[00:00:01]
IMPORTANT THAT WE HELP HER OUT AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE. AND THAT IS BACK TO THE OLD RULE OF IDENTIFYING YOURSELF BEFORE YOU START TALKING, BECAUSE THEN IT WILL IDENTIFY IT IN WHAT SHE'S TRANSCRIBING AND THEN THE. WHICH IS IN HERE. SO WE CAN GIVE THIS TO JOE. DO YOU WANT TO MAKE SURE IF YOU PASS THIS, I'M GOING TO TURN IT ON. IF RICH COMES THEN YOU HAVE TO DO THAT. IT'S ON. YOU MAY BE GIVING IT BACK. NO, NO BELONGS TO ME. I KNOW THAT GUY. THEY BELONG TO ME. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THE FLOOR IS ALL YOURS. WE'RE ALL ON. ALL OF OUR MIKES ARE ON.
[1. Planning Board to discuss various zoning code amendments for a report and recommendation ]
ALL RIGHT. FOR OUR NEW MINUTES. PERSON JOSH ROGERS, PLANNING DEPARTMENT FOR THE WORK SESSION.WE ONLY HAVE ONE ITEM GOING OVER SOME ZONING CODE UPDATES. AS YOU GUYS KNOW, FOR THE PLANNING BOARD, YOU GUYS ARE A RECOMMENDATION BOARD FOR ANY LOCAL LAWS THAT GET REFERRED TO THE TOWN BOARD. SO THERE ARE TWO THAT I WANT TO TALK ABOUT TONIGHT. ONE, I BELIEVE MR. ANDREW RILEY PRESENTED TO YOU. AND THE FIRST MEETING IN JANUARY RELATED TO SMOKE SHOPS AND VAPE SHOPS. THIS FIRST ONE, I JUST WANTED TO KIND OF SEE IF THERE WERE OBVIOUSLY I DIDN'T ATTEND THAT MEETING, IF THERE WERE ANY OTHER FURTHER COMMENTS. I UNDERSTAND THAT HE PRESENTED SOME OF HIS IDEAS, AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT HE MENTIONED IS THAT BY REQUIRING SMOKE SHOPS AND VAPE SHOPS TO REQUIRE A SPECIAL USE PERMIT, WE WOULD NEED TO ADD SPECIAL USE PERMIT STANDARDS IN THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT SECTION OF THE CODE. WHEN I DID TALK WITH WITH DREW, WE TALKED ABOUT THAT. THEY'RE SORT OF KIND OF ARE SOME ALREADY STANDARDS. IF YOU LOOK AT THE LOCATIONS SECTION OF THIS CODE. SO IT ALREADY TALKS ABOUT IF YOU GUYS RECALL SOME EXAMPLES OF SOME SPECIAL USE PERMIT STANDARDS ARE IF YOU LOOK AT LIKE COMMERCIAL CAR WASHES, SOME OF THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT STANDARDS TALK, TALK ABOUT NOT BEING, YOU KNOW, 500FT NEXT TO THE NEXT CAR WASH. OR IT TALKS ABOUT, YOU KNOW, BUFFERS AWAY FROM RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS. SO THOSE ARE SOME EXAMPLES OF SOME PROVISIONS THAT WE'VE PUT FOR OTHER USES THAT REQUIRE SPECIAL USE PERMIT. I JUST WANT TO KIND OF MAKE SURE THAT AS WE'RE AMENDING THIS CODE AND SENDING IT TO THE TOWN BOARD FOR THE SMOKE SHOPS AND VAPE SHOPS CODE THAT WHEN WE AMEND THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT SECTION AND THE ACTUAL PARAMETERS AND PROVISIONS THAT ARE IN THAT CODE, THAT THEY MATCH WHAT YOU GUYS TALKED ABOUT PREVIOUSLY AND WHAT YOU THINK NEED TO BE IN THAT, IN THAT CODE AS WE GO FORWARD. SO I GUESS THAT'S KIND OF THE QUESTION THAT I'M ASKING. ARE THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM THAT MEETING THAT YOU GUYS HAD ON JANUARY 7TH, AND DOES EVERYONE KIND OF FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH WHAT DREW PRESENTED? ARE THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON THAT, THIS DRAFT OF THE CODE? BOARD MEMBERS, DO YOU HAVE ANY OTHER COMMENTS IN REGARDS TO THE LOCATION? I KNOW IT WAS. IT WAS DISCUSSED AND WE TALKED ABOUT THE 500FT. AND I THINK THAT WE'RE ALL. IN AGREEMENT. IN AGREEMENT? YEAH.
SO WHAT WHAT I WOULD WHAT I WILL DO AND LIKE I SAID, THIS IS A RECOMMENDATION. BUT WHAT I WILL DO IS FOR THE SECTION OF OUR CODE THAT SPECIFICALLY TALKS ABOUT SPECIAL USE PERMITS.
WHAT I'LL DO IS WE WILL TAKE WHAT'S KIND OF IN THIS LOCATION. SO FOR EXAMPLE, NO SMOKE SHOP SHALL BE PERMITTED WITHIN 500FT. THAT'LL BE A SPECIAL USE PERMIT CONDITION THAT WILL BE IN THE PARAMETERS THAT WILL WHEN YOU GO TO THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT SECTION OF THE CODE, YOU'LL SEE THOSE LISTED AND IT'LL MATCH. LIKE I SAID, WHAT WE DO FOR COMMERCIAL CAR WASHES, PRIVATE RENTAL STORAGE, OTHER SIMILAR USES THAT REQUIRE A SPECIAL USE PERMIT IN THE TOWN. JOSH, FORGIVE ME FOR THIS QUESTION, BUT WHEN WE TALK SPECIAL USE PERMIT, THEY CAN'T GO TO THE ZBA AND HAVE THAT DISTANCE CHANGED THEN CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT. THERE'S THAT IS CORRECT IN THEORY. JOE, YOU CAN COMMENT FROM A LEGAL PERSPECTIVE, BUT I DON'T BELIEVE YOU CAN GO TO THE ZONING BOARD AND ASK FOR A VARIANCE FOR RELIEF OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT, STANDARD VARIANCE, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT THEY WOULD BE ASKING FOR, RIGHT? FOR THE AREA VARIANCE. GOOD QUESTION. YEAH, I I'VE NEVER HAD A SITUATION WHERE THAT'S
[00:05:03]
EVER HAPPENED, BUT I WOULD DEFER TO THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT ON WHETHER OR NOT THAT'S PERMISSIBLE OR NOT. VARIANCE IS STILL GOING TO HAVE TO COMPLY WITH THE THE FIVE. ASSUMING THAT. JOE, CAN YOU GRAB YOUR MIC, PLEASE? ATTORNEY JOSEPH GOGUEN ASSUMING THAT IT IT OTHERWISE IS ACCEPTABLE. FOR EXAMPLE, YOU KNOW WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF IF IT WAS AN M2, FOR EXAMPLE, AND THEY WANTED TO GET A USE VARIANCE FOR CANNABIS, IT WOULDN'T COME BEFORE THE LIKE WE DISCUSSED ON THAT OTHER MATTER. IT WOULDN'T COME BEFORE THE PLANNING BOARD ANYWAYS.WELL, BUT THIS ISN'T CANNABIS. THIS IS JUST A SMOKE SHOP. SO THERE'S A DIFFERENCE, RIGHT? WELL. YES, THERE'S A DIFFERENCE. SO I MEAN THE THE CANNABIS PIECE TO TO JOE'S POINT, LET'S SAY SOMEBODY CAME IN FOR A USE VARIANCE ON THAT USE VARIANCE. THEY WOULDN'T COME BACK TO THE PLANNING BOARD FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT. THEY'D COME BACK FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL, WHICH IS WHY IT'S IMPORTANT IF A USE VARIANCE WERE TO BE GRANTED, CONDITIONS ARE PLACED ON IT.
THAT'S WHERE YOU KIND OF PUT THOSE SPECIAL USE PERMIT STANDARDS ON THERE. BUT THEY DON'T COME BACK. AND I'M CORRECT IN SAYING THAT IF THEY GET A USE VARIANCE, THEY DON'T COME BACK TO THE PLANNING BOARD TO THEN GET A SPECIAL USE PERMIT AGAIN. SO IN THIS CASE FOR THE SMOKE SHOPS AND VAPE SHOPS, IF THEY'RE COMING FOR AN AREA VARIANCE, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAN ASK FOR AN AREA VARIANCE IF YOU NEED TO ALSO MEET THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT STANDARD IF THEY'RE GETTING A USE VARIANCE, I THINK THAT'S WHERE IT'S DIFFERENT, RIGHT, JOE? WHERE IF THEY'RE ASKING FOR A USE VARIANCE, THEN THAT'S WHERE THE ZBA HOPEFULLY PLACES CONDITIONS BECAUSE THEY WOULDN'T COME BACK TO US IF THEY'RE GRANTED A USE VARIANCE AND WE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO PUT SPECIAL USE PERMIT CONDITIONS ON SAID APPLICATION. OKAY.
THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION. YEP. AND IF I COULD THOSE I REFERRING SPECIFICALLY TO 500FT FROM THE THEY WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO GET VARIANCES ON AREA VARIANCES ON THOSE. THOSE ARE MINIMUM MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS OKAY. GREAT QUESTION. ANSWER THE QUESTION OKAY. SO THANK YOU. WE WILL TAKE THAT TO THE TOWN BOARD I THINK FOR THE SMOKE SHOP AND VAPE SHOPS I THINK WE'VE SET THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THAT FOR FEBRUARY 23RD. SO WE WILL PACKAGE UP YOUR RECOMMENDATION TO THE TOWN BOARD. WE'LL HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING ON IT ON FEBRUARY 23RD, AND THEN IT'LL BE UNDER THE TOWN BOARD'S DISCRETION OF WHAT THE FINAL CODE WILL LOOK LIKE. THE OTHER PIECE THAT WILL BE THAT I'M GOING TO PRESENT IN FRONT OF YOU, EVERYONE SHOULD HAVE A COPY OF IT. IS CHAPTER 34, AND THAT IS RIGHT NOW WHAT THAT CODE IS IN THE TOWN CODE. IT'S EXISTING, IT'S MANDATORY OR TRAINING IN ATTENDANCE OR RIGHT NOW IT'S MANDATORY TRAINING REQUIREMENTS FOR THE PLANNING BOARD AND ZONING BOARD.
YOU'LL NOTICE THAT THIS VERSION SAYS TRAINING AND ATTENDANCE REQUIREMENTS. AND I'LL KIND OF GO OVER A LITTLE BIT MORE INTO DETAIL ON WHERE THIS CAME FROM AND WHAT WE'RE GOING TO BE REVIEWING BEFORE IT GOES TO THE TOWN BOARD. SO CHAPTER 34 AND ITS INTENT ACTUALLY REALLY TALKS ABOUT THE MINIMUM NUMBER OF HOURS, AS YOU GUYS ARE, RECALL, ALL PLANNING BOARD AND ZONING BOARD MEMBERS HAVE TO RECEIVE A MINIMUM OF FOUR HOURS PER YEAR OF TRAINING RELATED TO ZONING, RELATED TO PLANNING RELATED TO LAND USE. MEMBERS WHO ARE ATTORNEYS ARE EXEMPT.
SO WE DO HAVE ONE MEMBER WHO TECHNICALLY IS EXEMPT FROM THAT. AND THEN IT ALSO TALKS ABOUT CHAPTER 34 AS IT CURRENTLY SITS ALSO TALKS ABOUT ACCEPTABLE FORMS OF TRAINING. IT TALKS ABOUT THE DIFFERENT PROVIDERS OF WHERE YOU CAN GET THE TRAINING FROM. IT TALKS ABOUT, YOU KNOW, HOW YOU KIND OF SUBMIT THE CERTIFICATES, YOU KNOW, THE NUMBER OF CARRY HOUR OVERS THAT YOU CAN DO. SO YOU'LL NOTICE ON THIS ARTICLE THAT YOU HAVE IN FRONT OF YOU.
34 134 234 334 434, FIVE, SIX, SEVEN, EIGHT, NINE AND TEN. ALL ARE EXISTING. WHERE YOU'LL SEE THE CHANGES ARE IS. UNDER ARTICLE TWO, YOU'LL SEE THAT THAT SECTION IS CALLED PLANNING BOARD. AND THEN IF YOU LOOK FURTHER, YOU'LL SEE THAT THERE'S AN ARTICLE THREE THAT TALKS ABOUT ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS. AND THEN YOU'LL SEE THAT THERE'S AN ARTICLE FOUR THAT TALKS ABOUT AN ALTERNATE BOARD MEMBER. AND I'LL GO INTO DETAIL ABOUT EACH ONE AND KIND OF THE BASIS FOR IT. SO ARTICLE TWO AND WE TALKED ABOUT THIS AT CODE REVIEW. WE ALSO TALKED ABOUT THIS FROM A TOWN BOARD PERSPECTIVE. THE TOWN BOARD WANTED SOMEWHERE IN THE CODE SPECIFYING KIND OF WHAT THE RESPONSIBILITIES OF A PLANNING BOARD AND ZONING BOARD MEMBER ARE. SOME OF THE DIFFERENT ARTICLES WITHIN THE TOWN CODE THAT PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS AND ZONING BOARD MEMBERS SHOULD RESPECTIVELY, BE AWARE OF. AND THEN ALSO, THE TOWN BOARD WANTED TO ENACT AN ATTENDANCE REQUIREMENT FOR BOTH PLANNING BOARD AND ZONING BOARD MEMBERS.
SO WHAT YOU'LL NOTICE IS IN THIS SECTION, IT TALKS ABOUT THE RESPONSIBILITY OF PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS. SO THAT'S 3411 FROM A THROUGH C OR A THROUGH B. IT TALKS ABOUT JUST SOME OF THE THINGS THAT EVERYONE SHOULD BE AWARE OF. SO YOU GUYS ALREADY KNOW AS PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS SITE PLAN REVIEW WHICH IS ARTICLE XLIV. WE TALK ABOUT THAT ALL THE TIME. THE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS IN CHAPTER 230 AND THE PORTIONS OF THE ZONING LAW THAT RELATE TO, YOU KNOW, THE POWERS AND THE DUTIES OF THE PLANNING BOARD. THAT'S THINGS LIKE REZONINGS, YOU KNOW, OTHER SITE PLAN, YOU KNOW, ASPECTS. THOSE ARE ALL THE THINGS TO CONSIDER. AND THEN UNDER SUBSECTION B, IT TALKS ABOUT, YOU KNOW, THAT PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS ARE
[00:10:04]
EXPECTED TO CONDUCT THEMSELVES, YOU KNOW, AND THE RULES AND REGULATIONS THAT ARE ADOPTED BY THE TOWN BOARD. AND, YOU KNOW, FOR THE CONDUCT OF MEETINGS AND PUBLIC HEARINGS, WHERE YOU'LL SEE THERE ARE SOME CHANGES IS UNDER C, AND THIS IS ONCE AGAIN, THIS IS A RECOMMENDATION. SO FEEL FREE TO ADD YOUR THOUGHTS. IT CAN BE AMENDED. NO MEMBER OF THE PLANNING BOARD MAY MISS MORE THAN FIVE REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETINGS DURING A CALENDAR YEAR, OTHER THAN A MEDICAL OR EMERGENCY, OR OTHER JUST CAUSE APPROVED IN ADVANCE BY THE CHAIR OF THE PLANNING BOARD. IT IS EXPECTED THAT BOARD MEMBERS WILL BE ON TIME AND CALL THE CHAIR OR THE SECRETARY OF THE PLANNING BOARD IF HE OR SHE CANNOT ATTEND THE MEETING. SO THAT'S REALLY TRYING TO PUT TOGETHER. AND LIKE I SAID, THIS IS OUR RECOMMENDATIONS FROM CODE REVIEW AND FROM THE TOWN BOARD OF JUST MAINTAINING AND REQUIRING ATTENDANCE REQUIREMENTS. OBVIOUSLY, ALL OF THE PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS ARE APPOINTED BY THE TOWN OR BY THE TOWN BOARD. AND, YOU KNOW, WE ALL OBVIOUSLY TAKE THE PLANNING BOARD AS A SERIOUS THING AND JUST MAINTAINING THAT THERE'S AN ATTENDANCE REQUIREMENT AND MAKING SURE THAT IF THERE ARE MEETINGS THAT YOU HAVE TO MISS, THAT THE PROPER COMMUNICATION IS BEING HAD WITH THE CHAIR OR THE SECRETARY, IN CASE YOU KNOW THAT YOU'RE GOING TO MISS A MEETING. THE REST OF THIS CHAPTER TALKS ABOUT THE TOWN BOARD HAVING THE POWER TO REMOVE A PLANNING BOARD MEMBER, AND THE CAUSES FOR REMOVAL ARE SPECIFIED, WHETHER IT'S NONCOMPLIANCE WITH THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS RELATED TO THE TRAINING OR IF IT'S NONCOMPLIANCE WITH THE ATTENDANCE REQUIREMENTS OR NOT, YOU KNOW, MAINTAINING THE TOWN'S CODE OF ETHICS, SO ON AND SO FORTH. AND THEN IT GETS DEEPER INTO, YOU KNOW, SHOULD THAT EVER HAPPEN, PUBLIC HEARING, YOU KNOW, THE CAUSES FOR REMOVAL. YOU KNOW, THE PROCESS OF IF, YOU KNOW, A PLANNING BOARD MEMBER DISAGREES WITH THAT RULING, YOU KNOW, WHAT HAPPENS FROM THERE. SO THAT'S KIND OF THE OVERALL GOAL OF ARTICLE TWO. PLANNING BOARD 3411 THROUGH 34. YEAH. 3411 A THROUGH H. JUST TO SUMMARIZE, IT TALKS ABOUT FAMILIARIZING YOURSELF WITH THE EXISTING LAWS OF THE ZONING CODE THAT RELATE TO THE PLANNING BOARD'S DUTIES AND POWERS. IT TALKS ABOUT THE ATTENDANCE REQUIREMENT. IT TALKS ABOUT MAINTAINING YOUR TRAINING REQUIREMENTS. IT TALKS ABOUT WHAT THE PROCESS WOULD BE, SHOULD THOSE NOT BE MET, AND WHAT THE RELIEF VALVE WOULD BE.IF A PLANNING BOARD MEMBER DISAGREES WITH THE TOWN BOARD WANTING TO REMOVE A PLANNING BOARD MEMBER. SO THAT WAS A LOT. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, THOUGHTS ON ARTICLE TWO? PLANNING BOARD. I'M GONNA TAKE THE SILENCE AS A NO I, I CAN WE JUST FINISH READING? SORRY. JOSH, THIS IS CHAIR GRONINGEN. I THINK THAT FOR 3411 C WHERE IT SAYS NOTIFY THE CHAIR OR THE SECRETARY, I THINK IT SHOULD BE IN WRITING, NOT JUST PHONE CALL. BECAUSE THEN IF YOU CAN'T GET AHOLD OF SOMEBODY AND THEY SAY THAT THEY'VE CALLED MOST OF THE BOARD MEMBERS NOW EMAIL ME AND THEY COPY YOU ON IT. SO WE HAVE THE RECORD AND I THINK THAT IT SHOULD BE A WRITTEN NOTIFICATION. OBVIOUSLY, YOU KNOW, IF IT'S 633 AND YOU'RE STUCK IN TRAFFIC AND IT'S A TWO HOUR ACCIDENT, YOU CAN STILL SEND A TEXT AND THAT'S A WRITTEN NOTIFICATION, WHICH MOST OF THEM DO NOW AND THEN. I USE THAT BECAUSE ESPECIALLY, I MEAN, AND I BEING THE CHAIR WHEN YOU'RE UP HERE, YOU GOT A LOT GOING ON. JUST LIKE YOU GOT A LOT GOING ON THERE. SO SOMEBODY WILL SEND ME A TEXT, AND I MAY NOT CHECK MY PHONE FOR TEXTS OR MESSAGES DURING THE MEETING. I HAVE IT HERE IN CASE I GET A TEXT FROM A BOARD MEMBER. THAT'S NOT GOING TO THAT'S GOING TO BE LATE. AND ALSO FOR TIME FOR PUBLIC PUBLIC MEETING, PUBLIC HEARINGS. BUT I THINK THAT A WRITTEN NOTIFICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED TO EITHER THE CHAIR OR SLASH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. THAT'S MY RECOMMENDATION. DOES ANYBODY HAVE A DISAGREE WITH THAT. SO CHANGE IT FROM CHAIR OR SECRETARY TO CHAIR OR PLANNING DEPARTMENT BECAUSE THEY CAN GET AHOLD OF THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT DURING THE DAY. AND THEN AND THAT'S HOW IT IS NOW. THE SECRETARY NOT SO MUCH. YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN. NOT SO MUCH.
ESPECIALLY IF THAT PERSON WHO'S EVER THE SECRETARY IS WORKING. RIGHT. YOU KNOW, THEY MAY NOT HAVE ACCESS TO GETTING AHOLD OF US OR LETTING US KNOW. AND THEN THAT WAY AND THE WAY, THAT'S
[00:15:01]
HOW WE'RE DOING IT NOW. AND IT WORKS PRETTY WELL. WE SERVE BACK AND THEN A WRITTEN NOTIFICATION AS OPPOSED TO SAYING, HEY, YO, I'M NOT GOING TO BE THERE, RIGHT? WHICH HAS HAPPENED IN THE PAST. SO THEN I DON'T REMEMBER. YEAH, I THINK THAT MAKES SENSE, ESPECIALLY IN LIGHT OF WHAT'S PROCEEDS OR WHAT FOLLOWS THAT. RIGHT. THEN THERE'S DOCUMENTATION. ANY OTHER THOUGHTS ON ARTICLE TWO SPECIFICALLY? NO, NOT ON MY PART. I'M GOOD. THANK YOU. OKAY WITH THAT? I'LL THEN MOVE ON. ARTICLE THREE. OBVIOUSLY THIS IS MORE PERTAINS TO THE ZONING BOARD. ONE OF THE BIGGEST DIFFERENCES FOR THE ZONING BOARD IS YOU'LL SEE UNDER 3412 SUBSECTION C. FOR THEM IT'S MISSING THREE MEETINGS. OBVIOUSLY FOR US WE HAVE 24 MEETINGS. FOR THEM THEY ONLY HAVE 12. SO THEY OBVIOUSLY, YOU KNOW, HAVE A DIFFERENT MEETING SCHEDULE. THIS ONE, YOU KNOW YOU'RE OBVIOUSLY ABLE TO PROVIDE YOUR COMMENTS. BUT THIS IS MORE FOR, YOU KNOW, THE ZONING BOARD AND YOU KNOW, THE DUTIES THAT THEY HAVE, WHICH OBVIOUSLY ARE DIFFERENT THAN, THAN THIS BOARD. AND THEN IF THERE ARE NO COMMENTS ON THAT ONE, I'LL GET TO ARTICLE FOUR. SO ARTICLE FOUR IS ONE THAT ALSO CAME OUT FROM NOT ONLY CODE REVIEW, BUT ALSO CONVERSATIONS WITH THE TOWN BOARD ABOUT THE TOWN'S INTEREST IN DOING WHAT A LOT OF MUNICIPALITIES IN NEW YORK STATE DO OF HAVING AN ALTERNATE BOARD MEMBER FOR BOTH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE ZONING BOARD. SO IF YOU LOOK AT 34, 13 ALTERNATE MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD, THIS WOULD BE THE TOWN BOARD OF THE TOWN OF HAMBURG ENACTING AN ARTICLE TO PROVIDE A PROCESS FOR APPOINTING ALTERNATE MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE ZONING BOARD. THESE INDIVIDUALS, OBVIOUSLY, WOULD BE MEMBERS WHO WOULD SERVE WHEN MEMBERS ARE ABSENT OR UNABLE TO PARTICIPATE. AND THEN I THOUGHT IT WAS IMPORTANT TO JUST PUT DEFINITIONS IN THERE OF WHAT AN ALTERNATE MEMBER IS VERSUS JUST A REGULAR MEMBER. SO OBVIOUSLY, AN ALTERNATE MEMBER IN TERMS OF DEFINITIONS, IS AN INDIVIDUAL WHO WOULD BE APPOINTED BY THE TOWN BOARD WHEN A REGULAR MEMBER WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO PARTICIPATE. AND THEN A MEMBER IS OBVIOUSLY YOU GUYS, AN INDIVIDUAL APPOINTED BY THE TOWN BOARD TO SERVE ON THE PLANNING BOARD OR THE ZONING BOARD PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE LOCAL LAW ORDINANCE THAT ESTABLISHES THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE ZONING BOARD. AND THEN I ADDED DEFINITIONS FOR WHAT THE PLANNING BOARD IS. OBVIOUSLY, IT'S ESTABLISHED BY THE TOWN BOARD PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 271 OF TOWN LAW AND THE ZONING BOARD. SAME THING. IT'S A BOARD ESTABLISHED BY THE TOWN BOARD PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 267 OF TOWN LAW. AND THEN WE GET INTO SUBSECTION B, WHICH TALKS ABOUT THE KIND OF THE PROCESS. SO ALTERNATE MEMBERS OF THE ZONING BOARD AND PLANNING BOARD CAN BE APPOINTED BY THE TOWN BOARD FOR A TERM OF TWO YEARS, WITH THE TERM TO EXPIRE ON DECEMBER 31ST OF THE SECOND YEAR OF THE DATE OF THEIR APPOINTMENT. THE CHAIRPERSON OF THE PLANNING BOARD, WHO OBVIOUSLY CINDY, OR FOR THE ZONING BOARD, WHO IS RICK DIMPLE, CAN DESIGNATE AN ALTERNATE TO SUBSTITUTE FOR A MEMBER WHEN SUCH MEMBER IS UNABLE TO PARTICIPATE ON AN APPLICATION BEFORE THE BOARD.WHEN DESIGNATED, THE ALTERNATE MEMBER SHALL POSSESS ALL THE POWERS AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF SUCH MEMBER OF THE BOARD. SUCH DESIGNATION WILL BE ENTERED INTO THE MINUTES OF THE PLANNING BOARD MEETING OR ZONING BOARD MEETING WHEN THAT SUBSTITUTION IS MADE, AND THEN FROM THERE, ALL PROVISIONS OF THE LAW RELATED TO THE PLANNING BOARD AND ZONING BOARD WOULD INCLUDING COMPENSATION, CONTINUING EDUCATION, YOU KNOW, TRAINING SHALL APPLY TO THE ALTERNATE MEMBERS, MEANING THAT THE ALTERNATE MEMBERS WOULD BE GETTING THE SAME MATERIALS AS A REGULAR PLANNING BOARD MEETING SHOULD THEY EVER NEED TO BE DESIGNATED BY THE CHAIRPERSON TO FILL IN SO THAT THEY'RE MADE AWARE THAT, YOU KNOW, THEY HAVE THE SAME INFORMATION THAT YOU HAVE TO BE ABLE TO VOTE ON SAID PROJECT IF NEED BE. THIS OBVIOUSLY IS A PROVISION THAT WOULD BE COMPLETELY NEW TO THE TOWN. WE CURRENTLY DON'T HAVE A PROCESS OR WE DON'T HAVE ALTERNATE MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING BOARD. ONE OF THE THINGS THE TOWN BOARD WANTED ME TO DO WAS KIND OF GAUGE, AS EXISTING PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS, YOU KNOW WHAT YOUR GUYS'S THOUGHTS ARE ON THAT. IF THERE'S OTHER PROVISIONS OR OTHER PROCEDURES THAT YOU THINK NEED TO BE ADDED, AND JUST WHAT YOUR OVERALL GENERAL THOUGHTS ARE, IF YOU THINK IT'S A GOOD IDEA TO HAVE AN ALTERNATE MEMBER, AND IF THIS KIND OF PROCEDURE WORKS, ONCE AGAIN, WE'RE RECOMMENDING BOARD. THE TOWN BOARD WILL, YOU KNOW, BE THE FINAL DECISION BOARD. BUT THEY DEFINITELY TAKE INTO ACCOUNT, YOU KNOW, THE THOUGHTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE PLANNING BOARD WHEN WE DO THESE LOCAL LAWS. SO THAT'S KIND OF THE BACKGROUND. THAT'S KIND OF HOW IT'S WRITTEN NOW. I TOOK A STAB AT IT WITH WHAT I WAS PROVIDED AND THIS IS WHAT I PUT TOGETHER. SO FEEL FREE TO AMEND. SAY THIS DOESN'T MAKE SENSE. YOU KNOW, THINK ABOUT THIS, THINK ABOUT THAT, AND THEN I'LL PUT IT TOGETHER, PACKAGE IT, PUT IT TOGETHER IN YOUR GUYS'S VOICE AS A RECOMMENDATION. AND THIS WILL ALSO GO TO THE TOWN BOARD, I BELIEVE, FOR THE FEBRUARY 23RD PUBLIC HEARING. JOSH, THAT WAS A GOOD JOB. I'M GOING TO SAY THAT I'VE WORKED ON BOARDS IN ANOTHER STATE AND ALWAYS HAD AN ALTERNATE, AND I THINK IT'S A GREAT IDEA. THE ONLY THING I WOULD LIKE TO ADD SOMEWHERE IN HERE IS THAT THE ALTERNATE IS REQUIRED TO ATTEND
[00:20:04]
EVERY MEETING, BECAUSE THEY CAN'T WALK IN AND AND HEAR A CASE. THAT WAS GOING TO BE MY QUESTION, RIGHT? THE ALTERNATE WOULD BE EXPECTED. IT'S LIKE TODAY WITH KATELYN, RIGHT? IF THERE IS AN ALTERNATE THEY WOULD JUST TAKE THE SEAT, RIGHT? I THINK THAT'S THE IDEA. THAT'S BASICALLY THE IDEA. YES. SO AND JUST TO BACK TO GO BACK A LITTLE BIT ON THIS, THAT'S WHY THE WRITTEN NOTIFICATION, IF YOU'RE NOT GOING TO BE AT A MEETING IS IMPORTANT. SO THEN THE ALTERNATE CAN BE NOTIFIED THAT THEY'RE GOING TO BE UP, THAT THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO, YOU KNOW, THEY WILL HAVE TO DO THEIR DUE DILIGENCE AND BE READY TO BE A PART OF THAT DISCUSSION FOR THAT PARTICULAR FOR IF IT'S JUST ONE CASE OR IF IT'S THE WHOLE MEETING. OKAY, OKAY. SO I THINK AND HERE'S THE OTHER, THE OTHER PART OF THAT THOUGHT PROCESS, ONE THAT THE ALTERNATE NEEDS TO ATTEND EVERY MEETING. BUT BECAUSE WE NEVER KNOW WHO'S GOING TO RECUSE, SOMETHING COULD HAPPEN AT A MEETING THAT YOU'RE GOING TO SAY, I HAVE TO RECUSE MYSELF AND THE ALTERNATE, IF THEY DON'T PREPARE EVERY MEETING, THEY'RE NOT GOING TO BE READY TO FILL IN. AND THEN MY THIRD AND FINAL THING IS THAT THIS IS A GREAT WAY TO TRAIN A FUTURE MEMBER FOR THE PLANNING BOARD, GREAT MEMBER. CLERK. THE ALTERNATE COUNT AS A QUORUM. SO IF THERE WERE FOUR PEOPLE MISSING BUT THE ALTERNATE WAS HERE, YOU'D STILL HAVE A QUORUM.YOU WOULD HAVE A QUORUM BECAUSE THEY WOULD THEY WOULD BE FILLING IN FOR WHOEVER THE WHOLE IDEA IS TO FILL IN, WHEN THAT'S THE WHOLE IDEA ABOUT THE ALTERNATE, SO THAT WHEN YOU HAVE AN ALTERNATE IN THE EVENT THAT YOU DON'T HAVE A QUORUM, THAT'S THE OTHER, THAT'S THE OTHER PART OF IT. NOT TO ADD MORE HOMEWORK FOR YOU, JOE, BUT JUST FROM A LEGAL PERSPECTIVE, CAN, IF IT'S POSSIBLE FOR YOU TO JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT WILL SUFFICE. I BELIEVE THAT'S HOW IT GOES. BUT CAN WE JUST MAKE SURE THAT THAT'S THAT'S UNDER NEW YORK STATE TOWN LAW? OKAY. PERFECT. THAT THAT THAT PERSON CAN FILL IN WHETHER THE PERSON'S ABSENT ILL CONFLICT OF INTEREST, THEY CAN STEP RIGHT IN EXCEPT EXPRESSLY FOR THE PURPOSE OF ENSURING THAT YOU HAVE A QUORUM. PERFECT. SO AND AGAIN, YOU KNOW, THIS THIS WHOLE PROCESS OF. NOTIFYING THE BOARD OR THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. THAT'S WHY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT SHOULD BE NOTIFIED AS OPPOSED TO THE SECRETARY, BECAUSE IN THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT CAN REACH OUT TO THE ALTERNATE AND SAY, HEY, WE'VE BEEN NOTIFIED OR, OR THE CHAIR WOULD NOTIFY THE ALTERNATE AND SAY, HEY, YOU'RE GOING TO BE UP. SO THAT WOULD BE THAT'S WHY THAT PROCESS IS IMPORTANT FOR THE WRITTEN FOR THE WRITTEN NOTIFICATION. AND THEN THE ALTERNATE CAN GET NOTIFIED. AND THEN THE THE WHOLE IDEA IS NOT TO HOLD UP ANY, ANY MEETINGS. THAT'S THE WHOLE IDEA OF IT. RIGHT? I DON'T ATTORNEY JOSEPH GO AGAIN. JOSH I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S I MEAN I KNOW THIS BOARD DOES IT ANYWAYS WHEN SOMEBODY'S ABSENT WHETHER IT'S EXCUSED ILLNESS, TEMPORARY, I DON'T KNOW IF IT NEEDS TO BE IN THE CODE, BUT THAT WOULD ASSIST. FOR CLARIFICATION WHY THE SUBSTITUTE IS PRESENT AT THE MEETING. SO THERE'S NO QUESTION AS TO THE VALIDITY OF A VOTE WHEN YOU'VE GOT THAT ON THE RECORD WHY THAT PERSON IS SUBSTITUTING. SO I DON'T KNOW IF IT WOULD BE NOTED AT THE BEGINNING OF THE MEETING OR BEFORE THE CASE. UNDERSTOOD. BUT. THAT'S NOT THAT'S NOT A REQUIREMENT. IT'S A MATTER OF PRACTICE. BUT I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S SOMETHING THAT WOULD WANT TO BE ADDED TO THE STATUTE ITSELF, THAT IT'S UPON PROPER. NOTICE OR PROPER RECORD. I MEAN, I KNOW IT'S DONE REGULARLY, BUT IT'S NOT, YOU KNOW, JUST SO IT'S IF YOU GET WHAT I'M SAYING. SO THAT'S PART OF PART OF THE, THE PROCEDURE THAT'S FOLLOWED, WHICH MAKES IT MORE MORE GIVES IT MORE WEIGHT. IF THERE'S EVER ANY CHALLENGE TO THE QUORUM VOTE. BUT DOESN'T THE DEFINITION OF THIS WHOLE THING CLARIFY THAT? I MEAN, WHEN IT CLARIFIES WHAT THE ALTERNATES PURPOSE IS? AND THEN IF WE IDENTIFY THAT THERE'S A PERSON ABSENT AND THAT THE ALTERNATE IS GOING TO STEP IN, I MEAN, WE'VE GOT THE DUTIES IN HERE ALREADY. SO TO YOUR POINT, JOE AND I, PART OF IT IS OBVIOUSLY I DIDN'T YOU DON'T HAVE A VERSION OF IT IN FRONT OF YOU AND I'LL PROVIDE YOU A VERSION.
BUT SUBSECTION C, I'LL JUST READ IT JUST SO THAT YOU CAN. SO SUBSECTION C OF THIS IS FOR THE ALTERNATE BOARD MEMBER SECTION SAYS THAT THE CHAIRPERSON OF THE PLANNING BOARD OR ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAY DESIGNATE AN ALTERNATE TO SUBSTITUTE FOR A MEMBER. WHEN SUCH MEMBER IS UNABLE TO PARTICIPATE ON AN APPLICATION OR MATTER BEFORE THE BOARD. WHEN SO DESIGNATED, THE ALTERNATE MEMBER SHALL POSSESS ALL THE POWERS AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF SUCH MEMBER OF THE BOARD. SUCH DESIGNATION SHALL BE ENTERED INTO THE MINUTES OF THE INITIAL PLANNING BOARD MEETING OR ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MEETING AT WHICH THE SUBSTITUTION IS MADE. WE SHOULD HAVE SOMETHING. SO LAST MEETING, MEMBER CLARK. YES. BILL CLARK SO, SO LAST MEETING YOU AS THE CHAIR WERE SICK SO YOU WOULDN'T BE HERE TO DESIGNATE SOMEONE THE VICE CHAIR, BUT IT DOESN'T SAY IT IN THERE. THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING. BUT DOESN'T IT SAY IT IN THE PROCESS? THAT THE VICE CHAIR CARRIES THE DUTIES OF THE CHAIR IN THE EVENT OF
[00:25:05]
HER ABSENCE? DOESN'T THAT SAY THAT IN THE OTHER PART, IN THE JOB, JOB DUTIES? OR DO WE NEED TO. THAT'S THAT'S THE POINT I'M TRYING TO MAKE. YEAH. WE MIGHT HAVE TO ADD A CLAUSE THAT SAYS IN THE ABSENCE OF THE CHAIRPERSON, THE VICE CHAIR OR DESIGNEE OR DESIGNEE, YEAH.TAKES OVER THE JOB DUTIES, RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE CHAIRPERSON. AND WE CAN WORK ON THE WORDING OF IT. BUT, MEMBER CLARK, TO YOUR POINT, I DO THINK THAT IS A GOOD POINT BECAUSE AS I'M READING IT NOW, IT DOES SAY, AND IF WE'RE BEING TECHNICAL, IT SAYS THE CHAIRPERSON OF THE PLANNING BOARD. SO IF THE CHAIR ISN'T HERE, TECHNICALLY NOBODY WOULD BE ABLE TO DESIGNATE AN ALTERNATE MEMBER HOW THIS CODE IS WRITTEN. SO. SO CHAIR OR VICE CHAIR? YEAH. THE CHAIR, VICE CHAIR OR DESIGNEE. WOULDN'T IT BE THE SECRETARY NEXT? PROBABLY. BUT WHOEVER THE CHAIRPERSON WOULD DESIGNATE IF IT SAID OR DESIGNEE. I MEAN, HOPEFULLY IT WOULDN'T HAVE EVERYBODY OUT ALL AT ONCE. BUT. WELL, IF THERE WOULD BE A MEETING, THEN IF EVERYBODY WAS GONE BECAUSE YOU WOULDN'T HAVE A QUORUM. WELL, NO, YOU COULD HAVE FOUR PEOPLE OUT AND STILL HAVE A QUORUM WITH AN ALTERNATE MEMBER BECAUSE YOU'RE STILL HAVE FOUR PEOPLE HERE. SO YOU COULD HAVE THE CHAIR, THE VICE CHAIR, THE SECRETARY AND SOMEONE ELSE AND STILL HAVE A QUORUM WITH THIS, WITH THE ALTERNATE. OKAY. SO SO YOU WANT YOU WANT TO ADD THE WORD OR DESIGNEE, RIGHT? OKAY. YOU WOULD DESIGNATE SOMEONE LIKE OKAY, THESE PEOPLE AREN'T GOING TO BE HERE. SO AND SO DECIDE OR DO THE DO THE THING TO HAVE THE ALTERNATE IN THERE. BECAUSE IT WOULDN'T EVEN BE DECIDING IF THE ALTERNATE THE ALTERNATE WOULD HAVE TO SIT IN, BUT SOMEBODY WOULD HAVE TO HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO DO IT. OKAY, JOE, I'LL HAVE YOU PUT YOUR LEGALESE ON IT, BUT FROM WHAT I'M HEARING IS WE WE'LL KEEP THE CLAUSE OF THE CHAIRPERSON OF THE PLANNING BOARD OR ZONING BOARD MAY DESIGNATE AN ALTERNATE MEMBER, BUT THEN WE'LL HAVE A SUBSECTION CLAUSE OF IN THE CHAIRPERSON'S ABSENCE, THE VICE CHAIR OR THE CHAIRPERSON'S DESIGNEE. AND THEN WE'LL CONTINUE CAN DESIGNATE AND IT'LL JUST FOLLOW WHAT IT ALREADY SAYS IS THAT IS THAT AM I CAPTURING KIND OF WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, BILL. YEAH. OKAY. AND THEN I'LL PUT YOU CAN PUT YOUR LEGAL SPIN ON IT I GOT IT I HATE TO REPEAT IT. IT SAYS THE MICROPHONE PLEASE DESIGNATES ON THE RECORD, BUT IT DOESN'T SAY THE THE REASON ON THE RECORD ON THAT ONE, ON THAT ONE SECTION YOU READ BACK, IT ONLY SAID THAT THE CHAIR WOULD WOULD PUT THE DESIGNATION ON THE RECORD, WHICH TO ME IS JUST NAMING THE PERSON, BUT NOT THE REASON FOR THE SEVEN OF YOU. DO YOU FEEL THAT IT NEEDS TO BE CODIFIED, THE REASON, OR DO YOU WANT TO KEEP IT? AS I THINK THAT THE EXPLANATION IN HERE IS PRETTY WITH THE DUTIES OF THE ALTERNATE, EXCEPT TO THE SEVEN OF YOU, I'LL PUT WHAT THE MAJORITY OF THE BOARD FEELS LIKE. I SAID, IT'S A RECOMMENDATION. ANYWAYS, THE TOWN BOARD WILL, BUT IF YOU FEEL THAT YOU WANT TO ADD, YOU KNOW, A CLAUSE TALKING ABOUT THE REASON, I'LL ADD IT. IF YOU DON'T THINK THAT IT MAKES SENSE, THEN I WON'T. BOARD MEMBERS.
MEMBER JERRY, WHAT'S YOUR OPINION? I THINK THE REASON FOR THE DESIGNATION OF THE ALTERNATE WAS, IN MY OPINION, WOULD BE SUFFICIENT. DO YOU NEED TO GIVE THE REASON WHY THE ALTERNATE IS, I DON'T KNOW, I'M LEGALLY I WOULD HAVE COULDN'T ANSWER YES OR NO. WELL, I'M WONDERING WHAT'S A GOOD ENOUGH REASON. I MEAN, WE'VE HAD PEOPLE MISS A MEETING BECAUSE THEY HAD A RELATIVE DOING A CONCERT AT A LOCAL SCHOOL. RIGHT. AND SOME PEOPLE MIGHT THINK, WELL, THAT'S NOT A REASON TO NOT DO YOUR JOB FOR THE TOWN. WELL, THAT'S A DIFFERENT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT A DIFFERENT. THAT'S NOT THAT'S FOR THE ATTENDANCE ISSUE. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT APPOINTING WHY THE ALTERNATE IS BUT IF WE'RE HAVING TO PUT IN WHY THE PERSON.
YEAH. SEE THAT'S WHY I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO. RIGHT. LIKE I DON'T KNOW THAT EVERYBODY NEEDS TO GET INTO SOME OF THE REASONS. IF SOMEBODY CALLS AND. THE REASONS SOMETIMES BETWEEN THEM AND, AND WHAT'S GOING ON IN THEIR LIFE. RIGHT. COULD BE PERSONAL. RIGHT? RIGHT. SO THAT'S WHY I DON'T THINK IT'S NECESSARY TO. ALL RIGHT. SCHEDULING CONFLICT OR PERSONAL REASONS THAT JUST DON'T GET INTO IT ANY FURTHER. IF WE WANTED TO PUT A REASON. I THINK WE'RE CROSSING LINES HERE. MAYBE I THINK THAT JOSH HAS DONE A GOOD JOB WITH THE I MEAN, THIS IS MY OPINION ONLY, BUT I THINK THAT WE'VE GOT IT CLARIFIED. AND AS FAR AS THE REASON GOES, IF THERE'S NOT A MEMBER HERE AND WE DON'T HAVE A QUORUM, I DON'T NEED A REASON TO TO TELL THE ALTERNATE THAT THEY'RE GOING TO BE IN. THAT'S HOW I THAT'S HOW I LOOK AT IT.
OKAY. I THINK I'VE HEARD FROM A MAJORITY OF THE BOARD THAT SHARES THAT SENTIMENT. SO.
RIGHT. I'LL LEAVE THAT UP. IT'S NOT MY OPINION OR RECOMMENDATION TO THE TOWN BOARD. IT'S THE BOARD'S OPINION OR RECOMMENDATION TO THE TOWN BOARD. I'LL DEAL WITH THE OTHER SIDE OF IT WITH THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT. EXACTLY. THANKS, JOSH. YEP. SO I THINK I JUST TO
[00:30:03]
KIND OF RECAP, WE TALKED ABOUT OBVIOUSLY, THIS ALTERNATE MEMBER SECTION OF THE CODE, WE'RE GOING TO ADD SECTION OR ANOTHER CLAUSE SAYING THAT IN THE CHAIR'S ABSENCE THAT WE WILL ADD EITHER THE VICE CHAIR OR THE CHAIRPERSON'S DESIGNEE WILL BE ABLE TO DESIGNATE AN ALTERNATE MEMBER. AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO ADD A SUBSECTION. WE'LL CALL IT SUBSECTION E THAT ALTERNATE BOARD MEMBERS ARE EXPECTED TO ATTEND EVERY MEETING. AS MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING BOARD OR ZONING BOARD ARE EXPECTED TO. AND I THINK THOSE WERE ALL OF YOUR RECOMMENDATIONS. AM I MISSING ANYTHING? ANY LAST COMMENTS, ANYTHING YOU WANT THE TOWN BOARD TO KNOW BEFORE THE PUBLIC HEARING IN FEBRUARY? THIS IS GOING ON THE 23RD, THE 23RD. SO WE CAN IF NEED BE, YOU CAN BRING IT TO THE FEBRUARY 18TH MEETING IF YOU'VE WANTED TO.OKAY. I'D LIKE TO JUST PONDER OVER IT A LITTLE MORE. OKAY. WHAT I THINK WHAT WE'VE DISCUSSED TONIGHT, I THINK WHAT THE BOARD COVERED TONIGHT, I THINK THOSE ARE THE MOST IMPORTANT. SOUNDS GOOD. WITH THAT, I WILL TAKE THIS, SEND IT TO THE TOWN BOARD AND THERE WILL BE OTHER ZONING CODE RECOMMENDATIONS COMING DOWN THE PIPELINE. SO YOU'LL BE SEEING A LOT MORE OF ME AT THE WORK SESSION OVER THE NEXT COUPLE OF MONTHS. SO OKAY. THANK YOU FOR THAT UPDATE. THANK YOU AS ALWAYS. OKAY. I'LL WAIT FOR YOU TO GET BACK TO YOUR SEAT THERE.
AND I'M GOING TO CALL THE FEBRUARY 4TH, 2026 PLANNING BOARD MEETING TO ORDER. PLEASE RISE FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. I PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS. ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. THANK YOU. MEMBER. WOULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL? YES. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE TOWN OF. JUST CALL THE ROLL. OH. I'M SORRY.
ATTENDANCE. I'M SORRY. AUGUST. HERE. HAVE YOU GOTTA THINK FOR A MOMENT? SORRY I MISSED. OKAY.
BILL. CLERK HERE. CAITLIN SHIMURA, ABSENT AND EXCUSED. GRONINGEN. PRESENT. KIM. RYAN.
PRESENT. BRIAN STEWART. PRESENT. RICH SAJAK PRESENT. OKAY, ALL MEMBERS ARE IN ATTENDANCE. OKAY, SO. MEMBER SHARE. MEMBER SHIMURA IS GONE THIS EVENING, BUT I WANTED TO THANK HER FOR FILLING IN FOR ME LAST WEEK OR LAST MEETING. I HAD A SEVERE CASE OF LARYNGITIS. THERE WERE SOME PEOPLE HAPPY ABOUT THAT. HOWEVER, I'M BACK AND WE WILL START WITH OUR FIRST CASE,
[1. Public Hearing – 7:00 P.M., Richard Saunders – Requesting Preliminary Plat Approval on a proposal for a 2-lot subdivision at 5225 Scranton Road ]
WHICH IS A PUBLIC HEARING FOR RICHARD SAUNDERS. IS THE APPLICANT HERE? YES. OKAY. SO RICHARD SAUNDERS IS REQUESTING A PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL ON A PROPOSAL FOR A TWO LOT SUBDIVISION AT 5225 SCRANTON ROAD. HE'S LOOKING BASICALLY TO DO A LOT SPLIT. AND TONIGHT WE'RE HAVING THE PUBLIC HEARING PLANNING DEPARTMENT. DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO BRING US UP TO DATE ON? THE ONLY THING THAT I'LL ADD IS WE DID. OBVIOUSLY, WHEN WE SENT OUT THE NOTICES, I DID RECEIVE A COUPLE PHONE CALLS FROM SOME PEOPLE WHO LIVE OVER BY SCRANTON, JUST KIND OF ASKING WHAT IS GOING ON. I THINK SOMETIMES THE WORD SUBDIVISION SCARES PEOPLE. SO THEY ASKED IF THERE WERE LIKE 15 HOMES GOING IN OVER THERE. TO WHICH I RESPONDED, NO, THAT THE SUBDIVISION IS JUST TAKING ESSENTIALLY AN INVISIBLE LOT LINE AND SPLITTING THE LOT INTO TWO, AND THEY HAD NO FURTHER CONCERNS AFTER THAT. SO THAT'S ALL. I'LL ADD THAT I DID ADDRESS SOME OF THE CALLS THAT WE DID GET ON THE SUBDIVISION REQUEST. OTHER THAN THAT, NO OTHER COMMENT. OKAY. THANK YOU. THE APPLICANT, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING OTHER ANYTHING ELSE TO OFFER TO US TONIGHT OTHER THAN WHAT YOU GAVE IN YOUR PRESENTATION AT THE LAST MEETING? DID ANYTHING NEW DEVELOP SINCE YOU WERE HERE? NO, I DO NOT. I THINK IT'S PRETTY.THIS. OKAY. SO. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. MEMBER. JURY, WOULD YOU PLEASE READ THE NOTICE? OKAY. LEGAL NOTICE. TOWN OF HAMBURG. PLANNING BOARD PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE TOWN OF HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD WILL CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING ON A TWO LOT SUBDIVISION PROPOSED BY RICHARD SAUNDERS, TO BE LOCATED AT 5225 SCRANTON ROAD. THE PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD ON FEBRUARY 4TH, 2026 AT 7 P.M. IN ROOM SEVEN A, SEVEN B OF THE TOWN OF HAMBURG TOWN HALL DATED JANUARY 23RD, 2026. OKAY, IN ORDER TO HEAR
[00:35:08]
ALL RESIDENTS AT A REASONABLE HOUR, A THREE MINUTE RULE WILL APPLY. A PUBLIC HEARING IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE COMMUNITY TO SHARE INFORMATION ON HOW THEY ARE IMPACTED, HOW THEY MAY BE IMPACTED BY THE PROJECT. IT IS NOT A QUESTION AND ANSWER PERIOD. ALL STATEMENTS MADE DURING THE HEARING, AS WELL AS WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE, WILL BE SENT TO THE PLANNING BOARD AND TO THE APPLICANT FOR LATER RESPONSES. SO AT THIS TIME, I'D LIKE TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS CASE. IS THERE ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WISHES TO SPEAK ON 5225 SCRANTON ROAD? SECOND CALL FOR ANYONE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK ON 5225 SCRANTON ROAD. THIRD AND FINAL CALL FOR 5225 SCRANTON ROAD FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING. SEEING NONE, I AM OFFICIALLY CLOSING THE PUBLIC HEARING. AND, JOSH, WE BOARD MEMBERS, DO YOU HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, CONCERNS? ANYTHING ELSE TO DISCUSS? EVERYBODY SHAKING THEIR HEAD? NO, BECAUSE I, I KNOW THAT THE RECORDING CAN HEAR THAT CHAIR. THE ONLY THING THAT I WILL ADD IS I KNOW I BELIEVE AT THE LAST PLANNING BOARD MEETING, THERE WAS A QUESTION ABOUT, OH, IS THERE AN EXISTING STRUCTURE? BECAUSE IF YOU LOOK AT THE GOOGLE MAPS, YOU'LL SEE THERE'S AN EXISTING STRUCTURE WE DO HAVE AND IT IS IN THE SHAREPOINT WE PULLED RIGHT FROM BUILDING INSPECTION.THAT STRUCTURE HAS BEEN DEMOED. RIGHT, MR. SAUNDERS? YEAH, THE HOUSE HAS BEEN DEMOED. SO I KNOW THAT WAS A QUESTION ON WHETHER OR NOT THAT WAS STILL UP OR NOT. THAT HOUSE HAS BEEN DEMOED. SO THERE'S THE PROOF OF THAT. AND THEN THE OTHER QUESTION, THE ONLY QUESTION THAT I HAVE, AS WE'RE CONSIDERING THE APPROVAL IS, MR. SAUNDERS, HAVE YOU GIVEN THOUGHT TO WHETHER ON THE SECOND LOT YOU WOULD WANT IT TO BE A SINGLE FAMILY HOME OR A DUPLEX? WHAT ARE YOUR CONCERNS THERE A LOT, YEAH, THE BIGGER LOT ARE LIKELY TO TWO POINTS.
OKAY. SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE WOULD JUST ASK FOR ON THE SUBDIVISION PLAT IS THAT THERE'S A NOTE THAT YOU WOULD WANT IT TO BE A DUPLEX, JUST THAT HELPS ENGINEERING AND THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT, IF THAT'S THE ROUTE THAT YOU WANT TO GO. SO THAT'S MY ONLY OTHER COMMENT FOR THIS BOARD TO CONSIDER. I DO HAVE A QUESTION. IS THERE STILL A BUILDING ON THE ONE PIECE OF PROPERTY. THERE'S A SHED STILL ON THE. AND CAN YOU COME UP TO THE MICROPHONE PLEASE. YES. THERE IS A SHED ON. AND IS THE SHED STAYING ON THE PROPERTY. THE SHED IS GOING TO STAY ON THE PROPERTY BUT IT'S GOING TO BE MOVED. OKAY. AND WHERE ARE YOU PLANNING ON PUTTING IT. WE'RE GOING TO PUT IT ON THE LARGER LOT. I'M GOING TO PUT IT TO THE WHAT I WOULD SAY WOULD BE THE WEST SOUTH CORNER. OKAY. SO IT'S NOT GOING TO BE ON THAT FOR, FOR LACK OF A BETTER DESCRIPTION, THE FLAG LOT WHERE IT IS RIGHT NOW. CORRECT. THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY.
I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT. AND THEN MR. SAUNDERS, JUST IN THE DRAWING, THE FINAL DRAWING THAT THEN GETS APPROVED BY THE TOWN ENGINEER FOR THE PLANNING BOARD, CAN WE JUST HAVE A VERSION THAT JUST SHOWS THAT JUST SO THAT WE HAVE THE MOST RECENT VERSION OF THAT I CAN HAVE THAT DONE? YES. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ANY ANY OTHER QUESTIONS DISCUSSION. SO IS THE BOARD COMFORTABLE WITH ME AUTHORIZING THE RESOLUTION. YES. YES OKAY. AND THAT'S FOR FEBRUARY 18TH. YES. OKAY. SO WE'LL SEE YOU FEBRUARY 18TH FOR POTENTIAL APPROVAL RESOLUTIONS OKAY. THANK YOU. I, I WANT TO JUMP AHEAD IF I COULD I JUST WANT TO NOTE IN CASE ANYBODY'S
[3. 3556 Lakeshore Development LLC – Requesting Site Plan Approval for the development of a mixed-use site, offering condominiums and townhomes for residential use, and commercial uses, such as restaurants, hotel space, and continuing the use of some of the existing office space at the Gateway Building, to be located at 3556 Lake Shore Road ]
HERE FOR THE THIRD AND FINAL CASE, THE GATEWAY PROJECT OR THREE FIVE, FIVE, SIX LAKESHORE DEVELOPMENT, THEY ARE NOT GOING TO APPEAR IN FRONT OF US TONIGHT. SO IF YOU ARE HERE FOR THAT, THEY WILL. THEY'VE ASKED FOR A POSTPONEMENT. THEY WILL BE GOING IN FRONT OF THE TOWN BOARD. THAT'S CORRECT. JUST FOR A LITTLE BIT OF CONTEXT, THAT PROJECT THAT WAS ON THE AGENDA TONIGHT IS GOING TO BE APPEARING AT A TOWN BOARD WORK SESSION IN THE NEAR FUTURE TO TALK ABOUT THE POTENTIAL FOR A POSSIBLE PUTT AMENDMENT. SO THAT'S WHY THEY'RE NOT BEFORE THE BOARD TONIGHT. THANK YOU. OKAY. AND THEN OUR FINAL CASE FOR THIS EVENING IS BRAD[2. Briad Development LLC – Requesting a Planning Board report and recommendation for the rezoning of a 4.14-acre parcel (SBL #: 160.18-1-9.1) from C-1 to C-2 for the development of a small-scale traveler center, anchored by an 8,700 sq-ft building to include several quick-service restaurant (QSR) establishments, separate fuel pump stations, and other associated parking and site improvements ]
DEVELOPMENT, LLC, REQUESTING A PLANNING BOARD REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION FOR THE REZONING OF A 4.14 ACRE PARCEL, SBL NUMBER 1601819.1 FROM C1 TO C2 FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A SMALL SCALE TRAVELER CENTER ANCHORED BY AN 8700 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING TO INCLUDE SEVERAL QUICK SERVICE RESTAURANTS, ESTABLISHMENT, SEPARATE FULL FUEL PUMP STATION, AND OTHER ASSOCIATED PARKING AND SAY IMPROVEMENTS. GOOD EVENING. WOULD YOU PLEASE IDENTIFY[00:40:04]
YOURSELF AND MAKE SURE YOU SPEAK INTO THE MIC? BECAUSE DURING MY REST, I GOT TO WATCH THIS MEETING AND I'M GLAD I DIDN'T HAVE A BUTTON THAT I COULD YELL OUT AND SAY, USE YOUR MIC. DID I WANDER AWAY FROM THE. YES, YOU DID SEVERAL TIMES. SO THAT'S MY CHAIRPERSON AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING BOARD, SEAN HOPKINS, ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT. ALSO WITH ME IS JAMES TALARICO. THIS IS A PROJECT YOU DID LOOK AT DURING A PREVIOUS WORK SESSION. WE'RE GOING TO FOCUS ON AN UPDATE. YOU CAN GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE. SO THE SITE ITSELF I THINK WE ALL KNOW WHERE IT'S LOCATED. INTERSECTION OF SOUTHWESTERN AND BIG TREE, 4.1 ACRES IN SIZE, CURRENTLY ZONED C1. WE'RE ASKING THAT IT BE ZONED C2. ULTIMATELY, IN CONNECTION WITH THIS REVIEW YOUR ADVISORY TO THE TOWN BOARD. IT WAS PRESENTED TO THE CODE REVIEW COMMITTEE ON NOVEMBER 19TH OF LAST YEAR. THE CODE REVIEW COMMITTEE DEEMED IT TO HAVE ENOUGH MERIT TO GO FORWARD. THE TOWN BOARD REFERRED THE PROJECT TO THIS BOARD DURING ITS MEETING ON DECEMBER 4TH, AND THEN JAMES DID PRESENT THIS PROJECT TO YOU DURING YOUR WORK SESSION ON DECEMBER 17TH OF LAST YEAR. THE AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THAT SITE IN THE GENERAL VICINITY. SO THE SITE PLAN ITSELF, WHAT ARE WE PROPOSING? WE'RE PROPOSING? YOU CAN SEE THAT NEW BUILDING THERE, THE APPROXIMATE SIZE OF 8000FT■S FOR VARIOUS TENANTS. IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THIS DEVELOPER IS WHAT I WOULD CALL ATYPICAL, AND THAT THEY'RE ALSO THE FRANCHISEE, WHICH MEANS THEY HAVE COMPLETE CONTROL OVER THE OPERATION. IT'S VERY GOOD TRAIT IN TERMS OF MAINTENANCE, ETC. ETC. MEANING THEY WILL HAVE SOLE CUSTODY CONTROL OVER THE PROJECT. WE ARE SHOWING FUEL, AS YOU CAN SEE OUT THERE BY THE STREET. THAT'S WHAT TRIGGERS THE NEED FOR THE C2 ZONING CLASSIFICATION THAT WE'RE SEEKING. YOU WANT TO GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE? THE COMPANY CIRCLE K WOULD OBVIOUSLY BE THE ANCHOR IN TERMS OF THAT PARTICULAR ASPECT OF IT. WE ARE SHOWING 43 PARKING SPACES, SUPPLEMENTED BY 14 PARKING SPACES FOR THE GAS CANOPY. AND OF COURSE THOSE WILL BE LOCATED UNDER THE CANOPY. WE HAVE MADE A DELIBERATE EFFORT TO DESIGN THIS SITE SO IT'LL BE EFFICIENT ON SITE CIRCULATION. THE BUILDING IS APPROXIMATELY 8700FT■!S IN SIZE, AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, ON THE SITE PLAN, YOU CAN SEE WE'VE DONE OUR BEST TO MOVE THE DRIVEWAY ONTO BIG TREE AS FAR SOUTHWESTERN AS FAR AWAY FROM THE INTERSECTION AS POSSIBLE. THAT'S ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE. THAT'S LITERALLY AS FAR AS IT CAN GO. OBVIOUSLY, GIVEN THE NATURE OF THIS PROJECT, GIVEN THAT WE ARE LOCATED ON A CORNER SITE, ACCESS ONTO BOTH SOUTHWESTERN AND BIG TREE IS INTEGRAL AND ESSENTIAL. NEXT SLIDE. THERE'S A CIRCULATION PLAN THAT WAS ALSO SUBMITTED FOR TRACTOR TRAILERS. WE'VE DESIGNED THIS SITE SO THAT WE CAN ACCOMMODATE THOSE. OBVIOUSLY THAT'S HELPFUL IN TERMS OF EMERGENCY ACCESS AS WELL. NEXT SLIDE. THE COLOR RENDERINGS SHOWING OBVIOUSLY THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING. SHOWING THE REAR. AND OF COURSE THERE WILL BE A DRIVE THROUGH WITH ADEQUATE STACKING. NEXT SLIDE. SO I THINK THIS IS PROBABLY THE MOST IMPORTANT SLIDE C1 IS WHAT OUR ZONING CLASSIFICATION IS, WHICH IS PINK, C2 IS IS IN RED. AND AS YOU CAN SEE TO A LARGE DEGREE AT THAT INTERSECTION, THE PREDOMINANT ZONING CLASSIFICATION IN THE PREDOMINANT USES ARE WHAT'S PERMITTED IN THE C2 ZONING DISTRICT. SO WE DON'T THINK THIS IS A STRETCH IN TERMS OF A LAND USE DECISION TO REZONE THIS SITE FROM C ONE TO C2, WHICH IS WHAT WE'RE ASKING. NEXT SLIDE. OBVIOUSLY, THIS IS SUBJECT TO AN ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PURSUANT TO THE STATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY REVIEW ACT. ULTIMATELY, IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT WE DID SUBMIT A PART ONE OF THE LONG ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM WITH THE REZONING APPLICATION, I BELIEVE THAT WAS DATED DECEMBER 5TH. THE TOWN IS IN THE PROCESS OF CONDUCTING A COORDINATED ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW, AND WE DO BELIEVE THAT WE'VE PROVIDED ADEQUATE INFORMATION THAT ULTIMATELY THE TOWN BOARD CAN SATISFY ITS SUBSTANTIVE OBLIGATIONS PURSUANT TO SEEKER, WHICH IS, OF COURSE, IDENTIFYING THE RELEVANT AREAS OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERN, ENSURING THAT THEY TAKE A HARD LOOK AT THOSE AND THEN FINALLY, WITH JOSH'S HELP, PROVIDING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION SUPPORTED BY A REASONED ELABORATION. NEXT SLIDE. ALTHOUGH WE'RE NOT THERE YET, IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE WE WILL NEED TO SUBMIT FULLY ENGINEERED PLANS ALONG WITH THE STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN THAT WILL OCCUR IN CONNECTION WITH THE FUTURE REVIEW OF A SITE PLAN APPLICATION THAT WILL COME BACK IN FRONT OF THIS BOARD. WE'RE WELL AWARE OF THE TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS FOR STORMWATER QUALITY AND QUANTITY OF BOTH THE DECK AND THE TOWN OF HAMBURG THAT APPLY TO A PROJECT THAT WILL RESULT IN A DISTURBANCE OF MORE THAN ONE ACRE. AND AS I INDICATED PREVIOUSLY, WE WILL BE ASKING THAT THE TOWN BOARD ISSUE A NEGATIVE DECLARATION. NEXT SLIDE. TRAFFIC IMPACTS. WE HAVE[00:45:01]
PROVIDED IT TRIP GENERATION DATA. I DO WANT TO NOTE IT DOESN'T ACCOUNT FOR PAST BY TRAFFIC AND WHAT I THINK YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH THIS FROM OTHER PROJECTS. PAST BY TRAFFIC MEANS SOMEONE THAT'S ALREADY DRIVING BY THE SITE, BUT BECAUSE NOW IT'S CONVENIENT, THEY WILL STOP AND UTILIZE ONE OF THE MANY SERVICES THAT WILL BE LOCATED HERE. WE'VE ALSO REACHED OUT TO THE NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, AND CARL CALARCO HAS INDICATED THEY ARE WILLING TO CONSIDER THAT DRIVEWAY ON THE SOUTHWESTERN BOULEVARD. AS WE KNOW FROM PAST PROJECTS, THAT HAS SOMETIMES BEEN PROBLEMATIC. BUT THIS IS A CORNER. AND GIVEN THE NATURE OF THIS USE, AGAIN, YOU HAVE TO HAVE TWO ACCESS POINTS ONTO THE ADJACENT ROADWAY NETWORK. NEXT SLIDE. WE DID RECEIVE A NO IMPACT LETTER ISSUED BY THE NEW YORK STATE OFFICE OF PARKS, RECREATION AND HISTORIC PRESERVATION DATED DECEMBER 12TH. SO THERE ARE NO CONCERNS ABOUT ARCHEOLOGICAL, CULTURAL OR HISTORIC RESOURCES AT THIS PARTICULAR SITE. NEXT SLIDE.WE'VE ALSO SUBMITTED A WETLAND DELINEATION. THERE ARE NO MAPPED WETLANDS SUBJECT TO THE JURISDICTION OF EITHER THE UNITED STATES ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS OR THE NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION ON THIS SITE. NEXT SLIDE. HOWEVER, BASED ON THE RESULTS OF THAT DELINEATION, THERE IS A VERY SMALL, TINY, POTENTIALLY FEDERAL WETLAND WITH A SIZE OF ONLY 0.06 ACRES. WE'RE GOING TO LEAVE THAT AREA ALONE. ULTIMATELY, GIVEN HOW SMALL WETLAND THAT IS, I THINK THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS PROBABLY HAS NO INTEREST IN ISSUING A JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION. BUT IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE, WE RECOGNIZE THAT POTENTIAL WETLAND AREA AND WE'RE SIMPLY NOT GOING TO TOUCH IT. IT IS ALSO IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT IT BISECTS THE SITE. AND IT'S JUST, AGAIN, THAT LITTLE, LITTLE TINY AREA WHERE THE ORANGE ARROW IS DRAWN TO NEXT SLIDE. SO WITH ALL THAT BEING SAID, AND AGAIN, BASED ON THE FACT THAT C-2 ZONING IS ESSENTIAL, BASED ON THE FACT THAT WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING IS NOT INCONSISTENT WITH THE PREDOMINANT ZONING CLASSIFICATION IN THAT IMMEDIATE VICINITY. RESPECTFULLY, WE ARE ASKING YOU TO ISSUE A POSITIVE RECOMMENDATION ON THE REZONING TO THE TOWN BOARD. IF THAT OCCURS, THE TOWN BOARD, OF COURSE, THEN WILL NEED TO HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING. THIS ALSO DOES REQUIRE A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR THE FUELING FACILITY AS WELL AS SITE PLAN APPROVAL. SO THIS IS STEP ONE OF MANY STEPS. BUT WE DO THINK THIS PROJECT DESERVES MERIT. AND WE THINK IT'S A WORTHWHILE ENDEAVOR IN TERMS OF THE REQUESTED REZONING. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR EITHER MYSELF OR JAMES, WE WOULD WELCOME THE OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS THEM. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. PLANNING DEPARTMENT. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I'LL ASK TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT THAT YOU CAN, CAN YOU PROVIDE SOME OF THE CONVERSATIONS THAT YOU JUST HAD WITH DOT, JUST TO KIND OF GET I KNOW THE BOARD ASKED ABOUT, YOU KNOW, THE CONVERSATION WITH DOT AND WHAT THEY'VE SAID TO DATE.
OBVIOUSLY, WE KNOW THEY DON'T GIVE A YES OR A NO ON WHETHER OR NOT YOU'LL HAVE ACCESS, BUT CAN YOU KIND OF JUST TALK ABOUT THOSE CONVERSATIONS AND WHAT'S LED UP TO THIS POINT? SURE. HI EVERYONE. MY NAME IS JAMES TALARICO. I MET YOU GUYS ALL LAST MONTH. I HAD THE CALLS ALONG WITH OUR ENGINEERING GROUP IN REGARDS WITH KEVIN HEBERT AND CARL CALARCO IN REGARDS TO OUR SITE. THE APPLICATION THAT WE PRESENTED TONIGHT WITH THE NEW SITE PLAN REVISED, WAS BASED ON SOME OF THE COMMENTS THAT WERE MADE AT THE BOARD LAST MONTH, ALONG WITH RECOMMENDATIONS THAT DOT HAD MADE IN REGARDS TO THE ACTUAL SITE PLAN LAYOUT. WE THEN MADE THOSE CHANGES, SUBMITTED THEM BACK TO THE STATE. THE STATE THEN ISSUED AN EMAIL BACK TO MYSELF AND OUR ENGINEERING GROUP SAYING THAT THEY WERE OPEN TO GIVING US ACCESS OFF OF SOUTHWESTERN BOULEVARD WITH A FORMAL APPLICATION. SO THE THE PATH FORWARD AT THIS POINT IS, IS IF WE GET A POSITIVE RESULT HERE, THAT WOULD BE OUR NEXT STEP.
OKAY. JOSH INDICATED THAT IS TYPICAL, MEANING UNFORTUNATELY, DOT DOESN'T GIVE YOU AN UNEQUIVOCAL YES. THEY ALWAYS SAY IT'S SUBJECT TO THE ISSUANCE OF A HIGHWAY WORK PERMIT, AND WE'RE WAY EARLY FOR HIGHWAY WORK PERMIT. TYPICALLY, TO GET A FULL HIGHWAY WORK PERMIT, YOU HAVE TO HAVE YOUR CONTRACTOR SELECTED, INSURANCE IN PLACE, ETC. ETC. SO I'LL ALSO ADD THAT AS YOU GUYS KNOW, WE ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR PRODUCING A RECOMMENDATION AND A REZONING REPORT, WHICH EVERYONE I BELIEVE SHOULD HAVE A COPY OF IN FRONT OF THEM.
WHAT I DID WAS, AND YOU GUYS KNOW, I TAKE SOME OF THE INPUT THAT WE'VE HEARD FROM WHEN JAMES PRESENTED BACK AT THE DECEMBER 17TH MEETING. I TAKE THE INPUT THAT WE'VE GOTTEN FROM THERE. AND I LOOK AT, YOU KNOW, THE CONFORMANCE TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ALSO LOOK AT, YOU KNOW, SOME OF THE EXISTING USES WITHIN THE AREA. AND WE PUT TOGETHER A REZONING REPORT THAT HOPEFULLY CAPTURES ALL OF YOUR GUYS'S THOUGHTS, BUT IT'LL BE THE THE THOUGHTS OF THE SIX OF YOU THAT WILL GO TO THE TOWN BOARD. SO I'LL KIND OF JUST RUN THROUGH THE REZONING REPORT AND KIND OF GO OUTLINE BY OUTLINE OF WHAT'S IN THERE, AND THEN WE CAN TALK ABOUT HOW YOU WANT TO AMEND IT AND GO FROM THERE. JOSH, BEFORE YOU GO, I HAVE A QUESTION. SO
[00:50:05]
CAN WE GO TO THE BACK TO THE MAP OF THE THE SITE PLAN? ONE OF THE CONCERNS WAS ABOUT RELOCATING THE ENTRANCE OF BIG TREE FURTHER NORTH. WAS THAT DONE? YES. YES. OKAY. THAT WAS THE FURTHEST I HAD MENTIONED EARLIER. YEAH. OKAY. THE DRIVE AISLE ON BIG TREE WAS SHIFTED PLAN NORTH. OKAY, OKAY. I JUST WANTED TO I WANTED TO SO WE MAY WANT TO REWORD THAT, THAT, THAT THE APPLICANT DID IN FACT RELOCATE THE ENTRANCE ON BIG TREE FURTHER NORTH ON THE PARCEL. SURE. SORRY FOR THE INTERRUPTION THERE, JOSH. SO I KNOW THAT. CLARK. BILL. CLARK.SO I UNDERSTAND THE DOT DIDN'T SAY A DEFINITIVE YES, BUT THE ANSWER THEY GOT IS THAT DIFFERENT THAN THE ANSWER OTHER APPLICANTS HAVE GOTTEN WHEN IT WAS A NO, RIGHT, I WOULD SAY YES. WE HAVE IN OTHER SITUATIONS, EVEN ON CORNER LOT PARCELS THAT IMPACT THE STATE HIGHWAY SYSTEM. AND CAMMY KNOWS THIS AS WELL. WE'VE GOTTEN EITHER FLAT OUT NO OR WE'VE GOTTEN WE WON'T EVEN CONSIDER IT. SO THIS IS DEFINITELY, LIKE I SAID, THEY WE DON'T ANTICIPATE EVER GETTING A YES. BUT GETTING AN OPEN TO YOU KNOW, WE'LL HAVE FURTHER CONVERSATIONS DEFINITELY DIFFERS FROM OTHER APPLICATIONS AS WE'VE SEEN IN THE RECENT PAST. THANK YOU. YEAH. MR. CLARK, AS YOU KNOW, AND I'VE WORKED ON SOME OF THOSE PROJECTS, THERE'S BEEN CLEAR, UNEQUIVOCAL NO ON SEVERAL OF THEM, INCLUDING THE ALLIANCE HOMES MULTI-FAMILY PROJECT, WHICH WE TRIED AGAIN AND AGAIN. AND THEN THERE WAS A CAR WASH THAT WE PROPOSED ON ROUTE FIVE AT THE OLD BOTTLE AT THE REDEMPTION CENTER, AND THAT COULDN'T GO FORWARD, EVEN THOUGH WE ONLY HAD 50FT OF FRONTAGE ON THE SIDE STREET, THEY WOULD NOT ALLOW US ACCESS. SO UNLIKE THOSE PROJECTS HERE, THEY HAVE STATED IN WRITING THEY'RE WILLING TO CONSIDER. AND ULTIMATELY I'M CONFIDENT WE WILL GET THAT ACCESS BECAUSE, AGAIN, OTHERWISE, WHAT'S THE BENEFIT OF HAVING A CORNER SITE? AND THIS TYPE OF USE DOES NEED TWO ACCESS POINTS. OKAY, GREAT. THANK YOU. YOU'RE WELCOME. ANYONE ELSE HAVE ANYTHING IN REGARDS BEFORE JOSH STARTS GOING THROUGH THIS RECOMMENDATION? HAVE YOU HAD A CHANCE TO LOOK AT IT? DO YOU HAVE ANY OTHER COMMENTS TO MAKE? THAT'S BEFORE US I DON'T OKAY.
ALL RIGHT JOSH ALL RIGHT I'LL JUST TRY TO PULL IT UP FOR. ALL RIGHT. SO FOR THE REZONING REPORT, LIKE I SAID, THE FIRST THING BECAUSE THIS IS THE REZONING OF LAND, ONE OF THE THINGS I LOOK AT IS SEEING IF THERE'S ANY REFERENCES IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN SPECIFIC TO THE SITE. OBVIOUSLY, THIS LOCATION IS AT THE INTERSECTION OF SOUTHWESTERN AND BIGTREE.
IT'S IN THE COMP PLAN. IT TALKS ABOUT THAT THE AREA IN GENERAL IS ONE OF THE IMPORTANT GATEWAY AREAS IN THE TOWN, AND IT MENTIONS HOW IT'S IN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO WHAT'S GOING TO BE THE STADIUM IMPACT AREA. BUT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DOES NOT SET FORTH SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THIS SITE. THIS PROJECT SITE SPECIFICALLY, WHAT IT DOES DO IS THAT IT TALKS ABOUT THE SEVEN CORNERS INTERSECTION. SO IT DOES TALK ABOUT BOTH THE NORTH SIDE AND THE SOUTH SIDE OF SOUTHWESTERN BOULEVARD. AND IT DOES SAY THAT IN THIS AREA, YOU KNOW, WHAT OTHER KIND OF USES ARE GOING TO NEED ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENT. THE OTHER THING THAT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DOES SAY IS THAT IT RECOMMENDS THAT THERE SHOULD BE AN INVESTIGATION FOR THE POTENTIAL FOR POSSIBLY A NEW ZONING DISTRICT ALONG THE NORTH SIDE OF SOUTHWESTERN BOULEVARD, AND IT ALSO DENOTES THAT THE NORTH SIDE IS A COMMERCIAL AREA, BUT IT NEEDS USES AND RESTRICTIONS THAT HELP PROTECT THE SURROUNDING RESIDENTIAL AREA.
JUST FOR CONTEXT, THE NEAREST RESIDENTIAL AREA IN THIS SITE IS BURKE PARKWAY, WHICH IS NORTH OF OF THIS SITE. AND I KNOW WE TALKED ABOUT WANTING TO HAVE, YOU KNOW, THE GAS STATION FUEL CANOPY AWAY AS FAR AWAY FROM THAT RESIDENTIAL COMPONENT AS POSSIBLE. AND WHEN I GET INTO THE POSSIBLE CONDITIONS THAT YOU MAY RECOMMEND TO THE TOWN BOARD, I KNOW THIS BOARD HAS TALKED ABOUT POTENTIALLY WANTING SOME MORE ROBUST LANDSCAPING ALONG THAT NORTHERN PROPERTY BOUNDARY. SO WE CAN KIND OF TALK ABOUT WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE IN TERMS OF THE RECOMMENDATION ITSELF. SO WHAT I SAID IS, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY, YOU KNOW, IT APPEARS THAT THE REZONING WOULD BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE COMP PLAN BECAUSE NOT ONLY IS THE PROJECT IN ALIGNMENT WITH THE EXISTING COMMERCIAL THAT'S ON BOTH SIDES OF SOUTHWESTERN BOULEVARD, C2 PROPERTY EXISTS, AS MR. HOPKINS NOTED, TO THE EAST AND TO THE SOUTH OF THE PROPERTY. IT WOULD NOT CREATE A SPOT ZONING ISSUE WHERE WE'RE REZONING IT TO C2 AND THERE'S NO C2 ANYWHERE IN THE AREA. THERE IS C2 ADJOINING TO THE EAST AND THE SOUTH. AND THEN I ALSO TALK ABOUT BECAUSE THERE ARE THE TOPS GAS STATION IS IN THE AREA BASED OFF OF, YOU KNOW, THE INFORMATION THAT WE'VE PROVIDED. I DON'T BELIEVE THAT IT WOULD CREATE A SIGNIFICANT CHANGE TO THE CHARACTER OF THE AREA. IT'S A MAINLY A COMMERCIAL AREA. LIKE I SAID, THE NEAREST RESIDENTIAL
[00:55:02]
IS ON THE NORTHERN SIDE OF BIG TREE, SO NOT SAYING THAT IT'S TOO FAR AWAY, BUT IT'S NOT, YOU KNOW, ADJOINING, YOU KNOW, LIKE IT'S RIGHT UP AGAINST THE PROJECT SITE. AND THEN I ALSO TALK ABOUT IN THE RECOMMENDATION, WE WOULD WANT TO GIVE SPECIAL CONSIDERATION TO THOSE RESIDENTS ON BURKE PARKWAY. AND WE WOULD ALSO WANT TO GIVE SPECIAL CONSIDERATION TO THE TRAFFIC CONCERNS ALONG SOUTHWESTERN AND VICTORY. WE KNOW THOSE ARE HEAVILY TRAVELED, HEAVILY TRAFFICKED AREAS IN THE TOWN. AND WE ALSO TALK ABOUT THAT. THOSE ISSUES OBVIOUSLY WILL BE ADDRESSED WITH THE NEW YORK STATE DOT, AND WE CAN ALSO REQUEST INPUT FROM THE TRAFFIC SAFETY BOARD. THEY OBVIOUSLY USUALLY LOOK AT TOWN ROADS, BUT IT DOESN'T HURT TO ALSO GET THEIR INPUT IF THIS BOARD REQUESTS. AND THEN IN TERMS OF WHERE THE CONDITIONS ARE AND WHAT I, YOU KNOW, PUT THAT I THINK THE BOARD, BASED OFF OF THE CONVERSATIONS THAT WE HAD LAST TIME, IS THAT THE BOARD WOULD RECOMMEND A REZONING FROM C1 TO C2, C2 WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS. I PUT X AS IN, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN DETERMINE IT IF YOU WOULD WANT A BUFFER ON THE SITE TO PROTECT THE ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES AND TO ALLOW FOR ADEQUATE ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPING ON THE SITE PLAN. I ALSO PUT AS A CONDITION THAT THE BOARD DID ASK FOR A TRAFFIC FLOW AND CIRCULATION STUDY TO HELP AID THE TOWN SEEKER DECISION, AND I SAID THAT HAS SUBSEQUENTLY BEEN PROVIDED AND I SAY SEE ATTACHED. SO WE WOULD ATTACH THAT CIRCULATION FLOW TO THIS REZONING REPORT, WHICH WILL GO TO THE TOWN BOARD TO HELP THEM MAKE A DECISION. AND THEN, AS ALWAYS, I PUT OTHERS IN CASE THERE ARE ANY OTHER CONDITIONS THAT THIS BOARD WOULD WANT TO CONSIDER. AND BEFORE WE TALK ABOUT THE CONDITIONS, I'LL JUST TALK AT THE VERY END. WE ALSO USUALLY ON OUR REZONING REPORTS, ADD A SECTION WHERE THE PLANNING BOARD CAN ADD GENERAL COMMENTS. SO IT'S NOT PER SE A CONDITION THAT YOU WANT THE TOWN BOARD TO CONSIDER, BUT IT'S JUST COMMENTS YOU WANT THAT THE TOWN BOARD TO CONSIDER. I TALKED ABOUT THAT. THE BOARD HAD SOME CONCERNS ABOUT THE AMOUNT OF STACKING SPACES OF THE DRIVE THROUGH. I KNOW THIS BOARD SPECIFICALLY TALKED ABOUT BILLS GAME DAYS, AND BELIEVE THAT THERE WEREN'T ENOUGH PARKING SPACES AS PRESENTED ON THE CURRENT SITE PLAN. THE BOARD DID ASK THE APPLICANT TO CONSULT. I THINK WE CAN TAKE THAT OFF BECAUSE YOU ASKED THEM TO CONSIDER RELOCATING THE ENTRANCE, WHICH WAS DONE. SO I'LL STRIKE THAT THAT HAS BEEN COMPLETED AND THEN THAT THE BOARD AND I THINK, MR. CLARK, YOU TALKED ABOUT THIS, THAT THE BOARD BELIEVES THAT TRAFFIC FROM THE BILLS GAME SHOULD NOT BE USED AS AN IMPEDIMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT, IT'S JUST THAT MITIGATION SHOULD BE OFFERED. AND THEN WE'LL OBVIOUSLY SUBMIT THE MINUTES FROM THIS MEETING AND THE 1217 MEETING TO THE TOWN BOARD. AND THEN AT THE VERY END, AS AN INVOLVED AGENCY, BECAUSE SITE PLAN APPROVAL WOULD COME BEFORE THIS BOARD, THAT THE BOARD WOULD AGREE THAT THE TOWN BOARD SHOULD ACT AS LEAD AGENCY AND WOULD RECOMMEND THAT THE BOARD GIVE A SEEKER NEGATIVE DECLARATION. SO THAT WAS ME GOING OUT ON A LIMB AND, YOU KNOW, TAKING WHAT WAS PROVIDED, YOU KNOW, FROM OUR PREVIOUS CONVERSATIONS. FEEL FREE TO ADD TO THE CONDITIONS. ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR CONCERNS YOU WOULD WANT THE TOWN BOARD TO KNOW, AND I'LL AMEND AS YOU SEE FIT. BOARD MEMBERS, DO YOU HAVE ANY? I, I DO THINK REALLY QUICKLY. I THINK MR. HOPKINS DOES HAVE A QUESTION. COMMENT ONLY HAVE ONE COMMENT PERTAINS TO TRAFFIC. OBVIOUSLY DURING HOME BILLS GAMES EIGHT DAYS A YEAR. I DON'T SEE HOW WE CAN MITIGATE FOR, YOU KNOW, THAT POTENTIAL INCREASE IN VOLUME DURING THOSE GAMES. AND I DON'T WANT THERE TO BE A CONDITION THAT WE JUST CAN'T SATISFY. I WILL SPEAK, I LIVE IN THAT AREA.FOR THE PAST 38 YEARS, NOT FAR AWAY. MEMBER AUGUST TRAFFIC ON A BILLS GAME IS JUST BUSY. TWO HOURS PRIOR TO THE GAME AND TWO HOURS, MAYBE THREE HOURS AFTER A GAME. SURE. AND FOR EIGHT WEEKS OUT OF A YEAR IT REALLY IS NOTHING. SO I'VE NEVER BEEN TIED UP IN TRAFFIC FOR 38 YEARS.
IF I HAD TO GO SOMEWHERE ON A SUNDAY, I JUST DON'T WANT THERE TO BE A SUGGESTED CONDITION THAT WE JUST SIMPLY CAN'T SATISFY. WE JUST TAKE OFF THE AND AND WHAT COMES AFTER. SURE, IF THE REST OF THE BOARD AGREES, YES. OKAY. WE AGREE. THANK YOU. DO WE WANT THE FIRE DEPARTMENT TO WEIGH IN ON THIS? IS THE TOWN BOARD GOING TO ORDER THE REPORT FROM THEM, OR DO WE OR DO WE REQUEST IT? WE CAN OBVIOUSLY SHARE THE REZONING REPORT WITH THE FIRE DEPARTMENT OBVIOUSLY BECAUSE THIS IS VERY PRELIMINARY. WE CAN GET INITIAL COMMENT, BUT WE OBVIOUSLY HAVEN'T GOTTEN A FULL SITE PLAN APPLICATION YET TO THIS POINT. WE CAN HEAR FROM THE FIRE DEPARTMENT. OBVIOUSLY, LIKE I SAID, THE TOWN BOARD IS RESPONSIBLE FOR MAKING A SECRET DECISION, BUT USUALLY FOR US, AT LEAST AT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT PLANNING BOARD LEVEL, WE SEND IT TO THE FIRE DEPARTMENT WHEN WE DO HAVE A FULL SITE PLAN APPLICATION AND SOME ENGINEERED DRAWINGS FOR THEM TO SEE. SO WE COULD RECOMMEND THAT THE TOWN BOARD BE SURE TO ASK THE FIRE DEPARTMENT WHEN THEY GET THEIR FULL. YEAH, WE COULD MAKE THAT A RECOMMENDATION. YEAH. SO YOU JUST WANTED TO SAY THE PLANNING BOARD REQUESTS THAT THE TOWN BOARD. REQUEST INPUT. INPUT? YEAH, BUT THAT WOULD BE BEFORE FULLY ENGINEERED PLANS. I JUST WANT TO MAKE IT CLEAR. YEAH. SO EITHER SO ADDING THAT YOU WOULD BE ESSENTIALLY SAYING YOU WOULD WANT THE TOWN BOARD TO BEFORE THEY MAKE THEIR SECRET DECISION, GET COMMENT FROM THE FIRE DEPARTMENT. IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE ASKING OR SAYING? YES, BECAUSE THAT'S WHEN THEY'RE GOING TO
[01:00:04]
HAVE THE SITE PLAN. NO, NO. SO THE TOWN BOARD WOULD BE MAKING A SECRET DECISION BEFORE WE WOULD GET A FULL SITE PLAN APPLICATION FROM THE THE APPLICANT. AND THE FIRE DEPARTMENT'S NOT GOING TO. SO IT'S GOING TO COME BACK TO US THEN. CORRECT. SO NEVER MIND I'LL WAIT UNTIL SORRY I'M I'M DISCOMBOBULATED. THERE'S A LOT OF MOVING PARTS WITH THIS PROJECT. THERE'S THERE'S THE FACT THAT IT'S GOING TO THE TOWN BOARD AND THEN COMING BACK TO US. I MISSED THAT PART. SO YES. OKAY. I JUST WANT TO GO BACK TO IF NO ONE HAS INITIAL COMMENTS, ARE THERE? FIRST OF ALL, IS THERE AN APPETITE FOR THAT FIRST CONDITION OF SUGGESTING A SUGGESTED BUFFER ON THE SITE TO PROTECT THE ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL COMPONENT? AND DOES ANYONE HAVE KIND OF AN IDEA? DO YOU EVEN WANT TO LEAVE A NUMBER OR JUST KIND OF SAY, I'LL TAKE OUT X AND JUST SAY THE TOWN BOARD SHOULD CONSIDER HAVING A BUFFER ON THE ON THE SITE? WELL, I KNOW THAT WE DISCUSSED THIS IN CODE IN CODE REVIEW, IT WAS A IT WAS DISCUSSED, BUT HOW MUCH I THINK I DON'T KNOW HOW FAR. IF WE LOOK AT THE. I CAN'T I DON'T BECAUSE THAT WHOLE AREA. JOSH DO YOU HAPPEN TO HAVE A FULL SIZE COPY OF THE PLAN WITH YOU? MAYBE YOU CAN PULL UP THE SITE PLAN AS A PDF? YEAH, BECAUSE MAYBE WE CAN QUANTIFY IT. OKAY, OKAY. BUT I'M NOT GOING TO WALK AWAY FROM THE MICROPHONE. TAKE IT WITH YOU WHILE YOU'RE THE FIRST. SO SEE THE RESIDENTIAL IS TO THE. RIGHT THERE TO THAT, TO THAT PART. WE'RE NOT DEVELOPING ALL THE WAY NORTH. NO, WAIT. YOU CAN'T TALK UNLESS YOU COME BACK UP HERE BECAUSE THEY CAN'T HEAR YOU. I'M TELLING YOU THE CALORIES. THAT'S OKAY. WE'RE NOT DEVELOPING ANYTHING PLANNED NORTH OF THAT. RIGHT. SO THAT'S WHERE THE BUFFER WOULD BE.ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPING THOSE AREAS. WE CAN WE CAN PROVIDE THAT. THAT'S WHAT I'M THINKING.
THAT'S NOT A PROBLEM BECAUSE WE HAD KIND OF DISCUSSED THAT IN CODE. AND AND I REMEMBERED AT THE LAST MEETING. YEP. SO I THINK THAT THAT SHOULD BE I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY FEET THAT IS. I MEAN, IF YOU HAD A WIDTH OF TEN FEET, YOU COULD PUT PRETTY DENSE LANDSCAPING IN IT.
OH, IT'S MORE THAN THAT, ISN'T IT? WELL, THERE'S PLENTY OF FEET. THE PLANNING BOARD CAN DECIDE THE AMOUNT OF. OKAY, BUT IF YOU WANT TO RECOMMEND SOMETHING. EITHER WE COME UP WITH A NUMBER OR WE LET THEM COME UP WITH. WELL, THE APPLICANT AGREED TO DO THE BUFFERING, RIGHT. SO. WITHOUT MEASURING IT, WE CAN'T COME UP WITH THE FEET LANDSCAPING. I'M FINE EITHER WAY. WHAT JAMES IS ASKING, IS THAT SOMETHING WE JUST LEAVE TO SITE PLAN APPROVAL? WE UNDERSTAND WE'LL HAVE TO DO IT AND COME BACK. AND ACTUALLY, I THINK THAT BECAUSE IT'S MORE A SITE PLAN TOPIC, WE'RE BETTER OFF BETTER OFF WORKING WITH YOU ON THAT.
THAT'S PROBABLY TRUE, RIGHT? AS BEST WE CAN. OKAY. DO YOU HAVE MORE COMMENTS AND YOU WANT ADDITIONAL. WE'LL, WE'LL WE'LL TALK IT THROUGH. SO THEN WHAT I IF YOU WANT TO STILL KEEP IT AS A CONDITION, I THINK I WOULD STILL REFERENCE THERE BEING A BUFFER TO BE REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING BOARD AT SITE PLAN APPROVAL. OKAY, I BOARD MEMBERS, ARE YOU IN AGREEMENT TO THAT VERBIAGE? OKAY. WE GOT A LOT OF HEAD SHAKING ON THAT. SO YEAH.
ACTUALLY SEE WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING VERSUS JUST ARBITRARILY WRITING A NUMBER.
RIGHT. THAT MEANS WENDELL CAN CHIME IN. YOU KNOW, ALL THE OTHER TYPICAL ENGINEERING. HOW WOULD YOU GUYS WANT THE CONDITION WRITTEN? WHAT HE SAID? I WOULD SAY THAT I WOULD SAY THAT AN ADEQUATE LANDSCAPE BUFFER. THAT'S THE NORTHERN SIDE HERE. THAT'S THE NORTHERN SIDE. IS THAT THE NORTHERN SIDE I'M GETTING? THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT IT WAS. BUT IF YOU'RE GOING NORTH, I COULDN'T SEE THE THE NORTH ARROW ON THE PLAN. SO I THINK IT'S I THINK IT IS NORTH. I BELIEVE IT IS. WAIT. YOU KNOW WHAT. THAT CAN'T BE NORTH, WEST, NORTH. YOU CAN SEE IT IN THE BOTTOM RIGHT HAND CORNER. NORTH. OKAY. IT IS NORTH. IT IS NORTH. YEAH. YEAH.
SO SO WE'D SAY WHAT? NORTHWEST. RIGHT. NORTHWEST. NORTH AND WEST. IT'S A TRIANGLE. NORTH AND WEST. OKAY. YEAH. WHATEVER DIRECTION YOU WANT TO REFER TO. JOSH, YOU WANT TO GO BACK, I CAN HELP. YOU COULD SAY THE AREA ALONG BIG TREE ROAD. SHOUT OUT TO THE DRIVEWAY ENTRANCE SHALL CONSIST LANDSCAPED AREA. WITH AND LANDSCAPING TO BE PROVIDED WITHIN THE LANDSCAPED AREA SHALL BE DETERMINED BY THE PLANNING BOARD IN CONNECTION WITH ITS FUTURE. REVIEW A SITE PLAN APPLICATION. I CAN'T YOU CAN'T TYPE THAT FAST. OH, SORRY. YEAH,
[01:05:04]
NOW I CAN SEE IT. ADEQUATE LANDSCAPING PLAN SHALL CONSIST OF A LANDSCAPED AREA. WE HAVE TO REWORD THAT. SO NO. NO LANDSCAPED AREA ADJACENT TO. BIG TREE. RIGHT. THAT'S WHAT WE SAID. YEAH. BIG TREE RIGHT. AND THEN I WOULD SAY THE DEPTH OR WIDTH THE WIDTH. IS THAT GOING TO BE A COMPLETE SENTENCE. YEAH. NO. THEN ADD ANOTHER SENTENCE. THAT'S FINE. THAT'S FOR SURE.PERIOD. OKAY. THEN I WOULD SAY THE WIDTH AND THE LANDSCAPING TO BE PROVIDED IN THE LANDSCAPED AREA. SHALL BE. DETERMINED BY THE PLANNING BOARD AREA SHALL BE, SHALL BE DETERMINED. BY BY THE PLANNING BOARD DURING. THE SITE PLAN REVIEW PROCESS. AND THAT WAY IT'S MEMORIALIZED. AND WE MAKE SURE OUR PLANS REFLECT THAT. OKAY. SOUNDS LIKE A PLAN. YEAH I AGREE WITH THAT. OKAY, DEFINITELY. BEFORE WE GO FURTHER, LET ME START WITH THE BIG QUESTION. ARE MOST OF THE BOARD OR ALL THE BOARD IN AGREEMENT WITH THE RECOMMENDATION TO REZONE FROM C1 TO C2? I PROBABLY SHOULD HAVE STARTED WITH THAT, BUT DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY CONCERNS ABOUT THAT? DISAGREE. IS EVERYONE IN AGREEMENT? I'M IN AGREEMENT. I'M IN AGREEMENT. I'M ALSO AN AGREEMENT. I AS WELL. YEAH. THE BOARD IT'S A IT'S A GENERAL CONSENSUS THAT THE BOARD IS IN AGREEMENT. OKAY. IS EVERYONE IN AGREEMENT WITH.
SO CONDITION TWO JUST SAYS THAT, YOU KNOW, THIS BOARD DID ASK FOR A TRAFFIC FLOW IN THE CIRCULATION STUDY. ONE HAS BEEN PROVIDED. AND THEN ONE WILL BE ATTACHED FOR THE TOWN BOARD TO REVIEW WHEN THEY MAKE A SECRET DECISION. YES. YEAH. PERFECT. OKAY. ARE THERE ANY OTHERS THAT THIS BOARD WOULD WANT THE TOWN BOARD TO KNOW OF? NO, NO, NO, BECAUSE I THINK WE'LL PICK IT UP AT THE WHEN IT COMES BACK. YEAH. NOW THAT WE REMEMBER WHAT THE PROCESS IS. YEAH. OKAY. ANY OTHER COMMENTS CONCERNS YOU WOULD WANT ADDED TO THIS REZONING REPORT. I DON'T BELIEVE THAT. THERE'S IT'S SILENT. SO I BELIEVE THAT THE BOARD IS IN AGREEMENT TO WHAT YOU HAVE PRINTED. PERFECT. SO IN TERMS OF NEXT STEPS WE WILL FINALIZE THIS. WE WILL PROVIDE THIS TO THE TOWN BOARD. AND THEN THEY WILL SCHEDULE A PUBLIC HEARING. AND THEN FROM THERE THEY'LL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR MAKING A SECRET DECISION AND A REZONING APPROVAL DECISION. SHOULD IT BE APPROVED. IT'LL THEN COME BACK TO THE PLANNING BOARD WHEN THE APPLICANT HAS A SITE PLAN APPLICATION AND A SPECIAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION READY FOR US.
OKAY, OKAY. SOUNDS LIKE IT SOUNDS LIKE A DEAL. OKAY. THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU FOR USING YOUR MICROPHONE TONIGHT I APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU FOR THE REMINDER. AND WELCOME BACK.
HAVE A GOOD EVENING. OKAY. HAVING SAID THAT I DON'T THINK WE HAVE ANY ANYTHING ELSE TO COVER. IS THERE A MOTION? MAKE A MOTION TO ADJOURN THE MEETING. YOU HAVE TO SAY THAT A LITTLE LOUDER. SO, MEMBER RYAN, MEMBER RYAN, I MAKE A MOTION TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AUGUST 2ND.
IT'S BEEN MOVED IN SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.