Planning Board Minutes 04/19/05

MINUTES OF APRIL 19, 2005, REGULAR MEETING
of the Town of Rochester PLANNING BOARD
held at the Town Hall, Accord, NY.

 

Meeting was called to order at 7:05 PM by Chairperson Melvyn Tapper.

 

        PRESENT: Melvyn Tapper                  ABSENT: Anthony Kawalchuk
                               Shane Ricks                            David O’Halloran, Alternate
                               Frank Striano
                               Robert Gaydos
                               Nadine Carney
                               William DeGraw

 

        THE CHAZEN COMPANIES:  Nancy Vlahos, Senior Planner

 

Pledge to the Flag

 

        VICTOR VANBORKULO c/o TACONIC DESIGN CONSULTANTS
        Continued Discussion – 6 Lot Subdivision off Millbrook Lane

 

Shane Ricks recused himself from the Board.

 

The Chairperson informed the Board that they had received the information requested by Chazen Companies from the second review letter.  The Board reviewed the information submitted.  

 

Motion was made by Ms. Carney and seconded by Mr. Gaydos to take this action as an unlisted action through SEQR .  All members present in favor.

 

Mr. Tapper advised that a letter of intent would be sent out to declare the Planning Board as Lead Agency, if interested parties did not object, the Planning Board would declare Lead Agency.  

 

Motion was made by Mr. DeGraw and seconded by Mr. Striano to send out letter of intent to declare Lead Agency.  All members present in favor.

 

Mr. VanBorkulo submitted a letter from the D.E.C. regarding endangered species and there would be no stream disturbance and the stream was classified as Type A.  He had filed a notice of intent with the D.E.C.
-1-
Ms. Vlahos recommended an engineering review regarding a storm water pollution prevention plan.

 

Ms. Carney recommended that a public hearing should not be held up based on the review as it would not make major chances to the site plan.

 

Motion was made by Mr. DeGraw and seconded by Ms. Carney to have a engineered storm water pollution prevention plan  submitted and reviewed by Chazen Companies.  All Members present in favor.

 

Motion was made by Ms. Carney and seconded by Mr. Striano to schedule a public hearing for May 17, 2005.  All Members present in favor.

 

The Planning Board agreed to prepare for a Part 2 EAF.

 

        THOMAS WARG, Discussion on subdividing property on Route 66 East St.
                                  Previous Subdivision known as Gray Subdivision

 

Mr. Warg informed the Board that the Bank would not hold a mortgage on the property with an existing a mobile home located on the premises.  The tax records show the property as one lot.  He informed the Board that he had originally purchased 5.3 acres from George Gray, Jr.  Approximately four years ago he purchased 4 more acres adjacent to the 5.3 acres.  At that time he created a lot line adjustment to combine the lots into one lot.  At this time, the Bank will not issue a mortgage unless he subdivides the mobile home off of the lot.  He informed the Board that the maps were not properly filed and the original subdivision of the property was not complete.  The Deed reflects the property as one lot and the tax records reflect one lot, however the maps were never altered.  He requested the Board to submit a letter reflecting that a subdivision approval would be granted regarding the separation of the two lots.

 

Mr. Tapper informed Mr. Warg that the Town Attorney advised the Board to submit a letter informing the Bank that the application was in the review process.

 

Mr. Tapper asked if this application should be reviewed by the Town Planner.

 

Mr. Ricks stated and Ms. Carney agreed that this application would not require the Town Planner review and that it should be one reason why the Planning Board should obtain a threshold for the review process.

 

Mr. Tapper agreed that this application is basically existing as two lots and no further changes have made.

 

Motion was made by Mr. Gaydos and seconded by Mr. Ricks that the Town Planner review shall not be required.  Ms. Carney added that the application shall meet all of the Town Subdivision Regulations.   All Members present in favor.
-2-
        MT. VIEW PHASE II, c/o DAVID HARITON
        PUBLIC HEARING, 4 Lot Subdivision, off Lucas Turnpike

 

Wayne Graff, Attorney and Edward Sprague of Medenbach & Eggers were present to represent to the application..

 

Mr. Ricks addressed the changes on the submitted map.  

 

Mr. Graff advised that the maps indicate a reduction from 6 lots to 5 lots, eliminating one lot to increase the size of the other lots and four of the lots are to be accessed by one private drive.  

 

Mr. Graff presented to the public the proposed map.

 

Ms. Carney asked if lot numbers 11 and 12 would be joined or kept as separate lots.

 

Mr. Graff answered that the lots would not be consolidated and that they would remain separate lots.

 

        OPEN TO THE PUBLIC

 

Minna Scharff asked why she was not informed of this application.

 

Mr. Tapper advised that this application has been in the process for a number of years.

 

Mr. Gaydos asked the location of the Scharff property.

 

Ms. Scharff answered that it was on Tow Path Road, across the creek from the applicant’s property.  

 

Mr. Tapper informed Ms. Scharff that she would be informed of any further hearings.

 

Mr. Sharkey inquired about the height restrictions and code requirements.

 

Ms. Carney responded that the applicant would be limited to the Density Control Schedule of the Town which is a minimum of 1 acre and the required set backs and the minimum height requirement of 35’ and maximum coverage of lot is 30%.

 

Mr. Ricks stated that the applicant had reduced the number of lots down to 5 lots with an average of 19 acres each.  

 

Mr. Graff added that if the lots were subdivided further, Subdivision Approval would be required by the Planning Board.

 

Mr. Sharkey asked about building in the Flood Plain District.
-3-
Ms. Carney responded that in order to obtain a building permit to build in the Flood Plain District an elevation flood plain special permit would be required.

 

Mr. Tapper added that it would be a Building Department permit which would not require Planning Board approval.

 

Joel Kaminski of Rondout Land asked about the Road.

 

Mr. Ricks advised that this application was previously approved by the Planning Board and that the applicant was requesting a reduction of usage.

 

Ms.Carney advised the Board that the road was designed for all Phases, I, II & III of this application.  

 

Mr. Ferro informed the Board that the original road maintenance agreement required these parties to be involved.  The Agreement allowed future agreement to use further roads and always intended to be dedicated to the Town and made a Town Road.  One of the owners did not make a contribution and as a result, they were delayed a year.  It then became too expensive to create a Town Road.  The Owners declined my offer to lend the funds to create a Town  approved road.  Separate agreement was made with owners in Mountain View Stables to pave the road with a sub-base paving which still allowed usage of the road to get further access without anyone having that access to pay for this road.  This was clearly explained by the Attorney face to face with the individuals.  It was an agreement that was made one year ago and now they want to change the agreement.

 

Mr. DeGraw asked if this agreement was in the original road maintenance agreement and did it involve the original 180’.

 

Mr. Ferro answered that it allows the owners to use the first 180’ , there is no oblation for payment.

 

Ms. Carney asked if this agreement was filed with the Town of Rochester.  She was informed that it was.

 

Heleri Gingal stated that it was her understanding that from the other home owners that an agreement with Mr. Ferro that the access from any additional lots from Mountain Stable would not come from Rondout Lane.  The burden of all construction related traffic would fall on the existing home owners and not on the proposed developer (applicant.) of this property.  It would be an unreasonable burden for the existing properties to consume.  The road should be taken care of in the event of any damage.

 

Mr. Ferro advised that the next item on the agenda was a 3 lot subdivision in this existing subdivision.
Ms. Gingal stated that the issue before them was the road maintenance for the access of
the road.                                               -4-
Mr. Ricks stated that if any damages were created on Rondout Lane it would probably a civil matter.  Town Attorney advice would be required.

 

Ira Stern asked if the Board would explain as to why he was not informed of the Phase III public hearing.  

 

Mr. Ricks explained that Phase III would be presented at this meeting and probably scheduled for public hearing after presentation.

 

Mr. Tapper added that the application was next on the agenda for discussion, not for public hearing.  

 

Ms. Carney added that it was an amendment to the Phase II application which was not previously owned by the development.  All boundary owners should receive notice of the first public hearings.  

 

Mr. Ricks added that the bounding owners will not receive further notices if hearing is continued.  However the notice will be advertised in the paper.

 

The Chairperson advised that if anyone would like to be notified of public hearings, please notify the Planning Board Office.

 

Ira Stern asked the Board to consider restricting the lot sizes along the Rondout Creek, which is popular for duck hunting, walking, and fishing recreation area.  Flood Plain restricts certain areas of the property.  He ask if the Board could restrict set backs regarding the creek and tree removal restrictions.  He asked if Board of Health Approval would be required for septic systems.

 

Mr. Gaydos advised that the lots would not require Health Department Approval at this time as the lots were over 5 acres.

 

Mr. Stern asked if he could receive notice of any further discussion by the Planning Board regarding this application.  

 

Mr. Gaydos informed that Phase III was not scheduled for public hearing at this time.

 

Mr. Stern wanted to be informed of any discussion by the Planning Board regarding this application and he would want the Town to consider changing the regulations regarding the Flood Plain Laws.  

 

Lisa Carbone asked if the changes to the road would restrict further subdivision on the road.  

 

Ms. Carney responded that it would require Planning Board Approval and major improvements to the road.
-5-
Motion was made by Mr. Ricks and seconded by Mr. Gaydos to close the public hearing.  All Member present in favor.

 

Further Discussion

 

Mr. Ricks stated that the existing road bond should be changed with new ownership and the Board needs to know if and when the road is complete.

 

Mr. Graff stated that they were entitled to the benefit of the existing bond.

 

Mr. Ricks asked when he intended to construction of the road.

 

Mr. Ferro stated that wanted the preliminary approval from the Board prior to the start of construction of the road.

 

Mr. Graff asked why would they have to change the existing bond?

 

Mr. Ricks asked if Mr. Ferro was willing to leave the bond in his name after the change of ownership.

 

Mr. Graff and Mr. Ferro stated that they would work it out.

 

Mr. Ricks requested a letter be forwarded to the Town Attorney with the agreement regarding Mr. Ferro and Mr. Harrington.

 

        MOUNTAIN VIEW STABLES, PHASE III, DISCUSSION
        Subdivision off Lucas Turnpike

 

Jerome Ferro was present to represent the application.

 

Mr. Ferro stated that he did not intend to create small lots in this subdivision and he wanted the building lots to be further from the road.

 

The Chairperson stated that in order to schedule a public hearing the following requirements must be submitted to the Planning Board Office.
–       contour map
–       metes and bounds map
–       road profiles
–       farm notes
–       bearings and distance
–       area of disturbance

 

Mr. DeGraw asked if a storm water plan was in place?

 

Mr. Ferro stated that it was already approved by the D.E.C.
-6-
Mr. Ricks informed the applicant that a storm water erosion control plan is required for the road and the new lots.

 

A motion was made by Mr. Striano and seconded by Mr. Ricks to schedule the public hearing for May 17, 2005.  All Members present in favor.

 

        AMPLE SELF STORAGEDISCUSSION
        Self Storage Facility on Route 209

 

Shane Ricks recused himself from the Board.

 

Motion was made by Mr. Tapper and seconded by Mr. DeGraw to be lead agency.  All Members present in favor.

 

The Attorney for Ample Self Storage asked the Chairperson to recuse himself from this application as indicated on previous correspondence to the Board.

 

Mr. Tapper stated that he would not recuse himself from the application.

 

The Attorney stated for the record the reasons for the request were in the April 11, 2005 correspondence.  

 

Ms. Vlahos asked if the Board wanted a storm water review of the plan of the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan.

 

Motion was made by Mr. DeGraw and seconded y Mr. Gaydos to have and engineer from Chazen Companies review the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan.  All Members present in favor.

 

Ms. Vlahos recommended the Board review the Part II of the EAF.  At that time, the Board reviewed and discussed the Part II of the EAF.

 

Mr. Vlahos recommended that the Board request the applicant to prepare a Part III EAF to address all of the items checked as a potentially large impact.

 

Mr. Tapper asked the Board if they would be interested in reviewing a photo visual analysis of the property.

 

Mr. Ed.Sprague stated that they could not do that in their office.

 

Ms. Vlahos informed that there are consultants that can produce this information.  The largest concern and impact for this application is visual.

 

Frank Karcerak, partner to the applicant, informed the Board that he would present examples regarding pitched roofs –vs- flat roofs regarding visual impact.
-7-
Ms. Vlahos recommended a traffic analysis be conducted to help prevent traffic congestion.

 

Mr. Tapper asked the applicant to consider a smaller project and reduce the amount of buildings.

 

Mr. Karcerak stated that this project may never reach the full size.  The only reason for application of a project this size was the future intent.

 

Mr. Tapper recommended that the Board vote on each individual impact.

 

The Board agreed that the traffic concern is a large impact.

 

Mr. DeGraw recommended that the Board hear the discussion regarding the roofs on the buildings prior to voting on the traffic issue.

 

Ms. Vlahos asked if the applicants would be willing to consider an alternative design.  She has reviewed other storage units that were designed in one building with two stories and look more rural in character.  

 

Mr. Karserak stated that they would rather scale the project back, the economics are totally different.  Those type of buildings work better in areas where land is scarce.

 

Ms. Vlahos stated that it was just an idea.

 

Mr. Karserak presented the Board with photo examples regarding flat roofs –vs- pitched roofs.

 

Ms. Vlahos stated that the concern was that the site slopes up and the units in the back would be more visible.

 

Mr. Karcerak stated the units would be higher and it would be harder to see the roofs on the buildings.

 

Mr. DeGraw asked if the buildings would be stepped up.

 

Mr. Karcerak indicated that they would be stepped up.  They designed the front to be a foot higher than the buildings in the back.

 

The Board again reviewed the site plan regarding the roofs and colors of the units.

 

Ms. Vlahos suggested completing the visual analysis and the proposed landscaping for the Boards review.

 

Mr. Striano stated that peaked roofs on the buildings would create a larger visual impact than flat roofs.                               -8-
Mr. DeGraw stated that the surrounding area should be reviewed regarding flat roofs –vs- pitched roofs.

 

The Board discussed the visual impact of the project  regarding color, etc.

 

Mr. Tapper suggested that the visual review be submitted to the Board for review.

 

Ms. Vlahos suggested the visual photo be submitted prior to the summer season for the Boards review.

 

Ms. Vlahos asked the Board if they reviewed the letter from Al Wegner.

 

At that time the Board reviewed the letter from Al Wegner and copy would be forwarded to the applicant.

 

Motion was made by Mr. Tapper and second by Mr. DeGraw to acccept Part II of the EAF.  All Members in favor except Ms. Carney, not excepting # 15.

 

Motion was made by Mr. Tapper and seconded by Mr. Striano to request the applicant to submit Part III EAF.  All Members present in favor.

 

        RV ASSOCIATES, SELF STORAGE FACILITY, DISCUSSION
        Self Storage Facility on Mettacahonts Road

 

Shane Ricks recused himself from the Board

 

Mr. Ricks noted the changes on the map.  The previous Planning Board Approval had been removed from the submitted site plan.  Listed are the existing buildings and the proposed building units.  Also listed is the 25’ buffer area to remain along the entire woods line around the storage area.  Also the Soil and Erosion Control Plan, lighting, and additional screening  is outlined on the map with all specifications.  

 

Mr. Gaydos asked if the proposed buildings were to be erected at a lower level than the existing structures.

 

Mr. Ricks responded that photos were submitted to the file and the new units would not be seen from Route 209, the Rochester Church or the Van Deist Residence.  The only visual view would be from Mettacahonts Road.

 

Mr. Tapper asked if the access would remain around building #5.  

 

Mr. Ricks answered that the access would remain for emergency access.

 

Mr. Tapper asked if  Mr. Ricks could plant another maple in the area and remain the access.
-9-
Mr. Ricks responded that he would plant another spruce in the area and not restrict access if the Board requested.

 

Mr. DeGraw stated the he was not at the last meeting and asked if the Business Zone issue was resolved.

 

The Chairperson stated that the Town Attorney confirmed that the Business Zone in that area was 1,000.

 

Mr. DeGraw added that the Board should consider the visual impact regarding the visual impacts of the proposed expansion of the project.

 

Mr. Ricks responded that if you looked at the existing buildings, you would see that each building hides the next further from the road.

 

Mr. Tapper agreed that the buildings would not be seen from Route 209 and would not create any further visual impact on the community.

 

Mr. Tapper asked about the landscaping –vs- screening and County recommendations.

 

Mr. Ricks indicated that he was installing more screening for this project than all of the other storage facilities located in the Town, combined.

 

Ms. Carney asked about the lighting regarding the new units.

 

Mr. Ricks responded that it was the typical lighting as previously submitted.  All lights would be off unless there was motion in the facility.  

 

Ms. Carney asked if an engineer and surveying map signed by and engineer was submitted.

 

Mr. Ricks stated that it was not required by Town Law at that time or at this time.

 

Mr. Gaydos stated that, in the past, the Board would waive the requirement of stamped maps if the maps that were submitted were sufficient to the application.

 

Mr. Striano stated that the maps submitted were previously approved by the Board.

 

Motion was made by Mr. Gaydos and seconded by Mr. Striano to except the maps submitted by Mr. Ricks without engineer or survey stamp, as the maps were previously approved by the Board.

 

Mr. DeGraw suggested an interpretation from the Zoning Board of Appeals.

 

-10-
Ms. Vlahos read Section 140-34 of the Town Zoning Code informing the Board that stamped plans were not required for Special Use Permits.

 

The Board agreed that a motion was not required to waive requirement regarding stamped plans.

 

The Board discussed the landscaping plan as shown on the map.

 

Motion was made by Mr. Striano and seconded by Ms. Carney to schedule a public hear for this application for May 17, 2005.  All Members present in favor.

 

        VINCENT VALETUTTI, CONTINUED DISCUSSION
        4 Lot Subdivision on Cedar Drive

 

Shane Ricks returned to the Board

 

Ms. Vlahos stated that they were still waiting for information requested in the 3rd review letter.  The most significant being the contours for the entire site.  

 

Mr. Valetutti stated that at the last Board meeting the Board advised that the contours were to be placed just in the areas of disturbance.

 

The Board reviewed the 3rd review letter from Chazen Companies.

 

Mr. Sprague asked about the requirements of a protection of Waters Permit from the D.E.C., as noted in #4 of page 2 of the April 13, 2005 letter from Chazen.

 

Ms. Vlahos stated that she had received the revised letter and that should be deleted.

 

Mr. Sprague stated that they had never requested information from U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services, as indicated on A.11 of page 2.

 

Ms. Vlahos explained why this information was required and that both State and Federal Agencies should be notified.

 

Ms. Vlahos asked if a Storm Water Management Plan was on the maps.

 

Ms. Carney explained that a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan was not required, however, some type of culvert plan should be on the maps.

 

Motion was made by Mr. Ricks and seconded by Mr. Gaydos to except application as an Unlisted Action.  All Members present in favor.

 

Motion was made by Mr. Ricks and seconded by Mr. Gaydos to declare intent to be Lead Agency.  All Members present in favor
-11-
The Board agreed to adjourn for further discussion and information on the application.

 

        MARVIN & GAIL ELLIS, DISCUSSION
        2 Lot Subdivision on Princess Lane

 

The Board reviewed the maps.  

 

This application was before the Board on June 29, 2004.

 

Health Department Approval was submitted.

 

Motion was made by Mr. Ricks and seconded by Mr. Striano to schedule the public hearing for May 17, 2005.  All Members present in favor.

 

        TLB MANAGEMENT CORP, LEONARD & TERRY BERNARDO
        Reduction in size of Roller Skating Rink previously approved by the Board

 

Shane Ricks recused himself from the Board

 

Mr. Tapper advised the Board that Condition #5 of the Decision instructed the applicant to comply with the plans by Medenbach and Eggers dated 10/1/04.  Mr.  Tapper asked for a Motion to rescind condition Condition #5 and replace it with “dated 3/3/05”.  Motion was made by Ms. Carney and seconded by Ms. Gaydos to amend the minutes to reflect that Condition #5 should now read “revised plan dated March 3, 2005.”  All Members present in favor.

 

        ACTION ON MINUTES OF MEETINGS

 

Motion was made by Ms. Carney and seconded by Mr. Tapper to accept the Minutes for the February 15, 2005 Regular Meeting and the Minutes for the February 22, 2005 Work Shop Meeting.  All Members present in favor.

 

Motion was made by Mr. Tapper and seconded by Ms. Carney to table the Minutes of the March 15, 2005 Regular Meeting.  All Members present in favor.

 

        YANKEE BARN APPLICATION EXTENSION

 

Motion was made by Ms. Carney and seconded by Mr. Gaydos for a 90 day extension on this application.  All Members present in favor.

 

        SAHLER MILL WOODS SUBDIVISION

 

Motion was made by Mr. Ricks and seconded by Ms. Carney for a 90 day extension on this application.  All Members present in favor.

 

-12-

 

Mr. Hasenflue addressed the Board and asked why his application was not moving forward.

 

Ms. Vlahos stated that it was her understanding that there were outstanding requirements regarding this application.

 

Mr. Hasenflue asked why he was not notified of this.

 

Ms. Vlahos stated that his engineer was contacted regarding a revised EAF.

 

Mr. Hasenflue indicated that he submitted the same EAF as the one he filed 6 months ago.

 

Ms. Vlahos informed Mr. Hasenflue that the old EAF did not address the comments in the review letter.

 

Ms. Carney added that the EAF needed to be updated to reflect the comments in the review letter.

 

Ms. Vlahos indicated that the engineer was aware of this.

 

It was agreed that Mr. Hasenflue would be placed on the Agenda for the next meeting for discussion only, provided that he submit the requested information.

 

The Board agreed to schedule a Workshop Meeting for April 26, 2005.  

 

Motion was made by Mr. Gaydos and seconded by Mr. Tapper to adjourn the meeting.

 

The ayes were unanimous and at 10:30 PM, Chairperson Tapper adjourned the meeting.

 

                                                Respectfully Submitted

 

                                                
                                                Brenda Striano
                                                Code Enforcement Office Secretary