Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Developer scales back apartment plan, DOT allows existing driveway to remain for now at former Grossman site
Summary
At a July 9 Penfield Planning Board work session, the developer of the former Grossman property presented a redesigned mixed-use plan that removes a proposed 3‑story, 48‑unit building and reserves the lot for future residential use; town and applicant agreed to proceed with an EAF/SEQR negative-declaration draft and further site-plan steps while NYSDOT signaled no immediate driveway improvements required.
Peter Vars of BME Associates told the Penfield Planning Board the revised plan for 1801 Fairport Nine Mile Point Road removes a previously proposed three‑story, 48‑unit apartment building from a 1.17‑acre parcel and reserves that lot for future residential development, while focusing initial work on the commercial lot and conversion of the existing greenhouse to a restaurant.
The change reduces impervious cover, adds a mix of grass/gravel parking and extends concrete sidewalks along Route 250 to a stone‑dust pedestrian path intended to connect with the town’s existing pedestrian spine. “We reduced the impervious cover quite a bit…we’re going more to a lawn area,” Vars said, adding the stormwater facility and utilities will be sized to serve the future residential lot.
Vars said the traffic study — prepared assuming the 48‑unit scenario — was reviewed by the town’s consultant, town engineering and the New York State Department of Transportation. “What New York State DOT came back with was that they are going to allow the existing driveway to remain in use, as is today,” he said, adding that DOT reserves the right to require the driveway’s removal and connection to a future fourth leg of the intersection once that roadway is built. Vars also said DOT indicated the applicant may be responsible for contributing to highway improvements through the DOT access‑permit process.
Town staff and the applicant recommended the board proceed with SEQR by drafting a negative declaration and preparing a preliminary/final site‑plan package for the commercial lot while holding the residential parcel as a reserved lot that would return for final site‑plan review when a developer is identified. Staff said the EAF and traffic/stormwater documents provide thresholds that would allow the lead agency to re‑open review if circumstances change.
Board members asked for architectural review of the proposed new building materials and windows; staff also noted the applicant has not yet submitted a required photometric (lighting) plan that was called for in the project’s earlier tabling resolution. The board directed staff to prepare a draft negative declaration and the preliminary approval resolution for review at a future meeting.
The next procedural steps will be staff drafting the negative declaration and the preliminary/final site‑plan documents for the commercial lot, submission of any outstanding lighting and canopy details, and continued engineering review. The board did not take a final site‑plan approval for the residential lot at this meeting.
