[00:00:01]
MAYOR, CAN YOU HEAR ME? YEAH, WE CAN.[ TOWN OF GREENBURGH PLANNING BOARD AGENDA WEDNESDAY, February 7, 2024 – 7:00 P.M. Meetings of the Planning Board will be adjourned at 10:00 p.m. ]
OKAY.WELCOME TO THE FEBRUARY 7TH PLANNING BOARD MEETING.
UH, MR. SCHMIDT, PLEASE CALL THE RULES CHAIRPERSON SCHWARZ.
MS. SPARKS HERE WITH MR. DESAI.
ABSENT THIS EVENING, MS. SPARKS WILL BE A FULL VOTING MEMBER.
AND JOHANN'S NOT HERE, RIGHT? JOHANN? YES.
WHERE ARE YOU GOING? YOU RUNNING FOR SOMETHING THAT WE DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT?
YOU SETTLED? NOW YOU'RE HAPPY.
IS THAT YOUR GOOD SIDE, WALTER? YES, IT IS.
UM, FIRST THING, APPROVAL OF MINUTES.
ANYBODY HAVE ANY CHANGES TO MINUTES? UH, YES.
UH, IT BEGINS WITH EXPLAIN THAT THEY HAVE BEEN ACTING AS LIAISONS WITH THE A VL INCLUDING, UH, UH, EXPERIENCE FROM, SHOULD BE SOME PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS.
SOME SHOULD BE IN FRONT OF PLANNING BOARD.
WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? INCLUDING EXPERIENCE FROM PLANNING BOARD? THEY, THEY TALK ABOUT WHO'S ON THE, WHO'S ON THE A VL COMMITTEE THAT THEY, THEY GOT OUTSIDE, UH, CONSULTANTS.
UH, UH, SOMEONE FROM THE TOWN BOARD AND INCLUDING SOME PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS ARE ON THAT COMMITTEE.
ANYTHING ELSE, WALTER? NO, THAT'S IT.
ANYBODY ELSE? TOM, YOU OKAY WITH THE MINUTES? THOUGHT THEY WERE EXCELLENT.
COULD I HAVE A MOTION THEN TO APPROVE THE MINUTES AS AMENDED? SO, MOVE THOSE A TIE.
UH, WE HAVE ONE PIECE OF CORRESPONDENCE, UH, WHICH WAS THE GOELDI SUBDIVISION.
I THINK IT'S THE THIRD, CORRECT? THIRD, RIGHT? CORRECT.
AND RIGHT NOW THEY'RE KIND OF TIED UP IN THE HEALTH DEPARTMENTS.
HOW LONG OF AN EXTENSION ARE YOU LOOKING FOR? UH, WE'VE BEEN GIVING OUT 180 DAY EXTENSIONS WE DID ON THEIR SECOND.
SO I WOULD, UH, FOLLOW SUIT HERE.
ANY DISCUSSION ON THE, ON THIS EXTENSION? UH, I JUST WANNA SAY I'M GLAD TO SEE THAT THEY PROVIDED DETAILS OF WHY IT WAS DELAYED AND NOT JUST A BLANKET STATEMENT THAT IT WAS LATE.
UM, IF THERE'S NO DISCUSSION, COULD I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THIS EXTENSION FOR A PERIOD OF 180 DAYS? SO, MOVE WALTER, DO A SECOND.
THE FIRST, UH, CASE IS CASE PB 11 DASH 13.
IT'S BEEN AROUND A WHILE, HUH? GOD, MORE THAN 10 YEARS.
UH, WE'RE HERE TO DISCUSS THE APPLICANT'S HEARING.
COME TO THE PODIUM OR THE OTHER ON ZOOM.
HOW ARE YOU? CAN YOU HEAR, HEAR ME? YEAH, WE CAN HEAR YOU.
THE, UH, SPEAKER VOLUME? 'CAUSE IT, IT'S A LITTLE LOW.
I THINK OUR CONTROL ROOM COULD DO THAT.
I APPRECIATE IT IS ON THE SCREEN.
I JUST, IT'S JUST A LITTLE BIT LOW.
IS THAT ANY BETTER? ANDY, CAN YOU HEAR ME HEAR? I CAN HEAR YOU GUYS.
I, YOU HEAR ME ECHO? NOW WE HAVE AN ECHO.
WE, WE'LL IT THE WAY IT IS THEN.
THIS IS TO DISCUSS, UH, MOVING SOME REGULAR, UH, SOME TREES.
AS YOU KNOW, THIS HAS HAVE BEEN AN ONGOING DEVELOPMENT, WHICH HAS BEEN DONE PIECE BY PIECE.
AND, UH, I'LL TURN IT OVER TO ANDY TODD, THE APPLICANT, TO EXPLAIN WHAT HE IS LOOKING FOR.
I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO SHARE MY SCREEN HERE.
IF YOU NEED ME TO SHARE, I, I ALSO HAVE THE DRAWING.
[00:05:01]
YEAH.UH, I HAD A WHOLE POWERPOINT, BUT, OH, I DON'T KNOW IF WE NEED THE, ANDY, I'M NOT SURE WE'RE GONNA EVEN NEED A WHOLE POWERPOINT.
IF YOU PUT UP THE SCREEN OKAY.
SO AARON WILL, AARON WILL PUT THAT UP.
SO, UM, BASICALLY WE, UM, THE SUBDIVISION IS, UH, MOSTLY SOLD THROUGH.
WE HAVE, UH, THREE LOTS IN GREENBURG THAT ARE, THAT ARE LEFT.
AND, UH, IT'S A GOOD SEGUE TO HOW YOU STARTED THIS, THAT WE'VE BEEN AROUND FOR A WHILE.
SO, UM, WHAT HAPPENED IN THE VERY BEGINNING WAS WHEN WE FIRST STARTED SELLING LOTS IN, UM, WE WERE SELLING VERY WELL IN TARRYTOWN.
'CAUSE THE TREES, LIKE, IT WAS KIND OF LIKE ALREADY A, UM, COMMUN.
LIKE THEY HAD A CAMP THERE AND THEY HAD A, THEY HAD NO STATES THERE.
SO THERE REALLY WEREN'T MANY TREES UP.
AND AS A RESULT, PEOPLE COULD UNDERSTAND, EVEN THOUGH UNDERSTAND WHAT IT, UM, COMMUNITY LOOKED LIKE, WOULD LOOK LIKE WHEN, WHEN THEY BUILT THEIR LOT.
UM, GREENBERG SIDE WAS, UM, WAS ALL THE WOODS, YOU KNOW, AND PEOPLE WERE SCARED TO GO IN BECAUSE OF TICKS AND ALL THESE DIFFERENT THINGS.
SO, UM, WE WEREN'T REALLY GETTING ANY SALES.
AND I CAME TO, UH, THE PLANNING BOARD AND I KIND OF MENTIONED, UH, WHAT WAS HAPPENING.
AND I SUGGESTED THAT, UM, WHEN WE FIRST GOT OUR APPROVAL, WE WERE APPROVED FOR, UM, TO TAKE DOWN CERTAIN TREES THAT WERE KIND OF IN THE BUILDING ENVELOPE.
AND AARON, IF YOU COULD JUST KIND OF LIKE SHOW THEM, UH, THEY'RE REALLY, REALLY NON SPECIMEN TREES.
SO WE WERE A LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT, CAME UP WITH A PLAN.
WE, UM, THERE WERE SPECIMEN TREES THAT WERE PROTECTED.
THERE WERE TREES OUT, YOU KNOW, OUT, YOU KNOW, FAR ON THE OUTSKIRTS OF A LOT THAT WERE PROTECTED.
AND THEN, UM, AND THEN WE WERE ALLOWED TO TAKE DOWN TREES UPON, UH, COMING TO YOU GUYS AND SAYING, ALL RIGHT, WE'RE READY TO BUILD THE LOT.
SO WE'RE AT THE POINT NOW WHERE TAR TOWN'S BEEN SOLD OUT FOR A LONG, FOR A LONG TIME.
GREENBURG HAS THE LOTS THAT ARE LEFT THAT HAD, THAT WE DIDN'T TAKE THE TREES DOWN ON.
UM, SO I AM COMING TO YOU GUYS TO PROPOSE THAT.
UH, AND IT WAS FANTASTIC THAT YOU ALLOWED US TO DO IT BECAUSE IT REALLY SPED THINGS UP FOR US.
AND, YOU KNOW, IT WORKED, WORKED OUT GREAT.
UM, AND IT WORKED OUT GREAT FOR THE TOWN BECAUSE OUR HOUSES ARE VERY VALUABLE AND IT CREATES A LOT OF, UH, A LOT OF REVENUE FOR THE TOWN.
SO, UM, WHAT I'M SUGGESTING IS, AND AARON I THINK IS YOU HAVE CONTROL OF THE MOUSE NOW, I THINK.
SO IF YOU COULD JUST KIND OF GO, YOU KNOW, IN THOSE THREE WHITE AREAS WHERE THE HOUSE ARE, IF YOU COULD JUST SHOW THEM THE THREE DIFFERENT LOTS AND THE AREAS THAT WE'RE PROPOSING TO TAKE THE TREES DOWN WITH.
WE'VE ALREADY BEEN APPROVED TO TAKE THEM DOWN ONCE WE, UM, COME TO YOU WITH A BUILDING PERMIT.
AND, UH, WE'RE ASKING SIMILARLY TO WHAT WE DID IN THE PAST TO, UH, BE ABLE TO TAKE THEM DOWN TO SPEED THIS UP.
AND, UH, SO YOU WON'T HAVE TO, SO THAT, UH, THE SUBDIVISION WON'T BE TAKING SO LONG ANYMORE.
AS, AS THIS STARTED, I HAVE A QUESTION.
DID WE ALREADY APPROVE THE REMOVAL OF THESE TREES IN THE, OF THE LOTS CANADA? THE, THE COMPLETE ANSWER IS THE TREES WERE APPROVED FOR REMOVAL.
HOWEVER, THERE'S A CONDITION THAT HE CAN'T CLEAR THE TREES FROM THE LOTS UNTIL HE FILES A BUILDING PERMIT FOR THE OTHER LOTS.
HE EITHER GOT A PRE PRIOR APPROVAL FROM THE PLANNING BOARD TO CLEAR THEM BEFORE FILING FOR THE BUILDING PERMITS, OR HE FILED THE BUILDING PERMIT AND CLEARED THE TREES.
HAS THE BUILDING PERMIT BEEN FILED FOR THESE? NOT FOR THESE THREE.
THE ISSUE HERE, AND HE'S HAVING TROUBLE MARKETING THE LOTS.
SO HE WANTS, HE WANTS US TO CHANGE IT SLIGHTLY TO ALLOW FOR THE REMOVAL OF THE TREES THAT WE ALREADY AGREED TO REMOVE AFTER THE BUILDING PERMIT, BUT BEFORE THE BUILDING PERMIT.
JUST TO CONFIRM, MICHAEL, UH, ANDY, I JUST WANT TO CONFIRM THIS, AND I THINK THIS IS RIGHT.
THERE ARE NO, THERE'S NO DIFFERENCE IN THE NUMBER OF TREES THAT YOU PLAN TO TAKE DOWN.
AND NO SPECIMEN TREES WILL BE TAKEN DOWN AT ALL.
I DON'T THINK, I DON'T THINK WE NEED PERSONALLY TO DISCUSS THIS.
I THINK WE SHOULD JUST MAKE A MOTION.
SO IT'S, IT'S, IT'S LOTS NINE, 10, AND 11 LANGUAGE.
BUT YEAH, BUT UH, IT'S, I AGREE.
BUT THAT'S, BUT I THINK IN THE MOTION WE JUST SHOULD I CAN FRAME IT, FRAME IT THAT WE ARE ALLOWING THE PRE-APPROVED OR THE PRE-CUTTING OF TREES WITHIN THE BUILDING.
UH, NOW WE'VE ALREADY APPROVED.
WALTER, I GUARANTEE YOU THAT THE MINUTES WILL NOT REFLECT THAT I SAID
I'M STILL LOOKING FOR A SECOND.
[00:10:01]
FORMATE THE MOTION? I HAVE IT WRITTEN IN.IT'S THAT WE'RE APPROVING THE PRE, THE PREUSS.
UH, TAKING DOWN OF TREES ON MARCH 9, 10, 11.
FOR THE PURPOSES OF BEING ABLE TO MARKET THESE PROPERTIES IN ADVANCE OF THE BUILDING PERMIT FOR THE PURPOSE OF MARKETING IMMEDIATELY EFFECTIVE.
THEY CAN CUT 'EM DOWN TOMORROW.
SO THEY CAN CUT THEM DOWN SOON.
HE HAS TO INSTALL THE PROTECTION FENCING AROUND THE PERIMETER AND VERIFY IT.
THERE'S A THIRD PARTY INSPECTOR.
SO I THINK, LESLIE, YOU JUST MADE THE MOTION AFTER.
ALL IN FAVOR? UH, I'LL OPPOSED.
AYE, YOU, YOU OPPOSED? THAT'S AN AYE THAT YOU'RE OPPOSED OR YOU JUST LATE? I WAS JUST LATE.
THIS IS A CONTINUATION OF OUR WORK SESSION ON, UH, REGENERON ON THE NEW BUILT LOGISTICS BUILDING, I BELIEVE.
AND, UH, WE'VE GOT JUST A RATHER SMALL PACKAGE OF INFORMATION.
LAST WEEK I HAD TO BUY A NEW COMPUTER, JANET, JUST TO PUT A, JUST TO DOWNLOAD IT.
UM, BUT YEAH, EXPLAIN WHERE WE'RE AT AND UH, WHAT YOU'D LIKE TO TALK TO US ABOUT.
JUST FOR THE RECORD, MY NAME IS JANET GARRIS.
I'M A PARTNER WITH DELBELLO DANNEL AND WEINGART AND WEIS AND WHITAKER HERE THIS EVENING ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT.
UH, JOINING ME ARE, UM, STEVE SPINA AND MARK PETRO FROM JMC.
THEY ARE, UH, CIVIL ENGINEERS AND, UH, TRAFFIC ENGINEER, UM, AND I THINK JOE
SO OUR ARCHITECT IS ALSO ON ZOOM AS WELL, UH, IN THE EVENT YOU NEED TO ASK HIM SOME QUESTIONS.
UM, SO AS YOU KNOW, WE WERE HERE IN NOVEMBER.
WE'VE UH, ADJOURNED SINCE THAT TIME BECAUSE WE RECEIVED A NUMBER OF, OF COMMENT MEMOS, UH, NOT ONLY FROM YOUR PROFESSIONAL STAFF BUT ALSO FROM YOUR TRAFFIC CONSULTANT.
AND, UM, AFTER WE MET WITH YOU IN, I'M SORRY, DID YOU, YOUR MIC, I JUST WARN YOUR HEAR.
CAN YOU HEAR IT? CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW?
I'VE SAID BEFORE NOBODY'S EVER ACCUSED ME OF NOT TALKING LOUD ENOUGH.
IT'S A ANYWHERE IT'S FROM HERE.
UM, SO, UH, AS YOU, SO AS I MENTIONED, YOU KNOW, WE WERE HERE IN NOVEMBER.
UH, WE RECEIVED A NUMBER OF COMMENTS FROM YOUR PROFESSIONAL STAFF AND CONSULTANTS THEREAFTER.
WE ALSO MET WITH THE CAC IN DECEMBER.
UM, THEY, UM, UM, POSITIVELY, UM, YOU KNOW, RECOMMENDED ON THE PROJECT.
UM, AS I MENTIONED, WE'VE ADDRESSED COMMENTS FROM YOUR TOWN ATTORNEY, YOUR TRAFFIC CONSULTANT, THE FIRE DEPARTMENT.
OUR TRAFFIC ENGINEER HAS DONE A TRAFFIC STUDY AND SUBMITTED THAT TO YOUR CONSULTANT.
UH, WE'VE ALSO PROVIDED YOU WITH STORM WATER AND WE'VE MADE MINOR MODIFICATIONS TO THE SITE PLANS AND, YOU KNOW, CORRECTED SOME ERRORS, JUST SCRIVENER'S ERRORS IN THE APPLICATION FORMS. SO, UH, WE'RE HERE BEFORE YOU THIS EVENING.
WE'RE HAPPY TO TALK TO YOU ABOUT THOSE MODIFICATIONS AND THE TRAFFIC THINGS.
I THINK YOUR TRAFFIC CONSULTANT IS HERE THIS EVENING AS WELL.
UM, BUT NOTHING ELSE HAS CHANGED SUBSTANTIVELY ABOUT THE PROJECT THAT WAS, UH, PRESENTED TO YOU IN NOVEMBER.
MY SUGGESTION IS TO GO BRIEFLY THROUGH THE REVISIONS FROM THE LAST TIME.
AND THEN I THINK THE ONLY OTHER THING THAT'S IMPORTANT TO DISCUSS TONIGHT IS THE TRAFFIC STUDY IS 'CAUSE I THINK THERE WERE SOME RECOMMENDATIONS BY OUR TRAFFIC CONSULTANTS.
AND JUST TO REFRESH YOUR RECOLLECTION, SO THIS IS A TOWN BOARD SITE PLAN APPLICATION AND TREE REMOVAL PERMIT, AND THEN A WETLAND AND STEEP SLOPES PERMIT FROM THIS BOARD.
SO, UM, I WILL INTRODUCE STEVE, WHO WILL TALK TO YOU ABOUT THE MODIFICATIONS THAT WERE MADE TO THE PLAN BECAUSE HE IS WAY MORE QUALIFIED TO DO THAT THAN I AM REFERRED TO US FOR RECOMMENDATION ALREADY.
YOU DO HAVE A SCHEDULE OF, WHEN YOU'RE ON THE AGENDA FOR THE TOWN BOARD YET, I THINK THE TOWN BOARD IS WAITING FOR YOUR RECOMMENDATION BACK.
WE HAD TO, UH, CONSENT TO AN EXTENSION OF TIME FOR YOU TO GET BACK TO THE TOWN BOARD AND WE RECOGNIZED THAT IT TOOK US A PERIOD OF TIME TO CONDUCT THE VARIOUS, UM, TRAFFIC STUDIES.
AND MARK CAN TALK ABOUT THAT IN SOME DETAIL.
BUT, UM, SO I'LL LET STEVE TALK TO YOU ABOUT THE, THE DETAILS OF THE MODIF OF THE MODIFICATIONS 'CAUSE THEY'RE HIS, UM, AND THEN AGAIN, WE'RE HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
[00:15:01]
WE'RE THE SITE ENGINEER.AND, UH, IN FRONT OF YOU ON THE SLIDE IS SITE PLAN WITH, WITH SOME HIGHLIGHTS ON THE LEFT.
UH, THIS SLIDE IS PRETTY MUCH WHAT WE HAD PRESENTED TO YOU PREVIOUSLY.
UM, WE JUST UPDATED THE SITE PLAN VIEW AND IT'S VERY SIMILAR.
UH, THE HIGHLIGHTS THAT WE MADE IN TERMS OF CHANGES WOULD BE, UH, WE'VE DONE SOIL TESTING IN THE FIELD TO DETERMINE THE, UH, SUITABILITY OF SOILS FOR STORMWATER PRACTICES.
WE HAD ALREADY PROPOSED THEM IN THOSE LOCATIONS, UM, AND WE WANTED TO DO INFILTRATION PRACTICES.
WE'RE ABLE TO DO SOME OF THAT, NOT ALL OF THAT.
SO WE HAD TO DO MORE OF A DETENTION OR FILTRATION TYPE STORMWATER PRACTICES.
THEY'RE ALL IN THE SAME LOCATIONS.
UM, THEY'RE JUST KIND OF DIFFERENT STYLES OF PRACTICES.
SO THAT'S ONE KIND OF HIGHLIGHT IN TERMS OF DRAINAGE.
UM, ANOTHER ITEM WE HAD WAS THE, THE SANITARY SEWER WAS PREVIOUSLY SHOWN AND PROPOSED COMING OUT OF THE BUILDING ON THE RIGHT SIDE, THE EAST SIDE AND TO A PUMP STATION.
AND THEN A FORCE MAIN SOUTH TO NINE A ALL THE WAY TO, UH, UH, FIELD CREST DRIVE.
THERE'S A MANHOLE WHERE THE, THAT'S THE CLOSEST GRAVITY MANHOLE THAT WE COULD TIE INTO.
UM, SINCE THEN WE'VE CHANGED IT AND THE NEW PLANS THAT WERE SUBMITTED PROPOSE ON ALL GRAVITY CONNECTION, AGAIN COMING FROM THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE BUILDING.
BUT NOW TURNING NORTH AND GOING DOWN THE PROPOSED CONNECTION DRIVEWAY THAT, THAT YOU SEE ON THE SCREEN, THAT HEADS KIND OF UP INTO THE LEFT CORNER.
UM, THAT ALWAYS WAS PROPOSED AND WE HAD STORM DRAINAGE IN THERE.
NOW WE HAVE A SANITARY SEWER AS WELL, KIND OF PARALLEL IN THE SAME TRENCH.
UM, AND THAT WILL CONNECT TO THE PREVIOUSLY, RECENTLY INSTALLED SANITARY SEWER, UM, THAT WAS PUT IN ON THE CAMPUS AS PART OF THE, THE PARCEL D-P-M-P-D PROJECT.
AND THEN THAT'LL, THAT'LL DRAIN, UM, YOU KNOW, DOWN THROUGH THE SITE.
SO I THINK THOSE ARE PROBABLY THE TWO MAIN CHANGES WE MADE.
THEY'RE PRETTY MINOR, I THINK IN TERMS OF SITE PLANNING, REALLY JUST UTILITIES.
UM, YOU KNOW, WE'RE GONNA MEET ALL THE CODES THAT ARE REQUIRED FOR THE COUNTY, THE STATE, UH, TOWN, UM, TERMS OF DRAINAGE AND SEWAGE.
UM, WE'RE NOT INCREASING ANY OF THAT FROM WHAT WE PREVIOUSLY PROPOSED.
AND, UH, WE DIDN'T CHANGE ANYTHING IN TERMS OF STEEP SLOPES, DISTURBANCE OR WETLAND BUFFER DISTURBANCE OR TREE REMOVALS.
THAT'S ALL BEEN, UH, PRETTY CONSISTENT REALLY.
THE PLANS HAVE JUST BEEN ADVANCED.
I MEAN, WE JUST HAVE A LOT MORE DETAIL NOW THAT THE, THE CONSTRUCTION DETAILS HAVE, HAVE ALL BEEN SORT OF SOLIDIFIED SINCE WE KNOW A LITTLE BIT MORE, UH, INFORMATION SINCE WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON THE PROJECT.
AND JUST TO REFRESH YOUR RECOLLECTION WITH REGARD OR TALK LOUDER, JUST TO REFRESH YOUR RECOLLECTION WITH REGARD TO THE SLOPES THAT ARE BEING DISTURBED, I THINK STEVE MENTIONED TO YOU PREVIOUSLY THAT THERE ARE SLOPES THAT WERE CREATED.
SO THEY WERE, THEY WERE CREATED IN CONNECTION WITH THE TEMPORARY PARKING AND THEN, YOU KNOW, WITH REGARD TO THE GRAVITY MAIN THAT'S GOING IN THERE, OR I DUNNO IF IT'S A MAIN, BUT IF I'M USING THE RIGHT TERMINOLOGY, WE THINK THAT THAT'S DEFINITELY AN IMPROVEMENT.
'CAUSE THAT'S WHAT YOU PREFER OVER, YOU KNOW, PUMPING AND FORCING.
SO ANY QUESTIONS? YEAH, BECAUSE SO THAT, BECAUSE UH, THE SURGE DRAINAGE ON THE SIDE FROM THE DIAGRAM, IT LOOKS LIKE YOU ARE DIGGING INTO A SLOPE, BUT THAT'S THE SLOPE THAT WAS CREATED WHEN YOU MOVE SOIL AROUND OR MIGHT OKAY.
WELL, THE, THE SEWER, UH, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE SANITARY SEWER? YEAH, BECAUSE IF YOU, IF YOU LOOK AT, IF YOU LOOK AT THE, THE, THE FINISH SLOPE PLUS THE DOTTED LINE OF WHERE THE SLOPE IS NOW, OH, ON THE PROFILE, IT'S LIKE YOU ARE DOING A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF, UH, UH, OF STEEP SLOPE DISTURBANCE.
BUT THAT MOUND WAS CREATED WHEN YOU WERE DOING THE OTHER WORK.
AND, AND THE ROAD GRAYS DOWN AND IT FOLLOWS THE YEAH.
BECAUSE, BECAUSE THAT WAS ONE OF MY QUESTIONS, RIGHT? BASICALLY THAT, THAT PARKING LOT THAT WAS JUST RECENTLY FINISHED WITH THOSE LARGE RETAINING WALLS WOULD COME OUT AND NOW YOU WOULD, UM, BUILD A ROAD THAT, THAT RUNS THROUGH IT.
SO IT LINES UP WITH THE INTERSECTION ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE INTERNAL LOOP ROAD FOR FLOW AND EVERYTHING ELSE.
AND WE'RE GONNA RESTORE THAT PARKING LOT IN TERMS OF, YOU KNOW, A A TON OF TREE PLANTINGS AND AND GRADING TO MAKE IT LOOK MORE NATURAL, YOU KNOW, TO, TO THE RESTORATION PLAN THAT WAS ALWAYS, UH, PREVIOUSLY APPROVED WITH THAT PARKING LOT.
SO, UM, IT'S GONNA HAPPEN SOONER THAN WE THOUGHT.
ANYBODY ELSE ON, ON ON THIS TOPIC? YEAH, RIGHT.
UM, WHY DON'T WE TALK ABOUT THE TRAFFIC THEN? YEAH.
AND, AND WE DO HAVE MR. CANNING ON
[00:20:01]
ZOOM, SO, HI JOHN.I HELPED PREPARE THE TRAFFIC STUDY FOR THIS, UH, SO SORRY, THIS, I'M PROBABLY PART OF THE REASON WHY I TOOK SO LONG TO GET BACK TO YOU.
UM, SO WE DID PREPARE THIS TRAFFIC STUDY, WHICH, UH, WE DID SUBMIT, UH, TO THE TOWN AS WELL AS TO YOUR TRAFFIC CONSULTANT AS WELL AS THE NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION.
SINCE THIS IS A LOT OF THE TERRITORY AROUND THE AREA IS ACTUALLY INVOLVING THEIR JURISDICTION.
UH, SO WE DID DO NEW COUNTS AT FIVE INTERSECTIONS THAT WE STUDIED.
SO WE COUNTED THE INTERSECTION WITH THE EASTERN CAMPUS DRIVEWAY, WHICH WAS RECENTLY IMPROVED WITH ALL THE PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE LARGER LOOP ROAD DEVELOPMENT.
UH, THAT'S UNDER CONSTRUCTION, SO THAT'S OLD SUMMER ROAD WITH THE EASTERN CAMPUS DRIVEWAY.
WE ALSO COUNTED AND ANALYZED THE, THE RECENTLY COMPLETED ROUNDABOUT BY THE DOT WITH A HUNDRED C AND OLD SUMMER ROAD.
WE COUNTED THE ROUTE NINE, A NORTHBOUND OFF RAMP, UM, AND GRASSLAND AS WELL AS ALONG SSO ROAD.
WE COUNTED AT OUR PROPOSED SITE DRIVEWAY LOCATION, WHICH WE'RE PROPOSING OPPOSITE THE GAS STATION DRIVEWAY AND THE SSO ROAD NINE A INTERSECTION.
THOSE WERE THE FIVE INTERSECTIONS THAT WE STUDIED AS PART OF THIS TRAFFIC STUDY.
UH, WE CONDUCTED COUNTS AS WE TYPICALLY WOULD, UH, FROM SEVEN TO NINE AND FOUR TO 6:00 PM ON A TYPICAL WEEKDAY.
UM, THE COUNTS WERE GENERALLY FOUND TO ACTUALLY BE LOWER THAN WHAT WERE ANALYZED IN THE PREVIOUS LOOP ROAD DEVELOPMENT STUDY.
UM, AND UH, SO WE TOOK THOSE COUNTS.
WE FOUND THE PEAK HOUR COUNTS WE PROJECTED OUT TO THE FUTURE YEARS.
UM, AS PART OF THAT PROJECTION, WE INCLUDED THE DEVELOPMENT VOLUMES AND ASSOCIATED IMPROVEMENTS FOR ALL OF THE CAMPUS APPROVED EXPANSION, AS WELL AS TRAFFIC VOLUMES ASSOCIATED WITH THE NORTH 60 DEVELOPMENT AND AS WELL AS THE AMAZON, UH, FACILITY UP TO NORTH OF MOUNT PLEASANT AS WELL.
THOSE WERE ALSO CONSIDERED IN THE PROJECTED, UH, TO THE FUTURE DESIGN YEARS.
UM, SO WE ACTUALLY ANALYZED TWO DIFFERENT DESIGN YEARS.
WE ANALYZED THE SECOND ONE BECAUSE OF ACTUALLY DOT.
SO WE ANALYZED THE 2028, UM, AS WELL AS 2038 DOT WAS THE REASON WHY WE DID 2038 BECAUSE, UH, HOW PART OF THE HIGHWAY DESIGN MANUAL THEY WANTED US TO GO AT AN ADDITIONAL 10 YEARS BECAUSE WE'RE, UH, ANALYZING A ROUNDABOUT ESSENTIALLY.
SO THAT'S THE REASON FOR THAT.
UM, BASICALLY IN SHORT, IN 2028, THE OPERATIONS, THE LEVELS OF SERVICE, THERE'S ONLY ONE LEVEL OF SERVICE DEGRADATION, UH, DURING THE PM HOUR, UH, THAT WAS ANALYZED IN THE NORTHBOUND APPROACH TO THE ROUNDABOUT FROM A B TO A C, UH, COMPARING NO BUILD CONDITIONS TO BUILD CONDITIONS.
AND, UH, JUST AS A REFRESHER, UH, NO BUILD CONDITIONS WOULD BE THE FUTURE YEAR WITH ALL THE, THE BACKGROUND TRAFFIC WITHOUT THE DEVELOPMENT VOLUMES BUILD IS THE SAME, BUT WITH THE, THE ACTUAL DEVELOPMENT VOLUMES FOR THE FACILITY.
UM, JUST AS A A SIDE NOTE, WE CONSERVATIVELY DID THIS STUDY IN A MANNER THAT, UM, I'M SURE THIS WAS DISCUSSED IN PREVIOUS, UM, MEETINGS, BUT A LOT OF THE OPERATIONS THAT ARE GONNA BE GOING ON AT THIS, UH, LOGISTICS CENTER, SOME OF 'EM ARE CURRENTLY OCCURRING ON THE CAMPUS AND WOULD BE RELOCATING TO THIS NEW LOCATION.
SO AS PART OF THIS TRAFFIC STUDY, WE DID NOT TAKE CREDIT FOR THOSE RELOCATION OF THE EXISTING VOLUMES.
SO WE CONSERVATIVELY ANALYZE IT AS ESSENTIALLY NEW VOLUMES TO THE ROADWAY.
SO IF YOU LOOK AT IT AS A CREDIT AND YOU LOOK AT THE EXISTING OPERATIONS BASED ON ITE, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE LOOKING AT MAYBE 63, 68 PEAK HOUR TRIPS IN THE AM AND PM WHEN YOU CONSIDER THE EXISTING OPERATIONS, UH, OF THAT.
BUT CONSERVATIVELY WE LOOKED AT IT AS ALL BRAND NEW AND IT CAME OUT TO 104 TRIPS IN THE PEAK HOURS.
UM, THOSE PEAK HOUR VOLUMES WERE ALL, UH, DETERMINED AND CALCULATED BASED ON INSTITUTES OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERS, MANUAL TRIP GENERATION, MANUAL, UM, STANDARD, UH, INDUSTRY PUBLICATION THAT'S USED FOR PROJECTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES.
UM, AND I KNOW WE, WE PREVIOUSLY SUBMITTED A LETTER REGARDING TRUCK TRIPS, UM, FOR THE FACILITY THAT'S BASED ON DISCUSSIONS WITH, UH, THE FACILITIES TEAM OVER AT THE CAMPUS.
UH, BUT BASED ON THE PEAK HOURS, UH, THE PEAK HOUR TRUCK TRIPS IS TO BE THREE DURING THE PEAK HOURS, IT'S PROBABLY MORE DOOR.
I KNOW THERE WAS DISCUSSION OF OTHER, UH, TRUCKS DAILY ON OPERATION, BUT THEY WOULDN'T OCCUR DURING THE PEAK HOURS.
SO THE PEAK HOURS HAS THREE, BUT YOU MIGHT HAVE MORE EARLIER OR LATER THAN THE PEAK HOURS.
SO, UM, THAT'S GENERALLY A VERY QUICK SYNOPSIS.
I KNOW THERE'S PROBABLY MORE QUESTIONS AND I'M SURE JOHN WANTS TO DISCUSS SOME OTHER THINGS.
BUT, UM, WE DID SUBMIT TO JOHN, UH, AS WELL AS THE TOWN AND AGAIN, DOT, WE DID SUBMIT TO THEM JUST TO TRY TO GET THEIR FEEDBACK AS WELL SINCE THEY, WE DID GIVE THEM
[00:25:01]
A PRELIMINARY INPUT MEETING TO GET SOME INITIAL FEEDBACK.THEY GAVE US COMMENTS AND WE PROVIDED THEM THIS STUDY IN RESPONSE TO THAT AS WELL.
SO YOU'RE AWAITING FURTHER FEEDBACK, IF ANY, FROM DOT? YES, WE'RE WAITING FEEDBACK FROM DOT, WHICH I DID SPEAK WITH DOT, THEY ARE REVIEWING IT CURRENTLY.
UM, SO, UH, IT IS BEING REVIEWED, UH, BY THE STATE, BUT WE WILL END UP HAVING TO GET THEIR REVIEW AND APPROVAL FOR ALL THIS PROJECT.
'CAUSE WE DO NEED A PERMIT FROM THEM FOR THE DRIVEWAY CONNECTION ON OLDS ROAD AS WELL.
SO THEY, A LOT OF IT IS UNDER THEIR JURISDICTION AS FAR AS THE IMPROVEMENTS OR ANYTHING THAT'S BEING PROPOSED IN THERE RIGHT OF WAY.
JOHN, DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS? SURE.
THANK YOU MR. CHAIRMAN, UH, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD AND THANK YOU, MARK.
UM, FIRST OFF, I I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THAT THE TRAFFIC STUDY WAS VERY THOROUGH AND COMPREHENSIVE.
I'M GENERALLY SPEAKING, UH, I AGREE WITH PRETTY MUCH EVERYTHING IN IT.
THE, THE ONE POINT, I GUESS IT'S TWO POINTS THAT I WANT TO BRING TO THE BOARD'S ATTENTION IS THAT THERE ARE TWO INTERSECTIONS OUT THERE THAT ARE USED NOT BY A LOT OF VEHICLES, ON CERTAIN MOVEMENTS THAT CURRENTLY EXPERIENCE POOR OR LEVEL OF SERVICE F OPERATING CONDITIONS.
AND THEY WOULD BE THE LEFT TURNS FROM OLD SAW MILL RIVER ROAD ONTO NINE A, THE LEFT TURNS OUT OF THE HOTEL ONTO NINE A AND THE LEFT TURNS FROM NORTHBOUND RAMP FROM NINE A TO TURN LEFT ONTO GRASSLANDS ROAD.
SO THOSE THREE MOVEMENTS CURRENTLY EXPERIENCE, UH, LONG DELAYS IN THE, UH, AM AND EITHER THE AM OR THE PMP CARS AND THEY'RE USED BY A TOTAL OF ABOUT 35 VEHICLES.
SO IN THE FUTURE, WHEN YOU ADD ALL OF THE TRAFFIC FROM AMAZON AND THE NORTH 60 AND LOOP ROAD HOLDINGS, UM, AND THIS PROJECT, UH, DELAYS ON THOSE MOVEMENTS ARE GOING TO BECOME BASICALLY SO BAD PEOPLE ARE GONNA NOT BE ABLE TO USE THEM OR NOT BE ABLE TO USE THEM SAFELY PERHAPS.
UM, THE STUDY PROJECTS THAT THE NUMBER OF VEHICLES USING THESE MOVEMENTS IS GOING TO INCREASE FROM 35 TO 80, BUT THAT MAY NOT EVEN HAPPEN BECAUSE IF YOU CAN'T MAKE THE TURN, YOU'RE JUST GONNA END UP NOT GOING THAT WAY.
SO THE QUESTION, UH, AND UH, LOOP ROAD HOLDINGS IS COMMITTED UNDER THEIR APPROVAL TO MITIGATE FOR TRAFFIC CONDITIONS AT BOTH OF THESE INTERSECTIONS BY POTENTIALLY INSTALLING A TRAFFIC SIGNAL.
SO INSTALLING A TRAFFIC SIGNAL AT BOTH OF THESE INTERSECTIONS WOULD RESOLVE THAT ISSUE.
HOWEVER, UM, FOR A TRAFFIC SIGNAL TO BE INSTALLED, YOU NEED TO HAVE A CERTAIN VOLUME OF TRAFFIC ON THE MINOR MOVEMENTS, UH, FOR THE SIGNAL WARRANTS TO BE MET.
AND BECAUSE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS ARE SO BAD, PEOPLE ARE NOT GOING TO GO ON THOSE MOVEMENTS.
AND I THINK THERE'S A VERY GOOD POSSIBILITY THAT WOULD, WITHOUT SOME CREATIVE TRAFFIC ENGINEERING, THE WARRANTS WILL NEVER BE MET.
SO LOOP ROAD HOLDING WILL, WILL MAINTAIN, WELL, WE DON'T MEET WARRANTS, WE CAN'T DO OUR MITIGATION.
AND THESE 80 ODD MOTORISTS IN THE PEAK HOURS IN THE FUTURE WOULD BE STUCK TRYING TO FIGURE OUT SOME OTHER WAY TO GO.
SO FOR EXAMPLE, IF YOU WERE LEAVING THE, UH, BAYMONT HOTEL, YOU COULD TURN RIGHT ONTO NINE A GO NORTH UP TO GRASSLANDS ROAD, GO EAST TO CLEARBROOK ROAD, GO SOUTH TO HUNTER LANE, AND THEN TURN LEFT TO GO SOUTH ON NINE A.
UM, AND YOU, YOU KNOW, THE OTHER MOVEMENTS COULD BE ACCOMMODATED MORE OR LESS THE SAME WAY.
SO THE QUESTION REALLY IS DOES THE BOARD WANT TO LOOK AT THESE MOVEMENTS AND TRY AND FIGURE OUT IF THERE'S A SOLUTION? BECAUSE MY CONCERN IS THAT AS WE MOVE DOWN THROUGH TIME, IF THEY'RE JUST GONNA GET FOR FORGOTTEN AND UH, NOW'S AN OPPORTUNITY TO DO IT, THE DOT IS REVIEWING IT.
MY RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE TO DISCUSS THIS ISSUE WITH DOT TO SEE IF THERE IS A POTENTIAL SOLUTION THAT THEY WOULD SIGN ON TO.
UH, IT WOULD ULTIMATELY PROBABLY BECOME THE RESPONSIBILITY OF LOOP ROAD HOLDINGS TO IMPLEMENT, BUT THE WAY THE WORDING FOR LIBERAL ROAD HOLDINGS IS RIGHT NOW, THEY JUST HAVE TO PUT A TRAFFIC SIGNAL IN IF IT MEETS WARRANTS.
SO IT'S KIND OF A COM COMPLICATED ISSUE.
BUT THE POINT IS, WE HAVE THESE MOVEMENTS, THEY'RE, THEY'RE SUBSTANDARD AND MY RECOMMENDATION IS LET'S TALK TO DOT TO SEE IF THEY'RE INTERESTED IN SEEING IF THERE'S A FIX FOR THEM.
AND IF THERE IS, WE'LL HAVE IDENTIFIED IT AND WE CAN MOVE ON.
JOHN, LAST LET ME ASK YOU A QUESTION.
HOW WOULD TRAFFIC SIGNALS ACTUALLY ALLEVIATE THOSE, THOSE INTERSECTIONS, THE PROBLEM AT THOSE INTERSECTIONS? SURE.
SO, WELL THE, THE, THE FIRST ONE, IF WE LOOK AT THE NORTHBOUND RAMP TO GRASSLANDS ROAD, BASICALLY YOU CAN'T
[00:30:01]
MAKE A TURN OFF OF THAT OR IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO MAKE A TURN OFF OF THAT BECAUSE THERE'S SUCH A HEAVY VOLUME OF TRAFFIC BACK AND FORTH ON GRASSLANDS ROAD.OKAY? SO YOU WAIT AND YOU WAIT AND OCCASIONALLY YOU'LL GET A CHANCE AND OUT YOU GO.
UM, IF YOU PUT A TRAFFIC SIGNAL IN THERE, THEN TRAFFIC ON GRASSLANDS ROAD WILL BE STOPPED AND YOU'LL BE GIVEN A GREEN LIGHT AND THEN YOU CAN GO WHEN IT'S YOUR TURN.
OKAY? IT'S SIMILAR FOR THE, UH, INTERSECTION OF OLD SAW MILL RIVER ROAD WITH, UH, BAYMONT AND, UH, ROUTE NINE A WHERE THERE WAS A TEMPORARY TRAFFIC SIGNAL WHEN THE BRIDGE WAS CLOSED.
SO A TEMPORARY TRAFFIC SIGNAL, AGAIN, WOULD STOP TRAFFIC ON ROUTE NINE A AND IT WOULD ALLOW WHEN THERE WERE CARS THERE PEOPLE TO TURN OUT OF THE HOTEL OR PEOPLE TO MAKE A LEFT TURN FROM OLD SAW MILL RIVER ROAD ONTO ROUTE NINE A.
IT IS, UH, NOTEWORTHY THAT THE TRAFFIC SIGNAL WAS TEMPORARY AND WHEN THE ROUNDABOUT AND BRIDGE WERE COMPLETED, THE DDOT TOOK IT AWAY.
UM, IF THEY HAD FELT AT THAT TIME THAT IT WAS IMPORTANT OR BENEFICIAL, THEY MIGHT MIGHT HAVE LEFT IT, IT WAS STILL ONLY TEMPORARY.
THEY DIDN'T INVEST IN THE TYPE OF INFRASTRUCTURE THAT YOU NORMALLY DO FOR A TRAFFIC SIGNAL TO BEGIN WITH.
JOHN, I HAVE TWO QUESTIONS FOR YOU.
'CAUSE I I I'M THINKING OF THAT TURN ONTO OLD SAWMILL RIVER ROAD.
UH, COULD YOU DO SOME KIND OF TRAFFIC CONTROLLED, A LEFT TURN SIGNAL THERE TO ALLEVIATE THAT PROBLEM? BECAUSE YOU DO HAVE A LEFT TURN LANE, I BELIEVE ONTO OLD SAW MILL MILL RIVER ROAD, RIGHT? SURE.
SO I WAS, YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE THOSE TRAFFIC CONTROL KINDS OF SIGNALS NOW, RIGHT? SO IF SOMEONE WAS COMING TO TAKE A LEFT, IT COULD TURN A RED LIGHT, OTHERWISE NOT BE THERE TO ALLOW PEOPLE TO TAKE THAT LEFT.
IS THAT POSSIBLE? UH, IF I UNDERSTAND YOU CORRECTLY, IF YOU PUT A TRAFFIC SIGNAL THERE, YOU CAN SET IT UP SO THAT THE LIGHT WILL ONLY GO RED IF THERE'S A VEHICLE WAITING TO TURN LEFT.
SO THEN IT WILL GO RED AND STOP MOST OF THE FLOW TO ALLOW THE LEFT TURN TO GO.
SO WERE YOU TALK, WERE YOU MR, SHE, WERE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE NORTHBOUND LEFT TURN, THE EASTBOUND LEFT TURN? NOW I'M TALKING ABOUT THE NORTHBOUND LEFT TURN, WHAT YOU JUST SAID.
THAT'S PER THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT I WAS THINKING.
SECOND QUESTION I HAVE, IF YOU CAN'T JUSTIFY THEM NOW, IT SEEMS LIKE INSTEAD OF BEING PROACTIVE, WE'RE GONNA WAIT UNTIL THERE'S A BIG TRAFFIC JAM OR, OR, OR A TRACTOR TRAILER TAKING A LEFT AND SOMEBODY PROBABLY GET INTO IT AT 60 MILES AN HOUR, THEN SOMEBODY WILL DO SOMETHING IF YOU CAN'T MEET THE WARRANTS NOW.
BUT, UM, LOOP HOLDINGS WOULD AGREE TO UNDERWRITE THE COST OF THOSE ANYWAY.
WILL THE DOT CONSIDER ALLOWING THEM, THE DOT TYPICALLY LOOKS TO SIGNAL WARRANTS TO SEE THAT YOU HAVE THE HIGH ENOUGH VOLUME OF TRAFFIC ON CERTAIN MOVEMENTS AND RIGHT NOW WE DON'T.
AND IT'S UNLIKELY THAT WE WILL IN THE FUTURE BECAUSE IT'S SO DIFFICULT TO MAKE THAT MOVE.
NOBODY GOES THERE ANYMORE LIKE YOGI BERRA SAID.
UH, UM, THE OTHER WARRANT THAT COULD BE MET, WHICH I HOPE IS NEVER MET, IS IF YOU HAVE MORE THAN FIVE ACCIDENTS PER YEAR THAT ARE CORRECTABLE THROUGH THE INSTALLATION OF A TRAFFIC SIGNAL.
THAT'S WHAT I I HAVE A QUESTION.
DOES IT, DOES IT MAKE ANY SENSE? HOLD ON MIC MICHAEL, FIRST OF ALL, WE GOT NO, WE ACTUALLY HAVE TOM FIRST THEN WALTER, THEN MICHAEL GO AHEAD.
UH, MY QUESTION, JOHN, RELATING TO THE FIRST INTERSECTION, YOU TALKED ABOUT, UH, COMING UP THE NORTHBOUND RAMP FROM UH, NINE A TO GRASSLAND ROAD, THAT LEFT TURN AT THE TOP.
IF YOU WERE TO PUT A SIGNAL THERE, IT SEEMS TO ME THERE'S THE POTENTIAL FOR THE TRAFFIC GOING EAST TO BACK UP INTO THAT TRAFFIC CIRCLE.
I DON'T KNOW HOW LONG THAT DISTANCE IS, HOW MANY CARS IT WOULD TAKE.
DO YOU FORESEE, UM, THAT BEING A PROBLEM? 'CAUSE IF YOU, IF YOU FILL UP THAT CIRCLE, YOU'RE REALLY SCREWED IN
SO THAT, THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION.
THERE IS ALWAYS THE POTENTIAL.
SO BASICALLY WHAT YOU WOULD DO IS THE PROCESS TYPICALLY IS YOU DO THE WARRANTS.
YOU MEET THE WARRANTS, THEN YOU STUDY IT, AND YOU DETERMINE WHETHER THERE'S GOING TO BE ANY, UH, UNINTENDED ADVERSE CONSEQUENCES.
SO YOU WOULD LOOK AT THE, THE QUEUING THERE TO DETERMINE HOW FAR BACK THE QUEUE WOULD GO.
UM, IF THEY SET IT UPRIGHT, IF THEY HAVE A SEPARATE LEFT TURN LANE AND A SEPARATE RIGHT TURN LANE.
'CAUSE THERE'S NOT THAT MANY VEHICLES ON IT.
BUT THAT'S SOMETHING THAT YOU WOULD HAVE TO STUDY BEFORE THE DOT WOULD APPROVE IT.
WALTER? UM, RIGHT NOW, UH, IF I UNDERSTAND YOU CORRECT, RIGHT NOW, IF I UNDERSTAND YOU CORRECTLY, JOHN, UH, WE DO NOT HAVE THE,
[00:35:01]
UH, THE NECESSARY, UH, EVIDENCE TO MAKE THE STATE PUT IN THE TRAFFIC LIGHT.YOU DID INDICATE THAT WE SHOULD START A DISCUSSION NOW WITH THE STATE.
SO MAYBE THEY WOULD CHANGE THEIR MIND.
I THINK WE SHOULD DEFINITELY DO THAT.
AND THEN WE SHOULD DEFINITELY, UH, HAVE INTO THE APPROVAL THAT X AMOUNT OF TIME AFTER THE BUILDING IS OCCUPIED.
YOU COULD TELL ME WHAT THAT TIME PERIOD IS, IS THAT WE WILL GO BACK TO THE DOT AFTER WE GATHER ADDITIONAL RAIL INFORMATION, UH, BECAUSE THE BUILDING WILL BE OCCUPIED AND THEN GO BACK TO THE DOT AND SEE IF THEY WOULD DO IT THEN.
UH, UH, I BELIEVE THERE'S A NEED FOR IT.
UH, UNFORTUNATELY I DON'T HAVE THE DATA, BUT WHAT WE SHOULD DO, RATHER THAN JUST ABANDONING IT, IS TO MAKE PREPARATIONS TO GET THE DATA.
MICHAEL, I THINK, I THINK WALTER SAID EVERYTHING I SAID.
UM, AND I'LL JUST REPEAT IT VERY QUICKLY.
UM, YEAH, I THINK THE APPLICANT, JOHN SHOULD TALK TO THE DOT AND SEE IF THERE'S ANYTHING TO BE DONE.
NOW IF THERE ISN'T, IF THERE ISN'T ENOUGH TRAFFIC TO INSTALL LIGHT, THEN I THINK, UM, WE SHOULD REVISIT THE ISSUE, YOU KNOW, IN WHATEVER TIME PERIOD YOU AGREE ON FIVE YEARS, SIX YEARS, SEVEN YEARS, AND THAT'S HOW I THINK WE SHOULD PROCEED.
I, SO JUST TO RES RESPOND, JOHN, TO RESPOND TO BOTH OF THOSE POINTS, UH, WHICH ARE WELL MADE, I BELIEVE, AND AARON, YOU CAN, YOU CAN CHECK THIS AND THEN CONFIRM WHETHER IT'S CORRECT OR NOT.
I BELIEVE THAT LOOP ROAD HOLDINGS IS OBLIGATED TO MONITOR TRAFFIC CONDITIONS, UH, AS THEY COME ONLINE AND AFTER THEY'RE COMPLETELY INSTALLED, TO SEE IF THE VOLUMES DO RISE TO THE LEVELS WHERE A SIGNAL IS WARRANTED.
SO IT'S ALREADY IN THERE IS WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, JOHN.
SO, SO WE SHOULD JUST PURSUE THAT.
I HAVE ONE OTHER, ONE OTHER QUESTION I THOUGHT I HAD HAD.
UM, MY BIGGEST CONCERN AT THAT, UH, NINE, A OLD SA RIVER ROAD O SAW MILL RIVER ROAD INTERSECTION IS CARS COMING DOWN AT A HIGH RATE OF SPEED SOUTHBOUND ON ON NINE A.
OKAY, IF YOU CAN'T GET A LIGHT THERE, SOME KIND OF LIGHT THERE BECAUSE OF A WARRANT, COULD YOU PUT SOME KIND OF SIGN THAT WOULD SLOW PEOPLE DOWN, SOME KIND OF TRAFFIC CALMING SIGN INSTEAD THAT WOULD SLOW PEOPLE DOWN A FLASHING SIGN? WELL, YOU COULD CERTAINLY WITH THE STATE'S PERMISSION POST, UH, A DYNAMIC SPEED FEEDBACK SIGN, WHICH TELLS YOU THE SPEED LIMIT IS, AND I HONESTLY DON'T KNOW WHAT IT IS, IT'S PROBABLY 35.
UM, AND IT WOULD TELL YOU THAT YOU'RE DOING 50 OR TELL YOU THAT YOU'RE GOING TOO FAST.
THEY PUT A CAP ON IT SO THAT PEOPLE DON'T TRY AND BREAK THE RECORD.
DO YOU THINK THEY MIGHT BE OPEN TO THAT OR THAT'S SOMETHING MAYBE TO DISCUSS WHEN WE HAVE A MEETING WITH THEM? UH, I, WE SHOULD, UH, I WOULD SUGGEST THAT YOU DISCUSS THAT WITH THEM.
I THINK THEY WOULD BE OPEN TO IT AND THAT'S THE TIME TO DO IT.
IF YOU'RE HAVING A MEETING WITH THEM, YOU'RE IN FRONT OF THEM AND YOU HAVE THEIR ATTENTION.
ANYBODY ELSE? JUST ONE QUESTION, JOHN.
JOHN, WHAT EXACTLY DO YOU MEAN BY WARRANTS? UM, THERE'S A SERIES OF NINE TESTS, THEY CALL THEM WARRANTS AND BASICALLY THEY ESTABLISH THRESHOLDS AND YOU HAVE TO RISE ABOVE THE THRESHOLD TO JUSTIFY THE INSTALLATION OF A SIGNAL.
UM, FOUR OF THEM ARE BASED PURELY ON TRAFFIC VOLUMES.
THEY LOOK AT EIGHT HOUR VOLUMES, THEY LOOK AT FOUR HOUR VOLUMES.
THEY LOOK AT THE PEAK HOUR VOLUME AND ONE OF THEM IS A COMBINATION.
AND THEN THE OTHER WARRANTS, THERE'S A TRAIN VOLUME.
THERE'S SCHOOL CHILDREN, A SCHOOL CROSSING WARRANT VOLUME.
WE'RE NOWHERE NEAR THE VALUES FOR THAT.
AND THEN THERE'S SOME OTHER COUPLE OF COMBINATION OF ONES THAT, UH, OH, THERE'S AN ACCIDENT WARRANT, WHICH I MENTIONED.
UM, JUST TO, UH, I BELIEVE IT'S ALREADY BEEN DISCUSSED, BUT YES, LOOP ROAD DOES HAVE THAT IN THEIR CONDITIONS ABOUT PUTTING SIGNALS AT THAT AND MONITORING IT FOR A SIGNAL.
UM, SECONDLY, FOR JOHN JOHN'S, UH, COMPLETING HIS, UH, THOUGHT BEFORE NINE A AS A SPEED LIMIT OF 45 MILES AN HOUR, UM, GUARANTEE THE AVERAGE SPEED OF THERE'S CLOSER TO 60.
IF YOU'RE COMING DOWN THAT HILL THAT WAY, THAT'S A STRAIGHT ROAD.
THIS IS SOME REVENUE FOR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT.
[00:40:01]
HELP HELP.MINA, DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE TO ADD? I DON'T BELIEVE THERE WAS ANYTHING ELSE.
UH, PARTICULARLY JUST SO YOU GET AN IDEA AS FAR AS VOLUMES AND EVERYTHING, MAKING THAT LEFT TURN TO GO FROM NINE A TO, UH, SORRY, FROM ULTIMATE ROAD TO NINE A DURING THE PEAK HOURS 18 MAKING THAT MOVEMENT.
THIS IS DURING THE BUILD CONDITION AND DURING THE PM HOUR AT SIX.
THIS IS WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO NOW.
UH, THERE WAS MENTION OF BIKE PATHS AND I WASN'T CLEAR WHAT THIS, THE CONCLUSION OF THAT WAS.
AND THEN THE OTHER ISSUE WAS ONE OF SIDEWALKS.
AND I'M NOT CLEAR EXACTLY WHAT THE POS I, I'VE, I'VE READ BACK AND FORTH, BUT I'D JUST LIKE TO CLARIFY YOUR POSITION ON THOSE TWO POINTS IN CONNECTION WITH THIS PROJECT.
SO WHETHER OR NOT, UH, BIKE PATHS OR, UH, AND, UH, BICYCLE RACKS AND, AND SIDEWALKS.
OH, I THINK FROM THE COUNTY, LIKE BASED ON THE COUNTY COMMENTS.
UH, YEAH, I READ IT SOMEPLACE ABOUT BICY.
IT MAY HAVE BEEN, THAT WAS THE COUNTY.
THERE WAS THE COUNTY, I THINK THE COUNTY.
AND I BELIEVE THERE WAS A RESPONSE.
SO WE'LL LET THE APPLICANT GO THROUGH.
BUT THERE WAS A COMMENT, I KNOW FOR A FACT FROM THE COUNTY ABOUT, YOU KNOW, CONSIDERATION EVEN POTENTIALLY IN THE FUTURE FOR SOME SORT OF, UM, YOU KNOW, WHETHER IT BE A BIKE LANE OR SOME OTHER TRAVEL METHODS WITHIN THE CAMPUS AND LOOP ROAD ITSELF.
AND I BELIEVE THERE WAS A RESPONSE, BUT YOU GUYS RESPOND, RIGHT? UH, RIGHT.
I THINK, I THINK WHAT REGENERON STANCE HAS BEEN ON THAT ALL ALONG, EVEN WHEN WE WERE HERE FOR LOOP ROAD WITH THE, UH, YOU KNOW, THE, THE WIDENING PROJECT THAT'S CONSTRUCTED NOW IS THAT THEY DON'T, FOR SAFETY REASONS, THEY DON'T WANT BICYCLES ON THAT ROAD.
THE, THE LANES ARE NOT WIDE AND YOU KNOW, IT'S UH, IT'S NOT THE KIND OF ATMOSPHERE WHERE PEOPLE ARE RIDING BIKES THROUGH THE CAMPUS.
WE DO HAVE SIDEWALKS EVERYWHERE AND PEOPLE DO WALK AND THAT'S ALWAYS ENCOURAGED, BUT NOT, NOT, NOT THE BICYCLES.
UM, AND THEY DO HAVE THE TRAIL ALONG THE FRONTAGE.
THE TRAIL THEY CAN RIDE ON THE TRAIL.
I MEAN, I'VE MAYBE SEEN A FEW PEOPLE OVER THE YEARS WITH BICYCLES THERE 'CAUSE IT DOESN'T REALLY GO ANYWHERE.
I, BUT I I I LA THE WESTCHESTER COUNTY FOR ONE, ONE BICYCLE.
BUT UNFORTUNATELY I'VE DRIVEN IN MANHATTAN TOO MUCH SINCE THEY DECIDED THEY WANTED BICYCLES.
AND IT IS VERY DANGEROUS NOT ONLY FOR THE BICYCLE RIDERS WHAT THEY'VE DONE, BUT IT'S FOR PEDESTRIANS AND FOR PEOPLE GETTING OUT IN CARS.
SO I THINK, I THINK WHAT YOU'RE DOING IS PRUDENT AND CORRECT.
BUT I DON'T THINK YOU COULD COMPARE THIS TO MANHATTAN.
THAT'S A NO ANIMAL, BUT EVEN IN WHITE, EVEN IN WHITE POINT.
MY POINT WAS JUST TO GET CLARIFICATION ON THESE POINTS AND I GOT CLARIFICATION ON THEM.
SO I, I PERSONALLY HAVE A PROBLEM WITH BIKE LANES IN THE MIDDLE OF, IN PARK AS PART OF THE STREET.
I THINK THEY'RE VERY, VERY DANGEROUS.
UM, AND I THINK WE'RE MOVING MUCH TOO FAST ON THAT IN THIS, IN THIS COUNTY AND IN THE STATE.
THAT'S PER JUST MY PERSONAL OPINION.
I THINK WHERE WE'RE AT IS, UH, WE SHOULD BE CONSIDERING A RECOMMEND RECOMMENDATION ON THE SITE PLAN BACK TO THE TOWN BOARD.
I'D LIKE TO DO THAT TONIGHT, GET IT OUT OF THE WAY.
IF WE COULD DRAFT, UM, IF THE BOARD WANTS, WE COULD DRAFT SOMETHING UP.
SO WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO IS TAKE A VOTE TONIGHT, VOTE AND THEN YOU DRAFT IT UP AND WE'LL, WE'LL SEND IT OUT THE NEXT TIME.
UH, DO YOU WANNA MAKE A MOTION YEAH.
PROVIDING THOSE POINTS THAT WE BROUGHT UP AS SPECIFICALLY IN TERMS OF THAT TRAFFIC LIGHT? I THINK THAT SHOULD BE A KEY POINT IN THE RECOMMENDATION.
WELL, JUST, THE ONLY THING WE CAN DO ON THE TRAFFIC LIGHTS AS I I HEAR IS TALK TO THE DOT.
BUT I'M SAYING NEGOTIATE WITH THE DOT.
WELL, AND JUST TO REFRESH YOUR RECOLLECTION OF THE RECOMMENDATION YES.
AND THAT SHOULD BE, THAT'S SHOULD BE A KEY PART OF THE RECOMMENDATION.
KATE, WHAT WERE YOU GONNA SAY? AND I WAS JUST GONNA SAY, JUST, AND TO REFRESH YOUR RECOLLECTION, THOSE ARE CONDITIONS OF THE LOOP ROAD APPROVAL.
UH, SO THEY WOULD, UM, YOU KNOW, THE APPLICANT IS, UH, REQUIRED TO COMPLY WITH THOSE CONDITIONS IN CONNECTION WITH THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE BIGGER CAMPUS.
THEN WE'LL TAKE A STRAW, STRAW VOTE.
WE'LL TAKE A STRAW VOTE TONIGHT.
WE VOTE OFFICIALLY, UH, WHEN WE GET THE RECOMMENDATION AT THE NEXT MEETING.
UM, SO THAT CAN GIVE YOU AN IDEA OF PLANNING FOR THE TOWN BOARD.
UM, JUST TO START OUT, WHO, WHO,
[00:45:01]
HOW DO PEOPLE FEEL ABOUT A POSITIVE RECOMMENDATION ON, ON THE SITE PLAN? OH, I VOTE POSITIVE.NO, WE'RE GONNA SEE EVERYBODY TO HAS HIS HAND UP.
EVERYBODY POSITIVE THAT THAT'S A POSITIVE HAND.
SO WRITE UP THE RECOMMENDATION.
AND THEN IT'LL GO TO THE TOWN BOARD THE NEXT DAY.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR ALWAYS HARD WORK AND, AND DETAIL.
I'M HAPPY TO WORK WITH THEM ON ANY PROJECT.
IT'S ALSO A QUESTION LAW FIRM TOO.
IT'S, IT'S, IT'S, YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE THINGS I LIKE DALE, WITH YOU AND REGENERON, WHEN WE ASK QUESTIONS, WE TAKE THE TIME TO DO THE RESEARCH AND, AND GIVE US AN ANSWER WHETHER OR NOT I AGREE.
BUT YOU GIVE THE REASONS WHY SOMETHING DOESN'T MAKE SENSE AS OPPOSED TO SAYING, I'M NOT GONNA, I DON'T WANT TO DO IT.
I MEAN, THE ISSUE OF, UH, BYPASS IS ONE OF THEM.
YOU GAVE A LOGICAL REASON, ALTHOUGH I WOULD LIKE TO GET BACK PASSED.
YOU GAVE A LOGICAL REASON WHY IT SHOULD NOT BE DONE.
SO I'M SATISFIED WITH THE ANSWER.
SO IT ALWAYS BEEN, UH, UH, THROUGHOUT THIS WHOLE PERIOD THAT HAS BEEN MY, UH, UH, UM, RECOLLECTION OR MY FEELING WORKING WITH YOU.
I'D ALSO LIKE TO THANK MR. CANNING FOR HIS DILIGENT WORK ON THIS.
WORKING DIRECTLY WITH YOU GUYS.
WE, WE THANK YOU MR. CHAIRMAN MEMBERS THE BOARD.
AND WE'LL SEE YOU IN TWO WEEKS.
WE'RE GONNA TAKE A COUPLE MINUTES BREAK.
AND PLEASE ATTORNEY TO ATTORNEY PRIVILEGE.
I DON'T THINK AMANDA THINKS THAT'S, THAT'S A PRIVILEGE.
SO HE'S UPSET WITH, ARE WE BACK ON? WE ARE.
DO YOU KNOW A HARD COPY? 'CAUSE I'M TRYING TO RELOAD.
I GOT KICKED OUT OF THE NEXT CASE IS, UH, TB 2309.
IT'S A CONTINUATION OF A WORK SESSION ON THE, UH, THE, UH, A DU LAW ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT LAW THAT, UH, WAS REFERRED TO US BY THE TOWN BOARD AND ORIGINATED FROM THE, UH, ACCESSIBLE VIABLE LIVING COMMITTEE AT GREENBURG.
UM, WE HAD A PRETTY EXTENSIVE MEETING ON AT THE LAST MEETING BASED ON THAT.
UM, AARON TOOK SOME NOTES AND WITH AMANDA HAVE DRAFTED SOME CHA MODIFICATIONS, UH, TO IT, WHICH I'D LIKE AMANDA TO TAKE US THROUGH NOW.
OKAY, SO LETTER Q ON PAGE THREE, NUMBER FOUR I JUST ADDED, UM, SHALL MAINTAIN THE APPEARANCE OF A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE.
I THOUGHT IT WAS APPROPRIATE TO ADD IT THERE AS WELL.
PAGE BOTTOM OR PAGE, PAGE THREE AT THE BOTTOM FOUR.
SO WE HAVE SIMILAR PROVISION ELSEWHERE, BUT I THOUGHT IT WAS APPROPRIATE TO ADD THERE AS WELL.
AND THAT'S CONSISTENT WITH OTHER LAWS THAT WE'VE SEEN.
SO WE THOUGHT THAT THAT SHOULD BE CAPTURED.
BUT LET'S PLAY THE DEVIL'S ADVOCATE.
A SINGLE, UH, YOU HAVE A, A STANDALONE GARAGE.
IT'S A, UH, THAT'S A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE.
SO HOW DOES THAT THIS STATEMENT COM? UH, GOOD POINT.
I, I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION.
IT SAYS AND SHALL MAINTAIN THE PARENTS OF A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE.
YOU HAVE A GARAGE WHICH YOU'RE CONVERTING TO A DU MM-HMM.
UH, NOW IS THAT CONSISTENT WITH THE STATEMENT? NO.
SEE, SO I'M SAYING WE NEED TO CLARIFY WHAT WE MEAN BY THAT.
WELL, WELL YOU CAN HAVE A GARAGE.
BUT NOW IT'S, IT IS, IT IS THE GARAGE WITH A DOOR AND THE WINDOW.
SO, AND I'S GONNA SAY HOME SUITE, HOME OF THE FRONT MELISSA, GO AHEAD.
MAINTAIN THE APPEARANCE OF A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE.
[00:50:01]
ARCHITECTURALLY THE SAME, LET'S SAY AS THE MAIN, THE PRIMARY RESIDENCE AND THEN IT'S IN A GARAGE ON THE SIDE, MAINTAINING THAT SORT OF COHESIVENESS BETWEEN THE TWO AND THEN IT LOOKING LIKE A SINGLE FAMILY, IT'S NOT GONNA LOOK AS BIG AS SOMEONE'S HOUSE, BUT IT WILL LOOK LIKE A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE AND NOT A SHACK.I, I AGREE WITH YOU, BUT I'M SORRY, WE JUST WANNA MAKE SURE OUR LANGUAGE REFLECTS WHAT WE WANT TO SAY.
I DON'T THINK WE NEED THAT GREEN STUFF SHALL
I THINK THAT SOLVES THE PROBLEM.
AND I THINK, AND I THINK WALTER'S POINT IS RIGHT ON.
I MEAN, IF YOU TURN A GARAGE INTO A SEPARATE RESIDENCE, IT LOOKS LIKE A TWO FAMILY LOT.
WELL FIRST OF ALL, YOU CAN'T, YOU CAN'T PUT THE FRONT DOOR FACING THE STREET BECAUSE OF THE WAY WE WROTE THE LAW.
SO IT COULD BE JUST AN ACCESSORY BUILDING.
AND IT WOULDN'T BE TOO FAMILY 'CAUSE THEY'D HAVE TO BE BIGGER.
NO, BUT HE'S SAYING TWO FAMILY ON THE SAME LOT.
I UNDERSTAND WHAT HE'S SAYING, BUT IT WON'T NECESSARILY LOOK THAT WAY.
IT COULD LOOK LIKE IF YOU KEEP IT ARCHITECTURALLY SIM SIMILAR.
YOU CAN TONE THAT DOWN TO, AND PUT, PUT THE, THE DOOR WHERE WE SAID WE'RE GONNA PUT THE DOOR.
IT COULD BE AN ACCESSORY BUILDING.
SO MY POINT DOES THIS SENTENCE THAT'S ENHANCE WHAT WE ALREADY I'M SORRY, BEFORE YOU SAY NO, CAN I, MAY I, NO, I'M JUST ANSWERING FOR ME.
BUT DOES IT, DOES IT ENHANCE WHAT WE ALREADY HAVE OR DOES IT DETRACT FROM WHAT WE ALREADY HAVE? IF IT'S, WE CAN TAKE IT OUT.
SO ONE, I I'M WONDERING IF THIS WAS PUT HERE THINKING ABOUT THE PART OF THE LAW THAT TALKS ABOUT NOW IF THE, THE ADDITIONAL A DU IS PART OF THE HOUSE.
AND SO YOU'RE NOT GONNA HAVE TWO FRONT DOORS.
AND IF THIS SORT OF WAS A RESPONSE OR, OR AN ENHANCEMENT MAYBE TO THAT PART OF IT.
BECAUSE WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A SEPARATE BUILDING, THAT'S ONE THING.
WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT PUTTING AN A DU IN A HOUSE THAT'S ALREADY THERE, YOU DON'T WANT IT TO LOOK LIKE A MULTIFAMILY HOUSE.
SO THAT SIMILAR LANGUAGE IS IN NUMBER FIVE AS WELL.
I, I THINK, I THINK THIS MAY, IT'S A GOOD ATTEMPT.
I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO DO WITH IT.
BUT I THINK IT MAY CAUSE MORE ISSUES AND NEED BE 'CAUSE IT'S SPECIFICALLY OTHER PARTS OF THE DOCUMENT OF THE LAW SPECIFICALLY WORK AROUND THAT.
WORK AROUND THE, ACTUALLY THIS PARAGRAPH DOES, AS MICHAEL SAID, I THINK IT DOES A PRETTY GOOD JOB.
WELL, AND I THINK TO LESLIE'S POINT, IT APPLIES MORE TO IT ATTACHED.
I REMEMBER WE HAD A LONG DISCUSSION ABOUT, YOU KNOW, NOT A S ADDITIONAL DOOR IN THE FRONT.
AND AGAIN, THESE ARE SUGGESTIONS THAT WOULD BE INCORPORATED INTO THE RECOMMENDATIONS BACK TO THE TOWN.
WE'RE TALK ABOUT HOW WE, HOW WE'LL POSITION THE RECOMMENDATION.
YOU WANNA JUST, THESE ARE BASED ON NOTES THAT WE, THAT'S ALL PAGE I GUESS PARAGRAPH FIVE MS. NEXT PARAGRAPH FIVE, PAGE FOUR.
SO I JUST CLEANED UP THE LANGUAGE A LITTLE BIT TO SAY SHALL NOT ADD INSTEAD OF IN ALL THE WORDS.
UM, AND THEN CHANGE WE DISCUSSED LAST TIME IF THERE WERE ALREADY TWO FRONT ENTRIES, RIGHT.
TOM, YOU'RE SEEING THIS SHARE SCREEN.
UM, SO MISSED FIVE, PAGE FIVE.
NO, IT WAS, IT'S WE'RE ON PAGE FOUR.
YEAH, WE'RE GOING NU THAT'S WHAT WE AGREED TO.
THAT NOT PUTTING AN ADDITIONAL, IF THERE WAS AN EXISTING SECOND DOOR, WE'RE NOT GONNA MAKE 'EM TAKE IT OUT.
I THINK THAT WAS YOUR UH, COMMENT LAST TIME ACTUALLY.
YEAH, BECAUSE YEAH, THEY EXISTING, 'CAUSE SOME HOUSES HAVE, RIGHT, THAT'S WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT.
SO SEVEN, I CHANGED IT TO AND WITH AARON.
UM, SO WE TALKED ABOUT POSSIBLE DRIVEWAYS AND HOW THE CODE PERMITS DRIVEWAYS NOW THAT YOU CAN HAVE LIKE A HORSESHOE OR LIKE A, UM, SEMI-CIRCULAR, UH, HAMMERHEAD AND OTHER TYPES OF DRIVEWAYS.
AND WE JUST ADDED A REQUIREMENT TO HAVE IT SCREENED WITH EVERGREENS.
YOU TOOK OUT THE REQUIREMENT THAT ONE OFF STREET PARKING SPACE SHALL BE PROVIDED YEAH.
I MEAN, AND IF THERE'S A TWO BEDROOM, THE PREVIOUS VERSION OF LOSS THAT IF YOU GOT TWO BEDROOMS YOU HAVE TO PROVIDE TWO ADDITIONAL PARKING SPACES.
SO THAT SENTENCE WAS CONFUSING, WHICH IS WHY WE TOOK IT OUT.
DOES THAT MEAN, DOES THAT MEAN NO, THAT YOU DON'T HAVE TO PROVIDE ANY ADDITIONAL SPACES? NO.
SO IT MAKES REFERENCE TO THEN GOTTA SHOW ME WHAT YEAH, WHAT'S 2 85? 32 85.
SO IT MAKES REFERENCE TO THE OTHER CODE SECTION, WHICH IS 2 85 38,
[00:55:01]
WHICH ARE OUR OFF STREET PARKING STANDARDS.OH, WHAT PAGE IS IT? WHAT WHERE IS THAT? UH, THAT'S IN NUMBER SEVEN ON PAGE FOUR.
SO IT MAKES A CROSS REFERENCE TO THE OTHER.
NOW I THINK THERE WAS ANOTHER SECTION WITHIN HERE THAT ALSO TALKS ABOUT, HOLD ON.
WHAT IS IT? HOLD ON, LET'S GO ONE AT A TIME.
WHAT, WHAT IS, WHAT IS 2 85 38? YOU ONLY NEED TWO SPACES FOR A RESIDENTIAL HOUSE.
EVEN YOU HAVE 20 BEDROOMS UNDER OUR LAW, SO THAT DOESN'T MATTER.
THOSE ARE THE OFF STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS OF THIS TOWN ZONING WITNESS, WHICH IS ONLY TWO REGARDLESS OF THE NUMBER OF BEDROOM.
BUT I THOUGHT THERE WAS A SECOND.
THE, THE NEW CHANGE TO 2 85 38 SAYS THAT ONE OFF STREET PARKING SPACE SHALL BE PROVIDED FOR EACH BEDROOM OF THE ACCESSORY DRAWING.
TOOK THAT OUT ON, ON WHICH PAGE? I'M SORRY, PAGE SIX.
'CAUSE WE WERE ON FOUR, SO THAT'S WHY I WAS CONFUSED.
WELL, WE WERE ON FOUR WHICH REFERENCED 2 85 DASH 38, WHICH IS ON PAGE SIX.
SO IT, SO IT ISN'T WHAT JUST IT'S, IT'S AMENDED BECAUSE RIGHT NOW OH YEAH.
SO IT WILL BE THE CAR ONE IS TWO, WE HAVE 12 BEDROOMS OR ONE NO BED, ONE BEDROOM.
STILL IT'S TWO PLUS WHATEVER THE A DU HAS.
WITH THE REVISIONS BASED ON THIS DIAGRAM.
WHAT THAT'S GOING TO DO IS FINE WITH ONE PER PER BEDROOM.
WHAT THAT WILL DO, JUST SO WE KNOW, YOU WILL MAKE SURE THERE ARE NO TWO BEDROOM A TO USE IN ANY, IN ANY R FIVE, PROBABLY MOST R SEVEN FIVE DISTRICTS JUST, I'M JUST SAYING THAT'S THE IMPACT AND IT'S CONSISTENT.
BUT HOLD ON, I GET TO YOU LESLIE, GO AHEAD WALTER, THEN LESLIE.
YEAH, BUT I THINK IT'S THE KEY HERE IS THAT WE ARE SAYING YOU CAN HAVE A 12 BEDROOM HOUSE AND YOU ARE ONLY REQUIRED TO HAVE TWO SPACES.
SO WHY IS IT IF YOU HAVE SAY, THREE BEDROOM HOUSE OR, AND YOU PUT IN TWO BEDROOMS, NOW YOU HAVE A FIVE BEDROOM HOUSE.
WHY ARE YOU REQUIRED TO HAVE, UH, FALSE STATION SEPARATE.
TENANT AND ADDITIONAL LIVING AREA AND BATHING AREA AND, OKAY.
LESLIE, AARON, EXPLAIN TO ME THIS.
THAT'S WHAT I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND.
THERE'S A, THERE'S A FULL SECTION THAT LAYS OUT ALL THE OFF STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR THE VARIOUS USES PERMITTED WITHIN THE TOWN.
AND, AND THIS PIECE WOULD BE ADDED TO THAT.
AND IT'S CONSISTENT WITH HOW WE'RE LAID OUT IN THE CODE RATHER THAN RIGHT.
BEARING THE OFF STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS.
BUT TO WALTER, I'M SORRY, LET LET AARON FINISH.
WITHIN THE TEXT, IT'S WITHIN ITS OWN SECTION.
BUT TO WALTER'S POINT, JUST SO WE UNDERSTAND IT, AND THEN I WANT TO GIVE THE OTHER SIDE OF IT ON WHY IT'S IN HERE.
BY THE WAY, THIS IS NOT A RESTRICTION IN ANY OTHER RADIO LAW THAT I KNOW IN WESTCHESTER COUNTY.
I DON'T THINK WE EVEN ALLOW ONE, MAYBE ONE OF THEM I'VE SEEN PARKING REQUIREMENTS.
THE MAJORITY OF THEM I KNOW DON'T AS I REMEMBER THAT BIG CHART THAT GARRETT DID FOR US.
BUT LET ME GIVE, LET'S TALK ABOUT BOTH SIDES OF THIS ON ONE SIDE, OKAY.
YOU MAY BE LIMITING THE NUMBER OF TWO BEDROOM ADUS, EVEN ONE BEDROOM ADUS BY REQUIRING ONE IN, IN OUR FIVE AND R SEVEN FIVE.
THE OTHER SIDE IS WE DON'T HAVE ANY PARKING.
WE GREENBURG, AND PARTICULARLY IN OUR FIVE AND R SEVEN FIVES, BECAUSE A LOT OF THOSE ARE VERY SMALL STREETS.
AND WE DON'T ALLOW PARKING ON THE STREET AT, IN THE WINTER ANYWAY.
WELL, LOOK, SO THAT'S THE DOWNSIDE OF, IF, IF YOU, IF, IF THE PARKING REQUIREMENT WOULD RESTRICT DEVELOPMENT OF THE ADUS IN, IN FIVE AND 7.5, THE FLIP IS IF YOU ELIMINATE THE PARKING REQUIREMENT, THEY'RE GONNA PARK ON THE STREET AND THAT WHICH DOESN'T WORK.
AND IT'S NOT EVEN LEGAL TO PARK ON THE STREET DURING THE WINTER.
I, I THINK I JUST SAID THAT TWO MINUTES AGO, BUT YES.
SO TECHNICALLY YOU'RE ON THE SAME PAGE.
YOU COULD ADD A WAIVER PROVISION.
I HAVE ANOTHER, I HAVE ANOTHER COMMENT.
I HAVE ANOTHER COMMENT ON THIS SECTION, SETH HERE, IF I CAN JUST, I BELIEVE SO BECAUSE YOU BROUGHT IT UP.
I THINK, UM, WAIT ONE AT A TIME.
DO YOU HAVE A QUESTION? LET, LET, LET LET AARON FINISH THEN.
SO JUST WITH RESPECT TO PARKING, UM, SO FOR OTHER COMMUNITIES THAT HAVE A DU LOCAL LAWS, TARRYTOWN, NO ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENT.
ARDSLEY ONE ADDITIONAL OFF STREET MOUNT KISCO.
[01:00:01]
GET TO THE OTHERS MORE THAN I FOUND ALREADY.I DIDN'T THINK IT WAS THAT MANY.
UH, I THINK THERE'S A FEW THAT WERE FOR PRINT BERRY IRVINGTON ONE.
I'M LOOKING, I DON'T KNOW IF I HAVE THE WHOLE PRINTOUT.
MATT, DO YOU HAVE THAT PRINTOUT BY ANY CHANCE? IS THAT JUST ONE REGARDLESS? OH, ONE ADDITIONAL.
UM, DOBBS FERRY, NO ADDITIONAL, I GUESS MAYBE THE WEST SHIFT OR WHAT THAT MODEL IS.
I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S A WEST THAT MAY THE MODEL ONE.
SO THOSE ALL JUST A QUICK QUESTION WITH DO TERRY AND THOSE OTHER TOWNS THAT HAVE A DU LAWS? MM-HMM.
SO THEN WE CAN'T REALLY DO THE COMPARISON.
BUT EVEN, EVEN SO, I MEAN, IF YOU DON'T WANT CARS IN THE STREET IN THE WINTER, 'CAUSE WHEN WE GET A SNOWSTORM, THEY'LL NEVER GET A SNOW PLOW DOWN HALF OF OUR STREETS.
SO NOW THAT IS THE REASON I DON'T NEED THAT TONE.
NO, THAT'S, THAT'S JUST THE I UNDERSTAND.
WALTER, I'M SHARING THE MEETING, MAGGIE, BUT WE ALL DO THAT.
I HAVE A COMMENT WHEN YOU TWO ARE DONE BICKERING.
I WASN'T BICKERING MADE COMMENT.
LET'S, LET'S STICK TO THE ISSUE.
AND DON'T INTERFERE WITH ME BEING CHAIR PLEASE.
WHERE WERE WE? IF IT'S APPROPRIATE, I WILL.
SO WE HAD NUMBER SEVEN ON PAGE FOUR.
AND THEN WE WERE GONNA MOVE TO THE NEXT NO, NO, NO.
OH, MICHAEL HAD ANOTHER COMMENT ON SEVEN NUMBER SEVEN ON SEVEN.
DO WE REALLY WANT TO DO IT ONE PER UNIT? I DON'T THINK IT'S BEEN RESOLVED.
WE NEED TO MAKE THAT DECISION.
DO WE WANT ONE PER BEDROOM? I'VE OWNED ONE PER BEDROOM THE WAY IT'S BEEN SINCE IT'S BEEN PRESENTED TO US AND THE WAY IT IS NOW.
SO, YOU KNOW, AS A REMINDER, THE, UH, ROOMING PROVISION REQUIRES THAT ONE PER OCCUPANT.
THEN THAT, THAT'S THE SPECIAL AS WELL.
JUST, JUST TO LET YOU KNOW, I, I LOOK IT'S A LIVING IT, I, IT'S A LIVING DOCUMENT AND WE'RE GONNA FIND OUT, WE'RE GONNA END UP HAVING TO MAKE SOME CHANGES TO THIS.
I, I DON'T, MY QUESTION, I WISH YOU, JOHANN WAS HERE.
MAYBE YOU REMEMBER WALTER, WHEN WE DID IT ON THE A VL, DID WE HAVE IT AS ONE PER BEDROOM OR DO WE HAVE IT AS ONE? JUST ONE.
SO THIS IS ACTUALLY MORE RESTRICTIVE.
DO YOU REMEMBER AISHA? I DON I THOUGHT WE STARTED AT ONE AND THEN WE AGREED ON THE PER BEDROOM.
WE DID AGREE TO THE PER BEDROOM.
I THINK THAT'S MORE RESTRICTIVE.
I THINK THAT'S THE ONLY THING THAT'S GONNA END UP PASSING THE TOWN BOARD ANYWAY.
UM, AND I THINK WE'LL HAVE TO LOOK AT IT WHEN WE DON'T GET A LOT OF, IF IT BECOMES A PROBLEM, WE'LL LOOK AT IT.
THE ONLY THING I WOULD LIKE, LIKE YOU TO LOOK AT AMANDA FOR ME, SEE IF THAT'S CONSIDERED.
JUST GIVE US AN OPINION IF THAT'S CONSIDERED DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENT, THAT CAN BE OVERTURNED BY THE ZONING BOARD.
'CAUSE NOT EVERYTHING CAN BE OVERTURNED BY THE ZONING BOARD.
AND YOU CAN ALWAYS INCLUDE A WAIVER FOR TWO SPACES FOR A TWO BEDROOM TOO.
YOU CAN, YOU CAN, WELL, WE COULD DO SOMETHING TO WHAT I'M MODIFY PROVISION IF THE ZONING, MICHAEL, I WOULD, I AGREE WITH MICHAEL THAT I'D PREFER THAT IT BE DONE, UM, BY THE ZONING BOARD.
HOWEVER, IF WE FIND OUT IT'S NOT CONSIDERED A DIMENSIONAL, REQUIRE DIMENSIONAL, UH, CRITERIA, EXCUSE ME.
DIMENSIONAL CRITERIA, WHICH CASE ONE-DIMENSIONAL CRITERIA CANNOT BE OVERTURNED BY THE I, BUT AS A VARIANCE.
I'M TELLING NEWER PEOPLE ON THE BOARD.
SO IF IT ISN'T, THEN WE HAVE TO COME BACK AND CONSIDER WHETHER YOU WANT TO HAVE THE OPTION OF A WAIVER FOR THE PLANNING BOARD.
MICHAEL, DO YOU HAVE SOMETHING ELSE? AND THEN LET'S SEE IF YOU HAD SOMETHING.
I THINK WHERE ARE HERE BEFORE WE ADVANCE, I THINK MICHAEL'S THE ONLY ONE, AT LEAST ON THE RECORD, THAT SAID HE SUPPORTS KEEPING IT AS ONE PER BEDROOM.
SO I JUST WANT TO GO AROUND, MAKE SURE EVERYONE ELSE, I THINK WE'RE, I THINK WE'RE STAYING AT ONE PER BEDROOM.
SO IF THEY, THAT'S AS IT WAS ORIGINALLY WRITTEN.
WHAT DO WE CURRENTLY HAVE IN THIS ONE? PER BEDROOM? PER BEDROOM.
IT'S BEEN LIKE THAT SINCE WE STARTED CONSIDERING I THINK WE SHOULD LEAVE IT LIKE SINCE IT WAS REFERRED.
I, YOU KNOW, I BROUGHT THIS UP LAST WEEK, THE FACT THAT IT WAS DIFFERENT IN BOTH PLACES.
[01:05:01]
IT WAS UNFAIR TO ASK FOR TWO PARKING SPACES FOR, YOU KNOW, A SMALL ADDITION VERSUS TWO FOR AN ENTIRE HOUSE.BUT AS WE DISCUSSED, AND AS YOU JUST MENTIONED, THE PARKING ON THE STREETS IS VERY DIFFICULT TO FIND IN MANY PARTS OF TOWN.
AND DURING THE WINTER, YOU CAN'T BE THERE AT ALL.
AND I THINK, UH, WE DON'T WANT TO CONTRIBUTE TO MAKING THAT WORSE.
AND IF A, IF YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT SMALL LOTS, MAYBE THEY CAN'T EVEN FIND SPACE FOR A TWO BEDROOM UNIT ANYWAY.
I THINK LEAVE IT AT TWO BEDROOMS. OKAY.
LET'S, EVEN THOUGH I HAVE, YOU KNOW, SOME ISSUES, I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO SAY.
SO YOU'RE OKAY WITH LEAVING IT AS IS? I GUESS THAT'S THE POINT.
TAKING A STRONG OH, YOU'RE TALKING TO LESLIE NOW.
WE'RE GONNA RECOMMEND, YOU KNOW, THE BOARD WILL RECOMMEND TO THE TOWN BOARD ON IT.
SHOULD IT REMAIN AS IS ONE PER BEDROOM OR SOMETHING ELSE? WELL, ON THAT, I DON'T AGREE.
THAT, THAT'S WHAT I JUST WANTED TO JOT DOWN.
BUT ARE WE, ARE WE DOING A POLL OR, I DON'T, I DON'T HAVE ANY COMMENTS TO ADD.
SO IF WE'RE DOING A POLL, THEN MY, MY, I'M NOT WITH ONE FOR ONE PER UNIT.
THAT'S WHAT I JUST WANTED TO GET THAT ON THE, I WANTED TO GET THAT ON THE RECORD.
MICHAEL, ARE YOU DONE ON FOUR? SO WALTER'S SAYING ON THAT PARAGRAPH, AM I DONE ON THAT PARAGRAPH? I HAVEN'T EVEN GOTTEN STARTED ON THAT PARAGRAPH.
WHAT ELSE COULD BE IN THAT PARAGRAPH? I THINK WE BEAT DEATH A NUMBER SEVEN.
I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE LAST SENTENCE.
ANY EXPANSION OF THE DRIVEWAY WIDTH INTO THE FRONT YARD SHALL BE SCREENED WITH EVERGREEN LANDSCAPING.
FIRST OF ALL, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE FRONT YARD IS.
UM, I MEAN, AS FAR AS I KNOW, THERE IS NO REQUIREMENT IN THE ENTIRE TOWN OF GREENBURG THAT AN EXPANSION OF THE DRIVEWAY, WHICH MEETS CODE HAS TO BE SCREENED WITH EVERGREEN LANDSCAPING.
UM, SO I DON'T SEE WHY A DU SHOULD BE SUBJECT TO SOMETHING THAT THE REST OF THE TOWN IS NOT SUBJECT TO.
PLUS I DON'T EVEN UNDERSTAND WHAT THIS PROVISION MEANS, SO I THINK IT SHOULD BE STRICKEN.
ANY, I HAVE A COMMENT, BUT ANYBODY ELSE FIRST? OH, AND, AND JUST ONE OTHER THING.
SO, SO YOU'RE SAYING WE SHOULD LEAVE IT UP TO THE DISCRETION OF THE, OF THE PLANNING BOARD? ABSOLUTELY.
ANYBODY ELSE HAVE A COMMENT? I AGREE.
I KNOW THIS IS GOING TO BE AN ISSUE.
I'M JUST TELLING YOU BECAUSE I KNOW THE FEEDBACK I'VE BEEN GETTING AND THIS, AND ONE OF THE THING, WE'RE GONNA HAVE A, A DIFFICULT TIME GETTING R FIVE THROUGH ANYWAY AND GETTING A WHAT THROUGH GETTING THE APPROVAL OF R FIVES, R FIVE FOR, FOR ER SEVEN FIVE AND ADUS MEMBER OF THE, THE TOWN BOARD'S POSITION IS THOU SHALT NOT UNDER 10,000 SQUARE FEET HAVE AN A DU.
THAT'S THEIR CURRENT POSITION.
THEY'RE WILLING TO MOVE OFF OF THAT.
BUT I GUARANTEE THAT WHAT, IN FACT IT ALSO CAME UP FROM THE, THE, SOME OF THE, THE, THE FEW COMMENTS WE GOT FROM THE COMMUNITY.
BUT IT'S COME OUT AS A COMMUNITY THING THAT, UM, WE SHOULD AT LEAST DO SOMETHING REQUIRING LANDSCAPING TO, TO OFFSET IT OR SOMETHING IN THERE.
I THINK JUST LEAVING IT, BUT WE ALWAYS REQUIRE A LANDSCAPE.
WE CAN'T NO, WE CAN'T REQUIRE IT.
WHY NOT? BECAUSE IT, IT'S NOT OUR REVIEW.
WE CAN'T REQUIRE THEN WE CAN ASK FOR ITT.
YEAH, WELL JUST PUT IN SOMEWHERE HERE.
THE PLANNING BOARD CAN REQUEST A LANDSCAPE PLAN AND CONNECTION WITH ANY APPLICATION.
IF THERE IS, IF THERE IS ALREADY EXISTING ENOUGH PARKING SPACE AND I PUT AN A DU, RIGHT? YOU'RE SAYING THAT NOW WHATEVER CONFIGURATION OF PARKING THAT I HAVE THERE, I'M GONNA HAVE TO SCREEN THAT A D'S PARTICULAR SPACE? NO, NO.
ONLY IF YOU'RE EXPANDING THE LOT WITH IN THE FRONT YARD, ANY EXPANSION AND THAT'S ADDRESSING CONCERNS RAISED BY, YOU KNOW, UH, COMMUNITY MEMBERS AND OTHERS ABOUT, UM, HAVING A PARKING LOT.
THAT'S WHERE, THAT'S WHERE IT'S THERE.
HOW IS THAT BECOMING A PARKING LOT? THERE ARE SOME, I'M SORRY.
THERE ARE SOME LOTS WHERE IT'S VERY SHALLOW.
SO WE'VE SEEN QUITE A FEW WHERE THEY, THEY DO EXPAND IT PRETTY WIDE AND IT DOES LOOK, JUST LET ME ASK YOU CAN, CAN I BRING UP SOMETHING ELSE? 'CAUSE AND I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR EVERYBODY ON THIS.
YOU KNOW, WHAT DO WE DO? YOU GET AN R FIVE MM-HMM.
IT HAPPENS TO BE FAIRLY A DEEP LOT.
THEY HAVE A GARAGE AND A TWO CAR DRIVEWAY.
ARE WE REALLY GONNA MAKE THEM? AND THEN THEY HAVE TWO.
WE NOW REMEMBER THEY ONLY NEED TWO SPACES LEGALLY NOW.
BUT YOU'RE NOT GONNA COUNT THE OTHER TWO SPACE, THE EXTRA SPACES THEY ALREADY HAVE.
[01:10:01]
WE DON'T HAVE, WE DON'T, THIS LOOKS LIKE ADDITIONAL SPACES.SO IF YOU'RE REQUIRED TO HAVE TWO FOR A HOUSE, IF YOU PUT AN A DU AND YOU HAVE A ONE BEDROOM, A DU, YOU NEED THREE.
IF YOU HAVE THREE, YOU DON'T NEED TO BUILD ANOTHER ONE.
I THINK YOU, I DON'T THINK THAT'S CLEAR FOR THE LAW.
IT DOESN'T SAY SHALL BE ADDED.
AND WE TALKED ABOUT THAT AND WE TRIED TO MAKE SURE THAT IT WAS CLEAR THAT IF SOMETHING EXISTING, I DON'T, IT'S TO ME IT'S NOT CLEAR PROVIDED.
IT COULD, IT IT COULD BE THERE ALREADY.
AND WE'RE JUST, I'M NOT SURE THAT'S COMPLETELY CLEAR.
WELL THEN WE JUST MAKE THE, MAKE IT CLEAR IF YOU HAVE, IF YOU HAVE, IF YOU ARE ON THE ALL FIVE WOULD HAVE A GARAGE IN THE BACK AND YOU HAVE A DRIVEWAY THAT WAS TWO ABOUT 20 FEET WIDE, TWO SPACES.
I'M JUST SAYING I'M JUST DON'T THINK ABOUT MY BROTHER'S HOUSE THAT HE JUST, UH, SOLD.
UH, THEORETICALLY YOU COULD PARK TWO CARS IN FRONT OF THE GARAGE.
SO THAT'S FOUR, YOU KNOW, RIGHT IN FRONT OF THE GARAGE.
AND THEN YOU HAVE A THEN THE CAR, WE HAVE A LONG DRIVEWAY TO THE STREET.
AND YOU COULD PROBABLY GET ANOTHER THREE CARS THERE.
SO THEORETICALLY YOU GET 1, 2, 3, 4, 7 CARS AND WOULD, WELL YOU WOULD NEVER MAKE HIM BUILD MY POINT IS YOU DON'T, I WANNA MAKE IT CLEAR THAT YOU DON'T WANT HIM TO BUILD ANYMORE.
THEY WOULDN'T HAVE TO BUILD ANY MORE SPACES.
YOU HAVE SEVEN SPACES ON THE, ON THE PROPERTY.
IT PROBABLY CLEARS IT UP ACTUALLY IN 2 85, 38, WHICH IS ON PAGE SIX.
THE ADDITION VERSUS WHAT EXISTS IN THE CODE TODAY UNDER 2 85 38.
SO IF YOU LOOK AT 2 85 38 TODAY.
WHAT DOES IT WITH RESPECT TO USES ONE OR TWO FAMILY RESIDENCE REQUIRES TWO OFF STREET PARKING SPACES PER UNIT OFF STREET.
SO THEN YOU ADD THIS IN ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT, ONE OFF STREET PARKING SPACE PROVIDED PER EACH BEDROOM OF THE I KNOW WHAT IT SAYS.
SO IF WHEN YOU ADD, I THINK IT'D BE, I STILL COULD BE, I, I AGREE WITH YOU IF YOU REALLY ARE THAT CLOSE.
BUT THE FIRST, IF YOU LOOK AT IT ON A QUICK GLANCE, YOU WOULD THINK IT'S AN ADDITIONAL PARKING SPACE AND IT ISN'T.
IF YOU HAVE SUGGESTED, I'LL SAY UP UNTIL NOW, I ASSUMED IT WAS AN ADDITIONAL SPACE.
ANY SUGGESTION? I, I DON'T UNDERSTAND.
UM, AND YOU COULD PARK TANDEM, RIGHT? ONE CAR BEHIND THE OTHER AND THAT COUNTS IS OFF STREET PARKING.
SO AS LONG AS FEW FEET OFF THE RIGHT AWAY.
SO IF YOU ADDED A TWO BEDROOM UNIT TO YOUR BROTHER'S HOUSE, HE'D STILL PROVIDES ONE ADDITIONAL PARKING SPACE FOR EACH UNIT.
THE CONFUSION IS THE LANGUAGE MAY NOT BE, WELL, I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE CONFUSION AHEAD.
PROVIDED DOESN'T PROVIDE, DOESN'T MEAN ADD.
IT DOESN'T, IT DOESN'T MEAN BUILD.
IT DOESN'T, I KNOW WHAT IT MEANS AND I KNOW HOW, HOW YOU CAN INTERPRET IT.
THEY'RE SAYING MAKE AVAILABLE THEN, YOU KNOW, SHALL MAKE AVAILABLE ONE ADDITIONAL PARKING SPACE PER IF IT DOESN'T EXIST, IT SHALL BUILD ONE.
WHY SHOULD WE CLEAR? I JUST WHY SHOULD BE CLEAR.
IF YOU CAN'T MAKE IT AVAILABLE, THEN YOU CAN'T GET IT AND YOU CAN'T BILL UNLESS YOU MAKE IT AVAILABLE.
IF YOU MAKE AVAILABLE, THAT'S FINE.
STILL BETTER THAN IT WAS BECAUSE I READ IT THE OTHER WAY.
SO INSTEAD OF PROVIDE MAKE AVAILABLE.
BUT THEN I THINK YOU GET INTO, I MEAN MAKE AVAILABLE, IT COULD BE SOMEWHERE ELSE.
THAT'S WHY WE DIDN'T SO WHAT, WHAT DOES IT MAKE AVAILABLE ON SITE? ON, YEAH.
WELL, PROVIDED I THINK DOES IT IN ONE WORD, BUT AGREE BECAUSE MAKE AVAILABLE TO MY NEXT DOOR NEIGHBOR.
WELL, EVENTUALLY YOU'LL VOTE ON IT AT THE NEXT.
BUT, OKAY, SO WHAT THE, WHAT WAS THE, HOW DID WE GET IN DISCUSSION TO BEGIN? WHAT, WHAT WAS WRONG WITH PROVIDE? BECAUSE SOMEBODY THINKS PROVIDE MEANS AD OR BUILD.
IT'S, THEY DON'T BELIEVE IT'S CLEAR ENOUGH.
WHAT DO YOU THINKING, AMANDA? WHAT IF, WHAT IF YOU SAY SHE'LL BE ALLOCATED PER ACCESSORY UNIT, DOES THAT HELP? NO, THAT'S THE SAME AS LIKE AVAILABLE ALLOCATED.
PROVIDE THE SAME WORD BECAUSE ALLOCATED DOES THAT MEAN THAT I CAN TAKE ONE OF MY SPACES AND ALLOCATED MEANS IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE NECESSARILY ON SITE? WELL, NO, YOU CAN'T BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO HAVE YOUR TWO SPACES.
SO BASICALLY IF YOU ARE BUILDING A ONE BEDROOM, UH, A DU, YOU HAVE TO HAVE THREE SPACES, RIGHT? IF YOU ARE BUILDING TWO BEDROOM, YOU HAVE TO HAVE FOUR SPACES.
WAS THAT CLEAR TO YOU, LESLIE, BEFORE JUST NOW? YES.
IT WASN'T TO ME AND IT WASN'T TO TOM, BUT, OKAY.
BUT, BUT I SEE THAT IT IS CLEAR.
IT JUST, I DIDN'T READ IT THAT WAY.
WELL I THINK A LOT OF PE OTHER PEOPLE WON'T EITHER, BUT, OKAY.
[01:15:01]
HAS TO APPROVE THE APPLICATIONS SINCE, SINCE NOW WE UNDERSTAND WHAT PROVIDE MEANS AND HOPEFULLY AARON DOES.SO IT WILL BE CLEAR IN THE, I THINK OUR BUILDING INSPECTOR'S OFFICE WOULD, I THINK HE'S ON BOARD TOO.
ARE WE STILL SEVEN OR PAGE FIVE 15? OR WHAT DO WE DO ABOUT THE SCREENING? ARE WE TAKING THAT OUT? WHAT DO YOU WANT TO DO? I THINK GOOD QUESTION.
WHAT DOES THAT MEAN EXACTLY? JUST GOING TO THE SITE? YEAH.
WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? YEAH, WHAT, WHAT DOES SCREENING ENTAIL? WELL, I I THINK INSTEAD, I THINK MICHAEL WAS ON THE RIGHT TRACK, BUT I THINK WE NEED TO MENTION IT ABOUT THAT NEEDS TO PROVIDE A LANDSCAPING PLANT IF, IF A NEW, IF A NEW, NEW PARKING SPACE HAS TO BE CONSTRUCTED TO MEET THE REQUIREMENT, RIGHT? MM-HMM.
BUT I THAT'S, YOU GUYS HAD ALREADY DECIDED THAT IT WAS MORE ONEROUS THAN THE EXISTING PARKING.
THERE'S A REASON FOR THAT, GUYS.
I'M JUST, THERE COULD BE BE SOMETHING, AND I SEE LESLIE'S HAND, SO ALONG HUGH'S LINES, BUT IF SUFFICIENT LANDSCAPING ALREADY EXISTS, YOU KNOW, THAT WOULD BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION.
VERSUS A MANDATORY REQUIREMENT THAT THEY MAY HAVE SHRUBS THERE.
REVIEW AND THEN YOU GOTTA RIP 'EM OUT.
MICHAEL'S LANGUAGE IS EXACTLY RIGHT.
AND I THINK, SO LESLIE REVIEW THE LANDSCAPING PLAN, RIGHT.
JUST TO REITERATE, WE HAVE A RIGHT TO REVIEW IT.
AND DID YOU GO NO, LESLIE, GO AHEAD.
SO WHEN WE SAY REVIEW, THE LANDSCAPING PLAN HAS THE PLANNING BOARD, THAT MEANS WE'RE LOOKING AT IMPERVIOUS SURFACES, THE WHOLE NINE YARDS.
MEANING IF THEY, IF THEY'RE ADDING, RIGHT.
SO THEY'RE GONNA START PAVING, RIGHT? WELL, PAVING, PAVING, FIRST OF ALL, THEY HAVE TO BE WITHIN OUR, THE, THE ZONING.
SO IMPERVIOUS, THAT'S, THAT'S EASY.
IT CAN ONLY A PERCENTAGE OF THE LOT BASED ON THE SIZE.
SO THAT, THAT'S ALREADY, IT'S ALREADY CONTROLLED.
RIGHT? THAT'S CONTROLLED, THAT'S HIS MAP SURFACE.
THE ONE THIS IS, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SOMETHING SOFT, WHICH IS THE HOW IT LOOKS.
THAT'S WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR.
AND THE REASON WHY WE NEED TO DO THAT IS 'CAUSE WE ARE INCREASING DENSITY GUYS.
WE ARE CHANGING WHAT IS IN OUR, WHICH IS A SINGLE RESIDENTIAL FAMILY TO A DIFFERENT STYLE.
AND WE NEED TO MAKE, TO MAKE SURE IT, IT'S AS NON DISRUPTIVE AS POSSIBLE.
EVERYTHING WE DO IS A BALANCING ACT ON THE, ON THIS PLANNING BOARD.
AND THIS WILL BE TOO, SO MAKE, BUT I JUST WANNA MENTION THE LANDSCAPING PLAN.
THAT WAY WE CAN LOOK AT IT AND SAY, GEE, JUST COULD YOU PUT SOMETHING THERE? BECAUSE THE, YOUR HEADLIGHTS ARE GONNA GO RIGHT INTO YOUR NEIGHBOR'S YARD, YOU KNOW, OR INTO THE NEIGHBOR'S BEDROOM CAN HAPPEN.
IT COULD BE ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
IF, IF YOU LOOK AT SOME OF THE COMMENTS THAT WERE MADE, ONE OF THE COMMENT ADDRESSED, THE VERY SAME ISSUE WE JUST TALKED ABOUT, THAT IT IS, UH, LEFT TO THE DISCRETION OF THE PLANNING BOARD.
AND, AND IN THE FUTURE, NEW PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS WILL COME ON AND, AND LOOK AT IT.
IF, SO THAT'S A, THAT'S AN ISSUE THAT WAS RAISED.
AND SO WE HAVE TO LOOK AT THAT AND ADDRESS IT.
NOW HOW DOES, YOU KNOW, WE MAKE SURE THAT WHAT WE INTENDED IS IN FACT GOING TO BE IMPLEMENTED THAT WAY WE DO IT.
IT'S NO DIFFERENT THAN ANY OTHER SITE PLAN THAT WE DO.
WE DO LANDSCAPING PLANS ALL THE TIME.
BUT WE HAVE A STANDARD, LET ME FINISH.
WE REALLY DON'T, WE DON'T HAVE A STANDARD.
WE NEGOTIATE IT IS WHAT HAPPENS.
I MEAN, BASICALLY IT GOES TO THE FORESTRY OFFICER OR TO AARON.
THEY SPEAK TO THE CODE KNOW APPLICANT.
THE APPLICANT PROBABLY AGREES 95% OF THE TIME AND EVERYBODY'S HAPPY.
SO, AND YOU KNOW, THE THING ABOUT, WELL, WE'RE, WE'LL ALL BE DEAD AND THERE'LL BE A NEW BOARD.
YOU KNOW, IT HA THINGS HAPPEN.
WE'VE HAD STUFF COME IN FRONT OF US.
YOU KNOW, FRAN MCLAUGHLIN WAS CHAIR WHEN OKAY.
THE, THE, UH, WE MADE THE POINT.
WE MOVED TO NUMBER SEVEN BECAUSE THIS, THIS IS WHAT I'M GETTING AT.
DID YOU, DID YOU GET ALL THAT AARON, THE LANDSCAPE PLAN ASSOCIATED WITH, OKAY.
SO I REWORKED THE EXISTING PARAGRAPH TO MAKE IT CLEAR THAT THE CRITERIA THAT WAS THERE, IT WAS THE CRITERIA WE WERE INTENDING.
[01:20:01]
PLANNING BOARD MAY DENY AN APPLICATION FOR AN A DU WHEN MULTIPLE ADUS ARE LOCATED WITHIN CLOSE PROXIMITY.PROXIMITY UPON PROXIMITY UPON FINDING THAT THERE'S INSUFFICIENT LANDSCAPING OR SCREENING, STREET BLOCK CONFIGURATION, AVAILABILITY OF OFF STREET PARKING OR OTHER SITE CONDITIONS, WHICH ARE ANTICIPATED PRODUCE A DETRIMENTAL IMPACT.
IT MAKES IT CLEAR LIKE THOSE ARE THE CONDITIONS THAT WOULD TRIGGER THE DISCRETION.
BECAUSE I KNOW YOU HAD A COMMENT LAST TIME, LIKE IT SEEMED, SO I'M JUST VERY DISCRETIONARY.
IT'S, IT'S, DO YOU HAVE ANY SUGGESTIONS? UM, WELL, LET ME JUST, LET ME JUST PLEASE ADDRESS THIS AND THEN MAKE A SUGGESTION.
IT SAYS, ANTICIPATED TO PRODUCE A DETRIMENTAL IMPACT, YOU KNOW, ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
IT'S, IT'S, IT'S, IT'S VERY VAGUE AND, AND INSUFFICIENT LANDSCAPING OR SCREENING.
THAT WOULD NEVER BE A REASON WE DENY IT.
WE WOULD SAY PUT IN THE LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING, AND THEN YOU COULD HAVE YOUR A DU AND THE APPLICANT WOULD SAY, OF COURSE I'LL DO THAT.
AND THEY'RE REQUIRED TO HAVE THE OFF STREET PARKING TOO.
AND, AND, AND THE ONLY REASON TO DENY IT IS THAT THERE'S A DETRIMENTAL IMPACT ON NEIGHBORHOOD BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, TWO OR THREE NEIGHBORS ON VARIOUS BLOCKS COMPLAIN.
AND THEN WE'RE IN THE POSITION OF LIKE AGREEING WITH THE THI THIS HAS THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN.
YEAH, I TRIED TO AND, AND I RESPECT THAT.
IT HAS, IT HAS HARD NO, NO, NO OBJECTIVE CRITERIA.
LOOK, THE ONLY, THAT'S, I MEAN, WHICH BASICALLY PUTS US IN A POSITION OF RESPONDING TO NEIGHBOR'S COMPLAINTS.
AND WE KNOW HOW, UH, THOMAS JUST ASKED TO SHOW THE, THE EXACT PARAGRAPH.
UM, IT, IT, IT REQUIRES THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN AND, AND THE WAY IT WAS ORIGINALLY WRITTEN.
I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT YOUR LANGUAGE, AMANDA.
IT REQUIRES US TO RESPOND TO NEIGHBOR'S COMPLAINTS.
AND WE KNOW HOW INTERESTING AND CREATIVE THOSE COMPLAINTS CAN BE.
AND THEN MAYBE AGREE OR DENY THE APPLICATION THE REVERSE WOULD BE BETTER.
AND WHEN I SAY REVERSE, WHAT I MEAN IS THIS, SOMEBODY MENTIONED, YOU KNOW, ADUS CAN'T BE BUILT AND I'LL MAKE IT UP A NUMBER WITHIN 500 FEET OF EACH OTHER, UNLESS THE BOARD GRANTS A WAIVER.
NOW, WHAT WOULD HAPPEN THEN IS INSTEAD OF DENYING AN APPLICATION, WE GIVE THE APPLICANT THE OPPORTUNITY TO GET HIS NEIGHBORS TOGETHER AND SAY, HEY, EVEN THOUGH IT'S, YOU KNOW, ONLY 300 FEET FROM MY HOUSE AND MY HOUSE, WE HAVE NO PROBLEM.
SO NOW WE'RE IN THE POSITION OF GRANTING A WAIVER TO PERMIT IT, WHICH IS A MUCH EASIER THING TO DO, UM, THAN DENYING IT BASED ON SOME VARIOUS COMPLAINTS.
I ACTUALLY THINK IT'S JUST ABOUT THE SAME.
BECAUSE IF YOU, AND LET NO, WELL, LET ME FINISH.
I'M JUST, LET ME FINISH MICHAEL, MUMBLING.
MICHAEL, I CAN MUMBLE MICHAEL.
I, I, I LISTEN TO YOU AND YOU CAN LISTEN TO ME.
UM, THIS, I AGREE WITH YOU ABOUT THE CRITERIA.
I THINK YOU HAVE THAT PROBLEM EITHER WAY THOUGH.
BECAUSE GRANTING A WAIVER, YOU MAY NOT P**S OFF THE PERSON WHO GETS THE WAIVER, BUT YOU MAY P**S OFF ALL THE, ALL THE NEIGHBORS FOR GRANTING IT.
SO THE ONLY WAY YOU CAN DO IT IS IF YOU HAVE CERTAIN CRITERIA.
WE LOOKED AT THE IDEA OF SEPARATION AND WE COULD JUST DO PHYSICAL SEPARATION TO, YOU KNOW, CAN SAY THAT THEY CAN'T.
'CAUSE WE DID IT WITH, UH, ASSISTED LIVING FACILITIES.
WE SHOULD HAVE, WE DO IT WITH FAST FOOD RESTAURANTS.
OKAY? THERE ARE THINGS IN OUR LAWS WHERE WE'VE ACTUALLY SAID, YOU HAVE TO BE THIS, THEY HAVE TO BE THIS FAR APART.
AND WE TALKED ABOUT DOING IT HERE.
WE COULDN'T FIND A GOOD WAY OF DOING IT HERE THAT WE THOUGHT WAS FAIR.
LET ME, LET ME, LET ME SO, SO HOLD ON, HOLD ON, HOLD ON.
LEMME JUST, LEMME JUST COMMENT ON WHAT YOU JUST SAID.
UM, IF WE HAVE A DISTANCE CRITERIA AND FIVE NEIGHBORS COME WITH FIVE DIFFERENT REASONS WHY WE SHOULDN'T GRANT THE WAIVER.
GOOD FAITH REASONS WE WON'T GRANT THE WAIVER.
WE PROBABLY WOULDN'T GRANT THE WAIVER.
I THINK YOU'RE FORGETTING ONE COMPONENT THOUGH.
THAT, SO THESE WELL JUST FINISH.
CAN I FINISH WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, MATT? BUT WHAT I'M SUGGESTING IS THAT, UM, THERE'S A VERY GOOD POSSIBILITY THAT IN A NUMBER OF CASES, THE NEIGHBORS WILL SAY, FINE
[01:25:01]
WITH ME.APPLICANTS GO TO THE NEIGHBORS, THEY EXPLAIN WHAT THE THING IS.
AND IN THE CASE WHERE NO NEIGHBORS OBJECT OR THE, LET'S SAY THERE'S A FRIVOLOUS OBJECTION, IT'S VERY EASY AND REALLY NON-CONTROVERSIAL TO GRANT THE LABOR.
THAT'S A BETTER WAY OF DOING IT THAN THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN NOW, AMANDA, WHAT WERE YOU GONNA SAY? I THINK IT'S SPLIT IN A DIFFERENCE.
SO, AND I THINK, AND THINK, SO THESE CRITERIA WOULD BE REVIEWED WITH STAFF.
SO YOU'D HAVE STAFF GIVING YOU MEMOS ON, YOU KNOW, UH, YOU KNOW, UM, IS THERE POSSIBLE RISK WITH PARKING? RIGHT? IS IT NARROW, NARROW STREETS IS GONNA BE THE ISSUE? IS IT, UM, YOU KNOW, SO YOU'RE GONNA HAVE SOME ADDITIONAL SUPPORT.
SO SOME, I DO AGREE WITH YOU THAT SOME OF THIS IS VERY VAGUE IN TERMS OF THE LANGUAGE, RIGHT? MM-HMM,
SO WHAT IS INSUFFICIENT? UM, WHEN WE TALK ABOUT PARKING, THERE ARE STRAIGHT RULES.
BUT SOME OF THIS IS VERY VAGUE.
I FEEL LIKE MICHAEL'S WAY IS YOU'RE INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY.
AND THE OTHER WAY IS YOU'RE GUILTY UNTIL, UNTIL YOU PROVE YOURSELF.
BECAUSE THIS TO ME, OPENS UP AN OPPORTUNITY FOR PEOPLE TO BE DENIED WITHOUT A CHECKLIST.
YEAH, BECAUSE YOU, WHAT YOU HAVE HERE INSUFFICIENT.
RIGHT? THAT, THAT'S LAST MINUTE
UM, WE AGAIN, OFF STREET PARKING, YOU'VE LAID THAT OUT.
BUT DETRIMENTAL IMPACT, LIKE, THAT'S SEEKER.
BUT HERE YOU WOULDN'T HAVE SEEKER BECAUSE IT'S NOT A
THEN, THEN MAYBE THAT'S WHAT WE SHOULD, THE REASON WHY I'M SAYING THAT IS, IS AS A PERSON, AS AN APPLICANT COMING FORWARD, WHAT DO I NEED? WHAT ARE, WHAT DOES THE LITMUS SAYS? WHAT DO I NEED TO CHECK OFF BEFORE I EVEN COME TO YOU WITH AN APPLICATION ADVERSE? SO THIS IS SAYING YOU HAVE THE ABILITY TO DENY IT IF ALL OF THESE THINGS ARE ABUNDANT.
DO YOU SEE WHAT I'M SAYING? SO, SO VERSUS HAVING A WAIVER, YOU HAVE SOMEBODY COME IN AND SAY, I SHOULD GET A WAIVER BECAUSE X, Y, AND Z HERE YOU WOULDN'T, YOU WOULDN'T DENY APPLICATION.
BUT, BUT DON'T, THEY'RE COMING IN TO, TO GET A WAIVER IS BECAUSE THERE'S ALREADY ONE ON THEIR BLOCK.
RIGHT? SO THE ONLY REASON THAT THEY'RE COMING IN IS NOT, IS TO SAY, OKAY, I KNOW THERE'S ONE ON MY BLOCK, I WANNA BUILD AN ADDITIONAL ONE.
AND THEN WHAT'S THE CRITERIA FOR SAYING A WAIVER IS, WELL THEN, BUT THEN IT'S THE SAME THING.
YOU STILL NEED THE WAIVER, BUT I, YOU STILL NEED TO MEET THEIR CRITERIA.
SO I THINK IN EITHER CASE YOU NEED A CRITERIA, BUT WE NEED TO DEVELOP A, A CHECKLIST TO SAY THAT IF YOU COME, YOU HAVE TO DO, IF YOU COME, YOU HAVE TO MEET THIS, THIS, THIS.
OR IF YOU FLIP IT AROUND, IF YOU DENY IT, IT IS BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T MEET THIS, THIS, THIS, AND THIS.
RIGHT? THEN IT BECOMES MORE OBJECTIVE.
AND I, AND I THINK HONESTLY, MY REASON FOR SAYING OBJECTIVENESS IS A PROTECTION AGAINST, YOU'RE SKEWING THIS WAY.
YOU'RE NOT GIVING IT TO US, BUT YOU'RE GIVING IT TO THEM.
RIGHT? SO THAT'S WHY I, I, THAT'S THE ONLY REASON I'M SAYING SOME SORT OF CHECKLIST.
I JUST HAVE ONE FINAL COMMENT ON THIS.
THESE LOOK LIKE CRITERIA OBJECTIVE, BUT THEY'RE NOT, I MEAN, LANDSCAPING OR SCREENING SUFFICIENT LANDSCAPING.
THE, THE, THE PLANNING BOARD, WE'VE ALREADY DISCUSSED THAT.
WE COULD ALWAYS SAY PUT IN ANOTHER HALF DOZEN TREES AND THEY'LL DO IT.
THERE'LL NEVER BE A TIME WHERE THERE'LL BE INSUFFICIENT BECAUSE I DON'T BELIEVE SO.
BUT ON, ON THE LOT, FOR EXAMPLE, IF YOU HAVE A LOT AND YOU HAVE AN EXISTING BUILDING AND YOU HAVE NO SETBACK EXISTING, WHERE ARE YOU GONNA PUT PLANTS? I MEAN, IT'S POSSIBLE WHEN YOU HAVE SMALL LOTS, IT'S, IT'S UNLIKELY.
I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT THAT MEANS.
AVAILABILITY OF OFF STREET PARKING.
TO LESLIE'S POINT, IT'S NOT WHERE ALREADY ORDERED REQUIRED OFF STREET PARKING.
THERE'S NO, THIS DOESN'T APPLY.
YOU KNOW, THE ONLY THING LEFT OF THESE VAGUE CRITERIA ANYWAY THAT I'M DONE HERE.
OKAY, LET, LEMME TALK ABOUT PARKING FOR A SECOND.
WHAT DO YOU DO? SOMEBODY COMES IN, THEY'VE GOT A, A HOUSE WITH FOUR CARS IN THE DRIVEWAY ALREADY.
NOW IT'S THE FIRST ONE ON THE STREET.
WE HAVE NO, WE, WE CAN'T DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT.
'CAUSE WE CAN'T DO IT SPECIFICALLY TO ONE ORDER.
BUT THEY, BUT THE NEIGHBORS HERE COME IN AND SAID THEY HAVE FOUR CARS IN THE DRIVEWAY.
SO THE INSUFFICIENT PARKING ONE ACTUALLY ISN'T HARD AND FAST.
IF WE KNOW THEY HAVE THAT, THE FIRST QUESTION IS BOARDED ASK IS WHERE YOU'RE GONNA KIND OF PUT THE FIFTH ONE.
AND IF THEY HAVE NO OPPORTUNITY, ONE OF THE WAYS, I DUNNO HOW YOU WRITE THIS.
IF THEY HAVE NO OPPORTUNITY, NO, I, I WANNA HELP YOU WITH THE CONCEPT.
[01:30:02]
FOR CONSISTENT OFF STREET PARKING OKAY.AS A RESULT OF THE CURRENT CONDITIONS AT THE HOUSE, THAT'S A REASON TO DENY IT.
I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S COVERED IN THIS.
IT'S NOT, BUT, BUT IT HAPPENS.
I MEAN, YOU KNOW, NOBODY, I MEAN, PEOPLE WITH THREE BEDROOMS, YOU KNOW, CAN EASILY HAVE 3, 3, 4 CARS.
BUT IF THEY WANT, OKAY, I I'M JUST THINKING ABOUT PEOPLE.
IF THEY WANT TO DO AN A DU, THEY'LL MOVE TWO CARS FOR A FEW MONTHS ANYWAY.
BUT AT LEAST YOU NO, YOU'RE, NO, YOU'RE NOT WRONG THERE.
PEOPLE ARE GONNA LOOK, PEOPLE ARE ALWAYS GONNA TRY TO WIRE AROUND THINGS.
BUT YOU GOTTA, WE GOTTA DO THE BEST WE CAN.
BUT ARE THERE OTHER CRITERIA? PROBLEM IS I DON'T, I CAN'T, THEY'RE ALL IN THE LAW ALREADY.
SO WHAT WOULD TRIGGER A RA WAIVER? I DON'T, I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT WOULD TRIGGER A WAIVER OR MAKE ME WANT TO DENY A WAIVER THAT'S NOT ALREADY IN WHAT WE'RE WRITING IF IT DOESN'T MEET SOMETHING ELSE.
SO THIS WAS INTENDED TO ADDRESS DENSITY, RIGHT? IF YOU HAVE LIKE MULTIPLE RIGHT.
STREET OR THE BACK STREET NEXT TO EACH OTHER.
UM, I KNOW WE HAD A DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS.
THESE GUYS CAN REMEMBER WE HAD A HUGE DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS ISSUE AT THE AAV L MEETINGS, RIGHT? MM-HMM.
BACK AND FORTH ON DISTANCE VERSUS DENSITY.
AND THAT'S NOT A REASON FOR US TO RECOMMEND ONE THING, THE TOWN BOARD I THINK WOULD LIKE TO SEE A DISTANCE IN THERE WITH A WAIVER.
FIRST OF IT WOULD BE A WAIVER.
IT'S EITHER TO THE PLANNING BOARD OR THE ZONING BOARD.
VARIANCE THAT YEAH, IT COULD BE A VARIANCE, RIGHT? YEAH.
A DISTANCE WOULD BE A VARIANCE.
JUST 'CAUSE SO I CAN UNDERSTAND.
IF YOU PUT A DISTANCE AND I KNOW THAT MY NEIGHBOR BUILT ONE, THEN I HAVE, I KNOW I NEED TO COME TO YOU.
BECAUSE ANY, REMEMBER WHAT IF I DON'T KNOW THEY DID IT.
SO, BUT WE WILL, BUT THE BUILDING INSPECTOR WILL, OKAY.
WE'RE NOT THE ZBA, BUT THINKING FROM THE ZBA A'S PERSPECTIVE, WHAT DO THEY DECIDE ON? HOW DO THEY DECIDE? HOW DO THEY RIGHT.
YOU HAVE TO HAVE CRITERIA, BUT, BUT THE DIFFERE HARD.
BUT THE DIFFERENCE IS THE DIFFERENCE WITH THEM.
THEY HAVE MUCH MORE DISCRETION THAN THIS BOARD DOES GENERALLY.
AND THEY'RE OVERTURN THEY'RE THEY'RE OVERRIDING LAWS ALL THE TIME, RIGHT? YEAH.
TO INTERPRET THOSE THINGS, PARTICULARLY WITH A SPECIAL PERMIT.
SOMEONE YOU MAY WANNA RUN IT BY ED.
SAY IF, IF, IF WE LEAVE THIS, IF WE PUT A DISTANCE IN, WHAT DO YOU THINK? HOW WOULD THE ZONING BOARD HANDLE IT? WHERE I AT? OKAY, SO SO WE ARE SAYING JUST BEFORE DISTANCE SETBACKS ARE THE SAME IN ALL ZONES, RIGHT? YEAH.
AND NO GRANDFATHERED ANYTHING DIFFERENT.
THE ONLY THING IS IF YOU HAVE AN EXISTING, UH, ACCESSORY BUILDING, WE SAID, UM, SOMETHING ABOUT NON-CONFORMING.
IF IT'S EXISTING AND YOU CAN WITHIN, AS LONG AS YOU STAY WITHIN THE FOOTPRINT OF THE EXISTING NON-CONFORMING.
SO IF YOU YEAH, IF YOU MIGHT HAVE A GARAGE, A LOT LINE, UH, THAT'S CLOSE TO THE LOT LINE, YOU DON'T HAVE THAT.
SO ONLY FOR NEW STRUCTURE CONSTRUCTION, RIGHT? YEAH.
SO, SO, UH, DOES NOT INCLUDE IS NOT CONFORM.
CAN I JUST COME TO CLOSURE ON THE, ON PARAGRAPH 15.
SO WE GOING TO, ARE WE GONNA REPLACE THIS PARAGRAPH WITH A 500 FOOT DISTANCE? 500 FEET? I MEAN 500 FEET.
I THOUGHT Y THAT ONE FROM, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT THEY USE FOR GAS STATIONS AND FOR IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH IT.
IT'S A DIFFERENT TYPE OF IMPACT.
IT WAS A QUESTION BEFORE WE GET, I, I PULLED IT OUT.
HEAVEN, WE'VE BEEN DISCUSSING THIS FOR THE LAST 15 MINUTES.
I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S THE RIGHT NUMBER.
I SAID, IS THAT THE RIGHT NUMBER? WHAT NUMBER SHOULD IT BE? 250 FEET WOULD BE FIVE FIVE HOUSE SEPARATION, RIGHT? ROUGHLY.
FOR OTHER LOTS IT MIGHT BE FOR OTHERS DISTRICTS IT MIGHT BE TWO OR THREE, BUT TWO LOTS.
LOTS, RIGHT? THE DENSITY IS LESS ANYWAY.
SO IF YOU'D MADE IT AT TWO 50 GUYS, THAT WOULD BE IN THE SMALLEST LOT.
THAT'S, WE DON'T EVEN HAVE FIVE HOUSES ON OUR LOT.
I I WOULD GO A LITTLE, I WOULD DROP IT DOWN TO EVERY OTHER.
BUT BEFORE WE GET TO DISTANCE, ARE WE ARE SAYING THAT WE REPLACING 15 WITH THE 500 FEET, ARE WE ADDING FI WHATEVER DISTANCE? ARE WE ADDING THE DISTANCE TO 15
[01:35:01]
OR WE REPLACING 15 WITH THE DISTANCE REPLACING 15 WITH A DIFFERENT DIF DISTANCE.JUST TALK TO ED THOUGH FIRST, UM, AND SEE WHAT HE THINKS.
BUT LET THE ZONING BOARD DEAL A LITTLE.
LIKE I THINK THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT SHOULD MAKE A RECOMMENDATION AS THE DISTANCE.
THEY DEAL WITH NUMBERS ALL THE TIME.
I'M SERIOUS BECAUSE I HAVE NO IDEA.
WE'LL STUDY HUNDRED, A THOUSAND FEET, WHAT THE IMPLICATIONS ARE.
WE COULD EVEN SHOW MAYBE ON SOME GRAPHICS.
ON THIS STREET IT WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, YOU'D HAVE TO BE FOUR AWAY OR FIVE AWAY ON THIS STREET.
AND WHY DON'T YOU TAKE LIKE EACH ZONE, LIKE THE FIVE ZONES.
MY GUESS IS MAKE IT YOU FOR THIS TO FLY, IT'S GONNA BE TWO 50 LEFT, TWO 50, MAYBE MORE SAY FIVE.
WELL I THINK THAT PEOPLE WHO WROTE IN LETTERS WOULD BE EMOTIONAL, COMFORTABLE WITH THE 500 DISTANCE.
BUT YOU KNOW, I FEEL BADLY AND YOU KNOW, IF YOU GET A NEIGHBORHOOD THAT ACTUALLY CARES ABOUT, THEN THEY CAN GET AWAY WITH IT.
BY THE WAY, WE NEED TO GET THIS DONE TONIGHT BECAUSE, OR WE, WE NEED TO OR REQUEST ONE EXTENSION.
WE DON'T HAVE TO REQUEST, WE JUST SAY NO.
WE JUST, JUST YOU HAVE 30 DAYS AS OF RIGHT.
WE SHOULD DO THAT BECAUSE WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO READ THIS ONE MORE TIME.
CAN WE MOVE ON FROM 15? MICHAEL, YOU DONE ON 15 NOW? OH YEAH.
ALRIGHT, IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE? DO YOU HAVE ANY MORE, I THINK THAT THERE WAS SOME, ANYTHING ELSE IN GREEN ELSE THINK THAT WAS, BUT THERE'S SOME THINGS IN HERE WHICH I THINK SHOULD BE INCORPORATED UNLESS IT'S ALREADY COVERED BY THE CODE.
THAT'S, THAT'S REQUIRED BY CODE.
THAT'S CODE, RIGHT? WHAT, WHAT DO YOU MEAN THOUGH? ARE YOU SAYING NEED THE REQUIREMENT? INTERNAL SPRINKLER SYSTEM.
OH, FIRE EXPRESSION SYSTEM INSIDE.
NEW CONSTRUCTION THAT'S COVERED BY CODE.
THE OTHER IS EVEN IF I CONVERT AN EXISTING GARAGE.
WELL, SO I PUT AN EXTENSION ON MY HOUSE A NUMBER OF YEARS AGO.
I DIDN'T HAVE TO ADD A SPRINKLER SYSTEM.
HOW LONG AGO FRANK? OVER THERE.
WELL, IT'S PROBABLY BEFORE IT WAS REQUIRED FOR RESIDENTIAL'S.
THAT'S WHEN YOU JOINED THE BOARD.
THAT'S WHERE YOU YEAH, WHEN I FOUND YOUR, WHEN I FOUND YOUR WATER COURSE.
HE WAS FIRE COMMISSIONER IN GREENVILLE AT THE TIME.
NO, NO, BUT BUT THAT'S THE REQUIREMENT.
IF YOU DO AN EXTENSION, YOU HAVE TO MY UNDERSTANDING, IT'S A CERTAIN NUMBER OF SQUARE FEET.
IT'S THE SAME THING ON AN ADDITION.
WHATEVER IS CONSISTENT WITH THE FIRE CODE.
RIGHT? SO WE DON'T NEED TO SPECIFY THAT HERE.
IT'S, THAT'S WHAT I'M, MOVE ON TO THE NEXT CLOSE COMMENT PLEASE.
THE OTHER COMMENT THAT SOMEONE MADE IS WHETHER OR NOT IF YOU HAVE A DETACHED UNIT, UH, SHOULD THAT HAVE A, A, A DIFFERENT NUMBER FOR YOUR MAIL AND YOUR FIRE? I DON'T THINK SO.
WELL, I'M JUST SAYING FOR, FOR EASE OF IDENTIFICATION, A SEPARATE UNIT.
IF YOU'RE NUMBER FIVE MAIN STREET, ISN'T THAT A POST OFFICE ISSUE? THAT'S AN INTERESTING QUESTION.
THAT, THAT IT MAY BE A QUESTION FOR THE POST OFFICE BECAUSE YOU HAVE TWO SEPARATE FAMILIES LIVING ON THE SAME PROPERTY.
I CAN EVEN ASK THE OTHER COMMUNITIES WHAT THEY'VE DONE.
ANYHOW, I CAN TELL YOU FROM LIVING IN AN A DU
UM, SO, YOU KNOW, I LIVED, UH, ATTACHED TO A DENTIST'S OFFICE.
AND SO THEY JUST PUT A LETTER NEXT TO WHATEVER THE ADDRESS WAS.
I WILL SEND AND THEN BEGINNING OF THE ADUS ARE, UH, LIKE PROGRAMS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
THE SEPARATE MAILBOX, THE SEPARATE DESCEND.
ANOTHER THING IN THE CODE, UH, A QUESTION WAS WHAT ABOUT THE SEWER AND WATER? THAT, THAT WOULD JUST BE HOOKED UP TO THE MAIN MUNICIPAL, RIGHT? IT'S THERE'S, IS THAT A SET? IT WOULD IT DEPEND UPON THE CONFIGURATION WHETHER OR NOT IT'LL BE HOOKED UP TO DIRECT HOOK UP OR DIRECT IT WOULD BE WHATEVER THE ENGINEER.
YOU KNOW, I WOULDN'T, I WOULDN'T EXPECT IT BE, I WOULD EXPECT IT MAYBE DIRECT HOOK, HOOK UP.
IT SAYS THERE THAT IT IS REQUIRED TO HAVE, UH, CONNECTIONS.
IT IS UP TO THE ENGINEER IN THE BUILDING, THE PARK.
WHAT WAS THE OTHER POINT? LEMME SEE.
THINK ABOUT THE PLANNING BOARD LEAVING.
WE CAN'T, WE'LL AGREE IN HERE THAT WE WILL STAY ON FOREVER.
AND I THINK IN, IN THE INTRODUCTION HERE, SOMEHOW WE, I THINK WE SHOULD MAKE REFERENCE BECAUSE THERE MANY OF THESE
[01:40:01]
COMMENTS THAT SAID THIS IS THE, A SINGLE FAMILY, NEIGHBOR, SINGLE FAMILY.WHY ARE YOU TRYING? IT SAYS SO IN A MASTER PLAN, SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND IF YOU GO THROUGH THESE, IT'S A LOT OF REFERENCE TO THAT.
BUT MY COUNTER ARGUMENT TO THAT IS THAT WHEN YOU LOOK INTO THE MASTER PLAN, THERE'S ALSO SECTIONS THAT'S STATES THAT WE SHOULD IN, UH, HAVE HOUSING TO KEEP PEOPLE IN IN THEIR PLACE.
WE SHOULD HAVE, UH, HOUSING POLICY TO KEEP YOUNG PEOPLE IN, IN, IN THE, THE TOWN.
SO WE MUST BE VERY CAREFUL WHEN WE MAKE RULES THAT IMPACT SINGLE FAMILY, NEIGHBORHOOD.
HOWEVER, SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD DEFINITION IS NOT ABSOLUTE ABSOLUTE.
AND WE JUST CAN'T LOOK AT IT AS BEING ABSOLUTE.
AND YOU COULD DO, MAKE NO CHANGES THAT WILL IMPACT IT IN ANY WAY.
SO I THINK SOMEHOW WE SHOULD INDICATE THAT IT, YOU KNOW, IS CONSISTENT WITH THE OVERALL MASTER PLAN THAT LOOKS AT SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD AS WELL AS KEEPING PEOPLE IN THE NOT, NOT IN THE LAW.
HUH? THAT THAT GOES TO NOT LIKE IN THE SECRET.
IT SHOULD BE IN THE LEGISLATIVE INTENT.
I CAN BELIEVE LEGISLATIVE INTENT ACTUALLY, IF YOU REMEMBER WHAT WE DID MONDAY NIGHT.
I THINK THE FIRST SLIDE, FIRST SECOND SLIDE THAT YOHAN DID.
I THINK THAT'S PERFECT BECAUSE I THINK IT GIVES YOU BULLET POINTS AS TO WHAT THE LEGISLATIVE INTENT SHOULD BE RIGHT IN THERE.
IT JUST, A LOT OF THE THINGS THAT JUST SAID SAID IN TERMS OF THE DISCUSSION OF WHY IT FITS WITH THE MASTER PLAN DOES NOT BELONG IN THE NO, UH, NO, BUT LET ME FINISH, BUT 'CAUSE THIS GOES ALONG, REMEMBER THE TWO DOCUMENTS WE HAVE MM-HMM.
THERE'S A COVER COVER NOTE THAT GOES ALONG WITH THIS.
IT SHOULD GO IN THE C WHAT YOU'RE SAYING NOW ABOUT THE MASTER PLAN.
AND BY WAY, GARY HA I THINK HAS AN ARGUMENT ON THIS ALREADY DONE, UM, THAT SHOULD GO INTO THE COVER NOTE THAT GOES ALONG WITH THE ACTUAL LAW.
BUT THERE SHOULDN'T, I DON'T THINK THE DISCUSSION OF WHETHER THIS IS, UH, IN CONFLICT WITH THE MASTER PLAN BELONGS IN
YOU DON'T HAVE TO PUT WE HAVE COPY THE COVER NOTE.
WE HAVE, IT HASN'T DRAFTED YET.
YOU, I'M NOT SUGGESTING THAT WE HAVE TO STRESS YOU PUT THE MASTER PLAN IN.
THAT IS JUSTIFICATION IN THE LEGISLATIVE INTENT TO INDICATE THAT WE, THAT, UH, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTS ARE IMPORTANT AND, AND IT IS ALSO IMPORTANT TO KEEP, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE IN THE HOME OF PROTECTED YOUNG FAMILIES SO FORTH.
TO THAT POINT, I THINK WHAT WE TALK ABOUT HERE IS THAT THE LEGISLATIVE IN INTENT WAS TO PROVIDE THE THINGS BANG, BANG, BANG WHILE MAINTAINING THE CHARACTER AND THE QUALITY OF LIFE IN A SINGLE FA SINGLE FAMILY.
THE SINGLE FAMILY WITH, UH, DISTRICT, I THINK THAT SAYS WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
OH, BUT ALL, LET'S SEE WHAT THE COVER LETTER SAYS.
YEAH, NO, HE WAS TALKING ABOUT IN HERE.
YEAH, I'M TALKING ABOUT IN HERE BECAUSE, UH, BECAUSE YOU, BECAUSE YOU READ THROUGH THESE THINGS, IT, IT, YOU KNOW, LIKE HALF OF THEM ARE SAYING YOU STARTED BEING A SINGLE FAMILY, UH, UH, CHARACTER OF SIM SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBOR I'S GONNA SAY, YOU TALK ABOUT CHARACTER IN HERE.
THAT'S WHAT YOU NEED TO TALK ABOUT.
THAT I, IN THE LEGISLATIVE INTENT, THAT IT DOESN'T DISRUPT THE CHARACTER.
THAT SHOULD BE PART OF LEGISLATIVE INTENT.
SOMEHOW IT SHOULD MAKE THAT, THAT COULD, THAT COULD MAKE THAT IN.
BUT I WOULD, I LIKE THE BULLET POINTS.
'CAUSE IT MAKES IT CRYSTAL CLEAR AS TO WHAT THE LEGISLATIVE INTENT IS AND RATHER THAN BURY IT IN A PARAGRAPH, RIGHT? MM-HMM.
THESE ARE THE FOLLOWING, YOU KNOW, WAS FOR THESE REASONS, BANG, BANG, BANG.
WHAT BULLET POINTS ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? YOU HAVEN'T SEEN? WE HAVEN'T SEEN THEY, THEY'RE BASICALLY THE ONES WE'VE TALKED.
IF WE HAVEN'T SEEN, WELL, IT'S NOT FAIR TO US.
NO, IT IS FAIR BECAUSE I'LL TELL YOU WHAT THEY ARE.
BASICALLY WHAT WE DISCUSSED, THEY'RE ABOUT, ABOUT TRYING TO KEEP PEOPLE IN PLACE.
WELL, WHY DON'T YOU JUST ATTRIBUTE THEM TO US, YOU KNOW, BEFORE THE NEXT MEETING.
UM, AMANDA, YOU WILL, THEY'LL BE IN, IN THE DOCUMENT.
SO YOU'LL SEE IT THEN PUT, PUT 'EM IN THE DOCUMENT.
IF YOU CAN GET, GET SOMETHING FROM JOHAN, WHICH IS A PRESENTATION.
OH, DO YOU HAVE IT? 12 POINTS ACTUALLY, I KNOW
[01:45:01]
YOU DID.YOU ACTUALLY DID IT, DID IT YOU DID THE DRAFT THOUGH.
WE'RE GONNA FINALIZE IT AND THEN WE CAN SHARE IT.
YEAH, JUST SHARE IT WITH THE PLANNING BOARD.
UH, IT'S, IT'S CLOSELY BULLET POINTS, NOT SENTENCES.
THE OTHER THING THAT WE GOTTA BE A LITTLE BIT IS A LITTLE BIT TRICKY FOR US IS THE COVER NOTE.
BECAUSE OF THE, BECAUSE WE HAVE MADE, THERE WERE SEVERAL WAYS, AARON AND I WERE TALKING ABOUT THIS THE OTHER DAY.
WE WANT, I I, MY VIEW IS WE WANNA MAKE A POSITIVE, POSITIVE RECOMMENDATION ABOUT THE LAW OVERALL, BUT WITH CHANGES WITH, WITH SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES FROM WHAT WAS PRESENTED TO US BY THE PLAINTIFF COURT.
IS THAT WHAT THE COVER NOTE IS? OUR RECOMMENDATION? IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT? MM-HMM.
BUT WHEN YOU MENTIONED IT, I WAS THINKING, OKAY, I THINK HE MEANS THE RECOMMENDATION.
SO I'M GLAD YOU ASKED THE QUESTION.
THE RECOMMENDATION, ACTUALLY TWO NOTES THERE, TWO OTHER NOTES.
THERE'S A, THERE'S A RECOMMENDATION, A REPORT AND A REPORT.
TWO, THE REPORT FOLLOWS THE SAME FORMAT THAT WE ALWAYS DONE.
'CAUSE THERE ARE SPECIFIC QUESTIONS WHEN YOU'RE MAKING A ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT, THEN THE RECOMMENDATION GIVES THE BACKGROUND AND THE VOTES.
AND THE ADDITIONAL RECOMMENDATIONS.
BUT THE RECOMMENDATION IS WHAT WE'VE JUST DISCUSSED.
YOU KNOW, THIS GREEN STUFF, SOME IS IN SOME'S OUT, PLUS YOU WANT TO ELIMINATE THE LIMITATIONS OF 10,000.
I MEAN, BUT THE QUESTION MICHAEL, ISN'T THAT THE QUESTION IS TONALITY, TONALITY, TONALITY.
I THINK IT'S, IT'S, IT'S, IT'S STILL A POSITIVE.
THAT'S THE WAY I WOULD, WE, WE COULD DO IT AS A NEUTRAL.
SAY WE DIDN'T LIKE WHAT WAS HERE.
THE RECOMMENDATION AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED, SHOULD BE OVERALL WE AGREE, AGREE WITH THE INTENT OF THE LAW AND THE MAJORITY OF WHAT'S IN THE LAW.
HOWEVER, OKAY, WE, WE RECOMMEND THESE CHANGES.
THAT'S WHAT I WANT TO DO IT OUT.
THAT'S PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD.
BUT IT COULD HAVE BEEN, WE COULD HAVE DONE IT THE OTHER WAY TOO, AND I DIDN'T WANT TO DO IT DIFFERENTLY.
TOM, DID YOU HAVE ANY, WAS FEEDBACK OBJECTING WHAT THEY WERE APPROACH? NO, NO.
I I'M FINE WITH WHERE YOU'VE COME OUT.
WE WERE RECOMMENDED THIS WITH THE, I JUST WANNA THE FOLLOWING CHANGES AND WE UNDERSTAND THAT, YOU KNOW, THERE'S LIKELY GONNA BE, YOU KNOW, A FAIR AMOUNT OF DISCUSSION ON WHAT STAFF DRAFTS, BUT WE'RE GONNA DEVELOP IT THE BEST WE CAN AND, AND, AND THE CHANGES THAT WE PROPOSE, WE SHOULD EXPLAIN WHY THEY'RE IN THERE.
THE, DO YOU WANNA SAY THAT IT WAS JUST TIMELINE? I THINK I'M A LITTLE BIT CONFUSED.
WE NEED A VOTE TONIGHT TO, UH, SAY THAT WE PLAN ON EXTENDING IT FOR 30 DAYS.
EXTENDING IT FOR 30 DAYS SO THAT WE DON'T RUN OUT.
SO HERE'S WHAT I'D LIKE TO BE ABLE TO DO.
I'D LIKE TO GET THIS OFF OUR DOCKET.
THE, BY THE NEXT TIME, HOPEFULLY, I THINK WE, WE CAN HAVE ENOUGH INFORMATION NOW ON ON.
UM, I TO ACTUALLY DRAFT THE FINAL, PRETTY MUCH OUR FINAL WHY AS WE FINALLY WANNA RECOMMEND IT.
WE NEED TO SEE THE RECOMMENDATION.
AND DO WE, DO THE LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL EVER GO TO THE WHOLE BOARD, THE THIRD LETTER, WHAT LETTER? THE, THE THIRD THING THAT GOES OUT IN THE FORMAT.
THE REPORT WILL BE THE DRAFT REPORT AND THE DRAFT RECOMMENDATION WITH A RED LINE VERSION.
IT'LL BE IN OUR PACKAGE BEFORE THE NEXT WILL BE IN YOUR PACKAGE.
THAT'S WHAT I WANNA MAKE SURE.
SO IF WE CAN GET THAT IN THE PACKAGE FOR THE NEXT MEETING, HOPEFULLY WE CAN GET THIS VOTED ON OR THE NEXT MEETING.
MM-HMM,
AND THAT'S, WE HAVE DONE OUR JOB ON A WELL, SO WHILE WE'RE HERE, I'M SORRY, GO AHEAD.
UM, AARON, COULD YOU JUST, WALTER, COULD YOU SHOW AARON THAT FOUR OR FIVE PAGE THING THAT I DIDN'T GET? IT STARTS, I HAVE IT.
NO, JUST, JUST DO DO YOU HAVE IT? NO.
I, I WANT GO BACK AND, AND SEE IF YOU SENT IT TO ME.
AND IF YOU DIDN'T SEND IT TO ME, WHY? I DIDN'T GET IT.
WE GOTTA WE GOTTA FIGURE THIS OUT.
THIS ISN'T THE FIRST TIME AND, AND IT MAY BE ENTIRELY MY FAULT.
I'M GONNA SEND MYSELF, I DON'T QUITE KNOW WHAT I UNDERSTAND.
UM, ONE LAST THING THAT I DID WANT TO PUT ON THE RECORD FOR TONIGHT ON THIS, AND I DO WANNA BRING ONE OTHER THING UP TONIGHT.
UM, WE WENT OUT OF OUR WAY TO HAVE A PUBLIC DISCUSSION, OPTIONAL PUBLIC DISCUSSION ON THE A DU LAW.
UNFORTUNATELY, IT'S VERY NICE THAT WE GOT SOME, SOME COMMENTS.
WE ONLY HAD ONE AND THAT, THAT NOTICE WENT OUT TO EVERY COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION IN GREENBURG.
[01:50:01]
ONE SHOWED UP.WHERE, WHERE WAS SHE FROM? MAISHA? UH, OH, NO, THAT'S, UM, EMMA.
THE PRESIDENT PARKWAY GARDENS WAS THE ONLY ONE THAT SHOULD HAVE, AND MURRAY WAS THE ONLY OTHER ONE TO COMMENT THAT NIGHT.
AND I'LL TELL YOU RIGHT NOW, THAT IS VERY DISAPPOINTING.
WE REALLY REACHED OUT TO TRY TO GET PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS.
A LOT OF PEOPLE HAVE WORKED HARD ON THIS LAW.
I DON'T KNOW IF YOU SAW IT IN THE NEWSPAPER TODAY, BUT, UH, THE AFFORDABILITY OF HOUSING IN THE UNITED STATES IS NOW AT AN ALL TIME LOW.
AND BELIEVE ME, IT'S WORSE HERE THAN IN OTHER PARTS OF THE COUNTRY.
YOU ASKED THIS QUESTION BEFORE MICHAEL, AND, AND IT, IT'S TRUE.
THIS IS ONLY THE FIRST STEP THAT THE A VL IS GONNA TAKE.
UM, WE ALREADY HAVE A PROJECT THAT, UH, WE'RE WORKING ON ON NINE A, UH, TO BUILD AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
BUT THOSE THINGS TAKE TWO, THREE YEARS TO DO.
'CAUSE YOU NEED TO GET GRANTS.
WE HAVE A COUPLE OTHER PIECES OF PROPERTY TARGETED THAT WE HOPE TO START WORKING ON SOON.
WE WILL ALSO BE TAKING UP THE SET, THE SET ASIDE LAW, UH, TO UP UPDATE IT IN SOME WAY, WAY.
ARE WE CLOSED? IT'S MEETING CLOSED.
UM, AARON, WHEN, WHEN, WHEN THE NOTICE WENT DOWN, I, YOU KNOW, I ASKED THAT QUESTION LAST TIME AND I'M SURE THEY WENT OUT TO EVERYBODY.
DID, DID THEY, HOW DID THEY GET AN ACCESS TO THE TEXT OF THE PROPOSED LAW? DID THEY, BY CONTACTING THE OFFICE? IT'S ON THE WEBSITE AND BY CONTACTING THE OFFICE.
THERE MAY HAVE EVEN BEEN A LINK IN THE NOTICE, BUT I'D HAVE TO DOUBLE CHECK.
YEAH, I I I JUST
BUT I, I JUST WONDER IF, IF THE LOW RESPONSE, BECAUSE WAS BECAUSE PEOPLE DIDN'T REALLY KNOW WHAT THE A DUR DID.
WE DIDN'T GET A LOT OF, SOMETIMES WHEN THERE'S CONFUSION ON, YOU KNOW, WHAT EXACTLY IS THIS, WHAT'S THE PROPOSAL? EVEN IN A SUBDIVISION, I DON'T UNDERSTAND.
WE GET PHONE CALLS OR EMAILS AND WE DIDN'T GET MUCH.
MY GUESS MICHAEL IS THEY KNOW THAT THEY CAN HAVE A BITE AT THE APPLE AT THE TOWN BOARD.
BUT, BUT JUST, JUST A FUTURE REFERENCE.
I MEAN, WHEN THESE NOTICES GO OUT IN THE NOTICE SHOULD BE THE WEBSITE LINK, YOU KNOW, SO THEY CAN GO RIGHT ON THE WEBSITE AND ACCESS THE RELEVANT DOCUMENTATION.
YOU DON'T INCLUDE ANY OF THE DOC, BUT JUST THE LINK.
AND WE, THAT'S EASY ENOUGH TO DO.
SO I'LL DOUBLE CHECK, BUT GOOD FEEDBACK.
I I JUST THINK IT'S UNFORTUNATE.
ANOTHER THING WE HAVE TO START LOOKING AT IS THE, AND, AND THAT WAS BROUGHT UP AS IN, IN THAT, UH, QUESTION IS THE REPURPOSING OF, UH, COMMERCIAL SPACE.
I THINK THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT AS, UH, AS MORE AND MORE OF THE, UH, OFFICE SPACE, UH, BECOMING VACANT.
IT'S BEING DONE ALL THROUGH NEW YORK CITY.
SO WE, SO I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING THAT, UH, WE HAVE TO LOOK AT.
ALSO, WE NEED TO HAVE A CHANGE IN THE CODE THAT WILL ALLOW US TO REPURPOSE, UH, OFFICE BUILDING OR ALLOWING.
NOW, FINALLY, VERY QUICKLY, I JUST WANTED TO BRING UP A PROJECT THAT WE APPROVED HERE, WHICH IS ZCO.
UM, THE GOOD NEWS IS I'VE BEEN DRIVING BY AND ALL THE RAINSTORMS AND THE ONLY DRY PLACE ON THE PIPELINE IS BEHIND ZCO.
SO, UM, THE HARD WORK THAT WAS DONE ON THE DRAINAGE WAS WORTH IT.
UH, THE BAD NEWS RIGHT NOW IS THAT THE ES THAT IS SUPPOSED TO BE IN FRONT OF THE WALL ARE ON TOP OF THE WALL, AND THERE IS A RAIL FENCE, NOT A, NOT A, UH, SOLID FENCE.
SO ANY CHILD CAN GO THROUGH THE FENCE AND OFF, OFF THE, UH, STILL WORKING ON IT.
THANK THE, UH, FRANK, THE BUILDING INSPECTOR HAS BEEN, IT HAS BEEN ADDRESSED TO THE BUILDING INSPECTOR AND HOPEFULLY, AND BOTH OF THOSE, OH, ONE OTHER QUESTION.
I CAN OFF FORESTRY OFFICERS ALSO LOOKING IN THE, OKAY.
I, I HAVE SOMETHING ELSE WE CAN DO OFFLINE.