Town of Clarence Planning Board·July 15, 2026
Skyline Hotel cleared · Car condos on 99-year leases · Transit Road density · Three votes, no dissent
The Planning Board moved three projects in 84 minutes Wednesday, granting development plan approval to Lucas James's 27-room Skyline Hotel and Restaurant at 9485 Main Street — the final board action before construction on a 9.5-acre lot that has sat vacant largely because of the bedrock underneath it — and clearing Clarence Motor and Sport's 55-unit automotive storage campus at the southwest corner of Goodrich and County Roads, where units will be conveyed not by sale but by 99-year lease. Both carried 15 conditions and passed 7–0, as did the night's third item: the board took lead agency and opened a coordinated environmental review of PB Investors, LLC's bid to add 10 apartments to an already-approved Transit Road mixed-use project, a density increase that still needs a variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals. Neighbors raised traffic, noise, lighting and rock-chipping. And the board struck one of its own standard lighting conditions after noticing it assumed the hotel would close at night.
Nearly two years after the Town Board sent it over, the Skyline Hotel and Restaurant got the last approval it needs from the Planning Board. Director of Community Development Jonathan Bleuer[*] laid out the road it had traveled — referral in September 2024, a coordinated environmental review that November, a negative declaration and concept approval with 20 conditions in January, a landscape sign-off in March, an engineering sign-off in June — and then noted the part that mattered: "an approval this evening would constitute the final board action prior to construction."
Applicant Lucas James, who is building it, declined the invitation to add anything. "I think you did an exemplary job," he told Bleuer[*]. Board member Gregory Todaro[*] took the lead and walked him through the concerns carried over from the concept hearing: the viewshed and noise for the neighbors behind the site, snow storage, the stone wall along Main Street ("it's really not optional. I actually have to build it"), the dumpster enclosure, and where the mechanical equipment would go. James answered that one with the meeting's driest line — his mechanical contractor, he said, would love to put a huge fan on the front of the building because it would be easier, "I, of course, will not allow him to do so."
Lighting took the longest. The board pressed on dark-sky compliance, the 15-foot pole limit, downward shielding, and what the third-floor patio would look like after dark. Then it ran into its own boilerplate. The standard condition turns site lighting off "one hour after close of business" — but, as one member pointed out, a hotel does not close. Todaro[*] struck the clause, leaving the requirement that overnight lighting be dimmed as far as feasible with full cutoff shields; the second and the applicant agreed on the spot.
James answered the traffic question with a threshold: the state DOT requires a traffic impact study when a project is expected to add 100 cars or more, and the study filed for this one put the increase at roughly 40 to 55. He conceded the corner is congested and declined to pretend otherwise — the lot is empty commercial land, someone will build on it, "and whoever develops it, looks like it's probably going to be me here, is going to have to deal with that traffic." On the rock: no blasting, but there will be chipping, in business hours, not Sundays. On alcohol: none leaves the building, patio included. The board asked James whether he had heard, understood and agreed to all 15 conditions. He had. The roll call was 7–0.
Two of the night's three items were described as "development plan approval of a conceptually approved" project — jargon that hides why the meeting mattered.
Concept approval is the board's yes in principle: the use fits, the layout works, now go solve the details. Development plan approval is the board's last look at those details once engineering, landscape and outside agencies have signed off.
Bleuer[*] flagged it for both the hotel and the car-storage campus: an approval "would constitute the final board action prior to construction." After Wednesday, neither project returns to this board. The next stop is the building department.
Clarence Motor and Sport also reached its final board action Wednesday — and it took even longer to get there. Bleuer[*] dated the referral to January 2023, environmental review to August 2023, and the negative declaration and 17-condition concept approval to December 2024. Engineering cleared the development plan this month. On roughly 10.6 vacant acres in the industrial business park zone at the southwest corner of Goodrich and County Roads, applicants Leonard and Julie Higgins[*] will build single-story buildings of individual units for storing cars and recreational vehicles, with access points on both roads.
Engineer Michael Metzger[*] noted one change from the approved concept: 55 units, not 56. Otherwise the layout was identical.
Board member Daniel Tytka[*] led, and spent his time on what happens inside the units. Would anyone run a business out of one? Change oil into a floor drain? Live there? Leonard Higgins[*] said the units are for storage and light personal use — "this is high-end stuff. Most people's idea of working on their cars is washing them" — and Metzger[*] said there are no floor drains at all, which is why no oil-water separator is required; runoff goes to sumped catch basins, pre-treatment and bioretention before it leaves the site.
Deputy Town Attorney David Donohue[*] asked to amend condition 11 so the town could review the proposed lease itself, not just bylaws and restrictions — and added a caution the applicants may not have expected: on a 99-year lease, a code violation inside a unit lands on the owner too, not only the tenant. The motion was amended to add the lease, and amended again when a member noticed condition 13 had dropped the word "review" from State Environmental Quality Review Act. Approved 7–0.
The units were originally going to be sold. They will instead be leased — for 99 years, which is close enough to a sale that the board asked twice to be sure it had heard right.
The reason is the septic system. Selling the units individually would have required assurances to the state DEC about a shared system the town board did not want to take on. Long-term leases keep the Higginses[*] as the single owner of record — and, as the town attorney noted, as the party the code still holds responsible.
The practical effect for a buyer: you get a 99-year lease and a deed restriction, not a deed. The town will review the lease before any certificate of occupancy issues.
One neighbor spoke. Ryan Sandler[*], of Pine Meadows Drive[*], asked whether vehicle maintenance and air tools would be allowed, and warned that more cars at that corner would mean more noise. Chairman Robert Sackett drew the line where the board's authority ends: on the prospect of owners laying rubber down County Road, "you can't speak to people speeding down the road" — that is a police matter, not a site plan condition. On the tools, the board settled on a distinction it asked the applicants to carry into the lease: taking bolts off a wheel is not collision work.
The one item that did not get approved Wednesday was the only one that never asked to be. PB Investors, LLC returned to the board for conceptual review of a density increase at 5695 and 5731 Transit Road — a 10-acre site on the east side of Transit south of Highland Farms Drive, already approved for 22,810 square feet of commercial space and 84 multifamily units. The applicant wants 94 units instead: three new four-unit townhomes where detached garages were approved, plus one more toward the center, less two units removed from the mixed-use building. Commercial space is unchanged.
Board member Jason Geasling[*] asked the obvious question — why now? The answer was economics. The developer[*] said the townhomes are phase two, waiting on the balance of the sewers, and that roughly two years have passed since approval while building costs climbed: "with our short delay here, we're looking to add some units for economic reasons." Chris Wood[*] of Carmina Wood Morris Design[*] noted the new townhomes sit farther from the property line than the garages they replace — about 84 feet, against 45.
Carrie Klasser[*], whose Highland Farms Drive house backs onto the site, asked about the tree line, the berms, the lighting, construction hours, and the access road onto Highland Farms across from the middle school. The answers: the lighting plan is unchanged, the tree line falls outside the limit of disturbance and stays, green space behind the townhomes increases, and the site now has three points of egress rather than the single one approved earlier — Highland Farms, Transit, and Roll Road through the former Clover senior apartment property. Build-out, about 15 months, working roughly seven to five.
Geasling[*] moved to accept the Part 1 Environmental Assessment Form, seek lead agency status and commence a coordinated review of the unlisted action. That passed 7–0 — and it starts the process rather than finishing it. Bleuer[*] noted the density increase would still need a variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals.
All three motions carried 7–0 by roll call, read by Senior Clerk Typist Amy Major. Seated: Chairman Robert Sackett, Vice-Chair Richard Bigler, 2nd Vice-Chair Wendy Salvati[*], and members Jason Geasling[*], Daniel Tytka[*], Keith Lukowski and Gregory Todaro[*]. No recusals.
Moved by Todaro[*], seconded, approving the development plan per the submitted plan by DEL Resource[*] dated May 14, 2026 and final architectural drawings by Dean Architects[*] dated May 8, 2026, subject to 15 conditions — among them engineering and building department sign-off before any permit, the landscape committee's March 10, 2026 approval with maintenance in perpetuity, dark-sky compliant and shielded lighting with no freestanding fixture above 15 feet, screened mechanicals, closed dumpster enclosures, no outside storage, a bar on converting hotel rooms to multiple-family housing, a temporary conditional permit for any future outside commercial operation, sign review, and open space fees.
Amended before the vote: the clause turning site lighting off one hour after close of business was struck, on the ground that a hotel has no close of business; the overnight dimming and full-cutoff shielding requirement remains. Mover, second and applicant all agreed. James confirmed on the record that he heard, understood and agreed to all 15 conditions.
Moved by Geasling[*], seconded, pursuant to Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law: accept the Part 1 Environmental Assessment Form as submitted, seek lead agency status, and commence a coordinated review among involved and interested agencies on the proposed PB Investors LLC mixed-use project in the commercial and restricted business zones. Classified an unlisted action.
This is the start of environmental review, not a decision on the added units. Bleuer[*] noted the residential density increase would additionally require variance consideration by the Zoning Board of Appeals.
Moved by Tytka[*], seconded, approving the development plan (SBL 44.00-1-51.2) per the submitted plan by Metzger Civil Engineering[*] dated February 14, 2025 with a final revision of June 12, 2026, and final architectural drawings by Sutton Architecture[*] dated June 18, 2026, subject to 15 conditions — including the landscape committee's June 9, 2026 approval, dark-sky lighting, screened mechanicals, no outside storage of unlicensed vehicles or parts, and a requirement that property restrictions and bylaws prohibit residential live-in and commercial operations and confine use to the stated business plan of customizable storage for personal storage, leisure and recreation.
Amended twice before the vote: condition 11 was expanded at the Deputy Town Attorney's[*] request to require submission of the lease or proposed lease agreement, not just bylaws and restrictions; and condition 13 was corrected to read State Environmental Quality Review Act. Mover, second and applicants agreed to both.
This brief is built from the livestream of the 7:00 p.m. public meeting and the Town's official agenda for July 15, 2026. The Planning Board's 6:30 p.m. work session — which the agenda says covers State Environmental Quality Review Act items and a review of the agenda — is not broadcast, and is not reflected here except where its work surfaced in the public meeting.
The agenda governs proper nouns and it corrected the audio in two places: the applicant on Item 3 is Clarence Motor and Sport (the broadcast rendered it "Clearance"), and Item 1's parcel is 9485 Main Street. Street names were validated against the Town's official street index: the road the audio calls "Gunville" is officially Gunnville Road, and the street a speaker gave as "Pine Meadow" is Pine Meadows Drive.
Two limitations worth stating plainly. First, the agenda lists "Approval of Meeting Minutes," but no such motion appears in the broadcast; it is not included in the motions list above. Second, the opening roll call as captured names only four members, though all seven answered every subsequent roll-call vote — an artifact of the recording, not an attendance question. The councilman who led the Pledge is not identified here: the audio renders his name in a form no official source confirms, and we would rather leave it out than guess.
Names carrying [*] were corrected from likely transcription errors against the Town's verified Planning Board roster or the agenda. Applicants' representatives, engineers, architects and residents appear only in audio — agendas list entities, not people — so those names remain unverified until official minutes post. "Chris Wood" of Carmina Wood Morris Design is flagged with particular caution: a prior meeting rendered the same firm's representative differently, and the surname may be the audio borrowing from the firm.