TOWN OF WOODSTOCK
APPROVED PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
March 15, 2012
Members Present: Tom Unrath, Paul Shultis, Jr., Peter Cross, James Huben, Lorin Rose and Laura Ricci
Member Absent: Judith Kerman
Others Present: Therese Fernandez, Secretary
Meeting called to order at 6:30. Determination of a quorum.
Agenda: No updates
Minutes: Minutes of December 1, 2011 and December 15, 2011 approved, as corrected. Motion by Mr. Unrath. Seconded by Mr. Huben. Vote: 6-0-1-0.
++
MICHAEL STOCK, MICHAEL STOCK & DIANE KRAUS, KPMC, LLC, PB #12-1080E: Sketch review of Lot Line Revision and Minor Subdivision application for three land parcels involving transfer of Parcel A of 1.173 acres, from +/- 30.6 acres parcel owned by KPMC, LLC, and Parcel C of 1.283 acres, from +/- 14.9 acres parcel owned by Michael Stock, to create a new 10.233 acres lot, part of which is a subdivision of +/- 26 acres parcel owned by Michael Stock and Diane Kraus. Parcel B of 1.392 acres, from +/- 26.0 acres parcel owned by Michael Stock & Diane Kraus, will be transferred to +/- 30.6 acres parcel owned by KPMC, LLC. Total lot sizes after transfers and subdivision: Michael Stock = 13.617 acres; Michael Stock & Diane Kraus = 17.957 acres; KPMC, LLC = 30.789 acres, and the new lot of 10.233 acres. All parcels are in an R5 Zoning District, located on private right-of-way known as Valley View Way, off Rt. 212 in Lake Hill, SBL#s 15.3-5-13.3 (Stock & Kraus), 15.3-5-13.21 (KPMC, LLC), 15.3-5-13.421 (Stock). Rep: Bert Winne III, PLS; PB Reps: To be re-assigned
Mr. Stock spoke for himself as Mr. Winne was not present.
Mr. Unrath and Mr. Rose were assigned as Planning Board (PB) reps for the application.
Mr. Stock was advised that application will be referred to the Town's Planning Consultant for review and comments.
To a request from Secretary for a narrative to clarify for members what he is planning to do, Mr. Stock said he would be happy to do that after he meets with the Planner at the site. He will bring in another map tomorrow for the site visit.
Some members are familiar with the site that is located on a private right-of-way. Mr. Unrath asked, how many lots are there now? Seven lots have already been approved, Mr. Stock explained. He has a buyer for the new parcel; buyer was reluctant to purchase parcel larger than 10 acres; he's starting the subdivision process for the buyer. The one new lot exceeds the 5 acres required for zoning district. Lot line revisions will follow the course of existing access road so the road will become the boundary line for the lots. Mr. Stock said he has Board of Health septic approval for the new lot.
Town Highway Superintendent Mike Reynolds will need to do a site visit and has to approve curb cut for new lot. May possibly need a waiver at entrance of access road off Route 212 to avoid having to make a "big cut" off the main road; also maybe a black top waiver. Mr. Stock said that he is using existing logging roads so not as much clearing necessary.
Mr. Shultis noted that the new house and driveway will require a Special Use Permit since it is in Scenic Overlay District.
Planner's Escrow amount to be determined. Mr. Stock will bring in check once Ms. Fernandez speaks to Planner.
Applicant will return for a preliminary review of application after PB case reps' site visit and review by Planner.
++
CAROL JELLINGHAUS represented by Heidi Jellinghaus, POA, PB #12-0986B: Sketch review of application for Minor 2-lot Subdivision: Rescheduled at applicant's request for March 29, 2012.
++
Pending Items:
Lessard & Penaluna WWP #11-015: the Town Board waived final development fee; sign "as built" plans and Wetlands & Watercourse Permit (WWP):
Mr. Unrath signed the plans and WWP.
++
Assign 2nd Case Rep for Jellinghaus Subdivision sketch review scheduled for March 29, 2012:
Mr. Unrath was assigned as second rep.
++
Discussion of edits to draft Special Use Permit (SUP) and Site Plan Review (SPR) Resolution for Woodstock Farm Animal Sanctuary (WFAS), for approval at March 29th meeting:
Chairman Unrath said after reading the draft SUP, he realized that the Zoning Board Appeals (ZBA) allowed retail sales at one of the WFAS events. He then thought that the Planning Board (PB) should probably allow retail sales during each of the three Special Events as he felt it would not increase traffic, pollution, or cause any other problem. Mr. Shultis said he thought allowing any retail sales at all is a ZBA determination. Mr. Unrath had the Secretary include in this draft SUP, an allowance for WFAS to have retail sales at the three events. Mr. Shultis questioned whether telling WFAS that was within the PB's purview. Mr. Unrath noted that the PB had previously said absolutely no retail sales based on the initial reading of the ZBA determination, but then he realized the ZBA did allow sales at the one event. Telling them no retail sales may not have been in the PB's purview either, Mr. Shultis said. Maybe it wasn't, said Mr. Unrath.
To Mr. Unrath's query about the amended SPR Resolution and SUP, Secretary Fernandez said the draft Resolution was actually almost complete, except for possible further review if more information is submitted, and once the revisions to the draft SUP are finished, that text needs to be incorporated into the Resolution as conditions of approval.
We will hold off approving these drafts until March 29th meeting, Chairman said.
Ms. Ricci said she is new to these WFAS documents and asked about some of the wording. Ms. Fernandez explained that the wording of the document had been gone over repeatedly since last year. Ms. Ricci thought the section of the SUP about Special Events should be clarified and suggested some alternative wording on page 3.
On page 6, Ms. Ricci asked about staff numbers and numbers of cars. Mr. Shultis explained the use of parking for Special Events as overflow.
Regarding a gift shop, Ms. Ricci agreed with Mr. Unrath that the WFAS could have sales at the 3 Special Events, but she did not see it spelled out anywhere in the document, and thought it should be. Mr. Shultis suggested they could say something like, "For retail sales, refer to the ZBA determination." He thought the ZBA said they are allowed to have sales at the Special Events.
Ms. Fernandez and Mr. Unrath said no, it said "one event." "Off-season event", Ms. Fernandez added, and none of the WFAS special events are off-season. Under the amended SUP, those events are held during "Open Season". Mr. Unrath did not care if the retail sales are in a gift shop, in a tent, or in various places on the site. He thought the PB could say they can have retail sales during the special events. Ms. Ricci asked where would it say that in the document? Mr. Rose agreed with Mr. Shultis: refer to the ZBA determination with respect to retail sales. As far as writing something, Mr. Shultis said that would be the PB writing something that is contrary to the ZBA's determination, and the PB should just leave it alone.
Ms. Fernandez pointed out that the existing SUP the ZBA refers to in its decision has different conditions with events than the amended SUP being drafted now. The ZBA allowed sales under an SUP that will be obsolete once the PB adopts the amended SUP. Mr. Shultis added, if the PB says that "Retail sales shall be allowed as per the ZBA", then that is for an off-season event that does not exist anymore. We should leave it alone and if the neighbors have complaints let WFAS go back to the ZBA. If the ZBA is okay with it, they would just have to change their determination to refer to on-season event(s). If it becomes an issue, when the SUP is renewed next year, the ZBA can give us a new determination and we'll change the language of the renewed SUP. We cannot write anything about retail sales contrary to the ZBA determination.
Ms. Ricci asked if we should say in the Resolution that WFAS should go back to the ZBA for a new determination about retail sales. Mr. Shultis said no, we can make a recommendation to the applicant, but not reference it in the Resolution.
Mr. Unrath said he wanted to make a positive statement that "this document is silent on retail sales", unless that might be interpreted as "a go-ahead" with retail sales whenever they want. No, we won't say that, leave it out, he decided.
Mr. Shultis suggested the PB explain to the WFAS that they have to go back to the ZBA, show them the new SUP with language that allows them the four events, and that they are asking for retail sales during those events.
Decision: Mr. Unrath made a Motion that the draft SUP document is to remain silent on retail sales, which reverses the last PB decision that they couldn't have retail sales at all. Any guidance concerning retail sales should come from the ZBA. Seconded by Ms. Ricci. Vote: 6-0-1-0.
++
Ken Panza comments on proposed zoning amendments through December 2010 for proposed Local Law:
He said he did not change any of the language for the proposed Local Law. He removed the reference to the proposed use changes in the Light Industrial zone for the Town police and court.
Mr. Panza said he found a problem in Zoning Law Section 260-74 [Site Plan Review and Approval, When Required]. Former Planning Specialist Trahan modified that language in October 2010, which is now the subject of a federal lawsuit, so he thought amending that particular paragraph is probably not a good idea.
He wants to schedule the proposed zoning amendments for the Town Board in time for first meeting in April. Mr. Unrath put it on Planning Board (PB) calendar for March 29th Workshop.
Mr. Shultis told Ken that the PB got the comments back from the County on the proposed hydrofracking law. He asked him if he got them back on the Gateway Overlay District changes? Ken said they never returned comments on Gateway as far as he knew. No, they commented on it, Mr. Shultis replied. They gave pros and cons. Has the PB taken a position?, Mr. Panza asked. Mr. Unrath said he's had a couple of conversations, but the Board is not talking about it. The Town Supervisor is working on it. The whole Town Board went through a review, Ken said.
Mr. Unrath asked, what if Mr. Hanowitz came before the PB, which is unlikely? Mr. Shultis said Mr. Hanowitz had gone through the PB process last year and made it through quite easily with the modifications he made. For the record, he added, the second use at that site never came before the PB. The site is in violation now of the site plan that was approved, whether or not the Zoning Enforcement Officer (ZEO) recognizes that. It is a blatant violation. How do we get him to appear before the PB then?, Chairman asked. Wait until the Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) is finished with him, Mr. Shultis replied.
Further discussion of details of the Hanowitz issue; nothing official decided.
++
Motion by Mr. Unrath to adjourn at 7:45. Seconded by Ms. Ricci. All aye.
++
Minutes approved at meeting of April 5, 2012
