TOWN OF ESOPUS
PLANNING BOARD MEETING
DECEMBER 2, 2010

BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Roxanne Pecora
Fred Zimmer
Charles Wesley
William Devine
Michael Minor
Darin DeKoskie
Margaret Yost

ALSO PRESENT: Myles Putman, M.L. Putman Consulting

Chairperson Pecora called the meeting of the Town of Esopus Planning Board to order at
7:00 p.m. beginning with the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. Roxanne advised the
public of the building’s fire exits and roll call was taken.

MINUTES: Board members were asked if there were any changes or corrections to the
minutes of the October 28, 2010 meeting.

CHARLIE MADE A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE PLANNING BOARD
MINUTES OF OCTOBER 28, 2010, SECONDED BY MARGARET. VOTE WAS
AS FOLLOWS:

Charlie…………………yes
Fred……………………yes
Bill……………………..yes
Mike…………………...yes
Darin…………………..yes
Margaret……………….yes
Roxanne……………….abstained

VOUCHERS:

M.L. Putman Consulting (October, 2010)…......…………………..…….....$2,250.00
M.L. Putman Consulting (November, 2010)..……………………………...$2,250.00
M.L. Putman Consulting (December, 2010)………………………………..$2,250.00
Clough Harbour (Tucker Pond)……………….……………………………$ 402.00
Joseph Eriole, Esq. (Planning Board)…………………………..…………..$ 154.00
Daily Freeman (Hermance Public Hearing)………………………………...$ 9.45
April Oneto (Secretarial Services)……………………………………….49 1/2 hours

MIKE MADE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE VOUCHERS AS READ
SECONDED BY FRED. ALL MEMBERS WERE IN FAVOR. MOTION PASSED
WITH A VOTE OF 7-0.

Roxanne stated that there are issues to review this evening that are not on the agenda the
Board Members received. We will be discussing Port Ewen Housing to give them
direction on the road design in order to proceed. We will be discussing the typical road
design for Town roads. Fred and Darin have been working on this with Pete Lilholt in
order to get that section of the Town Code revised. We received a technical review for
Esopus Lakes and we will discuss this. Charlie has asked to be able to address the Board
regarding Tucker Pond. Everyone received a copy of the meeting schedule for 2011 and
we will briefly review this.

OLD BUSINESS:

GILPATRIC-VANVLIET FUNERAL HOME: 2010-14 – Site Plan Review – 339
Broadway (St. Hwy. 310), Port Ewen; SBL: 56.076-2-33
& 1

Charlie removed himself from the Board at 7:08 p.m. due to his involvement in the
project.

Harry VanVliet was present representing this application. Myles reviewed M.L. Putman
Consulting Report dated 11/26/10, copy was given to applicant and copy was placed in
the file.

Harry submitted revised plan dated 11/5/10 and supporting documentation that will need
to be sent to the Ulster County Planning Board so they will have a complete record.

Mike questioned the existing paved parking across from VanLoan’s Discount Beverage
and who owns it. Harry stated that they are still looking into this. This is not designated
as part of his parking.

Fred stated that applicant turned in a drainage study as requested by the Board. Darin is
looking at it and in view of the fact that it is such a small lot he would say that since we
have an engineers stamp on it we should accept it as is without sending it out to our
Planning Board engineer and having to post an escrow, etc. Fred stated that regarding
the Item 4 in the parking lot after about the second funeral in the spring the applicant will
want to pave this. Harry agrees with Fred.

Roxanne stated that we have the Ulster County Planning Board review and there is a
required modification on lighting which states that the proposal is unclear from the
materials provided. They recommend the use of more sustainable luminaries rather than
the proposed High Pressure Sodium. Roxanne stated that this is about energy conserva-
tion and we will be seeing this on probably all County Planning Board project comments
in the future. Roxanne stated that if this Board wants to overrule this modification we
will need a majority plus one.

Harry stated that the new site plan submitted was done in satisfaction of what the County
Planning Board had asked for.

MIKE MADE A MOTION TO OVERRIDE THE ULSTER COUNTY PLANNING
BOARD’S REQUIRED MODIFICATION REGARDING LIGHTING AND THAT
THIS BOARD IS SATISFIED WITH WHAT HAS BEEN PROVIDED IN THE
NEW PLANS FOR GILPATRICK/VANVLIET FUNERAL HOME, CASE #2010-
14, SITE PLAN REVIEW, SECONDED BY FRED. ALL MEMBERS WERE IN
FAVOR. MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 6-0. VOTE WAS AS
FOLLOWS:

Fred……………………….yes
Margaret…………………..yes
Darin………………………yes
Bill………………………...yes
Mike………………………yes
Roxanne…………………..yes

Darin questioned the driveway entrance being one-way in. Harry stated that it is.
Roxanne stated that they could have enter and exit signs put up. Fred stated that you can
have an exit sign in the back since you are going to enter in the front anyway.

FERGUSON: Case #201002 – (2 Lot) Subdivision – 1723 Broadway (US Route
9W; State Hwy 5508), West Park; SBL: 80.001-3-23

Roxanne removed herself from chairing this part of the meeting. Fred Zimmer will act
as Chairperson for this application. Roxanne will still remain on the Board. Darin
DeKoskie recused himself from the Board for this application.

Applicant hired a new surveyor to represent her on this action. Chris Zell, Brinnier &
Larios will be the surveyor for this project.

Myles reviewed M.L. Putman Consulting Report dated 11/26/10, copy given to
applicant’s representative.

Applicant received a variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals for Ordinance Section
123-130(1) dated 5/20/10 to allow the property line to be 96 feet from the school
building, when the required setback is 100 feet with a recommendation that the Planning
Board review drainage issues of the adjoining southerly property owned by John Busick.

Chris Zell was told that he will need a letter from the applicant giving him permission to
represent her.

Chris stated that they have an application into the Health Department and they will be
visiting the site on December 9th for inspection of the test pits. He has a driveway profile
that was not part of the submission which shows that the 12% grade can be met. They
can get a final grade of 12% anywhere on the driveway. Mike stated that he was
concerned since the Building Inspector sent a memo indicating a 27% grade in some
areas. Chris stated that it is a preliminary profile and it will need to be revised somewhat
and snake the driveway back and forth to be able to get it a little less in the lower area.
They will need a waiver of Zoning Code 123.21 because it is in excess of the flag lot
length. Mike questioned who granted that waiver. Myles stated that it is the Planning
Board’s waiver to grant.

This application will have to be referred to Waterfront Advisory Board, and a courtesy
review to Hyde Park as well as the Ulster County Planning Board. Mike stated that
Vanderbilt Mansion is right across the river. This will have to comply with the LWRP
Policy which Waterfront Board will review. He suggested a courtesy review to the
Federal Government. Discussion took place regarding this suggestion. Chris stated that
where she plans to build the house you will not be able to see any part of it from the
school. The house will be visible from across the river. It will be limited visibility based
upon how many trees need to be taken down.

Chris stated that they do request the waiver and he will submit driveway profiles. Chris
was reminded that the Board needs to receive this request in writing.

Margaret stated that she is concerned about the memo we received from Tim Keefe,
Building Inspector, regarding the last 60 feet and the 27% grade. Fred stated that they
will need to show limits of disturbance which will show the grade. Fred stated that he
and Myles felt that it could be done with 12% grade at pre-submission meeting. Chris
will just have to show the Board how they will be able to do it and he is sure it can be
done.

Roxanne stated that the biggest problem with the next door neighbor is his concern about
headlights from the school parking lot and the fact that applicant did not close off the
other driveway (entrance) off of 9W. Chris stated that she does have DOT approval for
the entrance. Roxanne stated that she feels that we need a landscaping plan to see how
well the neighbor’s property is protected. She stated that there may be a couple of trees
or shrubs put in. Chris asked if we normally request driveway screening. Roxanne
recommended that Chris come in and look at the old maps from the school file. Areas of
disturbance will need to be shown. Roxanne stated that the variance needs to be noted
on the map.

Chris will submit letter of representation and will note variance on the maps. He will
submit a request for the waiver and will provide a soil and erosion control plan, area of
disturbance and a finished road profile. Fred questioned if they will show existing
vegetation. Chris stated they can show existing vegetation. Roxanne stated that if we
see that there is a problem we will address it. Chris stated that there should not be any
headlights after dark.

Mike asked about the courtesy referral to Hyde Park. Roxanne felt that we do not need
to do that since we don’t receive these from towns across the river. Fred stated that he
does not think that a single family house warrants this referral.

MIKE MADE A MOTION TO GRANT SKETCH PLAN APPROVAL FOR
FERGUSON, CASE #2010-02, SUBDIVISION, SECONDED BY ROXANNE. ALL
MEMBERS WERE IN FAVOR. MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 6-0.
VOTE WAS AS FOLLOWS:

Charlie…………………..yes
Roxanne…………………yes
Margaret…………………yes
Bill……………………….yes
Mike……………………..yes
Fred……………………...yes

Roxanne told Chris that the referral to the Waterfront Advisory Board, Ulster County
Planning Board is done by Motion when we schedule the Public Hearing which could
happen at the January meeting if he submits the required paperwork. Planning Board’s
next deadline is January 13, 2011.

Roxanne returned as Chairperson at 7:52 p.m. and Darin returned to the Board.

NEW BUSINESS:

ANDERSON: Case #2010-16 – Lot Line Adjustment – 221 Union Center Rd (Co.
Rd. 4); Rose Lane, Ulster Park; SBL: 63.03-5-18 & 63.04-34

Applicant Kemp Anderson was present at the meeting. Myles reviewed M.L. Putman
Consulting Report dated 11/16/10, copy given to applicant and copy placed in the file.

Applicant submitted a letter requesting the waiver of the Public Hearing as per Section
107.16-A.

Mike asked applicant if there is a long range plan to do something with the larger lot.
Mr. Anderson stated that there is not and he uses it all as one lot right now. Mike stated
that his concern is that if down the road they decide to put another dwelling on this they
can not do it if it is one lot. Mr. Anderson stated that the lot he is combining it with is
really not accessible due to the stream.

Bill asked about Rose Lane. Mr. Anderson stated that Rose Lane is a private road and
there are three houses up there. Mr. Anderson stated that there are differing opinions but
it is privately maintained and as far as he knows it is a private road. Roxanne stated that
if there is no deed with the Town for this road then it is a private road.

FRED MADE A MOTION TO WAIVE THE PUBLIC HEARING AS PER
SECTION 107.16-A FOR ANDERSON, CASE #2010-16, LOT LINE
ADJUSTMENT, SECONDED BY MIKE. MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF
5-1-1. THE VOTE WAS AS FOLLOWS:

Charlie…………………yes
Fred……………………yes
Margaret……………….yes
Darin…………………...yes
Bill……………………..no
Mike…………………....abstained
Roxanne………………..yes

HEPPNER: Case #2010-17 – Special Use Permit (tow-Family Conversion) – 212
Tilden St., (Town Hwy 918), Port Ewen; SBL: 56.060-6-17

Myles stated that he thinks that the Board should have some written letters of
authorization since the deed is in several names and the mother has a life estate. Mr.
Heppner was informed that if he is not going to be at every meeting and Mr. Jankovitz is
going to represent them we will need a letter giving him permission.

Myles reviewed M.L. Putman Consulting Review dated 11/26/10, copy given to applicant
and copy placed in file.

Mr. Heppner stated that the deed is in the name of Daniel (himself), his sister Carol and
his sister Beth. His mother has a life estate.

There are some concerns about this being an undersized lot and the applicants are
requesting a Special Use Permit to convert an existing one-family residence into a two-
family dwelling. It is recommended that applicants merge two abutting properties into
one parcel by doing a lot line adjustment. Mr. Heppner stated that whatever the Board
recommends they are willing to do. Roxanne suggested that they apply for a lot line
adjustment and submit a letter requesting a waiver of the Public Hearing for the lot line
adjustment. They will need a public hearing for the Special Use Permit.

Discussion took place regarding the best way to accomplish their goal. They want to
make the house into a two-family with the mother living in the bottom of the house and
an apartment for rent in the top. If they make this a two family, they have only 1/3 of the
lot size which will require an area variance. They may want to consider getting a
variance for an accessory apartment and this way they would not have to worry about the
60,000 sq. foot lot requirement.

Mr. Heppner asked if they would still need to get the approval from the Zoning Board of
Appeals on the area variance (floor) if you go for an accessory apartment. Applicant was
told that he would. He asked if it meant that you had to have family live in the apartment
in order to make it an accessory apartment. He was told no. Mike stated that in order to
have an accessory apartment your basic living area has to be 1,500 sq. feet. Applicant
meets this requirement because he has 1,700 sq. feet. They are calling the first floor the
accessory apartment. They only issue they will have in that case is that they need to go to
the ZBA and tell them that they want to have an accessory apartment which is 1,472 sq.
feet instead of their maximum of 1,000 sq. feet.

Planning Board will do a referral to the ZBA. Myles stated that if they go for the
Accessory Apartment then this application before the Planning Board is closed.

Roxanne stated that if they were going to go to the ZBA for the Accessory Apartment and
submit an application to the Planning Board for a Lot Line Adjustment she questioned
the fee difference. The fee will be waived because they paid for this application and it
will be closed.

Roxanne will write a letter to the ZBA telling them that this applicant will be coming to
them for an Accessory Apartment.

Board took a 15 minute break at 8:45 p.m.

Meeting reopened at 9:00 p.m.

ZBA REFERERALS:

None.

MISCELLANEOUS:

KROM: Case #2010-1 – Lot Line Adjustment

Applicant is requesting an extension since his timeframe expired.

CHARLIE MADE A MOTION TO RE-APPROVE THE FINAL PLAT
APPROVAL FOR KROM, CASE #2010-1 FOR A LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT,
SECONDED BY FRED. ALL MEMBERS WERE IN FAVOR. MOTION PASSED
WITH A VOTE OF 7-0. VOTE WAS AS FOLLOWS:

Charlie…………………….yes
Fred……………………….yes
Margaret…………………..yes
Darin………………………yes
Bill………………………...yes
Mike……………………….yes
Roxanne…………………...yes

2011 MEETING SCHEDULE:
2011 Meeting Schedule reviewed. The only change suggested is that the September 6th,
2011 Pre-submission Date be changed to August 30th.

ESOPUS LAKE (a.ka. Hudson Point):

Brief discussion took placed regarding the Hudson Point Slope Stability Geotechnical
Assessment Report Review received from Pete Lilholt, Clough Harbour dated November
30, 2010.

Fred stated that he reviewed their findings and what it basically states is that the slope is
not stable and one of the ways to alleviate the problem is to take some of the weight off
of the slope.

Mike asked if Esopus LakeS does not put a road in that area off of River Road and they
build back from the ledge, which they are planning on doing; what is the property
owner’s responsibility? Fred stated that the County is saying that it is the property
owner’s responsibility and have sent a letter to the property owner telling them this. Fred
stated that he does not know what the property owner is saying but the land was there
before the County built the road. It may end up in court. Roxanne stated that the
property owner is not happy and feels that the County is singling them out. The property
owner feels that the County is looking for them to solve the County’s problem. Bill
stated that the developer can disappear very quickly and then who is responsible. Fred
stated that the developer has no responsibility at all; it is the property owner who has
responsibility. Fred stated that he does not think that the Town has any responsibility
except that our Water Plant is located down there. Fred stated that the developer has an
agreement with the property owner contingent upon approval of their project. The
developer can walk away other than the fact that they have invested a tremendous
amount of money in the project. Roxanne stated that the expense of the boulevard is
what is holding up the developer. Darin stated that he will have to spend approximately
5 million dollars before he will even be able to sell a lot. Mike questioned if the
developer can put a water line across River Road. Roxanne stated that we have the
County on record stating that they will give access across River Road.

Discussion continued regarding the slope stability issue.

TUCKER POND:

Charlie stated that they are doing some clean up on this site. They would like to come
back and pursue this application. They are concerned about the Planning Board
Engineering Reviews, the items covered and the amount of money spent on these
reviews.

The Planning Board is only supposed to deal with parking, retaining walls and
landscaping as per the Article 78 Lawsuit Stipulation. Roxanne stated that the Planning
Board agrees with this and will make sure that this is relayed to Pete Lilholt, Clough
Harbour so there is no confusion. She also stated that even though Peter provides
additional information it does not mean that the applicant is being billed for it based on
discussions she has had with him.

TYPICAL ROAD SECTION:

Roxanne stated that she has received e-mails from Port Ewen Housing engineers
regarding direction on the road for this application. They would like to get back before
this Board and we owe them an answer.

Following some discussion it was felt that we should go with the November design.

MIKE MADE A MOTION TO APPROVE THIS ROAD DESIGN FOR THIS
PROJECT AND USE THIS AS A BASE FOR LATER DEVELOPMENT FOR
THE TOWN CONTINGENT UPON HIGHWAY SUPERINTENDENT’S
APPROVAL, SECONDED BY CHARLIE. ALL MEMBERS WERE IN FAVOR.
MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 7-0. VOTE WAS AS FOLLOWS:

Charlie………………..yes
Fred…………………..yes
Margaret……………...yes
Darin…………………yes
Bill…………………...yes
Mike…………………yes
Roxanne……………..yes

This project highlighted something in the Town Code that needs to be changed. We
would like to put together a typical road section that is easier to maintain. This section
of the Town Code would need to be revised and presented to the Town Board for
approval.

CHARLIE MADE A MOTION TO ADJOURN, SECONDED BY MARGARET.
ALL MEMBERS WERE IN FAVOR. MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 7-0.
MEETING WS ADJOURNED AT 9:50 PM.

NEXT MONTHLY MEETING: JANUARY 27, 2010

DEADLINE: JANUARY 13, 2010

NEXT PRE-SUBMISSION: JANUARY 4, 2010

Respectfully submitted:

April Oneto
Planning Board Secretary