PBA01.08.2026packet (full text)

WEST SENECA PLANNING BOARD 1300 Union Road, West Seneca, NY 14224 6:00 PM in the Community Center January 8, 2026 AGENDA Meeting # 2026-01 CALL TO ORDER APPROVAL OF PROOFS OF PUBLICATION APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Minutes of Meeting #2025-12 OLD BUSINESS 2024-005 A request from LaBella Associates for property located at 2544 Clinton St to amend the granted special use permit and permit a multi-unit residential development. 2025-006 A request from Carmina Wood Design for for property located at 1475 Orchard Park Rd to permit a 29 unit townhouse development. NEW BUSINESS SPR2025-006 A request of Green Philosophy 716 for property located at 101 Slade Ave. to permit a second sign. SPR2025-007 A request of Fund Raising Barn LLC for property located at 1325 Orchard Park Rd. to allow the construction of a 1,200 SF addition to the existing business. ADJOURN Page 1 of 110

WEST SENECA COMMUNITY CENTER Planning Board PROCEEDINGS 1300 Union Road Minutes #2025-12 West Seneca, NY 14224 December 11, 2025 ROLL CALL: Present: Chairperson Margaret Bebak Planning Board Member Eric Sailer Planning Board Member Jim Frick Planning Board Member Dale McCabe Planning Board Member Joseph Sherman Planning Board Member Tim Hayes Absent: CALL TO ORDER Motion by Chairperson Bebak, seconded by Planning Board Member Hayes, to open the public hearing. Ayes: 6 Noes: 0 Abstain: 0 Motion Carried APPROVAL OF PROOFS OF PUBLICATION Motion by Chairperson Bebak, seconded by Planning Board Member Sherman, to approve the proofs of publication. Ayes: 6 Noes: 0 Abstain: 0 Motion Carried APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Minutes of Meeting #2025-11 Motion by Planning Board Member McCabe, seconded by Planning Board Member Sherman, to approve Meeting Minutes 2025-11 of November 13, 2025. Ayes: 6 Noes: 0 Abstain: 0 Motion Carried OLD BUSINESS SPR2025-004 A request of Studio T3 Engineering, PLLC for site plan approval for property located at 484 Harlem Road to permit an expansion of the existing building and parking lot. Andrew Terragnoli of Studio T3 Engineering along with the owners of Don Juan Mexican Restaurant presented updated plans that addressed the review comments and revision requests received from the Engineering Department. Chairperson Bebak stated there were engineering concerns that were addressed in a letter. Mr. Schieber stated technical civil engineering adjustments were required, which were made and accepted by the Engineer. Additionally, the owners have agreed to work out minor items, including future sanitary sewer connections with the Code Enforcement and Engineering Departments. Chairperson Bebak asked whether the issues of screening and the placement of new trees were addressed. Mr. Terragnoli confirmed this and referred the Planning Board members to new landscape plans C4.0. Mr. McCabe stated that it appears some trees would be removed and 1 Page 2 of 110

WEST SENECA COMMUNITY CENTER Planning Board PROCEEDINGS 1300 Union Road Minutes #2025-12 West Seneca, NY 14224 December 11, 2025 replaced. Mr. Terragnoli confirmed this is correct. Mr. McCabe asked what type of trees would be planted. Mr. Terragnoli stated Black Cedar trees around the dumpster and Harvest Gold Crabapple trees. Mr. Frick asked if the concerns about the dumpster location were addressed. Mr. Terragnoli confirmed the refuse company has indicated the location and orientation was adequate. Chairperson Bebak stated one of the concerns in the letter was from the Fire Marshall about planting the trees too close to the fire pits and asked if this was addressed. Mr. Schieber stated the Fire Marshall referred to in the letter is the Fire Inspector in his office and the local Fire Chief has not provided comments and, as the project progresses, the Fire Inspector from the Code Enforcement Office can visit to advise safe placement. No public comments were received. Motion by Chairperson Bebak, seconded by Planning Board Member McCabe, to approve the site plan for property located at 484 Harlem Road to permit an expansion of the existing building and parking lot subject to the approval of the Fire Marshall on the additional plantings and the submission and approval of the revised plan set and drainage report as requested in the engineering report. Ayes: 6 Noes: 0 Abstain: 0 Motion Carried NEW BUSINESS SPR2025-006 A request of William Sahlem and Brian Hillery for rezoning and special permit for property located at 1475 Orchard Park Road to allow construction of five (5) 12 unit multi family buildings Mr. Schieber stated the property owners have requested to postpone the application and the town will perform neighbor notifications when the application will be heard by the Planning Board. Motion by Chairperson Bebak, seconded by Planning Board Member Hayes, to table SPR2025-006, request for rezoning and special permit for property located at 1475 Orchard Park Road to allow construction of five (5) 12 unit multi family buildings. Ayes: 6 Noes: 0 Abstain: 0 Motion Carried SPR2025-007 A request of 120 South Avenue LLC for rezoning for property located at 120 South Avenue to allow construction of two (2) warehouse buildings. Attorney Sean Hopkins, along with Todd Czarcinski of Hamburg Floor Coverings, Doug Feyes of Carmina Wood Design, and Dave Sutton of Sutton Architecture were present. 2 Page 3 of 110

WEST SENECA COMMUNITY CENTER Planning Board PROCEEDINGS 1300 Union Road Minutes #2025-12 West Seneca, NY 14224 December 11, 2025 Mr. Hopkins provided the following information: - Request to rezone a portion of 120 South Avenue from R-50 to C-1 - The parcel is 2.2 acres - Existing use is a flooring business - Property owner to occupy a portion of the two new buildings - Front of the property is zoned C-1, the rear of the property is R-50 and are requesting rezoning to C-1 - Proposed use is two flex warehouse buildings and 26 parking spaces - Applicant owns the adjacent vacant parcel of 134 South Avenue which is .89 acres and 60' wide - Proposing this parcel would remain permanent open space with a deed restriction and remain undeveloped to provide a buffer to the residential neighborhood - Concept site plan includes rezoning of 1.06 acres from R-50 to C-1; 2 flex warehouse buildings of 6,000-sf each; 26 parking spaces; on-site water management area; and a T-turnaround for emergency vehicles - If the rezoning is granted, the applicant will return to the Planning Board for site plan approval with fully engineered plans - Erie County Department of Environment and Planning had no recommendation and determined the application to be of local concern; the comments on the proposed action included compatibility, landscaping, operations, and lighting noting they are topics that can be addressed and EC was not adware of the proposed green space for 134 South Avenue - C-1 zoning allows a variety of uses and the applicant is only interested in the expansion of the existing business and some rental space - SEQRA: unlisted action, short EAF submitted with rezoning application, no environmentally protected resources, project will require site plan approval and compliance with applicable stormwater quality and quantity standards, project will not result in any potentially significant adverse environmental impacts, and the issuance of a Negative Declaration is justified - Requesting the Planning Board recommend rezoning a portion of the project site from R-50 to C-1 subject to the condition that the parcel at 134 South Avenue shall be merged with 120 South Avenue and shall be subject to a Declaration of Restrictions stating it shall consist of permanent open space to remain undeveloped Mr. Sherman asked if the new buildings would have tenants or be for the owner's personal use. Mr. Hopkins stated there would be both. Mr. Sherman commented that SHPO would have to be contacted and asked if other agencies have been contacted. Mr. Feyes stated they would contact the agencies during the site plan approval process. Mr. Sherman stated C-1 zoning does not list warehousing and proposed amending the rezoning to C-2(S) with the Special Permit for indoor storage only for the additional warehouses. Mr. Hopkins stated Mr. Schieber communicated with himself and stated his client was amenable to this. Mr. Sherman asked if the owner was amicable for indoor storage only. Mr. Hopkins stated there is presently limited outdoor storage. Mr. Czarcinski stated that other than his installation vehicles parked outside, there would be no outdoor storage. Mr. Sherman stated materials and things of that nature would be stored indoors at all times. Mr. Czarcinski stated that was acceptable. Mr. Frick referred to the EAF and commented that an archeological site had been identified. Mr. Hopkins stated they would do their due diligence and noted the fact that the site shows up as potentially significant does not mean there are resources onsite. 3 Page 4 of 110

WEST SENECA COMMUNITY CENTER Planning Board PROCEEDINGS 1300 Union Road Minutes #2025-12 West Seneca, NY 14224 December 11, 2025 Mr. McCabe referred to 134 South Avenue and the screening requirements along the side adjoining the residential property. Mr. Schieber stated the undeveloped parcel is 60' wide and would act as a buffer. Chairperson Bebak asked if this would be a conservation area or how best to define it. Mr. Hopkins stated the intent is to leave it as is and is familiar with deed restriction but Mr. Trapp could confirm the correct term. No public comments were received. Motion by Chairperson Bebak, seconded by Sailer, to recommend the rezoning for property located at 120 South Avenue to allow construction of two (2) warehouse buildings with the following conditions: 1) merge the 2 lots into one lot, 134 South Avenue and 120 South Avenue, with a declaration restriction stating it shall consist of permanent open space on the most westerly 60' of the property and the trees remain; 2) the zoning is changed to C-2 that no business or storage of materials take place on the exterior of the building. On the question, Mr. Sherman stated the Special Permit should be designated. Chairperson Bebak acknowledged this and amended the motion to indicate C-2(S). Ayes: 6 Noes: 0 Abstain: 0 Motion ADJOURN Future meetings are held the second Thursday of the month at 6:00pm Chairperson Bebak recognized and thanked Dale McCabe for the many years of service he has given to the Town of West Seneca. Mr. McCabe thanked the Planning Baord members, Town Clerk, Code Enforcement Office, and Town Attorney for their professionalism. Motion by Chairperson Bebak, seconded by McCabe, to adjourn the meeting at 6:25 P.M. Ayes: 6 Noes: 0 Abstain: 0 Motion Carried 4 Page 5 of 110

December 22, 2025 Jeffery Schieber Code Enforcement Officer 1250 Union Road – Room 210 West Seneca, New York 14224 RE: 2544 Clinton Street – Home Leasing Development Special Use Permit Amendment Mr. Schieber: On behalf of Home Leasing, I am pleased to submit the attached package seeking an Amendment to the Special Use Permit for the previously approved development at 2544 Clinton Street. The project is located on Tax parcel #124.00-2-5, which is a 11.7-acre parcel bounded by Clinton Street to the south, Cayuga Creek to the north and west, and a vacant property to the east. The modification to the site plan was driven by our commitment to improving the overall functionality and livability of the community. In response to comments from the Planning Board, Town Board, and various financing partners, we have developed a plan that better meets these objectives. By consolidating the layout into a single building set back further from the street, we can best meet accessibility standards, preserve mature vegetation, increase open space, improve shelter-in-place accommodations, improve parking and bus accessibility, improve playground safety, reduced electrical demand, and provide a better overall design for residents. Home Leasing previously received approval (1/27/2025) from the Town Board to rezone the parcel to R 50 and issuance of a Special Use Permit - allowing for multiple-family dwellings. Home Leasing is seeking to amend the existing Special Use Permit based on a revised conceptual site layout. We are first seeking a positive recommendation from the Planning Board before presenting it in front of the Town Board. The amended site layout includes ±75 units split between a proposed singular 3-story building - in the rear of the property - and a repurposing of the existing mansion – to include residential units. The previously approved layout included six townhouse buildings and reuse of the mansion. As with the original version of the project, the site will include the code required 150 parking spaces, site access will utilize the existing site entrance (to be widened), sidewalks, playground, landscaping and stormwater management facilities. Additional improvements to the existing mansion will include amenities for residents, modification (interior and exterior) to make the first floor ADA accessible. Also included as parts of this package are the following: revised conceptual plan, updated FEAF and appendices including reports/studies/supplemental information. After amendment of the Special Use Permit, Home Leasing intends to submit a fully engineered package to the Planning Board for Site Plan Approval. The revised site layout, with a singular apartment building - instead of six scattered townhouse buildings - will result in a variety of benefits for the project as a whole: Page 6 of 110

Building Location The proposed building will be located behind (north of) the existing mansion which will screen much of the view of the new building. It’s greater setback – significantly farther than the scattered townhouses – preserves the view of mansion and open space in the front of the property. This placement also enables the majority of the parking to be placed between the mansion and the proposed building, using the mansion and the existing trees to provide visual screening from Clinton Street. Improved ADA accessibility Throughout the site and within interior common areas - Common areas for the residents will now be in the new building (previously proposed in the mansion), this will allow for interior areas to meet and exceed code requirements. Sidewalks throughout the site will be ADA accessible including pedestrian access to Clinton Street. Preservation of Open Space and Existing Mature Vegetation Consolidating the project into a single building reduces the overall developments area of disturbance. This approach preserves more green space across the site and eliminates a less efficient building layout. The parking layout becomes more efficient and consolidated, fire access is simplified, and the reduced disturbance area ensure that more existing trees are maintained. Positioning the new building behind the mansion conserves additional trees in the front yard, protecting the existing feel of the property. Improved Shelter-In-Place Accommodations Common areas and shelter-in-place zones will be relocated to the new building (previously proposed in the mansion), ensuring that these essential spaces are easily accessible to the majority of residents. This rearrangement significantly improves both daily convenience and access during emergencies. The designated shelter-in-place areas will be supported by the backup generator and are designed to accommodate all residents – including residents of the mansion – in the event of a power outage. Improved Parking Layout and Bus Access The proposed design meets the minimum code requirement for parking (150 spaces, 2 per unit). Parking will be located closer to both the new building and the mansion than the previous layout, improving convenience for residents and visitors. Additional parking will be provided behind the new building which will also serve as additional fire access. The consolidated parking design also promotes improved bus circulation and allows residents to remain protected from within the shelter of the common lobby of the main building while awaiting bus pick-up. Playground Safety The playground will be located adjacent to the new building, which provides safe and convenient access from both the new building and mansion. This placement minimizes the need for children to cross internal roads or parking areas and provides improved sight lines for parents and guardians. 2 Page 7 of 110

Electrical Capacity Despite increasing the unit count from 67 to 75 units, the overall building square footage is reduced creating an opportunity for a more efficient energy design and thereby reducing the building's proposed load from 1.62MVA in the original design to 1.20MVA, which only increases the load on the existing NYSEG/RGE 12.5kV circuit from 46.89% to 56.10%. Summary Below is a table summarizing the proposed impacts of the revised site layout in relation to the original design. Categories are based on previous areas of concern as identified by the Town Board. Impacts of Revised Layout Design Element Proposed Impact Building Location Improved ADA Accessibility Improved Preservation of Open Space / Existing Vegetation Improved Shelter-In-Place Accommodations Improved Parking Layout Improved Playground Safety Improved Electrical Demand Reduced Sewer Impact Not Impacted Traffic Impact Not Impacted Sidewalk Connectivity Not Impacted Project History – June 2024 to January 2025 An application package for rezoning and a special use permit was originally submitted to the town in May 2024. The project appeared in front of the Planning Board on 6/13/2024, where it received a positive referral to the Town Board. The project appeared in front of the Town Board serval times in summer/fall 2024 before receiving a SEQR negative declaration and approval for Rezoning and a Special Use Permit on 1/27/2025. Throughout the approval process a variety of supplemental reports and studies were performed to address comments and concerns raised by residents, staff and board members. A summary of the information is provided below - detailed reports are included in the appendices. These reports have been updated (as needed) to reflect the revised layout and updated unit count. Appendix A - Sewer Study (updated) Appendix B - DOT Traffic Concerns Appendix C - Electrical Capacity (updated) Appendix D - Sidewalk Along Clinton Street – DOT Correspondence Appendix E - Correspondence with Seneca Nation & SHPO Appendix F - West Seneca Schools – Correspondence (pending) 3 Page 8 of 110

Appendix A - Sewer Study – (Study regarding the sewer capacity) Labella Associates completed a sewer study to analyze the potential impact of the proposed development would have on the existing sewer infrastructure and to confirm the available capacity. Results from the sewer study conclude that the existing sewer has sufficient capacity to handle the proposed project. The increased unit count (75 units) did not increase the impact on the sewer load. Of the three sample locations, the highest existing flows recorded during the monitoring period showed the existing 60” Sewer (Casmier Street) peaking at 34.6% of its total capacity. The proposed project would increase the load to 34.8% (dry weather weekend day peak). At the two other sample locations (Mathews Cemetery NW Corner and 8 Cable Street), the proposed project would increase peak flows to 10.3% and 33.3% of the total sewer pipe capacity respectively (dry weather weekend day peak). TEC Smith was contracted to install monitoring nodes in existing manholes as directed by Erie County Department of Health. Sanitary flows were monitored in three downstream manholes from August 13, 2024 – September 18, 2024. The data was provided and Labella Associates completed the sewer analysis report. Attached in Appendix A, with all supplemental node data provided to the town under separate cover. Refer to Appendix A for the sewer report, as prepared by LaBella Associates (Kristopher Winkler, P.E.) Appendix B - DOT – Traffic Study Correspondence Labella and Home Leasing met with the New York State Department of Transportation, Region 5 staff on 8/6/2024 to discuss if any traffic studies would be required in addition to the original traffic assessment prepared by Labella Associates (Traffic assessment dated 6/13/2024). The meeting was held with Casey Gordon, Ronald Frei and Carl Calarco of the DOT. The DOT is not requesting any additional traffic assessments at this time. The Traffic Assessment originally provided is sufficient. The original traffic study is based on 75 units – an update was not needed as part of this resubmission. Email correspondence confirming the DOT position via Casey Gordon, Transportation Analyst is provided in Appendix B. Appendix C - Electrical Capacity – Grid Capacity Evaluation (GCE) Labella Associates has prepared a Grid Capacity Evaluation (GCE) to provide insight into the available electrical capacity for the proposed project. The original report was updated to reflect 75 units and the gross square footage of the new building layout. The singular building design results in more efficient layout in regard to energy usage. Updated results from the Grid Capacity Evaluation found that the proposed project would increase the load on the 12.5kV circuit to 56.1% (in leu of 83.5% with the original layout) of its available capacity (if constructed at the time of the report). This is well below the maximum peak percentage, therefore is Labella’s opinion that the project can be serviced without additional upgrades from NYSEG. Based on previous experience, if the total peak percentage is below 90%, the proposed developments can be serviced without upgrades. The GCE evaluation looks at the current capacity of the electrical grid in the area and estimates the electrical load that the proposed project would potentially add to the existing infrastructure. The 4 Page 9 of 110

evaluation report includes research from the Electrification Capacity online resource and a site visit for observation of existing feeds. The GCE report is provided in Appendix C. Per NYSEG protocol, “Will Serve” letters cannot be provided until the project has an official address as issued by the local 911 department. Thus, until the project is further along a letter cannot be obtained. Refer to Appendix C for the GCE prepared by Labella Associates (Anthony Sanganetti, P.E.). Appendix D - DOT - Connecting Sidewalk on Clinton Steet Labella and Home Leasing met with the New York State Department of Transportation, Region 5 staff on 8/6/2024 to discuss the possibility of adding a sidewalk to Clinton Street to help connect the proposed project to the retail areas to the west. The meeting was held with Casey Gordon, Ronald Frei and Carl Calarco of the DOT. Labella provided a conceptual sketch to the DOT of a sidewalk from the proposed development connecting the shoulder of Clinton Street (included in Appendix E). At this time the DOT does not intend to upgrade/widen the road shoulder and/or bridge over Cayuga Creek or allow modification to the guardrail. The DOT does not object to the routing shown in blue (sidewalk in ROW, up to existing guardrail) on the above-mentioned sketch and as shown on the revised conceptual plan (Appendix D). Email correspondence confirming the DOT position via Casey Gordon, Transportation Analyst is provided in Appendix D. The sidewalk connection was not updated as a part of this resubmission. Connectivity along the new driveway to Clinton Street remains unchanged from the original layout/plans presented to DOT staff. Appendix E - Communication with Seneca Nation – (SHPO No Effect Letter) As previously shared with the town, Home Leasing has received a No Effect Letter from SHPO on 9/15/2023. As a part of the SHPO review process the NYS staff reached out to the local Native American tribes, with no comments/objections received. Additionally Home Leasing also reached out to local tribes as a part of the SHPO and geoarchaeological studies, with no comments/objects received. Prior to receiving the No Effect Letter, Home Leasing contracted out geoarchaeological studies as requested by SHPO, completing a Phase 1, Phase 1a and Phase 1b study and “Site Avoidance Plan”. Home Leasing will avoid all development in sensitive areas, avoid disturbance within the buffer zones and strictly follow the site avoidance plan as referenced and approved by SHPO and as provided by Deuel Archaeology & CRM (Jeremy Deuel, M.A.). Included in Appendix E is a copy of the SHPO No Effect Letter and a copy of the Site Avoidance Plan (appendix E of the Phase 1b report). Appendix F - Correspondence with West Seneca Schools Home Leasing met with the Superintendent of the West Seneca School District (Dr. Lisa Krueger) on 10/22/2024. The school district is very supportive of the proposed project and will welcome any students that live in the proposed development into the district, whether they are existing or new students. 5 Page 10 of 110

Based on the average number of children in Home Leasing's other multi-family communities, it was originally expected that 31 of the 67 proposed units at the proposed West Seneca site will be occupied by school-aged children. Specifically using two of Home Leasing’s existing communities with similar bedroom counts (communities with predominantly 2BR and 3BR units), Home Leasing would expect the number of school-aged children in residence to increase to 54. Based on Home Leasing’s other family communities, it is estimated that over 80% of these children would already be part of the existing school district. Home Leasing has reached out to the superintendent for her input on the updated unit count now expected to be 59 (+4). An updated correspondence letter will be supplied to the board upon receipt. Included as part of this submission are the following drawings and documents: • Revised Concept • Revised FEAF • Appendix A – Sewer Report (abbreviated report) • Appendix B – DOT Traffic Correspondence • Appendix C – Grid Capacity Evaluation • Appendix D – DOT sidewalk Correspondence • Appendix E – SHPO No Effect & Site Avoidance • Appendix F – Correspondence with West Seneca School District (pending) We look forward to presenting this project to the Planning Board on January 8th, 2026. If you have any questions or need any additional information, please feel free to contact me at 585-770-2525 or [email protected]. Respectfully submitted, LaBella Associates Shelby Vakiener Civil Engineer 6 Page 11 of 110

Page 12 of 110

Appendix a: Sewer report (updated report) Page 13 of 110

Page 14 of 110

Prepared For: Home Leasing, LLC 75 South Clinton Avenue, Suite 700 Rochester, NY 14604 Submitted by: LaBella Associates 300 State Street, Suite 201 Rochester, NY 14614 (716) 551-6281 SEWER REPORT FOR WEST SENECA Date: October 2024 Last Revised: December 2025 LBA Project No. 2241067 Page 15 of 110

West Seneca Sewer Report | Page 1 Table of Contents Section 1 – Introduction .................................................................................................................... 2 Section 2 – General.............................................................................................................................. 2 Section 3 – Proposed Facilities .................................................................................................. 3 Appendices Attachment A - Site Location Map Attachment B - TECsmith Flow Monitoring Attachment C - TECsmith Time Tables Attachment D - Erie County Flow Monitoring Attachment E - Erie County Time Tables Page 16 of 110

West Seneca Sewer Report | Page 2 Section 1 – Introduction Home Leasing is proposing the development of a new affordable housing complex on a +/- 11.7-acre parcel in West Seneca, NY. Home Leasing is seeking rezoning of the parcel from M 1 to R 50, allowing for multiple-family dwellings with the issuance of a special use permit by the Town Board. Home Leasing is also seeking Site Plan Approval from West Seneca and HCR 9% funding from New York State. The proposed development includes 75 units split between a repurposing of the existing mansion on site to now include apartment building in the rear of the property. Improvements to the existing mansion include the dwelling units, administrative offices, community room for residents and modifications (interior and exterior) to make the first floor ADA accessible. The project includes a private road accessing the apartments, parking, sidewalks, playground, landscaping and stormwater management facilities. Site Location The 11.7-acre site is nestled between Clinton Street (State Route 354) to the south and Cayuga Creek to the North and West. Within a quarter mile of the development there are multiple commercial uses and Interstate 90. The neighborhood is predominately comprised of agricultural land, single- and two-family homes and industrial/manufacturing facilities. See appendix A for location site map. Section 2 – General Existing Site Conditions The existing site includes the above-mentioned mansion, two barns, a stone wall along Clinton Street and parking areas. The barns and parking areas will be demolished, while the existing stone wall will remain, with the entrance being widened to allow for emergency vehicle access to the site. The site topography is relatively flat with elevations generally ranging from 600 to 580. Storm water runoff from site drains either via sheet flow directly to Cayuga Street, or to drainage inlets that drain to Cayuga Creek. The existing drainage system on site is minimal and consists of a small swale and dry detention basis which collects and re-directs off-site drainage from the east. Drainage is then conveyed to Cayuga Creek via storm pipes and open drainage swales. Proposed Site Conditions The proposed development includes 75 units split between a repurposing of the existing mansion on site to now include apartments and one apartment building in the rear of the property. Page 17 of 110

West Seneca Sewer Report | Page 3 Project Data: Facility Type: Affordable Housing No. of Buildings: 2 (Including one existing) Section 3 – Proposed Facilities Stormwater Storm and sanitary are separate systems within the project site. Building Utility Services – Sanitary The following summarizes the sanitary sewer service sizes for each building. Table 1: Sanitary Lateral Sizes Sanitary Lateral Building # Description Size Existing Mansion 1 6” 2 Proposed Building 6” Sanitary Sewer The project requires a Down Stream Sewer Capacity analysis (DSCA) to conform with NYSDEC regulations considering proposed sanitary flows are intended to convey a flow greater than 2,500 gallons per day. In accordance with Erie County policy a downstream, dry weather sanitary capacity analysis is included. The monitoring report is included in the appendices. Based on the flow depth measurements recorded the following conclusions are reached: • At no time did the flow depth exceed pipe diameter at any of the downstream monitoring points during the wet weather events monitored. • One time during the monitoring period the depth of flow exceeded the diameter of the pipe. DSCA Summary: Erie County provided three (3) nodes, described below: Flow Monitoring Period: August 13, 2024, to September 18, 2024 Page 18 of 110

West Seneca Sewer Report | Page 4 Dry Week Days Monitored: Aug 13-15, Aug 20-23, Aug 26-30, Sept 2-5, Sept 10-13, and Sept 16-18. Dry Weekend Days Monitored: Aug 24-25, Sept 8, and Sept 14-15. Nodes (manholes): Node 1 MH BAA8A – 48” RCP (Matthews Cemetery NW Corner) Node 2 MH BAA9A – 60” RCP (Casimer Street) Node 3 MH BAAA8 – 66” RCP (8 Cable Street) Design Parameters: Hydraulic Loading rates per NYS Design Standards for Intermediate Wastewater Treatment Systems, March 5, 2014. Calculations included below: Apartments – Bedroom Units = 110 gpd/unit Office Space= 15 gpd / employee Average Daily Design Flow: One Bdrm Units:(25 units) x (1 bdrm/unit)x 110gpd/bdrm=2,750 gpd Two Bdrm Units:(25 units) x (2 bdrm/unit)x110gpd/bdrm=5,500 gpd Three Bdrm Units:(25 units) x (3 bdrm/unit)x110gpd/bdrm=8,250 gpd Office Space: 4 Employees x 15 gpd = 60 gpd Total = 16,560 gpd Peak Hourly Flow (Sanitary): 16,560 gpd x Peak Factor Total Population=[(25x1)+(25x2)+(25x3)]x2 people per bedroom= =150x2= 300People (assume 2 people per bedroom)+4 office employees=304. P = 0.304 (in thousands) Peaking Factor = (18 + √P) / (4+√P) = (18+0.5514)/(4+0.5514)=4.08 Peak Sanitary Demand =16,560x 4.08 = 67,565 gpd 0.06800 MGD (0.10 CFS) Sanitary Demand Calculations: Node 1 – Average 16,560 gpd (0.017 MGD) Entire Site: 110-gal/d/unit x 1bdrmx25 units=2,750 gpd + 110-gal/d/unit x 2bdrmx25 units=5,500 gpd +110-gal/d/unitx3bdrmx25 units=8,250 gpd 4 employees x 15 gpd=60 gpd Site total= 16,560 gpd Ave. Total = 16,560 gpd (0.017 MGD) Assume 2 people per bedroom. 2 x 150 bedrooms = 300 people + 4 office employees = 304 people. P = 0.304 (in thousands) Peaking Factor = (18 + √P) / (4+√P) = 4.08 Peak Sanitary Demand = 16,560 x 4.08 = 67,565 gpd Page 19 of 110

West Seneca Sewer Report | Page 5 0.0680 MGD (0.10 CFS) Node 2 – Average 16,560 gpd (0.017 MGD) Entire Site: 110-gal/d/unit x 1bdrmx25 units=2,750 gpd + 110-gal/d/unit x 2bdrmx25 units=5,500 gpd +110-gal/d/unitx3bdrmx25 units=8,250 gpd 4 employees x 15 gpd=60 gpd Site total= 16,560 gpd Ave. Total = 16,560 gpd (0.017 MGD) Assume 2 people per bedroom. 2 x 150 bedrooms = 300 people + 4 office employees = 304 people. P = 0.304 (in thousands) Peaking Factor = (18 + √P) / (4+√P) = 4.08 Peak Sanitary Demand = 16,560 x 4.08 = 67,565 gpd 0.0680 MGD (0.10 CFS) Node 3 – Average 16,560 gpd (0.017 MGD) Entire Site: 110-gal/d/unit x 1bdrmx25 units=2,750 gpd + 110-gal/d/unit x 2bdrmx25 units=5,500 gpd +110-gal/d/unitx3bdrmx25 units=8,250 gpd 4 employees x 15 gpd=60 gpd Site total= 16,560 gpd Ave. Total = 16,560 gpd (0.017 MGD) Assume 2 people per bedroom. 2 x 150 bedrooms = 300 people + 4 office employees = 304 people. P = 0.304 (in thousands) Peaking Factor = (18 + √P) / (4+√P) = 4.08 Peak Sanitary Demand = 16,560 x 4.08 = 67,565 gpd 0.0680 MGD (0.10 CFS) Page 20 of 110

West Seneca Sewer Report | Page 6 Table 2: Dry Weather Peak Weekday Proposed Total Existing Peak Theoretical Ave. Daily Peak Available Capacity Node Sewer Peak Flow Sanitary Capacity Flow (mgd) Flow (Y/N) (mgd) Flow (mgd) (mgd) (mgd) 1-MH 48” RCP @ 0.41% BAA8A (Matthews 0.017 7.953* 0.068 8.021 59.6 Y Cemetery NW Corner) 2-MH 60” RCP @ 0.042% BAA9A 0.017 11.619** 0.068 11.687 34.6 Y (Casimer Street) 3-MH 66” RCP @ 0.026% BAAA8 0.017 10.614*** 0.068 10.682 35.1 Y (8 Cable Street) Notes: *Peak Dry Week Day for Nodes 1 on Aug 27,2024 **Peak Dry Week Day for Node 2 on Aug 21,2024 ***Peak Dry Week Day for Node 3 on Aug 21,2024 Table 3: Dry Weather Peak Weekend Day Proposed Total Ave. Daily Existing Peak Theoretical Peak Available Capacity Node Sewer Flow Peak Flow Sanitary Capacity Flow (Y/N) (mgd) (mgd) Flow (mgd) (mgd) (mgd) 1-MH 48” RCP @ 0.41% BAA8A (Matthews 0.017 6.070* 0.068 6.138 59.6 Y Cemetery NW Corner) 2-MH 60” RCP @ 0.042% BAA9A 0.017 11.972** 0.068 12.040 34.6 Y (Casimer Street) 3-MH 66” RCP @ 0.026% BAAA8 0.017 11.615*** 0.068 11.683 35.1 Y (8 Cable Street) Notes: *Peak Dry Weekend Day for Nodes 1 on Aug 25,2024 **Peak Dry Weekend Day for Node 2 on Sept 14,2024 ***Peak Dry Weekend Day for Node 3 on Sept 14,2024 Page 21 of 110

West Seneca Sewer Report | Page 7 DSCA CONCLUSION Based on the analysis and flow monitoring results the flow depth peak increases are described below. The combined sewer has sufficient capacity to handle projected peak flows. • Node 1 projected peak 0.068 MGD flow (0.10 CFS) result in approximately a 1.6 inch water level increase within the 48” RCP sewer. • Node 2 projected peak 0.068 MGD flow (0.10 CFS) result in approximately 2.6 inch water level increase within the 60” RCP sewer. • Node 3 projected peak 0.068 MGD flow (0.10 CFS) result in approximately 2.9 inch water level increase within the 66” RCP sewer. Page 22 of 110

Appendix B: Dot traffic study correspondence Page 23 of 110

Page 24 of 110

Vakiener, Shelby From: Gordon, Casey (DOT) <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2024 10:19 AM To: Vakiener, Shelby Cc: Calarco, Carl (DOT) Subject: RE: [Ext] RE: Proposed Residential Development at 2542 Clinton Street, West Seneca - NYSDOT Comments on sidewalk proposal Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Good morning Shelby, NYSDOT has reviewed the Traffic Assessment for 2544 Clinton Street dated 6/13/2024 which was provided in response to the NYSDOT SEQR comments dated 6/17/2024. NYSDOT has no addi.onal comments or concerns regarding traffic for this site. The driveway design as described in the Traffic Assessment for the expected traffic counts will be subject to an addi.onal engineering review as part of the NYSDOT Highway Work Permit process. Casey Gordon Transportation Analyst New York State Department of Transportation 100 Seneca Street, Buffalo, NY 14203 716-847-3580 | [email protected] dot.ny.gov From: Vakiener, Shelby <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2024 4:53 PM To: Gordon, Casey (DOT) <[email protected]> Cc: Calarco, Carl (DOT) <[email protected]> Subject: RE: [Ext] RE: Proposed Residential Development at 2542 Clinton Street, West Seneca - NYSDOT Comments on sidewalk proposal ATTENTION: This email came from an external source. Do not open attachments or click on links from unknown senders or unexpected emails. Casey, Thanks for sending your response over regarding the sidewalk connection/future sidewalks. We have passed it along to the town as work on addressing Town Board comments. One more open item that we have with the town is an email response stating the DOT’s position on if a tra!ic study, TDMP or any further tra!ic analysis is required or if the DOT is satisfied with the data (tra!ic analysis) that has been provided. Would you be able to send over to me stating the DOT’s position? 1 Page 25 of 110

Appendix c: Grid capacity evaluation (updated report) Page 26 of 110

Page 27 of 110

Utility Grid Capacity Evaluation GCE West Seneca 2544 Clinton St, West Seneca, NY 14224 LaBella Project No. 2243432 Prepared For: Home Leasing 75 S Clinton Avenue, Suite 700 Rochester, NY 14604 Adam Driscoll, Development Manager [email protected] Prepared By: LaBella Associates, DPC 300 State Street, Suite 201 Rochester, New York 14614 Date: December 2025 300 State Street, Suite 201 | Rochester, NY 14614 | p 585-454-6110| f 585-454-3066 www.labellapc.com Page 28 of 110

TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................................. 1 2.0 SUMMARY OF EXISTING CONDITIONS ............................................................................................ 1 3.0 SUMMARY OF PROPOSED LOADING CONDITIONS ........................................................................ 2 4.0 GRID CAPACITY EVALUATION ........................................................................................................... 2 5.0 OPINION OF PROBABLE CONSTRUCTION COST ............................................................................. 3 6.0 CONCLUSION .................................................................................................................................... 3 LIST OF APPENDICES APPENDIX A – LOCATION MAP APPENDIX B – EXISTING CONDITIONS APPENDIX C – LOAD SHEETS OR ESTIMATED LOADS APPENDIX D – CALCULATIONS APPENDIX E – PROPOSED SITE DESIGN Page 29 of 110

1.0 INTRODUCTION Home Leasing is intending to re-develop an 11.7-acre parcel in the Town of West Seneca into 75 affordable family housing units. The project will include repurposing the existing mansion on site and proposing a new 3-story building for offices, amenities and residential use. As part of the Homes and Community Renewal (HCR) and Housing Finance Agency (HFA) approval process, Home Leasing needs to obtain a “Will Serve” letter from all utilities including electric. The purpose of this report is to provide an evaluation of the existing electric lines in the immediate vicinity of the project site and to provide a reasonable cost estimate of the service connection or the required upgrades the project will need. All information contained in this report, including existing electrical circuit and rating information is based on publicly available information and not from any coordination with NYSEG/RGE. LaBella gives no warranty, express or implied, as to accuracy, description, quality, fitness for any particular purpose, or any other matter, of the evaluations and estimates contained in this report that are based on the publicly available information of NYSEG/RGE and others. 2.0 SUMMARY OF EXISTING CONDITIONS The proposed project will re-develop the 11.7-acre area in the Town of West Seneca, NY. The property currently has one main building, the existing mansion served by NYSEG/RGE. Refer to Appendix A for project location map. Per NYSEG/RGE Housing Capacity Portal the project site has an existing overhead 12.5kV (feeder ID 3104002) running along Clinton St. The table below summarizes the information available from the Electrification Capacity online resource. Table 1. Existing Circuit Information Parameters Value Circuit Feeder 3104002 Operating Voltage (kV) 12.5 Maximum Rating, Summer (MVA) 13.01 2025 Peak (MVA) 6.10 Based on field observations, the existing circuit is three phase overhead armless construction along Clinton St. For photos of the existing site and nearby electric circuits refer to Appendix B. -1- Utility Grid Capacity Evaluation GCE West Seneca LaBella Project No. 2243432 Page 30 of 110

3.0 SUMMARY OF PROPOSED LOADING CONDITIONS When calculating the electrical load of a development two variables are evaluated, the total connected load and the diversified load. The total connected load of the proposed building represents the amount of electricity being consumed when all devices within the building are connected and drawing power at the same time. The total connected load scenario is the maximum value and may not represent realistic conditions, therefore the diversified load should also be analyzed. The diversified load is an estimate of the expected electric consumption during peak hours. The existing building is currently served from the 12.5kV line, however electric consumption for the building has not been provided and cannot be estimated. As a conservative approach the capacity evaluation will consider the total area of development as a new load and not as a net increase from the existing load of the building. For the basis of this analysis, this estimated load will be the diversified load which is the one used to determine potential electric system upgrades. The table below summarizes the estimated load and the information considered to calculate these. Refer to Appendix C for detailed calculations of the estimated loading. Table 2. Proposed Loads Parameters Quantities New Building 50,100 Total Interior Existing Building 25,703 Gross Area (sq-ft) TOTAL 75,803 Elevator 0 EV Charging Units 5 Estimated Load (kW) 1,199 Estimated Load (MVA) 1.20 4.0 GRID CAPACITY EVALUATION Based on the proposed diversified load, the new West Seneca project will increase the total peak load of the existing circuit to 6.91MVA. This additional load will increase the peak percentage rating of the existing conditions to 56.1%. Refer to Appendix D for detailed calculations. Based on experience, if the total peak percentage of the circuit is less than 90% the development can be serviced without any upgrades, this will be considered a GREEN condition. If the total peak percentage of the circuit post development is between 90% and 100% minor upgrades may be required, such as increasing conductor size, replacing equipment, increasing the size of service transformers, etc. This will be considered a YELLOW condition. If the total peak percentage of the circuit post development exceeds 100% then major infrastructure upgrades may be required, such as a new circuit design or substation upgrades. This will be considered a RED condition. The West Seneca project is in a GREEN condition, see chart below. -2- Utility Grid Capacity Evaluation GCE West Seneca LaBella Project No. 2243432 Page 31 of 110

14 13.01 13.01 12 Load (MVA) 10 8 6 7.30 6.1 4 2 46.89% 56.10% 0 2025 Peak Diversified Load (Pre-construction) (Post Construction) Chart 1. Peak Load Capacity Based on the post development conditions, we believe that the new development may be able to be serviced without any upgrades needed to the existing circuit. The most cost-effective solution would be to utilize the existing service, however new transformers and conductors may be required due to the additional load. 5.0 OPINION OF PROBABLE CONSTRUCTION COST A conceptual construction cost estimate for this project was not developed at this time since the post construction loading is well below the assumed limit for upgrades. Please note that there will be a cost payable to NYSEG/RGE for the installation of service equipment. 6.0 CONCLUSION Based on this evaluation, the proposed project will increase the load on the existing 12.5kV circuit to 56.1% of its capacity. This is below the anticipated maximum peak percentage; therefore, it is our opinion that project can be serviced without additional upgrades from the utility. -3- Utility Grid Capacity Evaluation GCE West Seneca LaBella Project No. 2243432 Page 32 of 110

APPENDIX A Location Map Page 33 of 110

N . RD EM CREEKSIDE DR. RL HA PROJECT SITE VIOLA DR. CLIN TON ST. It is a violation of New York Education Law Art. 145 Sec. 7209 & Art. 147 Sec. 7307, for any person, unless acting under the ISSUED FOR: direction of a licensed architect, professional engineer, or land surveyor, to alter an item in any way. If an item bearing the seal of an architect, engineer, or land surveyor is altered; the altering architect, engineer, or land surveyor shall affix to the item their seal and ISSUED FOR REVIEW 8/15/2024 10:56 AM notation "altered by" followed by their signature and date of such alteration, and a specific description of the alteration. DRAWING NAME: DRAWN BY: DATE: PROJECT NO.: LOCATION MAP AJD 08/15/2024 2243432 VERSION 23.1 300 State Street, Suite 201 Rochester, NY 14614 PROJECT NAME: DRAWING NUMBER: C.A. NUMBER: 585-454-6110 GEOLOGICAL: 018750 GCE WEST SENECA LAND SURVEYING: 017976 labellapc.com PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING: 018281 West Seneca, NY 14224 Page 34 of 110

APPENDIX B Existing Conditions Page 35 of 110

Figure 1. Summer NYSEG/RGE New York System Data Portal Information for Line in front of Project Site Page 36 of 110

Photo 1. Close Up of Existing Pole on Project Site (Facing North Towards Project Site) Page 37 of 110

Photo 2. Existing Poles on Project Site (Facing North Towards Project Site) Page 38 of 110

Photo 3. Existing Line on Clinton St (Looking West) Page 39 of 110

Photo 4. Existing Tap to Project Site on Clinton St (Looking West) Page 40 of 110

Photo 5. Existing Line on Clinton St (Looking West) Page 41 of 110

Photo 6. Existing Tap to Project Site on Clinton St (Looking East) Page 42 of 110

Photo 7. Existing Line on Clinton St (Looking East) Page 43 of 110

APPENDIX C Estimated Load Page 44 of 110

General Assumptions Description Density Units Lightning Load 1.0 VA/sq-ft Receptacle Load 1.0 VA/sq-ft Electric Heating Load (heat pumps, hot water) 12.0 VA/sq-ft Air-Handling Equip 1 CFM/sq-ft. Pumping Equipment 50 BTU/hr/sq-ft Elevator 25** HP* EV Charging 6,700** VA Service Factor 125 % *To be conservative, we will assume 1HP = 1kW **Taken from previous projects Page 45 of 110

Area Load Density Units Description (sq-ft) (kVA) Gross Floor Area: 75,803 Lighting Load 1 VA/sq-ft 75,803 76 Receptacle Load 1 VA/sq-ft 75,803 76 Elec Heating Load 12 VA/sq-ft 75,803 910 Typical Mechanical Conditions Conv. Static Conv. Area Fan Effic. Factor Load (HP Service Airflow Press Factor (sq-ft) (unitless) (PSI/ in or kW) Factor (in WC) (HP/CFM) WC) Air-Handling Equipment 1 CFM/sq-ft 75,803 75,803 3 0.5 5.2 0.00095 72 125% 90 Area Heat Load Delta-T Flow (sq-ft) (BTU’s/hr) (Degrees) (GPM) BTU/hr/sq- 50 75,803 3,790,000 20 379 0.01010 4 125% 5 Pumping Equipment ft Units Elevator 25 HP 0 25 125% 0 EV Chargers 6.7 kW 5 33.5 125% 42 TOTAL 1,199 Page 46 of 110

APPENDIX D Calculations Page 47 of 110

For an AC single-phase P = I x V x PF Where, P = power (watts) I = current (MVA) V = voltage (volts) PF = power factor; for this effort we will assume it is equal to 1 P Therefore, I = V x PF For an AC three-phase P = I x V x √3 x PF Where, P = power (watts) I = current (MVA) V = voltage (volts) PF = power factor; for this effort we will assume it is equal to 1 P Therefore, I = V x √3 x PF Existing Circuit Information Voltage, kV 12.5 Capacity, MVA 13.01 Summer Peak, MVA 6.1 Phase 3 Current Peak Rating 46.89% Diversified Load Estimated Apartment Load = 807kW; 807/1000 = 0.81MVA Proposed new peak load = 6.1 + 0.81 = 6.91MVA Peak Rating % = (6.91/13.01) x 100 = 53.09% Diversified Total Power, kW 1,199 Total Load, MVA 1.20 New Peak Circuit Load, MVA 7.30 Peak Rating 56.10% Page 48 of 110

APPENDIX E Proposed Site Design Page 49 of 110

Page 50 of 110

Appendix d: Dot - sidewalk correspondence Page 51 of 110

Page 52 of 110

Vakiener, Shelby From: Gordon, Casey (DOT) <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, August 23, 2024 12:43 PM To: Vakiener, Shelby Cc: Winkler, Kristopher; Calarco, Carl (DOT); Adam Driscoll Subject: RE: [Ext] RE: Proposed Residential Development at 2542 Clinton Street, West Seneca - NYSDOT Comments on sidewalk proposal Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Good morning, NYSDOT has reviewed the sidewalk proposals as provided for the development at 2542 Clinton Street . At this "me, NYSDOT does not intend to make any changes to the guardrails as installed at this loca"on. NYSDOT does not object to the rou"ng shown as the “blue path” in the concept plans which installs a new sidewalk along the entrance driveway and ties into the shoulder pavement and allows pedestrians to continue on the existing shoulder to access the bridge. This sidewalk, along with all other entrance features within the State Right of Way, will require an additional engineering review with more detailed plans as part of the NYSDOT Highway Work Permit process if the development is approved by the Town. Respectfully, Casey Gordon Transportation Analyst Planning and Program Management New York State Department of Transportation, Region 5 100 Seneca Street, Buffalo, NY 14203 (716) 847-3580 [email protected] www.dot.ny.gov From: Vakiener, Shelby <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, August 6, 2024 10:30 AM To: Gordon, Casey (DOT) <[email protected]> Cc: Winkler, Kristopher <[email protected]>; Frei, Ronald A (DOT) <[email protected]>; Calarco, Carl (DOT) <[email protected]>; Adam Driscoll <[email protected]> Subject: RE: [Ext] RE: Proposed Residential Development at 2542 Clinton Street, West Seneca ATTENTION: This email came from an external source. Do not open attachments or click on links from unknown senders or unexpected emails. 1 Page 53 of 110

Casey, Ron, Carl, Thanks for meeting with us this morning, it was very helpful to talk through the project. Attached are the sketches of the conceptual sidewalk options that we discussed on the call. Let me know if you need anything else to facilitate email responses to Je+ Schieber and I. Thanks, Shelby Shelby Vakiener LaBella Associates | Civil Engineer 585-770-2525 direct 585-454-6110 office From: Gordon, Casey (DOT) <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, August 1, 2024 1:49 PM To: Vakiener, Shelby <[email protected]> Cc: Winkler, Kristopher <[email protected]>; Frei, Ronald A (DOT) <[email protected]>; Calarco, Carl (DOT) <[email protected]> Subject: RE: [Ext] RE: Proposed Residential Development at 2542 Clinton Street, West Seneca That looks good for us. Respectfully, Casey Gordon Transportation Analyst Planning and Program Management New York State Department of Transportation, Region 5 100 Seneca Street, Buffalo, NY 14203 (716) 847-3580 [email protected] www.dot.ny.gov From: Vakiener, Shelby <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, August 1, 2024 1:40 PM To: Gordon, Casey (DOT) <[email protected]> Cc: Winkler, Kristopher <[email protected]>; Frei, Ronald A (DOT) <[email protected]>; Calarco, Carl (DOT) <[email protected]> Subject: RE: [Ext] RE: Proposed Residential Development at 2542 Clinton Street, West Seneca You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important ATTENTION: This email came from an external source. Do not open attachments or click on links from unknown senders or unexpected emails. 2 Page 54 of 110

Page 55 of 110

Appendix e: Shpo no effect Letter & site avoidance plan Page 56 of 110

Page 57 of 110

KATHY HOCHUL ERIK KULLESEID Governor Commissioner September 15, 2023 Adam Driscoll Home Leasing 75 S Clinton Ave Rochester, NY 14604 Re: HTF Clinton Street Affordable Housing Project 2544 Clinton St, Buffalo, NY 14224 22PR06904 Dear Adam Driscoll: Thank you for continuing to consult with the New York State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO). We have reviewed the project in accordance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966. These comments are those of the SHPO and relate only to Historic/Cultural resources. They do not include potential environmental impacts to New York State Parkland that may be involved in or near your project. We are in receipt of the Phase IB survey report (23SR00435; August 2023). The survey identified the CSRH Indigenous Site (USN 02925.000612) among 5 lithic artifact loci within the project’s Area of Potential Effects (APE). The SHPO concurs with the intent to avoid Locus 5 including a 50ft buffer, and approves of the implementation of the Site Avoidance Plan included as Attachment E with the following additions: • The site boundary including buffer will be clearly delineated on the final construction plans and identified as “Environmentally Sensitive Area—No Access.” The SHPO requests submission of this updated Avoidance Map. • A preconstruction meeting with the construction contractor(s) is required to notify those in charge of the requirements to protect and avoid the archaeological site. • In the event that human remains are encountered during construction, all work must stop in the vicinity of the find and be reported to SHPO and the lead agency. We note the potential to demolish a building that is partially within the 50ft buffer and concur with the measures as outlined in the Avoidance Plan if this option is selected, including continued consultation with this office. There are no additional archaeological concerns with artifact loci 1-4. Based on discussions with the lead agency, SHPO has consulted with interested Indian Nations regarding the Phase IB survey results. New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation Division for Historic Preservation, Peebles Island, PO Box 189, Waterford, New York 12188-0189 (518) 237-8643 • https://parks.ny.gov/shpo Page 58 of 110

Based upon this review, it is the opinion of the New York SHPO that no historic properties, including archaeological and/or historic resources, will be Adversely Affected by this undertaking with the condition that the avoidance measures outlined above and in the Avoidance Plan are implemented. If you have any questions, you can call or e-mail me at the contact information below. Sincerely, Andrew Farry, Ph.D. Scientist/Archaeology 518-268-2185 | [email protected] New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation Division for Historic Preservation, Peebles Island, PO Box 189, Waterford, New York 12188-0189 (518) 237-8643 • https://parks.ny.gov/shpo Page 59 of 110

"Appendix E" of Phase 1B Field Investigation Report, as prepared by Deuel Archeology & CRM (August 2023) Avoidance  Plan  for  Locus  5  of  the  CSRH  Indigenous  Site  (DACRM  Site  ERI  P001)   The  Phase  IB  Archaeological  Field  Investigation  conducted  by  Deuel  Archaeology  &  CRM  (DACRM)  from   June  22  through  July  7,  2023  identified  a  previously  unrecorded  Indigenous  Site  distributed  across  5  loci   within  the  area  of  potential  effect  (APE)  for  the Proposed  Development  of  2544-­‐2574  Clinton  Street,   Town  of  West  Seneca,  Erie  County,  New  York.  Loci  1-­‐4  have  low  artifact  densities  and  exhibited  evidence   of  prior  ground  disturbances  resulting  in  a  lack  of  archaeological  integrity.  Therefore,  no  mitigation   measures  have  been  proposed  for  loci  1-­‐4.  Locus  5  of  the  site  has  temporally  and  functionally  diagnostic   artifacts  with  further  research  potential  and  fair  archaeological  integrity.  The  developer  has  selected  to   avoid  potential  adverse  impacts  to  locus  5  of  the  site  through  archaeological  monitoring  and  site   avoidance.  The  proposed  avoidance  plan  will  consist  of  the  following:   • A  fence  will  be  installed  around  the  50-­‐foot  buffer  for  the  duration  of  construction.  No   disturbance  will  occur  in  any  portion  of  the  locus  5  of  the  site  area  without  prior  consultation   with  the  SHPO.     • If  the  developer  opts  to  demolish  the  larger  outbuilding,  which  overlaps  with  the  50-­‐foot  buffer,   they  will  engage  the  services  of  a  36  CFR  61  qualified  archaeologist  to  monitor  the  demolition.   An  archaeological  monitoring  protocol  will  be  submitted  to  the  SHPO  for  review  and  comment   prior  to  demolition.  The  building  would  be  demolished  and  its  foundation  removed  in  its   entirety,  to  an  assumed  depth  of  approximately  8  feet  below  grade;  excavation  for  the   foundation  would  extend  outward  only  approximately  2  feet  from  the  foundation.  Once   removed,  a  layer  of  clean  fill  and  topsoil  will  be  brought  in,  and  the  fence  will  be  installed  along   the  50-­‐foot  buffer  line.  If  the  developer  decides  not  to  demolish  the  larger  outbuilding,  the  50-­‐ foot  buffer  fence  will  include  the  outbuilding  to  preserve  the  integrity  of  the  buffered  area.     • The  developer  plans  to  demolish  the  smaller  outbuilding  adjacent  to  the  50-­‐foot  buffer.  If  the   buffer  overlaps  with  the  building,  it  will  be  removed  in  the  same  manner  as  described  above  for   the  larger  outbuilding.  If  the  building  is  outside  the  buffer,  the  fence  will  be  installed  along  the   buffer  and  the  building  will  be  carefully  dismantled  and  removed  in  a  manner  that  avoids   ground  disturbing  activities  within  the  buffered  area.     • All  new  construction  and  associated  sitework  will  occur  outside  the  buffered  area.     • The  developer  plans  to  install  an  interpretive  plaque  or  panel  in  the  lobby  of  the  new   development,  which  will  inform  residents  and  visitors  of  the  history  of  the  site.  The  locations  of   the  recovered  artifacts  will  not  be  identified  to  protect  the  site  from  potential  looting.       Page 60 of 110

Appendix f: Correspondence w/ west seneca school district Page 61 of 110

pending Page 62 of 110

EXISTING SEWER EASEMENT LIMITS OF ARCHEOLOGICAL BUFFER ZONE DUMPSTER PAD 7 3-STORY 8 8 67-75 UNIT PROPOSED BUILDING PLAYGROUND LOCATION 15 12 11 15 15 15 15 PROJECT DATA 15 8 PARCEL INFORMATION APPLICANT/OWNER HOME LEASING PARCEL ADDRESS 2544 CLINTON STREET SLB # 124.00-2-5 PARCEL AREA (TOTAL) 11.7 ACRES TOTAL PROJECT AREA ±7.0 ACRES TOTAL DISTURBANCE AREA ±3.5 ACRES EXISTING BUILDING TO REMAIN ZONING INFORMATION REQUIRED PROPOSED CLASSIFICATION R-50 R-50 FRONT SETBACK 30 FT ±443 FT SIDE SETBACK 25 FT** ±111 FT REAR SETBACK 30 FT* ±255 FT 6 GREEN SPACE - 8.5 ACRES PARKING INFORMATION REQUIRED PROPOSED PARKING SPACES 150 150 EXISTING TREES *OR A DISTANCE EQUAL TO THE HEIGHT OF PRINCIPAL BUILDING, WHICHEVER IS TO REMAIN GREATER. **FOR MULTIFAMILY DWELLINGS, EACH SIDE YARD SHALL BE 25 FEET OR A DISTANCE EQUAL TO ONE-HALF (1/2) THE HEIGHT OF SUCH BUILDING, WHICHEVER IS GREATER. THE TOTAL OF THE TWO SIDE YARDS SHALL BE TWICE THAT REQUIRED FOR ONE SIDE YARD. THE TOWN BOARD SHALL HAVE THE POWER TO REDUCE SAID SIDE YARD REQUIREMENTS UPON SHOWING OF EXISTING WALL TO REMAIN SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES OR HARDSHIP. WEST SENECA 12/18/2025 N 1" = 50' AMENDED CONCEPT PLAN Page 63 of 110

Revised 12/22/2025. *Text in red has been revised Home Leasing proposes the development of a new affordable housing complex on an +/- 10.9-acre parcel in West Seneca, NY. Home Leasing is seeking rezoning of the parcel from M 1 to R 50, allowing for multiple-family dwellings with the issuance of a special use permit by the Town Board. Home Leasing is seeking Site Plan Approval from West Seneca and HCR 9% funding from New York State. The proposed development includes ±75 units split between a re-purposing of the existing mansion on site to include apartments and one new apartment building in the rear of the property. Improvements to the existing mansion include the residential units, modifications (interior and exterior) to make the first floor ADA accessible. The project includes a private road accessing the new apartment building, parking, sidewalks, playground, landscaping and stormwater management facilities. The existing site includes the above-mentioned mansion, two barns, a stone wall along Clinton and parking areas. The barns and parking areas will be demolished, while the existing stone wall will remain, with the entrance being widened to allow for emergency vehicle access to the site. 585-262-6210 Home Leasing - Angela Eicholtz, Development Manager [email protected] 45 East Avenue, 2nd Floor Page 64 of 110

Revised 12/22/2025. *Text in red has been revised Winter 2026 Spring/Summer 2026 Spring/Summer 2026 Spring 2026 HCR - Fall 2026; DEC - Spring 2026; SHPO - Sept. 2023; DOT - Spring/Summer 2026 Spring 2026 Page 65 of 110

Revised 12/22/2025. *Text in red has been revised +/- 10.9 +/- 4.3 +/- 10.9 Page 66 of 110

Revised 12/22/2025. *Text in red has been revised +/- 75 Units (two buildings) Page 67 of 110

Revised 12/22/2025. *Text in red has been revised +/- 16,500 Page 68 of 110

Revised 12/22/2025. *Text in red has been revised +/- 112,000 +/- 2.5 +/- 476,963 +/- 10.9 Page 69 of 110

Page 70 of 110

Page 71 of 110

Page 72 of 110

Page 73 of 110

Page 74 of 110

Page 75 of 110

Revised 12/22/2025. *Text in red has been revised Angela Eicholtz 12/19/2025 Authorized Signatory Page 76 of 110

Page 77 of 110

Page 78 of 110

Revised 12/22/2025. *Text in red has been revised Page 79 of 110

Page 80 of 110

Page 81 of 110

sections 7209N and 7301 of the New York State Education Law for any person, unless acting under the direction of a registered architect, licensed engineer or land surveyor to alter this drawing. If altered such R.A., P.E. or L.L.S. shall affix his or her seal, signature, the date,the notation "Altered By" and a specific description of the alteration. All Rights Reserved. Reuse of these documents without the expressed written permission of CARMINAWOOD DESIGN is prohibited. WARNING it is a violation of article 145 Greensboro 20'x8.5' MAIL KIOSK, RPZ ENCLOSURE & BUS SHELTER Utica ACK ETB DE S 25' I 25' S S ID 1-S /ATT ES 1 TO AC W Buffalo E TBA RY HE 5U DG CK NIT AR 1 PROPOSED 1-STORY 4 UNIT BUILDING BU AGE 2 ILD S ING W/ATTACHED GARAGES 1 40' FRO 1 9 NT 2 2 SET ING PROPOSED 1-STORY 4 UNIT BUILDING ILD BAC 2 B U NIT GES 30' REAR SETBACK 1 K W/ATTACHED GARAGES 8 U Y 4 RA 2 1 S T OR D GA 1- CHE O SED ATTA P / PRO W 4 Multifamily Development 1 EMERGENCY VEHICLE TURNAROUND 25' SIDE SETBACK STORM WATER EXISTING CEMETERY MANAGEMENT AREA 1425 & 1475 Orchard Park Rd BACK WETLAND BOUNDARY T DE SE 25' SI 100-FT WETLAND BUFFER 1 2 1 3 1 2 1 3 1 2 1 © CARMINA WOOD DESIGN West Seneca, NY PROPOSED 1-STORY 4 UNIT BUILDING PROPOSED 1-STORY 4 UNIT BUILDING PROPOSED 1-STORY 4 UNIT BUILDING EX. CHURCH W/ATTACHED GARAGES W/ATTACHED GARAGES W/ATTACHED GARAGES 1475 ORCHARD PARK ROAD 30' REAR SETBACK Date 100-FT WETLAND BUFFER No. Description WETLAND BOUNDARY REVISIONS: WETLAND BOUNDARY 100-FT WETLAND BUFFER ARY CTION CONSTRU 25' SIDE SETBACK PRELIMIN NOT FOR SITE DATA ( REZONED TO C-1 (S) ) - 1425 & 1475 ORCHARD PARK RD - 16.59 ACRES MULTI-FAMILY ALLOWED BY SPECIAL PERMIT Site Plan MIN. LOT WIDTH = 50 FT FOR FIRST DWELLING UNIT, PLUS 10 FT FOR EACH ADDITIONAL UNIT NEED NOT EXCEED 100 FT SCALE: 1"=50' MIN. LOT AREA = 8,000 SF FOR FIRST DWELLING UNIT, PLUS 5,000 FOR EACH ADDITIONAL DWELLING UNIT FRONT SETBACK = 40 FT 1 SIDE SETBACK = 25 FT MIN. OR A DISTANCE EQUAL 2 HGT. TO OF SUCH BUILDING, WHICHEVER IS GREATER DRAWING NAME: REAR SETBACK = 30 FT or EQUAL TO THE HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT = 40 FT (MULTI-FAMILY) Site Plan DRIVEWAY: 30 FT WIDE REQUIRED FOR MULTI-FAMILY Concept DWELLING SIZE: 500 SF EACH MULTI-FAMILY UNIT GROUP DWELLING: NO BUILDING SHALL BE NEARER TO ANY OTHER PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE THAN A DISTANCE EQUAL TO THE AVERAGE HEIGHT OF SUCH BUILDINGS Date: 12/22/25 Drawn By: A. Pandolfe DENSITY CALCULATION (16.59 AC) Scale: As Noted PARKING CALCULATION: REQ'D = 8,000 SF FOR FIRST DWELLING UNIT, PLUS 5,000 FOR EACH DRAWING NO. NOTE: BOUNDARY AND TOPOGRAPHIC INFORMATION PROVIDED BY OTHERS, MULTI-FAMILY: ADDITIONAL DWELLING UNIT CARMINA WOOD DESIGN ASSUMES NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR ITS ACCURACY. REQ'D = 2 SPACES PER UNIT + 5/25 UNITS VISITORS REQ'D = 2 SPACES x 29 UNITS + (29/25 x645)SPACES = TOTAL PROVIDED = 56 SPACES + 29 GARAGE SPACES 85 SPACES = ALLOWED NUMBER OF UNITS: 1ST UNIT: 722,660 SF - 8,000 SF = 714,660 SF REMAINING ADDITIONAL UNITS: 714,660 SF / 5,000 SF = 142 UNITS 50' 50 0 50 100Ft. C-100 TOTAL ALLOWED UNITS = 143 UNITS Project No: 23-4121 Page 82 of 110

Short Environmental Assessment Form Part 1 - Project Information 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 public review, and may be subject to further verification. Complete Part 1 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 current information. Complete all items in Part 1. You may also provide any additional information 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: Multifamily Development Project Location (describe, and attach a location map): 1475 Orchard Park Road, West Seneca, NY Brief Description of Proposed Action: Construction of three (3) 4-unit multifamily buildings with associated parking, stormwater management, on-site utility improvements, site lighting and landscaping. The site is currently zoned C-1 & R-75, it is proposed to rezone the entire site to C-1(s) to allow the development. Name of Applicant or Sponsor: Telephone: 716-842-3165 William Sahlem & Brian Hillery c/o Anthony J. Pandolfe, PE (Carmina Wood Design) E-Mail: [email protected] Address: 80 Silo City Row, Suite 100 City/PO: State: Zip Code: Buffalo NY 14203 1. 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. 2. Does the proposed action require a permit, approval or funding from any other government Agency? NO YES If Yes, list agency(s) name and permit or approval: Planning Board (site plan), ZBA (variances), NYSDOT (curb cut), NYSDEC (SPDES Permit) ✔ 3. a. Total acreage of the site of the proposed action? __________ 16.59+/- acres b. Total acreage to be physically disturbed? __________ 9.0+/- acres c. Total acreage (project site and any contiguous properties) owned or controlled by the applicant or project sponsor? 16.59+/- acres __________ 4. Check all land uses that occur on, are adjoining or near the proposed action: 5. Urban Rural (non-agriculture) Industrial ✔ Commercial ✔ Residential (suburban) □ Forest Agriculture Aquatic ✔ Other(Specify): School, church □ Parkland Page 1 of 3 Page 83 of 110

5. Is the proposed action, NO YES N/A a. A permitted use under the zoning regulations? ✔ b. Consistent with the adopted comprehensive plan? ✔ NO YES 6. Is the proposed action consistent with the predominant character of the existing built or natural landscape? ✔ 7. Is the site of the proposed action located in, or does it adjoin, a state listed Critical Environmental Area? NO YES If Yes, identify: ________________________________________________________________________________ ✔ NO YES 8. a. Will the proposed action result in a substantial increase in traffic above present levels? ✔ b. Are public transportation services available at or near the site of the proposed action? ✔ c. Are any pedestrian accommodations or bicycle routes available on or near the site of the proposed action? ✔ 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: _____________________________________________________________________________________________ ✔ _____________________________________________________________________________________________ 10. Will the proposed action connect to an existing public/private water supply? NO YES If No, describe method for providing potable water: _________________________________________ ✔ _____________________________________________________________________________________________ 11. Will the proposed action connect to existing wastewater utilities? NO YES If No, describe method for providing wastewater treatment: ______________________________________ ✔ _____________________________________________________________________________________________ 12. a. Does the project site contain, or is it substantially contiguous to, a building, archaeological site, or district NO YES which is listed on the National or State Register of Historic Places, or that has been determined by the Commissioner of the NYS Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation to be eligible for listing on the ✔ State Register of Historic Places? ✔ b. Is the project site, or any portion of it, located in or adjacent to an area designated as sensitive for archaeological sites on the NY State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) archaeological site inventory? 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? ✔ 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: _____________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________________ Page 2 of 3 Page 84 of 110

14. Identify the typical habitat types that occur on, or are likely to be found on the project site. Check all that apply: □Shoreline □ ✔ Forest Agricultural/grasslands Early mid-successional ✔ Wetland □ Urban ✔ Suburban 15. Does the site of the proposed action contain any species of animal, or associated habitats, listed by the State or NO YES Federal government as threatened or endangered? ✔ 16. Is the project site located in the 100-year flood plan? NO YES ✔ NO YES 17. Will the proposed action create storm water discharge, either from point or non-point sources? If Yes, ✔ a. Will storm water discharges flow to adjacent properties? ✔ b. Will storm water discharges be directed to established conveyance systems (runoff and storm drains)? ✔ If Yes, briefly describe: _____________________________________________________________________________________________ Storm water runoff will be conveyed to an existing on-site ditch. _____________________________________________________________________________________________ 18. Does the proposed action include construction or other activities that would result in the impoundment of water NO YES or other liquids (e.g., retention pond, waste lagoon, dam)? If Yes, explain the purpose and size of the impoundment:______________________________________________ Storm water detention area(s) will be designed in accordance with local and State requirements. ✔ ____________________________________________________________________________________________ _ Has the site of the proposed action or an adjoining property been the location of an active or closed solid waste 19. NO YES management facility? If Yes, describe: _______________________________________________________________________________ ✔ _____________________________________________________________________________________________ 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? If Yes, describe: _______________________________________________________________________________ ✔ _____________________________________________________________________________________________ I CERTIFY THAT THE INFORMATION PROVIDED ABOVE IS TRUE AND ACCURATE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE Applicant/sponsor/name: ____________________________________________________ Anthony J. Pandolfe, PE Date: 12/23/25 __________________________ _____________________ Project Engineer Signature: _____________________________________________________Title:__________________________________ PRINT FORM Page 3 of 3 Page 85 of 110

EAF Mapper Summary Report Tuesday, November 4, 2025 3:47 PM Disclaimer: The EAF Mapper is a screening tool intended to assist project sponsors and reviewing agencies in preparing an environmental assessment form (EAF). Not all questions asked in the EAF are answered by the EAF Mapper. Additional information on any EAF question can be obtained by consulting the EAF Workbooks. Although the EAF Mapper provides the most up-to-date digital data available to DEC, you may also need to contact local or other data sources to confirm data provided by the Mapper or to obtain data not provided by the Mapper. Part 1 / Question 7 [Critical Environmental No Area] Part 1 / Question 12a [National or State Yes Register of Historic Places or State Eligible Sites] Part 1 / Question 12b [Archeological Sites] Yes Part 1 / Question 13a [Wetlands or Other Digital mapping data are not available or are incomplete. Refer to EAF Regulated Waterbodies] Workbook. Part 1 / Question 15 [Threatened or No Endangered Animal] Part 1 / Question 16 [100 Year Flood Plain] No Part 1 / Question 20 [Remediation Site] No Short Environmental Assessment Form - EAF Mapper Summary Report Page 86 of 110 1

12/23/25 Multifamily Development 1475 Orchard Park Road (100 ft northwest of Reserve Road) Carmina Wood Design c/o Anthony Pandolfe 716-842-3165 80 Silo City Row, Suite 100, Buffalo, NY 14203 William Sahlem & Brian Hillery 2260 Southwestern Blvd., West Seneca, NY 14224 Carmina Wood Design 716-842-3165 80 Silo City Row, Suite 100, Buffalo, NY 14203 152.07-1-1 & 143.19-1-9 Construction of three (3) 4-unit multifamily buildings with associated parking, stormwater management, on-site utility improvements, site lighting and landscaping. 16.59 ac. 13.38 ac. Orchard Park Road - 258-ft C-1 & R-75 C-1(S) Daycare/vacant land Multifamily Gas station (C-2 (S)), church, daycare, school, single-family homes (C-1 and/or R-75) ✔ ✔ Site Plan Approval Page 87 of 110

Page 88 of 110

Page 89 of 110

Page 90 of 110

Page 91 of 110

Page 92 of 110

Page 93 of 110

Page 94 of 110

Page 95 of 110

Page 96 of 110

Page 97 of 110

Page 98 of 110

Page 99 of 110

Page 100 of 110

Page 101 of 110

Page 102 of 110

Page 103 of 110

Page 104 of 110

Page 105 of 110

Page 106 of 110

Page 107 of 110

Page 108 of 110

Page 109 of 110

Page 110 of 110