Skip to content
Home » Ontario County » Victor » Victor planning board debates driveway safety, parking and lot layout last week

Victor planning board debates driveway safety, parking and lot layout last week

The Victor Planning Board spent much of its meeting last week weighing site safety, septic design and long-standing neighborhood impacts as it reviewed several residential and commercial applications, approving one project while tabling or continuing others for additional information.

The meeting opened with some agenda adjustments, with several high-profile items — including proposals at Eastview Mall and the Lehigh Place planned development — removed and deferred to January.

Baker Road home raises driveway and wetland concerns

The board held a public hearing on the Centola site plan for a single-family home on a two-acre lot on Baker Road, part of the previously approved Vincent Subdivision. The applicant said the home would use public water and a private septic system, with percolation tests completed and reviewed by consultants.

Discussion focused heavily on the proposed driveway location near the intersection of Baker and Valentine roads. Town staff noted that the available sight distance — about 270 feet to the intersection — falls short of typical standards for a 40-mile-per-hour roadway, though they acknowledged topography and wetlands limit alternative placements.

An adjacent property owner, Melissa Allen of 175 Baker Road, told the board traffic already moves quickly downhill toward the intersection and said exiting her own driveway can be challenging.

Additional questions were raised about potential state wetland jurisdiction under updated 2025 regulations and the need for a response from the state Department of Environmental Conservation. Staff also requested updated site plans addressing driveway context, septic details and agency comments before any approval. The public hearing was closed, but no decision was made, with the application expected to return after revisions.

Benson Road home review centers on septic design and access

A second public hearing was held for the Barber site plan, a proposed single-family home on 18.2 acres on Benson Road. While the applicant reported completed percolation tests and water authority sign-off, board members and staff focused on the complexity of the proposed septic system and its proximity to the driveway.

Board members also questioned whether the gravel driveway length and turnaround area would meet emergency access needs, asking the applicant to review fire truck maneuvering and submit additional details. With staff review ongoing, the public hearing was closed without action.


Forte Studios approved with parking reduction

The board approved the Forte Studios LLC site plan for a change of use at 1290 Blossom Drive, allowing conversion of nearly 10,000 square feet of existing space into a visual and performing arts center primarily serving children.

Owner Joseph Johnson described the operation as an after-school program with occasional evening or weekend performances. He said large gatherings would occur outside normal business hours for neighboring tenants, limiting parking conflicts. Maximum occupancy was revised from 175 to 150 people.

After discussing shared parking availability and confirming that no significant environmental impacts were identified, the board issued a negative declaration under the State Environmental Quality Review Act and approved the site plan. The approval included a reduction in required parking from 75 to 73 spaces and standard conditions related to code enforcement and move-in permits.

Cheshire Ridge subdivision sparks extended debate

The lengthiest discussion of the night came during the public hearing on the Cheshire Ridge preliminary and final subdivision, which proposes creating two new single-family lots from Cobblestone Creek Country Club property.

Board members, neighbors and the applicant debated how to address landscaping and extremely tight side setbacks affecting an existing home on Sheffield Court, where the structure sits only a few feet from the property line. Neighbors said they believed the adjacent land had been represented years earlier as permanent open space. The applicant countered that no conservation easement or restriction was ever placed on the land.

After extensive discussion, the applicant proposed retaining five-foot strips of land on each side of the new lots under club ownership, paired with landscape easements to preserve existing plantings and access. While some board members viewed the concept as a potential compromise, town staff recommended delaying any resolution until revised subdivision maps and clearer easement documentation are submitted. No vote was taken.