PLANNING BOARD
TOWN OF ROCHESTER
ULSTER COUNTY
ACCORD, NEW YORK
(845) 626-2434
torpbzba@hvc.rr.com
MINUTES OF September 12, 2016 Meeting of the Town of Rochester PLANNING BOARD, held at the Town of Rochester Community Center, Accord, NY.
Chairman Baden asked that everyone stand to say the Pledge to the Flag. He asked that everyone remain standing for a moment of silence in honor of September 11, 2001.
The Secretary did roll call attendance.
PRESENT: ABSENT:
Michael Baden, Chairman
Lawrence DeWitt
John Dawson
Shane Ricks
Maren Lindstrom
Adam Paddock, Vice Chairman
Patrick Williams
Also present:
Mary Lou Christiana, Attorney for the Town. Rick Jones, Alternate. Rebecca Paddock Stange, Secretary.
ANNOUNCEMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS
Chairman Baden noted that there were a few letters back and forth about various applications and those are in member’s folders.
TRAININGS
Just a reminder that the County PB is sponsoring a training on 9/26, 7pm. The topic is going to be on written decisions and documentation and the process. Chairman Baden will be giving the training.
In October there are 3 trainings in Dutchess County that the Chairman will forward more information on.
ACTION ON MINUTES
Chairman Baden thanked the stand in Secretary for the August Meeting, Shaye Davis, as she did a fantastic job.
Mr. Dawson motioned to accept the August 8, 2016 Minutes. Seconded by Ms. Lindstrom. No discussion.
Vote:
Baden: Yes Dewitt: Yes
Lindstrom: Yes Ricks: Yes
Paddock: Yes Williams: Yes
Dawson: Yes
Motion carried. 7 ayes, 0 nays, 0 absent, 0 abstentions
Chairman Baden noted that Mr. Kambouris who is listed as the first applicant on the agenda, was not yet present, so they would come back to this if he showed up.
2016-03 SUP Continued Application, Public Hearing
Special Use
Acorn School, Motria Shuhan (applicant) and Joe Esposito (owner)
Proposes change of use of an existing structure for a Private Educational Facility grades N-3
2911 Lucas Tpke., S/B/L 77.1-2-42.31, R-2, AP Overlay, and FD Overlay zoning districts, Located in Ulster County Ag District 3
Mrs. Shuhan was present along with Mr. Barry Medenbach, PE on behalf of her application. Dana Rudakolf was present on behalf of her application.
Chairman Baden noted that the Board was waiting on comments back from the UCPB, the UCDPW. It was also submitted to UCHD, Accord Fire District and Army Corp of Engineers and they did not hear back from those 3 agencies.
Chairman Baden ntoed that the UCDPW did respond saying that they had no problem with the proposal to widen the existing driveway. The site distrance to the right as indicated on the plan was 570’ and will not currently meet requirments, however with the trimming of tree branches along the frontage to the south slight visibility can be increased to the private road, Thornwood Lane. For a 55 MHspeed limit- the requimrenet will be 606’ of sight to the left and this can be obtained with tree trimming. Also indicated by the UCPB, an access permit will be required for any work to be performed in the County road right of way and shall stipulate the requirement for improvements. Upon request, the applicant can apply for the permit from the UCDPW. So, there are really no other issues other than a little bit of tree trimming and they will need to get a permit before they do any work on the driveway widening. Chairman Baden noted that there is an application that Mrs. Shuhan would fill out with them and there is a process that she would go through with that Dept. Chairman Baden noted that other than widening the driveway and the little bit of tree trimming that there would be any issues. He believes that if they wanted curbing, they would have said it in the letter. UCPB sent back required modifications. Most of which the TORPB has already addressed. They say that the applicant is proposing to expand the driveway to 20’ and that expansion will require a permit from the UCDPW. Given the width and length of the driveway a turnaround area along the driveway for fire access is also recommended. There is a turn around area in the circular driveway that is being proposed and Chairman Baden didn’t believe that the driveway was that long in that short span where it would need a pull off or turn around. Chairman Baden was considering that loop the turn around area. The County PB also noted that in regards to wetlands the applicant was proposing to disturb existing federal wetlands, and an approval may be required from the Army Corp of Engineers. Chairman Baden noted that the applicant should just contact their office and see if any permits are required before she does the work to the driveway. The Board sent a notice to the ACOE and didn’t hear anything back, but just to be on the safe side, the applicant may want to check in with them on their end prior to construction. The County PB noted that if the applicant decides to host evening events, outdoor lighting will be needed under site plan review. A detailed landscaping plan should be submitted if the applicant were to propose new landscaping. Chairman Baden agreed with both of these things, but the applicant wasn’t proposing any changes to the landscaping or having any evening events, so to him it was a non-issue.
Mr. Paddock questioned if the Board was worried with it getting dark early in the fall and winter months for late afternoon pickups?
Chairman Baden noted that the applicant stated that it wouldn’t happen. There is also an existing outdoor light in the area of the school, just no lighting proposed in the parking area. The applicant noted that the school day would be over prior to dark.
Mrs. Christiana noted that the PB could always add to their decision that if the applicant were to add night events to their curriculum or activities, they should come back to get the lighting approved.
Mr. Dawson motioned to accept and follow the required modifications as per the County PB. Seconded by Mr. Dewitt. No discussion.
Baden: Yes Dewitt: Yes
Lindstrom: Yes Ricks: Yes
Paddock: Yes Williams: Yes
Dawson: Yes
Motion carried. 7 ayes, 0 nays, 0 absent, 0 abstentions
At this time Chairman Baden opened the Public Hearing.
There was no public comment.
Mr. Dawson motioned to close the public hearing. Seconded by Mr. Dewitt. No discussion.
Baden: Yes Dewitt: Yes
Lindstrom: Yes Ricks: Yes
Paddock: Yes Williams: Yes
Dawson: Yes
Motion carried. 7 ayes, 0 nays, 0 absent, 0 abstentions
At this time the Board reviwed Part 2 of the Short EAF. All items were answered, “no or small impact may occur.”
Mr. Dawson motined for a Negative Declaration under SEQRA seconed by Mr. Dewitt. No discussion.
Baden: Yes Dewitt: Yes
Lindstrom: Yes Ricks: Yes
Paddock: Yes Williams: Yes
Dawson: Yes
Motion carried. 7 ayes, 0 nays, 0 absent, 0 abstentions
At this time the Board reviewed the draft findings as prepared by Chairman Baden.
Findings of the Planning Board
1. The Planning Board has received zoning referral for Special Use Approval for a change of use for a “Private Educational Facility” use from the Code Enforcement Officer and an application, EAF, Site Plan, and related documentation from the applicant.
2. The application proposes change of use for educational facilities for grades Nursery – First.
3. The parcel is located in the R-2, AP Overlay, and FD Overlay zoning districts pursuant to the Town of Rochester zoning code.
4. The parcel to be developed is known as S/B/L 77.1-2-42.31.
5. The parcel existing use is for a school.
6. Existing improvements on the parcel include a yurt with deck, parking area, gravel driveway, landscaping and septic.
7. The parcel utilizes a public water supply for a water source.
8. The application was determined to be an Unlisted Action under SEQRA. A Neg Dec was prepared and adopted.
9. The parcel is located in the 100-year floodplain as identified on panel 36111C0590E, effective 9/25/2009. No disturbance is proposed.
10. The parcel contains federal wetlands identified as PEM1Bd.
11. The parcel is located in Ulster County Agricultural District #3. An Ag Data statement was prepared and accepted.
12. The applicant states proposed use of the school will be for approximately 25 students.
13. The applicant states there will be no events held after dusk.
14. The parcel has road frontage on Lucas Tpke., an Ulster County maintained highway.
• A County of Ulster Department of Public Works Driveway Access Permit is required.
• Kim Dufresne (Senior Engineering Aide of the Department of Public Works) stated the DPW has no issues with the location of the driveway contingent on trimming of trees to meet site distance standards.
• The applicant proposes to widen the driveway to 20’ as required by the Planning Board to allow two-way traffic.
15. The applicant proposes no changes in lighting, landscaping, or signage.
16. The applicant proposes a circular student dropoff area with 20 parking spaces. The Planning Board has determined the size, width of area between aisles, and surface meet code standards. The Planning Board further determined there is sufficient turnaround capability for emergency vehicles.
17. The applicant proposes 2 staff parking spaces. The Planning Board has determined this to be adequate for the use.
18. The application was required to be referred to the Ulster County Planning Board which returned a comment of “Required Modifications”, regarding access, wetlands, lighting, and landscaping.
Draft findings were prepared by the Chairman and were read, discussed, and amended by the Planning Board.
Adopted Sept. 12, 2016
Ayes: 7 Nays: 0 Absent: 0
Motion to adopt findings by Mr. Ricks
Second by Ms. Lindstrom
At this time the Board reviewed the resolution as prepared by Chairman Baden.
RESOLVED,
The Town of Rochester Planning Board Grants Special Use – Conditional Approval to Motria Shuhan and Joe Esposito permitting the change of use Private Educational Facility for the operation of a school grades Nursery – First for the lands situate at 2911 Lucas Tpke., known as S/B/L 77-.1-2-42.31, and located in the R-2, AP Overlay, and FD Overlay zoning districts.
The Site Plan dated Sept. 12, 2016 is approved with the following conditions.
Conditions of Approval for the Operation of a Private Educational Facility
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. Prior to issuance of a certificate of compliance and commencing operation the following specific permits shall be secured. All conditions imposed in the granting of these permits shall be made a part of this Special Use approval. Should any conditions imposed by these other agency permits cause conditions to be in conflict, the more restrictive condition shall prevail. Should any permit approvals necessitate a change to the approved Site Plan, the matter shall be referred to the Planning Board for consideration.
a. Any and all applicable provisions of New York State Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code associated with the use and/or structure shall be met. The facility shall be inspected and certified for compliance.
b. The Building Department shall determine the maximum occupancy for the facility according to the NYS Uniform Building and Fire Code and such occupancy shall be visibly posted.
c. The driveway shall be constructed and maintained to NYS Fire Code regulation and standards. An Ulster County Dept. of Public Works permit and certification of completion shall be secured and a copy filed with the Planning Board.
d. Parking areas shall be installed as shown on the Site Plan and be made to meet Town of Rochester code.
e. Ulster County Dept. of Health permit or approval may be required due to the change of use. Such shall be investigated by the applicant and approval received if required.
f. Army Corp of Engineers permit or approval may be required due to the disturbance of federal wetlands. Such shall be investigated by the applicant and approval received if required.
3. 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.
4. Parking shall only be allowed in the spaces designated on the approved and signed Site Plan. Parking shall not be allowed within the public road right-of-way or within the driveway or designated Site Plan traffic aisles at any time. One parking space shall be made to meet accessible parking code standards and signage shall be posted indicating such parking restriction.
5. 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.
6. Should the applicant desire to use the facilities after dusk at a future time, they shall apply for an amendment to the Site Plan and approval by the Planning Board prior to such use.
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 condition 1 has been completed without further resolution and to sign and date the plat at such time.
Adopted Sept. 12, 2016, by the following vote:
Ayes: 7 Nays: 0 Absent: 0
Motion made by Mr. Dawson
Seconded by Mr. DeWitt
2016-04 LLI New Application
Lot Improvement
Alex and Dru Kamboris – William and Moira Sotirovich
Proposes transfer of 3 acres of land between contiguous lots, 4747 Route 209, S/B/L 69.3-3-26 and 69.3-3-25.110, B zoning district
Mr. Kambouris was present on behalf of the application. He noted that he is proposing to increase the size of his lot from 3 acres to +/- 6 acres.
Chairman Baden confirmed that the lot size met the standards of the zoning district.
Mr. Kambouris noted that there was no proposed building at this time.
Mr. Dawson motioned to accept the Lot Line Revision. Seconded by Ms. Lindstrom. No discussion.
Baden: Yes Dewitt: Yes
Lindstrom: Yes Ricks: Yes
Paddock: Yes Williams: Yes
Dawson: Yes
Motion carried. 7 ayes, 0 nays, 0 absent, 0 abstentions
2005-12 SBD Review Final Approval Section 2
2014-01 SBD
Major Subdivision
Catskill Farms, Inc aka Mountain Laurel Estates
Review of final approval of Section 2 of a +/-90.44 acres subdivision of land -15 lots.
Proposes 8 lots of varying size ranging from 5.66 acres to 22 acres.
private road Dawson Lane (off Samsonville Rd.), S/B/L 60.1-2-2.15 and 60.1-2-3, R-2 zoning district
Mr. Dawson recused himself from the application review.
Mr. Jones, Alternate joined the Board.
Mr. Petersheim and Mr. Medenbach were present on behalf of the application.
Chariman Baden noted that the Board received a letter from Mr. Medenbach noting that he had inspected the road and drainage and certifies that the work is complete.
Chairman Baden noted that he had also driven up there about 2-3 weeks ago and the road was in it’s final stages, but the roads were right where they were shown on the maps.
Mr. Medenbach noted that the soils are suitable for septic and water.
Chairman Baden noted that with the size of the lots, that is all the Board requires—a certification from an engineer for water and septic.
Mr. Medenbach noted that parcels greater than 5 acres don’t require Health Dept. approval to create lots. That is a state law.
Chairman Baden noted that the Board received the easements and right of ways and shared driveway between lots 8 and 9—revision to the Declaration, Stormwater Maintenance Declaration. These items were reviwed and signed off on by the Attorney for the Town, Mrs. Christiana. These documents will be filed with the County along with the subdivision map.
Chairman Baden noted that Mr. Kelder, Highway Superintendent, went out and looked at the road as well. Chairman Baden noted that the Highway Superintendent is a little reluctant to sign off on private roads because his jurisdiction is Town Maintained roads, but the Board often looks to him for guidance as the Town’s road expert.
Mr. Petersheim noted that one thing that Mr. Kelder asked him to do was to cut back the existing road as it was 8 years old and over grown in places, so they opened it back up.
Mr. Medenbach agreed and noted that he had a conversation with Mr. Kelder where he was relying on him to sign off on it.
Chairman Baden onted that this was what the Board usually did on private roads.
Mr. Jones questioned when the requirement kicked in for recreation fees?
Chairman Baden noted that the Town does have one, but there is no specific lot #. It was left in the Code up to the Board’s discretion and was not mandatory. The Board has not imposed one in over 10 years. He didn’t think it was necessary for this subdivision based on the location of it. It’s so far removed from the Town Parks and rail trails. It borders the Town of Olive. And with the size of the lots, peole should certainly have their own recreation areas. If this were a subdivision was 50 lots and they could anticipate that there would be a reasonable amount of school children, they would probably look into the recretation fees, but he didn’t see that it was needed here.
Chairman Baden noted that beginning on Page 8 were the requirements that were to be completed and he just wanted the Board to go through them and all agree that those requirements have been completed for final approval. Chairman Baden noted that he did go over this information with the applicant a couple of weeks ago and as far as he could see all of the requirements of the code have been met in the final plans. The private road known as Dawson Lane conforms to regulations of NYS Fire Code. UCHD water and septic approval was secured for the subdivision plat—but since that time as Mr. Medenbach pointed out because of the lot size and also the Town’s code allows the PB to accept an Engineer’s certificatin. Before any building permits were issued they would still need to secure UCHD approval. So, no construction could start on homes prior to that. The Stormwater Management Plan was prepared and included. They made the installation of all of the improvements at one time. There was a question as to if some of the improvements, like the stormwater and the roadway were going to be bonded. Instead the applicant installed all of them. The RMA has been updated.
Mr. Williams believed they had had a question about the well on lot 5.
Chairman Baden agreed and questioned if on lot 5 the well was already drilled or if the location was just marked on the map?
Mr. Petersheim noted that it was drilled and he was looking for it. It was very thick with Mt. Laurel in there.
Chiarman Baden noted that there was a concern that the Board had with where the road ended up shifting to that it was in close proximity to the well.
Mr. Medenbach believed that it was within the 100’ circle, but there was nothing wrong with a road being in that 100’ circle. The 100’ really has to do with the septic area.
Chairman Baden noted that there was just a question about the potential for road salt to run off into the well.
Mr. Medenbach noted that there is also a requirement for what is called ‘well head protection’ so the water doesn’t run right into the well. The HD looks at that when the issue their certificates for completion. They make sure that the casing sits up out of the ground and there is no run off running up to it and it slopes away.
Chairman Baden noted that the RMA between owners of lots 8 and 9 has been added and addressed. The HOA was established and Stormwater and Road Maintenance Agreement included the correct language and criteria as per the Town Code. The Fish and Wildlife Service agreement is still on the map to regulate what time of year it is permissible to cut down trees to clear land to build. The 100’ buffer that was agreed to in Phase 1 was still shown on the map. Utilities were already provided and taken care of in Section 1 and those continue with Section 2. The lots have to have identification numbers for NYS Fire Codes Standards and those are handed out by the Assessor as the houses are being built. The two right of ways that were instructed to be deleted have been. Mrs. Christiana will issue an invoice for her time for the review along with any other outstanding charges for Public Hearings need to be paid prior to the maps being signed.
Mrs. Lindstrom motioned for Final Approval. Seconded by Mr. Paddock. No discussion.
Baden: Yes Dewitt: Yes
Lindstrom: Yes Ricks: Yes
Paddock: Yes Williams: Yes
Dawson: Yes
Motion carried. 7 ayes, 0 nays, 0 absent, 0 abstentions
2016-05 SPA New Application
Site Plan – Agricultural Tourism Enterprises
Westwind Orchard Cidery, Lowell Deutschlander (applicant) and Fabio Chizzola (owner)
Proposes new construction of a 4500 sq. ft. building for the production and tasting of hard cider
215 Lower Whitfield Rd., S/B/L 68.4-5-12.110, AR-3 and AP Overlay zoning districts, Located in the Ulster County Ag District #3
Mr. Dawson came back to the Board and Mr. Jones, Alternate, returned to the audience.
Hilton Purvis was present on behalf of the application as both Mr. Deutschlander and Mr. Chizzola were both out of Town.
Chairman Baden noted that this property is diagonally across the road from Arrowood Farms on Whitfield Road. The applicant is applying to build a new building for production and tasting of hard cider. Currently they have an orchard, they do pizza, pumpkin picking, etc. They submitted a whole packet of what is existing and what is proposed.
Mr. Ricks noted that they have a well marked way on the other side of the orchard, but he’s not sure they have one near the orchard?
Chairman Baden noted that they have a proposed water line coming from the existing well and bring it all the way across the road. They do have their NYS Liquor Authority License and they submitted a long form EAF which was not required, but the Board can still use it. There is a description of what they are proposing in the packet as well. A new building for the purpose of making and tasting hard cider and this will be in addition to their other agritourism activities, apple picking and the sale of produce from their property currently open to the public from April – November. The addition of the cidery will not be changing that schedule. Hours of operation are 12-6:30pm on weekends. The busiest season is fall and they are not proposing to host any outdoor events. They are currently 12 parking spaces across the street on Lower Whitfield Road. The Board debated the number of spaces and agreed on an 24 spaces based on the size of the building and the potential for people at the orchard. The Board did ask them to show potential over flow as well and they just went ahead and showed 36 spaces. One thing that the Board did ask them was to speak to Wayne Kelder, Highway Superintendent, and now that the Board has an application they will forward it on as well. At the crossing point, they are propsing to do signage warning people that they are crossing a public road. They talked abut the possibility of an actual painted cross walk, but the Board isn’t currently aware of what the legality of that is wth the Town Raod. They would have to ask Mr. Kelder about that. He didn’t know if they could just install one without the Town’s permission, but he does know that cross walks are required by Planning Boards in other Towns. Mrs. Christiana would also investigate this on her end.
Mr. Ricks questioned if the bathrooms were inside the building?
Chairman Baden noted that in the packet they presented there is a floor plan. It’s a shared bathroom.
Mr. Ricks questioned if that would be adequate.
Mrs. Christiana noted that was something that was up to the Building Inspector to determine.
Mr. Dawson believed that if it was 45 people or under, the unisex bathroom was sufficient.
Mrs. Christiana noted that the applicant gave this to the Board for their information, but the PB doesn’t actually review the floor plan. That’s the Building Dept.’s responsibility.
Chairman Baden noted that they presented elevations of the building and it was going to be traditional barn style. It will definitely fit into the area. They are proposing a pathway and very low profile lighting along the pathway. The Board did talk about allowing them to use their loading dock area for ADA parking as they wouldn’t be using the loading dock area when the orchard and cidery were open.
The Board wasn’t sure what they were using for bathrooms now as they do sell pizza.
Mrs. Purvis questioned if the farm stands were required to have bathrooms?
Mr. Ricks believed if you were serving food you had to have some sort of bathrooms. If it was just a farm stands where you buy a couple of vegetables and leave, he didn’t think you would—but if you were selling food to eat, you would.
Chairman Baden wasn’t sure as it wasn’t operating as a restaurant, so he wasn’t sure they were required.
Mr. Dawson noted that it could depend how the business was classified by the Health Dept. as to what is required of them.
Chairman Baden noted that they weren’t proposing any new signage.
Mr. Paddock questioned if the trucks would be able to clear that lighting on the building?
Ms. Lindstrom noted that when it was discussed last month, it was existing and it worked now.
Mr. Ricks mtoined to hold the public hearing at the October meeting on October 13, 2016. Secodned by Mr. Dawson. No discussion.
Vote:
Baden: Yes Dewitt: Yes
Lindstrom: Yes Ricks: Yes
Paddock: Yes Williams: Yes
Dawson: Yes
Motion carried. 7 ayes, 0 nays, 0 absent, 0 abstentions
Chairman Baden noted that Agricultural practices are typically a Type 2 Action, but because they are bringing people in from outside in the scope of a project, the Board has been typing it as Unlisted. Arrowood Farms was the same type of application and the Board listed that application as Unlisted for the same reasons.
Mr. Paddock motioned for an Unlisted Action under SEQRA. Seconded by Mr. Williams. No discussion.
Vote:
Baden: Yes Dewitt: Yes
Lindstrom: Yes Ricks: Yes
Paddock: Yes Williams: Yes
Dawson: Yes
Motion carried. 7 ayes, 0 nays, 0 absent, 0 abstentions
Mr. Dawson motioned to send referral letters to the Town of Rochester Highway Dept, Ulster County Health Dept, Accord Fire Dept, and Ulster County Planning Board. Seconded by Mr. Dewitt. No discussion.
Vote:
Baden: Yes Dewitt: Yes
Lindstrom: Yes Ricks: Yes
Paddock: Yes Williams: Yes
Dawson: Yes
Motion carried. 7 ayes, 0 nays, 0 absent, 0 abstentions
Mrs. Christiana would look into the legality of the proposed crosswalks.
OTHER MATTERS:
Local law referral from Town Board RE: solar
Chairman Baden noted that the Board discussed this at the last meeting. There was a minor change, so the Town Board was required to send out a new referral. On Page 10 under “Large Scale Systems”, it currently says they shall not be allowed in soil type areas known as “of prime farmland of statewide importance”. There are 3 categories- 1. Prime Farmland, 2. Prime Farmland if drained, and 3. Farmland of statewide importance. The County did a map for the Town. The green area is the prime farmland. The pink area is the farmland of statewide importance. Prime farmland is a designation by the Dept. of Agriculture. It’s based on soil types. Statewide importance is done by Ag and Markets. The ZRC looked at the map and said, there is way too much area in the statewide importance area, so they took it out. It says, “Prime farmland of statewide importance”, and the ZRC is recommending to take out the words, “of statewide importance”. When the Town Board amended it they merged the two together.
The County PB has reviewed this law and their only comments were that it should be approved.
The Public Hearing is set for October 6th at the Town Hall.
Ms. Lindstrom questioned how often the farmland designations as “prime” or of “statewide importance” changes?
Chairman Baden noted that the areas of statewide importance can change often. Prime farmland is designated by the USDA and he doesn’t believe it changes as often.
Ms. Lindstrom motioned to recommend to ament the language as recommended by the ZRC, seconded by Mr. Dawson. No discussion.
Vote:
Baden: Yes Dewitt: Yes
Lindstrom: Yes Ricks: Yes
Paddock: Yes Williams: Yes
Dawson: Yes
Motion carried. 7 ayes, 0 nays, 0 absent, 0 abstentions
Mr. Ricks motioned to adjourn the meeting. Seconded by Ms. Lindstrom. No discussion. All Members present, in favor.
As there was no further business, Chairman Baden adjourned the meeting at 8:20 PM.
Respectfully Submitted,
Rebecca Paddock Stange, Secretary