Town of Hague

Planning Board

June 2, 2005

 

 

Chairman Swanson called the meeting to order at 7pm with Rolly Allen, Tim Costello, Pam Peterson and Cathy Clark present.  Peter Foster and John Brown were absent.

 

For the minutes of the regular meeting of 5/5/05, it was noted that the correct name of the surveyor for Mr. Beneduce is Joe Fuerst.  Tim Costello moved and Rolly Allen seconded a motion to approve the minutes as corrected.  Approved 5-0.

 

Rolly Allen moved and Pam Peterson seconded a motion to approve the minutes of the special meeting of 5/24/05.  Approved 5-0.

 

Cathy Clark noted for the record that the Planning Board had 2 meetings and 2 site reviews during the month of May.

 

OLD BUSINESS

            SUBDIVISION

 

                        1.  BENEDUCE (42-1-23.1), Dodd Hill Rd, TR-1      

                        The applicant wishes to subdivide his property into a major 11-lot subdivision.  Discussion continued on the sketch plan review of the proposal.

 

                        Along Dodd Hill Road driveways should be placed in order to improve the sight distance.

                        The surveyor, Mr. Fuerst asked for a clarification of the recreation area or non-development area along the stream open to the residents of the subdivision.  He felt that a non-developmental area would be on the map but did not need to be encouraged.  The stream is about 1100 ft long and 100 ft on either side of it could be set aside.   Residents could access the area from the back of their lots on a 10 ft path that could be created.    Lot 11 is 39.5 acres with no plans for development at this time.  There is an alternate provision for a monetary amount which would have to be recommended by the Planning Board and then established by the Town Board.

                        Chris Navitsky asked whether the park land was open to residents or just the residents of the subdivision.  The park land or open space is just for the residents but if funds were required they could be used for facilities for all residents. 

                        The set-aside area (5-6 acres) would need to be restricted in the deed of the land in lot 11.  It was felt that this area would be left undeveloped and could be accessed by the subdivision residents.  It is a very steep area which probably should not be developed anyway.

                        The language of the code states that set aside could be park, playground, other recreational or open space.  Cathy Clark read the definition of open space (160-10 under definitions) to be: “Any recreation use particularly oriented to and utilizing the outdoor character of an area, including a snowmobile trail, bike, jeep or all-terrain-vehicle trail, cross-country ski trail, hiking and backpacking trail, bicycle trail, horse trail, playground, picnic area, public park, public beach or similar use.”  Since this definition is in the Zoning section of the Town Code (160) , not the Subdivision section (150), Chairman Swanson felt that it would need to be studied to see if it also applied to the subdivision section.

                        At this stage of sketch plan review, the Planning Board can suggest changes they would like before the developer goes to final plans. 

                        One of the suggestions is to preserve the area around the stream as undeveloped. 

                        Cathy Clark noted that Mr. Beneduce, during the site visit,  had seemed agreeable, on lots 1 and 2, to the deeded restriction that no building would be any closer than the stone wall and no development would be beyond the stone wall.

                        Rolly Allen suggested that the only tree clearing done should be that necessary for building the houses.  Mr. Fuerst said that their next plan would show the driveways and the cleared areas for the houses and be much more detailed with a stormwater plan.  Mr. Swanson read from the subdivision code, “In no case shall a living tree with a diameter of 24 inches or more as measured at breast height be removed unless such tree is within the limit of clearing for roads and utilities of a street as shown on the typical clearing and grading cross section being employed.  Removal of such trees not lying within such limit of clearing shall be subject to the prior approval of the Planning Board.”   Mr. Bailey’s interpretation is that this requirement is only for the creation of the subdivision and that once the lots are created “we are out of the subdivision regulations and into zoning and there is no such requirement in zoning for tree preservation except along the shoreline.”  Mr. Allen felt that whether it is a requirement or not, this is the time to come to an agreement with the developer to put in deed restrictions.                  

 

                        Tim Costello moved and Cathy Clark seconded a motion to approve the sketch plan with the following suggestions:

                        1)  100 ft on either side of the brook (stream) be set aside for open space

                        2)  No development on lots 1 &  2 beyond the stone wall

                        3)  Restrictions on cutting on each lot

                        Approved 5-0.

 

            2.  RAGOT (42.20-1-6), Lakeshore Drive (across from Cape Cod), TR-2

                        Robert Ragot appeared to continue the sketch plan review of a proposal submitted in February to subdivide a 7.73 acre parcel (which is currently in the Cape Cod Association) into 4 lots - 3 of 1.1 acres and the other of 4.43 acres. 

                        The Board discussed some of their observations at a site visit.  There was much concern about the lot with the very steep slope, the flooding area and the design of the lots. There remains a landlocked building (owned by Korot) on the property which needs to be given access to Lakeshore Drive.  A question was raised as to the inclusion of the common road in the 1.1 acres.

                        Mr. Ragot will resubmit his sketch plan considering the comments and with a clear definition of the egress for the 3 lots.

 

            SITE PLAN REVIEW

                       

                        1.  HINES (26.14-1-5), Friends Point, South, TR-1

                        The applicant seeks approval for minor modifications to the roofline of the existing house and modification to the existing entrance.

                        Rolly Allen moved and Cathy Clark seconded a motion to approve the site plan.  Approved 4-0.  (Tim Costello was momentarily out of the room.)

 

            ZONING CHANGE

 

            1.  MAIARO (42-1-9), Decker Hill Rd, (25.4-1-41), Fitzgerald Rd, OC-2

                        Applicant has requested a change in zoning within the Special Commercial Use Zone to be a consistent 2.9 acres.  A letter was received from APA indicating such a change may be possible.  The APA would have to hold a Public Hearing and send notices to all affected parties.  It would be subject to the SEQRA review as a Type 1 project.  The lead agency would be the APA with the Town as the sponsor since it includes more than one property (Maiaro, Nadeau, Waters, Weiss).

                        The Town Board will have to make the decision but asked the Planning Board for their recommendation.  ZEO Bailey has written a suggested letter to the Town Board.

                        The Planning Board recommended that the Town Board should address these issues:

                        1) To make all the properties in the commercial zone have the same requirement probably makes sense.

                        2)  Other landowners affected by the change should be consulted.

                        3)  The issue of costs should be considered.

                        4)  Hold a public hearing before submitting to the APA.

 

            ZEO Bailey will draft another letter, send it out and if everyone agrees, Chairman Swanson will send it out to the Town Board.

 

OTHER OLD BUSINESS

                        PHELPS - Cathy Clark noted that the minutes of the last meeting indicated that the approval was “also stated to constitute Site Plan Approval provided that the ZBA approves the variance with such five conditions [as approved by Planning Board] “.  The ZBA did not approve the conditions when it approved the variance.  ZEO Bailey, however, said that he is sending the Planning Board conditions to the Phelps as a condition of Site Plan Approval so that it does not need to come back to the Planning Board.

 

NEW BUSINESS

                        Cathy Clark asked about the need for Planning Board approval for change of use for the new commercial ventures in the hamlet.  ZEO Bailey said that when someone buys or rents a property he has no way to be aware of it.  Now that he is aware of it,  he will write them a letter and let them know to fill out the appropriate paperwork. 

                        Cathy Clark also reiterated her request that proposals be given to the Planning Board in a timely fashion in order to minimize the number of meetings that are necessary.  Councilman Gladu suggested that they work on a process modification according to a plan that ZEO Bailey has submitted to Chairman Swanson.

 

OTHER BUSINESS

                        Councilman Gladu handed out a document “Parkland Requirements for Major Subdivisions”.  He suggested that the Planning Board has to put together a definition and set of criteria for the recreational needs of the Town which can be used as a comparison for subdivision requests.  The zoning code seems to be driven by the “incomprehensible comprehensive plan” and it was suggested that the problem is larger than just recreation and needs to be addressed by a group other than the Planning Board.

                        Chairman Swanson moved and Cathy Clark seconded a motion to adjourn.  Approved 5-0 and meeting adjourned at 9:20pm.

 

Respectfully submitted,

 

 

Judy Stock

Acting Recording Secretary