TOWN OF WOODSTOCK
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
May 19, 2011
Members Present: Paul Shultis, Jr., Paul Henderson, Peter Cross, Allan Duane, Lorin Rose, Tom Unrath, James Huben (arrived 6:40)
Members Absent: None
Others Present: Therese Fernandez, Planning Board Secretary
Meeting called to order at 6:30 pm. Determination of a quorum.
Agenda: No changes.
Minutes: Minutes of March 17, 2011 were considered. Motion by Mr. Shultis to adopt the minutes, as corrected, up until beginning of RUPCO portion of meeting. Seconded by Mr. Duane. Mr. Unrath abstained as he had left meeting of that date early. Mr. Huben had not yet arrived. Vote: 5-0-1-1. Mr. Cross then recused himself. Second Motion by Mr. Shultis to adopt the minutes beginning from the RUPCO hearing until time of adjournment. Seconded by Mr. Duane. Vote: 4-0-1-2.
Pending Item:
Confirm new case assignment: Keefe & Wilber Special Use Permit
Mr. Shultis gave the case to Mr. Duane and Mr. Huben (who had arrived by this time).
++
Planning Session
Mr. Unrath asked about upcoming meetings with the Planning Board's new outside consultants. Chairman Shultis gave a brief explanation of what the meetings with the consultants will entail. He asked Ms. Fernandez to contact Planners Dan Shuster and Alan Sorensen to see if they might come to the June 2nd meeting.
Ms. Fernandez explained some details about the Resolution templates, as discussed with Attorney Drayton Grant.
Mr. Duane asked about Town Board's likely action regarding wetlands. Mr. Shultis thought a public meeting might occur, as had been done with Gateway issue. Planning Board (PB) will be able to comment and recommend, but Town Board (TB) is not required to comply.
Mr. Cross asked if it is law that Resolutions have to be read at the table on the record. No, Mr. Shultis said, they are gone over because there may be questions or corrections. If none, they can be adopted as presented.
++
Pending Item:
Draft Resolution for Lessard Wetlands Permit
A "whereas" was added.
Mr. Cross and Mr. Henderson had been to the site, the former in his role as Wetlands Inspector.
Mr. Cross described some of the culvert details and the property. Mr. Shultis said the Wetlands Inspector will return in the Spring to check the stream bed.
Mr. Shultis made a Motion to adopt the Resolution as presented, pending 4 copies of site plan with owner's signature and final development fee of $350. Seconded by Mr. Unrath. Vote: 7-0-0-0.
Mr. Shultis read the Wetlands Permit Resolution conditions:
* approved final site plan/wetlands mitigation plan shall be adhered to
* approval is limited to development area of disturbance shown therein
* modifications to the approved plan and permit require PB review and approval
* all conditions of chapter 260-34 of zoning law apply and shall be adhered to, including,
A) work conducted under the permit shall be open to inspection by the Wetlands Inspector or his agent, and B) the permit shall be prominently displayed at the project site during the undertaking of the authorized activity.
* the Town of Woodstock Wetlands and Watercourse Inspector shall visit the site in the Spring of 2012 to verify the stream bed materials placed in the culvert are still intact
* all Wetlands Permits shall expire one year after the commencing date or once authorized activity is completed, whichever is sooner
Mr. Shultis made a Motion to accept the Wetlands Watercourse Permit draft Resolution. Seconded by Mr. Cross. Vote: 7-0-0-0.
++
LANG, MICHAEL, PB #11-1123-A: Preliminary sketch review of subdivision of 91.30 acres parcel into three (3) lots: 20.32 acres, 54.45 acres and 16.67 acres, located between Wittenberg-Mt. Tremper and Coldbrook Roads in Wittenberg, SBL 36.2-1-30.100; Rep: Robert G. Cross; PB Reps: Mr. Cross & Mr. Unrath.
Applicant was not present, so board member Peter Cross described his site visit. It is not yet known whether the applicant will change the driveway or maintain the existing one, related to having a Road Maintenance Agreement (RMA) or not. There are no issues, Mr. Cross stated. There is just one curb cut. The culvert at the site was not checked yet because the applicant has not decided how to access the parcel. There is some slope. The stream is not crossed. Mr. Shultis thought the PB should request that a buffer be shown on the stream. Further brief discussion.
Applicant did not appear. Case was rescheduled for June 2nd.
++
YANOW, JO SCHWARTZ & FOYE, RAYMOND, PB #11-1128-A: Renewal application for Lot Line Revision to transfer 0.06 acre from Foye parcel (1.792 acre) to Yanow parcel (1.489 acre) to correct a lot line infringement, located at 7-11 Meads Mountain Road (Foye) and 15 Meads Mountain Road (Yanow) in Woodstock, SBL 27.1-3-46 (Foye) and 27.1-3-21 (Yanow). Rep: James Lonergan, Esq.; PB Reps: TBA
This is an application from the Open Cases list. At the Chairman's behest, Mr. Lonergan explained that applicant, Ms. Schwartz (sic), built a gazebo and a tiny pond on land she thought was her property. She later found out it was on the Foye property. A 0.065-acre portion of Mr. Foye's parcel is to be conveyed by lot line adjustment to Ms. Schwartz to correct the infringement. Both lots are non-conforming. A lot size variance from Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) is required for making the Schwartz-Yanow non-conforming lot less conforming.
Mr. Foye's representative authorization has not yet come in. Ms. Schwartz will get the letter asap.
Mr. Shultis stated that the existing accesses are suitable. A fire hydrant was noted on map for property so it appears to be on Town water & sewer. Discussion of waiving Public Hearing once variance and authorization is received. A new PB case rep is not needed. Mr. Lonergan requested that fees that have already been paid with prior application be approved for this action. It was agreed that this would be acceptable. Mr. Shultis stated that a Public Hearing will probably be held.
Applicant Assistance List:
* letter of authorization to represent co-applicant Foye
* Zoning Enforcement Officer determination on lot size
* ZBA variance
* fees were waived
Case will be re-scheduled after the ZBA makes its decision on variance.
++
HAUSMAN, ROBERT J., WW #11-014: Second sketch review of development within a regulated wetlands buffer area, located at 238 Wittenberg-Bearsville Road in Bearsville, SBL 26.15-1-1.100; Rep: James Lonergan, Esq.; PB Reps: Peter Cross & Paul Shultis, Jr.
All info was in. Mr. Rose stated that neighbors feel Mr. Hausman is going out of his way to mitigate site conditions. He also inquired as to setbacks for the set-aside portion of land, Mr. Cross replied that this is just an easement, that setbacks are measured from property line. Discussion of possibly waiving the Public Hearing as this was requested by applicant. Final development fee of $350 is due.
Tape side A ends, side B begins.
Mr. Shultis made a Motion to waive the Public Hearing. Seconded by Mr. Rose. Mr. Huben stated he is voting no. All others aye. Vote: 6-1-0-0. The draft Resolution is to be ready by June 2nd meeting.
++
LOVITZ, IRENE, PB #11-1177: Preliminary sketch review of Lot Line Revision application for an alternate 30 ft wide right-of-way access through an improved 3.85 acre parcel to a contiguous, vacant 3.60 acre parcel, both lots owned by applicant, located at 238 California Quarry Road in Woodstock, SBL 27.1-5-9 and 27.1-5-8; Rep: Michael Lonergan, Esq.; PB Reps: Mr. Shultis & Mr. Duane.
Mr. Lonergan was accompanied by Ms. Lovitz, the applicant, and Mr. Rich Praetorius, Surveyor. Mr. Lonergan was also accompanied by his brother and associate, James Lonergan, an attorney, who is co-representing Ms. Lovitz.
Michael Lonergan explained that Ms. Lovitz agreed to sell the flag lot to Daniel Silverstein. Not topographically possible to use the existing access. Their first proposal to Mr. Silverstein led to a lawsuit. Another access to the parcel was proposed. Mr. Duane asked about the site in relation to a "suicide turn". Mr. Praetorius showed the location on the tax map and the slope percentages. Driveway engineering and profile appear on second sheet of submitted plat. They had spoken to Town Highway Superintendent Mr. Reynolds who determined there was adequate site distance. The former 30 ft right-of-way (ROW) access is to be designated as forever wild by conservation easement. Ms. Lovitz would like to keep her house parcel private so does not want a shared drive. The location of the new access has a more desirable grade. Mr. Shultis said that the septic and well locations are not impacted and that the existing driveway to the house should be shown on the map. Mr. Shultis said call the application an establishment of a right-of-way. Mr. Praetorius acknowledged site is in Scenic Overlay, that Town Highway Superintendent Mr. Reynolds was OK with the preliminary plan; they need a permit to construct the new driveway. Mr. Duane questioned if a culvert was needed. Mr. Praetorius showed water drainage pattern across the proposed driveway in 3-5 places to avoid washouts. Mr. Henderson noted that they are still keeping the majority of water on the site. Mr. Shultis asked Mr. Cross if it was acceptable to him. Mr. Cross said yes. Mr. Shultis stated that a house application in the Scenic Overlay would have to be referred to the Ulster County Planning Board due to visual impact but not a driveway.
Applicant Assistance List:
* conservation easement to be written into deed for Lot 17
* new right-of-way to be written into deed for Lot 16
* submit letter from Town Highway Superintendent Mike Reynolds about curb cut
* schedule site visit with Mr. Reynolds
* show existing driveway on plat
* prepare deed with new language, to be reviewed by Planning Board attorney
Mr. Shultis made a Motion to set the Public Hearing for 7:45 on June 2nd. Seconded by Mr. Huben. Vote: 7-0-0-0.
++
NAIBURG, ERIC & LYNNE, SUP #11-422: Second sketch review of additions to house in the Scenic Overlay District, located at 97 Four Wheel Drive in Willow, SBL 14.4-1-7. Rep: Kevin Conklin; PB Reps: Mr. Rose & Mr. Unrath.
Case reps had made site visit. Drainage OK. House is existing. No visual impact noted. No vistas or trails or roads.
Applicant Assistance List:
* note that lighting fixtures are to have tin liners for shielding
* only 2 - 3 trees to be cut
As house additions will have minor visual impact, glazing is below 25% required in Scenic Overlay District (SOD), the lighting fixtures comply with standards, siding and colors meet the SOD palette in the Design Manual, tree cutting will be 2 - 3 trees only, and drainage area has been provided on site plan, Mr. Shultis made a Motion to waive further review. Seconded by Mr. Unrath. Vote: 7-0-0-0.
++
EVK REALTY, LLC/RURAL ULSTER PRESERVATION CO. (RUPCO), SPR #05-326 and SUP #05-368: Review of easement and conservation language for approved Affordable Housing project known as Woodstock Commons, located between Playhouse and Elwyn Lanes in Woodstock, SBL 27.55-2-3
Mr. Cross recused himself.
Estimated costs were in members' packets. Engineering consultant C.T. Male had reviewed the costs for work for water, sewer, and Elwyn Quarry Road, and thought they were adequate industry costs. They asked if Planning Board (PB) wanted further review. Mr. Shultis said he did not think it was necessary. Mr. Moriello asked Mr. Shultis for a letter to that effect. Mr. Shultis agreed. A copy of the correspondence from Jim Houston of C.T. Male was provided to Mr. Moriello.
For the benefit of newer PB members, Mr. Moriello explained that in 2009, RUPCO had, as part of SEQR process, put together a packet of declarations, covenants, homeowner recitals, and restrictions, including Army Corps of Engineers (ACE) restrictions, as well as private Road Maintenance Agreements and stormwater agreements. The PB had reviewed them.
Mr. Moriello said that now his client is working with the bank and other financing entities, some non-substantive (in his opinion) changes had to be made for title and financing reasons. He deemed the changes stylistic. RUPCO's general counsel and the bank required the changes. He had some new documents for the Board to read. One is an easement to Bradley Meadows, a 10-ft. easement through lands of Sinjun Family, LLC. It goes to edge of Bradley Meadows. Other document is an offer of cession agreement and an infrastructure improvement agreement, in draft form for review by the Town Board (TB). The PB is welcome to comment on it, but it is the TB's purview. We will offer the public infrastructure to the Town at some time in the future. The Town will take it, he said, assuming it is built properly. That will include the water and sewer line. The bonding and the recitals list that the security will be for public improvements and the work on Elwyn Quarry Lane, and some work at beginning of subdivision near bridge, in case of damage to Playhouse Lane with bridge installation. The TB had seen these documents this past Tuesday. Town Attorney Mr. Futerfas has not seen them yet. Mr. Moriello did not expect a lot of changes. He thought it likely that the TB prefers a letter of credit or a cash bond of $100,000, approximately, in infrastructure cost.
Mr. Moriello said they also have a draft of a non-vehicular easement and right-of-way through Bradley Meadows to Route 212. He had reviewed it together with RUPCO counsel Steve Heyman, but not yet by [Robert] Whitcomb and [Roz] Balkin.
Mr. Huben asked about the ownership of Bradley Meadows. It is owned by Mountain Meadow Realty. Mr. Henderson asked about an easement from the RUPCO parcel to Bradley Meadows parcel. Vickie St. John (Gilligan) and family still own a small parcel, said Mr. Moriello. That piece of property has a 10-ft. easement where the Army Corps of Engineers wanted it, on the westerly side.
Mr. Duane asked if the trail system will have to cut across the easement. It will stay where the PB and ACE said it should go, Mr. Moriello replied. He showed location on a map.
Mr. Shultis asked about private right-of-way and maintenance agreements. Should the third "whereas" say "the clearance obtains conditional site development plans and special use approval on August 5th," instead of "final"? Mr. Moriello said he referred to it as "final" but it is understood that we have to meet the conditions or we can't get the building permit. This is one of the stylistic changes he meant. If he writes "conditional," someone at Heyman's office will say "make it final."
Regarding stormwater management agreement, page 4, Mr. Shultis asked if instead of "Town of Woodstock consulting engineers" shouldn't it say "PB consulting engineers"? Mr. Moriello said he can put that in. He will look to see if that error is elsewhere in the documents.
On page 4, #6, Mr. Shultis asked about compliance inspections. He read a passage and asked that the Wetlands Inspector be mentioned as having the right to inspect too. Mr. Moriello agreed, saying it is Town law.
In Declaration of Covenants, Easements, and Restrictions, transfer of property in future, Mr. Shultis asked if anything is in the funding that indicates when this will be affordable. Mr. Moriello said there is a provision that says the project will be affordable housing for a minimum of 53 years. Fifty (50) years is a typical compliance, Mr. Moriello told the Chairman. A bit more discussion on this topic.
To Mr. Shultis's question, Mr. Moriello said that Mr. Futerfas will be reviewing the offer of cession agreement, infrastructure improvement agreement, and the bonding. He may look at stormwater, but not expected to comment on it as there has been so much comment already. After Mr. Futerfas' review, Mr. Moriello said we will have to meet the conditions for signing of the maps, and several other additional conditions prior to the issuance of Building Permits.
Audience member, Iris York, had comment about tenants, she is confused by page 14, does the 53 years apply to townhomes, not original apartments? Mr. Shultis replied that State funding triggers affordable status for 50 years. Attorney Futerfas is reviewing documents. Ms. York also commented that the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) restricted land of 16 acres; that was changed to 15.81 acres. Mr. Shultis responded that the difference is due to the easement, walkway; this is minor discrepancy.
Mr. Moriello reiterated that RUPCO will have to meet conditions in order to sign maps and issue Building Permit. Content and form should be proper for Town plus enough security in the form of bonding.
Mr. Shultis said let's see how they do with the Town Board and then we'll see if RUPCO needs to come back to the PB.
Mr. Shultis asked if any other questions or comments. Mr. Duane asked if hiking/biking trail is lit at night. No, said Mr. Moriello.
Mr. Shultis made a Motion to adjourn the meeting at 8:45 pm. Seconded by Mr. Huben. Vote: 7-0-0-0.
Minutes approved June 30, 2011
