Planning Board - Regular Meeting

like to bring this meeting to order of the Town of Brunswick Planning Board for January 15, 2026. If everybody please rise for the pledge of allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you. Okay, before we uh start our meeting, I just like to make a couple announcements. Uh the town of Brunswick uh town board passed a resolution on number 18 on January 5th reappointing uh uh the chairman of the zoning board of appeals and Clemeni and reappointing myself as chairman of the town uh uh planning board. We also have a new addition to our uh planning board. I'd like to welcome John Manalo.

Uh came on board. He was has experience on the zoning board. So um welcome aboard. And I'd like to just thank uh Andy uh Peterson for his service. He uh stepped off the board at the end of uh last year. So, uh, with that being said, uh, our agenda tonight is as follows. Oh, I can't forget. Welcome aboard officially now, Chris. Thank you.

As our attorney, thank you. Okay. Uh, our agenda tonight, number one, Tranquility Bookshop site plan and special use permit. Applicants seek site plan approval and special use permit to modify an existing residential structure into a bookstore. A public hearing to commence at 7 pm. Tranquility uh bookshop LLC is the applicant. Number two, Paramont Building Group major subdivision. Applicant proposes a major subdivision on approximately 33 acre parcel of land as well as construct a new road with a cul-de-sac and a waterline extension on property located in the northeast corner of Spring Avenue extension in Creek Road, Paramont Building Group of New York is the applicant. Number three, Fiser [clears throat] Minor Subdivision. Applicant seeks minor subdivision approval to subdivide an 82.17 acre parcel into three building new uh lots on property located at 842 Tamarak Road. Rebecca Fiser is the applicant. Number four, Due Jack Waver subdivision. Applicant seeks to subdivide a 9.68 68 acre lot into two lots of 3.68 acres and seven or excuse me six acres on property located at 70 Town Office Road. Karen Duch is the U applicant. Number five, Kyle Smith, site plan and special use permit. Applicant seeks site plan approval and a special use permit to complete construction of a two-story

building on property located at 1691 New York State Route 7. Kyle Smith is the applicant. There is also some new business to address after the agenda. Okay, as I stated, the first thing on our U for our meeting is a public hearing for Tranquility Bookshop and I will read the procedure for our public hearings. The purpose of the public hearing is to hear concerns, comments, and views of the general public regarding a particular proposed proposal or application. All public hearings are electronically recorded and a written record of the proceedings is generated. In most cases, this written record is included in the minutes of the planning board is a regular meeting which is usually conducted immediately after the public hearing. The applicant will be required to respond to all concerns and comments made at the public hearing and subsequently the planning board will consider all concerns and comments when evaluating the application to ensure that the applicant has addressed all the issues in question. The public hearing will be conducted as follow. The notice of public hearing will be read to the planning board attorney by the planning board attorney. Uh, next, the applicant will give a brief presentation on the proposal and will provide any updates on the application. Upon completion of the applicant's remarks, the chairman of the planning board will recognize persons from the public, and these individuals will be allowed to speak and offer their concerns, comments, and views. Since the proceedings of the public hearing is electronically recorded, is requested that all speakers step forward and use the microphone at the podium. All

speakers will give their name and address for the record. So, at this point, I am going to turn the floor over to planning board attorney to read the uh public hearing announcement. The following notice of public hearing was duly published in the official newspaper of the town was posted to the town clerk bulletin board and posted on the town of Brunswick website as follows. Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held by the planning board of the town of Brunswick at 7 p.m. on Thursday, January 15, 2026, at the Brunswick Town Hall, 336 Town Office Road, Brunswick, New York, 12180 to review the applications submitted by Tranquility Bookshop LLC for a special use permit and site plan approval in connection with the operation of a bookstore on property located at 902 Hous Road. Copies of the applications are available at the Brunswick Town Hall and are available for public inspection during regular business hours. All interested persons will be heard at the public hearing.

Thank you. At this time, I'll [clears throat] have the applicant come up and do a presentation. If you could address the public obviously with this portion of the public hearing, uh that would be appreciated. around everyone can see it. My name is Jesy. I'm a land surveyor. I developed a site plan for Tranquility Bookshop. Um the intent is to take the 2100 square foot um building and renovated into a commercial or rather retail space bookshop. There'll be improvements to the parking as well as some minor improvements to the exterior of the structure. um located at 902 road. The intended simply to have a quiet bookshop with people coming and going. Uh the only difference from the last time I spoke here is we did take the handicap parking and move it to the front to allow more access and space for anybody using handicap vehicle or having handicap needs. Um, other than that, the segment should be to the same as it was.

Okay. Andy, would you like to add some?

Yes. Thank you. Uh, thank you, Russ. Uh, Andy Gilchrist. I'm here with my wife, Jean. We are the members of Tranquility Bookshop LLC. So, our intent is to take the existing residence at 902 Huzzac Road and to convert it to retail use as a bookshop. Uh, as uh Jake went over, uh, there is an existing curb cut off Husk Road for the structure that will be maintained. I'll start by saying too, the property is located in the business light or BL zoning district um, where retail is an allowable use. So, the use is consistent with zoning. The intent I think along the BL zoning district was to take existing residential structures and put them into a lighter commercial use which we think fits that uh intent of the zoning. The existing curb cut will be used. There is an existing driveway there with a turnaround. We're going to extend that and provide for the required parking uh on the lot to have adequate off-site parking offic. Now, the location of the parking was done intentionally. Um, immediately to our east is an existing commercial lot. That's the realtor's office was Lorie Schindler. It's Howard Hannah. Now, uh to our west is residential and it's still in residential use. So, we've located the parking uh on, if you will, the commercial side of the lot. Uh so, it's closer to the commercial and away from residential. Um if anyone's pulling in and have headlights, they'll be shining in the direction of the commercial rather than uh residential. Um there's also some constraints on the lot. The [clears throat] g the septic tank is out in front on into the front lawn and there's two beautiful existing mature trees that we want to maintain on the lot. So the parking has been put uh over here. Um the layout as I said

provides for the adequate number of parking spaces. Now, this is still by and large residential along this portion of Husk Road. So, to try to keep that, we're we're keeping the residential look of the structure. We'll also have some vegetation in the front here to um not to hide the parking, but provide a little bit of a vegetative buffer uh particularly for across the street, which is still used for residential as well. Uh handicap parking is provided here. There'll be a handicap access uh provided into the structure as well. Now, for certain parts of the year, there there will need to be lighting in the parking. Um our hours are are really reduced. We're proposing just generally 10 to 4 most days. No Sundays, probably no Mondays, probably Tuesday through Saturday, maybe later on Friday nights to capture some of the traffic traveling east on on Huzzik Road for those portions of the of the year when we need light. There is a light proposed in the corner of the building to shine uh on the parking. There's no separate lamp posts or pole lights or anything proposed on that, nor should any be needed. Um, we're hoping to uh have a new front porch. The front porch, if you're familiar with the site, has some structural issues that needs to come down. We'll have a new front porch, a new walkway off the parking area. There'll be an outside patio in the back. We hope to be able to use the rear yard for some landscaped areas and people to sit and relax. Uh, we're hoping to have some fencing along the side. We'll coordinate with our neighbors as to final location of the fence. Uh we've had the lot surveyed. There is a small portion of existing fence uh with our neighbor immediately to the west. We'll coordinate on final fence location there, but we hope to have use of the backyard as well. Um, we

are looking to renovate the existing two-car garage that will be used for a seating area. Uh, so people can sit and relax and read uh hopefully after they bought a few books. And that that will be used as well. As Jake said, the whole structure is 2100 square ft. So, we're here for you heard site plan and special use permit. And the reason for that is under the Brunswick zoning law, if this site were 2,000 square feet or less, it would only require a site plan. This is a bit over. It's 2100 square f feet. It also requires a special use permit. So, we file those applications as well. Um, as I said, we'll extend the fence area. Now, the handicap that you'll see on the site plan, there's a fence here, uh, with a gate proposed with a little walkway up the parking lot, and that's to provide some existing handicap accessibility to the patio area in the back as well. Um, we're going to maintain those mature trees. There's also a wonderful reertry right here on the lot that we'll be maintaining as well. Um, one sign is proposed out front will comply with the town sign law. And as we said, want to keep it quiet and generally 10 to 4, probably 10 to 6 or 7 on on Fridays. And that's the proposal. Thank you.

Thank you, Andy. Okay. At this time, I will like officially open up the public hearing to the public. Does anybody wish to come up and make any comments? Have any questions for the applicant? Ma'am.

Hi. Um, Susan Finn, 900 Road. I'm on the other side. Um, Mr. Go. Chris went over the uh information, most of what the information was um on his site plan with me um the other day. Um we we talked about lighting, we talked about traffic, we talked about uh um how extensive the um the renovations would be. I believe that this would be a good uh plan for this house. Um if it's not going to be residential, it's going to it seems to be something that's going to be quiet and it I believe it might may contribute to the neighborhood in a good way. So, um as long as um the Gail Chris keep me informed about what's going on, which he promised he would. I don't have [laughter] I don't have any problems with this at the moment. Thank you.

Thank you. Anyone else? Jim Jim, 387 Brunswick Road is a change of pace uh for me, but I have nothing but praise for this project. [laughter] Okay. Uh I think this is exactly the kind of business we want on Pushik Street. is a local locallyowned business uh in an existing structure with a minimum of disruption. I think uh sort of getting tired of the you know the steady stream of you know gas stations, fast food and gun shops going have having a a bookstore here is going to going to raise the tone in the area. I really think that I who knows they may be the Gilchrist may be nucleating a new cultural cluster in I wish them good luck on this.

Thank you Jim. Anyone else wish to come up and uh make any comments?

Hi, my name is Leanne Kio. I live at 911 Husk Road, which is directly across the street at a diagonal um from the intended property. Um I did have some questions that I was hoping to get answered. Um one was how many parking spaces are going to be um going in in total where the the lawn currently is now. There will be there'll be a total of eight spaces plus the handicap spot.

And how long will the renovations do you estimate them taking? We hope everything done by late summer, Labor Day. Materials availability is the question mark, but that's our goal.

Okay. I asked this because I work from home. um quite often um during the week and especially in the warmer weather I have a sun porch that I can see directly there. So um I don't want to be interrupted on phone calls and that kind of thing um for you know when I'm working. Um also too has the home already been purchased or um so it has been purchased. Okay. Um, I just wanted to voice a few concerns that I have. Um, and the previous woman brought up uh the point of traffic. Um, I've lived in my home for just over nine years now and I've seen a vast increase in traffic on Husk. Um it we you know um have added quite a bit of commercial uh along further down. Um and also the gas stations further east of us that were put in. Um often I have to wait a good five minutes to get out of my driveway uh when I'm leaving for work in the morning. Um and sometimes I have to wait to turn into the driveway as well. So, I do have concerns about this increasing traffic right near my driveway where I'll need to turn. Um, it does sound like it it won't be too busy, which [laughter] I'm happy to hear. Um, but I so I do have the concern about traffic. Often Mary, my neighbor, my previous neighbor that lived in that property would have uh garage sales quite frequently. And what would happen was people would park up on Wyman Street and also sometimes just pull onto the side of Husk right in

front of the property with their hazards on which is obviously dangerous. Um so it's just you know I'm glad to hear that you've added parking because I was like three spaces is not going to cut it. Um my other just concern is that we've had a lot of commercialization um spreading on both sides of my little strip of neighborhood. Um and I'm just afraid of more commercial taking over and driving out the residents. We already lost five residential homes earlier this summer that were demolished and is now turning into commercial. And I just saw the other day another gas station is going up, which I counted them the other day. We already have about eight gas stations in a 3m radius and now this will be a ninth. So um you know I just I my fear is I'm a huge reader. I read every day and I would love a book shop. Um that is not my concern at all. What my concern is is that commercial is taking over my neighborhood and it's coming from both sides and my current neighbor um has already closed on a home um outside of town further out in the state and she plans on selling her home and is also going to list it as commercial residential. And my fear is then I'll have diagonally residential right across from me is the Howard Hannah that's residential and then next door is going to be or I'm sorry commercial rather. So each one of those properties and then if my neighbor that's directly uh next door to me if that becomes commercial too then I'm worrying about my um my current property value going down. I just want to speak on the behalf of the residents and make sure that we keep

some of the residential areas residential.

That's it. Okay. Thank you.

Good evening. Good [clears throat] evening everyone. William Joyce, 901 Husk and 13 Wyman Lane. Uh, longtime resident and I know Mr. Gilchrist from past proceedings and very interesting um, proposal. May I take a quick look at this real quick? Take a quick glimpse. Yeah.

Okay. I'm a career construction professional. some plans, site plans are no, I'm no stranger to um I haven't had a chance to review it. Uh a few concerns from past experiences with things that have happened in the past regards uh life safety. Uh one would be parking as was previously mentioned. Um I feel that that particular situation was a very unsafe uh scenario. um previous owner to 901 used to have the same kind of things going on and the restriction to Wyman Lane uh could be vehicles on either side and as far as I can tell there is no parking provisions on that road yet we do get intermittent parking. Um so my concern would be uh has a traffic study coordination with the existing high traffic on this road has anything been done in that regard? Uh what about the the last minute? I just saw the bookstore. I turn in anything relative to the side street. So I just want to make a the biggest concern is life safety um relative to vehicle movements and traffic around there. It doesn't sound like there is going to be a big impact, but I think um I have an obligation to come here tonight and mention that concern. Uh the other concern um would be what is the lighting plan? Is there anything on the proposal relative to lumens and dispersion? What are the impacts? So, basically two things. Lighting impact and [clears throat] uh traffic impact um in the immediate area uh on Wyman and along Route 7. Just given what I've seen in the past, that's the only concerns. It doesn't appear based on the proposal that that would be. It sounds like it would be less, but I mention it anyways. Um, I can't think anything else at the time. Thank you.

Okay. Thank you. [clears throat] Anyone else wish to come up and make any comments? Uh, have any questions, complaints, praise? Okay. All right, then. Uh at this time I think uh I'm going to make a motion to close the public hearing. I'll make a motion. Second.

Okay, there's a second. Uh any further discussion? Is there any restrictions? Should it be [clears throat] extended for a written period of comment or anything like that? No. Okay. [clears throat] Then uh all those in favor of closing the public hearing I.

Any opposed? Okay, thank you. Okay, now we're going to open up the regular meeting. And first on our uh agenda is the review of the previous minutes of U meeting on December 18th. Has everybody had an opportunity to look at those? Those are now available online only for our discussion at our last meeting. So, I hope everybody had an opportunity to take a look at them. Anyone have any uh corrections, additions? Okay. And I will uh ask for motion to approve the minutes. Okay.

All those in favor? Any opposed? Thank you. [clears throat]

Okay, first on our agenda is the Tranquility Bookshop. Well, we uh just before we get started here, uh we did receive uh two correspondents from the Prresser County uh Bureau of Economic Development and Planning. This is a notification of zoning review action. And in regards to the special uh use permit, there was determined that there is no that the proposal does not have any major impact on county plans and that local consideration shall prevail. Regarding the site plan review, once again, uh it was determined that the proposal does not have any major impact on county plans and that local consideration shall prevail. However, they did make one comment, and that was that possibly we should consider a walkway from the business's main entrance to the walkway on uh Route 7 provided for pedestrian shoppers. So, I just thought I'd pass that. That's probably going to be discussed shortly. And um we've had the the public hearing. You've heard comments. There's some that have to be addressed, I think. Um, but I will open it up to uh discussion from the the planning board. Is there anything further you wish to uh state before the planning board here before we proceed with our comments?

Sure. um were prepared to respond to the comments this evening or if the board prefers we can certainly address them in writing. However the board wants to handle that. I will address the comments tonight but if you would prefer also written confirmation we'll do that as well. Okay let's see where the conversation goes uh regarding the the application. Okay. Does anybody have any uh initial comments?

We I would like to make a comment. I live across the street from this up the hill on Army Hall. I've been there 40 years now. Far as the traffic on Wyman parking there, it's because the people previous had garage sales and they did not let anybody into the driveway. That's why they were parking. And again, I've been there 40 years, so I I have seen all the comingings and going there. And I believe this is approach for Mr. and Mrs. Gilchrist are planning there.

Okay. [clears throat] Now, there was some uh uh things that we discussed Wayne regarding the drawings. Yeah, I went through the site plan regs and I didn't notice that um the information the zoning information is not on the plan. Typically, we put a table there that has you know the zoning and the and the and the bulk requirements for that zone.

It is that's a fair point. When the board is prepared to act on the site plan, the final site plan, we'll need to add that block that goes over the zoning. We've discussed the zoning district BL, but should also have the area involved. I can tell you that based on my review, the structure, the structure is 100 years old. It was built in 1925, [clears throat] so it predates zoning, but it does comply with the current BL zoning district area bulk rigs for the structure. We're not proposing any additions to that structure with a patio, a backyard, but that would likewise meet the setbacks for that. Uh but that will be added to the final site plan. And and if I could on on one issue that may come up, it also deals with with setbacks. You did raise earlier about the parking area. Uh as you go in the northerly direction in the and we'll call it the rear corner, it is closer than 7 feet from the side lot line. So in the site plan regulations, one of your review standards is the parking area should be no closer to the lot line than 7 feet. There it's also a provision in that same section though that says however if that does inhibit the the development of the site the board has discretion to address that issue and modify it as long as it remains consistent with the intent of that zoning district. So here [clears throat] the side lot line kind of comes in at an angle given the way these lots were laid out 100 years ago. The proposed parking is well in [clears throat] excess of seven feet down near H who's road because the lot line comes in at an angle. The last couple of parking spaces and maybe it bleeds over into the third space is less than 7 ft. What we ask the board to do is to consider given the lot layout, given the proposal, given the adequate

off- streetet parking being proposed that the board has the jurisdiction to allow this limited area of the parking lot closer than 7 ft from the side lot line. Noting also that the adjacent property is used for commercial purposes. And we did locate the parking in this side as I said because of the constraints on the western side of the lot. Um that's the area where the septic tank is located. There's a couple of beautiful existing mature trees that we want to maintain. [clears throat] Um so we ask the board's discretion in addressing this area of the parking lot that that is closer than 7 ft from the side lot line, but I think you have it within your discretion to allow that if you think it's it's consistent with the overall development of the site. So we we ask you to consider that.

I I I just have a technical question on that. Would that require a a waiver by the zoning um on a setback subject to guidance by your council? I think the answer is no.

So, Mr. Gilchrist is correct in [clears throat] Go figure. He knows the site plan review regulation. So the one he is referring to does provide uh that generally parking shall not be permitted within seven feet of the side or rear line but there is a provision that says where a requirement restricts the effective development of the site plan board may take appropriate action deems necessary to modify these requirements. Um this is not um a bulk or area limitation. This is coming from a site plan review regulation. So, it's not something that would need to be modified by the zoning board. This board by the zoning law has the authority on its own to modify that 7 foot requirement.

Would that be done like in a uh a motion to accept that or part of the approval process? It it's part of the approval process. So you might simply note and recognize that although a portion of the parking is within the seven ft, okay, the board is exercising discretion under these circumstances and again to the extent we want to promote off- streetet parking for this site and this waiver of the seven foot rule allows more off- streetet parking than would otherwise be allowed. If you follow the seven foot, that's a good reason to explain why you're entertaining a modification for this application. Okay,

just out of curiosity, what is the closest point? Four feet. The closest point is this corner here. And it's believe it's within 3T there. Uh let's uh let's look at the uh the driveway and the potential of having a sidewalk down there. The question I initially have is I haven't really looked at it that close, so I I may be wrong, but how wide is the driveway coming up? Can it allow two cars to pass?

Right at the curve cut and then coming up into the parking lot. If you have one coming car coming down and one entering the the site, is there room for two cars to it's a little over 30 ft there. So you would have two 15 foot lanes where traffic would go either way. Okay. Would it be conceivable to have a striped walkway down to one side of the driveway?

So I'm sorry. So first of all, the recognizing the county's comments about an additional walkway. Obviously, we're proposing a new walkway off the parking lot area leading up to the front entrance, right?

Having an additional walkway. As I said, there's some sight constraints. The septic tank is in the front yard here. I would ask the board to consider not having a separate sidewalk in the area of our septic tank. I don't think that's a good idea to have that sidewalk over that. I suppose we could have striping here. Um given the site quite frankly the the in and out if people are going to walk ac on the sidewalk. Um it's not that much of a length just to walk up because think about it. Cars will be coming in and parking in this side. Patrons are going to be leaving their car and walking through the parking lot if you will anyway to get to that sidewalk coming in. And there will be people walking through here, including coming from where they parked their cars. We could strike it, but I think in this case, it's probably not necessary given the size of the proposed use and the size of the parking lot, but we'll we'll take any guidance from the planning board on that.

Well, you know, I'm going to uh defer to my sidewalk expert, [laughter] Mike Charney. I don't have a problem with that. It's just how to address it with was it the state asking for that? No, it's the county. The county.

Uh how can we address it with the county if we don't strike? I I would personally I would not want to see it strike. I think it's it's not going to look right. So, uh, can we call it how can we call it a sidewalk or if if they put it on the map lane and put designate three feet or whatever? Well, [clears throat] I I don't think you have enough room for two way traffic and a walkway. Scaling it off, it's about 18 feet.

Correct. Yeah. So you don't and you don't want to direct pedestrians into a conflict. Yeah. With cars. So um I don't think you got that much car traffic as well as pedestrian traffic. There's no sidewalks when you get down further towards Sickway, right? on businesses that are much busier and do have foot traffic in and out. I mean, there isn't a lot of pedestrian traffic there. There's like none. [laughter] No, my wife and I walk. There's probably an occasional

There's an occasional chy that walks up and down, but um but as far as other pedestrian generators, there really aren't up in that, of course. If if it's a handful, you're I I don't recommend striping or directing pedestrians through there because you're kind of giving them a a sense of safety when they should be alert to cars going in.

I mean, I I sort of agree with Mike. I don't It's the only reason I'm bringing it up is because the county brought it up. Understood. Um, now was that just a recommendation from the county? No, it's just a statement right at the end of the um comment at the end of the uh

It doesn't say shall, it says. There's a line which means that they just presented that as it should be something for the board to consider.

I I think with the restraints with the subject tank and then you know we had the sign there I don't see where they can put here. I think more green space is better too. I agree. Keeping that long, right? Well, we could just thank them for their comment. [laughter]

And if I could add it, it's it's good aspirational if there was a lot of pedestrian use of the sidewalks and but I concur with Mike. I for the many times we've been down there already, we don't see any walkers. Maybe an occasional runner, but you haven't seen it anymore. Well, we provided years ago, you know, along where the bank is there used to be sequired a a walkway up and everything. I I doubt that that's ever been used. What's that? The one at the bank, you know, that pioneer. No, the one the one across from Carbone,

that was two women. broad view now. [cough] So there's a there's a lot of situations where in the past this planning board has made it mandatory. You got to have a thing there. I mean the lawn is fairly level. Somebody wants to cut across the lawn and they can cut across the lawn. Yeah. It's not. Of course, if you could have overflow barriers like Duncan and everybody's walking up to I mean, you know, there's possibly [laughter] level. Yeah.

Um, so as far as accessibility for those that may not be able to maneuver on uneven terrain, they'll be able to trans traverse through there. I'll tell you, somebody's walking this sidewalk, they're going to walk up that drive. Yeah. There there wasn't a walkway originally there, you know, like a staircase down. No. All right. Okay. Does anybody have uh Wayne, do you have any other comments? Um he asked about lighting. What?

One gentleman asked about lighting. there. I see on the site plan there's a lamp post adjacent to the sidewalk in the driveway. I assume that's to remain and that's service from the reserve now business just one

I think the question is is there any difference in the lighting that you have provided now that was on the existing residential is there anything increased? Yes, there is a light shown on the corner of this building, a wall mount that will work with the building department to add some lighting for the parking area, but no additional lighting other than existing. There's no provisions for any lighting on the sign.

So on the sign there there is no proposal to have the sign itself illuminated. Uh what may be, again, we'll work with the building department on this with the uh sign regulations is potentially simply a [clears throat] light shining from the ground level shining up on onto the sign itself, but not an illuminated or back lit sign. Okay. On both sides, Andy, both sides of the city. And and I know this is a big issue with the zoning board. We have no intent on having that sign lit when the store is not open. So think of in hours stole my question.

Only question I was going to bring [laughter] your experience but that's they shut off. Okay. Can you verify the hours of operation again? So in general they're not set but in general 10 to 4. Fridays probably 10 to 6 or 7 and we're going to see how it goes. So for one day a week with the exception of three months in the winter when it's dark from 4:30 or 5 o'clock to possibly seven. That's right. There would be a lighting issue. That's right. Very good.

Yeah. I mean lighting is is mostly for safety for whoever parks in the parking lot can see to get into the building. Is there any way you can provide some um a spec on what light you're going to use? Yeah.

Yeah. I mean, we don't want a light that shines across the Schindler property, but enough to to capture the parking lot when certainly you could spec a light that would do that. There was one comment made uh about basically addressing any traffic studies that were done. Did that require a traffic study?

So, if I can on this with the scale of the proposed use, um it it would be my non-technical opinion. Traffic study would not be warranted. Uh there is the existing curb cut that we'll continue to use. We were very fortunate in that directly opposite the curb cut is the very end of the center turn lane. So even if someone did have to wait to to turn in like I've done on many more units, there is adequate area in the center turn lane to still allow traffic to proceed west. And so it it I don't believe this will generate a significant traffic impact on this particular section of Herac Road.

Okay. And your hours of operation are outside of the bulk of the traffic. That's right. That's correct. Except for Friday when of course Yeah. Friday when there's a lot of easterly traffic. We hope to Saturday morning. Correct. Well, there were a few comments made at the public hearing and uh I know we addressed them here. I think for procedurally I I I would be leaning towards possibly having a written response to all those.

I'll put that together. And uh I'd also like to see uh uh you know some of the changes on the drawing as far as the comments that Wayne made. Um is there anything else anybody else would uh require? One more question. Absolutely. Do you have any intent to sell any food or beverage? We're not selling. We're not selling beverage. Complimentary tea and coffee. Andy, that pendant sign I believe there's a I think it's I don't have a quote in front. It's a 15 foot setback requirement. Yeah.

Now, it's a good question. I'll I'll coordinate with you on that. Did the right say from the road, right, street or highway? Is that edge of pavement of the travel way or from the sidewalk? I don't know the answer to that yet and I'll coordinate. Yeah, I I believe the intent is from the travel way so that doesn't block it doesn't block the line of sight for cars. And regarding the sidewalk, if you could just kind of make a comment on I'll respond to that. Okay.

I don't have anything else. I think uh if we can get all that we have a 3-w weekek period I think before our next meeting and uh should be able to get all that back to us in adequate time to be reviewed by by Wayne and the board. Okay. Thank you.

And we will put you on the agenda for our next meeting which is February. I don't have a new calendar here. 12 no and uh hopefully we can wrap this up. Very good. Thank you.

Okay. Thanks a lot. Okay. Uh next on our agenda is the Paramont Building Group. Come on. Okay. Um, at our last meeting we were discussing uh your response to our draft part two and three of questions

of the seeker review. And since then we I believe we also uh uh charged u Wayne with reddrafting a new part two uh modifying certain things as far as uh uh mutually discussed items on that. Um, I think at this time I know we I know you uh sent us there was a a limited text of your exhibit A and exhibit B that were that you did in your office as far as a uh negative

declaration and so forth and so on. Yeah, I think at this time I'd like to have Wayne review his first and then we'll add comments to uh to your presentation there. [clears throat] Did we add that? Did we get that? What's that? Your draft. You should. We did. It's on the back of the one on top. I think the one on you had your hand on top. You go in deeper. Is that it in there? A little dysfunctional at time.

Yes. Okay. [cough] Now, do you have a copy of this? I did not give them a copy of that, but Okay. Thank you.

Now, I I don't know if you want to go through the whole thing or do you just want to go through the thing? The ones that you [laughter] just the ones that you uh made changes to from the I'll touch only those portions where changes were made. Okay. Okay.

Yes. Um so what I did is I took the liberty based on discussions in the last meeting and the information provided by the applicant to revise the part two and part three. Uh there's also with it an what I call an exhibit A that really is a an attachment to the part three. Instead of writing it all out on the form, I put an exhibit A together, which is really an attachment to the part three. Okay,

now um so I'm only going to go over those portions that I changed. Um and they [clears throat] are as follows on item number one on page one part D and part E. Um those two involve the excavation of the material from the site and um uh the issue of the um duration of the construction. Um, based on the information, additional information that the applicant provided, I switched those from moderate to large to no to small impact. um based on um the excavation plan the and the um correspondence that was provided by the attorney. Um, and I I'll get into that just a little bit more when I discuss the exhibit A. The other changes made were on page five, item number eight, uh section D, proposed action may re irreversible convert egg land to non- egg uses either more than two and a half acres if located in egg district or more than 10 acres if not. Um there's been

considerable discussion on that as well. And based on that discussion, I changed that from moderate to large to no to small. Um, those were the only changes to the part two.

Okay. based on um how the part two was filled out, I went ahead and did a draft of the part three um [clears throat] which is uh the evaluation of the magnitude and importance of the project impacts and determination of significance. In that part three, it has a section on the [snorts] reasons supporting the determination. Um, and in that, that's where I itemized every item into that exhibit A for discussion. Basically the p first part of the exhibit A kind of it identifies the the sections of seeker that are applicable. It gives a description of the action the location a little bit on the seeker procedural background. Uh it goes through who the involved agencies for the project with notices were sent which included the town uh for town of Brunswick Rel County Health Department, Wrenchler County Highway Department, the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. Additionally, courtesy copies of the notice of intent to establish lead agency were sent to the Town of Brunswick Water Department, Town of Brunswick Highway Department, Town of Brunswick Building Department, Wler County Department of Economic Development Planning, and the New York State Office of Parks Recreation, Historic Preservation. Uh, I did identify all the documents that were provided as

part of the record for this review. which included the application full environmental assessment form part one storm water pollution prevention plan. There was an excavation routing feasibility assessment and an acoustic analysis of the of the um subdivision. [clears throat] If you look on page two at the bottom, we get into the reasons supporting the determination. Um, the secret regulations provide that for all type one and unlisted actions, lead agency making a determination of significance must one consider the action as defined under seeker. Review the EAF criteria contained in subdivision C of this section and other supporting information. thoroughly analyze the identified relevant areas of environmental concern to determine if the action may have a significant adverse impact on the environment and set forth in its determination of significance in a written form contained a reasoned elaboration and providing reference to any supporting documentation. The seeker regulations further provide that determine whether a proposed type one or unlisted action may have a significant adverse impact on the environment. The impacts may be reasonably expected to result from the proposed action may be compared against this criteria in subdivision of the of the environmental code state code for seeker. Um and each criteria is discussed in more detail below. For the reasons discussed below following the order of primary questions in the FAF and the planning board

concludes the project will not result in a significant adverse environmental impact. Number one impact on land. The proposed action involves the excavation and removal of more than thousand tons of natural material. propo. The project proposes to remove over 400,000 cubic yards of material from the site during grading and establish the infrastructure for the subdivision. The applicant has provided an excavation plan indicating that removal of excavated material will be completed in less than two years and all excavation and grading will be accomplished in a logical sequence for establishment of the infrastructure including the roadway and storm water management facilities. Um, I'm not going to read all of these, but basically it's just a description of each of those items that were in the part two. I can skip down to item number eight on page four about the impact on egg resources. The project is located in an egg district. Project will result in physical alteration of more than two and a half acres in an egg district. Proposed subdivision will irreversibly convert egg land to n egg use. The property proposed for development has not been actively farmed in many years and as is limited to the presence of wetlands and steep slopes. That was discussed in the last meeting. Um

would it but just a quick question would you know when the last time that was used for talked to farm service agency which keeps track of where farmers grow and they went back nine years they had nothing but hay field there okay there's no corn and road crops and I'm guessing that was all part of a larger farm complex many years ago So I think the question I have is and this may be a stupid question. Uh does like hay fields constitute an agricultural use by definition?

If you read the letter from Mr. Gilchrist. Yes. Um when that was part of a bigger farm. I don't know. A wreck has been there forever and he kicks himself for not buying it. Well, there was a house there, remember? Yes. Yeah. So, a portion of that was like a residential use. You mean [clears throat] you mean on the corner there? Yep. Nel's house. I think it was the night house. They took the house out. The well still there. That's that corner that's white. That was a bu a house in there. But that's is that a separate parcel or is that part of separate?

There was a farm further towards Troy on Spring A where they at the gravel tank. There was a gravel bank in there cleaning out my father's stuff and I came on stuff from the 70s and they were they had issues with the gravel bank and then they had to restore it and uh but they couldn't remember who had the farm there before the gravel bank. So that's there was across the road there were people who were farmers but it's been a long time since farm has been done in that area in that

okay may I proceed? You may proceed.

Um just [clears throat] kind of going over some of the the more highlighted ones. There's no impact on historic and archaeological resources but often kind of hold up a project but none on this case. Um parcel is never used for recreational purposes. There's no critical environmental areas. uh transportation. Um there was a traffic impact study done uh and conclusion of that study uh indicated that there was there would be some minor impacts during construction, but it didn't warrant move to um an additional study due to the amount of traffic added to the intersections. Um and that uh upon completion of the subdivision uh you're looking at 18 residential lots um which don't have a significant impact on adding traffic to um the surrounding area. Uh it is consistent with community plans. It is located in A40 zone which is an allowed use and the proposed action is consistent with its immediate surroundings single family residential subdivisions allowed and there's there's no um impact as to community character caused by this development.

Okay. So that was my draft. So the final conclusion would be that this has a it would be a negative declaration. Correct. Okay. I have a question. You're going to take out 400,000 yards of material. I'm sorry. You're going to take out 400,000 yards of material. I think it's 420 at least yesterday. How many truckloads is that? Um we did have that noted in the uh traffic impact study. I'm sorry.

We did have that noted in the traffic impact study in front of me right now. We gave a different timeline whether it's completed in one year, a year and a half or two years. Um I think obviously be interested in the two-year period. I don't have it. I might have [clears throat] [snorts]

Yeah. All that information was included in that traffic impact study. uh included um how many trucks per day. Yeah. Right. Yeah. You also had some um routes that would potentially be used. Mhm. For that, I believe it was like 70 trucks a day, something like that. Yeah. Two the two-year frame was 34 trucks a day. So, did he ask for the two-year frame? Yeah. [clears throat] So, about 22,000 truckloads. No, no, no, no, no. Yes.

No. A truckload, a truck would hold anywhere between um 18 to 22 yards. So, it would be 34 trucks a day at the two-year schedule. That's what you asked for, I believe, right? The two-year schedule. 34 trucks a day. Yeah, that that's in the traffic impact study. And what are the hours that this is going to happen? Uh general business hours. So it would be during you know normal working hours. So 7 to 5. Yeah. 7 to 5. Yeah. We put in the excavation [clears throat] plan 7 to 5 Monday through Friday 8 to 5 on Saturdays.

So it's a lot of trucks. Have you decided what route the trucks are going to be taking? we have a destination. Uh, no destin there's not a destination total yet, but most likely um when Crate Manning reviewed and did the traffic impact study, it seems like Spring A would be the the general route and probably getting the uh 355 as quickly as possible and state routes from there. You're saying Alpha Creek Road at this point? I brought that up initially back a few months ago. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, it seems like the most likely routes would be Spring Avenue. Spring Avenue South on Creek Road to Spring Avenue.

Yes. Yes. And the left left on Spring. They're they're going to go out they're going to go out Spring Avenue to hit 355 to get over to 66. Okay. All right. basically possibly to get to Bennis and then from Bennis the trucks go from there. Yeah. You know, I think what would be more logical is if they could find a construction project that needs fill. Yeah. And you're going to clean this up every day, right?

Yeah. So the excavation plan that we had submitted outlines all of the site best management practices did she uh from cleaning trucks to the way the excavation is going to occur, storm water, um dust control measures, all that.

Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Can anybody have any other questions? Okay, we're at a point now where we've been presented with a draft part two [clears throat] and a draft part three. But before before you consider acting on anything, I just had one comment for Wayne. Um, your exhibit A references two things in particular that were considered in preparing the recommendation. One was the traffic study. The other was the excavation plan. Correct. Um on page two, you have a list of stuff documents that was considered.

Yeah, they didn't make the list. It's okay. Um there is a reference to an excavation routing feasibility assessment. Is that the traffic study? Yeah. Okay. So, that's already there. If we could add the recently submitted excavation plan just so it's clear. That's a good idea. Yeah. Just so it's clear that that was obviously it's part of what was being considered but just so it's listed on the document. That's all I was going to suggest. Good point. That was our only comment on document.

Okay. But uh since our last meeting, you your office has also prepared a similar part two and part three basically mirroring this. Is that correct? Uh it was [clears throat] a yes an exhibit A to a part three. I wasn't sure if Wayne was going to prepare one, so it was just offered up in case one wasn't prepared, but in reviewing this, like you said, it pretty much exactly mirrors what we had put together. So we're okay with And I didn't even look at yours. [laughter] So we're okay with just scrapping the one that we prepared and going with what Wayne had. It was just

Well, the only reason I brought that up is that we would discuss yours and if you prefer to move forward with yours, it would only delay this project. So, because these members would have to review that to make sure that they were comfortable with that. That's right. And so, so you've understanding that we're okay with going with what we prepared. It's almost identical to what we prepared. All right. Should we uh can we proceed with a declaration at this point with the idea that we can now schedule a public hearing? I'm that's where you're going with all this obviously.

So just again, this is my first time here. I know you guys have been to this rodeo before, but uh under the state environmental quality review act for a unlisted action type one type one action the plan board is required to issue a determination of significance. You have two options in that technically three. You can do a neg which is based on your conclusion after reviewing everything and Mr. Bonsteel's recommendations that the project will not result in any significant environmental adverse environmental impacts. You can issue a positive declaration which is based on your conclusion that the project may result in one or more significant impacts which continues the secret review process with the preparation of environmental impact statement or theoretically I'm not sure if it applies here but you also have a conditioned negative declaration where you issue a NEG deck that has some conditions intended to mitigate potentially significant impacts if the board at this point uh based on the meetings that have led up to this based on the information provided based on Mr. Bonsteel's recommendation. If you folks feel you are prepared and ready to make that determination, you can certainly do that now. Um, and the way to do it would be to adopt a resolution issuing a NEG deck for the reasons as set forth in the uh material prepared by Mr. Bones. Any questions on that? Any comments from the board on direction they want to go or is everybody comfortable proceeding along?

I'd like to make two comments on the exhibit A just as long as it's going to become if it becomes part of the record. There's two corrections. one on the first page turn to line and page three land at will.

You're gonna have to say that again because I didn't hear what you said. Sorry. [laughter] On page one, description of action. Second line after the word water. I believe the word should be line. L I N E extension. You have Lou, not Lou semantics, but I'll I'll be I'm okay with that. And then on page three, impact on land. Impact on what, Linda? Land.

Land. Okay. Second to last line. I believe as you read it, you inserted the word be after the word will. Grading will be accomplished. You're correct, Linda. And isn't there an addition we just discussed about uh uh yeah the addition of the excavation plan as part of the record that was reviewed termination. [clears throat]

So those three corrections to the uh exhibit A. Does anybody have any other corrections or comments, additional uh statements in the exhibit A? Okay, then we could proceed along. It's it's the only other thing I have is that little tiny red text at the last page. Yeah. What is

not sure what how that got there, but I can take that off. Okay. So, to get the conversation going, I will make a uh uh a negative declaration motion to accept a negative declaration. Do I have a second on that? I'll second it. And now we'll discuss that. Is it going to be a negative with conditions? And are there any conditions?

Well, we got we should hold off on doing a conditional um declaration because it is a type one. Typically, conditional declarations are for unlisted actions only. Okay. Then disregard what I just said. Okay. That and he's correct. That is correct.

Okay. I I misinterpreted that. No, because I wasn't clear. So, theoretically, a condition NEG deck is one of the options, but as Mr. Bowensteel points out, they're not available on a type one action such as this. So, if this was nonlisted, you'd have all three options, but because it's type one, you can either do a neg or a pause. Okay. Then uh on the motion that I just made, we're in the discussion period. Uh I can always withdraw that motion if people feel that it ought to be a conditional. There you go. So

is there any discussion on that? Just to be clear, there's only two options for the board. A motion to adopt a negative declaration. Period. Or a motion to adopt a positive declaration. As I recall, your motion was for a negative declaration. So that's fine as it was presented. Okay. It stands with those corrections made to exhibit A. Is there any further discussion on that? Question. Sorry, I know I'm new. Does the Looks like you got a large amount of holding area for runoff, correct?

Wayne, does that have to be in place prior to any excavation? Will that change any storm water plan? um it's in their excavation plan as being in the early phases. What's going to happen is that will become a temporary sediment basin um during all the excavation um and then when the site is all prepared and the infrastructure is in then that would convert to the permanent um pond. Thank you. And the SWIP has been reviewed. Yeah. Anybody else?

Okay, then we'll vote on the uh negative declaration. All those in favor? I. Any opposed? Okay, you're all set there. Now, as far as the public hearing, do we have are we sufficiently uh got enough information for the public? Is everything complete enough at this point, Wayne? Yes. Okay. We just before we go too far, were we supposed to do a roll call on that? No. Okay.

Not that I'm aware of. I just in the past I really Andy prepared a uh resolution with roll call vote for something of this magnitude but um I don't know for for [clears throat] seek or no and I prepared a simple resolution if the board wants to consider it for the night deck to memorialize it attorney is think we need it he's fine so usually when what you're talking about is with the approval of the eventual, you know, subdivision where they'll do a a full resolution listing all the, you know, the actions that have been taken and so forth and so on.

So again, from my perspective, I'm not aware of a roll call being required for this action that you just took on the on the seeker for the NEG deck. I can't speak to the practice that you guys have had up to this point, but I'm not aware of any requirement for that. um your discussion of the basis for seeker is not only going to be reflected in your discussions that are going to be in the minutes that's also documented by the exhibit A that you're relying on and incorporating by reference. So I think as far as I'm concerned that's been properly documented. Uh your rationale for your vote is going to be apparent of the record. I don't know that you need to do anything more than you already set there. There's there's adequate now information available to the public to proceed with the public hearing.

Yeah, they haven't made any changes to the plans or the plat. Okay. All the reports and everything are with the building department for public access. Is this part of the uh part three correct that it could be signed tonight or would you prefer to put the whole package together? There was no changes to that. We didn't No, you made changes to exhibit A. There are changes to exhibit A which are actually part of [clears throat] the part three. Yes. But it would be that separate attachment. Would you get

the thing be complete? So why don't we just have a package for the chair? Yeah. Why don't we make the corrections? Get a full package together with the part one, the part two, and the part three. And I'll get that over to the building department, and you can I can sign sign it then.

Okay. All right. So, as far as a public hearing is concerned, um there is I believe no I'm not even going to go there. It would be at the meeting the second meeting in February that we would have the public hearing just to give adequate. You only got enough days February just 10 days. Yes. I'm sorry. Sorry.

Our practice has been and this this is where it gets a little I'm gonna have to you know ask the board on this one. Usually if there's two weeks between meetings, we do not schedule a public hearing because we don't feel at times because of the posting in the newspapers and so forth and so on that there's enough time 10 days prior to the to the public hearing. So we always have been scheduling it and that was a change in the zoning laws in 2017. So now what we're going to do is we're going to schedule the public hearings for the second meeting which gives us adequate time four weeks sometimes five weeks to get all the information mailed out to the you know surrounding residents and everything like that and give everybody an opportunity to review the materials at the town office. uh there is a situation here where there's actually three weeks between this meeting and actually the first meeting in February. So technically we could schedule the public hearing and have adequate time for 10 days prior to have all that information posted.

We would very very much appreciate the public hearings be on the first meeting in February if the board would be amendable to that. I'll I'll refer to to you, Chris. Is that a viable option as far as

Yeah. So, I understand the practicality of having to make sure the required notice is published sufficiently in advance and how that can be challenging if you only have two weeks between the meetings. In this case, you have three. It's 21 days um till February 5th, which is the next regular meeting. I don't see an issue, no issue getting the public hearing notice published in time. Andy is saying so at the board's discretion, I see no reason why you couldn't do the public hearing on the 5th. Okay. Is it the fourth? Fifth. Fifth. Okay. Then you'll be on uh correct the fifth.

Yes. Okay. You'll be on for the fifth. Public hearing will be at 7 o'clock and followed by our regular meeting and you'll be first on the agenda. So we move right from the public hearing into discussion. All right. Do you have any other questions for us? Uh [clears throat] only um I don't know what the common practice is my first application for the board but um will the Wendy be taken care of the filing of the seeker neg negative declaration circulation. So, because it's a NEG deck on a type one, there are some circulation and filing requirements. We can go over that together.

Yeah. And if you need anything from us, obviously, just reach out. Okay. All right. Anybody have any other questions for the applicant? Wayne, you're all set. I'm all set. Okay. And I think we're done. Thank you very much. Okay. We will see you on the 5th. Thank you for your time. Okay. Okay, next on our agenda is uh the Fiser Winer subdivision. I didn't even see you there. Where'd you come from? I've been here the whole time behind the easel.

Good evening. My name is Mark Dance. going to be representing the Fiser or Rebecca Fischer, excuse me. Uh to pick up where we left off last time, I added the turnouts for the fire apparatus every a minimum of 500 ft. I added the turnaround fire apparatus at the end. We submitted we submitted to the attorney the roadway agreement. We see that it look good. Uh after I got the uh a day or two ago, I added the uh just a reduced copy of the note that uh

yeah,

Andrew wanted to make sure it was on the map tying the agreement to the subdivision. And it just says C private road maintenance should be simultaneously recorded in county clerk's office with the filing of this subdivision draft and be considered part of this subdivision plan. that'll tie the agreement to the subdivision plan as requested and uh all the other it's about it kind of wait for a review. Okay, just for the record uh Chris you reviewed the the private road agreement and uh concur that it was it was fine. So, where do we go from here? What we got going? Make these numbers smaller. That's now that on this big one that I got that note,

the roadway agreement note. Okay. All right. Is there any other things that have to be put on here? Not that I'm aware of. The maps are now complete. Okay. Well, complete perhaps. It's complete as complete. Complete as can be.

I don't I don't really have any issues with the plat. Um, what I would like a little additional time is to review the storm water rigs because you are going to have a road that goes for 3/4 of a mile and you'll have some disturbance. I got to check the storm water rigs to see what the rules are on on the disturbance for this type of subdivision. It could it could be and I think I'm leaning this way but I'm not I got to check [snorts] that you could do a modified swift for the erosion sentiment control [snorts] plan. But I'll confirm that the board does have the discretion to require that even if it isn't required by the ranks. Okay.

I mean, you're basically going to build this driveway based on this detail that you provide. That all counts as disturbance. 600. Yeah. There are other rules for non-realy subdivisions. So, I got to kind of work all that those details out to figure out what's required under under those rags. Very good. Okay.

Uh minor subdivision uh does require a public hearing, so we're going to try to work towards that. Um I don't know if there's anything else Anybody have any questions there? There's some discussion going on. I see the new board member might have need some time to review the plan. Okay. Does anybody have any other questions for Mark? Now, you're here for another application, aren't you?

I did it. I'm not really here for it. I could stay if you want. [clears throat] Okay. Which one would that be? You might want to stay there if you want. Don't mind. All right, [clears throat] then. We will schedule you for Would our next meeting on the third be fine? Yeah, we'll certainly have all that figed out. Is that my public hearing or is that just the next? That's the next meeting. If everything goes well at this one, then you're going to be scheduled for the first one in March for your

public hearing. That's that's just a tenative timeline. Okay. Okay. [laughter] So, I just need to show up next February 5th. Yeah. Find out what we're going to do, how we're won't schedule a public hearing unless you're here. Well, I understand. I have nothing to prepare. You're going to Well, you could send Paul. Paul was supposed to be here tonight. I don't know where he is. Okay. We good? We're good for this one. Yep. Thank you.

Okay. Next on our agenda is Djack. And this is the this is a some somehow there was something [clears throat] that I heard that there's actually Okay, I can disregard that. [laughter] Go ahead.

Good evening again, Jakey Lance Bear. Um here we represent the due jacks and waiver subdivision application. Uh the due Jacks would like to subdivide off one lot um from the 9.68 parcel shown on my survey map. Their lot that they're retaining is vacant. It'll be 3.68 acres. They intend to sell the house on the remaining 6 acres. This was previously subdivided more than seven years ago. We did a three lot subdivision. I have a copy of that if anybody would like to see it. It does pass the sevenyear rule.

Adequate roads run, adequate acreage. Um, the only question I had and was brought up at our last meeting was this little shed on the 3.6 foot. It's not a permanent structure. It's a rolloff shed. Um they were using it as a runin for horses, but there's no livestock or anything left on the property. They would if they do decide to build there, their intent would be to take that shed down. Okay. Um I would assume that's still an ex.

So the issue is right now as the 9.68 6A parcel. You have the house and you have the shed as potentially an accessory structure, which is fine. When you subdivide, you're not going to have the shed floating by itself. Yeah. So, the question is whether or not whether it's a temporary rolloff or not, is it still considered an accessory structure which would not be allowed without a principal structure on the parcel? So that that's the concern, right? So these folks can't subdivide. It either has to be removed, moved, or taken down or something.

Even if it's not it's not a permanent structure. It has no foundation or anything like that underneath it. What would it take to just draw it over under the six acres? A tractor, I would assume. Yeah. I'm not a professional. I I think that the thing here is it's considered a Is it over 80 square feet? Is it over what? 80 square feet. I would have to double check. I think it's under 100 though. 80 square feet is the limitation. Okay. structure.

Larger than [clears throat] it definitely does not have a foundation underneath, but I'll have to check on the square footage. It's actually a dirt floor inside the shed. Well, in the past, what we have done is we've approved the waiver with the condition that that structure be removed or taken down uh within a certain period of time uh based on if a new house was being constructed or so.

Okay. So, uh, we could set something like that up as a condition of approval that the structure be removed within one year. Okay. If there was not a house being put on the on the property. F first step probably is to confirm the square footage. Yeah. I would ask that if we do decide on a on a um condition like that that we would confirm the square footage before it had to be moved. If it was under the 80 square feet, then it wouldn't have to be moved. Correct. I'm I'm okay with that. An accessory structure, right? Did you say there's a third floor? Yeah. Not not

it's it's a runin shed on on a skid unit that they were using for horses and the goats or if you pull a building permit within certain amount of time. Yeah. the the DJs currently um don't intend to build but they want to retain it in case they ever do want to come back to the area.

Okay. Does anybody have any other questions? Uh we can move forward on this. It's the desire of the board. I hear no objections to that. So I'll entertain a uh secret determination. Anybody want to make a N deck on this? Make a negative declaration. Okay. Do I have a second? I'll second. Is there any questions on that motion? Any discussion? Okay. Hearing none. All those in favor? I.

Any opposed? Okay. Now, on the uh approval of the waiver, do I have a motion for that? Motion approve. We're going to have one condition and we're going to check on the shed.

So you could frame it as motion to approve with the condition that any accessory structure on the 3.68 68 acre parcel which exceeds which is equal to or exceeds 80 square feet either be removed or an application for building permit submitted within a year typically they give them a year to remove that construction. So what would have to happen within that year? Either gets removed or

apply for apply for a permit. Okay. Everybody understand the condition that's been attached to the approval. All right. There's that condition. Who Who did somebody make that motion? Mike. Mike. Are you okay with that condition? Yes. Okay. Then uh is there any further discussion on that? Okay. All those in favor. I. Any opposed? You're all set. Okay. Now we're going to Kyle Smith. Hi guys.

How are you? Good. Been around a while here, haven't you? All right. What's up here? a while since I was one of you guys November last time late November. Yep. Um so I am um buying to finish construction on top of an existing foundation or a small simple office space. The maps extra mut.

Okay, the last one I have here and Mark you can is 1111 is the last uh added last one is a onetory frame. Oh yeah, with a uh carport maybe. Yep. Initially in the beginning of tonight's meeting, you you said twotory. This is a one-story building. Okay. Yep. Yes. You got

Yep. Okay. Now, according to this, you got proposed parking. Is that right up against the the line that would be the rightway? Is the Don't get comfortable on me here. Yeah, that's the existing. That's the property line. Is that the actual where the rightway the end of the rideway on the

Okay. So, you're actually Now, does that 14.6 is that that's on an existing foundation? Yes. Is there some type of clarification, Wayne, that has to be as far as a setback, front setbackt for department, right? Where's the DOT rightway? The heavy line where it says IRF. Got the dot on the corner. It's got the bearing. It's got the distance. That's the property. That's the rightway line.

So, it doesn't meet the setback requirements if it's only 14 parking over the building. CBA handled all that. That was one of the last actions we did in the zoning. Oh, did you say that? Did I miss that part? I didn't say a thing. [laughter] You didn't say that. I don't recall hearing that. There was a building there that got hit by a car. They took the building down and put the foundation. So you got you got a variance. Y how how many uh what did you go for the zoning board for now? [clears throat] Just that setback uh used to be

front setback. This is a corner lot. So our setbacks were too close on both sides. Uh also uh building size is too small and the lot size is too small. Yeah. Yeah. Everything. Got everything going the whole Yeah. And the what was the action of the zoning? Scott started the process

right couple years ago. got sick, laid for a while, and then Kyle came in, picked it up. We took care of his own took care of his own. There should be recording on that. Okay. Yeah. Parking is supposed to be se at least 7 feet from the property line. Yeah. It's um you know, similar to the you know, we've got a septic tank in the back. can't be driving over that. Um, and you've got another property line, you know, on the backside. It's just a very

Yeah, that permanent easement that's to do DOT. Yeah, there's a there's a culvert that runs underneath. Are they okay with having parking over top of their permanent easement? Um, it been there for years. Eastman goes right through the middle of it. Goes under Route 7, too. They parked there temporarily. Yeah, they're going. They needed to do something. I'd make sure there was cars there, I guess.

Yeah. You can't put permanent structures, right? You're not paving it. Great. Now the action of the the zoning board was that based on the fact that it was a existing foundation? Yes. Okay. [clears throat]

Are you going to go in from deep? No. Um that is it's the only access will be from Route 7. The only access would be for this site.

There is one little hiccup that Bill Bradley brought up today. He is the MS4 coordinator need to review this and the uh that is a class A stream needs within 100 foot of that stream. So Bill's opinion is that the the 24 by 24 structure is basically grandfathered in because it was there before. However, the addition of the shed off the back 10 foot, you know, carport would need DEC approval because he's encroaching into the 100 foot buffer. Yeah, we'll take it off.

I I think that the wetlands should be delineated so we know where they are. Really? Yeah. Um, I've worked with DEEC before on the property next to it. We're not changing anything except adding more parking spaces. The foundation's there. There was a building there. We're not changing the driveway. We're not changing the parking. The grass is going to be the grass. The wetlands down by the creek is going to be the wetlands down by the creek. We're not disturbing any of that. We're not disturbing anything really.

I believe I believe you. I believe we're not even delinating our parking because it's gravel. We're just showing that there's room to have I think that's tough wetland. The only trouble is this is a sight plan. Pardon me. That's the problem. The only problem with the wetlands is a carport, right? Uh if it's within 100 ft of that stream potentially that's a problem. So if they take the car system is you see that where it says uh septic tank filter sewage bed. Yeah.

That's the sewage system. That's all approved. Got it approved for the basket case. Subsurface sand filter. So there's no wetlands there. That's grass. As I said, the only bill in here is Well, it's all in the buckler zone. Okay. I just think there's a few things on this site that are problematic regardless of whether or not there was an existing foundation there. Okay. And what are you proposing here? What are the things? Well, I need a chance to look at this for one thing. Okay.

I'm just throwing stuff out there right now, but yeah, I think we're going to have to take a look at this a little bit closer. Yeah. Make sure we have all the We're not changing anything. I didn't say you were. Okay. If it's good today, it's good. Relax, Mark.

Okay. But we, you know, like like we just put Kyle on the on the on the agenda based on, you know, uh where he was beforehand that he didn't have to go on to new business or anything like that. So, we got him here. We're trying. This is the first time we've seen this stuff. And we thought it'd be nice to have, you know, Kyle come here, tell us exactly what he's doing, what happened, what changes were made to the drawing, and then and then give us an opportunity to take a look at Very good. That's okay. Apologize.

All right. So, uh, why don't we, uh, have we'll have Wayne take another look at this just to finalize stuff up with to with Phil Bradley, too. Uh, I don't know whether he's got to put something in writing on that or what. I mean, this is a site plan. You know, it's going to have a public hearing. I think everything should be properly uh, documented, don't you think? Y. All right. I have an email. Should I be reaching out to DEC? You have a contact there.

Why don't you wait until um I meeting up? If not, I'd like to work through the building department. Sure, that's fine. Whatever. I don't know. All right. Can you give us, you know, come back on the 5th and we'll Should be an exciting one. Yeah, sure will be. I mean, you got all this stuff in front of you. I saw [laughter] that. Yeah, it'll be uh maybe you can move them up in the agenda a little bit. Well, we got to have a public hearing. Well, we got a public hearing. Yeah.

So, don't get here right away. I'll stay home with the kids. [laughter] We'll text you when it's time. Yeah, watch a nightly nude and stuff like that. Okay. Um, we'll put you on for the fifth. And you can check few days before where you are on the agenda. Y and judge by when you want to be here. Okay. How's that sound? Okay. And we'll see you on the 5th. Thank you. Thank you. Can I just ask a quick question? Is there an application for site plan review when?

Yep. It's here. I'll find it. I'll find it somewhere. Okay. Thanks for staying, Mark. Mark, thanks for staying. Appreciate it.

Okay, that concludes our regular agenda. We have one business item under new business [clears throat] and this is a waiver subdivision. Uh the applicant is Robert uh Monaco. How are you tonight? And why don't you uh come up here and uh give us a little idea of what you want to do. Be very patient. That's it. We'll we'll be we'll be fine here. I think

let's just take a look at this. This is the first time we've looked at it, so bear with us. Okay.

Now, the your land surveyor is not here tonight. That's correct. Your land surveyor is not here tonight. Uh, no. Okay. All right. Did you have an opportunity to take a look at this? I I did. I talked to Mr. Monica. I did talk to a survey. There's more information that needs to be put on the map as far as the proposed location of the house, proposed driveway, proposed wall and septic. Surveyor is going to add that. He just couldn't be here tonight. He's tied up and assured me he'd have that information for the next meeting. So, we're basically just

I was on no lines. I have 19 acres, a little over 19 acres. I'm trying to divide one lot out of it. Okay. Furl road and North Lake Avenue. So the remaining acres is 16.15 and the new lot is the 1.18. Is that correct? Yes. Okay. And is that size lot proper for the zoning uh? Yes. Okay. Where's his house? They had frontage. Yep. Where is this? Is there a house remaining on the 16?

Trying to p picture where this is. Where's I'm sorry. Where is Miller? Yeah, right off the fair. Your house is is right after that lot into the big area, right? It's between North Lake. Your house is over here, right? Yes. Yeah. Okay. Or the town beach. This is the town beach. Ah, his house. Okay. Russ, his house is on to big parts, right? Okay.

Is that something we should have on there also? Uh Wayne, yeah, he's going to he's going to put that on there. And septic system. There's a well. Yep. Okay. All right. There is well well and septic here. Yes. I don't think there has to be any sight distances on this. No. Okay, I think we're all set for tonight. We can uh we'll wait until uh um Kevin consults with the the land surveyor and we get everything on this that we need and then we'll uh hopefully I think he do that in three weeks.

Yes. Okay. and we'll have them do it uh so we uh can have it for our meeting on our next meeting and then you'll be officially on our agenda. See, now you're you're not on the agenda. We can't take any action. Okay. We can't take any action on this right now. Okay. Because you're under new business and [clears throat] uh now that we've reviewed it and you're here, now we can put it on our official agenda. Yes. Yep.

Okay. So, we we're going to put you on the schedule for our next meeting on the 5th of February. Hopefully, you know, your land surveyor will have all the information we need. Uh you don't need a lot of information on here. This is a waiver. Uh we're pretty, you know, liberal on on taking a look at these uh divisions of just one lot. So there's nothing to worry about there. But uh we do need more information. Okay. Okay. Thank you.

Okay. I don't have any other new business. Is there any old business? Yeah, I just have one thing. the uh storage facility on Carol's Grove Road. There was not supposed to be any outside storage there and they've got two trailers parked right along the fence on Route 7 side and they got big billboards on them with the company's name. Okay. I believe that would probably be a planning or a uh building department issue. Yeah. Okay. Anything else? Nope, that's it.

Okay. Uh let's review our agenda for for next on the once again, this is a 3-w weekek period between now and then. Uh first of all on the first on the agenda is going to be the Paramont uh building group because they're going to have the public hearing at 7 o'clock and then uh followed by the Tranquility Bookshop, Andy's bookshop, and then Fiser which is the minor subdivision. Kyle Smith, which is the site plan, and then Monup, who we just heard from, he's going to be number five. As far as other items on potentially that could be on there, we have heard nothing from National Grid.

They want to be on for the fifth. Really? Okay. And they are going to be number six. They're going to be around a while. AT&T did finally get back to us about the two towers. Yeah. um they would like to be on at the fifth and the fifth as well for special use permit. AT&T that's they have two uh amendments to the site plan road and mountain modifying those two and then Mavis Discount Tire would also like to be on

Well, we better bring our sleeping bags here. I'll tell you where they going to the old dentist. probably tennis. Yeah. Uh is there any way that maybe one or two of those could uh be pushed off to the second meeting in February? So you could certainly ask. So my catching up on some of these open project threads. My understanding is AT&T was kind of pokey in getting back. I mean, yes, the woman was on maternity leave, but it kind of got dropped by her her office.

But for the sake of two weeks, and understanding we have potentially a pretty full agenda, their option is either to be on the 5th, but probably plan on not standing up until 9 or 9:30, or if they're willing to wait a couple weeks, they could go on to the 19th agenda. So I don't know if you want to if there's an idea that we can ask if they would rather be on the So is that is that a request or a demand? I guess is my question. I mean it's up to the board. I mean at a certain point you need to keep your agendas manageable and I don't know at what point you guys decide you have too much on for a particular This could be a long public hearing too.

Yeah, it could be a very long public hearing and I I think I think I think Andy Bookshop will go pretty quick. I think that's just a matter of cleaning up a few things. Fisher. That's That's that minor subdivision item. DJ Jack, it's not like you got a bunch of waivers here. It's major league stuff. What was that number eight? What was that last one? Mavis.

Mavis. Mavis. We'll put on for the the 18th. 19th. 19th 19. Okay, just tell them we just got the only one you want to 19. Um, you could tell.

I I' I'd hate to be here any anytime, you know, after National Grid. I mean, National Grid's gonna chew in some time. So, I would suggest that we put AT&T on for the 19th. If they scream and yell, just explain to them or I'll explain to them or I'll have Don do it. [clears throat] Well, there are some those are the ones we discussed the deadlines. So, we looked at that a little bit as well, which is why my suggestion was to ask if they would be willing to put it off for two weeks.

AT&T, if you recall, it's a telecommunication law. We have 30 days to review their submissions and then another 30 days to approve their submission for a total of 60 days.

Yeah, but they haven't officially submitted anything before this board. Well, they have officially remember I introduced them to you in the first one. They didn't show up for that. They did submit all the proper documents. However, we we requested more additional information which we just received recently. So, I'm not I can review with Chris what the start of that clock is. I guess we'd have to look at that a little bit closer, but there is there is some deadlines for for these telecommunication upgrades by law. I'll start by asking them if they want to be more.

Yeah. And and you know, part of it is out of consideration for them because, you know, they come on the fifth and they're number seven on our agenda, they're going to be cooling their heels for quite a while. So, it may just be preferable for them to be higher in the lineup for the 19th and maybe fine with that. And if they are fine with that then you know I think we present some confirmation. Yeah I mean you run it by but we all agree that I'll try to get in this cont will definitely move to the 19th and I'll and I'll try to persuade AT&T. Okay.

All right. And we haven't heard anything from CV. Okay. That's all I got. Does anybody have any questions on the potential agendas? Just review it again.

Okay, we're going to review it one more time. Number one is Paramont Building [snorts] that includes a public hearing at 7 o'clock. Number two is uh Tranquility Books Shop. Number three is Fiser. This is the minor subdivision with a long driveway. Number four is Kyle Smith. He was a gentleman here with the building on on Route 7. Uh number five is uh Mr. Monop. He was just up here under new business. And uh you know, we might want might want to shift him into up in the batting order, maybe behind uh Tranquility, maybe making third. That would not be possible.

Yeah, I just

And then uh number six is National Grid potentially. There's two other items. Um AT&T and uh Mavis. We're going to try and push on to the to the 19th. So potentially we could have number seven is AT&T. Okay. I find it hard to believe that we can stack up these when we meet twice a month. That's that's what

we only have one meeting this month. So yeah, but that's true. We're busy. Our offices are busy. Yeah. Okay. Um, does anybody have anything else? And I will make a motion to adjurnn. Do I have a second? Second. Okay. All those in favor? Any opposed? Thank you everyone. [clears throat] Thank you.