MINUTES OF March 25, 2008 REGULAR MEETING of the Town of Rochester PLANNING BOARD, held at the Town Hall, Accord, NY.
Meeting was called to order at 6:45 PM by Chairman Tapper.
PRESENT: ABSENT:
Shane Ricks, Vice Chair Don Dunn, Alternate
David O’Halloran
Robert Rominger
Anthony Kawalchuk
Melvyn I. Tapper, Chairman
Leon Smith
Anthony Ullman
Pledge to the Flag
Chairman Tapper motioned for the Board to write a letter to the Town Board requesting nice letters of appreciation to be forwarded to the following past Planning Board Members: Nadine D. Carney, Bob Gaydos, and Steven Fornal. Seconded by Mr. O’Halloran. All members present in favor.
PLANNER INTERVIEWS
Chairman Tapper noted that Alan Sorenson from Planit Maintstreet was unable to attend this meeting.
Mr. O’Halloran questioned if anyone knew if the new planner hired would have anything to do with working on the new Code for the Town? Didn’t Chazen work on it in the past with the Town’s consultant, Tom Shepstone?
Michael Baden, member of the new code committee, and past member of the Zoning Task Force was in the audience and stated that Chazen did mostly mapping for last years proposed code changes. He believed it was more on a voluntary basis. They didn’t really consult on the new code though.
The Board briefly discussed the planners that they would be interviewing at this meeting.
Mr. Ullman noted that from reading the material submitted that Mr. Praetorius was involved with the Ulster County Planning Board.
Mr. Kawalchuk wanted to know if the Planners interviewed tonight would tell the Board how they differ from an Engineer?
Mr. O’Halloran expressed his favoritism of a firm that had Planners and Engineers all in one house to facilitate the applicant and Board in an efficient and timely manner. In speaking to a member of the community though, they felt that having an Engineering firm and a Planner that weren’t in the same company wouldn’t have as a dramatic effect as he would think. All the same Mr. O’Halloran stated that the applicant and the Board would all be better served with an all in house company.
RICHARD PRAETORIUS
Mr. Praetorius was present from his engineering firm Praetorius & Conrad in Saugerties.
Chairman Tapper noted that the Board was looking for someone to review applications that met certain thresholds under Town Law. Site Plan Approval or Special Use Permit over 2,000 sf of new building area or subdivisions over 5 lots or any one lot in a subdivision that was less than 4 acres would trigger Planner review.
Mr. Praetorius didn’t think that lots over 5 acres would be a concern as the Town has pretty good soil in general.
Mr. O’Halloran noted that an applicant’s engineer would have to certify that a lot would be buildable if it was over 5 acres. Health Dept. Approval was necessary as well.
Mr. Ricks wanted to hear the scope of the Praetorius & Conrad company.
Mr. Praetorius noted that there are 12 employees. 4 in Surveying, 2 Engineers, 1 Stormwater Specialist, and other general office workers who all helped to facilitate projects. He noted that he has been hired by Kingston for 2 large Hudson River Projects. Even though he is an Engineer, he does have a background in planning. Since 1975 he has spent 15 years on the Town of Saugerties Planning Board sitting in as Chairman for 8 years. He has been on the Ulster County Planning Board for 20 years. Being on both sides of the table—sitting on a Board and reviewing applications and representing applicants in front of Planning Boards has helped him to pick up Planning along the way in his career.
Chairman Tapper noted that most Board’s use a Planner as the first line of review and if the Planner determines that the application needs any Engineering review, then an Engineer is requested to review the application. Did Mr. Praetorius have any thoughts on in house consultants versus Planners and Engineers in separate firms? Also- Could Mr. Praetorius justify an Engineer as the first line of review?
Mr. Praetorius noted that these are things that will be determined by what a specific Board would want and feels comfortable with. Mr. Praetorius didn’t want to be negative about Planners, but he felt that the Planner has carved out a role over time where he has an hourly fee and doesn’t give an estimate—in case he needs to call in an Engineer as well to look at the application again. Praetorius & Conrad works both ways- they could be the first line as a Planner and review initial applications and if it needs Engineering review, they’d know right away and would be able to do that review as well.
Mr. Ullman wanted to know if Mr. Praetorius had any Planner experience besides being members on Planning Boards? The Board needed to consider a consultant to be able to rely on them for accurate knowledge of SEQRA standards and to rely on their credentials in case the Board was ever challenged.
Mr. Praetorius noted that he’s handled hundreds of Applications and impact statements and has done environmental work on the other side on behalf of the applicant that Town’s Planners review. Even the fact that a Planner reviews an Engineers work… He’s still not sure about that. He felt that there are 2 things a Planner looks at and that’s the Town’s Law and SEQRA—which is kind of the gray area where the Zoning Code is cut and dry. He’s been writing Environmental Impact Statements and has been working with SEQRA since 1973 and has watched it and worked with it through its evolution to where it is today. He’s been involved in a number of Article 78’s and is familiar with the things that can get a judgment overturned. Making sure procedure has been followed is the major thing in Article 78’s.
Mr. O’Halloran wanted to know what Mr. Praetorius’ take was on how he would review Special Use Permit and Site Plan Approval applications? Would he review and compare the application against the Comprehensive Plan?
Mr. Praetorius noted that the initial application would have to comply with the Comprehensive Plan – which would be a little flexible. The general specifics the application would need to follow would definitely be the Zoning Ordinance. Once they’d get more detailed plans that’s where the Engineering aspects would come in. So, could an Engineer Firm handle being a Planner as well? An Engineer would be more capable because the Engineer has to rely on the law and to design the application based on the law. He currently works on a case by case basis for some area Towns as a consulting Engineer. The Town of Esopus, Ulster, the Kingston Point review…
Mr. Kawalchuk questioned what a Planner could do that he couldn’t?
Mr. Praetorius didn’t’ know.
Mr. Kawalchuk questioned if he’d have different billing rates for Planning Aspects of an application vs. Engineering review?
Mr. Praetorius could do that. He could give the Planning Aspects of the application to a junior member of his staff. He himself could avoid having to do all the review to keep the costs down. This would be something that the Board and he could discuss.
Mr. Kawalchuk questioned what a Planner could do that the Planning Board couldn’t do?
Mr. Praetorius stated that Planners get trained on laws. A volunteer on a Planning Board doesn’t get the amount of training or exposure to the planning world that someone gets who is paid to do it.
The first thing that Mr. Praetorius said he would need to do if he was hired by the Town was to become familiar with the Town Codes. Having dealt with a number of Town Codes in his profession he has come to notice that they are all generally the same in nature.
Mr. O’Halloran questioned if he would spend any time getting familiar with our Town and reviewing it?
Mr. Praetorius noted that he was a little familiar with it from when he was younger. He spent a lot of time in the Town when he used to drive a car in the demolition derbies at Accord Speedway when he was younger. He’s done work in the Town here and there—mostly septic systems. The Town was small as far as population and not currently under a lot of developmental pressure.
Mr. Rominger was concerned with using junior members of Mr. Praetorius’ staff—afraid that they might miss something. He questioned if there was a project that would be too big for Mr. Praetorius’ comfort level as acting as a Planner?
Mr. Praetorius didn’t think he’d take on a 2,000 unit project as a Planner, but couldn’t’ say for sure. He didn’t handle any traffic studies over a certain limit. He’d want to see a particular project before he’d be able to say it was too big for him.
Mr. Rominger questioned if he’s done any commercial work?
Mr. Praetorius just did an 80,000 sf commercial building in Saugerties. Traffic was an issue, but these were sites with public water and sewer. Without municipal water and sewer projects are really limited to the scope of a strip mall.
The Board questioned if he’d want to attend every meeting or just applications that he was involved in?
Mr. Praetorius noted that he could send a junior staff member if the Board wanted to try and keep costs down.
Chairman Tapper noted that for the first 4 or 5 meetings the Board would want their consultant in attendance to try and get used to each other, but after that they were thinking of a case by case situation.
Mr. Praetorius would attend those first few meetings with his junior member to get a feel of what the Board would want. Then to keep costs down, he’d send the junior member. He bills hourly and doesn’t charge for mileage.
The Board thanked Mr. Praetorius for his time and would be in touch.
CLARK PATTERSON LEE
Greg Bolner, PE and Timothy Moot, CPG were present on behalf of Clark Patterson Lee.
Mr. Bolner noted that Clark Patterson Lee currently has a City of Rochester Office and a Newburgh location as well as an Albany office. He continued that they provide a unique firm for their clients. They have PE’s, AICP’s, AIA’s and Landscape Designers on staff—therefore they area able to pass applications to each department needed for review. He has worked for other firms in the area and he hasn’t found the same array of services provided by Clark Patterson Lee. They do mostly municipal work; work for schools and colleges and they have a few private clients as well.
Chairman Tapper noted that the Board was looking for someone to review applications that met certain thresholds under Town Law. Site Plan Approval or Special Use Permit over 2,000 sf of new building area or subdivisions over 5 lots or any one lot in a subdivision that was less than 4 acres would trigger Planner review.
He continued that most Town’s have a Planner as the first line of review where some have Engineers. What was Clark Patterson Lee’s approach to this?
Mr. Bolner thought it really depended on the experience of the particular Planning Board and what they were comfortable with. Sometimes they only need more technical help, but really it varies.
Mr. Smith questioned if one person could be both a Planner and an Engineer?
Mr. Bolner didn’t believe so. He felt that each part had an individual role to play and a specialty that they brought to the review process. He noted that Clark Patterson Lee’s technology is a real asset to their level of review. Even if two people reviewing an application aren’t in the same office or city, they can still have the same information at the same time. They have scanners that can scan up to 30” x 46” site plans and are able to email them to another office building on the same network.
Mr. Ricks questioned who would attend the Town of Rochester Planning Board meetings on behalf of the Clark Patterson Lee Company?
Mr. Bolner answered that it would be his associate who was also present, Tim Moot. Mr. Moot lives in Hurley, so he’s fairly local. They could do it on a case by case basis—and wouldn’t’ have to attend every meeting if they didn’t want him to. The Planning Board would just put any application reviewed by Mr. Moot on the agenda early so he could leave after that review. Mr. Moot has 14 years of experience that he would draw on. He’s done a lot of civil site work and a lot with SEQRA. The billing rate is based on individual time. They don’t charge for copies or mileage. Mr. Moot’s rate is $102 an hour.
Mr. O’Halloran commented that it seemed like the Board wouldn’t just be getting Mr. Moot, they’d be getting the team at Clark Patterson Lee behind Mr. Moot. He questioned if he’d go through the application and give an itemized list to the Board and the applicant of missing items that needed to be addressed?
Mr. Moot answered yes.
Mr. Ricks noted that the Board has struggled with certain aspects of SEQRA in the past. At what point did Mr. Bolner and Mr. Moot feel that a declaration of significance should be made and what degree of info should the Board require before that determination is made?
Mr. O’Halloran noted that this has been a past challenge with the Board. They ask for everything in the application process, so it would seem that a Positive Declaration wouldn’t be necessary—but there has to be a point when the Board decides that an application warrants one.
Mr. Bolner agreed noting that generally speaking certain impacts that the mitigation of them under SEQRA would be limited and while they need to provide the mitigation—certain impacts and mitigation may come into question a long way through the application.
Mr. O’Halloran questioned if sometimes in certain situations it would be a benefit to give a Positive Declaration to an application early in the process?
Mr. Bolner agreed noting that sometimes an application could drag on for a year and a half under a Negative Declaration, where if it was just given a Positive Declaration early on it could be done much quicker. Large projects should have a Positive Declaration early on.
Mr. Tapper asked that if the Planning Board chose Clark Patterson Lee to recommend to the Town Board and they were hired, would they be willing to attend the first 3-4 meeting to get a feel for how to work with our Board and then after that only attend on a case by case nature?
Mr. Bolner stated that Mr. Moot and another representative from Clark Patterson Lee would attend those first initial meetings and the Town wouldn’t be charged as it would be a learning curve for Clark Patterson Lee.
Mr. Ricks questioned what other things would they do to familiarize themselves with the Town?
Mr. Bolner noted that they would review the Town Codes. They would make every attempt to bill applicant’s Escrow Accounts where applicable as opposed to billing the Planning Board. They currently look at initial applications and provide the applicant an estimate cost for the whole project. Typical costs for an application range from $1,000-$1,200. It might even be an option to meet with the applicant and their engineers out side of meetings to expedite the process.
The Planning Board thanked Mr. Bolner and Mr. Moot for their time and would be in touch.
Mr. O’Halloran, Mr. Ullman, and Mr. Ricks were in agreement that Clark Patterson Lee was a good choice because they were very professional and they had a multitude of services that would be available to the Board and they were all in one company.
Mr. Kawalchuck wasn’t sure that this Town needed such a large firm to represent them. He’s been on the other side of these reviews from these larger companies and he didn’t think it was what the Town needed.
Mr. O’Halloran noted that the Board would provide the direction in which they would want Clark Patterson Lee to function. And a relationship would be developed on how the Board preferred to do things.
Chairman Tapper noted that once he met Mr. Moot, he was more comfortable. He was from Hurley and seemed very down to earth.
Mr. Rominger felt that maybe Mr. Praetorius should have brought a junior member of his staff, so that they Board could have become acquainted and maybe more comfortable to the fact that they’d be getting a junior member of his staff to rely on.
The Board members continued to discuss the applicants for the consultant position and whether or not they would hold another special meeting to interview Alan Sorenson from Planit Mainstreet. The consensus of the Board was that having both Planners and Engineers in the same firm would just be easier and more efficient all around to work with.
Mr. O’Halloran motioned to recommend to the Town Board to retain the professional services of Clark Patterson Lee. Motion seconded by Mr. Ullman.
Vote:
Smith- Yes Ullman- Yes
O’Halloran- Yes Rominger- Yes
Ricks- Yes Tapper- Yes
Kawalchuk- No Dunn(alt.)- Absent
Mr. O’Halloran motioned to adjourn the meeting. Seconded by Chairman Tapper. All members present in favor.
As there was no further business, at 8:30pm, Chairman Tapper adjourned the meeting.
Respectfully submitted,
Rebecca Paddock Stange, Secretary