Planning Board - Regular Meeting

I'd like to bring this meeting to order for the Town of Brunswick Planning Board for February 19th, 2026. If everybody please rise for the pledge of allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all. Thank you.

Okay. Our agenda this evening is as follows and this was posted on the town website and the town board. Uh Paramont Building Group major subdivision applicant proposes a major subdivision on a 31.92 acre parcel of land as well as construction of a new road with a cul-de-sac and a waterline extension on property located on the northeast corner of Spring Avenue and Crick Road. Paramont Building Group of New York is the applicant. Number two, Fiser Minor Subdivision. Applicant seeks minor subdivision approval to subdivide an 82.17 acre parcel uh into three new lots on property located at 842 Tamarak Road. Rebecca Fiser is the applicant. Number three, AT&T amendments to site plans and special use permits. Applicant seeks amendments to two previously approved site plan and special use permit applications concerning wireless communication facilities located at 226 Bald Mountain Road and 88 uh to 90 Pelish Pelage Road. I goofed it up again, didn't I? Uh, AT&T is the applicant. Number four, Syllis, major subdivision. Applicant wants to provide an update on a previously approved major subdivision. Jim Sillis is the applicant. Our first order of business is to review the minutes of our previous meeting on February 5th.

Does anybody have any uh [laughter] additions, corrections, comments to be added? Okay. Then I will make a motion to accept the minutes as they were uh presented. Do I have a second? I'll second. Okay. Is there any further discussion on the minutes? All those in favor of approval? I I Any opposed? Thank you.

Okay, first on our agenda is the Paramont Building Group. [clears throat] Okay. Now, we had our public hearing. Yeah. Last uh meeting uh there was a 7-day extension period for written comments after the closing of the public hearing. And that concluded, I believe, on uh last Thursday at 12 midnight. Obviously, we did receive some which I believe that were uh presented to you and uh and you presented us with a uh a response to these comments and I would like at this time possibly to go through and review those responses.

Sure. Okay. Does everybody have a copy of that? Okay. Hey, you have the floor. Sure. Um, [clears throat] so would you like me to just kind of go in order and summarize the the comment and then the the response would be helpful?

Uh, yes. just, you know, just to give a a quick uh uh determination on uh different things. I I don't think it's that long. I think we can pretty much uh go through item by item. Absolutely. Okay, not a problem.

Um so the first issue, which is an issue we've been talking to the planning board about since, you know, almost the outset of the project is traffic. So is the construction and excavation phase or or even the final phase of the project which is the subdivision going to create issues of traffic. So we um you know we engaged Manning to do a traffic assessment um focused on excavation which is going to be which was the biggest concern for traffic. They would have the most vehicles obviously compared to the resulting development which would only be 17 homes in that culde-sac. Um Kraton Manning found they looked at the roads um existing conditions what the roads are rated for and the timelines in or what's the the capacity of the roads and the three timelines we provided to them um for potential excavation being one year being the fat most aggressive time frame one and a half years and two years. Um based on that and the amount of trucks that would be needed for the construction excavation phase uh Manning determined that it would not have an impact on the two potential routes that we had identified. Um to remind the board there there was two routes run and three time frames run just to cover all the different variables. The one route would be north on Creek Road turning out of the subdivision going north on Creek Road. the other route going south on Creek Road east on Spring A. Um so and we've provided a copy of that uh traffic analysis to the board and it's it's part of the record. The there [clears throat] were various comments or um concerns or questions raised about sort of how the excavation is going to progress uh timeline phasing. Was there thought put into where you're going to start and where

you're going to finish? Um, is during construction excavation activities, are there going to be storm water controls? Is there going to be attention paid to groundwater impacts? Is was there any attention paid to wetlands? Um, for those concerns, those were um those were covered by the excavation plan. So in our response to comments, we again cite the excavation plan and the different sections and different considerations that the excavation plan went through and the measures that the e the excavation plan um impose in order to mitigate impacts to those various areas. So timeline um hours of operation um best management practices for noise, best management practices for dust control, best management practices for erosion and sediment control um [clears throat] um made note obviously for storm water that um there there is a a swip for this site um and storm water controls which are on the uh site plan. Um the next comment um was uh noise and so the concern would be would the excavation and I can roll one of the other comments into this too for noise was there was a question is are there's going to be blasting um during excavation um there is no blasting proposed with this site it's all machine removal um so noise um when this issue first came up with the planning board We um the applicant asked hard engineering to provide an acoustical analysis um which was reviewed by the planning board's engineer um and the acoustical analysis had some mitigating measures that would make sure that the project stayed within the um appropriate sound levels. Um and those mitigation measures

were then incorporated into the excavation plan. um dust uh concerns with air quality during excavation um off-site sort of um off-site travel of dust. We covered that in the excavation plan. We specifically uh imposed best management practices or prepared the excavation plan to cover best management practices um to address that. um being they're going to have spray uh they're going to use water on site uh water trucks to spray down the trucks and keep the trucks covered before they leave the site. So as they're traveling up Creek and Spring Creek Road, Spring Avenue, um they'll be covered. Um impacts [clears throat] to groundwater. Um we noted that the prior um during the sort of I guess site evaluation phase and preparing the site plan there was approximately uh 56 test pits were excavated on the site. Um and only the tech the test pits only at the lowest area of the site which is where the I bet I think it's the infiltration basin is located were the only ones that came near groundwater.

Correct. Um so as proposed and as covered in the site plan and we discussed that in the activation plan uh don't believe there's going to be or we don't anticipate any impacts to groundwater um at all. May I ask one question? Of course. Uh was there any evidence of any natural springs on that property? No. Okay. No, there's not. Even in the areas possibly where there was no excavation? Um yeah. Yeah, we we traversed um I don't know how many steps I walked those couple of days, but it was quite a few. Uh traversed the entire property from back crisscross and there was no evidence of springs anywhere on the project. All right.

Um so really just on those low those low points. Okay. Thank you. [clears throat] The next topic um was wetlands. The applicant had engaged a or has engaged a wetlands professional to delineate the presence of wetlands on the site. The wetlands delineation was submitted to DEEC and the Army Corps. Um the I believe the DEEC confirmed the findings. Yes. Yeah. And um JD was

Yeah. And a JD was issued for the site. the if we have the site plan was designed so that there would be no activities within the wetlands nor the wetlands buffer. Um so we don't anticipate any impacts to wetlands being that we're even outside the buffer. Um storm water sediment and erosion control. Uh as I noted uh the project will have to seek coverage under the general permit for construction activities which will require a SWIP which has been prepared. Um and the SWIP will regulate the storm water discharges on the site um along with the excavation plan which also has mitigating measures uh in it to address uh sediment and erosion control. community character. Um, looking around the vicinity of where the project is located, uh, this project is a residential development. Uh, it proposes an 18 lot subdivision, uh, 17 homes up on the culdesac and one down on on Spring A. We think it's in line with other residential developments in the area. Um, and so we think it is consistent with the community character. There was some comments and concerns raised about property value. Um, you know, we didn't find any evidence to suggest that this construction of this subdivision would have any impact on anyone's property value, nor was any presented to us. Um, blasting we've covered. There's no blasting involved in this project. and several comments had mentioned that this is um a mine that would require a

mining permit. Um to respond to that um you know we in response um you know as the planning board knows this was an issue that came up at the outset of the projects. You know, the first question the planning board asked us was, does this require a mining permit? Because if in the end it does, you know, we don't want to go down the whole road of doing Seeker and reviewing this project. And so at that time, we had reached out to DEEC. DEEC um confirmed to us that they do not make determinations as to whether a project is a mine until the project receives its local approvals. Um you know the second question we asked them was okay that aside would you want to be lead agency here? um you know the we circulated the lead agency notice to them identified in the EAF that we would be seeking the exemption and when we had our site visit DEEC again confirmed to us uh the Meland reclamation staff that they do not they will not confirm whether the project they will not evaluate whether the project or make a determination as to whether the project will need a mining permit until we have our local approval which is then why we sort of went forward with with the project. Um, and generally, you know, our response is that [clears throat] under the mineland reclamation law, there is an exemption for cons for excavation on construction related excavation and that is uh not subject to uh mine land reclamation law.

I have a quick question on the mining. Yeah. Uh there was an on-site uh meeting with DEEC uh and there is a minutes that were presented for that. Yeah, Minutes were prepared of that meeting and reviewed by DEEC and then um submitted as a final to all attendees of that meeting and and the basic determination of that meeting was that this was not something that DEEC wished to uh classify as a I think I have it.

Yeah, the discussion of exemptions, they don't issue exemptions. Um uh the we talked a little bit about seeker with them and whether or not that they would consider um taking lead agency and they said typically only if it's a mine would they um take lead agency on such an application.

Okay. They also said that if it's a approved project and the removal of material is part of the project that um they also don't normally consider that a mine and wouldn't require a mining permit. [snorts]

I would suggest just as a for the record that possibly that meeting uh be mentioned in your your response to the mining operations because uh I think that's important information that DEEC did meet with you. It it I I can't recall whether I saw that in the

uh I I did it's sort of buried in the it's like almost the last sentence. Um but I go over to confirm I'm just reading from the letter to it's in the second to last paragraph to confirm a DEC permit was not required. The applicant arranged a site visit for DEC in the town at the project site based on the information. Um

All right. And I believe it was DEEC that clarified in that I guess in the notes from our memo they the piece that they had added in was to confirm and we will not make a determination at on the permit until you have your local approval. So this sort of from the first time they told us that was February of last year. Yeah. the whole time. You know, our plan is once a determination or a decision is rendered by this board, if it was a positive determination to move forward, we would then be going to DEEC to see, all right, now we have our approval that you asked for. Do we need a mine or not or do we need a permit or not? Um, and

and just maybe help for the benefit of everybody, do you know what that review would look like at that point? In other words, are they just trying to confirm that because you have local approval, you are therefore a bonafide construction project and don't need a permit or are they evaluating anything else at that point? What would that review look like post approval?

So, the law only says excavation for construction related projects is is exempt. DEEC typically of what we've been advised that DEEC's criteria that they look at which they went over on site was they like to see the approvals as a way of verifying that this is actually going to come into fruition. And so that is a sort of checkbox to say yes at least they have the local approvals. Their jurisdiction though is continuing throughout the entirety of the project. And that is because they want to make sure that it just because you have your approvals, the reason they don't issue the exemption letters from what we understand is so that they can keep an eye over the project and at any time come in and stop and say, "All right, let's say somebody was excavating an area of the site that had nothing to do with the proposed construction that they could come in and say, "This is really just a mine. You're operating next to a subdivision." or you know you say that you're going to build a subdivision but then you just walk away in the end or it was just sort of a farce to get a mine going. Um you know and obviously we met with DEC they understand you know Paramount Building Group is not a mining company. They don't know you know they're bringing in contractors to do this excavation. Um this this is a real project. Um they said the continuing so at first they would start the conversation by we would have a local approval and then they would start looking at everything. They've already looked at our grading. They're at least aware preliminary preliminarily of our grading plan because when we first reached out we said here's the grading plan. We think it's going to be about 400,000 cubic yards removed. And then their response was you know we don't make a determination on this until you have your local approval. Um, you know, one of the things that they mentioned on site was as the project goes on, they would want to see the project actually come into fruition, like start putting the roads in, start putting utilities in. So, they said that they get more

comfortable as the project goes on if they see that non- excavation related work starts to move forward, like the foundation of one of these houses that's being proposed so forth.

I have a I have a quick question for anybody here. When do when does this you know you you have presented an excavation plan for two years? When when does that start on the approval of the project or when they first put the first shovel in the ground? My my understanding is when the actual construction begins, not not when you get your approval, but when you actually when the first put the shovel in the ground. Okay.

So, the excavations that they've already made don't count. No, that that was just I think it's after the approval. Well, that Yeah, after the approval. After the approval, not you know I know the excavation excavation has started but there hasn't been approval for

so so what I'm what I'm asking basically is for an example if for example it gets approved and all of a sudden they well we don't have a contractor to do this and all of a sudden stretches out to August before they start does the clock start at August when they drop a shovel That's my interpretation. That was that was my understanding from DEEC as well. Okay. I just want to, you know, make that clear. So, so let me ask you this. You have

there's only a couple outfits in this area that can handle that kind of who who is it going to be? Uh, do they have anyone? Yeah, I don't think it's I don't think it's been determined yet, but yeah, there there are probably I I can think of at least four outfits locally that could certainly handle. Well, when are you going to make this determination because I can tell you nothing's going to happen until this board knows what's going on.

Sure. Sure. Um, so if if I may, uh, typically for an agreement like that to be in place, the project would have to be would have to be realized. So um if preliminary uh my understanding is preliminary discussions have already been underway. So um assuming there's a positive you know approval of the subdivision plan those discussions will be finalized at that time and contractor would be selected

and and I I I believe those conversations had started because when this first idea of two years came up you know back to the applicant and said this is really GEC jurisdiction now not even dealing with the planning board that he had reached out to a few of these contractors to have those preliminary discussions and that's when they were able to confirm, you know, we could do this on a year or you could delay it and do a year and a half or two years. And so those that's why we use those three numbers in the updated traffic report that was based on conversations with the excavators. So, it would have been possible for this board to know um the terms of the contract with the hollow as to when they're going to start because if we were to approve this tonight, two didn't start till August.

Yeah. Yeah. Now, you're just kind of dragging your feet. So, you don't want to go with this, right? I I understand the concern is be the time period between when the subdivision approval decision is would be granted and when construction would commence. Um I can talk to the client about that to try to give you a better a better idea or see what we can do to try to address that concern. Um, is there a particular concern about it not starting to August that you had or

I I have one concern about this and that is that there's been a lot of comments at the public hearing in particular about the use of creek road and I would like to make sure that any contract that you have for you know excavator would not include truck routts on on Creek Road because I don't first of all northbound on Creek Road. They would have to get a permit from the Wrestler County. Yeah. I don't I don't know if you've been to the county yet for that. Have you Have you spoken with anybody for over highway department

for over permit to use? Yes. Northbound. Now my understanding is every few of the meetings um I think you had addressed that you were not going to use northbound creek. Am I right or am I wrong? Uh so we evaluated both ways but it seems like the most likely um with with the discussions that being have preliminarily with potential contractors the most likely routes look like southbound on prick to spring. So that's that's correct. But we still we still do not have an answer whether a no for that what I'm hearing.

Correct. Well, let let me let me ask you a question. When you put this out to bid, can you specify that no traffic goes north on on Creek Road? Can you do that? I' Yeah, I'd have to think about that. I mean, I mean, I'm not saying that we're um not saying that we're unwilling to do it or think about whether we would agree to something like that. To be clear to the board members, it it would be if we were Yes. many times.

So, you know how many blind curves there are with posted speed limits for those curves? Yes. It's just not reasonable to expect. Well, there's there's also attempts just head down road. It's just not

sensible. I just want to address I I I just be aware that we we're trying to address a concern by many people that spoke at the uh public hearing that they are to me you're going to have traffic but they don't want to go north on Creek Road because of you know just the the nature of the road the residents and so forth and so on that are there and I'm trying to figure out whether there can be something in your contract negotiations and say, you know, uh, we have been, regardless of what the county says, the county may agree with us on this, uh,

to avoid Creek Road going north. I would make a suggestion to contact the county, see what they would have to say before we keep guessing whether we're using northbound or not. Yes. ask that specific question. to him.

I I think it's important that that contact be made sooner than later and that we get something in response from the county uh in order for us to consider any conditions that we may place on a potential approval of this. Yeah. And uh to be clear, my comment that we would have to think about it is just how what would that look like? What would the language look like? Would it be a condition to the permit? Would it be something we would put in the contract with the bids with the hauler? So that's what I meant by that. So yeah,

we just need to consider how that we could address that concern. Okay. Does anyone have any other questions on the responses to the public hear? [clears throat] Um, tell me about acoustic mitigation. You listed several pieces of equipment are going to be out there, motor, excavators, trucks. What's your game plan for acoustic migration? Sure. Yeah. So, are you going to just say mufflers? Well, that's a pretty critical That's a pretty critical part. Absolutely it is. But

if you've ever heard a Detroit diesel powered scraper running on a site, then you know how important mufflers are. Still makes a lot of noise. Yep. You have anything besides mufflers? Um yeah. So with the with the proposed phasing of the excavation plan, it was coming into um I can if I may uh phase basically phase one, two, uh three, four. As we come in, proposal be for construction of the road. You're going to be excavating downwards and leaving BMS on both sides of the excavation, which is a which is very helpful for acoustic attenuation.

Um, and also the the distance where the primary excavation is taking place is going to be um the furthest point from surrounding residences. Okay. said no blasting, things of that nature. That's that's something else. Um see uh some inconsistencies in the numbers regarding the amount of felt taken out of it. can't put my finger on it, but you were going to leave so many thousands of inches

cubic yards yards of [laughter] fill. Um Yes, sir. for um landscaping and site work and things like that. Yep. But your total was still over 400,000. Correct. Correct. Yeah, approximately. Okay. So, what is it? You have any idea? Is it 400? Is it 450? Is it 420? I think that number is in the Can we get a

Yes. Yeah, we we did we did give a specific number. Um, and believe that's included in the excavation plan and prior submission to uh to the board. I believe is either 420 or 425,000 plus or minus yards. All right. How many yards is each truck going to hold? Do you know? You don't know because you don't know what kind of trucks you're going to I think. Yeah. Approximately 20.

20 yards in the truck. Okay. So for the sake of the market, it's 400,000 yards divided by 20 what? 20,000 25 20,000 trucks. Yeah. Okay. So

and and those calculations are all in the uh traffic analysis as well. They broke it down how they determined how many trucks your traffic analysis says no impact, right? Sorry, I can't I can't Sorry. Does your traffic doesn't your traffic analysis say that this is no impact? Correct. 20,000 trucks is no impact. Correct. Over a year, a year and a half, and two year spans. Sorry, I I can't

I said I got a hard time with that with 20,000 trucks. It's just it's just a lot of traffic on narrow roads. I I question the uh finding that there's little to no impact.

Well, it it was this board that found that there was little to no impact there and the planning board's engineer reviewed the traffic study and commented on it. I mean, it clearly shows that these roads have capacity for way more traffic that they're being subject to right now. Well, And just maybe can you remind us I know you've the applicant has looked at different time periods for the purposes of these studies. The actual excavation period is that the one year the one and a half or the two years that was if excavation was going to

what's the plan? So in other words if if you got approval today the goal is is it two years is it one year is it a year and a half? I think the goal would be to do it as fast as possible to get to the one year. Yeah. To get it to try to get as close to the one year to give as much as a buffer against the two-year sort of the target is to try to do it within one year. Yeah. Okay. I think originally we had estimated maybe it could be done in one year but you know we put a buffer in there at one and a half and that's why we went back to the excavators had those preliminary discussions and they said no we can do this in a year. All right. So you what's the frequency of these trucks going to be on a daily basis? Again, talk 16 an hour.

16 an hour or 18 at the one year. All right. Are you asking the one year, sir? [clears throat and cough] So let me just ask someone probably has a lot of knowledge about this. How long does it take to fill up a 20 yard truck? [cough] Depends on the size of the bucket. Depends on the bucket. Yeah. Oh, no. It'll be a big bucket.

I just I I I'm going to ask a quick question related to this. When you're doing 16 to 20 trucks an hour, is there going to be a stacking issue on Creek Road as far as trucks backed up and ready to go? You have you cont is is is is there going to be a stacking area on site that's going to be done first you know like a staging area or there will be no stacking on creek road right?

Yeah. Yeah. So you part of the part of the first phasing plan is [clears throat] making that initial cut in basically. So that provides the beginning of the road, the stabilized construction entrance, and what would be the staging area. Okay. And and we can always [clears throat] add a condition to make sure that no trucks back up or build up on Creek Road. Yeah. Well, definitely that that's going to be a traffic issue if it does obviously. Yeah, absolutely. Yeah.

How how would that condition be monitored? You know what I'm saying? So, it's easy to say don't do that. But when you got trucks coming in and out every x number of minutes per hour, how do you avoid that from happening? And what do you do if it does happen? How would we write that condition? We could think about that. Yeah. And that's Yeah. So, I think not to jump ahead, but I I think part of this board's considerations are going to be trying to come up with any appropriate conditions the board members might want to attach.

Absolutely. Part of that is going to be, I think, some dialogue about the nature of those conditions and then how they might be best phrased to both meet the board members concerns and also to be enforcable. You know, they can be monitored, they can be enforced. So having that dialogue will probably help. Absolutely.

I have a question. Y so when you're talking about the four phases of the excavation plan, is the roadway going to be completely built or will that be in the phases as well? So when you're talking about removal of phase one, the road goes to phase one, stops, you're going to enter phase two, the road continues into phase two or is the road going to be done at the very beginning of the whole project?

Yeah. Yeah. So, what they'd likely do is um work through the phasing, establish it, the subgrade, and get the subbase down for that section of the road, move into the next phase. That's that's how we foresee it occurring. And as you know, phase one is completed, the shoulders of the road and those lots that are now at their proposed grade are going to be temporarily stabilized. One, it's uh contingencies of the the stormwater pollution prevention plan minimizing exposed area. um there are limits on the timelines on leaving those soils exposed. It also [clears throat] helps from an erosion control standpoint, dust control, things of that nature. So you try to establish temporary growth on those soils as they move from phase to phase.

So is there any chance that any of the houses would start being built while you're in phase three, phase four? Would phase one construction of the houses be started? So you've actually got people living in the development while you're actually excavating um another 100,000 yards. So I I believe um in I'm trying to remember that the st code uh as far as prior to issuance of the building permit if it's required to have the road dedicated um prior to issuance of the first building permit. So I think the road the road would at least have to have the binder course on if I'm not mistaken. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that's yeah typically that's the case. Okay. I was just wondering because of you know utilities to the residences, fire hydrants.

Mhm. you know, oh certainly whether that would be yeah that that would be all part of the uh installation infrastructure prior to the road being dedicated. So that would be monitored um that would be monitored during the installation and then yes tested the water manes and fire hydro being tested disinfected per per standards prior to and handover and uh the road dedication of the road. So there is a possibility of house construction prior to the excavation prior to the excavation being completed. Before the full esavation plan is completed, there's a possibility of residential house construction being started.

Um I I think if there were to be overlap, it would be, you know, due to the timeline for what it takes to construct a home, I think the if there were any overlap on the construction process, it would be pretty minimal. Now I look at it that the water man would have to be run to the culite in order at least hydrant at the end so that we would have water there before you do any construction. Yeah. Yeah. I think that's all part of the um the road needing to be dedicated prior to issuance of the building permit for the

Yeah. Did you get a chance to ask the applicant about extending the waterway north on Creek Road?

Um, we we did get to discuss that just just uh briefly. Um, we we have not been able to um discuss that in any lengthy detail. One of the things we started looking at was um the number of homes in that area. So, it looks it looked like um there [snorts] were probably three or four homes in this in this area. Basically, we discussed potentially extending the line to here and I think two of the homes have driveways that are 4 or 500 ft long. Um as well as there was one home that was actually within uh one or possibly two homes that were within a close proximity to that main extension. Um, so we we looked at basically the number of homes that would potentially be serviced by it. Uh, and it it didn't seem like there was a significant potential for demand north of here. Um, so but we we did we did begin discussions on it. I I [clears throat] believe in the past developers have extended the main so that the towns eventually could continue on up road

whatever the goal and again it's just a suggestion sure yeah sure yeah certainly certainly not required for what we're proposing um to service and improve fire safety in in the uh the subdivision here

there was some concerns by uh some of the people about who have wells on Creek Road and whether they're be affected by the excavation and so forth and so on. Uh I believe you answered that possibly at the public hearing and stated that there would be no uh you know there wouldn't be any effect on those those wells at all. Is that correct?

Yeah, certainly. So, we're not proposing all these homes are going to be serviced by public water. So, they're not going to be withdrawing from the aquifer that um homes to the west side of Creek Road that out of.

All right. And just as a note, uh I think there was a reference to [clears throat] Wells being possibly in Spring Brook uh by one of the uh uh people that spoke and we checked that out. There there is public water in Springland. So there is there is no wells to compare. I think somebody was trying to compare uh a previous gravel pit that was reclaimed for residential area which is that is it Springbrook? Is that Spring Landing? Spring

Spring Landing, excuse me. Spring Landing, which is you know uh to the west of you on Spring Avenue on the other side of Moxy's area. Okay. Now it used to be a gravel pit. Yes. And uh I think it was mentioned that you know people have had problems with wells there. I don't know where that information came from but we checked it out. There are no wells in Springland. It's all public water. Okay. So just just to clarify that appreciate that. Yeah. To stay on that topic. Are there Spring Brook Spring Landing? Spring Brook. Which one? Which one is Spring Landing?

Spring Brook. Spring is over here. Spring is where? Spring. Spring Landing. Yeah, you checked Spring Landing, right? No, you checked. Well, and disregard that last uh disregard comments that I just made. I misunders Okay. All right. Um, on the, uh, topic of water, do you know if the two houses across Spring Avenue do the South are serviced by municipal water?

Um, I believe one of the uh, people who spoke said that they live there, that they are on a well. Um, there there is a name that runs past there. um just know from from past experience in the area, but um I believe one of the people who spoke at public hearing did say they're on a well.

Wayne, is there any um benefit to having a well survey done prior to the excavation so that we have a basis point? I think um knowing where the um water table is is one of the most critical pieces of this. Um they're not disturbing the water table. They're not down to the water table. Um, typically well surveys are done if there's any kind of blasting or or or even a significant number of wells drilled which they're not doing. It's typically when you do a well survey. And then I had another question about the uh amount of excavation is going into you know far be far below horizons A and B of the soils. Is there a protocol to um repair some of the soils? You know putting six inches of top soil on top of gravel might not be sufficient. we're growing if we're excavating down to something that has no nutrient level.

It's a good question. They will strip the top soil and save the top soil, right? You got to they'll be stockpiling the existing top soil and then use my like quick calculation based on the EAF. [clears throat] It's like eight acres of grass is going to be maintained meadow they call it which would be about 6,000 cubic yards of material. Is that a lot consistent with your calculations? Um considering the area um barring plan my calculator. Yeah, of course.

I just I didn't see it in the excavation plan. Maybe that could be added some of some of the details about you know yeah the restor for establish so part part of the the stormwater pollution prevention plan does discuss um restoration of gradient soils so that is included in the the sweat for the project [clears throat] okay any other questions uh how big are the homes you plan to I don't think there's a specific a range. There's got to be a th00and 10,000 square feet.

Yeah. Um it would certainly within zoning. What's that? It would certainly be within zoning requirements, but um I I don't again I don't think there's anything uh that's been specifically set aside for this. But um just seeing what's on the market these days, probably somewhere in the ballpark. I'm guessing, please, this is just, you know, loose loose numbers. 1,800 to 2,800 square feet seems to be common home sizes these days. building. We can confirm that with the client, too. Will these be Parammont building the going to build the homes or Yes. Are your Okay. Will these be manufactured homes?

No. Yeah. How the test pits you dug, how deep were they and what did you dig them with? uh Pittsburgh dug with a gosh I'm trying to remember the class of the excavator but a very large excavator because I've been by there a lot and I didn't I didn't see any sign of disturbance but I' I've seen the test pits all right right after

and then uh bonding to to protect the town if something happens and you guys walk away I think there should be a substantial bond that we can put the site back to something that's not gravel bank

like a like a neighborhood like a reclamation bond. essentially the equivalent of a reclamation bond to protect against the contingency of the guys start not you guys but the applicant starts something happens they can't finish the land is halfway excavated halfway not excavated applicant disappears town needs to come in to remediate the condition obviously we prefer to have the applicant pay for that through a bond and through town fund so okay that's something this board think would consider attaching as a condition. The question is going to be what would that amount be? Right. Okay. And certainly, you know, and as soon as you guys are in those [clears throat] discussions, we'd be happy to look at

we're in those discussions. Okay. So, you know, we certainly be interested in the applicant's perspective as to what a reasonable bond amount would be. Again, essentially a reclamation bond. Um, obviously your number is not the final word on the subject, but you know, certainly we can see what you guys would propose and see how that sits with the the members. Does anybody else have any questions?

Um, I do. Sorry. Um, on your grading plan for I can't read these lots. 15, 13, 14, and 15. You have a large area that's grading toward the detention basin. It is a detention basin. Correct. It's not infiltration. It is an infiltration basin. Yeah. So, we've got um three, four days, they'll all turn into an infiltration basin. Okay.

Yep. You're right. Um and in other areas of the site you have much steeper slopes coming at the height the uh homes proposed. Is it possible to um mimic those steeper slopes behind those houses so that we can reduce some of the grading and retain some of the vegetation that's existing on site

um between basically in this area. Um so right now I think to to do that uh you would end up with very steep slopes. Um basically you you you create an incredibly steep bridge to get to grade for this home to not have a steep driveway coming in. Um and then to meet grade down here and then you um you'd end up trying to preserve an existing grade. There would be a point where you try to preserve it and you probably end up with uh very steep cut up towards it and then a very steep drop off towards the four bed. Um once that grade is cut in because this would this would be a very steep face that would be difficult to regate most likely and maintain. So, you have a steep slope on the other side at the back corner. Um, I'd just like to see some kind of mitigation of these set 15 acres of vegetation that you're taking off the site either by way of replanting trees or reveating buffer areas. Um, specifically at the backs of 13 14 15

that's where I perceive you have some opportunity to yeah do such a I think I I trying to recall if any slopes in that area I don't think any exceed four on one um once we hit a threeon one that's we proposing something like control matting um fine with that but is that is that something I just think is there's an opportunity to save some of that mature vegetation and not grade that entire,

you know, uh I don't even know how many thousand linear feet you're going from property line to property line right now with contours.

Yeah. Yes. that's directing flow from the rear of these lots allowing it to drain towards the tips more bas um we can certainly look at the the slopes in that area um but I just because of the the way of the grading on these lots um I I don't know that you'd be able to actually maintain that vegetation uh without it being one I don't think it would be very aesthetic because it would be like large very steep slither side coming up here and then down here uh visible visible from the road as opposed to kind of the rolling rolling hills aesthetic there um but I can I'll certainly look at the grades there existing lots 13 14 15 And then I had a question about the grading plan and relationship ship to the um utility line that's existing at the back of the site. Um maybe you could show us a profile or section of the northeast side where it appears like [clears throat] grading is going in to affect that last power pole

of the utility line. [clears throat] Yes. One uh that might may need to be reset. So is it above ground or below ground utilities for power, cable, phone underground being proposed? Yeah, being being proposed is is below ground. I think they actually have a bridge almost uh mandates that

I Yeah, I do believe I think Yeah, I think from their standards. Okay. At this time, I'd like to uh just discuss a letter that we got from uh the town got from DEC. Uh this was addressed uh to Supervisor Harrington and it was uh dated February 17, 2026. I believe you already got a copy of this. Did you? I we we we did get a copy of it

and uh basically uh uh they wish to review uh the proposed uh excavation plan and the rooting of the traffic and so forth and so on by Kraton Manny and that material uh reports have been given to the DEC This would be Sean Mahar who's the regional director. He responded back uh today in an email and he said, "Thanks for your address to Kevin. Thanks for your pro prompt reply and additional information. Our experts are reviewing this and have additional questions and concern regarding the DEC's potential jurisdiction in this matter. and we would like to be respectfully request a meeting with you and the appropriate members of the town before any action is taken on this project. So we are moving forward to arrange a meeting with uh uh Mr. Mahar

right and uh uh we don't know what's going to come out of that but uh he has requested a meeting so great we are going to pursue that. Did you get a copy of that email? Yeah. Uh oh, I I don't know if we got a copy of the email. We got a copy of the letter. U we've responded and sent over the excavation plan and traffic study and said let them know if they have any other questions, they can always reach out to us as well. Okay. I think at this point uh if we uh we should talk about the the timeline.

So let's go over that. Okay. Okay. So, the town has subdivision regulations that prescribe the process to be followed by the planning board in considering a major subdivision like this one. The regulations provide that within 45 days of the public hearing, which we held on February 5th, the planning board is required to act on the preliminary plat. And that action can be either approve, approve with modifications or conditions or disapprove. The 45day period starting from February 5th, I believe expires as of March 22nd. That leaves as of right now two planning board meetings between now and the expiration. First one is March 5th. Second one is March 19th. So if nothing changes under that timeline and assuming that timeline applies and there's a question in my mind at least maybe not everybody's but my mind about whether or not the inquiry from DEEC and whether they are revisiting their jurisdiction of the project as it relates to potential mining changes anything in terms of what's been done up to this point. But let's set that aside for a second. If nothing else changes, the board would need to take action um one of those options by March 19th. Um I would note and I had a conversation with Mr. Ruane earlier today that that time frame can be extended upon mutual consent between the planning board and the applicant. If everybody agrees to push that time frame out, we can do that. Um, you know, one of the things that setting aside the DEEC stuff for a second, um, and you had raised some questions, folks had raised some questions that relate to potential [clears throat] conditions that the

board might want to consider. Uh, that may take some time to flesh out. Um, but right now, that is the the time frame that we're dealing with.

Okay. Everybody understand that? So I think with that in mind, we did talk about some possible conditions and everything and as far as I can tell uh we should proceed with trying to formulate conditions that would mitigate some of these uh concerns. Um in the meantime, I think we have to see what comes out of this DEC meeting. Um, I think the question I'm going to ask is if we run into a timeline that seems to be reasonably moving forward, uh, would you be opposed to asking the applicant whether he would be uh, willing to extend?

I would not be opposed to ask him. I after I spoke with the planning board attorney um I made a note to myself to bring that up because once the as your attorney said once the public hearing closes we are on a timeline. So I will discuss that with my client. Okay. Um the the only question I do have is does the time start at the end of the written period? So I can only go by what's written in the regulations and the regulations say within 45 days of the public hearing. So I am not extending that to reflect the fact that you accepted public written comments for an additional week. Okay. So I'm doing it from February 5th.

Okay. All right. So I think the I'm going to ask the board to you know kind of analyze [clears throat] the uh u the responses. If we were to move forward with a conditional approval, uh we should keep in mind what those conditions should be. Uh and uh hopefully we'll be able to report something at our next meeting on regards to the DEC conversation and and if before that meeting there's anything you want documents or anything to prepare for that, just let us know and we'll send it send it on over. Thank you. Yeah, of course.

Okay. So, right now we'll put you on the agenda for our next meeting just to keep things moving. Thank you. And uh we'll we'll see you then. That that next meeting is on the March 5th. 5th. The 5th and the 19th were the two meetings. Correct. Yeah. Okay. Does anybody have any other questions for the applicant before I was going to say the only reason why I know that is because February had 28 days, so it's the same days this month. That's right. All right. Do you have any other questions for the board? No, not at this time. Okay, we're all set. Thank you. Thank you, gentlemen. Thank you for your time.

Okay, next on our agenda is the Fiser Minor Subdivision. Paul Angster for the applicant, Rebecca Fiser. Uh Mark Danskin asked me to stand in for him this evening. He had a prior commitment elsewhere. and he advised me that the storm water prevention plan had been submitted to the town. That's correct. For Mr. Bone Steel's review and he also advised me that he filed uh today the u erosion and settlement control plans. Correct. Yep.

And I have previously submitted the U private roadway maintenance agreement which I believe council has reviewed and approved. Correct. Y. So that's I'm just here to in case. All right. I am going to turn the floor over right now to Wayne. [clears throat] Uh he has sort of reviewed the the information. You just you just got done. Well, we did we did receive the SWIP a couple of days ago Tuesday, right?

Uh and the plan um the erosion sediment control plans um they do appear to be complete. Um there is enough detail in here for my review. Um, so we will continue to review the SWIP and the erosion sediment control plan, but I I would say that uh I would be willing to consider these the subdivision plan with the added erosion sediment control plan to be complete a complete application. They've provided everything that they've asked for. All right. Does anybody have any questions? What what uh Wayne has you know determined that these are complete for basically public hearing so we could schedule a public hearing. Uh but I want to first of all ask the board whether they have any questions on this. [clears throat]

We do need to send this to the county. No. subdivision. Good. Because I didn't hear what you said. You taking that back? Yes. [laughter] Okay. Okay. All right. Um if there's no questions, uh I would suggest that we possibly u uh schedule the public hearing and that would be two meetings from now. Uh, we can schedule it for the night 19th of March. Okay. Does that work for you? Yes, absolutely.

Do you have anything else we need to know? No, I'm all I'm all set. We will adjourn you. You won't be here at our next meeting, but we'll adjourn you to the 19th. 19th. So you I just want to make sure you don't don't show up on next meeting for for whatever reason. I don't have any plans to at this point. Thank you, Paul. Okay.

Okay. Next on our agenda is the AT&T. Well, just for just for the record that uh public hearing will start at 7 p.m.

Okay, you have the floor. All right. I'm Martha Grady. I'm representing AT&T. Um we're seeking a revision. Could you Oh, sorry. Sorry about that. Is that better? I think so.

Okay. [laughter] seeking a revision to two previously approved special use permits for two existing cell phone tower sites. Um, one at 227 Bald Mountain Road, the second being at 90 Pal Road. AT&T is a currently is a carrier on both towers. We're looking to swap out equipment uh like for like on both towers. Not sure if you want to do one one tower at a time or how we want to let's do one tower at a time. Two different towers. Two different towers. [clears throat]

Are they um is this similar to this the swap out that you did what last March? Yes. Yep. Yep. Okay. Is there any extension to the No extensions. Footprint won't be affected. height will not be affected. Swapping out equipment. Okay. Um is there additional uh equipment put on the pad? On the pad? No. Okay. So, so strictly just replacing stuff. That's what you're doing. Correct. On the existing mount. Okay. And what's the reason for this? Just outdated stuff.

Outdated equipment. Yep. just to accommodate the higher demand for internet essentially on everyone's phones. Okay. For demand is any of the equipment for first it is. Yep. What was that question? Uh first so there's a first authority for public safety 18 contract. Okay there. Yep. Okay. Anybody have This is the first time we've received this. So, so it's kind of This is strictly going on the tower. On the tower, what I heard?

Yes. Yep. I believe one's a monopole, one's a self-sport already constructed. Um, we submitted structural analysis reports for both, both for passing. Um else are are you like changing from sectorized panels to to like omniirectional which the asthma is staying the same? Everything's same the same. Yes. So the look will be the same.

It'll be the same. Now Bald Mountain. Um that's the one on 227 Bald Mountain. This is the one. Oh no, I apologize. That's nine for nine. Um, pallet. We're adding three additional antennas. So, one new antenna on each sector. Okay. But it's on the existing mount. We're not swapping out the mount. It's the same. What type of antennas are those? The additional ones.

Um, they're Ericson Air antennas. They're They're just they're not like the big panels you see the sectorized panels that you see on No, there should there should be a picture here. I want to say they're four feet tall. They're they're actually smaller. They're not Yeah, they're not going to change the look. No. Yeah. No, they should have. I think they're they're um I want to say lengthwise I believe they're instead of eight feet I think they're about six feet long. So that means they're more they're smaller

than the existing. So they're going right in the center. Um on the same mount on the same mount. Yep. And then you're adding three new Ericson. Um, Erikson is the brand of the antenna. Yes. Three antennas. Yeah.

Wayne, you have any questions on this? Nope. [clears throat] No questions. I asked my questions. All right. Is there a need to review this any further? I I don't need to review it. Okay. And you would say it would be complete to proceed with a public hearing? Yes. Okay. Anybody have any questions? the public hearing. Yeah,

we can do the public hearing with the second with the uh the first one at 7:15. I don't think there's going to be anybody have a problem with hooking the two together. for either one of us. [laughter] I mean, we can push it out to the next meeting if you want. No, let's get it done. Okay, let's get it done. AT&T and I could use better service. Okay, we want this done. Yeah, I guess. So, we will schedule your public hearing for the 19th of March. March 19th. Okay.

And that would be at the 7:15. you would completely follow the uh the first one that we already have scheduled. So, all right. Okay, that's it. All right. Thank you very much. Okay. You're welcome. Thank you. Thank you, Sillus. Oh, okay. How are you tonight? I'm doing well. Good evening. community. Absolutely.

Don't try to walk out.

Excellent. Uh well, good evening. My name is Aaron Vera. I'm with Varity Engineering. Um I'm here tonight representing uh JJ Sillis Builders, Inc. Uh the owners of property on Cole Lane. Um, just so that I have some reference, how many planning board members have seen this project before? I know that it's kind of been in the works for Okay. [laughter] Um, apologies. Some of this is going to be repetitive. Then, um, the, uh, parcel of land we have is about 16.2 acres. It's in an R25 zone, uh, which is a 25,000, uh, square foot minimum lot size. Uh the proposal that we have is a 15 lot subdivision. 14 of those lots would be single family homes. Um one lot the lot furthest down the hill closest to Cole Lane uh would be for a stormwater management practice. The uh the road is about 1,600 ft long including the loop culdeac. Um, it's about 800 feet until you get to the uh to the tip of that culde-sac. It's got kind of a teardrop shape to it, just to give you an idea of the scale. Um, max grade on that road is 10%. Um, we're looking at servicing the homes using municipal water available on coal lane. So, we would extend uh a dead-end uh water line along with hydrants uh up the hill. uh the lots would be served by a private septic. Uh it is the intent of the applicant to dedicate this roadway uh to the town. Although the stormwater practices themselves uh we we're considering um incorporating a an HOA in order to maintain and and manage those in perpetuity. Um the the the project as a whole, including all of the lots and

the grading that's shown, would ultimately result in about 11.3 acres of disturbance. Um we do believe that we could put the roadway in under the 5 acre waiver requirement for uh the Speedy's permit. Um we did receive a Shipo signoff back in 2021. Again, I I know this has been around for quite some time. uh with no further action required for that. Um we also did prepare a SWIP back in in in 2021. Um I don't know uh Mr. Bone Steel if you had a chance to review that back then. There's some comments that we're trying to work through with

Yeah, we did we did some review on that and together with Bill Bradley. Yes. Yep.

There's been quite a lot of back and forth on that. Um so we do we do anticipate the need to revise that uh that report um as the years have have gone on here. Um DEEC came out with a a new permit at the beginning of 25 and so we have to make some revisions to that document. Um the design itself though uh we don't anticipate any changes to um Mike pick me up but we have a storm water management practice up here in the middle of the culdeac. Um, and then we would have another one down here or lot 15. Uh, that handles most of the storm water with the exception of lot nine that's all the way in the back. Uh, based on the grading, we just don't have the ability um economically to get the storm water into that uh practice that's up in the center of the culdesac. So, we intend to have a small little uh practice for that lot um by a retention area rain garden. Um all all all of the other practices are infiltration basins. Uh we did some feasibility testing um on the site a few years ago. Uh the soils were very conducive to to uh infiltration and we designed all of the practices uh with an infiltration rate of 3 and a half inches an hour. Um, more recently that that lower infiltration basin um with the uh the state's uh change in the wetland regulations at the beginning of last year. Um we did go through the process of of having wetlands on the site flagged. Uh there is a small wetland that was identified in that area. Um I want to say 2400 square feet, so about 600ths of an acre. Um, and we're awaiting correspondence back from DEEC about whether or not they would take jurisdiction to that.

Where is that? That would be located right around here. Um, the we we don't anticipate they they'll take jurisdiction given its uh um isolated nature and it and its size. Um, and in the event they do not, uh, it would still be subject to Army Corps regulations. So, we would be looking at a uh a nationwide permit in order to fill uh that wetland, well, actually excavate it for the infiltration basin. So, you're your detention in the wetland.

Uh it it it's it's larger than this this uh yes, the infiltration basin is larger than the wetland itself. The wetland is just this very small pocket. What has happened over the years? Um actually this might have taken place uh Jim do you know how many years ago you were 36

36 many years ago that area was um excavated there's some really nice sandy soils on the site and so what we believe happened is when the owner removed that material it created a little bit of a depression and over the years silt from runoff from further up the site washed down and kind of plugged up the soil down there. Um, and so that led to the creation of it's again it's a theory of ours that that led to the creation of the small wetland. Um, because we did some test pitting in that area and when you get below the the first three or four feet of soil, you're right back into this very coarse sand. Um, so, you know, again, we um we don't anticipate it being an issue. Um but we we do have to wait to get that correspondence back from DEEC about whether or not it is a uh jurisdictional to them. Um some of the minor uh changes uh that were discussed with um uh town departments, the the infiltration basin that we're proposing at the at the bottom of uh of this road, we designed it without um an a a piped emergency outlet. The emergency outlet was originally designed just with a rip wrap spillway. Um I believe it was Bill Bradley prefers to have that hardpiped under coal lane to the slope on the uh that would be on the western side of coal lane um and directed down down the slope. Um so we would be looking to make that change. Um, and then there were

a French drain or uh, no, we would probably uh, we probably do that with a [sighs and gasps] 12 to 18 inch um, corugated plastic pipe. We had bad rain gets sucked into that pipe. Oh. Oh, no. We would have um, no, sorry. We would uh, have a concrete structure with a grade on top um, and it would be an emergency spillway that that way. Yep. Yep. I think that's Oh, sorry. Go ahead. Dave,

you remember we visited that site with Park and there was some concerns on the other side of Coal Lane about the erosion and so forth and so on. How was how is that correct? I don't know. It's been a few engineers ago. Yeah, something we'll have to look at. Yeah. Yeah. And Bill Bill's been looking at that as well. Yeah. Bradley, you get that water running out of that pipe.

It is. It is just an overflow and I think the the design's a bit conservative um as far as what what will infiltrate and what will build up in a 100redyear storm and overflow. Yes, this would uh yeah, as designed we took uh we were very conservative with the infiltration rate. Um we we measure we we typically have the infiltration rate we measure in the field just to account for um you know uh uh e either lack of maintenance or uh untimely maintenance uh of of structures like that. Um the other thing we we we can do with the pipe that that the outlet pipe that we're proposing would be to um come out of that slope as far down as possible. You know, drop a structure just on the east side of Coal Lane, go down as far as we can, as far as you know as feasible and and get the pipe as close to the bottom of the slope as possible and then just rip wrap all the way down until the grade kind of flattens out at the bottom there. who's responsible for cleaning that out though?

Uh so any any uh storm water proposed on this project uh that would include the culverts uh the infiltration basins and that outfall um at this point the proposal is that all of that would be managed by the HOA if if we don't decide to do a drainage district there which still has to be discussed. Yeah, I can tell you my development that there's a similar situation there. the same thing. There's a drainage grate on somebody's property. It's supposed to drain under Heather Ridge Road and into a swampy area. It's not maintained and that residence has flooded several times. So, that's why I asked the question.

If we go to a drainage district, then then it would be the town that would maintain it. Yeah. And this is a uh that outlet control structure the the emergency overflow um that is only for storms larger than the 100-year event. So we are talking they happen every year now. [laughter] Um yeah I I we we could we could take a look at uh the modeling. I think we're talking anything above uh eight or nine inches of rainfall in 24 hours. So it's a it's a it's a pretty big storm. But yes, they they are increasing certainly. And is the discharge onto public land? [snorts]

Um, the discharge would be into an existing drainage way. I'd have to get back to you on who has rights. Um, exactly. So, I appreciate that comment. We'll take a look at that. Yeah, there may have to be some type of easement created. Um, I thought the HOAs weren't doing the storm water management anymore.

Well, I think we started this on Sharp Road where we we decided against requiring an HOA uh for stormwater maintenance because the HOAs

weren't doing their job. Um, so yeah, I think this will likely go to a drainage district where um people in the district are taxed and that money goes towards maintenance of the storm water with town forces. Um, so anyway, that's the uh general overview of the project itself. Um what you know in addition to any comments that the board members may have this evening um you know we are ultimately looking to move the process along and um I I I know the board has seen this a number of times but it's my understanding that um the seeker process while it may have been started uh a few times has not been completed um and we're not ready this evening to have uh the board take any action as to lead agency. But that is our our intent is to get you a uh a full environmental assessment form in advance of your next meeting. Um and and then at your next meeting to uh to have a vote on on lead agency and we'd have a list of all the involved agencies uh for you at that time. Um

so the only qualification with that is if you can get that in well in advance of the meeting so that Mr. Bone Steel has a chance to review it, be sure it's complete so that we're not seeing it for the first time that night. Oh. Oh, yes. Of course. Of course. Yes. Uh what would that Sorry, you did just mention these meeting dates, but the next meeting would be March 5th. Okay. Okay. Has your um water engineering report been updated recently or any pressures

for the public? I I I don't I'd have to get back to you on that. I don't believe it's been updated recently. Um we do anticipate about 6,200 gallons a day um based on EPA estimates of of water usage. Um and it's my understanding that we have adequate pressure um in that main along coal lane. But I would uh we'll have to get back to you with that information. What's the size of houses? The size of the houses. Uh Jim, what are you looking at putting here? Um whatever the market bears. Yeah. They're nice lots

1,800 to 2,800 like the other guys. 1,800 to 28. Um I will I will say that on the uh for the purposes of storm water, we we tend to uh oversize these footprints to make sure that we don't have to come back and and edit anything. So I think uh the footprint shown on those plans is 2500 square f feet with like you know singlestory ranch with an an attached garage type of thing being removed from site.

Um there there will certainly be some materials uh being removed from site. I' I'd have to get back to you on those exact figures. Um ideally uh you know it is the the goal is to balance the site. Um there may be um also a home we can find for any any spoils on on the site um so that we don't have to but nothing like the first application. [laughter] That'll all be reflected on the environmental assessment form anyway. Correct. It Yes, we have to get all of that up for that. Yes. So, the board should expect to get the uh EAF and uh do we need an updated uh application form and everything or

Yes. Okay. So, we should be able to get that material by next meeting. Yeah. If if we're shooting for the uh the meeting on the 5th, we would have all of that um into Mr. Bone Steel by the uh the Friday before at least giving him a week to look at it. Okay. Yeah, you can you can it should go to the town, but you can email me a courtesy copy to get it to me sooner. All right. Anybody have any other questions? And I guess we'll see you on the 5th. Excellent. Okay. Thanks so much.

Thank you. Okay, that concludes our agenda. We do have one piece of new business which is the Mavis Tire Supply. Is there anybody here for that?

Good evening.

Good evening. Uh for the record, I'm Robert Rolls representing uh BL Companies. I'm a principal engineer with them. Uh BL is serving as the applicant representing uh Mavis Tire Supply. Uh I will also be the engineer site civil engineer of record for uh this project. Um [clears throat] site is located the address is 721 Husk Road uh sitting in the northwest corner of Husk and Mohawk A having roughly 200 ft of frontage along Husk Road. Uh the property is zoned commercial with a budding residential. The lot is uh approximately 65 acres and currently has 17 a700 square foot building that was formerly used as a dentist office and uh roughly 8,500 square ft of additional imperous paved parking area. Um the existing site elevation is as high as 491 ft in the northwest corner and as low as 478 ft along the Husk Road frontage. Um there is an existing uh wooden railroad tie retaining wall uh behind the existing uh property uh that cuts the the current grade down to about four or 5% over the the paved area. Proposed improvements um include uh removing the the pro the uh the building that's there, construction of a new 6,000 ft² building with seven retail auto service bays and roughly uh a 1,400 square foot retail sales area and waiting lounge. Uh we're also proposing 20 roughly uh 12,000 square feet of paved parking area andor concrete walk.

Access to the site would be off Mohawk A. Um we are proposing site lighting, pavement marking. Uh we'll have 25 parking stalls, two ADA accessible stalls. Uh we do not have any expectation of needing or seeking any variances. Uh, other improvements will include dumpster enclosure, off-site improvements to Mohawk A, and we're proposing a 4 foot widening on the west side of Mohawk to accommodate school bus turning movements. Um, and uh, while we're we're only in conceptual phases this time, we envision a a short roughly 3- foot high retaining wall along the frontage and additional storm water improvements and landscaping.

The uh, curb cut you have on Mohawk, where is that in comparison to the existing curve cut for the dental office? Is it further up Mohawk? I believe it is right across you're talking about the uh the curb cut for the the development that's being built now. Still the driveway your driveway your driveway compared to your proposed driveway for the dental office. Uh, it appears that it is slightly north of the existing driveway. Is it possibly be across from where the quick check

uh is? I It's close. Yeah, I I we don't show it on this plan, but we can probably bring that in to show that you're talking about dangerous territory here. You know that, though. [laughter] based on the history of this this this area. I I understand the adjacent area had some Yeah. Okay. opposition.

So just just saying probably that should be off the record. Well, I can state to that effect that the design team that that Mavis has put together um we are prepared for some opposition. Um we do feel this is an improvement to the area. We have operational statements from Mavis that we'll be including noise studies, traffic reports, signals, whatever is necessary to uh make the com make the public feel more comfortable with what's going on. How much green space do you have that you're proposing?

I know that. So, it looks to me that we are proposing roughly 3,000 additional square feet of imperous area versus what is there now. I'm envisioning some green space along the frontage along uh the Mohawk area where we're widening and behind the building. Um, I don't have an actual number on that, but I'm guessing that's going to be You don't have the percentage?

I don't have that. No. Is there is there I'm thinking you know noise levels um you know air wrenches so forth and so on compressors [clears throat] what what what can you tell me about that? I can tell you that we're planning to submit a noise study that Mavis has done. I haven't seen that yet myself, so I don't know what the specifics of it are, but they are they're happy to supply information to the public and to the board for review.

I mean, just based on the location and and the neighborhood and what the uh response was to other development along there, I'm sure that would be something they're going to be interested. Yes. What would be the operation that I do have? Um Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, and Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Thursday, 8:00 a.m. to 8:30 p.m. Saturday, 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Sunday, 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. is is what has been supplied to me by uh Mavis as part of their operation statement.

So, seven days a week, that's what I'm seeing here. Yes. Could you just quickly repeat those again? Yes. Uh, Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, and Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Thursday 8:00 a.m. to 8:30 p.m. Saturday 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. And on Sunday, 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Thank you. [clears throat]

I can check with the client to see if there's any exceptions that they take to those or if that's what they have to have. Um, but that's that's what they've supplied to me thus far. Do you have building elevations? We're not at that level yet. No, it's a singlestory building. Um, I certainly will will meet height requirements. I can't imagine it's going to be that much taller than the office that's there. I'm sorry.

They do use a standard building style. So, yes, it probably would be similar to others that you've seen. Okay. Do you need any variances? We are not expecting to need any variances. No, sir. Are you going to put a sidewalk up your side of Mo? I don't believe we're showing one there now. Um, that's something we could consider. The same scale. Okay.

Okay. Thank you. You say the height of the retaining wall along road is going to be what? We're expecting it to be roughly 3 feet. Yeah.

I I notice you have a sign in the front here. It's You probably have signage on the building. that is in our department. But, uh, yeah, they could apply for whatever signage permits they need and review for that. Um, I can say yes, they generally have a a lit monument sign, which is what we're showing on the plan, and they do have signage on the building usually up at the up at the uh corners of the building. Okay.

We'll provide a full phototric plan. Um, I I don't know what the I mean, obviously, we would seek to reduce any light trespass that's there. Um, I would think they'd probably want to keep their signs illuminated and enough lighting for perhaps a night drop off, you know, if somebody wants to drop their car off at night or something like that. So, something over the over a door. Uh, but I don't see that we'd be lighting up the whole parking lot. We can detail that further. you guys.

Yeah. Um, another engineering firm from the design team will be designing lighting. So, I haven't seen that yet. So, I don't know for sure. I'm assuming it would be um fixtures mounted on the building. I don't know that we would have a need for a size a site this size for pole mounted lighting. be enough places. I'm sorry. I said I think there'll be enough light spilling over places. Yeah. [laughter] What made you want to go up versus trying to do it for

uh probably the grades and it's a state route. So, uh as far as encroachment permitting and things like that, I I don't I don't think that that would be the safest way to go just in my judgment. So I I I don't I think the Mohawk drive entrance is better question. Yeah. Uh I mean it may have been just looking at what was done on the the most recently approved project too. Um but I I my guess is that a traffic engineer and certainly myself I would think it's much safer coming off of Mohawk than trying to put a curb cut [clears throat] on Husk.

There are no there are no current curb cuts on that property on Husk Street. Is that correct? No sir, there's some grade there too. Uh because obviously we have that three-foot retaining wall there. So that would pose a kind of a driveway. Property is right at grade. I'm sorry. I think the current property at the very front of her property is at grade, but it severely her parking lot. Yes. Yeah. Yeah. Mohawk is probably, you know, roughly 8% I would think going up Mohawk. It's fairly fairly steep. Yeah.

Was there any consideration turning this? So the base base mohawk rather right out

uh I I don't know that I've seen many models with seven bays in that kind of orientation. I think that would have been more difficult for us to do. I'm not quite sure how many different layouts we did with it. Um, but I'm thinking that that would shrink the building to the size that wouldn't be attractive to the client given the slopes. Just as a as a note, uh, a set of these plans will have to be uh sent to the the fire company so they can review the curb cuts and

certainly. So make a make a note of that when we get to that point. Do you guys sell tires? What other kind of work you guys do in there?

Yes. So, um it is primarily tire sales, but they do also do um let me read this from uh Mavis [clears throat] provides brake, shock and strut and exhaust system services as well as oil changes, state inspections and fluid replacements. They do not perform engine repair. There's no anticipation of having vehicles overnight or idling in the driveway other than the exception I mentioned earlier where they might have a night drop off for somebody who wants to get their tires or oil changed first thing in the morning or something. All work will be done inside.

All work is done inside. All used tires are stored inside. Um um they use a double wall 250 gallon tank for new end waste oil. Um they have an accidental spill plan. Uh do they burn their oil or they No, it's um it's emptied through a licensed hauler uh roughly once per month is what they say here. Um there's no floor drains or anything like that. They How how are tires delivered to the site?

They could take all of their deliveries um via a 26 ft box truck or smaller. You said you don't anticipate needing a variance especially for signage. We don't. Yeah, we're we're I I I don't I didn't go through the signage requirements and they have like sometimes the tires stacked up with the signs on them and there might be three, four of those on site sometimes. Yeah. I I the main sign, the building sign.

If that's not allowed, they won't be proposing to do it. I just come up with zoning so I can tell you right now [laughter] it's anything going to be stored outside tire. No, they do they do make that statement here as well um that there is no um new or used tire storage outdoors.

Yeah, we would coordinate with with the fire marshall. Yes. I'm sorry. Knock whatever whatever is required. Yeah. Okay.

Do you have [clears throat] any questions, Wayne? At this point, all I would say is uh make sure that you review the site plan ranks. Make sure you check all the boxes on that. um and be ready to answer any questions. That's right. Do we want a full EAF? What's that, Linda? We want a full EAF or is the short form. Okay. Um

I don't know. Uh yeah, the proposed 4 foot widening goes up uh roughly to our driveway which is you know well within the turning radius of of what we are trying to accomplish is that and I and I think what we're trying to accomplish is that school buses could turn in and out without entering into the other lane. So yeah, it goes right up to the beginning of our driveway. I think we are also assuming that we'd be asked to do a mill and overlay on on Mohawk past our driveway as well, although that's not reflected on our concept plan. I think it will be on our proposed submitt.

You anticipate having like guidance coming out of the property on the Mohawk that they only go towards street and not up around to come out the other way because that concern with the other development. Yeah, I I we did discuss that internally in our office that we would probably force them to go to sick rather than up oh what's the next straight up Roosevelt that has the right

and were we to do the full environmental um I I got to look at this um see if there's any kind of triggers that might push you to a full EAF. You're welcome to do you're welcome to do one on your own. I won't I won't reject it. Yeah, we maybe maybe we'll just do that. Yeah, I mean I mean yeah, the website checks off a lot of the boxes for you anyway. And then yeah,

and and I'd like to see the, you know, the um the resource mapper that pops out after that. Okay. Yeah, we can do that. You're going to have to you're going to make a lot of storm water. They're [snorts] not going to let you put it in the drains.

Yeah. So, uh I I believe there's geotechnical information on the site. I haven't seen it yet, so I'm not quite sure what we're going to do. Um, we will have roughly a 3,000 square foot addition to the impervious area. That's what out there now. So, I'm planning that we will have to do something most likely underground. If if we can't infiltrate it, we'll store it with a large volume device and and and

they're having issues on the other corner. Uh, the water table, perched water elevations. Um, we do have infiltrators that a lot of finagling to get them to work properly. So, yeah. We'll we'll look at that in design. We haven't had all the information to to do that yet, but that's certainly something we'll we'll get right. And who knows, maybe that site might be okay, but not likely.

Not [laughter] likely. All right. Uh, well, we obviously just, uh, received this information, so uh, give us a a timeline of when you're going to have new material here for us to take a look at. Okay. Um, can I get back to you with that? Uh, no. Well, I think the question is is do you want to continue this process by being on our next agenda or do you want I have never had a client tell me to slow down the permitting process. So yeah, I can answer that affirmatively. So do you want to be tenatively on our next agenda on the 5th of March? That that would be fantastic. Yes. Thank you. Okay.

Okay. So you are on for the fifth. Just so you know, we only have uh we got Paramont. I know you've been here which was the first people in our list. So you are going to be at the end of the the agenda so you might be here a while. Understood. Thank you. All right. March 5th. Thank you very much. Thank you for coming. Thank you. Okay. Is there any other new business? Any old business? You want to discuss the joint public hearing? Ah, yes. [clears throat]

Um, I'm a little lost here. Can you uh Which application was it? Recap this for us. That was for um Golden Grain Pizza. Golden Grain. Yes. Okay. Yes, they uh they have to do a site plan review and a requesting. Yeah, they need a million and variance for the porch site. outside porch area where they're going to have some tables on the uh and that that in itself actually would amend have to have an amendment to the site plan.

Well, they they've overbuilt the size of that porch. So, that in itself amends the site plan. Okay. As well. And they changed some other features on the site plan. They do some air conditioning. They've changed some uh concrete work in the back. There's two or three subtle changes to the site that we need you guys. So basically our responsibility is to review the site plan and then possibly the the zoning is for any type of variances that they may. Correct. So zoning it's come before zoning.

Yeah. And we are trying to coordinate possibly having a joint public hearing. Right. And at their meeting at their meeting. So their next meeting is on the 12th. Correct. See that? 16th. 16th. I'm sorry. Yes. 16th. 16th. Y. Yeah. It's the 16th of March. Okay. And I guess we have to decide whether we want to do that. And well, you would join that public hearing. Did we get an official invitation by the zoning board? Well, this is it. This is it. [laughter] We always sent cards.

Okay. [laughter] Normally, normally they join your meeting typically. Yeah. Yeah. This could be a switch. Yeah. Yeah. [snorts] Are they going to present something to us on the 5th and then we're going to have joint public hearing on the 16th? They could. Yeah. I mean, we would go in blind if we didn't have something. Yeah. Well, I believe they did we did hand up the site plans for them, right? They did get a look at I believe you guys were given a site plan for those. Okay. So we could we could not act on them. I'm told.

I think the question I I think is here is regardless of whether we receive it or we'll get it anyway. Do we want to have them on our agenda for the fifth be able to present the project so then we can say yes, we'll we'll do the public hearing. Uh on the 50th we don't have enough time to No, no, no. Just just a meet and greet. Yeah. I'm sure I'm sure Nick Castle doesn't have a problem. Yeah. Can we get copies of the material you handed out because I got no clue where that is. No, you can't. [laughter] That pile is really I can take measure. Yeah. And I can highlight, you know, the differences on the

Yeah. I mean, we can we can put them on our agenda for sure. But we have to agree to go to the public hearing because they need to hear. Okay. All right. Attention everybody. We have to agree that we will do the joint public hearing with the ZBA so they can properly notice it. So does anybody have a problem with doing an additional meeting for the public hearing on the 16th which I believe is a Monday. It is six o'clock. Six o'clock. six o'clock.

All right. Is everybody okay with that? And then they will be on our agenda for the fifth just to give us a presentation. So justify the the public hearing attendance. So yes, you can pass that along to them that we will appreciate it. We have to have a motion or something or it just gets noticed properly. It'll certainly get noticed. Um, I think that should be officially done at our next meeting. We are now going to have a public hearing. We're going to jointly do it.

So, the only question is your next meeting is the 5th. Yeah. When is the public notice going to get published? Right. No. Okay. So, we have to Okay. And disregard all that stuff. I just So, if if you wanted to have something in the minutes, somebody could offer a quick motion to uh hold a joint public hearing with the zoning board of appeals in connection with the application of Golden Grain to be held March 16th at 6 PM. I'll make a motion.

I'll second it. Is there any further discussion on that? All those in favor? Any opposed? Okay. Well done. Anything else under old business? No. Not at this time. Everybody all set? Then I'll make a motion that we adjourn. We have an agenda. We need a Oh, we got to do the agenda. Everybody jump on March. Who's that? Smith. Oh, Kyle Smith. He was out of town. I think I have a note on that.

I think I have a note somewhere on that. Kyle, yes, I have a note on that. So just to review Paramont,

Sillis, Mavis, and Kyle Smith. What about AT&T? AT&T is on the 19th because we're going to a public hearing. And the 19th also is the public hearing for Fisher. Golden grain technically on

Golden Grain is going to be on the on the agenda too. So it's Paramont Sillis Mavis and Golden Grain right Kyle Smith. [laughter] We got you cover. Okay. Thank you. We all second. Then I'll vote on the adjournment. All those in favor? Any opposed? [clears throat] Thank you.