Planning board recommends PDD overlay for 65.5-acre Grand Island site and forwards rezoning to town board

Sean Hopkins, attorney for the applicant, told the Grand Island Planning Board on a recent meeting that the proposal would replace existing R2 and B1 zoning on a 65.5-acre site with a Planned Development District overlay based on a development concept plan dated Dec. 12, 2024.

Hopkins said the application would preserve more than the 25% permanent open space required under the PDD code, proposing about 30.7% permanent open space and a loop road built to public specifications that would provide access to contiguous properties. “We’re asking you consider again for the third time recommending approval by the town board of the requested PDD overlay based on the most recently submitted development concept plan,” Hopkins said.

Why it matters: the PDD overlay would become the zoning for the parcel if the town board approves it, locking in lot sizes, setbacks and allowed uses included in the approved plan. The change could alter what future owners may build on the site and was the primary reason the planning board spent more than an hour reviewing lot sizes, buffers and stormwater arrangements.

Key facts and board discussion: the site contains about 65.5 acres; roughly 51.1 acres are currently zoned R2 and about 14.4 acres B1. Hopkins and the project engineer, identified in the meeting as Rick from Invictus Engineering, described the application history dating to prior proposals in 2013 and 2020 and said the current concept reduced density significantly compared with earlier versions. Over multiple revisions the developer lowered total units from plans showing roughly 384 units to a development concept the presenter described as 288 units; the proposal includes single-family lots and townhouse buildings for sale rather than large multifamily rental buildings earlier residents opposed.

Board members pressed on specific protections for adjacent homeowners. The applicant agreed to minimum residential lot dimensions adjacent to Timberlake of 100 feet by 200 feet (about 20,000 square feet), substantially larger than the 8,400-square-foot lots that R2 technically allows after earlier zoning changes. The applicant also said townhome buildings were reduced in number and size and that the plan included an extensive on-site trail network of about one mile.

Stormwater and drainage were recurring concerns. Board members and staff discussed an existing ravine and an outlet pipe that connects to a structure and culvert under East River Road near the Holiday Inn parking lot. The applicant said stormwater would be collected and routed to a new stormwater pond and that the homeowners association (HOA) would be responsible for maintenance of private stormwater infrastructure. Board members asked staff to investigate whether easements exist for the downstream piping and to confirm maintenance responsibilities.

Zoning designations and conditions: during discussion one board member moved a recommendation that (a) the outer perimeter single-family lots be designated R1C, (b) the interior loop be designated R2, (c) townhomes be subject to an HOA, and (d) roughly 8.3 acres of the left/rear area be deed‑restricted permanent open space to belong to the HOA for the R2 area. The motion also requested follow-up on drainage easements and that accessory-structure rules for PDD lots be clarified to match the town’s residential code where appropriate.

Outcome: the planning board recorded the motion to recommend approval and the motion passed. The transcript records a “no” vote by one board member (identified as Brad) and otherwise does not provide a roll call in the public record provided; the town board will hold the final vote.

Next steps and outstanding items: the planning board advised that detailed engineering and a formal detailed plan approval step would follow if the town board adopts the PDD overlay. The applicant noted it has submitted environmental review materials, including a SHPO “no impact” letter dated March 14 and an Army Corps of Engineers jurisdictional determination stating no jurisdictional wetlands on the site, and said it has received comments from the Erie County Department of Environment pursuant to New York State General Municipal Law section 239‑m. Board members and staff said they would draft recommended language clarifying how accessory structures and enforcement would work on PDD lots and requested staff follow up on downstream easements for drainage.