[00:00:04] THE HERO HEROINE TONIGHT. GOOD EVENING EVERYBODY. I WOULD LIKE TO CALL THE PLANNING BOARD MEETING FOR APRIL 10TH TO ORDER. I'M SORRY. APRIL 15TH TO ORDER. WOULD YOU PLEASE? ALL 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, FOR LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. MEMBER, WOULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL? PRESENT. BILL CLARK HERE. KAITLYN SHIMURA HERE. KIM. RYAN HERE. RYAN. STEWART PRESENT HERE. ALL PRESENT. OKAY. THANK YOU. SO THIS EVENING. OUR FIRST. OUR FIRST BUSINESS IS THE PLANNING BOARD IS TO [1. Planning Board to discuss various zoning code amendments as presented by the Planning Department ] DISCUSS VARIOUS ZONING CODES, AMENDMENTS. JOSH ROGERS WILL BE WILL BE PRESENTING THOSE CODES. SO, MR. JOSH, YOU ARE ON. THANK YOU. SO WHAT I'M GOING TO DO TONIGHT IS FOR THOSE WHO HAVE USUALLY SEEN ME DURING THE WORK SESSION, FOR THOSE WHO ALSO DON'T KNOW THE TOWN, WE'RE CURRENTLY UNDERGOING A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT ZONING REVISIONS, WHICH HAVE STARTED OUT OF THE COMP PLAN, WHICH WAS IMPLEMENTED IN 2023. WE ALSO HAVE A COMP PLAN COMMITTEE, AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE'VE BEEN LOOKING AT IS AN OVERHAUL OF OUR CURRENT SITE PLAN REVIEW AND OUR SUBDIVISION OF LAND REGULATIONS. THIS BOARD KNOWS OVER A NUMBER OF COURSES, OF A NUMBER OF MEETINGS OVER THE PAST COUPLE OF WEEKS OR SO, WE LOOKED AT SITE PLAN REVIEW. THIS BOARD DID GIVE ME THE OKAY TO THEN SEND THAT ALONG AND PASS IT ALONG TO THE TOWN BOARD. SO THAT'LL BE BEFORE THE TOWN BOARD TO START IMPLEMENTING A NEW SITE PLAN REVIEW LAW. AND THEN OF COURSE, WHAT WE'RE GOING TO START DOING TODAY AND OVER THE NEXT COUPLE OF MEETINGS IS LOOKING AT OUR SUBDIVISION OF LAND. I DO HAVE I KNOW I PROVIDED A HARD COPY FOR SOME MEMBERS AFTER THIS MEETING. IF THOSE DO WANT A HARD COPY OF THE SUBDIVISION OF LAND LAW, PLEASE LET ME KNOW AND I'LL PROVIDE YOU ONE. I'M NOT GOING TO GO OVER ALL 23 PAGES TONIGHT. WHAT I'M PLANNING ON DOING IS PIECEMEALING IT GOING OVER CERTAIN SECTIONS, GETTING BOARD INPUT, YOU KNOW, TAKING NOTES, AND THEN I'LL CONTINUE TO PROVIDE FURTHER REVISIONS. SO WITHOUT FURTHER ADO, WHAT I WANTED TO DO IS OBVIOUSLY THIS BOARD KNOWS CHAPTER 230 IS SUBDIVISION OF LAND IN THE TOWN OF HAMBURG. FOUR LOTS ARE UNDER. WE CONSIDER A MINOR SUBDIVISION. I KNOW A LOT OF MUNICIPALITIES IN ERIE COUNTY DO NOT DO THAT, BUT WE DO HAVE MINOR SUBDIVISION APPROVAL IN THE TOWN OF HAMBURG AND THEN ALSO IN THE TOWN. FIVE LOTS ARE MORE. WE CONSIDER A MAJOR SUBDIVISION. THERE'S OBVIOUSLY A BIG DIFFERENCE BETWEEN MINOR AND MAJOR. SPECIFICALLY, FROM A SECRET PERSPECTIVE, THERE'S OBVIOUSLY A LOT MORE IMPACTS, USUALLY WITH A MAJOR SUBDIVISION. BUT WHAT I WANTED TO DO TONIGHT IS KIND OF GO OVER. I'M NOT GOING TO GO OVER THINGS THAT WE'RE NOT GOING TO CHANGE. I OBVIOUSLY WANT TO FOCUS ON WHAT WE'RE GOING TO CHANGE OUT OF SUBDIVISION OF LAND. LET'S SEE. SO IF YOU LOOK ON THE SCREEN, YOU'LL SEE THE FIRST SECTION OBVIOUSLY TALKS ABOUT HAS A TABLE OF CONTENTS FOR ALL THE DIFFERENT SUBSECTIONS OF SUBDIVISION OF LAND. WHERE I'M GOING TO START, WE'RE GOING TO SKIP 230 DASH 1-2-3. NONE OF THOSE. WE ARE PLANNING ON CHANGING WHERE I'M GOING TO DIRECT THE BOARD'S ATTENTION TO, TO START IS UNDER THE DEFINITION SECTION STARTING WITH TOWNHOUSE. SO I'M NOT GOING TO GO INTO IT. BUT I KIND OF WANT TO JUST REMIND THE BOARD THAT WHEN WE STARTED LOOKING AT THE SUBDIVISION OF LAND REGULATIONS DURING OCTOBER OF 2025, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE WANT TO DO IS I'M VERY BIG ON DEFINITIONS. IF YOU DON'T HAVE SOMETHING CLEARLY DEFINED, IF YOU LEAVE SOMETHING AMBIGUOUS, THEN IT LEAVES ROOM FOR ERROR. RIGHT NOW IN THE TOWN, WHICH IS ALSO UNIQUE COMPARED TO OTHER MUNICIPALITIES, IS WE HAVE A SPECIFIC DEFINITION FOR TOWNHOUSE, AND WE ALSO HAVE SPECIFIC TOWNHOUSE REGULATIONS, WHICH WE'RE GOING TO GO OVER LATER ON. BUT I JUST WANTED TO BRING IT TO THIS BOARD'S ATTENTION THAT SOMETHING THAT I WANT ALL THE BOARD MEMBERS TO THINK ABOUT IS REVIEWING OUR CURRENT TOWNHOUSE DEFINITION, WHICH RIGHT NOW, AS YOU CAN SEE ON THE SCREEN, 1 OR 2 MORE RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS HAVING A COMMON OR PARTY WALL SEPARATING DWELLING UNITS. I DON'T THINK THAT THAT IS A SUFFICIENT DEFINITION. I THINK THAT WE CERTAINLY CAN TWEAK IT, ESPECIALLY IF WE'RE GOING TO HAVE SPECIFIC REGULATIONS FOR TOWNHOUSES LATER ON IN THE SUBDIVISION OF LAND LAW. I THINK WE SHOULD DEFINE IT A LITTLE BIT BETTER. SO WE'RE NOT GOING TO DO THAT TONIGHT. BUT [00:05:01] THAT'S JUST SOMETHING TO KEEP ON YOUR RADAR THAT I'M GOING TO BE LOOKING FOR COMMENT AND FEEDBACK ON A PROPER DEFINITION. OBVIOUSLY, JOE, I'LL CONSULT WITH YOU FROM A LEGAL ASPECT OF GETTING A PROPER DEFINITION FOR TOWNHOUSE, BECAUSE SINCE I'VE BEEN IN THE TOWN, IT'S BEEN A DEFINITION THAT I'VE HATED. SO IF WE'RE GOING TO LOOK AT SUBDIVISION OF LAND, I'D RATHER THAT WE CHANGE IT. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I WANTED TO KIND OF GO OVER TONIGHT BEFORE WE GET INTO THE THE REST OF THE AGENDA. IS STARTING WITH THE APPROVAL PROCEDURE. SO THAT'S SECTION TWO 3013. THIS CURRENTLY DOES NOT EXIST IN OUR SUBDIVISION OF LAND CODE. AS YOU GUYS KNOW, WE TALKED ABOUT SKETCH PLAN DIRECTION FOR SITE PLANS. WE'VE ALWAYS HAD SKETCH PLANS FOR SITE PLANS. WE'VE ALWAYS OFFERED IT. WE CODIFIED IT A LITTLE BIT BETTER IN THE SITE PLAN REVIEW CODE. BUT I NOTICED WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING FOR MAJOR OR MINOR SUBDIVISIONS FOR SKETCH PLAN. ONE OF THE REASONS WHY I LIKE HAVING A SKETCH PLAN PROVISION IS THAT IT GIVES APPLICANTS A CHANCE TO COME BEFORE THIS BOARD, WITH VARYING DIFFERENT TYPES OF SITE PLANS. IT CAN BE SOMETHING WE'VE GOTTEN THINGS WHERE PEOPLE HAVE DRAWN ON AN EIGHT AND A HALF BY 11. WE'VE GOTTEN EVERYTHING FROM FULLY ENGINEERED PLANS FOR SKETCH PLAN. I THINK IT GIVES AN APPLICANT A GOOD CHANCE TO GET SOME PRELIMINARY FEEDBACK FROM THIS BOARD BEFORE THEY SPEND THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS HAVING AN ENGINEER OR A SURVEYOR OR AN ARCHITECTURAL FIRM ACTUALLY PUT TOGETHER FULLY ENGINEERED DRAWINGS. AND I ALSO THINK IT GIVES THE BOARD A CHANCE TO SEE SOMETHING BEFORE IT COMES BACK DOWN THE PIPELINE, GIVE YOU GUYS A CHANCE TO, YOU KNOW, GIVE THEM SOME EARLY FEEDBACK. SO WHAT YOU'LL SEE IN 2013 IS A SUBSECTION THAT LAYS OUT VERY SIMILAR TO SITE PLAN, BUT TAD BIT DIFFERENT. SOME PROCEDURES FOR SETTING SKETCH PLAN FOR MINOR AND MAJOR SUBDIVISIONS BEFORE I GO INTO IT. BEFORE I GO ANY FURTHER. FIRST, I WANT TO GAUGE THE APPETITE OF THIS BOARD. DOES CODIFYING A SKETCH PLAN APPROVAL PROCEDURE KIND OF SECTION. DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY ISSUES WITH THAT? DOES THAT SEEM LIKE A GOOD IDEA FOR MINOR AND MAJOR SUBDIVISIONS? I'LL START WITH THAT FOR NOW. BOARD MEMBERS, I AGREE. I SUPPORT THE IDEA. SO GOING INTO IT YOU'LL SEE NUMBER A OR SUBSECTION A LETTER A STARTS SUBDIVIDERS WILL SUBMIT A SKETCH PLAN TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT FOR STAFF REVIEW AND INPUT PRIOR TO THE MEETING WITH THE PLANNING BOARD. I WANTED TO START WITH THAT BECAUSE WHAT THAT ESSENTIALLY SAYS IS BEFORE THEY EVEN COME TO YOU FOR SKETCH PLAN, THEY'RE MEETING WITH ME FIRST. WHAT I TRY TO DO WITH ANY APPLICANT THAT COMES TO MY OFFICE IS TRY TO IRON OUT AS MANY KINKS AS I CAN BEFORE THEY COME TO THE PLANNING BOARD, BECAUSE I THINK IT SAVES A LOT OF YOUR TIME AND SAVES A LOT OF MY TIME AND SAVES THE APPLICANTS TIME. SO BEFORE SKETCH PLAN, HOW WE'RE CODIFYING IS BEFORE THEY EVEN COME TO SKETCH PLAN FOR YOU THAT THEY WOULD COME MEET WITH ME IN MY OFFICE, WE'LL HASH OUT, YOU KNOW, WHATEVER, YOU KNOW, SKETCH PLAN KIND OF DIRECTION. THEY WANT TO GO, BUT THEY MEET WITH ME FIRST BEFORE THEY EVEN COME TO YOU. ANY THOUGHTS, ISSUES, CONCERNS WITH THAT? I AGREE. I THINK THE WHOLE IDEA IS TO STREAMLINE THE PROCESS. AND WITH SPELLING THIS OUT AND HELPING THE APPLICANT, I THINK IT'S A GREAT IDEA. YOU'LL ALSO NOTICE THAT IN THERE IT SAYS THAT MY DEPARTMENT, SO MYSELF, I WILL, YOU KNOW, DETERMINE THE TYPE OF SUBDIVISION THEY NEED, THE REQUIREMENTS THAT THEY NEED, SHOULD THEY WANT TO CONTINUE FURTHER WITH ACTUALLY SUBMITTING A SUBDIVISION APPLICATION. AND THAT I WOULD, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY MEET WITH THEM BEFORE THEY COME AND MEET WITH THIS BOARD. SUBSECTION B TALKS ABOUT THE ACTUAL SKETCH PLAN REQUIREMENTS. SO AFTER RECEIVING INPUT FROM MYSELF, THE APPLICANT WOULD SUBMIT A SKETCH PLAN APPLICATION. AND THERE'S AN ASSOCIATED FEE THAT'S ALREADY IN A FEE SCHEDULE, WHICH WE'VE RECENTLY AMENDED FOR 2026. IN THAT SKETCH PLAN, IT CAN CONSIST OF. SO WE TALK ABOUT CONSISTING OF A FREEHAND LAYOUT OF THE SITE, STREET LAYOUT, PROPOSED LOT ARRANGEMENT, EXISTING STRUCTURES, WOODED AREAS, ANY PROPOSED WETLAND AREAS. ONE THING THAT YOU'LL NOTICE RIGHT NOW IS THAT THERE'S A SUBSECTION THAT'S KIND OF IN LIKE PINK THAT SAYS THAT THE DEVELOPER WILL SUBMIT A USGS, WHICH IS UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY MAPS THAT SHOW TOPO TOPOGRAPHIC CONTOURS OF THE SITE. RIGHT NOW, YOU'LL SEE TO THE TO THE RIGHT. I HAVE A COMMENT THAT RIGHT NOW, CURRENTLY, EVEN WITH REGULAR SITE PLANS, PEOPLE DO NOT SUBMIT ALL THE TIME MAPS WITH TOPOGRAPHIC CONDITIONS. SO MY FIRST QUESTION IS, DOES THIS BOARD IS THAT SOMETHING THAT YOU WOULD WANT REQUIRED IN THE SKETCH PLAN PHASE? AND IF NOT, WOULD YOU WANT REQUIRED IN A REGULAR SUBDIVISION APPLICATION, WHETHER IT BE MINOR OR MAJOR SUBDIVISION? MEMBER? SHIMURA. SO I DON'T THINK THAT THESE TYPES OF MAPS WOULD BE REQUIRED DURING THE SKETCH PLAN PHASE, BUT ALSO RECOGNIZING THAT, RIGHT, GETTING TOPOGRAPHIC INFORMATION WILL BE IMPORTANT FOR ANY OF THE. ANY ENGINEERING THAT YOU END UP HAVING TO DO. WHERE DOES THAT COME INTO PLAY FOR THAT DOESN'T COME INTO PLAY UNTIL SITE PLAN, RIGHT? THAT IS CORRECT. SO YEAH, WE REFER FOR SKETCH PLAN. OBVIOUSLY, LIKE I SAID, THAT'S THE FIRST CHANCE THAT SOMEBODY GETS FEEDBACK FROM YOU FROM A FULL MAJOR SUBDIVISION OR MINOR SUBDIVISION APPLICATION. TYPICALLY, WE DO LIKE TO SEE SOME SORT OF DRAWING THAT HAS SOME SORT OF TOPOGRAPHIC DATA OF SOME SORT. SO IF I'M [00:10:03] UNDERSTANDING YOU CORRECTLY, TAKING OUT A SKETCH PLAN NOT NEEDED, NOT NECESSARY, BUT HAVING IT POTENTIALLY MAYBE BE A REQUIREMENT FOR FULL, MINOR OR MAJOR SUBDIVISION APPLICATION BEFORE THIS BOARD. YES. OKAY. ANY OTHER THOUGHTS, QUESTIONS, CONCERNS ON THAT PIECE. AND THEN THE LAST PIECE THAT I'LL TALK ABOUT IS SUBSECTION C. SO I'LL PLACE WHEN SOMEBODY DOES SUBMIT TO ME THOUGH, I'LL PLACE A SKETCH PLAN APPLICATION ON THE NEXT AVAILABLE PLANNING BOARD MEETING THAT THE APPLICANT WILL APPEAR BEFORE YOU. YOU'LL GIVE THEM INPUT AT THAT MEETING, WE'LL DETERMINE WHETHER IT'S, YOU KNOW, A MINOR OR A MAJOR SUBDIVISION. I CODIFIED THAT NO FORMAL APPROVALS WILL BE GIVEN. SO I DON'T WANT PEOPLE COMING TO SKETCH PLAN THINKING THAT THEY ARE, YOU KNOW, SKIPPING ALL THE OTHER STEPS THAT WHEN YOU COME TO SKETCH PLAN, IT'S FOR PRELIMINARY FEEDBACK. AND THAT'S THE INTENT THAT THERE ARE NO FORMAL APPROVALS TO BE GIVEN DURING THAT PERIOD AND THAT AT THAT TIME, THE APPLICANT WILL NEED TO DECIDE WHETHER OR NOT THEY WANT TO MOVE FORWARD AND ACTUALLY SUBMIT A PRELIMINARY PLAT APPLICATION FOR MINOR OR MAJOR SUBDIVISIONS, OR IF THEY WANT TO GO BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD. I THINK THAT'S GOOD. OKAY. LIKE I SAID, I'M NOT GOING TO GO OVER THE FULL 23 PAGES. THOSE ARE LIKE I SAID, I WANT TO PIECEMEAL IT, KIND OF GET YOUR GUYS'S DIRECTION. THAT'S ALL I'M GOING TO GO OVER FOR TONIGHT FOR THE SAKE OF TIME. WHAT I WILL DO NEXT TIME, JUST SO THAT YOU'RE AWARE, WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT THE ACTUAL SUBMISSION OF THE PRELIMINARY PLAT, WHETHER IT'S MINOR SUBDIVISION, WHETHER IT'S MAJOR SUBDIVISION. AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO START TALKING ABOUT THOSE PROCEDURES WHEN IT COMES TO PUBLIC HEARING AFTER THE PUBLIC HEARING SEEKER WHEN THAT COMES IN. SO THAT'LL BE FOR THE MAY 6TH MEETING. I'LL TAKE SOME OF YOUR PRELIMINARY FEEDBACK, MAKE SOME ADJUSTMENTS, AND THEN I'LL COME BACK MAY 6TH AND WE'LL CONTINUE TO GO FURTHER. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. AS ALWAYS, THANK YOU. APPRECIATE IT. YEP. JUST WANTED TO ASK A QUESTION. JOSH. THIS HAD ATTORNEY JOSEPH GOGUEN. WE HAD AN ISSUE LAST YEAR, MAYBE TWO YEARS AGO, THAT HAD TO DO WITH MINOR SUBDIVISIONS AND THE POSSIBILITY OF A SERIAL MINOR SUBDIVISION SITUATION. I DON'T SEE THAT IN HERE ADDRESSED. IS THERE ANY THOUGHT BEHIND THAT? DID CODE REVIEW LOOK AT THAT. YEAH. SO WE LOOKED AT A CODE REVIEW. AND IT'S ONE OF THE THINGS THAT AS WE CONTINUE TO PIECEMEAL THROUGH IT, THAT WE'RE LOOKING TO ADD A SPECIFIC SECTION TO ADDRESS THAT VERY POINT. SO IT'S NOT IN THE ACTUAL DRAFT NOW, BECAUSE THIS IS A COPY OF THE EXISTING CODE WITH SOME CHANGES, BUT WE'RE LOOKING TO ADD A SPECIFIC SUBSECTION RELATED TO THAT POINT. OKAY. I DON'T KNOW IF SOME OF THE SOME OF THE BOARD MEMBERS WERE HERE WHEN WE DISCUSSED IT THE LAST TIME, BUT I DON'T KNOW IF ALL OF THEM ARE FAMILIAR WITH THAT. SO FOR SURE. THANKS, JOSH. YEP. SO MAY 6TH, YOU SAID CORRECT. THAT IS CORRECT. OKAY. SO MUCH TOUCH. [2. Carl DiNezza – Requesting Preliminary Plat Approval on a proposal for a 2-lot subdivision at 58 North Shore Drive ] OKAY. OUR SECOND CASE FOR THE EVENING IS KARL DÖNITZ REQUESTING PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL ON A PROPOSAL FOR A TWO LOT SUBDIVISION AT 58 NORTH SHORE DRIVE. IS THE APPLICANT HERE? YES. I'M HERE. OKAY, COME ON UP. GOOD EVENING EVERYBODY. MY NAME IS CARL AND I LIVE AT 58 NORTH SHORE DRIVE. I WAS HERE ONCE BEFORE IN FRONT OF YOU FOLKS IN THE BEGINNING, AND BEEN WORKING WITH JOSH, AND THEN ALSO HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH JEFF AT THE ZONING BOARD RECENTLY. THERE'S BEEN SOME UP AND DOWNS WITH WHAT'S GOING ON. IF SOME OF YOU DON'T REMEMBER AND THAT WEREN'T HERE THE FIRST TIME WHEN I WAS SPEAKING. OKAY, SO BASICALLY THINGS ARE MOVING WELL RIGHT NOW, A LITTLE TOPSY TURVY. MY SPOUSE IS IN THE HOSPITAL NOW. SHE HAD A STROKE, SO I'M TRYING TO DO DOUBLE DOUBLE WORK HERE. SO THE ZONING BOARD HAD APPROVED THE THE SUBDIVISION OR WHATEVER THEY WERE DOING. THEY GAVE ME THE APPROVAL. AND I'M, I'M GOING TO BE WORKING WITH DARRYL MARTIN. HE'S THE ARCHITECT. BUT RIGHT AT THIS MOMENT, I HAVE TO MAKE MY HOUSE. MORE LIVABLE FOR MY SPOUSE BECAUSE IT DOESN'T FIT HER NEEDS. SHE'S NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO WALK PROPERLY. I DON'T HAVE ENOUGH SPACE FOR A WHEELCHAIR AND STUFF. SO NOW I GOT TO TURN AROUND, GET IN A DISH AND PUT ON BATHROOM. THE WHOLE WORKS ACCORDING TO, YOU KNOW, THE PHYSICAL THERAPISTS AND, AND OTHER PEOPLE. AND EVEN THE ARCHITECT AGREED WHEN HE WAS LOOKING THINGS OVER BECAUSE HE'S DONE STUFF LIKE THAT. BUT IN THE MEANTIME, WHAT I'D LIKE TO BE DOING IS STILL GET THE PROPERTY WITH AN SBL NUMBER AND ADDRESS AND THEN COME BACK TO DARYL LATER ON THIS YEAR OR IN THE SPRING AND HAVE HIM DRAW UP THE PLANS. HE HAS SEEN THE SEPARATION OF THE PROPERTY, AND HE HAS SOME REALLY GOOD IDEAS. I COULD USE THE BACK STRUCTURE [00:15:04] AND ADD ON TO THAT TO KEEP UP WITH THE MINIMUM STANDARDS OF THE SQUARE FOOTAGE AND THE TOWN, OR CAN PUT SOMETHING UP MORE TOWARDS THE MIDDLE OF THE PROPERTY OR THE PROPERTY LINE IS AND IN A, IN A MORE WIDER SPACE. SO THERE'S REALLY TWO OPTIONS. JEFF DID INDICATE I MAY HAVE TO COME FOR ANOTHER VARIANCE, AND I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT AT ALL. BUT SO FAR EVERYBODY HAS SAID THEY'RE OKAY AS LONG AS I KEEP MOVING FORWARD, AND AS LONG AS I AT LEAST GET SOMETHING, YOU KNOW, SOME ARCHITECT DESIGNS WITHIN A YEAR. OTHER THAN THAT, I GUESS THAT'S PRETTY MUCH ALL I HAVE TO SAY FOR NOW. IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS. OKAY. PLANNING DEPARTMENT. OH. SO AS MR. REZA JUST EXPLAINED, HE DID GET THE NUMBER OF VARIANCES THAT HE NEEDED FROM THE ZONING BOARD AT THEIR APRIL MEETING. THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS WHY HE WAS TABLED. SO LONG AS THIS BOARD KNOWS NOW THAT HE HAS RECEIVED HIS VARIANCES, WE CAN CONTINUE TO PROCEED WITH THE PRELIMINARY PLAT REVIEW FOR THIS MINOR SUBDIVISION. ONE THING THAT I'LL NOTE FOR THIS BOARD IS THAT BECAUSE MR. REZA IS AT NORTH SHORE, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT HE WILL NEED IS A COASTAL CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION FROM OUR LWP COMMITTEE BECAUSE IT IS WITHIN OUR WATERFRONT AREA. I DO HAVE THAT SCHEDULED FOR HIM TO FOR THAT PROJECT TO BE REVIEWED BY THE COMMITTEE BEFORE OUR MAY 6TH MEETING, WHICH WE'D ONLY BE SCHEDULING A PUBLIC HEARING AT THE MOST ANYWAYS FOR, FOR MAY 6TH. SO THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS THAT HE'LL NEED FROM THE LWP DON'T WANT TO SPEAK FOR THEM, BUT I DON'T ANTICIPATE THE SPLITTING OF LOT LINES BEING OUT OF CONFORMANCE WITH THE LW RP, BUT I'LL LET THEM MAKE THEIR RECOMMENDATION. IT'LL BE THIS BOARD THAT DOES HAVE THE FINAL DETERMINATION ON WHETHER IT'S CONSISTENT WITH THE LW, RP. AND THEN OTHER THAN THAT, OBVIOUSLY HE HAS HIS, YOU KNOW, DRAWING ON THE SCREEN FOR, YOU KNOW, THE BOARD TO REVIEW. I ALSO WANT TO REMIND THIS BOARD THAT THE VARIANCES THAT HE HAS APPROVED IS FOR OBVIOUSLY, THE SPLITTING OF THE LOT LINES. AS OF RIGHT NOW, THERE IS NO CONSTRUCTION. SO THE APPROVAL IS FOR BEING ABLE TO SPLIT HIS CURRENT LOT INTO TWO LOTS, ANY CONSTRUCTION AND ANYTHING OF THE SORT. AS HE MENTIONED, HE MAY NEED OTHER VARIANCES. HE'LL HANDLE THAT AT ANOTHER TIME. BUT FOR THE VARIANCES THAT HE WAS APPROVED FOR, IT WAS FOR THE SPLITTING OF THE LOT. AS YOU SEE ON THE SCREEN. OKAY, WE HAVE AN EXTRA MIC DOWN HERE. SO WE'LL WE'LL PASS THAT DOWN TO YOU GUYS SO WE CAN DON'T HAVE TO BE PLAYING MUSICAL MIC. WE'LL HANDLE THAT. WELL, FIRST LET ME SAY WE ARE VERY SORRY TO HEAR ABOUT YOUR WIFE. WE HOPE THAT SHE'S ON A ROAD TO RECOVERY. THANK YOU. AND SECONDLY, SO JOSH, THERE IS NO DELAY IF WE ORDER THE PUBLIC HEARING AT THIS POINT. BECAUSE HE HAS SO MUCH TIME. IF WE IF WE PICK A DIFFERENT DATE, DOES IS THAT BETTER FOR HIM BECAUSE HE'S GOT A DELAY OR I DON'T WANT TO DO SOMETHING AND THEN HAVE IT ALL EXPIRE FOR HIM, GIVEN THE INFORMATION THAT HE'S GIVEN US, YOU KNOW, EVEN IF YOU KNOW WHERE I'M GOING. YEAH. EVEN IF THE LWP COMMITTEE DOES NOT ISSUE A RECOMMENDATION BEFORE THE MAY 6TH MEETING, IT WOULD JUST BE A PUBLIC HEARING ANYWAYS. OKAY. SO WE CAN CONTINUE TO HOLD THE PUBLIC HEARING. WE OBVIOUSLY JUST CAN'T MAKE A DECISION UNTIL THE LWP COMMITTEE ISSUES THEIR RECOMMENDATION. AND LIKE I SAID, IT'S A RECOMMENDATION. SO OBVIOUSLY IT'S THIS BOARD'S PURVIEW. ON WHETHER THE ACTION WILL BE CONSISTENT WITH THE LWP. OKAY, JUST AS LONG AS THE APPLICANT'S NOT INCONVENIENCED DUE TO THE HARDSHIP THAT HE'S GOING THROUGH RIGHT NOW, HE'S GOT ENOUGH ON HIS PLATE. SO WE DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH BOARD MEMBERS. WE DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE MAY 6TH PUBLIC HEARING. WE'LL GO AHEAD AND SCHEDULE THAT, AND THEN WE'LL SEE YOU BACK HERE ON MAY 6TH. THEN YOU CAN CERTAINLY GIVE US AN UPDATE ON YOUR WIFE AT THAT TIME AS WELL. GREAT. THANK YOU. AND THE WHOLE IDEA FOR ME TO BE DOING THIS IS SO I CAN BRING MY DAUGHTER CLOSER, SO SHE CAN HELP TAKE CARE OF HER MOTHER AS WELL. OKAY. BECAUSE I'M STILL TAKING CARE OF MY MY MOTHER. AND FOR SOME FUNNY REASON, I THINK MY MOTHER'S GOING TO OUTLIVE ME. SHE SHE'S STILL GOING GOOD. A LITTLE BIT OF THE DEMENTIA. BUT, YOU KNOW, SHE'S PUSHING 90. AND I GOTTA ADMIT, SHE LOOKS A HECK OF A LOT BETTER THAN ME AT TIMES. WELL, THAT'S BECAUSE OF YOUR EXCELLENT CARE, I'M SURE. LET'S HOPE SO. SO. AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD, BY THE WAY, IS REALLY THEY'RE REALLY GOOD ABOUT IT AND THEY CAN'T WAIT TO SEE SOMETHING DIFFERENT AND CHANGE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD A LITTLE BIT TOO. SO IT IS A, IT IS A WIN WIN FOR, FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD. ALL RIGHT. WELL, WE'LL SEE YOU BACK HERE ON THE SIXTH. OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MOM. AND YOUR WIFE. I'M SORRY. I SAID BEST WISHES WITH MOM AND YOUR WIFE. THANK YOU. APPRECIATE IT. SO, OUR THIRD [3. Ten Lives Club Inc. – Requesting a use variance for the expansion of rescue services to be located at 3747 Lakeshore Road ] CASE, TEN LIVES CLUB, HAS BEEN POSTPONED UNTIL THE MAY 6TH MEETING. CORRECT. WAS IT BECAUSE THEY WERE WAITING FOR SOMETHING OR THEY WERE POSTPONED BECAUSE THEY DID NOT RECEIVE APPROVAL OF A USE VARIANCE FROM THE ZONING BOARD DURING THE APRIL MEETING? OKAY. [00:20:02] SO THEY WILL BE BEFORE THE ZONING BOARD ACTUALLY THE DAY BEFORE OUR MAY 6TH MEETING. SO, [4. Brandon Santa – Requesting Site Plan Approval for a proposal to construct six (6) shop warehouse buildings along with other associated site improvements to be located on a 7.46-acre parcel at 0 Lakeshore Road (SBL #: 150.00-1-6.2) ] OKAY, MOVING RIGHT ALONG. THAT BRINGS US TO CASE NUMBER FOUR, THE BRANDON SANTA REQUESTING SKETCH PLAN DIRECTION FOR. WELL, AT THIS POINT, WORKING ON THE APPROVAL OF A WAREHOUSE BUILDING ALONG WITH A SIX SHOP WAREHOUSE BUILDING, ALONG WITH ASSOCIATED SITE IMPROVEMENTS. AND I KNOW THAT I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANT TO ADDRESS WHAT HAPPENED OR WHERE WE WANT TO GO. SURE, I'M GOING TO TURN IT OVER. I CERTAINLY CAN. SO, OKAY. SHAWN HOPKINS, ONCE AGAIN, ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT, BRANDON, SANTA, BRANDON AND BRITTANY ARE BOTH HERE WITH ME AS WELL AS ANTHONY PANDOLFI, THE PROJECT ENGINEER FROM CARMINA WOOD DESIGN. I DO WANT TO NOTE FOR THE RECORD THAT AFTER THE LAST PLANNING BOARD MEETING, THERE WAS SOME PRETTY POOR BEHAVIOR. BASICALLY WHAT HAPPENED IS MY CLIENT STANDING TO MY RIGHT, YOUR LEFT BASICALLY GOT SPIT ON BY SOMEONE WHO WAS OPPOSED TO THIS PROJECT, WHICH I FIND TO BE UNACCEPTABLE BEHAVIOR. I ALSO WANT TO NOTE FOR THE RECORD THAT AT TIMES, AS I'VE LEFT THESE MEETINGS AND BEEN NOTHING BUT POLITE, I'VE BEEN TOLD HAPPY HOLIDAYS A WHOLE. ET CETERA, ET CETERA. SO WHAT WE'RE ASKING TO HAPPEN HERE IS FOR THIS PROJECT TO BE JUDGED ON THE MERITS, NOT BASED ON FACEBOOK'S SPECULATION, NOT BASED ON INSULTS, BUT ON THE CRITERIA THAT GOVERN YOUR DECISION MAKING. I DO APPRECIATE THERE'S PRESENCE OF LAW ENFORCEMENT HERE THIS EVENING FOR SECURITY PURPOSES, BUT YOU CAN READILY UNDERSTAND FOR BRANDON AND BRITTANY, IT'S A LITTLE CONCERNING THAT WHERE YOU LIVE, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE HAVING TO TOLERATE THAT TYPE OF BEHAVIOR. WE ARE TRYING TO PROVIDE ANSWERS TO ALL THE QUESTIONS THAT HAVE BEEN ASKED, NOT ONLY BY THIS BOARD, BUT ALSO THE CONSERVATION ADVISORY BOARD, THE RESIDENTS. ET CETERA, ET CETERA. I THINK WE'VE BEEN PRETTY PROACTIVE IN DOING THAT. SO WITH THAT BEING SAID, I'M GOING TO WALK THROUGH THE PRESENTATION. WE ARE GOING TO REQUEST AT THE END THAT YOU CONSIDER AT YOUR NEXT MEETING, ISSUING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND APPROVING THE SITE PLAN, SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATE CONDITIONS. AND OF COURSE, AS WE PROCEED WITH THE PRESENTATION, IF ANY OF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS, DO FEEL FREE TO ASK THEM. SHAWN, BEFORE YOU MOVE ON, CAN YOU ADDRESS THE WHICH IS WHY YOU'RE GOING TO GO THROUGH THE NEW PRESENTATION BECAUSE THERE'S BEEN SEVERAL CHANGES SINCE YOU WERE HERE, AND YOU'RE GOING TO ADDRESS THAT. AND ALSO FOR THE BOARD MEMBERS, WE GOT A PART ONE. YOU WANT ME TO ADDRESS IT? YEAH, PLEASE. SO AS PART OF OUR UPDATED SUBMISSION THAT WAS MADE ON APRIL 10TH, ANTHONY AND I WORKED TOGETHER TO UPDATE THE EAF FORM. SO IT'S CONSISTENT WITH THE CURRENT INFORMATION. THERE WAS A COMMENT AT THE LAST MEETING ABOUT MEADOW VERSUS DISTURBED GROUNDS, SO WE UPDATED IT ACCORDANCE WITH THE COMMENT THAT WE RECEIVED. UNFORTUNATELY, WHEN I PUT THAT INTO THE SIGNED FORM, THE PDF PROGRAM ADOBE ACROBAT AUTOMATICALLY UNCHECKED SOME BOXES FOR SOME UNKNOWN REASON. WE BECAME AWARE OF THAT VIA JOSH TODAY AND WE DID UPDATE THE A F. I WOULD ALSO NOTE IN JANUARY WE HAD PREVIOUSLY SUBMITTED ANY AF AND THOSE QUESTIONS THAT WERE NOW MARKED AS UNCHECKED HAD PREVIOUSLY BEEN ANSWERED. SO YOU KNOW, THE RECORD IS COMPLETE, THE UPDATED EAF HAS BEEN SUBMITTED AND AGAIN THE BLAME IS ON ME. I APOLOGIZE SOMEHOW WHEN I ADDED MY ELECTRONIC SIGNATURE, IT UNCHECKED SOME OF THE BOXES. OKAY, THANK YOU FOR THAT EXPLANATION. SO THAT'S WHY YOU'RE GOING TO DO THIS PRESENTATION TONIGHT. PART OF IT IS THAT, AND I ALSO WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IF ANYONE HAS ANY QUESTIONS, YOU KNOW, WE'RE PROVIDING A COMPLETE RECORD. CAITLIN, JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, THAT THE EAF AMENDED PART ONE THAT'S UPLOADED, DATED FOR 1426 IS THE COMPLETED AND FINAL VERSION, RIGHT? YES. OKAY. IT'S I BELIEVE IT'S YEAH, IT WAS UP. RIGHT. SO ANTHONY DID RESIGN IT JUST TO MAKE CLEAR. YES. SO YES, THAT IS THE CURRENT VERSION. SO I'M GOING TO WALK THROUGH THE BEGINNING SLIDES QUICKLY. AND AGAIN IT'S MORE ABOUT THE HISTORY. WE ALL KNOW THE SITE AT THIS POINT IN TIME 77.5 ACRES ZONED M THREE AND ROUTE FIVE OVERLAY DISTRICT. THE PROPOSED USE IS A CONTRACTOR SHOP WAREHOUSE BUILDINGS PURSUANT TO SEEKER AND THIS IS IMPORTANT. THIS IS AN UNLISTED ACTION, MEANING IT'S NOT A TYPE ONE ACTION THAT CARRIES WITH IT A PRESUMPTION OF POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS. SHAWN, REALLY QUICK, CAN I JUST MAKE A POINT OF CLARIFICATION, JUST TO CLARIFY, BECAUSE I'VE SEEN IT ON THIS PRESENTATION. THIS PROJECT ACTUALLY IS NOT WITHIN THE ROUTE FIVE OVERLAY DISTRICT THAT ADDRESSED. WELL, THANK YOU FOR POINTING THAT OUT. WE STARTED THIS PROCESS IN OCTOBER 28TH OF LAST YEAR. YOU HELD A PUBLIC HEARING ON MARCH 4TH. WE DID PRESENT THIS PROJECT AGAIN DURING YOUR MEETING ON APRIL 1ST. AND OVER THE COURSE OF TIME, WE HAVE MADE SOME NUMEROUS ADJUSTMENTS AND MODIFICATIONS BASED ON THE INPUT WE'VE RECEIVED. NEXT SLIDE. THIS IS JUST SHOWING. AGAIN, ONE OF THE EARLIER [00:25:03] ISSUES WAS WHETHER OR NOT THIS IS TWO PARCELS. AND YES, INDEED IT IS. AND IT WILL REMAIN TWO PARCELS SUBJECT TO AN EASEMENT. NEXT SLIDE. ALSO IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT, AGAIN, IN TERMS OF THE SUITABILITY OF THE USE FOR THIS SITE, NOT TO BE DISRESPECTFUL IN ANY WAY WHATSOEVER, THAT'S GOVERNED BY THE CODE, NOT BY THIS BOARD. AND WHAT I MEAN BY THAT IS IT'S NOT THE PLANNING BOARD SAYING, HEY, THIS IS THE USE THAT WE WANT ON THIS SITE. YOU'RE TAKING A LOOK AT THE ZONING CODE AS PART OF YOUR SITE PLAN REVIEW PROCESS TO CONFIRM THAT, YES, IT IS PROPERLY ZONED AND IN THIS INSTANCE, THE M3 ZONING CLASSIFICATION IS THE APPROPRIATE ZONING CLASSIFICATION FOR THE PROPOSED USE. IF YOU LOOK AT THE LIST OF ALLOWED USES WHICH WE PRESENTED PREVIOUSLY, THERE ARE CERTAINLY MUCH MORE INTENSIVE LAND USES THAT WOULD ALSO BE PERMITTED AS OF RIGHT WITHIN THE ZONING DISTRICT. NEXT SLIDE. UPDATED PLAN THAT UPDATED SKETCH PLAN SUBMISSION ALL THE WAY BACK IN FEBRUARY 23RD. NOT GOING TO GO THROUGH IT POINT BY POINT, BUT WE DID ADD FIRE SERVICE TO THE PLAN. WE MADE SOME MODIFICATIONS IN TERMS OF EMERGENCY ACCESS. THE BUILDINGS WILL BE SPRINKLERED. WE MADE SOME MODIFICATIONS TO THE BERMS, INCLUDING PROVIDING A BERM ALONG THE LENGTH OF RUSH CREEK, AND WE ADDED SOME DIMENSIONS. NEXT SLIDE IS A SURVEY OF THE SITE. ONE OF THE TOPICS THAT CAME UP LAST MEETING VIA A VIDEO WAS THAT AREA THAT'S HIGHLIGHTED IN GRAY. THAT IS D O T RIGHT OF WAY. SO THERE'S BEEN A CONCERN EXPRESSED IN THE PAST OR AT THE PAST MEETING ABOUT UTILIZING THAT FOR ACCESS. I'LL ADDRESS THAT MORE IN A SECOND. BUT I DO WANT TO NOTE IT IS A PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY. AND WHAT I MEAN BY THAT IS BRANDON REALLY CAN'T CONTROL ACCESS BY ANYONE OTHER THAN HIS VEHICLES. AT THAT POINT. WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT A SITE PLAN CONDITION. NEXT SLIDE. THE ORIGINAL SITE PLAN OR UPDATED PLAN WE PRESENTED ON FEBRUARY 23RD BASED ON INPUT RECEIVED EARLY IN THE REVIEW PROCESS, WE ARE SHOWING THAT 25 FOOT CONSERVATION AREA FROM THE CENTER LINE OF RUSH CREEK, AND NO BUILDINGS THEMSELVES WILL BE LOCATED WITHIN 100FT OF THE CENTER LINE OF RUSH CREEK, AND BOTH THOSE AREAS ARE HIGHLIGHTED ON THE PREVIOUS PLANS AND THE CURRENT PLANS. I DO HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THAT, AND I NEED A CLARIFICATION, WHICH IS WHY I'M ASKING. SO BUILDING NUMBER NOW. SIX. CORRECT. IT WAS EIGHT. NOW IT'S SIX. YES. AND THE END OF THE BUILDING HAS THAT BEEN VERIFIED THAT THAT'S 100FT FROM THE CENTER OF THE CREEK? YES. BECAUSE WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE MAP, THERE IS SOME CONFUSION THERE. AND I DO HAVE THE ACTUAL MAP, THE NEW THE REVISED MAP. SO IT'S IT'S FROM THE CENTER OF THE CREEK. I'M REPEATING THIS FOR A REASON. 100FT FROM THE CENTER OF THE CREEK. SO THE 41.35 IS TO THE BERM. AM I, AM I READING THIS RIGHT? OH, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THIS BUILDING DOWN HERE. YEAH. THE ONE THAT I KEEP CALLING NOW IT'S NUMBER FOUR, BUILDING FOUR, RIGHT. YOU MENTIONED DO YOU KEEP CHANGING THE NUMBERS ON PURPOSE OR. JUST KIDDING. I DON'T THINK THEY WERE NUMBERED BEFORE, HONESTLY. I JUST NUMBERED THEM ON THIS. LAST UPDATED. OKAY. JUST TO MAKE THINGS EASIER, FOR THAT REASON, I DON'T. I DON'T THINK THEY WERE NUMBERED BEFORE. OKAY, BUT THAT DIMENSION IS TO THE CREEK BANK, NOT THE CENTER OF THE CREEK. BUT YOU CAN CONFIRM THAT TO THE CENTER LINE OF THE CREEK AND WE CAN ADD THAT DIMENSION. OKAY. I WOULD APPRECIATE THAT. THAT'S WHAT THE THAT'S WHAT THE HAT THAT IS. OH YEAH. RIGHT. THAT IS ABOUT RIGHT, RIGHT, RIGHT. SO PLANNING BOARD CHAIRPERSON THAT HATCHED AREA IS ACTUALLY THE 100 FOOT AREA. OKAY. SO YOU CAN SEE WE'RE OUTSIDE OF IT. OKAY. OKAY. JUST WANTED THAT CLARIFICATION. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. NEXT SLIDE. THAT'S JUST A SITE PLAN. ORIGINAL SITE PLAN OR THE FEBRUARY SITE PLAN PLUGGED INTO AN AERIAL BACKGROUND JUST TO SHOW NEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXT. NEXT SLIDE. PREVIOUS LANDSCAPE PLAN. ORIGINALLY, AS YOU RECALL, WE WERE SHOWING THE FENCE ALONG WITH THE LANDSCAPING CLOSER TO THE RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD. SUBSEQUENTLY, BASED ON INPUT WE RECEIVED, THAT'S BEEN CHANGED AND NOW CHANGED AGAIN. NEXT SLIDE. NEXT SLIDE. NEXT SLIDE. THERE'S THE ELEVATION PLAN THAT WE INCLUDED AS PART OF OUR SITE PLAN APPLICATION. THE BUILDINGS WILL SERVE AS THEY'RE DESIGNED TO FUNCTION, BUT THEY ACTUALLY WILL LOOK QUITE NICE. AND IN TERMS OF THE HEIGHT OF THESE BUILDINGS, UP TO THE PEAK WILL ONLY BE 26FT, TEN INCHES, WHICH IS MUCH LOWER THAN WHAT'S PERMITTED EVEN IN A RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT. NEXT SLIDE. UPDATED PROJECT SUBMISSION THAT WE MADE ON MARCH 27TH BEFORE YOUR PREVIOUS BUILDING, WE MOVED THE SCREENING BACK TO THE EDGE OF THE NORTHERN SIDE OF THE BUILDINGS, AND WE WERE ASKED TO ALSO CONSIDER SHORTENING THE WIDTH OF THE ACCESS AISLE IN BETWEEN THE BUILDINGS. WE DID TAKE A LOOK AT THAT, BUT TO ENSURE, NUMBER ONE, PROPER EMERGENCY ACCESS AND NUMBER TWO, THAT BUILDINGS CAN BACK UP AND [00:30:04] MAKE SURE THAT VEHICLES CAN BACK UP AND MAKE APPROPRIATE TURNING MOVEMENTS. WE DID LEAVE THAT UNCHANGED. NEXT SLIDE. THAT WAS THE UPDATED LANDSCAPE PLAN WE PRESENTED ON APRIL 1ST. AGAIN, LANDSCAPING NOW MOVED DIRECTLY TO THE NORTH SIDE OF THE BUILDINGS. NEXT SLIDE. NEXT SLIDE. AND THEN WE MADE AN UPDATED SUBMISSION ONCE AGAIN, MOST RECENTLY ON APRIL 10TH. THAT DID INCLUDE AN UPDATED SITE PLAN AS WELL AS UPDATED LANDSCAPE PLANS PREPARED BY ANTHONY'S TEAM AT CARMITA WOOD DESIGN. WE DID INCLUDE AN AMENDED PART ONE OF THE FULL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM, WITH COPIES OF THE DOCUMENTATION PREVIOUSLY ISSUED BY BOTH THE DEC AND THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, CONFIRMING UNEQUIVOCALLY THAT WE WILL NOT HAVE ANY ADVERSE IMPACTS ON WETLANDS, ALONG WITH AN ADDITIONAL COPY OF THE NO IMPACT LETTER ISSUED BY SHPO ON MARCH 2ND. NEXT SLIDE. IN ADDITION, ANTHONY DID HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO DISCUSS THIS PROJECT WITH THE ERIE COUNTY DIVISION OF SEWAGE MANAGEMENT AFTER THE APRIL 1ST MEETING. AND YES, INDEED, THEY DID CONFIRM THAT THEY WANT A 30 FOOT WIDE EASEMENT. AS YOU RECALL, THEY HAD SUGGESTED THAT WE THOUGHT IT WOULD BE 20, BUT ULTIMATELY IT WAS 30. AS A RESULT OF THAT FACT, WE HAD TO PUSH OUR BUILDINGS TO THE SOUTH. SO BASICALLY, WE'RE GOING TO PROVIDE AN EASEMENT ON A PORTION OF THE SITE AS SHOWN ON THE UPDATED PLANS. WE BASICALLY HAD TO MOVE THE BUILDINGS SO THAT THE WIDTH HOUR WAS REDUCED FROM 60FT PREVIOUSLY TO 52FT. THAT DID REDUCE THE TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE PROJECT FROM 79,500FT■S TO 75,220FT■S, ALSO RESULTED IN A REDUCTION IN THE IMPERVIOUS SURFACE, AND THEN THE FINAL BULLET POINT THERE TO ADDRESS THAT ISSUE THAT WAS RAISED AT THE PREVIOUS MEETING ON APRIL 1ST ABOUT SOUTHBOUND VEHICLES ENTERING THE PROJECT SITE, BASICALLY FROM HOLLY AND THEN CROSSING THROUGH THAT RIGHT OF WAY. WE WOULD ACCEPT THE CONDITION THAT ALL HEAVY CONSTRUCTION VEHICLES SHALL BE REQUIRED TO CONTINUE SOUTHBOUND AND UTILIZE THE WOODLAWN EXIT OFF ROUTE FIVE TO CIRCLE AROUND AND COME BACK UP ROUTE FIVE, GOING NORTHBOUND TO MAKE A RIGHT HAND TURN INTO THE SITE. BUT I DO WANT TO NOTE A COUPLE OF THINGS. NUMBER ONE, WE CAN AGREE TO THAT. WE CAN'T NECESSARILY ENFORCE IT ON ANY THIRD PARTIES, INCLUDING TENANTS, AGAIN, BECAUSE IT'S A PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY. AND SECOND OF ALL, AS BRANDON HAS MENTIONED, IF YOU'RE ACTUALLY ON GOOGLE EARTH OR ANY TYPE OF DRIVING DIRECTION PROGRAM ONLINE, IT ACTUALLY DIRECTS YOU TO GO THAT WAY. SO THERE'S A LEARNING CURVE THERE. WE CAN'T CONTROL THAT. SO BRANDON CAN ASSURE THAT HIS VEHICLES WILL NOT UTILIZE THAT. WE WOULD CERTAINLY ENCOURAGE TENANTS AND MAKE THEM AWARE OF THAT CONDITION. BUT I DO WANT TO CONFIRM, BECAUSE IT IS A PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY, WE CAN'T NECESSARILY CONTROL ACCESS ACROSS IT. ALL WE CAN DO IS ENCOURAGE IT. NEXT SLIDE. IT'S ALSO IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT WE MADE SOME CHANGES TO THE LANDSCAPING PLAN. BASICALLY, AS I INDICATED, THE BUILDING NORTH SIDE SETBACK WHEN WE WERE HERE LAST TIME WAS TEN FEET. YOU ACTUALLY ASKED US TO CONSIDER MODIFYING THAT BASED ON THE NEED TO INCREASE THE WIDTH OF THAT ERIE COUNTY DIVISION OF SEWAGE MANAGEMENT EASEMENT. WE'RE NOW AT 18FT, WHICH MEANS THERE'S SOME ADDITIONAL GREEN SPACE AND SOME ADDITIONAL ROOM FOR PLANTINGS. ANTHONY'S GOING TO WALK YOU VERY QUICKLY THROUGH THE UPDATED LANDSCAPING COMMENTS THAT WE'VE RECEIVED OR THE UPDATED LANDSCAPING PLANS THAT WE'VE SUBMITTED. THOSE ARE BASED ON COMMENTS WE DID RECEIVE ON MARCH 30TH. SO QUICKLY IF YOU WANT TO GO THROUGH THAT. ANTHONY. YEAH, JUST, JUST REAL QUICK, I WORKED WITH OUR LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT TO TAKE A LOOK AT ALL OF THE PLANNINGS WE'RE PROPOSING BEHIND THE BUILDINGS THERE. AND I DID GO THROUGH EACH ONE AND KIND OF DESCRIBE THE ROOT STRUCTURE OF EACH ONE AS AS HE FOUND IT, THERE ARE TWO THAT WE DID KIND OF AS RESEARCHING IT DID KIND OF SHOW THEY HAVE WIDE SPREADING ROOTS. THOSE TWO ARE THE NORWAY SPRUCE AND THE DAPPLED WILLOW. WE HAVE REMOVED THOSE FROM BEHIND THE BUILDING AND REPLACED THEM WITH ONE OF THE OTHER PLANTINGS. AND I JUST ALSO WANT TO NOTE THAT BECAUSE OF THAT EASEMENT, WHERE PREVIOUSLY WE WERE TEN FOOT OFF THE PROPERTY LINE, WE'RE NOW 18FT OFF THE PROPERTY LINE. SO THAT GIVES US A LITTLE MORE ROOM FOR FOR THESE PLANTS TO GROW AS WELL. BUT WE DID KEEP IT TO THE ONES THAT WE FOUND TO HAVE NOT WIDE SPREADING ROOTS SO AS TO NOT A NOT DISTURB THE BUILDING FOUNDATION AND B NOT DISTURB THE EXISTING SEWER LINE. AND AGAIN, WE DO APPRECIATE THAT THERE IS A MEMBER OF THIS BOARD THAT HAS LANDSCAPING EXPERTISE. SO WE HAVE TRIED TO INCORPORATE THEIR INPUT. NEXT SLIDE. THERE IS A COPY OF THE UPDATED SITE PLAN. AGAIN REFLECTING THAT CHANGE, PRIMARILY CONSISTING OF INCREASING THE SETBACK OF THE BUILDINGS FROM THE NORTH PROPERTY LINE TO 18FT. NEXT SLIDE. UPDATED LANDSCAPE PLANS. AND YOU CAN SEE AGAIN THAT INCREASED AREA. IT'S ALSO IMPORTANT TO REMIND THE BOARD [00:35:04] OF THE EXTENSIVE PLANTINGS WE'RE PROPOSING ALONG RUSH CREEK, WHICH IS THE BOTTOM OF THIS DIAGRAM. NEXT SLIDE. THIS IS THE UPDATED PLANTING SCHEDULE. AND ONCE AGAIN NOW FOR THE THIRD TIME, WE'VE INCREASED THE AMOUNT OF LANDSCAPING THAT WE'RE PROPOSING. WE'RE AT 28 DECIDUOUS TREES, FIVE ORNAMENTAL TREES, 136 EVERGREEN TREES, AND 15 SHRUBS. NEXT SLIDE. OH, THAT'S THE UPDATED PLANTING SCHEDULE. SO THE UPDATED PLANTING SCHEDULE IS 29 DECIDUOUS TREES, 25 ORNAMENTAL TREES, AN ADDITIONAL EVERGREEN TREES. WE'RE NOW AT 144 EVERGREEN TREES. AND AS YOU CAN SEE, WE'RE PROPOSING TEN DIFFERENT TYPES OF TREES THERE. SO IN THE END THERE WILL BE ADDITIONAL GREEN SPACE, EXTENSIVE ADDITIONAL GREEN SPACE AND LANDSCAPING PROVIDED ON THIS SITE. NEXT SLIDE. I ALSO WANT TO NOTE AGAIN THAT THIS IS SUBJECT TO AN ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PURSUANT TO THE STATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY REVIEW ACT, YOU HAVE CONDUCTED A COORDINATED ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW. TO DATE, NONE OF THE AGENCIES THAT RESPONDED EXPRESSED ANY CONCERNS ABOUT YOU ACTING AS A LEAD AGENCY, WHICH IS TYPICAL THE CASE. NEXT SLIDE. IN TERMS OF THE SEEKER DOCUMENTATION ITSELF, I WANT TO EMPHASIZE AGAIN THE NO IMPACT LETTER ISSUED BY SHIPPO DATED MARCH 2ND THAT CLEARLY INDICATES IT'S OPINION, NOT OURS, THAT THIS PROJECT WILL NOT HAVE ANY ADVERSE IMPACTS ON PROTECTED CULTURAL OR ARCHEOLOGICAL RESOURCES. NEXT SLIDE. LETTER ISSUED BY THE THE NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION DATED JULY 14TH OF LAST YEAR. THERE ARE NO MAPPED WETLANDS ON THE SITE, EVEN UNDER THE AMENDED REGULATIONS THAT WERE ACTUALLY THROWN OUT BY A COURT IN ALBANY COUNTY LAST WEDNESDAY. AND WHILE. PORTION OF THE 100 FOOT BUFFER DOES EXTEND ON THIS SITE, WE ARE NOT TOUCHING IT. NEXT SLIDE. JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION ISSUED BY THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS DATED APRIL 11TH. THERE ARE NO JURISDICTIONAL FEDERAL WETLANDS ON THE SITE. NEXT SLIDE. RESPONSES TO PUBLIC COMMENTS. I'M NOT GOING TO GO THROUGH THESE POINT BY POINT AGAIN, BUT IN EACH INSTANCE, WE HAVE RESPONDED TO ALL THE COMMENTS WE'VE RECEIVED. I JUST WANT TO EMPHASIZE TWO THINGS. NUMBER ONE, WE'RE WELL AWARE OF THE STORMWATER REQUIREMENTS. SO IN CONNECTION WITH THIS PROJECT AND SUBJECT TO REVIEW BY THE TOWN ENGINEER, WE WILL HAVE TO IMPLEMENT A STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN. THAT SYSTEM WILL NEED TO BE DESIGNED TO HANDLE BOTH STORMWATER QUALITY AND QUANTITY STANDARDS, INCLUDING THE NEED FOR THAT SYSTEM TO HANDLE 100 YEAR STORM EVENT. SO WHILE IT OFTENTIMES SEEMS SOMEWHAT COUNTERINTUITIVE, THE DRAINAGE ON THIS SITE WILL WORK BASED ON THE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM. NEXT SLIDE. I ALSO WANT TO NOTE ONE OF THE ADDITIONAL COMMENTS WE RECEIVED RECENTLY WAS REFERENCING A PHASE ONE AND PHASE TWO ESSAY REPORT THAT WAS DONE ON BEHALF OF, I BELIEVE, THE TOWN'S ID, A FOR PROPERTY LOCATED TO THE SOUTHEAST OF THE SITE. NUMBER ONE, I WANT TO MAKE SURE IT'S CLEAR WE CANNOT SUBMIT THAT THEY'RE NOT OUR REPORTS. THEY WERE NOT PREPARED ON OUR BEHALF. BUT NONETHELESS, ANTHONY AND I BOTH DID REVIEW THOSE REPORTS, AND THEY CLEARLY PERTAIN TO PROPERTY OFF SITE THAT WAS PREVIOUSLY DEVELOPED, WHICH IS NOT THE SAME AS THE CASE HERE. THIS SITE HAS NOT BEEN PREVIOUSLY DEVELOPED. WE'VE PREVIOUSLY ADDRESSED EMERGENCY ACCESS. I'VE SUBMITTED A DRAFT OF THE DECLARATION OF EASEMENTS FOR THE TWO PARCELS BRANDED. DID MEET WITH THE WOODLAWN SEWER ON MONDAY EVENING. AND BASICALLY WHAT THEY'RE ASKING FOR IS THEY'LL GRANT US AN EASEMENT, BUT THEY WANT US TO THEY'LL WE'LL GET AN EASEMENT FROM THEM, BUT WE'RE GOING TO GRANT AN EASEMENT TO THEM AS WELL. AND I'LL MENTION THAT IN A SECOND. NEXT SLIDE. THAT'S THAT COMMENT LETTER FROM WOODLAWN THAT WE RECEIVED ON MARCH 27TH. NEXT SLIDE. YEAH. GO AHEAD. CAN YOU BACK UP ONE SCREEN? SO ON THE WOODLAWN SEWER, THERE WERE COMMENTS MADE THAT THE ACCESS, THE CURRENT ACCESS TO THE WOODLAWN SEWER IS BLOCKED. AND I WOULD LIKE YOU GUYS TO CONFIRM. I'M SORRY. SAY THAT AGAIN THAT THE WOOD, THE ACCESS TO THE WOODLAWN SEWER. WAS BLOCKED. I IT I MAY KNOW WHAT YOU'RE REFERRING TO. BASICALLY THAT IS WHAT BRANDON MET WITH THE WOODLAWN SEWER DISTRICT ABOUT. OKAY. AT THE END OF BEAM ROAD HERE, THERE IS A SEWER MANHOLE OWNED ON THE WOODLAWN SEWER DISTRICT PROPERTY THAT GOES NORTH UP BEAM ROAD THAT CROSSES BRANDON'S PROPERTY. THEY DO NOT HAVE ACCESS TO THAT SEWER BECAUSE THEY DO NOT HAVE AN EASEMENT. SO THAT IS WHAT BRANDON MET. SO THAT'S WHAT THE EASEMENT IS ABOUT. THERE WILL BE AN EASEMENT. WE WILL ESTABLISH AN EASEMENT ALONG HERE. AND THEN BRANDON HAS AGREED TO GIVE THEM AN EASEMENT ACROSS HIS PROPERTY IN EXCHANGE FOR AN AN EMERGENCY ACCESS EASEMENT. SO THE CONCERN INDICATED AT THE LAST MEETING IS NOW SINCE BEEN ADDRESSED. [00:40:02] OKAY. SO EASEMENTS WILL BE CONVEYED BY BOTH PARTIES. ATTORNEY JOSEPH GOERGEN JUST WITH REFERENCE TO THE PROPERTY. THE WOODLAWN PROPERTY EXTENDS TO THE RIGHT OF WAY ALONG ROUTE FIVE. IT DOES. DOES THE WOODLAWN SEWER AUTHORITY HAVE ACCESS TO THEIR PROPERTY FROM THAT RIGHT OF WAY ON ROUTE FIVE? THAT'S THE THAT'S ANOTHER QUESTION THAT I HAVE AS THE ATTORNEY FOR THE ACCESS TO THE PROPERTY. BRANDON. THEY DO. BRANDON. I'M THE PROPERTY OWNER. YES. THEY DO HAVE ACCESS TO THEIR PROPERTY AT ROUTE FIVE. I KNOW THERE'S A FENCE THERE. THAT FENCE CROSSES MY PROPERTY. ONLY THEIR PROPERTY IS NOT BLOCKED AT ALL WHATSOEVER. THANK YOU. AND THAT EASEMENT THAT THEY'LL GRANT US FOR EMERGENCY ACCESS FROM A PERSPECTIVE OF EMERGENCY SERVICES IS VERY HELPFUL IN OUR BUILDINGS. DON'T. OKAY. SORRY ABOUT THAT. WE GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE. OH, WE DID RESPOND TO THE COMMENTS OF THE CONSERVATION ADVISORY BOARD. NEXT SLIDE. THESE ARE OUR RESPONSES. SO WE ADDRESSED EACH AND EVERY ONE OF THOSE. IMPACT ON LAND IMPACT ON SURFACE WATER, IMPACT ON FLOODING, IMPACT ON PLANTS AND ANIMALS, ESTHETIC RESOURCES AND CONSISTENCY WITH THE COMMUNITY CHARACTER. ALL OF THOSE WERE ADDRESSED. AND THAT LETTER WE SUBMITTED. NEXT SLIDE. WE ALSO DID RESPOND SPECIFICALLY TO THE COMMENTS OF THE DECK AND ITS LEAD AGENCY CONCURRENCE LETTER DATED FEBRUARY 27TH OF THIS YEAR. AND AGAIN, I WANT TO CONFIRM NO IMPACTS ON WETLANDS. WE'RE CERTAINLY AWARE OF THE FACT THAT RUSH CREEK HAS A STANDARD OF C CLASSIFICATION THAT WILL RESULT IN ADDITIONAL NEEDS FOR SWEEP INSPECTIONS TWICE A WEEK VERSUS A TYPICAL ONCE A WEEK. WE'RE AWARE OF THE FLOODPLAIN. AND THEN FINALLY, IN TERMS OF THAT ENDANGERED SPECIES THEY'VE LISTED WE'VE NOT RECEIVED ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. BUT I DO WANT TO NOTE IT WAS LAST SEEN NOT ON THE PROJECT SITE 23 YEARS AGO. SO WE DO THINK BASED ON ALL THE EXTENSIVE DOCUMENTATION THAT WE'VE SUBMITTED, BASED ON YOUR INPUT, BASED ON US ADDRESSING EACH AND EVERY CONCERN THAT'S BEEN RAISED, THAT YOU ARE IN A POSITION, FINALLY TO CONSIDER ISSUING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION DURING YOUR MEETING, YOUR NEXT MEETING, AS WELL AS APPROVING THE SITE PLAN. I DO APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO GIVE YOU THE ENTIRE PRESENTATION ONCE AGAIN, AND THE MEMBERS OF THE PROJECT TEAM WELCOME THE OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS THAT ANY OF YOU MAY HAVE. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. PLANNING DEPARTMENT. I DO HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. FOR STARTERS. ONE, I KNOW WE'VE GOTTEN A COMMENT ABOUT ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION TIMELINE AND PHASING OF THE PROJECT AND WORRIES ABOUT NOISE MITIGATION, SO ON AND SO FORTH. CAN YOU JUST SPEAK TO ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION TIMELINE, IF THERE WILL BE PHASING OF THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE PROJECT AND ANY TYPE OF NOISE MITIGATIONS THAT YOU'RE ABLE TO OFFER? YEAH. SO THE GOAL WOULD BE IT. AGAIN, WE HAVEN'T EVEN GIVEN THAT WE DON'T HAVE A PROJECT APPROVED, WE HAVEN'T GOTTEN TOO FAR INTO THIS. THE GOAL WOULD BE TO PUT IN ALL THE INFRASTRUCTURE AT ONCE, MOBILIZE AND PUT IN THE PAVEMENT, ALL THE SEWER, THE WATER, THE DRAINAGE, ETC. ETC. AND THEN THE INDIVIDUAL BUILDINGS WOULD BE BUILT BASED ON DEMAND, MEANING BRANDON'S, YOU'RE NOT GOING TO TURN UP THERE ONE DAY AND ALL OF A SUDDEN ALL THESE BUILDINGS ARE BUILT. AND LET'S FIND TENANTS AS HE IDENTIFIES TENANTS THAT ARE SUITABLE FOR THIS SPACE, THEN THE BUILDINGS WOULD PROCEED. SO IT COULD BE MULTIPLE PHASES, BUT WE REALLY HAVEN'T GOTTEN TO THE POINT IN TIME WHERE WE CAN GIVE YOU ANY VERY MUCH SPECIFICS. IN TERMS OF THAT, CAN I PIGGYBACK OFF THAT QUESTION? SO I NOTICED IN THE EAF, IT'S I THINK IT SAID THREE BUILDINGS. AM I REMEMBERING THAT ANTICIPATED THREE BUILDINGS IN THE BEGINNING? YES. AND THEN IT WOULD. AND THEN THE REST WOULD BE BASED ON MARKET. OKAY. AND AGAIN, I WANT TO MAKE SURE IT'S CLEAR THAT'S ALL SUBJECT TO BANK FINANCING AND A WHOLE LOT OF OTHER CONSIDERATIONS. BUT YES, BRANDON WOULD LOVE TO GET THESE BUILDINGS BUILT AS SOON AS POSSIBLE, BUT HE HAS TO DO IT IN A JUDICIOUS WAY TO MAKE SURE THERE'S SUITABLE TENANTS AND TO ALLOW FOR CONSTRUCTION FINANCING. OKAY, SO MY SECOND QUESTION FOR YOU, MR. SANTA. I KNOW I'VE ASKED YOU THIS BEFORE, BUT JUST SO THAT IT'S ON THE RECORD, CAN YOU ONCE AGAIN SPECIFY THE KIND OF USES WITHIN THE BUILDINGS THEMSELVES IN TERMS OF I KNOW IT'S DESCRIBED AS CONTRACTOR SHOP BUILDING. CAN YOU KIND OF JUST DESCRIBE THE USES AND THEN A PIGGYBACK QUESTION OFF OF THAT? DO YOU INTEND ON TENANTS BEING HAVING LIKE WORKSHOP SPACE, MEANING THAT THEY WOULD WORK ON PROJECTS, USE MACHINES, ANYTHING OF THAT SORT? CAN YOU JUST CONFIRM YOU KNOW, WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING TO HAVE INSIDE THE BUILDINGS THEMSELVES? YEAH. I MEAN, SO WE'RE WE'RE LOOKING TO HAVE PLUMBERS, ELECTRICIANS, CONCRETE GUYS, FRAMERS, PAINTERS, AUTO DETAILERS, ANYBODY THAT CAN USE SHOP SPACE. YES. THEY WOULD BE WORKING ON PROJECTS IN THE SHOP. I DON'T BELIEVE THEY WOULD BE WORKING ON ANYTHING OUT OF THE SHOP. AND THEN YOU ALSO TALKED ABOUT HAVING STORAGE SPACE FOR THEIR MATERIALS, IF NEED BE, SO ON AND SO FORTH, TRAILERS, ETC. THAT WOULD BE IN THE STORAGE. I THINK MOST OF MY EQUIPMENT WOULD BE IN THE THE OPEN MATERIAL STORAGE AREAS. I MAY [00:45:01] MOVE MY SHOP TO BACK THERE INSTEAD OF BEING UP FRONT BY THE NEIGHBORS, AND I THINK IT WOULD BE BEST FOR THEM TO, FOR ALL THE EQUIPMENT TO BE IN THE BACK, AWAY FROM THE HOMES. AND THEN LAST PIGGYBACK QUESTION. I BELIEVE YOU SAID PREVIOUSLY THAT THE BUILDINGS WERE PROPOSED TO BE LIKE COLD STORAGE. SO ARE THEY GOING TO HAVE UTILITIES WITHIN THE WITHIN THE BUILDINGS THEMSELVES? THEY'LL HAVE ONE BATHROOM SINK HEAT, BUT NO AIR CONDITIONING, ELECTRICITY, STORM WATER. YOU KNOW, THERE'LL BE A STORM DRAIN TO WASH VEHICLES, ETC. WOULD YOU AND YOUR REPRESENTATION BE AMENABLE TO A CONDITION OF NO HAZARDOUS MATERIALS, NO FLAMMABLE MATERIALS, THINGS OF THAT SORT. I KNOW WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THAT PREVIOUSLY OF NOT WANTING, YOU KNOW, THAT TYPE OF USE WITHIN THE BUILDINGS. WOULD YOU BE AMENABLE TO THAT TYPE OF CONDITION WITHIN THE BUILDING IN TERMS OF USES? I MEAN, WE'D HAVE TO GET SPECIFIC ABOUT THAT BECAUSE CONTRACTORS HAVE A LOT OF DIFFERENT SUPPLIES. IT'S IT'S TOUGH FOR ME TO TELL THEM THEY CAN'T STORE CONCRETE SEALER IN THE SHOP IF THEY'RE A CONCRETE COMPANY. SO THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE A LITTLE BIT, YOU KNOW, WE GOT TO GET INTO DETAIL ABOUT THAT. OKAY. IF I COULD PIGGYBACK OFF OF YOUR QUESTION AGAIN, IS THAT HE ENTERS INTO THERE'LL BE LANGUAGE ABOUT WHAT'S PERMITTED TO IN TERMS OF STORAGE. YOU'RE ALWAYS JUMPING AHEAD OF ME. IT'S OKAY. NO, NOT THAT YOU'RE INTERRUPTED, BUT THAT SEGUES INTO MY NEXT QUESTION. SO YOU MENTIONED ABOUT THEM WORKING IN THE BUILDINGS. ARE THEY GOING TO BE SET HOURS BECAUSE THEY CAN'T BE WORKING TILL TEN, 11:00 AT NIGHT, CAN THEY? SO WE DON'T TYPICALLY MANDATE HOURS OF OPERATION. WE DO HAVE A NOISE ORDINANCE WHICH DOES SAY 11 P.M. SO WE DON'T TYPICALLY INFRINGE ON HOURS OF OPERATION, BUT WE DO HAVE A NOISE ORDINANCE THAT SAYS NO DISTURB NOISE AFTER 11. AND GENERALLY SPEAKING, I DRIVE BY NUMEROUS OF THESE SITES THROUGHOUT WESTERN NEW YORK. I GUESS SOMEONE RANDOMLY COULD BE THERE IN THE EVENING, BUT GENERALLY THESE ARE PEOPLE THAT WORK DURING THE DAY. THEY TEND TO START EARLIER THAN WORK LATER. SO IN THE YOU BROUGHT UP THE LEASE AND I'M WONDERING IF WE CAN, IN LIGHT OF THE LAST DISCUSSION ABOUT THE EASEMENT AND THE RIGHT OF WAY AND THE SIDEWALK AND THE HEART ATTACK THAT 50 PEOPLE HAD WHEN THEY SAW THE VIDEO, COULD THERE BE SOMETHING IN YOUR EASEMENT, OR WOULD YOU BE AMENABLE TO HAVE SOMETHING IN YOUR IN YOUR LEASE? SORRY, I HAVE EASEMENTS ON THE BRAIN TODAY ABOUT NOT USING THAT RIGHT AWAY FOR THE TENANTS OR WHEN THEY'RE LEASING THE BUILDING, THAT THEY KNOW WHAT THE TRAFFIC FLOW IS TO GET BACK INTO THE BUILDING? I THINK WE'D BE OKAY WITH THAT. PLANNING BOARD CHAIRPERSON. THE PROBLEM WOULD BE ONE OF ENFORCEMENT. I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT AT LEAST WE'VE ON MAPQUEST OR GOOGLE EARTH AND IT SENDS YOU THAT WAY. THAT'S A RIGHT. BUT THE THING OF IT IS, IS THAT IF WE BRING IT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE TENANTS, THEN THERE'S A GOOD CHANCE THAT WE'RE GOING TO KNOCK DOWN SOME OF THIS CONFUSION AND MAYBE LESS VIDEOS. AND IT WOULD. YEAH, WE WOULD ALL LIKE LESS VIDEOS. BUT I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, IT'S BEEN A CONCERN. IT'S BEEN A WELL DOCUMENTED CONCERN. AND I THINK THAT THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT YOU MAY I MEAN, IF I'M, IF I'M MOVING IN SOMEPLACE AND I'M RUNNING IT AND I SEE THAT THERE'S A CHALLENGE OUT THERE AND, AND, AND BUT THAT'S JUST ME. BUT THEN AGAIN, I WALK TO THE BEAT OF A DIFFERENT DRUM. SO I WOULD BE COMPLIANT. I UNDERSTAND THAT, THAT THE APPLICANT IS NOT ABLE TO ENFORCE IT, BUT AT LEAST IT'S BRINGING KNOWLEDGE TO THE TENANTS. SURE. THAT'S WHAT THAT WOULD BE THE GOAL, TO HAVE IT ON THE LEASE. RIGHT. AND THAT WOULD BE OBTAINED A HEAVY CONSTRUCTION VEHICLES, RIGHT. SOMEONE'S DRIVING A CAR. I MEAN, WE'LL DO OUR BEST. THAT'S ALL WE CAN DO. I THINK IF WE COULD CURTAIL ANY KIND OF ENTRANCE IN THERE. AND THAT'S WHY WE'VE AGREED TO THAT CONDITION. OKAY. DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE? BOARD MEMBERS, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? MEMBER CLARK. YEAH. MEMBER CLARK, I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY WITH THE WITH THE 18FT, THE BUILDINGS ARE GOING TO BE 48FT AWAY FROM THE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES. BILL, CAN YOU PUT YOUR MIC A LITTLE. NO, IT'S ON JUST 58 58FT. RIGHT. OKAY. IS THAT BETTER. CAN YOU. YEAH, THAT'S MUCH BETTER. CAN YOU REPEAT THAT? SO MY QUESTION WAS HOW FAR THE BUILDINGS WOULD BE FROM THE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY LINES. AND THE ANSWER WAS 58FT. OKAY. THANK YOU. BEFORE IT WAS 50. YES. OKAY. ANYONE ELSE? MEMBERS A JACK MEMBERS A JACK. I HAD A QUESTION ON THE LANDSCAPING. THERE WAS SOMETHING LISTED AS A L, S O AND I DIDN'T SEE THAT IN THE. IN THE KEY. SO I WAS WONDERING WHAT PLANT THAT WAS. SORRY. ONE SECOND. I OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, I'M GONNA SAY THAT'S ONE OF THE ONES WE REMOVED. SO THAT MAY JUST BE. NO, NO, IT'S ADDED IN. YEAH. I'M I'M A I'M [00:50:02] IMAGINING IT'S ANOTHER SERVICE. BARRY. MAYBE A DIFFERENT VARIETY. YES. I WILL HAVE US LOOK INTO THAT I THINK. YEAH, WE'LL LOOK INTO THAT. I KNOW THAT THAT MIGHT HAVE BEEN ON THE PLANNING SCHEDULE BEFORE. THAT MIGHT BE ONE OF THE ONES WE REMOVED. AND THEN BUT NEVER CHANGE THE LABEL ON THE PLAN. SO I DON'T HAVE THE OLD DO YOU HAVE THE OLD LANDSCAPING SCHEDULE? JOSH. NO, THE THE DAPPLED WILLOW WAS S I RIGHT? THAT WAS REMOVED. AND THEN I'M NOT SURE NORWAY SPRUCE WAS PA RIGHT. I KNOW THE NORWAY SPRUCE SPRUCE IS STILL ON THE LANDSCAPE PLAN BECAUSE WE HAVE THAT ALONG THE FIRM. RIGHT. BUT I THINK IT WAS IN THE PRESENTATION. THE OLD LANDSCAPING SAID WE HAD BOTH. YEAH, YEAH. OH, I CAN GO TO CAPITAL A, CAPITAL L, LOWERCASE S, LOWERCASE O. NO IT WASN'T. OKAY. WELL WE'LL GET THAT LABELED CORRECTLY. IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S JUST MISLABELED. SO WE'LL MAKE SURE ALL THE LABELS MATCH THE PLANNING. THE PLANNING SCHEDULE IS CORRECT. THE LABELING MIGHT JUST BE OFF. SO WE'LL MAKE SURE THAT ALL MATCHES UP. AND THEN THE SPIRIT OAK I STILL HAD NOT NOT CONCERNS, BUT I THINK NOW THERE'S ADEQUATE SPACE FOR THE ROOTS. I PLANTED A FEW LIKE 15 YEARS AGO. OKAY. AND I WENT AND LOOKED AT THEM AND LOOKED AT THEIR ROOTS. AND THEY'RE 20FT WIDE OR SO, WHICH, YOU KNOW, BEFORE, BEFORE WE GOT EXTRA SPACE, THERE PROBABLY WOULD HAVE BEEN A LITTLE TIGHT. BUT MY OTHER CONCERN IS THAT THE DEER EAT THEM, YOU KNOW, ESPECIALLY WHEN THEY'RE YOUNGER. ONCE, ONCE THEY GOT MATURE, OKAY, THEY WERE LIKE, OKAY, SO I MEAN, I, YOU KNOW, REPLACE THEM WITH MORE OF THOSE. DO YOU HAVE A SUGGESTION THAT WE SHOULD CONSIDER? WELL, JUST DEER FENCING BECAUSE I REALLY LIKE THE PLANT FOR THAT AREA. I MEAN, THEY'RE, THEY'RE BEAUTIFUL PLANTS AND GET HEIGHT AND, YOU KNOW, WILL BE WHAT IT'S INTENDED TO DO TO BLOCK THE LIKE DEER. YEAH. LIKE DEER FENCING. YEAH, YEAH. THE FIRST COUPLE SEASONS SO THAT IT CAN GET ESTABLISHED BECAUSE IT, IT CAN, ONCE IT'S ESTABLISHED, IT CAN RESIST SOME GRAZING. BUT WHEN IT'S BRAND NEW, WHAT WILL HAPPEN IS THEN YOU JUST WON'T HAVE ANYTHING AROUND THE BOTTOM. SO I'D RATHER OKAY, GET THAT FULL LENGTH OF SCREENING. YEAH. AND BRANDON CERTAINLY DOES WANT TO SPEND MONEY ON LANDSCAPING THAT NO LONGER EXISTS. YEAH, WELL, THEY'LL THEY'LL SURVIVE. IT'S JUST THAT THE BOTTOM, AS FAR AS THE DEER CAN REACH UP WILL BE BARE, YOU KNOW, BUT ONCE ONCE IT GETS, ONCE THEY GET MATURE AND ESTABLISHED, THEY, IT, YOU KNOW, THEY'LL GRAZE ON IT STILL, BUT IT WON'T BE BARREN. OKAY. THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE? OH. OH, SORRY, I, I WOULDN'T MIND SEEING THE BLUE SPRUCE, THE KALMAR BLUE SPRUCES, MAYBE SOME MORE OF THOSE REPLACED BECAUSE I NEVER I NEVER SEE THEM SURVIVING VERY LONG. THE. OKAY. IS IT STILL STILL? I DON'T KNOW THE LATIN NAME. OKAY. THE. I MEAN, THERE'S ONLY 13 OF THEM, BUT BUT THEY. YEAH, WE I MEAN, IN PRACTICE, I, I NEVER HAD LUCK WITH THEM. I'LL, I'LL, I'LL TALK TO OUR LANDSCAPE GUY ABOUT THAT. EITHER WAY. I DON'T SEE AN ISSUE WITH JUST REPLACING IT WITH SOMETHING WE ALREADY HAVE IF YOU'RE OKAY WITH THAT. YEAH, I, I MEAN, EVEN LEAVING JUST A FEW TO TAKE A CHANCE THAT MAYBE THEY SURVIVED JUST BECAUSE THEY HAVE NICE COLOR AND STUFF. YEAH, SURE. I, I, I JUST, I JUST FEEL LIKE I'M SORRY. WHICH ONE WAS THAT? THE, THE BLUE, THE COLUMNAR, THE COLUMNAR BLUE SPRUCE, BLUE SPRUCE. THEY, YOU KNOW, MAYBE YOU GET LUCKY WITH A FEW OF THEM AND THEY SURVIVE. IT'S JUST THAT I LIKE HOW THEY LOOK. YEAH, THEY'RE A NICE LOOK, BUT THEY I'VE NOT SEEN VERY MANY SURVIVE AROUND HERE FOR ANY LENGTH OF TIME. OKAY. ALL SET? YEP. OKAY. ANYONE ELSE REMEMBER TAMARA? ON THE MEMBERSHIP, ON THE EDIT TO THE TABLE. YOU GUYS FORGOT TO PUT THE -3.5 SO THAT YOU THEN END UP LOOKING AT HOW THE CHANGE WORKS OUT. JUST AS AN FYI, LET US LOOK. AND THEN ON THE TWO [00:55:04] HYDRANTS THAT ARE REQUIRED. SO THE PLACING OF THOSE HYDRANTS, SINCE WE'RE LOOKING AT SITE PLAN APPROVAL, IS THAT SOMETHING THAT ENDS UP GOING THROUGH WITH LIKE THE FIRE DEPARTMENT REVIEW TO MAKE SURE THAT THE LOCATION IS ACCESSIBLE FOR ANY TYPE OF HAZARDS? OUR ENGINEER IS SHAKING HER HEAD. YES, BECAUSE THAT WOULD GO THROUGH HER THE THE FIRE HYDRANT LOCATIONS, AS WELL AS ANYTHING RELATED TO THE FIRE CODE GOES THROUGH CODE CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICE REVIEWS IT, AND WE TYPICALLY DO SHARE IT WITH THE FIRE COMPANIES AS WELL TO ENSURE THAT THEY'RE HAPPY WITH IT. SO DOES THAT HAPPEN BEFORE OR AFTER SITE PLAN APPROVAL? USUALLY AFTER DURING ENGINEERING APPROVAL. PIGGYBACKING OFF OF ENGINEERING APPROVAL. CAN I ASK A QUESTION REAL QUICK? SO I PUT YOU ON THE SPOT. CAMI, CAN YOU TALK ABOUT WHAT HAPPENS, ESPECIALLY AFTER THINGS GET RECEIVED, SITE PLAN APPROVAL FROM. WE'VE TALKED A LOT ABOUT LANDSCAPING, WHAT YOUR DEPARTMENT DOES DURING THE INSPECTION PIECE OF. BEFORE SOMETHING GETS A C OF O, HOW THE LANDSCAPING MUST BE PUT IN AND HOW YOU GUYS INSPECT IT, AND CAN YOU JUST RUN THROUGH THAT PROCESS JUST SO PEOPLE ARE AWARE? OKAY, SO AND THIS ALSO WILL HELP WITH SOME OF THE PHASING DISCUSSIONS. SO THE SITE WOULD GET WHAT WE CALL A SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT. AND THEN THE INDIVIDUAL BUILDINGS WOULD GET INDIVIDUAL BUILDING PERMITS, WHICH IS HOW, YOU KNOW, THEY COULD DO ONE BUILDING TWO BUILDINGS OR WORK THROUGH THE PROCESS. THE SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT WILL STAY AS PART OF THE PROJECT UNTIL THE SITE IS FINISHED, AND IT IS ONE OF MY STAFF MEMBERS FROM ENGINEERING WILL GO OUT TO THE POINT WHERE THEY'LL COUNT TREES, THEY COUNT BUSHES. THEY ENSURE THAT THAT LANDSCAPING PLAN MATCHES WHAT PHYSICALLY IS PUT OUT ON THE SITE, AS WELL AS LOOK AT UTILITIES AND GRADING AND THINGS LIKE THAT. BUT THAT IS ALL VERIFIED BY ENGINEERING. AND UNTIL THEY PASS THAT INSPECTION REPORT FROM ENGINEERING, THEY THEY CAN'T CLOSE OUT THAT PERMIT. OKAY. THANK YOU. JOSH. SURE. I HAVE A FOLLOW UP QUESTION TO THAT. SO IF YOU HAVE A SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT, BUT THEN YOU HAVE MULTIPLE PERMITS FOR EACH OF THE BUILDINGS. SO WE'RE LOOKING AT SIX DIFFERENT BUILDINGS. IS THERE AN INSTANCE WHERE YOUR SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT ENDS UP LINGERING UNTIL IT JUST HAS A SEPARATE TIMELINE? OR WOULD YOU EVER COULD WE AS A PLANNING BOARD, TIE THE LANDSCAPING INSTALLATION TO, YOU KNOW, THE ISSUANCE OF THE FIRST C OF O FOR THE FIRST BUILDING TO ENSURE THAT THE LANDSCAPING IS DONE UP FRONT IN THE OVERALL DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROJECT. SO TYPICALLY WE TRY TO BE REASONABLE WITH THAT. YOU KNOW, WE WANT TO SEE THE LANDSCAPING ASSOCIATED WITH THE BUILDING. YOU KNOW, IF THEY'RE DOING WHAT I'M GOING TO ASSUME IS BUILDING ONE BUT NOT BUILDING FOR IF I'M GETTING THE NUMBERS CORRECTLY. YOU KNOW, WE WANT TO SEE THE LANDSCAPING ASSOCIATED WITH THAT AREA WITHIN A REASONABLE FOOTPRINT. WE WON'T MAKE THEM DO TYPICALLY THE LANDSCAPING FOR THE ENTIRE AREA. BUT WE DO WANT TO SEE BECAUSE AGAIN, WE'RE LOOKING AT GRADING. SO WHEN IT COMES TO GRADING OUT WHETHER THERE'S A IT'S PART OF THE BERM, WHETHER IT'S JUST THE GRADING BEHIND THE BUILDINGS, ALONG THE BUILDINGS, WE WANT TO ENSURE THAT THAT'S DONE. WE WANT THE GRASS TO GROW IN. WE WANT THE PLANTS TO HAVE BEEN, YOU KNOW, INSTALLED. SO WE TRY TO BE REASONABLE. BUT THAT SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT WILL COVER THE ENTIRE SITE. SO WE WILL NOT CLOSE THAT UNTIL EVERYTHING IS FINISHED. BUT WE CAN HOLD A C OF O'S FOR A BUILDING UNTIL THE SURROUNDING AREA. A REASONABLE FOOTPRINT IS DONE. THERE'S NO SPECIFIC GUIDELINES TO THAT. WE WORK CLOSELY ENGINEERING AND BUILDING INSPECTION TO JUST DO IT. AND WHAT IS WHAT WHAT IS A REASONABLE REQUIREMENT? AND THEN TO FOLLOW UP ON THAT. SO THE STORMWATER, THE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT AREA, RIGHT? SO IT'S ORIGINALLY DESIGNED IN ORDER TO ACCOMMODATE HOW THE SITE PLAN IS DEVELOPED. RIGHT. SO THE IMPERVIOUS SURFACE, THE NUMBER OF BUILDINGS, THERE'S SQUARE FOOTAGE AND SO FORTH. SO YOU WOULD THEN BE INSTALLING THE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT AREA IN THE BEGINNING OF THE PROJECT IN ORDER TO ENSURE THAT YOUR INFRASTRUCTURE IS RIGHT THERE. ABSOLUTELY. WE WOULD REQUIRE THE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM, AGAIN, HAS A LOT TO DO WITH IMPERVIOUS AREAS. SO THE MOMENT THEY HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF PAVEMENT, IT THEY NEED TO HAVE THEIR STORMWATER AREA. AND IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO BUILD A POND IN PIECES. YOU HAVE TO BUILD THE WHOLE THING. YOU HAVE TO BUILD EVERYTHING ASSOCIATED. SO THAT BECOMES A VERY, VERY EARLY IN THE PROJECT. AND YEAH, WE WOULD NOT ALLOW THEM TO DO THAT IN PIECES. YEAH. ALL THAT, ALL THAT. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE. AND BRANDON JUST CONFIRMED, I MEAN, 99.99% CHANCE ALL THE INFRASTRUCTURE WILL BE DONE IN ONE PHASE. IT ALMOST HAS TO BE, YOU KNOW, TO DO IT RIGHT AND HAVE TO PAY FOR MULTIPLE TIMES OF REMOBILIZING. SO THAT WILL BE THE FIRST PHASE OF THE PROJECT. AND PER THE COMMENTS OF CAMI AND THEN THE LANDSCAPING THAT GOES ALONG WITH THE BERM, I MEAN, FROM A CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCING THAT WOULD WANT TO BE DONE FIRST. SO YOU'RE NOT GOING BACK INTO THE [01:00:04] BERM AFTER, YOU KNOW, YOUR STORMWATER AND SUCH IN PLACE. I'M JUST LOOKING FOR WAYS IN WHICH WE CAN GET A WIN WITH THE AMOUNT OF LANDSCAPING THAT'S BEING PROPOSED AND HAVE AS MUCH COMPLETED UPFRONT TO KIND OF GIVE THE GIVE THE LAND A, YOU KNOW, A NEW BREATH OF LIFE BASED UPON, YOU KNOW, THE 144 JUST TREES THAT ARE PROPOSED TO BE PLANTED AND SUCH, TRY AND GET AS MUCH DONE AS POSSIBLE. SO I KNOW THAT THIS BOARD IN PAST FOR OTHER PROJECTS HAVE PUT CONDITIONS ON CERTAIN SITE FEATURES AND THINGS LIKE THAT. CERTAINLY IF THE APPLICANT IS AMENABLE TO THAT, YOU KNOW, THIS BOARD COULD PUT THAT STRAIGHT INTO ANY CONDITIONS. THAT'D BE FINE. THANKS. SO JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, IN REGARDS TO THE BERM THAT'S GOING IN WHEN THE BERM FOR TO TO PROTECT RUSH CREEK, THERE'S NO SEQUENCING YET. PHASE ONE. YEAH. SO PHASE ONE, WE WOULD CERTAINLY BE WILLING TO DO THE BERM AND THE LANDSCAPING ON THE BERM. WE'RE RELUCTANT TO PUT ALL THE PLANTINGS BEHIND THE BUILDING BEFORE THE BUILDINGS ARE THERE, BECAUSE THEY'RE GOING TO GET DISTURBED. AND WELL, I GET THAT. BUT SURE, AS FAR AS THE RUSH CREEK PROTECTIONS AND THAT ADDITIONAL GREEN SPACE AND LANDSCAPING, SURE, WE COULD DO THAT. WOULD YOU BE FINE WITH THAT BEING A CONDITION THAT YOU DO THAT FIRST AS AS PART OF THE FIRST PHASE? YES. FIRST PHASE. YEAH. YES. WE WOULD. JOSHUA, MAKE A NOTE OF THAT. THANK YOU. AND THEN I KIND OF INTERRUPTED WITH THE LINE OF QUESTIONING, BUT MY OTHER QUESTION IS FOR CAMI IN REGARDS TO. SO WHILE YOU'RE SO POPULAR TONIGHT, SO LET'S SAY, AND I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU GUYS ARE SAYING THAT YOU WANT TO, YOU KNOW, COMPLETE AND ALL THAT, BUT LET'S SAY FOR FOR BUILDINGS GET BUILT. AND NOTHING ELSE IS DONE. AND THE APPLICANT DECIDES TO STOP AT FOUR BUILDINGS AND IT WOULD BE A SITE PLAN CHANGE, OBVIOUSLY, AND IT WOULD COME BACK IN FRONT OF US. YES. AND IT WOULD BE UP TO THIS BOARD TO MAKE SURE THAT THE REST OF THE LANDSCAPING IS DONE ALONG THE LINE, EVEN IF THE REST OF THE BUILDINGS ARE NOT DONE. SO AS FAR AS THE BERM, AND I HOPE EVERYBODY IN THE BACK OF THE ROOM IS LISTENING, THE BERM, THE LANDSCAPING, ALL THE PROTECTION AROUND THIS PROPERTY IS GOING TO GO IN REGARDLESS IF THERE'S FOUR BUILDINGS OR SIX BUILDINGS. DO I HAVE THAT CORRECT? IS THAT CORRECT? OKAY. ULTIMATELY, IF AT SOME POINT THE BUILD OUT HAS NEVER BEEN COMPLETED, YEAH, WE'D HAVE TO MAKE THE ADDITIONAL IMPROVEMENTS. OKAY. AND AT THAT POINT WE HAVE OVERDESIGNED INFRASTRUCTURE, STORMWATER, ETC. ETC. SO THAT'S CERTAINLY NOT THE GOAL BECAUSE THAT WAS A LOT OF THE THINGS THAT THE RESIDENTS WERE BRINGING UP. AND THAT'S WHY I REFERENCED THE BACK OF THE ROOM, BECAUSE THE RESIDENTS ARE HERE LISTENING AND I WANT TO BE I WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. YES. ASSOCIATED WITH THAT REMINDER, AND I KNOW I'VE SAID THIS BEFORE, BUT WE'LL SAY IT AGAIN. IF IF A SITE PLAN APPROVAL IS GRANTED, IF AT ANY POINT THEY THEN WANT TO MAKE A CHANGE, THAT CHANGE COMES TO ENGINEERING. IT'S REVIEWED BY PLANNING, ENGINEERING, BUILDING DEPARTMENT, AND WE DETERMINE IF IT'S A MINOR CHANGE AND DOES NOT NEED TO COME BACK. WE CONSULT WITH THE CHAIR AS NEEDED. IF WE FEEL IT IS A MAJOR CHANGE, IT COMES BACK HERE. SO WE HAD A PROJECT RECENTLY THAT DETERMINED THEY DIDN'T WANT TO DO THEIR FULL BUILD OUT, AND WE HAD THEM COME BACK FOR AN AMENDED SITE PLAN, BECAUSE THOSE BUILDINGS AND ASSOCIATED DRIVEWAY WERE ALL ELIMINATED FROM THEIR PROJECT. SO ALTHOUGH THEY WERE TAKING THINGS AWAY, IT STILL IMPACTED THEIR OVERALL SITE PLAN. SO THIS BOARD HAD TO LOOK AT IT A SECOND TIME. OKAY. THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION. BOARD MEMBERS AT THIS END. MEMBER STUART, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? I DO NOT HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. ANY QUESTIONS THAT I HAVE HAD WERE IN YOUR UPDATED PRESENTATION, WHICH I FEEL LIKE YOU GUYS HAVE COME A VERY LONG WAY FROM JANUARY. THANK YOU. YOU GUYS STARTED AT EIGHT BUILDINGS, WENT TO SIX. YOU GUYS REDUCED YOUR SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE BUILDINGS. THE HEIGHT, BERMS, LANDSCAPING. SO I APPRECIATE YOU GUYS TRYING TO ACCOMMODATE THE NEIGHBORS. YOU'RE WELCOME. MEMBER. RYAN. MEMBER. RYAN. I JUST AGREE WITH MEMBER STEWART. I ALL MY QUESTIONS WERE ANSWERED. EVERYTHING I HAD WRITTEN DOWN FOR TONIGHT. SO YES, THANK YOU FOR ALL YOU HAVE DONE. YOU'RE WELCOME. MEMBER TRACY, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE TO ADD? NO. MEMBER. DARCY I ALL THE QUESTIONS THAT WERE IN MY IN MY HEAD SINCE JANUARY HAVE BEEN OVER AND ABOVE ANSWERED TONIGHT. OKAY, I WOULD LIKE TO ADD SOMETHING WHILE YOU GUYS ARE HERE, WHICH I THOUGHT WAS KIND OF NICE. WE DID RECEIVE AN EMAIL FROM A RESIDENT WITH AN APOLOGY TO THIS BOARD, AND I KNOW THAT YOU GUYS WERE COPIED ON IT. AND I THOUGHT AND I, AND I APOLOGIZE, I DON'T HAVE THE NAME IN FRONT OF ME, BUT AND I DON'T WANT TO PUT THAT PERSON [01:05:04] ON THE SPOT, BUT I THOUGHT IT TOOK GREAT CHARACTER AND GUTS, IF YOU WILL, TO TAKE THE TIME. AND THIS BOARD, WE ALL RECEIVED A COPY OF IT, AND WE APPRECIATE VERY MUCH THE APOLOGY AND THE THOUGHT THAT WENT INTO IT. SO I DIDN'T WANT THAT TO GO UNNOTICED. JOSH, WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE? DOES THIS BOARD FEEL COMFORTABLE TABLING THE PROJECT TO MAY 6TH AND AUTHORIZING THE DRAFT SEEKER DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE? AND THEN MY SECOND QUESTION TO THAT WILL BE, DO WE WANT TO START WITH THAT? HAVE ME DRAFTING. BRING IT TO THE MEETING TO DISCUSS ON MAY 6TH AND THAT ALONE? OR DO YOU WANT TO ALSO POTENTIALLY DISCUSS SITE PLAN APPROVAL OR DO YOU WANT THAT TO BE SEPARATE? DO YOU WANT TO START WITH DISCUSSING SEEKER ON MAY 6TH AND MAY SEEKER ALONE, OR DO YOU WANT TO CONSIDER DISCUSSING SEEKER AND SITE PLAN APPROVAL? I HAVE TO TURN THAT OVER TO THE BOARD MEMBERS. MEMBER CLARK MEMBER. CLARK. I, I WOULD SAY JUST SEEKER. OKAY. MEMBER SURE, I AGREE JUST SEEKER. OKAY. MEMBER. RYAN. I AGREE WITH JUST SEEKER. I THINK WE GOT A GENERAL CONSENSUS THAT WE'LL START WITH SEEKER ON, ON MAY 6TH. WE'LL DO. OKAY. WOULD IT BE OKAY FOR JOSH TO BE AUTHORIZED TO AT LEAST BEGIN DRAFTING CONDITIONS FOR THE CONSIDERATION OF SITE PLANS, SO WE COULD DISCUSS THOSE? I THINK WE BETTER GO THROUGH SEEKER FIRST AND THEN BECAUSE WE'VE GOT A LIST. SO I, I, I'D BE, I, I'D RATHER NOT PUT THE CART BEFORE THE HORSE IF IT'S OKAY. I DO WANT TO KNOW. ANTHONY'S GOING TO UPDATE THE PLAN ONE MORE TIME TO SHOW THAT EMERGENCY ACCESS TO BEAM SO THERE WILL BE OKAY. I WOULD APPRECIATE THAT. YEAH, I WOULD LIKE EVERYTHING DONE RIGHT BY THE TIME WE GET THIS THROUGH. SO ALL RIGHT THEN WE'LL SEE YOU GUYS. SURE. IT WAS NOTED ON THE EAF. WE FORGOT TO INCLUDE THE NEGATIVE ON THE TABLE. DO YOU WANT US TO ADD THAT. AND YEAH WE WILL. WE'LL JUST. YEAH. THERE'S ALSO YOU STILL HAVE ROUTE FIVE OVERLAY IN YOUR ZONING AND WE COULD WE'LL MAKE THAT CHANGE AS WELL. OKAY. YEAH WE COULD. SO THE REMOVAL OF THE ROUTE FIVE OVERLAY. DID YOU ADDRESS THE L W P O. I'LL MENTION IT NOW. OKAY. I THINK I'VE MENTIONED IT BEFORE. THIS PROJECT CURRENTLY IS NOT WITHIN WHAT'S CALLED THE W R A, WHICH IS THE WATERFRONT REVITALIZATION AREA. FOR THOSE WHO DON'T KNOW, THE TOWN HAS AN L, W, P, WHICH STANDS FOR LOCAL WATERFRONT REVITALIZATION PLAN. THINK OF IT LIKE A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR THE WATERFRONT. IT EXTENDS FROM ALONG ROUTE FIVE, FROM THE BORDER WITH THE TOWN AND CITY OF LACKAWANNA, ALL THE WAY DOWN TO THE BORDER WITH THE TOWN OF EVANS, AND THEN IT. TRANSECTS ACROSS 18 MILE CREEK, THROUGH THE VILLAGE TO THE BORDER, I BELIEVE WITH THE TOWN OF BOSTON. THIS PROJECT IS NOT WITHIN THAT CURRENT WATERFRONT REVITALIZATION AREA. AND I JUST WANT TO MAKE IT CLEAR, EVEN IF THIS PROJECT WAS TABLED FOR A VERY LONG TIME, AND THE LTP IS IN THE PROCESS OF BEING ADOPTED, EVEN IF THE LWP WAS ADOPTED, THIS PROJECT WAS SUBMITTED PRIOR TO THE LW RP, SO IT WOULD BE GRANDFATHERED FROM BEING INCLUDED INTO THAT WATERFRONT REVITALIZATION AREA. OKAY. ANYTHING ELSE WE. I THINK WE COVERED ONE MORE. REMEMBER, SARA, SINCE YOU'RE REDOING THE A F IN THE DESCRIPTION OF YOUR MULTIPLE PHASES, IF YOU WANT TO INCLUDE THE DESCRIPTION OF YOUR BARE MINIMUM FOR PHASE ONE, BASED ON OUR CONVERSATION WITH INFRASTRUCTURE. OKAY, WHAT DO YOU HAVE THAT. PAGE THREE YEAH, I KNOW WHERE IT IS. D1EII WE'LL ADD SOME TEXT. YEAH, WE CAN PUT TEXT BOX IF IT DOESN'T FIT. IT JUST SAYS TIMING OF FUTURE PHASE IS DEPENDENT. AND SO YOU JUST WANT US TO ADD IN THERE PHASE ONE MINIMUM TO INCLUDE ALL SITE INFRASTRUCTURE. WHAT WE JUST TALKED. YEAH. WE'LL EXPLAIN THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN INFRASTRUCTURE AND BUILDINGS. DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE? SEEING NONE. WE'LL SEE YOU BACK HERE ON THE SIXTH. THANK YOU. OKAY EVERYONE ENJOY YOUR EVENING. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. YOU TOO. OKAY. THAT CONCLUDES DO. WE DON'T HAVE MINUTES [Additional Item] TONIGHT? WE DO HAVE TWO SETS OF MINUTES. SO I JUST WANT TO ADDRESS REAL QUICKLY ON THE MINUTES. I KNOW THERE WERE A COUPLE THAT DIDN'T GET PASSED. BRIDGET AND I ARE WORKING WITH MEMBER SHIMURA, WHO I KNOW HAS SOME REVISIONS, SO WE WILL BE WORKING WITH HER TO GET THOSE SETS COMPLETED. AND THEN THERE ARE TWO SETS THAT ARE IN THE MEETING FOLDER FOR OCTOBER 1ST AND SEPTEMBER 17TH. BUT IF YOU WANTED TO, IT SOUNDS LIKE THERE'S STILL SOME REVISIONS TO MAKE. SO MY SUGGESTION WOULD BE ON MAY 6TH. WE'LL HAVE WE'LL EVEN HAVE UP THROUGH APRIL. SO WE'LL JUST HAVE A COLLECTION OF MINUTES DONE FOR THE MAY 6TH MEETING, AND THEN EVERYONE CAN VOTE ALL AT ONE TIME. I THINK THAT'S WHAT WE SHOULD DO. SOUNDS GOOD. INSTEAD OF. SO [01:10:03] WE'RE NOT GOING TO DO ANYTHING FOR TONIGHT. OKAY. I JUST WANT I I'M SORRY. I WAS PREOCCUPIED WITH THE EXITING OF EVERYBODY OFF OUT OF THE ROOM. IS THERE ANYTHING FURTHER TO DISCUSS? NO. NOPE. OKAY. I'M WAITING FOR A MOTION. I MAKE A MOTION TO ADJOURN. I SECOND THE MOTION. IT'S BEEN MOVED IN SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF ADJOURN * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.