Town of Bolton SEQR = State Environmental Quality Review
PLANNING BOARD PB = (Town of Bolton) Planning Board
MINUTES WCPB = Warren County Planning Board
Thursday, July 22, 2004 APA = Adirondack Park Agency
6:00 p.m. LGPC = Lake George Park Commission
- DEC = Department of Environmental Conservation
Present: Chairman Herb Koster, Sandi Aldrich, Henry Caldwell, John Gaddy,
Chauncey Mason, Mitzi Nittmann, Don Roessler, Zoning Administrator Pam Kenyon, Town Counsel Michael Muller
Chairman Koster opened the meeting at 6:10 by asking for corrections to the June minutes. There being none, a motion was made by C. Mason to approve the June 17, 2004 minutes as written. Seconded by D. Roessler. All in favor. Motion carried.
1) SPR04-21 KOLVEK, RICHARD & MARY. Represented by Atty Susan Millington. Seek Type II Site Plan Review for a land use within 250’ of the lake shore, specifically for the construction of a proposed dock complex/boathouse. Section 156.00, Block 2, Part of Lot 90, Zone RCL3. Property Location: 5516 Lake Shore Dr. The WCPB determined no county impact with the condition that there be no land bridge to access the sundeck. Subject to SEQR.
This item was tabled, as the additional requested was not provided.
2) SPR04-23 ABBOTT, SCOTT. Seeks Type II Site Plan Review to timber-harvest that parcel designated as Section 185.00, Block 2, Lot 35, Zones RL3 & LC25. Property Location: Coolidge Hill Road and known as the Alpine View Subdivision. The WCPB determined no county impact.
Mr. Abbott explained that they were before the PB in the spring for a subdivision of this parcel, for which approval was granted. He noted that they plan to do less clearing than is associated with a timber-harvesting project. He referred to professional forester Dick Cipperly, who continued the presentation. Mr. Cipperly explained that the applicant wishes to minimally clear toward the east from the proposed house sites, such that no area will result in less than 60 sq ft of basal area. They will mark trees to be taken down, most of which will remain on the property since there isn’t much harvestable wood.
The purpose of the light clearing is to obtain a filtered view from each of the building envelopes. They will leave species of trees that tend to be long-living and best suitable to a rural setting. The property had been open land at one time. Thereafter pine, oak, hemlock and northern hardwoods grew. They plan to leave more trees between lot lines to screen the house sites from each other. Mr. Cipperly indicated that he walked the property with John Peck of WC Soil & Water Conservation District, who was satisfied with the proposal.
J. Gaddy was supportive of the applicant’s intent, but was reluctant to approve any clearing prior to site plan review for development of individual house sites, as historically double clearing has occurred on similarly proposed projects. Mr. Cipperly felt it was better to allow a professional forester to control the clearing for a filtered view, rather than a homeowner who may not be knowledgeable of the best species of trees that should remain. C. Mason suggested deed restrictions be proposed to address such clearing issues.
The Board had no concerns with the application meeting the criteria of 200-31.
Motion by C. Mason to approve the application with the condition that the applicant add to the deeds and covenants a restriction whereby specifying that any further cutting other than the area for the house envelope will be subject to Planning Board review. Seconded by J. Gaddy. All in favor. Motion carried.
3) SPR04-24 WATERHOUSE, LAWRENCE & TINA. Represented by Tom Jarrett of Jarrett-Martin Engineers. In accordance with Section 125.13C1 of the stormwater regulations, seek site plan review for a major project, specifically to remove more than 15,000 square feet of vegetation. Approximately 30,000 square feet is proposed. Section 186.07, Block 1, Lot 4, Zone RM1.3 & RCH5000. Property Location: 4838 Lake Shore Drive. Subject to SEQR. The WCPB determined no county impact. NOTE: Partial clearing has already taken place without approvals.
At the applicant’s request, this item was moved to the end of the agenda.
Atty Michael O’Connor also represented this application. He stated that they are seeking approval of the stormwater management plan for the area to be cleared for the house and parking area, which encompasses approximately 2,330 sq ft for the house and 1,000 sq ft for the parking area. Any other area disturbed during construction will be re-vegetated. The new structure will be accessed by the existing roadway, which will be upgraded.
Atty O’Connor referred to the retention area where stormwater from the house will be directed. They intend to install a waterline running across the lawn from the main house to the new structure. There will be a force main for the septic going from the proposed structure to a septic absorption area toward the west of the property. Mr. Jarrett noted that setbacks can be met from the existing septic field on the Bixby property to the north. He indicated that they will presumably have to blast for the septic tank and pump pit.
When asked, Mr. Jarrett and Atty O’Connor indicated there would not be any further clearing beyond what was already done, except for a small portion of the parking area and a retention area. They may need to blast a small area in one corner of the proposed house location. The house will be on slab. There is no boathouse proposed at this time. Atty O’Connor could not explain why areas were cleared beyond what was necessary for the house.
Noting that a lot of cutting had been done without approvals, the Board indicated they would like to see a replanting plan. Atty O’Connor indicated that a landscaping or replanting plan had not yet been developed. He noted that the landscaping around the proposed structure will match that around the main structure, and he asked if they could submit a landscaping plan after they build the house and see what it looks like. P. Kenyon explained that the applicant was granted a variance on a specific house design, and would therefore have to seek re-approval if that design changed. Atty O’Connor stated that the footprint submitted to the ZBA would not change. P. Kenyon indicated that any change would require re-review. The Board felt that a landscaping plan should be submitted prior to completion of the house, noting that they normally review all aspects of a project simultaneously.
Motion by H. Caldwell to accept the application as complete, waive a public hearing, make a negative declaration, and grant final approval with the condition that a landscaping plan be presented to the Planning Board within 6 months. Seconded by D. Roessler. 6 in favor. 1 (J. Gaddy) opposed. Motion carried.
4) SD04-19 CALDWELL, EDGAR & JANE NEILL. Seek to divide into 2 lots that parcel designated as Section 171.00, Block 1, Lot 1, Zone LC25. Property Location: 304 Edgecomb Pond Road. Minor Subdivision. Sketch Plan Review. Subject to SEQR.
This item was heard after Item #5, as the applicant had not yet arrived.
Mr. Caldwell explained that he and his wife own 85 acres on Edgecomb Pond Road. They wish to subdivide off a 12-acre parcel on the southern end for their son Samuel. The new lot will have 500’ of road frontage and meet all the requirements. Mr. Caldwell indicated there are wetlands at the other end of the property, and there are no deed restrictions on the property.
The Board had no concerns with the application meeting the criteria of C1-C7 of the SEQR form.
Motion by D. Roessler to accept the application as complete, waive a public hearing, make a negative declaration, convert the sketch plan to final and grant final approval as presented. Seconded by S. Aldrich. All in favor. Motion carried.
5) SPR03-15 NEACY, KEVIN. In accordance with Chapter 125.13C1 of the stormwater regulations, seeks Site Plan Review for a major project, specifically to remove more than 15,000 square feet of vegetation. Section 213.09, Block 1, Lots 10.1 & Section 213.05, Block 1, Lot 1.1*, Zones RM1.3 & LC25. Property Location: Adjacent to 4041 Lake Shore Drive. Subject to SEQR. The WCPB determined no county impact with the condition that the area to be cleared for the development of the house be appropriately managed with stormwater and erosion controls.
*corrected from agenda
Mr. Neacy explained that he was in front of the Board approximately a year ago, at which time the Board requested information on how runoff would be dealt with at the base of the property, which he had addressed. Town Engineer Tom Nace reviewed the plan and indicated he is basically satisfied with the overall plan, although he indicated concern with the derivation of some of the numbers in the stormwater report by Dennis Dickinson.
M. Nittmann wondered if the house would be in the vicinity of where the driveway ends, as shown on the plans. Mr. Neacy indicated it would. The driveway would be approximately 8-10’ wide in most areas and up to 12’ where there are turns. H. Koster was concerned with the radius of the turns (which appeared to be 90% angles) for emergency vehicle access. Mr. Neacy indicated he would address this. D. Roessler felt that a fire hose could reach the proposed house location from the hammerhead area.
M. Nittmann wondered if there were wetlands on the property, as both times she walked it, it was very wet. Mr. Neacy indicated that it was wet due to the heavy snowmelt in the spring and the amount of rain thereafter. He noted that they corrected the problem with the culvert along Route 9N, as there was ice build up last year.
M. Nittmann wondered who would design and supervise the installation of the culverts, as she was concerned over poor construction on other recent projects in Town. She noted there was little detail about the culverts and the inlets and outlets on Mr. Neacy’s plan. H. Koster suggested that the Board require project engineer Dennis Dickinson to provide more detail and be held responsible for its installation/construction. P. Kenyon noted that Mr. Nace had signed off on the project, to which H. Koster responded that Mr. Nace would likely not do a final site inspection.
Counsel noted that as a result of recent litigation between LG Fund and the PB, the Town agreed to follow a procedure for stormwater management that includes the issuance of a stormwater permit, which requires the applicant to conform to what the PB and Town Engineer approved. It the applicant fails to do so, the applicant is required to pay for a site inspection by the Town Engineer and to bring the site into compliance.
The Board had no concerns with the application meeting the criteria of C1-C7 of the SEQR form.
Motion by H. Caldwell to accept the application as complete, waive a public hearing, make a negative declaration, and grant final approval as presented with the condition that the 2 right angle turns (in the access) be softened to be more acceptable to emergency vehicle access to the top of the property. Seconded by D. Roessler. 6 in favor. 1 (M. Nittmann) opposed. Motion carried.
6) SD04-18 GABAY, EUGENE & CHRISTINE. Represented by David Bolster, LLS. Seek to amend a previously approved plat, specifically to re-aggregate those parcels designated Section 185.19, Block 1, Lot 44 & Section 199.07, Block 1, Lot 7 then divide same into 4 lots. Zone RCL3. Property Location: Off of South Trout Lake Road approximately 1,000’ from Coolidge Hill Road. Minor Subdivision. Sketch Plan Review. Subject to SEQR.
H. Koster wondered if this would be considered a major subdivision, since there were originally 7 lots. P. Kenyon noted that because the original subdivision was done more than 10 years ago, it would not be considered major, as the Board only considers aggregation over the last 10 years. H. Caldwell asked about the topography. Mr. Bolster replied that the area was relatively flat, but drops down to the north. He believes there may be wetlands on the northwest corner of the property. The length of the proposed road is approximately 700’, with a 75’ cul-de-sac at the end. H. Koster asked that pre- and post- construction contour lines be added to the map. The road will be owned by the HOA. S. Aldrich asked for proposed language for a road maintenance agreement. Mr. Bolster was not sure of the square footage of proposed disturbance for the road, but he indicated he would add this information to the map. H. Koster informed him that if there would be more than 15,000 sq ft of disturbance, it would become a major stormwater project. The road surface is proposed at 12’ wide.
Motion by D. Roessler to accept the sketch plan as complete, pending the following information: 1) pre-construction and post-construction contour lines for the road are added to the map; 2) wetlands, streams and watercourses are designated on the map; 3) a copy of the proposed deeds and restrictions/association bylaws is provided; 4) calculations on the total square footage of disturbance for the road is provided to determine whether the project is major or minor; 5) proposed language for the road maintenance agreement is provided. Seconded by S. Aldrich. All in favor. Motion carried.
7) SD04-21 THOMSON, WILLIAM. Seeks to amend a previously approved plat, specifically to create a lot line adjustment between those parcels designated as Section 171.07, Block 2, Lot 43.1 & 41. Zones RM1.3 & RL3. Property Location: 11 Aviator Lane. Sketch Plan Review. Subject to SEQR.
Mr. Thomson explained that he is seeking a lot line adjustment to increase the size of the “lower lot” (not labeled with a lot number, formerly owned by Lake George Association) so that he may build a house on it. Currently it is too small to fit a septic on it and the soils are better in the area they plan to add to the lot. The proposal is to take 1.07± acres from Lot 1 and add it to the subject parcel (currently 0.65± acres and not part of the original Thomson subdivision), for a total of 1.72± acres. Counsel noted that the previous owner, LGA, had a deed restriction prohibiting a home from being built on the lot. Mr. Thomson stated that he is addressing the matter by adding acreage to the parcel, to which the LGA agreed.
The Board had no concerns with the application meeting the criteria of C1-C7 of the SEQR form.
Motion by D. Roessler to accept the application as complete, waive a public hearing, make a negative declaration, convert the sketch plan to final and grant final approval as presented to merge 0.65± acres from Lot #1 with the undesignated parcel, which will become 1.72± acres. Seconded by M. Nittmann. All in favor. Motion carried.
Item #4 was heard at this point.
8) SD04-20 SMITH, WAYNE. Seeks to divide into four lots that parcel designated as Section 123.00, Block 2, Lot 45, Zone LC45. Property Location: 146 Alderbrook Road. Note: a variance is required for deficient density. 180 acres are required: 35.98 acres exists. It is noted that lot 3 will be revised to meet the 400’ width required. Minor Subdivision. Sketch Plan Review. Subject to SEQR.
Because the associated variance was not granted, this item was deemed null and void.
9) SD04-23 LAVIT JR., HENRY. Seeks to merge those parcels designated as Section 139.00, Block 1, Lots 70 & 71 and then divide the same into 3 parcels. Zones RR10 & LC45. Property Location: 394 & 416 County Route 11. Sketch Plan Review. Minor Subdivision. Subject to SEQR. Subject to WCPB and APA review.
This item was tabled at the applicant’s request.
10) SD04-24 RONNING, ROLF & BUDNER, STEVEN. Seek to amend a previously approved plat (SD04-05), specifically to create a lot line adjustment between those parcels designated as 139.00, Block 1, Lot 47 & 48, Zone RL3. Property Location: 29 High Meadow Farm Road off of New Vermont Road. Sketch Plan Review. Minor Subdivision. Subject to SEQR.
Mr. Ronning explained that Mr. Budner wishes to increase the size of his lot. They propose to add 2 acres to Mr. Budner’s 4-acre parcel from Mr. Ronning’s 165-acre adjacent parcel (formerly known as High Meadow Farm and currently under PB review as “Saddlebrook Subdivision”). There will be no new lots created.
The Board had no concerns with C1-C7 of the SEQR form.
Motion by D. Roessler to accept the application as complete, waive a public hearing, make a negative declaration, convert the sketch plan to final and grant final approval as presented. Seconded by C. Mason. All in favor. Motion carried.
11) SD04-16 SADDLEBROOK SUBDIVISION. Rolf Ronning. Seeks to amend previously approved plats (SD03-19 & SD04-05 formerly known as Mowery/High Meadow Farm), specifically to merge those parcels designated Section 139.00, Block 1, Lots 26.22 & 48 and then divide same into 22 lots. Zone RL3. Property Location: 83 High Meadow Farm Road. Major Subdivision. Sketch Plan Review. Subject to SEQR. This item was tabled last month pending additional information. See Planning Office letter for specifics.
Mr. Ronning stated that he has made modifications to the map as requested by the Board last month. They have added 2’ contour lines. He noted that the bridge would straddle the property line to the adjacent property to the south, owned by Ronning, Inc and known as tax map number 139.00-1-46.1. The bridge is subject to DEC approval. Mr. Ronning stated that DEC is not really concerned about the width of the bridge, but rather the disturbance to the streambed and whether there is adequate space to accommodate 100-year storm conditions. J. Gaddy asked for details on the stream crossing at the westerly portion of the property. Mr. Ronning stated that they would propose large a culvert(s) there, not a bridge(s). M. Nittmann noted that there was another bridge proposed on Lot 9.
H. Koster asked about what appeared to be 4’ of fill proposed at the top of one end of the bridge. Mr. Ronning stated that from what he has been told, they propose to pour concrete abutments on either side, away from the streambed, using reinforced concrete with I-beams. H. Koster questioned the fact that the bridge surface appeared to be covered by 4’ of fill at the center. Mr. Ronning referred to other stream crossings along CR11and other roads that are proposed the same way, noting that it would be built to DEC standards. He estimated that the bridge would be approx 20-30’ long, depending on what was required for stormwater, and depending on the design of the bridge. Mr. Ronning stated that he has not yet submitted the bridge design to DEC, as he wishes to first get preliminary conceptual approval from this Board. H. Koster stated that he was still concerned about meeting the 10% maximum grade requirement. He was reluctant to have the Board give any type of conceptual approval for the road without first seeing a bridge design accepted by DEC. Again, Mr. Ronning indicated his desire to get conceptual approval prior to investing time and money into further design.
Mr. Ronning noted that the APA would be visiting the site on August 4th to flag the wetlands. M. Nittmann noted that 6 of the items the Board requested last month were not reflected on the map, including complete contour lines and current adjacent property owners. H. Koster suggested Mr. Ronning make the map into 2 pieces if necessary to show all the information requested by the Board. Mr. Ronning noted that Soil Engineer Charlie Maine did additional test pits (requested by the Board last month) with an auger because they could not get machinery in these locations. J. Gaddy requested test pits be dug closer to the proposed house locations. When asked who flagged the APA wetlands, Mr. Ronning responded that a guy from APA came to the site last fall and indicated that the wetlands were so obvious, they didn’t need to be flagged. Mr. Ronning invited Board members to accompany the APA representative at the site on August 4th.
Regarding the bridge detail, Mr. Ronning asked permission for an extension of the submittal deadline (2 weeks prior to the meeting), as he anticipates it may take some time for DEC to review and approve the bridge. The Board agreed to this. J. Gaddy asked Mr. Ronning if he had discussed with Niagara Mohawk how they would bring utility lines into the subdivision. Mr. Ronning stated he had not, noted that NiMo has indicated to him that they won’t even consider a request for power until subdivision approval is granted. He is not certain whether he will propose above or underground power, but believes he meets the requirements to go above ground. (He noted that the school got some type of waiver to have aboveground power off CR11, should they obtain the parcel in the adjacent property.)
J. Gaddy asked about provisions for recreation. Mr. Ronning offered to make the wetland area on the map a public park. The Board did not seem favorable to this, so Mr. Ronning agreed to incorporate the $400 recreation fee per lot instead.
H. Koster requested that Mr. Ronning provide a map showing pre- and post-construction contour lines so that the Board can better assess the disturbance involved with the road prior to its construction. J. Gaddy noted that the course of the stream running through proposed Lot 12 had been altered in the past and he would like to see this remediated. Mr. Ronning suggested they address the matter on August 4, when the APA representative will visit the site.
Motion by J. Gaddy to table the application pending further information, as discussed (DEC approved bridge design, pre-construction and post-construction contour lines, and more test pits closer to the proposed house locations). Seconded by C. Mason. All in favor. Motion carried.
12) SD04-25 WRIGHT’S FARM SUBDIVISION. Rolf Ronning. Seeks to amend a previously approved plat (SD03-01) to incorporate a no-cutting zone and right-of-way on lot number 6. Section 140.00, Block 1, Lot 5.1, Zone RL3. Property Location: Federal Hill Road. Sketch Plan Review. Subject to SEQR.
Mr. Ronning stated that the Halls’ property borders Wright’s Farm, and they would like a right-of-way over Lot 6, so that they don’t have to propose a driveway off of Federal Hill, where it is very steep. H. Caldwell wondered about the no cutting restriction shown on the map. Mr. Ronning stated that the previous owner wanted many deed restrictions that Mr. Ronning did not want to agree to. So instead, it was part of his agreement when he purchased the property that he would maintain a no-cutting zone in order to obtain the proposed easement. It was determined that a new mylar needed to be filed for the Wright’s Farm Subdivision showing this change.
There was a discussion about the condition of the roadway that is under construction at this site. P. Kenyon assured the Board that she visited the site with Mr. Ronning and Town Engineer Tom Nace, who indicated to P. Kenyon that a stop work order was not necessary, although he did request Mr. Ronning incorporate more silt fence and hay bales. Mr. Ronning stated that the slopes along the road would be covered with mesh for stabilization, now that all the cuts have been completed. H. Caldwell noted that there were culverts put in at the site that were not shown on the original plans, and he wondered if they were sized correctly. P. Kenyon stated that this is one of the issues Mr. Nace would be looking at with the applicant’s engineer, Dennis Dickinson. Mr. Ronning stated that there were basically 2 culverts they were going to enlarge, noting that they put in more culverts than they were asked to.
M. Nittmann had concerns with the fill slopes, specifically at the rear of the wetlands, to which Mr. Ronning responded there were some contour issues. He added that they plan to build a retention pond, for which dirt was brought in. M. Nittmann asked if there had been any compaction done in the areas where the fill reached 7-8’. Mr. Ronning stated that they put in about 1’ at a time, over which the bulldozer and trucks travel to compact it. He stated that they are currently putting down item 4, and once the road is established, they will work on the ditches and banks.
Regarding the easement for Hall, Mr. Ronning pointed out the easement area (0.24± acres), which only includes the white area with the driveway shown through it, not the hash-marked area marked as “no cutting area”. H. Koster noted that this was in essence decreasing the size of Lot 6 by quite a bit. Mr. Ronning indicated that the owner of Lot 6 would not be responsible for the proposed driveway accessing the Hall lot, although they would be responsible for the taxes on the property.
There was continued discussion on the road currently under construction. Counsel summarized the problem as being that the storm water plan approved by the Board is not what was actually done at the site, partially due to incorrect topography being submitted. Counsel suggested that the Board require the storm water plan be revised to represent what had been done at the site, and reviewed by the Board. H. Koster indicated he would like to see Mr. Nace’s recommendations implemented at the site and the revised plan placed on the agenda next month for the Board’s review. Mr. Ronning stated that he would bring an as-built drawing next month.
The Board had no concerns with the application meeting the criteria of C1-C7 of the SEQR form.
Motion by D. Roessler to accept the application as complete, waive a public hearing, make a negative declaration, convert the sketch plan to final and grant final approval as presented with the condition that the map dated June 15, 2004, revised July 1, 2004 (marked received July 8, 2004) be added to the original Wright’s Farm Subdivision map as an amendment and filed with the County, specifically involving the .24 acres of Lot 6. Seconded by M. Nittmann. All in favor. Motion carried.
Motion by J. Gaddy to obtain a report from the Town Engineer that will verify the changes in the as-built stormwater plan, which Mr. Ronning will submit to Mr. Nace prior to the meeting so the Board can have all the information at its next meeting. Seconded by M. Nittmann. All in favor. Motion carried.
13) SD04-26 BOLTON CENTRAL SCHOOL. Represented by Rolf Ronning. Seeks to divide into two lots that parcel designated as Section 171.15, Block 2, Lot 32. Zones GB5000 and RM1.3. Property Location: 26 Horicon Avenue. Sketch Plan Review. Minor Subdivision. Subject to SEQR.
This item was tabled at the applicant’s request.
14) SD04-08 BRANDOW, EDWARD. Trout Lake West. Represented by Rolf Ronning. Seeks to amend a previously approved plat (SD04-17), specifically to divide into 4 lots those parcels designated as Section 185.00, Block 3, Lots 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30. Zone RCL3. Property Location: Trout Lake Road. NOTE: This is a modification to a previously approved plat known as Trout Lake Shores II that was rescinded by the APA. Sketch Plan Review. Minor Subdivision. Subject to SEQR. This item was tabled at the April 22, 2004 meeting pending additional information.
Mr. Ronning indicated that he revised the map as requested by the Board when this was last heard, as follows: specific location of wetlands were added, the proposed driveway was relocated to address grade, and lot #5 was removed from the plan. Mr. Ronning and his surveyor/engineer Dennis Dickinson do not believe the existing 12% grade of the proposed driveway can be changed without extensive fills. Mr. Ronning would be willing to pave the areas where the grade is 12% if the Board so desired, noting that the proposed road is in the location of an old existing road, built years ago. As proposed, the highest amount of fill would be 7’.
H. Koster requested that pre- and post-construction contour lines be designated on the map so that the Board had an idea of the width of disturbance. M. Nittmann was concerned with the slope as proposed and indicated she would like a soil-testing engineer on site during construction. She referred to other projects where compaction was not done on the slopes, causing major siltation problems and weakening the structure of the road.
Motion by J. Gaddy to accept the sketch plan as complete and convert it to preliminary plat, with the following conditions: 1) the 2:1 slope on Sections A & B will be allowed, provided that the fill is compacted every 8” using a vibratory compaction method; and 2) the applicant submits a map showing an overlay of the existing contour lines along with the proposed contour lines, so that the Board can see the before and after changes. Seconded by H. Caldwell. All in favor. Motion carried.
15) SD04-22 PFAU, KENNETH & JANICE and PFAU, ROBERT & SUSAN. Seek to amend a previously approved plat known as Section #2 Sandy Lane Estates, approved September 23, 1982, specifically to create a lot line adjustment between those parcels designated as Section 200.14, Block 1, Lots 39 & 40. Zone RM1.3. Property Locations: 26 & 28 Birch Drive. Sketch Plan Review. Subject to SEQR.
H. Koster recused himself, as he is a neighbor to the applicant and the developer of Sandy Lane Estates. H. Caldwell chaired.
R. Pfau indicated they were seeking the lot line adjustment between the two lots to eliminate the need for a variance from the stream to the west.
The Board had no concerns with the application meeting the criteria of C1-C7 if the SEQR form.
Motion by D. Roessler to accept the application as complete, waive a public hearing, make a negative declaration, convert the sketch plan to final and grant final approval. Seconded by M. Nittmann. All in favor. Motion carried.
Item #3 was heard at this time.
On other business, the Board expressed concern over the need for a code enforcement officer and made the following motion.
Motion by C. Mason to strongly recommend to the Town Board that the Town hire a compliance officer as soon as possible for enforcement of the building codes, zoning regulations, and storm water regulations due to the high volume and technicality of applications, and the sensitivity of the lands in Bolton. Seconded by H. Caldwell. All in favor. Motion carried.
Respectfully submitted by,
Melanie Quigan
Recording Secretary
08/17/04