Full Transcript

Thank you. [transcription gap] And after that, if you would remain standing and bow your head for a moment of silence for the 80th anniversary of D-Day. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Thank you. Thank you.

We have one public hearing tonight, and I guess we have Zoom set up, Heather? Yeah, are we good, Matt? We're good. Okay, great. Public hearing is with Heather Trojanowski for Vincent Franconini, a minor subdivision. Good evening. Yes.

Okay. [transcription gap] Okay. THE CERTIFIED MAILINGS AND THE GREEN CARD RETURN RECEIPTS AND THE APPODIVE OF POSTING AND MAILING. THIS IS FOR A MINOR SUBDIVISION. VINCENT FRANKENI IS TWO LOCK MINOR SUBDIVISION SEEKING APPROVAL TO SUBDIVIDE AN EXISTING 57,150 SQUARE FOOT IMPROVED PARCEL IN TWO LOCKS. PROPOSED LOCK ONE WOULD CONTAIN 23,720 SQUARE FEET AND IT WOULD EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING. PROPOSED LOT TWO WOULD BE 33,433 SQUARE FEET AND WOULD BE A VACANT LOT. BOTH PARCELS WOULD MAINTAIN ACCESS OFF OF SOUTH JAMES PORT AVENUE VIA A SHARED DRIVEWAY. AND JUST TO GIVE A BRIEF HISTORY, THE PLANNING BOARD BY RESOLUTION NUMBER 2023-101 CLASSIFIED THE ACTION AS UNLISTED AND ISSUED A NEGATIVE DECLARATION PURSUANT TO SECRA. THE APPLICANT DID REQUIRE RELIEF FROM THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS WHICH WAS SUBSEQUENTLY GRANTED BY APPEAL NUMBER 2024-001 AND THERE WERE NUMEROUS CONDITIONS ASSOCIATED WITH THIS. I THINK IT WAS EIGHT TOTAL. I'M NOT GOING TO RUN THROUGH ALL OF THEM NOW BUT I CAN IF THE BOARD WANTS ME TO. AND THE SUBJECT PARCEL IS AT 196 SOUTH JAMES PORT AVENUE IN JAMES PORT MORE IDENTIFIED AS SUFFOLK COUNTY TAX NOTE NUMBER 600-91-2-2.2. I'M JUST GOING TO GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT OF INFORMATION. I'M GOING TO HAND IT OFF TO THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE, MR. TOM LERNER, IF THE BOARD HAS ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU, HEATHER. SO YOU WOULD COME TO THE BOARD AND STATE YOUR NAME. MY NAME IS THOMAS LERNER AND I'M REPRESENTING THE FRANKINIS. SIR, COULD WE GET YOUR ADDRESS PLEASE? THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING. WE NEED A FLEET RECORD. 4 CHAPEL AVENUE, BROOKHAVEN, NEW YORK 11719. THANK YOU, SIR. SIR, I HAVE ONE QUESTION TO YOU. IF YOU HAVE A DRIVEWAY FOR BOTH LOTS COMING OFF OF SOUTH JAMESFORD AVENUE, WHAT IS THE WIDTH AND WHAT IS THE CONDITION THAT IT HAS TO BE IN? IS IT JUST DIRT? IS IT GRAVEL? WELL, RIGHT NOW YOU HAVE A DRIVEWAY TO THE EXISTING HOUSE. WHAT IS PROPOSED IS TO MAKE IT ESSENTIALLY A FLAG LOT EXTENDING THAT DRIVEWAY, ONE COMMON DRIVEWAY FOR THE TWO LOTS. AND WHAT'S THE WIDTH OF THAT? IS THERE A SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE DRIVEWAY AND THE FLAG LOTS? IS THERE ANYTHING SPECIFIC WITH HEATHER THAT THEY HAVE TO COMPLY WITH FOR ANY EMERGENCY VEHICLES OR ANYTHING? ONE SECOND. I'M JUST GOING TO GRAB THE REST OF THE FILE. SURE. LET'S SEE. SO BECAUSE IT'S A PRIVATE DRIVEWAY, IT DOESN'T EXCEED THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE LENGTH. I THINK IT'S CHAPTER 5 OF THE FIRE CODE. THIS WAS REFERRED TO THE FIRE MARSHAL'S OFFICE. SO IT'S THE MINIMUM OF THE WIDTH OF THE... I THINK IT'S 13. 15 FEET. 15 AND THEN 13.6 FREE AND CLEAR SO THEY CAN'T HAVE TREES OVERHANGING IT. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. SO THE DRIVEWAYS ARE GOING TO BE NORTH AND SOUTH OF BAYBURY LANE, IS THAT CORRECT? WHY IS THERE... ARE YOU LOOKING AT THE SOUNDSHORE ROADMAP OR ARE YOU LOOKING AT THE 196 SOUTH JAMESFORD AMBUMAT? THE ONE IN SOUTH JAMESFORD. OH. YEAH. SO THE PROPOSED DRIVEWAY, AND I APOLOGIZE, THIS IS A MARKET DRIVEWAY. THE PROPOSED 15-FOOT DRIVEWAY THAT WOULD EXTEND OVER LOT TWO IS ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE EXISTING LOT. AND WILL THERE BE TOWN WATER? YES, THERE IS TOWN WATER. SO YOU WILL EXTEND IT FROM THE EXISTING HOUSE TO THE NEXT HOUSE? YES. YES. YEAH, OBVIOUSLY THEY WOULD NEED WATER DISTRICT APPROVAL. WE HAVE A PROPOSED 15-FOOT DRIVEWAY THAT WOULD EXTEND OVER THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE EXISTING LOT. OKAY. SO THE PROPOSED 15-FOOT DRIVEWAY, THAT WOULD EXTEND OVER THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE EXISTING LOT. SO YOU WOULD EXTEND IT FROM THE EXISTING HOUSE TO THE NEXT HOUSE. OKAY. SO I THINK THAT'S IT FOR THE ZONING BOARD APPROVAL. I THINK THAT'S IT FOR THE ZONING BOARD APPROVAL. I THINK THAT'S IT FOR THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT APPROVAL. I'M NOT SURE IF AN APPLICATION HAS BEEN MADE YET TO THE SUFFOLK COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT. I DID REFER IT AND IN NOVEMBER I RECEIVED CORRESPONDENTS SAYING THAT THEY HAD NOT YET RECEIVED AN APPLICATION. BUT I THINK THEIR REVIEW OF APPLICATIONS IS TYPICALLY

EXTENDED. SO IT TOOK A LITTLE BIT OF TIME TO GET THE VARIANTS AS REQUIRED. AND AGAIN, THERE WERE EIGHT CONDITIONS THAT WERE IMPOSED BY THE ZONING BOARD THAT HAVE TO BE MET. AND THEY ALSO SAID THAT IT'S THE APPLICATION IS SUBJECT TO PLANNING BOARD AND SUFFOLK COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES APPROVAL. SO. HI. DOUG ADAMS, PROJECT ENGINEER, 400 OSTRANDER AVENUE. JUST A POINT OF CLARIFICATION. SOMEBODY SAID, I THINK, KEN MENTIONED THAT ARE WE EXTENDING WATER FROM THE EXISTING HOUSE. IT'S GOING TO HAVE ITS OWN WATER SERVICE FROM SOUTH GENESPORT AVENUE UP THE RIGHT-OF-WAY. SO IT'S TWO SEPARATE, YEAH, THE TWO SEPARATE LOTS, TWO SEPARATE WATER METERS, IF YOU WILL. OKAY. NOW, THE QUICK QUESTION. THE WIDTH OF THE DRIVEWAY, IF IT'S 15 FEET, IS THERE A MINIMUM OF WATER THAT'S GOING TO BE SEPARATED FROM THE OTHER DRIVEWAYS? I THINK THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION. [transcription gap] your front step close to the drive there. I don't know if there's anything in building or fire code that would preclude someone from having their front step close to their driveway. Because the driveway is access for lot one. So there are plenty of homes throughout the town that have driveways that are proximate to their front doors. Right, but you're creating a new neighbor now. I don't know. I would hope that the neighbors, should this be approved and a house built, that they would be mindful that their driveway is close to the existing house and they wouldn't be speeding down there. But that's something that. I just noticed that the steps are on the south side of the house where the driveway is going to be constructed.

Doug Adams again. Just for further history, so we originally started with the driveway on the north side of the house, which would not put it near the driveway, but it would require. Getting a more deeper variance for the for the setback to the right of way would only been a couple of feet. So this seemed like there was just more room to get the to get access to the back lot. I don't believe there's a requirement for how far it has to be off. Just has to be out of the right of way. You could always put trees or privet areas. Yeah.

Board members, any other thoughts or questions this time? Anybody from the public like to comment? Do we have any zoomers met? Nobody with their hands up. Want to close it? I would not close the public hearing for Vincent Franken. My minus subdivision. So moved second. Moved and second. May we have a vote, please? This is on Nikki. Yes, Mr. Hogan. Yes, Mr. Nero. Hi and I vote. Yes. Motion carries.

All right, moving on to discussion items. Susan McCarthy minus subdivision with the Trojan asking. Do we have anyone for the application here for Susan McCarthy? I'm here. If you need. You want to? Okay. If they have any questions.

Yes. Okay. This is a.

Okay. Okay. You're all good. Thank you. [transcription gap] Thank you, Chair. Okay. And let's see, we have Doug Adams here for the applicant. The Planning Department has received a minor subdivision application seeking to subdivide an existing 21,083-square-foot lot into two separate parcels. It's located at 934 Soundshore Road in Jamesport. The tax net number is 600-8-1-35. And proposed lot one would be 12,271 square feet, and it would be improved with the existing single-family dwelling and the decks that are there. Lot two would be 8,816 square feet, and that would be a vacant lot. Currently, the existing house is served by Bayberry Lane, which is a private right-of-way. It actually comes off of Pierre Avenue. And the new lot would have street frontage on both sides. So, the subject parcel is located within the RA40 zoning use district. As you could see from my staff report, the majority of the area is developed similarly with single-family dwellings and lots similar in size to the proposed subdivision. I will note that the properties to the west of the subject parcel were created as a result of a minor subdivision known as John Warner, which was approved by the Planning Board December 16th. So, the two lot sizes proposed in this current subdivision application is very similar to what was granted back then. They will require relief from the Zoning Board of Appeals. And I just wanted to note, at the end of my staff report, I required map revisions prior to the issuance of a denial letter. Those have actually all been addressed. I just received new copies of the map, so Jefferson-Murphy had been originally reviewing this and I guess had let the design professionals know the revisions that needed to be made. So, I do have updated maps available for the board members that address all of those concerns. All the concerns on the back page? Yes. Yes. So, the existing fire hydrants are now shown. The see-how line is shown. There's a table of dimensional regulations, so we can pull right from that to get the denial letter issued to get them over to the zoning board. There's a note saying that the existing shed that is... Currently serving lot one is going to be removed because in the creation of a new lot, you can't have an accessory structure without a principal structure. So, the owners choose to remove it in conjunction with the subdivision application. The water mains are all shown. And then, as far as the existing large trees, that can be addressed at the building permit stage, you know, should the subdivision be granted. Okay. [transcription gap] the building department that they have the surveyors flag any large mature trees to see if they can be retained and not have the lot clear cut during construction. But at this juncture, it's not necessarily, it doesn't need to be done as part of the subdivision because they're not proposing to build anything right now. Is the water on Bayberry or on Soundshore? There's water on both, I think, but I'm assuming, you know, I can't speak for, you know, the design. I don't know if it would be easier to take water off of Bayberry. I did refer it to the water district. So ultimately, you know, they'll decide which way is going to be more efficient. They'll probably take water off Soundshore. Yeah. And I did refer it to highway as well. The highway superintendent said that should, you know, access be taken off of Soundshore Road, any, you know, curb cuts or work within the right of way will require a permit from the Town and Riverhead Highway Department. I did refer the application and subdivision map to the DEC just to determine if they, if it was within title wetland jurisdiction because of the proximity to the sound. But they're not proposing any work with around the Seaha line. So no 219 application is going to be necessary. I did refer to the Town and Riverhead Fire Marshal and the James Fort Fire District. I received comments back from the office of the fire marshal and they reiterated the fact that we needed to see where the hydrants are. Again, those have been identified. On the revised map. So I will re-refer to the fire marshal's office just to ensure that their comments are satisfied. We received a title report with the application and that details the right of way for Bayberry Lane. So that's been existence for a very long time and it serves a majority of the lots that are on the sound side. I referred over to the Suffolk County Department of Health Services because they, you know, the subdivision will require approval from them as well as the Suffolk County Planning Commission and I did refer to our consulting engineer Vinnie Gordiello. I haven't received anything back from him yet, but when I do, I will forward it to the board and the applicant. So at this juncture, I have prepared a resolution to classify as unlisted pursuant to SECRA and issue a negative declaration so that the applicant can proceed with the Zoning Board of Appeals. Should they be granted the relief requested, we can then come back and schedule a public hearing. Any questions? No. Everybody good? You said you were going to have the access to the property that was going to come in off Soundshore Road? No, I said the water service would probably come off Soundshore Road. The lot fronts both right of way and the road, unless you wish to. So they would have the option as to wherever you want to put it? They just have to get a permit if it's going off Soundshore Road. Yeah, because it's a riveted highway. Okay. And we're kind of teetering on the subject of the Zoning Board of Appeals. I think that's a good point. [transcription gap] I just didn't get what she said. I didn't get what she said. [transcription gap] sizes impervious surface coverage for a lot one just because there's existing development there and then also a lot with so now that we have the revised maps with all of the dimensional regulations on there we can not going to change the character of the area it's pretty much correct yeah I mean as you can see from the aerials and even the map itself yeah yeah Heather is there a limited size of a house that you can put on that type of small of a lot and re40 I believe it's 1200 square feet don't quote me on this minimum that would be the minimum no no I it's so it's 1200 I think in the one acre zoning is in 1500 in the two acres on hands but I would just want to double-check town code so realistically if they were you know if they need to come back to build a house on lot two if they don't meet the minimums that are currently required by code they would have to go back to zoning board as well as for any setback relief if they can't meet the setbacks or re40 but at this point we're just looking at the subdivision itself okay everybody good okay thank you discussion item number two TJ max facade renovations once again would Heather busy tonight my name is Mike Baker I've worked with TJX construction project manager my name is Anthony Zara I'm with the construction company doing the renovation

so this is a fairly straightforward application If you're all familiar, the former Christmas tree shop located in the shopping center at 1751 to 1791 Old Country Road, Suffolk County Taxment Number 600-119-1-23.3. TJ Maxx is looking to come in for facade renovations. They're going to occupy the currently vacant storefront that was formerly Christmas tree shops. They are basically just doing new signage, removing some of the decorative items that are on the facade and then they wanted to paint to match TJ Maxx's colors. So as far as SECRA is concerned, this is a type two action with no further environmental be required. I will say this already was seen by the ARB at their meeting on May 22nd of this year, And they said, well, we're going to have to do this. [transcription gap] And they did request that the applicant come back with revisions. I know that they're currently working with Matt and the ARB to come up with a new color design. But as... Do you know what the denials were? There was too much red. So the ARB just wanted to see it toned down. I mean, the sign obviously is going to be subject to sign permits through the building department and understanding that that's TJ Maxx's color. But where TJ Maxx is currently located in Roanoke, I think it's in the middle of the plaza down the road. I don't think there's as much red on that building. I think they actually have black accents. Blue. Blue accents. Okay. So I think the ARB just wants to see something a little bit more muted and just not as much red. Why are they taking down the decorative rail up top? I guess I felt that that was more of the Christmas tree shop branding identity. As well as the other... I mean, I think that's... I think that's... [transcription gap] Yeah, that's where the carts are. So you're probably not going to really see it. Right, exactly. So this red would not exist here. But as far as the canopy, all the trim work, underneath the sign and over in the tower, whatever is blue, that's what we were painting. We weren't expanding beyond that scope. Yes, the ARB did not approve at their last meeting. And again, they are working to come up with a revised plan that the ARB will be satisfied with. I bet if they see it without that, it would help. So I have a resolution on today to approve this administratively with the planning board subject to ARB approval and any revisions that they require. So obviously, once that gets hashed out, I can forward you all the final elevations. But from a planning standpoint, I mean, they're occupying a vacant storefront, which is good. I'm not sure what's going to happen. I'm not sure what's going to happen with the other TJ Maxx store. But hopefully, they'll get somebody in there. I'm sure if you tone down that bottom part of it, that'll be fine. Yeah. You know, because after all, the target, it's red as well. I don't see a problem with the top part of it at all. Board of any questions? This one wasn't that big of a deal. I know it was. Thank you. We'll pick it up in a little bit. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Moving right along. Home Depot Outdoor Storage with Heather Trojanowski.

And if you could just state your name, please. Doran Ballin with Kimley Horn.

Okay. Okay. So this is... The planning department has received... And reviewed a site plan application proposing to legalize areas used for outdoor storage of equipment rentals and display areas within the existing Home Depot parking lot. They'll be formalizing and restriping those designated areas, and they will be updating site lighting. The project site is located at the Riverhead Center Shopping Center, 1550 Old Country Road within the DRC Zoning Use District, more particularly identified as Suffolk County Tax Map Number 600-1. Okay. [transcription gap] Okay. Okay. that they have their rental equipment in the parking lot, taking up designated customer parking. I will note that on the site plan, the reduction of stalls, I believe it's 91 total, the site will still be in compliance with the parking requirements because the shopping center as a whole is over parked. So I don't think reserving those areas for the outdoor storage will be an issue as far as parking is concerned. I did, for landscaping and screening, I am asking that they provide some additional screening along the Mill Roadside. They have their street trees there, but a lot of it's grass, especially going up to where that existing Home Depot sign is at the northerly entrance. So we're working to come up with a good plan. I gave them a list of suggested plantings. Also, a lot of the originally approved landscaping, and some of the landscaped islands, and even along the entrance at County Road 58 has either died or been removed. Upon looking at the original site plan, some of the species that were selected weren't necessarily appropriate. I think they had golden rain trees, which are technically invasive. They're not prohibited currently, but they are on the invasive list with the state. So instead of them replanting those, I gave a couple of different smaller size trees, like serviceberry or cornus florida, which is a flowering dogwood, just to take the place of the trees that died. The bigger issue is the site lighting. So this site plan was approved, I think just before we enacted the Dark Skies Code. And the application is proposing to bring all of the fixtures themselves, as far as the color temperature and the lighting, into compliance with the Dark Skies Code. You're talking about site-wide compliance? I think at this point they're proposing just the Home Depot parking lot. Just like in the lease area of Home Depot? Yeah, but I mean the property owner should be bringing the entire site into compliance. Yeah, it's 2017, it was sunsetted. Correct, yeah, I actually cited that section of code under the exterior lighting section of my staff report. So the code was adopted in 2002, and thereafter, it was amended in 2008. Commercial sites that had pre-existing non-conforming fixtures, both in illumination and height, were supposed to have brought the entire site up into compliance no later than December 31st of 2017. And they didn't have to do it all at once. There was a mechanism to do 10% of the parking lot areas per year. So as of now, in 2024, the entire Riverhead Shopping Center, including the Home Depot area, is not in compliance with Dark Skies. So the applicant does have the ability to appeal to the zoning board pursuant to chapter 301.236c within 36 days, oh sorry, 30 days of the decision. So they do have that option. I recommend that they- You're talking about just for the height? Yes, because they are bringing the actual fixtures in the Home Depot portion of the lot. Yeah. And they're bringing the entire site up into compliance. I will note that, as you recall, East End Commons, when they came in for Department of Social Services, they were just doing facade work, and they actually ended up updating the entire site. They did the entire site to have the lighting comply with every aspect of the Dark Skies code. So I understand that it's a big undertaking, especially for a property that's large. But I recommend that they try to get into compliance as soon as possible, considering the amount of time that's passed since that, you know, the code was adopted. And I believe we required it when they did the changes at Aldi. They had to do the entire lot. Yeah, and Target is up to date now, too, that shopping center. So, you know, if the applicant chooses, we can issue a deny letter, and they can go to the zoning board. There is no guarantee with that, but again, the code allows, it affords them the ability to do that. Yeah. So as much as I would like to see the entire site updated, it's really, it would be up to the zoning board whether or not those mounting heights would be permitted. Yeah. If the fixture heads are replaced and compliant, I really wouldn't have a serious problem. I hate to see applicants spending money that something that's already there. But definitely the heads, you know, at least in the home, home people area, have to be compliant, in my opinion. Yeah, and they are proposing to do that under the guise of this application. Is there any potential to maybe split the two applications so that the outdoor storage and the landscaping can be permitted, and then a separate application go in for the lighting? Just so that it doesn't hold up the storage and the landscaping improvements? I mean, that's up to the board, and again, if they. Well, then you're going to require another site plan? It's not going to make sense. Why can't we just put a time restraint on it? Yeah, I mean, I. So we can go in on the things. I leave that up to the board and to council, again, there they can go and apply to the zoning board. I can have a denial letter issued and we can see what the ZBA says about the pole mounting heights. And once we get a definitive answer from them, then we can make a decision. But I just wanted to bring it to your attention. I don't think there's any way to split the application, is there? I wouldn't split them. Yeah. All right. Which one to make you happy? How do you how do you want us to proceed? I think ideally I'd like to go back and talk to the council. But first, before we go to the aisle and then maybe get back to you. Okay. That's perfectly fine. Yeah. So I mean, there's one other issue that we'd like to discuss, and that's the potholes and the maintenance and the facility of there. They're paying tonight. Oh, were they really? Yeah. Okay. Just double check on that. Make sure it's. Yeah. I mean, other aspects of this application. I refer to the fire marshal's office and these are things that need to be worked out because the storage up against the building is considered high hazard. So he's requiring a sprinkler system, either that or they would have to remove it in its entirety. My only concern is that if they say they're going to remove it and we give them the green light, that it's just going to get put back there. There have been fires at Home Depot. One in particular dealt with the, I think, the outdoor display furniture that they had, and it actually went up to the facade. That was a couple of years ago. So again, safety is a big concern. We don't want fire zones to be blocked. I have no problem with designated storage areas because then we can look back, and if they exceed what was permitted, we can say, oh, no, your storage area was supposed to be right here, and that's what you're limited to. But I just want to make sure that the fire marshal is good with all aspects of it, especially with the proximity to the building, the entrances, and the fire zones. And the other thing I wanted to bring up was cross-access. So I don't know if you recall when Hobby Lobby came in, town code requires that adjoining commercial properties have cross-access agreements just to keep, you know, if somebody wants to go from one shopping center to another, it's better for them to do it site to site rather than going back onto the main road. And if you're eastbound, you can't make a left on Hobby Lobby. Correct, yeah. So Hobby Lobby did, they did file a future cross-access easement on the southwestern corner of their property, and in the pictures, you can see that it's already sort of built out on their side. At the time, the owners of the Riverhead Center refused to do a reciprocal cross-access. At this juncture, they're coming in for a site plan, and it's for the entire, the entire parcel is all connected. They're not parcelized. So I think that at this point, we need to file a reciprocal cross-access and build that out. Even if they lose, I think there are three parking stalls there, on the east side of Best Buy, they're still going to be in compliance with their parking. I just think it would, from a safety standpoint, again, I think it would be better, rather than having traffic go back onto 58. Makes perfect sense. Yeah. I've had people ask me about that. How come that's not, can't you do anything about that? Yeah, so at this point, I will let, you know, you can talk to the owner of the property and the applicant and see how you want to proceed. Should they want to move forward with zoning board, planning, we'll issue a denial letter, and we'll see how that plays out. I just wanted to introduce you to the board. I'd really like to see that landscaping picked up pretty good over there, not just a bush here and there. Yeah. I want it to look good. And you said that they don't have to be fully mature trees? No, no. I think three to three and a half inch caliper size is fine. I mean, it's understandable that we're not looking to have you plant six inch caliper size trees or like 20 foot trees. Those are difficult to procure. They're expensive. But again, you know, when those trees are replaced, it's important to just make sure that the landscaping is properly maintained. That's why in the email I sent you, I suggest a lot of native plantings just because once they're established, they're less dependent on water. They're salt tolerant. Again, I can't speak as to, you know, the landscaping plan that was originally approved, but a lot of the plantings in there could be swapped out for alternatives. If I just might add that if they are going to do any kind of planting, something that's not going to grow where it becomes a problem with people's vision who are driving small cars where they're not going to be able to see, especially like our corners and they may drive out. Yeah, we wouldn't want to impede, you know, visual intersections, especially on that northerly entrance on Mill Road, just because there's no traffic light there. So I was thinking having the screening, hugging the parking lot again, that's really just to make it look aesthetically pleasing rather than seeing rental equipment from the side of the road. Yeah. So we'll go on the backside of the curb here rather than continuing the tree line. Yeah, I would say I wouldn't put it right on Mill Road. I would do it back here. Again, there's nice plantings in this corner just south of that. I think if you were to sort of continue that theme, it would look good. Got it. How many areas within the parking lot are you going to have separate areas? Yeah, there's three areas within the parking lot. One for the plant corrals and then two for rental equipment and the truck rental equipment. Okay. And then the other one? Two for the rentals. That'll be to the west for the rentals, right? Two against the west side for the rentals and then the plant corral on the east side. It's basically how it's currently set up. They're really just coming in to formalize this. Well, it's kind of all over. And, you know, if you look at the photo taken in May, you know, there's so many carts in there full of flowers. I mean, that's haphazard. You know, that's way down. That's way down. I mean, you know, I would imagine that you're going to leave some parking up front or are you going to, you know, make... In that specific area, it looks like the entirety, like all of the parking stalls in that area up to the front where the drive aisle is, that's all going to be the designated plant area. But you still have your accessible stalls and other stalls at the front of the store throughout the rest of the parking lot. The loss of those stalls were included in the 91? Correct. Yeah. And even with all the existing cart corrals, too, they are way over parked. And, you know, coming from somebody, I'll park over by Petco. And if I need something from Home Depot, I'll walk. I see a lot of people do it as well. So that's why they utilize the entire site for their parking. But again, it was over parked when they originally came in for site plans. So the loss of these stalls wouldn't cause a parking issue, even at their busiest times with where the rental costs are. The same thing with where the rental equipment currently is. It takes up stalls. There are always empty stalls. I get that they're towards the rear of the lot, but there are always empty stalls available for parking. Now, these are just going to be designated areas. No building, no lean-tos. Correct. But that really doesn't help the problem they have in back, though, with all the... Well, and that's, you know, again, the fire marshal identified that the pallet storage and storage up against the building is an issue. Obviously, they wouldn't be permitted. They wouldn't be permitted. to put any of it in designated fire zones. I think on the site plan, they say that it's yellow striping. Those are fire zones. So, I mean, you can't have storage back there. I have no issue with them putting the storage in appropriate places. Again, if the fire marshal is okay with it, if it's not blocking any access or impeding any sort of fire access, I don't have an issue with that. It's really up to the board and up to the fire marshal and the applicant to come up with a good solution. Again, we're trying to get them into compliance and to formalize these areas so that they don't get any further violations. Why don't we require them just to paint the areas and designate those with a different color? Yeah, I think the site plan, they are proposing to re-stripe the areas. The areas within the parking lot would be re-striped so that people know not to park there. Currently, we're not proposing to stripe anything in the back, but if that's something, that would help. What I'm saying is, like, every year you go out, you set up a site plan. You set up the plans. We'll just have one area painted out for that. That's covered under the scope of the application. Okay, so next year they don't creep out another five feet a year after that. So if they have a boundary where they have to stay within every single year. Well, I think formalizing that through a site plan would be helpful. That way, if they do go past what they're allowed, it's very easy to identify those areas in the future. So at this juncture, I don't have a resolution on. I just wanted to present it to the board, and we'll see what the applicant comes back with. I do have one more question about the pallets, and this might be a question for the fire marshal, but if those were to be moved from, say, Area G against the building to maybe Area K or one of the areas within the parking lot, do you think that would get rid of the requirement for a fire sprinkler if it's some minimum distance away from the building? I would speak with the fire marshal's office about that just to see. You know, they're well-versed in fire code, and again, I defer to them as far as the fire safety aspects are concerned. I agree. Well, Heather, any time you see a no-parking fire zone, nothing is allowed there, right? There's no height? There's no... I mean, when it says no-parking fire zone, you're not supposed to store or park or idle, nothing. So again, I think things need to be worked out with the fire department. I agree. I agree with the fire marshal's office, but also whether or not we're going to go forward with CBA. Yeah, but at that point, is it okay for Home Depot to take some of that and put it in the new designated areas? I mean, if... You know what I mean? Yeah, if the fire marshal says it can't be up against the building, but it can be in the parking lot, again, now they're further increasing the storage in the parking lot. They're decreasing the number of parking stalls, so we would have to see how many additional stores... I think you would see stacks of pilots in the front parking lot. Maybe against the back curb. Well, that's up to the applicant, but... Yeah, I think Area K here along the side of the building would maybe be a good alternative just across the drive aisle. And then also Area J, it's on the northeasterly side of the building. That doesn't have any striping, so I mean, if they wanted to maybe increase that area a little bit, again, it's in the back of the building. It's not visible from the right-of-way. As long as it's not impeding any fire access or delivery truck access, I think that might be a better spot. Again, something that needs to be really worked out with the fire marshal. You will put restrictions on those designated areas? Yeah. The board would. The board and the fire marshal's office would really, you know, if this comes to fruition for approval, we could... build those into the resolution. But this is just the beginning, trying to hash out exactly what path we're taking.

You guys good? Yes. Okay, thank you. Yeah, I will. Thank you so much. Thanks, guys. Have a good night. You too. Okay, now we're going to get Greg Bourbon for the 836 East Main Street Mixed-U Site Plan Amendment. Okay. [transcription gap] Okay. [transcription gap] Okay. [transcription gap] Okay. [transcription gap] Okay. Okay. Okay. limited scope so as the board will recall back in August of 2020 the board approved a granted final site plan approval for a site plan obligation as 836 East Main Street that was an application to develop the vacant parcel on the northeast corner of East Main Street and Prospect Place there was a approved a two-story mixed-use building with about 6,500 square foot of ground floor commercial space and eight residential apartments on the upper floors related parking improvements parking lighting landscaping drainage sewer connections we went through the process as a result of the public hearing access to the site was going to be taken off East Main Street it was originally proposed to be off Prospect responded to neighbors' objections to the Prospect Place entrance so the site will take access off East Main Street what we have is a site plan application amendment they are seeking to add a américan américan add a half basement to this proposed site plan the basement will be approximately 2 600 square feet of net area which includes approximately 2 000 square feet of accessory storage space for the residential tenants and the commercial tenants and it's a half basement because about 3 000 square feet roughly of that space will be a crawl space so it will not be a full basement in discussions with the applicant when they came into the building department they ran the calculations and they discovered that if we if they were to do a full basement they would require variances for floor area as well as parking the addition of the basement space fits in with the existing parking plan the original approved site plan included a first floor exercise studio they're now going to repurpose that ground floor space where it's all going to be retail as a result of the change from exercise studio to retail that actually reduced the amount of parking required so that's sort of being absorbed by that ground floor storage space excuse me just for the record it's not going to be public space for retail correct so that so that's actually that's one of the conditions again i have no no issues with the accessory storage i understand you know the apartments they're not huge apartments i have no objection to you know residents being able to store some material down in the basement or if they need additional space with the commercial so i do have a resolution on to approve the amended site plan applications that include the basement of the crawl space there's some minor corrections when they as i said when the applicant first came into the building department they had an application in for a full basement so there is a cut and fill calculation on the last page which is based on that original full basement so the amount of cut that's going to be required is going to be cut so that's clear so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so um so that's it we received a copy of the uh operating agreement for the fish organization i i received and i believe you did yeah um i i do have a copy of that yes do you know why we received that what i i believe they for some for some reason considered that a title report i mean we didn't really need that i don't know why they necessarily we didn't need that okay just curious but yeah so the fisher organization did purchase this um it was previously going to be developed by uh arthur tite and dorothy rose unfortunately mr tite passed away last year and property's been sold so the fish organization is going to develop it again there's no other changes to the site landscaping parking drainage the building elevations will remain the same it's just the addition of the basement and the additional approval of that exportation of a small amount of film so the first floor will be commercial retail first floor will be commercial retail which is considered storage or no retail okay retail retail sales commercial you know it's a it's a mixed use building commercial retail uh if there's other uses that fit within that um fit within the parking calculations um you know there are a a wide range of uses in the zoning district um so if there was another use that went in there you know the small restaurant something like that that fits within those parking calculations that can go in there but ground floor commercial space um second floor apartments and the you know half basement with storage okay and greg you're happy with the amount of parking it's sufficient yes no they they they met their parking calculations to begin with um they actually when the site was approved i think they needed 37 they were providing 39 and again because they're they had to shift you know in order to accommodate that extra storage space um they had to shift the that's why they got rid of the exercise studio in middle school so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so TAKE A LOOK AT IT. I'M NOT A TRAFFIC ENGINEER BY ANY MEANS. I'M NOT SURE IF THE RECONFIGURATION OF SECOND AND THIRD STREET WOULD HAVE SORT OF UNINTENDED INFLUENCES AND IMPACTS ON OTHER INTERSECTIONS LIKE EAST MAIN STREET AND ROANOKE. WE'RE NOT TRAFFIC ENGINEERS EITHER SO WE JUST WANT THE TOWN BOARD IF THEY WANT TO SEND IT TO THE TRAFFIC AND SAFETY COMMITTEE. I THINK WE HAVE ONE SPEAKER THAT WANTS TO SPEAK ON IT. FRED, DID YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT IT? YES. COME ON UP. I CAN'T STAND BECAUSE I HAD MY NUMBER SHOT YESTERDAY. OH. YOU CAN COME TO THE TABLE. THAT'S FINE. COME ON DOWN. OKAY. I TOOK A SHOWER. NUMBER SHOTS WILL GET YOU EVERY TIME. SAY YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS, PLEASE. RIGHT HERE? YOU DON'T HAVE TO TOUCH IT. IT'LL PICK YOU UP. FREDDIE MARZIN. I LIVE AT 207. 207 PAPER LAVERDOME. ANYTHING ELSE? TELL US WHAT'S ON YOUR MIND. OKAY. I'M AGAINST THE ONE-WAY STREET BECAUSE WHICH WAY WOULD YOU PUT THE ARROW TO MAKE IT FEASIBLE? ONE WAY YOU'RE GOING TO END UP WITH THE ARROW GOING INTO THE SOCIAL SECURITY OFFICE. WOULDN'T GO DOWN THAT FAR. JUST A BLOCK. FOUR STRANDED WOULD BE THE LAST THING. YEAH. AND THEN YOU HAVE THE HOUSES. YEAH. NONE OF THEM NEED PARKING. NONE OF THEM AT ALL THAT I CAN SEE. WHAT THEY DO IS THEY LEAVE IT EMPTY IN THEIR YARD AND THEY PARK OUT IN THE STREET AT NIGHT SOMETIMES. SO THAT'S NOT CONSIDERED EXTRA CARS THAT THEY HAVE. IT'S JUST WHERE THEY WANT TO PARK AT NIGHT. WE HAD ANOTHER NEIGHBOR IN ONE OF THE PREVIOUS MEETINGS SAYING THAT THERE IS A SERIOUS PARKING PROBLEM DOWN THERE. DURING THE DAY THERE'S NOBODY THERE. I WOULD SAY HEATHER AND I TOOK A WALK DOWN THERE LAST WEEK. YOU CAN WALK ONE DAY AND IT WILL BE CHANGED THE NEXT DAY. YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT AN OVERALL ONE MONTH PLAN. AND THEN IF YOU'RE ON ROANOKE AND YOU'RE LOOKING TO GO DOWN THAT STREET, THERE'S A COUPLE OF HOUSES THAT MADE BUSINESSES OUT OF THEMSELVES. WHICH THE TOWN VOTED FOR ALL OF ROANOKE AVENUE TO DO THAT. IF THEY HAD I GUESS THE ROOM AND EVERYTHING FOR PARKING. BUT THAT STREET THERE. WHEN YOU START OFF RIGHT OFF OF ROANOKE, IT'S BUSINESSES. THERE USED TO BE, OR THERE STILL IS, A CHAIN LINK FENCE. I WOULD IMAGINE THE TOWN PUT IT IN THERE. TO GO ALL THE WAY DOWN ON THOSE HOUSES. AND THEY MADE A GATEWAY. THEY PARKED BACK THERE IN THE PARKING LOT WHERE THERE'S NOTHING PARKED THERE ALL THE TIME. AND THERE'S ACTUALLY 40 SPOTS RIGHT THERE. ALL YOU NEED TO DO IS PUT A GATE BEHIND YOUR HOUSE. NOW THAT FENCE DON'T DIVIDE ANY OF THE HOUSES. IT'S JUST I GUESS THE TOWN DIDN'T WANT PEOPLE WALKING THROUGH THEIR YARD. SO THERE'S 40 SPACES RIGHT THERE THAT ARE ALWAYS EMPTY. AND THEY DON'T WANT TO TAKE IT OFF THERE. THEY WANT THE CHOICE OF PARKING IN MY DRIVEWAY, PARKING OUT IN THE STREET. AND ANOTHER THING, COMMERCIAL VEHICLES SHOULD NOT BE PARKED ANYWHERE IN TOWN. UNLESS IT'S A COMMERCIAL AREA. AND THERE'S ONE ON ONE STREET, ONE ON THE OTHER STREET. AND THIRD STREET, THE GUY BRINGS HIS RUBBISH THERE. YOU GO THERE NOW, THERE'S RUBBISH FROM DOING A JOB. IT'S SITTING OUT IN THE STREET. NOT ON THE CURB OF THE SIDEWALK, OUT ON THE STREET. THEY DIDN'T PICK IT UP BECAUSE THEY KNOW IT. THEY KNOW WHAT TO DO WITH IT, YOU KNOW? I'LL STRAWPOLL THE BOARD, GEORGE, I'M SORRY. ANOTHER THING, YOU KNOW, WE'D LIKE TO GET THE TOWN TO CLEAN UP THAT PARKING AREA. ANYWHERE YOU'RE ASTONISHED. THE BRIDGE. WE'S KNOWN. 'S THIS GUY'S GOT AS MANY SPOTS AS THAT ONE. THE TOWN OWNED THAT ONE. THE TOWN DOES OWN THAT PARKING LOT. THEY DID A SUBDIVISION WHERE THEY SOLD THE OLD FIREHOUSE. THEY RETAINED THE PARKING LOT. I DID A ROUGH SKETCH OF THAT. I MEAN, I JUST SORT OF SCALED IT OUT. WE COULD RECONFIGURE THAT PARKING LOT. AND MAYBE PICK UP ABOUT THREE STALLS. I DID SORT OF CIRCULATE A SKETCH INTERNALLY TO THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT. AGAIN, THERE WOULD BE SOME EXPENSE TO IT. AS I'SPECIFY. I spoke with the owner of North Fork Brewing Company when I was rolling this idea over my head. Just kind of picked his brain about parking issues. Do they have any issues? So the way that parking lot is sort of set up, like when you go there on a busy weekend, when you come off of 2nd Street, the parking lot, you know, straight to the back of, you know, where it goes back to 3rd Street, that's generally where the, you know, the customers for both the brewery and the distillery will park. The way it's configured, it sort of has like segmented itself from the additional parking area behind the distillery. Because it's like an L, right? So it's an L shape. There's really no way to get there. There is like an 8-foot gap in the fence as you come from 2nd Street to 3rd Street. But that area behind the distillery, when I spoke to the owner of North Fork Brewing Company, he said that's really, a lot of that parking area is used for people who live on 3rd Street. It's used for residents. Who live on 3rd Street. So, again, if we reconfigured that parking lot, we could probably pick up, I would estimate between 2 to 3 stalls. Yeah, what we're trying to do, Freddie, the idea was to put... I didn't see any parking, put it off the bed, driveways, compared to being over there. Their driveways aren't filled up. Might be one or two cars. It's just the idea, oh, I don't want to walk all the way down there. And the best way they got is, I don't speak English. You've got to find somebody. Who speaks English. And let them know what we're going to do. The idea was to pick up parking on both sides of 2nd, which there is not at this point. And also to make it a temporary thing until the town would build the parking garage. I don't like those temporary things. I don't like how long they have to be there and how long they last. When you've got it right in front of you, this resolution, that guy with the commercial truck, he's got three or four vehicles. He's got a trailer. He's got a truck. I agree. That should be... He takes up the whole thing. I'm pretty sure he owns the house now. But he used to... Because I owned a house on 3rd Street also. It's a two-story white house. We never had a... We never parked in the street. And somebody lived upstairs. They parked in the backyard. And they walked up the front steps. And that's the way the other houses should be. They don't want to walk that far. It's too far. It's hard for them to walk. And, you know, 3rd is wider than 2nd. And it has... It's too far. [transcription gap] And it has parking on both sides. Yeah, but you ever go down the Docks Haven? It's like they're so slow to move them. But that ain't that wide. But it's got parking on both sides of the street. They got a little bit more width than 2nd Street has. But 2nd Street don't have us lined up to make turns and right turns or left turns. It's got enough room. But it's just, you know, putting this one there. Then people got to find another way to get to my house. Depends on which way the arrow's going. Depends on where the arrow's going to go. And I can take those arrows off as quick as they put them up.

I'm not trying to be funny, but it's serious about this. Let's see if the board wants to send it to the town board or not. I don't really care. I don't have a dog in a fight. I just thought it made sense. But if we don't think so, we'll drop it like a hot potato. I would just like the town to take a look at it. Who in the town is... Well... I mean, it's almost... You can look at it. And I can explain certain things to you. You can say, oh, yeah, that's right. That's not a good idea. So the letter would probably be transmitted to the town board that they sent to the traffic safety committee. And they would look at it. How do you get on the committee? I want to be on the committee. Oh, that's for another time. It's up to you, gentlemen. What do you want to do? I said let's move ahead with it. And if they deny it, fine. If they look into it, that's fine. I agree. I agree. Okay. I'm going to send it to town board. You can lobby them. All right. So if they say... I'm going to have a meeting on it. You'll be the first to know. Before they make any decisions on it. Yes. Okay. So we'll draft something, share it with you, and if it looks good, we'll... It's just an idea that's going to be temporary. Yeah. I know how I parked when I was there. In my... Right now, there's two vehicles for my house that park in my driveway. I have a double driveway we pull it in, and then it goes back single all the way to the back of the house. But I don't use it for anything except keep junk there. And there's a few other houses like that. The white one that just got built. He's got a pad for six cars on one side, and he only puts two on the other side of the house. He should talk to his renters and tell them what's going on. So I will say at this juncture, you don't need to... Don't be overly concerned. All we're going to do is draft a letter of recommendation to the town board. I've seen you not being overly concerned at times, and it didn't work. But again, so at this juncture, we're just going to draft a letter to the town board, making a recommendation to look at it. We're not taking it. The town board is not taking any formal action. One other thing. That house that they did next to Prendergast's that came in almost like mobile homes, and it was to come in sections, and they built it way back. They didn't even put it in line with the other houses. They put it way back. And then they dug down 10 feet so they'd have more sand to sell. It's a fact. I know about that. And I didn't see anybody there from the town. They just... They just told the town, oh, we're going to have 10,000 yards taken out of here, and then they paid the town because there was nobody that ever checked. And it was three tractor trailers all day long. One would be getting loaded. One would be dumping. One would be on its way either way. Tractor trailers, not 10 wheelers. Tractor trailers. All right. Thank you for your comment, Chuck. We appreciate it. Thank you for your listening. Thank you. Thank you. I didn't offend anybody. Not at all. That's a miracle. Keep trying. And my back. Public comments on the whole resolutions. I don't see anybody. Gentlemen, if we could move on to the resolutions, please. I'll move resolution 2020-4040 for TJ Maxx facade renovation subject to the ARB approval. Second. Moved and second. Gentlemen, may we have a vote? Mr. Zelnicki? Yes. Mr. Hogan? Yes. Mr. Nenero? Aye. And I vote yes. The motion carries. I move resolution 2020-4041, Susan McCarthy, minor subdivision resolution clarifying the action as an unlisted action pursuant to C-20. Second. Second. Moved and seconded. Gentlemen, can we have a vote? Mr. Zelnicki? Yes. Mr. Hogan? Yes. Mr. Nenero? Aye. And I vote aye. And the motion carries. Resolution 2024-042, 836 East Main Street site plan amendment resolution clarifying the action as an unlisted action pursuant to C-20. Second. [transcription gap] Moved and seconded. May we have a vote, please? Mr. Zelnicki? Yes. Mr. Hogan? Yes. Mr. Nenero? And I vote aye. The motion carries. At this time, we're calling for public comments on all matters. No takers. Can somebody move the minutes? I'll move the meeting minutes. May. Second. 2024. So moved. Second. All in favor? Aye. Aye. All opposed? Okay. Other correspondence, staff? Nope. Well, good. The next meeting date will be Thursday, June 20th, at 3 o'clock in the afternoon. We hope you can all make it. Can we get a motion to close the meeting? Motion to close. Second. Moved and seconded. Vote, please. Aye. [transcription gap] Motion carried. Second. [transcription gap] Thank you.