MINUTES of February 12, 2004 SPECIAL MEETING of the Town of Rochester PLANNING BOARD, Held

MINUTES OF February 12, 2004 SPECIAL MEETING of the Town of Rochester PLANNING BOARD, held at the Town Hall, Accord, NY.

Meeting was called to order at 7:30 PM by Chairperson, Nadine Carney.

PRESENT: David O'Halloran Shane Ricks, Vice Chair

Frank Striano, Sr

Nadine Carney, Chairperson

Robert Gaydos

William De Graw

Melvyn Tapper-7:05PM

Anthony Kawalchuck

Pledge to the Flag.

DISCUSSION

Review Planning Board Procedures and Responsibilities

The Chairperson started the discussion by referring to the packet that every Board Member receives when they first join the Planning Board. There are items in the packet from Code of Ethics to Planning Board Procedure to the Zoning and Subdivision Regulations . . . She noted that these items are very important and if anyone felt that they needed a refresher on this information or if they had misplaced it, to let her know. This packet is the best reference the Board has for every application they look at.

She then noted that the main reason this meeting was called was because she has had several phone calls from Supervisor Duke and the Board has received a few letters from people unhappy with the way Public Hearings were run or how meetings were held. She thought that before the Board’s next meeting and the next Public Hearing or review of applications, the Board should go over certain things. If any members have any problems with the way things are run, if anyone has any questions or concerns or suggestions that they want to discuss, this meeting was the time to do it. She understood that all of the members, including herself, were very busy in their personal lives and work. There have been many applications to come before the Board lately and a lot of information to review. She believed that the members should all pick up their folders at the Planning Board Office the Friday before the meetings and to look them over prior to the meeting. It would help the meetings move a little more smoothly. She knows that everyone doesn’t have the time to review every little detail in their folders, but being familiar with the information would help a lot.

She noted that as Chairperson, she neglected to focus enough attention on training this past year. She was preoccupied with the volume of applications and overlooked researching trainings and bringing them to the Board’s attention as well. She conveyed to the Board that she was looking for a little help from the members to maybe help her out with a couple things.

She noted that the Board reviews different types of applications, whether it is Special Use Permits, Site Plan Approvals, there are checklists. . . It may be helpful when a smaller project comes in if someone were to make it their ‘pet project’ by reviewing the checklists and making sure everything gets addressed in a timely manner.

T/ Rochester Planning Board-2-February 12, 2004

Minutes of Special Meeting

If a member would like to head up training. . . to keep in touch with the Ulster County Planning Board and see when trainings are.

Mr. Ricks suggested having the Secretary copy training announcements when they come in to the office, so that all of the Board members are aware. Quite a few years an ago certain members were approved by the Town Board to attend the Association of the Town’s training seminar down in New York City. There are different classes to attend all day long. It was very expensive and it was a set allotment of money. He recalls maybe one or two meals being paid for and the hotel room, but other than that you were on your own. Mr. Ricks volunteered to keep track and announce new trainings that come in.

Mr. De Graw noted that the County offers two trainings in the spring and two in the fall. They are always on a different topic and very informative.

Mr. Kawalchuck questioned if any of this information was available on the internet. He knew that a lot of the real estate updates were available on the internet that weren’t available a year or so ago. That would make it more convenient for everybody.

Mr. Striano noted that the only problem with the folders is that its only on a monthly basis. By the time he’s received notices of training, sometimes it is too late to attend them.

The Chairperson noted that Mr. Ricks would be able to alert the Board when he received trainings which would be beneficial to the Board. She also noted that she’d like to continue to follow the guidelines of making two (2) training sessions a year mandatory.

Mr. Ricks believed that someone in the State Department should produce a booklet that would be a guide to a Planning Board Member that would have a little bit of everything that would pertain to them.

Mr. De Graw stated that the Dept. of State has trainings for Planning Board and ZBA Members and they have an entire handout that they give to people at the meetings. He believes that the Dept. of State has also produced a CD.

The Chairperson agreed that this would be good to look into. She also noted that the Planning Board Office is on-line with e-mail, and maybe some members would be easier to get in touch with via this mode.

At this point she opened the meeting up to the Board for comments, suggestions, etc. . .

Mr. De Graw noted that he understood that everyone is busy in their personal lives. It shouldn’t be expected that one person be responsible for the whole Board. He continued that there is a lot of talk regarding Town Engineers and Planners to give the Board some guidance.

The Chairperson noted that the Supervisor was currently looking into hiring a Town Planner, but in the meantime, the Board is still getting new applications and the Board needs to find a way to handle these applications in the best way they can.

Mr. Striano questioned if the Board were to receive a particularly technical application, isn’t it up to the applicant to pay for the Planner if the Board requested it?

T/ Rochester Planning Board-3-February 12, 2004

Minutes of Special Meeting

The Chairperson responded that yes it was, but they aren’t required to pay for an Engineer or a Planner unless a Positive Declaration is made. Usually, though, it is in the applicant’s best interest and usually they agree to pay for an Engineer or Planner even if a Positive Declaration isn’t made. She noted that since the Town doesn’t have a Planner or Engineer on Staff now, the Board will request one when they feel it necessary. She noted that the Board has had to ask applicants to pay for an Engineer for the Town, and before the Board selected one, they discussed whether they should retain the services of a Planner or Engineer or Both. The Board came to the conclusion that if they hired a Planner they would have to retain an Engineer also to review the more technical aspects of the project. If only an Engineer is hired, they would do the technical review, and give some planning guidance along with the input of eight Board Members.

The Chairperson noted that in regards to SEQRA, in order to determine Lead Agency, the application being reviewed has to be complete. There are so many different levels of completeness. Usually the Planning Board requests to be Lead Agency and they do this in the initial steps in a process, sometimes even before the Board has a complete application.

Mr. Ricks stated that everything is up for discussion; ‘complete’ in one person’s mind, may not be the level of ‘complete’ in another’s.

Mr. De Graw believed that the Board should utilize the checklists more; it helps to determine and it helps the applicant know if their application is complete.

Chairperson Carney noted that in many instances the Board has declared themselves Lead Agency, gone through the checklist with applicants, noting the additional information they may need, and then tells the applicant that once they get the required information to the Board, it will be sent out to involved agencies. She questioned the Board if they should wait to determine Lead Agency until all information is in, or is the Board rushing things with applications?

Mr. Ricks commented that there are eight people on the Board to determine things like Lead Agency, with eight different points of view on various applications.Maybe the checklist would be a little more helpful here.

The Chairperson noted that she has been using the checklist especially when someone comes in for a Special Use Permit or Site Plan Approval. She then noted that she wasn’t very comfortable with the Subdivision Checklist. The Subdivision Regulations were understandable, but the checklist was vague. It’s better for the Board to go straight to the Regulations when reviewing subdivisions.

Mr. O’Halloran felt that the Board’s biggest area of concern in the eyes of the public is that when the Board reviews the checklists, they are not always consistent with each Applicant. Some applicants do the entire checklist and maybe even more, where other applicants don’t follow the whole checklist. He realized that some of it is because the Board may be familiar with a particular site, but to onlookers or other applicants it looks unfair. This is where Mr. O’Halloran believes the criticism is coming from.

The Chairperson stated that one thing that varies from application to application is the topography. The regulations have certain thresh holds, if an applicant needs it, they need it. If they don’t, they don’t.

T/ Rochester Planning Board-4-February 12, 2004

Minutes of Special Meeting

Mr. Ricks commented that one of the things about following the letter of the law regarding the Subdivision Regulations is that these Regulations were originally adopted from a town down in WestchesterCounty. The town had a Planner; they basically took those exact Regulations, did some modifications and gave it to the Town of Rochester. There are a number of things in the Subdivision Regulations that are required, like sidewalks on collector roads and planting trees along the side of the road; these things pertain to suburban neighborhoods. Some of these things don’t apply to a subdivision done in this area. Even things like the length of a dead end road or a cul-de-sac—they are much shorter down in a Westchester town than it would be up here in the country in order to get into some of these larger parcels. These are some of the typical things that the Planning Board waives—these are common sense things to do.

Mr. De Graw believed that the Board had to be careful in waiving things because they don’t think that they apply to certain projects. Sidewalks are more than just a cost for a developer or for aesthetic reasons. They are a safety concern to get people off of the streets from walking down the road. When the Board has it in their Regulations and they choose to waive it, it may become a safety concern and a liability.

At 7:55 PM, Mr. Gaydos excused himself from the meeting due to personal reasons. He would try and return if he had time.

Mr. De Graw felt that if the Planning Board had concerns or suggestions to change aspects of the Subdivision Regulations, they should approach the Town Board with these changes and the reasons for them. This would relieve the Planning Board from some liability.

The Chairperson stated that this is a part of knowing your community and knowing the development. If an area is a rural area with large lots on a rural road—is this the type of community that wants to introduce sidewalks?

Mr. De Graw responded that the parameters are the collector roads . . .

Mr. Ricks stated that the Regulations are saying if an applicant has a private road off of a main road, the private road needs sidewalks. Under that parameter, most of the roads in this Town would need sidewalks.

Mr. O’Halloran noted that he believes that the Board waives these sidewalks because they want to retain the rural characteristics in this Town. The last thing the Board should want would be sidewalks in these subdivisions.

Mr. De Graw responded that he believes that in smaller subdivisions with private roads, no it probably wouldn’t be practical, but when the Board is faced with 50, 70, or 100 residences in a community and they are close together, then maybe sidewalks become a safety measure to keep kids off of the roads.

Mr. Ricks read the definition of a Collector Road as stated in the Subdivision Regulations. According to this definition, most of the subdivisions approved by this Board would require sidewalks. Mr. Ricks then read section 125-26 Waivers, of the Subdivision Regulation, noting that if things aren’t applicable, there is a clause in the Regulations that account for these circumstances.

Mr. De Graw noted that collector roads serve between 50 to 200 residences. ‘Collector roads’ . . . is a technical term.

T/ Rochester Planning Board-5-February 12, 2004

Minutes of Special Meeting

Mr. Tapper stated that the Board hasn’t seen anything like this yet, and when they do, they will address it there.

Mr. De Graw continued, that if this was an issue the Board wanted to address, the Planning Board should approach the Town Board with it, and it’s their decision whether the Regulation in question is applicable.

Mr. Tapper commented, that sidewalks are on a case by case basis, and the Board hasn’t had anything like that, and if a project like this should occur, the Board at that time should have the option whether the sidewalks fit the project or are not necessary. It’s able to be waived or you can keep it.

Mr. De Graw stated that if the Planning Board approached the Town Board on this subject, it wouldn’t have to be waived.

Mr. Striano contributed that if the Planning Board kept it in the Regulations, then they would have the option to waive it. If the law were changed to something completely different, then the Board would lose that option.

Mr. De Graw felt that the other thing the Board had to keep in mind was were any members on the Board have the expertise to waive Regulations? The Regulations give the Board the option to do it, but do any of the members feel expert enough to waive requirements such as sidewalks?

Mr. Striano believed that anytime the Board has waived anything they have taken not only the Application into consideration, but any other information they were able to obtain, and then based their decision on that.

Mr. Tapper stated that if the Board was faced with a project on a large scale as a 70 lot subdivision, the Board may want to have the option of requiring sidewalks. If the Board had a project of that magnitude, they most likely would have an Engineer who would have the expertise to review the application as well.

Mr. O’Halloran stated that there are no professional Planners on this Board and he is not aware of any Boards that are made up of professional Planners. Based on what Mr. De Graw is saying, how is the Board supposed to make any decisions and feel confident about it? Was Mr. De Graw confident that the Board could type actions according to SEQRA along with Declaring Negative or Positive Declarations?

Mr. De Graw was only referring to waiving guidelines. Guidelines are placed by the State, Town, by our County to guide the Board in these situations. The Board is made up of lay people and the residents of the Town have the ultimate say. Those guidelines are laid down by professionals to assist Board Members in those decisions. When a guideline is waived it should be taken with some care. There is liability with people’s safety at risk.

Mr. O’Halloran noted that one of the guidelines the Board has to go by is the ability to waive other guidelines under certain circumstances. If the Board decides to waive the requirement of topography on a site plan, because the applicant’s project is on a flat piece of land, that’s not a safety issue.

Mr. Kawalchuck noted that by design, this is why the Board consists of the number of members that it does, the number of members is supposed to compensate for anyone’s inability to make a decision on something. This is what the intent of the Planning Board is, otherwise the Town could have one planner and the Board Members wouldn’t be needed.

T/ Rochester Planning Board-6-February 12, 2004

Minutes of Special Meeting

Mr. De Graw believed that the decisions are made through a representative of a group of people from the Town that knows the Town. Mr. De Graw reiterated that the Board needed to be careful when waiving the Town Code and Town Zoning Law because of liability.

Mr. Kawalchuck noted that the ability to waive in the Regulations had to carry as much weight as the ability not to waive. Which one is the Board trying to follow? They are both Regulations.

Mr. De Graw believed that the guidelines were put together by a professional who came up with reasons why these regulations would be the way they are.