PLANNING BOARD
TOWN OF ROCHESTER
ULSTER COUNTY
ACCORD, NEW YORK
(845) 626-2434
MINUTES OF February 8th, 2021 REGULAR MEETING OF the Town of Rochester PLANNING BOARD, held at 7:00pm via ZOOM and Streamed on Youtube.
Chairperson Lindstrom asked everyone to stand for the Pledge to the Flag.
The Secretary did roll call attendance.
PRESENT: ABSENT:
Maren Lindstrom, Chairperson Patrick Williams
Sam Zurofsky, Vice Chair Person
Rick Jones
Zorian Pinsky
Ann Marie Maloney
Marc Grasso
ALSO PRESENT:
Zachary Jarvis, Alternate.
Mary Lou Christiana, Town Attorney
Brianna Tetro, Secretary.
ANNOUNCEMENTS and COMMUNICATIONS
February 22nd Workshop Meeting Decision:
Chair Lindstrom stated that there would be a Workshop meeting on February 22nd, 2021 as scheduled as there was going to be more items for Short Term Rentals submitted at that point.
Meeting Protocol Template:
Chair Lindstrom stated the work on the new meeting protocol template
Introduction of New Members
Chair Lindstrom announced that Mr. Marc Grasso and Mr. Zachary Jarvis were appointed to the Planning Board. Mr. Grasso was appointed as a member while Mr. Jarvis was appointed as the alternate. Chair Lindstrom stated they would do a more official introduction session at the end of the meeting.
TRAININGS:
Chair Lindstrom reminded the Board to get their yearly training done early as there were many training opportunities already out and they continued to be all virtual.
ACTION ON MINUTES:
The Board did not make a motion on the January 11th, 2021 Regular Minutes. The Board did not make a motion on the January 25th, 2021 Workshop Meeting Minutes.
APPLICATION REVIEW:
PB 2021-03 LLI New Application
Accord LLC (Michael Fink) (Applicant & Owner) & Carolyn Ferolito (Owner)
Lot Line Improvement
The applicant proposes the combination of three lots: S/B/L 77.9-1-29 vacant land (+/- 1.33 acres), S/B/L 77.9-1-28 with a single family residence (+/- 1.98 acres), and S/B/L 77.9-1-31 vacant land (+/- 2.32 acres) by the deletion of lot lines to combine parcels into one +/- 5.61 acre parcel. The parcels are located at 2 Towpath Road, Accord, NY with further frontage onto Granite Road, The parcels are in the Hamlet (H) zoning district.
SEQRA: Type II by code
Mr. Renn Hawkey, Mr. Henry Rich, Ms. Vera Farmiga and Mr. David Wyncoop (all of Accord, LLC) were present on behalf of the application.
Mr. Hawkey explained the application. He added that this was the first phase of a future proposal that would be more involved.
Mr. Zurofsky commented that it looked as though there were three tax parcels to be combined but there were four tax section/block/lot (s/b/l) parcels.
Attorney Christiana asked if there were two deeds.
Mr. Hawkey confirmed there were two deeds for one tax parcel.
Attroney Christiana asked if everything had been deeded over to Accord, LLC as the Board could not grant the lot line improvement without the deeds being in the name of the proper parties.
Mr. Jones asked what the plans for the property were once the lot line improvement had been certified.
Mr. Rich explained that at the moment they were thinking of doing a restaurant or something to that affect.
Mr. Grasso asked if in changing the use to the current structure on the property, if there were any historic preservation issues.
Chair Lindstrom said that was a good question but the focus was only on the lot line improvement at the moment and those concerns would be addressed if and when the applicants came back with another project.
Attorney Christiana reminded the Board that they could not certify a lot line without the deeded being in the proper party’s name(s).
Mr, Hawkey said they would have the deeds in the coming week.
Mr. Zurofsky said the maps needed to be updated with the proper owner information.
Chair Lindstrom added the maps needed to have #125-18 A 3 and C.
Attorney Christiana said the map label should be changed from sketch plan to lot line improvement. She added there needed to be a label and certification seal on the maps from the surveyor.
There was no further discussion.
PB-2021-02 LLI (Natural Subdivision) New Application
John Post (Applicant) Henry M. Rich (Owner)
The applicant proposes a two lot subdivision of the lands at 272 Dug Road, Accord, NY S/B/L 60.4-1-25.210 (+/- 22.964 acres). Proposed lot two of +/4.01 acres (west side of Dug Road) and proposed lot 1 of +/- 18.75 acres (east side of Dug Road), the parcel being bisected by Dug Road. Lot two has an existing single family dwelling, well and septic. Lot one will need new well and septic. The parcel is wooded, may contain wetlands and contains steep slope lands. The parcel is in the R-2 (Low Density Residential) and R-5 (Rural Conservation) Zoning Districts Proposed lot one will be entirely in the R-2 Zoning District and contains a small amount of FEMA 100 year floodplains (FD Overlay District) in the rear of the lot. Lot two will be in both the R-5 and the R-2 Zoning Districts. Lot two contains Ulster County Habitat Core Lands/DEC Core Forest Layers of top 5% quality and is a DEC known area for rare aquatic animals along the interior 1,500 feet (approximately) and is within 500 feet of the Pacama Vly NYSDEC regulated wetlands, Habitat lands are not proposed to be disturbed.
SEQRA: Type II by code
Mr. John Post and Mr. Henry Rich were present on behalf of the application.
Mr. Post explained the application. He noted that the oddly shaped strip of the property was due to one piece being separated by the road.
Attorney Christiana said the maps needed all the required information for the Natural Subdivision and they were the same map notes as a lot line improvement.
Chair Lindstrom stated the maps needed #125-18 and the surveyor’s certification seal. She added the title of the map should be “Natural Subdivision” and if these changes were made in time for the next meeting, the certification of the natural subdivision could be made at that time.
2020-05 SPA Continued Application
Site Plan Approval 140-29 (B) (2) Type B action
American Tower Corporation (owner), Allison Hebel, agent (applicant) on behalf of AT&T d/b/a Cingular wireless PCS
Proposes equipment upgrade consisting of the replacement of six (6) antennas, six (6) RRVs, adding three (3) additional RRV’s , adding one (1) surge protector and equipment associated with the aforementioned, on existing wireless facility. No changes to tower height or footprint are proposed. Type B action by code: “replacement, alteration or modification of existing transmission equipment or a telecommunications structure or the colocation of transmission equipment on an existing wireless telecommunications facility which constitutes an ‘eligible facilities request’ action as defined by the FCC”. Site access is at 6140 Route 209, Kerhonkson, NY, S/B/L 76.1-3-17,(‘sand mine solar farm’ ± 67 acres). Area of equipment ± 3,000 sq feet (0.07 acres), in the AR-3 (Residential Agriculture) zoning district.
SEQRA: Unlisted/Uncoordinated Negative Declaration 1/11/2021
Ms. Allison Hebel was present on behalf of the application.
Chair Lindstrom explained the application and stated that a decision had not been made at the prior’s month’s meeting due to not receiving the required information in time. She explained that all items had been sent in and therefore a decision could be made.
Chair Lindstrom read the decision:
Decision 2020-05 SPA
Site Plan Approval 140-29 (B) (2) Type B action Conditional Final Approval
Applicant: American Tower Corporation (owner), Allison Hebel, Centerline Communications agent (applicant) on behalf of AT&T d/b/a Cingular wireless PCS
Reason for Request: Proposes equipment upgrade consisting of the replacement of six (6) antennas, six (6) RRUs, adding three (3) additional RRU’s , adding one (1) surge protector and equipment associated with the aforementioned, on existing wireless facility. No changes to tower height or footprint are proposed. Type B action by code: “replacement, alteration or modification of existing transmission equipment or a telecommunications structure or the colocation of transmission equipment on an existing wireless telecommunications facility which constitutes an ‘eligible facilities request’ action as defined by the FCC”.
Location: 6140 Route 209, Kerhonkson, NY
S/B/L: SBL 76.1-3-17
Total Acreage: (‘sand mine solar farm’ ± 67 acres). Area of tower pad/equipment ± 3,000 sq. feet (0.07 acres)
Zoning District: AR-3
Code Enforcement Determination: Site Plan Approval. A 140-29 (B) (2) Type B action by code.
Zoning Permit: 496 of 2020, received October 30th, 2020
Planning Board Application: 2020-05 SPA
PB Application filed: 11/19/2020
EAF filed: 11/19/2020
SEQR Type: Unlisted/Uncoordinated Neg. Declaration, January 11th, 2021
Other Referrals: Ulster County Planning Board (access onto Route 209)
Documents considered by the Planning Board for review for application:
1. Zoning Permit 496 of 2020 received 10/30/2020
2. Letter of determination from Code Enforcement Officer of Site Plan Approval received 11/09/2020
3. Planning Board Site Plan application, 2020 – 05 SPA received 11/19/2020
4. American Tower Structural Analysis Report, received 11/19/2020
5. Short Form EAF Part 1, received 11/19/2020
6. Site Plan, Equipment Layout Plan, Schedule of Installation, Equipment Specifications and grounding details, dated 10/07/2020, received 11/19/2020
7. Construction Drawings and aerial photos received 11/19/2020
8. Letter of Authorization from American Tower to Centerline Communications and Cingular Wireless PCS d/b/a ATT Mobility received 11/19/2020
9. Narrative of Project/Scope of Work received 11/19/2020
10. Certification of NIER levels (RF Compliance Report), dated 1/11/2021
11. Copy of Original Lease effective 12/01/2009
12. Ulster County Planning Board Response Letter, received 1/15/2021
Notice of Public Hearing:
1. Published in the Shawangunk Journal December 31st, 2020
2. Notice by mail to known adjacent landowners, and
3. Posted on the T/ Rochester Clerk bulletin board and town website.
Date of Public Hearing: January 11, 2021
Place: Community Center/Virtual Meeting, Accord, NY
Public Comment: (see Minutes of Town of Rochester Planning Board, 1/11/2021)
* * * *
Findings of the Planning Board with review of the Site Plan Approval Application:
1. The Planning Board received a zoning referral for maintenance and upgrade to the existing telecommunications cell tower at 6140 Route 209, Kerhonkson, NY. The request is a §140-29 (B) (2) Type B action by code.
2. Original Lease Agreement with the Town of Rochester commenced in December of 2009.
3. The Planning Board further received a Site Plan and Special Use application, EAF, and related documentation from the applicant, cited above in documents received.
4. The parcel on which the cell tower is located is known as S/B/L 76.1-3-17.
5. Proposes equipment upgrade consisting of the replacement of six (6) antennas, six (6) RRUs, adding three (3) additional RRU’s , adding one (1) surge protector and equipment associated with the aforementioned, on existing wireless facility. No changes to tower height or footprint are proposed. The new equipment is to be installed on the existing American Tower Corp. owned monopole. The maintenance and conversion/installation of equipment is expected to take several weeks.
6. The parcel is +/- 67 acres located at the Town of Rochester’s sand mine converted into a utility scale solar farm, is located in the AR-3 zoning district, and the use complies with the standards of such districts and no further review is required.
7. There are no other changes proposed to the site.
8. Planning Board discussed, reviewed, and determined the proposed upgrade and maintenance work is administered under and compliant with Town Zoning Code Chapter §140-29 and is a “Type B” action by code: “replacement, alteration or modification of existing transmission equipment or a telecommunications structure or the colocation of transmission equipment on an existing wireless telecommunications facility which constitutes an ‘eligible facilities request’ action as defined by the FCC”.
9. The proposal meets the minimum development standards of Town of Rochester Code Chapter 140, Zoning.
10. The Planning Board received certification that the proposed modifications/improvements NIER levels are within the threshold levels adopted by the FCC and that the calculations used to determine the cumulative NIER levels if the application involves collocation.
11. The Planning Board received a copy of the lease agreement stating that AT&T (or equivalents) can apply for all permits necessary for any construction in lieu of the parcel owner’s signature.
12. The telecommunications industry is considered a public utility and the federal government retains significant regulatory powers which override Home Rule authority of local government and the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is the federal regulatory authority of the industry.
13. The Telecommunications Act of 1996 mandates State or local government “shall not unreasonably discriminate among providers of functionally equivalent services” and “shall not prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting the provision of personal wireless services “. It further states “No State or local government or instrumentality thereof may regulate the placement, construction, and modification of personal wireless service facilities on the basis of the environmental effects of radio frequency emissions to the extent that such facilities comply with the Commission’s regulations concerning such emissions.”
14. The Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012 mandates “a State or local government may not deny, and shall approve, any eligible facilities request for a modification of an existing wireless tower or base station that does not substantially change the physical dimensions of such tower or base station.”
15. The Planning Board referred the application to the Ulster County Planning Board and received a “no county impact” response.
16. Public hearing was held on January 11th, 2021.
Draft findings were prepared by the Chairman and were read, discussed and amended by the Planning Board.
Adopted February 8th, 2021
Ayes: 6 Nays: 0 Absent: 1
Motion to adopt findings by: Mr. Jones
Second by: Ms. Maloney
* * * *
RESOLVED,
Pursuant to the standards of Town of Rochester code §140, Zoning, the Town of Rochester Planning Board has reviewed the application presented and grants Site Plan— Conditional Final Approval for Centerline Communications (agent/applicant) on behalf of American Tower, aka ATT d/b/a Cingular wireless PCS permitting the maintenance and upgrading of the leased cell tower lands situate at 6140 Route 209, Kerhonkson, NY, known as S/B/L 76.1-3-17, and located in the AR-3 zoning.
Condition of Approval:
1. Receipt of Certification of that the proposed upgrades of antenna(s) and equipment associated with the aforementioned will not cause interference with other telecommunication devices.
EFFECT of APPROVAL:
1. This Special Use and Site Plan approval and associated conditions shall be binding upon the applicant and all successive owners of the land so long as such use(s) shall occur.
2. This approval shall remain effective as an authorization to secure the required permits and establish the use(s) 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.
Draft resolution was prepared by the Chairman and was read, discussed and amended by the Planning Board. The Town of Rochester Planning Board further grants the authority to the Chairman to sign and date the plat without further resolution.
Adopted February 8th, by the following vote:
Ayes: 6 Nays: 0 Absent: 1
Motion made by: Mr. Pinsky
Seconded by: Mr. Grasso
PB 2020-06 SBD Public Hearing/Continued Application
Olga Byrne (Owner and Applicant)
Minor Subdivision
Applicant proposes a minor subdivision into three lots of the parcel S/B/L 60.3-2-2.510 (+/- 23.8 acres) located at 2002 Queens Highway, Accord, NY with access by a shared driveway. The current shared driveway is to be abandoned so that it no longer serves the adjacent parcel 60.3-2-51.120 as well as the proposed three lot subdivision. Proposed lots: lot one of +/-9 acres, lot two of +/- 4.9 acres and lot three of 9.9 acres. Parcel is in the R-2 (Low Density Residential) zoning district. Parcel is flat to sloping woodlands and contains a named stream (Gray Creek), ACOE wetlands, and Ulster County Habitat Core Lands.
SEQRA: Unlisted Uncoordinated, Conditional Negative Declaration December 12/14/2020
Ms. Heather Gabriel and Ms. Olga Byrne were present on behalf of the application. Liz Axelson from the Town’s consultant firm, CPL, was also present on behalf of the application.
Ms. Axelson explained that this was a complicated piece of property to subdivide as it was, essentially, trying to cram everything onto lots that were difficult to develop. She stated that the applicant and their representatives should add steep slopes to the maps, as well as address the driveway situation, as there were two driveways next to one another and that was potentially a safety issue. To the driveway issue, Ms. Axelson suggested doing a private road instead, as this would help make sure the use of the driveway would be safe as well as cause less of a disturbance to the land. Ms. Axelson summarized that there was enough land for this proposal to be a better and more reasonable way.
Chair Lindstrom echoed Ms. Axelson’s concerns and suggestions. She stated that the general overview was that they were cramping everything onto these lots and it would make it extremely difficult to approve as it were at the moment.
Chair Lindstrom opened the public hearing.
Chair Lindstrom read a letter for Mr. David Gray:
Dear Planning board members,
After the January meeting I have noticed some changes and mischief happening on the proposed subdivision located on queens highway. At the conclusion of the meeting it was decided that an engineer would come and make an assessment of the land and the grade of the slope, water etc etc. Within the next days to follow there were people in the streambed on this land pulling rocks out of the stone walls that have been there for a long time. Clearly someone had the idea to quickly get in and try to alter what has been shown by the photos my parents sent you for the last meeting before a fair assessment could be completed by the engineer. This seems very inappropriate and sneaky and a lack of character in my mind. The fact that someone is changing the land before it even had a chance to be evaluated makes me wonder what else will be covered up or hidden in the future if this subdivision comes to fruition. Please be aware of what is happening on this property because this isn’t the first time unusual things have happened there since these new owners have took possession. Please look at the attached photo’s and you can see the rock piles left after the stones were removed to change the flow of water. I’ve lived here 32 years and I know when something is different and this just happened after the meeting.
Thank you,
David Gray
Chair Lindstrom reminded the Board and applicant that any disturbance to a wetlands needed a permit from the DEC.
Ms. Gabriel stated that one of the Board members at the January meeting had suggested moving rocks in the nearby streambed.
Chair Lindstrom responded that that suggested had been during a Board discussion and had not been stated to the applicant as a suggestion.
Mr. Zurofsky stated he wanted to keep the public hearing open in order to ensure anyone else who wanted to comment could do so and for CPL to get their added comments and report in.
Chair Lindstrom made the motion to keep the public hearing open until the March 8th, 2021 regular meeting. Ms. Maloney seconded the motion.
Roll Call:
Chair Lindstrom- Yes Ms. Maloney- Yes
Mr. Zurofsky- Yes Mr. Grasso- Yes
Mr. Williams- Absent
Mr. Jones- Yes
Mr. Pinsky- Yes
All in Favor. Motion Carried.
6 ayes, 0 nays, 1 absent, 0 abstentions.
Ms. Axelson had not yet seen the most recent submissions of the application on Google Drive and therefore had suggested additional items that had already been submitted. Mr. Zurfosky suggested a call between the applicant’s representatives, CPL, and either Chair Lindstrom or Mr. Zurofsky to get everyone on the same page in preparation of the March 8th regular meeting.
There was no further discussion.
PB 2021-01 SBD Continued Application
Verna Gilles, Brian Rosenworcel & Megan Poe
Major Subdivision
Applicants proposes to convey +/- 0.68 acres from Gilles lot S/B/L 67.2-2-2.200 (+/- 21.4 acres) to Rosenworcel/Poe lot S/B/L 67.2-2-2.100 so that the existing septic and well serving S/B/L 67.2-2-2.100 (+/- 10.7 acres) are duly on the deeded lot. The proposed action is a “re-subdivision of lands” under 125-12 where by the re-subdivision of previously subdivided lands shall be considered a major subdivision. Both Parcels are in the R-5 zoning district and located respectively at 28 Doggums Way and 37 Chipmunk Hollow, Kerhonkson
Ms. Heather Gabriel was present on behalf of the application.
Chair Lindstrom explained the application had been determined to be a major subdivision but was more consistent with a lot line, therefore the applicant’s representatives had submitted a waiver in order to not have to address every item required for a major subdivision.
Chair Lindstrom read the waiver for the Board:
“Dear Planning Board Members;
Ms. Gillis would like to convey the lands that contain an existing well and septic system to her neighbor. Since the lots involved fall within an existing subdivision, the Town has classified this action as a major subdivision. On the behalf of the applicants and at the request of the Planning Board, we would like to formally request waivers from the provisions of Section 125-14 of the Town Code (Sketch Plans for Major Subdivisions), as this is action is essentially a lot line improvement and does not include the creation of a new lot. The current map for the proposed action was prepared in conformance with Section 125-18: Lot improvements and natural subdivisions.
We appreciate your consideration in this matter and will await your decision prior to submitting and addition plans for this lot line improvement.”
Chair Lindstrom stated it needed to be reviewed as a Major Subdivision, per the code. She said the remainder of the waiver request was sufficient.
Ms. Maloney made the motion to accept the waiver as read by the Chair. Mr. Jones seconded the motion.
Roll Call:
Chair Lindstrom- Yes Ms. Maloney- Yes
Mr. Zurofsky- Yes Mr. Grasso- Yes
Mr. Williams- Absent
Mr. Jones- Yes
Mr. Pinsky- Yes
All in Favor. Motion Carried.
6 ayes, 0 nays, 1 absent, 0 abstentions.
Chair Lindstrom made the motion to set the application for public hearing at the March 8th, 2021 regular meeting. Chair Jones seconded the motion.
Roll Call:
Chair Lindstrom- Yes Ms. Maloney- Yes
Mr. Zurofsky- Yes Mr. Grasso- Yes
Mr. Williams- Absent
Mr. Jones- Yes
Mr. Pinsky- Yes
All in Favor. Motion Carried.
6 ayes, 0 nays, 1 absent, 0 abstentions.
Attorney Christiana stated the maps needed to be changed from “lot line improvement” to “Amended Subdivision” and a Road Maintenance Agreement.
PB-2020-11 SBD Continued Application
Jack Schoonmaker (Owner & Applicant)
Major Subdivision
The applicant proposes a three lot subdivision of lands located at Tow Path Road, Garden Lane & Lawrence Road, Accord, NY S/B/L 77.1-3-2.113+/- 296 acres. Lot one of +/- 3.1 acres is proposed to front Lawrence Road. Lot 2 of +/- 3.1 acres is proposed to front Tow Path Road. Lot one and lot two propose the construction of single family dwellings, and will need well and septic. The third parcel will be the remaining lands of +/- 290 acres. The parcel is in the Ulster County Ag District, AP Overlay District, contains prime farmland and farmland of statewide importance, is within 500 feet of two registered historic structures: the Alliger-Davenport House and the proposed remaining parcel contains the Joachim Schoonmaker Farm House. The parcel is currently used for hay and contains gently sloping to flat lands. The parcel is in the AR-3 Zoning District, As the parcel was previously subdivided in 2014 (a 3.16 acres parcel) and received a natural subdivision permit for an additional +/- 3.06 acre parcel in 2019 the application is a re-subdivision of lands which as per 125-12 constitutes a major subdivision.
SEQRA: TBD
Ms. Heather Gabriel and Mr. Daniel Schoonmaker were present on behalf of the application.
Chair Lindstrom explained that the application had been granted a waiver at the January 11th, 2021 Regular Meeting as it had been determined to be a major subdivision but as it was only three lots, it didn’t need to address all the items for a major subdivision.
Chair Lindstrom stated the maps needed to have the addition of contour numbers.
Ms. Gabriel commented there was a 11% grade on the map.
Chair Lindstrom responded that needed to be shown.
Attorney Christiana said that the filed map from the original subdivision needed to be referenced on the new subdivision map and state it was amended.
The Board discussed the outside agencies they wanted to refer the application to.
Chair Lindstrom made the motion to refer the application to the following: New York State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), Ulster County Planning Board, Town of Rochester Historic Preservation Commission, Accord Fire District, and the Town Highway Department. Mr. Pinsky seconded the motion.
Roll Call:
Chair Lindstrom- Yes Ms. Maloney- Yes
Mr. Zurofsky- Yes Mr. Grasso- Yes
Mr. Williams- Absent
Mr. Jones- Yes
Mr. Pinsky- Yes
All in Favor. Motion Carried.
6 ayes, 0 nays, 1 absent, 0 abstentions.
Mr. Jones made the motion to set the application for Public Hearing at the March 8th, 2021 regular meeting. Chair Lindstrom seconded the motion.
Roll Call:
Chair Lindstrom- Yes Ms. Maloney- Yes
Mr. Zurofsky- Yes Mr. Grasso- Yes
Mr. Williams- Absent
Mr. Jones- Yes
Mr. Pinsky- Yes
All in Favor. Motion Carried.
6 ayes, 0 nays, 1 absent, 0 abstentions.
PB 2020-04 SUP Public Hearing/Continued Application
Henry Rich (Owner and Applicant)
Special Use Permit
The applicant proposed the conversion of existing pottery studio into a grocery/convenience store and office space. Existing use of Pottery Studio received a Use Variance in 1996. Current lot area is nonconforming (0.5 acres) in H (Hamlet) zoning district. Parcel is located at 19-23 Main Street, Accord, NY, S/B/L 77.9-1-37.100. Parcel is in FD (Floodplain Development) Overlay District and contains prime farmland.
SEQRA: Type II
Ms. Heather Gabriel and Mr. Henry Rich were present on behalf of the application.
Chair Lindstrom stated the applicant had submitted a new narrative late that afternoon:
“The site, shown on the Town of Rochester Tax Map as Lot 77.9-1-37.100, is 0.58
acres and contains a single-family home, a small antique shop and a former pottery
studio. The lot falls within the bounds of the Accord Historic District and the former
pottery was originally known as the Anderson Garage. There is an existing well, a
dug well and two septic systems on site, which serve the house and the studio.
There is no water or sewer service at the antique shop. The zoning for this site is
“Hamlet District”.
There is an existing approved site plan for the lot (“Pot Luck Studios”, approved
April 30, 1996) that illustrates the retail space, a pottery studio and a single-family
home. The existing site plan provides for 11 onsite parking spaces for use by the
studio and retail shop.
The applicant, Henry Rich, proposes to convert the former pottery studio into a
small grocery store. The shop would feature dried goods and local produce, with
prepared food sales limited to coffee and pre-packaged goods, with no onsite food
preparation. The proposed store hours are every day from 7am to 8 pm with two
employees per day serving the shop. The applicant also proposes to change the
existing antique store to general retail. These proposed uses are allowed in this
district with special use permit approval. There are no changes proposed for the
residential use of the property.
Total proposed customer area for both the retail shop and the grocery is 2,480 SF,
necessitating 14 parking spaces be provided at a rate of 1 space per 175 SF of
customer area. At the Planning Board’s request, the existing parking plan was
modified to accommodate 9 spaces, therefore 5 spaces from the municipal lot may
be needed during peak business hours. The employees will use the municipal lot in
order to keep the on site parking available for customers.
Trash and recycling for all uses would be removed by a licensed trash hauler and
kept indoors until the day of pick-up. Deliveries would come via a small box truck
and would be restricted to either before or after business hours so that the entirety
of the central lot can be used for the truck movements and thus eliminate the need
to back in or out of Main Street.
Proposed changes to the site include resurfacing a portion of the central parking
area and provide landscaping and outdoor seating areas as shown on the attached
site plan. The ADA-compliant parking stall and the crosswalk between the two
commercial structures would be paved, while the rest of the lots will remain as
gravel. Changes to the exterior of the building would be limited to refurbishing the
entries, installing shielded, Dark Sky compliant and architecturally complimentary
light fixtures near the entrances and installing solar panels on the roof. Signage for
the grocery and retail shop, designed in compliance with Town sign regulations and
the NYS Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation regulations for historic
districts, will be hung from the storefronts as shown. The attached architectural
floor plans and elevations illustrate the proposed changes to the studio and antique
store and the attached site plan illustrates the proposed changes to the site itself.
The applicant anticipates that these site improvements will result in a welcoming environment that encourages community gathering and stimulate further
development within the Hamlet.”
Chair Lindstrom went through the newly submitted site plan.
Ms. Gabriel explained they had mitigated the parking issues by widening the spaces and therefore lost 2 parking spaces.
Chair Lindstrom noted the application would need to go to Ulster County Department of Health (UCDOH) and Ulster County Department of Public Works (UCDPW) once the final map had been submitted in order for them to comment and review the proposed project. She asked about a landscaping plan.
Ms. Gabriel stated they were going to remove the taller trees in front of the property to help the sight line of the parking lot per UCDPW’s suggestion at the November 23rd, 2020 Gateway meeting.
Ms. Maloney asked where the handicap parking was going to located.
Ms. Gabriel stated it would be the 1st paved parking space shown on the plans.
Ms. Maloney said that the delivery times of before 7 am and after 8 pm sounded a bit intrusive, especially those after 8pm. She asked if that could be changed.
Ms. Gabriel explained the delivery times seemed to be the best of what was considered.
Mr. Jones asked if there was parking allowed on the street.
Chair Lindstrom stated absolutely not.
Mr. Pinsky said he did not feel the trees in front of the building, which the applicant was proposing to be removed, needed to be removed as they did not obstruct the view coming out of the parking lot. He stated he was not comfortable with removing them.
Ms. Gabriel said the trees blocked the façade of the building and would block signage they would potentially put up.
Chair Lindstrom stated maybe some of the trees could be removed and others would remain.
Mr. Pinsky asked where the proposed sign for the front of the store would be.
Mr. Rich argued that he wanted to proceed with the site plan as it were, he wanted the entire front shown, and did not want the trees remaining to be part of the condition of approval.
Mr. Grasso asked what the remaining 2400 sq ft of the building would be used for, would it be for storage?
Chair Lindstrom answered it was going to be used as an office space that would only be able to be used by the applicant.
Mr. Zurofsky stated he wanted to see parking signage to help make sure the parking was being done safely.
Chair Lindstrom stated they would need a complete package from the applicant in order to send it to the County for comments. She wanted the following: Narrative, Waiver, Original site aerial, lighting plan, signage, parking renderings, elevations, legend from architect, and dumpster location.
Ms. Gabriel said they would not need dumpsters because they would not be disposing of food.
Mr. Grasso said all their deliveries would be in boxes, the boxes would need to be disposed of somewhere, so there was a need to show where a dumpster could be.
Chair Lindstrom opened the public hearing.
Chair Lindstrom read two public comments in the form of emailed letters:
“I am writing to express my enthusiastic support for the creation of a grocery/convenience store at 19-23 Main Street in Accord.
Accord is one of the treasures of our Town, but is very much in need of revitalization and economic development. It has the potential to be a vibrant and charming hamlet with services for the community that would also draw people in from other parts of the town.
A grocery/convenience store would be a great beginning to this revitalization, since it meets fundamental daily needs. And the fact that the applicant has shown great sensitivity and creativity in his operations elsewhere suggests that this facility has the potential to become a model project.
I hope that the board will give this application a favorable response.
Thank you.
Andrew Pekarik
Accord, NY”
“Dear Planning Board Members
I am writing today regarding the Special Use Permit for the property located at 19-23 Main St., in Accord.
In looking over the minutes from 2020, my initial concern is the applicant’s lack of thoroughness in addressing needed information needed for review and consideration. On paper, this resistance reads as either incomplete plans and/or the understanding that this proposed use exceeds the property’s resources and is not a good plan at all. If the additional information has been provided, I did not find it and some of my questions may overlap previously answered concerns. Please advise if this is the case and let me know where I can find the answers already addressed.
It is also generally understood that the applicant’s original idea was for a restaurant. This Plan B is closely resembling that, with references to a deli and a “community space”. (Questions regarding this are below.). In my opinion, the plan is too big for the property and its resources. In trying to make it fit, boundaries are being pushed to overflowing, with little clarity as to why. We have many grocery store/delis in the area that appear to meet the needs of both our residents and our guests.
At this time, my personal opinion is the use of this parcel should be reconsidered for a different purpose. I am, however, open to more information and plans that address my concerns and the concerns of the Board and public.
My concerns and questions regarding the proposed plan and permit request are as follows:
Parking
What is the anticipated/approved building capacity?(Post COVID)
Does the capacity match the available parking?
How will deliveries be handled? Is there a loading zone/dock?
How do these parking spaces affect the neighboring businesses that are currently using those spaces? How will parking be addressed for those businesses?
How will overflow parking be handled and enforced?
Will there be “No Parking” signs on Main St.? (As I recall this needs to be run by the our Town Attorney, so maybe Ms. Christiana can address this?)
Will there be a tow truck on call to handle violators?
Who will be handling violations?
Will the Constables be ticketing violators? It is also known that the Constable’s powers are severely limited at this time, so have or will the UC Sheriff’s or NYS Troopers be asked to help deal with parking issues?
How many parking spaces of the 9, will be used by the business, including employees, business vehicles and residents of the house?
How many spaces are ADA compliant? Is the reduction in spaces a result of this compliance As two parking spaces are needed to make one handicapped space?
What kind of signage will be used to direct traffic to the Municipal lot? Who is expected to pay for this?
We are all aware that out of town visitors/part-timers (as well as locals) do not necessarily abide by rules and based on the proposed business venture being across the street from the firehouse this could (much like the swimming hole) become a safety issue, not only with on street parking (which will happen), but also with shoppers using the firehouse property to park (which will also happen).
Add to that that Main St. is used by farming vehicles that can take up more than one lane of traffic. People parking on the street will cause additional traffic issues during farming seasons.
The fire trucks have to have access to all of Main St., not just one lane, especially given the size our ladder truck.
And if the business is running during the snow season, on street parkers will hinder plowing efforts.
Municipal Parking – It is my understanding that part of the lot actually belongs to the firehouse. With that taken into account, how many spaces are available while considering current use (i.e. Philiber Research, the Historical Society et al). Also, since the firehouse hosts private, community, and election events, the Municipal Lot will certainly exceed capacity at times. How will this be addressed?
With the reallocation of parking, the probability of congestion on Main St. will be increased. And this should be taken into account prior to permit approval as well.
Business Scope
What is the scope and meaning of their website statement,
“A community space – equal parts grocery and general store – right in the heart of town”?
Are there proposed expansions for this business? A Phase 2? Or 3?
It appears to be a more involved idea than what is being presented/what I am aware of, perhaps a special event venue as well? Please elaborate on plans, particularly as it applies to “community space” and how much time customers/guests are expected to stay on site as this affects all the points listed below.
What are the planned hours of operation?
Who is the target customer? At face value, this appears to be another business for vacationers and part-timers. It is located between two well established businesses (Saunderskill and Kwik
Mart).
Will they be serving prepared foods as this increases all resource demands?
How many jobs will this be created or will this be a family run business and what are the wages?
Is the business going to be ADA compliant? How will that be handled with regards to customer parking, getting customers into the building, shelf/ display access, floor plan layout, accessibility to the second floor (if it will be open to the public) and are/will one or both of the bathrooms be handicapped accessible?
How many bathrooms are planned?
Understanding the scope of this business would help determine if this is even feasible.
Environmental Impact Statement – https://www.dec.ny.gov/permits/357.html
I would like to see the Environmental Impact Statement for this variance request, especially, but not limited to, how parking will affect current wells/water supplies. Please indicate how or where I can have access to it. If one has not been done, consider this my formal request to have one done.
This is listed as a .5 acre parcel with much of it covered by the buildings. The available footprint does not appear able to handle the proposed use.
http://townofrochester.ny.gov/files/2014/01/ZoningScheduleDec2014.Website.pdf
Septic/Water
What demands will be made on the septic? Residents of Main St. are aware of the septic limitations and while it’s my understanding that a new septic was put in, it’s limitations could create a septic issue affecting the neighboring properties, including the firehouse.
I am aware that there are, I believe, currently two bathrooms and an industrial sink in the showroom building which shares the septic with the house(?). These were not heavily used previously and the added burden is concerning, especially considering code requirements (health, OSHA, etc.) and compliance. How are these issues being addressed?
What kind of water usage is expected? And is there sufficient water available for the additional demands that this business will require? Having a well run dry can also affect neighboring properties, with drilling new wells a distinct resulting possibility.
Garbage/Waste
How will garbage/waste be stored and removed? For those of us who have lived on Main St. long enough, we have seen what a rat infestation can do, especially as a neighboring property. However, rats are certainly not the only concern. Unpleasant smells, unsightliness et al, affects the neighborhood. It is understood that the current plan is for a “zero waste” business, but the reality of that will involve a certain amount of trash and cannot be overlooked. What are the proposed method for actually keeping the waste to “zero” and for garbage removal? Is there space and access for a dumpster or will the owners use the Transfer Station? If using the Transfer Station, how will trash/recycling be stored onsite?
Light Pollution
What is the proposed lighting and how will the business keep from creating light pollution?
Noise Pollution
We currently do not have a noise ordinance, but noise increase is a concern. How are the owners planning on keep noise to a minimum?
Increase in Crime
As there is an increase in shoppers, an increase in crime must be considered. I speak from the experience of having to contact the Constables six different times regarding trespasses and suspicious activity because again, many people don’t think rules apply to them. Whose jurisdiction will this be and have those agencies been advised? Response time can be tricky as there is very limited coverage of officers in this area and that is a big concern along with the previous mention on parking issues. If there is slow response time then people will become more bold (as we have all seen in other town locations) and break even more laws.
I thank the Board, the applicant, the applicant’s representative and the concerned public for their attention to this matter.
My Best,
Sue Bruck”
Mr. Dan Roberts and Ms. Alana Blum stated they lived at 5 Scenic Rd and 7 Scenic Rd. Mr. Roberts stated he wanted to share some thoughts and concerns and that he supported the project. He said Mr. Rich had been in contact with them and had been receptive and that they were happy about a lot of the ideas and progress but also were concerned about the downside. Mr. Roberts said it would be a great addition to the Hamlet district but he shared the same concern as Ms. Maloney about the delivery times and that he liked the new parking plan. He stated he was concerned about the headlights from the cars at the store and the noise but that Mr. Rich had promised he would build a fence to block out the light intrusions. Mr. Roberts said he would continue to be in discussion with Mr. Rich about his concerns, especially the delivery hours as it was not an acceptable time to have delivery hours before 7am and after 8pm due to the noise of the truck deliveries (ie- The beeping of a truck backing up) and it was something he would need to keep his eye on. He said Mr. Rich had said the noise of the delivery was unlikely. He said he was in support of the project but that the Board needed to pay attention to smaller details.
There were no further public comments.
Attorney Christiana said that if there were to be a fence put up that would need to be shown on the site plan.
Mr. Zurofsky stated he did not wish to make the trees a condition of approval.
Ms. Maloney suggested more trees could be planted in the back of the building, which would also mitigate noise and light concerns as well as compensate for the loss of the front trees.
Chair Lindstrom said the tree discussion could be brought up in the letter to the Town’s Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) as they could comment if the tree removal would affect the overall historic nature of the building. She added the site plans need to show the fence location, trash location needed to be hashed out and added to the plan, a map note needed to be added stating lights will be turned off when store is not in operation, and address the delivery time issue, as it was outstanding and needed to be figured out.
Mr. Zurofsky asked for plan note about delivery because of the size of parking but he was open to options.
Ms. Maloney suggested having deliveries in the municipal parking lot, as it was done in many cities all the time, and the driver would need to use a handcart of bring items across the street to the store.
Mr. Zurofsky said they were beginning to discuss items out of the Board’s purview.
Chair Lindstrom said they were not all the way out of their purview as they needed to address potential noise effects but that a truck backing up does not make noise that was above the decibel of the code. Chair Lindstrom stated they would need to wait until comments from the UCPB came back in order to close the public hearing.
Chair Lindstrom motioned to keep the public hearing open until the March 8th, 2021 regular meeting. Mr. Pinsky seconded the motion.
Roll Call:
Chair Lindstrom- Yes Ms. Maloney- Yes
Mr. Zurofsky- Yes Mr. Grasso- Yes
Mr. Williams- Absent
Mr. Jones- Yes
Mr. Pinsky- Yes
All in Favor. Motion Carried.
6 ayes, 0 nays, 1 absent, 0 abstentions.
Mr, Zurofsky made the motion to refer the application to the following agencies once completed packet had been submitted: UCDOH, UCDPW, Ulster County Planning Board (UCPB), Accord Fire District, and Town of Rochester Historic Preservation Commission(HPC). Mr. Grasso seconded the motion.
Roll Call:
Chair Lindstrom- Yes Ms. Maloney- Yes
Mr. Zurofsky- Yes Mr. Grasso- Yes
Mr. Williams- Absent
Mr. Jones- Yes
Mr. Pinsky- Yes
All in Favor. Motion Carried.
6 ayes, 0 nays, 1 absent, 0 abstentions.
PB 2021-02 SBD Pre Application Conference
John Dawson (Applicant) & Richard Smith (Owner)
Minor Subdivision
The applicant proposes a two lot subdivision of lands located at Cedar Drive, Accord, NY S/B/L 68.1-2-59.111 (+/- 23 acres). There is an existing mobile home with well and septic and vacant wooded and open lands. Parcel contains a stream, small potential wetlands and partial medium quality UC Habitat Core Lands/DEC Core Forest Layers of 60 – 80% quality. Parcel is in the R-2 (Low Density Residential) Zoning District.
Mr. John Dawson was present on behalf of the application.
Chair Lindstrom explained the application.
Mr. Jones stated the maps need to show topography, core habitat, location of the electrical boxes, and that there were two proposed lots labeled “#1” so that would need to be remedied.
Mr. Grasso asked what the plans with the lots were once if/when the subdivision was approved.
Mr. Dawson stated there would not be a subdivision again and added he did not want to the subdivision as it were. He said he was fine with having a condition of approval be no further subdivision on the property.
Chair Lindstrom said there was a flag lot so therefore it could not be subdivided further even if he did want to try to subdivide again.
Attorney Christiana stated there needed to be a shared driveway agreement with Knight (neighboring land owner) and the other lots.
The Board discussed setting the application for public hearing but decided they wanted to wait to get the revised plan before the public hearing was scheduled.
There was no further discussion.
OTHER MATTERS
Mr. Zachary Jarvis and Mr. Marc Grasso, recently appointed Alternate and Member to the Board respectively, did introductions. Welcome to the Board, Mr. Jarvis and Mr. Grasso!
Chair Lindstrom stated the Short Term Rental referral will come back to the Planning Board again. She added there was going to be a discussion on that Thursday for an EEO (Economic Environmental Overlay) application in front of the Town Board and asked the members to try and watch it. She updated the Board on #140-63 Fees in which she stated the Town Board was considering the matter of charging applicants for escrow if an application was complex She stated in the meantime, the Planning Board could do a pre-app and if it looks to be involved, they would then request an escrow.
ADJOURNMENT
Mr. Zurofsky made the motion to adjourn the meeting at 10:15pm. Chair Lindstrom seconded the motion.
All in Favor. Motion Carried.
6 ayes, 0 nays, 0 abstentions, 1 absent.
Respectfully submitted,
Brianna Tetro, Secretary
Accepted and Adopted: March 8th, 2021