September 17, 2018
Attending: John Kincart, John Savoca, William LaScala, Rich Fon, Robert Garrigan
1. Fieldhome, Catherine Street
In an item not on the agenda, the board approved a lot line adjustment that will facilitate the transfer of title when a portion of the property now owned by Holy Comforter is sold.
2. Mohegan Audi Addition, East Main Street
The board approved the site plan, SWPPP and SEQRA neg dec.
3. Prestige Renovations, Buckhorn Street
(See Planning Board 6-11-2018.) Mr. Fon recused himself. The board approved the minor subdivision and eliminated the 5% bond on improvements as there are no planned public improvements.
3. Gallinelli Minor Subdivision, Quinlan Street
(See Planning Board 2-12-2018.) The board approved the subdivision, SWPPP and tree permit. The erosion bond will be needed when the developer applies for a building permit.
4. Popeyes (Staples Plaza)/Public Hearing
The applicant showed a revised plan based on discussions with town staff and ABACA that reduced the number of parking spaces and added more landscaping. The plan includes 8 conservation parking spaces.
In response to Geri Schwalb’s concern about the traffic flow from the building to the main driveway, the applicant explained that the revised plan left ample room to avoid problems.
Ann Kutter raised concerns about the traffic light on Route 202 not functioning properly and reminded the board about the need for current and future developments at the shopping center to work jointly to improve the traffic flow, including adding a fourth lane on the north side of Route 202.. (See 2015 discussions below.) The board acknowledged problems at the intersection but noted that the situation needed to be looked at after temporary conditions, such as the pipeline construction site and the construction at the top of hill, were no longer present. The applicant indicated that as part of the 2015 discussions, the timing of the traffic light was adjusted to mitigate the increased traffic coming from the BJ’s gas pumps.
The board went into executive session
7. Biffer Enterprises, Hill Boulevard
(See Planning Board 6-11-2018.) The board was concerned that the illegal sheds were still in place and that the owner’s plans for their relocation and/or removal kept changing. The owner of Frankie n Augies restaurant was present and explained his need for the two sheds; he said the Department of Health had said the refrigerated shed was ok. Also that the owner had given him a verbal okay to place the sheds and that neither knew that they needed an amended site plan. The applicant also said that the building department had issued an electrical permit for one of the sheds, but that the work hadn’t been done yet. In the meantime, renovations to the space for the proposed diner have progressed and the restaurant is almost ready to open.
While the board wanted to help the owner, its members were insistent on the need to clarify the shed issue in an amended site plan. Mr. Kincart suggested that if Frankie n Augies needed more room for storage, the owner should expand the building; both the building and restaurant owners rejected this suggestion as not possible. The board will make a site visit on Saturday
8. Lowe’s off sewer extension issue
(See Planning Board 8-13-2018.) Mr. Grace said that his client was still trying to get cost information for extending the sewer connection to each property and that the language in the SEQRA resolution was too general. He added, however, that Breslin was willing to pay to extend the sewer line to the individual septic systems but added that the homeowner should have some “skin in the game” He said Breslin would not pay for rock removal and restoration like paving the driveway or placing down sod or seeding; he would rough grade only. Grace said he wants to negotiate individual contracts with each homeowner.
Ms. Kutter advised the board that according to estimates received by homeowners, her hook up could cost $25,000 while another owner’s cost would be $50,000, plus the need for a pump and that in earlier discussions Breslin had indicated a willingness to give each owner $10,000. For Breslin, Bob Rosenberg said that Ms. Kutter’s cost estimates were not accurate, adding that while the company was not happy with its latest offer, it will make the connections but not pay for every nickel.
Mr. Fon said that the record stands and speaks for itself regarding Breslin’s commitment and that no future Planning Board action was needed. (See agenda item #9 below re Breslin subdivbision application.)
9. Lowes/Breslin Realty Subdivision
(See 11-21-2016 discussion.) In a brief comment, Mr. Fon said that the board would table this discussion until other issues were resolved. He did not elaborate.
10. 2040 Greenwood Street
The applicant advised the board that based on a DEP review, the stormwater plan has been changed and that a stormwater basin will now be located in front of the building and a pocket wetland will be created. The applicant said that the new location permitted a better stormwater practice. The new plan will involve the removal of some trees which will impact an abuting homeowner. The board asked the applicant to indicate the tree removal on a plan and return to the board.
11. Correia Site Plan, 250 East Main Street, Jefferson Valley
The pre preliminary application calls for the construction of two 1½ story storage buildings on the 8.22 acre site currently zoned county commercial. The site is at intersection of East Main Street and Route 6nN and houses a gas station. The new buildings would be used by a manufacturing facility currently on the premises. As Mr. Riina, the applicant’s engineer, did not know exactly what was manufactured in the building, the board remained concern as to whether the current use was allowed in the current zone and asked for more information. The new buildings would be “tucked” into the existing hill and conform to zoning requirements.
12. Envirogreen Associates, East Main Street, Mohegan Lake
The DEC has told the applicant to “go away” as it will not permit the filling in of the state wetland,. The agency has not provided any written documentation, e.g., a denial of its permit request. The board remains convinced that the latest plan is the nicest and best use of the parcel and is in conformance with the town’s long term goal of connecting the parking lots of adjoining commercial properties. The applicant prepared a possible new site plan that avoids the wetlands and calls for a single building and no connection to the Village Traditions property.
After discussing its options, the board decided to have its attorney send a letter to the DEC explaining the benefits of the original plan and requesting the agency to put its objections to the preferred plan in writing.
13. Proposed Solar Law/Town Board Referral
The brief discussion focused more on the proposed Lockwood Rd proposal than on the provisions of the proposed local law. Mr. LaScala was skeptical of the financial underpinnings of a solar project, including the fact that the tax credits that the developer would get would lead to more carbon dioxide emissions. Mr. Fon thought the proposed plan was too big and other board members had issues with a solar farm in a residential area. At the request of board members, Mr. Tegeder will provide them with a list of other solar projects in Orange County, noting that the one proposed in Yorktown would be the largest in the New York State. He also said that for the board’s next meeting, he will provide some guidance for reviewing the law including the amount of coverage, the size of the project and eligible zoning districts.
14. Proposed Tree law
Although not on the agenda, there was a brief discussion of the proposed tree law that Mr. Tegeder said the board would discuss at its October 1 meeting. (Note: Board members had been given a copy of the proposed law.) In response to questions about the requirement for a tree survey, Mr. Tegeder reminded board members that under the current Land Development Regulations, the board could require a tree survey. Some members felt that the survey should only be done on the proposed area of disturbance and not the entire site. Mr. Kincart thought the law was repetitive and could probably be condensed to three pages. Mr. LaScala had a problem with restrictions on homeowners and said the law shouldn’t “crucify” them; he suggested exempting homeowners from the law. Asked how the proposed law differed from the current law, Mr. Tegefder said it was more like the 2010 tree law.
15. Unicorn Contracting (Murphy’s Restaurant) Kear Street
In an item not on the agenda, Mr. Tegeder advised the board that there have been changes to the site plan in order to satisfy the DEP. The changes include parking and also the relocation of refuse dumpsters that are now planned to face Route 118. He said the applicant needs to come back to the board in October.