A lesson in small business finance

During the August 5 Planning Board meeting, the Planning Board, and hopefully the staff supporting the residents and the planning board, received a lesson in Small Business finance - that should be applied in all of their work with any Small Business looking to invest and improve the quality of services and opportunities in the town.

So to jump ahead, an applicant - who was before the board previously with her plans, presented an Amended Site Plan for 8 Barrister Row where she wants to convert a currently existing detached garage to a studio for movement/yoga. Since her last visit before the planning board, she had received Board of Health confirmation that her existing sewer/water services were adequate, she outlined the existing parking on her plan, submitted photos of the proposed lighting. The Board requested some language to be put on the site plan that indicated that the parking would be sufficient for the employees and clients. Then... the board voted to "authorize the planner to draft a resolution approving the plan" to be voted on at the next meeting (in September). The Applicant looked like someone had punched her in the gut. She waited until the end of the meeting and then approached the Planning Board again... and explained that she thought, because she had met all the requirements laid out in the previous meeting, she would be given permission to go ahead and apply for a building permit the day after the planning board meeting. She explained -- she has no investors, her business plan requires her to generate income to cover her costs asap... and, this is most troubling, this process of waiting until the next board meeting was never explained to her. The Planning Board Lawyer spoke up and explained that the board COULD vote on a verbal resolution (especially since there is video documentation) and that there is no reason to wait until a written resolution is provided. WOW... and few eyebrows shot up.... and the board went ahead with passing a resolution approving the ammended site plan. Good outcome, thankfully the applicant had the courage to approach the board and believes so much in her project/her business. BUT ... she should have never, ever been surprised by the current process, that should have been explained to her when she initially approached the Town AND how many other small business people (I can think of a few..... like the dragging out of a discussion about 5 parking spaces being paved vs. gravel for an investor who is looking to improve a property which has been derelict for years, or a small business person who received a stop work order while paying rent... to discover that the planning board didn't need to make a decision). Time is money, people are paying rents, paying interest on mortgages and business loans, their expenses continue to accrue and keeping clients happy and paying is always a challenge. Making things harder for them by not properly explaining the process, or introducing uneeded delays/requirements is inappropriate. I hope the Planning Board Members remember this perspective.

So...the rest of the meeting:

The Applicant on 562-563 Old State Road who is working to improve this property that has been vacant for a very long time and who has run the gauntlet of both Zoning and Planning Boards worked through the paving vs. gravel details for the site plan and the Board Voted to approved the resolution prepared by the Town Planner, thus approving the project.

Central Hudson returned, having submitted a revised plan that included a temporary gravel pad, and received approval for the Chelsea HPFF DC Cable Terminal Replacement Project at 114 Carnwath Farms Lane.

A consultant representing T-Mobile is making a request to increase the height of an existing Tower from 79 feet to 87 feet at 25 Don Bosco Boulevard to overcome tree line interference. They have requested approval from the FAA, It is below the FAA requirements to put a light onto the top of the tower - have received letters from the Town Planner & Engineer, as well as the County with their comments. The town requested a photo simulation of the tower extension, and to submit the prior approved plan in the next round of the application (isn't that something the building department should be able to make available to the Plannng Board and the applicant?).

Then a "interesting" discussion on a Subdivision Request on Smithtown Road and Cedar Hill Road. - Interesting because the current property spans the Wappinger/Fishkill Town Line - so there is current 1 lot, but two tax parcels, the requested subdivision would create 2 lots, which would mean 3 tax parcels. The Town of Fishkill has sent a letter with their OK to the plan. A public hearing is scheduled for September 4 on this project.

Hudson Valley Scrap Kings, LLC - who recently purchased 1980 Route 9D, came to discuss their plans to clean-up the current scrap yard and build a 4,000 sq ft. facility, removed some current buidlings, and improve the aesthetics of the property. While the owners indicated that the DEC is very happy with their plans, there was no mention of the status of open spills documented on the DEC website. Much more to come on this project.

The plan to sub-divide 39-41 Middlebush Road has hit a snag because Tri-Muni has turned down the request to hook up the buildings sewer services, requiring that a septic be built... which changes the set-back requirements. The site plan will have to be ammended.

CarMax Auto Superstore, sent an engineer and lawyer to request a site plan extension for their project at 1105-1115 Route 9. There is a bit of a conundrum because they need to demonstrate that an appropriate septic system can be built, but the way that the Board of Health requires them to do that is to put in a fill pad 126 feet by 22 feet - have it go through a freeze/thaw cycle before they will get approval. But to do that work, they need a building permit, which requires an approved site plan. The Board understood the dilemma and asked the planner to prepare a resolution to be presented at the next Board meeting. There was also a discussion about whether the current buildings should now be demolished, or to wait. A bond may be required, as well as a security fence. The extension was also approved - from August 7, 2024 to August 6, 2025.

Then the lawyer from Chelsea Farm Subdivision appeared before the board, (please remember the Planning Board approved an extension to allow the property owner to plant trees this fall during the last board meeting.) Apparently the resolution wasn't specific enough... and there are now two potential buyers of the property, one requesting that the site plan - which was approved years ago - be extended and transferred to new owners. The other buyer's interest does not include a housing/subdivision plan. Nothing has been signed at the point of the meeting, and the board was quite skeptical. Back on the agenda for September 4th.

The Planning Board did discuss the proposed local Law # 2 and Local Law # 3, which would clarify some definitions in the zoning code and enable tattoo artists to open establishments in zoning codes for Neighborhood businesses, reinstate protections on the placement of gasoline filling stations - all steps consistent with the Town Boards moretorium for large projects.