Planning Board - Regular Meeting

Thank you.

It's broken. That's why.

OK. OK. Yes, we're on. I call the meeting to order. This is the July 6, 2026 meeting of the planning board. Please rise for the Pledge of Allegiance.

I 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,

Minutes I'll take a motion first to appoint you as vice chair. What's that motion? Oh I say that I Make I make a motion to appoint Valerie lower dear as vice chair acting acting vice chair Pro Tem

All those in favor. Second. All those in favor.

Aye.

Okay. Has everyone had a chance to review the minutes of the last meeting?

Yes. Yes. Yes.

I'll offer a resolution to approve the minutes. All those in favor? Second Second All those in favor aye The minutes are approved as written First order of business is a public hearing on the Lake Ellis country in We have a motion to call the public hearing to order so moved second Favor aye Okay

Good to see you all again. For the public's benefit, I'm just gonna do a very quick rundown. So what we have here is a special use permit for a country and a conference center. It's on a parcel of 236 acres. The applicant is proposing to convert two existing structures into temporary lodging facilities, the main house with 12 units and the guest house annex with six. Since we last met, we pretty much checked off all our boxes, the highway department signed off on it, fire department signed off on our improvements, and we submitted a new large event note, which is going to be proposed for the site plan as part of the final assignment. So with that, I'm happy to answer any of the board's questions on a note or a plan or anything that they have. So with that, that's it.

Does anyone have any questions on the board?

No.

No question.

No, I'm happy with the revisions.

Do the consultants have any comments? So we had a question. Can you just confirm that an event is limited to a single day? An event is not defined in and of itself.

Oh, so you would specify a day. Yes.

Well, I'm asking if that's an invention. So, I mean, if that's the intent, I would like something just to say that event, you know, an event is no more than 24 hours.

Okay. We can easily amend that just a day, 24 hours, something like that.

Okay.

Any other comments? Any comments by the author?

If there's no public comments and we close the hearing, we can move on to the seeker stuff, but I'll wait until that happens.

Okay. There's no no comments from the public. So we will go ahead and. Move on to the resolution. Oh, we have to close the public so moved.

Second.

All those in favor I. We have a resolution to adopt a negative declaration and grant site plan approval and special use permit approval. And the resolution has been reviewed by the planning board members. And we'll read the important part of the resolution.

No?

Yeah, we can do that. But before we vote, I do want to go through the EAF while Marilyn's bringing it up.

But let's go through the resolution. You want to go through the resolution first? Yeah, we can do that. Part two? Now, therefore, be it resolved that for the reasons set forth in parts two and three of the FEAF, which are incorporated herein, the planning board hereby issues a negative declaration determining that the project will not result in any significant adverse environmental impacts and that the draft environmental impact statement will not be prepared. Be it therefore resolved that the planning board makes the following findings pursuant to section 145-63 of the town code. The project complies with all land use district, overlay district, and other specific requirements of the zoning law and other local laws and regulations and will be consistent with the purposes of the zoning law and the applicable zoning districts. A country inn is a permitted use on the property. Two, the project will not result in excessive off-premises noise, dust, odors, solid waste, or glare, or create any public or private nuisances. Due to the infrequency of events, no impacts related to noise are anticipated. The proposed project will comply with Chapter 107 of the Town Code due to the size of the property and the distance between the central core and the property lines, as well as the lakefront. Through notes included in the site plan set, the applicant will place temporary facilities within existing established mowed lawn areas and not within 50 feet of any property lines, and will position any noise amplification devices utilized during occasional events in a manner that faces away from Ellis Pond. The project will not cause significant traffic congestion, impair pedestrian safety, or overload existing roads, considering their current width, surfacing, and condition, and any improvements proposed to be made to them by the applicant. The project will limit the number of guests on the property during large events defined as events with at least 150 attendees to 200 people and limit the number of large events to 15 per year. The J.H. Ketchum Host Company Incorporated and Town Highway Department have reviewed the project plans and have no concerns. Three, the project will be accessible to fire, police, and other emergency vehicles. The project was reviewed by J H Ketchum host company incorporated and the town highway department and all comments, concerns related to access parking and the condition of Lake Ellis road have been addressed. The site plan set includes areas dedicated to overflow parking to be used during events, which have been determined to be adequate for The project will not overload any public water drainage or sewer system or any other municipal facility. The project will utilize existing private onsite systems for water, storm water drainage, and waste water disposal. Five. The project will not materially degrade any water course, wetland or other natural resource or ecosystem or endanger the water quality of an aquifer. The property is already developed and planned alterations to the property do not involve significant site disturbances. The applicant has determined that the work proposed in the core area of the property related to septic system upgrades is outside of the property's wetlands and the 100-foot adjacent area for those wetlands. This is confirmed through review of the topography on the plans and observations made during the planning board site visit. Six. The project will be suitable for the property on which it is proposed considering the property's size, location, topography, vegetation, soils, natural habitat, and hydrology, and its ability to be buffered or screened from neighboring properties and public roads. The project is centrally located on a large parcel, and the distance and forested areas of the parcel provide some buffering and screening from adjoining properties. Due to the siting of the elements of the project and the fact that there is limited amount of additional disturbances to the property, the project will be suitable for the site. Seven, the project will be subject to such conditions on operation, design, and layout of structures and provision of buffer areas as may be necessary to ensure compatibility with surrounding uses and to protect the natural, historic, and scenic resources of the town. Due to the infrequency of events, no impacts related to noise are anticipated. The proposed project will comply with Chapter 107 of the Town Code due to the size of the property and the distance between the central core and the property lines, as well as the lakefront. Through notes included on the site plan set, the applicant will place temporary facilities within existing established mown lawn areas and not within 50 feet of any property line and will position any noise amplification devices utilized during occasional events in a manner that faces away from Ellis Pond. Eight, the project will not adversely affect the availability of... sign the site plan set after compliance with the following conditions one payment of all fees and escrow two revision of the site plan set to include the outdoor event notes I would recommend that that last note just have this additional language added that says with additional language limiting each event to no more than 24 hours

So that would just get added to the notes. So before the board goes to vote, if there's any discussion, you can have it, but we need to go through the Seeker EAF form, part two. You had it up before.

I know I had.

Here it is. So Planner Warner.

Go through it, quick. You wanna quickly go through. So the categories that had a yes checked off for the main question were impact on land, groundwater, just gonna scroll through the larger thing.

But where you're checking yes, you're recommending anything else?

Yeah, where you check yes, you go through the sub-questions. So rather than going through each one, I think we can just go through the ones where that's been confirmed. Noise, order, and light. That's it so if we go back to the top Impact on land is yes, just because there's there is alteration happening at the site, but all that is being done Was to upgrade the septic system around the main house in the garage, so there's really no other site disturbance So everything that's the sub questions are all not applicable or no or small impact. So that's how that was filled out Any questions on that one? So if we go down to surface waters was checked no just because even though this wetlands on the site we're nowhere near them, you know, there's no disturbance happening within a 100 feet of them so check no for that. For number 4 groundwater. It's a yes just because the useful will use groundwater. And there already is a well there. It's got Department of Health oversight. They're already upgrading the septic system. So all these things are no or small impact below the main question. Moving along. Down to the noise, odor, and light. When I get there, hang on. Let's just get to it.

Yep.

Okay, number 15 so Right now it's a scene. It's basically a single-family house in the garage. It's being converted into Lodging units for a country and special permit so there will be increases in noise There really won't be any increase in outdoor lighting odors I don't believe there'll be a significant increase either because it's not like a commercial kitchen or anything like that So it's really just noise is like the potential issue for only when there's large events and Given the nature of the property, it's a very large property, over 200 acres. This core area is where the events would be. It's already very far away from property lines. I don't think there's going to be an issue complying with the town code for noise. within the distance of the property lines the applicants committed to orient any speakers or noise generating equipment away from the pond because you know as you know noise can travel over water faster and louder so turning those things away from the pond and I guess towards the north would be required through the site plan notes so you know that's enforceable by the town as well because it's part of the notes so having looked through all the questions you know there's no blasting proposed there's no other real disturbance they're not proposing any new outdoor lighting what's there is remaining I just put no or small impact for all those sub questions that's pretty much the extent of the questions that required initial discussion everything else was a no because it just isn't applicable or

So part three was prepared, which it's very similar to the findings, the special use permit findings, if you just want to pull up the part three.

So part three itself, the form just has a reference to the standalone negative declaration, which I made a separate document. because it we elaborate on all the different questions that need to be elaborated on. So just references that separate document includes the box check for unless it action noting that we've got parts 1, 2, and 3. And it's a negative declaration without need for any I S and I signed at the bottom.

So if no one has any changes, I said if no one has any changes, you can adopt, you know, you can move to adopt the resolution.

So there's a negative declaration that stands alone by itself, dated July 20th. It's a separate document that goes through the 12 criteria of seeker, determining significance. So describe, you've seen this format before, describes the action. What was reviewed and then the reasons for the termination 1 through 12 actually 13 now that there's a new question about disadvantaged communities, which is number 13 Any of these it didn't really apply There's no explanation. But for some of them there's a little blurb underneath Elaborating on why there's no impact anticipated and it ties into the part two that we just went through. I

We have a resolution to approve, I mean, sorry, a motion to approve the resolution as read with the one amendment.

So moved. Second.

Will the clerk please call the roll?

Member Palmer?

Aye.

Member Williams? Aye. Member Sudor? Aye. Member LaRoberty? Aye. OK.

Very cool. Thank you so much, everyone.

Thank you. OK, next we have public hearing. For 207 Dual Hall Road, can we have a motion to call the public hearing to order?

So moved. Second.

All those in favor?

Aye.

Can I ask who moved that? I missed it. Thank you.

of the project. It's located on a 45-acre site on the north side of the intersection between Dual Road and Birdsville Road. There's an existing eroded channel which begins at the corner of the property and runs from south to north towards the on-site DEC wetland. There's a culvert at the Stabilize the channel. The portion outside the DDC adjacent area is going to be relocated so the existing channel will be built in. It will be grading a new stabilized channel. And then the portions within the wetland and the adjacent buffer will just be regraded and stabilized in the same alignment that it is currently. The DEC was on site. They deleted the wetland, it was surveyed, and they have a validation map for it. We did make a submission to DEC for a freshwater wetland permit on May 27th. I followed up with them recently at the end of last week. They're still reviewing the application, so they haven't gotten any comments back yet. But as far as that, it's kind of an update.

We want to read this first and then discuss. OK. Does anyone on the planning board have any questions, comments, wish to speak?

None here. I did say one there.

Anyone from the public have wish to speak?

There's no one signed up.

No one signed up? No one signed up. Do the consultants have anything they wish to say?

No, I'll do the same thing we did last time. We'll go through the, if there's any public comment, and if you close the hearing, we can talk about the seeker resolution and the NGDAC.

I do have one question. Do you plan on doing no work until you get the freshwater wetland permit, correct?

Yeah, we wouldn't start. It doesn't necessarily happen.

I know, that's why I just wanted to make sure. Okay. Okay.

Motion to close public. Do I have a motion to close the public hearing?

So moved. Second.

All those in favor? Aye. The public hearing is closed. Do you want to start with the part two? The EAF?

Yeah. We do the same thing we did before. Okay. Is that it? Okay. So for this one, it's even less, uh, questions that were, yes, it was impact on land, um, critical environmental areas and surface water pretty much. Um, This is just a stream stabilization, a channel stabilization project. So yes, they're impacting the land. But all of these sub-questions were no or small impact. It's not a large project. So that's what number one is doing. Impact on surface waters, three. There are wetlands on the property and adjacent properties, including 100-foot buffers to those wetlands, which are the adjacent areas, which are also regulated by DEC. The applicant had DEC come out and delineate the wetlands. They are regulated by the state. um they included the validation map signed by the dc staffer that delineated them so those are officially valid i think they're valid for five years once they're delineated um so they do they are required to get a freshwater wetlands permit for any of the work that they have to do and they've already as he mentioned submitted that um to dc so we've With that in place. It's pretty clear that there's you know, any impacts are going to be taken care of Mitigated by themselves like the project will self mitigate any potential impacts the wetlands with whatever DC requires in the permit So no or small impact is checked off for all those questions on number three Move on to I critical environmental areas number 12. So this parcel is within the dual hollow brook cea which is um regulated it's not really regulated but it's identified by the town of dover in dc as a critical environmental area the project itself is designed to improve drainage conditions. Um, it's going to have oversight by D. C. Um, as part of the wetland permitting process, they know that it's critical environmental area, so there'll be measures in place to the permit to address any potential impacts there. So for the same reason, it's a yes for the main question, but I have a no or small impact for the sub questions there. I also did check off the last question, number 19, disadvantaged communities, only because the area of the site is in a DAC, a disadvantaged community, which is a new part of Seeker now, where they have these areas identified for potential environmental burdens. It's not really applicable for this is in the power plant. This isn't a you know a polluting facility. It's not industrial It's not something that's emitting air pollutants Not discharging anything noxious into waterways, so Even though it is a DAC I thought it would be fine just to say yes But have no or small impact for all the other ones just to make sure we're thorough on that. I Yeah, so the same thing as the last application description of the action what we reviewed and then the 13 topics are criteria. Talks about the DC wetland process talks about Joe's review for the erosion sentiment control in chapter 65 all being looked at and acceptable. Number 2 talks a little bit about species because we did identify this early on is an area that has potential for Indiana bat so what was done was the applicant work with DC and the town to take down the trees that they had to take down within the window is regulated for the bats by DC and they left them on the ground. So there wouldn't be any ground disturbance. So all that work's been done. And as the applicant mentioned, they're still going to be communicating with DEC on the permits they have to get. So there shouldn't be any impact to species as a result of that either. And we talked about the CEA again, just the reason why. And then really didn't have to answer any of the other questions.

Thank you. Okay, we have a resolution to adopt a determination of significance and grant erosion and sediment control permit and site plan approval. Now, therefore, be it resolved that for the reason set forth in parts two and three of the FEAF, which are incorporated herein, the planning board hereby adopts a negative declaration determining that the project will not result in any significant adverse environmental impacts and that a draft environmental impact statement will not be prepared. Be it further resolved that the planning board hereby grants the applicant site plan approval for disturbances as shown on the site plan set and authorizes the chair to sign the site plan set subject to the following conditions. One, payment of all fees and escrow. be it further resolved that the planning board hereby grants the applicant an erosion and sediment control permit for disturbance as shown on the site plan set subject to the following conditions. One, submission of $1,000 for an inspection escrow for the town engineer. Two, submission of a performance guarantee in the amount of $10,000 informed substance and manner of execution acceptable to the town attorney and the town board. Three, the applicant shall obtain freshwater permit approval sorry, freshwater wetland permit approval from the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation prior to commencement of construction activities and provide the planning board with a copy of the permit. Four, the applicant shall coordinate all work within the vicinity of the existing culvert beneath Dual Hollow Road with the town highway department. Be it further resolved that before the authorized official may issue a certificate of compliance, the planning board engineer shall provide the authorized official with a written statement indicating that all work authorized under the erosion and sediment control permit has been completed in accordance with the approved permit. We have a motion for this resolution to be adopted.

So moved. Second.

Will the clerk please call the roll?

Member Palmer?

Aye.

Member Williams?

Aye.

Member Sador?

Aye.

Member LaRocque?

Aye. The resolution is adopted.

Thank you.

Next on the agenda we have the town board wishes us to make a resolution appointing them lead agency that we have received the coordinated review package for the 2026 town of Dover zoning code update. and we either consent or do not consent for the town of Dover town board to be the lead agency. Is there any discussion?

No discussion.

So I'm presuming that we want to give town board lead agency. Could we have a resolution moving that we do accept them?

So moved. Second.

Okay. All those in favor, do we have to have a formal call? All those in favor? Aye. Okay. Next we have a motion to suspend the August meetings. So that we will resume meetings again in September.

So moved. Second.

Any discussion? Okay. All those in favor?

Aye. Aye. Aye.

Do you want to talk about the zoning and all that?

None other than it's out for review. It's referred. It went out this morning and probably the A town board will have a public hearing on it at the August meeting.

Okay.

Any comments, please? Make sure you get it to me or to Nicole, the town clerk, within the next 30 days.

That's comments on the zoning package. Okay, great. If there's nothing further, I have a motion to adjourn the meeting.

So moved. Second.

All those in favor? Aye.