Town of Huron Planning Board Minutes
Regular meeting - February 2, 2009
Call to Order: Larry Lockwood called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
Members present: Larry Lockwood, Joe Snyder, Jack McGuire, Chris Kenyon and Charles Boorgaard
Other Officials present: Laurie Crane - Town Supervisor, David Buisch - Councilman, David Scudder - Assessor and Roger Gallant - Building Inspector
Correspondence:
Planning Newsletter was the only correspondence received.
Approval of Minutes: Joe Snyder moved, seconded by Chris Kenyon to accept the minutes of January 5, 2009 as submitted.
Old Business:
1. Cost information for furnaces with different levels of efficiency presented by Charles Boorgaard.
Charles provided pricing for various furnaces from different manufacturers. Charles said there was a three to four thousand dollar difference for the more efficient furnaces. Another option available is buying used units for around $4000. He also reported that there is actually a pamphlet available on eBay to build your own furnace.
Joe asked about installation cost.
Charles said that installation costs varied. The cost of the insulated tubing that goes underground is approximately $13 per lineal foot. He emphasized that the prices he provided were just for the cost of the basic unit.
Joe asked if Charles could rework the figures to include the installation, etc. so that the public would be able to compare the costs of putting in the different units.
Charles was concerned about quoting prices to the public. The figures that he is using are approximate and could certainly change at any time.
The consensus was that Charles could give a range of prices as opposed to specific prices. Charles will put something together for the next meeting.
2. Draft proposal for Outdoor Wood burning Furnaces presented by Joe Snyder
Joe had two handouts, one titled "Chimney Reinforcement Recommendations" from Central Boiler.
The other handout was a draft of the Town of Huron Outdoor Wood Furnace Regulations. He stated that
he had tried to take the thoughts of the board from their discussions over the last few months in order to create a document that would be the basis for discussion. The handout contains two tables: one for unrestricted operation and the other for limited operation (Oct. 1st through May 1st). He listed three models that he proposed might be used in the regulations. The Unqualified model would be one that has been on the market for some time and does not meet any of the regulations proposed by the EPA. The next model,
the Phase I unit is about 70% cleaner than the unqualified unit, and the third model, the Phase II unit is
about 90% cleaner than the unqualified unit. (EPA information)
Joe used 20 feet as the standard distance from the property line and then determined the setback distance based on the efficiency of the furnace. He used two different scenarios - one with a minimum stack height of 2 feet above adjacent residences and one without a minimum stack height. The proposal reflects the idea that more efficient furnaces would require less setback. (Example: the most efficient type of furnace meeting the 2ft stack requirement would have a setback requirement of 125ft, with no stack ht requirement - 175ft; least efficient models meeting the 2ft stack ht. would have a 225 ft setback requirement, with no stack ht requirement - 300 ft.)
Charles liked the numbers Joe used - he stated that two states had already adopted regulations using similar distances.
Larry asked for other reactions from board members.
Chris liked it because he thought that it would give people options.
Joe agreed since it would allow someone to pick their unit, pick their months of operation, pick how high they wanted their stack, etc.
Jack asked about the second page of the handout on which Joe had tried to organize the information presented by Charles at the last meeting.
Joe said that the information was difficult to put into a table that was easy to understand.
Jack remarked on the stack height requirements which ranged from 2 feet to 5 feet above adjacent residences.
Joe said that the recommendation from Central Boiler was 2 feet above the eave of the adjacent residence.
The discussion then dealt with the difficulty of someone installing a furnace next to a property that has no residence on it. Joe's feeling was that when the regulation is drafted, it should put the burden of compliance on the owner of the wood burning furnace, not on the person who builds on the adjacent property.
Charles asked how the board would handle any units produced in the future that met even stricter standards.
Joe stated that there would have to be a revision to the law.
Dave Buisch asked if, in the case of someone building on an adjacent property, enforcing any requirements on the furnace owner would be triggered by a complaint as opposed to the town automatically stepping in.
Joe thought that it would probably be triggered by a complaint.
Charles could also see the possibility of an issue arising if the adjacent homeowner wanted to sell the property and the wood burning furnace was seen as detrimental to a sale. He wondered if furnaces should be placed as if there were a residence on the adjacent property.
Dave Buisch was concerned about further burden on the town if they had to follow up on a lot of complaints when new residences were built or properties changed hands.
Joe said that the board had originally started with the regulation being based on distance from property lines but the board felt that in order to make this work, they needed to use the adjacent residence.
Joe asked if the board wanted to take some time to review the information.
Jack said that the numbers presented looked reasonable.
Chris stated that he thought it was right in line with what other municipalities had done.
Joe will integrate the table into a revised draft of a proposed law, which would address some of the issues that the board has discussed such as adjacent properties with no residence.
Dave Scudder thought the approach was appropriate and suggested that perhaps a statement should accompany the proposal that would make the public aware of other municipalities' regulations.
Chris also shared a picture with the board of an outdoor wood burning furnace which had heavy smoke pouring out. It had a very short stack which probably hindered dissipation of the smoke.
Joe said he will work on the draft proposal for the next meeting.
Jack and Chris complemented both Joe and Charles on all the work they had done on this project.
3. Tax Issues for Townhouses and Condominiums
Dave Scudder was present to speak about this issue. He provided information from Attorney Alan Knauf's office which contained information on a bill being considered by the state. He reviewed information about "common property" not being taxable and how some developers are taking advantage of the law. He shared that Attorney Knauf is currently involved with a case in Parma that is dealing with this issue. Dave asked the board to read over the handout. He asked that they treat it as a draft and keep it confidential as the document requests. He expects to have something more refined by next month's meeting.
Jack had done some research and thought that it looked like the state was going to drop the bill and leave it up to the local governments.
Dave responded that he thought that the state would allow the NY City region to retain the old law but that Upstate could propose a local option. He felt that we needed to get something into the local law.
Joe thought the handout seemed to only deal with existing properties and wondered what would happen to those that would develop in the future.
Concerns were that the wording of the State bill did not really fit the local situation.
Jack pointed out that there were references in the document to changing local law.
Dave Buisch shared that local law can be written differently than the State proposal in order to fit the local situation.
Dave Scudder said that one of the things that need to be done is to develop a definition of a condominium -what it includes and doesn't include. Otherwise, the possibility exists for properties that are similar to be taxed differently. Dave clarified that the old law was based on rental income, not assessed value.
Laurie Crane asked if there was another law that dealt with new condominiums, since this seemed to deal with conversions of properties to condominium status.
Dave Scudder said that they are focusing on the conversions because that is the current issue.
Joe asked if Dave saw this as a joint effort of the Assessors, Attorneys and Planning to investigate what needs to be done to put the necessary protections in place at the local level. Dave agreed. Joe also wondered if there were any municipalities that have a model law or have adopted a law.
Dave stated that Alan is looking into that to see if there is one that has been court tested already. He hoped to have more information for the next meeting.
New Business:
1. County Planning Board Monthly Report
The County meeting was cancelled due to weather.
2. Review Application for Restaurant next to Sodus Bay Bridge
Roger Gallant had provided the board with copies of the application. Roger gave a brief history of the building. The County Planning Board had denied the owner's last application for a hot dog stand there because of an incomplete site plan. They were concerned over parking and traffic issues. Currently, the building does not have proper septic but Roger stated that it is being taken care of. The Planning Board had asked to review applications which fall under the Special Permit category and this application will require a Special Permit.
Joe asked if it was wetland or just adjacent to the wetland.
Roger said that it is adjacent to, not part of the wetland.
Joe asked if Roger knew what limitations there are or special permitting necessary because of its proximity to the wetland.
Roger said there may not be any restrictions. Members wondered about that since the building is so close to the wetland. The current structure is only 30ft from the wetlands.
Dave Scudder asked when the DEC would comment on the application.
Roger stated that would happen after the Zoning Board completed the SEQR.
He stated that one of the issues is that the owner is not building new and the old structure is grandfathered but noted that the building use is not.
Joe said that parking and entering and exiting the premises would be an issue.
Dave Scudder stated that since it is on a county road, the County Planning Board would deal with those issues.
Charles stated that it seemed that there was a lot that the applicant would have to go through before approval.
Joe said he was generally not opposed to it. He thought that this type of service business might be preferable to portable stands.
In discussing parking, it was noted that the site plan did not show the existing septic system or the addition to the septic system and those things could affect the amount of parking available.
Joe asked if the applicant had been advised that this plan may not be acceptable.
Roger said that the applicant had been advised by the Building Inspector in person and in letter form.
Charles wondered about enforcing any parking issues, since the bar up the road has cars parked on the road quite often.
Jack wondered what the Planning Board's next step should be. He asked Larry what he thought based on his experience with the County Planning Board.
Larry said that last time the County Board had problems with the application due to parking issues and site distances.
Joe said that Roger had done what the Planning Board had asked in regards to applications requiring a Special Permit.
Roger asked that the board put their comments in writing for the Zoning Board.
After discussion, it was decided that the clerk would draft a summary of the board's comments from the minutes of the meeting and send it to the board members for their approval. Once approved, the comments would be sent to the Zoning Board for their meeting on February 10th.
3. Keyholing (Keyhole Development)
Larry stated that this was one of the issues that the board decided to focus on in 2009.
Joe asked if someone wanted to champion that issue.
Jack said that since he would be away for a couple of months, he would not volunteer.
Chris said that he was willing to take on the next item on the agenda which was the Recreational Trails. Dave Scudder asked that if Chris took that on that he try to attend the Inter-Municipal Committee meetings. Chris said he would try.
Larry offered to search for some information on the issue to bring back to the board.
Some examples of Keyholing in the area that the board discussed were Shaker Tract, Port Bay, LeRoy Island and the Michael Virts' proposal which is now before the Zoning Board.
Roger said that when someone does decide to champion this issue, he could take them on a road trip to a community in Webster. It is newly developed on Irondequoit Bay and fits the "Keyholing" description.
4. Recreational Trails
Chris Kenyon did some checking after the last meeting. He said that in 2001, the town had been part of a study after receiving a grant. Chris had a printout of the study. He had also talked to Chuck Bush about the project. Chuck's concern would be liability for the town. Chris thought that maybe they could tie Lake Bluff Road right in with the State Park. Chuck said he would check out the shoulders, etc. in the spring. The 2001 study can be found on the Wayne County Planning website under "Projects". The printout was "Sodus Bay Waterfront Initiative" 2001 CCDR Summer Institute.
Larry thought that starting the conversation with Chuck Bush was a good first step and suggested that Chris could also talk with Kevin Rooney who is the new County Highway Superintendent.
Chris will ask him about the feasibility of such a project. Chris thought it would be a good idea to start on Lake Bluff at Ridge and continue to Chimney Bluffs State Park which they've been working on. Chris said that there was supposed to be a biking trail from Pultneyville to Sodus Point which never came about. Chris said he would take on the assignment and talk to Chuck Bush and the County. He would ask if there was enough room, what it would cost, when the roads are due to be paved again and offer to go out and look at it in the spring.
Larry said there would be an extra cost for the paving which would probably have to come from somewhere other than the highway budget.
Chris said he thought that some of the local business owners like Sue Smith would be glad to help with promotion of a trail.
Roger suggested that he also get in touch with the owner of Lake Bluff Campground to help with the promotion.
Chris said that a fact-finding could be done to see if it's feasible and then proceed from there.
5. Other Issues
Joe asked about the meeting on Wind Energy. Jack said he was given short notice and did not attend. Laurie Crane attended and reported that most of the discussion was on the failure of Empire Wind to pay the town for the lawyer.
Joe remarked that both meetings were on very short notice.
Laurie said that Alan Knauf was looking into information that he will bring back to another meeting.
Joe had a publication on wind power which he shared. He thought that the town could get the publication for free if they expressed interest in wind energy.
Joe also asked about the D&L issues that were brought up at the last meeting.
Roger reported that when the weather breaks the company would be taking care of the items in question.
Joe suggested that in future cases of this type, the board could ask for some type of plantings or something similar to make things invisible from the road.
Roger has been in contact with both the owner and the attorney and they are being cooperative.
6. Email communications
During the month of January copies of the following emails were received by the clerk:
From Joe Snyder: Outdoor Wood Furnaces - Proposed Setback Table
Adjournment: Joe Snyder moved, seconded by Charles Boorgaard to adjourn the meeting at 9:20 PM.
Respectfully submitted,
Kathy Grandjean, clerk
