Conservation Board - November 7, 2006

C.B. Mtg. #11 Reg. Mtg. #11 November 7, 2006 7:00 PM Page 1

Minutes of the November 7, 2006 meeting of the CONSERVATION BOARD of the TOWN OF ORCHARD PARK, Municipal Center, Second Floor Conference Room, 4295 South Buffalo Street, Orchard Park, New York at 7:00 PM. Present were the following:

MEMBERS PRESENT: Richard Schechter, Chairman

Ann Bergantz

Thomas Jaeger

James Loesch

Frank Newton

George Schichtel

David Ward

OTHERS PRESENT:

Nan Ackerman, Councilwoman

Remy C. Orffeo, Planning Coordinator

Frank Brzezinski, L.A.

Randy Bebout, FRA Engineering

Scott Francis, McDonald’s USA LLC

Rob Pidanick, GPI

Ken Zollitsch, GPI

Raymond Waite, resident Auckland Avenue

Theresa Schosek, resident – Auckland Avenue

James Ball, owner Jim Ball Pontiac

Dennis Scully, Enidine, Inc. V.P. Engineering & Operations

Ted Karnath

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________

Chairman Schechter called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. by stating that in accordance to the provisions of the ethics law of the Town of Orchard Park it is incumbent upon any Conservation Board member with a financial or business relationship with any petitioner coming before this Board to disclose this relationship and, if warranted, to recuse him or herself from any matter involving the petitioner. Any petitioner coming before this Board who is a relative of, or has a financial or business relationship with, any officer or employee of the Town of Orchard Park, must disclose the nature and extent of such relationship in accordance with the ethics provisions of the Town of Orchard Park.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES:

A MOTION was made by Mrs. Bergantz, seconded by Mr. Jaeger, to accept the minutes of the September 5 , 2006 meeting.

THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

A MOTION was made by Mrs. Bergantz, seconded by Mr. Loesch, to accept the minutes of the October 3, 2006 meeting with the following additions; the meeting was held in the Basement Meeting room, not the second floor conference room; and with regards to the CMO discussion, under “4.7 - Minimum habitable floor area, for dwellings only, shall be in accordance with R-1

C.B. Mtg. #11 Reg. Mtg. #11 November 7, 2006 7:00 PM Page 2

Districts, Town of Orchard Park minimum”, Mrs. Bergantz had asked if there will be a maximum lot coverage.

THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED WITH THE ADDITIONS AS NOTED.

OLD BUSINESS

1. Conservation Easement requests:

Report from Mrs. Bergantz on review of the following properties:

· Mr. & Mrs. Kabza, 5605 Amor Duells Road. Requesting a 75-year Conservation Easement on 8 acres. Town Board referred to Conservation Board on 8/02/06. Report from Anne Bergantz.

Mrs. Bergantz stated that the Kabza’s agreed to combine the two parcels using a 50-foot strip. She further noted that the original request for a 30 year easement has been revised to 75-years.

· Mr. & Mrs. Slomka, 6310 Cole Road. Requesting a perpetual Conservation Easement on 8.67 acres. Town Board referred to Conservation Board on 9/20/06. Report from Anne Bergantz.

Mrs. Bergantz stated that a sign exists on the property requesting “fill”. She discussed the sign with Mr. Slomka and he told her that he is adding fill around the existing home and that he understands that he may not deposit the fill onto the area in the easement.

Mrs. Bergantz made a MOTION, seconded by Mr. Loesch to RECOMMEND APPROVAL of each of the Conservation Easement requests to the Town Board.

THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

OLD BUSINESS

1. C.B. File #28-06, McDonald USA, LLC, 3232 Orchard Park Road, NYS Routes 240 & 277, Zoned B2. Town Board referred to Conservation Board on 4/19/06. The Zoning Board of Appeals granted a variance for front yard parking on 6/20/06. Resubmission of landscape plan and landscape valuation form.

Date of Plan: 10/18/06

Landscape Architect: Heinrich W. Fischer

Plan Number: C-4

Date Plan Received: 10/19/06

Mr. Francis presented and explained the revised plan to the Board. The

total interior green space is 10.1%. He told the Board that the site will have two-drive thru’s and be pedestrian friendly. The Board members agree that the revised plan is a great improvement. Mr. Loesch established that the proposed retaining wall will be raised block with plantings inside of it.

C.B. Mtg. #11 Reg. Mtg. #11 November 7, 2006 7:00 PM Page 3

Mr. Jaeger made a MOTION, seconded by Mr. Schichtel to accept the presented revised plan.

The Chairman noted that a two-year Landscape Completion Bond (performance bond) in the full amount of the landscaping cost $36,436.00 or a certified check in the amount of $18,218.00 is to be presented to the Town Clerk prior to receipt of a building permit. All lighting is to be directed downward and toward the site and any dumpsters are to be screened. Approval is contingent upon acceptance by the Town Engineering Department.

THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

Planning Coordinator Remy Orffeo noted that several Planning Board members and Councilwoman Ackerman have concerns regarding the façade of the building. Mr. Bebout stated that he would meet with Councilwoman Ackerman to discuss the concerns she has with the proposed façade.

2. C.B. File #36-04, Jim Ball, Vacant Land Corner of Southwestern Blvd. and Mid County Drive, Zoned B-2. Re-submission of landscape plan and landscape valuation form.

Date of Plan: 9/11/05

Landscape Architect: Gerald T. Hood

Plan Number: A-1.2

Date Plan Received: 9/19/06

Mr. Ball presented a revised landscaping plan based on the Board’s comments from the May 2, 2006 meeting and a correspondence he received from the Town.

Mr. Jaeger stated that he would like the plan to indicate that the existing natural foliage and brush shall remain; this needs to be marked on the plan and be a part of the minutes.

Mr. Loesch stated that the plan meets what was previously discussed; however, he would like the Town Engineering Department and Mr. Ball’s engineering firm to certify that the drainage swail will keep the water run-off from impacting any of the neighboring lots.

Mr. Schichtel stated that he would like the berm area to be constructed when the soil is fairly dry.

Mr. Newton noted that he feels that the project will work out well if the right soil is used to construct the berm.

Mr. Waite of Auckland Avenue noted that he had not had the opportunity to review the revised plan and he briefly studied it, commenting on the following; the location of the berm, drainage, enforcement of “no parking” in an area denoted as a “fire lane” and questioned if the plantings will be guaranteed. The Chairman stated that a two-year bond, in the amount of $92,577.00 will be used to guarantee the plantings. Mr. Waite may contact the engineering

C.B. Mtg. #11 Reg. Mtg. #11 November 7, 2006 7:00 PM Page 4

department to review the drainage plan.

Mr. Waite stated that the tree spacing indicated on the revised plan is not adequate and does not comply with his understanding based on previous meetings with the petitioner. The members determined that an error exists on the revised plan. There is to be two rows of trees, 15-feet on center, staggered; the presented plan shows the trees planted, two rows, 30-feet on center. The members noted that the plan as submitted is not adequate.

Mr. Ball stated that the revised plan is exactly to the “T” and is based on the correspondence he received from the Town.

The Chairman read a portion of the May 16, 2006 correspondence that the Planning Department had sent to Mr. Ball as follows, “Spruce Trees: Plant trees 15’ on center”. (for reference purposes, this correspondence is listed in its entirety below)

JIM BALL BERM LANDSCAPING

1. Berm: It is very important to use well drained material.

2. Drainage: The berm should be engineered so that there are no drainage problems on the homeowners side.

3. Spruce Trees: Plant trees 15’ on center.

4. Naturalizing Material: Add a double row of plants, 2’ size and 4’ apart, staggered and random placing along the entire length of the owner’s side of the berm. Bare-root material could be used if planted after October 1. Earlier planting should use container plants.

Suggested naturalizing plant materials:

Red Stem Dogwood, cornus stolonfera

Grey Dogwood, cornus recemosa

Mr. Loesch read portions from the approved May 2006 minutes pertaining to what the Board wanted revised in Mr. Ball’s landscaping plan. (These minutes are listed below, in their entirety, for reference purposes.)

“The landscaping plan approved by the Conservation Board previously proposed the use of a fence to buffer the area residents. A revised landscaping plan is being presented by Mr. Ball for the Board’s review that was developed through on going meetings between Chairman Schechter, Town Board members Nan Ackerman and Stan Jemiolo, Jim Ball and the area neighbors. Chairman Schechter stated that a compromise has been developed that is acceptable to the Town and the neighbors. The plan was discussed at length and the following was determined:

A fence will not be installed; there are issues with the look of a fence and its longevity; the consensus is that a berm is more desirable. Mr. Ball proposes to install a berm in the 50 foot buffer area, closer to his property that will taper downward. It was established that it will be 20 feet wide at the base and 5 feet in height, with a 1 to 1-1/2 foot slope and be flat at the top.

C.B. Mtg. #11 Reg. Mtg. #11 November 7, 2006 7:00 PM Page 5

Mr. Schichtel noted that the material used for the berm is important to the success of how the plants will grow. The trees Colorado Spruce and any other coniferous trees delineated should be planted fifteen feet apart on center in two staggered rows.

He discussed having smaller deciduous such as Dogwood, Forsythia, Vibernum, etc., being planted (on the neighborhood side of the berm) to create a naturalized area that will eventually grow to create a thickened dense screen that will help buffer if the Colorado Spruce looses their bottom branches to a disease. He feels the use of crown vetch is an excellent idea, rather than the use of mulch.

Mr. Loesch agrees that what is used for the berm is important. He noted that the berm, with respect to drainage should be subject to approval by the Town Engineering Department. He would like to insure that the drainage does not create a problem for the neighbors. He supports Mr. Schichtel’s suggestion to have tree plants at fifteen foot centers; this will fill in quicker and he likes the idea of having a naturalizing of the under story. This will give the area a more natural look and additional screening. He believes the “grubbing” process will cause a loss of vegetation; some areas exist with thin plant material. So, anything we do to aid with screening now will help the residents. The 7’ piece on the plan marked “snow loading” should be shown as 5’. He supports Mr. Schichtel’s suggestion to have the trees planted at an 8 to 10 foot stagger at the back.

Mr. Bergantz noted that she agrees with the aforementioned suggestions. However, she would like trees and bushes added to provide additional protection in the area where the residents will not have the berm. The members discussed preserving an existing natural buffer area that exists on the southern most portion of the conservation easement abutting Southwestern Boulevard. They determined that the area must be flagged to insure that the “grub” area is left undisturbed as a natural buffer area to the residents. All existing trees and brush will remain.

Mr. Waite inquired about the conservation easement area being disturbed to construct the berm. Councilman Jemiolo explained that the Town Board will lift the restriction during the construction of the berm and reinforce the original conditions of the conservation easement upon completion of construction. He believes the Town Board favors the proposed berm and natural vegetation rather constructing a fence. It was further discussed that no construction trucks or maintenance vehicles or any activity conceivable shall be allowed to access the subject property (or Conservation Easement Area) from Auckland Avenue from now until perpetuity. They must access the subject property (or Conservation Easement Area) from Mid County Drive and Southwestern Boulevard.

Mr. Waite asked why there is a 30 foot paved area on the site plan; he questions what it will be used for. Mr. Ball stated that it was not an unloading area. It was established that this area was most likely a fire lane.

The resident closest to Southwestern Boulevard questioned who would protect the neighbors and what recourse they would have if Mr. Ball does not abide with the approved plan. The Chairman noted that a performance bond in the amount of $92,577.00 will be effect for two years. This money may be used by the Town to guarantee that the landscaping remains in good form.

Councilwoman Ackerman asked for clarification of “on center” planting of the proposed trees and the members discussed the tree plantings further. It was her understanding that the evergreens in each of the two rows will be planted 15 ft. on center, with the rows being approximately 8 ft. apart, in a staggered arrangement, with an under story of Forsythia, Dogwood, Vibernum, etc. along the resident’s side of the berm for the entire length of the berm to create more density. The Spruce and ever evergreens will be planted 15 feet on center in two staggered rows with an under story along the entire length of the berm, as identified earlier, to create more density.

C.B. Mtg. #11 Reg. Mtg. #11 November 7, 2006 7:00 PM Page 6

Along the conservation easement, directly abutting the end of north end of Auckland Avenue, the berm will be lower due to the 30 ft. width limitation of the conservationeasement delineation. The same plant materials suggested for the larger conservation easement area are recommended for this area as well.

Mr. Schichtel reiterated that the berm construction is the key to the success of the buffer.

The members would like a revised landscape plan showing where the “do not disturb” area is during construction.

Councilman Jemiolo thanked the residents and the Board for their involvement and bringing this issue to a resolution.

Mr. Schechter made a MOTION, seconded by Mr. Loesch to TABLE the review of the proposed landscaping pending receipt of a revised plan based on the comments of the Board.

THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.”

Mr. Loesch read:

“Councilwoman Ackerman asked for clarification of “on center” planting of the proposed trees and the members discussed the tree plantings further. It was her understanding that the evergreens in each of the two rows will be planted 15 ft. on center, with the rows being approximately 8 ft. apart, in a staggered arrangement, with an under story of Forsythia, Dogwood, Vibernum, etc. along the resident’s side of the berm for the entire length of the berm to create more density. The Spruce and ever evergreens will be planted 15 feet on center in two staggered rows with an under story along the entire length of the berm, as identified earlier, to create more density.”

Mr. Loesch noted that the minutes are clear and he further read:

“Mr. Schichtel noted that the material used for the berm is important to the success of how the plants will grow. The trees Colorado Spruce and any other coniferous trees delineated should be planted fifteen feet apart on center in two staggered rows. He discussed having smaller deciduous such as Dogwood, Forsythia, Vibernum, etc., being planted (on the neighborhood side of the berm) to create a naturalized area that will eventually grow to create a thickened dense screen that will help buffer if the Colorado Spruce looses their bottom branches to a disease. He feels the use of crown vetch is an excellent idea, rather than the use of mulch.”

Mr. Loesch stated that at that meeting he talked about drainage and that Mrs. Bergantz spoke regarding the front area to be left in its natural state; then Mrs. Ackerman asked for clarification of “on center” planting. The Chairman stated that it is clear what the Board asked for.

In addition, Mr. Loesch read the following to address Chairman Schechter’s inquiry regarding how far the berm is to extend away from Southwestern Boulevard:

“Along the conservation easement, directly abutting the end of north end of Auckland Avenue, the berm will be lower due to the 30 ft. width limitation of the conservation easement delineation. The same plant materials suggested for the larger conservation easement area are recommended for this area as well.”

C.B. Mtg. #11 Reg. Mtg. #11 November 7, 2006 7:00 PM Page 7

Mr. Jaeger questioned if the trees are being planted too tightly. Mr. Schichtel noted that it will take six to seven years for the trees to create a screen and grow into one another. He further noted that to provide the neighbors what they want for screening, two rows, 15-feet on center is a good recommendation.

Mr. Ball asked for clarification of what the Board requires. The Chairman stated, two rows of trees, each row is to be 15-feet on center, staggered up into the “L” on the north end of the site.

Mr. Jaeger made a MOTION, seconded by Mr. Loesch to CONDITIONALLY APPROVE the presented plan, subject to the Applicant resubmitting the plan with the recommended changes as discussed:

1. The drainage plan, with respect in particular to the swail, is to be checked and approved by the Town Engineering Department and Mr. Ball’s engineering firm.

2. The brush on the south corner is to be flagged.

3. Dry soil is to be used in the construction of the berm.

4. Two rows of evergreens trees are to be staggered, each row is 15-feet on center approximately 8-feet apart on the 50-foot section of the berm, not on the 30-foot section of the berm.

The Chairman noted that a two-year Landscape Completion Bond (performance bond) in the full amount of the landscaping cost (to be revised) or a certified check in the amount of one-half of this amount is to be presented to the Town Clerk prior to receipt of a building permit. All lighting is to be directed downward and toward the site and any dumpsters are to be screened. Approval is contingent upon acceptance by the Town Engineering Department.

The landscape completion bond form must be resubmitted to reflect the increased cost of the landscaping.

THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

NEW BUSINESS

1. C.B. File #52-06, Enidine Corporation, 7 Centre Drive, Zoned I-1. Town Board referred to Conservation Board on 9/20/06. The Zoning Board of Appeals granted a variance for front yard parking on 10/26/06. Applicant is seeking Conservation Board approval of submitted landscape plan.

Date of Plan: 11/3/06

Landscape Architect: Frank Brzezinski

Plan Number: N/A

Date Plan Received: 11/3/06

C.B. Mtg. #11 Reg. Mtg. #11 November 7, 2006 7:00 PM Page 8

Mr. Schneider presented and explained the proposed landscaping plan to the Board. It was established that a variance had been granted by the Zoning Board of Appeals on 10/26/06 for front yard parking.

Mr. Jaeger asked for clarification regarding how the 13% interior green space was achieved and discussed the parking island areas. He also told the applicant that he feels the dumpster and scrap areas must be screened. Mr. Skully stated that he will screen the dumpster and the outdoor scrap areas. (The Planning Coordinator noted that during a review by the Planning Board this request may also be made.)

Mr. Brzezinski discussed the proposed plantings, noting that they will be used in groups. He explained further that the selection of plantings were chosen to mimic the existing theme across the street; Sunset Maples, with a combination of evergreen and ornamental trees such as Austrian Pines, Colorado Spruce and Scotch pine.

Mr. Schichtel stated that he feels the site is nice; he suggests parking islands be added to break up the black top area. Mr. Brzezinski noted that the site is tight due to setback requirements, a detention pond and wetland limitations. Although, the addition of parking islands may cause the applicant to lose parking spaces, Mr. Schneider stated that he will have the engineering firm review the possibility of adding two parking islands on the north side of the site.

The Chairman stated that the Board will act on the applicant’s request in a “good faith gesture” based on Mr. Brzezinski’s reputation with the Board. He told Mr. Skully to attempt to revise the plan and have two parking islands added to the site with one tree in each island. The Planning Coordinator will review the revised plan when it is received with Chairman Schechter. In addition the landscape evaluation form must be resubmitted to reflect additional trees in the two island areas. Mrs. Bergantz noted that she would like the applicant to save significant existing trees where possible on the site.

Mrs. Bergantz made a MOTION, seconded by Mr. Jaeger to accept the plan with the recommended changes; the dumpster area shall be screened, two island areas with one tree in each island shall be added to the site if possible and the landscape estimation form shall be resubmitted.

The landscape completion bond form must be resubmitted to reflect the increased cost of the landscaping. The amount submitted at this meeting is $11,085.00.

THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.

C.B. Mtg. #11 Reg. Mtg. #11 November 7, 2006 7:00 PM Page 9

OTHER BUSINESS:

1. 15-minute presentation on irrigation/water issues.

Mr. Ted Karnath works for a distributor that sells various irrigation systems. He explained to the Board irrigation, relating to commercial development guidelines. It was noted that the first site in Orchard Park to have an irrigation system installed was the Target Plaza. Mr. Karnath told the Board that a “CIC” Certified Irrigation Contractor should be used to develop the proper language for an ordinance regulating irrigation. He stated that presently, it is not a New York State law that a contractor be licensed. He noted that the Board should look to another town, such as Canandaigua, New York to review standards they have set.

2. Councilwoman Ackerman spoke regarding the sculpture project that has been privately commissioned with Mr. Michael Hamby for the McFarland green area. The statuary will depict a Quaker with a horse and plow; the cost will be approximately $48,000 to $55,000.

With no other business to be presented to the Board at this time, the meeting was adjourned at 8:48 p.m. by UNANIMOUS APPROVAL.

DATED: January 2, 2007 Respectfully submitted,

REVIEWED: January 2, 2007 Rosemary M. Seivert

Conservation Board Secretary

Richard Schechter

Conservation Board Chairman