READY? YES. I'M READY. OKAY. I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR EVERYBODY'S MIC IS ON. ALL RIGHT. SO, JOSH [WORK SESSION ] [00:00:15] ROGERS, PLANNING DEPARTMENT. FOR THE RECORD. WE ARE I'M HERE TO PRESENT THE. IF YOU GUYS RECALL FROM THE PREVIOUS TWO MEETINGS, I'VE PRESENTED A NUMBER OF VARIOUS ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS THAT WERE RECOMMENDED OUT OF CODE REVIEW TO THE PLANNING BOARD, THREE OF THEM, THREE OF WHICH AT A PREVIOUS MEETING, THIS BOARD DECIDED WERE GOOD TO GO. AND WE DECIDED AT THE LAST MEETING THAT THERE WERE TWO THAT SHOULD BE PULLED SEPARATELY OUT OF THOSE THREE TO FOR FURTHER INVESTIGATION BEFORE SENDING TO THE TOWN BOARD AS A RECOMMENDATION, ONE OF THOSE BEING THE MU ONE CODE AND ANOTHER ONE OF THOSE BEING OUR ADULT USE CANNABIS CODE. I'LL START WITH THE MU ONE CODE. IF YOU GUYS RECALL FROM THE LAST TIME AND I HAVE IT UP HERE ON THE SCREEN, I'M NOT GOING TO GO OVER THE PARTS OF THE CODE THAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT, WHERE THEY'RE JUST FIXING PARTS OF THE CODE THAT ARE REFERENCED WRONG. I'VE TALKED ABOUT THAT THE LAST COUPLE OF TIMES. I'LL FOCUS ON WHAT WE DISCUSSED LAST TIME. IF THE MIC WOULD WORK. OKAY. SO IF WE GO DOWN TO. JUST FOR EVERYONE'S EDIFICATION, YOU'LL NOTICE UNDER 280 408 IT A REFERENCE. USUALLY IT USED TO SAY M3 M2. IT DIDN'T SAID ML G I, WHICH WERE THE ORIGINAL ACRONYMS FOR OUR INDUSTRIAL DISTRICTS, WHICH WE CHANGED JUST TO LIGHT INDUSTRIAL, GENERAL INDUSTRIAL. AND THEN THE MAJOR CHANGES THAT YOU'LL SEE FOR DISCUSSION ARE UNDER 280. 409, SUBSECTION E. WE TALKED ABOUT PARKING SETBACKS AND WE TALKED ABOUT CHANGING THE LANGUAGE NOT ONLY FOR WHEN THERE ARE TIMES WHERE PARKING CAN'T BE IN THE BEHIND THE BUILDING, BUT ALSO TALKING ABOUT OFF STREET PARKING. AND AT OUR LAST DISCUSSION, WE TALKED ABOUT THE OVERALL INTENT OF THE MU1 CODE WHEN THIS PLANNING BOARD HELPED PUT IT TOGETHER TWO YEARS AGO, WAS THAT WE WANTED TO ENCOURAGE A MAIN STREET STYLE CHARACTER, RIGHT. SO WE TALKED ABOUT PUTTING THAT WITHIN THE CODE, SPECIFYING THAT, AND THEN ALSO HAVING SOME LANGUAGE INSTEAD OF HAVING DEFINITIVE TERMS LIKE EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED. WE USE DIFFERENT LANGUAGE LIKE GENERALLY DISCOURAGED. BUT THEN WE ALSO KIND OF QUANTIFY THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF WHICH WE'RE SAYING THAT, YOU KNOW, SETBACKS FOR PARKING IN THE FRONT DON'T HAVE TO BE FOLLOWED. SO FOR EVERYONE ON THE SCREEN, IF YOU LOOK AT E THE CHANGE THAT I SUGGESTED IS TO ENCOURAGE A MAIN STREET STYLE CHARACTER TO TRY TO GIVE A LITTLE BIT OF CONTEXT ON WHY THE FOLLOWING SAYS WHAT IT SAYS IT WILL READ TO ENCOURAGE A MAIN STREET STYLE CHARACTER. THERE WILL BE NO MINIMUM FRONT SETBACK AND NEW STRUCTURES SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED ABUTTING THE FRONT WALKWAY OR AS CLOSE AS POSSIBLE, EXCEPT. AND THEN THAT'S WHEN WE GET INTO ONE, TWO AND THREE. ONE AND TWO HAVE NOT CHANGED. THREE, YOU'LL NOTICE, SAYS A SETBACK TO ALLOW PARKING IN FRONT OF THE PRINCIPAL BUILDING IS GENERALLY DISCOURAGED, BUT MAY BE ALLOWED GIVEN UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, HAZARDS TO PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE, COMMUNITY CHARACTER AND SITE FEASIBILITY. THE INCLUSION OF COMMUNITY CHARACTER AND SITE FEASIBILITY WAS BROUGHT UP AT THE LAST MEETING, AND THE PART ABOUT INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO IS ALSO INCLUDED. SO I TRIED TO INCORPORATE WHAT MEMBERS OF THIS BOARD HAD SAID FROM OUR PREVIOUS MEETING. DOES THIS MAKE SENSE? IS THERE ANY OTHER ADDITIONS THAT I MISSED, OR IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON ON THIS SPECIFIC SECTION FOR 284 09E3? MEMBER SHIMURA SEE, YOU ARE A I THINK YOU DID A GREAT JOB CAPTURING WHAT WE WERE LOOKING FOR LAST TIME. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. IS EVERYONE COMFORTABLE WITH THAT? THAT SUGGESTION OKAY. OKAY. THE OTHER PART OF THE CODE THAT WE HAD TALKED ABOUT, THIS WAS SPECIFIC TO OFF STREET PARKING. SO YOU'LL NOTICE FOR TWO 8410 A HOW IT CURRENTLY WILL HOW IT WILL READ IS PARKING IS NOT A PERMITTED USE AND MAY ONLY BE CONSTRUCTED AS AN ACCESSORY USE TO A PRINCIPAL BUILDING. ALL EFFORTS SHOULD BE MADE TO KEEP PARKING LOCATED ENTIRELY BEHIND THE PRINCIPAL BUILDING. IF, DUE TO EXISTING CONDITIONS OR SITE CONSTRAINTS, PARKING CANNOT BE KEPT ENTIRELY BEHIND THE BUILDING. PARKING SHALL NOT IMPEDE OR INTERFERE WITH WALKABILITY AND COMMUNITY CHARACTER. NO PARKING SHALL FRONT ON ANY STREET. THIS GOES BACK TO WHEN WE HAD DISCUSSIONS ORIGINALLY HAD SAID WE WERE JUST GOING TO TAKE OUT PARKING, IF ANY SHALL BE LOCATED ENTIRELY BEHIND THE BUILDING. BUT WE TALKED ABOUT HAVING IN THERE KIND OF MIRRORING WHAT WE HAD IN 284 093, KEEPING SIMILAR LANGUAGE, TALKING ABOUT IF THERE WERE EXISTING CONDITIONS OR SITE CONSTRAINTS, THEN THAT WOULD BE [00:05:01] A REASON WHY PARKING COULDN'T COULDN'T BE KEPT BEHIND THE BUILDING. AND THAT WE ALSO TALKED ABOUT IF WE'RE GOING TO HAVE PARKING, YOU KNOW, SHALL NOT INTERFERE WITH COMMUNITY, CHARACTER, WALKABILITY. THOSE ARE SOME OF THE THINGS THAT YOU GUYS THREW OUT AS, AS QUANTIFYING IN THIS SECTION OF THE CODE. SO IS THERE ANY DISCUSSIONS OR ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS PART OF TWO 8410 A. CHAIR? GRONIGEN I DON'T I THINK YOU DID AN EXCELLENT JOB IN THIS AS WELL. I THINK IT WAS PRETTY WELL DISCUSSED AND I THINK YOU COVERED IT WELL. THANK YOU. BOARD MEMBERS, I AGREE. GRAMMATICAL NUMBER. CLERK. YEAH. BILL. CLERK. SORRY. BETWEEN WALKABILITY AND COMMUNITY SHOULD BE AN OR AND MAYBE INSTEAD OF PARKING LOT SHALL NOT IMPEDE. IT SHOULD BE PARKING LOT SHALL NEITHER IMPEDE NOR INTERFERE WITH WALKABILITY OR COMMUNITY CHARACTER. SO. NEITHER IMPEDE NOR I. OKAY, SO IT'LL READ IF DUE TO EXISTING CONDITIONS OR SITE CONSTRAINTS, PARKING CANNOT BE KEPT ENTIRELY BEHIND A BUILDING. PARKING SHALL NEITHER IMPEDE NOR INTERFERE WITH WALKABILITY OR COMMUNITY CHARACTER. NO PARKING SHALL FRONT OR ANY STREET. THAT'S CORRECT. YEAH. MEMBER MCCORMACK DO WE NEED THAT LAST SENTENCE ANYMORE WITH THE OTHER EDITS? DO WE STILL NEED TO SAY NO PARKING SHALL FRONT ON ANY STREET BECAUSE. THAT'S PRETTY DEFINITIVE LIKE THAT. THERE SHOULD BE NO PARKING ON THE FRONTAGE. I THINK WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS IF THERE IS EXTENUATING CIRCUMSTANCES, IT CAN. SO I'M WONDERING WHETHER OR NOT, WITH THE EDITS THAT YOU MADE, IF WE STILL NEED THE LAST SENTENCE MEMBER, SURE, I WOULD AGREE WITH STRIKING THE LAST SENTENCE. NO. ANYBODY ELSE? ANYBODY ELSE IN AGREEMENT OF REMOVING THAT? WHATEVER ANYBODY WANTS TO DO, I DON'T CARE. BILL CLARK. ALL RIGHT, I WILL. I THINK THAT'S EASY. WE'LL JUST CROSS IT OUT. AND I BELIEVE THAT WAS THE EXTENT OF THE MUON CODE WITH THESE WITH THESE CHANGES. IS THE BOARD COMFORTABLE WITH SENDING THIS AS A RECOMMENDATION TO CHANGING THE CODE BACK TO THE TOWN BOARD? MEMBER? SHIMURA. YES. OKAY. MEMBER. CLARK. YES. MEMBER MCCORMICK. YES. MEMBER. VALENTI. YES. MEMBER. YES. MEMBER. BRANIGAN. YES, AS WELL. ALL RIGHT. SO I WILL SAVE THIS, AND I WILL CLEAN IT UP, AND I WILL SEND IT ALONG TO THE TOWN BOARD AS THE PLANNING BOARD'S OFFICIAL RECOMMENDATION. THE OTHER PART OF THE ZONING CODE THAT WE WERE AMENDING OR TALKED ABOUT AMENDING WAS THE ADULT USE CANNABIS LAW. AND IF YOU GUYS RECALL, THERE WERE A NUMBER OF QUESTIONS ABOUT HOW YOU MEASURE FROM, YOU KNOW, CENTER LINE OF THE ROWS, SOME OF THE LANGUAGE THAT COMES FROM THE STATE LANGUAGE ABOUT HAVING PUBLIC YOUTH FACILITIES NEEDING TO BE A LOCAL LAW. AND THERE WAS A LOT OF QUESTIONS THAT I, I PRESENTED IT TO THE TO THE LEGAL TEAM FOR THE TOWN OF HAMBURG, AND I KNOW JOE GOGAN PROVIDED SOME DOCUMENTATION, SO I'LL ALLOW HIM TO KIND OF EXPLAIN THAT PIECE, AND THEN WE'LL KIND OF BRING THE DISCUSSION BACK TO THE ADULT USE CANNABIS PIECE. SO, JOE, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANT TO. SURE. JOSEPH GILGUN, HANG ON ONE SECOND. YOU GOT TO GRAB THE MIC. YEAH. DID YOU TURN IT ON THE GREEN? OKAY. JOSEPH GOGAN SO WHAT I PRINTED FOR THE, THE BOARD IS JUST A SMALL PDF DOCUMENT PROVIDED BY THE NEW YORK STATE LIQUOR AUTHORITY ABOUT HOW YOU MEASURE OR WHERE YOU MEASURE FROM FOR THE 200 FOOT RULE, THE 500 FOOT RULE, THE DEFINITION OF A PLACE OF WORSHIP. WHAT WHAT QUANTIFIES A PLACE OF WORSHIP, ETC. SO THAT SHOULD EXPLAIN THOSE DEFINITIONS. THOSE ARE PRETTY MUCH SET IN IN LEGAL INSTANCES. AND I'M GUESSING MOST OF THIS CAME FROM CASE LAW. IF THE STATUTE IS SILENT AND THERE'S A METHOD OF MEASURING, IT MOST LIKELY CAME FROM PRIOR ACTIONS. AND THEN THERE WAS THE OTHER QUESTION ABOUT IS THAT THE MINIMUM OR THE MAXIMUM? IN OTHER WORDS, COULD YOU SET PARAMETERS LIKE 1000FT INSTEAD OF 200FT? AND THE ANSWER IS YES. IN FACT, CHEEKTOWAGA JUST DID RECENTLY. THEY SET IT AT 1000FT INSTEAD OF THE SMALLER DISTANCE. SO YOU CAN CHANGE THE DISTANCE TO BE MORE RESTRICTIVE AND NOT LESS RESTRICTIVE. BUT THAT IS AVAILABLE. SO I THINK THAT GOES [00:10:03] BACK TO ONE OF THE QUESTIONS I BELIEVE MEMBER MCCORMICK HAD ASKED WAS ABOUT OR ACTUALLY I THINK IT WAS A MEMBER VALENCIA ASKED ABOUT, IS THIS ARE THESE REGULATIONS THE FLOOR OR ARE WE ABLE TO MAKE THEM MORE STRINGENT LOCALLY? I GUESS SO WITH THIS NEW INFORMATION, LIKE I SAID, I SENT IT TO THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT FOR THEIR INPUT. BUT IN TERMS OF FOR THE BOARD ITSELF IS THERE. WOULD THE BOARD LIKE TO CHANGE SOME OF THE OR. I GUESS MY QUESTION IS, ARE THERE ANY OF THE SETBACKS OR ANY OF THE DISTANCES THAT THE BOARD IS INTERESTED IN CHANGING? ARE WE KEEPING THEM THE SAME? IS THERE ANY THOUGHT ON ANYTHING THAT SHOULD BE CHANGED IN TERMS OF THE SETBACKS UNDER 280 424 BE. BOARD MEMBERS I AUGUST, I HAVE A QUESTION. IF THE GOES FROM 500FT TO 1000FT, IF THE TOWN BOARD DECIDES TO MAKE THAT CHANGE, OR WHAT HAPPENS NOW TO THE CURRENT OPERATION THAT WE'VE ALREADY APPROVED, THAT'S WHAT THE 500 FOOT RULE. I KNOW THERE'S ANOTHER ONE PENDING, BUT WE I'LL DEFER THAT TO JOE FOR THE LEGAL SIDE OF THAT. THERE'S ALREADY LEGISLATION IN PLACE ABOUT BEING GRANDFATHERED IN. SO THAT'S. OH OKAY. YEAH. MEMBER MCCORMICK. I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY WHAT YOU SAID. SO IT SOUNDS LIKE WE CAN HAVE MORE STRINGENT DISTANCES. IF WE WANTED TO MAKE SUCH A RECOMMENDATION. IT JUST CANNOT BE LESS THAN I BELIEVE. SO. RIGHT, JOE? THAT IS THAT IS CORRECT. AND JOSEPH GOGUEN, THE ONLY CAVEAT IS THE LEGAL CONCEPT OF REASONABLE AND UNREASONABLE. IN OTHER WORDS, YOU CAN'T UNREASONABLY DO IT JUST TO PLAY WITH SOME BUSINESS LIKE YOU KNOW, WHERE THEY'RE LOCATED. IF YOU MAKE THAT UNREASONABLY LARGE OR UNREASONABLY IMPRACTICAL, IMPRACTICABLE, OR IT COMPLETELY LIMITS THEIR BUSINESS, THEN YOU KNOW, THEY COULD SELL. YOU'RE TARGETING SPECIFICALLY THEM BY CHANGING THE LANGUAGE IN THE STATUTE. SO YOU GOT TO BE CAREFUL THAT THE STATUTE IS EVEN HANDED AND NOT TARGETING ANYBODY. NOT UNREASONABLE. AND THEN WHAT IF YOU ASK WHAT UNREASONABLE IS? THAT'S UP TO A JUDGE. IF YOU GET SUED SOMEDAY TO TELL YOU WHAT UNREASONABLE? WELL, THEN YOU'RE JUST DOING YOUR BEST GUESS. MEMBER MCCORMICK I THINK THE THOUGHT I HAD LAST MEETING MAYBE STILL STANDS. IS IT MIGHT BE LESS CONFUSING IF WE JUST DID IT FROM THE EDGE OF A PROPERTY LINE OUT, RATHER THAN THESE STREETS IN FRONT OF US. BUT IF WE COULD JUST. I DON'T KNOW THAT I HAVE A COMMENT ON THE DISTANCE ITSELF, BUT IF WE COULD MAKE IT FROM THE PROPERTY LINE, IT NEEDS TO BE FROM PROPERTY LINE TO PROPERTY. HOWEVER, IS MOST APPROPRIATE TO DO IT. BUT I THINK THAT MIGHT ALLEVIATE THE CONFUSION. IF THERE'S MULTIPLE ENTRANCES OR DOORS OR. WELL, I MEAN, I REALIZE WE HAVE THIS BROCHURE, BUT IT MIGHT JUST BE EASIER BECAUSE SOME OF THE DISTANCE VARY BASED ON WHICH SIDE OF THE PROPERTY IT IS. SO IF WE COULD JUST BE ONE FLAT NUMBER, IT MIGHT BE EASIER FOR PEOPLE TO INTERPRET. BUT I, I STILL DON'T THINK WE'VE SETTLED AS A BOARD. WHETHER WE'RE COOL WITH CIRCUMFERENCE OR WHETHER WE WANT A STRAIGHT LINE, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE PROPOSING. YOU'RE PROPOSING A 200 FOOT CIRCUMFERENCE FROM SOME KIND OF MARKER ON THE BUILDING. I THINK THE PROPERTY LINE IS TOO BIG, BUT SOME KIND OF MARKER ON THE BUILDING. AND I DON'T KNOW THAT WE'VE ALL LANDED ON WHETHER WE'RE OKAY WITH THAT OR NOT. SO THAT'S OUR FIRST STEP IS CIRCUMFERENCE OR BUILDING. BECAUSE WHAT IF YOU'RE ON A CORNER AND THERE'S A SCHOOL BEHIND YOU 200FT FROM THE STRAIGHT LINE ON THE SAME ROAD DOESN'T GET YOU THERE, RIGHT? I ALSO THINK PER A, THE IF WE DO KEEP IT AS IS THE LENGTH, THE ORIGINAL LANGUAGE IS CLEARER THAN THE THAN THE AMENDMENT INSERTED LANGUAGE. BUT WE SENT YOU IN 27 DIRECTIONS. SO I THINK IT JUST WE HAVE TO DECIDE WHERE WE'RE LANDING AS A BOARD FIRST. RIGHT. OKAY. CHAIR, I THINK THAT I CONCUR WITH MEMBER VALENTI, FIRST OF ALL. BUT IF WE'RE GOING TO PICK A PLACE LIKE THE DOOR OR THE BUILDING ITSELF, THEN I THINK IT SHOULD BE 500FT IN BOTH CASES AND NOT 205 HUNDRED, I WOULD, I WOULDN'T BE, I WOULDN'T OPPOSE TO INCREASING THE DISTANCE BETWEEN BUSINESSES, ESPECIALLY WHEN IT COMES TO. A. SO YOUR SUGGESTION JUST FOR CLARIFICATION WOULD BE TO INCREASE THE DISTANCE FOR HOUSE OF WORSHIP TO 500FT TO MATCH SCHOOLS AND PUBLIC FACILITIES. CORRECT? OKAY, THAT'S MY SUGGESTION. WHAT? JOE, DO YOU KNOW THIS IS MEMBER VALENTI. WHAT IS THE DISTANCE REQUIRED FOR ALCOHOL SALES? 200FT. 500 OH, IT IS 200. 500 FOR ALCOHOL. I MEAN, I READ THROUGH THESE, BUT I DIDN'T NOTICE. THE CANNABIS LAW PRETTY MUCH MIRRORS THE ABC LAW WHEN IT COMES TO THE DISTANCES FROM PLACES OF [00:15:04] WORSHIP, PLACES OF OTHER OTHER JUST. I FEEL LIKE WE SHOULD JUST MIRROR THE LIQUOR LAWS, RIGHT? BILL CLERK I AGREE WITH MARGOT. I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD REINVENT THE WHEEL HERE. THERE'S THOUSANDS OF BARS AND PLACES THAT SELL ALCOHOL THROUGHOUT THE STATE, AND THEY'VE ALREADY BEEN THROUGH THIS AND THEY'VE WORKED OUT ALL THE KINKS. IF WE START REWRITING IT, THEN WE'RE KIND OF WORKING IT OUT ON OUR OWN, AND I'D PREFER NOT TO DO IT THAT WAY. JOSEPH GOGUEN I AGREE WITH THAT. YOU'RE OPENING YOURSELF UP TO LITIGATION. IF YOU START CHANGING THE DEFINITIONS OF WHERE YOU'RE GOING FROM ONE BUILDING TO THE OTHER, I THINK IT'S IT APPEARS PRETTY WELL ESTABLISHED HOW YOU MEASURE, LIKE, FOR EXAMPLE, A SCHOOL ALREADY IN THIS LITTLE TREATISE BLURB THAT I PRINTED, BUT IT ALREADY SPECIFIES THAT IT'S DOORS THAT ARE REGULARLY USED, NOT NOT EMERGENCY EXITS, BUT, YOU KNOW, INGRESS AND EGRESS THAT ARE TYPICALLY USED AT THE SCHOOL. SO THAT'S ALREADY INCLUDED IN THE DEFINITION OF WHAT WHAT DOOR. WELL, IT'S ANY DOOR THAT'S REGULARLY USED. SO WITH THAT THOUGH, I DO THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE TO CAITLIN'S POINT THAT. I'M I'M OKAY MEASURING. I'M OKAY KEEPING MIRRORING THE ALCOHOL LAWS BY NOT BEING MORE RESTRICTIVE, BUT I'M NOT NECESSARILY OPPOSED TO A CIRCUMFERENCE, WHICH I GUESS IS MORE RESTRICTIVE. AND THAT'S IN PARTICULAR BECAUSE THE HIGH SCHOOL AND MIDDLE SCHOOL ARE ON A CORNER, LIKE THE SCHOOLS IN THIS TOWN ARE ON A CORNER, SO THEY HAVE A LEGION DRIVE ADDRESS, BUT THAT DOESN'T DO MUCH BECAUSE THE SCHOOLS ARE ON A CORNER. AND I JUST SOMETHING TO CONSIDER, RIGHT? I DO BELIEVE I WANT TO SAY THAT UNDER THE EXISTING. LAW FIRM, OFFICE OF CANNABIS MANAGEMENT, THAT THEY DO HAVE DISTANCE REQUIREMENT FOR CORNER LOTS, I BELIEVE, AND I'LL TRY TO PULL IT UP. I THINK I SAVED IT INTO THE FOLDER, BUT I BELIEVE THEY DO TALK SPECIFICALLY TO CORNER LOTS AND THAT THERE IS SOME DISTANCE REGULATIONS SPECIFIC TO THAT. I'LL TRY TO PULL IT UP, BUT IF I'M UNABLE TO PULL IT UP, I'LL SEND THAT TO THE BOARD JUST FOR YOUR EDIFICATION. AND THEN HOPEFULLY THAT ALSO CLEARS THINGS UP ON THE BOARD. I AGREE, THE CORNER LOT. I KNOW WHEN WE FIRST WROTE IT IN 22, THAT WAS ONE OF THE BIGGEST HURDLES WAS WHAT DO YOU DO ABOUT PROPERTIES OR ENTITIES ON CORNER LOTS? THAT'S OH SORRY, I WAS GOING TO ASK A FOLLOW UP QUESTION ABOUT THAT. JOSH, THIS MEMBER MCCORMICK. JOSH THAT IS FOR THE CANNABIS FACILITY THOUGH, BUT NOT THE SCHOOL, CORRECT? YEAH, YEAH. I'M WONDERING IF MEMBER VALENTI IS SAYING THE OPPOSITE. SHE'S WONDERING ABOUT THE SCHOOLS AND THEIR FRONTAGE AND THE DISTANCE. OH, OKAY. THAT'D BE DIFFERENT. YES. BECAUSE, SAY THE HIGH SCHOOL IS ON A CORNER. SO THEORETICALLY YOU COULD PUT A CANNABIS DISPENSARY IN RIGHT NEXT TO THE SCHOOL AS LONG AS IT'S NOT ON LEGION DRIVE BECAUSE THAT'S THE SCHOOL'S ADDRESS. RIGHT. AND I FEEL LIKE JOSEPH COGAN, IT'S STILL A DISTANCE FROM THE DOOR TO THE DOOR, BUT ONLY IF THEY'RE ON THE SAME STREET. NO. IF THEY'RE ON A CORNER LOT, IT'S CONSIDERED THAT THEY'RE ON BOTH STREETS. BUT I REMEMBER READING AS LONG AS THAT'S THE CASE SOMEWHERE. BUT THAT IS NOT WHAT THE LANGUAGE, THE LANGUAGE IN FRONT OF US ONLY TALKS ABOUT THE SAME STREET. SO FOR THE ABC LAW, IT'S THE STATUTE REFERS AT ABC LAW REFERS TO THE SCHOOL PLACE OF WORSHIP BEING ON THE SAME STREET AS A LICENSED PRESIDENT. LICENSED PREMISES. THE BUILDINGS DO NOT HAVE TO BE ON THE SAME BLOCK WITH RESPECT TO ESTABLISHMENT OR SCHOOL THAT'S ON THE CORNER. THE BUILDING IS CONSIDERED TO BE ON BOTH STREETS. OKAY. CAN WE ADD THAT IN? I BELIEVE THAT IS. ISN'T THAT ALREADY IN THE CANNABIS? I BELIEVE SO I THOUGHT THE STATUTES MIRRORED EACH OTHER I BELIEVE SO. I THINK IT IS, BUT ONLY FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF THE CANNABIS. YOU HAVE THE DISPENSARY. SO. SO. JOSH, I THINK YOU HAD IT RIGHT THERE, RIGHT NOW. GO DOWN FURTHER RIGHT THERE ON THE SAME STREET, A MINIMUM. IF YOU GO DOWN A LITTLE FURTHER. OH, IT DOESN'T ADDRESS CORNERS. UNTIL I REREAD THIS LAST TIME. YEAH. NO, I READ IT SOMEWHERE WHERE IT ADDRESSED CORNER LOTS. [00:20:15] I GUESS WE COULD JUST SEARCH IT. YEAH, I, I DON'T MEAN TO BE ADDING. THIS IS MEMBER VALENTI. I DON'T MEAN TO BE ADDING A TERRIBLE WRINKLE. I'M JUST. IF I WAS GOING TO APPLY THIS AND I'M USING THE FRONT DOOR OF THE SCHOOL, BUT THE SCHOOL IS ON A CORNER. AND THEN IF WE SAY A YOUTH FACILITY ON A CORNER LOT SHALL BE CONSIDERED TO BE ON BOTH STREETS, THEN WE RUN INTO WHAT ATTORNEY GOGAN WAS EXPLAINING TO US EARLIER THAT THERE'S ALL THIS REALLY LOVELY. CASE LAW AND EXAMPLES IN THE ABC LAW OF WHAT DOOR TO USE. AND IF THE SCHOOL IS ON BOTH STREETS NOW, SUDDENLY WE DON'T KNOW WHAT DOOR TO MEASURE FROM, AND IT'S MAKING IT WAY TOO COMPLICATED. YOU ALL CAN DISAGREE, AND WE DON'T HAVE TO JUST LISTEN TO ME YELL ABOUT THIS, BECAUSE I DON'T THINK IT SHOULD BE MORE RESTRICTIVE THAN ALCOHOL. I THINK CANNABIS AND ALCOHOL SHOULD BE TREATED THE SAME. SO HERE'S SOME GUIDELINES ON PROXIMITY. AT LEAST THIS IS AT LEAST PROXIMITY TO SCHOOL GROUNDS. SO DISPENSARY CANNOT BE ON. IT IS RIGHT THERE. JOSH SORRY, IT'S THE LAST IT'S THE LAST PARAGRAPH. IT SAYS IT CANNOT BE ON THE SAME ROAD AND WITHIN 500FT. TO THE SCHOOL GROUNDS. MY BAD. I THINK I WENT TOO FAR. HOUSE OF WORSHIP. OH, OKAY. THERE WE GO. SO IF SCHOOL GROUNDS, PUBLIC USE FACILITY OR THE ESTABLISHMENT. WELL, THE STREETS OF THE INTERSECTION IS JUST BELOW THAT. YEAH, I KNOW THIS PDF THING IS NOT. THERE YOU GO. THE SCHOOL GROUNDS, PUBLIC FACILITY OR THE ESTABLISHMENT ARE SITUATED ON A CORNER LOT, THE SCHOOL GROUNDS, PUBLIC USE FACILITY OR THE ESTABLISHMENT ARE CONSIDERED TO BE ON BOTH SIDES OF THE INTERSECTION. WHETHER OR NOT THERE IS AN ENTRANCE TO THE BUILDING ARE ON BOTH STREET. WHETHER OR NOT THERE IS AN ENTRANCE TO THE BUILDING ARE ON BOTH STREETS. OKAY, SO CAN'T WE JUST MIRROR THAT? YEAH, MAYBE WE CAN JUST MIRROR THAT. PUT THAT IN THERE. YEAH, I THINK WE SHOULD MIRROR THAT. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. I WILL DO THAT. AND THEN I THINK THAT WAS THE ONLY PART. SO LIKE I SAID, I'M STILL WAITING FOR THE JUST I SENT THE ADULT USE CANNABIS LAW JUST FOR LEGAL REVIEW BECAUSE THE BOARD ASKED FOR THAT. SO ONCE I GET AN ANSWER OR ONCE I GET, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING FROM FROM THEM, I WILL BRING THAT BACK TO THE BOARD. BUT IT SEEMS LIKE THE ONE CODE WAS GOOD TO GO. AND THEN THERE'S JUST A COUPLE OUTSTANDING THINGS WITH THE ADULT USE CANNABIS LAW. I'LL BRING THAT BACK AS SOON AS I HAVE SOMETHING AND WE'LL GO FROM THERE. OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU AS ALWAYS. JOSH. GOOD JOB. THANK YOU. AND BEFORE I START THE MEETING, I'M JUST GOING TO TELL THE BOARD THAT ON ON ANY FUTURE PUBLIC HEARINGS THAT WE DO, OUR LOVELY SECRETARY AT THIS THIS YEAR IS SECRETARY SHIMURA WILL BE TAKING ALL THE NAMES IN RECORDING THEM, AND THEN SHE'LL BE FORWARDING THEM TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT SO THEY CAN USE THAT INFORMATION. THE ACCURATE INFORMATION FOR THE FOR THE MINUTES. SO SHE WILL BE OUR RECORDING SECRETARY AS WELL. SHE JUST ACCEPTED THAT DUTY LAST WEEK. AND HAVING SAID THAT, IT IS 7:00 I BELIEVE. SO I WILL CALL THE JUNE 18TH PLANNING BOARD MEETING TO ORDER. PLEASE ALL RISE FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. AUGIE, WOULD YOU LIKE TO LEAD US FOR THE PLEDGE, PLEASE? I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR [00:25:03] WHICH IT STANDS. ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. MEMBER. SHIMURA, WOULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL? WILLIAM CLARK HERE. CAITLIN SHIMURA HERE. KIM FINLEY, ABSENT AND EXCUSED. AUGIE GERACI HERE. CINDY GROENEKAN PRESENT. CAITLIN MCCORMICK HERE. MARGO VALENTE HERE. OKAY. THANK YOU. MEMBER FINLEY WILL BE BACK WITH A NEW NAME. AT THE NEXT MEETING. I WITNESSED AND SAW PICTURES OF HER LOVELY WEDDING YESTERDAY AFTERNOON. SO CONGRATULATIONS TO MEMBER FINLEY. HAVING SAID THAT, WE ARE NOW GOING TO START OUR [1. Benderson Development – Requesting Site Plan Approval of a proposal for parking adjustments at 3670 McKinley Parkway] REGULAR MEETING. OUR FIRST CASE IS BENDERSON DEVELOPMENT. IS THE APPLICANT HERE? THE APPLICANT ASKED FOR THE SIX FOUR MEETING TO BE TABLED. THEY DID NOT, AT LEAST NOT TO ME AS TO BE TABLED. SO I ASSUMED ANYTHING. I ASSUMED THEY WERE GOING TO BE HERE, BUT I DO NOT, AT LEAST NOT FROM MY EMAIL. I DO NOT HAVE A REQUEST TO BE TABLED. DID WE MAYBE GET AN EMAIL OR NOT? NOT FROM MY. NOT FROM ME? NO. WELL, BEFORE WE GO AND TABLE IT, MAYBE WE'LL GIVE THEM A FEW MINUTES. I MEAN, IT WAS RAINING OUT THERE. WE'LL GIVE THEM THE BENEFIT OF THE DOUBT AND GO ON TO OUR NEXT CASE. IF THE BOARD IS COMFORTABLE WITH THAT, AND THEN WE'LL COME BACK AND OFFICIALLY OPEN TO THE BOARD. EVERYBODY, THE BOARD'S I'M HEARING. YES, IS QUIET. QUIET. YES. OKAY. THANK YOU. SO WITH THAT, WE'RE GOING TO BEG OFF BENDERSON UNTIL THE END OF THE MEETING. AND OUR NEXT [2. 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 IS THE CONTINUATION OF A PUBLIC HEARING FOR LARD ON DISPOSAL SERVICES. IS THE APPLICANT FOR LARD ON HERE? SO THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING UTILIZING AN EXISTING BUILDING AND SURROUNDINGS FOR A, C AND D CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION FACILITY. BOARD MEMBERS, YOU WILL REMEMBER THAT WE LEFT THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN. WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY FURTHER CORRESPONDENCE FROM ANYONE. CORRECT PLANNING DEPARTMENT. I EMAILED THE CHAIR AND LEADER OF THE COMMITTEE LAST WEEK, AND THEY REACHED OUT AND SAID THAT THEY HAD REVIEWED THE PROJECT ON JUNE 12TH, BUT THEY HAD NOT PRODUCED A RECOMMENDATION YET, AND THAT THEY WOULD GET ONE TO US OVER THE NEXT WEEK. NOT TO THROW BILL CLARK ON THE SPOT, BUT I KNOW HE'S ON THE COMMITTEE, SO IF HE WANTED TO SPEAK TO IT, MAYBE HE COULD, BUT THERE'S NO OFFICIAL RECOMMENDATION, AT LEAST NOT TO MY KNOWLEDGE. BILL CLARK SO WE DID HAVE A MEETING. WE TALKED ABOUT IT, AND WE'RE GOING TO AMEND WHAT WE DID AND CHANGE THE FORMAT. I HAVEN'T SEEN A DRAFT YET, SO I'M GUESSING THEY HAVEN'T FINISHED WRITING IT. BUT AS OPPOSED TO JUST CHECKING YES OR NO AND HAVING ONE SENTENCE, WE'RE PUTTING A LITTLE BIT MORE JUSTIFICATION INTO THE YESES AND NOS AND THE SENTENCE. SO THE WHEN WE LEFT IT ON THE 12TH, WE WERE GOING TO CIRCULATE A DRAFT TO THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE TO THEN SEND ON TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. BUT I HAVEN'T SEEN A DRAFT OF IT YET. SO AS FAR AS I KNOW, IT'S NOT DONE. WELL, THAT WAS JUST LAST THURSDAY. RIGHT? SO THEY THEY REALLY HAVEN'T HAD TIME TO. OKAY. SO PLANNING DEPARTMENT, WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE. WE CAN SO WE CAN. THE PUBLIC HEARING IS STILL OPEN. YOU CAN EITHER HAVE THE APPLICANT GIVE THEIR PRESENTATION NOW OR AT THE END. I KNOW THAT THE APPLICANT WAS IN CORRESPONDENCE WITH ME SAYING THAT SHE HAS SOME RESPONSES TO SOME OF THE AGENCY COMMENTS, AND ALSO TO SOME OF THE COMMENTS FROM FROM MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC, SO THE BOARD CAN DECIDE WHEN YOU WANT HER TO GIVE HER PRESENTATION. BUT THE PUBLIC HEARING IS STILL OPEN. IF THERE ARE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC, WE CAN ALSO HAVE THEM COME UP AND SPEAK AS WELL. SO WHY DON'T WE DO THAT FIRST? SO WE'LL DO THAT IN ORDER. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT HAS NOT SPOKEN YET IN REGARDS TO THIS PUBLIC HEARING AND LADAN DISPOSAL SERVICES? IS THERE ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WISHES TO MAKE COMMENT THIS EVENING? OKAY THEN COME ON UP TO THE PODIUM. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND SPELL IT. OKAY. AND YOU NEED TO SPEAK INTO THE MICROPHONE IF YOU WILL. YOU CAN YOU CAN BRING IT DOWN A LITTLE BIT SO IT'S NOT MINE OKAY. OKAY. AND YOU'LL HAVE I JUST WANT TO REMIND EVERYBODY THIS. THE PUBLIC HEARING IS A THREE MINUTE LIMIT OKAY. IT'S NOT A QUESTION AND ANSWER PERIOD. IT IS WHERE YOU STATE YOUR INFORMATION TO THE BOARD. AND THEN THAT INFORMATION IS GATHERED AND WE RESPOND ACCORDINGLY DOWN THE ROAD. OKAY OKAY. MY NAME IS [00:30:01] CAROL KOLB K O L B AND I LIVE ON FOURTH STREET IN WOODLAWN, AND I'M A FOURTH GENERATION RESIDENT. MANY OF MY FAMILY STILL RESIDE THERE. FOR MANY YEARS, THE PEOPLE OF WOODLAWN WERE LOOKED DOWN UPON AND DEROGATORY REMARKS SUCH AS SLUM OF THE TOWN WAS USED, AND MANY OF THE RESIDENTS WORKED AT BETHLEHEM STEEL AND FORD. WE DEALT WITH THE POLLUTION OF THESE PLANTS FOR YEARS BECAUSE IT PROVIDED THE LIVELIHOODS OF MANY WOODLAWN FAMILIES. WITH BETHLEHEM CLOSING, WE HAD FEWER JOBS, BUT ALSO HAD LESS POLLUTION. CANCER HAS RUN RAMPANT FOR MANY WHO GREW UP AND LIVED IN THE AREA, AND I DON'T WANT A NEW TRANSFER STATION TO COME IN AGAIN, POSSIBLY POLLUTE OUR AIR AND POSSIBLY OUR WATER. SOME QUESTIONS I NEED THAT THAT THEM TO ANSWER ARE WHAT ARE THEY BRINGING IN? DOES IT CONTAIN ASBESTOS AND OTHER DANGEROUS SUBSTANCES WHICH CAN BE AIRBORNE AND SEEP INTO THE CREEK AND EVENTUALLY THE LAKE? HOW LONG ARE THESE THINGS BROUGHT IN GOING TO REMAIN THERE AND HOW ARE THEY STORED? JUST LOOK AT THE OTHER TRANSFER STATION ACROSS THE HIGHWAY, WHERE THE STEEL IS STOCKPILED ALL OVER THE PLACE. THE TRUCKS COMING AND GOING WILL ALSO CAUSE POLLUTION. ALSO, I HAVE SEEN MANY OF THE TRUCKS ENTERING THAT AREA NOT OBEYING THE RED ARROW. THIS COULD CAUSE A MAJOR ACCIDENT. ARE THESE TRUCKS IMMUNE TO THE RULES OF THE ROAD? WHAT HAPPENS AT THE END OF THE WORKDAY AND THERE IS STILL STUFF LAYING AROUND. HOW IS IT SECURED OR IS IT JUST LEFT OUT? THESE ARE. THERE ARE PROBABLY MANY MORE QUESTIONS WE NEED ANSWERS TO. WE ARE NOT WILLING TO LET ANYONE DO AS THEY PLEASE IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. JUST ASK THE GROUP THAT WANTED TO BUY THE WOODLAWN SCHOOL IN THE 90S. THERE IS A PUSH TO DEVELOP THE BROWNFIELDS AROUND WOODLAWN, BUT I DON'T WANT THEM DEVELOPED. WE ARE READY TO HAVE MAJOR. WE ALREADY HAVE A MAJOR HIGHWAY BISECTING OUR COMMUNITY WITH ASSOCIATED NOISE, TRAFFIC AND POLLUTION. LEAVE US ALONE AND DON'T ALLOW ANOTHER TRANSFER STATION IN OUR COMMUNITY. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT, WHO'S NEXT? SIR, DID YOU WANT TO SAY SOMETHING? ALRIGHT, COME ON UP. AGAIN. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND REMEMBER THAT YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES. MY NAME IS TOM CRISCO. SENIOR. COULD YOU SPELL YOUR LAST NAME, PLEASE? K R E S C O N K O. THANK YOU. I'M SORRY, I ONLY HAVE THREE MINUTES, BUT I GOT ABOUT 20 ISSUES HERE. BUT I'M SORRY, BUT WE GOT YOU THE THREE MINUTE RULE. I'VE POSTED ON FACEBOOK RECENTLY. RECENTLY THAT IF YOU CAN, I'M ACTUALLY THE ONE THAT WAS FILMING THESE TRUCKS GOING THROUGH THE RED ARROW VIOLENTLY. LIKE NOT JUST PASSING A RED ARROW. THEY'RE PASSING EACH OTHER, GETTING IN. THEY'RE NOT EVEN STOPPING. AND MY QUESTION, FIRST OFF IS, WHAT DO THEY NEED AN APPROVAL WHEN THEY'VE ALREADY BEEN DOING IT FOR MONTHS AND MONTHS AND MONTHS? THEY'VE BEEN DOING THIS ALREADY. THEY'VE STILL BEEN DOING IT. HUNDREDS OF TRUCKS, HUNDREDS. MY OTHER CONCERN IS I DON'T THINK IT'S JUST LADAN THAT'S DOING IT. I THINK THEY HAVE OTHER SUBCONTRACTORS LIKE I SEEN TRISM TRUCKS, EDC TRUCKS, ZOLADZ TRUCKS AND MANY OTHERS WITH THESE SAME CONTAINERS ON THEM. SO I'M NOT SURE IF IT'S A 48. MAYBE THEY'RE SAYING THEY'RE DOING 48, BUT THERE'S A LOT MORE THAN THAT. MY SHOP IS RIGHT AT THAT CORNER, AND I SEE EVERY MINUTE OF EVERY DAY THERE. MY OTHER CONCERN IS THE ROCKS AND DEBRIS COMING OUT. I'VE BEEN COMPLAINING ABOUT IT SINCE 2016. I'VE TALKED TO THE DOT, DEC, ALL THESE OTHER THINGS. THERE'S BEEN MOTORCYCLES THAT HAVE CRASHED BECAUSE OF HOW MUCH DIRT THERE IS. EVEN IF THEY COME IN AND SWEEP IT 1 TO 2 DAYS LATER, IT LOOKS LIKE THEY WEREN'T EVEN THERE. IT'S VERY, VERY UNSAFE. WE USED TO HAVE A CAR LOT THERE FOR MANY, MANY YEARS, SINCE THE 70S, AND WE CAN'T HAVE IT THERE ANYMORE BECAUSE ALL THE DUST, DIRT, ROCKS, DEBRIS AND EVERYTHING ELSE. I HAVE BROKEN WINDOWS. I'VE BEEN HIT BY ROCKS, BY CARS COMING BY, ESPECIALLY 20,000 CARS A DAY THAT GO BY. ANOTHER MAJOR CONCERN IS ALL THE ROCKS AND DEBRIS THAT ARE ON THE SIDE OF ROUTE FIVE, WHEN THE SNOW PLOWS GO BY, I'VE HAD IT ANNIHILATE WINDOWS RIGHT OUT OF CARS, MACHINE GUN THE WHOLE SIDES OF CARS WITH HUNDREDS OF DENTS. I CAN GO ON AND ON ABOUT THE DUST. THE DIRT. WE HAVE LESS THAN 60S. NO. OKAY, WELL, LET'S SEE. YOU CAN LOOK AT LAKE AVE WHERE THEY'RE AT NOW. I INVITE YOU TO GO TAKE A RIDE DOWN LAKE AVE, AND YOU CAN SEE ALL THE DUST AND DIRT FROM THAT FROM THERE. MY HOUSE IS AT THE END OF FIRST STREET, WHICH IS VERY CLOSE TO THAT. AND THEY'RE SAYING THAT AT 730 IN THE MORNING THAT THEY'RE GOING TO DO THIS ON SATURDAYS, AND THEY GET WOKEN UP LIKE THESE TRUCKS THAT GO OVER THE RAILROAD TRACKS, THEY GO OVER THESE TRACKS WITH THESE DUMPSTERS. AND IT SOUNDS IT MAKES THE WHOLE HOUSE SHAKE. LET'S SEE. THERE'S MORE. I DON'T [00:35:06] SEE WHY THEY CAN'T USE THE JEFFREY BOULEVARD SITE, BECAUSE THERE'S ALREADY A DUMP SITE THERE. CONSIDER THAT MY OTHER STUFF IS. THE SEWER COMMISSIONER SAYS THAT WOODLAWN DOESN'T HAVE THE CAPACITY FOR SEWAGE FOR THAT SIZE BUILDING. AND ANOTHER QUESTION IS, WHEN IT RAINS, WHERE'S THE RUNOFF GOING TO GO? IT'S GOING TO GO INTO THE LAKE, INTO THE CREEKS. IF I CAN KEEP GOING. BUT MIKE, SAME THING WITH THE ASBESTOS AND EVERYTHING. YOUR TIME IS ACTUALLY UP. I'VE BEEN TAKING NOTES, SO YOU COVERED A LOT OF IT. OKAY. THIS IS MEMBER VALENTI, THE VICE CHAIR. JUST A GENTLE REMINDER. YOU CAN SEND US ANYTHING AT ANY TIME IN WRITING VIA EMAIL. YOU CAN SEND IT TO JOSH. SO IF YOU FEEL LIKE YOU DIDN'T GET TO MAKE YOUR POINTS OR YOU DON'T WANT TO SPEAK PUBLICLY, WE ALWAYS TAKE THEM IN WRITING. SO JUST EMAIL US. IT ALL COMES RIGHT TO US. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE IN THE AUDIENCE THAT COME ON UP? JUDY MARTINEZ? JUDY, SPELL YOUR LAST NAME FOR ME, PLEASE. M A R T I N E Z. THANK YOU. MARTINEZ. ON THIS SIDE. CALIFORNIA'S MARTINEZ. I WASN'T PREPARED TO SPEAK BUT THE NAME LAHDEN. I LIVE ON WOODLAWN AVE, WHICH IS THE STREET THAT RUNS PARALLEL TO THE LAKE. AND I DON'T KNOW WHO BOUGHT THIS DOUBLE. IT'S A KIND OF AN INDUSTRIAL TYPE OF BUILDING, BUT LAHDEN BOUGHT THERE'S LAHDEN CANISTERS THERE AND DUMPSTERS. SO YOU WALK DOWN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND YOU SEE IT'S LIKE A JUNKYARD. THERE'S FREEZER PARTS, CAR PARTS, OLD CARS. IT'S JUST SO UNSIGHTLY TO BE IN A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD. I MEAN, THERE'S OTHER CONCERNS WITH THE WATER. I DON'T DRINK THE WATER FROM THE TAP. I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY. I MEAN, WE HAVE A GREAT LAKE THERE. WE SHOULD BE HAVING FRESH WATER. I DON'T KNOW IF IT EVER GET TO THAT, BUT I THINK IF THIS COMPANY COMES IN, THE CHANCES OF US EVER BEING ABLE TO DRINK WATER AGAIN FROM THE TAP. I MEAN, A LOT OF PEOPLE HAVE THESE. THEY'RE FILTERED. I BUY BOTTLED WATER, WHICH I DON'T EVEN KNOW IF THAT'S GOOD BECAUSE OF THE PLASTIC, BUT I JUST I'VE LIVED THERE MOST OF MY LIFE AND MOVED AWAY FOR A WHILE. I'M BACK. I JUST I WOULD HATE TO SEE IT JUST LIVING THERE NOW. I'VE SEEN LIKE THESE HUGE TRUCKS AT 3 OR 4:00 IN THE MORNING AND WOODLAWN AVE, LIKE GOING TO THIS HOUSE OR I MEAN, IT'S A DOUBLE, BUT I DON'T KNOW WHY ALL THEY'RE, THEY'RE UNLOADING, LOADING STUFF. I MEAN, IT'S LIKE IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT. AND HAD I KNOWN THIS WHOLE, YOU KNOW, KNEW COMPANY WAS COMING IN, I PROBABLY WOULD HAVE TAKEN NOTES, PAID MORE ATTENTION TO IT. BUT I JUST I'LL WRITE MORE WHEN I'M PREPARED. BUT I JUST WANTED TO VOICE MY CONCERN. YOU DID A FINE JOB. AND AGAIN, JUST TO ECHO MEMBER VALENTI, AND IF YOU REMEMBER AT THE LAST MEETING, I ENCOURAGE EVERYONE TO WRITE WHATEVER YOUR CONCERNS ARE AND YOU CAN SEND IT TO JOSH. JOSH GAVE US HIS EMAIL LAST TIME. IT IS ON THE WEBSITE. WE UTILIZE OUR WEBSITE. WE'VE UPDATED IT SO IT'S USER FRIENDLY. IF THERE'S ANYTHING ELSE YOU THINK ABOUT, PLEASE SEND IT THROUGH. OKAY. THANK YOU. YOU'RE WELCOME. THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE? GOOD EVENING. DAN BERARDUCCI B E R A R D UCC I. I JUST WANTED TO COMMENT. IF THERE ARE, YOU NEED TO SLOW SLOW IT DOWN A LITTLE BIT. I'M SORRY THAT THAT B E R A R D U C C I. THANK YOU. I NEED TWO NAME TAGS. I SIMPLY WANTED TO SAY IF THERE ARE PROHIBITED USES THAT ARE THAT ARE THAT THE BOARD AND THE RESIDENTS AS WELL. IF THIS IS AN ISSUE WITH CODE ENFORCEMENT THEN THIS NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED. PROHIBITED USES ARE PROHIBITED USES AND AS AS WE ARE, WE'RE ALWAYS FACING ISSUES BOTH HERE AND IN THE TOWN BOARD MEETING AND THE PLANNING AND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. WE'RE ALL FACING ISSUES OF WHAT ARE WE BALANCE THE NEEDS OF BUSINESS VERSUS THE NEEDS OF RESIDENTS? WELL, FOR A LONG, LONG TIME, RESIDENTS HAVE TAKEN TAKEN THE BACK END. THEY HAVE NOT BEEN CONSIDERED TO BE IMPORTANT. EVERYTHING HAS BEEN WELL, WE'RE JUST GOING TO DO EVERYTHING FOR BUSINESS. WELL, BUSINESS HAS TO CONSIDER THEIR LOCATIONS AND CONSIDER WHAT THEIR IMPACT IS. AND, YOU KNOW, I THERE'S AN IF THERE'S ANYTHING THAT DESCRIBES AMERICA TODAY, IT'S A LACK OF CONSCIENCE. PEOPLE JUST DO THINGS AND CONSIDER NOTHING. CONSIDER DO NOT CONSIDER THE ENDS OF WHAT THEIR ACTIONS ARE. ALL ACTIONS HAVE CONSEQUENCES AT ONE POINT OR ANOTHER. THAT'S JUST A REMINDER TO THE WORLD IN [00:40:04] GENERAL. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE? ARE YOU COMING FROM THE CAB? ARE YOU COMING AS ON A PERSONAL NOTE? OKAY, COME ON UP. IS THE CONSERVATION ADVISORY BOARD. WAIT UNTIL YOU GET TO THE MICROPHONE SO EVERYBODY CAN HEAR, PLEASE. OKAY. HI. LEONA. ROCKWOOD, CONSERVATION ADVISORY BOARD. AS I WAS SAYING, THE CAB, ONE OF OUR JOBS IS TO LOOK AT PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AND TO IDENTIFY SOME POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS. AND I'VE GIVEN MY COPY OF MY LIST TO YOU, BUT I THINK IT'S A GOOD THING TO READ IN FRONT OF EVERYONE. AND I'M I'M NOT GOING TO GO INTO THE DESCRIPTION OF THE PROGRAM OR THE PLAN FOR THE SITE. HOWEVER, THE POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS THAT WE FOUND WERE THE PROJECTED 48 TRUCKS PER DAY MOVING WITHIN 400FT OF RESIDENCES MAY CAUSE A DISTURBANCE TO THE NEIGHBORING COMMUNITY. THE NUMBER OF TRUCKS CURRENTLY USING THE ACCESS ROAD IS FAR LESS THAN 48 PER DAY. TWO. THE PROPOSED ACTION MAY RESULT IN THE INCREASE OF NOISE AND ODORS. THREE THE MOVEMENT OF TRUCKS MAY CAUSE CREATE AIR POLLUTION IN THE FORM OF DUST AND PARTICLES AND EXHAUST. BECAUSE THERE ARE 48 TRUCKS PROJECTED PER DAY 8 A.M. TO 4 P.M, FIVE DAYS A WEEK AND HALF DAY ON SATURDAY, THERE MAY BE AIR POLLUTION THAT MAY RESULT IN IDLING DUE TO THE WAIT TIMES FOR THE TRUCKS TO ENTER THE SORTING TRANSFER FACILITY, THE 48 TRUCKS AND WAITING ON THE ENTRY ROAD MAY CAUSE DEGRADATION OF THE AIR QUALITY IN THE AREA, FOR THE PROPOSED ACTION MAY RESULT IN THE RELEASE OF CONTAMINATED LEACHATE FROM THE PROJECT SITE, IMPACTING THE BLAISDELL CREEK AND LAKE ERIE FIVE. THE SITE AND THE AREA ARE CURRENTLY UNDERGOING A STUDY, WHICH MEANS THEY'RE LOOKING AT THE BROWNFIELD OPPORTUNITY AREA IN WOODLAWN, AND THIS WOULD PLAN WOULD BE ACCEPTED BEFORE THE COMPLETION OF THAT STUDY. SIX THE ACCESS ROAD AND THE PROPOSED TRANSFER BUILDING ARE LOCATED LESS THAN 1800 FEET FROM WOODLAWN STATE PARK. AND THE DEC ENVIRONMENTAL REMEDIATION SITE, WHICH IS A GIANT WETLAND THAT THEY HAVE CREATED AND MAYBE HAVE AN IMPACT ON THE WILDLIFE THAT IS IN THE IN THE PARK AND THE PERMANENT RESIDENCE. THE SOLID WASTE SORTING WITHIN THE BUILDING MAY CAUSE AIR POLLUTION. THE. BASED ON THE WORKING MODERN TRANSFER FACILITY ON JEFFREY BOULEVARD, THERE HAVE BEEN LARGE THERE WHERE THERE ARE LARGE UPPER SIDE SCREENED OPENINGS FOR THE SORTING PROCESS. ALSO, I DIDN'T ADD THIS, BUT IT IS NOTED THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE SOME STORAGE OUTSIDE OF THE FACILITY, NOT JUST GOING IN GETTING THE SORTING DONE, BUT THERE WILL BE STORAGE OF WASTE OUTSIDE. THEY'VE ALSO MENTIONED THE USE OF TIRES, AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT OCCURRED TO ME PERSONALLY, NOT IN THE CONSERVATION ADVISORY BOARD, IS WHETHER THE WOODLAWN VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT WOULD BE HANDLING ANY KIND OF INDUSTRIAL FIRES THAT MIGHT OCCUR. OKAY. YOUR TIME IS UP. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE? AT THIS TIME? JOSH? PLANNING DEPARTMENT. I CAN, EVEN THOUGH WE'RE WAITING FOR THE OFFICIAL REPORT FROM THE LWR, I CAN STILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. YEP. BUT IF THE BOARD MEMBER OR THE RESIDENTS WHO HAVE VOICED THEIR CONCERNS, IF THEY HAVE ADDITIONAL CONCERNS, THEY CAN STILL WRITE TO US. THEY CAN STILL EMAIL ME BECAUSE WE SEND ALL COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING BOARD FOR YOU GUYS TO REVIEW. I JUST WANTED TO REITERATE THAT AND PUT IT ON THE RECORD. OKAY, THEN I AM GOING TO OFFICIALLY CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR TODAY. OKAY. AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO BRING THE APPLICANT BACK UP. AND YOU HAD SOME ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. BUT I HAVE A QUESTION JUST TO CLARIFY THIS, BECAUSE NOW I'M MORE CONFUSED THAN EVER. ARE YOU ALREADY IN OPERATION? HE DOES OPERATE. HE'S RUNNING HIS TRUCKS IN AND OUT OF THE FACILITY. IT'S MOSTLY A STORAGE. IT'S JUST THE DUMPSTERS ARE EMPTY. YOU CAN [00:45:03] SPEAK TO IT AS WELL, BUT IT'S MORE ROOM TO HOLD HIS DUMPSTERS THAT ARE EMPTY. AND THEN ONCE HE GETS A JOB OR THEY NEED TO GO TO ANOTHER SITE, YOU KNOW, A TRUCK WILL GO PULL UP, GRAB AN EMPTY DUMPSTER AND TAKE IT TO WHERE IT NEEDS TO GO. SO REALLY THE ONLY CHANGE FOR THIS FACILITY, IF THIS WERE TO GO INTO EFFECT, IS THE DUMPSTERS WOULD BE COMING IN FULL TO THE FACILITY, GET SORTED, PUT INTO DUMPSTERS SO THAT IT CAN BE TAKEN TO A FINAL RECYCLING DISPOSAL FACILITY. SO ESSENTIALLY IT'S JUST IMPROVED RECYCLING VERSUS EVERYTHING GOING TO THE LANDFILL. SO MY QUESTION IS THESE RESIDENTS THAT ARE TALKING ABOUT ALL THIS TRAFFIC IS THAT FROM THIS SITE IT'D BE LARDEN DOES RUN THEIR TRUCKS OUT OF THERE. THE LUMBER YARD JUST NORTH RUNS THEIR LARGE SEMI TRUCKS OUT OF THERE AS WELL. I BELIEVE THERE'S A METAL RECYCLING FACILITY AS WELL THAT'S NORTH ON THE TECUMSEH PROPERTY. SO LARDEN HAS ANOTHER SITE THAT THEY'RE OPERATING OR JUST FROM THIS SITE THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, JUST THIS SITE. AND THEN THEY HAVE THEIR LAKE AVE OPERATION. I'M CONFUSED. HOW IS IT THAT THEY'RE OPERATING AND WE'RE NOT EVEN WE DON'T HAVE THIS. THAT WOULD BE A TRAVELINGE NOW, AND HOW MANY TRUCKS WILL BE TRAVELING WITH THIS NEW BUSINESS? SO I DON'T WE'VE GOT PROJECTED 48 TRUCKS, BUT HOW MANY TRUCKS ARE ALREADY COMING THROUGH FOR THAT PIECE OF PROPERTY FOR THIS PIECE OF LOCATION? NOT FOR THE OTHER, I DON'T KNOW. I KNOW THAT YOU DON'T HAVE THE NUMBERS FOR OTHER BUSINESSES. I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT FOR THE RECORD, I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW HOW MANY ARE COMING NOW. AND WITH ADDING THIS BUSINESS OR CHANGING THE USE OF THIS BUSINESS WOULD BE THE WAY I'M BRINGING IT. WHAT'S THE INCREASE IN TRUCK TRAFFIC? I DON'T BELIEVE THERE WOULD BE ANY INCREASE IN TRUCK TRAFFIC THEN. THERE'S PRESENTLY RIGHT NOW. OKAY. BECAUSE WE GO IN THERE AND I THINK I EXPLAINED THIS AT THE LAST ONE WHERE WHAT WHAT YOU DO NOW IS WE GO OVER TO ANY MODERN YOU DUMP YOUR LOAD THERE, AND THEN YOU BRING THE DUMPSTER AND YOU DROP IT AT OUR SITE THERE. OKAY, OKAY. AND THEN YOU WOULD LEAVE AND GO GET ANOTHER DUMPSTER, AND THEN A DIFFERENT TRUCK MIGHT COME IN AND PICK UP A DUMPSTER AND TAKE IT TO ANOTHER SITE, OR ONE OF OUR TRACTOR TRAILERS MIGHT COME IN AND GET ONE OF THE TRAILERS THAT I PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED THAT WAS STORED THERE, THAT STORED THERE. I THINK STORED IS A WRONG WORD. ALL THESE TRAILERS ARE REGISTERED, INSURED, INSPECTED THE IT'S FORGIVE ME, I DON'T HAVE QUITE THE RIGHT WORD, BUT IT WOULD DROP SITE LIKE A DROP SITE. YEAH, THAT WOULD BE MAYBE A BETTER WORD BECAUSE WHEN YOU SAY STORAGE, IT GIVES THE IMPRESSION THAT WE'RE BRINGING IN AN OLD PILE OF GARBAGE AND WE'RE GOING TO STORE IT THERE ON SITE. AND IT'S NOT EVERYTHING THERE IS OPERATIONAL. EVERYTHING THERE IS GOOD. IT COULD BE SOLD FOR VALUE RIGHT NOW AND IT'S USED ON A DAILY BASIS. OKAY. SO I DON'T I DON'T WANT TO GIVE THE IMPRESSION THAT WE'RE STORING ANYTHING. YOU KNOW, IT IS THERE'S NO REAL STORAGE. WE'RE IT'S MORE OF A DROP YARD. I THINK THAT'S A BETTER TERM FOR IT. OKAY. SO THIS WHEN THIS NEW USE IS GOES INTO EFFECT, WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN TO THOSE EMPTY DUMPSTERS AND TRAILERS. ARE THEY STAYING ON THE PROPERTY. YES. SO HOW DO YOU FIGURE THAT IT'S ONLY GOING TO BE 48. IF THERE'S 48. THEY'RE COMING NOW. AND THEN YOU'RE ADDING AN INCREASE OF PEOPLE BRINGING IN DUMPSTERS TO EMPTY. ISN'T THAT GOING TO INCREASE THE TRAFFIC? I DON'T BELIEVE SO, BECAUSE WE'RE BRINGING OUR DUMPSTERS IN AND OUR DUMPSTERS ARE ALREADY THERE. SO INSTEAD OF COMING IN EMPTY NOW, THEY WOULD COME IN FULL. BUT DON'T THEY HAVE TO PICK THEM UP? WELL, YES, BUT WE WOULD PICK THEM OUT BY YOUR HOUSE. WE WOULD TAKE YOUR GARBAGE, WE WOULD BRING IT TO THIS FACILITY, WE WOULD SOURCE, SEPARATE EVERYTHING AND THEN DROP THE DUMPSTER EMPTY. RIGHT. AND THEN IT WOULD GET SOURCED, SEPARATED INSIDE THE BUILDING AND THEN GO OUT FROM THERE TO THE DIFFERENT. I THINK WE MENTIONED BEFORE, I DON'T WANT TO GO OVER STUFF WE'VE ALREADY MENTIONED, BUT, YOU KNOW, THE STEEL PLACE DOWN IN BUFFALO, A WOOD YARD THE WOOD WOULD GO TO AND ALL THAT SORT ■F STUFF. ■AND THE TIRES, I MIGHT MAKE MENTION WE'RE NOT TAKING TIRES, OKAY. BUT EVERYONE HERE KNOWS WHAT THEY PUT IN DUMPSTERS. AND YOU WILL PUT A TIRE IN A DUMPSTER. SO WHEN WE GET THAT TIRE, IT WOULD GO IN A COVERED DUMPSTER. OKAY. ONE DUMPSTER WE HAVE THAT WE PUT TIRES IN, AND WE PUT THE TIRE INSIDE. AND WHEN IT GETS FULL, WE DELIVER THAT TO MODERN. THEY'RE RECYCLING FACILITY UP IN LEWISTON. WE'RE NOT ACCEPTING TIRES. IT'S NOT GOING TO BE A BIG PILE OF TIRES DOWN THERE. I WANT TO MAKE THAT CLEAR. THIS IS WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS WE'RE TRYING TO BRING IN PRODUCT AND SOURCE, SEPARATE IT. THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO. AND UNFORTUNATELY, THERE ISN'T A PROPER TERMINOLOGY FOR WHAT I WANT TO DO. IT'S ALL UNDER THE C AND D TRANSFER FACILITY. AND TO ME THAT'S KIND OF A BAD NAME FOR THIS FACILITY BECAUSE WE'RE NOT A C AND WE'RE NOT TAKING FOOD. WE'RE NOT I'M NOT LOOKING FOR ANY OF THAT. I DON'T WANT ANY OF [00:50:05] THAT. I DON'T WANT TO PICK GARBAGE UP. IT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE LOOKING TO DO. SO I STRESS THAT TO EVERYONE. SO THERE WAS A MEMBER OF THE RESIDENTS OR ONE OF THE RESIDENTS MENTIONED ABOUT ASBESTOS. ARE YOU TAKING IN? CAN YOU CONTROL THAT? NO, WE WILL NOT TAKE ANY ASBESTOS AND WE CANNOT UNDER THE DEC REGULATIONS. OKAY. CONTINUE WITH WHAT YOU WERE GOING TO. OKAY. THE OTHER COMMENT WAS ABOUT LEACHATE. AND TO KIND OF PIGGYBACK OFF OF JOHN STATED, YOU KNOW, IT'S C AND D MATERIAL. IT'S NOT GARBAGE FOOD WASTE. YOU'RE NOT GOING TO CREATE A LEACHATE FROM THAT. IT'S BUSTED UP CONCRETE, DRYWALL. IT'S GOING TO BE YOUR TYPICAL IT'S THE SITE IS STAYING AS IS. SO THE STORMWATER IS GOING TO CONTINUE TO OPERATE AND FLOW THE WAY IT'S BEEN OPERATING THE LAST FIVE, TEN YEARS. AND THEN TO KIND OF COVER SOME OF THE MORE PUBLIC COMMENTS THAT WE GOT TONIGHT, JUST KIND OF GO OVER THE FACILITY OPERATION AGAIN. SO YEAH, THE TRUCKS ARE GOING TO CONTAIN A MIXTURE OF C AND D TO PRE. SO THAT'S GOING TO BE YOUR, YOU KNOW, WOOD, METAL, CONCRETE, DRYWALL, YOU KNOW THE OCCASIONAL TIRE. YOU NEVER KNOW CARDBOARD. AND THEN YOU KNOW NON-FOOD WASTE GARBAGE NON YOU KNOW RESIDENTIAL WASTE GARBAGE THAT'S GOING TO GET SORTED. THIS MATERIAL IS GETTING DUMPED SORTED IN THE ON SITE BUILDING INTO ITS RESPECTIVE DUMPSTERS. ONCE A DUMPSTER OF LET'S SAY CONCRETE GETS FULL, IT'S GOING OFF SITE. IT'S NOT SITTING AROUND TO COLLECT DUST. HE HE NEEDS TO KEEP HIS DUMPSTERS MOVING. IT MAKES ECONOMIC SENSE, YOU KNOW, TO KEEP EVERYTHING MOVING, NOT TO HAVE STUFF STALLED AND SITTING. AND THEN THAT KIND OF PLAYS INTO ALSO THE, YOU KNOW, THE IDLING AND AIR POLLUTION CONCERNS. YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT IN HIS INTEREST TO HAVE TRUCKS IDLING. THAT'S FUEL. THAT'S MONEY. SO, YOU KNOW, HIS FLEET IS EQUIPPED WITH A AUTOMATIC ENGINE SHUT OFF. YOU KNOW, AFTER A CERTAIN COUPLE MINUTES, THE ENGINE IS GOING TO SHUT ITSELF OFF. JUST WHAT'S NOT BURNING FUEL. THE OTHER THING IS THESE DUMPSTERS ARE ROLL OFF. SO LET'S SAY THERE'S A TRUCK DUMPING INTO THE BUILDING AND THERE'S ONE WAITING. A THIRD ONE ROLLS IN. HE MIGHT SAY, I'M NOT WAITING. YOU KNOW, HE WOULD JUST GO INTO THE YARD, UNLOAD HIS DUMPSTER AND BE ON HIS WAY TO PICK UP ANOTHER ONE, AND THEN THAT ONE CAN GET DUMPED INTO THE SORTING BUILDING WHEN YOU KNOW IT'S LESS BUSY. SO WE REALLY NOT ANTICIPATING A LINEUP OF TRUCKS ON THAT ROADWAY. AND IT'S ALSO JUST IT'S A HEAVILY USED ROAD. SO TO HAVE TRUCKS IDLING, HE'S HE'S GOING TO HAVE PEOPLE THE OTHER INDUSTRIAL CLIENTS, YOU KNOW, CALLING HIM UP ASKING WHY THEY CLOGGING UP THEIR THE JOINT ROAD. AND THEN AS WE DISCUSS YOU KNOW HOW IS IT STORED DEX REQUIREMENTS. THE ROLLS ARE GOING TO BE COVERED AT THE END OF THE DAY. SO YOU KNOW, THAT FURTHER PREVENTS ANY, YOU KNOW, RUNOFF FROM THAT. AND, YOU KNOW, KEEPING PAST AND WHATEVER ELSE OUT OF OUT OF IT. SO. IT'S GOING TO BE, YOU KNOW, MAINTENANCE, MAINTENANCE. EVERY NIGHT HE'S GOING TO THE TIPPING FLOOR IS SWEPT CLEAN. EVERYTHING IS PUT INTO ITS RESPECTIVE DUMPSTERS AT THE END OF THE DAY AND COVERED. THERE WERE A LOT OF COMMENTS. SO IF ANYONE. YEAH. I GUESS FOR THE TRAFFIC CONCERN AS WELL. YOU KNOW, JOHN DID INDICATE THE OWNER, THE SITE OWNER HAS A 15 MILE PER HOUR SPEED LIMIT. NOW, IF THAT IS FOLLOWED, I, I HAVEN'T DONE A TRAFFIC STUDY OR SAT AND WATCHED THE TRUCK. SO IT DOES SOUND LIKE THAT. MAYBE THAT'S NOT BEING FOLLOWED. I MAYBE SOME OF THE OTHER INDUSTRIAL FACILITIES THERE. SO I DON'T KNOW IF THAT WOULD HELP. MAYBE PUTTING UP SPEED SIGNS OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT JUST TO REMIND THE DRIVERS. ARE YOU ABLE TO SPEAK TO SOME OF THE. I KNOW YOU HAVE RESPONSES TO SOME OF THE COMMENTS THAT YOU RECEIVED FROM DEC OPRHP ERIE COUNTY PLANNING. YES. SO ERIE COUNTY, THEY JUST ASKED ABOUT ADDITIONAL BUFFERING INCORPORATED BETWEEN THE PROPOSED PROJECT SITE AND THE RESIDENTIAL AREAS. CURRENTLY THERE IS, YOU KNOW, VEGETATION ON BOTH SIDES OF THE CREEK. IT'S PROBABLY ABOUT 10 TO 15FT WIDE BETWEEN THE ACCESS ROAD AND THE CREEK. AND THEN ANOTHER, YOU KNOW, 20 OR 30FT BETWEEN THAT AND THE RESIDENCES AND KIND OF MAKE THAT OUT IN THE AERIAL. ALL RIGHT. JOSH, IS THAT FILE YOU JUST HAD UP? IS THAT SAVED IN [00:55:05] THE FOLDER? IT IS IN THERE NOW. WE RECEIVED IT TODAY. AND JOSH, MAY I ASK YOU A QUESTION WHEN YOU SOLICIT FEEDBACK FROM THE OTHER AGENCIES IN A COORDINATED REVIEW, WHAT DOCS DO YOU SEND THEM IN? ACCORDING TO A REVIEW, I SEND A LEAD A LEAD AGENCY SOLICITATION LETTER. SO THAT'S BASICALLY JUST A COVER LETTER SAYING WHAT'S IN IT? I SEND A LEAD AGENCY DESIGNATION LETTER, SO THAT CHECKS OFF WHO THE LEAD AGENCY IS, ALL THE OTHER DIFFERENT AGENCIES THAT IT'S GETTING SENT TO, THE TYPE OF ACTION, WHETHER IT'S TYPE ONE OR WHETHER IT'S UNLISTED. I ASK FOR COMMENTS TO BE 30 DAYS FROM WHATEVER DATE THAT I SEND IT. AND THEN I ALSO ATTACH THE CONCEPT SITE PLAN THAT I RECEIVED FROM THE APPLICANT. I ATTACH WHATEVER DOCUMENTATION. SO FOR THIS ONE SPECIFICALLY, I RECEIVED DOCUMENTATION ON THE WASTE LEVELS. I RECEIVED THE RESPONSE FROM THE APPLICANT RELATED TO WHAT'S GOING INTO THE INTO THE DUMPSTERS. SO ALL THAT GETS PACKAGED INTO ONE PDF AND SENT TO THE LIST OF AGENCIES AND THE DESIGNATION LETTER. OKAY, I'M JUST THINKING ABOUT THE AGENCY COMMENTS BECAUSE I'M LOOKING AT THE EAF. AND THE EAF ALSO DOES NOT SUGGEST THAT THERE'S AN EXISTING BUSINESS. IT JUST SAYS YOU HAVE A FIVE YEAR LEASE AND YOU HAVE NEW PLANS FOR A BUSINESS. SO I FEEL LIKE THERE WAS SOME MISSING INFORMATION. AND SO THAT'S WHERE I'M WONDERING IF SOME OF THE AGENCY COMMENTS ARE COMING FROM. LIKE DEC IS SAYING, ARE YOU GOING TO SHIELD THE NEIGHBORS? WE ALREADY SHIELDING THE NEIGHBORS OR OR NOT SHIELDING THE NEIGHBORS BECAUSE YOU'RE ALREADY RUNNING A BUSINESS. AND I FEEL LIKE THAT WAS NOT CLEARLY STATED TO US. AND I DON'T KNOW IF IT IS IN THE DOCS AS CLEARLY TO THE AGENCIES EITHER. IT DOESN'T CHANGE THE RESPONSE TO THEM. BUT I AGREE WITH CHAIR GRONINGEN. I HAD NO IDEA THAT YOU HAD A BUSINESS UNTIL TODAY, AND THIS IS THE THIRD TIME WE'VE HAD THIS CONVERSATION. SO I HAVE THE SAME QUESTIONS. HOW MANY TRUCKS ARE MOVING NOW AND WHAT'S THE EXPECTED CHANGE IN USE? BECAUSE IT'S NOT A NEW USE, IT IS A NEW USE, BUT IT'S A CHANGE IN USE. AND SO I JUST HAVE DIFFERENT QUESTIONS. BUT BUT BACK TO THE AGENCY RESPONSE. I JUST I WAS THINKING ABOUT THE BUFFERING AND I WAS THINKING, DID THEY GET THE INFORMATION TO EXPLAIN THAT THERE IS AN EXISTING BUSINESS THAT IS ACTIVELY RUNNING AND THEY THEY DID RECEIVE THAT AS PART ONE. BUT AS YOU KNOW, APPLICANTS FILL OUT THE PART ONE. WE DON'T. SO YEAH. AND THAT'S WHAT I'M LOOKING AT. AND IT DOES NOT SAY THAT YOU HAVE AN EXISTING BUSINESS. MEMBER. I ALSO READ THROUGH THE EAF AND EVERYTHING THAT'S NOTED ON THERE IS STATING THE SITE IS PROPOSED WILL BE ALL IN THE FUTURE TENSE, AND THERE'S NO REFERENCE TO EXISTING BUSINESS AND OPERATIONS AND MODIFICATION OF AN EXISTING BUSINESS OR OPERATION. YEAH, TO GIVE A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND TO THAT AS WELL. THE EAF WAS FILLED OUT AS PART OF, YOU KNOW, IT WAS ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS. WE WERE ASSISTING HIM GETTING A 360 PERMIT FOR THE LAND TRANSFER FACILITY. SO I THINK WE WERE, YOU KNOW, WE WERE USING PROPOSED AND ALL THAT IN CONTEXT OF IT'S GOING TO BE A NEW, NOT CURRENTLY FUNCTIONING C AND D FACILITY. I THINK THAT'S WHERE THE CONTEXT I THINK MAYBE KIND OF GOT, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE WE WERE WE SUPPLIED ALL THAT TO THE STATE DEC REVIEWED AND THEN WE GOT A KICKBACK THAT JUST SAID, YOU KNOW, WE'RE GOING TO WE'RE GOING TO SEND THIS OFF TO THE TOWN OF HAMBURG TO DO THE SECRET REVIEW. SO THAT WAS SORT OF I SAY THIS PROCESS WAS KIND OF A, AN AFTERTHOUGHT. SO AT THE POINT OF THE EAF BEING FILLED OUT, IT WASN'T GOING THROUGH THE TOWN PLANNING BOARD PROCESS WAS NOT KIND OF A. WHAT WE THOUGHT WE WOULD BE DOING. CHAIR, CAN I MCCORMICK GO AHEAD. SO RECOGNIZING THAT IN THAT YOU CAME TO US FOR SEEKER I GUESS I DON'T KNOW IF WHETHER IT'S BEST TO COME FROM YOU OR FROM JOSH OR FROM OUR ATTORNEY, BUT WHEN I ASKED THE QUESTION BEFORE ABOUT STORAGE, OPEN STORAGE, WHICH IS ALLOWED, AS YOU NOTED, JOSH, EXCEPT FOR JUNKYARDS. AND SO I PULLED UP THE DEFINITION FOR JUNKYARDS, AND I RECOGNIZED THAT IN THE APPLICATION, IN THE DISCUSSION, WE'VE BEEN REFERRING TO THIS AS A C AND D FACILITY, WHICH PROBABLY ALIGNS WITH THE STATE REGS. AGAIN, COMING BACK TO THE SITE PLAN PIECE. BUT BASED ON A READ OF THE JUNKYARD REGULATIONS FOR THE TOWN. SO THE TOWN'S DEFINITION, I AM WONDERING IF PERHAPS WHETHER OR NOT THIS IS A C AND D FACILITY FROM THE STATE LEVEL, WHETHER OR NOT THIS MEETS THE TOWN'S REQUIREMENTS FOR A JUNKYARD. AND SO MY CONCERN IS, IS THAT SO THE TERM JUNKYARD SHALL INCLUDE ANY SALVAGE YARD, SCRAP YARD OR RELATED USE, WHICH IS WHAT THIS IS, IS SALVAGING STUFF. THERE'S A INCLUDES A WHOLE BUNCH OF DIFFERENT THINGS, INCLUDING AUTOMOBILES, BUT THEN THEY ALSO INCLUDE STORAGE, BALING OR OTHERWISE DEALING IN SCRAP METAL. COMMERCIAL RESIDENTIAL APPLIANCES, USED PLUMBING FIXTURES AND USED BRICK, WOOD OR OTHER BUILDING MATERIALS, WHICH WOULD BE A LOT OF THE THINGS YOU JUST DESCRIBED. SO I JUST WANT [01:00:02] TO MAKE SURE, AS WE'RE LOOKING AT THIS FROM THE LENS OF THE SITE PLAN, AND AS WE APPROACH THIS, AND BASED ON THE DEFINITIONS IN THE TOWN CODE FOR JUNKYARD THAT I THINK THIS, THIS AND MAYBE THAT'S A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE EXISTING USE AND THE THIS NEW PROPOSED USE. OR THIS APPEARS ON A CURSORY REVIEW. I'M NOT AN ATTORNEY THAT THIS USE MEETS THE JUNKYARD REQUIREMENTS. AND THEN MAYBE SUBJECT TO SOME OF THE ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS. AND I, I DID NOT SEE THAT CALLED OUT ON THE EAF IS WHAT THE USE IS. IT JUST NOTES THE C AND D, BUT I THINK THAT WE PROBABLY MAY NEED SOME REVISIONS. AND LOOKING INTO THAT IN TERMS OF WHAT THE PROJECT DESCRIPTION IS IN THE EAF AND HOW THIS IS BEING REPRESENTED HERE, NOT JUST FROM THE STATE LICENSING AND PERMITTING PERSPECTIVE, BUT ALSO FROM WHAT THAT REQUIRES FROM THE TOWN AND ITS SITE PLAN APPROVAL. MY RESPONSE TO THAT IS, AS YOU KNOW, HOW THE PROJECT WAS PRESENTED AND WHAT IT SAID IN THE F WE PRESENT TO CODE ENFORCEMENT BEFORE IT EVEN REACHES YOUR GUYS'S DESK. AT THE TIME, CODE ENFORCEMENT DID NOT INTERPRET IT AS A JUNKYARD. NOW, AS YOU GUYS MENTIONED, THAT MAY HAVE BEEN BECAUSE THE EAF IS NOT MAYBE ENTIRELY WHAT THE PROJECT IS. SO OUR REMEDY WE CAN DO IS WE CAN PRESENT WITH NEW INFORMATION TO CODE ENFORCEMENT FOR BECAUSE THEY'RE THE ONLY ONES THAT CAN INTERPRET THE CODE. WE CAN BRING IT BACK TO CODE ENFORCEMENT FOR AN INTERPRETATION OF WHETHER THEY SEE THIS PROJECT IN ITS FULL ENTIRETY AS A JUNKYARD OR NOT. BUT AT THE TIME WHEN WE SUBMITTED IT, WE ALWAYS BRING APPLICATIONS TO CODE ENFORCEMENT AT THE TIME BEFORE WE SEND IT TO THE PLANNING BOARD. THEY DID NOT INTERPRET IT AS A JUNKYARD. BASED OFF OF READING THE EAF AND THE INFORMATION THEY HAD PRESENTED AT THE TIME. YEAH, UNDERSTOOD. MEMBER MCCORMICK I THINK THAT THAT IS BECAUSE IT IS NOT CLEAR IN THE MATERIALS THAT WE'VE BEEN PROVIDED. EVEN LOOKING BACK TO THE SITE PLAN CHECKLIST, IT'S TALKING ABOUT C AND D, BUT IT DOES NOT ACKNOWLEDGE. SO THERE ARE JUNKYARD REGS. JOSH CAN HELP YOU LOOK AT THAT. BUT I THINK GIVEN THE SALVAGE BEEN PUTTING IN BUILDING MATERIALS, I THINK WE JUST NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE COVERING ALL THE USES AND THE REQUIREMENTS FROM FROM THE TOWN'S PERSPECTIVE AND THE REGS WITH WHAT YOU GUYS ARE PROPOSING TO DO AND PROBABLY NEED SOME UPDATES. CHAIR. DOES THAT MAKE SENSE TO YOU? I CHAIR GRONINGA AND I 100% AGREE BECAUSE LIKE I SAID, I'VE BEEN THROUGH THIS SEVERAL TIMES AND READ A LOT AND I WAS STILL CONFUSED. AND WHEN PEOPLE ARE TALKING ABOUT TRUCKS COMING AT THREE AND FOUR IN THE MORNING, I DON'T KNOW IF WE NEED TO CALL CORDON CODE ENFORCEMENT ABOUT THAT. IS THAT THEM DOING IT OR IS THAT ANOTHER BUSINESS DOING IT? THAT'S A SEPARATE ISSUE. BUT THAT WAS A RED FLAG FOR ME. AND THE AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC IS THE RED FLAG FOR A BUSINESS THAT IS BRAND NEW. SO BASED ON THE INFORMATION, I THOUGHT THIS WASN'T THERE YET. SO I THINK THAT AS MUCH AS I HATE TO DELAY A PROJECT, I THINK THAT SOME OF THIS NEEDS CLARIFICATION AND I THINK IT DOES NEED TO GO BACK TO CODE REVIEW WITH ALL OF THE INFORMATION AT HAND, SO WE CAN GET A CLARIFICATION, AND THEN HAVE IT BACK HERE IN JULY WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS AS WELL. AND THEN ANY OTHER COMMENTS THAT ARE COMING IN FROM THE PUBLIC SO WE CAN LOOK AT THE ENTIRE PICTURE. I HAVE THE ENTIRE PICTURE ALONG WITH THE SITE PLAN FROM THE PREVIOUS INFORMATION. WILL THAT BE ENOUGH TIME FOR YOU TO GET THAT? YEAH, JUST TO CLARIFY, NOT CODE REVIEW, BUT BRINGING IT TO THE SUPERVISING CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER WHO MAKES INTERPRETATIONS OF THE CODE. I SPENT TOO MUCH TIME IN CODE REVIEW, BUT I APOLOGIZE. YEAH, YEAH. SO ACTION ITEMS I WILL RESEARCH THE PREVIOUS SITE PLAN APPROVAL IF THERE WAS ONE FOR SAID PARCEL. BRING THE PROJECT IN ITS ENTIRETY WITH THESE UPDATED INFORMATION TO THE CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER FOR INTERPRETATION. AND THEN BY THE TIME THEY COME BACK IN JULY, WE SHOULD HAVE AN LTP RECOMMENDATION FOR THIS BOARD TO POTENTIALLY MAKE A SECRET DECISION AND POTENTIALLY AN APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL DECISION AT THE JULY MEETING. SO I THINK YOU'VE GOT IT. MEMBER MCCORMICK. REMEMBER MCCORMICK? I JUST WANTED TO I THINK MEMBER VALENTI'S QUESTION WAS A REALLY GOOD ONE BEFORE IS WHAT INFORMATION DID EVERYONE HAVE FOR THE COORDINATED REVIEW? AND IF THERE IS NEW AND UPDATED AND CLARIFIED INFORMATION THAT'S ACCOMPANYING THE SITE PLAN IN THE LONG EAF, DO WE NEED TO REISSUE THE COORDINATED REVIEW SO THAT THE FULL PICTURE AND THE FULL ABILITY FOR THESE OTHER COORDINATING AGENCIES TO REVIEW IS THERE? I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT, BUT I THINK IT'S ONE WORTH LOOKING INTO LOOKING INTO. WE'LL LOOK INTO IT. OKAY. THIS IS MEMBER VALENTI. MY QUESTION, JOSH, BECAUSE I DIDN'T PULL UP THE JUNKYARD REGS. BUT IF YOU'RE GOING TO SPEAK TO CODE ENFORCEMENT, I WONDER IF THERE IS ANY KIND OF DIFFERENCE IN PERMANENCY, LIKE WHETHER A JUNKYARD HAS TO BE THE THINGS STAY THERE AND THE THINGS MOVING HERE MAKES IT DIFFERENT. THAT WOULD BE MY INTEREST AS WELL. AND THEN, CHAIR, DO YOU WANT TO TALK BRIEFLY ABOUT THE RESPONSES [01:05:03] FROM TO THE AGENCY COMMENTS, OR DO YOU WANT TO LEAVE THAT UNTIL JULY? I ALMOST THINK THAT WE SHOULD LEAVE IT NOW IF WE'RE GOING TO ASK THEM FOR MORE INFORMATION. WHAT'S YOUR FEELING ON IT? I FEEL LIKE JOSH CAN MAKE THE CALL ON WHETHER THEY NEED TO RECEIVE MORE INFORMATION OR NOT, BUT I CAN'T REMEMBER WHAT. I GUESS I CAN'T REMEMBER WHAT THEIR COMMENTS WERE AND WHETHER THERE'S MORE INFORMATION IS GOING TO CHANGE, LIKE WHETHER IT'S GOING TO CHANGE BUFFERING. I THINK THAT THAT WOULD BE THERE REGARDLESS. BUT IF THEY DON'T REALIZE THAT ONE OF THE RESPONSES. MEMBER VALENTI SORRY, BUT ONE OF THE RESPONSES THAT WE GOT FROM THE STATE WAS THAT THEY WANTED THE CREEK BUFFER. THEY WANTED US TO ADDRESS THE BUFFERING BECAUSE THEY THOUGHT IT WAS A NEW BUSINESS. EXACTLY. SO THAT'S SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT WE'VE GOT GOING ON. AND WHEREAS ADDING 45 TRUCKS TO AN ALREADY BUSY BUSINESS IS VERY DIFFERENT THAN 0 TO 48 TRUCKS LIKE THOSE ARE THOSE ARE DIFFERENT EFFECTS ON THE COMMUNITY CHARACTER AND THE NOISE. AND SO IT CHANGES OUR INTERPRETATION A LITTLE BIT, BECAUSE IF YOU'RE SAYING IT'S NO DIFFERENCE. IT'S 45 TRUCKS A DAY NOW. IT'S GOING TO CONTINUE TO BE 45 TRUCKS A DAY. BUT IF WE'RE HEARING FROM THE NEIGHBORS THAT IT'S A NUISANCE ALREADY, AND YOU'RE GOING TO ADD 48 TRUCKS, THAT'S A DIFFERENT CONVERSATION. SO I THINK WE JUST NEED TO UNDERSTAND THE STARTING POINT. MEMBERS, DO YOU THINK THERE'S ANY NEED FOR A TRAFFIC STUDY OR SOMETHING WARRANTED, GIVEN THE NUMBER OF TRAFFIC ISSUES THAT WERE RAISED, OR IS THAT NOT? I CHAIR, AND I DON'T THINK A TRAFFIC STUDY IS GOING TO HELP US HERE. I THINK BECAUSE THE BASELINE IS INVOLVED, I DON'T THINK THAT WOULD BE A FAIR. YEAH, I DON'T THINK THAT WOULD BE A FAIR ASSESSMENT, BECAUSE IT'S CLEARLY STATED ON THE RECORD THAT THERE HAVE BEEN OTHER BUSINESSES AT THE SHARED SITE AND THEY GO IN A DIFFERENT DIRECTION. I DON'T I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT'S GOING TO HELP ANYBODY. I WAS WONDERING MAYBE IF IT WOULD HELP SET THE BASELINE THAT THAT'S ALREADY THERE RELATIVE TO THE INCREMENTAL CHANGE. MAYBE NOT FOR THAT BUSINESS. NO, NO. YEAH. IF I MAY SPEAK. MEMBER GERACI CERTAINLY AUGUST. IN MY PREVIOUS LIFE, WHEN MY HAIR WAS BLACK AND I WAS STILL WORKING, I WAS A REGIONAL GENERAL MANAGER FOR A MAJOR FOOD MANUFACTURING COMPANY LOCATED IN CUBA, NEW YORK, CLEVELAND, OHIO, AND ADAMS, NEW YORK. I'M VERY FAMILIAR WITH TRUCK TRAFFIC. THE DAMAGE OR NOT, LACK OF WORDS DAMAGE, BUT THE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS THAT LARGE COMPANIES OR BUSINESSES THAT DEAL WITH TRUCKS THAT ARE DIESEL OPERATED ARE THE BIGGEST. AND I DON'T CARE WHAT KIND OF EQUIPMENT THEY HAVE ON THEIR ENGINES, THEY STILL POLLUTE THE AIR. ONE OF THE THINGS WE DID TO CONTROL IT, ALL OF OUR FACILITIES. AND WHEN I SAY A MAJOR CHEESE MANUFACTURER, I'M TALKING 100 TRUCKS A DAY BETWEEN SIX IN THE MORNING AND NOON WOULD COME TO OUR PLANTS, AND THEN FROM 1:00 UNTIL 5:00, WE'D GET ANOTHER HUNDRED TRUCKS. BUT WE CONTROLLED THE NUMBER OF TRUCKS PER HOUR. ALL OF THE DRIVERS HAD TO MAKE APPOINTMENTS FOR THEIR DELIVERY TIME. WE ACCEPTED NO MORE THAN FIVE PER HOUR, SO IT GAVE US THE OPPORTUNITY TO UNLOAD FIVE TRUCKS OR LOAD FIVE TRUCKS WITHIN THAT HOUR AND GET THE NEXT BATCH IN. WE CONTROL THE ENVIRONMENT WITH THE DIESEL EXHAUST AND THE STATE WOULD COME IN EVERY 30 DAYS AND MONITOR THE AIR CONTROL TO MAKE SURE THAT WE WERE IN COMPLIANCE, THAT WE WEREN'T POLLUTING THE AIR. MY RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE TO THE CODE ENFORCEMENT AND THE LOCAL POLICE DEPARTMENTS IN WOODLAWN TO MONITOR THE AMOUNT OF TRUCK TRAFFIC THAT GOES THROUGH A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD. NOW, OUR PLANT IN CLEVELAND WAS ALMOST DEAD CENTER IN THE IN A IN A MAJOR METROPOLITAN AREA WHERE THERE WAS ABOUT 35,000 PEOPLE THAT LIVED WITHIN A FIVE MILE RADIUS OF THIS PLANT. AND THE OHIO STATE POLICE DID MONITOR THE AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC THAT WOULD COME AND GO. SPEED LIMITS WERE STRICTLY ENFORCED. DRIVERS WERE TOLD NO ONE MILE OVER THE LIMIT. IT'S 35, YOU DO 35, YOU GET, YOU DO 36. WE'RE GOING TO GIVE YOU A SPEEDING TICKET. AND EVERYTHING WAS UNDER PERFECT CONTROL. NOW, I'M NOT SAYING IT TOOK ME ABOUT TWO YEARS TO REALLY GET ALL OF THIS STUFF ENFORCED. AND AGAIN, MY BACKGROUND WAS IN FOOD MANAGEMENT, RESTAURANTS, HOTELS, HEALTH CARE. AND THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN I GOT INTO THE SALES END [01:10:04] OF IT AND IT WAS A NEW EXPERIENCE. BUT I USED EVERYTHING THAT I APPLIED TO MY RECEIVING DOCKS FOR WHEN I WAS IN THE OTHER SIDE OF THE BUSINESS WITH THE DRIVERS, THE AMOUNT OF TRUCKS THAT WERE COMING IN. AND SO I WASN'T MESSING UP THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR THINGS LIKE THAT. THESE WOULD BE MY RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE RESIDENTS, WHICH YOUR LOCAL POLICE ENFORCEMENT TO, YOU KNOW, YOU GOT TRUCKS THAT HAVE NO BUSINESS COMING DOWN AT 3:00 IN THE MORNING, THEN YOU HAVE A COP OVER THERE TO GIVE THEM A TICKET. THEY'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO BE THERE. I MEAN, IN A RESIDENTIAL AREA, TRUCKS ARE LIMITED TO THE AMOUNT OF TIMES THAT THEY SHOULD COME THROUGH THE BUSINESS. AND I GOT WHERE I LIVE. THERE'S A MAJOR US HIGHWAY IS ONE OF THE ROADS AND TRUCK TRAFFIC USED TO GO THROUGH ALL NIGHT LONG. AND I COMPLAINED TO THE HAMBURG POLICE AND THEY PASSED OUT TICKETS AFTER MIDNIGHT AND TRUCK TRAFFIC STOPPED. YOU KNOW, THEY CAN USE IT DURING THE DAY, BUT AFTER 10:00 AT NIGHT, YOU'RE NOT COMING DOWN THAT ROAD. SO AGAIN, CALL THE POLICE DEPARTMENTS AND, YOU KNOW, LET THEM KNOW AND TRY TO GET SOME ROUTE FIVE. YOU'RE NEVER GOING TO BE ABLE TO DO ANYTHING WITH ROUTE FIVE. I MEAN, EVEN THOUGH WHEN I WAS WORKING I WOULD TRAVEL ROUTE FIVE A LOT, I WOULD SEE RADAR TRAPS. BUT WHEN YOU GOT HEAVY TRAFFIC, THEY JUST LET THE CARS GO FLYING BY. THEY DON'T DO ANYTHING. BUT THESE ARE MY RECOMMENDATIONS. OKAY. THANK YOU. I WANTED TO ADD SOMETHING. AS LONG AS WE'RE ON THIS WHOLE SUBJECT. SPEAKING OF THE POLICE, THE CHAIR GOT TO MEET THE POLICE DEPARTMENT WHEN SHE WAS OUT THERE BECAUSE I DROVE THAT NEIGHBORHOOD FOR AN HOUR AND I WASN'T DRIVING, THANK GOD. AND WE DIDN'T GET PULLED OVER FOR ANYTHING. BUT WE COULDN'T FIND THE ROAD TO GET INTO YOUR SITE BECAUSE THERE'S A FENCE OR A GATE AND IT'S CLOSED. YOU CAN'T GET IN ON THE WEEKENDS. BUT I DROVE FIRST STREET. I DROVE ALL THE WAY UP TO SEVENTH STREET, UP AND DOWN WOODLAWN LAKE AVENUE. AND I HAVE TO SAY THAT THE BUFFERING BETWEEN FIRST AND THAT SITE IS PRETTY HEAVY, THANK GOD. RIGHT. I MEAN, THERE'S A GOOD THING AND THE FACT THAT THERE'S A CREEK THERE KIND OF PROTECTS THAT AND ENSURING THAT THAT'S PROBABLY NOT GOING TO BE CLEAR CUT. I'M NOT I'M NOT STATING FACT, BUT I'M JUST SAYING THAT BECAUSE THAT GATE OR THAT CREEK IS THERE, THERE'S GOING TO BE SOME PROTECTION THERE. AND THE CORNER HOUSE AT FIRST AND WOODLAWN, THAT WOULD BE ABOUT THE ONLY HOUSE THAT COULD ACTUALLY SEE THAT PROJECT. IF THERE WAS A LOT OF CLEAR CUTTING. I MEAN, THAT'S THE WAY AND IF YOU'RE ON THE SECOND STORY, YOU MIGHT BE ABLE TO SEE INTO THAT. BUT I HONESTLY COULDN'T GET A VISION OF THE PROJECT FROM ANY OF THOSE STREETS. AND LIKE I SAID, WE WERE DRIVING AROUND FOR SO LONG THAT THE OFFICER WANTED TO KNOW IF WE WERE HOUSE SHOPPING OR, YOU KNOW, CASING THE JOINT OR WHATEVER. AND THEY WERE HELPFUL BECAUSE THEY SHOWED ME WHERE THE STREET WAS TO GET INTO THE PROJECT. AND THE AND THE GATE WAS THERE. SO I WANTED TO SHARE THAT WE TAKE THIS VERY SERIOUSLY, THIS BOARD, WE LISTEN TO ALL OF YOUR CONCERNS WHEN MEMBER IS TELLING YOU TO CONTACT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT. IF I WERE YOU, ALL THESE PEOPLE THAT ARE IN THIS ROOM, I'D WRITE A LETTER. I'D GET EVERYBODY TO SIGN IT. IF THESE ARE THE PROBLEMS THAT ARE HAPPENING IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD, ONLY YOU CAN FIX IT. WE'RE THE PLANNING BOARD, SO I WOULD I WOULD KEEP GOING. ON SITE THAT SHOWS TRUCKS GOING RIGHT THROUGH THE RED ARROWS UP, AND THEY'RE MAKING THE LEFT TURN. SO DOUBLE EVEN. SO I CAN HAVE A CAMERA ON THAT TWICE. OKAY. HANG ON. I'M NOT I'M JUST SAYING THAT I WOULD CONTINUE YOUR QUEST TO GET THAT INFORMATION TO THE DEPARTMENT. OKAY. I CAN'T DO IT. WE THIS BOARD CAN'T DO ANYTHING ABOUT TRAFFIC ON ROUTE FIVE. I MEAN, YOU KNOW, WE'RE GOOD, BUT WE'RE NOT THAT GOOD, RIGHT? AUGUST? AGAIN, I WOULD RECOMMEND THEN YOU HAVE A COUNTY LEGISLATURE. YOU HAVE A STATE ASSEMBLYMAN, YOU HAVE A STATE SENATOR THAT REPRESENTS YOUR AREA. YOU YOU COMPLAIN TO THOSE GUYS, THEY'LL DO SOMETHING. I MEAN, YOU GOT TO TALK TO THEM DIRECTLY. AND, YOU KNOW, WHOEVER IT IS, YOU WANT TO TALK TO THEM PERSONALLY AND AGAIN, TELL THEM. AND AGAIN, I ALSO DEALT WITH NICK LANGWORTHY WHEN HE WAS MY REPRESENTATIVE IN HE HE TOOK CARE OF THE PROBLEM. AND THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN THE POLICE WERE THERE ALL THE TIME. SO CALL YOUR LOCAL POLITICAL REPRESENTATIVE BESIDES THE POLICE DEPARTMENT AND LET THEM [01:15:03] KNOW THAT YOU'VE ALREADY TALKED TO LAW ENFORCEMENT AND NOTHING WAS GETTING DONE. AND THEN SOMETHING WILL GET DONE. SO I THINK AT THIS POINT WE'VE GOT SOME HOMEWORK YET TO DO. I DON'T THINK TO MEMBER VALENTI'S POINT THAT WE NEED TO HEAR WHAT THE AGENCIES HAVE TO SAY, BECAUSE I THINK THEY NEED ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. JOSH AND I, YOU AND I CAN TALK ABOUT THAT, BUT I THINK THAT THAT NEEDS TO BE RESUBMITTED, ESPECIALLY WITH THE COMMENTS THAT WE GOT THAT WEREN'T BASED ON ACCURATE INFORMATION WHEN THEY WERE ASKING ABOUT THE BUFFERING FROM THE STATE. SO I THINK WE NEED TO GET THAT. SO WE'VE GOT SOME INFORMATION TO GET BACK TO THE BOARD AND, AND THEN WE'LL, WE CAN TABLE THEM UNTIL THE JULY 9TH MEETING. IT'S JULY 9TH OKAY. OKAY. DO YOU HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR US. YEAH I WOULD JUST FOLLOW UP THE. SO IT'S MOSTLY THE I GUESS THE ONE COUNTY COMMENT ABOUT THE ADDITIONAL BUFFERING, BECAUSE THE NEW YORK STATE PARKS JUST REQUESTED THAT THE CURRENT BUFFERING VEGETATION STAY AND WE ACKNOWLEDGE THAT WE'RE NOT WE'RE NOT TRYING TO CLEAR CUT ANYTHING. WELL, AND THAT'S WHAT MAKES ME CONCERNED THAT THEY THINK IT'S NEW, A NEW, NEW BUSINESS BECAUSE THEY'RE SAYING SO YOU DON'T CLEAR CUT CLEARING AND LABELING. RIGHT. OKAY. GOTCHA. SO I, I, I THINK THAT NEEDS TO GET CLEARED CLEARED UP OKAY. SO THEY'RE DEALING WITH THE ACCURATE INFORMATION. SO THERE'S NO GRAY AREAS. AND IT'S THIS BOARD THAT NEEDS TO CATCH IT. AND THEN IT'S UNFORTUNATE THAT WE NEED TO SEND IT BACK. BUT THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE TO DO OKAY. SO WE'LL SEE YOU BACK ON THE NINTH AND I'LL TALK TO YOU AFTER THE MEETING OKAY. ALRIGHT. DO YOU HAVE ANY OTHER ANYTHING ELSE. BOARD MEMBERS. THE ONLY OTHER COMMENT WAS I HOPE WE GOT THE ROAD ISSUE CLEARED UP, BECAUSE I KNOW THAT WAS THE OTHER COMMENT FROM THE PARKS. YEP. AND BOARD MEMBERS, ARE WE ALL IN AGREEMENT TO TABLING IT UNTIL THE NIGHT? OKAY. WE'LL SEE YOU BACK ON THE NINTH THEN. OKAY. THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU. OKAY. WELL, WITH THA, I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION IF ANYBODY WOULD LIKE TO CALL THE FIRST APPLICANT. OH. I'M SORRY. THANK YOU FOR THAT. IS BENDERSON BENDERSON DEVELOPMENT. DID THEY COME IN LATE? ALL RIGHT THEN I'M GOING TO WE'RE GOING TO TABLE BENDERSON TO THE NINTH AS WELL. I'M SURE THAT WHATEVER HAPPENED, I DON'T KNOW, MAYBE THEIR WIRES GOT CROSSED. IT SEEMS TO ME THERE WAS THERE WAS SOMETHING ABOUT A TRAFFIC REPORT OR SOMETHING THAT THEY WERE TRYING TO GET. YEAH, THEY THEY SPECIFICALLY ASKED TO BE TABLED ON THE FOURTH, BUT NOT FOR THE 18TH. SO I DON'T KNOW. I WANT TO SLIP THEIR MINDS OR MAYBE THEY GET BUSY. WE'LL THEIR TABLE INDEFINITELY UNTIL THEY TELL YOU. YEAH, YEAH. THAT'S NOT WHAT THE WAY THAT THE CONTACT WAS. BUT WHATEVER. WE'LL WE'LL GIVE THEM THIS CHANCE TO THE NINTH. SO WE HAVE. AND JOSH HOW MANY CASES DO WE HAVE FOR THE NINTH NOW. FOR JULY 9TH WE HAVE. NINE ITEMS. SOME OF THEM ARE NEW SUBDIVISIONS. WE RECEIVED THE APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR THE GATEWAY BUILDING. WE RECEIVED A SITE PLAN APPLICATION FOR SOMETHING THAT GOT PREVIOUSLY APPROVED. BUT THEIR SITE PLAN LAPSED. SO A LOT OF THESE PROJECTS ARE NEW. SOME OF THEM ARE JUST BEING TABLED OVER. SO THERE'S A HODGEPODGE OF STUFF. OKAY. IS THERE ANYTHING IN THE WORK SESSION? A NEW SUBDIVISION AT PARKER ROAD, A PARKING LOT PROJECT THAT'S ACTUALLY IN THE VILLAGE OF BLASDELL, BUT BECAUSE THERE'S NO PLANNING BOARD AND BLAISDELL, THE TOWN OF HAMBURG'S PLANNING BOARD, REPRESENTS VILLAGE OF BLAISDELL PROJECTS THE GATEWAY BUILDING SITE PLAN APPROVAL AND ANOTHER SUBDIVISION AT PLEASANT AVE IN THE WORK SESSION. GATEWAY. WELL, WE CAN PUT IT IN THE REGULAR MEETING. SO THREE, THREE, THREE SUBDIVISION, TWO SUBDIVISIONS IN THE PARKING LOT PROJECT. OKAY, WELL I'M GOING TO CLOSE THE AGENDA FOR THE NINTH. WE WON'T ADD ANY MORE TO IT OKAY. AND THEN YOU'LL SEND IT TO ME AND I'LL DO THE FINAL APPROVAL TOMORROW. YEP. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. NOW, IS THERE A MOTION THAT I MAKE A MOTION TO ADJOURN? SECOND, ALL THOSE IN * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.