[00:00:01]
ALL SET.[ TOWN OF GREENBURGH PLANNING BOARD GREENBURGH TOWN HALL AGENDA WEDNESDAY, January 20, 2021 – 5:00 P.M. Meetings of the Planning Board will be adjourned at 8:00 p.m. ]
GOOD EVENING AND WELCOME TO, UH, JANUARY 20TH, PLANNING BOARD MEETING.I WOULD LIKE TO START WITH A ROLL CALL.
VOTE FOR FROM DEPUTY COMMISSIONER SCHMID.
UH, UH, THE FIRST THING ON OUR AGENDA IS, UM, THE MINUTES OF OUR JANUARY 6TH MEETING.
I HAVE TWO, UH, CORRECTIONS I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE ON IT.
UM, IF YOU LOOK ON THE CORRESPONDENCE, B UH, SECTION B, THE SECOND PARAGRAPH, IT STARTS OFF WITH CHAIRMAN SIMON SUGGESTED I WOULD LIKE TO CHANGE THE WORD SUGGESTED TO STATE IT.
AND IF YOU GO DOWN 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 LINES DOWN WITH THE SENTENCE, STARTING DETERMINATION SHOULD BE HIGH, AND I THINK THERE'S A EXTRA COMMA THAT SHOULD BE, UH, REMOVED.
I, UH, DO ANYONE ELSE HAVE ANY CORRECTION OR MODIFICATION TO THE MINUTES? I HAD A QUESTION.
FOR THE FIFTH PARAGRAPH DOWN, IT STARTS, MR. SCHWARTZ STATED IN THE MIDDLE, IT SAYS THERE'S AGREEMENT THAT A CONSULTANT IS NEEDED TO ADDRESS QUESTIONS AND CONCERNS RELATED TO SAFETY, FIRE GASES, ELECTRIFIED WATER.
IS THAT ACCURATE? IS THAT THAT IS WHAT WAS STATED, YES.
THAT IS ACCURATE, TOM, BE, BECAUSE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WATER THAT COULD BE ELECTRIFIED.
YOU COULD HAVE OPERATING BATTERY UNITS AND TAKES 3000 GALLONS OF WATER TO PUT OUT ONE OF THESE FIRES, SO YOU HAVE THE POSSIBILITY OF SOMEBODY BEING ELECTROCUTED.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS REGARDING THE MINUTES? YEAH, I THINK, UH, WALTER, I HAVE A COMMENT ON PAGE FIVE, UH, FOURTH PARAGRAPH.
UH, AND THE DISCUSSION WAS REGARDING THE, UH, WOULD THE PROPOSAL MAKE THE AREA COVERAGE WITH THE, UH, WITH THE CONSERVATION EASEMENT? AND, UH, I THINK APPLICANTS SAY THAT THEY'RE GOING TO USE THAT ADDITIONAL THREE POINT, I KNOW THREE ACRES TO BE USED FOR, UH, BUILDING CALCULATION OF AREA COVERAGE.
AND I DID NOT, UH, SEE THAT EXPLANATION IN THAT ONE.
SO I'LL, I'LL GO BACK TO THE TAPE AND IF THAT IN FACT WAS SAID, I WILL ADD THAT TO THE MINUTE.
SO PLEASE, YOUR COMMENT WAS THAT YOU BELIEVE THE APPLICANT HAD STATED THAT THEY'LL USE THAT ACREAGE TOWARDS THE LOT COVERAGE? YEAH.
ON ANY OTHER COMMENTS REGARDING THE MINUTES OF, UH, JANUARY 6TH? IF NOT, I'LL, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE MINUTES AS, UH, AMENDED.
SO MOVED SECOND BY SECOND BY, UH, HUGH.
UH, THE, THE NEXT THING ON OUR AGENDA IS, UH, CORRESPONDENCE.
AND THIS IS IN REGARDS TO, UM, UH, THE B M R ARDSLEY PARK THAT THEY'RE ASKING FOR AN EXTENSION.
AND THIS IS BASED UPON, UH, THE FACT THAT THEY CAN'T GET, THEY HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO GET FINAL APPROVAL FROM WESTCHESTER COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH.
AND IT HAS BEEN OUR TRADITION.
IF A APPLICANT, UH, UH, REQUIRES AN EXTENSION BECAUSE OF THE ACTIONS
[00:05:01]
OR LACK OF ACTIONS OF ANOTHER GOVERNMENTAL AGENCY, WE TRADITIONALLY WILL EXTEND THAT.UH, UM, WILL IT JUST GIVE, UH, AN EXTENSION OF THE, OF OUR, UH, UH, THE PERMIT THAT THEY HAVE, THIS BEING THE CASE? I ASK THAT THE MOTION THAT WE EXTEND, UM, WALTER, IS 90 DAYS, REALISTICALLY ENOUGH, I DON'T KNOW HOW LONG THEY'VE BEEN WAITING.
I, I THOUGHT IT WAS NOT ENOUGH, BUT THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE REQUESTING.
BUT I HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO OBJECTION TO MAKING IT LONGER THAN THE 90 DAYS.
UH, LET MAKE ONE COMMENT, DAVID.
IN GENERAL, WE, WE DO 90 DAYS BECAUSE THAT'S CONSISTENT WITH, UH, WHAT THE STATE CODE IS.
YOU CAN DO 180, BUT, UH, TO BE CONSISTENT, WE GENERALLY GO WITH THE 90 DAYS.
AND, AND SEEING HOW ADDITIONALLY ALL THAT IS REQUIRED AS A LETTER SHOULD HAVE HAPPENED AGAIN, BECAUSE TRADITIONALLY WE WILL EXTEND IT.
SO I THINK, UH, 90 DAYS SHOULD BE SUFFICIENT BECAUSE THEY COULD EASILY EXTEND THAT, AND WE WOULD NOT BE BREAKING WITH A TRADITION.
SO, I, UH, I, I MADE A MOTION FOR A SECOND TO APPROVE THE EXTENSION.
I MADE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE EXTENSION.
UH, SO WE, THE EXTENSION IS A, IS GRANTED, UH, WHAT WE WON'T, WE ONLY HAVE ONE ITEM ON THE AGENDA FOR PUBLIC HEARING.
SO, UH, WE'LL GO INTO PUBLIC HEARING, TAKE CARE OF THAT ONE ITEM, AND THEN WE WILL CONTINUE WITH OUR AGENDA.
SO WE WILL NOW, UH, GO INTO PUBLIC HEARING AND TRADITION, EVEN THOUGH THE PUBLIC HEARING IS RIGHT AFTER A PREVIOUS ROLL CALL FOR THE RECORD, WE'LL TAKE A ROLL CALL AGAIN, CHAIRPERSON.
SIMON, IF I MAY, FOR ONE MOMENT.
UM, TYPICALLY AS A COURTESY, WHEN WE DO HAVE A, ANOTHER COMMISSIONER, UH, FROM A DEPARTMENT BEFORE THE BOARD, WE WOULD HAVE THAT COMMISSIONER COME FIRST.
WE HAVE COMMISSIONER BYRNE FROM PARKS AND RECREATION HERE THIS EVENING.
IT, IT'S UP TO THE BOARD IF YOU
THAT'S, THAT HAS BEEN THE SAME.
WE TRADITIONALLY EXTEND THE COURTESY OF AN APPLICANT, UH, FOR EXTENSION.
IT ALSO HAVE BEEN OUR, UH, PRACTICE TO EXTEND THAT COURTESY TO OTHER BOARDS.
WE WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS CASE TB 2101, AND WE HAVE COMMISSIONER BURNS WITH US.
SO WE WILL HAVE HIM TO, UM, PRESENT THE APPLICATION.
AND, UH, THANK YOU ALL FOR, UH, ALLOWING ME TO SPEAK BEFORE YOU, UH, LIKE WE HAVE DONE, UH, OVER THE YEARS.
UM, WE HAVE ANOTHER, UH, PARKLAND PROPOSED, UH, PROJECT THAT'S BEEN IN THE WORKS PROBABLY FOR ABOUT THREE, THREE OR FOUR YEARS.
UM, WE, WE ARE LOOKING AT DOING A JOINT PROJECT WITH THE GREENBERG SCHOOL DISTRICT BY INSTALLING A, UH, PLAYGROUND ON SURPLUS, THE NEW PLAYGROUND, A SURPLUS, UH, UH, PROPERTY, UH, AT THE RJ BAILEY ELEMENTARY SCHOOL.
UM, WHEN WE STARTED CONVERSATIONS, UH, ABOUT FOUR YEARS AGO, UM, WE HAD SOME INTEREST, BUT THEN WE KNEW THERE WAS A, UH, BOND THAT WAS COMING BEFORE THE, THE COMMUNITY ABOUT, UH, SELLING THAT PROPERTY AND, UH, YOU KNOW, MERGING ALL THE CAMPUSES, UH, YOU KNOW, BY THE HIGH SCHOOL AND JUNIOR HIGH.
AND AS WE KNOW, THAT BOND WAS VOTED DOWN.
SO, UH, DURING THAT TIME, WE JUST PUT EVERYTHING ON HOLD.
SO, UH, I, I THINK, UH, PROBABLY ABOUT A YEAR AGO, NOVEMBER, WE STARTED CONVERSATIONS AGAIN, AND THEN THROUGH THE PANDEMIC, UM, WE WORKED WITH, UH, YOU KNOW, VARIOUS, UH, UH, KEY STAKEHOLDERS AT THE SCHOOL DISTRICT, UH, ALONG WITH OUR LAWYERS, UH, DAVID FREE, WORKING WITH THE SCHOOL DISTRICT LAWYERS.
UM, WE CAME UP WITH A, WITH A, UH, AN AGREEMENT OF WHICH, UM, UH, THE SCHOOL DISTRICT, UH, WOULD MAKE A MINIMUM CONTRIBUTION OF $75,000 FOR A NEW PLAYGROUND, WHICH THEY'RE LOOKING AT PROBABLY SPENDING ANYWHERE FROM 75 TO A HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS, ALONG WITH THE TOWN, UH, PAYING UP TO $75,000
[00:10:01]
IF IT'S MATCHED, UH, FOR BUILDING A PLAYGROUND, UH, ON THEIR, UH, PROPERTY.UM, WE, WE DON'T HAVE THE PLAYGROUND THAT THEY HAVE.
THERE IS OLD, THE D DILAPIDATED, IT'S NOT IN GOOD SHAPE.
UM, WE'VE COME UP WITH A CONCEPTUAL DESIGN, ESTIMATED BUDGET.
AND, UM, IN, IN ADDITION TO THAT, WE WERE ABLE TO SECURE THAT AS LONG AS THAT PLAYGROUND IS UP, THAT WE WOULD BE ABLE TO HOLD OUR SUMMER DAY CAMPS THERE FOR THE, UH, T D Y C C, UH, THAT WAS VERY IMPORTANT ON OUR PART, THAT IF WE WERE GONNA, YOU KNOW, PARTNER WITH THEM, THAT THEY GUARANTEED THAT THEY WOULD ALLOW US TO RUN THAT SUMMER DAY CAMPS.
UM, UH, SOME OF YOU MAY REMEMBER, UH, YEARS AGO, WE USED TO USE THE WESTCHESTER COMMUNITY COLLEGE, AND, AND THAT WAS TAKEN AWAY.
SO, UH, IN ORDER TO KEEP THAT CAMP GOING, UH, COMMISSIONER EARLY AND JACKSON'S, UH, THEY, THEY'VE BEEN PROGRAMMING OUT OF THE RJ BAILEY SCHOOL.
SO, UH, WE FEEL THIS, THIS IS A GOOD PARTNERSHIP AT THE SAME TIME, PROVIDING AN OPPORTUNITY DURING NON-SCHOOL DISTRICT HOURS, UH, FOR, FOR THE PUBLIC TO USE THEIR FACILITIES, UH, UH, ALONG WITH THE CHILDREN DURING THE SCHOOL DAY, TO HAVE ACCESS, UH, TO A SAFE AND, UH, UP-TO-DATE PLAYGROUND.
UM, AT OUR JUNE, UH, JANUARY 6TH, UH, MEETING, UM, THE PARK AND REC ADVISORY BOARD PASSED A UNANIMOUS, UH, RESOLUTION, UH, UH, RECOMMENDING UP TO $75,000 ENTRUSTED AGENCY PARKLAND FUNDS, UH, FOR THIS PROJECT.
UM, WHAT I ALSO WOULD LIKE TO SHARE IS THAT, UM, PROBABLY ABOUT, UH, TWO YEARS AGO, THE PLANNING BOARD ASKED US TO GIVE US, YOU KNOW, NOT HOLDING ME, BUT TRY TO GIMME PROJECTIONS OF, UH, FUTURE PROJECTS THAT'S COMING FORWARD TO YOUR WAY.
UM, I LOOKED AT MY NOTES WHEN I SENT IT, I THINK IN JANUARY LAST YEAR FOR A DIFFERENT PROJECT, UM, THAT I HAD UPDATED.
UH, IT DID IDENTIFY THIS PROJECT, UH, ON, AS A POSSIBLE CONSIDERATION FOR FUTURE, UH, PARKLAND FUNDS.
UM, THE, UH, PLANNING BOARD, A LOT OF TIMES LIKE TO ASK HOW MUCH IS AVAILABLE.
UH, TOWN WIDE PARK FUNDS ARE STILL REMAINING.
WE HAVE, UH, 500 AND, UH, 43,880, UH, $3 AS OF JANUARY 2ND OF, UH, 2021.
UM, IF I'M ALLOWED TO SHARE THE SCREEN, UH, I CAN SHOW YOU THE LOCATION ON A GOOGLE MAP.
IT CAN'T SHOW ON, ON A GROUND LEVEL, BUT AT LEAST YOU GET A GENERAL IDEA OFF THE HILLSIDE AVENUE.
AND THEN I HAVE A CONCEPTUAL DESIGN, UH, PHOTO I CAN SHARE, UH, THAT WITH YOU TOO.
DO YOU HAVE THAT PERMISSION? I DO.
UM, I'M GONNA GO WITH, WELL, NO, BEFORE I DO THAT, LET'S GO TO, WHERE'S MY GOOGLE MAPS? UH, CAN YOU SEE THIS SCREEN RIGHT NOW? NOPE, NOT YET.
WE SEE AN AERIAL, IT, IT'S AN AERIAL PHOTO, YES.
AND AS YOU CAN SEE, IF YOU CAN SEE MY CURSOR, THIS IS ON HILLSIDE AVENUE THAT, THAT FACES THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING.
UH, AND, UH, WHEN YOU COME INTO THE SCHOOL, THERE'S AN OPEN, YOU KNOW, SMALL, UH, GREEN SPACE AREA.
AND YOU CAN SEE ON THE OUTLINE RIGHT NOW, UH, THIS IS THE EXISTING, UH, AREA, UH, FOR THE PLAYGROUND THAT, UM, IS REALLY OUTDATED, ANTIQUATED EQUIPMENT, UH, AND MAYBE QUITE, I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THE SAFETY QUESTION OF IT, BUT THE AREA AROUND HERE WILL, IS BEING DEDICATED AS SURPLUS SCHOOL DISTRICT PROPERTY.
UM, THERE'S AN APPLICATION BEFORE THE STATE, UH, ED RIGHT NOW, UH, TO DEDICATE THAT AS SURPLUS LAND, AS YOU CAN SEE, THE TREE AREA.
UH, UH, MIKE FALCON, I DON'T KNOW IF HE'S GOTTEN ON, HE WAS GONNA TRY TO JOIN US.
I HAVE TO LOG OFF AND LOG BACK ON.
SO, SO MIKE FALCON IS THE, IS THE DIRECTOR OF BUILDINGS AND GROUNDS FOR THE SCHOOL DISTRICT.
AND HIM AND I, YOU KNOW, HAVE BEEN WORKING CLOSELY ON, ON, ON VARIOUS, UH, INITIATIVES, UH, THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS.
HE HAS ASSURED ME THAT, YOU KNOW, THE, THAT APPLICATION IS BEFORE, UM, WHAT'S INVOLVED IN THIS PROJECT.
THEY'RE ALSO GONNA BE DOING, UH, SOME TREE, UH, PRUNING ALONG THIS BORDER AREA TO CLEAN THAT UP.
AND, UH, THAT IS SORT OF THE LOCATION THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.
SO I'M GONNA TAKE THAT DOWN NOW AND GIVE YOU A CONCEPTUAL PLAYGROUND.
SO WHAT WE'RE LOOKING HERE, UH, THIS IS A, UH, DESIGN THAT WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH, UH, MIRACLE, UH, PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT WITH THE REPRESENTATIVE OF, UH, ROBERT TONELLI, UH, HAS WORKED UP A BUDGET.
UM, THIS, UH, PROPOSAL RIGHT NOW IS,
[00:15:01]
IS, IS VALUED, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, CLOSE TO A, A $150,000, UM, THAT, UH, IT WOULD HAVE A SWING SET, YOU KNOW, OVER ON THE LEFT, YOU KNOW, FOR SIX SWINGS.AND THEN THIS IS THE, UH, APPARATUS, YOU KNOW, THAT THEY HAVE, YOU KNOW, FOR THE CHILDREN WITH THE SLIDES CLIMBING APPARATUSES.
UH, IT WILL BE A D A COMPLIANT.
WE WOULD USE FIVE BAR WOOD CHIPS.
UM, UH, SOME OF THE, THE ADDITIONAL COSTS THAT, THAT'S WHY I THINK WE MAY, YOU KNOW, SPEND ANOTHER, YOU KNOW, UH, YOU KNOW, UH, UH, 20 TO $30,000 IS THAT WE MAY BE ABLE TO PUT IN SOME RAMPS WHILE IT'S AADA A COMPLIANT.
UM, WE MIGHT MAKE IT EASIER FOR SOME OF, UH, PEOPLE THAT VISIT IT WITH A WHEELCHAIR WHERE THEY CAN GO DIRECTLY, YOU KNOW, RAMP IT TO ONE OF THE, ONE OF THE AREAS THAT WE HAVE.
SO WHILE THIS IS THE, IT, IT, WE HAVE A BUDGET, UM, THIS IS THE TYPE OF DESIGN THAT WE'RE GOING AT.
UM, ONCE ALL PARTIES, UH, ARE AGREE AND FUNDINGS ARE IN PLACE, UH, WE WOULD THEN PROBABLY, YOU KNOW, MEET WITH SOME OF THE, UH, LEADERSHIP, UH, AT THE BAILEY SCHOOL AND, UH, YOU KNOW, PRESENT THIS, UH, PROPOSAL.
USUALLY THERE'S A COUPLE LITTLE THINGS THEY MAY WANT TO TWEAK THAT THINK THE KIDS WOULD LIKE BETTER, AND WHATEVER.
WE CAN ADDRESS THAT VERY EASILY.
UM, BUT THIS IS THE GENERAL CONCEPT THAT WE HAVE.
I ALSO WANNA SHARE THAT, UH, LAST NIGHT, THE, UH, GREENBERG SCHOOL DISTRICT BOARD PASSED A RESOLUTION, UM, UH, TO MOVE FORWARD, UH, WITH AN AGREEMENT WITH THE TOWN BOARD.
UM, WHEN I PRESENTED IT TO THEM OVER A YEAR AGO, I SAID IT WOULD BE WITH US COMING UP WITH A $75,000 COMMITMENT USING PARKLAND FUNDS, UH, PENDING APPROVAL AND RECOMMENDATION FROM THE ADVISORY BOARD, YOUR BOARD, AND THE TOWN BOARD.
UM, SO WE'RE, WE'RE, WE'RE SORT OF A LITTLE AHEAD OF THE, THE CURVE ON THIS.
UH, THAT'S BEEN GOING ON FOR A WHILE.
BUT, UM, UM, I JUST WANT TO TELL YOU THAT THERE WAS A RESOLUTION PASSED LAST NIGHT, AND, UH, WHETHER YOU WANNA MOVE FORWARD TONIGHT OR, OR, OR SIT ON THIS FOR A MONTH AND COME BACK, YOU KNOW, UH, THAT, THAT WE UNDERSTAND THAT.
I DON'T KNOW IF I HAVE ANOTHER, I THINK THAT'S, AT THIS POINT, I CAN OPEN IT UP FOR SOME, UH, QUESTIONS.
YEAH, I THINK TWO OF THE BOARD MEMBERS HAD A QUESTION.
UH, UH, I, I THINK HUGH HAD A QUESTION, AND MO HAD A QUESTION.
ANYBODY ELSE WILL HAVE QUESTIONS THEN? YEAH.
HOW ARE YOU? UM, THE QUESTION I HAVE IS, WHAT HAPPENS? FIRST OF ALL, YOU'VE MENTIONED SOMETHING ABOUT THIS BEING SURPLUS PROPERTY.
WHAT, WHAT DOES SURPLUS PROPERTY MEAN? UM, IN, IN ORDER TO, UH, IN ORDER FOR US TO, UH, ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH SCHOOL DISTRICTS FOR RECREATIONAL EQUIPMENT, WE'VE DONE THIS WITH THE EDGEMONT SCHOOLS AND GREENBURG SCHOOL DISTRICT IN THE PAST WHERE WE'VE HAD PLAYGROUNDS.
THIS IS, UH, NOT, YOU KNOW, WE'VE, WE'VE DONE THIS NUMEROUS TIMES OVER THE YEARS.
UH, IN ORDER TO DO THAT, THEY MUST, UH, FILE AN APPLICATION WITH THE STATE EDUCATION DEPARTMENT DESIGNATING THAT ON THEIRS OWN THE SCHOOL DISTRICT OWNED PROPERTY.
THEY'RE SAYING THIS IS CONSIDERED SURPLUS SCHOOL DISTRICT PROPERTY, AND THAT WE'RE GONNA ENTER, YOU KNOW, AN AGREEMENT WITH THE MUNICIPALITY TO PUT ON, UH, RECREATIONAL, UH, EQUIPMENT.
AND WHAT HAPPENS IF, UM, THE BAILEY SCHOOL GETS SOLD? YEAH, IT, IT, IT'S A GOOD QUESTION.
'CAUSE WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON AGREEMENTS.
UM, I THINK IF YOU CAN SEE THIS HERE, THERE IS SOMETHING IN HERE THAT FOR SOME REASON, IF THEY WERE SOLD, WE HAVE, UH, A COMPLAIN.
UM, IF THE, UM, IF THIS NO LONGER BECOMES A PLAYGROUND, THAT, OR, OR IT'S RE NOT ONLY THAT, OR IF IT'S RESTRICTED TO YOU, SO THAT THE TOWN, UM, UM, SO THAT TOWN RESIDENTS CAN'T USE IT, SO IT GOES BEYOND, IT'S NOT JUST SIMPLY THE SALE, THEN THE DISTRICT HAS TO PAY BACK, UH, THE DEPRECIATED VALUE OF THE EQUIPMENT.
THIS IS THE 75,000 IS FOR THE EQUIPMENT.
SO, UH, THAT'S, THAT'S THE, UH, CATCHALL THERE.
AND, AND MAINTENANCE, UH, UH, AND LIABILITY IS, IS, IS BEING, UH, TAKEN CARE OF BY THE, UH, SCHOOL DISTRICT.
AND I THINK, MELANIE, YOU HAD A QUESTION ALSO.
SOME OF MY QUESTIONS HAVE PARTIALLY BEEN ANSWERED.
UM, ONE OF THEM WAS REGARDING LIABILITY.
WHO'S HANDLING THE LIABILITY? IF YOU'RE GONNA BE THERE IN THE SUMMER MONTHS AND IN OFF SCHOOL HOURS, WHO'S RESPONSIBLE FOR LIABILITY? AND JERRY JUST BRIEFLY TOUCHED ON THAT TWO SECONDS AGO.
LET ME, LET ME, LET ME FOLLOW UP.
THE, THE, YOU KNOW, LANGUAGE IN
[00:20:01]
GENERAL, IT'S GONNA BE ON THE SCHOOL DISTRICT.IF THE TOWN IS RUNNING A PROGRAM THERE, UH, IT REALLY, YOU KNOW, YOU'D HAVE TO SEE WHAT THE SITUATION IS, IF IT, IF IT'S, YOU KNOW, IF THE TOWN GETS SUED BECAUSE THEY CLAIM THERE'S, UM, NEGLIGENCE ON A PART OF THE TOWN NOT DEALING WITH MAINTENANCE OR SOMETHING, THEN THAT THERE, THERE IS AN ARRANGEMENT BETWEEN THE PARTIES AS TO HOW TO, UM, RESOLVE, UM, LIABILITY IN THOSE SITUATIONS.
AND MY OTHER QUESTION WAS, WHO'S GOING TO HAVE CONTROL OVER, UM, BUDGET AND DESIGN AT THE END OF THE DAY FOR THIS PROJECT? YEAH.
WELL, IT'S THE, THE, THE AGREEMENT, UH, DEALS WITH US, UH, GIVING, YOU KNOW, WORKING WITH THEM AND CONSULTANTS.
AND WE'RE BASICALLY, YOU KNOW, LIKE 95% THERE.
YOU KNOW, MIKE AND I, UM, WHERE WE'VE GIVEN, YOU KNOW, FEEDBACK, WE'VE, WE'VE ALREADY GOTTEN A, UH, A PLAYGROUND CONSULTANT, UH, THROUGH MIRACLE PLAY SYSTEMS TO COME UP WITH A ROUGH DESIGN.
AND THEN THE NEXT STEP IS REALLY, YOU KNOW, FINALIZE IT.
UH, YOU, YOU KNOW, WITH THE LEADERSHIP AT THE SCHOOL DISTRICT AND WHETHER THEY REACH OUT WITH SOME OF THE P T A, WHATEVER, YOU KNOW, THEN WE WOULD TWEAK IT FROM THERE.
JUST SIMILAR APPROACH WE TOOK WHEN WE DID IT AT THE LEE F JACKSON SCHOOL.
WELL, THE PRINCIPALS GONNA BE VERY INVOLVED.
UM, SHE ALREADY KNOWS ABOUT IT.
SHE ALREADY SEEN THE PRELIMINARY.
SHE WA SHE WOULD LIKE TO TWEAK IT, BUT WE, WE'LL WORK TOGETHER AS A, A, A WHOLE GROUP.
SO YOU ARE WORKING WITH SHE O ON THIS PROJECT.
UM, I DID HEAR JERRY MENTION SOMETHING ABOUT IT BEING A D A COMPLIANT AS WELL.
IT'S, IT'S A FEDERAL REQUIREMENT.
I DID WANNA TOUCH ON THAT AS WELL.
AND YOU DID MENTION THAT IN, I KNOW A LOT OF MY QUESTIONS THAT I HAD WRITTEN DOWN AHEAD OF TIME, JERRY COVERED IN HIS SPEECH.
SO I WRITE THEM DOWN AHEAD OF TIME, AND THEN JERRY ROLLS RIGHT OVER THEM, AND I DON'T HAVE TO
SO ON TOP OF EVERYTHING, THIS BOARD, THIS BOARD HAS ALWAYS ASKED ME.
I, I, I, I HAVE A LOT OF EXPERIENCE WITH KNOWING YOU'RE GONNA ASK THE RIGHT QUESTIONS.
THERE YOU GO,
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM BOARD MEMBERS? YEAH, I THINK ROGER, I HAVE JUST A, A SORT OF FOLLOW UP QUESTION.
HOW DOES THE, HOW DOES THE ACCESS TO THE, UH, PLAYGROUND WORKS FOR THE TOWN, UH, RESIDENTS? DO THEY HAVE, THEY CAN USE THEIR PARKING LOTS AND, UH, AND, AND, AND THE, UH, GENERAL ACCESS TO THE PROPERTY, THE, BECAUSE THE PLAYGROUND IS IN THE BACK UP THE SCHOOL.
SO, UH, WELL, MAYBE MIKE, UH, I'M GONNA PUT UP THE, UH, LET ME PUT UP THE, UH, WHERE'S MY GOOGLE, UH, MAP.
AND, AND THE AGREEMENT IS WHEN THE SCHOOL DOES NOT USED.
SO IF THE, THE SCHOOL DOES NOT USE THE POP THE PARKING LOTS AND WOULD BE EMPTY, THE, THE STAFF WOULDN'T BE THERE.
SO THE AGREEMENT IS WHEN THE SCHOOL IS NOT IN SESSION.
AND THE WAY IT'S SET UP RIGHT NOW IS THAT, YOU KNOW, LIKE AT, UH, ANTHONY AT VETERAN PARK, WE HAVE A LOT OF EQUIPMENT, AND, UH, A LOT OF TIMES WE LOCK THE GATES UP AT NIGHTTIME.
THERE'S NO GATE SYSTEMS THERE.
IT IS OPEN, UH, YOU KNOW, AND IT, IT WILL BE AVAILABLE.
WE'LL HAVE SOME SIGNAGE UP THERE.
UM, WE WILL WORK WITH THE SCHOOL DISTRICT WHEN THERE'S CERTAIN TIMES WHEN, YOU KNOW, IF, IF WE'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO BE THERE, YOU KNOW, WE'LL HAVE THAT POSTED AND SO FORTH.
BUT FOR THE MOST PART, UM, FOR SCHOOL FUNCTIONS, AND, UH, IT WILL BE CLOSED TO THE PUBLIC DURING NON HOURS, YOU KNOW, EVENINGS, ESPECIALLY IN WARMER WEATHER SEASONS.
UH, AND ON THE WEEKENDS, UH, IT WILL BE OPEN FOR THE PUBLIC TO USE.
UH, MIKE, THAT'S JUST A GOOGLE THING.
I DID, IF, IF THERE WERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, UM, JERRY, I DID FORWARD ALONG TO YOU A VOICEMAIL FROM A TOWN RESIDENCE, AND I DID SHARE THAT WITH THE MEMBERS EARLIER ON.
YEAH, I, UM, I, I, I SEE THAT SHE'S HERE.
UH, PATRICIA WILLIAMS. YOU DID PHONE THAT TO ME.
UH, WALTER RARE, YOU, I GUESS YOU APPARENTLY ARE THE ONE WHO'S FROZEN, OR NOW IT LOOKS LIKE YOU'RE UNFROZEN.
SO WE, IF I, IF I SEE YOU MOVING, I CAN TELL YOU YOU'RE UNFROZEN.
SO, JERRY, YOU WERE GONNA SAY YOU, THERE WAS, UH, A VOICEMAIL THAT YOU GOT FROM MS. WEEMS, AND WERE YOU GONNA ADDRESS THOSE? NO, I, I DON'T KNOW WHO, WHO THE MESSAGE WAS FOR.
I DUNNO IF YOU WANT HER TO SPEAK, BUT SHE NO, WE WANT YOU TO
AARON, MAYBE YOU CAN JUST HAVE THE ANSWER EMAIL
[00:25:01]
TO JERRY AND, AND HAVE HIM ANSWER THOSE.WELL, THE, THE, IF I'M CORRECT, THE FIRST, THE FIRST, UH, QUESTION WAS, IS, UH, DIDN'T NECESSARILY THINK IT WAS, UH, WE SHOULD BE THINKING ABOUT BUILDING A PLAYGROUND RIGHT NOW, UH, BECAUSE THE, THE SCHOOL IS CLOSED.
UH, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING, I THINK FOR THE NEXT TWO WEEKS, THE HIGH SCHOOL IS CLOSED, BUT THE RJ BAILEY SCHOOL IS PRESENTLY OPEN.
UM, THIS IS A PROJECT THAT IS NOT SOMETHING TO START RIGHT AWAY.
IT, IT'S GONNA PROBABLY TAKE, YOU KNOW, ANYWHERE ONCE WE GET APPROVAL, YOU KNOW, FROM LIKE THREE TO SIX MONTHS.
SO, UH, IT WOULD BE GREAT TO HAVE IT, YOU KNOW, BY THE END OF THE SCHOOL YEAR.
BUT, YOU KNOW, IT WOULDN'T PROBABLY MAKE SENSE TO BEGIN CONSTRUCTION UNTIL THE SUMMER MONTHS.
SO, UM, IT WOULD BE IN PLACE, IF ANYTHING, PROBABLY, YOU KNOW, FOR, UH, OUR GOAL IS FOR, UH, SEPTEMBER, UH, WHEN SCHOOL REOPENS.
IS THAT CORRECT, MIKE? UH, IF YOU ASK ME, I'D LIKE TO PUT IT UP NEXT MONTH, BUT THAT'S NOT GONNA HAPPEN.
IT, IT'S GOING TO TAKE AT LEAST, UH, FIRST OF ALL, FOR BOTH PARTIES, ONCE EVERYTHING IS AGREED, UH, AND THE FUNDING IS THERE, PLANNING, IT'S GONNA TAKE A COUPLE OF MONTHS TO PLAN.
AND THEN WE HAVE TO, UH, THE AVAILABILITY OF THE PLAYGROUND ITSELF.
SO WE'RE GONNA, WE'RE GONNA BE WORKING WITH, UH, A CONTRACTOR THAT WE'VE WORKED WITH BEFORE WHO'S FABULOUS.
AND IT DEPENDS ON, YOU KNOW, SUPPLY AND DEMAND.
COVID SLOWED EVERYTHING DOWN, ALL, ALL KINDS OF MANUFACTURERS.
AND, UH, THE, THE, THE SCHOOL DISTRICT, YOU KNOW, AND, AND, UH, THE TOWN HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT THIS, YOU KNOW, FOR THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS.
AND, UM, I DON'T KNOW IF I COVERED EVERYTHING, AARON, ON THAT MESSAGE.
I THINK THAT COVERED, I, I BELIEVE THERE WAS.
I BELIEVE THERE WAS ONE OTHER COMMENT RELATED TO, UH, DOING SOMETHING SIMILAR AT THE HIGH VIEW GYM YEARS AGO, AND THAT NEW YORK STATE HAD, YOU KNOW, TURNED THAT DOWN OR SOMETHING ALONG THOSE LINES.
UM, I, I'VE BEEN HERE SINCE 1986, AND, UH, WE'VE NEVER DONE ANYTHING, UH, USING PARKLAND FUNDS, UH, ON CER SURPLUS SCHOOL DISTRICT PROPERTY WITH THE HIGHVIEW SCHOOL DISTRICT.
UM, WE HAVE BUILT PLAYGROUNDS, BUT ON TOWN OWNED PROPERTY AT PRESSER PARK AND WEB FIELD, AND NOT WITH IT, WE HAVE DONE THIS SIMILAR PLAYGROUND ARRANGEMENT FOR THE EARLY CHILD CENTER.
UM, WE'VE DONE TWO PROJECTS NOW FOR PLAYGROUNDS AT THE, UH, LEE F JACKSON SCHOOLS.
SO, UH, THIS WILL BE THE, UH, FOURTH ONE NOW AT THE RJ BAILEY SCHOOL.
YEAH, LET ME ADD ONE OTHER THING.
UH, BECAUSE IF, IN FACT, WE WERE TALKING ABOUT A GYMNASIUM, UH, THAT WOULD BE IN THE SCHOOL, IT WOULD NOT BE SURPLUS.
AND IF, AND THAT IF THAT HAD HAPPENED, AND THAT PREDATES ME ALSO BY A GOOD SEVEN YEARS, UH, THAT, THAT WOULD BE THE REASON WHY NEW YORK STATE MIGHT STOP IT.
IT'S NOT SURPLUS, UM, PROPERTY.
IT WOULD BE WITHIN THE SCHOOL GYMNASIUM WOULD BE USED FOR SCHOOL PURPOSES.
SO THAT MAY BE, IF THAT DID OCCUR, THAT MAY BE WHY NEW YORK STATE STOPPED THAT.
BUT THE KEY THING IS THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY IS FOLLOWING THE APPROPRIATE LEGAL PROCEDURES THAT IT IS, IS, IS IT IS IN, IT'S PROPOSED TO BE IN SURPLUS PROPERTY, OBEY ALL THE APPLICABLE CODE.
SO WHAT HAPPENED OR MIGHT NOT HAVE HAPPENED, ISN'T THE COURT ISSUE BEFORE US, IS WHETHER OR NOT THIS PARTICULAR APPLICATION RELEASE THE CRITERIA FOR, FOR THIS PLANNING BOARD TO AUTHORIZE THE RELEASE OF UP TO 75,000.
SO I THINK THAT'S THE ISSUE BEFORE US.
ARE THERE OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS NOW, IN THE PAST, UH, IF I RECALL, UH, CORRECTLY, UNLESS WE HAD SOME SPECIFIC QUESTIONS, I KNOW EARLY ON THERE WAS ONE APPLICATION FOR THE BOARD MEMBERS RAISED SOME QUESTIONS, AND JERRY WENT THOSE QUESTIONS.
UH, UM, A SUBSEQUENT APPLICATION, UH, WAS, UH, UM, A RELEASE OF FUNDS, BUT ALL OUR QUESTIONS WERE ANSWERED AND WE MADE A DECISION THAT NIGHT.
SO UNLESS BOARD MEMBERS HAVE SOME ADDITIONAL CONCERNS, UH, I FEEL WE'RE IN THE POSITION TO MAKE A DECISION TONIGHT.
UH, DO WE HAVE ANY MORE DISCUSSION THAT, DISCUSSION THAT ON THIS, OR CONCERNS ABOUT MAKING THE DECISION TONIGHT? AND, AND JUST, JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, THE DECISION WOULD INVOLVE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE TOWN BOARD ON RELEASE OF THE, OKAY.
THIS IS, I WILL THEN MOVE THAT THE, UH, THAT THE PLANNING BOARD ISSUE A POSITIVE
[00:30:01]
RECOMMENDATION ON THE EXPENDITURE OF $75,000 TO UPGRADE THE PLAYGROUND AT THE BAILEY SCHOOL.NOT AN UPGRADE TO BUILD A NEW ONE.
WE, WE CAN'T USE IT FOR UPGRADING.
IT HAS TO BE, YOU KNOW, FOR, YOU KNOW, DEVELOPMENT, OR IT'S A NEW PLAYGROUND FOR DEVELOP, FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A NEW PLAYGROUND AT THE BAYLOR SCHOOL.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND? YEAH, HAVE TWO GO, GO, GO.
A RECOMMENDATION WILL BE TO EXPEND 75,000 PE TO SPEND UP TO $75,000 TO PUT A NEW PLAYGROUND ON THE SURPLUS PROPERTY OF THE DAILY SCHOOL.
I WANT TO THANK EVERYONE ON BEHALF OF THE, UH,
JOINING US, MIKE, AND, UH, JUST WANNA THANK YOU, WALTER.
UH, AND JUST ONE OTHER THING, UH, PROBABLY HAVE TO ADD IT TO THE SPREADSHEET.
I'VE BEEN, UH, COMMUNICATING WITH THE, UH, ELMSFORD LITTLE LEAGUE, UH, PRESIDENT, UM, ABOUT, UH, WE HAVE AN AGREEMENT WITH THEM, UH, AT WEST RUMPER PARK.
UH, I DUNNO IF YOU'VE EVER SEEN IT OFF A NINE.
THEY'VE DONE SOME GREAT THINGS WITH OUTSIDE WORK, BUT WE'RE, WE'RE WORKING ON PUTTING A, ON A REALLY, REALLY SMALL SCALE, IT WOULD BE A LOT LOWER BUDGET AND SMALL PLAYGROUND WHERE WE CAN, YOU KNOW, BUY THE EQUIPMENT AND THEN IN-HOUSE LABOR, ALONG WITH VOLUNTEERS, THROUGH THE
SO, IN THE UPCOMING MONTHS, THAT MIGHT, ONE OF, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT YOU, YOU DID FOR US ABOUT A YEAR AGO IS TO GIVE US A SPREADSHEET WITH, UH, PROJECTED PROJECTS, AN APPROXIMATE COURSE.
IF YOU COULD UPDATE THAT SPREADSHEET FOR US WOULD BE HELPFUL.
AS A MATTER OF FACT, UH, CAN YOU, AM I SHARING A SCREEN RIGHT NOW? CAN YOU SEE IT? NOT YET.
SO I, I HAD THIS AVAILABLE, AS YOU CAN SEE, THIS WAS THE BAILEY SCHOOL.
YOU KNOW, WE HAD ANOTHER ONE THAT'S BEEN ON, PUT ON HOLD ABOUT, UH, THEY'VE RAISED SOME FUNDING FOR DOING A BARN PROJECT AT, UH, THE GREENBERG NATURE CENTER.
UM, WE HAVEN'T, WE'RE NOT MOVING FORWARD IN 2021 ABOUT GETTING A, A PLAYGROUND AT SEACOR WOODS.
AND THEN AT ONE TIME, WE, IT WAS PART OF A GRANT I HAD ABOUT GETTING A, UH, COMPOST TOILET AT HARTS BROOK.
BUT THAT GRANT WAS, UH, REJECTED.
AND THEN WE'VE ALL TALKING DOWN THE ROAD, UM, UH, POSSIBLY DOING AN UPGRADED, UH, YOU KNOW, RECREATION NEEDS ASSESSMENT.
COULD YOU MAKE SURE THAT, UH, AARON GETS THAT SO HE COULD DISTRIBUTE THAT TO THE PLAINTIFF BOARD MEMBERS? ABSOLUTELY.
UH, AND MATTER OF FACT, IF WE HAVE ANY NEW PROJECTS, I'LL TRY TO GET THEM ADDED TO IT.
SO JUST UPDATE WHATEVER, WHATEVER INFORMATION YOU HAVE.
UH, IF THE TOWN BOARD APPROVES THE 75,000 AND UPDATE WITH OTHER PROJECTS.
HAVE A GOOD EVENING, EVERYBODY.
NOW, NOW WE CAN GO INTO THE PUBLIC HEARING SESSION, UH, OF, UH, OF TONIGHT'S MEETING.
UM, SO AGAIN, WE'LL START OFF WITH A ROLL CALL TO GO INTO THE PUBLIC HEARING SESSION.
AND MR. SNAGS, YOU STILL HERE? OH, MR. I DON'T THINK HE CAME ACROSS THERE.
HE'S NOT, I THINK, I THINK HE, I DON'T SEE HIS NAME.
CAN YOU HEAR ME? OH, YEAH, HE'S HERE.
UH, THE FIRST, UH, THE FIRST, AND IN FACT, THE ONLY ITEM ON FOR TONIGHT ON THE PUBLIC HEARING, I IS, UH, PB 2004.
IT IS FOR SITE, UH, SUBDIVISION AND STEEP SLOPE.
DO WE HAVE A REPRESENTATIVE FOR THIS APPLICATION? YES, MR. CHAIRMAN.
I'M A PARTNER OF THE FIRM OF CUT AND FADER, AND I REPRESENT THE APPLICANT.
UH, WE HAVE APPEARED BEFORE YOU PREVIOUSLY AND PRESENTED THE APPLICATION AND PLANS.
THIS IS A MODIFICATION TO AN EXISTING SITE DUE TO THE ACQUISITION OF, UH, SOUTHERLY PARCEL, AND THEN TO CONSOLIDATE THE, THE, THE LOTS AS A SUBDIVISION AND, UM, TO HAVE STEEP SLOPES
[00:35:01]
PERMIT AS WELL.UM, DO YOU WANT ME TO SHOW YOU THE PLANS? I KNOW THAT WE'VE WALKED THROUGH THE PLANS.
ALTHOUGH THE MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING BOARD HAVE SEEN IT, UH, THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING AND I'LL BE, UH, HELPFUL FOR THE PUBLIC TO SEE IT ALSO.
UM, I THINK I'M SHOWING THE PLAN THAT'S ENTITLED PROPOSED SUBDIVISION.
IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING NOW? NOTHING.
SO THIS IS, UM, THIS IS THE SITE, THE, THE SOUTHERLY PORTION OF THE SITE IS A FORMER GAS STATION THAT WAS ACQUIRED, UM, WHERE I'M MOVING MY HAND HERE, BUT THE CURSOR HERE, UM, WHAT'S PROPOSED IS TO AND IMPROVE A SOUTHERLY ENTRANCE SO THE TRUCKS CAN COME IN, CIRCULATE INTO THE SITE, DROP OFF, UM, PRODUCT AND, AND EXIT THE SITE HEAD OUT RIGHT NOW, UM, THAT IS NOT, UM, THAT IS NOT FEASIBLE.
LET ME, UM, LET ME SEE IF I'VE GOT, YOU DON'T WANT I'M ON THE SAME ONE, RIGHT? NO, YOU DON'T WANT THE PUBLIC THINKING THAT YOU'RE BRIBING US WITH SOME NICE, GOOD RED WINE.
YEAH, IT'S, I'M GONNA CLOSE OUT OF THAT ONE.
I MEAN, IF YOU'RE GONNA SHARE
HOW'S THIS GOTTA BE FOR EVERYBODY? SORRY ABOUT THAT.
SO, UM, THIS IS THE PROPOSED SECTORS, AND I THOUGHT I HAD ANOTHER, ANOTHER PLAN HERE.
WELL, BUT THAT, THAT GIVES THE BASIC PLAN THAT YES, THAT IS THE BASIC PLAN.
WELL, I, I DO THINK IT'S IMPORTANT BECAUSE THERE'S ALSO A SUBDIVISION, AND MAYBE IF HE CAN'T, AARON CAN, UH, OR AT LEAST MR. KNOW IF YOU CAN EXPLAIN WHAT THE SUBDIVISION IS BECAUSE IT'S NOT SURE.
THE SUBDIVISION IS ESSENTIALLY COMBINATION.
THE SUBDIVISION IS ESSENTIALLY A CONSOLIDATION OF TWO LOTS RATHER THAN A DIVISION.
UM, WHAT HAPPENS IS THERE'S A, ESSENTIALLY A LOT LINE DIVIDING HERE, AND WHAT WE'RE DOING IS CONSOLIDATING THE TWO.
SO IT'S A SINGLE TAX LOT AND SINGLE LOT FOR PURPOSES OF ZONING.
THE, THE OTHER ITEMS THAT ARE BEING DONE IS, RIGHT NOW THERE'S VIRTUALLY NO PARKING ON THE SITE.
AND WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED IS TO PROVIDE, UM, THESE, UM, FIVE PARKING SPACES, SIX PARKING SPACES HERE.
UM, SO THAT RE SO THAT CUSTOMERS CAN COME IN AND PARK THEIR CARS AND GO TO THE RETAIL, UM, UH, STORE HERE.
UH, IT'S ON THE SITE NOW, BUT CURRENTLY DOES NOT HAVE, UM, MEANINGFUL PARKING.
WE, AT THE PRIOR APPEARANCE BEFORE THIS BOARD, WE WENT THROUGH, WE NOTED THAT, UM, KIMBERLY HORNE HAD DONE AN ANALYSIS OF THE PARKING AND FOUND THAT IT WAS ADEQUATE.
WE DID GET A VARIANCE FROM THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS WITH REGARD TO, UM, PARKING ADEQUACY.
WE ALSO GOT OTHER VARIANCES THAT WERE NEEDED WITH REGARD TO VARIOUS SETBACKS AND DISTANCES BETWEEN THE BUILDINGS AND THE PARKING AREA THEMSELVES, AND IT, AND THE AREAS WHERE WE'RE PROPOSING TO HAVE STACKS OF, UM, STORED ITEMS ALONG THE FRONT OF THE SITE.
UH, SO ALL VARIANCES WERE ISSUED BY THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS, WHICH ENABLES US TO COME BACK TO YOU, UH, IN A ZONING COMPLIANT MANNER FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL, STEEP SLOPES, PERMIT, AND THE SUBDIVISION ITSELF, UH, AARON, I THINK THAT ADDRESSES THE ITEMS THAT ARE, THAT ARE PENDING.
UM, PRIMARILY WHAT WE'RE DOING WITH THESE BINS IS PUTTING 'EM IN A PLACE WHERE TRUCKS CAN, UM, ACCESS THEM WITHOUT WHAT WITH HAD BEEN HAPPENING IS TRUCKS WOULD LINE UP AND BACK INTO THE SITE TO UNLOAD BECAUSE THEY WERE UNABLE TO TRAVEL THROUGH THE SITE.
AND, UH, THANK YOU, MR. NALL, IF YOU COULD ALSO JUST IDENTIFY, WE WENT THROUGH THIS DURING THE WORK SESSION, BUT THERE IS A RAMP BEHIND WHAT WE'RE HEARING WOULD BE THOSE PARKING SPACES.
AND THE BOARD HAD ASKED ABOUT SAFETY AND SECURITY ALONG THAT, I BELIEVE A, A WOOD GUIDE RAIL HAD BEEN PROPOSED.
IT'S A NOTE NUMBER THREE ON THE PLAN.
THERE WAS ALSO A QUESTION ABOUT REAR ACCESS, UH, TO THE BUILDING.
AND I KNOW THAT THAT WAS OVER HERE ALSO IDENTIFIED, RIGHT? CORRECT.
AND, UM, OTHER THAN THAT, I THINK, UH, ASIDE FROM THAT, THAT POOL OF
[00:40:01]
FIVE OR SIX SPACES, I BELIEVE THERE WERE TWO ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE BUILDING AS WELL.IS THAT RIGHT? OVER HERE? YEAH.
AND, UM, IN ADDITION TO THE SUBDIVISION OR RE SUBDIVISION, THE SITE PLAN, THERE'S ALSO A STEEP SLOPE PERMIT FOR SOME STEEP SLOPE DISTURBANCE ON THE PROPERTY ALONG RIGHT.
I APPRECIATE, APPRECIATE THAT.
UM, WE HAVE BEEN ASKED AT ONE POINT WHETHER IT WAS FEASIBLE TO PROVIDE LANDSCAPING, UM, TO HELP WITH THE SCREENING, BUT WE HAD DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THE INFEASIBILITY OF THAT GIVEN THE STEEP SLOPE BEHIND AND APPROXIMATELY 40 FEET OF HEIGHT DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE HIGH POINT OF OUR SITE AND, UM, THE LEVEL GROUND OF THE NEIGHBORS ADJACENT.
SO, UM, THAT WAS NOT FEASIBLE.
BUT WE, WE HAVE MET WITH THE NEIGHBORS.
I THINK THERE'S A, A, A GOOD LINE OF COMMUNICATION WITH THEM ABOUT OPERATIONAL ISSUES.
AND OUR CLIENT, UM, HAS CONTINUED TO COMMUNICATE WITH THEM AND KEEP IN TOUCH ON, ON HOW TO ADDRESS, UH, TIMING AND, AND OPERATION OF THE SITE.
THERE'S ONE OTHER THING, UH, BEFORE, UH, THEIR QUESTIONS, UH, JUST, UH, FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING, UH, AND, AND, UH, MR. SCHMIDT KIND OF MENTIONED IT, UH, BUT, UH, JUST WANT IT OUT IN, YOU KNOW, IN THE RECORD, UH, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, UH, 2,900 SQUARE FEET OF DISTURBANCE OF EXPENSIVE STEEP SLOPE.
CAN YOU AGAIN, JUST CIRCLE THE AREA WHERE THAT'S GONNA BE? UH, MR. NOLL, I THINK THAT THE DISTURBANCES IN THIS AREA HERE MM-HMM.
I JUST WANTED THAT ON A RELATED ISSUE, ON A RELATED ISSUE TO THE STEEP SLOPE AND REMOVAL OF SOME MATERIAL, UH, IN THAT AREA, WE GOT A LETTER FROM YOUR ENGINEER INDICATING THAT THE, UM, THE ALTERATIONS THAT WILL BE DONE IN THAT AREA OF THOSE PARKING SPACES, UH, UH, WILL NOT DISTURB, UH, INTEGRITY OF THAT SLOPE.
AND HE ALSO INDICATED THAT, THAT, UH, WHEN CONSTRUCTION TAKES PLACE, AND HE WILL GO BACK AND TAKE A RE-LOOK AT THAT, UM, THE INTEGRITY OF THAT ROCK TO ENSURE THAT IT IS STILL SOUND.
THAT BEING THE CASE, I WOULD LIKE TO, IF THIS APPLICATION IS APPROVED, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE A CONDITION THAT WHEN, THAT THE ENGINEER GO BACK AND HE'S CERTIFIED IN THE SIMILAR CORRESPONDENCE TO THE TOWN, THAT THAT'S SLOPE IS STILL, UH, HAVE NOT BEEN COMPROMISED.
DO YOU? WE HAVE, WE WOULD'VE NO PROBLEM WITH THAT, MR. CHAIRMAN.
ARE ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM, UH, UH, YEAH, JUST FOR THE RECORD, MR. CHAIRMAN, THAT WAS, UH, A LETTER FROM NUNO ANTE, UH, WITH REGARD TO THE STABILITY OF THE ROCK FACE ITSELF.
WE ALSO SUBMITTED A LETTER FROM JONATHAN MEAB ABOUT, UM, REMOVAL OF A, A QUANTITY OF SOIL, AMOUNT OF SOIL.
AND MR. MEAB CONFIRMED THAT THAT SOIL ACTUALLY HAD BEEN PREVIOUSLY REMOVED WHEN IN APRIL OF LAST YEAR, WHEN THE UNDERGROUND TANKS WERE REMOVED UNDER WESTCHESTER COUNTY PERMIT.
UM, BILL, IF I MAY, IT'S, UH, JONATHAN
UM, SO IT'S NOT ALL OF IT, A LARGE PORTION OF IT, UH, WHICH WAS WITHIN THAT TANK FOOTPRINT.
THERE'S STILL SOME SOIL LEFT, BUT, UH, SOME OF THE SOIL SHOWN THAT WAS TO BE CUT BACK IS, IS ALREADY GONE.
PROBABLY, I'D SAY THE SOIL, I'D SAY ABOUT HALF.
AND THE SOIL THAT REMAINS, IS THAT, UH, COULD YOU DESCRIBE THAT, PLEASE? IS IT, IS IT IN ANY WAY GONNA CAUSE EXCAVATION OR IS IT JUST REMOVAL FROM, UH, FROM THE LEVEL GROUND IT IS, THAT'S CORRECT.
IT'S REMOVAL FROM THE LEVEL GROUND THAT THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY, UM, INDICATED WAS, WAS PUT OVER THERE, UM, OVER ASPHALT AND, UH, WAS NOT, UM, I GUESS WAS NOT A NATURAL, UH, SITE FEATURE.
UM, IT WAS, IT WAS PLACED THERE.
SO MR. CHAIRMAN, MR. IT WOULD NOT, UH, IN TURN DO ANYTHING TO, UM, TO DISTURB THE SLOPE ABOVE IT.
MR. MR. CHAIRMAN, THIS HAS BEEN A QUESTION THAT ONE OF THE NEIGHBORS HAD RAISED AND THAT MR. SCHMIDT HAD ASKED, UM, THAT WE ADDRESS, SO
[00:45:01]
THAT, THAT'S WHY I BROUGHT IT UP.AND I APPRECIATE MR. ME HAD CLARIFYING, UH, THE CURRENT CONDITION.
UH, IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE YOU WISH TO POINT OUT IN THE APPLICATION? NO, SIR.
IF THAT BEING THE CASE, DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FROM OUR BOARD, UH, BOARD MEMBERS ON THIS APPLICATION? UH, ANY BOARD MEMBERS? IF NOT, DO WE HAVE ANYONE FROM THE PUBLIC WHO WISH TO SPEAK TO THIS APPLICATION ANY ON, I, I WOULD, I WOULD LIKE A CHANCE TO, MR. NO.
CAN YOU TAKE DOWN THE PLAN, THE SHARE SCREEN PLEASE? SURE.
SORRY, IF WE NEED TO PUT IT UP, WE'LL BACK UP.
UH, SO MY NAME IS HEIDI GRELLA.
I LIVE AT ONE 11 HEATH PLACE IN HASTINGS.
I'M ONE OF THE HOMEOWNERS THAT'S UP THE HILL, UM, FROM THIS PROPERTY.
I'M NOT THE ONE THAT THEY REFERRED TO THAT WROTE THE LETTER, BUT I, I JUST, IT SOUNDS LIKE MR. SIMON IS, IS ON TOP OF THE SITUATION, BUT I JUST WANTED TO GO ON RECORD AS SAYING THAT, UM, I THINK, UM, ONE OF SEVERAL NEIGHBORS THAT'S CONCERNED ABOUT THE STABILITY OF THE HILL, IF THERE'S GONNA BE, UM, EXCAVATION.
IT SOUNDS LIKE SOME OF IT'S BEEN DONE ALREADY, BUT THIS THING CAME IN THE MAIL THAT SAYS THE APPLICANT PROPOSES APPROXIMATELY 2,900 SQUARE FEET OF DISTURBANCE TO THE HILL, INCLUDING EXCAVATION OF 385 CUBIC YARDS OF EXCAVATION.
AND I JUST, I MEAN, I'M NOT AN ENGINEER.
I DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT HOW THIS STUFF WORKS, SO I JUST WANNA BE ON RECORD THAT HOPEFULLY PEOPLE WHO ARE ON THIS BOARD AND WHO ARE ENGINEERS WILL TAKE A VERY CLOSE LOOK AND JUST MAKE SURE THERE'S A WHOLE NEIGHBORHOOD OF HOMES PERCHED ON THAT HILL.
AND I JUST WANT EVERYONE TO BE, YOU KNOW, MINDFUL OF NOT DISTURBING THAT HILL IN A WAY THAT WOULD AFFECT THE STRUCTURAL STABILITY OF THAT HILL, AND THEREFORE THE STABILITY OF OUR HOMES THAT ARE SITTING ON THAT HILL.
SO IT SOUNDS LIKE, UM, MR. SIMON'S ON IT, BUT I JUST WANTED TO ADD MY CONCERN FOR THE OFFICIAL RECORD.
IF I MAY, I JUST WANTED TO DISTINGUISH THOSE TWO ITEMS THAT, UH, MS. GR GRAVELER REFERRED TO THE, THE STEEP SLOPES IS, UH, WHAT I WAS REFERRING TO AS, UM, THE CUT INTO THE HILL, AND THAT YES.
IS, IS WHAT, UH, NUNZIO PETRO OPINED ABOUT.
AND WE'LL GO BACK AND LOOK AGAIN AS, UH, THE CHAIRMAN, UH, INDICATED WOULD BE A CONDITION OF ANY APPROVAL.
THE 380 SOME ODD SQUARE, UH, CUBIC YARDS OF, UM, OF EARTH IS WHAT I WAS REFERRING TO BEFORE.
AND MOST OF THAT, THAT WAS EARTH, THAT WAS, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, PLACED ON TOP OF ASPHALT AND WILL BE REMOVED.
UM, MUCH OF THAT HAS BEEN REMOVED AS MR. MER HAD JUST TESTIFIED.
SOME OF IT REMAINS, BUT IT'S SITTING ON TOP OF ASPHALT.
SO JUST TO GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT OF COMFORT THAT IT, IT IS NOT FURTHER EXCAVATION INTO ANYTHING, UH, ON THE SITE OR NEAR THE SITE.
OH, ANYONE ELSE WHO WISH TO SPEAK? I, MR. SHERMAN, YOU HAVE MR. SHERMAN? YES.
YEAH, JUST MY, I'M ANDREW SHERMAN, I'M NEIGHBOR TO, TO MSRA.
I JUST WANTED TO, YOU KNOW, REITERATE THAT SAME CONCERN.
AND YES, WE DID SEE THE LETTERS, UH, BUT THE LETTERS SEEMED TO IMPLY THERE WAS NO FURTHER EXCAVATION INTO THE SLOPE.
SO NOW I'M ACTUALLY A LITTLE CONFUSED.
UH, I WAS CONCERNED, MY CONCERN WAS SATISFIED BECAUSE THEY SAID ALL THE EXCAVATION THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT WAS REMOVING SOIL THAT HAD PREVIOUSLY BEEN EXCAVATED DURING THE, UH, BUILDING OF THE, THE SOUTHERN SITE.
NOW IT SOUNDS LIKE THEY ARE INDEED DIGGING INTO THE HILL.
SO AGAIN, JUST WOULD LIKE TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE IS SOME ASSURANCES FROM THE ENGINEERS OR WHOEVER THE RIGHT PERSON IS THAT DIGGING INTO THAT STEEP SLOPE IS NOT GONNA AFFECT THE HOMES UP ABOVE MR. LAW.
COULD YOU ANSWER, UH, MR. SHERMAN? YES.
THE EXCAVATION THAT WAS, THAT WAS MENTIONED WAS THE 380 SOMETHING CUBIC, UM, YARDS OF, OF SOIL.
THAT, THAT IS WHAT I WAS REFERRING TO AS BEING REMOVED.
THERE IS SOME EXCAVATION INTO THE HILLSIDE WHEN THE BINS ARE BEING LOCATED.
THAT WILL BE THE SUBJECT OF, UM, INSPECTION AND REPORT TO THE TOWN ABOUT THE STABILITY.
WE WERE TOLD BY, UH, HE CONFIRMED WITH NUNZIO PETRO ANTE'S LETTER THAT WAS SIGNED AND SEALED, THAT THAT ROCK WALL IS STABLE AND THAT THERE SHOULD BE NO PROBLEM.
BUT HE WILL, AGAIN, AS A CONDITION OF THIS, CONFIRM THAT THAT IS THE CASE.
AND, AND WE CAN ADD THAT, UH, IT'S CONFIRMED TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE TOWN ENGINEER AS WELL.
SO, UH, WE CAN DO THAT ON THE TOWN'S BEHALF AND, UH, FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE RESIDENT AND FOR THE SITE ITSELF, WE'D HAVE NO OBJECTION TO THAT.
THAT IS WHAT WE UNDERSTAND WOULD BE THE TYPICAL PROTOCOL.
[00:50:01]
AND AGAIN, I'M JUST READING THE LETTER AND THE LETTER SA FROM NUN ZERO PETTI SAYS THAT THEY ARE FOLLOWING UP, FOLLOWING THE MEETING, THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT THE, UH, THEY'RE ADVISING THAT THE EXISTING VERTICAL WALK OUTCROP BEHIND THE CURRENT MATERIAL STORAGE BINS IS ITS SOUND CONDITION.SO THAT'S A, A STATEMENT OF CURRENT CONDITION.
THE ONLY OTHER THING HE SAYS IS, BASED ON MY FIELD OBSERVATIONS AND TO MY BEST KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF, THE PROPOSED REMOVAL AND RELOCATION OF THE PRECAST CONCRETE BLACK STORAGE BINS WILL NOT, NOT COMPROMISE THE INTEGRITY OF THE EXISTING VERTICAL ROCK OUTCROP.
HE DOES NOT GIVE HIS OPINION THAT THE FURTHER EXCAVATION OF THAT ROCK ISN'T GONNA HAVE ANY KIND OF NEGATIVE ALLOCATION.
AND THAT WAS THE QUESTION I HAD ASKED.
THE FOLLOW-UP LETTER THEN SAID, WELL, THE EXCAVATION IS ACTUALLY THE OLD, SO I THINK THIS YOU ARE, YOU'RE RIGHT, MR. NELL.
THERE'S TWO DIFFERENT ISSUES, BUT THESE ISSUES SEEM TO BE GETTING CONFUSED BY THE ENGINEER.
AND I WOULD JUST LIKE TO MAKE SURE THAT ENGINEER WRITES A LETTER THAT SAYS THE REMOVAL OF ANY MATERIALS FROM THE STEEP SLOPE WON'T AFFECT THE STEEP SLOPE.
NOT THAT THE RELOCATION OF THE PRECAST CONCRETE STORAGE BINS, THAT'S NOT THE ISSUE WE'RE CONCERNED ABOUT.
SO THAT RELOCATION, THAT RELOCATION INVOLVES EXCAVATION, WE WILL MAKE SURE THAT THE LETTER THAT COMES FROM MR. ANTE ADDRESSES WITH THE DAMAGE AND YOU IS GONNA REQUIRE AND IS WHAT YOU'RE ADDRESSING.
AND, AND ALSO, MR. SHERMAN, THAT IS THE PURPOSE OF MAKING THIS A CONDITION.
RIGHT NOW, IT IS THE OPINION OF THE ENGINEER THAT IT WOULD NOT CAUSE A PRO CAUSE A PROBLEM.
WE WANT TO GET CERTIFICATION THAT, UH, AFTER THE WORK IS DONE, IT HAS NOT BEEN COMPROMISED OR SOME SORT OF, OF, UH, UH, UH, ADDITIONAL, UH, UH, UH, ROOM ENFORCEMENT, WHATEVER THE CASE THAT A, A PE SAYS WILL BE REQUIRED TO RESTORE THAT HILL.
THE BOTTOM LINE IS THAT WE WILL GET CERTIFICATION THAT THAT HILL WILL NOT BE COMPROMISED.
AND IF IT IS, SOMETHING WILL HAVE TO BE DONE TO RECTIFY IT.
IT DOES DOEST SOUND LIKE THE BOARD HAS OUR CONCERNS, UH, WELL UNDERSTOOD AND WELL COVERED.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE PUBLIC? IF THERE ARE NO QUESTIONS FROM, UH, THE PUBLIC AND NO ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND KEEP THE RECORDS OPEN TO WHAT WILL BE THE DATE, UH, ERIC, JANUARY 27TH.
I, I ENTERTAIN A PROPOSAL TO CLOSE THE RECORD, CLOSE THE HEARING, KEEP THE RECORD OPEN TO JANUARY 27.
MR. CHAIRMAN, MAY, MAY I ASK, WOULD THERE BE, UM, A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZED TO BE PREPARED FOR YOUR NEXT, UH, MEETING? OH, YEAH.
THAT, THAT WOULD BE DONE AUTOMATICALLY.
BUT JUST TO GIVE YOU A CERTAIN COMFORT LEVEL, I WILL BE, AFTER I, UH, ASK THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER TO PREPARE THAT, WHICH IS THE NORMAL PROCESS, AND IT WILL BE, IT WILL BE BEFORE US AT OUR NEXT MEETING.
WE APPRECIATE YOUR TIME AND CONSIDERATION.
I LOOK FORWARD TO SEEING YOU AGAIN.
SO NOW WE ARE, WE WOULD WANNA MAKE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC, THE PUBLIC HEARING ASPECT OF THE MEETING.
OH, WE HAD A MOTION TO CLOSE, BUT I WAS JUST GONNA CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
THIS IS THE ITSELF OH, THIS PROJECT.
UH, I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
SO NOW WE'LL GO BACK INTO A WORK SESSION AND THE FIRST THING ON OUR WORK SESSION IS CASE PB 2008 GRAIN, UH, GREYSTONE, HUD FOR SITE, UH, IT, ITS SITE PLAN AND STEEP SLOPE.
UM, THAT'S CORRECT, CHAIRPERSON.
SIMON AND I, JUST AS A MATTER OF COURSE, IN PROCEDURE, UH, BEING THAT SEEKER HAS NOT BEEN, UM, COMPLETED WITH RESPECT TO THIS PROJECT,
[00:55:01]
BEFORE YOU CONSIDER A DECISION ON THE PROJECT ITSELF, STAFF DID PREPARE A DRAFT SEEKER DETERMINATION.WE PREVIOUSLY IDENTIFIED THIS PROPOSAL AS AN UNLISTED ACTION.
UM, SO YOU CAN, IF YOU WISH, MOVE FORWARD WITH CLASSIFYING AN UNLISTED ACTION, CONSIDER THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION THAT WAS PREPARED AS A DRAFT AND THEN MOVE FORWARD WITH CONSIDERING THE DECISION.
I PREFER TO DO IT BEFORE WE ACTUALLY CONSIDER THE DECISION.
IN YOUR DRAFT, UH, YOU HAVE, UH, A DRAFT, UH, SEEK A DETERMINATION INDICATING THAT THIS IS A UNLISTED ACTION AND, UH, UH, UH, AND THE BACKGROUND INFORMATION WHY WE SHOULD DECLARE THIS A EC.
UM, IF, DO ANYONE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE DRAFT N DECK, UH, DECLARATION THAT WAS, UH, THIS SENT OUT TO THE BOARD MEMBERS? THIS IS, WAS SENT OUT, UH, UH, WE, WE PUT THAT IN YOUR PACKAGES THAT WENT YES.
UH, ARE THERE ANY DISCUSSION ON THIS, UH, UH, NEG DECK? IF NOT, I, UH, MAKE A MOTION THAT, UH, UH, P P E 20 DASH OH EIGHT WE IS UNLISTED ACTION AND WE, UH, UH, SUBSEQUENTLY DECLARE IT NEG, UH, NEG DECK CLASSIFICATION.
SECOND, MY SUGGESTION IS YOU DO THE, YOU DO TWO SEPARATE VOTES.
SO, UH, IT SOUNDS LIKE THERE'S A SECOND FOR THE UNLISTED ACTION BY MR. GOLDEN.
SO THE SECOND STEP WOULD BE TO DECLARE THIS, UH, UH, A NECK DECK, UH, IN TERMS OF OUR SEEKER PROCESS.
NOW THAT WE HAVE THE SEEKER DETERMINATION ON THIS PROJECT, UH, I WOULD ASK THAT, UH, MR. TODD, UH, EXPLAIN, UM, GOING TO THE, UH, EXPLAIN, UH, THE APPLICATION TO THE BOARD AND THE PUBLIC.
UM, WHAT, UM, WE, WE'VE HAD A, UH, A, UM, A PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS.
AND THIS IS JUST FOR AN APPROVAL.
I KNOW YOU, WE OFTEN, WE OFTEN DO A PROCEDURE WHERE WE DO THE, UH, CCRA AND THEN WE GO IN AND WE OPEN IT, BUT WE ACTUALLY HAVE THAT ALREADY.
WE HAVE, WE FACT, WE HAVE IN FRONT OF US, WE HAVE THE ACTUAL, WE HAVE THE DRAFT RECOMMENDATION.
YEAH, I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT IT.
AND IT'S JUST REALLY OUTTA CURIOSITY IN THE FIRST TWO PARAGRAPHS, THE, UM, THE APPROVAL IS VALID FOR 24 MONTHS, YOU KNOW, FOR THE SITE PLAN AND THE STEEP SLOPE.
IT'S FOR TWO YEARS NOW, IT'S THE SAME AMOUNT OF TIME, BUT IS THERE ANY REASON WHY ONE IS IN MONTHS AND ONE IS IN YEARS? THAT, THAT'S JUST THE WAY THE CODE READS THAT, UH, STEEP SLOPE PERMITS ARE VALID FOR A PERIOD OF TWO YEARS.
SITE PLAN, WHICH WAS WRITTEN INTO THE CODE PRIOR TO STEEP SLOPE PERMIT STATES THAT YOU CAN APPROVE FOR 24 MONTHS.
SO WE JUST WANT TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE CODE, AND THAT'S THE WAY WE WRITE 'EM UP FOR ALL PROJECTS INVOLVING SITE PLAN AND STEEP SLOPE PERMITS.
SO, BUT GOOD QUESTION, AND I'M GLAD YOU ASKED FOR THAT CLARIFICATION AND CONGRATULATIONS.
I DON'T DON'T RECALL EVER HEARING THAT QUESTION, AT LEAST WITHIN THE LAST FIVE YEARS.
SO THEY ARE CONSISTENT WITH ONE ANOTHER IN TERMS OF THE TIME PERIODS.
UM, NOT NECESSARILY IF IN THIS CASE I'M TALKING ABOUT THIS CASE,
SO STILL BE TRUE WHETHER O YEAR OR NOT, IT'S STILL, IT'S STILL A YEAR.
IT JUST, THAT HAS MORE DAYS IN IT.
BUT, BUT ANYHOW, LET'S MOVE ON.
WITH THAT SAID, UH, THERE ARE TWO VOTES BEFORE YOU, THERE'S ONE FOR THE SITE DECISION ON THE SITE PLAN, AND ONE FOR THE DECISION ON THE STEEP SLOPE
[01:00:01]
PERMIT.AND I JUST DID WANNA NOTE THAT IN THE DRAFT DECISION, WE DID INCORPORATE COMMENTS THAT, UH, I'M SORRY, CONDITIONS THAT WERE SET FORTH AND REQUESTED BY THE VILLAGE OF TERRYTOWN.
WE'VE REVIEWED THOSE WITH THE VILLAGE.
THEY ARE SATISFIED WITH THOSE, MR. TODD'S AGREEABLE TO THOSE.
SO, UM, THOSE ARE ON PAGE FOUR WITHIN SECTION FOUR OF THE DRAFT DECISION.
AARON, ARE THERE ANY NON TEMPLATE SPECIAL CONDITIONS FROM OUR SIDE IN THERE? IF THERE ARE, WOULD YOU PLEASE JUST SAY WHAT THEY ARE? WELL, THAT'LL BE FOUR THAT'S NON-STANDARD.
AS, AS, AS AN EXAMPLE, 4.2 WOULD BE ONE OF THEM THAT THEY SHALL NOT EXCEED 3000 SQUARE FEET IN AREA IN THE ACCESSORY RE RESIDENTIAL.
FOUR ENTIRE SECTION FOUR WOULD BE NON-STANDARD LANGUAGE.
WELL, 4, 1, 2, 3 AND, UH, 4, 1, 2 AND THREE I THINK.
THE REST OF THEM SEEM TO BE, UH, THE TERRYTOWN ONES.
I'M JUST NOT AS SMART AS TOM HAY WHEN I ASKED MY QUESTIONS.
UH, MR. TODD, I'M QUITE SURE WHEN I MADE MY STATEMENT, YOU PROBABLY WAS REF HOMELESS, FELL OFF YOUR SEAT THAT WE WERE GOING.
ANOTHER DISCUSSION ON THIS, BUT, UM, IF, IF, IF THERE'S NO OTHER ISSUE REGARDING, UH, THIS DRAFT APPROVAL, UH, I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO A APPROVE THE, THE DRAFT AS WRITTEN, DRAFT APPROVAL AS WRITTEN.
BUT WE HAVE TO TAKE TWO, TWO VOTES.
ONE IS ON THE, UH, THE SITE PLAN ITSELF AND THE OTHER IS ON THE STEEP SLOPE PERMIT.
SO I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO APPROVE THE STATE PLAN.
ANOTHER, UH, UH, VOTE WE NEED TO TAKE IS ON THE STEEP SLOPE PERMIT.
UH, I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE ACCEPT THIS DRAFT.
UH, IT PERTAINS TO THE STEEP SLOPE PERMIT AS WRITTEN.
OPPOSED? THIS HAS BEEN A LONG, UH, PROCESS, MR. TODD.
WE'VE BEEN OVER THIS MANY YEARS.
UH, NOT THAT WE DON'T LIKE YOU, BUT HOPEFULLY YOU WON'T RETURN ON THIS PROJECT ANYTIME SOON,
AND I JUST WANNA SAY I WENT TO RJ BAILEY SCHOOL IN THE MID SEVENTIES, AND I DROVE BY THERE THE OTHER DAY JUST TO LOOK AT IT, AND I SAID, WOW, THAT PLAYGROUND LOOKS LIKE IT WAS THERE WHEN I WAS THERE.
SO IT'S A REALLY GOOD THING THAT YOU GUYS PASSED THAT BECAUSE IT REALLY, REALLY NEEDED IT.
YEAH, BUT DIDN'T YOU ALSO GO TO WOODLANDS? I DID.
YOU ALSO, HE, HE, HE ALSO HAPPENED TO GO TO BINGHAMTON, SO WE'RE GONNA ASK HIM TO SING THE BINGHAMTON FIGHT SONG, BUT
UH, GOOD LUCK TO YOU ON THAT, ON, UH, ON YOUR PROJECT.
AND, UH, I HOPE IT WINDS UP FOR WHAT I'VE SEEN SO FAR.
IT'S TURNING OUT TO BE A VERY NICE PROJECT, AND I, I HOPE THAT THE FINAL PROJECT WILL LOOK AS GOOD IF, IF NOT BETTER THAN WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE NOW.
OKAY, SO, UH, NEXT THING ON OUR AGENDA IS THE, UH, ELMWOOD RESERVE.
THIS IS FOR A A D E I SS REVIEW.
UM, UM, AND THERE WAS, YEAH, I'M SORRY TO INTERRUPT.
UH, ON, ON, ON THE FINAL AGENDA, I KNOW WE SWITCHED AROUND A FEW THINGS BETWEEN THE DRAFT AND THE FINAL.
ON THE FINAL, I DO HAVE BRIGHTVIEW METROPOLIS AS AS NEXT, AND THAT'S THE RECOMMENDATION TO THE TOWN BOARD, CORRECT? BACK TO THE TOWN BOARD ON THE SITE PLAN AND SPECIAL PERMIT REFERRAL.
WHAT WOULD BE, I KNOW YOU AND I, WE, WE GO THROUGH THE AGENDA BACK AND FORTH, BUT WHAT WOULD
[01:05:01]
BE HELPFUL IS THAT THE FINAL IS EMAIL TO EVERYONE THE DAY OF THE MEETING.SO WE, EVERYBODY HAS THE LATEST COPY IN FRONT OF THEM.
SO THE LATEST AGENDA HAS, UM, OKAY, I HAVE, EVIDENTLY, I STILL HAVE THE, THE REVERSE ORDER AS, UH, BRIGHTVIEW METROPOLIS.
SO THAT HAS BEEN CHANGED TO TP 1802 ELMWOOD PRESERVE? NO, IT'S THE, IT'S, IT'S A REVERSE.
IT'S BRIGHTVIEW METROPOLIS IS SIX B, IT'S THE NEXT PROJECT.
THAT'S PB 2021 BRIGHTVIEW METROPOLIS.
AND HERE IS A, UM, FOR THE SPECIAL PERMIT AND SUBDIVISION STEEP SLOPE, UH, I PLAN, PARDON ME, IT IS SITE PLAN AND
WE'RE NOT, WE'RE ONLY DOING SITE PLAN AND SPECIAL PERMIT WALTER.
LEMME, IT'S PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION.
LEMME CLARIFY THE DIVISION AND THE PLANNING BOARD.
STEEP SLOPE PERMIT AND THE TREE A REMOVAL PERMIT.
MR. MR. CHAIRMAN, UH, THERE ARE A NUMBER OF APPROVALS FOR THIS PROJECT AND ALL THOSE, WHICH YOU SAID ARE IN FACT APPROVALS FOR THE PROJECT.
BUT FOR TONIGHT, THE ONLY TWO THINGS THAT ARE ON, UH, ARE THE SITE PLAN AND SPECIAL PERMIT REFERRAL, UM, TO THE PLANNING FROM THE PLANNING BOARD.
NOW BACK TO THE TOWN BOARD, THE SUBDIVISION STEEP SLOPE PERMIT, UH, AND TREE REMOVAL WOULD BE ON FOR PUBLIC, UH, FUTURE PUBLIC HEARING, WHICH I THINK WE'RE ANTICIPATING TO BE AT OUR FEBRUARY 3RD MEETING.
A AFTER THEY, AFTER THE TOWN BOARD APPROVES THE SITE PLAN.
THAT'S, THAT'S THE WAY I UNDERSTAND IT.
UM, WE'RE GONNA HAVE OUR PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION AND THE STEEP SLOPE PERMIT.
THE TOWN BOARD'S PUBLIC HEARING, I BELIEVE IS GOING TO COME A WEEK AFTER.
IT'S JUST, UM, THAT'S THE WAY THAT IT HAS LAID OUT.
BUT, BUT, BUT SHOULDN'T, SHOULDN'T WE BE DOING, UH, UM, THE, THE, UH, THE SITE PLAN AFTER THE TOWN BOARD? NOT, WELL, WE'RE DOING REFERRAL.
SO WE'RE REFERRING, WE'RE GIVING, WE'RE EITHER GIVING A THUMBS UP OR THUMBS DOWN TO THE, UH, TOWN BOARD ON, UH, THE RECOMMENDATION.
RECOMMENDATION ON THE SUGGEST RECOMMENDATIONS TONIGHT.
IT ACTUALLY DOESN'T MAKE SENSE.
YOU STILL HAVE TO COME BACK FOR US FOR
STEVE SLOPE PLAN THE SUBDIVISION.
CAN I CHIME IN? CAN I CHIME IN REAL QUICK JUST TO, UH, YEAH, GO AHEAD, DAVID.
UH, DAVID COOPER, JUST FOR THE RECORD, PARTNER WITH THE LAW FIRM IS THERE, AND STEIN METZ.
UM, I, THE REASON WHY WE'RE KIND OF PING-PONGING BACK AND FORTH IS BECAUSE PROCEDURALLY, THE TOWN BOARD CAN'T HOLD ITS PUBLIC HEARING UNTIL IT HAS YOUR RECOMMENDATION ON THE SITE PLAN.
UM, AND SO THAT'S WHY WE'RE BEFORE YOU TONIGHT FOR THE RECOMMENDATION SO THAT THE, THE TOWN BOARD CAN THEN SCHEDULE ITS PUBLIC HEARING.
WE'RE THEN GONNA COME BACK TO YOU, I THINK, ON THE THIRD FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE SUBDIVISION AND THE, UM, TREE REMOVAL PERMIT.
NOW, ONE THING TO CLARIFY, I SHOULD NOTE, AND I'M SORRY TO JUMP IN WITH RESPECT TO THE TREE REMOVAL PERMIT, BEING THAT THIS PROJECT FALLS UNDER THE NEW LAW, TECHNICALLY THE TREE REMOVAL PERMIT WILL REST WITH THE TOWN BOARD.
NOT TO SAY THAT THE PLANNING BOARD CANNOT DISCUSS AND REVIEW THE TREE REMOVAL PLAN AND THE LANDSCAPING PLAN.
THE APPROVAL ITSELF WILL REST WITH THE TOWN BOARD, EVEN THOUGH, UM, THE PLANNING BOARD HAS HISTORICALLY HAD THOSE IN THE NEW LAW.
I HAVE SPOKEN WITH THE COMMISSIONER ON THIS, AND I'VE SPOKEN WITH THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE, THE PLANNING BOARD CUSTOMARILY IN IT DECISIONS WOULD PROVIDE CONDITIONS RELATED TO TREE REMOVAL OF TREE PROTECTION AND LANDSCAPING.
THAT WOULD CONTINUE AND IT WOULD BE MIRRORED IN THE TOWN BOARD'S DECISION.
JUST, UM, THEY WOULD BE IDENTICAL, BUT IT WOULD BE IN BOTH DECISIONS.
[01:10:01]
SO I JUST WANTEDCAN I ASK A QUESTION THEN? SURE.
IS, IS THERE, I MEAN, THERE'S, I THINK PINGING PONG WAS A VERY GOOD WAY OF DESCRIBING WHAT'S GOING ON.
WHAT UNFORTUNATELY HAS TO HAPPEN ON A COMPLEX THING LIKE THIS.
IS THERE A WAY WE CAN AVOID THE PINGING PONG BY PROVIDING THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS IN ADVANCE ON THE TREES IN ADVANCE TO THE TOWN BOARD SO THAT WE, THEY DON'T HAVE TO COME BACK TO US, DISCUSS THE LANDSCAPING WITH US ANOTHER TIME, AND THEN GO BACK BACK, OR ELSE WE'RE GONNA BE DOING ANOTHER ROUND.
ALSO, WHERE DOES THE C A C FIT INTO THAT ON THE NEW TREE LAW? RIGHT.
ONE, UH, WITHIN YOUR DRAFT RECOMMENDATION BEFORE YOU THIS EVENING, UH, WE DO, WE DO GET INTO LANDSCAPING OF THE SITE AND APPROPRIATE SCREENING.
SO THAT'S BUILT INTO THE RECOMMENDATION THIS EVENING.
SO IF WE DO MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT, THAT WILL GO TO THE TOWN BOARD.
NOW THAT WE DO HAVE A, UH, FULL TREE REMOVAL PERMIT, APPLICATION SUBMITTAL, UM, AND THE LANDSCAPING PLAN, ONCE THOSE ARE FINALIZED, WHICH THEY'RE IN PROCESS, THEY'VE SUBMITTED TO ME SOME PRELIMINARY INFORMATION, THEY HAVE TO GET ME THE FINAL, UH, THAT WILL BE FORWARDED TO THE C A C TO THE CONSERVATION ADVISORY COUNCIL.
WE'RE JUST DOING, DO WE NEED TO, DO WE NEED TO, UNDER THE NEW LAW, DO WE AS A BOARD NEED TO OPINE AGAIN ON THE LANDSCAPING PLAN BEFORE? OKAY.
SO TO, IT'S TOTALLY, IT'S C A C AND TOM WARD, AND WE'RE OUT, WE'RE OUT OF IT BEYOND WHAT WE'VE DONE TONIGHT IN TERMS OF THAT.
AND IS THAT A FUNCTION OF, OF US NOT BEING THE LEAD AGENCY OR REGARDLESS OF WHETHER OR NOT WE'D THE LEAD AGENCY, THAT'S THE, THAT'S THE PROCESS UNDER THE NEW, UH, TREE LAW.
HOW WE ENVISION IT IS, UH, UNDER THE NEW LAW, IF THERE IS A SITE PLAN INVOLVED WITH THE PROJECT, WHICHEVER BOARD HAS JURISDICTION OVER THE SITE PLAN WOULD HAVE JURISDICTION OVER THE TREE REMOVAL PERMIT.
UH, UH, SORRY FOR THAT MR. COOPER, DOUG, BUT THIS IS THE, THE NEW TREE LAW.
AND AS, AS, AS, UH, HUGHES SCHWARTZ INDICATE, THIS IS ONE OF THESE APPLICATIONS THAT'S GOING BACK AND FORTH AS IT IS, AND THEN WE HAVE SUPERIMPOSED UPON THAT, THE NEW TREE LAW.
BUT ANYHOW, WE, I THINK, UH, WE HAVE THAT STRAIGHT NOW, AND WE COULD, UH, UM, UM, DISCUSS, UH, THE, UH, THE DRAFT RECOMMENDATION THAT WAS SENT, UH, TO THE BOARD.
AND I WOULD LIKE TO ASK, UH, UH, UH, BOARD MEMBERS IF THEY HAVE ANY, UH, QUESTION REGARDING THE, THE, THE DRAFT RECOMMENDATION THAT WAS CIRCULATED.
UH, SO I OPEN IT UP TO ANY BOARD MEMBER WHO MIGHT HAVE A QUESTION REGARDING THE DRAFT RECOMMENDATION.
UM, AND AARON, MAYBE IT'S SOMEPLACE I'M MISSING IT.
I'M LOOKING UNDER SCREENING AND LANDSCAPING.
I REALLY WANT SOMETHING SPECIFIC IN THERE.
UH, AND MAYBE I MISSED IT, UM, IN THERE THAT SAYS THE SCREENING IS DESIGNED TO, TO, UH, MAINTAIN THE PRIVACY OF THE ADJACENT NEIGHBORS WORD.
IS IT IN THERE ANYWHERE? SO THAT'S, I THINK WE NEED A MORE SPECIFIC STANDARD WORDED, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE THAT COULD BE INTERPRETED A MILLION DIFFERENT WAYS.
WELL, NO, IT, I ACTUALLY, IF YOU TAKE A LOOK AT THE RECORD AND WHAT I SAID AT THE LA AT THE LAST MEETING ON THIS, I ACTUALLY SPECIFICALLY, AND I, I THINK DIEGO AND I TALKED ABOUT THIS, THERE WERE WERE, UH, TWO OR THREE HA THERE WERE TWO OR THREE WINDOWS THAT I COULD, THERE'S ONE SPOT YEAH.
ON THE, ON THE PROPERTY THAT OVER ACTUALLY, IT LOOKS INTO THE BACKYARDS OF THE, THE ADJACENT NEIGHBORS.
AND I HAD SUGGESTED AT THE TIME, UH, THAT WE SPECIFICALLY HAVE SC THAT THE SCREENING ENSURES THAT, UM, THAT THE SITE LINE INTO THE, INTO THE, INTO THE ADJACENT NEIGHBOR'S YARDS ARE OBSCURED THROUGHOUT THE, THROUGHOUT THE PROPERTY.
JUST AGAIN, JUST TO CHIME IN ON THAT REAL QUICK FOR THE RECORD, DIEGO WITH J M C, THE CIVIL ENGINEERS FOR THE APPLICANT, THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT WE HAD SPOKEN ABOUT.
AND WE TALKED ABOUT, UH, JUST ADDING A NOTE TO THE PLAN THAT THEY WOULD BE FIELD LOCATED AND FIELD VERIFIED WITH THE FORESTRY OFFICER SO THAT WE COULD COORDINATE THE LOCATIONS AND JUST MAKE SURE EVERYTHING IS SCREENED PROPERLY.
UM, SO YEAH, BUT I, THAT WAS AGREED TO, UH, UH, HAVE
[01:15:01]
A NOTE ON THE PLAN THAT, WELL, I DON'T SEE, I DON'T SEE IT, AARON, IN IN, IN SPECIFICALLY IN B YOU'RE REFERRING TO YOU THE SECTION B YOU'RE REFERRING TO.IT DOESN'T SPECIFICALLY ADDRESS.
SO LET ME POINT YOUR ATTENTION TO SECTION K AND WHILE I, UH, I, I, I THINK THAT IT MIGHT NEED A LITTLE TWEAKING.
I THINK IF YOU GO TO THE, UH, ONE THAT GOES SPECIFIC TO DOBBS FERRY ROAD, I THINK THAT WAS THE ONE.
OKAY, WELL, WHAT PARAGRAPH? I'M SORRY.
TO STEERING OF PLACE, PAGE PLACE, RIGHT.
UM, I THINK THAT CAN BE STRENGTHENED A LITTLE BIT, BUT IF YOU LOOK AT THE, THE BOTTOM, UH, LOCATION LANDSCAPING PROPOSING THIS LOCATION WILL HAVE ADDITIONAL ROOM FOR GROWTH AS A RESULT OF THE INCREASED BUFFER IS RECOMMENDED.
THE LOCATION OF THIS LANDSCAPING BE FIELD VERIFIED AND CONSULTATION WITH NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNERS.
I THINK YOU JUST HAVE TO TWEAK THAT A LITTLE BIT TO, TO, TO OBSCURE.
I THINK YOU NEED TO PUT SOMEWHERE IN THE LANGUAGE THERE TO, TO, TO OBSCURE THE SIGHT LINE FROM, FROM, FROM THE C C F INTO THE, INTO THE, UH, INTO THEIR BACKYARD TO THE, THOSE NEIGHBOR'S BACKYARDS.
SO, SO YOU HAD MENTIONED THIS DURING OUR PRE-MEETING AND MY FINAL VERSION, I DO HAVE THAT LANGUAGE, SO IT'S
THAT'S ALL I ASKED FOR THAT CHANGE.
THAT'S THE CHANGE THAT I ASKED FOR.
YOU SAID YOU, YOU HAVE THAT LANGUAGE, AARON Y AARON, CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT.
SO COULD YOU JUST EMAIL THAT AROUND TO THE BOARDS EVERY SO WE KNOW WHAT THAT LANGUAGE IS? WELL, IF YOU HAVE IT IN FRONT OF YOU, THROW IT UP ON YOUR SCREEN.
IT'S NOT THE ONE ON THE PACKET.
IT'S NOT ON THE, IN THE, WHAT WE GOT IN THE PACKET AT SOME POINT.
WHAT I'LL DO IS CIRCULATE A FINAL VERSION WITH ANY RED LINE CHANGES.
SO YOU SEE THOSE BEFORE WE TRANSMIT.
YOU JUST, THE MOTION THAT, UH, INCLUDES THAT, UH, THAT ADDITION.
AND YOU CAN SAY AS, AND YOU CAN VOTE ON AN AMENDED VERSION.
MS. FRY TAG HAS A QUESTION, I BELIEVE.
WALTER, I HAD MENTIONED SOMETHING THAT INCREASING THE HANDICAPPED PARKING BEYOND THE FOUR SPOTS AND THEY WERE GOING TO LOOK INTO IT AND JOHN COUNTY SEEMS TO THINK THAT WE COULD ALSO USE AN ADDITION BEYOND THE FOUR SPOTS, AND I DON'T SEE THAT CHANGED.
AND THAT IS LETTER C, UM, WHICH WE HAVE, IT'S RECOMMENDED THE INCLUSION OF ADDITIONAL A D A COMPLIANT PARKING SPACES BE CONSIDERED GIVEN THE TYPE OF USE PROPOSED BY THE APPLICANT ON PAGE.
ARE WE GOING DO SOMETHING ABOUT THAT? THAT WAS ATION I JUST READ.
YEAH, SO THEY'RE GOING TO, IT'S IN THE REC, IT'S IN THE RECOMMENDATION.
I HAD A DISCUSSION WITH MR. VILLA, UH, THIS AFTERNOON, AND IN FACT, THEY HAVE AND ARE WILLING TO MODIFY THE PLAN TO INCORPORATE TWO ADDITIONAL A D A COMPLIANT PARKING SPACES ON THE SITE THAT WILL BE REFLECTED IN THEIR UPDATED SITE PLAN THAT GOES TO THE TOWN BOARD.
CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, DIEGO.
ALSO, CAN SOMEBODY JUST RE REFRESH MY MEMORY? IF THERE WAS SOME CONVERSATION ABOUT WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO ABOUT PARKING COME THE HOLIDAYS THERE, IS THERE GOING TO BE ANY, YOU KNOW, LIKE DO WE HAVE ENOUGH PARKING AT HOLIDAY TIMES LIKE MOTHER'S DAY AND CHRISTMAS AND THAT KIND OF THING WHEN, YOU KNOW, WHEN THERE'S ADDITIONAL VISITORS TO THE FACILITY? AARON, YOU WANNA ADDRESS THAT? 'CAUSE YOU TALKED ABOUT THAT WITH MR. CANNING, I BELIEVE.
AARON, YOU ADDRESSED THAT WITH MR. CANNING, DIDN'T YOU? YES.
AND WHAT WE IDENTIFIED WITH THAT THERE, WELL, THE APPLICANT HAS DISCUSSED DIRECTLY WITH MR. CANNING OF LATE, UM, BUT WHAT WE HAD IDENTIFIED WAS THAT THERE WERE MORE THAN ENOUGH SPACES ON THE SITE, MORE THAN THE CODE REQUIRES AND SUFFICIENT TO HANDLE, UH, THE EXPECTED DEMANDS FURTHER.
UM, AND, AND AS WE'VE DISCUSSED WITH MR. CANNING IN THE PAST, YOU DON'T TYPICALLY DESIGN FOR ONE OR TWO DAYS PER YEAR.
UM, BUT THE UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THE SITE WOULD FUNCTION PROPERLY EVEN IN HIGH DEMANDS.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? I HAVE A QUESTION, WALTER.
IN THE, THE SECTION, I THINK THE LAST SECTION, K, UH, FOR THE LAND USE, UH, IMPACT ON THE LAND USE, UH,
[01:20:01]
ADJACENT LAND USE, UH, IF I UNDERSTAND CORRECTLY, LAST TIME, UH, THEY EXPLAINED THAT, UH, UH, THE ADDITIONAL THREE ACRE WOULD BE IN A POSITION OF, UH, UH, GOLF CLUB, BUT THEY'LL USE THE THREE ACRE FOR, EXCUSE ME, FOR, UM, CALCULATION OF, UM, NUMBER OF UNITS TAKEN, PROPOSED, AND ALSO THE, UM, THE, THE COVERAGE, UH, OF THE, THE IMPERVIOUS SURFACE.SO IS THAT, UH, AND I, I DON'T SEE THAT CLEARLY, UH, EXPLAIN, UH, IN THAT IF, IF YOU GO BACK TO, UH, THE ORIGINAL, UH, WHEN WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THE SPECIAL PERMIT, WE SAID THAT IT WAS, UH, UM, BUT, UH, AS LONG AND, AND THAT ONE ADDITIONAL ACRE, UH, IS, IS DECLARED OPEN SPACE, BUT YOU COULD CALCULATE YOUR F A R ON, ON THE BASIS OF, UH, OF THE SIX ACRES.
SO THAT'S PART OF THE SPECIAL PERMIT.
UH, WHAT WE DID IN ADDITION TO THAT, AND, UM, MR. COOPER, CORRECT ME OR MARK, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, THAT THEY ACQUIRED ANOTHER ACRE, TWO AC OF, OF GREEN SPACE.
SO THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF ACREAGE IN OWNERSHIP IS WHAT IS WILL BE SEVEN IF I'M CORRECT.
IT, IT'S, UH, IT'S, IT'S EIGHT.
THE WAY THAT THE, THE CODE REQUIRES IS THERE'S A MINIMUM OF FIVE ACRES.
UM, BUT, BUT I'M SORRY, MINIMUM OF EIGHT ACRES, BUT THAT CAN BE REDUCED TO FIVE ACRES AS LONG AS THERE'S ALSO THREE ACRES OF CONSERVATION AREA.
SO IN, IN THIS CASE, THE WAY THAT THAT THIS APPLICATION IS COMPLYING WITH THAT REQUIREMENT IN THE CODE IS THERE'S GOING TO BE A THREE ACRE, IT'S ACTUALLY LIKE A 3.3 ACRE, UM, STRIP OF, OF CONSERVATION LAND, WHICH IS WHAT I THINK, UH, CREED IS REFERRING TO.
UM, THAT IS GOING TO BE, UM, SUBJECT TO A CONSERVATION EASEMENT THAT UPON THE, THE CEASING OF THE GOLF COURSE, IT WOULD AUTOMATICALLY, UM, BE CONVEYED TO BRIGHTVIEW AND BECOME PART OF THEIR YEAH.
AND I THINK THOUGH OUR RECOMMENDATION WAS SIX FIVE, BUT THEN THE TOWN INCREASED THAT TO EIGHT ACRE MINIMUM, CORRECT? YEAH.
WHAT MY QUESTION IS, MAYBE DAVID CAN ANSWER THAT IF, IF THE APPLICANT DOESN'T OWN THE PROPERTY, BUT THEY STILL CAN USE FOR CALCULATING, UH, THE NUMBER OF UNITS THEY CAN USE, UH, NUMBER OF SORT OF, UH, UNITS THAT THEY'RE PROPOSING AND ALSO THE EMPLOYEE SURFACE THAT WILL BE CALCULATED.
THE, THE, THEY, THEY CAN, AND IN FACT, THAT WAS, THAT'S WRITTEN INTO THE CODE.
UM, SO CAN I EXPLAIN, EXPLAIN? 'CAUSE I, I HELPED DRAFT THE LAW
I WANTED DAVID TO, DAVID TO CHIME ON IT, BUT IF YOU DON'T OWN THE LAND, BUT YOU STILL CAN CLEAN THE PRIVILEGE OF F EXACTLY.
SO YOU, WHOEVER READS BECAUSE OF, BECAUSE OF THE, THE CONSERVATION EASEMENT, UM, YOU ABSOLUTELY CAN, AND IT, IT MAKES SENSE AND I THINK YOU OBVIOUSLY CORRECT ME AND, AND, AND, AND, UM, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, AND, AND PROBABLY YOU'LL ADD TO THIS, BUT I THINK PART OF THE THOUGHT THERE WAS, BECAUSE IT'S, IT'S A BUFFER AREA AS A CONSERVATION EASEMENT, IT CAN BE USED COUNTED TOWARDS, UM, F A R AND ET CETERA.
BUT THE RE THE REASON FOR IT, PARTICULARLY IN THIS CASE, IS PART OF IT'S STILL BEING USED AS A GOLF COURSE.
WHAT WE COULDN'T FIGURE OUT IS HOW BRIGHTVIEW COULD OWN PART OF A GOLF CO COURSE AT THIS TIME.
SO WE SAID IT REALLY DOESN'T MATTER WHO OWNS IT FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE, AS LONG AS IT'S NOT DEVELOPED, THAT'S HOW THE LAW CAME TO BE, WHAT IT IS.
SO THAT, AND THEY TECHNICALLY HAVE CONTROL OF IT BECAUSE IF, FOR SOME REASON METROPOLIS SELLS, CLOSES DOWN THE PROPERTY, THAT THREE ACRES CONVEYS TWO METROPOLIS AND HAS TO REMEMBER, I, THE SCREEN, THE SCREEN FROZE.
SO I DON'T KNOW, I DIDN'T HEAR WHAT YOU SAID HERE.
I'M NOT SURE WHAT I, WHAT I, I WAS EXPLAINING THE LAW OF WHY THE LAW WAS WRITTEN AWAY, THE MECHANICS OF THE LAW.
AND I, YEAH, I UNDERSTAND THE HISTORY OF IT, BUT, BUT THE BOTTOM LINE IS THAT HAS TO
[01:25:01]
MAINTAIN, BE MAINTAINED AS A CONSERVATION EASEMENT.AND IF METROPOLIS ENDS UP GOING, YOU KNOW, ENDING UP DEVELOPING HOUSES THAT THAT 3.2 ACRES CONVEYS TO METROPOLIS, BUT THEY CAN'T DEVELOP IT EITHER.
DAVID, IT'S IT CONSERVATION EASEMENT UPON FILING OF THE, OF THE, UH, CONSERVATION EASEMENT, WHICH IS, WHICH IS GONNA BE A REQUIREMENT WE ASSUME OF THE SPECIAL PERMIT.
SO IN OTHER WORDS, ON DAY ONE, IT WILL BE A CONSERVATION AREA.
WELL, THE, UH, MY QUESTION IS THAT IF IT WAS A 12 ACRE INSTEAD OF EIGHT ACRE, CAN THE APPLICANT USE THAT ADDITIONAL ACRE TO BUILD MORE UNITS? THEY, THEY WOULD HAVE TO, THEY HAVE TO LOOK, I THINK LEGAL QUESTION, I THINK WHETHER WITHOUT OWNERSHIP, CAN YOU CLAIM THE, UH, BENEFITS OF, UH, ADDITIONAL, ADDITIONAL UNITS AND, UH, ADDITIONAL, UH, IMPERVIOUS SURFACE OWNERSHIP UNDER, UNDER YOUR I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE, I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
I THINK EVERYBODY'S ANSWERING.
TOO MANY PEOPLE, TOO MANY PEOPLE ARE SPEAKING AT THE SAME TIME.
UM, DAVID ASKED THE QUESTION, AND, UH, I WOULD ASSUME, BUT DAVID CLA UH, YOU COULD CHARM IN, IF THE ORIGINAL APPLICANT DID NOT BILL TO THE MAXIMUM UNDER THE SPECIAL PERMIT, I WOULD ASSUME THEY COULD COME BACK AND ASK FOR MORE IF THEY DIDN'T BILL OUT THAT ACREAGE.
BUT THE REASON I WAS LETTING MR. COOPER ANSWER, FIRST OF ALL, I THOUGHT YOU WERE ADDRESSING TO HIM, AND SECOND OF ALL, WHEN ALL THE, THESE WERE DISCUSSIONS, UH, NOT AT OUR LEVEL, UH, AT THE PLANNING BOARD, BUT AT THE TOWN BOARD.
MR. COOPER WAS INVOLVED, UH, MUCH MORE WITH THAT.
SO I WAS VERY HAPPY TO LETTING, LETTING HIM ANSWER THOSE QUESTIONS.
AND GREG, I JUST WANTED, YEAH, OKAY, GO AHEAD.
WELL, THAT, THAT WAS ANSWERED THE QUESTION.
UH, FIRST THING I WANNA SAY IS I, I, I APOLOGIZE.
I I ALSO THOUGHT YOU WERE REFERRING TO ME AS DAVID, SO I DIDN'T MEAN TO OH, JUMPING IN.
THAT'S, THAT'S, THAT WAS WHAT WAS GOING ON.
BUT, UM, THE, THE SHORT ANSWER IS YES.
THE, THE, THE, THE LEGISLATION IN TERMS OF F A R AND AND, AND HOW YOUR TOWN WANTS TO REGULATE DENSITY IS, IS HOW YOUR LEGISLATIVE BOARD WANTS TO WRITE IT.
IN THIS CASE, THEY HAVE WRITTEN THAT IF YOU'VE GOT A CONSERVATION AREA THAT THAT IS ADJACENT TO YOUR PROPERTY, YOU CAN COUNT THAT PROVIDED THERE IS A, A, UH, CONSERVATION EASEMENT AGREEMENT.
SO IN, IN THIS CASE, IN THIS APPLICATION, THAT'S WHY YOU'VE GOT THAT THREE ACRE STRIP THAT'S GONNA BE SUBJECT TO THE CONSERVATION EASEMENT THAT WILL THEN BE CONVEYED TO BRIGHTVIEW UPON A TRIGGER EVENT, WHICH UNDER YOUR LAW, WHICH IS ABSOLUTELY WITHIN THE, THE BOARD'S DISCRETION TO DO, UM, IS ALLOWED TO BE COUNTED FOR F A R PURPOSES IN ANY OTHER AREA.
I, I THINK I THANK YOU FOR THAT.
I AGREE WITH EVERYTHING YOU SAID, AND I THINK HOPEFULLY TO CLOSE THE LOOP ON THIS QUESTION.
CRI, YOU POSED ALSO SOMEWHAT OF A HYPOTHETICAL QUESTION.
YOU KNOW, CAN YOU BORROW FIVE ACRES OR EIGHT ACRES AND THEN USE THAT AS A DENSITY, UH, YOU KNOW, METRIC? AND THE ANSWER IS NO.
THE CODE IS WRITTEN THAT IT'S UP TO THREE ACRES OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT CAN BE BORROWED.
ARE THERE ANY, UH, ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS THAT THE BOARD WISH TO, UH, POSE BEFORE WE DECIDE ON, UH, A RECOMMENDATION FOR THE, UH, BOARD? I, I WOULD LIKE TO, TO, UH, MOVE THAT WE GIVE A POSITIVE RECOMMENDATION ON THE SITE PLAN TO THE TOWN BOARD AS WRITTEN? NO, NOT AS WRITTEN.
DIDN'T, WE SAID WE WERE ON AS AMENDED.
UH, ALL IN FAVOR OF, UH, PROVIDING A POSITIVE RECOMMENDATION TO THE BRIGHTVIEW METROPOLIS APPLICATION, UH, UH, AS, UH, AMENDED.
WAIT A MINUTE, WE HAVE ANOTHER CALL.
OPPOSED? THAT'S THE SITE PLAN.
SO WE'LL GIVE A POSITIVE RECOMMENDATION, UH, TO THE
[01:30:01]
TOWN BOARD AS AMENDMENT ON THE SITE PLAN.YOU HAVE, I KNOW YOU WANNA GO WATCH.
I KNOW YOU WATCH THE GAME TONIGHT, BUT, YOU KNOW,
ADDITIONALLY THAT WE HAVE A VOTE, UH, WITH RESPECT TO ISSUING A RECOMMENDATION TO THE TOWN BOARD REGARDING THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST FOR A WAIVER FROM SECTION 2 85, 39 C NINE OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO PERMIT SHARED DRIVEWAY ACCESS TO THE METROPOLIS COUNTRY CLUB.
SO THAT'S WRITTEN UP INTO THE DRAFT AS WELL.
NO, WE HAVE TO TAKE A SEPARATE VOTE ON THAT.
AND THIS RELATES TO ISSUES ISSUING A RECOMMENDATION.
WE HAVE TO SEPARATE THE HIT THE HOUSE, AND I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT.
BUT, UH, A RECOMMENDATION TO THE TOWN BOARD REGARDING, UH, ONE, THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST FOR A BUILDING HEIGHT INCREASE AND TWO, THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST TO THE TOWN BOARD FOR A REDUCTION IN THE SETBACK OF A PARKING AREA TO THE NORTHERLY PROPERTY LINE.
THOSE ARE CRITERIA OUTLINED IN THE SPECIAL PERMIT, UH, LOCAL LAW, AND THEY DO REQUIRE, THEY DO REQUIRE WAIVERS FROM THE TOWN BOARD.
SO WE WOULD LIKE TO BUILD THAT INTO THE RECOMMENDATION.
AND YOU CAN HAVE ONE VOTE ON THE TWO.
YOU MAY HAVE ONE, ONE VOTE, OR TWO.
I THINK THAT, YEAH, THAT'S THE QUESTION.
WE CAN, WE CAN ROLL IT INTO, OKAY.
ANY OTHER VOTE REQUIRED FOR OUR RECOMMENDATION, TOM? BOARD? JUST, JUST THAT I CHANGED MY NAME.
YEAH, BUT ASSIGNMENTS CAN'T, SO, RIGHT.
IT, IT WOULD REALLY BE CONFUSING IF DAVID, DAVID S WAS HERE TOO.
BUT THANK YOU VERY MUCH AND WE'LL SEE YOU SOON.
ELMWOOD CHECKING MY, UH, ELMWOOD IS NEXT.
I'M CHECKING MY TIME VERSUS WHAT WE HAVE LEFT.
I THINK WE'RE MAKING, WE'RE MAKING GOOD TIME.
UH, THE, THE NEXT CASE IS, UH, CASE TB 18 DASH OH TWO ELMWOOD PRESERVE.
AND THIS IS, UH, UH, UH, THE QUESTIONS REFERRED TO THE D I S REVIEW.
WE GOT A, UH, A NUMBER OF QUESTIONS WERE PREVIOUSLY ASKED.
UH, THIS WILL PROVIDE US SOME OPPORTUNITY TO ASK ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS OR TO COMMENT ON THE QUESTIONS THAT WERE ALREADY, UH, BROUGHT UP PREVIOUSLY, IF WE HAVE ANY ADDITIONS TO ADD TO THOSE QUESTIONS.
SO, UH, DO WE HAVE A REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ELMWOOD PRESERVE? YES.
GOOD EVENING, MR. CHAIRMAN, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.
MY NAME IS JAMES CAR WITH J M C.
ALSO JOINED HERE THIS EVENING WITH MAX ICK FROM ZAIN STEINS HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THE BOARD MAY HAVE.
EVENING AND CHAIRPERSON SIMON AND MEMBERS OF BOARD.
WE ALSO HAVE KAREN WITH RETO HERE FROM CHAING COMPANIES, UH, CONSULTANTS ON BEHALF OF THE TOWN WITH RESPECT TO THIS PROJECT.
I, I'D JUST LIKE TO EXPAND UPON A QUESTION THAT I POS AND, UH, AND MICHAEL PRETTY GOES AROUND, UH, THE SAME IDEA THAT, UH, MICHAEL FIRST BROUGHT UP THE IDEA OF HAVING SOME CENTRALIZED OPEN SPACE FOR THE COMMUNITY.
NOW I RECOGNIZE THAT, UH, UH, THE APPLICANT WAS, UH, VERY COGNIZANT OF THE, THE NEIGHBORS
[01:35:01]
AND THEY HAD MANY DISCUSSION WITH THE NEIGHBORS IN TERMS OF APPROPRIATE, UH, UH, UM, UH, BUFFER, WHICH I THINK IS GOOD, BUT, UH, BUT WE, BUT IT, IT, THAT HAS TO BE BALANCED.THE NEEDS OF THE NEIGHBORS ALSO HAVE TO BE BALANCED WITH THE NEEDS OF THE PEOPLE MOVING INTO A NEW DEVELOPMENT.
YOU KNOW, WE WANNA CREATE A, A NICE DEVELOPMENT FOR THE PEOPLE WHO IS COMING IN AS WELL AS APPROPRIATE BUFFER FOR THE NEIGHBORS.
AND, UH, GOING BACK TO THE IDEA OF A CENTRALIZED SPOT, YOU KNOW, I'M OF THE OPINION THAT YOU ARE ASKING FOR 176 UNITS.
IF IT WAS 75, THAT WOULD NOT MAKE IT ECONOMICALLY, UH, UNVIABLE ONE, CNY ONE 60, WHATEVER THE NUMBER IS.
BUT I'M TOTALLY CONVINCED THERE IS A NUMBER THAT WILL ALLOW YOU TO DO THE NECESSARY IMPROVEMENTS TO RUM BROOK, REDUCE THE BUFFER.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE NU WHAT THE MAGIC NUMBER OF THAT IS.
REDUCE, REDUCE THE BUFFER BY FIVE FEET, 10 FEET, 25 FEET, 50 FEET, 75 FEET.
BUT I'M TOTALLY CONVINCED THAT YOU A COMBINATION OF REDUCING THE NUMBER OF UNITS, ADJUSTING THE BUFFER WITHOUT, AND, UH, WITHOUT MAKING ANY REDUCTION IN THE COMMITMENTS TO, UH, UPGRADE, UH, THE RUMBLE PARK.
AND IT'LL STILL BE A FINANCIALLY, UH, UH, ATTRACTIVE PROPOSAL.
SO I'M SAYING WHAT YOU NEED TO DO IS TO GO BACK AND START LOOKING AT THESE THINGS.
SO YOU'LL BE ABLE TO CREATE THE SPACE WITHIN THE UNIT FOR SOME CENTRALIZED AREA WHERE THE RESIDENTS CAN ENJOY.
YES, YOU HAVE A, YOU HAVE TRAILS THAT GO OUT TO, UH, WALKING TRAILS, BUT ON THE OTHER HAND, THIS IS A SENIOR COMMUNITY.
55 WHEN YOU COME IN, BUT 10 YEARS, YOU'RE 65 AND 15 YEARS, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE 70.
SO HOW MANY OF THOSE PEOPLE WILL STILL BE IN A POSITION TO REALLY WALK ALONG THE TRAILS THAT THEY WOULD NEED SOME AREA WITHIN THE, THE DEVELOPMENT WHERE IT CAN WALK A SHORT DISTANCE, SIT DOWN ON THE BENCH, ENJOY A NICE'S LANDSCAPE AREA.
SO I'M SAYING THAT I AM NOT CONVINCED AT ALL THAT YOUR LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT, YOUR RECORD, YOUR, YOUR HOUSING ARCHITECTS CAN'T COME UP WITH A PLAN THAT WILL ALLOW OPEN SPACE, UH, UH, UM, UH, UH, UH, IMPROVE RUM, PARK, PARK AND STILL MAKE IT A FINANCIAL ATTRACTIVE ENVIRONMENT.
SO YOU NEED TO TAKE A LOOK AT THAT, WALTER.
I WOULD, I WOULD LIKE TO, TO THANK YOU FOR THOSE COMMENTS.
UM, I, I THINK WE BOTH AGREE, WE FEEL STRONGLY ABOUT THE FACT THAT THAT CENTER, CENTER OF THE DEVELOPMENT SHOULDN'T HAVE A BUNCH OF UNITS IN IT.
IT SHOULD HAVE A PARK PLAYGROUNDS, I KNOW I'M REPEATING MYSELF, BUT 55 OR OLDER, THEY'RE GONNA HAVE GRANDCHILDREN.
THEY'RE GONNA HAVE THEIR KIDS THERE, THEY NEED A PLAYGROUND.
AND I THINK YOU MADE A GOOD POINT ABOUT THE BUFFER 200 FEET, YOU KNOW, NICE.
I MEAN, WHO, WHO HERE ON THE ZOOM CALL LIVES 200 FEET FROM THE NEAREST NEIGHBOR WHO LEAVES, WHO LIVES 50 FEET FROM THE NEAREST NEIGHBOR.
I THINK, I THINK, YOU KNOW, I, I, I APPRECIATE THE APPLICANT'S THOUGHTFULNESS TO TRY AND KEEP THIS DEVELOPMENT EVEN FROM THE NEIGHBORS, BUT I THINK WE CAN CERTAINLY RECONSIDER THE 200 FEET AND REALLY RECONSIDER THE CENTER OF THE, UH, THE CENTER OF THAT DEVELOPMENT, BECAUSE IT COULD BE A BEAUTIFUL PLACE FOR CONGREGATED.
I JUST WANT, I JUST REAL QUICKLY WANTED TO INDICATE THAT THAT STAFF DID CAPTURE THOSE QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS IN THIS LIST OF QUESTIONS.
SO THAT IS IN THE DOCUMENT AS OF NOW.
UM, AND I JUST WANTED YOU TO BE AWARE OF THAT ON PAGE THREE.
[01:40:01]
UH, OH, YEAH.I START WITH MY COMMENT BY SAYING THAT IT'S IN THERE, BUT I JUST WANTED TO REEMPHASIZE THAT, THAT POINT.
UM, MARTY, YOU WANNA GO FIRST? GO AHEAD.
UM, I JUST WANNA SAY THAT AS FAR AS I'M AWARE, I AM THE ONLY BOARD MEMBER WHO CURRENTLY HAS A HOME IN A 55 PLUS COMMUNITY.
AND AS SUCH, I DO HAVE SOME EXPERIENCE.
UM, THE COMMUNITY THAT MY HUSBAND AND I HAVE A HOME IN DOES HAVE SOME WALKING AREAS AND DOES HAVE SOME PARK-LIKE AREAS.
AND IT'S NOT NECESSARILY ONE LARGE AREA IN THE CENTER OF THE COMMUNITY.
NOT ONLY DO THEY HAVE A LARGER AREA IN THE CENTER, BUT THEY HAVE SEVERAL SMALLER AREAS OF PARK-LIKE AREAS WITHIN THE COMMUNITY.
AND I THINK THEY COULD CONSIDER NOT ONLY A CENTRAL AREA, BUT SEVERAL SMALLER AREAS THROUGHOUT THE COMMUNITY WHERE YOU CAN SIT AND RELAX AND HAVE LITTLE ZEN-LIKE GARDENS OR LITTLE GARDEN LIKE AREAS FOR PEOPLE TO, UM, GATHER AND MEET, WHICH IS WHAT THEY'VE DONE IN COMMUNITY WHERE WE RESIDE.
UM, YOU KNOW, THERE'S SEVERAL WAYS TO DO THIS.
ADDITIONALLY, ONE OF THE SUGGESTIONS I MADE THAT DIDN'T SEEM TO GO OVER VERY WELL, BUT IS SOMETHING THAT REALLY SHOULD BE CONSIDERED IS THAT YOU HAVE A COMBINATION OF SINGLE FAMILY AS WELL AS TOWNHOUSES.
NOT EVERYONE IN THE COMMUNITY OF 55 PLUS IS STILL MARRIED.
THERE ARE A LOT OF SINGLE PEOPLE THAT ARE EITHER DIVORCED OR ARE NOW WIDOWED OR WIDOWERS AND THEY WANT SOMETHING SMALLER.
YOU HAVE TO PLAN A COMMUNITY FOR EVERYONE.
AND YOU KNOW, LIKE MICHAEL WAS SAYING, SOME PEOPLE HAVE GRANDCHILDREN, THEY WANT A PARK, THEY WANT SOMETHING FOR THE GRANDKIDS WHEN THEY COME TO VISIT.
SO THEY WANT THE EXTRA BEDROOM.
SOME PEOPLE DON'T NEED THE EXTRA BEDROOM AND THEY CAN'T AFFORD IT.
SO THEY WANT SOMETHING A LITTLE SMALLER.
SOME PEOPLE WANT IT ALL ON ONE LEVEL.
SOME PEOPLE WANT DON'T MIND HAVING THE UPPER LEVEL FOR WHEN THE GRANDKIDS COME AND THEY CAN MANAGE THE STAIRS.
YOU HAVE TO PLAN FOR EVERYONE.
SOMETHING THAT HAS SOMETHING FOR EVERYONE.
UM, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT, UM, I'M LOOKING AT IS IF YOU TAKE A LOOK AT THE CO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN SPECIFICALLY SAYS THAT WE SHOULD NOT BE INCREASING DENSITIES.
UM, AND WHAT THAT WOULD MEAN IN THIS CASE IS YOU REALLY, I DON'T THINK UNDER OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, YOU CAN DOWN ZONE THE R 30 PART OF THIS PROJECT TO R 20.
I THINK THINK YOU'RE GONNA RUN INTO TROUBLE.
UM, CONSEQUENTLY, I THINK YOU NEED TO RECALCULATE THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF UNITS BASED ON, ON IT BEING AN R 20 VERSUS, I MEAN, BEING R 30 AND R 20 COMBINATION, NOT JUST ON R 20.
'CAUSE YOU'RE GONNA RUN YOURSELF INTO A LONG, YOU COULD RUN YOURSELF INTO A LONG-TERM PROBLEM IF YOU DON'T.
SECOND, I THINK, AARON, YOU'VE CAPTURED THIS, BUT I WANNA, I WANNA EMPHASIZE IT AGAIN, LEGALLY, UM, THE, UH, D A I SS REQUIRES YOU TO LOOK AT THE MAXIMUM BUILDUP.
BUT WHAT'S UNUSUAL IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE IS WE'RE, WE'RE, WE'RE NOT LOOKING AT A SPECIFIC PROJECT, UH, ONE SPECIFIC PLAN HERE.
OKAY? THE PA, THE PLANS ARE IN FLUXX.
UM, AND THIS ACTUALLY I THINK IS HELPFUL TO YOU.
I THINK AS PART OF THE E I S I WOULD ADDRESS THE IMPACT OF WHAT THE LIKELY BUILD OUT WOULD BE.
'CAUSE I ACTUALLY THINK THAT'S GONNA BENEFIT YOU GUYS WHEN IT COMES TO F A R AND SOME OF THE OTHER SEEKER ISSUES THAT, THAT COME UP ALONG THE WAY.
AND IT ALSO IS GONNA MAKE IT EASIER FOR THE TOWN BOARD AND THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE C A C TO ASSESS THE IMPACTS IF WE KNOW WHAT YOU'RE ACTUALLY GONNA PLAN.
AND LOOK AT IT THAT WAY WHEN YOU'RE ADDRESSING THE E I AS WELL AS THE LEGAL REQUIREMENT OF MAXIMUM BUILDOUT, BECAUSE IT SOUNDS TO ME, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, JIM, THAT THERE OR MAX? MAX MAX, IS THAT OKAY? YEP.
UH, MR. BAHA, UM, THAT THERE IS NO
[01:45:01]
DESIRE TO ACTUALLY DO A MAXIMUM BUILDOUT IN TERMS OF SQUARE FOOTAGE.AND THAT'S WHAT I REMEMBER FROM OUR LAST CON CONVERSATIONS.
IF THAT'S TRUE, THEN YOU REALLY SHOULD BE SHOWING WHAT YOU REALLY THINK YOU'RE GONNA BUILD.
SO, UM, THANK YOU FOR THE COMMENTS.
UM, EXCEPT THE MOVING, MOVING FORWARD, WHAT WE'RE GONNA DO IS, UM, AS PART OF THE I PROCESS TURNING INTO AN F B I S, WE WILL RESPOND TO ALL THE COMMENTS ARTICULATED BY THE PLANNING BOARD ALONG WITH THE OTHER VARIOUS BOARDS THAT WE HAVE MET.
UM, AND WE'LL BE ADDRESSING THOSE POINTS AND WE'LL PROVIDING, UH, THE, YOU KNOW, THE REQUESTED EXHIBITS, IMAGES, NUMBERS, ET CETERA.
UM, I DO KNOW THAT THE PROPOSAL SHOWED YES, A MAXIMUM BUILDOUT AS WAS ARTICULATED, YOU PRESENTED AT, UM, I ALSO KNOW THAT THE 4,500 SQUARE FOOT FIGURE THAT DID INCLUDE THE, UM, SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE BASEMENTS.
SO THERE WILL BE, UH, CLARIFICATIONS ON THE SQUARE FOOTAGES AND THE BUILD OUT OPTIONS.
UM, AS PART OF THE F A I S RESPONSE, IN OUR RESPONSE TO ALL OF YOUR COMMENTS, I JUST WANNA CLARIFY ONE THING.
AT SOME POINT YOU'RE GOING TO NEED TO DO THIS ANALYSIS THAT I'M TALKING ABOUT ANYWAY, WHETHER IT'S LEGALLY PART OF THE D A S OR NOT.
I CAN GUARANTEE IF YOU COME BACK TO THIS BOARD WITH TWO ALTERNATE PLANS AFTER THE E A S, WE'RE STILL GONNA BE ASKING THOSE QUESTIONS.
OKAY? SO I, AND I THINK, THINK THE COMMUNITY WANTS TO KNOW TOO.
THEY WANNA KNOW WHAT'S GONNA BE THERE.
OKAY? HOW DO YOU DO A TRAFFIC STUDY WHEN YOU DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHAT'S GONNA BE THERE? OKAY.
HOW DO, HOW DO YOU LOOK, LOOK AT, TRUTHFULLY LOOK AT WHAT THE GREEN SPACE IS, UH, TO MR. SIMON AND MR. GOLDMAN'S POINT ABOUT, YOU KNOW, THE, THE OPPORTUNITY FOR EITHER POCKET PARKS, LIKE, LIKE MS. FLY TAG WAS TALKING ABOUT, OR, OR THE LARGER CENTRAL OR WHAT'S, WHAT WOULD HAPPEN TO THE BUFFER.
SO I'M JUST, WHAT I'M SUGGESTING, YOU DO THE WORK NOW AND, AND GET IT ALL OUT THERE.
WE GET IT INTO THE E, INTO THE E I S AND COVER WHAT YOU HAVE TO DO LEGALLY.
'CAUSE THAT'S THE LAWS IS DAVID FREED WILL TELL YOU THE LAWS THAT YOU HAVE TO SHOW WHAT THE MAXIMUM BUILDOUT WOULD BE, BUT MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE A REALISTIC PLANS IN THERE TOO.
'CAUSE AT THE END OF THE DAY, THAT'S WHAT IT'S GONNA COME DOWN TO IN THE FINAL APPROVE.
IF I COULD JUST JUMP IN JUST FOR ONE MOMENT.
UH, TWO THINGS I WANTED TO ADD.
ONE WAS, UH, TO THANK MS. TTAG FOR HER COMMENT.
WE CAN ADD THAT TO THE LIST OF QUESTIONS AND INCORPORATE, UH, WHAT YOU HAD HAD OFFERED THERE.
AND THEN SECOND, MR. MHAS, UM, AUDIO, AT LEAST ON MY END WITH A LITTLE GARBLED, I DIDN'T KNOW IF FOLKS COULD NOT UNDERSTAND OR HEAR HIM, AND IF YOU COULDN'T, UH, WE CAN HAVE HIM RESTATE IT OR PERHAPS MR. CARAS COULD JUMP IN AND AND RESPOND AS WELL.
SO I JUST WANTED TO POINT THAT OUT.
IT WAS A LITTLE GARBLED, BUT WAS ABLE TO, UH, I'VE, YOU KNOW, WAS ABLE TO UNDERSTAND WHAT HE SAID.
AT LEAST I WAS YEAH, THAT'S WHAT I WAS GONNA SAY AS WELL.
IT WAS A BIT GARBLED, BUT WE'RE WE GOT IT.
AARON, ARE YOU GOING TO ADDRESS THE, THE, UH, ZONING ISSUE IN, IN THE DOCUMENT, PLEASE? I DON'T THINK THAT'S COVERED IN THERE.
SO 20, THE, THE R 20 VERSUS ATION SPECIFICALLY SHOULD BE ADDRESSED IN THE A YEAH, SO LET ME READ WHAT WE HAVE.
UH, AND THIS IS ON PAGE THREE.
THE FOURTH BULLET DOWN, UH, I'LL READ IT IN FULL, IS THE 175 UNITS, THE RIGHT NUMBER FOR THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE.
THE 175 UNITS IS AN INCREASE IN DENSITY OVER THE CURRENT ZONING, AND IT EFFECTIVELY TREATS THE ENTIRE PARCEL AS R 20 INSTEAD OF A SPLIT BETWEEN THE R 20 AND R 30 DISTRICTS.
THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE WAS REPRESENTED AS 175 UNITS AT THREE BEDROOMS, 525 TOTAL BEDROOMS FOR THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT VERSUS 119 UNITS AT FOUR BEDROOMS, TOTALING 476 BEDROOMS IN THE ZONING COMPLIANCE, SINGLE FAMILY PLAN B, WHY NOT 155 UNITS? WHAT IS THE MAGIC TO 175? BESIDES MORE INCOME TO THE APPLICANT? THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DISCUSSED NOT INCREASING DENSITY.
SO WHY SHOULD IT BE ALLOWED HERE? DO YOU WANT ME TO ELABORATE ON THAT FURTHER OR ADD
I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S 155, THAT'S THE PROBLEM.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE CALCULATION WOULD BE.
AND I THINK WE NEED TO KNOW THAT AND NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED IN THE E I S WHAT THE MAXIMUM, MAXIMUM BUILD OUT OF UNITS WOULD BE IF YOU'RE DOING, UH, WITH THE, WITH THE COMBINATION OF AN R 20 AND AN R 30.
I JUST POSE THE QUESTION, UH, TO, TO MR. SCHWARTZ, THE 1 75
[01:50:01]
NUMBER IN THE PROPOSED PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT WITH THE 1 75 TOWNHOUSES.THAT NUMBER IS A FUNCTION OF THE, UM, THE WAY PUD DENSITY IS DERIVED, AND THAT'S BASED ON THE PROPORTION OF, UM, UH, THAT'S ACTUALLY PROPO, UH, A PROPORTION OF THE WHOLE SITE BEING REZONED TO R 20.
AND THEN THE SINGLE FAMILY, UH, VERSION IS, UM, BASED ON THE ZONING OF THE UNDERLYING ZONING.
SO I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION.
YOU'RE SAYING
AND IT'S A COMBINATION AND AUTHORITY, RIGHT? RIGHT.
WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS THE PUTT ISN'T, AND IT SHOULD BE.
SO THEY LOOKED AT, UM, A, A, A VARIETY OF ALTERNATIVES.
SOME WERE A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT WITH THE DENSITY CALCULATION DERIVED ON THE RATIO OF R 20 AND R 30 THAT EXISTS ON THE SITE.
I FORGET THE, THE ALTERNATE NUMBER THAT THAT IS, THAT'S GOTTA, THAT'S WHAT SHOULD BE IN THE D E S.
IT'S IN THE D I S THAT IS IN THE D E I S.
THAT'S ONE OF THE ALTERNATIVES THAT WERE LOOKED AT.
UM, AND THEN, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY THE, UH, APPLICANT'S, I DON'T REMEMBER THEIR NUMBER.
I DON'T, I WOULD NEVER REMEMBER A UNIT NUMBER WHERE WE DID A, THERE WERE LOTS OF, THERE WERE LOTS OF ITERATIONS IN THERE WITH THE PARK AND NOT THE PARK, IF THIS IS REAL SIMPLE.
YOU KNOW, WE, WE UNFORTUNATE THAT'S WHAT'S VERY DIFFICULT ABOUT THIS C I S BECAUSE BASICALLY WE'RE NOT, I DON'T KNOW WHAT WE'RE EVALUATING IN THE C I S TO BE QUITE HONEST, BECAUSE IT'S NOT A PLAN.
IT'S A SERIES OF ALTERNATIVES, WHICH MAKES IT VERY, VERY DIFFICULT AND CO MUCH MORE COMPLEX TO DO AN E I S THAN IF, YOU KNOW, WELL, WE'RE BUILDING 25 HOUSES.
THAT ARE GONNA BE AN AVERAGE OF 4,000 SQUARE FEET.
LIKE WE DID, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING LIKE GEL SPRINT, I KNEW WHAT THEY WANTED TO DO.
SO WHEN WE HAD THE E I S I KNEW WHAT WE WERE GONNA ASK FOR.
IN THIS CASE, WE HAVE ALL SORTS OF DIFFERENT ITERATIONS.
OKAY? BUT THE, BUT WHAT I'M SAYING IS ANY ER, ANY ITERATION, THE ITERATION THAT SHOULD BE THE MAXIMUM BUILDUP SHOULD, SHOULD BE COMPLIANT, SHOULD BE CONSISTENT WITH A COMP PLAN.
I DON'T KNOW, AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT NUMBER IS.
IF, IF I MAY PROVIDE, I THINK THE ONE, I THINK THE KEY IS TO, TO DO EXACTLY WHAT HUGH SUGGESTED.
YOU LOOK AT HOW MANY UNITS YOU COULD BUILD ON EACH ZONE AND YOU ADD 'EM UP AND THAT'S THE POSSIBLE MAXIMUM UNITS.
IF IT'S THE R 20, YOU HAVE X NUMBER OF HOMES.
IF IT'S THE R 30, YOU HAVE X NUMBER OF HOME AND THE SUM IS THE MAXIMUM.
TO ME, THAT'S A VERY SIMPLE MATHEMATICAL CALCULATION, RIGHT.
SO JUST TO BE CLEAR, UM, ALTERNATIVE F IS A ZONING COMPLIANT PUD, MEANING THERE'S NO REZONE OF THE LAND.
IT'S, IT'S, IT'S A DENSITY CALCULATION THAT'S DERIVED ON THE RATIO OF R 20 AND R 30 THAT EXISTS ON THE SITE.
UM, SO THAT, THAT IS ONE ALTERNATIVE THAT WAS STUDIED.
UM, THERE, THE APPLICANT'S PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE, UM, IS, UH, YOU KNOW, THE, THE PROPOSED REZONING OF THE WHOLE SITE TO R 20.
IF YOU DISAGREE AND FEEL THAT THAT'S, HOLD ON FOR A MINUTE.
WE KNOW THAT, WE KNOW THAT ALREADY.
WHAT ASKING IS TO PROVIDE ONE MORE CALCULATION OR LAYOUT THAT SHOWS WHAT IT WOULD LOOK LIKE IF YOU DID THAT.
WHAT WHAT? ALL THE 3 0 4, IF YOU DID WHAT? THAT'S WHAT I WANNA UNDERSTAND.
WERE WE KNOW YEAH, WE KNOW WHAT THE A CAN, CAN I ASK OKAY, THAT MICHAEL, GO AHEAD.
MICHAEL GARRETT, I THINK YOU JUST SHOWED A, A, YOU KNOW, A, A PLAN BASED ON THE EXISTING ZONING R 20 AND R 30, HOW MANY UNITS CAN THEY BUILD IF THEY HAVE TO FOLLOW THE EXISTING ZONING? I ASSUME IT'S LESS THAN THE 1 75.
OKAY, SO IF YOUR QUESTION IS HOW MANY CAN, UH, IS, IS WOULD BE PROPOSED ZONING COMPLIANT UNDER A SINGLE FAMILY ITERATION? NO, NO.
NOW WHAT I JUST FLASHED UP HAD 126 UNITS.
OKAY, SO, SO REALLY WE NEGOTIATED BETWEEN 126 UNITS AND 175 UNITS, RIGHT? UM,
[01:55:01]
I MEAN, WHAT WALTER SAID BEFORE, YOU KNOW, HE IS SURE THAT YOU COULD BUILD LESS THAN 175 UNITS TO GET THAT, YOU KNOW, NICE CENTER AREA WITH THE PARKS AND THE SWINGS AND THE SWIMMING POOL AND THE PLAYGROUND.SO NOW I GUESS WE'RE NEGOTIATING BETWEEN 1 26 AND 1 75.
SO MY PERSONAL VIEW, WHICH I THINK SOME OF US SHARE IS COME UP WITH ANOTHER PLAN WITH A LITTLE MORE OPEN SPACE.
YOU KNOW, SOME MORE WALKS, MAYBE A FEW MORE BUILDINGS, UM, AND WE'LL SEE WHERE WE CAN GO.
YEAH, NO, AND I THINK WE HEARD YOU LOUD AND CLEAR, AARON RECITED THE, UH, CONDITION.
MODA EXPANDED ON IT WITH A, A VARIATION OF SOME OF THE OPEN SPACE CONCEPTS ON SITE.
AND I THINK WE'RE THERE, BUT I GUESS I'M ASKING, WE JUST WANTED TO BE CLEAR
IF YOU'RE ZONING COMPLIANT SINGLE FAMILY HOMES WITH THE R 20 AND R 30 IS 119, DO YOU MEAN THE PUB ONLY PICKS UP SEVEN UNITS? THAT MAKES NO SENSE TO ME.
THE CALCULATION IS THE UNDERLYING ZONING.
UM, AND THEN YOU USE THE EXISTING, UH, UH, MINIMUM, UH, UH, LOT SIZES.
AND THEN WHEN YOU GET THAT CALCULATION, YOU SUBTRACT 25% FOR INFRASTRUCTURE AND IT YIELDS A NUMBER.
UH, WHEN YOU DO THAT, UH, THE NUMBER YIELDS 1 26 FROM A PUD ZONING COMPLIANT WITHOUT JUST THE
NO, WHAT I'M SAYING IS THOUGH, IT MAKES NO SENSE, IF YOU'RE TELLING ME 119 IS ZONING COMPLIANT, 109 IS 119 ZONING COMPLIANT FROM A SINGLE FAMILY PERSPECTIVE.
THE REASON WHY THERE'S A DIFFERENCE IN NUMBER IS ZONING COMPLIANT.
THERE'S NOT A 25% MAGIC NUMBER FOR EROS AND INFRASTRUCTURE IN THE SINGLE FAMILY COMPLIANT NUMBER.
SO YOU ARE TELLING ME THEY ONLY PICK UP SEVEN HOUSES BECAUSE OF THE P THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? THAT'S AN APPLES TO APPLES COMPARISON.
IF IT IS, WHICH I'M NOT SURE, I'M STILL NOT CLEAR IT IS BECAUSE WE HAVE SO MANY DIFFERENT PLANS.
I'M NOT SURE WHAT APPLES TO APPLES IS ANYMORE.
YOU'RE TELLING ME THE PUT ONLY PICKS UP SEVEN UNITS THAT'S VERY HARD TO LEAVE WHEN YOU MAX OUT THE EXISTING ZONING THAT EXISTS ON THE SITE AND USE THE PUD CALCULATION TO DERIVE DENSITY, YOU GET 126 UNITS.
THAT'S A SO COMPLIANT PUD 1, 2, 6.
SO IT'S A SEVEN, SO I'M RIGHT, IT'S ONLY A SEVEN.
YOU ONLY PICK UP SEVEN UNITS BECAUSE OF THE PUD VERSUS SINGLE FAMILY.
WALTER, CAN I, CAN I
I WASN'T SURE WHAT AT WHAT MOMENT TO START SPEAKING HERE.
I I JUST WANTED TO MAYBE POSSIBLY PROVIDE SOME CLARITY ON SOME OF THESE QUESTIONS AS WE'RE GOING BACK AND FORTH AND LET ME KNOW IF MY, YOU SOUND FINE.
UM, SO JUST SO, UM, EVERYONE, UM, IS ON THE SAME PAGE IN TERMS OF THESE WHAT WAS REFERRED TO AS THE VARIOUS PROPOSALS.
WE DO HAVE OUR, WHAT'S CALLED THE PROPOSED PROJECT OR OUR PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE OF THE REZONING TO R 20 REZONING THE P U D IN 175 UNITS AS PART OF THE SCOPING PROCESS WHERE, UM, IT WAS REQUESTED WHAT WE WOULD REPORT ON IN THE D E I S, THE TOWN BOARD DECIDED ON THESE ALTERNATIVES TO PER, WHERE WE WOULD STATE WHAT IS THE BUILD OUT OPTION, WHAT ARE THE VARIOUS IMPACTS FROM THOSE ALTERNATIVES SO THAT ALL THE INVOLVED AGENCIES HAVE THE BENEFIT OF MAKING COMPARISONS BETWEEN WHAT OUR PROPOSAL IS VERSUS WHAT ALTERNATIVES WERE PRESENTED BY THE LEAD AGENCY.
UM, AND SO THERE'S A CHART RIGHT AFTER THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY, UH, COMPARING OUR PROPOSED PROJECT TO THOSE ALTERNATIVES.
I BELIEVE WE'VE GONE THROUGH THOSE IN PREVIOUS PRESENTATIONS, BUT, BUT IT HAS ON THAT CHART, UM, VARIOUS ALTERNATIVES INCLUDING, FOR EXAMPLE, BY RIGHT ZONING, BY RIGHT ZONING WITH A P U D AND IT SHOWS THE UNIT COUNT AND ALSO THE OTHER VARIOUS FACTORS AND, UM, OF VARIOUS DATA RELATED TO EACH ALTERNATIVE AS DETERMINED BY OUR VARIOUS, UH, CONSULTANTS.
SO THAT CHART IS THERE, IT'S TWO PAGES.
I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE EVERYONE KNOWS THAT THERE AND THEY, UH, YOU CAN TAKE A LOOK AT IT TO SEE HOW OUR PROJECT, UH, RELATES TO THESE ALTERNATIVES THAT WERE REQUESTED BY THE LEAD AGENCY.
UM, YEAH, AND YOU KNOW WHAT THERE IS, LOOK AT THE, THE CHART FOR A SECOND MAX, AND YOU'LL SEE THERE IS NOT AN APP.
THIS IS WHAT I WAS, I I SUSPECTED THERE IS NOT AN APPLES TO APPLES COMPARISON OF A ZONING COMPLIANT SINGLE FAMILY VERSUS A ZONING COMPLIANT P BECAUSE THE ONE 19 ASSUMES NO PUBLIC PARK, BUT THE, BUT F WHICH IS B F DOES.
SO IT'S NOT AN APPLES TO APPLES COMPARISON.
IT DIDN'T MAKE SENSE THAT YOU'D ONLY PICK UP SEVEN HOUSES.
[02:00:01]
SO I KNOW THAT THESE ALTERNATIVES WERE SET AFTER, UH, LONG CONVERSATIONS IN FRONT OF THE LEAD AGENCY.UM, AND I KNOW THESE WERE INTENTIONALLY SELECTED, BUT WE CAN DEFINITELY MAKE NOTE OF YOUR COMMENT AND, UM, RESPOND ACCORDINGLY.
ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS TAKE, TAKE F THE ASSUMPTIONS IN F AND THEN PUT A SINGLE FAMILY AND COMPARE THE NUMBER OF U SINGLE FAMILY UNITS YOU WOULD HAVE UNDER NORMAL ZONING WITH A PARK WITH WHAT YOU WOULD HAVE UNDER THE P.
IT'S SIMPLE AND IT'S GONNA BE MORE THAN A LOT MORE THAN SEVEN UNITS.
OKAY, MICHAEL HAD HAD SOMETHING TO SAY.
UM, IS IT MAX, MAX MILLION? IT'S MAX.
UM, WHAT, WHAT, WHAT IS THE SQUARE FOOT OF EACH UNIT? UM, SO RIGHT NOW, UH, THE SQUARE FOOT IS LISTED IN THE D I S THIS IS THE AVERAGE OF ALL THE, THE THREE UNIT TIMES TYPES, IT'S LISTED AS 45 90.
THAT DOES SEEM A LITTLE HIGH, AND THAT'S BECAUSE IT INCLUDES THE BASEMENTS.
UM, AND WE UNDERSTAND THAT, UH, BASED ON THE TOWN'S DEFINITION OF GROSS SQUARE FOOTAGE, PARTS OF THE BASEMENT ARE NOT INCLUDED.
SO THAT FIGURE IS GOING TO BE CLARIFIED AS PART OF THE, UH, RESPONSE TO THE D I S COMMENTS.
SO, SO MAX, MAX, IF YOU DO NOT INCLUDE THE BASEMENT, REALISTICALLY WHAT SQUARE FOOTAGE WE TALKING ABOUT, UH, JAMES, FEEL FREE TO CORRECT ME, BUT WE WOULD LOOK AT A THIRD THIRD.
SO IT WOULD BE ABOUT 3000 SQUARE FEET IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO, SO LOOK HOUSE, UM, THAT DOESN'T CHANGE THE BEDROOM COUNT, THAT DOESN'T CHANGE ANY OF THE TRAFFIC ANALYSIS.
IT DOESN'T CHANGE, BUT, BUT MY POINT IS THIS 3000 FEET FOR RETIRED COUPLE, IT'S A LOT.
I MEAN, YOU KNOW, I'M SURE A LOT OF PEOPLE WANT THAT, BUT I'M ALSO SURE A LOT OF PEOPLE DON'T.
I THINK, I THINK, I THINK YOU MAY WANNA LOOK AT WHETHER YOU REALLY NEED 3000 FEET BECAUSE IF YOU DON'T, IF YOU NEED 2,500 FEET, THAT'S A REDUCTION OF 15, 16%.
YOU KNOW, YOU CAN FIT, YOU KNOW, MORE UNITS INTO LESS SPACE.
JUST SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT.
UM, LOOK, I'M, ME, I, I LIVE IN 2000 SQUARE FEET, YOU KNOW, JUST TWO OF US.
WE GET ROOMS FOR THE KIDS, SO ON AND SO FORTH.
I'M HAPPY, PLUS I GOT A BASEMENT.
BUT I, YOU, YOU KNOW, I I 3000 SOUNDS LIKE A LOT BECAUSE THAT'S MORE TO CLEAN, IT'S MORE TO TAKE CARE OF, IT'S MORE TO FURNISH, UM, LOOK COST MORE TOO.
I, I, I, I'M, I DON'T SELL THESE UNITS.
I DON'T KNOW THE MARKET, YOU KNOW, I'M SURE YOU GUYS KNOW IT BETTER THAN ME, BUT IT'S SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT BECAUSE IT DOES SEEM A LITTLE HIGH FOR A 55 AND OLDER COMMUNITY.
YOU HAVE THAT QUESTION IN THERE ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD.
QUESTION ABOUT THE, THE SIZE CURRENT HASN'T SPOKEN ON THE ISSUE AT ALL, MONA? YEAH, AFTER THAT I'M LISTENING TO ALL THE SEDATION FLYING AROUND AND WONDERING THAT, UH, THE PLAN THAT IS THERE, I THINK THAT THEY HAVE A CERTAIN CONCEPT AND THE NUMBERS THAT CAME OUT WITH A, NOT ONLY JUST A WHAT NICE TO HAVE, WHAT WOULD SELL, BUT IT'S A COMBINATION OF MARKETING, UH, THE ZONING, UH, AND PLANNING BOARD AND THE COMMUNITY AND ALL OF THAT STUFF.
SO I I, I THINK WHAT WE ARE REALLY TRYING TO DO IS TO, UH, WHICH, WHICH I, I I DON'T KNOW WHAT'S END PRODUCT WHEN THEY'RE SOLID, EVERYTHING FIVE YEARS, 10 YEARS DOWN THE LINE WOULD LOOK TOTALLY DIFFERENT.
SO I THINK THAT WHAT WE SHOULD REALLY CO FOCUS IS THE GENERAL CONCEPT AND, UH, POSSIBILITY OF HAVING THIS ADDITIONAL, UH, HOUSING AVAILABLE TO THE TOWN OF GREENBERG PEOPLE IF THEY WANTED TO LIVE IN THE VICINITY, 3000 SQUARE FEET, 2000 SQUARE FEET.
I THINK IF IF THEY, THEY DON'T LIKE IT, THEY CAN LIVE SOMEWHERE ELSE, BUT, OR, OR THESE GUYS ARE, THERE ARE SO MANY MORE PEOPLE WANTS TO DO 2000, THEN THEY WILL CHANGE IT TO BUILD A 2000 AND LEAVE IT, UH,
SOME OF ADDITIONAL THINGS FOR, I DON'T KNOW WHAT WORD.
I, I, I THINK, UH, UH, WHAT GER WANTED TO DO WAS TO REALLY KIND OF KEEP US FOCUSED ONTO THE, UH, THE SORT OF MORE APPROPRIATE APPLICABLE QUESTION FOR D I S AND I THINK THE D I S IS THE EXERCISE TO GET TO THE SORT OF BETTER INPUT FROM, UH, EVERYBODY ELSE.
SO I THINK THAT, UH, WHAT, WHAT, WHAT THEY'RE DOING, I THINK IT'S, IT'S MAKES SENSE
[02:05:01]
TO ME AND I THINK LET THEM GO.WHAT'S THE NEXT STEP? I, I THINK, UM, MICHAEL MIGHT BE A LITTLE BIT OFF IN, UM, SIZING OF WHAT PEOPLE WANT.
I SEE THAT PEOPLE DO WANT, UM, LARGER SIZE HOMES, UM, THAT A LOT OF THE LARGER SIZE HOMES WERE THE ONES THAT WERE THE MOST, UM, PREFERRED IN THE COMMUNITY WHERE I, UM, JUST PURCHASED.
BUT THERE IS A NEED FOR ALTERNATIVES AND I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THEM OFFERING DIFFERENT ALTERNATIVES.
BUT WELL, WE HAVE TO STAY FOCUSED OF WHAT THE PURPOSE OF THIS MEETING IS.
DAVID WA DAVID WANTS TO SAY SOMETHING ABOUT THAT.
WELL, WELL, LET ME JUST FINISH TO MAKE SURE WE GET OUR QUESTIONS.
UH, UH, UH, NOTED AS OPPOSED TO DEBATE ON THE ISSUE IS TO BRING UP THE, UH, ISSUE.
NOW, YOU KNOW, WE, WE BROUGHT UP SEVERAL VERY, VERY VALID ISSUES IN THE WAY WE CALCULATE, UH, UH, THE SQUARE FOOTAGE.
WHETHER OR NOT IS A COMBINATION OF, OF ZONES OR DO IT INDIVIDUAL, THAT'S A VALID QUESTION.
THE ISSUE THAT WE NEED TO LOOK AT A, UH, A CENTER FOR, UH, THE DEVELOPMENT THAT'S A VALID, THAT'S A VALID QUESTION.
ANOTHER ONE IS THAT WE ALSO SHOULD LOOK AT MAYBE INSTEAD OF ONE LARGE AREA, WE SHOULD LOOK AT POCKETS.
THAT'S ANOTHER ISSUE THAT COULD GO IN.
SO I THINK WE NEED TO FOCUS RATHER THAN DEBATING ALL, ALL THE PROS AND CONS TO MAKE SURE WE DISTILL THAT INTO A QUESTION.
WE COULD PUT INTO THE D E I SS DAVID.
SO, UH, YEAH, I THINK YOU THINK YOU STOLE MOST OF MY THUNDERER, UH, MR. CHAIR
UM, ALL THIS GETS SYNTHESIZED, ALL THIS GOES TO THE APPLICANT TO ANSWER AND TO ANSWER BOTH QUESTIONS AND, YOU KNOW, UH, AND SO JUST, UH, YOU KNOW, JUST SO THAT WE'RE NOT GOING IN AROUND IN CIRCLES, RIGHT? WE JUST WANTED TO KNOW WHETHER THEY'RE, YOU KNOW, BEYOND THAT, WHETHER THERE ARE ANYTHING, ANY TOPICS THAT WE'VE NOT DISCUSSED OR ANYTHING THAT WE WANT TO INCLUDE ON THIS, UH, SO THAT, UH, YOU KNOW, WE CAN, WE CAN END THIS CONVERSATION AND MOVE AND MOVE ON.
I HAVE ONE, I HAVE ONE OTHER ONE.
UM, AND IT RELATES BASICALLY WHEN YOU TALK, YOU KNOW, THE, THE SIZE HAS ENOUGH FUNCTION, IT'S CALLED PRICE.
AND BY THE WAY, IT'S PROBABLY A LOT CHEAPER IN NORTH CAROLINA TO BUY 3000 SQUARE FEET THAN THESE UNITS WILL BE.
ONE OF THE ISSUES WALTER AND I HAVE TALKED ABOUT A LOT, UM, AND THEN WE TALKED ABOUT IT ACTUALLY DURING THE C C F WAS THE ABILITY TO BUILD SENIOR HOUSING THAT PEOPLE CAN ACTUALLY AFFORD.
SO I'D LIKE TO KNOW, I HAVE A QUESTION IN THERE AS TO WHAT THEIR ANTICIPATED PRICE POINTS ARE, UM, FOR THESE, FOR THE DIFFERENT UNITS THAT SHOULD BE ADDED TO THE THIS AND, AND BE UNDER CONSIDERATION.
CAN I, UH, JUST KIND OF GO ON THAT? UH, AND THAT MAY BE JUST, UH, AND I THINK IT WAS SOMETHING THAT PROBABLY HAS BEEN SAID BEFORE PROBABLY, UH, EARLY ON IS WHETHER OR NOT THEY'RE GOING TO INCLUDE, UM, ANY, UM, AFFORDABLE WORKFORCE OR, OR SOME DISCOUNTED, UH, PRODUCT IN THIS, UH, DEVELOPMENT.
IT REALLY DOES BECAUSE I MEAN, YOU CAN BUILD A LUXURY COMMUNITY WITH 4,000 SQUARE FOOT HOMES MM-HMM.
YOU KNOW, WE CAN, WE ALREADY HAVE A BUNCH OF THOSE IN, IN, IN GREENBURG.
BOULDER RI, WE, WE CAN REBUILD BOULDER THE RIDGE AND CALL IT OVER 55.
I DON'T THINK THAT'S NECESSARILY THE, WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE BENEFIT TO THIS OUR COMMUNITY IS AS PART OF THE E I S, WHICH IS WHY I'M ASKING THE QUESTION.
SO MR. WHAT THE QUESTION GOES IN AGAIN, WE WE'RE NOT GOING TO, UH, UH, EXPAND THE DISCUSSION ON IT.
NO, JUST A QUESTION THAT IS A QUESTION THAT GOES IN.
I I, I JUST HAVE A QUICK QUESTION IF, UH, ABSENTEE, YOU KNOW, JOHAN, GO AHEAD.
IF THERE'S ANOTHER, UH, 55 AND OVER COMMUNITY WITHIN THIS VICINITY THAT, UH, HAS BEEN BUILT ALONG THE LINES OF WHAT YOU'RE PROPOSING, UM, AS I UNDERSTAND, NOT IN OUR IMMEDIATE VICINITY, THERE ARE EXAMPLES
[02:10:01]
FROM LONG ISLAND, UM, THAT HAS BEEN CITED IN THE D I S AS COMPARABLES.NOT IN THE IMMEDIATE, IT'S IN THE, UM, THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING, JAMES, UNLESS YOU HAVE ANY OTHER INFORMATION ON THAT FRONT.
IF, IF THERE ARE NO ADDITIONAL ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS ON THIS, THEN UH, UH, UH, I'D LIKE TO WRAP OR, OR WRAP IT UP.
AND THEN, UH, THE PROCEDURE NOW IS THAT YOU WILL FORMALLY RESPOND TO ALL OF OUR QUESTIONS, CORRECT? CORRECT.
AND THEN IN ADDITION, OH, I DON'T WANNA JU INTERRUPT AARON.
UM, I WAS JUST GONNA SAY IN ADDITION, WE WILL BE BACK, UM, IN FRONT OF THE PLANNING BOARD, UH, FOR, UH, A VARIETY OF APPROVALS.
YEAH, I KNOW THAT, BUT I'M SAYING I'M, I'M LOOKING AT THE NEXT STEP.
SO THE NEXT STEP ACTUALLY, UM, IN, IN LINE WITH THE DRAFT THAT WE'VE PREPARED, WHAT MY SUGGESTION FOR THE BOARD WOULD BE IS TO TAKE A VOTE, UH, THIS EVENING TO PASS ALONG THESE SUBSTANTIVE QUESTIONS REGARDING THE APPLICANT'S D E I S.
UH, TAKE THAT VOTE THIS EVENING.
WE WILL FINALIZE THIS LIST BASED ON TONIGHT'S COMMENTARY.
LOOKS LIKE WE HAVE SOME LANGUAGE MODIFICATIONS AND A FEW ADDITIONS.
WE CAN CIRCULATE THAT TO THE BOARD WITH THE REQUEST THAT, YOU KNOW, EVERYONE LOOK AT IT BY LET'S SAY, UM, MID-AFTERNOON FRIDAY, IF YOU THINK THAT'S GOOD, SO THAT WE CAN GET IT OFF TO THE TOWN BOARD BY CLOSE OF BUSINESS ON FRIDAY.
THAT'S, THAT WOULD BE MY SUGGESTION AT THIS TIME FOR THE BOARD TO CONSIDER.
YEAH, SO, 'CAUSE KEEP IN MIND THAT THE, THE, THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE D E I S IS THE 27TH.
SO IT'D BE GOOD TO GET THE QUESTIONS OUT AHEAD OF TIME.
SO THE, TO THE VOTE, WE ARE TAKING, WE'D BE TAKING NOW IS THAT YOU PREPARE, UH, THE FINAL LIST OF, OF QUESTIONS, THE LIST OF QUESTIONS WITH THE FINAL INPUT OF THE PLANNING BOARD.
I, WHAT I WOULD SUGGEST IS THAT YOU VOTE TO ISSUE THE, UM, THE SUBSTAN SUBSTANTIVE QUESTIONS THAT HAVE BEEN DRAFTED, PUT TOGETHER BY THE BOARD AND DRAFTED BY STAFF AS AMENDED TO INCLUDE TONIGHT'S QUESTIONS IN COMMON.
SO WE'LL BE LOOKING FORWARD TO GETTING THAT DRAFT.
SO WE WILL GET THAT FINALIZED DOCUMENT OFF TO YOU FOR A FINAL REVIEW BEFORE TRANSMITTING TO THE TOWN BOARD.
AND WITHIN THE EMAIL WE WILL INDICATE, YOU KNOW, A DEADLINE OF FRIDAY AT 2:00 PM OR SOMETHING TO THAT EFFECT.
WE, WE SAW, WE SAW A PARTIAL LIST.
SO THE NEW THE ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS, COULD YOU PUT THAT IN RED? YES, I WILL DO THAT SO THAT YOU CAN SEE THE ADDITIONS, UM, ALL EDITS AND ALL.
AND BOARD MEMBERS, I JUST WANTED TO THANK YOU FOR ALL YOUR QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS, AND WE LOOK FORWARD TO TAKING TO THEM AND RESPONDING TO THEM AS PART OF THE SECRET PROCESS.
SO THE, UH, THE, THE LAST ITEM ON OUR AGENDA IS, UH, UH, CASE PB 2027 DALEWOOD TWO SHOPPING CENTER.
UH, AND THIS IS FOR A, UH, SPECIAL PERMIT.
UH, THIS IS FOR A SPECIAL PERMIT.
UH, THE, THE, UH, AS I UNDERSTAND THE ORIGINAL PERMIT WAS FOR A RETAIL STORE, AND, UH, AND, UH, APPLICANT WISHED TO CHANGE THAT TO A RESTAURANT, WHICH THEN LEADS AND SEEING HOW THEY'D HAVE A RESTAURANT AND A RETAIL STORE HAVE DIFFERENT PARKING REQUIREMENTS.
SO WE NEED TO, UH, SO WHAT WE'LL BE, UH, DOING THIS EVENING IS LOOKING AT A SHEER PARKING REDUCTION FROM THE APPLICANT.
SO COULD THE APPLICANT, UH, EXPLAIN WHAT THEY'RE DOING AND GIVE ADDITIONAL BACKGROUND WHY, UH, YOU'RE SEEKING TO DO THIS? SURE.
THIS IS BRIGGS MOORE PROPERTY GROUP.
[02:15:01]
CAN EVERYBODY HEAR ME OKAY? YES.I WAS, IT WAS TOLD THAT THERE WAS SOME INTERNET CONNECTION ISSUES, SO I'M HAPPY TO HEAR THAT.
I'M ALSO, UH, TONIGHT WITH ME IS CHUCK
AND WE ARE BEFORE THE BOARD TONIGHT TO, UH, SEEK A, UH, SHARED PARKING REDUCTION.
UM, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU RECOLLECT, BUT A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO, WE WERE BEFORE THE SAME BOARD, UH, FOR PURSUING A 5,000 SQUARE FOOT OUT PARCEL BUILDING, UH, THAT WAS MADE UP OF A 2000 SQUARE FOOT RETAIL SPACE AND A 3000 SQUARE FOOT RESTAURANT SPACE.
THE RESTAURANT SPACE IS OCCUPIED BY SHAKE SHACK, AND THE RETAIL SPACE REMAINS VACANT NEXT DOOR.
WE'VE HAD A VERY TOUGH TIME LEASING IT.
UH, MOST OF THE TRACTION THAT WE'VE, THAT WE'VE HAD HAVE BEEN FROM RESTAURANTS, AND THAT'S REALLY BEEN OUR, OUR BEST, OUR, OUR, OUR OUR BEST, UM, HOPE RIGHT NOW WITH RELEASING IT.
SO, UH, WE'RE WORKING WITH A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT, UM, RESTAURANTS RIGHT NOW, ONE IN PARTICULAR THAT WE WERE STARTING TO GET SOME TRACTION WITH AND HOPEFULLY CAN COMPLETE A LEASE.
AND, UH, IN, IN THAT SPIRIT, WE'VE COME BEFORE YOU TO SEEK THE SHARED PARKING REDUCTION TO ALLOW US TO GET A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO TAKE THAT 2000 SQUARE FOOT VACANCY AND, UM, USE IT FOR RESTAURANT USE.
SO THAT'S WHY WE'RE BEFORE YOU TONIGHT.
THE, THE, THE CHANGE FROM A RESTAURANT, FROM A RETAIL USE TO A RESTAURANT USE REQUIRE, UH, YOUR, YOUR PARKING REQUIREMENTS REQUIRE, IF I'M CORRECT, AND CHUCK, TELL ME IF I'M WRONG, I THINK AN ADDITIONAL 17 SPACES OF, UM, UH, PARKING RELIEF THAT WE'RE COMING TO YOU FOR BOTH OUR PARKING STUDY AND THE, UH, MEMO THAT WAS PREPARED BY THE, UH, THE TOWN'S, UM, TRAFFIC CONSULTANT, UM, BOTH SUPPORT, UH, THE, THE, OUR, OUR REQUESTS AND THAT THERE'S MORE THAN ADEQUATE PARKING AVAILABLE RIGHT NOW AND IN THE FUTURE, TOO.
AND CHUCK UCH, OUR TRAFFIC ENGINEER, CAN SPEAK TO THAT.
UH, GOOD EVENING, MR. CHAIRMAN, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD, UH, CHUCK HUTCH WITH LANG AND ENGINEERING.
JUST TO KIND OF REINFORCE WHAT MARK SAID, WE, WE'VE DONE, UH, A VARIETY OF TRAFFIC STUDIES, PARKING STUDIES, UH, PARKING UTILIZATION STUDIES.
UH, SO THOSE ARE REAL TIME, UH, ANALYSIS OF THE WAY PARKING IS UTILIZED AT THIS CENTER.
AND ALL OF THOSE STUDIES HAS CONCLUDED, AND, AND WE'VE PRESENTED THIS INFORMATION TO YOU AS PART OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION IN 2017.
UM, ALL THOSE STUDIES DEMONSTRATE THAT, THAT THERE'S MORE THAN ADEQUATE INFECT, THERE'S EXCESS PARKING AVAILABLE AT THIS CENTER.
UM, BACK IN 2017, YOU AND YOUR STAFF REVIEWED THIS INFORMATION, GRANTED US A, A SHARED PARKING REDUCTION OF 79 SPACES.
UM, I THINK IN ACCORDANCE WITH, YOU KNOW, THE SUMMARY GIVEN TO YOU BY YOUR, YOUR TRAFFIC CONSULTANT, YOU KNOW, HE'S CONFIRMED THAT THERE'S STILL IN EXCESS OF PROBABLY 80 SPACES, UH, JUST IN DALEWOOD TWO.
UH, BUT THAT DOES INCLUDE 40 SPACES IN THE REAR OF THE BUILDING.
SO ALL OF THE INFORMATION, AND IT'S BEEN FAIRLY EXTENSIVE, THAT'S BEEN SUBMITTED TO THE BOARD, BASICALLY DEMONSTRATES THAT, THAT THIS CENTER, EVEN IN ITS PEAK CONDITIONS, UM, YOU KNOW, HAS EXCESS PARKING.
UM, AND SO THIS IS ABOUT A CHANGE IN THAT PARKING DEMAND OF, AS MARK SAID, 17 SPACES.
UH, AND I I JUST WANTED TO BRING UP THE SITE PLAN FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE BOARD TO REFRESH EVERYONE'S RECOLLECTION.
UH, THIS IS THE EXISTING SHAKE SHACK, AND AGAIN, WE'RE IN DALEWOOD, UH, SHOPPING CENTER, THE EXISTING SHAKE SHACK, AND THIS IS THE VACANT SPACE THAT WAS BUILT OUT.
AND, UM, THEY'RE JUST SEEKING TO REPURPOSE AS RESTAURANT SPACE VERSUS WHAT WAS PREVIOUSLY APPROVED AS RETAIL SPACE.
COULD WE GET A UP, UPDATED, UH, UH, OPINION FROM MR. FROM, UH, MR. CANNON ON WHETHER OR NOT THERE'S ADEQUATE, UH, PARKING? BECAUSE HE DID THAT SOME, SOME A FEW YEARS AGO, BUT HAVE HE LOOKED AT? YEAH.
SO, UM, WITH THIS APPLICATION, WE DID FORWARD IT ALONG TO KINLEY HORN FOR MR. CANNING TO TAKE A LOOK AT.
UM, HE HAS PUT TOGETHER A REPORT.
IT JUST CAME IN RECENTLY, UH, I BELIEVE TODAY, UH, OR LATE YESTERDAY, WE DID SEND IT OFF.
WE SENT THAT OFF TO THE BOARD MEMBERS, SO YOU SHOULD HAVE THAT BY EMAIL.
WE'VE ALSO SENT IT OFF TO THE APPLICANT
[02:20:01]
AND ASKED THE APPLICANT TO ADDRESS IT AS THE PROJECT MOVES FORWARD.ULTIMATELY, WHAT MR. CANNING, UM, DID BELIEVE IS THAT THE SITE WOULD ADEQUATELY FUNCTION WITH THE, UH, CHANGE IN USE FROM RETAIL, THE RESTAURANT.
THERE'S AMPLE EXCESS PARKING ON THE SITE.
BUT ONE COMMENT THAT HE DID ADD WAS THAT, UM, OF THE EXCESS PARKING, THERE'S, THERE'S PART, AND I DON'T KNOW THAT IT COMES UP IN THE SITE PLAN, BUT, UH, WE CAN PUT UP AN AERIAL NEXT TIME THERE'S ADDITIONAL PARKING SORT OF BEHIND THE BUILDING.
AND ONE COMMENT THAT HE HAD WAS, IT MAY MAKE SENSE FOR THE BOARD TO CONSIDER REQUIRING SOME, UM, EMPLOYEE PARKING FOR THE CENTER, NOT SPECIFICALLY FOR THE RESTAURANT, BUT FOR THE CENTER, UM, IN THOSE REAR SPACES THAT ARE HEAVILY UNDERUTILIZED TO FREE UP SPACES ADJACENT TO THIS RESTAURANT AND, UM, IN THE PRIME PARKING SPACES, AS I WOULD CALL IT.
SO HE DOES THINK THE SITE WOULD FUNCTION, AND HE, UM, MADE A RECOMMENDATION FOR THE BOARD TO CONSIDER IF THIS PROJECT ADVANCES TO A PUBLIC HEARING COMING OUT OF TONIGHT'S WORK SESSION.
WE FULLY INTEND TO HAVE MR. CANNING AVAILABLE AT THE PUBLIC HEARING TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD MEMBERS, AND TO ALSO BE ABLE TO, UM, COMMENT ON ANY RESPONSE RECEIVED BY THE APPLICANT ON HIS INITIAL COMMENTS.
UH, ARE THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS, UH, THAT THE APPLICANT WOULD LIKE TO MAKE REGARDING THE APPLICATION? DAVID? UM, I WANTED TO CALL THE ATTENTION TO THE BOARD AND ALSO TO MR. NEWMAN THAT WHEN WE GO INTO PUBLIC HEARING, THERE ARE A SET OF CRITERIA UNDER THE SPECIAL PERMIT.
UH, I I THINK A LOT OF THAT HAS BEEN ADDRESSED IN THE REPORT TO THE PLANNING BOARD, WHICH IS PROBABLY WHY THEY'RE NOT, UM, REALLY THAT QUESTIONS, BUT THEY, YOU KNOW, THEY DEAL WITH, UH, A WHOLE, UH, ASPECT AS TO FUMES, UH, EXHAUST AND THAT SORT OF THING.
UH, I JUST WANT THE, AT THE PUBLIC HEARING, BECAUSE THAT'S ON THE RECORD, AND BECAUSE THERE WILL, THERE MAY BE PEOPLE IN THE PUBLIC, I JUST WANTED TO POINT OUT THAT THOSE SHOULD BE ADDRESSED, UH, IF, IF THERE ARE NO QUESTIONS ABOUT THEM TONIGHT, UH, JUST SO THAT WE HAVE COMPLETE RECORD IN FRONT OF THE BOARD, UH, WHEN IT HEARS THIS MATTER IN PUBLIC HEARING.
AND I, IN OUR APPLICATION, IN THE COVER LETTER OF OUR APPLICATION, WE'VE ADDRESSED, UH, THOSE CRITERIA SPECIFICALLY.
BUT IF, IF, UH, BUT THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE ADDRESSED, UH, IF NOT TONIGHT, UH, BUT AT THE PUBLIC HEARING, BECAUSE AWARE OF, I MEAN, YOU, YOU HAVE THE SHAKE SHACK AS A TENANT THAT THERE ARE SPECIAL REQUIRE, UH, REQUIREMENTS THAT HAVE TO BE MET, UH, BY THE RESTAURANT.
SO I WOULD THINK THAT WHEN YOU COME TO PUBLIC HEARING, YOU WOULD, ALL THOSE ISSUES WOULD BE ADDRESSED.
AND, AND LET ME, LET ME ADD TO THAT.
SO THE, IN THE APPLICANT'S SUBMITTAL, WHICH WAS FORWARDED TO THE BOARD, THE APPLICANT DID PROVIDE A WRITTEN COMMENTS RELATED TO HOW THE PROPOSAL MEETS THE SPECIAL PERMIT CRITERIA.
I KNOW THAT ONE QUESTION COMING OUT OF THAT, UH, WAS WHETHER THE EXISTING SPACE FOR GARBAGE AND RECYCLING WAS ADEQUATE TO ACCOMMODATE, YOU KNOW, ESSENTIALLY A SECOND RESTAURANT WITHIN THAT BUILDING.
I THINK WE ASKED THAT QUESTION OF MR. NEWMAN, AND, UM, TO MY KNOWLEDGE, IT WAS IDENTIFIED AS ADEQUATE.
UH, IT'S, IT'S A, IT'S ADEQUATE FOR, FOR THE RESTAURANTS THAT WE'RE TALKING TO RIGHT NOW.
I WILL TELL YOU THAT CERTAIN RESTAURANTS HAVE HEIGHTENED REQUIREMENTS AND, UM, IF, IF IT OUR CAPACITY DOESN'T ADDRESS THEIR REQUIREMENTS, WE WOULD PROBABLY HAVE TO COME IN AND SEEK ADDITIONAL TRASH CAPACITY.
BUT, UH, THE RESTAURANTS THAT WE'VE SPOKEN TO THUS FAR ARE OKAY WITH THE TRASH PROVIDED.
I MEAN, LET ME JUST END, UH, LET ME JUST, UH, JUST STATE THAT, UH, YOU KNOW, THROUGHOUT, THROUGH, EVEN PRIOR TO COVID, BUT DEFINITELY THROUGHOUT
[02:25:01]
THIS, THIS, UM, THIS PANDEMIC, UM, WE'VE BEEN, UH, CHALLENGED TO FIND RETAILERS THAT WANNA OPEN.AND, UM, THE FACT THAT WE'RE GETTING SUCH TRACTION AND SUCH, UH, YOU KNOW, THAT, THAT, THAT RESTAURANTS STILL WANNA OPEN TO US IS, IS ENCOURAGING, UH, AND, UM, WE THINK WE'LL SERVE THE NEEDS OF THE COMMUNITY.
UM, YOU KNOW, THERE, THERE, UM, AND, AND, AND WE'D ALSO REMIND YOU THAT SHAKE SHACK BEING A PRETTY SOPHISTICATED, UH, RESTAURANT OPERATOR THEMSELVES HAS CERTAIN BUILT-IN, UM, RESTRICTIONS IN THEIR LEASE THAT KEEP US FROM BRINGING IN, UH, USES THAT ARE VERY SIMILAR TO THEIRS.
SO YOU CAN, YOU KNOW, REST ASSURED THAT IT'S GOING TO BE A, A COMPLIMENTARY USE.
UM, AND, UM, YOU KNOW, WE'RE, WE'RE, WE'RE EXCITED ABOUT IT.
WE'RE, WE, WE JUST NEED THE ASSISTANCE TO, TO GET, TO GET THIS FORWARD.
IT'S BEEN OVER A YEAR THAT SHAKE SHACK'S BEEN OPEN, UH, AND WE STILL HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO SEEK, UH, TENANT FOR THE, UH, ADJACENT SPACE BECAUSE MOSTLY BECAUSE OF THE MARKET AND BECAUSE OF THE, UH, PANDEMIC.
SO, UM, THAT'S WHY WE'RE APPEARING BEFORE YOU TONIGHT.
UH, MR. NEWMAN, YOU MAY HAVE MENTIONED THIS, AND FORGIVE ME IF YOU DID.
I GOT, FOR SOME REASON I GOT KNOCKED OFF.
YEAH, WELL, YOU WERE SAYING WHEN I GOT OFF SAYING SOMETHING ABOUT THE, THE GARBAGE BINS THAT YEAH, THAT'S WHAT I DROPPED OFF.
SO I CAN SUMMARIZE VERY QUICKLY.
WHAT HE SAID WAS THAT THE, UM, RESTAURANTS THAT THEY'RE LOOKING AT RIGHT NOW, UH, YOU KNOW, THEY HAVE SUFFICIENT SPACE THERE, UH, FOR THE GARBAGE.
HOWEVER, THERE ARE OTHER ONES THAT, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE HOPE, HOPEFULLY THEY'LL RESOLVE THIS BEFORE THAT, UH, THAT WOULD REQUIRE, UH, SOMETHING MORE.
BUT THAT'S, THAT WOULD BE A DISCUSSION FURTHER DOWN THE ROAD, UH, IF NEED BE.
AND I WAS JUST GOING TO ADD, AND, AND MR. NEWMAN, IF YOU'VE MENTIONED THIS ALREADY, FORGIVE ME, BUT, UM, THAT THE, THE, UM, ANTICIPATED PEAK DEMANDS OF THE TWO RESTAURANT USES WITHIN THE SAME BUILDING ARE ANTICIPATED TO DIFFER FROM ONE ANOTHER.
SO, WHERE SHAKE SHACK IS MORE OF A AFTERNOON AND OR EVENING TYPE OF FACILITY, THIS WOULD BE EARLIER ON IN THE DAY, TO MY KNOWLEDGE, AS I RECALL.
NOW LET, LET ME, LET ME QUALIFY THAT BY SAYING THAT WE DON'T HAVE THE SIGNED LEASE YET, BUT THE TWO RESTAURANTS DEFINITELY ONE OF THEM THAT'S TAKEN, UH, THAT WE HAVE THE MOST MOMENTUM WITH RIGHT NOW.
UM, THEIR PEAK HOURS ARE MORNING AND MIDDAY AND SHAKE SHACK'S.
PEAK HOURS ARE MIDDAY TO THE EVENING.
SO IT IS A COMPLIMENTARY, COMPLIMENTARY USE.
THEY DON'T REALLY, IT'S, IT'S, WE, WE'RE, WE'RE GONNA BE MINDFUL OF, UM, YOU KNOW, BRINGING IN A RESTAURANT THAT, UH, WILL, WILL COMPLIMENT, UH, THE SHAKE, SHAKE SHACK AND SHAKE SHACK'S LEASE, AS I WAS DESCRIBING EARLIER,
ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, UH, CONCERNING THIS, UH, UH, PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS? NO, THERE'S NO OTHER QUESTIONS.
SO IF THERE'S NO OTHER QUESTIONS, SO I WOULD THEN, UH, WE'LL SCHEDULE THIS FOR A PUBLIC HEARING AND WE COULD PROBABLY, I, I, LOOKING AT THE, THE AGENDA FOR NEXT, THE NEXT MEETING, IT, UH, FOR THE FEBRUARY 3RD MEETING, UH, LOOKING AT THE TEMPORARY AGENDA, IT WOULD, UH, UH, APPEARS THAT WE HAVE, UH, ROOM TO PUT THIS ON PUBLIC HEARING FOR OUR FEBRUARY 3RD MEETING.
WILL BE, WILL YOU BE PREPARED TO, FOR PUBLIC HEARING ON FEBRUARY? OKAY.
UH, THAT WILL BE FOR THE SPECIAL, SPECIAL USE PERMIT? YEAH.
FOR SHARED PARK AS WELL AS THE SHARED PARKING REDUCTION.
SO, UH, TWO THINGS I WOULD STATE FOLLOWING THAT.
ONE WOULD BE THAT, UM, YOU DID GET A COPY OF THE REVIEW LETTER ISSUED BY MR. CANNING.
WE WOULD ASK THAT A RESPONSE BE PROVIDED NO LATER THAN WEDNESDAY THE 27TH, IDEALLY SOONER, BECAUSE WE'D LIKE TO GET IT BACK TO HIM AND THEN SEE IF HE HAS ANY FINAL COMMENTS AND MAYBE GIVE YOU GUYS AN OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE A LITTLE BIT
[02:30:01]
OF TIME TO PUT TOGETHER ANY FINAL THOUGHTS ON THAT BEFORE THE PUBLIC HEARING.SO NO LATER THAN THE 27TH, IDEALLY, MAYBE THE 26TH IF POSSIBLE MM-HMM.
YEAH, NO, THAT'S, WE, THERE'S NO PROBLEM WITH DOING THAT.
UM, MR. CANNINGS LETTER BASICALLY SUPPORTS WHAT WE, OUR POSITION.
SO WE'RE GONNA, WE'RE GONNA ACKNOWLEDGE HIS REVIEW AND SAY IT CONCURS WITH OURS.
SO YES, A AARON, WE CAN MAKE THAT SUBMISSION BY THE 26TH.
AND THEN, SO SPEAKING TO HIS, HIS, UM, INITIAL REVIEW, I MEAN, WOULD THERE BE ANY OBJECTION ON BEHALF OF THE CENTER ABOUT, YOU KNOW, DEDICATING SOME OF THAT REAR PARKING FOR EMPLOYEE SPACE ONLY? IS THAT SOMETHING THAT CAN BE DONE AND ACCOMMODATED IN A WAY THAT IT WOULD FUNCTION PROPERLY? WELL, YEAH, I MEAN, SOMETHING RATHER THAN DEDICATED.
I HAVE SOME RESERVATIONS ABOUT PUTTING THAT, SORRY, ON, ON, ON, ON THIS PARTICULAR TENANT, BECAUSE YOU, WHEN YOU SAY IT IS ALL FOR THE EMPLOYEES, WORK EMPLOYEES WORKING AT THAT PARTICULAR SITE, THEY WILL HAVE TO WORK, YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT THE PARKING AND BACK OF THE, LIKE THE FURNITURE STORE, OR YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THAT AREA? NO, WE COULD, THAT'S WHAT MR. CANNING HAD INDICATED WAS, UM, A LARGE PROPORTION OF THE VACANT AND AVAILABLE SPACES ON THE SITE ARE SITUATED WITHIN THAT AREA.
AND I DON'T THINK HE WAS SPECIFIC TO SAY, WOULD THIS TENANT, YOU KNOW, I MEAN, THEY MAY ONLY HAVE A SMALL NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES, BUT COULD THERE POTENTIALLY BE AN OPTION FOR EMPLOYEES THROUGHOUT THE SITE,
OR, OR BEYOND ENCOURAGED, YOU KNOW, TO PARK IN THOSE SPACES THAT THAT'S WHAT I THINK HE WOULD GETTING.
YEAH, I THINK DEFINITELY THAT'S, THAT ARE IN A RESPONSE.
OUR, OUR BEST, OUR BEST WAY OF DOING THAT, AARON, IS THROUGH OUR, OUR, UM, IN, TO THE EXTENT THAT OUR LEASE PASS, I CALL 'EM BYLAWS, THEY'RE, THEY'RE REALLY, THEY'RE, THEY'RE, THEY'RE, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE LIKE REGULATIONS FOR THE SHOPPING CENTER, WHICH WE ARE ALLOWED TO REQUIRE OF THE TENANTS THAT ARE, YOU KNOW, IN ADDITION TO THE LEASES SUCH AS PARKING AREAS FOR EMPLOYEES.
WE CAN, WE CAN ACCOMMODATE THAT.
SOMETHING IN WRITING, SOMETHING IN WRITING ON WHAT YOU MAY BE ABLE TO DO, I THINK WOULD BE HELPFUL FOR THE BOARD'S CONSIDERATION, UH, MOVING FORWARD.
NOW, MR. GOLDEN SEEMS TO HAVE A MICHAEL UNMUTE.
WE, WE, WE'VE TRIED TO DO THIS A NUMBER OF TIMES.
I, I DON'T KNOW HOW SUCCESSFULLY, BUT WOULD MARK, I MEAN, IF, IF YOU HAVE A NEW RESTAURANT AS A LESSEE, CERTAINLY ONE TERM OF THE LEASE IS TO REQUIRE THEIR EMPLOYEES TO PARK ON THE BACK.
FORGET THE BYLAWS OF THE SHOPPING CENTER, AND THEN THE LEASE CAN HAVE A SPECIFIC PROVISION, YOU KNOW, WHICH COULD REQUIRE THAT.
AND FRANKLY, WALKING AN EXTRA 20 FEET TO THEIR JOB IS NOT A HARDSHIP.
MICHAEL, FROM, FROM, IT'S NOT, THE RESTAURANT IS NOWHERE NEAR THE REST OF THE SHOPPING CENTER.
IT'S IN THE FRONT OF THE SHOPPING CENTER.
IT'S SEVERAL HUNDRED FEET TO, IF THEY HAD TO PARK AROUND THE BACK, IT'S ONE.
I I, WE CAN, WE CAN WORK, WE CAN WORK OUT SOME LANGUAGE.
WE CAN WORK OUT SOME LANGUAGE.
AND TRUTHFULLY, TRUTHFULLY, ONE OF THE THINGS WE DISCUSSED YESTERDAY, AND THAT I WANNA BRING IT UP, IS I THINK WE SHOULD SEE WHAT HAPPENS.
THIS, THIS PARKING LOT WAS DEVELOPED WHEN THAT WAS A SUPERMARKET.
YOU NOW HAVE A FURNITURE STORE, AND WHERE THERE'S A SUPERMARKET WHERE THE NUMBER OF CUSTOMERS THAT ARE KIND OF COME TO THAT FURNITURE STORE VERSUS A BUSY SUPERMARKET ARE MUCH, MUCH LESS.
I, I'VE GONE BY THAT PARKING LOT A MILLION TIMES.
UH, WE'VE SEEN PHOTOGRAPHS, UH, TAKEN BY A BRILLIANT PHOTOGRAPHER OF THE PARKING LOT.
AND, UH, ALSO SOMEBODY WHO HAPPENS TO BE ADDICTED TO SHAKE SHACK.
I WON'T SAY WHO IT IS, BUT SERIOUSLY, I'VE NEVER SEEN THAT PARKING LOT, ALL THAT BUSY.
SO I THINK AT THIS POINT, TO PUT ANY KIND OF RESTRICTION ON THAT, YOU KNOW, IS PREMATURE WHAT WE CAN DO, AND WE'VE DONE THIS IN THE PAST, WE'VE DONE THIS WITH OTHER, OTHER, OTHER, UH, APPLICANTS, SAY, WELL REVISIT IT ONE YEAR, HENCE THE PARKING ONE YEAR.
HENCE, RATHER THAN ENFORCE THAT, THAT PROVISION TO
[02:35:01]
BE OFF, OFF, YOU KNOW, TO BE FAIR TO, TO EVERYONE.AND I DO THINK IT'S A BIG DEAL IF SOMEONE'S BEEN WORKING ALL DAY OKAY.
TO HAVE TO WALK AT EXTRA 200 FEET.
I, I THINK IT IS A BIG DEAL, PARTICULARLY IF YOU HAVE BAD WEATHER.
SO I, I DON'T SEE, I DON'T SEE THE NECESSITY OF THAT RIGHT NOW.
UM, IF THERE IS IN THE FUTURE, DEPENDS ON, ON WHAT WE FIND.
OKAY, MR. NEWMAN, YOU GET, UH, OKAY.
YOU GOT A SENSE THAT, UH, UH, ELISE FROM, I HOPE YOU, UH, GOT A SENSE THAT YEAH, WE WOULD LIKE TO UTILIZE ALL THESE PARKING SPACES, THE BACK, THEY ARE NOT UTILIZED.
AND THAT IS SOMETHING, UH, WE LIKE TO SEE IN GENERAL, WHETHER OR NOT IT IS APPROPRIATE TO THIS PARTICULAR SITE.
YOU KNOW, AS YOU SEE, THERE'S A DIFFERENCE OF OPINION, BUT AS A, UH, AS THE LANDLORD FOR THE SHOPPING CENTER, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT YOU NEED TO BE KEENLY AWARE OF BECAUSE AS APPLICANTS COME IN AND ASK FOR SHARED PARKING, THEY ISSUE, YOU KNOW, A VERY LEGITIMATE ISSUE SHOULD, WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, YOU GOT PA PLENTY OF PARKING SPACES IN THE BACK, YOU KNOW? OKAY.
SO LET ME, LET ME, LET ME SUGGEST A COMPROMISE.
I DON'T AGREE WITH YOU, BUT I'M WILLING TO COMPROMISE IN THE SPIRIT OF THE TIMES, PUT IT PUT IN THE LEASE THAT THE EMPLOYEES HAVE TO PARK IN THE BACK.
BUT IF THERE ARE PLENTY OF SPACES IN THE FRONT, IF IT'S NOT NECESSARY, DON'T ENFORCE IT, JUST IGNORE IT.
BUT AT LEAST IT'S IN THE LEASE.
SO IF TWO OR THREE YEARS FROM NOW, YOU KNOW, YOU'VE GOT MORE BUSINESS, MORE PARKING, MORE CARS, AND YOU REALLY HAVE TO PUT THE EMPLOYEES IN THE BACK, NOW YOU HAVE A LEASE PROVISION THAT YOU CAN RELY ON AND YOU CAN ENFORCE.
I'M GONNA MAKE A SUGGESTION THAT, UM, WE HAVE THE PUBLIC HEARING, WE HAVE SOME DISCUSSION, AND THEN YEAH.
AT, AT THE PERIOD OF TIME WHEN WE'RE READY, WE CAN MAKE THAT FINAL DECISION.
WE CAN DISCUSS SOME LANGUAGE, UH, SOME OF IT WITH THE APPLICANT, BECAUSE THERE ARE A NUMBER OF ISSUES HERE.
UM, SOME OF THEM ARE SAFETY ISSUES, SOME OF THEM ARE, THIS IS AN APPLICANT.
THIS, THE APPLICANT IS NOT RESTAURANT, WHICH I'LL CALL, MAKE UP A NAME, BREAKFAST NOOK TWO OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
IT'S THE, UM, IT'S THE WHOLE PARKING CENTER.
AND WE CAN WORK OUT WITH, I THINK WITH MR. NEWMAN, SOMETHING THAT WILL BE ACCOMMODATING AND WE WILL FOLLOW THE, THE SPIRIT OF WHAT BOTH YOU AND MICHAEL ARE S SUGGESTING, AND WELL, WELL, WHAT I DON'T WANNA DO AT THIS POINT, BECAUSE I'M HAPPY TO HEAR YOU'VE, YOU'VE MAY HAVE FOUND A TENANT FOR THAT.
THIS IS A VERY DIFFICULT TIME TO FIND TENANTS, PARTICULARLY FOOD TENANTS, I WOULD THINK.
AND, UM, AND AS IT IS, I KNOW YOU, I BELIEVE THAT FURNITURE STORE IS NOT EVEN A FULL, UH, A FULL LEASE.
IT'S A TEMPORARY LEASE IN THAT, IN THAT FACILITY.
SO, YOU KNOW, I, I DON'T WANNA, I DON'T WANNA, I DON'T THINK THERE IS ANY JUSTIFICATION FOR PUTTING UP A POTENTIAL ROADBLOCK INTO THE LEASE OF THIS, UH, A NEW LEASE FOR THAT PARTICULAR SPACE.
NOW, I THINK THAT WOULD BE VERY UNFORTUNATE.
BUT, BUT I THINK WE, UH, UH, UH, THE APPLICANT HOPEFULLY HAVE A SENSE OF WHAT THE ISSUES ARE FOR THE PLANNING BOARD.
UH, UH, AND I THINK YOU RIGHTLY SAID, AND THAT'S A CON AND THAT'S A, THAT'S A CONCERN OF ALL OF US, UH, IS THE MOUND OF VACANT SPACE IN OUR MAJOR CORRIDORS.
SO THIS IS THE OPPORTUNITY FOR THE PLANNING BOARD, THE TOWN AND THE APPLICANT TO WORK TOGETHER AND COME UP WITH SOMETHING THAT'S REASONABLE, WORKABLE, AND WILL ALLOW THE TENANT TO COME IN AND BE SUCCESSFUL.
SO WHEN IT COMES UP TO THE PUBLIC HEARING, WE COULD TRY TO GET SOMETHING MORE SPECIFIC THAT WILL WORK FOR EVERYONE.
SO LET'S LEAVE IT AT THAT FOR THE MOMENT AND, AND, AND PUT THAT IN, UH, ON THE FEBRUARY 3RD FOR HEARING.
WE'LL GIVE, UH, UH, THE APPLICANT SOME TIME TO THINK ABOUT THE WORD AND GIVE DAVID SOME TIME TO COME UP WITH SOME LANGUAGE.
AND THEN, UH, UH, UH, AFTER THE HEARING THEN THE BOARD, WE CAN MAKE A DECISION ON THAT.
[02:40:02]
DO YOU, ARE YOU GONNA SUBMIT SOME OF THE PLANS OR THE DETAILED PLANS OF THE HOW THE RESTAURANT LAYOUT, OR THAT'S USUALLY WE GET THE APPLICATION.SO, UH, GARRETT, AARON, ARE WE GONNA GET SOME DETAILS SO WE CAN UNDERSTAND SOME OF THE SECURITY AND OPERATIONAL QUESTIONS WE MIGHT HAVE? YEAH, SO CORIN IN THIS CASE, UM, WHEN, WELL, LET ME BACKTRACK.
SO IN A LOT OF CASES, THEY'RE, UH, ALREADY AS A TENANT IN MIND, OR THE TENANT IS THE APPLICANT.
IN THIS CASE, AS MR. NEWMAN POINTED OUT, THEY DON'T HAVE A, A SET TENANT THAT ASSIGNED A LEASE AS OF YET.
WHAT WE CAN DO IN INSTANCES LIKE THAT IS ENSURE THAT THE PLAN, UH, THAT A FLOOR PLAN IS SUBMITTED, THAT IS REVIEWED AND ACCEPTED BY THE BUILDING INSPECTOR AND THE FIRE MARSHAL, UM, FOR SAFETY AND SECURITY PURPOSES.
SO THAT'S ONE OPTION THAT YOU HAVE.
AND I'M GLAD YOU ASKED THAT QUESTION 'CAUSE IT WAS A GOOD ONE.
ISN'T THAT STANDING ISN'T, WAIT A MINUTE, ISN'T THAT STANDING WHEN YOU COME IN AND WELL, RIGHT.
BUT MANY TIMES THE BOARD WILL SEE IT.
IN THIS CASE THEY DON'T HAVE ONE.
UM, BUT ALWAYS IT WOULD BE SUBJECT TO THE FIRE MARSHAL AND THE BUILDING INSPECTION AND, AND THE APPLICATION DOES LIMIT US TO A SET NUMBER OF SEATS TO OUR, OUR, OUR SHARED PARKING REDUCTION.
OUR REQUEST WAS, WAS BASED ON AN ASSUMPTION THAT THE RESTAURANT WOULD HAVE A SET NUMBER OF SEATS.
I MEAN, I THINK THAT GOES A LONG WAY TOWARD, UM, HELPING THE BOARD UNDERSTAND HOW THAT USE WOULD COMPLIMENT THE, THE SHAKE SHACK, WHICH HAS A LOT MORE SEATS.
I THINK SHAKE SHACK'S GOT 150 SEATS AND ALL IN, INCLUDING THEIR, THEIR PATIO AREA.
AND, YOU KNOW, UM, WE'RE, WE'RE PROPOSING A, A USE THAT WOULD BE 30 SEATS.
AND, UM, YOU KNOW, BOY, WOULD THAT BE GREAT IF PEOPLE COME AND FILL UP THE 30 SEATS.
IT'S LIKE A DREAM TO US RIGHT NOW, RIGHT? MM-HMM.
IF THERE ARE NO OTHER COMMENTS, THEN UH, WE'LL CONCLUDE.
SO WE WILL PREPARE THE PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE.
WE WILL GET THAT OFF TO YOU TOMORROW.
UH, DO YOU HAVE, WE CAN TALK TOMORROW, BUT WE WANNA MAKE SURE IF YOU DON'T ALREADY HAVE THE MAILING LABELS THAT WE GET YOU SET UP WITH THOSE SO THAT YOU CAN MAIL OUT THE NOTICES AS REQUIRED.
AND, UM, THERE WILL ALSO BE A PUBLIC HEARING SIGN THAT GETS POSTED ALONG CENTRAL PARK AVENUE, PROBABLY IN THE GRASS AREA IN FRONT OF THE BUILDING.
SO WE'LL COMMUNICATE ON THAT TOMORROW.
THAT'S, THAT CONCLUDES THE BUSINESS OF THE WALTER.
BEFORE, BEFORE WE LEAVE, BEFORE, BEFORE WE LEAVE, I JUST WOULD LIKE TO SUGGEST THAT, UM, EVERYBODY WATCH LAST NIGHT'S TOWN BOARD, UH, WORK SESSION, UM, ON THE, UH, ON THE BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEM.
THERE WERE, UH, DETAILED DISCUSSIONS ABOUT, UM, PRESENTATIONS DONE ABOUT THE SYSTEMS THEMSELVES, AS WELL AS, UH, A PRESENTATION ON THE PROPOSAL ON CENTRAL AVENUE FOR, UM, THE GREENVILLE SHOPPING CENTER IN THE MIDWAY SHOPPING CENTER.
SO, I, I, I STRONGLY SUGGEST YOU TAKE THE TAKES ABOUT AN HOUR AND A HALF 'CAUSE IT WENT ON FOR A LONG TIME.
UH, I STRONGLY SUGGEST EVERYBODY WATCH THAT AS WE MOVE FORWARD WITH THOSE PROJECTS.
THANK YOU FOR REMINDING EVERYONE OF THAT.
YEAH, I THINK IT'S BEING, I, I AGREE.
IT'S BE, IT, IT, UH, THE BATTERY STORAGE IS AN IMPORTANT ISSUE, UH, THAT'S BEFORE US, AND I THINK ALL OF US SHOULD TAKE THE TIME TO LEARN MUCH OF POSSIBLE ABOUT THE THIS APPLICATION.
UH, ALSO, FEBRUARY THE 18TH WILL BE THE DAY THAT, UH, I GO BEFORE THE Z B A, UH, UH, ON OUR APPEAL OF, UM, UM, THE SPECIAL PERMIT THAT WAS ISSUED BY THE, UH, NOT ISSUED, IT WAS A DECI BUILDING INSPECTOR, THE BUILDING, THE BUILDING INSPECTOR'S DECISION.
UH, I, I, UH, I, UH, SPOKE OR, OR CORRESPONDING WITH, UH, THE BUILDING INSPECTOR AND MADE IT ABSOLUTELY CLEAR THIS IS NOT A, UH, UH, UH, ANY, UM, YOU KNOW, UH, ATTACK ON HIS INTEGRITY OR HIS PROFESSIONALISM BECAUSE WE HAVE ENJOYED A VERY GOOD RELATIONSHIP WITH THE BUILDING, UH, INSPECTOR, WHICH SHOULD
[02:45:01]
BE.AND HE SAID ABSOLUTELY, HE HAS ABSOLUTELY NO PROBLEM WITH THAT, THAT HE ENJOYED WORKING WITH US.
WE, UH, UH, AND HE WILL CONTINUE TO COOPERATE AND WORK WITH THE PLANNING BOARD.
HE SAID, YOU KNOW, HE SAID, YOU GUYS HAVE, AND I'LL ALMOST QUOTE HIM VERBATIM, SAY, HEY, YOU GUYS HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY TO ACT, AND, AND ACCORDINGLY YOU HAVE RESPONSIBILITY AND I HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY TO DO MY PART.
AND, UH, THE FACT THAT WE DON'T COME TO AGREEMENT.
SO WHAT WE ARE EACH DOING OUR RE UH, DOING WHAT WE ARE EXPECTED TO DO.
SO HE HAS ABSOLUTELY NO PROBLEM WITH THE FACT THAT WE, UH, UH, APPEALING HIS DECISIONS.
I JUST WANTED TO RELAY THAT TO YOU.
WITH THAT SAID, IF THERE'S NOTHING ELSE, I, UH, YES, AARON.
AARON, YOU SOUND GREAT WHEN YOU'RE MUTED, BUT TRY, TRY.
THINK MONA HAD A FINAL COMMENT.
I HAD, UM, COMMENTED TO AARON EARLIER.
UM, I THINK MAYBE IT'S TIME FOR US TO RECOMMEND ONE MORE TIME TO THE TOWN BOARD THAT WE NEED TO REVIEW OUR PARKING, UM, REQUIREMENTS ONCE AGAIN, BECAUSE IT SEEMS THAT WE'RE CONTINUOUSLY, UM, LOOKING AT CASES AND LOWERING THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS.
AND ACCORDING TO AARON, WE'VE REQUESTED ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS THAT THEY BE REVIEWED, AND I THINK IT'S TIME WE TELL THEM ONCE AGAIN THAT THEY NEED TO BE REVIEWED.
SO COULD YOU, YEAH, COULD I THINK WE SEND A FEW, COULD YOU REVIVE THAT AND SAY FOR THE THIRD TIME, YOU KNOW, WE CO
SO THERE'S A UNIVERSAL RECOGNITION THAT OUR CURRENT, UH, PARKING CODES ARE OUT OF DATE, AND WE REALLY NEED TO DO IT BECAUSE I, I DON'T, I DON'T UNDERSTAND MS. TEX'S, UH, FRUSTRATION ONLY TOOK US EIGHT YEARS TO GET THE SIGNS
OUTTA OUTTA CURIOSITY, CAN WE MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS BEFORE, OR DOES IT HAVE TO GO THROUGH SOME TYPE OF FORMAL STUDY? I'M JUST TRYING TO THINK ABOUT HOW WE, IT HAS TO BE A ROLLING, TRUTHFULLY, WHAT SHOULD MAKE A RECOMMENDATION IS TRUTHFULLY WHAT THEY SHOULD BE.
THERE SHOULD BE A COMMITTEE MADE UP OF PEOPLE LIKE MR. NEWMAN'S SITTING THERE.
UM, THE PEOPLE WHO OWN THE, WHO RUN THESE SHOPPING CENTERS ALONG WITH MR. CANNING, UM, AND, AND SOME CITIZENS TO ACTUALLY MAKE A RECOMMENDATION AS TO WHAT'S APPROPRIATE, I THINK AT THIS POINT, YEAH, CLEARLY, CLEARLY ONE OF THE THINGS WE NEED TO DO, I, I STILL LOOK AT EVERY TIME I DRIVE CENTRAL AVENUE AND SEE THE VACANCY RATE IN GREENBURG VERSUS A VACANCY RATE IN WAKE PLAINS, WE HAS, DOESN'T HAVE AS, AS STRICT OF PARKING REGULATIONS AS WE DO.
AND, YOU KNOW, WE WANNA BE FRIENDLY, YOU KNOW, NOT, WE DON'T WANNA CREATE, CREATE A PROBLEM.
AND THERE ARE TIMES WHEN WE NEED TO REJECT EXPANSION LIKE WE DID WITH MID MIDWAY, OKAY.
AND WE DID A LOT OF ANALYSIS ON THAT PARTICULAR ONE BEFORE THAT GOT REJECTED.
BUT WE ALSO NEED TO BE OPEN TO, YOU KNOW, WHAT'S HAPPENING TODAY AND MAKING SURE THAT OUR PARKING REGULATIONS ARE IN LINE.
AND WE ARE, EVERYBODY TELL TELLS US THAT WE'RE OVER PARKED, RIGHT? AND I, AND, AND MR. NEWMAN, I THINK THAT IS AN EXCELLENT SUGGESTION.
YOU KNOW, AT THE PLANNING BOARD, WE'VE BEEN SAYING THIS FOR YEARS, IT WOULD BE IF ALL THE, THE LANDLORDS, THE OWNERS OF THESE SHOPPING CENTERS GET TOGETHER AND SAY, YES, YOU SUPPORT WHAT THE PLANNING BOARD HAS BEEN SAYING FOR YEARS, AND MAYBE THAT WILL FINALLY GET THIS THING MOVING.
SO YOU WOULDN'T HAVE TO SPEND YOUR TIME, YOUR ENERGY GETTING MORE PARKING, PAYING FOR MORE, UH, UH, UH, TRAFFIC STUDIES AND JUST, IT'LL MAKE YOUR JOB EASIER.
WE'RE HAPPY, HAPPY TO PUT ADDITIONALLY, WHILE WE'RE ON THIS SUBJECT, I JUST WANNA MENTION I'M NOT SO HAPPY ABOUT PUTTING THE EMPLOYEE PARKING ALWAYS IN THE REAR, BECAUSE HAVING BEEN A FORMER DISTRICT MANAGER WHERE EMPLOYEES HAD TO GO INTO THE REAR AT THE END OF THE NIGHT WHEN IT'S DARK AND THEY'RE SOMETIMES CARRYING CASH DEPOSITS, AND THEY'RE VERY OFTEN FEMALES, IT'S NOT ALWAYS THE SAFEST PLACE TO BE WALKING LATE AT NIGHT BY YOURSELF CARRYING CASH.
[02:50:01]
IT'S A SECURITY AND A SAFETY ISSUE FOR WOMEN TO BE WALKING LATE AT NIGHT TO A CAR.THAT'S SO, YOU KNOW,
SO I RECOGNIZE THAT THEY SHOULDN'T BE PARKING THE FIRST SPOT RIGHT UP FRONT WHERE THE CUSTOMERS BELONG.
BUT I ALSO WANNA KEEP EVERYBODY SAFE.
AND THAT'S WHY I HADN'T SAID WHAT I SAID, BECAUSE THERE ARE A, A NUMBER OF CONSIDERATIONS.
AND THAT WAS ONE THAT YESTERDAY ACTUALLY I HAD BROUGHT UP AS WELL.
SO LET'S, IT'S TIME, IT'S TIME TO PARTY GUYS.
WE, WE HAVE A NEW, A NEW PRESIDENT.
WE ALL ALL HAVE TO GO CELEBRATE.
ZOOM, UM, WHAT IN A, IN A GYM DOING A ZOOM EXERCISE?
WELL, I HAVE A ZOOM INAUGURATION PARTY TO GO TO IN 40 MINUTES, SO, OH, OKAY.
SO THERE'S NO OTHER ME IF THERE'S NO OTHER BUSINESS, I LIKE IT.