[{"_1":2,"_99":-5,"_100":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6480769,"mediaKeyId","5808634-68b2bff167dd1d4c4d30eae3c022165c","parentId",5808634,"title","Planning Board schedules Oct. 21 public hearing for retaining wall, steps and propane‑tank screening at 68 Livingston Street","audioSeconds",28,"startMs",2361000,"endMs",2389000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5808634-68b2bff167dd1d4c4d30eae3c022165c&start=2361&end=2389","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5808634-68b2bff167dd1d4c4d30eae3c022165c/thumbnail_2361000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6480769/Rhinebeck/Dutchess-County/New-York/Planning-Board-schedules-Oct-21-public-hearing-for-retaining-wall-steps-and-propanetank-screening-at-68-Livingston-Street","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6480769-f72a85495817f1793c4c0f9342a46fdc/orig.mp4?Expires=1770740467&Signature=DmtAsZpiiZPZL2Eqz9YmstYOmBp4R6UqGab9xCA20GqI2tOGCMlonnPHJQukylGCOczvF4rdhSJta6A-76~L3mhqyOzyoZ3q2nGQtHf5mLa4zGVChCZ328sefbKA31j8LcX93oZsXUtvouvfInzqjyqEOzs6~IyPv6lDx~6mlNll3tV5EM46mewT~U7HjwJ69DJyCfePXbgdtIhZeGZ1df-EDvzO1p4MDnJA8hBUM9a6G7lFb4fi2NW1Jn2ir2h9sLqJoEmfjn~4CLAnZTQFIIgc7JYOT9yWZyyglh2jJnGVD35uUSjwGMKBpnOyPJwv~zs~XITWRR5zAr5dvRlK8A__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Dutchess County","date","2025-09-22T15:52:28Z","article","The Town of Rhinebeck Planning Board accepted an application from Susan Rowan for site‑plan review and a special‑use permit to install steps, a retaining wall and screening around propane tanks at 68 Livingston Street (RCH/RCA overlay). Board staff read a draft procedural resolution accepting the application and scheduling a public hearing for Oct. 21.

Presenters discussed proposed retaining‑wall materials, gate design and tree preservation along the frontage. Board members asked for additional details showing the location of the historic masonry and for confirmation of ADA implications if the wall abuts what could be a public walkway; the applicant’s team said there is no existing sidewalk along that segment and the retaining wall will be set near the right‑of‑way. Reviewers also asked for historic photographs, where available, to show context and to help evaluate the design’s compatibility with the streetscape. The project was described as primarily a historic‑character review given the property’s location in an historic area.

Procedural action: the board classified the application as a Type II action for SEQR (no coordinated review required), accepted the application for further review, and scheduled a public hearing for Oct. 21. The board referred the application to CAB, WAC, HAPOC and Dutchess County Planning for comments and requested two planning board members to attend a site visit.

Next steps: the applicant was asked to provide final retaining‑wall details, additional site photos (historic and recent), and precise fence and gate details for inclusion on a revised plan set before the hearing.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Town of Rhinebeck Planning Board Meeting 09/15/2025","oneSentenceSummary","The board accepted an application from Susan Rowan for steps, retaining walls and screening related to on‑site propane tanks at 68 Livingston Street, referred the application to advisory bodies and set a public hearing for Oct. 21.","taxTitle","Rhinebeck, Dutchess County, New York","taxId",62384,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6480774,"Rhinebeck board continues workforce‑housing review after extended debate over sidewalks, open space and wastewater",1984,9389000,11373000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5808634-68b2bff167dd1d4c4d30eae3c022165c&start=9389&end=11373","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5808634-68b2bff167dd1d4c4d30eae3c022165c/thumbnail_9389000.jpg","/articles/6480774/Rhinebeck/Dutchess-County/New-York/Rhinebeck-board-continues-workforcehousing-review-after-extended-debate-over-sidewalks-open-space-and-wastewater","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6480774-7804b9a6b77b2fac83ff203d7219d50d/orig.mp4?Expires=1770740467&Signature=IBYwxf~x253rwOYxbvY5n1SiRnKHAaIrrP134hsLFaU6ebeiSspJoah9uREFsHmkKJ6MphfhOP5SBzB~FzzABkkWPIA87fjWgxc4zYudiyxcXzGd9gOZHvjD5g4Q7pbNlT0EWsuqIjGqJJtCaQcEAHfdaTnnBud0alzB4khyuecy4xR4LqR-4C3vENFtMbp1yIvXuXyTqGwPGSiRJBFJ6tg6epzNxIg9GWz0wQJtz5eXohVEBlQaaAYvAEL-IKWCPU-i89hK0ztZNaSaH2eefBVTEhlIcd742P~rR6-0B9KNqjfQrIRIZGy2KjZPpHTcE3KOHZ2-TwzPA-bhe89Gjg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Town of Rhinebeck Planning Board continued its review of a major workforce‑housing subdivision (project name in packet) after extended public comment and a lengthy board discussion over pedestrian connections, tree preservation and wastewater design.

Board and public discussion focused on whether the development should require a dedicated sidewalk and a tree lawn along the project’s internal access road to improve safety and make walking to the village and nearby hospital more attractive. One planning board member, citing job listings and public comment, said the site is within walking distance of the hospital (about 0.4 miles) and argued a safer sidewalk would encourage workers to walk rather than drive. Other board members and the applicant’s representatives said the road design, which is a 26‑foot one‑way access to accommodate emergency vehicles, and the presence of utility alignments and existing topography limit sidewalk placement without additional tree removals or easements.

Drainage, sewer design and environmental review were also discussed. Engineers for the applicant described a proposed pumped (force main) sewer connection and noted measures such as air‑release and soft‑close check valves intended to address operational concerns raised by board reviewers and village consultants. Board members requested more detail on the proposed pump station, pipe materials and connection to the village’s collection system. The applicant said they had submitted DEC jurisdictional materials for wetlands review and have been coordinating with state agencies; DEC responses and related wetlands determinations remain pending.

Traffic projections presented for the development showed modest peak‑hour trip generation in the applicant’s study: roughly 30 AM peak entering/exiting trips, 18 PM peak and 27 on Saturdays. Several public commenters questioned those trip estimates as too low given likely multi‑occupant households and multiple‑vehicle households. The board and applicant agreed that traffic estimates and sidewalk/connection options must be further evaluated.

Procedural action: after debate, the board kept the public hearing open and continued the item to the Oct. 20 meeting as old business. Board members asked staff and the applicant to produce additional information before that meeting, including: a more detailed pavement/sidewalk/tree‑lawn plan or a painted pedestrian striping alternative, clarifications on sewer force‑main design and air/vacuum relief measures, and an updated tree‑removal and open‑space plan showing how the required per‑unit open space (550 sq. ft. per unit was cited during discussion) will be provided in the layout.

Public comments at the meeting included residents urging stronger walking connections to the village and the hospital, requests to preserve existing trees near property lines and critiques that the development’s original concept (rezoning) committed to stronger pedestrian connectivity. Supporters of moving the project forward emphasized the need for affordable housing and the extensive design iterations the applicant has already made.","The Planning Board continued review of a large workforce‑housing subdivision, with extensive public comment on pedestrian access, tree‑preservation and sewer design; the board left the public hearing open and set the item as old business for Oct. 20.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6480778,"Rhinebeck planning board accepts TNT Homes 99 Russell Avenue application, schedules Oct. 20 public hearing",1832,83000,1915000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5808634-68b2bff167dd1d4c4d30eae3c022165c&start=83&end=1915","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5808634-68b2bff167dd1d4c4d30eae3c022165c/thumbnail_83000.jpg","/articles/6480778/Rhinebeck/Dutchess-County/New-York/Rhinebeck-planning-board-accepts-TNT-Homes-99-Russell-Avenue-application-schedules-Oct-20-public-hearing","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6480778-a9cdbcdfb0132f9847b3a2730c611f46/orig.mp4?Expires=1770740467&Signature=JH6cNP2qTJ4VHHb2o6vwjfB0E8csxlgwdnI7aSki9rhq6apmIu~~8d~wafd-Cy56uE~s1lgIkBbIodfGsT5PgFG91mLjuK-Uocxv5Gs3TpCa-VgJ~RidSBygg9qjbmDuD0CtPQOVEl70vsRhoQCltYfRXGt9Ro2uSw-e7LGeuGPjzzlt6cRGYLzVqspTicYfGdlBI5wBaCR6qRHa70ihfmsoPX0IKWcAx1uLgHICImlDk7GamGrZ8y2zKzvLEt54MBMFIC4gDDBKPF8hx4KksmuCDweIyLYDPX53nm~oKvAskngK6-szkq6CMcafI7xj6GaCCfWRHzXSsSE9qAWC~A__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Town of Rhinebeck Planning Board accepted an application from TNT Homes (99 Russell Avenue) for site-plan review and related approvals and scheduled a public hearing for Oct. 20.

Board members were presented detailed site plans showing a proposed single‑family residence (maximum three bedrooms), an attached garage, a pool and minor grading on a 5.1‑acre parcel on the north side of Russell Avenue. The project team said the proposed disturbance footprint is about 0.68 acres (about 13% of the parcel), with roughly 40% of that disturbance outside the wetland buffer and the remainder within the regulated buffer area. The design team said prior health‑department approval for an on‑site sewage disposal area exists but that the current submission will require a new health‑department review because of changes to the site plan.

The applicant’s project engineer and design team described efforts to minimize clearing and preserve a rock outcrop and large trees on the property. The plans show stormwater details including culverts and French drains intended to collect runoff before it leaves the site. The application package also includes a pool and pool terrace; the board’s reviewers asked that fence and lighting details be included on future plan sheets to show compliance with New York State pool fencing rules.

The board noted the submission includes a DEC Jurisdictional Determination request. The project team reported they had sent DEC digital materials and a certified mailing and had not yet received a formal response; the applicant’s representative described DEC as not taking jurisdiction to date. Board members reminded the applicant that if DEC replies that wetlands are within state jurisdiction the project may require additional steps or modifications.

Procedural action: the board classified the application as a Type II action for the State Environmental Quality Review Act (no coordinated review required), accepted the application for further review, referred it to the Conservation Advisory Board (CAB), the Waterfront Advisory Committee (WAC), the Historic & Architectural Preservation Oversight Committee (HAPOC) and to Dutchess County Planning, and scheduled a public hearing for Oct. 20. The board also requested two planning board members to visit the site prior to the public hearing.

Next steps: the applicant was asked to add clearer tree‑removal plans (which trees will be removed vs. retained), to provide finalized elevations and floor plans, to show detailed pool fencing and lighting on the plans, and to include updated health‑department materials when available. The board also asked the applicant to note any archaeological site constraints reported in state museum records and to confirm the location of the approved sanitary absorption area in plan sheets.","The Planning Board accepted a site-plan submission for a three‑bedroom house, pool and related site work at 99 Russell Avenue (TNT Homes), classified the application as a Type II action for environmental review, and referred the application to advisory bodies with a public hearing set for Oct. 20.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Planning Board schedules Oct. 21 public hearing for retaining wall, steps and propane‑tank screening at 68 Livingston Street

Rhinebeck board continues workforce‑housing review after extended debate over sidewalks, open space and wastewater

Rhinebeck planning board accepts TNT Homes 99 Russell Avenue application, schedules Oct. 20 public hearing