Oct 15, 2025 10-15-2025 PB Meeting

[00:00:02]

ON. YES. OKAY. WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND CALL THE WORK SESSION TO ORDER. OH WE'RE

[WORK SESSION ]

HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS BOARD MAY HAVE. YOU DON'T HAVE ANYTHING ELSE TO OFFER IN ADDITION TO. SOME OF THE BOARD MEMBERS. WEREN'T HERE LAST TIME. MAYBE YOU WANT TO JUST GIVE A BRIEF UPDATE. SO THIS IS A PART OF. SO THIS. SO THE THE PLAN BEFORE YOU ON THE TV IS SO IT'S PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ON THE THE LEFT SIDE OF THE SITE. AND THEN WE'RE PROPOSING TO SUBDIVIDE IT I BELIEVE IT PREVIOUSLY WAS TWO PARCELS AND THEN COMBINED FOR REZONING. AND NOW WE'RE SUBDIVIDING IT AGAIN. WE'RE DEVELOPING THE LEFT SIDE. AND THEN THE RIGHT SIDE WILL BE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT TO COME DOWN THE LINE. THERE ARE KNOWN WETLANDS ON SITE. THERE'S NO PLAN TO IMPACT THEM. THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IS A POLE BARN WITH PARKING, AND WE'RE LEAVING THE EXISTING ENTRANCES ON SOUTHWESTERN BOULEVARD. SO JUST TO CLARIFY, THERE'S ONE BUSINESS NOW AND THEN YOU'RE PLANNING ON PUTTING ANOTHER BUSINESS THERE IN THE IN THE NEW SUBDIVISION ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE SITE. SO THERE'S GOING TO BE TWO BUSINESSES IN THE FUTURE, RIGHT ON THE SEPARATE PARCELS. OKAY. SO COREY TIGER IS COMPLETELY AWAY FROM THIS. THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH COREY TIGER'S PROPERTY. YOU'RE GOING TO TAKE THE CURRENT. SO GO AHEAD. LET ME TRY TO CLEAN IT UP. SO IF YOU GUYS RECALL COREY TIGER ON 6722 SOUTHWESTERN BOULEVARD CAME BEFORE THIS BOARD ALMOST A YEAR AGO LOOKING TO DO A POLE BARN BUSINESS. HE THEN WAS LOOKING TO REZONE IT BECAUSE IT WAS CURRENTLY ZONED AN RA WOULD NOT ALLOW WHAT HE WANTED TO DO. HE THEN THOUGHT ABOUT DOING THE LAKEVIEW COMMERCIAL DISTRICT, WHICH IS STILL BEFORE THE TOWN BOARD. WE ENDED UP SETTLING ON HIM BEING REZONED TO THE AG AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT, BASED OFF OF AN INTERPRETATION THAT THE USE WOULD BE ALLOWED BY THE CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER. HE THEN GOT IT. HE MERGED THE TWO PARCELS TOGETHER. GUIDED, REZONED. IT'S OFFICIALLY AG. HE IS CURRENTLY BEFORE THIS BOARD FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL. ONLY OF THE OF THIS BUSINESS OR THE WESTERN HALF OF THIS PARCEL. THIS PROJECT IS THE EASTERN HALF OF THE SAME PARCEL IS LOOKING TO BE SUBDIVIDED FOR A BUSINESS FOR MR. HEPNER TO THEN ALSO WOULD HAVE TO OBVIOUSLY COME BEFORE THE PLANNING BOARD WHEN HE HAS THAT BUSINESS DOWN THE LINE. SO JUST ONE BUSINESS, JUST ONE DIVIDED AGAIN AND A SECOND.

CORRECT. OKAY. CORRECT. BECAUSE THAT'S THE WAY IT SOUNDED. SORRY I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT. CORRECT. OKAY. AS THIS BOARD KNOWS, WHEN COREY CAME FOR THIS WHOLE PIECE OF PROPERTY, THERE WAS A WETLANDS CONCERN. HE HAD WETLANDS DELINEATION DONE BY LA BELLA.

THE WETLANDS ARE OVERLAID INTO NOT ONLY THIS SITE PLAN, BUT THERE ALSO IS A COPY OF THE WETLAND REPORT THAT LA BELLA DID FOR THE ENTIRE PIECE OF PROPERTY. AND FOR MR. HEPNER.

WHAT HE'S LOOKING FOR IS ONE WHETHER THIS BOARD, FOR SECRET PURPOSES, WANTS TO DO A COORDINATED REVIEW, NOT ONLY BECAUSE THE SUBDIVISION WOULD BE ON SOUTHWESTERN BOULEVARD, BUT BECAUSE OF THAT WETLAND CONCERN ON THE EASTERN HALF OF THE PROPERTY, AND WOULD BE LOOKING FOR ANY COMMENTS AND CONCERNS FROM THE BOARD WOULD BE LOOKING, I'M ASSUMING, TO SEE IF A PUBLIC HEARING COULD BE SCHEDULED IN THE FUTURE. OKAY. THANK YOU. JOSH. YEP.

BOARD MEMBERS. MEMBER MCCORMICK I WAITED TO SEE IF SOMEBODY ELSE HAD A QUESTION. IT'S OKAY.

SO THERE ARE WETLANDS THAT GO NORTH. SOUTH, RIGHT. NORTH IS UP ON THIS, CORRECT? YES. IS THERE A NORTH ARROW? IT'S ON THE BOTTOM. OKAY. NEXT TO THE SITE. OH, IT'S WAY DOWN THERE.

[00:05:01]

THAT IS CORRECT. THE YOU'LL NOTICE THAT THE FURTHER SUBDIVISION. SO IT'S KIND OF HARD BECAUSE IT HAS BOTH ON HERE. BUT ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE, WHICH IS WHAT WE'RE FOCUSING ON. YOU'LL NOTICE IT'S DRAWN SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE MR. HEPNER CAME IN AND MET WITH MYSELF AND WITH JEFF, THE CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER, BECAUSE THE SUBDIVISION HAD TO BE DRAWN SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE THE AG DISTRICT HAS SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS. AND HE'S IN AN OVERLAY, THE LAKEVIEW OVERLAY. SO BECAUSE OF THAT, AND AS YOU GUYS KNOW, IN THE LAKEVIEW OVERLAY 25, THE OVERLAY REQUIREMENTS REQUIRED 25% MORE OF ALL OF YOUR BULK REQUIREMENTS. SO BECAUSE OF THAT, THE SUBDIVISION HAD TO BE DRAWN LITERALLY TO HOW YOU SEE IT TO BE ABLE TO THEN FIT HIS PROPOSED BUILDING IN THE FUTURE. ANYONE ELSE WITH ANY QUESTIONS? IT'S A QUIET BOARD. SO WE ARE GOING TO DO SEEKER. I THINK THE QUESTION WOULD BE SO WE HAVE TO DO YEAH, WE HAVE TO DO SEEKER. REGARDLESS IF THE QUESTION IS, DOES THIS BOARD WANT TO DO A COORDINATED REVIEW AND SEND THE MATERIALS TO SPECIFICALLY PROBABLY DOT BECAUSE IT'S ON SOUTHWESTERN BOULEVARD DECK FOR THE WETLANDS. AND I CAN'T IMAGINE ANY OTHER STATE AGENCY HAS ANY APPROVAL POWER. BUT THOSE ARE THE TWO. OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD THAT I CAN THINK OF.

IS THE BOARD IN AGREEMENT TO THAT? YEAH, WE MAY WANT TO INCLUDE. BECAUSE IF THE EC YEP WANTS ANYTHING THEN THEY WOULD ALSO WANT. SO IT WOULD BE EASIER TO JUST DO IT AT ONCE.

SO WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD WITH A COORDINATED REVIEW OKAY. AS PREVIOUSLY STATED THERE ARE NO VARIANCES THAT ARE NEEDED. SO THE NEXT STEP WOULD BE TO SCHEDULE A PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE FIFTH. OR SHOULD WE PUSH THAT THE THIRD? OBVIOUSLY THE 30 DAYS FOR ANY COMMENTS FROM AGENCIES ENDS ON THE 15TH OF NOVEMBER OR THE 14TH, WHENEVER THAT 30 DAYS IS OKAY, YOU CAN OBVIOUSLY STILL SCHEDULE A PUBLIC HEARING AND HEAR FROM THE PUBLIC BEFOREHAND, BUT WE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO MAKE A SECRET DECISION UNTIL NOVEMBER, THE NOVEMBER 19TH MEETING AT THE EARLIEST. SO WHAT IS THE BOARD'S PLEASURE? HAVE HIM COME BACK ON THE FIFTH, OR DO THE HEARING THE SAME NIGHT THAT WE GET THE SEEKER INFORMATION BACK? WE COULD PROBABLY DO IT ALL AT ONCE. MEMBER MCCORMICK I THINK THAT WE SHOULD DO IT ON THE 19TH AS WELL. OKAY. SO PUBLIC HEARING ON THE 19TH AND WE'RE DOING A COORDINATED REVIEW. CORRECT? OKAY. ALL RIGHT. CAN I GET A YES FROM EVERYBODY. JUST I GOT HEAD SHAKING BUT YES OKAY. THE BOARD'S IN IN AGREEMENT THERE. SO QUIET OKAY. SO WE'LL SEE YOU BACK ON THE 19TH AND WE'LL BE ABLE TO MOVE FORWARD.

AND ON THE 19TH THERE WILL BE A PUBLIC HEARING. THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU. SO OUR NEXT APPLICANT IS BELL ATLANTIC MOBILE SYSTEMS REQUESTING A PLANNING BOARD COURTESY REVIEW OF A PROPOSED OF A PROPOSAL TO INSTALL AND OPERATE A WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY ON A REPLACEMENT UTILITY POLE LOCATED ON AN NS NYSEG NEAR 3497 MCKINLEY PARKWAY. CAN I ASK THE PEOPLE IN THE BACK OUT IN THE HALLWAY? SORRY. GOOD EVENING. IF YOU WANT TO STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE BOARD. GOOD EVENING, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD. MY. CAN YOU HEAR ME? KNOW YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO TAKE THE MIC. GOOD EVENING. CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES. ALRIGHT. GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS JARED LUSK, WITH NIXON PEABODY, REPRESENTING VERIZON WIRELESS.

I'M THE ONE WHO SUBMITTED THE APPLICATION TO THE TOWN. YOU SUMMARIZED THE TOWER. VERIZON IS PROPOSING TO INSTALL A MICROCELL ANTENNA ONTO THE TOP OF A REPLACEMENT UTILITY POLE IN THE NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION RIGHT OF WAY IN NEAR 3497

[00:10:05]

EXCUSE ME, IS JUST OOPS. IT IS CURRENTLY 28.25FT TALL. AND THEY'RE GOING TO REPLACE THE POLE WITH A 34 FOOT POLE. AND THE ANTENNA IS INSTALLED AT THE TOP OF THE OF THE UTILITY POLE AND ON THE ALSO ON THE UTILITY POLES. THE SMALL EQUIPMENT CABINET THAT INCLUDES THE RADIO EQUIPMENT NECESSARY TO OPERATE IT, AS WELL AS THE THE THE ELECTRIC METER THAT THAT SERVES THE FACILITY. PRETTY ROUTINE. THEY'RE THEY'RE IN AND AROUND ALL OVER BUFFALO AND THE TOWNS AND IT'S IT'S TO GENERALLY TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL CAPACITY IN COMMERCIAL AREAS. OKAY. DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE TO OFFER? NO, IT'S PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD PROJECT. I KNOW YOU NEEDED TO TO PROVIDE A COURTESY REVIEW. I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE. THANK YOU.

PLANNING DEPARTMENT. SO I DON'T KNOW. I DON'T KNOW IF DURING MY TIME WE'VE EVER DONE ONE OF THESE, BUT OUR COURTESY REVIEW IN THE TOWN DOESN'T REALLY HAVE ANY GUIDELINES. THERE'S NO APPROVAL OR DECISION REALLY TO BE MADE BY THIS BOARD. THAT'LL BE DONE BY THE CODE ENFORCEMENT, THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT. BUT PURPOSELY, WHAT THE BOARD IS SUPPOSED TO DO IS GIVE ANY COMMENTS OR ANY CONCERNS THAT YOU MAY HAVE TO THE APPLICANT THAT YOU WOULD WANT JEFF TO BE AWARE OF AS HE'S REVIEWING THIS PROPOSAL. BUT ESSENTIALLY, BECAUSE THIS IS A REPLACING AN EXISTING POLE AND THE NEW YORK STATE DOT RIGHT OF WAY, THERE'S NO APPROVAL POWER FROM THIS BOARD OR A DECISION TO BE MADE. LIKE I SAID, IT'S JUST A COURTESY REVIEW. AND ANY COMMENTS WILL THEN BE SENT OVER TO JEFF AS HE WORKS WITH THE APPLICANT TO GO FORWARD. OKAY.

BOARD MEMBERS, MEMBER CLERK IS IT USED TO BE WE WOULD REVIEW THESE, BUT THEY CHANGE THE FEDERAL LAW. AND EVEN BACK WHEN WE DID REVIEW THEM, WE WEREN'T ALLOWED TO CONSIDER HEALTH EFFECTS BECAUSE IT WAS FEDERALLY REGULATED. BUT SINCE THEN THEY EVEN CHANGED THE LAW.

SO ALL WE CAN DO IS WHAT WE'RE DOING TODAY USED TO BE A LOT MORE IN DEPTH WHEN SOMETHING LIKE THIS WOULD COME IN FRONT OF US. WELL, AND THIS IS NOT A NEW POLE, IT'S AN EXISTING.

IT'S A REPLACEMENT OF AN EXISTING POLE. SO. ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY COMMENTS? NO, I, I THINK WE'RE I WAS GOING TO ASK IF THERE WAS A PICTURE. I REMEMBER LOOKING AT IT. SO I MEAN IT'S BASICALLY IT IS WHAT IT IS. RIGHT. I THE SAME THING BUT JUST HIGHER. RIGHT. JUST A FEW A FEW FEET HIGHER. WHERE CAN YOU GO BACK TO WHERE THE YOU HAD THE PICTURE OF THE EXISTING ONE? IT'S HARD TO EVEN TELL BECAUSE THAT'S AT THE CORNER WHERE THE ASPEN DENTAL IS. CORRECT. AND IT'S EVEN HARD FROM THE STREET VIEW TO, TO SEE THAT THAT'S SOMETHING DIFFERENT THAN LIKE A REGULAR. DISTRIBUTION LINE. THAT'S A REGULAR UTILITY POLE THAT, THAT THAT'S STANDING ON THE STREET. SO AGAIN, VERIZON AGAIN IS INSTALLING THE INSTALLING WELL, VERIZON, VERIZON TELEPHONE IS INSTALLING A REPLACEMENT UTILITY POLE BECAUSE THEY HAVE TO HAVE ADEQUATE SEPARATION OBVIOUSLY FROM THE FROM THE UTILITY LINES FOR THE COMMUNICATION EQUIPMENT. SO THAT'S THE BASIS FOR THE INCREASED HEIGHT. SO THE UTILITY WILL COME AND INSTALL THE NEW POLE AND THE LINES. AND THEN YOU GUYS WILL WORK WITH THEM TO INSTALL THE EQUIPMENT. SO VERIZON'S NOT TOUCHING THE LINE. THE ELECTRIC LINES. THE UTILITY WILL DO THAT. AND YOU WILL INSTALL YOUR INFRASTRUCTURE ON THE STRUCTURE THERE. THAT'S THE UTILITY THAT TELLS US WHETHER THEY NEED A REPLACEMENT POLE, WHERE THE EQUIPMENT HAS TO BE, ETC. SO THIS IS ALL GOVERNED BY THE BY BY THE NATIONAL ELECTRIC SAFETY CODE WITH REGARD TO THE SPACING ETC. AND, AND WHETHER, WHETHER WE CAN EVEN INSTALL. NOT EVERY POLE CAN HOST ONE OF THESE THINGS BASED ON THE EQUIPMENT THAT IS ON THE POLE. SO IN THIS INSTANCE THEY CAN HOST IT, BUT THEY HAD TO REPLACE IT TO GET THE ADEQUATE SPACING BETWEEN THE EXISTING UTILITY LINES. OH. SO THAT'S WHY THE INCREASE IN HEIGHT. CORRECT. OKAY. LEARN SOMETHING EVERY DAY OKAY. I DON'T KNOW THAT WE HAVE ANY COMMENTS ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.

I SEE A LOT OF HEAD SHAKING. SO I THINK THAT WE JUST SAY GOOD LUCK AND THANKS FOR THE UPDATE.

I DO HAVE ONE LAST QUESTION. SORRY. OKAY. WHEN YOU GUYS DO THE WORK WITH THE POLE, YOU GUYS ARE WORKING WITH THE TRAFFIC LIGHT LINES TO MAKE SURE THAT WHEN THE POLE GOES UP, THOSE LINES ARE STAYING AT THE SAME HEIGHT. CORRECT. SO THEY WON'T THOSE LINES WILL STAY AT THE SAME HEIGHT AND VERIZON WILL GO ABOVE THE EXISTING UTILITY LINES. SO THERE

[00:15:02]

OKAY. SO AGAIN WE'RE WE'RE OPERATING. IF YOU WERE TO LOOK AT THE THE EXISTING FIBER IS AT 27.5FT AND THE THE THE FIBER IS GOING TO BE AT 28FT. CABLE TV AT 26. AND IT'S GOING TO IT'S GOING TO BE I'M SORRY. IT'S CURRENTLY AT 26.42. IT'S GOING TO BE AT 26FT. SO I THINK THEY'RE DESIGNING IT TO, TO AGAIN TO TO MEET THOSE STANDARDS. OKAY. YOU'RE ALL SET THEN. THANK YOU. YOUR NEXT STEPS ARE JUST SEND ME AND JEFF AN EMAIL AND WE'LL WORK ON NEXT STEPS OKAY. YEP. THANK YOU. NO PROBLEM. WE HAVE A FEW MINUTES BEFORE THE START OF THE REGULAR MEETING. OKAY. OKAY. THANKS. I'M GOING TO DO A SIGNAGE. OKAY. ACTIONSCRIPT. ALL RIGHT. I'LL

[00:20:24]

SO THIS IS TABLED INDEFINITELY. THIS IS TABLE ONE DIFFERENT. SO FOR INSTANCE OKAY. SO THAT'S TABLE TWO RIGHT. THAT'S. THAT'S PUT ON HOLD INDEFINITELY. YEAH. EXACTLY LIKE THAT. OKAY. ACCESS PROPERTY. THERE'S SOME LEGAL ISSUES THAT THEY'RE TRYING TO RESOLVE UNTIL THAT GETS RESOLVED. WHICH I'M KIND OF. YES. WE DON'T DO ALL THE WORK IN THAT. WE FIND OUT THAT WE DO NOTHING. RIGHT, WHICH HAS HAPPENED IN THE PAST. SO. FULLY SUPPORT YOU IN ALL YOUR ENDEAVORS. YEAH, RIGHT. WELL, IT'S FUNNY, LIKE TREKKING BACK HERE. SO THAT'S THIS ONE, RIGHT? YEAH. THAT'S OVER NOW. SO NOW THIS. I'M GOING BACK TO THE OTHER ONE. YOU ARE. YES. IT'S

[00:25:05]

CAITLIN MCCORMICK. HERE. BRIAN STEWART. PRESENT. OKAY. WE HAVE A FULL BOARD TONIGHT. AND OUR

[1. Public Hearing – 7:00 P.M., Joe Colern – Requesting Preliminary Plat Approval of a 3 lot subdivision to be located at Hazelwood Terrace and Lake Shore Road ]

OKAY, SO IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO GIVE US A BRIEF, A BRIEF REVIEW BEFORE WE GET STARTED. OH, YOU GOT THE HEARING. GO AHEAD. SURE. HELLO. MY NAME IS DOUG PHASE WITH CARMINA WOOD DESIGN FOR THE SITE CIVIL ENGINEER. WE'RE HERE BEFORE YOU TONIGHT FOR A PUBLIC HEARING, AND WE'RE REQUESTING PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL OF THE THREE LOT SUBDIVISION. WITH THE SUBDIVISION, WE'LL HAVE TWO LOTS FRONTING, AND. OH, HAZELWOOD TERRACE AND ONE LOT FRONTING ON LAKESHORE ROAD. THE SITE IS ZONED R-2 AND THE LOTS MEET THE ZONING. AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THE BOARD MAY HAVE AND LISTEN TO THE PUBLIC RESPONSES OR INPUT.

I DON'T THINK THE BOARD HAS ANY QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME, BUT WE'LL GO AHEAD AND PROCEED WITH THE PUBLIC HEARING. SO IF YOU'D LIKE TO HAVE A SEAT AND THEN WE'LL DISCUSS THAT. MEMBER SHAW, WOULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE READ THE NOTICE LEGAL NOTICE. TOWN OF HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE TOWN OF HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD WILL CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING ON A THREE LOT SUBDIVISION PROPOSED BY JOE COLLERAN TO BE LOCATED AT HAZELWOOD TERRACE AND LAKESHORE ROAD. THE PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD ON OCTOBER 15TH, 2025 AT 7:00 PM IN ROOM SEVEN A, SEVEN B OF TOWN HALL. A PUBLIC HEARING IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE COMMUNITY TO SHARE INFORMATION ON HOW YOU ARE IMPACTED BY THE PROJECT. A THREE MINUTE RULE WILL APPLY. IT IS NOT A QUESTION OR ANSWER PERIOD. ALL STATEMENTS MADE DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING, AS WELL AS WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE REGARDING THE PROJECTS SENT TO

[00:30:04]

I JUST WANT TO. THIS MIGHT HELP. I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY FOR THIS SUBDIVISION. WHEN WE SAY SUBDIVISION, THIS IS A THREE LOT SUBDIVISION. IT'S ZONED R2, MEANING AT MOST A SINGLE FAMILY HOME OR A DUPLEX COULD GO ON ONE OF THE LOTS. SO THIS IS NOT LIKE A MAJOR SUBDIVISION WITH A BUNCH OF HOMES OR AN APARTMENT COMPLEX OR ANYTHING OF COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYONE, AS THEY'RE SPEAKING AND OBVIOUSLY, LIKE I SAID, COME UP AND FEEL FREE TO SPEAK. I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY, BASED OFF OF THE ZONING AND THE LOT SIZES, THAT WHEN WE SAY SUBDIVISION, IT'LL BE THREE LOTS. IF THIS WAS APPROVED, IT'D BE THREE LOTS ON THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY. BUT LIKE I SAID, AT MOST ON EACH OF THE INDIVIDUAL LOTS, AT MOST A SINGLE FAMILY HOME OR A DUPLEX WOULD BE ALLOWED ON THE LOT. SO I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY THAT. OKAY. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE? EXCUSE ME, IS THERE ANYONE ELSE IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WISHES TO SPEAK? HI, MY NAME IS LAURA. MAYBE M A Y B E. I'M A RESIDENT ON ELMHURST ROAD, 5953 ELMHURST ROAD, WHICH IS DIRECTLY INTO. I'M GOING TO HAVE YOU HOLD FOR ONE SECOND. THAT MICROPHONE IS NOT VERY LOUD. WE CAN'T HEAR. YOU CAN'T HEAR ME. THERE. NOW

[00:35:03]

I'M SAD EVERY TIME WE DRIVE AROUND IN HAMBURG, THERE'S ANOTHER DEVELOPMENT GOING UP, MORE TREES COMING DOWN, MORE GREEN SPACE BEING THROWN AWAY, AND IT DISTURBS ME GREATLY. WE LIKE SEEING THE DEER AND THE RABBITS. WE LIKE SEEING BUTTERFLIES AND BEES AND ALL THE THINGS THAT MAKE THE WORLD GO ROUND. I'M CONCERNED ABOUT OUR WATER, ESPECIALLY BECAUSE WE'RE IN A WATERSHED AREA AND WE DO HAVE UNDERGROUND SPRINGS, AND THERE'S GOING TO BE DISTURBANCE OF THOSE IN THIS AREA. I'M ALSO CONCERNED ABOUT OUR SEWAGE SYSTEM AND THE CONTINUAL ADDITION OF MORE AND MORE PEOPLE THAT ARE GOING TO BE STRESSING OUR OUR SEWAGE SYSTEM AND STORM DRAIN OFF. WE ALREADY HAVE SOME MILD FLOODING, AND I FEAR THAT THIS MAY IMPACT THAT FURTHER FOR US, THAT OUR OUR DOWNSTREAM FROM THIS AREA, THIS PROPERTY IS ELEVATED FROM US. I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH, BUT THERE IS A SLOPE FROM THIS PROPERTY ALL THE WAY DOWN. AND OUR ENTIRE STREET, IN FACT, IS DOWNWARD SLOPING. SO I WANT TO OPPOSE. THIS PROGRESSION OF THE DESTRUCTION IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE? GOOD EVENING. CAN EVERYBODY HEAR ME? YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO HOLD THE MIC REALLY CLOSE. THERE YOU GO. THAT'S MUCH BETTER. OKAY. MY NAME IS KELLY. MAYBE M A Y B E. WE'VE GOTTEN A NOTICE ABOUT THIS PROPOSED. SUBDIVISION, AND WE'VE JUST NOTED SOME OF THE THE BUILDINGS THAT HAVE BEEN GOING ON JUST RECENTLY THROUGHOUT HAMBURG, WHICH IS THE RILEY BROOK APARTMENTS. YOU HAVE THE VALLEY, THE VILLAGE AT CEDAR, CEDAR VALLEY, BRIARCLIFF, CLIFTON HEIGHTS. THESE ARE JUST SOME. OH, YEAH, JUNIPER APARTMENTS. THESE ARE JUST SOME OF THE THINGS THAT I MEAN, YOU'RE TALKING ONE AND TWO BEDROOM, THREE BEDROOM APARTMENTS, SINGLE FAMILY HOME AND. WE SEEM TO BE DIRECTED TOWARDS SOMETHING THAT ALMA ITSELF DOESN'T WANT. THEY PUT A MORATORIUM ON BUILDINGS OF DUPLEXES AND HIGHER. I MEAN, WITH MR. COBURN BEING THE BUILDING INSPECTOR FOR THE TOWN OF ALMA. WE'RE GETTING BASICALLY SOMETHING THAT ALMA ITSELF DOESN'T WANT. I MEAN, THEY'RE WORRIED ABOUT THEIR INFRASTRUCTURE, THEIR WATER, THEIR SEWER, THEIR ROADS, PUBLIC SAFETY FOR EVERYBODY ELSE. I KNOW IT'S BEEN BROUGHT UP BEFORE ABOUT A POSSIBLE MORATORIUM IN HAMBURG. IT SEEMS KIND OF SENSIBLE BECAUSE EVERYBODY'S MOVING AWAY FROM THE CITY TO GET A MORE RURAL ASPECT OF LIFE AND BE ABLE TO RELAX AND ENJOY YOUR HOMES. I MEAN, IF A NEIGHBORING TOWN DOESN'T WANT SOMETHING LIKE THIS GOING IN FOR THEIR CITIZENSHIPS, SAFETY AND BEST INTEREST, I KIND OF THINK IT'S UP TO YOU GUYS TO PLANNING BOARD THAT SHOULD THINK ABOUT EVERYBODY IN THIS AREA WITH THE SAME ASPECT. I MEAN, YOU'RE YOU'RE TALKING STRAINS ON POLICE FORCE, MORE TRAFFIC, MORE POLLUTION, YOU MEAN. THERE'S A LOT I WANT TO SAY, BUT I CAN'T SAY. WELL, YOU HAVE

[00:40:03]

AND I ALSO HAVE CONCERN WITH THE ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES THAT WOULD COME WITH DISTURBING ALL THIS STUFF THAT'S BURIED UNDERGROUND. THEY'RE GOING TO DO IT. I THINK THEY DO BETTER.

DO SOME SOIL SAMPLES, BETTER REMOVE ALL THAT STUFF, BETTER DO IT PROPERLY AND THE TOWN SHOULD BE INVOLVED WITH IT. SO I DON'T THINK JUST STANDING OR SAYING, OH, GO AHEAD AND PUT THREE HOUSES IN THERE AND EVERYBODY'S GOING TO HAVE TO LIVE WITH IT. THAT'S NOT ACCEPTABLE. WATER COMING THROUGH MY YARD. I GOT A PROBLEM WITH ALREADY THAT SHOULD BE FIXED JUST FROM WHAT'S BEEN DONE, I'M SURE, WITHOUT PERMIT. SO TRYING TO PUSH MORE WATER THROUGH OUR YARDS AND ANYWHERE ACROSS HAZELWOOD I THINK IS WRONG. SO THAT'S WHERE I'M AT WITH IT. I'M OPPOSED TO IT. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WISHES TO SPEAK? COME ON DOWN. OKAY, OKAY. I'VE GOT A COLD, SO YOU HAVE TO BEAR WITH ME, OKAY? AND I WASN'T GOING TO TALK, BUT I LIVE ON ROSEWOOD TERRACE, AND I WANT TO CLARIFY SOMETHING. YOU SAID. NO APARTMENT COMPLEX, ONE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES OR DUPLEX, OKAY. I LIVE ON A ROAD ON A LOT. THAT'S 300 FROM ROSEWOOD TO LAKEVIEW TERRACE. MA'AM, BEFORE YOU START, YOU DIDN'T GIVE US YOUR NAME. OH, I'M SORRY, KAREN. PATCH. PATSY. OKAY. AND I LIVE ON A LOT. THAT'S FROM ROSEWOOD TERRACE TO LAKEVIEW TERRACE. AND I'M LOOKING AT YOUR LOT SIZES ON YOUR THING THERE. AND YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT A DUPLEX OR A SINGLE FAMILY HOME.

UNBELIEVABLE. I MEAN, THAT IS A LARGE. WHAT KIND OF HOUSE IS GOING ON? OR WHAT KIND OF SINGLE FAMILY HOME IS GOING ON A LOT THAT THAT'S BIG, THAT BIG BECAUSE I'VE GOT IT'S 300FT BY 90. THAT'S PLENTY ROOM. AND I TOO HAVE HAD PROBLEMS WITH THE RAIN COMING FROM THE TOP OF THE HILL. I HAD TO PUT A FRENCH DRAIN IN BECAUSE THE RAIN WAS GOING. ANY RAIN WATER, ANY KIND OF WATER WAS GOING THROUGH MY GARAGE, THROUGH OVER MY YARD, UNDER MY HOUSE AND GOING DOWNHILL. AND SO I PUT A FRENCH DRAIN IN AND IT'S ALLEVIATED IT. BUT IT WAS OVER $7,000 AND IT HADN'T BEEN DONE BEFORE. AND APPARENTLY THAT PROBLEM HADN'T BEEN THERE BEFORE. I'VE ONLY LIVED THERE FOR TEN YEARS, AND I REALLY APPRECIATE THE NEIGHBORHOOD. I APPRECIATE MY NEIGHBORS, AND I TOO AM OPPOSED. SO I JUST WANTED TO PUT IT OUT THERE. OKAY. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. WE HOPE YOU FEEL. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE IN THE AUDIENCE? COME ON DOWN. MY NAME IS MARK HUMMEL AND I LIVE AT 5923 ELMHURST. CAN YOU SPELL YOUR LAST NAME, PLEASE? H U M M E L.

[00:45:03]

THERE'S PROBLEMS WITH DRAINAGE. I HAD ALL KINDS OF REASONS THAT I COULD NOT PURCHASE THAT PROPERTY AND BUILD OVER BY HAZELWOOD. ALSO, I JUST WANT TO MENTION THE SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF ACCIDENTS THAT WE HAVE ALREADY ON SHORE. HAMMOND ROUTE FIVE. THERE'S ALWAYS ALSO PRETTY MUCH ALL SUMMER LONG THERE'S ACCIDENTS AT THAT CORNER, SO I JUST FEEL LIKE INCREASING THE TRAFFIC IN THAT AREA IF THEY'RE TO COME DOWN. SAW HIM. WE'VE GOT MORE TRAFFIC TO. OKAY. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE IN THE AUDIENCE? YES. I AM ADAMANTLY OPPOSED TO THIS PROJECT. CAN WE HAVE YOUR NAME, PLEASE? KW I TK OH W SKY, MY WIFE WAS THE FIRST SPEAKER AND SHE MENTIONED THE PETITION. PETITION WHICH SHE HANDED TO YOU. I BELIEVE THERE WAS ABOUT 30 NAMES ON THAT PETITION. I CAN ASSURE YOU THERE WILL PROBABLY BE CLOSER TO 200. IF WE HAD MORE TIME TO GO OUT AND SOLICIT ALL THESE PEOPLE. WE'VE TALKED TO A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO WANTED TO SIGN. WE JUST DIDN'T GET TO THEM IN TIME. I THOUGHT THAT THAT WAS WORTH ADDING TO WHAT MY WIFE HAD HAD TO SAY. OKAY, SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE IN THE AUDIENCE? JOSH, CAN YOU JUST CLARIFY THE ONE QUESTION THAT WE HAD ABOUT THE ENTRANCES? TWO ENTRANCES ARE GOING TO BE ON? DO YOU WANT THE ENGINEER TO ANSWER THE QUESTION? I JUST WANT TO I BEFORE HE GETS INTO IT, I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY THAT AND I WANT TO OPEN IT UP TO THE BOARD IF THEY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT, ANSWER THE QUESTION ABOUT ENTRANCES WHERE THEY'RE GOING TO COME FROM. I DEFER TO THE ENGINEER WHO DESIGNED IT.

SO WHAT ARE THE TWO PLACES WHERE WHERE ARE THE WHAT ARE THE ENTRANCES? THE THE RESIDENT ASKED WHAT THE ENTRANCES WERE FOR THESE THREE DEVELOPMENTS. SO AS I STATED EARLIER, TWO OF THE LOTS WILL FRONT ON HAZELWOOD AND ONE LOT WILL FRONT ON LAKESHORE. WE HAVE NOT DONE ANY OF THE DESIGN WITH LOTS. THIS IS JUST A SUBDIVISION. CURRENTLY. ARE YOU MAKING THAT BIGGER? IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE. I'M JUST TRYING TO FIND THE THE PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR THE SPLIT. OKAY. SO ON THE SCREEN RIGHT NOW IT SHOWS FOR THE GENTLEMAN THAT HAD THE QUESTION, TWO OF THEM ARE GOING TO GO ON TO HAZELWOOD. AND ONE OF THE ENTRANCE IS GOING TO BE ON LAKESHORE ROAD. THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WISHES TO MAKE COMMENT ON THE ON THE. IN FRONT? ISN'T ANYONE ELSE IN FRONT OF WHAT WANT TO COME IN FRONT OF

[00:50:05]

WE HAVE RESIDENTS SAYING THAT THEY HAVE ADDITIONAL PEOPLE THAT WANT TO COMMENT ON THIS CASE. HOW DOES THE BOARD FEEL ABOUT THAT? MEMBER MCCORMICK IF YOU LEAVE IT OPEN, IT SHOULD BE THROUGH THE NEXT MEETING RATHER THAN JUST ONE WEEK. WELL, I'M OKAY TO THE NEXT MEETING. BOARD MEMBERS. ANYBODY ELSE WOULD AGREE? I'M OKAY WITH IT. OKAY, SO TO THE PEOPLE IN THE BACK THAT SPOKE ABOUT THE FACT THAT THEY HAVE MORE PEOPLE THAT WANT TO COMMENT ON THIS. CASE, I WANT TO MAKE IT VERY CLEAR WE WANT IT OPEN. THIS IS THE REASON WHY WE HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING SO PEOPLE CAN MAKE THEIR COMMENTS. YOU CAN WRITE TO TO JOSH, YOU CAN SEND YOUR EMAIL TO JOSH AND HE'S ON THE WEBSITE AT THE TOWN OF HAMBURG WEBSITE UNDER THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. AND HAVE THOSE PEOPLE THAT YOU SPOKE OF SEND AN EMAIL TO JOSH. OKAY. ONE THING ABOUT THE PLANNING BOARD, AND IF YOU HEARD WHAT I READ EARLIER, THIS IS WHY WE PUT A THREE MINUTE TIME LIMIT IS SO WE CAN HEAR EVERY EVERYONE. IF THERE ARE MORE PEOPLE THAT WANT TO SAY SOMETHING, I ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO WRITE LETTERS TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT WHEN IT COMES TO SOMETHING LIKE THIS. SO THIS WILL BE OPEN UNTIL THE NEXT MEETING, WHICH IS NOVEMBER 5TH. NOVEMBER 5TH. YEP. SO IT HAS TO BE IN BEFORE THE FRIDAY BEFORE. CORRECT. SO THAT IS.

THESE LETTERS HAVE TO BE HALLOWEEN OCTOBER 31ST ON HALLOWEEN. SO TRICK OR TREAT.

SO ANYONE THAT'S WISHING TO MAKE A COMMENT ON THIS CASE OKAY. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS YOU CAN ASK AT THE END OF THE MEETING, THE EMAIL OR COMMENTS HAVE TO BE SENT TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. JOSH ROGERS BY HALLOWEEN. OKAY, THEY CAN'T COME IN THE DAY OF THE MEETING BECAUSE THE REASON WHY IS IT GOES TO JOSH. IT COMES TO THE BOARD. SO WE ALL HAVE TIME TO REVIEW IT, AND IT GOES TO THE APPLICANT. AND THE APPLICANT NEEDS TIME TO TO ADDRESS THOSE CONCERNS. OKAY. EVERYBODY'S GOT I GOT SEE POSITIVE HEADS IN THE BACK. SO IF THERE'S ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS THEN LET US KNOW OKAY. SO WE'RE LEAVING THE THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN.

MEMBER MCCORMICK JUST TO CLARIFY, IN ORDER FOR US TO HAVE REVIEWED IT AND BE PREPARED WITH IT AT THAT MEETING, THAT'S THE CASE. BUT WHETHER OR NOT THERE'S A PUBLIC HEARING, PEOPLE CAN SEND US FEEDBACK ANY TIME ABOUT ANY MATTER IN FRONT OF US, WHETHER OR NOT THERE'S A HEARING. SO EVEN IF IT'S AFTER THAT DATE, YOU CAN CONTINUE TO TO SEND IT IN TO TO JOSH. THE ONLY THING IS THAT THEY MAY NOT GET SEEN. IF THEY DON'T GET IT, WE MAY NOT HAVE TIME TO REVIEW IT. SO AND IF THEY WANT IT, LISTEN TO. THAT'S WHY I'M SAYING BY THE 31ST YOU CAN WRITE US ANY TIME, ANYWHERE. BUT WHEN IT COMES TO THIS CASE, IF YOU WANT THESE CONCERNS ADDRESSED, THAT'S WHY I'M CLOSING IT ON THE 31ST. I'M NOT CLOSING IT, BUT I'M JUST SAYING IF YOU GET IT TO US BY THE 31ST, IT WILL BE GUARANTEED THAT WE WILL SEE THOSE COMMENTS IN THIS ENTIRE BOARD WILL GET TO REVIEW THEM, AND THEN THE APPLICANT GETS TO REVIEW THEM, AND THEN WE CAN HAVE A DISCUSSION AND AN INTELLIGENT DISCUSSION AND ADDRESS THE CONCERNS. OKAY. CHAIRMAN, I JUST CHAIRMAN, I JUST HAVE A QUESTION TO THE PEOPLE THAT SPOKE FOR THE PUBLIC. MEMBER JURY MEMBER, WHEN YOU STATED THAT THINGS HAVE BEEN BURIED ON THIS PROPERTY OVER THE YEARS, DID ANYBODY COMPLAIN TO THE CODE ENFORCEMENT DEPARTMENT AND FILE A COMPLAINT THAT THERE WAS ILLEGAL DUMPING GOING ON? I MEAN, THAT IF YOU LIVE THERE AND YOU SAW IT AND NOTHING WAS DONE, YOU HAVE NO ONE TO BLAME BUT YOURSELVES. AND I'M NOT BEING NEGATIVE BECAUSE WHERE I LIVE, THERE WAS AN INDUSTRIAL PROJECT BEFORE IT EVEN STARTED.

PEOPLE WERE DUMPING TIRES, GARBAGE, AND ME AND SEVERAL NEIGHBORS COMPLAINED TO CODE ENFORCEMENT AND THE POLICE DEPARTMENT ISSUED SUMMONSES. THEY OBSERVED THAT PROPERTY AND THE ISSUE WAS RESOLVED. AND THEN SIX MONTHS LATER, A DEVELOPER CAME IN AND BOUGHT THE PROPERTY AND HAS SINCE DEVELOPED IT IN THE PAST 25 YEARS. BUT THAT'S MY ONLY CONCERN. IF YOU SAW IT, YOU SHOULD HAVE DID SOMETHING THEN INSTEAD OF LATER. PLEASE, I DID ALL RIGHT. HANG ON, HANG ON YOU. FIRST OF ALL, IT'S NOT SUPPOSED TO BE A QUESTION AND ANSWER. SO

[00:55:05]

I WAS GOING TO BE. TAKING CARE OF THAT THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT. RIGHT CORNER IN THAT AREA. AND YOU HAVE NATIONAL PODS WITH THAT MUST BE UNDERGROUND GASOLINE. SO AGAIN, THOSE WILL GET ADDRESSED. THAT QUESTION WILL BE ADDRESSED BY THE APPLICANT. AND AGAIN I ENCOURAGE EVERYONE TO WRITE THEIR COMMENTS AND PUT IT IN WRITING. OKAY. DON'T TAKE THE BACK SEAT TO THIS. IF THIS IS SOMETHING THAT YOU'RE TRULY CONCERNED ABOUT I'M LEAVING THIS OPEN FOR THE RESIDENTS, OKAY? I HEAR PLENTY OF TIMES ABOUT WE DON'T GET TO VOICE OUR OPINION, NOT AT THE PLANNING BOARD. WE'RE LEAVING IT OPEN SO EVERYBODY CAN. AND AGAIN, I'M NOT GOING TO GO ANY FURTHER WITH THIS. IF YOU HAVE SOMETHING, YOU WILL. WE'LL WAIT.

OKAY. I CAN ANSWER IT LATER, BUT BECAUSE I HAVE TO MOVE ON. SO THE PUBLIC HEARING IS STILL OPEN. IF YOU HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS YOU NOTICE ON THE EMAIL OR TO CONTACT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND THEY CAN HELP YOU, OKAY. ALL RIGHT. MOVING FORWARD WE HAVE OUR NEXT.

[2. Public Hearing – 7:00 P.M., Corey Tyger – Requesting Site Plan Approval of a pole barn for storage purposes on a merged parcel at 6722 Southwestern Boulevard]

AND SAME AS THE PROJECT EARLIER THIS EVENING, SINCE IT'S GOING TO DEC IN CASE THEY HAVE A CONCERN, I WOULD RECOMMEND WE ALSO SEND IT TO THE SHPO AS WELL. YEP. ANY OTHER BOARD MEMBERS? MEMBER CLARK. IF THE ONE RESIDENT MADE THE COMMENT THAT SHE CONSIDERED BUILDING ON THAT AND WAS TOLD NO, IF IF THERE'S ANY OTHER DOCUMENTATION RELATING TO THAT, I'D BE INTERESTED IN SEEING THAT TO KIND OF GO ALONG WITH WITH AUGIE'S THING WITH THE

[01:00:03]

THAT'S THE ONLY THING YOU DIDN'T GET THOSE DONE, OKAY. ANYTHING ELSE? BOARD MEMBERS? DOES THAT ADDRESS EVERYBODY'S CONCERNS AT THIS POINT? THE APPLICANTS TAKEN NOTES. THEY KNOW WHAT WE'RE WHERE WE'RE GOING. OKAY? IT'S JUST THE CHAIR THAT'S A LITTLE CONFUSED TONIGHT. OKAY, SO EVERYBODY'S GOT THEIR HOMEWORK ASSIGNMENT. I'M LOOKING FOR PLENTY OF LETTERS SENT TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. I'LL BE CALLING JOSH AND ASKING HIM WHEN THEY'RE COMING IN. PUBLIC. HEARING IS STILL OPEN. ALL THE CORRESPONDENCE SHOULD BE IN BY THE 31ST OF OCTOBER. AND THEN WE ARE GOING TO REVISIT THIS CASE ON THE 5TH OF NOVEMBER.

OKAY. SO OUR NEXT CASE, IF IT'S OKAY WITH MEMBER MCCORMACK. JUST KIDDING. SURE. COREY.

TIGER NOW 6722 SOUTHWESTERN BOULEVARD. GOOD EVENING. THIS IS DOUG. PHASE KARINA WOULD DESIGN THE SITE. CIVIL ENGINEER. WE'RE HERE ASKING YOU WANT TO PICK UP THAT MIC JUST A LITTLE BIT BECAUSE WE CAN'T HEAR YOU. GOT IT. WE'RE. LET ME START OVER. NO, NO, YOU'RE ALL RIGHT.

WE'RE REQUESTING SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR THE DEVELOPMENT ON 6722 SOUTHWESTERN BOULEVARD.

WE'RE PROPOSING A 3900 SQUARE FOOT POLE BARN. THE SITE WAS REZONED TO AR. WE'RE ON THIS DEVELOPMENT. WE ARE NOT IMPACTING THE WETLANDS ON SITE. AND WE ARE KEEPING THE EXISTING ENTRANCES ON THE ROAD. AND JOSH DID DID THEY SEND YOU THE LANDSCAPING? YEP. SO WE ADDED SOME LANDSCAPING AS WELL TO THE TO THE SITE. THERE'S SOME TREE STORES IN FRONT OF THE SITE ALONG SOUTHWESTERN BOULEVARD, AS LONG AS SOME LANDSCAPING SHRUBS IN THE GREEN SPACE BETWEEN THE ENTRANCES. OKAY. ANYTHING ELSE YOU WANT TO ADD TO THAT? THAT'S ALL I HAD. OKAY.

I KNOW I HAD A PROBLEM. OKAY. SO WE'RE GOING TO OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING. MEMBER SHIMURA, WOULD YOU LIKE TO PLEASE READ THE NOTICE? SURE THING. LEGAL NOTICE. TOWN OF HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD SITE PLAN. APPROVAL NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE TOWN OF HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD WILL CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING ON A PROPOSAL FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A POLE BARN FOR STORAGE PURPOSES FOR A LANDSCAPE BUSINESS TO BE LOCATED AT 6722 SOUTHWESTERN BOULEVARD. THE PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD ON OCTOBER 15TH, 2025 AT 7:00 PM IN ROOM SEVEN A, SEVEN B OF HAMBURG TOWN HALL AND ONCE AGAIN, A PUBLIC HEARING IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE COMMUNITY TO SHARE INFORMATION ON HOW YOU ARE IMPACTED BY THE PROJECT. A THREE MINUTE RULE WILL APPLY. IT IS NOT A QUESTION AND ANSWER PERIOD. ALL STATEMENTS MADE

[01:05:05]

BUT THE ONLY CHANGE I NEED TO THE SITE PLAN IS REMOVAL OF THE WORD MILLINGS. OKAY, I THINK THAT'S BEEN DULY NOTED. I SEE A HEAD SHAKING. DO WE NEED TO PUT THAT IN THE RESOLUTION OR DO YOU THINK THAT'S I THINK SO. YOU THINK SO? YEAH. OKAY. DO YOU WANT TO ADD THAT. YEAH.

KAMI, DO YOU KNOW THE DATE OF YOUR ENGINEERING LETTER? TEN. TEN? AND THEN, CAMI, YOU SAID MILLINGS NEED TO BE REMOVED FROM THE SITE PLAN. SO MENTION OF THE WORD OR MENTION OF MILLS NEEDS TO BE REMOVED FROM THE SITE. PLAN. MILLING SHALL NOT BE PERMISSIBLE ON THE SITE PLAN.

IF AS FAR AS THE CONDITION GOES, IT JUST PARKING MUST BE STONE, NOT MILLINGS. OKAY, THERE YOU GO. OKAY. THE PARKING LOT. IT'S TECHNICALLY THE SURFACE OF THE WORLD, SO THE PARKING SURFACE PARKING SURFACE MUST BE STONE, NOT MILLINGS. PARKING LOT SURFACE. I THINK IT'S PROBABLY PARKING AND DRIVEWAY, RIGHT? YEAH, BUT TO BE COMPLETE, I WOULD SAY DRIVEWAY AND PARKING LOT SURFACE. MEMBERS. YOU DID SAY THAT THE DRIVEWAY IS CURRENTLY ASPHALT. YES. SO THE APRONS. SO THE THE AREA IMMEDIATELY OFF THE ROAD, THAT FIRST SECTION IS ASPHALT AND THE TOWN REQUIRES IT TO BE EITHER ASPHALT OR CONCRETE. SO THAT IS ACCEPTABLE OKAY, OKAY.

I JUST DON'T WANT THERE TO BE ANY CONFUSION THAT THE DRIVEWAY AND THAT THE APRON CONSIDERED PART OF THE DRIVEWAY COULD BE STONE AND NOT THE RIGHT AWAY, RIGHT? YES, YES. THE APRON IS THE THE PORTION IN THE RIGHT OF WAY. SO ARE WE GOOD? I THINK IF YOU JUST SAY IT'S CAN'T BE MILLINGS, I THINK WE SHOULD JUST SAY THAT MUST NOT BE MILLINGS. YEAH. HOW ABOUT THE USE OF MILLINGS ON THE PROJECT IS NOT PERMITTED. THERE YOU GO. OKAY. I THINK THAT'S WHERE WE

[01:10:02]

SHIMURA POLE BARN STORAGE PROJECT ZERO AND 6722 SOUTHWESTERN BOULEVARD. SITE PLAN APPROVAL RESOLUTION OCTOBER 15TH, 2025. WHEREAS THE TOWN OF HAMBURG RECEIVED A SITE PLAN APPLICATION FROM QUARRY TIGER REQUESTING SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR A POLE BARN STORAGE PROJECT, INCLUDING ALL PROPOSED SITE IMPROVEMENTS TO BE LOCATED ON A NEWLY MERGED 3.81 ACRE PARCEL OF VACANT LAND AT ZERO AND 6722 SOUTHWESTERN BOULEVARD, SBL NUMBER 194.00728, AND WHEREAS THE PROPOSED PROJECT SITE WAS THE SUBJECT OF A REZONING FROM R-1 TO AG PROCESS AND THE TOWN BOARD APPROVED THIS REZONING ON JUNE 2ND, 2025, SUBJECT TO THREE CONDITIONS. AND WHEREAS, A COORDINATED ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW FOR THE PROPOSED REZONING AND PROJECT WAS CONDUCTED BY THE TOWN BOARD IN CAPACITY AS THE LEAD AGENCY PURSUANT TO THE STATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY REVIEW ACT, SEQRA AND THE TOWN BOARD ISSUED A NEGATIVE DECLARATION ON JUNE 2ND, 2025, AND WHEREAS, THE TOWN OF HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD HAS REVIEWED THE SITE PLAN APPLICATION FOR THE PROJECT AT SEVERAL MEETINGS AND HELD THE REQUIRED PUBLIC HEARING ON OCTOBER 15TH, 2025. AND RECEIVED NO COMMENTS. FROM THE PUBLIC AND RECEIVED INPUT FROM THE TOWN DEPARTMENT'S TOWN ADVISORY COMMITTEES AND TOWN'S CONSULTANTS. AND WHEREAS, THE HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD HAS DETERMINED THAT THE PROJECT IS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE THREE CONDITIONS OF THE REZONING IMPOSED BY THE TOWN BOARD ON JUNE 2ND, 2025, AND THE APPLICABLE SECTION OF THE TOWN'S CODE. AND NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, THAT THE TOWN THAT THE HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD GRANTS CONDITIONAL SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR THE SITE PLAN DATED SEPTEMBER 18TH, 2025 WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS.

COMPLIANCE WITH THE THREE ZONING CONDITIONS IMPOSED BY THE TOWN BOARD ON JUNE 2ND, 2025. APPROVAL IS CONTINGENT UPON THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT LETTER DATED OCTOBER 10TH, 2025.

THE INSTALLATION OF SIDEWALKS IS NOT WARRANTED. THE LANDSCAPING PLAN, DATED SEPTEMBER SEPTEMBER 18TH, 2025 SHALL BE APPROVED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND THE USE OF MILLINGS IS NOT PERMITTED. IT'S BEEN MOVED. IS THERE A SECOND? AUGUST 2ND? IT'S BEEN MOVED BY MEMBER SHIMURA, SECOND BY MEMBER GERACI. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, I. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? NONE. SO THIS. YOU'RE ALL SET? THIS PART PASSES. OKAY. I JUST WANT TO MAKE A NOTE HERE. THAT CASE NUMBER FOR JOHN KALLMEYER AND CASE NUMBER SIX, JOHN BROCK'S. BOTH HAVE BEEN TABLED

[3. Marc Wittman – Requesting rezoning of property located at 4922 Oregon Ave from R-3 to C-2 ]

[01:15:07]

BACK AT THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY THERE. ANYONE ELSE? CHAIR. MEMBER MCCORMICK. SO THERE ARE RESIDENTIAL HOUSES ON THIS STREET. AND ONE OF THE CONCERNS THAT I HAVE HERE IS THERE'S YOUR PROPERTY. AND THEN THE ADJACENT PROPERTY, WHICH I KNEW ONE OF THE FORMER OWNERS

[01:20:01]

RYAN I'M SORRY. SORRY. WHERE WOULD THAT DRIVEWAY BE LOCATED? BECAUSE I DIDN'T SEEM TO SEE IT WHEN I WAS DOING. YOU CAN SEE IT RIGHT THERE. COMING UP, COMING UP OFF THE SOUTHWESTERN, THE DRIVEWAY TO THE EAST OF MY PROPERTY. THERE IS THAT THAT LITTLE BIT OF LAND IN BETWEEN THAT ROADWAY AND MY PROPERTY IS OWNED BY LOWE'S. DO YOU THINK YOU COULD JUST POINT TO IT JUST SO THAT THEY CAN? THERE'S A SIDEWALK THERE ON THE CURB. YEAH, IT'S ON A SIDEWALK RIGHT HERE. OKAY. RIGHT. KIND OF WHERE THE YELLOW LINE IS. YES. AND THEN THERE'S I ASSUME THAT IF BUYING PROPERTY WAS TO BE C2, THERE WOULD BE ACCESS FROM THE PLAZA, NOT FROM OREGON ROAD. I WOULD THINK YOU WOULD HAVE TO CUT THE CURB. THERE'S SIDEWALK THERE CURRENTLY. THERE IS. YEAH.

OKAY. THERE IS A CURB CUT THERE. FOR SOME REASON, I HAVE NO IDEA WHY I NEVER HAVE, BUT BUT YEAH, I WOULD ASSUME THEY WOULD WANT TRAFFIC FROM THE PLAZA TO COMING TO THAT. I WOULD ASSUME NOT FROM FORD ROAD. SO BUT THAT WOULD REQUIRE A CROSS ACCESS AGREEMENT BECAUSE THAT WOULD NOT BE FRONTAGE FOR THIS PARCEL. UNDERSTOOD. CHAIR, I HAVE A QUESTION. MEMBER. YES, MEMBER.

STEWART. JOSH, IF SOMEONE WANTS TO LIVE HERE AFTER THE SALE, CAN THEY DO IT BEING A NON-CONFORMING. IF IT'S BEING REZONED FROM R3 TO C2? YES, IT WOULD BE. OBVIOUSLY THE HOME WOULD BE A NON-CONFORMING USE, BUT THE HOUSE COULD STAY BECAUSE IT'S GRANDFATHERED.

IT'D BE GRANDFATHERED IN. THE QUESTION BEING WOULD BE IF OBVIOUSLY IF THE HOME IS TAKEN DOWN AND IT'S ZONED C2, OBVIOUSLY YOU CANNOT THEN BUILD ANOTHER RESIDENTIAL HOME ON THE PROPERTY. OKAY. SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I WANT TO ADD TO THIS IS THAT I WENT THROUGH AND READ THE MINUTES, ALONG WITH THE RESOLUTION FROM THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE PLANNING BOARD DISCUSSED AT LENGTH IN THEIR MEETING ABOUT THE BUFFER ZONE. AND WHAT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE IS THAT EVEN THE ATTORNEY FOR LOWE'S SAID THAT THEY WERE GOING TO DO A U. SHAPED U-SHAPE AROUND THE PROPOSED BUILDING. SO BASED ON THE DESCRIPTION OF A BUFFER ZONE JUST BEHIND THE

[01:25:04]

SO A U SHAPED GOES AROUND THE BACK OF THE BUILDING. BUT HOW FAR UP IS MY QUESTION? IT WOULD PROBABLY STOP AT THE MCCORMICK. IT WOULD PROBABLY STOP AT THAT STORMWATER POND, BECAUSE YOU WOULDN'T WANT TO HAVE THE STORMWATER FACILITIES IN A CONSERVATION EASEMENT TO PRECLUDE ACCESS AND AND MAINTENANCE. RIGHT. CAMMY'S NODDING. SO, CAMI, YOU DON'T THINK IT GOES ALL THE WAY UP TO 20 ON BOTH SIDES TO BECAUSE IT THE THING THAT I'M I'M SORRY, THE THING I'M CONFUSED ABOUT IS THE DISCUSSION, THE AT LENGTH DISCUSSION BY THE PREVIOUS PLANNING BOARD ABOUT THE BUFFERING FOR ALL THE NEIGHBORS. AND IT EVEN TALKS ABOUT BUFFERING FOR OREGON FOR AND FOR THE DIFFERENT. THE DIFFERENT COMPLEXES. MISSION HILLS, I THINK IS BACK. THERE IS ONE OF THEM. MEMBER MCCORMICK IS CORRECT THAT TYPICALLY A CONSERVATION AREA WOULD NOT INCLUDE THE STORMWATER FACILITIES BECAUSE THOSE ARE DRAINAGE FEATURES. THEY HAVE TO BE MAINTAINED AND CLEANED AND VEGETATION TRIMMED AND SO ON, WHICH IS CONTRARY TO A CONSERVATION EASEMENT WHERE IT'S KEPT IN NATURAL STATE AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE, WITH MAINTENANCE ONLY FOR DEAD TREES OR SOMETHING FALLEN OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. I DON'T HAVE THE MAPS EITHER, SO I CAN'T TELL YOU WHAT IT WAS. I CAN JUST SAY THAT IF IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT THIS MAP, THE EASEMENT WOULD CERTAINLY NOT INCLUDE THE STORMWATER PUMP. SO YOU THINK IT STOPS JUST BEFORE THE STORMWATER POND GOES AROUND IT IN SOME WAY? I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH SPACE THERE IS ON THE BACKSIDE OF THAT POND TOWARDS THE PROPERTY LINE. IT CAN BE CARVED OUT IN, IN ANY WAY THAT THE THE BOARD AT THE TIME SAW FIT? YEAH, IT DOESN'T DEFINE IT IN THE MINUTES. THAT'S THE PROBLEM. CHAIR. IF I MIGHT OFFER LIKELY ON THE SITE PLAN OR THE PLAT MAP OR WHATEVER. DO WE HAVE ACCESS TO THAT SITE PLAN? YEAH, I WOULD HAVE TO DO SOME DIGGING. I WAS GONNA SAY TO MAKE IT EASIER FOR YOU. THE LOWS, I THINK, PREDATES EVEN MEMBER CLARK ON THE BOARD, BUT THE KFC AND THE JIFFY LUBE WERE BOTH AFTER I GOT ONTO THIS BOARD, SO THEY MAY HAVE SOME OF THE OVERALL SITE PLAN IN THE KFC OR THE JIFFY LUBE FILES. I MEAN, I HAVE THE SITE PLAN OF THE LOWS. I WOULD JUST LITERALLY HAVE TO GO DIG IN THE FOLDER FOR IT, BUT I HAVE IT. IT'S A IT'S ACCESSIBLE SO I CAN SHARE IT WITH THE BOARD. YEAH, I THINK WE WOULD NEED TO SEE THAT. YOU DON'T THINK IT SHOWS THE JIFFY LUBE IN THE KFC ONES? I DON'T THINK SHOWS BEHIND THE BUILDING OF LOWS. OKAY. RIGHT.

SO BUT MY QUESTION IS WHEN IT SAYS YOU DO YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT I'M SAYING. IS THAT A LEGITIMATE. YEAH. WE SHOULD SEE THE MAP FROM WHEN THEY DID IT. SO BECAUSE IT'LL BE IDENTIFIED ON THE SITE PLAN, WHICH IS HOW WE WOULD USUALLY DO IT BECAUSE IT'S EASIER FOR CODE ENFORCEMENT AND BUILDINGS AND GROUNDS TO SEE THE MAP THAN READ A DESCRIPTION AND TRY AND FIGURE OUT WHERE IT IS, SO THE MAP WILL HAVE IT MORE CLEARLY THAN THE MINUTES. THAT'S WHY I'M I'M RIGHT. RIGHT, RIGHT. USUALLY IN A DIFFERENT COLOR. NOW I NOW I REMEMBER. YEAH. YES.

SO THAT'S WHAT'S HOLDING ME BACK IS BECAUSE IF THIS CONSERVATION EASEMENT DOES INCLUDE THE THE STUFF UP FRONT, THEN THAT'S A DIFFERENT CONVERSATION. THEN YOU WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO PUT THE DRIVEWAY THE WAY HE'S DESCRIBING IT. RIGHT. IF IT WAS TO GO THAT WAY I CAN GRAB THE LOWS SITE PLAN. YOU WOULD JUST HAVE TO TABLE HIM AND MOVE ON TO SOMEBODY ELSE.

AND THEN I THINK WE COULD DO THAT. WHY DON'T WE? WHY DON'T WE DO THAT AND WE CAN HAVE HIM STEP ASIDE FOR A LITTLE BIT IF YOU WANT TO GO GRAB THAT. AND THEN WE CAN GET THIS RESOLVED THIS EVENING AS OPPOSED TO TABLING IT FURTHER. IT'S NOT IN THE BASEMENT OR ANYTHING. OH WAIT, WE ARE IN THE BASEMENT, SO YOU DON'T HAVE TO GO FAR. OKAY. OH. DO YOU HAVE A MOTION TO TABLE? I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO TABLE. CAN YOU SAY IT LOUDER. AND I MAKE A MOTION TO TABLE IS THERE'S BEEN A MOTION TO TABLE. I GOTTA DO THE CASE. HANG ON. MOTION TO TABLE. MATT WHITMAN UNTIL WE GET THE LOWS. MAP BACK. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, I, I, I SECOND, IS THERE A SECOND?

[01:30:09]

[5. RMV Holdings LLC – Requesting Site Plan Approval of a proposal to construct six (6) contractor shop buildings on a parcel of land previously subdivided at 4021 Jeffrey Blvd]

WE'RE HERE REQUESTING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR YOUR NEXT MEETING ON NOVEMBER 5TH. RELATIVE TO THE PROPERTY, WE'VE BEEN DISCUSSING FOR THE BETTER PART OF THE YEAR. IT'S AS INDICATED ON THE SUBMISSION, AND I IMAGINE ON THIS ON THIS BOARD, AND I IMAGINE IN A MOMENT OR TWO ON THE ON THE SCREEN, WE'RE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. WE DO LOOK FORWARD TO HOPEFULLY A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE FIFTH. AND WITH A LITTLE LUCK, WE'D BE WITH THE IDEA ON THE 12TH OF NOVEMBER. OKAY. PLANNING DEPARTMENT, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD TO RMV HOLDINGS? WHAT I WILL ADD IS, IF YOU GUYS RECALL. I BROUGHT TO YOU SOME INDUSTRIAL REZONINGS BY JEFFREY BOULEVARD AND BY WEST AVENUE, AND I JUST WANTED TO GIVE THE PLANNING BOARD AN UPDATE OF WHERE THAT PROPOSED REZONING IS BECAUSE IT AFFECTS THIS PROPERTY. IT CAME BEFORE THE TOWN BOARD FOR A PUBLIC HEARING IN EARLY SEPTEMBER. THERE WASN'T MUCH OPPOSITION FROM THE PUBLIC, AND I'M FILING RESOLUTIONS FOR POTENTIAL APPROVAL FOR THE OCTOBER 20TH TOWN BOARD MEETING. SO CONCURRENTLY, THE PARCEL IN QUESTION WILL BE ZONED ALL M2.

BECAUSE IF YOU RECALL, WE ARE REMOVING THE M1 DISTRICT FROM THE ZONING CODE. I KNOW WE TALKED ABOUT THE LI AND GI DISTRICTS JUST SO THAT EVERYONE'S AWARE WE DROPPED THOSE ACRONYMS AND WE'RE JUST GOING TO KEEP IT M2 AND M3. BUT IF YOU RECALL, THIS USED TO STILL ALLOWED AN M2. NONE OF THE SETBACKS HAVE CHANGED. WE'VE OBVIOUSLY ADDED USES TO M2, BUT I JUST WANTED TO PROVIDE THE PLANNING BOARD AN UPDATE THAT THIS PARCEL, WHICH IS AFFECTED BY THAT REZONING, IT WILL POTENTIALLY BE ALL M2 AS OF MONDAY AT THE EARLIEST.

OTHER THAN THAT, NO OTHER COMMENTS UNLESS THIS BOARD HAS COMMENTS, YOU CAN SCHEDULE A PUBLIC HEARING AND GO FOR IT. ENGINEERING. DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD? ENGINEERING HAS NO CONCERNS ON THE SITE PLAN AS IT STANDS. SHOULD IT MOVE FORWARD, IT WILL HAVE A FULL ENGINEERING REVIEW INCLUDING GRADING, DRAINAGE AND IT WILL REQUIRE A STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN BECAUSE I ASSUME THIS IS GREATER THAN AN ACRE, SO SHOULD IT MOVE FORWARD? WE'LL DO A FULL REVIEW. BUT NOTHING JUMPED OUT AT ME AS BEING AN ISSUE AT THIS TIME. OKAY, BOARD, WE NEED TO DECIDE WHETHER WE WANT TO CONDUCT A COORDINATED REVIEW.

ON THIS PROJECT. YEAH, MY RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE I DON'T THINK ONE IS WARRANTED. THE ONLY APPROVAL IS SITE PLAN APPROVAL FROM THE PLANNING BOARD. JEFFREY BOULEVARD IS A TOWN ROAD. THERE ARE NO STATE, REALLY NO STATE AGENCY ACTIONS FOR THIS PARCEL. SO MY RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE NO, BUT IT'S YOUR DECISION TO MAKE. OKAY. SO I'M GOING TO OPEN IT UP TO THE BOARD FOR DISCUSSION. MEMBER CLARK NO, REALLY. MEMBER MCCORMICK SO I BELIEVE ONE OF THE ASKS ON THIS PROPERTY WAS TO DO A A WETLAND EVALUATION, WHICH IT LOOKS LIKE THEY'VE DONE. I GUESS FROM THAT TO THAT END, BECAUSE THAT WAS CLEARED UP, I GUESS UNCAUGHT, NO COORDINATED REVIEW I'D BE OKAY WITH. WOULD BE A COORDINATED REVIEW. I'D BE OKAY WITH AN

[01:35:01]

IS IS EVERYBODY AT THE TABLE IN FAVOR OF AN UNCOORDINATED REVIEW? YES. YES OKAY. YES. I GOT THEM ALL TALKING INTO THEIR MIC. I'M SO EXCITED. OKAY. SO THAT'S RESOLVED. OKAY. NOW DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS THAT WE WANT TO ADDRESS TO THE APPLICANT BEFORE WE SCHEDULE THE PUBLIC HEARING? MEMBER SHIMURA, DO YOU HAVE ANY ELEVATIONS OF YOUR BUILDINGS TO SHOW US MATERIALITY AND SO FORTH. SO THAT WOULD BE LOOKING AT THE FRONT SIDE, RIGHT. THOSE ARE JUST SITE PLANS RIGHT HERE. NOT AT THIS TIME. IS THAT SOMETHING WE CAN GET? WELL, WE'LL CERTAINLY LOOK INTO THAT AND CONSIDER IT. AND STRONG POSSIBILITY OKAY. MEMBER SHIMURA, ARE YOU SUGGESTING OR ASKING BECAUSE THIS IS A DIFFERENT SUGGEST OKAY. ASKING OKAY. OF THE BUILDINGS TO UNDERSTAND HOW WHAT THE MATERIALITY IS OF THE BUILDINGS, ANY PROPOSED ROOF LINES, JUST TO GET AN IDEA OF WHAT YOU GUYS ARE PROPOSING TO BUILD? SEE, I, I BELIEVE THE BOARD IS ASKING FOR ELEVATIONS FOR THE PROJECT.

OKAY. ANYONE ELSE? MEMBER MCCORMICK I HAVE SOME CONCERNS ABOUT THE SCREENING AT THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY. THIS LAYOUT FILLS UP THE FULL PROPERTY AND THIS DOES A BUT ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL USERS AT THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY. AND SO I KNOW THAT THERE ARE A COUPLE OF INDIVIDUAL TREES PLACED, BUT I THINK THAT YOU NEED MORE OF A VEGETATED BUFFER AS WELL AS POTENTIALLY DEPENDING ON THE NEIGHBORS THERE, SOME SORT OF FENCE OR OTHER MECHANISM THAT WE SHOULD BE LOOKING AT TO BETTER SCREEN BETWEEN THOSE TWO DIFFERENT TYPES OF USES THAT ARE HAPPENING THERE. THANK YOU. OKAY. ANYTHING ELSE? MEMBER CLARK I'D SAY A FENCE. I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S A WHOLE LOT OF SPACE FOR ANYTHING OTHER THAN THAT. I MEAN, DON'T TAKE OUT THE TREES YOU HAVE. WELL, I'M JUST WONDERING IF THEY HAVE TOO MUCH PACKED INTO THE SITE TO MAKE IT FIT THE SITE. BECAUSE THEY'VE USED BASICALLY EVERYTHING IS EITHER PARKING LOT BUILDING OR STORMWATER POND. BUT AN INDUSTRIAL THEY'RE ALLOWED. YEAH, BUT THEY ARE ABUTTING A RESIDENTIAL. MEMBER. I WOULD INSTEAD OF THE BECAUSE ALREADY THINKING OF FLOW OF WILDLIFE AND SO FORTH JUST DENSIFYING THE THE LANDSCAPING TO CREATE A I MEAN ARE YOU ABLE TO I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS KOSHER BUT HAVE A SMALLER STORMWATER RETENTION AREA TO THEN INCREASE THE AMOUNT OF LANDSCAPING TO INCREASE THE BUFFER, WE'RE GOING TO NEED MOST OF THAT. MOST OF THAT. YEAH, THAT WAS PRETTY STRICT. MAYBE NOT LENIENT. IT'S GOOD INCREASING THE DENSITY ON THE EAST SIDE IS SOMETHING THAT WE CAN CONSIDER. IT LOOKS LIKE THEY'RE SPACING BETWEEN THE BUILDINGS AS WELL. LIKE YOU HAVE A WHOLE BUNCH OF SMALL BUILDINGS. IS IT POSSIBLE TO SQUISH THE BUILDING SO THAT THEY ARE ALL CONTIGUOUS ON EACH SIDE, AND THEN MAYBE CUT THE CROSS ACCESS DRIVEWAY TO MAKE MORE SPACE TO PUT BUFFERING IN BETWEEN THERE AND THE ADJACENT PROPERTY. I'LL LOOK AT THAT, BECAUSE WHAT YOU'VE GOT IS LIKE THESE BUILDINGS WITH A COUPLE OF LITTLE TREES IN BETWEEN THEM, RATHER THAN MAXIMIZING THE BUFFER BETWEEN I, I RECOGNIZE THIS IS AN INDUSTRIAL ZONE, BUT YOU ARE ABUTTING RESIDENTIAL AND I THINK THAT WARRANTS UNIQUE CONSIDERATIONS TO TRY AND MINIMIZE THAT. SO I THINK THAT TARGETED LANDSCAPING THAT'S CONCENTRATED IN CONSOLIDATING SOME OF THAT TO MAXIMIZE THE GREEN SPACE WOULD BE A POTENTIALLY A BETTER WAY TO ALLOW FOR THOSE MITIGATIONS.

NOTED. ANYTHING ELSE? MEMBER CLARK. THE PARKING SPACE USUALLY. HOW WIDE ARE THESE PARKING SPACES? A LITTLE WIDER THAN MINIMUM, BECAUSE IF YOU BECAUSE YOU HAVE TWO PARKING SPACES IN BETWEEN THE BUILDINGS, IF YOU SWITCH TO JUST ONE, YOU'RE GOING TO ADD WHAT, 15FT? IN THE BACK SPACE BETWEEN THE BUILDINGS? AND CAN YOU JUST MAKE ONE LONG, SKINNY BUILDING? SO I BELIEVE THE SPACING BETWEEN THE BUILDINGS IS CURRENTLY AT AT THE MINIMUM FOR

[01:40:01]

SO WE'LL SEE YOU ON THE 5TH OF NOVEMBER OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU CHAIR. IF THEY COME BACK AND ARE ABLE TO DO SOME SORT OF SUBSTANTIVE ADJUSTMENT, WE MAY WANT TO KEEP THE HEARING JUST OPEN. ONE ADDITIONAL MEETING TO ALLOW PEOPLE TO COMMENT IF THERE'S ANY SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES.

I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT WOULD SUBSTANTIALLY CHANGE YOUR OVERALL REVIEW. BUT IN CASE YOU DON'T HAVE A LOT OF WELL, YOU DO HAVE ADDITIONAL NEIGHBORS THAT'LL GET NOTIFIED, BUT JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THE PEOPLE HAVE THAT OPPORTUNITY TO SEE THE LANDSCAPING. OKAY. SHE JUST SCHEDULED IT FOR THE FIFTH, RIGHT. WE WE DO UNDERSTAND AND WE DON'T WANT TO BELABOR THE POINT, BUT TIMING IS HAS BEEN A CHALLENGE FOR US. AND WE DO HOPE TO BE AT THE HAMBURG IDA ON THE 12TH, ONE WEEK AFTER NEXT MEETING. THERE'S A SEASONALITY TO IT BEING IN THE CONSTRUCTION BUSINESS AND WISHING TO DO THE CONSTRUCTION HERE FOR SCHEDULING PURPOSES AND FOR EFFICIENCY PURPOSES, BUT ALSO TO GET THE FOLKS IN THEIR BUILDINGS. BUT WE UNDERSTAND AND APPRECIATE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. WE'LL DO OUR BEST TO ADDRESS WHAT YOU'VE MENTIONED. AGAIN, WE JUST MENTIONED THERE ARE SOME TOPOGRAPHY REASONS FROM OUR POINT OF VIEW, LONGER BUILDINGS IS SOMETHING WE WE WOULD NOT SHY AWAY FROM AT ALL THUS FAR.

ENGINEERING IS KIND OF DICTATED BUILDINGS OF THIS LENGTH, BUT WE'LL DO OUR BEST TO ADDRESS AND YOU'LL KNOW. I MEAN, WE'LL COME BACK WITH OUR BEST. OKAY. ONE ADDITIONAL COMMENT.

ENGINEERING. JUST ONE COMMENT. LOOKING AT YOUR LANDSCAPE PLAN, BE SURE THAT YOU HAVE A WAY TO ACCESS THAT POND IN THE BACK FOR MAINTENANCE. THAT IS NOT GOING TO BE ALL BLOCKED BY LANDSCAPING. YES. THANK YOU. THANK YOU ALL. OKAY. WE'LL SEE YOU BACK ON THE FIFTH. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANKS. THANK YOU. OKAY SO WE'RE GOING TO CALL CASE BACK. CASE NUMBER THREE BACK UP MARK WHITMAN. JOSH WHAT DID YOU FIND. SO I PULLED THE WHOLE FOLDER.

THERE'S A SITE PLAN. THERE'S THE PRELIMINARY PLAT. THERE'S SOME ELEVATIONS. THERE IS. LIKE A PLANTING DETAIL. BUT I THINK THE THE SITE PLAN PROBABLY WOULD BE THE MOST HELPFUL FOR THE BOARD. AND I CAN JUST GIVE IT TO THE BOARD AND HAVE YOU TAKE A LOOK AT IT. DO I HAVE TO MAKE A MOTION TO REOPEN THE CASE? NO, I JUST CALLED IT BACK UP. NO, TAKE A MOTION TO TAKE IT OFF THE CASE. WE MADE IT TO TAKE IT OFF THE TABLE. NO, NO, WE PUT IT ON THE TABLE. WE NEED TO NOW REMOVE IT FROM THE TABLE. RIGHT? RIGHT. I MAKE A MOTION TO. IS IT REMOVE OR UNSTABLE? EITHER TO UNSTABLE. MARK WHITMAN 4922 OREGON AVE. IT'S BEEN MOVED. IS THERE A SECOND I SECOND IT IT'S BEEN MOVED IN SECOND. OKAY. WE'RE BACK. WE'RE BACK UP. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? MOTION MADE. SO WHAT DO YOU HAVE? SO I HAVE THE ACTUAL THE SITE PLAN THAT'S SIGNED. AND THEN I ALSO HAVE SOME 11 BY 17 OF THAT SAME SITE PLAN, BUT ALSO PLANTING DETAILS AND A LANDSCAPING PLAN OVERLAID ON THE SITE PLAN SO I CAN PASS THOSE AROUND. SO IS THE CONSERVATION EASEMENT THE 16 ACRES, IS IT MARKED ON THAT SITE PLAN? KAMI AND JOE GOGAN ARE TAKING A LOOK RIGHT NOW OKAY. WHERE'S THE. IS THIS. YEAH I'M SEEING. THIS LINE.

[01:45:03]

ATTORNEY GOGAN, DO YOU HAVE ANY CLARIFICATION FOR US ON ON THE SITE PLAN MAP? IT APPEARS THAT THE ON THIS SITE PLAN MAP, IT APPEARS THAT THE PROPOSED CONSERVATION AREA IN PARENTHESES AREA IS NOT TO BE DISTURBED. EXTENDS ALL THE WAY TO SOUTHWESTERN BOULEVARD. THAT WAS ON THAT WAS ON THE PROPOSED DOCUMENT. SO THE BOTH SIDES OF THE BUILDING, WELL, AT LEAST ON THE AT LEAST ON THE SOUTHWEST SIDE OF IT, WHICH IS ADJACENT TO OREGON. OKAY. SO THE OTHER CURB CUT IS BECAUSE IT'S ACCESSING THAT STORMWATER AREA. IF YOU GUYS ARE GOING TO DISCUSS, YOU GOTTA HAVE YOUR MICROPHONES. THERE WAS A COMMENT ABOUT A CURB CUT. AND JOSH, DO YOU HAVE THE GIS MAP UP? YEAH. AND KIM, IF YOU SEE THIS, THAT OTHER RETENTION POND.

YEAH, THAT OTHER RETENTION POND IS THERE. AND SO IF THERE'S A CURB CUT THERE, IT'S PROBABLY TO ACCESS THE RETENTION POND. THAT MAKES SENSE. OKAY. SO BOARD MEMBERS DOES THAT CLARIFY.

SO IT'S THE IT'S THE DASH AND THE LONG DASH AND THREE SHORT DASHES. I THINK THAT WE SHOULD TAKE THAT AND PASS IT AROUND TO THE BOARD MEMBERS SO EVERYBODY CAN TAKE A LOOK. THANK YOU.

WOULD YOU. OKAY. SUBDIVISION FOR THE CHANGE. YEAH. INTERESTING. IT COMES AROUND AND I STILL WANT IT. YEAH. THERE'S TWO PARTS. HERE BECAUSE IT CAN'T. FURTHER SUBDIVIDE IT.

THEY'RE JUST MAKING DEVELOPMENT FURTHER SUBDIVIDED. YEAH. SO IT IS POSSIBLE. OKAY. SO IT IS U-SHAPED. YEAH. RIGHT AROUND HERE. RIGHT. IF YOU LOOK AT THE SECTION. OKAY OKAY. THE ENTRANCE. RIGHT. THIS IS CORRECT. SO THIS ONE IS RIGHT HERE. YEAH. THIS IS THIS STRUCTURE IS NO LONGER HERE. THAT USED TO BE A HOUSE THERE. YEAH. THAT'S. THE STRUCTURE. OH IS THAT THE. IS THAT THE OTHER HOUSE. YEAH. THAT'S THE HOUSE. THE BLUE HOUSE. YEAH. GUYS, WHY DON'T WE COME ON BACK TO THE TABLE AND I'M GOING TO LET. THANK YOU. MEMBER SHIMURA DO THE EXPLANATION. IN THE MINUTES. SO LOOKING AT THE SITE PLAN THAT IS DATED. WELL, ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE MAY 9TH, 2008. AND THEN SIGN SITE PLAN APPROVAL OF THE LATEST DATE TEN ONE, 2008 FOR THE FOR THE LOWE'S PROJECT. FOR THE LOWE'S PROJECT, THERE IS A CONSERVATION EASEMENT LINE THAT RUNS NORTH. THAT RUNS ADJACENT TO THE. RIGHT. THIS IS NORTH. THIS IS NORTH. THAT WOULD BE WEST WEST AROUND THE WEST PROPERTY LINE THAT THEN ALSO RUNS PARALLEL TO THE MARK WHITMAN PROPERTY AND THEN ENDS UP RUNNING EAST TOWARDS THE EXISTING DRIVEWAY AND THEN

[01:50:08]

WHILE PLANNING FOR THE NEW. IT THEN GOES INTO HISTORY OF THE SITE AND THE ACTUAL REZONING REQUEST. I KIND OF GIVE AN OVERVIEW OF THE LAND USES, SO I TALK ABOUT THE LOW SITE TO THE NORTH AND THE EAST THAT THERE IS A PRIVATE RESIDENCE TO MR. WHITMAN'S WEST, AND THAT THERE'S COMMERCIAL PROPERTY SOUTH OF HIM ONTO SOUTHWESTERN. I TALK ABOUT THE THE SITE REZONING REQUEST IS FROM MR. WHITMAN AS PROPERTY OWNER, AND THAT OBVIOUSLY THAT THERE WAS A REZONING AND CONSTRUCTION OF THAT LOW STORE AND THAT STORMWATER POND INFRASTRUCTURE.

AND THEN THE PART WHERE THE PLANNING BOARD, WHERE YOU GUYS WILL COME IN IS I TALK ABOUT, I WOULD ASSUME, BUT OBVIOUSLY FEEL FREE TO DISAGREE THAT IF THE SITE WAS REZONED TO C-2, IT IS HARMONIOUS WITH THE ZONING THAT IS CURRENTLY EXISTING ON THE SITE WHERE THE PLANNING BOARD, WHERE THE SEVEN OF YOU HAVE TO FILL IN IS WHETHER OR NOT YOU WOULD RECOMMEND TO THE TOWN BOARD TO APPROVE THIS REZONING ANY SPECIFIC CONDITIONS YOU WOULD WANT ON THE REZONING, ANY SPECIFIC COMMENTS AND THEN ANY RECOMMENDATIONS CAN BE FROM THE BOARD AS A WHOLE OR FROM INDIVIDUAL PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS THAT YOU WANT THE TOWN BOARD TO CONSIDER. OKAY. MEMBER CLERK I THINK UNDER HISTORY OF THE SITE AND THE REZONING REQUEST, WE SHOULD ADD THE INFORMATION WE GOT TODAY ABOUT THE CONSERVATION EASEMENT BECAUSE IT DOES IMPACT THE APPLICANTS. THE IDEA I WON'T SAY PLAN BECAUSE I DON'T THINK IT'S CLOSE TO A PLAN, BUT IDEA THAT IF IT WAS COMMERCIAL, IT'D BE ACCESSED FROM LOWE'S BECAUSE THE CONSERVATION EASEMENT. DEFINITELY COMPLICATES THAT A LOT. STORMWATER STORMWATER POND BEING RIGHT, THERE IS ALSO AN ISSUE AS FAR AS ACCESS IN THAT DIRECTION. SO AS FAR AS THE THE HISTORY, BECAUSE IT IS SOMETHING THAT WE TALKED ABOUT TODAY, I THINK WE SHOULD ADD THAT SORRY, BILL, CAN YOU KIND OF JUST HIGH LEVEL SUMMARY JUST REPEAT WHAT YOU WOULD LIKE ADDED. SORRY I, I WOULD WANT ADDED THAT THERE'S A CONSERVATION EASEMENT. OH 16 ACRES 16 ACRE CONSERVATION EASEMENT THAT'S ADJACENT TO THIS PROPERTY. AND THAT CONSERVATION EASEMENT WOULD SIGNIFICANTLY COMPLICATE THE APPLICANT'S IDEA THAT ACCESS TO THE SITE WOULD BE FROM THE LOWE'S PARKING LOT DRIVEWAY AREA. IF WE COULD ALSO ADD TO THAT THE STORMWATER POND, TOO. IT'S NOT JUST IT'S IT'S BOTH PIECES. YEAH. SO 16 ACRE CONSERVATION EASEMENT AND A STORMWATER POND. ATTORNEY JOSEPH GOERGEN, IF I MAY, REFERRING BACK TO THE TOWN PLANNING BOARD MEETING WHERE THE RESOLUTION WAS PASSED CONCERNING THE PROPERTY. MARCH 19TH, 2008, THEN ATTORNEY JAY PULLMAN HAD COMMENTED, AND I'M READING RIGHT FROM THE RESOLUTION, STATED THAT LOWE'S WILL RETAIN OWNERSHIP OF THE REAR PARCEL AND CONSTRUCT THE LOWEST STORE WHERE THE DEVELOPER WILL RETAIN OWNERSHIP OF THE PARCEL AND WILL LANDSCAPE THE FRONT PARCEL. REGARDING THE CONSERVATION AREA

[01:55:05]

OTHER THAN OREGON. OTHER THAN OTHER THAN. OREGON ROAD TO IT'S ROAD. IT'S ROAD. IS IT NOT HAVE.

IT'S I'M PRETTY SURE IT'S, IT'S F. IT IS F BECAUSE I GOT COVE IN IN YOUR THING. BUT I THINK IT'S OREGON ROAD. SOME OF THE STUFF IT'S IT'S OREGON PROPERTY ADDRESS ROAD. OREGON ROAD AND A BUNCH OF THE TAX DATA. IT'S THE GIS SAYS THE GIS SAYS OREGON ROAD. RIGHT. OKAY. THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING. YEAH. SO THAT'S. ALL BUT ONE SPOT IN YOUR RESOLUTION HAS IT AS HAVE ONE OTHER SPOT DID HAVE IT AS ROAD. SO MEMBER SHIMURA. JOSH I THINK THAT TO ADD THAT THERE IS A SIX ACRE, SIX ACRE CONSERVATION EASEMENT THAT EXTENDS IN A U SHAPE FORM 16 ACRE. YEAH. 16 ACRE CONSERVATION. I'M JUST GOING TO SAY THIS OUT LOUD AND WORDSMITH IT AND THEN REPEAT IT FOR HIM TO TYPE CONSERVATION EASEMENT, OR U-SHAPED CONSERVATION EASEMENT THAT STARTS AND ENDS ON SOUTHWESTERN BOULEVARD, SO THAT IT'S UNDERSTOOD THAT IT COMES UP IN AROUND ON BOTH SIDES. SO THERE IS A 16 TO ADD UP ABOVE, WHERE IT'S A 16 ACRE CONSERVATION EASEMENT. SHE'S JUST DESCRIBING IT FOR DESCRIBING THE EASEMENT SAYS THERE IS A 16 CONSERVATION 16 ACRE CONSERVATION EASEMENT THAT BEGIN THAT IS U-SHAPED. AND.

BEGINS AND ENDS ON SOUTHWESTERN BOULEVARD. I THINK WE NEED TO SPLIT THIS ON. YEAH, YEAH.

CHAIR, I KNOW YOU'RE HOPING TO MAKE SOME GET THIS DONE TONIGHT, BUT GIVEN THE NUMBER OF EDITS WE'RE ADDING IN HERE, WE MAY WANT TO LET THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT REVIEW IT, AND THEN WE FINALIZE IT AT OUR NEXT. HANG ON. LET'S JUST FINISH OUR THOUGHT PROCESS HERE BEFORE WE MOVE ON. LET'S GET THIS WHAT EVERYBODY WANTS TO SAY. YOU COULD JUST PUT IN PARENTHESES.

BEGINS AND ENDS SOUTHWESTERN BOULEVARD. SO THAT THE U SHAPE IS CODIFIED. WHAT ELSE? I THINK WE SHOULD NOD TO THE FACT THAT IF THIS PROPERTY WERE REZONED, IT ORPHANS ONE RESIDENTIALLY ZONED PROPERTY ON OREGON ROAD. I THINK I SAID SOMETHING TO THAT POINT. I, I THINK WE SAY

[02:00:05]

SHOULD WE I DON'T KNOW. I MEAN, THAT'S HOW WE I WOULD PUT IT IN THERE FOR REFERENCE SO THEY CAN GO BACK AND LOOK AT THAT THEMSELVES. SO I HAVE DOWN HERE WE WILL SUBMIT MINUTES FROM THE MEETINGS THAT WE TALKED ABOUT. DO YOU ALL DO YOU WANT ME TO ADD SOME MINUTES FROM THE I THINK THE DATE WE HAVE, THE DATE OF THE PLANNING BOARD MINUTES IN THE TOWN BOARD.

PLANNING BOARD WAS 319, 2008. PLANNING BOARD MEETING FOR DISCUSSION WAS FEBRUARY 20TH, 2008. IS IT 220? I'M SORRY 220. YES 2008 2008. SO THEY HAD A DISCUSSION. FEBRUARY 20TH AND THEN MARCH 19TH. THE ANOTHER THING THAT WE SHOULD NOTE IS THAT WE DON'T KNOW WHEN SOME OF THOSE RESIDENCES WERE CONVERTED TO C2. SO THAT'S THE OTHER HOUSES ON THE STREET. AND I REMEMBER AT ONE POINT MR. CARNEVALE CAME IN TO COMMENT ON THE ZONING AT ONE OF OUR MEETINGS. WHO'S ONE OF THE OTHER RESIDENTS IS BECAUSE HE HADN'T REALIZED HIS PROPERTY HAD BEEN REZONED TO C2. WELL, AGAIN, SO THAT IT'S NOT CLEAR WHAT THE ORIGIN OF OTHER THE OTHER CHANGES ARE, THE OTHER PROPERTIES ARE CLOSER TO FRONTAGE ON SOUTHWESTERN, AND THIS ONE DOES NOT IS SET BACK. JOSH, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG. DID YOU NOT SEND ME A MAP THAT SHOWED 1977? IT WAS 2007. SO WE DO KNOW BACK TO 2007, IT WAS C2 AND THESE WERE R2 CORRECT. BUT I'M SAYING THAT I BELIEVE MR. CARNEVALE HAS BEEN LIVING THERE SINCE LONG BEFORE THAT, AND HE WASN'T AWARE THAT IT HAD BEEN CHANGED. HE CAME IN FRONT OF US AT ONE POINT, BUT THAT WAS WHY YOU WERE ON THE BOARD WHILE I WAS ON THE BOARD. WAS THAT BEFORE 2007? CORRECT. BUT THEY WERE NOT AWARE OF WHEN THAT CHANGE HAPPENED IN THAT WINDOW. I DON'T KNOW THAT HE WOULD HAVE GONE AND LOOKED AT THE ZONING ON HIS. I THINK IT'S FAIR TO SAY IT'S UNLIKELY THAT THE BOARD ACKNOWLEDGES IT'S UNCLEAR SPECIFICALLY WHEN OR IF THE PROPERTIES WERE THE HOMES WERE EVER REZONED TO C2, BECAUSE THERE'S NO THERE'S NO RECORD. HAD EVER HOT REZONE TO C2 IF THEY WERE ALREADY HOMES. WHAT MAY HAVE BEEN R3 TO START WITH BECAUSE THEY WERE RESIDENTIAL, WE DON'T KNOW. THEY COULD HAVE BEEN C2. THAT'S WHAT THEY COULD HAVE BEEN C2 FROM THE BEGINNING.

YEAH. DID THEY REZONE LOWE'S IN 2007? YES, YES. BUT THAT WAS THE ONLY THING THAT WAS REZONED AT THAT POINT. SO THE HOUSE IS ON THE CORNER OF OREGON WERE ALREADY C2 BEFORE ZONE LOWE'S WAS REZONED AS MAP. THIS MAP IS IS DATED 2007. AND THOSE THOSE RESIDENTIAL AND THOSE ARE COMMERCIAL. RIGHT. WELL THAT'S INTERESTING. I THINK THE OTHER THING I WOULD JUST ACKNOWLEDGE, THE OTHER THING THAT'S COME IN FRONT OF THIS BOARD AT VARIOUS POINTS IS, IS IF WE THERE ARE AND THIS WE HAD SOMEBODY COME TO US WHO WAS TRYING TO SELL THEIR HOUSE OR BUY A HOUSE, AND IT WAS ZONED NOT THAT MATCHED THE HOUSE STRUCTURE. AND IT CAN PRESENT ADDITIONAL CHALLENGES WITH PEOPLE WHO ARE FINANCING. SO I DON'T KNOW IF WE ARE POTENTIALLY PUSHING. THAT'S A GOOD POINT TO A COMMERCIAL USE IN THE NEAR TERM WHILE IT IS STILL A HOME, IF THAT MIGHT IMPAIR THE ABILITY FOR IT TO BE USED AS A HOUSE, WHICH I RECOGNIZE MAYBE PART OF. WHY THE. THE HOMEOWNERS WANT TO CHANGE IT, BUT I WOULD JUST BE CONCERNED THAT NOW WE'RE JUST AGAIN WITH THAT ONE HOME THERE LIKE THAT, WE SHOULD BE LOOKING AT SOMETHING MORE HOLISTICALLY FOR THIS LITTLE POCKET IN TERMS OF WHAT THE TOWN WANTS TO DO, BECAUSE IT'S NOT. I LOOKED AT THE COMP PLAN. IT'S NOT. THERE'S THOSE AREAS AND ZONES, BUT THEY DON'T REALLY REFLECT

[02:05:03]

THEY HAVE A HOME. HARDSHIP IS RIGHT NOW IT'S A AREA THAT'S SURROUNDED AS FAR AS YOU CAN ACCESS. I KNOW, I KNOW BEHIND IT'S NOT. BUT IN ORDER TO GET THERE, YOU HAVE TO GO ON TO SOUTHWESTERN, AROUND TO SOLES, ONTO ANOTHER STREET AND THEN ONTO ANOTHER STREET. IT'S PROBABLY LIKE LIKE THE DISTANCE IS FIVE. IS THE RIGHT NEXT TO EACH OTHER? WELL, I DON'T THINK THEY'RE BOTH UNDER A HARDSHIP RIGHT NOW. I MEAN, THEY'RE LIVING THERE. THEY'VE LIVED THERE FOR PLUS A LOT OF YEARS. I THINK THE SECOND HOUSE, WE'RE NOT KICKING THEM OUT IF WE MAKE THE ONE NEXT TO THEM. BUT I MY CONCERN IS, IS THAT IF THAT WE COULD THAT BECOMES COMMERCIAL AND THEN THAT GETS CONVERTED TO A COMMERCIAL BUSINESS. YOU HAVE ONE HOUSE THAT SHARES SIDE BY SIDE AND IT'S JUST THE TWO. SO YOU HAVE A COMMERCIAL BUSINESS BETWEEN THE CONSERVATION EASEMENT. THAT'S WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT IS WHAT ARE WE CREATING FOR THE NEIGHBOR BY BY DOING THIS. THAT WAS MY THAT WAS MY COMMENT. EXACTLY MY POINT. WHAT ABOUT MY HARDSHIP? MY WHEN MY NEIGHBOR. SIR. I'M SORRY. POINT OF ORDER. THEY'RE THEY'RE DISCUSSING. I MEAN RIGHT NOW, I, I, I UNDERSTAND THAT BEHIND IT IS ADJACENT TO SOMETHING. BUT WHEN YOU LOOK AT IT, IT'S JUST TWO HOUSES AND IT'S, IT'S EITHER A HARDSHIP ONE WAY OR THE OTHER AND IT'S AND THEY BOTH SHARE IT BEHIND. WHAT IF. OKAY, EVERYBODY'S GOT TO TALK ON THE MIC AND IDENTIFY YOURSELF. PLEASE. MEMBER MCCORMICK. IT MIGHT BE WORTH THE TOWN BOARD. ALSO POTENTIALLY CONSIDERING THERE ARE ADDITIONAL HOMES THAT ARE OWNER OCCUPIED THAT DO NOT FRONT ON SOUTHWESTERN, MAYBE THEY SHOULD ALL BE RESIDENTIAL THERE TO FIT IN WITH THAT AREA.

THAT ROAD IS NOT SIZED FOR A LOT OF THE C2 USES OR THE TRAFFIC THAT MAY ACCOMPANY THEM, AND IT'S NOT VISIBLE FROM SOUTHWESTERN. SO I THINK THE QUESTION IS, IS COULD YOU ALLEVIATE THE HARDSHIP TO THE EXISTING LANDOWNER, WHERE YOU HAVE SOME OF THOSE EXISTING RESIDENTIAL HOMES CONVERTED BACK TO A RESIDENTIAL ZONE? OR HOW ABOUT SOMETHING LIKE THIS? THE HARDSHIP IS SOME OF THEM ARE COMMERCIAL AND SOME OF THEM ARE RESIDENTIAL. SO THE SOLUTION ONE WAY OR THE OTHER, EITHER THEY SHOULD ALL BE RESIDENTIAL OR THEY SHOULD ALL BE COMMERCIAL, AND THAT WOULD ALLEVIATE OUR CONCERNS. I'M NOT COMFORTABLE MAKING THAT STATEMENT BECAUSE THE OTHER RESIDENT HAS NOT COME FORTH FOR ANYTHING, AND I'M NOT GOING TO GO DOWN THAT ROAD. THE OTHER RESIDENTS THAT ARE C2 ARE NOT HERE. NO, I DIDN'T SAY IT WAS.

[02:10:04]

I MEAN, WE'RE WE DON'T HAVE WE CAN'T PASS PASS IT OR NOT PASS IT. WE'RE MAKING A RECOMMENDATION. SO IN MY STATEMENT WAS WHAT I WAS CONCERNED ABOUT IS IF WE IF WE ARE AND THAT'S UP TO UP TO SOMEBODY ELSE. I'M NOT AN ATTORNEY. REMEMBER? FINLEY, DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO OFFER? NO. MINE WAS ABOUT THE EASEMENT. OKAY. REMEMBER, MCCORMICK, JUST TO FINISH YOUR THOUGHT ON YOUR INDIVIDUAL COMMENT ABOUT. I SAID THE TOWN BOARD SHOULD CONSIDER THAT THERE ARE OTHER HOMES THAT ARE OWNER OCCUPIED. I JUST WANT TO COMPLETE YOUR COMPLETE YOUR THOUGHT ON OREGON ROAD. THAT ARE NOT. AND THAT OREGON ROAD IS NOT SIZED FOR REGULAR COMMERCIAL TRAFFIC. YOU CAN SAY DO THEY SEND ROAD IS NOT DESIGNED FOR COMMERCIAL TRAFFIC. ARE THERE ANY OTHER BOARD MEMBERS WHO WANT A CLAUSE SIMILAR TO MEMBER MCCORMICK'S WHERE IT STATES YOUR NAME, YOU OFFERED THE FOLLOWING. AND THEN WE WRITE WHAT YOU SAY. I THINK YOU MIGHT WANT TO ADD THAT THAT FIRST SOMETHING TO THAT FIRST BULLET UNDER MY NAME THAT ALSO GOES WITH CHAIR CRONICAN. OKAY. GREAT. CHAIR. CORRECT. DO YOU WANT ME TO SAY LIKE CONCURRED BY CHAIR GRONINGEN? OR THE COUCH? OKAY. ANYTHING ELSE? OKAY. YOU SEE THE HIGHLIGHTING? THAT PART IS A CONSENSUS. SO THAT'S NOT INDIVIDUAL. WHETHER OR NOT THE BOARD AT LEAST FOUR OF YOU RECOMMEND OR BEFORE I EVEN GET TO THAT POINT, MR. WHITMAN DID WAIT TO GIVE A STATEMENT. SO YES, I JUST WANTED TO ADD THAT MY ONCE NEIGHBOR WAS ALLOWED BY THIS TOWN TO REZONE 40 ACRES OF WOODLANDS FROM, I BELIEVE IT WAS R2, MAYBE R3 TO C-2, AND THAT LOWEST PLAZA TO BE BUILT NEXT DOOR TO ME, SO I DON'T FIND IT AT ALL CURIOUS THAT I'M HERE DOING WHAT I'M DOING, IF THAT IF THAT WOULDN'T MOSTLY BE AN EXPECTATION. SO I UNDERSTAND THERE ARE ISSUES, BUT OVERALL, WHEN YOU LOOK AT THAT MAP AROUND ME, THIS SEEMS LIKE QUITE AN OBVIOUS MOVE. AND NOBODY REALLY CARED ABOUT ME WHEN THEY ALLOWED THAT REZONE.

SO I GET THAT THERE'S A PERSON BEING ORPHANED. THAT'S NOT MY RESPONSIBILITY. THAT'S GOT NOTHING TO DO WITH ME. AGAIN, THEY BOUGHT THAT HOUSE WELL, AFTER THE LOWE'S WAS BUILT, KNOWING WHAT WAS THERE. SO THAT'S ALL. SO WE ARE GOING TO BE CONCERNED ABOUT NEIGHBORS.

LET'S BE CONCERNED ABOUT ALL OF THEM. DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE TO OFFER? YOU HAD SOMETHING, ANOTHER STATEMENT YOU WERE GOING TO MAKE EARLIER? PLENTY, MA'AM, BUT I'LL I'LL WITHHOLD THEM FOR NOW. OKAY. SO THE THE PART THAT'S HIGHLIGHTED IS LIKE I SAID, IT'S A CONSENSUS. SO THAT'S NOT INDIVIDUAL. WHETHER OR NOT THE BOARD AS A WHOLE OR ENOUGH OF YOU WOULD EITHER RECOMMEND OR RECOMMEND AGAINST A REZONING FROM R3 TO C2 AND THEN ANY REASONS OR ANY CONDITIONS THAT YOU THINK THE TOWN BOARD SHOULD CONSIDER. SO BOARD MEMBERS, ARE THERE ANYONE ARE THERE ANY BOARD MEMBERS THAT RECOMMEND THIS REZONING? WE HAVE MISS MEMBER CLARK.

ANYONE ELSE? AUGUST I WOULD RECOMMEND THE REZONING. OKAY. WE HAVE TWO. HOW MANY BOARD MEMBERS DO WE HAVE THAT RECOMMENDS AGAINST REZONING ON FROM R3 TO C2? GO AHEAD. MEMBER

[02:15:02]

MEMBER SHAMARA. I RECOMMEND AGAINST THE REZONING. MEMBER MCCORMICK. I WOULD RECOMMEND AGAINST THIS ISOLATED PROPOSAL, BUT I THINK THAT THE TOWN NEEDS TO ADDRESS THE ZONING HOLISTICALLY IN THIS AREA. AND IRA, TO THE TO THE EXTENT THAT THE APPLICANT IS ASKING FOR.

BUT I THINK THAT THOSE PARCELS NEED TO BE CONSIDERED TOGETHER, AND I RECOMMEND AGAINST THE REZONING BASED ON ALL OF THIS DISCUSSION AT THE TABLE, THE LACK OF ACCESS AND THE CONDITIONS THAT WE LISTED. THIS IS GROSS. ABSOLUTELY GROSS. BE ASHAMED OF YOURSELVES.

ABSOLUTELY. WHAT WAS ON TOP OF ME AND I WAS. ARE YOU LEAVING THE MEETING? FOR THE RECOMMENDATION AGAINST THE REZONING? SPECIFIC CONDITIONS AND REASONS WHY? JUST TO ORIENT IT INTO THE THE REASONS WHY THE 16 ACRE CONSERVATION EASEMENT THAT WAS ON THE ABUTTING PROPERTY PROHIBITS ANY ADDITIONAL SIDE ACCESS FROM. LET ME REREAD IT, REREAD IT. 16 ACRE CONSERVATION EASEMENT ON THE LOWS PROPERTY. I'LL BE MORE SPECIFIC 16. ON THE PROPERTY.

ON THE LOWS PROPERTY. LIMITS. ANY ADDITIONAL ACCESS FROM OREGON ROAD. THIS PROPERTY. I'M SORRY. YEP. THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION. HAS BEEN ZONED C OR R2 SINCE PRIOR TO 2007. R3 SORRY. THANK YOU. DO YOU WANT TO SPECIFY THAT THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION HAS BEEN ZONED R3 PRIOR TO THE LOWS, CONSTRUCTION AND REZONING IN? THERE YOU GO. THAT'S EVEN BETTER. THANK YOU.

I'M A LITTLE BRAIN DEAD. ARE YOU OKAY WITH THAT? THERE WOULD BE IN 2008 THEN, RIGHT? ANYONE ELSE? DO? DOES THE BOARD WITH THE BOARD RECOMMENDING AGAINST. DOES THE BOARD WANT TO HAVE A CLAUSE TO MEMBER MCCORMICK'S PART OR POINT SAYING THAT THE BOARD, THE PLANNING BOARD, RECOMMENDS THE TOWN BOARD INVESTIGATE THE ZONING OF THIS AREA? YES, I THINK I THINK WE SHOULD RECOMMEND THAT THEY REVIEW THE ZONING OF ALL THE RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES ON OREGON ROAD TO COME UP WITH A HOLISTIC PLAN TO TO ADDRESS BOTH THE APPLICANT AND THE OTHER HOMEOWNERS POTENTIAL CONCERNS. WHETHER AND I THINK THAT THAT COULD BE EITHER WAY.

BUT HANG ON, LET HIM FINISH. LET HIM WRITE THAT. DO YOU WANT TO SAY ENTIRE AREA, THE INVESTIGATIVE ZONING OF OREGON ROAD, THE PARCELS ALONG FRONTING OREGON ROAD. FRONTING OR WITH ACCESS FROM. BECAUSE THAT OTHER ONE IS A WEIRD FRONTAGE. YOU CAN'T REALLY REZONE AS FROM HERE, BECAUSE THAT EASEMENT LIKE COMES IN, OH, I CAN'T DO ANYTHING ANYWAY.

NOTHING. SO IT'S IT'S MR. THE THERE'S OTHER INDIVIDUAL THERE'S AN EMPTY LOT. THERE'S

[02:20:06]

AND SWITCH THOSE TO JOSH. CAN WE PUT SOMETHING IN THERE THAT THE PLANNING BOARD REVIEWED EXTENSIVELY, REVIEWED THE HISTORY OF THIS PROPERTY AND THE ACTIONS OR SOMETHING ALONG THAT LINE TO LET THEM KNOW THAT WE READ ALL OF THE MINUTES AND READ ALL OF THE ALL OF THE. ALL OF THE HEARINGS, BECAUSE ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I WANTED TO POINT OUT IS THAT THE PLANNING BOARD AND JOSH GAVE THIS TO US, WHICH I FOUND VERY ACTUALLY. AND YOU'RE GOING TO THINK I'M WEIRD, BUT I FOUND IT VERY ENDEARING WHEN THEY SPECIFICALLY SAID IN THIS, IN THIS RESOLUTION THAT THEY WANTED TO BUFFER THE NEIGHBORS. THEY SPENT A GREAT DEAL OF TIME LOOKING AT THIS PROJECT. THEY DIDN'T TAKE THIS LIGHTLY. AND THAT'S WHY I'M STRUGGLING WITH THIS. IF THEY SAID IF THEY WOULD HAVE THOUGHT THAT SOMETHING WAS WRONG AT THE TIME, I BELIEVE JUST BASED ON WHAT WAS WRITTEN HERE, THAT THE BOARD WOULD HAVE MADE A RECOMMENDATION SOMEWHERE AND THEY DIDN'T. THEY WENT THROUGH IT AND, AND WHEN I, I READ IT AND REREAD IT AND READ IT AGAIN, THE RECOMMENDATION WOULD HAVE. AND WHAT WE DON'T HAVE WOULD HAVE BEEN THE REZONING. NO. BUT WHAT I'M SAYING IS WE'VE GONE THROUGH THIS A FEW TIMES, RIGHT.

THE TOWN BOARD REZONES IT. THEN, YOU KNOW THE PROJECT'S GOING IN, RIGHT? YOU'RE YOU'RE THEN AND THEN YOUR TASK IN SITE PLAN IS TO MINIMIZE THE IMPACT. RIGHT. SO IF THEY WERE REALLY CONSIDERING WHAT WAS GOING ON WITH THE NEIGHBORS, THOSE WOULD PROBABLY BE THE MINUTES. IF THEY MADE A RECOMMENDATION ABOUT THE REZONING. I DON'T KNOW IF THE PLANNING BOARD DID AT THAT POINT IN TIME OR NOT, IF THE TOWN BOARD JUST DID IT. NO, THE TOWN BOARD HANDLED THE REZONING RIGHT, BECAUSE I READ THE MINUTES. BUT WHAT DID THEY DO, A RECOMMENDATION LIKE THE ONE WE'RE DOING TODAY? NO, NO, NO, NONE. THE PLANNING BOARD DID NOT. THEY DIDN'T. IT WASN'T IN. BUT WHEN THEY GOT THE SITE PLAN, MY POINT BEING IS THAT WE HAVE WORKED ON PLANS, ON SITE PLANS AND SAW AND FOUND FAULTS AND MADE RECOMMENDATIONS OUTSIDE OF THAT. HAD JOSH OR OUR PLANNING DEPARTMENT NOTIFY THE TOWN BOARD THAT WE HAD CONCERNS AND THAT THEY SHOULD LOOK AT THIS INDEPENDENTLY. AND I'M THINKING OF ONE PROJECT IN PARTICULAR THAT THEY DID IT THEN. RIGHT? I BUT I BELIEVE IT WOULD BE IN HERE. THE WAY THIS IS DOCUMENTED, JUST TO MAKE SURE I'M UNDERSTANDING CORRECTLY IS ONE OF THE SUGGESTIONS IN TERMS OF INVESTIGATING THE ZONING OF THIS AREA, REZONING THAT PARCEL SOUTH OF 4912 AND MR. HOME BACK TO RESIDENTIAL OR REZONING THEM ALL COMMERCIAL OR EITHER WAY. OKAY. I THINK THAT THAT'S EITHER OPTION. SO THAT IF I THINK THAT WHAT THEY NEED TO LOOK AT IS WHAT MAKES SENSE IN TERMS OF A DENSITY WITH THE USE THERE AND THE LACK OF FRONTAGE AND THE DIFFICULTY TURNING IN AND OUT, YOU'RE NOT GOING TO WANT A MAJOR COMMERCIAL THERE. WITH THE OFFSET INTERSECTION, THE LACK OF A SIGNAL. SO PUTTING IN A MAJOR ACCESS USE WHERE YOU CANNOT CUT ACROSS A CONSERVATION EASEMENT AND THERE'S A STORMWATER POND, IT MAY MAKE SENSE FOR A LOWER DENSITY, EITHER COMMERCIAL OR RESIDENTIAL, OR EVEN BECAUSE I THINK THAT POSES TRAFFIC AND OTHER CHALLENGES THERE, AND THAT THE TOWN BOARD WOULD BE BETTER SERVED. LOOKING AT IT HOLISTICALLY, I HAVE A LOT OF EMPATHY. I UNDERSTAND THE CHALLENGE THAT HE IS A HOMEOWNER IS IN, BUT I DON'T THINK JUST DOING AA1 BY ONE APPROACH IS THE RIGHT SOLUTION HERE. AND WE'VE GOT TO FIGURE OUT A WAY TO ADDRESS WHAT MAKES SENSE FOR OREGON ROAD SO THAT PEOPLE CAN BUY OR SELL THEIR HOMES, FINANCE THEM. PEOPLE CAN DO WHAT THEY WANT TO DO OVER THERE IN A WAY THAT THAT MAKES SENSE FOR THOSE THAT ARE NOT ABUTTING WITH ACCESS OFF SOUTHWESTERN. YEAH, I ALMOST THINK THAT THOSE THE TWO HOMES, MR. WHITMAN'S THE PROPERTY AT 4912 THE PARCEL SOUTH AND MR. CARNEVALE'S, IF ANYTHING, MAYBE YOU SHOULD BE REZONED TO R2 BECAUSE I KNOW IN R3, OBVIOUSLY WITH THAT VACANT LOT, THERE WOULD BE A CONCERN. R3 ALLOWS

[02:25:04]

BUT I MEAN, RIGHT, THEY'RE NOT SEPARATE PARCELS. NO. YOU'D HAVE TO MAKE IT NOT A SEPARATE PARCEL ON TOP OF IT, A SEPARATE PARCEL. AND IT WAS PARKS. LOWE'S WOULDN'T WANT TO MAINTAIN IT. RIGHT, RIGHT TO THE TOWN. THE TOWN WOULD HAVE TO KEEP IT UP. RIGHT. THEY WOULDN'T WANT TO DO THAT. SO WHICH MAY BE WHY THE REZONING NEVER HAPPENED. PROBABLY. YEAH.

BECAUSE THAT'S HUGE. IF YOU COULD JUST CONFIRM THAT THEY'RE THERE. I'M ASSUMING THERE IS A CONSERVATION EASEMENT ON THAT FILED WITH THE. YEP. THERE IS. ARE THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS.

AND SO ONCE AGAIN JUST TO THIS PART, THESE THESE TWO BULLETS ABOVE ARE THE BOARD'S OFFICIAL RECOMMENDATIONS. SO JUST TO CONFIRM THE BIRD THE OR A MAJORITY OF THE BOARD RECOMMENDS AGAINST THE REZONING FROM R3 TO C-2 FOR THE REASONS SET FORTH. AND THEN A SUGGESTION OR A RECOMMENDATION FROM THIS BOARD IS THAT THE TOWN BOARD INVESTIGATE THE ZONING OF THE PARCELS FRONTING, OR WITH ACCESS FROM OREGON ROAD. MEMBER MCCORMACK ADDED HER INDIVIDUAL COMMENTS THAT SHE WANTS THE TOWN BOARD TO CONSIDER. ARE THERE ANY OTHER RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE BOARD AS A WHOLE OR INDIVIDUAL PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS THAT WANT THEIR COMMENTS ON THE RECORD TO THE TOWN BOARD? SECOND BULLET UNDER THAT'S MINE.

IF THE REST OF THE BOARD THINKS THAT THAT'S APPROPRIATE BECAUSE IT GOES WITH THE BULLET ABOVE, WE MAY WANT TO MOVE THAT SECOND BULLET YOU'RE ATTRIBUTING TO ME TO BE A BECAUSE THAT'S THE ONE THAT GIVES THEIR OWNER OCCUPIED HOMES AND THE ROADS NOT DESIGNED FOR REGULAR COMMERCIAL TRAFFIC THAT SUPPORTS THE ABOVE STATEMENT. I DON'T THINK THAT'S ANYTHING CONTROVERSIAL. MEMBER I WOULD AGREE TO TAKE THE SECOND BULLET AND BRING IT UP INTO THE FOLLOWING REASONS CONDITIONS OR ALL THE BOARD MEMBERS IN IN AGREEMENT TO THAT. YES. OKAY. YEAH. I ALSO DON'T KNOW HOW THE MATH WORKS. I WROTE A NO TO THE ONE ABOVE IT, IF I CAN COUNT. RIGHT. YOU COUNT BILL. ANY OTHER COMMENTS? I THINK WE'RE GOOD. OKAY, SO THIS IS THE RECOMMENDATION THAT'S BEING SENT TO THE TOWN BOARD. OKAY. OKAY, OKAY. JOSH IS WORKING ON THE MINUTES, SO THOSE WILL BE COMING SOON TO US. WE'LL BE CAUGHT UP. WE DON'T HAVE ANY TONIGHT. AND I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION. MAKE A MOTION TO ADJOURN. I SECOND IT, IT'S BEEN MOVED. AND SECOND.

ALL THOSE IN

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.