Minutes of the May 6, 2008 meeting of the CONSERVATION BOARD of the TOWN OF ORCHARD PARK, Municipal Center, Basement Meeting Room 4295 South Buffalo Street, Orchard Park, New York at 7:00 PM. Present were the following:
MEMBERS PRESENT: Richard Schechter, Chairman
Ann Bergantz
James Loesch
Frank Newton
George Schichtel
EXCUSED: David Ward
Thomas Jaeger
OTHERS PRESENT: Councilwoman Nan Ackerman
Remy C. Orffeo, Planning Coordinator
Rose Seivert, Conservation Board Secretary _________________________________________________________________________________________
Summary of Work Session:
Meeting with Representatives from New York State Senator Volker, Assemblymen Cole & Schroeder’s Offices to discuss the Towns of Orchard Park and Elma’s Conservation Easement program.
Others present: Orchard Park Town Attorney Leonard Berkowitz
Ms. Diane Rohl, Elma Conservation Board
Mr. Patrick Curry, for Assemblyman Mark Schroeder
Mr. Steven Cahoon, for Assemblyman Michael Cole
Mr. Brendan M. Lovullo, for Assemblyman Michael Cole
Ms. Susan Johnson, representing Senator Dale Volker
Chairman Richard Schechter and Diane Rohl explained the dilemma facing the Conservation Easement program and expressed the need to change the New York State law.
The towns of Orchard Park and the Town of Elma are seeking New York State legislation to remove the burden borne by the local Assessor’s office in determining the assessment reduction for property placed into the Conservation Easement program.
The Board members discussed the merits of the Conservation Easement program, noting that the Town faces the potential loss of green space if the program is not continued. Chairman Schechter noted that one Town resident applied for a renewal of his Conservation Easement as it was about to expire. Initially, the Town Assessor reviewed the request and denied it, explaining he felt there was no basis for an assessment reduction. After consideration, the Assessor approved a partial assessment reduction.
Councilwoman Ackerman stated that she and other members of the Town Board and the community whole heartedly support the Conservation Easement program.
Presently, there are approximately 70-Conservation Easements in Orchard Park and the Town of Elma has 7-applications pending the outcome of New York legislation. Many of the Orchard Park Conservation Easements are commitments based on renewals and some are for perpetuity. It was also noted that New York State offers a tax reduction for property placed in a perpetual Conservation Easement program.
Ms. Rohl stated that the Town of Elma is very interested in the Conservation Easement program; applicants are awaiting information with the expressed interest of preserving their town’s natural resources.
The discussion concluded with the New York State representatives present agreeing that legislation is needed to remedy this situation. It was also agreed that the towns of Orchard Park and Elma may be used as role models for other towns interested in Conservation Easements.
________________________________________________________________________________
The Chairman called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. by stating that in accordance with 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 provisions of the ethics law of the Town of Orchard Park.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
A MOTION was made by Chairman Schechter, seconded by Mr. Newton, to ACCEPT the minutes of the April 1, 2008 meeting.
MOTION UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
NEW BUSINESS
1. C.B. File #17-08, William Benn, 6870 Webster Road, proposed One-Lot Subdivision, SBL#162.05-5-20, 13.11 acres of vacant land, located on the north side of Webster Road east of North Buffalo Road, Zoned B-3. Requesting Pre-Application Findings Review.
The Board reviewed and discussed the project.
Mr. Loesch made a MOTION, seconded by Chairman Schechter to APPROVE a street tree for this one-lot subdivision.
THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
2. C.B. File #18-08, WNY Urology Associates, LLC, 500 Sterling Park, Zoned I-1, located on the west side of Sterling Park. Applicant is requesting a Building Permit and Site Plan approval to construct a 2,750 +/- sq. ft. addition to the existing building. Town Board referred to Conservation Board on 4/16/08.
APPEARANCE: No one was present
Mr. Loesch made a MOTION, seconded by Chairman Schechter to TABLE the review of this case.
THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
3. C.B. File #14-08, Calamar/Senior Services, Inc. is requesting SR designation and is proposing to develop a 140-unit Independent Living Apartment Complex, (Eagle Crest Senior Apartments) upon Vacant Land located at the end of Weiss Avenue (west end), Zoned B-2. Town Board referred to Conservation Board on 4/2/08.
APPEARANCE: Connie Lydon, Lydon Landscaping & Design
Phil Silvestri, Silvestri Architects
Paul Bowers, Wm. Schutt & Associates
Kenneth Franasiak, President Calamar
Mr. Bowers presented and explained the project to the Board, noting that he would like the Board to review the item as a “concept review” item.
The Board members discussed the project with the applicants and the following was established:
• Federal and State wetlands are located at the site; a report is being prepared.
• The importance of the location of the roadway relative to the creek bed; it is 50-feet away.
• The applicants stated that it is their goal to stay out of the flood plain area.
• Architectural elevation should be submitted to Planning Office
• Landscape buffering plan will incorporate layering of natural plantings and blending to screen area neighbors. The proposed Landscape Value Estimation is $108,665.00. The buffer area between the residents is 30-feet in width.
• It was suggested that additional plant material may be needed on the slope after construction takes place. Additional information is needed on the drawing; for instance, the water way is not on the map, the roadway, drainage plan, etc…
The Planning Coordinator discussed the following:
• Review process involved with this project;
• Zoning Board of Appeals variance request for the size of the units;
• Planning Board typically desires more than a single entranceway into a site for fire and safety purposes;
The Chairman noted that additional comments may be forth coming from the members that are not present this evening.
4. C.B. File #15-07, “Pines of Murphy Road”, 5245 Murphy Road, Zoned R-3. Applicant to discuss development of former sanctuary property into a Senior Housing facility and is seeking designation as such. Conservation Board tabled their review of this project on 4/1/08.
APPEARANCE: Andrew Spencer, BME
Mr. Spencer presented revised plans as requested by the Board. He noted that the open space requirement of 9% (5.45 acres) has been met and that it has been noted on the plan. He explained that the plan includes plant information for landscaping at the bungalow units and the main facility area. Alternating planting will be utilized at every other building. NYSDHCR funding has been sought with this project; this will limit the plant selections to what is available at the time of planting. Mr. Spencer also told the Board that the plan indicates trails with connectivity as requested by the Board. He also told the Board that the wetland delineations are currently taking place at the site.
Chairman Schechter discussed the proposed parking spaces for the site. He told Mr. Spencer that a notation must be made on the plan indicating the exact percentage of green space and total interior green space being provided, to insure that the project complies with the Town Code. The plan should also indicate how this calculation was achieved. Mr. Spencer discussed this further with the members.
Planning Coordinator Orffeo noted that this same discussion took place during the Planning Board’s concept review. He told Mr. Spencer that he feels there should be one “point person” representing this project and that he feels that the individuals involved with this project are not communicating with one another.
Mrs. Bergantz questions if there will be sufficient plantings on the list to accomplish the landscaping plan. Mrs. Bergantz noted that the Board is being asked for an approval that is not written in stone; she is not quite sure what they are approving. Further discussion established that a change may occur in the plant selection, but not in the magnitude of plantings.
Mr. Loesch established that the project has not been reviewed by the Engineering Department; therefore, footprint changes to the site with regards to the drainage basin area may occur. He further established that the applicant will not be prejudiced if the review is tabled.
The Board would like a revised plan showing the following:
1. The exact percentage of green space and total interior green space calculations for the site;
2. Show pedestrian access to the recreation area for seniors on the plan;
3. and show a firm footprint.
Mrs. Bergantz made a MOTION, seconded by Mr. Loesch, to TABLE the review of this case pending the receipt of a revised plan.
THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
OTHER BUSINESS:
Discussion with Harley-Davidson representative regarding recent tree removal issue.
Mr. Loesch stated that he is recusing himself from this matter.
Mr. John Sawicz, 50 Washington Avenue
Mr. Sawicz spoke regarding the tree removal that occurred on Milestrip Road. He told the Board that approximately 150-healthy trees were cut down on the State’s property and 120-healthy trees were cut down on Mr. Brinkworth’s property; he observed that one tree had fallen down across the fence. He feels that the trees were removed to provide a better view of Mr. Brinkworth’s building from any angle; there is no other reason. In addition, the trees were removed all on the property line.
APPEARANCE: Mr. John Brinkworth, property owner
Mr. Brinkworth told the Board that he had agreed to not remove trees along Milestrip Road without the Board’s permission as part of the terms in acquiring his certificate of occupancy. He told the Board that after the “October Surprise Storm” he contacted Mr. Steven Schneckenberger to assist with tree trimming on his property as extensive tree damage had occurred; the site was cleaned-up without incident. Mr. Brinkworth stated that he had spoke to New York State several times regarding damaged and fallen trees on the opposite side of the fence and what action could be taken. The State representative noted that maintenance of the site was not a priority for them. Mr. Brinkworth stated it was suggested that if he was willing to pay for the service on his own it would be possible to allow Mr. Schneckenberger to work on the State’s property. Mr. Brinkworth noted that additional damage to trees on his side of the fence occurred from another storm; however the primary purpose was for Mr. Schneckenberger to work on the State’s property. Mr. Brinkworth stated that he met with Mr. Schneckenberger and the individuals that were to perform the work and discussed what he wanted done; the tree cutting was performed on Monday. Neither Mr. Brinkworth nor Mr. Schneckenberger was present when the tree cutting took place. Mr. Brinkworth stated that the worker became over zealous in his performance of the tree removal. He told the Board that he realizes that he should have been present during the operation; however, he did not feel it was necessary based on his past experience.
The Chairman noted that as the property owner it was Mr. Brinkworth’s responsibility to maintain the commitment he had with the Town of Orchard Park. He told Mr. Brinkworth that he should understand that it looks as though there may have been a dual purpose with the trees that were removed. Chairman Schechter stated that he would like to see Mr. Brinkworth make an overture to replace trees and for him to make amends for what occurred.
Mrs. Bergantz stated Mr. Brinkworth made a commitment to the Town of Orchard Park with regards to tree removal in meetings with both the Conservation Board and Zoning Board of Appeals, wherein he would come before the Board to discuss the matter. Yet, Mr. Brinkworth took the time to talk to the State and ask them if he could remove trees; however, he did not come to the Town of Orchard Park. She finds it very hard to believe what Mr. Brinkworth is telling the Board.
Mrs. Bergantz feels the Town Attorney should be contacted in this matter and restitution sought.
The Board discussion concluded that;
1. The members would like the Town Attorney contacted regarding this matter;
2. Mr. Schichtel and Mr. Ward will visit the site and report their findings to the Board.
3. A Landscape Architect is to be retained by Mr. Brinkworth and a landscaping plan is to be submitted for the Board to review.
With no other business to be presented to the Board at this time, the meeting was adjourned at 8:25 P.M. by UNANIMOUS APPROVAL.
DATED: June 1, 2008 Respectfully submitted,
REVIEWED: June 24, 2008 Rosemary M. Seivert
Conservation Board Secretary
Richard Schechter,
Conservation Board Chairman