Tom Schwartz, Dick Oyler, Ryan Staychock, Richard Gentry (Via Videoconferencing)

January 26, 2016

Tom Schwartz, Dick Oyler, Ryan Staychock, Richard Gentry (via videoconferencing) Excused: Karen Blazey Doug Finch, Lance Brabant, Christian Nadler Kevin Bragg Pete German ____ German Rocco Venezia

CPN-105-15: Kimberly Bidleman

Kim presented. Opened a hair salon and proposes a sign to advertise, building mounted sign; 20 feet frontage, 16 square foot sign, LED backlit

Doug: was a previous sign, this is replacing a sign.

Public: None Public hearing closed by Tom.

Chuck: actual special use application: was it completed; asked for clarification, doug responded that it is for a new building sign

SEQR: Tom MOVES: CHUCK seconds: carried

Special Use Permit: CHUCK moves: TOM seconds Tom: Amend #1:

Site Plan: RYAN moves: CHUCK seconds: Carried

CPN-107-15: F & B Enterprises Donna and Gary Ross ZOCOR Donna: permit granted a number of years ago; no lapse, originally granted 1/26/2010; DOUG: no use operation as a bed and breakfast for one year. Gary: always operated that way, slow periods, but never a lapse; Zoning Officer felt that there had been a lapse and required a new special use permit; five rooms

TOM: concerns are parking, adequacy of septic; Doug: letter from george barden approving the septic

GARY: no changes in operation of property; actually reduced the lighting answering a question from Tom regarding lighting; Tom: no change in landscaping? Gary: no

Public hearing: Close public hearing CHUCK: review by county due to proximity of Route 21; Doug: was referred to OCPB did not approve or deny, it was referred and no comment; asked about waiver of professionally prepared site plan; doug entered it onto the permit, Gary initialed; SEQR: TOM moves –CHUCK seconds Carried

Ryan: special use permits run with the land? asked about condition #1, if ceases for 12 months, then Special Use Permit: CHUCK moves: TOM seconds Add one condition: need a copy of the LLC certificate Amend #1 “of the premises” Delete: #9, already has septic inspection

SITE PLAN approval: ryan moves CHUCK seconds Strike #6

CPN-108-15: Kolupski Continued by ZBA, continued to 2/23: TOM-RYAN Carried

CPN-109-15: Melissa Buchanan for Mark Case Not present Sign: Studio Fitness & Wellnesss, 32.38 square feet Doug: replacing an existing sign, requesting a waiver from a professionally prepared site plan TOM asks for building frontage: 39 feet; sign complies with code TOM asks about signage on windows and total square footage of signs

PUBLIC HEARING: Public hearing closed by Tom Adjourned until later tonight

CPN-111-15: Diedre Dye, 3465 Route 364, temporary use special use permit for home occupation:

DIEDRE: Warm Hands Therapeutic Massage, up to December was working on Beryl Ann on Lakeshore Drive, a fire and an accident; was doing licensed massage therapy, due to fire, room unavailable, now work only in therapeutic massage with rehab, no spa-style; wanted to be able to receive clients at her house in an extra bedroom; wants to invite clients into the home; part-time in the morning, hours 2 p.m. to 6:30 p.m. Monday through Friday; husband removed flagpole at north end of the house for parking; 1 client at a time; see 1 to 4 clients per week; wants a temporary permit to use the home until Beryl Ann’s #2 is renovated;

DICK: how long before going back to Beryl Ann? Diedre: might be by February, maybe April or May TOM: asks Diedre to show driveway and parking area on the aerial photo; now parking on Greg Westbrook’s property; now she parks next to the sheds

RYAN: any safety issues, access, going up and down stairs? DIEDRE: no stairs in back of the house, a ramp built and is available; CHUCK: asks about clients using the ramp? DIEDRE: no, clients don’t need

Public Hearing Opens: Greg Westbrook: own property to the south and north of the applicant; supports her initiative, understands the hardship only a temporary condition application very responsive, supportive to make the best of a tough situation

Doug: Code enforcement did an inspection today, existing shed needs 5 feet from the home, stairs needs code compliant railings, and smoke detectors for conditions

Diedre: CEO came today and pointed out these items; they will move the shed off the property;

Ryan: don’t have to move the shed before she can resume operation; Jim Dye: moving the shed, about 6 weeks weather permitting;

Chuck: Other conditions they will do right away, within a week

Doug: Diedre will call development office

SEQR: TOM-Chuck: carried

Special Use Permit: CHUCK MOVES – TOM: seconds Lance: 11 conditions: Lance reads New #2 expiration date New #9: shed 5 feet from the home and moved to different location on the property in 6 weeks per zoning officer New #10: stairs access requires code compliant railings New #11: smoke and CO2 detectors TOM: #1: residents’ premises Strike Original #4

SITE PLAN: RYAN moves –CHUCK seconds: carried Chuck: why mobile home in the title? Lance used reference in the application

CPN-112-15: TDK Engineering for Dworkin:

Tom Trytek, TDK Dworkin Wendy To replace existing wall with concrete wall to maintain virtually same footprint, 6 feet wide x 54 feet long; maintain same elevation 4 feet 9 inches off the lake bed; received DEC and Army Corps permits for the project; all comments from OCPB, CEO, Canandaigua Lake watershed council Kevin Olvany, MRB and have responded to these comments as needed;

TOM: OCPB no formal recommendation; an extensive response to Lance’s comments, approval from DEC and Army Corps of Engineers; within boundaries as permitted of interested parties

TOM: Kevin Olvany wanted bigger rocks

TOM Trytek: already made update to rip-rap size, 24-inch diameter; Chuck: do you have to go back to the corps for this amendment. Tom Trytek: don’t need to do so

Chuck: asks about new wall in relation to existing deck.

Tom T.: ice impact caused the failure on the cantilevered section, when breached, waves and ice further damaged;

RYAN: a pre-existing non-conforming use; when was it built? Wendy: prior to her ownership, she has only been there just shy of 3 years, it was there when we purchased it, and it seemed fine then

TOM: any landscaping? discussed shoreline guidelines to soften the visual impact of lake properties; Tom T and Wendy said grass up to the wall; Wendy asks what you mean? Tom S. to break up the outline of the work

Ryan: any need for zoning. Doug: no, they are reducing the pre-existing non-conforming use, but disturbing more than 5 cubic feet so being reviewed by PB in RLD; a neighbor would have to get a variance, Ryan: if starting new, this would not be approved;

Tom T: it would be difficult to DEC and Army Corps if proposed new; we have the permits because it’s a repair to an existing condition

Ryan: terrible if everyone else wanted to do this; Doug: ZBA would have to grant a variance for others to do this in the town of Canandaigua

Tom S. OCPB no formal recommendation; TDK responses to all engineering comments

SEQR: Add David’s name: TOM: moves: Chuck SECONDS: carried Ryan asks about short time, #6: no or minimal environmental impact? Chris: falls under SEQR Type II so no need to review this any more

ONE STAGE SITE PLAN: CHUCK moves: TOM seconds: carried Doug: Surety dollar value received per Lance: Add: Condition #5: updates erosion and sediment control: stone size to 24 inch stone rip rap Chris: Add 2 findings: existing seawall is a preexisting nonconformity and reducing the degree of nonconformity Tom: Amend findings #9: made no formal recommendation Tom: Amend findings #11: TDK responded on January __ 2016

CPN-115-15: Marathon Engineering: Brewer: Single stage site plan approval ZBA continued the application; PB continues to 2/23 TOM: Chuck moves carried

CPN-116-15: Daniel Long, Sarah Tuttle, 0000 NYS Route 21 Daniel Long: along with lance’s letter, sent a response letter to Doug’s office; have revised the drawings to include water superintendent and town engineer

Tom: presume you separated water and electric

Daniel: Glitch in perc test, george barden came out; did perform one, one performed OK, one performed slow; we agreed to dig another hole further to the south, then the weather changed, George sent an e-mail; they have an adjacent parcel of 28 acres to use;

Daniel: it was silt and slowed the perc rate; two other holes before the next step, they looked much similar to the one running faster

Tom: you have a lot of land to do it, by putting it in the SW corner not a lot of room for expansion which is one of george’s rules

Tom: do plans this evening show elevations of the structure; Tom asks for these so we know the height of the structure to be built; Daniel says these are on the plans

Tom: silt fencing? Daniel: this is shown as the border area of disturbance;

Daniel: house is on higher portion of the land so can have a walk-out, enough drop to allow for a walkout; want minimal site disturbance, wants to work with the grade

Ryan: why can’t septic go to the north of the property? Daniel says because of layout of the house

Ryan: still grazing on property to the east? Sarah: at the moment still all pasture; Sarah wants to keep the extra portion of the land as farmland, wants to protect it from additional building

Ryan: how many cattle are grazing and does it impact soil compaction? Sarah: 12 to 16.

Ryan: no till, all natural grass Tom: landscape plan? asks about screening? Sarah: existing deciduous shrubs and brush, showed on the aerial photo? Tom asks to consider additional landscaping. Sarah: wants to plant more evergreens and shrubs to fill in the screening

Ryan: good example if we are going to ask for plantings; Sarah: wants to enhance existing plantings. Daniel: initial plantings directly on southern boundary near the driveway and garage, wants a minimal amount of exposure on the driveway to avoid headlights on the neighbors’ properties;

Daniel: parking court wants to minimize site disturbance to follow existing grade

Tom: when we sign the prints, can you give us minimal but meaningful on south and east boundaries to enhance existing plantings;

Ryan: mow the lot? Sarah: around the house and then will brush-hog now and then

Sarah: still might keep part of the lot for grazing for the animals, depends on the number of cattle

Daniel: will keep utility trenching to one side of the driveway, a little shorter distance on the south side

Chuck: DOT permit: approved the driveway entrance. Daniel: construction entrance, then DOT suggested to pave the first 30 or 40 feet back to reduce tire pick-up on the driveway; chuck asks this be noted on the plan

Chris: ECB comments: caution about location and setbacks of leach lines, about lack of detail on the site plan about downward soil erosion, chris read the ECB comments; TOM: MRB discussed these, PB has discussed the septic; Daniel: silt fencing shown along the downward portion of the site

DICK: asked about silt fencing shown on the plan; LANCE will address these when MRB reviews the plans again; dick says there appears to be a need for more silt fencing

SEQR: TOM moves CHUCK seconds, carried

ONE STAGE SITE PLAN: CHUCK moves – TOM seconds CARRIED Lance read conditions: Add #7: landscaping plan to be provided Add #8: comments of engineering letter address Add: #9: PRV must be provided Add: #10: site plans must be revised to label driveway material and first 30 feet paved Add: #11: site plans revised to address highway superintendent and signed Add: #12: park and rec fee to be assessed Citizen: neighboring home, concerned about runoff from the crown of the land; concern: runoff of water after excavation; runoff is enough now due to the thaw that it comes down to several residential homes; supports the house but concern about the runoff and where the runoff goes; we like it being cut and mowed; concerned about how much you are going to aggrevate the contour of the land; DANIEL: that’s part of the reason why we placed the house on the crown, all drainage to go to the east, mainly from the roof, not planning to put any drainage from impervious surfaces down slope; all to the east; TOM: silt fencing should protect everything during construction

Vincent Vitalone

CPN-118-15: Rocco Venezia, marine storage facility, boat repair, county road 30, east of outhouse road; 6 storage units, office, boat repair structure, east of outhouse park, across from the civic center ROCCO and KEVIN BRAGG and PETE and RICK GERMAN property now is vacant, 40+ acres;

ROCCO: unique and extensive drainage plan on the property; a sensitive area so we can’t dig a pond; showed the parking area for boats worked out and service, some outside storage, to the east of the boat repair structure;

ROCCO: underground perforated pipe to hold the water; infiltration trenches, accomplished water storage and water quality, a big component of DEC, without the underground movement and infiltration in the swales couldn’t get the water quality

ROCCO: proposing in 3 phases, may have to do stormwater up front

TOM: toughest place on the 40 acres; because of drainage of sucker brook; very exotic drainage; if further to the east, wouldn’t have to go through this drainage regarding storm water infrastructure seems to be the most difficult place on the property for storm water management

ROCCO: not necessarily true, not just to hold back the water but have to have the water quality; digging a pond wouldn’t work, it wouldn’t be any different on another part of the property

RYAN: sucker brook? Doug: sucker brook has a huge drainage area throughout the town of Canandaigua; flows to the north, turns south through Canandaigua, outhouse park and into lake; the most polluted tributary into Canandaigua lake. Where are pressure relief areas for sucker brook? Concern about flooding in 100-year storm events in this area. Is this property going to flood? Are there other options to consider? MRB has requested additional infor regarding classification of soils and how storm water drainage would be handled

DOUG: last even all of outhouse park was under water and this property was flooded

RYAN: trenching looks like a good design; ROCCO: self sustaining: does not add to the problem. I understand there is an existing problem. We are still above the crest of the highway and if a catastrophic situation water would flow over the highway before coming back to our property

ROCCO: flood plain does not enter this property in response to question of CHUCK

PETE GERMAN: moved building to the west to preserve as much of the property as possible for future development; moving to the southwest corner seemed to make the most sense

ROCCO: use of property with boat storage different from other uses; not trying to extend another use through the middle of their operation

ROCCO: fiber optic line runs

PETE: wants to have the workshop operating by spring; we have a vested interest in the quality of the lake

DOUG: showed parcels and area of flooding; talked about creating a structure with city of canandaiuga and canandaiuga lake watershed council to create a structure to create a retention area for higher volumes of water; as volume of water reduces it would cede back into the tributary; this would protect outhouse park and city properties and improve water quality of Canandaigua lake; suggested berming on german brothers property;

DOUG: follows natural contours of the land for improvements of sucker brook drainage

DOUG: talked about acquisition of some of the property with the town board

TOM: town-owned property would affect German Brothers plans?

PETE: to move the structure to the east would require a new application, everything different

ROCCO: if town is contemplating doing something and we invest, how does the town’s plan affect us or can we work together with the town

DOUG: town would very much like to work together and perhaps the town plan could accept some of your stormwater and infrastructure work in exchange for land, a willingness of the town to think outside the box

DOUG: if you’re interested, maybe MRB could work with you to shift structures to the east and

ROCCO: if town assists, a win-win, Doug: you would pump storm water into the town drainage areas;

PETE: what happens with our project is this takes some time?

ROCCO: deal: what if we start, if you are on board, you would address them. PETE: we need these buildings up by August, repair and four of the six storage, phase 1 and 2; PETE: Rochester Telephone has an easement for the fiber optic cable but cable is buried very shallow; Frontier has a plan to rerun the lines down brickyard and north street; they have a reasonable figure; not sure if we have to move it or they will move it

DOUG: would PB have major concerns if their project is just to the east a little and no real storm water management on their parcel and feed it back to the town facility

CHRIS: issue is when the town storm water facility would commence in relation to the applicant’s need of the storm water facility

PETE: can the town do something temporary so we don’t get postponed another year

DOUG: won’t take that long, TB is interested in taking action as soon as possible, need numbers and other landowner; if you say yes to entertain the concept don’t see the reason by end of feb or march to move forward

PETE: with PB understanding not to delay our plans

LANCE: would need to be some storm water control measures

CHRIS: Rocco Doug and applicants need to get together with temporary measures for storm water management and new plans to agree

DOUG: majority stakeholders aware of funding of engineering plans so far, to move the structure to the east

ROCCO: a lot simpler to move the structure

PETE: we don’t want to get postponed, to get approval from planning board, then we can move on to work with the Town, everybody’s best interest to work together; we can certainly work together

TOM: we don’t have any objection to the project; I don’t believe we have an objection; impressed by the cost and now blindsided by this; no objections to the project, layout, buildings or operation, just the georgrpaphy showing a curve

PETE: knowing we have approval on this, if we can work out something with the TB and move to the east with a similar blueprint

CHRIS: if you move a few hundred feet to the east, a problem and a new plan

CHUCK: conceptually no problem but a problem with coordinating with TB

TOM: we can’t approve it tonight PETE: what are objections

CHUCK: work with town, come back with final plan to the PB

PETE: not the type to place hardball, but if you approve this, then we have something we can go back on. this was dumped in your lap

DOUG: even with this plan, so many comments on storm water.

TOM: if this was a sketch plan

ROCCO: should we be addressing the comments or working with TB; a time jam, if we don’t pursue the comments and Plan B is a better plan to save month

DOUG: I think we can things wrapped up with TB in the next couple of weeks

PETE: if you like the project and don’t have a problem, I don’t want to be in June and still be working

TOM: I understand town is of the essence. How fast can the Town move?

DICK: even if you get approval, doubt you would start without info from the Town as to where this storm water facility would be located? Even if it was approved, I don’t think yo would start until you had details form the Town on the collection facility. I think we can appove in time if you get approval from the town. I don’t think the PB would delay you. You need an answer from the town first as to the location of the storm water drainage facility.

TOM: conceptually – any objections to the layout, the plan,

DICK: no problem with the project, the lake needs more boats, industrial zone, the plan is good; no conceptual problems, but not ready to approve until you know how the town will deal with the drainage facility

RYAN: what kind of boat repair? where are we going store the chemicals, typical safety issues; new state laws clean drain and dry boats; pressure wash boats, removal of invasive species; you have an opportunity to pitch this effort to remove invasive species; this could be an opportunity.

PETE: boats have to be washed, safer for the lake to have this facility away from the lake; purchased property in 2004 to build a storage facility; having something to simplify our operation in one location would be very advantageous. We just want to know from the PB if you have any problems and we can some up with something mutually beneficial for my brother and I.

ROCCO: continue to Feb. 23rd and hopefully we will have an answer from the TB and either we have an answer and if TB doesn’t OK

RYAN: continue to February 23: CHUCK: CARRIED Kevin Bragg: Regarding Dick’s comment, a letter of understanding from the TB wouldn’t that be enough; DOUG: TB has given a green light to move forward with the concept. PETE: how are you making out the adjoining landowner?

PETE: include his brother with ROCCO on all meetings

BUCHANAN:

Chris: continue the hearing, no ZBA determination in the file, incomplete application, applicant isn’t present to answer questions

RYAN-CHUCK continued to February 9th

Reason: commercial speech either on the building or on the windows, or both?

MINUTES: JAN 12: CHUCK—GENTRY: CARRIED Ryan: abstain

TOM: next meeting Feb 9th chuck and dick remotely from February 9th. Dick suggests he will miss and be excused and let chuck do it via videoconferencing; we need a super majority for wegman and vanderhoof

CHRIS: what is causing hearing difficult? What is the background noise: cross talking

Webinar: agribusiness and clean energy, Feb. 9th and Feb. 11th, respectively; Doug will ask development office to set it up

Tom: stormwater management in buffalo; seminar; march 30th; doug will scan and e-mail to everyone

NY planning federation:

March 28th: joint meeting with TB, and other town boards,

Code Updates? per tom: Chris: several referred from the planning board to the TB; Doug: A # of code updates haven’t gone to the TB for referral, probably will come to the PB first meeting in March; Tom: expanding site plan review for all single family homes issue? DOUG: onsite wastewater and steep slope laws first; quite a few different code updates coming

SURETY: HAPPINESS HOUSE, landscaping bond: $22,300: RYAN-CHUCK: carried

TOC town

DOUG: reviewed the new town web site, not launched yet; this part is live, will be used for ECB and PB for next meeting

Packets: will go out Tuesday before the meeting

RYAN: do we want to look at landscaping requirements? Tom: we can give a waiver if something doesn’t make sense. RYAN: for some rural lots we could look at this

RYAN: phosphorus laws: there are phosphorus laws that only allow people to apply when establishing new lawns or you can prove when you have a phosphorus deficiency, we have a problem with phosphous in the lake; middle numbe – nitrigoen – phosphouus – potassium; worth revisiting this and saw the fertizilzer schedule on the site plan recently; we don’t have a phoshorus deficiency anywhere.DOUG: these are in site design criteria, perhaps the TB would consider budgeting for this review in 2017, an intensive document, 300+ pages, this is a valid point and we need to capture this information

RYAN: ADJourn: 9L24 p.m. CHUCK

Carried