Planning Board - Regular Meeting

Okay. Thank you. We're here this evening for uh the meeting of uh March 3, the planning board, and we have a quorum. So, is there a motion to open the meeting? Motion. Second. Second. All in favor?

I. Our first item tonight is a request from an applicant uh on Chapel Crossing, East Village at 480 Bedford Road. was a request to amend the resolution of approval. Um so we received correspondence from um um the applicant and um what's happening is they're they're very close to finalizing the sale of the last two or three units. I think it's three units that are outstanding and they've asked uh for an amendment to the resolution that was approved four and a half years ago to enable them to close on these uh last remaining units even though they haven't uh fully satisfied the conditions set forth in the resolution. So they're asking for really not a waiver but a change in the resolution um to uh to enable them to close on the last uh few. So, um, is the applicant here? Representative. There we are.

Mr. Mr. Clifford, uh, Cooper, is that me? Sorry, I got the city. That's about it.

Um, good evening, uh, members of the board. My name is David Cooper. I'm a partner with the law firm Aaron and Steinmets, uh, representing the applicant at the Toll Brothers. Uh, with me tonight is Greg Otis, the, uh, senior land development manager uh, for the project. Um you're correct. We are here asking for a slight modification to the uh the site plan uh approval in uh asking to move the uh conditions 58 to 62, the deadline to complete those from the uh final issuance of a CFO for these last three units to the close out of the filling and grading permit for the overall site work. Um, the reason why is because we're we're we're we're holding up the the purchase of the last three units and and we didn't want to um uh sort of uh keep those those purchasers in in limbo until the uh site work uh uh conditions can be can be satisfied. Um, and so what we're asking to do is to move that to the the uh grading and filling uh permit closeout because uh the town currently holds uh over $3 million in in bonds um for that work. And so there's still a hook uh into into the applicant um to make sure that even though once they get the COS for the for those uh residential units, they're still um coming back to the town to making sure that they comply with the uh the remaining punch lists. Um, I know Greg has been working with with with uh the deputy town engineer Mr. Sley on closing out the remainder of the punch list. And I'm happy to turn over to to Greg to talk through that that process. But ultimately, we're just asking to from the planning board perspective to move those uh uh five um conditions to the grading and filling permit.

Yeah, thank you David and uh thank you chairman, members of the board and and town staff. Um we feel that we are very close to completing uh those final resolution conditions as well as the deputy town engineers final punch list. Um, uh, thank you, uh, Bob, uh, Ciol, multiple Bobs here. Um, thank you, uh, for taking the time. Uh, uh, the deputy town engineer and I have an excellent line of communication. I can't thank the town enough for um, allowing him to provide as much time as he has to talk through all the remaining items. um as he eloquently put in his uh memo to the board. Um you can see that we are on on on his punch list. We're about 29% complete. Uh we're approximately 42% complete on items that have been submitted that are still under review. um some of those items I do expect closure over the next week or so uh from our side and then there is approximately 29% of the items to be submitted. Um this is as we know this this has been a challenging winter uh that has prohibited the closure of certain punch list items. Um and we are respectfully requesting that these the last CO uh the last homeowner uh is not affected by um call it the business between toll and the town. I

think we've been a very uh good developer over the last three and a half four years with the town. I think this project um has been performed uh very well with the town. Uh I think it's an excellent community that has been established and we look forward to closing out all the items with the town. Um, in the overall scheme of things, I see the water and sewer dedication uh process occurring through the town uh likely towards the end of April into May. Uh so we are, you know, approximately about two months out on our side from completing all items. And uh the latest update that I've received is that the last building consisting of three homes uh is ready for their final CFO issuance plus or minus a week or so. Um, we are here to respectfully request that, uh, we are able to move these conditions, incorporate all the deputy town engineer conditions, uh, over to the closeout of the filling and grading permit. And, uh, thank you again for taking the time to hear us on this matter.

Okay. Thank you. Um, Sabrina, did you have any thoughts on this that you wanted to uh, express? Um I Mr. Chairman I don't really have any thoughts. It's really uh Bob Zoli uh it's his uh project that he has most of the comments on. So I will defer to him.

Okay. Um just uh giving some context on this is set uh at least from my perspective some some context for board members. um uh there's there's mention of security with with a bond and that we we are holding bonds. Uh however, I I will tell you based on my professional experience uh at this point holding bonds as security is is pretty close to illusory because at this point were there to be a claim filed against a bond at this stage the shy will never pay. The shy will never go out and get um you know another contractor. they will contest this as will the applicant and they should. It's it's it's a reasonable thing to do. So, I don't really look at that as um you know, it's something that was very important when it was first done. It's still important to hold, but I don't think it's something that really is um you know, something I would consider a carrot for the applicant. I guess my perspective on this, having been around this application for a long time, is these terms and conditions um are not a surprise. They were negotiated after many years of negotiation and dealings and hearings and they were approved four and a half years ago and as recently as uh September uh the deputy engineer provided a lengthy checklist of items to be completed. It was a menu you know a mapping of getting to the finish line. And I know we've had bad weather but a lot of the stuff uh it really is not weather related. I'll let Bob refer in terms of what he thinks um is really left here to do. Um you know, I think this resolution could have been drawn up so that all of these things would have been done first before any cos were issued, but we didn't do that. We worked with the applicant as the applicant has

indicated. I think it is a great project. I think they've done an excellent job. They've been great partners, but they chose a route to get to move forward with the sale of the homes for, you know, good commercial reasons and um from our perspective, my perspective is to the neglect of some of these items until the last minute. Now, we got caught here. Uh I think frankly they got ahead of their schedule, which is good news for them, good news for the town. But um you know I know we're talking about at this point three homes that may not be sold or they're requesting you know waiver on this. Meanwhile, we have 90 plus homeowners in there in these units and an HOA uh which in theory could be left to hold the bag to have these things completed or have them completed in a manner that the town approves. So, it's not just getting the stuff in my opinion sent in. It's also a matter of doing the fieldwork, the inspections, the asbuilts um and getting it to the point where it's approvable. So you hear from Bob in terms of what what um what that process requires. Um and and I think the takeaway from my perspective will be we're not in a position to grant I'm not in a position to change the resolution. Now whether or not we want to grant relief um at some subsequent point before everything is fully buttoned up is something for the board to consider. But I don't think it should be at this point. I don't think there's any reason for the town to give up its leverage in terms of getting these things done which could have been done years ago. Um and um I don't think we should be risking the town's monies. I don't think we should be risking the other property owners and the HOA getting them involved. U I'm not suggesting in any way, shape, or form

that uh that that would be the expectation from this applicant. I don't it would be just the opposite in fact. But nonetheless, I think we have um a responsibility to the town, to the HOA, to the other people up there um to make certain that this thing is done correctly. And and I think you'll hear from Bob that we have never done this before. We have never in all the years of of working with subdivisions in this town. We have never uh at this point moved things around to the extent that we would grant cos and and and not have these these kinds of things uh finished. So that's my take on it. We've had extensive conversations, but I think it's important to hear from Bob because he can tell us some of the technical issues and some of the things um that are that are really required. Um we've had conversations about this. I know you you'll hear about 29% 42%. Uh that doesn't necessarily give any weight to the importance of the issues some of the issues that need to be completed. Some of these are very these are administrative and they should be able to knock them out very very quickly and um uh but some are not and some may take some time before the inspections are done the as builts are submitted reviewed and and approved. Um so it's not a matter of just the applicant submitting them and and beating some sort of time frame and having the the documents submitted but they've got to be reviewed by staff and and approved and and and forms approved by council. Um and um so it's it's it's it's not as uh uh brief a process at this point uh to get it to the finish line. Can we help them get it to the finish line? Absolutely. Uh would we like to do that? Absolutely. Um but um we're here to help, but at the same token, um it seems to me some heavy lifting has got to be done and expedited by the applicant. Now, based on experience that we've had with this application over the years, there have been times where um an applicant has needed stuff to get done.

And we have worked uh very very hard. Uh Greg was here for some of those times where we worked through the holidays, special uh meetings, special public hearings, uh staff working around the clock, applicants staff working around the clock to beat certain deadlines. on the commercial side, if people recall, we even worked and set up a TCO uh so that they could begin opening even though things were completely buttoned up. So, we have a history of doing that and and u but from what I understand, TCOs are not uh permissible for residential occupancy. So, we can't do that. But in any event, um Bob, there's your entree. Sorry.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the board. Uh yes, to just agree with Mr. uh Kirkwood. Uh in my experience with the planning board over the last 17 years, uh we've never modified a resolution to wave that certain condition about all these items being required prior to the last CO. Um the only time we've done that is to give the act applicant temporary CEOs. We did that with the retail section in Chapel Crossing, but that's the only time we have done that. Um, so anyway, what I did was I just really went through all of the punch list items just to give a bird's eye view, five mile look of what's done. Everything that's been completed and approved, about 29%, nine of them, 9 out of 31% of punch list items submitted currently under review, deemed complete, about 42% 13 out of 31. So, I'm going to start uh there's no sense in me going over the ones that have been completed. They're done. They're good. They're approved. Uh I sent Greg all the confirmation on that. I'm going to start on the items that's under the heading final SE or punch list items that have been submitted and currently under review which is nine out of 31. Um just for the board's information EC1, EC2, EC3, EC4, EC5 are under the opaces of Mr. Carelli. I can let him speak on this real quick to see what his opinion on these are and how much farther there is to go to the finish line. Dennis. So, I'm going to turn it over to you real quick if you don't mind.

Um, is that working? Yeah.

Okay. Uh, yes. So, just just so we're clear and I and you know, I I met with Greg on site multiple times and and I think from the we'll call it the field work perspective. I feel that that's completed. I'm just waiting sort of for administrative completeness with respect to asbuilt and certification from a registered landscape architect. But to to my knowledge, there's there's nothing else that needs to be installed. the uh the walking trail was in. Uh the trees as designed were in the additional replacement trees based on field calls uh were provided on site and we colllocated where where those should go and and best serve um not only the HOA but uh one of the neighbors who I felt, you know, should be shielded even further from this. So I I that that's all been done. So, I I just wanted to make that clear because I know you look outside and there's a ton of snow on the ground and that that's not affecting anything that needs to go forward. So, I'm I'm just about there. I just need to review uh submission at this point.

So, is it fair to say that the items that you still have to work on are they are basically desktop uh issues and administrative? Absolutely. Thank you. Yeah. I mean, how long do you think to when you'll get through the desktop portion? When I receive it, I can start reviewing it. Is it not? I I

It's under the highlight that they've been submitted. Have they not been submitted? I reviewed a draft uh map, provided some comment um with respect to the to the asbuilt and I know that uh I did meet at one point on site uh the landscape architect who I think was going to provide you know the letter. Um because what I had when we discussed was all the trees you know have like designated numbers and you know there needed to be additional trees that weren't part of the original plan. So I said I think that would all be best captured in a narrative okay

in the letter and not you know don't don't dot up the landscape with respect to the asbuilt. So that was so they've completed the work they've given you some stuff and then you're waiting for this post site visit follow-up documentation. Yeah. After I guess a round of comments next submission. That's that's fair. And the applicant was going to say when they think they can submit that. I didn't mean to cut you off. Yes. I I expect that submitt to occur as early as this week uh for Mr. Carelli. Okay. Good.

Can I just can follow up on that? Just Greg, earlier you said you thought you would have everything wrapped up by middle of May. Um, and then David's letter says April 1. Are you guys talking about wrapping up the same things or are those two different things?

Yeah, I you know I I think our challenge is is really just going to be the the water and sewer dedication as that makes its way through through the town. Um on the on generally speaking on the water and sewer dedication um Mr. Culli has asked for some additional information from the department of health uh which we are actively working on as well as a an amended easement as well. Uh those are I think the two highlights there. Uh so I think that's going to be the kind of the final process here. Uh so depending on how quickly we can get the the feedback from department of health um and work our way through through the town with the dedication process. You know I I think that that is a manageable time frame right there.

Okay. Two months. Yeah. And that was that information came to us after my my letter went into your board. So yeah, no worries. Okay. Can I continue with the guys chairman? Yep.

Uh DTE1 up to DE DTE5 are actually the conditions in the resolution of major concern tonight. Conditions 58 to 62. And to Greg's point, uh these are all items that are going to require legal review from town council. It's going to require the town board approval and some going back and forth uh with the attorneys on the revisions to some of the easements. So I think you guys figured it's going to take about two months. Greg, I think so, Bob. Yes.

Yeah, I think that's fair. So that's DTE1 up to DTE5. Uh then we get to DET. I'll go through item by item. I'll let you know my opinion on how big they are, how small they are. So, let me Bob, let me ask a question. Is is that a two-month running time after we receive it? Because looking at the schedule, they're sub they're suggesting that it's going to be submitted on or about April 16. So, is it two months from April 16, after you guys receive it?

I I would have to say so that requires town council. It requires to get on planning board agenda. Uh there might be some tweaks when we get it back in from him. So, I would say two months conservative. correct me correct me if I'm wrong, but we we did submit yes initial drafts, right? This is just tweaks to the to the initial drafts. Yes, you submitted all the maintenance bonds and I think council you're talking about the maintenance bonds, right? No, he's talking about the the draft ements themselves, the actual language. Yeah.

Uh draft easements for the comments I had to revise the easement because of the water mane. Is that what you're speaking of, David? There's a couple, and not to confuse the situation, there's a there's a couple things that are in in quue with Bob relative to the issuance of this these letters here. Um, so we we could talk about the specifics, but yes, the maintenance bonds, all the drafts are in uh for the town's review and comments. But I think that's primarily, you know, DTE2 all the way through DTE5. So that those are in in in the town's possessions now. So what we're working on with with uh Mr. CI is is DTE1 and addressing the comments on the water and sewer dedication itself.

Right. Right. But there were things that had to be done that I sent to you. But I'm just sticking out loud here, guys, so the board knows. I think to do DTE1 up to DET5 to get everything done, I'd say between one and two months. Agreed. Agreed.

Okay. Um, DTE6 is really just an inspection by Terry to go out there to take a look at it. Uh, I think we got warm weather coming in next week. Uh, that's not a big item there. chairman. Uh DTE14, he did submit the actual stakeout map and it was 40 iron pins and 26 concrete monuments. I just have to send Terry out there to have him take a look at it. That's not a big item. Uh de DTE17 is basically just a notice of termination being signed off by Jeffrey. Uh once we have confirmation from Terry, which is DTE6, that's good. So I don't think those items are big. The biggest item to hold things up in this one list of items is the dedication and all the maintenance box

if that makes any sense. What what is required in order for you folks to be in a position to approve it? Tell us about uh what has to be done in terms of the asbuilt inspections and uh reports. Well, look, I didn't get to that one yet, right? I'm just talking about the ones that have been submitted, right?

Okay. Okay. So, I'm going to go to the next one. Next uh series of items are the final co punch list that have been submitted to D and deemed incomplete. Uh we just went over those, right? Let me see. Wait up. What am I doing here? Yeah, right. DT DPW6. Uh I'll go through them right now. That starts on the bottom of page four just so everyone's information. uh final accepted asbuilts. Once the asbuilts have been accepted, DPW6, that's something they have to give us in all AutoCAD files. That's the reason we need that is so we have a town GIS system so we can download that into that. I think Sabrina worked with Bart on that. Uh that should not be a big item for them to get. Uh DTE7 is a big item. This requires them submit the asbuilt topographic survey. We have to review it. We have to make certain that the slopes are great are okay in the roads. We have to make certain that the easements are within the limits of the of the infrastructure they put in. We have to look at the basins to make sure the basins were constructed properly. So, there is some back and forth on this item. It is the biggest item in here. Um, and in my estimation, things like this can take between three to four months to go back and forth with two or three iterations. They may need some regraining out in the field. In my experience, I've never seen the storm water basin put in correct the first time. In all my years of looking at basins over four or five subdivisions, so this is a big item. That is a big item. No doubt about it. Uh, DT8 DTE8. Uh that's something the engineer will look at the aspil ch and I believe Greg got Mark Gratz looking at these right

now. Uh that's a certification letter. That's work he's doing. Uh that takes some time. DTE9 provide an updated stormwater report. That's going to be their consultant. Greg, chime in anytime. That's going to be Mark Ratz doing that. Correct.

No DTS Provident. I don't know what the status is on that. We have not received it yet. DTE10. Uh that's an inspection report which is quite comprehensive. They have to go out there the consultant DTS provident they have to photograph documentation of all the storm water uh make sure everything's working as designed and make certain there's no maintenance required as far as sediment removal. Uh so that can take some time as well. I don't know the status of that. Greg

actually yeah Bob that that one uh should you should have that within a week's time frame. Okay. So that is a big one um prepared by DTS Provident. Uh and that one is is basically ready for submittal to you for review. Very good. Uh DTE1 is additional storm water management as bill. Um so DTE7 chairman, Mr. Chairman and DTE1 are the two biggest items in my eyes. uh which takes some boots on the ground uh takes some iterations in the review of it uh and it may need some actual fieldwork to be redone to make certain it matches and complies with the approved plans. So those are the two biggest items which could take 3 to 4 months. uh DTE18 certification of construction compliance that's a letter from their engineer have to reviews all the asbuilts uh payment of all outstanding review fees that's not a big deal that does not take much time uh DTE20 Greg have you received anything from the building inspector

uh no I have not and this item was requested over um about 30 days ago from the town well I try to call them up and meet with them to get those items. But, uh, Mr. Chairman, that's that's my take on the items that have not been submitted and the amount of time and the big items that do require a lot more work than just test review. And that ends my comments. Okay, good questions, comments uh, from board members.

Have you commenced the asbuilt process yet? Uh yes we have yes we have um the asbuilt is approximately 80% complete and upon completion um copies of the prepare are provided to uh Mr. as well as to DTS Provident, our um civil site engineers. Um at which time they'll review and provide the appropriate certification letters. Um and just to I was just thinking of one side comment um regarding the chairman's comment about potentially leaving these items to the HOA. I just want the board to know that we're legally obligated through the offering plan by the attorney general's office to perform all of these items uh for the HOA. So um it is an obligation that we need to complete uh satisfactorily and uh it is one that we will stand up to. Um and also as as you had mentioned Mr. chairman about the outstanding bonds. Uh those outstanding bonds do have costs to Toll Brothers. Uh and those are bonds that we need to work with to get released uh from the town. So um these are items that we need to correct and and address as soon as possible and we look forward to continuing that process with the town. Um, and as as mentioned earlier, we're we're simply requesting not to mix these new homeowners, town residents into the mix of this uh business that really is

attached to the site. Um, and our request to tie it to the filling and grading permit closing. Are you under contract to sell these last three homes?

We are. Uh we're expecting to close on those at the end of March, early April. Um the last building consists of three homes. Um and all three homeowners are ready to take occupancy of those homes. Okay. Any questions, thoughts? I'm just thinking. Okay. Um, one of my thoughts would be um on this is uh not to just live leave this out in limbo, but to work with the applicant and uh as we've done by the way uh previously in this the commercial side. Um work with the applicant and and set up a very tight time frame, maybe every four weeks, maybe every six weeks, whatever is comfortable for the applicant. and working off of the punch list and uh making progress on the punch list and getting an updated report, let's say, in a month, six weeks, whatever it might be. Um and and and before we even do that, uh I should really ask the applicant, uh since we have the town folks here, is there is there something we heard something in here that something was submitted, for example, to the building inspector, are there anything in here where the town is holding you up that we can try to express things moving it forward other than just the normal you're going to be submitting these things and understand that we're going into the building season, we're going into the busy season. You're not the only application that we have in this town. and there's a queue and people also have reasonable expectations throughout the town when they submit their applications. So, from what I understand, things are picking up uh there's there's going to be a backlog of uh of new applications. So, but is there something that we can do? Uh is there something that's holding up the applicant that we can try to u move

along faster? Um, I I think what would be very helpful is to hear from from the applicant on that issue, but also for all of us to to to set have the applicant set up a checklist and and just have a progress report. Maybe it's weekly. You send it into staff and then we plan to pencil you in to meet in a month at six weeks, whatever is comfortable for you and see what we can do at that point where we are in terms of how many more uh items have been completed, what has not been completed, the reason why it hasn't been completed. I will tell you that in uh not to give up on you know give up Dennis's secrets here but in a conversation earlier today Dennis's position on the on his items was I don't know why it hasn't been done you know uh it wasn't something that uh was very tricky. It's not rocket science and uh for whatever reason it wasn't done but it's it's it seems to me that those items are going to be very easy lowhanging fruit and uh the applicant will be able to get those in right away. the things that are tougher as Bob has uh outlined. It seems to me that sooner than later uh it's it's it's important for the applicant to marshall the appropriate um staff and technical people, surveyors, whatever it is, and get them going ASAP to move that forward. Th those are those are more difficult and perhaps even more important. And I and I recognize that the the you know, you have an obligation to the HOA to complete things, but um you know, if that's the problem if if if it's perceived by the HOA that you're not moving along quickly enough, I mean, that's the kind of stuff that that generates difficulties and problems. And uh one of the things I I want to absolutely avoid is any expense to the town getting involved in litigation on this. It's just just crazy. Let's get this uh let's get this across the the the the finish line and and get you guys

set and get the the new the new folks into their new homes. So, um that would be my proposal. I don't you know, you guys come back to us and tell us what you think is more comfortable. Uh I think reporting on a regular basis to staff would be very helpful, but perhaps we can pencil you in for, you know, a planning board meeting a month from now or six months, six weeks from now. Um the problem is that again um we're pushing up against the date for uh a planning board meeting a month from today and that uh what's the submission date on that Felicia? Well for the April 7th meeting uh the submission deadline is March 16th right which is just uh next week.

So for yeah I would Mr. Chairman thank you. Yeah, I would I would um absolutely um thank the town for the opportunity to come back to provide a progress report. Um I do not think there are any uh issues with the town staff uh progressing items. Um actually to the contrary, they're extremely helpful. um you know and I'm able to ask questions of Mr. Cioli uh pretty much any time. Um I believe we have a great line of communication. Uh so we would definitely uh be open to coming back to the board. I I thought possibly the April 17th meeting to continue to provide status updates. Um and at which time um you know I think Mr. could also provide his feedback too. Um, and so that

I think that would be April 21st. I mean, not a big deal, but just Or was it the March 17th meeting you were talking about? I don't Did you Did you meet April 21? The April 21. I'm sorry about that. Yep. Thank you. Um I I I think that's a reasonable way to try to get the applicant through this and and and finished. I think also if you're not complete status actually on the asbuilts I mean what Bob and Jeff say as far as are you on the 95 yard line or are you still on the 80 yard line or

um with the initial submitt we're we're about on the 90 90 yard you know 90% done 10 yard 10 yard line 10 yard line I thought I thought I heard you guys say that of all the things on the list There was only two or three things that had a really long window of work that were months and mostly everything else were short administrative and you thought you were banging it out in the next few weeks. Um and with three closings you said possibly a month from now. Um

no actually those clo we're looking to request the uh co final inspections from the building department within the next two weeks. Oh okay. So, it's even quicker. It's even quicker, right? So, get the surveyors out there on the asbuilts. The the fieldwork has been the fieldwork has been completed.

Um, and they're just finalizing the plans. Um, and again, we feel that it is, you know, very obviously within the next couple months of being complete here. uh we feel that you know these you know the last homeowner should not be affected as the other 90 homes would have had the cos issued. Uh but to single out one town resident for this issue um with their new home that they're looking forward to moving into. We feel that um we we we're requesting that the board consider this application,

right? Okay. But does that sound like a a fair schedule then to set up something where um your team reports in what at whatever regular time you feel is fit and then we'll pencil in uh April 21 uh and hope uh hopefully we'll have uh a good progress report from you. uh again um telling us what has been completed um what has not been completed and if you would let us know what the obstacle might have been or is continues to be that prevents the completion of the last couple of items. I'm hopeful that uh by the time we meet again you're at the 97% or or 100%. Uh that's probably unlikely I guess with some of these as bits as builds but um in a position where you know we feel far more comfortable to uh to move forward and and figure out uh some sort of solution for you. Is that okay

Stuart? Is that okay? You're okay with that? Yeah, I'm good with this. Okay. Okay. Yep. Mhm. So I I guess this is just what what are you considering this? It's just an informal hearing, right? Yeah. So uh nothing special in terms of notice and if for something comes up and and you know the 21st doesn't work but you just have to do it another two weeks from fine. We'll just you know make the change whatever it is. We'll pencil it in. If for some reason um lightning strikes and you're really in very very good shape and you want to do it um in the the first meeting of April, we might have an opening for you and that if that works, we'll work with you to try to get you um uh to the finish line even faster. All right, great.

Okay. Well, thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Y This is very difficult when there's different um pieces, a couple different dates. Okay. Uh we do not have a second item. Uh apparently the application has been removed from the uh agenda. This was for Supreme Homes LLC on Tanglewood Road. Um so we will hear that when uh staff has uh received the completed application. apparently wasn't uh complete and uh so we'll move on to our next item. Hey, good night Mr. Chairman and board. Yep. Good night. Good night, Bob. Take care. Good night.

Thank you, Bob. So, our next item is the Rasine Reamer 93 Pinesbridge Road application for a site development plan.

Good evening. I'm Jim Anakarico with Cronin Engineering. Glad to be here. Um, so yes, our our application, uh, well, let me give you a little bit of background. Uh, Tom Rine, uh, who's on the screen up there, uh, he was the owner of the property when, uh, the pool and the patio were installed. Um, Mr. Brian Rhyr is the current owner of the property. Um, and uh they, you know, there's a obviously they're still tied together through some escrow money uh between them uh for Tom to finish this uh finish this up and give uh clear up the uh the building permit for the pool. Um so

there's nothing like an escro to solo solidify friendship, right? Yeah, exactly.

Um so uh uh there was a inground swimming pool installed uh by Tom uh there was a permit issued for that. Uh at that time there was no uh thoughts of patio around it. Uh so it did not require any drainage uh mitigation because it did not u uh did not go past the thousand square foot mark. Um in the meantime uh a patio was installed. Um, I will note that the entire pool and patio uh were not installed beyond the clearing and gradient design on the lot. They were all on on the correct side of it. Um there was uh when we submitted the asbuilt um there was a small portion of the patio uh in the sideyard setback that we had to go to the zoning board for and we did and we uh received the variance 8 foot variance for that into the sideyard. Um there was um some drainage mitigation uh drainage c in the form of cultex installed um by the contractor. Um there were four cults installed. They were beyond the clearing and grading limits line. Um and that's kind of how a lot of this started. Um we we made an application last year and um we decided that uh the drainage wasn't uh to this town's uh town staff liking. Uh so we went back and uh we did some uh recalcul. Well, in the meantime, we had Jeff uh had provided us with uh additional impervious areas on the lot, some of them which were done prior to Mr. Rine owning the property. Um and he asked us to to include them in our

drainage video, which we happily did. Um so we now uh have submitted a plan that uh proposes an additional 10 calls. Um they are obviously beyond the clear integrating limits line as well. Um just because that's the the only spot on the property pretty much to to do it in. Um I I should uh mention that uh not not part of the pool project but at some point Mr. uh expanded the driveway uh the asphalt driveway to the on the north end of the property. Um about 777 square ft of asphalt uh that was uh added um and that we've mitigated that we've you know designed our drainage for um 157 square feet of that asphalt was outside of the clearing and grading limits line. Um, and then I think there was uh there was another maybe 500 some odd square feet of that was beyond this clearing grad which was the cultex. So um this backyard is essentially grass beyond uh the pool and patio almost up to the the property line. Um there is a um fairly substantial uh uh planted and and mulched bed along the west property line uh adjacent to the golf course. Um there really I guess there were I I did submit some historic photos of the property uh

all the way back to 2000 I guess prior prior to the house even being built. Um there were some pine trees along uh that property line um which eventually were removed. I think there was a willow tree just north of the patio and pool that that was uh that was removed. Um there is a large pine tree in the northwest corner that still remains and uh many trees along the the southern property line um with uh with the residential neighbor to the south. Um there is no residential neighbor to the north immediately. Uh it's basically a drainage uh easement and uh course uh that takes some of the drainage from um Pinesbridge Road and uh brings it down to a culvert that eventually goes through the golf course and probably into one of their

Is that a lot to the north part of the golf course or is that a private lot? Uh that is town of Northick Castles. There's a strip there. Okay. Uh beyond that, I'm not sure. Um so the golf course is is is all the property to to the west though. So um we when we made the well before we made the resubmission uh

discussions with town staff, uh it was suggested that we ask for the clearing grading limits line to be adjusted by the board. And so what we did was we kind of did what we thought made sense and uh adjusted it pretty much up to the uh to the property line in the rear uh and you know close to the property line to the north. Um it's essentially all grass now. Um can you speak to the uh the wetland issue and the wetland buffer issue? I think that's important. Sure. Um conversation

I guess during I don't know all the uh history of it but I I assume that during this subdivision of of this land um at some point there was a wetland uh maybe to the north uh there was a 100 foot buffer line that that was on the filed map um that everything was outside of believe it or not pool patio driveway everything um that has that has obviously since changed to 150 ft. Um, but Dennis did uh uh provide a memo um some of the stuff that I I honestly was not aware of. I guess it was looked at at some point in 2021. Um by a wetland consultant and it was determined that there is no longer a wetland there. And so I believe Dennis's recommendation was to, you know, to to maybe amend our plans to show that there there is no longer a wetland buffer on our property.

Good. Thank you. Sure. D, do you want to comment?

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. So yeah, the first thing I just mentioned um because I I know why you had to check the uh secret form. I just bring up the cultural resources because if you think wetlands is a four-letter word, if they were truly cultural resources, that's four letters capital. Um so I decided just to provide the map that shows where those resources are and you know they're obviously not near not near the property. So that was kind of just to check that box. Um with respect to the wetlands, uh yeah, you made it convenient by basically submitting, you know, all of the aerials which kind of provides, you know, the history of, you know, the property and then its, you know, immediate surroundings. So, um, you know, at first the whole reason I guess to go out and just investigate, uh, because, you know, I I didn't think there were wetlands on the property, but you know, the buffer obviously was influenced off site.

Offsite, right? So, and now it's 150 ft and, you know, back to inconvenient truth. So it's like okay well considering that the town land is adjacent you know you have permission to go on that land you should hire someone that you know and again we didn't we didn't do uh I didn't ask or request to have a delineation done of that entire piece just you know proximal to the to the property line

and you know it was interesting that um I guess Mr. Schmidt didn't, you know, find wetlands there and the closest wetland that he found was, you know, back on on the golf course. So I, you know, did some field confirmations and it was, you know, an odd uh situation cuz, you know, you like he did your beline to where all the hydrophic vegetation is. And I, you know, one spot I didn't pick up hydric soils, another spot I got some weak modeling and I'm like, this is like something odd is is going on here. you know, you you just expected stronger uh redoxorphic features. That's the word. So, you know, I said you could put the pool in. I'm not there's there's no wetlands buffer issue here, right?

Um and so then, you know, as time went on to this and now we're looking at, you know, what the filed map was, uh it's interesting to look at this property and then, you know, the two uh adjacent properties that were developed. those lines appear to just be drawn. I don't know. It it has some uniformity to it. It kind of goes towards the back line. And then here you got a sharp bend because presumably, you know, it there there's the wetland buffer there in that corner. So the clearing and grading limit line certainly took a hard turn. So, you know, it it's difficult now from that perspective to say, okay, so if the wetland is gone, then you know, there's there's no worries or worries about incursions into a buffer. But if some of that clearing and grading limit line was actually predicated on that and the wetland's not there anymore, and I'm, you know, if you ask my opinion, I think because when the golf course went in, they totally changed the the hydraologic patterns there. you know, they just there's either they facilitate drainage. I mean, I'm even looking at the very first aerial that you submitted in 2000. If you go to the rear corner of the property, which is kind of like that northwest corner, there's little rivulletes there. It looks to me like, you know, that those are not there now. Now, it's golf course and a paved golf cart, you know, access way. So, so as far as um the wetlands is a non-issue at at this point, at least with respect to this property, there's there there is no buffer. Um if there was another reason for the clearing and grading limit line, then I just, you know, included to sort of insummation in my memo that, you know, that's kind of the exercise that you would sort of go through the avoid, minimize, mitigate. And you know it's difficult now with this property to potentially you know mitigate for all

all that. But again if if if if the um influence and the um reasoning and rationale really was was wetlands driven to establish that line it's it's it's not relevant today. So that that basically what I was trying to you know sort of bring forward and I guess that you know has to be obviously a detail for the board's consideration that if we're going to consider amending amending the line the wetlands is not not a factor at this at this stage. Okay. Thank you Sabrina. Do you have thoughts on this uh application? I forgot to call on

um just for the board's information. Uh it's a type two action under the state environmental quality review act. Um my one comment was um you know the application there is a 777 square foot encroachment over the clearing and grading limit line. Um there is a new line drawn on the plans. Um but it's something for the board to consider. Um Dennis has addressed the wetland buffer. Uh it is zoning compliant. There was uh variance for uh an 8-ft sideyard setback that was granted by the zoning board of appeals and all of the coverage uh calculations are within the maximum allowable limits.

Great. Okay. Thank you. Jeff, you had some comments. Jeff, you had some comments.

Yes, I did. So, I was uh was on looking at my comments and I had to go back to the Zoom to unmute myself. Uh so yeah the comment the previous comments that we had for the applicant were generally uh satisfied there is um you know one of the things that we that we do need to verify which I don't think was done in the initial but uh the new call text the new infiltrators that are being uh installed we do need to make sure that uh there were there was no perk per perk or deep testing so we need to make sure that if we don't we either have to view the soil to make sure that it's does perk, but a minimum do a uh a deep deep hole test to make sure we have separation between the bottom of the infiltrators and either groundwater or uh groundwater or uh bedrock. Um that's the only previous comment that we just need to kind of hold on to, but generally um previous comments were satisfied. There are a couple new comments. Most of it has to do with just we'd like to add a couple things to the drawings to memorialize it, some notes, things like that. uh you know the only uh you know intermediate change would be to add um there's no pre-treatment for the storm water so we just requested some pre-treatment be added uh prior to the infiltrators but you know generally nothing uh I don't think it's anything that's too uh too much to overcome generally minor

I would agree are we anticipating any fill to be introduced no okay so it's just a I guess a form uh common just there there will be uh there will be crush stone brought in but not fill per se but when you install the infiltrators you have to surround it with with 3/4 in crush stone. So there will be material that gets brought on which is why we have the comments regarding uh fill that's brought on. Generally it's it's really more of a paperwork thing to prove that you know the material that we got is clean and you know and uh uh you know not not environmental hazard environmentally hazardous right typically that wash gravel would be required for the drainage. We would we would provide a ticket for for that item.

Jeff, with the um uh the col that's installed and the col that's proposed, are you satisfied that that will mitigate uh the additional runoff from the 776 ft of uh Macadam that's that's there that was put in after it? It does. There's it does it it covers 100% of the coverage without any reductions for infiltration. Um which is perfectly acceptable. Um, like I said, the only thing we need to just verify is that the soil does perk. Uh, we do get percolation because we can't have the water go in there and then just it'll just sit in there and it won't go into the ground. And the second thing is verify we have the separation distances between uh between groundwater and be rock,

right? And just to touch on that for a minute, um I wasn't the engineer back then um when the you know when the uh cults that were installed were put in, but I've seen pictures and I don't see any any problem with uh that happening and you know it's the we're obviously just adding them on to the end of it. So I don't I don't see that as an issue and we can provide that. Okay.

Yeah. the the only risk is um if they weren't able to achieve the achieve percolation there or weren't able to uh get separation between the bottom of the cult and groundwater or bedrock is the system would have to be you know they might have to go with shorter cult it might have to get moved or something like that but you know that that's a that's a risk that you know they if if they choose to to accept that risk you know that they may have to change the design that's fine I don't I don't have any concerns concerns about it. Cults that you know there are cults there now. Um but uh just wanted to put that out there. Okay, good.

I've been there in a rainstorm. Um they seem to be functioning what's there now fine. Um I don't see any issue with with runoff. As I said, there's no downstream neighbor uh residential neighbor. I'd be more concerned with, you know, doing something like this um without all the information, but um I really don't see any issue with it because a golf course wicking water away. I'm sure that'll happen. Right. Yeah. Exactly. Right.

Well, it seems to me that the the clearing grading limit line might have been drawn because of the the wetland buffer issue. It seems to me if we don't have a wetland buffer issue, I don't see any real reason why we would not go with the applicant's proposed uh clearing grading limit line, which is basically the property line. It's all grass and lawn anyway. So, I I don't know why we would not uh grant the the the request. I mean, Dennis, the only thing that would go along with that, chairman, is they have to file an amended uh map with the county to get that formally amended, which I made a note, I think, in my in my memo about that. Yes, you did. You did.

Right. So, if just so I could be clear on that. So if you see with my memo I did attach but I guess that was the subdivision map which obviously um has so so you guys are going to file a map and it's just going to be a broken line for your parcel and then I guess that artifact of wetland buffer of 100 ft is obviously just going to continue for the other yeah because you're not changing right subdivision map doesn't change it's just going to be your your your parcel I assume we'd be just filing the survey

and my plan maybe together with the survey with the actual property survey. I'm going to have the, you know, I'd have the surveyor, you know, add the uh uh the new clearing and grading limit line and and remove the the landline from the survey. Exactly. Yeah. And and update our note, you know, referencing that survey. Uh and then I could I could we could file both plans together. Yep. Yeah. Pieces. We'll have to coordinate on that. It It doesn't need all that extra information. It doesn't need all the survey information. It doesn't need all your um So, the FO map is really just it's it's going to be boundaries and and lines, but we can coordinate on that. You know, let's uh down a little. Great. Does that sound reasonable uh to everyone?

Yeah. Okay. Um we have to go to public on this. Um I found out tonight. So, um we'll schedule a public hearing as soon as we can. And there are no more materials that we really need for this. So, we can schedule a public and maybe uh if we so desire um direct staff to propose a resolution so we can do a one and done next time we meet. That sound reasonable? So, is there a motion to set the public hearing and to direct staff to drop a resolution for that? Motion. Second. Second. All in favor? I. Okay. Thank you very much. Yep. Appreciate it. Good night. There was bound to be a happy person leaving here tonight.

Thank you everybody. Been a long ride. Thank you. You're welcome. Thanks, Sabrina. You're welcome. Have a good night. Thanks. Stay warm in Florida. We will. Thank you. Take care.

You're telling me this lock is along the apparently. Yeah. Transition. I think it was a drainage lot. So this this guy's constantly planting over here. I was like, so you thought it was a nursery? I thought it be the nursery across the street and I thought that was his because I always see a little bit of plant. Oh well.

Our next item tonight is a referral from the town board with regard to the proposed battery energy storage system uh legislation. So we last heard this back on February 3. Um I don't think we have anything formal. So it's really a discussion. It's a referral to us uh by the town board for a longer proposed and I think we discussed it last time with regard to tier one, tier two, tier three. Uh tier one is is designed to be permissive and tier two and t and tier three currently in the law is proposed to be prohibited. So that's where the proposed law is. Um, and uh, we left it with Jeff to get on a plane to Phoenix to write all kinds of information for us. And, um, by the way, did you guys did you get the, uh, the note from?

Yes. Yes. Okay. Uh, good. Anyway, um, I don't know where you want to pick up from there. Is Tom on Tom the poll? Um, Mr. Chairman, he, um, actually could not attend tonight. Uh, I do have the capability to text him with specific questions. He does send his apologies, but he has a personal matter that he's dealing with. Okay, no problem. Thank you.

Um, if I if I could, um, I just wanted to kind of set the groundwork for the board. Um, and just remind you that this is a legislative referral from the town board regarding a law that is presenting a prohibition on tier 2 and tier 3 battery energy storage systems. The charge of the planning board is to decide number one, do you agree with the prohibition? Or if you don't agree, why not? Or if you agree and there's a butt, that is what the town board would like to know. And the prohibition is forever until the law changes.

The prohibition is is a law that will be promulgated that can be subject to change later on. Okay. by by legislative change, right? There's it would need to be legislatively changed, right? There there's no sunset date or expiration date written into the the the draft. And do the zoning and planning boards have the right to after the law, if the law is passed and applicants come, do they do the zoning or planning boards have the right to relieve it? No. No. Okay. No. No variance from this. This would be no. If it gets passed, no two or three gets done. Period. Until the board makes a new law, right?

Okay. If if if so, it's a pro it's a prohibition without a license or a permit process. Gotcha. Okay.

And and you know, last time we heard, you know, Jeff came up with a couple of issues in terms of possibilities with regard to tier 2. Um I think tier three is is uh pretty clear. My concern on it uh is probably I I don't have the ability to have concerns on the the science, but one of the concern concerns I have on this is that this is couched as of course a a zoning regulation, but it's one that's going to be based on uh should be based on I believe uh not just because we don't want it, but really on valid environmental issues. And I'm not quite sure. My recommendation would be that the town board make sure that they've covered themselves and they've gone through the proper I don't know if a formal secret process is required but some sort of process to make certain that there are good reasons for the findings that they've made leading them to say there cannot be any tier 2 um operations in the town. Now, I I it seems to me just saying we want to preserve our residential um feel in nature may not be sufficient. I don't I it seems to me that there should be more of a basis um behind it. And and Sabrina has told me that there has been, you know, they've done a lot of work on this. they were charged, the staff was charged with doing a lot of research, but it seems to me that that should be um um formalized and and and and made public in case there's some sort of challenge. And then whatever those findings are that led to that conclusion, um you know, um as far as I've heard, the only pe the only things that we've considered are um commercial perhaps commercial and clustered or or density issues for a tier 2. But it seems to me that we have the potential of other tier 2 applicants or interested

parties, you know, say the the Sunshine Hospital over on the west side of town. Um perhaps the schools. Um I know that um I'm jumping ahead, Sabrina. I really should tell you this. You know, that one of the things that they thought about was that um it ought not to be within 500 ft of a residence. And it seems to me that some of these properties, if it's located properly on the on the on the property, that it would not be within 500 ft of a residential um location. That's a tier two. That's tier two. Tier three, I think, uh I think the feeling on tier three is that they're just so powerful and so big that it's a pretty good feeling that you shouldn't do it. But so a question I don't know if any of us can answer this. Maybe only Jeff can. I can't answer it.

So I I see the number thrown around of the 80 kilowatts, right? And that's that's the top of tier one. And then I read in the memo and I think you said last month that an escalade is 200. So I I'm 205. What's that? 205. 205. So, I find it confusing and I like what they said in the letter that professionals are installing the in-house ones that are done properly and then you have people driving their cars in and you know a car battery could be damaged for all they know because they hit a rock and they've got a 205 one sitting in their garage. How is but that's permitted but a REALLY SAFE 200.

Let me let me just interrupt here a second. vehicles are regulated outside of town control. But what's so I'm asking what's the logic for their decision? Who on the board did the research to come up with the 80? Or who on the town came up with the research to do the 80 when we have larger than 80 driving around the streets now parking in garages and parking on streets and parking everywhere. I just don't, you know, if I don't understand how the 200 is safe, but the 80 plus isn't. I, you know, I'm unless I'm just missing something. And I understand the point that the town can't regulate cards.

I'm not trying to regulate cards. I'm trying to understand the math. 70 to 80 comes from the New York State Building Code, actually, the fire code. Um they're they're the ones who determine uh up to tier one is 70 or 80 depending on the type of battery could be less. Uh between that 80 and 600 is considered tier 2 and above 600 is tier three. So the town nobody at the town made that. It wasn't an arbitrary decision by us. It really is taken from New York State.

I'm not Jeff. I'm not pointing fingers. What I don't understand I understand the math. I'm just trying to figure out how if it's being done for safety, how then are the 200s safe and the 80s not? From a New York State Fire Department logic, I I don't understand the logic in that. It seems to me that the cars are way more dangerous than the batteries that are installed in the garage. I I totally get it and I would be you know I I I would see I see a reason to say you know even we should allow tier 2 up to 200 kilowatt hour 250 kilowatt hour um I don't know if we can we can make that distinction but you know it seems to make sense that you know if you have a 200 kwatt hour car parked in a garage what's the difference between that and having a 200 kWh battery pack on the side of the house

right that you know you can make that recommendation and say, you know, we should we should allow tier ones and tier 2s up to 200 megawatts or 250 or kilowatt hours. And then you know anything above 250 kilowatt hours should be you know a special use permit by the town board or by the planning board or whoever you know that the the planning board can make that recommendation that you know we think the tier one the 70 or 80 kwatt hours too low raise it to raise it to 200 or 250 and then above that tier 2 um require special use permit you know provided that's at a residential you know conditions on it. It's residential. It's for, you know, whatever. Powering a house, you know, it's not for powering, you know, you know, side projects or whatever.

I mean, even the comment in the letter we got about the chap that they generate more than they can store, right? And then there's there's als they're generating more than they're using, especially during the day. If they're not net metered, so it's going back to the grid, then those paddles just stop producing. They only produce what's needed, right? Batteries allow Sabrina, but Sabrina, you know about that, right? Is that Are we getting We get credit for all that stuff that we put back in the grid, don't we? It it depends. It it I it really depends.

But I Okay, first off, I want to thank Sabrina and Tom. We had a very nice conversation on the snow day last week where we went through a lot of this stuff. So, I appreciate all the effort and everything that they've gone through. I didn't realize the extent and the tasks that they were deputized with doing. So, um after that conversation had a had a you better better understanding. Um, you know, my comment first off as it relates to what Jeff just brought up, which is the New York State Fire Code, and Tom, we spoke about this 2025 where those numbers that are in the um in this proposed law come right from the code.

But at least my read of that section is that if you're below these numbers, this section of the code does not apply. Section 1207.1.3 energy storage systems having capacities exceeding the value shown in the table below shall comply with this section of the section. So anything below that you don't have to do anything that's in here. I disagree with that fire code but that's a whole different issue. Um, as was just brought up, tier one, I think tier one, tier two, tier three have come, we've create kind of created these these tiers. Um, as a point of of comparison, a Tesla mega pack, which is the biggest, right? That is roughly 30 feet by 6 feet by 9 ft tall. So, it's small shipping container that has 3,900 kilwatt hours in there. So that's what we're from a comparison standpoint. How big something would have to be to store 600 kilowatt hours is a lot smaller than when you compare it to 3900 needs a whole, you know, needs a shipping container size basically. Um, so I do think that we should expand these numbers to allow more storage on residential properties, especially like the Tesla Power Walls that I have. They'll only stack them by three because the fire code says you can only st basically you can only stack them by three. But there's no reason why I shouldn't be able to have or anyone shouldn't be able to have a section of three for the respon the the required separation another section of three

um because you could in essence use these as your instead of backup generators right so you're going to the require to the one of the goals of this is to reduce our our our footprint our carbon footprint secondly I found in our town code in the past the for the for batteries. You're not allowed to have the batteries if you don't have solar. Um, now I know people would would put the batteries in but don't want to put holes in their roof. So, we may want to expand that conversation with the town board having this

distributed. It's distri can be called distributed generation in theory because if you wanted to, you can discharge those batteries to the grid during the day. Not saying that we should be dictating that, but if it allows there to be less uh demand on the wires that are going down the road, which reduces the opportunity for transformer fires, for increased transmission lines, I think we should be working towards that to giving our constituents um something that allows them to do that. Secondly, as Stuart brought up in his email, why are we limiting this to one or two family homes?

Mhm. Residents are residents, right? If you're we just heard from Toll Brothers that this last home has three in one building, right? So, is there any reason why they should be not not be able to if Toll Brothers or their HOA wanted to put those in that that we should be limiting that? Um maybe there is a valid reason. I'm I'm not an expert in the code. I just try to try to read what I can. The only thing I could think with multif family housing is that you'd be stacking a lot of them together maybe and they don't want the density of it. Right. Maybe you think requirement would you? Yeah. There's

like if you think of a meter bank on the side of a wall of a multif family housing is like 30 meters in a subter, right? They may not want to see 30 of those battery packs. Yeah.

Outside on a wall in that. Now what would likely happen in that scenario and Sabrina Tom and I spoke about this is that either Toll Brothers would have their own they would be the one so they'd be before the submeter so they have a deal with Coned where they site something on their property and everyone it's not necessarily each pro each residence gets it but the main feed that's coming in has the battery backup and ferry or KED does it themselves and then our board and our town board has no say over it. Um because it's out of a public necessity and that trumps local jurisdiction. Um

the Tesla project in Milwood, does this impact that? Uh the gentleman who came last time brought up that they have to have batteries on site to support that. I don't know what their electric feed is. If he's saying that that they're designing it, that they have the batteries there just in case if the load on if all those are filled up, right, that they can't pull enough from the from the power line that they're going to be discharging there. I don't recall what was what was in there, right? Yeah, I don't remember.

But, um, it's my understanding that there's a project that is looking to do a large amount of this in a residential area. And I mean there's there's there's pros and cons of it. Those are the letters we've been getting. I tried to find information on it about it online. Um I haven't seen it.

I couldn't there's nothing like NISO. There was no couldn't find any NSO is the is the one of the power regulators in essence. Um, I couldn't find any documents on what they're what they're proposing other than someone submitted something. And then there's sustainable sustainability board is correct in that this technology is continuing to get better. They're continuing to put additional safeguards in. Unfortunately, like most things, right, trial by error, right? Something happens, you figure out what it is, and you put some form of safeguard in there. But, you know, my my comments were that I think first off in our code, we shouldn't necessarily be dictating some of the nuances that is that are in here and we should just refer to the code to the New York State code.

Um, un if we want to be more restrictive, then then we can do that. to go through and and have actual performance criteria, design criteria which could easily change and then we need to keep up with it. We need to keep up with it. Um, you know, the comment that I made about the the tier one really this this the chart is the minimums or or the maximums before you need us you need to follow this code. Um, allow larger systems and then I think we should talk with the town about our code. Should we be allowing battery and storage systems without the solar? Yeah,

that's my So if you don't have solar, you just charge the batteries from Conet. Yeah. So you should you can do it one of two ways. You can set it and there's different systems. You can set it that it's 100% charged all the time. When you lose power, it discharges. Or you can set it that it charges at night when the power is cheaper and then during the day it discharges down to your reserve and then it connects and then it starts pulling off the grid. Right? That's that is more important during peak peak season peak peak times

where there's concern about overheating of the lines like there's only certain amount of power that can come down a line. Um but which if we start having these big peaks where there's issues and tripping then the power company comes and they put a brand new line down and when they put too many TR distribution lines which is the you know call it low 12 KV lines then they start bringing transmission lines which some of those could fit on poles three-phase but then you start getting the towers that are in Milwood which I think everyone wants to

wants to resolve. So, I know with ConEd and a lot of the utilities, what they're starting to do is find properties that are adjacent to their transmission lines and do those large sta those large stations so that they have power in essence stored closer to the demand and they don't have to run additional lines. Sabrina, did I misunderstand from the last time that I thought currently in order to uh you had to have solar to even have a tier one in this town. So that was a requirement. You couldn't have this the system without solar. You must be you must have solar.

So I mean I think that's a point that we should perhaps bring up uh to Jeff's point that uh why are we doing that? you know what's the what's the reasoning behind that if there are some evolving technology and alternate technologies that permit us to reach the same sort of goals but without solar especially as we get into smarter homes and smarter houses I have to think that the design industry is going to start designing these battery systems into homes it you know just it just I could see the trend down the road it makes sense um from a whole smart home point of living. So I just

it's cheaper for Khed to give you an incentive to put one of these in to run a new line down your block, right? And it's a whole new industry add more generation, right? Think of a whole new industry as we're phasing out some industries and new industries are being invented. I mean, this is a whole new industry in home technology. Um especially I loved in their letter talking about the micro grids and things like that if that's really actually happening. What a great concept for the future too. Yeah. And there's nothing to stop someone from coming charging their Tesla right in front here driving to their house and and utilizing the battery and the Tesla to power their house. The same thing with the Ford Lightning. I don't know about some of the other cars, but And when you charge out here, it's free, isn't it?

No. Oh, you have to pay. pay. Town makes a couple shekels a kilowatt hour. Well, they should. Yeah.

So, I I my thrust on on on the the the um the tears and the issues are what is the basis for cutting off 80 for example and not 200. What is what are the environment what are the safety issues? What are the public health issues? uh what are the environmental issues that lead us to conclude that 205 is the right number, not 80, uh 300 is the right number or a container of X size is the right right number. Um it seems to me that there should be some sort of basis for that those kinds of delineations. what we have and what's being proposed to me sounds like it could possibly be perfect, but I'm I'm hearing from Jeff and and and that perhaps it's um it's it's a little bit more arbitrary than it than it needs to be.

A little bit more restricted than it needs to be. Yeah. And I think it may make sense to have a work working session with staff and town and town board uh because I hear from them that there's there's a reason for doing this. I mean, it all started off not to, you know, they they asked Tom and Sabrina, where where are there places in our town that we could do something like this, and I don't think that there were a lot of of them. I'm sure, but Chap Crossing is a prime example. They've got a 2 something megawatt generator behind the office building that has the all um

North I keep thinking Northshore, whatever. Northwell Northwell. Northwell, right? with diesel belly a belly tank and then diesel extra tanks right there where someone skids goes right into that diesel that diesel tank is you know there's possibility that's spilling places right

yeah I mean I guess the only question I guess I would pose to everyone would be just this is more anecdotal but you know we've seen like the emails and stuff and I guess I appreciate everyone's efforts but I what I've heard and what's getting lost in the messaging is there just some people like the email from the engineer who just seem to be very sorry for using this word like hysterical about this like where they're so against it right this idea of oh it's going to get in our drinking water or you know when we hear about you have to let the fire burn off and things like that and I guess I mean my just two cents is I maybe it's just a messaging issue but there has to be a better way to sort of you know there's a lot of I'm hearing a lot of cons and I'm not hearing enough of the pro side. That's just what I've heard sort of again in conversations with people

describe being a data center developer. Um,

so can we just kind of refocus here? Um, we can draft for you a letter, but you need to tell us what you would like to have it say. Well, it seems to me that one of the themes is um perhaps um this the proposals are too restrictive and um perhaps there should be something in the legislation that permits um some sort of uh relief based on changing technology. if if the town board's not going to be able to change the law every six months or every three years. Um because it seems to me that uh these things are changing and and more quickly than we can legislate

as usual. Yeah. Um so uh that seems to me to be u one of the things. Um Okay. And and to to Stuart's point, the limitations and restrictions, whether you know, however you want to call those, you know, I I think they can be articulated in a very objective manner and uh weighed and and and you know, if if as I've heard uh 500 feet is the magic number for a resident's uh separation from uh a tier one, a tier two, whatever, however we going to we define a tier 2, right? Um, you know, if it's still going to be 80 or if it be 205 or something. One goes up to 205.

Right. Exactly. So, however, we might want to suggest that they that the the tiers are are looked at in terms of more flexibility based on what the the realities are out there right now, never mind what the changes are. Um, and the separation of a tier one is different than the separation of a tier two.

I would think so. I would think so. and and I don't you know I don't understand why tier one is just restricted to the single family and two family homes. I could think of some wonderful cur commercial applications where it could probably be a good thing and I think that there there's there's some um potential use for tier 2 as as as defined in a revised definition um for some facilities in town. Uh again, I point to the Sunshine Home. Um they probably have some sort of diesel thing up there. But again, to Jeff, what about the school districts? Oh, the schools. Absolutely. Right. The school districts.

And it seems to me that at G really you could place something that's more than 500 ft away from residences because they have a lot of property. Yeah. So you could do that. Uh is that is that okay? I don't know, Mr. Chairman. Listen, I the 500 ft is is a number that we came up as a best practice. I don't want you to rely on that number as the magic number.

I understand that and I guess that's really my point. In other words, uh it has been used as sort of a number at this point. It's the only thing that we have u that I'm aware of and all I'm suggesting is that we should be able to support that 500 one way or the other. If it should be a thousand, then it should be a thousand. If it's if 200 is perfectly fine, then we should do that. My point is, uh, it seems to me that, uh, we may have just p pulled some of these numbers out, um, in a in a fashion that as things evolve, uh, make little sense as as as we move forward or less sense, excuse me.

Is the 500 based on an explosion? Is that where the separation? It was uh, it was the it was um based on fire safety. Okay. um based on it was based on uh fire, not necessarily air. And it was what would we figured would be more manageable in relation to neighborhoods. Okay.

Before it was determined that the town board did not want to subject neighborhoods in any event to battery energy storage. And there might be I don't know perhaps Jeff you have experience with this but there might be some provisions or some steps that you that one could take even with a tier 2 to put an extra protection against groundwater in the event of a fire or a leak or or suppression. Um you know we've done that in other kinds of technologies. So perhaps that could be done. Yeah.

But a lot of that also is covered in the code in the New York code here. Um, that's what I was looking for because the more the greater you get, the larger onus is on you. It's more ownorous what you got to do. So, um, you know, there's there's specifications in here that goes through the whole whole thing. And then, you know, I know that Tom already deals with it because we I like talking about it, but even here's diagram for if you're doing in your garage, right? what you're required to do and specifications for is there a tier 2 anywhere in Westchester that we know of I'm sure there is

I don't know off the top just to be curious to see what it looks like and how you know what's around it what it looks like and stuff like that are are they not putting tier 2 in New York City in some of the I like I wouldn't even know what it looks like looks like a It looks like a It looks like a trans It looks like a container. Just like a container. That's it. A shipping container. Okay. You are It's white to I mean it's and like or tan. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. So it's not that sexy. Just a big box. It's a big box. Big box. Typically behind some fencing that you can't you know. Yeah. There's one in Austin. Where?

In Austining. Are they asking? Do you know where? I believe it's down by the waterfront. Okay. I believe. Yeah. Your point. All right. So, I have um three comments right now. I can summarize them for you if you'd like. I'll send you mine also, by the way.

All right. So, so the intention here, um, I think the town board gave you a deadline of March 19th, um, to get comments back to them. So, we can create a draft letter for you to review at your next meeting if you would like based on your comments this evening. And if Jeff, you want to circulate comments to us? Yeah. Um, are they still continuing the public hearing to next week? Yes, the the public hearing has been continued to the 24th. Okay. Or to next week. No, I don't know if it's next week or it continues on the 24th. I think it was continued to the 24th. Okay. I could be wrong.

I'll I'll look and say also. Okay. I think that makes sense. Okay. Yep. Good. So, do you want to um pass, you know, direct us to write that? Sure. to draft that for me. A motion for staff to direct a letter. To draft direct letter to draft. Second. All in favor? I. Okay. Excellent. Thank you. So, our next and last item are the minutes from uh February 3. Anyone any changes? No, I was good with these. Yeah, yeah. Yes. If so, is there a motion to adopt the minutes of uh February 3?

Motion. Second. Second. All in favor? I I. And is there a motion to close the uh hearing, the meeting? Motion. Second. Second. All in favor? I. Okay, we're all set. Thank you. Thank you.