BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: John McMichael
Russ Shultis, Chairman
ALSO PRESENT: Miles Putman, Shuster Associates, Planning Board Consultant
At 7:03 pm, Chairman Russ Shultis called the meeting of the Town of Esopus Planning Board to order beginning with the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. Russ then advised the public of the building’s fire exits, and roll call was taken.
It was noted that the minutes from the May 19, 2004 Planning Board Workshop meeting as well as the minutes from the May 27th monthly Planning Board meeting needed approving. Chairman Shultis noted that there was a question about the LaMirage application from last month which the Board needed to revisit so he wondered if the Board wanted to amend the 5/27 minutes with what is discussed later on in the meeting or proceed with minute approvals. Kathy Weitze felt any further discussion on LaMirage should be in the new minutes. RUSS SHULTIS THEN MADE A MOTION, SECONDED BY LINDA SMYTHE, THAT THE PLANNING BOARD APPROVE THE WORKSHOP MINUTES WITH THE CORRECTION THAT THE DATE BE CHANGED FROM APRIL 19 TO MAY 19, AND IN ADDITION, THE BOARD APPROVE THE PLANNING BOARD MEETING MINUTES FROM MAY 27TH. ALL MEMBERS PRESENT, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF DENNIS SURACI WHO VOTED NO, WERE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION WHICH CARRIED BY A 6-1 VOTE.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY ROXANNE PECORA AND SECONDED BY DENNIS SURACI TO ACCEPT ALL VOUCHERS SUBMITTED AND READ. ALL MEMBERS PRESENT WERE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION WHICH PASSED BY A 7-0 VOTE.
The vouchers submitted and read were as follows:
Daily Freeman....................(Mahairas Public Hearing/Escrow).....................
The Chazen Companies....(Small Escrow)..................................................... $ 117.00
Daily Freeman....................(Morris Public Hearing)...................................... $ 15.52
Kristy L. Nelson.................(5/22/04 - 6/18/04)............................................... 36 Hrs.
PUBLIC HEARINGS & OLD BUSINESS
COOPER - (2004-05) - 611 Ol
d Post Road, West Esopus, NY
5 Lot Major Re-Subdivision
Tax SBL #71.002-3-19.1
Dennis Cooper was present at this meeting. The applicant is proposing a 5 lot major re-subdivision in an R-40 district with substantial road frontage. Lots will range from 2 to 8 1/3 acres. There is one existing dwelling. KATHY WEITZE MADE A MOTION, SECONDED BY DENNIS SURACI, THAT THE PLANNING BOARD OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR COOPER. ALL MEMBERS PRESENT WERE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION WHICH CARRIED BY A 7-0 VOTE. Chairman Shultis called for public comment. None was made. KATHY WEITZE MADE A MOTION, SECONDED BY DENNIS SURACI, THAT THE PLANNING BOARD CLOSE THE COOPER PUBLIC HEARING. ALL MEMBERS PRESENT WERE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION WHICH CARRIED BY A 7-0 VOTE.
Chairman Shultis requested that the minutes reflect that he received a call from K. Defray of the Ulster County Dept. of Highways and Bridges who indicated that, after research, it was determined that what is shown on the map as the existing crushed stone drive which serves the existing barn has been there so there is no need to take it off of the map. At this time, Chazen Engineering’s engineering review of June 23, 2004 was reviewed. A copy of the same is on file and a copy was given to Mr. Cooper. It was suggested that in response to item 4. of Chazen’s review, the dashed line along the bottom of the map that runs along the property line of Lot 5 regarding the wetland be eliminated and a notation added stating that the wetland continues onto the neighboring property. In addition, the Planning Board felt item 6. should be handled by the County Dept. of Highway by having them sign off on it. Fred Zimmer felt what was being asked for in Chazen’s review was a lot of information. Mr. Cooper wondered if it would be acceptable to put this proposal on four (4) separate surveys/plats and turn them in as they go about them. He stated that the plan is to start one in Sept., the next the following April/May, and then the last two (2) the following fall. Russ Shultis felt once Nancy Clark of Chazen Engineering gets the data from the applicant’s engineer pertaining to item 1., her response would probably be that an erosion and grading plan are needed. Fred felt this was a little excessive. Miles Putman stated that by showing this information on the subdivision plan, the Board is providing a template or baseline for all the future lot owners. This information also feeds into the Planning Board’s determination on this project whether its SEQR or additions to the plat approval. Mr. Cooper’s engineer will contact Nancy Clark of Chazen Engineering to discuss items 1. through 4.
WALLENSTEIN/MCCARRON - (2004-006) - 322 Schultz Lane, May Park, NY
Conditional Use Permit w/Site Plan
Mr. McCarron was present at this meeting. The applicants propose to construct an enclosed “arena” that would cover an existing outdoor horse riding ring. ROXANNE PECORA MADE A MOTION, SECONDED BY DENNIS SURACI, THAT THE PLANNING BOARD OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR WALLENSTEIN & MCCARRON, CASE #2004-006. ALL MEMBERS PRESENT WERE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION WHICH CARRIED BY A 7-0 VOTE. Chairman Shultis then called for audience comments. None were made. ROXANNE PECORA MADE A MOTION, SECONDED BY LINDA SMYTHE, TO CLOSE THE WALLENSTEIN & MCCARRON PUBLIC HEARING. ALL MEMBERS PRESENT WERE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION WHICH CARRIED BY A 7-0 VOTE.
Board Member Kathy Weitze felt the applicants have fulfilled all of
the Board’s requests from the last meeting. It was noted that there
was no revision date on the site plan. In addition, Russ Shultis
wondered if the Planning Board should address outside lighting, fire protection,
and consider a condition that in the future no horses are
actually boarded here; it is not to be converted into a boarding stable. Discussion was had. ROXANNE PECORA MADE A MOTION, SECONDED BY KATHY WEITZE, THAT THE PLANNING BOARD APPROVE THE WALLENSTEIN/MCCARRON APPLICATION, CASE 2004-06, WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
· THE REVISION DATES BE INCLUDED ON THE MAPS.
· THE APPLICANTS UNDERSTAND THAT THEY ARE TO ADHERE TO ZONING CODE SECTION 123-11C.2.b. WHICH ALSO STATES THAT THE RIDING AREA IS NOT A PLACE WHERE ANIMALS ARE KEPT. IT IS NOT A KEEPING AREA AND, THEREFORE, THE SETBACK OF 150’ IS NOT REQUIRED.
AND, IT RENDER A DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE PURSUANT TO SEQR; AND GRANT CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT. ALL MEMBERS PRESENT WERE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION WHICH CARRIED BY A 7-0 VOTE. Mr. McCarron was advised that the Building Dept. would not issue a building permit until they have an approved site plan and the Planning Board would not sign the site plan until the revision date is added to the maps.
HUTH - (2004-012) - 47 Poppletown Road, Esopus, NY
Conditional Use Permit w/Site Plan
Tax SBL #71.2-2-27.1
Barbara Huth, her son-in-law, and Charlie Wesley, her draftsman, were present at this meeting. This proposal is for the construction of a 950 sq. ft. accessory apt. on a site where a previous house was located that was destroyed by fire. KATHY WEITZE MADE A MOTION, SECONDED BY FRED ZIMMER, THAT THE PLANNING BOARD OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR HUTH. ALL MEMBERS PRESENT WERE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION WHICH CARRIED BY A 7-0 VOTE. Public comments were call for. WITH NO COMMENTS TO BE MADE, LINDA SMYTHE MADE A MOTION, SECONDED BY DENNIS SURACI, THAT THE PLANNING BOARD CLOSE THE HUTH PUBLIC HEARING. ALL MEMBERS PRESENT WERE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION WHICH CARRIED BY A 7-0 VOTE.
It was noted that the applicant had been granted a use variance and an area variance with stipulations by the Zoning Board of Appeals which must be adhered to. John McMichael wondered where the well was for the accessory apt. Mrs. Huth noted that the septic exists, but a new well would be put in. A straw poll was taken and it was felt the proposed new well should be shown on the site plan. ROXANNE PECORA MADE A MOTION, SECONDED BY LINDA SMYTHE, THAT THE PLANNING BOARD APPROVE THE HUTH APPLICATION, CASE 2004-12, WITH THE CONDITION THAT THEY SHOW THE PROPOSED LOCATION OF THE WELL AND IT IS ALSO NOTED THAT THEY HAVE RECEIVED THE APPROPRIATE VARIANCE FROM THE TOWN ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS, CASE #04-20-04-02, AND THEY NEED TO ADHERE TO THAT VARIANCE. ALL MEMBERS PRESENT WERE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION WHICH CARRIED BY A 7-0 VOTE.
PATRICK - (2004-013) - 14 Lamont Landing, Parker Avenue & Appletree
Road, Esopus, NY
3 Lot Minor Subdivision
Applicant Barbara Patrick, her attorney Richard Riseley, and her engineer
Chris Zell were all present at this meeting. This application has
been made for a three lot minor subdivision of a 105+ acre riverfront estate
parcel, situated mostly in the RF-1 district. LINDA SMYTHE MADE A
MOTION, SECONDED BY DENNIS SURACI, THAT THE PLANNING BOARD OPEN THE PUBLIC
HEARING FOR BARBARA PATRICK, CASE 2004-13. ALL MEMBERS PRESENT WERE
IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION WHICH CARRIED BY A 7-0 VOTE.
Chairman Shultis called for public comments. None were made. For the record, it was noted that a memo dated June 23, 2004 was received from the Town of Esopus Waterfront Advisory Board who found this project to be consistent with the Local Waterfront Revitalization Policy and urged that protection of the sensitive marsh area on Lot #2 be recognized when the property is developed. A copy of the same is on file. In addition, a letter dated June 21, 2004 was received from the Town of Hyde Park Planning Board regarding their concerns as follows:
· Preservation of trees, shrubs, grasses, plants and other ground
· Control of erosion.
· Control of light pollution.
A copy of the same is on file. Board Member Kathy Weitze stated, for the record, that the Town of Hyde Park is doing huge developments and she wondered if the Town of Esopus had been notified. Roxanne Pecora added this was a pattern for Dutchess County. She stated that Dutchess County has a very high focus on this side of the river, but when Ulster County comments back to them on things they will not listen to anybody on this side of the river. Roxanne felt Dutchess County was only interested in their self-interest. At this time, Attorney Richard Riseley entered the following into evidence:
· Copies of the two (2) driveway permits
· An aerial photograph of the site taken in 2001.
WITH THE EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BEING ACCEPTED BY THE BOARD, ROXANNE PECORA MADE A MOTION, SECONDED BY KATHY WEITZE, THAT THE BOARD CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. ALL MEMBERS PRESENT WERE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION WHICH CARRIED BY A 7-0 VOTE.
John McMichael asked about ZBA Chair Don Cole’s letter dated 6/8/04 to the Planning Board regarding Chairman Shultis’ interpretation request/clarification regarding two residences on one property. Russ Shultis stated that his interpretation of Don’s letter was that if a subdivision creates a lot with 2 houses on it and it in anyway creates a violation of the zoning code, then it would have to go back to the ZBA for a variance. Russ felt, in this case, because of the size of the lots, this doesn’t pertain to this application. Chairman Shultis also noted that he addressed the County on this and they felt that the Board should just make sure that, if in the future, those two houses are subdivided onto separate lots, it should be taken into account during this approval to be sure it can meet the current zoning codes. Roxanne Pecora asked about Shuster Associates comments on the turn around. Miles Putman of Shuster Associates stated that his comment from a couple months ago was basically in the order of asking whether or not the bounds of the turning easement could be put on the plat. It was noted that there was a letter (11/27/99) from former Highway Superintendent Art Cross regarding this turn around. Discussion was had and maps were reviewed. Maps will be revised with a notation regarding the turn around. KATHY WEITZE MADE A MOTION, SECONDED BY ROXANNE PECORA, THAT THE PLANNING BOARD RENDER A DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE PURSUANT TO SEQR; AND GRANT CONDITIONAL PLAT APPROVAL, SUBJECT TO SUBMISSION OF AT LEAST TEN PAPER PRINTS AND A REPRODUCIBLE MASTER PLAN, ALL SIGNED BY THE TRUSTEE, THAT SHOW THE ADDITION OF THE TURNING AREA NOTATION THAT WAS JUST SPOKE ABOUT ON THE MAPS. ALL MEMBERS PRESENT WERE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION WHICH CARRIED BY A 7-0 VOTE.
MAHAIRAS - (2002-010) - 100-120 Carney Road, Rifton, NY
6 Lot Major Subdivision
Attorney Joe Pisani and Chris Kostigannis represented the applicant
at this meeting. This proposal is for a 6 lot subdivision of 24.3
acres and it is the developer’s intent to offer the new access road to
the Town as provided for in Section 107-33 of the subdivision code.
Chazen Engineering’s review dated June 23, 2004 was discussed. A
copy of the same was given to Joe Pisani and a copy is on file. Mr.
Pisani stated that in response to Chazen Engineering’s request for a formal
easement relative to the drainage on the adjacent property as noted in
item 3., they had no problem obtaining the same. Joe noted, however,
that this was just a recommendation and not a requirement. He did
not believe the Board really needed it. Kathy Weitze noted that the
Planning Board had a letter on file from Citivision regarding the drainage,
and she felt an easement seemed to be above and beyond the initial request
for a letter. Kathy did not think it was really necessary.
Some discussion was had regarding the easement to the Town. Joe Pisani
stated that if he was the town attorney, he would say don’t get it because
somewhere down the line it might be interpreted as accepting a certain
degree of responsibility for it. Kathy Weitze felt it might create
a liability issue. Fred Zimmer felt there should be some kind of
easement between Mahairas and Citivision in case the camp ownership ever
changed. Roxanne Pecora stated that at last month’s meeting, the
Board said all that was needed was a letter from Citivision regarding the
drainage, and she did not know where Chazen Engineer was coming from.
She felt easements were liability issues and she certainly wouldn’t put
the Town into that position. Fred Zimmer did not see a need for the
Town easement as noted in item 3.c). In addition, the Board felt
item 3.d) of Chazen’s review was an editorial comment. Dennis Suraci
noted that his question on contours for the driveway on Lot 3 was satisfied
by the applicant’s engineer, and it is fine. Next, Shuster Associates
memo dated June 22 regarding SEQR documents was reviewed with Miles Putman.
This memo resulted from Shuster Associates trying to wrap this project
up. Miles noted that his office had only one EAF dated April 7 and
requested an updated one from the applicant’s engineer. Chris Kostigannis
faxed Miles a revised EAF, however, as Miles went through it, he noticed
that some of the questions that were on the state form seemed to be missing
from the one faxed. At this time, Mr. Pisani submitted eight (8)
copies of a revised Full Environmental Assessment Form which he felt fully
responded to all of Shuster Associates’ memo comments. Miles Putman
commented that given the nature of the project, which is an unlisted action,
a full EAF is not required under SEQR; it was simply asked for by the Planning
Board in order to investigate one issue, traffic, which at this point the
Board believes is not a significant issue in terms of the environmental
impact. Miles added that it was up to the Planning Board to first
accept the revised EAF and then decide if it wanted Parts II & III
filled out by his office or if it wanted to go with Parts II & III
of the short form. Based on what Miles Putman said, Kathy Weitze
felt the Board should go with the short form. Roxanne Pecora, Dennis
Suraci & John McMichael agreed. Fred Zimmer thought a long form
was needed and believed the subdivision regulations required it for a major
subdivision. Subdivision regulation 107-28.D.(2) was reviewed.
It states that the subdivider shall also file a short environmental assessment
form (short EAF), unless a full environmental assessment form is requested
by the Planning Board. Joe Pisani suggested that as was stated by
Miles, the only substantive reason why the long form was requested was
upon the question of the impact of traffic. He added that in Shuster
Associates April 15, 2004 review there are two paragraphs which specifically
address the question of traffic and says very clearly there is no significant
impact. Mr. Pisani stated that the Board has all the evidence before
it and wondered why the Board would want to lengthen this process especially
since they have been before the Board for almost 2 years now. He
felt to put this matter over for another month, to have Miles restate what
he already stated to the Board on the record, to him was just wasting everyone’s
time and the Town’s money. KATHY WEITZE MADE A MOTION, SECONDED BY
ROXANNE PECORA, THAT THE PLANNING BOARD HAVE MILES DO THE SHORT FORM, PART
II & III. ALL MEMBERS PRESENT, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF FRED ZIMMER
AND RUSS SHULTIS WHO VOTED NO, WERE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION. MOTION
CARRIED BY A 5-2 VOTE. Chairman Shultis noted that the short form
needed to be completed before the Board could make its SEQR determination.
Miles Putman stated that he could have something back to the Planning Board
within the week.
RUSS SHULTIS THEN MADE A MOTION, SECONDED BY FRED ZIMMER, THAT THE PLANNING BOARD TABLE THE MAHAIRAS APPLICATION UNTIL NEXT MONTH’S MEETING TO GIVE MILES THE TIME NECESSARY TO PREPARE THE NECESSARY EAF DOCUMENTATION. ALL MEMBERS PRESENT, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF DENNIS SURACI, ROXANNE PECORA, AND LINDA SMYTHE WHO VOTED NO, WERE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED BY A 4-3 VOTE. Dennis Suarci wondered why the Board couldn’t give the applicant approval contingent upon Miles coming back with a positive thing. Miles Putman stated that he was taught that procedurally that was out of whack. The Board really can’t make a decision on a project that is subject to SEQR before making a SEQR determination. Miles added that the bigger issue is having the SEQR documentation that supports the Board’s neg dec. Joe Pisani, for the record, commented that if they were asked more than 2 days ago to submit the information this all could have been done at previous meetings. He added this was really an inordinate delay not caused by them and one of the things in this Town that people are complaining about, and the Town Board has complained about, an inordinate delay in getting things through this Planning Board. Mr. Pisani stated this is a perfect example of something that could have been done month’s ago because their first one was submitted month’s ago and now the Board is waiting for the next meeting; another month’s delay in the building season. Joe did not feel this was anyway to treat the taxpayers and it was not fair. He added that if that is the way the Board wants to operate, he really objected to it strenuously. Chairman Shultis added into the minutes that the Board did not receive the engineer’s comments until today and his discussion with the engineer stated that there was some delay with the applicant’s engineer meeting deadlines for her to get her information. Russ stated that he would not act on an application that is incomplete when he is handed information the night of the meeting. The Board is not delaying the application; the Board has a procedure to follow.
At this time, a five (5) minute recess was taken.
IPE ASSET MANAGEMENT, LLC - (2004-09) - 740-770 Old Post Road, West
Major 11 Lot Re-Subdivision w/New Road
Tax SBL #71.002-2-42.2
John Stinemire represented the applicant at this meeting. This
proposal is for the resubdivision of 73+ acres of wooded, sloping land.
It has been revised from 15 building lots with a 3,100 ft. dead-end road
to be turned over to the Town to 11 building lots with a shorter deadend
road at 2,200 feet which still exceeds the deadend road length limit.
Miles Putman of Shuster Associates gave his application review. A
copy of the same is on file and a copy was given to Mr. Stinemire.
At this time, Chairman Shultis read into the minutes a letter from Town
Attorney Peter Matera dated June 23, 2004 to the Town of Esopus regarding
a conflict of interest and Board Member Dennis Suraci. A copy of
the same is on file. Mr. Matera suggested that Mr. Suraci not participate
or sit in on any of the discussions or vote on this application.
Chairman Shultis added that he could not make Dennis step down. Dennis
Suraci went on record saying that the reason he first stepped down was
because he was unfamiliar with the Ethics Codes in the Town of Esopus and
after reading them, he felt is was definitive that it refers to puninary
or material benefit which means money. Dennis stated he had no involvement
in this project in terms of dollars and cents nor did his son-in-law, therefore,
he did not feel there was a conflict of interest. Mr. Suarci added
that he will sit on the Board tonight and he would comment. He suggested
that if anyone had a problem with this, they should call him and address
him directly. Dennis noted that he is a professional who deals with
ethics on a daily basis and felt that was the reason he was sitting on
the Board, given his background and his 40 years of experience. Linda
Smythe went on record saying that Dennis wrote a very nice letter to the
Board which she accepted and she felt Dennis had every right to sit on
the Board. Linda was satisfied. AT THIS TIME, RUSS SHULTIS
MADE A MOTION, SECONDED BY LINDA SMYTHE, THAT THE PLANNING BOARD, CONCERNING
THE REQUEST FOR A WAIVER FOR THE LENGTH OF THE ROAD, SCHEDULE A PUBLIC
HEARING ON THIS APPLICATION FOR THURSDAY, JULY 22, AT 7:10 PM. ALL
MEMBERS PRESENT, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF RUSS SHULTIS AND LINDA SMYTHE WHO
VOTE YES, VOTED NO ON THE MOTION.
BY A 2-5 VOTE, THE MOTION DID NOT CARRY. The revised maps were then reviewed. John Stinemire submitted a letter from the Mike Cafaldo, Chief of the Esopus Fire Dept. dated June 20, 2004 regarding the road length. Chairman Shultis read this letter into the minutes. A copy of the same is on file. Roxanne Pecora stated she still had an issue with the road length. She did not think the Town’s code was unreasonable as compared to other towns, and, therefore, she did not agree with the waiver. Kathy Weitze thought the revised plan was a definite improvement that was worth consideration by the Board. She felt eliminating the tank, which seemed to be a problem and a maintenance issue, was a good thing. Dennis Suraci asked John Stinemire if he had any comments from the Highway Dept. since his waiver request letter of June 10 stated he was in the process of obtaining a comment letter from them. John stated he hadn’t gotten anything in writing from the Highway Dept., but noted that going back to the original meeting when the Town Highway Superintendent was present, the only issue he had with the longer road was with the circular turn around which was now replaced with the standard Town Highway spec hammerhead. Dennis then asked if it was Fire Chief Mike Cafaldo’s idea to eliminate the water tank. John Stinemire stated that he had a discussion with Mr. Cafaldo and his comments were they did not need the tank since there was a pond located on the other side of Old Post Road which they used before and they have sufficient hose. It was also noted that Mike Cafaldo had no problem with the grades. John Stinemire added that they do not have a problem with providing a tank if the Planning Board felt one was justified. John McMichael stated that, in general, he didn’t agree with the 2,200’ road length. He also had a problem with pumping up grade. ROXANNE PECORA MADE A MOTION, SECONDED BY LINDA SMYTHE, THAT THE PLANNING BOARD DENY THE ROAD LENGTH WAIVER. ALL MEMBERS PRESENT WITH THE EXCEPTION OF DENNIS SURACI AND KATHY WEITZE, WHO VOTE NO, WERE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED BY A 5-2 VOTE. WAIVER DENIED.
SAMTON - (2004-019) - 60 Suominens Lane, Rifton, NY
Minor 4 Lot Re-Subdivision
Miles Putman of Shuster Associates gave his application review on this case. A copy of the same is on file and a copy was given to the applicant’s representative. This proposal is for a large residential parcel situated on a dead-end Town Highway to be split into four lots, three of which will consist of vacant land. Two flag lots are proposed. Sean Doyle represented Mr. Samton at this meeting since he could not be present this evening. Maps were reviewed and discussion had. In recapping, it was suggested to Mr. Doyle that the following be done:
· Either dedicate/deed 25’ from the center line of the road to
the Town and show it on the map or provide a 25’ road reservation area
which should also be shown on the map.
· Concerning the road frontage for Lot #3, a flag lot situation requires 50’ minimum, which is not met currently. If a road dedication is made as described above, it appears the road frontage would be increased enough to meet that requirement. However, if the road is not deeded and only a reservation is given, then Lot #3 would have to be reconfigured. Also, straighten out the driveway to Lot 3.
· Look at the septics and wells on the proposed lots. Put the distances required/radius, a linear distance from the well to the septic. It was also suggested that the well and septic on Lot 3 be flipped.
· Provide 10’ contours,
· Document the utility easements on the map.
· A written request for waivers to Section 123-21.D.(5) & (6) pertaining to the flag lots is required or the lots should be redesigned.
· Driveway culverts should be added to the map.
· Notation regarding shed to be removed should be relabed as ‘sheds’ to be removed.
· Provide a bulk zoning regulation block on the map.
· Have the survey date corrected from the July 9, 2004 date as currently shown on the map.
· Provide a notation on the map for Lot 4’s boundary line regarding the stream.
· Provide written documentation of approvals from the Town Highway Dept. for access into Lots 1, 3, and 4.
Next, the waiver request was discussed. It was the Board’s feeling that this could not be voted on this evening since the Board did not have the request in writing and the applicant’s representative did not have written authorization from the applicant to act on his behalf. DENNIS SURACI MADE A MOTION, SECONDED BY KATHY WEITZE, THAT THE PLANNING BOARD TAKE A POLL TO ALLOW A MINIMUM 500’ LENGTH FLAG LOT FOR THE ROAD ENTERING THE SITE. ALL MEMBERS POLLED WERE IN FAVOR. Meeting and deadline dates were then discussed.
HILL - (2004-020) - 40-52 Floyd Ackert Road, West Park, NY
David Hill was present at this meeting. This proposal is for site
plan approval for the conversion of a frame barn into two rental dwellings.
The property is presently developed with a single family residence and
accessory buildings. The addition of two dwellings onto the parcel
would create a multifamily dwelling occupancy, a use that is not permitted
under the zoning law, and the applicant received a use variance from the
Zoning Board of Appeals.
Miles Putman of Shuster Associates gave his application review for this case. A copy of the same is on file and a copy was given to Mr. Hill. At this time, Chairman Shultis read the findings and conclusions regarding the variance from the ZBA dated June 8, 2004. Submissions were reviewed. Fred Zimmer felt a better defined site plan was needed showing more detail. It was suggested that the existing landscaping be shown on the plan and the individual parking spaces be delineated. Fred Zimmer also suggested showing the property from Floyd Ackert Road, the railroad, etc. John McMichael wanted to see topos to see if it was uphill or downhill between the well and the new treatment field. Linda Smythe requested a copy of the apt. floor plans. Mr. Hill presented the same which was reviewed and put in the file. Russ Shultis asked Mr. Hill what the response was from the ZBA concerning the CSX crossing in relation to the increase in traffic. Mr. Hill stated that the question came up about the crossing and it was noted that it is an existing crossing and there would be no increase in traffic because people are crossing it that have horses there who would now be living there and probably not crossint it as much. Russ then asked Mr. Hill when he started boarding horses. David Hill stated that they don’t board horses, the horses are on the property by the tenants that are there. They don’t accept money for horses that are there, it is the owners that are living on the property now that have the horses. Meeting and deadline dates were discussed. It was noted that this application must be referred to the Ulster County Planning Board. In addition, it was noted that a public hearing is at the discretion of the Planning Board. Mr. Hill was informed that he could ask, in writing, for the public hearing to be waived.
Presubmission Conferences - Hrichi
Mr. Samir (Sami) Hrichi explained that he was proposing to do a 3 lot subdivision of 24 acres on Soper Road for property owner Alex Harrison. Mary Parker was present with Mr. Hrichi. Maps were reviewed. Mr. Hrichi was advised that the Town has requirements for maximum slope of driveways. It was suggested that, at least, 10’ contours be shown on the survey map. In addition, Samir Hrichi was informed that the stamped, signed survey must include a bulk zoning regulation block, a planning board signature block, an owners’ consent to file block, all metes and bounds, and proposed driveways, houses, wells, and septics. A public hearing is required and the Planning Board may, given the lay of the property, require the distances from proposed wells and septics to the nearest neighbors’ well and septic be shown on the map. If engineering studies are necessary, the Planning Board would require the applicant to establish an escrow account to cover the costs of the same. Mr. Hrichi noted that they did the three septic sites already and the permits went to the Health Dept. for the same. It was suggested that any Health Dept. paperwork be submitted with the application. Roxanne Pecora stated that all driveway cut approvals would have to be submitted to the Board in writing. In concluding, Chairman Shultis advised Mr. Hrichi that the Planning Board may required him, due to the terrain, to get Board of Health approval before they would act on any application. Also, Russ noted that since Soper Road is a town road, the Planning Board would be asking the applicant to deed over 25’ from the center of the road to the Town. An alternative to this, would be a 25’ road reservation area.
At this time, Miles Putman of Shuster Associates left the meeting.
Discussions were had between ZBA member Joseph Guido and the Planning Board regarding the Hill application and the Patrick application.
One (1) Zoning Board of Appeals application (Petit) was referred to the Planning Board for comments. It was agreed that a ‘No comment’ response should be returned.
Russ Shultis noted that Mr. Magliato fixed the stone wall and the driveway. However, his concern was there is no money in any account, and if he sells the second lot, what would be done to hold him to the requirement that he has to grade the road at the end of Jordon Lane. Russ wondered if the C.O. for the house Mr. Magliato is doing now could be withheld. Discussion was had. It was the Planning Board’s feeling that this matter was out of their hands and needed to be enforced by the Zoning Enforcement Office and the Town.
LAMIRAGE - (2004-03) - 423 Broadway, Ulster Park, NY
Site Plan Amendment
Tax SBL #56.020-3-28.2
Dennis Suraci had a concern from last month’s meeting regarding LaMirage. He thought it sounded like the Board dropped the DOT comments and their approval. Dennis spoke with the DOT who said all they have done was okay the preliminary; the plans are on file but nothing has been approved, and they have curb work to do. Dennis Suraci was afraid that if LaMirage’s approval was not contingent upon DOT approval, the necessary work would not be done. Chairman Shultis noted that Miles Putman of Shuster Associates felt that since the Planning Board had not yet signed the site plan, they could reopen the case and amend the conditions. ROXANNE PECORA MADE A MOTION, SECONDED BY KATHY WEITZE, THAT THE PLANNING BOARD RE-OPEN LAMIRAGE, CASE #2004-003, AND REQUIRE THEM TO HAVE DOT A HIGHWAY WORK PERMIT PRIOR TO SIGNING THE SITE PLAN. ALL MEMBERS PRESENT WERE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION WHICH CARRIED BY A 7-0 VOTE. A letter will be sent to the applicant advising him of the same.
In response to Building Inspector Mark Rieker’s letter of June 14 regarding the Van Loan site plan, it was the Planning Board’s feeling that the applicant had not done all the work as per the approved site plan. Chairman Shultis will write a letter from the Planning Board responding to the Building Dept. It was also noted that Stone Hedge had not complied to their approved site plan.
A list of monthly correspondence received by the Planning Board was given to each Board member.
Maps for the approved DiLorenzo application were signed.
WITH NO OTHER BUSINESS PENDING, LINDA SMYTHE MADE A MOTION, SECONDED BY FRED ZIMMER, TO CLOSE THE MEETING. ALL MEMBERS PRESENT WERE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION. MEETING ADJOURNED.
Kristy L. Nelson