PLANNING BOARD MINUTES September 9, 2002

MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman, Doug Allen, Mert Bartels, Tom Ferreri, Brian Gagne, Tom Morrison, Kevin Rooney. Also present were Scott Allen, Town Engineer, Ken Nawrocki, Town Councilman, and Anthony Villani, Town Attorney.

Chairman Doug Allen called the meeting to order at 7:22 p.m., and went into Executive Session to discuss possible litigation at 7:23 p.m. Meeting returned to Open Session at 7:30 p.m.

A motion to waive the reading of the Legal Notice as it appeared in the Times was made by Mert Bartels, seconded by Tom Morrison. All in favor, motion carried.

PUBLIC HEARINGS

PB-23-02 - Sanson/Corner Wilson & Wilkinson Rds./1 lot site plan - Preliminary & Final

Motion made by Tom Ferreri, seconded by Brian Gagne, to open this public hearing. All in favor. Robert Seeley was present, representing Matthews Consulting and Mr. & Mrs. Sanson, to speak in favor of this application. No one else was present to speak for or against this application. A motion was made by Brian Gagne, seconded by Tom Ferreri, to close this public hearing. All in favor, motion carried.

PB-24-02 - Dentico/Walworth Road/1 lot site plan & subdivision - Preliminary & Final

Motion made by Mert Bartels, seconded by Tom Ferreri, to open this public hearing. All in favor. Robert Seeley was present, representing Matthews Consulting and Robert Dentico & Peggy Richter, to speak in favor of this application. Mr. Gary Hetzel, 2140 Eddy Road, the current owner of this property was present to speak against this application. Mr. Hetzel stated that in a letter dated August 31, 2002, from his attorney, William Fletcher, to Mark Krause, attorney for Mr. Dentico & Ms. Richter, he had revoked authority to proceed with this application. Mr. Villani responded that the application is by the prospective purchaser (Dentico/Richter) of this parcel of land, accompanied by a permission and authorization dated July 15, 2002, by the owner to the purchasers to make application. The application is, therefore, by Dentico/Richter. It is not the application of Mr. Hetzel. The Board then received a copy of the letter from Mr. Fletcher saying that in the underlying purchase/sale contract certain contingencies were not met, and that, therefore, the contract was null and void. Mr. Villani advised that the validity of the contract is not an issue the Planning Board can decide, but they can certainly make any approval of the application contingent upon the sale closing. Mr. Allen then advised Mr. Hetzel that the Board would proceed with the application, and the closing of the sale/purchase of the parcel would be up to the parties involved. Mr. Hetzel then restated his position. No one else was present to speak for or against this application. A motion was made by Mert Bartels, seconded by Kevin Rooney, to close this public hearing. All in favor, motion carried.

PB-26-02 - Amesbury/County Line Road - 1 lot realty subdivision - Final

Motion made by Tom Ferreri, seconded by Kevin Rooney, to open this public hearing. All in favor. Oliver Amesbury was present to speak in favor of this application. There was no one else present to speak for or against this application. Motion made by Tom Ferreri, seconded by Mert Bartels, to close this public hearing. All in favor, motion carried.

OLD BUSINESS

PB-21-02 - Gananda Partnership/Pheasant Run Phase I/43 lot site plan & subdivision - Final

Mark Ward of Home Properties/Gananda Partnership addressed the Board regarding the drainage issues and three (3) easements they were seeking from two (2) residents on White Pine and one (1) on Hance Road. They have met with the homeowners, and the Robinsons on Hance Road did not want to grant this easement as they felt it would devalue their property. Gananda Partnership then went back to the two homeowners on White Pine regarding extension of the berm to redirect the water onto Gananda property and out onto Hance Rd. The Sohns and Dr. Scott felt this was not the best remedy and would prefer a drain. All parties have since been contacted again regarding Gananda Partnership installing the drain line on their properties. Reduction of the easement to 15 ft. has also been explored. To date, no response has been received from the homeowners, and there appears to be a stalemate on this issue.

Mr. Ward feels Gananda has taken care of all issues on the "punch list" other than drainage. They are now looking for final approval for this project and will continue to work with the homeowners to work out the drainage issue. He restated that Gananda Partnership did not feel they could accept this as a particular condition on the development of Pheasant Run.

Scott Allen then addressed Mr. Ward regarding the dedication of Blue Spruce, White Pine Lane and part of Evergreen Hills. It has been brought to Scott's attention that the dedication on these roads was not completed. Mr. Ward has not had a chance to check with Tom Farrell, who was the attorney handling this matter at the time. C of O's should not have been issued for houses on these roads without dedication. Holly Crescent, Blue Spruce & White Pine also lack a topcoat of paving. Holly Crescent has been dedicated as have the first two phases of Evergreen Hills. Following that, there is no record of any further dedications. Lack of proper paving on these roads has resulted in the concrete gutters being damaged by the snowplows and the binder breaking up, especially on Holly Crescent. Mr. Ward responded he didn't have an answer as to why these roads haven't been dedicated and/or topped. Scott cited this as one of the reasons the Town requires a Letter of Credit. Mr. Ward will pursue this issue with Gananda Partnership and Monroe Roadways, who has their contract for paving.

Mr. Villani then stated that many of these matters came up because the Planning Board had been receiving opposition and complaints regarding this project. One of the areas identified was the road dedications. Another problem is drainage, and by approving the subdivision it may be taking away the only ability for the developer to remediate this problem and others. Mr. Villani further stated there appears to be a feeling in the community that the Phase I application deviates from the developer's original agreement on lot arrangements (one-on-one) and position of the entrance. Additional issues include drainage from the north end of the project going into Walworth (Developer needs to respond to Walworth how they intend to handle.), and the amount of time from original SEQR reviews to present & changes that have taken place in that area. It is Mr. Villani's understanding that no SEQR review has been done on this subdivision, and he questioned whether an approval could be given without this. It was felt the last SEQR review in this area was probably in the 70's when it was rezoned NCD and would not be effective today. Mr. Villani also could not find any showings of Staging Plans as cited in Zoning Section 135-115, which calls for the developer presenting annually to the Planning Board a master plan showing the existing developments, the projected developments for the succeeding three (3) years together with an analysis of projected performance with land use ratios and other requirements of that section.

Mr. Villani stated he had some concerns about giving approval and indicated the Board could always deny this application. The other alternative is to extend the time, which may not be acceptable to the developer. He explained this is a combined site plan/subdivision application, and as a result comes under two different sections of the Town law. The site plan sections of Town law do not have any default approvals after the 62 days cited. However, under the sections dealing with subdivisions, there is a default approval. If the Board does not act within 62 days, the subdivision is automatically approved, unless that time limit is extended. Therefore, options are whether the developer will extend time to go into the areas mentioned such as SEQR process, approve the application, deny the application.

Mr. Ward then questioned Doug Allen regarding the drainage stipulation. Mr. Allen responded that this is an issue that must be addressed. Mr. Ward felt all options had been exhausted and was looking to the Town for assistance. Mr. Villani stated that without homeowner participation the only other option was for the Town to condemn this property, but that is a cumbersome & expensive project. He felt it was better for Gananda Partnership to pursue resolving this issue.

Mr. Ward then went on to explain that the timing (fall) is now right to put in the berm, install the trees, hydroseed & install the retention pond. When it comes to moving dirt for the roadways, that can come later. Paving of roads would not be scheduled until May of 2003. Mr. Morrison questioned if there is a way to allow the berms to be installed prior to approval of the development. Mr. Villani then questioned if the installation of a berm would trigger SEQR in itself. Kevin Rooney was opposed to the idea of any work being done prior to approval. Mr. Ward agreed he would like to see approval in place before installation of the berm. Mr. Villani also explained that if SEQR is involved, the 62-day approval time does not begin until after SEQR is completed. Mr. Ward then agreed to a 90-day extension of the approval period.

Motion made by Kevin Rooney, seconded by Mert Bartels, to extend this application approval period for 90 days to run until December 21, 2002. Mr. Ferreri added he would like to see a provision for Home Properties to provide their statement of projects for the next three years as stipulated in Zoning Section 135-115. Discussion followed regarding timelines, DEC approvals and sticking points on this project. Mr. Villani then interjected that he could not defend an approval of this project at this time. Mr. Morrison felt this stipulation should not be part of this motion, but should be a separate issue. After further discussion, the motion stands as originally proposed. Poll of members taken on motion as follows: Allen - yes; Bartels - yes; Ferreri - no; Gagne - yes; Morrison - yes; Rooney - yes. Motion carried. Mr. Ward, representing Gananda Partnership and Doug Allen as Chairman of the Planning Board signed the 90-day extension agreement. Copies were provided to both parties, as well as to Mr. Villani.

PB-23-02 - Sanson/Corner Wilson & Wilkinson Rds./1 lot site plan - Preliminary & Final

Bob Seeley, Matthews Consulting, presented the plans for this site. He went over the points in the Town Engineer's review, with appropriate corrections to be made. ZBA approvals have been given for the barn size & height, sight distances are good, as are perc rates. Short SEQR indicates no impact to the environment. Motion for negative SEQR declaration made by Tom Morrison, seconded by Brian Gagne. All in favor. Motion made by Tom Morrison, seconded by Kevin Rooney, to make preliminary & final approvals, subject to engineering changes. All in favor.

PB-24-02 - Dentico & Richter/Walworth Road/1 lot subdivision & site approval - Preliminary & Final

Ms. Richter & Mr. Dentico were present to request that this application go forward. Scott Allen indicated there were no negative environmental elements on the SEQR, but would be noting there was controversy over this parcel. Motion for negative SEQR declaration made by Tom Ferreri, seconded by Mert Bartels. All in favor. Town Engineer's recommendations were reviewed with Bob Seeley of Matthews Consulting. Motion made by Kevin Rooney, seconded by Tom Morrison, to approve this subdivision & site plan subject to engineering changes and the closing of the sale from Mr. Hetzel to Mr. Dentico & Ms. Richter. If the transfer of property does not occur, this approval is rescinded. All in favor - motion carried.

PB-26-02 - Amesbury/County Line Rd./1 lot subdivision - Final

There were no engineering comments on this property. Short SEQR - Motion for negative SEQR declaration made by Brian Gagne, seconded by Mert Bartels. All in favor. Motion made for final realty subdivision made by Brian Gagne, seconded by Mert Bartels. All in favor - motion carried.

NEW BUSINESS

PB-25-02 - Sutton/Strand - Kittering Rd/1 lot site plan - Sketch

Clancy Burkwit, representing the applicants, presented the sketch plan. The Town Engineer's letter was reviewed with attention to Item 2 regarding the septic system. Mr. Burkwit indicated the area had been perc'd again on August 20, 2002 with good results. It was also recommended that the wetland areas should be noted on the map. Motion to approve this sketch subject to the engineering comments made by Brian Gagne, seconded by Tom Morrison - all in favor.

PB-27-02 - Churchill/Shores - West Walworth Rd. (Lot 3 - Forsay)/1 lot site plan - Sketch

Bob Seeley, representing Matthews Consulting, presented this sketch plan. Town Engineer's recommendations were reviewed. The shared driveway and placement of evergreen buffering between the house and lots along the road were discussed. It was felt that trees would be enough; no berm would be necessary. Motion made for sketch approval subject to engineering comments made by Brian Gagne, seconded by Kevin Rooney - all in favor.

PB-28-02 - Ackerman/Victor Road/1 lot site plan - Sketch

Bob Seeley, representing Matthews Consulting, presented the sketch plan. The Town Engineer's recommendations were reviewed. Motion made by Brian Gagne to approve this sketch subject to engineering comments, seconded by Kevin Rooney. All in favor - motion carried.

PB-29-02 - Cotter/West Walworth Rd. (Lot 1 - Forsay)/1 lot site plan - Sketch

Newt Gowdy, representing the applicant, presented the sketch plan. Engineering comments were reviewed and discussion of the barn dimensions (sq. footage to be less than that of residence & height to be less than 16 ft. - excess of either requires zoning variance). Motion made by Brian Gagne, seconded by Kevin Rooney, to approve this sketch subject to engineering comments. All in favor - motion carried.

MINUTES

Motion made by Kevin Rooney, seconded by Mert Bartels, to approve the minutes of the August 26, 2002 meeting. All in favor - motion carried.

ADJOURNMENT

Motion to adjourn made by Mert Bartels, seconded by Brian Gagne. Meeting adjourned at 9:12 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Susan Bush