Planning Board Minutes June 2013

MINUTES OF JUNE 11, 2013 the Town of Rochester PLANNING BOARD, held at the Town Hall, Accord, NY.

 

Chairman Baden asked that everyone stand to say the Pledge to the Flag.

 

The Secretary did roll call attendance.

 

PRESENT:                                                                ABSENT:                                         Michael Baden, Chairman Baden                                            Shane Ricks  
Robert Rominger, Vice Chairman                                          Melvyn I. Tapper                                        Adam Paddock                                                             Rob Case, Alternate
Anthony Ullman
Fred O’Donnell
Also present:
Rebecca Paddock Stange, Secretary.  

 

ANNOUNCEMENTS and COMMUNICATIONS
Chairman Baden noted that the Schoonmaker Farm has been listed to the National Register of Historic Places. The Synagogue in Kerhonkson is being considered for listing on the National Register.

 

He also noted that on the 17th there will be an open house at the Rosendale Elementary School as the school is potentially being considered by Marbletown, Rosendale and Rochester to house Town Offices.

 

TRAININGS
  • Thurs June 13 – Watershed Management Priority Indices and the Data behind the Models –
8-9:30am – Plaza Diner
  • Wed. June 19 –Shovel Ready Strategic Planning for Ulster County Communities – UCPB –
7-9:30pm – Ulster Community College
ACTION ON MINUTES
Mr. Baden motioned to approve the May 14, 2013 Minutes with corrections as discussed and typographical errors to be corrected. Mr. Tapper is not listed as being in attendance for any of the votes that took place at the May meeting and his vote will be corrected. Seconded by Mr. Ullman. No discussion.
Vote:
Baden:  Yes                                             Tapper: Absent
O’Donnell:      Yes                                             Rominger:       Yes
Ullman: Yes                                             Ricks:          Absent
Paddock:        Yes                                     
                                                                        
Motion carried. 5 ayes, 0 nays, 2 absent, 0 abstentions
Continued Application Review
Site Plan Review
Elm Rock Inn LLC, for Site Plan Review. An expansion of a residential use Bed & Breakfast to hold onsite events pursuant to Section 140-35 of the Town of Rochester Zoning Code, 4496 Route 209, S/B/L #69.4-2-1.32, ‘B’ and ‘FD Overlay’ zoning districts.  The parcel also includes land located in the Town of Marbletown, 4494 Route 209, Tax Map #69.4-1-1.2.

 

Mrs. Carney from Peak Engineering, Mark Suszczynski of the Elm Rock Inn along with his Attorney, Michael Moriello Esq., were present on behalf of the application.

 

Chairman Baden noted that the application was voted a SEQRA Negative Declaration at the last meeting and as it was a Type 1 Action it was published in the ENB. The next step was to review the draft decision.

 

The Board first reviewed the draft findings prepared by the Chairman as follows:
Findings of the Planning Board
  • The Planning Board has received zoning referral for a Site Plan Approval from the Code Enforcement Officer and an application, EAF and Site Plan from Elm Rock Inn, LLC. The property previously had been the subject of a ZBA appeal of the CEO determination, however that appeal was withdrawn.
  • The application proposes expansion of a residential use Bed & Breakfast to hold onsite events pursuant to §140-35 of the Town of Rochester Zoning Code.  An approval will allow 12 onsite events per calendar year.  
  • The parcel is located in the ‘B’ zoning district pursuant to the Town of Rochester zoning code.
  • The parcel is additionally located in the ‘F Overlay’ zoning district as it is partially located in the FEMA mapped flood zone.
  • The parcel is divided by the town boundary line and is located in both the Towns of Rochester and Marbletown.
  • The parcel to be developed is known as S/B/L 69.4-2-1.32 and S/B/L 69.4-1-1.2 in the Town of Marbletown.
The parcel is located in the Ulster County Ag District #3.  An Agricultural Data Statement was prepared and presented.
The parcel has road frontage on US Hwy Route 209
The parcel contains a historic structure listed on the National Register. There are no proposed exterior changes or impacts to the structure.
  • The application was determined to be a Type I SEQRA action with the T/ Rochester Planning Board designated Lead Agency. A coordinated review was undertaken and a Negative Declaration was determined.
The Chairman prepared an application review memo discussed by the Planning Board.  The proposal meets the bulk standards requirements for the ‘B’ zoning district.
The Planning Board determined during the review the primary impacts of the proposed use to be noise, traffic access, parking, and Health Department issues.
The applicant submitted a report prepared by Peak Engineering discussing the principles of noise.  A field study of ambient noise levels of the parcel was not conducted. The applicant held belief the location on US Hwy Route 209 would create an ambient noise level greater than other areas of the town and presented photo documentation of natural tree and landscaping buffers. The Planning Board reviewed the Site Plan, the proximity of nearby property boundaries and structures, roadways, and the natural tree and landscaping buffers.  The Board determined these buffers will create some degree of noise mitigation measures. The Board will condition the decision to require additional noise mitigation measures to be implemented for the onsite events.
The application was referred to the NYS DOT for comment.  A field visit was held with David Corrigan (DOT), the Chairman, the applicant, and Peak Engineering in attendance. The DOT requires the north parking access to be relocated and improved to NYSDOT minor commercial standards and the southerly parking access to be removed in entirety.  A NYS DOT work permit will be required.  The south “service entrance” will remain as is.
The Accord Fire District submitted comments contrary to the NYS DOT requirements, however as the roadway is under the DOT jurisdiction, the DOT requirements take precedence. The Kripplebush Fire District did not respond to a request for comment.
  • The applicant developed and submitted a proposal for the required number of parking spaces combined in both temporary and permanent parking areas and included their methodology used to determine the information.  This was discussed by the Planning Board and determined to be adequate for the combined uses of the operation of the bed & breakfast and a 250 person event.  Temporary lighting which meets T/ Rochester specifications is proposed and will be a condition of the decision.
  • A request for comment was made to the UC Health Dept. which did not respond.
  • A request for comment was made to the NYS DEC which did not respond. Independently, the applicant submitted the report “Endangered, Threatened and Rare Species Evaluation” prepared by North Country Ecological Services, Inc.  No issues were found to exist and documentation was presented indicating the report was confirmed by the NYS DEC upon request by the applicant’s representative.
  • NYS OPRHP and the T/ Rochester HPC were requested to comment on the historical impacts of the proposal and neither agency had any issues.
  • The Town of Marbletown was requested to comment and indicated no permits are required by their jurisdiction so long as a condition is placed in the approval requiring the structure in Marbletown continue in use as a single family residence.
The application was required to be referred to the Ulster County Planning Board which returned a comment of “Required Modifications” indicating Health Dept. approval is required for this use.  The Planning Board decision will require the applicant seek Health Dept. consultation as to which, if any, permits or requirements are applicable in the use.
Mr. Ullman had questions on the language on #13. The last sentence- it should say something like “the board will impose as a condition of approval the requirement that the addition of noise mitigation measures be implemented.”

 

The Chairman agreed and changed the language.

 

On #16 Mr. Ullman had a problem with the ending- “Temporary lighting which meets T/ Rochester specifications is proposed and will be a condition of the decision.” He wasn’t sure what was meant by ‘proposed’. Proposed by whom?

 

Chairman Baden noted that it was proposed by the applicant.

 

This was suitable to Mr. Ullman.

 

Mr. O’Donnell wanted to make sure that they referred to the Town of Rochester in #6 in regards to the Section Block and Lot #.

 

Mr. Baden agreed with this correction.

 

Mr. O’Donnell motioned to approve the findings as amended. Seconded by Mr. Paddock. No discussion.
Vote:
Baden:  Yes                                             Tapper: Absent
O’Donnell:      Yes                                             Rominger:       Yes
Ullman: Yes                                             Ricks:          Absent
Paddock:        Yes                                     
                                                                        
Motion carried. 5 ayes, 0 nays, 2 absent, 0 abstentions

 

 
Continued Application Review
Site Plan Review
Elm Rock Inn LLC, for Site Plan Review. An expansion of a residential use Bed & Breakfast to hold onsite events pursuant to Section 140-35 of the Town of Rochester Zoning Code, 4496 Route 209, S/B/L #69.4-2-1.32, ‘B’ and ‘FD Overlay’ zoning districts.  The parcel also includes land located in the Town of Marbletown, 4494 Route 209, Tax Map #69.4-1-1.2.
At this time the Board reviewed the draft decision for Elm Rock Inn, LLC as prepared by the Chairman as follows:

 

RESOLVED,
        The Town of Rochester Planning Board grants Site Plan -Final Approval to Elm Rock Inn LLC permitting the expansion of a residential use Bed & Breakfast to hold onsite events pursuant to §140-35 of the Town of Rochester Zoning Code for the lands situate at 4494-4496 US Hwy Route 209, known as S/B/L 69.4-2-1.32, and located in the ‘B’ and ‘F Overlay’ zoning districts.  
This approval is given to allow twelve (12) onsite events to be held on the parcel per calendar year [as defined in §140-35 of the Town of Rochester Zoning Code].  Each day such onsite event occurs, whether held indoors or outdoors, shall constitute one (1) event.
The Site Plan dated April 2, 2013 is approved with the following conditions.    
        
CONDITIONS of APPROVAL:   

 

  • Any and all fees due to the Town of Rochester involving this application shall be paid in full prior to the Chairman’s signature on the plat.
Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the approved use
  • the applicant shall secure a NYS DOT work permit for the relocation of the north parking access and present certification of satisfactory completion of construction to the Code Enforcement Office and Planning Board
AND
  • the south parking access shall be removed entirely and rendered inaccessible with landscaping completed in accordance with the Site Plan.
  • The “service entrance” access shall be permitted to remain in “as is” condition, but shall be restricted from any use by guests of the bed & breakfast or the onsite events. Vehicles utilizing this access shall be restricted from backing onto or off of US Hwy Route 209.
  • This approval is subject to the specific conditions as detailed in §140-35, Bed and Breakfast Facilities, of the Town of Rochester Zoning Code.  [See attached copy]  
The owner shall bear the responsibility of notification to the Code Enforcement Office of the occurrence of each event by either written correspondence or by email a minimum of forty-eight hours (48) prior to the event.
The maximum occupancy of the onsite events shall be determined by the Code Enforcement Officer in conjunction with the NYS Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code, but shall not exceed 250 persons, inclusive of staff and guests, in any case with this approval.
  • All Local, County, State, and Federal Laws or Codes shall be complied with and all required Local, County, State, or Federal permits shall be secured for the current or future use of these lands.
Ulster County Health Dept. approval, if determined to be required, shall be specifically secured for each event.  
All onsite events with sound amplification shall be housed in a temporary tent or other structure.  The structure shall contain a minimum of three (3) sidewalls with only the side closest to US Hwy Route 209 permitted to remain open.  All sources of sound amplification shall be positioned so as to face Route 209. In the event the Code Enforcement Officer receives and determines valid noise complaints, the Planning Board authorizes him to require additional noise reduction barriers such as acoustic absorption panels or other measures.
Parking shall only be allowed in the spaces designated on the approved and signed Site Plan.  Parking for the Bed & Breakfast use shall be located in the gravel parking area. Parking shall not be allowed within the public road right-of-way or within designated Site Plan traffic aisles at any time.  
The applicant shall maintain the grass temporary parking area in a mowed and cleared safe condition when being utilized for the onsite event parking.
  • Temporary lighting of the temporary parking area meeting the T/ Rochester requirements, as stated on the Site Plan, shall be installed for each event occurring after daylight hours.
  • Any construction or disturbance within the FEMA designated 100-year floodplain shall adhere to the Code of the Town of Rochester Chapter 81, Flood Damage Prevention, or its successors.
  • As conditionally requested by the Town of Marbletown, the structure located within that town’s jurisdiction shall continue in use as a single family residence. Any change in use shall require determination by the T/ Marbletown Zoning Enforcement Officer.
  • Any deviation from or amending of the approved and signed Site Plan shall require resubmission to the Planning Board, except as may be permitted as determined by the Code Enforcement Officer.
The Town of Rochester Planning Board further grants the authority to the Chairman to certify condition 1 has been completed without further resolution and to sign and date the plat at such time.

 

EFFECT of APPROVAL:
  • This Site Plan approval and associated conditions shall be binding upon the applicant and all successive owners of the land so long as such use shall occur.  
  • This approval shall remain effective as an authorization to secure the required permits and establish the use for a maximum of one year from this date of approval unless the applicant shall have submitted written request and the Planning Board shall have adopted such resolution granting an extension and provided the applicant has submitted proof of having diligently pursued the implementation of the plans.  
DISCUSSION:
Mr. Ullman questioned #6, “with this approval”? He was confused by this language.

 

Chairman Baden agreed the decision probably didn’t need “with this approval” and they would delete it.

 

Mr. Ullman questioned #14, “conditionally”. What did that mean?

 

Chairman Baden noted that they didn’t have any jurisdiction over the structure because it was located in the Town of Marbletown. But Marbletown specifically made this request in their comment letter to the Board.

 

Mr. Ullman didn’t agree that the term “conditionally requested” was the right language for this.

 

Chairman Baden noted that he used that wording because they said that they wanted it as a condition of approval.

 

Mr. Ullman thought it sounded strange.

 

Chairman Baden took out the word “conditionally”.

 

The applicant questioned #9 on having 3 walls on the tent. If it was a beautiful night and the tent is open he thought that having 3 sides on the tent would be overboard.

 

Mr. Moriello noted that if it could make the tent very hot.

 

Chairman Baden asked how the Board felt about the condition?

 

The applicant noted that they were going to have the speakers facing Route 209 and the only house was in back of them.

 

Mr. Paddock thought that when they were taking a look at the one site plan they should a tent that wasn’t perpendicular to Route 209 and was on an angle- so at least 2 walls…

 

The applicant noted that the tree line in the back and the back wall in the tent would be plenty.
Continued Application Review
Site Plan Review
Elm Rock Inn LLC, for Site Plan Review. An expansion of a residential use Bed & Breakfast to hold onsite events pursuant to Section 140-35 of the Town of Rochester Zoning Code, 4496 Route 209, S/B/L #69.4-2-1.32, ‘B’ and ‘FD Overlay’ zoning districts.  The parcel also includes land located in the Town of Marbletown, 4494 Route 209, Tax Map #69.4-1-1.2.
Mr. Rominger was okay with the Code Enforcement Officer determining the noise issues.

 

Chairman Baden noted that normally the Board doesn’t negotiate with the applicant at this point, but he was willing to listen to what they had to say, but ultimately it was up to the Board.

 

Mr. O’Donnell noted that #13 on the findings “The Board will condition the decision to require additional noise mitigation measures to be implemented for the onsite events.” He was okay with leaving this up to the CEO.

 

Chairman Baden was in agreement with that and noted that they should word it to say that the wall must be at the rear of the property, but allow the other 3 to remain open.

 

Mr. O’Donnell noted that this almost had to be put up to the CEO. They might find out that the walls were too much and they didn’t need them- then they were locking them into something and not leaving room for variation. The CEO is the person that is going to get the feedback.

 

Chairman Baden agreed with the Board and noted that they would say the tent wall should be on the rear- the side opposite Route 209. and anything additionally required would be determined by the CEO.

 

Mr. Moriello questioned #12- the temporary lighting- did that need to be glare shielded?

 

Chairman Baden noted that was why the Board asked it be noted on the site plan that “the lighting shall be as per the Town of Rochester Code- and that would be determined by the CEO”.

 

Mr. Rominger motioned to approve the decision as amended. Seconded by Mr. Ullman.
Discussion:
Chairman Baden noted that this may have seemed like a long process, but from the Town’s standpoint, they have to protect the health, safety, and welfare. He emphasized that these conditions were important to be adhered to. Especially the parking along Route 209- that is a safety issue. He thought it was a great project.  
Vote:
Baden:  Yes                                             Tapper: Absent
O’Donnell:      Yes                                             Rominger:       Yes
Ullman: Yes                                             Ricks:          Absent
Paddock:        Yes                                     
                                                                        
Motion carried. 5 ayes, 0 nays, 2 absent, 0 abstentions
PB 2013-04 SBD          New Application Review
Minor Subdivision
Elizabeth Kawalchuk, for Minor Subdivision of a 7.89 acre lot into 2 lots, off Bank St./Route 209, S/B/L #77.1-1-26, ‘B’ and ‘FD Overlay’ zoning districts.
 
 Bill Eggers, LS from Medenbach & Eggers was present on behalf of the application.

 

Chairman Baden noted that this was located next to the former carpet store and it spans between Route 209 and a right-of-way next to Bank Street. What they are proposing is to cut off the back portion and create two lots. The house is already there and there is an existing right-of-way on the property where it says “improved gravel road” on the plan. There is a copy of the right-of-way in the member’s folders. The Town Attorney read through it and the right-of-way is granted in that, but there is no discussion of any Road Maintenance Agreement. She said that an RMA will have to be developed between Mrs. Kawalchuk and the owner of that right-of-way. He did note that the owner of that right-of-way has been in the PB office several times already and he is quite concerned about it, so they may want to contact him. A lot of the questions that he had were about the existing right of way and basically its not part of the Board’s review. Because previously they had access from Route 209 even though there was no road through there. But the Board now has to guarantee safety and emergency service access so they have to require a RMA be submitted.

 

Mr. Eggers questioned if they could not come to terms on an RMA- then they couldn’t get the subdivision approval?

 

Chairman Baden noted that would be the case unless they wanted to build their own right of way from Route 209 or some other mechanism.

 

Mr. Eggers noted that when Mrs. Kawalchuk noted that she wanted to keep a right-of-way from Route 209.

 

Chairman Baden noted that because the house is existing, the right-of-way wouldn’t be good enough- it would actually have to be built because the Town has to guarantee that access all the way to the home. It could be a private driveway and she would still need an RMA- which right now would be between herself because she owns both lots. When he pulled the County maps the front part of Route 209 is in the flood plain. It;s not a big issue, but because of that and the fact it is located on Route 209 the application needs to be referred to the County Planning Board. He didn’t see that being an issue.

 

Mr. Paddock questioned if this was the road that the Rondout Country Club was on?

 

Chairman Baden answered yes. Bank Street comes off of Whitfield and winds around the golf course and then becomes Bank Road which is a town road and if you go further down Bank Street there is a gravel road that he drove tonight before the meeting and it is in very good condition. He was very impressed with how wide it was. Bank Street dead ends from the Town’s jurisdiction and there is a right-of-way that had been granted in 2010 and it was filed with the County, but there is no discussion in it of maintenance and especially because it is completely on someone else’s property they need to ensure that.

 

Mr. Eggers believed that there was another house after that.
PB 2013-04 SBD          New Application Review
Minor Subdivision
Elizabeth Kawalchuk, for Minor Subdivision of a 7.89 acre lot into 2 lots, off Bank St./Route 209, S/B/L #77.1-1-26, ‘B’ and ‘FD Overlay’ zoning districts.

 

Chairman Baden noted that there was an RMA for the Yankee Barn Subdivision which is after the Kawalchuk lot, but there was never one done for this lot. Because the Town was never involved in it previously because this lot always had frontage on a public road. Now by making this subdivision there no longer will be. So by granting the subdivision they have to guarantee the condition of the road. If the Board thinks they have enough information, they can schedule it for public hearing and refer it to the County PB. They just wouldn’t be able to do a final decision until such time as the applicant can produce a RMA of some kind to be reviewed by the Town Attorney.

 

Mr. Eggers noted that he’s seen this situation a few times in the past and he can’t force these people to sign one.

 

Chairman Baden realized that, but because it doesn’t have frontage, they can’t approve the subdivision without it because essentially they would be creating a land locked parcel. Even though they have the right-of-way, there is no guarantee in it that it will be maintained.

 

Mr. Eggers noted that obviously they were able to get a building permit.

 

Chairman Baden didn’t know the answer to that.

 

Mr. Rominger motioned to schedule the Public Hearing for the July meeting. Seconded by Mr. O’Donnell. No discussion.
Vote:
Baden:  Yes                                             Tapper: Absent
O’Donnell:      Yes                                             Rominger:       Yes
Ullman: Yes                                             Ricks:          Absent
Paddock:        Yes                                     
                                                                        
Motion carried. 5 ayes, 0 nays, 2 absent, 0 abstentions

 

Mr. Baden motioned to refer the application to the County PB. Seconded by Mr. O’Donnell. No discussion.
Vote:
Baden:  Yes                                             Tapper: Absent
O’Donnell:      Yes                                             Rominger:       Yes
Ullman: Yes                                             Ricks:          Absent
Paddock:        Yes                                     
                                                                        
Motion carried. 5 ayes, 0 nays, 2 absent, 0 abstentions
New Application Review
Minor Subdivision
David and Thomas Kennedy, for Minor Subdivision of a 2 acre lot into 2 lots, off Krum Rd., S/B/L #68.4-7-20, ‘R-1’ zoning district.

 

Mr. Dawson was present on behalf of the application. He noted that this was two existing homes with a right of way that they accessed on the lot next door. It’s a family- two kids, separate septics, shared well.

 

Chairman Baden noted that this is a similar situation. There is a right-of-way on the lot next door, but no RMA. So, because the new lot 1 will not have frontage- there will need to be a RMA between lot 1 and the owners of the right-of-way.

 

Mr. Dawson noted that what he has done in the past is come up with an RMA from the lot to the public road agreeing to take care of the road from point A-B.

 

Chairman Baden noted that what ever they come up with will need to be reviewed by the Town Attorney. In the past when it was one lot on paper it had access on Krum Road even though that access was not utilized. It didn’t need an RMA at that.

 

Mr. Dawson noted that the house in the back accesses this right-of-way as well. That is all one parcel- it wraps around. The right-of-way is on a 3rd lot owned by a different owner. He didn’t think an RMA would be a problem anyway. They are all friendly.

 

Chairman Baden noted that the applicant will be responsible for the cost of the Town Attorney review. This is not in an Ag District, no flood plain, no wetlands- no other referrals. Since there is a shared well there will also need to be a shared well agreement that the Attorney will need to review. The shared well agreement should be referenced on the plan.

 

Mr. Rominger motioned to schedule the Public Hearing for July. Seconded by Mr. Paddock. No discussion.
Vote:
Baden:  Yes                                             Tapper: Absent
O’Donnell:      Yes                                             Rominger:       Yes
Ullman: Yes                                             Ricks:          Absent
Paddock:        Yes                                     
                                                                        
Motion carried. 5 ayes, 0 nays, 2 absent, 0 abstentions

 

OTHER MATTERS:
LGRMIF Grant update- Chairman Baden noted that the grant money runs out at the end of June and they are 2/3rds of the way done.

 

August Meeting: There is a conflict for the 2nd Tuesday of the month, so Chairman Baden asked the Board members to check their calendars for August 6th and they will decide at the next meeting.
ADJOURNMENT
Mr. O’Donnell motioned to adjourn the meeting. Seconded by Mr. Rominger. No discussion.
All members present in favor.

 

Chairman Baden adjourned the meeting at 7:55PM.

 

Respectfully submitted,
                                                        
Rebecca Paddock Stange, Secretary       
                                                        Approved July 9, 2013