September 23, 2013
Attending: Richard Fon, Ann Kutter, John Flynn, John Kincart
1. Kiederer Subdivision
Approved a reapproval. The applicant said that a contract was pending that should finally bring closure to this subdivision first approved in 2005.
2. Crompond Crossing
Approved the amended site plan.
3. Savannah’s Restaurant
The Board reconvened the public hearing. There were no public comments. After closing the hearing the Board voted to approve the amended site plan. There was a discussion with the applicant on how to handle the joint egress with the abutting property if and when that property comes before the Planning Board.
4. Spirelli Electric
(See September 9, 2013) In response to Planning Board comments made at the previous meeting, the architect has added some landscaping to “soften” the site. The Board approved the site plan.
5. Taps Express
(See September 9, 2013) In response to Planning Board comments made at the previous meeting, the architect has added some landscaping along Edgewater Street on the town’s right of way, will replace the existing gravel driveway with a concrete driveway, and will add additional grass and plantings. Although the architect has to submit more details on the landscape plan before a CO can be issued, at the architect’s request, the Board approved the site plan in order to facilitate the property owner’s application before the Zoning Board later in the week. The property owner will have to come back to the Planning Board if the attic use is changed or if the owner wants permission for outdoor storage.
Creative Living (Navajo Fields)
Originally in the Special Session portion of the agenda (Board actions can only be taken only in special, aka regular sessions), on the advice of counsel, the item was moved to the work session portion of the agenda for discussion purposes.
Prior to the discussion, the Board set September 28 for a joint site visit with the Conservation Board.
(Note: Creative Living is on the agenda for the Town Board’s September 24 meeting. The item is listed as: Request for extension of time to meet wetland permit condition.)
Although both Mr. Tegeder and Mr. Barber agreed that “most” of the conditions of the February, 2013 wetlands permit had been completed, the Board was reluctant to approve the dome site plan with conditions because too many issues relating to the plan were still unresolved. Also complicating the issue was the fact that the applicant will not be meeting with the DEC on the wetlands permit issue until next Wednesday and that based on that meeting the wetlands site plan might change, which in turn, would affect the dome site plan.
The applicant had previously advised the Board that the DEC will not begin its review of dome application until the agency finished its review of the wetlands issues. The applicant had hoped to meet with DEC right after Labor Day but that meeting didn’t materialize. Mr. Capellini said the site plan issues were a “moving target” and that it was difficult to pin down the DEC on what it wanted.
Mr. Fon was particularly distressed that the applicant hadn’t met with town staff to iron out the remaining issues as had been suggested at the Board’s previous meeting. The general sense of the Board was that while it supported the plan, no progress had been made on dome site plan issues since the summer meetings. After the Board made it clear to the applicant that it would not proceed with the dome application, the applicant indicated that it would meet with town staff prior to the Board’s next meeting.
The applicant was hoping to get dome site plan approval so that it could go ahead and order the dome, accepting the risks involved in not having DEC approval or having fulfilled any conditions that might be attached to the dome site plan approval resolution.
Town wetlands permit issues still needing to be resolved:
1. The existing width of one of the wood chip paths is wider than stated on the permit.
2. A more detailed landscape plan needs to be submitted, and reviewed, that includes what has already been planted (is it in compliance with the landscape plan?) as well as additional plantings.
DEC wetlands issues that need to be resolved:
1. Location of greenhouses. While the applicant is willing to move the greenhouse currently on the second field, Mr. Riina advised the Board that the DEC is more concerned about the location of the greenhouse between the two fields that is in or near a stream corridor. That greenhouse, he said, was more critical to the field’s operations. The ultimate location of the greenhouses is critical as it will determine the need for the ring road as well as potentially modifying the location of the dome. Where a greenhouse might be relocated to would also impact future plans for the site, including a planned basketball court and rock climbing wall.
2. Removal of one of the footbridges
Dome site plan issues needing to be resolved:
1. possible need for a new floodplain permit as the original permit assumed the grass fields would absorb runoff but with the dome one field will be replaced by artificial grass. Mr. Barber said that the applicant should provide calculations to show that changes already made to the second grass field will compensate for the impervious nature of the domed field.
2. The future location of one or both greenhouses. As noted above, both these issues need to be dealt with by the DEC and Mr. Barber suggested that the Board needed more feedback from DEC first in order to avoid approving a plan that was later rejected by DEC and needed to be changed. He wanted the Board, and the applicant, to avoid a “ping pong” scenario.
3. A lighting plan
4. More details on rest room facilities
5. Revised mitigation plan
6. General review of the dome structure by the building department
At the close of the work session, the Board went into closed session to discuss the application.
7. 1968 East Main Street (Mohegan Lake)
On a referral from the building department, the Board reviewed a proposed plan to expand an existing dental office in a C-2 zone where no previous site plan existed. The Board was satisfied with the plan, voted to go back into special session, and approved the plan.
8. Jefferson Valley Mall
Several members of the development team reviewed the main components of the planned renovation. (Note: the same presentation will be made at the September 24 Town Board meeting. In addition to slides showing the changed facades, a video showed what the mall, with a newly landscaped berm, would look like driving east and west along Route 6.)
a. The plan will add 20,000 square feet to the existing building, mostly in the areas around the entrances on both levels and in order to accommodate new restaurants and an outdoor plaza on the Lee Blvd. side.
b. 79 additional trees will be added to the parking lot
c. The existing entrances on the upper level will be changed.
d. The berm on Route 6 will be regarded a “minimal amount,” some white pines will be removed, the existing oaks will remain, and the berm re-landscaped.
The traffic consultant said that the upgrade would generate minimal additional traffic and was too insignificant to require any changes to existing intersections.
In general, the Board was very pleased with the presentation and will send a “warm and fuzzy” memo to the Town Board which has final site plan approval. The Board did ask the applicant to consider a “green wall” in the loading dock area. Mr. Fon asked if the applicant might also consider some landscaping on the town-owned Lee Blvd median from Route 6 up to the site entrance. It was pointed out, though, that this would be up to the town to maintain.
9. Yorktown Farms
A discussion on the siting of an additional lot.
10. Stormwater project at the Police Department
Because the proposed stormwater retrofit measure will modify the existing site plan, the Board will advertise for a public informational hearing, to be followed by a public hearing.
11. St. Patrick’s Church Multipurpose Room
On a referral from the Zoning Board, the Board reviewed plans to finish the lower level of an existing classroom building built in 2004 adding two multipurpose rooms. The modification will be used for people already on the premises and will not increase occupancy or parking needs. The Board had no problem with the plan and will send a memo to the ZBA.
12. Yorktown Auto Body
The Board will advertise for a public hearing on the amended site plan. It has been determined that the applicant will not need a variance. Mr. Tegeder suggested that at the hearing, the applicant have photos showing the screening and building and wall elevations. The applicant will try to reduce the amount of impervious surface in order to avoid the need to prepare a stormwater plan for DEP approval.