1 1 2 STATE OF NEW YORK : COUNTY OF ORANGE TOWN OF NEWBURGH PLANNING BOARD 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - X In the Matter of 4 LANDS OF PICARD (2006-43) 6 Wells Road at intersection of Fostertown Road 7 Section 39; Block 1; Lot 20 R-2 Zone 8 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - X 9 PUBLIC HEARING TWO-LOT SUBDIVISION 11 Date: August 2, 2007 Time: 7:00 p.m. 12 Place: Town of Newburgh Town Hall 13 1496 Route 300 Newburgh, NY 12550 14 BOARD MEMBERS: JOHN P. EWASUTYN, Chairman FRANK S. GALLI 16 CLIFFORD C. BROWNE KENNETH MENNERICH 17 EDWARD T. O'DONNELL, JR. 18 ALSO PRESENT: DINA HAINES MICHAEL H. DONNELLY, ESQ. 19 BRYANT COCKS PATRICK HINES KAREN ARENT KEN WERSTED 21 MICHAEL MUSSO 22 APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE: WILLIAM HILDRETH 23 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - X MICHELLE L. CONERO 24 10 Westview Drive Wallkill, New York 12589 (845)895-3018 LANDS OF PICARD 2 CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. I would like to welcome you to the Town of Newburgh Planning Board meeting of the 2nd of August. At this time we'll call the meeting to order with a roll call vote. MR. GALLI: Present. MR. BROWNE: Present. MR. MENNERICH: Present. MR. O'DONNELL: Present. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Myself present. The Planning Board has experts that provide input and advice to the Planning Board in reaching various SEQRA determinations. I ask that they introduce themselves now. MR. DONNELLY: Michael Donnelly, Planning Board Attorney. MR. HINES: Pat Hines with McGoey, Hauser & Edsall, Consulting Engineers. MR. COCKS: Bryant Cocks, Planning Consultant, Garling Associates. MS. ARENT: Karen Arent, Landscape Architectural Consultant. MR. WERSTED: Ken Wersted, Creighton, LANDS OF PICARD 3 Manning Engineering, Traffic Consultant. MR. MUSSO: Mike Musso, HDR LMS, Wireless Consultant. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: At this point I would like to turn the meeting over to Ed O'Donnell. MR. O'DONNELL: Would you please rise and join me in saluting the flag of our country. (Pledge of Allegiance.) MR. O'DONNELL: Would you please turn off all electronic devices. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: The first item of business this evening is the lands of Picard. It's a public hearing for a two-lot subdivision located on Wells Road at the intersection of Fostertown Road. The property is zoned R-2. It's being represented by William Hildreth. I'll ask Ken Mennerich to read the notice of hearing. MR. MENNERICH: "Notice of hearing, Town of Newburgh Planning Board. Please take notice that the Planning Board of the Town of Newburgh, Orange County, New York will hold a public hearing pursuant to Section 276 of the Town Law on the application of lands of Picard LANDS OF PICARD 4 for a two-lot subdivision on premises Wells Road and the intersection of Fostertown Road in the Town of Newburgh, designated on Town tax map as Section 39; Block 1; Lot 20. Said hearing will be held on the 2nd day of August 2007 at the Town Hall Meeting Room, 1496 Route 300, Newburgh, New York at 7:00 p.m. at which time all interested persons will be given an opportunity to be heard. By order of the Town of Newburgh Planning Board. John P. Ewasutyn, Chairman, Planning Board Town of Newburgh. Dated June 29, 2007. Publish one time only no later than July 27, 2007." MS. HAINES: The notice of hearing was published in The Sentinel on July 10th and in The Mid-Hudson Times on July 25th. The applicant's representative sent out eight registered letters, seven were returned. The publications and mailings are all in order. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Thank you. Before we ask Mr. Hildreth to give his presentation I would like to turn to Mike Donnelly, Planning Board Attorney, to explain to the public the purpose of a public hearing. MR. DONNELLY: There are two public LANDS OF PICARD 5 hearings on this evening. The first one is for a subdivision, the second one is for a special permit. In both cases before the Planning Board takes action we want to give the public the opportunity to bring to the attention of the Planning Board any matters that the Planning Board and its various consultants have not recognized or seen themselves. Therefore, after the applicant gives a presentation the Chairman will give anyone who wishes to speak a chance to be heard. We'd ask that after you are identified as a speaker, that you please tell us your name. If you would please spell your name for our Stenographer so we get it down properly, that would be helpful. And tell us where you live in relation to the project so we can better understand your perspective. We would ask you to address your comments to the Board but if you have questions and it's appropriate that they be answered this evening, the Chairman will either ask the applicant or one of the consultants to answer your questions. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Thank you. Bill. LANDS OF PICARD 6 MR. HILDRETH: Thank you. My name is Bill Hildreth, I'm the land surveyor that prepared the subdivision plans for this application which is a two-lot subdivision of 2.74 acres at the southeast corner of Wells Road and Fostertown Road. As it exists, there is a house at the southwestern portion. The proposed subdivision is going to create just under an acre of land. The boundary will run along an existing fence that is there. The property is served by municipal water and sewer. Access to the new lot will be off of Wells Road. The remaining property consists of 1.7 acres and will house the house. There's no plans to subdivide that. This application did receive one variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals for a front yard setback to the existing house. It was a pre-existing condition. It had nothing to do with the proposed new lot which is completely compliant with all of the Zoning Regulations. LANDS OF PICARD 7 CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Thank you. Is there anyone here that has any questions or comments on the two-lot subdivision? (No response.) CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Thank you. I'll turn to our consultants for their final review comments. MR. HINES: We have no outstanding comments. We reviewed the project. The water and sewer details we had requested are on the plans. The City of Newburgh has signed off on the flow acceptance from the new residential structure. The plans are in order. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Bryant Cocks, Planning Consultant. MR. COCKS: The applicant addressed all of our previous issues. The only thing we were waiting for was from the County Planning Department, which we received; and a letter from the highway department, which we have not received yet. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Final comments from Board Members. Frank Galli? LANDS OF PICARD 8 MR. GALLI: No additional. MR. BROWNE: Nothing. MR. MENNERICH: No. MR. O'DONNELL: No comments. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Since at this point there's no interest from the public to comment, I'll move for a motion to close the public hearing on the lands of Picard. MR. GALLI: So moved. MR. O'DONNELL: Second. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: I have a motion by Frank Galli. I have a second by Ed O'Donnell. Any discussion of the motion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: I'll move for a roll call vote starting with Frank Galli. MR. GALLI: Aye. MR. BROWNE: Aye. MR. MENNERICH: Aye. MR. O'DONNELL: Aye. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Myself yes. So carried. At this point I'll turn to Mike Donnelly to give us the conditions of approval LANDS OF PICARD 9 that will be made part of the resolution. MR. DONNELLY: First we'll make reference to the Zoning Board decision and carry over any conditions contained within it. This approval will be conditioned upon the receipt of the highway superintendent's letter of approval that was mentioned earlier. Since we have the sewer flow allocation approval, I will remove that as a condition. Finally, it is subject to the payment of fees in lieu of parkland. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Having heard those conditions, I'll move for final approval for the lands of Picard two-lot subdivision subject to those conditions. MR. MENNERICH: So moved. MR. O'DONNELL: Second. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: I have a motion by Ken Mennerich. I have a second by Ed O'Donnell. Any discussion of the motion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: I'll move for a roll call vote starting with Frank Galli. MR. GALLI: Aye. MR. BROWNE: Aye. LANDS OF PICARD 10 MR. MENNERICH: Aye. MR. O'DONNELL: Aye. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Myself yes. So carried. (Time noted: 7:10 p.m.) C E R T I F I C A T I O N I, Michelle Conero, a Shorthand Reporter and Notary Public within and for the State of New York, do hereby certify that I recorded stenographically the proceedings herein at the time and place noted in the heading hereof, and that the foregoing is an accurate and complete transcript of same to the best of my knowledge and belief. DATED: August 14, 2007 1 11 2 STATE OF NEW YORK : COUNTY OF ORANGE TOWN OF NEWBURGH PLANNING BOARD 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - X In the Matter of 4 ORANGE LAKE NORTH COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY (2007-13) 6 929 Orchard Drive 7 Section 1; Block 1; Lot 57 AR Zone 8 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - X 9 PUBLIC HEARING SPECIAL USE PERMIT & AMENDED SITE PLAN 11 Date: August 2, 2007 Time: 7:10 p.m. 12 Place: Town of Newburgh Town Hall 13 1496 Route 300 Newburgh, NY 12550 14 BOARD MEMBERS: JOHN P. EWASUTYN, Chairman FRANK S. GALLI 16 CLIFFORD C. BROWNE KENNETH MENNERICH 17 EDWARD T. O'DONNELL, JR. 18 ALSO PRESENT: DINA HAINES MICHAEL H. DONNELLY, ESQ. 19 BRYANT COCKS PATRICK HINES KAREN ARENT KEN WERSTED 21 MICHAEL MUSSO 22 APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE: TONY STELLATO 23 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - X MICHELLE L. CONERO 24 10 Westview Drive Wallkill, New York 12589 (845)895-3018 ORANGE LAKE NORTH COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY 12 CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: The next item of business this evening is Orange Lake North Communications Facility. It's a public hearing for a special use permit and an amended site plan. It's located on Orchard Drive in an AR Zone. It's being represented by Kevin Brennan. I'll ask Mr. Mennerich to read the notice of hearing. MR. MENNERICH: "Notice of hearing, Town of Newburgh Planning Board. Please take notice that the Planning Board of the Town of Newburgh, Orange County, New York will hold a public hearing pursuant to the Municipal Code of the Town of Newburgh, Chapter 185-57 Section K and Chapter 168-16 Section A, on the application of Orange Lake North Communication Facility for a site plan and special permit for the modification of an existing wireless telecommunication facility consisting of replacing and/or installing antennas and associated unmanned equipment on premises 929 Orchard Drive in the Town of Newburgh, designated on Town tax map as Section 1; Block 1; Lot 57, AR Zone. Said hearing will be held on the 2nd day of ORANGE LAKE NORTH COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY 13 August 2007 at the Town Hall Meeting Room, 1496 Route 300, Newburgh, New York at 7:00 p.m. at which time all interested persons will be given an opportunity to be heard. By order of the Town of Newburgh Planning Board. John P. Ewasutyn, Chairman, Planning Board Town of Newburgh. Dated June 29, 2007. Publish one time only no later than July 27, 2007." MS. HAINES: The notice of hearing was published in The Sentinel on July 10th and in The Mid-Hudson Times on July 25th. The applicant's representative sent out eight registered letters, eight were returned. The publications and the mailings are all in order. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Thank you. Kevin, would you give your presentation please. MR. STELLATO: Actually I'm Tony Stellato from Clough, Harbour & Associates. I'm the engineer for Cellular One. This is an existing telecommunications tower. It's owned by American Cellular Corporation. It was built originally in the 1950s for AT&T for use as a microwave tower. In ORANGE LAKE NORTH COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY 14 the 1990s AT&T decommissioned it after the fiber optic network and they no longer needed the microwave network. American Tower bought it in 2000 for the purpose of renting out space to wireless carriers. Currently Nextel is at the top of the tower and they occupy space in one of the two existing block one-story buildings that are on the site. It's a two-acre site. The tower is a large four-sided structure. It's 138 feet tall. The two buildings are situated next to the tower. Nextel is in the smaller of the two buildings, 300 square feet. There's a 1,000 square foot building, which is mostly empty, which is where Cellular One is going to install their equipment inside. There will be some cables running from the existing building to the existing tower for Cellular One's antenna hookup, and those will follow the routing of previous cables that are there right now. So there will be no actual site construction at all other than the attachment of the antennas to the tower. Everything else will be inside the building in prepackaged equipment ORANGE LAKE NORTH COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY 15 cabinets. Utilities are at the site. The site is secure, it's fenced. The tower portion is fenced. The buildings are secure. There's no water or sewer required for this installation. It will be unmanned. Cellular One will have a technician visit approximately once per month just to make minor adjustments and do maintenance. That's pretty much it. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Thank you. Questions and comments from the public? (No response.) CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: I'll turn to Mike Musso, our telecommunications expert. MR. MUSSO: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Board, members of the public, thanks for having me here tonight. I figured I would move over here so I can point on the plan if I need to answer questions or just point out some of my analysis. I'm Mike Musso with HDR LMS. We were contracted by the Town of Newburgh to perform a technical review of the Cellular One application. ORANGE LAKE NORTH COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY 16 I think the applicant representative tonight gave a thorough overview of what's being proposed. I'm going to go through our letter report that was issued today, go over our methods briefly, our findings and a few recommendations for the Board to consider. The first thing we did when we received the application back in March was to give an overall technical review with the Town's wireless ordinance and look for elements of completeness in the application. We had some back and forth with the applicant representatives for things like coverage, confirmation of the antenna heights, the layout that's being proposed and also some historic information and structural information about this tower that's been standing for a long time. As mentioned, there is a co-location. Nextel is located on the top of the antenna - the top of the tower. Cellular One is proposed about 18 feet lower. As mentioned, the tower really isn't changing appreciably in appearance. There's no increase in height. The panel antennas are small, especially when viewed from the ground at ORANGE LAKE NORTH COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY 17 a distance. In our minds there's no real element of change. We did go through the application. We received some additional information after we requested it. We reviewed the information and overall the application is deemed complete as it stands now with all the information that's in to the Town. We also conducted a site visit, just taking some photos of the general site area just to give you an idea of what the tower looks like. We then looked at the coverage maps, looked at existing Cellular One sites both in Newburgh and in surrounding municipalities. We wanted to confirm indeed this facility is needed. We looked at the modeling that was done on those coverage maps. We agree that they were done with a fairly standard method of an in-vehicle coverage. There is a gap that's noted in the vicinity of the site, specifically the northwest part of the Town of Newburgh off of Routes 301, Orchard Drive, but there's also supplemental coverage that would be provided all the way up actually to the New York State Thruway, a little ORANGE LAKE NORTH COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY 18 piece, and then of course handing off to those existing sites I was talking about, a few adjacent sites in Newburgh, others in Walden and in Ulster County. Therefore we do feel that the installation proposed is justified and that there's a need for the site. We also did a quick verification from a health and safety perspective of radiofrequency emissions. It's a common question that comes up. We wanted to make sure that, A, the proposed facility by Cell One is being included but also the twelve existing Nextel antennas are being included. I checked over the calculations in the model and indeed as expected the highest reading within the vicinity of the tower is about 25 times below the general public exposure limit. So again, we didn't think there would be any issues but we did check those calculations as well. I want to note that those aren't things typically municipalities look at under the Telecommunications Act but the applicant did provide that information to answer any of those questions. Very quickly, from an aesthetic point ORANGE LAKE NORTH COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY 19 of view the site is currently fenced, 8-foot fencing. As mentioned there's a 300-square foot building occupied and dedicated to Nextel for their ground equipment. There's an old tan utility building where Cellular One would like to locate their base radio stations and other ground-based equipment. Like the tower, really the ground layout, the access road, the fenced area, the appearance really isn't changing appreciably. We're going to use this existing structure that's there. We also looked around, and as noted there's very good vegetation providing a screen of that whole compound down below. I think that's -- that really ties in the aesthetics. Again we looked at the structural. We did have conversations with the owner of the tower, American Tower Corp. We were able to confirm and spot check those calculations and confirm the tower has plenty of capacity to maintain the four Cell One antennas that are proposed and their cables. So the foundation and the structural checked out in our mind, and a structural memorandum is attached to our report. ORANGE LAKE NORTH COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY 20 We then just put forth some recommendations. These are recommendation that are typical on co-location type sites. This isn't a new tower, it's using an existing structure, something the wireless ordinance here in Newburgh favors. Here are a few of the recommendations that are put down that the Board may want to consider: Any renovations to the existing on-site building -- certainly there will be some renovations to be done to prepare it for the installation if this application is approved. Any renovations including the demolition or disposal of material should be done in accordance with all local, State and Federal regulations. The existing security fencing including the locked gate and signage that exists should be maintained. The applicant representative noted that approximately once per month there will be people on site just to manage the ground-based equipment. Those things should be checked, inspected and maintained at those times. The proposed four panel antennas and cables should match the existing tower, which is an old communications tower, and/or the existing Nextel ORANGE LAKE NORTH COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY 21 equipment for conformity. We're talking about four panel antennas 120 feet up. We don't want to bring forth some new color that's not at the site currently. Those standard colors should just be confirmed that they do match the existing Nextel equipment and the tower. Based on the multi-carrier nature of the site, Nextel, and if approved Cellular One, as we've done with other applications, we do recommend a series, a half day field test, what I would refer to as baseline radiofrequency readings within the vicinity of the site. This is in addition to the annual re-certifications that are done by the applicant. When a co-location site comes up like this, if it is approved we do ask that a baseline reading is taken as well just to confirm those calculations that were provided to us at this point. Last, any proposed increase in their power, the size of their equipment, both on the ground and up on the tower, if Cell One is approved it's just memorialized here, and it's very clear in the Wireless Ordinance as well, that before doing any modifications they would have to come back before the Town to get appropriate permission to do so. ORANGE LAKE NORTH COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY 22 I think that ties up our analysis. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: I'll turn to the public one more time. Any additional questions or comments from the public? (No response.) CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: I'll turn to the Planning Board Members. Frank Galli? MR. GALLI: No additional comment. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Cliff Browne? MR. BROWNE: I think the analysis was quite complete. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Ken Mennerich? MR. MENNERICH: Will there be any bonding providing for removing facilities if they are no longer used? MR. MUSSO: The Wireless Ordinance does set that forth. That might be a question for Mr. Donnelly. I don't think the applicant noted in their application what exactly that amount is or what they understand it to be. MR. DONNELLY: The code requires $75,000. That's what the resolution will provide. MR. STELLATO: Is it $75,000 for a ORANGE LAKE NORTH COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY 23 co-locator or is that for the tower owner? MR. DONNELLY: We have, in cases where the payment had already been made, when somebody comes in to co-locate prorated that back so that the contribution could be returned. I don't believe to my knowledge there's any bond on this tower yet. I think the original proposal predated the current code provision. MR. STELLATO: Would you require Cellular One to bond the entire facility, to actually remove Nextel's equipment and the tower that they don't own, or just their portion of it? MR. DONNELLY: In some cases -- I wish we knew whether or not anybody had posted a bond in the past. We have prorated it in some cases where earlier carriers are not paying. It's really the Board's discretion. We could make it half of the $75,000 if you thought that was appropriate, and then if Nextel came in for an amended approval we could obtain the other half. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Do we have that? MR. HINES: We've done that. MR. DONNELLY: You've done that in the past on - ORANGE LAKE NORTH COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY 24 MR. O'DONNELL: So what's the proposal? CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: There's just a question. We'll go around with that. I'm just taking questions, then I'll poll the Board Members. MR. HINES: When was Nextel in? They may have it all bonded. American Tower has been here before. MR. MUSSO: I think it was `99, their approval. I think it was right at or after the ordinance. I don't know the answer to whether or not there's existing bonding. It's close. MR. DONNELLY: I might suggest that you require $37,500 and if the applicant demonstrates the Town is already holding $75,000, that you can either release that or request it be paid in return of the full bond to the other carrier. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Additional comments. Ken? MR. MENNERICH: No. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Ed O'Donnell? MR. O'DONNELL: Nothing CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: I'll move for a motion to close the public hearing for the Orange ORANGE LAKE NORTH COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY 25 Lake North Communications Facility for a special use permit and amended site plan. MR. MENNERICH: So moved. MR. GALLI: Second. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: I have a motion by Ken Mennerich. I have a second by Frank Galli. Any discussion of the motion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: I'll move for a roll call vote starting with Frank Galli. MR. GALLI: Aye. MR. BROWNE: Aye. MR. MENNERICH: Aye. MR. O'DONNELL: Aye. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Myself yes. So carried. At this point I'll ask Mike Donnelly to give us conditions for final approval for the special use permit and site plan for Orange Lake North Communications Facility. MR. DONNELLY: I think it also includes an ARB. The conditions will be the bullets of Mike's recommendation that he has just read to you. I've incorporated those into the ORANGE LAKE NORTH COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY 26 resolution. In addition, the ARB condition is of course that what is done in the field must be consistent with the plans. I'll include a requirement of the posting of a security performance removal bond in the amount of $37,500. We will carry the standard condition that says that the site plan allows construction only of that which is shown on the plans, no amenities or accessory structures or outdoor fixtures may be constructed except as shown on the plans. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Thank you. I'll move for a motion for final approval for the special use permit, amended site plan and ARB for the Orange Lake North Communications Facility. MR. GALLI: So moved. MR. O'DONNELL: Second. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: I have a motion by Frank Galli. I have a second by Ed O'Donnell. Any discussion of the motion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: I'll move for a roll call vote starting with Frank Galli. MR. GALLI: Aye. ORANGE LAKE NORTH COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY 27 MR. BROWNE: Aye. MR. MENNERICH: Aye. MR. O'DONNELL: Aye. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Myself yes. So carried. Thank you. MR. STELLATO: Thank you very much. (Time noted: 7:25 p.m.) 28 C E R T I F I C A T I O N I, Michelle Conero, a Shorthand Reporter and Notary Public within and for the State of New York, do hereby certify that I recorded stenographically the proceedings herein at the time and place noted in the heading hereof, and that the foregoing is an accurate and complete transcript of same to the best of my knowledge and belief. DATED: August 14, 2007 1 29 2 STATE OF NEW YORK : COUNTY OF ORANGE TOWN OF NEWBURGH PLANNING BOARD 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - X In the Matter of 4 THE POLO CLUB (2006-9) 6 Route 300 7 Section 39; Block 1; Lot 78.1 R-3 Zone 8 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - X 9 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT REVISIONS 11 Date: August 2, 2007 Time: 7:25 p.m. 12 Place: Town of Newburgh Town Hall 13 1496 Route 300 Newburgh, NY 12550 14 BOARD MEMBERS: JOHN P. EWASUTYN, Chairman FRANK S. GALLI 16 CLIFFORD C. BROWNE KENNETH MENNERICH 17 EDWARD T. O'DONNELL, JR. 18 ALSO PRESENT: DINA HAINES MICHAEL H. DONNELLY, ESQ. 19 BRYANT COCKS PATRICK HINES KAREN ARENT KEN WERSTED 21 22 APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE: 23 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - X MICHELLE L. CONERO 24 10 Westview Drive Wallkill, New York 12589 (845)895-3018 JAY SAMUELSON THE POLO CLUB 30 CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: The next item of business is The Polo Club. It's the Draft Environmental Impact Statement. The first document was received on April 5, 2007. It was considered then to be incomplete. It's been revised. We received it again on June 22nd. The project is located on Route 300 and it's in an R-3 Zone. It's being represented by - MR. SAMUELSON: Jay Samuelson, Engineering Properties. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Thank you. We reviewed the document, all of us have, and we discussed it during our work session. First I'm going to turn to Mike Donnelly to discuss some issues in reference to recreation fees. MR. DONNELLY: One of the issues we discussed was a request or a proposal within the D.E.I.S. that because there is open space being provided on the site as well as some limited playground space with facilities, that this might be a case where a fee in lieu of parkland for the units in question is not required. While that THE POLO CLUB 31 may be the case, I think what needs to be done, and we think -- the Board thinks it can be done prior to the F.E.I.S. and would not be a completeness issue for the D.E.I.S., is that you provide a study of what the demand that this project will create for those facilities as well as study, simulate or summarize what the needs of the Town are. The statute itself, Section 277 of the Town Law, sets forth the criteria upon which the Planning Board can impose the fee. I think those are the things that need to be addressed. Relevant to that is existing parkland and recreational facilities within the immediate neighborhood and the need of the Town for recreational facilities, space and land, and whether what you proposed addresses that need. I'll send you a letter outlining it in a little bit more detail. That will have to be part of the F.E.I.S. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Thank you. At this time I would like to turn to Bryant Cocks, Planning Consultant. We had discussed the issue of off-street parking. Bryant. THE POLO CLUB 32 MR. COCKS: I'm looking at the site plan. There were a couple areas. Basically I was looking at in between buildings 14 and 17, that there was no extra parking spaces in that area. The closest ones were a couple hundred feet away up by the rec field. We just felt like people are either going to park on the street illegally or find somewhere to park. They're not going to park there because it's too far away. We feel like you guys can add a couple extra spaces in there. We saw you have about thirty extra spaces besides the spaces for each condo. We were working on numbers thinking how many spaces are going to be needed for the site as a whole. We figured maybe about half a parking spot per unit. Maybe about sixty total, sixty-three for the whole site. If you guys can just look and kind of squeeze in some parking spaces here and there. We don't want people parking illegally on the street and blocking any emergency services or causing any disruption or anything like that. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: We also took consideration to the potential visual along THE POLO CLUB 33 Plattekill Turnpike. I'll have Karen Arent, our Landscape Architect, discuss that. MS. ARENT: Additional screening is necessary in accordance with the memorandum I submitted. The stormwater management basin area needs better screening or a way to make that visually appealing. There's more screening necessary along Route 300 as well as between the existing commercial site and -- existing commercial neighborhood and the residential projects. Also, preserve more of the trees between the commercial, because it looks to me like you can revise your grading plan to preserve quite a few more trees than you're proposing to preserve. MR. SAMUELSON: We're talking about the commercial along Jeanne Drive? MS. ARENT: Yes. That's it. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Ken Wersted, Traffic Consultant, completeness of the studies to date. MR. WERSTED: Our previous comments on completeness have been addressed. The only THE POLO CLUB 34 outstanding comments we have right now are the technical comments on the traffic impact study. Just briefly, those include the improvements discussed at the intersection of Route 300 and Gardnertown Road, specifically the proposed westbound right-turn lane and also including the southbound left-turn lane. Our last comment has to do with the intersection of Route 300 and Route 52 with reference to a right-turn lane eastbound on 52 being included as part of the improvements. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Pat Hines, Drainage Consultant. MR. HINES: We had previously submitted numerous comments regarding the original Draft Environmental Impact Statement. All of those comments have been addressed. We got a letter on how they were each addressed and received the marked-up copies italicized so it was easy to review. We feel that the document is responsive to the scope and appropriate for public review. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Comments from Board Members. Frank Galli? THE POLO CLUB 35 MR. GALLI: No additional comment. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Cliff Browne? MR. BROWNE: Nothing further. MR. MENNERICH: No further comments. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Ed O'Donnell? MR. O'DONNELL: Just a couple things. I would like to re-emphasize the parking issue. The additional parking place for every unit, I guess it's about sixty or so. There is an alternative as you know. You can widen the road thirty feet and then you can park anywhere. MR. SAMUELSON: Okay. MR. O'DONNELL: The parking is a major issue. If we have people parking on the streets we're going to have trouble with emergency vehicles getting through. MR. SAMUELSON: That's understood. MR. O'DONNELL: I'll reiterate what Karen said about screening. Very important. I mean not only the front screening but that adjoins Jeanne Drive. That's all I have. MR. SAMUELSON: Okay. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: The Board had THE POLO CLUB 36 discussed the service of trash pickup. That would be a decision that the owner can decide himself as to how he's going to handle that. MR. SAMUELSON: Okay. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Having heard the comments from our consultants and the Planning Board, I'll move that we accept the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for The Polo Club as being complete and that we set a public hearing for the September 20th Planning Board meeting. MR. MENNERICH: So moved. MR. GALLI: Second. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: I have a motion by Ken Mennerich. I have a second by Frank Galli. Any discussion of the motion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: I'll move for a roll call vote starting with Frank Galli. MR. GALLI: Aye. MR. BROWNE: Aye. MR. MENNERICH: Aye. MR. O'DONNELL: Aye. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Myself yes. THE POLO CLUB 37 MR. DONNELLY: That's for a public hearing both on the E.I.S. and the site plan. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Thank you. If you would work with Dina Haines, Planning Board Secretary, in reference to the mailings and all. MR. SAMUELSON: Yes, we will. (Time noted: 7:32 p.m.) 38 C E R T I F I C A T I O N I, Michelle Conero, a Shorthand Reporter and Notary Public within and for the State of New York, do hereby certify that I recorded stenographically the proceedings herein at the time and place noted in the heading hereof, and that the foregoing is an accurate and complete transcript of same to the best of my knowledge and belief. DATED: August 14, 2007 1 39 2 STATE OF NEW YORK : COUNTY OF ORANGE TOWN OF NEWBURGH PLANNING BOARD 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - X In the Matter of 4 G.G. PROPERTIES 6 (2007-24) 7 Zeus Court off Pressler Road Section 6; Block 1; Lot 17.41 8 AR & RR Zones 9 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - X CONCEPTUAL SKETCH PLAN FOUR-LOT SUBDIVISION 11 Date: August 2, 2007 12 Time: 7:33 p.m. Place: Town of Newburgh 13 Town Hall 1496 Route 300 14 Newburgh, NY 12550 BOARD MEMBERS: JOHN P. EWASUTYN, Chairman 16 FRANK S. GALLI CLIFFORD C. BROWNE 17 KENNETH MENNERICH EDWARD T. O'DONNELL, JR. 18 ALSO PRESENT: DINA HAINES 19 MICHAEL H. DONNELLY, ESQ. BRYANT COCKS PATRICK HINES KAREN ARENT 21 KEN WERSTED 22 REPRESENTATIVE: GUS GUKACUS 23 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - X MICHELLE L. CONERO 24 10 Westview Drive Wallkill, New York 12589 (845)895-3018 G.G. PROPERTIES 40 CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: The next item of business we have is G.G. Properties. It's a conceptual sketch plan for a four-lot subdivision located on Zeus Court off of Pressler Road. It's zoned AR and RR. I believe Mr. Gukacus is here tonight. MR. GUKACUS: I can't hear. That's why she's here. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: John Tarolli couldn't make it this evening. He had a previous engagement. MR. GUKACUS: He submitted it two months now and he doesn't know when he's supposed to be here? That's great, isn't it. How do you think I feel? I can't hear. You know, I shouldn't be attending these meetings. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Okay. He was mailed the - MR. GUKACUS: I'm sure he was. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: -- the agenda. MR. GUKACUS: If he wasn't or if anything went wrong he should have made it his business to find out when he had to appear. That's neither here nor there. G.G. PROPERTIES 41 CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Okay. Gus, you haven't changed. There's a fire in your soul -MR. GUKACUS: I haven't too many years left, I don't want to change now. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: There's a fire in your soul that will continue burning. Thank you. I'll turn to Pat Hines to go over his review that John has. MR. GUKACUS: Give me a copy, I'll get it to him or whatever. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: I believe he received them. MR. HINES: He received a copy. Just on the schematic, it's a rather large lot this is being subdivided off of. There's no reference to the balance of the parcel on the map. Typically the Board requires a deed lot showing an outline of the entire parcel as well as the little piece that you're subdividing off. John has that comment. We have a comment regarding the location of the septic tank system. We're asking that he move it more central to the lot to get more room on the lot lines and the driveway. It G.G. PROPERTIES 42 meets the code, it's just a clean-up item. Mike Donnelly will need a copy of the private roadway access and maintenance agreement. John Tarolli has these. I can give you one. I know you'll follow up with him. MR. GUKACUS: Of course. I've been out of the house for three years. All right. Thanks again. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: There's other comments. Bryant Cocks. MR. GILLESPIE: I'm Jason Gillespie, I'm looking at the property from Gus. We were also at the meeting. I think I may have the overview of the whole property plan. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: For the record -- Mr. Gillespie, I'm glad -- I'm trying to run a meeting. Bryant Cocks, Planning Consultant. MR. COCKS: A couple of my comments echo Pat's. We also wanted to see the survey for the whole site. The common driveway maintenance agreement was also there. The wetlands delineation has to be G.G. PROPERTIES 43 provided on the plans. They provided a buffer for lots 2 and 3. We wanted to see the whole sheets. I was asking if the stonewall on lot 4 was going to be removed. Also the backs of lots 2 and 3, for a note on the plan that it won't be further subdivided because of the soils. I faxed this over. MR. GUKACUS: To John Tarolli? MR. COCKS: Yes. MR. GUKACUS: He can fax me a copy. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Karen Arent, do you have anything to add? MS. ARENT: No, I don't. MR. GUKACUS: That's it? CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Comments from Board Members. Frank Galli? MR. GALLI: No additional. MR. BROWNE: None. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Ken Mennerich? MR. MENNERICH: No questions. MR. O'DONNELL: I've got a question for you. The property across from Ethan Allen, is G.G. PROPERTIES 44 that yours? MR. GUKACUS: Yes. MR. O'DONNELL: Are you ever going to clean that up? MR. GUKACUS: Am I ever going to get a permit? Am I every going to -MR. O'DONNELL: I don't issue permits. MR. GUKACUS: Well - MR. O'DONNELL: I'd just like to know because I'll tell you -- listen to me. MR. GUKACUS: I want to tell you -MR. O'DONNELL: No, no, no. Listen to me for a second. It's my turn. When you come through this Board for any other item and that property is not resolved, I'm not going to vote in favor of you. Just so you know. I can't fix it for you. You can deal with the Town, you can deal with the lawyers but you're not going to get my vote. MR. GUKACUS: Before you say that why don't you try and find out -MR. O'DONNELL: Because it's not my job to do that. MR. GUKACUS: What is your job? G.G. PROPERTIES 45 MR. O'DONNELL: My job is to look at projects here and approve them for the Town because they meet the standards. Yours doesn't. MR. GUKACUS: That doesn't meet the standards over there? MR. O'DONNELL: That's right. MR. GUKACUS: How about when OSHA said the bridge is safe and the judge says it wasn't. Who do we go by? MR. O'DONNELL: I don't know. MR. GUKACUS: I'm saying I've been trying for fifteen years to get a crossing there. Every time we get approved -- I got approved by the DEC, I got approved by the Corp of Engineers, now we're approved by FEMA, yet no permit. How am I supposed to go in there? If I get on that bridge or cross that bridge I'm subject to arrest. MR. O'DONNELL: You don't want to do that. MR. GUKACUS: I was chased by the police three times. They said if you come back we'll have to lock you up, which I don't mind. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Here's Bryant G.G. PROPERTIES 46 Cocks' review. I'll move for a motion - MR. GUKACUS: I'm sure you'll find out that it will be taken care of. MR. O'DONNELL: Gus, I just want you to know. All I do is I live in this Town - MR. GUKACUS: I do, too. MR. O'DONNELL: Every morning I go and get coffee and I ride passed that place and it makes me sick. MR. GUKACUS: I've been here eighty-three years in this Town. MR. O'DONNELL: That's only twenty more than me. MR. GUKACUS: How do you think I feel after all this? MR. O'DONNELL: I don't know. MR. GUKACUS: How about paying $262,000 in taxes over the past fifteen years and can't go on my property. That's nice. That's great, isn't it? Let's go. We're finished. Are we through, John? CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: I don't know. What G.G. PROPERTIES 47 do you want me to do? MR. GUKACUS: This has nothing to do with this. I'm saying it comes up. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Fine. What we have to do is we'll take an action tonight to grant conceptual sketch plan approval for G.G. properties. Do I have that motion? MR. MENNERICH: So moved. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: I have a motion by Ken Mennerich. Do I have a second? MR. GALLI: Second. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: I have a second by Frank Galli. Any discussion of the motion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: I'll move for a roll call vote starting with Frank Galli. MR. GALLI: Aye. MR. BROWNE: Aye. MR. MENNERICH: Aye. MR. O'DONNELL: Nay. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Myself yes. So carried. What happens now is John will address those comments. G.G. PROPERTIES 48 MR. GUKACUS: Follow through. Okay. Thank you. We'll do everything in our power to get it cleaned up, believe me. MR. O'DONNELL: Thank you. MR. GUKACUS: Not just for cleaning up. I want out of it more than you can imagine. MR. O'DONNELL: I can imagine. (Time noted: 7:40 p.m.) 49 C E R T I F I C A T I O N I, Michelle Conero, a Shorthand Reporter and Notary Public within and for the State of New York, do hereby certify that I recorded stenographically the proceedings herein at the time and place noted in the heading hereof, and that the foregoing is an accurate and complete transcript of same to the best of my knowledge and belief. DATED: August 14, 2007 1 50 2 STATE OF NEW YORK : COUNTY OF ORANGE TOWN OF NEWBURGH PLANNING BOARD 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - X In the Matter of 4 MO PROPERTIES 6 (2006-32) 7 Southern corner of NYS Route 9W & Devito Drive Section 20; Block 2; Lot 30.2 8 B & R-3 Zones 9 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - X THREE-LOT SUBDIVISION 11 12 Date: August 2, 2007 Time: 7:40 p.m. Place: Town of Newburgh Town Hall 13 1496 Route 300 14 Newburgh, NY 12550BOARD MEMBERS: JOHN P. EWASUTYN, Chairman FRANK S. GALLI 16 CLIFFORD C. BROWNE KENNETH MENNERICH 17 18 ALSO PRESENT: EDWARD T. O'DONNELL, JR. DINA HAINES 19 MICHAEL H. DONNELLY, ESQ. BRYANT COCKS PATRICK HINES KAREN ARENT KEN WERSTED 21 22 APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE: 23 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - X MICHELLE L. CONERO 24 10 Westview Drive Wallkill, New York 12589 (845)895-3018 CHARLES BROWN MO PROPERTIES 51 CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: The next item of business we have this evening is MO Properties. It's a three-lot subdivision located on the southern corner of New York State Route 9W and Devito Drive. It's zoned B and R-3 and it's being represented by Charles Brown. MR. BROWN: We were last here before the Planning Board several months ago. We were asked to do a couple clean-up items, some pertaining to septics and water lines. We addressed the storage trailer and demarcated the area that's presently used by the tree removal company for storage of his equipment. Those plans have been submitted and we're here with that map tonight. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Thank you, Charles. Pat Hines. MR. HINES: The applicants have addressed our previous comments regarding water and sewer separations and the septic systems. Actually, our previous comment also identified the use of the tree cutting company on the site. That area has been depicted on the plans. I'm just looking at Mike Donnelly's MO PROPERTIES 52 comments, note 1, sheet 1 of 4, the additional notes. There's notes regarding the tree clearing company on there. I just want to make sure this is an allowable use. You're really approving that use too in what we're approving on that site tonight. MR. DONNELLY: What is the proposed use? MR. HINES: It's existing. It's a tree cutting company. They park their vehicles there overnight. MR. BROWN: Correct. They are not in use. MR. DONNELLY: I see. There is an issue with that. I remember now. You have an accessory use. You're trying to classify that as an accessory use for this property. Storage of vehicles and equipment is in fact an accessory use under the ordinance. The requirement is that be accessory to a use on the site. Since it's accessory to a use that's off site, that is not permitted under the Ordinance. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: But this predates the zoning. Wouldn't it be MO PROPERTIES 53 nonconforming? MR. DONNELLY: Generally speaking the ordinance says if it's a nonconforming use it's protected so long as it continues. You can't change it. You can't change the nature of that use. MR. BROWN: We're not. That's been there. MR. DONNELLY: No, no. The use on the site. I mean if you can convince the Zoning Board that's not a change in the use, they could authorize it without a use permit. If you change to a -- I don't have the ordinance in front of me. If you change from a nonconforming use to a conforming use. Here you're adding a conforming use, you lose the protection. The concept is to protect something that existed on those terms. As soon as it changes, it increases, it changes to a different use, the protection goes away. MR. BROWN: We're not changing that use. MR. HINES: You had to go to the ZBA for the front yard setback. That you didn't change but because you're altering the lot lines MO PROPERTIES 54 you lose that protection. MR. BROWN: Okay. MR. DONNELLY: We can refer you for that use variance or that determination but the Board can't approve it. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: I'm confused. Can someone clarify, please? MR. O'DONNELL: Isn't the other alternative he could just do away with the storage of the vehicles? MR. DONNELLY: Yes. MR. O'DONNELL: That is another option. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: When I purchased the property that was always a rented lot in the back. MR. DONNELLY: No one is telling you that has to stop. If you bring forth a proposal to change what the lot is being used for, that protection disappears. MR. BROWN: We're not changing the use as part of this proposal, we're just subdividing the property between the zoning lines. MR. DONNELLY: If you subdivide it you still have the same issue because the Zoning MO PROPERTIES 55 Board has determined that all protections are lost upon subdivision. MR. BROWN: Okay. That's the same reason we had to go for the setback. MR. HINES: It wasn't shown on the previous maps. It wasn't until we looked at the maps that use was shown there, otherwise you could have got it the last time you went to the ZBA. When we started looking at the site plan - I was actually going up there on the Linare property and lots of trucks were parked there. That's when we asked you to show it on the map. When the Board approves this map they're going to be approving that use. They can't unless the ZBA says yes. MR. DONNELLY: You need a use variance. MR. BROWN: We'll ask for a referral please. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: I'll move for a motion to refer this to the Zoning Board of Appeals for an interpretation. Mike. MR. DONNELLY: And/or a use variance. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: And/or for a use MO PROPERTIES 56 variance. I'll move for a motion. MR. MENNERICH: So moved. MR. O'DONNELL: Second. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: I have a motion by Ken Mennerich. I have a second by Ed O'Donnell. Any discussion OF the motion? (No verbal response.) CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: I'll move for a roll call vote starting with Frank Galli. MR. GALLI: Aye. MR. BROWNE: Aye. MR. MENNERICH: Aye. MR. O'DONNELL: Aye. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Myself yes. So carried. Thank you. (Time noted: 7:42 p.m.) (Time resumed: 8:05 p.m.) CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Do you want to bring Charles Brown in? I'm going to move for a motion to rescind our motion to refer MO Properties for a three-lot subdivision to the Zoning Board of Appeals for a use variance. MR. MENNERICH: So moved. MO PROPERTIES 57 MR. GALLI: Second. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: I have a motion by Ken Mennerich and a second by Frank Galli. Any discussion of the motion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: I'll move for a roll call vote starting with Frank Galli. MR. GALLI: Aye. MR. BROWNE: Aye. MR. MENNERICH: Aye. MR. O'DONNELL: Aye. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Myself yes. So carried. Charles, what is it you want to present now? MR. BROWN: We will remove the secondary use, the accessory use. We'll remove that from the project site. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: For how long? MR. BROWN: He's asking you that. For how long? UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: For how long or when? CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Both. MO PROPERTIES 58 MR. O'DONNELL: That's what I was going to ask, when. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: I would like to make it contingent on we get approved then I would have them move out and that would be it. MR. DONNELLY: It would be a condition of approval. You couldn't file the plat until the operation shutdown. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: In which case someone would first be looking at the site to see it was moved, and then of course once - UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: I would have it removed. I removed that storage trailer box. Charlie has some pictures. That's all gone. MR. BROWN: For how long? It would not come back without coming before this Board first to get your approval. How is that? MR. O'DONNELL: You need a variance anyway before you - UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: If it's accessory to the primary use we need a variance. If it's another new use -- so we would be here. What I didn't understand is why the Board would ask me to go for a variance until after it was at MO PROPERTIES 59 the approval stages. We may not make the approval stages for a subdivision. MR. DONNELLY: They can't approve the subdivision until you have the variance. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Like the cart before the horse. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Pat Hines, are you satisfied that we can make a SEQRA determination? MR. HINES: Yes. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Bryant Cocks? MR. COCKS: Yup. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Karen Arent? MS. ARENT: The only consideration is the buffer that they're showing because the Newburgh -- for SEQRA I guess it's okay. It's just that the buffer regulations require a buffer between residential and commercial. They're showing the fifteen-foot buffer but I think that they kind of need more. If they showed the buffer space to be the entire slope then there would be adequate screening and they wouldn't have to add any landscaping. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Are you saying that they should have a limit or show a - MO PROPERTIES 60 MS. ARENT: Larger buffer than what they are showing. MR. BROWN: Thirty feet rather than the fifteen? MS. ARENT: Yes. MR. BROWN: Thirty feet is fine. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Can I stop for a second? I think we have to kind of specify why. I mean if he says thirty and the next guy says twenty -- let's set a standard. Let's work from the standard. I'm not comfortable sitting up here having people just throw numbers out saying okay, that sounds like a good number. What is the basis for our decision? MS. ARENT: I went to the site with - CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: What is the number that we're going to -- I'm looking for a foundation for this number, Karen. I'm not looking for a free for all of people throwing numbers out. MS. ARENT: Because of the existing vegetation thickness there. Because the transparency of existing vegetation varies from site to site, I think it's difficult to determine MO PROPERTIES 61 a set number. It slopes and everything. I don't think we can have a set number. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Then I would like to have that as part of the records because at a later point I wouldn't want someone coming along and saying well in the case of MO Properties you said thirty feet is good. For the record I think we have to be specific as to why we're stating this. MS. ARENT: And I think within the buffer regulations -MR. COCKS: I think it's fifteen feet. MS. ARENT: -- it says it's fifteen feet or you need landscaping. If it's not sufficient by preserving existing vegetation you need to add landscaping. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Would the site allow for fifty feet? Would this site allow for fifty feet? MR. BROWN: Fifty? MS. ARENT: If he can do the entire slope it's totally sufficient and they need no new landscaping. MR. BROWN: Yes, fifty feet. MO PROPERTIES 62 CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Would you show fifty feet? MR. BROWN: Sure. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: They'll show fifty feet. That will be in accordance with the standard and it's set. Thank you. MR. COCKS: John, the standard is fifteen. MS. ARENT: It has to be sufficient or we can ask for more landscaping if it's not sufficient. The fifteen feet isn't really sufficient because there's not that many trees. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Is thirty sufficient? I misunderstood the number. MS. ARENT: I just need to look real quickly. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Could I just mention there's some large mature trees there and I planned on maintaining all the large mature trees. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: I'm sure it will work. I just want to, for the records, have a foundation for the statement. MS. ARENT: If you could preserve - MO PROPERTIES 63 actually, fifty feet is the slope and that's where all the big trees are. MR. BROWN: It wouldn't benefit us to go to that slope anyway. MS. ARENT: If you could. MR. BROWN: We don't need any additional landscaping? MS. ARENT: Right. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: That's why I think it's important. We reach a point in the meeting sometimes where we know we're getting close to closure and we begin throwing numbers out without having a -- without validating what we're saying. It's very important we continue to validate things. MS. ARENT: Okay. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: We heard from our consultants. The consultants are comfortable at this point in time that we have considered any potential adverse impacts and they recommend we make a SEQRA determination. At this point I'll move for a motion to declare a negative declaration for the three-lot subdivision for MO Properties and set it up for MO PROPERTIES 64 the next available date for a public hearing. MR. MENNERICH: So moved. MR. O'DONNELL: Second. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: I have a motion by Ken Mennerich. I have a second by Ed O'Donnell. Any discussion of the motion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: I'll move for a roll call vote starting with Frank Galli. MR. GALLI: Aye. MR. BROWNE: Aye. MR. MENNERICH: Aye. MR. O'DONNELL: Aye. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Myself yes. So carried. Charlie, I don't have a date for you at this particular moment. It will be probably in October. I'll get back to you on that. MR. BROWN: Again, I apologize for the interruption. MR. O'DONNELL: Can I just ask a question? We're going to take this plan to a public hearing and then we're going to have site approval and then he's going to get rid of the MO PROPERTIES 65 trucks. Is that how it's going to work? MR. BROWN: Prior to filing of the map. MR. HINES: That's correct, what you just said. MR. O'DONNELL: So then the trucks leave -MR. HINES: You can't file the map -MR. O'DONNELL: How do we know the trucks leave? MR. DONNELLY: It can't be filed until Jim Osborne or Jerry Canfield tells us he's satisfied. MR. O'DONNELL: So those guys go and look to see if the trucks are gone? MR. BROWN: Yes. MR. O'DONNELL: You're not going to bring the trucks back? UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: You have my word. MR. O'DONNELL: I'll remember that. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: It's true. MR. BROWN: The storage trailer is the same situation. It's the same situation, that they have to inspect. MO PROPERTIES 66 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: That has been moved. If you want to show them the pictures -MR. BROWN: They're going to come and inspect. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Thank you. Everybody have a good night. (Time noted: 8:12 p.m.) C E R T I F I C A T I O N I, Michelle Conero, a Shorthand Reporter and Notary Public within and for the State of New York, do hereby certify that I recorded stenographically the proceedings herein at the time and place noted in the heading hereof, and that the foregoing is an accurate and complete transcript of same to the best of my knowledge and belief. DATED: August 14, 2007 1 67 2 STATE OF NEW YORK : COUNTY OF ORANGE TOWN OF NEWBURGH PLANNING BOARD 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - X In the Matter of 4 LANDS OF CHRIS KELLY 6 (2006-07) 7 39 New Road Section 34; Block 2; Lot 16 8 B Zone 9 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - X THREE-LOT SUBDIVISION 11 12 Date: August 2, 2007 Time: 7:45 p.m. Place: Town of Newburgh Town Hall 13 1496 Route 300 14 Newburgh, NY 12550BOARD MEMBERS: JOHN P. EWASUTYN, Chairman FRANK S. GALLI 16 CLIFFORD C. BROWNE KENNETH MENNERICH 17 18 ALSO PRESENT: EDWARD T. O'DONNELL, JR. DINA HAINES 19 MICHAEL H. DONNELLY, ESQ. BRYANT COCKS PATRICK HINES KAREN ARENT KEN WERSTED 21 22 APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE: 23 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - X MICHELLE L. CONERO 24 10 Westview Drive Wallkill, New York 12589 (845)895-3018 CHARLES BROWN LANDS OF CHRIS KELLY 68 CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: The last item of business we have this evening is the lands of Chris Kelly. It's a three-lot subdivision and site plan located on New Road in a B Zone. It's being represented by Charles Brown. MR. BROWN: This project also has been before the Board previously. It's a three-lot commercial subdivision with an existing residence on the front lot which we received a variance for. In addition to addressing the comments on this subdivision, this subdivision included a site plan for lot 2 for the business of the owner of the property, Chris Kelly. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: I'll start with comments from Bryant Cocks. Bryant. MR. COCKS: For the subdivision plan we're going to need a surveyor's seal and signature and a copy of the electric easement, a common driveway maintenance agreement. Do you have a copy of the minutes from the Town Board meeting where they made the determination on the rezoning for the adjacent property? LANDS OF CHRIS KELLY 69 MR. BROWN: I thought we had forwarded those but I could get those again. I thought we forwarded those two submittals ago. MR. COCKS: I didn't have them in my file. See if you can get those. MR. BROWN: As it happened we're presenting this as a three-lot commercial subdivision at this time which is in conformance with the zoning. MR. HINES: The residential use is off the back. MR. BROWN: It doesn't show that on this map. MR. HINES: The Town Board did not act on that; correct? MR. BROWN: Not yet that I've heard. They were behind it but they have been pretty slow with acting on it. MR. HINES: So you're here for just three lots in the B Zone? MR. BROWN: Three-lot commercial subdivision in the B Zone. Correct. MR. COCKS: I had site plan comments for lot 2, but if we're not addressing those - LANDS OF CHRIS KELLY 70 MR. BROWN: If we get to that. I would at least like to, if possible, schedule a public hearing for the commercial subdivision. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Why don't we review lot 2 also. I'm thinking about getting ready for a public hearing on the subdivision. MR. BROWN: Do them all at the same time. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: It's always discretionary as to whether or not we want to have a public hearing on the site plan. I think we should be prepared to discuss openly at that public hearing what all is being proposed for the property. MR. BROWN: That would be fine. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Bryant. MR. COCKS: For lot 2, the 25-foot buffer is going to have to be shown for the new buffering requirements. There's only 14 feet from the edge of the pavement on lot 2 on the northern side. It's only about 14 feet. That needs to be 25, the buffer space. MR. BROWN: That's a commercial zone also, the B Zone on the north side. LANDS OF CHRIS KELLY 71 MR. COCKS: There's an R-1 back - MR. BROWN: That's adjoining lot 3 only. That's an R-2 Zone. The zone line is this heavy line. MS. ARENT: It needs to be labeled. MR. BROWN: It is. It's labeled on the subdivision. MR. COCKS: He's saying that this doesn't abut the residential zone. MR. MENNERICH: He's showing 15 feet and he needs 25. MR. COCKS: The dumpster is kind of in a weird location. We're asking if you could kind of move it to the side of the building so it wouldn't be sitting out in front. MR. BROWN: We could do that. MR. COCKS: Is there going to be an entrance sign or any kind of sign for the business? MR. BROWN: It's not really my client's business. In other words, what it is is he works on windows for old buildings, renovation and that type of work. As far as I know there's no intention of putting up a sign. LANDS OF CHRIS KELLY 72 MR. COCKS: Okay. Just there were some weird property lines on the plans that just need to be cleaned up. It looked like a couple of them just in the CAD program or whatever, there were just lines going through. MR. BROWN: I'll correct those. MR. COCKS: Those should be cleaned up. Is that whole area to the south side of the building proposed to be asphalt? MR. BROWN: Let me get that map up. MR. COCKS: I didn't know if one of those lines was meant to be the edge of the parking lot. It looks like there's a large excess of parking. MR. BROWN: This is the edge of the parking lot right here at the end of the -- we're leaving that pipe through the parking lot. This is the septic area. This shows the continuation with a break line of the driveway for the next lot. MR. COCKS: It just seemed like there was a lot of asphalt for not that much parking. MR. BROWN: That's the septic area. That will be green. LANDS OF CHRIS KELLY 73 MR. COCKS: Okay. We're going to need a common driveway access and maintenance agreement for these two lots, and also the electric easement that's going through. That was about it. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Karen Arent, Landscape Architect. MS. ARENT: All of the uses around this site are commercial; is that correct? MR. BROWN: Yes. Around lot 2. MS. ARENT: I asked the same thing as Bryant, the dumpster enclosure to be moved to a less conspicuous location. MR. BROWN: We can put it right over here. MS. ARENT: That would be good. You also need to show some kind of screening. MR. BROWN: The standard. We'll do that. MS. ARENT: The sidewalks should be to -- provide more space for the landscaping to soften the side of the building. MR. BROWN: No problem with that. MS. ARENT: There's no sign. LANDS OF CHRIS KELLY 74 The proposed water line. You're showing the existing trees in this area. It should be determined if the water line should be moved to preserve the trees or -- if you just want to move the water line to preserve the trees, that would be great. MR. BROWN: We'll move the water line. MS. ARENT: The handicap parking space could be relocated to this other space to reduce the quantity of asphalt. You can use what you're showing on the southerly most space for the handicap walkway space and then you could cut off the north side of the parking lot and preserve some of the asphalt just to make a turn-around space to make it more efficient for the parking. MR. BROWN: Okay. MS. ARENT: And then notes should be placed on the drawing to preserve the stonewall and large trees along the stonewall, and also to put tree protection fencing on the line around the trees you're going to save. MR. BROWN: Okay. MS. ARENT: Either that or -- it looks like there's a lot more -- I didn't get a chance LANDS OF CHRIS KELLY 75 to visit the site but it looks like there's a lot of individual trees to be preserved rather than wooded areas. You should make a determination whether it's better to put the tree preservation fencing on the drip line of each tree or just to cord off large areas of existing trees to remain. MR. BROWN: In this case this survey does show the actual trees. He's pretty specific about which ones he wants to save as part of his site. We will put them around the drip line of the trees. MS. ARENT: Can you let us know which trees you're going to be saving ,too? MR. BROWN: Yeah. MS. ARENT: With the different symbols show the trees that are going to be removed compared to the trees that are going to remain with the notes putting the construction fencing around the drip line, et cetera. And then to show some landscaping on the plan. MR. BROWN: Okay. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Pat Hines, we were talking about actually lot number 2. LANDS OF CHRIS KELLY 76 MR. HINES: Some of mine are subdivision, some are lot 2 comments mixed together here. I know Charlie has my comments. The septic system needs to be moved outside the access easement. It currently encroaches the easement area. Lot 3 could potentially disturb the septic for lot 2. Site improvement details will need to be shown. Typically the Town requires commercial sites to have concrete curbing. That's not currently shown, or if it is it wasn't clear. Along with that the drainage needs to be addressed from those curbed parking areas. We're not seeing that yet. MR. BROWN: Would that be something I could ask a waiver from the Planning Board? MR. HINES: For curbs? MR. BROWN: On this particular site. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: The Planning Board has been requesting them on all commercial sites. MR. BROWN: You want the curbs. Curbs it is. MR. HINES: Curbs it is. LANDS OF CHRIS KELLY 77 Just a clarification on the narrative. The size of the building is 200-foot difference. We previously discussed when this was before us access across the Central Hudson right-of-way. MR. BROWN: Down in here. MR. HINES: We need to assure you have the ability to construct those improvements, whether it's by agreement or the easement allows it or whatever. The shared water line, I think that's going to be an issue. You may have to run two separate water lines or one with sufficient diameter. MR. BROWN: We'll run two and put them in at the same time. MR. HINES: I think that may be the way to go, otherwise you may need to go to Jim Osborne to figure out how you're going to do that with a shared line. I think the Town would prefer individual lines serving each of the individual parcels. MR. BROWN: We'll put the valves down by New Road. LANDS OF CHRIS KELLY 78 MR. HINES: So if someone doesn't pay their water bill you turn that person's water off, not everyone's. That's all we have on this. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Comments from Board Members. Frank Galli? MR. GALLI: No additional. MR. BROWNE: No. MR. MENNERICH: Is there a transmission line on that easement? MR. BROWN: Yes. MR. HINES: Yes. MR. BROWN: It's high. Those large towers that go on New Road. MR. MENNERICH: None of them are shown here on your map. When you go to Central Hudson to get approval for crossing the right-of-way, it might be helpful to have any of those towers shown. MR. BROWN: Yeah, we could do that. MR. MENNERICH: That's it. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Ed O'Donnell? MR. O'DONNELL: Nothing, Charles. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Pat, are the plans LANDS OF CHRIS KELLY 79 sufficient enough to make a SEQRA determination? MR. HINES: I have the drainage issue. I think that needs to be resolved. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: So we're going to have to re-address drainage and maybe redefine the plans, Charles, one more time before we can make a SEQRA determination. MR. BROWN: In that case we'll be doing it on both subdivision and site plan together. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: I think that would be the best way to move forward on this so we could hold the public hearing simultaneously. MR. HINES: We're looking at both of them at the same time. MR. BROWN: It's not going to at this point slow us up at all. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Thank you. MR. BROWN: Thank you. MS. ARENT: John, Charlie should be aware they need ARB on this project since the commercial project - MR. DONNELLY: It's part of the application. MS. ARENT: Architectural review. LANDS OF CHRIS KELLY 80 MR. BROWN: On the building? MS. ARENT: Yeah. MR. BROWN: We've already started on that also. MS. ARENT: Terrific. We were wondering if the side, you're showing asphalt right up to it, does that have a garage? MR. BROWN: Yes. MS. ARENT: Thank you. MR. BROWN: It's a barn- style building. I'll submit the prelims with the next submission. Thank you. (Time noted: 7:55 p.m.) 81 C E R T I F I C A T I O N I, Michelle Conero, a Shorthand Reporter and Notary Public within and for the State of New York, do hereby certify that I recorded stenographically the proceedings herein at the time and place noted in the heading hereof, and that the foregoing is an accurate and complete transcript of same to the best of my knowledge and belief. DATED: August 14, 2007 1 82 2 STATE OF NEW YORK : COUNTY OF ORANGE TOWN OF NEWBURGH PLANNING BOARD 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - X In the Matter of 4 ORCHARD HILLS 6 (2003-41) 7 Letter from Ross Winglovitz dated 7/12/07 re: final approval 8 9 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - X BOARD BUSINESS 11 Date: August 2, 2007 Time: 7:55 p.m. 12 Place: Town of Newburgh Town Hall 13 1496 Route 300 Newburgh, NY 12550 14 BOARD MEMBERS: JOHN P. EWASUTYN, Chairman FRANK S. GALLI 16 CLIFFORD C. BROWNE KENNETH MENNERICH 17 EDWARD T. O'DONNELL, JR. 18 ALSO PRESENT: DINA HAINES 19 MICHAEL H. DONNELLY, ESQ. BRYANT COCKS PATRICK HINES KAREN ARENT 21 22 APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE: JAY SAMUELSON 23 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - X MICHELLE L. CONERO 24 10 Westview Drive Wallkill, New York 12589 (845)895-3018 ORCHARD HILLS 83 CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: The first item of business we have is Ross Winglovitz' letter of July 2, 2007, Orchard Hills final approval. I believe what was outstanding at our last meeting, we couldn't take action, we were waiting for a letter from the Department of Health. Would someone come forward? We have a letter from Ross dated July 12th. It says, "Dear Planning Board, attached please find the Orange County Health Department approvals for Orchard Hills. As discussed, please place this matter on the August 2, 2007 Planning Board agenda under Board Business." I would like at this point to turn to Mike Donnelly. Do you have something you want to raise? MR. BROWN: I just discussed this with my client. Sorry for interrupting the meeting. He will ask the tree company to leave the property if we can move forward with the public hearing then on the subdivision. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Then you are interrupting the meeting. You have to wait. ORCHARD HILLS 84 Mike, go ahead. MR. DONNELLY: I'll bring up the resolution. It's subdivision and site plan. MR. SAMUELSON: I have a copy. MR. DONNELLY: The conditions of the resolution -- and I think we reviewed them the last time but then realized we were missing the Health Department approval -- the usual ARB condition saying no buildings could be built other than as approved. Requirement of a developer's agreement in this case, which I know they have been working on. The posting of the performance bond, and maintenance guarantees, and inspection fees pursuant to the terms of the developer's agreement. A requirement that all private roads and drainage systems are to be maintained by the condominium association or homeowner's association as identified on the drawings. The creation of a transportation corporation and issuance of an amended SPDES permit by the DEC. Posting of a landscape -- let me just make sure I have this right. Landscaping bond. I think we had the amount. I don't see it here now. ORCHARD HILLS 85 MS. ARENT: Don't record an amount. That has to be approved by the Town Board. MR. DONNELLY: It says in an amount to be recommended at the time of final approval. The Oak Street culvert must be completed to the satisfaction of the town engineer before any construction activity, including site grading, is begun. Unless the recreational facilities proposed are completed and operational within nine months after issuance of the first residential CO, then no further residential COs shall be issued until those facilities are completed and operable. I think we did that in lieu of -- at one point we had it on the fortieth CO and then we changed it to time. We needed a sign-off letter from Pat but I guess that's taken care of. A sign-off letter from Karen. I believe that's now taken care of. MR. HINES: The only outstanding issue was the Health Department final. MR. DONNELLY: We recite the other agencies, Army Corp., DOT. It's conditioned upon proof of a written approval from the town engineer, and the Town Board regarding a ORCHARD HILLS 86 satisfactory agreement regarding maintenance of the water system. Health Department we just talked about. The school children pick-up areas, I think they're now shown on the plan. Review of the condominium and homeowner's association bylaws by the town attorney. The payment of parkland fees. Stormwater improvement security, water main extension security, sewer main extension security, Town road and private road extension securities, and offers of dedication for the roadways shown. MS. ARENT: They need ARB, too. MR. DONNELLY: ARB. MR. SAMUELSON: We have to come back. I do have one question. The rec facilities, I remember the Findings Statement did say after the fortieth unit. We're now changing that to nine months? MR. HINES: The Findings Statement was originally done with the forty. We discussed phasing and that came out of your phasing plan. MR. SAMUELSON: Okay. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Comments from Board Members. Frank Galli? ORCHARD HILLS 87 MR. GALLI: No additional. MR. BROWNE: Nothing. MR. MENNERICH: Nothing. MR. O'DONNELL: Nothing. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: I'll move for a motion for final approval for Orchard Hills, our project number 2003-41, subject to the conditions in the resolution that Planning Board Attorney Mike Donnelly has just presented. MR. MENNERICH: So moved. MR. O'DONNELL: Second. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: I have a motion by Ken Mennerich. I have a second by Ed O'Donnell. Any discussion of the motion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: I'll move for a roll call vote starting with Frank Galli. MR. GALLI: Aye. MR. BROWNE: Aye. MR. MENNERICH: Aye. MR. O'DONNELL: Aye. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Myself yes. So carried. MR. SAMUELSON: Thank you. ORCHARD HILLS 88 (Time noted: 8:05 p.m.) C E R T I F I C A T I O N I, Michelle Conero, a Shorthand Reporter and Notary Public within and for the State of New York, do hereby certify that I recorded stenographically the proceedings herein at the time and place noted in the heading hereof, and that the foregoing is an accurate and complete transcript of same to the best of my knowledge and belief. DATED: August 14, 2007 1 89 2 STATE OF NEW YORK : COUNTY OF ORANGE TOWN OF NEWBURGH PLANNING BOARD 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - X In the Matter of 4 DRURY HEIGHTS 6 (1994-41) 7 E-mail from Michael Donnelly dated 7/25/07 Re: Approval of amended SEQRA Findings Statement 8 9 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - X BOARD BUSINESS 11 12 13 Date: August 2, 2007Time: 8:13 p.m. Place: Town of NewburghTown Hall 1496 Route 300 14 Newburgh, NY 12550 16 BOARD MEMBERS: JOHN P. EWASUTYN, ChairmanFRANK S. GALLI CLIFFORD C. BROWNE 17 KENNETH MENNERICH 18EDWARD T. O'DONNELL, JR. 19 ALSO PRESENT: DINA HAINES MICHAEL H. DONNELLY, ESQ. BRYANT COCKS PATRICK HINES 21 KAREN ARENT 22 23 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - X MICHELLE L. CONERO 24 10 Westview Drive Wallkill, New York 12589 (845)895-3018 DRURY HEIGHTS 90 CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: The next item of business is Mike Donnelly would like to discuss with us the Drury Heights SEQRA Findings Statement. MR. DONNELLY: You'll remember on July 5, 2007 you granted preliminary approval to Drury Heights. This followed a lengthy environmental review and the issuance of a Findings Statement. Although we discussed and prepared -- Bryant prepared for us an amended Findings Statement because we're returning now to the ordinance as it was before the Town changed it, despite being aware of that I neglected to bring to your attention the requirement that's before you to approve the subdivision even on a preliminary basis that you issue the amended Findings Statement. I believe the way to cure this problem is for you to issue that amended Findings Statement this evening. It's a document you have seen before but I think you have a copy before you. I also think in the abundance of caution what we should do is re-approve the resolution of preliminary subdivision approval, DRURY HEIGHTS 91 and the resolution can actually then carry both dates, that way the horse stays ahead of the cart because we should issue the Findings Statement at least before the second time you approve the resolution. I apologize for the mishap on my part but I don't think anything of substance -- of a harmful nature has been done. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: For the record, can you give us the motion? I would move for that motion. MR. DONNELLY: You would move to approve and issue the SEQRA amended Findings Statement and then to re-approve the preliminary subdivision resolution. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Having heard the motions for the Drury Heights subdivision as presented by our Attorney, Mike Donnelly, I'd move for those motions. MR. MENNERICH: So moved. MR. GALLI: Second. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: I have a motion by Ken Mennerich. I have a second by Frank Galli. Any discussion of the motion? DRURY HEIGHTS 92 (No response.) CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: I'll move for a roll call vote starting with Frank Galli. MR. GALLI: Aye. MR. BROWNE: Aye. MR. MENNERICH: Aye. MR. O'DONNELL: Aye. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Myself yes. So carried. (Time noted: 8:17 p.m.) 93 C E R T I F I C A T I O N I, Michelle Conero, a Shorthand Reporter and Notary Public within and for the State of New York, do hereby certify that I recorded stenographically the proceedings herein at the time and place noted in the heading hereof, and that the foregoing is an accurate and complete transcript of same to the best of my knowledge and belief. DATED: August 14, 2007 1 94 2 STATE OF NEW YORK : COUNTY OF ORANGE TOWN OF NEWBURGH PLANNING BOARD 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - X In the Matter of 4 PINNACLE SUBDIVISION 6 (2003-62) 7 Clearing Mitigation Plan Discussion by Karen Arent 8 9 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - X BOARD BUSINESS 11 12 13 Date: August 2, 2007Time: 8:18 p.m. Place: Town of NewburghTown Hall 1496 Route 300 14 Newburgh, NY 12550 16 BOARD MEMBERS: JOHN P. EWASUTYN, ChairmanFRANK S. GALLI CLIFFORD C. BROWNE 17 KENNETH MENNERICH 18EDWARD T. O'DONNELL, JR. 19 ALSO PRESENT: DINA HAINES MICHAEL H. DONNELLY, ESQ. BRYANT COCKS PATRICK HINES 21 KAREN ARENT 22 23 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - X MICHELLE L. CONERO 24 10 Westview Drive Wallkill, New York 12589 (845)895-3018 PINNACLE SUBDIVISION 95 CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Karen, the next three items are yours. We'll start out with Pinnacle, the clearing mitigation plan. MS. ARENT: I'll just put it right up here. MR. O'DONNELL: In cases like this do we notify the developer this is going to be discussed or you just put it on the agenda? MR. DONNELLY: I talked quickly with their attorney and let her know we were going to do this. You're right, they should be aware of it. MR. GALLI: Now that we approved the amended SEQRA they can move forward. MR. DONNELLY: It's just where you were in July. They have a whole host of other agency approvals to obtain. MS. ARENT: As you recall, there was - I went to the site and found that clearing was performed -- I have to apologize, I just did this quickly. Clearing was performed that wasn't in accordance with the previous lots that we looked at and there was evidence with large stumps. The centers of the trees were removed but there were PINNACLE SUBDIVISION 96 still canopies there to prove that these trees were in good condition when they were taken out. Basically the note that's on the drawing allows almost anything we want to be put back because when you calculate the diameter, the equivalent basal area of the existing trees that were removed illegally, you come up with a figure that pretty much allows hundreds and hundreds of trees to be planted the size of two to two-and-a-half inches in caliber. That's unreasonable and I don't think that's what anybody really wants. What I was thinking is just to be -- we might just ask for trees to be put along property lines so that we still allow the views that were desired but also provide some screening from the river in many years from now because we're going to be very much lower than where these houses are sitting. That's the bad part of this. I also did show a few trees up on the hill, but showing the trees in here below this line means that they have to forever save them. Above this line they have the ability to take out whatever trees they want because this is the line for the conservation easement here. So we can PINNACLE SUBDIVISION 97 ask for a few up here which would do a lot more screening than the ones down there. The ones down there in the future will provide screening. MR. GALLI: Is there a stop order on this? MS. ARENT: Yes, there is a stop work order. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: He's not working on the project? MS. ARENT: There's a stop work order on this portion of the project. The rest of the project he's working on. So for lot number 4, we could propose seventeen trees; lot 5, eight trees. The reason for lot 5, the fewer trees, is because there was already an existing cleared area in here so they didn't clear that many in here. Lot 6, fourteen trees; Lot 7, thirteen trees; and lot 8, seventeen trees. If we just put them in at two, two-and-a-half the total cost would be about $23,000. Now, I didn't know if that's something -- I also got the comment from someone involved with this site that for the $10,000 that it's going to cost to put the trees back that it was PINNACLE SUBDIVISION 98 worth clearing these because of the money that they are - MR. MENNERICH: They'll make more money on the lots. MS. ARENT: Right. Anyway, if we did this -- this is a gentle version of what could be required. MR. HINES: By placing them there I think they're more likely to remain when people do build their houses. You won't have someone say let's knock these things out of the way. MS. ARENT: We never intended to block the views. The whole idea was to allow this view field because -- you've been to the site, Ed and Ken, and you know how high the trees were and you could see right through them. MR. O'DONNELL: You're going to plant about seventy trees? MS. ARENT: The kind I thought would match the stumps that I evaluated. There's Oak -- mostly Oaks. I thought that mostly Oaks. MR. O'DONNELL: Are they going to be Pin Oaks? MS. ARENT: No. They should be Red PINNACLE SUBDIVISION 99 Oaks because there's a lot of Red Oaks there. Maybe a few Whites here and there. MR. O'DONNELL: Are they going to grow to be sixty, seventy feet tall? MS. ARENT: Go for the Red Oak. MR. O'DONNELL: If you go for the Red Oak they're going to cut them down. The Pin Oaks won't grow as high and block their view. MS. ARENT: The whole idea is to kind of screen the houses a little bit from the river. MR. O'DONNELL: I understand the idea. The reality is - MR. HINES: They're putting them along the property line. The intent is they are going to still have their view where they have done their excess damage already. MS. ARENT: They also cut down White Pines, which obviously the White Pines really did do some screening. Very large White Pines were cut down. MR. O'DONNELL: They're going to do screening between those eight lots? MS. ARENT: I'm sorry that you can't see this that well. Here's the property line PINNACLE SUBDIVISION 100 here and here. I thought that the screening should be along the property lines. That would be fair for their purposes. MR. BROWNE: I don't think it's fair at all. I think they should be paying a whole lot more. MS. ARENT: That's why I'm discussing this with you before we go to the building department. MR. BROWNE: They slap us in the face with this whole thing. MS. ARENT: We can ask for more. MR. HINES: The building department is looking for guidance. MS. ARENT: They want guidance. That's why we're talking about it now. MR. BROWNE: Is this the only recourse we have for this, or the Town has? MR. DONNELLY: That's what you had. In the event they did this they could be required to replace an equivalent basal area of plantings. MR. HINES: You could ask for a whole bunch more trees but the individual residents will cut them down on you. The more you put PINNACLE SUBDIVISION 101 there - MS. ARENT: We can show a few more on each property. MR. BROWNE: I'm not really concerned with the individual residents that buy the places. MR. HINES: I'm thinking long term. MR. GALLI: Can we require ten-foot walls? MR. DONNELLY: Are we doing the plantings in the area that we were concerned with erosion so that the appropriate plantings are there to protect the slope ? CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: That was significant, the stabilization of the slope. MS. ARENT: We should look again. MR. HINES: They left the stumps. Ten years from now that slope is going to be a mess. MS. ARENT: Since they have a stop work order they haven't cleaned up. They were supposed to clean up the tops of trees and everything. I'm concerned with the future land owners. If they leave all the tops of the trees there, there's nobody that can get down there to PINNACLE SUBDIVISION 102 cut up all the - MR. HINES: There's a million Black Locusts growing in the first year. MS. ARENT: That was the whole idea of saving these things. That didn't happen. Now they have the canopy of the trees down. On the plans it says that has to be cleaned up or cut into small pieces so it's easy for future maintenance. The idea is so somebody can go down there and cut all these things without getting caught up in these canopies of these trees. I'll tell Jerry to make sure or I'll write in the letter that they still have to abide by that requirement on the plan, that they either have to take the debris out - MR. GALLI: Make them haul them out of there as part of this. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Wouldn't it be more beneficial to cut them and just leave them? MR. HINES: I think you should cut them. Practically I don't think you're getting them out of there without a helicopter. MR. O'DONNELL: They serve a purpose by staying. PINNACLE SUBDIVISION 103 MS. ARENT: That's why we wrote they could cut it up and leave it into manageable pieces. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: If the Board is in agreement we'll have them cut it up and leave it. What's the Board's position as far as the quantity of trees as proposed? Do they want to see more and Karen can make the recommendation on that? MR. BROWNE: With Karen's number as far as being reasonable, is that reasonable from your perspective as a landscape architect or - MS. ARENT: I mean I'm okay with even asking for $30,000 say of planting. That's a hard call. MR. HINES: Trying to strike a balance. MR. O'DONNELL: I think the unimportant thing is the amount of money. MS. ARENT: The intention. MR. O'DONNELL: If you focus on the amount of money it's punitive. What you ought to be focusing on here are what are the trees that are required to satisfy reasonably what our site plan says. PINNACLE SUBDIVISION 104 MS. ARENT: That's a really tough question. I mean we can add a few more up in here. The whole idea was to provide some -- you know, to preserve that screening from the river. These aren't going to do anything for so many years. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Can I have a time out? I think between -- I would like to do that at this current moment. Between yourself, Ed O'Donnell, Ken Mennerich who are most familiar with this site, I think you have to advise the Board as to what you think is reasonable. Frank Galli, Cliff Browne and myself, except maybe for the one site inspection, were never there. That was the purpose of you people going there. I trust you'll make a recommendation to the Board. MR. O'DONNELL: Why don't we go back there. MS. ARENT: Let's do that. That would be great. MR. MENNERICH: It is interesting. I went up to Kingston in the boat and you go to the different areas and there's many of the sites where they've kept a lot of trees. It looked PINNACLE SUBDIVISION 105 very nice. MR. GALLI: A lot of big homes they just built. MR. MENNERICH: There's other ones where they cleared everything out and a big old house sits there with its huge swimming pool and no trees. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Just for record- keeping and Board Business, when do you think you'll be going out there again so Dina and I know how to prepare? MS. ARENT: I can't go for the next two weeks. I'll send an e-mail of a good date. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: We'll put this under Board Business for our meeting of the 30th of August. Will you be in Town for that meeting? MS. ARENT: I'm going away the next meeting but I should be back for that meeting. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Dina, make a note we'll redo this and arrange - MR. O'DONNELL: Take a look at your calendar in September and give Kenny and I a couple of dates. MS. ARENT: You mean August. Like in PINNACLE SUBDIVISION 106 three weeks, is that okay? I'll send you an e-mail. The Hudson River has an amazing history and one of the big things most environmentalists are concerned with is all the housing projects along the river ruining that history and view. (Time noted: 8:25 p.m.) 107 C E R T I F I C A T I O N I, Michelle Conero, a Shorthand Reporter and Notary Public within and for the State of New York, do hereby certify that I recorded stenographically the proceedings herein at the time and place noted in the heading hereof, and that the foregoing is an accurate and complete transcript of same to the best of my knowledge and belief. DATED: August 14, 2007 1 108 2 STATE OF NEW YORK : COUNTY OF ORANGE TOWN OF NEWBURGH PLANNING BOARD 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - X In the Matter of 4 6 SUNRISE BROADCASTING (1998-56) 7 Discussion by Karen Arent 8 Absence of fencing as required by the Planning Board 9 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - X 11 BOARD BUSINESS 12 Date: August 2, 2007 13 Time: 8:25 p.m. Place: Town of Newburgh 14 Town Hall 1496 Route 300 Newburgh, NY 12550 16 BOARD MEMBERS: JOHN P. EWASUTYN, Chairman 17 FRANK S. GALLI CLIFFORD C. BROWNE 18 KENNETH MENNERICH EDWARD T. O'DONNELL, JR. 19 ALSO PRESENT: DINA HAINES MICHAEL H. DONNELLY, ESQ. 21 BRYANT COCKS PATRICK HINES 22 KAREN ARENT 23 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - X MICHELLE L. CONERO 24 10 Westview Drive Wallkill, New York 12589 (845)895-3018 SUNRISE BROADCASTING 109 CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: The next is Sunshine Broadcasting. I believe there may be a stop order on this project also right now. WGNY. MS. ARENT: Sunrise Broadcasting. If you recall there was a neighbor that was very concerned about screening that and the fence. We came up with an agreement with Sunrise Broad casting that they would put in a fence of X amount of linear feet. The woman has been in touch with me several times and I relayed all these concerns to Jerry. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Do you know the woman's name? MS. ARENT: Lynn Knapp. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: For the record. MS. ARENT: And last July I sent him a quick e-mail saying that the fence wasn't up. It was supposed to be up before they started construction. Last April I did a more formal memorandum saying I went out for a site visit and they did a lot of work and the fence wasn't up. Then in July I contacted Jerry again and what happened is they only had to ask for one SUNRISE BROADCASTING 110 inspection, according to Jerry, for the footings. All the other work -- I don't know if it needed more inspections or what but they did all the other work. It looks like it's operational but they have no C of O. It's in Mark Taylor's hands right now because it was a difficult situation with Sunrise Broadcasting. I didn't talk to Jerry and see if there's a stop work order but they're pursuing it legally. MR. DONNELLY: I can't imagine they can't - MR. GALLI: It wasn't that big of a deal, the fence, because I was on the Zoning Board at the time they sued us. MS. ARENT: They were willing to put it up and they didn't do it. MR. DONNELLY: It is an enforcement issue. It is for Jerry and Mark to handle. It is disappointing, all the hard work to try to deal with this woman's concerns. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: If the Board approved it can't we for a matter of record send a letter to that attorney and the people from WGNY? SUNRISE BROADCASTING 111 MR. DONNELLY: I don't have a problem. I don't want to work at cross purposes with Mark. He might have done all that already. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: We haven't been cc'd. MS. ARENT: They didn't get a C of O. MR. O'DONNELL: Why don't we tell them we expect them to put it up. MR. DONNELLY: I'll prepare the letter. If I talk to Mark and for some reason they have some proceeding pending, I'll hold off. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: In the meantime, since he didn't want to live up, at least let him know in a few words what we think. We'll also send a copy of the letter -- thank you -- to Lynn Knapp. MS. ARENT: That's what I was going to ask. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: I would like to do that just to say we weren't deficient. MR. DONNELLY: I'll get her address from you later. MS. ARENT: Okay. Should we let her know it's in the Town's hands? SUNRISE BROADCASTING 112 CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: That's between Mike and Mark Taylor. MS. ARENT: Okay. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Let these gentlemen decide what to do at this time. (Time noted: 8:30 p.m.) C E R T I F I C A T I O N I, Michelle Conero, a Shorthand Reporter and Notary Public within and for the State of New York, do hereby certify that I recorded stenographically the proceedings herein at the time and place noted in the heading hereof, and that the foregoing is an accurate and complete transcript of same to the best of my knowledge and belief. DATED: August 14, 2007 1 113 2 STATE OF NEW YORK : COUNTY OF ORANGE TOWN OF NEWBURGH PLANNING BOARD 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - X In the Matter of 4 6 DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR SIGNAGE 7 Discussion by Karen Arent 8 9 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - X BOARD BUSINESS 11 12 13 14 16 BOARD MEMBERS: 17 18 19 ALSO PRESENT: 21 22 Date: August 2, 2007 Time: 8:30 p.m. Place: Town of Newburgh Town Hall1496 Route 300 Newburgh, NY 12550 JOHN P. EWASUTYN, Chairman FRANK S. GALLICLIFFORD C. BROWNE KENNETH MENNERICHEDWARD T. O'DONNELL, JR. DINA HAINES MICHAEL H. DONNELLY, ESQ. BRYANT COCKSPATRICK HINES KAREN ARENT 23 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - X MICHELLE L. CONERO 24 10 Westview Drive Wallkill, New York 12589 (845)895-3018 DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR SIGNAGE 114 CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: The next item, Karen, you have for us is the design guidelines for signage. MS. ARENT: The design guidelines for signage. They're recommending front lit carved wood or sand blasted raised letter signs are preferable for their historic look and image. Signage lighting should be low level and minimize glare. Back lit light box signage is undesirable. My concern with these two statements is that that excludes the channel lettering that we've been approving for the plazas, for example Target and also the Shop Rite plaza. The concern I have with this ordinance -- I think this works where the streets are close, like Warwick, Goshen, where you don't have to look from far away to see the signs. In the Town of Newburgh where the speeds are faster and the shopping centers are further away from the road I think that these historic signs are going to get lost. I personally have no objection to those channel letter signs but I think that if we can define what is allowed in terms of size and none of DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR SIGNAGE 115 those big ugly boxes, we certainly don't want those, we would be better off than just excluding channel letters because of the fact I think the businesses will have trouble getting their sign to be visible. MR. GALLI: Could that be just for signage near the road they're talking about? MS. ARENT: I would like it to be signage near the road. It's this general broad- brush stroke. It sounded to me like one of the consultants at the last meeting thought it was for the - MR. GALLI: The entry sign. MS. ARENT: And also for the building signs. See, this is what they are showing and this is what you have in Goshen and Warwick. I don't think it's appropriate for the fast traveled roads that we have. MR. DONNELLY: One of the advantages of design guidelines is that they are enacted by and amended by mere resolution of the Town Board. I think if this Board were to send a letter calling this to their attention and making a concrete proposal for change, all they would have to do is DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR SIGNAGE 116 vote on that change. Now, from a cost point of view, since we already have a booklet, if they want to keep it in the booklet they might have to redo pages. I think if you made a proposal to them and they don't have to do a local law and change the ordinance, it's a very flexible tool. I think you need to explain. I think perhaps, Karen, you can do it better. MR. GALLI: Is that set in stone? MS. ARENT: It's not set in stone. It's a guideline. MR. DONNELLY: You don't have to follow it but it would be kind of silly to have a guideline that you wouldn't follow eighty percent of the time. MS. ARENT: Especially since the consultants that are coming before you are kind of reading it the literal way that we just spoke about. I just wanted feedback from all of you as to what you thought. MR. MENNERICH: The logic of your reasoning for allowing the other types of signs is very good. I think it needs to just be DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR SIGNAGE 117 explained. MS. ARENT: We want to control it. For example, I think we can think about limiting sizes. We don't want giant -- like Best Buy for example. It would be nice not to have the super giant box letters. If it can be kind of controlled and reasonable. I think the Target plaza is a nice example. You can pretty much well see all those signs from within that plaza. If they were this other kind you wouldn't see them and they would come like with those overhead gooseneck lights that have a lot of glare. There's also alternatives like halo lighting which are behind the sign and make it shadow -- a little bit more shadowy. So even though we might say box signs are not allowed, then they come up with these other ways to do it that I think aren't as elegant almost as the channel letters. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: So what is the Board's decision then? MR. BROWNE: Does the ARB Board have the ability to make judgment decisions versus the Planning Board we have to stay by the rule? MR. DONNELLY: Actually the way design DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR SIGNAGE 118 guidelines are written they are kind of preferred -- they're encouraged and discouraged things. They are not black and white rules. They are to try to guide both applicants in their design and the Planning Board in discharging its function, both as ARB and Planning Board. MR. BROWNE: Where I'm going with the thought is as the ARB Board we would have the ability to essentially request either one depending on the situation. MR. DONNELLY: There's no doubt that you're not bound by this. I think the difficulty is the Town Board has enacted that and applicants are told to comply with it. If the feeling is that in eight or nine cases out of ten you're not going to be requiring what the guidelines suggest as the preferred method, then the book loses credibility and its usefulness dwindles. You're not bound by it but I think it would be better to change to something that's consistent with how you want to go. MR. BROWNE: I don't like going with one thing as the preferred. I would rather see a couple options and make it the ARB's decision. DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR SIGNAGE 119 MS. ARENT: We can work something out like that. MR. DONNELLY: It may depend upon where - MS. ARENT: Like The Market Place, that central road, it might be better to have that kind of signage because everything is close together. MR. BROWNE: How would you have the Town do whatever they need to do to - MR. DONNELLY: I think you want to have Karen rewrite the page to say in commercial shopping center areas channel signs are permitted but in areas where the visibility is -- I don't know how you want to write it -- these signs are more appropriate. MR. HINES: Shopping center is a use in your zone. MR. DONNELLY: However Karen would describe what the guidelines should say. I don't think it should be one size fits all the other way either. MS. ARENT: That's a good point. MR. DONNELLY: If you want the Town DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR SIGNAGE 120 Board to act on it you have to do more than give them the idea, you have to rewrite what you want it to say. MR. GALLI: Write it up and give it to them. MS. ARENT: I have another question. I think you brought this up. The monument signs might be preferable to have the historic look rather since they're close to the road. They probably could have that historical look instead of the box signs we've been seeing. I just want to say if that's your opinion - MR. MENNERICH: I've never seen the big pylon type signs. MS. ARENT: Like Adams is a good example of the old fashioned sign. MR. MENNERICH: I'll have to drive by it. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: It's a white - MS. ARENT: A white fence sign. It's a wood sign and it's lit from below. We can discuss this again before we work on it. MR. GALLI: It varies the whole project. If you have a place like The Market DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR SIGNAGE 121 Place you're not going to put this little historic sign out there. MR. DONNELLY: The style of sign shall be dependent upon the area where they are proposed. For instance, in areas like, then historic signs. In areas like shopping centers setback from State highways, channel and box - MR. GALLI: You don't want it to look like Route 211 in Middletown, Wallkill. MR. DONNELLY: I think that's a varying scale. If you can find a way to write that and - MS. ARENT: It's going to take a little time to think about, too. (Time noted: 8:40 p.m.) 122 C E R T I F I C A T I O N I, Michelle Conero, a Shorthand Reporter and Notary Public within and for the State of New York, do hereby certify that I recorded stenographically the proceedings herein at the time and place noted in the heading hereof, and that the foregoing is an accurate and complete transcript of same to the best of my knowledge and belief. DATED: August 14, 2007 1 123 2 STATE OF NEW YORK : COUNTY OF ORANGE TOWN OF NEWBURGH PLANNING BOARD 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - X In the Matter of 4 6 PELLA ESTATES PHASE II (2003-11) 7 Six-month extension of preliminary approval 8 9 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - X BOARD BUSINESS 11 12 13 Date: August 2, 2007Time: 8:40 p.m. Place: Town of NewburghTown Hall 1496 Route 300 14 Newburgh, NY 12550 16 BOARD MEMBERS: JOHN P. EWASUTYN, ChairmanFRANK S. GALLI CLIFFORD C. BROWNE 17 KENNETH MENNERICH 18EDWARD T. O'DONNELL, JR. 19 ALSO PRESENT: DINA HAINES MICHAEL H. DONNELLY, ESQ. BRYANT COCKS PATRICK HINES 21 KAREN ARENT 22 23 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - X MICHELLE L. CONERO 24 10 Westview Drive Wallkill, New York 12589 (845)895-3018 PELLA ESTATES PHASE II 124 CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: The next item we have to finalize business, we received a letter from Brian J. Strokosa, he represents Pella Estates Phase II. They had gotten preliminary approval which expires on the 28th of August 2007. They are looking for a six-month extension which will bring them to February 28, 2008. I'll move for a motion to grant a six-month extension for Pella Estates Phase II. MR. O'DONNELL: So moved. MR. GALLI: Second. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: I have a motion by Ed O'Donnell. I have a second by Frank Galli. Any discussion of the motion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: I'll move for a roll call vote starting with Frank Galli. MR. GALLI: Aye. MR. BROWNE: Aye. MR. MENNERICH: Aye. MR. O'DONNELL: Aye. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Myself. So PELLA ESTATES PHASE II 125 carried. (Time noted: 8:42 p.m.) C E R T I F I C A T I O N I, Michelle Conero, a Shorthand Reporter and Notary Public within and for the State of New York, do hereby certify that I recorded stenographically the proceedings herein at the time and place noted in the heading hereof, and that the foregoing is an accurate and complete transcript of same to the best of my knowledge and belief. DATED: August 14, 2007 1 126 2 STATE OF NEW YORK : COUNTY OF ORANGE TOWN OF NEWBURGH PLANNING BOARD 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - X In the Matter of 4 6 UPDATE ON COMMERCIAL & RESIDENTIAL APPLICATIONS 7 Provided by Garling Associates 8 9 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - X BOARD BUSINESS 11 12 13 Date: August 2, 2007Time: 8:42 p.m. Place: Town of NewburghTown Hall 1496 Route 300 14 Newburgh, NY 12550 16 BOARD MEMBERS: JOHN P. EWASUTYN, ChairmanFRANK S. GALLI CLIFFORD C. BROWNE 17 KENNETH MENNERICH 18EDWARD T. O'DONNELL, JR. 19 ALSO PRESENT: DINA HAINES MICHAEL H. DONNELLY, ESQ. BRYANT COCKS PATRICK HINES 21 KAREN ARENT 22 23 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - X MICHELLE L. CONERO 24 10 Westview Drive Wallkill, New York 12589 (845)895-3018 UPDATE - COMMERCIAL & RESIDENTIAL APPLICATIONS 127 CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Bryant, for an update for the Board, if the Board so desires maybe we can establish every six months to have Garling Associates provide us with an update of both residential developments and commercial developments that are before the Board. In this case Bryant, we just have residential. Would the Board like to add commercial to that also? MR. BROWNE: Yes. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: I would assume so. Would that be satisfactory for the Board. Ed? MR. O'DONNELL: I think we do it a little sooner. Why can't we alternate the update every three months? CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Do commercial one - MR. O'DONNELL: And then the next one residential. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Generally speaking it takes around three months before someone can get back on our agenda. MR. GALLI: Really in a year we see UPDATE - COMMERCIAL & RESIDENTIAL APPLICATIONS 128 them only a couple times. MR. O'DONNELL: Let's take it four months and get three times a year. MR. MENNERICH: Would it be possible on that type of status report to add any projects that have been withdrawn? Sometimes I get the feeling there's projects that come here and nothing has happened and - MR. HINES: They might have been sold. MR. MENNERICH: After a certain number of years don't they automatically drop out? MR. DONNELLY: I don't think the ordinance has that. I know certain boards I have it's a little tough to do overhead wise. If an applicant is off the agenda for six months they write a letter and say you last appeared before us on such and such a date. Unless you make application to return to the agenda before this date we'll deem your application withdrawn. It would be very hard to track. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: So then I'll move for a motion from the Board to -- Ed, do you want to make the motion? MR. O'DONNELL: That we develop this UPDATE - COMMERCIAL & RESIDENTIAL APPLICATIONS 129 listing of both residential and commercial properties to be updated every four months. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: I have a motion from Ed O'Donnell. Do I have a second? MR. BROWNE: Second. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: I have a second from Cliff Browne. Any discussion of the motion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: I'll move for a roll call vote starting with Frank Galli. MR. GALLI: Aye. MR. BROWNE: Aye. MR. MENNERICH: Aye. MR. O'DONNELL: Aye. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: And myself. MR. COCKS: Is this all the information you want? CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: I think it's simple enough. Again, I have budgetary constraints and all this right now. I can't be spending a whole lot of money on this. MR. O'DONNELL: One of the things you might want is a start date. Like the thing Kenny just brought up, I mean there is a start date. UPDATE - COMMERCIAL & RESIDENTIAL APPLICATIONS 130 MR. HINES: Project numbers indicate -CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: The project number would be the start date. MR. O'DONNELL: Is that it here? MR. HINES: That's not the start date. If it's 06-60 you know it's -MS. ARENT: Can we talk about the project numbers for a second even though it's not on Board Business? CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Talk. MS. ARENT: I was thinking that since for me there's so many different -- so many of the same type names for different projects, if the applicant can put the project number on the correspondence. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: I've been asking on all resubmissions to provide that. I have been asking that. MS. ARENT: I was speaking with Jerry too and he would like that. MR. DONNELLY: I keep my files numerically. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: I spoke with Maser. Maser resubmitted Laborers Local 17. I spoke to UPDATE - COMMERCIAL & RESIDENTIAL APPLICATIONS 131 Carol to remind her. Carol is sorry she forgot. It's not as easy as you think to repeatedly tell these people. MS. ARENT: Can it be put on like the general requirements or something? CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: We'll get to that point. There's a lot more to do. MS. ARENT: Thank you. That will be helpful. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: It's just monumental. MS. ARENT: I can imagine. I'm just reorganizing my whole office. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: I think that's what we're doing now. It's in the process. Give us a year. Dina has been working on entering the actions into our history so we can get a printout. It's a slow process. MS. ARENT: Thank you. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: It's improving. Any additional comments from the Board? (No response.) CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: I'll move for a motion to close the Planning Board meeting of 132 August 2nd. MR. O'DONNELL: So moved. MR. BROWNE: Second. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: I have a motion by Ed O'Donnell. I have a second by Cliff Browne. I'll ask for a roll call vote starting with Frank Galli. MR. GALLI: Aye. MR. BROWNE: Aye. MR. MENNERICH: Aye. MR. O'DONNELL: Aye. CHAIRMAN EWASUTYN: Aye. (Time noted: 8:47 p.m.) 133 C E R T I F I C A T I O N I, Michelle Conero, a Shorthand Reporter and Notary Public within and for the State of New York, do hereby certify that I recorded stenographically the proceedings herein at the time and place noted in the heading hereof, and that the foregoing is an accurate and complete transcript of same to the best of my knowledge and belief. DATED: August 14, 2007