[00:00:01]
EVENING AND WELCOME[ TOWN OF GREENBURGH PLANNING BOARD GREENBURGH TOWN HALL AGENDA WEDNESDAY, February 3, 2021 – 5:00 P.M. Meetings of the Planning Board will be adjourned at 8:00 p.m. ]
TO THE PLANNING BOARD, UH, MEETING OF FEBRUARY THE THIRD.UH, ASK DEPUTY COMMISSIONER AARON SCHMIDT TO CALL THE ROLE.
MR. HAY TOLD ME I HAD TO STAY MUTED THE WHOLE, THE WHOLE MEETING FOR THE RECORD HERE.
THE FIRST THING ON THE AGENDA IS APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF JANUARY 20TH.
UH, I REVIEWED THE MIN, I JUST HAD ONE, UH, ITEM I JUST WISH CLARIFICATION ON, AND THAT'S APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES.
AND THE LAST PARAGRAPH WAS THAT MR. SMITH STATED THAT HE WOULD REVIS REVISIT THE RECORDING, RECORDING AND ADD EXPLANATION IF IT WAS STATED.
WAS THAT DONE OR WHAT WAS THE OUTCOME? YES.
SO WE REVIEWED THE TAPE AND WHAT WAS CAPTURED IN THE DRAFT MINUTES WAS ACCURATE, SO WE DID NOT MAKE ANY UPDATES OR CHANGES.
I HAVE NO OTHER COMMENTS OR ANY OF THE OTHER BOARD MEMBERS HAVE COMMENTS ON THE MINUTES.
IF NOT, IF THERE'S NO OTHER COMMENTS, I, UH, IF THERE ARE ANOTHER, OTHER COMMENTS HAVE BEEN, I MOVE TO ACCEPT THAT THE MINUTES SECOND.
THE NEXT THING ON THE AGENDA IS, UH, CORRESPONDENCE.
WE HAVE ONE, UH, PB 1408 FINDLAY WAS A STEEP SLOPE PERMIT FOR THE THIRD EXTENSION.
YOU GOT THE COMPANY LETTER INDICATING, UH, THE BACKGROUND OF THAT, THAT, UH, THE PART, UH, THE OWNERSHIP HAS CHANGED HEARINGS.
UH, THE CURRENT OWNER IS IN THE PROCESS OF GETTING A BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION, UH, FOR THE START OF THE CONSTRUCTION OF THIS PROPERTY.
WITH THAT SAID, I RECOMMEND THAT WE EXTEND, UH, UH, THE PERMIT FOR, UH, THE THIRD TWO YEAR EXTENSION, THE DISCUSSION ON THAT FOR, OKAY.
I, YEAH, I'D LIKE TO SAY SOMETHING, WALTER.
I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH A THIRD TWO YEAR EXTENSION, BUT IF THERE IS NO MOVEMENT ON THIS THIS TIME, I THINK WE HAVE TO BRING THEM BACK IN HERE BECAUSE A FOURTH TWO YEAR EXTENSION IS A BIT MUFF ON THIS ONE.
SO AFTER THIS TIME, THEY HAVE TO COME BACK IN IF THERE'S NO MOVEMENT ON THIS.
SO YOU WANNA MAKE A RECOMMENDATION ON THAT POINT THERE? YES.
SO YOUR RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL WITH THE, WITH THE CAVEAT WITH THE STIPULATION THAT IF THEY COME BACK FOR ANOTHER ONE, THEY HAVE TO COME IN PERSON.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND TO THAT? UM, I, I'D LIKE TO, I'D LIKE TO DISCUSS THAT BRIEFLY.
UM, LOOK, THIS, THIS IS APPARENTLY A NEW NUMBER.
I WOULDN'T PREJUDGE AN APPLICATION, YOU KNOW, THAT MAY COME, YOU KNOW, TO US IN TWO YEARS, I WOULDN'T PREJUDGE IT NOW, UM, YOU KNOW, IF HE WANTS TO GET AN EXTENSION IN TWO YEARS, WE CAN ADDRESS IT ON THE MERITS THEN, YOU KNOW, I, I UNDERSTAND EIGHT YEARS EXTENSION IS LONG, BUT LET'S GIVE BENEFIT OF DOUBT AND, AND WE CAN ADDRESS IT IN TWO YEARS WHEN IT COMES TO THAT.
I AGREE WITH MONA ON THIS ONE.
I, I UNDERSTAND WHERE MICHAEL'S COMING FROM, BUT THERE'S ACTUALLY A STIPULATION IN THE LETTER THAT SAYS HE ALREADY HAS A BUILDING PERMIT.
SO I I, IF HE DIDN'T SAY THAT, IT WAS LIKE IN A CHANGE IN 2018, WHICH WAS WELL BEFORE THE PANDEMIC TOO.
SO, SO I DON'T, IT WASN'T LIKE HE JUST EXCHANGED RIGHT BEFORE COVID.
IT WAS A YEAR BEFORE COVID, AND NOW HE'S GOT, FINALLY GOT A BUILDING PERMIT.
SO I, I DON'T SEE A REASON TO EXTEND IT, BE BEYOND THAT.
IT CAN ALWAYS CHANGE OUR MINDS, BUT I THINK WE NEED TO SEND A SIGNAL THAT WE'RE, WE'RE, UH, YOU KNOW, EIGHT YEARS IS ENOUGH.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER DIS DISCUSSION ON THAT? OR I MOVE THE MOTION? WE, WE, UH, WE, WE NEED A SECOND.
I'D LIKE TO SEE SOME MOVEMENT ON THIS.
[00:05:01]
SECOND? I'LL SECOND THE, WHAT, WHAT'S THE MOTION? THE MOTION IS TO A TWO YEAR EXTENSION WITH, UH, WITH THE CERTAINTY THAT THEY WOULD, UH, THE APPLICANT WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK AND APPEAR IN PERSON IF THEY WANT AN ADDITIONAL EXTENSION.THAT'S NOT, THAT THEY CAN'T GET ONE.
WE HAVE ABOUT FIVE NEIGHBORS ON THE LINE THAT WE'RE HIGHLY OPPOSED TO THIS.
UM, IT'S, THE PROPERTY ITSELF IS NOT WIDE ENOUGH TO MOW IT, A HOUSE TO
THAT DISCUSSION TAKES PLACE WHEN THE FORMAL APPLICATION COMES BEFORE, UH, UH, UH, COMES BEFORE US.
OH, THERE IS NO FORMAL APPLICATION? NO, NO, NO, NO, NO.
THIS IS EXTENSION OF, OF SOMETHING THAT WAS ALREADY APPROVED, PREVIOUSLY APPROVED.
UM,
SHOULD A GRANT, UH, SHOULD WE GRANT AN EXTENSION OF THIS APPLICATION WITH THE CERTAINTY THAT THE APPLICANT WILL HAVE TO COME BACK IF THEY WANT ANOTHER EXTENSION? THAT'S THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND TO THAT MOTION? LEMME JUST, I I WILL SECOND IT.
BUT WHEN YOU SAY THEY HAVE TO COME BACK, YOU DON'T MEAN THEY HAVE TO REAPPLY, YOU JUST MEAN THEY HAVE TO APPEAR BEFORE US, RIGHT? YES.
UH, OPPOSED? OPPOSED OR A DETAIN SUB MOVE.
UH, MR. CHAIRMAN, MAY I SAY ONE THING? YES.
UM, MR. POWELL, UH, THIS WAS NOT, THIS WAS WITH RESPECT TO AN EXTENSION FOR A MATTER CALLED PV 14 8 8 0 8 RATHER.
I, I UNDERSTAND THAT MR. MR. POWELL, MR. POWELL, PLEASE, UNTIL THE, DURING THE WORK SESSION.
UH, UNLESS, UH, PLEASE STAY, STAY MUTED.
WHEN THERE'S A PUBLIC HEARING, AND I KNOW YOU'RE INTERESTED AND OTHER MEMBERS ARE, WE'LL MAKE SURE THAT EVERYONE IS UN UNMUTED AND WILL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK AT THAT TIME.
UM, UM, NOW, PIECE OF CORRESPONDENCE, UH, WAS THE, UM, ONLY PRESERVED ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS THAT WERE IN YOUR PACKET.
THESE WERE JUST ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS THAT WE IDENTIFIED AT THE LAST MEETING THAT WILL GO INTO THE PACKET TO, IN REGARDING TO THE D E I S.
SO THERE'S NO NOTHING TO DISCUSS, IT'S JUST THE RECORD OF OUR ADDITIONAL, OF OUR ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS THAT, UH, THAT WERE BROUGHT UP.
UM, YEAH, WITH THAT SAID, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO GO, UH, IN TERMS OF CORRESPONDENCE, JUST A BRIEF UPDATE ON, UH, SEE, YOU HAVE TWO MEMBERS OF OUR PLANNING BOARD ARE ON THE BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE THAT'S, UH, FOR JOHAN SCHNUG.
AND, AND SO I'D JUST LIKE TO GET A BRIEF UPDATE OF WHERE WE ARE IN THAT PROCESS.
JUST TO FILL UP, JUST TO FILL THE BOARD UP, UH, BRING THE BOARD UP TO DATE.
UH, WHAT, UH, COULD THAT BE A BRIEF, BUT JUST LET US KNOW.
UH, YEAH, MY OTHER ONE IS ACTUALLY HAVE THE LATEST CORRESPONDENCE WITH, UH, GARRETT.
SO WHY DON'T YOU GET OFF? SURE.
SO, UM, UH, LONG STORY SHORT, WE'VE BEEN MEETING SINCE JULY OF LAST YEAR.
UH, ON A CONSISTENT BASIS, I WOULD SAY AT LEAST ONCE A MONTH.
WE TOOK, IT WAS A LITTLE BIT OF A HIATUS IN NOVEMBER, AND THERE WAS ACTUALLY SOME CORRESPONDENCE THIS WEEK.
GARRETT RESPONDED TO AN EMAIL THAT I SENT OUT ASKING WHERE WE STOOD, AND ULTIMATELY WHERE WE STAND IS THE EVALUATION PROCESS THAT WE WENT THROUGH TO DETERMINE WHO THE FINAL APPLICANTS WOULD BE FOR THE TOWN BOARD TO INTERVIEW WAS DECIDED UPON.
AND GA IS GOING TO SUBMIT OUR RECOMMENDATIONS VIA FORMAL WRITEUP TO THE TOWN BOARD, UM, WITHIN THE NEXT, I FORGET THE TIMEFRAME THAT HE PLACED AN EMAIL, BUT, UM, WITHIN THE NEXT, UH, UM, I, I BELIEVE WITHIN THE NEXT COUPLE OF WEEKS FOR RECOMMENDATION.
AND THERE SHOULD BE TWO, IF NOT THREE FINAL APPLICANTS.
SO, UH, ONCE THAT'S DONE, THE TIME BOARD SHOULD BE INTERVIEWING THEM AND, UH, THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT EFFORTS SHOULD BE UNDER.
UM, THERE'S BEEN SOME TALK, UM, I, YOU COULD SPEAK TO THIS AS WELL, OF OUR CONTINUED PARTICIPATION TO SOME
[00:10:01]
DEGREE TO I'D, I'D BE INTERESTED IN.UM, UH, THERE WERE SOME OTHER COMMITTEE MEMBERS THAT WERE INTERESTED IN KIND OF, UM, SUPPLEMENTING THE EFFORTS AND STAYING ENGAGED TO, TO SOME DEGREE, ONCE THE SELECTION PROCESS WAS COMPLETE, IS COMPLETE AND THE EFFORTS ARE UNDERWAY TO WORK WITH THE TOWN, UM, TO, UM, TO HAVE THE, UH, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN UNDERWAY.
CAN I ASK A QUESTION? ANYTHING OUT HERE? UM, JUST MARK, DO YOU WANNA ASK A QUESTION FIRST? GO AHEAD.
QUICK QUESTION ARE, ARE THESE OUTSIDE CONSULTANTS, PART-TIME EMPLOYEES? FULL-TIME EMPLOYEES? THE, WE ONLY ACTUALLY GOT ONE APPLICATION FROM AN INDIVIDUAL.
AND SO THE, RIGHT NOW THERE WERE TWO, GARRETT WAS GONNA PUT, PUT TWO IN FRONT OF, UH, TRYING TO INTER HAVE THE TOMBOY INTERVIEW TWO, TWO OF THE FORMS ON FEBRUARY 10TH.
I THINK THOSE WERE OUR TOP TWO, OUR TOP TWO CHOICES.
FOLLOW AND P W P, BUT WE DIDN'T, WE REALLY DID NOT GET, UH, MAYBE WE GOT TWO, TWO APPLICATIONS.
ONE I THINK WE THOUGHT WASN'T APPROPRIATE AND ONE WE THOUGHT WAS PRETTY GOOD AND ACTUALLY GOT PRETTY FAR, BUT ALMOST ALL OF OUR APPLICA, WE ACTUALLY REVIEWED, I THINK 13 OR 14 APPLICATIONS, AND THE VAST MAJORITY WERE, WERE, UH, WERE FIRMS. OKAY.
AND, UH, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT THE PLANNING BOARD IS KEPT, YOU KNOW, APPRISED OF WHAT'S HAPPENING.
AND I THANK BOTH OF YOU FOR BEING ON, ON THAT BOARD.
UH, THE NEXT THING, UH, WE WANT TO GO INTO THE BUSINESS, UH, FOR THIS EVENING.
EARLIER TODAY, I SENT AROUND AN EMAIL, UH, INDICATING THAT, UH, WE WOULD LIKE TO CHANGE THE WAY WE RUN THE MEETING, UH, AND FOLLOW THE FORMAT THAT IS PRETTY MUCH FOLLOWED AT THE TOWN BOARD MEETING, WHERE THE STAFF IN, INTO INTRODUCED THE APPLICANT AND, AND OUTLINE WHAT THE ACTIONS THE PLANNING BOARD WILL BE TAKING THAT EVENING.
I THINK IT IS A, A GOOD WAY TO DO THINGS.
I THINK WE MUST ALWAYS BE WILLING TO LOOK AT WAYS TO MAKE THE PLANNING BOARD MORE EFFICIENT AND EFFECTIVE.
AND I THINK, UH, WHAT'S BE BEING DONE THIS EVENING IS AN ATTEMPT TO DO THAT.
AND I WOULD ASK THE PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS THAT AFTER THE MEETING, JUST GIMME SOME FEEDBACK WHETHER YOU THINK IT'S WORKING OR WE HAVE TO MAKE FURTHER, UH, ADJUSTMENTS OR YOU THINK IS A GOOD IDEA OR BAD IDEA.
WITH THAT SAID, I'D LIKE TO PROCEED WITH THAT PROCEDURE AND START OFF WITH, UH, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER SCHMIDT.
THE NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS PLANNING BOARD CASE NUMBER PD 20 DASH ZERO FOUR CASAL LOCATED AT 34 DASH 40 AND 50
THE PROPOSAL CONSISTING OF THE RE SUBDIVISION OF THREE EXISTING TAX LOCKS INTO ONE LOT.
THE APPLICANT PROPOSES TO MODIFY THE LAYOUT OF THE SITE BY MOVING STORAGE BINS TO MORE EFFICIENT LOCATIONS, ADDING OFF STREET PARKING SPACES, ADDING STORAGE LOCATIONS, AND RELATED ZONE IMPROVEMENTS.
THE PROJECT INVOLVES APPROXIMATELY 2,900 SQUARE FEET OF DISTURBANCE TO 35% AND GREATER SLOPES THAN EXCESSIVELY STEEP SLOPES.
THE PLANNING BOARD CONDUCTED A PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS MATTER AT ITS JAN, JANUARY 20TH MEETING.
NO ADDITIONAL WRITTEN COMMENTS WERE RECEIVED DURING THE OPEN WRITTEN RECORD PERIOD.
THE DRAFT DECISION HAS BEEN PREPARED FOR THE BOARD'S CONSIDERATION THIS EVENING.
I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT THE BOARD HAS.
UH, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER SCHMIDT, UH, YOU, WE ALL HAVE A COPY OF THE DRAFT A DECISION, UH, AND, UM, AND WE ARE OPEN TO COMMENTS CONCERNING THE DRAFT.
THERE WAS ONE, UH, UH, THERE'S TWO PARTS IN THE DECISION WHICH, WHICH WAS CAPTURED IN THE DRAFT.
ONE WAS, UH, UH, IS WORKING WITH THE D O T TO, UH, GET APPROVAL TO MAKE THE MODIFICATION OF THE ENTRANCE THAT'S IN HERE.
[00:15:01]
UH, THAT SLOPE THAT, UH, THE, SOME OF THE, THE BIN THAT'S EXTEND THAT, UH, IS CURRENTLY LOCATED IN THAT POSITION WILL BE REMOVED.AND WHETHER OR NOT THAT WILL UNDERMINE, UH, UH, THE ROCK OUT CLIPPING OUTCROP BECAUSE THERE ARE HOMES AT THE TOP OF IT AND IT REQUIRES THE, UH, THE ENGINEER, THE ENGINEER SAID HE DID NOT FEEL THAT THAT WOULD BE A PROBLEM, BUT IT REQUIRES THE ENGINEER TO ANALYZE THAT ROCK, UH, LEDGE AFTER THOSE BINS ARE REMOVED AND CERTIFY THAT THAT IS, UH, UH, NO DAMAGE HAS BEEN DONE TO THAT, UH, ROCK CLIP.
AND IF IT IS, THEN THEY HAVE TO TAKE THE NECESSARY REMEDIAL ACTION.
SO ARE THERE ANY OTHER, UH, ISSUES OR QUESTIONS CONCERNING THE DRAFT RECOMMENDATION? DRAFT DECISION? UH, CHAIR? YEAH, OBJECTION.
THE DRAFT DECISION, AND THERE ARE THREE VOTES FOR THIS SAME DAY.
UM, UH, WALTER, I HAVE A QUESTION, UH, REGARDING THE FENCE ISN'T, THERE WAS A DISCUSSION THAT THEY DON'T, UH, WRITE A, UH, CUT SHEETS FOR THE FENCE THAT THEY'RE GONNA PUT RATHER THAN A CHAINING FENCE.
MY, MY UNDER THEY DID, WASN'T THAT IN THE PLANS EXACTLY WHAT PLANS THAT, WHAT FENCE THEY COULD PUT IN AND WELL, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE FENCE IN THE FRONT OF FRONT, CORRECT? YEAH, THEY, UH, INDICATED AND THAT SHOULD BE REFLECTED IN THE DRAWINGS THAT THE TYPE OF FENCES THAT THEY PLANNED THE PULL UP IS NOT A CHANGE IN FENCE.
IN FACT, I THOUGHT IT WAS A VERY ATTRACTIVE FENCE THAT THEY HAD.
I BELIEVE THAT, I'M SORRY TO INTERRUPT.
I BELIEVE THAT WAS FOR ANOTHER CASE THAT'S GONNA BE AROUND LATER THIS EVENING.
MY RECOLLECTION OF THIS NO, THIS IS, GO, GO AHEAD.
YEAH, WE, WE HAD SHOWN A BROAD IRON STYLE ALUMINUM FENCE THAT, THAT WOULD EXTEND WHAT'S NOW ON THE OVERLY SECTION OF THE SITE ALONG THE SOUTH AREA, WHERE WE'RE GONNA IMPROVE THEM.
AND THAT WAS SHOWN ON THE PLANS, I BELIEVE, AND, AND IS WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING TO DO.
AS LONG AS IT'S NOT, IT'S CHANGING THINGS.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS BEFORE WE VOTE? TAKE THE, THE THREE VOTES REQUIRED FOR APPROVAL OF THIS, UH, DRAFT RECOMMENDATION.
IF THERE'S NO OTHER QUESTIONS, THEN UM, COULD I HAVE A MOTION TO, UM, APPROVE THE PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION? SO MOVED.
WHO SECOND? TOM A AT SAME TIME.
NEXT, UH, UH, VOTE WE HAVE TO TAKE IS ON THE, UH, THE PLANNING.
THAT WOULD BE THE, THE, THE, THE PLANNING BOARD STEEP SLOPE PERMIT.
DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO ACCEPT, UH, THE STEEP SLOPE? SO MOVED.
UH, THEN WE NEED A, WE HAVE A PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION SITE PLAN, RIGHT? NOT THIS SITE PLAN, WALTER.
THAT'S THE THIRD VOTE IS THE SITE PLAN ITSELF.
AND THEN WE HAVE THE STEEP VOTE.
WE DID THE PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION, WE DID THE, UH, UH, STEEP.
SO EACH NOT, SO THE OTHERS VOTE WE HAVE TO TAKE IS ON THE SITE PLAN ITSELF.
DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO, SO MOVED, UH, BY MIKE.
SO, UH, THE DRAFT RECOMMENDATION IS, UH, APPROVED AS AS WRITTEN.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME AND CONSIDERATION, AND WE LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING WITH YOU TO GET THE FINAL SUBDIVISION SIGNED OFF BY COUNTY HEALTH AND THEN APPROVED BY YOU.
WE'LL GET TOMORROW, TALK TO THE APPLICANT TOMORROW.
THANKS VERY MUCH FOR YOUR HELP, EVERYBODY.
NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS PLANNING BOARD CASE NUMBER PV 1621
SO ROAD TERRYTOWN WITHIN THE P E D PLANNED
[00:20:02]
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ZONING DISTRICT PLANNING BOARD WILL BE CONSIDERING A DECISION ON THE APPLICANT'S FINAL SUBDIVISION AND TRUE HONORABLE PERMIT APPLICATIONS FOR PROPOSAL CONSISTING OF THE SUBDIVISION OF AN APPROXIMATELY 121 8 ACRE PARCEL INTO TWO LOTS CONSISTING OF PROPOSED LOT ONE 60.01 ACRES AND PROPOSED LOT TWO 40.17 ACRES IN CONNECTION WITH ITS DEVELOPMENT OF THE RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CAMPUS.ON PROPOSED LOT ONE PROJECT INVOLVES THE REMOVAL OF 1,945 REGULATED TREES JANUARY 4TH THOUSAND.
ON JANUARY 4TH, 2018, THE APPLICANT RECEIVED PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION PLANNING BOARD RECEIVE SLOPE PERMIT AND LET WATER FORCE PERMIT APPROVALS.
THE PLANNING BOARD REAPPROVED THE PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION APPLICATION, WHICH PREVIOUSLY HAD EXPIRED WITH MINOR MODIFICATIONS FOR THE LAYOUT ON PROPOSED BLOCK TWOS FRONTAGE TO ACCOMMODATE A RIGHT OF WAY TAKING BY THE STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION.
THE DRAFT DECISION HAS BEEN PREPARED FOR THE BOARD'S CONSIDERATION THIS EVENING.
HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
I, WE HAVE REPRESENTATIVES FROM THE APPLICANT IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS AS TO, UM, ANY CHANGES MADE TO THE PLA OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT THEY'RE HERE TO SEE.
HEY, AARON, I THINK THE BIGGEST QUESTION TO ME IS IN DIGGING DOWN ON THOSE 2000 TREES, DOES A NEW TREE LAW APPLY AND, AND HOW IS THAT BEING VALUED? SO, UM, THE TREE LAW, UH, THE NEW, THE OLD TREE LAW WOULD APPLY IN THIS INSTANCE.
UM, THEY HAD OTHER BOARD RELATED APPROVALS IN PLACE.
HOWEVER, AS A CONDITION OF THE DECISION AND A RECOMMENDATION OF THE CONSERVATION ADVISORY COUNCIL, WHICH REVIEWED THIS PROJECT YEARS AGO, KNOWING THAT THE NEW LAW IS, OR HOPING THAT THE NEW TREE ORDINANCE WOULD TAKE EFFECT AND, AND, AND BE ADOPTED BY THE TOWN BOARD REQUESTED THAT THE APPLICANT, UH, OR RECOMMENDED THAT THE APPLICANT, YOU KNOW, MAKE ITS BEST EFFORT TO COMPLY WITH, UM, THE ENVIRONMENTAL VALUE REQUIREMENTS THAT WERE LAID OUT IN THE DRAFT LAW AT THAT TIME, THE APPLICANT HAS MADE THOSE COMMITMENTS, UM, TO DO IT TO THE, THE BEST OF ITS ABILITY.
WE DO HAVE FINAL LANDSCAPING PLAN AND WE CONTINUE TO WORK WITH THE APPLICANT AS THEY MOVE FORWARD WITH DEVELOPMENT OF THIS PROJECT TO ENSURE THAT, THAT THEY, YOU KNOW, THAT THEY'LL MAKE THEIR BEST, UM, TAKE THEIR BEST, UM, STEP MOVING FORWARD AND, AND LEADING THE, THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE
SO THEY'VE COMMITTED TO THAT AND STAFF WILL WORK WITH THEM ON THAT IF THEY, IF THEY'RE COMMITTED TO THAT.
WHY ISN'T THAT A CONDITION OF THE APPROVAL NICOLE LEGALLY OBLIGATED TO BOOST LAW? I THINK THAT'S THE DIFFERENCE.
AND DAVID, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG.
NO, I THINK IF, IF I MAY, AARON AND MR. CHAIRMAN, IT'S JANET GARRIS FROM DELBELLO GENERAL WEINGARTEN ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT.
UM, I THINK THAT WHAT YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU IS A SUBDIVISION APPROVAL AND A SUBDIVISION APPLICATION.
THE SITE PLAN APPROVAL, UH, THAT MR. SCHMIDT WAS SPEAKING ABOUT WAS SOMETHING THAT THE TOWN BOARD APPROVED AND THERE IS, UH, A LANDSCAPING AND TREE REMOVAL PLANS, UH, THAT WERE APPROVED IN CONNECTION WITH THE SITE PLAN APPLICATION, WHICH IS NOT SOMETHING THAT'S BEFORE THIS BOARD.
SO ALL OF THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS DISCUSSED AT THAT TIME, BUT IT'S THE SUBDIVISION THAT'S BEFORE THIS BOARD.
SO THEN MS. GARRIS, WHAT THAT MEANS IS YOU WERE COMMITTED TO WHATEVER'S IN THAT LANDSCAPING PLAN THAT WAS SITE PLAN THAT WAS APPROVED BY THE TOWN BOARD, IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S RIGHT.
AND HOW CONSISTENT IS THAT? I'M JUST CURIOUS WITH OUR, WITH A, THE PLUNGE TO GET COME CLOSE TO WHAT THE NEW TREE LAW IS.
ARE WE OFF BY A FACTOR? SO ACTUALLY LET ME, UM, LET ME RECITE TWO CONDITIONS IN IN THE DECISION BEFORE YOU, BECAUSE OF COURSE TREE REMOVAL AND LANDSCAPING WERE DISCUSSED WITH THE TOWN BOARD.
THEY WERE PREVIOUSLY DISCUSSED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD, BUT AS YOU MAY KNOW, WHEN THE FORMER LAW WAS IN EFFECT, UM, TREE REMOVAL PERMIT APPROVAL RESTED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD WHEN THERE WAS A SUBDIVISION APPLICATION AS IN THIS CASE.
SO THAT'S WHY WE HAVE THIS, UH, DRAFT DECISION AS A FINAL SUBDIVISION REMOVAL PERMIT.
UM, SO LET ME JUST RECITE CONDITIONS 8.9 AND EIGHT POINT 10.
UH, FIRST THING THAT 8.9 STATES THAT AT THE TIME OF
[00:25:01]
DETAILED LANDSCAPE PLAN SUBMISSIONS PROVIDED IN CONNECTION WITH EACH PHASE OF DEVELOPMENT, THE TOWN FORESTRY OFFICER SHALL FORWARD SUCH PLANS FOR THE CONSERVATION ADVISORY COUNCIL FOR REVIEWING COMMON.THAT WAS A RECOMMENDATION FROM THE C A C.
THE APPLICANT HAD NO OBJECTION TO THAT.
UH, AND SECONDLY, EIGHT POINT 10, THE APPLICANT IS ENCOURAGED TO PROVIDE WITHIN ITS DETAILED LANDSCAPING PLANS TREE REPLACEMENT BASED ON OBTAINING, WHEN REPLACING TREES ARE FULLY MATURE.
80% OF THE EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL VALUES FOR TREES APPROVED FOR REMOVAL AS PART OF THIS PROJECT AS DEFINED USING THE TOOLS SUCH AS THE UNITED STATES AND UNITED STATES FOREST FOOD SERVICES REE PROGRAM AND THE APPLICANT COMMITTED TO THAT.
AND WE'LL WORK WITH THE APPLICANT THROUGHOUT THAT PROCESS AND THROUGH EACH PHASE OF DEVELOPMENT ON A PROJECT OF THIS MAGNITUDE, IT'S LIKELY TO BE DONE IN SOME PHASES AND REALLY WORK WITH THEM ON THAT.
AND, AND JUST ONE, UH, JUST ONE CORRECTION.
UH, THIS, THERE IS A TREE REMOVAL PERMIT ON, UH, FOR TONIGHT.
UH, THERE ARE THREE VOTES THAT ARE ON FOR TONIGHT AND ONE OF THEM INCLUDES THE TREE REMOVAL PERMIT.
UM, IT HAD BEEN DISCUSSED WITH PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION WITH THE FORMAL VOTE ON THE TREE REMOVAL PERMIT HAD NOT BEEN, HAS NOT BEEN TAKEN YET.
OKAY, SO CAN I I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED AND PROCEDURE, DAVID.
SO UNDER THE NEW, IT WOULD'VE BEEN IN THE TOWN BOARDS PURVIEW, BUT THIS IS UNDER THE OLD LAW.
SO IT'S A, IT'S OUR, OUR DECISION.
IT WOULD GO WITH SITE PLAN, BUT THAT THE SITE PLAN HAD BEEN APPROVED ALREADY.
WHAT, WHAT, OKAY, THEN THE SAME WAY TO PREVIOUS QUESTION CONFUSE YOU, YOUR RESPONSE JUST NOW CONFUSED ME IN TERMS OF WHAT, WHAT IS OUR LEGAL JURISDICTION REGARDING THE TREE PERMIT IN FRONT OF US NOW, EVEN THOUGH THIS APPLICATION CAME UNDER THE O LAW.
SO WHAT ARE WE EXPECTED TO DO IN TERMS OF VOTING FOR THE TREAT PERMIT TO VOTE FOR IT? WELL, BUT I'M SAYING YEAH, WE'VE, I'M JUST SAYING WHAT DISCRETION, IF ANY, MAYBE WE HAVE NO DISCRETION.
LARRY SUBDIVISION, WE ARE THE AGENCY THAT IS APPROVING THAT.
YEAH, WELL, HO HOLD ON THOUGH.
IT, IT, LET, LET ME SIMPLIFY THIS.
AS OF, BECAUSE OF THAT HAD NOT CHANGED AT THE TIME THEY GOT THE SITE PLAN APPROVAL, THE OLD, OLD TREE LAW IS IN EFFECT, THEREFORE, THE APPROVAL TO CUT DOWN 1,975 TREES LIES WITH THE PLANNING BOARD.
UM, THE FACT IS THOUGH, THAT AARON DID INCORPORATE SIGNIFICANT LANGUAGE AS TO, TO THE PERCENTAGE OF TREES TO BE REPLACED IN, IN THE DRAFT, UH, THROUGH THE LETTER TONIGHT.
SO I THINK IT, I THINK IT'S COVERED AND THEY HAVE TO GO BACK TO THE C A C LATER.
SO I, I THINK IT, MY BELIEF IS THAT IT IS COVERED IN WHAT WE'RE DOING, BUT THE JUST CLEAR RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE FEE REMOVAL IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE DOES LIE WITH THE PLANNING BOARD.
I JUST THINK IT'S, I DO THINK IT'S COVERED IN THE RECOMMENDATION HOWEVER.
HAS THAT, WITH THAT SAID, IS THERE ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON, UH, THE DRAFT, UH, APPROVAL? IF THERE IS NO OTHER DISCUSSION CONCERNING THE DRAFT OF APPROVAL, THEN WE HAVE THREE VOTES TO TAKE THE FINAL SUBDIVISION TREE REMOVAL.
UH, AND, UH, AND THE, THE THIRD WHICH WOULD ACTUALLY COME FIRST WOULD BE TO CONSIDER WAIVING THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE FINAL SUBDIVISION APPLICATION.
SO I BELIEVE THAT WE WAIVED THAT THE, THE U I AND THE FINAL SUBDIVISION APPLICATION.
SO WHEN, SO WITH THAT SAID, WE WILL GO INTO THE THREE VOTE, THE TWO VOTES.
WE HAVE TO TAKE THE FIRST ONE BEING, UH, UH, UH, THE TREE REMOVAL PERMIT.
DO WE HAVE A PROPOSAL? DO WE HAVE A, A MOTION TO, UH, GRANT THE TREE REMOVAL PERMIT? SO REMOVAL.
[00:30:01]
ALL IN FAVOR? AYE.MICHAEL GOLDMAN HAS NOT BEEN BEING PRESENT FOR EITHER OF THOSE TWO VOTES.
AND UH, AND THE, AND THE SECOND VOTE WE HAVE TO TAKE IS FOR THE FINAL SUBDIVISION.
DO WE HAVE A MOTION, UH, IN FAVOR OR APPROVAL FROM THE FINAL SUBDIVISION? I MAKE A MOTION.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND? I, UH, TOM MADE A SECOND.
SO, MR. GOLDEN, ARE YOU IN FAVOR OF THE, UH, VOTES WITH RESPECT TO THIS CURRENT PROJECT? THE BOARD VOTED TO YES.
BUT THAT SAID, WE, WE, WE WERE JUST GOING THROUGH THE VOTES, THAT'S WHY, WHY'S ASKING YOU NOW? THAT'S WHY I YOUR WAY.
UH, UH, WITH THAT SAID, THE, THE DRAFT, UH, APPROVAL OF PB 1621 IS APPROVED.
UM, THE NEXT THING IS WE HAVE, UH, IS PUBLIC HEARING.
THERE'S THREE ITEMS, UH, FOR PUBLIC HEARING THAT WE WILL, UH, DISCUSS.
AND THEN AFTER THAT WE HAVE TWO REMAINING ITEMS THAT WE, UH, WISH TO DISCUSS.
AND THEN, AND THEN AT THE END OF THE MEETING, WE ARE GONNA HAVE A SHORT EXECUTIVE SESSION BECAUSE THERE'S A LEGAL ISSUE THAT NEEDS TO BE DISCUSSED, UH, UH, WITH, UH, WITH DAVID, UH, REGARDING, UH, UH, THE PLANNING BOARD.
UH, SO WE WILL DO THAT AT THE END OF, UH, OF THE WORKS OF THE WORK SESSION.
IT SHOULD BE VERY BRIEF, BUT I THINK IT'S INFORMATION THAT THE PLANNING BOARD SHOULD HAVE.
I, I'M HAPPY TO CALL THE ROLL.
ALL MEMBERS ARE HERE THIS EVENING AND I'M READY TO ANNOUNCE THE FIRST CASE NUMBER, UH, CASE ON FOR PUBLIC HEARING.
UH, JUST A REMINDER THAT FOLKS IN THE AUDIENCE, EVERYONE WILL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK, BUT PLEASE KEEP YOUR MICS MUTED UNTIL SUCH TIME AS THE CHAIRPERSON OPENS IT UP FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.
FIRST ITEM ON, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO ADD AS A PUBLIC VOTE, WE DO NOT HAVE THE TIME LIMIT ON SPEAKER.
HOWEVER, UH, I ASK THAT YOU, UH, BRIEF STAY ON THE ISSUE AND, UH, AND, UH, DON'T REPEAT WHAT ANOTHER PERSON HAS SAID ON A PARTICULAR ISSUE.
IF YOU AGREE WITH THEM, JUST SAY, I AGREE.
AND THEN YOU HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO ADD ADDITIONAL INFORMATION IF YOU HAVE IT.
BUT, UH, AS I SAID, WE DON'T HAVE THE TIME LIMIT, BUT, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, SOMEWHERE AROUND THREE OR FOUR MINUTES, YOU KNOW, AND I'LL USE MY DISCRETION.
BUT, YOU KNOW, IF YOU COULD AIM FOR THAT, YOU KNOW, IT, UH, IT WOULD BE HELPFUL.
SO THE FIRST ITEM ON FOR PUBLIC HEARING THIS EVENING IS PLANNING BOARD CASE NUMBER PB 20 DASH 27 AT THE DALE LEAD TWO SHOPPING CENTER, LOCATED AT 3 7 7 CENTRAL PARK AVENUE NORTH IN DALE, LOCATED WITHIN THE CA, CENTRAL AVENUE MIXED USE IMPACT ZONING DISTRICT PROJECT INVOLVES A PLANNING BOARD SPECIAL PERMIT FOR A RESTAURANT AND A PLANNING BOARD SHARED PARKING REDUCTION REQUEST INVOLVING THE PROPOSED CONVERSION OF A 2000 SQUARE FOOT VACANT RETAIL SPACE INTO A RESTAURANT SPACE TO FACILITATE A BAKERY STYLE RESTAURANT.
RESTAURANT IS PROPOSED TO CONTAIN UP TO 30 SEATS AND REQUIRES AN ADDITIONAL 17 OFF STREET PARKING SPACES UNDER THE ZONING ORDINANCE.
THE SITE PREVIOUSLY WAS GRANTED A SHARED PARKING REDUCTION IN 79 SPACES FROM 522 SPACES REQUIRED TO 443 SPACES APPROVED, WHICH EXIST AT THE SITE MAIL.
AND THAT WAS UNDER CASE NUMBER PB 1634,
[00:35:01]
WHICH ALSO APPROVED ONE RETAIL STOREFRONT AND ONE RESTAURANT STOREFRONT.WITHIN THIS SPACE, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A SHARED PARKING REDUCTION TO ACCOUNT FOR THE 17 ADDITIONAL OFF STREET PARKING SPACES REQUIRED IN CONNECTION WITH A CLOSED CONVERSION AND ALREADY BUILT OUT SPACE INITIALLY APPROVED FOR USE AS A RETAIL STOREFRONT.
NO EXISTING PARKING SPACES WILL BE REMOVED IN CONNECTION WITH THE PROJECT.
THE APPLICANT LAST APPEARED BEFORE THE PLANNING BOARD IN THE BOARD SESSION ON JANUARY 20TH, 2021.
MR. AND MR.
THE DETAIL OF THE PROJECT MAY ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THE BOARD OR MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC MAY HAVE.
UM, PLEASE INVITE THE APPLICANT TO SPEAK ON THE ISSUE.
I'M WITH BRICKS MOORE PROPERTY GROUP.
UH, THE APPLICANT AND THE OWNER OF DALEWOOD TWO SHOPPING CENTER, UH, IN 2018.
UH, IN 2017, EXCUSE ME, THE TOWN GREENBERG DID APPROVE, UH, DID APPROVE OUR AMENDED SITE PLAN, UH, TO ALLOW FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 5,000 SQUARE FOOT TWO TENANT COMMERCIAL OUT PARCEL BUILDING.
UH, THE AMENDED SITE PLAN SPECIFICALLY ALLOWED FOR A 3000 SQUARE FOOT RESTAURANT, WHICH IS CURRENTLY OCCUPIED BY SHAKE SHACK AND 2000 SQUARE FEET OF ADJACENT RETAIL SPACE.
THE SITE WAS CONSTRUCTED AND SHAKE SHACK OPENED IN 2018.
IT'S NOW 2021, AND WE STILL HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO LEASE THE ADJACENT SPACE.
WE ARE APPEARING BEFORE THE BOARD TONIGHT TO BOTH REQUEST A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO CHANGE THE USE FROM RETAIL USE TO RESTAURANT USE, AND IN A, AND IN, IN CONCURRENT WITH THAT, WE WILL THEN BE REQUIRED TO ASK FOR AN ADDITIONAL, UM, I BELIEVE THE NUMBER IS 14 SPACES, BUT I COULD BE INCORRECT.
SIGN 17 ADDITIONAL OFF STREET PARKING SPACES THAT WE WOULD NEED FOR THE SHARED PARKING REDUCTION.
SO IN 2018, WE GOT A SHARED PARKING REDUCTION OF 79 SPACES, AND NOW WE'RE COMING BACK AND ASKING THAT THAT BE REVISED TO BE A SHARED PARKING REDUCTION OF 96 SPACES.
UM, SO IN, ALONG WITH OUR, UM, APPLICATION FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT ARE, UH, THE LIST OF GENERAL REQUIREMENTS THAT YOUR CODE REQUIRES.
AND I WANTED TO GO THROUGH THOSE SO THAT THOSE ARE ON THE RECORD ALONG WITH OUR, UM, OUR POSITION ON EACH OF THESE.
EACH SPECIAL USE PERMIT SHALL BE RE, RE SHALL BE REASONABLY NECESSARY FOR THE PUBLIC HEALTH, FOR GENERAL INTEREST AND WELFARE.
WE BELIEVE THAT HAVING A RESTAURANT HERE IN THIS SPACE AS OPPOSED TO REGULAR RETAIL WILL BE IN THE GENERAL, WILL BE IN THE, FOR THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND, UH, GEN GENERAL INTEREST IN WELFARE BECAUSE ONE, IT PROVIDES AN ALTERNATIVE RESTAURANTS TO SOME OF THE RESTAURANTS THAT ARE IN THE AREA.
IT'S, UH, SOMETHING THAT I THINK THE AREA WOULD LIKE TO SEE AND DESIRE.
AND, UM, TWO, I THINK IT SERVES THE GENERAL INTEREST AND WELFARE TO LEASE UP VACANT SPACE THAT'S BEEN VACANT FOR A WHILE, AND THIS WILL GO A LONG WAY TO HELPING US DO THAT.
NUMBER TWO, EACH SPECIAL USE PERMIT SHALL BE OF SUCH CHARACTER, INTENSITY, SIZE, AND LOCATION, THAT IN GENERAL, IT WILL BE IN HARMONY WITH THE ORDERLY DEVELOPMENT OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS SITUATED AND WILL NOT BE DETRIMENTAL TO THE ORDERLY DEVELOPMENT OF ADJACENT DISTRICTS.
UH, ON THIS POINT, I'D SAY A COUPLE THINGS.
ONE, THE SPACE IS ALREADY BUILT OUT AND, UH, WE BELIEVE THAT CHANGING THE USE FROM, UM, WE BELIEVE THAT CHANGING THE USE ON A 2000 SQUARE FOOT VACANCY FROM REGULAR RETAIL TO RESTAURANT HERE IS A PRETTY DE MINIMIS CHANGE IN THE SCHEME OF THINGS.
THE CENTER IS 83,000 SQUARE FEET, THAT'S DALE WITH TWO.
AND, UH, THIS 2000 SQUARE FOOT VACANCY MAKES UP ABOUT TWO AND A HALF PERCENT OF THE TOTAL G L A WE THINK CHANGING FROM RETAIL USE TO RESTAURANT USE HERE WILL HAVE A DI MINIS IMPACT.
AND, UH, THE PARKING STUDY THAT WE'VE SUBMITTED AND THE PARKING AND THE, THE TESTIMONY, UM, PROVIDED REGARDING ADEQUACY OF PARKING SHOWS THAT THERE'S MORE THAN AMPLE PARKING AVAILABLE.
NUMBER THREE, THE THIRD REQUIREMENT, EACH SPECIAL USE PERMIT SHALL BE SO LOCATED IN ORDER TO BE ADEQUATELY SERVICED BY TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES, WATER SUPPLY, WASTE DISPOSAL, FIRE AND POLICE PROTECTION.
I'D SAY, AGAIN, THIS IS ALREADY CONSTRUCTED SQUARE FEET AND THE SQUARE AND, AND WHEN WE WENT THROUGH THIS APPLICATION ORIGINALLY, WE MADE SURE THAT WE, UH, CONSTRUCTED THE BUILDING OR WERE PLANNING TO CONSTRUCT THE BUILDING, UM, TO, TO PROVIDE FOR EASY ACCESS FOR FIRE TRUCKS, FOR POLICE TRUCKS.
UH, CIRCULATION IS PRETTY, UH, STRAIGHTFORWARD IN THIS, IN THIS, UH, CENTER, AND WE DON'T REALLY ENVISION
[00:40:01]
ANY ADDITIONAL, UH, ISSUES THAT WOULD BE, THAT WOULD COME UP AS A RESULT OF CHANGING THIS FROM RETAIL USE TO RESTAURANT USE.WE ALSO HAVE ADEQUATE TRASH CAPACITY ON THE SITE.
UM, NUMBER FOUR, EACH SPECIAL USE PERMIT SH UH, WHICH ADJOINS OR ABUTS A RESIDENTIAL DI DISTRICT SHALL BE SO LOCATED IN THE LOT INVOLVED THAT IT SHALL NOT IMPAIR THE USE AND ENJOYMENT AND VALUE OF THE ADJACENT RETAIL PROPERTIES.
THE THIS OUT PARCEL BUILDING SITS IN THE FRONT OF DALEWOOD TOO.
IT'S ADEQUATELY SEPARATED FROM THE APARTMENT BUILDINGS THAT ARE BEHIND THE SHOPPING CENTER BY THE SHOPPING CENTER.
THE SHOPPING CENTER SERVES AS A PRETTY SUBSTANTIAL BUFFER BETWEEN THE APARTMENT BUILDINGS AND THIS OUT PARCEL BUILDING.
CHANGING THE USE FROM RETAIL TO RESTAURANT IS GONNA HAVE A NEGLIGIBLE, IF ANY, IMPACT ON, UH, ON, ON THE ENJOYMENT OF, OF, UH, ON THE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS THAT EXIST IN THE AREA.
AND LAST IS, UM, EACH SPECIAL USE ACTUALLY NOT LAST.
EACH SPECIAL USE PERMIT SHALL NOT CREATE PEDESTRIAN OR VEHICULAR TRAFFIC HAZARDS BECAUSE OF ITS LOCATION.
IN RELATION TO SIMILAR USES, UM, AGAIN, OUR TRAFFIC STUDY AND PARKING STUDY WILL SHOW THAT WE BELIEVE THAT WE HAVE ADEQUATE PARKING MORE THAN ADEQUATE PARKING AVAILABLE AT THE SITE FOR THIS CHANGE OF USE.
UM, AND THEN EACH SPECIAL USE PERMIT SHALL NOT INCLUDE THE DISPLAY OF SIGNS, NOISE, FUMES, OR LIGHTS THAT WILL HINDER THE NORMAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE DISTRICT OR IMPAIR THE USE ENJOYMENT OR VALUE OF ADJACENT LANDER BUILDINGS.
UM, WE ARE NOT PLANNING, UH, ON CHANGING ANY OF THE EXISTING SIGNAGE.
WE DON'T BELIEVE THAT THE, UM, BECAUSE THE RE THE ADJACENT SPACE IS ALREADY BEING USED AS A RESTAURANT, WE DON'T ENVISION THAT THERE'LL BE ADDITIONAL, UM, ISSUES AS A RESULT OF CHANGING THIS ADJACENT SPACE FROM RETAIL TO RESTAURANT AND BELIEVE THAT, UM, AGAIN, THIS CHANGE OF USE WILL FIT WITHIN THE CHARACTER OF THE EXISTING DEVELOPMENT AND THE COMMERCIAL DISTRICT THAT IT'S LOCATED WITHIN.
THAT BASICALLY IS OUR APPLICATION.
UM, I WILL TELL YOU THAT WE'VE HAD A VERY DIFFICULT TIME WITH VACANCY, UH, NOT ONLY AT THE SHOPPING CENTER, BUT THIS OUT PARCEL SPECIFICALLY.
AND WE HAVE HAD SIGNIFICANT INTEREST FROM RESTAURANTS, UH, IN ORDER FOR US TO BE ABLE TO ENGAGE IN FRUITFUL CONVERSATIONS WITH THEM.
THEY WANNA KNOW THAT THEY CAN OPEN HERE.
UM, AND, UM, WE, UH, THAT'S, THAT'S THE REASON THAT WE'RE APPEARING BEFORE YOU TONIGHT.
IS, UM, ARE YOU, IS THERE ANY OTHER REPRESENTATIVE, UH, WHO WISH TO SPEAK ON YOUR APPLICATION FOR FROM YOUR PARTY OR THAT'S YOUR PRESENTATION? UM, WE HAVE CHUCK YOUTUBE HERE, MR. AND MY NAME IS CHUCK ENGINEERING.
I, I DON'T THINK I NEED TO COMPLICATE THE PRESENTATION ANYMORE, BUT I AM AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE RELATIVE TO THE PARKING.
I THINK WHEN, WHEN THIS BOARD, YOU KNOW, APPROVED THE PARKING WAIVER BACK IN 2007, IT WAS BASED ON A PARKING UTILIZATION STUDY THAT WE DID THAT YOUR CONSULTANT REVIEWED.
UH, THERE ARE PLENTY OF EXCESS PARKING SPACES AT THIS CENTER.
SO THIS CHANGE OF 17 SPACES REALLY DOES NOT CREATE ANY NEGATIVE IMPACT ON AVAILABLE PARKING AT THE CENTER.
AND, AND IT'S REALLY KIND OF BOILS DOWN TO THAT THERE IS A FULL TRAFFIC UTILIZATION STUDY THAT SUPPORTS THAT CONCLUSION, WHICH YOUR CONSULTANT, I THINK ALSO, UM, WITH THAT, I, I THINK I'LL JUST ANSWER IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS.
UH, ARE THERE ANY QUESTION OF BOARD MEMBERS BEFORE I TURN IT OVER AND ENTERTAIN QUESTIONS FROM THE PUBLIC CHAIRPERSON? I, I HAVE A QUESTION IF I, OKAY.
I JUST WANNA TO ANNOUNCE FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE BOARD THAT WE DO HAVE MR. CANNING, OUR CONSULTANT ON THE ZOOM CALL THIS EVENING.
UM, SO HE IS HERE AND ABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS WITH RESPECT TO TRAFFIC AND PARKING AND TO GO ANYTHING YOU'D LIKE WITH RESPECT TO THAT OR HIS REVIEW OF IT.
MY, MY QUESTION MAYBE YOUR CONSULTANTS CAN HELP WITH IS THE, WHAT IS THE SORT OF, UH, WE DOING THIS INCREMENTAL REDUCTION REQUEST? UH, SO WHAT I WANNA DO, UH, KIND OF QUESTION IS, AND FOR MARK MAYBE, BUT WHAT IS YOUR PROJECTING, UH, UTILIZATION FOR YOUR SHOPPING THERE? I'M GONNA HAVE SOME MORE RESTAURANT, WHICH WILL NECESSITATE, UH, HAVING A, UH, LOWER REDUCTION, YOU WILL COME BACK FOR PARKING.
SO JUST WANTED TO GET A, GET A SORT OF LARGER ISSUE CONSIDERING THAT YOU KNOW, WHAT THE MARKET IS AND, AND WHAT THE TREND IS.
AND, UH, I MEAN, I LIKE THE RESTAURANT SO
[00:45:01]
A VERY GOOD QUESTION.I, I, I WISH WE COULD COME BACK.
I WISH WE COULD APPEAR BEFORE YOU NOW AND ACTUALLY REQUEST WHAT WE THINK WE'RE GONNA NEED IN THE FUTURE, BUT WE CAN'T, WE SORT OF, WE HAVE TO COME BEFORE YOU WITH WHAT'S ON THE TABLE TODAY.
AND, AND THIS WAS SEEN AS SORT OF MORE OF AN IMMEDIATE NEED, UM, AND A REACTION TO A LOT OF INTEREST THAT WE WERE GETTING ON THE OUT PARTS OF THE BUILDING FROM RESTAURANTS ONLY.
WE REALLY TRIED MANY OTHER CATEGORIES TWO YEARS LATER WITH NO LUCK.
UM, BUT I WILL TELL YOU THAT IN GENERAL, AT THE CENTER WITH THE VACANCY RATE THAT AS IT IS AND THE VACANT ANCHOR SPACE THAT EXISTS THERE, WE, WE, WE MAY END UP COMING BEFORE YOU AGAIN TO DISCUSS SOMETHING LARGER AT THE CENTER.
UM, WE, UM, HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH AND TALKING TO MANY DIFFERENT RETAILERS AND WE REALLY DON'T HAVE, UM, AT THIS POINT A LOT OF TRACTION.
I'M HOPING IT CHANGES AS THINGS ARE TURNING WITH OUR ECONOMY RIGHT NOW.
AND, YOU KNOW, LOOKING AT 2021 WITH BRIGHT EYES, UH, WE'RE OPTIMISTIC THAT WE WILL HAVE SOME RENEWED INTEREST IN, UM, THE ANCHOR SPACE AND WE ARE CONSIDERING POSSIBLY MAKING SOME ENHANCEMENTS TO THE CENTER AND MAKING SOME UPGRADES TO THE CENTER.
AND MAYBE, UM, TAKING A LOOK AT THE SQUARE FOOTAGE THAT EXISTS TODAY AND SEEING HOW IT MIGHT BE BETTER UTILIZED, POSSIBLY THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE'RE JUST IN A VERY CONCEPTUAL, UH, DISCUSSION RIGHT NOW.
SO I CAN'T MAKE A PREDICTION ABOUT HOW MUCH OF THE, WHEN A REST OF THE CENTER WILL BE USED FOR RESTAURANT IN THE FUTURE.
I WOULD SAY RIGHT NOW THE AMOUNT OF RESTAURANTS THAT WE HAVE AT THE CENTER IS THE MINIMAL AMOUNT.
I THINK IT WILL GO UP AT THE CENTER.
I THINK WE WILL PROBABLY SEE MORE RESTAURANTS.
YOU KNOW, IT'S BECOMING ONE OF THE, UM, IT'S BECOMING ONE OF THE RETAIL CATEGORIES THAT ACTUALLY STILL SERVES A PURPOSE IN A SHOPPING CENTER, UH, IN OUR OLD, SORT OF THE OLDER TRADITIONAL, UH, USES THAT ONE WOULD IMAGINE IN SHOPPING CENTER RESTAURANTS STILL ARE VIABLE.
THEY, THEY WANNA BE THERE, THEY USUALLY WANT SOME SORT OF DRIVE UP OR PICK UP ACCESS.
UM, BUT, UH, GENERALLY SPEAKING, I WOULD SAY THAT, THAT WE DON'T HAVE A SPECIFIC NUMBER, BUT I WOULD THINK THAT THAT WOULD INCREASE IN THE FUTURE.
AND I THINK THAT WE PROBABLY WILL BE BEFORE YOU AT SOME POINT IN THE FUTURE, TALK ABOUT THE CENTER IN GENERAL AND ARE LOOKING FORWARD TO WORKING WITH YOU TO COLLABORATE ON HOW WE COULD MAKE THE CENTER EVEN MORE APPEALING GOING FORWARD.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS BY BOARD MEMBERS BEFORE I, I, UH, I ASK FOR PUBLIC CON COMMENT.
I HAVE SOMETHING TO SAY, WALTER.
YEAH, THERE'S A LETTER IN HERE FROM MR. CANNING ABOUT THE REDUCED, UM, PARKING AND AGAIN, THEY SUGGEST ABOUT EMPLOYEES PARKING IN THE REAR.
AND I HAVE TO SAY, I'M, I, FIRST OF ALL, I DON'T THINK MR. NEWMAN CAN CONTROL THAT, WHICH HE SAID PREVIOUSLY.
AND NUMBER TWO, I'M REALLY, I HAVE SAFETY CONCERNS FOR THE EMPLOYEES PARKING IN THE REAR, ESPECIALLY AT THE END OF THE EVENING WHEN IT'S DARK.
I'M REALLY TOTALLY AGAINST IT.
I THINK WE HAVE TO TAKE A SECONDARY LOOK AT ALL OF OUR PARKING REGULATIONS AND GO THROUGH IT.
ONCE AGAIN, I THINK WE ARE ASKING FOR TOO MUCH PARKING IN A LOT OF THESE PARKING CENTERS.
AND I THINK MR. NEWMAN, WE NEED YOU TO WORK WITH US ON THAT AND SEVERAL OF OUR LARGE SHOPPING CENTERS TO WORK WITH US ON OUR PARKING CODES, AND WE NEED TO TAKE A LOOK AT THEM.
AND WE'RE JUST ASKING FOR TOO MUCH PARKING TO BEGIN WITH.
SO I JUST WANT THAT ON RECORD.
DAVID, YOU HAD A COMMENT? YEAH.
UM, LANA, UM, WE ARE VERY AWARE, AWARE OF YOUR CONCERN AND, UH, AS STAFF, WE HAVE ACTUALLY DISCUSSED THAT, UH, IT IS UP TO OUR BOARD TO CONDITION, UM, BASED ON THE CONCERNS YOU RAISED.
UH, ONE OF, WE WILL POSSIBLY OFFER ALTERNATIVES, BUT ONE OF THE ALTERNATIVES DESPITE THE, UM, UH, OFFER NECESSARILY FROM THE APPLICANT ABOUT, UH, HAVING PARKING IN THE BACK IS ACTUALLY TO HAVE THE PARKING FOR THIS RETAIL RESTAURANT BEHIND THIS RESTAURANT BUILDING.
BUT BETWEEN THIS AND THE MAIN SHOPPING CENTER, I THINK THAT WOULD ADDRESS YOUR CONCERNS.
UM, I SEE MR. NEWMAN IS ALSO SHAKING HIS HEAD AND, AND AARON IS, UH, YOU KNOW, HAS PULLED UP THE SCREEN.
WE ARE VERY AWARE OF YOUR CONCERNS, UM, AND, AND WE HAVE THE SIMILAR CONCERNS, UH, AS WELL.
SO WHEN IT COMES TO, UH, IF THE BOARD CHOOSES TO GRANT, UH, THIS, UH, PERMIT, UH, WE WILL INCORPORATE THAT LANGUAGE IN THE DRAFT.
UM, I THINK WE'RE OVERCOMPLICATING THIS FOR RIGHT NOW.
AND, AND I, I, I THINK
I, I DON'T THINK WE NEED NEED TO, TO, UH, OVER MANAGE THIS PARKING SITUATION CURRENTLY.
[00:50:01]
THINK I LOOK FORWARD TO MR. NEWMAN'S MASTER PLAN.I THINK THAT IS THE TIME, UM, WHEN WE HAVE TO REVISIT THIS, UM, TRUTHFULLY, UH, OR I THINK AT THE TIME, IF THERE HAPPENS TO BE A SWITCH FROM WHAT'S CURRENTLY, UH, IN THE OLD, UM, UH, UH, UH, SUPERMARKET SPACE, THE OLD BEST SPACE THERE, UM, CLEARLY THE CURRENT USE OF THAT SPACE IS, UH, SIGNIFICANTLY LESS THAN A SUPERMARKET.
IT'S NOT EVEN CLOSE TO A SUPERMARKET.
I'VE NEVER, THERE'S NO REASON TO MAKE PEOPLE PARK.
YOU DON'T WANT TO HAVE DESIGNATED SPACES.
THAT MAKES IT MORE INEFFICIENT, I THINK.
AND I AGREE WITH MONA, THERE'S NO REASON TO, TO MAKE PEOPLE WALK TO BEHIND THE, THE SHOPPING, THE MAIN SHOPPING CENTER OF THE EMPLOYEES AT THIS POINT.
I MEAN, GENERALLY WHAT YOU TRY TO DO WITH EMPLOYEES ANYWAY, I WOULD THINK IS ENCOURAGE 'EM NOT TO PARK IN THE PRIME SPACES.
I THINK IN ANY GOOD BUSINESS DOES THAT EMPLOYEE TRY TO HAVE A PARK, PARK? I THINK BOTH OF THOSE POINTS ARE, ARE DULY RECORDED.
AND, UH, AND WE WILL, UH, UH, ADDRESS THAT IN, UH, IN OUR FINAL DECISION.
UH, I WOULD LIKE TO GET INPUT FROM THE PUBLIC AT THIS POINT.
AND, UH, IF THERE ARE NO, NO OTHER QUESTIONS FROM BOARD MEMBERS, I'D LIKE TO GET INPUT FROM THE PUBLIC AT THIS POINT.
UH, SO, UH, I'D LIKE TO SPEAK.
UM, NUMBER ONE, JUST WANNA MAKE, WELL, LET'S, LET'S OFFICIALLY GET, MAKE SURE THAT NO OTHER BOARD MEMBERS WISH TO SPEAK, AND THEN WE START HEARING FROM THE PUBLIC.
SO WITH NO OTHER BOARD MEMBERS WISH TO SPEAK, WE WILL TURN THAT OVER TO, UH, TO MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC.
AND, UH, MR. STREET, YOU COULD, UH, START ADMITTING, UH, MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC.
WHO WISHES TO SPEAK AT THIS TIME? GOOD EVENING, MR. BOIN.
UM, I, FIRST, MR. MARK, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU KNOW WHO I AM, UM, I'VE BEEN ON THE, UH, MEETING WITH THE TRAFFIC ENGINEERS IN WASHINGTON, AND THESE ARE THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE WRITTEN THE RULES THAT GOVERN PARKER.
I'VE BEEN A MEMBER OF THE MARKETING COMMITTEE FOR MORE THAN 20 YEARS.
EVERY TRAFFIC ENGINEER IN THE UNITED STATES WHO IS INTERESTED IN MARKINGS, KNOWS EXACTLY WHAT I'M GOING TO SAY TONIGHT.
'CAUSE I'VE SENT THEM ALL A COPY OF IT.
PEOPLE HAVE BECOME DISTRACTED.
LOOMBERG IN PARTICULAR, IS INTERESTED IN SAFETY, AND THEY HAVE VARIOUS COMMITTEES INVESTIGATING PEDESTRIAN SAFETY AND CROSSING THE ROADS.
IT HAS BEEN SHOWN THAT THE CONTINENTAL BAR CROSSWALK IS THE SAFEST CROSSWALK BECAUSE IT'S THE ONE THAT'S OBVIOUS TO THE DRIVER.
AND WHAT'S THE MOST IMPORTANT TODAY IS THE DRIVERS SEE THE CROSSWALK.
THE ORIGINAL CROSSWALKS WERE DESIGNED 75 YEARS AGO WHEN THEY FIRST STARTED HAVING LINES ON THE ROAD MANY YEARS AGO.
I WAS IN WASHINGTON AND I READ EVERY SINGLE MANUAL FROM ITS ORIGINAL IN THE PAPER COPY, WHICH ISN'T AVAILABLE TODAY DURING WASHINGTON ON THIS, ABOUT 25 YEARS, MAYBE LONGER, I CAN'T REMEMBER ANYMORE.
THE NEW MANUAL, WHICH IS NEW, IS NOW SHOWS THREE HIGH VISIBILITY CROSSWALKS.
THE ONE THAT'S APPROPRIATE AND USED TO ROUTE, UM, EUROPE CALLED THE CONTINENTAL OR BAR IS THE ONE THAT SHOULD BE USED UNIVERSALLY FOR SAFETY PURPOSES.
ARE YOU AWARE OF THAT, MARK? UM, NO.
LET, THIS IS THE, YOU SAID THIS WAS A DISCUSSION THAT WE COULD NO, NO, THIS IS PUBLIC HEARING.
YOU, YOU STATE WHAT YOU WANT, SAY THERE'S NO QUESTION AND ANSWER.
AND THEN, BUT WE DON'T HAVE, UH, A QUESTION AND ANSWER BETWEEN, UH, UH, UH, THE PUBLIC AND, AND THE APPLICANT.
YOU STATE YOUR POSITION, AND IT IS UP TO THIS BOARD TO MAKE SURE THAT APPLICANT ANSWERS ALL OF YOUR QUESTIONS.
EITHER, EITHER THEY DO IT NOW, AFTER ALL THE SPEAKERS HAVE SPOKEN, THEY CAN RESPOND TO ALL THE QUESTION.
AND IF THEY'RE NOT IN A POSITION TO RESPOND NOW, THEY'LL HAVE TO DO IT AT A NEXT, UH, UH, WORK SESSION.
[00:55:01]
ANSWERED.I'M REQUESTING YOU, THIS IS THE FIRST OPPORTUNITY TO PUT SOMEBODY ON THE SPOT TO CHANGE ALL OF THE CROSSWALKS IN YOUR AREA TO THE SAFEST CROSSWALK FOR THE PEDESTRIAN.
THAT'S THE PARALLEL BARS IN THE DIRECTION OF TRAFFIC.
NEW YORK CITY USES IT EXCLUSIVELY.
THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT USES IT EXCLUSIVELY.
CALIFORNIA USES IT EXCLUSIVELY, AND IN GREENBURG IS MIXED.
AND WHERE PEOPLE ARE NOT PAYING ATTENTION ANYMORE BECAUSE THEY'RE TEXTING AND WE HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO STOP THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT YOU WANNA GIVE THEM, WHEN THEY LOOK UP, THEY SHOULD SEE THE CROSSWALK AS A CROSSWALK.
AND EVERY SINGLE OPPORTUNITY IN GREENBURG, I WILL PRESENT THIS.
I PRESENTED IT TO WESTCHESTER COUNTY, TO THE NEW YORK STATE, THREE EIGHT, THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TO PORT AUTHORITY TO THE M T A.
ANYBODY ELSE I CAN THINK OF, IT'S TIME WE TEST.
I HAVE TROUBLE WITH, WITH DYSLEXIA.
UM, IT'S TIME TO PROTECT THE PEDESTRIAN, THE RULES OF THE PAST.
MANY PEOPLE HAVE VERY MUCH TROUBLE GIVING HIM UP.
YOU CAN SEE WHAT'S GOING ON IN THIS COUNTRY TODAY IS PEOPLE WHO HAVE FIXED IDEAS UNABLE TO CHANGE.
WE'RE MOVING FROM AN ECONOMY BASED ON FOSSIL FUELS TO ONE WHERE ALL THE ELECTRIC, ALL CARS WILL BE ELECTRIC.
ALL OF THOSE PEOPLES WITH OIL REFINERIES ARE GONNA LOSE THEM.
EVERY TIME YOU INTERRUPT ME, DON'T YOU? NO, NO.
THAT'S ONE OF YOUR FAVORITE, MR. BODEN.
YOU MAKE YOUR RULES AS YOU GO ALONG.
BUT I BE THERE EVERY SINGLE TIME I'VE INDICATED THAT I WISH TO HAVE EVERYONE GIVE EVERYONE THE RESPONSE, UH, THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK.
I ASK THAT WE DON'T REPEAT OURSELF.
YOU MADE THE BEER POSITION VERY CLEAR THAT THE, ABOUT THE CONTINENTAL, UH, STRIPING, YOU MADE THAT VERY CLEAR.
AND WE, AND THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE ASKED, UH, MR. CANNON TO SPEAK ABOUT.
WE ASKED THE APPLICANT TO SPEAK ABOUT.
SO, SO WE MUST, LIKE I SAID, WE, I'M TRYING TO GIVE EVERYBODY, YOU KNOW, A REASONABLE AMOUNT OF TIME WITHOUT SETTING A CLOCK.
AND I WISH YOU WOULD RESPECT THAT.
I WILL RESPECT THAT COMMUNICATION.
IF YOU WISH TO FINISH, FINISH UP, I'LL ALLOW YOU TO FINISH UP.
YOU SAID I SENT A COMMUNICATION THIS MORNING TO BE PRESENTED TO THE BOARD COVERING THESE ISSUES.
IT THOROUGHLY IT WAS NOT, UH, MENTIONED IN COMMUNICATIONS.
I'LL MAKE SURE THAT, THAT, THAT THAT IS DISTRIBUTED.
ONE OF THE THINGS, AND THAT'S A GENERAL COMMENT, WHEN PEOPLE SEND INFORMATION OUT THE PEN BOARD, GET A PACKET ON FRIDAY WITH ALL THE INFORMATION, WHICH WE STUDY IN PREPARATION FOR A WEDNESDAY MEETING.
WHEN PEOPLE SEND NOTICES, YOU KNOW, ON THE LAST DAY, YOU KNOW, IT IS DIFFICULT FOR US TO GET ALL THAT INFORMATION AT THE LAST MINUTE, READ IT, DIGEST IT, AND BE PREPARED TO SPEAK ABOUT IT AT THE EVENING.
SO I WOULD JUST SUGGEST THAT IN THE FUTURE, WE TRY TO SEND THAT, UH, EARLIER, SO THAT COULD BE INCLUDED.
IT'S ALSO INCLUDED, UH, IN THE, IN THE RECORD.
SO IF IT'S NOT ADDRESSED SPECIFICALLY TONIGHT, IT GOES TO THE APPLICANT AND GOES TO THE RECORD AND IT GOES TO THE BOARD.
SO IT IS SEEN, BUT LAST MINUTE, UH, EMAILS ARE DIFFICULT, UH, TO DISTRIBUTE AND MAKE SURE THAT EVERYONE GETS.
THANK YOU TO THE NEXT SPEAKER.
ONE OTHER PERSON HAD PREVIOUSLY EXPRESSED INTEREST.
I DON'T KNOW IF HE OR SHE OR ON THE MEETING, SO I'M JUST MAKING AN ANNOUNCEMENT.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE FROM THE PUBLIC THAT WISHES TO SPEAK ON THIS APPLICATION AT TON? OKAY, SO IF THERE'S NO, NO OTHER, UH, SPEAKERS ON THIS ISSUE, I WOULD LIKE TO, UH, UH, CLOSE THE RECORD, UH, CLOSE THE, UM, CLOSE THIS APPLICATION.
KEEP DIRECT IT OPEN UNTIL FEBRUARY THE
[01:00:01]
10TH.IF YOU WANTED TO GET ANY COMMENT FROM, UM, WHETHER THE APPLICANT WANTED TO COMMENT, UH, AND, AND OR WHETHER MR. CANNING WANTED TO COMMENT.
I JUST WANTED TO ADD THAT WE, AGAIN, WE HAVE MR. CANNING HERE, IF YOU'D LIKE HIM TO GO THROUGH THE REPORT, THE REVIEW OF THE APPLICANT'S SUBMITTAL, HE'S MORE THAN HAPPY TO WHAT I WOULD LIKE HIM.
UH, THERE WAS THAT, UH, THE APPLICANT, UH, UH, INDICATED THAT THEY FELT THAT THERE WAS MORE THAN AMPLE SPACE, UH, FOR THE 17 SPACE REDUCTION.
AND I'D JUST LIKE TO, UH, UH, UNDERSTAND IF MR. CANNON AGREE WITH THAT ANALYSIS, MR. CHAIRMAN? YES, GOOD EVENING.
UM, I, I AGREED WITH THE ANALYSIS THAT, UM, MR. UICK AND MR. UM, NEWMAN PRESENTED.
UH, I WOULD LIKE TO NOTE THAT IN THE RECOMMENDATION TO REQUEST EMPLOYEES TO PARK IN THE REAR, I DID MENTION THAT IT SHOULD AT LEAST BE CONSIDERED, UH, AT THE CHRISTMAS HOLIDAY IF THEY'RE BUSY.
BASICALLY, IF THEY HAVE THE BUSIEST TIMES IN THE YEAR, UH, CERTAINLY WHEN THEY'RE NOT BUSY, THERE'S NO REQUIREMENT TO HAVE THEM PARK BACK THERE.
BUT IF THEY HAVE BUSY TIMES, IT'S PROBABLY BETTER FOR EVERYBODY IF THEY DO BACK THERE, PARK BACK THERE SO THAT WHEN YOU COME IN, YOU CAN FIND A SPOT.
BUT I DEFINITELY RECOGNIZE, UH, BOARD MEMBER FRY TYPE'S CONCERN.
AND IF THERE WAS TO BE PARKING BACK THERE AT BUSY TIMES, I'M SURE, UM, UH, THE MANAGEMENT COULD TAKE EXTRA MEASURES TO MAKE SURE THAT, UH, IT WAS SECURE BACK THERE.
UM, WITH REGARD TO THE CROSSWALKS, I HAVEN'T HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW THE MATERIALS MR. BOLDEN POINTED TO OR SUBMITTED.
I WILL NOTE THAT THERE ARE THREE TYPES OF CROSSWALKS APPROVED BY NEW YORK STATE, D O T, UH, THE, THE, THE LINES, THE BARS, AND THEN A COMBINATION OF LINES AND BARS.
IT'S ON THEIR STANDARD SHEETS, WHICH, UH, STANDARD SHEET NUMBER 6 85 DASH OH ONE.
UM, I CERTAINLY WOULD BE INTERESTED IN REVIEWING THE MATERIALS THAT MR. BODEN PROVIDED, BUT AT THIS POINT IN TIME, UM, I, I THINK THAT WHAT THE APPLICANT HAS PROVIDED IS CONSISTENT WITH CURRENT STANDARDS.
UM, SOME MAY BE SOMEWHAT BETTER THAN THE OTHER, BUT I, I, UH, DON'T HAVE AN OPINION ON THAT AT THIS POINT IN TIME.
WOULD YOU BE ABLE TO PROVIDE, UH, AN OPINION ON THAT, UH, PRIOR TO FEBRUARY THE 10TH? CERTAINLY.
SO, UH, THE RECORD WILL BE KEPT OPEN TO FEBRUARY 10TH AND BY THE, AND WHEN WE ARE IN THE POSITION TO MAKE A DECISION, WE WOULD HAVE THAT, UH, INPUT.
IF I MAY ALSO, UM, RESPOND TO, UM, THE COMMENTS REGARDING THE, UH, CONTINENTAL BAR CROSSWALK.
UH, FIRST OF ALL, I DO APPRECIATE YOU BRINGING, UH, THAT INFORMATION TO EVERYBODY'S ATTENTION.
I THINK YOU'RE SERVING A REAL PURPOSE, UH, YOU KNOW, VERY IMPORTANT PEDESTRIAN SAFETY.
UM, I WILL TELL YOU THAT I THINK THAT PROBABLY THE RIGHT TIME TO HAVE THAT CONVERSATION IS WHEN WE COME BEFORE THE BOARD WITH LARGER, UH, PLANS FOR THE SHOPPING CENTER AND ARE READY TO ENGAGE IN CONVERSATION REGARDING, UM, SOME MORE SUBSTANTIVE COMPREHENSIVE IMPROVEMENTS AT THE CENTER.
IN 2018, WHEN WE CONSTRUCTED THIS IN 2017 AND 18, WHEN WE CONSTRUCTED THIS BUILDING, WE DID ADD CROSSWALKS AT, UH, I BELIEVE THREE OR FOUR DIFFERENT PLACES THROUGHOUT THIS, THROUGHOUT DALEWOOD TWO THAT DIDN'T EXIST PRE, THAT WERE NOT THERE PREVIOUSLY.
IT DOESN'T MEAN THAT WE CAN'T CONTINUALLY IMPROVE IT, AND WE'RE VERY OPEN TO, TO THOSE SUGGESTIONS, I WOULD SAY ON THE SIDE, ON THE SIDEWALK MARK? YES.
YOU, YOU, YOU ALSO ADDED A SIDEWALK, SO YOU MADE SUBSTANTIAL IMPROVEMENTS AT THAT TIME? YES, WE DID.
AND, AND I'D SAY THAT WE'RE, WE'RE OPEN TO THOSE SUGGESTIONS, MR. BODEN.
UH, I JUST THINK NOW, MAYBE NOT RIGHT THIS MINUTE, BUT DEFINITELY WHEN WE COME BEFORE YOU WITH WHAT WE'RE HOPING IS GONNA BE REALLY EXCITING THINGS FOR THE CENTER.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER CONCERNS OF, UH, ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM THE APPLICANT OR BOARD MEMBERS? IF NOT, I WILL, UH, UH, ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO CLOSE THIS RUBBER HEARING.
KEEP THE RECORDS OPEN UNTIL FEBRUARY 10TH.
WHO, WHO MOVED IT FOR THE RECORD? BOB MOVED IT.
HOW ABOUT VOTING? ROGER, WE NEED TO VOTE ON THAT.
[01:05:01]
AYE.SO THE NEXT ITEM ON FOR PUBLIC HEARING IS CASE NUMBER PB 20 DASH 12
FAMILY RESIDENCE ZONING DISTRICT PROJECT INVOLVES A PROPOSAL TO CONSTRUCT A NEW TWO STORY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE WITH AN ATTACHED TWO CAR GARAGE, AS WELL AS A FLAGSTONE PATIO, I'M SORRY, A FLAGSTONE WALKWAY, ASPHALT PATIO, STONE PATIO AND RETAINING WALL PROJECT ALSO INVOLVES REGULATED STEEP SLIP DISTURBANCE AND REGULATED CREW REMOVAL FOLLOWING LAND USE APPROVALS ARE APPLICABLE PLANNING WITH STEEP SLOPE PERMIT APPROVAL AND TREE REMOVAL PERMIT APPROVAL.
THE APPLICANT LAST APPEARED BEFORE THE PLANNING BOARD AT AWARD SESSION ON JANUARY 6TH, 2021.
AND NOTE THAT THIS PROPERTY BY A PRIOR OWNER SLASH APPLICANT KNOWN AS RTOS PREVIOUSLY RECEIVED A STEEP SLOPE PERMIT FROM THE PLANNING BOARD FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE UNDER CASE NUMBER PB 15 DASH FIVE, WHICH WAS APPROVED ON NOVEMBER 5TH, 2017.
THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE IS PRESENT THIS EVENING, THE DETAIL OF THE PROJECT AND ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THE BOARD OR MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC MAY HAVE.
THIS IS SHANE AL, I'M REPRESENTING THE APPLICANT FROM THE DALLY ENGINEERING IN MOUNT VERNON.
UM, WE HAVE BEFORE YOU A SLIGHTLY REVISED SITE PLAN AND TREE REMOVAL PLAN FROM THE JANUARY MEETING WHERE WE FIRST PRESENTED THIS.
UM, I'M GOING TO, UH, JUST SHARE MY SCREEN AND, UH, JUST FLIP UP TO THE SITE PLAN.
SO, UM, I BELIEVE THE, THE BOARD OF SEVERAL BOARD MEMBERS DID MAKE A SITE VISIT, UH, AND INSPECTED THE CONDITION OF THE TREES THAT ARE LOCATED ALONG THE TOP OF THE PROPOSED RETAINING WALL, AS WELL AS ON THE BACK OF THE SITE.
UH, IN CONJUNCTION WITH THAT, UH, SITE VISIT AND THE RECOMMENDATIONS MADE BY THE BOARD, WE HAVE REVISED OUR TREE PLAN, UH, TO REMOVE ALL OF THE EXISTING TREES THAT WOULD IMPACT THE INSTALLATION OF THAT RETAINING WALL, AS WELL AS PROVIDE NEW TREES IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TREE WALL, UM, THAT WOULD PROVIDE SCREENING ALSO FOR THE NEIGHBOR ON THAT, ON THAT SIDE.
UM, SO THIS TREE PLAN BEFORE YOU IS NEW.
UH, AND WE ARE NOW PROPOSING, UM, YOU KNOW, SUBSTANTIALLY LARGER AMOUNT OF TREES AS WELL AS FOUR DIFFERENT SPECIES AND SOME, SOME PLANTINGS IN THE FRONT.
UH, IN TERMS OF THE SITE PLAN ITSELF, WE DID MAKE A COUPLE OTHER MODIFICATIONS.
UH, FIRST OF ALL, THE AREA OF DISTURBANCE HAS BEEN MODIFIED IN ORDER TO ACCOUNT FOR THE REMOVAL OF THOSE TREES.
SO THE AREA OF DISTURBANCE WAS EXPANDED.
IF YOU, UH, LOOK ON THE SHEET THAT I HAVE, UH, DISPLAYED HERE, THE PREVIOUS AREA OF DISTURBANCE IS SHOWN IN THIS LIGHTER LINE, AND THAT'S WHAT WAS APPROVED IN THE CASE THAT MR. SCHMIDT JUST MENTIONED TO YOU FROM 2017.
AND THIS NEW AREA OF DISTURBANCE, WHICH IS MODIFIED FROM THE PREVIOUS, UH, MEETING OF LAST MONTH AS WELL, UM, IS, IS SHOWN HERE.
I DO WANNA MAKE THE BOARD AWARE THAT THE NEW AREA OF DISTURBANCE WE ARE PROPOSING IS APPROXIMATELY 70 SQUARE FEET LESS THAN THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED AMOUNT.
UM, BUT IT IS DIFFERENT IN ITS SHAPE.
UM, AND THEN IN CONJUNCTION WITH MODIFYING THAT AREA OF DISTURBANCE, WE ALSO, UH, MODIFIED THE STORMWATER SYSTEM, FIRST OF ALL, ON A RECOMMENDATION MADE BY A BOARD MEMBER LAST MONTH THAT WE MOVED THE CULEX IN THE DRIVEWAY OVER TO THE LEFT TO GET OUT OF THE STEEPEST PART OF THE SLOPE.
HOWEVER, DUE TO SETBACKS, UH, WE WERE ONLY ABLE TO MOVE IT SLIGHTLY OVER.
THERE WAS A A, THERE IS STILL A PORTION OF THOSE CULEX IN THE, IN THE, UH, EXCESSIVELY STEEP SLOPED AREA.
AND THEN WE DID ALSO MODIFY THE LOCATION OF DETENTION TANKS IN THE REAR YARD, UH, JUST TO BRING THEM IN A LITTLE BIT CLOSER.
UM, I, I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S ANY OTHER MODIFICATIONS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE TO THIS PLAN SINCE LAST HAS BEEN PRESENTED TO YOU.
UM, AND I DO WANNA MENTION THAT THE APPLICANT DOES HAVE THE INTENT AND, UH, TO, TO PROVIDE THE BUILDING ELEVATIONS PRIOR TO THE PERMIT ISSUANCE AS WELL.
AND IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, MR. BATLEY, UH, I JUST WANTED TO NOTE THAT
[01:10:01]
IN YOUR PRIOR SUBMITTAL THAT CAME IN AFTER THE LAST WORK SESSION, UM, YOU DID SHOW AND PROVIDE FOR FENCE ON TOP OF THE PROPOSED WALL.I KNOW THE TOP OF THE COMMENT OF THE BOARD, SO
THE, THE BUILDING MATERIALS? YES.
SO, SO YES, THAT WAS MENTIONED BY THE BOARD.
SO THE RETAINING WALL IS PROPOSED TO HAVE A STUCCO FINISH.
THAT STUCCO FINISH IS SHOWN UP HERE AS A, UH, A GRAY WHITE, SO IT'S LIKE AN OFF WHITE COLOR.
AND THEN THE TOP OF THE FENCE IS TO BE A 48 INCH HIGH ALUMINUM FENCE AS DEPICTED IN THIS BOTTOM LEFT IMAGE.
SO IT WAS JUST A STANDARD FENCE.
UM, BUT THE APPLICANT IS PRETTY OPEN, UH, TO TO, TO THE FENCING.
AND DOES THAT CONCLUDE YOUR PRESENTATION? NO.
YEAH, I JUST WANTED TO ADD FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE BOARD THAT WITH RESPECT TO STORMWATER MANAGEMENT, THERE WAS A REQUEST THAT OUR BUREAU OF ENGINEERING TAKE A PRELIMINARY LOOK AT THE DESIGN AND LAYOUT AUTHORED BY THE APPLICANT'S DESIGN PROFESSIONAL.
AND I DID HAVE COMMUNICATION WITH THE BUREAU OF ENGINEERING TODAY THAT THEY HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW IT AND THAT THE PROPOSAL THEN APPEAR TO MEET CHAPTER 2 48 OF THE TOWN CODE ENTITLED STORMWATER MANAGEMENT.
FURTHER, IF THE PROJECT WERE TO MOVE FORWARD, UH, THROUGH THE PLANNING BOARD PROCESS, THE APPLICANT WOULD BE REQUIRED TO OBTAIN A STORMWATER MANAGEMENT CONTROL PERMIT FROM THE BUREAU OF ENGINEERING PRIOR TO FILING FOR A VOTING PERMIT.
UM, I, I DON'T KNOW IF WE HAVE THIS.
I THINK IT WOULD BE HELPFUL FOR THE BOARD AND THE PUBLIC IF WE DO, TO SHOW THE PRIOR PLAN, UH, WHAT HAS BEEN APPROVED, UH, PREVIOUSLY, AND CONTRAST THAT WITH THE, UM, CURRENT PLAN, UH, THAT'S BEFORE, UH, THIS BOARD, AND MAYBE I HAVE THAT.
SO MS. VA, IF YOU, IF YOU TOOK DOWN THE SHARE SCREEN FUNCTION, I'M HAPPY TO PUT IT UP.
LET'S SEE, BEAR WITH ME JUST FOR A MOMENT.
UH, IF I COULD ALSO MAKE A BRIEF POINT WHILE YOU PULL THAT UP, UH, IN REGARDS TO THE SNOW MOTOR.
SO, AND, AND WE DID DRAFT A LETTER AND, AND PROVIDE IT TO THE BOARD, AND IT WAS A LITTLE LATE.
I'M VERY SORRY FOR THAT, BUT IF I COULD ELABORATE ON IT, UM, WE DID BRIEFLY MENTION IN LAST MEETING THAT, UM, WE DID HOPEFULLY OBTAIN A PERCOLATION TEST TO VERIFY THE AMOUNT OF STORMWATER RETENTION.
UM, AND I DO WANNA MENTION TO THE BOARD THAT WE HAVE NOT OBTAINED THE PERC TEST.
UM, THE REASON THAT IT'S TWO REASONS.
NUMBER ONE, THAT IT'S A LITTLE COSTLY AND WE WERE HOPING TO FOREGO THAT COST.
AND ALSO THE STORMWATER DESIGN THAT'S BEEN PROVIDED HAS THE VOLUME TO RETAIN THE FULL 24 HOUR STORM WITHIN IT WITHOUT ANY RETENTION OR PERCOLATION, AND THEREFORE IS ADEQUATE WITHOUT PERCOLATION TO MEET, UH, THE TOWN ORDINANCE.
AS I MENTIONED, OUR ENGINEERS HAVE REVIEWED THAT AND FIND IT ACCESSIBLE EVEN WITHOUT, WITHOUT THE PERCOLATION TEST AT THIS TIME.
I'M JUST GONNA SHOW THE SCREEN.
SO YOU CAN SHOW A SIDE BY SIDE OF WHAT WAS PREVIOUSLY APPROVED.
BEAR WITH THE, AND THERE'S AN ACTIVE PERMIT FOR, UM, SO THEY COULD START IMMEDIATELY UNDER THE
THEY COULD, THERE'S AN ACTIVE AND, UH, CURRENT AND ACTIVE, UH, APPROVAL ON THE SLEEP SLOPE PERMIT THAT IS PLAN ON THE LEFT, WHICH WAS CASE NUMBER PD 15 DASH FIVE RDO, WHERE A SINGLE FAMILY HOME WITH DRAINAGE THREE REMOVAL AND LANDSCAPING, AS WELL AS A WALL ALONG THE SIDE OF THE PROPERTY LINE.
ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE IS THE CURRENT APPLICATION, WHICH AGAIN IS MR. BRADLEY WENT THROUGH IS FOR A SINGLE FAMILY HOME WITH SOME TREE REMOVALS.
UH, THERE'S A RETAINING WALL ON THE SIDE OF THE PROPERTY.
THERE'S DRAINAGE STRUCTURES BEHIND AND
AND THE ONE THING THAT THIS PLAN DOES NOT HAVE IS THOSE TREES THEY SHOWED ON THE PREVIOUS PLAN.
SO I WAS TRYING TO COMPARE TO CHERYL AS MUCH DETAIL AS POSSIBLE, BUT SOMETIMES IT'S DIFFICULT.
SO NEITHER OF THESE PLANS SHOW, UM, XS THROUGH THE TREES TO BE REMOVED.
THE PLAN ON THE RIGHT DOES SHOW, UM, AFTER THE TREES ARE REMOVED, THAT DOESN'T SHOW THE NEW LANDSCAPING AS MR. BATLEY SHOWED IN HIS PLAN.
JUST, I JUST WANNA MAKE EVERYONE SURE THAT THOSE TREES DIDN'T DISAPPEAR.
[01:15:01]
TO OPEN OUT TO ANY QUESTIONS THAT THE BOARD MEMBERS MAY, MAY HAVE BEFORE WE TURN THAT OVER TO THE PUBLIC.UH, FOR QUESTIONS OF ANY WONDER, UH, WAS ONE OF THE THINGS CONFUSING IS THAT THAT STREET, UH, TURNING INTO THE, UH, INTO THE SORT OF EXISTING DWELLING, SO I JUST WANTED TO UNDERSTAND HOW FAR THAT STREET GOES ONTO THE, UH, INSIDE BECAUSE THIS ONE SHOWS LIKE IT'S A CORNER LOT WHILE THE PREVIOUS APPLICATION SHOWS THAT IT IS A, IT, IT IS ITSELF LIKE A CONTINUOUS THING.
SO I THINK I, SOMEBODY CAN EXPLAIN SOME OF WHAT'S GOING ON, RIGHT? SO MR. DESAI, WE PICKED UP ON THAT IN OUR REVIEW AND, UM, WE HAD THE APPLICANT IDENTIFY THAT, RIGHT? DID YOU SEE THIS CURB LINE HERE? AND YOU THINK, OH, IT'S ALMOST LIKE A CORNER LOT.
WHAT THEY DID IS THEY MODIFIED TO SHOW THAT THE DIMENSION FROM THEIR NEAREST PROPERTY CORNER TO THE CURB EDGE IS 156 FEET.
SO, UH, WE DID PICK UP ON THAT AS WELL, BUT THANK YOU FOR THE COMMENT.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS BY BOARD MEMBERS? IF NOT, UH, UH, AARON, COULD YOU, UH, OPEN UP THE HEARING TO FOR MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC? YES.
WE DO HAVE A NUMBER OF MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC THAT WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS APPLICATION OR LEAVE.
UM, WAS IT MR. POWELL THAT EXPRESSED AN INTEREST PREVIOUSLY SPEAK ON THIS APPLICATION? AND IF SO, WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK AT THIS TIME? YOU JUST HAD TO STEP AWAY.
SO WE'RE NEIGHBORS OF THIS PROPERTY.
UH, WHAT IF, IF YOU COULD PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, UM, AND SPELL IT OUT WITH ME FOR OUR STENOGRAPHER, IF YOU DO APPRECIATE IT.
LIZ CANTON ESSA, C A N T A L A M E S S A 100 CATER CENTER TERRACE.
I THINK IT WOULDN'T BE HELPFUL.
DO YOU ALL HAVE AN AERIAL SHOT OF THE PROPERTY? JUST SAYING SKETCHED RENDERINGS, I DON'T THINK REALLY PAINTS AN ACCURATE PICTURE OF, UM, THE TREE REMOVAL THAT IT SOUNDS LIKE IS GOING TO HAPPEN.
IS THAT A POSSIBILITY? I CAN SEE IF I CAN PULL ONE UP.
THERE WAS ONE PROVIDED TO THE BOARD IN, IN THE STAFF REPORT THAT WAS PROVIDED, SO I'LL SEE IF I CAN DIG THAT UP AND THEN, UH, POST IT.
AND DID YOU HAVE A NUMBER OF TREES THAT ARE COMING DOWN? YOU'LL ASK THE APPLICANT TO ADDRESS ALL OF YOUR QUESTIONS FOLLOWING YOUR ENTIRE COMMENTARY.
AND WILL THE STRUCTURE REQUIRE, UM, DRILLING DYNAMITE EXCAVATION? MM-HMM.
AND THEN I'D LIKE SOME MORE DETAILS ON, UH, THE RAIN RAINWATER AND HOW THAT, WHERE THAT'S GOING TO BE DIRECTED.
IT'S ACTUALLY QUITE A, A TIGHT PIECE OF LAND.
SO I THINK THERE'S A, A LOT OF QUESTIONS AROUND HOW YOU'RE GOING TO FIT A HOUSE AND EVERYTHING IN SUCH A LITTLE SPOT.
CAN YOU, UM, I LIKE THAT A LITTLE BIT MORE WHAT YOUR QUESTION IS ON, ON THE RAINWATER, JUST SO THAT, UH, WE KNOW SO THE ANSWER, THE QUESTIONS BE ANSWERED, CORRECT.
WELL, WHICH YEAH, WHICH DIRECTION WILL IT BE HEADED? OKAY.
AND I GUESS, UH, UH, MR. KEN, UH, CAN'T TELL MELISSA CANA YES.
I JUST WANT TO REMIND ME THAT THE APPLICANT, IF THERE'S A SECOND, THERE'S A SECOND ONE OFF OF RUNOFF THAT EXISTS NOW.
YOU SEE, THEY DON'T HAVE TO PREVENT THE, UH, WATER FROM RUNNING OFF THE PROPERTY THAT'S RUNNING OFF NOW.
BUT I, BUT, UH, YOU KNOW, A STRUCTURE COULD BE CHANGED,
SOMETIMES, HOPEFULLY MANY TIMES LY UH, WE FIND THAT WHEN THINGS LIKE THAT IS DONE, IT ACTUALLY DECREASES, BUT THAT'S NOT, THAT'S NOT A LEGAL OBLIGATION.
SO WE'LL LET THE APPLICANT ADDRESS THAT FOR, UH, STATE.
I'M GONNA BRIEFLY SHOW AN A IS REQUESTED BY, UH,
[01:20:06]
OKAY.THE ALLOTMENT QUESTION IS ROUGHLY IN THIS AREA.
THIS IS THE EXISTING NEIGHBORING HOME TO THE SOUTHWEST, AND THIS IS THE NEIGHBORING HOME TO THE NORTHEAST.
I THINK, UM, MS. CAN, VANESSA IS SPEAKING TO THE TREE COVER ON THE PROPERTY, AND I KNOW THAT WE HAD THREE BOARD MEMBERS OUT TO THE SITE MAKE SENSE FOR ONE OR MORE OF THEM TO OFFER THEIR COMMENTS ON THE PROPOSAL AND ANY OBSERVATION THAT THEY MADE, I LEAVE THAT UP TO THE BOARD.
UM, AND JUST FOR, FOR THE BOARDS BENEFIT, UH, MS. UH, VANESSA? YES.
AARON, ACTUALLY, IF YOU COULD KEEP THAT, UH, ON, YOU'RE ON, UH, PETERSON, UH, TERRA.
SO WHERE IS YOUR PROPERTY IN, UH, RELATIONSHIP TO, UH, THE RED DOT BASICALLY? UM, NOT, I, I BELIEVE I'M, I'M NOT TANNER.
I'M THE ONE NEXT TO IT THAT I BELIEVE THAT'S 100.
I ALSO QUESTION HOW OLD IS THIS MAP? I'D RATHER, I THINK WE SHOULD LOOK TOWARDS, UM, A CURRENT IMAGE.
MAYBE THEY CAN DO SOME DRONE FOOTAGE OR SOMETHING.
OKAY, ARIEL, I I WOULD ASK THAT, UH, WE GET THROUGH THE COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC AND IF THOSE BOARD MEMBERS WHO VISITED THE SITE WISH TO ADD TO THAT, THAT THEY COULD ADD TO IT AT THAT TIME.
UH, UH, BUT RIGHT NOW I'D LIKE, I'D LIKE TO GET THROUGH THE STATEMENT OF THE PUBLIC, THE NEXT, ANYONE ELSE FROM THE PUBLIC THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS APPLICATION? YES, SIR.
MY NAME IS ZOYA AND I LIVE ON 64 MERCER AVENUE, WHICH IS RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE PROPERTY THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.
AND, UM, QUITE A NUMBER OF YEARS AGO WHEN WE FIRST FIRST STARTED HAVING THIS CONVERSATION AROUND 2015, I VOICED MANY OF MY CONCERNS, WHICH I'D LIKE TO REPEAT.
UM, AND I KNOW THAT MANY OF THEM WERE ADDRESSED AS A RESULT OF THE HEARINGS THAT YOU HELD AT THAT TIME.
UM, BUT I THINK THAT IT'S IMPORTANT TO AT LEAST MENTION THEM, UM, IN THE HOPE THAT THERE IS GOING TO BE REAL MONITORING OF THE SITUATION WHEN CONSTRUCTION DOES BEGIN.
UM, THE FIRST CONCERN IS OBVIOUSLY THE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT.
I MEAN, YOU SAW THE PICTURE WAS VERY CLEAR AROUND THE BEAUTIFUL TREES IN THE AREA.
UM, THAT'S WHAT MAKES OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND TO THINK THAT TREES THAT ARE OLDER THAN WE ARE, ARE, ARE GOING TO BE TAKEN DOWN, IS SAD, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, I UNDERSTAND I'M A PRAGMATIC PERSON AND UNDERSTAND THAT, YOU KNOW, WE DO NEED TO BUILD HOUSING, ET CETERA.
HOWEVER, I AM VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THE RUNOFF OF THE WATER.
AND WHILE I HEARD, UH, YOUR CHAIR SIMON, UH, YOU TALK ABOUT THAT IT MIGHT BE IMPROVED.
I'M HOPING THAT IT WILL BE BECAUSE I'VE BEEN VERY, UH, UNFORTUNATELY MY HOUSE HAS BEEN FLOODED AND I'VE TAKEN A LOT OF, UM, PRECAUTIONS AND MEASURES AND SPENT A LOT OF MONEY TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT HAS BEEN ABATED.
AND I HAVEN'T HAD AN INCIDENT NOW FOR OVER 10 YEARS, AND I CERTAINLY WOULDN'T WANT TO NOW HAVE SOMETHING HAPPEN AS A RESULT OF A NEW CONSTRUCTION.
AT THE SAME TIME, UM, I'M ALSO VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THE, UM, THE ROCK, THE CHIPPING, UH, THAT CAUSES VIBRATION AND WHAT THAT VIBRATION COULD DO IN TERMS OF THE PROPERTIES SURROUNDING THE AREA, INCLUDING MINE.
I HAVE A HOUSE THAT'S PRACTICALLY A HUNDRED YEARS OLD AND CERTAINLY, UM, DON'T WANT IT TO BE UNSETTLED AS A RESULT OF THIS VIBRATION THAT'S BEING CAUSED.
SO I'M ACTUALLY ASKING, UM, FOR, UH, VIBRATION MONITORING AND, UM, WHETHER THE TOWN IS REALLY PUTTING IN SOME REAL MEASURES THAT ARE GOING TO MAKE SURE THAT WHOEVER IS, I'M NOT AN ENGINEER AND I'M NOT AN ARCHITECT, BUT CERTAINLY THERE HAVE TO BE SOME WAY OF MONITORING THE WORK SO THAT, UM, AS IT OCCURS AND THERE ARE ISSUES THAT THE WORK CEASE UNTIL THOSE ISSUES GET ADDRESSED.
UM, AT THE SAME TIME, UM, UH, A VERY CLEAR PROTOCOL AROUND THESE MONITORING ISSUES, BOTH FOR THE WATER AND FOR, UM, WHATEVER ROCK CHIPPING.
I MEAN, THIS, THIS IS SOLID ROCK.
[01:25:01]
THERE WAS AN ATTEMPT BY ANOTHER DEVELOPER TO DO SOMETHING IN THAT PROPERTY AND THEY ACTUALLY STOPPED, UM, AND THEY DIDN'T CONTINUE.AND OBVIOUSLY THEN THEY SOLD IT, AND NOW NEW PEOPLE ARE TRYING TO DO THE SAME.
UM, SO THERE, THERE ARE REASONS WHY THERE HASN'T BEEN SOMETHING BUILT THERE.
AND IT'S OBVIOUSLY A BIG AND GRAVE CONCERN, NOT ONLY TO ME, BUT TO MY NEIGHBORS WHO I SPEAK TO ON A DAILY BASIS ABOUT THIS.
AND, UM, MY ONLY HOPE IS THAT AS WE PROCEED AND GO FORWARD, THAT THE TOWN REALLY MAKES SURE THAT THERE ARE MONITORING PROCEDURES AND THERE'S ACCOUNTABILITY SO THAT THOSE OF US THAT HAVE LIVED IN THIS BEAUTIFUL NEIGHBORHOOD FOR SO MANY YEARS, UM, DON'T HAVE ANY ISSUES OR PROBLEMS AS A RESULT.
UM, AARON, THE NEXT SPEAKER? YES.
UM, I BELIEVE WE HAVE SOME OTHER SPEAKERS THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS.
UM, I CAN'T SEE THE ENTIRE NAME.
I BELIEVE IT'S CYNTHIA CASTILLO.
IS THAT CORRECT? AND SHE'S ON THE MEETING.
DO YOU WISH TO SPEAK AT THIS TIME OR THIS APPLICATION? HI, IF NOT.
I'M SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF OUR FAMILY.
WE LIVE AT 68 MERCER AVENUE FOR THE, UH, FOR THE, UH, RECORDER AND YOU SPELL YOUR NAME AND, AND PROVIDE YOUR ADDRESS.
UH, SS A R A H C A SS T I L L L.
IT'S DIRECTLY ACROSS FROM, UH, THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION.
AND I JUST HAVE TWO MAIN QUESTIONS, I GUESS, FOR THE APPLICANT.
UM, THE FIRST ONE KIND OF ECHOES WHAT OUR NEIGHBOR I WAS TALKING ABOUT WITH, UM, DAMAGE CONTROL MM-HMM.
UM, MY QUESTION IS, WHO WOULD WE CONTACT? WOULD WE CONTACT THE CONTRACTOR OR THE TOWN? UM, I KNOW THAT, THAT SOMETHING HAPPENS.
AND THEN MY SECOND QUESTION IS, I SAW IN THE PLANS THAT WERE MADE AVAILABLE ONLINE THAT YOU HAD, UM, EROSION CONTROL, LIKE PLANS FOR EROSION CONTROL, BUT, UM, I DIDN'T REALLY SEE ANYTHING ABOUT DUST CONTROL, UM, ON CONSTRUCTION.
AND I JUST WANTED TO KNOW IF THERE'S ANYTHING THAT, UM, THE CONSTRUCTION TEAM WAS GOING TO DO DURING THAT TIME, BECAUSE YEAH, THAT, THOSE ARE ALL MY QUESTIONS.
NEXT, I BELIEVE WE HAVE MR. RAILING ON THE, ON THE CALL FOR, UH, ANY COMMENTS HE MAY HAVE.
YES, THIS IS CHRISTOPHER RAILING.
I LIVE, UH, NEXT DOOR TO THE CASTILLOS AT 72 MERCER AVENUE.
UH, MY LAST NAME IS R E Y L I N G.
UM, FIRST OF ALL, I'D JUST LIKE TO, TO REITERATE, UH, MS. UH, OSIS, UM, CONCERNS ABOUT THE VIBRATION DUE TO THE CONSTRUCTION.
ALL OF OUR HOUSES ARE BUILT, UH, BUILT ON TOP OF ROCK.
AND, UH, WE'RE CONCERNED THAT WHEN THEY COME IN HERE, UH, TO DO THIS, THAT, THAT THERE'S GONNA BE VIBRATIONS THAT ARE, THAT ARE SENT THROUGH NORTH FOUNDATIONS.
I MEAN, THAT'S, THAT'S A CONCERN.
UH, BUT WITH THE, THE COMMENT THAT I'D LIKE TO MAKE IS ON THE TREE REMOVAL PERMIT, AND IT SAYS, IT STATES THAT, UM, FIVE REGULATED TREES ARE, ARE DUE TO BE REMOVED, INCLUDING THE 36 INCH BEAD TREE AND A 32 INCH WHITE OAK TREE, BOTH OF WHICH ARE, UH, IN THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY, QUITE VISIBLE FROM THE ROAD.
THEY'RE GONNA REALLY IMPACT THE, UH, UH, THE, THE WHOLE, UM, UH, LOOK OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN THE, TAKE THESE TOWN.
UM, THEY, THEY, THEY'RE BEING REPLACED BY SIX, SIX INCH SPECIES, THE SAME SPECIES.
NOW, I UNDERSTAND THIS HAS CHANGED.
I HAVEN'T SEEN THE NEW PLAN, BUT, BUT EVEN SO, IT'S, UH, IT'S HARD TO, TO REPLACE A 36 INCH BEACH TREE THAT'S PROBABLY 150 OR OR MORE YEARS OLD AND SIMILAR WHITE OAK THAT'S OVER A HUNDRED YEARS OLD WITH A SIX INCH TREE AND, AND CALL THAT EQUIVALENT, UM, BEYOND THAT, UM, AND IF I MAY, UM, I'D LIKE TO SHOW A
[01:30:01]
SCREENSHOT OF A PHOTOGRAPH.HOW, HOW DO I, HOW DO I, UH, GET THAT UP THERE? IS I, I HIT SCREEN SHARE? YES.
SHARE SCREEN, WHICH WE, ON THE BOTTOM IT IS USUALLY GREEN ICON.
UM, CAN, CAN YOU SEE THIS IS A PHOTOGRAPH OF THE, THE FRONT FROM THE ROAD? NOT YET.
I HIT MY HIT SCREEN WHEN YOU HIT THE SHARE SCREEN BUTTON.
IT SHOULD BRING UP, IT SHOULD BRING UP A, UM, VARIOUS WINDOWS, AND THEN YOU HAVE TO DOUBLE CLICK ON THAT.
UM, UH, SO NOW YOU HAVE TO CLICK ON THE PICTURE THAT YOU WANT.
WELL, YES, IT'S LIKE BEACH TREE DOUBLE CLICK.
I MEAN, THIS IS, THIS IS A PICTURE OF THE TREE THAT'S IN QUESTION ON THE ROAD.
I'LL TELL YOU WHAT, IF, IF FOR SOME REASON WE HAVE PROBLEMS, WE'LL JUST, UH, DID THAT OPEN, THEY, THEY'RE NOT OPENING.
BUT IT, UH, WORST CASE SCENARIO IS, UH, YOU CAN SEND THOSE PICTURES TO MR. SCHMIDT AND THEY'LL BE PART OF THE RECORD.
WE CAN SEE THE SMALL, YOU KNOW, SMALL VERSION OF IT.
AND SO YOU CAN TELL US, YOU KNOW, WHAT YOUR CONCERNS ARE, EVEN IF YOU CAN'T OPEN IT.
ANOTHER, ANOTHER ALTERNATIVE WOULD BE TO STOP YOUR SHARE SCREEN, OPEN THE PHOTOS, AND HAVE THEM OPEN IN THE BACKGROUND.
AND THEN YOU COULD COME BACK IN VERY QUICKLY TO SHARE
I, I THINK I, I, I, UH, UH, I AM SORRY.
WELL, WHAT, WHAT I, I, I SUGGEST THAT YOU GET THAT INFORMATION TO US, AND PRIOR TO MAKING ANY DECISION ON THIS, WE'LL DEFINITELY HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO LOOK AT IT AND REVIEW IT AND MATCH THIS UP WITH YOUR COMMENTS.
I, I DID, I DID MENTION THAT IN MY EMAIL THIS MORNING, BUT, UM, I GUESS THERE WAS NO WAY TO, TO GET THAT PUT THROUGH.
ANYWAY, UH, IF I MAY GO ON, UM, MY COMMENT IS IN PARTICULAR, THIS, THIS, UM, PARTICULAR, UH, 36 INCH BEACH TREE THAT ACTUALLY IS PARTLY ON TOWN PROPERTY.
AND, UM, IT, IT'S DUE TO BE REMOVED.
UM, LOOKING AT, AT THE SITE PLAN, IT JUST SEEMS THAT THE, THE 36 INCH BEACH TREE, UM, I WENT OVER AND MEASURED WHAT'S AVAILABLE, AND THAT FROM THE SIDE OF THE TREE TO THE, TO THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE PROPERTY, THERE'S SOME, THERE'S 14 FEET AVAILABLE.
AND, UM, IT JUST SEEMS TO ME THAT THERE, THERE COULD BE SOME, UM, UH, CAN'T THE OWNER COME UP WITH A CREATIVE WAY TO ROUTE THE DRIVEWAY IN MORE OF AN SHAPE, UH, WHILE PRESERVING THIS TREE TO MAINTAIN IT IN, IN THE AREA? I, I, I, I THINK IT'S, IT'S STILL, UM, IT COULD BE KEPT.
CHRIS, CHRIS, I JUST WANNA SAY FOR THE RECORD THAT IT'S 36 FEET, NOT 36 INCHES.
NO, THE, THE TREE IS 36 INCHES IN DIAMETER.
AND IT, AND IT, AND IT'S, IT'S ACTUALLY LOCATED 14 FEET FROM THE SIDE OF THE PROPERTY, AND IT'S A BEAUTIFUL TREE.
UH, MS WHAT, WHAT WE WOULD DO THE, THE, THE, THE APPLICANT WHEN WE, AFTER ALL OF THESE QUESTIONS THAT WE PROPOSED, THE APPLICANT WILL ADDRESS IT FOR REAL QUESTIONS.
UM, I JUST, UH, FIRST I WANNA QUESTION WHEN ONE PERSON SPEAKING, WE CAN'T HAVE SOMEONE ELSE.
UM, JUST FOR PURPOSES OF THE RECORD, BARBARA, DID YOU GET THAT? THAT WAS MS. ZIA WHO SPOKE.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, MR. RO? UH, NO, THAT, THAT WAS MY MAJOR COMMENT TO TRY AND PRESERVE THAT, THAT PARTICULAR TREE.
ANY OTHER, ANYTHING YOU'D LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS TOPIC? AND THEN I WILL ASK THE APPLICANT TO ADDRESS THOSE QUESTIONS.
ANYONE ELSE? I'D LIKE TO ASK A QUESTION.
AARON ISAACSON, I LIVE AT 1 65 GAON TERRACE.
UM, THE, THE FIRST ONE THAT HAS TO DO, UM, WITH THE, UM, SIZE OF THE DWELLING RELATIVE
[01:35:01]
TO THE, UM, RELATIVE SIZE OF THE LOT AND THE WORK THAT'S BEING DONE THERE, JUST TO UNDERSTAND THE PERCENTAGE PROPORTIONS THERE AND HOW THAT'S DONE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TOWN'S REQUIREMENTS.UM, THE SECOND QUESTION I HAVE IS ON THE, UM, METHODOLOGY FOR THE STORMWATER, UM, TREATMENT THAT'S BEING DONE.
UM, THE, THE CALTECH CHAMBERS AND, UH, WHETHER OR NOT THAT HAS, UH, SUFFICIENTLY TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION THE CURRENT, UH, ENVIRONMENT AND THE NATURE OF THE STORMS AND RAINWATER, WHICH WE RECEIVE, BECAUSE I AGREE WITH, UH, AS MUCH, UH, MANY OF MY NEIGHBORS HAVE, UH, EXPRESSED THAT, UH, RAINWATER RUNOFF IS A, IS A CHALLENGE IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND THEN, UM, THE LAST QUESTION I HAVE IS JUST AROUND, UM, AS MANY OF MY NEIGHBORS HAVE EXPRESSED AS WELL, THIS IS AN ESTABLISHED NEIGHBORHOOD, UM, AND, UM, UNDERGOING, UH, THIS DEGREE OF ENGINEERING IS VERY CONCERNING, I THINK, IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND SO I JUST WOULD ALSO MAKE SURE, I'D LIKE TO UNDERSTAND KIND OF THE, UM, UM, FINANCIAL VIABILITY OF, UM, WHAT'S BEING CONSIDERED HERE.
SO WHAT FINANCING HAS BEEN ARRANGED TO MAKE SURE THAT ONCE THIS PROJECT IS COMMENCED, IT WILL BE COMPLETED SO THAT WE ARE NOT LEFT WITH A, UM, PARTIALLY COMPLETED PROJECT THAT IS AN ENGINEERING PROBLEM FOR OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM, UH, FROM MEMBERS OF PUBLIC? IF NOT, I'LL TURN THAT OVER TO THE APPLICANT AND, UH, HAVE HIM, UH, ANSWER THE QUESTIONS THAT WILL CLOSE THIS EVENING.
UM, CHAIRPERSON SIMON, I DID JUST GET A CHAT FROM LIZ
BUT, UM, IT STATES, I DO NOT WISH TO SPEAK THAT I LIVE AT 1 23 MERCER AVENUE AND, AND CONCERNED ABOUT THE DRILLING AND REMOVAL OF TREES, THE LIVING MANOR WOODS, AND THE TOWN HAS PERMITTED ANOTHER NEIGHBOR ON MERCER TO REMOVE ALMOST ALL OF THE TREES FROM THEIR PROPERTY AND CANNOT REPLACE 50 TO 100 YEAR OLD TREES.
AND THAT'S FROM, I'M SORRY, DE PERRY, P E R R I 1 23 MERCER AVENUE.
THAT'S PART OF THE RECORD ALSO.
IF THERE'S NOT, UH, UH, UH, MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC IN THE WAITING ROOM, I'D LIKE TO TURN IT BACK TO THE APPLICANT AND HAVE THE APPLICANT ADDRESS THE QUESTIONS THAT WILL RAISE THE PROCEED.
UH, SO I'LL JUST GO THROUGH, UH, ONE BY ONE A COUPLE OF THE POINTS AND HOPEFULLY, UH, TOUCH BASE ON ALL OF THEM.
UM, I'D LIKE TO START OFF IN TERMS OF THE TREE, UH, REMOVAL AND THE TREE WORK THAT'S PROPOSED.
UM, FIRST OF ALL, I'D LIKE TO MENTION THAT WE DID SUBMIT A NEW REVISED TREE, UH, PLAN THAT DOES COMPLY WITH THE NEW TREE ORDINANCE.
THAT TREE PLAN IT WAS REQUESTED.
HOW MANY TREES ARE BEING REMOVED? CURRENTLY, WE ARE SHOWING 16 TREES TO BE REMOVED, OF WHICH 10 OF THOSE ARE REGULATED.
UM, TWO OF THOSE TREES ARE THE LARGE TREES THAT THE GENTLEMAN WAS MENTIONING, ONE OF WHICH IS A BEACH TREE, UH, ONE OF WHICH IS AN OAK TREE.
THE BEACH TREE, WHICH IS THE 36 INCH DIAMETER TREE NEAR THE STREET, IS STORM DAMAGED AND, AND DOES NEED, UM, OR, OR SHOULD BE REMOVED.
REGARDLESS OF THIS WORK, THE, OR AT LEAST PROVED, UH, THE OAK TREE, UM, IS SUBSTANTIALLY IN THE WAY OF THE PROPOSED SITE.
AND UNFORTUNATELY, AS DEPICTED WITH THIS SITE PLAN, UM, IT, IT WOULD BE VERY DIFFICULT NOT TO REMOVE THAT TREE.
I DO WANNA MENTION, AS PART OF OUR, UH, TREE INSTALLATION, UH, WE DO HAVE PROPOSED, UH, TWO SUGAR MAPLES TO BE INSTALLED, WHICH, WHICH DO GROW TO BE QUITE LARGE TREES, UM, IN ADDITION TO COVER ALONG THE ENTIRETY OF THE FRONT ROADWAY, EXCEPT FOR, UH, THE ACTUAL DRIVEWAY.
UM, OTHERWISE, UM, IN TERMS OF THE STORM WATER MITIGATION, UH, THE PLAN THAT WE HAVE PROPOSED INCLUDES BOTH, UH, UH, DRAINS AT THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY IN ORDER TO CAPTURE RAINWATER OFF THE WALKWAYS AND DRIVEWAY, AS WELL AS A DRAIN IN THE ACTUAL GRASSED AREA AT THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY IN ORDER TO MITIGATE ADDITIONAL RUNOFF ON THE ACTUAL GRASSED AREAS.
UM, SO WE DO HAVE A STORMWATER SYSTEM, UH, THAT, UM, NOT ONLY MEETS THE TOWN LAW, UH, BUT DOES ALSO, UH, AND I COULD, I'M SORRY, I COULD SHARE MY SCREEN IF NECESSARY AS WELL.
UM, BUT DOES ALSO, UM, UH, UH, UH, MITIGATE THE ADDITIONAL STORMWATER RUNOFF THAT WE MAY INCUR.
[01:40:02]
UM, THE NEXT POINT I'D LIKE TO MAKE IS IN TERMS OF THE EROSION CONTROL PLAN AND THE DUST, UH, ON, ON ANY SOIL STOCKPILE THAT MAY OCCUR.UH, AND HERE, LET ME JUST SHARE MY SCREEN BACK SO I CAN, UH, PROPERLY SHOW THIS PLAN.
SO ON OUR SOIL STOCKPILE DETAIL, WHICH IS, UH, UH, SHOWN HERE ON C 1 0 1, WE ARE SHOWING THAT ANY, UH, SOIL POWER SHOULD BE, UH, STABILIZED WITH A VEGETABLE VEGETATION, I'M SORRY, SOME SORT OF OTHER COVER IN ORDER TO MITIGATE THE DUST, UH, FRYING OFF ONTO, UH, A NEIGHBOR.
SO, SO WE DO HAVE A DETAIL IN THE EROSION CONTROL, UH, TO MITIGATE THAT.
UM, IN TERMS OF THE EXCAVATION WORK NECESSARY, UH, TO CONSTRUCT THIS SITE, UH, THERE IS SOME CONSIDERABLE EXCAVATION.
HOWEVER, THERE IS NO BLASTING CURRENTLY PROPOSED WITHIN THIS PROJECT.
IT IS, UH, STRICTLY PROPOSED AT THIS TIME TO, UM, THE TRADITIONAL EXCAVATION METHODS USING A HAMMER AND A, AND AN EXCAVATOR, UH, IN TERMS OF VIBRATION LEVELS AFFECTED ON THE NEIGHBORS.
WE TYPICALLY LOOK AT ANYWHERE ABOVE ONE INCH PER SECOND OF VIBRATION AS CAUSING SOME SORT OF STRUCTURAL OR EVEN AESTHETIC DAMAGE TO AN EXISTING BUILDING DUE TO THE DISTANCE OF THE PROPOSED EXCAVATION FROM THE EXISTING STRUCTURES, IT IS HIGHLY UNLIKELY THAT ANY EFFECT TO OUR EXCAVATION WOULD, UH, UH, WOULD, I'M SORRY.
IT'S HIGHLY UNLIKELY THAT OUR EXCAVATION WOULD AFFECT ANY ADJACENT BUILDING.
WE TYPICALLY, UH, FOR AN EXCAVATION OF THIS NATURE, LOOK AT A DISTANCE OF ABOUT 25 FEET FROM THE EXCAVATION OR THIS LEVEL OF VIBRATION TO AFFECT AN ADJACENT STRUCTURE.
THERE ARE NO STRUCTURES THAT I'M AWARE OF THAT ARE WITHIN THAT DISTANCE.
UM, IN TERMS OF IF DAMAGE WAS TO OCCUR TO A NEIGHBORING PROPERTY, IT WAS QUESTIONED WHO TO CONTACT.
I BELIEVE THE CORRECT, UH, UH, METHOD WOULD BE TO CONTACT THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR WHO'S ON THE SITE OR THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY.
AND, AND IF, IF THEY'RE NOT MADE AVAILABLE TO YOU, THEN OF COURSE I WOULD RECOMMEND REACHING OUT TO THE TOWN.
BUT WE, WE DON'T ANTICIPATE THAT BEING SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE NECESSARY.
UM, IN TERMS OF, UH, ALSO IN TERMS OF DAMAGE TO THE NEIGHBORS, IT IS COMMON PRACTICE, UH, IN THIS SORT OF PROJECT FOR THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR TO, UH, PROVIDE PRE-CONSTRUCTION SURVEYS VIA PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE NEIGHBORING BUILDINGS IN ORDER TO DOCUMENT ANY POSSIBLE DAMAGE THAT WOULD BE DONE IN THE FUTURE.
UM, THE, UM, AND, UM, THE, THE LAST THING I'D LIKE TO TOUCH BASE ON IS THE SIZE OF THE DWELLING AND THE LOT COVERAGE.
UM, SO CURRENTLY WE'RE PROPOSING A 13% BUILDING COVERAGE FOR A LOT, THAT'S ROUGHLY 12,200 AND, UH, 52 SQUARE FEET.
AND LET ME JUST GET THAT NUMBER FOR YOU, WHICH IS ABOUT A BUILDING FOOTPRINT OF ALMOST 1600 SQUARE FEET.
UM, I, I'M NOT SURE IF I TOUCHED BASE ON ALL THE QUESTIONS.
I BELIEVE I DID, BUT IF, IF I DIDN'T, IF, UH, IF YOU COULD PLEASE ADVISE ME.
UH, I JUST WANNA ADD, UM, IF I MAY, WITH RESPECT TO REMOVAL OF ROCK ON THE SITE, UH, FOR THE BENEFIT OF MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC AND, AND FOR INFORMATION FOR THE APPLICANT AND ITS ENGINEER, BUT THE TOWN DOES HAVE ROCK BLASTING, ROCK CHIPPING PROTOCOLS, THE APPLICANT INDICATED THAT IT INTENDS TO REMOVE ROCK BY, BY, UM, BY ROCK HAMMERING OR ROCK CHIPPING.
UH, IF THAT'S THE CASE, THE APPLICANT WOULD HAVE TO HAVE A HIGH RESOLUTION SEISMIC REFRACTION SURVEY PREPARED, AND THE RESULTS INTERPRETED BY A GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER ULTIMATELY GETS REVIEWED BY THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT.
UM, FURTHER, THERE ARE LIMITATIONS ON THE HOURS FOR ROCK REMOVAL, AND THE APPLICANT TYPICALLY REQUIRED TO CONDUCT A PRECONDITION OR PRE PRE-CONSTRUCTION SURVEY OF ALL ADJACENT STRUCTURES LOCATED WITHIN 50 FEET OF THE LIMITED DISTURBANCE ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
AND THAT SURVEY IS TO BE SUBMITTED TO THE TOWNS GLASS DAY INSPECTOR AND THE TOWN BUILDING INSPECTOR FOR REVIEW PRIOR TO ANY ISSUING OF A ROCK CHIPPING PERMIT.
SO I JUST WANTED TO GO, THERE ARE OTHER CONDITIONS AS WELL, AND IF ANYONE'S INTERESTED IN SEEING CONDITIONS THAT THE PLAN WERE PUT ON OTHER PROJECTS WITH RESPECT TO ROCK
[01:45:01]
REMOVAL, WE'RE HAPPY TO SHARE THOSE WITH MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC.I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO ADD THAT, UH, UH, THIS IS NOT OUR FIRST GO AROUND ON THIS PROPERTY.
UH, I BELIEVE THE BOARD HAS RECEIVED, UM, THE PRIOR STEEP SLOPE, UH, APPROVAL, AND WE DID HAVE AN ADDITIONAL, UM, CONDITION WITH RESPECT TO ROCK CHIPPING HAMMERING, UH, THAT MUST BE COMPLETED WITHIN 30 BUSINESS DAYS OF COMMENCEMENT.
OTHERWISE, THE APPLICANT WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK TO THE PLANNING BOARD TO RESUME ROCK CHIPPING.
I CAN'T THINK OF A REASON WHY WE WOULD NOT INCLUDE THAT, UH, CONDITION OR A SIMILAR CONDITION, UH, ON, ON APPROVAL, UH, OF THIS, UH, OF A NEW STEEP SLOPE PERMIT.
UM, AND AS LONG AS I'M JUST DISCUSSING THAT THERE ARE, WERE ALSO, UM, SPECIFIC CONDITIONS RE REGARDING TRAFFIC SAFETY, WHICH WERE NOT MENTIONED AT THE PUBLIC HEARING TONIGHT, BUT WHICH WE WOULD INCLUDE, UM, UH, IF WE FEEL NECESSARY, UH, WITH RESPECT TO, UH, THIS NEW PROJECT GOING FORWARD, UM, WE WOULD NOT REMOVE THOSE, UH, FROM, UH, A PRIOR THAT, THAT WERE CONSIDERED AN A PRIOR APPROVAL.
I BELIEVE, YES, MARCO, UM, YOU THERE, THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS 36 INCH BEACH TREE, AND WHAT I THINK, I THINK THE APPLICANT SHOULD HIRE A CERTIFIED ARBORIST TO DETERMINE IF THIS BEACH TREE IS HEALTHY OR NEEDS TO BE CUT DOWN OR SOMETHING IN BETWEEN.
AND IF IT'S BASICALLY HEALTHY, I WOULD LIKE THE APPLICANT TO ATTEMPT TO COME UP WITH A PROPOSAL TO SAVE THE BEACH TREE BY REVISING THE PLANS SOME WAY OR THE OTHER.
AND I THINK WE ONLY CERTIFIED ARBORIST BECAUSE THERE WAS A SUGGESTION THAT THE BEACH TREE, YOU KNOW, MAY NEED TO BE CUT DOWN.
AND I DON'T KNOW, I'VE NEVER SEEN IT.
UM, CAN I SPEAK, UH, AS ONE OF THE BOARD MEMBERS THAT WENT TO THE SITE, UM, I GUESS IT WAS LAST WEEK.
NOW, FIRST OF ALL, IT'S A BEAUTIFUL AREA.
THERE ARE A LOT OF TREES, BUT IT, THEY'VE GROWN UP OVER TIME.
I'M SURE THERE ARE A LOT OF TREES WHERE YOUR HOUSES, YOU KNOW, ARE NOW, UM, BEFORE THEY WERE BUILT, I HATE TO SEE TREES COME DOWN.
THAT BEACH TREE IS RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE FRONTAGE OF THE PROPERTY, AND IT'S ALSO IN THE LOWER PART.
SO IF YOU, BUT I'M NOT SAYING YOU CAN'T, AND I'M NOT SAYING NOT TO EXPLORE IT.
IF YOU TRY TO MOVE THE DRIVEWAY OVER, YOU KNOW, TO THE, THE RIGHT OF THE TREE, WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING FROM THE STREET, YOU ARE CHIPPING MORE INTO THE SLOPE, WHICH COULD BE MORE DISTURBANCE.
ALSO, WHEN WE WERE THERE WITH, UM, AARON, IT'S A QUESTION OF EVEN IF YOU WORK AROUND IT, ARE YOU GOING TO DISRUPT THE ROOT SYSTEM ENOUGH THAT THE TREE WILL THEN BEGIN TO AIL AND YOU DON'T WANT A TREE THAT BIG, YOU KNOW, GETTING SICK.
SO JUST SOMETHING TO KEEP IN MIND.
THERE WAS, THERE'S ALSO A ROCK ISSUE WITH THE TREE THAT WE NOTICED.
IT LOOKED LIKE THERE WAS A CONCRETE OR A ROCK PLUGGED INTO THE BASE WHERE MAYBE THERE WAS AN OPENING BEFORE, SO MAYBE THERE WAS SOME, UH, UH, DAMAGE THERE THAT NEEDS TO BE INVESTIGATED.
SO MICHAEL, YOU RECALL AARON WAS LOOKING AT ONE MORE TIME? YEAH, AARON, THAT I JUMPED IN.
IT SEEMED TO BE SOME STORM DAMAGE THAT AARON WAS NOTICING WHEN WE WERE THERE AS WELL.
AARON MAY WANNA SPEAK TO THIS.
WE DID SEE, UM, SOME WIND DIEBACK FROM, UH, STORM DAMAGE.
UH, WE, WE DID SEE THE ROCK AT THE BASE OF THE CONCRETE.
WE WEREN'T SURE IF THERE WAS, THERE WAS SOME MATERIAL THAT APPEARED TO BE RIGHT AT THE BASE OF THE TREE.
UM, IT, IT'S UP TO THE BOARD IF IT WISHES TO HAVE THE APPLICANT, UM, BRING A BOARD, SOMEONE TO FULLY ASSESS THE TREE, UH, THE WAY THAT THE CURRENT PROPOSAL IS, THE TREE WOULD DEFINITELY HAVE TO BE REMOVED WITH THE DRIVEWAY SHOWN WHERE IT IS.
IF THE DRIVEWAY WERE TO BE SHIFTED TO THE LEFT, UH, WHICH I BELIEVE IS TO THE SOUTH, THAT COULD INTRODUCE A VARIANCE BECAUSE YOU CAN'T COME WITHIN THE SIDE YARD SETBACK.
IF YOU WERE TO SHIFT IT TO THE RIGHT OR TO THE NORTH, AS MR. HAY INDICATED, THAT WOULD INVOLVE LIKELY ADDITIONAL STEEP SLOPE DISTURBANCE AND POTENTIALLY ADDITIONAL ROCK REMOVAL ON THAT SITE.
SO I JUST WANTED YOU TO HAVE THAT INFORMATION.
UH,
UM, THE APPLICANT, JUST SO YOU KNOW, I DID GET A CHAT FROM ONE OF THE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC THAT INDICATED THE APPLICANT
[01:50:01]
HAD NOT ADDRESSED THE ISSUE OF THE FINANCIALS, BUT THERE, UH, HAD WROTE ME BACK THAT THEY WILL DO THAT ONCE, YOU KNOW, THE BOARD IS READY FOR THEM TO DO SO.BUT THAT SAID, I THINK THE, THE BEST WAY FOR US TO PROCEED IS RATHER THAN SPECULATE, UH, HOW WE CAN MOVE THE TREE, UH, WHETHER OR NOT WE SHOULD GO INTO THE SPEECH SLOPE, THE FIRST QUESTION SHOULD BE, YOU KNOW, IS THAT TREE IN GOOD HEALTH? YOU KNOW, IF THE TREE IS NOT IN GOOD IN GOOD HEALTH, THEN THE QUESTION IS MOVED.
SO THE FIRST QUESTION IS, IS THE TREE IS IN GOOD HEALTH, THEN WE CONSIDER WHAT, IF ANY, UH, ALTERATIONS THAT WE SHOULD CONSIDER, WHETHER WE MOVE IT IN TO, UH, DO MORE ROCK, UH, UH, CHIPPING, OR WE, UH, ADJUST THE SIDING OF THE BUILDING.
SO I THINK THAT'S THE FIRST THING WE SHOULD DO.
SO MY RECOMMENDATION IS FOR THE APPLICANT TO PROVIDE THAT INFORMATION TO US, UH, PROVIDE INFORMATION ABOUT THE, THE FINANCES WHICH THE APPLICANT, UH, AGREED TO DO.
AND, UM, AND, UH, AND, UH, RATHER THAN, UH, UH, UH, CLOSE THIS HEARING, WE JUST HAVE A CONTINUATION OF THE HEARING UNTIL SUCH TIME WHERE THE APPLICANT, UH, INDICATES THAT THEY HAVE THE, THE INFORMATION THAT'S REQUIRED.
AND THEN WE WILL, WE'LL CONTINUE THE HEARING.
OKAY, WALTER? YES, UM, I, I, I COULD CERTAINLY APPRECIATE ALL OF THE NEIGHBOR'S CONCERNS WHEN IT COMES TO THE TREE AND, UM, HAVING TO CUT IT DOWN AS A RESULT OF THE CONSTRUCTION.
BUT BASED ON MY OBSERVATION WHILE I WAS THERE, THE WAY THE TREE IS PURCHASED KIND OF ON A HILLSIDE TO SOME DEGREE, AND RIGHT IN THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY OF THE ROOT SYSTEM, THE LARGE ROCKS, AS WELL AS CEMENTS THAT WAS POURED INTO IT.
SO ASIDE FROM ASSESSING THE TREE'S HEALTH RIGHT NOW, I THINK WE SHOULD PROBABLY FOCUS ON THE FACT THAT THE PROPERTY IS GOING TO BE EVENTUALLY, UM, UH, WILL EVENTUALLY HOUSE A, UH, AN ACTUAL STRUCTURE.
AND IN ORDER FOR FOR THAT TO HAPPEN, IT WOULD BE A DISTURBANCE TO THE ROOT SYSTEM.
UM, OVERALL, THERE'S NO WAY, BASED ON MY OBSERVATION, THAT A STRUCTURE COULD EVER BE PLACED THERE WITHOUT DISTURBING THE TREE.
SO IF THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE A CONSULTANTS LOOK AT IT, I THINK IT WOULD MAKE SENSE FOR THEM TO FOCUS ON THE FACT THAT A DRIVEWAY HAS TO BE PLACED SOMEWHERE ON THE PROPERTY FROM THE STREET.
AND WHAT'S THE LIKELIHOOD OF THAT TREE SURVIVING THAT INTRUSION TO THE TRUE SYSTEM WOULD BE AFTERWARDS.
SO I THINK THAT THAT'S THE KEY ISSUE, UH, TO GET THAT ASSESSMENT BEFORE WE DECIDE ANY OTHER ACTION WE SHOULD TAKE IN REGARD TO ALTERING THE PLAN.
UH, ANY OTHER COMMENTS ABOUT, UH, UH, UH, NOT CLOSING THE HEARING UNTIL WE GET THAT ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, AND THEN AT THAT POINT WE COULD CLOSE THE HEARING AND MAKE A DECISION ON IT? SO, UH, UM, WITH THAT SAID, I WOULD, UH, ALL LIKE TO, UH, KEEP THE HEARING OPEN UNTIL SUCH TIME WE GET THE INFORMATION FROM A ARBORIST AND, AND, AND THE FINANCIAL INFORMATION THAT WAS PROPOSED.
AND ONCE THAT, UH, UH, WE INDICATE THAT WE HAVE THAT INFORMATION AVAILABLE, I WILL RESCHEDULE THE CONTINUATION OF THIS PUBLIC HEARING.
SO, MR. MR. CHAIR, BEFORE A MOTION IS MADE, UH, MIGHT I SUGGEST SO THAT THERE IS NO NEED TO RE-NOTICE EVERYONE THAT WE CHOOSE A, UH, A FIRM DATE OR AT LEAST A DATE THAT, UH, IT'S, UH, IT'S, THEY DON'T PROVIDE THE INFORMATION WE CAN ON THAT DAY, ADJOURN THE HEARING SHORTLY TO THE NEXT DATE.
WE CAN ASK THE APPLICANT HOW LONG IT TAKES.
I THINK IT WILL, UH, BE TO, UM, GET THAT INFORMATION IF IT'S NOT WITHIN, UH, A WEEK OR SO, WE CAN PUT THIS OFF, UH, FOR A MONTH.
I, I, WHAT WAS THAT? I, I THINK MY, MY QUESTION WOULD BE DIRECTLY TO THE APPLICANT.
UH, ONE, HAVE YOU WORKED WITH A CERTIFIED ARBORIST IN THE PAST ON ANY OTHER PROJECT? IS THIS SOMETHING THAT, YOU KNOW, TOMORROW YOU CAN REACH OUT TO, UH, VARIOUS CERTIFIED ARBORISTS IN THE AREA AND LOOK TO HAVE HIM OR HER COME OUT AND ASSESS
[01:55:01]
THE TREE AND PROVIDE A WRITTEN REPORT.IF THAT'S SOMETHING THAT CAN BE DONE IN A TIMELY FASHION, THEN WE'D LIKE TO KNOW THAT, BECAUSE PERHAPS IT COULD BE PUT OUT FOR TWO WEEKS FROM NOW.
IF NOT, THEN YOU FEEL LIKE YOU NEED MORE TIME, AND THAT'S UNDERSTANDABLE.
THEN THE BOARD WOULD BE IN A POSITION TO POSSIBLY PUT IT OVER UNTIL ITS FIRST MARCH MEETING.
SO I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND FROM THE APPLICANT WHAT THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE AT THIS TIME.
UH, I, I AM FAMILIAR WITH THE CERTIFIED ARBUS THAT I WORK WITH ON SEVERAL PROJECTS.
I COULD REACH OUT AS EARLY AS TOMORROW, BUT I, I CAN'T COMMENT, UH, ON IF IT CAN GET DONE IN WEEK, BUT I, I WOULD LIKE TO HOLD MYSELF TO THAT DATE AND, AND HOPEFULLY REACH BACK OUT TO THE BOARD AS EARLY AS TOMORROW IF THAT'S NOT POSSIBLE.
SO WE'LL KEEP, UH, WITH THAT SAID, UH, WE OF FEBRUARY, OUR NEXT MEETING IS FEBRUARY, UH, WHAT, THE 15TH, 17TH.
SO I WOULD LIKE TO, UH, KEEP, UH, KEEP THE, UH, THE HEARING OPEN UNTIL, UH, UH, THE 17TH WHEN WE WILL CONTINUE, UH, UH, HEAR, UH, CONTINUE THE HEARING IN THIS APPLICATION.
SO WE CAN GET A, IF SOMEONE MAKES A MOTION TO ADJOURN THE PUBLIC HEARING TO FEBRUARY 17TH,
WE HAVE GOTTEN MICHAEL SECOND.
POSTPONE, UH, ADJOURNING THE PUBLIC HEARING TO FEBRUARY 17TH.
THIS IS THE FIRST WE NEED VOTE.
SO FOR THIS MEETING IS A JOINT OF FEBRUARY 17TH.
DO YOU HAVE A QUESTION? CORRECT? YEAH, JUST WHAT THIS IS THE FIRST HEARING OR THE FIRST TIME MAKE A PRESENTATION OR? YEAH.
THIS IS, THIS IS THE FIRST PUBLIC HEARING, BUT THERE WAS A WORK SESSION ON JANUARY 6TH FOR THIS PROJECT.
LET'S MOVE ON TO THE NEXT CASE.
THANK YOU MR. VALLEY AND THANK THE MEMBERS OF
THE NEXT CASE IS, IS PB 2021 BRIGHTVIEW METROPOLIS, LOCATED AT 2 89 BURY ROAD WHITE LANE SITUATED WITHIN THE R 15 AND R 21 FAMILY RESIDENCE UNION DISTRICT PROJECT INVOLVES A PRELIMINARY THREE LOT SUBDIVISION AND PLANNING BOARD.
EACH SLOPE PERMIT APPLICATION FOR PROPOSAL CONSISTING OF THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 155 UNIT 186 BED, APPROXIMATELY 174,571 SQUARE FOOT CONTINUUM OF CARE FACILITY ON AN APPROXIMATELY FIVE ACRE LOT, WHICH WOULD BE, UH, KNOWN AS LOT ONE OF WHAT CURRENTLY IS PART OF THE METROPOLIS COUNTRY CLUB PROPERTY.
THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING AN APPROXIMATELY 3.17 ACRE LOT PROPOSES, LOT NUMBER THREE CONSISTING OF AN ADJACENT AND CON CONTINUOUS CONSERVATION EASEMENT AREA TO MEET THE REQUIRED EIGHT ACRES FOR CONTINUING HEALTHCARE FACILITY.
PROPOSED LOT TWO CONSISTING OF APPROXIMATELY 123.86 ACRES WILL CONTINUE TO OPERATE AT MATURE RISK.
COUNTRY CLUB PROJECT ALSO INVOLVES REGULATED STEEP SLOPE DISTURBANCES AND REGULATED REMOVALS.
THE APPLICANT LAST APPEARED BEFORE THE PLANNING BOARD AT A WORK SESSION ON JANUARY 20TH, 2021.
THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVES ARE PRESENT THIS EVENING TO DETAIL THE PROJECT AND ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THE BOARD OR MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC HAVE AT THIS TIME.
UM, UH, THE APPLICANT IS INVITED TO, UH, PRESENT THAT PRESENTATION.
UH, MR. CHAIRMAN, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD, UH, JUST FOR THE RECORD, UH, DAVID COOPER, PARTNER WITH ZA, UH, WITH THE LAW FIRM WITH ZA AND STEINZ, UH, WITH ME TONIGHT, UH, IS MY PARTNER, DAVID STEINITZ AS WELL, UH, DIEGO FROM J M C, WHO'S THE, UH, UH, ENGINEERING, UH, FIRM ON THE MATTER, AS WELL AS, UH, STEVE MARKER FROM, UH, UH, BRIGHTVIEW.
UM, I BELIEVE, UH, REPRESENTATIVES FROM, UH, METROPOLIS ARE ALSO WITH US, INCLUDING ANDY, NATHAN.
UM, WE'LL BE QUICK TONIGHT UNLESS YOU GUYS WANT US TO, TO DIVE INTO ANYTHING SPECIFIC.
WE'VE BEEN BEFORE YOUR BOARD FOR, FOR A WHILE AND WE'VE GONE THROUGH, UH, UH, THE PLANS.
BUT, UM, I WILL TURN OVER QUICKLY TO, TO DIEGO IF THE BOARD WOULD LIKE TO TAKE YOU THROUGH, UH, THE, THE SITE PLAN, OR SORRY, THE SUBDIVISION AND THE STEVE SLOPES, UH, BECAUSE THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING TONIGHT.
WE'LL, WE'LL KIND OF TAKE, TAKE OUR LEAD FROM, FROM YOU, MR.
[02:00:01]
CHAIRMAN.AND, AND YEAH, WE, WE, THIS IS A, THIS HAS GONE THROUGH THE TOWN BOARD, WHICH IS THE, THE LEAD AGENCY.
WE, UH, UH, WE WE'RE NOT THE LEAD A WITH THE, UH, UH, NOT THE LEAD AGENCY, UH, ON THIS PROJECT, BUT WE DO HAVE, UH, PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION AND STEEP SLOPE, UH, JURISDICTION.
SO AT THIS MEETING, I WOULD LIKE TO FOCUS ON THOSE ISSUE, THE PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION AND THE STEEP SLOPE ISSUES BECAUSE THOSE ARE THE ISSUES THAT WE CAN, UH, MAKE A DECISION ON TONIGHT.
DIEGO, DO YOU WANNA JUST, UH, QUICKLY GO THROUGH THOSE? I, UH, IF IT'S OKAY, I'M GONNA SHARE MY SCREEN.
I JUST HAVE A COUPLE OF EXHIBITS THAT I WILL SHARE WITH YOU THIS EVENING.
IF YOU CAN LET ME KNOW WHEN YOU SEE MY SCREEN.
UH, GABE, GOOD EVENING EVERYBODY.
DIEGO VI WITH J M C, THE ENGINEERING AND PLANNING CONSULTANT FOR THE APPLICANT.
I JUST HAVE A COUPLE OF EXHIBITS I'LL REALLY TAKE YOU THROUGH, UH, THIS EVENING.
THIS FIRST ONE, AGAIN, FOCUSING ON THE SUBDIVISION OF THE PROPERTY.
UH, THIS IS THE FORMAL SUBDIVISION PLATT THAT WAS INCLUDED IN THE BOARD'S PACKAGE.
UH, THIS IS THE ACTUAL DOCUMENT THAT WILL BE SUBMITTED AND, UH, FILED WITH COUNTY LAND RECORDS, AND IT JUST REALLY GIVES YOU AN IMAGE OF THE OVERALL, UH, PROPERTY.
UH, THE OVERALL PROPERTY IS APPROXIMATELY 132 ACRES, JUST A LITTLE BIT UNDER AND EXTENDS FROM DOBBS FERRY ROAD ALL THE WAY TO JUNIPER HILL ROAD AND FAIR STREET.
UH, THE SUBDIVISION IS REALLY FOCUSED ON THE DOBBS FERRY ROAD FRONTAGE OF THE PROPERTY.
TO MAKE THIS A BIT EASIER TO READ AND TO FOLLOW, WE DID OVERLAY THIS ON AN AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH.
I JUST THINK THIS MAKES IT A LITTLE BIT EASIER TO UNDERSTAND THE SUBDIVISION ITSELF FOR ABODY.
UH, VIEWING THIS ON THE SCREEN.
UH, DOBBS FERRY ROAD IS ON THE BOTTOM PORTION OF THE PAGE HERE, AND YOU CAN SEE THE GOLF CLUB, UH, MAIN CLUBHOUSE BUILDING IS IN THE CENTER OF THE PAGE UP HERE.
UH, THE ACCESS TO THE COUNTRY CLUB IS OFF OF DOBBS FERRY ROAD AND COMES UP THIS DRIVEWAY IN THIS LOCATION.
AND AS WAS DESCRIBED BY AARON, UH, THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION IS TO, UH, DIVIDE THIS PROPERTY INTO THREE LOTS.
THE FIRST LOT IS THE GOLF COURSE, PROPERTY ITSELF THAT WILL REMAIN, IT'S 123.8 ACRES, AND THAT COMPRISES OF MAJORITY OF THE PROPERTY, OBVIOUSLY.
LOT TWO IS THE BRIGHTVIEW PARCEL, WHICH IS FIVE ACRES, AND THEN LOT THREE IS THE 3.17 ACRES THAT WILL MAKE UP THE CONSERVATION EASEMENT AREA.
AGAIN, THIS PORTION OF THE PROPERTY WILL REMAIN IN THE GOLF COURSE'S HANDS UNTIL SUCH TIME, UH, ONE OF THE TRIGGERS ARE MET WHERE IT ULTIMATELY WOULD BE TRANSFERRED TO BRIGHTVIEW.
BUT FOR PURPOSES OF THE SUBDIVISION, IT'S THREE LOTS, 123.8 ACRES, FIVE ACRES FOR BRIGHTVIEW, AND 3.17 ACRES FOR THE CONSERVATION EASEMENT AREA.
THE SUBDIVISION ALLOWS US, UH, TO CONTINUE TO COMPLY WITH ALL OF THE APPLICABLE ZONING REGULATIONS.
THE PROPOSED BRIGHTVIEW PROJECT, WHICH WE OVERLAID ON THE PLAN HERE AS WELL, SHOWS THE DEVELOPMENT CENTRALLY LOCATED IN THAT FIVE ACRE PARCEL.
FULLY COMPLIES WITH THE ZONING REQUIREMENTS, UH, OF THE NEW SPECIAL PERMITS THAT'S BEEN, UH, CREATED TO PERMIT THIS USE.
UM, UTILIZING OBVIOUSLY THE CONSERVATION EASEMENT AREA THAT'S PART OF THAT LOT AREA AS WELL.
THE GOLF CLUB AT 123 ACRES WOULD ALSO CONTINUE TO REMAIN ZONING COMPLIANT, CONTINUE TO HAVE THE FRONTAGE.
WE'RE NOT CREATING ANY TYPE OF NONCONFORMITIES BY PERFORMING THIS SUBDIVISION.
UM, ONTO A COUPLE OF DETAILS FOR THE SITE PLAN AND THE REALLY SPECIFICALLY THE SLOPES, UH, AND THE STEEP SLOPES ON THE PROPERTY BECAUSE THERE ARE STEEP SLOPES.
I'M GONNA JUST SHARE WITH YOU THIS EXHIBIT.
THIS IS THE SLOPE ANALYSIS PLAN THAT WAS INCLUDED IN THE, UH, PACKAGE TO THE BOARD.
AGAIN, VERY LIMITED AREAS OF STEEP SLOPES.
IT'S REALLY BROKEN UP INTO SMALLER PIECES, SOME OF WHICH HAVE BEEN MANMADE, BUT AGAIN, STILL MEET THE DEFINITION OF YOUR CODE.
OBVIOUSLY WITH THE DEVELOPMENT OF THIS AREA, IT DOES INVOLVE DISTURBANCES TO THOSE STEEP SLOPES.
THIS IS THE ZOOMED IN AERIAL OF THE EXISTING CONDITIONS THAT SHOWS THE MAINTENANCE FACILITY, THE GREENS, AND THE, UM, UH, REALLY THE STORAGE AREA ASSOCIATED WITH THAT.
AND THEN WE SUPERIMPOSED THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT PLAN.
ON THE AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH, THE BUILDING IS PROPOSED TO BE CONSTRUCTED CENTRALLY ON THE PROPERTY AND A DRIVEWAY ACCESS OFF OF DOBBS FERRY ROAD.
THE MAIN ACCESS IS LOCATED HERE, WHICH WOULD BE SHARED
[02:05:01]
WITH THE GOLF CLUB UP TO THE GOLF CLUB MAIN ENTRANCE.AND THEN THERE'S A SECONDARY ACCESS ON THE NORTHERN NORTHEASTERN PORTION OF THE PROPERTY.
AGAIN, BECAUSE OF THE STEEP SLOPES IN THE TOPOGRAPHY ON THE PROPERTY, THE BUILDING WAS DESIGNED TO WORK WITH THOSE STEEP SLOPES ON THE HILLSIDE.
IT'S REALLY DESIGNED TO STEP UP AS YOU GO UP THE GRADES, AND THAT HELPS US MINIMIZE DISTURBANCE BEYOND THESE RETAINING WALLS AND, OR EXCUSE ME, BEYOND THE LIMITS OF THE PROPERTY AND DOESN'T AFFECT ANY STEEP SLOPES ARE MUCH OF THE DISTURB.
IT DOESN'T AFFECT A LOT OF AREA BEYOND THE PROPERTY ITSELF AND LIMITS THE DISTURBANCE TO THE STEEP SLOPES.
AND BY UTILIZING THE RETAINING WALLS AROUND THE PERIMETER, AGAIN, FURTHER ALLOWS US TO LIMIT THE OVERALL DISTURBANCE TO THE PROPERTY.
WE HAVE A TOTAL OF 99 PARKING SPACES THAT ARE PROVIDED.
THAT'S ONE LESS THAN WE DISCUSSED LAST TIME BECAUSE WE DID MAKE THAT CHANGE TO, UH, SIX ACCESSIBLE PARKING SPACES ON THE PROPERTY.
UM, SO THERE ARE A TOTAL OF 99 PARKING SPACES, AND THAT'S PRIMARILY LOCATED ABOVE THE FRONT PORTION OF THE BUILDING.
AGAIN, WITH THE PROPOSED IMPROVEMENT PLAN AND THE, UH, RETAINING WALLS, IT REALLY ALLOWS US TO LIMIT THE DISTURBANCE AND CREATES A NUMBER OF THESE GARDEN SPACES AND THESE LANDSCAPED AREAS.
WE ARE RESTABILIZING ALL OF THE DIFFERENT AREAS AND, UH, PROVIDING A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF LANDSCAPING ON THE PROPERTY, WHICH INCLUDES OVER 250 TREES THAT WOULD BE PLANTED AS PART OF THE APPLICATION.
UH, MR. CHAIRMAN, I'D LIKE TO WRAP IT UP THERE UNLESS YOU'D LIKE ANY MORE DETAIL.
I THINK THAT WAS JUST A GOOD OVERVIEW OF THE APPLICATION AND, UM, HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THE BOARD OR THE PUBLIC MIGHT HAVE.
THAT WAS A VERY GOOD, UH, UH, PRESENTATION OF WHAT, UH, THE CLIENTS ARE.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS BY THE BOARD MEMBERS BEFORE I OPEN IT UP FOR PUBLIC COMMENT? YEAH, WALTER, I HAVE A QUESTION.
UM, SINCE THIS IS A, UH, PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION, UH, APPROVAL, UH, COULD YOU, APPLICANT CAN TELL US WHAT HAPPENS IN THIS PARCEL, WHICH IS THE LARGE PARCEL, WHICH IS A, UH, GOLF COURSE.
AND IF THAT IS A DEVELOPED AS A SAY, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE, HOW WOULD THAT BE? UH, WHY THEY ACCESS TO THAT, UH, SAY MAYBE 50 HOUSES ARE, UH, HOW WOULD THAT BE PROVIDED ACCESS TO DUCK? WELL, WELL, WELL, IF, UH, APPLICANT WAS TO COME IN SOMETIME IN THE FUTURE, UH, FOR A, A BUILD OUT OF THE GOLF COURSE, IT WOULD BE UP TO THE APPLICANT TO PROVIDE HOW THEY WILL GET APPROPRIATE ACCESS TO THAT FACILITY.
I, I THINK THIS PLAN, THIS PLAN SAYS IT SPEAKS TO THE SUB, UH, SUB, UH, SUBDIVISION THAT, UH, UH, WILL FOREVER KEEP THAT OPEN SPACE BOUNDARIES.
BUT WHAT HAPPENS TO THE GOLF COURSE IN THE FUTURE, THAT'S, THAT'S A DIFFERENT CASE.
WHAT WE WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THAT OPEN SPACE IS FOREVER, UH, UH, DIVIDED.
AND, AND YOU COULD SPEAK TO THAT, UH, UH, UM, DAVID, UH, SPEAK, UH, WELL, JUST, JUST QUICKLY, JUST, JUST SO I, BECAUSE IT'S A PUBLIC HEARING.
I, I KNOW, YOU KNOW, BUT WE SHOULD JUST SAY THIS FOR THE RECORD, BUT THE, THE, THE SUBDIVISION HERE, THE PURPOSE OF THE SUBDIVISION OF THE GOLF COURSE IS NOT FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT.
IT, IT, THE, THE GOLF COURSE WILL REMAIN AND, AND CONTINUE TO OPERATE.
UM, SO THAT'S PRECISELY WHY YOU DON'T SEE ACCESS POINTS OR, OR, YOU KNOW, BACKYARDS, ET CETERA.
THAT PARCEL IS TO REMAIN AS IT IS TODAY AS A GOLF COURSE.
UM, AND CHAIRMAN SIMON, AS YOU SAID, IF THAT WERE EVER TO COME TO FRUITION, THAT SOMEBODY WOULD COME IN WITH, WITH A PROPOSAL, THEY WOULD'VE TO PROVE OUT, UH, ACCESS.
THAT THAT CERTAINLY WAS NOT, UH, UH, WHAT JAMES C WAS LOOKING TO DO, OR, UH, FOR THE SUBDIVISION THAT'S RIGHT FOR THE SUBDIVISION.
THE ONLY OTHER THING I COULD SAY, JUST TO, UH, UH, KIND OF DOVETAIL ON, ON THE COMMENT ABOUT THE, THE CONSERVATION EASEMENT, IF THAT WERE TO OCCUR, YOU'RE RIGHT, THE, THE CONSERVATION EASEMENT WOULD AUTOMATICALLY, UH, THAT WOULD BE A TRIGGER EVENT AND THAT WOULD AUTOMATICALLY REVERT TO, TO RIGHT VIEWS OWNERSHIP AND ALL, UM, IMPERIAL SURFACE ON IN THAT AREA WOULD'VE TO BE REMOVED.
BUT THAT, UM, IN TERMS OF A, A RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, THAT'S NOT WHAT'S CONTEMPLATED
[02:10:01]
BY THIS SUBDIVISION.ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, MICHAEL? I THINK, WALTER, MY QUESTION IS, SINCE WE ARE KIND OF CONNECTING TO WHAT HAPPENS IN THE FUTURE WITH THE CONSERVATION THINGS, UH, IT WOULD BE ALSO JUST FOR INFORMATION THAT WHAT POSSIBLE ACCESS POINTS COULD BE.
I'M, I'M NOT SAYING THAT IT IS, OF COURSE IT COULD BE DIFFERENT, BUT AS, AS THE OLD PLANNING BOARD, WE WANTED TO UNDERSTAND WHAT'S THEIR, THEIR THOUGHT PROCESSES.
AND I THINK THEY MUST HAVE HAD THE, UH, THE, THE GO GO CLUB, UH, HAS, HAS AN IDEA THAT THEY HAVE DIVIDED UP AND THEY HAD IT PROVIDED ALL THESE OTHER CONTINGENT, WHICH IS, UH, THREE ACRES, AND THEY GONNA BE BETTER OWNERSHIP.
UH, UH, STRANGE ADJUSTMENT, BUT, SO I JUST, I MEAN, IT'S A QUESTION.
WELL, I DON'T THINK THEY CAN ANSWER.
I, I DON'T THINK THEY CAN ANSWER IT.
THAT THEIR PLAN, I THINK IF YOU TAKE A LOOK AT, AT THE POSITIONING OF THIS, IT WAS THE PLACE THAT MADE SENSE FOR SENIOR LIVING WITHOUT DISRUPTING THE GOLF COURSE.
THE OBJECTIVE WAS TO SAVE THE GOLF COURSE.
YOUR QUESTION'S A VERY GOOD ONE, BUT I WOULDN'T EXPECT THESE PEOPLE, UH, THIS APPLICANT TO BE ABLE TO, UH, ANSWER THAT QUESTION.
AND FRANKLY, IF AT SOME POINT THEY JUST, SOMEBODY WANTS TO DEVELOP A HUNDRED HOUSES IN THERE, THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO GET CLEARANCE FOR, FOR WHERE THEY GET ROAD ACCESS TO.
THAT'S NOT THE PROBLEM, UH, IN FRONT OF US RIGHT NOW.
AND IT'S SOMETHING WE'LL DEAL WITH IT IF IT SOMETIME, HOPEFULLY IT DOESN'T HAPPEN.
HOPEFULLY THIS SAVES METROPOLIS, WE HOPE.
AND WHO KNOWS WHAT COULD GO IN THERE IN THE EVENT THAT IT EVER DOES HAPPEN.
MAYBE IT'S HOUSES, MAYBE IT'S, YOU KNOW, A DIFFERENT CONFIGURATION.
I DON'T THINK YOU CAN PLAN FOR UNKNOWNS WHEN THEY'RE NOT ON THE TABLE AT ALL.
I MEAN, SOMEBODY CAN COME IN WITH A P YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GONNA HAPPEN.
WHAT COULD HAPPEN IN THERE? I WILL, I IF, IF I, I THINK IF, UH, I, I I I, I'M TRYING TO STAY ON, ON, ON THE AGENDA SO WE CAN FIT EVERYTHING IN, UH, UH, IF, UH, UH, THE ISSUE IS THAT IS A OPEN SPACE FOREVER.
SO THAT'S WHO, REGARDLESS OF WHO OWNS IT, THE GOLF COURSE OR METROPOLIS THAT IS DEDICATED OPEN SPACE.
UH, NO, WALTER, THAT'S NOT THE QUE NO, I THINK THAT'S NOT THE QUESTION.
WE KNOW THAT THE BUFFER IS DEDICATED OPEN SPACE.
THAT'S NOT WHAT THE QUESTION WAS.
AND IT'S A VERY GOOD QUESTION FOR THE FUTURE, AND IT'S A VERY GOOD QUESTION.
IF SOMEBODY COMES IN AND TRIES TO DEVELOP THE LAND OF HOW, NOW THAT YOU'VE TAKEN UP, UM, WHERE YOU'VE PUT THIS METROPOLIS THERE, OBVIOUSLY THAT SHARED DRIVEWAY WOULD NEVER WORK IF THERE WERE A HUNDRED HOUSES IN THAT'S RIGHT.
SO, SO THAT WAS S QUESTION, WHICH IS OUTSTANDING QUESTION, BUT JUST NOT FOR THIS APPLICATION.
THERE IS, THERE IS FURTHER FRONTED ON THE GOLF COURSE PROPERTY ON DO SURRY ROAD, UH, IF I UNDERSTOOD KURT'S QUESTION WAS, UH, AND IT'S, IT'S RIGHT IF WE CAN'T CROSS OVER THAT BUFFER AREA, SO HOW DO YOU GET ACCESS? THE ACCESS WOULD BE, YOU'D HAVE TO GET IT FROM SOME OTHER PLACE.
ONE OF THOSE PLACES, UH, PERHAPS IS FURTHER WEST ON DOTS FERRY ROAD.
BUT THAT'S SOMETHING THAT AN APPLICANT WOULD HAVE TO COME TO THE TABLE WITH.
I I, I THINK AT THIS POINT, THE ISSUE IS RAISED, UH, UM, THE, THE OWNERS OF THE GOLF COURSE, YOU KNOW, THEY, THEY, THEY HAVE TO CONSIDER THAT IN ANY OTHER FUTURE ACTIONS.
BUT THAT'S NOT ON THE TABLE NOW.
AND I THINK WE NEED TO GO BACK TO ADDRESS THE APPLICATION THAT'S ON THE TABLE.
AND, AND IF THERE IS ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS BY THE BOARD, I WOULD, YOU KNOW, YOU ARE WELCOME TO SHARE THAT.
IF NOT, MONA, IF NOT, WE WOULD LIKE TO GET TO HEAR WHAT THE PUBLIC HAS TO SAY.
MONA, I THINK THE QUESTION MIGHT BE IS ARE WE LEAVING ENOUGH SPACE FOR A ROADWAY ON DOBBS FERRY, A FUTURE ROADWAY ON DOBBS FERRY ROAD WITH THE EASEMENT STILL INTACT? IS THERE, I DON'T THINK THE EASEMENT, I DON'T THINK THE EASEMENT HAS ANY IMPACT AT ALL.
IS THERE ENOUGH ROOM FOR A ROADWAY? EASEMENT HAS NO NECESSARY.
THE, THE, THE, HOLD ON FOR A SECOND.
THE CONSERVATION EASEMENT BACKS UP ONTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD
[02:15:01]
ON THE JORDAN STREET.IT HAS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH A, EVER, WITH ACCESS TO DOBBS FERRY ROAD THAT I COULD SEE.
YOU WOULD HAVE TO GO TO THE, BECAUSE IT'S ON THE EAST SIDE, MONA, IT WOULD HAVE TO BE ON THE WEST SIDE.
YOU'D HAVE TO ENTER DOBBS FERRY ROAD INTO THE GOLF COURSE AND THE WEST SIDE, NOT FROM THE SIDE SIDE.
CAN YOU, CAN YOU PUT THAT BACK UP ON THE SHARED SCREEN ONE MORE TIME? YES.
I'M GONNA SHARE, I WAS JUST GONNA MAKE ONE, ONE UP ONE POINT.
PUT MY SCREEN UP VERY QUICKLY.
IT, IT'S THE, THE QUESTION IS NOT NECESSARILY OF THE DRIVEWAY AT THIS POINT, BECAUSE AGAIN, WE'RE NOT DESIGNING A DRIVEWAY FOR ANY SPECIFIC USE.
WHAT WE ARE OBLIGATED TO DO IS MAINTAIN THE REQUIRED FRONTAGE ALONG THE PROPERTY SO THAT IT HAS FRONTAGE ON DOBBS FERRY ROAD, WHICH WE DO HAVE.
SO THIS SHOWS THE CONSERVATION EASEMENT THAT COMES INTO THIS AREA.
AND THEN THEY HAVE ADDITIONAL FRONTAGE ALONG THIS OPPOSITE THE SHOPPING CENTER, UH, DRIVEWAY, WHICH IS REALLY AT THAT LOW POINT WHERE THE BUS STOP IS, IT'S A LITTLE BIT DECEIVING WHERE IT IS HERE, IT'S REALLY PRETTY FAR DOWN THE ROAD.
YOU, THAT LITTLE DIEGO EXCUSE, CAN YOU LARGE THAT A LITTLE DIEGO? I ACTUALLY, I ACTUALLY HAVE THE ZOOMED IN ONE AND IT JUST SHOWS IT OFF TO THE SIDE HERE.
WELL, UH, SO, OKAY, SO THAT ANSWERED THE QUESTION THAT, UH, THAT CORRECT RAISE THAT WE'RE NOT FOREVER, UH, UH, LOCKING IN THAT PROPERTY.
WE'RE, WE'RE, WE'RE MAINTAINING THE REQUIRED LEGAL FRONTAGE AS PART OF THIS SUBDIVISION.
BUT AS BEEN DESCRIBED, WHOEVER DOES ANY, IF THEY DO ANYTHING IN THE FUTURE, THEY NEED TO DEMONSTRATE ACCESS TO YOU, D O T ET CETERA, AND GET ALL THE NECESSARY APPROVAL.
AND THE CONSERVATION EASEMENT IS GOING TO BE DEEDED.
SO IT'D BE VERY, VERY DIFFICULT TO, TO, THE ONLY WAY YOU COULD POSSIBLY DO IT IS OFFER OTHER LAND AS PART OF THE CAR CONSERVATION EASEMENT AT THAT POINT.
BUT THAT'S A SUBJECT FOR IF THERE'S EVER A SUBJECT, IF THERE'S EVER IF, IF THERE'S EVER A UH, OKAY.
THE PROPERTY'S NOT LANDLOCKED, SO I THINK WE CAN MOVE ON.
THERE'S A VALID QUESTION THAT, UH, RAISED AND, AND I THINK THAT WELL, AND WE, THEY HAD ANSWER.
IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THE, ON THIS PARTICULAR APPLICATION? IF NOT, UH, UH, UH, UH, UH, DO WE HAVE ANY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WHO WE WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS APPLICATION? YES.
I HAVE A NUMBER OF QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS APPLICATION AT THIS TIME, BUT BECAUSE OF THE CIRCUMSTANCES IN THE LAST FOUR WEEKS IN WASHINGTON DC AND THE QUESTIONS THAT HAVE BEEN RAISED, UH, I WILL RESERVE MY QUESTIONS FOR PROBABLY HOPEFULLY THE NEXT MEETING.
UM, ATTITUDES ABOUT WHAT IS PROPER AND WHAT SHOULD BE DONE IN THE FUTURE, WHICH HAS NOT BEEN DONE IN THE PAST, CHANGES THE COMPLEXITY OF THIS COUNTRY ENORMOUSLY.
SOME OF THE CHANGES HAVE ALREADY BEEN MADE, UH, AND, UH, TO RAISE ANY ISSUES TONIGHT IS NOT THE PROPER TIME FOR ME TO DO THAT.
BUT I WOULD LIKE TO GO ON THE RECORD TO SAY THAT I DO HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS PROJECT AT THIS POINT, BUT BECAUSE THE CHANGING CIRCUMSTANCES, I WILL RESERVE 'EM FOR NEXT TIME.
AND YOUR COMMENT WAS DULY PART BECOMES PART OF THE RECORD.
UH, ANY OTHER MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WHO YOU WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS? NO, IT IS CHAIRPERSON.
I, I JUST WANTED TO RESPOND TO MR. BODEN VERY QUICKLY TO INDICATE THAT EVEN IF THE PLANNING BOARD WERE TO CLOSE ITS PUBLIC HEARING ON THE SUBDIVISION SITE PLAN, THERE WOULD BE A WRITTEN RECORD PERIOD FOR YOU TO SUBMIT COMMENTS IN WRITING FURTHER, THE TOWN BOARD WILL BE CONDUCTING A FUTURE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE SPECIAL PERMIT AND SITE PLAN APPLICATIONS WHERE THERE WILL BE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.
ON OTHER APPLICATIONS, NOT ON THIS APP, NOT RIGHT.
THE PUBLIC RECORD WILL BE LEFT OPEN.
BUT YOUR LAST COMMENT, JUST FOR CLARITY, IS THAT WE WILL BE DISCUSSION, WE'LL HAVE PUBLIC HEARINGS OR WHERE PEOPLE CAN GIVE THEIR, UH, OPINION ON FUTURE APPLICATIONS.
[02:20:01]
DISCUSSION PERMIT IS NOT OUR, OUR DECISION.THE SPECIAL PERMIT IS OF TABLOID'S DECISION, AND THEREFORE THEY WILL HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING.
I JUST WANTED TO MAKE THE RECORD CLEAR THAT ON, UH, UH, PUBLIC HEARING FOR CYCLING, WHETHER OR NOT, UH, UH, WE ARE THE LEAD AGENCY OR THE TOWN BOARD IS THE LEAD AGENCY THAT'S APPLICABLE THAT WE WOULD, BUT TONIGHT WE IS THE OPPORTUNITY FOR MR. BODEN TO GIVE HIS OPINION IF HE CHOSE NOT TO GIVE THE OPINION TONIGHT FOR THE REASON WHICH HE HAD STATED, HE STILL HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO SEND SOMETHING IN WRITING BY, UH, UH, FOR THE NEXT, WHAT, THE FEBRUARY 17TH THAT WAS, I WAS SAYING I JUST WANTED TO MAKE THE RECORD.
EVEN IF WE CLOSE THIS, UH, ON, ON THE, ON THE, UH, SPECIAL PERMIT.
SO, UM, SO WHAT WE DO AT, UH, IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, WE MADE OUR RECOMMENDATION TO THE TOWN BOARD ON THE ISSUE.
AND NOW IT COMES BACK TO US TO ACTUALLY, UH, UH, UH, UH, UM, WILL, UH, OPINE ON THE, THE STEEP SLOPE AND, UH, UM, THE PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION, RIGHT? IS THAT, UH, ERIC IS SUBPLAN APPROVAL IS ALSO TO BOARDS.
THE PLANNING BOARD HAS, UH, APPROVAL AUTHORITY OVER THE PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION OF STEEP SLOPE PERMIT.
IF THE BOARD WISHES IT, IT COULD CLOSE THAT HEARING THIS EVENING AND LEAVE THE WRITTEN RECORD PERIOD OPEN.
UH, WE WOULD RECOMMEND TO FEBRUARY 10TH.
ALL IN FAVOR OF CLOSING A PUBLIC HEARING.
WE KEEP THE RECORD UP UNTIL FEBRUARY 10TH.
WE CLOSED THE HEARING AND KEEP THE RECORD OPEN TO, UH, UH, FEBRUARY 10TH AND FEBRUARY THE 17TH.
UH, WE, WE WILL HAVE, UH, UH, STAFF WILL PREPARE A DECISION WHICH WE COULD REVIEW AND VOTE ON IS FEBRUARY THE 17TH? OKAY.
THANK YOU, MR. HAVE A GREAT, YOUR TEAM.
UM, AND I JUST WANT TO REMIND MR. BODEN, FEEL FREE TO SEND IN YOUR COMMENTS, UH, BY FEBRUARY 10TH.
UM, UH, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND GO BACK INTO WORK SESSION.
DO WE GET A SECOND? SECOND, SECOND.
THE FIRST THING IN THE GOODNIGHT, BARBARA.
BARBARA? WHAT DID I DO? OKAY, UH, THE, THE NEXT, I HAVE THE READY TO GO.
SO, UH, COULD YOU INTRODUCE THE APPLICANT? YES, CHAIR PRESIDENT SIMON.
UH, AS YOU NOTED, NEXT CASE IS PB 2017.
THE HOUSING ACTION COUNCIL LOCATED, UH, PROPERTY LOCATED AT ONE 12 NORTH LAWN AVENUE ELMSFORD, WITHIN THE R FIVE ONE FAMILY RESIDENCE ZONING DISTRICT PROJECT INVOLVES A PROPOSAL TO SUBDIVIDE ONE EXISTING LOT INTO TWO BUILDABLE LOTS FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONSTRUCTING TWO SINGLE FAMILY HOMES WITH RELATED IMPROVEMENTS.
THE PROJECT ALSO INVOLVES REGULATED SLEEP SLOPE DISTURBANCE, AND REGULATED TREE REMOVALS.
THE FOLLOWING PLAN USE APPROVALS ARE REQUIRED THROUGH THE PLANNING BOARD, SUBDIVISION, SLEEP SLOPE PERMIT, AND TREE REMOVAL PERMIT.
THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE MEANS PRESENT THIS EVENING, THE DETAILED THE PROJECT, AND ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THE BOARD MAY HAVE.
I JUST WANT TO MAKE A, A DISTINCTION FOR, UH, ABOUT THE HOUSING AND ACTION COUNSEL.
IS A MEMBER OF THE, UH, HOUSING ACTION COUNCIL.
[02:25:01]
YEARS AGO.UH, UM, THE NONPROFIT AGENCY OF GRACE CHURCH AT THAT TIME WAS CALLED GRACE CHURCH COMMUNITY CENTER.
UH, UH, I WAS A BOARD MEMBER OF, UH, THAT ORGANIZATION AND WE WORKED VERY CLOSELY WITH SHORE, WHICH IS A MEMBER OF THE HOUSING ACTION COUNCIL ABOUT 25 YEARS AGO.
AND, UH, UH, THE CONSTRUCTION OF A MEN'S SHELTER.
SO MY CONNECTION WITH THE, WITH THE HOUSING ACTION COUNSEL THROUGH SURE.
GOES BACK 25 YEARS AGO WHEN WE WORKED VERY CLOSELY WITH THEM.
SO I DON'T FEEL THAT IS REASON FOR ME TO, NOT TO TAKE PART IN THIS DISCUSSION.
I FELT I SHOULD INDICATE THAT.
QUALIFIED
UM, THERE'S A LONG DRIVEWAY FROM EVERETT AVENUE, UH, TO THE HOUSE.
MY QUESTION IS, WHY CAN'T YOU GO THE DRIVEWAY FROM NORTH LAWN AVENUE? I'M SURE THERE'S A GOOD ANSWER, BUT I'D APPRECIATE TO HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT.
UM, MICHAEL STEIN, PRESIDENT
UM, AGAIN, THIS PROJECT IS MO LOCATED IN THE R FIVE ZONING DISTRICT OF A TOTAL PARCEL AREA, GOT 16,000 SQUARE FEET.
EACH OF THE LOTS WILL HAVE AN EXCESS OF THE, THE 5,000 SQUARE FOOT REQUIREMENT.
UH, LOT ONE WILL HAVE ALMOST TWO, I'M SORRY, 8,000 AND LOT TWO WILL HAVE JUST OVER 8,000.
EXCUSE PUT YOUR, IT'D BE HELPFUL IF YOU JUST PUT THE, UH, THE, UH, THE PLAN.
SO, UM, LEMME GO BACK TO, SO THIS BEING LOT ONE HAS APPROXIMATELY 7,956 SQUARE FEET.
LOT TWO ON THE RIGHT HAS 8,055 SQUARE FEET.
UM, THE HOUSES WERE CITED TO COME OFF EVERETT AVENUE, UH, FOR THE PRIMARY REASON OF, UH, GRADE ELEVATION.
IF WE GO BACK OVER TO, UM, THE SITE PLAN OR THE STORMWATER PLAN, UH, YOU'LL SEE THAT THE SIGNIFICANT GRADE DROP OFF GOING DOWN TO NORTHMONT AVENUE AND
SO WE'RE AVOIDING GOING THROUGH, TRYING TO CUT THROUGH AND, AND ANY ROCK THAT MAY BE PRESENT, ANY MINIMIZED, UH, TREE REMOVAL BECAUSE OF THE, THE, THE AMOUNT OF TREES COMING OUT TO AVERAGE.
ALSO, WERE, WERE VERY LIMITED.
UM, YOU CAN SEE RIGHT ALONG THROUGH HERE, WE HAVE ABOUT FOUR TREES RIGHT IN THIS AREA OF FIVE TREES.
UM, AND THIS, IN THIS, THIS STEEP SLOPE AREA.
UM, AND JUST KIND OF JUMPING BACK OVER TO THE STEEP SLOPES MAP, ALL THE STEEP SLOPES ARE REALLY PRIMARILY OVER THROUGH THIS AREA AND INCLUDING AREAS THAT ARE IN EXCESS OF 35%.
SO OUR IDEA WAS WE WANNA AVOID THIS THE MAXIMUM WE CAN, AND BY TRYING TO PUT A DRIVEWAY COMING DOWN TO NORTH LAWN, WE, WE'D END UP WITH A LOT MORE DISTURBANCE AND A LOT MORE TREE REMOVAL.
UM, THE, THE AVENUE COMING DOWN TO EVERETTS IS A VERY GENTLE SLOPE THAT WE'RE ABLE TO COME DOWN, UM, TO ACCESS EVERETTS AVENUE.
I WAS JUST GONNA ADD THAT, UM, THE, THAT STEEP SLOPE ANALYSIS PLAN DOESN'T SHOW IT FULLY BECAUSE IT, IT ONLY, UH, CALCULATES WHAT'S WITHIN THE LIMIT FOR THE PROPERTY.
BUT THERE ARE, AS MR. STEIN NOTED, ADDITIONAL REGULATED STEEP SLOPES THROUGHOUT THE RIGHT OF WAY ALONG NORTH LONG AVENUE.
I WAS OUT TO THE SITE, UH, A WEEK OR TWO AGO, AND THOSE AS WELL.
AND I PASSED BY THE SITE, UH, YESTERDAY EVENING.
IT WAS KIND OF DARK, SO I COULDN'T GET A COMPLETE VIEW OF THE SITE, BUT I WAS ABLE TO LOOK AT THE SLOPE.
IT IS A SIGNIFICANT SLOPE, UH, UH, ON THE, AT THAT, UH, LONG, LONG AVENUE.
YES, IT'S A SIGNIFICANT SLOPE FOR THERE.
WELL, LET, LET, LET ME ASK THIS.
I MEAN, UM, CAN YOU MOVE THE HOUSES? I, I, I GET, I GET THE STATE SLOPES AND I GET WAY YOU'RE DOING THE EVERS AVENUE.
CAN YOU MOVE THE HOUSES CLOSER TO EVEREST AVENUE AND SHORTEN THE DRIVEWAY? UM, LET
[02:30:01]
ME BRING THIS BACK UP.THE ABILITY TO DO THAT FOR LOT ONE, UH, BE BECAUSE OF THE SIGHTING OF, OF, OF THE SHAPE OF THE LOT.
WE REALLY DON'T HAVE THE ABILITY TO DO THAT, UH, WITH FOR LOT TWO.
UH, UM, THERE MAY BE SOME ABILITY TO SHIFT FURTHER UP.
UM, BUT WE HAVE, THIS IS OUR DRIVEWAY AREA.
WE ALSO HAVE A PARKING THAT WE NEED TO, UH, PROVIDE BECAUSE, UH, FOR, FOR THE UNITS, BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE GARAGES, I JUST CONSIDER IT.
DID YOU WANNA CONTINUE WITH YOUR PRESENTATION, MR. STONE? UH, THAT'S PRETTY MUCH IT.
I, I MEAN, IT, IT'S A, IT'S PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD.
UH, I MEAN, BOTH, IT, IT IS AN AS OF RIGHT SUBDIVISION.
WE, WE HAVE FRONTAGE ON ACTUALLY BOTH STREETS, BUT WE HAVE ADEQUATE FRONTAGE ON NORTH LAWN, UM, FACILITATE THE, THE SUBDIVISION.
THERE'S WATER SEWER, AND WE'VE DONE, UH, PERCOLATION DEPO TESTING ON THE SITE.
UH, WE HAVE VERY FAVORABLE RESULTS.
UM, WE DESIGNED A SYSTEM WITH, WITH COLEX TO SERVE EACH PROPERTY.
WE'RE TAKING IN ALL THE IMPERVIOUS AREA FROM THE ROOF, FROM THE DRIVEWAYS, AND BRING 'EM INTO COAL TECH SYSTEMS. UM, THE, THE RESULTS OF THE, THE TESTING, UM, WERE IN EXCESS OF 90 INCHES PER HOUR, WHICH IS, IS BASICALLY WE'RE RUNNING INTO SAND.
UM, I'LL OFTEN WOULD TYPICALLY USE A VERY CONSERVATIVE RATE FROM THAT AND NOT EXCEED 30 INCHES PER HOUR.
UH, SO IN, IN OUR OPINION, WE'RE COMPLETELY SELF-CONTAINED ON THE SITE AND, AND, AND ABLE TO HANDLE EVEN ABOVE THE 25 YEAR STORM, A HUNDRED PERCENT INFILTRATE ALL WATER THAT'S COLLECTED, UM, WITHOUT ANY, WITHOUT ACCOUNTING FOR ANY OF THE EXISTING CONDITIONS, ANY EXISTING RUNOFF.
SO THERE'LL BE AN OVERALL REDUCTION IN, IN RUNOFF COMING FROM THE SITE, BECAUSE IT'LL ALL BE INFILTRATED FROM THE IMPERVIOUS AREAS.
I, I JUST WANTED TO ADD THAT WE'VE PRELIMINARILY REVIEWED THE TREE REMOVAL PERMIT APPLICATION.
UH, ALL BUT ONE OF THE TREES PROPOSED FOR REMOVAL ARE INVASIVE.
THE
UM, THE APPLICANT'S LANDSCAPING PLAN CONSISTS OF A SINGLE EVERGREEN SPECIES, UH, 15 GREEN ARE PROVIDED.
STAFF'S COMMENT BACK TO THE APPLICANT WAS THAT WE'D LIKE TO SEE THE LANDSCAPING PRO PROPOSAL COMPLY WITH THE NEW DIVERSITY STANDARDS WITHIN THE NEWTOWN TREE ORDINANCE.
SO WE'VE GIVEN SOME GUIDANCE AND SUGGESTIONS WITH RESPECT TO, UM, JUST MIXING UP WITH, UH, MULTIPLE EVERGREENS VERSUS ONE SPECIES.
SO THAT'S GONE TO THE APPLICANT AND PROBABLY SOMETHING THAT THEY COULD, UH, ADDRESS VERY QUICKLY.
YEAH, WE'RE, WE'RE ACTUALLY, I THINK MY OFFICE HAS ALREADY UPDATED OUR PLANS TO INCLUDE THOSE TRADES.
SO FOR THESE, THOSE WILL BE SUBMITTED AND IT SHOULD BE IN TIME FOR NEXT MEETING.
OKAY, MS. MR. STEIN, UM, I JUST HAVE A, A SUGGESTION, UM, REALLY SORT OF FOR FULL DISCLOSURE FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD, WE HAVE THIS LISTED AS ONE 12 NORTH LAWN AVENUE, AND IT IS OBVIOUSLY THE, UH, YOU KNOW, FRONTAGE ON NORTH ONE.
HOWEVER, YOU'RE GONNA HAVE ACCESS TO, AND I PRESUME THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT WILL WANT TO HAVE THIS AS, UM, THE, WAS IT EVERETTS, UH, UH, ADDRESS? UM, SO I THINK WE SHOULD, UM, MAKE, UH, NOTICE, UH, OF THE FACT THAT, UH, YOU KNOW, SO EVERYONE IS AWARE THAT YOU ARE GONNA HAVE, UH, FRONTAGE COMING FROM THAT STREET, UM, NOT AS OPPOSED TO, UH, NORTH LAWN.
THAT, AND WE COMPLETELY AGREE.
AND I MEAN THAT EVEN, UH, PART OF EVEN THE REASON COMING OFF OF NORTH LAWN IN, IN ADDITION TO A, A STEEP SLOPE OR TREE REMOVAL, UM, WE'RE ENDING UP IN A MORE RESIDENTIAL SETTING AS WE'RE PULLING OUT THE DRIVEWAY COMPARED TO, TO COMING OUT ONTO NORTH LAWN WHERE WE'RE GOING, WE'RE FACING THE BACK OF COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS.
SO, SO I'M GONNA SUGGEST AARON, FROM THE PUBLIC HEARING, WE AT LEAST, UH, WITH NOTICE INDICATE THAT THERE'S ACTS OF COMING OFF OF, UH, EDWARDS.
SO THAT, UH, IT'S, SO WE HAVE THAT IN THE AGENDA AS WELL.
I DID ADD THAT A ONE LINER ON IT MM-HMM.
UM, BUT IF WE NEED TO, UM, FURTHER THAT FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING, WE NEED COUNCIL, WE DISCUSS THAT AND MAKE IT, DAVE, THINK IN OF ORDER, PLEASE.
UM, I KNOW THAT WHEN PROPERTY'S ON A CORNER, YOU CAN CHOOSE YOUR,
[02:35:01]
UH, ADDRESS, RIGHT? YOU CAN DECIDE WHAT THE FRONT IS.IS THAT TRUE WHEN YOU'VE GOT, WHEN YOU'RE, WHEN THE PROPERTY'S JUST ON TWO SIDES LIKE THIS? OR DOES THE ACCESS DICTATE THE ADDRESS SO WE DON'T HAVE THIS CONFUSION? WELL, I THINK WHAT, WHAT HAPPENS IS THAT, UM, WHEN CHOOSING ADDRESSES, THEY GO THROUGH OUR ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT AND, UH, FOR, UH, E 9 1 1 PURPOSES, IF EVERYTHING IS COMING OFF OF IS NOT GOING NORTH, NORTH ONE, WE DON'T WANNA HAVE THAT NORTHLINE.
I WONDER IF THE APPLICATION SHOULD CHANGE THE ADDRESS SO WE DON'T HAVE THIS CONFUSION.
I, I DON'T, FIRST OF ALL, A CODE SPEAKS TO THIS.
A CODE SPEAKS TO WHAT THE, WHERE THE FRONTAGE IS.
BECAUSE I SAID IF IT'S, IF IT'S A CORNER LOT, THEY HAVE A CHOICE, OKAY.
OF WHERE THE FRONTAGE IS, WHAT, WHAT THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING IS.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE CODE SAYS IN, IN TERMS OF THIS.
DO THEY, ONE THING IS DO THEY HAVE ENOUGH FRONTAGE ON, ON THIS STREET, ON THE LEFT LOT, BECAUSE IT SEEMS LIKE IT'S ALMOST A FLAG LOT.
I WOULD SUGGEST YOU CHANGE THE ADDRESS BECAUSE IT'S GONNA SCREW UP THE NONE OF THE E M S EMERGENCY SERVICES.
IT ALSO SCREWS UP THE POST OFFICE AND EVERYTHING ELSE.
AND THE NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC, I, I, THAT'S NOT THE APPLICATION SHOULD JUST BE REVISED.
I'M SUPPOSED TO MAKE SURE IT'S, UH, UH, WHAT THE CODE SAID.
I WOULD HOPE THAT THE CODE, THE CODE WOULD INDICATE THAT IF YOU ARE ON A PROPERTY AND THAT BORDERS TWO STREETS, THEN YOU HAVE THE FLEXIBILITY OF DETERMINING WHICH, WHAT IS THE STREET ADDRESS.
BUT, UH, AND, AND IF THAT IS NOT THE CASE, WE NEED TO SEE WHAT HAS TO BE DONE SO WE CAN IDENTIFY THE, UH, THE, THE CORRECT ADDRESS OF THESE TWO HOUSES, ESPECIALLY AS YOU POINTED OUT TO YOU IN CASE OF, UH, UH, EMERGENCY, YOU WANT THE EMERGENCY VEHICLE TO RESPOND TO THE CORRECT ADDRESS.
SO THE OTHER THING I WOULD, AARON, HAVE YOU CHECKED OUT FROM A SETBACK POINT OF VIEW, WHAT HAPPENS, UH, AT THE ADDRESSES ON ONE STREET VERSUS THE OTHER? SO HOW, HOW THE CODE WORKS IF YOU HAVE FRONTAGE, UM, BETWEEN TWO ROADWAYS AND THE LEGAL FRONTAGE BETWEEN TWO ROADWAYS, WHICH THIS APPLICANT HAS DEMONSTRATED THAT THEY COULD HAVE FRONTAGE ALONG NORTH LAWN, OR THEY COULD HAVE FRONTAGE ALONG EVERETT'S APP ONCE THEY'VE, THEY'VE ESTABLISHED IN, WHEN YOU LOADED WHAT HAPPENED? UH, YES.
I, I HAD TO STOP FOR ONE SECOND BECAUSE I COULD HEAR THAT, UM, SOMEBODY WAS MAKING AN ANNOUNCEMENT OVER OUR ALEXA, SO JUST HAD TO CALL MYSELF.
UM, IN THIS CASE, THE APPLICANT IS USING, UH, EVERETT AS THE, UH, FRONTAGE.
SO THEY'RE SHOWING, UM, THE ENVELOPES AND RIGHT THERE, MR. STEIN'S PLANNING TO, UH, THE FRONT YARD SETBACK AT 20 FEET, UH, FOR HIS HOME.
AND IT CAN BE TAKEN FROM THAT CORNER BECAUSE IT'S SORT OF LIKE A DOUBLE FRONTAGE, UM, THAT WAS REVIEWED WITH THE BUILDING INSPECTOR'S OFFICE.
THEY SHOW ALL THOSE DIMENSIONS.
THEY SHOW THE SIDE YARD DIMENSION AND THEN THE REAR, BUT THEY ARE, THEY'RE, OKAY, SOME DONE IN TERMS OF
SO WHETHER OR NOT WE LET ALL THE RECORD REFLECT THAT, WHETHER OR NOT YOU, YOU PUT THE NORTH LAWN ADDRESS AND PARENTHESES THE, UH, UH, UM, THE, UH, WHAT'S THAT MERCER AVENUE ADDRESS AVENUE? YEAH.
WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT THE RECORD IS CORRECTED.
WHAT ABOUT REAR YARD? CAROLINE? TWO THINGS.
SO THE REAR YARD, IN THIS CASE, UH, BECAUSE THEY'RE PROPOSING THE FRONT YARD ALONG EVERETT, THEY HAVE SHOWED COMPLIANCE WITH THE REAR YARD FOR NORTH LAWN AVENUE, OKAY.
SO THE, THE ONLY THAT LOOKS LIKE THEY'RE GONNA NEED IS ONE FOR THE DRIVEWAY, RIGHT? THEY'RE UP TOO CLOSE TO THE DRIVEWAY.
SO THAT WAS THE QUESTION, RIGHT? SO THAT WAS THE NEXT THING I WAS GONNA BRING UP.
UM, IT, BECAUSE IT DOES LOOK AWFULLY CLOSE, HOWEVER, AND I CONFIRMED THIS WITH THE BUILDING INSPECTOR, THAT WITHIN THE R FIVE ZONING DISTRICT, THERE IS NO, UM, THE DRIVEWAYS CAN DO NOT NEED TO MEET THE MINIMUM SIDE YARD SETBACK.
[02:40:01]
UM, THE ONLY THING I WANTED TO MENTION IS, YOU KNOW, IN OUR PROPERTY ASSESSMENT SYSTEM AND RECORD SYSTEM, THE PROPERTY SHOWS AS ONE 12 NORTH LAWN.WHAT I WOULD SUGGEST DOING IS, AS CHAIRPERSON SIMON INDICATED, UH, AND MR. FREE, WE CAN, UM, WITH RESPECT TO THE FUTURE AGENDA AS WELL AS THE PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE, MAKE MENTION IN, IN THE TITLE OF THE PROJECT, UH, UH, EDWARD AVENUE.
SO FOLKS ARE, ARE
SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE PROCESS WOULD BE TO DO IT RIGHT NOW, I CAN TELL YOU THAT IF THIS SUBDIVISION WERE TO MOVE FORWARD AND THEY WERE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH, UM, SECURING BUILDING PERMITS, THAT'S WHEN THERE WOULD BE DISCUSSION WITH OUR BUREAU OF ENGINEERING ABOUT ESTABLISHING THESE TWO PARCELS WITH EVERETT'S AVENUE ADDRESSES.
I WOULD ASSUME THAT WHEN YOU, WHEN YOU FILE A SUBDIVISION PLOT WITH WESTCHESTER COUNTY, YOU'D HAVE TO ESTABLISH YEAH, BUT LET, LET'S, LET'S, BUT I, I THINK WE NEED TO DETERMINE WHAT WE COULD DO, DO RIGHT NOW AND MAKE SURE IF THIS GOES TO, UH, POINT OF APPROVAL IN THE CONDITIONS, WE MAKE SURE ALL OF THESE THINGS ARE ADDRESSED.
SO I THINK FOR NOW, THE ONLY THING THAT WE NEED TO PUT THIS ON PUBLIC HEARING IS A UPDATED, UH, LANDSCAPING PLAN.
SO WHAT I WOULD PROPOSE THAT, THAT, UH, WE PUT THIS ON FOR, UH, PUBLIC HEARING ON FEBRUARY THE 17TH, AND THE APPLICANT, FIRST OF ALL, I WANT TO MAKE SURE THE APPLICANT CAN PROVIDE UPDATED LANDSCAPING PLAN BY FEBRUARY THE 10TH.
CAN YOU DO THAT? I BELIEVE, UH, MAYBE MR. STEIN STEPPED AWAY, BUT HE HAD INDICATED EARLIER THAT HIS OFFICE WAS ALREADY IN PROCESS OF UPDATING THE LANDSCAPE PLAN.
SO I DON'T HAVE, UH, I'M COMFORTABLE WITH THE FACT THAT THEY'LL BE ABLE TO FIT IT IN.
SO WHAT I WOULD DO THEN IS TO, UH, UH, PUT THIS ON FOR PUBLIC HEARING ON FEBRUARY, UH, THE 10TH, PROVIDING THE APPLICANT SENT IN THE MESSAGE 17TH, I MEAN 17, PROVIDING IF AN APPLICANT SENDING ALL THE NECESSARY, UH, INFORMATION BY THE 10TH.
AND THEN WHEN IT COMES PART OF, UH, UH, IF WE WOULD APPROVE THIS, THEN IN THE CONDITIONING, WE COULD ADDRESS ALL OF THESE ISSUES REGARDING, UH, SOLVING A PROBLEM PER, UH, PUT IT PERMANENTLY IN TERMS OF WHAT THEIR ADDRESS IS.
WITH THAT SAID, I WOULD LIKE TO, UH, UH, UH, UH, MOVE ON TO THE NEXT APPLICATION, WHICH IS THE, YES.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, EVERYONE.
HAVE A GREAT, HAVE A GOOD, HAVE A GOOD NIGHT.
UM, AND THE LAST CASE ON THE AGENDA THIS EVENING IS PLANNING BOARD CASE NUMBER PB 1913 THOMPSON, LOCATED AT 2111 SAW MILL RIVER ROAD BY PLAINS WITHIN THE R 21 FAMILY RESIDENCE ZONING DISTRICT.
THE PROJECT INVOLVES THE LEGALIZATION OF PREVIOUSLY DEVELOPED SITE IMPROVEMENTS AND LEGALIZATION OF BUILDING AND PATIO ENCLOSURES, AS WELL AS THE PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW DETACHED THREE CAR GARAGE STRUCTURE AND DRIVE, AND RELATED DRIVEWAY EXPANSION.
THE PROJECT ALSO INVOLVES REGULATED STEEP SLOPE DISTURBANCE AND REGULATED TRUE REMOVALS REQUIRING PLANNING RULES FOR STEEP SLOPE PERMIT APPROVAL, AS WELL AS TRUE REMOVAL PERMIT APPROVAL.
THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE IS PRESENT THIS EVENING TO FURTHER DETAIL THE PROJECT AND ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THE BOARD MAY HAVE, AND THAT MR. ESTIS ASKED ME TO HAVE THE PLANS MADE AVAILABLE.
I BELIEVE MS. FRANK MAY HAVE A COMMENT OR SHE WAVING.
UM, SO I'M GONNA SHARE THE SCREEN AND THEN MR. ESTIS CAN SPEAK TO, UM, THE DETAILS OF THE PROJECT.
UM, AND, AND THANK YOU FOR HELPING ME WITH THE COORDINATION OF THE DRAWINGS, AND I FOUND MYSELF IN A DANGEROUS SITUATION BECAUSE I JUST HAD A TUNA SANDWICH AND THREE GLASSES OF GOOD BOTTLE WINE.
SO I AM GOING TO, UM, TRY TO BE VERY, UH, UH, QUICK
[02:45:01]
WITH THE PRESENTATION.AS I EXPLAINED IT, IT SEEMED, IT SEEMED LIKE A VERY LONG SET OF REQUIREMENTS, BUT WHAT HAPPENED HERE IS THAT THIS LOT THAT YOU WILL SEE ON THE SITE PLAN, UM, WITH THE, UH, EXISTING RESIDENCE OFF TO THE FAIRLY, FAIRLY REAR OF THE FRONT, FRONT PROPERTY, KIND OF, UH, THE PROPERTY KIND OF DIVES FROM THE SAWMILL RIVER ROAD, UM, INTO A HOLLOW.
AND THEN IT COMES UP AND YOU SEE THE PROPERTY RIGHT THERE.
THE TWO CIRCLES THAT YOU SEE ARE CIRCLING THE AREAS OF IMPROVEMENT THAT WERE MADE WITHOUT THE BENEFIT OF A BUILDING PERMIT.
THE, THE ONE TO THE RIGHT IS AN ENCLOSURE OF AN EXISTING, UH, UM, COVERED GARAGE.
WHAT THEY DID THERE, THE GARAGE WAS ALREADY A, UM, IT WAS COVERED BY THE SECOND FLOOR, BUT THE APPLICANT SIMPLY FILLED IN THE WALLS, UH, AND PUT A DOOR IN THE FRONT AND A DOOR IN THE BACK.
THE OTHER, UH, UH, CIRCLE THE ELLIPSE TO THE LEFT, AS YOU CAN SEE IN THE FLOOR PLAN ON THE RIGHT, IS AN ENCLOSURE, UH, WHICH IS NOW MADE INTO A FAMILY ROOM, UH, THAT IS, UH, ACCESSIBLE FROM, FROM THE BREAKFAST AREA OF THE HOUSE.
SO THESE ARE BASICALLY TWO NATURAL, UH, PROGRESSIONS, UH, OF AN OWNER INTO A NEW SPACE.
HE MOVED INTO, UM, THE, THE IDYLLIC WESTCHESTER COUNTY FARMHOUSE TYPE OF THING.
IN HIS MIND, HE'S A CITY BOY, AND HE, HE WAS SO HAPPY AND EXCITED TO BE HERE.
AND HE BEGAN, UH, PREMATURELY TO MAKE IMPROVEMENTS TO HIS HOUSE, TO BEAUTIFYING THE ENTRANCE, UH, UH, CUTTING ALL TREES, UH, PICKING UP ALL BROKEN BRANCHES AND SO ON.
UH, I THINK HE GOT CARRIED AWAY, AND THERE WERE CERTAIN, NONE MAJOR IMPROVEMENTS, BUT MINOR, UM, EDGES, UH, BETTERMENTS AND WALLS, PATHS TO THE HOUSE, UM, UM, UH, CUTTING OF, OF TREES THAT WERE NOT LEGAL.
AND SO HE, HE WAS FOUND TO BE, OF COURSE, IN VIOLATION OF OUR RULES.
AND, UH, HE WAS, UH, HE WAS GIVEN A, UM, UM, YOU KNOW, UM, DO NOT COLLECT $200, DO NOT GO, UH, UH, TO THE GO CART.
AND, AND, AND OF COURSE, UH, WE HAD TO PRODUCE DRAWINGS INDICATING TO THE AUTHORITIES WHAT WAS THE EXTENT OF THE WORK THAT WAS DONE.
ONE OF THE, UM, TOGETHER WITH THE, THE ADDITIONAL WORK THAT HE DID ILLEGALLY, WHICH IS MINOR, IT WAS THE STRAIGHTENING OUT OF WALLS.
I THINK IF YOU GO TO THE NEXT, UH, THE NEXT PAGE, YOU CAN SEE THE NATURE OF, OF WHAT THE VIOLATIONS WERE.
UM, YOU COULD SEE THE UPPER RIGHT HAND SIDE, I MEAN, LEFT SIDE, THE UPPER LEFT HAND SIDE, YOU HAVE AN, AN A LITTLE TWO FOOT WALL THAT WAS EDGING, UH, AND IT WAS A HUNDRED, A HUNDRED PERCENT IMPROVEMENT TO WHAT WAS THERE, WHICH WERE COLLAPSING BRICKS AND MORTAR AND SO ON.
THE NEXT PICTURE ON THE RIGHT IS A SET OF STEPS TO THE HOUSE, UH, THAT HE HAD PURCHASED, AND HE WAS TRYING TO SLOWLY FIX THE, THE MIDDLE PICTURE IS AGAIN, A VIEW OF THE RETAINING WALL.
THE MIDDLE PICTURE ON THE LEFT, UH, THERE'S A, UH, UH, IT'S THE FRONT VIEW OF THE NICELY DONE RETAINING WALL, UM, UH, OF THE, OF THE, OF THE RAISED GARDEN.
AND THEN YOU GO TO THE EXTREME RIGHT TOP.
UM, YOU SEE THE ENCLOSED WALL THAT WAS DONE TO THE OPEN.
IT WAS AN OPEN, UH, UH, ROOF OVER PARK AREA.
AND, AND THE OWNER, UH, BASICALLY FILLED IT IN AND CONVERTED IT INTO A SECURE SPACE.
UM, UH, LIKE A TYPICAL GARAGE WITH FOUR WALLS.
UM, THE LOWER DRAW, UH, PICTURE SHOWS THE ENCLOSURE OF A COVERED, UH, PORCH THAT TURNED NOW INTO A, UH, A, UH, FAMILY ROOM, WHICH I HAVE PROVIDED DRAWINGS TO THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT.
UM, BUT THAT'S, THAT'S PART OF THE, UH, OF THE ILLEGAL ACTIVITIES THAT WERE DONE.
UM, THE LOWER RIGHT HAND PICTURE JUST SHOWS THE ACCESS POINT, UH, TO THE PROPERTY, SHOWING THAT IT GOES IMMEDIATELY DOWN FROM SO MILL RIVER ROAD INTO, INTO A HOLLOW WHERE THE HOUSE IS BUILT.
AND, UH, IT ALSO SHOWS TREES THAT WERE PLANTED.
THE EXTREME LEFT PICTURE IS HE, AGAIN, WHEN HE CAME IN, HE, HE SHIELDED HIMSELF FROM THE TRAFFIC BY, UH, PLANTING A SERIES OF ARVID, UH, IN THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY.
UM, GO BACK TO THE SECOND PRINT.
UM, I WANNA SHOW THE, THE BOARD WHERE, UH, THE OTHER ITEM THAT YOU MENTIONED, UM, ONE OF HIS PROPOSALS AS PART OF THE IMPROVEMENT OF THE PROPERTY, THERE'S, THERE'S A POOL THERE WITH A DECK AND A FENCE THAT IS RIGHT THERE THAT'S EXISTING.
AND THE HOUSE, OF COURSE, IS EXISTING.
SO THE GREEN PURPLE THAT YOU SEE THERE, THE, THE PURPLE IS ADDITIONAL PAVEMENT THAT IS BEING, UH, UH, PROPOSED IN ORDER TO ENTER.
AND, UH, UH, UH, WITH THE FRONTAGE OF A NEW GARAGE, A FOUR CAR GARAGE AS A SEPARATE ENTITY AT
[02:50:01]
A SEPARATE BUILDING FROM THE MAIN HOUSE.UH, THIS GENTLEMAN, UH, IS, IS A, UH, IS A MECHANIC IN THE CITY, AND HE COLLECTS, UH, CARS.
UH, SO HE, HE CLEARLY, HE SAYS, CAN I, CAN I HAVE, UH, A SEPARATE STRUCTURE? I SAID, YES, YOU CAN.
BUT, UM, IN THE AREA WHERE HE PLANT, HE PLANTS, TO PUT IT, THE, THE LEFT SIDE OF THE PROPERTY, UH, THE LEFT SIDE OF THE GREEN, UH, RECTANGLE IS IMPINGING ON STEEP SLOPE, UH, NOT MUCH, BUT THAT CORNER IS, IS, UM, UH, HAS TO BE EXCAVATED, AND THE EXCAVATION IS OCCURRING IN A, UH, PROBABLY, UH, 200 SQUARE FEET OF STEEP SLOPE.
UM, THE PURPLE AREA, AS I SAID, IS SIMPLY THE EXTENSION OF THE PAVEMENT OF, UH, UH, ASPHALT THAT, UH, GOES FROM THE EDGE OF THE PAVEMENT THAT IS EXISTING, THE BEGINNING OF THE PURPLE TO THE BEGINNING OF THE GREEN.
SO THE PURPLE IS ALL BRAND NEW, UH, PROPOSED, UH, PAVEMENT.
THERE ARE A FEW TREES THAT HAVE BEEN CUT, AND THERE IS ALREADY, UM, THIS WAS DONE BEFORE THE, THE NEW TREE CODE.
AND I BELIEVE AARON IS ALLOWING, UM, UH, THE PERMITTING TO GO, UH, AND TO BE, TO BE PROCESSED AS THE ORIGINAL, UH, TREE, TREE PERMIT PROCESS.
I DIDN'T, I DIDN'T ASK HIM, BUT I BELIEVE THAT THAT IS WHAT WAS TOLD TO ME.
UM, THE REST, THE REST OF THE DRAIN REFORM OF THAT IS, OF COURSE, FOR ENGINEERING REQUIREMENTS.
UH, THERE'S PLENTY OF, OF PERK IN THE AREA.
SO, IN, IN, IN, IN ESSENCE, WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO LEGALIZE IS, NUMBER ONE, THE MINOR IMPROVEMENTS THAT WERE DONE TO THE PROPERTY, UM, AS, UH, THAT WERE, THAT WERE PERFORMED WHEN HE FIRST BOUGHT THE PROPERTY, NOT KNOWING THAT HE COULDN'T DO IT, THERE WAS SOME TREES CUT, THERE WAS SOME, SOME, UH, DEBRIS PLACED ON THE LAND'S PROPERTY, WHICH HAS, UH, SINCE BEEN DISCUSSED AND WORKED OUT.
UH, WE HEARD THAT THE NEIGHBOR HAS PASSED AWAY SINCE.
AND, UH, UH, THE OWNER HAS, UH, HAS, UH, HAD ALREADY MADE AN AGREEMENT WITH HIM, HAD COME TO A PEACEFUL, UH, UH, UH, UH, ACCEPTANCE OF, OF RE UH, REFURBISHING HIS NEIGHBOR'S DAMAGE.
UH, THIS PICTURE THAT IS BEING SHOWN IS, UM, UM, AND, AND I DON'T KNOW WHO MADE THIS, UH, FILL, I DON'T KNOW IF IT WAS THE OWNER WHO WAS PREVIOUSLY DONE, BUT NEVERTHELESS, THIS WAS, UH, THIS AREA OF DISTURBANCE THAT IS SHOWN IN ORANGE IS BEYOND THE PROPERTY, UM, OF THE, OF THE PRESENT OWNER.
AND IT WAS DONE, UM, UH, TO, I BELIEVE, CREATE A FLATTER AREA AROUND, UH, THE REAR OF, OF THE PROPERTY.
I DON'T THINK, UH, IF, IF THE PRESENT OWNER DID IT, AND I, I DON'T KNOW, I DIDN'T ASK HIM.
UM, I THINK IT WAS, UH, HE DIDN'T KNOW WHERE HE WAS.
HE DIDN'T KNOW WHERE THE PROPERTY LINE WAS, AND HE EXTENDED, UH, HE FLATTENED OUT THE AREA, WHICH WAS ALL FILLED WITH GARBAGE AND JUNK, AND HE KIND OF CLEANED IT UP AND CLEANING IT UP.
UH, THIS IS THE, THE INVASION, UH, TO THE NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTY.
AND THAT'S WHAT PROMPTED THE NEIGHBOR TO TAKE, TAKE NOTICE AND, AND MAKE A, A STATEMENT TO, UH, THE PRESENT OWNER.
UH, UH, SINCE, AS I SAID, SINCE, SINCE THEN, THEY HAVE, THEY HAVE AGREED AND, UH, UH, OLD PEACE WAS MADE, AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE PERSONAL AGREEMENT WAS BETWEEN THE NEIGHBORS, UM, BUT, BUT EVERYTHING WAS, UH, WAS AGREED UPON.
I THINK HE, HE OFFERED TO, UH, TO PLANT, AND THE NEIGHBORS SAID, OKAY, NO PROBLEM.
AND, AND UNFORTUNATELY, THE, THE, UH, THE NEIGHBOR DIED.
THE OTHER REQUIREMENT, UM, THAT WE HAD TO WORRY ABOUT WAS THE BUFFER, UM, UH, DISTANCE BETWEEN THE NATURAL LOW POINT.
THERE'S A, THERE'S A INTERMITTENT BROOK, UH, IN THE AREA.
UH, IT'S MOSTLY DRY, BUT IT IS, IT EXISTS, AND IT IS A, IT IS A PATH FOR, FOR STORM ORDER, UH, TO, TO GO THROUGH THE PROPERTY.
AS YOU CAN SEE, WE JUST MISS THE, THE NEW CONSTRUCTION JUST MISSES, UH, THE 100 FOOT BUFFER TO THE EXISTING BOOK.
UH, IT IS THAT MR. MR TIS, UM, OBVIOUSLY WE WON'T BE ABLE TO FINISH YOUR APPLICATION THIS EVENING, SO WE DO, WE'LL HAVE TO CARRY IT OVER.
BUT THERE IS ONE, ONE, I THINK WITH ONE PIT OR ONE PIT OF CLARIFICATION, I LIKE TO SEE IT IS BECAUSE WE ARE LOOKING TO, UH, UH, APPROVE WHAT WAS ALREADY DONE, PLUS YOU HAVE FOR ADDITIONAL WORK.
MY QUESTION IS IN YOUR, UH, UH, DIAGRAMS OR, OR PROPOSAL, UH, FOR THIS, DOES IT INCLUDE WHAT'S THERE NOW, UH, IS, IS WHAT'S THERE NOW CONSISTENT
[02:55:01]
WITH THE CLE, IF THEY HAD GOTTEN A BUILDING CODE YES.WOULD THAT, WOULD WHAT HE DID, WOULD THAT BE CONSISTENT WITH THE BUILDING? YES.
SO WHAT HE DID IS CONSISTENT WITH THE BUILDING CODE, IS THAT HE JUST DOES NOT HAVE A PERMIT.
IS THAT WHAT, 100 100% WE HAVE TO LEGALIZE IT? THAT'S CORRECT.
BUT IT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE CURRENT CODE? YES.
THEN THE OTHER QUE THEN THE OTHER QUESTION IS, IF WE LOOK AT THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY THAT WE GET VERIFICATION THAT FROM THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT, THAT WHAT YOU DID IS CONSISTENT WITH THE CODES, THEN WE COULD LOOK AT, OKAY, WHAT ADDITIONAL WORK YOU WANT TO DO AND WHICH WOULD INCLUDE THE STEEP SLOPES AND EVERYTHING ELSE.
IS THAT, IS THAT THAT SUMMARY, THAT SUMMARY IS ACCURATE? YES.
WITH THAT SAID, WE NEED TO GET FEEDBACK FROM THE BUILDING'S DEPARTMENT VERIFYING WHAT I JUST SAID.
SO THEN WE CAN, UH, UH, PROCEED WITH THIS APPLICATION, WHICH WILL NOT BE TONIGHT.
SO WHAT WE HAVE TO DO IS TO PLAN ADDITIONAL WORK SESSION AND WE CAN, AND THEN, AND THEN AARON, YOU COULD
SO, YEAH, SO I WILL ENDEAVOR TO SPEAK WITH THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT TO FIND OUT IF, IF EVERYTHING THAT THEY HAD DONE WAS HAVE DONE ALREADY WAS LEGAL, JUST ABSENT OBTAINING A BUILDING PERMIT.
UM, I WILL NOTE THAT I HAVE, UH, WORKED WITH THE OWNERS WITH RESPECT TO TREES, UH, TREE REMOVAL AND TREE DAMAGE ON THE PROPERTY.
THEY TOOK DOWN SOME TREES THAT WERE CLEARLY HAZARD.
UH, WE WERE ABLE TO VERIFY THAT THE TREE FELL ON A CORNER OF THE HOUSE, UM, AND INTO THE POOL AREA AS WELL.
THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF HAZARDOUS TREES ON THE PROPERTY.
I DO AND INTEND TO SPEAK WITH THE OWNERS ABOUT THESE FIVE TREES REQUESTED FOR REMOVAL.
I'M NOT EVEN SURE ALL FIVE STILL EXISTS.
THIS PROPOSAL ORIGINALLY CAME BEFORE US IN 2019, AND THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF STORM DAMAGE WITH RESPECT TO TREES, UH, AND LEASE ON THIS PROPERTY AND OTHER PROPERTIES AS WELL.
UM, TO CLARIFY THE RECORD, WITH RESPECT TO TRUE REMOVAL AND LANDSCAPING, ONCE IT'S VERIFIED THAT IN FACT THERE ARE ADDITIONAL TREES TO BE REMOVED THAT NEED TO BE REMOVED ON THE PROPERTY, UM, THEY WOULD HAVE TO COMPLY WITH THE, WITH THE NEW REQUIREMENTS.
BUT WHAT I INDICATED TO MR. ES WAS HIS LANDSCAPING PROPOSAL WOULD APPEAR TO EXCEED THE REQUIREMENTS OUTLINED IN THE NEW, SO WE SHOULDN'T HAVE WITH COMPLIANCE, BUT THE FACT IS HE DOESN'T HAVE ANY APPROVALS IN PLACE UNDER THE OLD LAW THAT WOULD CARRY OVER INTO NOW.
THEREFORE, HE HAS TO MAKE THE REQUIREMENT TO RENEWAL LAW, UH, IN TERMS OF FILING APPROPRIATE PAPERWORK AND REPLACEMENT VALUES AND TERMS OF THAT NATURE, WHICH WILL WORK WITH HIM ON.
THAT'S ALL I WANTED TO STATE, AND I'M HAPPY TO GET THAT ADDITIONAL INFORMATION OFF TO THE BOARD AS SOON AS POSSIBLE FROM THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT.
THEY'LL BE BACK IN THE, OFF THEIR OFFICE HAS ENCLOSED, BUT THEY'LL BE BACK IN ON MONDAY.
SO BASED UPON, UH, UH, OBTAINING THAT INFORMATION, AT THAT POINT, I WILL SET THE, UM, THE SCHEDULE FOR THE NEXT WORK SESSION.
I CANNOT DO THAT NOW BECAUSE THERE'S TOO MANY OPEN QUESTIONS, BUT AS SOON AS WE GET ALL THE INFORMATION, I WILL DEFINITELY MOVE FORWARD, UH, RAPIDLY AND GET YOU BACK ON THE AGENDA.
WITH THAT, UH, I, UH, CAN WE SEE ABOUT GETTING A SITE VISIT TO THIS SITE? YES.
WITH THAT SAID, I WOULD LIKE TO, UH, GO INTO A VERY SHORT EXECUTIVE SESSION.
SO, BECAUSE WE ARE AT EIGHT O'CLOCK NOW, SO, UH, WE HAVE A PRACTICE OF A HARD, UH, UH, SHUT UP.
UNLESS ANY BOARD MEMBER OBJECTS TO US GOING TO A VERY SHORT EXECUTIVE SESSION.
WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THOUGH, THAT WE, UM, UH, ARE OFF, UH, CABLE, UH, TELEVISION AND, AND THE INTERNET.
BEFORE WE DO, I JUST WANNA HAVE THE MOTION AND THE VOTE TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION, AND I'LL VOTE THAT ON THE RECORD.
[03:00:01]
DO THIS.