Minutes of the May 11, 2005 meeting of the PLANNING BOARD OF THE TOWN OF ORCHARD PARK, S4295 South Buffalo Street, Erie County
MEMBERS PRESENT: Lorraine Biryla, Chairman
Paul Bodden
Harold Fabinsky
Michael McGuire
William McNamara
Philip Murray Eugene Majchrzak, Alternate
EXCUSED: John Bernard
OTHERS PRESENT: Sarah desJardins, Planning Coordinator
Andrew Geist, Supervising Building Inspector
Thomas Ostrander, Junior Engineer
Michael Wolf, Deputy Town Attorney
The Chairman called the meeting to order by stating that if anyone appearing before the Board has a family, financial or business relationship with any member of the Board, it is incumbent upon that person to make it known under State law and the Town Code of Ethics. She noted that in accordance with the Town Board’s recently passed regulation, Alternate Board Member Gene Majchrzak would be voting this evening as a full member, due to Board Member John Bernard’s absence.
Upon a motion duly made and seconded, the reading of the minutes of the April 13, 2005 Planning Board meeting was unanimously waived as each Board Member had previously received copies.
Mr. Murray made a MOTION, seconded by Mr. Bodden, to accept the minutes of the April 13, 2005 meeting as presented.
THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING:
BIRYLA AYE
BODDEN AYE
FABINSKY AYE
MAJCHRZAK AYE
MC GUIRE AYE
MC NAMARA AYE
MURRAY AYE
THE VOTE IS UNANIMOUSLY PASSED.
1. 7:30 P.M., Public Hearing, P.B. Sub. File #6-04, proposed Armor Knoll Subdivision, Vacant land, northwest corner of Armor Duells Road and Duerr Road, Zoned R-2. Requesting Preliminary Approval of a 12-lot subdivision. Pre-Application Findings Review made on 4/14/04.
The Chairman called the Public Hearing to order. She verified with the Planning Coordinator that all fees have been paid. The Affidavit of Publication and Posting, published April 30, 2005 was presented and filed with the Board by the Planning Board Secretary.
IN FAVOR:
Mr. Andy Romanowski of Alliance Homes
4727 Camp Road
Hamburg, NY 14075
Mr. Romanowski told the Board that he is the developer and that he favors the project.
Mr. Michael Borowiak
Nussbaumer & Clarke
3556 Lake Shore Road
Suite 500
Buffalo, NY 14219
Mr. Borowiak stated that he is in favor of the project.
OPPOSED: No one
Mr. Fabinsky made a motion, seconded by Mr. Bodden, to close the Public Hearing.
THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING:
BIRYLA AYE
BODDEN AYE
FABINSKY AYE
MAJCHRZAK AYE
MC GUIRE AYE
MC NAMARA AYE
MURRAY AYE
THE VOTE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING IS UNANIMOUSLY PASSED.
APPEARANCE: Andy Romanowski, Alliance Homes
Michael Borowiak, Nussbaumer & Clarke
Mr. Borowiak distributed copies of the sketch plan to the members for their review.
Mr. Fabinsky established with Building Inspector Andrew Geist that the proposed project conforms to the Town’s requirements. He also verified that the project had received Engineering Approval. The Chairman established that the cul-de-sacs conform to the new regulation.
Mr. Fabinsky made a MOTION, seconded by Chairman Biryla that the Planning Board Declare itself Lead Agency.
THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING:
BIRYLA AYE
BODDEN AYE
FABINSKY AYE
MAJCHRZAK AYE
MC GUIRE AYE
MC NAMARA AYE
MURRAY AYE
THE VOTE IS UNANIMOUSLY PASSED.
Mr. Fabinsky made a MOTION, seconded by Chairman Biryla that this is an Unlisted SEQR action based on the submitted Full EAF Parts 1 and 2, and a negative declaration be made on 5/11/05.
THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING:
BIRYLA AYE
BODDEN AYE
FABINSKY AYE
MAJCHRZAK AYE
MC GUIRE AYE
MC NAMARA AYE
MURRAY AYE
THE VOTE IS UNANIMOUSLY PASSED.
Mr. Fabinsky made a MOTION, seconded by Mr. Bodden to Grant Conditional Preliminary Plat Plan Approval to this 12 lot subdivision based on the submitted preliminary plat plan received 5/11/05 with the following conditions:
1. This is an Unlisted SEQR action based on the submitted Full EAF Parts 1 and 2, and a Negative declaration is hereby made on 5/11/05.
2. Public Hearing and Subdivision Development fees have been paid.
3. Recreation area per Section 25-4 of the Town Code shall be deeded prior to the Final Plat Plan Public Hearing. In addition, the petitioner has agreed to construct a trail system as marked on the map presented to the Conservation Board on 4/6/04.
4. One (1) Street Tree per the Conservation Board Street Tree Plan shall be provided on each lot per Section 121-66 of the Town Code.
5. Town Engineering Preliminary Approval has been granted on 4/28/05.
THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING:
BIRYLA AYE
BODDEN AYE
FABINSKY AYE
MAJCHRZAK AYE
MC GUIRE AYE
MC NAMARA AYE
MURRAY AYE
THE VOTE IS UNANIMOUSLY PASSED.
The Chairman made a MOTION, seconded by Mr. McGuire, to WAIVE the Final Public Hearing.
THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING:
BIRYLA AYE
BODDEN AYE
FABINSKY AYE
MAJCHRZAK AYE
MC GUIRE AYE
MC NAMARA AYE
MURRAY AYE
THE VOTE WAIVE THE FINAL PUBLIC HEARING IS UNANIMOUSLY PASSED.
2. P.B. File #11-05, David Smith, 15 Errington Terrace, SBL#161.11-
2-13.14, Zoned R-3. Requesting Home Occupation in order to operate a small gun business out of the residence. Town Board referred to Planning Board on 3/16/05.
APPEARANCE: The applicant was not present.
Mr. Fabinsky made a MOTION, seconded by Mr. Bodden to TABLE this request.
THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING:
BIRYLA AYE
BODDEN AYE
FABINSKY AYE
MAJCHRZAK AYE
MC GUIRE AYE
MC NAMARA AYE
MURRAY AYE
THE VOTE IS UNANIMOUSLY PASSED.
3. P.B. File #15-05, Expert Fence Co., S2881 Southwestern Boulevard, Zoned B-2. Requesting Planning Board approval of outside display.
APPEARANCE: Jeffrey Anger, applicant
Mr. Anger told the Board that he has been in business at this location since 1977. He explained to the Board that it is his desire to have better visibility for his fencing business from the highway. He believes fencing display year round will attract potential customers traveling along Southwestern Boulevard and lessen the difficulty individuals have had in locating his business. He told the Board that the display would not be permanent, as he would be able to change the fence styles offered. Approximately 12 varieties of fencing would be displayed. He noted that another retail fence outlet located nearby, known as “City Fence”, has an outdoor display consisting of approximately 20 fences. Mr. Anger would like the same business advantage that “City Fence” has.
Mr. McGuire stated that the Town ordinance does not permit permanent outdoor displays. He suggests that Mr. Anger consider having an outdoor display that can be taken down during the winter months, as the demand for fencing is not prevalent during that time. If he desires a permanent display he must apply to the Zoning Board of Appeals for a variance.
The Board members told Mr. Anger that their decision could not be
based on “City Fence”, as the circumstances that have allowed the reported permanent outdoor display are not known. Mr. Anger may only request permission to have outdoor display seasonally exhibited.
Mr. Bodden verified that the request is for 12 sections of fencing with each aisle being 8 feet deep and 25 feet long, making it possible for a customer to walk through.
Mr. Fabinsky noted that he would like the outside display to be located with a setback of 25 feet from the R.O.W. It was noted that the existing signage is currently located 25 feet from the R.O.W.
The Board requested that Building Inspector Andrew Geist review the situation at “City Fence”.
Mr. Bodden made a MOTION, seconded by Mr. Fabinsky, to GRANT Outside Display from March 1st to November 30th, on a yearly basis, based on the site plan received 5/2/05 with the following stipulations:
1. This is a Type II SEQR action and therefore no determination of significance is required.
2. There will be no additional outside lighting for the display or temporary structure.
3. Display will be seasonal in nature.
4. The display will be a minimum of 25 feet back from the highway R.O.W.
THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING:
BIRYLA AYE
BODDEN AYE
FABINSKY AYE
MAJCHRZAK AYE
MC GUIRE AYE
MC NAMARA AYE
MURRAY AYE
THE VOTE IS UNANIMOUSLY PASSED.
4. P.B. File #7-05, Steve Hollins, vacant land, north side of Webster Road, west of Deacon Road, Zoned R-2. Requesting rezoning from R-2 to R-3 in order to construct a townhouse project. Town Board referred to Planning Board on 2/2/05.
APPEARANCE: Steve Hollins, applicant
Tim Gawenus, Wm. Schutt & Associates
The Chairman noted that the project presented to the Board has been revised and that it now complies with the Town of Orchard Park setback ordinances. Therefore, a variance is no longer required from the Zoning Board of Appeals.
The Chairman established with Mr. Hollins that a portion of the townhouses have been reduced in size. Originally the townhouses were approximately 1,700 sq. ft.; now some are 1 or 2-bedroom and 1,400 – 1,500 sq. ft. in size. Mr. Hollins told the Board that a substantial amount of interest has been expressed from both potential buyers and realtors for this townhouse project. It was further established that the smaller townhouses would be on the market for approximately $165,000; the larger townhouses will sell for approximately $185,000 - $190,000.
Mr. Bodden established that there would a homeowners’ association that would maintain the private access road. The Town of Orchard Park will not be responsible for snow removal, water, sewer, etc…
Mr. Fabinsky discussed the homeowners’ association fee with Mr. Hollins and established that it would be a monthly fee of approximately $130 - $150. The private road and the entire infrastructure will be constructed in accordance with Town of Orchard Park standards. It was noted that this would be similar to the “Hammocks” site where the homeowners association is responsible for snow removal, repaving of the private road and the sewers.
· · · The Chairman stated that the petitioner had previously come before the Board as an “Other Business” item. At that time, the Board was asked if they preferred a townhouse project or subdivision built here. The Board determined that there is a need for townhouses and that the proposed price range is attractive for this area. Further, the impact on traffic and schools will be far less than if this property were developed as a subdivision.
Mr. McNamara made a MOTION, seconded by Mr. Bodden, to RECOMMEND that the Town Board APPROVE the requested
rezoning from R-2 to R-3 in order to construct a townhouse project based on the following conditions and stipulations:
1. This is an Unlisted SEQR action based on the submitted long EAF, Parts One and Two and a negative declaration is recommended.
2. Acreage fees shall be paid in accordance with Section 144-70C of the Town Code prior to publication of the Public Hearing Notice.
3. This recommendation is contingent upon the applicant completing the project as proposed on the preliminary development plans received on 5/10/05 and shall revert to its original zoning classification if the project is not completed per Section 144-67 of the Town Code.
THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING:
BIRYLA AYE
BODDEN AYE
FABINSKY AYE
MAJCHRZAK AYE
MC GUIRE AYE
MC NAMARA AYE
MURRAY AYE
THE VOTE IS UNANIMOUSLY PASSED.
5. P.B. File #28-04, Krog Corporation, 15 Cobham Drive, Zoned I-1. Requesting a Building Permit to construct a 25,000 sq.ft. warehouse/office facility. Town Board referred to Planning Board on 9/15/04.
APPEARANCE: John Schleyer, Krog Corporation
Mr. Schleyer explained to the Board that Genius Tools is a Canadian firm that would like to construct a storage/distribution center in the United States at the proposed Cobham Drive site. The business would initially employ 8 to 10 workers. Employment is expected to grow in the future to approximately 20 workers. Genius Tools is a wholesale operation that distributes small hand tools manufactured in Taiwan. There would be no retail sales at the site. United Parcel Service will be used on a daily basis and deliveries of stock would occur once a week via a trucking firm. Once a month there would be a semi-tractor trailer delivery. The building will be a total of 25,000 sq.ft., of which 5,000 sq.ft. would be used for office space and the remaining 20,000 sq.ft. would be used for
warehousing.
The Chairman discussed parking requirements with Mr. Schleyer. He told the Board that the project would require a total of 50 parking spaces based on the projected future growth. The plan shows 29 immediate parking spaces, with 21 future spaces located at the rear of the building to be installed when needed. Mr. Schleyer presented an elevation of the proposed building and explained the landscape plan to the Board.
Mr. Fabinsky confirmed with Mr. Schleyer that the project had been before the Conservation Board and that the landscape plan had been approved.
Mr. Murray confirmed with Mr. Schleyer that the proposed project is ADA compliant. He also re-confirmed the truck deliveries that will take place; there will be a total of 5 trucks per month with daily United Parcel Service.
Mr. Majchrzak asked Mr. Schleyer to explain how the customer base operated, as this will not be a retail outlet. Mr. Schleyer explained that Genius Tools is a wholesale business that distributes to its retailer customers by using United Parcel Service.
Mr. McGuire discussed the lighting plan with Mr. Schleyer. The revised lighting plan dated 4/17/05 indicates that there will be 3 building fixtures with 250 watt metal halide lights and 2, 25-foot high parking lot poles with 250 watt metal halide lights.
Mr. Bodden verified that there would be no manufacturing taking place at the site, it will be used strictly for distribution and warehousing. Presently, the company distributes from their Canadian distribution center. The Cobham Drive site will be their first distribution center located in the United States. There will be a maximum of 20 employees.
Eugene Majchrzak made a MOTION, seconded by Mr. McGuire to RECOMMEND that the Town Board authorize a Building Permit for a 25,000 sq. ft. warehouse/office building and APPROVE the site plan received 5/11/05 based on the following conditions and stipulations:
1. This is an Unlisted SEQR action based on the submitted Long EAF, Parts One and Two and a Negative Declaration is recommended.
2. The site lighting is limited to those fixtures and poles indicated on the approved site plan. Light fixtures shall have flat lens.
3. No outside storage or display is permitted.
4. Dumpsters as shown shall be screened, along with any additional dumpsters, in accordance with Section 144-25 of the Town Code.
5. A Landscape Completion Bond in accordance with Conservation Board minutes shall be provided for the approved landscape plan, which includes 60% green space.
6. Town Engineering Approval has been granted on 5/11/05.
7. Twenty-one spaces have been provided for future parking if needed.
6. P.B. File #31-04, Benderson Development Co., Inc., 3165 Southwestern Boulevard, Zoned B-2. Requesting a Building Permit to construct a 7,560 sq.ft. restaurant/retail building. Town Board referred to Planning Board on 10/20/04.
APPEARANCE: Mr. Eric Recoon, Benderson Development
Mr. Chris Wood, Carmina & Wood
Mr. Recoon presented a parking plan for the members to review for the proposed project that Benderson Development desires to construct on the remaining outparcel near Lowe’s, at the “Cross Roads Corners” site. He told the Board the parking requirement per the Town ordinance is 45 spaces, but that the plan presented provides 157 spaces. Mr. Recoon stated that Benderson Development was granted an area variance by the Zoning Board of Appeals on March 15, 2005 for front yard parking. The Zoning Board requested that Benderson Development install fencing along the residential property line to aid with litter and debris complaints voiced by the resident located there. The project received Conservation Board approval on May 3, 2005 for the presented landscape plan and Town Engineering Department approval on May 11, 2005. He told the Board that one of the tenants would be “Starbucks” with a drive-thru window. Information is not available regarding the other tenants, as they have not been contracted. However, a small restaurant and a retail outlet could be located here.
P.B. Mtg. #5 Regular Mtg. #5 May 11, 2005 Page 11
The Chairman asked Mr. Recoon to verify who owns the property.
He told the Board that Benderson Development owns the 2.68-acre
parcel. The Chairman noted that the 112 additional parking spaces
are required as mitigation that took place in allowing Wyoming County Bank and the Tops Gas station to be built within the plaza parking lot. She further discussed parking spaces with Mr. Recoon, noting that she would like to be sure that no sign is erected that specifies the parking spaces as being for a specific tenant’s customer.
Mr. Recoon told the Board that specific tenant parking would not occur, as a reciprocal cross agreement exists between the parties involved (Lowe’s, Benderson and DDR). It was verified that the Town of Orchard Park has a copy of this agreement.
Mr. Recoon told the Board that a total of 45 parking spaces would initially be put in. Starbucks requires 15 spaces and the future retail operation requires 30 spaces. Parking spaces for a future restaurant have not been calculated. The Chairman told Mr. Recoon that Benderson Development would have to re-appear before the Planning Board if a tenant, other than retail was leased to, as the Board would insist that the additional parking spaces required for a restaurant use be put in. Mr. Recoon told the Board that Benderson Development owns additional property at the back of the property, approximately thirty acres. It was established that this area is not near the Tops store.
Mr. Fabinsky discussed the history of a combination Tim Horton’s/Wendy’s that was previously approved at the Crossroads Center. It has two drive-thru windows and the traffic flow from the drive-thru windows has created numerous safety problems. Mr. Fabinsky stated that based on this situation, he could not support another restaurant with a drive-thru window. Mr. Recoon explained to the Board that he did not feel the same problems would occur, as there would be only one drive-thru window, whereas the Tim Horton’s/Wendy’s restaurants have two. On that parcel, all four sides of the building are used by vehicles accessing the drive-thrus, making it difficult for the walk-in customer to enter the restaurant. This would not be the case with Starbucks.
The members discussed the problems that exist at the Tim Horton’s/Wendy’s outparcel further. Mr. Recoon was asked by Mr. McNamara if tractor-trailer deliveries would have enough room to access Starbucks and a future restaurant. Mr. Recoon told the Board that he was not able to answer operational questions as he deals with real estate development. Mr. McNamara told Mr. Recoon that planning must be done now to insure how deliveries would occur. He does not want traffic blocked by a truck making a
P.B. Mtg. #5 Regular Mtg. #5 May 11, 2005 Page 12
delivery and to have the same unsafe situations develop that exist at the Tim Horton’s/Wendy’s site. Junior Engineer Thomas Ostrander told the Board that there is adequate room for a tractor-trailer to enter, make a delivery and leave at the proposed Starbucks outparcel.
Mr. Majchrzak stated that once the footprint is put in of the building it becomes difficult to move. He told Mr. Recoon that the Board is expressing their concerns and that it is up to Mr. Recoon to decide if he wants to plan for these concerns or not. The Board’s concerns are not going to go away; and at some point in time, they will have to be dealt with.
Mr. Murray established that Mr. Recoon has observed the traffic at the Tim Horton’s/Wendy’s site. Mr. Murray noted that the traffic is bumper to bumper and that a walk-up customer risks his life to enter the restaurant. He told Mr. Recoon that what has been proposed to this Board with Starbucks is an identical “bad” concept plan.
Mr. Recoon stated that a walk-in customer to Starbucks would not cross through the drive-thru to enter the restaurant. Mr. Murray asked Mr. Recoon how a person who is parked in a parking space would get into the restaurant; he feels that the project is designed the same as Tim Horton’s/Wendy’s and that this will be an accident waiting to happen. He further stated that if Mr. Recoon is trying to make the point that this project is somehow different than the Tim Horton’s/Wendy’s he would like to see a differentiation of concepts. Mr. Recoon stated that he would be happy to install signage and he explained the intention of the stacking plan to the Board. He told the Board that he understands the problems that exist at the Tim Horton’s, but he feels that that Starbucks caters to a different customer. He told the Board that customer walk-in trade exceeds the drive-thru usage and that customers would not be crossing the drive-thru area to enter the building.
Mr. Murray asked if Mr. Recoon would concede that the proposal was essentially the same concept as the Tim Horton’s and wondered if there was anything different in the stacking queue or parking. Mr. Recoon told the members that it is totally different and he proceeded to explain how. However, during this explanation Mr. Murray pointed out that it was not different and he told Mr. Recoon that the stacking pattern is similar to a bracelet linking all the way around.
Mr. McNamara asked if Starbucks would be willing to eliminate the
drive-thru window. Mr. Recoon told the members that was not an option.
P.B. Mtg. #5 Regular Mtg. #5 May 11, 2005 Page 13
Mr. Murray would like future site plans for this plaza to include a general ledger denoting the mitigation actions that have occurred to prevent future confusion as to what has transpired. He asked that Mr. Recoon identify where the 112 mitigated parking spaces came from in the plaza. It was determined that 53 parking spaces were from the Wyoming County Bank site and that the remaining 59 spaces were what the plaza needs to be in compliance with Town Code.
Mr. Murray feels that if one would think “out of the box” another way could be found to design a drive-thru window to prevent the situation that exists at the nearby Tim Horton’s/Wendy’s. The Board discussed ways to correct the situation with Mr. Recoon. Suggestions included extending an island, creating parking for delivery trucks only, eliminating or move parking spaces in certain areas and planting a wall of landscaping to aid in directing customers. The Board would like the delivery dock area to remain open at all times.
Mr. McGuire noted that he had not seen the lighting catalogue cut information in the file. Mr. Recoon presented this information, but Mr. McGuire told the applicants to submit this to the Planning Coordinator. He told Mr. Recoon that receiving this information tonight does not allow the Board time to review it. He also told Mr. Recoon that the photometrics plan would need to be updated.
The Chairman made a MOTION, seconded by Mr. Fabinsky to TABLE this request, due to the fact that there are too many concerns with the project.
ON THE QUESTION:
The Chairman would like the applicants to submit a revised plan for the drive-thru window showing how to avoid having a stack-up of cars and people trying to get into the building at the same time. She is not averse to losing several parking spaces if needed, as the safety of customers is her main priority. She would also like information provided to the Board addressing when and how deliveries will occur. In addition, any motion made will be for just one drive-thru. The applicant will need to return to this Board if a restaurant is being proposed. At that time parking will be addressed.
Mr. Bodden asked if the presented architectural design was the only choice available. He explained that he feels that what is being presented does not fit in with the Orchard Park aesthetics. He told Mr. Recoon that he liked the Starbucks built in nearby East Aurora, New York and asked him to provide other options for the
P.B. Mtg. #5 Regular Mtg. #5 May 11, 2005 Page 14
Board to review.
Mr. Fabinsky commented on the Zoning Board of Appeals stipulation for a fence to be installed to aid with blowing litter. He told Mr. Recoon that litter had been an original concern expressed by the Planning Board to Benderson Development during the site plan review process for this plaza. He does not want the development of the property to intrude on the neighbors’ enjoyment of their property. He would like to see a maintenance program, in addition to artificial and natural fencing, to eliminate the problem of blowing litter that becomes an eyesore in the neighborhood. The Chairman noted that the litter is from the plaza, but is also from Lowe’s. Mr. Fabinsky noted that Benderson Development had made the commitment to deal with the litter on the property as a whole, before Lowe’s was built. He feels that Benderson Development must abide by their original commitment and maintain litter control. Mr. Recoon stated that they do not object to this.
THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING:
BIRYLA AYE
BODDEN AYE
FABINSKY AYE
MAJCHRZAK AYE
MC GUIRE AYE
MC NAMARA AYE
MURRAY AYE
THE VOTE TO TABLE IS UNANIMOUSLY PASSED.
OTHER BUSINESS:
Mr. McGuire discussed the fact that the Tops store is operating a seasonal outdoor display without having gone before the Planning Board. Other businesses, such as Lowe’s and Orchard Parks and Gardens, have the same situation and they needed to be reviewed by the Planning Board. He has observed items being displayed over the yellow double traffic lines, along with the sidewalks being made unavailable because of display items. Tops should be addressing the same questions the Board has had other businesses address. He asks that the Building Inspector review the situation.
P.B. Mtg. #5 Regular Mtg. #5 May 11, 2005 Page 15
There being no further business, the Chairman adjourned the meeting at 8:55 P.M.