MINUTES
OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE TOWN OF ELLICOTT PLANNING BOARD HELD AT THE ADMINISTRATION
BUILDING, 215 SOUTH WORK STREET, FALCONER, NY 14733 ON DECEMBER 13 AT 7:00 P.M.
PRESENT: Chairman Dan Evans, Gary
Swanson, Dave Carlberg, Phyllis Belin, Paul Shanahan,
Robert Thomas, Attorney William Wright, Code Enforcement Office Randy
Woodbury
ABSENT: Ron Calanni
Chairman Evans opened the meeting at 7:02 PM.
Last months minutes were approved in motion by David
Carlberg and seconded by Gary Swanson.
Chairman Evans opened the meeting for continuance
for request from the Town Board for recommendation to modify the shopping
center district on Fairmount Ave.
Richard Wolney, part of the group that is presenting this
change of the application. He states
that they have listened to the community and the concerns and comments from the
people in the Town. The first plan had
the three out lots, and two large retail stores with small shops in
between. There were traffic concerns,
lighting concerns and noise concerns and a big concern about the quality of the
stream
and what was going to happen and how it was going to
be relocated. This plan today has been
significantly changed. It changes in
impact and responds to everything that was stated by both the Board and members
of the community. By eliminating the
88,000 sq. ft. store we have completely eliminated the impact to the
stream. Also, any impact to Elmwood
Ave. has been removed. What is in place
now, to handle the impervious surface of the present shopping center is
inadequate, antiquated, old and not up to date with today’s standards. With the new plans, we will actually improve
the down stream quality. We will be
able to dramatically be able to change the flow, the quantity at any given
time. Now, that flow is
uncontrolled.
The STEL facility will stay where it is. We eliminate the restaurant and some other
facilities. The old furniture building
is functionally obsolete.
Potentially, eighty new jobs will be created, with
an income of about 2 ½ million dollars.
That is not including the part time jobs. There will be a very large sales tax number and property tax
revenue generated by this project.
The Fairmount Ave. end of Avalon Blvd. toward the
project is zoned commercial. We tried
to minimize building near these people.
We maintained the green space to shield them also. We tried to address their concerns and at
the same time, bring this development to the community.
Earl Inwood, 121 Avalon Blvd: My concern is that every
home from my house up is on well water.
If they dig into our aquifer it might be damaged and we will be out of
water. Right now we have a terrible
traffic problem. There is a Lowe’s in
Warren, 15 miles from here and we have a Home Depot, so we don’t need another
Lowe’s here.
Gene Ingersoll, Avalon Blvd.: I’m disturbed about the
changes in zoning. They selected the
lot their house is on to build because it was in a residential area. Ever since Fairmount Ave. was rebuilt, there
has been pressure to invade the residential area by out of town investors. Spot zoning should not be allowed.
Bud Larson, 64 Avalon Blvd: He would like the Planning Board to look up the report on the
expansion of the plaza eight years ago.
That board said no.
Sharon Turett, 55 Avalon Blvd: She didn’t feel she had a 100 ft. buffer. She feels it is too close and
unacceptable.
Marge Whittman, Lakewood NY: If the project is built, she doesn’t want her children playing
back there when visiting her parent’s home.
Mr. Al Lisciandro, 32 Avalon Blvd: The traffic increases on a monthly basis on Hunt Rd.; he feels
this project will cause increased traffic.
He begs the Planning Board and Town Board to reject this project.
Richard Wolney:
There have been several comments made regarding Hunt Rd., that haven’t
come up before. Before anything gets
passed, part of the process, besides noise and light, is traffic. Hunt Rd. is clearly going to be part of a
study to be analyzed. It is part of the
due process. I know that you want this
property to stay the way it is. This
project may not get approved. But this
may not be the last project. Something
else could come in here and be much more intense. If you want the property to stay the way it is, you need to pay
the owner his money.
Cindy Orlando, Willard St. Ext.: She doesn’t feel any one is against expansion within what it is
now, but expanding the zoning to accommodate development is what they are
against.
Coleen Orlando, 48 Elmwood Ave.: There have been other
developers showing interest on property on Route 60 where the zoning is
appropriate. She read an e-mail from
Pioneer development regarding this development. She wants the development to go on Route 60.
Bruce Anderson, 93 Avalon Blvd.: He wishes people would stop and think and get away from the
emotions. We have a quality developer,
with an established reputation that wants to replace a deteriorating
establishment, with adequate plans, and they are bending over backwards to
accommodate the neighborhood. There is
adequate green space. Some one else is
paying the taxes on the forest that you don’t want to change. The reality is that things do change. If this project doesn’t go through, you must
realize that this is already zoned (70-80%) commercial. You have a project that has the potential to
yield tremendous benefits in sales tax revenue and property tax revenue for all
the citizens of the Town of Ellicott, not just those in the immediate
vicinity. You are all emotional. Stop and think, is this really going to ruin
your house, are you going to have to pick up and move because you lost a little
stretch of woodland?
Jim Carlson, owners of property on N. Main St: He wants to know why the developer would want to downsize to one
store, when they could have two stores on North Main St. Why would they want to go where they have to
demolish when they could go to open land?
Vickie Laurie, Columbia Ave.: The green space around Sam’s Club has totally wrecked the
neighborhood.
Sheila Webster, 45 Elmwood Ave.: This isn’t an emotional issue for people as much as a financial
issue. Traffic is a concern that needs
to be addressed. She wants to know who
would manage the water flow.
Atty. Wright: Explained
the process of rezoning an area, at the request of Sheila Webster.
Mr. Inwood: I’m not
emotional, but once Mr. Anderson sells his property, they will be gone. They won’t have to look at the project, or
see the lights, or listen to the trucks.
Toni Campbell, 27 Avalon Blvd.: Instead of sitting on our
deck watching wild life, we will listen the trucks and traffic and watch our
property value decline. Please
carefully consider what will happen to these WE neighbors.
Rich Digirolamo, 86 Glidden Ave.: Questioned if there is going to be a comprehensive study. Mr. Evans told him the process for such a
study has begun and Celoron and Falconer will be included in this study. He wants the study to be done before
rezoning. He is concerned that once the
developer gets the land he will eventually put up additional buildings.
Mr. Wolney: The application
for rezoning is very specific. The
residential area stays residential.
There is no intent to do anything but what we represented last time. We are seeking to rezone the same expansion
for mercantile as in the first application.
The project has gotten smaller, but the request for rezoning remains the
same. The Board could suggest that it
be smaller.
Mr. Anderson: I live on
Avalon Blvd. and will continue to live on Avalon Blvd. He wants to know what is going to happen to
the space between my house and the plaza?
Mr. Wolney: Those are
issues that come up during the Site Plan approval process.
Unidentified speaker, Westbury Ct.: He requests the project be downsized to fit in the existing
properly zoned area.
Vickie Bardo, 49 Elmwood Ave.: I’m concerned that
something encroaching on our neighborhood of this magnitude would affect her
ability to make any financial gain on this property. She is putting her house on the market. Don’t abandon us.
Unidentified, Woodworth Ave.: What happened to the master plan suggested when Fran Morgan was
Supervisor?
Mr. Evans: That
recommendation never came down to this board.
There was talk of having one, but it was never followed through and
given to this board.
Sharon Truver, 55 Avalon Blvd: What direction are the trucks coming from to get to the proposed
project?
Mr. Evans: That isn’t
known at this point because it isn’t an approved project. It will come up during Site Plan.
Unidentified speaker: What will happen to Avalon Blvd. and Elmwood if the big trucks
traverse them? We went through this
eight years ago, how many times are we going to do this before they get the
message that we don’t want any big store?
Mr. Wolney: In regards
to taking the buffer or green space and conveying it to the Town in a
Conservancy and a life long agreement and making a park out of it. Now that the
plans have been changed, it is still in the plan and there is additional land
because the 88,000 sq. ft. building has been taken out. A Conservancy Easement
is a very legal, technically negotiated document between the giver and the
receiver. I can’t do that at this
point. We are prepared to do it and to resolve some of the issues in regard to
what we are going to do with the rest of the land. Until I get to a certain point in the process, all I can tell you
is that is our intent. We are still
asking for the rezoning, however, we are asking for it with the stipulation,
that if it is granted, we are willing to do the Conservancy. The engineers would literally have to create
a legal description of this. It has to
be recorded as a binding legal document between the giver and the
receiver. The Town will dictate as to
who is going to take care of it. We
offered this as a way to alleviate some of the concerns as to what is going to
happen. I have absolute faith that we,
and the Town of Ellicott, will grant the Conservancy Easement down the
road.
We are looking at eight acres to be rezoned. We can’t request a change to what we
want. But, the Board can make a
recommendation to the Town Board that the rezoning only encompass the land
necessary for the development.
There is a significant flow of ground water. We are not tapping into anyone’s
aquifer. We were told to avoid the
stream at all costs.
Unidentified speaker: Made a comment on how bad the retention pond looks up by
Wegman’s. He called it a mosquito
hatching plant.
Mrs. Truver: We are having a problem with West Nile. She feels
that the retention ponds are unsightly, unattended, and a West Nile
hazard. They are not filtered. They are stagnant.
Mr. Evans closed this part of the session to public
comment regarding this rezoning issue at 8:25 PM
Chairman Evans opened the meeting for Public Hearing
for the CAT Scale Company, which was tabled due to the fact no one appeared to
represent the applicant.
Chairman Evans opened the meeting for Public Hearing
for Chautauqua Watershed Conservancy for Site Plan Review for driveway entrance
and parking lot.
Rex Tolman: We are
filling what is now partially a ditch.
There is unsupervised storage on it, piles of gravel and junk all
over. That will all go away. Any run off will be collected in a water
garden (a large depression with lots of plants). The extreme south part of the
parking lot is where they would treat water that runs off the parking
area. They will be filling about 5 feet
of the ditch. There is a catch basin. We are extending the parking lot about 8-10
feet and will extend the pipe. We are putting
up an informational kiosk, a double covered bench with two four by eight areas
for information. One on each side. We are also putting two signs out along the
outlet. No lighting. The property is open from sunrise to
sunset. There is no gate, but you can
see from the road if anyone is parked there.
There were no public comments. Site Plan checklist reviewed. #9 requirement for bituminous surface was
waived. #26 Aerial map regulation
waived.
Motion by Paul Shanahan and seconded by David Carlberg
to accept short form SEQR.
Carried. Ayes-6 Noes- Absent-1
Motion by Phyllis Belin and seconded by David
Carlberg to accept Site Plan.
Chairman Evans opened the meeting for a Sketch Plan for
Jeff Boardman for vehicles to be placed on lot for sale, which was tabled due
to the fact that the applicant did not appear.
Chairman
Evans opened the meeting for a rezoning request on Howard Ave. The issue will be addressed at the same time
as Fairmount Ave. rezoning.
Chairman
Evans opened the meeting for Starbucks requesting modification to their
previously approved Site Plan.
Kevin Patrue: The overall
development will not be changed. The
building position and number of cars parking is unchanged. The drive-thru flow hasn’t changed, lot
lighting hasn’t changed and landscaping hasn’t changed.
Jeff Skorka of RJR Engineering: Requested changes to the south side of the retaining wall and the
slope of the driveway to solve some construction issues. Also requested was modification to the fence
on the top of the wall. The amount of
runoff leaving the site should not be changed.
We will gain a little bit more snow storage. They are requesting a one-foot change, but the finished floor is
still 2 feet above the roadway. The
engineers are making these recommendations, not the contractor.
Atty. Wright: Requested
that the Engineers put in writing to the Board certification that the changes in
the parking lot/driveway slopes will not have any adverse impact on your
drainage plan no change or impact on traffic patterns, building size or
design.
The applicant was referred to the Zoning Board of
Appeals to see if the changes warrant their reappearance before that Board.
Discussion by the Board regarding rezoning of the Fairmount
Avenue Plaza area.
Engineer: The intent
of the drainage basin is to pick up all the drainage from the building, roof
drainage as well as drainage from the hillside. It would be discharged in a controlled manor.
Paul Shanahan:
Recommends denying application and advises the developer to change
boundaries.
Gary Swanson: Our job is
to represent the Town and the people in it.
I have never seen so much opposition to one project and I do not feel
comfortable approving something with so much opposition. This rezoning should be part of a total
Comprehensive Plan. I suggest denying the application and referring it to the
Zoning Commission for consideration as part of Comprehensive Plan.
David Carlberg and Phyllis Belin: Agree with Gary Swanson’s statement.
Motion by Robert Thomas and seconded by Paul Shanahan that
Dan Evans and Atty. Wright will draft a letter to the Town Board. It should be
noted in the letter that it is acknowledged that the applicant has made
significant positive changes in the plan.
Those changes have not been changes in the original boundaries proposed.
The applicant should be requested to revise the plan
to reflect the minimum rezoning that is necessary to accomplish the purpose of
the applicant, stating a preference that the applicant present a plan that fits
within the existing shopping center zone.
The Board does not recommend that the Town Board
rezone any property in the Town pending the revision of the Town’s
Comprehensive Master Plan, or a detailed recommendation of the Town’s
established Zoning Commission.
It is the belief of the Planning Board that the
rezoning of property on an applicant specific basis is a Type 1 action under the
NYS Environmental Review Act and if it does decide to take any action, such
action should be taken after the applicant has complied with the SEQR
regulations and the Planning Board would be willing to act as the lead agency
for SEQR purposes for this project.
Carried. Ayes-6 Noes-0 Absent-1
Motion made by Dave Carlberg, seconded by Phyllis Belin
that since the applicant has abandoned their application and no information has
been presented on which to base a recommendation to rezone Howard Ave.,
there is no basis to consider rezoning.
Motion to adjourn by Dave
Carlberg and seconded by Phyllis Belin.