PLANNING BOARD TOWN OF ROCHESTER ULSTER COUNTY ACCORD, NEW YORK (845) 626-2434
MINUTES OF November 13th, 2017 Meeting of the Town of Rochester PLANNING BOARD, held at the Town of Rochester Community Center, Accord, NY.
Chairman Baden asked everyone to stand for the pledge to the Flag. The Secretary did roll call attendance.
PRESENT: ABSENT:
Michael Baden, Chairman Rebecca Collins Maren Lindstrom, Vice Chair
Laurence DeWitt Alonzo Grace Rick Jones Patrick Williams
Also present:
Shaye Davis, Secretary. Mary Lou Christiana, Attorney for the Town, Sam Zurofsky, Alternate.
ANNOUNCEMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS
Chairman Baden stated that there were no announcements.
TRAININGS
Chairman Baden noted that there was a Farmland Protection training at SUNY New Paltz on Tuesday, November 14th from 5:00-7:00pm and that the training was free.
ACTION ON MINUTES
Mr. Jones motioned to approve the September 11th and October 12th minutes. Mr. Williams seconded the motion.
Motion carried. All in favor
6 ayes, 0 nays, 1 absent, 0 abstentions
2017-11 LLI New Application Lot Improvement
Ian Read-Ian Read
Proposes transfer of 0.606 acres from Read to Read
4753 and 4757 Route 209, SBL 69.3-3-27.210 and 69.3-3-27.220, B Zoning District
SEQRA: Type II (by local law)
Ian Read was present on behalf of the application.
Mr. Read stated that the reasoning for the lot line improvement was to make it so the pond would be on lot 2.
Chairman Baden stated that the lot line would fix the problem with the lot line and the garage on lot 2. He also noted that the application was classified as a Type 2 action under SEQRA.
Ms. Lindstrom motioned to accept the lot line improvement. Mr. DeWitt seconded the motion.
Motion carried. All in favor
6 ayes, 0 nays, 1 absent, 0 abstentions
2017-07 SUP Continued Application, Public Hearing Special Use Permit – Agricultural Processing Facility
RM APPL, LLC c/o Josh Applestone
Proposes change of use to a USDA licensed Agricultural Processing Facility with retail storefront 5010 State Route 209, SBL 77.1-1-24.131, B, AP, and FD Overlay zoning districts, Adjacent to Ulster County Ag District #3
SEQRA: Unlisted Action
Olli Chanoff and Barry Medenbach were present on behalf of the application. Mr. Medenbach presented new maps to the Board.
Chairman Baden read the email from the Department of Transportation stating that they did not believe a highway work permit would need to be issued being there was already commercial access to the property and they requested a site plan for their review. He stated that the application was also submitted to the Ulster County Planning Board. He stated that the Ulster County Planning Board had issued Required Modifications which stated the applicant would need to get approval from the Ulster County Department of Health for the wastewater. The UCPB also stated signage details were lacking and will need to be provided for local Board review.
Mr. Medenbach stated they were going to use the sign that was already at the facility and replace the writing.
Chairman Baden continued to read the Ulster County Planning Board recommendations. The next recommendation was to allow cross access for the lots along 209. The Planning Board stated that would not be possible due to wetlands and the loading dock. He noted the lighting details were absent from the information. The UCPB states the lighting should be fully shielded and a certain type of lamp or LED lamps. Chairman Baden noted to the Board that in the new maps there was a page with the lighting details. He stated there would be 4 new lamps added to the property. He also stated the lighting met the Town zoning code criteria. The next comment from the Ulster County Planning Board was that landscaping details were missing.
The new maps showed the new trees the applicant was proposing. The final comment from the County was an advisory comment about the Route 209 right of way; it noted that the width of the shoulders where the new bridge is located will be wider than before. Chairman Baden stated that the Department of Transportation would handle that.
Mr. Medenbach stated that they were in front of the Health Department at the moment waiting for approval. He stated that they are adding the loading dock and adding the addition to the back. They are adding a truck turnaround and 5 truck spaces in the back as well.
Chairman Baden opened the meeting for public hearing.
Alisha H. asked how the impact of the property would affect their property.
Chairman Baden clarified the location of her property. He stated the meat processing facility should not have any impact on their property. He explained that she received the notice because they were within 500 feet of the property boundary line. He stated that the facility would be open for retail sales 24/7 but all the lighting will not be on 24/7, just the lights on the building.
There were no further questions.
Ms. Lindstrom motioned to close the public hearing. Mr. Jones seconded the motion.
Motion carried. All in favor
6 ayes, 0 nays, 1 absent, 0 abstentions
The Board reviewed the draft SEQRA part 2 and developed a part 3. There Board had no further questions.
Mr. DeWitt motioned to adopt a negative declaration under SEQRA. Mr. Williams seconded the motion.
Motion carried. All in favor
6 ayes, 0 nays, 1 absent, 0 abstentions Roll Call Vote:
Chairman Baden – Yes Mr. Grace – Yes
Mr. Williams – Yes Ms. Lindstrom – Yes
Mr. DeWitt – Yes Mr. Jones – Yes
Findings of the Planning Board
1. The Planning Board received zoning referral for Special Use for an “Agricultural Processing Facility” use from the Code Enforcement Officer and an application, EAF, Site Plan, and related documentation from the applicant.
2. The parcel is located in the ‘B’ zoning district pursuant to the Town of Rochester zoning code.
3. The parcel is additionally located in the FD Overlay and AP Overlay zoning districts.
4. The parcel meets the Town of Rochester Development Standards for the B zoning district except for the side yard setback. 25 ft. is required, and 12.5 ft. exist, however this is pre-existing and new construction will not further violate the setback standard.
5. The parcel is located minimally in the 100-year flood zone, as mapped on FEMA flood map 36111C0590E, as dated 9/25/2009. All new construction must adhere to Town of Rochester Code Chapter 81, Flood Damage Prevention.
6. AP Overlay standards no not apply to this use due to water usage below the standards.
7. The parcel to be developed is known as SBL 77.1-1-24.131.
8. The parcel has road frontage on US Route 209, a NYS DOT maintained highway.
9. The parcel existing use is commercial use.
10. Site Plan Approval was granted May 18, 2010 by the Town of Rochester Planning Board with decision PB 2009-01SPA for the use “Retail and Service Establishment (Non-Auto)”.
11. It was amended approved March 29, 2011 to add the uses Gift, Antique, or Craft Shop, Low-Impact Retail and Service Establishment, Office, and Recording Studio with decision PB 2011-01 SUP.
12. The applicant has two other facilities in the area, currently. Both current facilities have processing and store fronts. They are full animal butchers and they bring in whole animals and butcher them at the facilities. They do not kill at the facilities. There will be no live animals at the facilities. They will have one person for customer service from 11- 6 every day to start.
13. The applicant proposes a small store front area with meat vending machines which will be like the other stores and the rest of the building will be processing. The retail area will operate 24/7. Processing will be for beef, pork and lamb with possibly poultry. The animals are all local. The applicant states they are full animal butchers and they like to use everything from the animal that they can. They are producing hot dogs, sausages, bacon, ground beef and pet food with the left-over animal parts. They will be making stock with bones. The intention is to throw out as little as possible and advance the processing capacity. All waste will be kept in the freezer until the garbage would be picked up.
14. The use “Retail and Service Establishment (Non-Auto)” will continue as approved for the retail area.
15. Existing improvements on the parcel include 12,225 ft² structure with 34 parking spaces, gravel and paved parking area, 8’ x 11’ sign,2 parking area pole lights, drilled well, septic area, and electric
16. The site plan proposes new construction of
a. 240 ft² addition
b. 4400 ft² addition
c. Relocated and upgraded* septic area with reserve system
*amended wording 11-13-2017
a. 1 additional parking area pole lamp (shielded and full cut-off)
b. 4 building exterior wall lights (shielded and full cut-off)
a. 5 10’ x 50’ truck parking spaces
a. 30’ x 50’ truck turnaround area
17. Applicant proposes 28 parking spaces, 2 handicapped accessible parking spaces, 5 truck parking spaces, and a truck turnaround. The Planning Board finds this to meet the parking standards for the use.
18. The applicant self-reported 3 ACOE wetlands on the property. These do not appear on National Wetlands Inventory mapping, however all regulations for federal wetlands shall be required to be adhered to for these areas, as delineated
19. NYS DOT expressed no concerns of access as an approved commercial access exists. They request a copy of the approved Site Plan for review.
20. The applicant will coordinate with the Ulster County Health Dept. in the relocation of the septic area and removal of the existing septic.
21. The parcel is located contiguous to a parcel located in Ulster County Agricultural District
#3. The Planning Board finds this use will not impact the agricultural district.
22. The application was required to be referred to the Ulster County Planning Board which returned a comment of “Required Modifications”.
23. The application was determined to be an Unlisted SEQRA use. A negative declaration was determined.
Draft findings were prepared by the Chairman and were read, discussed, and amended by the Planning Board in public meeting. Amendments are notated where made by the Board.
Adopted Nov. 13, 2017
Ayes: 6 Nays: 0 Absent: 1
Motion to adopt findings by Mr. Grace Second by Mr. Dewitt
* * * *
Motion:
To accept the Ulster County Planning Board (UCPB) comments of “Required Modifications” for Special Use approval as expressed in detail below due to the following reasons:
1. Wastewater
Comment:
The applicant is proposing to move the site’s existing septic facilities to a different portion of the parcel. Approval of the Ulster County Department of Health will be necessary.
Response:
The Planning Board agrees and will require Ulster County Health Dept. approval
1. Signage
Comment:
Signage details are lacking from the materials submitted. Signage details will need to be provided for local board review. All signage should conform to the standards found in the Town of Rochester’s zoning statute.
Response:
The Planning Board accepts this. Signage will comply with the zoning statute.
1. Cross Access
Comment:
As consistent with the Town’s policies for shared access and parking, there appears to be opportunities for this site to have cross access points with adjacent parcels. The Town should review the site for potential cross access opportunities and encourage the property owners to create cross access easements if any exist.
Response:
The Planning Board has reviewed the possibility and determined cross access is not feasible due to the ACOE wetlands. The access is an existing access, approved by the NYS DOT.
1. Lighting
Comment:
Lighting details are absent from the materials submitted for review. Engineering Society (IES) Outdoor Site/Area Recommended Illuminance Levels (see attached). All luminaires should meet the “fully shielded” definition adopted by the International Dark Sky Association (IDSA) or be an approved fixture of IDSA. Where Metal Halide (MH) or Light Emitting Diode (LED) lamps are not proposed the applicant should be required to provide reasons why they were not chosen.
Response:
The Planning Board has received and reviewed the proposed lighting. The proposal complies with these standards.
1. Landscaping
Comment:
A landscaping plan was absent from the materials submitted to the County for review. A landscaping plan for the site will need to be provided. The plan should include a schedule that indicates the number, types, and sizes of plantings to be included on the site.
Response:
The Planning Board has received and reviewed the proposed landscaping. The proposal complies.
1. Route 209 Right-of-Way Advisory Comment
Comment:
As part of the bridge replacement to the west of this proposal, larger shoulder areas are being put in place. Shoulder width of the public right-of-way at the location of this proposal should match, if possible, the width of the shoulders of the new bridge.
Response:
The Planning Board expects the NYSDOT will construct the roadway shoulders as is necessary within their right-of-way.
Draft responses were prepared by the Chairman and were read and discussed by the Planning Board in public meeting.
Adopted Nov. 13, 2017 by the following vote: Ayes: 6 Nays: 0 Absent: 1
Motion to accept Required Modifications by Ms. Lindstrom Second by Mr. Grace
* * * *
RESOLVED,
The Town of Rochester Planning Board grants Special Use Permit Approval permitting the establishment of the use, Agricultural Processing Facility, situate at 5010 Route 209, SBL 77.1- 1-24.131, and in the B, AP Overlay, and FD Overlay Zoning Districts of the Town of Rochester.
The use, Retail and Service Establishment (Non-Auto), granted with Town of Rochester Planning Board decision PB 2009-01 SPA of May 18, 2010 is hereby allowed to continue in granting this Special Use Permit Approval. The Site Plan and all Conditions of Approval associated with decision PB 2009-01 SPA of May 18, 2010 shall be revoked with this decision
The uses Gift, Antique, or Craft Shop, Low-Impact Retail and Service Establishment, Office, Recording Studio, granted with Town of Rochester Planning Board decision PB 2011-01 SUP of March 29, 2011 are hereby revoked in granting this Special Use Permit Approval. The Site
Plan and all Conditions of Approval associated with decision PB 2011-01 SUP of March 29, 2011 shall be revoked with this decision.
The amended Site Plan dated Nov. 3, 2017 is approved with the following conditions. Conditions of Approval:
1. 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 Site Plan.
2. Applicant shall present a Final Plat for signature as amended to include these statements and information.
a. “This parcel has been identified as potentially containing land identified on the National Wetlands Inventory. Owners shall be noticed a permit may be required prior to any disturbance, construction, or other alteration in the designated area.”
b. “This property contains land within the 100-year floodplain as depicted by FEMA on plate 36111C0590E effective as of 9/25/2009. 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.”
c. Approximate delineation of the FEMA 100-year flood zone
d. The chart indicating the front yard setback details shall be corrected*
*added condition 11-13-2017
3. 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. Specifically,
a. Town of Rochester Building Permit to construct
b. Ulster County Dept. of Health waste disposal permit to construct
c. Certification from the NYS DOT the existing access permit remains valid or provide an amended access permit to construct
All conditions imposed in the granting of these permits shall be made a part of this Special Use approval. One copy of each approved permit shall be filed with the Town of Rochester Planning Board.
4. Prior to issuance of a certificate of compliance and commencing operation all applicable provisions of New York State Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code associated with the use and/or structures shall be met.
5. Signage, including lighting of signage, shall meet the standards of the Town of Rochester zoning code, Chapter 140. Should the Code Enforcement Officer determine such signage requires Planning Board approval, the applicant shall resubmit to the Planning Board for review.
6. All landscaping, as identified on the Site Plan to be retained or added, shall be maintained and replaced if dead or diseased with like kind plantings.
7. Animal waste products shall be stored as per Ulster County Dept. of Health and USDA regulations.
8. Onsite parking areas shall be constructed as indicated on the Site Plan.
9. Parking shall be in approved Site Plan designated parking spaces only. All designated parking spaces shall be kept in safe and accessible condition, free from any obstructions. There shall be no use of designated parking spaces for any purpose other than vehicle parking, including display or storage of products, materials, or supplies. There shall be
no on-street parking.
10. There shall be no outside storage of materials or supplies.
11. Parking area lighting shall be turned off from 10pm until 6am, except the pole lamp located in the front retail parking area. Building wall lighting fixtures shall be allowed to remain on as needed for security purposes.*
*wording amended 11-13-2017
12. As per T/ Rochester code Chapter 140, all storm water management improvements shall be properly maintained to continue to perform in their intended manner. Sediment shall, at a minimum, be removed from sediment traps or sediment ponds whenever their design capacity has been reduced by 50%.
13. 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.
Effect of Approval:
1. This Special Use approval and associated conditions shall be binding upon the applicant and all successive owners and/or lessees of the land so long as such use shall occur.
2. 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.
The Town of Rochester Planning Board further grants the authority to the Chairman to certify conditions 1 through 3 have been completed without further resolution and to sign and date the plat at such time.
Draft decision was prepared by the Chairman and was read, discussed, and amended by the Planning Board in public meeting. Amendments are notated where made by the Board.
Adopted Nov. 13. 2017, by the following vote: Ayes: 6 Nays: 0 Absent: 1
Motion to approve with conditions by Mr. Williams Seconded Ms. Lindstrom
2017-06 SUP Continued Application Special Use Permit – Large-Scale Solar System Fordemoor Solar LLC
Joseph Grasso (owner) and Cypress Creek Renewables (applicant)
Proposes a change of use and new construction on a ±25.32-acre parcel
Berme Rd., SBL 76.3-1-20, R-5 zoning district, contiguous to the Town of Wawarsing
SEQRA: TBD (tentative Type I Action)
Anne Waling was present on behalf of the application. Tim Moot from Clark Patterson Lee was present on behalf of the Town.
Chairman Baden stated that Mr. Jones and Ms. Lindstrom walked the property.
Ms. Waling presented new maps to the Board. She noted that they moved the invertor and the retaining wall as well as explaining what else had changed on the maps.
Ms. Lindstrom noted that when she walked the property and that they went after a rainstorm and that the roadway would destroy people’s homes. She stated that the neighbors had culverts and hurricane fences put up to delineate the water and if they put the roadway where it was proposed it will destroy the fence and culvert. She explained the problems with the water runoff from storms. She stated some of the storm water management was located on another person’s property. She said no matter what the Town ends up with problems.
Mr. Jones stated that there were two streams that drained each property that come together and meet.
Mr. Moot stated that they issued their comment letter on November 4th. He stated CPL offered to do a conference call with Aaron Mann from Cypress Creek and went over all the comments. He stated that CPL wanted Cypress Creek to really look at the stream. He noted that the CPL engineers had a hard time visualizing how the rack systems were going to work on such steep slopes. He said CPL is hesitant to go any further with review on the plans until the Board had a chance to talk about it at the meeting.
Mr. Jones stated that he had a concern about the amount of water. He stated that Cypress Creek stated that there would be sufficient absorption of the water into the ground but there’s a velocity factor. He stated that there wouldn’t be trees there anymore which slowed the water. He stated that water will move down the hill faster than before. He stated that he wondered if the 36 inch culvert was enough, did they need a retaining wall, and about the houses. He stated that he thought the Board asked for the houses to be marked on all the neighboring parcels, including across the street. He stated there would be water coming from 3 different streams and what was going to stop the water from going across the road? He had
questions about the disturbance lines and thought they were in the wrong places. He asked if it was a real proposal to generate electricity or just a tax relief.
Mr. Moot added that the panels are facing the wrong way for them to take in sunlight.
Mr. Jones stated that he would like to see an engineer give him reassurance that the project was a legit project to generate electricity.
Ms. Waling stated that they could use panels that move to the sunlight.
Mr. Jones stated that he would like to see the panels proposed by an engineer and then looked over by the Town’s hired engineer to say that it was a real proposal that will produce the amount of electricity that it said it would. He stated that the project did not meet the nature of the Community which was made up of single family homes and farms. He stated that he looked at the pictures from the drone and he noted that he could not tell whether the project could be seen or not from 44/55. He stated that he would imagine it could be seen from Route 209.
Ms. Lindstrom stated that the project certainly will be seen from Route 209.
Chairman Baden stated that the Board will need to see what it will look like from Route 209.
Mr. Jones also added that the plans are missing landscaping plans. He also noted that parts of the project were cleared in places that they did not need to be cleared.
Ms. Waling asked if the positions were better than before.
Chairman Baden asked if it would be possible for the engineer to come to the meetings to explain more to the Board and have them ask questions to help move the project along.
Mr. Grace stated that he was very concerned about the scenic byway.
Ms. Waling asked if there was a spot or two were it would be most visible.
Chairman Baden stated that along Route 209 between Queens Highway and Boice Mill Road. Mr. Jones stated that the new plans do not help with fire truck access to the property.
Mr. Moot stated that he had discussed with the project manager Aaron Mann about the fire truck access.
Chairman Baden stated that it was hard for the Board to talk about a basic plan when they have such concerns about issues like stormwater and fire access.
Mr. DeWitt asked what sort of degree fire trucks can go up.
Mr. Moot stated that he was not sure but he knew they were looking for a 20 foot wide road and a 10-15% slope.
Chairman Baden stated the Board is really concerned about the fire access into the property by the invertor.
Ms. Waling stated that Cypress Creek offers local departments fire training classes and how to handle everything on the property in case of a fire.
Ms. Lindstrom stated that if there was a grass fire due to lightning striking, the company can shut off the entire electrically facility but the grass is still on fire and you need to have access to get in there so the firemen can stop the fire before it approaches the neighboring houses.
Chairman Baden stated that they would need to see all the houses that are adjacent properties to the project.
Mr. Moot stated that the level of disturbance and the clearing. They need further wetland and wildlife studies would be necessary.
Chairman Baden stated that the property was shown as a habitat corridor on the Ulster County Parcel Viewer. He stated that he wasn’t certain of the source of the mapping but it’s a significant amount of property that was indicated in that corridor.
Ms. Waling stated that they do all the studies. She also stated that they plan to connect to the 3 phase right on Berme Road.
Ms. Lindstrom asked about the rock outcropping located in a corner of the project and that the SEQRA states certain information but when you go onto the property that rock was the whole top part of the project.
Attorney for the Town Christiana stated that the economic viability was not part of SEQRA.
Mr. DeWitt stated if the project states it would do a certain thing but it really does not, that wouldn’t be part of SEQRA?
Attorney for the Town Christiana stated that it wouldn’t be economic viability. Mr. Jones wanted to make sure the project was viable.
Attorney for the Town Christiana stated if the Board was looking at doing SEQRA, which they are nowhere near ready, the applicant would be looking at doing an Environmental Impact
Statement so they would like more information or change certain things so it wouldn’t have those effects on the SEQRA.
Ms. Waling asked what the Boards ideal scenario would be for the fire access road.
Chairman Baden stated that the road to the invertor was able to have a firetruck drive down to it would be ideal. He also stated that the surface throughout the property would have to be able to withstand the weight of the tanker trucks or ATV’s or whatever kind of fire emergency vehicles need to access the property.
Ms. Waling asked what the Board was looking for.
Chairman Baden stated that if the applicant did two smaller paths from the invertor to either corner on the backside and connected it as one.
Mr. Jones stated that he would like to see what the fire departments take on the road was.
Chairman Baden stated that the Board had heard from NYSERDA and that they do not want to be lead agency. So, the Board can now determine themselves as lead agency.
Mr. Jones motioned to classify the Town of Rochester Planning Board as lead agency. Mr. Williams seconded the motion.
Motion carried. All in favor
6 ayes, 0 nays, 1 absent, 0 abstentions Roll Call Vote:
Chairman Baden – Yes Mr. Grace – Yes
Mr. Williams – Yes Ms. Lindstrom – Yes
Mr. DeWitt – Yes Mr. Jones – Yes
Ms. Lindstrom motioned to classify the application as a Type 1 action under SEQRA. Mr. Williams seconded the motion.
Motion carried. All in favor
6 ayes, 0 nays, 1 absent, 0 abstentions Roll Call Vote:
Chairman Baden – Yes Mr. Grace – Yes
Mr. Williams – Yes Ms. Lindstrom – Yes
Mr. DeWitt – Yes Mr. Jones – Yes
SEQRA Lead Agency
Area Variance – Large-Scale Solar System
Wilfred and Susan Neff (owner) and Rondout Creek Solar, LLC (applicant)
Proposes a change of use and new construction on a ±81-acre parcel. 16.1 acres to be disturbed.
Residential Use to be retained.
12 Pompey’s Cave Rd, SBL 69.4-2-7.116, AR-3, AP Overlay, and FD Overlay zoning districts, Located in Ulster County Ag District #3, partial Prime Farmland on parcel, contains 3@ USACE wetlands, contiguous to the Rest Plaus Historic District,
SEQRA: TBD (tentative Type I Action)
At 9:05pm alternate, Sam Zurofsky joined the Board, replacing Rebecca Collins who has recused herself from this application.
Anne Waling was present on behalf of the application. Tim Moot from Clark Patterson Lee was present on behalf of the Town.
Chairman Baden stated that he asked Mr. Moot to provide a draft SEQRA part 2 for the Board to review.
Ms. Lindstrom motioned for the Town of Rochester Planning Board to take lead agency. Mr. DeWitt seconded the motion.
Motion carried. All in favor
7 ayes, 0 nays, 0 absent, 0 abstentions Roll Call Vote:
Chairman Baden – Yes Mr. Grace – Yes
Mr. Williams – Yes Ms. Lindstrom – Yes
Mr. DeWitt – Yes Mr. Jones – Yes Mr. Zurofsky – Yes
Mr. Williams motioned to classify the application as a type 1 action under SEQRA. Ms. Lindstrom seconded the motion.
Motion carried. All in favor
7 ayes, 0 nays, 0 absent, 0 abstentions Roll Call Vote:
Chairman Baden – Yes Mr. Grace – Yes
Mr. Williams – Yes Ms. Lindstrom – Yes
Mr. DeWitt – Yes Mr. Jones – Yes Mr. Zurofsky – Yes
Chairman Baden reviewed the history of the application for the Board
Mr. Moot read the memorandum that was given to the Board. He stated that what popped out most to him and his team was that the entirety of the site was on prime agricultural land so it would be a major impact. He said they could go over line by line but first you have to get over the first part. He stated that CPL did not perform a full site plan review. He stated that permitting a solar array on prime farmland was a violation of the town zoning code.
Chairman Baden stated that the Planning Board is not granting the variance, the Zoning Board of Appeals would be granting the variance.
Mr. DeWitt asked if the Planning Board was looking at two things simultaneously, one being in regard to the prime farmland and the other being that it’s not consistent with the Town Code, which are SEQRA problem of itself but also the property was agricultural prime land and that would also be an environmental issue to look at as different than the solar code.
Chairman Baden stated that the project certainly had an agricultural point that would be investigated.
Mr. DeWitt stated that the Planning Board would be looking at the prime farmland/agricultural land independently upon the solar code.
Ms. Waling stated that there are several ways to look at the impact on the prime farmland. She stated that it was not a total 100%, 20 acre impact on prime farmland.
Mr. DeWitt asked about what percentage of the project was on prime farmland.
Ms. Waling stated that it depends on how you calculate the percentage. She stated it can vary from just the ground posts being the impact or the panels being the impact.
Mr. Grace stated that the solar panels are going on 26 acres of land that will then be unusable as an agricultural use.
Mr. Moot stated that on the plan he was looking at it stated the potential disturbance was 31.2 acres total and usable acres were 20 acres based on the 2 megawatts.
Ms. Waling stated that of those 20 acres the amount of agricultural disturbance on the Prime Farmland varies from .8%-11.8%. It would be about an 11 percent area variance on the highest end.
Mr. Moot stated that the map that showed the covered area as the project area. He asked if the applicant looked at a soil map, what did the soil map state?
Ms. Waling stated that they had a soil map overlay in the original submission.
Chairman Baden stated that he had asked Clark Patterson Lee to draft a SEQRA part 2 for the Board to walk through and not necessarily lock into answers, but they can eliminate the questions that they do not think are a concern.
Mr. Williams stated that the whole point to the Town Code and the particular part of the solar code about the Prime Farmland was to stop things like this from happening on prime farmland.
Chairman Baden stated that it was denied by the code enforcement officer and the applicant had applied for a variance. He noted that the Zoning Board of Appeals cannot make a decision until SEQRA was completed. He stated that the Zoning Board of Appeals decided that the Planning Board had a greater review authority to review SEQRA. He said that the Planning Board must complete the SEQRA for the application to move further along.
Mr. Moot stated that he did not have contours on the map. He stated that the site did have a lot of wetlands on it and they have been flagged. He also stated that the solar arrays can be constructed with little disturbance so for 20-30 years it would be prime farmland taken out of service. He stated that at some point theoretically the property could be returned to prime farmland.
The Board read through the draft part 2 of SEQRA and discussed the different questions and their comments.
The Board decided that they need more information on the project.
Chairman Baden stated that any information and studies the applicant could provide for the Board and residents of the Town to look at to ease their minds would be appreciated.
Mr. Moot stated that he would like the new updated maps.
Ms. Waling stated that they are obtaining an easement from the neighboring property for the portion of the access road to the property.
Chairman Baden also stated to the Board that they received the County Planning Board Referral Response.
Mr. Zurofsky left the Board and returned to the Alternate position
Pre-application Special Use
Woodstock Farm Sanctuary
Proposes amendment to Special Use decision 2015-01 SUP/SPA. Construction of an educational lodge.
2 Rescue Rd, SBL 69.4-2-11.200, AR-3, AP Overlay, and FD Overlay zoning districts, Contiguous to Ulster County Ag District #3, Contiguous to Rest Plaus Historic District listed on the National Register, Located within the 100-year flood plain, and Contiguous to the Town of Marbletown
Jeff Lydon was present on behalf of the pre-application.
Chairman Baden stated the applicant was pursuing an amendment to a special use permit decision that was approved. He stated the applicant would like to construct an educational lodge on the property. He noted that it was originally proposed to be a reuse of an existing building and now they are proposing constructing a new building.
Mr. Lydon stated that they would like to construct a new building close to the building they originally intended to be used for the educational lodge.
Chairman Baden asked the purpose of the project and what they were trying to achieve. Mr. Lydon stated that it would be for agricultural tourism. It would be hosting interns,
volunteers, artists, speakers and occasionally celebrity chefs, members of the media and help with the profile to have a really nice lodge for everyone.
Chairman Baden asked if it would be rented out as a bed and breakfast to guests who are going to visit the facility and maybe stay overnight.
Mr. Lydon stated that members would be renting the lodge on occasion for longer amounts of times.
Chairman Baden asked what constitutes a member.
Mr. Lydon stated that they are paid members and they would be eligible to rent out the space and help with the farm.
Mr. DeWitt asked how many units there would be.
Mr. Lydon stated that it would be 5 bedrooms and a shared living area and kitchen.
Chairman Baden stated the Board would be amending the plan itself and they would have to see if there were any conditions of the existing approval decision that would be modified.
Mr. Jones asked what the special use was for the property.
Chairman Baden stated that the special use was the farm sanctuary itself. He stated that on the old approval they were approved for an inn to be in one of the old buildings but now they want to make it a new building.
Attorney for the Town Christiana asked if they would be using the old building that was supposed to be used as an inn as housing as well or if this plan was replacing it with the new one.
Mr. Lydon stated that the building was being used for office space.
Chairman Baden stated that the applicant is amending part of the site plan and the approval. He also stated that the Board will need to see an engineered plan.
Mr. Lydon stated that the road would be moved some.
Chairman Baden stated that the new plan will need to show the access to the other buildings and distances. He suggested for the applicant to go back to the original engineer and start with them since they’ll have it on record. He also noted that if the road will be moved, the plan should show the road will be wide enough to meet New York State fire code. He noted that the Board will also need information on how the road will be constructed.
Ms. Lindstrom asked if they need to see handicap parking.
Chairman Baden stated yes, they will need to show that along with access to the buildings from the parking areas, and lighting. He also asked the Town Attorney if they needed to redo SEQRA.
Attorney for the Town Christiana stated that if the building was less than 4,000 square feet they would not have to redo SEQRA, as it would be classified as a Type 2 action.
Mr. Lydon asked what his next steps would be.
Chairman Baden stated that the next step would be to submit an application to the Planning Board to amend the approval. He stated that they would need to show details of any changes they are making. He stated that exterior lighting was something the Board would need to review. He noted that they have to show where the lighting will be and what type of fixtures they will be. He noted that they have to be full cut off and shielded. He stated that the architect should be able to supply all of that. He added that they will need to show the septic and where the well will be going. He also noted that the applicant would need to fill out a short form SEQRA. He also noted that they will need to see a rendering for the building as well.
OTHER MATTERS:
Chairman Baden stated that he had provided each of the proposed checklists and applications for the Board to review. He asked the members of the Board to look over and review the new applications. He noted that he would like to approve the new application at next month’s meeting.
Mr. DeWitt motioned to adjourn the meeting at 10:25pm. Ms. Lindstrom seconded the motion.
Motion carried. All in favor
6 ayes, 0 nays, 1 absent, 0 abstentions
Respectfully submitted,
Shaye Davis, Secretary