Planning Board Minutes October 14th, 2021

PLANNING BOARD
TOWN OF ROCHESTER
ULSTER COUNTY
ACCORD, NEW YORK
(845) 626-2434

MINUTES OF October 14th, 2021 REGULAR MEETING OF the Town of Rochester PLANNING BOARD, held at 7:00pm at the Harold Lipton Community Center and streamed live via YouTube.

Chair Jones called the meeting to order and asked everyone to stand for the Pledge to the Flag.

The Secretary did roll call attendance.

PRESENT: ABSENT:
Rick Jones, Chairperson Sam Zurofsky, Vice Chairperson
Patrick Williams Elizabeth Axelson, Planning Consultant, CPL
Maren Lindstrom
Ann Marie Moloney
Marc Grasso
Zorian Pinsky

ALSO PRESENT:
Zachary Jarvis- Alternate
Mary Lou Christiana-Town Attorney (via Zoom)
Nicole Knapp-Secretary
Erin Enouen – Councilwomen (to facilitate livestream)

ANNOUNCEMENTS and COMMUNICATIONS

October 25th Workshop Meeting Decision:
Chair Jones stated the workshop meeting will be held to discuss the Malatesta/Gentilucci/Pigazzi and DeJager applications.

Chair Jones stated Mr. Jarvis and Mr. Grasso made full-scale copies of the Town’s zoning district map. Copies were provided to each member and a large copy will be displayed at each meeting.

TRAININGS:

Chair Jones reminded the Board members they have 2 more months to get their four hours of required training into the Planning Board Secretary.

ACTION ON MINUTES:

Mr. Grasso made a motion to accept the 9/13/21 minutes. Mr. Pinsky seconded the motion.
All in Favor. Motion Carried.
6 ayes, 0 nays, 0 abstentions

Ms. Lindstrom made a motion to accept the 9/27/21 minutes. Ms. Moloney seconded the motion.
All in Favor. Motion Carried.
6 ayes, 0 nays, 0 abstentions

APPLICATION REVIEW:

PB 2021 – 14 LLI
Naegeli/Silver & Goyet

Heather Gabriel from Medenbach and Eggers was present on behalf of the application.

No comments from the applicant’s representative or the Board. Chair Jones reminded Ms. Gabriel to include the LLI note on the final plat.

Chair Jones read the Lot Line Certification:

Decision: PB 2021-14 LLI

Lot Improvement – Certification
*Pursuant to Chapter 125 and Chapter 140 of the Code of the Town of Rochester.

Applicant: Jennifer Naegeli
Owner: Jack Silver/Sanna Goyet & Jennifer Naegeli/Sam Merians

Reason for Request:
Applicants propose the conveyance of +/- 2.0 acres from S/B/L 60.1-1-30.210 (+/-22.8 acres) of Silver/Goyet to S/B/L 60.1-1-30.220(+/- 4.8 acres) of Naegeli/Merians.

Location: 66 Sundown Road Kerhonkson, NY
S/B/L: 60.1-1-30.210 & 60.1-1-30.220
Zoning District: AR-3

Zoning Permit filed: 10/4/2021 SEQR Type: Type II by definition
Planning Board Application #: LLI 2121-14 PB Application filed: 10/4/2021

* * * * *

The Planning Board has reviewed the plat and certifies the lot improvement proposed will meet Town of Rochester lot requirements for the AR-3 zoning districts and, for recording purposes only, further represents an exempt lot improvement in accordance with Section § 125-18 of the Town of Rochester Subdivision Regulations. No subdivision approval is required or given by the Planning Board. The Planning Board further grants the authority to the Chairman to sign the plat certifying the lot improvement for filing purposes without further resolution upon receipt and the Chairman’s determination such plat meets the requirements of the code is in agreement with the sketch plan provided for review.
Plat shall be prepared by a licensed Land Surveyor or Professional Engineer to describe the conveyances involved by metes and bounds and shall include the Town of Rochester Lot Line Note:

“These plans are acknowledged by the Town of Rochester, and for recording purposes only, to represent an exempt lot improvement in accordance with § 125-18 of the Town of Rochester Subdivision Regulations. No subdivision approval is required or given Lot improvement parcel shall not be considered a separate building lot apart from the tract to which it is being added. ”

The owner shall file in the office of the Ulster County Clerk such certified plat bearing the Chairman’s signature within 62 days of this certification. The owner shall have the responsibility to return four (4) Ulster County Clerk certified copies of the plat to the Town of Rochester Planning Board within 30 days of filing.

Ms. Moloney made a motion to certify the application. Mr. Grasso seconded the motion.
All in Favor. Motion Carried.
6 ayes, 0 nays, 0 abstentions

******************************************************************************

PB 2021–13 SBD Continued Application/Public Hearing
Rock Mountain Farms (Karen & Howard Osterhoudt)
S/B/L 68.4-6-1.117/R2/R1
Minor Subdivision

Kristen Osterhoudt from Rock Mountain Farms present on behalf of the application.

Ms. Christiana stated the need for the access road to the larger lot to be clearly labeled. There is currently a dashed line on the map labeled “trail”.

Mr. Pinsky brought up a question about adequate water supply on the property. The subdivision has its own water district and supply, so there is adequate water for the new lots. There is a proposed curb valve on the map.

Mr. Pinsky expressed concern about water collecting down to the house in lot 1 due to the grading of the land. Ms. Lindstrom stated there are no wetlands where the proposed houses are to be built. There is a slope, but it is flat when you get down to the bottom.

Ms. Osterhoudt stated once the house is placed, there will be appropriate pitching of the land, away from the house.

Ms. Lindstrom made the motion to set the application as an unlisted/uncoordinated action for SEQRA. Mr. Grasso seconded the motion.
Roll Call:
Chair Lindstrom- Yes Ms. Moloney- Yes
Mr. Zurofsky- Absent Mr. Grasso- Yes
Mr. Williams- Yes
Mr. Jones- Yes
Mr. Pinsky- Yes
All in Favor. Motion Carried.

The Board completed a SEQRA EAF Part 2 review.

Mr. Pinsky made a motion declaring no negative environmental impact. Ms. Lindstrom seconded the motion.
Roll Call:
Chair Lindstrom- Yes Ms. Moloney- Yes
Mr. Zurofsky- Absent Mr. Grasso- Yes
Mr. Williams- Yes
Mr. Jones- Yes
Mr. Pinsky- Yes
All in Favor. Motion Carried.

Chair Jones opened the Public Hearing.

Tammy Hart of 50 Cathy Jo Place made public comment stating the road is bad, there is an increase of traffic due to construction, and it is soaked next to her property. There are old trees on the property and it goes off to a cliff. There is not even an acre of land for the new parcel and it is all wetlands. Trees were removed to help with the water. If you drive down there, your car will sink. She stated her water would be affected.

Ms. Kortright stated Mr. Osterhoudt will find a way to put a house there and mitigate any of these concerns.

Discussion occurred regarding whether this property was part of the original subdivision. The Code Enforcement Office had typed the application as a minor subdivision.

Ms. Lindstrom made a motion to close the Public Hearing. Ms. Moloney seconded the motion.
All in Favor. Motion carried.
6 ayes, 0 nays, 0 abstentions

A concern was raised about machinery coming up and down the road, but it was stated the Highway Department will take care of any issues regarding strain on the pipes under the road. Ms. Christiana stated there is no weight limit on that road.

Chair Jones read the decision:

Decision: PB 2021-13 SBD
Minor Subdivision Conditional Final Approval

Applicant: Karen & Howard Osterhoudt d/b/a Rock Mountain Farms, Inc.

Reason for Request: The subdivision of parcel S/B/L 68.4-6-1.117 (+/- 6.6 acres) into two lots: lot 1 of +/- 1 acres and lot 2 of +/- 5.6 acres. Lots are to be accessed by Cathy Jo Place. Accord, NY. Parcel contains farmland of state-wide importance; the far rear of the current parcel is in the FD Overlay District (FEMA 100 year flood plain); Parcel contains hydric soils and probable wetlands and is in the TOR AP Overlay District.

Location: Cathy Jo Place, Accord, NY
Total Acreage: ±5.6 acres
S/B/L: S/B/L 68.4-6-1.117
Zoning District: R-1 (neighborhood residential) and R-2 (Low Density Residential)

Code Enforcement Determination: Minor Subdivision
Zoning Permit: 257 of 2021

Planning Board Application: 2021-13 SBD
PB Application filed: 7/26/2021 EAF filed: 7/26/2021

SEQR Type: Unlisted, Uncoordinated –10/14/2021
SEQR Determination: Negative Declaration – 10/14/2021
Other Agency Referrals: N/A

Documents considered by the Planning Board for review

1. Zoning Permit 257 of 2021 determination of Minor Subdivision received 5/27/2021 & dated 5/27/2021
2. Code Enforcement determination letter received 5/27/2021
3. Letter of representation from Karen Osterhoudt to John Post dated 7/26/2021
4. Planning Board Subdivision application 2021-13 SBD received & dated 7/26/2021
5. Short Form EAF Part 1 received 7/26/2021
6. UCDOH waste disposal permit dated 2/23/2021 & septic plan by Medenbach & Eggers received 8/30/2021 for lot one.
7. Preliminary Site Plan dated 3/14/2021. Received 7/12/2021, Revised 8/30/2021

Notice of Public Hearing:

1. Published in the September 23rd, 2021 edition of the Shawangunk Journal.
2. Notice by mail to known landowners within 500’.
3. Posted on the T/ Rochester Clerk bulletin board and Town of Rochester website.

Date of Public Hearing: 10/14/2021
Place: Harold Lipton Community Center, 15 Tobacco Rd Accord, NY 12404
Public Comment: (see Minutes of Town of Rochester Planning Board, 10/14/2021)
* * * *
Findings of the Planning Board
1. The Planning Board received a zoning referral and determination letter for a minor subdivision from the Code Enforcement Officer.
2. Applicant proposes the subdivision of parcel S/B/L 68.4-6-1.117 (+/- 6.6 acres) into two lots; lot 1 of +/- 1 acres and lot 2 of +/- 5.6 acres. The new lots are to be accessed by Cathy Jo Place, Accord, NY. The larger lot 2 of 5.6 acres can also be accessed by Roberts Drive, which is not proposed. Parcel contains farmland of state-wide importance; the far rear of the current parcel is in the FD Overlay District (FEMA 100 year flood plain); parcel contains hydric soils and small probable wetlands in the rear along/within the FD Overlay District. The parcel is further within the TOR Aquifer Protection Overlay District.
3. The applicant’s representative met with the Planning Board and presented the subdivision map for review. The Board discussed and reviewed the proposed subdivision and requested additional map details: neighboring parcel owners listed on map; location map; location of proposed dwellings, driveways, well and septic; topography; and delineation of FD Overlay (FEMA Floodplain area).
4. The parcel is in the R-1 and R-2 zoning districts.
5. The existing plat is filed with the Ulster County Clerk.
6. The current use of the parcel is vacant land. Proposed lot one will be a +/- 1 acre lot incorporated into a community water system and will need septic, plans which were submitted and for which DOH approval exists. Proposed lot 2 will need well and septic. Parcel is partially highly sloping dropping to flat lands, is in the AP Overlay District and is partially within the FP Overlay district. No land disturbance is proposed within the FD Overlay portion of the parcel to the rear. The proposed land uses meet the regulations of the FD and AP Overlay Districts.
7. Rochester R-1 zoned districts are neighborhood residential districts designed to preserve the predominantly moderate density residential areas of the Town and to protect them from incompatible uses. Rochester R-2 zoned districts are Low Density Residential Districts, this district is intended to recognize and preserve the integrity of predominantly low density rural residential areas of the Town and to protect them from incompatible uses.
8. The application was determined to meet the requirements of an Unlisted SEQRA action.
• A Negative Declaration was determined upon review.
9. A Public Hearing was held.
10. The Board reviewed if the proposed lot has safe and legal access.
• The Board concludes that proposed lots will have adequate >/= 50 foot frontage on the Town Highway.
11. The parcel is in the R-1 and R-2 zoning districts. Upon review, the Board concludes that the 2 proposed parcels meet or exceed the bulk standards requirements for the R-2 zoning district.
12. The Board reviewed if the proposed lots could support water and septic. Lot 1 will connect to a community water system and has UCDOH approved septic. The Planning Board will need engineer certification or UCDOH approval that the new lot 2 can support water and septic. This shall be a condition of approval.

Discussion continued regarding the lots being part of the original subdivision (Sylvan Glade).

Ms. Christiana advised the Planning Board to table the decision until research is done regarding the filed map of the original subdivision. Ms Christiana and Chair Jones will meet to discuss whether this should have been a Minor or a Major Subdivision.

Ms. Moloney made a motion to table the decision for the next meeting. Mr. Williams seconded the motion.
All in Favor. Motion Carried.
6 ayes, 0 nays, 0 abstentions

PB 2021-14 SBD Continued Application/Public Hearing
Joseph & Christine Schneider
S/B/L 69.3-2-35.100/R2
Minor Subdivision

Joseph and Christine Schneider present on behalf of the application.

Mr. Grasso made the motion to set the application as an unlisted/uncoordinated action for SEQRA. Ms. Moloney seconded the motion.
Roll Call:
Chair Lindstrom- Yes Ms. Moloney- Yes
Mr. Zurofsky- Absent Mr. Grasso- Yes
Mr. Williams- Yes
Mr. Jones- Yes
Mr. Pinsky- Yes
All in Favor. Motion Carried.

The Board completed a SEQRA EAF Part 2 review.

Ms. Lindstrom made a motion declaring no negative environmental impact. Mr. Grasso seconded the motion.
Roll Call:
Chair Lindstrom- Yes Ms. Moloney- Yes
Mr. Zurofsky- Absent Mr. Grasso- Yes
Mr. Williams- Yes
Mr. Jones- Yes
Mr. Pinsky- Yes
All in Favor. Motion Carried.

Chair Jones opened the Public Hearing.

No one was present to speak at the Public Hearing and no written correspondence had been received.

Mr. Williams made a motion to close the Public Hearing. Ms. Moloney seconded the motion.
All in Favor. Motion Carried.
6 ayes, 0 nays, 0 abstentions

It was noted revision dates must be added to the final maps.

Chair Jones read the decision.

Decision: PB 2021-14 SBD
Minor Subdivision Conditional Final Approval

Applicant: Joseph & Christine Schneider

Reason for Request: A 2 lot minor subdivision of S/B/L 69.3-2-35.100 (+/- 4.47 acres) into lot one of +/- 2.24 acres and lot two of +/- 2.237 acres. The parcel is located at 60/64 Airport Road, Accord, NY. Parcel is flat cleared lands with 2 existing single family dwellings, and associated accessory structures, well and septic. Parcel is contiguous to Ulster County Ag District lands and the parcel contains farmland of state-wide importance.

Location: 60/64 Airport Road, Accord, NY
Total Acreage: ±4.47 acres
S/B/L: S/B/L 69.3-2-35.100 Zoning District: R-2 (Low Density Residential)

Code Enforcement Determination: Minor Subdivision
Zoning Permit: 404 of 2021

Planning Board Application: 2021-14 SBD
PB Application filed: 6/30/2021 EAF filed: 10/14/2021

SEQR Type: Unlisted, Uncoordinated –10/14/2021
SEQR Determination: Negative Declaration – 10/14/2021
Other Agency Referrals: N/A

Documents considered by the Planning Board for review

1. Zoning Permit 404 of 2021 determination of Minor Subdivision received 8/30/2021 & dated 7/22/2021
2. Code Enforcement determination letter received 7/28/2021
3. Waiver request letter dated 9/30/2021
4. Planning Board Subdivision application 2021-14 SBD received 8/09/2021
5. Short Form EAF Part 1 received 9/14/2021
6. Agricultural Data Statement received 9/14/2021
7. Preliminary Site Plan dated August 25th, 2020. Received 8/30/2021, Revised 9/27/2021

Notice of Public Hearing:

Draft findings were prepared by the Chairman and were read and discussed by the Planning Board in public meeting at the time of adoption.

Adopted October 14th, 2021 by the following vote:
Ayes: 6 Nays: 0 Absent: 1

Motion to adopt findings by Mr. Pinsky
Second by Ms. Moloney
* * * *
RESOLVED,
The Town of Rochester Planning Board grants Minor Subdivision- Conditional Final Approval permitting the subdivision of lands situated at: 60/64 Airport Road, Accord, NY.

The subdivision plan dated August 25th, 2020 as revised and reviewed on October 14th, 2021 is approved with the following conditions.

CONDITIONS of APPROVAL:

1. All fees due to the Town of Rochester involving this application shall be paid in full prior to the Chair’s signature on the Final Plat.
2. The applicant shall present a Final Plat for signature. The Final Plat shall show updated plan revision date(s).
3. The following plat notes shall be included on the recorded Final Plat Map:
“Any further subdivision shall be treated as a major subdivision under TOR subdivision law §125-12”.
4. All required Local, County, State or Federal permits shall be secured for the current and future use of these lands, specifically local driveway permits.

This Conditional Final Approval shall expire 180 days from this approval date unless the Final Plat is presented and signed by the Chair. This period may be extended for two additional 90 day periods upon application to and resolution by the T/ Rochester Planning Board.

The Town of Rochester Planning Board further grants Minor Subdivision- Conditional Final Approval permitting the subdivision of lands upon satisfactory completion of the conditions of approval 1 – 3 and grants the authority to the Chair to certify that the conditions have been met and review, sign and date the plat without further resolution at such time.

EFFECT of APPROVAL:

1. The owner shall file in the office of the Ulster County Clerk such approved plat bearing the Chair’s signature and any other related documents within 62 days from the date of signature or such approval shall be deemed to expire without further notice in accordance with NYS Town Law §276.
2. The owner shall have the responsibility to return three (3) Ulster County Clerk certified copies of the filed plat and any other related documents to the T/ Rochester Planning Board within 30 days of such filing.

Adopted October 14th, 2021, by the following vote:
Ayes: 6 Nays: 0 Absent: 1

Motion made by Ms. Lindstrom.
Second by Mr. Pinsky

PB 2021-06 SBD Continued Application
Frank Kortright
S/B/L 68.3-2-14/NR
Minor Subdivision

Heather Gabriel of Medenbach & Eggers and Frank Kortright present on behalf of the application.

Sight lines were added to the map as requestion.

Mr. Pinsky proposed further clarification of the property lines for Lot #2. Representative for applicant, Heather Gabriel of M & E agreed to make change to map.

Ms. Lindstrom made a motion to set the Public Hearing for November 8, 2021. Ms. Moloney seconded the motion.
All in Favor. Motion Carried.
6 ayes, 0 nays, 0 abstentions

PB 2021-15SBD Continued Application
Reginal Solcberg/David Demorest
S/B/L 68.2-1-74.200/R2
Minor Subdivision

David Demorest present on behalf of the application.

The Board discussed some information that was still missing from the maps, including more detailed definition of the right of way, labeling of Dug Rd., location map in top corner, topography measurements on the topography lines, and DEC overlays.

Mr. Grasso made a motion to set the Public Hearing for November 8, 2021, contingent on receiving the required materials by October 25, 2021. Ms. Moloney seconded the motion.
All in Favor. Motion Carried.
6 ayes, 0 nays, 0 abstentions

PB 2020-07 SBD Continued Application
Suzanne Cusack (Owner & Applicant)
S/B/L 68.1-1-27/AR-3
Minor Subdivision

Suzanne Cusack and Barry Medenbach, of Medenbach & Eggers, present on behalf of the application.

Decision: PB 2020-07 SBD
Minor Subdivision Conditional Final Approval

Applicant: Suzanne B. Cusack

Reason for Request: Proposes the subdivision of S/B/L 68.1-1-27 (+/- 108 acres) into 7 lots

Location: 5 Ridgeview Road, Kerhonkson, NY
Total Acreage: ±108 acres
S/B/L: S/B/L 68.1-1-27 Zoning District: AR-3 (Residential Agricultural)
The applicant proposes a seven (7) lot subdivision of the parcel. The parcel’s current use is the Villa Veritas Rehabilitation Center, woodlands, and farmlands. Parcel is located at 5 Ridgeview Road and the seven proposed subdivision parcels will front Upper Cherrytown Road, Kerhonkson, NY. The parcel and proposed subdivision parcels contain lands within a FEMA 100 year flood plain, contain a DEC known trout stream (Mombaccus Creek) and an unnamed tributary stream (also a known trout stream), hydric soils, prime farmland and farmland of statewide importance, are in the Ulster County AG-3 agricultural district, contain Ulster County Habitat Core lands/NYS DEC forest lands in the top 20% of Forest Conditions, are within the UC DOH Aquifer Zone and substantial portions of the proposed parcels are on slopes above 15% and 25%. Proposed new subdivision lots are to have separate driveway access onto Upper Cherrytown Road and are proposed to be between 5 and 3 acres in size. The applicant further requests a lot line improvement in tandem with the proposed subdivision to convey +/- 0.17 acres to Faso to remediate a deck encroachment.

SEQRA: Unlisted/Uncoordinated 6/1/2021; Negative Declaration July 12th, 2021
Code Enforcement Determination: Minor Subdivision
Zoning Permit: initial 363 of 2020 modified and resubmitted as 118 of 2021

Planning Board Application: 2020-07 SBD
PB Application filed: 9/14/2020 (amended)
EAF filed: 11/20/2021, amended 3/22/2021, re-amended 5/13/2021

SEQR Type: Unlisted/Uncoordinated 6/1/2021
SEQR Determination: Negative Declaration – 7/12/2021
Other Agency Referrals: Town of Rochester Highway Department, Accord Fire District, Ulster County Planning Board, Town of Rochester Environmental Conservation Commission, NYS Department of Environmental Conservation, Army Corps of Engineers, NYS Agriculture & Markets, Ulster County Department of Health.

Documents considered by the Planning Board for review

1. Letter of Determination from Code Enforcement Officer dated 3/31/2021, received 4/1/2021
2. Original Zoning Permit 363 of 2020 determination of Major Subdivision received & dated 9/9/2020, amended and resubmitted as Zoning Permit 118 of 2021 determination of Minor Subdivision dated 3/3/2021, received 4/1/2021 and Lot Line Improvement number 12 of 2021 dated 3/22/2021 received 5/10/2021
3. Planning Board Subdivision application 2020-07 SBD 8 lot major subdivision received 9/14/2020 amended to 7 lot minor subdivision, received 8/30/2021
4. Letter of Representative powers from Suzanne Cusack to Medenbach & Eggers Civil Engineering & Land Surveying dated 9/1/2020 and received 9/14/2020
5. Letter from Applicant’s Engineer, Medenbach & Eggers Civil Engineering & Land Surveying, dated 12/18/20.
6. Agricultural Data Statement dated 9/2/2020 and received 9/14/2020, amended & received 5/13/2021
7. Long Form EAF Part 1 received 11/20/2021, amended 3/22/2021 & received 3/24/2021, re-amended & received 5/13/2021. Full EAF Part 2 prepared by CPL 6/1/2021, reviewed 7/12/2021, EAF Part 3 prepared 7/12/2021
8. Threatened and Endangered Species & Habitat Suitability Assessment Report prepared by Michael Nowicki, Ecological Solutions, LLC prepared 11/18/2020 & received 11/30/2020
9. Interested Party letter to Accord Fire District, TOR Highway Department, TOR ECC, Ulster County Planning Board, NY DEC, NYS Ag & Markets, US ACOE, & UC DOH
10. Dec email response to interested party letter received 6/29/2021
11. Preliminary Survey Map/Site Plan and site details dated 8/28/2021 received 9/1/2021, revised 11/25/2020, revised 1/22/2021, revised 3/22/2021, revised 4/1/2021, revised 5/13/2021, revised 7/26/2021
12. Slope Analysis 1/13/2021, revised 3/22/2021
13. Site Distance Profile dated 4/1/2021, revised 5/7/2021 revised 7/26/2021
14. SPDES general permit dated 7/22/2021 & SWPPP detail sheet dated 3/22/2021 received 7/26/2021. SPDES Owner/Operator Certification Form dated 7/23/2021 & received 7/26/2021
15. Response letter from Accord Fire District certifying emergency access dated 2/23/2021 & received 6/29/2021
16. Waste Disposal Permit(s) for proposed lots from UC DOH signed 3/25/2021 & received 4/6/2021
17. Response letter dated & received 4/9/2021 and driveway construction details from TOR Highway Supervisor received 4/30/2021
18. CPL Review #1 3/2/2021, #2 4/5/2021, #3 5/26/2021, #4 8/4/2021.
19. Response Letters to CPL review from Medenbach & Eggers #1: 3/22/2021, #2: 5/13/2021, #3: 6/26/2021. CPL/M&E review matrix created 4/26/2021, updated 6/1/2021
20. Letter of project scope from Medenbach & Eggers dated 12/18/2020
21. Letter from William Collier of Collier & Berger outlining conservation area restrictions for proposed deed covenants, dated 3/4/2021, received 4/9/2021 and revised 7/22/2021
22. Letter from William Collier of Collier & Berger detailing contact and discussion with Rondout Esopus Land Conservancy dated 5/10/2021
23. Response required modifications letter from UCPB reviewed 7/7/2021 & received 7/15/2021.
24. Letter from Madeline Russo, Chair TOR Environmental Conservation Commission.
25. Public Comment Letters: Steven Kelley received 7/1/2021, Dwight Coombs, received 7/12/2021,

Notice of Public Hearing:

1. Published in the July 1, 2021 edition of the Shawangunk Journal.
2. Notice by mail to known landowners within 500’.
3. Posted on the T/ Rochester Clerk bulletin board and Town of Rochester website.

Date of Public Hearing: 7/12/2021 & 8/9/2021
Place, Howard Lipton Community Center, Accord, NY
Public Comment: (see Minutes of Town of Rochester Planning Board, 7/12/2021 & 8/9/2021)
* * * *
Findings of the Planning Board
1. The Planning Board received zoning referral and letter of determination for a minor subdivision from the Code Enforcement Officer. Under TOR Code a subdivision is considered a minor subdivision regardless of the number of lots if each proposed lot has sufficient road frontage and does not propose the construction of a new roadway.
2. The applicant met with the Planning Board and presented the subdivision map for review. Initial subdivision proposal of 9/1/2020 was for 7 new lots (for a total of eight lots). Subsequent submission of 11/25/2020 was for 6 new lots (for a total of 7 lots). The proposed new subdivision lots are all to have separate driveway access onto Upper Cherrytown Road with the exception of lots 2 & 3, which share a driveway.
3. The parcel is in the AR-3 zoning district. After numerous revisions to the proposed lots, the applicant proposes the subdivision of the parcel located on Ridgeview and Upper Cherrytown Road, Kerhonkson, NY S/B/L 68.1-1-27 (+/- 108 acres) into 6 proposed parcels between 5 and 3 acres in size: +/- 5.03 (lot 1), +/- 5.05 (lot 2), +/- 5.08 (lot 3), +/- 3.41 (lot 4), +/- 3.04 (lot 5), +/- 3.81 (lot 6), with the remaining +/- 82.58 acres intact as proposed lot 7.

4. The current use of the parcel is a commercial rehabilitation center (Villa Veritas), The parcel further contains hay fields wetlands, streams, and woodlands. The proposed subdivision lands are steep sloping (50% of the lands are greater than 15% in slope) and contain hydric soils. Several of the proposed driveways are on steep terrain of greater than 25% slopes that will require grading.
5. Town of Rochester AR-3 zoned districts are Residential Agricultural Districts, this district is intended to recognize and preserve the high valued agricultural lands of the Town while allowing for low density residential development of a compatible nature. The district is further intended to compliment the New York State Ag District program and maintain full rights to farm within these areas.
6. The lands to be subdivided are located in the Ulster County Agricultural District and contain prime farmlands and farmlands of state-wide significance. Ulster County Agricultural District land use encourages “agricultural operations within the district are the priority land use. They afford benefits and protections to promote the continuation of farming and the preservation of agricultural land. In practice, districts may include land that is actively farmed, idle, forested, as well as residential and commercial”.
7. The proposed lands to be subdivided further contain lands within the FD Overlay (FEMA 100-year flood plain) District and contain a named T(A) stream (Mombaccus Creek) and an unnamed tributary stream, hydric soils, Ulster County Habitat Core lands and are within the Ulster County DOH Aquifer Zone.
8. The Planning Board discussed the preservation of the sensitive wetlands and streams, flood zone lands, habitat lands and agricultural lands in the regular public meetings. The Planning Board noted that the initial proposed land disturbance appears to be at the level requiring a SPDES permit. Subsequent revisions to the lots brought the disturbance to +/- 3.6 acres.
9. The applicant stated reasons for the proposed 7 lot subdivision as follows: the lot(s) “were the most pristine and valuable lands on the parcel”; that she “wanted to provide these proposed lots to others who wanted to come here and become a part of the Town”; that she “needed to sell off acres so she could subsidize her business as there had been an influx of clients at her facility due to the pandemic. She stated she needed only 70 acres and any help to sell off the 30+ acres would be appreciated as she needed to make money to accommodate her facility”; and that she “did not need to use them for her business”.
10. The Planning Board discussed that the proposed subdivision layout appeared ‘cookie cutter’ and the ‘cookie cutter’ template does not respect the goals of the comp plan and that it was not in the spirit of the UC Ag district mandate as it did not strive to preserve and create parcels that would be readily usable for agricultural uses.
11. The Board encouraged the applicant to preserve the existing natural resources and woodlands as per subdivision code guidelines stated in TOR zoning code §125-21 and §125-22. The Planning Board discussed the preservation of the Habitat lands in the regular public meetings of 4/13/2021, 5/11/2021 and expressed the preference that no development is to occur within the Habitat Core area.
12. Application Timeline: Beginning with the initial application presentation at the October 14th, 2020 Planning Board meeting the Board consistently suggested alternative subdivision ideas that might (a) serve the purposes of the applicant and (b) preserve the sensitive lands, and create larger lots with more development flexibility due to the environmental and natural constraints of the land, the intensity and difficult engineering of proposed driveway cuts and the difficulty meeting the design standards of Chapter 125 Article IV General Site Requirements and Subdivision Design (125-21 and 125-22 respectively). Board alternative subdivision configurations:
a. At the 10/14/2020 meeting the Board suggested subdivision of alternative portions of the +/- 108 acres that could be accessed by Ridgeview and were quite flat and had what appeared to be old logging or farm road access that could be re-used. The applicant state that she did not want to explore that alternative. The Planning Board suggested retaining the Town Planning Consultant but withheld as the applicant and representatives stated that they would look over everything and come back with a more concrete submission.
b. At the 12/14/2020 meeting Board member Maloney suggested a natural subdivision of the lands bisected by Upper Cherrytown Road into one lot and maintaining the two lots (current lots 5 & 6) “if Mrs. Cusack was just looking to sell the lots to make some money, then she should talk to a real estate agent about selling and let whoever potentially buys it deal with all the matters of dividing it if they would choose”. Mrs. Cusack agreed that selling the bigger lots would make sense. Board member Jones states that “it was not a slam dunk project”. He added that what had been done so far was great but some of the material was beyond the scope of the Board’s capabilities and it needed to go to CPL, the Town’s planning firm. He said CPL could analyze the Code but “it would make more sense to make bigger lots and charge more”. Chair Lindstrom said if Mrs. Cusack were to go that route, they could do a natural subdivision for lots 1-4 and make it one piece of land and lots 5 and 6 could be done on their own as they were not as constricted. Attorney Christiana stated Mrs. Cusack would need to speak to a real estate agent. Chair Lindstrom added she did not want to run up costs and suggested the application be put on pause.
c. 1/11/2021 Meeting: Chair Lindstrom stated the Board had offered the applicant an alternative plan at the previous month’s meeting that was a bit easier, but the applicant had sent a written response dated 12/18/2020 10/ via her representative and had decided to stick with the original plan. Given this, the Board asked for a more in-depth site analysis and voted unanimously to retain the services of the Town Consultant CPL to do a comprehensive review of the code, subdivision regulations, full EAF mapper, and review from their SWPP/grading engineer. $6,000 of initial escrow was posted by the applicant for consultative services of CPL. Ms. Cusack states that she had not expected the application process to be so complex and that she had come to the Planning Board for guidance. Chair Lindstrom stated that the Board had suggested to the applicant alternative subdivision designs that could make the project fit better with the Town’s subdivision code, but that she and her representatives had chosen to pursue the more difficult subdivision layout.
d. Applicant was not discussed on the February Agenda pending review of the application by CPL and response to the review by Medenbach & Eggers.
e. 3/8/2021 Meeting: CPL provided comments and necessary revisions to the survey plan (driveway, grading, make-up of the lots, storm water concerns, and amendments to SEQRA that needed to be addressed). Mr. Grasso reiterated his concerns with the proposed subdivision. He said he “drove by the property and could see that some of the lots may needed to be taken out”. Mr. Medenbach offered to stake out driveway and property for the Board to view and the Board discussed a site visit with a CPL Engineer. Board Members Williams and Jones expressed concerns, regarding habitat issues and the endangering species. The Attorney for the Town responded that she had been in contact with the applicant’s lawyer and that they would be submitting a list of deed restrictions and establishing a conservation area. The Planning Board received the conservation area deed restrictions from the applicant’s lawyer on 4/4/2021. The revised map set of 3/22/2021. March 30th and April 1st planning board members did site tours in groups of three or less so as not to have quorum with an engineer from CPL and with Mr. Medenbach to observe staked locations for driveway access and driveway locations and grading, proposed structure and septic locations, and conservation area boundaries. Mr. Medenbach with the input of CPL observed that the interior lot boundaries for lots #4 and #5 were close to old stone walls and that the lot boundaries should be moved to follow the old stone walls as per TOR Subdivision 125-22 A. (11), which was subsequently done. Planning Board members and CPL engineer requested subsequent to the visit that significant trees should be marked (ones to be retained and ones to be removed) so as the Planning Board could determine if the proposed development would need to be modified to retain specimens that are part of the character of this stretch of Upper Cherrytown Road.
f. 4/26/2021 Meeting: The Planning Board discussed the application.
g. 6/1/2021 Workshop Meeting: The Planning Board reviewed the response letter of 4/18/2021 and the response matrix tracking Medenbach and Eggers responses to CPL’s requests for information (CPL comment letter #3) and clarification. The Board concurred that there were remaining engineering details concerning driveway grading, site lines and erosion control that would best be discussed directly between the applicants engineer and the Town engineer, CPL and suggested that they contact each other directly. The application was typed as an unlisted/uncoordinated SEQRA action, and a roll call vote was held. A Motion was made by Chair Lindstrom to submit a referral for comment to, DEC (Department of Environmental Conservation), Ag & Mkts (Department of Agriculture and Markets), UCPB (Ulster County Planning Board), DOH (Department of Health). Second: Mr. Williams. A further motion was made to set a public hearing for July 12th regular meeting.
h. 7/12/2021 Meeting: Liz Axelson of CPL, the Town’s consulting engineering firm, presented a draft SEQRA Part 2 and Part 3 with rationale for Part 3, which was discussed by the Board, applicant, and consulting engineer. Vice-Chair Zurofsky made a motion to adopt EAF part 2 and 3 and negative declaration. Mr. Pinsky seconded the motion. A roll call vote was held, and a negative declaration was made. Madeline Russo of the Environmental Conservation Commission shared her thoughts in a letter (not representative of the ECC’s opinions) “I would like to submit personal comment regarding the proposed minor subdivision along Cherrytown Road. Having driven past this property nearly every day for the last five years, I’m very familiar with the frontage and with the surrounding area, and while I appreciate the applicant’s consideration of the floodplain through a conservation easement, there is simply no scenario in which the Mombaccus is sufficiently unaffected by this development. The slope analysis map submitted along with the application says more than I could with regard to the risk this poses to both the surface water and groundwater resources on this parcel.
The New York Department of State partnered with the DEC and other partners to create model local laws to help local governments be more resilient to climate change and extreme weather events, and their recommendations identify six criteria where any one of each would prompt a subdivision applicant to submit a report evaluating the detailed environmental impacts of their project; this application has four of the six: land within the 100 year floodplain, wetlands/watercourses identified and regulated by the DEC or federal government, land with a slope 15% or greater, and farmland of state-wide importance. Given the Town of Rochester’s unique susceptibility to flooding as well as our dependence on groundwater for drinking water, these are crucial considerations.
I am skeptical of the EAF’s assertion that there will only be a total of 0.8 acres of impervious surface resulting from this development, (and I would like to point out that EAF E.1.a does not acknowledge the presence of wetlands/waterways on the property or adjoining properties, so it’s possible there are more errors?) — six new homes, driveways, wells and septic systems will cause a lot of disturbance on land that is at 10%+ slope, and the introduction of 1980 additional gallons of water being used and disposed of on a daily basis in addition to that development has severe implications for the wetlands, the Mombaccus, and everyone who lives downstream — especially the two historic farms that are downstream. The New York Rural Water Association recommended more than 15 years ago that any project requiring 2,000 gallons/day or more should submit a hydro geologic study to ensure that groundwater replenishment and well yields surrounding the development are not detrimentally affected — I would recommend the same for this, even though this submission estimates just short of that.
Again, even just eyeballing the road frontage of these properties can only result in raised eyebrows — it will be a lot of work to put homes on those slopes, and the Mombaccus is a crucial waterway. If our existing code allows this type of development on this land, I can only say that our code desperately needs updated. I strongly urge the Planning Board to request that the applicant solicit further evaluation of the environmental and groundwater impacts and resubmit for review.”

i. 8/9/2021 Meeting: – The Planning Board discussed the subdivision layout reiterating a concern from prior meetings that the layout of proposed lots 1 through 4 on the western side of Upper Cherrytown Road, seemed to be too constricted, especially given the proximity of the proposed Lot 1 driveway and grading to the proposed southern lot line resulting from the proposed lot line revision with Filippo Faso. The Planning Board discussed numerous concerns about:
1. the environmental constraints at the site on the West side of Cherrytown Road (woodlands, steep slopes, Mombaccus Creek, tributaries thereto, and aquifer area),
2. that the rural nature of this area of the Town is based on generally lower-density development regardless of zoning lot area requirements, and the importance of maintaining the character of openness,
3. concern about the number of houses and bedrooms in regard to water consumption and the underlying aquifer, and
4. open lands throughout the Town being developed in numerous minor subdivisions.
j. Planning Board members observed that proposed Lot 1 appeared to have inadequate area for a yard, outside of the conservation easement area, and might be combined with proposed Lot 2 to create a more viable residential lot more in character with the open, rural character of the area. The Planning Board members expressed that while code standards and requirements appeared to have been met, they had been reluctant to accept the proposed layout noting from the early stages of review that the layout should have been reduced to fewer lots along the West side of Cherrytown Road. This concern had been expressed at many meetings throughout the review of the subdivision.

13. The application was determined to meet the requirements of an Unlisted SEQRA action.
• A Negative Declaration was determined upon review.
14. A Public Hearing was held.
15. The Board reviewed if the proposed lot has safe and legal access.
a. The Board concludes that all proposed lots will have adequate >/= 50-foot frontage on the Town Highway Upper Cherrytown Road. The Board and CPL expressed concern with the sight distances and density of driveway access along Upper Cherrytown. Grading and sightline clearing will be necessary for the proposed driveways. Due to the sloping nature of all the driveways, and the probability of runoff and gravel into the town highway with snow removal and rain the Board requested that all drive aprons be paved as a condition of approval, which are shown on the plans.
b. The board contacted the TOR Fire department (Accord Fire District) and the TOR Highway Supervisor, who respectively responded that the driveway meets UCDOT and TOR emergency access requirements.
16. The parcel is in the AR-3 zoning district. Upon review, while the Board concludes that the 7 proposed new parcels meet or exceed the bulk standards requirements for the AR-3 zoning district. With the conservation portion of lots one, two, three and four, and the highly sloping nature of all the proposed lots very limited areas of disturbance/locations for structures are available for lot development. Lot development restrictions shall be a condition of approval.
17. The Board reviewed if the proposed lots could support water and septic. Percolation Tests for septic were performed by Medenbach and Eggers Civil Engineering & Land Surveying. The Planning Board received UCDOH permitting that the 7 new lots can support water and septic.

Draft findings were prepared by the Chairman and were read and discussed by the Planning Board in public meeting at the time of adoption.

Adopted October 14th, 2021 by the following vote:
Ayes: 6 Nays: 0 Absent: 1

Motion to adopt findings by Ms. Lindstrom
Second by Mr. Pinsky
* * * *

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 July 7thth, 2021 and returned written comment stating Required Modifications.
1. Health Department-
Required Modification
Final approval of the proposed septic systems and their 100% reserve areas by the Ulster County Department of Health will need to be required as a condition of approval.
Response: Planning Board agrees.
2. Stormwater
Comment
Greater than an acre of disturbance has been Indicated on the Full EAF, yet a SWPPP and erosion and sediment control plan were not submitted for review as part of the full statement requirements. Only a “typical” erosion and sediment control plan was submitted for the Board’s review. The UCPB does note that each single-family home has been designed with a driveway with a maximum slope of 10% and has had a turnaround included as part of its design for emergency response vehicles.

Required Modification
A full statement should include all the reports and data requested for a board to make its SEQRA determination. The SWPPP and Erosion control plan should, at a minimum, be reviewed by the local planning board and the Town engineer, as well as be submitted to the County Planning Board for review.
Response: Planning Board is overruling this required modification as they note that based on what they reviewed, that no Full SWPPP was required as the area of disturbance was less than 5 acres. The plan set included an erosion and sedimentation control plan, details, and corresponding calculations sufficient for a basic SWPPP.
UCPB Required Modifications are accepted in part and overruled in part on October 14, 2021, by the following vote:
Ayes: 6 Nays: 0 Absent: 1
Motion made by Mr. Pinsky.
Seconded by Ms. Moloney.

RESOLVED,
The Town of Rochester Planning Board grants Minor Resubdivision (Lot Line Revision) – Conditional Final Approval to permitting the resubdivision of lands situated at 55 Upper Cherrytown Road (lands N/F Faso) with lands situated at 5 Ridgeview Road (lands N/F Cusack), Kerhonkson NY conveying 0.17 acres of land from Cusack to Faso as depicted on the plan set on sheets 1 of 8 and 2 of 8.

The subdivision plan dated March 22, 2021, last revised July 26, 2021, is approved with the conditions set forth below for the Minor Subdivision of lands situated at 5 Ridgeview Road.

RESOLVED,
The Town of Rochester Planning Board grants Minor Subdivision (Lot Line Revision) – Conditional Final Approval to permitting the subdivision of lands situated at 5 Ridgeview Road, Kerhonkson NY.

The subdivision plan dated March 22, 2021, last revised July 26, 2021, is approved with the following conditions.

CONDITIONS of APPROVAL:

1. All fees due to the Town of Rochester involving this application shall be paid in full prior to the Chair’s signature on the Final Plat.
2. The applicant shall present a Final Plat for signature. The following plat notes shall be included:
1. “The plat is not capable of being subdivided further or is so restricted without Planning Board approval”.
2. “Driveway access and construction shall be as shown on the final plan. Any changes to location or grade from the approved site plan shall require PB approval. All driveways shall have paved aprons installed before a certificate of occupancy shall be given.”
3. DEC Stream: “This property contains a New York State regulated stream, pursuant to Article 15 (Protection of Waters) of the Environmental Conservation Law (ECL) of the State of New York. The clearing of vegetation (trees, understory, native ground cover, etc.), except for dead or diseased or invasive vegetation, is prohibited within the 100-foot buffer area of the stream and wetlands.”
4. Rochester Waterway: “As per the Code of the Town of Rochester §140-12(E), each lot fronting on a named stream depicted on United States Geological Survey maps shall include a setback of 100 feet in depth from the high-water mark of such stream.
5. “No tree clearing shall be allowed between April 1st and October 31st to protect the spring/summer nesting habitat of the Indiana bat. Applicant shall comply with applicable DEC guidelines regarding protection of Indiana bats”.
6. “Vegetative clearing in the Core Forestlands as defined by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) as per the Hudson Valley natural resources mapper shall be limited to the Limit of Disturbance shown on the plat.”
7. “Trees of a caliper of twenty-four inches, (24”), measured at four feet from ground, and larger shall be cleared only as indicated on plan set, unless dead or diseased.”
8. “DECLARATION OF RESTRICTIONS. The following activities are expressly prohibited within the entire Easement Area:
a.) Cutting or removing of trees and the harvesting of timber shall be prohibited, except to the minimum extent necessary to remove trees and limbs which are dead, diseased, or dangerous.
b.) Excavation or alteration of natural resources within the Easement Area, excepting for the construction, repair, maintenance, and all permitted uses as reserved by the Grantor.
c.) Construction or maintenance of deer stands and other hunting related accoutrements.
d.) Creation of any impervious roadway surfaces and roadway appurtenances, except as may be shown upon the filed Subdivision Plat.
e.) Storage of any vehicles, mobile home, truck, tractor, trailer, camper, boat, or other vehicle, nor repair thereof.
f.) Placement, construction, or maintenance of wells, septic/reserve systems, drainage structures, roadway impervious surfaces, or other improvements affecting surface water or groundwater, other than as permitted pursuant to the Town of Rochester Zoning Law and/or Subdivision Regulations and/or as shown on the filed Subdivision Plat.
g.) Prohibition of construction or placement of any structure.
h.) Placement or maintenance of ashes, trash, rubbish, garbage, yard debris, waste oil, petroleum products, toxic substances, hazardous materials, fill materials, or any unsightly or offensive materials.
i.) The Easement Area shall be managed in accordance with sound and generally accepted soil and water conservation practices. NO pesticide, herbicide, inorganic fertilizer, or other chemical treatment for land, vegetation, or animals shall be used unless it is done in accordance with applicable laws and regulations and will not contaminate any water body.
j.) Leg holds, conibear implements, and trapping of all kinds is prohibited upon the Easement Area.
k.) All-terrain vehicles, motorcycles, snowmobiles, minibikes, and any motorized vehicles are prohibited for use upon the Easement Area.”
3. Regarding the vertical sight distance for lot #6 to the right, revise the plans to show regrading and any related improvements, which work would occur in the Town road right-of-way (ROW). Refer to CPL comment memorandum of 8/4/21, comment B.1 and B.2.
4. Revise the plans to correct the zoning requirements table so that the lot areas in the row for minimum lot area consistently match what is shown in the plan view by correcting the area of Lot 1 as shown in the plan view on Sheet 1 to be 5.09 acres; and by correcting the area of Lot 1 as shown in the plan view on Sheet 2 to be 5.09 acres.
5. Revise the plan set regarding the proposed stormwater management practices; and the size, width, and length of the proposed broad crested weir as follows:
a. On plan sheets 3 and 4, add reference to the Soil Erosion and Sediment Control Details.
b. On plan sheets 3 and 4, add labels or legend items to specify the types of lines for the piping to and through the dry swale on each lot, including the size.
6. Revise plan sheet 1 to be entitled “Subdivision and Lot Line Revision”.
7. Conservation Area Marking: Forty-eight-inch (48”) witness posts and iron rods shall be placed at each corner and angle point of the conservation area. Easement witness posts shall be made of a durable material that will last a minimum of 20 years, well set within an anchor and at least two inches in width. Furthermore, the sign must say, “conservation easement with deed restrictions.” Trees can be used as witness posts at the property boundary but shall also have the easement language above. Metes and bounds of conservation area shall be included on all parcel deeds, plot plans and the site plan. Conservation area shall be delineated before site plan signature.
8. Conditions 1 through 7 must be met before the plan is signed.
9. Before any building permit shall be issued, the following additional conditions shall be met; (10-13), and pertinent items shall be clearly shown on building plot plan(s) and verified by the code enforcement officer/building inspector.
10. All required Local, County, State or Federal permits shall be secured for the current and future use of these lands.
11. Any and all development shall comply with §125-21 and §125-22; with specific attention to be paid to §125-22 A sections # (4), (5), (7) & (8) regarding woodlands preservation. No development shall occur within the conservation easement area. The Planning Board expresses the preference that development shall be limited to the amount practicable within the Ulster County Habitat Core/DEC Hudson Valley Natural Resources Mapper Core Forestland.
12. Plot plans, with soil erosion and sediment control plans, for grading shall be submitted for each plot before issuing building permit.
13. Lot development, including the area in acres of the limits of disturbance shall conform to the subdivision plan for each parcel. The “Proposed Disturbance Per Lot” area in acres of any lot shall not be increased from that shown on the subdivision plan without further Planning Board approval and any stormwater mitigation as required by the NYSDEC.

This Conditional Final Approval shall expire 180 days from this approval date unless the Final Plat is presented and signed by the Chairman. This period may be extended for two additional 90-day periods upon application to and resolution by the T/ Rochester Planning Board.

The Town of Rochester Planning Board further grants Minor Subdivision (Lot Line Revision) – Conditional Final Approval permitting the subdivision of lands upon satisfactory completion of the conditions of approval 1 & 2 and grants the authority to the Chairman to certify that the conditions have been met and review, sign, and date the plat without further resolution at such time.

EFFECT of APPROVAL:

1. The owner shall file in the office of the Ulster County Clerk such approved plat bearing the Chairman’s signature and any other related documents within 62 days from the date of signature or such approval shall be deemed to expire without further notice in accordance with NYS Town Law §276.
2. The owner shall have the responsibility to return three (3) Ulster County Clerk certified copies of the filed plat and any other related documents to the T/ Rochester Planning Board within 30 days of such filing.

Adopted October 14th, 2021, by the following vote:
Ayes: 6 Nays: 0 Absent: 1

Motion made by Mr. Grasso
Second by Ms. Moloney

Discussion occurred between the Planning Board members and Mr. Medenbach regarding which signage to use to identify the conservation easement. It was decided 2” wide signs were sufficient, so long as they were firmly anchored into the ground.

PB 2021-07SBD Continued Application
CDG Ridgeview
S/B/L 68.1-1-47/R5
Minor Subdivision

Charles Holtz and Christopher Coleman present on behalf of the application.

The Chair stated a response to Ms. Axelson’s letter would be required. The engineer, Chris DiChiaro would consult with Liz regarding the responses she provided.

A wetlands delineation had been completed, but no report was provided. The Chair stated the Board would need a copy of that report. A steep slope plan must also be provided. The Board asked for Mr. Holtz to stake the roadway identifying where each lot begins and ends, in preparation for a site visit.

The Secretary will provide a copy of the Road Maintenance Agreement template to Mr. Coleman.

Ms. Lindstrom brought up that Ms. Axelson proposed marking off conservation areas where necessary. It is part of the Subdivision code, that the Town’s woodlands are highly valued. While not required, it can be helpful for the Board to make a decision.

Mr. Coleman brought up a discussion about the Board making their determination based on levels of disturbance on vacant land. He stated there is no way for the Board to know now what the disturbance will be once the homes are placed on the land, and it should then be left for the site plan step of the process. Ms. Christiana stated she will take this concern into consideration and advise the Board accordingly. Chair Jones stated he did not agree nor disagree with the statement being made by Mr. Coleman.

A discussion was brought up by Mr. Coleman about the Indiana bat DEC guidelines. There is confusion regarding the wording of the requirements. Mr. Coleman stated he would provide the documents he was referring to for review by the Attorney for the Town Ms. Christiana.

The Board discussed the areas that needed to be staked prior to scheduling a site visit. Those areas included the two driveways servicing two separate houses on lots 4 and 5 and the long driveway serving the 3 houses on lots 1,2 and 3. Also to be staked were the corners of each of the lots.

The applicant will confirm when the areas are marked in order to set up the visit.

PB 2021-18SBD New Application
Krom-Stone LLC
S/B/L 69.1-1-23.100/AR-3
Minor Subdivision

Heather Gabriel of Medenbach & Eggers present on behalf of the application.

A question was brought up by the Board about whether or not this parcel was part of a previous subdivision. Ms. Gabriel provided the original survey from 1991 and Ms. Christiana stated it was not considered a subdivision according to Town Code back then.

Mr. Grasso suggested the possibility of pursuing a natural subdivision with a waiver and then doing a lot line adjustment.

Ms. Gabriel stated that would make the process smoother and easier and asked if the Board would be ok with that. The Board agreed this would be the best route to take. Ms. Gabriel stated she would re-submit applications to the Code Enforcement Office and the Planning Board Secretary for a natural subdivision of the land along with a lot line change.

H. OTHER MATTERS

1) PB 2020-06 SBD Continued Application
Olga Byrne (Owner and Applicant)
Minor Subdivision
R-2 Zoning District
S/B/L 60.3-2-51.120

Chair Jones reviewed certain changes that were agreed to as a result of the applicants’ representative (attorney) requesting said changes to better clarify certain matters. These changes were made to the original decision voted on and approved at the September 27, 2021 Planning Board workshop meeting. This amended conditional final approval was read by the Chair.

Decision: PB 2020-06 SBD
Minor Subdivision Amended Conditional Final Approval

Applicant: Olga Byrne & Rodrigo Pereda Beauchat
Owner: Olga Byrne & Rodrigo Pereda Beauchat

Reason for Request: Proposes the subdivision of S/B/L 60.3-2-2.510 (+/- 23.8 acres) into 2 lots: lot one of +/- 14.71 and lot 2 of +/- 9.01 acres with access by a shared driveway.

Location: 2003 Queens Highway, Accord, NY
Total Acreage: ±23.8 acres
S/B/L: S/B/L 60.3-2-2.510 Zoning District: R-2 (Low Density Residential)
Parcel is flat to sloping woodlands with steep slopes (greater than 25%) running through the middle to front of the property and substantial wetlands (ACOE and other defined wetlands), a named A(T) stream (Gray Creek) comprising toe front of the parcel, and Ulster County Habitat Core Lands

Code Enforcement Determination: Minor Subdivision
Zoning Permit: 459 of 2020 (as amended of 252 of 2020)

Planning Board Application: 2020-06 SBD
PB Application filed: 10/26/2020 (as amended) EAF filed: 10/26/2020

SEQR Type: Unlisted, Uncoordinated – 12/14/2020
SEQR Determination: Conditional Negative Declaration – 12/14/2021 amended to Negative Declaration 8/9/2021 (due to reduced number of proposed lots & reconfiguration)
Other Agency Referrals: New York State DEC

Documents considered by the Planning Board for review

1. Letter of Determination (second amended determination) from Code Enforcement Officer dated 10/27/2020, received 10/28/2020
2. Original Zoning Permit 252 of 2020 determination of Major Subdivision received 7/30/2020, resubmitted as Zoning Permit 459 of 2020 determination of Minor Subdivision received & dated 10/28/2020.
3. Planning Board Subdivision Application 2020-06 SBD, received 9/1/2020, revised 10/26/2020, revised 6/28/2021
4. Letter of Representative powers from Olga Byrne & Rodrigo Pereda to Medenbach & Eggers Civil Engineering & Land Surveying received 9/2/2020
5. Short Form EAF Part 1 received 9/2/2020, revised 10/26/2020, revised 4/26/2021 revised 6/28/2021
6. Short Form EAF part 2 dated 12/14/2020 revised/amended 8/9/2021
7. Threatened and Endangered Species Report prepared by Michael Nowicki, Ecological Solutions dated 9/21/2021 and received 10/26/2020
8. DEC email thread determination of wetlands and stream initiated 10/16/2020 received 10/26/2020
9. Letter to DEC 11/13/2020 with DEC response for 3 lot subdivision 12/14/2020 Christina Pacella DEC Permits Region 3
10. Letter to TOR ECC 11/13/2020with response letter 12/14/2020
11. Shared Driveway abandonment statement form Robin & William Carroll dated 10/23/2021 and received 10/26/2020
12. Preliminary Plan received 9/1/2020 (5 lot subdivision) Revised 3/30/2020. Revised 10/22/2020 (3 lot subdivision). Revised 1/22/20201 (3 lot subdivision). Revised 4/24/2020. Revised 6/28/2021 (2 lot subdivision). Revised 7/26/2021 (2 lot).
13. Aerial view of parcel 11/4/2020
14. NYS DEC Environmental Map of Conditions 12/14/2020
15. Slope analysis dated 1/22/2021, revised 4/26/2021,
16. Soil Erosion & Sediment Control Plan dated 2/22/2021, revised 6/28/2021, revised 7/26/2021
17. Site Grading Soil Erosion & Sediment Control Plan dated 4/21/2021
18. Grading Plan & Driveway Profile (2 lot SBD) 6/28/2021, revised 7/26/2021
19. Driveway Profile dated 4/26/2021
20. Requests for extension of Public Hearing 4/5/2021, 5/10/2021, 6/14/2021
21. Letter to Accord Fire District 11/13/2021. Response letter stating required modifications received 11/23/2020
22. Public Testimony w/ photos 1/5/2021
23. Email thread regarding disturbance of stream/stream bed between applicant and Medenbach & Eggers 2/9/2021
24. CPL Review #1 2/15/2021, #2 5/3/2021, #3 7/6/2021, #4 8/4/2021
25. M&E response letters to CPL analysis #1 4/26/2021. #2 6/29/2021, , #3 7/26/2021,
26. Letter to TOR Highway Department 11/13/2020 with from TOR Highway Supervisor received
27. Letter from UCPB received 5/11/2020 stating exempt from UCPB review.

Notice of Public Hearing:

1. Published in the December 3rd, 2020 edition of the Shawangunk Journal.
2. Notice by mail to known landowners within 500’.
3. Posted on the T/ Rochester Clerk bulletin board and Town of Rochester website.

Date of Public Hearing: 12/14/2020 – 7/12/2021

Place: Virtual Meeting(s) and Harold Lipton Community Center, Accord, NY
Public Comment: (see Minutes of Town of Rochester Planning Board, 12/14/2020 – 7/12/2021)
* * * *
Findings of the Planning Board

1. The applicant initially met with the Code Enforcement Department and the Planning Board Chair in a pre-application meeting to qualify the subdivision. Subsequently the applicant proposed and presented to the Planning Board a five lot subdivision which was determined to be a major subdivision requiring a private road access. The applicant amended the five lot subdivision to a three lot subdivision and resubmitted their application to the Code Enforcement Office.
2. Upon amendment of the proposed subdivision as a 3 lot subdivision, it was determined that Robin and William Carroll, (neighboring property owners at 2011 Queens Highway) currently share an access drive with the applicant over the existing +/-23 acre lot. The 3 lot subdivision therefore would create 4 lots using the private right of way, and no longer fit the definition of a shared driveway. The applicant was told by the Code Enforcement Office that the access remained a private road and Major Subdivision review would still apply. Robin and William Carroll submitted a letter to the Code Enforcement Office stating that they would build their own driveway to access their lot at 2011 Queens Highway and no longer share the access with the applicant’s lot at 2003 Queens Highway, thus achieving the determination of a minor subdivision with shared driveway in a R-2 zoning district.
3. The applicant presented the revised 3 lot subdivision with the elimination of the shared driveway across the adjacent plots to the Planning Board with revised subdivision map for review.
4. The parcel is in the R-2 zoning district. The applicant proposed the subdivision of S/B/L 60.3-2-2.510 (+/- 23 acres) into 3 parcels of +/- 9.0 acres (lot 1), +/- 4.9 acres (lot 2), +/-9.9 acres (lot 3) respectively with construction of single family dwellings, well and septic on lots 2 and 3. As detailed sequentially below, the subdivision of S/B/L 60.3-2-2.510 (+/- 23 acres) was subsequently modified in the final application to a two lot subdivision of lot 1 +/- 14.71 acres and lot 2 +/- 9.01 acres with the construction of a single family dwelling with well and septic on lot 2.
5. The existing plat is filed with the Ulster County Clerk.
6. The current use of the parcel is residential and woodlands with one single family dwelling, well, and septic. The centerline of the parcel, where the proposed shared driveway and right-of-way for proposed lot 3 (final proposed lot 2) is located, contains highly sloping lands. Furthermore, proposed lots 2 and 3 (final proposed lot 2) contain substantial wetlands, riparian buffers, and a DEC named and regulated A(T) stream (Gray Creek) runs along the entirety of lot 2 and lot 3’s (final proposed lot 2’s) frontage onto Queens Highway. As a DEC regulated stream, any disturbance to the bed or bank of Gray Creek shall require permitting by the DEC. The DEC responded to correspondence from the Planning Board and required that the final site plan shall show a shared driveway so as to minimize stream disturbance and stipulated that if with the subdivision multiple stream crossings were shown these crossings would not meet permitting requirements. This shall be a condition of approval and noted on the final plat and deed.
7. Upon subsequent reviews with the Planning Board, the Board determined that the three lot subdivision, specifically the proposed lot 2, would necessitate extensive grading, land clearing/disturbance and a building site that does not adhere to Chapter 125 Subdivision of Lands subdivision standards. Drive access and limits of disturbance on the greater or equal to 25% steep slopes and sloping lands between 15% and 25% would have great difficulty meeting code (per code section 125-22. A. (7) grading on slopes exceeding a 15% grade shall be minimized and no disturbance is allowed on slopes exceeding a 25% grade), and further review showed difficulty with septic and primary dwelling unit setbacks to the named stream and wetlands which substantially cover the front third of the parcel up to the steep slope(s).
8. Proposed lot 1 and lot 3 (final proposed lot 2) are substantially contained within Ulster County Habitat Core lands and NYS DEC Core Forest Lands (Forest within the 60 – 80 quality percentile as defined on the NYS DES Natural Resources Mapper) and contain nesting sites for the endangered Indiana Bat. No land disturbance shall be allowed between April 1st and October 31st to protect the spring and summer nesting habitat of the Indiana Bat as a condition of approval.
9. Due to the topographical and environmental constraints of the property, the complexity of the access, and the fluidity of the proposed number of lots, the Board requested and passed by unanimous vote that escrow be posted by the applicant for review of the proposed subdivision by the Attorney for the Town and the Town Planning Consultant, CPL.
10. The Town of Rochester Planning Board sent letters seeking comment from the NYS DEC, TOR Highway Department, Accord Fire District and the TOR Environmental Conservation Commission.
11. The TOR Environmental Conservation Commission stated concerns regarding vegetation clearing, the lack of mention of wetlands on the applicant’s SEQRA EAF Part 1, the impact on threatened and endangered species, the effects on a DEC regulated stream, and infringements on 100’ foot setback requirements amongst other concerns (at the time a 3 lot subdivision).
12. The Board encouraged the applicant to preserve the existing natural resources and woodlands as per subdivision code guidelines stated in TOR zoning code §125-21 and §125-22. Quality forest lands are found on proposed lots 1 & 3 (final proposed lot 2). The Planning Board discussed the preservation of the forest lands in the regular public meetings and expressed the preference for limited development occurring within the Core Forest/Habitat Core area. Limit of land disturbance shall be a condition of approval.
13. The Planning Board discussed the responsibility of balancing the impact on the environment, health, welfare and safety of the community and the benefit to the landowner.
14. Pursuant to the TOR Planning Consultant CPL’s reviews and suggestions, and in light of the aforementioned land constraints the applicant amended the three lot subdivision to create a two lot subdivision with the elimination of proposed lot 2 and the reconfiguration of proposed lot 3 (final proposed lot 2) so as to achieve greater setback from the wetlands, riparian buffer, stream and steep slopes. Full CPL comments are included with this decision. Comments and suggested changes of note from CPL, are as follows and corroborated the Planning Board concerns for the difficulty of development on the parcel:
o Many comments remain to be addressed, however, the revisions made provide information sufficient to recommend the proposal be redesigned as a 2-lot subdivision, for the following reasons:
o Proposed Lots 2 and 3 are substantially constrained with little or no rolling terrain, very limited portions of or no moderately sloped area for location of house, septic, well, driveway, large areas of steep lands and very little usable yard area. Lot 2 has a residence and septic on steep slopes, with the shared driveway occupying most of the moderately sloped land
o The stream, 100-foot stream corridor, and United State Army Corps of Engineers (US ACOE) wetland areas, and setbacks are avoided only to a limited degree in the lot layout. The proposed septic system for Lot 2 is located on steep slopes and the reserve area is at the bottom of a steep slope, close to the stream corridor and wetlands, yet far from the proposed dwelling. This requires clearing and disturbance on steep slopes and in woodlands near streams and wetlands, which must be avoided.
o Of the combined area of proposed lots 2 and 3, which is 15 acres, it appears that only about one quarter of the combined area, or 3.75 acres, is without constraints such as steep slopes (15%-25%; and 25% or greater), wetlands and streams and their corresponding adjacent areas and setbacks.
o Lot 2’s dwelling and most of the driveway is proposed on slopes of 15%-25%, since there is little or no area sufficient with slopes of 10% or less for these improvements or any lawn or yard area adjoining the proposed house site.
o Lot 2’s waste line from the septic tank to the system below requires disturbance on slopes of greater than 25%.
o Reconfiguration to a 2-lot subdivision would result in one new lot on which a reasonably suitable, safe homesite may be developed while minimizing problems with constructing necessary improvements and conserving the Town’s natural resources and environment. A 2-lot subdivision would be consistent with the stated purposes, requirements, and design standards of Chapter 125. Subdivision of Land. However, this is not true of the currently- proposed 3-lot subdivision.
15. The application was determined to meet the requirements of an Unlisted SEQRA action.
• A Conditional Negative Declaration was determined upon review of the three lot subdivision and was re-opened and re-classified as a negative declaration for the revised 2 lot subdivision.
16. A Public Hearing was held. Neighboring parcel owners presented testimony and pictures demonstrating the frequent flooding of Gray Creek creating an extended high water mark for Gray Creek and thus potentially extending the corresponding required setbacks to the high watermark of a named stream as per code. Public comment expressed concern that land disturbance along and above the steep slopes would cause runoff, stream turbidity, and worsen flooding. Public testimony was further heard that the condition of the culvert under the current proposed (existing) driveway entrance is of poor condition resulting in blockage of the culvert and commensurate flooding. Repair of the entrance culvert shall be a condition of approval. The Planning Board decided that the modified design of the three lot subdivision to a two lot subdivision moves the limit of disturbance sufficiently away from the stream and stream flooding/riparian areas. Public comment also was made about the parcel owners disturbing the stream bed of Gray Creek. The applicant corroborated this fact in an email and was informed that disturbance of a NYS DEC named stream is subject to stiff penalties when done without the appropriate DEC permitting. Disturbance of the stream without DEC permitting shall not be allowed and shall be a condition of approval.
17. The Board reviewed if the proposed lots have safe and legal access.
• The Board concludes that the proposed lots will have adequate >/= 50 foot frontage on the Town Highway Queens Highway via the shared driveway. Direct access for parcel 2 is limited by Gray Creek running along the entire front of the parcel. A shared driveway agreement and deeded right of way to lot 2 shall be a condition of approval.
• The Board contacted the TOR Fire department (Accord Fire District) and the TOR Highway Supervisor. The Accord Fire District responded that the private shared driveway would need access pull off at the midpoint of the shared driveway and a turnaround area of sufficient size at the end of the driveway, as the distance from a water source would mandate the use of water tanker trucks. The TOR Highway Department did not respond.
18. The Board requested a road maintenance/shared driveway agreement for the proposed subdivision. Receipt of the road maintenance/shared driveway agreement shall be a condition of approval upon review and acceptance by the Attorney for the Town.
19. The parcel is in the R-2 zoning district. Upon review, the Board concludes that the 2 proposed parcels meet or exceed the bulk standards requirements for the R-2 zoning district.
20. The Board reviewed if the proposed lots could support water and septic. Lot 1 has existing water and septic. The Planning Board will need engineer certification or UCDOH approval that the new lot 2 can support water and septic.

Draft findings were prepared by the Chairman and were read and discussed by the Planning Board in public meeting at the time of adoption.

Adopted October 14th, 2021 by the following vote:
Ayes: 6 Nays: 0 Absent: 1

Motion to adopt findings by Rick Jones
Second by Maren Lindstrom
* * * *
RESOLVED,
The Town of Rochester Planning Board grants Minor Subdivision- Conditional Final Approval to permitting the subdivision of lands situated at: 2003 Queens Highway, Accord NY.

The subdivision plan dated July 26thth, 2021 is approved with the following conditions.

CONDITIONS of APPROVAL:

1. All fees due to the Town of Rochester involving this application shall be paid in full prior to the Chair’s signature on the Final Plat.
2. The applicant shall present a road maintenance/shared driveway agreement duly reviewed and approved by the Attorney for the Town prior to signature of the Final Plat.
3. The applicant shall repair the culvert under the shared driveway entrance to the satisfaction of the Code Enforcement Officer and Highway Department before a building permit shall be issued.
4. The applicant shall obtain a driveway permit and construct the driveway as shown on the final site plan with pull off and turn around as requested by the Fire District before a building permit shall be issued.
5. No additional stream crossings shall be allowed on either of the subdivided lots, unless approval is given by NYSDEC, as may be required by NYS DEC regulations.
6. The applicant shall present a Final Plat for signature and change the title “Preliminary Plat” to “Final Plat”. The following plat notes shall be included:
1. “The plat is not capable of being subdivided further or is so restricted without Town of Rochester Planning Board approval.”
2. Shared Driveway: “the proposed ingress-egress easements shown shall be used in common by the owner(s) of lots 1 and 2. All such easements shall be in effect and binding on owners of said lots, their heirs, successors, and assignees and all future owners of said lots their heirs, successors and assignees upon filing of this subdivision plat in the office of the Ulster County Clerk”.
3. “Per Town of Rochester Code 125-29®(2) and 140-10(d)(2), the Planning Board approves the use of a shared driveway as shown on this plat (plan) to service no more than two single family dwellings via access from a shared driveway through the establishment of a right-of-way. The shared driveway shall be utilized by no more than a total of three single family dwellings or lots including the lot it has access over”.
4. DEC Stream: “This property contains a New York State regulated stream, pursuant to Article 15 (Protection of Waters) of the Environmental Conservation Law (ECL) of the State of New York, he clearing of vegetation (Trees, understory, native ground cover, etc.) is prohibited within the 100-foot buffer area of the stream and wetlands. Construction of additional stream crossing access points is prohibited, unless all NYSDEC, Town of Rochester, and any other necessary approvals are obtained.”
5. Rochester Waterway: “As per the Code of the Town of Rochester §140-12(E), each lot fronting on a named stream depicted on United States Geological Survey maps shall include a setback of 100 feet in depth from the high water mark of such stream.
6. No tree clearing shall be allowed between April 1st and October 31st to protect the spring/summer nesting habitat of the Indiana bat”. Applicant shall further comply with all applicable DEC guidelines regarding the protection of Indiana bats.
7. Vegetative clearing in the Core Forestlands as defined by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) as per the Hudson Valley natural resources mapper shall be limited to the Limit of Disturbance shown on the plat.”
8. The above prohibitions and limitations are further noted in deed covenants
7. Revise the plan set to create final plans, as follows:
1. The Soil Erosion & Sediment Control Plan filed to mitigate runoff and/or erosion from any construction on the sloping lands (per TOR 125-21 (7) all grading and earthmoving on slopes exceeding 15% grade shall be minimized) Sheet 3 shall be revised to show the locations of Rock Check Dams and a Concrete Washout corresponding to the details thereon.
2. On Sheet 1 in the Zoning Requirements table the proposed front yard setbacks shall be revised to show greater than four hundred feet (>400’) for Lot 1 and >600’ for Lot 2.
3. All 3 sheets in the plan set must have revision dates and common revision dates.
8. Any and all development shall comply with §125-21 and §125-22; with specific attention to be paid to §125-22 A sections # (4), (5), (7) & (8) regarding woodlands preservation. The Planning Board expresses the preference that development shall be limited to the amount practicable within the Ulster County Habitat Core/DEC Hudson Valley Natural Resources Mapper Core Forestland.
9. All required Local, County, State or Federal permits shall be secured for the current and future use of these lands.

This Conditional Final Approval shall expire 180 days from this approval date unless the Final Plat is presented and signed by the Chairman. This period may be extended for two additional 90 day periods upon application to and resolution by the T/ Rochester Planning Board.

The Town of Rochester Planning Board further grants Minor Subdivision- Conditional Final Approval permitting the two lot subdivision of lands at 2003 Queens Highway, Accord, NY upon satisfactory completion of the conditions of approval 1, 2, 6, & 7 and grants the authority to the Chairman to certify that the conditions have been met and review, sign and date the plat without further resolution at such time.

EFFECT of APPROVAL:

Adopted October 14th 2021, by the following vote:
Ayes: 6 Nays: 0 Absent: 1

Motion made by Chair Jones
Second by Ms. Lindstrom

2)
The Chair discussed the 5G roll-out letter from Campanelli’s office. The letter will be forwarded to the Town Board, as the Planning Board has no authority to act on this potential legislation change.

3)
Ms. Lindstrom brought up the new drive through deli project on 209 where the Rainbow Diner used to be. The property is currently in violation of the Planning Board’s decision, requiring the owner to have 20ft of landscaping before the asphalt started. The Chair stated he spoke to the Code Enforcement Officer, and he will address before the certificate of occupancy is issued. Ms. Lindstrom stated the owner was warned about this prior to the pouring of the asphalt.

It was also noted the Accord Market has not been shutting off their lights at night. The Secretary offered to bring this up to the Code Enforcement Office in the morning.
I. ADJOURNMENT

Ms. Moloney made a motion to adjourn. Mr. Grasso seconded the motion.
All in Favor. Motion Carried.
6 ayes, 0 nays, 0 abstentions