Typeset from the official record — motions and recorded votes are detected automatically. The official copy governs.
Regular Meeting Planning Board May 10, 2017
APPROVED
The regular meeting of the Planning Board of the Town of Clay, County of Onondaga held at Town Hall located at 4401 State Route 31, Clay, New York on the 10" day of May 2017. The meeting was called to order by Chairwoman Guinup at 7:30 PM and upon roll being called, the following were:
PRESENT: Karen Guinup Chairwoman
Hal Henty Member Allen Kovac Member Michelle Borton Member James Palumbo Member Brian Hall Member Mark Territo Commissioner of Planning & Development Ron DeTota C&S Engineers Scott Chatfield Planning Board Attorney Gloria Wetmore Planning Board Secretary
ABSENT: _ Russ Mitchell Deputy Chairman
A motion was made by Hal Henty seconded by Brian Hall to approve the minutes of the
April 12, 2017 meeting.
Motion Carried 5-0
A motion was made by Brian Hall seconded by Hal Henty to approve the minutes of the
April 26, 2017 meeting.
Motion Carried 4-0_ Al Kovac abstained, he was not at that meeting.
**7:30 P.M. Case #2017-017 — Bohler Engineering, LLC- Walmart Stores, Inc. (3) — Amended Site Plan — 8770 Dell Center Dr..
A motion was made by Brian Hall seconded by Michelle Borton to adjourn this Case to
the May 24, 2017 meeting.
Motion Carried 5-0
Regular Meeting Planning Board May 10, 2017
from 12 previous meetings)
Joe Durand of TDK Engineering explained the plan, they received an area variance. They satisfied all the engineering, complied with all the conditions of the neg. pos. dec. The re- subdivision done administratively through the Commissioner of Planning to combine the two lots.
Jim Palumbo joined the Board at 7:48 PM.
Karen thanked the applicant for getting everything taken care of.
Ron DeTota noted that the County said no sanitary sewers will be extended under Route 31.
The water quality using filters required by the D E C. The filters have to be cleaned and changed from time to time. Additional units should be purchased and stored at the Highway garage, in case of an emergency.
Scott Chatfield said looking over the easement; the map doesn’t match the legal description. Mr. Durand explained the easement to Mr. Chatfield’s satisfaction.
Karen asked if there were any additional comments or questions, hearing none she asked for a motion.
A motion was made by Michelle Borton seconded by Hal Henty using standard form # 10
SEQR determination for Case #2016-008 — Fox Dealership (3) - Site Plan - 3687 NYS Route 31 that the proposed action is an unlisted action and does not involve any other agency including any Federal agency. It is further determined that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the environment and the resolution shall constitute a negative resolution for the following reasons. The proposed site development will not have any adverse impacts to the Town or the immediate surrounding area regarding, noise, air or visual “pollution”. The site is an acceptable transition between existing residential and commercial.
A motion was made by Michelle Borton seconded by Brian Hall for Site Plan approval
using standard form #20 for Case #2016-008 — Fox Dealership (3) - Site Plan - 3687 NYS Route 31, based on a map by TDK Engineering dated January 2016, revised May 10, 2017, and numbered SP1, ES1,ES2,ES3,DM1,GD1 thru GD6,UP1,UP2,PL1,PL2,LS1 & LS2 subject to all legal and engineering as well as sanitary sewer.
Motion Carried 6-0
(3) — Site Plan — 3566 & 3578 NYS Route 31. (Adjourned from 1 previous meeting).
2
Regular Meeting Planning Board May 10, 2017
A motion was made by Jim Palumbo seconded by Al Kovac to adjourn this case to the
June 14, 2017Meeting.
Motion Carried 6-0
Oswego Road. (Adjourned from 2 previous meetings).
Tim Coyer of Ianuzi and Romans explained the plan. The applicant has been granted two variances. They did not get the variance for the parking. They are proposing a 1400 square foot addition. One handicap parking space in the back and the three in the front will remain. They will relocate one light pack. County comments, add a “No Left Turn” sign on to Oswego Road from Laurel Lane.
Karen asked what plans were sent to the County for the rt in rt out. They spoke to the County before they knew the easement was in place. Right now there is full access. Karen said when the county approved the rt in rt out they were under the impression that there was no other way to exit the site.
There are two light standards in the back. Karen said the Board will need a lighting plan. How high are the light poles. Tim can commit to 15 ft from the ground up.
When you make improvements to the gravel area with asphalt will there be any gravel areas left. Tim Coyer said there will not.
Karen asked if they will disturb the buffer, Tim said yes, Karen said try not to move the buffer. Add the dimensions to the plan. She asked if there will be any dumpsters. Tim said no.
Ron DeTota asked to have a silt fence added along the west. Also add the lighting and cross hatching on the legend Jim Palumbo suggested winter hardy evergreens. White pines, hemlock or spruce would be good choices. They should be 3 foot trees so they will take root.
Mr. Freteshi asked if they got a letter from the County approving the rt in rt out on to Oswego Road would the Board be ok with it.
Karen said the insurance company had to close off their access tRoute 57 totally. If the County agrees to full access the Board will need a letter from them.
Jim said when the Right in and right out is built the curbs need to be worked out so there can be no question that it is only Right out. We don’t want cars jumping the curb to make a left on to Route 57.
Regular Meeting Planning Board May 10, 2017
Karen said she will need a letter stating that even though there is another way out that they will still allow the access to Route 57.
A motion was made by Al Kovac seconded by Hal Henty to adjourn this case to the June
14, 2017 meeting.
Motion Carried 6-0
Amended Site Plan — 7463 Buckley Road. (Adjourned from 1 previous meeting).
A motion was made by Michelle Borton seconded by Al Kovac to adjourn this case to the
May 24, 2017 meeting.
Motion Carried 6-0
Plan — 7641 & 7645 Henry Clay Blvd. (Adjourned from 1 previous meeting).
A motion was made by Brian Hall seconded by Jim Palumbo to adjourn this case to the
May 24, 2017 meeting.
Motion Carried 6-0
Closed Hearings
Lot C-R2 on Winter Sweet Dr. in the Inverness Gardens Development. (Adjourned from 2 previous meetings).
Mr. McCormack said the major issue was the ingress and egress, Karen said at the last meeting it was made clear that the applicant has to pave to the property line. Is it your intent to pave to the property line. Mr. McCormack said they were in contact with the Town Attorney, to work out a construction guarantee for completion of the service road. Conveyance of the service road to the Town using town specs is very expensive.
Karen asked if OCWA has been contacted. The light poles need to be 15ft from the ground up, also move the trees out of the County easement.
Jim Palumbo said the landscape is very well done.He pointed out that one parking space seems to be wider than the rest, you may want to use that for the ADA loading zone.
Brian Hall asked if the parking is different in a PDD. Mark Territo said they would use the specs for Office.
Regular Meeting Planning Board May 10, 2017
Ron DeTota said there are 29 parking spaces, once the service road goes in the parking will only be 1.5 feet away that could be problematic. Maybe these spaces could be eliminated or used as emergency spaces.
Ron DeTota handed out a list of things that needed to be worked on. See attached. He will forward a pdf of the manhole connection as well.
Karen asked if there were any comments or questions, hearing none she asked for a motion.
A motion was made by Al Kovac seconded by Hal Henty to adjourn this case to the June
14, 2017 meeting.
Motion Carried 6-0
A motion was made by Michelle Borton seconded by Brian Hall to adjourn the meeting
at 9:15 P.M.
Motion Carried 6-0
Respectfully Submitted
Slovie- \. Witabee
Gloria Wetmore
Simon Agency, Inc. Site Plan Application Case #: 2017-008
We have reviewed the Site Plan Documents dated May 3, 2017, and the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan dated February 2017, and have the following comments:
General Comment: The Site Plan documents should contain a cover page identifying the project, a location plan and have the necessary signature lines.
Sheet L-1:
¢ Detail 4/L1 does not agree with what is proposed on the plan.
e Please show where the topsoil pile and concrete washout area are to be ’ located. Provide all necessary details pertaining to these work items.
e Detail 8/L1 — the 3-inch diameter orifice elevation does not agree with the value used in the drainage analysis.
e The Construction Sequence identified on the sheet is very basic. Additional detail should be provided for each item number.
© Hood(s) need to be provided over each orifice on the proposed outlet control structure to assist in eliminating debris from getting caught in the orifice.
e HDPE pipe should be used for the storm sewer system. Do not use SDR35 PVC pipe for this application.
Sheet L-2:
.
¢ Pertinent high points for the proposed grading should be shown on the plan.
¢ The location of the proposed drainage inlet structures are not identified on the plan.
e Please identify what the symbol “DS” represents.
¢ Additional product information should be provided for the proposed Erosion Control Net.
e Has the applicant corftacted OCWA about their proposal to remove approximately 2 feet of cover from their existing water main?
¢ The applicant is showing their proposed sanitary sewer lateral connecting to a town owned manhole. A $700 fee will need to be submitted to the Town of Clay for this connection. Additionally, an approvable connection detail needs to be provided in the Site Plan documents showing how this connection will be made.
Sheet L-3:
e It does not appear the applicant is proposing to extend or construct their portion of the proposed interconnected roadway at this time. They are proposing to plant grass within the existing ingress — egress and utility easement.
e The applicant is proposing to plant trees in proximity to the existing water main and within the town road right-of-way. Any woody vegetation should be located away from the water main and out of the town right-of-way.
Sheet L-4:
e Detail 1/L4 — the depths of all utilities should be identified.
e See previous note pertaining to SDR35 PVC pipe.
Sheet L-5:
¢ Need verification that the height identified on this sheet for the light poles includes the height of the concrete base.
Drainage Report:
e Sheet 1 Drainage Report — Under Pre-Developed Conditions the summary identifies a CN value of 54 for the drainage area. In the actual analysis a value of 66 is used.
¢ It appears the existing time of concentration is mislabeled as developed time of concentration.
e It does not appear the analysis considers the upstream overland runoff and it’s impact on this property. The report will have to be modified to take that area into account.
e A map should be provided showing the time of concentration routes.
e Considering what the applicant is basing their CN value on for existing conditions it would be reasonable to require a Manning’s Roughness Coefficient value of .24 be utilized for the Sheet Flow calculation instead of 0.13.
e For Pond 2P an elevation of 450.5 is used for the 3-inch diameter orifice in the analysis. On the Site Plan this value is 450.0.
e I did not find any calculations or drawings showing how the applicant is going to address the NYSDEC runoff reduction volume or green infrastructure requirements.
e Ifthe applicant proposes to disturb one acre or more of land a Notice of Intent will need to be submitted for this project.
These are my comments to date and are subject to change as additional information is provided.