7575 Van Buren Road, Baldwinsville, NY 13027
July 2007 Planning Board minutes
July 2, 2007
The Regular Meeting of the Planning Board of the Town of Van Buren, held at the Town Building, 7575 Van Buren Road, Baldwinsville, New York, was called to order at 7:00 pm.
Those present joined in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
Roll Call: Harold Crandon present
James Virginia present
James Ruddock present
Eric Knapp absent
Fred Thomas present
Mary Frances Sabin present
Anthony Geiss, Chairman present
Also present: Brad Hunt, Attorney
Jim Billings, Engineer
Dave Pringle, Codes Enforcement Officer
Vera Cavallaro, Planning Board Secretary
MINUTES:
Mr. Crandon asked that Town Board be changed to Planning Board on page 25.
Motion Mr. Crandon made a motion to accept the June minutes as amended. Mr. Thomas seconded the motion, there was no further discussion; motion carried, unanimously on a roll call vote that follows:
Mr. Virginia yes
Mr. Thomas yes
Mr. Knapp absent
Mr. Crandon yes
Mr. Ruddock yes
Ms. Sabin yes
Mr. Geiss, Chairman yes
GERALD SNOW - SUBDIVISION
New State Route 31 and Warners Rd. Tax Map Parcel Id# 047-02-6.1
Mr. Doug Reith was present to address the Board.
Mr. Geiss read the County comments aloud.
Mr. Geiss said that the applicant has a permit for access on Route 31 and that the applicant has addressed all the comments from County Planning.
Motion # 07-120 Mr. Geiss asked the Board to entertain a motion to declare the Town of Van Buren Planning Board as lead agency, a single agency, uncoordinated review for the unlisted action under SEQR for the Gerald Snow subdivision New State Route 31 and Warners Rd. Tax Map Parcel Id# 047-02-6.1. This is the subdivision of a total property of 104.91 acres into a lot which is 1.739 acres and the remaining lot which is approximately 103 acres and includes the combining of 50ft by 201.23ft for a total acreage on the lot facing Warners Rd. to 1.151 acres. There is no adverse environmental impact with regard to this proposal. Mr. Crandon moved to accept the motion, seconded by Mr. Thomas. There was no further discussion. Motion carried, unanimously.
Motion # 07-121 Mr. Geiss asked the Board to entertain the following motion:
WHEREAS Town Code Section 175-5 (C) establishes the criteria for the reservation of parkland on residential subdivision plats or the imposition of a sum of money in lieu thereof; and
WHEREAS, the purpose of such a provision is to prevent deterioration in the quality of park and recreational services to residents in the Town of Van Buren as a result of a new residential development; and
WHEREAS, based on the present and anticipated future needs for park and recreational facilities in the Town relative to the projected population growth in the Town to which the Gerald Snow subdivision will contribute, a proper case exists for requiring that a park or parks be suitably located for playground or other recreational purposes within the Town; and
WHEREAS, a suitable park or parks of adequate size to meet the Town's requirements can not be properly located within the Gerald Snow subdivision, nor is there a need for such additional facilities in the immediate neighborhood,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that a proper case exists regarding the Gerald Snow Subdivision development for requiring the developer pay a park fee of $150 per lot. Ms. Sabin moved to accept the motion, seconded by Mr. Ruddock. There was no further discussion. Motion carried, unanimously.
Motion # 07-122 Mr. Geiss asked the Board to entertain a motion to approve the subdivision for Gerald Snow New State Route 31 and Warners Rd. Tax Map Parcel Id# 047-02-6.1. This is based on the final map submitted by the applicant which is dated 6/4/07 and is a signed and stamped map that shows the subdivision and the 1.739 acre lot and also the 50ft by 201ft combined for a total of 1.51 acres. Mr. Crandon moved to accept the motion, seconded by Mr. Ruddock. There was no further discussion, motion carried, unanimously.
Mr. Geiss adjourned the regular meeting and opened the Public Hearing for Riveridge Development LLC at 7:05p.m.
Motion # 07-123 Mr. Geiss asked the Board to entertain a motion to waive the reading of the Public Notice. Mr. Crandon moved to accept the motion, seconded by Ms. Sabin. There was no further discussion. Motion carried, unanimously.
Mr. Geiss explained to the audience how the Public Hearing would be conducted and asked the applicant to make a presentation.
RIVERIDGE DEVELOPEMNT LLC - SUBDIVISION - PUBLIC HEARING
River and Daboll Rd. Tax Map Parcel Id# 045-01-01.2
Mr. Mastroianni was present to address the Board.
Mr. Mastroianni said that the developer proposes to subdivide a portion of land which is located along River Rd. near the intersection of Daboll Rd. and they are proposing to divide it into 28 lots; 27 of which will be used for residential purposes and they fall under the AR-80 sizing and the remainder would just be the 28th lot. They are looking for 27 residential lots and then the 28th lot would be the remainder from the subdivision. There would be an access road coming in at the bottom approximately 400ft from the Daboll Rd. intersection coming up through and for now there would be a hammerhead at the end with the thought of eventually going through but this is just phase one and they are only looking for subdivision of this to develop these lots. This will also be on public water with single family residences and have a home owners
association.
Mr. Geiss asked if anyone in the audience wished to speak.
Ms. Kathleen Kavin of River Rd. stated that her concern is not necessarily the development itself but the developer. She doesn't know if the Town or the Planning Board checks to make sure that the development actually happens. When this was first proposed she spoke with a friend of hers from Hannibal and his brother lives next door to a farm that is owned by Ms. Parsons and he told her about a similar situation that had happened and she can't guarantee that this is true but this is what she was told and that was that Mr. Shortslef made an agreement with Ms. Parsons to buy her property and Mr. Shortslef was going to pay her as they sold the lots and developed them. Not only was Ms. Parsons not paid for her farm but they almost lost it because the taxes went unpaid and the family had to save Ms. Parsons from being thrown out on the street by
the County tax sale. The top soil was sold without a DEC permit and someone supposedly came in and was removing the topsoil from this lady's property and when the DEC found out about it the DEC came in and stopped that and gave Mr. Shortslef a big fine. She said that she doesn't know all the details and she is just telling the Board what she was told and she is really concerned that this same thing will happen in their neighborhood and this is a beautiful piece of property and she doesn't know if the Board normally does this or if it is within the Board's power to make sure that there is some kind of financial bond to protect this piece of property because the things that this friend told her about this particular developer were very discouraging and she is really not confident at all that this will come to fruition and that it will be as nice as planned and she is really worried about the quality of life in their neighborhood. If it is possible she would like the Board to do a
financial background check on this developer before any approvals are given.
Ms. Joan Polano lives in N. Syracuse but owns property on River Rd. stated that if these are going to be river lots she knows that the depth of the shore over there is not there and people have been hitting their props and bottoms to their boats and so on and she would like to know what they are going to do about the river and what that is going to do to the river. She also asked how many lots are being proposed.
Ms. Mary Crego of River Rd. stated that she lives right across the street from this proposed development and she was the previous owner of the whole property several years ago and she has also worked several years and the Town spent several thousands of dollars on a comprehensive plan to protect agriculture in this area. This totally flies against it and this property is currently in an agricultural district and she would like to see it stay in the agricultural district and help protect the farmers that are trying to farm it. If a realtor had tried to sell a lot there last week they would have been hard pressed to sell it to anyone but a die hard farmer because of the manure and this goes along with farming practices and the farmers were there first and they have every right to do it. She has dealt with city people that want to live out in
the country and then don't want to deal with the noise, the dirt, the dust, and the smells of farming. Let's keep it farming.
Mr. Dan Michaels of Daboll Rd. stated that he is along the same lines as Ms. Crego as far as leaving it farmland for one because there are people that are actually farming it now and they want to farm it and it is not like it is abandoned land so he would like to see it kept as farmland.
Mr. Paul Johnson of Kingdom Rd. stated that they currently farm the land on the north and east side of the proposed development and they do currently spread manure over there as well as at least one other dairy farm and he can just imagine the grief he is going to have to put up with when he starts spreading over there again. There are plenty of houses in this County that are up for sale that more housing does not need to be put in the County or the Town. It is a nice big block of farmland there and the sparse houses that are there are all that is needed and they don't need a development there because they don't take their farm waste in Town and spread it around so why take the Town people and spread them around the country.
Ms. Kathleen Kavin of River Rd stated that someone said a few minutes ago about taking farmland and building on it all these houses and every single day it seems in the paper that there is some kind of article about how poor the housing market is, how many houses are sitting empty, how the housing market is flat, no one is buying anything and houses are sitting on the market a year or two before they are sold. Does the Town really need more houses being built out here especially on land that is right now perfectly productive and fulfilling a very useful function in our society and community and does the Town need to build more houses that are just sitting there empty and she thinks that it is kind of foolish herself and if it was a booming housing market maybe it would make more sense but she doesn't think that this makes any sense at all.
Ms. Carol Peterson of River Rd. said that when this first started she thought that they said they were going to have a marina so that people could launch their boats and since this is out in the country and some of the machinery are driving for harvesting and asked if anyone had looked at the road lately because there is an S curve and a slight hill and what is going to happen with these roads to accommodate all these new people that are moving in, how are they going to manage when there is a big piece of machinery coming down the road. Who has got the right of way and who has to crawl in the ditch? These roads were not put in for here for all these people that they expect to move in and she also understands that the houses are supposed to be on the water and she took a trip down there and if there are two boats someone is in trouble because
they can't pass and she remembers an individual told her that their son put water jugs out to let people know were all the rocks are because at this time of the year it is really shallow and a decent size boat can't get down through there and some of the homes are right on the embankments so what is the developer going to do put a stairway down to the water to where their boat is.
Mr. Geiss said that might be possible but right now the applicant is not looking for the marina and stairways would be decided by the builder at the building stage but that isn't part of their proposal right now but there was a marina for the people or a common access to the river for the lots inside but that is not part of this proposal at this time.
Motion # 07-124 Mr. Geiss asked the Board to entertain a motion to close the public hearing. Mr. Thomas moved to accept the motion, seconded by Mr. Virginia. There was no further discussion. Motion carried, unanimously.
Mr. Geiss reopened the regular session.
RIVERIDGE DEVELOPEMNT LLC - SUBDIVISION
River and Daboll Rd. Tax Map Parcel Id# 045-01-01.2
Mr. Mastroianni was present to address the Board.
Mr. Geiss said that for the Board's information this is a Type I action so the Board is looking at a coordinated review so letters need to be sent out.
Motion # 07-125 Mr. Geiss asked the Board to entertain a motion to declare the Town of Van Buren as lead agency and do a coordinated review for the Type I action under SEQR for the Riveridge Development subdivision Tax Map Parcel Id# 045-01-01.2. The Board will be looking at sending letters out to involved agencies which is Department of Health, Water Authority, Department of Transportation, Army Corp, DEC, and the Canal Authority. Mr. Thomas moved to accept the motion, seconded by Mr. Virginia. There was no further discussion. Motion carried, unanimously.
Mr. Geiss said to answer the first question from the hearing about financial checks; the Town does not do financial or DMV or any other background checks on developers but the Town does require developers to post money that would cover the costs of the Town to do a review of the project and the Board is looking at the project itself and the Board also looks that there are contracts and that either they are the owner or they are representing the owner and they have a letter from the owner to that affect that they are in fact representing the owner. The contract between any property owners and the developer is up to them and if they state to the Board that they are using the developer the Board accepts that and the Board does not go further into their financial capabilities.
Mr. Geiss said looking at the river in which there were comments on the shallowness of the river and the boats. The lots are obviously facing the river and if this proposal goes through it is the developer's to market in any way that they want but nobody has said that and people would assume that they would want their boats out there but how they are going to do that or what they do with regard to boats and access to the river is up to the people that have these lots and that wouldn't affect the Board in looking at the subdivision of it whether the river is deep or not.
Mr. Geiss said that the comprehensive plan looks at preserving farmland and one of the things that has been looked at here and this is going to be for discussion yet because the Board has not made a decision but this is still an AR-80 district which is what the zoning area is and these lots do conform to the AR-80 district for this area and in doing any kind of development like this required that there be public utilities and in this case there is public water available for these lots. This property is in the AG district and the Board will be looking in to this and the affect on farming and the couple other comments on noise, dirt, and smell are concerns of the Planning Board and when developments get done out in the farm. Houses however have been in strip development along the road many times out in the farmland and that is an ongoing
problem how residential and farms get along together. One of the things that was asked is if there was going to be a marina but just for the people in that development if he is not mistaken for access to the river for lots that didn't have frontage on the river so there was something there which would now be in this second phase if that comes about but it is not in this first phase but there was a common access to the river for the lots that do not face the river. Road traffic; these are farm and market roads most of them and there is a great concern on how the roads are used and today the roads are used much more than they ever were before when this was entirely just farmland so that is something that the Board is going to be looking at.
Mr. Geiss read the county comments aloud and asked the applicant if they have had a chance to address any of the comments.
Mr. Mastroianni said that they have talked about them but they have not been put on the plan yet.
Mr. Geiss said that the Board can not do any action tonight because SEQR can not be completed and there are a lot of questions from County that need to be resolved.
Mr. Geiss asked Mr. Billings if they have seen anything on the drainage and wetlands as of yet.
Mr. Billings said that they have been working with the applicants engineer on the drainage and the wetlands they originally had showing on their original drawings.
Mr. Mastroianni said that the wetlands are mainly on phase two.
Mr. Geiss said that County commented that there were some on phase one.
Mr. Mastroianni said that there are some and pointed out to the Board where those areas are.
Mr. Geiss said that with regard to public water the applicants intent would be that water is extended at the developers cost.
Mr. Geiss asked if they are changing any lots in the North West corner with regard to access.
Mr. Mastroianni said that at this time they are not changing them and they are going to have a road that goes to them and the road will be maintained.
Mr. Geiss asked who would be maintaining the road.
Mr. Mastroianni said that it would be a private road.
Mr. Geiss said that they need to look at access off of River Rd. to be across from Daboll Rd. and also lots 12 and 14 the County commented that they didn't want to see any lots accessing directly off of River Rd. A Variance is going to be needed for lot size for lots 24, 26, and 28 because they do not meet the requirements.
Ms. Sabin asked what the sizes of the lots are now and what the Variance would be that they are asking for.
Mr. Mastroianni said that the variance is for the 2½ to 1 ratio for frontage and depth and explained the sizes to the Board.
Mr. Geiss asked with the reconfiguration if they were considering changing any lots at this time.
Mr. Mastroianni said no.
Mr. Ruddock asked what the current capacity is for the access road that would provide the vehicle traffic coming into this subdivision and asked what the class of River Rd. is.
Mr. Billings said that it is a County road and he believes the developer submitted a traffic study some time ago that indicated and County accepted the fact that it could handle that. Condition of the road is a different story and that is a County issue because it is a County road and once the road gets into such a condition that it needs repairs then obviously they have to address that. The County has accepted this project as River Rd. being able to handle it from a capacity stand point.
Mr. Ruddock asked if there would be any upgrade for any of the traffic controlled devices, signs, stop signs or things like that from this subdivision to the major arteries leading into the city. Are any of the intersections along the way potentially hazardous?
Mr. Billings said that he can't answer that but he thinks most of the roads along the way are probably County roads as well but any Town roads they would obviously be concerned about.
Mr. Billings asked the applicant if they have had any time to consider the County's comment about realigning this road to meet up with Daboll Rd and how do they propose to do that.
Mr. Mastroianni said that they are looking at reconfiguring the lots at the south end.
Mr. Billings said that this is probably going to have to be resubmitted to County after it has been changed.
Ms. Sabin said that the Board also asked about sewers for these lots and asked if they were going to be individual sewers.
Mr. Mastroianni said that they are going to be individual septic systems.
Mr. Geiss asked if it was required with a two acre lot to have a design prior to approval.
Mr. Pringle said that he believes that they do.
Mr. Mastroianni said that they have been designed they just need to be submitted. All the field work is done and was monitored by the County and the sites have been designed but with the reconfiguration some lots septic systems will have to be changed.
Mr. Geiss said that the archeological study has been completed and they found no problem with it.
Mr. Ruddock asked if the lot at the corner of the property about 2/3 of the way up the road on the east side where the corner of the large parcel is has adequate depth.
Mr. Mastroianni said that they put a building footprint on it and they have the necessary offsets.
Mr. Ruddock said that they have it on two sides but the actual depth of the lot from that apex of that rectangle perpendicular to the road bed doesn't look like it would meet the minimum and asked if that was averaged.
Mr. Pringle said that is what triggered the variance.
The Board had a discussion about sending the applicant to the ZBA for a variance and decided to wait for the updated maps.
Mr. Ruddock asked Mr. Hunt what the rational behind the agricultural statement is and is that to protect the Town from any type of action from homeowners that are upset; how does the Town communicate that to potential buyers and can that just be refreshed as to what the agricultural statement does here in the Town.
Mr. Hunt stated that he would look in to that and let the Board know.
The Board discussed the local law that is on the books related to farming.
An audience member asked about storm water management.
Mr. Geiss said that the Town does require the applicant to submit that and if the audience member feels that they have something to add as to underground pipes, drainage concerns and such than they can speak with the Town engineer about that.
Motion # 07-126 Mr. Geiss asked the Board to entertain a motion to table this until new information is submitted by the applicant. Mr. Thomas moved to accept the motion, seconded by Ms. Sabin. There was no further discussion. Motion carried, unanimously.
HOOPER - SUBDIVISION
Daboll Rd. Tax Map Parcel Id# 045-02-14
Mr. Doug Reith was present to address the Board.
Mr. Geiss read the County comments aloud.
Mr. Reith said that basically the only difference between the preliminary and final maps is that they took the 60ft right of way that the County was asking for and they put it up basically where Dan Michaels lot is and a note on the map that was requested. He believes that they do have a driveway permit for lot 2.
Ms. Sabin asked if there was a way to show where the approved driveway is on lot 2.
Mr. Reith said that there is an existing driveway there and he thinks that is what the County was using.
Mr. Crandon said number four on County comments going back to the letter the County is commenting relative to in particular the farm driveways that currently exist around the buildings is the County indicating that they want those brought up to code now.
Mr. Geiss said that the Board has a copy of the May 2007 letter from Jim Stelter of County DOT that says that there is access and lot 1 has existing access.
Motion # 07-127 Mr. Geiss asked the Board to entertain a motion with regard to SEQR for the Hooper Farms subdivision on Daboll Rd. Tax Map Parcel Id# 045-02-14 referred to as Crego Meadows in which the Board has previously taken lead agency upon review of this subdivision which is lot 1 of 54.447 acres and lot 2 of 12.920 acres. There is no adverse environmental impact with regard to this action. Mr. Crandon moved to accept the motion, seconded by Mr. Ruddock. There was no further discussion, motion carried, unanimously.
Motion # 07-128 Mr. Geiss asked the Board to entertain the following motion and to declare this a minor subdivision:
WHEREAS Town Code Section 175-5 (C) establishes the criteria for the reservation of parkland on residential subdivision plats or the imposition of a sum of money in lieu thereof; and
WHEREAS, the purpose of such a provision is to prevent deterioration in the quality of park and recreational services to residents in the Town of Van Buren as a result of a new residential development; and
WHEREAS, based on the present and anticipated future needs for park and recreational facilities in the Town relative to the projected population growth in the Town to which the Hooper subdivision will contribute, a proper case exists for requiring that a park or parks be suitably located for playground or other recreational purposes within the Town; and
WHEREAS, a suitable park or parks of adequate size to meet the Town's requirements can not be properly located within the Hooper subdivision, nor is there a need for such additional facilities in the immediate neighborhood,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that a proper case exists regarding the Hooper Subdivision development for requiring the developer pay a park fee of $150 per lot. Mr. Virginia moved to accept the motion, seconded by Mr. Thomas. There was no further discussion. Motion carried, unanimously.
The Board had a discussion on the 2½ to 1 ratio and the code states that if it is a non-residential use than it does not apply.
Motion # 07-129 Mr. Geiss asked the Board to entertain a motion to approve the Hooper Farms subdivision on Daboll Rd. Tax Map Parcel Id# 045-02-14 referred to as Crego Meadows subdivision. This is per the map submitted by the applicant which is dated 7/2/07. This shows lot 1 of 54.447 acres and lot 2 of 12.920 acres. This subdivision shows as requested by the Onondaga County Planning Board a 60ft access point on Daboll Rd. for lot 1. There will be a single driveway permitted for lot 2 and it states per the request from County that lot 2 does not have adequate sight distance for a road as per the County DOT and also that the applicant must complete all work on existing driveways required by the County DOT limited to lot 2. Mr. Thomas moved to accept the motion, seconded by Mr. Ruddock. There was
no further discussion, motion carried, unanimously.
HOOPER - SUBDIVISION
River Rd. Tax Map Parcel Id# 045-02-16
Mr. Doug Reith was present to address the Board.
Mr. Geiss read the County comments aloud and also a letter from County DOT stating that the 60ft ingress/egress meets sight distance for use of a driveway or subdivision road.
The Board discussed where County would like the 60ft right of way to be placed.
Motion # 07-130 Mr. Geiss asked the Board to entertain a motion with regard to SEQR in which the Board has previously taken lead agency for the Hooper Farms subdivision on Daboll Rd. Tax Map Parcel Id# 045-02-16. This is for the creation of lot 1 of 34.49 acres and lot 2 of 27.44 acres. There is no adverse environmental impact with regard to this action. Mr. Crandon moved to accept the motion, seconded by Ms. Sabin. There was no further discussion, motion carried, unanimously.
Motion # 07-131 Mr. Geiss asked the Board to entertain the following motion and to declare this a minor subdivision:
WHEREAS Town Code Section 175-5 (C) establishes the criteria for the reservation of parkland on residential subdivision plats or the imposition of a sum of money in lieu thereof; and
WHEREAS, the purpose of such a provision is to prevent deterioration in the quality of park and recreational services to residents in the Town of Van Buren as a result of a new residential development; and
WHEREAS, based on the present and anticipated future needs for park and recreational facilities in the Town relative to the projected population growth in the Town to which the Hooper subdivision will contribute, a proper case exists for requiring that a park or parks be suitably located for playground or other recreational purposes within the Town; and
WHEREAS, a suitable park or parks of adequate size to meet the Town's requirements can not be properly located within the Hooper subdivision, nor is there a need for such additional facilities in the immediate neighborhood,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that a proper case exists regarding the Hooper Subdivision development for requiring the developer pay a park fee of $150 per lot. Mr. Crandon moved to accept the motion, seconded by Mr. Ruddock. There was no further discussion. Motion carried, unanimously.
Motion # 07-132 Mr. Geiss asked the Board to entertain a motion to approve the Hooper Farms subdivision "Crego Woods" on Daboll Rd. Tax Map Parcel Id# 045-02-16. This is the creation of lot 1 of 34.49 acres and lot 1 of 27.447 acres as submitted by the applicants map entitled "Final Plot Crego Woods Subdivision" and dated 7/2/07. This map shows a 60ft ingress egress easement along the southerly boundary of lot 1 for access to lot 2. This access has been approved by the County DOT and it benefits that this does not cross in the middle of lot 1 which would inhibit further use of lot 1 for farming at this time. Mr. Ruddock moved to accept the motion, seconded by Mr. Thomas. There was no further discussion, motion carried on a roll call vote that follows:
Mr. Virginia yes
Mr. Thomas yes
Mr. Knapp absent
Mr. Crandon yes
Mr. Ruddock yes
Ms. Sabin yes
Mr. Geiss, Chairman yes
KLOTZ FARM - SUBDIVISION
E. Sorrell Hill and Hoag Rd. Tax Map Parcel Id# 049-04-04
Mr. Doug Reith was present to address the Board.
Mr. Geiss read County comments aloud.
The Board discussed the County's comment on wetland delineation.
Mr. Reith said that he did go back and look at the National wetland maps and it is a little bit different and they are connected otherwise the shape is the same and there really is not that much difference.
Mr. Geiss said that the wetland does not affect the portion that the Board will be subdividing off.
Ms. Sabin said that on the map there is a note that says the wetlands were taken from freshwater map 21 which has no date on it and it does say it is approximate only.
Mr. Reith said that a lot of the wetland maps are not dated.
Mr. Geiss said that it is on the 100 acre parcel which is the remaining land and the Board is dividing off lot 2 which the wetlands do not affect.
Motion # 07-133 Mr. Geiss asked the Board to entertain a motion with regard to SEQR for the Klotz Farm Subdivision on E. Sorrell Hill and Hoag Rd. Tax Map Parcel Id# 049-04-04. This is the subdivision into two lots; lot 1 being 100.375 acres and lot 2 of 14.883 acres. There is no adverse environmental impact in regard to this proposal. Mr. Crandon moved to accept the motion, seconded by Mr. Thomas. There was no further discussion. Motion carried, unanimously.
Motion # 07-134 Mr. Geiss asked the Board to entertain the following motion:
WHEREAS Town Code Section 175-5 (C) establishes the criteria for the reservation of parkland on residential subdivision plats or the imposition of a sum of money in lieu thereof; and
WHEREAS, the purpose of such a provision is to prevent deterioration in the quality of park and recreational services to residents in the Town of Van Buren as a result of a new residential development; and
WHEREAS, based on the present and anticipated future needs for park and recreational facilities in the Town relative to the projected population growth in the Town to which the Klotz subdivision will contribute, a proper case exists for requiring that a park or parks be suitably located for playground or other recreational purposes within the Town; and
WHEREAS, a suitable park or parks of adequate size to meet the Town's requirements can not be properly located within the Klotz subdivision, nor is there a need for such additional facilities in the immediate neighborhood,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that a proper case exists regarding the Klotz Subdivision development for requiring the developer pay a park fee of $150 per lot. Mr. Crandon moved to accept the motion, seconded by Mr. Thomas. There was no further discussion. Motion carried, unanimously.
Motion # 07-135 Mr. Geiss asked the Board to entertain a motion to approve the Klotz Farm Subdivision on E. Sorrell Hill and Hoag Rd. Tax Map Parcel Id# 049-04-04. This is for the subdivision into Lot 1 100.375 acres and Lot 2 of 14.883 acres. Lot 2 along its western boundary has a 60ft ingress egress easement which allows access from Hoag Rd back to Lot 1. Lot 1 will have access through this 60ft easement to Hoag rd. as well as access to E. Sorrell Hill Rd. There are existing driveways on E. Sorrell Hill Rd. and also noted that the dividing off Lot 2 from the remaining parcel there are no Federal or State wetlands on Lot 2. Mr. Thomas moved to accept the motion, seconded by Mr. Crandon. There was no further discussion. Motion carried on a roll call vote that follows:
Mr. Virginia yes
Mr. Thomas yes
Mr. Knapp absent
Mr. Crandon yes
Mr. Ruddock yes
Ms. Sabin yes
Mr. Geiss, Chairman yes
GLR - SUBDIVISION
Jones & O'Brien Rd. Tax Map Parcel ID# 60-04-02.2
Mr. Ed Keplinger, John Brennan, Tom LaMere and Fred Zolna were present to address the Board.
Mr. Geiss stated that the Board received a letter from Mr. Tom LaMere stating that they give their approval to Loretto to join them in the subdivision process.
Mr. Geiss asked about the traffic study.
Mr. Keplinger said that they had the traffic study completed and they just handed it to Mr. Billings this evening for B&L's review.
Mr. Billings asked if the traffic study has been sent to County.
Mr. Keplinger said that they haven't yet and the outcome of the traffic study was that the level of service on the road was no greater than a B level of service and to sum it up that there would be no notable affect on the traffic operations or safety on the adjacent public roadway or specifically at the Jones and O'Brien Rd. intersection and according to the information provided by Onondaga County DOT there is no significant accident history or accident pattern that has existed at the Jones Rd. and O'Brien Rd intersection.
Mr. Keplinger said that one of the other items was the verification of the wetland limits and Mr. Bliss of the NYS DEC walked the wetland boundary and they verified that the boundary delineated as shown on their plan drawing is accurate and true and he has provided a letter of the affect from them. They also have correspondence from SHPO that there will be no impact on historic or archeological resources by their actions.
Mr. Geiss asked if they received a driveway cut from County DOT.
Ms. Cavallaro said that Mr. Stelter from DOT called this afternoon and stated that they do have approval for the driveway cut.
Mr. Geiss asked about the reciprocal agreement between lot 1 and lot 3 with regard to the 60ft ingress egress easement.
Mr. Brennan said that is going to be set forth in the deed.
Mr. Geiss said that they need to have their attorney work with the Board's attorney to get a similar easement contract that the Board has requested from applicants in the past and before the Board approves the subdivision the Board would like the contract for common access in place for the lots. In regard that this is a senior home and that this is commercial there will also be no park fees. Therefore the Board can not take any action tonight because the traffic study needs to be completed and the reciprocal easement contract for the driveway is also needed.
Mr. Billings asked if there was some reason that the property line that splits the driveway couldn't be moved over as such that the driveway is 100% on the first parcel which would avoid the reciprocal contract.
The Board and the applicant discussed moving the lot line and what the applicant might do with the back property in the future.
Mr. Zolna asked if they could change the line and still seek approval at the next meeting.
Mr. Geiss said yes, what the Board is saying is instead of reciprocal agreements make a change in the lot line and that wouldn't require sending in down to County again.
The Board discussed the speed limit.
Motion # 07-136 Mr. Geiss asked the Board to entertain a motion to table this until the next Board meeting until the Board receives additional information from the applicant. Mr. Thomas moved to accept the motion, seconded by Mr. Crandon. There was no further discussion. Motion carried, unanimously.
GLR - SITE PLAN
Jones & O'Brien Rd. Tax Map Parcel ID# 60-04-02.2
Mr. Ed Keplinger, John Brennan, Tom LaMere, Penny Abulencia and Fred Zolna were present to address the Board.
Mr. Keplinger said that the only significant change from the previous set of drawings is the design of the storm water drainage facility. The project site is located on O'Brien Rd. about a quarter mile west of Jones Rd. The project site is wooded, slightly sloping and there are Army Corp and DEC wetland located along the east portion of the site and the wetland has been reviewed by DEC and verified. The project consists of a 40 unit housing apartment project. The project is for frail elderly residents and the building will be wood frame construction with siding and stone veneer. They have not decided the final colors as of this point and the project also includes the construction of 44 parking spaces and access will be from O'Brien Rd. The amount of parking spaces does not meet the Town requirement and they understand that so they would like
to go to the ZBA to get a parking variance and there are two parking spaces per unit required but from their experience they think that they can provide one parking space per unit and that would be adequate. The traffic study that was requested by the Planning Board has been submitted for the Town engineer to review. The building will be served by a sanitary pump station and the pump station will pump the waste to the public sanitary sewer on Blanchard Blvd. A portion of the system will be constructed on the O'Brien Rd. and Blanchard Blvd right of ways which will be dedicated to the Town and the pump station and forced main portion of the system will be maintained by Loretto. Water service will be coordinated with OCWA and gas and electric service will be coordinated with National Grid. Storm drain facilities will be constructed to comply with the SPDES Phase Two requirements. The storm system includes a four bay detention basin and the outlet into the buffer area. They coordinated
this with the DEC and DEC requires as part of the mitigation that they excavate a pot hole because through the drought the wetland became very dry so the DEC would like them to excavate a hole out and hopefully the water will settle in it and provide a habitat for frogs and what not.
Mr. Geiss said that the plan L103 says 44 parking spaces.
Mr. Keplinger said that it does say 40 and what they have done is added 4 parking spaces in the service area and that would be dedicated staff parking so they have 40 spaces plus 4 staff parking.
Mr. Geiss asked how many units are there.
Mr. Keplinger said that there will be 40 units.
Mr. Geiss asked how many employees would there be.
Ms. Abulencia said that she is currently the executive director of the Pace program and the main Pace center is in N. Syracuse and connected to the Pace Center is the Sally Coyne center are two 202's. One is the Malta House and the other is the Malta Manor; together there are 90 units there.
Ms. Abulencia gave the Board parking lot pictures.
Ms. Abulencia said that Malta House has 49 apartments and 1 Supervisor apartment and they have about 30 parking spaces for that site so there are 50 apartments and 30 parking spaces and right at this moment of all the people that live there 3 to 4 people drive. Malta House has been running 8 or 9 years now so the folks are frail and Pace does allow people to stay in their apartments that is what Pace does they support the elderly so that they can stay there. Malta Manor is 39 apartments and 1 superintendent and it is connected by a tunnel that connects the apartment building to a Pace center so there is a little triangle that connects it. That has been up a couple of years and the folks there aren't as frail and of the 39 apartments there are maybe 10 people that drive and actually they don't drive there is about ten cars there and 4 or 5 of
them can actually drive and that has 30 parking spots. At 2:45p.m. today they went out and took pictures of the parking lot which was essentially empty and that is a fully functioning Pace site and if the Board comes to N. Syracuse and looks at the Sally Coyne Center that is packed with employees but that is not part of the apartment parking at all; that is a separate building so they are talking about a Pace Center they are strictly talking about senior housing and Pace will come and be there but they believe there will be about four employees there at any given day and some of those will be coming and going. Two to 3 a day is what they are forecasting. Depending on the needs they would have one employee there 24/7 and 1 employee coming for 12 hours a day and a couple coming in and out to provide aid service and there will also be a van coming a couple times to pick up people which will not be staying and not parking so until it is a fully developed Pace Center which is 10 years
down the road and they would have to come back to the Board and get approval for they should have more than ample parking.
Mr. Ruddock asked about visitors such as family and friends what type of parking load do they contribute say on a special holiday.
Ms. Abulencia said that on Mother's Day and Christmas there are more folks that come but they have never had an issue and with their 60 spots for their 90 apartments they have never had an issue for parking either for family or residents.
Ms. Sabin said that she has been to the property that the applicant is discussing on numerous occasions as she did have a friend that lived in one of the units and she has been there at various times of the day on weekdays and weekends and the parking lot was pretty much empty and if it was half full that was an extraordinary number of cars in the entire time that she was there so she would go along with the limited number of parking spaces that they are proposing.
Ms. Abulencia said that they have less than they are proposing at other centers, right now they are proposing one for every unit and the other centers do not have that much. They normally have 2/3 per unit.
Mr. Ruddock asked where the proposed sign would be located.
The applicant and the Board discussed where the sign would most likely be located since the applicant does not have it shown on the plan.
Mr. Ruddock said that the Town does have a sign ordinance and they would have to check with the Codes Officer to make sure that they are in compliance.
Mr. Geiss said that when they do submit the sign the Board would appreciate that it be in color so that the Board can give approval on what it looks like with the colors because the Board will not give a blanket approval on a sign.
Mr. Ruddock asked if they were working on a lighting study because along that western edge they have a lot of residential properties that he thinks people will be concerned about the lighting and even though there is vegetation over on that one side should that other facility be developed and that be cleared the people are going to see the lights on this facility.
Mr. Keplinger said that they will be doing that shortly.
Mr. Thomas said that they have ample room if need be for the parking to be expanded.
Mr. Keplinger said that they do have enough room if need be.
Mr. Crandon asked if the expanded parking would infringe on the additional future building.
Mr. Keplinger said that they don't need the parking so they would like to go for the variance.
Mr. Zolna said that they do not want to have more blacktop than necessary and explained the reason why.
The Board discussed with the applicant the possibility of additional parking.
Mr. Virginia asked about covered parking or entrance ways.
Mr. Keplinger said that they will have a covered entrance way that comes out to the curve line.
The applicants discussed with the Board what HUD would and would not fund with the senior housing.
Motion # 07-137 Mr. Geiss asked the Board to entertain a motion that a positive recommendation be sent to the ZBA for review of parking in regards to the reduction of parking spots from 80 to 40 for the GLR Site Plan. Mr. Crandon moved to accept the motion, seconded by Ms. Sabin. There was no further discussion. Motion carried, unanimously.
Mr. Pringle stated that this has to go to the Fire Department for review and asked if the 4 extra parking spots are being shown in the fire access turn around area because once the fire review is done those might have to be removed.
FED EX GROUND - SITE PLAN
7020 Van Buren Rd. Tax Map Parcel Id# 58-01-38.3
Mr. John Walsh was present to address the Board.
Mr. Geiss read the County comments aloud and said that their primary concern is drainage.
Mr. Billings said that they reviewed the drainage report and they did a nice job and they are planning on expanding their basin.
Mr. Geiss asked if they are pretty much at their 100% build out.
Mr. Walsh said yes.
Motion # 07-138 Mr. Geiss asked the Board to entertain a motion with regard to SEQR in which the Board took lead agency in its previous meeting. This is for the addition of parking areas and updating of existing storm water detention areas. There is no significant adverse environmental impact with regard to this proposal. Mr. Thomas moved to accept the motion, seconded by Mr. Ruddock. There was no further discussion. Motion carried, unanimously.
Motion # 07-139 Mr. Geiss asked the Board to entertain a motion to approve the site plan for FedEx Ground 7020 Van Buren Rd. Tax Map Parcel Id# 58-01-38.3. This is per the submittal from the applicant which are drawings dated 5/14/07 with no additional revision date noted on it. This is for the expansion of the parking for FedEx located along Van Buren Rd. and also improvements to the storm water detention area. Mr. Thomas moved to accept the motion, seconded by Mr. Crandon. There was no further discussion. Motion carried on a roll call vote that follows:
Mr. Virginia yes
Mr. Thomas yes
Mr. Knapp absent
Mr. Crandon yes
Mr. Ruddock yes
Ms. Sabin yes
Mr. Geiss, Chairman yes
CONNORS RD. TRACT - SUBDIVISION
Connors Rd. Tax Map Parcel Id# 051-02-26
Mr. Mathew Freshette and Mr. Mark Edwards were present to address the Board.
Mr. Edwards said that when they were last here they talked about parcels having driveways directly on Connor Rd. and more than what the Board had determined they desired so they did the redraw and redrew the 28.7 acres so there would be two lots in the back of the parcel which will be single family lots that they would personally own and then four lots on the frontage of Connors Rd. In order to not have so many driveways created they created a shared driveway with a 60ft easement for four of the lots so there would be 6 parcels. At the same time they did PERK tests for all of them and septic designs for all the ones in which the County requires septic designs which are less than 5 acres. These lots will be serviced by public water. So they have given the Board 6 PERK tests and 4 Septic designs.
Mr. Ruddock asked why there are not 6 septic designs.
Mr. Edwards said that septic design is not required if they are greater than 5 acres.
Mr. Ruddock said that if they are going to call them building lots don't they have to have them.
Mr. Edwards said that they will accept them with the qualification on their map as not suitable to be deemed a building lot since they are their own private lots anyway which they will then submit their septic design at the time when they go to build.
The Board discussed with the applicant how the applicant was going to note the lots on the map.
Mr. Geiss asked if they were going to be able to get driveways on lots 1 and 6.
Mr. Edwards said yes and that they checked with the Highway Department and Mr. Parks came up and marked the road and said that they would have no problem at the west end of lot 6 and anywhere on lot 1 and at the lower end of lot 6 there is an existing gate there.
Mr. Geiss asked about the existing 60ft easement.
Mr. Freshette said that is not on their property.
Mr. Edwards said that the 60ft easement that they are proposing is right where the driveway would be and is acceptable for a common shared driveway for the four parcels.
The Board and the applicant discussed putting the 60ft easement all on one parcel so that they wouldn't have to have reciprocal easements.
The Board and the applicant discussed the driveways out to the road and how changing the amount benefited both the Town and the applicant.
Motion # 07-140 Mr. Geiss asked the Board to entertain a motion to declare the Connors Rd. Tract subdivision as a major subdivision. Mr. Thomas moved to accept the motion, seconded by Ms. Sabin. There was no further discussion. Motion carried, unanimously.
Motion # 07-141 Mr. Geiss asked the Board to entertain a motion to declare the Town of Van Buren Planning Board as lead agency, a singly agency uncoordinated review for the unlisted action under SEQR for the Connors Rd. Tract subdivision on Connors Rd. Tax Map Parcel Id# 051-02-26. This is the division of the property into 6 parcels which have been submitted on the applicants map and are shown as Lot 1 of 2.3 acres, lot 2 of 2.3 acres, Lot 3 of 9.15 acres, Lot 4 of 9.15 acres, Lot 5 of 2.92 acres and Lot 6 of 2.92 acres. Mr. Thomas moved to accept the motion, seconded by Mr. Ruddock. There was no further discussion, motion carried, unanimously.
The Board discussed changing the August meeting.
Motion # 07-142 Mr. Geiss asked the Board to entertain a motion to move the August meeting from August 6th to August 13, 2007. Mr. Crandon moved to accept the motion, seconded by Ms. Sabin. There was no further discussion. Motion carried, unanimously.
Motion # 07-143 Mr. Geiss asked the Board to entertain a motion to call a Public Hearing for the Connors Rd. Tract subdivision for August 13, 2007 at 7:05p.m. Ms. Sabin moved to accept the motion, seconded by Mr. Virginia. There was no further discussion. Motion carried, unanimously.
Motion # 07-144 Mr. Geiss asked the Board to entertain a motion to refer the Connors Rd. tract Subdivision to County Planning for review. Mr. Thomas moved to accept the motion, seconded by Mr. Virginia. There was no further discussion. Motion carried, unanimously.
STORE YOUR STUFF - SITE PLAN
7443 Van Buren Rd. Tax Map Parcel Id# 031-02-6.1
Mr. Jason Kantak and Mr. Bill Ennis were present to address the Board.
Mr. Kantak said that they went through the site plan approval process for ten buildings on the original site plan and broke it into three phases. As they developed and the project unfolded and everything each phase subsequently came. They got to the completion of the second phase and they came back in front of the Board regarding U-Haul truck rental about six months ago and from that point on they started renting U-Hauls and there was an opening for the contractor who did the original work which was Canton Development and they approached the Ennis's and started the tenth building. There was a little misunderstanding on whether the tenth building was approved with U-haul or was the tenth building taken off as U-Haul and they spoke to Mr. Pringle and low and behold they made an overlook and the tenth building was taken off of the latest site
plan approval that was approved with U-Haul so they are back in front of the Board now to put the tenth building back on along with the U-Haul storage. One thing that immediately jumped out at him was the storm water management and to make sure the impervious area and everything else was still covered and he went through the calculations, storm water prevention plan along with their notice of intent and he was conservative enough on the original design because during the original tenth building project they were going back and forth and he incorporated quite enough to cover them for what is shown on the plan now. The storm water management area does not need to change and the prevention plan doesn't need to be changed either and he sent a letter to B&L based on his calculation and revisions. The other thing that was included on there was during the U-Haul rental they noticed that several people would routinely drop a vehicle off or truck rental in the morning or the late evening
and subsequently into a customer parking area or someone would rent a vehicle for a day rate and they would leave their vehicle there for the day and take the truck and come back so one thing that was always needed was two additional parking spaces and they have them proposed by the main entrance.
Mr. Ennis explained to the Board the misunderstanding in starting the tenth building before having site plan approval.
Mr. Geiss asked if they were taking the plantings out of the front and if they were going to put any back.
Mr. Ennis said that they put the flowers underneath the sign and they are constantly massaging that.
Mr. Geiss said that he is looking at the plan layout.
Mr. Ennis said that the plantings that are shown on the plan were never actually put in because they did other things like putting the maples out front and they put more along the fence than they had originally planned, they added the flower box under the sign and every year they have added more and they are going to be adding another flower box. They have added more than what was taken away.
Mr. Geiss said that he thinks the front looks very nice and that was the Board's desire and they have worked well at meeting that.
Mr. Ennis said that they mow all along Rt. 690 which is not their property and if it was the State mowing it would be done every 8 weeks and the appearance is good for them and they realize what is good for the Town is also good for them so they are trying to go the extra effort to keep the property nice.
Mr. Geiss asked Mr. Pringle if they were into the 20ft setback with the parking in the back.
Mr. Pringle said that as long as it is noted on the plan and the Board doesn't have a problem because it is a setback for structures and the trucks are movable.
Mr. Thomas asked if they are going to do more plantings along where the trucks are.
Mr. Ennis said yes, they are going to be putting in more plantings every year and they are putting in more paving for cosmetic reasons as well because asphalt looks a lot better than dirt; most places park the trucks on stone and they are spending $10,000 back there where the trucks are for cosmetic reasons alone because it will look better from Rt. 690 if that is paved and in the triangle there will be more paving.
Ms. Sabin asked if they would consider putting more trees along Rt. 690 closer to building 10.
Mr. Ennis said that they have disappointed because they put flowering pear trees in and they have been in three years and they are not doing really good so they are contemplating putting different trees in and more of them because in three years they have grown about six inches so he doesn't know if it is the soil or whatever but they will definitely be adding more along Rt. 690 and the triangle green area.
Mr. Virginia asked where the trucks are parked today.
Mr. Kantak said where building ten is.
Mr. Virginia asked if they were moving everything back.
Mr. Ennis said that the trucks are parked were they are going to be parked right now.
The Board discussed referring the application to County and decided that it did not need to be reviewed by County since County has seen it previously.
Motion # 07-145 Mr. Geiss asked the Board to entertain a motion to declare the Town of Van Buren Planning Board as lead agency, a single agency uncoordinated review for the unlisted action under SEQR for the Store Your Stuff site plan at 7443 Van Buren Rd. Tax Map Parcel Id# 031-02-6.1. This is for the construction of building 10 at Store Your Stuff which is located just opposite Village Blvd South and also relocating the parking for the U-Haul trucks on the property. There is no significant adverse environment impact with regard to this proposal. Mr. Crandon moved to accept the motion, seconded by Mr. Ruddock. There was no further discussion. Motion carried, unanimously.
Motion # 07-146 Mr. Geiss asked the Board to entertain a motion to approve the site plan for Store Your Stuff at 7443 Van Buren Rd. Tax Map Parcel Id# 031-02-6.1. This is per the submittal by the applicant which is dated 6/22/07 and noted on this drawing is the location of building 10 and the additional paving and parking area for the U-Haul trucks. This application has not been resubmitted to County in that it has been submitted twice prior for the storage building and for the U-Haul trucks and therefore re-submittal is not necessary; it does not change drainage which has been reviewed by the Town engineer. Mr. Thomas moved to accept the motion, seconded by Mr. Crandon. There was no further discussion. Motion carried, unanimously.
EMPOWER CREDIT UNION - SITE PLAN
2265 Downer St. - River Mall - Tax Map Parcel Id# 034-04-6.2
Mr. Dan Todero was present to address the Board.
Mr. Todero said that they would like to put in a drive up ATM kiosk in the River Mall parking lot.
Mr. Geiss asked if it was going to be owned by the shopping mall.
Mr. Todero said that it would be a leased space owned by the Empower Credit Union and it is a portable kiosk that comes in on a truck and it placed and all they have to do is pour concrete.
Mr. Geiss asked how wide the grass area is that they are trying to build on.
Mr. Todero said that the grass area is probably 7ft and the base of the kiosk is 50 inches and concrete slab will be 4ft.
Mr. Geiss said that they are going to have 1½ft of grass on either side of the kiosk.
Mr. Todero said that they could pour all of it if the Board prefers.
The Board discussed the Kiosk that was previously in that area for photos.
Mr. Crandon asked how it would be hooked up to Empower Credit Union.
Mr. Todero said that they would have to bring in phone, data, and security lines.
The Board had a discussion on how the cables would be run.
Mr. Geiss asked why they chose this location.
Mr. Todero said that they have to be at least 600ft from the P&C for the lease Phillips Edison has with P&C and just about any place on the site would somewhat restrict further development for the owner.
Mr. Geiss said that he thinks it is a very tight island with snow and other things there too.
Mr. Todero said that in the terms of the lease the owner of the mall is responsible in keeping the snow away from the kiosk.
Mr. Crandon said that if it was in the main drive he would be concerned but since they are going to swing off over in the movie plex area he is not that concerned.
Mr. Geiss said that he has a concern that goes back to the owner in that when someone drives in there they drive in and have to swerve. Ultimately they have to look at this and if they are going to maintain that area and someday redo that it will wipe the kiosk out if it is located there. When someone drives in if they kept driving straight they would come inside the stop sign because they want people to come in and do an S turn to come on to the defined roadway. It is nice for some of the parking spots that are parked against the building because they can back out but if they put the kiosk there someday they may want to redo that entrance so it is a straight drive in and if the kiosk is put in that spot that eliminates ever doing anything with the entrance.
Mr. Todero said that according to the terms of the lease if they need it to be moved it will be moved and the mall owner will pay for it. There are only six bolts that hold this kiosk to the ground.
Mr. Geiss said that the Board wouldn't want to locate it if it is going to have to be moved and maybe they should build the island bigger and over and put the kiosk on the other end of the island then it would not have to be moved and then they could look at what the future road might be because then the kiosk would be out of the way or they can look at a different spot because he looks at that spot as a possible future change in this development and someday that would be very appropriate. The Board is not going to make that a condition to accommodate this but the Board would hate to locate something there that would have to be moved.
The Board discussed the entrance to the mall.
Mr. Todero said that he will let the owner know the discussion that has taken place and try to figure out how they can accommodate everyone.
Mr. Ruddock said that the thing that he has issues with is that if the operator of the vehicle comes in that entrance than they are going to have to make sure that anyone coming out has cleared and then they are going to make a left hand turn and cut hard around and then they will be heading south so that the drivers side of the car in on the west side of that concrete island and when they finish their business they are not going to be able to make a left hand turn and come up perpendicular to the area way, they are going to be at an angle and getting close to the stack space and he wouldn't mind it as much if that entrance was filled in so that the island became part of the peninsula and that would force people after they were done with their business to drive around and then come back out where they would be almost opposite on the space
between the building and the Rite-Aid. He thinks that they are going to end up with a snarled traffic pattern.
Mr. Geiss asked where the stacking for the kiosk is going to occur.
Mr. Todero said they have space for one car and the kiosk and one stacked behind it.
Mr. Geiss asked if one car is all that there ever is because if they put more than one they will be out in the driving lane and that is a problem there and they are putting the kiosk in the middle of a driving area and cars will not be able to make the turn.
Mr. Ruddock said that they might have to give up parking spaces and he would rather see them given up rather than the overall parking of the entire complex to make a new island so that they would get better flow than to try to use that existing island that is so immediate to the main circulation path coming in and going out. The spaces going towards movieplex because they have twenty spaces in there and he thinks it would be better to forfeit some of those so that there would be a better pattern and it would give standing space or stack space behind it that would not interfere with the stacking trying to get out of the mall which is becoming more difficult now. He really thinks pouring some curbing and getting it better located for people approaching it and people exiting and leaving it would make more sense and they would still be 600ft from
the P&C as long as they stay in the current alignment and with Movie Time Video he has never seen those parking spaces used.
The Board discussed the parking spaces.
Mr. Todero said that he has no problem having a discussion with Philips Edison and they have been very accommodating.
The Board told the applicant to talk to the owner about location.
Ms. Sabin said that if the kiosk is out there a lot of people will use it and if they can stack more than one car and not impact everyone else that would be better.
The Board discussed other kiosk locations.
OTHER BUSINESS
Mr. Geiss asked Mr. Pringle if a consultant was found for cell tower projects yet.</ | ||