May 13, 1997

MINU= TES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE TOWN OF ELLICOTT PLANNING BOARD HELD AT THE ADMINISTRATION BUILDING, 215 SOUTH WORK STREET, FALCONER, NY 14733 ON AUGUS= T 12, 2009 AT 7:00 P.M.

PRESENT: Chairman Dan Evans, Gary Swanson, Ron Calanni, Ph= yllis Belin, Paul Shanahan, Steve Peterson, Fred Santucci, Attorney William Wrigh= t, Code Enforcement Officer Randy Woodbury and Secretary Valerie Pierce

ABSENT: None=

Chairman Evans opened the meet= ing at 7:10 PM.

Motion made by Paul Shanahan, = seconded by Gary Swanson to approve the minutes of the June 10, 2009 meeting. <= /o:p>

Carried. = &nb= sp; Ayes – 7 = &nb= sp; Noes – 0 &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Absent – 0<= /span>

Chai= rman Evans reopened the public hearing for Chautauqua Watershed Conservancy to install foot trails and a gravel parking area at Woodworth Ave and Elmwood Ave., W.E., Jamestown, NY.

Randy Woodbury told the Board the Conservancy had requested this application be continued until the next meeting because they are waiting to close on additional property that would affect their consideration.

Mr. Evans opened the public hearing for Todd Saracki (Carlton Homes, LLC) for the Hawthorne Patio Home Subdivision, on Hunt Rd., W.E., Jamestown, NY for = &nb= sp; = approval of the subdivision and final plat plan.

Mr. = Don Sennett, PE, told the Board that:

the water design w= as approved by the Health Department – it had been designed by the Jamestown Board of Public Utilities – he provided a letter and a= copy of the water system design
the plan has been revised to reflect the ownership of both ponds by the homeowner’s association with an easement to the Town of Ellicott
the plan also refl= ects the addition of a four foot fence around both ponds =
the Heath Departme= nt has reviewed the project in its entirety and he has a letter that they= are good with what is happening but cannot approve the plan until the Plan= ning Board approves it – the Health Department did request they show a utility drawing with connections to the houses and that they be sent to the DEC – the applicant provided new plans with the ch= anges
the lighting will = be dusk to dawn pole lanterns - the applicant will put poles in to delineate the road until the houses are built an= d the lanterns are in
Attorney Wright st= ated he has received a draft copy of the homeowners association agreement – Todd said he has been waiting for the final approval of the subdivision so he can tell his attorney to finalize the agreement R= 11; they will get the final copy to Attorney Wright

Jack Scalise, 67 Nottingham Circle, W.E., Jamestown, NY, stat= ed he is not against this project but has concerns with the 24” drainage pipe that will disperse the water coming from the detention pond. He owns lots adjacent to Todd Sara= cki’s property, that he is trying to sell, and does not think he will be able to = sell the lots if prospective buyers see the 24” pipe. Mr. Scalise told the Board that you could not see the pipe before but buyers would now see the 24” pipe. Mr. Scalise stated he had other concerns but his main one is the visibility of the 24” pipe.

There was discussion on the drainage.

There is a pipe no= w and Dan Evans said that if you walk up there water is coming out of the di= tch any day of the week
Mr. Sennett explai= ned the drainage and told Mr. Scalise that there will be less water runoff unto his property - they need the 24 “pipe so they can slow down= the velocity
Attorney Wright as= ked Mr. Sennett if the pipe could be backed off of the property line so th= at the spillage from the pipe is away from the property line and turned i= nto a more natural state because you do get the visual of the pipe
Mr. Wright also as= ked if a 24 inch pipe is large for this water detention facility - Mr. Sennett said that the pipe is not what is controlling the flow –it is controlled by a very small orifice, then a small weir and then a larger weir - by law you are not forced to store the water from= a 100 year storm - they do not want to go over the road or down the bank and= do not want erosion to take place - the ditch that is there now is much larger than the 24” pipe will be - running full it carries much = more water than the pipe will – the pipe will store the water and rel= ease it a slower rate – they could bring the pipe back slightly and t= ry to take care of the slope but the slope (3 on 1) is as steep as they would ever want to have and still have cars come around the pond - such a la= rge pipe is needed to take care of all the water that comes unto Mr. Saracki’s property as well as his own runoff - State regulations state you cannot interrupt natural drainage patterns and block someone else’s drainage - the pipe will end approximately 10 feet from t= he property line.
Mr. Scalise stated that this will make his property worthless and he should just deed it = back to the Town of Ellicott - He said that bringing the pipe back 10 feet will not make it any bet= ter.
Dan asked if it we= re possible to take the outage drain and pick it up with DI’s behind the houses - Mr. Sennett said it could not be carried to the other pon= d - the reason two ponds were proposed was because there are two distinct drainage patterns occurring on the site - according to regulations they can not increase the amount of runoff
Mr. Scalise told t= he applicant that another solution was to buy the lot and put the pipe all the way though the ditch to the far side of the property - Mr. Saracki said it would be a huge undertaking to do that because the lot has so = many hills and ravines.

There were no other neighbors present.

The Planning Board did not want to review the site plan checklist again since t= hey had gone through it before. <= o:p>

The = Board did receive a letter from Highway Superintendent Shellhouse. Attorney Wright asked if the water treatment ponds would be retained by the Homeowners Asso= ciation because it was originally intended to be deeded over to the Town. Mr. Sennett said that the Town wil= l have an easement in and over the outlet pipe and in and over the ponds. That was a request of the Town High= way Superintendent.

Randy explained that the County and Town have applied for a grant to do a regional correction to some of the drainage problems on the hill south of Hunt Road.<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> The Town has already begun that wo= rk with the money they received from Verizon Wireless. They have corrected the drainage problem the Geraces had. Randy said the one disadvantage to that i= s it will carry sediment on through that will end up in the pond the Town built = near Southwestern School. It will not move the sedim= ent into Chautauqua Lake.<= /p>

The Planning Board needed to review the long form environmental assessment. Ran= dy went to make copies for the Board members.=

Chai= rman Evans reopened the Public Hearing for Timothy Magnuson and Robert Ostrom= for a site plan for an addition to the boarding home at 484 Fairmount Ave., W.E= ., Jamestown, NY (Dibert Home).

Joe Wenger, 29 N Hanford Ave., W.E., Jamestown, NY, told the Board that he = came to see the plans because they share a side property. Mr. Wenger was told th= at this addition was going to be on the north side and for one resident. The B= oard had seen a one page sketch but had not seen any other plans.

Randy told the Board that he received a call from Tim Magnuson on Monday requesti= ng that this application be withdrawn because of the cost of the engineer. Randy said that he had offered to = help with contours to save them some money and that the applicant had an opportu= nity to ask for any waivers at the sketch plan conference but they did not reque= st any waivers. Randy stated that he thought the Board policy in the past had = been to ask for the withdrawal in writing.

Atto= rney Wright said that he would like to have a formal action from the Board accep= ting the withdrawal of the application. <= /span>

Motion made by Paul Shanahan, seconded by Gary Swanson to accept the withdrawal of the application of Tim= othy Magnuson and Robert Ostrom for site plan review for an addition to 484 Fairmount Ave., W.E., Jamestown, NY.

Carried. = Ayes – 7 = Noes – 0 = &nb= sp; Absent – 0

The Board continued with the environmental assessment form for the Hawthorne Subdivision on Hunt Road. The members took time to review the SEQR.

Steve Peterson had= a question on the surface of an existing water body – Mr. Sennett stated there is no existing water body – they will be adding two= new water bodies
Phyllis Belin asked about the generating of solid waste – they will generate solid w= aste during construction and residents will once they live there – the project will not involve the disposal of any solid waste (not a landfi= ll)
Attorney Wright as= ked about hunting existing on the project area – he believes there is significant amount of hunting in the project area – Mr. Sennett = said there is none on this property but he would agree there is within the project area.
Mr. Wright also ha= d a question on the area of lakes, ponds or wetlands – they indicate= d .4 feet – when the site was delineated they indicated 1.2 acres of wetlands – Mr. Sennett said that he had filled out the form befo= re the property was delineated – Mr. Saracki changed and initialed = the change to 1.4 acres
there was discussi= on on the maximum number of vehicular trips generated per hour on the completed project – Mr. Sennett said it was a calculated guess – they changed the number to 30 per hour
they filled in the anticipated date of commencement as September 1, 2009 – there is only one phase so the anticipated date of completion is September 2010= .
The maximum potent= ial development of the site as permitted by the present zoning is calculat= ed by taking out a road way and taking side yard setbacks and dividing the minimum size of the lot - you can get 81 houses – Mr. Sennett sa= id that would not realistic but what would be allowed under the zoning
Mr. Saracki initia= led the changes to the maximum vehicular trips and the commencement and completion dates

The Board reviewed Part II of the environmental form (determination of significance) noting:

there would be an impact on land – there was 1% of the property that was 15% or greater - it would be small to moderate because it is being altered – the water table is 1.5 feet for the property – - Mr. Sen= nett stated that the perched water table are surface water – it would= be the wetlands that were discussed that will be going away - it would be= a small to moderate impact
there will not be = an effect to any unique or unusual land forms found on the site
there will be no impact on water
the proposed action will not affect any non-protected existing or new body of water
the proposed action will not affect surface or groundwater quality or quantity =
the proposed action alter drainage flow or patterns, or surface water runoff – it wi= ll change flood water flows – the applicant is planning to drain la= nd that is wet or sub-standard at his own peril by his study on his own <= o:p>
the proposed action will not affect air quality
the proposed action will not impact plants or animals – it will not affect any threatened or endangered species – DEC site showed no threatened species
the proposed action will not substantially affect non-threatened or non-endangered species=
there will be no impact on agricultural land resources
the proposed action will not affect aesthetic resources
the proposed proje= ct will not impact any site or structure of historic, prehistoric or paleontological importance – the applicant did have a letter on = that in the storm water management report from Parks and Recreation
there will be no impact on open space and recreation
the proposed action will not impact exceptional or unique characteristics of a critical environmental area established pursuant to subdivision 6NYCRR 617.14 (= g)
there will be an effect to existing transportation systems - the site distances were addre= ssed
the proposed action will not affect the community’s sources of fuel or energy supply=
there will be no impact on odors, noise, or vibration
the proposed action will not affect public health or safety
there will be no impact on the growth and character of the existing community
there is likely to= be no public controversy related to potential adverse environmental impac= ts – there will not be a potential large impact and Mr. ScaliseR= 17;s concern is more a aesthetic concern than a physical concern – calculating the water coming off the site is better than it is before construction
the Board determin= ed there would be no large impacts

Motion made by Gary Swanson, seconded by Steve Peterson making the determination the project will not ca= use a significant adverse environmental impact.

Mr. Scalise told the Board he has a major concern that this will make it so he cannot sell his lots (with the visual 24” pipe). Mr. Sennett said that the 24” pipe will slow down the velocity. Attorney Wright told Mr. Scalise t= hat the Planning Board has to rely on the data that is given to them by an engineer. He certainly has an independent cause of action for nuisance or trespass for re-diversion of water that causes damage to his property if th= ey determine this is increasing water flow unto his property. The numbers that the Board has seen determines it does not increase the water flow. Gary asked if they could plant somethin= g in front of the pipe and Mr. Sennett stated there could be something plant shr= ubs (no large plantings) on the sides but nothing in front that would obstruct = the pipe.

Carried. = &nb= sp; Ayes – 7 = Noes – 0 = Absent – 0

The Board stipulated some additional items they needed:

copies of the third sheet (the proposed sanitary and water lines with changes that the hea= lth department requested) – they will be provided to Randy Woodbury<= o:p>
the final copy of = the homeowners agreement when complete – one to Randy and one to Attorney Wright

Motion made by Paul Shanahan, seconded by Gary Swanson to approve the plan for Todd Saracki (Carlton Home= s, LLC) for the Hawthorne Patio Home Subdivision as presented with the two stipulations listed above.

Carried. = &nb= sp; Ayes – 7 &nb= sp; = Noes – 0 = &nb= sp; Absent – 0

Chairman Evans stamped and dat= ed three sets of plan.

The Board took a short break at 8:45 PM

The Board reconvened at 9:12 PM

Andrew Goodell, Esquire, presented a revised site plan for Richard and Anthony Benedetto to extend their parking at 42= Dunham Ave., W.E., Jamestown, NY.

they are proposing= an additional 1250 square feet of asphalt with 11 nine foot wide parking spaces

their drainage is working well and the engineers said this would have no impact on the existing drainage system and well within the design parameters
there are currently five parking s= paces that are parking north and south that will be converted into the 11 sp= aces
there is an approximate six foot drop off at the steepest point – they will = put bumpers there
the original plan = had a service entrance on the lower part of the building – there has been parking there and Mr. Benedetto has addressed that – he told them they cannot have routine parking there on the graveled area<= /o:p>
Attorney Wright to= ld the Board that the Zoning Board had granted a 12 ½ foot area variance not to exceed 11 parking spaces – the site distance of = the parking spaces by the driveway were a concern of the ZBA so the reques= ted spaces were reduced to 11
there are no other changes (signs or lighting) to the site
the dumpster is not fenced in – Randy checked the minutes and it was a condition of = the original site plan that the dumpster be fenced in – the applicant will be fencing in the dumpster
the Board received= a letter from Paul Potter, PC that stated there will be no impact on the drainage - Randy said th= ere is a maintenance issue on the drainage that is minor that he will take ca= re of
Attorney Wright st= ated this proposed project is exempt from SEQR

Motion made by Steve Peterson, seconded b= y Fred Santucci to approve the modified site plan for Richard and Anthony Benedetto for additional parking at 42 Dunham Ave., W.E., Jamestown, NY to be complet= ed by November 15, 2009.

Carried. = &nb= sp; Ayes – 7 = &nb= sp; Noes – 0 = &nb= sp; Absent – 0

Chai= rman Evans stamped and dated three sets of plans.

Motion made by Ron Calanni, seconded by Steve Peterson to adjourn the meeting at 9:28 PM.

Carried. = &nb= sp; Ayes – 7 = &nb= sp; Noes – 0 = &nb= sp; Absent – 0

The Board discussed the date of the next meeting. Some of the members will not be available for the 9^th of September. The Board decided they would leave= the date the same and see if they get any applications. They will have a comprehensive plan meeting on August 26, 2009. V= al or Randy will send a reminder.

____= ______________________________

Vale= rie Pierce, Secretary