Turns out there are "bad" questions - Chickens ok, roosters not so much - Planning board - Nov 21

We are often told "there is no such thing as a bad question"... well, there are. Or rather, a question at the wrong time can be bad. When a project has been submitted to the planning board, gone through the public hearing process, had engineers address all the professional questions about water, fire code etc. -- that is NOT the time to wonder if the project fits the Town's comprehensive plan, if it is the type of project that the town should be encouraging or suggesting that we have "too many" of "these projects" (turns out the last one like this was 12 years ago) and "is there a way to monitor the number of people living there?" -(just think through the implications of that question and how that enforcement/discussion would occur). The project in question, a proposal to convert an adult home on Cooper Road to four apartments was before the planning board on Monday. That is when the planning board seems to have decided that the quality of life in Wappinger needed to be re-examined, apparently in some kind of mea culpa over earlier decisions they have made. The repurposing of an existing building into one providing housing for four households seems to be in keeping with preserving the good things about the town, while providing for additional housing. The Board finally reached an agreement to ask the planner to prepare a resolution approving the project.

This was a capstone to their agenda on Monday - which included approving the MidHudson Islamic centers request for lot line consolidation and the building of a pavilion, the approval of a Dog Grooming business on Chelsea Road -- which will be amended to include the business to be located in the existing home/or a shed yet to be built.

Also included in Monday's agenda was a discussion/initial public hearing for the Children's Enrichment Center at 2321-2325 Route 9D. The engineer for the project presented an update to the plan which included -

A restatement that it is a private membership organization, there will be no public use. The hours of operation will be 9 to 5 during the week, with some weekend activities.

Updates where the Handicap parking space will be and indication it will have a hard surface, in compliance with ADA.

The Septic Tank has been cleaned and found sufficient… with lateral service to the caretakers’ cottage. They have conducted Perc Tests.

The number of parking spaces the engineer, in his interpretation of the town code, thinks is required is 11 — and he is proposing 15, based on the number of memberships

A Landscape Berm — upon which a split rail fence will be installed has been pushed further back from the road.

A submission of the correspondence with the DOT.

Basically, the updated plan is a completion of the tasks outlined in the last meeting with the planning board.

The town planner then explained that there is still some concern with the number of parking spaces and that the town code doesn’t really deal with “valet-style” parking. He said the board would like them to use the calculations based on the amount of space that is considered “public assembly” - so no bathrooms, closets, offices etc. — and to recalculate the number of parking spaces allowed… and to also ensure that the caretakers cottage parking is separate from the valet parking — and that 2 spaces are allocated for that. The engineer replied that what they are trying to do is limit the amount of space dedicated to parking and have more open/green space, but that he’ll go back and recalculate the number of spaces required. It was suggested the board would prefer they don’t use a valet system of parking… and if they want to use it that the board would have to see a “parking” study.

The planner then went on to say, that since the board has asked gasland to install sidewalks, he would like to have the Center also install sidewalks, with the intention of eventually connecting his patchwork of sidewalks together. The engineer asked (reasonably - given the cost to install and maintain an “orphan sidewalk” )- if they would be satisfied with an easement for a sidewalk — to be installed in the future.

The board directed the Center to the Zoning Board of Appeals to get a special use variance for the minimum lot area requirements.... apparently in this case something they cannot waiver.

The public hearing was opened and a citizen asked a few questions:

- red cottage on the property - is shown on the plan as a 1 bedroom.. he believes it is a 2 bedroom cottage

- would like the engineer to detail the chicken wire fence/split rail fence

- asked about the parking for the apartment - but felt that the engineer answered those questions

- Asked about refuse containers — and that up to 5 had been used in the past - was there a plan to build some kind of screening

- Said the plan use both the terns enrichment spaces and member spaces — would like an explanation

- and Requested that there be a written narrative explaining the plan in addition to the floor plan

There was also a discussion about housing chickens on the property (there is currently a chicken coop on the property and the plan indicates additional coops). The town code addresses farm animals in residential areas - not "commercial areas" -- or Hamlet Mixed use Zone . It was pointed out that the property abuts property that has an Agricultural Easement. A comment was made that while chickens may be permissible, the town has had difficulties with Roosters annoying neighbors in the past.