Minutes of the MaY 9, 2007 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
Philip Murray
EXCUSED: Eugene Majchrzak
OTHERS PRESENT: Remy C. Orffeo, Planning Coordinator
Thomas Ostrander, Junior Engineer
Michael Wolf, Deputy Town Attorney
Andrew Geist, Building Inspector
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.
The Chairman stated that Board Member Harold Fabinsky is en route to the meeting and should be arriving shortly.
Upon a motion duly made and seconded, the reading of the minutes of the April 11, 2007 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 11, 2007 meeting as presented.
THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING:
MC NAMARA AYE
BERNARD AYE
BODDEN AYE
FABINSKY N/A
MURRAY AYE
THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
1. 7:30 P.M. Public Hearing, P.B. File #39-06, proposed one-lot subdivision, Hugh Smith, vacant land, 3410 Angle Road, west side of Angle Road, SBL#153.19-1-12, Zoned R2. Planning Board, under SEQRA, to conduct a public hearing. Pre-Application Findings were made on 12/13/06 based on the submitted sketch plan received 8/17/06.
The Chairman called the Public Hearing to order. The Affidavit of Publication and Posting, published April 28, 2007 was presented and filed with the Board by the Planning Board Secretary.
IN FAVOR:
Mr. Tim Arlington
Apex Consulting
102 East Avenue
Lockport, NY 14094
Mr. Arlington stated that he is representing the petitioner, Mr. Hugh Smith. Mr. Arlington told the Board that he is in favor of the proposed one–lot subdivision.
AGAINST:
No one
Mr. Murray made a MOTION, seconded by Mr. Bernard, to CLOSE the PUBLIC HEARING.
THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING:
MC NAMARA AYE
BERNARD AYE
BODDEN AYE
FABINSKY N/A
MURRAY AYE
THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
APPEARANCE: Mr. Tim Arlington, Apex Consulting
Mr. Hugh Smith, applicant
The Chairman explained to Mr. Smith that Mr. Fabinsky is en route to the meeting and that only four members were present to vote at this time; all four voting members must respond in favor of the project in order for it to be passed. The Chairman asked Mr. Smith if he would like to wait for Mr. Fabinsky to arrive; however, he indicated to the Chairman that he would like to proceed with the present Board.
The Chairman asked Mr. Arlington to briefly explain the project. It was established that final Engineering approval has been granted and that Erie County has issued a letter granting septic approval.
Mr. Bodden made a MOTION, seconded by Mr. Bernard to Grant Conditional Preliminary Plat Plan Approval to this one-lot subdivision based on the submitted preliminary plat plan received 2/28/07 with the following conditions:
1. This is an Unlisted SEQR action based on the submitted Short EAF, Parts 1 and 2, and a Negative Declaration is hereby made on 5/9/07.
2. Public Hearing and Subdivision Development fees have been paid.
3. Recreation fees in accordance with Section 144-70E of the Town Code have been provided prior to the Final Plat Plan Public Hearing.
4. One (1) Street Tree per the Conservation Board Street Tree Plan shall be provided on the lot, per Section 121-66 of the Town Code.
5. Town Engineering Preliminary Approval has been granted on 3/14/07.
THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING:
MC NAMARA AYE
BERNARD AYE
BODDEN AYE
FABINSKY N/A
MURRAY AYE
THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
Mr. Bodden made a MOTION, seconded by Mr. Bernard, to WAIVE the FINAL PUBLIC HEARING.
THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING:
MC NAMARA AYE
BERNARD AYE
BODDEN AYE
FABINSKY N/A
MURRAY AYE
THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
Mr. Bodden made a MOTION, seconded by Mr. Bernard, to CONDITIONAL FINAL PLAT PLAN APPROVAL to this one (1) lot subdivision based on the submitted plat plan received 8/17/06 with the following conditions:
1. Conditional Preliminary Plat Plan approval was granted on 5/9/07.
2. A negative declaration was issued on 5/9/07.
3. Public Hearing and Subdivision Development fees have been paid.
4. Recreation fees in accordance with Section 144-70E of the Town Code have been provided.
5. 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.
6. Town Engineering Approval has been granted on 5/09/07.
7. All approvals are contingent upon conformity to Conservation Board recommendations as indicated in Conservation Board minutes.
8. All understandings, covenants and agreements that are part of the written record are incorporated as conditions of approval.
THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING:
MC NAMARA AYE
BERNARD AYE
BODDEN AYE
FABINSKY N/A
MURRAY AYE
THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
2. P.B. File #20-07, Orchard Park Antique Mall, 3025 Orchard Park Road, Zoned B-2. Requesting Planning Board approval of outdoor display. (renewal)
Mr. Murray stated that he will recuse himself in this case due to a business relationship with the applicant.
APPEARANCE: Mr. Don Frank, applicant
Mr. Frank told the Board that he is proposing to renew a request to erect a 30 ft. x 100 ft., 12-1/2 ft. high outdoor tent, to be located on the Michael Road side of the building. The previous tent approved was larger in size (60 ft. x 120 ft., 21 ft. high)
The Chairman noted that an April 4, 2007 directive was issued to the Planning Board by Building Inspector Geist stating that, “two fire extinguishers be provided – one at either end of the tent, mounted to the poles; the tent shall not be occupied in the event of winter type weather, i.e. accumulating snow or high winds”.
The Chairman made a MOTION, seconded by Mr. Bernard, to GRANT OUTSIDE DISPLAY from 5/10/07 to 10/31/07 based on the site plan received 4/2/07, based on the following stipulations:
1. This is a Type II SEQR action and therefore no SEQR determination is required.
2. There will be no further additional outside lighting for the display or temporary structure.
3. There will no banners or additional signage for this facility.
4. Two, 20 lb. fire extinguishers shall be provided at either end of the tent, mounted onto poles.
5. There will be no occupancy of the tent during severe weather conditions.
THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING:
MC NAMARA AYE
BERNARD AYE
BODDEN AYE
FABINSKY AYE
MURRAY ABSTAINED
THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
3. P.B. File #21-07, Moe’s, 3165 Southwestern Boulevard, located within the Cross Roads Plaza, Zoned B-2. Requesting Planning Board approval of outdoor seating. (renewal)
APPEARANCE: Mr. Brad DeGrazia
Mr. DeGrazia told the Board that he is requesting a renewal for outdoor seating and have the expiration time extended to November 30, 2007. There will be four tables with three chairs. Mr. Murray discussed providing adequate space for wheel chair access and Mr. DeGrazia told the Board that he will provide accessibility for wheel chair bound customers. He also told the Board that the fence had not been removed as agreed to; however, the snow removal was not affected with the fence left in place.
Mr. Bodden made a MOTION, seconded by Mr. Murray, to GRANT the renewal of the patio outdoor seating (for twelve (12) persons) from 5/9/07 to 11/30/07 with the following condition:
1. After November 30th, the tables, chairs and umbrellas shall be removed. The outside seating shall not be located any further west than what the photo indicates.
2. Seating will be provided for 12 individuals; there will be 4 tables, with three chairs at each table.
3. The applicant is to have the patio area ADA compliant by providing adequate room for wheel chair bound individuals.
THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING:
MC NAMARA AYE
BERNARD AYE
BODDEN AYE
FABINSKY AYE
MURRAY AYE
THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
4. P.B. File #23-07, Panera’s, 3995 North Buffalo Road, located in “The Orchard” Plaza, Zoned B-2. Requesting Planning Board approval of outdoor seating. (renewal)
APPEARANCE: Mike Herald, representing Panera’s Bread
The Board discussed the renewal for outdoor seating with the applicant. Although the applicant requests that the Board’s review take place every two-years, the Chairman stated, that based on the fact that the seating is currently being used, he would prefer to have a probationary period of one-year and have the applicant return in December of 2007. At that time the Board will make a determination regarding the request for a two-year renewal period.
Mr. Herald noted that several of the outdoor tables have not been located; therefore, he would only have seating for 24-persons during the time period of 4/1/07 through 10/31/07, after which time the tables will be removed and stored until the next season.
Mr. Bernard discussed the parking requirement with Mr. Herald and it was noted that additional parking is available on the north side of the building and at the rear of the site. Junior Engineer Thomas Ostrander stated that the Engineering Department reviewed the parking at the site, conducted a park space study since December 2006, and concludes that there are no parking concerns at the site.
Mr. Bernard, also, discussed concerns regarding children errantly running out onto North Buffalo Street. Mr. Herald noted that the road is approximately 20-feet from the outdoor seating area, with a flower bed in between. He told the Board that he would review the site and add more plantings or chain-type fencing to detour this behavior.
Mr. Herald told the Board that several of the outdoor tables used in 2006 have not been located; therefore he would only have seating for 24.
Mr. Bodden made a MOTION, seconded by Mr. Murray, to GRANT a renewal of the outdoor seating for 24-persons from 4/1/07 to 10/31/07 with the following conditions:
1. There will be 8-tables with four chairs at each table.
THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING:
MC NAMARA AYE
BERNARD AYE
BODDEN AYE
FABINSKY AYE
MURRAY AYE
THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
5. P.B. File #25-07, 3878 Southwestern Boulevard, Richard Schosek/Windom Power Equipment property, north side of Southwestern Blvd., Zoned B-2. Sun Enterprises requesting Planning Board approval for outdoor display.
APPEARANCE: Mr. Richard Schosek, property owner
Mr. Greg Funk, Sun Enterprises
Mr. Funk told the Board that he would like to use a portion of Mr. Schosek’s property for the display and sale of garden/storage sheds. The Board’s questions established that, initially, there will be seven (7) sheds on display; however, prior to the County Fair in August, four (4) of the sheds will be permanently removed. Mr. Funk would like to have the remaining three (3) sheds on display through out the year as they are large and difficult to dismantle. A sales office will be established in an existing building. Mr. Funk explained that this is not a high volume business and he feels there is ample parking. It was also learned that the
highest shed will be 16-feet tall at its peak and that the sheds will be located in a 100-foot wide linear area. It was further established that there will be no additional lighting and that the parking of vehicles at the site will continue during the football season. Building Inspector Geist stated that he will review the applicant’s proposed signage upon its submission.
The Planning Coordinator requests that a more formal submission be made for next year and that the applicant include photos for review.
Mr. Bernard made a MOTION, seconded by Mr. Bodden, to GRANT Outside Display from 5/9/07 to 11/01/07 based on the site plan received 4/24/07 based on 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 displays or temporary structures.
3. Seven (7) sheds will be in the arranged in an area of the approximately 24-ft. x 100-ft. plan area as shown on the submitted plat plan.
4. Proposed signage is to be submitted to the Building Inspector’s office for review and approval.
ON THE QUESTION:
The Chairman questioned the motion specifying seven (7) sheds; however, Mr. Bernard noted that he would not have a problem as long as the sheds were all gone at the end of the time period.
THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING:
MC NAMARA AYE
BERNARD AYE
BODDEN AYE
FABINSKY AYE
MURRAY AYE
THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
6. P.B. File #11-07, McGard, 3875 California Road, Zoned I-1. Requesting a Building permit and Site Plan approval to construct a 5,500 sq. ft. +/- addition to an existing building. Town Board referred to Planning Board on 3/21/07.
APPEARANCE: James Churchill, Scheid Architectural
Mr. Churchill explained the project to the Board.
Planning Coordinator Remy Orffeo noted that Mr. Churchill sent a correspondence dated 4/25/07 regarding the proposed project. Item #9 in the correspondence states that, “Based on the number of employees, 258 first shift, 122 second shift and 11 third shift, the existing 342 spaces and proposed
addition of 65 spaces provide an adequate amount of parking for shifts 1 & 2 to park in the site at the same time, while leaving 19 spaces for visitor parking. The
new addition of 5,574 square feet would require the addition of 12 spaces; we have added 65 totaling 407 spaces. Per my conversation with Thomas Ostrander we have added (8) additional spaces along the south side of the building”. Mr. Orffeo stated that he believes the needs for employee parking have been met.
Junior Engineer Thomas Ostrander told the Board that the Engineering Department requests that an enlargement of the site plan along the south property be submitted; this is needed for clarity of the proposed parking lot area grading. He reports that there are no problems with the project and that once the requested drawing is received, Engineering Approval will be granted.
Mr. Bernard established that the parking at the site will be 34-parking spaces deficient. However, it was verified that there is ample room at the site to add parking spaces if they are needed; the green space area will not be impacted and a variance will not be needed if additional parking is added. It was further established that the lighting at the site will not be increased.
Mr. Murray and Mr. Bernard request that the re-submitted plan indicate where future parking spaces will be proposed if requested by the Board.
Mr. Ostrander confirmed that the site has ample space for future parking.
Mr. Bodden made a MOTION, seconded by Mr. Bernard, to recommend that the Town Board AUTHORIZE a Building Permit for a 5,500 sq. ft. +/- Building and APPROVE the site plan received 3/16/07, 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. Dumpsters as shown shall be screened, along with any additional dumpsters, in accordance with Section 144-25 of the Town Code.
5. Conditioned pending the submission of an enlarged drainage and grading plan and Town Engineering approval.
6. A landscape completion bond in the amount of $13,360.00 shall be provided for the landscape plan received 3/16/07 which includes 66% total green space, prior to the receipt of a Building Permit.
7. The applicant is to detail the future location of additional parking spaces on the enlarged drainage and grading plan that is to be re-submitted to the Engineering Department before final approval can be granted.
8. Per Section 144-29(2), the Board approves the site plan with reduced parking of 34-parking spaces, contingent upon a submittal of the revised plan showing where those spaces could be added if ever required.
THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING:
MC NAMARA AYE
BERNARD AYE
BODDEN AYE
FABINSKY N/A
MURRAY AYE
THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
7. P.B. File #05-06, Reed’s Jewelry Store, south east corner of Milestrip Road and Abbott Road, Zoned B-2. Planning Board granted approval on 7/5/06 to submitted plan dated 6/23/06. Board to review additional information regarding site plan revision to allow a second site curb cut located on Milestrip Road.
APPEARANCE: Mr. Jeffrey Zimmer, owner Reed’s Jewelry Store
Mr. Jeff Palumbo, Attorney
Robert Miller, Project Manager – Nussbaumer & Clarke
The Board members revisited the applicant’s request to allow a second site curb cut located on Milestrip Road based on the submittal of a review dated 4/11/07 from the D.O.T.
Mr. Miller discussed the review letter issued by the D.O.T. based on the traffic study that his firm submitted to their office. He told the Board that the Regional Office of the D.O.T. also participated in the review. The D.O.T. review determined that the raised medium (splitter island), originally requested by their office, is no longer desired; two driveways at the site are preferred as they feel it is safer; only right-hand turns in or out of the site will be allowed; and, the curb radius is to be flattened out as it creates a hazard to pedestrians.
Mr. Bernard stated that he read the report prepared by the D.O.T. and he found contradictory statements in the report. He noted that there is no discussion of site distance. Mr. Miller stated that he specifically asked the D.O.T. about site distance and they told him that it is not a problem. Mr. Bernard, again, noted that this was not mentioned in the report.
Mr. Bernard questions the signage that will be used to control right-hand turns into and out of the site. He wonders how they will be placed. He described traveling west bound on Milestrip Road approaching the double left turning lanes that line up in front of the applicant’s property, prior to the Abbott Road directional signal. He wonders how a motorist can be stopped from acting on turning left into the applicant’s property with these two lanes inviting you to turn left. Mr. Miller discussed other sites with this situation, i.e. Starbucks on Milestrip, noting that a splitter is used with numerous signs. Mr. Bernard questions what verbiage will be used to stop a westbound motorist entering the double left-hand turning lane to not turn left into the site. Mr. Miller stated that the D.O.T. does not have a problem with “no left-hand turn” signs. Mr. Bernard,
again, stated that he does not understand the rational used; further he must know how it will work before he approves a site plan.
Mr. Bernard told Mr. Miller, that, although the traffic report is very thorough, it also states that one of the curb cuts is too close to the signal. He notes that the
same D.O.T. that approved a curb cut did meet their standard. Mr. Miller stated that it is his understanding that this curb cut was put in before the reconstruction of the intersection; it existed and the D.O.T. worked around it. Mr. Bernard noted that he feels that the State could have closed off the most northern curb cut on Abbott Road, which obviously has an impact on turning; he, again, stated that he feels there are contradictions in the report from the D.O.T.
Mr. Miller discussed the D.O.T. recommendations further, noting that they also suggest eliminating a portion of the retaining wall to make the site safer.
Mr. Murray stated that it sounds to him as though the D.O.T. and Nussbaumer & Clarke will prepare a signage plan for the site. Mr. Miller stated that he does not believe it would be called a “plan”; it is a field review performed by the D.O.T. prior to placing signage.
Mr. Ostrander told the Board that it is a practice for the D.O.T. to make a determination in the field based on site conditions, to tailor the signage for the site.
Mr. Bernard, again, stated that it does not make sense to him to install a sign that states “no left hand turn” when there already is a left hand turn; this is confusing. He would like to know what the plan is for the signage. He commented that, perhaps the yellow striping can be changed; there are many other things that could be done on the “what if hypothetical”; he is not sure what the site will look like in the future.
Mr. Bodden stated that he feels the State D.O.T. approved the site plan; the Town Engineering Department has no problem with the plan; the number of vehicles is not significant; therefore, he does not believe this is a problem.
The signage for the site was discussed at length by the members. The Chairman concluded that, to him, it makes common sense to have the splitter island included on the site. He can not support having nothing. Mr. Miller told the Board that he agrees that having the island area makes more sense; but the experts have directed not to have it. He told the Board that he can ask the D.O.T. if they will provide a signage plan for the site.
Mr. Murray stated that he can not grant final approval for the curb cut requested on Milestrip Road, without being provided with a directional traffic management plan for this extremely busy street with double left-turn lanes. The Planning Board has thoroughly reviewed safety at the site and he does not feel the Board can issue an approval on the “what if hypothetical”; he does not feel the Board should settle for whatever the D.O.T. decides upon and not be related to the process. He asked the applicants what the height and size of the proposed signage will be and Mr. Palumbo stated that he did not know; however, he told the Board that this information was provided in the
submission. The Board took a short recess and studied the applicant’s signage information. The following comments were made;
• Mr. Fabinsky noted that he feels the absence of an island invites chaos.
• Mr. Bodden stated that he does not believe the curb cut will be a problem, based on the number of vehicles that will access the site. He feels that the Planning Board’s job is to grant or deny the curb cut and that the D.O.T. will study the situation accordingly, with regards to signage.
• Mr. Murray needs to see a design of some sort in order to make a determination regarding the curb cut, with respect to safety concerns; installing a sign that states “no left turn” has no value to traffic on Milestrip Road that will be tempted to access the site using the existing double left-turning lanes. He stated that he agrees the site needs the originally proposed splitter island .
• The Chairman noted that he believes it is common sense to have the island.
The Board concluded their discussion and determined that Mr. Zimmer will re-discuss installing the splitter island area with the D.O.T. The Planning Coordinator will issue a letter that indicates that the Board prefers the original site plan #7166492351 proposing the splitter island.
The Planning Coordinator noted that the Board must resolve to accept or deny the submitted traffic study as the motion made at the April meeting failed. He explained that the Board can order a new traffic study, hire a consultant, or accept the traffic study.
Mr. Bernard made a MOTION, seconded by Mr. Bodden, to ACCEPT the traffic study received 3/1/07.
THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING:
MC NAMARA AYE
BERNARD AYE
BODDEN AYE
FABINSKY AYE
MURRAY NAY
THE MOTION BEING FOUR (4) IN FAVOR AND ONE (1) AGAINST, THE MOTION IS PASSED.
8. P.B. File #68-06, Young Development/Hilltowne Park Phase II Subdivision, +/- 15.4 acres vacant land east side of Murphy Road, Zoned R-2. Requesting Pre-Application Findings review of an 11-lot Subdivision.
APPEARANCE: Bryan Young, owner and developer
Mr. Young stated that the submitted revised plan is based on the comments received from the Engineering Department. In addition, a 50-foot conservation easement area has been added to the site, per the request of the Conservation Board and an 8-foot wide trail will be placed at the beginning of the creek.
Junior Engineer Thomas Ostrander stated that Town Engineer Wayne Bieler met with Mr. Young’s engineer today and that additional improvements were made not shown on the plan presented. This includes, connecting the trail to the access driveway, re-configuring lot #9 to improve the building envelope and increasing the size of lots 1 & 2 by adding property that Mr. Young owns at the rear of the site. Mr. Ostrander told the Board that the total number of building lots remains at 11.
Mr. Bernard established that the aerial layover of the site was not provided as requested by the Board at the concept review.
Mr. Bodden discussed the build out of Phase I. Mr. Young stated that he does not know how many homes have been constructed; however, Mr. Ostrander believes 10 to 11 lots have been built upon. (The 1997 site plan indicates there are a total of 35 building lots in Phase I.) Mr. Young told the Board that he intends to increase marketability on the Phase I site by planting trees near Route 219. He also told the Board that the homes will be approximately 2,600 sq. ft. to 3,000 sq. ft. in size and that a building lot will cost approximately $70,000.00.
The Board reviewed the plan further; however, they determined that they require the aerial overlay is needed before the Board can make pre-application findings.
Mr. Bernard made a MOTION, seconded by Mr. Fabinsky, to TABLE the review of the case pending the receipt of an aerial overlay.
THE VOTE ON THE MOTION BEING:
MC NAMARA AYE
BERNARD AYE
BODDEN AYE
FABINSKY N/A
MURRAY AYE
THE MOTION TO TABLE WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
CONCEPT REVIEW:
1. P.B. File #15-07, Bryan Young, 5245 Murphy Road, Zoned R-2. Applicant would like to discuss converting the existing Sanctuary Building into a senior housing facility. (Property SBL#184.07-1-1./A)
APPEARANCE: Mr. Bryan Young, owner and developer
Mr. Peter Krog, owner and developer
Mr. Roger Langer, NHR Architect
Joe Bowes, Rural Opportunities - Housing
Mr. Krog told the members that he had met with the Town Board during a work session and presented the proposed project to receive their comments. He states that the current zoning is R-2 and requests that 12 acres be rezoned to R-3. The proposal is to utilize the existing facility that is located on the site for senior housing.
Points of interest:
• Fifty (50) apartments, approximately 650 – 900 sq. ft. in size will be developed in the existing building.
• Twenty-five (25) apartments will be constructed into an addition off the main building.
• Twenty-five (25) bungalows be constructed around the perimeter of the building.
• There are a total of 136-acres owned by Mr. Young and Mr. Krog. They have no plans for the remaining acreage; it will be farmed.
• There will be outdoor common areas located on the site.
• Residents must be 55 years of age or older, with a maximum income of $40,000. The apartments will be 1 to 2 bedroom rental units. “Housing Opportunity” is a “not for profit operation” based out of Rochester, New York and is part of “Rural Opportunities”.
• The project site has sewers.
• Mr. Krog told the Board that the project is named “Pines of Murphy Road”.
Mr. Fabinsky noted that he strongly supports the re-use of existing structures. He established that, under the R-2 classification, 24 – 30 single family homes could be constructed upon lots ½-acre in size; the R-3 classification would allow 72 units. Mr. Fabinsky would like additional acreage added to the outdoor common areas for buffering. He noted that, conceptually, he is comfortable with the proposal.
Mr. Murray would like to know if this proposed project is part of a federal title program.
The Chairman would like to review an amended plan demonstrating 100-single family homes constructed here. He also discussed the residents living in the surrounding area and he asked the applicants to contact them and discuss the proposed project. He told Mr. Krog that he feels that the facility is institutional looking and he would like the building appearance improved. He would also like to know where the tenants will come from; inside the area, or outside of Orchard Park.
Junior Engineer Thomas Ostrander would like the applicant to consider storm water detention when calculating the use of the acreage at the site.
Mr. Bodden asked the applicants if the project will be receiving tax breaks and Mr. Krog stated that he can not answer this. Mr. Bodden also would like to know if the project will create a burden on our emergency services.
Mr. Bernard noted that several points discussed this evening will need to be addressed in the SEQR long form. He also requests that the applicant provide an
aerial overlay for the proposed project and a revised site plan indicating the increase in acreage.
Attorney Michael Wolf discussed the acreage requirement for the project; Building Inspector Geist will review the project and advise the applicants of his determination.
The Planning Coordinator noted that the applicants must submit a revised request to the Town Board for re-referral to the Planning Board if the number of acres to be rezoned has changed.
2. P.B. File #19-07, Vacant Land, 7830 Ellicott Road, north side of Ellicott Road, Zoned R-1. Mr. Moeller to discuss proposed two-lot subdivision.
APPEARANCE: Mr. Steven Moeller, property owner and developer
Mr. Moeller told the Board that he originally owned 42-acres with a farm house upon it. He described the history of the property and concluded that he would like to demolish the existing farm house, develop a two-lot subdivision and build his “dream home” at the rear of the property. He presented a sketch plan for the Board’s review and comments. It was noted that the frontage of the building lots will be 120 feet wide.
Junior Engineer Thomas Ostrander noted that he had issued a comment letter to the applicant’s engineer.
The Board concluded that they liked the proposal.
3. P.B. File #12-07, Vacant Land, north east corner of Jewett-Holmwood & Freeman Roads, Zoned R-1. “Courtyard at Birdsong”. Mr. Dominic Piestrak would like to discuss a project proposing the construction of 39 +/- residential homes for this site under the Conservation Management Overlay District “CMO” ordinance.
APPEARANCE: Dominic Piestrak, Developer
Nick Piestrak, Developer
Cliff Crumb, GPI
Ken Zollitsch, GPI
Mr. Crumb presented a concept plan proposing to construct village style homes based on the newly adopted Town of Orchard Park Conservation Management overlay District ordinance (CMO). He told the Board that a trail system and terraced walls are proposed for the site. He also stated that the homes will have basements and walk-out areas.
Planning Coordinator Remy Orffeo pointed out that the applicant’s project does not meet the requirements of the CMO. He stated that the minimum area requirement, as defined in Section 3.1 of the ordinance, has not been met. He further noted that vehicles parked in driveways as shown on the plan will extend into the sidewalk areas. Mr. Orffeo stated that the CMO ordinance requires sidewalks, as defined in Section 4.8.7; however, there are no provisions in the ordinance for relief. He suggests that the applicant contact the Town Board to discuss amendments to the ordinance.
Mr. Murray discussed the Birdsong Subdivision and the EIS that was performed, noting that the “Courtyard at Birdsong” site was included in the study. He told Mr. Piestrak that he would like information provided indicating stub roads and future connections. Mr. Nick Piestrak told the Board that the Courtyard at Birdsong is separate from the existing Birdsong Subdivision and that the original EIS performed had no roads connecting to this site. He told the members that this site is totally separate form the Birdsong Subdivision. Mr. Murray confirmed with Mr. Piestrak that the project, as presented, does not meet the CMO ordinance.
The Chairman noted that he is not impressed with the proposal; he would like to see less density in their proposal.
The Board members concluded that there are ordinances issues that need to be resolved and they directed the applicant to meet with the Town Board.
4. P.B. File#09-07, Wal-Mart Superstore, Vacant Land south side of Milestrip Road, across from the existing Quaker Crossing Plaza site, Zoned B-1. Requesting a Building Permit and Site Plan Approval to develop a 134,088 square feet +/- store with a retail department, grocery department, pharmacy and a partially enclosed garden center. Town Board referred to Planning Board on 3/7/07.
APPEARANCE: Kelly Pronti, Harter Secrest Emery, LLP
Tom Lucey, APD Engineering
Elisa Tsang, APD Engineering
Scott Hagadorn, Bergmann Associates
Mr. Lucey presented and explained plans for a proposed Super Wal-Mart to be constructed on the south side of Milestrip Road across from the existing Quaker Crossing Plaza. Mr. Lucey told the members that the Wal-Mart Superstore project will not have a gas station or car wash and is 635 sq. ft. smaller than the Sam’s Club project previously proposed for this site. It was established that the Sam’s Club project that had been proposed was a total of 34,723 sq. ft.; the Wal-Mart Superstore totals to 134,088 sq. ft. It was also established that the Wal-Mart Superstore will operate 24-hours per day. The project received Conservation Board approval on 5/1/07 and has a landscape value estimation cost of $210,496.50 and an interior green space area of 10.75%.
Mr. Fabinsky noted that he feels this is a large, high profile project; Wal-Mart has become a focal point with residents having different community views. He noted that the Board will carefully review the benefit and problems associated with the project. He further noted that the Town of Orchard Park is a semi-rural community and he feels that there will be issues with traffic and the store’s appearance. Mr. Fabinsky stated that he would like the store to be unobtrusive. He stated that he believes the proposed pedestrian walkways in the parking lot detract from the “big box-store” feel.
Ms. Pronti told the members that she is working with the members of the Town Board; noting that Councilwoman Ackerman has been assisting them with the elevations. Mr. Lucey stated that the elevations presented to the
Board have been based on Councilwoman Ackerman’s input and visual studies performed in the Town.
Discussion and comments from the members included:
• Mr. Fabinsky stated that he has concerns regarding abandoned plazas.
• The Board would like the applicant to submit an updated traffic study prepared as one concise new document. All traffic data must be less than 3-years old. Chairman McNamara discussed having the traffic study to include information regarding the number of motorists that access Lake Avenue to and from the Quaker Crossing site. Mr. Murray discussed having the traffic study show the cumulative impact of traffic through-out the Town of Orchard Park. Mr. McNamara added that the Board would like a survey study done on other existing Wal-Mart stores to verify number of actual parking spaces used versus actual available spaces onsite.
• How long does Wal-Mart plan to be in operation at this site? It was established that Wal-Mart is under contract to purchase the property.
• The applicant stated that the proposed parking plan does not meet the Town ordinance with regards to parking spaces; it is deficient by a total of 152 parking spaces. However, the applicant feels that the proposed parking is adequate.
• The Board would like to be provided with information indicating the number of employees that will work here to confirm the 135 noted on the Site Plan.
• The Board discussed the site plan further and noted that it must show the location of the parking spaces.
• The applicants stated that there are no intentions to create an additional access, using this parcel to Milestrip Road.
• The over-night parking of camping trailers and tractor trailers is not promoted by the applicants; nor will it be by the Town of Orchard Park.
• Mr. Fabinsky discussed litter issues; it was established that the same standards used at the existing Quaker Crossing will be used at this site.
• Planning Coordinator Orffeo suggests that the EAF be re-submitted and that it pertain specifically to this project. He also noted that on March 7, 2007 he requested that a copy of the site plan and the proposed traffic improvements and changes be sent to the Town Police Chief, who requested these items; as of this date, he has not received this information.
• Mr. Orffeo suggests that during the public hearing the applicants have a duplicate presentation and an easel to face the audience so they may view the information being discussed.
There being no further business, the Chairman adjourned the meeting at 10:50 P.M.
DATED: May 29, 2007 Respectfully Submitted,
REVIEWED: May 30, 2007 Rosemary M. Seivert
Planning Board Secretary
William McNamara,
Planning Board Chairman