Beacon City Planning Board

The Planning Board meeting was held on Tuesday, December 14, 2004 in the courtroom of the Municipal Center. A workshop took place at 7:00 p.m. The regular meeting commenced at 7:30 p.m. with Chairman Hibbs, Members Sablinski, Sheers, Arquilla and Attaway, Alternate Member John Gunn, Building Inspector Tim Dexter, City Planner David Stolman, City Engineer Art Tully and City Attorney Gerard Pisanelli in attendance. Members Williams and Lassiter; and Alternate Member Anne Rapalje were absent.

Chairman Hibbs asked for corrections/additions to the minutes of the November 9, 2004 meeting or a motion to approve as circulated. A motion was made by Ms. Attaway, seconded by Mr. Sablinski to approve the minutes as circulated. All voted in favor. Motion carried.

ITEM NO. 1 PUBLIC HEARING ON APPLICATION FOR SUBDIVISION, 2

LOTS, SUBMITTED BY CLARK GEBMAN (PROPERTY OWNED BY VENDEL

& EVA BENDER), 348 LIBERTY STREET

Mr. Hibbs noted the notice of public hearing was printed in the Poughkeepsie Journal on December 8, 2004 and opened the public hearing on the application for a two lot subdivision of property, owned by Vendel and Eva Bender, located at 348 Liberty Street, identified on City Tax Maps as Section 6054, Block 24, Lot 448993.

Contract vendee Clark Gebman attended the meeting to answer and respond to comments made at the previous meeting. Mr. Stolman reviewed correspondence from Tim Miller Associates that outlined their examination of the subject property. Based on a site investigation, they determined the parcel did not contain wetlands based on criteria set forth in the Army Corps 1987 Wetland Delineation manual.

Mr. Tully asked that his written comments specific to each note be responded to in writing. He explained that although changes have been made to the plan, written responses should be submitted by the applicant’s engineer or surveyor.

Mr. Gebman understood three items required response: site grading, retaining walls, a construction plan, and evidence of the lowest sewerable elevation. He explained all requested information was noted on the drawing and apologized for the lack of written responses.

Mr. Tully explained the existing sanitary sewer in Liberty Street is a 24-inch line however the plan illustrates an 8-inch line. He explained the service line shown is relatively flat and may create a potential for it to back up since the 24-inch main flows full much of time. Mr. Tully advised Mr. Gebman to have his engineer review the service line, keeping in mind that a 24-inch trunk main flows down Liberty Street rather than an 8-inch line as shown on the plan. Mr. Tully understood the sanitary service was kept flat in order to keep the first floor elevation low however, he recommended measures be implemented to correct the potential for a back-up situation. Mr. Gebman explained the lowest sewerable elevation is currently 157 ft. and the first floor level is 165 ft. which provides an 8 ft. allowance so there should not be a sewer back up. Mr. Tully explained that the lowest sewerable elevation is the lowest elevation that sewer may be tied into therefore a check valve may be necessary. He requested clarification from the engineer. Mr. Tully also requested details on the water service connection and information on erosion control measures that will be implemented during construction.

Mr. Hibbs read the following memorandum from Chris Ericson, Conservation Advisory Committee Chairperson:

Please be advised that on this date Mr. Gebman, contract vendee for the property at 348 Liberty Street presented his plans to the Beacon CAC at our monthly meeting.

During the meeting Mr. Gebman addressed our concerns over runoff, flood plains, and the general aspects and topography of the land parcel. The CAC feels that potential issues of concern were adequately addressed.

We encourage the Planning Board to continue its review process. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Mr. Hibbs read correspondence from Donna Fleming-McCollum into the record:

I am writing in reference to the above proposed building site and as not to waste anyone’s time, I will get right to the point.

I apologize for not attending these meetings, but since I work on Tuesday evenings, my attendance is not possible.

I have documented some information below that I feel the Planning Board will find helpful in making a decision on this proposal:

*My home, which again is situated on a much higher ground than that of the proposed site, also is on a bed of shale. Even back in the 1920’s when this home was built and the dam was in place – it did not require any fill. I understand that this proposal brings with it 100 yards of fill, how will this fill be disturbed on this site without undermining the stream or Fishkill Creek? Mr. Gebman stated, “This project does not environmentally affect the Fishkill Creek or flood plain”, what research has been done to make this statement?

*I have spoken to numerous organizations regarding this proposed site. Though most organizations have been extremely polite and informative, the final decision must fall on the City of Beacon Planning Board if in fact it will only be one house. Mr. Gebman, please answer this question directly – will there ony be one house built on this lot, or do you plan to build more houses there? Are you deceiving the Board? Are you deceiving the neighbors? Are you trying to avoid what would warrant an intensive environmental review if more than one house was to be built there?

*There has been neighboring opposition to this proposal, such as property conditions and wildlife. I have also seen this property wet and always green with color as stated by Ms. Kraft who has been a resident at 315 Liberty Street for 19 years. Since other property conditions have already been raised for and against, I will not what wildlife I have seen since my residing here at this location for the last 10 years. I have seen numerous Blue Heron (which I know there are at least two different heron based on their sizes), ribbon snakes, garter snakes, water snakes, brown trout, brook trout (which has been stocked to my knowledge for the last four years or more), wild mountain cat, deer, geese, ground hogs, raccoons, ducks and their babies, mallards, frogs, tadpoles, chipmunks, just to name some, not all. New construction will certainly have an impact on this wildlife, when does it stop?

*Mr. Gebman proposed a one-house subdivision now and possibly a total of six houses in the future. Hopefully, Mr. Gebman had answered this question regarding the number of homes at this site. This one house proposal is approximately 3,000 square feet, which is quite large considering Mr. and Mrs. Bender’s home is 1,924 square feet as described in the Dutchess County Tax Report.

*The Updated FEMA Flood Insurance Map may not be available until January of 2005, which was last updated many years ago in 1984. If flooding is not a concern, then why had I paid for flood insurance since purchasing the property when my home sits much higher than the proposed site?

*Liberty Street is approximately 1.2 miles in length and already has 180 houses and townhouses or condominiums. The breakdown is as follows:

· Roundtree Court has 68 homes with ONE entrance/exit, which is located on Liberty Street.

· The Villas has 35 houmes with ONE entrance/exit, which is located on Liberty Street

· Forrestal Elementary School (takes approximately .2-1/2 miles)

· A parking lot for Beacon Engine

· St. Joachim’s Church and after-school program, and

· The First Presbyterian Church and parking lot (combined takes up almost the entire block from Grove Street to Amity Street)

· Central Hudson Station

· City of Beacon Water Treatment Plant with TWO entrances/exits which is located on Liberty Street

· One lane bridge (that had been deteriorating and had a deteriorating wall) that is being completely redone and still is a ONE lane bridge

· Single family houses

· Multi-family houses

Washington Avenue for comparison is approximately 1.3 miles in length (Washington runs parallel to Liberty Street) and has 123 houses and townhouses. The breakdown is as follows:

· Fairview Cemetary

· St. Joachim’s Cemetary

· Glendale Estates has 29 homes with ONE entrance/exit, which is located on Washington Avenue

· Single family houses

· Multi family houses

Considering the churches on Liberty Street take up the entire block and the school takes up a rather large amount of square footage as well – Liberty Street still has 180 places to live. While Washington Avenue is yet a little larger than Liberty Street as it has much lower number of homes. *I have taken the liberty of enclosing some information that may also be helpful in determining this proposal. (Enclosures on file)

Mr. Hibbs asked Mr. Tully for a response to Ms. Fleming-McCollum’s concern regarding the flood plain. Mr. Tully reported the flood plain has been identified on the plan and construction of the foundation is located outside the limits of the flood plain. Mr. Hibbs asked if the Fishkill Creek is a protected waterway. Mr. Tully explained the Fishkill Creek carries a specific classification and Mr. Gebman shows it to be a “C” classification which indicates further review or permitting is not necessary. Mr. Tully asked that the DEC or Mr. Gebman’s design professional verify that data. In response to Ms. Fleming-McCollum’s concern that Mr. Gebman’s intent is to subdivide only one lot now with plans for future subdivision, Mr. Tully reported this application is only for one lot and a new application to the Planning Board is required for further subdivision.

Theresa Kraft, 315 Liberty Street, corresponded with a representative of the Dutchess County Soil and Water Conservation Department regarding this project. She presented a map to show that the subject property is listed under FEMA/floodplains. She also provided documentation on the soil breakdown. Mr. Tully explained a part of the property is in the flood plain however the building footprint is located outside of that area. The Dutchess County Soil and Water Conservation representative informed Ms. Kraft that all waters and streams are regulated by New York State. Mr. Tully explained waterways carry different classifications and levels of coverage depending on particular locations. The applicant has shown that this portion of Fishkill Creek is a section that does not carry a very high classification. Ms. Kraft noted that this property has three areas of water that run through it: along the front, side and along the Fishkill Creek. Mr. Tully explained that although smaller streams are located on the property, only Fishkill Creek has a DEC rating. Ms. Kraft reported the representative she spoke to in the Dutchess County Soil and Water Conservation office informed her that all construction within the area must go through their office. Ms. Kraft said although she had never met Mr. Gebman outside of these hearings, he stopped at her house and while talking to her mother, a doe and fawn emerged from the subject property which proves it is used as a wildlife crossing. Ms. Kraft felt her previous comments were not addressed and that the waterway should be protected from contamination spills. She felt construction should not take place in protected wetlands and expressed concerns over the proposed house size. Mr. Hibbs explained the Board is very careful about locating a flood plain area on a map and research reveals the construction to be outside the area designated as the 100 year flood plain. Discussion took place regarding the designation of flood plains and what determines 50-, 100- and 500-year flood plains. Ms. Kraft’s list of concerns follows:

· What makes this property eligible to be subdivided building site, when the said property is on a flood plain?

· Has a report been filed with DEC to date?

· What is the egress and exit out of the property?

· How tall is the structure and what is the maximum allowed?

· What type of foundation will be used?

· Said, ‘No run-off during construction’ but what about daily life runoff; dripping car oil, gas oil, and lawn mower, visiting cars?

· What about flooding, property borders on two water sources plus a 8” running stream across the front of the property?

· State permits?

· Is the property part of the wetlands/flood plains?

· Are you required to complete an archeological study?

· How much square footage available to abut the creek?

· Single or multi dwelling? If so how is it controlled?

· How and where is the septic and water systems to go?

· How will they get the garbage up and down the hill?

· Is this a spec house?

· For the past 15 years we have always seen the property wet!

Nancy Musacchio, 319 Liberty Street, explained her property is located directly across from the proposed house. She expressed concerns that a large home will be built on small portion of the property. She has witnessed water coming over the banks of Fishkill Creek and felt any structure would be undermined. Mr. Hibbs outlined the Board’s duty is complex because approvals must be based on standards that are applied to all applications. Additionally, they must follow the flood plain definitions and limits adopted by the City. It was confirmed that the house footprint meets the required front yard setback in the R1-10 zoning district. Ms. Musacchio expressed concerns for further development of the property.

Dennis Pavelock, 34 Judson Street, asked if any impervious surfaces would be created with this development. He read documentation describing the effects impervious surfaces cause: “Pervious surfaces interrupt the natural water cycle, unable to filter to the edge, rainwater rushes into streams leading to flooding, erosion, damage to wildlife, habitats and channels further downstream. As water flows over paved surfaces it also collects soil, pet waste, salt, fertilizer, oil and other pollutants which are carried to nearby streams.” Mr. Tully explained concern for impervious surfaces is considered by degree, and this proposal is for one house and one driveway is deemed to have minimal affect. Mr. Pavelock asked what precautions are in place to avoid children from playing near the waterways.

There were no further comments from the public and Ms. Attaway made a motion to close the public hearing, seconded by Mr. Sheers. All voted in favor. Motion carried.

Mr. Tully reported four items must be fulfilled: verify information on the sanitary sewer connection as discussed, provide details on the water service connection, confirmation of the classification of the Fishkill Creek and details on storm water run-off mitigation measures for construction. Mr. Tully did not want to minimize comments posed by the public as they are all valid concerns however the applicant has appropriately addressed them at this time.

After some consideration, Ms. Attaway made a motion to issue a negative SEQRA declaration for the proposed two lot subdivision at 348 Liberty Street, seconded by Mr. Gunn. All voted in favor. Motion carried.

Ms. Attaway made the following motion: grant preliminary subdivision approval for a two lot subdivision subject to verification and modifications to the sanitary sewer connection, providing details on the water service connection, confirmation of the classification of the Fishkill Creek and providing details on storm water run-off mitigation measures for construction; waive the public hearing required prior to granting final subdivision approval based upon the fact that the preliminary and final plan are substantially the same; and to grant final approval of the subdivision plan subject to the same conditions as noted in the preliminary approval. The motion was seconded by Mr. Sheers. All voted in favor. Motion carried.

ITEM NO. 2 REVIEW APPLICATION FOR SUBDIVISION, 2 LOTS,

SUBMITTED BY DAVID DE LEO (PROPERTY OWNED BY ARTHUR &

MARYLOU VOLBERT), 40 RUSSELL AVENUE

Mr. Tully excused himself from the remainder of the meeting and provided Mr. Stolman with his review comments on the subject application. Bill Povall, of Povall Engineering, described Mr. DeLeo’s proposal for a two lot subdivision of a .42 acre parcel located on Russell Avenue for the purpose of constructing a new single family house on Prospect Street. The property is located in an R1-5 zoning district, between Russell Avenue and Prospect Street, and First Street and Union Street. The new lot will be approximately 7,500 sq. ft. in size which exceeds minimum zoning requirements. The existing single family home on Russell Avenue will be located on Lot #1 and the new single family home will be located on Lot #2 with frontage on Prospect Street.

Mr. Stolman said a backup area is needed for the driveway because vehicles should not back out into the street. Mr. Povall explained it would be difficult to add a backup area because the front yard setback is almost the length of a car. Mr. Stolman explained a larger area could be made in front to accommodate a turnaround area. Sight distance measurements from the driveway are needed, as well as information on front yard setbacks for houses within 250 ft. of the subject property in order to determine proper alignment of the proposed home.

There were no further comments and Ms. Attaway made a motion to set a public hearing for the month of January, seconded by Mr. Sheers. All voted in favor. Motion carried.

Miscellaneous Business

1. Certificate of Appropriateness – 442-444 Main Street – Front Door

New colors for the façade at 442-444 Main Street were reviewed and approved by the Architectural Review Committee. After reviewing the application, Ms. Attaway made a motion to approval the proposal as submitted, seconded by Mr. Sheers. All voted in favor. Motion carried.

2. Certificate of Appropriateness – 137 Main Street – Store Front

Details for a new store front proposed for 137 Main Street was reviewed and approved by the Architectural Review Committee. After reviewing the application, Ms. Attaway made a motion to approval the proposal as submitted, seconded by Mr. Sheers. All voted in favor. Motion carried.

There was no further business to discuss and the meeting was adjourned on a motion made by Mr. Sheers, seconded by Mr. Sablinski. All voted in favor. Motion carried. The meeting adjourned at 8:25 p.m.