TOWN BOARD MEETING February 28, 2018 7:00 P

TOWN BOARD MEETING February 28, 2018 7:00 P. M. Council Rock Elementary School Auditorium 600 Grosvenor Road

MEETING CALLED TO ORDER:

PRESENTATIONS/RECOGNITIONS:

OPEN FORUM:

APPROVAL OF AGENDA:

APPROVE AND FILE TOWN BOARD MEETING MINUTES FOR: January 24, 2018 Town Board Meeting February 14, 2018 Town Board Meeting

PUBLIC HEARINGS: MATTER RE: Incentive Zoning Application for the proposed Whole Foods Plaza project NOTE: Communications received for inclusion in official Public Hearing Record: FROM: Doug Rosenzweig dated February 8, 2018, Grace Moreno dated February 8, 2018, Mick Whittemore dated February 17, 2018, Audra Webber dated February 10, 2018, Shari Eduardo dated February 21, 2018, Kevin F. Kenny, Arlene Levit, Bernard Shore and Ginni Jurkowski all dated February 22, 2018, George Fekete, Jonathon Little, Joey Valenti all dated February 25, 2018, Penelope Weller and Marlow Hagood Laicona both dated February 26, 2018, Jeffrey Blood dated February 27, 2018 and Joe & Patti Bellizia dated February 28, 2018. BIDS:

COMMUNICATIONS: FROM: Brighton Police Chief Henderson to Town Board dated February 12, 2018 regarding resignation of a part-time Police Officer.

FROM: NY Municipal Insurance Reciprocal Re: annual underwriting savings to the Town of Brighton in the amount of $1,013.00.

COMMITTEE REPORTS: Community Services Committee Finance and Administrative Services Public Safety Services Public Works Services

OLD BUSINESS:

NEW BUSINESS: MATTER RE: Reading and approval of claims

MATTER RE: Authorize a particular 2018 budget transfer in the amount of $2,400 to support purchase of computer equipment for the Finance Department (See Resolution #1 and letter dated February 15, 2018 from Director of Finance Suzanne Zaso).

MATTER RE: Authorize a particular 2018 budget transfer up to $13,000 support purchase of replacement X-Ray Detection Machine for Brighton Court (see Resolution #2 and letter from Colleen Rogers Administrative Court Clerk).

MATTERS OF THE SUPERVISOR: MATTER RE: Expenses and Revenue for month ending January 31, 2018

MATTERS OF THE ATTORNEY TO THE TOWN:

MATTERS OF THE TOWN CLERK:

MATTERS OF THE BOARD:

MOTION TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION:

MEETING ADJOURNED:

NEXT TOWN BOARD MEETING: March 14, 2018 Brighton Town Hall - 2300 Elmwood Avenue MINUTES 12

MINUTES OF TOWN BOARD MEETING OF THE TOWN OF BRIGHTON, COUNTY OF MONROE, NEW YORK, HELD AT THE BRIGHTON TOWN HALL, 2300 ELMWOOD AVENUE, ROCHESTER, NEW YORK January 24, 2018

Present: Supervisor William Moehle David Marcus, Deputy Town Clerk Councilmember James Vogel Kenneth Gordon, Attorney for the Town Councilmember Jason DiPonzio David Catholdi, Captain, Staff Services Councilmember Christopher Werner Tim Keef, Commissioner of Public Works Councilmember Robin Wilt Suzanne Zaso, Director of Finance

MEETING CALLED TO ORDER AT 7:04 PM:

PRESENTATIONS/RECOGNITIONS:

OPEN FORUM: • Jess Sudol - Whole Foods Plaza, Daniele project, Passero Associates • Judy Van Houten - 205 Shoreham Dr • Aaron Saykin, Hodgson Russ • Robert Brenner - Nixon Peabody • Judy Schwartz – 179 Ashbourne Rd • Heather O’Donnell – Rochester People’s Climate Coalition (RPCC)

APPROVAL OF AGENDA:

Motion by Councilmember Christopher Werner seconded by Councilmember Jason DiPonzio to approve the agenda

UPON ROLL CALL VOTE MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED

APPROVE AND FILE TOWN BOARD MEETING MINUTES FOR: December 13, 2017 Town Board Meeting December 27, 2017 Town Board Meeting January 2, 2018 Organizational Meeting January 10, 2018 Town Board Meeting

Motion by Councilmember Robin Wilt seconded by Councilmember Jason DiPonzio to approve and file the aforementioned minutes

UPON ROLL CALL VOTE MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED

PUBLIC HEARINGS:

BIDS: MATTER RE: Authorization to solicit for proposals as necessary for 2018 to provide various materials, equipment and services to the Town Facilities, Parks, and Public Works Departments which have been accounted for in the 2018 adopted budget (see Resolution #4 and letter dated January 11, 2018 from Timothy Keef, P.E. Commissioner of Public Works).

Motion by Councilmember Christopher Werner seconded by Councilmember Jason DiPonzio that the Town Board adopt the resolution as prepared by the Attorney for the Town as set forth in Exhibit No. 1 attached 13

UPON ROLL CALL VOTE MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED

MATTER RE: Authorization to solicit for proposals as necessary for 2018 to provide various materials, equipment and services to the Highway, Sewer and Public Works Departments which have been accounted for in the 2018 adopted budget (see Resolution #5 and letter dated January 11, 2018 from Timothy Keef, P.E. Commissioner of Public Works).

Motion by Councilmember Christopher Werner seconded by Councilmember James Vogel that the Town Board adopt the resolution as prepared by the Attorney for the Town as set forth in Exhibit No. 2 attached

UPON ROLL CALL VOTE MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED

MATTER RE: Authorization to solicit for proposals to provide annual maintenance services relating to the streetscaping associated with the Monroe Avenue GIGP project (see Resolution #11 and letter dated January 16, 2018 from Michael Guyon, P.E. Town Engineer).

Motion by Councilmember Robin Wilt seconded by Councilmember Jason DiPonzio that the Town Board adopt the resolution as prepared by the Attorney for the Town as set forth in Exhibit No. 3 attached

UPON ROLL CALL VOTE MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED

COMMUNICATIONS: FROM: Beth Tarduno dated January 11, 2018 to Supervisor thanking him for his stance concerning the NY State Canal Corporation’s Clear Cutting project.

FROM: Judy Schwartz - dated January 24, 2018 – Comments from open forum

FROM: Heather O’Donnell dated January 24, 2018 - Comments from open forum

COMMITTEE REPORTS: Community Services Committee - Met on 1/16/18; next meeting 2/22/18 at 9:30 AM at Brookside School. Finance and Administrative Services – Met on 1/16/18; next meeting 2/6/18 at 3:30 PM in the Stage Conference Room at Town Hall. Public Safety Services – Met 1/9/18; next meeting 2/13/18 at 8:30 AM in the Stage Conference Room at Town Hall. Public Works Services – Met 1/20/18; next meeting 2/6/18 at 9:00 AM in the Auditorium at Town Hall.

OLD BUSINESS:

NEW BUSINESS: MATTER RE: Reading and approval of claims

Motion by Councilmember Jason DiPonzio seconded by Councilmember James Vogel that the Supervisor read and approve payment of the claims as set forth in Exhibit No. 4 attached

UPON ROLL CALL VOTE MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED

Councilmember Wilt recused herself from the next matter and left the room.

MATTER RE: Authorize acceptance and filing of Final Environmental Impact Statement for proposed Whole Foods Plaza under State Environmental Quality Review ACT (SEQRA) and set February 28, 2018 as date for continuation of Public Hearing on 14

the Incentive Zoning application for same (See Resolution #17, letter dated January 23, 2018 from Town Planner, Ramsey Boehner and all other related materials).

UPON ROLL CALL VOTE the following vote was recorded. 4 Yes, 1 member recused. Supervisor Moehle Yes. Councilmember Vogel Yes, Councilmember Diponzio Yes, Councilmember Werner Yes, Councilmember Wilt Recused, Motion Carried

Councilmember Wilt rejoined the meeting.

MATTER RE: Accept donation in the amount of $50 from Richard C. Byassee for the Brighton Veterans Memorial fund (see Resolution #1)

Motion by Councilmember James Vogel seconded by Councilmember Christopher Werner that the Town Board adopt the resolution as prepared by the Attorney for the Town as set forth in Exhibit No. 6 attached

UPON ROLL CALL VOTE MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED

MATTER RE: Approval to accept donation in the amount of $500 from Howard and Daphne Cohen to support the Brighton Police Department (see Resolution #3 and letter dated January 8, 2018 from Police Chief Mark Henderson).

UPON ROLL CALL VOTE MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED

MATTER RE: Authorize Supervisor to execute a Stormwater Maintenance Agreement and all related easement agreements and documents in connection with the Pinnacle Hills Subdivision project (See Resolution #6 and letter dated January 8, 2018 from Michael Guyon, P.E. Town Engineer).

UPON ROLL CALL VOTE MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED

MATTER RE: Authorize Supervisor to execute contract with Colonial Fire Protection Systems Inc. to provide quarterly automatic fire sprinkler system testing at Fire Station located at 2695 West Henrietta Road (see Resolution #7 and letter dated January 11, 2018 from Fire Marshal Christopher Roth).

Motion by Councilmember Robin Wilt seconded by Councilmember Jason DiPonzio that the Town Board adopt the resolution as prepared by the Attorney for the Town as set forth in Exhibit No. 9 attached

UPON ROLL CALL VOTE MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED

MATTER RE: Authorize Supervisor to authorize the Town and execute any related documents with Woodstone Custom Homes, Inc, to approve abandonment of particular existing highway and public rights of way parcels in the Town located in the proposed Pinnacle Hill Subdivision project (see Resolution #8 and letter dated January 11, 2018 from Michael Guyon, P.E. Town Engineer).

UPON ROLL CALL VOTE MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED

MATTER RE: Authorize Supervisor to execute letter of engagement with Raymond F. Wager, CPA to provide independent financial reporting, auditing and accounting services for fiscal years 2018 through 2020 (see Resolution #9 and letter dated January 12, 2018 from Suzanne Zaso, Director of Finance).

Motion by Councilmember Jason DiPonzio seconded by Councilmember James Vogel that the Town Board adopt the resolution as prepared by the Attorney for the Town as set forth in Exhibit No. 11 attached

UPON ROLL CALL VOTE MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED

MATTER RE: Approval to transfer a total of $4,815.85 from various Departmental Maintenance I.T. support accounts to various Information Technology Systems Department computer equipment accounts (see Resolution #10 and letter dated January 8, 2018 from Jeremy Lutz, I.T. Director).

Motion by Councilmember Jason DiPonzio seconded by Councilmember Christopher Werner that the Town Board adopt the resolution as prepared by the Attorney for the Town as set forth in Exhibit No. 12 attached

UPON ROLL CALL VOTE MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED

MATTER RE: Approval to appropriate $3,500 from the seized assets funding account to support a Mental Health First Aid (MHFA) training program for the Police Department (see Resolution #12 and letter dated January 18, 2018 from Police Chief Mark Henderson).

Motion by Councilmember Robin Wilt seconded by Councilmember Jason DiPonzio that the Town Board adopt the resolution as prepared by the Attorney for the Town as set forth in Exhibit No. 13 attached

UPON ROLL CALL VOTE MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED

MATTER RE: Approval to appoint a particular person as a part-time, on-call School Traffic Guard, effective January 22, 2018 (see Resolution #13 and letter dated January 16, 2018 from Police Chief Mark Henderson).

Motion by Councilmember Robin Wilt seconded by Councilmember James Vogel that the Town Board adopt the resolution as prepared by the Attorney for the Town as set forth in Exhibit No. 14 attached

UPON ROLL CALL VOTE MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED

MATTER RE: Set February 14, 2018 as Public Hearing date for proposed Extension #101 to the Brighton Consolidated Sewer District relating to the Pinnacle Hills subdivision project (see Resolution #14 with letter dated January 8, 2018 from Junior Engineer, Chad Roscoe and all associated documents).

UPON ROLL CALL VOTE MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED

MATTER RE: Set February 14, 2018 as Public Hearing date for proposed formation of the Pinnacle Hills Drainage District relating to the Pinnacle Hills subdivision project (see Resolution #15 with letter dated January 8, 2018 from Junior Engineer, Chad Roscoe and all associated documents).

UPON ROLL CALL VOTE MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED

MATTER RE: Authorize permanent appointment of provisional employee Jeremy Lutz as Coordinator of Data Processing effective January 24, 2018 (See Resolution #16 and letter dated January 18, 2018 from Tricia VanPutte, Director of Personnel).

Motion by Councilmember James Vogel seconded by Councilmember Jason DiPonzio that the Town Board adopt the resolution as prepared by the Attorney for the Town as set forth in Exhibit No. 17 attached

UPON ROLL CALL VOTE MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED

MATTER RE: Appoint a particular person as a member of the Brighton Memorial Library Board of Trustees for a five (5) year term effective immediately through December 31, 2022 (see Resolution #18)

Motion by Councilmember Jason DiPonzio seconded by Councilmember James Vogel that the Town Board adopt the resolution as prepared by the Attorney for the Town as set forth in Exhibit No. 18 attached

UPON ROLL CALL VOTE MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED

MATTERS OF THE SUPERVISOR: MATTER RE: Inclusion, Diversity and Equity Advisory Committee.

Motion by Councilmember Robin Wilt seconded by Councilmember Jason DiPonzio that the Town Board adopt the resolution as prepared by the Attorney for the Town as set forth in Exhibit No. 19 attached

UPON ROLL CALL VOTE MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED

MATTERS OF THE ATTORNEY TO THE TOWN:

MATTERS OF THE TOWN CLERK:

MATTERS OF THE BOARD:

MOTION TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION AT 9:16 PM:

Motion by Councilmember Robin Wilt seconded by Councilmember Jason DiPonzio to go into executive session to discuss employment of particular people.

UPON ROLL CALL VOTE MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED

MOTION TO EXIT EXECUTIVE SESSION AT 9:33 PM:

Motion by Councilmember James Vogel seconded by Councilmember Christopher Werner to come out of executive session.

UPON ROLL CALL VOTE MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED

ADJOURNED AT 9:34 PM:

Motion by Councilmember James Vogel seconded by Councilmember Robin Wilt to adjourn at 9:34 PM

UPON ROLL CALL VOTE MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED

CERTIFICATION:

I, David Marcus, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and accurate record of the proceeding of the Town of Brighton, County of Monroe, State of New York meeting held on the 24th day of January 2018 and that I recorded said minutes of the aforesaid meeting of the Town Board of the Town of Brighton, New York. 18

MINUTES OF TOWN BOARD MEETING OF THE TOWN OF BRIGHTON, COUNTY OF MONROE, NEW YORK, HELD AT THE BRIGHTON TOWN HALL, 2300 ELMWOOD AVENUE, ROCHESTER, NEW YORK February 14, 2018

Present: Supervisor William Moehle David Marcus, Deputy Town Clerk Councilmember James Vogel Kenneth Gordon, Attorney for the Town Councilmember Jason DiPonzio Mark Henderson, Chief of Police Councilmember Christopher Werner Tim Keef, Commissioner of Public Works Councilmember Robin Wilt Suzanne Zaso, Director of Finance

MEETING CALLED TO ORDER AT 7:03 PM:

PRESENTATIONS/RECOGNITIONS: 2018 State of the Town Address – The Honorable William W. Moehle February 2018 African American History Month – Proclamation OPEN FORUM:

• Ruth O’Brien & Cea Gallant – Bri-Pen Rides Service • Margaret Peet – 129 Klink Rd • Judy Schwartz – 179 Ashbourne Rd

APPROVAL OF AGENDA:

Motion by Councilmember Christopher Werner seconded by Councilmember James Vogel to approve the agenda

UPON ROLL CALL VOTE MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED

APPROVE AND FILE TOWN BOARD MEETING MINUTES FOR:

PUBLIC HEARINGS: MATTER RE: Extension #101 to the Brighton Consolidated Sewer District relating to the Pinnacle Hills subdivision project (see Resolution #1, letter dated January 8, 2018 from Junior Engineer, Chad Roscoe and all associated documents).

(Complete transcript under separate cover)

Motion by Councilmember Robin Wilt seconded by Councilmember James Vogel that the Town Board adopt the resolution as prepared by the Attorney for the Town as set forth in Exhibit No. 1 attached

UPON ROLL CALL VOTE MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED

MATTER RE: Proposed formation of the Pinnacle Hills Drainage District relating to the Pinnacle Hills subdivision project (see Resolution #4, letter dated January 8, 2018 from Junior Engineer, Chad Roscoe and all associated documents).

(Complete transcript under separate cover)

UPON ROLL CALL VOTE MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED

MATTER RE: Proposed Extension #102 to the Brighton Consolidated Sewer District relating to property at 2212 West Henrietta Road (see Resolution #2, letter dated January 17, 2018 from Assistant Engineer, Evert Garcia and all associated documents).

(Complete transcript under separate cover)

UPON ROLL CALL VOTE MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED

BIDS:

COMMUNICATIONS: FROM: Richard Rosenbloom to Supervisor dated January 25, 2018 regarding excellent service he received from our Sewer Department.

FROM: Monroe County Legislator Vincent Felder to Supervisor dated January 4, 2018 congratulating Supervisor Moehle on his swearing in as Supervisor and praising the positive working relationship between the Town and the County of Monroe.

FROM: Brighton Historian Mary Jo Lanphear’s 2017 Annual Report to Supervisor and members of the Town Board dated January 11, 2018.

FROM: Ginny Hall to Supervisor dated February 1, 2018 thanking him for his attendance at the Indivisible Rochester Women’s Rally and a Whole Foods news article.

FROM: Town Justices Karen Morris and John Falk – Referencing 2017 Town Court Annual Report to Supervisor and members of the Town Board.

FROM: Brighton Volunteer Ambulance – 2017 Annual Report

FROM: NY Upstate Chapter American Society Landscape Architects 2017 Merit Award to Bayer Landscape Architecture, PLLC for the Brickyard Trail project.

FROM: Ruth O’Brien and Cea Gallant, Bri-Pen ride service Flyer

FROM: Margaret Peet comments from open forum

Motion by Councilmember James Vogel seconded by Councilmember Christopher Werner to receive and file the aforementioned communications

UPON ROLL CALL VOTE MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED

COMMITTEE REPORTS: Community Services Committee - Has not met since last Town Board meeting; next meeting 2/22/18 at 9:30 AM at Brookside School. Finance and Administrative Services – Met on 2/6/18; next meeting 2/16/18 at 3:30 PM in the Stage Conference Room at Town Hall. Public Safety Services – Met 2/13/18; next meeting 3/13/18 at 8:30 AM in the Stage Conference Room at Town Hall. Public Works Services – Met 2/6/18; next meeting 3/6/18 at 10:00 AM in the Stage Conference Room at Town Hall. 20

OLD BUSINESS:

NEW BUSINESS: MATTER RE: Reading and approval of claims

Motion by Councilmember Jason DiPonzio seconded by Councilmember Christopher Werner that the Supervisor read and approve payment of the claims as set forth in Exhibit No. 4 attached

UPON ROLL CALL VOTE MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED

Councilmember Wilt recused herself from the next three matters and left the room. Supervisor Moehle and the Town Board adjusted the agenda to consider the Stantec resolution earlier than scheduled as Councilmember Wilt would have recused herself from that matter as well.

MATTER RE: Approval to amend Public Notice concerning Town Board Meeting and Public Hearing scheduled for February 28, 2018 to reflect change of venue from Brighton Town Hall to Council Rock School, 600 Grosvenor Road (see Resolution #25).

Motion by Councilmember James Vogel seconded by Councilmember Jason DiPonzio that the Town Board adopt the resolution as prepared by the Attorney for the Town as set forth in Exhibit No. 5 attached

MATTER RE: Receive and file second Letter of Intent dated February 1, 2018 concerning the Whole Foods Plaza Incentive Zoning project and consent to extend date for SEQRA findings statement (see Resolution #13 and letter dated February 7, 2018 from Town Planner Ramsey Boehner and associated documents).

MATTER RE: Authorize approval to amend existing agreement with Stantec to support costs associated with additional services relating to the Environmental Review of the proposed Whole Foods Plaza project (see Resolution #18 and letter dated February 2, 2018 from Ramsey Boehner, Environmental Review Liaison Officer).

Councilmember Wilt rejoined the meeting.

MATTER RE: Authorize Supervisor to executive a Sanitary Sewer Easement Agreement relating to Extension #102 to the Brighton Consolidated Sanitary Sewer District (see Resolution #3 and letter dated January 17, 2018 from Assistant Engineer Evert Garcia). 21

UPON ROLL CALL VOTE MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED

MATTER RE: Approval to accept $4,105.94 in funding from the Justice Court Assistance Program to be used by Brighton Town Court (see Resolution #5 and letter dated January 29, 2018 from Colleen M. Rogers, Administrative Court Clerk).

Motion by Councilmember Jason DiPonzio seconded by Councilmember James Vogel that the Town Board adopt the resolution as prepared by the Attorney for the Town as set forth in Exhibit No. 9 attached

UPON ROLL CALL VOTE MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED

Supervisor Moehle recused himself from the next matter. The Supervisor turned the Chair over to Councilmember James Vogel and left the room. Councilmember Vogel then proceeded with the meeting for this matter.

MATTER RE: Set March 14, 2018 as Public Hearing date for Extension #103 to the Brighton Consolidated Sanitary Sewer District in connection with the 1925 South Clinton Avenue development project (see Resolution #6 and letter dated January 19, 2018 from Chad Roscoe, Junior Engineer).

UPON ROLL CALL VOTE the following vote was recorded. 4 Yes, 1 member recused. Supervisor Moehle recused. Councilmember Vogel Yes, Councilmember Diponzio Yes, Councilmember Werner Yes, Councilmember Wilt Yes,. Motion Carried

Supervisor Moehle rejoined the meeting.

MATTER RE: Authorize Supervisor to execute agreement with Eco-Green Park to provide secure town departmental document shredding services (see Resolution #7 and letter dated February 6, 2018 from Town Clerk, Dan Aman)

Motion by Councilmember Robin Wilt seconded by Councilmember Jason DiPonzio that the Town Board adopt the resolution as prepared by the Attorney for the Town as set forth in Exhibit No. 11 attached

UPON ROLL CALL VOTE MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED

MATTER RE: Approval to accept donation from the Board of Trustees of the Jack G. Lubelle Foundation Inc. in the amount of $1500 to support the town’s senior citizen recreational programing (see Resolution #8 and letter dated January 19, 2018 from Rebecca Cotter, Recreation Director).

Motion by Councilmember Robin Wilt seconded by Councilmember Jason DiPonzio that the Town Board adopt the resolution as prepared by the Attorney for the Town as set forth in Exhibit No. 12 attached

UPON ROLL CALL VOTE MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED

MATTER RE: Authorize Supervisor to execute agreements with New York State Municipal Workers’ Compensation Alliance (Comp Alliance) for employee workers’ compensation benefits for 2018 and Wright Risk Management as third party 22

administrator of any pre-existing claims (see Resolution #9 and letter dated January 17, 2018 from Tricia VanPutte, Director of Personnel).

Motion by Councilmember Jason DiPonzio seconded by Councilmember Robin Wilt that the Town Board adopt the resolution as prepared by the Attorney for the Town as set forth in Exhibit No. 13 attached

UPON ROLL CALL VOTE MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED

MATTER RE: Set Public Hearing date for March 14, 2018 to consider proposed Source of Income Local Law (see Resolution #10, letter dated January 5, 2018 and proposed draft local law).

Motion by Councilmember Robin Wilt seconded by Councilmember James Vogel that the Town Board adopt the resolution as prepared by the Attorney for the Town as set forth in Exhibit No. 14 attached

UPON ROLL CALL VOTE MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED

MATTER RE: Set Public Hearing date of March 14, 2018 for Community Choice Aggregation Local Law (see Resolution #14 and letter dated February 8, 2018 from Town Planner Ramsey Boehner along with associated materials).

Motion by Councilmember Robin Wilt seconded by Councilmember Christopher Werner that the Town Board adopt the resolution as prepared by the Attorney for the Town as set forth in Exhibit No. 15 attached

UPON ROLL CALL VOTE MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED

MATTER RE: Authorize Supervisor to execute agreement with Genesee Valley Ford for provision of police vehicle set up services (see Resolution #11 and letter from Police Chief Mark Henderson, dated January 30, 2018).

UPON ROLL CALL VOTE MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED

MATTER RE: Authorize Supervisor to execute affidavit concerning two State and Municipal (SAM) Grants with the Dormitory Authority of the State of NY (DASNY) (see Resolution #15 and letter dated January 30, 2018 from Michael Guyon, P.E. Town Engineer).

Motion by Councilmember Robin Wilt seconded by Councilmember Jason DiPonzio that the Town Board adopt the resolution as prepared by the Attorney for the Town as set forth in Exhibit No. 17 attached

UPON ROLL CALL VOTE MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED

MATTER RE: Authorize Supervisor to execute agreement with the University of Rochester for the Strong Employee Assistance Program for 2018 (see Resolution #16 and letter dated January 31, 2018 from Tricia VanPutte, Director of Personnel).

Motion by Councilmember Jason DiPonzio seconded by Councilmember James Vogel that the Town Board adopt the resolution as prepared by the Attorney for the Town as set forth in Exhibit No. 18 attached

UPON ROLL CALL VOTE MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED

MATTER RE: Authorize Supervisor to execute agreement with the Monroe County Water Authority to provide new fire hydrant installation and related services in connection with the 23

Town’s landfill service renovation project (see Resolution #17, letter dated January 30, 2018 from Assistant Engineer Evert Garcia and all associated documents).

UPON ROLL CALL VOTE MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED

MATTER RE: Approval of various 2017 budget transfers and appropriations to reflect actual budgetary activity as occurred in 2017 (see Resolution #19 and letter dated February 2, 2018 from Suzanne Zaso, Finance Director).

Motion by Councilmember Jason DiPonzio seconded by Councilmember Robin Wilt that the Town Board adopt the resolution as prepared by the Attorney for the Town as set forth in Exhibit No. 20 attached

UPON ROLL CALL VOTE MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED

MATTER RE: Authorize Supervisor to execute a contract with Paragon Compliance LLC to provide reporting services relating to employer Affordable Care Act compliance (see Resolution #20 and letter dated February 2, 2018 from Suzanne Zaso, Finance Director).

UPON ROLL CALL VOTE MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED

MATTER RE: Approval to accept donation from the Garden Lovers Club of Brighton in the amount of $750 to be used to plant new trees at Buckland Park (see Resolution #21 and letter dated February 1, 2018 from Matt Beeman, Superintendent of Parks).

Motion by Councilmember Robin Wilt seconded by Councilmember Jason DiPonzio that the Town Board adopt the resolution as prepared by the Attorney for the Town as set forth in Exhibit No. 22 attached

UPON ROLL CALL VOTE MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED

MATTER RE: Authorize Supervisor to execute contract with Young Explosives Corp. to provide fireworks display services at the 2018 July 4th celebration (see Resolution #23 and letter dated February 1, 2018 from Matt Beeman, Superintendent of Parks).

Motion by Councilmember Robin Wilt seconded by Councilmember James Vogel that the Town Board adopt the resolution as prepared by the Attorney for the Town as set forth in Exhibit No. 23 attached

UPON ROLL CALL VOTE MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED

MATTER RE: Authorize Supervisor to execute agreement with the “Skycoasters” to provide entertainment services at the 2018 July 4th celebration (see Resolution #24 and letter dated February 1, 2018 from Matt Beeman, Superintendent of Parks).

Motion by Councilmember Robin Wilt seconded by Councilmember James Vogel that the Town Board adopt the resolution as prepared by the Attorney for the Town as set forth in Exhibit No. 24 attached

UPON ROLL CALL VOTE MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED

MATTER RE: Approval for Supervisor to execute an agreement with Bartlett Tree Experts, to provide arborist consulting services for 2018 with renewal option for up to three additional one-year terms (see Resolution #12 and letter dated February 6, 2018 from Chad Roscoe, Junior Engineer).

UPON ROLL CALL VOTE MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED

MATTERS OF THE SUPERVISOR:

MATTERS OF THE ATTORNEY TO THE TOWN:

MATTERS OF THE TOWN CLERK:

MATTERS OF THE BOARD:

MOTION TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION:

ADJOURNED AT 9:50 PM:

Motion by Councilmember Christopher Werner seconded by Councilmember James Vogel to adjourn at 9:50 PM

UPON ROLL CALL VOTE MOTION UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED

CERTIFICATION:

I, David Marcus, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and accurate record of the proceeding of the Town of Brighton, County of Monroe, State of New York meeting held on the 14th day of February 2018 and that I recorded said minutes of the aforesaid meeting of the Town Board of the Town of Brighton, New York. PUBLIC HEARING & Co -----Original Message----- From: grace moreno [mailto:[email protected] Sent: Monday, February 12, 2018 8:53 AM To: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; chris. werner@townofbrighton .org Subject: Bring Whole Foods To Rochester

I am sending this email to each of the Board members in Brighton ..I am hopeful that you will all finally realize that Whole Foods will be a wonderful support to a community that needs a Health Food Store with a well established reputation . I moved to this area five years ago and hoped that Whole Foods would be available. This store brings a complete ability to help those of us of all ages who are involved in a life of organic and plant based diets which many believe will assist in having a long and healthy life style .. .I love Wegmans but it is not a complete Health Food Store like Whole Foods .. .lt won't destroy the traffic on that street. It will create a new shopping adventure for all of Rochester. Please Bring Whole Foods market to this area This Year!!!

Respectfully,

Grace From: Mick Whittemore [mailto:[email protected]]

Sent: Saturday, February 17, 2018 10:54 AM

To: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]

Subject: Whole Foods

Thank you for serving our town. My name is Norman Whittemore and my family resides at 2262 Clover Street.

Please don't approve the Whole Foods development project. I simply don't understand why the town has worked around existing zoning laws, even considered a project too big for the .location in the first place, and already disrupted the Auburn Trail.

It would be nice for that location to be updated and developed, but not with such a big project. And, we need a guarantee that there will be no access road on to Clover Street, which is already busy enough for a residential area.

I love this area and our home, and pay $30K in school and to~n taxes, and don't want to leave due to this decision. And, now our town is in the news for all of the wrong reasons, including lawsuits and what sounds like backroom deals. I know the town can do better than this and reach a decision that sticks to our zoning laws and protects our neighborhoods.

Thank you.

Norman "Mick" Whittemore [email protected] 2262 Clover Street Rochester, NY From: Audra Webber [mailto:[email protected]]

Sent: Monday, February 19, 2018 10:24 AM

To: [email protected]; [email protected]; robin. [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]

Subject: Whole Foods Market

All,

I am a resident of Brighton and support bringing Whole Foods to Brighton. This impasse had gone on for far too long and that corridor along Monroe Ave looks terrible and blighted. In addition, Buffalo now has a Whole Foods and there are a number of Brighton/Rochester residents who have travelled to Buffalo just to go to there. Isn't that a bit ridiculous?

Please approve the plan for the Whole Foods plaza and let's get Brighton on track.

Thank you,

Audra Webber

446 Antlers Dr. From: Shari Eduardo [mailto:[email protected]]

Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2018 8:44AM

To: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]

Subject: whole foods center brighton town meeting

As a long term resident of Brighton, I would like to voice my support for the Daniele Family Companies and the overdue resolution of the Whole Foods matter and the eyesore Monroe Ave has become. Please move ahead and allow Whole Foods to build at that location.

Regards,

Shari Eduardo

Benefit Consultant

Worksite Marketing/Presentations/Enrollments

Brighton, New York [email protected] February 22, 2018

Town of Brighton Board Members 2300 Elmwood Avenue Brighton, NY 14618

Dear Board Members,

In advance of next Wednesday's Town meeting I would like to share my opinion on the Monroe Avenue development project as I will be on business in Washington, D.C. and not able to be heard in person. For context, I was born into a home on Hillside Avenue, currently reside in Pittsford, am a regular customer in the businesses along Monroe Avenue, and was employed by the Daniele's prior to 1999.

It is my opinion that the Daniele Family have put together an excellent development package that will benefit the residents of the Town of Brighton, and the region by bringing not only a world class grocery store but also a progressive yet safe plaza. This project would be an investment in the area for the coming decades to improve what has been a deteriorating corridor, that has already seen the benefit of the Daniele Family's investment in four properties. This is not a short-term play, and like all capital investment pr9jects they have done requires a personal oversight to align with the quality they are known for in their businesses, and relationships.

I worked for the Daniele family at Mario's during the pursuit of my college degree. Their flexibility with me was critical to the completion of my degree, but was also extended to those committed to their work for the last 40 years to achieve their personal goals. Their investment in me allowed me to finalize my education, and grow a~ a businessman to a point where I operate a $300m organization, and the growth associated with it. I would suggest that this is exactly the type of people that we want in our region leading the way for redevelopment, and hope that you will vote positively on both the incentive zoning and approvals to move forward.

The benefit of their real property taxes has significantly bolstered your ability to run the towns services, to no benefit for them while awaiting this decision. I hope that you will have the wisdom to see that this is an opportunity to not only improve the physical attractiveness of the town, but the business and constituent reputation as well.

As a closing thought, I was recently in University Park Florida, a community like Brighton and Rochester in that it holds many varied demographics of ethnicity, age and wealth, that appreciates the arts. I enjoyed lunch at their new Whole Foods, built inside of 2 miles from Fresh Market, Super Target Grocery, WaiMart Neighborhood Market, and Two Publix! While there is higher population density, they all keep busy, provide fantastic choice at multiple price points, and have seen very effective traffic management through partnership between Benderson Development and the local municipalities. Food for thought.

Best Regards,

Kevin F. Kenny ;2., :20 I;? UOt\..V gitll ------~~------·--- - r· (.i - r l-· i rs~.L !"'-t'-11 k 1t)}:l ~ . r~..r CP'? r I& u.Jn o__ Y_ ~~~-/-Dn. Ot-is L~+fe:v i-s d~tk+ 'fke_ p1--vP-osd .z:::-e!'1i rt§ ch.t:utt§'?__~.-- 1 't~utl~ &t.:V);L{ d t:;t /[01tU uJho lc J.Cct(5 1"'8 tYLo1le. i 1'/fo '{-l'l(!__ ~ (I YJ e v {V/ ~~~· o s s If c. _ _1t).L __ Vlt\'l/e.. Ci.v-ec{ o{'~ iV}~()e ~~t-·· Lfdi R.oosw~lf f2d 2_.gs-:__ _ ~-~l?- ncniJ. ,,.,. tlu. .. lct;J- 1 o ~clfs aJtd.:.. e~fl 111.ote sv lrl'f-?LC..lt4'__ -~t(_S~ fr~J£~ &Ulr ce-rner 5C'!U'!-h • .-.r1 JIAonrn~ fv _ _ __c.c:ovev ha.s ~v'\ ho vr-e.,Jau s ~~&\U il.nYL 0-(+e r 10 ~m ~a..V1d ,, . I~ .? ~I 1...... · ...L.. ll 7 1 __ · of' c,;.. r~ · -·--~~ 1'-t'- 0 r I t ., Vl t'> i7 clae:- 1v Tite 5~r Vo lA.. p'11t2../te. xl-l( 'ililfJ ______·Q:t~_sqo in ~i-·h _

Subject: FW: for inclusion in public record/ Whole Foods

From: Ginni Jurkowski [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2018 10:08 PM To: [email protected] Subject: for inclusion in public record/ Whole Foods

We can't attend the upcoming meeting. So we are submitting this letter to the Town Clerk to be read.

In the many pages of documents submitted by the Whole Foods project developer, there is one piece that deserves special attention. That ·is the proposal to improve the Auburn Trail from Aliens Creek Road to Highland Avenue.

Here are some points for you to consider.

UTILITY TRUCK SUPPORT My husband has been in the transportation industry for 50+ years. He believes that when the Rochester Subway tracks were taken out, there still was the ballast rock which originally offered support to the RR tracks. Now when utility and other heavy trucks use this trail to maintain and repair lines, they are supported.

He is concerned if there was some gravel pavement stone on top, that the heavy trucks will leave ruts or have more of a difficult time navigating this trail. He also mentioned that although grass has grown over much of the ballast rocks, the rocks provide good drainage for the area. We have been told that some of the overhead lines actually are for power as far away as Canandaigua. So if the trucks can't easily drive these trails, it will have a far reaching impact.

The path is wide enough for these trucks to navigate. And it is definitely wide enough for civilians. If there are large ruts, that will be hazardous to the pedestrians.

TRAIL USAGE We have resided here for more than 20 years. Over that time, we have seen a significant increase in the number of people who use the trail for recreational activities ... Bird watching, photography, hiking, jogging, dog walking, biking, snowshoeing and cross country skiing. Area schools use it for their cross country teams. And school children walk the trail on the way to and from school. So it definitely is a multi-use trail.

It is being used in its natural state. Near us, grass, flowers, bushes and trees attract and protect the wildlife. Throughout the year, we see deer, fox, chipmunks, groundhogs, birds, squirrels and other animals. ·

Humans and wildlife are successfully co-existing in this natural setting.

TRAIL SURFACE Personally, we have walked some other trails that have had stone dust, cinder, are paved or have larger stones bases. They are not the same experience as meandering down a natural, grass path. And in some cases, the larger stones actually are dangerous ankle turners.

1 COMMUNITY SAFETY Some communities are experiencing more break-ins, thefts and burglaries. If you look at crime in areas such as canal walkway access areas, you will see this. Personally we have experienced this at the Rte 65 access point and the Burgundy Basin access point. Police told us that since there was a path, the thieves could quickly and easily get away utilizing the maintained path. So we do not want to see any increase in crime based on easy access to our neighborhood.

ENVISION BRIGHTON VISION STATEMENT The Vision Statement had 4 components. The existing Auburn Trail is an example of two of those goals.

-Preserve our natural environmental assets

-Ensure the public health, safety (and welfare for all.)

SUGGESTION In our opinion, there is no need to formalize the appearance of the trail that is providing ·a positive experience for so many. In a fast paced world, it is a welcome retreat. While other communities are having to construct a natural environment, we have a preexisting one in terrific condition.

If there are to be gifts in exchange for Incentive Zoning, make it something the community NEEDS better sidewalks, improved road maintenance, replacement of aging trees, expansion of Buckland Park, a dedicated Senior Citizen Center, a Community Center.

Thanks for considering these option~.

Ginni and John Jurkowski 805 S. Grosvenor Road Rochester, NY 14618

February 22, 2018

2 From: George T. Fekete [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Sunday, February 25, 2018 3:38 PM To: [email protected] Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]

Subject: Whole Foods Plaza Project

Mr. Moehle,

I do not plan on attending the February 28 Whole Foods Plaza project meeting. I am sending you this email so you know where I stand on the issue. Also, I am sending copies to the Town Bo~rd because my intentions will be influenced by their decisions on this matter as well.

I am a lifelong, loyal Democrat who has supported and voted for you and other Brighton Democrats since the1970s .

I have three issues with the proposed Whole Foods .Plaza project:

1. If approved, this project will make the already-stressed traffic congestion on MonroeAvenue even worse.

2. Exceptions to zoning ordinances should only be gr~nted in exceptional cases that merit them; this one does not. Far less-intrusive exceptions have been denied in the past. I believe one of them had to do with signage and/or plastic utensils in a fast food restaurant not far from the proposed location of the Whole Foods Plaza.

3. Anthony Danielle has trie~d- sometimes successfully- to use .his influence and money to NOT follow the rules that the rest of us must. His arrogant attempt to circumvent rules protecting eagles on his property near Irondequoit Bay and to build a car wash at the Clover/Monroe . Avenue intersection are two examples. It is time to stop pandering to him.

Unless this proposal is totally defeated I will not vote for you or anyone else that appears on my ballot in the future.

Sincerely,

George T. Fekete

P.S. Jim, you may remember me from Xerox Customer Administration back in the day. From: Jonathon Little [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Sunday, February 25, 2018 9:48 PM

To: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; chris. werner@townofbrighton .org

Subject: Support of Whole Foods in Brighton

Brighton Town Board members,

I've lived in Brighton for over ten years and have two daughters in the Brighton school system. Whole Foods would be a welcome addition to the community.

Thank you for your time,

Jon From: Joey Valenti [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Sunday, February 25, 2018 11:25 PM To: [email protected] Cc: [email protected] Subject: Whole Foods, Progess

Dear Mr. Moehle,

Let me start of by saying I admire the work you ha.ve done for this community. In the past few months I have ~eard a lot about the possibility of a Whole Foods store being added \ into the Brighton community. A lot of people have probably contacted you concerning this topic. As senior at Brighton High School I believe I am credible enough to voiCe my opinion. The creation of a Whole Foods store will benefit the people of Brighton. This is because the competition between Wegman's and Whole Foods will bring the price of basic products down. Also it will bring more jobs into the community including jobs for younger workers who need basic experience in the workforce. Not to mention the money the community will gain by taxing their property. The argument against the Whole Foods is being lobbied heavily by Wegman's. The traffic situation couldn't get much worse and surety civil engineers could be brought in to fix the situation on Monroe. I believe the pros outweigh the cons in this situation and would love to have the option to shop at Whole Foods. Thank you for your consideration.

Regards,

Joseph Valenti Penelope R. Weller 85 Kirk Drive Rochester. NY 14610

February 26, 2018

Supervisor William Moehle Town of Brighton 2300 Elmwood Avenue Rochester, NY 14618

Re: Whole Foods

Dear Supervisor Moehle:

Again, in the interest of full disclosure, I will remind you that my husband was employed by Wegmans for 25 years. I have previously stated that I do not limit my grocery shopping to Wegmans. Convenience and the availability of products I want are determining factors in where I shop on any given day.

In my letter of May 15, 2017 (enclosed), I mentioned some specific concerns about the traffic in the area of the proposed Whole Foods store. Many times I have avoided going toward Wegmans, Trader Joe's or other businesses in the area when I see the gridlock. If this can happen on a sunny afternoon in June, imagine what "rush hour" or holiday traffic will be like. Remember the unquantifiable component of human nature in heavy traffic.

Not long ago, the Town of Brighton was assured that the entrance and egress of the Royal Car Wash would not cause traffic issues at the intersection of Monroe Avenue and Clover Streets. Have you seen what happens as cars exit the car wash and tum left toward Monroe Avenue? I have neither the skills nor courage to do that! Are the same traffic engineers involved in the current study for the Danieles? The proposed size of the Whole Foods store suggests that traffic volume will increase exponentially and the residents of Brighton will bear the burden.

Given the fact that Amazon has purchased Whole Foods, have you been assured that the proposed Whole Foods store will remain a traditional Whole Foods or will it become a hybrid store that also distributes fresh foods to Amazon customers or will have a lengthy drive through line for "pick up" (particularly burdensome during the evening rush hour)? Amazon has been innovative in their planning and I believe that this should be considered. A hybrid will generate additional truck traffic, as well as drive-through traffic. Without knowing who the additional tenants of the plaza will be, how can you make an informed decision?

Neighbors should be given protection regarding truck access to the site. At no time should trucks be allowed access where neighbors are impacted by noise and traffic. In the past, it seems that the Daniele philosophy has been that it's better to ask for forgiveness than ask for permission with regard to access behind Mario's Restaurant. The proposed incentives will do little to negate the impact on the neighbors. Offering a traffic light to ameliorate a self-caused traffic jam is merely self-serving. While parts of the Auburn Trail would benefit from additional work, how will that benefit neighbors most affected by the project?

I will admit that the presence of Whole Foods has a certain snob appeal in a tony community like Brighton, but a recent Consumer Reports study on Grocery Store Satisfaction ranks Wegmans at # 1, Trader Joe's at #3, Aldi's (part of Trader Joe's) at# 13 and Whole Foods at #30. Additionally, a study done in the Metropolitan NY area discovered that several stores had their corporate thumbs on the scale and were not providing the amount of product on the labels (copy of newspaper report attached).

I would like to reiterate that I would likely shop at Whole Foods under the right circumstances and at the right location, but this proposal does not meet my criteria.

I am not anti-development or anti-Daniele. The Daniele family has built a very successful business empire due to their hard work and business acumen. I do not want the expansion of that empire to be at the expense of the safety and well-being of the citizens of Brighton.

Penelope R. Weller

C: Judy Schwartz, BNU Ramsey Boehner, Town of Brighton Planning Jason DiPonzio, Councilperson ' James Vogel, Councilperson Christopher Werner, Councilperson Robin Wilt, Councilperson EDITION

IT'S NEVER BEEN EASIER TO DONATE,

FOOD & DRINK 06/251201510:42 am er 1 Whole Foods Busted For Overcharging On Packaged Foods ~Again·

i .. By Joe Satrali

ASS XIAI=D PRE:3S

Consumers have long referred to Whole Foods as "Whole Paycheck" for its high prices, but it isn't just sticker shock: Many locations of the Austin-based grocery chain are illegally overcharging customers.

New York Daily News reporters broke the story, finding that Whole Foods locations in New York· City have been systematically overcharging customers for a host of foods since at least 2010. According to documents obtained by the paper, New York City officials have cited the chain 800 times for charging customers more than they should pay, and have levied over $58,000 in fines for those offenses in the past five years. Much of the overcharging took place when customers were buying foods sold by weight. Inspectors from New York City's Department of Consumer Affairs undertook a sting operation last fall, wherein they weighed 80 different packaged foods labeled with a certain weight, and found that all 80 packages actually contained less food than they purported to - from an 80 cent discrepancy to nearly $15 in overages for a package of prepared shrimp.

"Our inspectors tell me this is the worst case of mislabeling they have seen in their careers, which DCA and New Yorkers will not tolerate," DCA commissioner Julie Menen said in a harshly worded statement. "As a large chain grocery store, Whole Foods has the money and resources to ensure greater accuracy and to correct what appears to be ·a widespread problem -the city's shoppers deserve to be correctly charged."

Daily News reporters conducted their own, albeit informal investigation to confirm the City's findings, purchasing $100 worth of groceries from one location. They discovered a number of items that were improperly labeled, though errors went in both directions: A package of mini roast beef sandwiches labeled as weighing 3 ounces, and priced per ounce, actually varied in ' weight from 4.5 to 5.1 ounces. Meanwhile, breaded chicken breasts sold at $5.99 per 7 ounces in fact weighed in at anywhere from 6 to 9.2 ounces.

The shocking revelation comes almost exactly one year after Whole Foods was fined $800,000 for a similar pattern of overcharging in the Los Angeles metro area.

Whole Foods has disputed the findings stridently. "We disagree with the DCA's overreaching allegations and we are vigorously defending ourselves," the company said in a statement to ABC. "We cooperated fully with the DCA from the beginning until we disagreed with their grossly ., excessive monetary demands.

tf» Follow Us On Pinterest I ~ Like Us On Facebook 1 Follow Us On Twitter

~' BEFORE YG& SO

t.!l Joe Sa.tnm "'tt! .,,{"'. Staff Writer Penelope R. Weller 85 Kirk Drive Rochester, NY 14610

May 15,2017

Supervisor William Moehle Town of Brighton 2300 Elmwood Avenue Rochester, NY 14618

Re: Whole Foods

Dear Supervisor Moehle:

1 would like to reiterate some of the concerns stated in my letter of June 16, 2016 regarding the proposed Whole Foods on Monroe Avenue.

Although my husband was employed by Wegman.s for 25 years, I have shopped at a Mennonite farm overlooking Canandaigua Lake, at Costco and everywhere in between. Given the right location, I would likely shop at Whole Foods.

Part of the core curriculum for interior design at Syracuse University included engineering drawing and, because of this, I was a civil engineering draftsman for my home county's engineering department for two summers. I have some knowledge of road design. At that point, roads and bridges were designed by human beings, not computers. Engineers were able to consider human nature/behavior in their designs.

As a commercial interior designer (schools, hospitals, nursing homes, as well as the previous iteration of the Brighton Memorial Library), following codes dictating safety were a requirement. Once safety issues were addressed, the designer then looks at human behavior and human needs as a guide for completing the design.

As I stated in my previous letter, an automobile accident precipitated frequent medical appointments (as many as 5 round trips per week) from my home toward West Henrietta Road due to my injuries. My usual route takes me along Aliens Creek Road to Westfall Road and then as far as W. Henrietta Road.

There are two issues I encounter in the traffic at the intersection of Westfall Road and Monroe Avenue. The first is gridlock where multiple vehicles are caught in the intersections as the lights change impeding traffic in all directions. The second is the impatient driver who puts their foot on the gas to race through the traffic light that has just turned red.

My accident on Route 441 occurred when I was legally stopped at a red light behind a few cars and a truck. My car was "rear-ended" by a flat bed tow truck going in excess of 55 miles an hour. He pushed my car partially under the truck ahead and then pushed both of us forward. The driver made no attempt to stop. The red light that was visible for hundreds of yards didn't work because the driver was distracted. My Camry was reduced to an origami version of itself.

In this world of "distracted driving", you must consider human nature when planning. I'm sure the most up to date algorithms do not take into account the woman who was doing FaceTime on her phone as she followed me down Westfall Road. The slickest of traffic studies are useless if they don't consider human behavior.

The traffic in the area of the proposed Whole Foods store is already a challenge. Without knowing what other businesses will be located on the site, how can anyone predict how they will affect traffic? I expect morning commuter traffic to increase as drivers pick up their coffee at Starbucks. If a "take out" restaurant such as Chick-fil-A opens there, the evening commute would be dramatically affected. I've seen Whole Foods and Chick-fil-A advertised on television in our area. I doubt that either would waste advertising dollars on an area where they have no stores at this time without the expectation of the town's approval of the Daniele's proposal.

Another aspect of the proposed development cannot be ignored. A 90,000 square foot supermarket and other businesses on the site would likely require a significant number of truck deliveries each day. Has the developer factored in the impact of this traffic, including the times of the day or night that these deliveries might occur? Will trucks be "idling" during deliveries with their refrigerator compressors running all night? What will the impact of light pollution and noise be on the surrounding residential area?

I believe that many residents of Brighton and Pittsford are blessed with ample resources that meet their daily needs and, because of that, look for other opportunities to enrich their lives - which may well include shopping at Whole Foods. While I am not against a developer enriching himself, I don't want that to happen when it endangers the safety of the citizenry or negatively impacts their quality of life. There are too many unknowns in the current proposal for me, or you, to support this proposal.

Penelope R. Weller

C: Judy Schwartz, BNU Ramsey Boehner, Town of Brighton Planning Jason DiPonzio, Councilperson Louise Novros, Councilperson James Vogel, Councilperson Christopher Werner, Councilperson William W. Moehle, Supervisor

Town of Brighton

2300 Elmwood Avenue

Rochester, NY 14618

This is a response to the Developer's stance that no one uses the stretch of trail between Aliens Creek Rd. and Clover St. (which then continues on into the Village of Pittsford). People absolutely use that stretch; living on Schoolhouse Lane for over four years, backing up to the trail, I have seen walkers, joggers and bicyclists passing in either direction. If they are heading in that direction, they certainly do continue on through the stretch of trail in question. I have walked numerous times with my dog from my house to the Village of Pittsford and have used that route. Although there is currently no visual"trail" most people know the way.

People use the trail at all times of the day; if the section between Aliens Creek Rd. and Clover St. is going to be recreated, then of course it will continue to be traveled- it will just be pronounced as a trail. Just because the Developer doesn't happen to see people does NOT mean the "trail" isn't used.

WHY does the trail from Aliens Creek Rd. all the way to Highland Ave. have to be changed?? Most of the surface is grass; it is regularly used by people living in the surrounding neighborhoods and beyond. Aesthetically, it is far more pleasing to view the natural ground than to have that long distance be turned into a widened, man-made surface: It is FINE the way it is; what is the necessity to change it?? I have befriended quite a few other neighbors throughout the trail, and none of them have ever mentioned wishing that the trail could be changed. JUST LEAVE IT ALONE! The developer doesn't need to get involved in changing the trail that runs through the residential stretch.

Sincerely, rv\.c.t.h L0u ~ f3. n~ s:oz.:;~ LCLi'CL ~:&7UA.___ Marlowe B. Hagood Laiacona

25 Schoolhouse Lane

Rochester, NY 14618 From: Jeff Blood [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2018 10:08 AM

To: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]~; Chris. [email protected]; James. Vogel @townofbrighton .org Cc: Mario Daniele; [email protected]

Subject: Whole Foods Project

To all:

It is my understanding that there will be a key vote on this project at the next town meeting on February 28, 2018. I would like to express my total support of this project.

I did not grow up in Rochester, but I moved here in 1981 to take a job as a PhD chemist for Eastman Kodak. I married and had four kids here and have enjoyed living in this region ever since. I have had many opportunities to live elsewhere but I have always chosen to stay even with many of my kids moving away. Since they have all moved away, two have since returned to raise their families here in Rochester. It is a great place for families and I hope we can keep it that way. Through the years, I remarried and now have three ~dditional step children and as it normally happens- now four grand kids. Most of these children are spread around the country- but two are here and another one is trying to get back to Rochester to raise his family. Because these kids had moved away, I have spent much of my free time traveling to visit them. Chicago, Orlando, LA, Sea~tle, Austin, Denver, Madison, you name it- I've been there. For my job with Kodak as Departmental VP, I traveled a great deal both domestically and internationally. A close relative of my wife is Lyndsay Wall, the Olympic hockey player in 2002 and 2006. Suffice it to say- I've seen a lot of other cities. In fact, Alaska is the only state I haven't visited- yet.

As a result of all this travel over the years, I have seen how other cities are growing and expanding. Even the city of Madison has five sky cranes over it now as they build new complexes for busin~sses entering the area. Rochester has very little of this. I strain to remember the last sky crane over our city. Hyatt?? In any case, we need to grasp and embrace progress when it comes our way. This project is being headed up by a family I have grown to know well over the years. The Daniele family is also very concerned about the growth and expansion in and around Rochester and want to contribute to a renewal of Monroe Avenue. And the Daniele family will do a great job building a new mall with Whole Foods as the main attraction. This is not an opportunity we should pass up.

Monroe Avenue is starting to show it's age with small shops leaving and relocating further out of the area. Ontario County is a very "business friendly" area competing for the business growth in and around Rochester. I live in Victor and enjoy the lower taxes here because of it. This is only going to continue if Brighton and other towns in Monroe County shun business development. The Daniele family has shown its dedication to the Brighton area by developing most of its projects in Brighton. This project has been very expensive for them and needs to push through to approval now.

Please carefully consider your vote this Wednesday and make a difference for Brighton in the direction of renewal and business development. I have visited many Whole Food stores around the nation and it is a great store. Many natural and organic foods. First class in many ways. It would be a huge feather in Brighton's cap to have this store in its town.

Humbly submitted

Jeffrey C Blood FROM: Joe Bellizia 02/28/18

TO: tim.keef, robin.Wilt, chris. werner, james. vogel, william.moehle, jason.diponzio, me

Dear Town of Brighton Supervisor, Town Board and Mr Keef,

I am writing this email, which I rarely take the time to voice a concern, as I find that it is necessary to stand up and be heard on this matter. Myself and a tremendous amount of others, who won't or can't take the time to attend one of your meetings or write an email, are asking you to VOTE YES to Whole Foods on Monroe Ave in Brighton! It seems only those few complainers, like all complainers in life unfortunately, always take the time to complain.

The whiners that have opposed every growth opportunity for businesses on the Monroe-Ave.---- corridor seem to want to go back to 1950's & 60's with traffic, and that will never happen. The nearby residents must have chosen to live where they do so they could shop and walk to shop for the convenience, now they complain. You can't have it both ways.

This same group of complainers were spewing the same, just a few years ago, when the car wash was proposed. Now three years later t~e traffic has proved to be no worse, and everyone I speak to finds it flowing better since the light timing issue was solved. I bet if we were to check these past complainers cars, we would find many who have annual car wash plans or now frequent it! It appears the developer did what they said they would do.

From attending the last few town meetings I understand that a much needed traffic light is in the Whole Foods project's design. I also understand the plan is to limit all the various business's patrons from pulling out in traffic to cross the road in mayhem, as they have for so long. I understand they will be forced to exit at a light or turn right only. I and everyone that travels this road daily, or many times a week, will surely applaud this design, if you vote YES!

Also, everyone I know believes that having a choice when it comes to buying anything, gives the consumers an edge. So why not give YOUR residents, and Neighbors (like myself) the choice to shop at Whole Foods ... in Brighton.

I guess that is alii have to say. Now it is up to YOU, do what is needed and please Vote Yes!

Best Regards,

Your Neighbors who travel and shop all up and down Monroe Ave for over 25 years!

Joe & Patti Bellizia

Pittsford, NY 14534 At a Town Board Meeting of the Town of Brighton, Monroe County, New York, held at the Brighton Town Hall, 2300 Elmwood Avenue, in said Town of Brighton on the 14th day of February, 2018. PRESENT: WILLIAM W. MOEHLE, Supervisor

JAMES R. VOGEL CHRISTOPHER K. WERNER JASON S. DIPONZIO Councilmembers

WHEREAS, the Town Board has previously scheduled a public hearing for February 28, 2018 at 7:00 p.m. at Brighton Town Hall, 2300 Elmwood Avenue, in the Town of Brighton, County of Monroe and State of New York on the incentive zoning application for the project known as Whole Foods Plaza, and

WHEREAS, the Town Board wishes to facilitate public participation in the public hearing by providing a public venue larger than that offered by the rooms available for such a hearing at Brighton Town Hall, and

WHEREAS, in cooperation with the Brighton Central School District, the Town has identified available space at the Council Rock School, 600 Grosvenor Road, in the Town of Brighton, County of Monroe and State of New York which will accommodate more members of the community than could be accommodated at Brighton Town Hall, and still permit the live broadcast and streaming of the meeting it is hereby

RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby amends its previous notice of public hearing on the incentive zoning application for the project known as Whole Foods Plaza to change the location of said public hearing to Council Rock School, 600 Grosvenor Road, in the Town of Brighton, County of Monroe and State of New York, and it is hereby further

RESOLVED, that the Town Board directs the Town Clerk to post and publish notice of the public hearing and its new location as is required by law.

Dated: February 14, 2018 William W. Moehle, Supervisor Voting ____

James R. Vogel, Councilmember Voting ____

Christopher K. Werner, Councilmember Voting ____

Jason S. DiPonzio, Councilmember Voting ____

Robin R. Wilt, Councilmember recused

Brigtres02-14-18-25 At a Town Board Meeting of the Town of Brighton, Monroe County, New York, held at the Brighton Town Hall, 2300 Elmwood Avenue, in said Town of Brighton on the 14th day of February, 2018. PRESENT: WILLIAM W. MOEHLE,

Supervisor

JAMES R. VOGEL CHRISTOPHER K. WERNER JASON S. DIPONZIO ROBIN R. WILT Councilmembers

RESOLVED, that correspondence dated February 7, 2018 from Town Planner Ramsey together with a Second Amended Letter of Intent from Jerry A. Goldman, Esq. dated February 1, 2018 on behalf of the Daniele Family Companies regarding the proposed Whole Foods Plaza project and correspondence from Town Planner Ramsey Boehner dated February 9, 2018 together with correspondence from Jerry A. Goldman, Esq. dated February 9, 2018 also on behalf of the Daniele Family Companies consenting to a 30 day extension under SEQRA for the Town to make findings regarding the proposed Whole Foods Plaza project be received and filed.

Dated: February 14, 2018

William W. Moehle, Supervisor Voting ____

James R. Vogel, Councilmember Voting ____

Christopher K. Werner, Councilmember Voting ____

Jason S. DiPonzio, Councilmember Voting ____

Robin R. Wilt, Councilmember Voting ____

Brigtres02-14-18-13

100 Crossroads Building WOODS 1900 Main Place Tower 2 State Sfreef. Rochesfer. New York 14614 OVIATT Buffalo, New York 14202 P 585.987.2800 F 585.454.3968 GILMAN P 716.248.3200 F716.854.5100 Lll'

Writer's Direct Dial Number: 585,445.2726 woodsoviatt.com Writer's Direct Fax Number: 585.445.2626 Email: [email protected]

February 18, 2015

Town Board Town of Brighton 2300 Elmwood Avenue Rochester, New York 14618

Rc: Application of Daniele Family Companies Incentive Zoning LETTER OF INTENT

Dear Board Members:

This office has been retained by the Daniele Family Companies and their affiliated entilies (the "applicant") to assist them in obtaining the municipal approvnls required fOr an exciting redevelopment pmject proposed on Monroe Avenue in the Town of Brighton to be known as Palazzo Plaza. This letter is submitted to request Incentive Zoning approval be granted, pursuant to Chapter 209 of the Town of Brighton Code, to facilitate the development.

PROPERTY LOCATION

The properties proposed to be redeveloped as Palazzo Plaza are the current Mario's Italian Restaurant parcel (at 2740 Monroe Avenue, with tax identification number 137.19-2-70.32), the Clover Lanes bowling parcel (at 2750 Monme Avenue, with tax identification number 150.07-2- 8.11), the Mamasan's Restaumnt parcel (at 2900 Monroe Avenue, with tax identification number 150.07-2-7.1 ), and a 2.2 +/- acre portion of land behind the Mariats und Clover Lanes parcels. which is pa11 of the lands of the First Baptist ChlU'ch (at 175 Aliens Creek Road, with tax identification number 137.190-2-68.1). The applicant maintains ownership over the Mario's and Clover Lanes parcels and has the other properlies unde1· contract to purchase. The existing Mario's, Clover Lanes and Mamasan's buildings will be demolished for the proposed comprehensive redevelopment of lhe site.

The properties· on Monroe Avenue are split zoned. The site includes 7.3 +/-acres located in the BF-2 General Commercial Zoning District and 2.8 +/- acres located in the RLA Residential· Low Density District adjacent to the north. Of the 2.8 acres in the RLA Disb·ict, a 2.2 acre area will be acquired from the First Baptist Church ("Church"). The lands to be acquired fmm the Church extend to Clover Street Only a limited portion of this RLA property immediately adjacent to the Mmio's and Clover Lanes parcels are proposed to be developed. The RLA zoning is proposed to be maintained.

people~ !2698619:) The art of representing Town Board- Town of Brighton Letter of Intent February 18,2015 Page2

NEIGHBORHOOD IDSTORY

The Momoe Avenue con·idor between Clover Street and 1-590 is an important commercial district and gateway into both the Towns of Brighton and Pittsford. The at·ea is currently in transition, with some parcels recently redeveloped or vacant, and extensive transportation improvements under way. The area is characterized by aging buildings, a lack of vehicular cross-access, numerous curb cuts onto Monroe Avenue, and segmented parking. The current disjointed design of the corridor 1s incongruous with the importance and value of this area ofMomoe Avenue to the community.

The Mario's Italian Restaurant was built in 1995 on a 2.4 +/-acre parcel. The restaurant has been very successful in this location, but has outgrown the prope11y. To accommodate increased parking demand, approximately 15 years ago, the parking lot was expanded onto the First Baptist Church property. Although the expanded parking lot is necessary to the business, it encroaches into the RLA District, a condition which will be resolved in connection with the proposed redevelopment.

Clover Lanes Bowling Center sits on 4.5 acres immediately adjacent to and east of Mario's. Clover Lanes was built in 1951, and has operated successfully despite a decline in the recreational bowling business over time. The building contains an arched wood truss roof system that has been repaired through the years, but has ihr exceeded its useful life. Roof replacement is (:ost prohibitive for the current use as a bowling alley. The building is lacking in architectural character.

Mamasan's Restaurant is located on a 1.2 acre property east of the Clover Lanes parcel. The building has housed different restaurants over the years. It had operated as a Perkins Restaurant tbr over 20 years, becwne a Denny's Restaurant for the next decade, and then was converted into its current use as Mamasan 's. Mamasun's is seeking to relocate to a smaller and more suitable space for its needs.

The First Baptist Church borde" the Malio's and Clover Lanes Plaza properties to the north on approximately 10 +/- acres. The Chm-ch sits at the southeast comer of Clover Street and Allen Creek Road. The ClnJI'ch has approximately 2.2 acres of excess undeveloped residential land whlch is disjointed from its main propet1y by a neighbol'ing residence along Clover Street Part of the excess space is wooded and serves as a buffer between the residential neighborhood on Clover Street, and the existing commercial activity ofthe Mario's and Clover Lanes parcels. and Monroe Avenue. The sale of the land by the Church will generate proceeds for much needed capital improvements and ensure the continued use ofits Clover Street frontage as an undeveloped buffer.

An important asset included in the project is the a trail, which crosses the properties and is part of a trail system which extends fTom the Village of Pittsford, through the Town of Pittsford, the Town of Brighton and into the City of Rochester. While parts of the tl:ail are regularly used by walkers and cyclists. that portion of trail which crosses the subject prope11ies was never improved or used, and is cunently used by RG&E as a maintenance road.

t269S6l9: I The art of representing people! Town Board -Town of Brighton Letter of Intent February 18, 2015 Page 3

THE l'ROPOSAL

The applicant pi'Oposes to redevelop the properties as Palazzo Plaza, a lifestyle center anchored by a 50,000 sq. ft. natural and organic fOods market/grocery, shown on the conceptual site plan as Building A. The proposed development includes a new 34,000 square ft. retail plaza building (Building B), and two outparcel buildings (Buildings C and D). The existing buildings will be demolished for the cohesive redevelopment of the site. One of the outparcels (Building C) is anticipated to include a specialty coffee shop with a drive through. The other outparce\ is contemplated as potentially a bank, with ddve through and automated teller machine likely (Building D),

The proposed project will significantly upgrade the property and this important gateway to the Town of Brighton. An exciting food mm·ket anchor, attractive architecture, and cohesive design will help to update and transfmm this section of Monroe Avenue. 11te proposal will include q\Jality design and architecture, with architecture contemplated to be consistent with the anchor tenm1t. The current trail numing through the property is proposed to be improved, slightly relocated, and incorporated into the development. Proximity to the trail will provide new pedestrian connections between the retail and residential neighborhoods. At the same time, the proposal provides for permanent protection for the adjacent residential neighborhood, maintaining buffering and sepamtion. The trail will separate the residential and commercial areas.

Pedestrian access is incorpmated in the plan, providing access to the site for pedestrians and bicycles. The pedestrian tl'iendly development will enhance the neighborhood by improving wR.Ikability and fostering neighborhood business. The applicant also proposes to address safety on the trail by separating vehicle traffic from pedestrian and bicycle activity on the trail. 1'he project will create new pedestrian connections, consolidate parking, and improve vehicular access to and from Monroe Avenue. Pedestrian connections will also be incorporated internal to the development.

The new lifestyle center design will also improve vehicular access and circulation. A new traffic signal with crosswalk will be installed on Monroe Avenue. The anticipated location will align the Clover Lanes propetty and the Sakura Home restaurant. The existing curb cut at the Mamasan 's property will be eliminated. The signal location will be dictated by the New York State Department of Transportation (NYSDOT). which maintains jurisdiction over Monroe Avenue.

The proposed food market building incorporates sustainability. The design will respect the local landscape. Recycled materials from the Clover Lanes building, including wood ii·om bowling lanes and timber from the roofing system, will be incorporated into the building. The natural and organic foods market/grocery building will be constructed to LEED standards and incorporate architectural features and materials appropriate to the Rochester area. The two outparcel buildings and retail plaza building will be designed to complement the new food market, providing an architectural theme for the development.

{2698619: J The art of representing people.• Town Board- Town of Brighton Letter of Intent Febmary 18, 2015 Page 4

In addition to the amenities of 'this project, which are set forth on pages 5 and 6 below, this development provides substantial public benefits. Among them arc:

I. Fulfilling the Vision of the Monroe Avenue Corridor Plan. The Monroe Avenue Conidor Plan ha.'; a number of distinct elements which are being addressed by this plan. Those elements are both aesthetic in nature (dealing with placement of buildings) and safety-related (relative to Monroe Avenue access). Project design has incorporated the goals of the Corridor Plan.

2. Diversity of Retail Offerings within the Town of Brighton. The addition of a natural and organic foods market/grocery is of substantial benefit to the residents of the Town of Brighton. At present, the Town is home to a Tops Market on South Clinton A venue, several pharmacies selling some grocery items and occasional specialty or convenience type stores. R's Market recently closed its doors after many yetJrs of neighborhood service. Many residents do not have convenient access to a quality grocery store in their community requiring residents to shop lbr groceries outside of the Town, such as at the Pittsford or East Avenue Wegman's stores. ln addition, the lead tenant within the plaza enhances the possibility of bringing new and upscale retailers to the remainder of the Center. There is a natural following of the lead tenant and some of those prospective tenants are in discussions with the developer.

3. Tax Revenues. The proposed development will generate a significunt increase in tax revenues. The yearly taxes currently generated are $190,600 plus or minus and includes tax exempt property. The future projected taxes (using current tax rates) are expected to be $483,300.

4. No COMIDA. While this property may be eligible for a payment in lieu of taxes (PILOT) Agreement and substantial benefits under pmgrams sponso1·ed by the County of Monroe Industrial Development Agency the applicant has committe{\ that they will, in accordance with the Town of Brighton's preference, forgo any request ibr such beneJits,

APPROVALS NECESSARY

We anticipate the following approval process to be required for the Palazzo Plaza Development:

1) Incentive Zonine Anoroval. Incentive Zoning approval is required from the Town Bom·d in accordance with Chapter 209 of the Town of Brighton Code.

2) Planning Board, Architectural Review Board, and Historic Preservation Commission APpl'ovals. The Planning Board would have jurisdiction for site plan approval, and subdivision approval (to combine the subject properties, create a separate lot for the remaining church property and create internal lots for financing and tax allocation purposes-

(2698619: I The art of representing people~ Town Board- Town of Brighton Letter of 1ntent Febmary 18,2015 PageS

all depicted on the "Bulk Data Lot Plan" attached to this letter.) Several of the proposed uses, including the food market I grocery store, coffee shop, bank, drive through parts of the operations, automated teller machines, and outdoor seating, are all conditionally permitted uses per Code. While we are requesting that these uses be permitted as an incentive in this incentive zoning application, the Planning Board would otherwise have conditional use permit approval authority. The Architectural Review Board would also have jurisdiction over the exterior design of the buildings and signs under the Town Code. The Historic Preservation Committee reviews all demolition requests to confirm that the property being demolished has no historic or architectural significance.

INCENTIVE ZONING Al'l'LICATION

Incentive Zoning is regulated by Chapter 209 of the Town of Brighton Code. The purpose and the intent of the Code provisions are to provide a vehicle whereby an applicant can request ce~tain "incentives" (relief from Town Code provisions), in exchange for cettain "amenities" (public benefits offered by the applicant). Specifically, Section 209-5(1A) sets for the information to be provided by the applicant in conjunction wilh an Incentive Zoning Application. Those four (4) subsections are addressed below:

1) The Proposed Amenitv. Typically, amenities address specific infi·astructure or development needs or improvements in the area of the proposed development project. Several such amenities of benefit to the community are offered as part of the application, as further illustrated on the concept site plan submitted with the application. We estimate the value of the amenities to be in excess of $265,000, before including on-going maintenance costs for certain amenities, as described below (for the trail and traffic signal).

a. Pedestrian and Bicycle Access. The amenities offered by the applicant include improvement and slight relocation of the existing trail across the development site to make it accessible, safe, and inviting for public usc. The proposal includes delineating the trail, improving its condition, and main1aining it. Vehicular traffic is proposed to he separated fi·om the trail to create a safe and pleasurable experience for those who wish to use the trail. The trail will also be connected to the pmposed development via sidewalks throughout the site, with bike racks within the center. A proposed traffic signal and crosswalk (another arncniiy described below) will afford trail goers sate crossing and access to ihe south side of Monroe Avenue. The estimated value of this amenity is approximately $65,000, plus the estimated annual cost of maintaining the trail of$1 ,200.

b. Traffic Signal. The anticipated traffic generation and potential traffic related impacts for the proposed development have been evaluated by the applicant and discussed with the NYSDOT. The applicant proposes to install and pay for the maintenance of a traffic signal to be located as shown on the site plan, together with other traffic improvements

126911619: 1 The art af refmsenting people~ Town Board- Town of Brighton Letter oflntent February 18,2015 Page6

(including a right out and ingress in located where Mario's restaurant currently has its primary access). The signalized intersection will offer an opportunity for additional traffic calming, access management and cross access along Monroe A venue. One curb cut on the north side of Monroe Avenue, being the driveway for the current Mamasan's Restaurant, will be removed. The signal location, dictated by the NYSDOT, proposes to line up at the existing Clover Lanes and the Sakura Home restaurant on the south side of Monroe Avenue. The signaf will serve traffic for the new Palazzo Plaza development, and, as a part of this Incentive Zoning proposal, the applicant has actively engaged property owners of the south side of Monroe Avenue to design and construct crosswacce:is between parcels on the south side of Monroe Avenue to utilize the new traffic signal. Access to a traffic signal would provide a significant economic benefit to these neighboring pmpetties and businesses, and would help to address traffic issues related to this part of the Monroe Avenue corridor. The cost of the traffic signal and improvements are estimated at this point to be $200,000 to $250,000, which amount will be borne by the applicant. While some of these costs fall under the category of traffic mitigation, the effOI'ts of the developer go well beyond that and the value of amenity (above and beyond immediate traffic mitigation) is valued nt $100,000 to $125,000, plus a portion of the ongoing annual cost maintenance of the traffic signal of approximately $1.800.

c. Preservation of Passive & Active Open Space. The applicant will acquire approximately 2.2 +/- acres of lands from the First Baptist Church, a small portion of which is needed and incorporated into the development site. as shown on the concept site plan. The property is in the RLA Zoning District and is adjacent to the BF-2 District. The properly fronts on Clover Street and backS to the Mario's and Clover Lanes parcels. While the Church has contemplated the potential development or use of its excess property over the years, selling the property for the proposed development will provide the Church with much needed funds to complete capital improvements that would not be possible without this sale, thus posing a hardship to the Church and its congregation.

The applicant proposes to preserve the bulk of the 2.2 +/- acres to be acquired fi·om the Church, fronting on Clover Street as undeveloped open space. This area may be dedicated as a Conservation Easement. This land will se1ve as a substantial forested buffer between the commercial development and adjacent residential uses. Anothe1· potential bene lit to be fu11her explored is improved storm water management for the Clove•· Street area. The remaining area of the property adjacent to the Palazzo Plaza is proposed to be incorporated in the development site to accommodate necessary parking and paved areas. The proposed trail described above will separate the proposed development from the open space and residential development. The value of the amenity is estimated at $100,000, exclusive of any drainage benefits to the community.

2. The cash value of the proposed amenity. The cash value of the proposed amenity is discussed above.

{261111619: I The art of representing people~ Town Board- Town of Brighton Letter of Intent February 18,2015 Page7

3. A narrative, which:

a. Describes the benefit to be provided to the community by the proposed amenity. The benefits to the community are discussed above.

b. Gives preliminary indication that there is adequate ... (infrastructure) ... to handle the additional demands of the incentive .... There is adequate infrastructure for the proposed incentives. A conceptual utility plan has been submitted to demonstrate adequate storm water, sanitary and water service tOr the development. The proposed development offers benefits to the comm\lnity, including the addition of traffic signal on Monroe Avenue, and the development of the trail across the property, Adequate parking is provided for the development. The property is also accessible by public transpm1ation. A concise engineering nauative entitled "adequacy of utility infrastructure" is attached.

c. Explains how the amenity helps implement the .... policies of the Comprehensive Plan. as supplemented by local laws and mdinances... The proposed amenities helps implement and advance the policies of the Comprehensive Plan, the Town of Brighton Monroe Avenue Corridor Community Vision Plan~ Monroe Avenue East End (between Town of Pittsford and 590 called the "Corridor Vision Plan"), the Town of Brighton Monroe Avenue Design Guidelines (adopted 1999) (called "Design Guidelines") and the Town of Brighton Code. There is substantial support for the proposed amenities in all of these documents.

The Comprehensive Plan calls for trail improvements and open space, and tOr encouraging the upgrading, beautifying and revitalization of existing commercial areas. These amenities are offered and will have significant public benefit.

The Corridor Vision Plan recognizes that this area is difficult and dangerous fm· pedestrians to navigate and the need for pedestrian and bicycle friendliness and connections, improving sidewalks and crossings, and enhancing commercial areas to provide cohesion. It also recognizes the benefit of shared parking and cross~access, and the need to reduce curb cuts in this area. The amenities provide these benef-its.

The Design Guidelines also recognizes the issues presented by the need for pal'idng and number of curb cuts on Monroe Avenue. as causing hazardous conditions for pedestrians and motorists and contributing to vehicular circulation problems resu1ting in traffic congestion on the street. An objective is to reduce the size and number of curb cuts to impl'Ove safety, increase off.. street parking and expand open space. The Design Guidelines call for adjacent parking lots to have internal vehicular and pedestrian connections, for intemal vehicular circulation patterns that improve pedestrian and vehicular accessibility and safety, and for contiguous networks of pedestrian walkways extending fi'Om building entrances to sidewalks. Provisions of the Town Code similarly address requirement of cross-access and access management. The proposed amenities are consistent with these goals for traffic safety, cross-access and access management.

12698619: l The art of representing people~ Town Board- Town of Brighton Letter of Intent February 18,2015 Page 8

4. Tlte Proposed Incentives. The proposed incentives for the proposed development are identified on the overall concept site plan enclosed with the application, on the "Palazzo Plaza Bulk Data Summary" attached to this letter and described further below. The property along Monroe Avenue has long been zoned and developed as commercial prope11y. The incentives relate primarily to dimensional deviations from the Code, in large part dictated by the split zoning of the development parcel. The addition of a small portion ofRLA zoned hmd t<> the northern portion of the site (behind the current Mario's and Clover Lanes prope11ies) generates the need for a use incentive to allow commercial improvements and activity to extend into this small area of the adjacent RLA District. Other use incentives proposed relate to conditional permit uses which cany a favorable legal presumption of being permitted and in harmony with the neighborhood. To that end, the incentives seek to avoid unnecessary duplication in the review process.

a. Use. The lands to be acquired from the Church are located in the RLA Zoning District. Limited activities involving parking and access are proposed to extend 01ito the property to be acquired from the Church. While commercial uses are not generally permitted in the RLA District, pursuant to Code Section 201~9(A)(3), the commercial use is pe1mitted to encroach into the residential district by 30 ft. The proposed incentive is to permit commercial development to extend slightly into the RLA District beyond the permitted 30 ft. zone. Notwithstanding this fact, the 1·emaining approximately 1 +/~ acre block of land extending between the Palazzo Plaza development and Clover Street is proposed to remain undeveloped open space between the commercial and residential areas.

The bulk of the property is located in the BF~2 District. The identified proposed uses include a food market, a specialty coffee shop/restaurant, and a bank. The coffee shop and bank require drive through operations, and the hank would typically require an ATM. Outdoor seating may be desired by the restaurant and/or food market. All of these uses are conditional pe1mit uses in the BF~2 District. A proposed incentive is to waive the conditional use permit requirement these uses, as these uses will be thoroughly reviewed as part of both the incentive zoning application by the ToW11 Board and site plan approval process by the Planning Board. This request is not designed to avoid scrutiny by the Town Board or the Plarining Board, but only to confirm that the proposed use of the property is permitted as part of this overall Incentive Zoning package.

b. Drive Through LocatiQn. The proposed development includes drive through operations for a specialty coffee shop and for a bank. }lursuant to Code Section 207~14.3, drive through operations shall not be located in the front yard. A proposed incentive is to allow the proposed d!'ive throughs to be located in the front yard. 'lltis relief is appropriate and necessary for the development of the coffee shop as an outparcel in the larger shopping center. While not clearly necessary for the bank, this need may change during the review process as the site plan and on-site traffic is reviewed. The layout of the site is constrained largely by the placement of the traffic signal. The visibility of the drive through is in keeping with the nature of development along this portion of Monroe Avenue, which includes a new Dunkin Donuts with a drive through on the south side of Monroe A venue.

126911619; J The art of representing f>eople~ Town Board- Town of Brighton Letter of Intent Febl'Ua!)' 18,2015 Page9

c. Signs. Town Code Section 207M32 allows limited business identification and directional signage. Section B allows a single attached sign on the principal building entrance. The total area of the business identification sign permitted may not exceed 10% of the firstMfloor area of the building tiu:e or 150 square ft., whichever is Jess. A requested incentive is to allow a sign package which is designed to meet the needs of the individual businesses fOr signage in the context of the business plaza, with visibility from both Monroe Avenue and internal to the plaza. The sign package will exceed the amount permitted by Code and include: (1) signage on multiple building faces (for the food market aod outparcel buildings), (2) appropriate drive through signagc, which typicRlly requires specialized signage (such as a menu sign), (3) an attractive monument sign identifying the plaza and tenants. Tenant signage may include logos as pat1 of the tenant signage., (4) signage greater than 150 square feet on Building 1, (5) lngo greater than 25% of any individual sign .• and (6) additional signage contained in a sign package to be provided in final form to the Town Board prior to the scheduling of the public hearing on the Incentive Zoning application. A preliminary "Palazzo Plaza Sign Package" chart and accompanying plan is attached. ·

d. Bulk Requirements. In respect to bulk requirements, among the requested incentives at·e relief with respect to several building setbacks, lot coverage, density, and pavement setbacks, as detailed on the conceptual site plan and on the "Palazzo Plaza Bulk Data Summary" attached to this letter. Calculations in this area reflect the split-zoning of the site. Bulk requirement for the BFM2 were applied to the BFM2 area, and requirements applicable to the RLA are applied to the RLA area. As depicted on the "Palazzo Plaza Bulk Data Summary'' attached, we are in conformance with the preponderance of the bulk requirements under Code.

Where the Code requires a front setback of 60 teet, the proposaJ is for Building A to have fi·ont setback of 5 feet on Monroe Avenue and Buildings B and C to have a front setback of 24 feet. Where the Code requires a side setback of 10 feet, a side setback of9 feet is proposed on the west side of Building A and on the east side of Building B. In addition, the Code requires a rear yard abutting a residential district to be 60 feet. The rear yard meets the Code at 62 feet, but reflects a pe1mitted encroachment of the commercial parking into the residel).tial distl'ict.

With respect to impervious surface, Code provides for a maximum of 65 feet. The proposed Jot coverage in the BF-2 pmtion of the site is 91% (roughly the same as currently exists). Code provides for a maximum density of 10,000 squme feet per acre in the BFM2 District. The proposed density, applied to the BFM2 portion of the site, is 13,384 square feet per acre for Lot I and 12,096 square feet per acre for Lot 2. These numbers reflect the exclusion of the RLA lands in the calculations.

The proposed incentives include relief ft:om pavement setback regulations of the Town Code applicable to the BFM2 and RLA Districts to allow the proposed pavement setbacks of 13 feet on Lot l and 8 feet on Lot 2. Parking in the front yard is also proposed for the development aJong Monme Avenue. Rear yard paved areas of 5 feet on the BF-2 part of Lot I and 0 feet on the BF-2 pa11 of Lot 2, as well rear yard parldng areas of 64 and 61% on the residentially zoned pottion of the 2 development lot..<; in lieu of the 35% maximum under Code, are occasioned by the pavement approaching or crossing the zoning line.

12698619: J The art of representing people~ Town Board- Town of Brighton Letter of Intent February 18,2015 Page 10

Finally, the portion of Lot 2 which is zoned residential requires an incentive because it would be a substandard lot (19,832 square feet as opposed to 23,125 square feet) if it wel'e a freestanding residential Jot (which it isn't).

Relieffi'Om drive through stacking to allow 113 feet in lieu of the 120 feet required by Code is requested. Inasmuch as no loading betihs are deemed necessary Lot 2 users, we are 1-equesting relief allowing us to have no loading berths on Lot 2 (we have the requisite 3loading berths on Lot I),

In respect to the First Baptist Church, the proposed subdivision will not create non conf:Ormities. It is noted that the existing setback on Allen Creek is non-confirming and will remain so. Where Code requires a front setback of 100ft., the existing is 59.4 ft. and will remain so.

With regard to the bulk requirements, the requested incentives are based upon the conceptual site plan being reviewed by the Town Board. It is common that there are change..c;; to the final approved plan as a result of Town reviews. Accordingly, the applicant is requesting that the Planning Board be given reasonable discretion to adjust the bulk amenities to accommodate changes as u result of its review process of the preliminary and final site plan, in the interests of arriving at the best plan for construction.

e. Fence. Code Section 203-84(C) indicates that a 6 ft. solid fence is required along any lot line abutting residential zoning. A solid fence would be undesimble and inappropriate for this project. A solid fence would encumber public use, access, and visibility of the trail. Accordingly, we request that this requirement be waived.

STATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY REVIEW ACT

As with all real estate development projects which requit-e Town approval, compliance with the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) is required. 111e proposal is classified as an Unlisted Action for purposes of SEQRA. We have submitted an Environmental Assessment Form with this application. It is anticipated that the environmental review will commence after the referral of the application to, and report Ji·om, the Planning Board, at which time it is anticipated that the Town Board will seek (and receive) lead agency status to conduct a coordinated environmental review for this project and schedl.lic a public hearing for the application.

Once a lead agency is established, the threshold determination to be made is whether the prqject "will have no significant adverse environmental impact" (resulting in a negative declaration) or that the project "may have a significant advcl'Sc environmental impa(:t" (resulting in a positive declaration).

A negative declaration concludes the formal environmental review process under SEQR.A (although consideration of elements related to the environment and the project itself continue throughout the application pl'Ocess). A positive declaration results in the requirement of the preparation of an Envii'Onmental Impact Statement (with many procedural steps, many of them time consuming).

{2698619: l The art of representing people~ Town Board- Town of Brighton Letter of Intent February 18,2015 Page 11

The applicant will be providing supplemental reports and information to be proactive in its eUbrt to provide the Town sufficient information to make the appropriate environmental findings.

The Daniele Family Companies development team looks forward to presenting the proposed Palazzo Plaza development and this Incentive Zoning application to you. If any Board member has any questions or requires any additional infonnation, please do not hesitate to contact me at any time.

Very Truly Yours,

WOODS OVIATT GILMAN LLP

~Jerry A. Goldman !'lease direcl responses to Rocl!esrer Office

JAG/mxm Enclosures

:2698619: I The art of representing people~

PALAZZOPLAZABULKDATASUMMARY ../ MEETS MIN.MAX ALLOWED OR N/A i

+ LOT 1 RLA= 67,103; LOT 3 RLA = 47,342; LOT 4 RLA"' 342,939; LOT 1 BF-2 = 162,729; LOT 2 BF-2 = 144,048 ++ ASSUME 30,000 SF BUILDING IN LOT 2 IS MUL Tl USER •CML + SETBACK TO LOT LINE NOT DISTRICT LINE ENGINEERING ++ IMPERVIOUS IN A SPECIFIC LOT IN A SPECIFIC DISTRICT •LANO +++ IMPERVIOUS PAVEMENT IN RLA AREA SURVEY1NG SHOPPING CENTER 511000 SF= 90,000 x 511,000: 450 (TOTAL REQUIRED)· TOTAL PROVIDED= 469 • • l.ANOSCAI"E LOT 1 TOTAL REQUIRED= 250- TOTAl PROVIDED= 300 .. LOADING 15,000-40,000 SF -2 BERTHS, 40,000-100,000 SF- 3 BERTHS, 3/2 IS 3 PER LOT#1 AND2 PER LOT#2 <£ARCHITECTURE 35 SF PER PARKING SPACE= TOTAL REQUIRED= 469 SPACES x 35 SF!SPACE= 16,415 SF- TOTAL PROVIDED= 31Jo,024SF ••• 217'-"'<£.0.""~"· lOT 1 REQUIRED= 10,500 SF- PROVIDED= 15,627 SF; LOT 2 REQUIRED= 5,915- PROVIDED= 14,397 Roc><.OTER. "" '4606 ENGINEERING (5e5}45~0:20 Cl!5648

F•bruary 17,1!015 CC!>S111ci-i ENGIN~~RJNG, P.C.

Palazzo Plaza.".lncenllve Zoning·Appll.. fton Acloq~acy oH.!flllty Wla•trgclllte

1.0 WAtER MAIN'Uo SERVICES

Adequate wator·supPiy'.existll 'ior .the project. The pt'!Pertl.. ore .. f!ili:ll <:#)~ theliltll•·

Tl\e$1ov~.Jllt!'l~l~lhe·~l!ie. l1"iiikoyotoln. ·Tiidil.O.OOeqlllU'e-fei!tofplatmedt8b!d..t<>•havear!Mty . . ._..·-"''-'"'~"Oil tlit!1\totllave an eotiiitlmdatoi:LIO cl)lllleC:t to th• 8" walt!rmain.wl:ilch coinarll]y o~ MoHo'~: ThO·~ Qfothe•ll\lliil"""b!i' '0\lllll>oved lho~·wi!h.~.li'CWi\aridPepotllnePtOfH

2.0 SAJIIITAR)' MAIN!> &.J;ATJlllALS

Acfoqilale•~.,caporlily~tsfor!he~act. Theprop~eo are oervedbypubllc sew!!<. The ToWn Of Brlght!Ot\ OWN art 8-lnoh we gravity sewer located In MOnr.le Avenue (NYS'Rt Sl) ·!UUI an B•inch 081\i~ ..,..,.. which enters the sib! at the north.weot comer oltlie site.

The deoreosed water'denumc!s fot the ~ectwUI re.ult In r)ecrease liailltery ..wer llow• ltomthe ~ect.

The WhOle Foods facility hi anticipated ID connect to the oanitery ..- system at the norlhweot oomer of the site. The balence Of the ...tail. devtOW 8-lnch sorlitery ..wer mains on.aite ID convey flowo from propo•ed C<)IIIIIle1'cia arid·ri!talifadllt!eo. Connecfton willb

ENGINEERING • LAND PLANNING • SURVEYING Costich Engineering, P.C, Inc. • 217 Lake Avenue • Ro~hester, New Yol'k 14608 585-458-3020 • 585-458-2731 (Fax) • www.costich.com ' .

Palazzo Pleza -Incentive Zoning Applicalllln Page2 Adequacy of Utility lnfraolructure Memo

made to an eo

Connection to the public system will be made in accordanighton Department of l't!blic Works, Monroe Coumy 1't!re Waters aod NYSiiOT standordo.

3.0 SWPPP & DRAINA<;J!

Slonnwa!er monagement prlldi<:eo for the project will be developed in a~ with the N\'S.DI!C Pha,. D Stormwa!er ~. lr.ondequolt Creek Drainsge Buin Collaborative initiativeo, and Town of 8righton Deolgn Guidelineo. The .,..,.u dralnsge pat!ernsforthe aile will be mainlained. The projectwill ooliect storm water IIIIIOff ~ roof'top and pavement sorfaceo in a ckloed syBiom and will utilize a subsurface infiltration bed/chamber system to attenuate post ®velopment runoff ratea aod toad

4.0 BLBCTRIC&GAS

The sits Is c:umnt1y aerved by public electrk aod gas. Adequate e1ectrk and gas supply will ex~$! for the redevelopment of the property. The electric aod gas demands sro llkely to decrease due to advances In enersy elf!dancy ratingS for healing~ lighting aod advances in the New YorkStste BneJy Code for new conatruction. ' '

P~_l_lilto Pliiia-SIS:n ~aikage SIGN IlOCATION ISQFEET Monument Sign Plaza Entrance 200/200 Main Sign 1 Whole Foods 144 Main Sign 2 Whole Foods 144 Main Sign 3 Whole Foods 144 Cafe Sign Whole Foods 90 Main Sign 1 Gourmet Coffee Drive-Thru 88 Main Sign 2 Gourmet Coffee Drive-Thru 120 Main Sign 1 Bank 88 Main Sign 2 Bank 120 T1 Sign 1 Corner Tenant #1 so T1 Sign 1 Corner Tenant #1 so T2 Tenant#2 so T3 Tenant#3 so T4 Tenant#4 so TS Tenant#S so T6 Tenant#6 so T7 Tenant#? 50 TS Tenant#S so T9 Tenant#9 so no Tenant#lO so T11 Tenant#ll so I I

I I ' I I 617.20 AppendixB Short Environmental Assessment Fol'm

Instructions for Completing

Part 1- Project Information. The applicant or project sponsor is responsible for the completion of Part 1. Responses become part of the application for approval or funding, are subject to publiCTeview, and may be subject to further verification. Complete Patt I based on information currently available. If additional research or investigation would be needed to fully respond to any item, please answer as thoroughly as possible based on cunent information.

Complete all items in Part I. You may also provide any additional infonnation which you believe will be needed by or useful to the lead agency; attach additional pages as necessary to supplement any item.

Part 1 - Project and Sponsor Information

Name of Action or Project: Palazzo Plaza Project Location (describe, and attach a location map): 2750 Monroe Avenue

Brief Description of Proposed Action: Associated approvals for the redevelopment of the sites known as Mario's Restaurant (2740 Monroe Ave), Clover Lanes Bowling Alley (2750 Monroe Ave), Mamasan's Restaurant (2800 Monroe Ave), and a portion (to be subdivided) from the First Baptist Church (175 Aliens Creek Road). The parcels outlined above are to be combined and developed as a specialty grocer, specialty coffee shop, community bank, and other community retail tenants. Associated improvements to include vehicle and pedestrian access improvements (including signalized traffic light on Monroe Ave), cross access between developments, parking (including accessible spaces), stormwater management facilities, landscape, lighting, and all necessary utilities to service proposed uses.

Name of Applicant or Sponsor: Telephone: (585) 271-1111 Mardanth Enterprises Inc. E~Mail: [email protected] Address: 2740 Monroe Avenue City/PO: State: Zip Code: Rochester New York 14618 I. Does the proposed action only involve the legislative adoption of a plan, local law, ordinance, NO YES administrative rule, or regulation? If Yes, attach a narrative description of the intent of the proposed action and the environmental resources that may be affected in the municipality and proceed to Part 2. If no, continue to question 2. 0 D 2. Does the proposed action require a permit, approval or funding from any other governmental Agency? NO YES If Yes, list agency(s) name and pennit or approval: NYSDEC- SPDES Permit, Town of Brighton- Architectural Review Board D 0

3.a. Total acreage of the site of the proposed action? 10.10 acres b. Total acreage to be physically disturbed? 8.5 acres c. Total acreage (project site and any contiguous properties) owned or controlled by the applicant or project sponsor? 10.10 acres

4. Check all land uses that occur on, adjoining and near the proposed action. I£] Urban DRum! (non-agriculture) D Industrial D Commercial OResidential (suburban) 0Forest 0Agriculture OAquatic OOther (specify): DParkland

Page I of4 5. Is the proposed action, NO YES N/A a. A pennitted use under the zoning regulations? D 0 D b. Consistent with the adopted comprehensive plm1? D 0 D 6. Is the proposed action consistent with the predominant character of the existing built or natural NO YES landscape? D 0 7. Ts the site of the proposed action located in, or does it adjoin, a state listed Critical Environmental Area? NO YES IfYes, identify: 0 D 8. a. Will the proposed action result in a substantial increase in traffic above present levels? NO YES 0 D b. Are public transportation service(s) available at or near the site of the proposed action? D 0 c. Are any pedestrian accommodations or bicycle routes available on or near site of the proposed action? D 0 9. Does the proposed action meet or exceed the state energy code requirements? NO YES If the proposed action will exceed requirements, describe design features and technologies: D 0

I 0. Will the proposed action connect to an existing public/private water supply? NO YES If No, describe method for providing potable water: D 0

II. Will the proposed action connect to existing wastewater utilities? NO YES If No, describe method for providing wastewater treatment: D 0

12. a. Does the site contain a structure that is listed on either the State or National Register of Historic NO YES Places? b. Is the proposed action located in an archeological sensitive area? 0 D *Site as it exists is developed and proposed action will not impact undeveloped areas. D I GIJ 13. a. Does any portion of the site of the proposed action, or lands adjoining the proposed action, contain NO YES wetlands or other waterbodies regulated by a federal, state or local agency? 0 D b. Would the proposed action physically alter, or encroach into, any existing wetland or waterbody? If Yes, identify the wetland or waterbody and extent of alterations in square feet or acres: 0 D

14. Identify the typical habitat types that occur on, or are likely to be found on the project site. Check all thai apply: D Shoreline D Forest D Agricultural/grasslands DEarly mid-successional D Wetland !21Urban D Suburban 15. Does the site of the proposed action contain any species of animal, or associated habitats, listed NO YES by the State or Federal government as threatened or endangered? 0 D 16. Is the project site located in the 100 year flood plain? NO YES loll II I 17. Will the proposed action create storm water discharge, either from point or non-point sources? NO YES If Yes, a. Will storm water discharges flow to adjacent properties? ll/'l NO DYES D 0

b. Will storm water discharges be directed to established conveyance systems Doff and storm drains)? If Yes, briefly describe: NO !Z]YES Stormwater Management Facilities to maintain existing discharge ~oints.

Page 2 of4 18. Does the proposed action include construction or other activities that result in the impoundment of NO YES water or other liquids (e.g. retention pond, waste lagoon, dam)? If Yes, explain purpose and size; Stormwater Management Facilities D 0

19. Has the site of the proposed action or an adjoining property been the location of an active or closed NO YES solid waste management facility? IfYes, describe: 0 D

20. Has the site of the proposed action or an adjoining property been the subject of remediation (ongoing or NO YES completed) for hazardous waste? IfYes, describe: 0 D

I AFFIRM THAT THE INFORMATION PROVIDED ZEIS\fRUEAND ACCURATE TO THE BEST OFMY KNOWLEDGE Applioont/•pnn•oc nome: Mloh"l Mnotaltn_- Cn.tloh Engin~ Date: 01-20-2015 Signature: "' L~ ....--;>. ' -:=;e:

Part 2 - Impact Assessment. The Lead Agency is responsible for the completion of Part 2. Answer all of the following questions in Part 2 using the information contained in Part I and other materials submitted by the project sponsor or otherwise available to the reviewer. When answering the questions the reviewer should be guided by the concept "Have my responses been reasonable considering the scale and context of the proposed action?"

No, or Moderate small to large impact impact may may occur occur I. Will the proposed action create a material conflict with an adopted land use plan or zoning regulations? D D 2. Will the proposed action result in a change in the use or intensity of use of land? D D 3. Will the proposed action impair the character or quality of the existing community? D D 4. Will the proposed action have an impact on the environmental characteristics that caused the establishment of a Critical Environmental Area (CEA)? D D 5. Will the proposed action result in an adverse change in the existing level of traffic or affect existing infrastructure for mass transit, biking or walkway? D D 6. Will the proposed action cause an increase in the use of energy and it fails to incOJ]lorate reasonably available energy conservation or renewable energy opportunities? D D 7. Will the proposed action impact existing: a. public I private water supplies? D D b. public I private wastewater treatment utilities? D D 8. Will the proposed action impair the character or quality of important historic, archaeological, architectural or aesthetic resources? D D 9. Will the proposed action result in an adverse change to natural resources (e.g., wetlands, waterbodies, groundwater, air quality, flora and fauna)? D D

Page3of4 No, or Moderate small to large impact impact may may occur occur 10. Will the proposed action result in an increase in the potential for erosion, flooding or drainage problems? D D 11. Will the proposed action create a hazard to environmental resources or human health? D D Part 3 - Determination of significance. The Lead Agency Is responsible for the completion of Part 3. For every question in Part 2 that was answered "moderate to large impact may occur", or if there is a need to explain why a particular element of the proposed action may or will not resull in a significant adverse environmental impact, please complete Part 3. Part 3 should, in sufficient detail, identifY the impact, including any measures or design elements that have been included by the project sponsor to avoid or reduce impacts. Part 3 should also explain how the lead agency determined that the impact may or will not be significant. Each potential impact should be assessed considering its setting, probability of occurring, duration, ineversibility, geographic scope and magnitude. Also consider the potential for short-term, long-tenn and cumu1ative impacts.

Check this box if you have determined, based on the information and analysis above, and any supporting documentation, D that the proposed action may result in one or more potentially large or significant adverse impacts and an environmental impact statement is required. Check this box if you have determined, based on the information and analysis above, and any supporting documentation, D that the proposed action will not result in any significant adverse environmental impacts,

Name of Lead Agency Date

Print or Type Name of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency Title of Responsible Officer

Signature of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency Signature ofPreparer (if different from Responsible Officer)

PRINT Page 4 of4 • · 'EAF Mapper Summary Report Tuesday, May 20, 2014 9:42AM

Disclaimer: The EAF Mapper Is a screening tool intended to assist L project sponsors and reviewing agencies in preparing an environmental assessment form (EAF). Not all questions asked in the EAF are ' 19-1-76.'1 /'37'1~-1-70,1 answered by the EAF Mapper. Additional information on any EAF " question can be obtained by consulting the EAF Workbooks. Although ,, !>'I _ _ ,,.,- th!l EAF Mapper provides the most up-to-date digital data available to ' 19 1 DEC, you may also need to contact local or other data sources in order to obtain data not provided by the Mapper. Digital data Is not a substitute for agency determinations.

.'.' l50.,ml-4' :r

"•· _:;''· ,'\'

Part 1 I Question 7 [Critical Environmental No Area] Part 1 I Question 12a [National Register of No Historic Places) Part 11 Question 12b [Archeological Sites] Yes , Part 1 I Question 13a [Wetlands or Other No i Regulated Waterbodies] 'Part 1 I Question 15 [Threatened or No 'Endangered] Part 1 I Question 16 [1 00 Year Flood Plain] No Part 1 I Question 20 [Remediation Site] No

Short Environmental Assessment Form - EAF Mapper Summary Report 1 100 Crossroads Building WOODS 1900 Main Pla.ce Tower 2 State Street, Rochester, New York 14614 OVIATT Bufhlo, New York 14202 p 585.987.2800 c 585.454.3968 GILMAN p 716.248.3200 J= 716.854.5100 Wrltet''s Direct Dial Number: 585.445.2726 ''" Writer'S Direct FoK Number: 585.445.2626 ATTORNEYS [email protected] woodsoviaH.com

May 15,2015

Town Board Town of Brighton 2300 Elmwood Avenue Rochesrer, New York 14618

Re: Application of Daniele Family Companies Incentive Zoning AMENDED LETTER OF INTENT

Dear Board Members:

This office has been retained by the Daniele Family Companies and their affiliated entities (the "applicant") to assist them in obtaining the municipal approvals requiTed for an exciting redevelopment project proposed on Monroe Avenue in the Town of Brighton to be k,nown as Palazzo Plaza. This letter is submitted to request Incentive Zoning approval be granted, pursuant to Chapter 209 of the Town of Brighton Code, to facilitate the development.

This Amended Letter of Intent is designed to supersede the original Letter of Intent dated February 18, 2015 to provide updated information based upon public input garnered through our neighborhood meeting and public processes·since the original application. Delivered with this letter are:

1. A submission from SRF & Associates with traffic analysis on a couple of fronts: a. The full traffic impact analysis submitted to the New York State Department of Transpottation anc;t the Monroe County Department of Transportation. We have gotten initial comments from MCDOT, but have yet to receive NYSDOT comments. b. An access management plan for the south side of Monroe Avenue, with discussion on the SRF cover letter. 2. A submission from Costich Engineering, including: a. An updated Full Environmental Assessment Fo!Iil (FEAF). b. A revised lighting plan. c. An expanded engineers-report covering drainage and other issues.

PROPERTY LOCATION

The properties proposed to be redeveloped as Palazzo Plaza are the current Mario's Italian Restaurant pitrcel (at 2740 Monroe Avenue,. with tax identification nwnber 137.19-2-70.32), the Clover Lanes bowling parcel (at 2750 Monroe Avenue, with tax identification number 150.07-2-8.11), the Mamasan1s. Restaurant parcel (at 2900 Monroe Avenue, with tax identification number 150.07-2-7.1),

{2698619:3} The art of representing people~ Town Board- Town of Brighton Amended Letter of Intent May 15,2015 Page2

and a 2.2 +/- acre portion of lartd hehind the Mario's and Clover Lanes parcels, which is part of the lands ofthe First Baptist Church (at 175 Allens Creek Road, with tax identification number 137.190-2- 68.1). The applicant maintains ownership over the Mario's and Clover Lanes parcels and has the other properties under contract to purchase. The existing Mario's, Clover Lanes and Mamasan's buildings will be demolished for the proposed comprehensive redevelopment _of the site.

The properties on Monroe Avenue are split zoned. The site includes 7.3 +1- acres located in the BF-2 General Commercial Zoning Distrfct and 2.8 +/- acres located in the RLA ResidentialN Low Density District acljacent to the north. Of the 2.8 acres in the RLA District, a 2.2 acre area will be acquired from the First Baptist Church ("Church"). The lands to be acquired from the Church extend to Clover Street. Only a limited portion of this RLA property immediately adjacent to the Mario's and Clover Lanes parcels are proposed to be developed. The RLA zoning is proposed to be maintained.

NEIGHBORHOOD HISTORY

The Monroe Avenue corridor between Clover Street and 1-590 is an important commercial district and gateway into both the Towns of Brighton and Pittsford. The area is currently in transition, with some parcels recently redeveloped or vac,;ant, and extensive transportation improvements completed in 2015. The area is characterized by aging_ buildings, a lack of vehicular cross-access, numerous curb cuts onto Monroe Avenue, and segmented parking. The current disjointed design of the corridor is incongruous· with the importa)lce and value of this area of Monroe Avenue to the community.

The Mario's Italian Restaurant was built in 1995 on a 2.4 +/-acre parcel. The restaurant has been very successful in this lo_cation, but has outgrown the property. To accommodate increased parking demand, approximately 15 years ago, the parking lot was expanded onto the'First Baptist Church property. Although the expanded parking lot is necessary to the business, it encroaches into the RLA District, a condition which will be resolved in connection with the proposed redevelopment.

Clover Lanes Bowling Center sits on 4-.5 acres immediately adjacent to and east of Mario's. Clover Lanes was built in 1951, and has operated successfully despite a decline in the recreational bowling business over time. The- building contains an arched wood truss roof system that has been repaired through the years, but has far exceeded its useful life. Roof replacement is cost prohibitive for the current use as a bowling alley. The building is lacking in architectural character.

Mamasan' s Restaurant is located on a 1.2 acre property east of the Clover Lanes parcel. The building has housed different restaurants over the years. It had operated as a Perkins Restaurant for over 20 years, became a Denny's Restaurant for the next decade, and then was converted into its current use as Mamasan's, Mamasan's is seeking to relocate to a smaller and more suitable space for its needs.

The First Baptist Church borders the Mario 1s and Clover Lanes Plaza properties to the north on approximately 10 +/-acres. The Church sits at the southeast comer of Clover Street and Allen Creek Road. The Church has approximately 2.2 acres of excess undeveloped residential land which is disjointed from its main property by a neighboring residence along Clover Street. Part of the excess space is wooded and serves as a buffer between the residential neighborhood on Clover Street, and the

(2698619:3 ) The art of representing people~ Town Board- Town of Brighton Amended Letter of Intent May 15,2015 Page3

existing commercial activity ofthe Mario's and Clover Lanes parcels, and Monroe Avenue. The sale of the- land by the Church will generate proceeds for .much needed. capital improvements and ensure the continued use of its Clover Street frontage:· ~s an undeveloped buffer.

An important asset included in the project .is a trail, which crosses the properties and is part of a tr{lil system which extends from the Village of Pittsford, through the Town of Pittsford, the Town of Brighton and into the City of Rochester. While parts of the trail are regularly used by walkers and cyclists, that portion of trail which crosses the subject properties was never improved or used, and is currently used by RG&E as a,maintenance road.

THE PROPOSAL

The applicant proposes to redevelop_ the properties as Palazzo Plaza; a lifestyle center anchored by a 50,000 sq. ft. natural and organic foods market/grocery, shown on the conceptual site plan as Building A The proposed development includes a new 34,000 square f\, retail plaza building (Building B), and two outparcel buildings (Buildings. C and D), The existing buildings will be demolished for the .cohesive redevelopment of the site. One of the outparcels (Building C) is anticipated to include a specialty coffee shop with a drive through, The other outparcel is contemplated as potentially a bank, with. drive through and automated teller machine likely (Building D).

The proposed ptoject will significantly upgrade the property and this important gateway to the Town of Brighton . .An exching food market anchor, attractive architecture, and cohesive design will help to update and transform this section of Monroe Avenue. The propnsal. will include quality design and architecture, with atchitecture contemplated to be consistent with the anchor tenant) including use of regional materials and a waste management plan that will look to- re-use a significant &mount of the material from the existing buildings. Light colored roof systems and use of concrete in certain areas will mitigate the "heat island" .effect associated with parking lots, Additionally, more trees and vegetation and proposed within parking areas. The current trail running through the property is proposed to be improved, slightly relocated, and incorporated into the development. Proximity to the trail will provide new pedestrian connections between the retail and residential neighborhoods. At the same time, the proposal provides for permanent protection for the adjacent residential neighborhood, maintaining buffering and separation. The trail will separate the residential and commercial areas.

Pedestrian access is incorporated in the plan, providing access to the site for pedestrians and 'bicycles (the plaza·will also include bicycle racks). The pedestrian friendly development will enhance the neighborhood by improving walkability and fostering neighborhood business, The applicant also proposes to address safety o·n the trail by separating vehicle traffic from pedestrian and bicycle activity on the trail. The project will create new pedestrian connections, consolidate parking, and improve vehicular access to and from Monroe Avenue. Pedestrian connections and way-finding signage will also be incorporated internal to the development.

{Z698619:3} The art of representing people.• Town Board- Town, of Brighton Amended Letter of Intent May 15,2015 Page4

property will be_ eliminated. The signal location will be dictated by the New York State Department of Transportation (NYSDOT), which maintains jurisdiction over Monroe Avenue. Muftimodal transportation improvements, in cooperation with the Roche$ter Genesee Regional TranSportation Authority are contemplated, Included in the development will be. electronic vehicle charging stations, dedicated spots for HOV (high occupancy vehicles) and LEV (low emission vehicles). The developer is committed to work with an independent traffic consultant, if hired by the Town, on internal and external transportation issues.

The proposed food market building incorporates sustainability. The design will respect the local landscape. Recycled materials from the Clover Lanes building, including wood from bowling lanes and timber from the roofing system, will be incorporated into the building. The natural and organic foods market/grocery building will be constructed to silver LEED standards and incmporate architectural features and materials appropriate to the Rochester area. The two oo.tparcel buildings and retail pla,za building will be designed to complement the new food market, providing an architectural theme for the development.

In addition to the amenities of this project, which are set forth on pages 5 and 6 below, this development provides substantial public benefits. Among them are:

I. Fulfilling the Vision of the Monroe Avenue Corridor Plan. The Monroe Avenue Corridor Plan has a number of distinct elements which are being addressed by this plan. Those elements are both aesthetic in nature (dealing with placement of buildings) and safety~ related (relative to Monroe Avenue access). Project design has incorporated the goals of the Corridor Plan.

2. Diversity of Retail Offerings within the Town of Brighton. The addition of a natural and organic foods market/grocery is of substantial benefit to the residents or' the Town of Brighton. At pr~sent, the Tqwn is home to a Tops Market on South Clinton Avenue, several pharmacies selling some grocery items and occasional specialty or convenience type stores. Many residents do not have convenient access to a quality, f"'-ll service groc~ry store in their community requiring residents to shop fm groceti'es oUtside of the Town, such as at the Pittsford or East Avenue Wegman's stores. In addition, the lead tenant within the plaza enhances the possibility of bringing new and upscale retailers to the remaJnder of the Center. There is a natural following of the lead tenant and some of those prospective tenants are in discussions with the developer.

3. Tax Revenues. The proposed development will generate a significant increase in tax revenues. The· ye_ariy taxes currently generated are $190,600 plus or minus and includes tax exempt property. The future projected taxes (using current tax rates) are expected to be $483,300.

4. No COMIDA. While this property may be eligible for a payment in lieu of taxes (PILOT) Agreement and substantial benefits under programs sponsored by the County of Monroe Industrial Development Agency the applicant has committed that they will, in accordance with the Town of Brighton's preference, forgo any request for such benefits.

{2698619:3} The art of representing people Town Board- Town of Brighton Amended Letter of Intent May 15,2015 Page5

APPROVALS NECESSARY

We anticipate the following approval process to be required for the Palazzo Plaza Development:

L Incentive ZOning Approval. Incentive Zoning approval is required from the Town Board in accordance with Chapter 209 of the Town ofBiighton Code.

2. Planning Board, Architectural Review Board, and Historic Preservation Commission Approvals. The Planning Board would have jurisdiction for site plan approval, and subdivision approval (to combine the subject properties, create a separate lot for the remaining church property and create internal lots for financing and tax allocation purposes- all depicted on the "Bulk Data Lot Plan" attached to this letter.) Several of the proposed uses, including the food rnatket I grocery store, coffee Shop, bank, drive through parts· of the op_erations, automated teller machines, and outdoor .S:eating, are all conditionally permitted uses _per Code. While we are requesting that these uses be permitted as an incentive in this incentive zoning application, the Planning Board would otherwise have conditional use permit approval authority. The Architectural Review Board would also have jurisdiction over the exterior design of the buildings and signs under the Town Code. The Historic Preservation Committee reviews all demolition requests to confirm that the propet1y being demolished has no historic or architectural significance.

INCENTIVE ZONING AJ'PLICATION

Incentive Zoning is regulated by Chapter 209 of the Town of Brighton Code. The purpose and the intent of the Code provisions are to provide a vehicle whereby an applicant can request certain 1 ' incentives" (relief from Town Code provisions), in exchange for certain "amenities" (public benefits offered by the applicant). Specifically, Section 209-5(1A) sets for the information to be provided by the applicant in conjunction with an Incentive Zoning Application. Those four (4) subsections are addressed below:

1. The Proposed Amenity. Typically, amenities address specific infrastructure or development needs or improvements in the area of the proposed development project. Several such amenities of benefit to the community are offered as part of the application, as further illustrated on the concept site plan submitted with the application. We estimate the value of the amenities to be in excess of $265 1000, before including on-going maintenartce costs for certain amenities, as described below (for the trail and traffic signal).

a. Pedestrian and Bicycle Access. The amemttes offered by the applicant include improvement and slight relocation of the existing trail across the development site to make it accessible, safe) and inviting for public use. The proposal includes defineating the trail, improving its condition, and maintaining it. Vehicular traffic is proposed to be separated from the trail to create a safe and pleasurable experience for those who wish to use the trail. The trail will also be connected to the proposed development via sidewalks throughout the

{"'""" 1 The art of representing people.• Town Board- Town of Brighton Amended Letter of Intent May !5, 20!5 Page6

site, with bike racks within the' center, A proposed traffic signal and crosswalk (another amenity described below) will afford trail gOers safe crossing and access to the south side of Monroe Avenue, The estimated value of this amenity is approximately $65,000, plus, the estimated annual cost of maintaining the trail of $1 ,200.

b. Traffic Signal. The anticipated traffic generation and potential traffic related impacts for the proposed development have- been evaluated by the applicant and discussed with the NYSDOT. The applicant proposes to install and. pay for the maintenance of a traffic signal to be located as shown on the site plan, together with other traffic improvements (including axight out and ingress in located where Mario's restaurant currently has its pdm;;rry access). The signalized intersection wHI offer an opporttinity for additional traffic calming, access tnano\lgement and cross access along Monroe Avenue. One curb cut on the north side of Monroe Avenue, being the driveway for the cun:e;nt Mamasan's Restaurant. will be I'emoved. The signal location, dictated by the NYSDOT, proposes to line up at the existing Clover Lanes and the Sakura Home restaurant on the south side of Monroe Avenue. The signal will serve traffic for the new Palazzo Plaza development, and, as a part of this Incentive Zoning proposal, the applicant has actively engaged property owners of the south side of Monroe Avenue. to de·sign and construct cro:s.s-access between parcels on the· south side of Monroe Avenue to utilize the new traffic signal. Access to a traffic signal would provide a significant economic benefit to these neighboring properties and businesses, and would help to address traffic Issues related to this part of the Monroe Avenue corridor. Another important aspect of this amenity is the developer1s commitment to addressing a long standing access management issue on the south s·icte of Monroe Avenue. An access management plan will be developed by the developer, it will seek review by the NYSDOT and the Town of Brighton .for- their adoption as a master access management plan including the 5 parcels (Dunkin Donuts, Sakura Home, the former Pizza Hut, Comfort Inn and the fonner Friendly's), The developer is in the process of acquiring excess NYSDOT property to the south of the parcels to include additional space for parking and a cross access road. This excess property is intended to be purchased by each adjacent property owner, funded by the developer and the developer handling the actual acquisition. The developer, limited by the owner's desires to make such changes to their parcels, is committed to funding and therefore executing the fulfillment of the Access Management Plan. The cost of the traffic signal and improvements are estimated at this point to be $200,000 to $250,000, which amount will be borne by the applicant. While some of'these costs fall under the category of traffic mitigation, the efforts of the developer go well beyond that and the value of amenity (above and beyond immediate traffic mitigation) is valued at $!00,000 to $125,000, plus a pmtion of the ongoing annual cost maintenance of the traffic signal of approximately $1,800.

c. Preservation of Passive & Active Open Space. The applicant will acquire approximately 2.2 +1- acres of lands from the First Baptist Church, a small portion of which is needed and incorporated into the development site, as shown on the concept site plan. The property is in the RLA Zoning District and is adjacent to the BF-2 District. The property fronts on Clover Street and backs to the Mario's and Clover Lanes parcels. While the Church has

{2698619:3 l The art of representing people.• Town Board- Town of Brighton Amended Letter of Intent May 15,2015 Page 7

contemplated the potential development or use of its excess property over the years, selling the propertY for the proposed development will provide the Church with much needed funds to complete capital improvements that would not be possible without this sale, thus posing a hardship to the Church and its congregation.

The applicant proposes to pres:erve the bulk of the 2.2 +/- acres to be acquited from the Church, fronting on Clover Street as undeveloped open space. This area may be- dedicated as a Conservation Easement. This land will serve as a substantial forested buffer between the c<>mmercial deve!Qptnent and ac!jacent residential uses. Another potential benefit to be further explored is improved storm water m!;lilagement for the Clover Street area. The remaining area of the property adjacent to the Palazzo Plaza is proposed to be incorporated jn the development site to accommodate necessary parking and paved areas. The proposed trail described above will separate the proposed development from the open space and residential development The value of the amenity is estimated at $100,000, exclusive of any drainage benefits to the_community.:

2. The cash value ofthe proposed amenity. The cash value of the proposed amenity is discussed above.

3. A narrative, which:

a. Describes the benefit to be provided to the community by the proposed amenity. The benefits to the community are discussed above.

b. Gives preliminary indication that there is adequate ... (infrastructure) ... to handle_ the additional demands of the incentive.... There is adequate infrastructure for the proposed inc~ntives. A conceptual utility plan has been. submitted to demonstrate adequate storm water? sanitary and water service for the development. The proposed development offers benefits to the community, including the addition of traffic signal on Monroe A venue, and the development of the trail across the property. Adequate parking is provided for the development. The property is also acces'sible by public transportation. A concise engineel'i_ng narrative entitled "adequacy of utility infi:astructure" is attached.

c. Explains how the amenitv helps implement the .... policies of the Comprehensive Plan. as supplemented by local laws and ordinances... The proposed amenities helps implement and advance the policies of the Comprehensive Plan, the Town of Brighton Monroe Avenue Corridor Community Vision Plan- Monroe Avenue East End (between Town of Pittsford and 590 called the 11 Corridor Vision Plan"), the Town of Brighton Monroe Avenue Design Guidelines (adopted 1999) (called "Design Guidelines") and the Town of Brighton Coc!e. There is substantial support for the proposed amenities in all of these documents,

The Comprehensive Plan calls for trail improvements and open space, and for encouraging the upgrading, beautifying and revitalization of existing commercial areas. These amenities are offered and will have significant public benefit.

{2698619:3} The art of representing people~ Town Board- Town of Brighton Amended Letter of Intent May 15,2015 Page8

The Con·idot1 Vision Plan recognizes that this area. is difficult and dangerous for pedestrians to navigate and the need for pedestrian and bicycle frie·ndliness and connections, improving sidewalks and crossings, and enhancing commercial areas to provide cohesion. It also recognizes the benefit of shared parking and cross-access, and the need to reduce curb cuts in this area. The amenities provide these benefits.

The Design Guidelines also recognizes the issues presented by the need for parking and number of curb cuts on Monroe Avenue, as causing hazardous conditions for pedestrians and motorists and contributing to vehicular circulation problems resulting in traffic congestion on the street. Ali objective is to reduce the size and number of curb cuts to intptove safety, increase off-street parking and expand open space, The Design Guidelines call for adjacent parking lots to have "internal vehicular and pedestrian connections, for internal vehicular circ;:ulation patterns thaUmprove pedestrian and vehicular a.cc_essibility and safety, and for contiguous networks of pedestrian walkways extending from building entrances to. sidewalks. Provisions of the Town Code similarly address requirement of cross-access and access management. The proposed amenities are consistent with these goals for traffic safety, cross access and access management.

4. The Proposed Incentives. The .vrop·osed incentives for the proposed development are identified on the overall concept site plan enclosed with the application, on the "Palazzo Plaza Bulk Data Summary" attached to this letter and described further below. The propet1y along Monroe Avenue has lon:g been zoned-and developed as commercial property. The incentives relate primarily to dimensional deviations from ·the Code, in large part dictated by the split zoning of the development parcel. The addition of a small portion of RLA zoned land to the northern portion of the site (behind the current Mario's and Clover Lanes properties) generates the. need for a use incentive to allow commercial improvements and activity to extend into this small area of the adjacent RLA District. Other use incentives proposed relate to conditional pennit uses which carry a favorable legal presumption of being pennitted. and in harmony with the neighborhood. To that end, the incentives seek to avoid unnecessary duplication in the review·process.

a. Use. The lands to be acquired from the Church are located in the RLA Zoning District. Limited activities involving parking and access are proposed to extend onto the property to be acquired from the Church. While commercial uses are not generally pennitted in the RLA District, pun~uant to Code Section. 201-9(A)(3), the commercial use is permitted to encroach into the residential district by 30 ft. The proposed incentive is to permit commercial development to extend slightly into the RLA District beyond the permitted 30 ft. zone. Notwithstanding this fact, the remaining approximately I +/- acre block of land extending 'between the Palazzo Plaza development and Clover Street is proposed to remain undeveloped open space between the commercial and residential areas.

The bulk of the property is located in the BF-2 District. The identified proposed uses include a food market, a specialty coffee shop/restaurant, and a bank. The coffee shop and bank require drive through operations, and the bank would typically require an ATM. Outdoor seating may be desired by the restaurant and/or food market. All of these uses are

{2698619:3} The art of representing people.' Town Board- Town of Brighton Amended Letter of Intent May 15,2015 Page 9

conditional permit uses in the BF-2 District. A proposed incentive is to waive the conditional use permit .requirement these uses, as these uses will be thoroughly reviewed as part of both the incentive zoning application by the Town Board and site plan approval process by the Planning Board. This request is not designed to avoid scrutiny by the Town Board or the Planning Board, but only to confirm that the proposed use of the property is pennitted as part of this overall Incentive Zoning package.

b. Drive Through Location. The proposed development includes drive through operations for a specialty coffee shop and for a bank. Pursuant to Code Section 207-14.3, drive through operations shall not be located in the front yard. A proposed incentive is to allow the proposed drive throughs to be located in the front yard. This relief is appropriate and necessary for the development of the coffee shop as an outparcel in the larger shopping center. While not clearly necessary for the bank, this need may change dwing the: review process as the site plan and on-site traffic is reviewed. The layout of the site iS constrained largely by the placement of the traffic signal. The visibility of the drive through is in keeping with the nature of development along this portion of Monroe Avenue, which inCludes a new Dunkin Donuts with a drive through on the south side of Monroe Avenue.

c. Signs. Town Code Section 207-32 allows limited business identification and directional signage. Section B allows a single attached sign on the principal building entrance. The total area of the business identification sign permitted may not exceed 10% ofthe first-floor area of the building face or 150 square ft., whichever is less. A requested incentive is to allow a sign package which is designed to meet -the needs of the individual_ businesses for signage in the context of the business plaza, with visibility from both Monroe Avenue and internal to the plaza. The sign package will exceed the amount pennitted l;ly Code and include: (l) signage -on multiple building faces (for the food market and outparcel buildings), (2) appropriate drive through signage, which typically requfres specialized signage (such as a menu sign), (3) an attractive rllonument sign identifYing the plaza and tenants. Tenant signage may include logos as part of the tenant signage., (4) signage greater than 150 square feet on Building 1, (5) logo greater than .25% of any individual sign., and (6) additional signage contained in a sign package to be provided in final form to- the Town Board prior to the scheduling of the public hearing on the Incentive Zoning application. A preliminary "Palazzo Plaza Sign Package" chart and accompanying plan is attached.

d. Bulk Requirements. In respect to bulk requirements, among the requested incentives are relief with respect to several building setbacks, lot cover(!.ge, demdty, and. pavement setbacks, as detailed on the conceptual site plan and on the "Palazzo Plaza Bulk Data Summary" attached to this letter. Calculations in this area reflect the split-zoning of the site. Bulk requirement for the BF-2 were applied to the BF-2 area, and requirements applicable to the RLA are applied to the RLA area. As depicted on the "Palazzo Plaza Bulk Data Summary'' attached, we are in confonnance with the preponderance of the bulk requirements under Code.

{2698619:3} The art of representing people~ Town Board- Town of Brighton Amended Letter of Intent May 15,2015 Page 10

Where the Code requires a front setback of 60 feet, the proposal is for Building A to 'have front setback of 5 feet on Monroe Avenue and Buildings B and C to have a fi·ont setback of 24- feet. Where the Code requires a side setback of I 0 feet, a side setback of 9 feet is proposed on the west side ofBu:ilding A and ·on the east side of Building B. In addition, the Code requires a rear yard abuttiog a residential district to be 60 feet. The rear yard meets the Code at 62 feet, but reflects a pel'initted enQtoachrnent of'the commercial parking into the residential district.

With respect to impervious surface, Code provides for a maximum of 65 feet. The proposed lot coverage in the BF·2 portion of the site is 91% (roughly the same as currently exists). Code provides for a maximum density of 10,000 square feet per acre in the BF-2 District. The proposed density, applied to the BF-2 portion of the site, is 13,384 square feet per acre for Lot 1 and 12,096 square feet·per acre for Lot 2. These numbers reflect the exclusion of the RLA lands in the calculations,

The proposed incentives include relief from pavement setback regulations of the Town Code applicable to the )3F-2 and RLA Districts to allow the proposed pavement setbacks of 13 feet on Lot 1 and 8 feet on Lot 2. Parking in the front yard is also proposed fOr the development along Monroe Avenue. Rear yard paved areas of5 feet on the BF-2 part of Lot 1 and 0 feet on the BF- 2 part of Lot 2, as well rear yard parking areas of 64 and 61% on the residentially zoned portion of the 2 development lots in lieu of the 35% maximum under Code, are occasioned by the pavement approacWng or crossing the zoning line. Finally. the portion of Lot 2 which is zoned residential requires an incentive because it would be a substandard lot (19,832 square feet as opposed to 23,125 square feet) if it were a freestanding residential lot (which it isn't).

Relief from drive through stacking to allow 113 feet in lieu of the 120 feet required by Code is requested. Inasmuch as no loading berths are deemed necessary Lot 2 users, we are requesting relief allowing us to have no loading berths on Lot 2 (we have the requisite 3 loading berths on Lot 1).

In respect to the First 'Baptist Church, the proposed subdivision will not crea:te non-confonnities. It is noted that the existing setback on A:llen Creek is non-confirming and will remain so. Where Code requires a front setback of 100ft., the existing is 59.4 ft. and will remain so.

With regard to the bulk requirements, the requested incentives are based upon the conceptual site plan being reviewed by the Town Board. It is common that there are changes to the final approved plan as a result of Town reviews. Accordingly, the applicant is requesting that the Planning Board be given reasonable discretion to adjust the bulk amenities to accommodate changes as a result of its review process of the preliminary and final site plan, in the interests of arriving at the best plan for construction.

e. Fence. Code Section 203-84(C) indicates that a 6 ft. solid fence is required along any lot line abutting residential zoning. A solid fence would be undesirable and inappropriate for this project. A solid fence would encumber public use, access, and visibility of the trail. Accordingly, we request that this requirement be waived.

{2698619:3} The art of representing people~ ToWn Board- Town of Brighton Amended Letter of Intent May 15,2015 Page 11

STATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY REVIEW ACT

As with all real estate development projects which require Town approval, compliance with the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) is required. The proposal i$ classified as an Unlisted Action for purposes of SEQRA. We have submitted a full Environmental Assessment Fortn and supplements with this application. It is anticipated that the environmental review will commence after the. referral of the application to, and report from, the Planning Board, at which time it is anticipated that the Towo Board will seek (and receive) lead agency status to conduct a coordinated environmental review for this project and schedule a public hearing for the application.

Once a lead agency is established, the threshold -determination to be made is whether the project '"will have no significant adverse environmental impact." (resulting in a negative declaration) or that the project "may have a significant adverse environmental impact" (resulting in a positive declaration).

A negative declaration concludes the fotrrtal environmental review process under SEQRA (although consideration of elements related to the· environment and the project itself continue throughout the application. process). A positive declaration results in the requirement of the preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement (with many procedural steps, many of them time consuming).

The applicant will be providing. supplemental reports and information to be proactive in its -effort to provide the Town sufficient inf01mation to make the appropriate enVirorup.ental findings.

Very Truly Yours,

WOODS OVIATT GILMAN LLP c~y&;;.e&~~~ Jerry A. Goldman Please dfrecl responses/(} Rochester Office

JAG/mxm Enclosures

{2698619:3} The art of representing people.• At a Town Board Meeting of the Town of Brighton, Monroe County, New York, held at the Brighton Town Hall, 2300 Elmwood Avenue, in said Town of Brighton on the 14th day of February, 2018. PRESENT: WILLIAM W. MOEHLE,

Supervisor

JAMES R. VOGEL CHRISTOPHER K. WERNER JASON S. DIPONZIO ROBIN R. WILT Councilmembers

Dated: February 14, 2018

William W. Moehle, Supervisor Voting ____

James R. Vogel, Councilmember Voting ____

Christopher K. Werner, Councilmember Voting ____

Jason S. DiPonzio, Councilmember Voting ____

Robin R. Wilt, Councilmember Voting ____

Brigtres02-14-18-13 700 Crossroads Building WOODS 1900 Main Place Tower 2 State Street, Rochester, New York 14614 OVIATT Buffalo, New York 142 02 P 585.987.2800 F 585.454.3968 GILMAN P 716.248.3200 F 716.854.5100 liP

woodsoviatt.com ECESVE

FEB 0 1 2018 Writer's Direct Dial Number: 585.445.2726 Writer's Direct Fax Number: 585.445.2626 Email: [email protected] TOWN OF BRIGHTON BUILDING & PLANNING

February 1, 2018

Town Board Town of Brighton 2300 Elmwood A venue Rochester, New York 14618

Re: Application of Daniele Family Companies Incentive Zoning SECOND AMENDED LETTER OF INTENT

Dear Board Members:

This office has been retained by the Daniele Family Companies and their affiliated entities (the "applicant") to assist them in obtaining the municipal approvals required for an exciting redevelopment project proposed on Monroe Avenue in the Town of Brighton to be known as Whole Foods Plaza. This letter is submitted to request Incentive Zoning approval be granted, pursuant to Chapter 209 of the Town of Brighton Code, to facilitate the development.

This Second Amended Letter of Intent is designed to supersede the original Letter of Intent dated February 18, 2015 as amended by an Amended Letter oflntent dated May 15, 2015. Since the filing of the initial application, there has been an extensive process of review by the Town Board, including neighborhood and public meetings, and compliance with the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act ("SEQRA") process.

The initial application for Incentive Zoning was received by the Town Board on February 25, 2015. The Town Board thereafter declared its intent to be lead agency for purposes of conducting a coordinated environmental review. A coordinated review was conducted pursuant to the SEQRA regulations, which included the process and preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement ("EIS"). The Town Board accepted the Final Environmental Impact Statement ("FEIS") on January 24, 2018 and set a continuance of the public hearing on the Incentive Zoning application for the Whole Foods Plaza Project for February 28, 2018. While the application remains largely the same, as a result of comments during the process and public review of the Draft EIS ("DEIS") and Supplemental DEIS ("SDEIS"), some changes were made and offered by the applicant and were analyzed in the FEIS. Certain changes relate to amenities offered, as further discussed below.

{583 1637:2) Town Board- Town of Brighton Amended Letter of Intent February 1, 2018 Page2

PROJECT LOCATION

The properties proposed to be redeveloped as Whole Foods Plaza are the Mario's Italian Restaurant parcel (at 2740 Monroe Avenue, with tax identification number 137.19-2-70.32), the Clover Lanes bowling parcel (at 2750 Monroe Avenue, with tax identification number 150.07-2-8.11), the Mamasan's Restaurant parcel (at 2900 Monroe Avenue, with tax identification number 150.07-2-7.1), and a 2.2 +/- acre portion of land behind the Mario's and Clover Lanes parcels, which is part of the First Baptist Church property (at 175 Aliens Creek Road, with tax identification number 137.190-2- 68.1 ). The applicant maintains ownership over the Mario's, Clover Lanes and Mamasan's parcels and has the Church property under contract to purchase. The existing Mario's, Clover Lanes and Mamasan's buildings will be demolished for the proposed comprehensive redevelopment of the site.

The properties on Monroe Avenue are split zoned. The site includes 7.04 +/- acres located in the BF-2 General Commercial Zoning District and 3.06 +/-acres located in the RLA Residential- Low Density District adjacent to the north. Of the 3.06 acres in the RLA District, a 2.2 acre area will be acquired from the First Baptist Church ("Church"). The lands to be acquired from the Church extend to Clover Street. Only a limited portion of this RLA property immediately adjacent to the Mario's and Clover Lanes parcels are proposed to be developed for parking and access (no buildings). The RLA zoning is proposed to be maintained.

NEIGHBORHOOD HISTORY

- The Monroe Avenue corridor between Clover Street and 1-590 is an important commercial district and gateway into both the Towns of Brighton and Pittsford. The area is currently in transition, with some parcels recently redeveloped or vacant, and extensive transportation improvements completed in 2015. The area is characterized by aging buildings, a lack of vehicular cross-access, numerous curb cuts onto Monroe A venue, and segmented parking. The current disjointed design of the corridor is incongruous with the importance and value of this area of Monroe Avenue to the community.

The site includes three parcels. The site includes the Mario's Italian Restaurant property, a 2.4 +/- acre parcel. The building was built in 1995 and is now closed and vacant. The site includes the Clover Lanes Bowling Center property, a 4.5 +/-parcel immediately adjacent to and east of the Mario's property. Clover Lanes was built in 1951 and is also now closed. The building has exceeded its useful life and is lacking in architectural character.

The third parcel is the Mamasan's Restaurant property, a 1.2 +/-acre parcel located adjacent and east of the Clover Lanes parcel. The building has housed different restaurants over the years, including a Perkins Restaurant for over 20 years, a Denny's Restaurant for the next decade, and then its current use as Mamasan's. Mamasan's is seeking to relocate to a smaller and more suitable space for its needs.

The First Baptist Church borders the Mario's and Clover Lanes Plaza properties to the north on approximately 10 +/- acres. The Church sits at the southeast comer of Clover Street and Allen Creek Road. The Church has approximately 2.2 acres of excess undeveloped residential land which is disjointed from its main property by a neighboring residence along Clover Street. Part of the excess

{583 I 637:2 } The art of representing people® Town Board- Town of Brighton Amended Letter of Intent February 1, 2018 Page 3

space is wooded and serves as a buffer between the residential neighborhood on Clover Street, and the commercial parcels and activity along Monroe Avenue. The sale of the land by the Church will generate proceeds for their much needed capital improvements and would ensure the continued use of its Clover Street frontage as an undeveloped buffer.

An important asset included in the project is the Auburn Trail, which crosses the properties and is part of a trail system which extends from the Village of Pittsford, through the Town of Pittsford, the Town of Brighton and into the City of Rochester. While parts of the trail are regularly used by walkers and cyclists, that portion of trail which crosses the subject properties was never improved or used, and is currently used by RG&E as a maintenance road. Additionally, the trail is disjointed and incomplete resulting in the public unintentionally going onto on private properties owned by the developer, neighboring businesses and RG&E.

THE PROPOSAL

The applicant proposes to redevelop the properties as Whole Foods Plaza, a 90,000 square foot retail center anchored by a 50,000 square foot natural and organic foods market/grocery, shown on the conceptual site plan as Building I. The proposed development includes a new 31,780 square foot retail plaza building (Building II), and two pad sites (Buildings III and IV). The existing buildings will be demolished for the cohesive redevelopment of the site. One of the pad sites (Building III) is anticipated to include a specialty coffee shop with a drive through. The other pad site is contemplated as a retail pad site (Building D).

The proposed project will significantly upgrade the property and this important gateway to the Town of Brighton. An exciting food market anchor, attractive architecture, and cohesive design will help to update and transform this section of Monroe A venue. The proposal will include quality design and architecture, with architecture contemplated to be consistent with the anchor tenant, including use of regional materials and a waste management plan that will look to re-use a significant amount of the material from the existing buildings. Light colored roof systems and use of concrete in certain areas will mitigate the "heat island" effect associated with parking lots. Additionally, more trees and vegetation are proposed within parking areas. The current trail running through the property is proposed to be improved, slightly relocated, and incorporated into the development. The project provides connectivity of the trail to the development and adjoining commercial corridor. Proximity to the trail will provide new pedestrian connections between the retail and residential neighborhoods. In addition to relocation of the trail throughout the site, the trail will be improved and extended to the Pittsford Town line and to the north side of Highland Avenue. The proposal provides for permanent protection for the adjacent residential neighborhood adjacent to the development parcel, maintaining buffering and separation.

Pedestrian access is incorporated in the plan, providing access to the site for pedestrians and bicycles (the plaza will also include bicycle racks). The pedestrian friendly development will enhance the neighborhood by improving walkability and fostering neighborhood business. The applicant also proposes to address safety on the trail by separating vehicle traffic from pedestrian and bicycle activity on the trail and bringing nearly 2 miles of trail to modem standards of safety and convenience including improved cross walks across Clover Street, Aliens Creek Road, Elmwood Avenue and Highland A venue.

{5831637:2} The art of representing people'" Town Board- Town of Brighton Amended Letter of Intent February 1, 2018 Page 4

The project will create new pedestrian connections, consolidate parking, and improve vehicular access to, from and across Monroe Avenue. Pedestrian connections and way-finding signage will also be incorporated internal to the development.

The new retail center design will also improve vehicular access and circulation. Traffic was carefully evaluated during the SEQRA process and certain modifications will be made consist with professional recommendations. A new traffic signal with crosswalk will be installed on Monroe A venue, aligning the Clover Lanes property and the Sakura Home restaurant, with an advanced eastbound protected left tum signal at the western project entrance and a protected westbound tum signal at the eastern project entrance. The existing curb cut at the Mamasan's property will be eliminated. The signal location is dictated by the New York State Department of Transportation (NYSDOT), which maintains jurisdiction over Monroe Avenue. An Access Management Plan (also called AMP) is to be provided for the south side of Monroe A venue, to provide traffic calming, cross-access and access to the proposed traffic signal for the project. This plan will result in the restriction of access to the Pizza Hut, Comfort Inn and City Mattress properties to right-in only at Pizza Hut and right-in, right-out only at the Comfort Inn and City Mattress properties, upon redevelopment of those properties. Eliminating these left tum movements are only made possible through the planning and implementation of the AMP.

Multimodal transportation improvements, in cooperation with the Rochester Genesee Regional Transportation Authority are contemplated including a new sheltered R TS bus stop where one does not currently exist near this section of the corridor. Included in the development will be electronic vehicle charging stations, dedicated spots for HOV (high occupancy vehicles) and LEV (low emission vehicles).

The proposed food market building incorporates sustainability. The design will respect the local landscape. Recycled materials from the Clover Lanes building, including wood from bowling lanes and timber from the roofing system, will be incorporated into the building. The natural and organic foods market/grocery building will be constructed to silver LEED standards and incorporate architectural features and materials appropriate to the Rochester area. The two outparcel buildings and retail plaza building will be designed to complement the new food market, providing an architectural theme for the development.

In addition to the amenities of this project, which are set forth on pages 5 and 6 below, this development provides substantial public benefits. Among them are:

1. Fulfilling the Vision of the Monroe A venue Corridor Plan. The Monroe A venue Corridor Plan has a number of distinct elements which are being addressed by this plan. Those elements are both aesthetic in nature (dealing with placement of buildings) and safety-related (relative to Monroe Avenue access). Project design has incorporated the goals of the Corridor Plan.

{5831637:2} The art of representing people® Town Board- Town of Brighton Amended Letter of Intent February 1, 2018 Page 5

selling some grocery items and occasional specialty or convenience type stores. Many residents do not have convenient access to a quality, full service grocery store in their community requiring residents to shop for groceries outside of the Town, such as at the Pittsford or East Avenue Wegman's stores. In addition, the lead tenant within the plaza enhances the possibility of bringing new and upscale retailers to the remainder of the Center. There is a natural following of the lead tenant and some of those prospective tenants are in discussions with the developer.

3. Tax Revenues. The proposed development will generate a significant increase in tax revenues. The yearly taxes currently generated are $190,600 plus or minus and includes tax exempt property (First Baptist Church). The future projected taxes (using current tax rates) are expected to be approximately $483,300.

4. No COMIDA. While this property may be eligible for a payment in lieu of taxes (PILOT) Agreement and substantial benefits under programs sponsored by the County of Monroe Industrial Development Agency, the applicant has committed that they will, in accordance with the Town of Brighton's preference, forgo any request for such benefits.

APPROVALS NECESSARY

The following approval process is required for the Whole Foods Plaza development:

1. Incentive Zoning Approval. Incentive Zoning approval is required from the Town Board in accordance with Chapter 209 of the Town of Brighton Code.

2. Planning Board, Architectural Review Board, and Historic Preservation Commission Approvals. The Planning Board would have jurisdiction for site plan approval, and subdivision approval (to combine the subject properties, create a separate lot for the remaining church property and create internal lots for financing and tax allocation purposes). Several of the proposed uses, including the food market/grocery store, coffee shop with drive through, and outdoor seating, are all conditionally permitted uses per Code. While we are requesting that these uses be permitted as an incentive in this Incentive Zoning application, the Planning Board would otherwise have conditional use permit approval authority. The Architectural Review Board would also have jurisdiction over the exterior design of the buildings and signs under the Town Code. The Historic Preservation Committee reviews all demolition requests to confirm that the property being demolished has no historic or architectural significance.

INCENTIVE ZONING APPLICATION

Incentive Zoning is regulated by Chapter 209 of the Town of Brighton Code. The purpose and the intent of the Code provisions are to provide a vehicle whereby an applicant can request certain "incentives" (relief from Town Code provisions), in exchange for certain "amenities" (public benefits offered by the applicant). These are also discussed in the FEIS. Specifically, Section 209-5(A) sets for

{5831637:2 } The art qfrepresenting people® Town Board- Town of Brighton Amended Letter of Intent February 1, 2018 Page 6 the information to be provided by the applicant in conjunction with an Incentive Zoning application. Those four ( 4) subsections are addressed below:

1. The Proposed Amenity. Typically, amenities address specific infrastructure or development needs or improvements in the area of the proposed development project. Several such amenities of benefit to the community are offered as part of the application, as further illustrated on the concept site plan. We estimate the total value of the amenities to be in excess of$1,710,576.

a. Pedestrian and Bicycle Access. The amenities offered by the applicant include improvement and relocation of the existing Auburn Trail across the development site, providing connectivity to the development and adjoining commercial corridor, and making the trail accessible, safe, and inviting for public use. The width and scope of the trail improvements will be extended to the Pittsford Town Line and to the north side of Highland Avenue, together with necessary improvements. The proposal includes delineating the trail and improving its condition. Vehicular traffic is proposed to be separated from the trail to create a safe and pleasurable experience for those who wish to use the trail. The trail will also be connected to the proposed development via sidewalks throughout the site, with bike racks within the center. A proposed traffic signal and crosswalk will afford trail goers safe crossing and access to the south side of Monroe Avenue.

The result will be approximately 2 miles of 10 ft. wide improved stone dust trail, 800 sq. ft. pedestrian gathering areas with kiosks, way finding signage, trash receptacles, a bus shelter, and pedestrian crosswalk markings.

The estimated value ofthis amenity is approximately $727,790.50.

b. Access Management Plan. Apart from any traffic mitigation required for the project, the applicant proposes, as an amenity, the development of an Access Management Plan (or AMP) to address the longstanding issue of access management for the south side of Monroe Avenue from Interstate Route 590 east to Clover Street. The improvements will provide interconnectivity between properties and connectivity to the proposed signalized intersection. The AMP will provide for a common rear lot access drive, stormwater management facilities, and cross lot access among the properties. Access will be provided to a proposed signalized intersection. The project includes construction of the AMP from 2717 Monroe Avenue to 2835 Monroe Avenue.

The development proposal includes the creation of a long term comprehensive AMP for the town, residents and businesses for reference in the future as growth continues and further access points are altered and removed for safety and traffic mitigation purposes.

The estimated value ofthis amenity is $867,785.98.

{5831637:2} The art of representing people® Town Board- Town of Brighton Amended Letter of Intent February 1, 2018 Page 7

c. Preservation of Open Space. The applicant will acquire approximately 2.2 +/- acres of lands from the First Baptist Church, a small portion of which is needed and incorporated into the development. The property is in the RLA Zoning District and adjacent to the BF-2 Zoning District. The property fronts on Clover Street and backs to the Mario's and Clover Lanes parcels. While the Church has contemplated the potential development or use of its excess property over the years, selling the property for the proposed development will provide the Church with much needed funds to complete capital improvements that would not be possible without this sale, thus posing a hardship to the Church and its congregation.

The proposal includes preservation of approximately 1 +/- acres of the 2.2 acres of land being acquired from the First Baptist Church as open space rather than having it incorporated in the commercial redevelopment or developed as a residential property. This open space land will serve as a permanent forested buffer to the homes along Clover Street from the commercial development.

The estimated value ofthis amenity is $115,000.00.

2. The cash value of the proposed amenity. The cash value of the proposed amenity is discussed above.

3. A narrative, which:

a. Describes the benefit to be provided to the community by the proposed amenity. The benefits to the community are discussed above.

b. Gives preliminary indication that there is adequate ... (infrastructure) ... to handle the additional demands of the incentive.... There is adequate infrastructure for the proposed incentives, as evidenced in the materials submitted as part of this application and SEQRA review. A conceptual utility plan has been submitted to demonstrate adequate storm water, sanitary and water service for the development. The proposed development includes traffic improvements, including the addition of traffic signals on Monroe A venue and dedicated turn lanes in accordance with professional traffic recommendations, as well as the development and improvement of the Auburn Trail across the property and extending to the Pittsford Town line and the north side of Highland A venue. Adequate parking is provided for the development. The property is also accessible by public transportation.

c. .Explains how the amenity helps implement the ....policies of the Comprehensive Plan, as supplemented by local laws and ordinances... The proposed amenities helps implement and advance the policies of the Comprehensive Plan, the Town of Brighton Monroe Avenue Corridor Community Vision Plan- Monroe Avenue East End (between Town of Pittsford and 590 called the "Corridor Vision Plan"), the Town of Brighton Monroe A venue Design Guidelines (adopted 1999) (called "Design Guidelines"), The Town's Bike/Walk Brighton Master Plan and the Town of Brighton Code. There is substantial support for the proposed amenities in all of these documents.

{5831637:2} The art of representing people® Town Board- Town of Brighton Amended Letter of Intent February 1, 2018 Page 8

The Comprehensive Plan and Bike/Walk Brighton Master Plan calls for trail improvements and open space, and for encouraging the upgrading, beautifYing and revitalization of existing commercial areas. These amenities are offered and will have significant public benefit.

The Corridor Vision Plan recognizes that this area is difficult and dangerous for pedestrians to navigate and the need for pedestrian and bicycle friendliness and connections, improving sidewalks and crossings, and enhancing commercial areas to provide cohesion. It also recognizes the benefit of shared parking and cross-access, and the need to reduce curb cuts in this area. The amenities provide these benefits.

The Design Guidelines also recognizes the issues presented by the need for parking and number of curb cuts on Monroe A venue, as causing hazardous conditions for pedestrians and motorists and contributing to vehicular circulation problems resulting in traffic congestion on the street. An objective is to reduce the size and number of curb cuts to improve safety, increase off-street parking and expand open space. The Design Guidelines call for adjacent parking lots to have internal vehicular and pedestrian connections, for internal vehicular circulation patterns that improve pedestrian and vehicular accessibility and safety, and for contiguous networks of pedestrian walkways extending from building entrances to sidewalks. Provisions of the Town Code similarly address requirement of cross-access and access management. The proposed amenities are consistent with these goals for traffic safety, cross-access and access management.

4. The Proposed Incentives.

The proposed incentives for the proposed development are identified in a Table contained in the Final Environmental Impact Statement, which Table is appended hereto. The Incentives are divided into three sections: (1) those related to the "Whole Foods Store parcel" (Parcel 1), (2) those related to the remainder of the Plaza (Parcel 2) and (3) those related to the properties on the south side of Monroe A venue (Lots A through H), which incentives are occasioned by improvements to allow the establishment of the Access Management Plan.

The property along Monroe A venue has long been zoned and developed as commercial property. The incentives relate primarily to dimensional deviations from the Code, in large part dictated by the split zoning of the development parcel. The addition of a small portion of RLA zoned land to the northern portion of the site (behind the current Mario's and Clover Lanes properties) generates the need for a use incentive to allow commercial improvements and activity to extend into the adjacent RLA District. Other use incentives proposed relate to conditional permit uses which carry a favorable legal presumption of being permitted and in harmony with the neighborhood. To that end, the incentives seek to avoid unnecessary duplication in the review process.

{5831637:2} The art of representing people® Town Board- Town of Brighton Amended Letter of Intent February 1, 2018 Page 9

STATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY REVIEW ACT

As discussed above, compliance with the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) is required for the project. A thorough SEQRA review was undertaken pursuant to the processes and requirements set forth in the SEQRA regulations. The process included substantial public, professional staff and agency input. To recap, the proposal is classified as an Unlisted Action, a coordinated review was conducted with the Town Board acting as Lead Agency, a Positive Declaration issued, and an Environmental Impact Statement required and prepared in compliance with applicable regulations and procedures. On January 24, 2018, the Town Board accepted and filed the Final Environmental Impact Statement dated January 23, 2018 and set a continuance of the public hearing on the incentive zoning application for February 28, 2018, as described further in a resolution of the Town Board dated January 24, 2018.

The Daniele Family Companies development team looks forward to moving forward with the approval process and the' Incentive Zoning application. We anticipate addressing the Town Board and answering any questions at the upcoming continuation of the public hearing. If any Board member has any questions or requires any additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me at any time.

Very Truly Yours,

WOODS OVIATT GILMAN LLP

Please direct responses to Rochester Office

JAG/grs Enclosures

{5831637:2 } The art of representing people® Parcell Requested Incentive Code PERMITTED & CONDITIONAL USES:

Residential Low-Density District (RLA): In all cases where a district boundary divides a lot in one ownership, and more than Section 201-9.A (3). 50% of the area of such lot lies in the less restricted district, the regulations prescribed by these regulations for the less restricted district shall apply to such portion of the more restricted portion of the said lot which lies within 30 feet of such district boundary. For purposes of this section, the more restricted district shall be deemed that district subject to regulations which prohibit the use intended to be made of said lot, or which require higher standards with respect to coverage, yards, screening, landscaping and similar requirements.

The requested incentive is to allow the regulations of the less restrictive zoning district to apply 108' (measured to edge of parking lot I turnaround pavement) beyond the beyond the 30' zone.

General Commercial District (BF2): The proposed use includes a food market. A food market is a conditionally ·Section 203-84.8 . (5). permitted use in the BF2 Zoning District.

The requested incentive is to allow the conditional use permit requirement for this use to be waived. The use will be thoroughly reviewed as part of both the incentive zoning application by the Town Board and the site plan approval process by the Planning Board.

Use regulations within the BF2 District require that the proposed Whole Foods Section 203-84.B. (17) facility be set back from the side property line by twenty-five feet since the building is over 20,000 s.f. in size.

The requested incentive is to allow the building to be set back ten-feet (I 0') from the side property line. The site plan currently shows a setback of II' however 10' is requested to account for potential minor shifts during construction. Parcel 1 Reouested Incentive Cont. Code REGULATIONS FOR SIGNS:

BF2:

Regulations for signage in commercial districts allow limited business Section 207-32.8.(1) identification and directional signage. No business identification sign shall be erected unless attached to the building face. A building on a comer lot with side walls approximately parallel to the street lines shall have one face which shall be the side containing the principal entrance. This face shall be the one on which the sign is located.

The requested incentive is to allow. a free-standing business sign "Monument Sign" and to allow building mounted signs to be on additional sides of the building other than the principal building entrance side.

The Business identification sign standards allow for a single attached sign on the Section 207-32.8. (2). principal building entrance. The total area of the business identification sign permitted may not exceed 10% of the frrst-tloor area of the building face or 150 square feet, whichever is less.

The requested incentive is to allow for three (3) building mounted signs totaling approximately 400 square-feet, and a monument sign totaling 100 s.f. for a combined total of 500 s.f.

Signs may not project in any part more than 20' above grade measured at the Section 207-32.8. (3). building face.

The requested incentive is to allow signs to project up to 25' above grade. Pali'cell Reguested Incentive Cont. Code BULK AREA REQUIREMENTS: *

RLA: Parking and paved areas shall not exceed 35% of the rear yard. Section 207-lO.E. (3).

The requested incentive is to allow 95% of the rear yard to be paved (as measured to the RLA zoning line).

BF2: Section 205-7. Minimum bulk area requirements include: A front setback of60'; Maximum bulk area requirements include: A maximum of 65% lot coverage; A maximum density of I 0,000 square feet per acre.

The requested incentives are to allow the following: A front building setback of 11.8'; A lot coverage of 87%; A density of 14,326 square feet per acre. Section 205-18.B. No parking, paved area or aisles shall be permitted in the front yard within 20 feet of the front property line nor within I 0 feet of any lot line. A waiver shall be granted in those cases where a cross-access easement is required for shared access with an adjoining parcel.

The requested incentives are to allow the following: A front yard parking setback of 13'; A front yard pavement setback (sidewalk) of 0';

*In reviewing any site plan for development of the property, the Planning Board shall have the authority to waive any bulk regulations applicable to the property upon making the finding that such waiver shall not produce an undesirable change in the character of the sunounding neighborhoods or create a detriment to nearby properties. Any Planning Board adjustment shall be within I 0% of the applicable bulk regulation. PERMITTED & CONDITIONAL USES:

Residential Low-Density District (RLA): In all cases where a district boundary divides a lot in one ownership, and more than Section 201-9 .A. (3). 50% ofthe area of such lot lies in the less restricted district, the regulations prescribed by these regulations for the less restricted district shall apply to such portion ofthe more restricted pottion of the said lot which lies within 30 feet of such district boundary. For purposes of this section, the more restricted district shall be deemed that district subject to regulations which prohibit the use intended to be made of said lot, or which require higher standards with respect to coverage, yards, screening, landscaping and similar requirements.

The requested incentive is to allow the regulations of the less restrictive zoning district to apply 3' beyond the beyond the 30' zone.

General Commercial District (BF2): The proposed uses include retail, and a specialty coffee shop/restaurant. The coffee shop will incorporate a drive through operation. Outdoor seating may be desired Section 203-84.B. (5). by the restaurant. All of these uses require a Conditional Use Permit.

The requested incentive is to allow the conditional use permit requirement for these uses to be waived, specifically the 50,000 SF Grocery Use and +/- 2,000 SF Coffee Shop, as these uses will be thoroughly reviewed as part of both the incentive zoning application by the Town Board and the site plan approval process by the Planning Board.

At grade outdoor dining facilities as accessory uses to restaurant facilities are permitted in the front yard provided they are located 20 feet from the front property line. Section 203-84.B.(4)(i)[l] The requested incentive is to allow an at grade dining area to be located 16 feet from the front property line.

DRIVE-THRUSTANDARDS:

BF2: Abutting a street. Stacking lanes must be set back I 0 feet from all street lot lines. Section 207-14.3.D.(4)

The requested incentive is to allow the stacking lane for the proposed drive through to be located 7 feet from the street lot line in the front yard. REGULATIONS FOR SIGNS: Refer to attachment in appendix 15 for sign locations and sizes.

BF2: Section 207-25.E. The tenn" sign" does not include signs for the direction or convenience of the general public, including signs which identify rest rooms or locations of public telephones or traffic control devices; however, the total area shall not exceed two square feet.

Building #3, The requested incentives are to allow the following: A 2 sided "Drive Thru" sign totaling 7 s.f. (freestanding ground sign) A "Clearance" sign of 3 s.f. (freestanding ground sign) An "Exit Only" sign of 3 s.f. (freestanding ground sign) Section 207-32.8. (2).

Regulations for signage in commercial districts allow limited business identification and directional signage. The Business identification sign standards allows for a single attached sign on the principal building entrance. The total area of the business identification sign permitted may not exceed 10% of the first-floor area of the building face or 150 square feet, whichever is less.

Building #2 The requested incentive is to allow for fourteen (14) building mounted signs totaling approximately 1,100 square-feet (each business sign is less than 150 square feet plus building logo sign);

Building #3 To allow four (4) building mounted signs totaling less than 80 square feet, free standing menu boards and a free standing "Thank You" sign, and to allow Section 207-32.8. (3). signs on other than the primary building face and to allow logo to exceed 25% and of total sign area ("Logo sign", east elevation 100% logo). Section 207.26.0.

Building #4 To allow two (2) building mounted signs totaling 181 square feet.

Signs may not project in any part more than 20' above grade measured at the building face.

The requested incentive is to allow signs to project no more than 27'-2" above grade. BULK AREA REQUIREMENTS: *

Parking and paved areas shall not exceed 35% of the rear yard. Section 207-lO.E.(3)

The requested incentive is to allow 82% of the rear yard to be paved.

BF2: Section 205.7 Minimum bulk area requirements include: A front setback of 60' ; Maximum bulk area requirements include: A maximum of 65% lot coverage; A maximum density of 10 ,000 square feet per acre.

The requested incentives are to allow the following: A front setback of 27' for building #3; A front setback of 26' for building #4; A lot coverage of 91 %; A density of 11,235 square feet per acre.

Section 205.18.B. No parking, paved area or aisles shall be permitted in the fi·ont yard within 20 feet ofthe front property line nor within 10 feet of any lot line.

The requested incentives are to allow the following: A front yard parking setback of 7'; A side yard parking setback of 5'; A front yard pavement setback (sidewalk) of 0'; A lot line pavement setback (sidewalk) of 0';

*In reviewing any site plan for development of the property, the Planning Board shall have the authority to waive any bulk regulations applicable to the property upon making the finding that such waiver shall not produce an undesirable change in the character of the surrounding neighborhoods or create a detriment to nearby prope1ties. Any Planning Board adjustment shall be within I 0% of the applicable bulk regulation. Lot A Requested Incentive (City Mattress) Code PERMITTED & CONDITIONAL USES:

BULK AREA REQUIREMENTS: ** Section 205-7.

BF2: Maximum bulk area requirements include: A maximum of 65% lot coverage;

The requested incentive is to allow the following: lot coverage of 70% (70% existing);

No parking, paved area or aisles shall be permitted in the front yard within 20 feet Section 205-18.8. of the front property line nor within I 0 feet of any lot line. A waiver shall be granted in those cases where a cross-access easement is required for shared access with an adjoining parcel.

The requested incentives are to allow the following: A side yard parking setback of 0'; Relief from granting waivers in those cases where a cross-access easement is required for shared access with an adjoining parcel, (Shared access areas). Eot B Requested Incentive (Comfort Suites) Code PERMITTED & CONDITIONAL USES:

BULK AREA REQUIREMENTS: **

BF2: Section 205-7. Maximum bulk area requirements include: A maximum of 65% lot coverage;

The requested incentive is to allow the following: A lot coverage of 90% (93% existing); Section 205-18.8. No parking, paved area or aisles shall be permitted in the front yard within 20 feet of the front pro petty line nor within I 0 feet of any lot line. A waiver shall be granted in those cases where a cross-access easement is required for shared access with an adj oining parcel.

The requested incentives are to allow the following: A side yard parking setback of 0'± ; Relief from granting waivers in those cases where a cross-access easement is required for shared access with an adjoining parcel, (Shared access areas). Lot C Requested Incentive (Pizza Hut) Code PERMITTED & CONDITIONAL USES:

BULK REQUIREMENTS: Section 205-7.

BF2: Minimum bulk area requirements include: A minimum lot coverage of 65%;

The requested incentive is to allow the following: Section 205- 18.£ . A lot coverage of 72% (70% existing);

No parking, paved area or aisles shall be permitted in the fi·ont yard within 20 feet ofthe fi·ont proper:t.y- Line_nor within 10 feet of any lot line. A waiver s:;chc::a.:.:.ll ~b:-=e______granted in those cases where a cross-access easement is required for shared access 1 with an adjoining parcel.

The requested incentive is to allow the following: A side yard parking setback of 5'± ; Relief from granting waivers in those cases where a cross-access easement is required for shared access with an adjoining parcel, (Shared access areas). .tot D Requested Incentive (Sakura Home) Code BULK REQUIREMENTS:

BF2: Maximum bulk area requirements include: Section 205-7. A maximum of 65% lot coverage;

The requested incentive is to allow the following: A lot coverage of 90% (96% existing)

No parking, paved area or aisles shall be permitted in the fi·ont yard within 20 feet Section 205-18.E. of the front property line nor within I 0 feet of any lot line. A waiver shall be granted in those cases where a cross-access easement is required for shared access with an adjoining parcel.

The requested incentive are to allow the following: A side/rear yard parking setback of 0'±; 77 Parking Stalls where 89 was previously granted by a variance. Relief from granting waivers in those cases where a cross-access easement is required for shared access with an adjoining parcel, (Shared access areas). Lot E Reguested Incentive (Dunkin Donuts) Code BULK REQUIREMENTS:

BF2: Maximum bulk area requirements include: Section 205-7. A maximum of 65% lot coverage;

The requested incentive is to allow the following: A lot coverage of 73% (Existing Variance granted to allow 69%)

No parking, paved area or aisles shall be permitted in the front yard within 20 feet Section 205-18.£. ofthe front prope11y line nor within 10 feet of any lot line. A waiver shall be granted in those cases where a cross-access easement is required for shared access with an adjoining parcel.

The requested incentive are to allow the following: A side/rear yard parking setback of 0'±; Relief from granting waivers in those cases where a cross-access easement is required for shared access with an adjoining parcel, (Shared access areas). Lot F Requested Incentive (TT Nails, Spa & Maximum Tan) Code PERMITTED & CONDITIONAL USES:

BULK AREA REQUIREMENTS:

BF2: Section 205-7. Maximum bulk area requirements include: A maximum of 65% lot coverage;

The requested incentive is to allow the following: A lot coverage of 87% (85% existing); Section 205-18.8. No parking, paved area or aisles shall be permitted in the front yard within 20 feet ofthe front property line nor within 10 feet of any lot line. A waiver shall be granted in those cases where a cross-access easement is required for shared access with an adjoining parcel.

The requested incentives are to allow the following: A side/rear yard parking setback of 0'± ; Relief from granting waivers in those cases where a cross-access easement is required for shared access with an adjoining parcel, (Shared access areas). Lot G Requested Incentive (California Closet) Code PERMITTED & CONDITIONAL USES:

BULK AREA REQUIREMENTS:

BF2: Section 205-7. Maximum bulk area requirements include: A maximum of 65% lot coverage;

The requested incentive is to allow the following: A lot coverage of 95% (95% existing); Section 205-18.8. No parking, paved area or aisles shall be permitted in the fi·ont yard within 20 feet of the front property line nor within I 0 feet of any lot line. A waiver shall be granted in those cases where a cross-access easement is required for shared access with an adjoining parcel.

Lot H Requested Incentive (Country Inn & SuitesfBrickwood) Code PERMITTED & CONDITIONAL USES:

BULK AREA REQUIREMENTS:

BF2: Section 205-7. Maximum bulk area requirements include: A maximum of 65% lot coverage;

The requested incentive is to allow the following: A lot coverage of 90% (90% existing); Section 205-18.8. No parking, paved area or aisles shall be permitted in the front yard within 20 feet of the front prope1ty line nor within I 0 feet of any lot line. A waiver shall be granted in those cases where a cross-access easement is required for shared access with an adjoining parce l.

CLAIMS CLAIMS FOR APPROVAL AT TOWN BOARD MEETING OF February 28, 2018

THAT THE CLAIMS AS SUMMARIZED BELOW HAVING BEEN APPROVED BY THE RESPECTIVE DEPARTMENT HEADS AND AUDITED BY THE CHAIR OF THE FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES COMMITTEE ARE HEREBY APPROVED FOR PAYMENT.

A - GENERAL $ 638,201.91

D - HIGHWAY 177,986.66

H - CAPITAL 1,321.50

L - LIBRARY 132,393.66

SF - FIRE DIST 3,874.57

SS - SEWER DIST 27,075.43

SW - WATER DIST 7,714.85

TA - AGENCY TRUST 41,812.03

TOTAL $ 1,030,380.61

UPON ROLL CALL MOTION CARRIED

APPROVED BY: SUPERVISOR

COUNCIL MEMBER COUNCIL MEMBER

TO THE SUPERVISOR:

I CERTIFY THAT THE VOUCHERS LISTED ABOVE WERE AUDITED BY THE CHAIR OF THE FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES COMMITTEE AND APPROVED BY THE TOWN BOARD ON THE ABOVE DATE AND ALLOWED IN THE AMOUNTS SHOWN. YOU ARE HEREBY AUTHORIZED AND DIRECTED TO PAY TO EACH OF THE CLAIMANTS THE AMOUNT OPPOSITE THEIR NAME.

DATE TOWN CLERK NEW BUSINESS

MATTERS OF THE SUPERVISOR *LIVE* Town of Brighton *LIVE* Expense Budget by Organization Report Through 01/31/18 Prior Fiscal Year Activity Included Summary Listing

Adopted Budget Amended Current Month YTD YTD Budget - YTD % Used/ Organization Budget Amendments Budget Transactions Encumbrances Transactions Transactions Rec'd Prior Year YTD Fund A - General Fund Fund A - General Fund Totals $17,462,765.00 $4,200.00 $17,466,965.00 $1,149,101.61 $673,410.26 $1,149,101.61 $15,644,453.13 $1,209,915.84 Fund D - Highway Fund Fund D - Highway Fund Totals $5,526,190.00 $0.00 $5,526,190.00 $343,599.09 $1,160,104.76 $343,599.09 $4,022,486.15 $311,536.15 Fund H - Capital Projects Fund Fund H - Capital Projects Fund Totals $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Fund L - Library Fund Fund L - Library Fund Totals $2,204,420.00 $0.00 $2,204,420.00 $119,058.84 $179,731.26 $119,058.84 $1,905,629.90 $133,682.53 Fund SA - Ambulance Special Dist Fund SA - Ambulance Special Dist Totals $369,495.00 $0.00 $369,495.00 $1,881.00 $0.00 $1,881.00 $367,614.00 $1,481.02 Fund SB - Business Improvement Dist Fund SB - Business Improvement Dist Totals $1,990.00 $0.00 $1,990.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $1,990.00 $0.00 Fund SD - Drainage District Funds Fund SD - Drainage District Funds Totals $6,160.00 $0.00 $6,160.00 $56.78 $0.00 $56.78 $6,103.22 $0.00 Fund SF - Fire Prevention Districts Fund SF - Fire Prevention Districts Totals $1,360,595.00 $0.00 $1,360,595.00 $292,112.35 $5,550.00 $292,112.35 $1,062,932.65 $4,093.90 Fund SK - Sidewalk District Fund SK - Sidewalk District Totals $193,265.00 $0.00 $193,265.00 $0.00 $1,000.00 $0.00 $192,265.00 $0.00 Fund SL - Street Lighting Districts Fund SL - Street Lighting Districts Totals $329,920.00 $0.00 $329,920.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $329,920.00 $0.00 Fund SM - Sidewalk Snow Removal Dst Fund SM - Sidewalk Snow Removal Dst Totals $33,745.00 $0.00 $33,745.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $33,745.00 $0.00 Fund SN - Neighborhood Improve Dist Fund SN - Neighborhood Improve Dist Totals $2,205.00 $0.00 $2,205.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $2,205.00 $0.00 Fund SP - Park Special District Fund SP - Park Special District Totals $4,285.00 $0.00 $4,285.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $4,285.00 $0.00 Fund SR - Refuse Removal Districts Fund SR - Refuse Removal Districts Totals $866,190.00 $0.00 $866,190.00 $0.00 $839,186.64 $0.00 $27,003.36 $0.00 Fund SS - Consolidated Sewer Dist Fund SS - Consolidated Sewer Dist Totals $1,944,550.00 $0.00 $1,944,550.00 $74,654.85 $198,362.53 $74,654.85 $1,671,532.62 $80,482.05 Fund SW - Consolidated Water Dist Fund SW - Consolidated Water Dist Totals $45,000.00 $0.00 $45,000.00 $0.00 $1,000.00 $0.00 $44,000.00 $0.00 Fund V - Debt Service Fund Fund V - Debt Service Fund Totals $43,950.00 $0.00 $43,950.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $43,950.00 $0.00

Grand Totals $30,394,725.00 $4,200.00 $30,398,925.00 $1,980,464.52 $3,058,345.45 $1,980,464.52 $25,360,115.03 $1,741,191.49

Run by Suzanne Zaso on 02/20/2018 06:37:41 PM Page 1 of 1 *LIVE* Town of Brighton *LIVE* Revenue Budget by Organization Report Through 01/31/18 Prior Fiscal Year Activity Included Summary Listing

Adopted Budget Amended Current Month YTD YTD Budget - YTD % Used/ Organization Budget Amendments Budget Transactions Encumbrances Transactions Transactions Rec'd Prior Year YTD Fund A - General Fund Fund A - General Fund Totals $16,577,765.00 $33,700.00 $16,611,465.00 $8,723,445.01 $0.00 $8,723,445.01 $7,888,019.99 $9,418,818.86 Fund D - Highway Fund Fund D - Highway Fund Totals $5,276,190.00 $0.00 $5,276,190.00 $4,103,796.50 $0.00 $4,103,796.50 $1,172,393.50 $4,084,020.84 Fund H - Capital Projects Fund Fund H - Capital Projects Fund Totals $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Fund L - Library Fund Fund L - Library Fund Totals $2,159,420.00 $0.00 $2,159,420.00 $2,044,563.14 $0.00 $2,044,563.14 $114,856.86 $1,993,660.54 Fund SA - Ambulance Special Dist Fund SA - Ambulance Special Dist Totals $359,495.00 $0.00 $359,495.00 $359,260.00 $0.00 $359,260.00 $235.00 $355,453.04 Fund SB - Business Improvement Dist Fund SB - Business Improvement Dist Totals $1,840.00 $0.00 $1,840.00 $1,840.00 $0.00 $1,840.00 $0.00 $1,700.00 Fund SD - Drainage District Funds Fund SD - Drainage District Funds Totals $5,495.00 $0.00 $5,495.00 $5,495.00 $0.00 $5,495.00 $0.00 $2,790.00 Fund SF - Fire Prevention Districts Fund SF - Fire Prevention Districts Totals $1,234,595.00 $0.00 $1,234,595.00 $1,134,720.00 $0.00 $1,134,720.00 $99,875.00 $1,017,004.98 Fund SK - Sidewalk District Fund SK - Sidewalk District Totals $178,265.00 $0.00 $178,265.00 $178,265.00 $0.00 $178,265.00 $0.00 $163,610.00 Fund SL - Street Lighting Districts Fund SL - Street Lighting Districts Totals $289,100.00 $0.00 $289,100.00 $288,970.00 $0.00 $288,970.00 $130.00 $285,563.11 Fund SM - Sidewalk Snow Removal Dst Fund SM - Sidewalk Snow Removal Dst Totals $31,870.00 $0.00 $31,870.00 $31,870.00 $0.00 $31,870.00 $0.00 $31,190.00 Fund SN - Neighborhood Improve Dist Fund SN - Neighborhood Improve Dist Totals $1,200.00 $0.00 $1,200.00 $1,200.00 $0.00 $1,200.00 $0.00 $1,200.00 Fund SP - Park Special District Fund SP - Park Special District Totals $3,500.00 $0.00 $3,500.00 $3,500.00 $0.00 $3,500.00 $0.00 $3,500.00 Fund SR - Refuse Removal Districts Fund SR - Refuse Removal Districts Totals $866,150.00 $0.00 $866,150.00 $866,150.00 $0.00 $866,150.00 $0.00 $845,290.00 Fund SS - Consolidated Sewer Dist Fund SS - Consolidated Sewer Dist Totals $1,899,550.00 $0.00 $1,899,550.00 $1,802,656.30 $0.00 $1,802,656.30 $96,893.70 $1,705,700.98 Fund SW - Consolidated Water Dist Fund SW - Consolidated Water Dist Totals $45,000.00 $0.00 $45,000.00 $15,121.91 $0.00 $15,121.91 $29,878.09 $17,526.72 Fund V - Debt Service Fund Fund V - Debt Service Fund Totals $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

Grand Totals $28,929,435.00 $33,700.00 $28,963,135.00 $19,560,852.86 $0.00 $19,560,852.86 $9,402,282.14 $19,927,029.07

Run by Suzanne Zaso on 02/20/2018 06:39:26 PM Page 1 of 1