKING, HAVING LANGUAGE THAT SAYS DISCOURAGED INSTEAD OF EXPRESSLY BASICALLY STILL SAYING THAT WE WOULD, YOU KNOW, PREFER TO HAVE PARKING IN THE FRONT, BUT GIVEN UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES, HAZARDS TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE, WHICH I TOOK FROM SEEKER, BY THE WAY, THAT, YOU KNOW, WE CAN WE WOULD ALLOW PARKING IN THE FRONT GIVEN GIVEN THOSE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES. BILL CLARK. YEAH, AND I DON'T KNOW ABOUT EXACTLY WHAT WE PUT IN WHAT YOU HAVE IN THE PARENTHESES, BUT I ALSO WAS THINKING OF READING THIS SINCE THE REASONING BEHIND HAVING THE PARKING BEHIND THE BUILDING WAS TO ENCOURAGE MORE OF A MAIN STREET SETUP IN COMMERCIAL AND MIXED ZONE MIXED USE AREAS. MAYBE WE SPECIFICALLY SAY THAT SOMEWHERE. SO WE SO WE WORK IN THE REASON WHY WE WANTED THE PARKING BEHIND. SO THAT WAY WHEN PEOPLE LOOK AT THE LAW, THEY UNDERSTAND WHY IT'S DISCOURAGED. WHAT WOULD YOU SUGGEST THAT LANGUAGE GO I DON'T KNOW, IT'S A ADD AN ENTIRE NEW SENTENCE OR REWRITE IT. MAYBE MAYBE IN THE FRONT, YOU KNOW, TO ENCOURAGE A MAIN STREET LOOK. MAIN STREET CHARACTER, MAIN STREET STYLE CHARACTER. IF THERE'S A BETTER WAY TO DESCRIBE THAT TOO, IT WOULD BE NICE. WOULD IT MAKE SENSE TO ADD IT TO THE INTENT SECTION OF THE CODE? WE COULD, BUT BUT ON THIS ONE HERE, BUT SPECIFICALLY IT'S TO WRITE A SETBACK. A LOT TO ALLOW. BUT YEAH IN THE INTENT ALSO THIS MEMBER MCCORMICK PERHAPS IF YOU SCROLL UP TO WHERE E IS THAT IS ABOVE THOSE, IT MAY MAKE SENSE TO I'LL PUT IT UP THERE, PUT IT UP THERE SO THAT IT APPLIES TO ALL THREE OF THE SUBBULLETS. RIGHT HERE IN THIS SUBSECTION. PUTTING IT WHERE IT IS. SO E WOULD SAY, YOU KNOW, TO ENCOURAGE A MAIN STREET CHARACTER, BILL CLARK, ENCOURAGE A MAIN STREET CHARACTER, THERE WILL BE NO MINIMUM FRONT SETBACK AND NEW STRUCTURES SHOULD BE CONSTRUCTED ABUTTING THE FRONT WALKWAY OR AS CLOSE AS POSSIBLE. AND THEN THE PARKING FRONT IS GENERALLY DISCOURAGED, BUT MAY BE ALLOWED GIVEN UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES. IN THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WE'VE HAD IN THE TWO THAT COME BEFORE US IS THAT PARKING WAS ALREADY EXISTING IN BOTH OF THEM. WELL, NO, NOT THE GYM, ACTUALLY. YEAH, YEAH, I DON'T KNOW HOW WE DESCRIBE IT. MEMBER SHIMURA FOR THE SECTION WITH E THREE. I MEAN, CAN WE JUST ADD THESE GIVEN UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO HAZARD, HAZARD TO PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, WELFARE AND COMMUNITY CHARACTER. BUT THEN WITH THAT REFERENCE TO, YOU KNOW, IF THE ACTUAL SITE AND THE PROPERTY ITSELF. RIGHT. THE NEXT SECTION THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT, OFF STREET PARKING. RIGHT. THAT WAS WHERE RIGHT, THAT GYM CAME UP. AND THEN YOU JUST LEAVE. WHILE WE'RE THINKING ABOUT THAT, THIS IS MEMBER VALENTI. I DO LIKE ADDING COMMUNITY CHARACTER OR MAYBE FEASIBILITY, BECAUSE ONE OF THE THINGS WE TALKED ABOUT IS IF YOU'RE ON THE LAKE SIDE OF ROUTE FIVE, YOU CAN'T PARK BEHIND THE BUILDING. YOU CAN ONLY PARK IN FRONT. SO INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO AN ADD COMMUNITY, CHARACTER AND VISIBILITY. AND MAYBE BY THE NEXT TIME WE'LL COME UP WITH MORE TO ADD. WELL, I MEAN, I DON'T WANT TO MAKE EVERYONE'S LIFE MORE TOUGH BECAUSE YOU DID A GREAT JOB DRAFTING JOSH, BUT I KNOW THAT THE WORD UNIQUE HAS GOTTEN US INTO TROUBLE BEFORE IN THE WETLAND AND WHAT MAKES UNIQUE. SO I THINK HAVING A LIST HERE OF EXAMPLES IS HELPFUL. I HATE PARENTHETICALS IN CODE MORE THAN ANYTHING. IF IT DOESN'T [00:30:03] NEED TO BE THERE, GET RID OF IT OR PUT IT THERE. BUT I THINK HAVING AN EXAMPLE OF INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO IS REALLY GOING TO HELP THE APPLICATION OF THIS SECTION. OKAY. ANY OTHER THOUGHTS ON EITHER? ALL RIGHT. AND THEN THE OTHER PART THAT WE TALKED ABOUT FOR THE CODE, IF YOU GO TO TWO 8410, THIS IS OFF STREET PARKING AND SIGNS A. SO YOU'LL SEE THAT I HAVE SOME LANGUAGE BUT ALSO A COMMENT. SO TO GIVE SOME BACKGROUND WE TALKED ABOUT RIGHT NOW CURRENTLY SAYS THAT PARKING IS NOT A PERMITTED USE IN THE CODE. IT CAN ONLY BE AN ACCESSORY USE AND THAT PARKING, IF ANY, SHALL BE LOCATED ENTIRELY BEHIND THE BUILDING. NO PARKING SHALL FRONT ON ANY STREET. SO I KNOW WE TALKED ABOUT MAYBE HAVING PARKING BE A SPECIAL USE PERMIT. I KNOW THAT WAS THROWN AROUND. SO I HAD A COMMENT THAT OBVIOUSLY WE NEED SOME CLEAR LANGUAGE HERE, THAT IF PARKING CANNOT BE KEPT BEHIND THE PRINCIPAL BUILDING, MY THOUGHT WAS, DO WE SAY HERE THAT WE HAVE SOME LANGUAGE SAYING THAT THE TOWN BOARD HAS THE AUTHORITY TO, YOU KNOW, EITHER WAIVE REQUIREMENTS OR HAVING LANGUAGE LIKE THAT? I DON'T KNOW IF SPECIAL USE PERMITS MAKE SENSE HERE, BECAUSE IF YOU REMEMBER, FOR THE MM1 CODE, WHATEVER, EVERYTHING FROM THE USE DOWN TO EVERYTHING IS APPROVED BY THE TOWN BOARD. SO HAVING PARKING AND PARKING IS IT'S NOT A IT'S NOT ALLOWED USE, IT'S ACCESSORY. SO WHERE I GUESS MY QUESTION WOULD BE WHEN WE WERE THROWING OUT HAVING, YOU KNOW, THE PLANNING BOARD HAVING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT, WHERE WHERE WOULD THAT BE BROUGHT UP, CONSIDERING THAT ANY PLAN HAS TO BE IRONED OUT BY THE TOWN BOARD, AND THAT WHEN IT COMES TO THE PLANNING BOARD, IT OBVIOUSLY GETS SITE PLAN APPROVAL. BUT PARKING ITSELF IS ALREADY NOT AN ALLOWED USE. WHAT IF? MEMBER CLARK BILL CLARK AGAIN. SO YOU'VE GOT IF PARKING CANNOT BE KEPT ENTIRELY BEHIND THE BUILDING DOT DOT DOT. RIGHT. WHAT IF WE SAY IF WE'LL FIND A DIFFERENT ADJECTIVE? YOU KNOW, DUE TO UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES, PARKING CANNOT BE KEPT ENTIRELY BEHIND THE BUILDING. PARKING SHALL NOT INTERFERE WITH WALKABILITY OR ANYTHING LIKE THE REASON WHY YOU PUT THE PARKING BEHIND THE BUSINESS IS SO PEOPLE CAN WALK AROUND TO THE OTHER PLACES, AND THAT'S WHY YOU DON'T WANT THE PARKING IN THE FRONT. SO IF WE SAY THE PARKING. I'M TRYING TO I'M THINKING ABOUT THE GYM, YOU KNOW, WHY DOES IT. YEAH, AS LONG AS AS LONG AS IT DOESN'T. RIGHT. YOU HAVE TO IDENTIFY YOURSELF. AS LONG AS THERE'S NO INTERFERENCE WITH WALKABILITY. THAT'S WHAT I. THAT'S WHAT I SAID. OKAY, BUT IF WE COME UP WITH A DIFFERENT WAY BECAUSE I'M THINKING ABOUT THE GYM, WHY DID THE GYM WORK WITH THE PARKING IN FRONT? BECAUSE IT COULDN'T PARK IN BACK. THERE WAS NO PROPERTY, RIGHT. BUT WHEN YOU DO THE LAYOUT, WE HAD THE WHOLE THING ABOUT SIDEWALKS AND EVERYTHING, BUT THEY HAD THEY HAD A WALKWAY IN FRONT OF IT. MEMBER SHIMURA IS IT DUE TO EXISTING EXISTING CONDITIONS THAT YOU DO NOT THAT PARKING IN FRONT DOES NOT INHIBIT THE WALKABILITY AND ACCESSIBILITY? SOMETHING LIKE THAT. YEAH, THAT'S RIGHT, BECAUSE WITH THE GYM IT WAS OKAY BECAUSE THERE ARE NO SIDEWALKS THAT YOU'RE INTERRUPTING. RIGHT? RIGHT. SO IT'S YOU KNOW, BUT THAT WAS AN EXISTING CONDITION THAT THEN ALLOWED FOR THAT PARKING IN THAT LOT ALIGNMENT. SO I THINK MAYBE IN PUTTING THAT IN THE LAW MAY HAVE INFORMED OUR SIDEWALK DISCUSSION. YEAH. EITHER IN EXISTING THIS IS MEMBER VALENTE EITHER AN EXISTING CONDITION OR SITE CONSTRAINT. MAYBE I WAS GOING TO SAY UNIQUENESS OF SITE. RIGHT. WELL WHEN WE USE UNIQUE IN E3 SO I'M FINE IF WE USE IT IN TWO 8410 A. BUT CAN WE MAKE THEM TALK TO EACH OTHER. BECAUSE RIGHT NOW THEY JUST FEEL LIKE THEY'RE THE SAME CONCEPT, BUT WHOLLY FOREIGN, LIKE E IS KIND OF SETTING THE STAGE FOR IN GENERAL. WE WANT YOU TO PARK BEHIND THE BUILDING, BUT WE REALIZE SOMETIMES THAT'S NOT FEASIBLE. AND THEN IN A YOU SUDDENLY GET IF THE SITE'S UNIQUE, BUT IT'S NOT TALKING BACK TO THE REASONS IT COULD BE UNIQUE OR THE SORT OF EASE, KIND OF INTENT LIKE, YOU KNOW, SO IT'D BE GREAT IF THEY COULD TALK TO EACH OTHER. KAITLIN. MEMBER MCCORMICK I JUST WANT TO AFFIRM THAT I THINK THAT WE SHOULD USE SITE CONSTRAINTS AND FEASIBILITY INSTEAD OF THE WORD UNIQUE. I THINK IT'S A LITTLE BIT SUBJECTIVE AND QUALITATIVE. AND TALKING ABOUT SITE CONSTRAINTS IS MORE APPROPRIATE. I ALSO THINK, THOUGH, THAT WE SHOULD, IN ADDITION TO WALKABILITY, THAT WE SHOULDN'T BE ALLOWING PARKING OUT FRONT. THAT WOULD IMPEDE COMMUNITY CHARACTER OR TRYING TO BRING THAT NEIGHBORHOOD FEEL. AND SO I WOULD RECOMMEND WE ALSO ADD THAT. THAT EXISTING CONDITIONS, SITE CONSTRAINTS AND FEASIBILITY, I THINK I HAVE THAT INSTEAD OF EXISTING CONDITIONS, ARE THERE ANY OTHER THOUGHTS? I THINK THAT'S THE LAST. I THINK [00:35:03] THAT'S THE LAST PART. THE LAST ONE. YEP. SO I, I THINK I CAPTURED ALL OF OR TOOK NOTES ON CAPTURING ALL THE, THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT THIS BOARD HAD. IF IT'S ON VIDEO, RIGHT FOR THE RM ONE CODE, WOULD THIS BOARD PREFER WHAT WE DID FOR THE ADULT USE CANNABIS LAW AND THAT I BRING THIS BACK SEPARATELY AS WELL? OR DO YOU FEEL COMFORTABLE IN MY ABILITY TO GIVE YOUR RECOMMENDATION TO THE TOWN BOARD AND MOVE FORWARD? WHAT WOULD THIS BOARD PREFER THAT WE DO WITH THIS? BOARD MEMBERS. MEMBER CLARK, JOSH'S JOB IS TO PRESENT THESE THINGS TO THE TOWN BOARD. SO IF HE DOESN'T THINK IT NEEDS TO COME BACK, I'LL GO WITH JOSH. OKAY. MEMBER MCCORMICK, YOU WANTED TO COME BACK? I WOULD. MEMBER VALENTE. WE COULD SEE IT AGAIN. IT CAN COME BACK. MEMBER SHIMURA I'D LIKE TO SEE IT ONE MORE TIME. MEMBER FINLEY I HAVE FAITH IN JOSH, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT ONE MORE TIME. JOSH, I FEEL THE SAME WAY. WE'LL BRING IT BACK. OKAY? SOUNDS GOOD. I WILL BRING BOTH BACK AT THE SAME TIME. SO WE CAN KNOCK TWO BIRDS WITH ONE STONE. AND THOSE ARE MY CODE UPDATES FOR NOW. I WILL HAVE A TON MORE. SO PREPARE YOURSELF THROUGHOUT THE SUMMER. WE HAVE A BUNCH THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT AT CODE REVIEW, AND THERE ARE SOME OTHER ZONING CODE UPDATES GOING OUT THROUGHOUT THE TOWN, SO EVERYTHING HAS TO COME TO THE PLANNING BOARD FOR RECOMMENDATION. SO THERE WILL BE YOU'LL SEE A LOT MORE OF ME DOWN THE LINE. THANKS FOR YOUR TIME, GUYS. THANK YOU JOSH. THANK YOU JOSH. DONE WITH THESE OKAY. IT'S 709 AND I'M GOING TO CALL THE JUNE 4TH, 2025 PLANNING BOARD MEETING TO ORDER. MEMBER CLARK, WOULD YOU LIKE TO JOIN OUR LEAD US IN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE, PLEASE? 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. THANK YOU. MEMBERS, TOMORROW, WOULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL? WILLIAM CLARK HERE, KATELYN SHIMURA HERE, KIM FINLEY HERE. AUGIE DRISSI HERE. CINDY GRONINGEN, PRESENT. CAITLYN MCCORMICK. PRESENT. MARGO VALENTI HERE. ALL PRESENT. THANK YOU. WE HAD MINUTES FOR TWO OF THE MEETINGS. ARE THERE ANY [Additional Item] CHANGES OR ADDITIONS? IF NOT, WOULD SOMEBODY LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION FOR THE FIRST SET OF MINUTES? WHAT IS CHAIR? WHAT'S THE DATE ON THOSE MINUTES YOU'RE ASKING FOR? JUST ONE MINUTE. MAY 7TH, MAY 7TH AND MAY 21ST. MAY 7TH AND MAY 21ST. MEMBER MCCORMICK I YOU KNOW, I REMAIN CONCERNED THAT THEY'RE THEY'RE HARD TO READ AND NOT EVERYONE'S IDENTIFIED OR DISTINGUISHING WHO SAID WHAT AND WHAT THE CONCLUSIONS WAS IS. SO I'M NOT I'M JUST NOT COMFORTABLE REALLY WITH HOW EITHER OF THESE TRANSCRIPTS ARE. THERE'S, YOU KNOW, TYPOS AND PIECES THAT COME IN FROM THE AUTOMATION. WELL, YOUR CONCERNS HAVE BEEN NOTED. AND AT THE END OF THE DAY, THERE IS A TRANSCRIPT RECORD THAT WE HAVEN'T SEEN YET BECAUSE THEY'RE STILL WORKING ON IT. LIKE I SAID, THIS IS A CHANGE. BUT I THINK THAT THE GENERAL CONSENSUS, BECAUSE I LOOKED AT THE MINUTES, THEY WERE BETTER THAN WHAT THEY WERE BEFORE. ARE YOU ARE YOU? RECUSING YOURSELF FROM VOTING ON THE MINUTES? I WILL BE ABSTAINING FROM THE SEVENTH BECAUSE I WASN'T PRESENT AT THAT MEETING, BUT I AM NOT OTHERWISE RECUSING MYSELF FROM ANYTHING. OKAY, SO ON THAT NOTE, IS THERE A IS THERE SOMEONE THAT WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION FOR THE MAY 7TH MINUTES? I'LL MAKE THE MOTION TO ACCEPT THE MINUTES OF THE MAY 7TH MEETING. IT'S BEEN MOVED BY MEMBER GERACI. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND MEMBER FINLEY SECONDS. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? ONE ABSTENTION. MEMBER MCCORMICK. SECOND MOTION FOR MAY 21ST. CORRECT. SECOND MOTION FOR MAY 21ST. THIS IS MEMBER SHIMURA I. SO I ECHO MEMBER MCCORMICK'S CONCERNS THAT THESE ARE NEARLY IMPOSSIBLE TO READ AND DIGEST, [00:40:03] AND IT DOES NOT IDENTIFY CLEARLY HOW AND WHO SAID WHAT. I'VE GONE BACK AND WENT THROUGH SOME OF THE PREVIOUS VIDEOS AS WELL TOO, AND I KNOW WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE ADJUSTMENTS, BUT I DON'T I DON'T FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH HOW THESE ARE ALL COMING TOGETHER. NOT TO SAY I KNOW WHAT THE ANSWER IS, BUT THIS IS IT'S VERY DIFFICULT. SO WHAT WOULD THE BOARD LIKE TO DO ABOUT THE MAY 21ST MINUTES? THIS IS MEMBER MCCORMICK. MY RECOMMENDATION UNTIL SUCH TIME AS WE GET THESE INTO A FORMAT THAT IS USABLE AND REFERENCEABLE IN THE FUTURE, AND TO LOOK BACK AT IS THAT WE WOULD RETURN TO USING THE FORMAT THAT A MANUAL SUMMARY THAT ARE MORE MINUTES. THESE ARE TRANSCRIPT NOT MINUTES. AND THEY'RE, THEY'RE GENERATED. THEY'RE JUST NOT USEFUL. AND I RECOGNIZE THAT WE HAVE THE VIDEO IN THE REPOSITORY AS A RECORD. BUT THAT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT WE CAN PAUSE A MEETING AND FLIP BACK AND LOOK AT OR PULL UP IN FRONT OF US WHILE WE'RE WORKING THROUGH AND HAVING DISCUSSIONS OR HAVE AT OUR FINGERTIPS TO REFERENCE OR POINT OUT. SO. SO JOSH, ISN'T THERE THERE'S ANOTHER FORM THAT'S COMING THAT SHOWS THE, THE RESOLUTIONS AND THE VOTE. CORRECT. THE. YEAH, SURE. YOU HAVE ONE. SORRY. JOSHUA ROGERS, PLANNING DEPARTMENT. YES, THAT'S DIRECTION FROM IT THAT AT SOME POINT THERE WILL BE A FORM OF SAID TRANSCRIPT THAT HAS THE RESOLUTIONS PULLED OUT FROM IT AND MAJOR DECISIONS. BUT AT THIS TIME, THE WHAT THE BOARD APPROVES ARE THE TRANSCRIPT FROM THE VIDEO. BUT IT HAS BEEN DISCUSSED AT SOME POINT THAT RESOLUTIONS AND MAJOR DECISIONS WILL BE PULLED OUT AND WILL BE IN A READABLE FORM. IT'S JUST NOT AVAILABLE AT THIS TIME. SO AT THIS POINT, I'M GOING TO IF EVERYBODY'S IN AGREEMENT TABLE THIS, I WILL TAKE IT BACK TO THE ADMINISTRATION AND VOICE YOUR CONCERNS AGAIN. I'VE BEEN TOLD THAT WE ARE NOT ABLE TO GO BACK TO THE OLD WAY FOR TECHNICAL REASONS, THAT WE DON'T HAVE ANYBODY TO DO IT RIGHT NOW. SO WE WILL I WILL TAKE THIS BACK TO THE ADMINISTRATION AND SEE WHAT OTHER RESOLUTION. THAT CAN BE HAD. CHAIR, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO NOTE THAT THAT SUMMARY THAT THIS IS MEMBER MCCORMICK. THAT SUMMARY THAT JOSH IS MENTIONING ISN'T GIVING ME THE DETAIL ON THE DISCUSSION THAT I WOULD WANT TO REFERENCE. I THINK THAT GIVES YOU THE DECISION, BUT IT DOESN'T GIVE YOU SOME OF THE DIALOG AND THE DISCUSSION OR THE KEY POINTS THAT THAT FED INTO A DECISION. SO I, I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THAT WOULD CAPTURE WHAT, WHAT I WOULD BE ASKING FOR. OKAY. BILL. CLERK. IS THERE A WAY TO CALIBRATE THE RECORDING TO MAKE MORE PARAGRAPHS, WHICH MIGHT MAKE IT EASIER TO READ? BECAUSE WHAT HAPPENS IS, IF ALL IT ALL BLENDS IN AND PEOPLE'S NAMES ARE IN THE MIDDLE, AND IF THEY SAY THEM, YES. AND ACCORDING TO THIS, I'M, I DON'T AS OFTEN AS I SHOULD. BUT THAT'S PART OF WHAT MAKES IT HARD. BECAUSE IF ALL 5 OR 7 OF US HAVE A COMMENT AND IT'S ALL IN ONE BLOCK, THAT'S WHAT MAKES IT DENSE TO GO THROUGH. SO IF THERE WAS A WAY FOR IT TO RECOGNIZE PAUSES AND DO MORE PARAGRAPHS, I FEEL LIKE THAT WOULD GO A LONG WAY BECAUSE IT'S NOT. IT RECORDS WHAT WE SAY. THAT'S WHAT WE WANT IT TO DO. SO IT'S DOING THE JOB WE WANT IT TO DO. IT'S JUST IT'S DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WE'RE USED TO. BUT I THINK THAT MAYBE THERE'S TWEAKS THAT CAN BE DONE WITH THIS, AS OPPOSED TO TRYING TO GO BACK TO THE OLD WAY. WELL, CHAIR GRONINGEN, AND THAT'S WHY I SAY THAT IT IS A WORK IN PROGRESS. I WILL TAKE YOUR COMMENTS BACK TO THE IT AND TO ADMINISTRATION AND SEE WHAT CAN BE DONE. I DO KNOW THAT PART OF IT IS WORKING. THEY'RE STILL WORKING ON THE OTHER SUGGESTION BECAUSE I'VE WORKED WITH THIS PROGRAM BEFORE, I'VE MENTIONED THIS IS THAT WHEN WE ARE SPEAKING, WE ALL I KNOW IT'S HARD, ESPECIALLY WHEN WE GET INTO THE HEAT OF A DISCUSSION TO REMEMBER NOW THAT WE'RE DOING SOMETHING DIFFERENT. SO BEFORE YOU SPEAK, IF YOU GIVE YOUR NAME OR AT LEAST PAUSE AND THEN THAT MIGHT HELP IT. I DON'T KNOW FOR SURE, BUT AT LEAST IT WOULD BE ABLE TO IDENTIFY THE SPEAKER AND THEN THE COMMENTS. SO I DON'T KNOW. I MEAN, BECAUSE IN WHAT WE HAVE, PEOPLE'S NAMES ARE IN THE MIDDLE, RIGHT? SO IT'S NOT IT'S NOT QUITE DOING THAT. BUT MEMBER SHIMURA SPELLED C H M U R A MY NAME IS SPELLED INCORRECTLY THROUGHOUT THE MINUTES. SO THIS IS MEMBER VALENTI, SO ALMOST ALL THE NAMES ARE SPELLED INCORRECTLY, WHICH I. I GUESS I CAN SEE BOTH SIDES OF THIS, BUT [00:45:07] I JUST WANT TO ADD KIND OF A LAYER HERE. I KNOW THAT IT IS A TRANSCRIPT, AND THE TRANSCRIPT IS TRUE TO WHAT'S SAID. SO IN THAT SENSE IT IS, YOU KNOW, THE BEST RECORD WE COULD HAVE. BUT AT THE SAME SENSE, IF I PUT MY DAY LIFE INTO THIS AND THIS IS IT, THIS IS ALL YOU'VE GOT TO GO TO COURT. I CAN'T REALLY WORK WITH THIS. AND THAT'S OUR JOB IS TO BUILD A PUBLIC RECORD. SO SAY THERE'S AN ARTICLE 78 TO REVIEW. ONE OF OUR DECISIONS WE DON'T HAVE WE HAVE AN EXACT RECORD, BUT NOT A VERY GOOD RECORD. BUT WE HAVE THE VIDEOS. SO AS LONG AS THE VIDEOS ARE PART OF THE RECORD, THAT'S HELPFUL. BUT I'M THINKING THROUGH THE UTILITY OF THE LEGAL USES OF THESE, WHICH AS A PERSON WHO HAS DONE THIS MORE THAN ONCE, IT'S NOT THAT HELPFUL. OKAY, AGAIN, I'M GOING TO TAKE THIS BACK TO IT. I'VE TALKED TO IT A COUPLE OF TIMES NOW AND TWO OF THE ADMINISTRATION, AND I'LL SEE WHAT I CAN COME BACK WITH. OKAY. ANY OTHER COMMENTS AT THIS POINT IN REGARDS TO THE MINUTES, CAN WE JUST VERIFY FOR THE RECORD WHAT OUR ACTION IS? SO WE'RE GOING TO TABLE THE REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF ALL MINUTES AT AT LEAST UNTIL NEXT MEETING, SO YOU CAN HAVE MORE CONVERSATIONS OR SORT OF INDEFINITELY UNTIL WE HAVE KIND OF A RESOLUTION. I KNOW I THINK WE SHOULD ONLY TABLE THE MAY 21ST MINUTES AND THEN I'LL TALK TO IT. AND IF I COME BACK WITH THE WITH THEIR RESPONSE AND THE BOARD'S NOT HAPPY WITH IT, THEN YOU'LL MAKE THE CALL. I'M NOT GOING TO MAKE A CALL TO TABLE INDEFINITELY AT THIS TIME, ESPECIALLY IF THERE'S SOME SORT OF RESOLUTION THAT THIS CAN BE FIXED. OKAY. SO. THAT'S WHAT I THINK. IT'S FINE. OKAY. ANYTHING ELSE? ATTORNEY JOSEPH COGAN, FOR RECORD KEEPING PURPOSES. THE FACT THAT MINUTES SHOULD BE VOTED ON AND THIS IS BEING TABLED, IT PROBABLY SHOULD BE A MOTION TO TABLE IN A SECOND. THE MOTION MEMBER I MAKE A MOTION TO TABLE THE MAY 21ST, 2020 FIVE MINUTES. MEMBER MCCORMICK I SECOND THAT ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF TABLING THE MAY 21ST 25 MINUTES UNTIL THE CHAIR CAN HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH IT AND ADMINISTRATION TO RESOLVE THE ISSUES THAT WERE DISCUSSED AT THIS TABLE, SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? NONE. OKAY. I HAVE A HOMEWORK ASSIGNMENT. OKAY. MOVING RIGHT ALONG. OUR FIRST CASE OF THE EVENING, GUNDERSON DEVELOPMENT BENDERSON DEVELOPMENT HAS BEEN TABLED. ASKED TO BE POSTPONED, AND I BELIEVE THEY'RE ON THE NEXT AGENDA OF JUNE 18TH. YEP. THEY ASKED TO BE TABLED TO 618. OKAY, SO THAT BRINGS US RIGHT TO [2. 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)] BJ MUIRHEAD COMPANY REQUESTING SITE PLAN APPROVAL OF A PROPOSAL TO CONSTRUCT A TWO STORY OFFICE TRAINING SALE AND WAREHOUSE BUILDING, TWO RENTAL STORAGE BUILDINGS, FIVE PRIVATE STORAGE BUILDINGS AND OTHER SITE IMPROVEMENTS ON A 10.4 ACRE PARCEL ON THE EAST SIDE OF JEFFREY BOULEVARD. SO THIS EVENING YOU ARE JAMIE ALLEN FROM THE ALLEN GROUP. AND ON BEHALF OF AND HERE ON BEHALF OF BJ MUIRHEAD. OKAY. AND WOULD YOU LIKE TO BRING US UP TO DATE ON YOUR PROJECT? YEAH. SO AT THE END OF LAST MEETING, WE WERE HOPING TO GET NOD TO MOVE FORWARD ONTO ENGINEERING AND GET PLANNING BOARD APPROVAL. AND WE WERE ASKED TO PRIOR TO THAT, WE WERE ASKED TO PUT TOGETHER A AN ACCEPTABLE LANDSCAPE PLAN. SO AND WE'VE ALSO BEEN ASKED TO INCLUDE THE PENN-DIXIE, THE CAB. AND WE ALSO DID WORK WITH JOSH THROUGH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. SO THE FOLLOWING DAY OR CLOSE TO THE FOLLOWING DAY, WE SUBCONTRACTED WITH A WITH A PRETTY WELL KNOWN LICENSED NEW YORK STATE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT AND SOUGHT PROFESSIONAL HELP TO CREATE A PLAN THAT WOULD HOPEFULLY BRING THIS TOGETHER AND GET EVERYBODY WHAT THEY WERE LOOKING FOR AND YET STILL WORK WITHIN THE CONFINES OF WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO WITH REGARD TO PARKING, SNOW REMOVAL, LONGEVITY, SURVIVABILITY, PROTECTION FOR THE PENN-DIXIE, ALL OF THE ABOVE. SO IT TOOK HER A COUPLE OF WEEKS. SHE PUT TOGETHER A PRETTY A PRETTY EXTENSIVE PLAN. WE PRESENTED IT TO JOSH, WE SPOKE THROUGH IT AND WORKED THROUGH IT. AND THEN BASED ON SOME OF THAT SUGGESTION, WE SCALED BACK AND ADDED AND DEPLETED. WE THEN TOOK THAT WORK TO THE PENN-DIXIE. WE WORKED WITH DOCTOR PHIL STOKES AND TOOK IN ALL OF HIS CONSIDERATIONS AND OR ALL HIS REQUESTS INTO CONSIDERATION. HE WAS EXTREMELY HELPFUL IN GIVING [00:50:01] US HIS EAR AND UNDERSTANDING OF, YOU KNOW, HOW DO WE REMOVE SNOW? WHERE DO WE STORE SNOW? HOW WOULD THAT IMPACT THE PENN-DIXIE? HOW DO WE HANDLE WATER BETWEEN THE TWO PROPERTIES? CAN WE GO ON EACH OTHER'S PROPERTIES TO FIX THESE SAID PLANTS? AND WE CAME TO AN AGREEMENT THAT ON THE BACKSIDE OF THIS PROPERTY, UP ALONG THE TOP, I DON'T KNOW, THIS WAS PRESENTED IN OR THIS WAS SUBMITTED THROUGH SARAH AND JOSH. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'VE HAD A LOT OF TIME TO REVIEW IT OR NOT. WE JUST SUBMITTED IT IN THE LAST FEW DAYS, BUT I CAN ASSURE YOU THAT WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON THIS LITERALLY EVERY DAY TO GET THIS BEFORE YOU. SO UP ON THE TOP, IF YOU HAVEN'T HAD A CHANCE TO REVIEW IT, THERE'S THE OLD RAILROAD HILL THAT COMES DOWN INTO WHAT WE CALL PHASE TWO, WHICH IS WHERE THOSE THREE BUILDINGS ARE. AND I'M ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE PROPERTY. SO BY, PER THE REQUEST OF DOCTOR PHIL FROM THE PENN-DIXIE, WE'VE ELECTED TO PUT A CHAIN LINK FENCE ALONG THERE, WHICH WILL KEEP ANYBODY FROM BEING ABLE TO PENETRATE FROM PHASE TWO INTO THE PENN-DIXIE. SO WE DON'T SEE HOW ANYBODY OTHER THAN SOMEBODY THAT COULD POSSIBLY CLIMB THE FENCE. BUT THERE'S NOT MUCH WE CAN DO ABOUT THAT. THE SITE NATURALLY WILL FENCE ITSELF AND PROTECT ITSELF FROM THE PENN-DIXIE. WE FEEL THERE'S A GATE ALONG THE TOP WALL. YOU'VE THEN GOT THE BUILDINGS IN PHASE TWO, AND THEN WE'VE GOT THE CHAIN LINK FENCE DOWN THE RIGHT HAND SIDE. WE'VE GOT A HEDGEROW OF PLANTS. WORKING WITH GARDY AFTER PENN, AFTER WORKING WITH DOCTOR PHIL AND THE PENN-DIXIE, WE THEN PRESENTED THIS REVISED PLAN TO GARDY AND WORK WITH HIM ON HOW DOES HE FEEL BEST TO BRING THIS SITE BACK TO ITS NATURAL LOOK THAT'S CONDUCIVE TO THE TOWN OF HAMBURG'S ULTIMATE GOAL. WHAT PLANTS DID HE FEEL WERE SUFFICIENT AND CONDUCIVE TO WHAT THEY'RE LOOKING FOR? WE MODIFIED THE PLAN AGAIN, ADDED SOME OF THOSE PLANTS. WE WENT BACK AND WORKED WITH DOCTOR PHIL, DOCTOR STOKES SOME MORE, ESPECIALLY WITH REGARD TO THE SPACING BETWEEN PHASE ONE AND PHASE TWO, SO THAT WE CAN STORE SNOW THERE WITHOUT DAMAGING THE PLANTS. WE'VE GOT A WATERING PLAN IN PLACE THAT YOU CAN SEE THERE ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE, THERE'S A THERE'S A NEW TECHNOLOGY THAT THEY CALL IT A PLANT DIAPER. BELIEVE IT OR NOT, YOU LAY IT AROUND THE PLANT, IT ABSORBS WATER. AND IN THE DROUGHT IT FEEDS THE PLANT WATER. SO WE DON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT BAGS OF WATER. AND THERE'S A LOT OF PLANTS ALONG THIS RIGHT HAND SIDE. WE'VE GOT TREES THAT ARE ALL LISTED IN THE PLANTING, ALL CONDUCIVE TO THE AREA. I TO BE HONEST, I DON'T KNOW MUCH ABOUT LANDSCAPING. SO THESE ALL WERE APPROVED BY DOCTOR STOKES AND ULTIMATELY A LICENSED NEW YORK STATE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. I'VE GOT LETTERS FROM THE PENN-DIXIE, AND GARDY WAS SUPPOSED TO TALK TO LEONA AND PRESENT A LETTER OF COMPLIANCE. AND I THINK WE'VE GOT IT TO WHERE IT NEEDS TO BE. WITH REGARD TO ALL THE REQUESTS FROM THE TOWN PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO WORK WITH ALL THOSE DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS. SO NOT ONLY DID WE TAKE IT FROM THE LICENSED ARCHITECT, THE PROFESSIONAL LEVEL, ALL THE WAY DOWN TO THE ADVISORY LEVEL, AND WE COLLECTIVELY CAME UP WITH SOMETHING THAT EVERYBODY IS IN AGREEMENT WITH. AND WE THINK ULTIMATELY, TO BE HONEST, IT'S GOING TO BE A BEAUTIFUL PROJECT. I WOULD JUST LIKE TO REMIND THE BOARD THAT WE'RE IT'S BUFFALO, WE'RE TRYING TO GET MOVING AND WE'RE ALREADY INTO JUNE WITH EVERYTHING ELSE THAT'S GOING ON IN THE WORLD. THE MANUFACTURE OF THE PRE-ENGINEERED BUILDING FOR PHASE ONE HAS GOT US NOW BACKLOGGED INTO GETTING THE BUILDING MADE. SO WE'VE GOT ALL THOSE ADDED COSTS THAT HAVE NOW BEEN INCURRED. IF WE CAN'T MOVE ON TO PLANNING OR TO ENGINEERING SOON, WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO REALLY RECONSIDER THE PROJECT BECAUSE WE DON'T THINK THAT WE CAN GET IT. WE DON'T THINK WE CAN GET IT INTO INTO CONSTRUCTION EARLY ENOUGH TO BE ABLE TO GET IT DONE. SO WE'RE HOPING THAT THROUGH ALL OF THESE DIFFERENT PIECES AND PARTS THAT WE CAN GET IT TO THE NEXT LEVEL. OKAY. ANYTHING ELSE? PLANNING DEPARTMENT? I WOULD JUST SAY SO THE BOARD HAS A COUPLE DECISIONS IT CAN MAKE TONIGHT. FROM THE LAST MEETING YOU DID AUTHORIZE ME TO PRODUCE DRAFT APPROVAL OF RESOLUTIONS FOR DISCUSSION, POTENTIAL APPROVAL. I'LL REMIND THE BOARD WE ALSO HAVE TO MAKE A SECRET DECISION. THAT APPROVAL RESOLUTION TAKES THAT INTO ACCOUNT. JUST PICKING BACKING OFF OF THE APPLICANT. I PERSONALLY MET THE APPLICANT, SCHEDULED A MEETING WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT MYSELF ON FRIDAY OF LAST WEEK TO GO OVER THIS LANDSCAPE PLAN. I REMINDED THE APPLICANT OF THE CONDITIONS THAT THIS BOARD HAD ASKED FOR THE APPLICANT TO DO, WHICH WAS [00:55:04] WORK WITH THEIR NEIGHBOR IN PENN-DIXIE AND ALSO WORK WITH A MEMBER OF THE CAB. THE APPLICANT THEN TOOK THE LANDSCAPE PLAN, AS HE MENTIONED, AND WORKED WITH THOSE TWO GROUPS AND PRODUCE WHAT YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU TODAY. SO, YOU KNOW, WE PRODUCED THAT THAT APPROVAL RESOLUTION, WHICH I CAN BRING UP IF THIS BOARD FEELS COMFORTABLE. BUT WE STILL HAVE TO MAKE A SECRET DECISION. AND YOU GUYS NOW HAVE THAT LANDSCAPE PLAN. ALSO, REMEMBER ONE OF THE CONDITIONS THAT I PROPOSED ON THE APPROVAL RESOLUTION IS THAT THE PLANNING BOARD WILL APPROVE THE LANDSCAPE PLAN. NOT MYSELF, NOT THE CAB, BUT YOU AS A COLLECTIVE WILL APPROVE OF THE LANDSCAPE PLAN. SO NOW'S THE TIME TO ASK ANY QUESTIONS YOU CAN. YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY ASK JAMIE FOR YOU KNOW, WHAT HE HEARD FROM FROM PHIL AND FROM FROM GARDY. BUT THOSE ARE THOSE ARE THE OPTIONS THAT THE BOARD HAS TODAY. OKAY. THANK YOU. ENGINEERING. DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING? NOTHING FROM ENGINEERING. OKAY. BOARD MEMBERS, I KNOW THAT WE HAVEN'T HAD A LOT OF TIME TO LOOK AT THIS, BUT IT'S IN FRONT OF US NOW. WE HAVE A HARD COPY FROM WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT. DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS, QUESTIONS, CONCERNS? MEMBER CLARK I'M ALL SET. I MEAN, I, I LOOKED AT THE RESOLUTIONS. I'VE GOT SOME SUGGESTIONS FOR SITE PLAN IF WE WANT TO GO FORWARD WITH THAT TODAY. OKAY. SO NUMBER FIVE IS FENCE CONDITION QUESTION MARK OKAY. WAIT BEFORE YOU IS THERE BEFORE YOU GET INTO THAT. IS THIS ABOUT THE LANDSCAPE OR ARE YOU ARE YOU. YEAH SOME OF THEM ARE ABOUT THE LANDSCAPE. OKAY. CAN YOU HOLD THAT THOUGHT FOR A SECOND AND JUST SEE IF THERE'S ANYBODY ELSE THAT HAS ANYTHING ELSE ABOUT THE LANDSCAPE. CAN WE DO THIS? YES I CAN I HAVE A COUPLE QUESTIONS THAT ARE LANDSCAPE AND LANDSCAPE ADJACENT. MEMBER VALENTI SURE. SO I JUST HAVE A COUPLE OF CLARIFYING QUESTIONS. AND PLEASE FORGIVE ME FOR ASKING THIS FOR THE 56TH TIME, BUT WHERE IS PENN DIXIE? TO THE RIGHT. TO THE RIGHT. OKAY, SO THIS WHOLE LIKE, ROW OF TREES ON THE RIGHT IS PENN DIXIE. SO THEN, CAMMIE, MAYBE YOU NEED TO MAYBE YOU CAN HELP ME UNDERSTAND THIS TOO. BUT BELOW THE ROW OF TREES, THERE'S A HANDFUL OF RIPRAP WEIRS, WHICH I'M ASSUMING ARE LIKE BEN WAY WEERS AT THE BOTTOM OF WHAT IS MAYBE AN EXISTING BERM. WHAT ARE WHAT ARE THOSE FOR? I HAVE NO IT MIGHT BE TOO DEEP OF A QUESTION, BUT IT JUST SEEMS LIKE NOW WE HAVE AN ELEVATION IN DIXIE AND THESE WEIRS. SO I DON'T MEAN TO JUMP IN, BUT THOSE ARE ON THE DIXIE CURRENTLY. THOSE EXIST. YES, THERE ARE ALREADY. OH, OKAY. I WAS GOING TO SAY IT BASED ON WHAT I'M LOOKING AT. THOSE EXIST ON THE DIXIE SITE. THERE APPEARS TO BE SOME KIND OF SWALE. OKAY, COOL. AND THEY HAVE SOME RIPRAP, SO STONE WEIRS ALONG THE WAY, PROBABLY TO KEEP WATER SLOW AND KEEP SEDIMENT FROM MOVING AROUND TOO MUCH. GREAT. BUT THOSE ARE PREEXISTING. PREEXISTING. OKAY, COOL. SO NOT A PROBLEM. AND THEN DO YOU HAVE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT AND WHERE IS THAT LOCATED ON THE SITE. IT'S RIGHT IN THE CENTER RIGHT WHERE IT SAYS PROPOSED POND. RIGHT. OKAY. SO THE PROPOSED POND IS THE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT AREA. OKAY. SO THEN IN TOP LEFT WE HAVE SPOIL PILES AND DEBRIS. WHAT IS THAT TOP. YEAH. IN THE VERY TOP LEFT IT SAYS SOIL PILES AND DEBRIS. SO IT'S BEHIND THE EDGE OF TREE BRUSH. IS THAT ALSO EXISTING OKAY COOL. THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING. ANYONE ELSE IN REGARDS TO THE LANDSCAPING PLAN. MEMBER MCCORMICK, THIS IS MEMBER MCCORMICK. IS THAT A WET POND OR A DRY POND FOR THE STORAGE FOR THE STORMWATER? I BELIEVE IT'S A COMBINATION POND. I DON'T KNOW MUCH ABOUT THE PONDS ITSELF, BUT IT'S BEEN DESIGNED BY APEX CONSULTING, WHICH IS A AN ENGINEERING FIRM AND GROUP THAT I KNOW WILL EVENTUALLY END UP WORKING WITH CAMI. SO I BELIEVE IT'S WET AND DRY. CAMI GERALDTON ENGINEER I WOULD FOR THE SITE THIS SIZE. I'M GOING TO HAVE TO REVIEW THEIR FULL STORMWATER PLAN AND DESIGN. THIS IS MARKED PROPOSED POND AND FOREBAY. TYPICALLY YOUR YOUR FOREBAY IS WET. YOUR POND MAY OR MAY NOT BE. SO I WILL HAVE TO SEE WHAT THEIR DESIGN DOES WHEN THEY SUBMIT THE FULL ENGINEERING FOLLOW UP QUESTION FOR CAMI, THIS IS MEMBER MCCORMICK. THIS WOULD THEN BE SUBJECT TO WHAT YOU'RE PUTTING IN WITH REGARD TO PERMANENT ACCESS FOR ANY MANAGEMENT OF THAT. OR IS THIS BECAUSE IT'S FULLY ON A PRIVATE PROPERTY FOR MAINTENANCE? I KNOW THAT'S SOMETHING YOU'VE BEEN LOOKING AT HOLISTICALLY. SO THIS CAMI GERALD, TOWN ENGINEER, SINCE THIS IS A PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT, IT IS LOCATED ON PRIVATE PROPERTY. THEY ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR LONG TERM MAINTENANCE AND, YEAH, LONG TERM INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE OF [01:00:02] THOSE FACILITIES. THE TOWN DOES CHECK ON THEM ABOUT EVERY THREE YEARS BASED ON OUR STATE PERMIT, BUT OUTSIDE OF THAT, THEY ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL THE WORK. ANYBODY ELSE? NO. OKAY, NOW, BACK TO MR. CLARK. DID YOU HAVE. ALL RIGHT. SO, I MEAN, IT'S SKIPPING AHEAD TO SITE PLAN. I DON'T KNOW IF WE WANT TO DO SEEKER FIRST, BUT JUST SO THREE, THE LANDSCAPING PLAN DATED JUNE 3RD, 2025 SHALL BE APPROVED BY THE PLANNING BOARD. SO THIS IS THE LANDSCAPING PLAN. SO I THINK WE SHOULD SWITCH SHALL BE TO IS IF WE'RE GOING TO VOTE ON IT AND APPROVE IT AS OPPOSED TO SHALL BE, WHICH MAKES IT SEEM LIKE WE WOULD DO IT AT A DIFFERENT TIME. BUT SINCE WE HAVE IT IN FRONT OF US IF WE ARE GOING TO VOTE TODAY, WE SHOULD WE SHOULD ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THAT THIS IS WHAT WE'RE VOTING ON AND APPROVING. MEMBER. SURE. I AGREE WITH THAT CHANGE TO CONDITION NUMBER THREE. AND THEN I WOULD PROPOSE WE'VE GOT THE LETTER FROM DOCTOR STOKES. IF PENN-DIXIE HE'S GOT SOME NUMBERED THINGS. SO NUMBER TWO AND NUMBER THREE I WOULD PUT WORD FOR WORD. IN CONDITION NUMBER THREE. AND THEN FIVE I WOULD HAVE WORD FOR WORD. HIS FIRST NUMBERED COMMENT, A SIX INCH BLACK VINYL COATED CHAIN LINK FENCE. THAT THAT SHOULD BE THE FENCE CONDITION. CAN YOU CLARIFY CONDITION NUMBER THREE AGAIN? YOU SAID CONDITION NUMBER THREE IS THE LANDSCAPING PLAN DATED? IS APPROVED BY THE PLANNING BOARD. RIGHT. AND THEN WE WOULD SAY FOLLOWING INSTALLATION OF ELECTRICAL AND OTHER UTILITIES AT THE REAR OF PROPERTY, PREVIOUSLY REMOVED VEGETATION WILL BE REPLACED WITH NATIVE MEADOW SEED MIX IN AREAS INDICATED AND THEN A LINE OF TREE AND SHRUB PLANTINGS TO PROVIDE A NATURAL BARRIER ALONG THE SOUTHERN SIDE OF THE PROPERTY. SO THAT WOULD BE THREE. ALL RIGHT. LET ME SEE IF I CAN COPY THAT. YEAH. MEMBER SHIMURA I THINK TO MAKE THINGS A LITTLE, THE NUMBER ONE ON THE PENN-DIXIE LINE IS INDICATED WITH THE SAME TYPES OF DETAIL ON THE LANDSCAPING PLAN. SO IT'S ALREADY INCORPORATED AS BLACK VINYL COATED CHAIN LINK FENCE, SIX FEET IN HEIGHT, TYPICAL. AND THEN ALSO SAME THING WITH NUMBER THREE OF THE PENN-DIXIE LINE, A LINE OF TREE AND SHRUB PLANTINGS TO PROVIDE A NATURAL BARRIER THAT IS WHAT IS INDICATED ALONG THE LINE ON THE ACTUAL PLAN. I'M FINE. I'M FINE WITH THAT. I WAS JUST I DO UNDERSTAND, I THINK I DO SUPPORT INCLUDING FOLLOWING INSTALLATION OF ELECTRICAL AND OTHER UTILITIES AT THE REAR PROPERTY. PREVIOUSLY REMOVED VEGETATION WILL BE REPLACED WITH NATIVE PLANTING AND SEED MIX AND INDICATED AREAS. NUMBER TWO. RIGHT. OKAY, SO WHAT AM I COPYING FROM THE LETTER. JUST NUMBER TWO. JUST TWO. NUMBER TWO YOU'RE GOING TO COPY AND PUT THAT IN. AND THAT'S GOING TO BE A PART OF THREE BECAUSE AS MEMBER SHIMURA INDICATED, NUMBER ONE AND NUMBER THREE ARE CLEARLY STATED ON THE LANDSCAPING DOCUMENT IN FRONT OF US. SO THEN WE TAKE SIX OR HOLD ON, LET ME FINISH BEFORE I START SAYING NUMBERS BECAUSE THE NUMBERS CHANGED. ALL RIGHT. SO THEN WE TAKE FIVE OUT ALTOGETHER. YES. BECAUSE FIVE IS INDICATED ON THE LANDSCAPING PLAN. RIGHT. AND THEN I WAS THINKING THE NEXT PARAGRAPH IN ADDITION IN ON THE LETTER. JOSH SORRY. IN ADDITION. H AND H S SLASH PENN-DIXIE AGREES IS THINKING STARTING AT H AND PENN-DIXIE AGREES. WE PUT THAT IN AS CONDITION NUMBER SIX. SO IT'S ON THERE THAT THERE THAT PENN-DIXIE ON OUR SITE PLAN THAT PENN-DIXIE IS AGREEING TO DO THIS RIGHT. NO, I GUESS IT'D BE FIVE NOW BECAUSE WE DELETED FIVE. NO, THE REST OF THE PARAGRAPH. JOSH, I'M SORRY. EXCUSE ME FOR INTERRUPTING THE DOCUMENT THAT YOU'RE. I'M SORRY, IT'S JAMIE ALLEN AGAIN. THE DOCUMENT THAT YOU'RE ALTERING OR ADDING AND DELETING FROM. IS THAT THE CONDITIONS? YES. OKAY. I DIDN'T SEE A COPY OF IT, SO I JUST DIDN'T I DIDN'T KNOW IT'S OUR RESOLUTION THAT WE'RE CREATING RIGHT NOW, RIGHT. CAN I GET A COPY? YOU WILL GET YOU WILL GET IT ONCE I FINISH. I THINK THIS IS THE DRAFT. ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE LETTER? NO, HE'S NOT TALKING ABOUT THE. YEAH, LITERALLY. WE'RE LITERALLY PUTTING THE CONDITIONS TOGETHER JUST RIGHT NOW AS WE SPEAK. WE'RE MAKING IT SO. [01:05:15] ALL RIGHT, THOSE ARE ALL OF MY SUGGESTIONS. OH, WE HAD IT. UP THERE. THAT'S RIGHT. YEP. THAT'S RIGHT. CAN WE DO KNOW THE DATE OF YOUR ENGINEERING LETTER? 530. ANYTHING ELSE? BOARD MEMBERS. OKAY. DO WE NEED TO GO BACK TO SEEKER AND DISCUSS THAT NOW? THANK YOU. YEAH. JUST FOR JUST FOR EDIFICATION. YEAH. FOR SEEKER, IT'S AN UNLISTED ACTION. BUT WE DIDN'T DO A COORDINATED REVIEW. SO THERE IS A PART TWO AND PART THREE THAT WE PUT TOGETHER THAT'S IN THE BJ MUIRHEAD PROJECT FOLDER. AND IF YOU READ THIS YOU WOULD BE ISSUING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE PROJECT. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THE SEEKER PORTION OF THIS RESOLUTION? THIS IS MEMBER MCCORMICK. CAN YOU TALK THROUGH FOR THE RECORD HOW WE APPROACHED JUST THE FACT THAT IT WAS PRE-CLEARED AND HOW WE JUST CATEGORIZED THAT AND THEN ADDRESSED IT WITH THE LANDSCAPING PLAN FOR THE PUBLIC? YEAH. SO OBVIOUSLY THERE WAS SOME CLEARING DONE ON THIS PROJECT AND WITH THIS BOARD DID, AT LEAST FOR A SECRET PURPOSES IN TERMS OF MITIGATIONS AND FOR ADDRESSING ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS. THIS BOARD OBVIOUSLY ASKED FOR THE APPLICANT TO INCREASE VEGETATION WORK WITH THE NUMBER OF DIFFERENT BOARDS THROUGHOUT THE TOWN. AND IN TERMS OF SEEKER ITSELF, ONE OF THE THINGS ABOUT SEEKER IS THAT IF YOU DO FEEL THAT THERE WILL BE ANY SMALL OR MODERATE OR ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT, THAT YOU WOULD NOTE THAT IN THE PART TWO, AND THEN THE PART THREE IS WHERE YOU TALK ABOUT PROPOSED MITIGATIONS. AND IN THE PART THREE WE DISCUSS HOW THE APPLICANT IS WORKED WITH THE CAB AND WORKED WITH OTHER ENTITIES TO THEN PRODUCE A LANDSCAPE PLAN THAT THIS BOARD WOULD THEN APPROVE, THAT WILL THEN ACT AS THAT MITIGATION OF WHAT WAS PREVIOUSLY TAKEN AWAY AND WHAT WILL BE ADDED AND BE MAINTAINED BY BY THE APPLICANT. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? THIS IS MEMBER MCCORMICK. I WOULD PERHAPS ASK THAT JUST A LITTLE BIT MORE CLARITY ON WHAT YOU JUST SAID. GET ADDED INTO THE PART THREE. I THINK THAT AT A HIGH LEVEL, WE KIND OF CALLED ALL THAT STUFF, BUT I THINK THE PART THREE WOULD BENEFIT FROM ADDING AND I TRUST JOSH'S CATEGORIZING WHAT HE JUST SAID IN THE PART THREE, BUT I THINK IT WOULD BE GOOD IF WE COULD JUST ADD A COUPLE OF SENTENCES THAT SAID, THAT NODS TO THE DILIGENCE OF THIS LANDSCAPING PLAN. THE INPUT FROM THE CONSERVATION ADVISORY BOARD FROM PENN-DIXIE, WHO IN ADDITION TO THE GEOLOGICAL PRESERVE, IS ALSO A NATURE RESERVE, THAT ALL OF THAT WORK WENT IN TO, TO MITIGATE THE WORK THAT AND THE CLEARING THAT HAD BEEN DONE. I JUST WANT TO MAKE IF YOU'RE COMFORTABLE ADDING THAT LANGUAGE IN, I JUST THINK THAT THAT WOULD BE IMPORTANT TO CODIFY THEIR. YEP. AND I WILL I WILL ADD THAT. AND THEN OBVIOUSLY BEFORE THE CHAIR SIGNS THE PART THREE, WHICH WILL ACT AS A NEGATIVE DECK, WE'LL MAKE SURE THAT THAT LANGUAGE IS INCORPORATED IN THERE. JOSH, CAN WE INCORPORATE THAT INTO THIS IS MEMBER VALENT. CAN WE INCORPORATE THAT INTO THE RESOLUTION AS WELL? BECAUSE THE RESOLUTION, YOU KNOW, SAYS WE'VE DETERMINED THAT THE PROJECT HAS NO ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS, BUT THE ADVERSE IMPACTS HAVE ALREADY HAPPENED. SO IT WOULD BE NICE IN HERE. I REALIZE WE HAVE TO DO THIS ON THE FLY, BUT TO, YOU KNOW, SAY SOMETHING THAT THE BOARD IS SATISFIED THAT IMPACTS HAVE BEEN PROPERLY MITIGATED AND THERE WILL BE NO FURTHER ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. YEAH. TYPICALLY IN PREVIOUS RESOLUTIONS FOR SEEKER, FOR OTHER SITE PLAN APPROVAL PROJECTS, WE'VE SAID SOMETHING ALONG THE LINES OF THE PLANNING BOARD HAS RECEIVED INPUT FROM OTHER TOWN DEPARTMENTS, TOWN AGENCIES, ADVISORY BOARDS, WORKED WITH THE APPLICANT TO SUBMIT REVISED PLANS. YOU KNOW, HAVING ALL THAT LANGUAGE, WHICH I SHOULD PROBABLY BE TYPING RIGHT NOW. WELL, I'M THINKING MORE SPECIFICALLY ABOUT THE TREE REMOVAL, RIGHT. AND THAT THEY'VE GONE THEY'VE PUT IN ALL THIS WORK AND DONE ALL THIS EFFORT TO SATISFACTORILY MITIGATE IT. BUT I DON'T WANT TO PRETEND THAT IT DOESN'T EXIST. AND I THINK IT SHOULD BE IN BOTH THE RESOLUTION AND THE PART THREE. BUT IF PEOPLE FEEL DIFFERENTLY, YOU CAN SAY THAT BILL CLARK, THEY DIDN'T [01:10:01] DO THE TREE REMOVAL, AND IT WAS SOMETHING THAT HAPPENED PRIOR. TRUE. SO IF WE PUT THAT IN THERE, IT'S ALMOST SAYING THAT THEY DID IT. AND I MEAN, THEY'RE MITIGATING IT BASED ON WHAT WE'VE ASKED THEM TO DO. BUT IT'S NOT THEY DIDN'T DO THE TREE REMOVAL. AND THAT HAPPENED IN THE PAST. NO, THEY THEY IT DID WAS HAPPEN BY A CONTRACTOR THAT WAS TRYING TO SUPPORT THIS PROJECT. SO WHAT I WOULD SAY IS THAT I ALSO THINK MAYBE TO THAT END THAT ON THE PART TWO, PART ITEM SEVEN, THE CLEARING WAS NOT YOU KNOW, WE'VE DEALT WITH THIS BEFORE ON OTHER PROJECTS WHERE THERE WAS AN IMPACT, YOU KNOW, DEBRIS PLACED PILES AND THINGS, AND IT WAS NOT DONE BY THE APPLICANT OR SOMETHING AFFILIATED WITH IT, LIKE THE CLEARING WAS DONE TO GET A HEAD START ON THIS PROJECT. SO I WOULD MAYBE WE NEED TO CHANGE NUMBER SEVEN TO YES, UNDER IMPACT ON PLANTS AND ANIMALS AND ACKNOWLEDGE THE CLEARING. EVEN THOUGH IT WAS ALREADY DONE. IT WAS DONE INADVERTENTLY. AND I THINK ALL OF THAT IS MITIGATED. I THINK JUST IN TERMS OF HAVING THE CLEAR RECORD THERE. AND THEN THAT FEEDS INTO THE STATEMENT THAT WE JUST TALKED ABOUT ADDING INTO PART THREE TO PROPERLY REFLECT THAT. WE WENT THROUGH THIS PROCESS JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE ARTICULATING ALL THAT. THAT WAS MEMBER MCCORMICK I DON'T THINK I SEE MY NAME. SO ARE WE DO YOU WANT ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE UNDER THE RESOLUTION ITSELF, OR DO YOU FEEL COMFORTABLE THAT IF IT'S REFLECTED IN THE PART TWO AND PART THREE, AS IT'S BEEN DISCUSSED ON THE RECORD, THAT THAT WOULD SUFFICE? I WOULD PROPOSE IT GOES IN THE RESOLUTION. I'M PUTTING THIS OUT FOR EVERYONE TO RESPOND TO. BUT TO SAY THAT THE PLANNING BOARD HAS DETERMINED THAT THE PROJECT'S ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS HAVE BEEN MITIGATED, AND THERE ARE NOT AND ARE NOT, AND WE HAVE TO FIX THE AND ARE THERE BUT ARE NOT ANTICIPATED TO RESULT IN ANY ANY LIKE FUTURE SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OR SOMETHING. OR MAYBE FUTURE DOESN'T NEED TO BE THERE, NOT FUTURE. LIKE I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT THE TREES PER SE. I JUST KIND OF WANT TO NOTE THAT THERE WAS AN ISSUE. IT'S BEEN PROPERLY MITIGATED. WE DON'T FORESEE ANY OTHER ISSUES GOING FORWARD. SO BASED ON THIS REVIEW, FOR THIS UNLISTED ACTION AND COMPLETION OF PART TWO AND PART THREE OF THE, THE PLANNING BOARD HAS DETERMINED THAT THE PROJECT'S ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS HAVE BEEN MITIGATED AND ARE NOT ANTICIPATED TO RESULT IN ANY SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS, SO ON AND SO FORTH. YES. HOW DOES EVERYONE ELSE FEEL ABOUT THAT? MEMBERS, I AGREE AND SUPPORT THAT. THANK YOU. MEMBER FINLEY. I AGREE IN SUPPORT IT. MEMBER MCCORMACK I AGREE AS WELL. OKAY. SO IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON WHAT'S IN FRONT OF US ON SEEKER SEEING NONE WHO WOULD LIKE TO TAKE A. I'M SORRY YOU SAID IT'S A LONG SENTENCE. WHO WOULD LIKE TO MAKE THE MOTION? I WILL I MOVE TO ADOPT MEMBER SHIMURA THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION. HERE WE GO. CAN YOU SCROLL TO THE TOP? BJ MUIRHEAD COMPANY, JEFFREY BOULEVARD. SEEKER AND APPROVAL RESOLUTION JUNE 4TH, 2021. SEEKER. IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE NEW YORK STATE SEEKER LAW, THE TOWN OF HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD HAS REVIEWED THE BJ MUIRHEAD PROJECT TO CONSTRUCT A TWO STORY OFFICE, 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. SBL 159.1224, AND HELD THE REQUIRED PUBLIC HEARING ON MAY 7TH, 2025. BASED ON THIS REVIEW FOR THIS UNLISTED ACTION AND COMPLETION OF PART TWO AND PART THREE OF THE F, E A F, THE PLANNING BOARD HAS DETERMINED THAT THE PROJECT'S ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS HAVE BEEN MITIGATED AND ARE NOT ANTICIPATED TO RESULT IN ANY SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS, AND A NEGATIVE DECLARATION IS HEREBY ISSUED AND THE PLANNING BOARD CHAIR IS AUTHORIZED TO SIGN THE PART THREE, WHICH WILL ACT AS A NEGATIVE DECLARATION. IT'S BEEN MOVED. IS THERE A SECOND MEMBER? FINLEY SECONDS IT. IT'S BEEN MOVED BY MEMBER SHIMURA, SECOND BY MEMBER FINLEY. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE, AYE. ANY OPPOSED? SECTION ONE. SEEKER HAS PASSED. SITE NUMBER TWO. SITE PLAN APPROVAL. BASED ON THE REVIEW OF THE BJ MUIRHEAD 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 530 2025 TWO. SIDEWALKS ARE NOT WARRANTED AS THE PROJECT IS LOCATED WITHIN AN INDUSTRIAL PARK. THREE THE LANDSCAPING PLAN DATED SIX THRE, [01:15:09] 2025, IS APPROVED BY THE PLANNING BOARD FOLLOWING INSTALLATION OF ELECTRICAL AND OTHER UTILITIES AT THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY. PREVIOUSLY REMOVED VEGETATION WILL BE REPLACED WITH NATIVE MEADOW SEED MIX IN AREAS INDICATED FOR ALL PROPOSED LIGHTING ON THE PROJECT SHALL BE DARK SKY COMPLIANT. FIVE. IN ADDITION, H AND H S SLASH PENN-DIXIE AGREES TO THE RELOCATION OF THE APPLICANT'S TEMPORARY FENCING ONTO H AND H S SLASH PENN-DIXIE PROPERTY BY A DISTANCE NOT TO EXCEED THREE FEET DURING CONSTRUCTION. FENCING PROVES IMPROVED. SECURITY PLUS IS A VISUAL BOUNDARY BETWEEN THE PROPERTIES. FURTHER, BJ MUIRHEAD AGREES TO MAKE AVAILABLE A POINT OF CONTACT FOR CONCERNS RELATED TO CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES. IT'S BEEN MOVED BY MEMBER SHIMURA. IS THERE A SECOND, SECOND, SECOND BY AUGUST? AUGUST? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE. ANY OPPOSED? YOUR RESOLUTION HAS PASSED. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. OKAY, SO WE'RE JUMPING AHEAD NOW TO CASE NUMBER FOUR COREY TIGER, WHO'S BEEN HERE SINCE 3:00 THIS MORNING I THINK. IT'S POSTPONED. IT'S BEEN TABLED I DON'T THINK BUT WE HAVEN'T TOLD THE PEOPLE THAT. AND I'M AFRAID THAT THEY MAY ANY OF THESE PEOPLE MAY THINK THAT THEY STILL OPEN. AND THERE IS PUBLIC HEARINGS ARE OPEN UNTIL THE NEXT MEETING. RIGHT. YEAH. SO LIKE WHAT IF YOU WANT TO BE HEARD ON THE PERIOD. OKAY. SO ON CASE NUMBER THREE LARDEN DISPOSAL SERVICES, THE [3. Continuation of a Public Hearing – 7:00 P.M., 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] CASE HAS BEEN POSTPONED UNTIL JUNE 18TH BECAUSE THE PAPER OR TABLE. SORRY. BECAUSE THE PAPERWORK THAT THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED WAS NOT COMPLETE AND NEEDED TO GET REDONE, SO TO SPEAK. THE PUBLIC HEARING IS STILL OPEN AT THIS TIME AND WILL REMAIN OPEN UNTIL THE 18TH. AT THAT TIME, IS THERE ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE THAT IS HERE THIS EVENING TO MAKE COMMENTS ON THIS? ON ON LADAN LADAN DISPOSAL SERVICES? COME ON IN. PLEASE SPEAK CLEARLY INTO THE MICROPHONE. GIVE YOUR NAME. OKAY. MY NAME IS CAROL KOLB. I LIVE ON FOURTH STREET IN WOODLAWN AND I WAS WONDERING WHY ONLY CERTAIN RESIDENTS GOT LETTERS ABOUT THIS PROJECT. ONLY FIRST AND SECOND STREET RESIDENTS GOT A LETTER. NO ONE ELSE IN THE VILLAGE OF AREA OF WOODLAWN GOT A LETTER. OKAY, A PUBLIC HEARING IS NOT A QUESTION AND ANSWER PERIOD. SO YOU CAN YOU CAN STATE YOUR CONCERNS. WE WILL ADDRESS IT AFTER THE AFTER THE AFTER YOUR QUESTIONS. OKAY. THANK YOU. DID YOU GET HER ADDRESS? DID YOU GET HER ADDRESS? MA'AM, WOULD YOU MIND JUST SPELLING YOUR NAME FOR JOSH OVER HERE FOR THE MINUTES AS WELL? OKAY. ANYONE ELSE? COME ON UP. HELLO. MY NAME IS RICH HILLMAN. H I L L I'M A N I DIDN'T DO MUCH OF MY HOMEWORK, BUT I DID RECENTLY PURCHASE A HOME. I'M A HOMEOWNER RIGHT ON LAKE ON ROUTE FIVE THERE. I'M ALSO THE OWNER OPERATOR OF THE QUEEN CITY BIKE FERRY, AND WE DO A LOT OF TRANSPORTATION OF CYCLISTS AND RECREATION FOLKS THAT GO FROM DOWNTOWN TO THE OUTER HARBOR AND USE THE SEAWAY TRAIL QUITE A BIT. AND OVER THE PAST, WELL, I'VE BEEN OPERATING THAT FOR TEN YEARS NOW, AND THERE HAS BEEN A HUGE DEMAND TO GET THAT, THAT, THAT TRAIL GOING ALL THE WAY TO, YOU KNOW, TO WOODLAWN BEACH. AND I'M REALLY CONCERNED THAT, YOU KNOW, OUR SEAWAY TRAIL AND ANY OF NOT ONLY THE TRAFFIC, BUT YOU KNOW, WHAT TYPE OF SMELLS AND ALL THE OTHER STUFF THAT COME WITH IT. AND WE GOT SUCH A BEAUTIFUL WATERFRONT. I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH HAS BEEN DONE. AND I WILL DO MY HOMEWORK AND I WILL COME BACK ON THE 18TH ON LIKE HIS WATERKEEPER, BEEN INFORMED AND STUFF LIKE THAT. BUT I'LL DO MY HOMEWORK ON THAT STUFF. BUT I AM A NEW HOMEOWNER ON ROUTE FIVE. YEAH, I AM A HOMEOWNER ON ROUTE FIVE, SO I AM VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THAT. I'M REALLY CLOSE TO WHERE THE SITE IS, YOU KNOW, PROPOSED, YOU KNOW, SO RUNOFF IS A BIG CONCERN OF MINE. AND AS WELL AS OUR BIKE PATH THAT'S GOING TO GO THROUGH NEW YORK STATE, THEY I REPRESENT PROBABLY ABOUT 30,000 BICYCLE [01:20:02] RIDERS A YEAR THAT CROSS FROM DOWNTOWN TO THE OUTER HARBOR. AND THERE IS A HUGE DEMAND TO GET TO THAT BEACH. AND I KNOW THAT THE COUNTY HAS DONE SOME WORK FOR SOME OF THE BROWNFIELDS AND SOME OF THE STUFF THERE TO MAKE SOME PARKS IN THAT AREA. I DON'T KNOW HOW FAR THAT IS, BUT I, I, MY WIFE WORKS FOR PARKS, SO I WILL GET A LITTLE BIT MORE INFORMATION ON WHAT PARKS ARE ALREADY PLANNED, AND YOU GUYS ARE WAY AHEAD OF IT THAN ME. I JUST WANT TO VOICE MY CONCERN ABOUT THAT AND THAT'S ABOUT IT. OKAY. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WISHES TO MAKE COMMENT? I CAN'T SEE BEHIND THE PODIUM, BUT SECOND CALL FOR ANYONE ELSE THAT WANTS TO SPEAK IN REGARDS TO THE GARDEN PROJECT DISPOSAL SERVICES. OKAY, WE'RE LEAVING THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN. IF YOU HEAR ANYONE ELSE THAT WISHES TO COMMENT, THEY CAN SEND THEIR COMMENTS. GO TO THE TOWN OF HAMBURG WEBSITE AND JOSH, WILL, CAN I JUST ADDRESS SOME THINGS AFTER I I'M GOING TO GET THAT TOO. AND NOW I'M GOING TO TURN IT OVER TO OUR PLANNING DEPARTMENT WHO WILL ADDRESS THE MAILINGS FOR THE MAILINGS. WE WILL NOT WE BUT NOT I, BUT APPLICANT OR NEIGHBORS ARE NOTIFIED 500FT FROM THE SBO NUMBER. AND AS YOU GUYS KNOW, THIS PARCEL, WHICH IF YOU LOOK AT THE SCREEN IN THE TV, IS THIS LONG STRIP OF PARCEL HERE IN THE GREEN ISH. SO NOT SURE HOW FAR 500FT GOES OUT FROM IT. SO MEMBERS OF FOURTH STREET AND BEYOND MAY NOT HAVE BEEN WITHIN THAT 500FT. LIKE I SAID, I DON'T DO THE NOTIFICATIONS, BUT THAT MAY BE A REASON WHY MEMBERS FURTHER SOUTH FROM FROM SECOND STREET MAY NOT HAVE GOTTEN A NOTIFICATION. AND THEN JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, EVEN THOUGH THE APPLICANT ISN'T HERE, I KNOW THAT THIS BOARD ASKED THE QUESTION ABOUT ACCESS. WE GOT A COMMENT FROM STATE PARKS DURING THE COORDINATED REVIEW FOR THIS PROJECT, AND THERE WAS A QUESTION ABOUT ACCESS. THERE WAS A QUESTION ABOUT WHERE STATE PARKS HAVE MADE A COMMENT THAT THERE WAS GOING TO BE A ROAD THAT WOULD NOT BE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC USE. THAT WAS ONLY STATE PARKS PROPERTY. AND I KNOW THERE WAS A QUESTION ABOUT WHERE ON THE MAP ARE WE TALKING ABOUT? SO AFTER SPEAKING WITH MARK MISTRETTA, WHO IS THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR FROM STATE PARKS, I GAVE HIM A VERSION OF THE MAP AND HE WAS ABLE TO HELP MARK IT UP FOR ME. SO IF EVERYONE LOOKS AT THE TV IN FRONT OF YOU IN GREEN IS RIGHT OFF OF ROUTE FIVE, WHICH IS A PUBLICLY ACCESSIBLE DRIVEWAY WHICH THE APPLICANT WILL BE USING TO GET TO THEIR SITE. AND THE RED IS A STATE PARKS ROAD. IF YOU GUYS RECALL, WHEN WE DID THE GATEWAY BUILDING THAT ACTUALLY CONNECTS DOWN TO GATEWAY BOULEVARD, WHICH WE KNOW IS A STATE PARKS ROAD, SO IN RED WILL NOT BE ABLE TO BE USED BY THE APPLICANT. IN GREEN WILL BE A DRIVEWAY THAT IS ABLE TO BE USED BY THE APPLICANT FROM. AND THIS IS FROM STATE PARKS REGIONAL DIRECTOR FOR THE NIAGARA REGION. THAT'S CORRECT. THERE'S A LOT OF WEAPONS IN THERE. IF I MAY MAKE A COMMENT CONCERNING THIS PROJECT. MEMBER DJERASSI I SPENT PROBABLY AN HOUR TO MAYBE AN HOUR AND A HALF EARLIER TODAY GOING THROUGH THIS WHOLE AREA FROM FIRST AVENUE TO SEVENTH AVENUE. FAMILIARIZING MYSELF WITH THE ENTRANCEWAY THAT WILL GO INTO THE PROJECT. AND WHILE I WAS DOING THIS, IT KIND OF REFRESHED MY MEMORY WHEN I WAS ON A PREVIOUS PLANNING BOARD, WE APPROVED A RECYCLING LOCATION ON SOUTH PARK AND AN OLD BETHLEHEM STEEL BUILDING THAT RECYCLES PLASTIC AND GLASSWARE, AND I DROVE AROUND THERE TODAY, AND I NOTICED A ABOUT A THREE STORY BUILDING HIGH BY A TWO STORY BUILDING, WIDE OF DEBRIS PILED ON THE OUTSIDE AND THE BACK OF THE BUILDING, WHICH FACES RESIDENTS ON LAKE AVENUE. AND IF I HAD A HOME ON LAKE AVENUE IN THE SUMMER, SITTING ON MY PORCH, HAVING TO LOOK AT THAT PILE OF DEBRIS, I WOULD NOT BE SITTING ON MY FRONT PORCH. SO WHEN THIS PROJECT DOES COME ABOUT, FOR THE RESIDENTS THAT LIVE ON FROM FIRST TO SEVENTH, I DON'T WANT THEM TO BE HAVING VISIBILITY TO A BIG STACK OF PILE OF DEBRIS THAT WILL BE ON THIS BUILDING OUTSIDE IN WARM SUMMER WEATHER. AND I KNOW IT'S NOT TRASH, IT'S CONSTRUCTION, DEMOLITION MATERIAL, BUT THAT'S STILL UNATTRACTIVE TO LOOK AT, AND IT'S STILL A NEST FOR RODENTS AND ANY OTHER VARMINTS THAT INHABIT AREAS LIKE THIS. SO THAT'S MY OWN PERSONAL FEELING. AFTER SEEING THIS TODAY. OKAY. [01:25:12] PLANNING DEPARTMENT, DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE TO OFFER? NOT AT THIS TIME. OKAY. BOARD MEMBERS. HANG ON. YOU HAVE TO COME UP TO THE MICROPHONE. IF YOU'RE GOING TO SPEAK, CAN YOU ANGLE THAT MICROPHONE BACK UP AGAIN? SO THIS. HI. MY NAME IS TRACY PARKS AND I HAVE PROPERTY ON FIRST STREET THAT I ALSO MY HOUSE IS ON SECOND STREET AND MY PROPERTY GOES ALL THE WAY BACK TO FIRST STREET. I WANT TO KNOW IF THEY'RE GOING TO BE USING THE TRACKS TO GET RID OF WHATEVER SAID TRASH IS GOING TO BE THERE. AND I WANT TO KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO BE TO THE LEFT OF WOODLAWN AVENUE. I CAN ANSWER, THE RAILROAD TRACKS WON'T BE USED. NO. AS FOR YOUR SECOND QUESTION, WHAT'S TO THE LEFT OF WOODLAWN? THEY'RE USING, AND I WOULD HAVE TO ZOOM IN. THEY'RE USING AN EXISTING BUILDING. I THINK IT MIGHT SHOW UP. SO IF I COULD GET MY CURSOR TO WORK. THEY'RE USING AN EXISTING BUILDING. NOT THERE. HERE, HERE, HERE. AND THEN THERE WILL BE SOME. I GUESS YOU CALL THEM STORAGE BINS. THAT WILL BE TO THE LEFT, TO THE WEST OF THIS BUILDING AND THIS PARKING, THIS PAVED PARKING AREA THERE. AND THAT IS THE EXTENT OF THE BUILDING SLASH LAND THAT THE APPLICANT WILL BE USING. OF COURSE. OKAY. ANYONE ELSE? MARGARET VANARSDALE. AND AS LONG AS QUESTIONS ARE BEING ANSWERED, AREN'T THEY GOING TO BE DRIVING? IF THEY'RE DRIVING THE GREEN SECTION, AREN'T THEY GOING TO BE GOING THROUGH THE RED SECTION, WHICH IS THE STATE ROAD? AREN'T THEY GOING TO DRIVE OVER IT? THEY HAVE TO GET THROUGH THAT RED SECTION TO GET TO THEIR BUILDING. THE RED CIRCLE IS A ROUGH ESTIMATE. SO THAT'S NOT THE EXACT THAT'S NOT THE EXACT EXTENT OF THE ROAD. SO THEN THEY'RE NOT GOING TO BE DRIVING OVER THE STATE ROAD. NOT AFTER MY CONVERSATION WITH STATE PARKS. NO, THEY DO NOT HAVE THAT CONCERN. YOU HAVE TO FIX THE RED LINE. SO FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO COMMENTED TONIGHT, I'M GOING TO SUGGEST THAT YOU MARK YOUR CALENDARS FOR JUNE 18TH. THE APPLICANT WILL BE BACK. THERE WILL BE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION PRESENTED AND FURTHER DISCUSSION BY THIS BOARD. THE PUBLIC HEARING WILL STILL BE OPEN. I STRONGLY WITH A BIG CAPITAL S SUGGEST THAT IF ANYONE HAS ANYTHING ELSE, PLEASE SUBMIT YOUR COMMENTS IN WRITING TO THE TOWN OF HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD PLANNING DEPARTMENT. JOSH IS ON THE WEBSITE. YOU GO TO THE TOWN OF HAMBURG WEBSITE, GO TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND THEN JOSH'S EMAIL IS THERE. SO IF YOU KNOW SOMEONE THAT HAS CONCERNS, WE ENCOURAGE EVERYONE BECAUSE WE SEE ALL THE COMMENTS THAT WAY. NOT ONLY THAT, BUT THOSE COMMENTS ARE ARE SENT ALSO TO THE APPLICANT. THAT'S IN EVERY CASE THAT WE HAVE WHERE WE HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING. THAT'S THE PROCESS. WE TRY TO ENCOURAGE RESIDENTS TO VOICE THEIR CONCERNS. SO YOUR CONCERNS TONIGHT ARE A PART OF OUR RECORD VIDEO AND OTHERWISE. AND I'M JUST BEING FUNNY. SORRY. AND BUT IF YOU KNOW OF ANYTHING ELSE OR IF YOU THINK OF ANYTHING ELSE OR IF YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT ANYTHING ELSE, THE PUBLIC HEARING IS OPEN. SO NOW'S THE TIME TO SEND THOSE THAT INFORMATION. SO FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO HAVEN'T HAD TIME TO DO YOUR HOMEWORK, AND IF YOU FIND SOMETHING ELSE THAT YOU FIND, PLEASE SEND IT TO JOSH AND HE'LL FORWARD THAT TO THE PARTIES THAT BE IN MY EMAIL. JUST FOR CLARIFICATION IS JAY RODGERS. THAT'S J R O G E R S AT TOWN OF HAMBURG, NY GOV. OR YOU CAN STOP BY SEE ME IN THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. I'M THERE MONDAYS AND WEDNESDAYS. SAY HELLO. OKAY. ANYTHING ELSE IN REGARDS TO THIS MATTER? OKAY. SO THANK YOU MEMBER VALENTI FOR [4. Corey Tyger – Requesting Site Plan Approval of a pole barn for storage purposes on a merged parcel at 6722 Southwestern Boulevard] ALLOWING THAT TO HAPPEN. AND NOW WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON TO COREY TIGER WHO'S BEEN HERE SINCE 3:00 THIS MORNING. HI, COREY. COREY IS REQUESTING A SITE PLAN APPROVAL OF A POLE BARN FOR STORAGE PURPOSES ON EMERGED PARCEL AT 6722 SOUTHWESTERN BOULEVARD. THE APPLICANT IS [01:30:07] LOOKING TO DO A POLE BARN STORAGE PROJECT AT THIS PROPERTY, AND IT'S NOT ZONED CORRECTLY. AND SO THE APPLICANT WENT TO CODE REVIEW AND THEN CAME BACK TO US EARLIER THIS YEAR. WE WERE GOING TO DO ONE THING, BUT THEN WE REALIZED THAT THIS PROPERTY FITS UNDER THE AG DISTRICT OR THE AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT. WENT BACK TO THE TOWN BOARD AND GOT IT APPROVED AND NOW IS BACK IN FRONT OF US TO RECEIVE A PRELIMINARY. COMMENTS FOR HIS SITE PLAN. DO I HAVE ALL THAT CORRECT? OKAY. PLEASE PICK UP THE MIC BECAUSE WE HAVE TO HEAR YOU. CORRECT. THANK YOU. PULL IT OUT. YOU CAN PULL IT OUT AND TALK INTO IT. YOU DON'T WANT TO BE A PART OF OUR PROBLEM WITH OUR MINUTES. JUST. JUST SAYING, OKAY. DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE TO OFFER TONIGHT? NO I DON'T I TURN THAT INTO JOSH. AND I MEAN, IF YOU GUYS WERE TO HAVE ANY PROBLEMS WITH THAT, I WOULD I WOULD WRITE UP A NEW ONE. OKAY. JOSH, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO OFFER? YEAH, JUST TO GIVE YOU JUST TO GIVE A LITTLE BIT MORE BACKGROUND. MR. TIGER GOT HIS REZONING APPROVED. HE'S OFFICIALLY. WELL, WHEN THE SECRETARY OF STATE, SECRETARY OF STATE APPROVED, IT WILL BE ZONED AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT TO REMIND THIS BOARD. WE GOT THIS SHOWN TO THE CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER WHO CONFIRMED THAT HIS USE FOR STORAGE PURPOSES ISN'T ALLOWED USE IN THE AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT. MR. TIGER PROVIDED THIS FOR THE BOARD TO GET SOME PRELIMINARY INPUT ON. IF THERE ARE ANY CHANGES OR ANY CONCERNS WITH THE SITE PLAN, THEN HE SAID HE WOULD FLESH IT OUT A LITTLE BIT MORE TO PROVIDE IT FOR THIS BOARD AND FOR CAMI, FOR ENGINEERING AND THEN FOR SECRET PURPOSES. OBVIOUSLY, THE TOWN BOARD DID NEGLECT THE PROJECT. ONE THING THAT MR. TIGER WILL HAVE TO DEAL WITH ON THE ENGINEERING SIDE, BUT FOR THIS BOARD TO BE AWARE, IS THAT IN THE TOP LEFT OF THE PARCEL, THERE MAY BE WETLANDS ON THE PROPERTY FROM DEC, LIKE KIND OF VERY SIMILAR TO WHAT WE DID FOR OUR RALEIGH BOULEVARD WHEN WE DID THE COORDINATED REVIEW, WE SUBMITTED JD TO THE DEC AND IT USUALLY TAKES BETWEEN 90 TO 100 DAYS. BUT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THE TOWN BOARD SAID ON THEIR REZONING APPROVAL IS THEY HAD A CONDITION THAT THE APPLICANT THAT COREY WILL ADHERE TO ALL DEC REGULATIONS. AND OBVIOUSLY WE'LL WORK WITH THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT AS WELL TO MAKE SURE THAT, YOU KNOW, NO WETLANDS ARE AFFECTED IN THE IN THE SITE PLAN. SO OTHER THAN THAT, THOSE ARE ALL THE UPDATES FROM THE TOWN BOARD, AND HE'S JUST HERE TO SEE IF THERE ARE ANY COMMENTS ON THE ON THE SITE PLAN LAYOUT. AND WE'LL GO FROM THERE. OKAY. ENGINEERING DO YOU OWE ENGINEERING BEING THE. WE'LL GIVE HER A MINUTE. UNDER ENGINEERING WHILE YOU'RE DOING YOUR DOUBLE DUTY. I'M. DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE TO OFFER ON THIS? YES, ON JUST FOR ENGINEERING WHAT WE'D BE LOOKING FOR. AS FAR AS THE SITE PLAN, THIS JUST KIND OF GENERALLY SHOWS THE BUILDING AND THE AREA TO BE CLEARED. SO WE'LL NEED A LITTLE MORE DEFINITION. YOU'RE STILL SHOWING THE BUILDING TO BE DEMOED. WHAT WE KIND OF ARE LOOKING FOR MORE IS LIKE WHAT THE FINISHED SITE'S GOING TO LOOK LIKE. SO HOW THE DRIVEWAY IS GOING TO BE ADJUSTED IF ANYTHING'S GOING TO CHANGE THERE, IS THERE A DRIVEWAY EXTENSION INTO THAT CLEARED ARE? ON THE DRAWING? IT SAYS 25 FOOT WIDE CULVERT. SO WE'LL NEED TO KNOW WHAT THAT'S GOING TO BE 25 FOOT WIDE. CULVERTS ARE VERY UNUSUAL. SORRY. THERE'S A CULVERT IN IN THE FRONT. THERE'S A IT'S A STONE APPROACH CULVERT PIPE IN THERE. YEAH. THERE'S A CULVERT PIPE SHOWN IN THAT CLEARED AREA. YEAH I THERE'S A THERE'S A SORRY I'M TALKING TO THIS. THERE'S A DITCH THERE. I MEAN IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE 25 FOOT. I JUST, YOU KNOW, I COULD GET A 20 FOOT PIPE FOR MEDIUM PIPE I JUST YEAH. YOU'RE CATCHING ON, BILL. I ASSUME IT'S NOT 25FT WIDE. IT IS 25FT LONG. OH, YEAH. YEAH. AND THEN I WOULD NEED TO KNOW SIZE. IS IT 18 INCH PIPE? WHAT MATERIAL LENGTH. YOU KNOW, TO BE SURE THAT IT WORKS WITH THE DITCH. SO SOME GRADES ARE GOING TO BE NEEDED FOR THE SITE TO SHOW WHAT YOUR CURRENT AND PROPOSED GRADING IS, TO MAKE SURE YOUR BUILDING SET RIGHT AND THE SITE DRAINS PROPERLY, AND THEN THAT AREA FOR CLEARING, I THINK SHOULD BE A LITTLE BIT BETTER DEFINED, BECAUSE THERE IS A TREE LINE THAT IS SHOWN THAT KIND OF GOES FROM WHAT WAS THE PROPERTY WITH THE BUILDING AND THEN BUT THE CLEARING IS SHOWN [01:35:06] KIND OF NEXT TO IT. ARE YOU CLEARING A PATHWAY TO THERE. LIKE YOU'LL HAVE TO DEFINE THAT A LITTLE BIT BETTER. THERE'S NO TREES THERE OKAY. CAN I WALK OVER SINCE THIS RIGHT HERE IS A CLIP. ARE YOU GOING TO TALK INTO THE MICROPHONE OR NOT. YOU CAN'T USE IT AT THIS POINT. THERE'S A CREEK. THERE'S NO TREES THERE AT ALL. THE TREES ARE AFTER THE CREEK. OKAY. SO THAT'S GOING TO NEED TO BE PUT ON THE SITE. PLAN IN SOME CLEAR, CLEAR DETAIL. ABSOLUTELY. IT SHOULD. YOU NEED AN ARCHITECT OR AN ENGINEER OR SITE ENGINEER TO WORK WITH. I'M JUST GIVING YOU SOME IDEAS OF WHAT WE'LL BE LOOKING FOR. SO THERE'S STILL A FEW OUTSTANDING QUESTIONS. I THINK ONCE WE HAVE THAT SORT OF SITE PLAN FROM EITHER HIS ENGINEER OR ARCHITECT, A LOT OF THAT WILL BE ANSWERED, BUT JUST POINTING OUT SOME THINGS TO GET CLARIFIED. I WANT TO SEE GRADES. I WANT TO SEE HOW MUCH DRIVEWAY, WHAT MATERIAL. I WANT THAT CLEARING KIND OF A LITTLE BETTER DEFINED ON WHAT'S THERE AND WHAT'S BEING REMOVED FOR BOTH ENGINEERING AND THIS BOARD. YOU KNOW, JUST THAT'S KIND OF GENERALLY IF YOU'RE ADDING A CROSSING SUCH AS THAT CULVERT, IT'S GOT TO BE, YOU KNOW, SIZE, MATERIAL LENGTH AND ALL THAT DETAIL. SO THEY SHOULD ALL KNOW THAT. BUT I JUST WANT TO KIND OF GIVE YOU THOSE INITIAL THOUGHTS LOOKING AT THIS PLAN, I APPRECIATE THAT. CAN I MAKE A SUGGESTION. SURE. YES. GO AHEAD. JOSH COREY I WOULD SUGGEST WE DO THIS TYPICALLY WITH A LOT OF APPLICANTS, SCHEDULING A COORDINATION MEETING BETWEEN YOU, YOUR ARCHITECT, ENGINEER, WHOEVER THAT IS, MYSELF AND CAMI, A LOT OF TIMES WE'LL SIT DOWN AND SAY WHAT PLANNING IS LOOKING FOR, WHAT ENGINEERING IS LOOKING FOR, JUST SO THAT YOU'RE AWARE AND YOUR ENGINEER IS AWARE, SO THAT WHEN THEY MAKE THE CHANGES, THEY CAN HAVE THAT STREAMLINED. AND I CAN CONNECT WITH YOU OFFLINE ABOUT SETTING THAT MEETING UP. THAT'D BE GREAT. OKAY. YEAH, I THINK THAT CHAIR I THINK THAT GIVEN THE DISCUSSION AT THIS TABLE TONIGHT AND THE THINGS THAT WERE POINTED OUT, I THINK WE NEED TO SEE ALL OF THAT AGAIN. SO I'M GOING TO ADDRESS THE BOARD MEMBERS AND SEE IF THEY HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS. EVERYBODY WENT FOR IT. NO FIGHTING OVER THE MICROPHONES. I ONLY I WENT BILL CLARK, I WENT FOR A FIRST BECAUSE I WAS GOING TO SAY MARGOT'S CATCHPHRASE, WHEN YOU MEET WITH THE ARCHITECT, MAKE IT PRETTY. I WAS GOING TO SAY ABOUT ADDING LANDSCAPING. THAT'S WHY I WANT TO SEE THE SEE THE SITE PLAN TO FIND OUT WHAT WE'RE BECAUSE I'M. MY CONCERN IS ABOUT THE CREEK. SO I'LL JUMP IN BEFORE YOU. YEAH, WE BEAT YOU TO IT. I APPRECIATE THAT, BUT MAKE IT PRETTY IS ONLY SECOND TO IS THERE A WETLAND. SO WHEN YOU HAVE YOUR ENGINEER ARCHITECT MAKE THE PLAN UPDATES, CAN YOU JUST HAVE THEM PUT THE WETLAND ON THE POTENTIAL WETLAND ON THE SITE PLAN? IT'S JUST HELPFUL SO THAT WE CAN UNDERSTAND THAT. LIKE IF YOU HAVE A POTENTIAL WETLAND, BUT YOU'RE NOT TOUCHING IT AT ALL, GREAT. WE DON'T HAVE TO HAVE A CONVERSATION IF YOU ARE POTENTIALLY GOING TO FILL IT. AND DEC SAYS YOU NEED A PERMIT LIKE THAT'S ON YOU. IT'S JUST HELPFUL FOR OUR FULL UNDERSTANDING. IF THERE'S A WETLAND THERE, WE'RE NOT GOING TO TOUCH IT. RIGHT. SO YOU CAN JUST HAVE THEM SHOW IT ON THE PLAN AND NO PROBLEM AT ALL. THANKS. OKAY. MEMBER MCCORMICK. MEMBER MCCORMICK I WOULD ECHO MARGOT'S PRIMARY COMMENT, WHICH WE NEED THE WETLAND ON THERE. AND THEN WE NEED, I GUESS, BOTH FROM YOUR ENGINEER ARCHITECT AS WELL AS FROM THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, WHAT THE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS ARE FROM THAT DEC REGULATED WETLAND, IF THERE IS INDEED ONE ON THE SITE, I THINK THAT WILL AFFECT WHERE AND HOW THIS PROPERTY CAN BE DEVELOPED. AND WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE MAINTAINING THOSE THOSE BUFFER AREAS AND AGREE WITH CAMI AND ALL OF HER SUGGESTIONS ABOUT SOME MORE DETAIL THAT WE NEED. ANYBODY, ANYONE ELSE MEMBERS, WHILE YOU'RE LOOKING WITH YOUR ARCHITECT TO MAKE IT PRETTY, PLEASE CONSIDER ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPING ALONG THE ROADWAY. THERE'S THAT KIND OF HALF GROWN SWATH OF GRASS AND A WAY IN WHICH TO ADD THE LANDSCAPING THAT FOLLOWS SUIT WITH THE NEW ZONING AREA TO CONSIDER ADDING PLANTINGS THERE. SURE. SO WE'RE TABLING HIM. DO YOU THINK YOU CAN BE READY BY THE 18TH OF JUNE OR DO YOU WANT TO GO INTO. YEAH, I'LL, I'LL CALL THE ARCHITECT TOMORROW. OKAY. AND HE COULD HE COULD START DESIGNING. DO YOU THINK HE'LL BE READY BY THE 18TH. WHAT'S HIS DATE? THE FOURTH. WELL, WHY DON'T WE JUST GO TO THE NEXT MONTH SO THAT I'M NOT RUSHING AROUND? OKAY. SO IT'S. I MEAN, IT'S JULY 9TH. YEAH, LET'S DO JULY 9TH. AND THEN THAT WAY HE'S GOT THE STUFF YOU NEED, AND THEN I DON'T HAVE TO GO BACK TO HIM AGAIN. YOU KNOW, MAYBE JOSH, YOU COULD EMAIL ME THE THINGS THAT YOU WANT. YEP. I'LL SEND IT TO HIM. HE COULD DO HIS JOB AND THEN WE CAN GO. YEP. JUST SO YOU REMEMBER, OUR JULY MEETING IS THE SECOND WEEK IN JULY, NOT THE FIRST WEEK. SO JULY 9TH BECAUSE OF THE HIGH, BECAUSE OF THE HOLIDAY. SO WE MOVED. IT REMINDS ME THE DAY OF. IS USUALLY PRETTY GOOD ABOUT THAT. HE'S PRETTY BUSY. HE SHOULD BE AT THIS ONE. [01:40:04] JOSH REMINDS ALL OF US, FRANKLY. DON'T THINK YOU'RE SPECIAL. COREY, DO YOU HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OR WE KNOW WHAT WE GOTTA DO AND WE'LL DO IT. OKAY? ALRIGHT THEN WE'LL SEE YOU BACK IN JULY. OKAY? THANKS. HAVE A GOOD NIGHT. ALL RIGHT. YOU TOO. THANK YOU. THERE'S NO VOTE NEEDED TO MOVE IT THEN. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. SO WE ARE AT THE END OF THE EVENING AND MEMBER SHAMAR IS GOING TO MAKE A MOTION. I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO ADJOURN. SECON, IT'S BEEN MOVED IN SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR. THANK YOU. WHAT DID I SAY? AND JUST REMINDER, I * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.