Depew planning board recommends concept approval for convenience store and full‑service fueling station at 6300 Transit Road

The Village of Depew Planning Board voted 5‑0 on Feb. 5 to recommend that the Village Board accept a concept plan for a convenience store and full‑service fueling station proposed for 6300 Transit Road.

Bradley Kyler, CEO of Isaac Development, presented the concept and told the board, “We’re just looking at a convenience store, gas pumps,” and that detailed plans would be submitted later and would follow local and state codes. Kyler said the business hopes to attract more customers from Transit Road and that pump access could allow 24‑hour fuel sales by card after staffed hours.

Why it matters: The board’s recommendation clears the applicant to proceed to detailed engineering and regulatory review, but does not grant final permits. Several board members and staff flagged traffic safety, large‑vehicle access for fuel deliveries, lighting impacts on nearby homes and the interplay with local cannabis rules as items that must be resolved in the next review stage.

Legal counsel Sam noted the village has an existing local law regulating cannabis and cautioned about the “interplay” between a co‑located cannabis retail unit and a convenience store, saying state regulations also control certain limits. Sam added that certain building separations and separate entrances can address some compliance concerns.

Board members required buffering for nearby residences: the planning board indicated concept approval would include a condition to require a vinyl privacy fence along the rear property line to reduce impacts on homes on Regal Street and Martin Court. On lighting, code enforcement advised that site lighting must be down‑lighting and “cannot protrude past the property line,” and suggested area or awning lights should be managed so they do not shine over adjacent yards.

Traffic and delivery access drew sustained attention. Members questioned whether tractor‑trailer deliveries could safely turn into and out of the site; staff said engineers use turning‑radius software during final site plan review to determine whether on‑site maneuvers are feasible. The board emphasized that the state Department of Transportation will weigh in on whether access should be limited (for example, to right‑turn in/out) after a formal traffic study. Kyler said the existing business already sees substantial daily trips and deliveries—“we do, you know, 4, 500 cars a day,” as recorded in the meeting transcript; that figure was presented by the applicant and not independently verified at the hearing.

Public comment: Jason Kane, a neighbor at 33 Martin Court, asked whether DOT determinations on right‑turn restrictions and physical barriers would occur after concept approval and whether such measures could be enforced. Staff replied DOT performs a traffic study and its input is required before final approval. Other residents cited local examples (including prior nearby drive configurations) that they said created access problems or vehicle damage where right‑turn restrictions were imposed without durable barriers.

Action taken: Member Fedorovich (recorded in the transcript as “Dave Ferroz”) moved to recommend the Village Board accept the concept plan; Member Matuszak seconded. On a roll‑call vote the board recorded five affirmative votes and the motion carried. The planning board noted that final permits and approvals—including DOT decisions, detailed engineering, and any required building separations—will be resolved in subsequent filings.

What comes next: The board said the recommendation permits the applicant to pursue architects and engineers and file final plans; a later public hearing and full plan review will follow, at which point DOT comments, traffic‑study results and engineered turning‑radius analyses will be considered.

(Reporting note: quotes and attributions are taken from the meeting transcript.)