Town of Schodack
PLANNING BOARD Approved Minutes of January 2008

Approved Minutes: January 7, 2008

Called to order by: CHAIRMAN PETER GOOLD AT: 7:01 p.m.
PRESENT
Peter Goold, Chairman
G. Jeffrey Haber
John LaVoie
Paul Puccio
Wayne Johnson
Nadine Fuda, Director
Tim Nugent, Esq.
Richard Laberge, Planning Board Engineer
MEMBERS ABSENT
Denise Mayrer, Vice-Chairman
Sylvester Kedzierski

APPROVAL OF MINUTES - December 17, 2007

Johnson moved, Haber seconded that the minutes be approved as amended.
5 Ayes. 0 Noes. Motion carried.
Ayes: Goold, Haber, Johnson, LaVoie, Puccio
Oppose: None

PUBLIC COMMENT

No comment made.

SITE PLAN

Enderley Farm     007-45/RA/198.-1-3.11
797 Western Rd
Proposed - Dog Kennel

No one was present for this meeting.

SUBDIVISION

Hunters Run     3-2003/RA, R20, LB/190.-3-1.1 and 1.2
Rt. 150
Proposed - 18 Lot

Richard Tice, Brewer Engineer was present for this meeting.

Mr. Puccio stated the maps were very difficult to understand.

Mr. Tice stated the Hunters Run project is located in East Schodack, on 127 acres and, north of Route 150. The proposed project was presented to the board in 1992, at that time John Dennis owned the property. However, the process was never completed. This came back to the board in 2004 with the current owners. At that time they presented phase 1 with 20 lots. But after the public hearing the Army Corp of Engineers stated that the entire project had to be laid out and the wet lands had to be addressed in its entirety. They completed the maps showing the entire 39 lots including the 21 acres of wetlands; the new map was presented back to the Army Corp of Engineers. The only objection they had to the lay out, where the 9 proposed driveway crossing the wet lands, which were then eliminated, in doing so the applicant lost 8 lots. Brewer Engineering redesigned the project with three small cul-de-sacs which gave them back the 9 lots, this satisfied the Army Corp of Engineers, they then submitted it to DEC for water quality certification. DEC requires 100-foot buffer between the wet lands and any construction which is reflected on the map.

Mr. Puccio asked why the DEC decided to make the 100 foot buffer a requirement.

Mr. Tice stated they do not know why, DEC stated that the entire 21 acres were to be designated as DEC wetlands with a 100 foot buffer around the construction.

Mr. Puccio asked about the DEC report

Mr. Tice stated that most of the wet lands are through soil only, very little of the property has standing water, there is a drainage way that runs to Rt. 150. and as of September 2007 DEC stated that the applicant has met all their requirements.

Mr. Tice stated 27 lots will have building lot restrictions. The entire 39 lots are part of the East Schodack sewer district. we are asking for the town assistance on four of the lots that do not meet the RA zoning requirement of lot width at the 50 foot building set back. Lot # 4 will be 210 feet off the road right of way, lot #30 will be 310 feet back but will have over required 200 feet at that point. There are two lots where the houses have to be built in the front of the lot, lot 34 is 194 feet wide at the 50 foot set back and lot 32 is 165 feet at the 50 foot set back. So they are looking for the boards advice as to where they should go from here.

Mr. Puccio stated that this seams to be all about economics, why worry about the four lots just change the lot lines.

Mr. Johnson asked if the lot lines can be moved to adjust the four problem lots.

Mr. Tice stated no, that is why the lots are staggered and the houses have to be built as shown on the map.

Mr. Johnson asked how much frontage is on the adjacent lots, can they move the lot line.

Mr. Tice stated the adjacent lot has more then enough frontage but cannot be moved to accommodate the other lot do to the side yard set back.

Mr. Johnson asked if the lot line could be adjusted towards the other house.

The members and Mr. Tice discussed the map, the other lots, and the moving of the lot lines.

Mr. Puccio asked what is the applicant looking for from the board, and asked if the five lots could be combined into four lots. and be in compliance with the town code.

Mr. Tice stated they are looking for a favorable recommendation from this board with lots as is. They cannot move the lot lines, the houses have to stay where they are placed on the map due to the side yard setback. Example lot 34.

Mr. Puccio asked if they were hooking up to the sewer system. And if a variance is possible with sewer.

Mr. Tice stated that is correct about the sewer hook up . This is why they are requesting a favorable recommendation.

Mr. Haber asked what the frontage for each of the nonconforming lots.

Mr. Tice stated one is 40 feet and the other is 10 feet. Lot 30 was set back 340 feet with a 240 foot width because of the wet lands. This lot only had 90 feet at the fifty foot set back.

Mr. Haber asked what is next to lot 30.

Mr. Tice stated that there are two additional lots.

Chairman Goold asked if additional land is owned to the north, could they move the lots over.

Mr. Tice stated that it is not possible because of the extensive wetlands the houses have to stay where they show on the plans.

Mr. Puccio asked Mr. Laberge from an engineering point of view can this idea work.

Mr. Haber stated that lot 30 is the only one he feels the zoning board will have an issue with.

Member discussion on frontage and set back lines for lot 30.

Chairman Goold stated this is not a use variance; it is an area variance and asked Attorney Nugent what his thoughts are.

Attorney Nugent asked for clarification on the width and depth of lot 30.

Mr. Tice stated lot 30 has road frontage of 135 feet at the fifty foot set back line.

Attorney Nugent stated the only concern he has is the shortage of 30 feet which may become a flag lot which is not allowed in a major subdivision.

Chairman Goold asked Attorney Nugent for clarification on setbacks. As he understands the minimum set back is 50 feet, and the applicant can move back as far as they can to achieve the 200 feet required, is this correct.

Attorney Nugent stated that statement is correct; a possible point to the zoning board would be if the applicant is willing to commit to a greater front yard set back then the code requires. With out further research into lot 30 there is still the potential of it being viewed as a flag lot.

Chairman Goold asked about the acreage of lot 30.

Mr. Tice stated all the lots are a minimum of 2.5 acres.

Mr. Puccio wanted clarification on applicants requesting.

Mr. Haber summarized the meeting so far, stating the applicant has an issue with lot 30. With 90 feet of frontage a recommendation to the zoning board dose not seem to be a big deal since this is a very large lot to begin with.

Mr. Tice stated there are 20 homes on the East Schodack sewer system, with exorbitant fees. This expense will be greatly reduced when the full 39 homes go on line.

Mr. Haber stated that is a good point. The existing 20 homes have an accrued debt, with increasing the number home this will cut the operation, maintenance and capitol cost to each existing home.

Mr. Tice stated the cost to modify the plant will be on the developer and not the home owners.

Mr. Puccio asked Mr. Laberge from an engineering point, is this a sound project.

Mr. Laberge stated the storm water and the waste water all seems to work well as shown on the plans. The zoning issues of the four lots need to be addressed. He questioned how many lots were on the original plan.

Mr. Tice stated 39 lots were on the original plan and they are not looking to exceed that number.

Mr. Laberge stated if the land is still supporting the same 39 lots just with a different layout due to the wet lands everything should be ok.

Attorney Nugent asked if the lots will have deed restrictions to prevent the home owners building beyond the permitted area.

Mr. Tice stated yes the deed restrictions have to be mapped, written, and recorded by March 2008.

Attorney Nugent asked how will the building department know that the deed restrictions have been filed. Mr. Tice stated that the deed restriction will be filed with the town and the county.

Mr. Laberge stated they are making it very clear on the final subdivision plats of all the land restrictions.

Mr. Haber stated that no action can be taken by this board until the Zoning Board of Appeals has made a decision.

Mr. Johnson stated that in the past this board allowed developers to use the actual building line as frontage. He asks Attorney Nugent about the lot with the 160 feet of frontage. Can the applicant seek a variance from the zoning board or would it be considered a flag lot which is not allowed.

Attorney Nugent stated that at 160 feet he doubts the zoning board would consider this a flag lot.

Chairman Goold stated the next step will be for the applicant to submit a variance application. Come back for a recommendation by the planning board. And thanked everyone for their time.

SUBDIVISION

Brookview Hollow     2007-12/R-20, RA/177.-8-3,5,8,9
Brookview Road at Appletree Lane
Proposed - PD-2

Richard Tice, Brewer Engineering, Joe Perez applicant were present for this meeting.

Mr. Tice spoke about the project, it is located on the Schodack and East Greenbush line. It is 57 acres with 21 acres of wet lands. He states that both the Schodack and East Greenbush supervisors have been discussing the issues of water and sewer hookups. The water is to come down Brookview to Janine Drive loop around to a force main system for each resident in the back of the development and another force main to Pheasant lane so there is on site water and sewer.

Mr. Haber asked about the sewer line that will run from East Greenbush down Brookview Road.

Mr. Tice stated due to gravity they are going to run a force main.

Mr. Haber stated that pipes should be installed with future usage in mind. So if a countywide sewer system is available other users could be connected easily.

Mr. Tice stated the depth of the manhole would determine if hook up is possible.

Mr. Haber asked if this can be engineered so that we can accommodate future flow of sewage from properties south of where this line will be.

Mr. Laberge stated in review we will take a look at the larger picture.

Mr. Johnson asked if they are planning a future access road to the lands of Lanford.

Mr. Tice stated that they are going to leave access at Pheasant Hollow for access. But will look into providing for future access for Lanford

Mr. Johnson stated he cannot figure it out their computations in coming up with thirty two town houses, they are based on 36 acres minus so many acres of wet lands.

Mr. Tice stated the 14 acres of wet lands were deducted still giving them the room needed.

Mr. Johnson asked what is the status of approvals for sewer and water from East Greenbush.

Mr. Puccio asked how do we know that East Greenbush is on board.

Attorney Nugent stated approvals from East Greenbush would be dealt with through the project engineer.

Mr. Laberge stated we held a pre-application conference required for the PD process, and he will go through the technical check list and will put together a letter to East Greenbush on water and sewer.

Members agree to send this to Mr. Laberge for review.

PUBLIC HEARING

Peter Giangande     2007-43/R-20/188.-6-3.32
2429 Old Coach Drive
Proposed - 2 Lot Subdivision

Nadine Fuda read the hearing notice(s) as published in the Troy Record:
Titled Peter Giangande January 7, 2008
Chairman Goold directed the affidavit(s) of publication be made part of the hearing record(s).

Chairman Goold opened the public hearing at 7:40 p.m.

Peter Giangande, applicant was present for this meeting.

Chairman Goold asked if any one had any comments on this 2 lot subdivision.

Mr. Johnson stated there was a question brought up from the original presentation as to whether or not they were creating a substandard lot.

Attorney Nugent stated he has look everything over and that the frontage is on Old Coach Road. In addition, is satisfied that there is not an issue. The lot in question will be facing Sunset Road.

Mr. Johnson asked if something should be made part of the record from Attorney Nugent stating that this was originally developed with substandard frontage and therefore we are not creating a substandard lot.

Attorney Nugent stated it is his opinion they are not creating a substandard lot. That this already exists and there are several properties in the cul-de-sac that have a lower frontage.

Johnson moved, Puccio seconded that the Planning Board be LEAD AGENCY.

5 Ayes. 0 Noes. Motion carried.
Ayes: Goold, Haber, Johnson, LaVoie, Puccio
Oppose None:

Puccio moved, LaVoie seconded a NEGATIVE DECLARATION.

5 Ayes. 0 Noes. Motion carried.
Ayes: Goold, Haber, Johnson, LaVoie, Puccio
Oppose: None

Haber moved, Johnson seconded that the following resolution be adopted:

WHEREAS, a formal application was submitted to the Planning Board on: November 26, 2007 for approval of a 2 -lot subdivision entitled, "Giangande Subdivision," map prepared by: Francis McCloskey , dated "November 14, 2007," and

WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on the subdivision application and plat at the Schodack Town Hall on PUBLIC HEARING DATE at 7:40 p.m., and

WHEREAS, the requirement of the subdivision regulations of the Town of Schodack have been met by said subdivision plat and application;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the application of Peter Giagrande be APPROVED CONTINGENT UPON submission of final maps, payment of fees and before building permits can be issued, permits to construct well and septic must be obtained from the Rensselaer County Health Department.

5 Ayes. 0 Noes. Motion carried.
Ayes: Goold, Haber, Johnson, LaVoie, Puccio
Oppose: None

Chairman Goold closed the public hearing at 7:48 p.m

PUBLIC HEARING

Mayz Development     2007-34/HC/211.-2-11
3528 US 20
Proposed- Family Dollar Retail Store
Site Plan / SP /Water Qlty. 223

Nadine Fuda read the hearing notice(s) as published in the Troy Record:
Titled; Mayz Development January 7, 2008
Chairman Goold directed the affidavit(s) of publication be made part of the hearing record(s).

Chairman Goold opened the public hearing at 7:49 p.m

Clark Wilkinson, Developer was present for this meeting.

Chairman Goold asked if there were any comments or questions from the public as well as from the board.

Chairman Goold asked Mr. Laberge if all his recommendation have been addressed.

Mr. Laberge stated he has not had the opportunity to review the applicant's letter dated December 21, 2007. But looks as if they agree with all the requests listed in his letter dated November 29, 2007.

Chairman Goold asked the applicant if they agree to all the requests.

Mr. Wilkinson stated that they agree with all the requests.

Mr. Puccio asked if they agree parking issues as well

Mr. Wilkinson stated yes, He recapped the issues with the parking spaces, they agreed to pave 42 and agreed to do grass pavers for the remaining 16 spaces.

Chairman Goold asked Mr. Laberge if he had any more comments.

Mr. Laberge stated he has no more comments he just needs to check the final details of the last submittal.

Chairman Goold asked Mr. Laberge should we approve pending conditions on his final recommendation.

Mr. Laberge stated correct and anything else the board deems fit.

Chairman Goold closed the public hearing at 7:52 p.m

Paragon letter dated December 21, 2007 see file.

Laberge letter dated November 29, 2007

We are in receipt of a set of plans for the above referenced project consisting of eight (8) sheets last revised November 7, 2007. These plans are advanced beyond the conceptual stage and we have incorporated comments pertaining to preliminary submittal items. We offer the following:

1. The project requires a special use permit under the Town's Water Quality Control Act and site plan approval in the HC zone.
2. A minor lot line adjustment incorporating the 0.3 acres of land from Devlin is required to keep the project entirely on one parcel. In addition, a copy of the filed deed should be provided after Planning Board approval.
3. The project requires fifty-eight (58) spaces; the applicant is providing forty-two (42) paved spaces with space for the other sixteen (16) required spaces. In addition, the applicant has provided information on the number of transactions and employees at the store. From the data the maximum number of transactions in any one-hour is twenty- seven (27). The Board should decide if this banking of future spaces is acceptable.
4. All building door locations and types should be identified on the building footprint.
5. The loading area north-south dimension should be indicated.
6. The parking space counts shown in the front yard parking lot on the plan are incorrect.
7. A curbed landscaped island should be created using the western most parking space in front of the building and the proposed striped area at the corner of the building.
8. The striped area on the eastern side of the access drive should also be converted to a curbed, landscaped island.
9. Sign details should be shown on the plans.
10. Additional trees should be planted on each side of the driveway as well as at the eastern end of the front parking lot, and along the eastern side of the building.
11. The stormwater report indicates post development run-off rates exceeding pre-development run-off rates. The applicant should modify the plan so that "post" does not exceed "pre."
12. All applicable construction details from the project's SWPPP should be incorporated onto the plans to avoid confusion over two sets of documents.
13. Coordination with emergency services should be indicated and written comments from fire, police, and rescue should be solicited by the applicant.
14. A project location map is needed.
15. Rensselaer County DOH approval is needed.
16. NYSDOT approval is needed.
17. Sight distances available versus design standard sight distances should be noted on the plan.
18. Lighting locations and details of all outdoor lighting is required including building mounted lighting. All lighting shall be full cutoff down lighting.
19. The types of delivery trucks accessing the loading area should be noted and how they will maneuver into position should be described, or shown graphically.
20. A detail of the dumpster enclosure is required.
21. Location of any outdoor storage or sales area should be shown or a note should be added indicating none is proposed.

Puccio moved, Haber seconded that the Planning Board be LEAD AGENCY.
5 Ayes. 0 Noes. Motion carried.
Ayes Goold. Haber, Johnson, LaVoie, Puccio
Oppose: None

Puccio moved, LaVoie seconded a NEGATIVE DECLARATION.
5 Ayes 0 Noes. Motion carried.
Ayes Goold, Haber, Johnson, LaVoie, Puccio
Oppose: None

WATER QUALITY

Haber moved Puccio seconded that the SPECIAL PERMIT under the Water Quality Control Act - Chapter 223 be granted; for an initial period of eighteen (18) months.
5 Ayes 0 Noes. Motion carried.
Ayes Goold, Haber, Johnson, LaVoie, Puccio
Oppose: None

SITE PLAN - APPROVAL

Johnson moved, LaVoie seconded APPROVAL of SITE PLAN contingent upon the following conditions:
- Final Review from the Laberge Group that Paragon has meet all the recommendations

5 Ayes. 0 Noes. Motion carried.
Ayes: Goold, Haber, Johnson, LaVoie, Puccio
Oppose: None

ADJOURN
MHaber moved, LaVoie seconded that the Planning Board meeting be adjourned. There being no objections, Chairman Goold adjourned the meeting at 8:16 p.m.

Back to Planning   Archives Page

Pursuant to the regulations of the Americans with Disabilities Act (Public Law 101-336), the Town of Schodack will provide auxiliary aids or special services for persons with disabilities. Please notify the Town Clerk's Office at 477-7590 so arrangements can be made for requested services.

Please forward written comments to: Nadine Fuda, Director, Planning & Zoning, Schodack Town Hall, 265 Schuurman Rd., Castleton, NY 12033-9622, Nadine.Fuda@schodack.org, Telephone: 518-477-7938, Fax: 518-477-7983

Planning Board Members are:
·  Peter Goold, Chairman
·  Denise Mayrer, Vice Chairman
·  G. Jeffrey Haber
·  Wayne Johnson
·  Sylvester Kedzierski
·  John LaVoie
·  Paul Puccio

Planning and Zoning staff:
·  Nadine Fuda, Director of Planning and Zoning
·  Melissa Knights, Transcriptionist
·  Attorney: Tim Nugent