Minutes of the October 11, 2006 meeting of the PLANNING BOARD OF THE TOWN OF ORCHARD PARK, S4295 South Buffalo Street, Erie County
MEMBERS PRESENT: William McNamara, Chairman
John Bernard Paul Bodden
Harold Fabinsky
Michael McGuire
Philip Murray
Eugene Majchrzak, Alternate
EXCUSED: Lorraine Biryla
OTHERS PRESENT: Remy C. Orffeo, Planning Coordinator
Andrew Geist, 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.
Upon a motion duly made and seconded, the reading of the minutes of the July 5, 2006, July 12, 2006 and August 5, 2006 Planning Board meetings were unanimously waived as each Board Member had previously received copies.
Mr. Bernard made a motion, seconded by Mr. Fabinsky, to accept the minutes of the July 5, 2006, July 12, 2006, and August 5, 2006 meetings as presented.
THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING:
MC NAMARA AYE
BERNARD AYE
FABINSKY AYE
BODDEN AYE
MCGUIRE AYE
MURRAY AYE
MAJCHRZAK AYE
THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
1. P.B. File #4-06, Andy Romanowski, proposed 1 lot subdivision, SBL#184.05-2-4.112, Vacant Land located on the north side of Armor Duells Road (between house #’s 5234 & 5258 Armor Duells Road) Zoned R-2. Pre-application findings were made on August 9, 2006. Public Hearing was held on 9/13/06. Requesting Preliminary Plat Plan Approval of a 1-lot subdivision. Tabled by the Planning Board on 9/13/06.
APPEARANCE: Andy Romanowski, Developer
Mr. Romanowski confirmed that he plans to develop a single family home per the Town requirements. Mr. Ostrander stated that all necessary filings and approvals have been received.
Mr. Fabinsky made a MOTION, seconded by Mr. Bodden to GRANT Conditional Preliminary Plat Plan Approval to this 1-lot subdivision based on the submitted preliminary plat plan received 5/25/06 with the following conditions:
1. This is an Unlisted SEQR action based on the submitted Short EAF and a negative declaration is hereby made on September 13, 2006.
2. Pre-application findings were made on 8/9/06.
3. Public Hearing and Subdivision Development fees have been paid.
4. Recreation fees in accordance with Section 144-70E of the Town Code shall be provided prior to the Final Plat Plan Public Hearing.
5. One (1) Street Tree per the Conservation Board Street Tree Plan shall be provided per Section 121-66 of the Town Code.
6. Town Engineering Preliminary Approval has been granted on 10/03/06.
THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING:
MC NAMARA AYE
BERNARD AYE
FABINSKY AYE
BODDEN AYE
MCGUIRE AYE
MURRAY AYE
MAJCHRZAK AYE
THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
Mr. Fabinsky made a MOTION, seconded by Mr. Bernard to WAIVE the final public hearing.
THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING:
MC NAMARA AYE
BERNARD AYE
FABINSKY AYE
BODDEN AYE
MCGUIRE AYE
MURRAY AYE
MAJCHRZAK AYE
THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
Mr. Fabinsky made a MOTION, seconded by Mr. Bodden to GRANT Conditional Final Plat Plan Approval for this 1-lot subdivision pending the project receiving Final Engineering approval.
THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING:
MC NAMARA AYE
BERNARD AYE
FABINSKY AYE
BODDEN AYE
MCGUIRE AYE
MURRAY AYE
MAJCHRZAK AYE
THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
2. P.B. File#19-05, Proposed Quaker Crossing East, Vacant land bounded by Lane, Zoned B-1. Review of site plan/landscape plan as directed by the Conservation Board and review of façade.
APPEARANCE: Mr. Robert Walsh, Attorney
Mr. Walsh stated that he is appearing before the Board to have the confusion resolved that exists with the approved minutes for Quaker Crossing East. He told the Board that Quaker Crossing East is comprised of Marshalls and other buildings, but that Ashley Furniture, owned by Mr. Steven Kane, is a separate development from Quaker Crossing East; however, the project was considered jointly during the review process.
Mr. Walsh explained that there are in–line stores connecting to the Ashley Furniture building and that an “L” shaped spine will come out separately from the main building. He further explained that there will be three (3) separate out-lots located on Amelia Drive, one of which will be located on the Kane parcel. Mr. Walsh stated that it is his understanding that approval was granted for the in-line building and for the “L” shaped spine along Amanda Drive, in terms of the over-all landscaping; he believes that the applicant is to return for the out parcels. However, when the applicant applied for a building permit to construct the Marshalls store, confusion involving the approved minutes was encountered and it also occurred when he returned for a building permit for the building located on Amanda.
Mr. Walsh told the members that at the Conservation Board October 3, 2006 meeting the members directed the applicant to appear before the Planning Board for review and clarification of the project’s landscaping. Mr. Walsh restated that he believes the approval was for the in-line stores that connect to Ashley Furniture and also for the “L” shaped spine that runs along Amanda.
Mr. Fabinsky discussed his concerns regarding the view of the back of the stores (along Amanda) from the east. It was established that there will be landscaping along the road behind the structure. Junior Engineer Thomas Ostrander explained that the number of plantings is limited here due to being located adjacent to a major utility corridor. Mr. Walsh told the Board that he believes there will be a planter on each corner with shrubbery. He further noted that a huge amount of landscaping has been approved along Amelia Drive. The landscaping cost is approximately $150,000.00. Mr. Fabinsky noted that he is not worried about the volume or cost of the landscaping, he is concerned about the view of the backside of the building. Fabinsky stated that he is concerned that this side will have a “minimum security kind of feel to it”. Mr. Walsh stated that he believes that as they mature the proposed trees will buffer the area. He further believes that a business located at the end of Benzing will not be impacted. Mr. Walsh told the members that the Conservation Board went through great detail to achieve the landscaping they desired for the site.
Junior Engineer Thomas Ostrander told the Board that the façade at the rear is similar to the façade approved for Borders and for the existing Target store; it flows with the rest of the overall look of the Quaker Crossing Complex. This building in question along Amanda is actually a separate building and not attached to Marshall’s and Ashley Furniture.
Mr. Bernard discussed the site lighting with Mr. Walsh. He noted that there is an approved parking lot lighting plan which shall be followed. The parking area shall not have flood lights or spot lights; he noted that they are presently being used at the Ashley Furniture plaza, as they are not approved and the Building Inspector is working to have them removed. He noted that the wall packs should match the style and type approved for use at the Borders store. He would like assurance that the applicant will follow the approved lighting plan which Mr. Walsh agreed to. He further confirmed that the Town Board has reviewed the presented elevation.
Mr. Murray noted that at a previous meeting he discussed the site being developed as a “single site” in compliance with ADA regulations. In particular, he discussed having an ADA compliant walkway connecting to each building. Mr. Murray noted that Mr. Buchheit indicated that he would incorporate this into the site, and that to the best of his knowledge, the plan does not reflect this. Mr. Walsh told the Board that the applicant researched ADA compliancy in detail and the legal opinion, after conferring with Town Attorney Leonard Berkowitz regarding this matter, is that this is different than what the law requires; it has been determined that the site is compliant. Mr. Murray noted that he found no documentation regarding this in the file. Junior Engineer Thomas Ostrander stated that he is aware of this document’s existence and believes that the Engineering Department has this document. Mr. Murray stated, “Your point is that you are ADA compliant?” Mr. Murray noted, “By the way, Mr. Buchheit had indicated that he would do it”. Mr. Walsh noted that he had, “but to the extent that we needed to comply with ADA; he has and we are”. Mr. Walsh stated that he is not sure what the confusion was on that particular question, but they did
the research and reviewed the law; they found that in this particular type of development they are ADA compliant.
Mr. Murray asked Mr. Walsh if he has a copy of his correspondence to Mr. Berkowitz, in terms of what he specifically requested. Mr. Walsh noted that he does not have this correspondence with him tonight, but it certainly was part of the Engineering review, and it was signed-off on.
The Chairman confirmed with Mr. Ostrander that the project could not receive Engineering approval unless the site issues such as ADA requirements were looked at. Mr. Ostrander noted that he recalls some of the conversations concerning ADA requirements and the Town Engineer Wayne Bieler enlightening him on the situation. He further recalls seeing the documentation that Mr. Walsh is referring to, noting that it is in their file system. Mr. Ostrander stated that this review was also gone through for Quaker Crossing West. The Chairman noted that Mr. Dwight Mateer had appeared before the Board during a work session arranged by Conservation Board Member Anne Bergantz to discuss an idea being promoted in New York State of “pedestrian friendly” shopping plazas; however, the Chairman noted that Mr. Mateer’s discussion, was not part of the present ADA New York State law and it was looked at using Quaker Crossing as an example.
Mr. Fabinsky discussed the landscaping plan, noting that the tree selection is not listed. Mr. Walsh stated that he does not recall the tree selection as it has been some time since the plan was approved by the Conservation Board. Mr. Fabinsky noted that the plan is approved by the Conservation Board; however he believes the Town Board will want to know more detail of the selection. The Planning Coordinator stated that the planting list is in the Conservation Board file.
Mr. Bodden made a MOTION, seconded by Mr. McGuire to recommend that the Town Board AUTHORIZE the landscaping plan submitted to the Conservation Board on 11/7/05 as part of the site plan and APPROVE the site plan received 11/7/05 based on the following conditions and stipulations:
1. A Positive Declaration was issued by the Town Board and Findings to Approve were issued by the Town Board on 9/7/05.
2. The site lighting is limited to those fixtures and poles indicated on the approved site lighting. Light fixtures shall have flat lens and zero cut-offs. Building lighting will be subject to submission to the Planning Board approval as tenants are identified. Light design will be consistent with approved lighting on existing buildings. (The style of wall packs shall match the style used on the Borders’ store.)
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. General plaza litter control shall be in accordance with previous agreement for Quaker Crossing.
6. Engineering approval was granted on 10/15/05.
7. Landscaping and site approval for three (3) out parcels identified on the site plan along Amelia Drive identified as proposed retail (2 buildings) and proposed bank shall be submitted for review and approval by the Town Conservation Board, Planning Board and Town Board.
8. Recommend Town Board approve a building permit.
9. The Town Board shall review the landscaping along Amanda to insure that acceptable screening is provided from the building.
THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING:
MC NAMARA AYE
BERNARD AYE
FABINSKY AYE
BODDEN AYE
MCGUIRE AYE
MURRAY NAY
MAJCHRZAK AYE
THE MOTION BEING SIX (6) IN FAVOR AND ONE (1) AGAINST THE MOTION IS PASSED.
3. P.B. File #01-06, proposed Holly Ridge 24-lot Subdivision, Vacant Land off of Silent Meadow in the Braunview Subdivision, bordered by the Barrington Heights Subdivision, Zoned R-1. Applicant is seeking pre-application findings.
The Chairman noted that the applicant had requested to be removed from this evening’s agenda.
Mr. Fabinsky made a MOTION, seconded by John Bernard to TABLE this request.
THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING:
MC NAMARA AYE
BERNARD AYE
FABINSKY AYE
BODDEN AYE
MCGUIRE AYE
MURRAY AYE
MAJCHRZAK AYE
THE MOTION IS UNANIMOUSLY PASSED.
4. P.B. File #37-06, Doodle Bugs Day Care, Vacant Land Redtail Drive located in Sterling Park, Zoned I-1. Requesting a Building Permit for a proposed11,300 sq. ft. day care center. Applicant was granted a Use Variance by the Zoning Board of Appeals on 3/21/06. Town Board referred to Planning Board on 6/7/06.
APPEARANCE: Mr. Anthony Insinna, Owner
Mr. Andrew Terragnoli, Architect
Mr. Terragnoli noted that they have been directed to relocate a storm sewer outfall on the site. Junior Engineer Thomas Ostrander noted that the storm outfall for the site must be change to use the existing man hole onsite, so that the roadway will not be impacted and avoid a possible surcharge into the road from the water. Two other issues remain with this project; the applicant is awaiting external approvals from Erie County Sewer District 3/ECDEP and Erie County Water Authority.
Mr. Bodden established that the applicant did not have any colored 3-D renderings/elevations, or a site lighting plan and that the project does not have Engineering approval.
Mr. Insinna stated that he was under the impression that the Town Planning Department had been provided with a full set of drawings. He further told the Board that he believes the project will fit well in the business Park. The look of the building is similar to the health care facility located at the entrance of the park.
Mr. Bodden established that the applicant feels they will have Engineering approval in several weeks. Mr. Terragnoli asks that the Board proceed conditionally upon this fact.
Mr. Fabinsky noted that typically, the Board does not approve a project without Engineering approval and he further noted that he would not vote on a motion without reviewing colored renderings of the building.
The Chairman directed the applicant to provide the Planning office with colored 3-D renderings of the building and to obtain the necessary approvals from Erie County.
Mr. Fabinsky made a MOTION, second by Mr. Bodden to TABLE this case pending the following:
1. Until such time Engineering approval is obtained.
2. Colored 3-D renderings of the building are provided to the Planning Office.
3. Receipt of a lighting plan.
THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING:
MC NAMARA AYE
BERNARD AYE
FABINSKY AYE
BODDEN AYE
MCGUIRE AYE
MURRAY AYE
MAJCHRZAK AYE
THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
The Planning Coordinator noted that the applicant stated that part of their problem was due to a late response from the Town Engineering Department, this is not true. The Town Engineering Department and the Planning Office have been working with the applicant over the last six weeks; the applicant should have been prepared to come to this Board last month; it is their own inability to get items together that has create the delay. He believes that this is an unfair characterization of our Town Engineering Department.
5. P.B. File #46-06, M.A. Carr, Vacant land, located on the west side of North Buffalo Street adjacent to the Legion Post and Village Fireplace Shop, Zoned B-3. Requesting a Building Permit to construct a 3,360 sq. ft. Bridal Dress Shop. Town Board referred to Planning Board on 8/16/06. Zoning Board of Appeals granted a setback variance on 10/02/06.
APPEARANCE: Mr. & Mrs. Carr, property owner
Mr. Bob Gill, Architect
Mr. Gill thanked Planning Coordinator Remy Orffeo for assisting the applicants through the various Board meetings (Zoning Board of Appeals and Conservation Board) that were necessary in moving the project forward. He further thanked the Planning Board for reviewing the project and he presented a rendering of the proposed building. He told the Board that the original plan proposed front yard parking and that the revised plan dated 10/4/06 proposes to have the parking spaces located behind the building. To accomplish this, the building was relocated and a setback variance was granted by the Zoning Board of Appeals.
Mr. McGuire noted that the file did not contain the revised plan dated 10/4/06. He further established that a dumpster is not proposed for the site and he discussed the lighting at the site with Mr. Gill. Mr. Gill noted that the parking lot lighting will have single lighting. Junior Engineer Thomas Ostrander told the members that a courtesy copy of the photometrics plan is available in the Town Engineering Department.
Mr. Fabinsky discussed the proposed parking spaces for the site and established with Building Inspector Geist that the site will be in compliance with the parking requirement.
Mr. Bodden asked Mr. Gill to clarify the revised plan and he established that ground cover will be used under the four-picture windows area, which is designed low to the ground. It was further established that this project is located
on a lot adjacent to the Red Door Ski Shop and the area was filled-in. Mr. Gill told the Board that landscaping will also be located at the back of the parking lot to help control passerby’s that cut-through this lot.
Mr. Ostrander told the Board that there are very minor changes to be made to the drawings and that he is comfortable that Engineering approval will be granted by October 18, 2006. He also noted that soil borings should be performed to test the soil bearing capacity of the site, due to the fact that it was a fill area by the previous owner.
Planning Coordinator Remy Orffeo told the Board that due to the accelerated review process, the most recent submissions for the project are in the Conservation Board file. He noted that at a special meeting on October 2nd the Zoning Board of Appeals granted the applicant a setback variance and that on October 3rd the Conservation Board granted approval of the presented landscaping plan. He further noted Councilwoman Ackerman discussed the façade with the applicants and she had requested slight changes to be made to the façade.
The Chairman asked Mr. Ostrander to summarize what the project will need before Engineering approval can be granted. Mr. Ostrander noted the following:
1. There must be two soil bearings performed within the footprint of the building.
2. Modification of the outfall pipe location.
3. Either rotate the building or provide a deeper footer to avoid the existing storm pipe on the site.
4. Better define and note percent slope of a proposed on site drainage swales.
Mr. Gill noted that if deeper footers are acceptable to the Town Engineering Department, the applicant will pursue this and he will not have to move the building.
Mr. McGuire discussed the lighting for the site and he told Mr. Gill that he must have a copy of the plan; the site should be limited to 400-watts, one pole with a flat lens and have two wall packs. Mr. Gill told the Board that he is willing to adjust the lighting and comply with any suggestion from the Board.
Mr. McGuire made a MOTION, seconded by Mr. Fabinsky to recommend that the Town Board AUTHORIZE a Building Permit for a 3,360 sq. ft. Bridal Dress Shop and APPROVE the site plan received 10/4/06 based on the following conditions and stipulations:
1. This is an unlisted SEQR action based on the submitted Short 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. If in the applicant decides to use a dumpster, it shall be screened, in accordance with Section 144-25 of the Town Code.
5. The Building Permit will be based on the future Town Engineering Approval that needs to be granted with the appropriate stipulations that were spelled out by Junior Engineer Thomas Ostrander this evening, on 10/11/06.
6. A landscape completion bond in accordance with the Conservation Board minutes shall be provided for the approved landscape plan, which includes 47% green space prior to the receipt of a Building Permit.
7. The Zoning Board of Appeals granted a setback variance on 10/02/06.
THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING:
MC NAMARA AYE
BERNARD AYE
FABINSKY AYE
BODDEN AYE
MCGUIRE AYE
MURRAY AYE
MAJCHRZAK AYE
THE MOTION IS UNANIMOUSLY PASSED.
6. P.B File #51-06, John Henderson of Niagara Frontier Recovery, 3958 Southwestern Blvd., north side of Southwestern Blvd., Zoned B-2. Town Board referred to Planning Board on 9/20/06. Planning Board to review request for a Change in Use to allow a rear pole barn building located on the property to be used as a key making facility for late model running cars and light pick-up trucks.
APPEARANCE: Mr. John Henderson, property owner
Mr. Henderson noted that the property is presently used as a commercial parking lot for Ralph Wilson Stadium activities. He would like to use an existing pole barn at the rear of the property for his locksmithing business. Previously the building was used for a wood shop operation.
Mr. Bernard noted it was difficult to locate the pole barn using the survey that was provided and he asked Mr. Henderson for clarification of its location. Mr. Henderson provided a sketch of the site for the members to review, noting that
P.B. Mtg. #14 Regular Mtg. #10 October 11, 2006 Page 11
the site is located on the north side of Route 20, across from a vacant lot. Mr. Henderson told the Board that in the future he may return to the Board to request permission to convert the existing house on the site to an administrative
office for his business.
Mr. Henderson told the Board that the zoning is B-2 which allows temporary parking. He will not be performing retail services of any kind; there will be no mechanical repairs, junk yard operations or the selling of parts. Vehicles will be transported to the site and the locks will be changed; vehicles will be moved out within five days. He anticipates 12 to 15 vehicles per day arriving at the site. Mr. Henderson stated that approximately 56 vehicles are parked during the football season at this site, which is blacktopped. He plans to pave the remainder of the
Mr. Fabinsky established that the vehicles will be kept at the rear of the property behind the pole barn. Mr. Henderson told the Board that the rear of the property is not seen from the street or by the nearby residences; a 6-foot high stockade fence exists at the site and the area is wooded. There will be no noise created with the proposed business. Vehicles will arrive during the daytime hours for the locksmithing service.
Mr. Bodden established that it is possible that Mr. Henderson may have repossessed vehicles arrive at the site but that these, too, will be moved within five days. The vehicles arriving will be several years old and in running condition. No mechanical work will be performed on the vehicles. Reprocessed vehicles would not arrive during the night hours; instead they will be taken to Mr. Henderson’s holding facility in Hamburg, New York.
The Chairman asked Mr. Henderson how security will be provided to the site. Mr. Henderson noted that at present, he does not see the need for it as the location is undisclosed. However, he feels that as the operation moves forward he may install a computerized camera system at the site. He anticipates four to six workers at this facility if he incorporates the administrative office at the site. He told the Board that the nearest resident is 200-feet away on either side of the site.
Mr. Bernard established that the vehicles will be transported via flat bed truck or driven to the site under Mr. Henderson’s NYS Transporter license. Also, during the afternoon a tow truck may transport a vehicle to the site.
Mr. Bodden established that there will be a maximum of two employees at the same time at this site. Presently, screening of the site is accomplished with the existing stockade fence and the wooded area.
Mr. Henderson told the Board that he is not proposing any additional lighting or signage for the site. Mr. McGuire asked the applicant to return to the Board if additional lighting is proposed for the site and Mr. Henderson agreed to do so. He further established that the existing resident is presently occupied. Mr. Henderson will return to the Board and request that the entire property be used for business if he desires to covert the existing home to an administrative office.
Mr. Murray discussed the rental situation that exists at the site and he questions if Mr. Henderson is proposing a dual use or a single use. Mr. McGuire noted that he recalls a variance being granted for this property when the wood shop existed. Building Inspector Andrew Geist will research this and make a determination.
Mr. Henderson stated that in the future it is his intention to change the site into a business complex strictly for his own business. However, he is appearing before the Board for approval of the primary use of locksmithing. Mr. Murray questioned the area marked on the sketch noted as “holding operations”. Mr. Henderson told the Board that this is the area where he would park cars. Mr. Murray asked if there will be a parking plan with designated parking spaces. Mr. Henderson noted that the area is large and that there is no need for a plan as he will not have many cars.
Mr. Bodden made a MOTION, seconded by Mr. Fabinsky to recommend that the Town Board APPROVE the requested Change in Use at 3958 Southwestern Blvd. to allow a rear pole barn building located on the property to be used as a key making facility for late model running cars and light pick-up trucks based on the following conditions and stipulations:
1. This is an Unlisted SEQR Action and therefore no determination of significance is required.
2. If the lighting is revised the applicant must provide a lighting plan with a photometrics study and cuts of the fixtures and the height of the poles. Flat lens fixtures must meet our requirements so that we do not create a problem for the adjacent neighbors.
3. If the use of the site is changed to vehicle storage or a holding area for repossessed vehicles the applicant is to return to the Planning Board for review.
ON THE QUESTION:
Mr. Murray asked for clarification of the motion being proposed. He noted that his prior question regarding dual usage was not clarified. The motion as proposed is to have the entire parcel a single use. Attorney Michael Wolf concluded that Building Inspector Geist must research the prior variance granted to this property to determine if the residence is allowed to exist on the property. It may be necessary for the applicant to request a variance for dual usage in order for the tenant to reside here.
THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING:
MC NAMARA AYE
BERNARD AYE
FABINSKY AYE
BODDEN AYE
MCGUIRE AYE
MURRAY AYE
MAJCHRZAK AYE
THE MOTION IS UNANIMOUSLY PASSED.
7. P.B. File #13-05, Eagle Heights West Subdivision, 31 acres of vacant land as an extension of Deer Run, Zoned R-1. Applicant is requesting Pre-application Findings Review of a revised site plan for a 22-lot subdivision.
APPEARANCE: Mr. Rob Pidanick, Greenman-Pedersen
Mr. Kenneth Zollitsch, Greenman-Pedersen
Mr. Peter Sorgi, Attorney
Mr. Pidanick noted that the applicant has provided proof of ownership and is requesting pre-application findings for this 22-lot subdivision. The Board previously directed that a connection be made from this subdivision into the existing Eagle Heights subdivision. He told the Board that the applicant proposes to create the extension across Town owned property and have a bridge cross over a creek in that area. He told the Board that the connection the Board requests ends abruptly at what is basically a paper street; it can not continue forward as the property is owned by private property owner.
Mr. Pidanick told the Board that there are roughly 5-acres of wetlands located here and that the applicant will preserve approximately 4.5 acres of the site. In addition, the applicant proposes to donate land adjacent to the Town owned land and also provide a passage way, along the street, to link to the Town Park area. He further told the Board that all utilities exist; a small detention area is being proposed and that the sanitary sewers will be gravity operated.
Junior Engineer Thomas Ostrander questioned, and Mr. Pidanick established that the detention facility will be private and maintained by the two adjacent home owners. There will be an easement to allow access to the pipe. Mr. Ostrander noted that the Town has not had good experience with homeowner associations maintaining detention facilities.
Mr. Fabinsky stated that he has concerns with regards to having private maintenance of a detention basin. Mr. Pidanick noted that there is a possibility of additional land being dedicated to the Town to create access for storm water and quality requirements on the south side of the site adjacent to the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad tracks. The Planning Coordinator stated that this was the initial recommendation from the Town Engineering Department and that they directed the access be 30-feet wide.
Mr. Ostrander stated that to the best of his recollection that Engineering, Police, Fire, Highway and Public Safety have recommended a full connection. He feels that basically, the applicant is proposing a paper street and Mr. Ostrander does feel that this fulfills the desires or wishes of the Town. Mr. Pidanick stated that he feels that what is proposed is “above and beyond the call of duty”.
Mr. Murray noted that the discussions he remembers did not include an option, of this nature. The discussions were always either there will be no connection which satisfied some of the neighbors or the suggestion that it be connected to satisfy the Town. He now feels that Mr. Pidanick’s description of being connected sounds like it includes not being connected, unless someone else does the connecting. Mr. Pidanick stated that is true and that he explained that they do not own the property to create the connection. Mr. Murray asked, “How do you describe this pre-application finding as one that connects, when in fact it does not connect?” Mr. Pidanick stated that you cannot describe it as connecting and that it is just a stub street across Town owned property. Mr. Murray concluded that all the documentation in the file suggests that this project is to have a connection and that there is virtually a connection; but, it has turned into a third option. Mr. Sorgi noted that they have no power to carry out the connection.