Planning Board - Regular Meeting

Testing. Testing. You got it now. Steel, Dave. What?

Want me to give my steel? Sorry. Chris, you're going to read the short. The following notice of public hearing was duly published in the newspaper, posted on the town clerk's sign board, and posted to the town's website, providing as follows. Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held by the planning board of the town of Brunswick at 700 p.m. on Thursday, March 19, 2026 at the Brunswick Town Hall, 336 Town Office Road, Brunswick, New York, 12180 to review the minor subdivision application submitted by Rebecca Fiser for property located at 842 Tamarak Road. Copies of the application are available at the town of I'm sorry, at the Brunswick Town Hall and are available for public inspection during regular business hours. All interested persons will be heard at the public hearing dated March 3rd, 2026.

Okay, I'm going to I'm going to read uh procedures for the public hearing. Purpose of public hearing is to hear concerns, comments, and views from the general public regarding a particular proposal or application. All public hearings are electronically recorded and a written record of the proceedings is generated. In most cases, this written record is included with the minutes of the planning board regular meeting, which is usually conducted immediately after the public hearing. The applicant will be required to respond to all concerns and comments made at the public hearing and subsequently the planning board will consider all concerns and comments when when evaluating the application to ensure that the applicant has addressed all of the issues in question. The public hearing will be conducted as follows. The notice has been read. The applicant will give a brief presentation of the proposal and will provide any updates to the application upon completion of the applicant's remarks. I will recognize persons from the public and these individuals be allowed to speak and offer their concerns, comments, and views. Since the proceedings of the public hearing are electronically recorded, it is requested that all speakers step forward, use the microphone at the podium. All speakers will give their names and address for the record.

Could we just I'm not sure if I hear one. Could we have a motion to open the public hearing? We have a motion. I'll make a motion to open the public hearing. All in favor? I

I Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. My name is Mark Danskin. I'm a local land surveyor. I'm here representing the applicant, Rebecca Fiser, and her attorney, Paul Angster. and we're here to discuss the uh property and the nonrealy minor subdivision of the premises known as 842 Tamarak Road. It's a 80 plus acre parcel. It's located on the east side of Tamarak Road. It's uh north of Indian Creek. It's accessed by a 60ft strip in fee uh and then opens up to the 80 acres. Uh what we propose is a private roadway uh designed by the town specifications. Each lot is a three lot subdivision, two building lots which are greater than 5 acres each and the remaining lands. Each lot has 20 ft of road frontage and the bulk of the property i.e. pass the strip is uh accessed by a private roadway. As I said, uh, private roadway is to be built at the town of Brunswick specifications with a 16 ft travel way, 3-ft shoulders and swells on either side and fire apparatus turnouts located no greater than 500 ft throughout the access of the private roadway. Private roadway is approximately 300 3,600 ft long and uh it accesses two 5 acre building

lots and then remaining lands just all I got.

Okay. Uh anyone wish to get up and comment about the project step to the podium. Can you give your name and address? Speak into the mic. Stand to the side. Uh my name is Morgan Waters. I could I'm at 64 Indian Creek Road and uh I was just uh aware of this just this week of this uh proposal uh which is it's a great idea and my concern here is that uh I have a pretty serious uh power line that's underground here in this uh rightway easement that I have there and uh it stretches 1600 feet. Um you can take notes. It's an MC 350 7000 volt line and uh I don't have much information on the infrastructure how the road is going to be built. That line is just in a uh it's 3 foot deep and uh it's only in plastic loom. It's not in a hard like a schedule 40 plastic. It is 1600 ft and uh it's not in concrete. We've covered it. So, my concern uh my real concern uh I haven't met I haven't met the new owners but uh um and talking with Mark Danskin on that corner uh where the there's a big bend there's not a lot of room but from what I understand looking at uh this chart right here road is only 16 foot wide with a three-foot uh shoulder on each side which is it would give plenty of for a a single road, 16 foot wide road. Uh looking at this other one, I quite didn't understand this other one here. Show three 20 foot wide honestly there really isn't uh with the wetlands there, there really isn't enough room there.

But at 16 ft with six feet on shoulder, there's plenty of room. But uh coming together with the owners to make them aware of that a lot of heavy construction dump trucks uh hauling in and out would uh crush that line and snap it. It would probably back feed and blow a lot of power. That line comes from uh Tamarak Road. It feeds all the houses on the Indian Creek uh feeds my property. Uh it would be uh pretty pretty severe if it broke. And uh so going forward if you know there's a way to protect it ahead of the construct. It's just that one area where it needs to be protected. The rest of it is it's all marked out underground dig has been out. They've flagged it many times over the years. Uh there's great stakes uh along the property line there. So it uh I've kind of come here unprepared. I was going to reach out to National Grid to get their advice on an underground line like this. Obviously, you can't build the road over top. It just it would just the compaction from all the heavy vehicles would snap that line. So, uh but if the road is not built over that line, then we're okay. Um there's other issues like I mentioned before. There's it is a wetland both sides. Uh there's a there's a pond on the west side over here. Uh you might have maybe been at one time on Kak's property and it feeds across it goes over the B. Uh it is a low spot here. So if you come over this null when you go down, you know, if they fill this in to bridge the road, uh it's going to shut the it's going to cut the water off. It'll dry right off. So there's a lot to be said on that one corner. Um that pretty much covers it, Dave. I don't know if people have questions or

just let it be for now. That's it. I

say though, I would like to myself, I would like to reach out to National Grid just to try to protect any interest there and see what they have to say, you know, as far as uh protecting that line. So with that easement and this goes back uh to when uh I cut this whole road from a Tamarak road all the way up to my backpark um it's over 3,000 ft and my agreement contract with uh Niagara Mohawk at the time was that I had to maintain that keep it clean uh so they could access it at any time. They have uh they have a pole here where the rides tie back and it feeds down to B and uh basically it was just any trees cleaned up so they could drive their utility trucks in there. Um it's been like that honestly 25 years never had an issue.

So not it's been good for now. I think that's Thank you. Just one quick question. Where does it feed your property? Uh so here there's a pole here and it comes across from uh over here on uh Tip Bolson's property. There's a pole with a transformer and from there it feeds back toward the uh Tamarak Road, but it branches off. It drops down to Indian Creek and it feeds all the houses. And when I research this, this is a really old infrastructure. uh it might need to be upgraded. You know, like the new builders here, I'm not sure where, you know, if they reached out to

we obviously have one location on comes in right here brings in the power to you. Yes. And it's underground from there. It's 1600 ft from there. Underground. The pole comes in here and it follows the property line. The only markings I found are right down through here. They were really old long time ago. It hugs it hugs this. It's it's within 10 12 feet off of this. There's a stone wall here and uh it hugs that wall all the way around. And you think it's on side of the wall? Uh no. No.

It's in the clear. It's in the it's in the in the rightway what they described as easement there. So at the time it was not they came out and they laid it out. You know this is where but does the power line proceed beyond where that pole is. It goes east. It goes goes across the and in the not it's not not any further on that fire. No. Yeah, it is. It ends right here. That's what I'm saying. Yeah, the boarding on the same. Yeah. How many houses on Indian Creek? Uh, three.

So, I was just given the deed today and this easement didn't show up on any of the title reports or any of the uh research that I did and all the people through it. And I think it's because Morgan signed it instead of Mr. who was it Rifenberg. Rifenberg own George Ryenberg owned the property owned and he he's the one who signed off and I want to say it's been a long time. I'll be honest with you. Uh that uh Bill Doyle actually did the you know the write up for it. So it's been a lot of years. I see is Morgan's signature on it. So he's not going to come up in the search of the property. You know what I'm saying?

Right. Thank you, Morgan. Anyone else? From the sketch, given it appears that the line is within 5 ft of the property line all the way around the deep sketch. Yeah, it might vary. It might vary, Mark. it uh uh like on that corner uh where Bson's uh corner is there. It's probably uh come up. There was some Yeah, there's a steak there and it's probably 12 feet. It's probably 12 feet off the corner there. I saw him here and I saw them there.

Yeah, 800 dig. They've been out a few times. Uh back when Nits had prior owned the property, they were doing some work in there and uh I had to come out just so you know they wouldn't hit it or dig into it. He'll push your chin to hit it. So it's been marked but for whatever reason. So you know, you know, it's there to prevent any any kind of accidents. I'll have to have them come out and flag it. big city. Yeah.

So, there's a note on the drawing though where on the uh entrance where it says stabilized construction access 50 ft in length. Is that meant to protect that? No. At the uh is that on the uh it's on the entrance side of this property though coming in. It's on this uh storm water management. Yeah. No. Is it right down by Tamre Road? Yeah. No, I think that's more of a truck map. Okay. bring out on the camera.

Uh my name is Chip Bolson. I'm uh at 63 Indian Creek Lane. Um couple of things. We have we have four houses on Indian Creek. Um total of four, not three. uh for the chairman's um notes and um I wanted to just make sure that was correct. And then um uh the easement in favor of waters uh that that that was available with a one minute search on uh through the county's website. So um I got noticed on this last week in the mail. We've only had a week really to look at it or discuss it. Um, and so I have some comments here I'd like to um make regarding the plan. Uh, the houses, if it were my lot, I'd do the same thing. Uh, it's a perfect spot for them. I only have uh questions and concerns uh regarding a small section of roadway that abuts our farm in terms of the houses and what they're doing there. I think that's a good spot overall. So, um,

what's your concern? Uh, my concerns are the first one. Uh, I'm just going to read a statement I made if I may. Is that okay? All right. Um, the Let me see if I can Yeah,

I guess the first thing is the lands that are notated as I purchased it 10 years ago. Been there ever since. Um this roadway here that is These roadways right here that lead up to Waters property, those are part of our farm and we've made obligations to the USDA within that program that we have. We'd like to fulfill those. I did reach out to Miss Fischer today and some other days and we met after she went. She's a nice gal. I think she'd be a great addition to So, but my biggest concern is that fields I've notated were discussed with her and shown here on this map. Uh they they are currently used for agriculture and the zoning code 160-31 uh for agriculture uh setbacks buffers are required. If I may just read section B from 16031 the policy of the town of Brunswick is to encourage agriculture. So wherever agriculture uses a joint I'm sorry where agriculture uses and non-aggricultural uses join the applicant for the non-aggricultural use shall provide buffers to reduce exposure of these abuing uses to odors and other potential nuisances associated with the agricultural operation. and buffer strips may consist of vegetative screenings, woodlands, vegetated burns, or natural features. When required, they shall be no less than 100 ft width, maybe required up to 300 ft, depending upon the type of

joint, agriculture or farm use, the topography, and the proposed design and planning of such. In the event that an application requires the approval of the planning board shall take the responsibility of the planning board to provide direct protecting agricultural use for nuisance complaints lawsuits from their non-farm neighbor as a result of normal farm operations. So I don't see any buffer in here. I did discuss this with Miss Fischer today and asked if we could talk about it and work on it and just put a buffer in sections where we have Is it along a roadway or is it

It's along this proposed roadway. If you'd like I can either turn this or show you.

Yeah, please. This is this right here. This is the only section. Everything else here actually. So I would say this one, this one, this one, maybe a little bit here, a little bit here, and that's it. That starts. So it's it's this section, right?

And where's this field? All right, we'll we'll Yeah, we take comments today and then we'll sort them out. Um maybe better turn that at least turn it sideways so

that's all right. We got maps and stuff. All right. Perfect. Um, I also have some comments on the UI if I may. Um, they similarly echo uh what Mr. Waters mentioned and I'd like to see if there's been a study done to know if there's capacity on those lines. Um and if that can be required so we know because uh we're we're a small group between myself Harrington Farms Water Bishop Johnson and Tatsuki um we're the only ones on that line. So when we had an outage if it's a big outage takes a while for National Grid to get there. in one case three days. Um, so I'm concerned about the length of the extension to make sure that it's properly protected. Same concern as Mr. W brought up. Um, and I know where that line is. We can generally see its location. I'd like to be sure that we that that roadway and traffic vibration won't affect. Are you I'm sorry. Are you speaking at the overhead and underground or only the underground line?

Um well I generally just the underground line at this point but that would tie into my first comment about capacity. Um because I did talk to National Grid about perhaps getting a larger service when they came out they said I would have to put new lines all the way down to Tan Road. I said okay that answer my question. Well, thank you. Um, so my concern is, let's say this gets extended from wherever it drops into waters up to here. Will there have to be changes made to the overhead lines that run through my property? Um, where will they put poles and things of that nature? For example, this pole is now on the roadway. Are they going to move that back into my property? And then there's also a guide wire here that holds that whole line because that's the end of it. Where will that guy it's move or maybe it won't be? So it' be nice to know if that that needs to change. Um and then the the third lot one will that ever require electrical service and if it will what type of service and what size and how will that affect this new extension and then also the overhead lines within that are visible right out our kitchen window. I'm open to working with Fishers and also on the National Grid to help improve this. But it would be nice to know that ahead of time so that we can plan a good collaborative plan. Um

the other thought I had with regards to the lengthy outages that we can have is if this line is extended um can the planning board require fuses to be put in which utility companies use just just like our bigger at key locations. Say for instance where the where things might go underground or maybe back near where this power line drops down to the other three neighbors kind of goes down through Harington and then crossing road there's three neighbors over there and just to maybe eliminate if there is a fault this underground line on the road maybe it just shuts that down kind of segment off that primary truck just because we have that small um It would be nice to have that opportunity.

Chip, can you swing that microphone the other way? I'm not quite picking you up. Appreciate it. Yep. Sorry about that. That's all right. Thank you. Is that okay?

Yeah, that's much better. Um, outside of the electrical work, I want to just echo the same concerns as Mr. Waters about this pond. Um, as he mentioned, um, water does flow this way over to Arpon. If this roadway is put in, um, we don't has, I guess, has a site grading plan been provided yet.

Uh, this is a well, they provided existing contours. Okay. Um, this is a non-realty subdivision. We don't require extensive grading. Okay. For a for a minor um non-realty subdivision. Okay. There is grading there is grading on the road. I mean they do have something on the road with a with a typical section of the road construction but

okay. Um, but if we could look at that, that would be great. And, uh, because this this road does kind of undulate right here. It's not like a major up or down or anything, but some I think some grading will have to be done here. Um, as we can see, this pond uh does go into the roadway and that is listed as a wetlands on DEC's water environmental resource map as well as the pond that's located over here on our property water that runs through. I'll I'll definitely work with them and I love to do those kinds of projects. So, if they want to create some kind of waterway collectively with the two ponds and whatever, I'll I'll work with them help with a plan. But, I'm concerned because this road goes in this field is one of the fields I mentioned that we're using this one. All this leads over the waters and it uh depending on the type of roadway what type of runoff will we be subjected to because um some of these fields are burning and uh seedlings that are still pretty sensitive. So, uh, I just want to make sure that things don't run off into these fields and affect the things we just planted or the chickens and trees that we have there. So, if we can look at this section and learn more about this waterway that travels through here, so we can just make sure that that's unaffected and that this roadway doesn't create runoff on that section into the fields. Um and uh lastly this if you you might have seen it today our water table is very high. Anywhere you dig on this site 8 inches, 10 inches, you dig, you got water. For wells, that's great. But if we're going to grade out this road and

and get it working for them, this is this is really low. And the water table in this section here is just a few inches below. Other places it's it's feet. I don't see it being an issue, but I I think we should really look at this a little deeper and uh determine what should be done there. And then um Miss Fischer mentioned that there is a storm water plan of uh that's been done uh on the roadway. if we could see that to see what the calculations are and or if the town engineer could look at these two sections here and help me learn um if there will be any um runoff from this property to this property additional from the improved surfaces and if so just help us understand how much and what would be expected and that that's one of the reasons I'd like to have a buffer there. So there is these crazy storms or something to filter stuff and things so they don't drop into the field there. Um the last thing relating to the ponds um would be that um our area uh my property and the um the fissurers not all but portions large portions of it those are listed as significant natural communities uh by DEEC and they contain uh water bodies that are listed

as national in the within the national wetlands inventory. I'm not sure what that means at this point, but um I think we should look at it. And then lastly, we do have the long-eared bat um which is protected and there are certain times of the year where uh they should be aware of that uh so when they build um you know they don't run into issues. And I I guess I want to reiterate here that um being that the buffer is required by the zoning code, um I would like to be sure that we we do get into that in some fashion or grant us some time if you could keep this public hearing open or hold it over for us to work with the fisers and come up with a plan to get a buffer in there um so that we could just do it voluntarily as a group um versus um you know force and things of that nature. And um the the other reason um I would ask the board if if they would be so kind to keep it open is that um after quickly without studying the the meetings regarding this just in the last week um being that some wrong information was given early on to the board. Um I think they should have some extra time to look at it and we as uh the neighbors should have some time to look at it. Um, and just to review some of those things, uh, uh, ownership and easement information, uh, along with the

utility information that was presented, uh, may be incorrect. Um, and there are some also some provisions within the subdivision regulations that don't seem to be, uh, within these plans. One of them would be, um, structures, wooded areas, and significant features within 200 ft of the subdivision don't uh, don't appear, at least on these maps. Maybe you guys have gotten them. Um and uh within those regulations, the utilities available proposed uh those don't appear to be provided at least in terms of volume volume or capacity. And um the uh the patterns of drainage also don't seem to be provided. And again, specific section that section Oh, and um also the the uh portions of land within the subdivision uh subject to periodic inundation or flood hazards uh don't appear to have been located. And then uh the next thing are some notes. I the subdivision regulation refers to the comprehensive plan and uh under the natural and agricultural resources goal one, two, and three. Uh I'm concerned about um and I'll just read this to do it quickly. Uh adding a 3,800 foot road serving three parcels through a sensitive environmental area and water bodies runs counter to the goals of the comprehensive plan. Uh the proposal before the planning board today um as it as we see it on the plan uh doesn't appear to provide adequate protection for the farmland and this plan also uh appears to put at stake the risk of

rural lifestyle which is one of those goals that we maintain that. Um and that is by uh perhaps endangering primary electrical lines with traffic nearby or on top of it. And then finally, fragmenting large lots. Uh this proposed subdivision will impact our farm if it's built as shown. Um but without knowing the traffic counts or what type of traffic will be generated, placing traffic directly adjacent to our animals is going to disturb them. Uh lowering production and perhaps be a distraction for those drivers. Uh and also another question would be relating to uh traffic is will there be any homebased businesses that would generate traffic that the planning board should be aware of? Um will the lot owned by the corporation generate traffic and uh when and where uh when and where will delivery and trash vehicles be routed? Um garbage trucks are heavy and and this is they could very easily slide off right here. Um and um separately the scattered uh nature of the residential lots um lends the large lots for agriculture being divided for residential uses. As lots get smaller they are less conducive to agriculture in contradiction of the comprehensive plan. Uh, this proposal in its current plan appears to be a quasi reszoning of large agricultural lots into fragmented mixeduse lots and I appreciate the uh Fiser's location of the homes at the site and I would likely do something similar because that is a a good spot for homes. But in order to preserve agriculture and open space congruent with the comprehensive plan, we must seek to maintain larger, more uniformly

shaped lots that promote agriculture versus fragments with non-aggricultural uses mixed about. And uh finally, um it appears there there may be an alternative on Old Seek Road um to access the proposed home. There's an easement that was recorded in 2009 providing access to the property from Old SEK. Uh in similar fashion, it's a 60-oot roadway just as this uh longer one is. Uh the road on that easement uh that's depicted on that easement, it appears shorter and has fewer turns. Uh is this 60oot roadway available and can it be used as an alternative? And it appears buffers are already uh in place at that location where my concerns wouldn't even be uh needed.

Finally, the utilities could be shorter, reducing the risk of outages and maybe lowering the cost of those utilities. Earlier today, I did meet with Miss Fischer very briefly to discuss my concerns about buffer and the electrical line. uh she indicated she would discuss uh my concerns with her partners in the development and get back with me. Um I did ask if she would postpone uh the meeting tonight so we could talk about it and come up with a plan so I could just say, "Hey, great plan. Go for it." Um or or I have no comments, you know, or I support it. Um so um and we were only not notified about this last week. So if there's something you could do to hold it over or keep it open, that'd be great. uh or give us some time to work on it. Uh and that's it. So, if we could just have some more time to discuss it and then

give us some time to really focus on those few sections, that'd be really helpful. Thank you for your comments. Thank you. Anyone else? Anybody else have comments on this project? Well, no. I gentleman wanted he he he had a concern about the turn at the pond and fire. Okay. That it was 60 feet wide. Previously they were going to put houses in the back.

Don't mean to put you on the Did you got to get on the mic? Okay. Force me into this. Okay, tell us who you are. I'm George Ola Brandt. I'm 880 Tamarak. I'm right now right I bordered this land. But previously the previous owner was going to put houses in the back and the fire department killed it because they couldn't get fire trucks around the the bends. And that's my concern because I'm if there's ever a fire in the back there, I'm the first one to get burned. come right next to it and it's something the big fire trucks can't make these dents. Okay, we'll have it looked at

now. He tells me it's 60 ft wide. Mr. Hill's here.

Yeah, but still if it burns the wind is going to burn. Fair enough. We have to we'll have to make sure that the uh road can handle fire trucks. And I believe what uh what you were talking about earlier was uh Mr. Nits who did a preliminary design form. He was looking for seven or eight lots in a town road. Yeah.

It's just a driveway shared driveway. Town calls it a roadway because it's wider than 12 feet. We have driveway regulation be less than 150 ft long and it's 12 feet wide and private roadway which is a driveway longer than 150 ft. This isn't a road. It's one driveway going two houses. But still, you got a 40 foot, 50 foot fire truck making the corners. That's just that's my concern. Okay. Thank you for stepping up.

So, at this point, the board has two options. It can formally close the public hearing or it can choose to adjourn the public hearing but keep it open for continuation at a subsequent meeting. We've had a couple requests I think from the speakers to keep the public hearing open um based mostly on the fact that some folks are saying they only learned about this project in the last few days or so. So that that's the options available to the board at this point. Either close it or adjourn it but keep it open to continue at another meeting. members

fine with keeping it open. Keep it open. So instead of a motion to close the public hearing, the motion would be a motion to adjourn and continue the public hearing. I'll make a motion to adjourn and continue the public hearing until our next schedule meeting. I'll second the motion. All those in favor? I I now are we going to be able to hold a public hearing at the ne our next meeting or the So you will it's a continuation of the same public hearing so we don't have to worry about notice and all correct.

Okay. So we've closed the public hearing for tonight. They're going to work on the comments and then two weeks or whatever the 2nd of April. Um we're going to open the public hearing again. So if you have more comments, we're going to work on the comments that have been made and then we'll uh carry on with this project. So that's that. Now we got a motion to open the regular meeting.

Nope. We're going back into the regular meeting. So the public hearing is now done for tonight, right? You kept it open, but we're done with the Fiser application for now. So we'll just move on down the So we'll do the minutes from the last meeting. Any additions or corrections? Emil? Nope. Make a motion to accept the minutes as as presented. Is there a second? Second. All those in favor? I I excuse me.

Uh, last time I was in front of the board, I believe our engineer uh Steve Dean sent the uh uh pollution control and sediment control plan to uh Mr. Bone Steel. Mr. Bone Steel reviewed it, gave him some comments. I talked to Mr. Dean this morning, this afternoon, and uh he said he tried to have them ready for the next meeting, the April meeting. Is that the next one? Yeah. Okay.

Um hopefully he has them done earlier than that. And I don't know what the comments were, if how long it would take to review them. There was nothing really there was nothing really substantial as far as comments. Uh a lot of it was some of the report had the wrong dates on it. Uh the NOI the draft NOI was incomplete. Um we wanted some more silt fence in some area downs slope areas that was missing. We wanted silt fence around stock piles that kind of stuff. Um, so he has to update all the details. Yep.

So hopefully we have some a new one to show you and hopefully we get it to you before the meeting. It shouldn't be a problem for Mr. Dean to do that. I'm just telling you what he told. You're going to work on the comments from tonight? Yeah, Mr. Angster will uh take care of that. Okay. Um, I could comment a little bit right now though. Uh, I totally understand the uh power concerns. Correct. Yep.

I don't know if we were ever planning on hooking into that or not. Uh, that's to me down the road after approval and more of the building phase. Uh, and I'd like to just reiterate that, you know, this is just a driveway. If we if we didn't split this, we wouldn't be here and we'd be putting a driveway in. We're not putting anything more than a driveway. Just happens to be going to two spots instead of one. So, I just wanted to say that on there's two spots in the remaining lands.

Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yes. That's what I want to say. Okay. Do you want to say anything about Belleview? Yeah, I do.

Uh there was a public hearing scheduled tonight at for 227 Ball Mountain Road, which I believe is the cell towers up on the top of Belleview Road. And if you ask the Niagara Mohawk or the National Grid Corporation, who's ever running the show these days, how they access that parcel, they go up Belle View Road. There is no longer access from Bald Mountain Road. They got rid of it. So, nobody knows where 227 Bald Mountain Road is. Nobody on Bald Mountain Road. Nobody on Belleview Road. But the people on Belleview No, the people on Belleview Road are the ones that are affected by the truck traffic. They put a lot of stuff up there and when they put a lot, you know, they they've done a lot of developing up there and they've done it all through Belleview, not Bald Mountain. Thanks.

All set. golden grain. So, we had a public hearing at the zoning board meeting on Monday night. Um, one comment from a neighbor who was looking forward to the project being carried on through. And now we got a amendment to the site plan, I believe, that we have to discuss.

Yes. Good evening. Uh, Nick Casta. Uh, yes. uh the the site plan amendment with the the changes that have been made need to be uh the approved site plan needs to be amended. So the on the patio, yes, the overhang the way you have it proposed or way you have it started to build it hangs over the property line that the overhang. Yeah. Overhang right here, right? Just go. So what we talked about with Kevin is to cut off two feet of it so that it doesn't hang over.

Okay. And then the three yellow um in the back. Yeah, those are all existing. This has these are existing.

Okay. But that was on the original uh site, right? During the zoning board hearing, could you review what um conditions were set for the compressor area? Yes, that's correct. So, uh we had proposed uh to put in a couple of arbories here. There was some concern that those could be candy for the deer. Uh, so we we talked about maybe switching it to a a solid fence, a solid wood fence. Do you know what you're going to do or do we have to tell you what to do or

No, no. I I I believe that we're going to do the solid wood fence because if we put the arborites and and the arborites uh become uh eaten by the deer, then we'll have to either replant them or put the fence. So, we might as well avoid that. And you're going to do a wood fence? Yes, a wood fence. Yeah. Not a plastic vinyl. No, I I I think that, you know, there's problem with some of the vinyls with the winds. It'll be similar to the enclosed dumpster. Yes, that's correct. They'll match

on the site plan. Um, I have a question about the amount of area that was increased on the patio. Um, I believe, sorry, I'm trying to find my notes here. There was a the original was 9 by 20. Yeah, n 9 by 20 or 9 by 21. Originally what this planning, that's correct. And what is built currently is 13 by 30. Yes. Which is almost double what was approved. Right.

And we had a pretty lengthy discussion at this point about parking for this facility and the number of seats. It is part of that parking calculation or the square footage. So, I'm not sure how we address this, but if the seating could be limited to the to reflect the amount of parking that's provided, whether they move it inside or outside, I don't have a problem with that, but I don't want to see, you know, 20 tables and we only have 10 m 10 parking spaces. Right. Right.

So, I'm okay with it being a flexible space in the summertime if they want to move tables to the outside patio area, but I don't want to see our site plan approval, which your concern is a bigger patio means potentially more customers, means potentially more cars, and is the parking that was previously approved going to be sufficient? Well, the form the formula with the have those before me.

The formula with more area, it's going to say you're going to have more people and then parking, it's going to go with the square footage. Yeah. The the idea is that the people that would be outside would not be inside. you know, there's certain times of the year that they'll be dining outside and and those people are not going to be inside. Uh so, you know, the the the parking is limited like you said and and that was based on uh the the number of seats.

So, patio calculated parking needs for what they built? No. But it but we approved it based on a number of seats I believe was the approval. How do you do that? I don't recall that that's the way you guys approved it. I have to go back. Yeah. I I don't remember number of seats but u if you could you know I don't I don't I don't believe there was a a footprint off the top of my head for the patio. Right. Right. It was just in the summertime the Yeah. patrons instead of being in the diner, they'd be outside of the diner

and a seasonal use. Right. But you still could have the same number of people inside as you got tables for inside and you could have more people outside at the same time. So you could actually have more people there.

You could. Yes. if if there's uh you won't have the same number because the the patio is not equivalent to what's inside. But you you're correct. If if uh uh there's people inside and outside, then that's not that's not how it was uh planned. And uh if uh you know if that becomes a problem, I think it would be a one-time problem because then people are not going to come back if if they can't park if there's no parking spaces.

Did you have that calculation on your original site plan about the number of parking spaces? Yeah. The number of parking spaces I we do have, you know. Yeah. And then but then you expanded parking to go across the road. Yeah. Yeah. Because you lost some spots in the front because of maneuverability. Yeah. And along the side. But how many spots are in that overflow parking parking? Yeah. That that was done for that reason, right? If you remember that he he approached the owner there. There's eight. There's eight here. Yeah. Across the street. And how many along the front?

Eight. Eight along the front.

I I would just ask that the the number of seats is consistent with the originally approved site plan parking stalls. Basically what Chris said is is the parking adequate for the additional square footage that was added to the you could say that the number of tables seats shall not exceed that previously approved on the original site plan. What I don't know though is whether that site plan specified that. I know we had a parking layout, right?

But I'm not sure if it was specifically tied to number of patrons, so I'm concerned about I don't recall that it was. I think it based on the square foot and the usage. The only Yep. the plans that were submitted for building construction has tables out. The site plan did not No. Right. The the detail the detail of the interior was was not correct. Part of the site plan, right? It was not worked out at that time. Would it be hard to check that tonight or Yes. Question. Did the zoning board approve the changes or Yes.

So, the the zoning board granted their sideyard variance request subject to two conditions, right? One was uh required the installation and maintenance of either vegetative screening or a fence along the rear property line. Right. And the second condition was the uh trimming back of the overhang by at least two feet. Y and presumably if if and when you guys decide to approve the amendment to the site plan, you'd have at least those same two conditions. So there's some consistency. You could always add additional conditions if you were so inclined.

So, Kevin, uh what is it? Three three uh three patrons per car. I don't have that code. Oh, you don't have that? That's what I thought I It was something like that. It's

in there somewhere. What's the total square feet of the dining area inside?

Yeah, roughly I don't I don't have the the elevation. That's the elevation. I only have the elevations. Well, you had adequate parking for the original site.

Yes. Yeah. Right. Right. I don't remember if you had excess or not when you added that other park. I I don't know that either. It's I know we had enough.

Yeah. I don't think I'm going to find it right away. So I What's the Are we looking for the parking standards?

I think I found it. So for restaurant, it's either one for every two seats. For every two seats or one for every 60 square feet of area available to patrons. So theoretically with this site amendment, we're increasing the square feet of area available to patrons by a certain number. And we could theoretically do the math to figure out what that translates to in terms of parking. The square footage

it was 9 by 20. So that's 180. Well, but we we need to know the overall square footage of the restaurant before and after, right? So, when you first approved it, it was X and that translated into so many parking spots.

I guess the only question I have to that too is we're we're also talking about a space that's seasonal, right? So, do we want to hinge the overall parking restriction on seasonal space? I mean, look, your board, you know, I I guess I would plan for the worst case scenario, right? So, the seasonal use, it's June, you've got a full restaurant, you've got a full patio. How many spaces would you need? Yeah. We don't want people parking on the street. That's the whole thing. Yeah. I calculate the difference is 210.

So let's call that three spaces. Three extra space. Now what we don't know is whether or not the original plan provided more than they needed and so it provides some of that 3x. Right. Do you know what the inside seating area is or the I don't have that. There's a there's a floor plan, but I don't have the floor plan with me. Trying to get a decision tonight. Yeah. Yeah. No, I the um the extra parking across the street that was always part of the plan. Uh no, originally there wasn't enough parking

when when the when you got the first site plan approval. That was part of the plan. Well, yeah. Yeah. But it happened during the process, you know. Correct. Right. So when we went through the discussions, right, realized he didn't have enough parking space. So he approached the the How many spaces do you have across the street? Eight. Across the street. Yeah. 16. There's there's actually 19, but three of them are u allocated for employees. And that those are in the back, right? Yeah, those are in the back. Yeah, 19.

Yeah, there's 19 total. And that's that was shown on the approved site plan. But for intent purposes though because the this is talking about area parking square footage available to patrons, right? So I don't think you could include the three spots that he's talking about for the employees. So we're still really talking about 16. That's Y 16* 60. Yeah. 16* 16. So that means you if you have 32 people in there, you need 16 spies. Now, what's the capacity of that space? Are you going to have 32 people in there? It's we

It's a lot of takeout there, right? Yeah. Delivery. Delivery. Delivery and takeout. Yeah. Mostly it's delivery. He does his other two stores on Wolf Road and uh East Scream Bush. He does lots and lots of deliveries. They don't have a lot of parking in East Spring. They don't have a lot of parking in East Spring Bush. I passed by the old No. No. Actually, he expanded the he bought the house next door. He put in another I think it was eight or nine parking spaces. How much is it per It would be 96 time 960,

right? And then what's the patio is along this

what's the total the total is eventually going to be 13 by 30. So the patio patio one two you could scale it quickly. Oh yeah, yeah, yeah. The you're talking about the building square footage, Wayne. Except I mean it's a good start, but technically it's just the area of the building available to patron. So part of it's going to be kitchen, part of it's going to make certain assumptions, right?

It can't be worse than that, right? Right. You assume the entire building's available to patients, which it probably is not. Can we use Wayne's limit the number of table occupancies? You can 32. You can make that a condition. I don't know how you enforce it. Number of seats. Well, if it becomes an issue and people are parking down the road and and you walk in and you count the seats and they got more than the parking supports and the road is is an enforcable violation anyways.

Okay. as long as it's covered somewhere that I know we had a lot of discussion about parking on the road and providing ample parking and they've gone to lengths to provide parking across the road, right? But they've also increased the area. Yep. What what did we decide was the total proposed number of parking spots available for customers? 16 for patrons and three for employees. Correct. So if there's 16 spots that can support 32 seats,

right? So, a condition could be that um there should be no more than 32 seats available for customers at any time. Anybody else? the the only the only tricky part of that is if there's 32 inside, you know, uh if if you take, let's say, 10 of those and put them on the patio, you know, then there's 22 inside and I don't have any issue with that. Right. Right. If there's 30 outside and 30 inside,

right? No, that's an issue. Yeah, that's correct. Yeah. Then he'll come to see him. Yes. Enforcement. Yes. That's planning board, not enforcement board. Yeah. I don't Kevin and I'll just go have to have pizza someday in the middle of the summer. Have pizza. Starts putting on weight. Let's Anything else on this matter? Um, I'll make a motion to neg the secret. I guess you got to neg the secret. She made a motion. Neg. I'll second it. All those in favor?

I I want to make a motion to approve this. I'll make a motion to approve the site plan of 32 seats. So is there also an interest in including the same conditions that were attached to the zoning board approval?

So why don't I just read out what I think are the three conditions that are being proposed for the approval. One is that uh the installation and maintenance of vegetative screening or fencing at the rear of the parcel. Two is that the overhang be cut back by no less than two feet. And three is that um the seating capacity be limited to no more than 32 seats. Second that. Any other discussion? All those in favor? I I Thank you.

You got a stiff neck, Nick. Yeah. Pinch no business. No, we do not any old business.

My daughter said Chipotle's moving right along with their building. They have a expected when they're going to open or she need a job. No, she's a banker. She's all right. They are moving right along. uh agenda for the next meeting, the public hearing for So, we're going to continue the Fisher public hearing. Correct. We may have AT&T or are they the 16th? We have We have a public hearing for Kyle Smith. Kyle Smith for the second. Yeah.

JJ Silus. And we also have the 16. I'm sorry. Davis Davis and we'll probably have Paramount group back as well and the AT&T public hearing you 50 on Bel or Bald Mountain or

um anything else. Look like a motion to close the meeting. Is there a second? Second. All those in favor? I I