Philipstown Planning Board

Meeting Minutes

July 20, 2005

The Philipstown Planning Board held its monthly meeting on Wednesday, July 20, 2005 at the VFW Hall in Cold Spring, New York. The meeting was opened at 7:30 p.m. by the Acting Chairman, Michael Gibbons.

Present: Josephine Doherty

Michael Gibbons

Kerry Meehan

Anthony Merante

Andrew Pidala

Pat Sexton

Tim Miller, Planner

Janell Herring, Tim Miller Associates

Absent: George Cleantis, Chairman

Tim Pagones, Counsel

Public Hearing

Garrison Gold Club PDD - Site Plan Application - Route 9, Garrison

Mr. Watson said that they have submitted to the Town Board’s staff for review the FDEIS to Mr. Bibbo’s office and Mr. Miller’s office. He said that there have been no changes in the plans other than the planting plan, which has been augmented to conform with the recommendations of the Wetlands Committee and that is being forwarded this week to Mr. Klotzle for his review.

Mr. Gibbons asked for comments from the Board.

There were none.

Mr. Gibbons asked Mr. Miller for his comment. He said that he knew he had questions with regard to the design standards and asked if Mr. Miller was comfortable.

Mr. Miller said that he was not comfortable that nothing has changed and nobody cares.

Mr. Gibbons asked for comment from the Wetlands.

Mr. Mastrantone said that after the review, the summary was that they feel that it was satisfactory, but they recommend a detailed planting plan for the area around the basin, the hillside be stabilized and restored, and that there should be a three-dimensional rendering of the exit showing the energy dissipation needs and (inaudible) basins as they have seen a problem with Philipse Brook Road.

Mr. Gibbons asked Mr. Watson to address the drainage coming down the road.

Mr. Watson said that it has always been their plan and they’ve talked about it before. He said that the gullies that have been created over the years have to be filled in and restored to a usable condition. Mr. Watson said that they have no problem with the recommendation at all - it is consistent with what they’ve been talking about. He said that the planting plans are done and are ready to go to Mr. Klotzle. Mr. Watson said that they will give them the three-dimensional view.

Mr. Gibbons referred to the location for the house and said that they had indicated a couple of times that they would be able to narrow down the area.

Mr. Watson said that they have narrowed it down. He said that in the northwestern corner, there is a small triangular piece that is a likely and probably the only logical option. Mr. Watson said that they are prepared to come back with a condition that it would be subject to site plan approval.

Mr. Gibbons said that he thought that was acceptable and asked if the lighting plan was in place.

Mr. Watson said that the lighting plan is all in place and has been given to Mr. Bibbo’s office.

Mr. Miller suggested that this matter be adjourned until the Town acts on the PDD.

Mr. Watson said that he requests the Board consider closing the public hearing.

Mr. Gibbons asked if there was any comment from the public.

There was no comment.

Mr. Gibbons asked what the Board wanted to do.

Ms. Sexton commented (inaudible).

Mr. Miller said that the Planning Board does not know what the Town Board is going to do, whether they are going to have a condition associated with the PDD, changes to the site plan, and although no one from the public wished to speak, they also have Bibbo’s conditions out there - this site is not zoned for the use. Mr. Miller suggested the Planning Board adjourn the matter until the Town Board takes action.

Mr. Watson said that the Board could close it with the stipulation that it reserve the right to reopen it if those kinds of issues (did not finish sentence).

Mr. Merante asked if the Town Board (inaudible) and the Planning Board agreed, if the public hearing (inaudible).

Mr. Watson said that the Planning Board could reserve the right to reopen it in case there was a substantial change.

Ms. Sexton asked Mr. Watson what exactly his client (inaudible).

Mr. Watson said that it closes one more door.

Mr. Gibbons asked Mr. Miller if in his opinion the client really gained anything from the (inaudible).

Mr. Miller said that it is a psychological thing - there’s some piece of mind.

Mr. Gibbons asked the Board members how they felt.

The Board agreed to leave the matter as adjourned.

Elizabeth Todd Healy - Timber Harvest Permit - Lane Gate Road, Cold Spring: Revised map/discussion

Mr. Ramey said that since the last meeting, they made a revision and sent it to the Planning Board. He said that they changed the third landing area and access road to the south end of the property so they avoid using the right-of-way. Mr. Ramey said that they have a fifty foot minimum buffer around the entire property including around the Dale property, the right-of-way, and the main property. He said that they had a site walk with the Planning Board last Sunday morning. Mr. Ramey said that they faxed the attorney for the Dales.

Mr. Merante said that from what he had seen, he was pretty comfortable with it.

Ms. Doherty responded (inaudible).

Mr. Meehan said that at the last Town Board meeting, the Highway Superintendent was complaining about how many trees are falling across their Town road and they are spending an abnormal amount of time there. He asked if there was a possibility they could take a quick look along Lane Gate with regard to any dead trees.

Mr. Ramey said that they’d be happy to look at that. He said that it is a dangerous situation and there is a possibility that they could get that resolved.

Mr. Meehan said that he did not see a lot of dead trees there - maybe one or two.

Mr. Ramey said that they would take a look.

Mr. Miller said that they could do a Record of Decision. He said that he spoke with John today about some of the issues and he basically responded to them. Mr. Miller said that they have recommended that the applicant make every effort to harvest during the winter, when the ground is frozen.

Mr. Gibbons asked that the applicant take into consideration the comments from the Board.

Mr. Miller said that the Record of Decision sets forth the recommendation (inaudible).

Mr. Gibbons asked if the public had any comments.

There were no comments.

Ms. Doherty made a motion to close the public hearing. Mr. Meehan seconded the motion. The motion was carried unanimously and was as follows:

George Cleantis - Absent

Josephine Doherty - In favor

Michael Gibbons - In favor

Kerry Meehan - In favor

Anthony Merante - In favor

Andrew Pidala - In favor

Pat Sexton - In favor

Ms. Doherty made a motion to adopt the Record of Decision with the approved conditions. The motion was seconded. The vote was as follows:

George Cleantis - Absent

Josephine Doherty - In favor

Michael Gibbons - In favor

Kerry Meehan - In favor

Anthony Merante - In favor

Andrew Pidala - In favor

Pat Sexton - In favor

Steven Pidala - Site Plan Application - Route 9, Cold Spring: Submission of Statement of Use and additional materials

Mr. Pidala recused himself and left the table.

Mr. Carr stated that the applicant is proposing to combine two lots and (inaudible). In addition, they are proposing to put in a stormwater detention basin, parking for both the north and south lots and (inaudible). Mr. Carr said that since the May meeting, there have not been a lot of changes. With regard to the comments from Bibbo Associates, they wanted to see additional (inaudible) around the basin, which has been added. He said that he received a memo from Bibbo today, stating they wanted to (inaudible) further. Changes in the retaining wall have been incorporated into the plan they now have. Mr. Carr said that the landscaping plan was changed significantly since the May meeting. He said that they had comments from Tim Miller Associates that they would like to see landscaping moved back since the house was brought in back, and that was accomplished.

Mr. Gibbons asked if the Board had any questions.

Mr. Merante said that he was still not clear on the cutting on the bank. He said that it looked tremendously steep and asked Mr. Carr to discuss it a little bit.

Mr. Carr stated that they basically selected a ground cover which would, he was pretty sure, hold the soil in place. In addition, the slope is slightly less steep. The retaining wall is not the stacked retaining wall - it is twenty two inches thick at the base and the footing is ten foot wide. Mr. Carr said that the continuation of the wall that exists now in the northern lot...it is no higher. He said that it is retaining the same type of soil - a well draining soil. Mr. Carr said that he did not think it was a big problem.

Mr. Merante asked where it drained to.

Mr. Carr said that it drains along the swale on the uphill side of the retaining wall and ultimately ends up in the detention basin. He said that it slows it down and allows the soil volume to (inaudible) and then eventually passes on to a twenty four inch underground pipe.

Mr. Miller asked if they would be taking the water away from the wall.

Mr. Carr said right.

Ms. Doherty asked if there was an adequate turning radius.

Mr. Carr said yes, they did have to do some work on that and they now have enough room to turn around a tractor trailer behind the existing building.

Mr. Gibbons told Ms. Doherty that they are going to have Ms. Herring comment on that.

Ms. Herring commented (inaudible).

Mr. Gibbons referred to the comments from Bibbo - Item #2, and asked if an additional guard rail for the northeastern half of the basin they requested was shown on the plan.

Mr. Carr said that it is not, as unfortunately he received the memo (did not finish sentence).

Mr. Gibbons asked if he would oblige by that.

Mr. Carr said yes.

Mr. Gibbons asked if the facility has a gas tank.

Mr. Carr said propane.

Mr. Gibbons asked if there was anything in harms way were they to have an accident.

Mr. Carr said that a few oil tanks will be used on the business. He said that they are currently inside the north lot (inaudible).

Mr. Gibbons said that there are a number of water tanks and garbage on the upper lot and he would like to see that cleaned out of there. He asked for the hours of operation.

Mr. Carr said that the hours of operation are (inaudible).

Mr. Gibbons asked the Board if it had a recommendation for hours.

Someone (unidentified) said eight to five.

Mr. Gibbons said that they need to do something about the truck sitting in the break down lane at six a.m..

Ms. Sexton asked for the percentage of coverage on the property.

Mr. Carr said that the total lot coverage is fifty-seven percent.

Ms. Sexton said that it looks like a lot more than fifty seven percent.

Mr. Carr referred to the plan and explained that one area (pointed out) is going to be grass. He said that they are digging a basin there and will do some landscaping, but essentially it is a grass area. He pointed to the area in front and said that it is now a turnaround and it will be reclaimed as grass.

Ms. Sexton asked a question with regard to storage (inaudible).

Mr. Carr said that he didn’t have the number.

Mr. Gibbons said that the Board would like to limit it to twelve feet. He said that when the Board made a site visit, the applicant actually had stuff on either side of the bay doors stacked up to the roof.

Ms. Sexton asked if Mr. Carr would clarify that there would be five cars on the lot for sale and how the parking spaces would be used.

Mr. Carr said that it probably won’t be five cars. He said that the applicant has had his dealer license for over twenty years and a requirement for that licence is that he have five spots available to show cars. Mr. Carr said that in the last twenty years, he’s never had more than two vehicles for sale.

Ms. Sexton said that once this is approved, he’ll have the ability to have those five cars there, but no more than five.

Mr. Carr said no more than five.

Ms. Sexton asked if they’ll be repair at the site.

Mr. Carr said no. He said that in the back of the north lot building he does tire changing and that kind of stuff, but he is not a licensed New York State (inaudible).

Mr. Meehan said that there is no car repair on the premises. He asked if that would be o.k.

Ms. Sexton said that sounds fine.

Mr. Gibbons said that he agreed and asked if they had a lighting plan.

Mr. Carr said that he did not have a plan for the Board.

Mr. Gibbons said that when he first came to the Board, he asked for the house because he was afraid of burglaries on the property. He said that apparently, he’s going to have lighting to protect himself.

Mr. Meehan asked what kind of lights were there now.

Mr. Carr said that there were lights on the rear building and one adjacent to the front.

Mr. Meehan asked if they shined down in the yard and not up.

Mr. Carr said that they shine down on the wall of the building and there is a street line on the corner.

Mr. Meehan asked if they shined out to Route 9.

Mr. Carr said that the street line on the corner probably does shine out to Route 9.

Mr. Gibbon said that they need a lighting plan.

Mr. Meehan said that before the Board made its site visit, there was a tremendous amount of ice a few days before that between this property and Mid-Hudson concrete. He said that the applicant has to know where the water goes to.

Mr. Carr said that he knew where it came from.

Mr. Meehan asked if anyone knew why the water backed up. He said that the whole highway is covered with ice.

Mr. Carr responded (inaudible).

Ms. Sexton said just a remark on the plat that the plants are maintained in a living state and act as a screen and if they grow thirty feet in the air with nothing on the vine, they have to be replaced.

Ms. Doherty said that she thought they had a landscaping note the Board puts on and also the hours of operation are put on the plan.

Mr. Miller said that it should be on the Statement of Use.

Ms. Doherty said that in the past, they were putting it right on the plan, as it made it a lot easier.

Mr. Gibbons asked if the public had any comment.

There were no comments.

Mr. Gibbons said that because of the lighting plan not being there and a few other questions, he did not think they were ready to close it.

Mr. Miller said that he did not see any need to keep it open. He said that he would suggest the Board close it and open the Part 2 and at the Part 2, the Board could address the lighting and define that in the Part 3. Mr. Miller said that if there were controversy from the public, he would say keep the hearing it open, but there was not.

A motion was made to close the public hearing. Ms. Doherty seconded the motion. The public hearing was closed and the vote was as follows:

George Cleantis - Absent

Josephine Doherty - In favor

Michael Gibbons - In favor

Kerry Meehan - In favor

Anthony Merante - In favor

Andrew Pidala - In favor

Pat Sexton - In favor

Mr. Miller distributed the Part 2. He went over it with the Board. Mr. Miller said that he felt the only item he would check yes would be on the following:

- Item 1 - Impact on Land

. destruction on slopes 15% or greater - YES

- Item 11 - Impact on Aesthetic Resources

. under Other - Lighting plan is needed - potential large impact

Mr. Miller asked Mr. Carr if he provided the detail Bibbo was looking for on the retaining wall design.

Mr. Carr said yes.

Mr. Gibbons asked about Item 6 - drainage or surface runoff and if it would constitute (did not finish sentence).

Mr. Miller said that the plan has already more or less addressed that. He said that the way the plan is now designed it is not increasing the runoff on the site. Mr. Miller said that if the Board wanted an explanation of that in the Part 3, (inaudible).

Mr. Gibbons said that he would like to see that, especially because of the retaining wall.

Mr. Meehan asked about the impact on transportation and the vehicles parking alongside of the road making deliveries.

Mr. Miller said that he did not know if there was any sign stating that parking is not permitted or something to that nature that might address that.

Mr. Merante made a motion to adopt the Part 2. Ms. Sexton seconded the motion. The vote was as follows: George Cleantis - Absent

Josephine Doherty - In favor

Michael Gibbons - In favor

Kerry Meehan - In favor

Anthony Merante - In favor

Andrew Pidala - Recused

Pat Sexton - In favor

Mr. Miller said that the applicant has to prepare a Part 3 and submit it to the Board.

Mr. Pidala joined the table again.

Morris/Lippe - Application for revision of a previously filed plat - Esselbourne Road, Cold Spring: Discussion

Mr. Watson said that this application was before the Board months ago and the Board agreed to table it pending resolution of the zoning issue with regard to the zoning requirements for the lots, specifically the lack of six thousand square feet of buildable area on the lots. He said that the appeal was granted on June 6, 2005. The property is on Esselbourne Road with access to High Road. It is improved with two buildings. Mr. Watson said that they want to divide it into two lots - one lot for each of the buildings. He said that they made the application and got a variance and seek the Board’s approval.

Mr. Merante said that on one lot they have a well and asked if that well was to be drilled or was (inaudible).

Mr. Watson said that there were some issues with the wells over the years and they were corrected over the last year. He said that a new well was installed. Mr. Watson said that he did not know for certain whether the one to be abandoned was in fact abandoned, but that is a requirement of the Health Department. Mr. Watson said that there was a permit and it will be taken care of.

Mr. Gibbon asked if the public had any comment.

There was no comment.

Ms. Doherty made a motion to close the public hearing. Mr. Pidala seconded the motion. The vote was as follows: George Cleantis - Absent

Josephine Doherty - In favor

Michael Gibbons - In favor

Kerry Meehan - In favor

Anthony Merante - In favor

Andrew Pidala - In favor

Pat Sexton - In favor

Mr. Miller distributed the Part 2. He asked Mr. Watson if there was any new construction.

Mr. Watson said no.

Mr. Miller said that everything on the Part 2 could be checked “NO”.

Mr. Gibbons said that he would concur. He asked for a motion to accept the Part 2.

Ms. Doherty made a motion to accept the Part 2. Mr. Merante seconded the motion. The vote was as follows: George Cleantis - Absent

Josephine Doherty - In favor

Michael Gibbons - In favor

Kerry Meehan - In favor

Anthony Merante - In favor

Andrew Pidala - In favor

Pat Sexton - In favor

Mr. Miller distributed a Resolution and stated that it was pretty straight forward, including a Negative Declaration, because there is no construction and no physical disturbance.

Ms. Doherty made a motion to accept the Resolution (copy attached) as presented. Mr. Meehan seconded the motion. The vote was as follows:

George Cleantis - Absent

Josephine Doherty - In favor

Michael Gibbons - In favor

Kerry Meehan - In favor

Anthony Merante - In favor

Andrew Pidala - In favor

Pat Sexton - In favor

Carlson Construction Management, Inc. - Application for approval of alternate road standards - Torchia Road, Cold Spring: Submission of EAF parts 1, 2 and 3/discussion

Mr. Watson stated that the property has approximately fifty feet of frontage on Route 9 and access via (inaudible) Road, known as Torchia Road. He said that the applicant has considered the conditions and has applied for alternate standards to be approved by the Town , which would waive a couple of items with regard to the Town road that is being proposed. Mr. Watson said that first, it would be granted a waiver on the width from thirty to fifty feet - approximately a little less than half, perhaps forty percent of the road (inaudible) over the existing Torchia Road, which is thirty feet wide. The second waiver would be on the radius of curvature, which would be required to be under normal circumstances, two hundred feet. They’ve asked for a waiver down to 175 feet. Mr. Watson said that finally, at the end of the alternate road specification, they are asking to substitute a hammerhead for a circular turnaround. Mr. Watson said that each of these has a reason. He said that they explained to the Town Board at their public hearing on the alternate standards they do have a fifty foot (inaudible) for access. It goes through a wetland and would require a new bridge. It would be an expense for the applicant. (Inaudible) the disturbance of a significant amount of wetlands before they could get the buildable portion of the property. Mr. Watson said that Torchia Road is an existing road. There is a bridge over Torchia Road, which is in bad need of replacement. Mr. Watson said that Mr. Carlson said that he has a right to come in there and thought he should be able to use it. Mr. Watson said that as the Board knows and the public knows, there are approximately eight houses that are already serviced by this private road. Those eight houses are unable to get emergency services. Mr. Watson said that the pavement of the road will be Town standard. He said that it will be twenty feet wide - the same as any other Town road. Mr. Watson said that if he builds a bridge, it will open the access up to the eight houses that do not have emergency services at this point, he will be able to get into his property, and will be able to do the subdivision. So, they simply asked for the alternate road standards on the width, because they don’t have enough width to fill the requirement. Mr. Watson said that they asked for the turning radius because it helps them avoid steep slopes and improves their ability to get into the property doing less damage at this point than they would necessarily have to do if they used the flatter radius and had to cut deeper into the side hill as they were making the turn. He said that the same goes to the hammerhead. Mr. Watson said that they want to employ the hammerhead because it involves substantially less grading. He said that Mr. Carlson has engaged Tectonic Engineering to design the bridge. The bridge has been fully designed with supporting calculations in terms of its structural integrity and its sizing with regard to passing the storm underneath the bridge. Mr. Watson said that they are certain that there will be significantly improved conditions. The engineers for the bridge have devised a plan that will minimize the interruption of traffic that can go across the bridge to approximately a four hour period of time. Mr. Watson said that the bridge plans were submitted to the Fire Company. They did ask about the capacity of the bridge in terms of weight. He said that the letter was submitted in the Part 3 of the EAF with regard to capacity of the bridge, and he believed it was 86,000 pounds. Mr. Watson said that the Fire Company wanted to be assured that 86,000 pounds could be supported by the bridge and that assurance was provided by Tectonic. He said that they have made an application for a wetlands permit because of the impact of the construction of the bridge. There is a wetlands along the edge of Clove Creek, which they are disturbing (inaudible) and they are putting in the drainage structure in the wetlands buffer. Mr. Watson said that their recommendation was positive to the Planning Board and they have submitted that. He said that they did, again, recommend that Mr. Klotzle be consulted with regard to plant materials in the drainage area so that they will do the minimal amount of damage to the wetland. Mr. Watson said that they are proposing five lots. They originally had applied for a two-phase subdivision because of the way the subdivision regulations are structured. Mr. Miller’s office commented that they felt it would be better if they did it all in one phase, so they’ve asked the Board for a waiver of that particular thing. Mr. Watson said that the lots meet all the minimum zoning requirements. They have had a public hearing with regard to the alternate road standards. The Town Board is (inaudible) to act, he believed, positively, but of course are barred from doing so until the Planning Board has completed the SEQRA process.

Ms. Sexton said that Mr. Watson was going to get the Board a road maintenance agreement.

Mr. Watson said that he should have addressed that. He said that they did turn in form letters from six of the neighbors, and an issue was raised at the public hearing. At least one of the neighbors said that they understood they were participating in the maintenance of the road and not the maintenance of the bridge. So, there was a little kink there, but Mr. Doyle and the Town Board have made it very clear that they will be certain that in the approval of the alternate road standards it will include maintenance of the bridge. Mr. Watson said that his guess is that it will result in instead of having eleven - their five lots plus six of the neighbors participating, they will have their five lots plus perhaps four or five of the neighbors. He said that there is no way that they can force the neighbors to participate. Mr. Watson said that they think it is a matter of being a good citizen to do that and those that will be good citizens will willingly participate. He said that they believe the service that Mr. Carlson is providing in terms of replacing the bridge is a very valuable service. Mr. Watson said that he was not saying that he was doing this out of the kindness of his heart. He said that obviously, he wants to make a profit on his lots, but Mr. Watson said that he thought it works both ways. Mr. Watson said that they would certainly make the approval of the maintenance agreement subject to any approval. He said that he could tell the Board for certain that Mr. Doyle will have a handle on it - a hand in getting that.

Mr. Merante said that he thought he heard that at the Town Board meeting, all but one of those people had agreed.

Mr. Watson said that he thought there were eight, and they have six letters. He said that Mr. Carlson told him that of the eight, one flat-out refused, one person was ill and unable to be approached, and the other six signed. Mr. Watson said that he was not at the public hearing, but one of the six did comment that he didn’t believe they had to participate in the maintenance of the bridge.

Mr. Gibbons asked if with regard to the entry road, Mr. Watson was asking for fifty down to a thirty foot buffer area.

Mr. Watson said a fifty foot right-of-way with ownership.

Mr. Gibbons said, and that is due to the fact that his client does not own the property on either side of the road.

Mr. Watson said that is correct. He said that the property to the southeast -the Reichard property, has a cottage that is very close to the road and to convey any of that land would be virtually impossible because of the house being there. Mr. Watson said that it was not quite that bad a situation up to the northwest, but there is a house there and there would be a setback issue that would be required.

Mr. Gibbons asked how wide the travelway going through the thirty foot right-of-way was.

Mr. Watson said twenty feet.

Mr. Gibbons said twenty feet out of thirty feet gave them five on either side.

Mr. Watson said that is right. He said that it is the full width required by the Town Code.

Mr. Gibbons said that one of the members was asking earlier about screening to the southern side of that road. He asked if that could somehow be installed in the right-of-way.

Mr. Watson said that they could certainly look at it. He said that his recollection is that five feet is not very much.

Mr. Gibbons asked if there was any way to work with the neighbor to be able to get some screening there.

Mr. Watson said that they could certainly ask.

Mr. Gibbons said that at the public hearing the other night, one of the concerns was the approach, not only coming out of the new development, but out of the older road that exists and he asked Mr. Watson to go over that again.

Mr. Watson referred to the map, and said that coming in from Route 9, you’ll get across the bridge and will have the opportunity to turn onto Torchia Road. He said that it is essentially a “T” or a “Y” intersection. The main portion of the road will continue, bend to the north, and go to the cul-de-sac. Mr. Watson said that they will make the necessary repairs...part of the plan is to re-grade the road and blend it in so that Torchia Road is fully serviceable.

Mr. Gibbons said that one of his concerns was actually coming out of the road, as apparently, there is a slope there.

Mr. Watson said that the roadway will be improved over its present condition. He pointed to an area and said that there is a condition there where the fairly steep grade already exists and they are not proposing to do anything on that part of the road. Mr. Watson said that they will certainly be improving the condition - not worsening it.

Mr. Gibbons referred to the EAF, Form #3 - second page, appendix two. He read aloud the following: “increase the (inaudible) values to the greatest extent...”.

Mr. Watson said that they did that. He said that appendix two is Mr. Bibbo’s first report - April 27^th, and they responded to that and on May 19^th he wrote the Planning Board that he was satisfied from an engineering point of view. Mr. Watson said that he did know they addressed that particular question.

Mr. Gibbons asked Mr. Watson if he had a picture of the bridge and asked if it was going to be a nice New England covered bridge.

Mr. Watson said that it is not going to be a covered bridge. He said that he did have plans for the bridge, but did not have a rendering of the bridge. Mr. Watson said that it is going to be a functional bridge with the necessary railings and travelway.

Mr. Gibbons asked if the drawings had been reviewed by Bibbo.

Mr. Watson said yes, and they’ve been approved. He said that incidentally, the DEC, although it didn’t address the structure of the bridge, has issued a permit for its replacement.

Mr. Miller asked Mr. Watson to describe to the Board exactly how this construction is going to proceed. He said that in particular, they were going to install the new footings since this is going to be brought in several sections on a truck and is a pre-built bridge.

Mr. Watson said that it is pre-built, yes.

Mr. Miller asked if they were going to install the footings and how they would take out the existing bridge.

Mr. Watson said that he was sure they would lift the existing bridge out with a crane of some sort. He said that the existing bridge is actually two parts and the footings, he believed, will go outside of that, will be put in, and when the first section of the new bridge is available to come in and be put in place, there will be a period of time when they’ll take the old bridge out and it will be out of service. The engineer from Tectonic has estimated that it would be approximately a half of a day. Mr. Watson said that they discuss that in Part 3 of the EAF He said that there actually is another way around, but that is private property, so they will do their best to schedule that at a time when it is convenient for the residents and minimize the amount of time the bridge is out of service.

Mr. Miller said that he got that the bridge is out of service, but he was trying to understand what was physically happening.

Mr. Watson said that his understanding was that the bridge coming in would get lowered onto the footers and would be ready to go.

Mr. Miller said that it gets bolted on.

Mr. Watson said and then there would be grading at the end of it to make it work.

Mr. Miller asked if the whole thing is a four hour deal.

Mr. Watson said that the engineer’s estimate of the period of time that the bridge will be out - that there will be no service at all, is a half of a day - four hours.

Mr. Miller asked if that includes the grading of the (did not finish sentence).

Mr. Watson said yes - not finished grading, obviously, but enough to get it so (inaudible).

Mr. Miller said that it seemed like a big job to be done in a half of a day.

Mr. Watson said that he was just going by what the engineer said.

Mr. Miller asked if all the new utilities on this job would be underground.

Mr. Watson said yes.

Mr. Gibbons said, and what they see is the envelope for the tree cutting.

Mr. Watson said that he thought that was a reasonable expectation.

Mr. Miller said, but that is not a commitment on the (inaudible).

Mr. Watson said that was correct.

Mr. Miller said that they could clear cut the whole property.

Mr. Watson said that was a misstatement. He said that they can’t clear cut the whole property without a wetland permit.

Mr. Gibbons asked if they could retain it as this though.

Mr. Miller said that they could state that the (inaudible) of clearing shall be as shown on the (did not finish sentence).

Mr. Gibbons said that he meant within ten percent of that.

Mr. Watson said that generally as shown on that, he thought it was fine.

Mr. Gibbons asked if the public had any questions.

Mr. Raphael Catania of 61 Torchia Road introduced himself and said that he was in front of the Board to bring up questions that his fellow neighbors had. He said that they wanted to be absolutely sure that the bridge would be built first before any approval of the subdivision, or that there would be a contingency that they would build the bridge first.

Mr. Watson said that the bridge will not be built without approval of the Planning Board - period. He said that the applicant is prepared to bond the construction of the bridge as a condition of the approval.

Mr. Contania asked if with respect to the five new lots to be built, the requirement would be under their deed that they would have to join the Association.

Mr. Gibbons said yes.

Mr. Contania said that other comments were specific questions about the bridge itself - whether it would be built in two parts, so that they could cross and other questions related to grading, etc..

Mr. Watson said that the bridge will be built in two parts as he described and as were described in Part 2 of the EAF. A prefab will come in two sections. There will be about four hours where the bridge is totally out of service, by the engineer’s estimate. Mr. Watson said that it will be higher and the road will be graded to meet it. He said that the bridge that is there now is not adequate to pass the storm under it. Mr. Watson said that this bridge has been raised to allow for the proper amount of flow.

Mr. Sal Torchia of Torchia Road introduced himself. He asked a question (inaudible).

Mr. Gibbons said that as the applicant had indicated, it is not going to occur like that - in their opinion.

Mr. Torchia said that it is impossible to have (inaudible) unless he is going to put a temporary bridge to go across the water.

Mr. Gibbons said that he intended to come back to that.

Mr. Carl Dempsey of 17 Clove Brook, introduced himself. He said that one of the positions that no one has addressed is any approval of this, of which he is very pro (inaudible). Mr. Dempsey said that the bridge is abominable - there’s been no maintenance on that area whatsoever in years. He said that it is a very dangerous situation - walking, driving, sleigh riding, etc., but his biggest concern is that they do have an access of fifty feet up the street from that. He said that it is a matter of money. Mr. Dempsey said that in the past years, any applicant that had come before the Board with the application to reduce the fifty foot right-of-way has been denied. He said that if they are willing to bond the maintenance of that road and the bridge, he is asking the Board for a bond for twenty years for the legalities that will come behind it for this approval.

Ms. Anita Chester introduced herself. She said that in looking at the plan, it looked very close to the wetlands. Ms. Chester said that it is going to put in five septics, driveways, and roads, and things they are talking about now is ground water. So they are going to have more salt and more pollution going into the creek. Ms. Chester said that she thought they really should think about, if they approve the subdivision, minimizing the lots, because there appears to be too many lots in such a small area.

Mr. Mastrantone said that they reviewed this before the Wetlands Committee and because of the safety issue with the bridge, it is a big job in terms of them trying to make it work and designing the subdivision very close to the wetland buffer. He said that their concern was what was said about the detention basin and having the wetland (inaudible) monitor that.

Mr. Sexton said that Mr. Watson said that there was another way onto the property, but it was private. She asked if there was any way to insure that for a period of time that the road is out of service, and if there should be an emergency, they could (did not finish sentence).

Mr. Watson said that they will certainly ask the owner of that bridge if they may have permission for that period of time to use that bridge.

Ms. Sexton asked where it was.

Mr. Watson said that there are actually two. He pointed them out to the Board. Mr. Watson said that he understood in an emergency that you can get there, but he would have to check. He said that he would make that effort to seek permission and notify the people so that if there is somebody who needs to be away for that period of time in case of medical emergency, they will do everything in their power to make sure those people know and have the opportunity to leave prior to that interruption.

Mr. Gibbons asked if with regard to the notice, they could get that in writing that these people would be given a five-day advance notice for the bridge work.

Mr. Watson said that they would take that as a condition.

Mr. Gibbons asked where the back side of Tochia Road went to.

Mr. Watson said that it is a dead end. He said that there are a couple of ways to go through people’s private property and get back out with those other bridges, but essentially it ends (did not finish sentence).

Mr. Gibbons said, so they need access one way or another. He asked if with regard to the comment from the gentleman on the fifty foot right-of-way, Mr. Watson could briefly point out where the fifty foot right-of-way would be.

Mr. Watson pointed it out to the Board. He said that it is just immediately north of DiSisto. Mr. Watson said that he believed the next property was Dew Drop Inn Antiques. He said that besides what he spoke about before being Clove Creek and the wetlands to contend with, there are also sight distance issues. Mr. Watson said that he was sure the sight distance to the north is substantially less than it is at Torchia Road.

Mr. Gibbons referred to the eastern side of the fifty foot buffer zone, and asked how big the wetland was and if it was more than just the creek.

Mr. Watson said that it is more than just the creek, yes.

Mr. Gibbons said, so they’d have to have a substantial span across that.

Mr. Watson said that it is about the same distance - you’d need all of the wetlands.

Mr. Miller said that you can’t build a bridge there - period. He said that it just doesn’t make any sense.

Mr. Gibbons said that he was trying to explain that to the general public why they are not going there.

Mr. Meehan said that nothing has been said about what kind of a staging area they are going to need, what the bridge (inaudible) is going to need, if they’re going to have to block off Route 9 to get all this stuff, or where is the staging area going to be.

Mr. Watson pointed it out to the Board.

Mr. Meehan asked if he was going to be able to put all his stuff there.

Mr. Watson said that there is going to be a time when they’re going to have to truck in that piece of the bridge, but other than the piece of the bridge (did not finish sentence).

Mr. Meehan asked how many pieces they were talking about.

Mr. Watson said that his understanding was that there were two major pre-fabricated pieces.

Mr. Meehan said, and they are just going to be sitting along that road there.

Mr. Watson said that he thought they were going to be brought in the day they are going to be put in place.

Mr. Meehan said that it would be nice to hear the engineer or somebody explain how they are going to put it together.

Mr. Watson said that they did provide that in the EAF - in the description.

Mr. Meehan said that he knew that, but it would still be nice to hear someone explain how they are going to do it.

Mr. Watson said that it is going to have to be staged - there is no question about it.

Mr. Merante asked if there were any services/utilities there for the business to the south and the other businesses just above there. He said that he’s been told that there’s been some digging going on. Mr. Merante asked if Mr. Watson was aware of any of that.

Mr. Watson said that he’s heard a couple of different stories that there was some trenching done. The most recent story he had heard was that they uncovered a (inaudible) drain broke the (inaudible) drain and there were some issues with regard to that flow, invariably sewage, but he didn’t know.

Mr. Merante said, so he was not aware that there are any utilities under this road.

Mr. Watson said that to the best of his knowledge, there are none. He said that he was not aware of any.

Mr. Sig Ferber said that about two years ago, the North Highlands Fire District used a (inaudible), which went along the used car lot. He said that (inaudible) heavy equipment out that way and (inaudible) rotation higher on Torchia Road, but they spent about an hour and a half putting back trees (inaudible). Mr. Ferber said that it would make sense if there was going to be a four hour (inaudible) of opportunity to put this bridge into place that as a contingency, they set up this road as a backup in case there is a need for it. He said that he was sure that could be arranged with the owner.

Mr. Watson said that they already said they did that.

Mr. Gibbons asked if they would have the road surveyed as far as making sure that it has access for that date and have all the brush cut back.

Mr. Watson said absolutely.

Mr. Torchia asked a question (inaudible).

Mr. Gibbons asked Mr. Watson to answer the question.

Mr. Watson presented the engineering drawing and said that there is a fifty foot stand - fifty by twenty feet. He said that it will be laid on with footings and piers and (inaudible). Mr. Watson said that it is a timber bridge.

Mr. Torchia said that he thought they should make provisions - have a temporary road made up so that the people can use that other road. He said that it is not going to be a four hour job. Mr. Torchia said that should be done first.

Mr. Sylvester (inaudible) of Torchia Road introduced himself and stated that his concern was that once you stop them, once they get the subdivision passed, they sell the property or build homes and not do anything (inaudible).

Mr. Gibbons said that he was not about to answer that.

Mr. Watson said that he could answer it. He said that the answer to the question is, and he answered the question before, that the applicant is willing to bond the construction of the bridge, the Town will hold that bond, and if he fails to perform, the Town will have that bond to draw upon to finish the construction.

Mr. Sylvester (inaudible) asked how much the bond would be.

Mr. Watson said that it will be based on the construction estimate. The Town will decide.

Mr. Sylvester (inaudible) asked, which is what?

Mr. Watson said that his understanding is fifty thousand dollars.

Mr. Sylvester (inaudible) asked why they did not have a detailed plan of the bridge.

Mr. Watson said that they do have a detailed plan of the bridge.

Mr. Sylvester (inaudible) asked why the homeowners weren’t allowed to get a detailed plan.

Mr. Watson said that they were allowed to get it - it was posted in the paper, and the plans have been in the Town Hall for several months.

Mr. Sylvester (inaudible) asked if he wanted to get a copy, he could get one.

Mr. Watson said yes.

Mr. Gibbons said that he could go to the Town Hall, fill out a freedom of information request, and could probably get a copy.

Mr. Sylvester (inaudible) asked what was to stop the applicant from saying, “the heck with fifty thousand, I’ll sell the property, (inaudible)”.

Mr. Watson said that for the third time, they are posting a bond to insure (did not finish sentence).

Mr. Sylvester (inaudible) said fifty thousand dollars. He said that fifty thousand dollars was nothing.

Mr. Watson said that the Town has the money to construct the bridge.

Mr. Sylvester (inaudible) asked why the Town allowed the people who live there to build homes when they knew there was a problem with the bridge since (inaudible).

Mr. Watson said that he thought they assumed the people had lived there and (inaudible) the bridge would be willing to put some money into its (inaudible).

Mr. Gibbons interrupted and said that the Board was going to discuss the arrangements. He said that he might not get his answer tonight.

Mr. Sylvester (inaudible) asked if there would be another meeting.

Mr. Gibbons said that they are more than likely going to head that way. He asked him to be a little patient as the Board would try to answer everything.

Mr. (inaudible) introduced himself and stated that he lived in the white cottage in the center of the plan. He said that he thought it was a wonderful thing, but the only thing is that the house sits right behind him.

Mr. Watson said that they could move it a little bit, but could not move it a lot.

Mr. (inaudible) said that was all he would ask.

Mr. Gibbons asked if he wanted it moved to the east.

There was no reply.

Mr. Gibbons asked if there were any other questions from the public.

There were none.

Mr. Gibbons stated that he thought there was a lot of discussion/concern from the public and there seemed to be concern from the Planning Board as to the design of the bridge. He asked the Board members if they were ready for the Part 3 and if they felt comfortable with closing the hearing, or keeping it open.

Mr. Meehan said that he would like to see the engineer in front of the Board to explain how (inaudible).

Mr. Gibbons said that personally, he would like to see a rendering of the bridge, so he was not ready to close the hearing at this point.

Ms. Doherty commented (inaudible).

Mr. Merante commented with regard to the pre-cast (inaudible).

Ms. Sexton commented with regard to the concrete and the life expectancy being fifty years (inaudible).

Mr. Watson said that he did not know the answer to that, but it was submitted to the DEC for review and it was approved. He said that he would very respectfully request that the Board consider closing the public hearing. Mr. Watson said that they have to get the bridge in this year.

Mr. Gibbons said that he understood that, but he did not think any of the members felt comfortable with it.

Mr. Watson said that he wanted it on the record that if they don’t start in September, they are not going to get it in (did not finish sentence).

Mr. Gibbons said that he understood. He said that the Planning Board is willing to meet in August.

Mr. Watson said that it is clear that the Board wants more answers, but he would respectfully request the Board consider closing the public hearing and doing a Part 3, so that they can have their Negative Declaration and go back (tape ended).

Mr. Gibbons said that the Board typically does not meet in the month of August. He asked if the members were willing to meet in the month of August.

A brief discussion followed with regard to a mutual date.

The Board decided that on Thursday, August 11^th, the Board would meet to discuss this matter only.

Mr. Gibbons said that the Board would leave the public hearing open and he asked for a motion.

A motion was made to leave the public hearing open. Ms. Sexton seconded the motion. The vote was as follows: George Cleantis - Absent

Josephine Doherty - In favor

` Michael Gibbons - In favor

Kerry Meehan - In favor

Anthony Merante - In favor

Andrew Pidala - In favor

Pat Sexton - In favor

Mr. Gibbons asked if the Board wished to go over the Part 3.

Mr. Miller said that they submitted an EAF Part 3.

Mr. Gibbons said that he understood that, but the Board needed to vote on it.

Mr. Miller said that the Board did not need to vote on it. He said that they can vote on it and if the Board were to vote on it and adopt a Negative Declaration, the Town Board would take action on the alternate road standards. Mr. Miller said that the existing bridge is not a great situation and having it in that condition for another seven or eight months is not a desirable thing from the neighbors’ point of view. He said that in going over the Part 3, it doesn’t obligate the Board to conclude anything, but it does open the door, gets the Board also to adopt the Negative Dec for the Town Board to adopt all sorts of road standards. Mr. Miller said that the only thing about the road standards is whether or not they are obligating the Planning Board to do the bridge the way it is presently configured.

Mr. Watson said that there is no release sought on the bridge - the bridge meets the Town standards. He said that it is the three things he talked about - the width at the beginning of the road, 175 feet set on radius, and the hammerhead at the end.

Mr. Miller asked Mr. Watson if that helped his circumstances and if they were prepared to go back to the Town Board.

Mr. Watson said that he had a closed public hearing with the Town Board.

Mr. Miller said, so they are just waiting for a Negative Declaration.

Mr. Watson said yes.

Mr. Miller asked (inaudible) for approval.

Mr. Watson said no.

Mr. Gibbons said that the Town Board indicated that the Planning Board is the authority on what bridge goes in there.

Mr. Miller said that at the end of the day (inaudible) approve the project, so they can get whatever they feel they can get. He said that if the applicant disagrees with it, he can deal with that in court.

Mr. Gibbons agreed and said that he was indicating that the Town Board was not basing any of its decisions on the bridge. They were basing it on the other conditions of width, length, and what is standard.

Mr. Miller asked Mr. Watson if he needed to get a permit (inaudible) guidelines for the bridge.

Mr. Watson said that he did not know the answer to that.

Mr. Miller said that he did not want to be moving this thing along because there are conditions out there that they are just not going to be able to satisfy anyhow. He asked if they were going to be in a position (did not finish sentence).

Mr. Watson said that he believed he was in a position to go back to the Town Board with a Negative Declaration and get them to act. He said that he further believed that they are going to act positively. Mr. Watson said that he did not know that - it was what he believed.

Mr. Miller said that it is one option the Board has - to leave the public hearing open. He said that they can adopt the Negative Declaration prior to the Resolution of Approval or Denial. Mr. Miller said that it does not obligate the Board. It simply says they’ve looked at the environmental factors and are making a finding that there is not going to be an adverse impact based on the Part 3.

Mr. Gibbons said that he understood that and was ready to throw out Mr. Merante’s comment that if it is a bridge made out of wood versus a pre-cast metal, then they seem to indicate that the Board does have environmental concerns that might me associated with this bridge.

Ms. Doherty said that she would like to make sure that adopting the Negative Declaration doesn’t tie them to (inaudible). She asked if they were to adopt the Neg Dec tonight, and next month they meet and say, “Wait a minute, (inaudible)”, would they be able to go back then.

Mr. Miller said that they could adopt a Neg Dec with an indication that this does not preclude the Board or make a commitment to or in any way obligate the Board.

Ms. Doherty asked if that would satisfy the Town Board.

Mr. Miller said that he asked Mr. Watson about the alternate road standards and (inaudible) the road standards do not pertain to the actual bridge itself in terms of the materials and construction.

Mr. Gibbons said that the Board is meeting in three weeks to hopefully resolve this issue. He asked Mr. Watson if the Planning Board could sit on this (did not finish sentence).

Ms. Doherty and Mr. Merante said that the Town Board is meeting between now and then.

Mr. Gibbons said that he understood that, but asked if the Planning Board could sit on this and although they won’t be ready for the Town Board meeting, they could have a workshop and the Planning Board could decide at the work shop.

Mr. Miller asked, why would they? He said that they held a public hearing and they’re done. Mr. Miller said that they are waiting for a Neg Dec.

Mr. Gibbons said right, but the Planning Board will possibly have that in three weeks, so then could they not the next day schedule a work shop and approve it.

Mr. Watson said that he wouldn’t ask them to schedule a workshop without a Neg Dec.

Mr. Gibbons asked for a motion.

Mr. Merante made a motion that the Planning Board adopt the Negative Declaration on the condition that it can deal with the bridge as a separate issue -the construction and nature of the bridge as a separate issue. Ms. Sexton seconded the motion.

Mr. Miller suggested the Board (inaudible) by resolution as he wanted to make sure that the minutes reflect that the Resolution is to adopt the Negative Declaration based on the information provided by the applicant in the plans and in the Part 3 EAF, which sets forth various measures to mitigate impacts and sets forth various measures that relate to the sequencing of construction regardless of whether it is a (inaudible) bridge or some other form of bridge. It states that the DEC has already granted a permit for construction of this bridge, that it has certain conditions that would (inaudible) with the understanding that the Negative Declaration does not endorse the current proposal for the bridge, nor does it bind the Planning Board to the type of bridge that ultimately may be improved at some future date.

Mr. Gibbons asked each individual member of the Board if they agreed. The vote was as follows: Ms. Sexton - yes

Mr. Merante - yes

Ms. Doherty - yes

Mr. Pidala - yes

Mr. Meehan - yes

Mr. Gibbons - yes

Mr. Cleantis - absent

Mr. Miller said that he thought at the meeting on the 11^th, they are going to have Tectonic there, and thought it might also be prudent to have a road maintenance agreement submitted to the Town Attorney by then.

Mr. Watson said o.k.

Mr. Miller said that he thought they might want to ask the Town Engineer to be present because there are engineering issues that as a Planner, he was not familiar with.

Mr. Gibbons said that he would agree with all these conditions.

The Walter Hoving Home - Site Plan Approval (Referral from ZBA) - Garrison: Submission

Mr. Jamie Copeland introduced himself. He stated that he was representing the Walter Hoving Home for a building permit for two projects - the staff housing project and an addition to the existing dining hall. He stated that they have submitted their documents, had received a request for additional information from Bibbo Associates and have received comments from Tim Miller’s office and have responded to those. Mr. Copeland said that they have also received additional requests for information and those he would like to present tonight and answer any questions.

Mr. Justin Kacur of Hudson Design introduced himself. He stated that they had provided the supplemental package for the Board. Mr. Kacur said that between then and now there were some additional (inaudible) they thought were necessary to provide to the Board.

Mr. Miller and Mr. Gibbons informed Mr. Kacur that he could present information and leave it with the Board, however, the Board would not be addressing the new information this evening.

Mr. Copeland said that there were three main areas. One had to do with special events, the other was a planting plan and the third was the response from the (inaudible). He said that they submitted a description from the Walter Hoving Home about the events, which are basically a Christmas gathering and graduation. Mr. Copeland said that the graduations have up to approximately sixty to eighty guests and as shown on the plan they provided for forty six spaces in addition to the parking areas that are already designated on the site. He said that the areas they suggested for parking would take place (did not finish sentence).

Mr. Merante asked if with regard to their saying that typically they have sixty to eighty guests at these two events, that was under the current number of residents or was the additional...they were talking about thirty additional residents on the property.

Mr. Copeland said that is at peak with the addition.

Mr. Merante said that it would go to ninety residents and the eighty guests.

Mr. Copeland said yes, they don’t all graduate at once. He said that the sixty to eighty is a peak

with the increased (inaudible).

Mr. Merante said that is what they anticipate and not what they have currently.

Mr. Copeland said no. He said to handle that load they have two yards that they are looking at - both are now grass covered. Mr. Copeland said that in order to make it a more established place to park, they are suggesting using a grass-paved product. He said that it is a stabilizer. The grass grows up through it. It is very durable and is used in many places where you want to allow emergency vehicles over planting fields. Mr. Copeland said that it will be undetectable when it has grown in.

Mr. Gibbons asked if it would remain grass in that area.

Mr. Copeland said yes. He said that the affect would be as if there was nothing there, but it does take the weight of fire trucks, etc.

Mr. Miller asked if they had someone directing traffic to the parking spaces or if they were going to have wheel blocks. He asked how the spaces would be found by the public.

Mr. Copeland said that their facilities staff is on hand and they are used to having people directing traffic.

Mr. Miller asked if he would make sure that was included in their Statement of Use that during special events there would be someone available to direct cars to park in parking locations. He asked if it would be shoveled or plowed at Christmas time.

Mr. Copeland said yes, it would have to be cleared.

Mr. Miller asked Mr. Copeland to make sure that was in his Statement of Use also.

Mr. Copeland said that in inclement weather, they may rent a hall somewhere else. He said that was their other option.

Mr. Miller said that renting a hall requires advanced planning and weather happens every other day. He said that they are looking for realistic measures.

Mr. Copeland said yes and with something like this, you would use a different kind of snow removal - you wouldn’t plow this. He said that they have other snow removal equipment that picks it up and throws it.

Mr. Miller said that he should make sure his client is aware of the difficulties in having this parking available (inaudible).

Mr. Copeland pointed out the two principle parking areas. He said that they wanted to be cognizant of parking along Avery Road, which is what the Board asked for clarification on. Mr. Copeland said that they have submitted a planting plan and they are introducing a hedge row - similar to what already exists on Avery. They are introducing blueberry bushes going parallel to the stone wall. They are also introducing mountain laurel and rhododendron. Mr. Copeland said that they are planting four sugar maples and want to keep that as the predominant tree in that area. He said that there is also an area where existing conifers were planted to screen the waste treatment center. Some had died. Part of the plan is to fill in that gap. Mr. Copeland referred to the staff housing and said that in the changing of the topo lines, they are creating (inaudible). He said that with regard to the slope, they are going to introduce mountain laurel and rhododendron along the top of the rise that will help screen the lower level, which is the garage level of the staff housing. The Japanese maples are small enough so they can move them. Mr. Copeland said that they have a report from the Chief of the Garrison Fire Company. He said that they reviewed the plans and had six items they wanted clarification on and made recommendations on. He said that one of them had to do with the fire lane. With the building of the addition, they are cutting off a driveway, which went around the northwest corner of the building. The Chief wanted the remainder to be designated a fire lane and they will do that. There will be markings on the surface. With regard to the driveway width - the staff housing down to the parking garages, it would also be considered a fire lane for access of emergency vehicles. They’ve created a twenty foot wide fire lane.

Mr. Gibbons asked if the two new houses would be built into the hill that is alongside the creek.

He asked how many floors they had.

Mr. Copeland said two - there is a parking level in the basement, the main level, and then a partial loft level.

Mr. Gibbons asked if the building was going to be sixty feet tall.

Mr. Copeland said that in its tallest possibility, it is not going to exceed the thirty five feet.

He said that there would really be no reason to go higher than that.

Mr. Gibbons asked if there would be handrails on the stairways.

Mr. Copeland said yes.

Mr. Gibbons referred to the reservoir tanks and asked if they had a rendering. He said that he’d like to see where they are going to be and what they are going to use for plantings/screening for those.

Mr. Copeland presented a plan and said that the tanks go into the ground quite a ways. He said that they plan to use the same stone foundation as the surround.

Mr. Gibbons asked how far the second house was from the fire hydrant that he proposed.

Mr. Copeland said slightly over two hundred feet.

Mr. Gibbons said that he was wondering about the possibility of putting in another hydrant closer to that house.

Mr. Copeland said that they reviewed it with the Fire Chief and F.J. Spinelli. He said that the issue didn’t come up, but they made a strong point of reminding them the pond was of no use to them - that it is not reliable and in the winter, non-accessible. Mr. Copeland said that they found a location that not only is established, but also has the advantage of being gravity fed.

Mr. Gibbons asked how much of those houses would be exposed with the new construction.

Mr. Copeland said that it was in the submission package.

Mr. Gibbons said that he would look at it and asked if it would be pretty well screened. He said that it was his concern and they would come back to that next month.

Mr. Copeland said that part of the reason the site was chosen was to keep the meadow. He said that not only was it important to the Hoving Home, but they understood that is a view shed that the community values. Mr. Copeland said that they are using the grade somewhat to their advantage.

Mr. Gibbons said that the creek used to be much deeper through there and asked if they had any plans to re-claim that stream with this project.

Ms. Zolinski, Vice-President of Walter Hoving Home, introduced herself and stated that they have a permit to clean out the pool and rebuild the walls, but they do not propose to do that right now. She said that they need to get to the planning and zoning portion of this project, but they are planning on rebuilding all of the stone walls.

Mr. Gibbons asked if they would be cleaning out the waterway.

Ms. Zolinski said yes.

Mr. Gibbons asked if the Board had questions.

Ms. Sexton asked if there was an elevator in the other building or just the one building.

Mr. Copeland said yes, there is an elevator in both buildings.

Mr. Merante referred to the capacity of ten thousand gallons and asked if it would also handle (inaudible).

Mr. Miller said that he did not think they would reach capacity.

Mr. Kacur said that they had Badey and Watson provide engineering for them. He said that last time they met, they were light on the engineering on the site plan, so they consulted with Badey & Watson. They also did calculations on the waste water treatment - that is on the site plan, and the actual numbers the engineer came up with can be seen as still under the ten thousand gallons.

Mr. Miller asked if those engineer drawings had been given to the consulting engineers of the Town.

Mr. Kacur said that they had not sent them to Bibbo.

Mr. Miller said, so there are a lot of unanswered questions Bibbo raised.

Mr. Kacur said that when they got the Bibbo comments, they took every one and incorporated them into their drawings, including the engineering comments when they consulted with Badey & Watson.

Mr. Miller said that it needs to go back to Bibbo, and the Board would like to get a letter from them saying they are satisfied.

Mr. Copeland said that they will contact them.

Mr. Miller said that everything sent to Bibbo should be forwarded to the Planning Board. He said that the Planning Board was not aware they sent anything further to them after the June 18, 2005 letter.

Mr. Gibbons said that the Board would go over the Bibbo matters when it gets the new details.

Mr. Miller asked if the Badey & Watson plan was in the package.

Mr. Kacur said that it was in the site plan they revised yesterday from the package.

Mr. Pidala asked if they had a well.

Mr. Kacur said that the existing well right now with the sixty gallons per minute, flows to the main house and pumps to the reservoir.

Mr. Pidala asked a question (inaudible).

Mr. Kacur said that it is the main one and is near the garage (pointed out).

Mr. Pidala asked if they checked with the Board of Health with regard to needing a backup well.

Mr. Kacur said that he would have to check with the Facilities Manager there.

Mr. Miller said that he thought the Board needed to look at the information and get the comments from Bibbo.

Mr. Gibbons agreed.

Mr. Miller said that the Planning Board is not approving it, but rather, sending it back to the ZBA with a recommendation under 175-53. He said that he wanted to commend the Planning Board for taking the time to work with this, because lots of times stuff just gets sent back to the Zoning Board and they don’t know what happens.

Mr. Gibbons said that this will be held over until another meeting.

Mr. Kacur asked if there would be an August meeting.

Mr. Gibbons said that the Board would only be addressing the one agenda item. He said that it is typically the Board’s recess time, and thought this application would be more than what the Board wanted to entail on that. Mr. Gibbons asked for a consensus from the Board.

Mr. Miller said that if Bibbo is good to go, (inaudible).

Mr. Merante said that Carlson Construction would be a lot of discussion.

Ms. Doherty asked if they had said that Bibbo does not even have the information yet.

Mr. Copeland said no - it was just submitted to the Board tonight.

Ms. Doherty said that it still needs to be sent and Bibbo would have to make a site visit, etc.

Mr. Kacur said that the last time they sent something to Bibbo, they were very quick to come back to them with comments.

Mr. Merante made a suggestion (inaudible).

Mr. Gibbons said that he would agree with that. He agreed to put them on the agenda, but told them they would have to have the information. Mr. Gibbons asked if the Board agreed on a majority basis.

Inaudible response.

Nicholas and Hanay Angell - Approval of a 3-lot subdivision - South Mountain Pass, Garrison: Submission of revised plans/discussion

Mr. Watson stated that they submitted additional plans to Mr. Miller’s office addressing some of the engineering issues. They revised the road and last month gave the Board the comment letter from the Town of Cortlandt with regard to the width of the road in Philipstown. They’ve added the laybys along the road on the plans. He said that they are hopeful of having Health Department approval from Westchester. Mr. Watson said that they are hoping too that the Board would consider giving them an additional final approval.

Mr. Gibbons asked the Board if there were any questions.

There were none.

Mr. Gibbons asked Mr. Miller to please advise the Board as to where it should go on this.

Mr. Miller stated that he distributed a Resolution and went through it with the Board. He stated that Cortlandt already did the SEQRA part, so there is nothing to do on that.

Ms. Sexton made a motion to adopt the Resolution as amended (copy attached). The motion was seconded. The vote was as follows: George Cleantis - Absent

Josephine Doherty - In favor

Michael Gibbons - In favor

Kerry Meehan - In favor

Anthony Merante - In favor

Andrew Pidala - In favor

Pat Sexton - In favor

Eric and Patricia Hine - Minor Subdivision - Route 9D: Request for 90-day extension

Mr. Watson stated that this was a subdivision the Board approved approximately six months ago. He said that they are still pursuing Health Department Approval and request a ninety day extension.

Mr. Gibbons asked if the Board had any comments.

There were none.

Mr. Pidala made a motion to approve the ninety day extention. The motion was seconded. The vote was as follows: George Cleantis - Absent

Josephine Doherty - In favor

Michael Gibbons - In favor

Kerry Meehan - In favor

Anthony Merante - In favor

Andrew Pidala - In favor

Pat Sexton - In favor

Susan Preisler - Approval of Access - 363 Route 301, Cold Spring: Submission of private way improvement plan and details

Mr. Watson said that last month, Mr. Weicher was in front of the Board. He said that they met at the site, had some comments from the Board on the site, met with the State and prepared plans they believe will meet with their approval. Mr. Watson said that they are seeking approval to the lot over a private right-of-way in lieu of applying to the State for a new driveway permit. He said that the primary issue is drainage. Mr. Watson said that the driveway is a little narrower than they are proposing it. He said that the first thing they did was re-grade the driveway to provide a negative grade from the road and then a positive grade up to fourteen percent and they have graded a couple hundred feet before they come out of the cut. Mr. Watson said that their plan is to widen the driveway. He said that he believed it was sixteen feet up to the point where the private drive will go into the house. Mr. Watson said that the neighbors have expressed that they would prefer to have it stay dirt. They do have a Homeowners Association and they have agreed to join that. Mr. Watson said that they will re-grade the road, widen it, formalize the drainage, install curbs, and pave it up for about seventy five feet. There is a negative grade off of the road so that there will be a low point, so that any spillage that does get away won’t run into the road. Mr. Watson said that there will be a series of two catch basins at the end of the gutters, which will lead to a third catch basin, which will lead to a manhole. He said that they’ve submitted this plan to the State for their approval, and have not gotten anything back as of yet. Mr. Watson said that he believed this would be acceptable and would not be surprised if there were a couple of red lines that came back on the plan asking them for some minor modifications. He said that’s typical. Mr. Watson said that he thought they accomplished most of what the Board had talked about.

Mr. Merante referred to the sight lines and asked if it made any difference with the sight distance.

Mr. Watson said that he was right - it was shown incorrectly. He said that actually, he did not think it would make any difference.

Ms. Doherty said that they said there would be a road maintenance agreement.

Mr. Watson said that Mr. Weicher has agreed to join that.

Ms. Doherty asked another question (inaudible).

Mr. Watson said that they actually do a pretty good job on the road. He said that there is an agreement.

Mr. Gibbons asked if the Board could get a copy of the agreement.

Mr. Watson said sure.

Ms. Doherty said that she would like to see that on the plat.

Mr. Watson said that he could put a note on that.

Mr. Gibbons asked how many houses were on the road already.

Mr. Watson said that it is over the limit.

Mr. Gibbons said that the reason the Board was looking at this is because it is on a corner lot and can get access on 301, but they are looking at not adding another curb cut on 301, so they are allowing access on the existing road.

Mr. Watson said that was correct.

Mr. Gibbons asked if there was sufficient drainage in Mr. Watson’s opinion. He said that he noticed in reviewing the plan that there is a lot of drainage down below, but he didn’t see much on the road coming down.

Mr. Watson said that there is a pipe that exists that is shown on the plan and they are calling for the construction of new gutters to go along most of the edge of the road to pick up any additional water.

Mr. Gibbons asked what the length was from the edge of the road up to the driveway entrance

and what the slope distance was.

Mr. Watson said it is maybe 380 feet to the intersection of the proposed driveway. He said that the grade changed from Route 301 - it is 470 feet at the road and 511 feet at the house - a ten percent average.

Mr. Miller said that they continue to recommend that this road be paved up to the driveway. He said that there are seven or eight houses on the road and everybody uses it. Mr. Miller said that they would also like Bibbo to review the drainage. He said that they would suggest having a public hearing on it.

Mr. Gibbons said he would also like to get Bibbo’s opinion with regard to keeping it a dirt road.

Mr. Merante made a motion to hold a public hearing next month on this matter. Mr. Pidala seconded the motion. The vote was as follows:

George Cleantis - Absent

Josephine Doherty - In favor

Michael Gibbons - In favor

Kerry Meehan - In favor

Anthony Merante - In favor

Andrew Pidala - In favor

Pat Sexton - In favor

David Small Industries LTD Retirement Plan - Approval of a minor subdivision - Jaycox Road, Cold Spring: Submission of EAF parts 1, 2 and 3/discussion

Mr. Miller stated that they had not been able to find a record that this was referred to the Wetland Committee, (inaudible) a wetland permit, and the public hearing’s been opened and closed.

Mr. Watson said that he submitted meeting minutes from the Wetlands to Mr. Miller. He said that they have had at least three meetings on this application.

Mr. Miller asked if he had minutes that they reported on.

Mr. Watson said that he did not know that. He said that he had never seen a report.

Mr. Gibbons asked if the Board wanted to wait until it received that documentation.

Mr. Watson said that this did go to sleep for a while. He said that there were issues with regard to whether or not it was adequate. The six thousand square foot was an issue. Mr. Watson said that they resolved that problem. He said that they do have a permit from the State with regard to the bridge replacement. Mr. Watson said that Wetlands had three meetings on that and he had those minutes and thought they were submitted. He said that the only issue that the Board had with the bridge was the capacity of the bridge and they’ve answered that in the EAF Part 3.

Ms. Doherty asked if this went to the CAC.

Mr. Watson said that it did not go to the CAC.

Mr. Gibbons asked how the Board wanted to handle this.

Ms. Doherty commented (inaudible).

Mr. Gibbons said that he was concerned with no Wetlands report.

Mr. Meehan asked if the Board should table this until (inaudible).

Mr. Miller said that they have a Resolution of Approval. He said that it is a little two-lot subdivision, but he wanted to make sure the Board knows what’s happening.

Mr. Gibbons asked what the issues with the wetlands were.

Mr. Watson said that the only issue is that there is a driveway that came off of the property, came down across the bridge and then went to the back. He said that they need to replace the bridge and reconstruct the driveway because it’s not up to standard for a car. Mr. Watson said that they got a permit from the State to replace the bridge. He said that there is a wetland that is adjacent... on the northwest side of the creek, there is a wetlands and they had that flagged, they minimized their activities in the wetlands, and they pushed their project back out of the wetlands buffer. Mr. Watson said that one of the questions he believed the Wetlands Committee asked them to investigate was whether or not they could...they thought they could go out Dry Pond Road, but they can’t do that because they don’t have any rights to it. Mr. Miller’s office raised an issue with regard to the capacity of the bridge. Mr. Watson said that they provided those calculations. He said that they have answered all of the questions with regard to wetlands.

Mr. Gibbons said that the other question the Board had was the possibility of expanding upon the subdivision and if it could be assured that these would be the only two residences being built.

Mr. Watson referred to the plan and showed the wetlands with very steep slopes. He said that Mr. Miller’s office asked whether or not they could get their six thousand square feet of buildable area on that lot. Mr. Watson said that they were able to do that and the reason was because they found another place to put their septic expansion. He said so, as a practical matter, he did not think this could be subdivided under today’s code.

Mr. Merante asked if in getting the six thousand square feet he could put the square on the lot (inaudible).

Mr. Miller said no. He said that six thousand square feet (inaudible) access to the road that doesn’t cross (inaudible). Mr. Miller said that the zoning square can be anywhere. He said that the zoning square manages the dimensions of the lots (inaudible).

Mr. Gibbons said that they looked for alternatives. He said that they had three different alternatives they looked at and thought that this was the only access - across that stream. Mr. Gibbons suggested the Board look at adopting the Part 3. He asked for a motion.

Ms. Sexton asked a question (inaudible). She asked why they were proposed on some on not on others.

Mr. Watson said that they are always proposed. He said that the village has to get an area that’s required to build a septic system. With four bedrooms and such and such a perc rate, you need to have four thousand square feet of septic area. That is to build the system. (Inaudible) requires you to have an expansion area - eight thousand square feet. Mr. Watson referred to the plan, pointed to an area and said that it is an area that is set aside that is large enough to handle both the septic and expansion within one area. Here, they couldn’t do it. He said that they are smaller. Mr. Watson said that you never propose a septic system without an expansion area to the Planning Board for a new subdivision.

Mr. Merante asked a question with regard to a hundred year flood plan (inaudible).

Mr. Watson said that he was right - it says that.

Mr. Merante said that he was concerned with it and knew that in Continental Village, there was one built right next to the stream.

Mr. Watson said that the septic area is a minimum of ten feet above the (inaudible).

Mr. Gibbons asked why the Resolution calls out for a hazardous waste kit to be on site during construction.

Mr. Watson said that he thought it was when you’re dealing with digging around water, it is a safety precaution. He said that they’re not that expensive and he put that in.

Mr. Gibbons asked if the Board would see that in the Carlson Resolution.

Mr. Watson said that it is actually in the Carlson EAF as well. He said that was their recommendation.

Mr. Gibbons asked where the Board wanted to go and if it agreed on accepting the Part 3 EAF.

Ms. Doherty said that she would like to see the report from Wetlands.

Mr. Watson said that the Wetlands Committee has long since (inaudible) of their twenty day response requirement.

Mr. Miller said that they had their chance and they missed it.

Ms. Doherty said, and it didn’t go to the CAC.

Mr. Gibbons asked if the Board could put that on a condition of the EAF - that they contacted (did not finish sentence).

Mr. Watson said that technically, the Part 3 does address the issues that were raised in the Part 2, so, from the staff’s perspective, they responded to those issues and mitigated impacts in Part 3.

Mr. Miller said that regarding the Wetlands reports and things of that nature, it is up to the Board. He said that the DEC has given the permit, so there’s been a review by technical people with technical knowledge and the issue has been addressed.

A motion was made to go with the EAF and seconded. Mr. Gibbons asked for a roll call. The vote was as follows: George Cleantis - Absent

Josephine Doherty - No

Michael Gibbons - Yes

Kerry Meehan - Yes

Anthony Merante - Yes

Andrew Pidala - Yes

Pat Sexton - (Inaudible)

Mr. Miller referred to the Resolution and said that he thought the WHEREAS to acknowledge that the DEC has (inaudible).

Mr. Merante made a motion to accept the Resolution as amended (copy attached). Mr. Pidala seconded the motion. The vote was as follows:

George Cleantis - Absent

Josephine Doherty - Opposed

Michael Gibbons - In favor

Kerry Meehan - In favor

Anthony Merante - In favor

Andrew Pidala - In favor

Pat Sexton - Abstained

The motion passed 4 - 0.

Local Law - 27 (Zoning Law) - Referral from Town Clerk: Discussion (continued)

Mr. Miller said that this was actually reviewed before and there is a public hearing on it tonight. Mr. Miller distributed a letter to the Board and read it aloud. He stated that the letter was delivered to the Town Board.

Proposed Local Law to Amend Zoning Law 112-1 and Section 112-2E: Referral from the Town Clerk: Planning Board’s review and recommendation

Mr. Miller said that this was a correction of what was probably an omission relating to Schedule 112-1 in terms of what defines a subdivision. He said that this came about because of comments and letters from the Assessors Office about people exchanging lands/deeds and filing without any review of anyone, creating many problems for the Assessors. Mr. Miller said that he would recommend the Board act on (inaudible).

Ms. Sexton said that they had talked about this and that it could cost people an awful lot of money to exchange (inaudible) property.

Mr. Miller said that if it doesn’t require approval by the Planning Board, there still needs to be a plat prepared and sealed by a licensed surveyor and it needs to be stated on the plat that it conforms with all regulations of the Town of Philipstown.

Ms. Sexton asked Mr. Watson if that was what he was suggesting.

Mr. Watson said that this whole thing was enacted and then the first time it came up, there was an issue with regard to them not having foreseen a circumstance, but he forgot exactly what it was. He said that this is really a technical change to correct what they already did.

Ms. Doherty made a motion that the Board authorize the Acting Chair to sign the letter. Mr. Merante seconded the motion. The vote was as follows:

George Cleantis - Absent

Josephine Doherty - In favor

Michael Gibbons - In favor

Kerry Meehan - In favor

Anthony Merante - In favor

Andrew Pidala - In favor

Pat Sexton - In favor

Adjourn

Mr. Meehan made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Mr. Pidala seconded the motion. The meeting ended at 10:55 p.m. The vote was as follows:

George Cleantis - Absent

Josephine Doherty - In favor

Michael Gibbons - In favor

Kerry Meehan - In favor

Anthony Merante - In favor

Andrew Pidala - In favor

Pat Sexton - In favor

Respectfully submitted,

Ann M. Gallagher

Note: These minutes were prepared for the Philipstown Planning Board and are subject to review, comment, emendation and approval thereupon.

Approved: ________________________________________