[00:00:02]
          WORKING. OH, IT NEEDS BATTERIES. OKAY, SO BEFORE WE GET STARTED, I HAVE A COUPLE OF HOUSEKEEPING ITEMS, IF YOU WILL. I'M GOING TO CLASSIFY THEM AS HOUSEKEEPING. TONIGHT IS THE MAY 6TH PLANNING BOARD MEETING, WHICH WILL BE STARTING HERE IN A COUPLE OF MINUTES. I WANT THE EVERYONE TO KNOW THAT WE DO HAVE SECURITY ON THE PROMISE AGAIN TONIGHT, AND WE RECEIVED CORRESPONDENCE FROM RESIDENTS ASKING WHY WE INVOLVED THE POLICE DEPARTMENT. WE DIDN'T DO IT BECAUSE WE WANTED TO. I'M GOING TO MAKE THIS VERY CLEAR BECAUSE IT'S VERY SERIOUS. WHEN WHEN RESIDENTS OF HAMBURG GET THREATENED, EITHER IN THE PARKING LOT ON THE WAY TO THEIR CAR, OR WHEN CORRESPONDENCE IS SENT TO THIS BOARD IN A NEGATIVE, NOT SO GOOD LIGHT, IT'S TIME TO LOOK AT SECURITY. AND THAT'S WHY THE POLICE ARE HERE TONIGHT. SO HAVING SAID THAT, WE WILL BE STARTING THE BOARD MEETING. AND IF YOU WOULD 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, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. THANK YOU. MEMBER AUGIE, WOULD YOU PLEASE. MEMBER JERSEY, WOULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL? OKAY. CINDY CAN PRESENT CAITLYN SHIMURA HERE. WILLIAM CLARK HERE. BRIAN STEWART HERE. RICH SAJAK HERE. KIM RYAN HERE. MILTON KWANT HERE. ALL PRESENT. OKAY. THANK YOU. SO WE HAVE A FULL BOARD TONIGHT. AND FOR THOSE OUT IN THE AUDIENCE, WE NOW HAVE AN ALTERNATE WHO WILL BE FILLING IN. IN THE EVENT THAT SOMEONE IS NOT ABLE TO VOTE. WHICH BRINGS ME TO THE NEXT HOUSEKEEPING ITEM, CASE NUMBER FOUR, JAMES DRAGONETTE REQUESTING A PLANNING BOARD APPROVAL FOR A TREE CLEARING PERMIT. I THE CHAIR WILL BE RECUSING MYSELF FROM THIS CASE. DOCTOR DRAGONETTE IS MY PERSONAL PHYSICIAN. I'VE BEEN UNDER HIS CARE FOR THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS, AND I FELT THAT THERE WAS A CONFLICT IF I STAYED AT THE TABLE. SO I WILL BE RECUSING MYSELF AND MEMBERS WILL BE RUNNING THE MEETING ON THAT CASE. OTHER THAN THAT, I DON'T. I THINK WE HAVE WE DON'T HAVE MINUTES FOR TONIGHT. 
          CORRECT. JOE. OH, SORRY. BRIDGET AND I ARE GOING TO GO THROUGH THE REVISIONS THAT MEMBER SHIMURA HAS PROVIDED, AND WE WILL HAVE UP THROUGH APRIL 15TH AT OUR NEXT AVAILABLE MEETING. OKAY. THANK YOU. OKAY. THERE WAS SOMETHING ELSE I WAS GOING TO ADD. SO OUR 
          [1. Public Hearing – 7:00 P.M., Carl DiNezza – Requesting Preliminary Plat Approval on a  proposal for a 2-lot subdivision at 58 North Shore Drive ]
FIRST CASE IS CARL DENASIA. WE HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING FOR MR. DENASIA REQUESTING A PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL ON A PROPOSAL FOR A TWO LOT SUBDIVISION AT 58 NORTH SHORE DRIVE. IS THE APPLICANT HERE? YES. WOULD YOU PLEASE COME ON UP? GOOD EVENING. YOU GOT TO WAIT UNTIL YOU GET TO THE MIC SO THEY CAN HEAR YOU. GOOD EVENING. PLEASE. YOU MAY PROCEED. FROM THE LAST TIME WE MET, I DO BELIEVE I. I KIND OF HOPEFULLY EVERYBODY HAD AN UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT WAS GOING ON WITH MY SITUATION. AGAIN, BASICALLY JUST WANT TO GET THE THE PROPERTY DIVIDED SO I CAN GET MY DAUGHTER HERE AND GET HER BUILT AND SO SHE CAN ACTUALLY HELP TAKE CARE OF HER MOTHER. AND OF COURSE, I'VE GOT TO DO SOME WORK AT MY PLACE TOO, BY ADDING ON STILL WAITING FOR THE DRAWINGS FROM DARRYL MARTIN. BUT WE KNOW HOW BUSY EVERYBODY IS AT THIS TIME OF THE YEAR. I DO HAVE MY LETTERS FROM HOOVER BEACH INDICATING THAT IT'S OKAY TO GO AHEAD WITH THIS PLAN. NEIGHBORS ACTUALLY CAME UP TO ME A FEW WEEKS AGO AND ASKED ME HOW THINGS WERE GOING. I SAID, WELL, IT'S IN IT'S IN THE HANDS OF THE POWERS TO BE HERE IN THE TOWN. AND THEY SAID, WELL, GOOD LUCK AND WE CAN'T WAIT FOR THINGS TO GET STARTED. SO EVERYBODY'S REALLY ANXIOUS TO SEE SOMETHING TRANSITION, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING NEW, SOMETHING DIFFERENT. AND, AND THEY CAN'T WAIT FOR MY KIDS TO COME ON UP TO. WE GOT MORE, MORE KIDS IN THE, IN THE, IN THE COMMUNITY. MATTER OF FACT, THERE'S MORE BABIES AND YOUNG KIDS. SO THE COMMUNITY IS ACTUALLY STARTING TO GROW AGAIN, LIKE IT DID LIKE 40, 50 YEARS AGO. SO THAT'S A, THAT'S A PLUS TO OTHER THAN THAT, I'M HOPEFUL THAT EVERYTHING WILL GO ACCORDINGLY. 
          [00:05:07]
AS WE TALKED ABOUT LAST WEEK. AND IF YOU DON'T HAVE ANYTHING ELSE TO ADD FOR THIS, NOTHING. 
          OKAY, SO WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ALONG THEN AND WE'RE GOING TO START THE PUBLIC HEARING. I DO HAVE ONE QUESTION, THOUGH FOR YOU. HOW IS YOUR WIFE DOING? IT'S IT'S A VERY SLOW PROCESS. 
          OKAY. SHE'S HAVING SHE'S IN REHAB AND THE WALKING IS VERY DIFFICULT. WHAT THEY HAVE HER DOING, I WOULDN'T EVEN WANT TO DO EVEN IF I DID HAVE LIKE, I MEAN, THEY'RE REALLY TWISTING HER AND EVERYTHING, BUT RIGHT AT THIS MOMENT, THERE'S THERE'S REALLY NO ANSWERS YET AS TO HOW MUCH FURTHER WE DO KNOW SHE WON'T BE COMING HOME FOR AT LEAST TWO MORE MONTHS. OKAY. SO SHE GIVES US SOME TIME NOW FOR, FOR TWO MONTHS. SO. WELL, WE'RE GLAD TO HEAR SHE'S ON THE ROAD TO RECOVERY. AND LET'S GET THE PUBLIC HEARING STARTED. YES. SO, MEMBER GERACI, WOULD YOU PLEASE READ THE PUBLIC NOTICE AND GO SIT DOWN? YES YOU CAN. DON'T GO TOO FAR. I DON'T HAVE IT. DO YOU HAVE IT? I DO. DO YOU WANT ME TO READ IT? NO. OKAY. JOHN. HAMBURG MINOR SUBDIVISION APPROVAL NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE TOWN OF HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD WILL CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING ON A PROPOSAL FOR A TWO LOT SUBDIVISION TO BE LOCATED AT 58 NORTH SHORE DRIVE. 
          THE PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD ON MAY 6TH, 2026 AT 7 P.M. IN ROOM SEVEN A AND SEVEN B OF THE HAMBURG TOWN HALL. OKAY. IN ORDER TO HEAR FROM ALL RESIDENTS ON AT A REASONABLE HOUR, A THREE MINUTE RULE WILL APPLY. A PUBLIC HEARING IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR COMMUNITIES MEMBERS TO SHARE INFORMATION ON HOW THEY ARE IMPACTED BY A 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 AS WELL AS THE APPLICANT FOR RESPONSE. SO AT THIS POINT, I WOULD LIKE TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND ASK IF ANYONE IS HERE TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF CARL DIONISIO AT 58 NORTH SHORE DRIVE. HOW ABOUT THAT? COME ON DOWN. SO YOU'RE GOING TO GIVE US YOUR NAME AND THEN YOU'RE GOING TO SPEAK INTO THAT MIC. SO YOU MAY HAVE TO PULL THAT MIC UP. SO AND TALK RIGHT INTO IT JUST LIKE THAT. THANK YOU. HI EVERYBODY. MY NAME IS SCOTT PHILLIPS. I JUST WANTED TO COME UP HERE AND GIVE MY SUPPORT TO THE PROJECT. I JUST WANTED TO, YOU KNOW, SAY THAT I APPLAUD HIS EFFORTS TO GOING TO HIS NEIGHBORS AND, YOU KNOW, GETTING THEIR SUPPORT AND GETTING THEIR FEELINGS OF IT ALONG WITH HOOVER BEACH AS WELL. 
          I THINK THAT GOES A REALLY LONG WAY, AND I HOPE PEOPLE FOLLOW SUIT. I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, THE SUPPORT OF YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD FOR ANY KIND OF PROJECT, WHETHER IT'S, YOU KNOW, A SMALLER ADDITION. AND I'M GLAD TO HEAR THAT, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE REVIVING HOOVER BEACH. 
          I'M FROM WOODLAWN, AND I HUNG OUT IN HOOVER BEACH MY WHOLE LIFE. AND IT'S JUST, IT'S GREAT TO SEE THAT. AND I APPLAUD THAT. YOU KNOW, YOU'RE GETTING THE SUPPORT OF YOUR COMMUNITY. OKAY. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WHAT IS YOUR FIRST NAME? SCOTT. SCOTT. SCOTT SCOTT. OKAY. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE? SECOND CALL FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR 58 NORTH SHORE DRIVE. LAST CALL FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR 58 NORTH SHORE DRIVE. SEEING NO FURTHER. NO FURTHER COMMENTS. 
          I'M CLOSING THE PUBLIC HEARING. AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT. SO FOR MR. DENISE'S SUBDIVISION. I ALSO WANT TO NOTE FOR THE RECORD THAT MR. DANZA PROJECT DID GO TO OUR TOWN'S LW RP COMMITTEE, ALSO KNOWN AS OUR LOCAL WATERFRONT REVITALIZATION COMMITTEE. HE HAD TO GO TO IT BECAUSE HIS SUBDIVISION IS WITHIN THE TOWN'S WRA, WHICH IS THE WATERFRONT REVITALIZATION AREA. HE DID RECEIVE A FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION. THE TOWN'S LW P RECOMMENDATION WAS THAT IT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE LW P, AS THIS BOARD KNOWS, IT IS YOUR DECISION TO DECIDE WHETHER OR NOT IT IS COASTALLY CONSISTENT AND IN THE APPROVAL RESOLUTION THAT IS BEFORE YOU. 
          YOU'LL NOTICE THERE'S A WHEREAS CLAUSE ABOUT IT, AND THEN WITHIN THE ACTUAL APPROVAL RESOLUTION ITSELF, UNDER THE CONDITIONS THAT WE USUALLY ALWAYS PLACE ON SUBDIVISIONS, OBVIOUSLY WE PUT THAT THE INSTALLATION OF SIDEWALKS IS NOT WARRANTED. THIS IS A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD. AND THEN I DID ADD, BECAUSE THIS IS A UNIQUE CASE, ADDING A 
          [00:10:02]
CONDITION THAT THE HOOVER BEACH COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR APPROPRIATE FILING REQUIREMENTS AND RECORD KEEPING OF THE SUBDIVISION. THE REASON I ADDED THAT IS BECAUSE, AS THIS BOARD KNOWS, MR. DANZA DID NEED TO GET AUTHORIZATION FROM THE HOOVER BEACH COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION, AND THEY DO KEEP UP THE MAP. IF YOU'VE EVER LOOKED AT THE TOWN GIS OF HOOVER BEACH, YOU'LL NOTICE IT'S ONE GIANT PARCEL. SO OUR TOWN GIS AND OUR RECORDS, WE DON'T KEEP ALL THE SPLITS AND ALL OF THE FILINGS OF, OF ANY, YOU KNOW, SUBDIVISION. SO WE'RE GOING TO ADD A CONDITION HERE THAT HOOVER BEACH COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THAT AND FOR FILE KEEPING. AND I DON'T THINK THEY'LL HAVE ANY ISSUE WITH THAT. SO I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S ANY OTHER CONDITIONS THAT ANYONE WANTED TO ADD, BUT THOSE ARE JUST WHAT I WANTED TO TO BRING UP. OKAY. THANK YOU. ENGINEERING. DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO OFFER AT THIS POINT? NOTHING TO OFFER. OKAY. BOARD MEMBERS COMMENTS. QUESTIONS? NOPE. NOPE. NO. NO ADDITIONAL COMMENTS. SO JUST FOR THE RECORD, THERE WAS A LOT OF HEAD SHAKING SAYING NO. OKAY, SO WE HAVE THE RESOLUTION. WE HAVE IT UP ON THE SCREEN. DO WE HAVE ANY, ANY OTHER CONDITIONS THAT ANYBODY'S. CONCERNED ABOUT? NO, NO. SO DOES THAT MEAN I HAVE SOMEBODY THAT WANTS TO READ THE RESOLUTION? I'LL MAKE A MOTION. CARL DANZA, 58 NORTH SHORE DRIVE, SEEGER AND APPROVAL RESOLUTION, MAY 6TH, 2026. SEEGER. WHEREAS THE TOWN OF HAMBURG PLANNING DEPARTMENT RECEIVED A MINOR SUBDIVISION APPLICATION FROM CARL DANZA FOR THE APPROVAL OF A TWO LOT SUBDIVISION TO BE LOCATED AT 58 NORTH SHORE DRIVE. AND WHEREAS, THE TOWN OF HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD HELD THE REQUIRED PUBLIC HEARING ON MAY 6TH, 2026. AND WHEREAS THE TOWN, THE TOWN'S LWRP COMMITTEE HAS REVIEWED THE WATERFRONT CONSISTENCY FORM WAF AND RECOMMENDED THE PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDED TO THE PLANNING BOARD THAT THE PROJECT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE TOWN'S LW P AND THE PLANNING BOARD HAS REVIEWED THIS INFORMATION AND DETERMINED THAT THE PROJECT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE TOWN'S LW, RP COASTAL CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION AND. WHEREAS, INCONSISTENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH PART 617 OF THE IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS PERTAINING TO ARTICLE EIGHT, STATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY REVIEW ACT, SEEKER OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION LAW, THE TOWN OF HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD HAS REVIEWED PART ONE OF THE SEA, F AND COMPLETED PARTS TWO AND THREE OF THE S, E, A, F AND REVIEW THE CRITERIA FOR DETERMINING SIGNIFICANCE IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 617.7 OF SEEKER. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, THE TOWN OF HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD HAS DETERMINED THAT THIS PROPOSED SMALLER PROJECT WILL NOT, WILL ALSO NOT SIGNIFICANTLY ADVERSELY AFFECT THE NATURAL RESOURCES OF THE STATE AND OR THE HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC AND IS CONSISTENT WITH SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS AND THEREFORE ISSUES A NEGATIVE DECLARATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 617.7 OF SEEKER AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE TOWN OF HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD CHAIR IS AUTHORIZED TO SIGN THE SHORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM, WHICH WILL ACT AS THE SEEKER NEGATIVE DECLARATION. IT'S BEEN MOVED. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. IT'S BEEN MOVED BY MEMBER SHAMARA, SECOND BY MEMBER STEWART. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE AYE. MINOR SUBDIVISION APPROVAL. THE PLANNING. THE HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD. AFTER REVIEWING THIS PROJECT AGAINST THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE TOWN OF HAMBURG SUBDIVISION LAW AND GRANTING A SEEKER NEGATIVE DECLARATION HEREBY GRANTS MINOR SUBDIVISION APPROVAL FOR CARL DEAN, A TWO LOT SUBDIVISION WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS. ONE THE INSTALLATION OF SIDEWALKS IS NOT WARRANTED. TWO THE HOOVER BEACH COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR APPROPRIATE FILING REQUIREMENTS AND KEEPING TRACK OF THE SUBDIVISION. IT'S BEEN MOVED BY MEMBERS. SHAMARA. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND MOVED BY MEMBER SHARMA, A SECOND BY MEMBER RYAN? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE AYE. YOUR RESOLUTION HAS BEEN APPROVED SO YOU CAN MOVE FORWARD AND WE WISH YOU ALL THE BEST. OKAY? AND PLEASE SEND YOUR REGARDS TO GIVE OUR REGARDS TO YOUR WIFE, PLEASE. OKAY. GOOD LUCK TO YOU. GOOD LUCK. THANK YOU. OKAY. OUR NEXT 
          [2. Public Hearing – 7:00 P.M., Erie County Agricultural Society – Requesting Site Plan  Approval for a proposal to demolish three (3) structures and construct a 32,850+/- sq-ft  one-story building within the existing Slade Park between the existing Fireman's  Building and Grange Building, to be located at 5600 McKinley Parkway ]
CASE IS THE ERIE COUNTY AGRICULTURAL SOCIETY REQUESTING SITE PLAN APPROVAL. THIS ALSO IS A PUBLIC HEARING FOR TONIGHT. SO WE'RE NOT GOING TO GO OVER THE WHOLE PROJECT AGAIN. THE APPLICANT PRESENTED IT. I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THERE'S ANY OTHER CHANGES TO WHAT YOU PRESENTED TO US THE LAST TIME YOU WERE HERE. IS THAT CORRECT? THERE WAS ONE EDITION. OKAY. 
          SUBMITTED THE LANDSCAPE PLAN FOR THAT. AND I THINK JOSH WILL PUT THAT UP ON THE SCREEN AND I CAN REVIEW IT FOR EVERYBODY'S BENEFIT. OKAY. STATE YOUR NAME, PLEASE. DOUGLAS HUTTER WITH 
          [00:15:08]
ARCHITECTURAL. OKAY. GO AHEAD. TERRIFIC. SO THANKS, JOSH, FOR HELPING US OUT AND PUTTING ALL THIS TOGETHER. JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT HE'S A GREAT SUPPORT OF US AND THE TOWN OF HAMBURG. 
          SO AROUND THE BUILDING, ONE OF THE THE LAST COMMENT WE HAD LAST MONTH WAS, HEY, WHAT ARE YOU DOING HERE LANDSCAPING WISE? SO BETWEEN THEN AND NOW WE'VE GONE THROUGH, WE WORK WITH MOLLY VENDOR, WHO'S A LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT IN WESTERN NEW YORK HERE VERY GOOD AT WHAT SHE DOES. 
          AND SHE'S BEEN ABLE TO DEVELOP AND WORK WITH US. WHAT ARE WE DOING WITH THE TREES PRIMARILY, AND WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO WITH OTHER LANDSCAPE FEATURES? SO HERE AND I'M QUITE A DISTANCE AWAY, YOU WILL SEE GREEN CIRCLES, ALL THE SAME SYMBOLS. THOSE ARE THE NEW TREES. YOU WILL SEE VERY TINY, TINY DOTS. THOSE ARE THE DEMO TREES THAT ARE IN THE PARKING LOT AND UNDERNEATH THE BUILDING. OKAY. AND THEN YOU'LL SEE THE BIG SQUIGGLY, ROUNDISH TYPE OF CIRCLES. THOSE ARE THE EXISTING TREES THAT WILL REMAIN. WE TOOK GOOGLE, OVERLAID IT. THEY HAD SOME NICE DRONE PHOTOS TO HELP US OUT SO WE CAN GET AN UNDERSTANDING OF THE CANOPY THAT'S THERE. AND THAT WILL BE CONSISTENT WITH WHAT WE'RE PUTTING IN WITH THE NEW TREES WE ARE TAKING OUT. AND I'M JUST GOING TO DOUBLE CHECK MY NUMBERS HERE, BECAUSE I CAN'T SEE THE DRAWING FROM THIS DISTANCE. IT'S UP IN THE UPPER CORNER THERE. SO AND I MADE A LIST AND I DON'T WANT TO QUOTE IT WRONG. HERE WE GO. SO THERE WILL BE 28 TOTAL TREES REMOVED. 
          AND THAT INCLUDES THE ONES THAT ARE UNDER THE NEW BUILDING AND THE ONES THAT ARE IN THE PARKING LOT. THERE ARE 37 TREES WITHIN THIS WORK AREA HERE THAT WILL REMAIN EXISTING TO REMAIN. 
          I JUST WANT TO MAKE ONE COMMENT ABOUT THE TREES THAT ARE BEING REMOVED. SIX OF THEM ARE CURRENTLY ASH TREES THAT ARE UNDERGOING SUPPORT. THEY GET THEIR SHOTS, IF YOU WILL, DEALING WITH THE VIRUSES AND OTHER CREATURES THAT LOVE THEM. BUT THEY'VE THEIR HEALTH IS IN QUESTION. CERTAINLY LONG TERM. MAINTAINING THEM IS NOT THE BEST INTEREST OF EVERYBODY. WE ARE PUTTING IN 31 NEW TREES, SO WE'RE GOING TO BE PLUS THREE TOTAL TREES FOR THE PROJECT. 
          THIS DOES NOT INCLUDE PLANTING, SO I'LL JUST GO THROUGH THAT AS WELL. AND JOSH, IF YOU'D BE SO KIND TO PUT UP THE RENDERING, THAT'LL HELP FOLKS UNDERSTAND. SO THIS RENDERING AGAIN WAS PUT PUT TOGETHER BY MOLLY. THIS RENDERING IS A VIEW. IF YOU'RE ON TOP OF THE EVENT CENTER IN CASINO BUILDING. SO THE NEW BUILDING IS TO THE LEFT. THE GRANGE BUILDING IS TO THE RIGHT AND IN THE CENTER. THAT'S OUR CIRCULATION NODE WE'RE PROPOSING. I'LL JUST START BY SAYING THE NEW BUILDING WILL HAVE FOUNDATION PLANTINGS AROUND IT. WE HAVEN'T SELECTED THE SPECIFIC PLANTS YET THAT WILL BE GOING IN THERE, BUT THAT WILL HAPPEN BEFORE WE GET TO THE BID PERIOD FOR THE PROJECT. AND THE CENTER OF THE CIRCULATION NODE IS A TREE, AND IT'S GOING TO BE A LARGE GROWTH TREE SO THAT IT REPRESENTS PARK AND COMMUNITY ITSELF. AND YOU SEE CONCENTRIC CIRCLES GOING OUT FROM THOSE TREES. SO THOSE ARE MATERIALS IN THE GROUND. 
          THEY ALSO ARE SEAT WALLS IN AN ASYMMETRICAL PATTERN. SO FOLKS CAN SIT, RELAX AND ENJOY THE SPACE. TO THE RIGHT, NEXT TO THE GRANGE BUILDING WILL BE A WATER FEATURE. IT'LL HAVE A LITTLE FALL HERE. THEY HAVE ANOTHER ONE IN FRONT OF THE FIREMEN'S BUILDING RIGHT NOW. 
          THAT'S MORE OF JUST A POND. THIS WILL HAVE A LITTLE FALL TO IT. LITTLE POND AREA THERE, MOVING WATER, THAT SORT OF THING WILL BE GOING ON. AND THE FOREGROUND, THERE ARE TWO WOODEN STRUCTURES THAT FOLLOW THE ARC THAT WILL BE WOODEN PERGOLAS, NOT COMPLETELY COVERED, BUT THEY'LL BE THERE. SO IT HAS SOME SHADE EFFECT IN THE PARK. WE'RE NOT LOOKING TO PUT SOMETHING DIRECTLY OVER YOU, BUT SOMETHING THAT FITS IN. IT'S ALL WOOD FRAMED WITH THE PARK LIKE SETTING, AND THEN YOU CAN SEE THE PATHS. THAT'LL BE VARIOUS MATERIALS. AND AS YOU LOOK TOWARDS THE PARKING LOT, YOU'LL SEE ANOTHER SMALLER CIRCLE. THAT ONE HAS AN EXISTING TREE IN IT THAT WE'RE GOING TO MAKE SURE SURVIVES THROUGH CONSTRUCTION AND GETS A SPECIAL PLACE. SO YOU'LL HAVE A SEAT WALL AROUND THAT AS WELL. AND THE LARGE LITTLE BLOW UP ON THE MIDDLE OF THE RIGHT PAGE KIND OF SHOWS WHAT WE WOULD BE DOING IN THE FALL. IT'S GOT A FEW FIRE PITS IN THERE. IT'S AN IDEA. SO IN COOL WEATHER, DURING EVENTS, THEY CAN BRING THESE PORTABLE LITTLE FIRE PITS OUT AND YOU CAN HAVE GATHERINGS OUTSIDE IN THIS SPACE. SO THIS IS AREAS NOT MEANT JUST FOR SUMMERTIME, NOT JUST FOR THE FAIR, BECAUSE THIS BUILDING AND 
          [00:20:03]
THE COMPLEX IS MORE ABOUT THE 12 MONTHS OF THE YEAR FOR THE FAIRGROUNDS. SO FESTIVAL OF LIGHTS, YOU COULD EVEN HAVE THAT GOING ON THERE AS WELL. SO I JUST WANTED TO BRING EVERYBODY'S ATTENTION TO WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE. A LOT OF FOLKS WHO PUTS A LOT OF TIME AND THOUGHT INTO THIS BEING A REALLY SPECIAL PLACE IN THE PARK, AND TO CREATE AN ENVIRONMENT THAT WILL COMPLEMENT THE BUILDING AND MAKE THE BUILDING COMPLEMENT THE PARK THE SAME TIME. OKAY. ANYTHING ELSE TO ADD? NOTHING ELSE IS NEW FOR THE PROJECT. 
          OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AS I MENTIONED EARLIER, THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING AND I'M GOING TO ASK MEMBER TO READ THE PUBLIC NOTICE. LEGAL NOTICE, TOWN OF HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD SITE PLAN APPROVAL NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE TOWN OF HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD WILL CONDUCT A PUBLIC. A PUBLIC HEARING. ON A PROPOSAL TO DEMOLISH THREE STRUCTURES AND CONSTRUCT A 32,850 SQUARE FOOT, PLUS ONE STORY BUILDING WITHIN THE EXISTING SLADE PARK BETWEEN THE EXISTING FIREMAN'S BUILDING AND THE GRANGE BUILDING, TO BE LOCATED AT 5600 MCKINLEY PARKWAY. THE PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD ON MAY 6TH, 2026 AT 7 P.M. IN ROOM SEVEN A AND SEVEN B OF THE HAMBURG TOWN HALL. OKAY. THANK YOU. IN ORDER TO HEAR FROM ALL RESIDENTS AT A REASONABLE HOUR, A THREE MINUTE RULE APPLY. A PUBLIC HEARING IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE COMMUNITY TO SHARE INFORMATION AND HOW THEY ARE 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 AS WELL AS THE APPLICANT FOR RESPONSE. AT THIS TIME, I WOULD LIKE TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. IS THERE ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WISHES TO MAKE COMMENT ON THIS CASE? COME ON DOWN. STATE YOUR NAME, PLEASE SPEAK INTO THE MICROPHONE. GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS TED GEHRIG. YOU ARE A TED. YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO PICK THAT MICROPHONE UP BECAUSE THEY CAN'T HEAR YOU AND THEY'RE RECORDING THAT. PLEASE. SO YOU MIGHT WANT TO TAKE IT OUT. JUST HOLD IT UP TO YOUR UP. HEAR ME NOW. NO, YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO HEAR ME NOW. YEP. OKAY. LIKE THAT. YES. OKAY. GOT MY NAME. OKAY. I RESIDE AT FOUR, TWO, SEVEN, SIX CHERRY. PLACE THE REAR OF OUR PROPERTY LINES. ME AND MY NEIGHBORS BORDER ON THE GRASS PARKING LOT OF THE FAIRGROUNDS. TO THE LEFT IS THE WHERE THE POLICE DEPARTMENT. 
          THEN THE LARGE HILL THAT BLOCKS THE PLAZA, GABE'S PLAZA, AND THEN YOU SEE THE FAIRGROUND BUILDINGS IN THAT. OUR CONCERN IS THAT THIS PROJECT, THAT CONSTRUCTION DEBRIS NOT BE DUMPED IN THAT GRASS PARKING LOT WITHIN OUR SIGHT DISTANCE, AND ALSO THAT HEAVY EQUIPMENT AND NOT BE PARKED NEAR OUR PROPERTY LINE, IF THEY CAN PARK CLOSER TO THE CONSTRUCTION SITE, THAT WOULD BE GREAT. OKAY, THAT'S ABOUT IT. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WISHES TO SPEAK? SECOND CALL FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR ERIE COUNTY AGRICULTURAL SOCIETY. CONSTRUCTING THE NEW BUILDING AT 5600 MCKINLEY PARKWAY. FINAL CALL FOR ERIE COUNTY AGRICULTURAL SOCIETY. SEEING NONE, I'M CLOSING THE PUBLIC HEARING. HI, JOSH. HOW ARE YOU? DOING WELL. SO I THOUGHT MAYBE WE SHOULD TALK ABOUT ERIE COUNTY. OKAY. AGRICULTURAL SOCIETY? SURE. WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE TO DO NEXT? JOSH? I KNOW WE DON'T REALLY DO QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS, BUT MR. HUTTER, WOULD YOU FEEL COMFORTABLE JUST AT LEAST KIND OF EXPLAINING THE FAIRGROUNDS ANTICIPATED CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE, CONSTRUCTION, GEOGRAPHY, WHERE THINGS ARE GOING TO BE JUST TO KIND OF ANSWER THAT QUESTION FROM THE GUY AT CHERRY PLACE. CAN I ADD TO THAT QUESTION? AND IF THERE WHAT TYPE OF DUMPSTERS ARE GOING TO BE ON SITE AND IF THEY'RE GOING TO BE COVERED? THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY FOR A QUICK REBUTTAL, JOSH. THERE'S A PHASING PLAN IN OUR ORIGINAL SUBMISSION FOR YOU. 
          THE CONSTRUCTION SITE ITSELF WILL BE FULLY ENCLOSED IN FENCING. SO WE DO NOT WANT PUBLIC, NOR DO THE CONTRACTORS WANT ANYBODY COMING IN TO VISIT WITH CURIOUS EYES WHILE CONSTRUCTION IS GOING ON. SO ALL STAGING STORAGE OF MATERIALS WILL BE WITHIN THE FENCED AREAS FOR THE PROJECT CONSTRUCTION VEHICLES AS THEY COME IN AND OUT. THIS IS A ONE 
          [00:25:06]
STORY BUILDING, SO WE'RE NOT ANTICIPATING TALL CRANES TO DEAL WITH ALL THAT SORT OF THING. ENTRANCES FOR CONSTRUCTION IS OFF A SOUTH PARK. IF YOU GO DOWN TO THE ROAD RIGHT NOW, THE. THEY DO HAVE THE MAIN ENTRANCE CLOSED FOR. THEY'RE DOING A LITTLE BIT OF ROAD WORK, AND THAT SIDE ENTRANCE TO THE SOUTH OF THE POND AREA THAT THEY'RE USING RIGHT NOW, THAT IS ALSO THE CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE. SO THAT'S WHERE VEHICLES WILL BE COMING IN AND OUT. THE FOLKS ON CHERRY PLACE WON'T SEE EVEN THAT ACTIVITY GOING ON. 
          DURATION OF CONSTRUCTION. WE WILL START BY THE DEMOLITION OF THE NEW YORK STATE BUILDING AFTER FAIR THIS YEAR, 2026 UTILITIES WILL BE INSTALLED DURING THE FALL. ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION OF THE BUILDING WILL START IN THE SPRING OF 2027. DURING THE FAIR OF 2027, THE CONSTRUCTION FENCE WILL BE BROUGHT TIGHT AROUND THE BUILDING SO THE FAIR CAN CONTINUE AND OPERATE AS IT NORMALLY WOULD WITH THE EXCLUSION OF THE BUILDING FOOTPRINT. AFTER THE FAIR IS COMPLETE, CONSTRUCTION WILL CONTINUE AND THE BUILDING AND THE AREA OF THE CIRCULATION WILL BE COMPLETE AND OPEN FOR THE FAIR OF 2028. SO THE BIG CONCERT THAT'S GOING TO BE SCHEDULED THERE ON THE 11TH AND 12TH OR 12TH AND 13TH OF SEPTEMBER, THERE'S GOING TO BE ANOTHER ENTRANCE FOR THAT CONCERT, OR IS THERE WILL THEY BE WALKING PAST THIS? THE ACTUAL CONCERT, I BELIEVE IS IN THE GRANDSTAND AREA. OKAY. IT WON'T AFFECT THIS WORK AREA, SO THEY'RE NOT GONNA BE WALKING. SO THE ANSWER TO MY QUESTION WOULD BE THAT THEY'RE NOT GOING TO BE EXPOSED TO THIS TO GET INTO THE GRANDSTAND. CORRECT. 
          OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THAT'S WHAT I WANTED TO CLARIFY. THANK YOU. OKAY. JOSH, WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE? IF YOU IF THIS BOARD FEELS COMFORTABLE, YOU CAN TABLE THE PROJECT TO MAY 20TH AND AUTHORIZE SEEKER AND DRAFT SITE PLAN APPROVAL RESOLUTIONS. LIKE I SAID, IF YOU'RE COMFORTABLE BOARD MEMBERS, DO YOU HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS? DO YOU HAVE ANY CONCERNS? ARE YOU IN AGREEMENT TO MOVING FORWARD? BASED ON OUR PLANNING DEPARTMENT'S RECOMMENDATIONS, I AGREE TO HAVE JOSH HAVE THE APPROVAL TO DRAFT APPROVAL RESOLUTIONS AND SEEK A RESOLUTION FROM MAY 20TH. HANG ON A SECOND. I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S A NOISE COMING FROM OVER HERE AND IT'S PICKING UP ON THE NOISE. WHAT'S THAT SQUEAK? A MOUSE IN MY POCKET? WELL, IT SOUNDS LIKE A LIKE A LOOSE TABLE. THAT'S THAT'S. YEAH. BECAUSE THEY'RE TEXTING ME TELLING ME IT'S BEING PICKED UP IN THE RECORDING. SO WHATEVER'S GOING ON OVER THERE, THAT'S GREAT. YEAH, THERE IT IS. IT'S DEFINITELY YOUR TABLE. IS IT ME TYPING? OH, MAYBE YOU'RE TYPING MOVES THE TABLE JUST TO SEE. YEAH. OKAY, GENTLEMEN, JUST WANTED TO ADD THAT THERE IS A MEMBER, GOGGIN OR ATTORNEY GOGGIN. THERE IS A REQUIREMENT IN THE TOWN CODE ABOUT EVEN IF IT'S PART OF A SITE PLAN, WHEN THERE'S A REMOVAL OF MORE THAN TEN TREES, THERE'S A PERMIT APPLICATION REQUIREMENT THAT GOES WITH THE SITE PLAN. AND SO THERE SHOULD BE A PERMIT APPLICATION WITH WITH THE SITE PLAN. I DON'T KNOW IF IT WAS OR WASN'T, BUT IT SHOULD. IT SHOULD BE ADDED AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. SO IT'S PART OF THE RECORD BEFORE THAT MAY 20TH MEETING. JOSH AND I WILL TAKE CARE OF THAT PROBABLY TOMORROW. RIGHT. AND THEN THAT APPLICATION, IT DOES GET REVIEWED BY OUR CONSERVATION ADVISORY BOARD FOR THE TYPES OF TREES. I DON'T KNOW IF THEY HAVE AN ACTIVE LIST OF TREES THAT ARE APPROPRIATE FOR GOING IN TO REPLACE WHAT'S BEING REMOVED, BUT THAT CAN BE DEALT WITH BETWEEN THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND THE CABINET. THANK YOU. COOL. THANK YOU CHAIR. THANK YOU. DO WE FEEL THAT THE 20TH IS ENOUGH TIME NOW THAT WE'RE GOING TO INVOLVE THE CAB SO THEY CAN GET OUT AND DO THEIR. THAT'S PLENTY. PLENTY OF TIME. YES. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. SO WE WILL SEE YOU BACK HERE ON THE 20TH. YOU'VE GOT SOME HOMEWORK. AND TALK TO JOSH, ESPECIALLY ABOUT THE TREE PERMIT. AND THEN WE'LL SEE YOU BACK ON THE 20TH. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, EVERYBODY. 
          APPRECIATE YOUR TIME. SURE. THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU. HAVE A GOOD NIGHT. OKAY. SORRY ABOUT THAT. BUT I HAD TO GET MY PAPERWORK READY FOR THE NEXT CASE, WHICH IS BRANDON SANTA 
          [3. 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) ]
REQUESTING CONSTRUCTION. WELL, SITE PLAN APPROVAL, ACTUALLY, FOR PROPOSAL TO CONSTRUCT A SIX SHOP WAREHOUSE. AND TONIGHT, BOARD MEMBERS, YOU'VE BEEN SENT THE SEEKER INFORMATION. GOOD EVENING, MR. SANTOS. I UNDERSTAND PART OF YOUR PARTY IS NOT WITH YOU TONIGHT. YEP. 
          [00:30:02]
THEY COULDN'T MAKE IT TONIGHT. YEAH. SO. AND I DIDN'T THINK THAT IT WAS RIGHT TO DELAY IT, SO I UNDERSTAND. I'M SURE YOU WANT TO GET THIS DONE BEFORE CHRISTMAS OF NEXT YEAR. I WOULD HOPE SO. SO HAVING SAID THAT, FIRST OF ALL, DOES EVERYBODY UNDERSTAND THE PAPERWORK THAT'S IN FRONT OF US TONIGHT AND WHAT WE ARE VOTING ON? IS THERE ANY CONFUSION ON WHAT WE'RE VOTING ON TONIGHT? NO, NO, THIS END OF THE TABLE, THERE'S NO CONFUSION. OKAY. SO BEFORE US, WE HAVE A RESOLUTION FOR SEEKER. AND BEFORE WE GET STARTED, I SHOULD PROBABLY TALK TO MY PLANNER. 
          SURE. BASED ON ALL THE INFORMATION THAT WE HAD AND THE CORRESPONDENCE FROM THE STATE AND DC. AND WHY DON'T YOU TAKE IT OVER FROM THERE? YEAH, I JUST WANT TO GO OVER THE PROCESS. SO BEFORE THE BOARD TONIGHT, THEY DO HAVE A SEEKER RESOLUTION. IT WAS CRAFTED AS A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THEIR CONSIDERATION TO DISCUSS TONIGHT. AND OBVIOUSLY THIS BOARD IS RESPONSIBLE FOR MAKING A SEEKER DECISION. WE STARTED REVIEWING THIS PROJECT BACK IN NOVEMBER OF 2025. AND THERE HAVE BEEN OBVIOUSLY A NUMBER OF EIS, A NUMBER OF CONCERNS ABOUT THIS PROJECT. I JUST WANT TO GO OVER THE PROCESS OF HOW WE'VE GOTTEN TO THIS POINT. SO WHAT WE DO IS WHENEVER WE'RE REVIEWING SEEKER IS THERE'S WHAT'S CALLED A FULL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM OR AN FAF THAT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE APPLICANT TO PUT TOGETHER. WE'VE HAD 3 OR 4 ITERATIONS OF THIS FAF, BUT WE DO HAVE A VERSION THAT THE BOARD DID DEEM TO BE COMPLETE THAT STARTS AS THE FAF PART ONE. AND THEN AS THIS BOARD KNOWS, THEY PUT TOGETHER THE PART TWO, WHICH LOOKS AT A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT IMPACTS THAT MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE A MODERATE TO A LARGE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT. AND THEN WE PUT TOGETHER A PART THREE, WHAT OTHER MUNICIPALITIES DON'T TYPICALLY DO, BUT WE DO HERE IN HAMBURG IS IN CONJUNCTION WITH A PART THREE. WE DO A PART THREE ANALYSIS AND OTHER MUNICIPALITIES. SOMETIMES IT'S CALLED A PART THREE SUPPLEMENTAL DOCUMENT. AND WHAT THAT DOES IS IT LOOKS AT THE PART TWO, WHICH THE BOARD, YOU KNOW, SELECTS SOME IMPACTS THAT MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE A MODERATE TO LARGE IMPACT. AND WE EVALUATE ALL OF THOSE IMPACTS WITHIN THAT PART THREE SUPPLEMENT. AND IN THAT SUPPLEMENT DOCUMENT, WE ALSO ATTACH A NUMBER OF ATTACHMENTS BASED OFF OF THE CORRESPONDENCE WE'VE GOTTEN FROM NEIGHBORS, APPLICATIONS AND STUDIES THAT WE'VE GOTTEN FROM THE APPLICANT. AND THEN OBVIOUSLY, ALL THE CORRESPONDENCE THAT'S BEEN HAD BY THE BOARD. I USUALLY TAKE A FIRST STAB AT PUTTING TOGETHER THESE DOCUMENTS, BUT I ALWAYS REITERATE IT'S BASED OFF OF THE INFORMATION THAT I'VE COLLECTED. 
          IT'S BASED OFF OF EVERYTHING THAT WE'VE HEARD ALONG THIS PROJECT, AND I PUT TOGETHER THE DRAFT, BUT IT HAS TO BE IN THE VOICE, AND IT HAS TO BE, IN THE OPINION OF THE BOARD OR AT LEAST FOUR OF YOU. SO WE PUT TOGETHER THE PART TWO. AND IN THE PART THREE, THE IMPACTS THAT WE NOTED, YOU KNOW, NEEDED FURTHER REVIEW IN THE PART THREE ANALYSIS THAT EVERYONE SHOULD HAVE GOTTEN A COPY OF OUR IMPACT ON LAND, IMPACT ON SURFACE WATER, IMPACT ON PLANTS AND ANIMALS, IMPACT ON TRANSPORTATION, NOISE, ODOR AND LIGHT, AND COMMUNITY CHARACTER. 
          SO LIKE I SAID IN THE PART TWO, WE CHECK OFF, YOU KNOW, THOSE IMPACTS AS BEING ONES THAT NEED TO BE INVESTIGATED FURTHER. THE PART THREE DOES A LITTLE BIT DEEPER DIVE IN ALL OF THE DOCUMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED TO DATE AND PUT TOGETHER AN OPINION, LIKE I SAID, HAS TO BE, IN THE OPINION OF THIS BOARD TO MOVE FORWARD BASED OFF OF THE, YOU KNOW, CONVERSATIONS WITH THE BOARD OF THE DOCUMENTS THAT WE'VE GOTTEN ON THIS RECORD. IT WAS OF MY OPINION THAT, YOU KNOW, I'LL PUT TOGETHER A DRAFT DECK, AND THEN IT'S OBVIOUSLY UP TO THIS BOARD TO DECIDE WHETHER OR NOT THIS PROJECT IS WORTHY OF A NEGATIVE DECLARATION, OR IF YOU SO CHOOSE AND FEEL DIFFERENTLY, THEN WE WOULD HAVE TO PUT TOGETHER A POSITIVE DECLARATION BEFORE ANY APPROVAL ON THE SITE PLAN, OR TALKING ABOUT CONDITIONS OR TALKING ABOUT ACTUALLY APPROVING THE PROJECT. THIS BOARD IS RESPONSIBLE FOR MAKING A SECRET DECISION. SO WHAT YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU TONIGHT IS NOT A RESOLUTION FOR APPROVAL OF THE PROJECT. WHAT YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU TONIGHT IS NOT APPROVAL OF THE ACTUAL SITE PLAN OR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE BUILDING, OR MOVING FORWARD TO ENGINEERING. WHAT YOU HAVE FOR YOU BEFORE YOU TONIGHT IS A PART THREE ANALYSIS THAT LOOKS AT ALL THE IMPACTS BASED OFF OF THE SEEKER F PART ONE AND PART TWO, AND A RESOLUTION THAT IS GEARED TOWARDS BEING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION, BUT IT IS OBVIOUSLY UP FOR BOARD DISCUSSION AND THEN ULTIMATELY A BOARD APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL OF SEEKER TONIGHT. VERY GOOD. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. SO WITH THAT, I'M GOING TO TURN IT OVER TO THE BOARD, AND I'M GOING TO START DOWN. MAYBE I SHOULD. WELL, MR. MEMBER, CLERK DOESN'T LOOK LIKE HE WANTS TO TALK TO ME YET. SO WE'LL START AT THIS END. MEMBER DORIS, DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS OR TO ADD OR ANYTHING TO ADD OR DO YOU HAVE ANY OBJECTION? DO YOU HAVE ANY ANYTHING? NO. WHAT I'VE READ SEEMS TO BE PRETTY THOROUGH. FOLLOW THROUGH OF SINCE NOVEMBER TO TO DATE. OKAY. THANK YOU. MEMBER. RYAN. I ALSO AGREE WITH EVERYTHING THAT I HAVE READ, WHICH IS VERY DETAILED, THAT IT FOLLOWS THROUGH WITH EVERYTHING THAT 
          [00:35:06]
HAS BEEN DISCUSSED FROM THE BEGINNING TILL DATE. I HAVE NO NO FURTHER COMMENTS. MEMBER STEWART. I CONCUR WITH WHAT MEMBER RYAN SAID. I AGREE WITH EVERYTHING. OKAY. MEMBER SHIMURA, I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS. OKAY, SO IN LOOKING AT THE I BELIEVE THE PART TWO, WE HAVE THE ITEM NUMBER FIVE, THE IMPACT ON FLOODING, RIGHT. THE PROPOSED ACTION MAY RESULT IN DEVELOPMENT ON LAND SUBJECT TO FLOODING IS CHECKED. NO, BUT WE DID END UP INDICATING THAT THE ACTION IS IN A HUNDRED YEAR FLOODPLAIN. GRANTED, IT'S A SMALL. IS THAT CORRECT? YEAH. SO THE THE PART OF THE PROPERTY THAT IS WITHIN WHAT YOU WOULD CONSIDER THE FLOODPLAIN ARE THE EXTENT OF RUSH CREEK, WHICH IS OBVIOUSLY ON THE SOUTHERN BORDER OF THE PARCEL. SO THEN I WOULD SAY THAT NUMBER FIVE SHOULD BE MARKED AS. YES. AND THAT ALTHOUGH IT'S NOT A MODERATE TO LARGE IMPACT THAT WE WOULD WANT TO JUST CONTINUE TO RECOGNIZE THE HUNDRED YEAR FLOODPLAIN. AND THAT THEN IN THE ANALYSIS FOR OUR PART THREE THREE ANALYSIS, I MIGHT HAVE MY PARTS MIXED UP. YES YOU DO. YEAH. SO THE PART THREE. NUMBER FIVE. NUMBER FIVE. THERE WE GO. PART THREE. NUMBER FIVE, I BELIEVE SHOULD BE MARKED. YES. 
          OH THAT'S PERFECT. NO, THAT'S PART TWO. OKAY. YEAH. OKAY. TO RECOGNIZE THE HUNDRED YEAR FLOODPLAIN. AND THEN IN OUR ANALYSIS IT'S NUMBER THREE, WHICH IS PART PART THREE ANALYSIS. THERE WE GO. WE JUST WANT TO INDICATE AND RECOGNIZE THAT IT IS. AND THAT ALSO, I MEAN, I DO. SO WE DID LOOP IT IN WITH. SO I UNDERSTAND. SO YEAH, WE CAN CERTAINLY AMEND THE FAA IF PART TWO AND INCLUDE IMPACT ON FLOODING. AND THEN THERE IS A WRITE UP UNDER IT'S, IT'S LOOPED IN WITH SURFACE WATERS, BUT THERE IS A WRITE UP ON THE FEMA MAP AND I'LL JUST READ IT JUST FOR. IT SAYS ON THE FEMA MAP FOR THE PROJECT SITE, THE HUNDRED YEAR FLOODPLAIN PERTAINS TO RUSH CREEK AND A SMALL PORTION OF WHERE THE LANDSCAPE BERMS WILL BE. NO BUILDINGS AT THIS TIME ARE PROPOSED TO BE CONSTRUCTED WITHIN THE 100 YEAR FLOODPLAIN. 
          AND THAT'S THE RIGHT. AND THEN THERE ARE ONE OF THE ATTACHMENTS IS THE ACTUAL FEMA FLOODPLAIN. THAT'S WITHIN THE PART THREE ANALYSIS DOCUMENT. YEP. I MEAN, EVEN THOUGH IT WOULD BE REGURGITATION, I THINK THAT WE JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S NOTED. YEP. MY OTHER COMMENT, AND THIS ISN'T NECESSARILY A CHANGE, BUT I KNOW THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF DISCUSSION WITH RESPECT TO A SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN TRAFFIC. AND I DO THINK THAT THERE IS SOMETHING TO BE NOTED ABOUT THE ANALYSIS THAT WAS DONE, STATING THAT WITHIN THE I T TRIP GENERATION MANUAL, THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT, BASED UPON ALL THE DATA THAT'S PROVIDED, CAN EXPECT 36 TRIPS DURING THE PEAK HOUR, AND THIS FALLS WELL SHORT OF BELOW THE DOT THRESHOLD OF 100 TRIPS, WHICH THEN WARRANTS THE TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY, WHICH THEN WOULD BE YOUR KIND OF TRIGGER FOR HAVING A SUBSTANTIAL INCREASE IN TRAFFIC. SO JUST FOR A POINT OF CLARIFICATION, WHY IT IS NOT CONSIDERED A SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN TRAFFIC. SO YOU'RE JUST CLARIFYING WHAT'S IN THE REPORT FOR THE RECORD, FOR THE RECORD. OKAY, I APPRECIATE THAT. 
          ANYTHING ELSE? AND THEN ALSO IN THE FOR NUMBER F. NUMBER 15 UNDER SECTION THREE. YEP. SO WHEN WE ARE DESCRIBING AND THIS ALSO WILL GO TO MY POINT WITH RESPECT TO CONDITIONS THAT I KNOW THAT IT STATES THAT NO BUILDING MOUNTED FIXTURES ON THE NORTH OR EASTERN BUILDINGS. 
          I THINK THAT IT SHOULD ALSO BE NOTED ANY BUILDING FACES THAT ARE ABUTTING ANY RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES, BECAUSE THAT IS THE INTENT OF NOT HAVING BUILDING MOUNTED FIXTURES ON THOSE SIDES OF THE BUILDINGS AND RECOGNIZING THAT THERE ARE NEIGHBORS. THAT'S FENCING. 
          NOBODY ALSO SAYS LIGHTING FIXTURES WILL BE COMPLIANT AND DIRECTED SO AS NOT TO SHED LIGHT ON ADJACENT PROPERTIES. I PERSONALLY HAVE EXPERIENCED SOMETHING IN THE VILLAGE WHERE THAT SORT OF INSTALLATION WAS DONE, AND IT STILL IMPACTED MY PROPERTY. AND SO THEREFORE, I AM GOING TO ASK THAT THERE ARE NO BUILDING MOUNTED LIGHT FIXTURES ON THOSE WALL, ON THE 
          [00:40:03]
WALLS AND ELEVATIONS OF THOSE BUILDINGS ABUTTING, WHICH IS ACTUALLY WHAT'S ALREADY SAID, BUT MAKING SURE THAT IT'S CLEAR THAT THE INTENT OF IT IS ANY ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES. 
          I AGREE WITH YOUR CLARIFICATION AND ASK THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO ADD THAT AS PART OF THE CONDITION, WHEN WE GET TO THE RESOLUTION. OKAY. ANYTHING ELSE WOULD THAT IS THAT OKAY WITH YOU? YEP. OKAY. ANYTHING ELSE? NO, I THAT'S IT. OKAY. MEMBER ZAJAK. I DON'T REALLY HAVE ANYTHING EXCEPT FOR AN IMPACT ON COMMUNITY CHARACTER. WE TALK ABOUT THE TEN FOOT FENCE AND THE LANDSCAPING ALONG THE FENCE THAT THAT'S ON A SEPARATE PARCEL, RIGHT? CORRECT. THAT ARE. ARE WE TAKING THAT OUT? TAKING WHAT OUT? WELL, WHY ARE WE TALKING ABOUT THIS? I THOUGHT WE WEREN'T TALKING ABOUT THE SEPARATE PARCEL. IT WAS NOT CONSIDERED FOR THE PROJECT. JOSH. THE ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT NUMBER 18 UNDER IMPACT ON COMMUNITY CHARACTER. 
          YEAH. THAT THERE WILL BE A TEN FOOT FENCE AND LANDSCAPING ALONG THE FENCE. AND I DON'T BELIEVE THERE'S ANY THAT'S ON THE SEPARATE PARCEL AND I DON'T. IS THERE ANY LANDSCAPE? I THOUGHT WE TOOK THE LANDSCAPING. THE LANDSCAPING IS UP AGAINST THE BUILDINGS NOW. THAT'S NOT THAT'LL BE ON THE PROJECT PARCEL. YEAH, WE CAN REMOVE THAT. SO IT'LL TALK ABOUT HAVING LANDSCAPING ALONG THE EXISTING BUILDINGS THAT ARE PROPOSED TO BE ON THE ZERO LAKESHORE ROAD SPECIFIC PARCEL. SO WE WILL MAKE THAT A MISSION. AND AND AGAIN, I BELIEVE THAT IT'S IN THE SECTION THREE. I THINK IT'S ADDRESSED IN SECTION THREE. BUT I THINK ON THE SEEKER PART IT WASN'T IT GETS CONFUSING SOMETIMES, BUT WE DID ADDRESS THAT IN THE IN THE COMMENTS. ANYTHING ELSE? THAT'S ALL. OKAY. MEMBER CLERK DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD? I, I HAD TWO THINGS THAT I WANTED TO BRING UP. YOU JUST GOT TO PUT THE MIC CLOSER TO YOUR MOUTH, PLEASE. THAT'S OKAY. I HAVE TWO THINGS I, I WANTED TO BRING UP. OKAY, SO PART 213 D SO, SO UNDER E AND F WE HAVE MODERATE TO LARGE IMPACT WITH TRAFFIC. BUT GIVEN THAT THERE'S THE ENTRANCE SO CLOSE TO THAT WALKWAY, I THINK WE SHOULD OUR PART THREE SHOULD TALK ABOUT THE IMPACT OF PEDESTRIANS COMING OFF THAT WALKWAY WITH THE TRAFFIC. AND THAT'S NOT IN OUR PART THREE ANYWHERE. AND ALSO IT'S IT'S KIND OF A GENERAL ONE ON THE PART 18 IMPACT ON COMMUNITY CHARACTER. SO THE GENERAL ZONING CODE WOULD BE 75FT AWAY FROM AN INDUSTRIAL TO RESIDENTIAL FOR A SETBACK. BUT BECAUSE THERE'S THAT TEN FOOT PIECE OF PROPERTY, THEY'RE ABLE TO KIND OF GET A LOOPHOLE TO NOT HAVE THE FULL TYPE OF SETBACK. AND WE DON'T ADDRESS THAT AT ALL WITH OUR IMPACT ON COMMUNITY CHARACTER. THE FACT THAT IT'S A IT'S A SHORTER DISTANCE. AND, AND TO MITIGATE THE SHORTER DISTANCE, THEY'D HAVE TO DO MORE SCREENING, WHICH THEY DID. RIGHT. BUT IT'S NOT. BUT YOU'RE SAYING IT'S NOT SPELLED OUT. 
          IT'S NOT SPELLED OUT. RIGHT. OKAY. AND GO AHEAD FOR VOTES. SO I'M JUST ONE GUY. OKAY. WELL. 
          YOU WANT TO TAKE THIS ONE OR DOES ATTORNEY GOGAN WANT TO ADDRESS THIS? NO, IT'S. AS LONG AS THE REASONING IS STATED ON THE RECORD, WHAT THE WHAT THE CONCERN WAS, WHICH IS WHAT MR. CLARKE IS SAYING. REGARDLESS OF WHAT THE DECISION IS, IT'S IT'S BEEN ADDRESSED THAT THAT THERE'S A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE HARD LETTER OF THE THE STATUTE WHERE IT SAYS ABUTTING AND THE. COMMUNITY CHARACTER AS YOU AS YOU PUT IT, WHERE IT IS ADDRESSED, BUT IT'S ADDRESSED WITH MITIGATION. SO I THINK THAT'S A REASONABLE REQUEST TO INCLUDE THAT, TO SHOW IF IT IS RESOLVED WITH MITIGATION, THAT IT WAS AT LEAST CONSIDERED AND ADDRESSED. SO I. I AGREE WITH MR. CLARKE ON JOSH. YOU GOT THAT? OKAY. MEMBER SHIMURA, I WAS TRYING TO READ THE SITE PLAN. WHAT IS THE DISTANCE? 58FT, 58FT. OKAY. SO I'M GOING TO ASK THE AUDIENCE TO HOLD BACK ON ANY COMMENTS. AT THIS TIME. IT'S AT THE TABLE. 58FT. AND I WOULD LIKE TO BRING UP TO 
          [00:45:03]
THE FACT THAT THE ORDINANCE SAYS THAT IT'S ABUTTING NEXT TO THE SAME PROPERTY, TO THE TO THE PROPERTY LINE. SO THE REASON WHY THIS INFAMOUS TEN FEET THAT KEEPS GOING AROUND AND AROUND AND PEOPLE ARE BUILDING STORIES ON, IT'S THAT'S NOT WHAT'S ABUTTING TO THIS PROJECT, THIS PROJECT THAT WAS IN FRONT OF US. AND I'M GOING TO SAY IT HOPEFULLY FOR THE LAST TIME, THE PROJECT THAT'S IN FRONT OF US IS THE PROJECT THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT THE TEN FEET WE SAID AT THE VERY FIRST MEETING. AS MATTER OF FACT, MEMBER MCCORMICK WAS STILL ON THE BOARD AT THE TIME. SHE SAID, NO, THIS HAS GOT TO BE INCLUDED. JOSH CAME BACK AND SAID, NO, WE CAN'T INCLUDE IT. AND WE HAD A DISCUSSION AND IT WAS COVERED AT LENGTH. SO I DO AGREE THAT IT SHOULD BE SPECIFIED IN THIS IN SECTION THREE, BUT IN NO UNCERTAIN TERMS. I DON'T FEEL THAT THIS BOARD WAS CONFUSED IN ANY WAY. I DON'T RIGHT THAT WE DIDN'T SPELL IT OUT RIGHT. BUT I'M GLAD YOU BROUGHT IT UP. NOT 75. RIGHT. IT'S 58, BUT IT WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN EVEN THE 58FT HAD THE COUNTY NOT COME BACK AND CHANGE THAT EASEMENT WITH IT WOULD HAVE BEEN LOST. SO WE WE ACTUALLY CAME AHEAD OF THE GAME. AND, AND IF I COULD CLARIFY FOR CERTAINLY MEMBER OR ATTORNEY GOGAN. GOGAN. YEAH. THE THE BOARD DOES NOT HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO CHANGE THE STATUTE OR THE CODE. THAT'S UP TO THE TOWN BOARD. SO THE EXISTING LAW THAT YOU HAVE TO WORK WITH SAYS ABUTTING. OKAY, SO THAT'S THE LIMIT AS FAR AS THE HARD RULE, WHAT THE BOARD CAN DO IS BASED ON THE CODE THAT YOU'RE GIVEN, YOU CAN DO MITIGATION TO THE TO WHAT YOU SEE FIT. AGAIN, THERE IS NO HARD, HARD RULE. IT'S NOT WRITTEN BY THE TOWN IN THE CODE THAT IT'S NEAR THE PROPERTY OR DISTANCE FROM THE PROPERTY. IT'S ABUTTING. AND THAT'S THE LANGUAGE FOR THE TOWN CODE. OKAY, REALLY QUICKLY, BEFORE WE READ ANYTHING, I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ADDRESS THE PART THREE ANALYSIS AND AND HAVE IT ACCURATELY INCORPORATE THE BOARD AS A WHOLE ON, ON HOW YOU ALL FEEL. SO I WANT TO HAVE IT UP ON THE SCREEN. MEMBER SHIMURA, YOU MENTIONED IMPACT ON FLOODING. WOULD YOU FEEL COMFORTABLE HAVING THE DOCUMENT BASICALLY REFERENCE WHAT'S WRITTEN IN SUBSECTION THREE, TALKING ABOUT THE FEMA FLOOD MAP, OR WOULD YOU WANT TO JUST COPY AND PASTE TO IMPACT ON FLOODING NUMBER FIVE? YOU CAN YOU CAN REFERENCE THE FLOOD MAP AND THE PREVIOUS SECTION THAT YOU. YES. OH MY GOD. WELL, I NEED TO GET BACK TO READ IT AGAIN. YES. SO REFLECTING, YOU CAN JUST USE THAT ON THE FEMA MAP. NOTING THE HUNDRED YEAR FLOODPLAIN ONLY PERTAINS TO RUSH CREEK. ET CETERA. ET CETERA. YOU CAN COPY PASTE THAT. SO IT'LL READ C REFERENCE TO THE FLOOD MAP AND NARRATIVE AND SUBSECTION THREE RELATED TO THE 100 YEAR FLOODPLAIN AND RUSH CREEK. YES. AND THEN WOULD YOU COPY PASTE THE INFORMATION SUBMITTED ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSION, OR IS IT JUST REFERENCING JUST ABOVE? IT WOULD JUST BE REFERENCE TO SUBSECTION THREE AND THEN MEMBER CLARK TO IMPACT ON TRANSPORTATION. TO YOUR POINT ABOUT, YOU KNOW, TALKING ABOUT PEDESTRIAN INFRASTRUCTURE, IS THERE ANY SPECIFIC WAY YOU WOULD WANT IT WORDED OR ADDING A SUBSECTION, OR HOW WOULD YOU WANT IT KIND OF INCORPORATED INTO THIS DOCUMENT? I DON'T KNOW, THEY DIDN'T DO ANYTHING ABOUT THAT. IT'S JUST IT'S THERE, THERE'S I MEAN, I GUESS THEIR PLAN IS TO NOT USE THAT PART OF THE RIGHT OF WAY TO ENTER THE PROPERTY. WHICH WAS ADDRESSED AGAIN IN THAT SECTION IN SECTION THREE, AND SPELLED OUT ABOUT THEM COMING BACK DOWN AND MAKING THE CIRCLE OF COMING IN OFF OF ROUTE FIVE C, I'LL READ IT JUST FOR CLARITY, SO I'LL READ IT. I'LL JUST READ IT OUT TO ADDRESS VOLUME AND TRAFFIC ACCESS CONCERNS, THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING THAT ALL HEAVY CONSTRUCTION VEHICLES SHALL BE REQUIRED TO CONTINUE SOUTHBOUND AND UTILIZE THE WOODLAWN EXIT OFF OF ROUTE FIVE TO CIRCLE AROUND AND COME BACK UP ROUTE FIVE, GOING NORTHBOUND TO MAKE A RIGHT INTO THE PROJECT SITE. THIS HAS BEEN DISCUSSED TO BE A REQUIRED CONDITION OF SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR THE PROJECT. THE APPLICANT WILL DIRECT HIS DRIVERS INTO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PRACTICABLE. HIS TENANTS TO NOT USE THE STATE RIGHT OF WAY OFF OF HOLLY ROAD. HOLLY ROAD, WHICH IS A TOWN ROAD, ALREADY HAS SIGNAGE PROHIBITING TRUCKS OVER FIVE TONS FROM ENTERING THE ROAD. ARE YOU OKAY WITH THAT MEMBER, 
          [00:50:02]
CLARK? I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING THAT I'D SAY FIXES IT DIFFERENTLY. I GUESS THAT'S THE WAY TO SAY IT. OKAY. AND THEN I ALSO BELIEVE YOU WANT TALKED ABOUT UNDER SUBSECTION 18 IMPACT ON COMMUNITY CHARACTER. MEMBER SHIMURA. SO TO ADDRESS THE THE PEDESTRIAN, IS THERE SOMETHING TO THE EXTENT TO SAY THAT IT'S NOTED THAT THERE ARE NO IMPROVEMENTS PLANNED FOR ANY PEDESTRIAN ACCESS OR SOMETHING ALONG THOSE LINES, AND THAT THE POTENTIAL FOR. BUT THAT'S NOT A THAT'S THAT'S NOT A MITIGATION. THAT'S RIGHT. SO. I MEAN, JUST THROWING THAT IN THERE, I DON'T KNOW THAT WHAT THAT DOES. I DON'T SUPPORT THAT. BECAUSE IT'S IT DOESN'T IT DOESN'T. 
          EVERYTHING THAT'S IN HERE, THERE'S MITIGATION OR EXPLANATIONS. AND I DON'T EVEN KNOW THAT THAT WALKWAY. I, I WOULDN'T EVEN KNOW HOW TO ADDRESS THAT. JUST SO EVERYONE'S AWARE TO MEMBERS AJAX POINT, WE'RE REMOVING THE PART, TALKING ABOUT LANDSCAPING AGAINST THE FENCE AND THAT THERE WILL BE LANDSCAPING AROUND THE BUILDINGS TO PROVIDE A BUFFER MEMBER. CLARK GOING BACK TO THE SUBSECTION 18, DO YOU WANT TO BRING BACK UP THE REASON YOU HAD BROUGHT UP? 18? I FORGOT WHAT YOU HAD PREVIOUSLY SAID BECAUSE IT'S IT'S NOT 75FT. SO THE MITIGATION WOULD BE FENCING AND LANDSCAPING IN THE 58FT IN BETWEEN. MEMBERS. I HAVE A QUESTION. IT'S JUST IF WE I DON'T KNOW IF WE'RE GOING TO BE MENTIONING THIS FENCING ON ANOTHER PROPERTY AS MITIGATION. I DON'T THINK IT SHOULD BE. 
          YEAH, IT'S GOING TO BE TIED TO THE PROJECT. AND THEN IF IT'S TIED TO THE PROJECT, WE SHOULD IMPLEMENT THE 75FT. I MEAN THAT'S MY FEELING ON IT. THE CODE DOESN'T WANT US TO DO THAT. 
          NO, THE CODE DOES NOT ALLOW US TO DO THAT. THAT'S NOT IN OUR CODE. IT'S SO STRANGE THAT WE WE COULD. SO THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING. LIKE, HOW CAN WE EVEN. I DON'T THINK THAT THE FUNDS SHOULD BE IN THERE. YEAH. WE CAN'T MENTION THE FENCE AT ALL. RIGHT NOW. THE MENTION OF THE FENCE WAS REMOVED FROM IMPACT ON COMMUNITY CHARACTER. IT TALKS ABOUT LANDSCAPING AROUND THE BUILDINGS ITSELF. YEAH. I MEAN, THAT'S I WOULD, I, I ONLY, YOU KNOW, I FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH THE FENCE NOT BEING MENTIONED AT ALL THAT BECAUSE IF IT IS THEN THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT MITIGATION AND THEN WE'RE VIOLATING THE CODE. I REMEMBER TALKING ABOUT FENCES VIOLATING THE CODE. NO, BUT TO THE 75FT, THEN WE'RE VIOLATING THE CODE. NO, THERE'S A SEPARATE PROPERTY. IT'S A LOOPHOLE. THE CODE IS WRITTEN A CERTAIN WAY. IT SAYS ABUTTING. 
          SO THE THING THAT'S ABUTTING IT MEANS THEY ONLY HAVE TO HAVE SO MUCH. I'M JUST GOING TO. I'M GONNA STOP YOU RIGHT THERE. I'M GOING TO CLARIFY THIS ON THE RECORD BECAUSE SOMEBODY SAID THIS TO ME AND I WANT TO MAKE IT VERY CLEAR AND I'M PRETTY HOT ABOUT IT. THIS BOARD AND THAT PLANNING BOARD AND THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT DID NOT USE THAT INTENTIONALLY TO I LET ME JUST FINISH. I WANT TO GET IT ON THE RECORD. THIS PLANNING BOARD AND THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT LOOKED AT THE ORDINANCE AND IN NO WAY, SHAPE OR FORM DID WE USE ANY INTENT TO DO A LOOPHOLE IN ANY WAY, SHAPE OR FORM, BECAUSE I'VE GOT THE CORRESPONDENCE AND I'VE HAD THE CONVERSATIONS. NO, I'M JUST MAKING SURE I'M NOT MAD AT YOU. I'M JUST UPSET BECAUSE I KNOW WHERE YOU'RE GOING WITH THIS, BUT I ALSO KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN. OKAY. SO I WANT TO BE VERY CLEAR THAT THIS WAS NOT USED AS A LOOPHOLE. IT'S THE WAY THE STATUTE'S WRITTEN. 
          THAT'S THE CORRECT VERBIAGE. IT'S THE OUR ORDINANCE AND WE ARE FOLLOWING OUR ORDINANCE. 
          WE'RE NOT DOING ANY KIND OF LOOPHOLE OR RULE BENDING OR ANYTHING. THAT'S EXACTLY RIGHT. 
          AND THAT'S WHAT I WANT TO CLARIFY BECAUSE WE'VE BEEN ACCUSED OF THIS BOARD HAS BEEN ACCUSED OF THAT. SO AND I WANT THERE'S NOT GOING TO BE THIS BOARD HAS DONE EVERYTHING ABOVE BOARD AND VERY CLEAR. AND THAT'S WHY WE'RE WORKING ON THIS AND GETTING THE VERBIAGE RIGHT. SORRY BILL, BUT YOU HIT A NERVE BECAUSE WHEN IT COMES WHEN PEOPLE SAY THINGS LIKE, LIKE WE DID SOMETHING INTENTIONAL. I'M NOT SAYING THAT WE DID. NO, WE HAVEN'T 
          [00:55:05]
DONE ANYTHING. WE HAVE A PROJECT THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT THE RULES AND APPLY. THAT'S CORRECT. WHAT WE'RE DOING. AND, AND WHEN YOU IMPLEMENT THE RULES, THAT'S THE RULE. WE'RE WE'RE WE'RE GIVEN YOU SHOULD BE USING YOUR MIND BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT GOING TO HEAR ANY OF THAT IN THE. WE'RE APPLYING THE RULES AND THESE ARE THE RULES WE WERE GIVEN, NOT THE RULES THAT I'LL JUST SAY THE RULES WE WERE GIVEN. YEAH. OKAY. BUT THE RULES WE WERE GIVEN ARE A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT THAN THEY COULD HAVE BEEN WITH SOMETHING ELSE. SO WE WANTED MORE. MORE OF A BARRIER. I THINK FOR MITIGATION WE CAN. ADDRESS EVERYTHING THAT'S MITIGATION, WHETHER IT'S ON THIS PROPERTY OR NOT FOR A PART THREE OF A SEEKER. OKAY. I THINK THAT'S DIFFERENT THAN SITE PLAN, DIFFERENT THAN SOME OF THE OTHER AREAS. AND I DON'T IF IT'S GOING TO GO THE WAY IT SEEMS LIKE IT'S GOING TO GO, I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD LEAVE OFF ANYTHING THAT COULD BE USED AS A MITIGATION OR GIVE THE IMPRESSION THAT WE'RE TWISTING ANYTHING. I. REMEMBER YOU'RE SAYING, BUT I DON'T THINK WE WERE GIVEN THE IMPRESSION THAT WE WERE TWISTING ANYTHING OKAY, AT ALL, EVER. SO OKAY. I WOULD SUPPORT MEMBER SHIMURA. I WOULD SUPPORT MEMBERS AJAX. A SUGGESTION IN REMOVING THE REFERENCE TO THE TEN FOOT FENCE SO THAT THERE'S NO CONFUSION ABOUT ANY SORT OF CONNECTION WITH WHAT IS CONSIDERED A SEPARATE PROJECT. THAT IS OUTSIDE OF THE DEFINITION OF THIS PROJECT, AND ALSO IN ADDITION TO THE LANDSCAPING THAT IS BEING PLANNED, I THINK THAT IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT THE ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPING, IN ORDER TO SUPPORT THE BERM, IS IT THE BERM AND THE BANK WOULD HAVE A SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN THE COMMUNITY CHARACTER BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT RIGHT NOW IT'S JUST A CLEAR BRUSH AND THAT THE AMOUNT OF PLANTING THAT'S BEING REQUIRED IS A SIGNIFICANT. A SIGNIFICANT. ARE YOU READING MY NOTES? NO, BECAUSE I DIDN'T GET TO GO YET. JOSH, I KNOW YOU'RE WRITING. CAN I ADD MY COMMENTS FOR THE RECORD? SO MY COMMENTS ARE IN REGARDS TO COMMUNITY, CHARACTER AND IN HAVING DISCUSSIONS WITH PEOPLE AND REVIEWING THIS. I EVEN HAVE I WENT TO THERE SEEMED TO BE SEVERAL COMMENTS FROM THE CORRESPONDENCE THAT WE'VE RECEIVED ABOUT COMMUNITY CHARACTER. SO I WENT TO THE NEW YORK STATE WEBSITE JUST TO MAKE SURE, EVEN THOUGH I'VE BEEN DOING THIS FOR 30 YEARS, TO MAKE SURE THAT I HAD IT RIGHT. 
          I THINK COMMUNITY CHARACTER IS NOT DEFINED SPECIFICALLY BY THE STATE OF NEW YORK, BECAUSE I THINK EACH CASE IS JUDGED ON ITS OWN MERITS. I THINK IN THIS CASE, THERE IS A COMBINED USE THROUGHOUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD. I THINK THERE'S SOME INDUSTRIAL, SOME RESIDENTIAL, THERE'S SOME COMMERCIAL IN THE BACK OF THIS PROPERTY. AND I FEEL THAT THE APPLICANT HAS DONE. HIS. LET ME JUST PUT IT THIS WAY. I FEEL THE APPLICANT HAS MADE A SINCERE EFFORT TO BUFFER NOT ONLY THE CREEK, BUT THE PROPERTY LINE THAT'S GOING TO BE NEXT TO THE NEIGHBORS. I MEAN, 150 TREES AIN'T NOTHING. AND LOOKING BACK ON THE LOOKING BACK ON THE PREVIOUS. WHAT WAS THERE, I DON'T EVEN THINK THERE WAS 150 TREES ON IT THAT WERE CUT DOWN. NOT ONLY THAT, BUT THERE WAS A LOT OF SCRUB. I FEEL THAT GIVEN THE RULES THAT WE HAVE TO FOLLOW, WE. THE PLANNING BOARD WITH THE AMOUNT OF BUSHES, WITH THE AMOUNT OF BUFFERING AROUND THE CREEK, AND I HAD BEEN HARD ON THESE PEOPLE AND THEY TOOK IT. AND SIR, DO YOU HAVE SOMETHING TO SAY RIGHT NOW, OR ARE YOU GOING TO SIT THERE AND MIMIC ME BECAUSE I CAN HAVE THE OFFICERS REMOVE YOU FROM THIS ROOM RIGHT NOW? I'M GOING TO KNOW I SAW EVERY EVERY GESTURE. YES YOU ARE. 
          YEAH. NO YOU'RE NOT, I AM. SO MY POINT IS, IS THAT WITH THE BUFFERING AROUND THE CREEK, WE DIDN'T THINK IT WAS ENOUGH. THE APPLICANT WENT BACK AND PUT MORE. THERE WAS CONFUSION ABOUT THE TREES AND WHERE THEY WERE GOING TO GO. THE APPLICANT WANTED TO PUT IT ON THE THE SILENT PIECE OF PROPERTY. WE DIDN'T ALLOW IT SO WE BROUGHT THE BUFFERING BACK TO THE BUILDINGS. WHY? BECAUSE IT HELPS THE NEIGHBORS. AND I FEEL THAT THAT ADDS TO COMMUNITY 
          [01:00:07]
CHARACTER, AND THAT HE DIDN'T HAVE TO PUT 150 TREES BEHIND THESE BUILDINGS. BUT WHEN WE TOLD HIM WE WANTED MORE BUFFERING AND MORE LANDSCAPING, THE APPLICANT, IN FACT DID DO THAT. THE OTHER THING THAT EVEN ABOUT REMOVING THE THE LIGHTS, SO THERE'S NO LIGHT DISTURBANCE TO THE APPLICANTS OR TO THE I'M SORRY, TO THE RESIDENTS. AT THE END OF THE DAY, WE HAVE TO WEIGH EVERYTHING. AND I FEEL THAT COMMUNITY, COMMUNITY, CHARACTER IS WHAT THE PERSON WHO'S LOOKING AT IT FINDS TO BE REASONABLE AND IN LOOK. AND IN RESEARCHING SOME OF THIS, THAT'S WHAT THE COURT'S GOING TO SAY. IT'S NOT FIVE FEET. IT MAY BE FIVE MILES FOR ME, AND IT MAY BE TWO MILES FOR YOU, BUT I MAY BE LOOKING AT SOMETHING DIFFERENT. BUT AFTER LOOKING AT THIS AT VARIOUS MILEAGE AND VARIOUS DISTANCES AND VARIOUS CAUSES AND REREADING AND EVEN TAKING THE HIT FOR SOME OF THE LETTERS THAT WE GOT, AND THE FACT THAT THIS CASE DREW OUT, THAT HAMBURG POLICE DEPARTMENT, WHICH I WANT TO THANK VERY, VERY MUCH FOR BEING HERE. IT'S IT'S NOT EASY SITTING HERE AND WE JUST CAN'T SAY NO. AND DESPITE THE FACT THAT SOME OF YOU MAY THINK THAT THIS DOESN'T BELONG HERE, IT'S ZONED THAT WAY. AND THAT'S WHY LOOKING AT EVERYTHING THAT WE HAVE IN THAT'S WRITTEN OUT ON THIS PROJECT, IT IS DULY DOCUMENTED THAT THE APPLICANT HAS MADE EVERY EFFORT TO FOLLOW THIS PROJECT AND UP TO AND INCLUDING UP TO AND INCLUDING, SAYING, MADAM CHAIR, I WILL ADD ON TO ON TO THE LEASE THAT THEY CAN'T MAKE A TURN FROM ANYWHERE BUT ROUTE FIVE. HE STOOD RIGHT THERE WITH HIS ATTORNEY. SO, I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW WHAT ELSE I'M SUPPOSED TO DO OR THESE BOARD MEMBERS. THE ACCUSATIONS HAVE BEEN FAST AND FURIOUS. HALF OF THESE BOARD MEMBERS DON'T KNOW ABOUT THE THREATS AND ABOUT THE NASTY LETTERS, BECAUSE WE WE DEALT WITH THEM THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, THE HAMBURG POLICE DEPARTMENT, THE TOWN BOARD. AND IF YOU THINK THAT THIS IS A JOKE, IT IS NOT. AND IF YOU THINK FOR ONE MINUTE THAT THIS WAS TAKEN LIGHTLY, IT HAS NOT BEEN. OUR LIVES HAVE BEEN TURNED UPSIDE DOWN OVER ONE CASE, OVER ONE CASE. AND THE THING OF IT IS, IS THAT WE ARE GOVERNED BY THE RULES OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK. IF YOU DON'T LIKE WHAT THOSE RULES ARE, THEN YOU CAN TAKE IT TO THE TOWN BOARD AND HAVE THEM GO LOOK AT THE MASTER PLAN OR THE OR THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. WE DON'T HAVE THAT POWER. OUR POWER IS WHAT'S RIGHT IN FRONT OF US. AND I FEEL THAT THIS BOARD WENT BEYOND THE CALL OF DUTY. THE NUMBER OF HOURS, THE ENDLESS LETTERS, THE THE ENDLESS MISINFORMATION, THE THREATS, THE PHONE CALLS WERE YOUR RESIDENTS WERE YOUR NEIGHBORS. THIS GUY WALKED OUT AFTER I GAVE THE LAST SPEECH AND SAID, WE'RE ALL NEIGHBORS. AND HE GOT THREATENED AND GOT SPIT ON. WE'RE THE TOWN OF HAMBURG, FOR GOD'S SAKES. THE. THE TOWN THAT FRIENDSHIP BUILDS. 
          IS THAT REALLY WHAT WE'RE BUILDING? SHAME ON ALL OF US. I STAND WITH WHAT I SAY ABOUT THIS, AND I AM IN SUPPORT OF THE POSITIVE OF THE NEGATIVE DECK. JOSH, WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE? IS EVERYONE COMFORTABLE WITH HOW THE PART THREE ANALYSIS WITH THE AMENDMENTS, AS NOTED BY ALL THE BOARD MEMBERS, IS WRITTEN TO BE ENTERED INTO THE RECORD ALONG WITH THE POTENTIAL NEGATIVE DECLARATION? YES, YES. OKAY. WITH THAT, THERE IS A. NEGATIVE DECLARATION RESOLUTION. I JUST WANT TO STATE FOR THE RECORD THAT UNDER A RESOLUTION FOR SEEKER OR FOR DECK, WE DON'T ADD CONDITIONS TO THIS RESOLUTION. THIS IS OBVIOUSLY JUST APPROVING SEEKER. AND THEN SHOULD THIS BOARD VOTE TO GIVE THIS A NEG DECK, WE CAN THEN CERTAINLY DISCUSS PROPOSED SITE PLAN CONDITIONS, AS HAVE BEEN MENTIONED THROUGHOUT THIS PROJECT. IF THIS BOARD SO CHOOSES. OKAY, OKAY. WHO WANTS TO READ THE RESOLUTION? I'LL READ IT. MEMBER STEWART. RESOLUTION SEEKER. BRANDON SANTA ZERO. LAKESHORE ROAD INDUSTRIAL SHOPS PROJECT. WHEREAS THE TOWN OF HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD RECEIVED A SITE PLAN APPLICATION FROM BRANDON SANTA FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF SIX SINGLE STORY CONTRACTOR SHOP WAREHOUSE BUILDINGS TOTALING 75,220 SQUARE FOOT ON A VACANT LOT, ALONG WITH 
          [01:05:04]
ASSOCIATED PARKING ON SITE UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS, STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SITE LIGHTING AND LANDSCAPING AT ZERO LAKESHORE ROAD, LOCATED BEHIND 3401 LAKESHORE ROAD, SB L, LOT NUMBER ONE FIVE, 0.00-1-6.2. AND WHEREAS, PURSUANT TO PART 617 OF THE IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS PERTAINING TO ARTICLE EIGHT, STATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY REVIEW ACT, SEEKER OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION LAW, THE HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD HAS ESTABLISHED ITSELF AS SEEKER LEAD AGENCY AND CONDUCTED A COORDINATED ENVIRONMENTAL SEEKER REVIEW OF THIS UNLISTED ACTION. AND WHEREAS, THE PLANNING BOARD HAS REVIEWED PART ONE OF THE FEA, F HAS COMPLETED PARTS TWO AND THREE OF THE F, E, A, F AND REVIEWED THE CRITERIA FOR DETERMINING DETERMINING SIGNIFICANCE IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION SIX. 
          17.7 OF SEEKER, AND DOCUMENTED THEIR ANALYSIS AND AN EXPANDED PART THREE ANALYSIS DOCUMENT. 
          AND WHEREAS, THE FINDINGS OF THIS REVIEW INDICATE THAT THE PROPOSED PROJECT WILL NOT ADVERSELY, ADVERSELY, ADVERSELY AFFECT THE NATURAL RESOURCES OF THE STATE AND OR THE HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC. AND WHEREAS, THE TOWN OF HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD HELD THE REQUIRED PUBLIC HEARING ON MARCH 4TH, 2026. NOW FOR. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, THE HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD AS SEEKER LEAD AGENCY FOR THIS ACTION, HAS DETERMINED THAT THE CONSTRUCTION OF SIX SINGLE STORY CONTRACTOR SHOP WAREHOUSE BUILDINGS TOTALING 75,220 SQUARE FOOT ON A VACANT LOT, ALONG WITH ASSOCIATED PARKING ON SITE UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS, STORMWATER MANAGEMENT, SITE LIGHTING AND LANDSCAPING AT ZERO LAKESHORE ROAD, LOCATED BEHIND 3401 LAKESHORE ROAD, WILL NOT RESULT IN ANY SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACTS ON THE ENVIRONMENT, AND A NEGATIVE DECK IS HEREBY ISSUED BASED ON THE REASONS AS SET FORTH IN THE FULL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM IN PART THREE, ANALYSIS ATTACHMENT AND BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED, THE TOWN OF HAMBURG PLANNING BOARD AUTHORIZES THE PLANNING BOARD CHAIR TO SIGN THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM, WHICH WILL ACT AS THE SECRET NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND AUTHORIZES THAT THE APPROPRIATE NOTICES AND FILINGS BE MADE. I'M GOING TO ASK FOR INDIVIDUAL VOTE. MEMBER GERACI HOW DO YOU VOTE? YES. MEMBER RYAN. HOW DO YOU VOTE? YES. MEMBER STEWART HOW DO YOU VOTE? YES. MEMBER SHAMARA. HOW DO YOU VOTE? YES. MEMBER ZAJAC HOW DO YOU VOTE? YES. MEMBER CLARK HOW DO YOU VOTE? NO MEMBER GRONINGEN IS A YES, THEREFORE IT PASSES 6 TO 1. 
          YOUR SEEKER HAS BEEN APPROVED. YOU WILL HAVE TO COME BACK HERE AGAIN. I KNOW YOU'RE GETTING TIRED OF SEEING US, AND WE WILL. OUR NEXT. WE HAVE EARMARKED IT FOR MAY 20TH. I DON'T KNOW IF THE BOARD WANTS TO DISCUSS POTENTIAL SITE PLAN CONDITIONS AT THIS MEETING, OR IF YOU WANT ME TO PUT TOGETHER A DRAFT BASED OFF OF THE INPUT THAT WE'VE GOTTEN. WE DISCUSSED IT ON THE 20TH. IT'S UP TO THIS BOARD ON WHAT YOU WANT TO DO WITH THAT. JOSH, I THINK THAT WE SHOULD DO A DRAFT AND WE'LL HAVE SOMETHING IN FRONT OF US. I THINK THERE'S TOO MUCH TONIGHT. OKAY. TO BE HONEST WITH YOU. AND I DON'T WANT TO CONFUSE THE ISSUES. AND THERE HAVE BEEN SOME GOOD POINTS BROUGHT UP, AND IT WILL GIVE THE BOARD SOME TIME TO THINK ABOUT THOSE CONDITIONS. AND THEN WE'LL COME BACK ON THE 20TH AND LOOK AT IT AND MOVE FROM THERE. OKAY. WILL YOU BE AVAILABLE ON THE 20TH? YES WE WILL. OKAY. ALL RIGHT THEN. 
          WE'LL SEE YOU ON THE 20TH. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. OKAY. YES. SO THE NEXT CASE I WILL BE LEAVING THE ROOM AND JOINING THE TWO POLICE OFFICERS BACK THERE. I'M RECUSING MYSELF FROM JAMES DRAGONETTE AND. MEMBER SHIMURA WILL BE RUNNING THE MEETING. YOU HAVE TO WAIT UNTIL I LEAVE THE ROOM. I JUST REALIZE THAT I DON'T WANT. CAN I GET. THE SABERS ARE WINNING. 
          IN CASE ANYONE SAW THAT. 201311 NO, MY FAMILY'S BEHIND. OKAY, FOR THE RECORD, CHAIRWOMAN 
          [4. James Dragonette – Requesting Planning Board Approval of a tree clearing permit to  clear cut 0.6 acres of land at 4735 Southwestern Boulevard ]
          [01:10:07]
GRONINGEN HAS LEFT THE ROOM. THE NEXT ITEM ON OUR AGENDA IS JAMES DRAGONETTE REQUESTING PLANNING BOARD APPROVAL FOR A TREE CLEARING PERMIT TO CUT 2.6 ACRES OF LAND AT 4735 SOUTHWESTERN BOULEVARD. BEFORE WE BEGIN, IS THERE ANYTHING THAT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT WOULD LIKE TO ADD OR CLARIFY? SURE. SO THIS IS A UNIQUE ONE FOR THE PLANNING BOARD, WHERE THIS IS A CASE WHERE THIS IS SOMEBODY ASKING FOR A TREE CLEARING PERMIT, BUT IT'S NOT REALLY ASSOCIATED WITH A SITE PLAN OR SUBDIVISION LIKE WE TYPICALLY SEE. I MET MR. DRAGONETTE DOWN IN TOWN HALL. HE TALKED ABOUT HE HAS PROPERTY OVER ON SOUTHWESTERN BOULEVARD, AND HE LIKED TO CLEAN UP SOME DEBRIS, SOME OF THE DOWNED TREES THAT ARE OVER THERE. BUT BECAUSE OF THE AMOUNT OF WHAT HE'S LOOKING TO CLEAR, IT'S ABOUT ALMOST SIX ACRES. THAT DOES TRIGGER NEEDING TO COME BEFORE THE PLANNING BOARD AS THE APPROVING AUTHORITY TO ULTIMATELY POTENTIALLY GRANT HIM A TREE CLEARING PERMIT ASSOCIATED WITH THAT, BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, HE'S LOOKING TO DO SOME CLEARING THAT DOES REQUIRE A RECOMMENDATION AND A REVIEW FROM OUR TOWN'S CONSERVATION ADVISORY BOARD. I WAS IN CONTACT WITH THE CHAIRWOMAN OF THE BOARD, LEONA, AND THE CONSERVATION BOARD DID HAVE PRETTY LOW, WHO I KNOW IS A LANDSCAPER, REALLY GOOD MEMBER OF THE CAB. HE DID DO A SITE VISIT, I BELIEVE, TO MR. DRAGONETTE'S PROPERTY, CONDUCTED A SITE VISIT. HE DID PUT HIS COMMENTS TOGETHER IN A MEMO THAT I SENT TO ALL THE BOARD MEMBERS. YOU ALL SHOULD HAVE HAD A COPY OF IT. I CAN BRING IT UP FOR FOR THOSE WHO DIDN'T GET TO SEE IT. SO WE'LL TALK. WE'LL TOUCH ON THE CAVS MEMO IN A SECOND. AND THEN I KNOW CAMI ALSO PUT TOGETHER SOME ENGINEERING COMMENTS. AND I'LL YOU KNOW ASK HER TO ADDRESS THOSE COMMENTS IN A SECOND. BUT I WANT TO KIND OF SET THE STAGE FOR WHAT WE'RE REVIEWING. SO I HAVE THE SURVEY THAT MR. DRAGONETTE PUT TOGETHER. IT SHOWS THE BOUNDS OF WHAT HE'S LOOKING TO CLEAR. I WILL ALSO PULL UP A GOOGLE MAPS SLASH GOOGLE EARTH IMAGE, SO YOU CAN KIND OF GET AN IDEA OF WHAT'S IN THERE. I'LL ASK MR. DRAGONETTE TO KIND OF SPEAK TO THE PROPERTY, KIND OF JUST DESCRIBE IT FOR THE BOARD. AND THEN WHAT THIS BOARD WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR IS THERE'S NO PUBLIC HEARING COMPONENT WITH THE TREE CLEARING PERMIT. THE APPROVAL AUTHORITY IS WITH THIS BOARD, YOU CAN PLACE CONDITIONS ON A TREE CLEARING PERMIT. YOU OBVIOUSLY CAN TAKE UNDER CONSIDERATION THE CONSERVATION ADVISORY BOARD'S RECOMMENDATION. AND THEN SHOULD YOU APPROVE THE TREE CLEARING PERMIT FOR MR. DRAGONETTE, HE THEN WILL WORK WITH THE BUILDING PERMIT TO ACTUALLY GET THE PERMIT, AND THEN WILL WORK WITH THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT ON, YOU KNOW, SETTING THAT UP. SO THERE'S NO PUBLIC HEARING COMPONENT. THERE'S REALLY NO RESOLUTION PER SE. THE APPROVAL POWER FOR THE PERMIT COMES FROM THIS BOARD. LIKE I SAID, YOU CAN PLACE CONDITIONS LIKE WE DO WITH SITE PLAN OR SUBDIVISION, BUT THAT'S KIND OF SETTING THE STAGE FOR, FOR OUR DISCUSSION TONIGHT WITH THIS PROJECT. THANK YOU. JOSH. MR. DRAGONETTE, WOULD YOU BE ABLE TO PROVIDE US WITH THE OUTLINE OF YOUR PROJECT, THE OUTLINE AND ALSO THE, YOUR OVERALL, IN YOUR WORDS, YOUR INTENTION FOR THE TREE CLEANING? WELL, MY INTENTION IS JUST TO CLEAN UP PART OF THE PROPERTY BEHIND MY BUILDING. I KNOW I DON'T NEED APPROVAL TO CUT DEAD TREES, AND THERE'S A LOT OF DEAD STUFF ON THE GROUND. THERE'S A LOT OF DEAD STANDING TREES, BUT I JUST KIND OF WANT TO CLEAN UP PART OF WHAT I OWN BEHIND MY PARKING LOT. I WANT TO MAKE IT LOOK NICER. I THINK IT'LL INCREASE THE VALUE OF THE PROPERTY. YOU KNOW, I'M JUST LOOKING TO CLEAN UP PART OF MY PROPERTY. SO IS THERE ANY JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, IS THERE ANY PROPOSED FUTURE DEVELOPMENT IN THE REAR PART OF YOUR PROPERTY? THIS IS SOLELY FOR RIGHT NOW. 
          NO CLEANING. OKAY. THEN. AND THEN, MR. DRAGONETTE, WOULD YOU SAY I MEAN, THIS IS OBVIOUSLY, YOU KNOW, GOOGLE MAPS, GOOGLE EARTH. BUT JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, THIS RIGHT HERE IS YOUR BUILDING ON SOUTHWESTERN. YES. AND THEN BEHIND HERE IS WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING TO THE EXTENT OF WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING TO CLEAR. IS THIS ABOUT KIND OF IS THIS ABOUT I MEAN, OBVIOUSLY, LIKE I SAID, THIS IS FROM GOOGLE MAPS, BUT WOULD YOU SAY THIS IS KIND OF ACCURATE IN TERMS OF WHAT IT SORT OF KIND OF LOOKS LIKE BACK THERE? YES. OKAY. YEAH. THE PART I'M LOOKING TO CLEAR TOTALS, MAYBE HALF OF THE TREES THAT ARE STILL STANDING BEHIND MY OFFICE. SO IF, IF I CLEAR THE 255FT THAT I'M ASKING FOR, I THINK THERE'S STILL OVER 300FT TO THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY THAT'S WOODED, THAT'S GOING TO BE UNTOUCHED. SO JUST TO GO BACK TO THE TO THE SITE PLAN. SO HERE'S HIS SURVEY, HERE'S SOUTHWESTERN, AND THEN HERE'S THE PARKING LOT IN HIS BUILDING. AND THEN YOU'RE LOOKING TO CLEAR ABOUT 255FT. 
          AND THEN THE WIDTH OF YOUR, YOUR PROPERTY. AND THAT'S THE EXTENT AND THAT'S THE ENTIRE WIDTH OF THE PROPERTY. AND THAT TELLS US ABOUT, LIKE WE SAID, ABOUT 0.6 ACRES. AND THEN I'LL BRING UP THE CONSERVATION ADVISORY BOARD'S MEMO. SO THE CONSERVATION ADVISORY BOARD DID 
          [01:15:06]
GO OUT THERE. HIS COMMENTS WERE AS FOLLOWING. THERE ARE VIABLE MAPLE AND BLACK CHERRY TREES THAT ARE THERE. THERE ARE SOME A FEW DEAD ASH TREES. MOST OF THOSE HAVE ALREADY FALLEN DOWN. 
          THE LOT IS LESS THAN 200FT WIDE, AND BOTH NEIGHBORING LOTS ARE CLEARED BACK TO WHERE THE LANDOWNER IS PROPOSING TO CLEAR TO. THERE IS CONSIDERABLE VALUE IN THESE CUT CHERRY AND MAPLE TREES AS FIREWOOD. I WOULD PROPOSE THAT ANY. AFTER ANY CLEARING, THERE SHOULD BE A PLAN TO REESTABLISH SOME NEWLY PLANTED TREES. IN PLACE OF THE TREES THAT HAVE BEEN REMOVED FROM THE HALF ACRE LOT. SO THAT WAS THE MEMO AND RECOMMENDATION FROM THE CONSERVATION ADVISORY BOARD AND THE CAMI. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANTED TO QUICKLY JUST TOUCH ON YOUR ENGINEERING LETTER, WHICH I GAVE A HARD COPY TO EVERYONE AT THE TABLE AS WELL. IF YES, PLEASE. 
          ENGINEERING. SO TOWN ENGINEER CAMI GEROW. SO I THINK WHEN I FIRST SAW THE PLAN FOR THIS, YOU KNOW, IT OPENED A LOT OF QUESTIONS FOR ME. SOME HAVE BEEN ANSWERED. SO THE INTENT IS TO CUT ALL AND REMOVE ALL TREES IN THAT AREA. PROPERTY TO BOTH PROPERTY LINES ON EACH SIDE AND THEN TO THE DISTANCE TO THE BACK. ARE YOU REMOVING ALL STUMPS? YES. OKAY. DO YOU PLAN ON FILLING THAT THEN THOSE DIVOTS AND AND HOLES AND EVERYTHING. IT'S JUST GOING TO BE GRADED SMOOTH AND PLANTED WITH GRASS. OKAY. AND THEN I THINK THE ONLY REQUEST THAT ENGINEERING WOULD HAVE IS BECAUSE IT'S OVER HALF AN ACRE. WE'D ASK FOR SOME BASIC EROSION SEDIMENT CONTROLS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE WERE IN THE RAINY SEASON. IF YOU GET RAIN IN THE MIDDLE OF THIS CLEARING BEFORE THE GRASS ESTABLISHED, WE JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IT DOESN'T RUN THE SEDIMENT LADEN WATER OFF INTO YOUR NEIGHBORS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. I CAN TELL YOU MY PROPERTY IS LOWER THAN ANYONE ON EITHER SIDE AND AND THAT WOULD BE FINE AS WELL. 
          WE THAT'S WHAT WE WOULD LOOK FOR WHEN WE'RE OUT THERE TO MAKE SURE THAT RAINWATER IS NOT HITTING YOUR PROPERTY, WASHING DIRT SOIL, SURE. WHERE IT DOESN'T NEED TO GO. AND AS LONG AS EVERYTHING STAYS CONTAINED, WE WOULD NOT HAVE A PROBLEM. BUT THOSE WERE MY QUESTIONS. 
          STUMP REMOVAL, RESTORATION, WHICH HE'S ADDRESSED. AND THEN EROSION. SEDIMENT CONTROL. I HAVE ONE OTHER QUESTION. SO IF THE INTENT OF THE TREE CLEARING WAS TO CLEAN UP YOUR PROPERTY, AND IT'S NOTED THAT THERE ARE VIABLE LIVE TREES, WHAT WOULD BE THE I GUESS, WHY WOULDN'T WE JUST BE LOOKING AT CLEARING OUT ALL OF THE DEAD, THE DEAD TREES, IN ORDER TO THEN CLEAN UP AND ALLOW FOR THE NEW, THE EXISTING AND VIABLE TREES TO REMAIN VERSUS CLEAR CUTTING AND THEN HAVING, YOU KNOW, JUST A STRAIGHT GRASSLAND. I'M NOT SURE I'M UNDERSTANDING YOU. 
          YOU'RE ASKING ME, WHY AM I ASKING? WELL, WHY ARE YOU CLEAR? CUTTING, TAKING EVERYTHING DOWN, INCLUDING DEAD AND ALIVE TREES. RIGHT. WELL, I KNOW THE DEAD STUFF. I DON'T NEED ANY APPROVAL FOR. RIGHT. LIKE I SAID, I'M JUST TRYING TO CLEAN UP PART OF MY BACKYARD AT MY OFFICE. I WANT TO MAKE IT LOOK NICER. I DON'T HAVE PLANS ON DEVELOPING ANYTHING THERE RIGHT NOW, BUT IN THE BACK OF MY MIND, I MAY WANT TO PUT A GARAGE UP FOR MY USE SO IT WOULD HAVE TO BE CLEARED AT SOME POINT. AND YOU KNOW, I'M NOT AN ARBORIST, BUT I WOULD KIND OF DISAGREE AS TO THE VALUE OF THE TREES IN THERE. I THINK THERE'S FIVE BLACK CHERRY TREES. BACK THERE THAT ARE NOT VERY BIG. I JUST DON'T THINK THERE'S A LOT OF VALUE. I DON'T THINK THERE'S A LOT OF VALUE IN MAPLE TREES. BOARD MEMBERS. DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANYTHING ELSE TO ASK OR ADD? I DO REMEMBER RYAN. HI. HOW MANY ALIVE TREES? NOT THE DEAD ASH OR ANY OF THOSE. WOULD YOU BE CUTTING DOWN APPROXIMATELY? WELL, I DID WALK THROUGH AND DO A ROUGH COUNT. I CAME UP WITH ABOUT 118 TREES STANDING. I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY OF THOSE. I MEAN, THERE'S QUITE A FEW ASH DEAD ASH IN THAT 118. SO I, I DON'T HAVE A NUMBER OF MAPLE AND OAK OR I'M SORRY, CHERRY, I JUST WAS THINKING JUST BETWEEN THE ONES THAT ARE ALREADY DEAD, THAT YOU AND THE ONES THAT ARE THRIVING. THAT'S WHAT I WAS TRYING TO FIGURE OUT. HOW MANY ARE STILL THRIVING. MY ESTIMATE WOULD BE MAYBE MAYBE 75 OR 80 LIVE TREES. OKAY. AND YOU HAVE NO PLANS ON KEEPING ANY OF THOSE. CORRECT. I'M LOOKING TO, TO, TO GET APPROVAL TO CUT THEM DOWN. OKAY. THANK YOU. YES. ANY OTHER BOARD MEMBERS? YEAH. DID YOU GET A CHANCE TO SEE THE CONSERVATION ADVISORY BOARD'S MEMO BEFORE THE MEETING? NO, NO. SO JOSH READ IT IN. ONE OF THEIR 
          [01:20:01]
RECOMMENDATIONS IS AFTER THE TREES ARE CLEARED, PLANTING SOME NEW TREES TO REPLACE THE LIVE ONES THAT WERE CUT DOWN. DO YOU HAVE AN OPINION ON THAT? I DO HAVE AN OPINION ON THAT. I WOULD DISAGREE WITH THAT. I'M ASKING TO BE ABLE TO CUT TREES DOWN. I DON'T KNOW WHY IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE. YOU KNOW WHY? TO CUT THEM DOWN AND THEN REPLANT THEM. WELL, THERE'S NO FUTURE PLANS FOR DEVELOPMENT. WHY ARE WE CLEAR CUTTING AGAIN? I, I JUST I FEEL IT'S MY PROPERTY. I'M JUST TRYING TO CLEAN UP PART OF MY BACKYARD AT THE OFFICE THERE COLLECTS A LOT OF GARBAGE THAT BLOWS IN, IF I MAY, ATTORNEY JOSEPH GOGUEN, THE REASON THE THE PLANNING BOARD IS ASKING THIS QUESTION IS BECAUSE SECTION 243, ONE OF THE TOWN CODE SAYS PURPOSE AND INTENT. THE TOWN OF HAMBURG RECOGNIZES THE VALUE OF TREES AND THAT THEIR PRESERVATION OF THESE RESOURCES IS NECESSARY. NECESSARY TO PROTECT THE HEALTH, SAFETY AND GENERAL WELFARE OF THE TOWN. TREES PROVIDE SHADE AND IT GOES ON AND ON. AND SO THAT'S THE TOWN'S POSITION. SO YOU'RE SAYING, WHY CAN'T I JUST CUT MY TREES DOWN IS BECAUSE THERE'S ACTUALLY A CODE SECTION IN THE TOWN LAW THAT SAYS, THIS BOARD HAS TO DO THIS EVALUATION TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT YOU CAN CUT DOWN TREES ON YOUR PROPERTY. I KNOW, I UNDERSTAND, I'M ANSWERING. SO, SIR, I'M ANSWERING YOUR QUESTION. YOU'RE ASKING WHY CAN'T I JUST CUT MY TREES DOWN? BECAUSE IN THE TOWN OF HAMBURG, THERE'S A SPECIFIC CODE SECTION THAT SAYS YOU CAN'T JUST CUT YOUR TREES DOWN, THAT THIS BOARD HAS AN OBLIGATION TO DO THE REVIEW UNDER THIS SECTION OF LAW. YEAH, AND I UNDERSTAND THAT. THAT'S WHY I'M HERE SEEKING APPROVAL. AND I DIDN'T JUST CUT THEM DOWN. 
          PART OF MY FORWARD THINKING IS I'M GETTING NEAR THE END OF MY WORKING LIFE. AND I'M THINKING THAT WHEN I WANT TO SELL MY PRACTICE IN MY OFFICE, IF PART OF IT IS CLEARED, IT'S GOING TO MAKE IT MAYBE MORE VALUABLE AND DESIRABLE TO THE NEXT PERSON. AND SO IF I CAN DO SOME WORK NOW TO HELP ME MOVE THIS PLACE IN A FEW YEARS, IT'S GOING TO PAY OFF. ANY OTHER BOARD MEMBERS. OKAY. SO JOSH, WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE? SO THERE ARE A NUMBER OF THINGS THAT THE BOARD CAN DO. YOU CAN APPROVE THE PERMIT WITH CONDITIONS. YOU CAN TABLE THE PROJECT AND ASK FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. YOU CAN, YOU KNOW, ASK FOR, YOU KNOW, THE CONSERVATION BOARD TO PROVIDE ANOTHER RECOMMENDATION. YOU CAN DO A NUMBER OF THINGS. I'M GOING TO TAKE LIBERTY HERE. 
          AND SOUNDS LIKE THERE'S SOME THINGS THAT THE BOARD STILL HAS SOME SOME QUESTIONS ON. I KNOW MEMBER RYAN, YOU ASKED ABOUT SPECIFIC TREE COUNT. WOULD IT BE HELPFUL FOR THE BOARD? OBVIOUSLY, YOU KNOW, WE PULLED UP GOOGLE MAPS AND WE HAVE THE ACTUAL SURVEY. WOULD IT BE HELPFUL FOR ACTUAL PICTURES OF THE TREES AND, AND OTHER DOCUMENTATION LIKE THAT? SO YOU'RE GETTING AN IDEA OF WHAT'S DEAD, WHAT'S LIVE, WHAT'S ON THE PROPERTY. WOULD YOU WANT MORE PHOTO DOCUMENTATION TO HELP YOU MAKE A DECISION? YOU HAVE A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT THINGS THAT YOU CAN ASK FOR AT THIS TIME. BOARD MEMBERS, ANY COMMENTS? I GOT A QUESTION FOR JOE. HOW MUCH COULD HE CLEAR WITHOUT OUR APPROVAL? UP TO TEN TREES. ALL RIGHT. AND THEN THERE'S ANOTHER SECTION. KIMMY, YOU ALLUDED TO THIS EROSION CONTROL. AND JOSH, YOU KNOW, DOES THAT REQUIRE A SEPARATE PERMIT? IF IT'S MORE THAN 200 ZERO SQUARE FEET IS CHAPTER 107. ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH THAT? I AM NOT FAMILIAR WITH THAT. SO ISN'T IT ANY JUST ANY JUST OVER HALF ACRE ALSO TO GO BACK GO BACK REALLY QUICKLY. TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, MEMBER CLARK, THE TOWN DOES HAVE A DEFINITION. DEFINITION OF CLEAR CUTTING AND THE DEFINITION IN OUR TREE MANAGEMENT LAW, SUBSECTION 243 IS THE COMPLETE CUTTING AND REMOVING OF AN ENTIRE STAND OF TREES, OR THE COMPLETE CLEARING OF TREES IN THE TOWN OF HAMBURG, YOU CAN DO UP TO ONE QUARTER ACRE WITHOUT A PERMIT. IT'S WHEN YOU'RE DOING ONE QUARTER ACRE OR MORE WHERE THE PLANNING BOARD BECOMES THE APPROVAL AUTHORITY WHEN IT'S NOT IN CONJUNCTION WITH A SITE PLAN. SO THAT'S WHY HE'S BEFORE YOU TODAY, BECAUSE HE'S LOOKING TO CLEAR CUT MORE THAN THAT ONE ACRE THAT'S ALLOWED BY THE CODE. WELL, QUARTER, QUARTER, QUARTER ACRE. 
          SO COULD HE MEMBER STEWART, COULD HE CLEAR CUT A QUARTER NOW AND TWO YEARS, TWO YEARS FROM NOW, COME BACK AND ASK FOR ANOTHER QUARTER? IF HE CHOSE TO DO THAT, THE CODE DOESN'T REALLY SET TIME FRAMES PER SE. THAT'S MY QUESTION. YEAH. AT THAT POINT, THE PERMIT CAN BE GIVEN. YOU KNOW, IF IT'S LESS THAN THE QUARTER ACRE, THE PERMIT CAN BE GIVEN BY THE CODE ENFORCEMENT WITHOUT HAVING TO COME TO THE BOARD. IT'S THAT PART OF IT. YOU'RE ASKING ABOUT WHAT'S, YOU KNOW, THE SERIAL APPLICATION WHERE YOU DO THE APPLICATION, COME BACK AGAIN 
          [01:25:02]
AND DO AN APPLICATION. YOU CAN SEE THAT WITH MINOR SUBDIVISIONS TO WHERE SOMEBODY CAN DO A MINOR SUBDIVISION, THEN COME BACK TWO YEARS LATER AND DO ANOTHER MINOR SUBDIVISION. AT THIS POINT, THERE IS NOTHING IN THE TOWN CODE THAT PREVENTS IT. IN FACT, ON THAT SUBDIVISION ISSUE, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT IS HOPEFULLY GOING BEFORE CODE REVIEW TO INCLUDE A SERIAL APPLICATION CLAUSE THAT WOULD PREVENT THAT. RIGHT NOW, THERE IS NOTHING IN THE TOWN CODE THAT WOULD PREVENT IT. IT'S THAT PROVERBIAL LOOPHOLE SITUATION, SIMILAR TO THE ONE THAT WHERE THE LANGUAGE IS ABUTTING INSTEAD OF FROM THAT HAPPENS, YOU KNOW, YOU WRITE THE CODE THE BEST YOU CAN. AND SOMETIMES THERE'S A SECTION THAT CAN BE WORKED AROUND. THAT'S WHY CODES GET LONGER AND LONGER AND LONGER. AND THEN JUST, JUST TO PIGGYBACK OFF OF ATTORNEY GORDON'S POINT, SO THE, THE CLEAR CUTTING THAT I JUST MENTIONED, EVEN THOUGH, YOU KNOW, MORE THAN A QUARTER ACRE, YOU KNOW, REQUIRES THE, THE APPROVAL BY THE PLANNING BOARD UP TO THAT QUARTER ACRE STILL DOES NEED APPROVAL BY THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT. AND THEY DO OFTEN PUT ON CONDITIONS. THEY DO INSPECTIONS, THEY DO THINGS OF THAT SORT. SO I DON'T WANT TO FRAME IT AS IF, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN JUST COME IN, GET A PERMIT, AND THEN, YOU KNOW, SIX MONTHS LATER, DO IT. YOU KNOW, THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT DOES HAVE RECORD OF IT. THEY KEEP RECORD OF IT. NOW, THAT'S NOT TO SAY THAT, YOU KNOW, THINGS CAN'T BE SNUCK IN, BUT THERE ARE, YOU KNOW, YOU STILL HAVE TO DO GET A PERMIT AND APPROVAL BY THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT TO CLEAR CUT. IT'S NOT JUST A FREE FOR ALL WHERE YOU'RE ABLE TO JUST JUST CLEAR CUT. SO THERE IS THAT PROVISION THAT'S IN THERE RIGHT NOW. SO GOING BACK TO THE ORIGINAL POINT AT HAND THOUGH, IS THERE IS THERE OTHER INFORMATION THAT THE PLANNING BOARD WOULD WANT FROM THE APPLICANT BEFORE MAKING A DECISION ON, ON THE CLEAR CUTTING PERMIT MEMBERS? I WOULD. SO ARE YOU GOING TO PUT IN LAWN AFTER AFTER? YES, YES. 
          LIKE I SAID, THE STUMPS ARE GOING TO COME OUT. IT'S GOING TO BE GRADED SMOOTH AND THEN PLANT GRASS. AND YOU WOULD STILL BE OPPOSED TO A FEW ORNAMENTAL TREES THROUGHOUT THERE. YOU JUST WANT TO OPEN FIELD, CORRECT? CORRECT. THERE'S THERE'S STILL, I THINK I, I THINK THERE'S GOING TO BE STILL MORE LAND OF UNTOUCHED STANDING TREES THAN WHAT I'M CUTTING. I'M NOT CUTTING ALL THE WAY TO THE END OF MY PROPERTY LINE. HOW MUCH HOW MUCH IS LEFT IS GOING TO BE LEFT. I THINK IT'S ABOUT 300FT. I THINK WHAT MIGHT BE HELPFUL, MR. DRAGON, IS IF WHETHER IT'S YOU OR I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHO YOU WOULD HIRE, BUT HAVING SOMEBODY TAKE AN AERIAL. AND SO, YOU KNOW THAT THAT SURVEY THAT YOU GAVE TO US THAT HAS THE THE HATCHING. YES. HAVING AN AERIAL, I THINK MIGHT BE HELPFUL BECAUSE IT'LL SHOW WHAT'S THE EXISTING FOLIAGE, AND THEN IT'LL SHOW THE EXTENT OF WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING TO TO CLEAR. SO IT'LL SHOW THE BACK HALF OF YOUR PROPERTY FOR THE BOARD TO SEE WHAT'S GOING TO REMAIN. AND IT'LL ALSO GIVE THEM THE ABILITY TO SEE OF WHAT'S WHAT'S GOING TO BE CLEAR. BECAUSE WHEN WE PULL UP, OBVIOUSLY WHEN WE PULL UP THE, IT'S KIND OF IT'S HARD TO TELL WHERE, WHERE THE, WHERE THE EXTENT OF THEIR PROPERTY. AND OBVIOUSLY YOUR PROPERTY IS VERY LONG AND IT, YOU KNOW, IT GOES BACK IT'S LONG AND IT'S VERY DEEP. BUT I THINK IF YOU'RE ABLE TO, WHETHER IT'S YOUR SURVEYOR OR WHOEVER HAVING AN AREA, IT COULD EVEN BE AS SIMPLE AS, YOU KNOW, PRINTING OUT AN AERIAL OF YOUR PROPERTY AND THEN DOING THE SAME THING, KIND OF HATCHING OVER WHAT THE EXTENT OF YOUR LOOKING, WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING TO CLEAR. BECAUSE I THINK THAT MIGHT BE HELPFUL. GIVING AN IMAGE TO THE BOARD OF WHAT'S GOING TO REMAIN VERSUS WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED TO BE TO BE CLEARED. DOES THAT WORK FOR THE BOARD? I KIND OF JUST THREW THAT OUT THERE. YEAH. THE PICTURE OF THE AERIAL, WHAT YOU JUST HAD, AND MAYBE HAVE HIM COME UP THERE JUST TO KIND OF GIVE US AN IDEA OF WHERE. YEAH. SO THE SO YEAH, SO WHAT I WAS MENTIONING WAS, WHAT I WOULD SUGGEST HAPPENED IS THAT AND I CAN PROVIDE YOU THE, THE AERIAL. 
          MR. DRAGON, BECAUSE WE HAVE THE CHALLENGES, WE'LL PULL UP THE GIS OF THE EXISTING. YOU KNOW WHAT THE LOT EXISTS LOOKS LIKE RIGHT NOW. AND THEN THAT SAME HATCHING THAT WAS ON THAT PLAN. 
          HE'LL OVERLAY IT ONTO A DRAWING TO SHOW YOU WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED TO BE CLEARED, AND THEN IT'LL SHOW THE REST OF HIS PROPERTY OF WHAT'S GOING TO STAY. AND I THINK IT'LL GIVE YOU A BETTER IMAGE OF WHAT HE'S WHAT HE'S LOOKING TO DO. ARE YOU ABLE TO OPEN THAT PHOTO UP ANY MORE THAN THAT OR. NO, IT'LL IT'LL ONLY SO LIKE, I WON'T IT DOESN'T ALLOW ME TO LIKE, DROP MYSELF IN AND LIKE, SHOW WHAT'S IN THERE THE BEST. CAN I JUST TAKE A KIND OF WALK UP THERE AND. YEAH, SURE. I WAS JUST. OKAY. I MEAN, IF I CAN, CAN I POINT IT OUT ON THERE RIGHT NOW? YOU CAN COME RIGHT UP. YEAH, YEAH. THAT'LL HELP. THE COURT. YES. YEAH. YEAH. 
          OKAY. I, I KNOW THIS IS THE POND THAT GALLO HAS ON HIS PROPERTY AND THE BACK OF MY PROPERTY COMES HERE WITH A LITTLE MORE AT THE END OF THESE, THE BACKYARDS OF THIS 
          [01:30:04]
NEIGHBORHOOD HERE. SO THIS IS ABOUT THE END OF MY PROPERTY. AND AND I'M ONLY PROPOSING TO COME TO ABOUT HERE. I DON'T EVEN I DON'T I DON'T EVEN GET NEAR HIS POND. SO. I MEAN, LIKE I SAY, I THINK THERE'S GOING TO BE MORE STANDING TREES LEFT THAN WHAT I'M CUTTING DOWN. 
          MEMBER RYAN, WOULD YOU BE OPEN TO MAYBE LEAVING A BORDER ON EITHER SIDE FOR THE NEIGHBORS THAT IT'S NOT JUST AN OPEN FIELD? WELL, THE BORDER OF TREES GOING DOWN THE SIDES, LIKE BORDERING YOUR PROPERTY. WELL, THE ONLY NEIGHBOR HERE IS THE THRUWAY DEPARTMENT. OKAY, I OR I DON'T, I MEAN, IN THEIR CLEAR CUT ALL THE WAY BACK AND THE OTHER SIDE IS, IS GALLO'S AND MILLIGAN'S AND THEIR CLEAR CUT ALL THE WAY BACK THAT'S FENCED. AND THERE'S A FENCE ON THIS SIDE ALONG THE THRUWAY, THE THRUWAY AUTHORITY AND THE THE ONLY HOUSES OR RESIDENCES ARE ARE BACK HERE. AND I'M GOING TO STOP WAY UP HERE. OKAY. ROUGHLY. I MEAN, AND AGAIN, THERE'S 250 OR 300FT UNTOUCHED. OKAY. I GUESS I STILL WOULD WOULD LIKE TO SEE A BUFFER ON GALLO'S SIDE THEN JUST I UNDERSTAND THE OTHER SIDE IS THE NEW YORK THRUWAY, BUT AT LEAST A LINE OF TREES ON GALLO'S SIDE. THEN HAVING IT JUST A CLEAR CUT. THAT'S JUST. 
          HE'S NOT GOING TO STOP. NO. GALLO'S GOES ALL THE WAY UP. HE COMES DOWN ABOUT HERE, SO HE'S THERE'S AREA THERE, AND BILL'S GOT A LOT OF HIS OWN LANDSCAPING AND STUFF IN THAT AREA THERE. PLUS HE'S GOT VEHICLES OVER THERE TOO. SO. THEN WHAT IS THAT? I KNOW WHERE YOUR BUILDING IS. IS THE RED DOT. WHAT IS THE BLUE DOT? ISN'T THAT GALLO'S? IS THAT THE GAMING PLACE? MILLIGAN'S OKAY. AND THEY'RE CLEAR CUT RIGHT UP. I MEAN, THEY'RE, THEY DON'T HAVE ANY STANDING TREES. THEY GOT TWO TREES OUT FRONT, 2 OR 3 TREES. WOULD THE BOARD WANT THOSE TWO SUGGESTIONS OF AN AERIAL WITH THE SAME KIND OF EXTENT OF WHERE MR. DRAGONETTE WANTS TO, TO CLEAR AND THEN JUST EXISTING PHOTOS, EXISTING CONDITIONS, PHOTOS OF WHAT THE SITE LOOKS LIKE RIGHT NOW. JUST THAT THE BOARD HAS AN IDEA OF WHAT IT CURRENTLY LOOKS LIKE, OTHER THAN JUST A GOOGLE MAPS IMAGE. YES, I WOULD REQUEST THE EXISTING CONDITIONS DOCUMENTATION AS WELL AS THE AERIAL OVERLAY WITH THE PROPOSED LINE DELINEATION OF CLEAR CUTTING, AND ALSO RECOGNIZE THAT I WILL NOT SUPPORT A BUILDING PERMIT, A TREE CLEARING PERMIT WITHOUT ANY ADDITIONAL TREES BEING PLANTED. IT'S BEEN NOTED BY THE CAB. IT ALSO HAS BEEN NOTED THAT THE PURPOSE OF THIS IS SOLELY TO CLEAN UP, NOT NECESSARILY FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT, AND THAT WE CAN'T. I'M NOT IN SUPPORT OF JUST CLEAR CUTTING TO CLEAR CUT. ANY OTHER THOUGHTS? I CONCUR. THERE'S ANOTHER QUESTION JUST TO GET ALL THE STUFF THAT I'M THINKING OF OUT EARLY AND NOT CHANGE THE GOALPOST LATER. IF YOU DID CLEAR CUT AND IT'S BASICALLY A LAWN, WHAT IS THAT GOING TO MEAN FOR CHEMICALS? TREATING THE LAWNS STUFF FOR WEEDS, WE CAN PUT CONDITIONS ON THE CLEAR CUTTING. COULD WE LIMIT SOME OF THOSE TYPES OF THINGS? BECAUSE I'M THINKING LIKE THE THE ADVERSE IMPACTS OF LAWN, CAN WE MITIGATE THOSE? YEAH. THIS BOARD HAS THE AUTHORITY TO PLACE CONDITIONS ON APPROVAL FOR A CLEAR CUTTING PERMIT. OKAY. THANK YOU. MR. DRAGNA. DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? SO THE BOARD IS ASKING FOR FOR TWO THINGS. ONE, I CAN PROVIDE YOU THE AERIAL FROM LIKE THE TOWN'S GIS THAT SHOWS LIKE THE EXTENT OF YOUR PROPERTY, LIKE WITH THE FOLIAGE. AND THEN I'LL GIVE IT TO YOU TO JUST KIND OF HATCH OUT THAT SAME EXTENT OF WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING TO CLEAR. 
          AND THEN ARE YOU ABLE TO, YOU KNOW, WHETHER IT'S ON YOUR IPHONE OR YOUR SMARTPHONE, IT TAKES SOME PICTURES OF THE EXISTING CONDITIONS REALLY OF, YOU KNOW, THE AREA YOU WANT TO CLEAR, YOU KNOW, EVEN BACK SOME JUST SO THAT THE BOARD HAS AN IDEA OF WHAT'S CURRENTLY EXISTING AND BRINGING THAT ON. MAY 20TH. SURE. OKAY. SO THIS IS MORE COMFORTABLE TABLING HIM THE MAY 20TH WITH THOSE TWO REQUESTS. YES, YES, YES. WE'LL BE TABLED UNTIL MAY 20TH. OKAY. 
          I WILL BE IN TOUCH TO GET YOU THAT THAT AERIAL SO THAT YOU CAN GET AHEAD OF IT AND SUBMIT IT TO ME AND I'LL GET IT TO THE BOARD. ARE YOU HERE TOMORROW? I AM ALL RIGHT. YEP. OKAY. OKAY. 
          [01:35:06]
THANK YOU. SOUNDS GOOD. ARE THE NEXT ITEM ON OUR AGENDA IS TEN LIVES CLUB, AND WE CAN HAVE CHAIRWOMAN GRONIGEN JOIN US AGAIN. I DON'T KNOW THAT ANYBODY CARES, BUT THEY DIDN'T SHUT MY MIC OFF, DID THEY? NOPE. OKAY. NO. LAST TIME I CHECKED, IT WAS 4 TO 1. OH, NOW IT'S 4 TO 2, 4 TO 2. SEE, IT WAS A LONG WALK. OKAY, THAT WAS A NICE BREAK. IS THERE. WE DON'T 
          [5. Ten Lives Club Inc. – Requesting a use variance for the expansion of rescue services  to be located at 3747 Lakeshore Road ]
HAVE ANYTHING ELSE. OUR LAST CASE FOR THIS EVENING WAS TEN LIVES. OH, SORRY. WE HAVE ONE MORE CASE. SO THE THE ATTORNEY FOR THAT PROJECT IS NOT HERE, BUT THEY WILL BE HERE. SHOULD THIS BOARD TABLE THE PROJECT FOR A PUBLIC HEARING. DO YOU WANT ME TO KIND OF GO IN, OR DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING YOU WANTED TO ADD FOR THIS PROJECT? SO WE'RE NOT GOING TO HEAR IT TONIGHT OR WAIT, I DON'T I'M I'M SORRY. I WAS IT WAS A LONG WALK. I WAS THINKING I WAS SAYING THAT THE, THE APPLICANTS OR THE ATTORNEY FOR THE PROJECT WHO WAS AT THE ZONING BOARD LAST NIGHT, SHE IS NOT HERE TONIGHT, BUT SHE IS ABLE TO SHE IS GOING TO BE AVAILABLE FOR IF THIS BOARD DECIDES TO TABLE THIS PROJECT FOR A PUBLIC HEARING, BECAUSE WE'RE. THE REASON IT'S BACK BEFORE THE PLANNING BOARD IS THIS PROJECT AT 3747 LAKESHORE ROAD RECEIVED A USE VARIANCE LAST NIGHT FROM THE ZONING BOARD. I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY WHAT THAT MEANS. SO THE ZONING OF THE PROPERTY AT 3747, WHICH USED TO BE A GENTLEMAN'S CLUB, IT WAS ZONED M THREE. THE ZONING IS STAYING THE SAME. SO THE ZONING IS STILL GOING TO BE M THREE. THE USE VARIANCE NOW ALLOWS THE USE OF A RESCUE FACILITY TO BE WITHIN THE EXISTING BUILDING ON 3747 LAKESHORE ROAD, SO THE ZONING ISN'T CHANGING. THE USE VARIANCE NOW ALLOWS FOR THAT KIND OF USE. IT COMES BACK BEFORE THE PLANNING BOARD BECAUSE WE DO CHANGE OF USE APPROVAL. AND EVEN THOUGH IT'S USED USING THE EXISTING BUILDING, WE DO GIVE SITE PLAN APPROVAL. AND TYPICALLY, AS YOU GUYS KNOW, WHAT USE VARIANCE IS IF THERE'S AN EXISTING SERVING EXISTING SURVEY OR AN EXISTING BUILDING LAYOUT, WE USUALLY USE THAT AS THE SITE PLAN. AND WE'RE APPROVING THE CHANGE OF USE FROM GENTLEMAN'S CLUB TO TO RESCUE FACILITY. I'LL TAKE NOTE THAT THE ZONING BOARD DID NOT PLACE ANY CONDITIONS ON THE USE VARIANCE THAT WAS GRANTED LAST NIGHT, BECAUSE THE SITE PLAN APPROVAL, THIS BOARD DOES HAVE THE ABILITY TO PLACE ANY CONDITIONS SHOULD YOU CHOOSE, SHOULD YOU CHOOSE TO DO SO. AND THIS PROJECT WILL REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING LIKE ALL SITE PLAN APPLICATIONS DO BEFORE THE TOWN. JOSH, HOW MANY CASES DO WE HAVE ON THE 20TH? RIGHT NOW WE HAVE SEVEN. WE DO HAVE THE ABILITY TO TABLE THEM TO. JUNE 3RD IS MEMBER SHIMURA IS THE PUBLIC HEARING. FOR THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT AND SEEKER. IS THAT SO? SEEKER SO WE ALREADY TOOK CARE OF SEEKER. WE ISSUED A NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND THERE IS NO SPECIAL USE PERMIT COMPONENT OF THIS PROJECT. IT IS SOLELY CHANGE OF USE APPROVAL AND SITE PLAN APPROVAL. SO GO AHEAD AND ADD I'LL TAKE THE HEAT FOR THE EIGHT CASES BECAUSE WHO KNOWS WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN. SOMEBODY MIGHT WITHDRAW. AND THEN SO WE'LL GO AHEAD AND SCHEDULE IT ON THE 20TH FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING. ATTORNEY GOGAN, IF I MAY REAL QUICK, JOSH, WE HAVE A SITE PLAN APPLICATION THAT INDICATES IT'S JUST FOR ANIMAL RESCUE. 
          YES. OKAY. THE REASON I BRING THAT UP IS I, I WAS PRESENT, I'M ALSO THE ATTORNEY FOR THE ZBA. AND THERE WAS DISCUSSION BY ACTUALLY THE OWNER WAS HERE AND SHE INDICATED THAT ONE OF THE POSSIBLE USES WOULD BE A CAT CAFE, WHICH WE DISCUSSED THAT AT THE LAST MEETING. RIGHT. 
          SO IS THAT, IS THAT PART OF THE APPLICATION THAT IT'S MORE THAN JUST THE RESCUE. THERE'S OTHER OTHER ACTIVITIES. OKAY. THANKS FOR THE CLARIFICATION. IS ALREADY ALLOWED TO USE. IT'S IN ZONE. SO THEY DON'T NEED A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR THAT. IT'S JUST THE HOSPITAL. RIGHT? RIGHT. THAT'S RIGHT. OKAY. OKAY. WELL NO, NO IT'S THE THAT IS THAT IS M3 INDUSTRIAL. SO THAT'S NOT A THAT'S NOT A PERMITTED USE. SO THE SPECIAL USE WOULD HAVE TO INCLUDE THE 
          [01:40:01]
CAT CAFE, NOT JUST RESCUE. SO BECAUSE GET YOUR MIC. I'M SORRY. SO THIS IS THIS IS THE UNIQUE PIECE ABOUT ABOUT USE VARIANCES. SO WHEN WE GRANT I'LL USE LIKE THE CANNABIS PLACES THAT WE'VE THAT HAVE BEEN HAPPENED BEFORE. WHEN YOU GRANT THE USE VARIANCE, IT THEN DOESN'T COME BACK TO THE PLANNING BOARD FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT. SO A LOT OF TIMES WHAT WE RECOMMEND IS ON THOSE USE VARIANCES THAT YOU PLACE THE SAME CONDITIONS YOU WOULD IN THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT ON THE USE VARIANCE CONDITION. SO WHAT THIS BOARD IS REVIEWING IS SOLELY CHANGE OF USE AND SITE PLAN APPROVAL. NOW OBVIOUSLY YOU HAVE THE ABILITY TO PLACE CONDITIONS ON THE SITE PLAN APPROVAL PIECE. BUT THIS PROJECT IS NOT COMING BACK BEFORE US FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT. SO THE THAT'S ALREADY BEEN DECIDED. THE USE VARIANCE ALLOWS FOR WHAT THEY DESCRIBED ON THE USE VARIANCE APPLICATION, WHICH I BELIEVE WAS RESCUE FACILITY AND CAT CAFE. NOW OBVIOUSLY THIS BOARD CAN ON THE SITE PLAN CONDITIONS SPECIFY YOU KNOW IF YOU KNOW IT SHOULD CHANGE, YOU KNOW IT'LL HAVE TO COME BACK TO THE PLANNING BOARD, ALL THOSE KIND OF THINGS. YOU CAN ADD THOSE CONDITIONS, BUT THE USES THAT ARE ALLOWED ARE CAT CAFE RESCUE FACILITY. SO BUT THE ONLY THING I'M GONNA SAY ABOUT THE CAT CAFE WHEN SHE WAS HERE PRIOR IS THAT THEY WEREN'T 100% SURE THEY DIDN'T HAVE A TENANT FOR THE CAT CAFE AND THAT IT WAS A GRAY AREA, BUT THEY GOT THE VARIANCE IN CASE THEY DO. RIGHT? RIGHT. BUT WHAT IF THEY DECIDE THAT THEY WANT TO PUT A KNITTING CLUB IN THERE SOMETHING? THEN THEY HAVE TO GO BACK TO THE ZBA? OR DO THEY HAVE TO COME BACK TO US? WELL, IF THEY WANT TO CHANGE, IF THEY WANT TO CHANGE THE CAT CAFE AND AND CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG. ATTORNEY GOGAN, THEIR USE VARIANCE WAS APPROVED FOR CAT CAFE RESCUE FACILITY. IF ANY OF THOSE TWO CHANGE AND THEY WANT TO CHANGE THAT, THEY HAVE TO THEN RESUBMIT FOR ANOTHER USE VARIANCE. I PERSONALLY I THINK THAT GIVEN THERE WAS A GRAY AREA THE LAST TIME THEY WERE HERE, AND BOARD MEMBERS, YOU CAN AGREE OR DISAGREE, BUT I'M JUST GOING TO THROW IT OUT THERE AND SEE IF THE CAT LICKS IT UP. COULDN'T RESIST. I THINK THAT WE SHOULD HAVE THE APPLICANT COME BACK AND SPECIFY WHAT SHE'S DOING, WHAT THEY'RE DOING, BECAUSE THERE'S A GRAY AREA. THIS BOARD WAS TOLD THAT THEY WEREN'T SURE THAT IT WAS GOING TO BE A CAT CAFE. NOW THEY GOT A VARIANCE FOR IT. BUT THE THE TESTIMONY TO US THAT DAY WAS THAT SHE WASN'T SURE THAT THAT'S WHAT THEY WERE GOING TO DO. AND I THINK I WOULD WANT THAT SPELLED OUT. ARE YOU LOOKING TO HAVE SO OBVIOUSLY, YOU KNOW, BRINGING THE APPLICANT HERE IN PERSON, BUT WOULD YOU BE LOOKING TO HAVE THEM EXPLAIN IT AND THEN STILL HOLD THE PUBLIC HEARING OR HAVE THEM COME JUST EXPLAIN IT AND THEN SCHEDULE A PUBLIC HEARING AFTERWARDS? MEMBER SURE. I WOULD SUPPORT HOLDING THE PUBLIC HEARING. AT THE SAME TIME. YEAH, YEAH. DON'T MAKE HIM COME BACK TWICE. WELL, THEY'LL HAVE TO COME BACK AT LEAST MAYBE TWICE, BUT WELL, THEY'RE GONNA HAVE TO COME BACK ANYWAYS, RIGHT? SO THEY CAN COME BACK ONCE FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING AND THE EXPLANATION. IT'S A PROJECT. WHAT ABOUT THE REST OF THE BOARD? DO WE HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING? BOARD MEMBERS? I AGREE WITH THE ONE MEETING, THE PUBLIC HEARING AND WHAT THEIR INTENT IS WITH THE TERM CAT CAFE. MEMBER OR ATTORNEY. 
          GOGAN. WHAT? I WAS JUST WONDERING IF IF YOU'RE GOING TO DO THAT, THERE'S ALREADY SEVEN IF YOU'RE GOING TO DO THAT AND THERE'S ALREADY SEVEN ITEMS ON THE AGENDA, DO YOU WANT TO PUSH THAT PUBLIC HEARING TO THE JUNE 3RD DATE INSTEAD OF PACKING IT ON ON THAT MAY 20TH? THAT WAS THAT WAS MY CONCERN FOR THE BOARD. THERE WERE I THINK WE BETTER PUSH IT TO THE 20TH THEN. 
          NO. JUNE 3RD, JUNE 3RD. SORRY, IS THE BOARD OR AT LEAST FOUR OF YOU IN AGREEING WITH MOVING IT TO JUNE 3RD? YES. YES, YES, YES. OKAY, I COUNTED FOUR, I COUNTED FIVE, BUT SINCE MY VOICE COUNTS TOO. SO SO WE'RE TABLING IT FOR JUNE 3RD. OKAY. AND I WILL ASK THAT THE APPLICANT COME IN PERSON TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTIONS. OKAY. IT'LL BE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND THE PUBLIC HEARING. PUBLIC HEARING. YEP. SO WE CAN DO BOTH. BUT THEN IT'S NOT GOING TO BE EIGHT CASES ON THE 20TH BECAUSE WE GOT SOME HEAVY HITTERS ON THE 20TH. YEP. OKAY. I ALSO WANT TO OH WELL, LET'S END THAT. AND THEN OTHER BUSINESS. I HAVE ONE ANNOUNCEMENT. YES. IS IT OTHER BUSINESS TIME? YES. OKAY. AND I'LL MAKE A, YOU KNOW, NOTICE ON THE THE AGENDA AND ALSO ON, YOU KNOW, THE TOWN'S WEBSITE, THE EDF POWER SOLUTIONS PROJECT THAT WAS GOING TO BE TABLED UNTIL MAY 20TH. I DID RECEIVE A CALL FROM TORY, THE APPLICANT WHO CAME BEFORE US, AND THEY'RE LOOKING TO BE TABLED INDEFINITELY, AND THEY WILL LET MY DEPARTMENT KNOW WHEN THEY'RE READY TO COME BACK. SO I'M NOT GOING TO CONTINUE TO TABLE THEM TWO WEEKS OUT. SO THEY'RE TABLED INDEFINITELY UNTIL THEY'RE READY TO SUBMIT A SITE PLAN APPLICATION OR, YOU KNOW, FURTHER DOCUMENTS FOR YOUR REVIEW. AND THAT WILL ADD THEM BACK TO THE AGENDA WHEN THEY ARE READY. SO KNOWING THAT, IS THERE STILL SEVEN CASES. EVEN SO, ME KNOWING THAT REMOVE THEM FROM MAY 20TH AND THERE'S STILL SEVEN CASES. OKAY, OKAY. WOW. 
          WE'RE POPULAR. WE'RE A POPULAR GROUP. WHAT CAN I TELL YOU? YEAH. OKAY. JUST TO GIVE AND LIKE I KIND OF ALWAYS DO, I'LL KIND OF GIVE AN OVERVIEW, YOU KNOW, MY SUBDIVISION OF LAND 
          [01:45:03]
UPDATES ARE BACK. PUBLIC HEARING FOR TEN LIVES CLUB. WE'RE BRINGING BACK THE FAIRGROUNDS PROJECT 716 STORAGE. WAIT WAIT WAIT WAIT. WE'RE NOT DOING THE TEN LIVES CLUB ON THE 20TH. SO THAT'S REMOVED. THANK YOU. OH MY GOSH. WHAT'S THE SCORE? SO WE HAVE WE HAVE ZERO LAKESHORE ROAD. MR. SANTA, MY SUBDIVISION UPDATES THE FAIRGROUNDS PROJECT 716 STORAGE IS LOOKING FOR AMENDED SITE PLAN APPROVAL. WE HAVE A MINOR SUBDIVISION AT LAKESHORE ROAD THAT WAS SUBMITTED. AND THEN WE HAVE A USE VARIANCE FOR BATTERY PROJECT. SO WE HAVE SOME HEAVY HITTERS ON THE 20TH. OKAY. THEN WE SHOULD. YEAH LET'S LEAVE. SO THEN WE HAVE SIX CASES SIX CASES RIGHT NOW. BUT HEAVY HITTERS. YEP. OKAY. SO LET'S JUST LEAVE IT AT THE SIX CASES TABLE. THE THE TEN LIVES TO THE THIRD BECAUSE SOME OF THOSE CASES ON THE 20TH ARE GOING TO BE GONNA BE GREAT. YEAH, IT'S GONNA BE FUN. AND ANYTHING ELSE. SO I GOT OKAY, CAN I ASK THE BOARD A QUESTION OR DO WE HAVE TO HAVE IT POSTED? CAN I ASK THE BOARD A, A CAN I ASK THE BOARD THEIR OPINION ON SOMETHING ON PROCESS. OKAY. IN FACT I'D RATHER IT BE ON, ON THE RECORD. OKAY. SO BOARD MEMBERS AND BILL WOULD KNOW THIS BECAUSE HE WAS A PREVIOUS CHAIR. WHEN WE HAVE COMMITTEES COME AND TALK TO GIVE US A REPORT. OKAY. THE FIRE DEPARTMENT CAB LWR P. THERE'S SOMETHING ELSE. TRAFFIC SAFETY, TRAFFIC, TRAFFIC, FIRE. SO WE USUALLY HAVE THEM GIVE THEIR REPORTS. WHEN JOSH AND CAMI GIVE THEIR GIVE THEIR INFORMATION. SO WE START THE MEETING. WE HEAR FROM THE FROM THE APPLICANT AND THEN WE OPEN UP TO THE DEPARTMENTS, IF YOU WILL. AND ALONG WITH THE BOARDS, WITH THE, THE BOARDS. MY QUESTION TO YOU IS, I WAS RECENTLY ASKED ABOUT THE BOARDS GIVING THEIR REPORT DURING A PUBLIC HEARING, AND I DIDN'T FEEL THAT THAT WAS RIGHT. AND THIS IS MY REASON. AND I WANTED TO KNOW IF YOU GUYS HAD ANY FEELING ON IT. THE REASON WHY I DON'T WANT THE BOARDS OR THE DEPARTMENTS TO GIVE THEIR OPINION DURING A PUBLIC HEARING IS BECAUSE IT TAKES AWAY FROM THE PUBLIC. IT TAKES AWAY FROM THE RESIDENTS TO SPEAK. AND NOT ONLY THAT, BUT A PUBLIC HEARING IS FOR THE APPLICANT AND FOR THE BOARD TO ASK QUESTIONS. ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS. RIGHT. 
          AND THEN THE APPLICANT WOULD HAVE TO RESPOND TO THOSE CONCERNS OF THE RESIDENT. 
          THAT'S HOW I FEEL. THAT'S WHAT A PUBLIC HEARING IS. DOES ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY? I, I AGREE, I THINK USE YOUR MIC PLEASE. SORRY, I, I AGREE, I THINK MEMBERS OF THOSE BOARDS CAN COME TO A PUBLIC HEARING AND SPEAK AS A MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC, RIGHT, BUT NOT NECESSARILY SPEAKING FOR THE BOARD. OKAY. BUT IT IS BECAUSE IT IS DIFFERENT. WE CONSIDER IT DIFFERENTLY. SO IT SHOULD BE PRESENTED DIFFERENTLY. BUT I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANYTHING WRONG WITH THE MEMBERS OF THAT BOARD EXPRESSING THEIR OWN OPINION. NO, NO, THAT'S NOT EVEN THE ISSUE. IT'S JUST IT'S IT'S IT'S STRICTLY ABOUT BOARDS AND DEPARTMENTS GIVING THEIR REPORT. AND MY, MY SUGGESTION IS THAT THEY GAVE THEIR REPORT. MY VIEW IS THAT THEY GIVE THEIR REPORT WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND THE ENGINEERING. AND THEN IT WOULD FALL IN WITH THE REST OF FIRE, YOU KNOW, WHATEVER TRAFFIC, WHATEVER. AND THAT'S WHAT I WANTED TO HEAR FROM THAT. YOU GUYS TIME TO DO THAT BECAUSE THAT THAT'S GOING TO THAT USUALLY COMES IN BEFORE THE PUBLIC HEARING. EXACTLY. SO THEY'D HAVE TO GET THEIR REPORTS DONE EARLIER. WELL, WE NOTIFY THEM RIGHT AWAY ANYWAYS. JOSH DOES, WE NOTIFY THEM WHEN WE'RE LOOKING FOR SOMETHING WE ORDER WHEN LIKE BEFORE IT EVEN COMES TO US BEFORE WE SEE IT, THE REPORTS ARE ALREADY ORDERED, SO WE HAVE PLENTY OF TIME. SOMETIMES THEY'LL COME BACK AND SAY, I CAN'T BE THERE, BUT I'M GOING TO GIVE, I'LL SEND THE REPORT. DID DID THEY INDICATE ANY REASON TO WHY THEY WOULD WANT. YOU SAID THAT THERE WAS REQUESTS TO DO IT DURING THE PUBLIC. THERE WAS NO REASON GIVEN. AND I THINK WE LEAVE IT THE WAY IT IS. I AGREE THAT THOSE REPORTS BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT THEY ARE DIFFERENT IN NATURE FROM A PUBLIC COMMENT, THAT THEY REMAIN TO BE PRESENTED WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, WITH THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT IN THAT COURSE OF ACTION, AND THAT IT'S NOT A PART OF THE PUBLIC HEARING. IT'S STILL A PART OF 
          [01:50:02]
THE PUBLIC RECORD. WHATEVER ENDS UP BEING SUBMITTED AS PART OF THE FILE IS STILL A PART OF THE PUBLIC RECORD, BUT A PUBLIC HEARING HAS A DIFFERENT INTENT. RIGHT. AND IT'S FOR THE RESIDENTS. AND THE OTHER THING IS, YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU'RE SITTING THROUGH THIS MEETINGS AND IF YOU HAVE TO GO THROUGH SOMETIMES WE MIGHT HAVE FIVE REPORTS, YOU KNOW, ON THESE BIGGER CASES. AND SOME OF THIS IS COMING DOWN. AND THAT'S WHY I WANTED TO CLARIFY THIS, BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, IF YOU'RE A RESIDENT, YOU DON'T WANT TO BE SITTING HERE TILL YOU KNOW, WHATEVER. SO IT WOULD SPEED UP THE PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS FOR JUST THE RESIDENTS AND THEN THE BOARDS OR THE, THE, THE BOARDS OR THE DEPARTMENTS CAN HAVE, THEY CAN SEND THEIR REPORT. 
          THEY DON'T HAVE TO COME AND GIVE IT IF THEY CAN'T MAKE IT. AND THEN THEY'RE. SO WE'RE ALL IN AGREEMENT TO THAT, YOU GUYS. YOU UNDERSTAND? OKAY, THEN I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING FURTHER. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE SCORE IS. GO, SABERS. I MAKE A MOTION TO ADJOURN. I SECOND THE MOTION. 
          OH, MY GOSH, MOTION'S BEEN. MOTION'S BEEN MADE TO ADJOURN THE MEETING. AND SECOND, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.