Planning Board - Regular Meeting

I'd like to bring this meeting to order for the Town of Brunswick Planning Board for June 4th, 2026. If everybody please rise for the Pledge of Allegiance.

I pledge 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. Our agenda this evening, as it was posted on the town website and town board, is as follows. As I go through this, there has been several items that have been taken off the agenda tonight by request of the applicant. So as I go through the agenda, we will note those. The number one Fisher minor subdivision applicant seeks minor subdivision approval to subdivide 82.17 acre parcel into three new lots on property located at 842 Tamiac Road. Rebecca Fisher is the applicant. This minor subdivision has been postponed by request of the applicant. and will be put on the agenda for our next meeting on June 18th. Game number two on our agenda was Navis Tire Site Plan. Applicants seek site plan approval to demolish an existing residential structure and construct a new building to serve as a Navis Tire Motor Vehicle Repair Shop on property located at 721 Cusick Road, Richard Valverde is the applicant. This application for site plan has been postponed because they need to go right now before the zoning board before they can come before us. So they will be postponed at this time for future meeting. I'm not sure whether they'll be ready on the 18th. But we'll say tentatively on the 18th.

They may need to go to the zoning board. That's the way for a revised plan.

They may need to go to the zoning board. Okay. Okay, number three, Bodo King site plan amendment. Appleton seeks an amendment to a previously approved site plan, including changes to the drive-through parking lot, landscaping, and signage. At the Burger King Fast Food West driving property located at 747 Roussac Road, Carol's LLC and Joshua Basin, I think it's Bias Basin, is the applicant. Apologize for that if you're here. They are on the agenda, so we're starting with them. No. 4, Gallivan Way Road Subdivision. Applicant seeks to subdivide 2.55 acres of vacant land from 3.75 acre parcel at 156 Deep Care Road and merge it with the adjacent property at 401 Smith Hill Road. Shawn Gallivan is the applicant. No. 5, Cirrus Major Subdivision. Applicant proposes a major subdivision on property. Hold on a second. Excuse me. Applicant proposes a major subdivision on approximately 16.2 acre parcel of land on property located at the east side of Coral Rain. Jim Sawas is the applicant. They have been asked to be taken off the agenda and placed for a future date to be determined. So, In addition to that, we have two new businesses. What is the left field special use permit? This is for ground solar. Which I understand they're not going to be here tonight and the second one is Brunswick Acres major subdivision. So moving along for our regular business, we have received crafts of several past minutes that we should review and approve. The first one, it was a joint zoning board and planning board special meeting held on March 16th. And this was to do basically a joint public hearing, but it does classify as a meeting for the planning board. Has everybody had an opportunity to review those? Is there any questions, comments, additions? If not, I'll make a motion to approve them as they've been submitted. Do I have a second? Second.

Second.

Okay, second. Any further discussion on those? All those in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed? Thank you. Okay, number two is the minutes of the planning board meeting on March 19th. Has everybody had an opportunity to review those? Is there any questions, comments? I will say that as in the previous meeting, myself, Don Henderson, and Mike Chorney were not at that meeting, so any comments to those amendments should be

heard by the remaining four so if there's no additions or comments uh i'll make a motion to approve okay and so those members who are not present for the meeting should abstain from voting to approve the minutes should that be a matter of course as we approve these minutes it should i think it's unusual that you have three members absent so we'll need the remaining four to vote

According to backtracking, the same three people were absent for the joint public hearing.

I missed that. Okay. So did we already approve those? Yes. So why don't we rescind that resolution, that motion, remake it, revote it, but with any members who are not present for that meeting abstaining from the vote.

You're not going to have four tenants? Well, we have three of the four who were in attendance. Boy, these are, this is like a law school question.

But the problem is, are we going to be in a better position next month? Are we going to have the seventh member here?

If they watched it on the internet, does that count?

Look, for the sake of practicability, okay, we're going to want to have approved minutes. The better course would be for members who are not present to abstain, but if that prevents us from formally adopting the minutes, I think we can waive that irregularity for these particular minutes. So again, not setting a pattern for going forward, but under the circumstances, I'm advising the board that the full membership can vote to approve these minutes to get it done.

All right. Then there's a motion on the floor. There was a second. Is there any further discussion on that? All those in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed? moving on and just as a point of interest i think we had a foot we have a full report great stop so you don't have to worry about this one this is the minutes for the planning board of april uh second everybody had an opportunity to look at those is there any additions changes or amendments to it OK, hearing none, do I have a motion to approve? Yes. OK. That weak sound was a yes. Yes. I'll second it. I'll second it. OK. Is there any further discussion? All those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? And now to get to the agenda, which everybody is on the edge of their seats waiting to . So our first item on the agenda Would be better thing. Kind of moved up in the water real quick.

So I've got the same boards with me tonight as we had for the last meeting. We went through a fair amount of questions and answers at the last meeting. I think tonight's just a continuation of where we are at. I don't know if you want me to give you another brief overview or you just want to jump into where we're at in the process.

Yeah, just a quick fellow review where you are with the process.

So basically, and I don't want to speak for him, but I do understand that Mr. Moonsteele was able to review the plan set that was submitted, a full set of plans and everything. I don't believe you've got any further comments from what we discussed at the last meeting. Okay. And then I think the main thing really that we got into at the last meeting is I brought it, and I do have it if we want to get back into it again tonight, but I brought the board that kind of gave you guys a graphic depiction of kind of the rationale and reasoning for what was basically preventing us from being able to provide the pedestrian connection out to the sidewalk, being the significant grade changes and ADA requirements for slopes and rails and things like that. We would literally have to put a handrail across the drive aisle for the exit traffic, which obviously doesn't work. And other than that, I think the other item that you guys were discussing amongst yourselves was whether or not you were going to need to do a public hearing. I think you were leaning towards it not being necessary. A couple members were sure just from a... precedent of other projects on Route 7. So I think that's, for me anyway, the biggest question for tonight is if that's necessary. And if so, if we can get that scheduled or if it's not.

Yeah, we can discuss that as we go along here. I'd like to ask Wayne. You've reviewed everything. Everything is satisfactory. Yeah, I reviewed the site plan. Okay. In regards to the sidewalk, this project was approved initially. What year was it initially?

I'm not sure when it was, when it first came through. I know I was, I went back through some of the time slider aerials just to see if that angle was quite good. I think we're talking 80s or 90s actually.

I think it was, yeah. And I'm sure there would have been some concern at that time for a sidewalk. So there must have been some discussion about that. And probably based on what you're telling us now that the problem with trying to put something there is it can't be put there. So I'm pretty satisfied that we can proceed ahead without worrying about a sidewalk. at this point, since it was approved without one before. Do I have any discussion on that?

Yeah. I mean, I reviewed the information that Craig had provided. I don't see .

OK.

I also went to visit the site, and the cross pitch on the road driveway coming out is pretty significant. And the curb. corner you know that was possible that's also very narrow with the existing signage and curving that's there i don't know that you can get a four foot right so it might not be ada you could get a sidewalk but it wouldn't be ada compliant but i mean there is handicap

accessibility to the buildings.

Right, and the project is improving that as well. We're adding an additional space, rebuilding the sidewalks with new tactile learning strips and reworking all of that stuff that's going to provide better accessibility once you're into the site anyway.

The only comment I had in viewing the site in person was that this plan proposes a great deal of landscaping to the rear of the building, but THERE'S REALLY NOTHING ON THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING ADJACENT TO ROUTE 7, WHOSUK STREET. AND DIDN'T KNOW WHETHER THE APPLICANT WOULD BE WILLING TO MAYBE ADD A STREET TREE OR SOMETHING TO THE FRONT TO IMPROVE THAT LANDSCAPE.

Yeah, I think we could definitely look at that. There'll be a couple of things we've got to just consider. We've got power lines out there and we've got, there's a drainage swale that's between the parking and the sidewalk. So as long as I can get something in there, that's not going to interfere with any of that. I'm sure they'd be all right with that. Thank you. We also got to consider visibility of the sign. They're definitely not going to be impressed with it if we block it, but we'll see what we can come up with.

Okay, now let's discuss the possibility of a public hearing. Does anybody have? I'm a little sensitive to Route 7 at this point with all the development that's happened on Route 7. and uh concerns of traffic and everything with the residents and everything like that i know we sometimes treat uh amendments to site plans on the grade of which they're going to change the site um since you're possibly including you know what you're going to be including a second drive through and stuff like that I think there's significant changes to the site plan that would warrant us to possibly consider a public hearing at this point.

That's my opinion. I'll open the floor to any other comments from the board. I see this only as a good thing. I can't imagine a need for a public hearing.

Okay.

I think past history for Route 7, we've always had a public hearing. Even for amendments? Yes.

Okay. John, do you have any

uh yeah i mean i think if the people want to come and speak about it they should have your opportunity all right i think it's it's a positive part of the project so i think it will be positive comments all right i'm not opposed to it okay public hearing is a good idea okay

Yeah, I understand. Okay. It seems to me like the general consensus is that I think in the best interest it would probably be a good idea to have a public hearing on this.

Is that something we can get on for the next meeting then?

The next meeting would have to be the meeting after that because we need proper time to notice it. And we sometimes find that a two-week period does not work. Okay. And we've had some issues in the past on that. So we've now scheduled the second meeting out. So with that being said, you would be scheduled for?

July 2nd.

July 2nd.

OK, would we need to be at the upcoming meeting in two weeks then? Or just wait till that public hearing meeting?

I don't see any need for it. Wayne, you don't see any need for that?

No.

We have all the information we need to present to the public. They can review it. Yeah, we'll just put you straight on the agenda for July 2nd. OK. And there would be no need to come to our 18th.

Okay. Is there an updated picture? Is that what you'll bring with you the next time? Because I know we talked about the angled parking spots.

Yeah, I've got that on a different board. And like I mentioned at the last meeting, so we're going to make that change. We did make it just on board to show you guys how it worked out and that it netted an additional loss of four spaces, but we're still way over what we need to have. We were kind of just waiting to make sure that that solidified before we funneled that change through. have that ready for the next meeting for

prefer to have it available before, you know, for the public to review.

Okay.

If you could get that, you know, within the next two weeks.

Oh, absolutely. The change is made. We just haven't gone through and, you know, changed call-outs and, you know, leaders, things like that.

I mean, Wayne, do you agree with that, that that is probably important?

Yes, it should be available to the public.

Yeah. Yeah. Okay.

is that is that is an electronic submission of those revised materials acceptable for that purpose or do you need hard copies yeah you need drawings so that residents could come in and take a look at the building department okay okay so i just

All right. So I think we're all set.

Okay. And we'll do Seeker at the public hearing meeting too then?

There are some questions on that. We went to a seminar back about a month ago for Seeker. It was like Seeker 101. And they pretty much were adamant about having a secret determination before you had a public hearing. Because that supplied the public with proper information of how that was going to be perceived.

So we should probably have a conversation about that. We haven't been doing that. No, well, except for one example, right, where you issued a secret information before the public hearing. And at that public hearing, all people, I shouldn't say all they wanted to talk about, but a big part of what they wanted to talk about was environmental impact, right? And you had already issued your NEGDEC. So I would want to take a look at that. You know, my sense is that if you're going to have public input, and views on potential impacts. You're going to want that before you issue your determination of significance, which would suggest you would wait until you've had the public hearing before you issue your determination. So let's get together on that to make sure we're sequencing it properly. So again, if you hadn't mentioned the information you got from that seminar, my advice would be we have the short environmental assessment form, I'm assuming. It's probably an unlisted action. have our public hearing for the site plan. Once the public hearing is closed, the Board is now in a position where if it's ready, it can start issuing determinations. First step is secret determination, NEGDEC or POGDEC. If it's a NEGDEC, then the next step is you could issue a determination approving the site plan amendment. So that's how I would normally sequence it. All right.

I have one question.

site plan amendments did they need to go to the county planning and i didn't they've already been no wait until it's it's sent to the county once we have all the accurate information okay okay um just to give you a you know

The public hearing is going to be scheduled for the 2nd of July at 7 o'clock. And if there's other public hearings there, they will follow yours and so forth and so on. Once the public hearings are either closed or left open for whatever reason, the termination of the public hearing, then we go to our general meeting, and you will be first on the agenda. If you have no comments, we can move forward. If you do have comments from the public, it's required that you put a response to each one of those comments and present it to the board. We review it. And if everything is acceptable, any mitigating circumstances or whatever, then we can proceed ahead with the secret determination and the approval or disapproval or whatever.

Alternatively, if there are comments that require a response, the Board won't take action on July 2nd and come back on the 16th with those responses to be reviewed and at that point the Board

What this project is, I mean all the typical triggers are non-existent because of what we're doing. It's right there, all the stuff that you can generate. I'm not talking about from the public.

We've had some projects where, you know, at the public hearing, no comments. And then we just, you know, issue a statement since there is no comments, you're not obligated to obviously respond, and we move forward. So, You know, they work out that way.

Sounds like a plan. Appreciate it.

All right. Thank you. You're welcome. Next on our agenda is the Gallivan waiver of subdivisions.

just make sure you note that in a minute. Okay.

I think your boss presented this at our last meeting. Yeah, two weeks ago, Jake presented it.

Okay.

New business. Yeah, I think it's a pretty...

simple like lock line adjustment if i remember correctly yeah would you kind of like to review that with us on your board yeah so my name is ethan madison i work for jake t's me lansford i'm representing sean gallivan and michael lewis um they're looking for proposal for uh Boundary line adjustment between Sean's lot three that he owns. It's two and a half acres, 2.55 acres would be annexed to Michael Lewis. Michael has no intention of doing anything with the property.

This lot can't be built on, right? Because it's all wetlands pretty much.

Yeah, he has no intention of doing anything with the property.

No, that's not. The only issue we have, I think, is because it's divided by a row.

Yeah, we had a short environmental assessment form filled out because it is all wetlands.

It's not going to be a separate lot, though. It's going to be merged.

Yeah.

So it won't be a separate lot. It's going to be merged. Yeah. I know we've done this once before for Mike. Which one back years ago? With some other land that Sean had. But I'm familiar with that pretty much wetlands there.

Anybody have any questions on us? Wayne, your assessment. OK. All right, if there's no comments or questions, we could proceed ahead with an approval of the lot line adjustment. First of all, we would need a secret determination. Okay, there's been a nay deck proposed. Do I have a second?

I'll second.

Okay, any further discussion on that? All those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Okay, now moving on to the approval of the, I'm going to call it a waiver of subdivision lot line adjustment. Okay. Do I have someone who's going to make that motion?

I'll make that motion.

Do I have a second?

Second.

Are there any further discussion?

All those in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed? You're all set. Do you want these back? Yes. Yes, they're going to keep them, right? Okay, so gather them up. I think you're all set. All right, thank you. That's it. Okay, and that concludes the agenda we already talked about the fisher we're going to be put on the agenda for our next meeting uh latest tire though that that's are we going to put them on the fire next meeting or what you know it's hard to say until i put them on our tenant i guess because bill and i need to review the revised plan okay and that concludes our agenda so now we're into new business and the first item on the new business is going to be this solar collector for Mr. Rothfield, if he is not here. So that leaves us with, should we put those, him and Jennifer under new business again? Or what at this point?

I mean, this is now the second consecutive meeting where we haven't had the applicant come in.

That's correct.

I don't know at what point we just stopped putting them on.

You can be contacted by the building department.

Okay. And that leaves our final item of Brunswick Acres. Just to review everybody on that, this is a reapplication of an existing by a previously approved major subdivision. It was a conditional approval. And you have presented us with this big package of stuff. I would assume that there is virtually no changes to the application no no changes at all okay plans are still the same everything's okay these are the same drawings that you already know yes just 10 copies now there was a conditional approval uh we're going to have to review the conditions of that again i know one of the big things was the Getting the easement from National Grid.

Yeah, July 29th is their date.

Okay. So there shouldn't be any problems with that condition. The other conditions involved, bonding and so forth and so on, I would assume as we move forward, those conditions would be readily satisfied also.

Yeah, they're easy to do once everything else is mapped. It'll just be the last item completed.

Okay. Wayne, I don't think you've had an opportunity to review these.

No. I would like to talk to the SWIFT. OK. Did they review this the last time? Did you get the email from Bill? Did you get an email from the guys?

Yeah.

So we'll need to review the SWIFT because they're going to make some changes since the last week. OK. Yeah, Bill.

Are you sure that the SWIFT complies with the training?

yeah because bill bradley reviewed it i want to say in september i don't think i don't know if anything's changed since then but i'll just read forward to you that would be the previous foot yeah we got an email from bill on that so we gotta review that okay and electronic Yep.

I don't think I have your email address. Can I just send it to Kevin?

Send it to Wendy. Okay. All right. I have a business card. I'm not here to do business.

All right. Then why aren't you here?

I'm here to talk about planning. So we... Process now is obviously we have the material. We have to review it just to make sure there isn't any changes. Obviously, there probably isn't, but we do have to review the SWPPP.

And when we do that, would that be- The other issue perhaps is the jurisdiction

I thought, well, isn't that new, right?

Unless you can get the jurisdictional determination from DEC, then you'll have to go through DEC to give you a letter that I thought with that new reg that they changed in 2025, that if Seeker was determined before that date, then it still fell under the old rules. Yeah, but Seeker still was determined by the...

So there was a secret previous. Let me tell you how it played out on the second application, right? The one that has since expired. This is now the third. I look back at the second application approval specifically to see that the planning board redo any seeker. And there is a passage in that 2024 resolution that says we already did seeker or somebody did. And because this second application at the time is not materially different and environmental conditions have not changed, we can rely on and incorporate the prior seeker determination. So we can do the same thing here, provided that the project is substantially similar to what was already reviewed. And assuming that environmental conditions have not changed, we would not need to redo seeker. I think we still need to have the the submissions updated to reflect current requirements so if anything has changed swift requirements wetlands we need to review for that and just make sure it's compliant with what's in effect today not two years ago okay does anybody have any questions on this

I mean, we've done this a few times.

I might have to go through the record with Wendy and Kevin. I don't have everything, so. Yeah. Yeah. But the town board did this. They were the lead agency. Yeah.

Well, you also need to review the conditions of the second approval, see if there's any changes there. Well, the thing is, that was done by .

So this one we determined in our last meeting that the reviewing engineer would be Wayne.

So now we can put it on our formal agenda.

The condition should probably remain the same, right? It's going to carry through? Maybe, but maybe not. So because it's a new application, it's a new approval, everything is open. My guess is that we're going to start with the same conditions we had last time, right? Some of those conditions may have become moot in the time frames, so they might get taken off. Yeah, because they were just a copy and paste of the planning board's conditions for the PDD. Correct. But some conditions may still need to be there. These folks might decide there's additional conditions that they want to attach to. It's going to be up to them. But I think the starting point is the same set that were there the first time. They'll go through them. What do you want to keep? What do you want to change? What do you want to get rid of? What do you want to add?

Okay.

If any.

Now, can all this be done in two weeks?

Well...

The process should be kept going in two weeks.

So I think your next step is when everything is complete and Wayne's satisfied and you're satisfied, you're going to schedule for a public hearing. You're going to come in and do the public hearing. Once the public hearing is closed... and any comments have been responded to, if any, that starts a clock for you guys to issue your final approval. And that's when the content of that resolution, the conditions kind of come into play.

Okay. All right.

So come back next week?

I would probably say yes, because if we do have review and there's some questions on it.

He hasn't been on the formal agenda.

Oh, he hasn't been on the formal agenda. Right, that's what I'm saying.

Do I have to be put on the formal agenda before you can set the public hearing?

Yes.

So that's number one, you have to be on the formal agenda. So you're going to be on that. And then number two, we have to make sure We have everything we need, right? So if Wayne's going to take a look and get back to us, you'll come in on the 18th. We'll see where we are. If Wayne's done and we're satisfied, the board can choose to set a public hearing for the next available meeting. If there's still something outstanding, we might need to have that conversation.

Okay.

Sounds good.

Okay, our next meeting is on the 18th. Thank you. All right, thank you. Okay, that concludes our new business. Is there any old business? Okay. Now, let's review our agenda. I'll just. Okay, I have for our next meeting a reschedule of Fisher, and that's a minor subdivision. Mavis Tire is tentative for our next meeting. Burger King is not going to be at our next meeting, but has a public hearing scheduled for 7 o'clock on the 2nd of July. Gallivan was approved. Silas wants to be placed on our agenda for the 18th. We don't know about the law field ground mount solar.

I thought Wendy said that they wanted to come in.

She's going to.

Thank you.

Okay. So we will put them on for the. Still a new business. It will be under a new business. Yes, that's correct. But on our agenda, we now will add Brunswick Acres. So for the 18th, we have Fisher, Mavis, Sillis, and Brunswick Acres. And under new business on the 18th is Lawfield. Does that match up with everybody else? Okay. So if there's no other business to conduct, I will entertain a motion to adjourn. I'll make a motion. Second. All those in favor? Aye.

Okay.

Thank you.

That concludes our meeting.