Planning Board - Regular Meeting

Okay, I'd like to bring this meeting to order for the Town of Brunswick Planning Board for April 2nd, 2026. If everybody please rise for the pledge of allegiance. To the flag of the United States of America and to the stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Thank you. Okay, this evening's agenda is as follows. This was posted on the town website and the town board. Uh, number one, Kyle Smith site plan and special use permit. Applicants seek site plan approval and a special use permit to complete construction of a one-story building with a carport on property located at 1691 New York State Route 7. Public hearing to commence at 7 p.m. Kyle Smith is the applicant. Number two, Fiser Minor Subdivision. Applicant seeks minor subdivision approval to subdivide an 82.17 acre parcel into three new lots on property located at 8 uh excuse me, 842 Tamarak Road. Uh public hearing to continue at 7:15 p.m. Rebecca Fischer is the applicant. Number three, Paramont Building Group Major Subdivision. Applicant proposes a major subdivision on 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. Paramount Building Group of New York is the applicant. This item has been uh removed from our agenda by the request of the applicant and rescheduled for the April 16th agenda and that was posted also I believe on the door coming in. So anybody that's here for the Parammont building group that is not on our agenda tonight. And finally, number four, Mavis Tire site

plan. Applicants seek site plan approval to demolish an existing structure and construct a new building to be used as a Mavis uh tire supply store on property located at 721 Usk Road. Uh Richard Vendina Lera Valverie

Valverie. Okay. is the applicant. Thank you. I have a history of not being able to pronounce people's names, so please excuse me. Okay. Uh our first uh item of business before we get into the agenda is the review and approval of our minutes of the March 5th meeting. Has everybody had an opportunity to review those? Are there any corrections, additions, uh comments that have to be made on those minutes? Okay, hearing none, I will make a motion to approve the minutes as they have been submitted. Do I have a There's a second. Is there any further discussion on the minutes?

All those in favor?

Any opposed? Thank you. The minutes for the March 19th uh meeting have not been prepared yet. So, we will uh review those at our next meeting. Okay. First on our agenda is a public hearing. This is a public hearing for Kyle Smith site plan and special use permit. Procedurally, I will read the uh the procedure for the public hearing. The purpose of the public hearing is to hear current concerns, comments, and views from the general public regarding 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 introduced or included, excuse me, with the minutes of the bo uh planning board regular meeting which is usually conducted immediately after the public hearing. An applicant will be required to respond to all concerns and comments made at the public hearing and subsequently the planning board will consider all concerns and comments when evaluating the application to ensure that the applicant has addressed all the issues in question. The public hearing will be conducted as follows. The notice of public hearing will be read by the planning board attorney. Next, the applicant will give a brief presentation on the proposal and will provide updates on the application. Upon completion of the applicant's remarks, the chairman of the planning board will recognize persons from the public and these individuals will be allowed to speak and offer their comments, concerns, and views. Since the proceedings of the public hearing are electronically recorded, it is requested that all speakers step forward and use the microphone at the

podium. All speakers will give their name and address for the record. The notice of public hearing will now be read by the uh planning board attorney. The following notice of public hearing was duly published in the newspaper, posted to the town clerk sign board, and posted on the town's website as follows. Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held by the planning board of the town of Brunswick at 7 PM on Thursday, April 2nd, 2026 at the Brunswick Town Hall, 336 Town Office Road, Brunswick, New York, 12180 to review the applications for site plan and special use permit submitted by Kyle Smith for property located at 1691 New York State Route 7. Copies of the application are available at the Town of Brunswick Town Hall and are available for public inspection during regular business hours. All interested persons will be heard at the public hearing.

Thank you. Okay. Will the applicant uh step forward and give a brief presentation and give us any updates on the application if there is any? Uh yep. I don't think there's any updates on the application. Um, what I'm doing is conduct constructing a simple 24x 24 building with a carport off the side which will house an office space. Um, and uh that's it.

Okay. All right. At this time, I will open up the uh public hearing to the public. Anybody wish to come up and make any comments, have any questions for the applicant or uh make any type of uh opinions on the uh application. I didn't think there'd be an overwhelming crowd tonight. So once again I will make a announcement that anybody wishes to make any comments have any questions or concerns about the application. This is the Kyle Smith application for a site plan and special use permit at 19 at 1691 Route 7. It's obvious that there's nobody here that's wants to uh be heard. So uh I will make a motion to close the public hearing.

Second. Second. Any uh discussion? Okay. All those in favor of closing the public hearing. Any opposed? Okay. Thank you. Now you have to stick around for our regular agenda items. the rest of them. Well, no. We I have another public hearing to do before you come up and then we'll open up the the meeting and you're first on the agenda. Okay. All right. All right. Don't get all excited on me.

Okay. Now, the second uh public hearing is an a I'm going to resume the public hearing uh for the um let's see this is the Fiser minor subdivision public hearing was was was uh at our last meeting on the 19th of March. uh there was comments heard the com the conversation in the public hearing was kind of uh on the long side I understand so they u decided to leave it open so it's been remained open and now we're resuming that public hearing why don't you give a just a brief outline of the uh project uh Park

just give a

Oh, yeah. Just a brief outline. It's a 80 80 plus acre parcel located on the east side of Tamarak Road. We subdivided into two building lots and a remaining parcel of land. Each building lot is five acres accessed by Tamarak Road. Each lot has 20 feet of road frontage and share a uh private roadway to the building lots through the uh through the property. Okay. Now, uh we did receive a response to the the comments that were made at the first part of the public hearing last meeting. Um, I would like to know if there's any additional comments from the public. Does anybody wish to come up and make any other comments?

Sir, come on up. I may, but my my comments may be answered. So So you don't wish to make any more? You don't you don't wish to make any other comments or add anything to the to the comments that you've made before? I do. Yes. They may already be I'm happy to make them. They're short. That's fine. This is just a preliminary, you know, uh submission by uh by the applicant.

Uh Charles Bolson, 63 Indian Creek Lane. Um Morgan Waters who came at the prior meeting uh he was unable to attend tonight's meeting uh he asked me to convey a message if it's okay that additional time be granted for him to discuss uh with National Grid the power line we had a lot of discussions about he he's concerned about protections he wants to walk that line with them and just make sure that the roadway or that there's a distance away from that line So, it's protected. So, that's a message from him. Um, I would uh I would also like some additional time to uh look into some things. Um, that'll allow me to review the pond on my property uh with the Fish and Wildlife Service, DEC, and the Army Corps. Uh the wetlands I notated in the inventory in the prior meeting uh are classified and regulated as far as I can tell and I would like time to look into those regulations uh surrounding the ponds. Uh there are uh protected migratory birds that use our pond for breeding. They're in the pond right now and they arrive every spring for a few months. Those birds also use the pond located on the neighbor's property that is not owned by the applicant. Uh the proposed uh roadway landing immediately adjacent to these waters raises concern that any artificial means used for the roadway construction may affect these ponds, including drying them out, particularly mine. Uh the groundwater that feeds these ponds and the waterway. Uh I'm sorry, scratch that. Um, basically I want to review the these two ponds and the waterway that connects

them uh just with uh some additional authorities. Um, and I'd also like some time to look into the prior project that Mr. Hilda Brandt discussed or mentioned. Um, I reviewed the proposed roadway on file at the town. Um, just the section uh I notated that borders are fields. Uh, Mr. Aster, you weren't here. I just have a a limited section that I'm concerned about um that my comments relate to. I reviewed that uh proposed roadway on file at the town and without a site grading plan, we have no way of knowing whether or not those improvements will create any issues with wetlands, wildlife, agriculture, soils, or trees. Uh the subdivision regulations appear to grant the board with discretion to require a site grading plan. It would be helpful to know where to what this roadway will look like on paper before if it is approved. And um if it's okay, uh Mr. Mr. Danskin, may I use your your map to show the board this section?

Absolutely. Where are you?

Just a section. That's so um gener generally we're talking about this year and I have a different I a drawing just with a further extension. And this is the section my comments relate to. Nothing else. The pond I'm discussing is here on uh looks like Kak's property and my pond is over here. And the reason I bring up the site grading plan as I I looked at this uh there's great marks all along the roadway grade lines but the sections here on my property this line and then further down as it turns no there's no grade lines and so without those grade lines and without a photo sight gradient plan we don't know what elevation this road will be and there's a waterway that traverses through here and you were to go out there right now in the last few days the entire area.

Okay.

He's right here. There's the pond he's talking about located right here. Neither are on this property. Thank you very much. Did you say neither neither of those ponds are on your property? No, this one is on my property. On subject property. Oh, subject's property. Okay.

I'm talking about this one here. It It does fall into a little bit onto the proposed property behind here. There's a waterway through here. And there's no grade lines. There's a couple here, but there's nothing here. This area here, this area here, and this area here is right now all flooded with water. And that's really my concern is what are the elevations going to be on this roadway so that I don't take on extra water or have water restricted to our pond, which currently floats this way. So that's my that's my general concern.

Okay. Uh and that relates back to my

we would like to just respond to that if we can that particular issue. We have been we have some photographs to show the board. We have been uh focused on the power pole which is not servicing our property but certainly servicing Mr. Waters property but is on our the applicant's property. And when you stand at that position and you can see we'll show you pictures. You can see Mr. Bolson's pawn over here and you can see Mr. Hilligrant's pond down here. And that's the problem. He's at 509 and this this elevation up here where the power line is is over 600. So it's a uphill travel. I don't know anything about what may exist subterranean wise between the two bodies, but it's uphill from Mr. Hillbrand's pond to Mr. Bolson's pond. And the last I know, water doesn't go off. Now, there may be some issues down there, but we're going to build a driveway in accordance with the town's requirements that's going to be raised up, if anything. And it's going to be a bed of gravel, and we're not having any kind of cut or fill that would interfere with whatever is going on now, if anything, between the two bodies of water. So, I don't think it's an issue that needs to be addressed other than we're not going to do anything on the roadway that would interfere with care of it.

No. Um I I disagree. Um the He's right. There is an uphill portion and I would agree that this is at 600 and uh that's at 590 not 509 and I'm talking excuse me 59 10 ft down from this point right I'm talking about here this is the one not this way I'm talking about this but this is clearly uphill this is uphill this is 600 ft over over there. Yeah, but that's a lot of

I'm not a qualified and I'm reasonably certain you're not I'm happy to grab my phone and show you. We have some right here. Well, let me finish. Okay. All right. Put that So the

I'll come back to that in a moment. Um but my uh I only have two comments. We can go back to that. this this uh property pin here. Um this uh I was told by prior ownership that property pins were moved for whatever reason. I don't know. This one has hammer marks on which it may be moved, may not be. I don't know. I would like to have my surveyor independently check this mainly just check this line. Uh that would be another reason I would like some time. Um, up until now I kind of said, "Well, there's there's no real effect there, but based on the appearance of that one, what I was told by prior ownership, I'd like some time to look at that." And then the other thing is uh reviewing this these BM marks in relationship to the property and where they are. I'd like to verify that as well. I I realize that these can't be located exactly on the drawings. So, I'd like I just like some time to verify these pins here. That's it. And um I guess we we go back to the water photos just self-explanatory. This is the pond on the Hill property. This is my truck at where the power line is. And down there is the Hill property. And back here is the Bolson Pond. So there's a distance of

several hundred yards between the two and it's uphill from mill. I disagree with Mr. Kingster. These photos don't depict the waterway. Um this he's correct that this is the pond on the neighbor's property and he's correct where his truck is sitting is uphill but what we're talking about is from the corner of this pond behind this old rock wall coming down this way that leads it's these photos do not depict the water I have photos on my phone but um he's Mr. Drinkster is correct. This is the pond on our property and the waterway is here and there's there's also a small section of pond over on this side. This is the electrical easement and it flows it flows through this field here and then down here to our pond and then down to Indian Creek. And that's the waterway that I'm I'm concerned. I can show you But he is correct. This is high. This is low. If it was if the grade lines were notated on the plan, it would show it would show it. So I'm going to ask a question. Uh what what are you trying to prevent here? What what what is what is the what is the objective of you say that it's uphill downhill. Are you worried about your this pond being

flooded additional land being flooded? What what are you concerned about? I'm concerned that this roadway could cut off water supply that already flows this way into our pond. Is there any is there any coverts or anything through that road? Right now the road is the road is maybe an inch or two below the the height of this pipeline. Is there water? So So when they so when they possibly put this road in, they're going to put a bed through there, maybe raise the the road up couple feet, maybe. Probably not even.

Would would a would a covert pipe correct that problem? Would there some type of drainage across that road? Correct. Or satisfied. I would I would put that question back to the applicant to solve that problem. All right.

I don't think the Cobra pipe would work. The water there's water passing through from pond to pond. It's groundwater. There's no outlet on that pond on that side. So you have to where's the cobra gonna flow? There's there's no room for it to flow. The road is a bit higher than the water level right now. I would say more than a couple inches, but you know, there's a driveway there now. I don't see any. Mark, can you go up to the microphone? We got we got we got to record this. I'm sorry. I mean, there's a driveway there. Excuse me.

You can see the improvement. This is the road. Yeah. Trying to get a specific right where it is. So, you're you're basically saying that there'll be minimal change to minimal disturbance on that road. Yes. So it would possibly be status quo after the project is done. Correct. The Hillsbrand pond drains out towards Camar Road. I don't know where it drains to. I don't know. I think it's a D pond. I think it just drains in. I'm not sure. There's no designated stream there coming out of it between the two.

Not that I Not that I witnessed though. Okay. between the between the the two pond, Mr. Bolson's pond and Mr. Hillig. No. Okay. No. Do they ever dry out? Pardon? Do they ever in the summertime? I I I've grown up and haven't seen your pond, but that was many years ago, so I can't really speak to that. Have you been Mr. Hillbrand's pond does not dry out. Like neither one of them dry out. Have you been up there in the last couple days with the rainfall that we had? Yes. And did you see anything noticeably different of flow or anything like that?

When we drove up, we took these pictures to see it was wet. No, I didn't. So, your comment uh Mr. Bolson is to you don't wish anything to be disrupted by putting a driveway in. That's basically the bottom line. No, no, that's not it. My concern is that. Okay.

The waterway be preserved between the two ponds and that a buffer be provided in conjunction with the zoning code. that's required because we use these fields here all the way up to waters from for pasture and being that this would be a non-aggricultural use and we have one I mentioned this at the last meeting place here so that these fields are protected because this is a gravel road higher we get these raintorms We have everything to filter down into our fields and I want to just make sure that these are protected. So I requested that the buffer be installed here uh to prevent as as they mentioned it is higher in places um to prevent runoff from coming into these fields or let me rephrase that to prevent uh silt and debris from a roadway from coming into the fields. I know water is going to flow, but if we had a buffer in there, there could be something fines and debris or what have you could be filtered if the water does come in. Um, so that was my request that a buffer be placed uh in here uh as required to protect those fields. Do you have any other comments?

Um, uh, the only, uh, following, uh, I just want to say all my other comments still are in place. I'm I'm happy to work with, uh, the fisers and their, uh, professionals to work on it. And, uh, right now, um, this plan, as I see it here, I I oppose the plan, but I do not oppose the fishers living on the property, using their property. I just would like to see a buffer put in there to protect the fields and that waterway and the Oh, and the electrical line, but that's all that kind of said. There's an electrical line there as well. So,

well, you mentioned a buffer of 100 to 300 foot buffer. What What would that buffer be? Are you talking like a berm or something through there or just just real estate? That that would be up to them, but something that could filter rainwater if it were to come into the fields. Uh grasses, tall grasses, um things that catch water as it sheds um or or catch things that might come from a driveway into those fields.

Yeah. But if you put a burm on that curve there, you're going to stop the water flow from that other side going into your pond. So, it's a catch 22 from what I'm seeing here. Trying to keep the water flowing and trying to keep it from flowing. Trying to keep the water flowing from pond to pond and trying not to keep the flowing from the driveway into right now that I haven't been out there. I like to have permission to drive out there and go up the road. Um, does the water cross that at that point on that curb? Yes or no? Uh, or is that all underground water?

Uh, it can on occasion. It typically does not, but there is it is underground water. And that's the thing on this side of Indian Creek. I've dug on both sides. On this side of the creek where this is in my home is, the water table is high. You go to the other side, it's hard to find water. But on this side, the water is just below the surface. So, it's probably a combination of groundwater, rainwater. Um, on occasion, it will go across the road, but typically no. Mark, what's the width of the roadway there that we're talking about currently? Yeah. Well, what would be proposed after all the lots are set up?

It' be a 16 foot travel way probably. Excuse me. be a 16 foot travel way per the crosssection, but coming around that turn, we'd probably smush it out a little bit. In your experience, how much have you seen silting wash away from six feet 16 foot wide roadway?

I hope you realize I'm taking a lot of liberty with this public hearing. You know that, don't you? And uh the reason being is because I want you to explain your comments a little bit more to us versus going to the regular meeting where you have no you know no you can't make any comments. So that's why I'm I'm I'm being a little bit more liberal with this this this public hearing. But I just want to make sure that we're all on the same, you know, your comments are heard and uh you made a mention of Mr. Walters uh concerned about Waters. Waters, excuse me.

Yes. Um with the electrical line and so forth. I think that's a given as far as one of the you know approval conditions that to determine what that that electrical line would be. So I think that comment can be addressed through the process. Uh I think you can address these comments that he has. Is that correct? The problem I have is I don't know if I need to extend this this this this public hearing for another meeting. I think most of the comment if most of the comments that were made tonight were made the other night and we prepared to address them. The same comments.

Okay. We would like to review the the waterways that that is important and and we do uh from what we can tell US Fish and Wildlife does regulate those. We would like an opportunity to review those. Um, are they DEEC wetlands or listed as wetlands by DEEC? They're not big enough to not see not for Mr. Bradley. Okay. Wetlands. Not they're not core wetlands either.

Not on our property. We're not disturbing anything off our property. Road's been well improved. There's been a lot of rockwood down on the road. You know, it's it's not like we're cutting into native soil and putting it down. You know, it's been down for quite some time.

The original the original roadway coming off of Tamarak was granted 1987. So that means that road is was cut into that the lands that we are seeking to build residents on back then. That roadway you can see clearly is that's that's where Mr. Boss started where he's concerned about water is high and dry. There's no, and this is the other day during all all the water we've had in the last few weeks, there's no storm water running through the stream. It's that's the photo just the other day.

The uh this is where is that spring? That is your roadway mark right there. There's your there's the guy wire for the power line. This is the rope coming down. Yeah. And that's all water flowing from that. Where's the Where's the rope? Right there. See, there's your guy. Where is it relative to the water that you're showing us? It's right in front of us that you're looking at. That's the road. Those are the dire. That's the road. I can clearly see that guy. I don't see any road there.

All right, gentlemen. Your photo is incorrect. I disagree, Mr.

Okay, you've made your comments. Um, is there anyone else who wish to make any uh comments for the uh uh this public hearing? Okay. There's been a request by one of the uh the public to extend this uh public hearing or to adjourn it temporarily. And I at this point do not see why we'd have to do that. uh all the the the comments have been addressed and now you've heard any additional comments or modifications to those comments. Um I'm going to pull the board here. Do you want to close this public hearing and move forward with the process?

Okay. Okay. Okay, if I have if there's no more comments, I'll make a motion to close the public hearing. Second. Okay, there's been a motion to close the public hearing. Is there any further discussion on that? All those in favor? I.

Any opposed? Okay, the public hearing is officially closed. We are going to move on to our agenda, which the Fiser application is part of that agenda. So, Right now, our first on our agenda is the Kyle Smith. Come on back up. Okay, you've had your public hearing. There was no comments. Obviously, you don't have to respond to anything because there wasn't anything. Usually, we would require a written response. Uh we at times have wavered that, but uh I would have to satis say that you've satisfied anything in the public hearing. So, moving forward on this, uh, is there anything that has to be addressed at this point of all the

the Did you get a response back from uh the county on this?

Okay. Is there anything engineering wise that uh has to be reviewed or discussed? No, they've addressed all the comments that I've had. Okay. Is there any conditions that would have to be put on this as far as a a potential approval? Not that I'm aware of. I mean, there's an existing curb cut on Route 7, so you don't need a driveway permit from the state. It's already an existing curb cut. He has a septic and he has a well

and a foundation. Okay, I think we're all set to to move forward on this. Make a make a declaration on secret. Second. Okay. Is there any further discussion on uh the seeker determination? Okay. All those in favor? Any opposed? Now the approval of the uh site plan and special use permit. This can be done. Let's do two separate resolutions, one for each.

Okay. We probably should do the special use permit first. Okay. Do I have a motion to approve the special use permit? I'll make a motion. Is there a second? Second. Okay. Okay. Is there any conditions that have to be put on that? I don't think so. Any further discussion on the special use permit? Okay. All those in favor? I. Any opposed? Now, a motion to approve the site plan. Do I have a motion to I make a motion? Okay. Do I have a second?

I'll second. Okay. Is there any conditions that have to be placed on that? You need a knockbox from fire. Yeah. Yeah. I hate that. Otherwise, you're going to pound that door in. Well, hopefully there's never a fire or do the overhead take the overhead door. Okay. One condition to have a Knox box put in there. Yeah. Any other conditions? Wayne, you all set? I I can't think of any. Okay. Okay. Then uh we'll take a vote on the the motion. All those in favor? I. Any opposed? Okay, you're all set. Okay, thank you guys.

Thank you for your patience. You want any of these drawings? Well, that's that's uh those are his drawings, right? Okay. Should we collect? Um, Kevin, you want us to collect the drawings here? Yeah. Yeah.

It's the one dated um

February 19th. Okay, moving along here. Everybody's doing their paperwork is we're back with Fiser. Come on up. We you did submit a um comments and responses. I would like to go through those. Yeah. I tried to do this as uh an organized fashion as I could. The responses, excuse me, the comments of the public which includes Mr. Waters, Mr. Bolson, and Mr. Ilibbrand, we kept them in order and then I gave one answer to several of the comments and initially I'd like to start with the uh Mr. waters um brought to our attention that there was an easement across the existing property or excuse me the property of the applicant that was burdened with a power line coming from Tamarak Road through the the uh driveway area and uh then to a pole in that driveway area which I was showing to earlier which is

right here and then it travels into the lands of Balsson and it's for the purposes providing power as we understand it to the lands of Morgan Waters. Uh now we knew the power pole was there before we started this process but we didn't know anything about who was benefited by it or where it went other than that it went off of the lands of the applicant onto someone else's property. And when uh Mr. Waters came in with the utility easement that he gave to Nash Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation back in 1995. Um it was something that we were not aware of and did not know. My clients purchased the property in November I believe it was of 2025. They had a title report. title report showed all the easements and all the chain of title and who was owner. That easement that Mr. Waters provided us was not in the chain of title. And the reason why it wasn't is because Mr. Waters gave the wa the easement to National Grid Niagara Mohawk in 1995 across lands that he did not own. Now, I asked him about that when he was here last, and he said, "Well, Mr. Rifenberg, who was an owner in title at one point, gave him permission to give the easement." And I said, "Well, either way, uh it's an easement we did not know about until now." Now, we we uh without our knowledge or our consent,

uh Mr. Waters and Mr. Mr. Bolson took it upon themselves to put stakes in the roadway area showing where they believe or whoever did the job for them um where this power line is. And now that we know that they think there's a power line in our 60 foot private driveway area, we have to deal with it. Notwithstanding the fact that the easement may be a nullity as a matter of law, the power line is still there and we have to deal with it. So our response is is that we're going to identify it. We're going to mark it and we're going to build our driveway away from it and not on it. and we're going to protect it because it may very well be our source of power to feed the two residences that the applicant wants to build. We just don't know. We've asked National Grid to give us an analysis of how we should go about servicing the two proposed homes with power. They will not do that unless there's a foundation in the ground. So, we're caught in a catch 22. We can 1800 dig and identify and find this power line. Well, we believe it goes up along the where where they have it. It's in the photos that I put in my responses. You'll see these flags along here. This is this particular shot shows three flags where the power line is allegedly located. That's the lands of Bolson. That's the lands of waters. And this is the driveway area.

So we think uh I we don't think Mr. Danskin has confirmed that there's more than sufficient room there for us to build the driveway in accordance with all town regulations and still leave the power line wherever it is. Whether or not it's an easement that's enforceable doesn't really matter. Once we have the power line located and we know who is serviced by it and we can figure out who should be benefited by it, then we can talk about an appropriate easement to the appropriate parts. But just as a reference, the second one from the left on the bottom here where you have the flag, there's a little looks like a little pine tree there.

Yeah. The house over here. Whose house is that? I'm sorry. This house? Yeah, that's the Bolson house. Okay. Now, I'm in when I'm I took this photograph, I'm standing on the roadway, and this is the power line that drops, right?

And then it goes across. Here's a better shot of it. Here's the power line. And here's the uh the where the power line goes through the lands of Bolson. There's another pole over there with a U transformer on it. And then we're not sure what the hell's going on because when you look at the power, we we went in on Indian Creek Road. There's power lines going up and down Indian Creek Road servicing all of the homeowners there. And there's also a main power line coming off of Tamarak Road going across lands that I'm not sure who owns it. I think probably mostly Harrington Farms property goes across the big field and straight into Indian Creek Road. We believe this power line comes off that line that goes across the lands of Harrington to Indian Creek shoots off to the side and comes to this pole. We don't know why. It doesn't really make any sense. Um, but that's what we're facing and we understand the responsibilities we have.

So, if I'm reading this right, you got poles that go to that aerial. I'm sorry. You have an aerial map and then it goes underground there. If you could show us where that Thanks, it's an old photo. It's okay. Here's our property. Yep. Way I think it comes in. Here's our property. Comes up here. Yeah. It goes across that field.

Goes in this way. somehow gets to here. It's all It's all underground. So, it's east, Pardon me. It's east of the pond. Comes up from road overhead and Mr. Bolson. Yeah. Couple transformers on it. Then it goes to our property power that's on our land, right? Then it drops goes underground. Okay. To where? We think it goes the waters. It goes up the waters.

It may continue through because when you go at the beginning of Tamarak Road and Indian Creek, there is no power until you get back quite a ways. Then the poles show up and it looks like they're coming from the east instead of the west. Do you know what I mean?

I do know what you mean. I'm not really sure how how what I do know is what's marked out there is probably fairly accurate to where the power line is because now that you know that there's a power line there even though it was put in 25 years ago. This driveway is uh hard. It's it's had rock put on it. It's been approved. It's really hard. And about 3 ft off the edge of the driveway, there's a little bit of a swell, which is most likely the dig for the power. It didn't get compacted like the driveway does. You know what I mean? So, you can you can see a little depression. Almost looks like a swale, but I bet you that's where the line is. That seems to be what their markings show. you know, you know, we don't want to get into the easement, but it seems like it's about 15 feet off the property line as opposed to 5t.

So, the bottom the bottom line is you got to identif it's it's there. Period. So to me, which I think we can you recognize the problem, you recognize the comment right away. You're going to address it. Do it. Yeah.

And it's not we're not being altogether altruistic about it. I mean, we I don't know what National Grid is going to say, but that makes sense for us to our source of power should come off of that line somewhere. Well, this leads to next I think the other comment on number six. Uh was there is there it says was there a study for the existing electrical line capacity? That's that's that's not your concern at this point, is it? That's diagram national grid when you asked to get hooked up, right?

That that's strictly we're we're all subject to what national grid wants to do. Yeah. Or doesn't want to do. They may say you might have to go out to Tamarak Road and come up. The line goes a long way now without a jump. Goes about 1,600 ft. You've seen people with transformers up a 400t driveway. They got another box at the top of their house. Yeah. To jump. Yeah. A little juice. A line right from the uh from the transformer. That line to the pole that doesn't come from Tamarak Road.

Which pole are we talking about? This pole. You only got one pole. It's pole on your property. There's a line comes It comes off of the power comes up in your creek and up into that pole and then the buried table goes to the waters. That's a national pay. Sorry.

Either way, the the the point we were trying to make is is that the power that services Indian Creek and the the residents there comes off doesn't come off of the the lands of the applicant. There's just this one pole here. And now we know there's an underground line that apparently goes up along the lands of Balsson, the lands of waters through the roadway area and services Waters. That's what we understand is was the what Waters was saying the other night.

The first house is Bolson. The second house is Waters. Yes. Yeah. On the Bolson's gonna get his power off. before it gets on. So, as far as you know, the only service provided is waters off this underground line. Is that correct? That's what we believe. That's what Morgan was saying. He installed the the the power line. He did. That's what I That's what he said. He paid

he gave an easement to National Grid in 95 and he bought his property in 94. And I'm guessing that's when the power line went down in the ground there. And that was probably makes sense. It was the shortest route to get to his house. No trees cut. Okay.

If it did show up, right? However, the line still would not be inside the east. It says it's 5t wide. The lines at least 15. Say, say hypothetically that you take you're going to get your power off this pole, right? National good says we're going to take it off here.

And as far as capacity for that 1,200 1400 line underground line, is that something that National Grid has to address? Okay. So, you have nothing to do with that. No, but I think that in the ground somewhere where it leaves our property according to the sketch there looks like there's a structure of some kind like future continuum or something. As you'll see, the easement comes up and then they draw a box.

Okay. Not that. I don't see it out there. I think what what I'm trying to get at is this. You know, there's been a request that we should do a study on all the I don't think we should do a study. I think the the the thing is is national grid's going to have to address this, right? Yes. Your responsibility is to identify where the the underground line is and make appropriate changes in your roadway to compensate for anything that maybe that line may may bring. Yes.

Exactly. And we've got 60 ft to fit, you know, the cross sections like 20 wide or something to wiggle. Okay. All right. All right. I think we bang that around enough. Yep.

I think so. Um, shall I go on with the other responses or are we all? Um, as far as Go ahead. I don't know if there's going to be additional responses that are going to be provided for you from the minutes and so forth and so on. Mr. Bolson's comments. I would classify this as basically an initial draft at this point. Maybe additional stuff. It was an attempt to respond to the comments of last meeting. That's okay.

Can I add something? Absolutely. So, one of the comments that you heard both I think tonight and last time related to a buffer. Yes. You know what I'm talking about? Y. Okay. So, I just want to point out the section of the town code that talks about that. Okay. It's section 160-31 subdivision D.

Right. And it does talk about buffers when you have a proposed non-aggricultural use which adjoins an existing agricultural use. And assuming that section applies, it requires a buffer of not less than 100 ft up to 300 feet, but not less than 100 ft. It doesn't define what that buffer needs to be. It doesn't say it needs to be a burm, for example. So if in your supplemental comments if you can address how the applicant believes either this section doesn't apply or if it does how your plan provides for a 100 foot buffer what that looks like. I think that would probably be helpful for the for the board member. I

think we addressed that in your comments. I I did address it to to the degree that we take the position that we believe no buffer is necessary under these circumstances. My understanding of the intention of the use of the buffer is when you have a fullblown farming operation adjacent to a substantial residential development. And in those circumstances, there's an interest in protecting the new residential development from the odors, whatever you want to call in the way of negative impacts from the farming ongoing farming situation. It's kind of interesting that they did they looked at it that way. I as a farmer

I I agree. It's the way I read it. It appears as if it's intended to be protective of the non-aggricultural use from nuisances that might be raised about living next to a farming operation. And if I'm a farmer, I strongly disagree.

Correct. That being said, you use the phrase fullblown agriculture. That's not language from the section. So all I'm suggesting is if if the applicant's position is this doesn't apply, explain why using the language of the code. Okay. If your conclusion is it does apply, but we satisfied the buffer requirement with this plan, tell us how it satisfies that. My conclusion thus far is that it does not apply because both properties, the Bolson property and my client's property are zoned A40. They're both allowed to have residential and agricultural uses. And Mr. Bolson has, I believe, very limited agricultural use, albeit some. I'm not exactly familiar what's there. I know there are chickens and I believe there are some four-legged farm animals, but I'm not certain. And that's the extent of it. It's not something that would fall into the category of a farm operating as a farm. Now, because the the zoning is the same and we intend to have two residences that are a How far away are these houses going to be

from each other? No, from the Bolson property. Thousands. Long distance. Couple thousand. Um and it's all woods in between on both the Bolson and the applicant's property. So from that view a buffer is provided.

It's there. It's existing and the ordinance is quite clear. You know I I believe that one of the comments that Mr. Boss made was he was concerned about his chickens being at risk by the residences going up and down their driveway and somehow the chickens were in harm's way. And the ordinance seems to say that you got to keep your chickens in a coupe or some sort of contained situation as with your farm animals. So if that's in compliance, I mean, anything can happen obviously, but it seems to me it's not necessary to even have to address the need of a buffer in these circumstances. And I'll I'll go into that more if

that that I think that would be helpful for the board to have that spelled out a little bit more explicitly. the reasoning than from your initial I got I got to tell you I mean if you're talking 800,000 ft for the closest resident if if that doesn't classify as some type of buffer I I I'm I'm lost on what we can do here and that may very well be the answer I didn't see that expressed in the comments

yeah I was under the oppression initially by the, you know, maybe we're talking possibly a a residence that could be right within, you know, the setback requirements property line. Yeah. The nearest res. Well, I'm I'm talking about the property his property line, his property line,

which what I classify is what he's classifying as his right there. So just off the map there's 400 700 to the So that's four that's 1,100 just to the property line and property line. You know what I'm saying? Okay. Chris, does the buffer distin or does the code distinguish the buffer being property line or residence to res? Seems like most of it was wooded near near our No, I think he he's questioning the definition.

Yeah, I have a subsequent question to the buffer area. There's a definition. Is the definition buffer area the same as the buffer that's in the agricultural? So, everybody is welcome to read the language. um stay at a holiday in so I can't

again for the record uh code section 160-31 this is subdivision D whenever agricultural uses and proposed non-aggriculture uses adjoin the applicant for the non-aggricultural use which in this case would be our applicant shall provide buffers to reduce the exposure of these abuing uses to odors noise and other potential nuisances associated with the agricultural operation. said buffer strips may consist of vegetative screening, woodlands, vegetated BMS or natural topographic features and when required shall be no less than 100 ft in width and may be required up to a width of 300 ft depending on the type of adjoining agriculture or farm use and the topography and the proposed design and planting of such buffer. In the event that an application requires approval of among others the planning board, it shall be the responsibility of the respective board to provide an effective buffer that will reasonably protect adjacent residential living areas from agricultural practices and to protect the agriculture use from nuisance complaints and nuisance lawsuits from their non-farm neighbors. So, there's a couple things. Okay. It does not whoever asked define how that 100 foot is to be measured. Property line to property line, use to use. I think for what it's worth, and this could be a code enforcement question, but uh interpretation, it would make sense to me that you'd measure it from the house to the farming operation because that's the the nuisance. So I you know um

I heard you say residential living area correct to protect adjacent residential living areas. Um and then your question was does it define there there's a buffer area definition in the front but I don't they're not quite similar. Um and it is also not explicit in its uh definition of either property line or

so there's a couple ways potentially it gets resolved. Okay. One is it could be decided for whatever reason that there is not this is not a situation where an agricultural use and a non-aggricultural use are join. You heard Mr. Angster question potentially the scope of the farm operations. That's one. The other way is to say okay there is this adjoining use but there is a buffer provided of sufficient size based on what's proposed I think I agree with the chairman that just the distance alone the size of the property provides it up

the residences are thousand to 1300 feet away you've met your 100 to 300 area the driveway. Yeah, it seems like along the driveway is mostly wooden. All right, just photos.

I think we've uh hammered this around enough. I would suggest that we you we you view the comments of the second part of the public hearing. if there's anything that can be added to your comments or you know uh it's been mentioned twice that you know uh to modify those but I would have to say from our discussion and from what I've heard that most of the comments have been addressed in this in your your presentation here. So, I would suggest you just kind of look at those. We'll have time to maybe look at these a little bit more because we just got these

afternoon. This afternoon, um I think if anybody has any questions, they can contact you. Is that correct? The building department can we work through the building department? Pardon me. um any legal questions we have we'll work through through Chris that work and then at our next meeting hopefully if there's no changes to this and you wish to submit the same document we'll go through this okay fair would you want that submitted ahead of time

preferably yes when's the uh re Our next meeting is on the 16th. 16th. Correct. So maybe we can get it out next week. All right. I think we've hammered quite a few of these through the the the public hearing and the dialogue with Mr. Bolson in this dialogue here. We've covered a lot of the things here of what's in questions. I think it would give the the for an opportunity to sit there and say, "Okay, let let's let's read this and and see what we come up with." Okay. All right. Fair enough.

Is there any questions from the engineering department? Can you put a map together and show what direction the electricity Pardon me? Some kind of a map together and show that pole the electricity where it comes from and where it goes to. You got the pole mapped on the I know it's on our property. Yeah, we understood that pole that's on our property. I'll show you right here went straight into the lands of B. Now we are told that's it. You're right right there. That's all we knew. So there's the pole. Right. Here's Mr. Bolson.

And there's a line that comes off that pole. The line comes here to another power pole and then it runs down to Tamarak Road. So that's what I believe. That's really hard to see going on the property. All right. Can you can you and when it hits that pole, it goes underground. Have you been allowed to go on on on the property? When it when it hits I didn't I didn't really feel a need. I knew that the easement didn't wasn't affecting us at this time. If you want me to check it out now, I'll go check it out with Mr. Olson's permission.

Well, the one thing that's Well, what I'm saying is is it's overhead. Here's Tamarak Road and it comes up and I I don't know how it gets up there because there's a 25 foot easement coming this way. When I when I came to this meeting tonight before anything drive by, excuse me, did you drive by this? I was up there the other day. Okay. I thought the power line was buried up along the that driveway that you want to put in. Now you're telling me Well, it is, but it starts up here.

Yeah, I didn't I thought it was coming all the way up from Tamarak Road, you know. He's he's right. That's what we understood was the lay of the land when they started this was the power came off of here and all we have was that pole. Now, at the last meeting, there's this waters eastment shut, and they went ahead and went on the Fiser property and put these stakes in saying there's a there's an underground cable that goes up this roadway that we want to build. It goes up along the Bolson property and the waters property and we believe into waters, the service him. Okay, that's the underground thing that's that's shown in these pics. Where is it? That's all right. I

where so there is an additional thing now we got to find out about all right okay so for instance in this shot this is Bolson property and this is water's property and here they got three stakes they put in right I saw them apparently that's where the there's another Did you drive up the road to waters I drove all the way to to the to the power lines And I said, "I'm going to get stuck out here and I'm walk back." You mean the first power pole that we're talking about with the drop on? I was I was all the way I could see the side transmission. Oh, so you Oh, you went I was all the way in the back.

You were all the way in the back. Nice road, isn't it? Not quite to town standards, but my You got there easy enough. I got there in back, but it wasn't It didn't rain all week. But anyways, um, when I looked at that poll, the the the line going down was on the wrong side of the pole. So, I didn't didn't make sense to me. It didn't make sense to me either. That's why I'm just asking for the underground going both ways. Grab Morgan and figure out what the hell's going on up there.

He told us what's going on. It's coming down that drop. It's going out. Runs along uh what we're calling the roadway. It parallels the road edge of the roadway. I'd say three or four feet off of it. All the way down to to Waters. No, all the way down to one more map goes away from Tamarak Road. It's going in towards the second house.

This direction overhead. Correct. Overhead. There's knees missing. And it goes underground three four feet off the edge of the road about 15 ft off the property line all the way to this point. Then it shoots that way and this way to waters. Okay. It leaves the road right there. All right. The property line. All right. I when I was up there, the the lines are coming down the wrong side of the pole. So, I thought it was coming up from Tamar Road and feeding power to everybody up there,

but it's not. Is there a survey map on record at the county with Waters property that you could Is there a potential to move the rightway road farther away from that property line where power line where it makes the 12 do anything with the roadway coming up until you get to this point. That's what I'm talking about. Between there and along that

I mean the rub is is the last the last real the only real spot that the power line I think is going to be an issue at all if it is an issue right at the which you're confined to 60 which I'm confined. Thank you. All right. You got you got a few things to do. Can I can I comment? Absolutely.

You guys brought up the electrical issue again and I think we've uh aren't going to be able to resolve all that tonight, but um in your response number two regarding wetlands, you indicate all wetland and pond areas are shown on the Danskin survey maps. Uh, were the were the wetlands delineated? No. I would suggest you have a a wetland specialist go out and confirm that there are no wetlands on your propert. There's no wetlands in that 60 foot strip and there's How do you know? How do you know? Because because I've been there and it's hard as a rock.

You're not You're not a wetland specialist. There's no vegetation. It's more than it's more than just no vegetation that would confirm that there is wetland there at all. You're talking about in the roadway. Yeah. All right. So, are you talking about I'm talking about everything inside the property. That includes the roadway and the rest of the property. I uh I I disagree with with that. I I see no no no wetlands throughout our roadway and I would like to see something from a wetland specialist that that that verifies that.

I would like to see something from a wetland specialist that verifies that. I want to just make sure I understand your concern. Well, the issue came up and there are adjacent wetlands to your roadway. Well, I don't know their wetlands. They're ponds. Not every pond's a wet land. And not every wetland is wet. But what if what if the Bolson pond is a wetland? It's not on our property. And the Hillbrand pond is also not on our property. Well, it depends on how close it is to your property. right there. Well, both of them are really close.

Well, if it's classified as a state wetland, there's a 100 foot buffer zone that you have to I know that. I know. Well, I want to see I want you to show me. I want you to give me evidence that that's true.

All right. So I I just got to ask one more question on it because it's an expense to the client as far as delineating or uh noting if there were wetlands or not wetlands on the property. Are you concerned with just the development part of the property or are you concerned with the entire 80 acres? Well, if if there are if you're in a wetland buffer where your road is, that that's an issue because you'll you'll disturb you'll be

putting disturbance in the buffer zone. Not that it's not a deal killer, but you might need a permit to do that. on top. The rest of your property is big enough where you can avoid it, but you can't build a house in a wet land either. So, all right. I understand. There there's not a weather near Well, I can't just take your word for it. The disturbed area is your roadway because you have to improve the roadway to get to service those houses. He's talking about the road. Very good.

All right. My only other comment is about the drainage. I mean, you can't you can't disrupt drainage patterns. So, if you give us enough evidence that you're not, then I'm okay with that. Um, but you do have to address the comments from the public. And I'm still waiting on um the changes to the erosion sediment control plan. Really? Yeah. I'm sorry. You're still waiting on Yeah. I made comments on the erosion sediment control plan. Sent them to Steve Dean.

Yeah. So he still has to do that. So that's just a another item that needs to be addressed. So, we'll see you gentlemen on the 16th. Correct? 16. All right.

Thank you. Okay. Number three on our agenda was the Paramount Building Group. We've already discussed that. Number four, Mavis Tire. Hi, good evening. Uh, Andy Brick from the Brick Law Firm on behalf of Mavis Tire. Uh, Rich Valverie is is the applicant for Mavis. Um, since we were here last month, we submitted a number of documents including a long environmental assessment form, a geotech uh study as well as a traffic study that demonstrates no impact uh to traffic patterns as a result of our project. Um, I'll have Kevin Hixon from BL Companies, our our engineer, walk you through all the changes in the documents since we've been here last month. Um, I think we're in a position where you could declare our uh application complete and possibly schedules for a public hearing, but you know, that that's within your discretion, but I I think we may be at that point and we're here to address any questions you may have. And I'll turn it over to Kevin.

Okay. And while I'm waiting for Kevin to hand it out, I would just say that Mr. Bone Steel is spot on with that wetland analysis. If if I had the ability to get up and say there's no wetlands every time, there'd never be wetlands. So that that was well done.

You could have made a comment at the public hearing on that. It was okay. Before we start, I I have one question uh for Kevin and Sure. the the B15 zone. That's B15, correct? Yeah. How far does that extend up Mohawk? Uh don't go I believe it's 500 ft 500 feet

center line of street because I I seem to recall uh years ago we were reviewing some commercial site and they wanted to put an exit into a residential area and it was not allowed. Um, this would not be an exit into a residential area because it's into the road extends up. This exit is lower than the exit. Quick check. Okay. And just back that microphone up. Oh, no. Just take it back into the crowd the entire farther away. Yeah, it's singing a little bit. Which way you want me to go? This way.

Yes. Okay. Sorry. Okay. Um, the floor is yours. Thank you.

For the record, uh, Kevin Hixon with BL Companies, uh, 355 Research Parkway, Meridan, Connecticut, uh, tonight. Uh we had met on the 5th of March uh with the uh the members here and we have submitted a full application uh that includes a full drainage report, the full environmental assessment form, the traffic report and uh a geotech report. uh the support uh the application. Um the subject parcel is at 721 Husk Road in the city of Brunswick uh and it butts two roadways Husk Road to the south Route 7 and then Mohawk Avenue to the east. Uh the existing land is a uh dentist office. Uh it's idle at this point. Uh was previously used as a dentist office and uh it's a one-story approximately 2,680 ft. Uh the existing building has uh parking areas, walkways, utilities associated with it, and a 3 to 4 foot high timber retaining wall uh toward the back or the north of the property. um the pre-existing conditions. Uh the slope, it slopes from the north to the south. Um and elevations uh that range from 491 uh 492 at the back. Okay, that's back along the northernly property line and road is at 476 477. It gives you a magnitude of the elevation difference uh from existing conditions

at 492 is the the the end of your property line. Yep.

Um we are proposing a um and and the drainage patterns uh it's 1.67 six seven acres that drain um the drainage patterns that in also includes Husk Road drain toward Husk Avenue. Um so there's a drainage area of 1.67 acres. Um and the redevelopment of this site includes the de demolition of the of the existing uh structures followed by uh construction of a 6,98 square foot Navis Tyrant building containing uh seven uh bays um vehicle service bays and then it also includes new parking areas for 25 parking spaces We are requesting a uh waiver of the the 20 foot u 20 foot buffer zone for residential with parking areas. Um as shown here, we have the the dumpster enclosure that is up against the building. This provides easier access for the the employees to gain that access. Plus, it gets the the dumpster enclosure further away from the rear property line, which we understand is a residential uh property. Um, so we're asking for the the waiver of that uh part of it for that requirement.

Show that on the show us again on that. What what distance are you talking about? Uh the distance is right. See this this line right here is 20 ft. Yeah. And this parking space, this one parking space is actually within that that 20 foot. Okay, I see it. Yeah. Yeah. So, yeah, we want to make sure that the enclosure is as close as possible to the building for operations, but also for the residential uh abuing property. That requires a ZVA action. Is that correct? Yeah.

Okay. If I can address that briefly. Um, if you look at the language of 16044, it talks about parking areas or access there too. Can't be within 20 ft. We could put the parking space where the dumpster is and put the dumpster back there and we wouldn't need any type of relief because the dumpster can be within that 20 ft. It's the parking space and the access to the parking space that can't be. So, we were proposing if we'd waved that, which is a design standard in the off streetet parking section 16044, and I read the code that the planning board can wave design standards, we'd be seeking the waiver to allow the dumpster to be farther away from the neighbor and and the one parking space to be within the 20 ft. So, that that's was our rationale for it. Also, in addition, if you look at the definition of parking space in your code, and I'll read it to you. A parking space unit is an off- streetet space available for the parking of one motor vehicle having an area of not less than 162 square feet, which is 9 by8. I believe our seven service bays meet the definition of parking spaces. And if I could get Mr. Manelo to agree with me, then we wouldn't need that parking space because we'd have more than the 25 needed because we pick up seven here. So, if I can convince the building inspector that our seven bays meet the definition of parking spaces, we can eliminate that parking space back there and eliminate the need for the waiver because nothing would be within the 20 ft.

I asked that question the last meeting about overnight parking. Would they use the bays to park people? Yes. What about the parking spaces on the west side of the parking lot? Are they within the buffer? The 20 foot? No, the it's only above the 20 foot requirement is only for the residential behind us. It's not to the street. It's just on the the back side to the west. There's there's no that we're not abing residential. That's not residential. So, it doesn't apply. So, I have a question about those spots on the west side.

Okay. So judging by the drawing here, the corner of the building to the property line is less than 20 ft. That backup turnaround area that you're proposing is maybe 10. Yeah. on the far. How do you propose to number one back a vehicle out of the bay to even fit in that spot or the parking spots to the west be able to back in to an area that's not even 10 ft to back up enough to pull out? I I don't believe we're showing the parking space here. We have 17 along No, no. That's what I'm saying though. That I think that

you're backing out of the space facing Buzzik Street. Yep. Backing into that small turnaround area. But it's it to me looks like it's not even 10 ft. How do you back up a 25 foot long truck if you got a bigger truck or even a standard size car these days into something that's barely 10 foot deep to turn around and even to get the car out of the bank? Well, you have you have uh 25 feet to the bays, right? So you can if you're to instead of making the movement of going left to do a K turn, right, and using that area, you can go straight back and then exit out because you have that 25. I think it's uh

you're also talking a person that's parked their car there moving it versus an employee that might be right more asked to park it, move it into the bay, pull around, right? If I if we can get agreement that the bays would constitute parking spaces, that gives us the ability to rework that. That's why I bring that up because if I can if you can say that those bays are parking spots, you could eliminate the two on the corner. Absolutely. Yes. And have more turnaround space for what would be bay in front of bay 2, bay three now. Right. Correct. And eliminate those two bay one because that's that's not deep enough for backing up.

I agree. And I have a concern about where the dumpster is too. What is the what is the width between the where the dumpster would be and this kind of peninsula area where the parking spots are because the garbage truck is going to have to come in Yep. and then attempt to back out and they're going to have to make that turn on the property. Correct. instead of backing all the way out on the mall. Nope. They would back they would do the the movement within the property and there's enough room there. Yes. For that.

Y and we can provide a uh auto turn truck movement of the box truck or garbage truck. Well, yeah. For delivery vehicles. It just seems awful tight to me that they almost had to back all the way out on the Mohawk. Do you have a loading dock? Where where do you take deliveries? U well the deliveries would be uh either a at the bays right where they have the garage doors. That's most likely where the would occur. I don't see any other questions or comments so far.

The retennial wall on the western property. Yep. Um, is that required? Yes. On the western side, meaning the western side over here, right? Yes.

The uh FF is 486. Um, and then like I mentioned before, the 476 is down by the way. Uh so in order to have a uh you know a parking lot with two to 3% slope cross slope we want to make sure that the parking lot is level and so that elevation difference is what kind of drives this and really what drives it is our our connection to um Mohawk being at 486 as well. Right. So the FF and then the elevation at at the center of the of the driveway is at 486. Let's go back to these parking places again. You you referenced Kevin's decision to um are you still analyzing that?

I'm not going to make decision as we sit here, but I you know I'm I don't know of any other um commercial property in our town that we've used the interior portion of the structure for a parking spot. So, I'd have to do some research there. I as I sit here, I I was trying to think of the same thing and I I can't remember. We do have another, you know, tire company up the road from from here. I can do some research and see how that parking was analyzed. Yeah.

To compare to that. But, as I said, Jerry, I I'm not prepared to answer that. I mean those in my mind, you know, just looking at it quickly, those spots in the in the interior of the structure are for vehicles that are being repaired, not parked. But that's not to say that, you know, they couldn't be classified, put up some research. And it wasn't my intention to put you on the spot tonight. I just to start the conversation. No, I I I figured there's there's there's something going on. Yeah. Um I have a couple questions. Uh, one is, uh, you're showing, you know, vegetation, uh, you know, probably some landscaping that you're going to put through here. Yes.

And that's right on the border of the of your property, which I assume, you know, is right on the border where this house is. this house. Uh uh I'm concerned that there's got to be something more than immediately these trees. Um I looked at the property a couple times today driving by. There seems to be some trees, especially in the the western end, and there's some trees across the back. None of those trees are going to stay. Is that correct?

That's correct. So now you're starting off fresh. So this this resident up here who we all know from previous applications uh is is not going to be very happy with having to sit there and wait for these trees or shrubs or stuff to give her property. I'm suggesting that possibly you might want to entertain some type of solid fencing across there. We could Yep, we could do that. I I don't know whether it was shield a second. Is that a twotory building residence per house? Yeah. Yeah. It might be a moot point.

Are you looking for like a decorative fence to something? Yeah. I'm thinking you might want to think about it. Okay. Because I think you're going to get some push from that resident. Right. We're putting all those are all evergreen trees. There's a uh there's actually uh 35 uh actually 30 well as it wraps around they're all evergreen trees that that wrap around and they're white spruce. How big will these trees be?

Uh they'll be uh six feet when they plant them. Uh they'll be six feet. That's what our our detail calls out. six to seven feet but say six feet. Um and there will also be uh if you talk about the the actual building height right building height being 23 feet um you're at 486 you're at 491 elevation at the back and then you're putting in another from 491 to another six feet you're at 497 right be the top of the tree when you first plant it. Um then they typically the the plants will grow you know being south facing like this they will grow two to three feet a year. Um you know in its natural state. Um, and you know the reason for getting the vegetation cleared because we want to establish those plants because we do come across where we try to put plants underneath a a canopy that's already there that tends to crowd out and not uh I guess be in the ideal conditions for a tree uh to to grow. So it is giving you a height delta right at 491 would be the start of the of the tree to 497 and we're at 486 with a building height of you know 23 feet.

What what's the lighting in the rear? Is there any lighting in the rear? There's uh there'll be lighting on the building. Uh there's a series of 10 of them and the foot uh camel spill at the property line is 0.1. This is all down lighting I would assume. That's down lighting. Yep. You wouldn't have any tower poles right there. No, the poles will be uh there's four uh light poles. Uh they're at 24 feet in height and they'll be the LEDs. Uh and how tall is the building?

23 feet. So this uh brings up a a question that I asked you last meeting and that is the length of time that your lights will remain on after business closes. Right. You indicated that your business was going to close at 5:00 or thereabouts, but your lights would remain on until 11. Yeah.

I don't see the need for that with all of the glow and the light spillage from everything else going on on Hix Street. I think that uh anything you could do to help mitigate light pollution in that area would be uh well appreciated by the residents. Okay. I know hours of operation uh based on what we had submitted uh previously Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, and Friday it's 8:00 a.m. 6 p.m. Thursday they're open uh from 8:30 p.m. I'm sorry. uh 8 am to 8:30 on Thursday on Thursday.

Right. And the rest of the week is is 8 am to 6 pm and then on Saturdays 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Sundays 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Well, I would put forth that I think a reasonable amount of time to let your lights stay on after the close of visits would be an hour. Right. Right. Yeah. I can bring that to the client and get back to you. That's what you said last minute. Yes, that's what I mean that's what it would normally be. Uh so you haven't brought that to the client yet. I have brought it to the client, but he hasn't said okay.

Otherwise, but I'll confirm. I'm just I'm just trying to reduce the light pollution. Yep. You should also reference um code 160-41, height of the poles. Okay. This got a flat roof on the building. Yes. Air conditioners are going to be on the ground. Uh

I don't know. I have to get back to because they'll be looking right into the people's right on the ground. Yep. Does the existing structure of a basement? I don't know. Well, what I'm trying to figure out I I believe it does. I You're going to do some type of grading on that property, right? Uh I'm trying to figure out whether you're going to remove material or you're going to use it for fill in in a foundation. That's what I'm trying to figure out. You mean like a earthworks quantities? Yeah, like a balance of sight. Balance of sight. Yeah. Yeah.

Could it be like a pit for somebody to get under or change filters and stuff? It's all on list. What I understand it as. I don't think pits are illegal. Right. Right. They're all on list. the and what's the uh what's the uh safety plan as far as dealing with oil spills? So, they did provide uh a safety plan here. Um each store uses a double wall 250 gallon tank for new and waste. Can I get a copy of that? Yeah.

Okay. Yeah. I think did we not uh I think the packet did you get that? I don't know if it was like the first initial submission that we had provided. It may not so I could for the rest of the I don't believe I will supplement the the application with this. Um but each store uses a double wall 250gallon tank. All right. Well, if you could just copy. Yeah, we'll do. But they have protocols in place with clean up. It's inside. Yes, inside.

And everything's contained. Nothing goes out. There's no piping connected to it. So, um, and then obviously they would use absorbent. So, you were saying what's that? You were saying about the safety. Oh, the the safety is that they have a 250galon double wall tanks inside the building and that's what contains any if there is or happens to be a spill inside the facility, it is contained. uh they would use speedy dry to absorb the oil uh to make sure that they do clean up

and then uh and it's immediately reported to the facilities department and then if necessary environmental uh cleanup crew is dispatched to remediate and properly dispose of the infected materials. Okay, great. As long as you got a safety All right, any other uh questions? Sorry. Davis down in Troy. Mhm. You going to keep that open? I don't know. I can check with them. I'm not sure. I mean, just wondering if they closed and all that business up here. I just Yeah. Okay.

Wayne, have you had a chance to look through the uh We did start looking through the plans and I did review the FBAF. I do have some comments on the EAF. Um, in your description or your proposed action, you you identify this says the city of Brunswick. You should change that to the town of Brunswick.

Yes. Okay. Um on the second page on item B, um you may need a variance for the height of your light poles. If you're going to keep them at 24 feet, then you should check that as yes. Town zoning board of appeals. All right. Uh, you described the planning board as Town of Brunswick, New York Planning and Zoning Department. That should be Town of Brunswick, New York Planning Board.

Yeah. A copy of that. You're going to need some kind of approval from New York State DOT because you are discharging to their storm sewer system. So, under item G, that should be yes. And that would be New York State DOT. At some point, you're going to have to submit your swift and storm water report to DOT. Yep. And they're existing connection that's there now. Well, they're still going to tell you they don't want to point discharge into their into their catch basin, but you'll have to deal with that. Yeah.

On the third page under item C3, zoning say the proposed action does have an adopted zoning law. So that should be yes. And it is in a B15 uh zoning classification. And we're kind of up in the air on what you usually do for like water impoundment. Do you have underground detention? Yes.

And we uh disconnected uh one of the roof drains, actually two of the roof drains, so they can go uh into an amended soil. You know, it's got the rip wrap dissipate the energy. Um, and the two roof trains on the ends matching our pipe with the ones in the middle. U we're only counting the runoff uh reduction uh coefficient or runoff reduction value by taking and disconnecting one of the root strains, bringing it into an amended soils area that that's more like a depression that has grass on it. Um and then that uh overflows to a yard drain within the area and then connects in. So all that roof water will make its way down go into the isolated row of the ads underground system and the rest of the parking lot will get treated through hydrodnamic separator through an isolator row uh to achieve the uh so that that's the only comments I have on the EAF.

Okay. And I mentioned about the discharge to the DOT right away. Yep. Um plans look really good. Um so far um I don't think we're going to have a ton of comments. They're pretty comprehensive

and I know uh the you all had mentioned or one of you had mentioned about matching the retaining wall on the development that's across Mohawk Avenue. Their wall is 10 ft high because I have the plans and I got the plans from the engineer. Uh so we're going to use the same type of wall. Ours is going to be seven feet tall. Like the highest is going to be seven feet tall. Not not 10. How much? Seven. Exactly. What they have there? Three. Three or four. Yeah. I thought initially it was three or four feet in the front.

Yeah. Where did the seven feet all of a sudden come from? Uh a detailed site design. Um it had evolved just because of the 486 and the 486 at Mohawk Avenue was driving that. So all right. And that was that was from I wasn't on the board for the quick check, but I got to tell you I have a serious concern with that wall. Yep. Anything over four feet, what are you going to have there for a barrier for cars that are mistakenly We have a guide rail. We have a guide rail that wooden guide rail. And then we also have for fall protection, we have a 4 foot u fence with the the slats in it for screening. So headlight any headlight flare because you're up at the higher elevation.

That's another concern is you're at that kind of a middle ground for headlight flare, right? And that's what we're doing to to treat that. So you're going to mitigate that for the headlight flare? Yep. You have a detail plan of the pollards or the fencing you're going to put in for that for that. Yeah. Yeah. And then we're we're putting uh landscaping down at the base of the wall. Um, which would be more of the shrubs. Uh, that would kind of soften the the retaining wall. Um, and then like what's that? Something the deer won't eat. Yeah, we got to talk about No, we got to talk about the wall type, you know. I mean, what I mean, we're open to

I I I Well, I'm I'm doing all the numbers here with this 7 foot wall and then you're going to have a a rail and then you're going to have a 4 foot 4 foot fence. Now you're up to 11 feet. Get No. No. I mean, it's you have to have the the chain link fence for fall protection, right? It's it's a I understand that. Absolutely. Right. I understand that. But you know that whole corridor is going to look like a tunnel. Yeah.

Russ, I would recommend that the board ask for a rendering, you know, from street elevation, you know, of the vehicle looking towards that building. So the retaining wall, the railing, the light poles and and the building. I think that's one thing we kind of missed on quick check. And I think the rendering would really help the board understand the dynamic look from, you know, as you sit in a vehicle. So street view, right? Yeah. As you sit in the vehicle on who's street? Yeah. Do you want it from different angle points or Well, I'll leave up to the board, but I think I I think a rendering from that view shed would be very very helpful. Okay. Times of day, maybe time of day would light spill from a vehicle that's parked in a parking spot

shining out on Goosburg Road. Right. In the corner of my walk in seven, you can do that corner. Yeah. Okay. Couple angles would be good. So, because this is below quick check, so any vehicles exiting aren't going to have, you know, come up to the property and maybe shine into the neighbor behind quick check, right? They're going to be more straight enough to come out, right? So that that should mean it. But you're still gonna have a are you gonna have a negative pitch from this area where the two lines coming in going out to go back out on a mohawk? So I I think about Hannerford. Right. Right. Right. Right. Right. Right. Hannifford's got that negative pitch.

Yep. When I'm sitting at the traffic light on the Planet Fitness property, those lights are glaring right at my eyes. Happens every time. When you come when you come in the drive, you're going to be pointing down because it's going to come down. That's what I'm asking, right? Because we tried to match FF with the center point. So, what's the height difference between the back of the lot and the front of the lot when you're all done? Um, in in existing like because the front of the lot, like the base of the wall is pretty much existing. Great. Right. So, you're at 47. still struggling with seven to eight feet of wall. Seven feet tallest. It's not 8 feet.

I'm still struggling with 11 feet of structure. And I I'm just trying to figure out if there's enough pitch in what you're proposing to reduce that height with the parking lot. Um, and then you got to have the the bumper uh the front of your car overhang, right? That's kind of dictating uh where this wall goes. Um, so you can't get any relief from like if you had like 10 foot, you could slope it down to reduce the wall, right? Or even like uh more than that. It's it's you're trying to keep it level so that you have the guide rail to protect the car from going off the wall and you have the fence 4 foot fence from fall protection if anybody were to

you know protect the the customer. I get I do but I So according to the original plan we got there's about a 13 foot differential from the front to the back. Yep. So, you're going to raise up obviously the parking spots to 7 ft. We're showing 479 on this plan. Brings you up to your 480, you know, 480 what? Six. Uh, and now you're really left with 5T overall,

right? For that. I know I know signage is not our department, but as you drive by quick check right now and you see from the road, there's going to be obviously some poll signs and stuff, but as far as the building, you just see the top section of that building. What are you going to have signage across the top? Yes. Of that building. There will be building signage. And there'll be a monument sign located at the

I mean, it's not going to be as drastic obviously as as the 10-ft wall is now, but uh you don't you don't you don't see a lot of that quick check when you're driving by. You just see that upper section. And uh I'm just concerned about where the signage is going to be in relation to possibly not being able to see the signage on the Well, when we do the rendering, right, that'll Yeah, that'll come out. I I would suggest that you put that on. Oh, yeah. Yeah.

And there was a point about the the height of the the poles for the lights 15 ft. So that you're going to make that adjustment also. Yeah, because you I think originally it was 21 23 feet. They had it listed as 24 feet. 24T lighting. So, uh that's going to make a big difference, too. I have a few. Sorry. Um if you could review code 160-43 when you're preparing your plans um and comment on that.

Appreciate that. And then for the landscaping if there I don't see on any of your existing conditions where you're located the actual trees that are there if there's just like a vegetation line. So if your survey actually located the trees that are existing in the back they could be shown on the map so that we can if you cut in determine whether or not plants could be placed underneath them. Yeah. Or behind them. You want a tree survey? Well, if it's if you've surveyed those points, those trees. I thought it was just one row of spruce trees behind the house. I could be wrong.

Um, yeah. I think there's a couple couple along the, like I said, the western edge of the property, but most of them are the ones in the back there, right? Yeah. Yeah. Behind the parking lot there's a row of trees. I guess the spruce evergreens are on the other property. Maybe you could just define that a little bit cleaner so that I understand you're not taking down all the trees. It may be evident in your photo simulation that you're prepared, right? Um but I think that would be helpful for

Yeah. for the public when we get to that point. Um, I think that's all for now. Okay. I have one question for Wayne. Did you uh have a chance to look at the traffic study? It's being reviewed now. Okay. One of the I handed it off to my

one one of the things we have to be aware of that this is this would be a destination type place. People would come there's going to be some added traffic. It's not it's not going to be servicing the people that are going through there now, the tourists, the skiers and stuff like that like a fast food or a market or a gas station. This is now going to be a a destination type place. We'll look at how they did the trip generation. Yeah, we'll have uh Gordon from um the traffic consultant. Yeah. Uh that was on the project. We we'll have him uh speak to the details on that.

We did get a traffic study. Yeah. My only other comment I sorry remember was um having the fence the chain link fence in the front with the slats. It shows in your typical section that you have sort of a an arm at the top and just if you could consider fencing options that might be appropriate to a Yeah. What's that? More decorative. Okay. Okay. Anyone have any other questions at this point? So,

I think we got a little bit of homework here. We got to look at these a little bit more. Yep. Um, does anybody have any more questions? What's the finished grade from the top of that foot wall? The finished grade So in other words, how much lower is the wall? The top of wall is 44.85 like the top top of the wall and then the bottom of the wall is 477.79.

Can you repeat that again please? Top of the wall is 484.85. The bottom of the wall is 4779. Okay. What's the elevation of the parking? Uh the parking is at four you know curve is 48461. It varies because of the drainage, right? But that would be the lowest point because that's where catch basin is located. Um, and then up at the building obviously coming out it's at 486. They have like a 2.16%.

And there's no space between the bottom of the wall and the property line to grade the bottom and the wall. Property. Yeah. Uh it's about a 4 foot five foot space. Okay. Was there any consideration given to putting any part of the ball in the back? 484. You put a rotating well to split the difference so you don't have seven feet in front. Maybe do three and three or five and two or was there any any discussion about that or any

did you look at that at all? Yes, we did look at that. And really, it's the road grade, your existing grade that you got to tie into is really what drives it. You know, further you put it down, the lower you can bring the building, but then you're too close to the intersection. I understand that. So, it's going to come up now. Yeah. Yep. Okay. There's no more questions and you have no more questions for the board at this point. Like to put you on the agenda for our next meeting. Perfect. move move forward on that. Yeah, that would be on the 16th. Yeah, two weeks. That'd be great. Okay, I think we're all set for tonight.

Thank you for your time. Thank you. Okay, that concludes our agenda for this evening. Uh I'd like to review our agenda. Is there any new business? No business. Any old business? Mr. Chair, can I address the board about another project?

Question supposed to be placed upon the agenda. I have speakers know about. Say that again. I I've been trying to get the Brunswick acres subdivision back before this board since last July. Um and we finally gotten to the point where um I was directed by Mr. Grberg and Mr. Langloy to approach Mr. Manelo about getting on the agenda. Um and I'm here tonight. So I just wanted to see if I could appeal directly to you to put that matter back on your agenda. Let me let me clarify something. You've been working on this since last July. I have. By by who?

So, is it is that our fault that we're No. No, not at all. Okay. Just just to be fair. All right. We're not going to get into the substance of what it is. So, this is just a request to be on the agenda. The next avail the next available agenda. I think if you contact the building department, speak with Kevin or Wendy, they can add you as an agenda item for the next available meeting. And that would that would be the request. Okay. Thank you.

Okay. Thank you. Okay. Any other old business? Okay. New business or our agenda, excuse me. Our agenda for next meeting is as follows. I have a public hearing scheduled for AT&T. actually two public hearings. I think they are they're two different applications. Yes.

Uh to commence at 7 pm. So they're going to be first on the agenda. Uh then there's um Fiser Paramont now wants to be back on and we have Mavis Tire. I just assume maintain that order. Fisher Mont uh Parammont and then Mavis. Is there any problems with that? So, we have four items as far as I know potentially.

I presume that would be old that would be old business acres. But we'd have to we'd have to put them on the agenda though officially. Correct. So I'm assuming Andy Brick will be in touch one more to ask to be put on if that happens you can add them to the agenda but okay so potentially we're going to have Brunswick acres is number five

okay anything that I'm missing yeah when's coming back what's that That's that's cold on I have not heard come like one or two meetings a year ready for tonight. Okay. Um if there's no other business uh I will entertain a motion to adjurnn. Second. All those in favor. Any opposed? Thank you.