MEETING MINUTES
April 15, 2021
REGULAR ZOOM MEETING
7:00 PM START TIME: 7:00 PM
CALL TO ORDER, determination of quorum
Members Present: Peter
Cross
Stuart
Lipkind
John
LaValle
Judith
Kerman
Conor
Wenk
Brian
Normoyle
James
Conrad
Members Absent:
Additional Present: Melissa
Gray, Administrative Assistant
Ashley
Slovensky, Zoom Meeting Coordinator
Agenda Invitees: Margit
Dahl Witmer-Pack
George
Cross
Mitchell
Owen
Barry
Price
Maxanne
Resnick
Hank
Starr
Dawn
Ladd
Victoria
& Jerry Balentine
Alex
Bolotow
Julia
Blelock
Ingrid
Haeckel
Public Invited: Marcia
Zwilling
Georgia
Cohen
Jenny
Maddock
Kat
Hunt
Anne
Hemenway & John Wilson
Hollie
Burton
Tim
Jones
Natalie
Cyr
Michelle
Shek
Updates to AGENDA: Mr.
Cross asked Ms. Gray if there were any updates and she stated no.
MINUTES: April
1, 2021
Make motion to approve minutes: Peter Cross 2nd: Conor Wenk Aye: All
COMMUNICATIONS & ANNOUNCEMENTS:
+ Email
from M. Smith re: Lasher Property rec’d
Apr. 1
Mr. Cross acknowledged and states to the Planning Board (PB)
that isn’t a case in front of the PB and not an issue.
+ NY
Zoning Law & Practice Report:
Jan/Feb 2021 Issue rec’d April 1
+ Talk of
the Towns & Topics: Mar/Apr 2021
issue rec’d Apr. 1
+ NYS
Legislative Commission on Rural Resources:
Winter 2021 Issue rec’d Apr. 7
Mr. Cross acknowledged all of these mailings and states they
are good reads.
+ Email
from J. Cohen re: SPR#21-0366A Brookside Getaway LLC rec’d Apr. 5
Mr. Cross acknowledges and states this case is before us and
we will deal with this letter then.
Everything in the letter has to do with the ZEO and Building Department
and not the PB.
+ Email from
Melissa re: Webinar through Hudson River
Estuary Program on Tues, Apr. 20 rec’d Apr. 7
Mr. Cross asked Ms. Gray if she wanted to say anything about
this. Ms. Gray states she was just
forwarding the webinar information along to anyone that is interested.
+ Memo
from B. Hoffman re: STR Questions rec’d Apr. 7
Mr. Cross states that he hopes everyone has read this; it
clarified the numbers of the short term rentals and there are 140 non-owner
occupied and 140 owner occupied. We are
working through those. Ms. Kerman asks
if she received the email and Mr. Cross and Ms. Gray states yes. Ms. Gray tells the PB that she took Mr.
Cross’s questions and asked Mr. Hoffman to answer them to the best of his
ability. Mr. Cross continues and tells
the PB that the Town Board can decide to change the cap numbers on a yearly
basis.
+ Email
from N. Schmidbaur re: Beauty of Woodstock & PB rec’d Apr.
15
Mr. Cross acknowledged and states that the email says we are
doing a great job in Woodstock and they are looking for information for
Saugerties. If we can help them, we
will.
NEW BUSINESS:
SCHEDULED BUSINESS:
SKETCH PLAN REVIEWS:
MARGIT DAHL WITMER-PACK SUP# 21-0588: 2nd Sketch Plan Review of Special Use Permit application to construct family home to
replace recently demolished house located in the R5 and Scenic Overlay Zoning
Districts at 301 Hutchin Hill Road in Shady, SBL# 15.-3-23.100 Reps:
Mitchell Owen and George Cross
Present: George Cross and Mitchell Owen
Notes: Mr. Cross did the site visit and states that all is in
order. The view is well and it is hidden
in the trees. He asks Mr. Wenk if he
went. Ms. Gray reminds Mr. Wenk that it
is on Hutchin Hill and he replies he didn’t go.
Mr. Cross continues it looks good and is laid out. He asks is the PB has any questions.
Mr. Wenk states that he will be returning to the
office and his availability will be limited and he won’t be able to do any site
visits. Mr. Cross said OK. Mr. Cross asked Ms. Gray to set a public
hearing for this case. Ms. Gray states
to the applicants that she will be in touch to schedule.
NICHOLAS CARNE & CHERYL A. BOIKO SUP#
21-0606: Sketch Plan Review of Special Use Permit application to construct an addition
located in the R3 and Scenic Overlay Zoning Districts at 142 Grogkill Road in
Willow, SBL# 14.4-2-10 Rep: Barry Price
Present: Barry Price
Notes: Mr. Cross read the case summary and asked Mr. Price to
explain what he is proposing. Mr. Price
shares his screen. Up on Grogkill there
is an existing property and house for about twenty to thirty years. This is my first Zoom PB meeting. He continues to explain the additions to the
house and plans. A couple pine trees may
need to come down. The existing tree
line is noted. No driveway or septic changes. There will be a new fence for parking and it
is within the setbacks. He shows the
roof plan with elevations which is contingent upon budget. He is seeking approval for two different
color roofs for this reason. The height
of the building is eighteen feet and no higher than what is already there. He shows the window and glazing details with
the lighting fixtures and the shielding.
Ms. Kerman asks Mr. Price if this map is south at the top. Mr. Price replies that it is north to the
right. Mr. Cross asks if he has cuts
sheets for the lighting. Ms. Gray states
we have those. Mr. Cross asks if the
glazing is within code. Mr. Price states
that he is a hair over, with his calculations he is at 27% because he looked at
the whole house. Mr. Cross states that
he sees that it is mitigated by the overhang.
Mr. Cross asks if the glass non-reflective. Mr. Cross states that we have been suggesting
for the tress in front protecting the view from the outside and asking for
drone photographs. Ms. Gray states they
need to show the canopy, area of disturbance, etc. It can be simple and emailed to me. Mr. Price said he could do that. Mr. Cross asks the PB for volunteers for a
site visit. Mr. Wenk replies he
can’t. Ms. Gray states that this is on
Grogkill in Willow. Ms. Kerman states
she can if someone goes with her. Mr.
Cross asks the PB if they have any questions. Ms. Kerman asks if he is taking down any
trees. Mr. Price replies that he doesn’t
plan to but just in case he put them on the plans for the purpose of the
addition. Mr. Cross asks if they plan to
excavate. Mr. Price states yes. Mr. Cross asks if it was on site. Mr. Price states it can be. Mr. Cross states that we can request silt
fencing. Mr. Price states that he has
shown he will be using silt fencing already.
Mr. Price asks Mr. Cross if there is a preference. Mr. Cross replies no. Ms. Kerman states it looks like flat
property. Mr. Lipkind asks about the
glazing mitigation, doors, and elevations.
Mr. Price replies that the shading is the roof line or elements that bolt
onto the building, and describes the windows, doors, glazing and elevations on
the plans. Mr. Lipkind asks the roof
color. Mr. Price states a bronze color and as you can see on the plans there
are two; continent upon budget. Mr.
Cross explains to the PB that Mr. Price is showing the shadow shading used to
mitigate reflection from the glass. This
counts as mitigation. Conversation
between Ms. Kerman and Mr. Price about north at the top of the map. Further conversation between the PB and Mr.
Price on the sliding doors being half screened.
Mr. Cross asks if the roof is non-reflective and not stainless
steel. Mr. Price states that all the
information is in the plans and photos.
Mr. Cross asks if anything is staked out for the site visit. Mr. Price says he will do that. Ms. Kerman asks who is going on the site
visit. Mr. Cross replies he can go with
Ms. Kerman. Mr. Price states that you
can see it from a car. Mr. Cross tells
Ms. Gray they will do the site visit and then schedule a second sketch
review. Ms. Gray asks Mr. Price to email
her when he has staked out the property and with the drone photos.
WOODSTOCK LAND CONSERVANCY, INC. SPR#
21-0382: Sketch Plan Review of a Site Plan Review application to expand parking lot at
Sloan Gorge Nature Preserve located in the R3 Zoning District at 487 Stoll Road
and W. Saugerties-Woodstock Road in Woodstock, SBL# 16.-3-31.100 Rep:
Maxanne Resnick
Present: Maxanne Resnick and Hank Starr
Notes: Mr. Cross asks Ms. Resnick to tell us what they have going
on. Ms. Resnick states she is here with
Hank Starr. Sloan Gorge Nature Preserve
is on Stoll Road off of Goat Hill. We’ve
had increasing interest in this reserve during Covid. Right now the parking lot accommodates three
to four cars; now we want to take the pressure off the road. Mr. Starr can explain. Mr. Starr continues that they sent in a
sketch. The original is 300-400 yards on
Stoll Road. The dotted lines are where
you pull in. Some weekends there are
twelve or more cars on Stoll Road and we want to proactively alleviate
that. Ms. Kerman shared her screen to
show mapping. Mr. Starr states that the
style is gravel as it is now. They will
improve what is there now with gravel, rails and fences with signs. It does involve some clearing. Seven or eight trees will be stumped. Ms. Resnick asks Ms. Kerman to move the
screen to the actual location of the parking and states it is opposite of Beth
Murphy’s driveway. Mr. Cross asks if
there are trails on the property. Ms.
Resnick states yes, there is a trail and it’s an amazing 88 acres in
total. It was donated by Allen Sloan in
1998 to the Woodstock Land Conservancy (WLC).
She describes the land and hike within the Gorge. With grants, they installed some stone stairs
and they learned how to build the stone stairs.
Ms. Gray added that it is beautiful and a great hike, she’ll second what
Ms. Resnick is saying. Mr. Conrad agreed
with them and states it is beautiful and more parking would be great. Mr. Starr states that they have a contractor
picked out. Mr. Cross states that this
is an excellent project and he doesn’t think we will need to do a site visit. He continues to tell the applicants that they
will need a curb cut from the Highway Department. Mr. Starr asks if they talk to the Highway
Department. Ms. Gray says yes and she’ll
make a phone call, also. Mr. Cross asks
if the Planning Board has any questions.
If you don’t, I think we can waive without further review. Mr. Lipkind states he agrees with that
assessment. He asks if there will be
drainage issues with the gravel. Mr.
Starr states that is a good question.
There is existing parking drains and it is semi permeable gravel. The plan is to use the natural slope and take
advantage of that. Mr. Wenk states that
this sounds exciting. Mr. Cross asks Mr.
Lipkind to make a motion.
Mr. Lipkind makes a motion to propose without
further review and minor changes it is a very good idea to move to approved the
approved revisions to the parking lot contingent upon a resolution.
2nd:
Judith Kerman & Conor Wenk
Aye: All
BROOKSIDE GETAWAY LLC SPR# 21-0366A: Sketch Plan Review of a Site Plan Review application to construct an artist
studio located at 51 Millstream Road in Woodstock, SBL# 27.14-2-1 Rep:
Dawn Ladd
Present: Dawn Ladd
Notes: Mr. Cross asks Ms. Ladd to tell the PB what she is
proposing. Ms. Ladd states that the gist
of it is she is a lighting designer and restorer. She has a five apartment building and keeps
one for herself. She has had a business
in Brooklyn for decades. This year with
Covid has changed things and she wants to build a studio on the property she
owns. Mr. Cross states that parking and
lighting are the PB concerns. We need to
know there is enough parking and cut sheets for the lighting that are dark
skies compliant. We will need to do a
site visit. He asks the PB for
volunteers. Ms. Ladd states that there
is no need for additional parking because the studio is just for herself. She knows all about dark skies compliant
because she’s a member of it and follows it.
Mill Street is dark and she can guarantee there will be no obstructive
lighting. Ms. Kerman asks if there will
be running water and a bathroom. Ms.
Ladd replies yes to running water, a slop sink and a bathroom. Mr. Cross states the PB received a letter
from Mr. Cohen and his issues really come down to the building department and
inspector/ zoning enforcement officer. On
the site plan, we have to see the site use.
He asks the PB if they have any questions. Ms. Kerman asks about the existing septic and
if it will accommodate this addition.
Ms. Ladd replies that three years ago she wanted to build a studio and
they had the septic evaluated then and it would accommodate one more
building. Mr. Cross states we need a
site visit. Mr. Conrad and Mr. Cross
volunteer to be the site representatives.
Mr. Cross asked if it is staked out.
Ms. Ladd replies she will do it this weekend. Mr. Cross states after we do the site visit,
we will schedule a second site plan review.
Ms. Gray asks Ms. Ladd to show us
the exterior lighting in her plans. Mr.
Cross states that is basically it, the lighting on the updated site plan. This is a multi-family dwelling. Ms. Ladd asks the PB if they are comfortable
with the concept. Mr. Cross replies that
it’s really all the building department for the electrical and physical parts
of the site plan. Ms. Ladd asks again no
issues. Ms. Gray states we are good, the
PB will do a site visit and we’ll get you back in front of us.
VICTORIA & JERRY BALENTINE SUP# 19-0483: Request for Extension of Special Use Permit for Timber
Harvest
of approximately 888 trees in the R3/R5 Zoning
District and partially in the Scenic
Overlay located at 3664 Route 212 in Shady, SBL# 15.4-1-25.210. Rep: Patrick Dolan, forester; PB Reps: Peter Cross and Stuart Lipkind
Present: Victoria Balentine
Notes: Mr. Cross read the case summary and
reminded the PB of the case. Mr. Cross
asks Ms. Balentine if any logging as started.
Ms. Balentine states that she has an immuno-compromised child and wasn’t
having any people on the property; so only a few already dead ash trees but a
majority has not been done. Mr. Cross
states that since they haven’t started we will give you an extension. There will be a site inspection after it is
complete, then you can get your performance bond back. Ms. Gray asks Ms. Balentine if a year is
sufficient for the extension. She states
oh yes. Mr. Cross reminds her to use
best management practices. Ms. Balentine
states of course, we want to take care of our trees.
DISCUSSION:
WEC / Alex Bolotow: Hudsonia CEAs Application
for Training & Assistance Input and Participation from PB
Present: Alex Bolotow & Julia Blelock
Notes: Mr. Cross read the cases summary. The PB is having a workshop meeting to
discuss CEAs with the WEC and NRI are both the lead agencies on this
activity. I watched the Hudsonia
training for the process. The WEC is
going to help identify areas and then SEQRA, etc. There is a three month training coming
up. Mr. Cross asks Ms. Bolotow what she
has in mind. Ms. Bolotow states we are
here to support you. The training is to
help delineate CEAs and seek adoption by municipality. We would have the areas mapped out, etc. There is no guarantee we get the training and
we have to commit at least three to five people. There are about four to six meeting and extra
research, writing, etc. which will probably take about two – six hours. We would like to get a letter of support from
the Town Board and they meet April 20.
We want to get that letter and see if we had interest and the three –
five people to participate and commit.
Do we want to apply for this she asks the PB. Should we not apply or yes. Ms. Blelock has kindly started the
application process. Mr. Cross and Ms.
Kerman state they are both in. Ms.
Blelock states she thinks we should have five – six people. Ms. Bolotow and her go back and forth on the
number best suited for this. We aren’t
pushing this. CEAs aren’t regulatory or
enforceable but mapping it is helpful.
Mr. Cross states we are hoping WEC can be lead agency on identifying
these areas. Part of the process will be
a public hearing. There are no
restrictions from the state on this; however, it asks the PB reasons for the
CEA proposed land uses in and out. We
need to get more specific about that, including the impacts and features of
concern. The other part is the PB wants
this adapted into the comprehensive plan.
If it’s there, we may be able to add restrictions. Ms. Blelock asks Ms. Resnick to comment on
CEAs and asked if she would be interested in being on board with this. Ms. Resnick states it is only capacity
issues. When Ingrid (Ms. Haeckel)
presented this, she stated there is no regulatory impact. The PB’s desire to pursue this from wetlands
regulations and this will give you the checklist for a certain ecosystem. The New Paltz PB was balking at CEAs and
feeling it was too much. The town of
Warwick has had success with development and agriculture. Ms. Kerman states ignorance doesn’t help us
make decisions. Building off NRI will
allow us to learn how to use what we have and make good decisions. Mr. Cross comments on wildlife corridors and
expanding around the wetlands, and putting more review into these areas. If we can get the state to back us up, it is
a step in the right direction. Ms.
Kerman states that if we can say and show to the landowners, usually their
heart is in the right place. Mr. Cross
thanks everyone for all their participation.
Ms. Bolotow states she wants to confirm that we are moving forward with
this and Mr. Cross and Ms. Kerman are the volunteers. They agree.
Mr. Normoyle states that he is interested but he can’t commit right
now.
Gateway Overlay District
Presenter: Judy Kerman
Notes: Mr. Cross states that Ms. Kerman is going to talk about the
Gateway Overlay District and the mapping work she has done. It will be handy in case we have any more
cases to know this. Ms. Kerman states
that is why she did this. Mr. Cross did
a drawing, with help from Tom Hines, and using the law (the 300 ft, etc), I
think this map is fairly accurate. The
fifty percent in the shops on the side, the credit union is in it; school,
Cucina and the theater. If this comes up
again, we have it. I’m not sure about
the cultural overlay but I assume it is Cucina and the theater. Mr. Cross states it is the same foot
print. Ms. Kerman states that in a
crunch it would have to be surveyed for that 300 foot, if it is within the 50 %
then within the district. MS. Kerman
states that the map is close to what Ms. Gray had in the office. Ms. Gray and Mr. Normoyle thank Ms. Kerman
for all her hard work with the mapping.
Ms. Kerman states that we need more people who have it, the mapping
skills. Mr. Normoyle asks if it can be
saved on a google drive somewhere. Ms.
Kerman responds that you would still need the software. Mr. Lipkind thanks Mr. Normoyle and Ms.
Kerman. He asks if there is a way to
preserve and utilize this. If one cog
drops out, can we still use this. Ms.
Kerman states that Ms. Gray has it on a drive in the PB office, but you still
need the software.
STR Cases under Executive Order
Notes: Mr. Cross asks Ms. Gray to talk about this. Ms. Gray states that there are roughly about
fifty more short term rental cases to be processed in the Planning Board
office. She knows all of the PB concerns
are valid. Her concerns are the
legalities that we approved the first hundred and now these are having issues
being passed, not because of their individual circumstance but rather on the
feeling of short term rentals on a whole.
She didn’t do any (short term rental) STR cases for this agenda because
she wanted to have this conversation with the PB and move forward. She states she wants to move forward with
these applications and get through the pile without any legal issues. She says that these applications have been
thoroughly inspected by the ZEO, paid all fees and has done everything that
they were asked to do to operate legally.
All of these applications are our backlog and are included in the cap of
the number for the STRs. Mr. Normoyle
states we vote on them. Mr. Cross states
that they forget everybody gets a vote.
If we get ourselves in a legal spot – this is a tough decision. We need to get through the last bunch and I
can only hope that the vote goes through to get it though. We are ¾ way through it. It has a cap and now we know the numbers. Ms. Gray is going to continue processing the
cases. Mr. LaValle states he is not
comfortable with this process. Ms.
Kerman states she isn’t either but the Town Board did this. Mr. Normoyle adds that it is an imperfect
situation. We have to finish the
process, whether we like it or not. Mr.
Wenk asks about the cap and the Town Board.
Mr. Lipkind states that the Special Use Permit brings this in front of
us and we’ve approved all of these in front of us. Mr. LaValle asks about differentiating the non-owner
occupied and owner occupied. Ms. Gray
explains that the majority of what the PB sees is non-owner occupied. We only see owner-occupied if it is a three
or more bedroom. Mr. Cross states he
encourages the PB members to individually send their positions to the Town
Board. We’ll move on. Ms. Kerman offered the map at present and Mr.
Normoyle states not now.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
+ Site Visit Report
from reps for Bearsville Center SPR# 21-0141E on Apr. 8
Site Visit Reps: Brian
Normoyle & John LaValle
Notes: Mr. Cross started the discussion and asked
the site representatives to give their report.
Mr. LaValle tells Mr. Normoyle to take the lead. Mr. Normoyle asks if everyone read the
report. There were a couple issues. The occasional use of the field / grassy
areas behind the theater; and we talked to Peter and realized this conforms
with the existing site plan. There are
two new structures with a little bit of construction. Mr. Cross asks if the PB is ok with the
parking plan. The engineer would like to
know if the numbers are ok to do the swifts calculations. Mr. LaValle states that it looked like Mr.
Medenbach conformed with the town law and a lot of parking is required. Mr. Medenbach’s layout is good. Mr. Cross states we will let him do his
engineering and calculations for the SWPPP.
Mr. Normoyle asks if the next step is a public hearing. Mr. Cross replied that we couldn’t continue
the review with that fence that was in violation. Ms. Gray asks the PB if they are all ok with
scheduling a public hearing for May 6.
PB agreed. Mr. LaValle states
that it is better than ever and they have put millions of dollars have been
poured into it. Just the drainage they
did around every building is impressive.
Mr. Cross states it’s going to be nice.
+ Make a motion to approve
credits for Peter attending the HVEP CEA webinar on Apr. 11
Make motion to approve credits for Peter: Stuart Lipkind 2nd:
Brian Normoyle Aye: All
ADJOURNMENT
Time: 8:30 pm
Make motion to end meeting:
Peter Cross 2nd: Conor Wenk Aye: All
Closing Conversation:
Mr. Normoyle states he may be out
for the next month.
Mr. Wenk states he is going back
into the office for work and won’t be able to do site visits.
