Planning Board - Regular Meeting

Call this meeting in order. Please rise for the pledge of pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

All right. Um, next item on our agenda is the acceptance of the minutes. uh that will be held off until the next meeting. Uh so then the next item on the agenda is uh a public hearing for uh the amended Sherman Hill development uh plan. Uh so there should be a signup sheet for the um public hearing. If you'd like to speak, uh please sign in on the signin sheet. Um once we go through the names, anybody else who'd like to speak is welcome to do so. Um and uh we'll hear from the uh applicant and their consultant first and then we may have some questions and the consultants our consultants may have some questions and then we'll actually

is proposing to turn the basement of each of those four structures into an apartment which would then convert those two family structures into a multifamily use. Um right now there's only a commercial laundry in those basements. So what we'll be doing is adding the apartment down below. Uh we receive the comma then to note that right now it's the third here. So clockwise right so that you drive in one two or mine then three four I see clockwise. Okay. So this is over here. Right. Okay.

All right. So again we don't know what that particular property owner is doing. They might not be out here seeking approval but we are seeking approval for the multif family use. And right now code code demonstrates that we have sufficient parking. So again, we're happy to answer any questions that the board of the consultants may have or members of the public. So with that, I don't know if there's anything up for us. We expect that we're not changing any other comments. Uh, this was an email. Uh, where have you gotten with the building inspector in terms of the code experts, we're going to call it? And according to the existing building code of the state of New York, I don't meet the qualifications to meet sprinklers as long as the building has full smoke detected. And that's a matter of the code I just got to review with Don, but it's pretty clear in the exemption. Okay.

All right. We again, we make no exception to any of the other fire department comments on this one. What we're saying me merely is that the application we're proposing meets the zoning code. And so there really is no requirement to provide more or less spaces. We're already going above and beyond what's required by code. And that's but again, we're happy to accommodate the the fire department on the other the two family. They had their input. changed the parking lot. So what you have there now was to their liking, not increasing, right? Just you're asking for more. So per building. So you're asking for more. So we're looking to see if that's a sufficient parking spot,

right? You don't want more parking spots. We understand and I understand what you're saying the code says. I'm going to rely on our planning board consultants to tell us what they think needs to happen. And just to touch base because it was over two years ago, one of the fire provisions we did is we had this parking lot designed so a fire truck could come in, pull up and get to these buildings in either scenario. So we demonstrated that that is accommodating for a fire apparatus. So sure, just wanted to reiterate that. Right. I would I would think most people would understand that the concern of the fire department is if there's a bunch of cars parked in the culdesac, they can't make easy access. Mhm. So, we'll get to that in a moment. Uh, member Sidor, anything?

That's it. Lower. Okay. Thank you. Uh so before we get to the AKRF memo, um uh I believe we should wait on the building inspector to tell us what the building inspector thinks about the um sprinkles uh the sprinkler system for either just the new space or the entire building. Correct.

Right. And uh on parking, the code says what the parking should be for uh these units. Um but if there's more cars than what um what the parking allows, what can the planning board do, if anything? Um want to start? I can start with that. That's on the code. Comment number six for my memo addresses. All right, let's go to number six first, then we'll go through the rest of the

six and seven, which are supposed to be six uh together if you zoom in a little bit. Yeah. So, six was the original comment from the last meeting. Um, prior iteration of the project, the one that was previously approved uh for two family is a two parking spaces per unit requirement. that's per the code. Um, multif family has a rate as well in the code which is there's no three family, there's no, you know, there's two family and it goes to multif family and multif family is 1.5. So it's half a space less per unit. Um, so they're needing that right now uh with those lots. They have 20 spaces and they would need 18 according to these calculations. So um you know multif family is you know it's less than two family because the idea is I don't think it was written with the intent of a three family but um you know the idea is that there's

right more density usually closer to transit usually in you know the do plains area probably was what the code was thinking about in that. So a lower parking ratio is appropriate and it's usually it's applicable to a lot of codes in the Hudson Valley multif family. Um so that's why it's less. They're saying that they have enough and they're they are meeting the code right now with the unit count and the going by those rates. So um you know the fire department had their letter with the issues that they see it's overcrowded. I guess they're concerned about um access double people double parking when they have to come in. But if they were looking at the wrong lots, you know, that's one thing. But

right, the board did go out there and take a look at these lots. I don't know if it was a weekend was what were those conditions like Saturday morning, right? No one's having a barbecue on a Saturday morning, right? But was it was it full with all the residents and um I would say it was full. No. Oh, okay. But I think again people could have left, right? The fire department's comments were that was a weekend condition as well, I think they said, but they were looking at the other lots. So, um I don't know. Without photos of everything, it's hard to say, but sure,

they are meeting the code. The board does have the authority to um modify provisional parking standards. you know, code 14538A 3B says that um that can happen based on various factors. You can if you think based on reality there's an issue, you can modify the rate um for one, but right now they are meeting what the code says. Was that 14538?

14538. Uh, additional parking stands. There's 3, sorry, three. That's only for B. Number two for B. Yeah. Why? It's under the heading nonual party. Yes, it's off. So, Oh, yeah. Okay. So, it's not applicable. Okay. There isn't a provision that you can modify a residential rate. You're saying there is not.

There is if you if it can be reduced for dwelling units less than 1,000 square feet of floor space, senior citizen housing. That's under 2C, right above where I was looking. So, we could reduce it, not increase it. Well, I would say there's no explicit authority to increase it, but under your special permit standards, you do have to go through that test and you if if you find it's going to create a nuisance or a safety nuisance, right? Okay. Um condition, then then you would have the ability to, you know, require something else. Okay.

Yeah. Okay. So, wrong code citation. I apologize for that, but I think we pointed out the right one this time. Okay. All right. Uh, back to the memo.

Yep. So, that was the parking issue. It's really the main outstanding Yeah. Um, number two, they confirmed at the last meeting that these are one-bedroom units. They did provide floor plans as well, which, um, we'll get to that comment. Um, county planning responded. Matter of concern. That's comment three. Comment four, floor plans, though not required. We did look at those for the original plan and they did provide those at the last meeting in person which I forgot to note. So um and and then you just pulled them up earlier. So we do have the foil plans. We understand the layout of these units. Uh number five is just on the engineering items. I'll let Joe talk to those when it's his turn. Seven actually six. Um May the May 15th comment on number six

is uh what we just talked about with the fire department's letter. No new comments on eight. I still think the seeker determination that you issued for the original approval um could carry over for this. It's an increase of four units. Um it's not a large amount. They're not really disturbing anything else on the site. they have the um the septic and well the septic fields were size originally and I don't think they're increasing. So again, that's still applicable. Mhm.

Um comment nine was about the fire department and code enforcement thoughts about sprinklers, which sounds like we're going to wait and see what they say. Um and then you did do a sidewalk. So, the recommendation is to have the public hearing um and then get an update about the fire company and code enforcement review which we've gotten so far. Okay. Thank you, Planner Warner. Uh engineer Burgerer, anything on the I don't know I mean whatever you want but

well and the health department will will handle the septic and well so they're reviewing that. I understand that they've tenatively approved it, waiting for final approval by the planning before they have the maps come in and sign them. So that's done. Their position is they're not making any changes to the parking. Again, it's up to the planning board. But with that, if that stands and there's no new no parking spaces, there's no no um improvements outside the building for the town to look at. Uh I did go there. We did have a second sitewalk. Paul and I was on Monday night and we did notice that in the two parking on our side there were less cars than across in the other units. Yeah. The the two parcels

for this one project or less number, you know, there than across that the other ones seem to be a higher density for whatever reason than these two. Okay. And I've been there a few times on my own in between just checking for erosion control in the last month and noticed there's never been a full lot. Right. There's one car that parks on the culde-sac, but in talking to the the owner and other people there, it's just that person likes to park on the culde-sac, right? Regardless if there's empty spaces and the times I've seen the car in the culde-sac, there are at least four empty spaces in that in that lot. So, it seemed to make sense that he just likes parking there, right? And it's a private road. Yeah.

So, the provision in the town code about no parking like for wintertime does not apply. It doesn't apply because it's a driveway really a private road. So, that I have no other comments. Okay. Thank you. You have um this is a question. Are there like rules about where people can park depending on what building they're in currently? I mean to their lot. I mean overflow we'll say during the day people visiting is at the bottom of culdeac but okay so far like overnight or that we have very very isolated instances we'll say I think the concern would be the other units parking in your spaces I think that would be the concern do you have a like everybody sick of their own building sort of

do you have a provision for towing if that becomes a problem I wouldn't say I've gone that far those of us who've lived in apartments anybody who's lived in apartment complexes They don't honor those things. If I come home at 2:00 in the morning, my lot is full and two spots next door are empty. I'm parking in those empty spots. No, no, I agree. We just now not initiate, right? We talked on the sidewalk. There's no designated spots like I live in this apartment, so that's my spot. I live in that apartment, so that's my spot. Just Okay. Just they're supposed to stay on their lot. That's kind of the rule that that's what everybody's naturally buys by right now. And you have right it's more of a just a common decency rule not an actual rule just

okay and since it's a private road I mean the enforcement falls on the owner to right let folks know like if you're causing an issue we're going to call a tow truck you know that's sure right they'd have to violate the lease or rental or something I've had zero issues so far Okay. Okay. Uh, all set. Okay. Attorney Palado. No comments. Okay. Thank you. Members of PL board haven't heard from our consultants. Any comments, questions at this time? None here.

Okay. All right. Uh, so, um, we're going to start the public hearing. If you could please have a seat. Uh, Engineer Burger, if you could uh, thank you. No need to apologize. There's no names. There are no names. Okay, that makes that simple. All right. Um. All right. I'll need a motion uh to open a public hearing for the amended Sherman Hill Development uh, public hearing. Motion made by so moved

member Palmer, second by member Lroadier. Discussion. Seeing no discussion, all those in favor say I. I. I. Any post say no.

All right. This public hearing is now open. I vote of uh five zero with one absence. No one has signed up to speak. Any members of the public wishing to speak at this public hearing for the amended Sherman Hill development uh please come to the podium at this time. All right. Seeing no one approaching the podium. Um so we can close public hearing. We could leave it open. We could close it but leave it open for written comments. Um, I don't know if it makes sense waiting for the building inspector to leave it open for his comments or thoughts there.

I mean, you could leave it open for the next for another meeting while we don't have a resolution prepared for tonight. Mhm. Wouldn't make a difference. Yeah. I mean, there's just the open questions that still need to be answered whether it's part of the public hearing or not. So, all right. the fire department followup, right? Yeah. Okay. All right. Uh I'll entertain a motion to continue this public hearing to June 1st. June 1st. Motion made by So moved. Member Sedor, seconded by second member Palmer.

Discussion. Okay. See no discussion. And all those in favor of continuous public hearing to June 1st 7 p.m. or soon thereafter as public can be heard. All in favor say I. I. I. Any oppose say no. Okay. This public hearing is continued to June 1st.

Okay. Good to go on that. Nothing else you need from our end because I think at this point we're pretty Mike's going to continue with the building department to see if we can get a response. Right. But again, this is more of a building department rather than site plan. So, anything else on our end that we need to provide the board? Um, I mean, there was something in the comment letter about um, you know, the planning board acting in the role of the ARB. Um, anything further? No, I think it's really new. Yeah, you've really requires looking at the elevations. The buildings are there already, right? So, you know what they look like, right? Um, floor plans was just an added item because you look at them the first time. They're not required to be looked at,

right? They're not required to be looked at, but they're helpful. Yeah. Right. The the buildings are there. The facade is already in place. In this case, it was helpful because it's kind of a the entrance was already built because it's a laundry room. So, you wanted to understand how the laundry room and utility interplay with the unit. So, I think it was good to have that. Right. The concrete paths weren't on the original Yes. plans, but you built them because it made sense. But so, this rectifies this would rectify that. Yep. Yeah. So, your ARB submission requirements have been fulfilled, I think. Okay. All right. Okay. Thank you. Sounds good. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you.

All right. Next um next item on the agenda is uh old business uh Wingdale Solar. Hey Other than the final the draft of the final scope, I don't think there's anything else really to

That's it. Yeah, sir. How are you? Yeah, go ahead. Um, Robert Quolo here on behalf of the applicant covering for Tom Saunders who's typically here unfortunately couldn't make it. Um, ironically enough, I've lost my voice as you can all tell. I don't have too much to say. We We were going to have you read this entire thing out loud to us.

Okay, fine. We have reviewed the comments received regarding the scoping document uh from the planning board and their consultant AKRF um and have reviewed the uh draft and find it to be acceptable to move forward with um with no additional comments from our end. So we'll defer it to the board on the next steps. All right. Um, all right. Um, I guess just for the record, uh, we had the public hearing on the scoping session two weeks ago,

correct? Um, we left the comment open. Yeah. For Right. It was you had you left the comment period open for an additional two days. Um, yes. So all the comments were received. Uh some were given here at the meeting. Um we considered those um the the big change that we made to the scope was under the noise chapter chapter 3 3.2 in the document which is on page seven of the PDF. Mhm. Uh let me go back to that. So this is a also a clean version of the scope. The last one was red line showing our proposed edits. We we've accepted all those,

right? Um again, I'm on noise. It was which page seven of the PDF 3.2. Yeah, there you go. Yeah. Under existing conditions, we made some text edits to the methodology for the collecting the noise readings or noise reading. Um so it's still a 24-hour continuous uh monitoring period. We added a non-h holiday weekend as the day that it would occur.

Mh. Um, and the location, the way we describe the location is one location on the site that is representative of the area where noise producing equipment introduced by the proposed action would have the greatest potential to increase noise levels. Um, we assume that's in the area of the equipment, but we're going to um get that from them. So, we added this last sentence to get um kind of a a sign off on what they're going to do before they do it. Mhm.

The planning board will be notified 48 hours in advance of the measurement date so the location can be confirmed acceptable and the work can be monitored by the town engineer. Everything else in that existing conditions uh methodology and then how we're going to describe the impacts or they're going to describe the impacts is all um the same as the last red line. Mhm.

Okay. There were some comments about wildlife um tree removal, storm water. Just a reminder that those we had those uh at the end of the scope there's a section called topics that are not to be not being covered by the EIS and the reasons why they're not covered. Um that's section 11 starts on page 11. So we we kept that in there. Um, it explains the planning board's deliberations on EF part two and how they came to the conclusions on these issues and how we came to the focused areas of the the EIS that we have in the scope. So, at this point, the board's in a position to vote on this tonight. Um, if you don't adopt the final version by the end of the month and you don't meet again this month, I think the deadline comes up on the 26th or the 29th, I forget what day it is.

What they submitted is the scope and

correct. If you don't act tonight on a scope that's been heavily modified by your consultants, um, their original draft will apply, which had some deficiencies in our opinion. So, um we recommend that you go with this one and then the applicant will go away for a little bit and prepare the DEIS and come back and we'll review it um against the scoping document. What happens next if this is adopted is it gets uh circulated again to the same agencies that got the draft. Um we post a notice to the environmental notice bulletin uh that there is a final scope that's been issued. Um, and I think there's also a resolution that Victoria drafted to adopt it, too.

Yep. All right. Do you have any sense of the time frame for DEIS? Not entirely. Um, I can definitely confer with our environmental consultants and engineering team and then circle back with you all once we have a little bit more visibility when we'll have a draft together. Right. I think we're just trying to get a sense of is it two months from now or six months from now or Yeah, I would say ballpark like target would probably be two monthsish.

Okay. Um yeah, we we have uh some additional studies to do which we want to make sure we're doing those the proper time and attention but definitely not unfamiliar with the DIS process. So sure, we do have some prior documents we can lean on to help expedite certain aspects of it. So I would say two months and we'll definitely let you know if that's drastically different in either direction, but it's probably a good expectation. Okay. All right. Uh, any members of the planning board have any comments? No comments. Anything further? Planner Warner? Uh, no. Not for me. Engineer Burgerer. Attorney Badero.

No. Okay. All right. All right. Uh, I don't uh I don't see the resolution on the laptop. Where uh where am I seeing it? You can do a printed copy. I have a printed copy. Okay.

Okay. And then as that's being sent regarding the uh circulation of the final draft or the final scoping document, you guys are spectacular to work with and very organized, but um is there anything you would like us to do as far as circulating this with the involved agencies or will you all pick that up? You want them to print and put them in envelopes? Yeah, I think Marilyn would weigh in on because she did the last two circuit. She did the positive declaration and she did the draft scope. So, okay. Yeah. We just want to make sure we're not throwing too much.

Marilyn, would it be helpful if they printed this and put them in envelopes for you to assist with circulation? I already have everything. Of course. Okay. Well, there's I have all the labels. So, there is for this one there's a site. So, he could make they could they could print the copies and Okay. Otherwise, we print them and charge them to do it. But one thing to keep in mind is that there's an attachment to this. It's a site plan, like a kind of a limited scale site plan set that's like exhibit A or attachment A, I forget how it's referenced, but that's that needs to be attached. It's not attached to this version that's on the screen here.

Um, so that makes, you know, if they can print those copies and provide those, it would probably help a lot. And does the U resolution have to also be included in Yeah, you can put it on top. Okay. Yeah. And if you used and you used the cover letter when you sent around the draft scope to the I would just take that and say it's final now and I can look at it before you send it out. Yeah. Okay. We can talk. Yep. And for the site plans we'll uh do 11 by 17s but then make a note if anyone requests like larger format or electronic format we can certify with them. Sure. through as well. That works.

Okay. All right. Uh seeing no further comments, questions from members of the planning board, uh we'll um go through the uh resolution here. Uh and just before I I guess I go through this and begin just to be clear about Windale Solar Project, us uh adopting a final scoping document for them to create a draft of our own pack statement is not the planning board agreeing or disagreeing about the project's great or terrible or this is just a step in the process. So us agreeing tonight is we agree that this is the document that should be used as the basis for the draft environmental impact statement. Y

there's still a lot of work to do. So resolution to adopt the final scoping document for the draft envir impact statement or DEIS for the proposed Wingdale solar project. Whereas the applicant Wingdale PV LLC, the applicant or project sponsor has submit an application to construct an approximately 4.28 28 megawatt ground mounted solar energy system on property located at 6435 Route 55, Windingale, New York, identified as tax parcel 13260-7160-00-55290- quadruple 0 and known as the property uh in the zoning district and aquifer overlay district said parcel totaling approximately 48.3 acres known as the project or proposed action. And whereas the project constitutes a tier 3 solar energy system which is a permitted use in the RU zoning district subject to special permit and site plan approval. And whereas on June 2nd, 2025, the planning board declared its intent to serve as lead agency in a coordinated review of the project under the state environmental quality review act or SRA to which no other agency objected. And whereas on October 20, 2025, the planning board declared itself lead agency. And whereas on March 2nd, 2026, the planning board adopted a positive declaration for the project determining that the project may result in one or more potentially significant adverse environmental impacts. And whereas the applicant submitted a draft scoping document dated March 27, 2026 pursuant to 6NYCRR section 617.8. And whereas the draft scoping uh document was circulated to all involved and interested agencies for comment and a public scoping session was open for comments on May 4, 2026 and closed on May 6, 2026 during which all those who wish to speak were heard and written comments were accepted. And whereas the planning board has considered the draft scoping document submitted by the applicant and comments provided by the planning board and members of the public

and has prepared a revised draft scoping document. dated May 18, 2026. Now therefore, be it resolved that the town's over planning board hereby adopts the final scoping document for the DEIS dated May 18, 2026 for the proposed action. Be it further resolved that a copy of the adopted scoping document shall be circulated by the planning board secretary to the project sponsor, all involved and interested agencies and any person who has expressed an interest in writing. This resolution is being offered by Williams. Member Sedor, seconded by member Williams. Member Williams. Discussion.

Seeing no discussion. Resolution to adopt the final scoping document for the draft impact statement of DEIS for the proposed Windale Solar Project. Secretary, please call the RO. I All right. That resolution passes. a 40 with one absence and one recusal. All right. Uh we await the DEIS.

Sounds good. And then just one coordination question regarding the notice for the noise study. I know the the notice of 48 hour. We'll probably give you more than that. Our consultants should know in advance. Who specifically? And then how I just want to make sure it gets to the right. I think Marilyn is the point of contact for that. She'll get it to all of us, including all the full board and the consultants. Um, and then we'll Joe will work with you to set it up. Appreciate it. Okay. Thank you. Y

Yes. Thank you. Let me go get Paul. I'll get him. All right. Uh, next we have uh GOP Accessory Apartment.

Good evening. You just bring the microphone. Okay, just give me a moment. Okay. Um, all right. So, this is to build a detached accessory apartment within an existing garage

and you're expanding the size of the structure. Okay. Okay. All right. So, please go ahead. Um, okay.

All right. So, um, give me a second. You don't have to apologize. Let me get rid of this. Okay. So, this is the um existing conditions on the property, your house, location of the garage, a metal building, solar panels. Okay. And then um uh so again as you were saying sir uh you're adding on a 16 by 20 piece. I feel like this used to work better. This pointer is not doing much of anything right there. The big black spot. Um that's the So you're adding to the building and then that whole space will be an accessory apartment.

The whole thing. Okay. All right. And let's see. So um we have this building. So uh work has begun to expand. No, we just tore down the other part of it. We had like a lean that we built. Okay. So, we just took that down anticipation that at some point we were going to put it on. So, got but no, nothing else has been done. Okay. So, then so the the building basically it'll look exactly like that just longer longer. Okay.

Same height, same right. So, let me go back to this other Right. All right. So, it'll be added on to this space here. Yes. Okay. All right. Okay. And um any members of the planning board have any comments, questions? No comment. Nope. Okay. All right. Uh whomever would like to go first. I'll start. Yeah.

Uh, so we have an updated memo. Um, new comments are in bold. Um, get it. Which document would that be? Secretary. Oh, let me see. Is it

Where should I look? Right there. 26. Number five. Oh, the memo. Okay. Thank you. All right. So, the last time they were here was the January comments. Uh the italicized the new stuff's in bold. Um the first comment is just indicating that this is a it requires a public hearing. At this point, I feel that you've got enough to set that public hearing because we've they've responded with all our comments,

right? Um for number two, again the architectural review board is applicable. Um they're showing the existing elevation of that building. It's not going to change. Um it's going to be similar to that. They did provide also floor plans that are uh schematic, but still useful to understand the space.

Um so I think you have what you need for the ARB. Um no additional comment on 239M. Comment number five. Um they do have a letter from the health department that approving their septic system. Um it includes the department in addition to the house. Okay. That was dated April 16th. As far as code compliance, um they did uh address the comment. We asked them to just have like a separate site plan drawing that's um separate from the survey. They provided that. That's what that comment was saying. They labeled the garage Um, actually we're asking that they make sure they label the garage on that site plan. Um, and the approximate area of the septic system if I think we'll have time between this meeting and the next one to add those notes on the on the site plan. Not a big deal.

I do have I mean they do have it on the board of health um plan where everything will go. Okay. I know it's not on the site plan or the survey. Well, the survey is separate. Well, the site plan is ultimately going to be signed by the chairman. So, if it has as much information as possible, it would be great. Um, you know, including the just labeling what's there, what's existing, what's proposed. Perhaps they can add the health department additional sheet. I think I have it here.

Yeah, you can see it. I mean, just if you want to visually see where it's on that would be part of the planet, I think just add it. There's another sheet in the set. It's the easiest way to do it. Yeah. Not adding anything. So, uh, this has it that, uh, a 20 by 40. That's the entire garage. I think I see that's the entire space. I think when he did it, he was trying to like he didn't do it separate at the the original one. Okay. He just did the entire what the entire new length would be with the proposed addition to it. Okay.

Yeah, that goes into my next comment perfectly actually, which is not really a comment. Just acknowledging that it's 16 by 20 was the addition, right? And then when you combine it with the existing, it's 40 by 20, so it's 800 square feet. Um, it meets the requirements of the code. Um, applicant provided photographs too to show where how this is going to work. Um, they don't need a variance for floor area. It's all in compliance. Um, okay. I'm just uh just looking at this drawing. Looking for the scale here.

North says, yeah, it says SDS plan. One inch is 50 ft. Uh again, this isn't necessarily to scale. It just seems like this is not the right shape. I don't know what else to say. Like it just seems like it's way too long. It looks long cuz if this is 20, that's clearly not 40. So something wrong here, that's all. Yeah, the footprint doesn't seem to match dimensions. Okay. I'm just saying this is the one that the board of health signed off. This is what they use to get board of health approval. They have a site plan, right? Okay.

Another one. I just I want to make sure we're looking at the right thing here. So, um let's go back to that then.

Right. Yeah. It's much more appropriately sized. Yeah. I think this is the plan that you're going to Right. Okay. Okay. Does the site plan and sign, but having the what was submitted to the board of health as an exhibit to it or an extra sheet, I don't think hurts. Like Joe said, the original and it was handdrawn and this is engineer drawn like I guess I don't know CAD drawn. Yeah. Okay.

Okay. Um, and then we're continuing on to we're still on comment 7B. On the layout, they did provide um a couple of options to the layout, but you know, either one. It's a it's a one-bedroom unit. I guess there could be some tweaks to it as you finalize it, but it's Y it's gonna have a bedroom, a kitchen, a bathroom, and looks like a mud room as well. So, um

uh elevation provided shows it's 15 ft, which complies with the height requirements, and the owner will occupy the property in the main house. So they meet that code requirement also for accessory apartments. Um just one other minor comment eight on the table that was included. We noticed that um minimum lot size should be corrected to 2 acres. And unless the house or another structure is over 35 ft, it's probably just better to say less than 35 ft. I think right now it says greater than. just a typo.

I tried to contact him, but it's all right. I mean, yeah, the board's gonna be not able to take action tonight because they still have to have a public hearing, but between now and the next submission deadline, I think these are easily addressed. Um, all the notes we asked for have been added to the plans. This was already I'm on the last comment now. This was type two for seeker in February. So, recommendations are to set a public hearing. You could also do a sitewalk because you wanted to or you talked about it originally, but there was like a foot of snow on the ground back then, right? First met with them. Okay, that's it. I would have gone. You would have gone. Yes. All right. Um, thank you, Pler. Anything?

That's it. Further engineer Burger or No, the health department signed off and the additional uh building is does go for chapter 65. No, no comments. Okay. Attorney Palado. Uh, we have a resolution tonight uh to classified as type two. I think we did that by motion previously. So, this kind of documents it. Sure. Um, we also have it to be referred to the Dutch County Department of Planning, but I'm because it's a special permit. We're not sure it's needed, but Oh, we have that. And I know the roadway comes off of a county road, right?

Um, yeah. Yeah. Uh, okay. We thought it didn't require it. Yeah, that's Did we change that? Well, I'm not sure because if it was site plan, it doesn't I don't know. I We have to look at the I don't think it meets IMA. Yeah, I just don't think it met the location requirements to be referred. I thought it was within 500 ft. But either way, it it authorizes Maryland to send it in the event that it I can check within the 500 ft. Okay. I can check with the referral thingy, the Duchess County referral identifier.

That's So is it the property is within 500 feet? Well, the access is, right? Is is route Yeah. Is that a county road? This is a county road here. Halls Corners Road. Yeah. So, this is a private road to That's part of their lot, right? What? This is the lot. Oh, that's the lot. That's our driveway. And then I see. So, the roadway goes across this property and then up this shar. This is the road. But is but is the lot within 500 ft? No, I think it is. No, we checked that. Okay. So then we don't need the referral. What's the address again?

696 ft. Okay. All right. Okay. So we don't need to do number two. Yeah, we're confirming. Yeah, I'm trying to find. So, the Duchess County Planning has this thing called a referral identifier, which is pretty nifty. Okay. You put in the address and it tells you what the qual if it has qualifiers, but the address isn't coming up for me. So, no, me neither. Um, possible within Let's keep doing the same thing here. Uh, is it possible proximity to an agricultural number instead? Hold on. You have to put Cedar Berry because one says lane and one says road.

Yeah, I'm just going to put the lot number in. So it is it is just outside of the referral boundary, right? So we do not need to do the second part. Thank you. Okay. Yeah, we checked that originally. It's just been a while. So Okay. We'll take that out of the resolution, Marilyn, and send it back to you. Okay. So just the first resolved, I guess you. Yep. Just the first one. All right. Um and then we'll also set a we'll also set a public hearing for the next meeting. All right. Any members of the planning board have any comments, questions at this time? None here. Okay. All right. Let's bring this up.

All right. Resolution to classify the action and refer the applicant. So just resol resolution to classify the action.

Resolution to classify the action. Graph Accessory Department. Whereas the applicants, Tiffany and Joe uh GOP uh have submitted an application for a minor special use permit with site plan approval to allow the construction of a 16x20 addition uh to an existing garage and the conversion of that space into an 800 ft single bed room accessory apartment known as the project on property located at 47 Cedar Lane over Plains identified as tax parcel number 7063-00-014-690 in the RC zoning district known as of property. And whereas the project is depicted on a site plan entitled site plan prepared for GOP uh dated June January 9, 2026, revised April 7, 2026 and prepared by Brian Hston Houston, Inc. Sheet 101. And whereas accessory apartments are permitted subject to issuance of a special use permit in the RC zoning district. And whereas pursuant to section 145-12C of the town of Dover zoning law, one accessory apartment per single family dwelling unit uh sorry single single family dwelling may be located in accessory structure or principal building and the accessory apartment shall not be counted as a residential unit for purposes of determining density. And whereas pursuant to section 145-12C of the town of Dover zoning law, no special permit shall be granted for an accessory department without approval or certification from the Dutch County Department of Health on the adequacy of the septic system. And whereas the Dutch County Department of Health has approved septic system in a letter dated April 16, 2026. Uh and whereas the applicant has submitted a short environment assessment form or EAF dated January 13, 2026 pursuant to the state environmental quality review act or SRA and whereas in accordance with SER planning board is required to determine the class and the classification of the proposed project

and whereas pursuant to 6 NYCRR section 617.5 subsection C subsection 11 construction or expansion of single family two family or three family residence It's a type two action. And whereas and now therefore be resolved that the planning board hereby classifies the project as a type two action under SRA. This resolution is being offered by so moved

member Palmer, seconded by member Loadier. Discussion. Seeing no discussion, all in favor of the secretary, please call the role. Williams I, I chair I. That resolution passes 50 with one absence. Uh, I need a motion to set a public hearing for the graph accessory department uh for June 1st at 7 p.m. or soon thereafter as the public may be heard. Motion made by Palmer, second by member Sedor. Discussion.

No discussion. All those in favor say I. I. I. Any post say no. Okay, that motion passes 5 Z with one absence. Okay, so um need to get a public hearing sign from the secretary. Uh we had discussed having a sitewalk. Um it's really up to all of you. Doesn't seem necessary. I mean adding on to it. Building is already there. And if you want to go, we can go. Anybody want to go? No. No. I I want No offense. I want snow and five below. Okay, they don't go. Amber Palmer wants to delay your uh action for six months, but Oh, no.

Okay. Well, so uh we don't need to have a sidewalk. I mean, I don't think it's required. So, anything further regarding his application? I mean, no, now that you've cleared up the issue with the the footprints, I don't think there's right a reason. Yeah, seems pretty straightforward. Okay. Um, so yeah, just um check in with uh Secretary VMillan the next day or two. Get a sign. You post it uh because at the it's on a it's on a property at the end of like a private road. Should they should they post it out by the county road or at their corner of their property? Yeah, we probably just post the road sign like the street, right?

Because there's like one visible house and then you can't see, right? people driving, right? It looks like just some It looks like one house a house with where Yeah. Yeah. You can't see anything else. Um I can put it at the top of the road. The road that you use Cedarberry Laneberry by the county road. That's the best probably just I mean no one ever did it, but just so no one could be like, "Oh, I had no idea and I really wanted to say something." But just better safe than Okay. Uh thank you. Thank you.

Thank you. All right. Um, all right. Next is Lake Ellis Country in. Right. Country in. Um,

okay. Welcome back.

All right, good to see you all again. All right. So, we have the uh site plan set here. All right. We did end up discussing this uh a bit last meeting just because we discussed the sitewalk and so we ended up discussing a few other things, but you just want to run us through it and

Yeah. Okay. So, just a quick recap. Uh this is a 236 acre parcel in the RU zoning district. The applicant is proposing to convert two existing structures into lodging structures with the main house being converted into a 12 unit lodging facility and the lakehouse annex being converted into a six-bedroom lodging facility.

Um, and I say lodging facility loosely. This is a country in where we're proposing it. Whereas the lodging facility is not so much your regular transient uses but more people coming out to the site for a private retreat, family function, things of that nature. Um nothing new has been submitted. We briefly discussed uh all the additional items that we provided EAF a statement um event data. Uh so I think the one of note bringing up again is the event data. So, we put a maximum event occupancy for this site at 200 people. The applicant really doesn't have any intention to have that as a primary focus. The really the goal is to just have this available for say an outdoor wedding, but the applicant has other facilities that they would want those guests to be using and having those events at. So, really this is more for retreat focused small groups. we just wanted to leave it open.

Um, so one of the items that we did is identify grass overflow parking. Um, and I know Aaron has a few more comments on that which I'll happily address when we get to that point. But everything else we've pretty much addressed with our site plan revisions and I'm happy to answer any more comments. Okay. Okay. So earlier when you were saying about it being uh uh lodging and transient it and trying to draw a distinction. You're trying to the distinction you're trying to draw is that it's not hotel lodging like oh I want a room. It's you're renting out the building. Yeah. Like a holiday in. People come in, they'll stay for the night and immediately leave. This is we want to rent a nice space for our family. Family reunion or something. Could be a weekend, could be a week. Exactly. Could be a family. Could be a business.

Right. But again, not that. Oh, I'll take room five. Yeah. So, again, that's a perfect point because the lodging units really aren't intended to be rented out individually. It's more you rent the whole space, you get the whole space, right? Sort of deal, right? You might separate it out into we'll take the 12 or the six or both. Right. Yeah. There's But not I'll have one room in this one, someone else has a room in the other one. Exactly. Yep.

Okay. Um and then also on the you know having larger events there and it's not the intention of the land owner. I mean it it could be that sometime in the future this property sold and then it has the ability to have these larger events. So what is um like a you know for other projects like this we've had um you know a limitation on the number of events per year. I don't know if you've discussed that with your applicant. I don't think there's any limitation. Again, the I think the primary focus is that because any of these large events would be supported by outdoor facilities, a giant tent, outdoor dance floor, right?

Your your restriction in the when those events occur and how many is really weather dependent. Mhm. Will there will there be multiple events at one unit, one location? In other words, there's two different houses here. Will there be two different No, I I think that's well beyond what the applicant's intending. Again, he we just want to reserve the option because it's a beautiful space. You've all been out there. So, to have that view of the lake, it be a really nice place to have an outdoor wedding, right? But again, that is not his intention. He has other facilities that are better suited that have indoor event space with outdoor patios, like TMR facility, which actually is designed to accommodate those events.

Right. So again, there's no intention to have really it's limited to have one event. Really no intention to have more than one going on at any time. Okay, that was a good question. That was a good question, Williams. So I mean it could be that the 12 guest bedroom seeing the space there, you could certainly have a wedding for 40 50 people within within that building. Some of them stay there, some of them don't. There's a kind of a grand foyer. You could probably hold a wedding 40 people. Okay. But the concern then I think might be that you know in the future if there's just an approval for this to have events without any kind of limitation. Someone in the future could say oh I could make this into a weekend wedding venue that every weekend they just have a tent that's temporary but never goes away and always has you know a wedding there. And this is, you know, where the because it like it actually reminds me of where my wife and I had our wedding up near Platsburg where it kind of looks like this.

Um, but the big difference there is that that was off of a state roadway where this is off of a a a town dirt road. So, um, okay. Uh, any other members of the plane board have any comments, questions at this time? No comment. Nope. Nope.

Okay. Um All right. Let's go to uh planner Warner first. Okay. So um a lot of these have been addressed or there's no further comment. I guess we'll let me just look at the uh we did ask them to submit the full EAF because this is a major project and they submitted the short form originally. So they did submit that long form EF as required by the code. That's comment three.

Um comment four, this does require referral to the county. I think it's ready for that now at this point. We've gotten the application materials. We asked for some additional information on the plan. some answers to uh that's because there's a property within 500 ft of a farm operation of the farm of a yeah of a farm operation in the a district. Okay. Yep. So that will be that can be referred um if you're ready to do that. Mhm.

You did submit the a data statement as required by the application. Um number six is ARB. The buildings aren't changing. You've been out there. You've seen how they look from the exterior. So, I think from as far as architectural review requirements, um there's not much else. They uh I don't think we've seen a floor plan. Again, it's not it's not required by the by the code for ARB. It's more exterior elevations. Um but the understanding is that the main house already has the layout. Um and they're making those into guest rooms. Um and the garage, they're just adding they're reconfiguring that. But you know, you can ask for those. Um, this didn't provide those. Uh, number seven is on the uh erosion sentiment control. Uh, according to Joe, and he can speak to it more like the area of disturbance isn't triggering the um anything permitting wise. Um, moving on to the site plan comment eight. Uh, we did ask them to clarify the zoning district. So they did add the uh that there's no there's no structures in the RU district currently. Um number nine goes into each of the requirements for site plans um and supplementary regulations from the code. A lot of these are met. No further comment. I'll scroll down to uh G which is talks about events which the applicant just alluded to a little. So, um, they don't they're not saying they're going to have more than 500 that would trigger a large event management plan. They're saying they're going to be well below that and probably maximum of 200 um at a time when those events happen. So, again, you've have it's a special permit, so you do have the ability to to add

conditions regarding the number of events. Um, you've done that on other projects of this type,

right? Uh H under the same comment uh has to do with the planning board's ability to allow um increases in footprints up to 20,000 square feet for the RC district. Um in this case the both buildings the main house and the other the garage structure um is about 8,500 square feet. So, per the code, if you go over 4,000, you just have to ask for a waiver um from the planning board for that, and that's what they're asking for. Uh I is lighting. From what we can tell, there's no new lighting proposed. What's out there is staying. There's existing um 9 10 foot tall lamp posts that are not changing. Um and they're pretty far away from neighboring parts. Um J, uh the kitchen will be indoors. Um noise and order from the kitchen shouldn't be a nuisance to other properties. Let's see. K, uh has to do with the fire department, which we did say at the last meeting when moving down to see the zoning boundaries we asked for. Um the applicant is asking for a waiver from showing the trees uh 8 in or more in diameter because they're not proposing to remove any. There's no additional disturbance proposed outside of the core area. The site has already been disturbed. Um they're working in the septic system areas mainly which are as Joel will say, you know, they're not it's not a large enough area that triggers any permitting issues. They're not removing.

Um, no just no additional landscaping plans because what's out there is what's remaining. Um, existing conditions already disturbed and they are adding silt fences around the area of work for the septic system. Talked about the floor plans. Um, we don't have any for the garage that can be asked for if you so desire. Um, it's really just site plan elevations or the minimum requirements. My question was, were all six bedrooms on the second floor of that garage or was it the garage space as a garage was going to be used for? That I'd have to check. Rich would know better than

I wasn't sure it was going to be like three and three or all six for up top and it was still going to be a garage on the bottom. Yeah, I'm not sure. I can follow up on that. Okay, that was like the only Okay. thought there. Next comment is on parking number 14. Um, so they they did update the plan to show overflow where that would go. Um, it's along the grass, um, along the driveway in a flat area. Seems like it would work. Um, so they have a total of 81 spaces now. Um, sorry, 81 overflow and 24 um that are already they've already provided.

Mhm. So, the applicant calculated the parking to be 103 spaces and they're proposing 105 including the overflow. Um, how they came up with that calculation is on the plan set. I included the screenshot of how they came up with it.

Um, basically um the 80 spaces that they calculated for large events um are based on an average of 160 guests and they assume at least two people per car. Um, if you want to zoom in on that screenshot, it gets into the how they calculated the guest bedroom requirements. So, it's basically one space per bedroom for the guest, 12 guest bedrooms. So, that's 12 spaces. And the annex, same thing, six. One space per unit is six. And then for employees, they have five. Um and then for the banquet event usage if um is based on a like I said 160 average with two people per car. Um and they also did some trip some preliminary trip generation calculations for us that our traffic folks looked at and I'll get to those in a minute. Um so the total requirements 103 and they're providing 105.

So I know that from being there there's already the existing parking area. Is there an existing ADA spot or does that need to be painted? Yeah, we have it proposed to be striped in there. Okay. So, it's going to be right near the front entrance, right? Right over here. So, that's not painted there currently. Okay. That's what Yeah, that was my question. I know there was I know there's parking there and I thought I remembered lines. I just couldn't remember if there was already an ADA spot. So, okay. Okay. Uh 15. Uh again, just on the elevations, the applicant provided photos. I think those are suitable for what's out there, what's going to be there.

Um that 16 is on the uh referral to the fire department, which is recommended.

Mhm. Um they did provide a narrative on the special permit findings as well which we'll get you know when it comes time to take action we'll go through those and uh discuss those um deferring to Joe on the engineering stuff and on the events again we talked about it um they updated their narrative to show 200 guests anticipate um they updated their narrative to show 200 guests anticipated for a large event and things brought in, you know, portable bathrooms, tents, etc., right?

And we have overflow parking now adequately shown. Okay. So, on the seeker side, um there were flags in the EF mapper. We don't think those are concern just based on the nature of this application. It's all happening in an area that's been disturbed in the center of the property. Um so, no concerns about endangered species. Same thing with wetlands. We talked about that. Scrolling down to the next comment. Um, so we did bring up traffic and noise as two areas of focus in the initial comments. The first in response to the just questioning, you know, the concern with noise and where things are going to be. Um, you know, on water, usually the sound is amplified when you're on a lake. Um, so just things that we've had other applications in this area over the years like Camp Bergkshire and Camp Rama that had folks come out in public hearings to voice concerns about noise. Right.

This isn't really the same type of intensity. Which letter is noise? I'm not seeing Oh, I'm sorry. It's uh B, page seven. The long comments. It's the second paragraph down. Yeah. Second paragraph about I see I see now driving.

So their response was that um due to the infrequency of events you're not anticipating impacts. They're going to comply with chapter 107 of the code. Um we think that's reasonable. I mean given the size of the site and how far away this is going to be from from the neighbors based on the size of the property because this is a special permit. There can be conditions um related to noise concerns including like where locations of music can be. You know, if there's going to be an event, maybe not by the lake, have the tent closer to the house. Um right, the speakers are pointing away from the lake. Speakers point away from the lake, right? Things like that.

Um and then with regard to traffic, uh they did some calculations. Our traffic engineers looked at them. They thought they were reasonable based on the IT standards and um it's less than 100 cars in a peak hour running a scenario of a 200 person event. Um we don't think there's going to be traffic issues. However, just the condition of the road is an issue or just something to think about and maybe have some input on from uh the fire department, maybe the highway department given that you've done that for other projects. U most recently Harlem Valley Homestead which is a similar um dirt road entering getting to the site is this is similar like that's the end of the line for um old forge this is the end of the line for the most part for this road right so

yeah this is the last it's the last use thing on that road old forge had a few houses past that's true it did but yeah and again there is a difference that harm homestead was intending and having a lot more people, certain number of weddings, more people, a lot more units, 42. Yeah. Again, the point I was making earlier is that properties get sold if it has an approval to have 200 person events, someone could I'm uncomfortable with the review being based on the term infrequent because I'm saying like it's not measurable. I would

I think if the board is going to say that impacts are minimal because of frequency, we should have a number that's enforcable or we have to plan for like a worst case scenario where there's events three times a weekend because otherwise there's nothing to stop that. Okay. Yeah. My point is that right the next owner could just take the approval that this would have and say, "Oh, I can have an event every weekend with 200 people." So what I'm saying is I think what needs to happen is you know again um that there needs to be some yes numerical limitation but I I don't know if you could say infrequent but

well I think the applicant's representative should talk to his client about what you know the seasonal nature of this like maybe come up with a number that that makes sense that he's comfortable with um we can go with that right I mean yeah I you know I don't four a year, one a month. I don't, you know, I I'm not I'm not saying what it should be. I'm just saying there should be something. What I was getting to, again, I I believe what you're saying. I know who you're, you know, everyone knows who your client is. Clarify. Yeah. Because it could be 10, 20 years from now that property gets sold and someone buys it and says, "Hey, this is my new every weekend wedding venue." So,

yeah, that's a good that's a valid valid point. Also, I mean, and with that, I think you you probably want locations where the tent can be and maybe where it can't be based on, you know, maybe the fire department can't get to it if it's one location, but they can if it's another. So, maybe two or three different tent locations. Notes about the speakers and noise mitigation, right? And again, also, I mean, again, just thinking about this more, I just in anticipation of a public hearing, there could be people who live along or next to Lake Ellis Road who might then hear about this and be like, "Oh, this could be something that jams up my road like or nearby roads like these other places already do and it's just going to get worse." So, uh, again, just

anticipating what the public might say. So, just wrapping that comment up, just the concern is just, you know, there's some spots on the road where it's pretty narrow. It seems like it would be challenging for two-way traffic and emergency access. So, I think, you know, having it referred to both the fire department and down highway super thoughts would be a good idea. You've done it before. Yeah. Again, it's not as intense project. And again, I think the some of the difference here is it's at the end of the road. There is some narrow spot that I can kind of picture in my mind. I can't exactly point to it on a map, but I would think for an event, most people would be coming. Yep. And then later, most people would be going. Not that there'd be so much cross. True.

Traffic, but depends on how Yeah. If there's, you know, how long folks rent it out for and the event's over and they're still there and but again, it's not right. Not a lot of traffic, but if there's an event and emergency folks have to get there. I don't think there's issues with flooding on this road like there was with the other project, but um I saw some photos from Yeah, I'm not familiar with any flooding along I saw some photos from the sidewalk from Corey when she took she took some photos driving in. There's some spots where like there's a tree like right up against the road. I know there's this like there's a stream that goes by a neighborhood near there that

has flooded, you know, kind of over got its banks, but that was into people's yards, not into not into the roadway itself is my recollection. So, different conditions, but just for um you know, precedent and just being consistent between applications, I think it makes sense to have that referral happen.

Okay. Um and then on the archaeology, we don't have any concerns with that. I mean, the area um is already disturbed. So if there's sensitivity there, it's um it's not in this part of the site where the activity will be. Um yeah, so the recommendations are to make those referrals, do the county referral, you can do a fire department referral and for fire company referral, I should say. Yes. Highway super. um on issues on operational and emergency access and then you can also schedule a public hearing for the next meeting.

Okay. And just to to clarify on the road bit, so again it is similar to old the homestead, but it is pretty much very different because this is a dead end, right? And that there is no real between the applicants property. There's only one other land owner and that's Camp Rama, right? So at that point really there's no there really would never be any through traffic and then if there is there are at least two turnaround spots. One at the Camp Rama entrance and then there's an applicant control turnaround spot right in front of the gate for the applicant property.

And I mean again I'm not I'm not sure what has happened more recently. I do believe that's kind of the the auxiliary entrance to Camp Brahma and not the entrance that they normally do. Yeah. So, yeah. No, I I agree. It's certainly it's it's similar to Harle Homestead. It's not the same. Um and again, I understand the intention of the applicant is not to have nearly any number of events as Harvey Homestead intended. um and that you know it doesn't have the same number of uh transient units as Horn Valley Homestead. Uh again, it's just that an approval goes on forever.

We I see this I mean all the time enforcement something is approved by one owner and then it morphs and it morphs and it morphs and when it becomes a problem there's nothing to there's not enough information in the approval to kind of peel it back. Yeah. And again, if you're, you know, your applicant is saying we'll have four events a year, then we approve four events a year, I would think. But, you know, if we don't approve anything, then it's open, it's open season. Yeah. I'll I'll go back to him and I'll ask about number events and put a plat or does a site plan go on there. I mean, and if not, that's fine. If he wants to have events every weekend, but then I think we need to review it as a different intention and the site can't do it. So, we're just not going to propose an every weekend sort of thing,

right? Yeah. Again, I don't know that 20 additional cars for, you know, a 50 person wedding would be so noticeable. I mean, you could have someone could have, you know, a graduation party at their house nearby and they have 20 cars coming or 50 people. So, it's not like it's, you know, it's maybe maybe it's it's um when you think through it, it's a difference between mediumsiz events and largecale outdoor events because it's the outdoor ones that I think generate the most. Well, right. That's what I'm saying. You know, you can fit 4050 people in that building. No one would, you know, would probably notice that there was an additional 20 cars that hour.

Really? I just I don't want to complicate the application because again this is we're steering away from what the applicant even really wants to do over there. This is not a large event space. It's just the ability to have the outdoors. Sure. And I'll happily go back talk to him about frequencies. Right. We'll get a site plan note but I just don't think it warrants anything more than a discussion of that level. Okay. Thanks. Right. Yeah. But I think you understand our perspective. Okay. Thank you. Yeah. And as far as the referral to the highway and fire company, it's just a recommendation. It's board's decision, but Okay. Thank you, Planner Warner. Engineer Burger, you had a few things.

Um the uh disturbance for the septic system and septic tanks is under half an acre, under the 200 yards, is far enough away from the lake so the water uh portion of the chapter 65 doesn't uh come into play. So there's no reason to have a chapter 65. They are certainly under the 1 acre storm water for the state. So that's not relevant. You're going to health department for not only for your septic approval but for your water system approval. So that's under the health department. That'll be conditions of approval, right? And there's no uh other than the septic in the uh septic tank, there's no other improvements being proposed. The striping of the

handicap is not really a disturbance. That's just striping paint and that's about it. So nothing else. Okay. And so the disturbance that we saw um through the uh Dutch County aerial access was just clearing away the brush so that the septic work could happen. Is that what it was? Clearing that was done because the applicant's son was getting he was having his wedding there. Oh, right. They didn't want a bunch of stuff. Yeah. So they cleared up some of the brush and then we actually did um a septic investigation for the existing system. Yeah. So it was the deep test you dug. It was more than that cuz we had to uncover the whole system.

Yeah. They had to Yeah. They investigate the existing system and dug holes, dug tests and that was all that was your disturbance was your engineering investigation of your septic system which the improvements of the septic system would still have to occur. They have not occurred yet. Yeah. Those are all proposed. Okay. Yes. But nothing would exceed uh any um no. Okay. And the disturbance used for investigating for septic doesn't go underneath of a permit required because that's part of your engineering evaluation. Got it.

Okay. Uh thank you, engineer Burger. Uh Attorney Palado. I already chimed in while everyone else was speaking, but just for me just making sure we have the right information on the plans about uh what the actual use is going to be. Right. Right. Okay. And this is just referring to event frequency, right? Well, because all the uses are listed. I just want to know. Yeah. I think the the outdoor events for me is are is what I expect to generate uh neighbor complaints in the future. Yeah, possibly.

Possibly. I mean, it's Camp Rama and Camp Birkier and then I know has the amphitheater right on the lake and Birkshere I live next door to them and I listen their drums till 11:00 and and we've heard and we've heard complaints about all of those things. Yeah. So, me I like the drums. Well, but but this just happens to be an area where complaints are made. Um, so just thinking that through. So the outdoor I think locations and any kind of mitigation techniques that you can use to keep noise away from the leak would be helpful.

Okay. All right. Uh, members of the planning board, having heard from our consultants, any further comments, questions at this time? Nope. Okay. All right. All right. So, we have a resolution to classify the action and declare intent to serve as lead agency in a coordinated secret review. And then we'll also have some other um referrals. All right. A resolution classifying the action declaring intent to serve as lead agency in a coordinated secret review Lake Ellis Country in. Whereas the applicant uh Chipala Properties, Inc. has submitted application to redevelopment a single family home into a hospitality venue with 18 guest rooms on property located at 316 through 349 Lake Ellis Road, Wingdale, New York. identified as tax parcel 132-60-71-61-00-586740-0000 the property in the RUNRC zoning district and Oxer overlay district totaling approximately 236.9 acres also known as a project and whereas a country in is a permitted use in the RU and RC zoning district subject to special permit and site plan approval and whereas the project is depicted a site plan, sorry, on a set of plans entitled Lake Ellis Country in 316-349 Lake Ellis Road, Dutch County, New York, prepared by Renie Engineering Design PLC, dated uh 218 2026, last revised 429 2026 sheets 1 through 4, also known as the site plan set. And whereas the applicant has submitted part one of a full environmental assessment form or EAF dated 429 20226

with supplemental narrative uh dated 218 2026 and revived revised 419 sorry 429 2026 pursuant to state environment quality review act or SRCA and whereas in accordance with SRA the planning board is required to determine the classification of the proposed project and whereas pursuant to 6NYCRR section 617 7.4 and 6 NYC RR section 617.5. A project that involves activities not classified as type one or type two is an unlisted action and whereas the planning board of the town of Dover has performed a preliminary review of the application materials. Now therefore be it resolved that the planning board hereby one classifies the project as an unlisted action. Two declares its intent to serve as lead agency in a coordinated s review and directs its secretary to circulate notice of its intent to serve as lead agency to all involved and interested agencies. And three, direct its secretary to refer the application to the Duchess County Planning Department pursuant to section 239-m of the general municipal law. This resolution is being offered by

so moved sedor seconded by second member Palmer discussion. Oh if you just scroll down to the involved and interested agencies I just want to make sure. So yes so we have as part of this when we send the seeker circulation it'll go to JH Ketchum hose and to the highway department

um and that will be their opportunity to provide comments. Okay. Okay. You anything further? Okay. Uh seeing no comments or questions from any planning board members. Uh resolution classifying the action uh and declaring intent to serve as lead agency in a coordinated secret review for Lake Ellis Country in. Secretary, please call the role. I I

that resolution passes 5-0 with one absence. Okay. And I don't think we have anything further for this application this evening. Would the board be willing to entertain to uh authorize legal to begin drafting an approval resolution on this? Everything seems minor and then if there are tweaks to the notes that we're going to provide, I feel like they can happen pretty quick pretty fre or pretty fast or as part of final site plan approval because I don't really anticipate any major changes on this project.

Right. I mean, we have 30 days to go to the county planning anyways and the 30-day clock on the seeker, right? Right. We would like to be able to hit that 30-day deadline if there's no other comments we need to address, be able to move that along. I mean, it's up to the board. They often like to wait to see if there's public comment and get the comments back, but Right. Yeah. So, again, I'm happy to. I just if it's going to be circulated to the neighbors, it's neighbor pretty much being circulated to the applicant in Camp Rama.

So, I just I don't really anticipate significant public comment. If there is, we'll address it when it comes, but I just don't think there's any reason to hold back at least beginning to draft the resolution.

So, I don't need to be authorized in any event. I usually start drafting so when the board's ready, we have it. Yeah. So that's not Yeah, I don't think we've ever had an application held up because we were waiting on a resolution to be drafted. Um, anything further? That's it. Okay. Thank you. All right. Thank you very much, everyone. Thank you. Thank you. We didn't set a public hearing. Oh, yeah. Did we set a public hearing? We did not. No point. You stepped away from the podium. I think we're done. I didn't step away. had one foot is basketball rules still applies. It's just a pivot.

Uh well, we're waiting on uh Secret and the county. I mean, we could set it for second meeting in June. You have the second meeting in June. Second meeting in June. That would be uh June 15th. Yeah, June 15th. Okay. Um it's still not 30. You could get responses back. Yeah, that's how I think like we might have have to continue the public hearing at that point, but motion to set a public hearing for Lake Ellis Country in uh for June 15th at 7 p.m. or as soon thereafter the public can be heard. Motion made by So moved. Member Williams. Second.

Seconded by member Palmer. Discussion. Seeing no discussion, all in favor of setting a public hearing as I stated, say I. I. I. Any oppose say no. That motion passes 5-0 with one absence. So see Secretary Van Millan to get your sign. Now this is traveling basketball rules. Sorry. All right. Uh I guess the sign should go at the end of the property. Who would see this sign? signs go at the end of the property on the private road that you

kind of serves as a private driveway. Yeah, at some point it's a private road. All right, thank you. Thanks everyone. All right, our next meetings are June 1st for which the deadline has already passed and then June 15th with a deadline of May 27th. Uh any further business before the planning board? All right. Motion to adjurnn. Seconded by second door. All those in favor of German say I. I. I. We're returned.