MINUTES OF October 20, 2009 Regular MEETING of the Town of Rochester PLANNING BOARD, held at the Town Hall, Accord, NY.
Chairman Tapper called meeting to order at 7:00 PM.
PRESENT: ABSENT:
Melvyn I. Tapper, Chairman Michael Baden
Shane Ricks, Vice Chairman –left at 8:15PM
Anthony Ullman
Anthony Kawalchuk
Robert Rominger
Malena Calan (alt.)
Leon Smith
Pledge to the Flag.
CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING
MOUNTAIN VIEW STABLES, Inc.-Subdivision Approval for 2 lots in the Mountain View Stables Subdivision, Lucas Avenue, Tax Map # 77.1-2-33. NY.
Jerome Ferro was present on behalf of his application.
Chairman Tapper noted that the referral from the Ulster County Planning Board has been received and they stated that an Ag Data Statement needed to be submitted by the applicant. Mr. Ferro has done so and there are no operating farms within 500’ of his application to his knowledge. He noted that Mr. Ferro has indicated that he would like to amend an earlier approved lot line adjustment to one of the parcels being applied for. The Board has been advised by the Town Attorney that Mr. Ferro should amend his application and the Board will hold the Public Hearing open pending Mr. Ferro’s revised map showing the changes he’s requesting.
At 7:05 Chairman Tapper opened the hearing to the public. There was no comment.
Mr. Ricks motioned to keep the Public Hearing open pending Mr. Ferro’s revisions. Seconded by Mr. Rominger. No discussion.
Vote:
Tapper: Yes Ricks: Yes
Smith: Yes Kawalchuk: Yes
Ullman: Yes Rominger: Yes
Baden: Absent Calan, Alt: Absent (not required to participate)
PUBLIC HEARING
BELLIMAN RETAIL c/o ALAN MADNICK– Site Plan Approval/ Special Use Permit for conversion of 7,000 SF warehouse to Flea Market sales and conversion of 4,000 SF showroom to Auction Area, Tax Map
77.1-1-24.131, ‘B’ District
Mr. Sprague of Medenbach & Eggers was present along with Applicant’s representative, Jay Feinberg.
Chairman Tapper noted that the applicants have submitted revised plans to the Board with increased parking spaces. He questioned how many parking spaces were proposed?
Mr. Sprague noted that 55 spaces were required for the floor area and 29 were proposed for employees/ vendors for a total of 84 spaces.
Chairman Tapper noted that a question arose from the Planner today during a conversation with the PB Secretary, Mrs. Paddock Stange. The Planner questioned the access and parking spaces being able to accommodate fire trucks. He suggested having the applicant get a letter from the fire chief saying the parking and access would be fine.
Mr. Ricks questioned what the dark black lines were along with edge of the parking lot. Was that for run off?
Mr. Sprague noted that the Planner had suggested fencing or a barrier between the parking and the wetlands, so Medenbach & Eggers is proposing some split rail fencing as shown on the plans.
Chairman Tapper questioned if the expanded parking area was going to be gravel?
Mr. Sprague answered yes.
Chairman Tapper questioned if the areas on the left of the map were located as requested—showing drainage ditches and things like that?
Mr. Sprague noted that yes; they had located the grass swale and culvert on the left side of the site plan- to the left of the building.
Mr. Ricks stated that it looked like they took care of everything the Board had asked about.
Mr. Sprague noted that they moved a propane tank on the plans to make extra room for parking and they added one shade tree to the back parking lot expansion.
Mr. Rominger questioned how big the trees were proposed to be at the time of planting?
Mr. Sprague noted that there was a detail sheet on the plans that showed this. He wasn’t sure, but they usually do 6’ trees at time of planting.
Chairman Tapper questioned if there wasn’t any room to put some grassy areas in to soak up the run off?—Like maybe in the middle of the parking area?
Mr. Ricks and Mr. Smith didn’t think this would work.
At 7:14 Chairman Tapper opened the hearing to the public for comment.
Mr. Sprague explained that this was the site of the old Ulster County Carpet building on Route 209 and they were proposing to convert the warehouse area into a flea market retail space and the front of the building will be an auction house. They were proposing to expand the parking. The flea market would be in operation from Thursday to Sunday 9a.m. to 6p.m. and the Auction would operate on Friday nights from 6pm to 11pm.
Mr. Ricks recalled the applicant had previously stated that the auction would operate 2 nights a week. He thought maybe Tuesday night was also said?
Mr. Sprague and Mr. Fienberg were not sure.
A member of the public was recognized to speak who owned adjacent property to this proposed application. He questioned if the Board had considered of positive declaration for the effect of the traffic or the need for a traffic light. Did they consider the issue of pollutants traveling into the wetlands or going into the creek? Will there be a SPEDES Permit? Is the Board going to take measures to ensure that there will be no parking on Route 209 from this action? He realized that flea markets were an approved use as far as zoning was concerned, but has the Board looked at the Napanoch Flea Market? Is the Board going to make sure that its maintained and nicely landscaped and no vendor booths to be located outside? Will there be an environmental impact statement prepared and a SPEDES Permit and traffic study with a Positive Declaration? He knows that the applicant needs a special permit to convert the warehouse into retail—but what is the protocol? Does the applicant ask for it and receive it?
Chairman Tapper noted that the Board looks at the plan to make sure that it conforms to the Zoning and that there is enough room for everything. There is no parking allowed on Route 209 as it’s a state law and the applicant is not applying for an outdoor flea market. If you look at the site plan, most of their outdoor space is taken up with parking spaces based on the square footage. If they wanted an outdoor flea market in the future they would need to reapply.
Mr. Sprague noted that Medenbach & Eggers has completed and submitted a Full EAF and some of the items they are required to fill out have to do with trips generated and whether or not SPEDES is required. SPEDES is triggered by the disturbance of 1 acre or more. Their proposed limit of disturbance as indicated on their grading plan is .55 acres. They have done a Sediment, Soil, and Erosion Control Plan and a grading plan that have been reviewed by the Town’s Planner.
Mr. Ricks noted that no SPEDES was required for the septic as it is an existing system.
Chairman Tapper noted that the Town’s Planner has reviewed the items submitted by the applicant including the EAF and the site plan.
A member of the public questioned how many vendors would there be at the flea market?
Mr. Ricks recalled from previous meetings that the applicant indicated that there would be 20-25 vendors there.
A member of the public was unfamiliar with the Environmental Impact Statement Process.
Mr. Ricks noted that there are Environmental Assessment Forms (EAFs) that the applicant is required to fill out so the Board can address potential impacts. If the plan lacks things and if it’s a big project, usually large projects done from scratch (unlike a conversion of use of an existing business) the application might be given a Positive Declaration from the Board.
A member from the public questioned if the Town’s Planner looked at this plan and finds it acceptable?
Mr. Ricks noted that he addressed things like wetlands that he wanted to see delineated and certified. Wetlands are a natural cleaning area.
Mr. Rominger noted that the Planner required fencing along the wetlands and the Planner basically comes up with issues and it’s the applicant’s job to mitigate those concerns.
Chairman Tapper wanted to clarify that the run off goes from the wetland and into the Route 209 drainage?
A member from the public noted that it goes into a culvert under Route 209 and into the Rondout Creek.
Mr. Rominger questioned if this was a massive amount of water in this area that was being talked about.
The member of the public noted that it’s only a lot of water in that area when it rains a lot.
Mr. Ricks wanted to point out that as far as the run off was concerned that it wouldn’t be any worse than the pre-construction of the parking lot.
The Board continued to discuss the drainage and noted that some of it goes into the Saunderskill field.
Mr. Kawalchuk, Board Member, noted that the DOT had him increase his culvert size because it wasn’t large enough. He owns adjacent property to this site.
A member of the public noted that a vast amount of the run off from the project site and that side of Route 209 goes into the Rondout Creek.
Chairman Tapper noted that nothing was raised by the Planner to meet the need for a Positive Declaration. The thresholds for a Positive Declaration are very high. This is a rather minor action in regards to that. NYS DOT will monitor run off and won’t let it go on top of the road.
A member of the public noted that the drainage and entrance aren’t addressed for 80 parking spaces. Was the DOT notified of this?
Chairman Tapper noted that this access has been previously approved by NYS DOT.
Secretary, Mrs. Paddock Stange noted that she spoke with Town Planners, Mr. Bolner and Mr. Moot on this date and questioned this. They confirmed that the Board didn’t need to send this to DOT because it was existing and previously approved.
Mr. Rominger noted that NYS DOT would be more concerned with a new access.
Another member from the public was recognized to speak. He was worried regarding the auction traffic coming out onto Route 209 all at the same time and that there would be problems.
Mr. Sprague noted that as part of the Long EAF they did a trip generator and there was nothing that triggered concerns.
Mr. Ricks, Board Member, noted that any member of the public was free to view this file in the Planning Board Office. He also pointed out that the applicant has stated that the two businesses won’t both operate at the same time.
The Board further discussed the entrance.
A member from the public questioned if only having one lane at this part of Route 209 would be a problem?
Mr. Ricks, Board Member, noted that the only time there might be high traffic is when the auction lets out.
A member of the public stated that because this was a state road it sounded like that would be a problem.
Chairman Tapper noted that they didn’t have an answer for this, but they would look into it. This also gets reviewed by the Ulster County Planning Board (UCPB) and we have to take their input into account. This Public Hearing will not be closed tonight because the Board needs to wait for the UCPB’s referral response. It will most likely be re-opened at the November meeting.
Mr. Ricks, Vice Chairman noted that it seemed that the biggest topic at this Public Hearing was concerns with traffic. All other issues that the Board has had have been addressed by the applicant.
Board Member Rominger questioned if there was any lighting proposed in the parking lot?
Mr. Sprague noted that they didn’t have any. Just wall packs on the building- there were details on it in the plans- it was down shielded.
Mr. Ricks, Vice Chairman, didn’t think the applicant wanted people coming out of the auction into a dark parking lot.
Chairman Tapper agreed. There should be lighting in the parking lot.
Board Member Ullman stated that the landscaping appeared sparse. The applicant should add more landscaping to make the property attractive so it doesn’t just look like a massive parking lot. They don’t want it to look like Napanoch and they don’t want it to be an eyesore. Looking on the plans, the front of the building is bare. This is a new application—a new project with new characteristics—an expansion—and there should be a different approach to the landscaping.
Mr. Sprague noted that if you looked at the alignment of the shade trees that were proposed on the plans, they will screen the parking in the back.
Board Member Ullman stated that it looked sparse- more like accent landscaping.
Vice Chairman Ricks noted that he understood Mr. Ullman’s point, but this was a business—they didn’t want to hide it.
Board Member Ullman stated that it should still be landscaped.
Vice Chairman Ricks stated that it wasn’t screening that Mr. Ullman was looking for- you could still landscape without hiding the business.
Board Member Ullman suggested more landscaping to take away from the impact of the vastly expanded parking lot.
Vice Chairman Ricks stated that there probably wasn’t anything more that could go near the road—they had to consider snow plows and they couldn’t plant in the wetlands.
Chairman Tapper questioned if Mr. Ullman had anything specific in mind?
Board Member Ullman noted that he wasn’t a landscaper. If he reviewed a plan that the applicant submitted he could comment on that, but he couldn’t come up with one for the applicant.
Chairman Tapper questioned where Mr. Ullman would like to see more landscaping?
Board Member Ullman stated in front of the building.
Mr. Sprague noted that the building was landscaped in front. There was existing landscaping.
Board Member Ullman commented that he would like to see more landscaping to the right of the first shade tree closest to Route 209 on the plan.
Mr. Sprague noted that they couldn’t plant there because those were the wetlands.
Board Member Ullman noted that the Planner could suggest landscaping.
Board Member Rominger noted that it was unfortunate that there wasn’t a lot of room in between the parking spaces for landscaping to break it up more.
Board Member Ullman stated that the Board could ask the Town’s Planner’s Office for ideas.
Board Member Rominger commented that this was going to be one of the biggest parking lots in the Town.
Vice Chairman Ricks stated that the applicant could put shade trees by the site markers on the plan: B13, between B10 and B11, and one by B5 and one by B6—make the trees every 30’ around the lot. Maybe throw a clump of bushes in there too.
Board Member Rominger was still concerned with no lighting in the parking lot.
Mr. Sprague stated that the wall packs on the building would provide a lot of light.
Board Member Ullman noted that it wouldn’t throw enough light as Mr. Sprague had previously noted that those lights on the building are down shielded.
Chairman Tapper stated again that the applicant should put lighting in the parking lot.
A member of the public wanted to know what happened when the lot was plowed? If the gravel base was 12” thick, would it need to be maintained as such so that it wouldn’t turn to mud as the plowing scrapes the gravel away?
Another member of the public had another concern with traffic noting that the Accord Speedway also operated on Friday nights. He was concerned that if they let out at the same time there could be some serious issues with traffic on Route 209 as Accord Speedway is on Whitfield Road which is very close to this application.
Vice Chairman Ricks noted that they wouldn’t be leaving at the same times. The Speedway let out later than the auction was proposing.
Board Member Rominger also noted that a lot of people that leave the speedway travel to Route 209 via Airport Road.
Vice Chairman Ricks motioned to continue the Public Hearing in November. Seconded by Board Member Rominger. No discussion.
Vote:
Tapper: Yes Ricks: Yes
Smith: Yes Kawalchuk: Yes
Ullman: Yes Rominger: Yes
Baden: Absent Calan, Alt: Absent (not required to participate)
Vice Chairman Ricks motioned to refer this application to the Ulster County Planning Board for their referral response. Seconded by Chairman Tapper. No discussion.
Vote:
Tapper: Yes Ricks: Yes
Smith: Yes Kawalchuk: Yes
Ullman: Yes Rominger: Yes
Baden: Absent Calan, Alt: Absent (not required to participate)
Chairman Tapper noted that he would speak with the Planner regarding DOT and the concerns raised by the public at this meeting. Mr. Sprague should prepare a response to the Public comment.
Board Member Kawalchuk stated that as far as he knew that when the DOT looks at an application for a highway access, they look at the total square footage of the building to give themselves a worse case scenario and approve the entrance on the total square footage of the building based on max use.
Board Member Ullman noted that there is a difference between if it needed to go to the DOT or if it makes sense to send it to the DOT.
Chairman Tapper noted that they could call the DOT and see what they had to say on the matter.
Vice Chairman Ricks noted that he always worries with how long the Board spends on an application, but everything has totally changed since the first time this applicant has come in. If the applicant would have done what they were supposed to do in the first place they may have been out of here already.
Mr. Feinberg noted that they may lose the tenant that wants to get in there because this is taking so long.
Chairman Tapper noted that the Board needs to review this carefully. If three cars try and get out at the same time and have an accident, someone is responsible. The Board needs to make sure they do everything they can to ensure this is safe.
Vice Chairman Ricks also noted that if there are no lights in the parking lot and someone slips and falls—there needs to be lighting in the parking lot—especially the top lot being so far from the building. Public safety needs to be addressed. This is all stuff that has been repeated since the first meeting. These are all things that should have been provided up front. He likes to see applications go through quickly too, but the Board needs to see plans that are complete.
PUBLIC HEARING
AT&T, SUP/SPA-for equipment shelter adjacent to approved tower and collocate 6 antennas on approved tower, at 100 Airport Road and 6140 Route 209 Approved Tower Locations, Tax Map #s 69.3-2-37 & 76.1-3-17,R-1 Districts
Representative, Doug Migliaccio, of the Pyramid Network Services, LLC was present on behalf of AT&T for this application.
Chairman Tapper noted that this application was to collocate 6 antennas on approved towers at 100 Airport Road and 6140 Route 209. The Route 209 application was referred to the Ulster County Planning Board as it is within 500’ of a State Highway. The Referral came back as having No County Impact.
At 8:00PM Chairman Tapper opened the hearing to the public.
Mr. Ricks noted that everything seemed to be covered at the last meeting.
There were only positive comments from the public and their interest in seeing the antennas go up as quickly as they could.
Chairman Tapper noted that the antennas are going to match their respective poles and the shelter will match the existing ones that were installed by Verizon.
Mr. Ricks motioned to close the Public Hearing on the Airport Road site. Seconded by Mr. Kawalchuk. No discussion.
Vote:
Tapper: Yes Ricks: Yes
Smith: Yes Kawalchuk: Yes
Ullman: Yes Rominger: Yes
Baden: Absent Calan, Alt: Absent (not required to participate)
The Board went over Part 2 of the EAF as prepared by Town Planners, Clark Patterson Lee. There were no Potentially Large Impacts.
PUBLIC HEARING
AT&T, SUP/SPA(cont’d)-for equipment shelter adjacent to approved tower and collocate 6 antennas on approved tower, at 100 Airport Road and 6140 Route 209 Approved Tower Locations, Tax Map #s 69.3-2-37 & 76.1-3-17,R-1 Districts
Mr. Ullman motioned to accept Part 2 of the EAF for Airport Road. Seconded by Chairman Tapper. No discussion.
Vote:
Tapper: Yes Ricks: Yes
Smith: Yes Kawalchuk: Yes
Ullman: Yes Rominger: Yes
Baden: Absent Calan, Alt: Absent (not required to participate)
Mr. Ullman made the following motion seconded by Mr. Smith with the following conditions:
The Town of Rochester Planning Board grants approval for Special Use Permit/ Site Plan Approval as per plans by Carpenter Consulting Group dated August 18, 2009~for 11’ 6” x 20’ prefab equipment shelter and 5’ x 11’ generator pad adjacent to approved tower; antennas and appurtenant cabling on approved tower contained within the existing compound leased area from American Towers Corporation on property located at 100 Airport Road, Tax Map #69.3-2-37 and in an R-1 Zoning District situate at and owned by the Town of Rochester. Special Use Permit/ Site Plan Approval was adopted on October 20, 2009, with the following conditions, by the following vote:
CONDITIONS:
1. Applicant shall comply with all State and Local Building Codes and Fire Codes.
2. Placement of building must be in accordance with approved Site Plan prepared by Carpenter Consulting Group dated August 18, 2009. Any deviation from said maps shall require Planning Board review.
3. Color of equipment shed shall match the color of the existing equipment shed placed by Verizon Wireless.
4. Color of Antennas shall match color of existing pole (galvanized).
5. Building inspector shall verify the colors of the existing pole and antennas match.
6. Applicant shall comply with all FCC rules.
7. Special Use Permit shall be revoked if not exercised within one (1) year of the date of the signed decision as per Section140-32(D) of the Town of Rochester Zoning and Land Use Control Laws.
Vote:
Tapper: Yes Ricks: Yes
Smith: Yes Kawalchuk: Yes
Ullman: Yes Rominger: Yes
Baden: Absent Calan, Alt: Absent (not required to participate)
Mr. Ricks motioned for a Negative Declaration under SEQRA seconded by Mr. Ullman. No discussion.
Vote:
Tapper: Yes Ricks: Yes
Smith: Yes Kawalchuk: Yes
Ullman: Yes Rominger: Yes
Baden: Absent Calan, Alt: Absent (not required to participate)
Mr. Ricks, Vice Chairman, left the meeting at 8:15PM.
PUBLIC HEARING
AT&T, SUP/SPA(cont’d)-for equipment shelter adjacent to approved tower and collocate 6 antennas on approved tower, at 100 Airport Road and 6140 Route 209 Approved Tower Locations, Tax Map #s 69.3-2-37 & 76.1-3-17,R-1 Districts
Chairman Tapper opened the Public Hearing for the Route 209 site at 8:15PM.
There was no public comment.
Chairman Tapper motioned to close the Public Hearing. Seconded by Mr. Rominger. No discussion.
Vote:
Tapper: Yes Ricks: left at 8:15PM
Smith: Yes Kawalchuk: Yes
Ullman: Yes Rominger: Yes
Baden: Absent Calan, Alt: Absent (not required to participate)
The Board went over Part 2 of the EAF for the Kerhonkson site as prepared by Clark Patterson Lee, noting it was identical to the Airport Road one.
Mr. Smith motioned to accept Part 2 of the EAF for the Kerhonkson site. Seconded by Mr. Kawalchuk.
Vote:
Tapper: Yes Ricks: left at 8:15PM
Smith: Yes Kawalchuk: Yes
Ullman: Yes Rominger: Yes
Baden: Absent Calan, Alt: Absent (not required to participate)
Mr. Smith motioned for a Negative Declaration under SEQRA. Seconded by Mr. Rominger. No discussion.
Vote:
Tapper: Yes Ricks: left at 8:15PM
Smith: Yes Kawalchuk: Yes
Ullman: Yes Rominger: Yes
Baden: Absent Calan, Alt: Absent (not required to participate)
PUBLIC HEARING
AT&T, SUP/SPA(cont’d)-for equipment shelter adjacent to approved tower and collocate 6 antennas on approved tower, at 100 Airport Road and 6140 Route 209 Approved Tower Locations, Tax Map #s 69.3-2-37 & 76.1-3-17,R-1 Districts
Mr. Ullman made the following motion seconded by Mr. Rominger with the following conditions:
The Town of Rochester Planning Board grants approval for Special Use Permit/ Site Plan Approval as per plans by Carpenter Consulting Group dated August 18, 2009~for 12’ x 20’ prefab equipment shelter and 5’ x 11’ generator pad adjacent to approved tower; antennas and appurtenant cabling on approved tower contained within the existing compound leased area from American Towers Corporation on property located at 100 Airport Road, Tax Map #69.3-2-37 and in an R-1 Zoning District situate at and owned by the Town of Rochester. Special Use Permit/ Site Plan Approval was adopted on October 20, 2009, with the following conditions, by the following vote:
CONDITIONS:
1. Applicant shall comply with all State and Local Building Codes and Fire Codes.
2. Placement of building must be in accordance with approved Site Plan prepared by Carpenter Consulting Group dated August 18, 2009. Any deviation from said maps shall require Planning Board review.
3. Color of equipment shed shall match the color of the existing equipment shed placed by Verizon Wireless.
4. Color of Antennas shall match color of existing pole (brown).
5. Building inspector shall verify the colors of the existing pole and antennas match.
6. Applicant shall comply with all FCC rules.
7. Special Use Permit shall be revoked if not exercised within one (1) year of the date of the signed decision as per Section140-32(D) of the Town of Rochester Zoning and Land Use Control Laws.
Vote:
Tapper: Yes Ricks: left at 8:15PM
Smith: Yes Kawalchuk: Yes
Ullman: Yes Rominger: Yes
Baden: Absent Calan, Alt: Absent (not required to participate)
NEW APPLICATION PRESENTATION
TONON, LLC- c/o Tanya Kefer, Site Plan Approval to enclose existing pavilion located at the Pizza Barn property for personal use health club, Route 209, Tax Map # 76.2-2-49, ‘B’ District
Tanya Kefer was present on behalf of the application.
Chairman Tapper noted that this application was for the purposes of enclosing the pavilion located at the Pizza Barn Property on Route 209, which used to be Barnyard & Extras BBQ.
Chairman Tapper questioned how many acres the property was?
Mrs. Kefer noted that it was +/- 2.6 acres. This was the restaurant that was the big red barn right across the street from Rosakranse on Route 209. She was proposing personal training and acupuncture by appointment only.
Chairman Tapper questioned how many cars would be in the parking lot for this part of the business at the most?
Mrs. Kefer noted that there would be at most 5 cars generated from this part of the business.
Mr. Rominger questioned if the restaurant was open yet?
Mrs. Kefer noted that it was not.
Mr. Rominger questioned if it would be 2 different businesses?
Mrs. Kefer answered, yes.
NEW APPLICATION PRESENTATION
TONON, LLC(cont’d)- c/o Tanya Kefer, Site Plan Approval to enclose existing pavilion located at the Pizza Barn property for personal use health club, Route 209, Tax Map # 76.2-2-49, ‘B’ District
Chairman Tapper questioned if the parking would be the same area as the restaurants?
Mrs. Kefer answered, yes. There would be no other parking. There is a walkway that goes from the restaurant to the pavilion. Both buildings have outdoor lighting and there is lighting in the parking lot.
Chairman Tapper questioned the septic.
Mr. Sprague from Medenbach & Eggers was in attendance and noted that Medenbach & Eggers designed the septic and the original site plan for the BBQ place. The septic was existing and oversized when built, so by enclosing the pavilion they’d actually be taking seats away from the restaurant and it would be sized fine for the health services business.
Mr. Rominger questioned if there would be bathrooms in the enclosed pavilion or just the restaurant.
Mrs. Kefer noted that people could use the restaurant bathrooms. If the restaurant was closed, she had a key and could let them into the bathroom. For acupuncture she was aware that she needed a water source, but she wasn’t required to have a toilet. She consulted with the Health Dept. and they said that they didn’t require bathrooms for training studios.
Mr. Smith questioned if the pavilion would match the barn (restaurant)?
Mrs. Kefer answered, yes.
Mr. Ullman questioned if there would be a heating source.
Mrs. Kefer answered, yes, it would be ceramic heat.
Mr. Sprague mentioned again that when they originally designed the system for the restaurant, they oversized it and now it will be underused, so it will be fine.
Chairman Tapper noted that he wanted to check with the Building Dept. to see if they had any State Codes or requirements for the need for bathrooms. There is already a roof on the pavilion, so they aren’t creating anymore run off so that’s not an issue.
Mr. Sprague noted that it had a full Storm Water Management Plan for the original owner. They’ll provide a response to these comments from the Board.
Mr. Rominger felt that the only issue he had was the bathroom.
Chairman Tapper noted that it would be looked into.
NEW APPLICATION PRESENTATION
TONON, LLC(cont’d)- c/o Tanya Kefer, Site Plan Approval to enclose existing pavilion located at the Pizza Barn property for personal use health club, Route 209, Tax Map # 76.2-2-49, ‘B’ District
Chairman Tapper motioned for the Town of Rochester Planning Board to be Lead Agency with an uncoordinated review under SEQRA. Seconded by Mr. Kawalchuk.
Vote:
Tapper: Yes Ricks: left at 8:15PM
Smith: Yes Kawalchuk: Yes
Ullman: Yes Rominger: Yes
Baden: Absent Calan, Alt: Absent (not required to participate)
Chairman Tapper motioned for an Unlisted Action under SEQRA. Seconded by Mr. Kawalchuk.
Vote:
Tapper: Yes Ricks: left at 8:15PM
Smith: Yes Kawalchuk: Yes
Ullman: Yes Rominger: Yes
Baden: Absent Calan, Alt: Absent (not required to participate)
Chairman Tapper noted that this was complete enough to send to the Ulster County Planning Board and he motioned for the Board to refer it. Seconded by Mr. Smith.
Vote:
Tapper: Yes Ricks: left at 8:15PM
Smith: Yes Kawalchuk: Yes
Ullman: Yes Rominger: Yes
Baden: Absent Calan, Alt: Absent (not required to participate)
Mr. Rominger motioned to schedule the Public Hearing for the November Meeting. Seconded by Mr. Kawalchuk.
Vote:
Tapper: Yes Ricks: left at 8:15PM
Smith: Yes Kawalchuk: Yes
Ullman: Yes Rominger: Yes
Baden: Absent Calan, Alt: Absent (not required to participate)
ACTION ON MINUTES
Mr. Ullman motioned to accept the September 15, 2009 Minutes. Seconded by Mr. Smith. No discussion.
Vote:
Tapper: Abstained Ricks: left at 8:15PM
Smith: Yes Kawalchuk: Yes
Ullman: Yes Rominger: Yes
Baden: Absent Calan, Alt: Absent (not required to participate)
OTHER MATTERS
DISCUSSION ON BELLIMAN
Mr. Kawalchuk noted that it seemed that the only issue the public seemed to have was the traffic—which always seems to be the case. The Board needs a better way to answer people regarding this.
Mr. Rominger thought that they should see how it goes the first few times they have auctions and see how it goes and revisit it if it has any problems.
Mr. Kawalchuk noted that there were probably 5-10 crashes a year as a result of the Speedway traffic.
Mr. Ullman noted that Town Consultant, Tom Shepstone touched on traffic at their training on October 19, 2009. It would be useful to know more about it—what guidelines are followed.
Mr. Kawalchuk noted that when he goes to auctions up state, people park along the side of the State Roads. He specifically asked someone about that and he was told that auctions aren’t restricted.
Mr. Ullman wanted to find out what traffic guidelines the planners use and they should be circulated.
90 DAY EXTENSION ON CONDITIONAL FINAL APPROVAL
10P5C, c/o Colin Houston, PLS, 2 lot subdivision, Project 32 Road, Tax Map # 76.4-3-15.115, R-1 District
Mr. Kawalchuk motioned to grant a 90 day extension on Conditional Final Approval for 10P5C. Seconded by Mr. Ullman.
Vote:
Tapper: Yes Ricks: left at 8:15PM
Smith: Yes Kawalchuk: Yes
Ullman: Yes Rominger: Yes
Baden: Absent Calan, Alt: Absent (not required to participate)
ZBA ADVISORY REQUEST
BRUCE & KATHLEEN TOREEY– 187 Dewitt Road, Lot #8 in the Martamas Subdivision, Tax Map #60.3-5-2,R-2 District, Area Variance for being closer to the street than the principle structure, 140-
13C.(2).
The applicant was not present.
The Board discussed if they would review the application without the applicant present to answer questions.
Mr. Ullman questioned why the applicant would need a variance if he had over 5 acres? You couldn’t tell why just from looking at the site plan he submitted.
Chairman Tapper noted that they couldn’t entertain the request because there was no one present to answer questions on behalf of this application.
ADJOURNMENT
Mr. Ullman motioned to adjourn, seconded by Mr. Rominger. No discussion. All members present in favor.
As there was no further business, at 8:55 PM, Chairman Tapper adjourned the meeting.
Respectfully submitted,
Rebecca Paddock Stange, Secretary