C.B. Mtg. #10 Reg. Mtg. #10 October 3, 2006 7:00 PM Page 1
 |
Minutes of the October 3, 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.
Terry Myers, LBM Construction
Mary Anne Carr
James Carr
Randy Bebout, FRA Engineering
Scott Francis, McDonald’s USA LLC
Gerald Buchheit, Developer
Mary Anne Carr, M.A. Carr
Rob Pidanick, GPI
Ken Zollitsch, GPI
David Archabald
Karen Jakubowski, concerned citizen/Fisher Bus project
Alberta Obenauer, concerned citizen/Fisher Bus project
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
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:
The Chairman stated that the September meeting minutes were not available therefore; the Board will approve them at next month’s meeting.
C.B. Mtg. #10 Reg. Mtg. #10 October 3, 2006 7:00 PM Page 2
OLD BUSINESS
1. Report from Mrs. Bergantz on her review of the following properties:
· Mr. & Mrs. Kabza, 5605 Amor Duells Road. Requesting a 30-year Conservation Easement on 10.77 acres.
Mrs. Bergantz stated that she has concerns regarding the applicant’s request to have two, four-acre parcels placed in a Conservation Easement. The Board discussed the easement request and determined that the five acre minimum standard must be met. Mrs. Bergantz will contact the applicants and discuss having the property to be placed in the Conservation Easement be contiguous.
Mrs. Bergantz made a MOTION, seconded by Mr. Schichtel, to TABLE the review of this case.
THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
· Mr. & Mrs. Archabald, 5997 Benning Road. Requesting a perpetual Conservation Easement on 48.80 acres.
Mrs. Bergantz reported that this is an excellent property; however she needs clarification on the acreage that is to be placed into the Conservation Easement.
Mr. Archabald spoke to the Board and stated that he is requesting 42.5 acres be placed into the Conservation Easement.
Mrs. Bergantz made a MOTION, seconded by Chairman Schechter to recommend APPROVAL of Conservation Easement request as modified.
THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
2. C.B. File #19-05, proposed Quaker Crossing East, vacant land bordered by Amelia Drive, Amanda Lane, North Benzing Road and Milestrip Road, Zoned B-1. Applicant was granted Conservation Board site approval on 9/6/05. Board to discuss landscaping with regards to the out parcel area.
Date of Plan: 9/05
Landscape Architect: Matthew Y. Lydon
Plan Number: 19B
Date Plan Received: 9/06/05
The Chairman and Mr. Schichtel recused themselves in this case.
Mr. Buchheit explained to the members that it is his position that he met with the Board before and, at that time, he agreed to a number of changes to the master site plan he presented. Among other things, he agreed to have a
solid tree line at the back, considerable plantings along Amanda Drive and a sophisticated meadow. Mr. Buchheit stated that he agreed to this because
there will not be room to have plantings along the in-line buildings, since
C.B. Mtg. #10 Reg. Mtg. #10 October 3, 2006 7:00 PM Page 3
the sidewalk area will be cobblestone-brick and contain street lights. He further believed that he was to return with a landscape plan for the remainder of the site, as at that time, he did not have any idea what would be built there.
Planning Coordinator Remy Orffeo stated that the Planning Board resolution, Part 6, specifically states that a landscaping plan for the three out parcels along Amelia Drive must be reviewed and approved by the Conservation Board, Planning Board and Town Board. However, Part 7 of the resolution is unclear. The transcript of the minutes identifies only the buildings north of Ashley Furniture; but, because it is unclear, Mr. Orffeo seeks clarification from the Conservation Board.
The Board members discussed the project and could not resolve the issue before them. Several members stated that they had thought the plan was approved for the entire site, and several did not believe it was. Mr. Newton stated that he believes the issue should be resolved by the Planning Board and not the Conservation Board, as apparently it is their minutes that have the problem.
Planning Coordinator Remy Orffeo read aloud the amended Planning Board minutes, page 14, Part 6 of the resolution as follows;
“A Landscape Completion Bond in accordance with Conservation Board minutes for the overall parking, service road, buffer and the Ashley Furniture store shall be provided for the approved landscape plan which contains 19.5% green space prior to the receipt of a Building Permit. Landscaping for the remaining two out parcels, Building, I call it “B” along Amanda and the buildings north of Ashley Furniture shall be submitted for review and approval by the Town Conservation Board, Town Board and Planning Board approval. (“I’ll stop Rose and let you catch up”.)” Part 7 of the resolution read, “The completion of the NYSEG & NYMO encroachment agreements shall be finalized prior to a certificate of occupancy is issued to the first tenant of this plaza”. (“Someone said, “I have one question, on the landscaping, do they have to come back before the Conservation and the Planning Board?” Mrs. Biryla noted, “For the three out buildings, I have been calling it three on that side… the rest of it I am calling it part of the plaza. Okay? Just to clarify then, the out parcels are to come before the Planning Board and the Conservation Board… Mr. Bernard continued, “And the mutual buildings landscaping remaining to the major plaza buildings, Conservation Board.” “I am okay with that and I will try to help Rose with that later because…”).”
Mr. Orffeo noted that the Board can see that this is confusing.
He suggests that the Conservation Board refer the project back to the Planning Board.
C.B. Mtg. #10 Reg. Mtg. #10 October 3, 2006 7:00 PM Page 4
Mrs. Bergantz made a MOTION, seconded by Mr. Loesch to refer the project back to the Planning Board to clarify what was approved.
THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
NEW BUSINESS
1. Conservation Easement request:
• Mr. & Mrs. Slomka, 6310 Cole Road. Requesting a perpetual Conservation Easement on 8.67 acres.
Mrs. Bergantz will tour the property and report her findings to the Board.
2. C.B. File #46-06, M.A. Carr, Vacant land, east side of North Buffalo Street, Zoned B-3. Requesting a Building Permit to construct a 3,360 sq. ft. Bridal Dress Shop. Town Board referred to Conservation Board on 8/16/06. Board to review revised plan. Applicant appearing before the Zoning Board of Appeals on October 2, 2006.
Date of Plan: 9/22/06
Landscape Architect: Frank Brzezinski
Plan Number: L-3
Date Plan Received: 9/22/06
Mrs. Meyers presented and explained a revised landscaping plan and building elevations to the Board. She told the Board that the Zoning Board of Appeals granted a setback variance on 10/2/06 making it possible to have the parking area behind the building. Plantings will be made at the rear of the property to stop its use as a cut-through. The applicant has agreed to relocate a proposed tree farther back on the site as requested by the Zoning Board of Appeals members.
Mr. Loesch made a MOTION, seconded by Mrs. Bergantz to accept the presented plan.
The Chairman noted that a two-year Landscape Completion Bond (performance bond) in the full amount of the landscaping cost $6,824.00 or a certified check in the amount of $3,412.00 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.
3. C.B. Sub. File #13-05, proposed Eagle Heights West Subdivision, Part 3, 31 acres of vacant land as an extension of Deer Run, Zoned R-1. Requesting Pre-Application Findings Review of a 23+/- lot subdivision. Conservation Board tabled on 5/3/05.
C.B. Mtg. #10 Reg. Mtg. #10 October 3, 2006 7:00 PM Page 5
Date of Plan: N/A
Landscape Architect: N/A
Plan Number: Sketch plan
Date Plan Received: 9/25/06
Mr. Pidanick presented a sketch plan for the Eagle Heights West Part 3 Subdivision. The Board discussed the proposed area to be conveyed to the Town. Mr. Pidanick told the Board that it is adjacent to the Town owned- land; the applicant proposes to provide a walkway to link this area to the Town park land area. The Chairman noted that the walkway should be minimally 30-feet wide.
The Board discussed a memo from the Engineering Department requesting that an additional 30-foot wide parcel be dedicated to the Town between sub lots 20 & 21. This area is the outlet for an existing Town storm water basin within the Independence Heights Subdivision. The 30- foot parcel would not only provide additional access for maintenance of the basin outlet, but could also serve in the future as a corridor for a trail connecting the two subdivisions. In addition it could access the railroad right of way if it is abandoned and turned over to the Town as a trails corridor. Mr. Pidanick noted that the applicant has no objection to Town Engineer Wayne Bieler’s request. Mrs. Bergantz noted that she feels that lot 18 is not the best to build on. She further noted that she supports the proposed plan if the Town Engineering Department is in agreement with the access pathway.
Mr. Pidanick stated that there are roughly 5-acres of wetlands located at the site and that the applicant proposes to preserve most of the wetland area. Mr. Pidanick further stated that he will submit a revised plan based on the Board’s comments.
Mr. Jaeger made a MOTION, seconded by Mr. Newton to APPROVE the sketch plan subject to the changes discussed by the Board; there shall be a 30-foot wide parcel dedicated between lots 18 through 21, worked out by the Town Engineering Department.
THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
4. 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. Conditional Approval granted by Conservation Board on 8/1/06. Applicant is requesting a re-hearing regarding parking.
Date of Plan: 10/03/06
Landscape Architect: Heinrich W. Fischer
Plan Number: C-4
Date Plan Received: 10/3/06
Mr. Bebout noted that he would like the Board to reconsider their decision made on April 19, 2006 granting the applicant conditional approval. The conditional approval is based on the applicant reducing the number of parking spaces to less than 40 in order to meet the 10% interior green space
C.B. Mtg. #10 Reg. Mtg. #10 October 3, 2006 7:00 PM Page 6
requirement. Mr. Bebout told the Board that the presented plan has one revision; elimination of a five-foot bump on the back of the building.
The Board discussed the project in depth. It was confirmed that the applicant has not appeared before the Planning Board for site plan review.
Mr. Bebout explained to the members that the existing site is mainly asphalt, and has a total of 58 parking spaces. He proposes to reduce the parking spaces to a total of 45 and have 6.4% interior green space. He told the Board that fewer parking spaces than 45 will create an inconvenience to the customers. It was also established that the island areas will be irrigated.
Mr. Ward told Mr. Bebout that the number of parking spaces was not the issue during the Board’s last review; the Board’s issue was that the interior green space requirement was not met. He further stated that at that time, Mr. Bebout seemed very willing to reduce the parking spaces to meet the interior green space requirement.
The Board discussed ways to revise the landscaping plan to meet the 10% interior green space requirement.
The Chairman tabled the review of this project pending receipt of a revised landscaping plan based on comments from the Board.
OTHER BUSINESS:
1. Conservation Management Overlay District – Discussion
The proposed CMO reviewed by the Board is as follows;
TOWN OF ORCHARD PARK
SUGGESTED ZONING CODE
CONSERVATION MANAGEMENT OVERLAY (CMO) DISTRICT
VILLAGE HOMES – DETACHED SINGLE FAMILY
Updated August 3, 2006
1.0 Intent
To create a floating zone to provide areas within the town’s R-1 Residential Districts for single family detached residential development in groups on lots which vary in size but where the maximum gross density within the overall development does not exceed the density limits for R-1 Districts in order to preserve the natural and scenic qualities of open land. The maximum gross density is determined by submission of an overall plan in accordance with the R-1 supplemental height, lot, yard and bulk regulations. This overlay district is intended to permit single family detached housing to be sited in closer proximity to each other, with privately contracted maintenance provided by formation of a homeowner’s association approved by the New York State Department of Law (Attorney General’s
Office) and to further provide greater flexibility and creativity in the location of structures on the land and to utilize topography and site features to best advantage.
C.B. Mtg. #10 Reg. Mtg. #10 October 3, 2006 7:00 PM Page 7
2.0 Permitted Structures and Uses
2.1 Any structures or use permitted in the R-1 Districts.
2.2 Open space. (Common Area)
3.0 Standards and General Requirements
3.1 Minimum Area.
The minimum area required to qualify for the Conservation Management Overlay District shall be fifty (50) contiguous acres or fifty (50) acres contiguous to parkland.
** Mr. Loesch discussed section 3.1 minimum area; questions if redundant or not; he feels that the intent is not clear.
3.2 Permitted District.
The Conservation Management Overlay District shall only be permitted within the R-1 Residential District.
3.3 Maximum Density.
The maximum gross density for the entire subdivision shall not be more than the maximum density permitted in the R-1 Residential District. The maximum gross density is determined by submission of an overall plan in accordance with the R-1 supplemental height, lot, yard, and bulk regulations. In calculating the maximum gross density, land which may not be developed shall be excluded. That is, land such as wetlands, steep slopes, and other undevelopable land shall be excluded.
** Mr. Loesch noted that he feels it makes sense to add in the last sentence to add “steep slopes, stream corridors and other undevelopable land.
3.4 Buffer Strips.
A buffer strip consisting of at least forty (40) feet shall be provided between the subject property and adjacent properties or roads. These buffer strips shall be part of the common area owned and maintained by the homeowner’s association. No buildings shall be less than sixty (60) feet from any exterior lot line. A buffer strip may be crossed to access an exterior public street from an interior public street. Such road shall comply with the minimum requirement of roads in the Town of Orchard Park.
** Mr. Loesch would like this to read “a minimum of forty (40) feet shall be provided between the subject residential property and the adjacent residential properties or roads” and; is the strip separate or not from the common land? They concluded that buffer areas shall not be calculated into required open areas calculated for purposes of establishing minimum requirements. The Board further noted that this should be looked at further. Are wetlands & steep slopes excluded? The Chairman noted that there is an overlay district in Grand Island that we may refer to. Councilwoman Ackerman will look into this. Further clarification must be established with 3.3 and 3.5.
C.B. Mtg. #10 Reg. Mtg. #10 October 3, 2006 7:00 PM Page 8
3.5 Open Space Regulation.
Overall, the minimum amount of open space preservation shall be no less than twenty-five percent (25%) of the gross acreage of the parcel or parcels to be developed. Designated open space shall not include setbacks and lawns, and existing rights-of-way and utility easements. At least seventy-five percent (75%) of designated open space shall be contiguous. At least fifty percent (50%) of designated open space shall be designated as “green space” and shall be maintained in a natural, undisturbed condition. Limited access to green space may be allowed in the form of a walking or biking path. All paths are subject to approval by the Planning Board.
The remaining designated open space may be designated as “common area” and may be used for passive or active recreation. If used for active recreation, impervious surface shall not exceed 5% of this area.
** Mrs. Bergantz suggests that this be applied to a test project to see if the numbers make sense.
3.6 Open Space Management.
Open space or “common area” in the Conservation Management Overlay District, is a parcel or parcels of land, together with improvements thereon, for the use and enjoyment of which are shared by the owner-occupants of the individual building sites. Where such property exists, the landowner shall provide for and establish a homeowner’s association, approved by the New York State Department of Law (Attorney General’s Office), for the ownership and maintenance of any common property.
Each lot owner shall be required to be a member of a homeowner’s association, which shall be formed prior to conveyance of the first lot. Such homeowner’s association shall not be dissolved, nor shall it dispose of any common property by sale or otherwise. Development in designated open spaces is prohibited.
3.7 Landscape Design Standards.
3.7.1 Landscape treatment for roads, paths, service and parking areas shall be designed as an integral part of a coordinated landscape design for the entire site.
3.7.2 Primary landscape treatment shall consist of shrubs, ground cover and street trees and shall combine with appropriate walks and street surfaces to provide an attractive development pattern. Landscape materials selected should be appropriate to local growing conditions.
** Mr. Ward discussed adding, “Landscape materials selected should be appropriate to local growing conditions and include irrigation and drainage report when deemed appropriate.
3.7.3 Whenever appropriate, existing trees shall be conserved and integrated into the landscape design plan.
C.B. Mtg. #10 Reg. Mtg. #10 October 3, 2006 7:00 PM Page 9
3.7.4 Landscape plans shall be submitted to the Conservation Board for recommendation to the Planning Board.
** Mr. Schichtel noted that he would add,
(3.75) “Whenever appropriate, identify the existing trees shall be conserved and integrated into the plan; Individual specimens shall be identified by their size and variety”. “Woodlands should be identified by types”.
** Mr. Loesch noted that he feels the Planning and Conservation Boards need to work a little closer because of the new overlay district. Mr. Schichtel wants the landscape plan to follow our landscape ordinance. The Chairman noted that 3.7.4 should read “all” plans submitted to the Conservation Board for recommendation to the Planning Board” should be signed/stamped by a registered landscape architect”.
4.0 Design Regulations – Principal Structure and Uses
4.1 Minimum Lot Area.
Having achieved all goals of the Conservation Management Overlay District, the minimum lot size may be reduced to no less than six thousand five-hundred square feet (6,500 sq. ft.), provided that any and all such area that is not designated to serve as residential areas, roads, or other public purposes, be set aside and restricted on the subdivision plat for use by inhabitants as common open space, parkland, or recreational purposes of an active or passive nature.
4. 2 Minimum Lot Width.
The required minimum lot width shall be no less than sixty (60) feet.
4. 3 Minimum Front Setback.
4.3.1 Interior Public Streets. Minimum front setback measured from the right-of-way is ten (10) feet.
4.3.2 Exterior Public Streets. Minimum setback measured from the right-of-way is sixty (60) feet and shall meet Town of Orchard Park design standards.
4.4 Minimum Side Setback.
The side setback may vary depending on the design and arrangement of the building, drives and common open space. However, there shall be a minimum setback
distance of five (5) feet from any property line. Additionally, the minimum distance between adjacent dwellings shall not be less than twenty (20) feet.
4.5 Minimum Rear Setback.
No principal building shall extend closer than twenty (20) feet to the rear lot line. The minimum distance between dwellings backing up to each other shall not be less than
C.B. Mtg. #10 Reg. Mtg. #10 October 3, 2006 7:00 PM Page 10
forty (40) feet.
4.6 Maximum Structure Height.
The maximum structure height shall not exceed two (2) stories or thirty-five (35) feet and shall be in accordance with R-1 Residential Districts, Town of Orchard Park.
4.7 Minimum habitable floor area, for dwellings only, shall be in accordance with R-1 Districts, Town of Orchard Park minimum.
4.8 Arrangement, Access and other Requirements.
4.8.1 Dwelling units may only be arranged on interior public streets.
4.8.2 Each dwelling unit must be accessible by means of a public street to service vehicles and emergency vehicles.
4.8.3 The standards of design and construction for interior public streets shall meet applicable town specifications for public streets. However, pavement widths may be reduced to twenty-four (24) feet wide and two (2.5) foot gutter curbs on each side.
4.8.4 Within the CMO District, the centerline radius of curves can be reduced to a minimum of one-hundred (100) feet.
4.8.5 The location, design, and construction of all public facilities shall meet all applicable specifications and must be adequate to serve the needs of the development.
4.8.6 The procedures for the preservation and maintenance of all pedestrian ways and common open space shall be the responsibility of the homeowner’s association identified in Section 3.6.
5.0 Site Plan Review
5.1 A Petitioner seeking to create a Conservation Management Overlay District, shall make application in compliance with Article 10 of the Zoning Ordinance: Amendments. Creation
of a Conservation Management Overlay District shall be considered an Amendment to the Zoning Ordinance.
5.2 The Planning Board shall review the proposed development in accordance with the subdivision review process, landscape and screening regulations in section
§144-46 C (5): Proper Landscaping.
5.3 Subdivision lots shall be created to allow owners flexibility in the private use of their lot. The homeowner’s association shall regulate and control any changes to private lots that are requested by the owner of the lot. The minimum lot size for each dwelling unit is in accordance with supplemental height, lot, yard and bulk regulations as listed in Section 4.0.
C.B. Mtg. #10 Reg. Mtg. #10 October 3, 2006 7:00 PM Page 11
5.4 All other lands are to be common (area) property which is a parcel or parcels of land, together with improvements therein, the use and enjoyment of which are shared by the owner/occupants of the single family detached housing and are members of the homeowner’s Association approved by the New York State Department of Law (Attorney General’s Office).
5.5 The architectural style of all new structures must be reviewed and approved by the Planning Board. The applicant shall provide the Planning Board with building elevations, plans, and renderings. A list of proposed building design materials should also be provided.
5.6 Any applicant seeking a Conservation Management Overlay District designation will be prohibited from using section 339-y of the Real Property Law of New York State.
Definitions:
Buffer Strip: The area between the subject property and the adjacent property or road, consisting of various forms of vegetation in order to provide visual screening. The buffer strip can consist of landscaping, natural vegetation, or a combination of the two. The area is mainly used for aesthetic mitigation for existing or future adjoining land uses.
Common Area: Property that is owned by the homeowner’s association, together with improvements therein, that is for the shared use and enjoyment by the owner/occupants of the single family detached housing.
Contiguous Parcels: Two or more parcels that are located directly adjacent to each other.
Exterior Public Street: Those public streets which were in existence prior to the creation of the Conservation Management Overlay District and the construction of the interior public streets in the Conservation Management Overlay District. Exterior public streets provide access to the interior public streets from highways which existed prior to the creation and construction of the Conservation Management Overlay District.
Floating Zone: A floating zone defines a use that the community wants to encourage. The floating zone may be affixed to a qualifying parcel of land, after application by the parcel’s owner, with the approval of the Town Board. Upon approval, the parcel is rezoned to reflect the new use and becomes a small zoning district; its development is governed by the use and provisions of the floating zone ordinance.
Green Space: Open space maintained in a natural, undisturbed or revegetated condition.
Homeowner’s Association: An association created for the ownership and maintenance of any common property, including but not limited to common space, private roads, and pedestrian paths, located within a development. The association must be approved by the New York State Department of Law (Attorney
C.B. Mtg. #10 Reg. Mtg. #10 October 3, 2006 7:00 PM Page 12
General’s Office). Each lot owner in the development shall be required to be a member of a homeowner’s association, which shall be formed prior to conveyance of the first lot. Such homeowner’s association shall not be dissolved, nor shall it dispose of any common property by sale or otherwise.
Interior Public Streets: Those streets which are built by the developer and which did not exist prior to the development of the Conservation Management Overlay District.
Maximum Gross Density: The total number of dwelling units per acre that can be built upon developable land for an entire subdivision in accordance with R-1 supplemental height, lot, yard, and bulk regulations.
Non-Contiguous Parcels: Two or more parcels that are not located adjacent to one another.
Open Space: A portion of a development site that is permanently set aside for public or private use and will not be developed. Open space may be used as community open space, or preserved as green space.
Parcel: Any subdivision of land within the Town of Orchard Park.
The Chairman asked that the members fax or e-mail further comments to him prior to the Town Board meeting/public hearing on October 18th.
Mr. Schichtel submitted information regarding the NYS conservation easement tax credit. A copy will be given to the Town Assessor.
With no other business to be presented to the Board at this time, the meeting was adjourned at 9:10 p.m. by UNANIMOUS APPROVAL.
DATED: November 2, 2006 Respectfully submitted,
REVIEWED: November 4, 2006 Rosemary M. Seivert
Conservation Board Secretary
Richard Schechter
Conservation Board Chairman