2007-07-12 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF PLANNING BOARD -2- 7/12/07 Next on the agenda was the discussions regarding an amendment to the site plan approved for Bill Bostwick. Mr. Cappelli stated applicant is not here to amend his site plan – there seems to be an issue with the fence on the North side of the property. The fence goes down the property line. Somewhere during the approval process it was suggested to make vinyl slatting on the chain link and also the chain link fence in the rear. There is a note to that effect on the approved plan. Mr. Bostwick went and got a letter of approval from the adjacent property owner. (Copy of letter is on file in the Planning/Zoning office). Mr. Cappelli went on to say that as the building was finishing completion and the fence slatting was not done – the owners of the adjacent spoke with former Building Inspector Brutting and said “don't give him a Certificate of Occupancy until he finishes the vinyl slatting.” Mr. Bostwick then finished the vinyl slatting and the adjacent owners asked him “what are you doing putting vinyl slatting on our fence?” At the moment there is a temporary Certificate of Occupancy for the project and owner is waiting to get his permanent Certificate of Occupancy but the fence issue is holding it up. Mr. Morris stated when the adjacent property owners came to the Planning Board they stated that the fence was taken down and reinstalled in a different spot – was the fence altered in any way except for slats? - Mr. Cappelli answered yes it was because you could not put slat on a fence that literally falling apart – so in several instances Mr. Bostwick put in new posts and improved the fence – maybe Mr. Bostwick should have put the slats in a fence that was broken and sagging but he did not and improved it at his own expense. Mr. Morris asked if Mr. Bostwick had authorization to replace the fence other than to put the slats in and Mr. Bostwick yes he did and showed Mr. Morris the letter from the adjacent property owners – these letters were dated August 11 and 18, 2005 and copies of these letters are on file in the Planning/Zoning offices. Mr. Bostwick stated the reason he had a temporary C/O was that it was winter and he had to finish landscaping and the slats in the rear portion of the fence and Mr. Brutting gave him a temporary C/O contingent upon the above work being finished by May 15, 2007. All work is finished and Mr. Bostwick is waiting to get his final C/O. Mr. Cappelli showed the Board before and after photos of the fencing. Mr. Morris stated when Mrs. Restivo came to the Planning Board a few months ago she told them that the fence had not been authorized to be touched – obviously Mr. Bostwick has correspondence which states otherwise – the Planning Board at that time wrote a letter to Mr. Bostwick stating he was to work with Mrs. Restivo to work out a mutually agreeable solution regarding the fence. In a letter dated May 31, 2007 from Albert P. Roberts, attorney for Mr. Bostwick (copy of letter on file in the Planning/Zoning offices) it references a letter dated August 11, 2005 signed by Mr. Restivo and a letter dated December 28, 2005 signed by Mr. Restivo as President of the Board of Managers for Rock Hill confirming the agreement with the Bostwicks that in exchange for the removal of a tree on the Rock Hill side of the common boundary Mr. Bostwick would repair/replace the fence. The letter goes on to state in reliance on those letters – the old disrepaired fence was replaced with a new six foot slatted fence essentially along the location of the original fence as requested/approved by the Planning Board. The letter also states the following (1) the fence was installed essentially on the same line that the original fence was constructed- if there was any encroachment on either side, such encroachment preexisted the placement of the current fence, (2) a statement will be provided that the new fence belongs to Rock Hill and that the fence has been paid in full with a copy of the lien waiver enclosed, (3) no monetary damages will be paid – if it is demonstrated that an easement is needed, one will be provided on the condition that rock Hill will maintain the fence in proper order and (4) the slatted fence was installed at the request of the Planning Board to provide privacy for Rock Hill not for Mr. Bostwick. Mr. Fenton stated applicants are in 100% compliance with all codes. Mr. McCormick made a statement of fact based on the facts that were presented this evening, the fence matches the site plan, there is no outstanding litigation at the moment and there are no outstanding issues from the Code Enforcement Officer. Mr. Moran seconded the statement of fact. Unanimously carried.