Minutes

WEBSTER TOWN PLANNING BOARD MINUTES

Anthony Casciani, Chairman

Dave Malta, Vice Chairman

Mark Giardina, Secretary

Derek Anderson

John Kosel

Peggy Maltman

Drazen Gasic

Frank Ciardi, Attommey

Josh Artuso, Director of Community Planning & Development

Erika Corsi, Planner of Community Planning & Development

Please join us in the Pledge of Allegiance/Roll Call. We’ve got I believe, like, seven items on the

agenda this evening. And, Mark, why don’t you go do a roll call, please?

Summary overview of outcome:

TABLED MATTERS

:

1. DINKS AND LINKS

SCHEDULED MATTERS

:

2. WEBSTER SOLAR GARDEN LLC

3. POLE BARN

4, POLE BARN

5. VISION MITSUBISHI WEBSTER

Applicant. ROBERT SANDERS/765 RIDGE RD

Pg. 187 September 2, 2025 Planning Meeting

6. GARAGE

7. CARE A LOT SIGN

(MARK GIARDINA READ EACH APPLICATION INTO THE RECORD)

(SEE ATTACHED SEQR

RESOLUTIONS

, if any)

DINKS & LINKS: Located next to 900 Five Mile Line Road. Applicant Joe Catalani is

requesting PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN & SUBDIVISION APPROVAL (PUBLIC

HEARING) associated with the construction of a 41,000 SF indoor/outdoor recreational facility

on a proposed 10.4-acre lot consisting of SBL# 079.10-1-2.3 (9.38-acres) and a 1.08-acre portion

of SBL#079.10-1-1.11 located in the HC High Intensity Commercial District under Sections 269-

10, 296-17 and 350-19 of the Code of the Town of Webster.

Appearing before the board is Joe Catallini, representing Dinks and Links.

puta family recreation center next to Lowe's. Um, this was, uh, land that | think in the early 2000 was set

aside for this kind of thing. Um, Lowe's is on one end. BJ's is on the other. Kind of as bookends we're in

the middle of it. Um, we're, um, not asking for any variances. Um, we have enough parking. In fact, we

are planning on leaving the top quarter, the north end, um, untouched. And that'll stay green if we can.

Uh, we have enough room down below to facilitate our parking needs. Um, and, uh, that’s really about. It

have itin your packet, I got it late Friday, Everybody was off. The Engineers did respond to it today. So

Josh and Erika should have a copy of it, and Keith, Um, of that, wh, and the traffic study came in earlier

today. The comments we had in traffic study as well. So everything's been responded to.

woods and yeah, you know rcal history on that. That land was Brian Hogan's grandfather, right? He

farmed(?) that land. So that is not an old growth forest, folks. Over there, that's brush trees growing.

Number one. Number two, that whole parcel from Hard Road over to Five Mile Line Road does have an

Pg. 188 September 2, 2025 Planning Meeting

approval for this type of building going in there. [t's been approved for construction already. What comes

in we don't know. In this case we have we have this pickleball court coming in and we're dealing with that

currently. Uh, regard to some of the letters complaining about it and things that I see, I'm on the. (?)

they get their information, but they're 99.5% wrong. Um, that said, this still has some issucs to deal with

the DEC. What has changed over the past few years? | don't know, but I do know for a fact this parcel

was surveyed and found to have no wetlands and a few years back now this was...

followed, but we have to wait until this stuff is resolved with the DEC.

than likely tabling this. It won't be a vote on this, but if there is anybody here that wishes to speak. If you

do, they ask you to come up to the podium. That's it. Okay. Go ahead.

having wetlands. DEC's new maps show it as having wetlands.

habitats for wildlife. They mitigate climate change by um, absorbing the carbon from, uh, and] think that,

uh, it reduces heat islands. And | think we need to look at this carefully as it's surrounded by two

shopping plazas and a senior center that, um, are producing, um, urban heat and runoff, and the wetlands

purify that water. Um, so it's important that, wh, let it not be disturbed so that they can continue to. We'rc,

we're a wet town, and we have an obligation to, um, to Lake Ontario. Um, the Lake Ontario watershed. So

it's important to, um, that the project sounds like a nice project, but this might not be as it's described

currently and its location and where the wetlands are on these properties. Um, that.

we have to find out.

you where the wetlands are.

Pg. 189 September 2, 2025 Planning Meeting

this.

is something the DEC came out with about a year ago. This is about a year ago, isn't it? Derek? January

Not even a yearago, where they threw darts at the wall and said this could be wetlands. And they did this

allover. {thas infuriated a lot of the builders and construction people and so on, in all or not just here,

because it isn't a firm, positive wetland that may be right in the water.

1 mean if it needs more approval, fine.

looked at, and we may be changing, uh, building codes, um, coverages, um, things like that. That may

definitely impact, | mean, right now, Lowe’s doesn't use that full parking lot, um, that they were required

to build, So, you know, I think that we need to take some time as a town to look at, um, the fact that we

may be changing some of that. Um, so I'm saying that it needs some modifications. Um, it needs further

investigation, and, um. It’s a great business, but maybe not this location.

AUDIENCE MEMBER YELLS OUT FROM SEAT — INAUDUBLE

Pg. 190 September 2, 2025 Planning Meeting

like your acknowledgment and I like Webster's willingness to ensure that the issues with the wetlands,

which are indeterminate as of now, and the DEC and the whole permitting process and everything that's

pertinent to that with respect to the new regulations, is dealt with before any permissions are issued. I

think that's great. Um, so I'm not going to bang on about that. Um, | will say a couple of things to reiterate

kind of where Dottie was coming from with the upcoming Comprehensive Plan point and there being

certain aspects of our code which are out of date and in needing of refurbishment, I do think that any

current development that should be taken into account, things like parking !ot size and lot coverage, those

things hopefully in the not too distant future, will be being updated and that will really affect any future

development that's going through. So I think those factors need to be considered with current

developments. I think that kind of a thing is going to be different in the future, and we shouldn't

necessarily be rushing anything through if we know that imminent is going to be change, which, you

know, ostensibly, materially affects the nature of the development. And having said that, I appreciate that

there was a PDD done by COSTICH in 2002. I appreciate that these woods are not old growth, and that

the intention for this area was always of a particular, uh, direction, viewpoint, remit, what have you.

But! would say that given we do have the Comprehensive Plan update coming up, it should at least be

allowed that, that intention may be reevaluated, modified, re-articulated, particularly because Webster in

2002 was a lot different than Webster in 2025. Um, personally, I think a pickleball court, I've seen the

plans. I think, you know, the development itselfis a great idea. Um, J just do think that and it seems like

you guys are in line with this, that the issues with the wetland and the deck permitting and all of that does

need to be sorted because it's going to affect really, it's setting a precedent for any development in

Webster on or adjacent to wetland in the future. Right. So it's important to like, get that part right.

the Comprehensive Plan coming up and modification and stuff. Yeah. In the meantime, you can’t tell

somebody you can't do something if they conform to what the code is today.

um, analysis, the feedback that you give to the developer any goodwill that they are willing to sort of, you

know, issue forth with those factors taken into account. Um, I realize it's a gray arca and, you know, I'm

not really sort of articulating any, any specific directive for you based on that, But all I'm saying is those

are considerations,

supposed to be. I appreciate il.

can’t hear? Louder, louder? Oh Jeez, | got the thing. I'm gonna choke on it if] get any closer here. Um, |

don't know if they can be turned up or anything.

Pg. 191 September 2, 2025 Planning Meeting

Can't, What's that? Youcan. Okay. Allright. I was I can ask the board. Just don't choke on it. But get that

thing close to your mouth J guess. I'm not an expert on microphones. Yes, sir.

104, in the 2008 Comprehensive Plan was made high intensity zone for these type of operations. This is

even a low intensity. So the project outside of the question on the wetlands shouldn't have any problem

being passed whatsoever. Uh, there are people that do not want us to take any more trees down in the

town of Webster, but I ask them to go back and look ata map from 1950 where we have more trees today

than we had in 1950. And the reason for that is this was farmland, and the farmland was tumed into

houses where you all live now. So. we also have 2,915 acres of open space right now in the town of

Webster. Anda lot of people do not know where they are. So I'm just saying to the board that this project

is a permitted use in this zone, outside of the questions that are being brought up about the wetlands, and

it should be passed. Thank you.

there an arca there that was wetlands prior to [ don't know, that's why I'm just. I'd rather table it, make

sure we coverall the bases with it, | wouldn't want to move forward. The motion for an approval on it,

and then have it come back and bite us. That's all. Yes, sir.

Uh, I'm in support of the project. I think this will be a great facility for the community. Uh, continues to

build out the community relalions and allowing people to come together and work together. I'm sure the

DEC and the SEQR and everything that you're going to have to do to make sure it checks all the box are

going to come through. So just supporting.

come on up.

when I got the Monroc County comments specifically about the PUBHX Wetland. I sent an email to both

Joe Cattalani and Joe Arrieta, and I'm going to share that with you folks. Starting at the left, you can pass

it down. There'sa picture of me standing in this wetland that's supposed to be permanently flooded, open

water in April. 1] wouldn't have been standing in it if it was open areca and permanently flooded.

sysiem was already put in all the drainage is there. If you've ever gone back and looked at the back side

out there, there's pond back there. There's pond by a Five Mile angled, | think there's what is there 3 or 4

different ponds on that site. They were developed to take the water. Excess runoff water from the parking

lots for was there and for future development. So as far as the drainage that was covered. I'm sorry, Sir.

No.

Pg. 192 September 2, 2025 Planning Meeting

And if I'm not mistaken, chairman, uh, Casciani were you on the board with the Angela Okolo

(SPELLING?)?

right, so. This wetland, they called ita PUBHX. Andon the front sheet, it says this pedestrian non-title

wetlands. Okay, we would agree with that. It's got an unconsolidated bottom because it was dug.

permanently flooded? No. Excavated? Yes. So it's not permanently flooded. It's not open water. What's

my point? ] havea project down in Volney (?), right outside of Fulton, where the Army Corps. when

January 1st came about they changed their wetland maps. They've created a great deal of confusion. They

show potential wetlands 14ft higher than the stream with a slope of 7%. I have requested, and Oswego

County will not review this one single family building until the DEC gives it the all clear. There'sno way

there's a wetland 14ft higher than a stream with a 7% percent slopc. But what's happened now is the

Army Corps draws some lines and they basically send it to DEC and then DEC central office Albany

throws it to the region.

] have another one in Farmington where yes, we know there is a wetland on the south of the Niagara

Mohawk property. We're up on the north right by the Farmington Town Hall, except it's the same tax

account, So Central Office Albany flagged it. Yes, you have a wetland on the property. I've had to go to

Region Eight and ask and after a year of fooling around, we had to withdraw our application in

Farmington because of the sulfur spots, because they're overloaded in (Albany? Avon?) with this stuff.

But my point is, just because somebody waves a magic wand and calls it a wetland. Those are swales that

were cut as part of the COSTICH plan. They're very flat. If you have a swale that's less than 1.5% slope,

it's going to grow Phragmites. It just a fact of life. Youreally need 1.5 or 2% slope and or you got to be

on top of it all the time, always maintaining it.

So there was a wetland delineation done by Marathon Enginecring with um group out of Victor. And the

other thing is that they classified the roadside ditch of the service road as a potential wetland. well, if they

classify every roadside ditch as a potential wetland we're in trouble. You're in trouble if you've got

roadside ditches in the town. But the other thing is that they can't deny you access to your property. You

need a permil, bul they can't deny you access to the property. And we're of the two fields to the north.

One would make a really great little guy soccer. The furthest one north of the two, we're only putting a

parking pad onthe southem one, not on the northern one. And you can sec them up on the map further up

on the map. The other thing I'll just say about parking, the parking for this site is 1.75 every 175 square

feet of gross floor area. You need one parking space. Lowe’s is two. I would agree that Lowe's is

potentially over parked. I did the design for the Lords and Taylor expansion at East View Mall, and the

argument that Willmott made at the time to the Town of Victor was that taking their parking code, and it

was going to create way more parking than you needed.

And if someone can't find a space two days before Christmas, that's just too bad. But most of the time,

people are always going to be able to find a space. The other thing is that some of the western towns, one

being Ogden and actually down in Rush, they're still going with 10 x 20 parking spaces, which increases

your asphalt footprint by 10%. So on the one hand, we're trying to reduce stormwater runoff. We still

Pg. 193 September 2, 2025 Planning Meeting

have towns with codes that are probably 30 years old. That's kind of my soapbox right now. Are there any

questions?

they post these. This is wetland. That's wetland. That's in formation that isn't finalized yet. But people sec

this stuff and they said ch that's a wetland there. You can't do anything. It's potentially we don't know.

Nobody knows yet. So anyways, back to that.

comments and.

needed it, you could expand your parking on that plenty of times. I'm sure you've seen that.

the road. So to get to this pickleball thing, you don't necessarily have to go by Lowe's. The roadway is

already out around the perimeter.

There's a big fight about Wegmans. You know, people wanted Wegmans, Pittsford to put the bus stop up

on Wegmans parking lot closer to the store. And they said, no, it’s private property. That bus stop is on

Monroe Avenue. And so if you're telling people or telling Lowe’s that they've got to allow people to drive

around on their private property, you're creating a liability. In my opinion.

why we're tabling this. There's comments and concerns. But if you get addressed down here.

on our private property, I would think that Lowe's Corp would have a similar reaction.

contentious here. When was the most recent wetland delineation completed?

Pg. 194 September 2, 2025 Planning Meeting

SWPPP, we have applied for a permit for freshwater permit on the site, and we're actively before them for

review, That delineation showed no wetland other than a very tiny portion of the most eastern portion of

our parking lot up towards the front and the drainage ditch, which even a gentleman from the DEC said is

not classified correctly. But in any event, we've taken the top of that parking lot, a quarter of the site

which under the PDD was to be fully developed and we decided we didn't need that. You know, we

fulfilled the town's parking without having to pave that. And so we left that green. And the thought is that

the DEC wants us to replace more wetland there. We'd be happy to do it. We've got a we've got a couple

acres to do it with, Um, but we are before them for a permit. And that's where we stand. Now, I don't

know if there's ways to further around. You know, getting approvals was subject to a DEC permit or not

or how the process goes.

south portion.

which is showing all the wetlands. The base.

When they originally did this, PDD. Right? They satd, we're going to build all of this retail. Right? And

where my site is, it was approved for 48,000 ft? of retail. So already we're we're building 20% less. But in

any event, when they did that, that comprehensive pian, the the development district, it went from Lowe's

to BJ's right before BJ's. And so what they say is they look at that and they say, all right, listen, if these

buildings get built and they put the buildings on, even though they weren't constructed yet, they put the

Lowe's oul and they put the 48,000 square foot where I am. They put another 48,000 square foot next to

me. They put all these restaurants out in the parking lots, which aren't going to be developed, probably.

But they said if this were to occur now, we need to put a Stormwater prevention plan in for all this

watershed, And so that top piece of wetland around was a dug basin. And there was in inverts there. All

this water eventually gocs to Nine Mile um Creck orum, Shipbuilders Creck. It all exits there. So when

they did this development, they dug that pond out. They dug a pond out up on the north, uh, northwest

side in the very comer. You'll sce a pond there. They dug two ponds right at the entrance to Lowe's. They

Pg. 195 September 2, 2025 Planning Meeting

dug a pond behind us. Um, and they dug a pond on the western side. All those were there to mitigate

rainfall in the SWPPP. Now it's 20 years later. And so now what's happened is, over the years, some of

those regulations have gotten a little bit more stringent. So now we have to live with the original SWPPP

and all the benefits, all those ponds. And that one pond becomes a wetland now.

Incremental changes, um, that that are now today's standard we have to meet and we should be able to

meet them very easily. We're 20% less watershed just on our building alone. But we have the SWPPP

before the DEC. The deck is the one that, you know, okays the design, and the town is the enforcement

end of it. Make sure that it’s done right.

the state.

grading into the wetland and you're filling it on the north side.

Yeah. So that's a very small a small portion. That'l! be somcthing that'll be handled with, with the with the

DEC.

state wetlands. And you're coordinating with the DEC for that impact

drawings, but it's indicated in the plans as wetland. Also, is ita pond or is that delincated wetland?

you're talking about the very south end of Lowe's where it shows.

there where.

Pg. 196 September 2, 2025 Planning Meeting

the overall development. That was one of those ponds that was dug.

related, So maybe I'll send those to our enginecring department specifically. Some additiona! details |

would like to sce on the plan set. Anything from dumpster enclosures? What are you proposing for that?

All the proposed external, like the volleyball court details, pickleball details, bocce ball details. You're

proposing a mini golf, but there's no grading indicated for that arca. So you know what's going on?

parking. We put some of that out on the side. Yes. Yeah.

will be proposed there. I did have a question that might be more engineering related. You're showing

infiltration basins as one of the stormwater practice or infiltration perc tests performed in those areas?

anywhere from 4.5-ft to 15-ft wide. Infiltration.

fence, inlet protection, those kinds of thing. Construction, entrance. Um, I also saw there's a stormwater

pipe that's over 300ft long. I was wondering if there should be a manhole there. It's one that's in the

parking tot going cast to west. And then I didn't see any RPZ, details or anything with regards to those

connections,

ina 15 foot casement adjacent to the DOT right of way. That's where water is on the property. There's no

other water. If you drive around the perimeter of Lowe's, you will sec their RPZ meter. It's the same

detail. They have a pipe to carry, the swale. They've got to go up and over maintain frost protection.

We're going to have to do the same thing. And] located it. I asked Joe, I said, where is your mechanical

room? And he told me it's to the cast side of the main door. So I drew a straight line north, and we'll have

to get a permit to cross that swale.

Pg. 197 September 2, 2025 Planning Meeting

maintenance?

like that up to where it is.

comments.

words, you wouldn’t haven't got anything back that quick on that I'm sure

comment responses that engineering is looking for. Yes.

COSTICH hired, I'm gonna say Diebold, but they make locks a firm out of Victor to do the wetland

delineation for the whole thing. The client was Hagedorn Properties, Inc. Hagedom did this because they

wanted to sell land, and they wanted to be, um, full disclosure as to what they were selling. Does that

make that make sense? So they Marathon hired a sub who's a wetland expert. They did it. The client was

Hagedorn Properties, and that's that's where our wetland delincation came from.

saying. Address the comments on here, which you've got a month, I guess nowto probably get this. And

then hopefully we'll move forward with the program.

Yeah, yeah. My wifc, my. Wife retired from strong a year ago. She's pushing me to retirc, but 1 gota

couple projects that got to gel wrapped up.

Pg. 198 September 2, 2025 Planning Meeting

emailed them to you about an hour and a half for the PRC engineering comments that you had.

from DEC, we should be able to move. Um, again, this is it's a public hearing, this meeting. Um, in the

case of this, there is interest from people will we won't close the public hearing. We'll leave it open to you

guys. We'll leave it open. So it's that close. So the next meeting, if something new comes up, you want to

address something, you'll be able to do this. Okay? Fair enough.

project, you had mentioned wanting a traffic study to be done because of the impact that the traffic has

from Lowe's to BJ's to the intersection. The report, as I saw it, basically calculated on what an anticipated

flow would be and said, hey, we don't have to doa traffic study based on these requirements. So I guess is

the ask of the applicant that irregardless of what this calculation of what the anticipated number is, where

they fall under that, it wouldn't need to do a traffic study. Are they not required to do a traffic study

anymore? Or is the board still saying irregardless of that, we want you to do a traffic study?

traffic study on this, Josh? ] mean, ] mean, we can carry this thing all the way over to hard road if, you

know, if you wanted to. The area, the arca around, um, BI's, the gas station there that needs to be

modified without a question thal, that that needs to be widened so that what is there currently is part of

BJ's gas station. You know what] mean? Where people can go in and it needs to have a clear shot out,

which could be a little bit move to the north. They can put a stretch of road in there, you know, some

asphalt there and they'd have it. But that's something I don't know. Do we need to have that as a part of

the study I don't know.

applicant to bear the burden of doing that, but in terms of potential Reconfigurations that are off their

property.

wanted as a traffic study. He supplied to us what type of study he wanted, and we supplied that.

Pg. 199 September 2, 2025 Planning Meeting

from our Engineering Department. And in speaking with Keith earlier today, he still has some concerns

and some additional information that he's going to require.

stuff.

know what to do, But if Keith just got it to you, you'll have a month. Hopefully we get it beforehand.

all of our comments. So there are certain things that did not get addressed originally, and that's what I'm

referring to. Okay. Yes.

understand the users of this new facility. If it's young, can we consideras a part ofa traffic study which is

pending, um, bicycling, And! sce kids that are crossing over 104 with their helmets on a bike. Could we

think about lessening traffic, increasing bike flow and then lessening? Um, you know, just the need for

parking spaces, making this really more inclusive of ages across the community. And the second question

is, can we consider the conservation board's recommendations? Site walk through again? Um, you know,

coming into this next meeting, will there be a conservation Board representative as a part of the next

discussion? Um, I would love to see that. So that that is weighted as well as the DEC determination.

table this thing, get the required information that's requested, and, uh, plan on coming in next month with

it and hopefully move forward. Thank you. Is that work good. So you want to make a motion John? Yeah.

mecting? What's today?

Pg. 200 September 2, 2025 Planning Meeting

RESOLUTION 25-0064 John Kosel made a motion for TABLE

APPLICATION TO OCTOBER 7, 2025

which was seconded by Derek Anderson.

Mr. Malta AYE

Mr. Giardina AYE

Mr. Anderson AYE

Mr. Kosel AYE

Mrs. Maltman ABSENT

(Mark Giardina read the second application):

Montante Solar is requesting SKETCH PLAN REVIEW associated with a 6.63 MW Soal

Generation Facility across 20-acres of a 120-acre lot owned by Xerox Corporation having SBL#

065.02-1-40.111 located in the IN Industrial District under Sections 269-5 and 350-22 of the

Code of the Town of Webster.

Appearing before the board 1s Katie Soscia of Montante Solar.

you guys for having me here today. My name is Katie Soscia. I'm the director of project development

representing Montante Solar. My colleague Marcus Lathrop represents Xcrox Corporation, and together

we, the applicants, are proposing 6.63MW ofa solar project to be constructed on the Xerox campus in the

town of Webster. I'd like to start by introducing the project basics. This is a 6.63MW facility across 20

acres near the dead end of Caracas Drive.

The project is wholly located in the town of Webster, More than 1000ft away from the Village of Webster

Line. The project will directly benefit Xerox Corporation and a larger community as it's participating in

NYSERDA’s Inclusive Community Solar Project. Xcrox Corporation will be hosting the solar project at

Pg. 201 September 2, 2025 Planning Meeting

its campus, and utilizing 60% of the energy generated by the project, and 40% of the energy will be

cligible will go to eligible subscribers through that community Solar program.

The parcel is zoned industrial. RG&E has already reviewed and approved the project, and the project, we

believe is currently designed as in compliance with the Town of Webster zoning code and are asking for

no variances. The project background. Montante solar is a full service developer and installer of large

scale and industrial commercial solar systems. Established in 2009 by two brothers located in Buffalo,

New York.

Montante Solar is still a family owned business. Um, and the projects we have completed range from 100

kilowatt rooftop commercial projects to over 13MW ona landfill constructed in Niagara Falls, New York.

Montante has received a NYSERDA’s quality and scholar designation, is NABSEP certified and is one of

the only installers in New York State to have a Department of Labor approved apprenticeship program.

Haley and Aldrich is our Professional Services is a professional services consulting firm, and it was

founded in 1957 providing geotechnical, environmental and management consulting services across the

United States.

Haley and Aldrich has been consulting at the Xerox Webster campus since the early 1990s, and Haley and

Aldrich, Haley, Haley and Aldrich and Montante have worked collaboratively on past product projects. It

was Haley and Aldrich that introduced Xerox to Montana in 2022. And I'm just going to pass the mic real

quick to my colleague Marcus, just to speak a little bit about why Xerox is interested in doing this project.

And then I'd like to dive in and give you all of the information that I can about this project to date.

Corporation, Um, so it was kind of my doing that brought Katie and Montante in. So, as you know, Xerox

is evolving beyond our legacy and print technology to become a broader provider of software and

services. But, you know, with that change, we still remain deeply committed to Our legacy of corporate

social responsibilily as part of our commitment.

We recognize the importance of addressing climate change. And so we havea roadmap to net zero. I don't

know if you've seen it on our website, but it's how we're going to get to net zero by 2040. Um, there are

three pillars there cnergy efficiency and process improvements, uh, circular economy and low carbon

design of our products. And then the third pillar which this project falls under is Carbon Compensation

and neutralization. So the benefits that we sec in the solar project, um, first zero carbon electric electricity

generation that um, this will produce clean renewable energy. Um, optimal land use. The location on our

campus where this is being placed, um, includes a solid waste landfill. So it makes this project kind of

one of the more beneficial uses for this part of our property.

Um, it's a community solar project. So this initiative allows the community to subscribe and bencfit from

the project as well. Um, having access, getting access to renewable cnergy, as well as support for our state

initiatives when the New York State Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act. So kind of my

closing. Um, you invite the community to join us in this endeavor to create a sustainable future So thank

you.

environmental due diligence that was completed for this project. So there the project had a full wetland

Pg. 202 September 2, 2025 Planning Meeting

delineation completed, and we have heard back from both the Army Corps of Engineers and DEC. No

jurisdictional wetlands on site for either. SHIPPO. No finding no effect. That's the State Historic

Preservation Office. And then DEC was also notified separately a different department because this is on

a landfill and so an NOT was already submitted the 90 day period has passed with no comment.

if you go to the next slide, I just want to talk about the project siting a little bit. Um, so the project has

been strategically sited on an area of the Xerox campus where there are two closed landfills and 13

monitoring wells, with ongoing monitoring and reporting requirements by the DEC, leaving the area with

limited redevelopment Opportunities. Xerox has deemed that this is the highest and best use for this area.

it's an industrial zone parcel located at the dead end of Caracas Drive, at the northern part of the Xerox

campus, and the project's closest edge of panel is more than 250ft away from, I'm sorry, more than 200ft

away from the closest HOA property line and 740f away from the closest residential lot line. And then

the closest actual domicile is about 800ft away.

Um, the actual proposed site plan includes just under 11,000 solar panels, a top of racking and 18

inverters. The project will be connected directly into RG&E gas distribution lines along Caracas Drive.

And as I mentioned, RG&E has already reviewed and approved the project. The project has been

strategically designed so that all environmental monitoring obligations with DEC can remain intact.

The project has been designed in compliance with national electric code and all state and local laws, and

the entire project will be surrounded by an eight foot tall fence. And on the next slide, I have some

pictures ofan actual project, which I think is kind of like helpful to see what these projects actually look

like. So this is a similar project that was also constructed ona closed landfill. This is actually the project

in Niagara Falls that I was referencing. And so this project is 100% fully ballasted, so no ground

penetrations were made.

And the DEC, you know, we worked with them to review and approve this project. If we go to the next

slide. Um, this is some of the major equipment that will be used. Um, panels. Panels are pretty big.

They're over ten feet tall. Um, and then inverters, just like what an actual inverter looks like, how big they

are. That's kind of onc of our, um, site superintendents opening up a box and looking inside.

If we go to the next slide, this is the racking system that we're going to be using. Um, it's a geo ballasted

system, so it's a weighted system and it has rock in inside gabion baskets and it's weighted down. Um, this

is really nice because no ground penetrations arc made. And also these can be rock can just be brought in

and and dumped onsite. And it's really easy to decommission and take away as well. And I'll get into the

decommissioning of the project in a moment.

So neighboring site lines. Um, so] wanted to talk about really the major neighbors of the project are kind

of to the northeast and northwest. Um, to the direct cast. Xerox owns all that land all the way to Salt Read

and then to the direct west. They own a bunch of land all the way up to I think that's like a volunteer fire

station that you can't quite sec because I have a picture over it, but it's, uh, it's quite a distance away. So,

um, to the cast, there's about 25,000ft of vegetation to the immediate.

To the immediate west, there's about 1500ft of vegetation. To the north west, there's about 150ft of

mature vegetation before it kind of gocs out into more of that mowed, uh, field kind of area. And then

there's some more mature vegetation before there's like a small stream. Um, and then to the northeast, um,

Pg. 203 September 2, 2025 Planning Meeting

there's about two, uh, yeah, 230ft of mature vegetation, um, before it kind of gets to that other mowed

area, which is that Webster Meadows, too.

Um, so I just wanted to show what was, um, here right now, um, taking some photos out from the site.

And L also just wanted to point out one other thing, um, the direction of the project. So the back side of

the project will be facing Meadows of Webster and Meadows of Webster

2. To sow there shouldn't.

There's no glare. No panels, Actually looking at we're looking at the back side. So so glare concerns and

concems should be eliminated because of that.

If we go to the next stide, I also want to talk about some more mitigation. So as | mentioned, the really the

major neighbors of this project are to the northeast and northwest. And so we'd like to propose I actually,

a town resident, had reached out to me right before, um, last week, right before this mecting. So I don't

have it included as part of our civil set, but I would like to add it with our next iteration, But I want to add

some landscaping mitigation to kind of help some concems.

So I did have the opportunity Jast week to walk orto walk around the Meadows of Webster and then drive

around the Meadows of Webster 2 and agree that, you know, we can put some, um, evergreen hedge tn to

help mitigate views in the winter months when some of those trees, natural vegetation, mature vegetation

that already exists, the deciduous trees shed their leaves. So putting some coniferous trees in place will

also help mitigate view shadows all year round. Um, I would like to point out that the, um, racking at the

tallest point, the backside is about 15ft tall, and the trees that we're proposing to plant, um, at time of

planting be between 12 and 15fit tall, with some space left in between so that they can continue to grow

and mature and continue to obstruct that viewshed.

Um, we could go to the next slide.

Okay. So the operations plan. Um, so the only way that this project actually makes money is if the project

is up and running. So our operations plan is put in place to make sure that the project is compliant to all

state, local and federal laws and is also ensuring maximum safety and uptime. Um monitoring and

performance can be tracked real time. The utility has real time monitoring and can disengage the project

from the grid whenever it wants to immediately.

In addition, Montante and NYSERDA will both have access to monitoring portals as well, where we gel

real time alerts. Um, anything, like 1] said, can be pulled off virtually, like off site if there's ever an

emergency.

Um. Next slide.

So a decommissioning plan. So making sure that this thing doesn't stick around forever. Um, so the

project will be fully removed at the end of its useful cycle. And the useful cycle of these solar projects arc

anywhere between 25 and 35 years, so a decommissioning bond will be put in place with both the Town

of Webster and Xerox both listed as the beneficiaries of that decommissioning bond, to make sure therc's

monies in place to remove, even if for whatever reason, Moniante isn't around you know, 25 ycars from

now or whatever.

In order to move forward with decommissioning, it would follow a very similar process as as permitting,

we would necd to reach out lo both the Town and DEC to let them know that we want to take down the

Pg. 204 September 2, 2025 Planning Meeting

project and sce what the laws and requirements are at that time to safely comply and do so. Um, getting

rid of the equipment itself. Um, panels will be recycled at a licensed facility. Um, all other equipment that

has value will also try to be recycle. A lot of that racking has steel in things like that that has reusable

value and all other materials would be disposed of at a CNI facility, whereas otherwise deemed by the

Town and or DEC. At the time.

] talked a lot. I'm a little out of breath, but I'm happy to answer any questions. And I'd also love to hear

from the community as well. Thank you so much.

marked as no. Is that correct? Number seven it reads is the site of the proposed action located in or does it

adjoin a state listed critical environmental area? You have. No.

the end that has about landfills. Um, which is. | apologize, I don't have the SEQR in front of me right

now.

that it's not just a landfill. It was a DEC listed, inactive or hazardous waste site.

actually hada thing classified as a code two parcel, which meant that it was a threat to human health and

environment. So therefore you have this asphalt cap over part of the landfill cover. The landfill. What !

did notice from the original decision, the the the drawings are attached in here is actually shown on your

drawings is a different location than the study was done back in the day. At some point, the landfill is

classified as a cold four, which meant it needed continuous monitoring. And my understanding is that

that's supposed to go on for the next 30 years.

Um. Even though you're using ballasted things, you are still building on top of a hazardous waste site and

there are deed restrictions on this property. We are aware of those because of the transfer of ail the

property forthose devclopments that you saw to the north, and there are still our deed restrictions on

those properties that require, at least on the neighboring parcel portion of the landfills to be under the the

wetlands and wooded areas to be maintained. The green space with no development in that direction came

from DEC. I don't sce any of that stuff addressed in your application.

Pg. 205 September 2, 2025 Planning Meeting

There are deed restrictions on. It is something that we need to sec. To verify that those are still in place

and what they actually entail. So there are semantics about that in the past and the previous product. Find

out what the deed restrictions are and really find out from DEC your simple comment that you sent it to

DEC and they didn’t respond in 90 days doesn't really hold water for this particular property. | called the

director whose person was supposed to be the manager for this application.

There is no longer an email address that works and her phone number is directed to a different person. So

I believe that person has left DEC at Albany. Your application. Her name was Debbie Gordell. I don't

believe she is there anymore. Where where the application has ultimately gone to. That's up for you to

determine. But right now it seems like if you haven't got a response, it's probably because they have had

staffing changes and that has been systemic across all of DEC. see. So being outside the comment period

doesn't work for this project. This is. This is a hazardous waste site and it's something we want to make

sure it's protected properly..

that are. Managing a record permit. So they're awarc of the site and landfill. Yeah I don’t recognize that

individual that...

application in DEC.

It's nice as permitted by our Genie. They don't know what's undemeath the ground. You Xerox know

what's underneath the ground. Even monitoring your plans do show on it the rock trench that was blasted

into the ground forthe correction of the ground, the groundwater, the dual phase vapor extraction system

that was used for collecting the groundwater in the vapor space for remediation.

our monitoring wells and our recovery wells. And then we made changes to the solar panel. So we have

access to those to monitor those for the next 30 years maintain or whatever. So yeah, none of that is

changing.

personally, I think it's unlikely the DEC will let you go ahead with this property just because it is a

contaminated site and we don't want to we don't want to create a situation, and it's going to allow it to

become a way to release those contaminants. Once again, this is a very specific cover on this linc. So you

don't see very many landfills that have an asphalt cover in regards to your landfill you put up in Niagara

County, that was what A C and D landfill or a municipal waste landfill. It has a liner system and six fect

of cover on top of it. This landfill is not covered that way. It's a different type of cover.

Pg. 206 September 2, 2025 Planning Meeting

so you know, as part of our NOI te DEC, we are doing geotechnical investigations to ensure the asphalt

land, the asphalt cap can withhold any weights to the landfill. Haley and Aldrich will be at our next

meeting and can talk about that testing in more detail. Unfortunately, I'm just not the best person to talk in

detail about the engineering related to that.

show on your drawings really does match with what was in the the original delineation for the project.

your fence system? It's not a ballasted fence system. And so the posts are going to be driving through the

caps that are on site.

remain in place. And then we're going to be adding on around that. We can change to ballasted, um, if

that is something that the DEC requests, which is, you know, part of this discussion is something that will

be, um, going down in deeper detail with them.

identified the areas as landfill, but then you're also showing fencing going through that area. And the

fencing detail is a typical Fence that's going to be probably protruded four feet into the ground, passed the

cap, impacting the cap. So it's something that should be also reviewed because right now the proposed

fencing throughout the whole site, if, if, if the landfill and the environmental sensitive areas are not just

limited to the areas that are currently shown in these drawings, you're impacting those environmental

areas all throughout the site with your fencing.

We've done it before on other landfills in the past. We're happy to do it here as well.

Pg. 207 September 2, 2025 Planning Meeting

around and leave again?

tuned right into. Anything like that. So they'll give you some feedback too, I'm sure.

something.

01:05:44:11 - 01:05:50:17

program, they'll be training to the fire depariment as well as part of this project.

fire department or upon request by the fire department.

matting as you're crossing those wetland areas?

wetlands, we're still being compliant to the, um, uh, nationwide permit, uh, 51 just to, uh, not have to go

through permitting for that project.

could use, like, a staggered planting system. So it isn't just a single row. Um, probably minimum plant

height at planting should be eight fect, and then, uh, at least a two year landscaping warranty.

Pg. 208 September 2, 2025 Planning Meeting

the rack.

like choke cach other out.

sorry. I had just some brief questions. So in the decommissioning plan, could you provide existing

condition, um, images of what it looks like, including aerial view. Um, I saw the proposed escalation be

25 years. Would you be able to do that escalation at 40 years plus 18 months for decommissioning?

Drazen It's just typically I've scen 40 years on them. Why was 25 picked?

years. So it would coincide with the end of the lease.

leases. So I would cover the extensions as well.

18. Drazen Gasic: Uh, at 2% escalation. And then I'm not sure if you've done this before, but if you are doing

bond instead of Ictter of credit, would you be able to do like a standby trust fund, um, ¢stablished so that,

uh, the surety company can pay the fund into the trust company if something were to happen, um, with

the owner of the facility.

internally with our ownership. And I can get back to you for sure, but it's a standby trust fund to fucl.

Okay.

Pg. 209 September 2, 2025 Planning Meeting

this is just informational, as you just saw tonight. Its not a public hearing, Um, I know there's a few of you

would if you want to speak. I want to get. I don't want to open this up to everybody going up. It's nota

public hearing. However, if maybe 2 or3 people want to come up and weigh something. Um, we'll open tt

to that, And just for clarity, 1 mean, just three minutes. That's it for clarity.

opportunity to speak. But we I think Tony's right we'd give a few people the opportunity Today.

they'll be coming back for another site plan, which would have the public hearing associated.

panels and energy. | have a lot of questions for the company, so I'm | don't know if you wanted to hear

them or if | could arrange time to ask the questions.

know the other neighbors you might have.

applicant, that you can ask the question. then she will get up and respond at that time.

not at This meeting Not not right here.

40% goes back to the community, um, in the, in the, in the energy and the power. Right. And I notice it's

designated for only for low income. So is. Is that is there a reason why it's designated that way?

hearing, but you got your question, and we'll have you come up. You can adjust that down and this way,

everyone can hear exactly what what her question was and what her answer is.

disadvantaged communitics subscribe. So that's just the program that NYSERDA to has laid out. It's

Pg. 210 September 2, 2025 Planning Meeting

called the Inclusive Community Solar Program. Um, so right now the only way that Xerox can constuct a

project that is also a community solar project so they can receive the benefit is through this program.

Unfortunately, the the they're the only other program out there is called statewide solar for all, and Xerox

can't participate as at all because they're a corporation. This ts obviously on Xerox land, and they're

wanting to make the project happen. But but I would like to give you my card, as well as anyone else in

the community who has some questions. I would love the opportunity to talk with you. Happy to arrange

like a virtual town hall or come here in person sometime as well. So sorry for.

this project is considered community solar correct?

been addressed yet. Take a look at our code for solar community solar. Our code specifically says all

residents of Webster.

who benefits from the electrical.

caveat in there saying it could only benefit a low income, that's not a conformance with the town code.

admittedly a year or so ago, it did have the word residence.

you.

Pg. 211 September 2, 2025 Planning Meeting

comments and concerns. I don't need answers to everything right now. I just want to get them oul there so

other people can maybe join in and understand where I'm coming from. Um, the first thing was when we

saw the first maps of where this was going. It's in a wooded area, so you're going to cut down a bunch of

trees to put up solar panels. And if it's benefiting, I didn't know who was benefiting originally. So now

you're not benefiting Xerox. They're paying for it. It sounds like they're going to get 60%. They've got a

ton of open land where they could just put solar panels in without having to cut trees and woods down.

So it's just the concer is why was that considered and or was it not and why why. ! understand I didn't

know it was a landfill. So but it's a wooded area and like it’s the wildlife and the trees is what I was

concerned about. That was my first comment. Um, the other was, uh, there's in the plan document that I

read, uh, yesterday, the day before. There's a lot of comments on if they hit contamination, The equipment

will be decontaminated and all that. So I'm wondering, is this normal, that normal language in these

things where they're going to build these properties or do this kind of work? Is it normal that they talk

about contamination so much, and what they have to do if they do run into a contamination?

They've already said the whole site is already a contaminated site that's been shielded over. Okay. And

protected. So that's that's why they're using it. Can that be used for any development or anything else? So

rather than go into a good wooded area or natural feature or whatever, uh, this would be the ultimate use

for this piece of property. Alt right, I want to I just I don't want to drag this out. J opened it just fora

couple of comments. Not for a whole.

some comments back on what this will do to the assessment of our properties with this the solar pancls

system so closc to Grand Meadows and everybody in that community in Grand Meadows Two that's now

being built. Um, will this it does. Does this type of thing affect the assessments of our property that did?

right now, or do you want to just make a note of that and address it in the future, whatever you prefer to

do.

I'm happy to kind of like take it back and address them. Um, regarding the the assessment, I'd like to have

a land use attorney answer that question. I just don’t think I'm the best person to to answer that for you, so

I apologize. But, um, like I said, this. Is Just a sketch plan meeting. At our next meeting, our full team

will be here, which will include our engineers and our legal counsel as well, which can help address some

of those questions that I can't answer.

it.

Pg. 212 September 2, 2025 Planning Meeting

reiterate it. We could flip that map onto pavement. I don't know if this would be for Marcus, you know, so

I don't expect an answer right now, but it's. Why can we flip property and go right offa paved area that's

not in use? I don't know, but that's something that be interesting to know. I do have a map. We're

probably the closest property to where the panels will be. So obviously [havea concern with that. And I

have not only the map that was in the display, but I havea picture from the back of our property. I know

you can’t see it from the back of our property, which faces south- southeast And my question is what

would I see? If this comes up? I talked to Katie earlier, but my big concern is what am J going to see?

Especially during the winter when deciduous trees lose their leaves? What is expected?

trees in there ten feet apart.

zero axis property. You could have had a five story building there.

moot. Yeah. But you know, I just wanted to bring up the comment to sec if 1 could get some answer for it

That's all.

have more comments and questions.

real estate team and we looked at the whole campus, you know, trying to find the best location, There's

the re-imagined Webster program between the Village of Webster and the Town of Webster that's going

on. So there's some ideas for some of the other property and what how that could benefit Webster. So

when you're looking at the whole thing froma, you know, 30,000 foot view, we said, okay, what's going

to be the one area where you could do this, where it wouldn't impact some of the potential growth

opportunitics here? And so that's why we selected the landfill.

being a contaminated site?

Pg. 213 September 2, 2025 Planning Meeting

you've been following it, but just at the beginning of summer. So right now, I believe we would be

applying through the Inclusive Community Solar program and it would be a brownfield adder.

we've gone through the sketch plan review of the project for the solar solar garden. Um, I think you've got

some responses that you can fill in the blanks on.

literature that's already black capped over, isn't it?

going to be. My concern is what happens in the summer with those gable ends full of stone. Will add it,

sink into the asphalt. Will that ultimately crumble up or what? You know. So that's you going to be able

to adjust that.

from DEC, acknowledging the project as part of our NOI to DEC. We did have a geotechnical

investigation plan proposed in there, to make sure that the integrity of the CAF would not be affected.

edits to our plan set and come back again for a preliminary site plan review.

Thank you.

AUDIENCE TALKING INAUDIBLE

(Mark Giardina read the third application)

PRELIMINARY / FINAL SITE PLAN APPROVAL (

PUBLIC HEARING

) associated with

Pg. 214 September 2, 2025 Planning Meeting

the construction of a 1,536 SF metal pole bam on a 2.7-acre lot having SBL# 081.01-1-46 located

in the LL Large-Lot District under Sections 269-10, 350-13 and 350-36 of the Code of the Town

of Webster.

Appearing before the board is Damian Costanza and Joseph Giorgione.

somewhat hurt, that everyone's like.

who I've known for 25 years, Mr. George Oney suffered a bout with the COVID virus in which he almost

lost his life as a result. Sometimes he has some trouble with his speaking voice, so I'm here to offer aid

and assistance where I can this evening. This is an application for a pole barn on Mr. Giorgione ‘s

residential property. The pole barn is 32 x

48. It will be composed of 28 gauge metal. Uh, it. There is a 65

foot, uh, setback from the rear property line that we have put into the plan. Uh, knowing what the

setbacks would be, we've got ourselves a little bit of grace room there. Uh, it will have no floor other than

crushed stone. Crushed stone floor. There will be no electricity. There will be no plumbing. Uh, there will

be no water to the facility. It'll be primarily just be used for storage. Uh, this is primarily as a result of the

fact that, uh, Mr. Giorgione lost his father, uh, Recently a Mr. Giorgione His father was a mason for all of

his life. As a result, there are some things that came into Joe's possession. He needs some space to store

those things in. So this would serve that function primarily for him. Uh, the, uh, the metal facility would

be constructed of black metal. It would be directly behind the house. There's no side of the property

issues, therefore. Um, as you know, the size of the facility. Um, and it is a post and beam barn. The

trusses are not being homemade. Uh, they have been ordered. They are professionally made trusses for

the structure. Uh, Mr. Giorgionc has lived at this address for, I believe, just over 20 years. Uh, as a result

of his bout with Covid, he is now having thoughts that he will be spending morc time at home. Therefore,

this is an attempt, I think, to, have more use of his property. And as he will be spending more time there

in the relatively near future. Uh, he also owns a couple of, uh, rental propertics. Sometimes there are

things that need to be stored. Uh, this would allowa place for for those things to be stored, like washing

machines or things like that.

electric going into the barn?

it. Um, there's two. Two large, uh, looks like, uh, doors or garage doors. Are there going to be operated

manually?

the height of this?

Pg. 215 September 2, 2025 Planning Meeting

believe 20ft. The maximum height is 20ft. That's to the peak. Your highest point. So I don't know what

you've got. You're not showing anything in regard to it, though. But I haven't seen it anyways.

Mr. Giorgione informs me that we're looking at 1 6ft.

note of that. That the height is 16ft. Um The colors are pretty accurate with what it's showing there.

Yeah. So it's a dark. Okay. Similar to what's here.

requirements of the height.

which is directly behind this. Our concerns are that, first of all, he has not indicated where he's going to

build this. So there's no site plan. Where? where are you going to build it? where on the lot?

Pg. 216 September 2, 2025 Planning Meeting

shows it drawn on our property, which is on the other side of the creek.

doesn't say where it's going to be. And it really should. | mean it has to.

survey map, because the survey map that was provided indicated a 1 to 40 scale, But then when we scaled

it out to his sized building, we realized it wasn't right. So Erika sketched the building up top. Okay. It

wasn't intended to to to reflect the location on your property.

thing. Uh, that's. You drew that, right? Erika, where youre showing it?

il, we can, It's up to the board. If we were to approve this project, we could make it subject to the

applicant. Having an engineer actually make a site drawing with the location to.

IIe'd have to give that before he could get a permit. That's all.

there's a creek in the back, and I'd like to know the setback. The lot lines in the middle of the creek. So do

you take that into consideration or not?

Pg. 217 September 2, 2025 Planning Meeting

50. Anthony Casciani: 350-36 is part of the code. I believe it's where it is. Did you find it in the code?

think the instrument survey should reflect the actual applicants location of the pole barn, and then also

indicate the setback requirements that are required as part of the application. Clearly, on this instrument

survey, and I also see based on the aerial view, that it looks like this has already started to be constructed,

including, um, elongation of the drive to the back. So is that is that something thal was approved in the

past to start this already or.

to sce it downsized. The house is a tiny 2-bedroom branch 1,230 square foot. The building he is

proposing, To put up is | ,536 square foot. It's almost a third size larger than the house itself. He made the

application, saying he was just going to store a tractor and some houschold goods, which is absurd he

intends to store much more. He's already changed his mind. And, um, you don't need. Our shed is Icss

than 200 square foot, and we store a tractor with a bucket a riding lawn mower and household. So this is

absurdly large. He also, um, owns, And this is the major concern. He ownsa business called Upstate Auto

on 104 which, as far as I can tell, is like a junkyard auto shop place. So our concem.

104. He has a business on 104,

that business, by its own admission, he plans to be homc. I'm afraid that he's going to run a business out

of this commercial type bam. it doesn't pass the smell test. Something is up.

Pg. 218 September 2, 2025 Planning Meeting

houschold items. It seems like he wants to bring in, you know RV or something to work on. And he says

the building is going to be 16 ft tall, but is hes got 12 ft side walls anda 4in run on the roof, that’s another

§ ft, so that’s 17 ft.

isn't it.

you go up four inches. So my calculations he’s going to have Sft on top of that 12 ft.

prefer to table this. You can write.

ae Casciani: Well, I don't that's have to be determined, I guess.

determine that and show that on the drawing. Okay.

Pg. 219 September 2, 2025 Planning Meeting

the same. And it. Will you enforce that going forward.

we want them to show? Actually, probably the best way to say is to look at the code and what the code

requires. And just like that.

footage, square footage of the building compares to the acreage of the lot.

Yeah. But because he may have a big lots getting the acreage this way, he's able to get the size

get a tape location map showing.

are and you want to give the height of the building, height of your house relative to okay. Just go by the

code, That's it. And setbacks. He's okay. He's gota lot.

Yeah. Albright. That's where we're at, I] guess right now. So motion and tables, gentlemen.

Pg. 220 September 2, 2025 Planning Meeting

RESOLUTION 25-0066 John Kosel made a motion for TABLE

THE APPLICATION TO OCTOBER 7,

2025 which was seconded by Mark

Giardina,

VOTE:

Mr. Casciani AYE

Mr, Malta AYE

Mr. Giardina AYE

Mr. Anderson AYE

Mr. Kosel AYE

Mrs. Maltman ABSENT

Mr. Gasic AYE

/ FINAL SITE PLAN APPROVAL (

PUBLIC HEARING

) associated with the construction of a

768 SF pole barn on a 0.57-acre lot having SBL# 081.01-1-20 located in the LL Large-Lot District

under Sections 269-10, 350-13 and 350-36 of the Code of the Town of Webster.

Appearing before the board was John Hayes.

as a garage for wifes car and winter storage for a boat. Um, basically we are 268 sf over what code calls

for for our lot.

0:1:38:04:19 - 01:38:07:28

acrial photograph It looks like it's fairly new. Um, whenever it was taken, it implics the construction has

started on it.

01:38:21:12 - 01:38:23:16

Pg. 221 September 2, 2025 Planning Meeting

check and make sure the work is not started on that project.

something that code enforcement should go out and check.

single 14 x 10 garage door, personal door and a couple windows. We want to do the attic trusses so the

overall height will be 23 ft 10 in, which | know we arc set to go in-front of the zoning board for that, and

one setback off by 3 feet. The survey map shows where its going to be with the setbacks.

make it overall 23ft, 10 inches.

road. It should be about the same height as the house.

storage for the boat.

You get a variance for it anyway. So yeah. You’re matching it to the house?

Pg. 222 September 2, 2025 Planning Meeting

you're just getting. Is it something that you.

look like.

and what kind of framing you're proposing your footers or anything hike that,

ground.

building it.

guess not seeing anyone. We'll close the public hearing. Bring it back. Any concerns, Dave?

have to come back again.

Pg. 223 September 2, 2025 Planning Meeting

RESOLUTION 25-0068 Derek Anderson made a motion for a TYPE II

SEQR which was seconded by Mark Giardina.

VOTE:

Mr. Casciani AYE

Mr. Malta AYE

Mr. Giardina AYE

Mr. Anderson AYE

Mr. Kosel AYE

Mrs. Maltman ABSENT

Mr. Gasic AYE

your approval.

Uh, Okay. Look, I got a sheet of it right here. Motion for for an accessory. Building for the state of the

address to the 1759 Ridge Road. Yeah, uh, we'll base it on the town code. The accessory building is

defined, permitted onc lot, and placement shall not. It shall conform to all the setback requirements which

is done. Applicable. To other buildings in the district. No such building should place nearer to the front of

the property. He's in conformance with thal. It’s to the rear.

John Kosel Um, no, that's what he needs to know. So he needs a variance for isn't it?

square footage of the main building, or 2% of the lot size. It conforms to that, uh, where the accessory

building is more than 500ft®. He had appears before the planning board. He has done that. And the main

accessory or the accessory building should not be higher than the main structure. In this case, it is a

couple feet higher. The applicant will need to get a variance so you conform with everything else. Excuse

me. This is for personal use only. Yeah, not for rental or anything like that. Power to the butlding?

[ Pg. 224 September 2, 2025 Planning Meeting

I think that should do it, shouldn't it?

John Kose!: Significant construction?

right, So, uh, significant construction to commence within one year from this date, which is, what,

September 2nd, 25? It'll be

26. And there shall be no permit issued until the applicant oblains a variance

for the project. Okay?

know, what you want to do is make sure you you you probably schedule for variance. Correct? Yes.

Okay, So you get your variance and then you're all set.

RESOLUTION 25-0069 Anthony Casciani made a motion for

PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN APPROVAL

Located at 1759 Ridge Road. Applicant John Hayes

is requesting PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN

APPROVAL (

PUBLIC HEARING

) associated

with the construction of a 768 SF pole bam ona0.57-

acre lot having SBL# 081.01-1-20 located in the LL

Large-Lot District under Sections 269-10, 350-13

and 350-36 of the Code of the Town of Webster. .

Which was seconded by Mark Giardina.

PRELIMINARY APPROVAL CHECKLIST

1. Subject to PRC Comments

Subject to a Letter of Credit posted with the Town of Webster.

Subject to Conservation Board comments

Subject to Monroc County Water Authority comments

Pg. 225 September 2, 2025 Planning Meeting

wh

5. Subject to the determination of the ZBA for requested variances.

6. Address any land to be conveyed to the Town.

7. Address any recent subdivision approvals of adjacent lands.

8. All the improvements shall be constructed according to the specification of the Town of Webster.

9. Allroadway construction to be in accordance with the specification and regulations set forth by the

Town of Webster.

10. All sitework is to be in compliance with the standards of the Town of Webster.

11. Preserve all mature trees on site, where possible, and mark said trees by the developer’s engineer

prior to the commencing of any site work.

12. Comply with all requirements of any Federai, State, County, or Town agency.

13. Address drainage, lighting, signage, and landscaping, buffering, berming and snow storage.

14. The landscape, hardscape, site accessories, and associated finished grading design for the

development must be prepared by a NYS licensed Landscape Architect, The final landscape plans

shall bear the seal and signature of the Landscape Architect.

15. Approvals are subject to Drawing No: —s«é@Dated:

16. Proceed to Final Approval

VOTE:

Mr. Casciani AYE

Mr. Malta AYE

Mr. Giardina AYE

Mr. Anderson AYE

Mr. Kosel AYE

Mrs. Maltman ABSENT

Mr. Gasic AYE

RESOLUTION 25-0070 Anthony Casciani made a motion for FINAL SITE

PLAN APPROVAL Located at 1759 Ridge Road.

Applicant John Hayes is requesting FINAL SITE

PLAN APPROVAL (

PUBLIC HEARING

)

associated with the construction of a 768 SF pole

bam on a 0.57-acre lot having SBL# 081.01-1-20

located in the LL Large-Lot District under Sections

269-10, 350-13 and 350-36 of the Code of the Town

of Webster. Which was seconded by Mark Giardina.

FINAL APPROVAL CHECKLIST

Subject to PRC comments.

Subject to Parks and Recreation fees (if applicable)

Subject to Prelimimary Approval Conditions.

Subject to all applicable governmental fees.

Subject to Department of Public Works approval

Significant construction shall occur within one year, as deemed by the Planning Board, to expire

on 9,2.26

The conditions of Preliminary and Final approval are depicted on the cover page of the final

designed plans.

Pg. 226 September 2, 2025 Planning Meeting

8. The Engincer for the proposed project shall provide a Letter of Certification that all proposed

work was completed, as per Planning Board resolution of final approval before a Certificate of

Occupancy will be issued.

9. A Letter of Credit to the Town for the project shalt include the fee for the Engineer’s final

certification inspection of the site.

10. No permits will be issued until an area variance is obtained by the Zoning Board of Appeals.

11. Approvals are subject to Drawing No: Dated:

VOTE:

Mr. Casciani AYE

Mr. Malta AYE

Mr. Giardina AYE

Mr. Anderson AYE

Mr. Kosel AYE

Mrs. Maltman ABSENT

Mr. Gasic AYE

requesting SKETCH PLAN REVIEW associated with the construction ofa 1,200 SF building

addition, expansion of existing parking lot and improvements to existing storm sewer system on

a 3.1- acre lot having SBL# 079.17-1-22 located in the MC Medium Commercial District under

Sections 269-5 and 350-18 of the Code of the Town of Webster.

Appearing before the board is Ryan Destro from BME Associates.

Mitsubishi. Webster. Um, as mentioned, we arc here for sketch plan application for Vision Mitsubishi

Webster. Located at 765 Ridge Road. This proposal is for a 1,200 square foot building addition and this is

for a proposed vehicle entry to the dealership’s service department and its located on the cast side of the

cxisting structure.

This proposal also includes. An expansion of the existing asphalt parking lot and improvements to the

existing onsite storm sewers. Just to give a quick brief overview of the property. The total area of the

subject parcel is 3.3 acres in size. It's located along the south side of Ridge Road to the cast of the existing

Vision Hyundai dealership for reference. The parce! contains two zoning districts, one being the MC

Medium Intensity Commercial district that's located in the northern or front portion of the parcel, and then

it also contains the LMR Low Medium Residential District, and that is located in the southem or rear

portion of the parcel.

We did reccive comments from both the town PRC, as well as the Monroe County Department of

Planning and Development on August 27th. All the comments appear to be minor in nature to this point,

and will be addressed in the subsequent planned submittals. One town PRC comment that we'd like to

highlight. It was acknowledged that the commercial parking extended into the Low Medium Residential

district area on the parcel at the southern end of the parcel. After discussion with the applicant.

Pg. 227 September 2, 2025 Planning Meeting

The proposed pavement wili be removed from the LMR zoning district. Therefore, a use variance for the

commercial parking area in the LMR zoning district will not be required with this application. With

regards to utilities, no new connections to the public utilities are proposed or necessary with this

application. With regards to stormwater management. This. The proposed soil disturbance will be

designed and updated to be under 25 ,000ft*.

Therefore, New York State DEC Speedy's general permit coverage for discharges from construction

activity is not required, nor are any post construction stormwater management facilitics required for the

New York State DEC Stormwater Management Design Manual and the SWPPP will also not be required

per the Town Code requirements. With that being said, we arc here for the Planning Board's feedback on

this application as we move forward with this project. And with that, I'm happy to answer any of your

questions.

tonight and I'll tell you what this is like putting 15 lbs in a 5lbs bag. The additional parking in the back. J

really don't know where that line is there, but that's. Certainly the edge of the wetland area. My feeling on

this. We did this with with the other project. Josh, remember a few about a year or so ago? They actually

have a site visit there. A few people just go take a look at this thing, because I'm looking at this piece of

paper and I'm seeing it pretty drying, but in reality, not what's there, not even close. There's cars all over

the damn place in the back there. Looks like a mess in the place. Right next door is a disaster zone.

The gentlemen earlier was talking about the lady was talking about a junkyard. That's what this is in the

back, Um. Another thing. Uh, the cars are parked out by the road. They're not supposed to be there. This

is getting to be a real pain in the butt with, uh, with the car dealers. Um, I don’t know how it's got to get

enforced. They're unloading right in the middle of the road. This is one of them is doing it. Two last

week, I think it was a truck parked right in the middic of Ridge Road unloading the bring cart. That's

baloney. I'm sorry.

property just to the west of you there. That that's part of the problem also somehow. I don't know if we

mentioned this at PRC if if there could be a roadway connecting the two together, a circle or like a U-

shape in and out where trucks can come in. Every dealer that's been in, we've requested where can you

unload on your site? Not on the road.

So I think that's going to be one of the prime things that maybe having to get looked at for this project, uh,

buffering on the side. Um, I saw the drawing. I don't remember what it was now, but it's tight on the side.

What's the sideline supposed to be on there? 15 foot.

Pg. 228 September 2, 2025 Planning Meeting

that you're mentioning as part of this application, especially because they're looking to upgrade this

facility. We would want to have that discussion with the actual applicant. [ feel like a lot of the comments

that we're making to the engineer record are also supposed to be directed directly at the applicant that is

looking to do this.

I'm just giving him the keys. He can take it back. It's up to them how you want to handle this now? You

know, I'm suggesting that a couple of board members and town staff. We've donc this in the past. Go over

and look at the. Because I'm looking at this. And if you drive in there, it doesn't look like that, you know.

The back looks. Whereas in the back section there where you're showing future parking, is that where

there's gravel bcen put in there right now.

with the subsequent application. So we are not going to be encroaching into the LMR zoning district. The

existing pavement limits will remain as they are and the rear of the parcel, so a variance will not be

required with this application.

of the property. Like you said it goes for every one of them. 1 don’t know what we have to do to get you

guys to comply, but it’s a terrible hazard. I’m up and down Ridge Road all the time.

the grass. Out by the by the road. They wouldn't even think of doing that in the past. So somehow that's

got to get tightened up. Yeah. And this is the time where you do it right here.

just going in because you were coming in this evening from the planning board, I says. Uh, I'll tell you

right now, those cars you've got out there, you've got to be moving. Oh, I'll move them right now. Well,

you know, they shouldn't be there. You know they're not supposed to be. Why the heck you got them

there? Sec? Yeah. They just keep pushing buttons on this stuff. Anyways, that's enough complaining. Um.

enforcement officer for the whole town. So although we'd like to enforce this more, we do have limited

staff.

because one day somcbody’s going to drive in the back of one of these car carriers.

Pg. 229 September 2, 2025 Planning Meeting

lot back in, you're not putting silt fence up against that wetland anymore. Are you bringing that in as

well?

accordingly as weil.

of that.

submitted. But the line closest to the rear of the parking is the 100 foot adjacent rear.

been there forever. He lives in the back of that.

last

50. Plus. Years. Uh, almost as long as Tony, uh. Been around here. Um, I'd. Liketo. Say a few things.

And 1 know you've had. A iong night, and I hope you bear with me for the sake of some of our new

residents who've just moved in on our street and don't know the history from from what has transpired on

this LMR zone. Uh, and also for some of you new board members who may not have been here 40 years

ago and know what has transpired, but basically approximately 40 ycars ago, the LMR zone that's there

was an hour three residential zone.

Uh. A. Uh, insurance agent on Ridge Road tried to put in a project that was way too dense, 50ft from my

lot line, three storeys tall. And 1 think Tony was the first onc that said this is way too much. Well, we as

neighbors realized that there's probably not going to be in R-3, uh, residential property put in this LMR

ever. It just was a little too narrow for a two sided strect. So we decided to work with the town with some

of the property owners from Ridge Road, some potential developers to create something that would work

for everybody.

Pg. 230 September 2, 2025 Planning Meeting

All right. We had, uh, Jim Carlavatey, who was the town councilman, He came down on a weekend and

he walked the properties with us, and he went on a he went on my back porch with all of us residents

from Eastwood and Westwood listen to our concerns. And he right there drew up the specifications for

the LMR zone. The size of the building, the maximum, the density, height, everything. Uh, also with

some wooded area, For us, our concern was to keep the residential, uh, residential aspect of our strects

because every one of the businesses from Ridge Road was trying to move back right to our lot line and

build, you know, more car dealers and more things that would that would, uh, you know, change that

complete residential, uh, character of our community where we live.

Well, anyway, the town board adopted it, and ever since they adopted the LMR Zone, this has worked

perfectly for the residents on Eastwood and Westwood. The commercial ventures on Ridge Road be able

to build, to use their property the way they want. And also the LMR Ourzone. We've had three successful

multifamily projects come in there that have done a great job to insulate us from the sights and sounds of

Ridge Road.

It's done a great job for us and we want to continuc that aspect. But about every 3,4 or 5 ycars, onc of the

car dealers comes in and I hear you say that you've rescinded. | guess I heard it correctly, that he's

rescinded the fact that he wants to move into the LMR at all. Okay, I'mnot sure that's correct or not, but,

uh, we've got to maintain that LMR the way it is and not allow them to move into that zone.

Uh, so far there's been a number of times I think vision was in once before for that. Peter Specksgoor

Gunn was in there once before to do that, to move into it. Each and every time the zoning board or the

planning board has decided to honor the decisions that the original Town Board made, and that the

subsequent boards made in protecting us and keeping that LMR strictly residential and noi allowing any

commercialization into that zone whatsoever.

It has worked very well. I think the town liked the fact that we worked with them and worked with the

business people, so hopefully you can do the same thing. Honor their commitment. Not necessarily

tonight or but in the future. Uh, and, uh, residents here can know what also happened back then. Uh, so

it's worked well. And I want to thank you for your time. And unless you have a question for me, I'll get

out of your way.

And I don't know how you're going to do this, but somehow they cannot be parked on the road unloading.

So you need to communicate that to whocver owns this business.

Pg. 231 September 2, 2025 Planning Meeting

right through make a you a horseshoe. Come in one side and out the other side I don’t know.

to addressing the loading and unloading and the properties. And if this practice has been continuing and

we've even had previous dealers come in and say, oh, we don't have a control of it, that's just a driver on

it, This practice keeps continuing. All of these things have been issued a special use permit for use in this

area. All of their approvals are subject to making sure that the trucks and so forth unload off of the

property. It keeps happening, Do we have to send a notification to them saying that they're in violation of

their approvals and their approvals are rescinded? Because they’re not conforming to the approvals.

coming in. And there's really with this canopy on their 25 foot. Do a zig zag getting your your car carrier

to get around thai to a place in the back.

even conducive to putting on a way for the cars to unload.

a rental property somewhere clse.

actually it was better for a while, But recently 1 saw that truck in the middle of the road twice.

of the park, between the parking, no parking signs in front of the facility.

discussion now for.

can't approve this unti! we get some kind of guarantee or some, some way to make sure.

Pg. 232 September 2, 2025 Planning Meeting

This is one of the minor ones relative to the major ones. You know, on the other hand. Would it do any

good? I'm just thinking here. Would it do any good to issue a letter to all the car dealers?

regarding the additions to the building so that we can note it as part of this application that's in front of us

today? I know that the the parking of the trucks and unloading is an issue that has becn discussed many

times. 1 will make sure to put it in. Um, but in terms of what's on the agenda, docs the board have

comments or concerns for what is being presented in terms of an addition.

going to do with the rest of the project. They can show it again if they come in fora preliminary or come

in with a reapplication. But they need to show some of the things we're asking for on there and if they

conform. And I think if the board is satisfied, we can move forward. Otherwise, why the hell are we

putting an addition on a building that's already squished in there? You know what | mean?

turning in the back that a 18 Wheeler can get back there, a specific vehicle that is meant for transporting

these vehicles. And if it can fit on the site and it can tum around, then I know that you can't unload on site

and if you're unloading on site, indicate the designated unloading arca with the vehicle turning going into

that area.

they were unloading cars and as far as 1 went off the road. If you know how Ridge Road is, it's slants.

And, uh, [ was somewhat concerned. Even though I had control of my own car. | was concerncd that I

was going to slide down the hill there. And because of it, those trucks are huge. Even if you go around

them, you're still very close to them.

30 foot. That's a big piece of an addition on the back of the other. The existing building is probably. What

is it, about 45, 50ft or something? Not cven. It's it's a large piece of that overall site, And the way they're

showing the, the bypass to get around there, that may bea spot where they have to come in with a truck or

something to negotiate. Turning, | don't know.

getting oul again.

Pg. 233 September 2, 2025 Planning Meeting

the bump out around the proposed addition. So we would. Require. That it be marked as a fire lane

because you can't. It has to be accessible 24/7. Can't park cars there.

We're looking for eliminating going any further to the south. Correct. Going into past the buffer line there

or the the zoning line, um, Showing how they could park cars inside and out. No definite side with the

side setback on the on the on the east side there is your pavement. It looks like it's right on the edge of the

blacktop, isn't it?

wanting to take down to.

think I need to look at this thing engineering wise and bring it into conformance for a review. Bottom

line. It’s a small. What the heck? Isn't that what? It's only what 151 ft. Got houses with bigger lots than

that. And we're putting anyways. I don't want to belabor it. | think you need to come up with something

on that thing to modify it, to make it accommodate truck traffic. You know, unloading on the site, no

parking out by the road and climinating going back beyond the rear, uh, zoning linc. Those would be the

three main things insidc. Sctbacks to be shown. Okay.

the building.

Pg. 234 September 2, 2025 Planning Mecting

making it a nicer appearance. But that's a really cute picture though isn't il.

Mitsubishi Motors, the whole vertical strip on top going to be lit up at night, or is it just certain portions

of that facade going to be lit continuously?

door. So you're going to have red lighting at night there, too.

so we'll we'll make sure to get that those details fleshed. Out before. Next meeting.

those few comments, we we're not taking them down. They'll be in the tape. | guess it's the best we can

do. I've brought them up a couple times, so

INAUDIBLE..

(Mark Giardina read fourth application)

FINAL SITE PLAN APPROVAL (

PUBLIC HEARING

) associated with the construction of

a 672 SF 2-car garage on a 0.49-acre lot having SBL# 048.19-1-82.1 located in the R-1 Single-

Family District under Sections 269-10, 350-10 and 350-36 of the Code of the Town of Webster.

Appearing before the board was Jay Palermo, owner of JC Concepts.

Pg. 235 September 2, 2025 Planning Meeting

behalf of my client, Kate McCurdy. Uh, we're proposing to a remove an existing structure thal is 14 x

24. Currently, for size, we want to expand out 10-feet to the east clevation and go another 4-fect to the north,

The application is going to be a viny] sided pole barn style construction, so no steel siding. It's going to

actually have asphalt shingles to match the existing roof structure of the house.

Uh, it is a 24 x 28, 10- foot tall pole bam that has a 4 x 12 truss on it coming in at 14-foot. Uh, average off

average grade for elevation height, which is 4-fect lower than the current house. Uh, at 18ft off average

grade all the way around the existing property, The reason that we need this, uh, this approval is because

it's on the back yard of the house, because of the lake view of the house. It's one of those situations.

Uh, so my client hasa electric vehicle that she wants to be able to keep inside, along with some other

family effects and another truck and obviously electric vehicles, we like to keep them under roof. So we

will be doing a sub panel that is currently in the space. We're going to be decommissioning it during

construction and we'll bring that conduit back in. It's going to be an uninsulated, uh, unconditioned space

with one man dooron the west clevation and one overhead door on the south elevation, with ap propriate

coach lights on each opening and no overhead spotlights that are going to affect any neighbors views. It's

going to have a concrete floor as well.

back so you wouldn't have to walk so far.

like it.

1. Like it where itis. I don't mind walking. And my, um, future husband docs not mind shoveling.

So. I'm good with it.

years ago.

Pg. 236 September 2, 2025 Planning Meeting

that lake road there. Uh.

and the survey map that we have is dated 2010, There appears to be three buildings on this parcel. What It

was. The building was behind the existing garage.

know there is restrictions to, uh, multiple dwellings or multiple outbuildings on a property. Uh, that is

something that we are prepared to, as a condition of our approvals, remove and eliminate before any final

C of C is permitted.

expansion ofa carport to the said property. Uh, there's current footers in the ground. Uh, and it's actually

going to be in the lot within the footprint of what we're proposing. So they just never built that carport off

the existing garage. But that was originally proposed as a 24x

24. We're going to go 24 x

28. Uh, we're

just reducing our impact of size. It's going to match the clap siding of the house.

The current house is cedar clapboard. It's going to have a vinyl clapboard. Going on is a color match. And

then eventually we're going to be doing the siding on the house as well down the road. But now we have

our color palette all matching the neighborhood, all horizontal substrate, no vertical,

indicated that it would take off the other one.

Pg. 237 September 2, 2025 Planning Meeting

then the new building will be built in that place.

Which? Which one is it?

towards you. You'll see the. Green. On. The. Side or. Side. Yeah. That's what. I'm. Deciding as a white or

green color calicd spring Meadow. Our trim and our comers are going to be sand drift. And then we're

going to be doing it. Owens Coming driftwood shingle on the roof to match existing.

there's, you know.

Yes, Yeah. It is. I don't know if there's anybody you're wishing to speak for if you want to complain about

it. ] don't think so. Okay. Um. All right. We'll close the public hearing, bring it back up. Anybody any

concerns? No. No, no. Pretty simple little operation. Um, we can approve it, but then it's. We'll have to

put it in there and make it subject to, uh, uh, getting getting a variance from the zoning board to do.

Pg. 238 September 2, 2025 Planning Meeting

with a 672 square foot, two car garage and a 0.49 acre parcel having SBL number 048.191 -82-1. The

Planning Board classifies the a proposed action is a type two action under section 617.5 C2, the State

Environmental Quality Review Regulations and therefore is not subject to further review.

RESOLUTION 25-0071 Derek Anderson made a motion for a TYPE II

SEQR which was seconded by John Kosel.

VOTE:

Mr. Casciani AYE

Mr. Malta AYE

Mr. Giardina AYE

Mr. Anderson AYE

Mr. Kosel AYE

Mrs. Maltman ABSENT

Mr. Gasic AYE

right.

restricted to one accessory building. So one of the three, what did you call it was a shed.

presented on the plan. Placement of the building shall conform to all setback requirements. Um, no point

in the building will be higher than the existing structure. No commercial use shall occur in the parcel.

Accessory buildings shall be used for personal usc only, as defined by town code. Significant construction

shall occur within onc year is deemed by the Planning Board to expire on September 2nd, 2026. Comply

with all requirements of any state, county and town agency. Also work to be in compliance with the

standards of the Town of Webster. Subject to all engineering government approvals, so do all appropriate

government fees, if any. Subject to resolution of final improvements.

Pg. 239 September 2, 2025 Planning Meeting

do a final.

RESOLUTION 25-0071 Dave Malta made a motion for PRELIMINARY

SITE PLAN APPROVAL Located at 512 Lake

Road. Applicant Jay Palmero is requesting

PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN APPROVAL

(

PUBLIC HEARING

) associated with the

construction of a 672 SF 2-car garage on a 0.49-acre

lot having SBL# 048.19-1-82.1 located in the R-]

Single-Family District under Sections 269-10, 350-

10 and 350-36 of the Code of the Town of Webster.

PRELIMINARY APPROVAL CHECKLIST

10.

11.

12.

13. Subject to PRC Comments

Subject to a Letter of Credit posted with the Town of Webster.

Subject to Conservation Board comments

Subject to Monroe County Water Authority comments

Subject to the determination of the ZBA for requested variances.

Address any land to be conveyed to the Town.

Address any recent subdivision approvals of adjacent lands.

All the improvements shall be constructed according to the specification of the Town of Webster.

All roadway construction to be in accordance with the specification and regulations set forth by the

Town of Webster.

All sitework is to be in compliance with the standards of the Town of Webster.

Preserve all mature trees on site, where possible, and mark said trees by the developer’s engincer

prior to the commencing of any site work,

Comply with all requirements of any Federal, State, County, or Town agency.

Address drainage, lighting, signage, and landscaping, buffering, berming and snow storage.

Pg. 240 September 2, 2025 Planning Meeting

14. The landscape, hardscape, site accessories, and associated finished grading design for the

development must be prepared by a NYS licensed Landscape Architect. The final landscape plans

shall bear the seal and signature of the Landscape Architect.

15. Approvals are subject to Drawing No: Dated:

16. Proceed to Final Approval

VOTE:

Mr. Casciani AYE

Mr. Malta AYE

Mr. Giardina AYE

Mr. Anderson AYE

Mr. Kosel AYE

Mrs. Maltman ABSENT

Mr. Gasic AYE

RESOLUTION 25-0072 Dave Malta made a motion for FINAL SITE

PLAN APPROVAL Located at 512 Lake Road.

Applicant Jay Palmero is requesting FINAL SITE

PLAN APPROVAL (

PUBLIC HEARING

)

associated with the construction of a 672 SF 2-car

garage on a 0.49-acre lot having SBL# 048.19-1-

82.1 located in the R-1 Single-Family District under

Sections 269-10, 350-10 and 350-36 of the Code of

the Town of Webster.

FINAL APPROVAL CHECKLIST

Subject to PRC comments.

Subject to Parks and Recreation fees (if applicable)

Subject to Preliminary Approval Conditions.

Subject to all applicable governmental feces.

Subject to Department of Public Works approval

Significant construction shall occur within onc year, as deemed by the Planning Board, io expire

on 9.2.26

7. The conditions of Preliminary and Final approval are depicted on the cover page of the final

designed plans.

8. The Engineer for the proposed project shall provide a Letter of Certification that all proposed

work was compicted, as per Planning Board resolution of final approval before a Certificate of

Occupancy will be issued.

9. A Letter of Credit io the Town for the project shall include the fee for the Enginecer’s final

certification inspection of the site.

10. Approvals are subject to Drawing No: Dated:

an awWNo

VOTE:

Mr. Casciami AYE

Pg. 241 September 2, 2025 Planning Meeting

Mr. Malta AYE

Mr. Giardina AYE

Mr. Anderson AYE

Mr. Kosel AYE

Mrs. Maltman ABSENT

Mr. Gasic AYE

(Mark Giardina read fifth application)

Solutions is requesting SIGN APPROVAL associated with the replacement of existing facade and

monument signs (30 SF facade sign and 21.5 SF monument sign) for the Care A Lot child care facility

on a2.3-acre parcel having SBL # 050.03-2-23.1 located in an R-3 Single Family Residential District

under Section 265-7 of the Code of the Town of Webster.

conversations with this particular sign applicant. They assured me they were going to be here tonight and

unfortunately, it looks like they're not.

there's a it's a backlit saint so the weight is glaring white.

you know, reapplying.

The white on herc, ycah is all lit.

well.

Pg. 242 September 2, 2025 Planning Meeting

[

enforcement perspective.

because it's number one, it's not conforming to what the town code is. And the applicant has already put the

sign up prior to any approvals,

appear at this hearing.

RESOLUTION 25-0073 Anthony Casciani made a motion to DENY

the CARE A LOT SIGN Located at 369 Phillips

Road which was seconded by Mark Giargina.

VOTE:

Mr. Casciani AYE

Mr. Malta AYE

Mr. Giardina AYE

Mr. Anderson AYE

Mr. Kosel AYE

Mrs. Maltman ABSENT

Mr. Gasic AYE

ADMINISTRATIVE ITEM:

e =Planning Board mecling minutes for August 5, 2025 ( ) were approved.

e With no other applications before the Board this evening Anthony Casciani

concluded tonight’s meeting at =PM.

Pg. 243 September 2, 2025 Planning Meeting

Respectfully Submitted,

Signed

Mark Giardina, Secretary

JAN 8°26 6M11:49

__FILED WEBSTER TWN CLK

Pg. 244 September 2, 2025 Planning Meeting