PLANNING BOARD
TOWN OF ROCHESTER
ULSTER COUNTY
ACCORD, NEW YORK
(845) 626-2434
MINUTES OF May 24th, 2022 WORKSHOP MEETING OF the Town of Rochester PLANNING BOARD, held at 6:31pmat the Harold Lipton Community Center, 15 Tobacco Rd., Accord, NY, via Zoom, and Streamed on YouTube.
Chair Jones called the meeting to order at 6:31pm and asked everyone to stand for the Pledge to the Flag.
Chair Jones did roll call attendance.
PRESENT: ABSENT:
Rick Jones, Chair Nicole Knapp, Secretary
Sam Zurofsky, Vice Chairperson
Maren Lindstrom
Marc Grasso
Zachary Jarvis
Patrick Williams
Zorian Pinsky
Ann Marie Maloney, Alternate
Also present:
Mary Lou Christiana, Attorney for the Town
Liz Axelson, CPL, Town of Rochester consulting engineer
APPLICATION REVIEW:
1. PB 2021-05 SPA (Site Plan Approval) Continued Application
Lucky Petroleum
S/B/L 76.1-3-28.100
Applicant proposes renovations to the existing parcel, including demolition of existing convenience store, construction of a new convenience store, replacement of gas pumps, and will need a Site Plan Approval. Parcel is +/- 3.4 acres and in the Business (B) zoning district.
Khattar Elmassalemah and Surinder Cheema present on behalf of the application.
Mr. Emassalemah stated waiver letter was submitted. Will be reviewed by Ms. Christiana.
Ms. Lindstrom summarized the comments from Ulster County Planning Board and motions were made as follows:
Ulster County Planning Board (UCPB) NYS General Municipal Law §239 Referral
Whereas,
The T/ Rochester Planning Board submitted the application for review to the UCPB pursuant to NYS GML §239.
Whereas,
The UCPB reviewed the proposal 5/4/2022 and returned written comment stating required modifications:
1. Transportation
Comment
The applicant is proposing to modify the existing curb cuts and traffic patterns for the site. Truck turning templateshavebeenprovided.Thesitealsoindicatesaproposeddrive-thruwithnovendornamesupplied and a queue of nine vehicles. The plans also indicate a “future” sidewalk along the frontage.
RequiredModification
Theapplicantwillneedtoobtain acommercialhighwayworkpermitfromNYSDOTfortheproposed modifications. The vendor for the drive-thru will need to be identified to help with calculations regarding peak queue lengths and what impacts those queues will have at peak hours of operation from both aninternal trafficmovement perspective as wellas potential impacts on theStateRoute. The proposed sidewalk, in the state right-of-way, will also require the review of NYSDOT as will any additional plantings. The use of additional street trees along the frontage, provided they do not obstruct sight distances, is recommended.
Response
Required Modification 1:“obtain a commercial highway work permit from NYSDOT” Obtaining a commercial highway work permit from the NYSDOT shall be a condition of approval before a Certificate of Occupancy is issued”: “Any and all other agencies’ permits or approvals which are currently required or any which may be determined in the future to be required in conjunction with the construction and/or operation of this use shall be secured or renewed as applicable. Should any conditions imposed by other agency permits cause conditions to be in conflict, the more restrictive condition shall prevail” is a standard condition of approval.
UCPB Required Modification is accepted and adopted May 24th, 2022 by the following vote:
Ayes: 7 Nays: 0 Absent: 0
Motion by Chair Jones
Second by Mr. Zurofsky
Required Modification 2: “…calculations regarding peak queue lengths and what impacts those queues will have at peak hours of operation from both an internal traffic movement perspective as well as potential impacts on the State Route.” The proposed vendor is Dunkin’ Doughnuts, LLC. The ingress/egress and estimated queuing lengths were reviewed by the NYS DOT and the TOR consulting engineer. Both parties stated that internal traffic movements and queueing was sufficient and safe.
UCPB Required Modification is overruled by supermajority May 24th, 2022 by the following vote:
Ayes: 7 Nays: 0 Absent: 0
Motion by Chair Jones
Second by Ms. Lindstrom
Required Modification 3: “The use of additional street trees along the frontage, provided they do not obstruct sight distances, is recommended”. The Town of Rochester Landscaping Code 140-15 requires at least one deciduous tree every 35 feet. Review by the Planning Board of the configuration of the site and the provided landscape plan determined the number of deciduous trees shown to be sufficient for the site. The landscaping strip(s) shall otherwise comply with 140-15 (6). All other size criteria for landscaping and other elements of 140-15 shall be adhered to and landscape bonding shall be a condition of approval.
UCPB Required Modification is overruled by supermajority May 24th, 2022 by the following vote:
Ayes: 7 Nays: 0 Absent: 0
Motion by Chair Jones
Second by Mr. Grasso
Required Modification 4: “The proposed sidewalk, in the state right-of-way, will also require the review of NYSDOT as will any additional plantings”. The proposed sidewalk has been reviewed by the NYSDOT and the NYSDOT recommended labeling as “proposed sidewalk” which has been done by the applicant as no sidewalk is to be built at this time. If a community sidewalk project is undertaken in the future the applicant shall coordinate review with the NYS DOT
UCPB Required Modification is accepted and adopted May 24th, 2022 by the following vote:
Ayes: 7 Nays: 0 Absent: 0
Motion by Ms. Lindstrom
Second by Mr. Williams
2. Signage
Comment
Theproposedsignappearstobeafree-standingsign thatexceedsthesquarefootagerequirements,whichare set at a maximum of 32 square feet in the B zone. As proposed, the sign is greater than twice what is allowed intheZoneonasingleside.Thezoningstatutealsocallsforlargefreestandingsignstobelandscapedand located as close to the ground as possible
RequiredModification
As currently configured, the proposed sign will require a variance of greater than 50%. The UCPB recommendsthataconformingsignwithamonumentbaseandlandscapingaroundthebaseasa preferred design alternative.
Response
The proposed sign is approximately 32.4 sq. ft. thus does not require a variance of 50%. The Planning Board in the regularly scheduled Planning Board Meeting of May 9th, 2022 granted a waiver for the small 1.25% overage as it is allowed to do by code for overages under 10%. The Planning Board further agreed that the height and size of the proposed 32.4 sq. ft. sign was within the guidelines of TOR 140-21 which specifies 140-21 C (2) “wherever feasible multiple signs should be combined to avoid clutter” The applicant is combining the petrol station and the drive thru sign. 140-21 c (3) “signs should be as close to the ground as possible”. Monument style signage is not required by code. The 15’ height meets code.
UCPB Required Modification is overruled by supermajority May 24th, 2022 by the following vote:
Ayes: 7 Nays: 0 Absent: 0
Motion byChair Jones
Second by Mr. Grasso
3. SiteDesign/ParkingLayout
Thecurrentsitedesignisclosertokeepingwith§140-17:Parking,loading,access,andtrafficstandardsthan the proposed layout. The Town’s standards call for, where possible, that parking: “belocatedinthesideorrearyardofanyuse,withtheprincipalbuildingsituatednearthefrontline..”.“Thisis for the purpose ofmaintaining thecontinuity ofthe building line alongany highwayandavoiding theeffective merger of parking areas along a highway into one mass of pavement where entrances and exits become difficult to identify”.
AdvisoryComment
Design goals were a clear priority and continue to be a priority for the Town as it has revised its zoning statute over the past ten to twenty years. Given that the proposed site layout design is contrary to the design goals of the community, it is recommended that the applicant produce alternativedesignlayoutsthataremoreinkeepingwiththecommunity’sdesigngoalsandzoning statute. The Ulster County Planning Board recommends the applicant and community review the recently completed Stewart’s Shop on NYS Route 32 northbound in the Village of New Paltz as a similarly redeveloped convenience store and fuel station combination that made the necessary changes to the design goals of the community
Response
The TOR Planning Board disagrees with the County. The placement of the pumps and the setback of the structure, combined with the large upgrade of the convenience store, upgrades to and the existing placement of the accessory commercial building close to St Route 209, and the landscaping will greatly improve the parcel and bring it much more in line with our current zoning laws. Our design guidelines for parking in the rear and commercial structures toward the street front are more germane for retail, small offices, small medical facilities etc. It would be highly nonstandard to have petrol pumps behind a drive through and a convenience store and could cause traffic and pedestrian hazards and an unnecessary burden on the applicant as clientele solely interested in filling their tank would pass by the location. The Stewart’s on route 32 in New Paltz is not readily comparable: it is at an intersection so the pumps are highly visible and the intersection has a traffic light and crosswalks making it accessible from two streets, more accessible to pedestrians and the traffic flow and visibility is much different.
4. FuelStorage
Comment
Theapplicantisproposingtoremovetheexistingfuelstoragetanksandplacenewtanksatanalternative location on the site.
RequiredModification
The applicantwill need to comply with NewYork State’s Petroleum BulkStorage Program, as well as Federalregulationsofundergroundtanks,andcoordinatewithNYSDECforpermitting.Soiltestingis recommended as part of the Applications for new storage tanks and closing existing tanks will be necessary. Soil testing may be required.
Response
The TOR Planning Board agrees with the county: a condition of approval shall include the required modification, all permits and approvals from other agencies must be in place before a project receives a Certificate of Occupancy”: 1. All Local, County, State, and Federal Laws or Codes shall be complied with for the current or future use of these lands. 2. Any and all other agencies’ permits or approvals which are currently required or any which may be determined in the future to be required in conjunction with the construction and/or operation of this use shall be secured or renewed as applicable. Should any conditions imposed by other agency permits cause conditions to be in conflict, the more restrictive condition shall prevail. The facility owner shall specifically comply with Federal and NYS DEC regulations for underground tanks removal and replacement before a Certificate of Occupancy shall be issued. Shall be conditions of approval
Ms. Lindstrom made a motion to grant the waiver request submitted by the applicant to reduce the number of Town Code required parking spots by 10 spots, from 52 to 42. Mr. Williams seconded the motion.
All in Favor. Motion Carried.
Ayes: 7 Nays: 0 Absent: 0
Chair Jones stated there will be a continued Public Hearing for the 6/13/22 meeting and a draft decision will be prepared by Ms. Axelson and available at that time, as well. The draft decision will be posted on the website and it may be edited based on public comment.
Ms. Moloney left the meeting at 7PM.
OTHER BUSINESS:
• Chair Jones proposed moving the June meeting from June 13th to June 23rddue to Ms. Christiana being unavailable for June 13th. It was determined there would not be quorum, so the meeting will remain June 13th.
• Ms. Lindstrom and Mr. Grasso attended the Gateway meeting regarding the Town Board’s Granary EEO project.
o Mr. Grasso reported the UCPB was happy with the overall project. Many questions were asked and answered.
o Ms. Lindstrom stated many of the comments were regarding crosswalks in that area and is a good example of why an EEO should be utilized.
o Chair Jones made a motion giving consent for the Town Board to take Lead Agency on the Granary EEO Project. Mr. Jarvis seconded the motion.
ROLL CALL:
Mr. Grasso – Aye
Mr. Williams – Aye
Ms. Lindstrom – Aye
Mr. Zurofsky – Aye
Mr. Pinsky – Aye
Mr. Jarvis – Aye
Chair Jones – Aye
All in Favor. Motion Carried
Ayes: 7 Nays: 0 Absent: 0
• The Planning Board discussed new material regarding the Town Board’s Walnut Brook EEO project.
o Ms. Lindstrom noted several agencies, such as ACOE, missing from list of involved agencies. Ms. Christiana stated some are not classified as involved agencies but may be interested agencies only. Ms. Lindstrom stated the narrative contains some contradictory comments regarding floodplains. She also made comments regarding water usage and this project seems to be on the lower end of meeting water requirement – should over-estimate water needed.
o Traffic was a major topic of discussion among Board Members, particularly regarding school buses, car stacking, and delivery trucks.
o Mr. Williams made comments regarding water maintenance.
o Mr. Zurofsky asked questions regarding not having unit numbers, number of bedrooms changing, septic plan. SEQRA cannot be completed without this information.
o Ms. Lindstrom offered to compose a letter comprising the items discussed on behalf of the Planning Board, which will be submitted to the Town Board.
Chair Jones made a motion to send Mr. Zurofsky’s, Mr. Williams’, and Ms. Lindstrom’s comments to the Town Board as noted in the meeting. Mr. Jarvis seconded the motion.
All in favor. Motion carried.
Ayes: 7 Nays: 0 Abstentions: 0
ADJOURNMENT:
Mr. Zurofsky made a motion to adjourn at 7:46pm and Mr. Grasso seconded the motion.
All in favor. Motion carried.
Ayes: 7 Nays: 0 Abstentions: 0
Respectfully submitted,
Nicole Knapp