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 AUGUST 8, 2007 AT 7:00 P.M.

 

PRESENT: Chairman Dan Evans, Gary Swanson, Ron Calanni, Phyllis Belin, Paul Shanahan, Steven Peterson, Attorney William Wright, Code Enforcement Officer Randy Woodbury

Gary Swanson serving as secretary

 

ABSENT: Dave Carlberg 

 

Chairman Evans opened the meeting at 7:00 PM.

 

Motion made by Steve Peterson, seconded by Ron Calanni to approve the minutes of the July 18, 2007 meeting.

 

Carried.                         Ayes – 6                                  Noes – 0                               Absent - 1

 

Chairman Evans opened the Public Hearing for Anthony Payne for Site Plan Review to construct a new building to replace the existing building owned by the Am Vets at 3334 Fluvanna Avenue, Jamestown, NY.  

 

Jerome Erickson, Engineer and Surveyor for Mr. Payne, presented the site plan for Mr. Payne.  He provided a survey of the property that was purchased by Mr. Payne with the structures and the names of abutting property owners.  He reviewed the plan with the Planning Board noting:

1)    Mr. Payne proposes to eliminate the “band shell” and the building that was the restaurant   

                  and the Am Vets Post building

2)    he proposes to build a 16’ by 100’ building with a 28’ by 40’ additional building – the second building will be large enough for Mr. Payne to store two of his trailers and the other one will store a tractor and trailer – the building will be functional as a wash bay

3)    the house that is on the back of the property will be used as an office

4)    there is a very good productive well on the property that supplies water to the house – they may or may not use the small well house over where the well was – water could be transferred over to the main building

5)    Mr. Payne would like to put an 8’ chain link fence around three sides of the property – there may be a 6’ or 8’high wrought iron fence in the front

6)    they are proposing that as the building is demolished some blacktop will be removed off the west end of the parking lot – they will put more paving in near the office for parking and some paving around the building so trucks can drive in and out around the building

7)    Mr. Payne may move into the house or he may continue to rent the house

8)    the water will come from the existing well – there are septic systems on the site but if they are disturbed the County Health Department will be involved in replacing them

9)    the storm water runoff will follow the same path it does now – presently it flows both to the east and to the west and also south into catch basins that are in the State right-of–way -  Mr. Erickson stated he thought that there could be more water running to the east (towards the bowling alley) then there is at the present time and less going to the west- there is a ditch on each side of the property that runs toward the road that connects into the State storm water system

10) there will be no major repair done in the building –there will be a concrete floor and with a  drain connected to an oil separator

11) there is one large pole light on the west side of the property - Mr. Erickson does not think that will be used because Mr. Payne has no need for that lighting – he will probably have a security light over the doors

12) the structure will be a pole building – it will be metal sided and have a metal roof – Mr. Erickson did not have any elevation drawings of the building but stated the building would be somewhere between 13’ and 15’ high – the 16’ by 100’ building will probably be have a 14’ by 20’ door – the door where the tractors are will be 12’ by 12’ 

13) Attorney Wright asked, given the applicant has been told he cannot park the trucks outside, what reason would there be to leave so much impervious area - Mr. Erickson said that perhaps there would be a truck waiting for another one to leave before he could park inside.

14) Mr. Evans asked about the landscaping – Mr. Erickson said there are a lot of pine trees on the property – the area where they are removing the pavement will be replaced with grass 

15) Mr. Erickson stated that all setbacks meet the code – nothing will be changed in the existing house area 

16) no outside storage -  no dumpster is needed – Mr. Erickson told the Board there could be a small building around the well if Mr. Payne wants the well controls outside

17) signage – there is an existing pole sign that will probably be removed – Mr. Payne has no need for signage

18) Paul Shanahan said the County referral letter indicated that the closed building would not meet the side yard setbacks – Mr. Erickson said this plan has been modified to meet those setback requirements

19) the floor in the building will be concrete and will be built so it can retain any spillage if there is any – the trucks will be empty when they are at this location – Mr. Payne hauls oil products, some other chemical additives for diesel fuel and gasoline, transmission fluid, cooling cutting oil - most of the time it’s a component of the products and not a finished products

20) Phyllis Belin asked if Mr. Payne had only two tractor trailers - Mr. Erickson told the Board Mr. Payne has other trucks that haul in the Texas and California area that never get here – he has other places for those – Mr. Erickson stated that he will never have more then one trailer on the property at a time

21) Steve Peterson asked if the building would be heated - Mr. Erickson said the buildings will be heated and all the eves will be finished off – the building will be insulated and will have a fire rated dry wall on the inside

22) Ron Calanni asked about regular business hours – Mr. Erickson said that Mr. Payne does have one full time employee to keep track of the schedules, etc - there could be vehicles there when an employees comes to work – employee parking will be behind the building that will house the trucks

23) Phyllis Belin said the application stated there would be a building to be used as a garage for three tractor trailers – Mr. Erickson told the Board that originally when they went to the Zoning Board they wanted a building that would house 3 tractor trailers – the property did not allow for that so they decided to build a building to house just one rather than to build something that would detract from the value of the property by having something in front of the whole house – they also would have had to add more pavement

 

Bruce Scolton, Attorney for the Hedin family, addressed the Board. Mr. Scolton stated that the Hedins’ have indicated what their practical concerns are about the products, noise, numbers and the run off. 

 

Mr. Scolton said everything that has been presented by Mr. Erickson presumes that Mr. Payne can do this under the zoning that exists in that area.  Mr. Scolton stated that he did not believe that the zoning in a Shopping District would permit the operation of a trucking company.  This proposed use is not something that is a shopping center, commercial or service use to serve the surrounding residential districts. He recited from 146-25 of the Town of Ellicott Zoning and Planning code, which is the purpose of the shopping center district.  It refers to another section of the statue, the mercantile district, that says you can do what the mercantile says - Mr. Scolton feels that is where Mr. Woodbury may have been drawing information about the vehicles repair and maintenance facilities.  In section 146-33 the permitted uses in a mercantile district are listed, which includes vehicle repair and maintenance facilities. If you incorporated that into the shopping center district, it is suppose to be serving the surrounding residential districts not an individually owned business that serves itself.  Mr. Scolton reviewed section 146-28 that listed the excluded uses. It states that there shall be no storage of goods and no storage of vehicles, except within the premises constructed, except agricultural products displayed within three feet from the building.

 

Mr. Scolton said he felt that it was drawn out of that section to give Mr. Payne a foot lever into saying he is entitled do this because he is within premises being constructed.  He emphasized on behalf of the Hedins’ and his interpretation of the zoning code that those three or four words in an exception situation cannot override the general purpose of the shopping center use itself.  Mr. Scolton said that the vehicles permitted inside should be related to the mercantile or shopping center use that is permitted within the district.

 

Mr. Scolton said he was trying to determine at what level or stage and in which form the basic determination was made that this is a permitted use and allowed this application to come before this Board. 

 

Attorney Wright stated that the determination was definably made when the applicant appeared for a sketch plan conference on May 9, 2007.  Mr. Woodbury put on the record that based on the discussions with Mr. Payne that the project falls within the shopping center district requirements and he gave the reasons why.  The Board at the next meeting on June 13, 2007 approved those minutes.  They are within the sixty-day statue of limitations under 267A (8), but only by days. The preliminary decision of what is and is not allowed in the district is that of the Code Enforcement Officer subject to any appeal that is made. Mr. Wright’s recommendation is to follow the procedure under 267A (8), within 60 days of the determination being made, and make an appeal challenging the determination of the Code Enforcement Officer.

 

Attorney Wright’s recommendation to the Planning Board, based on the Code Enforcement Officer’s determination, is to have them move forward.  However, when the zoning issues are raised that will set aside the Planning Board. You need the site plan approval plus you need it to be zoned properly.  Mr. Scolton wanted to make clear to Mr. Erickson that he would like him to inform his client that if the Planning Board says he can do this and Mr. Payne wants to start digging tomorrow they will try to halt the project.  Mr. Erickson said that it would not be possible to start so fast because Mr. Payne cannot start digging until he has the building plans approved. Randy told Mr. Scolton that if he files the application to appeal his determination tomorrow he would hold the building plans and not issue the building permit.

 

The Board reviewed the site plan and went through the site plan checklist noting the following:

1)    section 121-11C 5 and 7 - there was no storm water management plan provided – Mr. Erickson said contours won’t work because the site is flat - there are site elevations on the plans indicating the drainage flow – the total elevation across the entire property is approximately two feet – the Board can recommend to waive contours  - the Board agreed there should be some sort of certification on the drainage because of the new buildings and they are changing parking – Mr. Erickson said this does not fall under the NYS DEC requirements for physical disturbance in storm water plan – the parcel is approximately 1 ½ acres but there will not be physical disturbance of over an acre – Randy stated the code requires a storm water management regardless and asked Mr. Erickson to put his analysis in writing – the applicant also went  through the 28 point check list during the sketch plan conference -  he had the opportunity to ask for any relief on the 28 points but did not ask for any – the Board would like to see an engineering analysis of the water drainage but agreed to waive the topals - 

2)    section 121-11C 12 – discussion on where the oil separators will discharge – Mr. Erickson said that will depend on the Health Department – the Health Department has asked in certain circumstances that the discharge be underground or run above ground and into a ditch – Randy also stated that the fence is 8 feet high and would require a variance

3)    section 121-11C 13 - they will use existing septic systems if approved by the County Health Department

4)    section 121-11C 17– there will be no signage

5)    section 121-11C 18- they have vegetative cover all around the site

6)    section 121-11C 19 – there is one light in the parking lot that Mr. Erickson said he sees no use for – there will be lights on the building

7)    section 121-11C 23 – they will have to have approval from the County Health Department as well as the NYS DEC and NYS DOT

8)    section 121-11C 25 – Mr. Payne is under contract to purchase this property and has a land contract – the Town will need a copy of the contract

9)    section 121-11C 8 and 28 – the Board needs to see the elevations of the building

 

There was discussion on the possible removal of the existing large parking area since they will have no use for it. Attorney Wright asked the Board if it did not make sense to require the applicant to remove the parking area if he did not need it and it would help with the drainage and the appearance.  Mr. Woodbury agreed with the idea of removing any parking area that was not needed. The Board would also like the signpost removed that Mr. Erickson stated they did not need.

 

Chairman Evans listed the items that Mr. Erickson needed to provide:

1)    the Board waived the contours but will require a storm water analysis

2)    the Board will require that the paved area that is not in use be removed

3)    the 8 foot fence would have to be made compliant or he will need a variance from the ZBA

4)    the Board is requesting that the sign pole be removed – unless Mr. Payne wants to bring in a proposal for a sign and use the pole

5)    the Town needs a copy of the land contract

6)    the Board wants building elevations and the lighting shown on the buildings

 

Gary Swanson made a motion, seconded by Phyllis Belin to table this application pending additional information by the applicant.

 

Carried.                         Ayes – 6                       Noes – 0                         Absent – 1

 

Richard Kaczar was not present for the Site Plan Review for an addition to Rick’s Collision at 3148 Fluvanna Ave. Ext., Jamestown, NY.  Mr. Woodbury told the Board that the applicant needed another month to prepare.

 

David Sobina, R.W. Larson Associates, presented a sketch plan for Dunn Tire on Fairmount Avenue, W.E., Jamestown, NY.  Rex Tolman, P.E., and David Simons, representative for Dunn Tire and Gene Aversa, Hanson Signs, were present.

 

The building is the old Century building in the Fairmount Avenue Plaza.  Dunn Tire is planning to lease the building.  It will require a change in use for the building. They will not change the square footage but changes will be made to the interior and slight renovations to the exterior of the building.

 

Mr. Sobina reviewed the plans with the Board.  Dunn Tire is proposing to use the front for a sales area. The middle of the building will be used for repairs, tire service and brake service and the rear part of the building (approximately 5000 SF) will operate as wholesale for Dunn Tire.

 

Mr. Sobina said that they are asking for relief on some of the site plan items since most of the renovation is inside of the building.

 

Mr. Evans asked if they would be using the east side of the building that is partitioned off.  They have leased the entire building but will seek another retail tenant for the east side of the building.  They will not be using the loading dock.

 

Mr. Sobina told the Board they will be using the existing sewer and water and they would not be changing the storm water plan.  They are adding garage doors (16’ to 20’ in width) on the side to provide access for vehicles.  The landlord has agreed to pave some area in the back of the building.  Mr. Tolman stated that is driven on gravel, which is impervious already.  They would not be changing drainage patterns significantly.  They would probably have additional lighting. They would not expect to have cars outside.  There will be no outdoor storage. They do not currently do any oil changes or fluids.  It might be a possibility they would do that later. They have a lease signed July 26, 2007 and have sixty days to get their permits and get this project done.  The landlord has agreed to give them the top panel on the pole sign.  They would have a 150-foot sign on the faηade facing Fairmount Avenue.  If they were able to identify another tenant quickly they would need another sign. They would need two signs and would have to come back to the Town. 

 

Attorney Wright asked which items they were asking for relief from. Mr. Sobina listed the following:

1)    #3 – property boundaries – they would like to use the deed instead of a survey – they would show the new bituminous surface on the plan

2)    #5, # 6 and #7 – they are adding a minor amount of bituminous area which is already accounted for – they are not disturbing any watercourses, tree masses or other significant natural features

3)    # 9 – the Board would like to see the paved area around the building

4)    #10 – the pedestrian access will not change

5)    #12, #13 and # 14 – they will not alter any of the utilities

6)    #15 – the Board would like markings on the pavement for the fire and emergency zones

7)    #25 – they will provide a copy of the deed

8)    #27 – will not need a map of the site topography since they will not be disturbing any thing

 

Attorney Wright said on the detailed area of the site plan they should show the water direction because the Board needs to know water is not going to gather and freeze.  They should show contours in the driveway.

 

Mr. Sobina said they were looking to do as many of the items in the checklist with notes on an architectural plan without having to go through a survey.  Attorney Wright said they should clarify that because the Board wants a site plan but they do not need it of the entire property.  They need a site plan on the used part of the property.

 

Randy said the Board might like to put some constraints on the hours of operation,

 

Mr. Simons stated the normal hours of operation would be 8:00 AM to 7:00 PM Monday through Friday and from 8:00 AM to 4:00 PM on Saturday. Some stores that are open on Sundays but he is not sure this will be one of the stores. If it were the Sunday hours would be 9:00 AM to 1:00 PM. 

 

Steve Peterson asked if the doors would always be closed when they are working on cars. The Board could stipulate that the doors would be closed except when bringing the vehicles in and out. 

 

Mr. Woodbury stated that this is a permitted use in the shopping center district zone provided that the extra layers of sensitivity that are required in a shopping center zone are adhered to.  He said when the air guns are operating; the doors need to be closed. He would like to see it written on the plan that would be part of the operational requirement.

 

Motion made by Paul Shanahan, seconded by Ron Calanni to adjourn the meeting at 8:55 PM.

 

Carried.                      Ayes – 6                           Noes – 0                       Absent – 1

 

 

 ___________________________________

 Gary Swanson, Secretary