Planning Board Meeting

e e e

okay I would get started here I guess a little bit after I'd like to welcome everyone to the planning board meeting August 6th would you join our Pledge of Allegiance please un Mr Anderson here Mr here Mr jordina here Mr here Mr Mal here Mr Mixel present Mr artuso here m M Mal here Mr Taylor here okay um before we start first of all there's one application uh for the coffee shop at the uh I'm sorry oh you're not I'm sorry is that any better is that you probably don't want to hear me anyway so no just kidding um is this can you hear okay now yes is that better okay I'll just I'll just move it up here a little bit more then I hope everybody might have to move

your mics and just keep them close to you then if if if I do back off let me know okay all right anyways I was saying the one application is the coffee shop that was proposed it's the last item on the agenda they have requested to be tabled to a future date so they will not be on this evening okay with that we have uh we have the other two and Mark why don't you go ahead and start with the first one now okay bird first uh table item on tonight's agenda bird song At Con Coast subdivision located between the East End of Conor Cove Lane and Webster Road applicant Grove Underhill LLC is requesting preliminary final subdivision site plan approval along with a public hearing associated with the creation of nine lots for construction of eight single family residences and an Associated storm Water Management Facility on a 5.55 acre parcel located in an R3 single family residential district under sections 269-1972 and 350-12 of the code of the town of Webster okay thanks Mark okay Mr vs would you like

to yeah give us a little presentation of what the proposal is yes before you start before you start Peter I want to acknowledge that we we did receive letter unsigned don't have any idea who who sent it or what but we did receive a letter from Friends of Webster trails and somebody else on there everybody want to inv well I'm not asking for that it's too late for that should be on the paper that means nothing to me now um but we did receive it um you sent it to the town and as per usual the town did forward this all board members we already had it so really wasn't necessary to make envelopes and bring them up again to the to the town tonight this evening we really didn't need them we already had them anyways with that uh we'll address this as we're going along go ahead Mark or uh Peter I'm sorry okay thank you uh my name is Peter bars with BME Associates appearing tonight on behalf of Grove Underhill LLC who is the owner of the property and the developer of the proposed property with me this evening is um Mitch Brodsky and Jeff Bell uh from Grove Underhill uh as you mentioned we're here this evening it's a

continuation of uh from our last appearance back on June 4th of 2024 where we brought forward the proposed preliminary and final subdivision application for the proposed subdivision of of the subject property um just to refresh the board's memory what the proposal is it's a proposed eight lot single family home residential subdivision of 5.5 Acres the property is zoned R3 residential the plan and the development is proposed or the plan has been prepared and the development is proposed as a conventional subdivision uh per direction we received from this board uh back during the concept plan review stage at the end of 2023 the lots have been prepared in conformance with the R3 zoning uh District criteria which includes a minimum lot areas of 22,000 Square ft minimum lot widths of 100 ft front setbacks of 50 fet including 50 ft to New York State Route 250 15t side setbacks and 50ft rear setbacks uh since our last appearance back in June we went through the various comments that we received from this

board uh from that meeting along with public comment also with comments that were received uh from the town's Consulting engineer and from the town's PRC the result of that is is excuse me is on July 17th we submitted revised plans uh to this board and uh our goal this evening or our purpose this evening is to go through with you what the uh plan revisions are the primary plan revision really which was one of the which was the primary issue discussed at the June meeting was that the plan no longer now proposes an extension of Conifer Cove Lane Eastward to serve the proposed development and connect to New York State Route 250 Conifer Cove Lane will remain as is as it is today as a dead end Street serving those existing residents on Conifer Cove Lane uh through consultation with the town Highway superintendent and town staff the Design's been prepared we're looking to preserve uh a minimum 30ft vegetative buffer at the end of Conifer Cove Lane so there's uh both a physical and visual barrier uh between the two streets so as

you can see up on the screen the layout uh the proposed layout now is the subdivision would still be served by a proposed dedicated Street to be named uh Sage Forest Lane we will label the maps accordingly that street name was just recently approved by the County 911 office the layout of this street has been reviewed with the town Highway superintendent and the Fire Marshall uh the road is proposed at just about 600 ft in length it will terminate at its Western end in a te turnaround that meets the criteria of the New York State Building and fire code the pavement width would be 26 ft wide plus the concrete gutters and it would be situated within a 60t right of way the proposed access point onto New York State Route 250 has been reviewed with the New York State Department of Transportation they have reviewed the access location find it acceptable the app uh the access point meets the required stopping site distance and the recommended intersection site distance uh for the proposed location and that information is all documented uh on the final site plans that were

submitted we um just recently met with the town uh back uh just Thursday August 1st and this meeting also included the town supervisor the uh uh the purpose of that meeting was to clarify the developers intent uh as it relates to this subdivision as it relates to the dedication of of this of the proposed Road it is the developer intent and he confirmed this in this meeting uh back on Thursday that these Lots are to be subdivided for sale Lots the Lots will be sold as single family lots for single family home construction it is not intended to be a rental Community the town made their position very clear that if it were to be a rental Community uh that the road would not be accepted in dedication it would not be a public road it would in turn become a private road but again to clarify that is not the developer's intent it is his intent for these lots to be for sale uh single family home lots the remainder of the subdivision design is very consistent with the original application in W which was presented and reviewed uh back on the June 4th meeting uh as we mentioned

the site has been laid out the subdivision has been prepared to conform to the R3 zoning lot standards and Zoning criteria and the subdivision design itself has been prepared to meet the standards of the town of Websters design standards these items include as the already previously mentioned lot standards that have been established the site will be served uh or the eight proposed Lots would be served by public water and public sewer that would be extended from existing facilities on Conifer Cove Lane the project will include a comprehensive storm water management plan that's been prepared per the town of Webster standards and the New York State dec's storm water design manual the the storm water management plan will include a storm Water Management Facility that will be located up in the northwest corner of the property it's the area highlighted in blue on the rendering this storm water management plan maintains the current drainage patterns through the property which is a south to North uh pattern the facilities have been designed to provide the required water quality treatment areas and to attenuate the uh water quality runoff or water quantity runoff excuse me um all that design has met the

standards of of the dec this is summarized in the engineers report and the storm water management plan that has been provided to the town for Town engineer and staff review the other key component of that storm water management plan is it does include a construction erosion control plan uh to address uh storm water and erosion during the construction process the last thing we would like to address this evening as it relates to uh uh a follow our follow-up appearance here this evening is regards to the state and Environmental Quality review act Seeker uh as we have put forward it is our belief that this proposed action is an unlisted action pursuant to uh New York State parts 67.4 and 67.5 in that this proposed development does not meet any of the type one thresholds we do understand that the town uh has interpreted a memo of understanding from the New York State Department of Health that reality subdivisions should be a type one action we're pursuing clarifying that with the dec the Department of Environmental

Conservation because it is the dec that's actually charged with administering the Seeker regulations and uh uh inst instigating any changes we don't have that clarification so with that being said what we have done we have provided you with the resubmittal the long form part one eaf such that if the town does determine that this is a type one uh action you can proceed uh with uh with your determination because we are providing the eaf part one as required along with our plans and the engineers report um regardless if it's an unlisted or a type one action uh I don't think there's any doubt that the planning board is the correct entity to be the lead agency so we would uh look to the planning board to to declare their intent to be lead agency uh for Seeker so that's really all we wanted to do this evening was go over with you what the changes that have been made since we last appeared in June which that primary focus being as to the concern that was raised last June about Conifer Cove Lane and its connectivity out to uh Webster Road and how the

applicant uh has revised his plan accordingly to to address that uh uh concern raised so with that myself or the applicant will be available to answer any questions uh when you're ready okay thank you Peter okay okay um I know there's several neighbors or interested parties here this evening wish to speak I would we will open it is a public hearing and all I'm going to ask is please just limit your amount of speech and if you can just please don't repeat if somebody's spoken about something don't repeat the same thing we don't need to hear it over and over okay um we'll keep it friendly and try and keep it as short as we can now one other thing I in your letter um again I wish somebody I wish I had a contact I would have been happy to call and sit with you and talk to you about some of the things on here but no address I don't know who to talk to so when you again you say raise your hand doesn't do anything for me this evening um however there are some things in here that you have that are factual and there are things that are addressed and we agree with and we go along with it uh some of the things in here are I don't know where you got your information on Facebook or something or but it's not factual and you'd be better off

contacting somebody at the town or myself I'd be even willing to talk to someone if you if I could no not we're not and and we could resolve issues you know before we get into a situation where everybody's here and upset over the situation and this and that and they don't have the facts or they believe they have them but they don't have them so I'd rather see a group more prepared and then come in and then voice your opinion on different different topics okay um with that is any any board members want to say anything in regard to what we've heard from Mr vs or we can just open it up and get a few comments from people we'll do that okay all right so let's do this let's what I'm going to ask you is if you go up to the podium give us your name and address and uh speak clearly into it and let's keep it just short so go ahead just want who wants to go first anyone somebody in back yes ma'am uh Janice Jackman 27 West overdrive this is very hard for me to

speak about this property I have a lot of emotions tied to it but I'll do my best I wish I could um look up and see you all clearly when I look up but I need these reading glasses to be able to read what I wrote and it doesn't allow me to do both there is a buzzword out there have you heard it it's a goal of 99% of the companies in existence politicians speak of it educational institutions want to be a part of it world leaders boast of their efforts to hit the mark in this category but I ask you how are Webster policy makers doing in this regard and what is the buzzword you ask sustainability this moment here tonight is an opportunity Unity to see

if Webster is hitting the Mark I happen to know a little bit about sustainability in addition to what we see on TV and and whatnot that's in the media I wrote a book on this topic when I took a halfe sabatical and I moved to South America and lived in the country of Chile I attended seminar after lecture after presentation ation by some of the world's top experts in this field one of the biggest takeaways is that sustainability is multipronged besides an economic aspect there are two others and the other 2third of this pie that I want to highlight regarding the proposed property development the first is societal this property let me ask you a question look at you're going to be going on for a while I'm not going to leave that much time I this is a project if I want you to just specifically address this project I am we don't need to know about sustainability those are books we've all seen before let's stick right to this

project please I am can I continue well if you're sticking to the project this property butts up to a nature trail people in the housing nearby can tell you it's a nature hate even they themselves see the wildlife in their own neighborhood and they love it hence I think many of them are here the love of the animals is one reason we have joined together the preservation of this property and the bird Trail create a human Haven of Walkers bird watchers people in need of a respit from a busy day an opportunity to commune and meditate while in nature destroying the wooded lot will do nothing to help the peace and serenity of the trail that is beloved by Webster Society the bird Trail risks becoming a tiny sliver isolated in its own natural wonder people don't want nature that is one foot wide to the left and one foot wide to the right they want the full Beauty feeling like they enter a special spot in Webster where life is worth living they can leave their cares behind for a few moments and

connect with that green thing called nature that is a Healer to all who partake of it and again it is not meant to be one foot to the right and one foot to the left that wooded property adjacent to the bird Trail is so vitally important to the preservation of this nature which fulfills this part of the the so of the societal aspect of sustainability it's a place where people go in commune and feel better it's where they see nature that is good for society the other prong of sustainability is simply environmental this is clearly a moment for you to consider this aspect as one of great importance it is an area that ought to be protected it is full of wildlife it is a Haven of original Woods not to be replaced by a tree planting here and there these are areas that offer value as carbon sinks much needed in fight fighting the global warming we're all experiencing they provide these trees provide a home to countless species that we keep leaving habitat less by overbuilding certainly their well-being has to be considered they are living

creatures that Survive and Thrive by being separate from humans in their own space we must Prov provide it to them as good stewards of the land I'm on my last page I hope Webster will consider this key topic going over five minutes so that everyone else is trying desperately to prove that they're in that Arena Webster make a choice tonight to act sustainably and think about the environment and the society's needs not just economic goals be courageous Webster board in in front of me your town will thank you for it okay thank you Denise let me ask you a question before you step away let me ask you a question the property has been there right it's next to the bird sanctuary what would you propose we do with it do you want my honest answer absolutely that's what I'm asking okay my honest answer yeah is have the courage to leave it alone how do we do that tell me how I I I don't no this is wait a minute folks hold on this is a very important part of this we get this all the time you know M and P had a farm yep you know and you or others have worked at

zerox Kodak binam had pensions and everything else but M andp worked the farm their whole life now they're 65 70 years old they want to retire that property is their pension the zoning allows precisely what the applicant is looking for so would you tell that farmer that he can't sell his property this isn't a farm wait wait whoa whoa whoa excuse me are I'm not talking to you yet I'll let you go up and talk hold on nobody said it is a farm it's a piece of property my point is that piece of property was owned by someone who for whatever reason wants to sell it now anyone could have bought the parcel this board doesn't distinguish between who's right and who's wrong or anything like that it's who owns the property does it meet the requirements of zoning does it meet the requirements of zoning is it an allowed use yes it is we cannot say you cannot develop the piece of property there are there's a criteria of restrictions for it yes absolutely but we cannot say you can't develop it I'm not saying it's a Farm by any means but it is a parcel of land and it is developable that's it now anyone could

buy a parcel that's what you do you buy it if you want it you buy it you do you I don't know how many people are familiar the town hall Webster's got more open space Park land than anybody in Monro County if I can just say contribute to the town if I can just say that seems funny to me as everywhere I drive there's either for sale sign on the land which you're saying they're entitled to but there are so many housing developments and I'm a teacher I I I know a lot of community members a lot of parents a lot of families a lot of teachers no one can believe no one can believe the overdevelopment of this town so if you think if you say to me oh we have more park space than any than any other town I find that hard to believe unless you're talking about all of Lake Road and and all of that no I'm talking Parklands Parklands are town-owned Parklands I'm talking this is not even however okay okay I just want to say this is not even just a piece of land it's natural original Woods and it's it's home to a so many species B it borders a natural Trail Denise we understand that what I'm saying is jise please I'm sorry Janise it is zon for

residential AR well then is it your zoning code that's improper can I ask that it is not improper it is what it currently is okay look when was the last time it was looked at and changed you left your comment we appreciate it thank you very much all right well I thought you were engaging but I guess not so someone else come up please anyone wishing to speak go up and would please stick just to this specific project Dorothy F Dorothy fate 742 High towerway okay planning board members thank you for the opportunity to share my concerns about this development as it currently is presented my concern as Janice's was um that it's along the bird song Trail um I believe the board has the ability to um put uh more restrictions on the development of this property per um per the town code um under development chapter 296 section 19c give me an example so is what what more could we do I mean that the code says the board

finds the project would have an if the board finds that the project would have an adverse impact on adjacent land uses it can add additional restrictions bird song is an important Wildlife Corridor connecting large Parcels of undeveloped properties I would ask the board to consider the character of this mature treed lot and require the developer to consult with an arborist and present a plan that not only marks all mature healthy trees defined by web Webster code under chapter 296 section 15a item 19 as 8 in in diameter but presents a plan that preserves these trees and the existing vegetation vital to the wildlife habitat Webster's comprehensive plan may have been completed in 2008 but it was prepared by a committee consisting of Webster citizens and town officials it included a future land use plan and it recommended cluster development however according to the plan the space created in the open portion of the cluster was to preserve wildlife habitat reduce erosion and

enhance Scenic and aesthetic qualities according to page three of the comprehensive plan all our town departments and board should be using the comprehensive plan as a road map in their own long range planning I ask this board to honor our comprehensive plans intent and hold the developer to those objectives I would further encourage the board to consider requesting a more in-depth Seeker review as this is an ecologically sensitive area our comprehensive plan on page 30 does indicate that the planning board should utilize this tool to protect development in Webster the property has areas of standing water and does filter to mil Creek an important Watershed that needs to be protected I would propose that this property as such provides critical habitat and a retention Pond as a as a proposed and a speci and specimen landscape plantings does not protect or provide appropriate cover for most Wildlife this is also an important safe Corridor between Charles ston Park and the less developed properties to the east I would ask the board to consider the environmental pressure it has already placed on the bird song Trail with its prior approval of the cluster

development at The Orchard Street Holt Road entrance to the trail I would contend that there is a silent majority of Webster residents who view the preservation of mature undisturbed treed Lots as critical to the aesthetic qualities of Webster this large parcel was designated as a partial a parcel of interest in a prior commissioned Studies by the town and as such the developer should be held to a higher standards that are available within our current code thank you okay thank [Applause] you can we have a copy of that letter you have ma'am can we get a copy of that letter I didn't hear so you some of your comments I agree 100% and that's why that's that's what the engineer was just saying part of The Proposal is for a Seeker review which is an environmental review that's increasing everything everything the drainage Air Quality Lighting everything

so that that's correct and as far as the trees and stuff that's standard also the trees get marked 8 in trees 10 in depending on the subdivision what they look like but you're on Queue with that and that's legit legitimate request those were good I'm sorry yes ma'am no problem hi I'm Elizabeth Decker uh my address is 726 B Arbor Trail did you guys hear that okay um I've been here since um November of 2022 I would like to start by expressing a heartfelt thank you to the board for your faithful service to this town thank you for the uh chance to address you um I'm grateful that you're willing to listen to all of us because I know it's probably tedious I will also try to skip over things that have already been addressed um my journey to Webster was exhaustive I looked everywhere from around AO way halfway through Wayne County and somebody uh turned to me and told me that Webster is a town where life is worth living so I was kind of happy to see that behind you there today and I would agree with that assessment um my my home I bought on purpose because it was near this Trail and part of the real estate livability score that you get when you're picking a home has

to do with whether you can get places without using a car and I'm very excited to tell you that by walking or riding my bike I can get to the rec center to the the town of Webster to the lake and to the north Ponds Park all by their your fabulous excellent trail system and I use it every day and um as such what I want to address is what I have seen as decimation on the bird Trail in the last week and um either the town is doing it or it's that sub the the division that she mentioned just west of Orchard and north of the trail that I think is already approved there were two bulldozers a a red one and a blue one driving right down the trail at me while I was trying to walk they um ruined both sides of the trail they drove down the creek up the other side and they clearcut I could hear the cracking of the trees and they they made a swath wide enough to be a road on the north side of the creek it's at least 100 ft long they cleared another 60 70 ft just south of the creek and directly on the trail I have pictures of all of it I went over yesterday and I took them yesterday afternoon and it is devastating so if this building project is responsible for the bulldozers and if the builders are

going to have this kind of disregard for whatever they agree to with you I have great consternation about what what the next set of builders is going to do because I cherish the trail and it's the only place that I can go in full shade and be protected and be out all day so um I I can't prove these machines were from the Builder um but let's see I'm asking you these questions why would a builder not consider the impact that their proposed project has on the livability of its neighbors why would a builder not consider what their project will do to the neighboring uh home values I was willing to overpay for my house because I could be near the this this trail system um I have a tiny house and a tiny yard but I'm so happy because of where it is um also why would a builder choose to clearcut the smallest strip of forest and habitat on the most used trail in the town just in order to build and my only answer is profit I propose that the code regarding preservation of vegetation and habitat is much too lenient in its verbiage providing too much discretion on the part of the Builder I have witnessed firsthand and

given testimony to the utter disregard for the trail the woods and the law by men and their machines you the board are the only things standing between the Builder desire for profit and your community's quiet enjoyment of our own properties so what I would propose is that we be allowed to offer a fair or above market value and keep the entire area wild somehow uh make them an offer and make it a park or just protect it forever wild is that possible that's all I have so so you're saying there's construction vehicles we in there I ask the engineers I don't believe you'd have any I have I have pictures of of the piles of the trees they just left yeah I believe what you're saying yeah it's there I it was devastating and it was last week last Thursday Friday this week Monday I've got you I I believe what you're saying Mr vars would you just address I don't believe that the engineering that the developer would even attempt to go in there and do anything like that no there's um no there's been no activity on that site El I think they're talking about a different piece of property along the trail must be y okay thank you

I just want to clarify it saying is if the other Builder who did get approved agreed to whatever is legally required by environment and now they're doing this we don't know no this we yeah okay thank you thank you all right was there anyone else wish to speak or sure go ahead okay hi uh Kenyan Kowski 768 Bell hour Trail the only thing I can add is I understand you know the board not maybe being able to stop this project but you can't put limitations on it so the back the front setback is set for 50 ft right now reduce that down move the houses closer to the road which will have more open space towards the the uh

um Trail also you can put a limit on the size of the dwelling let's say houses can't be bigger than 1500 square ft now you open up more open space because the footprint is much smaller and that that's really all I have to say okay thanks Ken yeah that's that's again see that goes back this board is Guided by the town code and I I hear your points but you're saying 1500 ft the code allows in an R3 Zone I believe 20 what's a minimum 2200 square ft I believe it is for the size of the home yes well there's a minimum requirement of at least 1,400 ft 14 is minimum minimum for it and that would be like a small ranch or something correct so that's it's Guided by that too and the developer is going to put something up that's the neighbors that are in the area wouldn't want to see something less expensive than their houses I'm sure I don't know if there's any of the local residents that are on uh the existing subdivisions around there but you'd want to have normal siiz houses

yeah well I'm Cecilia robello I live at 1291 Foothill Circle the development backs up to me and so does the pond I'll take a small piece of a house compared to 2200 square feet and save the wildlife okay thanks hi hi um yeah I think I I just want to touch on some of give us your name and address sorry Diana Davis 942 Gaywood Lane um one of the writers of the letter you received not the person who sent it to the town apologies that there were no contact details we weren't trying to be Incognito um okay so I think one main point to say is I do think that the wildlife preservation is on everyone's mind and I think that that is probably more significant to the neighbors in the area um than you know the size of the house and how nice the house looks I think that it definitely impacts upon the home values it definitely impacts upon the adjacent

land use um for the bird song trail that sort of piece of property even though it is not official Parkland has kind of been functioning as Parkland for a lot of people in the area there's Trails where people walk their dogs um it's a buffer to the trail itself I understand that that is not um you can't just argue well because people are using it therefore the person that owns the land doesn't get to um sell it but as the planning board right as we have mentioned you are entitled to place restrictions on the development that is outside of that are outside of the R3 zoning the zoning isn't all you have to work with for the R3 you can also work with the subdivision zoning which is why we put those items in the letter which pertain to not just the preservation of trees that are greater than 8 or 10 in but also just a Consciousness right of the wildlife itself and I I do take your point that R3 zoning allows up to you know whatever it is 2200 square feet or something like that um but and I I don't know how much remit you have to say the house itself needs to be smaller but surely the setback could be reduced I actually think that's a pretty brilliant idea um and just say no clear cutting I mean there are actually development in Webster has I

think historically been such a problem right because we've had a lot of developments that have been these sort of clear cutting sweeping Lawns you know uh tumble weed blowing across the Prairie kind of style things um but not every development in Webster have been like that I'm thinking of a couple that are off of H um I used to actually door Dash is one of my 80 million jobs and there are some really nice developments in Webster that left their like old mature Trees gasberry Lane is another one that I'm thinking of and they're beautiful so I'm just thinking if you're now going to have the houses be for sale and not for rent you are selling them to people that want to be lifelong theoretically residents they're going to want to pay for access to that Wildlife they would buy wood Lots you're not going to be losing out on profit as a developer if you make these houses basically in a wood lot um and just to speak to you know overall um you know I think the cont that we're talking about I do think that the other development that has been approved at the other end of the trail I think unfortunately you know it's kind of like with Webster developments that have come before even though it's nowhere written officially into the code you know you don't want eight Walmarts right even though something might be zoned and a Walmart

might want to come in you have to consider things in context and because that one came on the other end it's now made this one a lot more sensitive and dicey and a Hot Topic because of the impact it's going to have on wildlife and everybody that lives in that area cares about the wildlife I've gone door to-door talking to people they all care it's not just about the peace and the Tranquility that the nature affords they connect with the little Do's in their backyard and you know little squirrels and everything else so I think I think that it should be as Dy said held to a higher standard because of that um and I do want to say the damage that we were talking about it's it's kind of like a secondary topic right because there's no guarantee this engineer could just as easily stand up and say well our guys won't do that right but I think it's just an example of how close the development is to um to the trail really and how they're just right up against each other and so therefore you know the utmost standards I think by you guys you are the buffer between you know what could be a beautiful development with lots of trees and all the residents around the area are happy and the trail is still preserved and yay everybody gets to buy wood Lots and what could be just like a clear-cut nightmare and everybody's really upset about it like I think that there is an argument to say

that um some of the things that the applicant hasn't done yet need to be done so I'm not going to read the letter back to you but that 296 15a right giving the plan for the preserving existing vegetation not clear cutting and planning a few things and then WR 29616 a you guys then basically requiring them to maintain existing vegetation and wildlife habitats within the site right so anyway generally there's good points and again so I tried to say before but that is those are the items that we do look at at a final approval right for projects I mean you could look at at minutes of other meetings in the past in wooded areas like that yeah we've preserved trees we've worked around trees we've done everything you can possibly do and we do do that so who's thinking that we're annihilating the woods and doing this that's the stuff that gets frustrating sure for the sport because that's not factual stuff I think the concern was because tonight's application is for preliminary and final Subdivision plat approval in one and the current plat does not have anything related to what we would want to see I think as a community in terms of like tree preservation we don't want to see approval go forward before like that you know site

plan gets changed to reflect some actual effort to like keep the woods we've discussed this actually u a couple weeks ago with the engineers and town staff and stuff and this was the outcome of it is let's hold on that because this really has some environmental issues we're aware everybody here is aware of it yeah and let's address them so that's why tonight I don't think we're moving forward with the preliminary and final approval because it's going to be gone through the Seeker process so determination what's the significance of it probably is going to be I guess Josh a type one that is correct a type one action which means that there'll be a period of time the only thing we can probably do here tonight correct me if I'm wrong is our board takes lead agency to the project am I correct we would be lead Agency for the project we would get information um anybody else that would want to take it which we doubt very much anybody's you know the county isn't going to want it the state isn't going to want it so the town's stuck with it so we end up being lead agency to the project then there's a 30-day period where information and so on so forth can come in and so on and then and then we move forward with that and then items like what you folks were saying tonight those are the items that are addressed

in this so this is nowhere's near done by any stretch understood my I guess I still would have the concern that once you give um approval there's less remit within the Seeker process to for instance require a preservation of a certain amount of trees who's going to be the one pushing on that well that would be my question yeah sometimes I'm talking too much here I know but sometimes when we look at trees on a property you take an area where a sewer line a gas line a water line have to you know service this house that takes out 99% of the trees in the front the best place they can be preserved is the back which is generally what we do is try and save the trees along the back and the bird song uh project if you will the uh the Parkland actually has a 100 foot buffer of Parkland that's you know in in adjacent adjacent to this piece of property so are we saying that on the current subdivision or on the current plan that sort of light green here this is inaccurate because this is that's that's Park L back there does this yes but where's the 100 foot buffer well 100 feet of the

Parkland is buffer well that's buffer to it that's not that's not quite the same thing so I just have one more question and then I won't take up any more of your time so my understanding um and I did get in touch with um a lawyer um just just to check that I had this understanding right um the sections of the code require the developer to submit the location proposed development of all buffer are's location existing trans of stands of trees particular notation prior to approval that these contents are not optional so not only that but for you to then ensure right 2961 16a that you know that existing vegetation and wildlife habitats are maintained when the plan quite clearly doesn't address that to defer that to say well that's going to be done at the level of Seeker you're you're approving it before you've done the those two items so that to me what what I was advised by the lawyer that I consulted is that those two items are not optional and if they're not attended to prior to approval it it opens us up to an article 78 appeal I think all the stuff would be before approval anyways wouldn't it I don't the board cannot act on the

application until the secet process is completed so what Tony's referring to in in working with the developer and addressing some of these concern got you he said the board cannot act on the application until the Seeker development process is completed correct so you're saying approval is not going to be issued tonight it's just going to be designated a type one Seeker yeah the planning board is going to declare themselves lead agency go through the secr process and but you're not granting approval tonight no that's what I said before I'm going to shut up and go down then okay that's what I said before it only it'll only be for the secret process tonight so the concerns that have been raised the board can take the opportunity to address it with the developer and the engineer okay they can take that feedback amend their plans and resubmit uh at a later date after the secret process has has run its course yes all right okay okay thank you thank you very much I appreciate thank [Applause] you all right um anybody want to ask a couple more questions we'll open a couple more I don't want just repetition but again please understand that this property has been for sale somebody buys it as much as we would want to say God that's

a beautiful piece add it to the park well who's going to add it to the park who go talk to the town and tell them to buy it the town has bought it they're not going to buy every piece of land to peas every person every little piece of around all right we're not going to we're not going to argue this here okay all right anyone else wish to make a comment offer I I hear you but I can't see you what you have to go to the m yes ma'am hi I'm Isabelle Kaplan I live at 1278 Clear Pond I have a question about the map I need a clarification please this this yellow I'm sorry this green strip here this L shap is yeah that would be part of that lot yes that would be part of that lot the first lot there yes okay so it's not it's actually not a buffer zone to the to 250 or anything like that no that that road that it goes out to 250 but it's there's nothing there it's just a narrow strip of land that's just the way the land is because there's a already an owner for property right next to it there the dark

the gray spot okay so the the green exactly yeah okay I was just about whether that could be somehow preserved as as wood well originally actually if we think back when the applicant came in originally uh what they were going to do there was make a parking lot for you know for the bird song Sanctuary well the neighbors the you know the adjacent neighbors they weren't too thrilled with that making it a parking lot rightfully so so the developer said okay then we'll just leave it way it is and it'll be part of the lot that's it okay all right I just clarification M no problem okay anyone else we take a couple more if anybody wants to sure go ahead's it sure go ahead my name is Kevin I live over in kbur Park from what I'm hearing tonight is that the people want a comprehensive plan for the town to steer more towards an open Green Space and preserving Green Space and they're concerned about the interests of this planning board and so I think we just got to have some clarity on the not only the comprehensive plan and prioritizing for people who clearly

here in Webster want to preserve the open space and the green space and but also reflect that in this zoning map because we're very cognizant of what's happening in Penfield they changed the zoning the comprehensive plan last year shifted the whole plan of the zoning map and now they're building a Costco and ruining that whole beautiful we are from what I hear from the people here it sounds like we're all worried about that happening here and so we just want to grasp onto our comprehensive plan and have a good sense that the people here are at least going to agree on the document and that we're going to have some NE ability to negotiate on behalf of nature um with this board because you might see a growth in the tax base and want to enlarge in the tax base or whatever sell to developers however that all works and do the business and you know if you're good at the business then that's going to be growing what you know however that works I don't know but that's uh what I wanted to say so thank you appreciate it good [Applause] comments you're right and the comprehensive coincidentally their comprehensive plan is what designed this as residential R3 years ago so that's

why it is what it is and we just go by the book if it was zoned for an apartment that'd be another whole story if that if the zoning got changed I don't think anybody would like that either so but anyways that's what it is and that's what we deal with yes ma'am hi my name is Janette Chambers and I live at 1474 Oakmont Boulevard I um grew up here I love this little town I respect the fact that this person bought that land I get it what you said about the older couple having property my parents were those parents there you go and he needed to sell his property it wasn't here it was in Ontario but I get it my concern here is what I heard the woman say earlier not about this property but about the property where she was out for a walk and met a bulldozzer are would there guard rails around when this person does bring in and start developing the house that we can prevent meeting a bulldozer on the trail is there something that does that yeah yeah actually that's one of the first things that's required is they'll have to be putting fencing around it won't be a barb wire fence or

anything like that nature you know but they will not a trump wall nothing like that no nothing like that no but they will have to you know move the you know Mark off the perimeter okay and for for erosion off of the property and so on and they will not go onto anything of the park line by any means okay I appreciate that and I really want to have the utmost faith in this person who bought the land that they respect Webster they came here to build in Webster because they obviously see value in it I know there's a lot of profit I know that people are talking about that but I want to hold in my heart somewhere they want to hold the Integrity of Webster MH than thank you okay thank you very good okay is there anyone else if not we'll okay then we'll close this portion of the meeting we'll bring it back up to the board anybody any comments or guest tonight what basically what the decision was that we were going to do is to just move forward with secret on this project tonight Peter uh no more no further questions from the board okay probably what we'll do um I'm assuming we'll get

a summary of of the we'll get the meeting minutes and probably like what we'll do is we'll request a meeting with the PRC and we'll hash through these just like we did before and we'll we'll find out uh the path forward sounds good okay so we thank you for your time this evening okay thank you Peter I can't hear you now everybody's talking now we've closed heing [Music] so there's no project no wait wait wait wait there's no project started I don't know that has nothing to do with this ma'am that's what I don't know where you're seeing the bulldozers but there's none there these are the misconceptions that come in where were they by Orchard Street that's another Could That Be The Village has nothing to do with this I would like to clarify okay that's enough we're done we're good thank you Tony Tony Could That Be The Village could be we'll let them take care Kenny go all

right all right so our job right now is to make a determin hey uh folks listen look okay if you want to talk please go out in the hall if you want we still have to finish this part of the meeting now they think it was the builders thank you but yeah we should really coordinate cuz I was getting calls and emails and pictures and I didn't know you know we sent three people out there to look at different areas we're going to take a few minutes for a little commercial time here I think that's what they do with TV don't they let's sell some medicine that'll secure uh acne or something next item is here yep no it's on the list it's on the list us a couple

minutes type one action am I correct here we making this a type one action right you're intent to declare lead agency okay so then we to read this sorry I'll read if you got one go ahead use it sure certainly yeah this is a motion for intent to establish lead agency whereas the town of Webster planning board can we shut the door excuse me excuse me folks folks can you take the conversation out in the hallway sir could you go out in the hall please please conducting the meeting okay go ahead I'm sorry I'll start over again yeah that's right motion for intent to establish lead agency whereas the town of Webster planning board considered the request by applicant Grove Underhill LLC to create a magot subdivision consisting of eight single family residences and an Associated storm Water Management Facility located on the East End of conord Cove Lane in Webster Road on a 5.55 acre parcel having SPL number

06518 D1 d27 and in a R3 single family residential district under sections 669-1171 and 350-12 of the town of Webster of Cota the town of Webster now therefore be it resolved that the planning board determined that the is a subject to a single agency review pursuant to part 67.6 B4 of seeker and that is that it is the most appropriate Agency for making the determination of significance the planning board therefore designates itself lead Agency for the proposed action now therefore be resolved that the planning board has determined that the action is a type two action based on the following criteria number one the New York State Department of Health title 10 part 97 regulations implementing State Environmental Quality review sections section 9714 lists of of Department actions B2 I I lists realy subdivision as type one action the proposed project is a

realy subdivision is defined by the public health law that your motion we need a second I just have a question early on you let me get a second first wait AE second we have a second hold on a second hold on one second Josh clarification right yeah I I heard I don't know if I was the only one but I heard you read into the record that the board was declaring it as a type two but I think we need to clarify the type one clarify the motion onee type one action so it's a type one Tye one and we have a second so go ahead Jen Derek says section 669 but on the sheet here it says section d11 I heard him say 269 269 11 2691 all right I stand I stand corrected okay no problem y okay we have a motion have a second all in favor I oppos with that all right that's that's resolved we're done need an action on the application probably to table it um I don't know we how long we don't how we table it so the 30-day clock will then essentially start tomorrow that puts us at September 88th

roughly which is two days after the next planning board meeting so I'm proposing um that we potentially hold a special meeting later in September once the 30-day clock is expired uh as to not delay them to the October meeting m so um if you're looking for a date so that would be what Tuesday would that be on there yeah I believe it's Tuesday the 20th um would it be 24th I think our next meeting is September second or third the third it would be third would be the normal date you want the 17th it goes to the thir it would go to the third Tuesday of September you have to go to the 10th but that's zoning board too 17th you want the 17th you have to go to the 17th a question about that actually what's that um through the motion we established ourselves as lead agency with single agency review right and the intent was to do a coordinated review is that the intent that's what yes that's what we're prepared to do okay just want just want to clarify that because if we weren't going to do a coordinator review the 30 days doesn't

hold yeah okay right we the intent was to do a coordinated review all right confir do tonight if you want to do as a single agency you this is Lally a singal agency review Monro County Department of Public Health has uh they have to weigh in on this right their approval they definitely have to sign off on it right so they need to approve the project wait that was my understanding so they have to approve the project be a coordinated review right and because New York State dos involved we felt that that was the better way to go right um so yeah it'd be a coordinated review so the coordinated review I guess the act the question is for scheduling purposes is the 30-day actually necessary because in the regulation when it talks about 30 days for coordinated review that's for one there's multile involved is lead agent well I thought that they have 30 days to contest this board's declaration notice that you're declaring yourself as lead agency they have 30 days to respond right and they rarely do but we that's

how we had anticipated moving forward on this okay I just want to make sure bring that up good point so so did we agree on the 17th what's the date going to be then it would be September 17th going under that September 17 all right all right um let's see we have one more application here do yet okay so why don't you go ahead with the last one you have to resolve the previous application whether you're tabling till the 17th oh yeah it's right too um all right so let's want to make a motion I'll make a motion we table the uh CER uh bird song whatever one you want to call it uh to the uh September 17th special meeting and the 17 okay I'll second it second all in favor I okay we're good yeah good sorry about that okay uh moving on all right last item on tonight's agenda is LA Fitness sign located at9 929 Holt Road the applicant Randy

dinatali is requesting sign approval associated with the installation of two building mounted facade signs one being 275 Square ft the other being 173 Square ft and tenant panels on existing Monument signs to reflect the name change from espora Fitness back to LA Fitness on a 5.58 acre parcel located in an high-intensity commercial District under Section 2657 of the code of the town of Webster hi my name is Randy D Natali my address is 2900 Hunters Lane Sanborn New York and I'm representing Flex in LA Fitness and I'm here before the board as requested pretty much signs are in the same areas I'm sorry what was that signs are pretty much in the same are area right yep exact same area um La fness was there before and then spida and then back and forth but it's going to be LA Fitness again did they save the old sign we should have been changing them all over the state put it back up again yeah exactly

um any you don't need any variances any extra signs on there yeah everything's existing they're all pretty much the same thing right same layout yep yes sir all right anybody any questions on it Josh are you okay with it engineering wise uh yeah they meet the uh requirements and there were a previous variance had been granted to have the second sign at this location sool that would remain okay all right with that want to make a motion for a Seeker you're on a roll with it got his wife asking him to bring a Loa of bre no I printed it but it's there it is T Webster planning board considered a request by applicant Randy Tali to establish sorry to install two building mounting facade signs one being 273 Square ft and the other being 173 Square ft and tenant panels on an existing Monument signs to reflect the name change from aspor Fitness back to LA Fitness located at 929 whole Road on a 5.58 acre parcel

having SPL number 07912 1-1 9.1 the planning board classifies as a proposed action as a type two action under Section 67.5 C9 of the State Environmental Quality review regulations and therefore is not subject to further review second I have a motion second second all in favor I D that so we sign approval somebody make a sign motion for that we'll reach out to you when the permit's ready to be picked up okay great sounds good I appreciate it sounds good I'll make a motion for uh there wrong place for Randy D Nali uh for a sign for the installation of two building mounting facade signs one being 275 Square ft and the other being 173 Square ft and tenant panels on existing Monument signs to reflect the name change from ES sport uh Fitness to LA Fitness uh uh at um 929 Hol Road second have a motion have a second all in favor all right have a good

night uh I'd like to make a motion for approval of the July 2nd 20 24 planning board minutes second have a second all in favor hi hi okay we're good with that all right I guess with that we're all set thanks for coming in