YT YouTube2Text

YouTube2Text → Transcripts → 6/9/2025 Planning Board Meeting

6/9/2025 Planning Board Meeting — Transcript

by Town of Rochester · 31,668 words · 4,686 segments · language en · Watch on YouTube

Open in transcriber Summarize with AI Download SRT/VTT

Full transcript

24:10I pledge allegiance to the flag of the
24:13United States of America and to the
24:15republic for which it stands, one nation
24:18under God, indivisible, with liberty and
24:21justice for all.
24:27Robin, would you uh call the role?
24:29Absolutely. In attendance, Rick Jones
24:32here. Peter Nelson here.
24:37Here. Dave Roberts here. Jennifer
24:39Farwell here. H
24:44I want to note that our planner Dave
24:47Gordon is here. Our journey for church
24:50and slip our attorney is on his way
24:53lining across the mountain and we will
24:55have Greg Fulmer here about 7:30. So you
24:57might want to know that. Okay. Um so we
25:01have three items I want to go through
25:03that are not project related at this
25:05point in time. Um one of them is Hans
25:08has been working on some procedures
25:11um along with Dave and myself. So I
25:14think you have a copy of that in front
25:16of you. Anie, you just want to explain
25:17to the world what you did and what's
25:19here? Sure. So, Rick,
25:23we've
25:25t and I have been working on procedures
25:28and policies to make uh our planning
25:31board to have more consistent procedures
25:34and policies for the planning board uh
25:36and and to have kind of also as a
25:39codified as a qualified document going
25:42forward. This is basically the start for
25:46our implementation and we're going to
25:48continue with that. Today we talk only
25:50about two of these policies which we
25:53have bought so far. Uh one is it's about
25:57party communication. So it's week about
26:00communication of members with each
26:03and one of the key patterns of this this
26:07policy is that to avoid uncoordinated
26:10action uh with the public which can
26:12create uh confusion, redundancy or
26:15issues with the public. There should be
26:18no conversation with board members
26:21outside of this of the official
26:23meetings.
26:25That's Go ahead. No, go ahead.
26:28No. Well, first I wanted to say this is
26:30not to replace the town code. Obviously,
26:31the town is there and rules. This was
26:34just to pick up on some of the more um
26:37the many things that come up over and
26:39over and over again and that affect uh
26:41either the behavior of the board or
26:43things like posting public hearings um
26:46agendas um preparation of agendas, that
26:49sort of thing. So, there's quite a bit
26:51here. Um, I think we handed it out a few
26:54weeks ago and I I know that Hans wants
26:56to go put a lot of time into it. It's
26:58not complete yet, but it doesn't replace
27:00anything. It's just an easy reference
27:02guide. And we probably also want to put
27:05down the codes in the town code that
27:09that support whatever you wrote here.
27:11So, Hans, why don't you if there's other
27:12items you want to go through, that's
27:14great. What I'd like to do is ask people
27:17to really read through it and send me
27:20separate comments via email. Don't copy
27:24each other. I don't want to have a
27:25conversation over email with the whole
27:27board. So, just send me your comments
27:29and then hopefully the next meeting I'll
27:31reflect back on those comments and we'll
27:33just nail it as okay. This is the
27:36beginning of an easy to understand and
27:38readily available set of processes and
27:41procedures. Hans, is there anything else
27:43you want to mention on this? That's
27:44exactly what the point. The other thing
27:45I would like to ask you to look at is is
27:48policy for alternate members. That's
27:51which is for what? The policy for
27:53alternate members. Yeah. Uh which we
27:56want to change a little bit from where
27:57we need to
27:59work to look at it. Uh so that the
28:03alternate can sit with us on the table
28:05and really can actively participate in
28:08the discussions because they need to
28:09jump in at a moment's notice and to be
28:12informed and ready to go. Yeah, on that
28:13one. The little group went back and
28:15forth. The current town code says that
28:19the um alternate member needs to be
28:21separated from the board. Um cannot
28:24participate in the um discussions of the
28:27board during um while they're acting as
28:30an alternate um and can't vote while
28:33they're in alternate. They only quote
28:34unquote participate when they are um
28:38moved to the board if that becomes
28:40necessary. So there may be some changes
28:43that you all feel might be appropriate.
28:45The one that I think might be
28:46appropriate is that they should sit at
28:48the same table so at least they can
28:50share in the documentation. Um I think
28:53the question of whether they can vote is
28:55pretty clear. No, they're an alternate.
28:57And then the question of whether or not
28:59they should participate in discussions,
29:01that's where I'm looking for input from
29:03the board. Um, and actually we may be
29:07overstepping whatever we recommend
29:08because um, the town code says something
29:11different, but it may even be state code
29:13that's that describes what they can and
29:15can't do. I didn't get that far of it.
29:17So anyway, that's one. So I think we can
29:20make recommend one change. We can't do
29:22that change without the town board
29:24acting on it. Hans, was there anything
29:26else? No, that it basically but I
29:29researched uh especially the alternate
29:32proposal and it's it's aligned with most
29:34town boards in New York state do. What's
29:37your Yeah. What do they do? I'm sorry. I
29:41researching basically most most uh town
29:44boards planning boards in state allow
29:46them to to participate participate
29:48discussions. So to sit and participate
29:51to sit and participate because the logic
29:53is they have to jump in at a moment's
29:55notice. So they need to be informed what
29:57they need to be addressed. Okay. So if
30:01you can get me some comments on next
30:03week, that'll be great. All right. So
30:05next one item. Um the next item,
30:09comments on the community preservation
30:11uh fund and I sent that out probably a
30:15couple of times to you. The town board
30:18is looking to
30:20um get comments from this planned board
30:23and there's a memo from
30:26um the town supervisor Erin
30:29um dated May 6th where she asks us for
30:33comment. They need it soon like in the
30:37next week so that they can vote on this
30:40and get it and move in such a way to get
30:42it onto a ballot for November. This has
30:44to be voted on on a ballot. So, I asked
30:47you to review the information. Um, there
30:51was some verbiage here,
30:54local law number one of 2024 is what
30:57it's called. And then there was a
30:58detailed document that was put together
31:01uh with Peter acting as the chair of
31:03that group uh that I also provided you
31:05with. It was 90 to 100 pages I think
31:08that gave a lot of the details of the
31:10community um preservation fund. So what
31:13I wanted to do tonight is is not an
31:15education of the board yet. We all had
31:18time to read the documentation, but if
31:20you had any observations, you had some
31:22sense of you agree or don't agree, do
31:24you agree? What in particular would you
31:27like to see the preservation fund used
31:29for? There are a number of things that
31:31can be used for among which would be uh
31:35housing, environment,
31:37uh agriculture, recreation. Um, I'm not
31:40sure about the housing actually. No,
31:42it's not housing. Uh, that might be a
31:43broader comment that you might want to
31:45make about needs that you see as an
31:47active member of the planning board, but
31:49specific to the preservation fund. It's
31:52basically environmental related, Peter.
31:55Um, so again, I'd like to get we can
31:58talk a little bit about it tonight. We
32:00have a lot on the agenda, so I don't
32:02want to go too far a field. Um, if we
32:05make some people have some comments,
32:07great. Otherwise, I'd also like to get
32:09some comments from you and package that
32:11together so I can send the town board
32:13some comments on the next week. Peter,
32:16do you want to comment on it? No, I'd
32:18say that the housing is is not part of
32:20the part of the plan. Um, is that you
32:23can use that's dedicated if they're
32:26collected. uh real estate transfer tax
32:28are dedicated to either buying uh
32:30development rights or potentially
32:32outright property and a small percentage
32:35can be used down the road for
32:36maintaining down the road once it's in
32:38the fund. Um but the the plan which is
32:41really a roadmap and needs to be updated
32:43by law every five years. Um so it's a
32:46you know as things change and things can
32:50change um it needs to be reviewed every
32:52five years but the priorities that we
32:55came up with were uh clean water,
32:57agriculture, biodiversity, scenic
32:59beauty, recreation and historic
33:01properties. And those were kind of the
33:03six priority areas that we um sort of
33:06thought were important. Um and um the
33:10money would be collected on a real
33:12estate transfer tax that gets passed um
33:14at a percentage that the town board
33:17would have to decide on. Um and then
33:19that would go into a dedicated fund that
33:20would be only used for that purposes for
33:22those purposes. Um there would be a
33:24committee uh that the town appoints that
33:27would make recommendations. People can
33:30um present to the committee. the
33:31committee could go to properties and
33:34they see something for sale if it has to
33:36be presented to the town board and then
33:39there has to be a public hearing to the
33:40entire town. So, it's a very open uh
33:43process and um I think it could be
33:46really a benefit for this town. Um it's
33:49there's a similar plan has been adopted
33:51by Gardener Town of Marble Town and uh
33:55Newalts I believe. Yeah, Newalts. News.
33:58Um and so town of Rochester, I think it'
34:00be a core um thing to align with those
34:04other communities. Um it's been very
34:06successful. Um in town of Marbletown,
34:08they they bought the Oscar Hop property
34:10which is a now a park for the benefit of
34:13the community, but you can also buy
34:15development rights on farmland if it's
34:18essential. So you don't actually have to
34:20buy property, you can buy development
34:22rights. So it's a pretty versatile um
34:24program, I think. So yeah, my comment
34:27about housing in in the letter from the
34:28town board, they just referenced if if
34:31the this board wanted to go far a field
34:33to say, hey, in addition to
34:34environmental matters supported by the
34:36preservation fund, are there others that
34:39believe the town should pay attention to
34:41and housing came to mind? Yes. Mentioned
34:43in the But it is it, you know, it can't
34:46the fund can't be used for housing, but
34:49the fund could be compatible with a
34:51housing program. So, like there's a a a
34:54program right now in the Red Hook that's
34:57being done um that is they uh purchased
35:00a piece of property um and then it's
35:03part of that property has been separated
35:05out and will be used for housing and so
35:07that's in the process. So, it's kind of
35:09a good model and Marbletown is working
35:11on something as well in that direction.
35:13So, um but it's it's a very interesting
35:15program. I think could be could be a
35:17real benefit to the town. Does anybody
35:19have any comments right now or would you
35:20much rather just send me a I agree. I
35:22think there's great potential and
35:24benefits for the community. Um
35:28uh my concern well and I know that it
35:31has been uh successful in other towns in
35:35our region which I think is important
35:37and within you know you look at the
35:39impulse within a fairly short period of
35:41time they have accumulated you know not
35:45an insubstantial amount of money um but
35:48I think that it's you know within our
35:51community it's a relatively new idea and
35:53it's something that people aren't
35:55familiar
35:56And I think it's important that um you
35:58know enough not sufficient time is given
36:00to you know
36:03allow the community to understand you
36:05know the potential of this and that is
36:06for the the future of the greater
36:08community. Um and that that's my concern
36:11when you say oh you know we got to get
36:12this together you know for them to vote
36:15for it in a week. That's not really the
36:17best process. the best process is to
36:19really make sure that everyone's
36:21educated, understand it, and then say,
36:22"Hey, this thing is ready, you know, for
36:25our community to vote on." This is
36:26really important. Yeah. If I'm not
36:28mistaken, there's been a couple of
36:30public hearings or public information uh
36:34Yeah. We held three public information
36:36sessions last year um before uh before
36:40the town of the board did not vote to
36:42put it on the referendum last year,
36:44right? Uh but there were three public
36:45information, I would imagine. Um the
36:47committee that I pointed on is an anthoc
36:49committee is no longer in in um in we
36:52don't meet um but I would imagine that
36:54the panel would want to do more
36:56information um sessions on that um and
36:59uh it's also an important part of this
37:01is that the percentage is something that
37:03the town board would have to determine
37:06um what that is. it will be a small
37:08percentage one to it can be up to 2% um
37:11but I would guess if they do something
37:13less than 2% most other communities have
37:16um and it's only on above the median
37:19price of um a home but the tax would
37:23only apply to above and it's paid by the
37:25buyer. Uh yes,
37:29since you're here and it's an important
37:30item for the town board in moving into a
37:33referendum, is there anything that we
37:35misstated? Is there public information
37:37sessions planned? Do you want to just
37:39add a little color?
37:42I would just say what we're look we did
37:43a referral to all boards and commissions
37:46to get feedback on the plan document
37:48itself. Um the tax has to be on the
37:53ballot. So the it's a multi ultimately
37:57the voters decide on the the tax. But
38:01what we really what we got a lot of
38:03input from the community about last year
38:05was wanting to have a more thorough
38:08review of the plan document and input on
38:11the plan document. That's the document
38:13that Peter shared. Yes, Mr. Chair. Okay.
38:16That's the long Yeah, the the there was
38:19a link to a drive for that. Yeah. And
38:22it's it's and not because I've worked a
38:25lot on it last year, but I think it's a
38:27it's a good read and I I would encourage
38:29people to read it because you'll learn
38:31something about the town and doing it
38:33and I think it's a really important um
38:35important piece of work. I actually read
38:37most of it. Yeah. It's a really
38:39impressive document. uh what I would
38:42suggest just just to make an abstract
38:45concept for
38:48great people is to give an example like
38:51or other successes of of this which
38:54could be achieved with this measure.
38:58Yeah, I think that's a good point. The
38:59more the more you show that becomes
39:01clear for people and the more I kind of
39:05point. Yeah, I think that you know it's
39:07it is a very versatile tool. So, so you
39:09can use it for just protecting farmland
39:12or you could buy a piece of property to
39:14create a access to a rail trail or a
39:16canoe launch or uh protect water supply
39:20or you know there a lot of different
39:21things. So I um I think it would be it's
39:24a it's a good idea to do examples but it
39:26would be a lot of examples could be done
39:28because I think it is very give like
39:31different examples. Yeah.
39:34Okay. Good. Anybody else? So look
39:36forward to getting your comments. Short
39:38one. Yeah, short one about the law. It
39:42doesn't say explicitly or anywhere how
39:45the funds be used. It wasn't really how
39:49it's going to be used. It does say how
39:50it's going to be used. Not in the law.
39:54It does. Did we read the same specific?
39:57It does. It has a specific collective.
40:00And by the way, in terms of that it's
40:02above
40:04the average uh value, it's somewhere in
40:08the middle first that Okay. So, do me a
40:10favor. Yeah, I will argue. I'm not going
40:12to sit here and disagree with you
40:13because I thought it was there. There's
40:14a there's a whole process that uh in
40:17terms of how the and in your document, I
40:20think there's a whole process for how to
40:22use the fund and how people go about
40:24determining what it choose for. But
40:26having said that, just put it in writing
40:28what it is you think is missing and I'll
40:31go through it again and communicate it
40:33with the town board. Okay. Anybody else?
40:36All right. Good. Thank you, Will. Um,
40:39last but not least, uh, at your at your
40:43seat there is minutes. We've been remiss
40:46in our minutes. It's quite a number of
40:48minutes that we have to catch up with.
40:51And so this one uh is actually from
40:55March
40:56uh of this year.
40:59I hope you had an opportunity. It went
41:00out a while ago, couple days ago. So uh
41:04if anybody has an opportunity had an
41:06opportunity and sees something they
41:07weren't changed, let me know. Otherwise,
41:10I'll entertain a motion to approve these
41:13minutes. The minutes are from March uh
41:16March 10th. Motion to approve the
41:18minutes. I make a motion to approve the
41:20minutes. Alina makes the motion. Second,
41:23Hans, you got the next one. Second. Um,
41:26all in favor? I Anybody opposed? It's 7
41:30to zero. Good. There'll be more coming.
41:34Um, okay.
41:38So, the first item on the agenda is a
41:40project um proposed by Dor Hellet and
41:44his wife um Sierra Powell. So if you
41:47guys want to approach the bench
41:53seat
41:56um
41:57so the original map that you saw was in
42:01your Google file. It was just a survey
42:04map since then and I loaded it up today.
42:07I got to put it in the Google map up a
42:09Google Drive. Um, and you do have a copy
42:12of an actual site plan at your place uh
42:15of the uh project. It's a um and I'll
42:19let the doer do most of the talking, but
42:21it's a proposal for a home business.
42:24It's a home business type three, which
42:27is home business with sales with retail
42:30sales. So, that's what it was classified
42:33by the building department by the CEO.
42:36And um this is just a preliminary
42:39meeting to familiarize you with the
42:41project and I have questions for Dave
42:44and Dave in terms of next steps. Um but
42:48let's let Dor why don't you go through
42:50um and give us a little presentation of
42:52what you're trying to do here. Okay. So
42:55uh why don't you introduce your your
42:56wife? Yes. So my name is D and this is
42:59Sierra my wife. We uh do our property on
43:02floor 9 um September of 2023
43:07and our idea is um simple non-permanent
43:12tent for the purpose of selling homemade
43:16bread and also seasonal vegetables,
43:20flowers, eggs and agricultural produce.
43:24uh the main part will feed bread and the
43:26bread will be baked in a big woodf fired
43:31oven.
43:33So this would make use of
43:37our location and also the fact that I
43:41have already um developed skills in
43:44using a woodf fired oven and making what
43:45I think is good bread. So that's that's
43:48the main focus of our report. So in
43:51essence it's a farm stand although
43:53calling it the last three home debate.
43:55So I think they don't mind as a farm
43:57stand.
43:59So there's a number of documents that
44:01are and have it in the Google drive for
44:03you to look at. Um well you now have the
44:06complete site plan. Uh you had a survey
44:10before. Uh the site plan shows the
44:14results of meeting with um Dave Church
44:18and myself. So it it shows parking
44:20spots, ADA parking, other parking. It
44:24shows a roundabout. Um
44:27so there's two entrances onto Route 209.
44:30Uh obviously they need to be locked
44:32entrance and exit separately. the actual
44:35woodfire um woodfire area. If you look
44:39at this site uh map, it's up on the top
44:43and it's one of the pole barns. There's
44:46two pole barns there. You see something
44:49there, chicken coops as well, but you
44:50see two pole barns. So, one of those
44:52pole barns is the actual kiln um that
44:56you had crafted, right? A clay slick
44:59kil. Yeah, we did it. We built it.
45:02So, um you see that on the map. Uh you
45:06also see a sample of the uh on the
45:08Google Drive of a sign that he wants to
45:11have outside which does meet Cove. Um
45:15it's called Poly Phony Fred, Polifany
45:19Fred. Um,
45:22and there's also various permits from
45:26the county which permits him to be
45:30someone who from the state. From the
45:33state. Thank you. Home home food
45:36processing for the home food processing
45:38permit. Okay. Thank you. Yeah. Includes
45:40bread. Okay. And all the usual things
45:44for site plan in there too. The deed, so
45:46on so forth. By the way, here's your
45:47original deed. Don't forget to take it
45:49home with you. You'll need it. Um, so
45:52does anybody have any questions of door
45:54right now?
45:57I have, while you're thinking of them, I
45:59have some comments or questions
46:01actually.
46:04Dave, do we have to send this to Olter
46:07County Planning Board?
46:09Well,
46:12and it would be would it be easier for
46:13me just to have you do a review because
46:16I'm wondering about also county planning
46:17board. Is this a type two or is it
46:20unlisted? Um, do we need to go to DOT?
46:23So, there's a host of procedural
46:25questions I have. And if you want to
46:26just do a quick review for the board for
46:30the next meeting, that's sufficient for
46:32me. Okay. Well, do you're not changing
46:35the driveway? No. So, it's a work permit
46:39to do work and stay right away. Okay.
46:41So, he's not doing proposing to do any
46:43work in the rightway, right? Um, it
46:47would I see no reason to get a DOT
46:49permit. Okay. Um,
46:52it's a little unclear in the new code
46:54what it's clear you treat a class 3 home
46:57occupation with site plan approval in
47:00this district. It's a principal
47:01permitted use, but it's not literally
47:05a site plan application.
47:08I don't know what it is in terms of
47:10referral to the county. So, to be
47:13conservative, you could refer it to the
47:15county because it fronts the state
47:16highway. So, um let's go back to my
47:19first statement or second statement. Why
47:21don't you do a review, a quick review,
47:23see if you can get answers to those
47:25questions maybe from um county planning
47:28board. Sure. Right. um also make a
47:30recommendation on whether it is a type
47:33two or not or is it unlisted
47:35rather than used around here. Wouldn't
47:38you do that? Okay. All right. Um do you
47:41ever have any other I only bring up the
47:43county because there's process.
47:46If you if you miss the monthly meeting,
47:49you've got two months you're deal with.
47:51Right. Right. So that's why um but
47:54you're not sure if we have to send it to
47:56Well, we'd have uh
47:59county planner and board meets on the
48:01first Wednesday of a month. You have two
48:04weeks before that to get it into them.
48:06So you have a little time. Okay. You
48:08can't you can't make the June meeting,
48:12right? Uh June meeting's already got 15
48:15projects on. So, we're not going to So,
48:18for the We need to decide about the
48:20county before you meet again. Well, I'll
48:22let you recommend it. Okay. All right.
48:24And then if it is that we do, um, we'll
48:27find a way to get the board to act on
48:29that on the 23rd without getting into a
48:31lot of details so it gets up to them
48:33quickly. Is there a good reason not to
48:35submit it to the county other than No,
48:38they'll come they would come back and
48:40say it wasn't referable, but here's some
48:43advisory comments. Yeah. We finished
48:46what we have in the file. There's
48:47nothing to be lost by referring except
48:49time. So, why don't we get a vote from
48:52the board to do that? And you need to
48:54advise me if we have enough information
48:56to actually
48:58refer it to them. Yes, there is. All
49:00right. So, I'll entertain a motion from
49:03the board that assuming we have enough
49:05in the in the and I think we do we have
49:08enough in the file that you would um
49:10agree or requesting that we send this to
49:13the county planning board. I'll make
49:15that motion. Peter second
49:18the senate of the county planning board.
49:20All in favor?
49:23Sorry. Is that an I? No, I just because
49:26it's a home occupation. We they need to
49:28state that solid waste and sewage or
49:31sewage discharge other than residential.
49:35We need to make sure that it's nothing.
49:38I'm sorry, I don't understand. He's
49:40reading from the home occupation
49:41standards. Okay. And what's the issue?
49:44Solid waste. Solid waste facility
49:47discharge other than residential type.
49:50They need to say yes or no essentially.
49:53So it's just a yes or no question. I
49:55mean there no public restrooms, correct?
49:57There's no it's just a basically a
50:00graband go kind of a situation. So
50:05security.
50:06So can I have a vote? All those in favor
50:08of referring it. I I and Dave, I'd look
50:12to you to let you know that Yeah, we do.
50:16And the final is complete. I believe it
50:18is complete enough.
50:21Um for referral to the county. Was that
50:24all in favor? I don't know if we have.
50:25We did. All in favor? Sorry. Seven.
50:28Yeah. Um I just have a question. One to
50:31three days a week you're talking about.
50:33Would that be like Friday, Saturday,
50:34Sunday? Friday, Saturday. Friday,
50:37Saturday. Okay. Um all right
50:45near to the Dollar General is it say
50:48it's near
50:51the mailing address is that okay but
50:53it's close to the it's across from the
50:55dog that's next to the storage by Kaiser
51:00I broke oh thank you so Dave you'll
51:02cover all these these issues that ours
51:05will event I think potentially it'll
51:07save some time to do the Olster County
51:08referral potentially if there's there's
51:11no downside to doing so. Um, and Dor,
51:14we're going to need escrow from you
51:17primarily for the work that Dave may do
51:20andor the public hearing notice, that
51:22sort of thing. So, we're going to set
51:24the escrow at $500.
51:26You can bring it into the office and
51:28give it to Robin sometime this week. All
51:31right. We need to vote on that. Uh,
51:33yeah, let's vote on that. Thank you,
51:35Peter. Um, I'll entertain a motion to
51:37collect escrow of $500 from the
51:40applicant. Uh, Dave Roberts makes the
51:43motion. Second. Second, Peter. Yep. All
51:46in favor? I seven to zero.
51:50Okay. Anybody else on anything? Okay.
51:55So, I'll let you know uh when the next
51:57meeting is going to be for the project.
51:59Not likely until the beginning of July,
52:02but there'll be a lot of work going on
52:03in the background while that's happen
52:06while we get prepared for that meeting.
52:08Uh work going on. No, no, not from your
52:11point of view. From our point of view,
52:12we'll be doing work to get prepared for
52:14that meeting in terms of a write up from
52:17our planner and potentially referring it
52:19to the Olter County Planning Board for
52:22their review. Okay. So, we'll stay in
52:25touch. If you haven't seen there,
52:26there's a the woodf fired oven directly
52:28behind this building. Yeah.
52:33The original
52:39[Music]
52:55[Music]
53:03that.
53:05Yeah. Okay. The next item on the agenda
53:08is a request
53:11uh from Mr. Morello, attorney Morello,
53:15uh representing the grainery project in
53:18Backport. Um
53:22the project at freedom of limber was
53:24approved
53:26last year in um
53:30in July. July 8th the approval was given
53:34um to create a a downtown development
53:39project and uh since then has been
53:42involved in litigation of one sort or
53:44another. And I believe two meetings ago,
53:46our attorney uh related to the board
53:50that the um the litigation was
53:54successful um in supporting the project.
53:58The town was sued as well as the
53:59applicant. So the court found in favor
54:02of the applicant and the town that the
54:04town board and the planning board acted
54:06correctly. Um
54:10the plaintiff had the opportunity within
54:1230 days after that decision to appeal
54:15it. They did and so the applicant is
54:18before us now asking for an extension
54:22uh to our site plan approval of July 8th
54:26of 2024.
54:28Um it will expire July 8th of this year.
54:32And I think again we talked about this
54:35and Dave Gordon went through with us
54:37some of the details that we need to
54:39consider in approving the uh the
54:42extension. And in our code, the code
54:46refers to for a site plan. The site plan
54:49expires one year from the approval date
54:51and during that one year um the
54:53applicant has the ability to ask for an
54:56extension and uh we had talked about
55:00that the set extensions shall be granted
55:02in six-month increments up to a maximum
55:05of four. Um the applicant has to show
55:08that they've diligently pursued the
55:10implementation of the plan. Well, they
55:13haven't started building because they've
55:14been in a lawsuit.
55:16They've been diligently pursuing their
55:17lawsuit. Um, absent the extension, the
55:21project expires uh in a couple of weeks.
55:24So, that's why they're here. And Mike,
55:27I'll let you pick it up from there. Chat
55:30with the board about the specifics of
55:32why you need two years
55:35um
55:36instead of doing it in six-month
55:38increments. Four six-month increments.
55:41Is the um Rick is the By the way, I'm
55:44Mike Morello. Um is the sixmonth
55:47increment was that suggested? That's not
55:50in the not in the current law. Okay.
55:52It's in the current law under uh code
55:55section 140-52
55:58section B. Yeah, I I have that. But I
56:01must have says a maximum one year. So
56:04that which was our approval too, but
56:07it's part of your new adopted year. The
56:10one year is the period from when we
56:12signed it last year to when it expires.
56:14That's the one year. The extension has
56:17to happen within that one year. And the
56:19extension
56:20um it says specifically six month
56:23increments up to a maximum of four. You
56:26asked for two. This board kicked around.
56:29We could do two. We could do four uh six
56:31months. we could do a year and our
56:34attorney had some advice pretty much
56:36that it it's up to the board what we
56:38want to do. So I'm asking you to make a
56:41case for what you requested which was
56:43two years and to add whatever else you
56:45want to add to it. I mean I think that
56:46you know this is a ministerial act by
56:48the board. It's not it's not I I don't
56:52think it's a it's not a big deal to
56:54grant an extension and it's almost
56:56proform granted especially on
56:58complicated projects especially on
57:00projects that have been involved in
57:02continuous litigation and I would say
57:05especially on projects where that
57:06litigation has been successfully
57:08determined in favor of the applicant and
57:10of the planning board and their review.
57:13So my thought process behind this was
57:16that Henry and Ren and uh Accord LLC
57:20have been forced to spend many thousands
57:22of dollars on lawsuits which I they
57:25myself are frivolous and of no account.
57:29They've lost those lawsuits. But
57:31meanwhile my client's my client's
57:34property has had a cloud on title. They
57:37have they with those lawsuits in effect
57:40with the appeal now in effect they have
57:44difficulty obtaining finance. They have
57:46difficulty dealing with their investors.
57:49They have difficulty um forwarding a
57:52project to any meaningful degree with
57:56certainty while those uh while those
57:59actions are pending. So my thought was
58:02that since we've been
58:06nearly a year since the approval was
58:09granted and darn near a year since the
58:12lawsuit um was instituted and that the
58:17statutory time to perfect a lawsuit
58:20after you put in a notice of appeal is
58:22six months. You put in a notice of
58:24appeal that buys you 180 days to put in
58:28a perfected appeal, which means that the
58:32the uh appellants, if you will, the
58:34people that lost and the court below
58:36would have to produce the whole record,
58:38spend quite a bit of money to do that
58:40and then go up to the appellet division
58:42with the full record. That takes some
58:44time um and but they have a 180day
58:48period within which to do that. um that
58:51period um is supposed to be hard and
58:54fast. If that 180 days um in during that
59:00180 days if the appeal is perfected my
59:03experience and I do a fair amount of
59:05work vision is that you'll be will be at
59:09least 6 months to a year to get a
59:12decision. By the time everyone gets done
59:14with their briefing and they get done
59:15with submittals, that usually takes
59:18three or four months of extensions
59:21aren't necessary. Um, and then you have
59:24a case before the the the appellet
59:27division. They give you a scheduled
59:29date, calendar date, you argue, then
59:31it's you usually the third department,
59:33we're very lucky. They're fairly quick
59:35with getting decisions. So anywhere from
59:37the time you argue, you're probably
59:39looking at like 90 days for a decision
59:41or so. somewhere in that neighborhood.
59:44So, my thought process was it's darn
59:46near two years to go through a lawsuit.
59:49So, I thought that my client was
59:52deserving of a two-year extension. I
59:55have, you know, the utmost respect for
59:58the board. Uh there's a lot of new
1:00:00members since the granary was uh was
1:00:03before the board. It was very very
1:00:05contentious. Um and uh there was a very
1:00:08good record made as the court noted and
1:00:11I'm willing to work with the board. I
1:00:13think Henry is too was whatever you
1:00:15think is reason. So I'd like to hear
1:00:18from the board. Um we did chat about it
1:00:20last time but we didn't make any
1:00:21decision as to I wouldn't expect the
1:00:24applicants to come back in six months. I
1:00:26think six months is kind of a blink of
1:00:28the eye because as Mike has outlined the
1:00:33you know the process that they're going
1:00:34through I I I think that would be too
1:00:37short but I also think you know as we
1:00:39said I think Dave said uh when we
1:00:42discussed in the meeting a lot can
1:00:43happen in two years in terms of changes
1:00:46and so on. So, I think somewhere in the
1:00:49middle, you know, I' I'd propose a year
1:00:52would be a good time. Yeah. To come
1:00:55back, see where we're at, see where
1:00:57they're at, and then you know, if it
1:01:00needs to be extended beyond that to uh,
1:01:03you know, to do that. I don't think that
1:01:04would be a hardship on the applicant.
1:01:07Yeah. I guess I take a different view
1:01:08and I'm going to put my opinion on the
1:01:10on the floor and my my view is um
1:01:16it it was the project was approved. Uh
1:01:19the applicant still has a long hall
1:01:21because of the lawsuit. Um they lost
1:01:25hands down if you would. I think it's
1:01:26the best way to put it. So, um I don't
1:01:30know that I want to cause the applicant
1:01:33any doubts as to this board standing
1:01:37behind its original decision. And so,
1:01:39for that reason, I'm going to argue for
1:01:41for two years. I think we need to stand
1:01:43behind even though I think there's only
1:01:45two people on the or three people on
1:01:47this board that actually were involved
1:01:49in the decision. Myself, Peter, and I
1:01:51think Zurion. So, um I would support two
1:01:55years. I would strongly also support two
1:01:57years. I think uh it was not the fault
1:01:59of the applicant to start with the
1:02:01project and the intention of the code is
1:02:04really kind of to expedite that people
1:02:06start to work on their projects not to
1:02:08get likeations
1:02:10for a reserve purpose. So for that from
1:02:14that perspective I strong support.
1:02:17Anybody else?
1:02:19Um sorry uh is I understand if I
1:02:24understand correctly attorney best case
1:02:26scenario they're going to get within one
1:02:29year some decision.
1:02:32So I think two years the should be more
1:02:35practical give them two two years
1:02:37because it's one year is the best case
1:02:39scenario. You're saying that one year is
1:02:41the least amount of time it's going to
1:02:43take them to get a decision, right? And
1:02:44it's more likely to be at the other end,
1:02:47right? So, make it more effective as a
1:02:49process and have some certainty. Okay.
1:02:52Jen, do you want to go? That was my
1:02:54thinking, too. Okay. Alina, Peter,
1:02:57all right. So, I'll entertain a motion.
1:02:59I think we have a um consensus of sorts
1:03:03that two years would be more
1:03:04appropriate. So, I'll entertain a motion
1:03:06to that effect.
1:03:08Hond makes the motion for a two-year
1:03:10extension starting on July 8th of this
1:03:14year and continuing till July 8th of two
1:03:18years from now 2027.
1:03:20Um Hans makes the motion. Who wants to
1:03:23second? Zorian.
1:03:26Um
1:03:27call the start starts now.
1:03:31Okay. Starts now.
1:03:34Starts now. Okay. All in favor?
1:03:38Anybody opposed?
1:03:40Okay. So, um is that a seven? Is that
1:03:44seven votes? Yay. Or Okay. Seven zero.
1:03:48Um so, starting now, you have two years.
1:03:51Is there anything else administratively
1:03:53we have to do? Any kind of notice to
1:03:55anybody? No. Okay. Extending it. Thank
1:03:58you very much. You're good to go.
1:04:00Thanks. Thank you for that.
1:04:05All right. Um, so the next project is
1:04:07Nikkenberg. And at this point, I need to
1:04:10um
1:04:12make a
1:04:14a long- winded probably statement of um
1:04:18where we are with public hearings for
1:04:19tonight. There were actually uh going to
1:04:22be six,
1:04:25five public hearings tonight. Um four of
1:04:29them I'm cancelling. Actually, six. I'm
1:04:32sorry. There was six. Four of them are
1:04:34cancelling and I'll get to the reason
1:04:35for that uh in a second. The two that
1:04:37are going to remain
1:04:39was actually a public hearing that was
1:04:41established back in March, the end of
1:04:44March. So this is just a continuation of
1:04:46that public hearing. Um and there was no
1:04:49need to renotice that public hearing.
1:04:52The second public hearing that can stand
1:04:54is Meta Metal Lakes which will be at the
1:04:57end of uh the meeting. Thank you for
1:04:59being early. Um, the reason why that can
1:05:02stand is because that that was noticed
1:05:05from our
1:05:07April meeting, actually, April 28th
1:05:09meeting, and so the proper notice was
1:05:11given. So, that one's fine. The other
1:05:13four public hearings, so I'll rattle
1:05:16them off. Uh, Green Revocable Trust,
1:05:21Nolan, Palmer, Smith, both of those are
1:05:23subdivisions.
1:05:25Adcord social which is a site plan and
1:05:28congregation MCRT
1:05:31which is also a site plan. Those four
1:05:35um those public hearings have been
1:05:37cancelled. The reason for the
1:05:39cancellation is that we aired uh in
1:05:42sending out a proper public hearing
1:05:44notice in the newspaper. There are two
1:05:46things that has to happen. One is a
1:05:48public notice in the newspaper. It has
1:05:50to appear and be published 5 days before
1:05:52the hearing date. It missed by one day.
1:05:55It was only in the newspaper for 4 days.
1:05:58There was a misunderstanding at the
1:06:00board's my end as to um when we had to
1:06:05get the notification into the newspaper
1:06:07for publication. So, we missed the 5-day
1:06:10requirement by state law by a day. The
1:06:14other piece of public hearing is we have
1:06:16to send notifications
1:06:18to all of the residents within 500 ft of
1:06:21the project. That was accomplished. that
1:06:23has to be done seven days has to be
1:06:25postmarked seven days before the public
1:06:28hearing. Those were actually postmarked
1:06:3010 days u before the public hearing. So
1:06:33we got a half right but we also got it
1:06:36half wrong. So those are cancelled and
1:06:38they'll be we'll renotice
1:06:41and we'll also resend all of the
1:06:43mailings to uh the residents within 500
1:06:47ft. and the renoticing will be before um
1:06:51June 23rd. Having said that, because a
1:06:54lot of you did come out for these public
1:06:57hearings and the applicants are here,
1:06:59although the applicants were notified, I
1:07:01think yesterday late that we had a
1:07:03problem. I'm going to let people make
1:07:05public comments anyway. They just will
1:07:07not be official uh comments in the
1:07:10context of a public hearing. What's the
1:07:13difference? One legally is public
1:07:15comments. open the floor up to public
1:07:17comments. The other one legally is
1:07:19comments within a public hearing. So the
1:07:22administrative or legislative record of
1:07:25what we do with regards to those four
1:07:27projects is what we do every um at every
1:07:31meeting. But importantly for legal
1:07:36purposes, court purposes, the public
1:07:39hearing and the comments made in the
1:07:41context of that public hearing is what
1:07:43becomes the public hearing. record and
1:07:46that's very important for defending
1:07:48against lawsuits or for making lawsuits
1:07:50or more importantly just the
1:07:52administrative record of what we do. So,
1:07:55um, again, if you make comments tonight,
1:07:59they're public comments. To make them
1:08:02viable public hearing comments, you
1:08:04simply need to come again or send us a
1:08:08letter, send the planning board office a
1:08:11letter um, referencing the public
1:08:14hearing coming up on the 23rd that you
1:08:17would like to submit these comments for
1:08:19the public hearing. So, there's two ways
1:08:21that you can get those comments within
1:08:24the context of um the event pool, the
1:08:27public hearing. Um
1:08:31so, I just want to let people know that
1:08:33Mickenberg is not affected, but I didn't
1:08:34want people who would much rather be
1:08:37here in the official public hearing. If
1:08:40you wanted to leave and come back on the
1:08:4123rd, fine. As I said, I will open it up
1:08:45for your public comments, but the public
1:08:48hearing comments will only be called
1:08:52that if those comments are made on the
1:08:5423rd or if you send in a a letter to the
1:08:57planning board. So, having said that,
1:09:00um, so Meckenberg, if you remember, the
1:09:02last time they were here was at a public
1:09:04hearing. It was at the end of March,
1:09:06March 31st. Um, and we put the project
1:09:11aside because there were many, many
1:09:13comments both by people at the meeting
1:09:15as well as people who wrote to us. There
1:09:17were many comments made about the
1:09:19availability of water in that area. Just
1:09:22to backtrack a little bit, this project
1:09:24is a two lot subdivision. There's
1:09:26already one house on the lot or on the
1:09:29plat. And the um the projection was to
1:09:33put one more house uh on the uh the lot.
1:09:36It met all the zoning requirements in
1:09:38terms of bulk size. We've had maps upon
1:09:42maps and readjustments to maps. Uh we
1:09:44had the public hearing and the board
1:09:46decided to put it aside because of the
1:09:49number of comments about water
1:09:50availability and neighbors who were
1:09:53having uh problems with their water and
1:09:58suggesting that it could perhaps be as a
1:10:00result of uh or further problems as a
1:10:03result of this extra lot being
1:10:05developed.
1:10:06We put together a small subcommittee
1:10:08refer to it as the
1:10:11Ridge View Road Water Subcommittee of
1:10:13the Board. Um Dave Church headed it up.
1:10:17Um Surion was on it, Jennifer was on it,
1:10:21and Helina was on it. Did I miss
1:10:24anybody? I don't think so. So, we
1:10:27couldn't have four because if it was
1:10:28four, then it was the official board
1:10:30meeting. So, we kept it at three. and
1:10:32they worked for about a month and a
1:10:33half, two months on researching it um
1:10:37and coming up with a report
1:10:40which
1:10:42I sent to the board and I believe I have
1:10:44extra copies of it. Do you have extra
1:10:48copies? Yeah, I can make them.
1:10:53Um just give me a second.
1:10:55I know they're here, Dave. While I'm
1:10:58searching for them and while the board
1:11:00is looking uh for them online, could you
1:11:03give a summary of what the board found?
1:11:10Uh, sure. So, four of us uh exchanged
1:11:12some documentation, had a remote meeting
1:11:16and some follow-up conversations. Um, in
1:11:19summary, uh, we went over Helena
1:11:22volunteered and, uh, reached out the
1:11:24Oscar County Department of Health staff
1:11:27and talked about the conversation she
1:11:29had with them, um, about their process
1:11:32for permitting uh, water supplies with
1:11:35subdivisions. Um, and what emerged was a
1:11:38concept uh, correct me if I'm wrong,
1:11:41Helena, built on New York State
1:11:43repairing rights. Repairing rights being
1:11:46rights related to the rivers. Um,
1:11:49you got anybody need one on this side?
1:11:50You got sir, you need one per. Okay,
1:11:54everybody over here need one.
1:11:58No, give one to Hang on one second.
1:12:02Sure. No, that's
1:12:05just give them one. There's like 10 of
1:12:06them now. Let me have the nine back. Is
1:12:10it one? Yeah, it's just one page. Oh, I
1:12:12thought it wasn't. No, no, that's okay.
1:12:14And I have extra copies here if anybody
1:12:16from the public wants uh one. Um that's
1:12:19fine. You can put it out there by uh by
1:12:23Matt if you would. Go ahead, Dave.
1:12:25Sorry.
1:12:27Uh so county's position uh as experts in
1:12:31particularly smaller scale projects and
1:12:33uh and res residential subdivisions. a
1:12:36larger scale permitting uh related with
1:12:39water supply does can be triggered to
1:12:41the New York State DEC
1:12:44um which also has expertise on staff but
1:12:46there are staff engineers uh and others
1:12:50uh at uh county health departments um
1:12:54they consider that every property owner
1:12:57has a right to groundwater under their
1:13:00property um and they generally take the
1:13:02position um that everyone therefore has
1:13:05a right to get well in um they be Olster
1:13:08County Department of Ol County
1:13:10Department of Health. Of course, that
1:13:12have any such new well um would have to
1:13:15meet certain quality and quantity
1:13:17standards which they oversee through the
1:13:20New York State Health um in coordination
1:13:22with the state health department and in
1:13:24some cases as I said larger scale
1:13:26projects with New York State DNC. So
1:13:29there's generally an accepted
1:13:31recognition from the regulatory agencies
1:13:34um that property owners have a right to
1:13:36water to to use for portable drain water
1:13:40purposes. Um
1:13:42uh we've reviewed uh some uh options uh
1:13:48some some general options uh regarding
1:13:50how we uh analyze uh whether there's
1:13:54good yield or bad yield in groundwater
1:13:58in the town. Um the ground the town's uh
1:14:01uh uh well known for having uh a
1:14:05groundwater an aquaer protection zone in
1:14:07their zoning as you know with uh with
1:14:10pretty excellent code standards. Um but
1:14:13we did acknowledge that there seems to
1:14:16be a potential not unique to Rochester
1:14:20um but regionwide uh for low groundwater
1:14:24yield neighborhoods. Uh, and we need to
1:14:28do some more research about what to do
1:14:30about that as a town. Um, is that
1:14:32something that should go into the
1:14:34zoning? We don't know yet. Is that
1:14:35something that should be in standards
1:14:38for this board's review? We don't know
1:14:40yet. Do we just merely defer it to the
1:14:42health department or andor DEC? It's
1:14:46those things are to be determined. Dave,
1:14:47if I could just stop you there, I think
1:14:49it's safe to say that when the town
1:14:50looked at their resoning, they did take
1:14:53into consideration a couple of studies.
1:14:55one in particular whose name escapes me.
1:14:58It's about 10 years old. They did look
1:15:00at reszoning areas that were known low
1:15:03yield, right? I'm not saying all of
1:15:05them, but they did look at that as one
1:15:08of the reasons to change, let's say, 2
1:15:11acre or 3 acre to potentially five acre.
1:15:14Now, whether or not there's additional
1:15:15work that needs to be done, I think
1:15:17that's something that this board could
1:15:18look at and maybe make recommendations
1:15:20to the town board. But I don't want to
1:15:22give anybody the impression that the
1:15:24town hasn't been looking at the town
1:15:26board hasn't been looking at changing
1:15:28zoning and one of the components is
1:15:30water availability. Correct. Correct. So
1:15:33a common technique
1:15:36in throughout the country probably
1:15:38throughout North America if not Europe
1:15:40um is to uh reduce density of
1:15:42development. if you are concerned a
1:15:44neighborhood lacks water supply um uh go
1:15:49from two acres zoning to 5acre zoning
1:15:51and the town did that some in the past.
1:15:53So that that is true. Um but we don't
1:15:56have any standards for what if a what if
1:15:59a neighborhood comes in and says we're
1:16:01concerned about development X because
1:16:03there's no water in our neighborhood. Um
1:16:05you've historically particularly in
1:16:07smaller projects deferred that question
1:16:09to the county department of health. Uh
1:16:13uh who are completely capable of
1:16:15analyzing that question um as as well as
1:16:18other analytical issues. Uh for example,
1:16:20it's common in Olster County um that
1:16:22there's residual contaminants from the
1:16:24predominance of orchard fruit prop fruit
1:16:27tree properties in the county. So they
1:16:29now have protocol that require certain
1:16:31water testing before wells are approved,
1:16:33new wells are approved um for certain
1:16:35heavy metals or what tends to linger in
1:16:38the soil. Um so they do say they're
1:16:40attentive to those issues have brought
1:16:41to their attention that there's a trend
1:16:43in a neighborhood that there's that
1:16:45there's low well low yield wells and
1:16:49what they do about it. Um we did look at
1:16:51well log data um so since a certain date
1:16:55which I don't recall um well drillers
1:16:57are requested to file the well logs that
1:16:59they do um into a New York state
1:17:02database which is online through their
1:17:04GIS geographic information system. Um, I
1:17:08went to that database. I found about 17
1:17:11wells. As I recall, they're in proximity
1:17:13of the RI what I'll call upper Ridge
1:17:16View Road neighborhood. Um, not
1:17:19necessarily all on Rididge View Road.
1:17:21They were in neighboring roads as well,
1:17:23but in proximity of this subject
1:17:25property. Um
1:17:27uh the practical reality is and we
1:17:29talked about this um the well logs
1:17:32report both depth of well and well yield
1:17:35and gallons per minute is all over the
1:17:38place. Right next to each other is a
1:17:41shallow well with phenomenal yield next
1:17:43to a deep well with less phenomenal
1:17:46yield. Next to a well with low yield I'm
1:17:49talking three five gallons per minute
1:17:51for example. Um, others have abundant
1:17:54yield at the at much at much more
1:17:56moderate levels. Some of the wells are
1:17:59hundreds of feet down. Some are barely
1:18:01100 feet down. So there's no rhyme or
1:18:03reason to it. Um uh but the rhyme or
1:18:06reason which we both also looked at was
1:18:10there is a scientific memoir from the US
1:18:13Geological Surve survey done by a guy
1:18:15named Michael Frimpter um from the late
1:18:181980s called the groundwater resources
1:18:21of Olster in Orange County. Um and he
1:18:24quotes
1:18:26in there I have it here if you want me
1:18:29to read it. You want to read it? Yes.
1:18:32The degree of fracturing is extremely
1:18:34variable even with very within very
1:18:37small areas. Wells that are only a few
1:18:40feet apart and then tap the same rock
1:18:42aquifer can have vastly different yields
1:18:45and can sometimes exhibit different
1:18:47static water levels. I think that's the
1:18:49quote you were looking for. Correct.
1:18:51Correct. So in essence, bedrock wells,
1:18:54which my presumption is all the well
1:18:56logs that we looked at are drilled in
1:18:58the bedrock, um are relying on fractured
1:19:00rock. Fractured rock according to the US
1:19:03Geological Survey in our region is
1:19:06highly variable. Um even right next to
1:19:10each other um and it's and the well is
1:19:13relying on what kind of fractures you
1:19:14built. That's why many people have
1:19:16replenished their wells by by what's
1:19:19called hydro fracking. Um driving under
1:19:22pressure a fluid that opens the cracks
1:19:24up and creates more cracks. Therefore,
1:19:27you get more flow as the groundwater
1:19:29comes out of the flow. I of the 17
1:19:31wells, uh we've got one at depth of 578
1:19:37feet off Victoria Lane. Um, we've got
1:19:41one at 150 feet yielding eight gallons
1:19:44per minute. Uh, we've got one at 160
1:19:46feet near Mountain View Road yielding 20
1:19:49gallons per minute. Um, a ne one next
1:19:52door to that yielding at a shallower
1:19:54depth 25 gallons per minute. Um the
1:19:58lowest yield one uh is actually in the
1:20:00same I believe subdivision referred to
1:20:03back in the day as Catskill Farms um
1:20:06which was uh three gallons per minute at
1:20:09400 ft. So these wells are literally
1:20:12right next to each other. Um so because
1:20:15of that high variability
1:20:18um and because of our the scale of the
1:20:20project uh and the reliance uh
1:20:24historically the expertise of the health
1:20:25department and as necessary their
1:20:27consultation with New York State DEEC we
1:20:30talked the committee talked a little bit
1:20:32about well what could we ask the
1:20:33applicant to do? Um so we're
1:20:36recommending the applicant at we you ask
1:20:39the applicant as a board um to have the
1:20:42applicants engineer respond to the
1:20:44comments about this water supply uh and
1:20:46what their responses are substantively
1:20:49as well as they might do about it and
1:20:51what they're doing in terms of protocol
1:20:53to get uh a portable water permit. Um
1:20:57second uh we are not recommending which
1:21:00would be the typical protocol a
1:21:02speculative well be drilled and tested
1:21:05uh for one single new home. Um which
1:21:09would be an extensive
1:21:11expansive cost and time commitment for
1:21:15an applicant that would set a difficult
1:21:17precedent uh is what our committee felt
1:21:20recommending to you all. If you were to
1:21:22do that for every two lot subdivision um
1:21:25where a neighbor has a concern that they
1:21:27have a bit of a dry well sometimes um uh
1:21:31it would be diff it would be very
1:21:33difficult. Um and our recommendation is
1:21:35we're not there yet. Um third we
1:21:39recommend that we need more information
1:21:41from people that have come forward
1:21:43legitimately and said they have drywall
1:21:45conditions. We need to know more about
1:21:47is it seasonal? Is it chronic? Is it
1:21:51constant? Is it a are there factors
1:21:53related to how the well was drilled? Um
1:21:56the method drilled. Uh there you know
1:21:58there's screw type augers. There's
1:22:01pounding systems. Uh they both produce
1:22:03different wells. Have they done anything
1:22:05to attempt to address uh adequate
1:22:08necessary storage if they have low
1:22:10yield? Uh have they tried to refurbish
1:22:12the well? Um, so we're suggesting the
1:22:15board in these circumstances could use
1:22:18more substantive information uh from the
1:22:21neighbors uh when if and when they do
1:22:24comment and when they're willing to do
1:22:26so because this is private information
1:22:28so you can only request them. Um uh and
1:22:34I think that's it. So um I'd like to
1:22:37hear from anybody else from that
1:22:39committee on the issue. I do the others
1:22:41on the committee
1:22:45the subject basically he captured what I
1:22:48had down in my notes. Okay, Jennifer,
1:22:51but I could just add one other thing is
1:22:53that I did speak with um James Roden at
1:22:56the Olter County Board of Health who did
1:22:58provide the information
1:23:00um about people having right parenting
1:23:02rights and the right to drill and access
1:23:05the grand order on their property.
1:23:08The only thing that I would add is that
1:23:10I think it's a complex issue and I think
1:23:12in many ways it supersedes the board's
1:23:16role and that I would encourage the town
1:23:19to consider this and perhaps study it
1:23:22and think about whether there needs to
1:23:23be additional guidance or protections
1:23:26for groundwater in the area.
1:23:30I will I will note that uh my previous
1:23:33job I dealt with this in dozens of
1:23:36towns. it uh it's a common problem as
1:23:39the Frter study from USGS I articulates
1:23:42it's uh a known documented issue in our
1:23:45region um uh for example Long Island has
1:23:50spent a lot of time on land preservation
1:23:52issues with protecting aquifer recharge
1:23:56um particularly where there's low yield
1:23:58or sensitivity for potential
1:24:00contaminants. So it may be something I I
1:24:03looked it's recognized in your community
1:24:05preservation plan is proposed. I don't
1:24:07know it's the highest priority though.
1:24:09There are some jurisdictions that have
1:24:10put that literally on top. Um because
1:24:13you can't live without water. Yeah.
1:24:15Right. Um I have one thought which would
1:24:18be should this go forward that when that
1:24:22is well is drilled that data be provided
1:24:25to
1:24:26to the to our committees. because any
1:24:30you know that we're working off of the
1:24:32database and having an actual uh well
1:24:35log um
1:24:38is better than just what we're finding
1:24:41on the DP state.
1:24:44So what I'd like to like to do is just
1:24:46uh so what we had anticip we wanted I
1:24:48guess we wanted to know whether or not
1:24:49we were going to ask the applicant to do
1:24:52some sort of a well impact study of the
1:24:55N uh to prove to the neighbors that
1:24:57there wasn't any impact from them
1:24:59drilling another well or there was and I
1:25:02think the conclusion of it if if I'm
1:25:04correct is that it's a it's a mixed bag
1:25:06in terms of bedrock uh wells and that in
1:25:11essence uh legally
1:25:13the applicant has the right to drill the
1:25:16well with certain standards and with the
1:25:19approval of the department of health and
1:25:21that's the bottom line. So well and this
1:25:26if I can add this location doesn't
1:25:28trigger a hydrogeeologic study under the
1:25:31town code. Okay. So it's not subject to
1:25:34that and it is a single home. It's a
1:25:38sing it's one and it's a single home. So
1:25:39it it it wouldn't just by that virtue of
1:25:41that fact. So, uh, I think it's
1:25:44appropriate to just say yes, uh, you
1:25:46could be having problems with the well,
1:25:48um, but this applicant has the right to
1:25:52move forward with this particular, uh,
1:25:54this particular project, which brings us
1:25:57to, um, the point of uh, and Matt, we do
1:26:04need we want the well information just
1:26:06to add to the database. I think it would
1:26:09be good if we could create a database
1:26:10and share it with the town board at some
1:26:13point in time. Um,
1:26:15and um, I don't know that I ever saw
1:26:19anything from you, Matt. I could be
1:26:21mistaken um, with your perspective
1:26:24towards the matter. Did you ever send us
1:26:26the requested? I I didn't. I I looked
1:26:30around for some information and
1:26:33could couldn't find wells right next to
1:26:36this home. I didn't see those in the DC
1:26:39database. What I did do was I talked
1:26:41with the owner of the property who has
1:26:44an existing well on his other on what's
1:26:48going to be the front lot of this
1:26:50subdivision. And he indicated that there
1:26:53he hasn't had any issues with water
1:26:55supply from that well. And that well is
1:26:57actually the closest to his to the new
1:27:01well.
1:27:02Not again the Frter study kind of says
1:27:05that's not particularly relevant but for
1:27:08whatever it's worth he didn't have any
1:27:11water supply issues. All right. So what
1:27:14I'm going to do unless the board has
1:27:15other comments on the on the study or
1:27:17questions.
1:27:19Yeah, I think from all practical point
1:27:21for people who don't have enough water,
1:27:24they should go back to the drillers and
1:27:27it was done already recently and
1:27:30basically present them with a
1:27:33problem and ask for solution and if they
1:27:36scam we done everything possible and
1:27:40you're not going to have more water then
1:27:42it's a little bit different situation
1:27:44but okay all right good point ask for
1:27:46second opinion good Yeah, I I'll note
1:27:50and Greg could certainly know more about
1:27:52this. Uh um the two primary methods if
1:27:55you have low yield, low flow, um you you
1:28:00could add storage to your system. You
1:28:02could put a tank in the basement for
1:28:03example under pressure and it's got
1:28:05reserve
1:28:07and allows the well to replen the time
1:28:09to replenish that it might need that it
1:28:13just can't do under current
1:28:14circumstances if you're fine. The other
1:28:16is, as I mentioned, the to the hydro
1:28:19flag frack your well to drive have a
1:28:22well drill to drive fluid down there,
1:28:24open the cracks up um and get more flow
1:28:26out of the existing well. You can and
1:28:29you can also drill deeper if you want.
1:28:31So, I think it's appropriate with um
1:28:33having gotten this report and I want to
1:28:34thank the members of the board who put a
1:28:36lot of time into this particularly
1:28:38researching well logs and finding them
1:28:41um on the site. I think it's appropriate
1:28:44to reopen public hearing um which has
1:28:47been standing um suspended uh since late
1:28:51March. Reopen the public hearing um and
1:28:54ask the public uh anybody in the public
1:28:56at this time if they have any comments
1:28:58they'd like to make with regards to this
1:29:00project. We'll entertain those. I just
1:29:03want to make one further comment is is
1:29:05this is a you know going to potentially
1:29:08move forward with this but I think it
1:29:09does indicate that there is a a future
1:29:11problem or issue or concern with this
1:29:13because we heard real people who have
1:29:15real problems with their wells. So I
1:29:18think that we may want to we're not I
1:29:20don't think we're done with this issue
1:29:21in this area and I think that we ought
1:29:24to suggest to the town that they do
1:29:27that's beyond the purview of our board.
1:29:30suggested to the town that they may
1:29:32investigate either through a change in
1:29:35the zoning or uh some sort of further
1:29:39research about this so we don't have to
1:29:41go through this necessarily again and be
1:29:44as uninformed as we are uh with it. So I
1:29:47just think that ought to be part of this
1:29:48process so that we can potentially help
1:29:51future projects.
1:29:53Okay. So, so I think a letter. So, Dave,
1:29:58we've shared this amongst ourselves. Um,
1:30:01it's available for the public. Uh,
1:30:03there's copy. So, it's put together by
1:30:05the committee on the table over there. I
1:30:07think it'd be appropriate if if the
1:30:09committee choose to take a final step
1:30:11and put something together more formal
1:30:13and send it to the town. Um, and I why
1:30:17don't we just I'll entertain a
1:30:19resolution that that subcommittee do so
1:30:21and send it to the town board for their
1:30:23review along with whatever
1:30:24recommendations of whatever breadth or
1:30:27depth um, no pun intended. Um, they may
1:30:32have in addition to what's already been
1:30:33said. I mean, there short-term remedies
1:30:35potentially for individuals that are
1:30:38having problems that may or may not work
1:30:39from going back to well drill or
1:30:41hydroactive to storage. But I think we
1:30:43also need to look for a longer view
1:30:46forward. Yes. About, you know, an
1:30:47ongoing issue with and I think those
1:30:49kind of comments could be included in
1:30:51the report. So I'll make I'll make a
1:30:53motion to to send a letter to the
1:30:57referral.
1:30:59Jennifer seconds it. Okay. So Peter made
1:31:01the motion. Jennifer seconded. All in
1:31:04favor?
1:31:06I So seven to zero.
1:31:10All right. So, let's um reopen the um
1:31:13the public hearing from Mikinberg. If
1:31:15anybody from the public uh has any
1:31:17comments they want to make on this
1:31:18project,
1:31:23going once, going twice.
1:31:27Okay. Um in the context of the public
1:31:29hearing, you know that we've we've
1:31:31changed the way in which we do our
1:31:32determination of significance.
1:31:35So before I um do anything to close the
1:31:38public hearing, I'm going to entertain a
1:31:39motion to make a determination of
1:31:42significance.
1:31:44I'll pass out the forms that you're used
1:31:45to by now,
1:31:48uh which is the part two on the impact
1:31:50analysis.
1:31:54And so part two is for the board to um
1:31:58simply agree or disagree uh as to what
1:32:01the impacts of a variety of questions
1:32:04that I'll go through
1:32:07and I'll go through them quickly. You
1:32:08haven't done one of these in the past.
1:32:09You need a motion first. I can't hear
1:32:11you. Do you need a motion first to go?
1:32:15Um no. I think after we do this, we take
1:32:17the motion. We make the motion then to
1:32:20make a declaration of of significance.
1:32:25And it's a voice vote rather individual
1:32:28polling vote. Um so question number one
1:32:31will the proposed action create a
1:32:33material conflict with adopted land use
1:32:35land or zoning no or small. Will the
1:32:39proposed action if any of you disagree
1:32:41with um what I determine it to be?
1:32:44Please let me know. Will the proposed
1:32:45action result in a change in the use or
1:32:47intensity of a use of land? No a small
1:32:51impact. Will the proposed action impair
1:32:53the character or quality of the existing
1:32:55community? No or small. Will a proposed
1:32:58action have an impact on the
1:33:00environmental characteristics that cause
1:33:02the establishment of a critical
1:33:04environmental area? Um, no or small.
1:33:07Will a proposed action result in an
1:33:09adverse change in the existing level of
1:33:12traffic or affect existing
1:33:13infrastructure for mass transit biking
1:33:16or walkway? No small. Six. Will the
1:33:19proposed action cause an increase in the
1:33:20use of energy and it fails to
1:33:22incorporate reasonably available energy
1:33:24conservation or renewable energy
1:33:26opportunities? No or small. Seven. Will
1:33:29proposed action impact existing public
1:33:32private or private water supplies? No or
1:33:35small. Uh or B public or private
1:33:39wastewater treatment utilities? No or
1:33:41small impact. Eight. Will the proposed
1:33:44action impair the character or quality
1:33:46of important historic, archaeological,
1:33:48architectural, or aesthetic resources?
1:33:51No or small. Will the proposed action
1:33:53result in an adverse change to natural
1:33:55resources, namely wetlands, water
1:33:57bodies, groundwater, air quality, flora
1:33:59or fauna? No or small. Will the proposed
1:34:02action result in an increase in the
1:34:04potential for erosion, flooding, or
1:34:06drainage problems? No or small. And 11.
1:34:09Will the proposed action create a hazard
1:34:11to environmental resources or human
1:34:13health? No. Or small. Um,
1:34:17so I'll entertain a motion which will
1:34:19allow me to question. Go ahead.
1:34:23So what if we don't know number seven
1:34:26how it's going to affect? Well, that's
1:34:28why we said no or small.
1:34:31We don't know. So I consider that to be
1:34:33small. How would you want to answer it?
1:34:37Is there something different you'd like
1:34:38to answer this?
1:34:42I can I can say moderate, but I cannot
1:34:45also can say no.
1:34:49It says no or small. So you're saying
1:34:52small and so that column gets checked
1:34:54off. So it's the way I read. How do we
1:34:57know it's small? What? How do we know
1:34:59it's small? Because we have a
1:35:01controversy right now. We don't. But the
1:35:04evidence for sure. I mean nothing is
1:35:06sure right the evidence that we have
1:35:08here that you worked on and I understand
1:35:11you were very supportive of the notion
1:35:14that the person wait the person has the
1:35:16ability to take water and the property
1:35:20that he he or she resides on.
1:35:24So we now have to do the determination
1:35:27of significance the secret determination
1:35:28of significance.
1:35:31Is it significant or not? Or is it no?
1:35:34Is it significant or not? Which is the
1:35:36column moderate to large impact or is
1:35:40this no impact or small impact?
1:35:44But I think personally we don't know
1:35:46until we
1:35:49the people who concern brings us datas
1:35:54saying
1:35:56that we consulted our
1:36:00our drillers. They told us
1:36:03that uh have issue and nothing can
1:36:07resolve it.
1:36:09Okay. Okay. So, you know what? Let's
1:36:10let's you can vote against what the rest
1:36:13of the board or we can return to the
1:36:14slate. So, why don't we um go ahead with
1:36:17the vote and it's a void. It's an
1:36:21individual vote. We poll the board and
1:36:24the vote is to agree that there is no
1:36:26significant impact environmental impact.
1:36:30Okay. And I have a question for you
1:36:31before I call that vote. If one person
1:36:33votes no to or yes to the question of
1:36:37significant impact that's obviously
1:36:39overridden. If the others six vote no
1:36:42there is no sign significant impact.
1:36:45Are you asking I'm asking you are you
1:36:48asking me about a a motion for a
1:36:49declaration of non-significance a neg?
1:36:52Yes. There's a neg motion on the floor
1:36:55and uh the board votes six in favor of
1:36:58the neg and one against it. The neg
1:37:00passes. Okay. That's what I wanted. I
1:37:02want to make sure seeker is not exactly
1:37:04the clearest thing um in my mind. I know
1:37:08it is in yours. So, let's go around. So,
1:37:11the a proposal I'll entertain a proposal
1:37:14um for a negative declaration.
1:37:18I make a motion motion a declaration of
1:37:22significance being a neck deck. Okay.
1:37:24Second. Yeah, I'll second. Dave Roberts.
1:37:28Uh all in first we'll do all
1:37:32we'll do the uh individual votes. So
1:37:34we'll do the individual votes starting
1:37:36with Peter and going around the table.
1:37:38Hi. Peter votes I I votes I I votes I.
1:37:44Jennifer. Jennifer votes I. Zory
1:37:47abstain. Abstain. I. And the chair votes
1:37:50I. So we have six six eyes and one
1:37:54abstain.
1:37:56Did we do this properly? Pretty close.
1:37:58Okay. For government work, right?
1:38:02And that allows me to check the box that
1:38:04we've determined that there is that the
1:38:08action will not result in any
1:38:09significant adverse environmental
1:38:11impact. And I will sign this shortly at
1:38:16the break time. I'm sure I sign it when
1:38:18we break. Don't lose it. Don't let me
1:38:20lose it. Um,
1:38:23and now if anybody else from the public
1:38:25wish to comment, public hearing is still
1:38:28open.
1:38:30Okay. So, now I'll entertain um a motion
1:38:32to close the public hearing. I would I
1:38:35would um I'm referring to a letter that
1:38:38we got from one of the neighbors who
1:38:40contested u
1:38:43you know the fact that the minutes were
1:38:45not available.
1:38:46And I feel like we should
1:38:49leave the public hearing open until
1:38:51those are available to be read by. Okay.
1:38:56Um, which public what uh minutes did he
1:38:58refer to? Uh, March 10th or March 31st?
1:39:0210th. 31st was the last time we were
1:39:0531st. Yeah. Okay. Those were not those
1:39:08were not prepared. They're not they're
1:39:10not ready. They were Yeah. So, it's I
1:39:12would like to
1:39:14be sensitive of that. just make sure
1:39:16that the public has the information that
1:39:19they Was that the letter that came in
1:39:21today, Peter? Uh, yes, I believe. So,
1:39:24yeah, it's one of them. All right. So,
1:39:28so in light of that, um,
1:39:31so
1:39:33we have a motion to close the public
1:39:35hearing, right? Um, well, I'd like to
1:39:39keep it open. You'd like to keep it
1:39:41open? I'm sorry. That's the motion on
1:39:44second.
1:39:47Sorian seconds that to keep it open and
1:39:51I'll go around the table or I ask for a
1:39:53voice vote. All in favor of keeping the
1:39:55public hearing open by virtue of the
1:39:58fact that we didn't have the minutes uh
1:40:01available of March 31st, which is when
1:40:04the public hearing was first open.
1:40:07I saw that letter and I'm not sure what
1:40:10difference that makes. Well, it's just a
1:40:12matter of information. If they were
1:40:13unable to attend or view the minutes, I
1:40:17think it's a it's a matter of record
1:40:19that the public is entitled to, but the
1:40:21minutes only reflect the fact that we
1:40:23open the public hearing.
1:40:27Um, which and it has been open. I just
1:40:30want to I that's the motion. So, if you
1:40:33vote for it, the public hearing um stays
1:40:35open. If you vote against that motion,
1:40:38it gets closed.
1:40:40All right. So, why don't we go around
1:40:41the table? Um, I Peter I keep it open. I
1:40:48I keep it open. I keep it open.
1:40:52I keep it open. I keep it open. I keep
1:40:56it open. Nay.
1:40:59That'll be one descent. I I finished my
1:41:01work later.
1:41:04I'm changing your vote. Okay. So, 5 to
1:41:08two the public hearing stays open.
1:41:11and um
1:41:14and I so we'll public hearing is still
1:41:17open. You'll be back on the agenda for
1:41:22the 23rd. You'll be one of 13 or 14
1:41:26other projects.
1:41:31Can I raise something? Go ahead. One
1:41:34thing in my notes as a holdover from the
1:41:3631st from March 31st there was a note
1:41:39that you was going to submit you were
1:41:41going to it was permit from do that you
1:41:44were waiting on a response and it was
1:41:46self
1:41:47yeah I received a couple comments back
1:41:51and I mean they're just minor cleaned up
1:41:54comments
1:41:57I just didn't do anything because I
1:41:58didn't know where this water table
1:42:04Okay. So, we're keeping the public
1:42:06hearing open. It'll be back on for the
1:42:0823rd. Um, we have to get the minutes out
1:42:12because the motion specifically talks
1:42:14about getting those minutes out. So,
1:42:15they have to get out by the by that date
1:42:18and then we should be able to take an
1:42:19action potentially to close it.
1:42:22Would you be able to
1:42:25You have one procedural matter. Um the
1:42:28applicants requested a waiver. You have
1:42:31to at some point consider um you want me
1:42:34to go in? It's quick. Go ahead. Um so
1:42:37both the definition
1:42:40uh this is in essence a flag lot being
1:42:42created, right? Um
1:42:45both the definition as well as the uh uh
1:42:49the provision for renting waiver with
1:42:52insufficient frontage. The alternative
1:42:54to having a flag lot in envisions and
1:42:57indeed the definition of a flag states
1:43:01uh the flag is to access serving both
1:43:05lots. the applicants requested in
1:43:07writing um the non-necessity of the part
1:43:12of the flag strip providing access to
1:43:16bolt lots because there's this existing
1:43:18home and driveway fronting the road um
1:43:22that doesn't need to access the strip of
1:43:24land from the R lot.
1:43:27So an so if you want if to require them
1:43:30to do that you'd have to either go to it
1:43:33a minimum through a paper exercise have
1:43:35them show on a ma map that the flag
1:43:38would be used for a driveway access into
1:43:42the to the existing home even though
1:43:45they already have a driveway access
1:43:48that's completely legal for the public
1:43:50street uh directly. So they would have
1:43:53to go through a paper exercise or step
1:43:55two actually build that secondary access
1:43:59on the flag to meet the definition of
1:44:01what a flag is. But right now the map or
1:44:04you can grant a waiver. So right now the
1:44:05map shows them accessing the the road
1:44:09for the current lot and this other
1:44:12driveway up the side is going to access
1:44:15the lot in the back only the last. So
1:44:18when you look at the it's it's very
1:44:22clear that the wagler makes sense I
1:44:26think. Well you reduce pervian surface
1:44:30you I agree uh you reduce land
1:44:33disturbance. So would you formulate the
1:44:36um motion for the board you want to
1:44:39consider would you like to consider the
1:44:41waiver to the definition or the
1:44:44insufficient frontage waiver? It's one
1:44:46six of one half dozen the other
1:44:48probably. If we do the insufficient
1:44:50frontage, do we have to refer to the
1:44:51highway department? Yes. So, let's do
1:44:55the other waiver.
1:44:57Doesn't the applicant need to submit the
1:44:59request for a waiver? He did. Oh, you
1:45:01did? It's in writing from uh it's in the
1:45:03folder March 31st, 2024.
1:45:07It's been so long.
1:45:09So, let's do the easier one that doesn't
1:45:12have to go to the highway department,
1:45:14which would then be the definition of
1:45:16black line, right? Okay. All right. So,
1:45:20the motion is before the board. I make a
1:45:22motion before the board that we grant
1:45:25the waiver um for the definition of a
1:45:28flag lot permitting the applicant to
1:45:32continue to access the roadway
1:45:34um from his existing lot and the other
1:45:39uh driveway
1:45:41um
1:45:43the access to the lot in the back. Well,
1:45:45that's the effect. If you're going to do
1:45:47the definition, then the effect of what
1:45:50you're I mean, what you're doing is
1:45:52you're exempting this particular
1:45:54property from the town's definition of
1:45:56of low flag is thereby it's not I mean
1:46:00that's the logic of it, right? It's not
1:46:01going to be a flag lot. So, we're asking
1:46:03for a waiver. We're specifically
1:46:04exempting this lot from the definition
1:46:06of a lot. So, this particular one is not
1:46:09going to be a flag lot. Okay. And that
1:46:10what section of the code is the flag
1:46:12want definition uh 12511
1:46:16glossery of terms in alphabetical order
1:46:19starting with that for flag line. Okay.
1:46:22So I'll amend my I'll amend my uh motion
1:46:27um I make a motion that we wave the
1:46:29requirements of a flag lot as defined in
1:46:32section 125-11 glossery of terms. Why is
1:46:35that on the paper?
1:46:38I'm asking for a waiver. I make a motion
1:46:40asking for a waiver from the definition
1:46:43of what a flag lot is in section 125-11
1:46:47called glossery of terms. So the
1:46:50motion's on the table. I'll make a
1:46:52motion. Motion made by Jennifer. Second.
1:46:56Second. Peter. All in favor? I. Anybody
1:46:59opposed? 70.
1:47:02The Zorian's question. The justification
1:47:04provided
1:47:06the front lot. This is quoting from the
1:47:08ROA request from the applicant. The
1:47:10front lot already has road access and
1:47:12combining these driveways would create
1:47:14additional unnecessary land disturbance
1:47:16and removal of trees. There you go.
1:47:24Okay.
1:47:26So, Matt, you got half of what you came
1:47:28here for. One, you got the waiver, but
1:47:31it's still an open public hearing. I'd
1:47:33like to
1:47:35Matt, there was another letter that came
1:47:37in um from somebody who seemed to be the
1:47:42former owner of that property who
1:47:43questioned the viability of the septic
1:47:47location for the proposed proposed
1:47:49septic location that it was residing on
1:47:51an old rock for area that in 35 years of
1:47:54ownership has always had standing water
1:47:56from underground feed and runoff to the
1:47:59rear of eastern corner of a property.
1:48:01never known it to dry up. Um, so I know
1:48:04that getting a board of health permit
1:48:06will be part of the um conditions, but
1:48:09just as a heads up on that, I don't know
1:48:11if you applied or it's been engineered.
1:48:14Yeah. Yeah, it has. We did soil tests at
1:48:17the site. Um, okay. U county health
1:48:19department representative and I went out
1:48:21there. Yep. And dug around. Uh, we found
1:48:25a viable spot. There was Okay. And I
1:48:28think there was like four feet of soil.
1:48:30So just want to make you aware of that.
1:48:32Yeah. I mean I know as you go further
1:48:34back. Okay. But uh where we are at it's
1:48:37it's pretty good. Okay. So at some point
1:48:40in time I need the um
1:48:43do septic permit. Yeah. If I don't get
1:48:46it by the time that we move forward with
1:48:49a decision then it'll be one will be
1:48:51addition.
1:48:53Okay. Yeah. that
1:48:57anything else
1:48:59on this one? We'll see you in an hour or
1:49:01two to go through venue.
1:49:04Um, okay. Next project on the agenda.
1:49:07Terry
1:49:10Green revokable trust.
1:49:13Why don't you come on up?
1:49:25All right. So, Terry, we're not doing a
1:49:26site uh we're not doing the um public
1:49:28hearing, but we are going to allow the
1:49:31public to make comments if there's
1:49:33anybody who does want to make comments,
1:49:35but not in the context of public
1:49:36hearing. Um
1:49:41I probably misled the board a wee bit in
1:49:45the notes that I sent you in preparation
1:49:47for this meeting. I indicated that um we
1:49:50needed to do the lead agency and the
1:49:53typing of the project, but upon further
1:49:58inquiry um we did the lead agency and we
1:50:02typed this as unlisted back on April
1:50:0514th. So we don't have to do that. It is
1:50:08done. So if you just want to make a note
1:50:10of that
1:50:12and Terry, you must remember that. I
1:50:14should have just called you.
1:50:18Um,
1:50:20okay. So, lead agency was done
1:50:23and we made it unlisted.
1:50:28Okay. Does the board have anything else
1:50:29before I ask the public if they have
1:50:31comments? Have anybody anything else on
1:50:33this project? If you remember, um, our
1:50:36planner agreed with the requested waiver
1:50:38that we received from Terry Wrangler and
1:50:41so that passed must have. There's
1:50:44actually Oh, okay. I'll I'll stop there.
1:50:50Anybody else from the board? All right.
1:50:51Is there anybody from the public?
1:50:54Dave, anything? No. Is there anybody
1:50:56from the public that wants to comment on
1:50:58this uh project?
1:51:05Okay. Go ahead.
1:51:07Go ahead, Barbara. I don't know anything
1:51:09about this project, but what I hear was
1:51:11waivers. Waivers were never given in the
1:51:13back. So my red flag goes up. So okay,
1:51:17that's why I'm going to say that. Okay,
1:51:19that was the previous project, not this
1:51:21one about the past, right? Okay,
1:51:26anybody else?
1:51:30Okay, so uh Terry, thanks for coming out
1:51:32tonight. Anything that we need? I just
1:51:35like to know if there's anything that we
1:51:36need moving forward that delay another
1:51:39meeting that
1:51:42no we have everything submitted that we
1:51:44need for this so yeah you don't need
1:51:47I there was some stuff from the May 28th
1:51:50meeting it was from the post meeting
1:51:52notes so there were a few things that
1:51:54were needed and maybe we didn't have any
1:51:56list for the things that were
1:51:58outstanding
1:52:00to your point make sure the judge was so
1:52:03is that okay I do
1:52:05Yeah. Um, so the things that were
1:52:07needed,
1:52:09uh, the suffix
1:52:12Okay. Um, submit. I'm checking the map
1:52:14now. So, it's already been um,
1:52:21letter from highway.
1:52:25We get that. I didn't show the file. No,
1:52:27that I don't I think you're talking
1:52:29about Nolan Palmer.
1:52:32Maybe there was nothing from highway
1:52:33that we needed on this one. Okay. Yeah,
1:52:35because there's no building. Um, so the
1:52:38post meeting post meeting uh letter says
1:52:42talks about we would be voting on lead
1:52:44agency and
1:52:46I think from 4:14
1:52:49from 414. Yeah, I put it under May 28th
1:52:51because so we could go down the list but
1:52:53I think it would have been from 414
1:52:54because on May 28th the revised map has
1:52:57things like the 100 foot around the
1:52:58wells wells on it, things like that.
1:53:01Oh, I see. All right. So, says letter
1:53:03from highway. Maybe we don't need it
1:53:05anymore. That's fine. No, it wasn't a
1:53:06letter from highway. I think it maybe
1:53:08the reference. So, I have the letter
1:53:10here. Post meeting letter says house and
1:53:12driveway on map. It was done. Indicate
1:53:15the limits of disturbance. That was
1:53:18done. Heat map done. 100 foot buffer
1:53:20done. So, done. So, I have all those
1:53:26items from that date as done. Okay.
1:53:30Okay. So, I think we're good.
1:53:33So, the only thing might be an RMA, but
1:53:36there's no need for an RMA because
1:53:37there's no shared drive. So, I think
1:53:40we're good. Jennifer,
1:53:43you have no for
1:53:46Sorry, Terry. You have the letter I
1:53:47submitted from.
1:53:50Yes. So, we're all good as far as I can
1:53:53see.
1:53:55We'll see you another couple of weeks.
1:53:57Just would like to explain. I think it's
1:53:59a for the for the public benefit as
1:54:01well. What happened with the public
1:54:03hearings was because of uh Memorial Day
1:54:07pushed our meeting and then also we had
1:54:10to move our meeting again uh because of
1:54:13grievance day which has to happen on a
1:54:15certain day and that pushed our meeting
1:54:18to that Wednesday and that affected the
1:54:22timing of the roll out to the letters.
1:54:24So just so everybody's now it affects my
1:54:26fishing shirt.
1:54:32Okay, thanks for coming. See you next
1:54:36meeting. Good luck.
1:54:39Bill Agres,
1:54:41Bill.
1:54:44I thought I saw him. In the parking lot
1:54:46before, was he?
1:54:51Caleb, are you looking for Bill? Yes. He
1:54:54looks like he's coming here.
1:55:12[Music]
1:55:19You're going to be the reason that we
1:55:20can't get out until midnight. I said,
1:55:22"Okay, to finish it up, I'll put Matt
1:55:24and get out of the car, walk over here.
1:55:26We already done with Terry. That was
1:55:28quick.
1:55:29All right. So, Bill is here representing
1:55:32um
1:55:33Nolan and Dividy Palmer Smith.
1:55:38And Bill, you you got my letter um about
1:55:42there not being a public hearing
1:55:43tonight? Yep. Okay.
1:55:46And so, uh we are going to take comments
1:55:49from the public, but they won't be
1:55:50considered to be part of a public
1:55:52hearing. Um so, we need to do a couple
1:55:55of things tonight. We we were looking
1:55:56for some items from the u from the
1:55:58applicant and he delivered them an hour
1:56:03or two or three before this meeting and
1:56:04I put them into the into the folder.
1:56:07Those items were
1:56:11uh the deed, if you remember, we need to
1:56:14see the deed that transferred the
1:56:15property from Gillette to Nolan Palmer.
1:56:19Uh so that's in there. I took a quick
1:56:22look at it. Um
1:56:25the
1:56:28letter regarding um the bald eagles as
1:56:31well as bats in the area agreement as to
1:56:34when to tear trees down. So that letter
1:56:37was delivered. That's in the folder as
1:56:40well. Um and an email from the Ster
1:56:44County Highway Department indicating uh
1:56:47that they had no problem with the curb
1:56:49cut, but there a specific curb cut
1:56:51permit will have to be applied for.
1:56:54Sounds like when when they got ready to
1:56:56do the construction, he he was
1:56:57indicating that then they needed to do
1:56:59that. That's what I that's what the
1:57:01letter said. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. You're
1:57:04asking me? No. No. You sent me the
1:57:05letter.
1:57:07Um, is there anything else you want to
1:57:09say about all that information, all that
1:57:12extra information? No. Okay. Then this
1:57:16was a project that we had not yet done
1:57:18the uh lead agency declaration or the uh
1:57:22the typing of the project. Um so I'll
1:57:26entertain a motion uh to declare this
1:57:28declare ourselves lead agency.
1:57:33I'll second it. Seconds it. All in
1:57:36favor? I. Anybody opposed?
1:57:39Okay. And I'm going to uh I should have
1:57:43also added um so I'll make a motion that
1:57:45we declare as to be an unlisted action.
1:57:48Um
1:57:50I'll make the motion. Anybody want to
1:57:51second it?
1:57:53Hans second it. What's the motion for?
1:57:55Uh the motion is to make it unlisted as
1:57:58unlisted action.
1:58:00I should have combined them but I
1:58:01didn't. So all in favor of making this
1:58:04an unlisted action. Anybody opposed?
1:58:08Okay.
1:58:10Bill, do you have anything else for us
1:58:11that you want to talk about?
1:58:18Um, I don't think so. We had all those
1:58:21things that we just talked about
1:58:23additionally. Um, oh, I don't did you
1:58:26mention that I did send over to you the
1:58:29um draft of the uh road maintenance
1:58:32agreement?
1:58:33I have the draft. I got that. I don't
1:58:36think I've sent it to the attorney here,
1:58:37but I did get that
1:58:40up. That needs to be reviewed, but I
1:58:42believe before we move forward on that,
1:58:46well, it has to be reviewed. It won't
1:58:47hold up. Yeah. Anything. And it also has
1:58:50to go to the town board for their
1:58:51acceptance. So, okay. So, the RMA needs
1:58:55to go to Not sure if I sent it to you
1:58:57yet, but I'll deal with that tomorrow.
1:59:00Good. Um, should have been copied on the
1:59:03email.
1:59:05You copy, Dave?
1:59:07Does the board have any questions for
1:59:09Bill? Not any comments. Everybody's
1:59:12good. Anybody from the public want to
1:59:15comment on this project?
1:59:18Going once, going twice.
1:59:21Okay. So, um, Bill, we'll see you on the
1:59:2523rd. Yes.
1:59:29And that will be the the real public
1:59:32hearing. Very good. Thank you. Thank
1:59:35you.
1:59:44Okay, back social.
1:59:54Greetings.
2:00:00Michelle, do you want to just summarize
2:00:01where you're at?
2:00:03We had anticipated doing a public
2:00:05hearing, but I've already said once,
2:00:08twice, three times why we can't do it
2:00:09tonight. Um, so Caleb, why don't you
2:00:12just summarize?
2:00:14I know at the last meeting we, you know,
2:00:16they updated the water results. Uh, and
2:00:19we gotten the flow confirmation letter
2:00:21from mult department of health. I did
2:00:23submit all those documents. There was a
2:00:26few emails and Greg and uh church um
2:00:30about those documents that we submitted.
2:00:33Um and then
2:00:36we're I mean we're waiting for the NEG
2:00:38deck to be able to complete our
2:00:39submission to the DEC for the sewer
2:00:41permit. Um we can't move the the new
2:00:44online permit. Yeah, they need the NE
2:00:46deck before they deck before we can move
2:00:48forward with that general permit. And so
2:00:50you won't get that until um you know
2:00:53depending upon what the board wants to
2:00:55do until the public uh hearing. Until
2:00:57the public hearing. Yeah. All right.
2:00:59Um anything else you want to We'll get
2:01:03to the bonding in a minute. Um
2:01:06I don't really have anything else. Oh
2:01:08no, that was one of the things. Um you
2:01:10Grant, you had mentioned about
2:01:11additional Swift comments coming in a
2:01:12more unofficial form. I know you had
2:01:15asked about the impervious cover. Yes.
2:01:18Um but I don't know if there is going to
2:01:19be third of the letter for the homing or
2:01:21not. I'll get that out. All right. Okay.
2:01:25And so in my um comments to the board, I
2:01:28mentioned that just kind of a summary
2:01:30that we had taken care of lead agency.
2:01:33We had typed this as a one type one. We
2:01:35sent this to Ola County Planning Board.
2:01:36If you remember, they came back with
2:01:38four items. We all agreed with the
2:01:41applicant that they would do three. the
2:01:43one item we said they didn't have to do
2:01:45and that would be part of the final
2:01:47decision. We'd have to make sure that we
2:01:48got a super majority. So, so just um
2:01:52want to remind the board of that and
2:01:55then um again the public hearing snafu
2:01:58will do that on the 23rd.
2:02:00Michelle, we have a matter of the
2:02:02bonding and we talked about that a
2:02:03little bit in the past. So, we had
2:02:06decided and the board voted on the items
2:02:09that we wanted to be bonded. Uh, and
2:02:12from the code, it was either items 2,
2:02:16three, and six or three, four, and six.
2:02:18But in any case, we voted on that.
2:02:21Michelle um went out and got a letter of
2:02:24credit from Morgan Stanley. Okay. So,
2:02:29doing a letter of credit instead of a
2:02:30bond is the easiest way of doing it.
2:02:32It's also cheaper than doing a bond. Um,
2:02:36so I have a sample of that and it's in
2:02:38your folder. Uh, the actual bond. What
2:02:41we need to do tonight as a board, if you
2:02:43have any questions about the bond or
2:02:44Michelle, if you want to speak to it,
2:02:46that's fine. Um, what we need to do
2:02:48tonight is to make a motion um,
2:02:51referring the matter to the town board.
2:02:55We don't refer the sufficiency of the
2:02:57letter, actual letter of credit that
2:03:00gets reviewed by the town's attorney.
2:03:02what we're sending or making a motion to
2:03:05send a report to the board that we're
2:03:07satisfied with the items that are being
2:03:09bonded and the amount of the bond which
2:03:13was what 54,000 some odd dollars.
2:03:18Um
2:03:19so when we get there um that's what
2:03:22we'll be making the motion around a
2:03:24motion to refer this all to the town
2:03:26board.
2:03:28Does anybody on the board have any
2:03:29questions about the bond,
2:03:32Michelle? 67,000 is 120. 67,000 is 125%.
2:03:37Oh, all right.
2:03:3954 up by 125. 67,000.
2:03:43Do you have any other comments you want
2:03:44to make about them? No. I mean, I think
2:03:46we discussed this amount of We've kind
2:03:49of beat this one to death. Yeah. Okay.
2:03:52For good reason. It's important. So,
2:03:55I'll entertain a motion to refer this to
2:03:57the town board. I make a move. Dave
2:04:00makes the motion to refer the bonding
2:04:03documents and proposal to the town
2:04:06board. Second, I second it. Helina. All
2:04:09in favor? I. I. Anybody opposed? So,
2:04:13seven zip. Um,
2:04:16I will ask the public, as we had the
2:04:19previous two applications, if anybody
2:04:21wants to make a comment, public comments
2:04:24about this project. Um, it's a
2:04:27restaurant on route 209
2:04:31near
2:04:32I know near Lucas. Yeah. Little bit
2:04:35south of Lucas Avenue by about 150 200
2:04:37feet give or take. Anybody have any
2:04:40comments? Remember, this is going to be
2:04:42renoticed and you'll have the
2:04:44opportunity to make public uh comments
2:04:46at the public hearing um public hearing
2:04:49comments on the 23rd.
2:04:52So, failing in that.
2:04:55Okay. Board have anything else? Just one
2:04:58question. What do we need to do with the
2:05:00town now with So, I'm going to send this
2:05:02out to them tonight or tomorrow. I'll
2:05:04send an email. I'll copy you on it.
2:05:09I don't think they actually need you
2:05:11unless they have questions. Although,
2:05:14you may want to go to the meeting. One
2:05:15of you may want to go to a meeting where
2:05:17they discuss it. They'll have it on
2:05:18their agenda. So, I'll send it to the
2:05:20supervisor, to the town clerk, and to
2:05:24the town's attorney. I'll copy you and
2:05:27Caleb and um this for town. Um and
2:05:33that's it. There's really nothing except
2:05:35a bird to look at. to find out when it's
2:05:38on the agenda. The best way to find out
2:05:39when it's on the agenda of the town
2:05:41board is to call the town clerk, Kate. I
2:05:45think you've dealt with her before,
2:05:46Kate, and she can tell you when it's on
2:05:48the agenda.
2:05:50They may have questions, but it's pretty
2:05:52cut and dry.
2:05:54All right.
2:05:56Thank you. Thank you. Patience. Thank
2:05:58you.
2:06:04All right. We'll take a 5 minute.
2:06:12Where's the motion? Sorry.
2:06:15I got it.
2:06:31Yes.
2:06:35I'm on the Yes. Yes. It's open. Yeah.
2:06:38Why couldn't you get into
2:06:46it says, you know, network number one
2:06:50and it says no internet. I can I can
2:06:53find out.
2:06:55So
2:06:58that needs to go into the Google file. I
2:07:01don't know if you have access. Okay.
2:07:08did they was it can connect
2:07:13but
2:07:17I'll do it in a year. So I automatically
2:07:21for some reason it was not automatically
2:07:25hardly
2:07:27have access to it. I just said these
2:07:29right off. So much for it security. I'm
2:07:32more sorry than you can imagine because
2:07:33it's more worth present. So you got on
2:07:36at one point it's still just
2:07:37reconnected.
2:07:39The secured network for a year and a
2:07:41half now today it was
2:07:46no internet
2:07:48on that. Is this appropriate for
2:07:50password?
2:07:53No, didn't even ask. Now, so you're
2:07:56getting you're connecting to the Wi-Fi,
2:07:58but you're just saying it's not a secure
2:08:00I'm connecting via
2:08:08Oh, no.
2:08:11remembering to
2:08:19have ahead.
2:08:21The next one is Rav.
2:08:38I'm going to like this. time you want to
2:08:39burn. So I got to go since I'm going to
2:08:42do a memo,
2:08:44but I will if you want just to clear the
2:08:46record.
2:08:48If someone brings it up,
2:08:52it's a bunch of
2:08:54other people here that are I think so.
2:08:57I think so. I'm going to leave it.
2:09:00You're going to do a report. So Oh, is
2:09:02it public? Are they? No, it's over,
2:09:04right? because you got over the same day
2:09:08issue but they can speak
2:09:14I mean if it becomes a it's not even
2:09:16asking I would say if our board
2:09:19isn't clear on something else matters we
2:09:21can clarify
2:09:28it was classic what Dennis Doyle does
2:09:31it's like they regurgitate everything
2:09:33you're supposed to do
2:09:35referred to the county.
2:09:38Oh, I got him. He's got like six or
2:09:39seven for
2:09:42all of which we knew
2:09:45CEO got the zoning district office.
2:09:50It doesn't matter. No,
2:10:00he's got some he's got some substantive
2:10:02comments about about lighting and
2:10:04landscaping. Of course, he thinks the
2:10:06building's too big. But
2:10:12it's a big building for the
2:10:17How big is the concrete? Is it the old
2:10:2012,000
2:10:2310,000 12,000 something
2:10:35big roller
2:10:3930,000.
2:10:41So it's not the first time
2:10:44something
2:10:46grand it's
2:10:52more recently called Hudson Valley
2:10:54Resort now. Now empty. It's empty.
2:11:04I assume it's When was the peak of the
2:11:07bors?
2:11:10[Music]
2:11:17Yeah, that may be a newer house.
2:11:30Yeah. So, it's a big building for the
2:11:31staff, right?
2:11:40There's no limit. There's no limit.
2:11:43No, there's a height.
2:11:46For sure. You can't go above 35
2:12:06elongated buildings in C50, right?
2:12:11Don't believe that truth.
2:12:14It's not that you don't have
2:12:24Let's bring Let's get back together
2:12:26again.
2:12:28No internet security.
2:12:35I'm just going through unsecured for
2:12:38some reason. All righty. It's like a
2:12:40side build.
2:12:43No, I was on the right. The next project
2:12:49on the
2:12:52next project is draft top.
2:12:55You guys want to take a seat?
2:13:05Moshi and Mr. the police as you as I as
2:13:07I wrote to you. Um we're not doing the
2:13:11public hearing tonight
2:13:13about that. It'll happen next meeting
2:13:16which is the 23rd, the formal public
2:13:18hearing. We are going to let people talk
2:13:21tonight um if they wish to make any
2:13:24comments. So do you have anything new
2:13:26for us tonight?
2:13:28Well, we uh we had submitted the permits
2:13:30as requested as well as a referral for
2:13:32fire department for the so they could
2:13:34review the site life safety. Uh in the
2:13:38permits you you probably notice that the
2:13:40camp permit is expired. That's typical
2:13:43because it's like a three-month permit.
2:13:45It's not good for a year. It's only good
2:13:47for the duration of a camping season.
2:13:49They perform an inspection sometime in
2:13:52June and then seeing that you're up to
2:13:55up to the requirement of Department of
2:13:57Health, they issued a permit. Uh we're
2:14:01going to need to see a copy of the
2:14:02permit. What? We're going to need He
2:14:05gets the new copy. Of course, we can
2:14:06send. Okay. So, we want to see that,
2:14:08right? On the fire safety, just his copy
2:14:11there, Peter. Um yeah, we haven't done
2:14:15You need to get together. Yeah, they
2:14:16they have I talked a little bit about
2:14:18today that they do have uh he's going to
2:14:21forward to me um the safety plan that
2:14:24they have. So once I have that then we
2:14:26can review it. Okay. So we'll review
2:14:28that. Go ahead Mr. Time Department of
2:14:31Health will also approve that safety
2:14:33plan for a camp. So they'll send their
2:14:35preview with the state law. Right. Um I
2:14:39think his which is great. Peter's
2:14:42concern is also for things like where
2:14:43the fire trucks going to pawn. No, we
2:14:45want to address everyone's concerns.
2:14:47That's not a problem. Uh, also we have
2:14:50they the applicants received no
2:14:51information about updating the speedies.
2:14:53Uh, today I put in a call to the uh, yes
2:14:56uh, Friday I put in a call to the DEC
2:14:58environmental permits people. No one has
2:15:00got back to me yet. I'll try them again
2:15:02tomorrow. This is with respect to the
2:15:04Speedy's permit. With the respect to the
2:15:06Speedy's permit. Okay. They have not
2:15:08received any email or mail notification
2:15:11that the um permit has to be renewed
2:15:15this year because it is valid until
2:15:172032. It's typically a 10 year per
2:15:22okay because it's discharged to the
2:15:24ground.
2:15:26There is also a note on the plans that
2:15:28uh spoke about bats which is a was a
2:15:32standard note taken from a different
2:15:34project. Uh if you look at the uh long
2:15:36form EAF with the EAF mapper summary on
2:15:39page two, uh there are no uh endangered
2:15:43species on site.
2:15:45So that that's from the DEC mapper
2:15:50and like I said, that's on the second
2:15:52page of the EM of the environmental
2:15:55summary of the EM.
2:15:59Okay. What else you got for us? That
2:16:01that's it. We've tried to uh we've also
2:16:03have the color uh the rendering that
2:16:05Moshi has with the Moshi. Do you want to
2:16:08show the board that? Yes. Yeah. Multiple
2:16:10copies or just one or just one big one.
2:16:12All right. So, why don't you two of you
2:16:14why don't you hold it up?
2:16:30You know what you do? Would the two of
2:16:31you mind just standing over in front of
2:16:34that table there so the whole audience
2:16:35could see it? So I I had asked Moshi if
2:16:39he could
2:16:41give us a diagram that showed the
2:16:43perspective of the building with respect
2:16:46to the entire site.
2:16:48Um so you want to point out Moshi you
2:16:51know the entrance the existing
2:16:54buildings.
2:16:55Yes. Go ahead. Here is Trey Road. This
2:17:00is our existing building.
2:17:03So um the way how we got the liberties
2:17:07now everyone can see it. There's a hill
2:17:09over here.
2:17:11Basically what we're going to accomplish
2:17:13the other side of this building we have
2:17:14a huge big property to all the trucks
2:17:17will right away be going in. This is
2:17:19going to avoid traffic. the design of
2:17:22the building. Um this is probably the
2:17:25second code too and well designed the
2:17:28same colors very similar I think we do
2:17:31have the samples here no what how you
2:17:34can see it's almost the same colors of
2:17:36the old one and we try it so it look
2:17:39very very similar and matched to the our
2:17:42facility
2:17:44um the trees are those trees staying the
2:17:48all the trees I showed the the board all
2:17:50the trees what is behind the fence If
2:17:53there's going to stay today, they're
2:17:56staying. It's the trees outside the
2:17:58fence on the ches within the rightway, I
2:18:00believe, is what he wants to say. No,
2:18:04but the trees on the property itself
2:18:06where you're going to do the building,
2:18:08they're all obviously Well, any ones
2:18:10that are affected during construction
2:18:12and would not be able to be saved. If
2:18:13there's any excavation within the drip
2:18:15line of the tree, there's pretty much
2:18:17nothing. Okay. Motion, you going to
2:18:20leave that diagram with us? Yes, why
2:18:22not? Okay, perfect.
2:18:26All right, good. Thank you. Um, I know
2:18:29that there were some members of the
2:18:31board, I think everybody has seen the
2:18:33site now. There's some members of the
2:18:34board that went out there today. Um, so
2:18:38does anybody from the board have
2:18:39anything they want to talk about?
2:18:43Yeah, I I was in the site today and I
2:18:47was surprised
2:18:49how overlook because it's never was
2:18:52shown on a map existing
2:18:56more than half a dozen big pines like a
2:19:00I would say couple feet diameter. Couple
2:19:02feet. Yeah.
2:19:04And they planted cut down and I I'm
2:19:07really I'm happy with that. and and it's
2:19:11called pine grove but they cutting half
2:19:13a dozen pines there
2:19:16and I think considering that excessive
2:19:18size of the building and seeing what is
2:19:23inside of the property now how much
2:19:26shopping space they have I think they
2:19:30should shrink that building and save
2:19:34those trees
2:19:37that's so you're concerned with the
2:19:40overall size of the building because of
2:19:41the trees or is your concern with the
2:19:43over size of the building?
2:19:46Wow. In context of the whole of the
2:19:48whole property and the and the area or
2:19:50both size of the building because it's
2:19:52affect the uh uh environmental
2:19:56surrounding
2:20:00doesn't
2:20:02more cutting those trees.
2:20:06Anybody else? And I add to add to that
2:20:09every project we look we try and we're
2:20:11asking applicants don't build where the
2:20:14big tree such a big tree retains them
2:20:18and here we kind of miss it because we
2:20:20never saw it on plant but in reality
2:20:23it's a huge trees. Zoe do you know and
2:20:26can you estimate how many trees are
2:20:27being big trees are being lost? I would
2:20:32suddenly half a dozen mark already. I
2:20:35didn't I didn't see it like that. I saw
2:20:37one big tree. No, but I saw
2:20:42I saw a dozen tree already mar around
2:20:46the trunk to be removed. Okay.
2:20:51All right.
2:20:53Other comments?
2:20:55We we have received some letters and
2:20:58most of them came in. One of them in
2:21:00particular came in today. We have
2:21:01received some letters
2:21:03and I believe they're all in the Google
2:21:05Drive by now. U one of them was quite
2:21:08extensive.
2:21:10Um it was about six pages long. Had
2:21:12about 12 different points. Um the Ben,
2:21:17sorry. Was that the Ben? Yes, the Ben.
2:21:21Um so I don't know. Did anybody get a
2:21:23chance? It only came in today. I read
2:21:25some of it. Anybody have any comments on
2:21:27that? Well, he he did mention um the
2:21:31historic house on the corner. There was
2:21:33some questions about that and having
2:21:36missed that at the for the racetrack, we
2:21:40may want to drill down deeper to make
2:21:42sure that we
2:21:45look at it and
2:21:47see. Yeah, there was if we have I don't
2:21:49know who is if the if the comments
2:21:51verified. I I think it's 500 ft. I
2:21:53didn't have a map, but I'm just saying
2:21:55Dave is gonna take a look at that. If we
2:21:58had the public hearing, I'm sure Mike
2:22:00would be here and he'd be he'd go
2:22:02through them all with us. So, I
2:22:04encourage everybody um to read that. And
2:22:06then some uh some of his other comments
2:22:08had to do with the R5 zoning, the R3
2:22:12zoning, but uh working with the map, the
2:22:16zoning map online, I couldn't blow it up
2:22:19enough to make that determination.
2:22:22It wouldn't make sense to me to have the
2:22:24Pine Grove resort like this and have
2:22:26that open area be in R5 with the rest.
2:22:30So I I didn't really have a chance to
2:22:33address his comments, I guess, is what
2:22:35I'm saying, but I'm just regurgitating
2:22:37from, you know, what I'm I'm playing
2:22:40devil's advocate a little bit to get to
2:22:42it. Um, a particular point. Uh, I saw
2:22:44the letter. There's a lot in there. Um,
2:22:47and Moshe, I can it's public. I can
2:22:49share it with you. Um, but I asked Dave
2:22:52when I got the letter, um, if he would
2:22:54go through the the letter and do he
2:22:57usually does a write up and I think
2:22:58we're at the point where we we should do
2:23:01a write up summarizing everything. There
2:23:03were comments about lighting. There were
2:23:05downward lighting and that's huge. And
2:23:07apparently there were comments about
2:23:09being contiguous to another town or
2:23:11seeing. Yes. So site the public hearing
2:23:15notice, make a note of this. The public
2:23:17hearing notice has to be sent to them as
2:23:19well. So town clerk turn town clerk. So
2:23:23Dave is going to do a complete review of
2:23:25that letter and I encourage everybody on
2:23:28the board to uh to take a look at it.
2:23:30Does have one point where he was saying
2:23:33the size of the building is very large
2:23:37for
2:23:38the town.
2:23:41You know just it would be the largest
2:23:43building in the town. Yeah. Would it? I
2:23:46think the granite's bigger than Oh,
2:23:47there's granite. Yes. But I'm just say
2:23:49I'm just Veritas might
2:23:53right as far as new construction. But
2:23:56okay, anybody else?
2:24:00Rick, if I if I may. Uh,
2:24:03so yes, the par it's confusing the as
2:24:06they know the parcel is rather large and
2:24:09rambling. It crosses Cherry Town. Yes.
2:24:12In uh it's on both sides of Cherry Town
2:24:15and and two pieces from Samsonville.
2:24:18right, that they're hooked across the
2:24:20road. Um, so it is a little confusing.
2:24:23If you look at the entire parcel, it
2:24:26does border the adjoining town. Yes. The
2:24:29entire parcel is within 500 ft of a
2:24:32historic home. Um however your brand new
2:24:35code provision says that if the proposed
2:24:40construction is with five within 500 ft
2:24:43um the issue will have to be you'll have
2:24:45to reconcile at some point is um uh to
2:24:50to my knowledge at this point the
2:24:52national register listing is the entire
2:24:54parcel of maker home uh which does a
2:24:57butt to the west
2:25:01southwest of Cherry town. That parcel
2:25:04has frontage on Cherry Town. The
2:25:07adjoining parcel on Cherry Town to this
2:25:10to the applicants. So, I think there's
2:25:12no denying the parcel is within 500 ft
2:25:16of the proposed construction, but the
2:25:18house is not. So, we're going to have to
2:25:21you're going have to reconcile that.
2:25:23Enough for me to do. Well, I rais it
2:25:26because there's a procedural question.
2:25:27You're supposed to because of the new
2:25:29code refer this for comment. Uh, which
2:25:32you don't have to consider by the way.
2:25:34Um, comment to your historic
2:25:36preservation committee. I don't know how
2:25:38that works. I've never been here. What
2:25:40you did is First thing you have to do,
2:25:41you'll have to do first, Dave, is is
2:25:43sort through new code, old code, old
2:25:46code, and does it fall under the new
2:25:48code or not and then we probably would
2:25:52historical society. So, yeah, I don't
2:25:53know where the write up. We'll figure
2:25:56that. Well, we know we know the where it
2:25:58needs to go. We just need to make sure
2:26:00that it does need to go based on old
2:26:02code, new code. So that's what I want
2:26:03you to do in your write up is to go
2:26:05through each one of those points. Um,
2:26:08but remember but remember this applicant
2:26:10owns much more land than the than the
2:26:12envelope of what where they're building.
2:26:14Correct. Right. But yeah, I'm he was
2:26:16asking for if we'd had read the comments
2:26:19or in that letter. And so those were the
2:26:21things that jumped out that just, you
2:26:24know, I mean, just jumped out at me. And
2:26:26then because of the ruling with the
2:26:28racetrack, I think we should be a little
2:26:30bit more sensitive. Remember the whole
2:26:33our determination or seeker was not done
2:26:35correctly because we missed a historic
2:26:37outset from the race threat, right? So
2:26:40just don't want to make that mistake.
2:26:44So Dave, how quickly do you think you
2:26:46can review that um letter from I'll do
2:26:50it this week. All right. And we'll get
2:26:52it out to the board in anticipation with
2:26:54a summary of what we got overall. Yeah.
2:26:56Okay. All right. By the weekend. Okay.
2:26:59Good. Question came up today. Jennifer
2:27:03brought it up is and I didn't find
2:27:05anything out about it was bats
2:27:07and um whether bats are an issue here or
2:27:10not. I didn't see anything on it, but
2:27:14address
2:27:18is listed on the environmental map.
2:27:22Okay. The
2:27:24I think it's uh 2
2:27:28uh one zero on the sheet two of the
2:27:34environmental. Thank you. Sorry for So
2:27:36was it flagged when you pulled it
2:27:38through GDC? No. No, it wasn't. This
2:27:41trees are going to become anyway. No,
2:27:43but yeah, just
2:27:47do the eyes, please. It's not a problem.
2:27:49And I was looking and this you can't the
2:27:53state websites just have the whole
2:27:55county blocked off for vacing
2:27:59your restrictions. Exactly. So if it was
2:28:02applied based on the geograph
2:28:05you'll see that's all the way back in
2:28:06the environment
2:28:08the second page
2:28:10only. Okay. Agree.
2:28:14So, um
2:28:16since we can't do the formal site um of
2:28:19public hearing tonight, um I'm going to
2:28:22open up the meeting to anybody in the
2:28:24public who wants to comment on the
2:28:26project. So, the meeting is now open for
2:28:29any comments. Big um I don't know who
2:28:33all of you know me. I'm having to choose
2:28:35where she neighbor. of I live at 191
2:28:40Sanville Road. If you look at the map,
2:28:43you will find
2:28:46that the Pine Grove is contiguous across
2:28:48the whole upper portion of my property
2:28:51and down onethird of the side. So, my
2:28:55main concern this evening is, and I did
2:28:58a little looking up at Speedy, so yes, I
2:29:01know yours due any time because I
2:29:03checked the dates.
2:29:06And um if I'm understanding correctly,
2:29:10your speed's permit is for 27,400
2:29:14gallons. Is that per day of of material
2:29:19to be moved? I'm asking the board. I
2:29:22can't move. I don't know. I know. I
2:29:24can't Yeah, I don't have it in front of
2:29:25me. B, so don't Well, it's from your
2:29:27last meeting and it was I watched the
2:29:30meeting and recorded these numbers.
2:29:31Great. Do you remember the number? I did
2:29:33not look at that, but typically speed
2:29:36number would be a gallon per day. Okay,
2:29:39that is my concern. I live downhill
2:29:44on a slope and I'm no engineer, so some
2:29:47engineer would have to come and tell me
2:29:49what the slope is.
2:29:52But I can tell you stuff runs downhill
2:29:55and I've sledded that hill and you can
2:29:58get some dog on good sled riding down
2:30:00that hill. That's how steep it is.
2:30:03And
2:30:04there's enough water there now. I invite
2:30:07anyone on this board, it's not because
2:30:09of rain, to please come and walk my
2:30:12property, wear boots.
2:30:15And it's been like this now since the
2:30:18new parking lots were put in and the new
2:30:20big building was put in faces. It has
2:30:24six or seven vertical lights on it. Um,
2:30:28I believe it's an activity center.
2:30:30That's what it was put there for. I
2:30:33don't care if you paint the building
2:30:35green with purple polka dots. The facade
2:30:38means nothing to me. I want to know
2:30:41where all this rain water is going to
2:30:45go. Somebody has to show me.
2:30:49And they said they were doing six
2:30:51outlets. I think I believe one permit is
2:30:54for 126 residence units. Is that
2:30:58everyday residents? people living there
2:31:01and then there's 570
2:31:04persons total of another permit.
2:31:09Is that turnover for when maybe the
2:31:12other two facilities located close by to
2:31:16visit?
2:31:19My property can't sustain 27,000 gallons
2:31:23a day. I know they're putting in water
2:31:26saving. I I watched the whole meeting.
2:31:28And I watched it twice. They're putting
2:31:30in water saver.
2:31:33I don't care how much water you save, it
2:31:35still runs downhill. I seen they have
2:31:38one out outlet going for Cherry Town.
2:31:41It's a very gorgeous building.
2:31:44But if they're building that close to
2:31:46the edge of Cherry Town Road, what are
2:31:49they doing about the ditching on Cherry
2:31:51Town? Anyone thought to think of that?
2:31:54Where's the water going to run on Cherry
2:31:56Town?
2:31:58And if they're putting an outlet or a
2:32:00sewage or water system, they're they're
2:32:04tying in in many places to the existing
2:32:07water system. If they're tying into the
2:32:10existing water system, you know where
2:32:12that's been for 70 years.
2:32:16I can tell you, and Mrs. Collier could
2:32:18tell you, too, if she was still alive.
2:32:21I'm 74 years old. I've lived on my
2:32:23property since I was brought home on
2:32:26January 5th, 1951.
2:32:31I know the property. I used to walk
2:32:33across it because my parents have had
2:32:36the first house on the right going up,
2:32:40Cherry Town, so I could walk from my
2:32:43father's house to what I live in now is
2:32:45my grandfather's house.
2:32:49And I didn't get wet feet.
2:32:52I was a little kid. I would have been
2:32:54stuck in the mud. I can't. When I mow my
2:32:57field now, I mow water. But in order to
2:33:01keep it down, I have to mop.
2:33:06I want to know
2:33:09what why can't they build
2:33:13a septic unit, you know, a septic
2:33:17something to do their septic and let it
2:33:19out slower. Is there a way to do that?
2:33:21Is there a way to disperse their gray
2:33:23water or have it go in tanks and
2:33:25disperse
2:33:27a different way? Something's got to slow
2:33:29down the water. Or eventually my well,
2:33:33you want a well log? I'll give you a
2:33:35well log. At 101 ft, I sit at rock.
2:33:4170 ft below that is where my well is in
2:33:44the black shale.
2:33:47The well pounder pulled the the well
2:33:50piece up three feet
2:33:52at 167 feet. That's where my well is.
2:33:56And I have I have sulfur water, but it's
2:33:58good water. I don't want to lose that.
2:34:01And I'm going to
2:34:04I'm going to and Bill Collier is going
2:34:06to want to sell his mother's lot. I
2:34:09can't speak for him, but if there's as
2:34:11much sewage as that Speedy's permits
2:34:13allows or as much gray water, it may not
2:34:15be sewage, but gray water, it's going to
2:34:18go on her, too, because that's the way
2:34:20the drainage is aimed.
2:34:24So, Greg, could you
2:34:28I understand what you're saying. One
2:34:30other interesting point on your M.
2:34:35Sir, may I ask your name? Mike. Mike
2:34:39Khi, Mr. Kesi, I don't know if you're
2:34:42aware of it or not, but the one corner
2:34:44of the property
2:34:47there is a cemetery. It's Dun Cemetery.
2:34:51I believe it's on the property that's
2:34:53Paul Court, right? But for many years
2:34:56when I was a little girl, an obelus
2:34:59shaped like the Washington Monument if
2:35:02you will stood and there's a grave
2:35:06outside of that cemetery. The marker is
2:35:09gone and that grave could very well lie
2:35:12on the property. Maybe you're not going
2:35:15to disturb it this time, but at some
2:35:16point there's going to be disturbance
2:35:18there. And I think you need to look at
2:35:20some old deeds.
2:35:23I can tell you where to start. Elroy and
2:35:26Henry Smith because when the property
2:35:29they owned it and it was sold, they
2:35:32couldn't do anything with that piece of
2:35:34property because there was a grave
2:35:36outside the graveyard there. It's the
2:35:39Dun family graveyard.
2:35:42You have a lot more issues here than you
2:35:44know. And as far as big trees, yes,
2:35:46there are big trees up there. And if you
2:35:47only saw one, you all better open your
2:35:49eyes. Um, as far as the house, the
2:35:53historic house down on Samsonville Road
2:35:56belonged to Nelly C. Dio Huber,
2:36:02my great great great aunt. Yes, it's in
2:36:06a historical house. You're right. I
2:36:09believe Mr. Church is absolutely
2:36:11correct. That's much more than 500 ft
2:36:13from where they're going to build
2:36:15because they're building up toward
2:36:17White's house. And if I recall
2:36:20correctly, Moy made a statement. He had
2:36:22spoken to Mr. Whiteitman about lighting
2:36:24and there was no problem.
2:36:27Lighting, I don't care about lighting. I
2:36:29don't, like I said, I don't care what
2:36:30color you paint it. I don't care how you
2:36:33construct it. But don't let your gray
2:36:36water flow down on my property, Mr.
2:36:39Medbach's property, Jeff Decker's
2:36:42property, Mrs. K's property. We're the
2:36:45ones that are going to get it back.
2:36:47You've got to figure a way to do
2:36:49something about that. So Mike, do you
2:36:51have any comments or Greg?
2:36:55I I had not previously looked at there
2:36:58because they were showing that there
2:36:59were no changes in the use of water or
2:37:03discharge of of wastewater. I didn't
2:37:06review that aspect of the project.
2:37:10Well, I think that's I think that's very
2:37:12important that
2:37:14for the um and there's no indication
2:37:17that anything has changed. The project
2:37:19has proposed is to serve the people that
2:37:21are already there and they have um
2:37:24permits already from the department of
2:37:26health to both take water as well as
2:37:29discharge water in certain amounts and
2:37:33um the way in which this project has
2:37:35proceeded is under the assumption that
2:37:37there's no additional taking of water.
2:37:40In fact, the hope is that it'll be less
2:37:41because of the water saving devices. B,
2:37:44let me let me finish trying to answer
2:37:46some of your questions and direct the
2:37:48conversation in um and correct not what
2:37:53I believe but what I know from the facts
2:37:54that they've given us from the facts
2:37:56that we've gotten. There is no
2:37:58additional usage of water or discharge
2:38:00of water. So, what is is and they have a
2:38:03permit to do what they're doing right
2:38:04now. I don't know. Are you discharging
2:38:09I mean, if you were discharging water,
2:38:10they'd shut you down. Well, it would
2:38:13require an amendment to the existing
2:38:15speed pump. That's not what I asked you.
2:38:17Are you discharging water now? Are we
2:38:19discharging the water? You're
2:38:20discharging water into the ground,
2:38:22correct? Correct. As part of the
2:38:24speedies permit, you're not in any kind
2:38:26of violation. There's no smell of sewage
2:38:28or septic out there. Not No, not there's
2:38:30no overflow. That's not that I'm aware
2:38:32of. I'm sorry. All right. Because that's
2:38:34what the lady sounds like she was
2:38:35claiming. Understand the question. We're
2:38:36not changing the number of outfalls.
2:38:38They're existing. They cross the road.
2:38:40There's other stuff. There's other
2:38:42outfalls. They I don't know the
2:38:44direction of each outfall. I just know
2:38:46that there's six of them as per the
2:38:48permit and that you're permitted to the
2:38:4927,400 gallons per day. That is exactly
2:38:53what you said at the last meeting. And
2:38:54I'm not disputing that. What I am
2:38:57disputing, I want to know where those
2:38:59six outlets are and I would like them
2:39:02clearly mark
2:39:05on whatever site plan. Well, nothing has
2:39:07nothing has changed.
2:39:10If he marks it, what's that going to do?
2:39:12I mean, you know where they are, right?
2:39:16Not necessarily. They're historic,
2:39:19right? So I I can't say I know the
2:39:20location of every septic system on site
2:39:24because we're not touching any of the
2:39:25septic systems. We're not incre
2:39:27increasing any of the flow. We we
2:39:29believe that there'll be a decrease in
2:39:31flow based on the the fixtures and so
2:39:33forth. But every time you put a building
2:39:36on a piece of property, you take away
2:39:40that much place for the rainwater and
2:39:42stuff to absorb.
2:39:44Well, we would be providing a zero net
2:39:47increase in runoff for the facility. So,
2:39:50there should be no additional runoff
2:39:52that exists for today exists at the
2:39:55current at the current site for the
2:39:57application. So, so the building that
2:39:59you're building is bigger than the
2:40:00current building. The water that falls
2:40:03on the Where's all the water the rain
2:40:06water going? Well, we have a a storm
2:40:08water uh area, storm water management
2:40:11area that that water will be directed to
2:40:14specifically. We haven't seen that plan,
2:40:16have we? No, it's it's it's in the set,
2:40:18but I think it requires, you know, uh
2:40:23engineer to review. So, and and I have I
2:40:26have not looked at that. I would asked
2:40:27to look at the lighting and landscaping
2:40:30plan. Um I wasn't asked to look at that.
2:40:32I did. So, now you're being asked to
2:40:34look. Okay. Yeah. is because the one
2:40:37thing that I did note as being um of
2:40:42somewhat of a concern is that they're
2:40:45proposing
2:40:47just under an acre of disturbance like
2:40:500.95 acres of disturbance.
2:40:54Wow. And the code you have to get a SWIP
2:40:58if you have more than an acre more than
2:41:00an acre disturbance. Typically once you
2:41:03start to exceed 0.95 the DEC considers
2:41:06that rounded up to one. So so that so so
2:41:11basically they're right there at the
2:41:13point where during construction if they
2:41:16go outside their area disturbance
2:41:18they're in violation. So 0.5 of an acre
2:41:21would make them have a swip
2:41:24whatever it's called. So, Greg, are you
2:41:26saying that the DEEC wants a SWIP
2:41:28because it's so close to the one acre?
2:41:33What I'm saying is is is if they
2:41:36increase by a square foot, they're over
2:41:38that point where then it rounds up to an
2:41:41acre. And all right. So, but it's it
2:41:44would it would bear fruit if you would.
2:41:47It's an area of in they have they say
2:41:49they have a drain there's a drainage
2:41:51plan which I didn't look at that. Yeah.
2:41:55And yeah, but the um
2:41:59if they've got a drainage plan and
2:42:01they're showing no increase, I think
2:42:04it's prudent that they get the SWIP and
2:42:06have the SWIP coverage rather than get
2:42:08into construction and have an issue with
2:42:11exceeding the acre and then the building
2:42:15department would be put in a position.
2:42:16They'd have to issue a stop work order
2:42:19and have them go to the DEC to follow.
2:42:24So you're recommending that we do a
2:42:25swim? I think it's Yes. I think we would
2:42:28rather look at reducing the disturbance
2:42:31area than going for the swim. And if we
2:42:33can't, then we don't have a choice. But
2:42:35if we can reduce the the disturbed area,
2:42:38that would that would also not have to
2:42:40trigger us.
2:42:43If you reduce the disturbed area, you're
2:42:44reducing the footprint of the building.
2:42:46No, it's he's it's a total area we're
2:42:48taking, not just the building because
2:42:50the building's only 22,000 square feet,
2:42:53right? It's a building itself is about a
2:42:55half adjacent and around that we we're
2:42:58paving the parking lot right
2:43:01the well right now the uh the only only
2:43:04access to the building from for
2:43:06vehicular is a loading dock. So we we'll
2:43:09look to look at the grading to see if we
2:43:11can pull back the grading, reduce the
2:43:13amount of grading and is it um correct
2:43:16me if I'm wrong, but you're paving in a
2:43:17parking lot, right? Paving portion in
2:43:20the parking lot. That's going to
2:43:21increase also the amount of impurities.
2:43:24Yes. For this area, I have All right. So
2:43:27Greg, what you're recommending you're
2:43:29going to take a look at the
2:43:32at the drainage? Yes, I'll take a look
2:43:34at the drainage. Um, and then the
2:43:40Yeah, that doesn't I mean that doesn't
2:43:41really address the question about the
2:43:43grade one. It doesn't, but it also adds
2:43:45more area that would not absorb water.
2:43:48So again, every time you change
2:43:51something on this plan, you are taking
2:43:53away that much more absorbable land,
2:43:56which is going to force the water to go
2:43:59where there is land to absorb. And
2:44:02that's us at the bottom of the hill.
2:44:07I don't care if it's raining water, gray
2:44:10water. I'm not really interested in what
2:44:12color it is at this time. Just the fact
2:44:14that it is
2:44:17and it was never there before.
2:44:20Not even when O'Halerin owned it did we
2:44:23have trouble. Betty Sllo and and
2:44:28their family had it and they had cess
2:44:31pools and we didn't have trouble and
2:44:33they were a kosher hotel. We've never
2:44:36had trouble on this parcels. I know I
2:44:40played there. I sledded there. I walked
2:44:42there. So Greg, the on the on that sheet
2:44:47five of 15, the drainage and storm water
2:44:52management plan, there's actually a note
2:44:55that says limits of disturbance 976.
2:45:01Well,
2:45:03then I then I think you're you're
2:45:05basically
2:45:06there. Yeah, direct. The 95 I I couldn't
2:45:10I missed that because I was looking for
2:45:12it. I found 0.95 in the heat. Yeah.
2:45:15Well, it has that there.
2:45:18And then I mean on the back side of the
2:45:21building away from the road, it doesn't
2:45:25you know away from which road. So we
2:45:27don't have any. So on the on the back
2:45:31side of the building, not on the cherry
2:45:33tenant side. Okay. But the uh line of
2:45:37disturbance is you know hard up against
2:45:39the building. So,
2:45:42so I I think you really need to do a
2:45:44swim. Like I said, let's look at
2:45:46reducing the area and if we can't, then
2:45:48we'll have to come back and do a swim.
2:45:52All right. So, Grace's going to take a
2:45:54look at it. You guys should talk, but it
2:45:56sounds like you got some work to do in
2:45:58order to avoid doing the web. But where
2:46:02is to the lady's point?
2:46:05Where is the water going?
2:46:08Forget about the disturbance from the
2:46:10construction. What are you going to do
2:46:11with that extra water that's bouncing
2:46:13off the um from the roof? The roof. From
2:46:16the roof. Right now, we're doing
2:46:18underground infiltration.
2:46:23All that what is going to underground
2:46:26recharge.
2:46:28Underground. We have an infiltration.
2:46:30Yeah, there's a very large infiltration
2:46:32trench at the front of the building. But
2:46:34uh that that's what needs review. I mean
2:46:36it's when you say under the building.
2:46:39Are you talking Samsonville Road or Cher
2:46:41Town? Not doing a back. Yeah. So, we're
2:46:45in the So, there is a very large um
2:46:49infiltration trench, but you know,
2:46:50that's why Greg has to look at the whole
2:46:52thing because, you know, we all know
2:46:54this is a large building, has very large
2:46:57root. It's going to create a lot more
2:46:58storm water, right? Because of that. So,
2:47:01so getting a look at the whole thing. So
2:47:02with Michael was the the infiltration
2:47:04the water direction from the roof does
2:47:07it all direct around to the Cherry Town
2:47:09Road side or it all goes from the back
2:47:13the building goes right?
2:47:15Absolutely not.
2:47:18They have buildings that the peaks of
2:47:19their boos come right toward the Okay,
2:47:21we got it. Okay, we got it. Did we get
2:47:23We did ask for DEC permits and the water
2:47:27withdrawal permits etc etc. Do we have
2:47:29any? I can't find it in our planning
2:47:32board file. Uh, you mean the speed
2:47:35permits? Yeah, we asked for transmitted.
2:47:38Either you have or you have not. We have
2:47:40transmitted them. Okay. Well, they're
2:47:41not in our they should be here. I got to
2:47:44see why they're not in there. Okay.
2:47:47Because that would be most helpful to to
2:47:50read what be has in her hand.
2:47:54I'm justing what I left in the meeting.
2:47:56Okay.
2:47:58Anything else? No, I know. Hang on.
2:48:00Anything else from the board be
2:48:01provided.
2:48:05All right. So, Greg, you got a lot of
2:48:06work to do in addition to the lighting
2:48:07and the uh
2:48:09Dave, is there anything else you want to
2:48:11make a comment on from the Ben letter?
2:48:16I don't uh I mean, I only look
2:48:18procedurally. I
2:48:21other than this question about whether
2:48:22it's needs a proper referral to the
2:48:25historic preservation committee. Um, I
2:48:28agreed with him on the other and we in
2:48:31fact either internally or the full board
2:48:34had talked about the other issues. The
2:48:36the the whoops issue with the zoning
2:48:39classification we knew was had to be
2:48:41referred to the county planning board.
2:48:44Um, uh, there other procedural matters
2:48:46he brings up. I they're valid. I So the
2:48:50referral the public notice to the town
2:48:53clerk of wars, right?
2:48:56These are all true. What's the the uh
2:49:00what's the rationale for referring to
2:49:01Olster County parcel fronts Samsonville.
2:49:05Oh, okay. That's right. Which is a
2:49:06county road. Okay. Um
2:49:09uh I don't think there's you could
2:49:12quibble about I think it's again like
2:49:15something we talked about earlier best
2:49:17to it. it uh particularly procedurally
2:49:21because it I get hung up on it after the
2:49:24fact. Fail to refail to refer I'll leave
2:49:28it to council is a fatal flaw of a
2:49:31decision if you if you had were supposed
2:49:33to refer it to the county and didn't.
2:49:35Yeah, that's a problem. That that
2:49:37doesn't go that problem doesn't go away.
2:49:39No, that's that's a problem. You you
2:49:41don't want to be in that positions.
2:49:44uh he did raise the uh without dwelling
2:49:48on this um the issue of it it should be
2:49:51type one because of look at all these
2:49:53potential con uh imp impacts which the
2:49:57count which council can elaborate on and
2:49:59we have discussed in other projects you
2:50:01ask me to elaborate that's dangerous um
2:50:04I've told the board this uh several
2:50:06times I I'll mention here in the context
2:50:07of Mike's letter um things don't become
2:50:11type one because of a vibe we were
2:50:13worried about it. Things become type one
2:50:15because they're on the type one list.
2:50:17And so I'll tell the the the the
2:50:20audience as well, if you want to claim
2:50:22that something is a type one action,
2:50:24provide a rationale with from the
2:50:27regulation. The regulation has a list of
2:50:28type one actions. Tell us which one it
2:50:31is. If it's on there, it's type one. If
2:50:32it's not, it's not. It doesn't come to
2:50:34where, you know, we're really concerned.
2:50:36I will say this isn't near one of the
2:50:38categories that cuts the threshold down,
2:50:39is it? We're going to have to do the
2:50:41calculation. Quick look and the C the
2:50:43the clearest category to me was the size
2:50:45of the building and this it would have
2:50:47to be 100,000 square foot building. So
2:50:49it's clearly short of that. But as we
2:50:51know there are some categories of land
2:50:54that if it's near um it cuts that down
2:50:57by 75%. For instance, a historic home or
2:51:00a park, things like that. So I need to
2:51:02have more information on that. It is
2:51:03definitely contiguous
2:51:06to a parcel that's on the National
2:51:08Register of Historic Places. So we're
2:51:10starting to get into an area where might
2:51:12it may cut the type one threshold down
2:51:13by 75% in which case 100,000 square foot
2:51:18that's applicable here. And so cutting
2:51:19that down by 75% is 20,000 25,000 square
2:51:23feet. So we may be getting into a type
2:51:24that's the sort of rational you do for a
2:51:26type one. It's going to be specifically
2:51:28related to a regulation. It's not a
2:51:29vibe. It's not is that 20,000 square
2:51:31footprint or 20,000 square foot space?
2:51:35Thank you for asking. I pulled it up
2:51:37before.
2:51:38right there before my uh for my um
2:51:44what does it say?
2:51:47I think it's
2:51:50100,000 square feet of gross floor area.
2:51:54What it says in a village or town having
2:51:55a population of 150,000 persons or less
2:51:58a facility with more than 100,000 square
2:52:02feet of gross floor area. So that's your
2:52:04that's your standard and again it gets
2:52:06cut by 75% if it's near one of those
2:52:08categories like a historic home or a
2:52:10park. So that if that's what the
2:52:12situation it would go down to 25,000
2:52:15square feet of of gross floor area. So
2:52:18with a two-floor building it's 50,000
2:52:20square feet plus or minus this this
2:52:23building is 50,000. It's three it's and
2:52:25plus it's got a basement that they right
2:52:27has significant area as well. part of
2:52:29the again that's the language and again
2:52:33maybe square feet relates to more than
2:52:35just a footprint in terms of type one
2:52:37there it means that there's more people
2:52:39etc more more areas to do business in
2:52:42one form or another so I would not look
2:52:45too hard at that uh in the words are the
2:52:48words
2:52:51in a situation like that if you don't go
2:52:53by what's the most reasonable thing in
2:52:54terms of the words you're just opening
2:52:56yourselves up to all kinds of problems
2:52:57you're much better of being conservative
2:52:59and saying looking at as like a type
2:53:01wines
2:53:02if that's a situation. We haven't
2:53:04verified that but situation. All right.
2:53:06So I think um
2:53:08I have a question um just about lighting
2:53:10and maybe it's a question for Greg
2:53:12because Greg went a little bit into
2:53:13lighting right? Yes. Um, do we have, and
2:53:16this is a question for Dave and Dave,
2:53:19um, is, uh,
2:53:22it has to be dark sky compliant for new
2:53:25construction. And this is something that
2:53:26Mike brought up in this letter, too, is
2:53:29something I thought about, but does do
2:53:30we have the way to make the property
2:53:34dark sky, the existing lighting, or is
2:53:36this new construction, new construction?
2:53:38So, I guess the question is when we're
2:53:39doing a site plan, yeah, with just a new
2:53:42building, can we apply the standards to
2:53:44the entire can we go back to the entire
2:53:46property and uh have them exact those
2:53:50standards across the whole property?
2:53:55Well, question mark. Yeah. Um, that's is
2:53:58that what you're Yeah. Yeah. In terms of
2:54:01secret mitigation,
2:54:03um, it's an open book. I mean, if you
2:54:05have to mitigate something, it doesn't
2:54:06hurt. And if the applicant can do that
2:54:08easily on on their own property, that
2:54:10that's a bad idea. I will point out that
2:54:14we're we're starting to inch into a
2:54:16situation that I've that I've told you
2:54:17guys about a couple of times, but here's
2:54:18where the rubber meets the road. Um,
2:54:23in a type one of the one of the quirky
2:54:25seeker rules is that in a type one
2:54:27action, you cannot do something called a
2:54:30condition negative declaration. So if we
2:54:32were moving toward the board ultimately
2:54:34wanted to do a negative declaration but
2:54:36it would be related to one of these
2:54:37conditions we could not issue a document
2:54:40like that and so you're in the situation
2:54:42where the applicant the applicant would
2:54:44need to essentially propose the
2:54:46mitigation as part of their project
2:54:49rather than the board imposing that.
2:54:51Okay. And that's kind of we have to work
2:54:53out specifically. I'll do some more
2:54:55research on that but we're starting to
2:54:56get into that problem. Right. Okay. But
2:54:59the answer is yeah, it's easier for the
2:55:01applicant to mitigate by by by making
2:55:04some changes on their property that
2:55:05wouldn't otherwise be affected. But that
2:55:07might help us, you know, get to a point
2:55:09where we have less things to worry
2:55:11about. Yes, that's that's a viable.
2:55:15And then the other thing I So just so a
2:55:18neg can't be condition negative
2:55:21condition not doing it. Yeah. But the
2:55:24problem is if you do a neg deck and it
2:55:28starts to look like we're imposing
2:55:29conditions on it, somebody who who wants
2:55:32to challenge the project can step in and
2:55:34and and basically say this is really a
2:55:36condition negative declaration that's
2:55:38not calling itself that and the court is
2:55:40going to take a good look at that
2:55:41because of the rule. Okay, I didn't make
2:55:44that there's a bunch of permutations,
2:55:45but that's the problem is they're going
2:55:47to go running in and say this next deck
2:55:48is really condition negative deck. look
2:55:50at the conditions on it and you'll get
2:55:54they will be receptive. Why are we
2:55:55talking about conditions right now? We
2:55:56haven't discussed it because because
2:55:58Peter asked about conditions is that
2:56:01going to be a condition take care of
2:56:03light on existing property as well.
2:56:06Well, that's what I was asking is that
2:56:08is that
2:56:11that's one of the, you know, when you
2:56:14think about where this is located,
2:56:16that's one of the largest environmental
2:56:18impacts that are made on the surrounding
2:56:20community. And so that's right. I
2:56:23understand it's the rich and the rich.
2:56:25Yes, it's true. It's not condition. It's
2:56:28basically require view up to the rich.
2:56:30That's basically conditional require
2:56:32condition is Latin for requirement. I
2:56:34mean it's it's it's the way we if we
2:56:36want to require something we put it in
2:56:38as a condition that's that's what we do
2:56:39that's the currency of of what we're
2:56:41talking about. So yeah, I mean we're
2:56:44starting to get into that I mean nothing
2:56:45you know there's a lot of paths by which
2:56:48we can do things differently but we're
2:56:49getting into that territory now we
2:56:50should start thinking about it in
2:56:51advance whether this is type one whether
2:56:54we how do we deal with these conditions
2:56:56and to advise the applicant that good
2:56:58idea for them to come forward with plans
2:57:01and so otherwise and I you know it's a
2:57:03very esoteric area of law you just don't
2:57:05want to you don't want to mess it up
2:57:08and the other thing is and maybe there's
2:57:10a question for or Dave, but the
2:57:12reference uh that be made to the
2:57:14cemetery. Um, how do we investigate
2:57:18that? I mean, all cemeteries, I
2:57:19understand, are marked in Olter County
2:57:22and can't be, but I don't know, you
2:57:24know, how do we know about that?
2:57:29Oh, we can walk the property. You know
2:57:30where it is, right? Well, she said it
2:57:32was, you know, unmarked.
2:57:34Is it a grave outside of the cemetery?
2:57:38You can see the cemetery. We call it the
2:57:40cemetery. in the pines because if you
2:57:42want to see big pines, it's hidden by
2:57:43the pines. Yeah. But um there was a
2:57:47grave outside of that.
2:57:50And back when Elroy and Henry Smith
2:57:54owned the field that Paul now owns,
2:57:58people see him as a contiguous owner.
2:58:01There is something in that deed
2:58:04that states X amount of property must be
2:58:07left because of the cemetery and an
2:58:10outlying. So would you be able to show
2:58:12us where you think that grave is? That's
2:58:14the question. You would
2:58:17I'll try to see. I just want to make
2:58:18sure that in the that it's outside of
2:58:21any sort of construction area.
2:58:22Somebody's carrying a stick because
2:58:23there's rattlesnakes there.
2:58:28Okay. So, we need to get out there and
2:58:30take a look. Well, you certainly you
2:58:33would certainly need to make sure none
2:58:34of that's anywhere near areas of
2:58:37disturbance. Yes, it is. It would be
2:58:41because you could disturb a bit without
2:58:43right
2:58:45the corner, right? So, Pete,
2:58:49we'll get in touch with you. We'll any
2:58:51day but tomorrow. It won't be. What's
2:58:54tomorrow? Someone I care about has
2:58:56surgery.
2:58:59Um, this week we'll do it. Don't want to
2:59:01get I'd be happy to, but I'm not taking
2:59:04not.
2:59:07I just have a comment about speedies. My
2:59:10history in this town of knowledge of
2:59:12speedies. It's self-reporting
2:59:15and the DEC doesn't come out and check.
2:59:18So, they trust that the person putting
2:59:20in the speedies permit is telling the
2:59:22truth. And the history in this town has
2:59:25been feed violations into the round out
2:59:30the rob camp sewage running down the
2:59:33road until it finally is pursued and it
2:59:36is done. But speedies is self-reporting
2:59:41and they tr and the DEC trusts that the
2:59:44per so this previous permit that they're
2:59:46claiming they have we don't know that
2:59:49that is not doing what B is saying it's
2:59:55going to check on it I don't know but so
2:59:58Greg could you well Molina you two are
3:00:00the speedies experts can you comment on
3:00:03that comment generally generally
3:00:09the subsurface disposal systems are
3:00:13regulated by the help.
3:00:15So I won't say that it's not untrue that
3:00:18this DC doesn't chase the speedies
3:00:21permit on stuff like that because it's
3:00:23really a health department. So if you
3:00:26had an illicit discharge from your
3:00:29subsurface disposal system that leeched
3:00:32out onto the ground, it's generally not
3:00:34the DEC that's going to come after you.
3:00:37It's the health.
3:00:38So it's not like nobody's looking at it.
3:00:41It's just And is the health department
3:00:43examining it where it's by somebody?
3:00:45Well, they regulate it. No, does it
3:00:47somebody has to pick up the phone and
3:00:48say, "I smell something in order for the
3:00:50health department to come out." Well,
3:00:52well, true. Because the health the
3:00:54health department can't be everywhere in
3:00:56all time. But if but if they So what the
3:00:59lady stated is right if there was an
3:01:02odor associated with with the wet area
3:01:07then that would be the health department
3:01:09that would come out and look at it and
3:01:12if necessary take appropriate action.
3:01:16Have you had the health department out
3:01:17there? Excuse me. I have never had the
3:01:20health department out of 350 Cherry Town
3:01:23Road.
3:01:25Yes, there under Mike Ben as supervisor
3:01:28there was a big to do and they had to
3:01:31rebuild their whole septic system and
3:01:33put in an above ground system and that
3:01:36was the other that was the other upper
3:01:38camp and it took three years. So, is
3:01:42your property is your property
3:01:44experiencing the same thing that the
3:01:46upper appeal? I'm not saying that. I'm
3:01:48talking water. I'm not talking at that
3:01:51yet. And I don't want to experience
3:01:53that. So, I'm trying while they're doing
3:01:55this project
3:01:58to get it taken care of
3:02:01before there's a problem. I don't want
3:02:03on a problem. I don't want the people
3:02:06around me, we've lived there all of our
3:02:08lives. I don't want them to have a
3:02:09problem. Just to clarify if I may. Sure.
3:02:11Sure. You're talking about storm water
3:02:13water or are you talking about gray
3:02:15water which I don't know because I don't
3:02:19Some of it is storm water from the
3:02:21buildings because as Joe's there they've
3:02:24got an underground storm water
3:02:26dispersement
3:02:28and some of it's got to be coming from
3:02:31somewhere else.
3:02:33Okay. You yourself have not witnessed
3:02:36smell? Yeah. No. And I really don't
3:02:39Okay. I said I'm just trying to, you
3:02:40know, because sometimes people are using
3:02:42terms interchangeably, though I'm not
3:02:44sure if it's just runoff, uh, rainwater
3:02:47runoff, storm water runoff, or is it
3:02:50something from a failed septic or So, I
3:02:53think it helps to clarify better than I
3:02:56You look at the ground, it's brown. It
3:02:59looks like it's got oil poured on top of
3:03:01it. It's It's I don't know. It doesn't
3:03:05have a septic smell. Okay. just but it's
3:03:09it is there and there's a lot of it.
3:03:12Okay. Anybody else from the public want
3:03:14to comment on this project?
3:03:20All right. So, we got a lot of homework
3:03:23to do. Um Dave, you're going to be
3:03:26taking um the letter that we've received
3:03:30and putting everything together into a
3:03:32report to the board
3:03:35of the point summary review of where
3:03:37we're at where we're at, including
3:03:40of that letter. Okay. my five. Right.
3:03:44Right. If you're going to you're working
3:03:46on the lighting, you're working on
3:03:48you're going to be working on the
3:03:51drainage and you're looking at the
3:03:53parking slash
3:03:55and the landscaping. I'm looking at the
3:03:57landscape. I wasn't looking at parking.
3:04:00I did see in there where they say
3:04:02there's no increase.
3:04:04Look at that. Okay. Yeah. So, I'll look
3:04:06at the lighting, the landscaping,
3:04:10um, and the drainage.
3:04:13Yeah. I'd just like to say, you know, I
3:04:17know this is not official public
3:04:19hearing, but the public comments, this
3:04:21is to me as a board member, this kind of
3:04:24input from the public, Barbara and B is
3:04:28super important to our process because
3:04:30we don't live there and you know, and
3:04:32it's uh it's very helpful and in the
3:04:35long run, I know some stuff is not easy
3:04:37for applicants to hear, but it does
3:04:39speed along the process.
3:04:41Stop all. Yeah. Well, you know, but
3:04:43that's that's what public comment and
3:04:45public hearing is really the benefit for
3:04:47me. It just reinforces that all the
3:04:49time. So, thank you for and where the
3:04:52cemetery is. You're going to send up
3:04:54smoke to get a hold of me. How are you
3:04:55going to lose?
3:04:58I know. I know where to find you.
3:05:02That's a problem.
3:05:05All right. So,
3:05:08I think we're done for tonight with this
3:05:10project.
3:05:11[Music]
3:05:14Thank you, Dave. Thank you, Barbara.
3:05:16Barbara, you're hanging around for the
3:05:17next one, aren't you? Oh, you better
3:05:19believe it.
3:05:22Thank you so much.
3:05:35Afterwards,
3:05:44I'm sorry.
3:06:00She cares
3:06:03what she does. What does she know?
3:06:16Yeah.
3:06:22whenever she
3:06:30can turn around. If I can make it, I'm
3:06:32going to
3:06:34get acquainted.
3:06:40Well, that's pretty cal. I'm not telling
3:06:42them. Pretty calm. You know, that's a
3:06:45lot of subdivision.
3:06:48It's like he's amazed. I get like two
3:06:50hours.
3:07:17Well,
3:07:19that's
3:07:40I don't see
3:07:50But it's easier. Okay.
3:07:53Last project of the evening.
3:07:56Hi everyone. You're supposed to say but
3:07:58the best
3:08:00you decide. Um so we have with us
3:08:03tonight um or on next is the project
3:08:07known as Meadow Lakes and uh both we're
3:08:11going to have a tag team here in terms
3:08:12of presentation.
3:08:14Um so we're kind of all ears. I'm a
3:08:17little worn out so I'm not going to
3:08:18summarize anything. I'll let you do all
3:08:20that. All right. Um I'm Eric Lifton. Uh
3:08:23we are a group of friends and family who
3:08:26have gotten together and collectively
3:08:28bought this property in Metacons.
3:08:31And uh the goal is to create homes for
3:08:35ourselves together um on the in this
3:08:38area that we've really come to love. And
3:08:41uh I'm an architect. I'm both managing
3:08:44the project and designing the houses.
3:08:47And I just want to say just as a matter
3:08:49of background, I've long been interested
3:08:51in sustainability and sustainable
3:08:53construction. Uh I've been lead
3:08:55certified for 18 years and pass
3:08:58certified for 11 years. Then about seven
3:09:00years ago, I got into mass timber, which
3:09:04is a way of building with wood that uh
3:09:07uh sequesters carbon and and is much
3:09:10lower energy way to build than more
3:09:11conventional needs. And so that these
3:09:14are houses will all be built in CLT,
3:09:18which is to say mass timber.
3:09:21And it will all be um we're going to
3:09:23have solar power, there will be net zero
3:09:25energy. And so, uh, that's something
3:09:28that we're quite proud of. We're in
3:09:31addition to the houses, we are going to
3:09:33have, um, swimming pool and an
3:09:36activities barn for the use of the
3:09:38residents and aial tennis court as well.
3:09:42Um, and we have engaged landscape
3:09:45architects to help with the uh,
3:09:47landscape design that we submitted to
3:09:49the board.
3:09:51And um
3:09:53I guess we should also say that uh we
3:09:56originally we originally presented this
3:09:58in September of last year. That was our
3:09:59first presentation. Then the uh board
3:10:02changed over the new zoning and really
3:10:04came into effect. And uh after a few
3:10:08meetings, we uh came to develop this as
3:10:12a conservation subdivision, which means
3:10:14about half of the land being dedicated
3:10:16to not being built on. And show the
3:10:21step.
3:10:23Um, it's also good to point out, you
3:10:25can't see the topography here, but you
3:10:27know, down here is where the pond is and
3:10:30the creek. This is actually Maka Street
3:10:32now. Um, and we're not building anywhere
3:10:34around Lucer. Then here there's a slope
3:10:38going up. And this property was uh long
3:10:42used as summer camp. And that kind of
3:10:43showed these cleared areas up here,
3:10:46these fields. And we're focusing our uh
3:10:49building of the house sites up here away
3:10:52from the creek and lake down here. And
3:10:54that is an important part of our
3:10:56strategy. And now we're building in
3:10:58these areas that were um where can you
3:11:01point out? So the the white squares you
3:11:04see there, those are the tops of the
3:11:05houses. Yeah. As being proposed
3:11:08previously, where were those? Can you
3:11:10kind of compare where you were with the
3:11:12conventional subdivision versus where
3:11:14you were with this conservation
3:11:15subdivision? Right. So, the houses are
3:11:17in slightly we're slightly different
3:11:19positions. You know, it's not We were
3:11:21never going We were originally when we
3:11:23first came in, we were going to build
3:11:24the activities barn down here by the
3:11:26lake, right? And so, we moved that away,
3:11:28but we were never going to build houses
3:11:30down in this area to begin with, like in
3:11:34these. There were going to be houses in
3:11:35these up up. Yeah. Up here flat. You
3:11:39decreased the acreage for most of the
3:11:42home. And then the main thing is we we
3:11:44this the lots were going to continue
3:11:45down here. Uh and then because this area
3:11:48right here is slowed since we didn't we
3:11:50built land anyway. Um but the lots were
3:11:53to continue there. Now what we did was
3:11:55we pulled up the lots move the houses a
3:11:57little bit but not a huge amount.
3:12:00We do not have the barn down there
3:12:01anymore. And so the lots are smaller and
3:12:05and um more tightly packed over here. So
3:12:07what's the total acreage is X and what
3:12:10is the amount dedicated to lots versus
3:12:12conservation subdivision? So just give
3:12:14me the total acreage 66
3:12:17and there's 31.35
3:12:21being concerned conserved. Okay. So 48%
3:12:2550% is being conserved. Yeah. And you
3:12:29agreed to retain those double stone
3:12:32walls, correct? There's Yeah, there's
3:12:34lots of uh stone wall, right? And you've
3:12:36agreed to
3:12:38Yeah. Yeah.
3:12:41It's good to to hear that again because
3:12:43it's we you've been in front of us. Not
3:12:45that we don't love seeing you, but
3:12:46you've been in front of us for a long
3:12:47time. So, you lose track of
3:12:50um so 66 and 50% is
3:12:56ahead.
3:12:59Um
3:13:01but yeah, I mean I was I think that's
3:13:03what you were referring to at first.
3:13:05That's in the R5 zone and that's where
3:13:07we started. So the lots were 5 acres but
3:13:10now we're doing conservation subdivision
3:13:12conserving all the sensitive areas which
3:13:15includes the pond, wetlands, steep
3:13:18slopes, core forests, flood plane, uh
3:13:22creek, it's all we're not disturbing any
3:13:24of it. We're not getting anywhere close
3:13:26to any of it. um where development's
3:13:29occurring. If you remember from the map
3:13:31we're just looking at, it's pretty much
3:13:33all an open field. So, there's very
3:13:35little trees that need to come down.
3:13:37There's an existing drive through here.
3:13:39We're reusing existing gravel roads um
3:13:43to limit disturbance. We're proposing
3:13:46septic systems that are kind of an
3:13:48advanced technology so the footprint can
3:13:51be shrunk even further. Um
3:13:56so very few trees. So is shrinking the
3:13:59footprint by in other words the area of
3:14:01disturbance area. Yeah that's yeah we're
3:14:05reducing the area of disturbance as much
3:14:08as possible. Um this is an existing
3:14:10road. We're just going to be widening
3:14:12that um possibly resurfacing but uh
3:14:16mostly just widening that 20 ft so that
3:14:19uh it's a private road. Another private
3:14:21road down here. Um,
3:14:25so
3:14:27yeah. So that's that's the West Land. So
3:14:31there was some
3:14:33debris that was purported to be buried
3:14:35somewhere in this area. Um, the whole
3:14:40area is going to be proposed in a
3:14:42conservation easement and that is
3:14:44because it's all considered to be prime
3:14:48farmland.
3:14:49um which
3:14:51that's one of the aims of the new code
3:14:54is to preserve private farmland, but it
3:14:56also uh it's where the buried material
3:15:00if it exists it may be and if there is
3:15:03buried material on the site it should
3:15:05just be left. It's kind of general
3:15:07consensus that should remain in place.
3:15:10um our water testing. Uh the health
3:15:13department requires some to be done for
3:15:16qualitative purposes.
3:15:18We're testing the well closest to where
3:15:21that very material may be um to explore.
3:15:25We already tested uh to figure out if
3:15:28there are any petroleum byproducts or
3:15:31anything of that nature. Eric will talk
3:15:34more about that later, but long story
3:15:36short, there weren't. Um, so some other
3:15:40things we've done, uh, we did a traffic
3:15:43study which showed there wasn't going to
3:15:44be any impact. Um, there was a wetland
3:15:47delineation. Um, they're down here. Um,
3:15:50we're not we're not getting close to
3:15:52them. Um, we've prepared a storm water
3:15:54pollution prevention plan, drainage
3:15:56analysis, the water testing. Um, so I'll
3:16:01let Eric talk about that now. Yeah, just
3:16:02briefly we hired Russell Reed of Labella
3:16:06to do the hydro geological study that
3:16:08the board asked for. He gave a report
3:16:11said that there would not be any effect.
3:16:13One of the concerns was whether there
3:16:14would be an effect on neighboring wells
3:16:17from the wells and property. He did
3:16:19investigation that said there wouldn't
3:16:21be but then um requested testing to make
3:16:25sure of that. So, when we did our our
3:16:26well test, which as said, we did uh on a
3:16:31well that we aren't even planning to use
3:16:32anytime soon, but is the one that's
3:16:34closest to the purported burial site.
3:16:38And uh we tested there and put loggers
3:16:42in five neighboring five of the closest
3:16:44existing wells to the to this one to our
3:16:47property. And uh there was no effect on
3:16:50neighboring wells and we got the quality
3:16:54of water that muted 5 gallons a minute
3:16:58and also uh the water is passes through
3:17:01point to the appropate location of the
3:17:03other five wells where you put the
3:17:05logging devices on. There's um
3:17:13so one is at the property over here that
3:17:17just this house that was built a year or
3:17:19so ago. Uh two were in the fireman's
3:17:22camp up here. Is that that's the fireman
3:17:25camp main well that you tested, right?
3:17:27They have two wells we tested, but we we
3:17:29logged both of them. Okay. And then
3:17:31another one is
3:17:34Larry Arnold's rock was right up there.
3:17:36And then and then we have on this
3:17:39property right here, there's an existing
3:17:40well that's not being used, but it's
3:17:43there. And so we tested that one. We
3:17:44tested that one. Okay. So the well that
3:17:46you did the test well, is that a well
3:17:49that you will use eventually? Yeah. But
3:17:51if in the future, but it's not going to
3:17:53be used, you know, you're talking about
3:17:55the one on the left hand side there,
3:17:56Peter. The one that they drilled for
3:17:57testing. That's that's the one you're
3:18:00not going to use. You will use it
3:18:02eventually. Eventually. Yeah. Yeah.
3:18:03Okay. These are not the houses are not
3:18:05going to build be built all at once,
3:18:07right? It's going to take it'll take
3:18:08some time at least. And I should just
3:18:11say I mean I've said this before, but
3:18:12just to again, you know, these are not
3:18:14going to be sold on the market. There's
3:18:16no profit here. There's there's no real
3:18:18estate brokers. There's no selling of of
3:18:21blocks uh to the design.
3:18:28Okay, keep going or you're done. Well, I
3:18:32talk a little more about um
3:18:35so this just to talk about the swift and
3:18:38drainage analysis. Um
3:18:41so the property serves over one acre but
3:18:45less than 5 acres. It's about 4.6 is
3:18:48what it's coming in at. Um so we have to
3:18:51get u a permit from the DEC for um it's
3:18:57for erosion and sediment control
3:19:00practices during uh construction
3:19:02activities.
3:19:03So have to prepare the slip in order to
3:19:07obtain that. Um
3:19:09so that's been done. I know Greg had
3:19:11some comments but we've talked about it.
3:19:13We had a pretty good meeting so I think
3:19:15we kind of we can hash that out. But um
3:19:18so the other part was we did a drainage
3:19:20analysis to look at uh water going to
3:19:24the pond during uh storm events. So I
3:19:29know the board was concerned about that.
3:19:31So that's why I did it. It's not
3:19:32required by the DC. There are no laws
3:19:34that are requiring us to do this. I just
3:19:36want to state that I did it to address
3:19:39the bird board's concerns. Um
3:19:42so runoff that was modeled or the uh
3:19:47pond was the one year, 10 year and
3:19:49100year storm. These storm rates are um
3:19:52defined by the uh Northeast Regional
3:19:57Climate Center. That's Cornell and then
3:19:59the USDA as well. Um just to kind of
3:20:02give it some uh credence. But so the the
3:20:05drainage area for this pond is about 73
3:20:08acres. Um
3:20:10the pond was modeled as if it was
3:20:13completely full at all times, which is a
3:20:15conservative estimate. Um just when
3:20:18you're looking at runoff leaving the
3:20:21pond. So in normal conditions,
3:20:24air and everyone living there want more
3:20:27water to go into the pond because it's
3:20:30low generally speaking, right? Um so so
3:20:34that was a conservative estimate. the
3:20:36just to kind of define the drainage
3:20:38area. Um, all the soil testing on the
3:20:42site
3:20:44uh for septic systems came in within 1
3:20:47to 5 minutes per inch, which is an a
3:20:50very quick absor soil absorptive rate.
3:20:52It's pretty much all sand and gravel in
3:20:55this area. The well log actually showed
3:20:57it's 60 ft deep of sand and gravel. Um
3:21:02but the significant depth of the sand
3:21:04and gravel along with how flat the
3:21:07drainage area is
3:21:10um the majority of runoff is absorbed
3:21:13into the ground. So there's not much
3:21:15runoff
3:21:17uh going actually over the surface into
3:21:20the pond. Um, and and if you look at the
3:21:22pond, if you guys remember from the site
3:21:25visit, how clean and clear it was,
3:21:28that's because it's groundwater. It's
3:21:30fed from groundwater. There's not
3:21:32sediments draining into it. Um, it's a
3:21:36groundwater pond. Um, so during the
3:21:40one-year storm, actually no water got to
3:21:43the pond from the entire drainage
3:21:46analysis. Um, nothing got there. in the
3:21:5110-year storm. So, in pre well, I don't
3:21:55know how wonky I want to get on all of
3:21:57this, but uh so I'll just say
3:22:01in post-development conditions, there
3:22:04was a little bit more flow than in
3:22:06pre-development. There was enough to
3:22:08raise the pond a tenth of an inch, and
3:22:10that's what the project added. Um it it
3:22:13went from 07 CFS to.16 CFS. And to put
3:22:18CFS into context,
3:22:20on an average day,
3:22:23the Wall River flows with,300 CFS.
3:22:27So 07 to.16,
3:22:31tenth of an inch rise. During the
3:22:33100redyear storm, which is 1% chance of
3:22:37that occurring any year, um it was it
3:22:41raises half an inch. Um it's a.3 CFS
3:22:45rise from 2.61 to 2.91 cfs.
3:22:51Again, these are negligible flows. It's
3:22:53a very these models that you create are
3:22:57very conservative to begin with. Um the
3:23:00soils are highly absorptive. It's going
3:23:02into the ground. It's not it's not going
3:23:05to overflow the pond. Um
3:23:08so and the driveways are gravel also I
3:23:12should say that roads and driveways are
3:23:13gravel is not behaved. Uh so the other
3:23:17the last issue I'll talk about is the
3:23:20pond slash dam. Um
3:23:24we know that
3:23:26uh this pond is
3:23:31well I when was it built? It was I guess
3:23:35I'll just say so the dam was classified
3:23:37by the DEEC in 2012. That's that's when
3:23:41the DEEC
3:23:43um gave it's called a Mooney Pond dam
3:23:45and they gave it a class A or low hazard
3:23:49class which is the lowest um hazard
3:23:52rating that the DEEC uses in their
3:23:55system. Um, so what that means is
3:24:00dam failure is unlikely to result in
3:24:03damage to anything more than isolated or
3:24:06unoccupied buildings, undeveloped lands,
3:24:09minor roads such as town or county roads
3:24:11unlikely to result in interruption of
3:24:13the board of utilities.
3:24:15So very low hazard if it were to fail.
3:24:18It's a giant earthn dam here. Um the
3:24:23issue is the eroding bank over here and
3:24:28that issue is caused it's you can see
3:24:31where the where the stream creek turns
3:24:35right there. It's caused from high flow
3:24:37events where they hit the bank um and
3:24:40they erode. So it's been happening
3:24:44long before
3:24:47uh this project was proposed.
3:24:50uh if this project goes away, it's still
3:24:52going to continue to happen and if this
3:24:55project is approved, then we're going to
3:24:59consult with the DEEC and we're going to
3:25:02figure out how to fix it. So, actually
3:25:04proposing this project is going to help
3:25:06to save the pond. It's in the owner's
3:25:08best interest to retain this pond, save
3:25:11it, and that's what we plan to do. We we
3:25:15just feel that that should be done after
3:25:18the planning board process. It's kind of
3:25:20a separate um a separate issue um with
3:25:25the DEC directly. That's that's
3:25:29what I have.
3:25:35Okay. The board have any uh comments?
3:25:39Pond. Is that what it's officially
3:25:40called? Yeah, I looked it Mooney Pond
3:25:43Dam. on the DEEC's site. It says Mooney
3:25:46on there and it's a low hazard damp.
3:25:51Anybody from the board?
3:25:54Anybody from the public want to comment
3:25:56on the project? Barbara?
3:26:19My name is Barbara Fornel and I live at
3:26:21Fort Bul Road and I've lived here for 35
3:26:24years. I have two letters I would like
3:26:26to read into the record.
3:26:29Are they both the same Barbara or
3:26:30they're different? Two different. So
3:26:33could we agree they they look long? Um I
3:26:37it is a public hearing and you have to
3:26:38give me my time. I I this is not a
3:26:41public hearing. This is a public
3:26:43hearing. It's not a public hearing
3:26:46in the legal definition of a public
3:26:48hearing. I ask for comment. The better
3:26:50way of doing this if you have general
3:26:52comments make the general comments and
3:26:54give us the papers and the papers will
3:26:57be considered as being part of the
3:27:00public hearing that hasn't opened yet. I
3:27:02simply ask does the public have any
3:27:03comments they'd like to make?
3:27:07that say public hearing. It was
3:27:10cancelled because we didn't notice it.
3:27:14Oh, I'm sorry. You said this for was not
3:27:18she just asked for
3:27:21and so I will start my comment that as a
3:27:24former school teacher it's embarrassing.
3:27:27I will make this comment first. the fact
3:27:29that you didn't have your ducks in the
3:27:31row and have this people have to leave
3:27:33because public hearings were cancelled
3:27:36and if attorneys didn't have what they
3:27:38needed that is not acceptable. This is
3:27:42planning board has a history of doing
3:27:44this doesn't look good to the public. It
3:27:47gets out to the public and the planning
3:27:48board doesn't know what you're doing.
3:27:51So I will read Steve's letter. From
3:27:53watching the review of this application,
3:27:56I have to say that I'm impressed that
3:27:58members of the board were not convinced
3:28:00regarding the Mooney Camp illegal burial
3:28:02located on Metal Lakes LLC property in
3:28:05question as it should be. I there
3:28:08therefore are submitting a Kingston
3:28:10Daily Freeman article dated August 2nd,
3:28:132002 detailing what happened at that
3:28:15property under review.
3:28:19The article is dated 2002 by Dan Leus
3:28:23from the um is mentioned in the Freeman.
3:28:27Rochester town board members Thursday
3:28:29agreed to investigate medical road
3:28:31property owners who were allegedly seen
3:28:33burying the remains of nearly 10
3:28:35buildings in holes. I didn't know this
3:28:38throughout the roughly 60 acre parcel.
3:28:41Little Hall resident Steven Frenel asked
3:28:43the board to investigate after telling
3:28:45its members Rochester law strictly
3:28:47prohibits the dumping of any kind of
3:28:49waste or debris on private property. He
3:28:52also informed them he had contact with
3:28:54the state BEC which was also
3:28:56investigating what happened to the
3:28:57buried main structure of area south
3:28:59buildings numerous large piles of debris
3:29:02that had been part of a former resort
3:29:04camp. Supervisor Howard Lipton said he
3:29:06and the board would discuss the
3:29:08situation with the town code enforcement
3:29:10officer at that time, Douglas Diamond.
3:29:12On June 19th, we're now said that there
3:29:14were piles of debris, cans, glass,
3:29:18metal, paper, rags, lumber, cinder
3:29:21blocks, piping, and furniture on Brent
3:29:23Brandenburg and Julie Chi's property.
3:29:26That day, a bulldozer and an extraator
3:29:28arrived, followed by the following day
3:29:30by the appearance of two garbage bins,
3:29:32he added. Over the course of the
3:29:33weekend, Fornel said large mounds of
3:29:35dirt were excavated from the site and
3:29:38calls came in from all the concerned
3:29:39neighbors saying the workers were
3:29:41burying refues and waste materials in
3:29:43the hold. Brandenburg and Cheetel's
3:29:45property is the former Happy H camp h
3:29:48camp happy lake demolished about three
3:29:51years ago. For now said 10 benalows were
3:29:54knocked down, but the debris remained on
3:29:55the site until June 22nd. Councilman
3:29:58Randy Hornbeck said he and Lipton were
3:30:00called to the site that day, but all he
3:30:01saw were pieces of concrete and the two
3:30:04or three garbage bins full of debris.
3:30:06When asked if he thought the total
3:30:08debris of the site could have been
3:30:09contained in those trash bins, Hornbeck
3:30:11said, "No, I could see where a hole was
3:30:14dug and covered up, but I don't know
3:30:16what was in there, and I saw concrete."
3:30:18Hornbeck said, "Regardless of what was
3:30:20in the hole," Cornell said. Section 118
3:30:22of our town code states that burying any
3:30:25kind of debris or waste on private
3:30:27property is strictly prohibited.
3:30:32As for the lakes's potential collapse
3:30:34via the erosion, for the planning board
3:30:36not to send a letter to the DEEC
3:30:38regarding that worrisome condition,
3:30:40claiming it doesn't have authority to do
3:30:42so seems really weak. To establish
3:30:45liability alone, it would seem the
3:30:47appropriate action, we would have to
3:30:49inform the DEEC of the condition and ask
3:30:51for an assessment. Should the DEEC then
3:30:54find the condition of the lake warrants
3:30:56immediate attention, the planning board
3:30:58could condition approval of this project
3:31:02uh upon New York City DEC sign off on
3:31:05that repair having been made. If no
3:31:07condition is rendered, it would be on
3:31:10the record as to the concern over the
3:31:12erosion issue, firmly establishing the
3:31:14applicant's responsibility to reme
3:31:16remedy the situation if in fact the DEEC
3:31:19considers it a problem. My reading of
3:31:21the planning board's position is that it
3:31:24doesn't have authority under seeker to
3:31:26order the removal of the buried camp
3:31:28remains. That position is also weak.
3:31:32Obviously, if the planning board ordered
3:31:34the applicant to dig up and remove the
3:31:36buried debris and there was nothing to
3:31:38be found, that would be a lawsuit the
3:31:40town of Rochester would lose. But in
3:31:43this case, there is sufficient evidence
3:31:45that the act of the burial occurred.
3:31:47There are attached pictures, debris from
3:31:49the buildings there one day and gone the
3:31:52next. And and and a condition of
3:31:55approval to dig up and dispose of the
3:31:57debris can clearly be seen as
3:31:59reasonable. and anything but capriccious
3:32:02seeing as the very contamination sits on
3:32:05top of our water protection zone.
3:32:08However, the compromise and undisturbed
3:32:10common area in perpetuity over the area
3:32:12of the buried remains does seem
3:32:15reasonable. Finally, the representative
3:32:17for this applicant actually questioned
3:32:20the clarity of the code requirement
3:32:23140-5.1
3:32:25A3A.
3:32:27quote, "Any residential uses, including
3:32:30subdivisions with projected on-site
3:32:33groundwater withdrawal and on-site
3:32:35sewage disposal closed using 2,000
3:32:39gallons a day, not what he quoted from
3:32:42the health department or more during any
3:32:45single 30-day period shall be designated
3:32:47as a type one action under SEA. A
3:32:50hydrogeeological study shall be required
3:32:52and mitigation including reduction in
3:32:55intensity or denial of use as necessary
3:32:57shall be made to protect our water
3:32:59supply. The clarity is clear. If only
3:33:02the applicant's reps would come in and
3:33:04present their case with facts without
3:33:07veiled threats of a lawsuit. Not very
3:33:10professional. The whining for clients in
3:33:13this town does seem dur
3:33:21as it existed. All the buildings. Here's
3:33:24another picture of the buildings that
3:33:27were buried.
3:33:29Here's a source from the award crier
3:33:32that they repeated back in 2002.
3:33:37So that was Steve's letter.
3:33:40my letter. The main reason I went and
3:33:43addressed the town board at their last
3:33:45workshop meeting. My main reason for
3:33:47addressing the town board this evening
3:33:48is to bring to your attention a
3:33:50situation that poses a danger to our
3:33:52residents and downtown.
3:33:54There was presently an application
3:33:56before the planning board called Metal
3:33:58Lakes. It is a proposed at that time 10
3:34:01lot subdivision at 481 Medica Hunts
3:34:04Road, formerly the Mooney Indoctrination
3:34:07Camp. The Mooney sold this property of
3:34:1066 acres at an auction for $125,000
3:34:15and then resold to Stone Creek Manor for
3:34:17$44,000.
3:34:19And this couple in July, after sitting
3:34:22vacant for 20 years, brought it from
3:34:24Brooklyn, purchased it for $2.8 million.
3:34:28But their
3:34:32property description report
3:34:35says the land assessment in 2024 was
3:34:38448,000.
3:34:40The full market value is 772
3:34:43and they paid 2.8 million.
3:34:46This couple from Brooklyn inherited a
3:34:48property they thought was ready for
3:34:49subdivision and soon found out they
3:34:52inherited problems that due to lack
3:34:53enforcement code enforcement in this
3:34:55town for 20 years under Doug uh uh under
3:34:58the present one and 15 years under Doug
3:35:01Dy we basically had no one checking
3:35:03anything especially things of
3:35:05significant impact. In fact, due to the
3:35:07fact that they are in a water aquifer
3:35:09protection zone, the new code states
3:35:12they must do a complete hydro geological
3:35:14study to ensure they can get 2,000
3:35:17gallons a day without diminishing
3:35:20surrounding property water supply. Work
3:35:22began on May 6th of 2025 because I could
3:35:25hear it with my windows closed. Did they
3:35:27pass the test? They have been working
3:35:29every nice day since then. What are they
3:35:30doing and do they have permission? In
3:35:33fact, over the past three years, I
3:35:34reported activity going on on that site
3:35:37by the previous owner to the code
3:35:38enforcement and nothing was done. They
3:35:41clear cut trees. They put in the road
3:35:43that he's talking about. They had a
3:35:45temporary building to house big trucks
3:35:47which was visible from the road. The
3:35:49existing camp was illegally buried. The
3:35:51entire camp of buildings, oil tanks,
3:35:53piping, species were buried instead of
3:35:55being taken off site. And now it is set
3:35:57vacant for 20 years. On this piece of
3:36:00property, a previous camp illegally
3:36:02created the lake by danning up the
3:36:04boodle hole stream on or what they call
3:36:07on Bakas Creek. I have a stack of
3:36:10historical documentation back to the 70s
3:36:12on this issue when was called campa. The
3:36:15lake was a problem 20 years ago and the
3:36:17hurricanes over the years have made the
3:36:19erosion of the land between the edge of
3:36:21the lake and the stream smaller and
3:36:22smaller. A neighbor went on Google Earth
3:36:25and said, "It is evident over the years
3:36:27that the lake is going to collapse."
3:36:29Town board member Helena Dul Duda
3:36:32publicly stated after viewing the
3:36:33situation to the applicant, "You are
3:36:36going to lose that lake. If the lake
3:36:38collapses, there is an impendent danger
3:36:40and damage to all the residents who live
3:36:42downstream, even extending maybe into
3:36:45downtown A. After attending meetings on
3:36:47this proposal since the beginning and
3:36:49making correspondences since November
3:36:5124, I brought the burial issue stating I
3:36:53had documentation along with the late
3:36:56situation to the attention of the
3:36:57planning board applicant and planning
3:36:59board attorney. Correspondence with
3:37:00chairman Rick Jones stated, quote, "It's
3:37:03a DEC issue." At a recent meeting, Mr.
3:37:06John stated that he conferred with other
3:37:07board members in the planning board of
3:37:09attorney and they stated the lake issue
3:37:11was not their issue on this application.
3:37:13I jumped up immediately left the meeting
3:37:15and sent the following email to Rick
3:37:17Jones. I had to leave this meeting as I
3:37:19was so disgusted with the ignorance and
3:37:21the nonchalant lack of feeling of any
3:37:22responsibility by the town officials and
3:37:25attorney as the danger that that lake
3:37:27poses to the resident and downtown
3:37:29Aquort. It is quote it is obvious to me
3:37:32that no one in power or authority is
3:37:33going to do anything. I felt I had to. I
3:37:36contacted the DEC DEC by phone, got the
3:37:40number. I spoke to an officer. After
3:37:42explaining my concern, he directed me to
3:37:44the Department of Ecosystem Health at
3:37:47this number.
3:37:48I called twice and left a lengthy
3:37:50messages to my concern along with my
3:37:52name, address, and contact number. I
3:37:54have never heard back. My husband has
3:37:56written correspondence to the planning
3:37:58board back in November 24 on this
3:38:00project and parcel and recently
3:38:02suggested that before I write to the
3:38:04DEEC ask the town board to write a
3:38:06letter to the DEC that this situation
3:38:08has come to their attention and you
3:38:10would like it they would like it
3:38:11investigated. I would hope the town
3:38:13board would share my concerns and act
3:38:14accordingly. I've also included the
3:38:16property description port for this
3:38:18process parcel because originally when I
3:38:21went to the assessor, the owner's names
3:38:23and address and everything wasn't filled
3:38:25in. She filled it in for me. So, if
3:38:27anybody needed to contact you, now they
3:38:29know how to do that.
3:38:36Uh, thank you for your time. Uh,
3:38:38Barbara,
3:38:41can we have copies of that, Barbara? Do
3:38:43you have copies?
3:38:45I have the one from Steve.
3:38:48I have this one says right here. I
3:38:51turned it into the town board and asked
3:38:53them to copy all town registers. And
3:38:56right here it says CC all town board
3:38:58members and planning board members. I
3:39:00gave this to Kate and she said she would
3:39:02forward it. So if you didn't get it
3:39:04another
3:39:06and can you submit that Barbara? So just
3:39:09to save time, can you send that to the
3:39:11planning board? These are Can I send
3:39:13this to the planning?
3:39:15We'll take it right now. Guaranteed
3:39:17we'll get it.
3:39:19I know about the one from Steve, but and
3:39:21also the planning board minutes are way
3:39:23behind,
3:39:28but if you want to get information, it's
3:39:30hard. Um, any other comments from the
3:39:33public?
3:39:36Yes, sir.
3:39:38So, this is just uh to give a piece of
3:39:42information for the board um to
3:39:47investigate themselves because I I can't
3:39:51attest to its veracity or not. Um but we
3:39:57happen to be speaking about this
3:39:59property um with some uh someone who was
3:40:04a surveyor for the DEEC for a period of
3:40:08more than 20 years. And he commented to
3:40:12us that if there were um remediation
3:40:19had to be done on a property that had
3:40:23passed ownership from the time at which
3:40:26uh damage was done uh through owner to
3:40:30owner to owner to owner to owner. Um and
3:40:34it was not
3:40:37fully discovered. Um, and to the present
3:40:41owner that every single owner back to
3:40:46the time of the damage would need to
3:40:48share in the remediation that had to be
3:40:52done. That would not fall on the present
3:40:56owners. Um, that everyone who had owned
3:40:59that property from the time of the
3:41:01damage forward would need to, you know,
3:41:05pony up or ante up uh for that. use. So
3:41:10that's something to investigate as to
3:41:12whether or not that is the law. Um and
3:41:15if it ever comes into effect for this
3:41:18particular project um that um the
3:41:22present owners would not be left, you
3:41:25know, to
3:41:27have to pay whatever costs for that
3:41:30remediation were would necessary.
3:41:33Can can you just give us your name just
3:41:35Thank you. Uh, Robert Lesn. And where do
3:41:38you live? We live on nearby near Barbara
3:41:4256 Hall Road. Thank you.
3:41:47Anybody else?
3:41:51Does the board want to make any comments
3:41:52about uh anything they've heard or any
3:41:55questions for the uh
3:41:58and um Matt, could you address the
3:42:01hydrogeeological
3:42:03comment and the 2,000 gallons?
3:42:07Well, that I mean that's in the code.
3:42:08The code was just if the withdrawal is
3:42:11over 2,000 you have to do a hydro.
3:42:15Right. Right. We did we did what we were
3:42:17supposed to already. All right.
3:42:22And did anybody hear that? Yes. That
3:42:25they did do the they did exactly with
3:42:28the plant with the code.
3:42:30And and what we've seen what we've heard
3:42:32from you tonight is that the impact on
3:42:35the level of the pond is negligible.
3:42:38Negligible. So does every is everyone
3:42:40kind of on board? Yeah. In fact, Matt, I
3:42:43would like that whole you started to say
3:42:46this is really gets wonky and I read
3:42:49your wonky stuff or the wonky stuff from
3:42:51Labella. Could you just summarize that
3:42:54section for the board in writing where
3:42:56you talked about um
3:43:01a half of a half an inch with Yeah. the
3:43:04actual volume.
3:43:06Just replay that in writing to the
3:43:07board. So if we want to refer to it, we
3:43:11don't have to go through the wonky stuff
3:43:12from Labella.
3:43:16S
3:43:17I just want to repeat we discussed that
3:43:21burial stuff and we agree it's there's
3:43:23no benefit to dig it out. Just leave it
3:43:25as it is since 20 some years past a lot
3:43:29of the stuff probably deteriorated
3:43:31already. And and you and you did the
3:43:34water test quality right next to it
3:43:36where where they said that it was buried
3:43:39there right
3:43:42and there was no oils or Yeah. what
3:43:45Zorian is referring to at one point the
3:43:47board was talking to the applicant about
3:43:48digging it up and the
3:43:53those comments or questions came from
3:43:54people with little knowledge of these
3:43:56things and the consensus amongst the
3:43:58expert I just don't mean the applicant
3:44:00but it was from Helina Jennifer
3:44:04and may have even been from whatever
3:44:06experience Dave had in such matters I
3:44:08don't remember was leave it be it's been
3:44:11there for quote unquote a long time of
3:44:14from Greg also. So that's what Grzorian
3:44:17is referring to. Leave the material
3:44:19there. And that's when we were convinced
3:44:22that we need to do a hydrogeeological
3:44:24study, which we had to do by code
3:44:25anyway. And it showed no impact.
3:44:29The hydro study, the impact study, if
3:44:33you had a chance to read it, each of the
3:44:35five wells, um there's a bit of detail
3:44:39on each one.
3:44:41uh what the impact on the I guess it's
3:44:43cool the head volume or whatever but the
3:44:45impact was zero to negligible on each of
3:44:48those five wells they believe they took
3:44:51five minute I think it was five minute
3:44:52increments that they were monitoring so
3:44:55it was very frequent data points that
3:44:57they were collecting during the pump
3:44:59down well so it wasn't that it went down
3:45:01and yeah they would have caught it if
3:45:03there was a change as a result of right
3:45:05thank you Jen
3:45:07um I had a question that just based on
3:45:11um this may be obvious but based on some
3:45:13oversightes I've seen in previous
3:45:15projects the hundredyear cycle or
3:45:18whatever that fuzzy math you were
3:45:20talking about I understand that
3:45:21infiltration to the pond is negligible
3:45:23but let's say we have a 100redyear storm
3:45:25on Bahole Creek that's I don't know 40t
3:45:29away from it was your study
3:45:31incorporating Bahole Creek under storm
3:45:34conditions as well as that pond from the
3:45:37downs slope of the property that we're
3:45:39talking about in isolation. So my study
3:45:43was analyzing all of the runoff not not
3:45:47infiltration but surface runoff that
3:45:50would go into the pond. So whatever's in
3:45:53Bhole Creek doesn't go into the pond.
3:45:55Have you ever seen hole under 100year
3:45:58storm conditions?
3:46:00I
3:46:02have you ever seen beautiful creek under
3:46:04100year storm conditions? Have you? Yes.
3:46:06I I haven't. Okay. I'm just saying it's
3:46:08it will impact that area for sure,
3:46:12guaranteed.
3:46:15And we're going to have the worst
3:46:18season this year. The worst hurricane
3:46:21season this year. Okay. I you know
3:46:23that's that's what you're saying is that
3:46:25the creek overflows and goes into the
3:46:28pond. That's what I think it's something
3:46:29you should study. Okay. Because it's I
3:46:32mean what's the topography? It's like 20
3:46:34ft. At least 20 ft. Oh, 20. I can take a
3:46:36look at that. It's a good idea. Sure.
3:46:38Thank you. I think the concern is,
3:46:40correct me if I'm wrong, and I have seen
3:46:42that that the uh the erosion on Bron
3:46:45Little Creek of the outside. Is that
3:46:47what you're referring to? Absolutely.
3:46:49Oh, yeah. That's what we were talking
3:46:50about earlier. That's not going into the
3:46:53drainage.
3:46:59We're not talking about ground water.
3:47:00We're talking about surface
3:47:03water
3:47:04and sort. And so anyway, let me let me
3:47:07understand the back and forth here.
3:47:09Bhole Creek. It's the Mumbus Creek.
3:47:13Please call it by Are we talking about
3:47:15We're talking about the Mumbo. Hang on,
3:47:17Alina. Bhole is going into Mumbus,
3:47:20right? No, it's a little hole. Is you're
3:47:22talking about the creek that's on there
3:47:24that we see that used to be Raptchester
3:47:26Creek or a different creek? That same
3:47:29That's why it's the same one. It's the
3:47:31same one. A rename. I just I thought
3:47:34what you were talking about. Okay. I
3:47:35thought we came about another one. It's
3:47:36the same one. And so Peter's comment
3:47:39that we're talking about the erosion of
3:47:41the
3:47:43of the side of the uh the external side.
3:47:45Yeah. The external side, not that
3:47:47overflowing and coming up 30 40 ft into
3:47:50the pond. No. Okay. Right. I just Well,
3:47:53that's what streams do. But when that
3:47:55thing is raging Yeah. That's part of the
3:47:57problem. Yeah. And I think the comment
3:47:59that we made two meetings ago and the
3:48:01board pretty much agreed to it. Not
3:48:03pretty much. They did agree to it. Is
3:48:05that worst case scenario,
3:48:09the force of nature in the Mombacus
3:48:11brutal hole is going to do damage to
3:48:14this property. And that's what the
3:48:16applicant needs to talk to the DEEC
3:48:18about. There's nothing that the
3:48:20applicant can do without the DEC's
3:48:23approval and and collaboration and doing
3:48:26something. And they're just not at the
3:48:29point of they don't even have approval
3:48:31to do this project. So why would they
3:48:34begin to do something without first
3:48:36getting approval and then dealing with
3:48:37the DEEC? We can make as a condition
3:48:40presumably and we'll have to talk about
3:48:42that. We can make as a condition that um
3:48:45within a period some period of time that
3:48:47you're going to seek input from the
3:48:48DEEC. That certainly seems reasonable.
3:48:51But to say that you have to you have to
3:48:54do it before
3:48:56uh create the solution before we give
3:48:59you approval doesn't make any sense to
3:49:01me.
3:49:03Doesn't make any sense to the board. The
3:49:05main point is just that this project is
3:49:08not impacting the situation that's
3:49:11already happening. They're two separate
3:49:13issues.
3:49:14If we go away, that issue stays the
3:49:17same. If we do the project, we'll
3:49:20actually
3:49:21talk with the DC and mitigate the
3:49:23situation. So, we're going to improve it
3:49:25because it's affect their properties
3:49:27essentially because they care about
3:49:31hope. All right.
3:49:34Anybody else from the board? Anybody
3:49:36else from the public? I just want to say
3:49:39that's why I went to the town board
3:49:40because I'm thinking if this project
3:49:42does not go through who is going to that
3:49:46problem's going to continue. It has for
3:49:4820 years. Who is going to now correct
3:49:52that lake so it doesn't collapse? If
3:49:54they don't get approval, they're not
3:49:55going to do it. So that's project.
3:49:59Pardon? Shouldn't you be in support of
3:50:00the project then? Why would I be in I
3:50:03should be I was bringing a little
3:50:05levity. No, I don't take levity as you
3:50:08can see in serious situation. Okay.
3:50:11Thank you, Barbara. Yes, sir. Um,
3:50:15you know, there's been conversation
3:50:17about the impact um of the collapse
3:50:23of that bank of the pond um through some
3:50:30ongoing uh erosion over time. I guess
3:50:34I'm wondering
3:50:36does anyone have something you know to
3:50:40say about if that erosion were u to
3:50:45cause that collapse? What would be this,
3:50:50you know, the likely impact of the water
3:50:54in the lake ending up in the Mafus Creek
3:50:59and then traveling down?
3:51:04It's responsibility. It's not
3:51:07Go ahead, John. You have a comment. So,
3:51:09the the dam is classified as a class A
3:51:12dam. That means that the state has
3:51:15determined that it has a low hazard
3:51:17impact downstream. And what the state
3:51:20will do is they will look downstream to
3:51:22see is there a house on the right there?
3:51:25Is there a you know a hospital nearby?
3:51:28They'll look to see what's downstream
3:51:30and they'll do their own analysis to
3:51:32understand how much water is in the how
3:51:35much water is then founded and if that
3:51:37were to collapse, how would that impact
3:51:40downstream? And the state has determined
3:51:42that it is a very low hazard dam at
3:51:44class A which is the lowest um or the
3:51:47least um hazardous type of dam and
3:51:52that's how they make that determination
3:51:53and it's done solely by the state um and
3:51:56that's how they you know classif
3:52:00and when was that again was a years ago
3:52:02the looked at it years ago not now I
3:52:07okay I we we answered the gentleman's
3:52:10question Yeah. Okay. Thank you. The um
3:52:13anybody else from the board?
3:52:16Okay.
3:52:22What does the board want to do next?
3:52:24We do need to do a determination of
3:52:26significance at some point in time. Um,
3:52:36the
3:52:38we're going to need an R, let me just
3:52:40jump down a little bit. We're going to
3:52:41need an RMA.
3:52:43I think you know that we're looking uh
3:52:45the attorney has or will have the HOA
3:52:48agreement to take a look at that. And I
3:52:51think in terms of the public hearing, I
3:52:52think it'll be appropriate to leave it
3:52:54open um another meeting
3:52:57uh to the 23rd
3:53:01and at that point in time decide whether
3:53:03we want to close it or not and of course
3:53:05do the determination of significance. I
3:53:07think that's appropriate and fair. Yes.
3:53:10Do the determination of significance at
3:53:11that point. What is the determinance?
3:53:12The 23rd. It's what's determination.
3:53:16Determination of significance is the
3:53:17seeker step which negative declaration.
3:53:23Sorry.
3:53:24Is the board all right with that? Yeah.
3:53:26All right. So, um we're going to
3:53:28continue. We're going to leave the
3:53:29public hearing open until the 23rd.
3:53:32All right. I think that's it. Yeah.
3:53:35Thank you. Good presentation. Thank you.
3:53:39Thank you. I wish all the presentations
3:53:41would want that one.
3:53:49It's always
3:53:53ask for something.
3:53:59Hey,
3:54:04most recent
3:54:06most recent DC inspector.
3:54:09I saw that he
3:54:18order.
3:54:29Do you want to go home? You want to be
3:54:30the reason for not going home?
3:54:33This was an important question. It
3:54:35wasn't, "Hi, how are you doing?" It was
3:54:37a technical question. Um, yeah. Does the
3:54:40board want to go home? Anybody want to
3:54:42propose? Yes. Make a motion. Just make a
3:54:46motion. I Han seconds.
3:54:50Colleina thirds. Everybody in favor of
3:54:51closing the
3:55:01Yeah, that's their lawyer. Oh, he comes
3:55:05from the same school as this lawyer.
3:55:07become slave.
3:55:16Was literally
3:55:24all that
3:55:27show
3:55:30together. That's

About this transcript

This page contains the full transcript of 6/9/2025 Planning Board Meeting by Town of Rochester, generated from the public captions YouTube serves with the video. The transcript has 31,668 words across 4,686 segments, with the original timestamps preserved so you can click any line to jump to that moment in the embedded player.

What you can do with it

Use the transcript to take notes, quote the speaker, build a study guide, generate a summary with ChatGPT or Claude via the YouTube Summary tool, or export it as a timed subtitle file with YouTube to SRT. You can also re-open it in the transcriber to translate the transcript into 100+ languages.

Free YouTube transcript tool

YouTube2Text is a free YouTube transcript generator — no signup, no daily limit. Paste any YouTube link and get the full transcript instantly, with timestamps, click-to-jump, translation to 100+ languages, AI prompts for ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini, and exports to TXT, SRT, VTT, or Markdown.