By Rob Sample
A bed-and-breakfast lodging at a home on Bingham Road is expected to get the green light following a brief public hearing on Monday, February 3. The hearing took place during the Marlborough Planning Board’s bimonthly meeting.
The B&B application was first aired by the Planning Board in January. The property is at 69 Bingham Road in Marlboro and includes a 4,000 square-foot house on 10 acres. Its owners are Asa and Shulamit Nathanson.
The public hearing on the application involved no statements from the public, and the Planning Board had few comments. After approving a resolution of approval, Board Chairman Chris Brand authorized Gerry Comotos, the board’s attorney, to draft a letter approving the Nathanson’s application. A vote has been set to take place on Monday, March 3.
Next up for discussion by the board was an application for a two-lot subdivision at 184 Plattekill Road in Marlboro. The 51-acre lot is owned by Bradley Rosen, who seeks to create a separate building lot of almost six acres in size. Pat Hines, the town’s consulting engineer, noted that his firm and the board had received most of the answers to its earlier questions about Rosen’s proposal.
“The only question I did have is …to confirm that the grade is less than 15 percent on the [proposed] driveway,” asked Patricia Brooks of Control Point Associates, the project’s surveyor. Hines confirmed that documentation had been received showing the driveway met this requirement.
Also in ongoing review was an application by Mekeel Marlboro Mini Storage to add to its storage facility at 1430 Route 9W. That complex was first okayed by the town and built in 2002. The owner seeks to add a 6,000 square foot storage unit on the south end of the site.
Hines noted that the proposal complies with all bulk-table requirements for commercial properties in HD (Highway District) zone but still requires Department of Transportation approval for its emergency-access drive. In addition, since 2002 the state has imposed new “dark sky” requirements for buildings that are lit at night and because of the addition the applicant would need to comply with those new rules.
Board member Steve Jennison questioned the application’s inclusion of 19 additional parking spaces, which seemed numerous for storage-unit customers. “If you’re going to have outdoor storage for vehicles, you’re going to need some sort of fencing,” he noted. The site currently is not enclosed by any fence.
The final item under review marked a return to the Planning Board of Adam and Danielle Broza, who seek to operate a resort complex on Mount Rose Road in Marlboro. In a letter to the Planning Board, Town Inspector Tom Corcoran noted that before the proposal can proceed the ownership of the Mount Rose
Road parcel must be combined into a single lot of at least 10 acres.
The parcel currently consists of three lots, two of which are owned by the Brozas and the third owned by an enterprise the couple owns. The proposed resort has been named Some Place Upstate and would, if it goes forward, include lodging and a variety of recreational amenities.
Beyond that, the project faces a variety of hurdles which were outlined by Hines. The Department of Transportation wants to conduct a traffic study at the site and has also indicated that the resort operators should not have bus passengers embark and disembark on the neighborhood streets: The Brozas will need to build an off-street area for this purpose.
Additionally, the county Health Department has requested more details on the usage requirements for the portable restrooms the plan specifies. “This facility will be used over many, many weekends during the year,” said Hines. “That seems to be a more intense than would be met by portable-type toilets. More permanent facilities should be provided.”
In a public hearing last year, a host of neighborhood residents had complaints about noise levels during prior events at the site. Accordingly, the Planning Board voted to authorize EA Science and Technology to conduct a noise study there. Other elements of the project that still require study include the site’s septic facilities and a proposed pool and hot tub.
Hines pointed out that the Brozas’ application is considered a “special use” – and thus must meet a variety of criteria and will ultimately undergo a public hearing. “The assembly of persons has to be in congruence with a residential district,” said Hines.
“Can we set a public hearing for the second meeting in March?” asked Brooks, who is also a consultant on the Brozas’ application.
“I’m not sure you’ll be where you’ll need to be by then,” said Brand, “so I’m going to say no at this point.”