FINAL
Eden Planning Board
Minutes of Meeting
June 3rd, 2004
Members
Present: Guests:
Mark Agle Drew
Reilly, Town Engineer
Dennis Brawdy Councilman
Ed Krycia, Jr.
Anthony Weiss Don
Braasch
Kevin O’Gorman Sandi
Ferrucci
Gerard Schwab Pam
Murray
Andrew Romanowski, Alternate Kevin
Saxon, Stop-N-Gas
Excused:
Scott Henry, Building Inspector
William Zittel
Absent:
Juanita Majewski
****************************************************************************************************
Chairman Agle called the June 3rd, 2004 Meeting of the Eden Town Planning Board to order at 7:30 PM. Agle stated
that until such time that a full board member arrives, Andrew Romanowski, Board Alternate, would be acting as a full
member. Agle requested a motion to
approve the April and May 2004 minutes as written & submitted, so moved by
Jerry, seconded by Andy Romanowski, carried all
ayes.
NEW & UNFINISHED BUSINESS
Minor
Subdivision – Mroz Property. A revised sub-division plan was submitted by Jeff
Magavern, Esq. The revised
plan meets the requirement of leaving an outlet onto Main
Street for future development of the
back remaining 20 acres. The plan leaves a 25’ wide fee strip out to Route 62, as
requested of applicant by the Planning Board at it its May meeting. This way, if the proposed development across
the street (Senior Housing Project) should come to fruition, their outlet would
be directly across from the 25 foot strip thus creating a 4-way intersection,
rather than an off-set driveway creating traffic hazards. Reilly stated that the strip also provides an
access for a future sewer extension.
Kevin O’Gorman asked what the highway Superintendents requirements would
be for this road?
Reilly stated that this is not a road, but in fact a driveway, making an
alternate to having only an access from Shadagee Road. O’Gorman asked if a tractor-trailer would be
able to pass through this driveway? Jerry Schwab replied that a tractor-trailer
could indeed pass through the easement property. Agle stated that as discussed at the May
meeting, if and when the development of a site-plan is submitted for Lot #1,
(lot fronting on Main Street), the Planning Board could again request an
easement from that lot creating an adjoining easement and common access to
serve both Lot #1 and #2. Schwab
stated that in the future, a delivery only road could be created from the Shadagee entrance as a possible traffic pattern. Agle requested a motion to approve the minor
sub-division site plan as submitted, Tony Weiss moved, Chairman Agle seconded,
carried all ayes.
Resubdivision of Lots
72 & 73
Cherry Lane. Mr. & Mrs. Murray own Lot #72 and
later acquired Lot #73. They are requesting a re-subdivision of the
current subdivision to combine their property.
They have already merged them
into one tax parcel through a common deed, and now just need to receive
approval from the Planning Board to adjust the Map-Cover lots. Kevin O’Gorman motioned to approve the
re-subdivide, Jerry Schwab seconded, carried all ayes.
Sketch Plan (2) Submission from
Dick Minekime:
(1) 14 Lot Subdivision on Beverly and (1) 10 Lot
Subdivision on Evelyn in the Town of Eden. Mr. Minekime
described the location of the subdivisions as well as lot size and
placements. He stated that there are
already existing sewers and utilities on all of the lots. Erie County Sewer authority has stated that
in the future they wish to enhance the existing pumping station on Schreiner
Road, therefore there is an strip of property 50’ x 100’ easement for future
pumping station. Minekime
stated that there may also be future phases of development of the remaining
acreage. Drainage to an existing open
ditch was discussed. Reilly addressed
the drainage issue. The drainage
easement would either be turned over to the Town or to a Homeowner
Association. If the Town acquired the
drainage easement, a Drainage District would be developed and would consist of
the lots that exist in the subdivision, so that the Town would have the
financial resources to maintain the drainage ditches. Reilly also stated that a decision needed to
be made as to whether or not the Planning Board will require Mr. Minekime to submit cluster plan layouts of the proposed
developments as an alternate plan of development. The Board agreed that the developments will
continue to be 2 separate entities and that cluster plans of these submissions
would not be required as they would not be in character for this neighborhood
and utilities are already in place for the submitted lot layout. Reilly stated that it must also be
determined whether the developments will be required to set aside Recreation Land for the
Town or pay fees in lieu thereof. The
Planning Board will request a recommendation of the Recreation Board as to what
their needs may be and hope to have an answer before the July 1st,
2004 Planning Board meeting. The final
decision will be made by the Town Board.
After the in-put from the various Board is
received, a preliminary plat must then be submitted, at that time a coordinated
SEQR review will be initiated. Reilly
stated that under SEQR, this is an unlisted action (under 250 lot development), however a coordinated review will be performed. Chairman Agle will notify the Recreation and
Town Board that we have received preliminary sketch plans for 2 major
subdivision, 1 on Beverly and 1 on Evelyn Drives; and we would like the
Recreation Board to consider whether they need additional green space to add to
the existing Minekime Playground at the northeast
corner of Evelyn and Beverly or cash in lieu of land. At this point, Mr. Minekime
cannot proceed until the recommendations from the Recreation and Town Boards
are received. Topic is tabled until the July 1st 2004
meeting. Reilly did state that fuel for
thought for Mr. Minekime is that one drainage solving
method that may be applicable to the Evelyn subdivision is to use the
downspouts from the house and drain them into 1 or 2 drywells at the corners of
the lots and believes that this method meets the SPDES requirement.
Revised Site Plan for the STOP & GAS – Kevin
Saxon. Chairman Agle stated that a revised site-plan was received
for the previously approved STOP & GAS gas
station and convenience store. The
revised plan as submitted, indicates an addition to
the front of the store and does not conform to the Town setback requirements
and would need a variance approval from the Zoning Board of Appeals. However, if the addition was to be placed
behind the existing building, there would not be a variance issue. Mr. Saxon stated that the revised plan is
similar to what was used at a West Seneca Store and it worked beautifully. They would like to duplicate that plan at the
Eden
location. The addition would support a ADA Bathroom and a small storeroom/office area. Keeping the addition in the front is
advantageous to allowing the walk in coolers to stay in place, and convenient
since the utilities services currently enter at the front. Agle asked if the foundation plantings shown
on the site plan approved at the March meeting would remain in tact? Saxon replied
that they would. Saxon submitted
photographs of the West Seneca store for
reference. Agle stated that the lot, as
it exists, is a “grandfathered” non-conforming lot, but that approval was given
in March due to the fact that the footprint of the building remained
unchanged. However, the addition would
project even closer to the street, making the plan even more non-conforming and
would require a variance by the Zoning Board of Appeals. The Planning Board cannot approve this site
plan as submitted until it receives a variance from the Zoning Board. Reilly stated that there is a new overlay
district. Retail uses are allowed,
however one of the requirements of the hamlet transition area is addressing the
entrance to the community and keeping in-step with the character of the
area. Therefore, landscaping,
architectural designing, and signage, screening of dumpsters, access
management, are key issues. The area
discourages large pylon signs with flashing lights, etc. The sign must conform to the new signage
regulations, keeping it under 12’ in height and the square footage must be
approved by the Building Inspector.
Reilly asked if the blue colored roof was absolute? Saxon stated that blue is their trademark color. Reilly asked if the ground sign could be
toned down, adding that Eden is
looking for a little different image, keeping in step with the rural
character. The signage on the canopy
should also be reconsidered. Jerry
Schwab asked if there was any possibility that the addition could be placed on
the back of the building? Saxon said that it could, but would need
redesigning and that he was hoping to just duplicate the West Seneca
Store. Agle asked if there was a
possibility to place the addition on the north side of the building? Reilly stated that would change the entire
roofline and that would be extensive.
Saxon stated that if necessary, they could relocate the coolers and add
onto the back. Reilly asked that if the
addition were to be placed on the back, would it impact the parking spaces that
are allocated in that area? Agle looked at the scale and thought that
there was still enough space to accommodate the addition on the rear. Reilly asked if it were absolutely necessary
to carry the name on all three sides of the canopy? Saxon replied that the sign on the front
panel of the canopy was all that was really necessary. Mr. Saxon stated that they would go back to
the drawing board and place the addition off the back of the building, lower the
front sign so it is not taller than the building and only 1 sign on the front
panel of the canopy. Saxon asked if the
roof was o.k.?
Agle stated that it is the consensus that the color is o.k. on the roof
but try to tone down the sign. A
motion by Dennis Brawdy to approve the site plan with the following conditions:
Submit a revised plan to Scott Henry with the following amendments: Place the addition on the back of the
building, lower the ground sign to no more than 12’ in height and tone down the
colors, place architectural features on the front of the building (no signage
allowed), the canopy may only have a sign on one panel (provided that the signage complies with the
code as determined by Scott Henry), seconded by Jerry Schwab, carried all ayes.
Mr. Sandy Ferrucci,
7482 Southwestern Boulevard (former
Newcomb Auto Auction property), owner or North East Rail Service Inc. asked the
Board for information as to how to proceed in developing this property if the
sale of the lot closes. He is currently
awaiting DEC approval of the lot.
Currently he is leasing the property from Mr. Newcomb and sells spare
equipment, manufactures and stores mulch from tree removal, stone, slag, etc. This operation is sometimes 24/7 depending on
need. Currently employes 10-12 people. Currently maintain the Steel Plant property
and during the winter also maintain the Ford Plant Property. Agle asked if stockpiling snow on the
property ever occurs? Mr. Ferrucci replied no.
Agle stated that the property is zoned PI. Reilly stated that he and Mr. Henry reviewed
the mixture of uses of the lot as indicated in the letter, and they tried to
determine whether or not these uses were all allowable in the PI or if a
Special Use Permit was necessary. Drew
asked if the mulching operation required a NYSDEC or SPDES permit, because if
in the manufacturing process a certain number of square foot is exceeded, a
permit would be necessary? Drew stated that he would contact the DEC to
obtain this information. Drew stated
that under the new NYS stormwater SPDES laws, you
would likely need to perform a stormwater runoff
evaluation. You will need to submit a
site-plan showing where the mixed uses will occur on the property, the extents
of those uses, parking, etc. A survey of
the property is required. Some of the
proposed uses may be allowed in the PI district and some may be allowed by
Special use Permit only. For example
bulk storage requires Town Board approval - Special Use permit. Storing oil and diesel fuel is also a Town
Board approval – Special Use permit. Ferrucci asked if ready mix cement was allowed? Reilly stated that he needed to investigate
that issue further.
Chairman
Agle recognized Larry
Place, a
neighbor of the Newcomb property. He
wanted to state for the record that there are instances that this operation is
a nuisance. Is there a noise ordinance
in place after 11:00 PM? There is noise when unloading oil, lights
shining into his bedroom during the night.
Another time, a crane was being repaired and it was extremely noisy, it
just so happened that I had a potential buyer for my home, it was a real
deterrent. Reilly stated that there is
nothing in the zoning code that specifically targets those complaints, however
there may be other laws of the Town that do regulate these issues. Drew stated that the direction given so far
is: A site-plan must be prepared by a
licensed architect, surveyor or engineer and submitted to the Planning Board,
the Planning Board along with Scott Henry, will determine whether or not any of
the uses require a Special Use Permit, we would review the site plan for
overall compliance and then refer it to the Town Board so as to schedule a
public hearing to issue a Special Use Permit for any uses requiring such. The Town Board would determine whether or not
to attach conditions to the Special Use Permit that may protect the adjoining
property owners. Mr. Ferrucci told his neighbor that any time any of the
neighbors have any problems or concerns, he would be
happy to listen and try to accommodate their schedules as well. Agle stated that the site plan should show
what is currently on site, the current screening, (Ferrucci
stated that there is screening on 3 sides).
Drew stated that using the internet could be helpful, as an aerial view
would be obtainable. Agle stated that
screening is an important factor. The
site plan should also indicate paved areas and future paving, indicate parking
areas and show where mulch, stones etc will be stored on the premises. Basically show all of the current and planned
uses on the property. Mr. Ferrucci stated that the
corporate office is located in Lancaster, and the Board is welcome to come and view the
operation.
DON SCHREIBER – revised site plan
for Mini-Storage – S. Main
Street:
Chairman Agle stated that Mr. Schreiber is not present at this meeting,
but was at the May 2004 meeting when he submitted his revised site plan for a
recommendation to amend the Special Use Permit for outdoor parking. Since the
plan was submitted late for that meeting, this issue was tabled until the June
meeting, when the full Board would have had a chance to review the plan and
might be present to discuss the matter.
O’Gorman and Brawdy asked if the new building or berm
was going to be built before the June 1, 2004
deadline. Agle replied that when he
asked Schreiber about that issue, Schreiber stated that he was under the
understanding that he had until December 2004 (the anniversary date of the
Special Use Permit) to do either, not June 2004. The Planning Board approval was for 1 year
(June 2004) however, the Town Board issued the Special Use Permit in December
2003 and was good for 1 year from that time (December 2004). Agle stated that due to this ambiguity, the
December 2004 date would be enforced but since that date is only 6 months away,
Schreiber should have some idea as to what option he plans to fulfill. Reilly stated that he too reviewed all the
Planning Board meeting minutes as well as those of the Town Board minutes and
that Schreiber needs to amend his special use permit with the Town Board
because there was never any discussion of outdoor storage at any of the
previous meetings. Brawdy stated that
had it been discussed, the Board would have insisted, at a minimum, that the
outdoor parking be delineated on the site plan, where the parking would be, how
many storage spaces in total, etc. We
never would have let this just slip by.
Reilly stated that Special Use Permits are issued for specific uses and
specific site plan. There was never any
mention of this outdoor storage. Agle
stated that all of these topics were discussed at the May 2004 meeting and Mr.
Schreiber made aware of these concerns.
Jerry Schwab stated that he in fact asked Schreiber at the May meeting
if he had thoughts of this outdoor storage before? Schreiber replied that he did when he first
started to plan for this project. Schwab
said he then asked Mr. Schreiber why wasn’t it ever put to paper? Schreiber stated that he thought he had. Reilly stated that most mini- storage do not
have outdoor storage, because the ones that do require very heavy
screening. Agle stated that the Planning
Board does not have the ability to grant or deny this request; however, it is
our responsibility to make a recommendation to the Town Board to either amend
this Special Use Permit to allow for it or deny the request. For example, if we
were going to allow it, the parking could be restricted (ie:
motor homes, just motor homes, only licensed vehicles, no boats, no
construction equipment). Or we could
recommend that the Town Board deny the amendment and give the reasons for
denial.
After extensive discussion by the
Planning Board, a Motion was made by Jerry Schwab to recommend to the Town
Board not to allow Mr. Schreiber to amend his Special Use Permit to
allow for outdoor storage and that the Special Use Permit should stand “as
is”. Concerns of the Planning Board are:
a)
Original Site Plan approval by the Planning Board was
for the construction of public mini-storage buildings, an office building and a
contractor’s office building.
b)
The only additional future use shown on the approved
site plan by Mr. Schreiber was for the construction of possible future
mini-storage buildings.
c)
Outdoor storage is out of character for the
neighborhood and it will create an eyesore, particularly due to the fact that
it is not sufficiently screened.
Kevin
O’Gorman seconded, carried all ayes.
And as part of the original
conditions of the Special Use Permit recommendation, either the contractors
building or the berm must be in place before the next
issuance of the Special Use Permit in December 2004.
Chairman Agle recognized Don Braasch – Southwestern Blvd. Mr. Braasch
attended the February 2004 meeting regarding this property, certificate of
occupancy and a summons for non-conforming use received from the Building
Inspector. Mr. Braasch
asked what he needed to do to obtain the certificate of occupancy. Reilly stated that a change of use
automatically requires a site-plan submission.
Mr. Braasch stated that there was no change of
use. Reilly stated that Mr. Braasch had expanded the
use, which still requires a new site-plan.
Chairman Agle explained to Mr. Braasch that
all of the requirements were discussed with him in detail at the February 5th, 2004 Planning
Board Meeting. Reilly stated that a
site-plan is a survey depicting how the property will be utilized. Mr. Braasch stated that he should not have to submit a
site-plan if he is just using the property for parking. Mr. Braasch was
under the impression that he needed a topography plan,
Reilly stated that a full site plan prepared by a licensed engineer is needed
but not a topo.
Agle stated that the site-plan check list is in the code and should to
be used to develop the necessary site plan.
Agle read from the February
5th, 2004 minutes stating what actions were
necessary to obtain a certificate of occupancy, (a copy was made and presented
to Mr. Braasch).
REPORTS:
Drew Reilly passed out some information regarding the
issue of rezoning part of the OB district to GB in regards to allowing some
small retail business in the OB district for example flower shops etc. The other issue to discuss is how the Town
would address big box retail stores. The
hamlet overlay does address the size of the buildings, but should be more
definitive. Please read this over and be
prepared to discuss at the next meeting.
ANNOUNCEMENTS:
Respectfully Submitted
Catherine A. Swiech
The Next Meeting will be held on Thursday, August 4th, 2004 at 7:30 PM
