* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting. [ FINAL TOWN OF GREENBURGH PLANNING BOARD GREENBURGH TOWN HALL AGENDA WEDNESDAY, July 21, 2021 – 7:00 P.M. Meetings of the Planning Board will be adjourned at 10:00 p.m. ] [00:00:03] OKAY. UH, GOOD EVENING AND WELCOME TO THE WEDNESDAY, JULY 21ST MEETING OF THE PLANNING BOARD. I ASKED, UH, DEPUTY SCHMIDT TO GLOBAL WORLD, MR. DESAI. HERE, MR. HAY? HERE. MR. SIMON. HERE. MR. . HERE NOTE FOR THE RECORD THAT BOARD MEMBERS MICHAEL GOLDEN, HUGH SCHWARTZ AND JOHANN SNAGS ARE NOT PRESENT THIS EVENING. HOWEVER, WE HAVE A LEGAL QUORUM TO CONDUCT THE MEETING, SO WE WILL PROCEED. UH, THE FIRST THING ON THE AGENDA AT THE MINUTES OF JULY 7TH, 2021. UM, I HAVE A COMMENT ON MY, THE VERY FIRST PART THAT REFERS TO A COMMENT I MADE, UH, IN TERMS OF SETTING THE MEETINGS, UH, FUTURE MEETINGS AT 7:00 PM BUT I DID ADD TO THAT COMMENT THAT, UH, IF VIRTUAL MEETINGS ACCESS BECOMES AVAILABLE, THE PLANNING BOARD WILL REVIEW THE STARTING TIME. NO, NO OBLIGATION TO CHANGE THE TIME, THE, UH, STARTING TIME, BUT JUST IF VIRTUAL MEETINGS COME AVAILABLE, WE'LL DISCUSS WHETHER OR NOT WE SHOULD. SO WE'LL ADD. THAT WAS THE COMMENT I MADE. WE WILL ADD THAT. THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS TO THE MINUTES OF, UH, JULY 7TH? IF THERE ARE NO OTHER COMMENTS, I, UH, I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE ACCEPT THE MINUTES AS MODIFIED. DO I HAVE A SECOND? SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. OKAY. UNDER WITH NO EX, UH, ABSTENTIONS OR OBJECTIONS, UH, MINUTES APPROVED. UM, THE NEXT THING ON THE AGENDA IS A CORRESPONDENCE. UH, AS YOU KNOW, WELL, YOU MIGHT BE FAMILIAR THAT THE ZONING, UH, THE PLAIN BOARD, UH, MADE, UH, AN APPEAL OF THE BUILDING'S, UM, INSPECTOR'S DECISION. I UNDERSTAND THAT, UH, THE, THE DECISION WAS MADE AND THE WRITEUP IS FORTHCOMING. I THOUGHT THE WRITEUP WOULD BE AVAILABLE THIS EVENING, BUT SINCE IT IS NOT AVAILABLE, AND I HAVE NOT READ IT, I'LL MAKE NO COMMENT REGARDING IT, AND WE'LL WAIT TO WE RECEIVE THE ACTUAL DOCUMENT, AND I WILL HAVE THAT ON THE AGENDA NOTE FOR THE NEXT MEETING FOR ANY DISCUSSION FROM OUR PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS. UM, OKAY. UM, IS THERE NO OTHER, THERE'S NO OTHER CORRESPONDENCE THAT, UH, I'M AWARE OF. OKAY. SO THE NEXT THING, ONLY GENERAL WILL BE THE PUBLIC HEARING IN THAT YOU SEE THE STATEMENT THAT WE MAKE REGARDING THE PUBLIC HEARING. WE ASK THAT YOU ABIDE BY A STATEMENT, UH, AND, AND, UM, DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING, WE DO NOT HAVE A TIME LIMIT ON WHAT IS SAID, BUT I, I WILL USE MY DISCUSSION AND I ASK YOU TO BE CONCISE. STAY ON TOPIC. DO NOT REPEAT WHAT SOMEONE ELSE HAD SAID. IF YOU AGREE WITH THEM, YOU JUST SAY, I AGREE WITH WHAT MR. SO-AND-SO, AND MRS. SO-AND-SO SAID. AND, UH, AND THAT WILL BE RECORDED IF YOU HAVE SOMETHING ADDITIONAL TO SAY, YOU SAY, I AGREE WITH WHAT WAS PREVIOUSLY SAID, AND THEN YOU COULD ADD ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. SO I ASKED YOU NOT TO REPEAT SOMETHING THAT'S ALREADY IN THE RECORD, JUST SAY YOU AGREE WITH IT, UH, OR YOU DON'T AGREE WITH IT. OKAY. UM, WITH THAT SAID, BEFORE WE OFFICIALLY, UH, START THE PUBLIC HEARING, WE HAVE TO TAKE ATTENDANCE AGAIN. SO IT'LL BE REGISTERED IN THE, IN THE, IN THE RECORDING OF THE, OF THE PUBLIC HEARING THAT, UH, ATTENDANCE OF THE PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS. SO WE HAVE TO TAKE ATTENDANCE ONE MORE TIME. YES. MR. SI? MR. DESAI? HERE. MR. HAY? HERE. MR. SIMON? HERE. MR. F*G, HERE. NOTE AGAIN FOR THE RECORD THAT MR. GOLDEN, MR. SCHWARTZ AND MR. SNAGS ARE NOT PRESENT. OKAY. AND BEFORE YOU START, MR. SHELLEY, UM, I AM GOING TO, BECAUSE [00:05:01] AGAIN, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT'S SOMEWHAT NEW FOR US, COMING BACK WITH MASKS. I'M GONNA GO BACK AND CHECK IN THE OTHER ROOM JUST TO MAKE SURE EVERYONE'S MICS ARE COMING CLEARLY, BUT AARON OKAY. DO THE INTRO. UH, SO THE FIRST THING ON THE AGENDA IS PB 2112. I ASKED, UH, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER SCHMIDT TO INTRODUCE THE APPLICATION AS CHAIR. AND SIMON INDICATED CASE NUMBER PB 21 DASH 12 LICHEN LOCATED AT 85 AND 89 HILLCREST ROAD, PO HARTSDALE IN THE R 21 FAMILY RESIDENCE DISTRICT. THE APPLICANT SEEKS A PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION FOR A PROPOSAL CONSISTING OF THE RE SUBDIVISION OF TWO EXISTING LOTS INTO ONE LOT FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONSOLIDATING THE PARCELS TAX PARCEL. 8.2582 DASH 16 KNOWN AS 89. HILLCREST ROAD CONTAINS A ONE FAMILY RESIDENCE WITH RELATED IMPROVEMENTS AND CONSISTS OF APPROXIMATELY 63,193 SQUARE FEET. TAX PARCEL, 8.2 50 DASH 180 2 DASH 17, KNOWN AS 85 HILLCREST ROAD CONTAINS MINOR IMPROVEMENTS IN LANDSCAPING, SUCH AS A PERGOLA AND A FOUNTAIN, AND CONSISTS OF APPROXIMATELY 25,000 999 97 SQUARE FEET. NO SITE WORK IS PROPOSED. AS PART OF THIS APPLICATION, STAFF HAS PREPARED A DRAFT SEEKER DETERMINATION FOR THE BOARD'S CONSIDERATION BEFORE YOU OFFICIALLY OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE PROJECT. THIS PROJECT DOES QUALIFY AS AN UNLISTED ACTION UNDER SEEKER, AND WE HAVE, AS I MENTIONED, PREPARED A DRAFT NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE BOARD'S CONSIDERATION. WELL, UM, ALTHOUGH WE, WE, UH, JUST GOT THIS, UH, UM, DOCUMENT, IT'S A STRAIGHTFORWARD, SIMPLE DOCUMENT, UH, WHAT, WHICH I THINK WE COULD JUST SPEND A FEW MINUTES, UH, REVIEWING IT BECAUSE IT IS VERY STRAIGHTFORWARD, UH, SIMILAR TO THE DOCUMENTS THAT WE HAVE SEEN OVER THE YEARS. THERE'S NO SPECIAL CONDITIONS OR ANYTHING IN THIS PARTICULAR DOCUMENT. SO, UH, I SEE NO REASON WHY WE CANNOT DO THE SEEKER ON THIS APPLICATION RIGHT NOW IF ALL THE MEMBERS ARE PREPARED TO VOTE ON IT. SURE. GO AHEAD. OKAY. UH, SO THE FIR THE FIRST, UH, SEEK VOTE IS DECLARE THIS A UNLISTED ACTION. SO MOVED. GO AHEAD. YES. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. AND, AND THE SECOND VOTE WE HAVE TO TAKE IS THE NOTICE OF, UH, OF A NEGATIVE, UH, DECLARATION. SO MOVED. SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. OKAY. I WOULD ASK THE APPLICANT TO THE APPLICANT OR THE APPLICANT REPRESENTATIVE TO IDENTIFY THEMSELVES AND, AND SPEAK TO THE APPLICATION IN FRONT OF US. GOOD EVENING. GOOD EVENING, MR. CHAIRMAN. I DON'T KNOW IF THIS, YES, SIR. THERE YOU GO. SORRY. THERE YOU GO. GOOD EVENING, MR. CHAIRMAN. MEMBERS OF THE BOARD, MY NAME IS STEVEN ELLI FROM VAN RUSO, KURT SCHWARTZ AND CRITO ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT. THIS MATTER INVOLVES AN APPLICATION TO THE PLANNING BOARD FOR SUBDIVISION APPROVAL WITH RESPECT TO PROPERTY COMMONLY KNOWN AS 85 AND 89 HILLCREST ROAD. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED WITHIN AN R 21 FAMILY RESIDENCE DISTRICT. THE APPLICANT WILL PURCHASE BOTH LOTS IN MAY, 2012 UNDER ONE DEEDED AND LIVES THERE AS THEIR PRIMARY RESIDENCE. WISH TO CONSOLIDATE THE TWO LOTS INTO A SINGLE LOT FOR ALL PURPOSES. EIGHT NINE HILLCREST, WHICH IS LOT 16, CONSISTS OF 1.45 ACRES AND CONTAINS THE TWO STORY, ONE FAMILY RESIDENCE TOGETHER WITH THE DETACHED GARAGE. 85 HILLCREST, WHICH IS LOT 17, CONSISTS OF 0.6 ACRES AND CONTAINS AS FAR AS IMPROVEMENTS ARE CONCERNED, THE FOUNTAIN AND THE PERLA AS ALREADY MENTIONED, THE TOTAL AREA OF THE TOOL LOTS AS COMBINED WOULD BE 2.05 ACRES. THE APPLICANT IS NOT PROPOSING ANY PHYSICAL CHANGES, UH, WITH RESPECT TO THE PROPERTY OR THE STRUCTURES AND IMPROVEMENTS. SO NO WORK IS BEING REQUESTED AND WILL BE PERFORMED IN CONNECTION WITH THIS APPLICATION. UH, PUBLIC NOTE FOR THE RECORD, THE PUBLIC NOTICE WAS SENT AND SIGNED THAT WAS POSTED AT THE PROPERTY, AND THIS INFORMATION WAS PROVIDED TO DEPUTY COMMISSIONER SCHMIDT. UM, IN ADDITION, JUST TO CIRCLE BACK ON A REQUEST OR A COMMENT THAT WAS MADE AT THE, AT THE, UM, [00:10:01] WORKSHOP, WE DID ENDEAVOR TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT THIS LOT WAS, UM, SEPARATED AT THE COUNTY LEVEL. UM, TOGETHER WITH, UM, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, UH, SCHMIDT AND MR. BURTON. UM, COLLECTIVELY, WE WERE NOT ABLE TO CONFIRM WITH ANY DEGREE OF CERTAINTY WHETHER OR NOT AT THE COUNTY LEVEL, UM, THESE TWO LOTS WERE TWO OR, OR ONE. SO THE, THE IDEA WAS, UH, GIVEN THAT AND THE INVESTIGATION DONE THIS FAR, WE THOUGHT THE APPLICANT, UM, WISHES TO PROCEED WITH THE APPLICATION. THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS, UH, APPLICATION BY MEMBERS OF THE BOARD? YOU JUST ANSWERED MY QUESTION, . OKAY. DOES ANYONE IN THE PUBLIC WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS APPLICATION? PLEASE COME FORWARD AND IDENTIFY YOURSELF. YOU'LL GO, YOU'LL COME UP TO THE LECTER AND SPEAK INTO THE MICROPHONE, SIR. THANK YOU. JUST MAKE SURE YOU SPEAK IN MARK OPOLIS. YEAH, PETE, YOU CAN PICK IT UP. I PICKED UP THE PORT OF MARKOPOULOS, UH, RESIDENT AT 34 MAPLE AVENUE IN DALE, THAT RIGHT DOWN THE STREET. I'M JUST CURIOUS AS TO, AND I DON'T REALLY KNOW IF THIS IS TRUE OR NOT, WHETHER THIS PROPERTY CAN BE USED FOR COMMERCIAL PURPOSES BECAUSE, OR IT'S, UH, IT'S AN R 20. SO THE ONLY COMMERCIAL WOULD BE WHAT COMMERCIAL? AND THAT WOULD BE, I, OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, I, I DON'T RECALL LIKE MAYBE A DOCTOR'S OFFICE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, BUT ANYTHING THAT'S, THAT WOULD BE PERMITTED, UH, AS R 20, WHICH WOULD, IT'S STILL NOW, THERE'S NO CHANGE IN THE, THE ZONING. OKAY. OKAY. SO, UH, IT'S, IT'S, IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT, THERE'S NO, THERE'S NO POSSIBLE USE FOR THIS OTHER THAN FOR RESIDENTIAL PURPOSES, WHAT'S EVER DEFINED UNDER RESIDENTIAL PURPOSES. IT'S NOT CHANGING THE ZONING DESIGNATION WHATSOEVER. AND IS IT GOING TO INCREASE THE, UH, TRAFFIC IN ANY WAY? NO, ALL THIS IS NO. IS C IS, THERE'S A LAT LINE BETWEEN THE TWO. UH, MAYBE AARON CAN JUST SH SHOW IT ON THERE. YEAH. BETWEEN THE TWO PROPERTIES. AND IT'S ESSENTIALLY ELIMINATING THAT LAT LINE. YEAH, THAT'S ALL'S NORMAL CONSTRUCTION. A NUT CHANGING IN THE ZONING OF THE PROPERTY IS STILL R 20 AND, AND IT'LL CONTINUE TO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF R 20 RESIDENTIAL 20 ZONE. AND WHAT'S, WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF THIS, UH, SUBDIVISION REQUEST? I WILL LET THE APPLICANT, IF WHAT, SIR, IF YOU'RE, IF YOU HAVE ANY MORE QUESTIONS, YOU'LL SAY THEM NOW. IF NOT, THEN WELL, I'M FINE. I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHETHER THERE'S ANY REASON FOR ME TO BE, UH, CONCERNED ABOUT THIS BECAUSE, UH, I, I KNOW FROM BAD EXPERIENCE THAT, UH, RIGHT DOWN THE STREET FROM ME WITHOUT ANY NOTICE, EVEN THOUGH THEY SAID THAT THEY SENT NOTICE, THEY, UH, THIS BOARD HAS APPROVED, UH, THE BUILDING OF A NEW HOUSE, WHICH WE ONLY FOUND OUT ONCE THE SUBDIVISION WAS APPROVED, WHICH MADE ME VERY CONCERNED THAT THINGS COULD BE DONE THAT, UH, WE DON'T KNOW ABOUT. SO THAT'S WHY I'D WANT TO KNOW AT LEAST THE INTENT OF, OKAY. SO WE'LL LET THE APPLICANT BEFORE YOU GO, BEFORE YOU GO THOUGH, CAN YOU SPELL YOUR NAME FOR THE REPORTER? M O R F AS IN FRANK, O P AS IN PETER, O U L O S. FIRST NAME MARK, M A R K. THANK YOU. UH, UH, FOR, JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, HOW LONG AGO WAS THIS DONE? YOU SAID THAT IT WAS A COUPLE YEARS AGO. I REMEMBER I WAS ON THE BOARD AT THE TIME. YEAH, THAT WAS ON NA AVENUE. THAT'S WHICH INFURIATED ME BECAUSE, UH, I NEVER RECEIVED THE SAME NOTICE THAT I JUST RECEIVED TO, UH, LAST WEEK. AND, AND, AND YET I'M TOLD THAT THAT NOTICE WAS SENT AND, UH, THE NEIGHBORS HERE AND, AND ALL THE OTHER NEIGHBORS ON MY BLOCK ALSO SAID THEY NEVER RECEIVED THIS NOTICE. SO BECAUSE OF THAT, UH, I'M NOW VERY CONCERNED ABOUT ANYTHING THAT HAPPENS IN THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY. I, WE, WE, WE UNDERSTAND. OKAY. OKAY. BUT I, I WOULD, RIGHT. OKAY. THAT'S A, THAT'S A VERY POINT I WOULD LIKE THE APPLICANT. AND, AND IF YOU, UH, AARON CAN SORT THAT, THE LETTERS DID GO OUT EVERYONE WITHIN 500 FEET. AND DO WE HAVE DOCUMENTATION TO THAT FACT FOR THIS PROJECT? ABSOLUTELY. OKAY. FOR THE LAST ONE FOR THIS PROJECT, AN ADDITION ABOUT MAYBE TWO, THREE YEARS AGO, AND RECOGNIZING CONCERNS OF, OF NEIGHBORS THAT THE APPLICANT HAS TO POST A SIGN ON THE LOAN. SO AS YOU PASS THAT PROPERTY, [00:15:01] AS AN ADDITIONAL WAY OF NOTIFYING THE NEIGHBORS THAT AN APPLICATION IS BEFORE US AND MAY SHOULD HAVE BEEN. AND, UH, UH, THERE WASN'T, I DON'T THINK IT WAS IN EFFECT AT THAT. IT WAS NOT IN EFFECT AT THAT TIME, AND I KNOW THAT THERE WAS NO SIGN. OKAY. I'M SAYING FOR NOW, BECAUSE YOU SAID THAT, WELL, THE DAMAGE IS DONE AS MUCH. NO, NO, NO, NO. WE, WE DON'T SAY THE DAMAGE IS DONE AND FORGET ABOUT IT. IF THE DAMAGE IS DONE, WE MAKE SURE WE TAKE, UH, APPROPRIATE STEPS TO, UH, ELIMINATE IT IF AT, AT AN, AT LEAST . SO MY QUESTION GOES BACK TO THE CURRENT APPLICATION, WHETHER OR NOT THE RESIDENCE WERE NOTICE OR WHETHER OR NOT THAT SIGN WAS PLACED ON THE MORNING OF THE PROPERTY? YES. OKAY. OKAY. OKAY. SO, OKAY. SO, MR. ELLI, WHY DON'T YOU ADDRESS THE QUESTION? THANK YOU. YOU'RE WELCOME. YES. UM, IN ADDITION, UM, ALSO FOR THE RECORD, THE, UH, AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE WITH RESPECT TO THE MANUAL OF THE NOTICE TO THE NEIGHBORS WAS ALSO PROVIDED TO THE TOWN AND IS IN THE TOWN'S RECORDS AS WELL. UM, SO THAT, THAT FURTHER EXISTS. UM, WITH RESPECT TO THE REASON BEHIND IT, UM, THE, THERE ARE TWO THERE, THERE'S ONE BEING TWO SEPARATE LOTS, 16 AND 17, EVEN GETTING TWO SEPARATE TAX BILLS. EVERYTHING'S , EVERYTHING'S BEEN DOUBLE. THEY JUST WANNA CLEAN UP THE PROPERTY, CONSOLIDATE IT, ONE, ONE TAX LOT, NOT TWO. AND THERE'S NO OTHER REASON FOR REQUESTS OTHER THAN THAT. IT'S VERY STRAIGHTFORWARD. OKAY. SO ABSOLUTELY NO WORK IS BEING DONE. NO CHANGE IN THE ZONING, NO CHANGE IN THE USES THAT CAN GO THERE. IT'S A LINE THAT'S ONLY ON MAPS IS GOING TO BE ELIMINATED, SO THAT THEY ALREADY OWN BOTH PARCELS. IT'S NOW GONNA BE CONSIDERED ONE INSTEAD OF TWO SEPARATE. CORRECT? CORRECT. CORRECT. AND IT'S CORRECT THAT THEY RECENTLY ACQUIRED THE PROPERTY, IS THAT RIGHT? TWO THOU 2012 THE PROPERTY WAS PURCHASED? YES. NOT SO RECENT. SOMEWHAT RECENT. ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE PUBLIC ON REGARDING THIS APPLICATION? ANYONE WISH ELSE, WISH TO SPEAK? NO. IF THERE ARE NO OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE PUBLIC, NO ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS FROM, WELL, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO ASK AARON, IS IT POSSIBLE TO GO BACK AND CHECK IF THERE IS AN AFFIDAVIT FOR THE MAILING, UM, REGARDING THE, THE PROJECT THAT THE RESIDENT BROUGHT UP ON MAPLE AVENUE? I KNOW WE HAD A COUPLE WORK SESSIONS ON, I'M SURE WE MUST HAVE HAD A PUBLIC HEARING. WE DID. WE CERTAINLY DID. SO SEPARATE FROM THIS PROJECT, THE OTHER PROJECT ON MAPLE AVENUE THAT THE RESIDENT MENTIONED, UM, I BELIEVE I DO KNOW THE CASE NUMBER OFFHAND. I CERTAINLY REMEMBER THE PROJECT, AND WE CAN CHECK OUR RECORDS ON THAT. I CAN REPORT BACK TO THE BOARD. OKAY. THANK YOU. I THINK THE HOUSE IS PRETTY MUCH COMPLETED AT THIS POINT. NO. WE'LL, THANK YOU. YEAH, WE WILL EITHER THROUGH EMAIL OR THROUGH CORRESPONDENCE, UH, LET THE BOARD KNOW WHAT WE SIGNED OUT ABOUT THAT OTHER PROJECT. OKAY. THAT, THAT WAS THE NAKAMURA SUBDIVISION ON MAPLE AVENUE. OKAY. ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? PLEASE, WHEN YOU DO FIND OUT, PLEASE, YOU COME UP TO THE MICROPHONE. WHEN YOU DO FIND OUT, NOW, WAIT TILL YOU GO ON THE MICROPHONE SO EVERYONE CAN HEAR YOU. WHEN YOU DO FIND OUT THAT INFORMATION IS IMPOSSIBLE TO EMAIL ME. SO LET ME KNOW WHAT THE STORY IS, BECAUSE I'M JUST VERY CURIOUS HOW ALL OF MY NEIGHBORS, INCLUDING MYSELF, HAD NO KNOWLEDGE OF THIS UNTIL IT WAS TOO LATE. I MEAN, YES, FOR ME NOW, TO BE ASKING THE BOARD TO KNOCK DOWN A HOUSE THAT'S A $1.3 MILLION HOUSE IS PRETTY UNFAIR AND UNREASONABLE. BUT I JUST FEEL TO PREVENT THIS FROM HAPPENING AGAIN, UH, THAT YOU SHOULD LOOK INTO THIS FURTHER AND, AND UNDERSTAND WHY AND HOW THIS COULD POSSIBLY HAVE HAPPENED. OKAY, SURE. AND YOU, AND YOU DESERVE AN ANSWER. WE WANT. I WE DESERVE AN ANSWER. WE WANT, YOU KNOW, UH, UH, AND I, SO TO GIVE YOU SOME ASSURANCE THAT THESE ARE SOME OF THE THINGS WE RECOGNIZE, AND THAT'S WHY WE WENT TO THE EXTRA STEP OF POSTING THE SIGN ON THE LAWN. BUT WHAT IS, UH, HELPFUL TO US ANYTIME A RESIDENTS FEEL THAT THAT PROCESS COULD BE FURTHER IMPROVED OR WE WELCOME THAT? WELL, AGAIN, I, I JUST, FOR THE RECORD, IT WASN'T POSTED ON THE LAWN FOR THIS PARTICULAR INSTANCE. UH, AND, AND IF YOU COULD SEND IT TO MOPS@GMAIL.COM, THAT'S, CAN YOU SPELL THAT FOR ME? M AS IN MARKOPOULOS, THE SPELLING OF MY LAST NAME, M O R F AS IN FRANK, O P AS IN PETER, O U L O S, AT GMAIL.COM. THAT'D BE GREAT. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR INPUT. THANK YOU FOR [00:20:01] YOUR CONSIDERATION. I APPRECIATE IT. OKAY. ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION? IF NOT, I WILL, UH, ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC CARE AND TO KEEP THE RECORD OPEN UNTIL, WHAT IS THAT DATE? JULY 28TH. JULY 28TH. UH, BETWEEN NOW AND JULY 28, IF THE PUBLIC HAS ANY MORE COMMENTS, THEY COULD SUBMIT THAT IN WRITING AND THAT WILL BECOME PART OF A RECORD AND A CONSIDERATION WHEN WE MAKE A DECISION ON THIS PROJECT. THANK YOU. AND WE JUST NEED A VOTE ON THE CLOSURE. WELL, WE DIDN'T ACTUALLY HAVE A MOTION, DID WE? I, THAT'S WHAT I, SO I MOVE THAT WE THANK YOU. CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, KEEP THE RECORD OPEN UNTIL JULY 28TH. IS THAT CORRECT? THANK YOU. SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. OKAY. THANK YOU. AND YOU WANNA TAKE ONE MORE MOTION? OH, YEAH. ANOTHER, A MOTION. OKAY. I, I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING COMPONENT. YEP. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. OKAY. SO WE'LL GO BACK INTO A WORK SESSION AND, UH, FIRST, UH, HARRY, CAN WE MAYBE IN THE FUTURE HAVE PEOPLE SEND YOU A PHOTO OF THE SIGN THAT THEY PUT UP ON THEIR THEY DO PROPERTY. THEY DO SEND YOU A PICTURE? YES. OKAY. AND THIS APPLICANT DID SEND US THAT PHOTO. OKAY. THANK YOU. YOU'RE WELCOME. AND WE CHECK AND, AND WE DO TRY TO CHECK BEFORE WE GO ON PUBLIC HEARING TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYTHING SIGN IS SET. WE DO GET THOSE, YEAH. OKAY. THANK YOU. OKAY. OKAY. UM, THE NEXT THING IS PB 1922. I BELIEVE IT'S 32. 32. 32. UM, UH, ON THAT YOU HAVE A LETTER OF FREE, UH, PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION, UH, APPROVAL, UH, ON IT. IS THERE ANYTHING THAT, UH, NOW I DRAW YOUR ATTENTION TO THREE THINGS THAT ARE SITE SPECIFIC IN THIS APPLICATION. IF YOU LOOK AT FOUR, UH, UM, THAT THE, THAT THE APPLICA, THE APPLICANT AND ALL SUCCESSES AND INTERESTS, UH, HAVE AGREED TO AND SHALL SUBMIT ELEVATION PLANS FOR THE PROPOSED NEW HOUSE TO THE PLANNING BOARD FOR REVIEW BEFORE ANY BUILDING PERMIT IS ISSUED ON THE NEW HOUSE. THE PURPOSE OF WHICH IS TO ENSURE THE DESIGN OF THE NEW HOUSE DOES NOT NEGATIVELY IMPACT THE CHARACTER OF THE EXISTING HOUSE TO RETAIN, REMAIN ON WHAT? SEVEN B, UH, THAT STATES BACK TO 1800, AND IT'S LOCATED AT THE PROPERTY KNOWN AT TWO 50 FORT HILL ROAD. AND I WOULD, UM, UH, ASK THAT, UH, THE APPLICANT, UH, IS IN CONTACT WITH THE, THE HISTORICAL LANDMARK AND PRESERVATION, UH, BOARD. AND I THINK THERE ARE SOME SPECIFIC, UH, THINGS THAT THE APPLICANT AND, AND THE LANDMARKS BOARD SHOULD BE LOOKING AT. AND THERE'S A PART OF THE, IN THE CODE REFERRING TO THAT. AND I THINK IT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO GIVE THAT TO THE APPLICANT. SO THE PART THAT YOU READ, UH, SO THE, THIS APPLICANT HAS PREVIOUSLY MET WITH THE HISTORIC AND LANDMARKS PRESERVATION BOARD, AND THEY FOLLOWED BOTH THAT PROCEDURE. SO THE PROCEDURE FOLLOWED IN THAT CASE WAS, UM, THE APPLICANT IN RECENTLY ACQUIRED THE PROPERTY YES. IN THIS CASE, WITHIN THE LAST YEAR OR TWO. RIGHT. UHHUH . AND HE ALSO SOUGHT TO MAKE OR RENOVATE, I SHOULD SAY, THE EXISTING HOME ON TWO 50 FORT HILL ROAD. RIGHT. THE, THE RESIDENCE THAT DATES BACK TO THE 18 HUNDREDS. RIGHT. SO TOWNS STAFF REFERRED THE PROJECT OVER TO THE HISTORIC AND LANDMARKS PRESERVATION BOARD. AT THE SAME TIME, WE ALSO NOTIFIED THE HISTORIC AND LANDMARKS PRESERVATION BOARD THAT THE APPLICANT SOUGHT A SUBDIVISION. OKAY. SO THE HISTORIC BOARD WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FACT THAT THIS GENTLEMAN WAS SEEKING THE SUBDIVISION, AND ALSO THE FACT THAT HE WAS PROPOSING SOME RENOVATIONS AND IMPROVEMENTS TO THE EXISTING SITE THAT INCLUDED, YOU KNOW, CHANGING WINDOWS, UM, PUTTING IN A, A NEW GARAGE. AND THERE WAS DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT. SO THE HISTORIC BOARD SEEN THAT. I NOTIFIED AGAIN, THE HISTORIC BOARD OF THE FACT THAT THE PLANNING BOARD WAS [00:25:01] MOVING FORWARD WITH THE PUBLIC HEARING PRIOR TO LAST MEETING, ASKED IF THERE WERE ANY COMMENTS, AND THEY HAD REVIEWED THE PLANS AND WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT, YOU KNOW, THERE WAS SOME CONSISTENCY SIMILAR TO WHAT WE ADDED IN. OH, OKAY. THE CONDITION THAT THE APPLICANT AT THE TIME, WHOEVER IT IS, BUILDS OR PROPOSES TO CONSTRUCT A NEW HOME ON THIS NEW LOT, UH, COME BACK BEFORE, AND THAT THEIR ARCHITECTURAL ELEVATION PLANS BE, UH, PROVIDED. OKAY. BECAUSE O ONE OF THE ISSUES THAT THE PLANNING BOARD HAD IS THAT, UH, THE, THE SECTION OF THE CODE, WHETHER OR NOT THAT THEY WERE BEING, UH, UM, SUFFICIENTLY ADHERED TO BY BOTH THE APPLICANT AND, UH, AND, UH, AND THE BOARD AND, AND, UH, JUST TO GET THAT CODE TO REMIND THEM THAT THIS IS HOW IT SHOULD BE DONE, SO RIGHT. THEY'RE AWARE OF THAT, THEN THAT'S FINE. THEY ARE, AND IN THIS CASE, THE HISTORIC BOARD DID NOT SEEK TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE LANDMARKING OF THE STRUCTURE ON THE SITE, SO THEY DID NOT GO THROUGH THAT PROCESS OKAY. WITHIN THE CODE. OKAY, FINE. GOOD. YEAH. AND, AND THE OTHER TWO POINTS ABOUT, UH, IN THE FRONT WHEN I, THERE, I MADE THE COMMENT THAT THERE WERE BUSHES THAT RIGHT UNDER ON THE ROAD THAT COULD REDUCE YOUR LINE OF SIGHT. AND SO THEY AGREED TO CUT BACK THOSE BUSHES. AND I, UH, MICHAEL GOLDEN, OR YOU, AND, AND DEPUTY SCHMIDT ALSO WENT AT THE SITE, AND TOWARDS THE BACK, THERE'S A STONE WALL THAT HAD A LOT OF, OF PLANTS AND BUSHES ARE ASKED THAT, UH, THOSE BUSHES WOULD BE CUT BACK AND SO THE STONE WALL COULD BE MORE PROPERLY SEEN. YEAH. AND THERE, AND IN ADDITION, THERE WAS A, A LOT OF LANDSCAPING DEBRIS KIND OF DUMPED INTO THIS REAR AREA THAT TOOK AWAY FROM THE VISUAL APPEAL OF THAT WALL. SO THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY TO CLEAN THAT UP. AND, UH, I, THE APPLICANT'S, UH, AWARE OF IT, WILLING TO DO IT, BUT WE ALSO WANTED TO ADD THAT IN AS A CONDITION. OKAY. WITH THAT SAID, THERE ARE TWO VOTES WE HAVE TO TAKE, ONE FOR PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION AND THE OTHER FOR A TREE REMOVAL PERMIT. IF THERE ARE NO, YES. I'M SORRY TO INTERRUPT. UM, WE HO WE'RE GONNA HOLD OFF ON THE TREE REMOVAL UNTIL FINAL SUBDIVISION. YES. OKAY. SO YOU JUST HAVE TO TAKE A VOTE ON THE PRELIMINARY AT THIS TIME. OKAY. OKAY. ARE, IF THERE ARE NO ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS, UH, UH, ARE WE PREPARED TO TAKE A, A, A VOTE ON PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION? I, I THINK I HAVE A ONE QUESTION. IS IT THE ONE, THE WORDING IS ELEVATION PLANS OR WE DO SUBMIT, UH, THIS, THIS SORT OF, UH, IMPROVEMENT PLANS ALSO, OR JUST A WELL, WE CAN OBTAIN AT THE SAME TIME MAYBE A SITE PLAN, BUT, UM, THE, MY UNDERSTANDING WAS THAT THE BOARD WANTED TO SEE THAT THE NEW HOME AT ANY FUTURE TIME WHEN IT'S CONSTRUCTED, YOU KNOW, DOESN'T TAKE AWAY FROM THE HOME, THE EXISTING HOME ON THE PROPERTY. SO THE IMPORTANT CHARACTERISTIC WERE THE ARCHITECTURAL ELEVATIONS. BUT IF THE BOARD ALSO WANTS TO SEE, YOU KNOW, A SITE PLAN PER SE, WE CAN ADD THAT IN. I MEAN, ONLY CONCERN IS THAT WE ARE GONNA ASK, UH, SO THE FINAL SUBDIVISION WOULD HAVE THAT, OR I'M, I'M, I'M NOT CLEAR ABOUT THE, OKAY. GO FOR ONLY ELEVATION PLAN. I THINK WE SHOULD SAY PLANS OR, SO THERE WOULD BE AN OVERALL ELEVATION. THERE WOULD BE A SITE PLAN, BUT THE APPLICANT'S, YOU KNOW, THE, WHAT I DREW FROM IN PREPARING THIS CONDITION WAS A CASE THAT, UH, TOOK PLACE YEARS AGO IN EAST IRVINGTON MM-HMM. . AND, YOU KNOW, THERE WERE SOME OLDER HOMES IN THAT AREA, I BELIEVE SOME VICTORIAN HOMES. AND THE BOARD JUST SAID, HEY, LOOK, WE WANT YOU TO COME BACK. WE KNOW YOU'RE NOT GOING TO BUILD THIS HOME, BUT WHEN YOU SELL OFF THE LOT AND SOMEONE DOES COME IN TO BUILD, WE WANT TO SEE WHAT THIS HOME'S GOING TO LOOK LIKE TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S NOT OUT OF CHARACTER WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD. IT'S NOT A HISTORIC DISTRICT, IT WASN'T EVEN A HISTORIC RESIDENCE, UH, OR RESIDENCES NEARBY, BUT THEY JUST WANT, THE BOARD WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS WASN'T GOING TO STICK OUT LIKE A SORE THUMB. AND I THINK THAT WAS THE SIMILAR THOUGHT IN, IN THIS CASE, AND CORRECT KATE, IF I'M WRONG, IF THE SUBDIVISION IS APPROVED AND FINALIZED AND DOWN THE ROAD, THEY WANT TO BUILD A HOUSE, WE HAVE NO JURISDICTION OVER A SITE PLAN AS LONG AS THERE'S NOTHING THAT, UH, WOULD NORMALLY COME BEFORE THE BOARD. CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT. THAT'S, THERE'S NO SITE PLAN AND, YOU KNOW, A SIMPLE, UH, HOUSE. YEAH. SO THAT, THAT, THAT'S SORT OF HOW IT LOOKS IS TO ME, THE IMPORTANT THING. RIGHT. FROM A CHARACTER [00:30:01] OF THE COMMUNITY PERSPECTIVE. YOU KNOW, WE WE'RE BOUND BY SEEKER, AND SEEKER TALKS ABOUT COMMUNITY CHARACTER, AND THE BOARD HAS THE RIGHT TO ASK TO SEE WHAT THAT HOME WILL LOOK LIKE IN THE FUTURE AND TAKE A LOOK AT IT. AND THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE WRITTEN UP IN CONNECTION WITH THIS, UH, CONDITION. THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? I, I THINK, UH, WOULD IT BE BETTER IF IT'S ELEVATION DOESN'T, I MEAN ELEVATION PLAN, NOT VERY, WHAT WILL THE WORD PLAN DO, ADD OR SUBTRACT TO WHAT ALREADY? WELL, ELEVATION TO ME, IF YOU SIMPLY STATED PLANS THEN COULD BE TALKING ABOUT STORMWATER MANAGEMENT, WHICH IS REVIEWED BY A BUREAU OF ENGINEERING, UTILITY DRAWINGS, UH, CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS, FLOOR LAYOUT PLANS. I MEAN, IT'S A PRETTY BROAD TERM. SO LIKE ARCHITECTURAL RENDERINGS. ARCHITECTURAL, YEAH. TWO SPECIFIC MAYBE. WELL, YEAH, THAT WE, WE DON'T HAVE AN ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD. SO THAT'S, SO THAT BECOMES THERE WE HAVE VERY, VERY, UH, LIMITED, UM, OVERSIGHT IN THIS UNDER OUR, UNDER OUR TOWN CODE AND UNDER THE SUBDIVISION LAW. YEAH. WE'RE THIS THE MOST EXPANSIVE WORDING WE WE CAN USE? THIS WAS, OR MOST SPECIFIC, THIS WAS DISCUSSED AND REVIEWED WITH LEGAL AND YES, TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION. OKAY. AND BY LEGAL, I MEANT ME , BUT TECHNICALLY THERE IS NO ELEVATION, EITHER IT'S ELEVATIONS OR PLAN TECHNICALLY. SO ANYWAY, AFTER IT'S A LEGAL ISSUE, SO I'LL DEFER IT TO DAVID OKAY. WITH THAT. AND THAT'S IT. YEAH. I DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS. OKAY. WITH THAT SAID, UH, I'D LIKE TO TAKE A VOTE ON, UH, FOR APPROVAL OF THE PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION. I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE THE PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION. SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. OPPOSED? AND I CAN MAKE AN EFFORT AT THE TIME THAT SOMEONE COMES BEFORE THE BOARD IN THE FUTURE DOWN THE ROAD, THAT IF THEY'RE WILLING TO SHARE THOSE ADDITIONAL DRAWINGS. YEAH. I, I THINK RENDERING IS, IS PROBABLY MORE APPROPRIATE FOR IF, IF WE CAN ASK THEM TO DO THAT. OKAY. WELL, WE WE DON'T HAVE THAT LOOK. NO, WE, NO, NO, NO, NO. WHAT I'M SAYING, I'M ACTUALLY SAYING, LOOK, WHEN SOMEONE COMES AND THEY HAVE AN IDEA, THEY'RE GONNA SUBMIT SOMETHING TO THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT, WE'LL ASK THEM, YOU KNOW, AND IF ANYTHING THAT'S SUBMITTED TO THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT WE CAN SEE IS OPEN AND AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC, WE'LL BE HAPPY TO PROVIDE THE BOARD WITH THAT . OKAY, GOOD. GOOD. YOU MAY NOT BE ABLE TO, TO COMMENT ON IT, TO PROVIDE. OKAY. UH, THE NEXT THING ON THE BRENDA'S PAGE, TTB 2011 LEY SCHOOL, UH, WE HAVE A, UH, RECOMMENDATION, UH, TO THE BOARD THAT WAS SENT OUT, UH, TO EVERYONE. AND, UH, BEFORE WE VOTE ON IT, I WOULD LIKE TO ASK, IS THERE ANY MODIFICATION TO THE RECOMMENDATION TO THE PANEL BOARD ON APPLICATION TB 2011? SO I JUST WANTED TO NOTE THAT, UH, WE FEEL LIKE WE, THERE WERE SOME VERY GOOD COMMENTS MADE BY THE BOARD AND A GOOD DISCUSSION WITH THE APPLICANT. SITE VISITS, SMALL GROUP SITE VISITS WERE MADE. UH, WE ATTEMPTED TO CAPTURE EVERYTHING THAT THE BOARD HAD DISCUSSED WITHIN THIS DRAFT. I KNOW THAT THE APPLICANT'S, UH, PRESENT THIS EVENING AND MAY WANT TO SPEAK TO ONE OR MORE OF THE, UH, POINTS IN THE DRAFT. GO AHEAD, AARON. UH, PETER MCANDREW, HACKLEY SCHOOL. UM, JUST A POINT OF FACT IS THAT I DON'T THINK ANYBODY FROM GLENVILLE WAS THERE. THE FIRE DEPARTMENT REPRESENTATIVES WERE FROM THE VI FROM THE TERRYTOWN FIRE DEPARTMENT. OKAY. UNLESS GLENVILLE, I THINK GLENVILLE ISS IN GREENBURG, ISN'T IT? SO I WILL DOUBLE CHECK ON THAT. I DID HAVE A DISCUSSION WITH THE NEW, UH, CHIEF, UH, CHIEF MURPHY, AND SHE HAD INDICATED THAT THERE WAS A SITE MEETING, SO I'LL VERIFY HER. YEAH. SHE'S THE VILLAGE. I'LL VERIFY HER, UH, AFFILIATION. GREAT. THANK YOU. SO YOU HAD A QUESTION? YOU SOUND LIKE YOU'RE READY TO ASK A QUESTION. NO. OKAY. UH, UM, I, I HAVE, UH, FOR THE APPLICANT, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT. UH, IN, IN TERMS OF THIS, UH, RECOMMENDATION AT THE LAST MEETING, I, I, I TALKED ABOUT, UH, UH, AN ISSUE OF, UH, UH, SIDEWALKS. NOW, THE SIDEWALKS, UH, SOMETHING THAT THIS BOARD CANNOT MANDATE, AND IN ADDITION, THE SIDEWALKS WILL BE IN TARRYTOWN, WHICH IS OUTSIDE OF OUR, UH, UH, JURISDICTION. [00:35:01] UM, NEVER. I, I, SO I WOULD JUST RECOMMEND THAT WE ADD SOME WORD IN THAT, UM, THAT THE APPLICANT SHOULD BE ENCOURAGED BECAUSE THAT'S ALL WE CAN LEGALLY DO, THAT THE APPLICANT SHOULD BE ENCOURAGED TO WORK WITH THE VILLAGE OF TARRYTOWN AND CONSIDER THE POSSIBILITY OF INSTALLING SIDEWALK ALONG ALONG THE NORTH SIDE OF BENEDICT AVENUE. YEAH. FROM THE MAIN ENTRANCE DOWN TO MIDLAND AVENUE. YEAH. THAT'S, THAT'S, THAT'S IN TERRY'S HOUSE. WE HAVE NO JURISDICTION, BUT I THINK, UM, THEY SHOULD BE ENCOURAGED TO CONSIDER THAT. OKAY. WE CAN AMEND THE, UH, WE CAN ADD THAT AS AN ADDITIONAL BULLET POINT ON PAGE FOUR. MM-HMM. , THAT'S, THAT WAS MY ONLY COMMENT. SO ARE YOU READY FOR A VOTE? I THINK, UH, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE EVERY, EVERYONE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TO ABOUT THE RECOMMENDATION. NO, I THINK THAT'S, YEAH, I THINK IT COVERS ALL OF IT. THAT HANDICAP, UH MM-HMM. PARKING IT. OKAY. YEAH, THAT WAS THE ISSUE THAT YOU BROUGHT UP THOUGH, THE ONE WITH THE HANDICAP PARKING, WHICH I THOUGHT WAS AN EXCELLENT POINT. YEAH. ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU LOOKED AT THE DISTANCE THAT, UH, HANDICAP WOULD HAVE TO TRAVEL WITH, UH, WITH THE CURRENT DESIGN. SO I THINK THAT WAS A VERY GOOD INPUT. UH, WITH THAT SAID, UH, IF THERE ARE NO OTHER RECOMMENDATION ADJUSTMENTS WE SHOULD MAKE, I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE, UH, UH, APPROVE THE RECOMMENDATION WITH, UH, UH, APPROPRIATE, UH, AMENDMENT MADE REGARDING THE SIDEWALK. OKAY. SO A POSITIVE, IS IT POSITIVE? YEAH. YEAH. YES. SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. HAVE A GOOD NIGHT. UH, WE HAVE TWO NEW BUSINESS, UH, ITEMS ON THE AGENDA. THE FIRST IS PB 2112 FOUNTAIN HEAD APARTMENTS. YES. 2115. THANK YOU CHAIRPERSON SIMON. UH, SO THE NEXT CASE ON THE AGENDA IS PB 21 DASH 15, UH, KNOWN AS THE FOUNTAIN HEAD APARTMENTS LOCATED AT FOUNTAIN LANE OFF OF CENTRAL PARK AVENUE SOUTH PO. SCARSDALE. THE APPLICANT SEEKS AMENDED SITE PLAN APPROVAL INVOLVING A REQUEST FOR THE PLANNING BOARD TO CONSIDER AMENDING A CONDITION OF PRIOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL ASSOCIATED WITH THE SUBJECT PROPERTY UNDER CASE NUMBER PB 79 DASH ZERO ONE, WHICH REQUIRED THAT A SIX FOOT HIGH WOODEN FENCE BE PROVIDED ALONG THE WEST ENTIRE WESTERLY PROPERTY. LINE OF THE SUBJECT SITE REPRESENTATIVES ARE PRESENT THIS EVENING TO FURTHER DISCUSS THIS REQUEST WITH THE BOARD. I I HAVE A, A QUESTION BEFORE THEY COME UP. SO THIS WAS 1979, CORRECT? IT'S OBVIOUSLY A LONG TIME AGO. WHEN THERE'S A CONDITION LIKE THAT, IS IT ASSUMED THAT IT IS IN PERPETUITY INTO PERPETUITY? YES. SO IT'S, THEY DID DO THE CONSTRUCTION, BUT IT EXPECTS YOU TO MAINTAIN THAT AND REPLACE IT. YES. YES. OKAY. I JUST WANTED TO UNDERSTAND, AND, AND I'LL, I'LL CLARIFY THAT ALL ALSO. FIRST OF ALL, I DO RECOMMEND BECAUSE THERE WAS A PUBLIC HEARING FOR THAT, AND WE PROVIDE YOU WITH THE TRANSCRIPT THAT YOU READ THE TRANSCRIPT SO YOU CAN UNDERSTAND THE REASONS AND THE RATIONALE BOTH BACK AT THAT POINT AND, YOU KNOW, WHETHER THEY ARE RELEVANT, YOU KNOW, 40 PLUS YEARS LATER. SO YOU CAN CONSIDER THAT, UM, THE APPLICANT WILL MAKE THEIR, UM, UH, PRESENTATION. BUT, UH, GENERALLY YES, THOSE ARE THERE. IT'S NOT, UH, FOREIGN TO US THAT APPLICANT, UH, APPLICANT'S 10, 20, UH, YEARS DOWN THE LINE CAN COME TO US SOMETIMES AND ASK TO SEEK RELIEF IF THEY WANT TO. WE HAD THAT WITH RESPECT TO, UM, THE CONDOMINIUM OR CO-OPS THAT WERE ADJACENT TO, UH, THE ART STORE ON CENTRAL AVENUE WHERE THEY HAD AN EMERGENCY EXIT ISSUE A NUMBER OF YEARS BACK. STONE MANOR. STONE MANOR, THANK YOU. UH, OR STONE RIDGE MANOR. SO THAT'S, UM, YOU KNOW, CERTAINLY SOMETHING THAT HAPPENS, BUT THEY ARE BOUND BY, UM, AND A CONDITION UNLESS OR UNTIL THE PLANNING BOARD PROVIDES RELIEF, AND THAT'S WHAT THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING. OKAY. WITH THAT SAID, WOULD THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD AND SPEAK TO YOUR APPLICATION BEFORE THIS BOARD? [00:40:08] OKAY. AND JUST STATE YOUR NAME IN THE RECORD AND HAVE THE MICROPHONE UP CLOSE TO YOU. YEAH. JAMES CARELLI, OR SPEAK TO THE MICROPHONE. JAMES CARELLI. C A R N I C E L I. I'M A MANAGING ENGINEER OF, UH, CORNELL ENGINEERING LOCATED IN VALHALLA. UH, AND I'M THE ENGINEER THAT'S, UH, BASICALLY WORKING FOR THE COMPLEX. I DO INITIALLY WANT TO THANK, UH, THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT, UH, DARREN SMITH, UH, GARRETT DUQUE, UH, AND, UH, TO HELP US SOLVE THIS PARTICULAR PROBLEM WITH THE FENCING ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY. UH, SO IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS, UH, YOU HAVE MY REPORT THAT WAS, UH, COMPLETED SEPTEMBER, I THINK, 10TH OF 2 0 2 OH. UM, AND, UH, SO IF THERE'S ANY KIND OF QUESTIONS WE'D LIKE TO YEAH. RESOLVE THIS ISSUE. WE, I FOUND IT INTERESTING. IT'S DEFINITELY VERY UNUSUAL, UM, SINCE MY BEING ON THE BOARD TO HAVE SOMETHING COMING BACK FROM THIS LONG AGO. I MEAN, A LOT OF THE TRANSCRIPT TALKED ABOUT THE SCREENING THAT WAS GONNA BE PLANTED AND YOU KNOW, HOW IT WAS GOING TO GROW, AND HALF OF THAT'S PROBABLY ALREADY DIED BY NOW. I DON'T KNOW. THERE'S ALSO THAT ENORMOUS VINYL FENCE THAT'S, YOU KNOW, I'M SURE WAS NOT THERE RIGHT. 50 YEARS AGO, 40 YEARS AGO. RIGHT. SO, I, I DON'T KNOW HOW THE RESIDENTS NOW AND OR THE PEOPLE THAT HAVE TO LOOK AT THE FENCE FEEL ABOUT WOOD VERSUS CHAIN LINK AND HOW MUCH VEGETATION THERE IS IN FRONT OF IT. BEHIND IT. THE PICTURES THAT WERE GIVEN TO US WERE VERY BLURRY. IT'S HARD TO REALLY TELL. I SEE. THERE'S SOME SLIDES. THAT WOULD BE GREAT. OKAY. YEAH. JUST, UH, YOU KNOW, THE GAME PLAN FOR THIS, THIS IS THE INTRODUCTION, IS THAT, UH, IT WOULD REQUIRE PUBLIC HEARING. SO THEN THEREFORE WE HAVE THE RESIDENTS, UH, BOTH, YOU KNOW, WHOEVER WANNA SPEAK EITHER ON BEHALF OR AGAINST, OR NEUTRAL, HOWEVER THEY WANT TO, WILL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY, UH, PROBABLY AT OUR NEXT, UH, PLANNING BOARD, MEETING AT A PUBLIC HEARING TO DISCUSS, UH, WHAT THEIR THOUGHTS ARE AND CONCERNS ABOUT THAT. AND THEN THIS BOARD CAN MAKE THE DETERMINATION, UM, THEREAFTER AS TO WHAT IT WANTS TO DO. YEAH. THIS IS, WE'RE, WE'RE IN THE WORK SESSION, AND THIS IS A TYPICAL WORK SESSION. I, I UNDERSTAND THAT WE SHOULD ASK THE QUESTIONS. UH, FOR CLARIFICATION, MY MAIN ISSUE IS ONE OF, UH, SITE HOW, UH, WHAT WILL THE PEOPLE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE CHAIN LINK FENCE C WHEN THEY LOOKED OUT OF THEIR PROPERTY, ONE OF THE THING, WHITE FENCE? NO. WELL, THEY, THEY JUST LOOK AT THE, THAT'S, IN THAT CASE, THEY DON'T SEE ANYTHING YET. IT APPEARS THAT WAY. YEAH. BUT, UH, BUT IT IS, IT IS, UH, IT IS A LONG FENCE. AND BECAUSE I, I, I WAS THERE AND I LOOKED AT IT IN SOME AREAS, LIKE HERE, IT'S, IT'S NOT AN ISSUE TO WHAT, UM, THE NEIGHBOR WILL SEE. THEY'LL SEE THEIR OWN PLANT, HOME PLANT. I'M SORRY, THERE ARE OTHER ISSUES THAT IT IS A LOT OF VEGETATION, SO THAT'S NOT AN ISSUE. BUT THERE ARE A FEW SPOTS WHERE THERE ARE HOMES. AND SO MY QUESTION IS, WHAT WILL THOSE PEOPLE SEE? I KNOW ON ONE HOME THE HEIGHT IS SUBSTANTIAL, SO THE NEIGHBOR HERE, WHEN THEY LOOK OUT, REGARDLESS OF WHAT YOU PUT IN THERE, THEY'LL, THEY'LL LOOK RIGHT OVER. SO THAT'S FINE. SO MY INTEREST IS TO PINPOINT THOSE AREAS WHERE YOUR NEIGHBORS COULD SEE THE FENCE. AND THAT IS WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE. UH, THE OTHER AREAS WHERE THE NEIGHBORS CAN'T SEE IT, I DON'T THINK THAT'S AN ISSUE BECAUSE WE SPEND A LOT OF TIME WITH, UM, WITH THE, UH, APPLICANTS MAKING SURE THEY SCREEN IF THEY'RE GONNA BUILD A HOUSE TO MAKE SURE THEY SCREEN THEIR PROPERTY APPROPRIATELY FROM THE NEIGHBORS. SO IT'S THE SAME ISSUE HERE. RIGHT. HOW DO YOU SCREEN THOSE HOMES THAT COULD ACTUALLY, UH, YOUR NEIGHBORS COULD ACTUALLY SEE, OKAY. ON THE SOUTHWEST PROPERTY LINE, SOUTHWEST IS SOME VIEWS THAT THEY COULD SEE FROM THE HOUSES ON SOUTHWEST, THE REST OF THE WEST LINE, WHICH IS LIKE FOUR, 700 FEET. OKAY. AND 400 FEET HAVE BEEN REBUILT, [00:45:02] UH, ON THE EXISTING PIPING OF THE ORIGINAL WOOD FENCING. OKAY. AND WOULD YOU BE ABLE TO SHOW PICTURES AND, AND WHILE YOU ARE SHOWING THE PICTURE OR TALKING, SHOWING THE PICTURES. OKAY. THE PART THAT WAS REPLACED IS THE PART THAT THEY HAVEN'T ED. OKAY. RIGHT. 300 FEET HAS THE ORIGINAL PIPING, UH, WHERE THE WOOD FENCE HAD TOTALLY BROUGHT IT OUT. AND THE ENVIRONMENT IN THAT PARTICULAR AREA, NOT THE ELEVATIONS ARE BASICALLY OKAY. UH, THERE'S A STREAM ON THE PROPERTY, THERE'S VEGETATION ON THE PROPERTY, UH, AND ALSO THERE'S NO SUNLIGHT. RIGHT. SO PUTTING THE WOOD AND FENCE THERE, IT'S NOT THE IDEAL THING THAT AN ENGINEER WOULD SAY, UH, GO, GO AHEAD AND PUT A WOOD, A WOOD FENCE. THE OTHER, THE OTHER ISSUE IS THAT WHEN THEY ORIGINALLY BUILT THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY, OKAY. ALL THE OTHER FENCES BASICALLY WERE CHAIN LINK. AND, AND WE DON'T KNOW, I GUESS WHY WAS THE WEST ELEVATION WOULD YOU MEAN FENCES AROUND THE SAME PROPERTY EXCEPT FOR THAT STRETCH OR CHAIN? RIGHT. I WOULD, I CAN, I CAN ANSWER THAT QUESTION 'CAUSE I READ THE TRANSCRIPT. THE TRANSCRIPT IS THAT THAT WAS OFFERED BY THE DEVELOPER AT THAT POINT. UM, IT'S JUST IN THERE THAT HE OFFERED A WOOD, UH, WOOD FENCE. WHY? I CAN'T TELL YOU WHY, BUT THAT'S WHAT CAME IN BEFORE THIS BOARD RESIDENT HAD ASKED FOR IT. OKAY. BUT HERE AGAIN, SURE. I I, I THINK WE HAVE TO LOOK AT THAT WITHIN THE SCOPE OF WHAT THE RESIDENT CAN SEE. OKAY. IF, IF IN THE AREA, WELL, UH, I'M TRYING TO FIND, WHICH IS NORTH AND SOUTH. SO NORTH IS UP ON THE PLAN. OKAY. NORTH ON THE FIRST 400 FEET THAT WAS ALREADY PUT IN. YES. AND IT WAS THE FIRST THAT WAS, THAT, THAT WAS PUT IN WITH ORIGINAL PIPING WHERE THE WOOD F FENCE WAS. I KNOW, BUT THE ISSUE, THE REASON WHY YOU GOT A STOP ORDER, BECAUSE YOU WERE PUTTING IN THE FENCE D DIFFERENT FROM WHAT WAS ALREADY THERE. SO LET'S LOOK AT WHAT WAS ALREADY THERE AND LOOK AT, UH, HOW IT LOOKS TO THE NEIGHBOR AND WHETHER OR NOT THAT IT, IT, IT, IF THE NEIGHBOR CAN'T SEE IT, THEN I, I WOULD BE INCLINED TO SAY TO LEAVE THAT SECTION ALONE AND GO TO THE AREAS WHERE THE NEIGHBORS CAN SEE IT. YES. I, I WAS JUST GONNA STATE THAT I THINK WHAT MIGHT BE HELPFUL FOR THE BOARD IN, IN MOVING FORWARD WITH THIS IS THAT I'M HAPPY TO GO OUT TO THE SITE, TAKE SOME PHOTOGRAPHS FROM DISADVANTAGE POINTS, AND BE ABLE TO PROVIDE THAT TO THE BOARD IN ITS NEXT PACKAGES GOING INTO THE HEARING, HAVE THOSE PHOTOS AVAILABLE FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING. WE DEFINITELY WANT TO HEAR FROM MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC. SO WE WILL GET THE NOTICE OUT AND HAVE THE SIGNAGE POSTED. AND I THINK THAT WILL BENEFIT THE BOARD IN, IN CONSIDERING THIS FURTHER, I WOULD ALSO SUGGEST THAT IF YOU HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO GO OUT AND SEE IT, TO GO OUT AND SEE IT. ABSOLUTELY. BECAUSE I THINK THAT REALLY WILL HELP YOU. AND, AND I'M HAPPY TO ADJUST SITE, BUT I CAN JUST DRIVE OVER THERE. OKAY. I MEAN, I CAN ACCOMMODATE MEMBERS AND WE CAN MEET WITH THE SITE. SUPER. SO RIGHT. YOU JUST WORK IT THROUGH AARON, BECAUSE WE, YOU CAN'T JUST WALK ON THE PROPERTY OVER THERE. . I TRIED . YEAH. IT'S VERY DIFFICULT. I TRIED A COUPLE TIMES. UH, I, I WOULD THINK ABOUT 80% OF THE NEIGHBORS CANNOT SEE THE FENCE. UH, THEY BUILT A, A, A SIX FOOT FENCE WITH A, A ONE FOOT EXTENSION WITH FILIGREE ON THE TOP, AND THEY CANNOT SEE THE FENCE BECAUSE THE FENCE IS RUNS BETWEEN THREE AND FOUR FEET BELOW THE VINYL SOLID FENCE. MM-HMM. . NOW THE SOUTHWEST, AS I SPOKE TO, IS OPEN A LITTLE MORE. SO THERE'S SOME OTHER HOUSES OVER THERE, UH, THAT THEY WILL BE ABLE TO SEE THE FENCE. OKAY. WELL, THEY'LL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY AT THE PUBLIC HEARING. YEAH. AND I'M HAPPY TO, I'LL BE MORE THAN WILLING TO MEET WHOEVER THE BOARD MEMBERS OR, UH, I WAS OUT THERE TO WALK THE PROPERTY IN GENERAL. I, I AGREE WITH, UH, COMMENT THAT ON THE, UH, THE WESTING SIDE, UH, UM, THE NEIGHBORS MIGHT SEE IT, BUT THEY'LL BE RELATIVELY HIGH. BUT I WOULDN'T SOMEHOW BE ABLE TO QUANTIFY THAT AND SAY IN THIS SECTION THAT THE NAVY IS, THE WA IS, UH, IT IS A SAME CHAINLINK FENCE, BUT IT'S NOT VISIBLE. IT MIGHT HAVE TO BE THAT, UH, ON THE EASTERN SIDE I DON'T SEE AN ISSUE. UH, AND THEN YOU HAVE THAT HOUSE [00:50:01] WITH THE VINYL, UH, BACKYARD. I DON'T SEE AN ISSUE. BUT THE BUT POSSIBLE CONCERNS IS THE AREA ON THE WESTERN SIDE. SO YOU NEED TO BE ABLE TO QUANTIFY IT AND SAY, THIS IS WHAT THE NEIGHBORS SEE. AND AND JUSTIFY WHY THAT SECTION SHOULD BE A LINK, UH, UH, A UH, A CHAINLINK FENCE. CORRECT. I, I THINK THAT'S REALLY THE, THE ISSUE, AT LEAST FROM MY OBSERVATION. OKAY. THE ISSUE ON THE WESTERN SIDE. WE, WE COULD, WE COULD DO THAT. JIM, CHARLIE WANTS SOMETHING. UH, AND UH, CHARLIE IS THE SUPERINTENDENT I MET. WE HAD A LONG DISCUSSION. AND , HOW YOU DOING MR. SIMMONS? NICE TO SEE YOU AGAIN. YEAH, JUST SPEAK. I ENJOYED OUR DEBATE THE LAST TIME WE SPOKE. UM, OKAY. CAN YOU HEAR ME? YEAH, THERE WE GO. ALRIGHT. SO I AGREE. UH, MY NAME IS CHARLIE ALVAREZ. I AM THE SUPERINTENDENT OF THE FOUNTAIN HEAD OF SCARSDALE ON, UH, ONE AND TWO FOUNTAIN LANE IN, UH, SCARSDALE, NEW YORK. I'VE BEEN THE SUPER THERE FOR ABOUT NINE YEARS. MY FATHER WAS THE SUPER THERE PRIOR 29 YEARS. SO I, I HAVE KNOW THE HISTORY VERY WELL. GREW UP IN THE DEVELOPMENT, TOTALLY AWARE OF THE SITUATION IN, IN, IN THE BACK OF THE, OF THE BUILDING. SO I, I THANK YOU FOR LETTING ME SPEAK. UM, AS FAR AS, UH, MR. SIMON WAS THAT BACK THERE WITH ME, WE HAD A NICE LONG DISCUSSION AS FAR AS THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY. UM, AND I, I, I KNOW THE SECTION THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, 'CAUSE WE BOTH SPOKE ABOUT IT THAT DAY, BUT THE, THE HOUSE IS ELE ALL THOSE HOUSES ARE MORE ELEVATED THAN THAT FENCE. MM-HMM. . SO REGARDLESS OF WHERE THE FENCE IS, THEY'RE GONNA STILL SEE INTO OUR PROPERTY, REGARDLESS OF THE SITUATION. MM-HMM. 'CAUSE THE HOUSES AND THEIR PROPERTIES ARE, ARE ELEVATED COMPARED TO OURS. MM-HMM. . SO IT, I MEAN, I UNDERSTAND WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. THE FENCE ALSO, THAT PARTICULAR PROPERTY THAT YOU'RE SPEAKING OF SLOPES DOWN INTO OUR PROPERTIES, WHICH MEANS THAT OUR FENCE IS AT A LOWER GRADE THAN, THAN THE THE GRASS LINE OF THAT PROPERTY. SO THEY'RE GONNA BE ABLE TO SEE THAT JUST THE TOP OF OUR FENCE AND OVER INTO OUR PROPERTY. IT SHOULDN'T BE A, A BIG VISION OF THE FENCE OR SEEING THROUGH THE FENCE. AND, AND I THINK THAT YOU CAN CONCUR WITH THAT BECAUSE YOU WERE AT THE PROPERTY WITH ME AND YOU COULD SEE HOW HOW MUCH MORE ELEVATED THOSE, THOSE HOUSES WERE COMPARED TO US. YES. SO, WELL, THAT'S WHY WE'VE RECOMMENDED THAT THE BOARD MEMBERS, IF THEY CAN COME OVER SO THEY CAN SEE IT, BECAUSE IT'S DIFFICULT ON A I AGREE WITH YOU PHOTO, I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT THERE WAS A BOARD MEMBER THERE. YEAH. BUT THE ONE I UNDERSTAND, I UNDERSTAND. I THOUGHT IT JUST ONE, ONE MEMBER COMES OUT AND SEES IT AND OH, OKAY. I TOTALLY UNDERSTAND. EVERYBODY HAVE THE LUCK. AH, EVERYONE HAS TO BE, I, I UNDERSTAND. AND YOU'RE, YOU'RE MORE THAN WELCOME TO COME. OKAY. I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU. YES. IF THE ORIGINAL FENCE WAS INSTALLED BACK IN SAY, 1980, AND IT WAS WOOD, I CAN'T IMAGINE THAT ORIGINAL FENCE ACTUALLY LASTED UNTIL RECENTLY. SO IT MUST HAVE BEEN REPLACED AT SOME POINT WITH, I GUESS IN THE WOODEN FENCE. AND THAT'S, THAT'S, THAT'S, THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION. AND, AND I'M GONNA, THE REASON WHY WE'RE REPLACING THIS FENCE IS BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT THE WOODEN FENCES, THE VEGETATION AND THE, THERE IS NO SUNLIGHT BACK THERE AND THE VEGETATION AND THE TREES BLOCK EVERYTHING. SO EVERYTHING STAYS MOIST BACK THERE. AND WHAT HAPPENS IS THE WOOD ROTS AND IT FALLS. SO WE'VE HAD MULTIPLE COMPLAINTS FROM THE NEIGHBORS BEHIND US THAT THE FENCE HAS FALLEN FROM STORMS. AND UNFORTUNATELY BECAUSE WE'RE A CO-OP DEVELOPMENT, IT TAKES US A WHILE TO REPAIR THAT. 'CAUSE WE HAVE TO PUT IT UP FOR BID. WE HAVE TO HAVE MULTIPLE CONTRACTORS BIDDING IT. THE BOARD HAS, THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS HAVE TO VOTE ON IT. SO IT TAKES A WHILE. AND SOME OF THE NEIGHBORS WERE GETTING VERY UPSET HOW LONG IT TAKES FOR US TO GET TO THAT TIME TO REPLACE THE FENCE. SO WE WERE TRYING TO BE PROACTIVE AND PUT A CHAIN LINK FENCE THERE SO THAT WAY WE DON'T DEAL WITH THAT ROT AND WE DON'T HAVE TO BEFORE QUESTION. OH, PLEASE COME THROUGH MIC. YEAH. I, I WAS JUST QUESTIONING IF THE ORIGINAL WOODEN FENCE HAD BEEN REPLACED WITH OH, SEVERAL TIMES. SEVERAL TIMES. SE MULTIPLE, MULTIPLE TIMES. IT'S SOMEONE THAT USED TO REPAIR HOMES. I UNDERSTAND. PUTTING YES. WOOD FENCE IN A VEGETATIVE, DAMP AREAS, NOT A LONG LASTING. AND, AND THEN NOT ONLY THAT, UM, THE POLES, WE KEPT THE, THE ORIGINAL POLES THERE, WE WERE ABLE TO MAINTAIN, 'CAUSE THE POLES WERE METAL, IT WAS WOOD ATTACHED TO THE METAL POLES SO THAT WOOD SLATS WOULD ROT AND THEY WOULD JUST FALL. SO THAT MEANING THAT IT'S IN THE SAME LOCATION, THEY HAVEN'T SHIFTED IT ONE WAY OR THE OTHER. IT'S JUST THE MATERIAL. [00:55:01] IT MAKES MORE SENSE FROM A DURABILITY STANDPOINT. CORRECT. AND A SAFETY STANDPOINT TO NOT REPLACE IT WITH WOOD. YES. I DON'T THINK THAT'S THE REASON THE WOOD WAS THERE, RIGHT. IN THE FIRST PLACE. IF SOMEONE, THEY MAYBE REQUESTED IT, BUT THE DEVELOPER APPARENTLY OFFERED IT. CORRECT. SO I GUESS MY QUESTION FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING IS, DO NEIGHBORS ON EITHER SIDE STRONGLY HAVE A, HAVE A STRONG REASON FOR WANTING WOOD VERSUS CHAIN LINK? RIGHT NOW THIS IS ALL BEING DEBATED BECAUSE IT WAS IN THE APPROVAL, CORRECT? RIGHT. NOT BECAUSE SOMEONE CAME FORWARD AND SAID, WHERE'S MY WOOD FENCE? OR DID THEY THERE WAS, THERE WAS A COMPLAINT. THERE WAS A COMPLAINT TO THE, UH, I BELIEVE AS IT WAS BEING REPLACED YEAH. TO THE BUILDING INSPECTOR. YEAH. I, I THINK I HAVE A QUESTION REGARDING YES. I THINK THAT'S, UH, IS THAT CONSIDERING THERE ARE LIKE ABOUT 13, 14 CONDITIONS, SO, UH, IS, IS ALL THE CONDITION ARE STILL SATISFIED BECAUSE THERE ARE SOME FROM THE ORIGINAL APPROVAL, YOU MEAN? YEAH, APPROVAL. I MEAN YOU CAME FOR JUST ONE CONDITION THAT IS IN VIOLATION OR WHAT ABOUT ALL OTHER CONDITIONS ARE, ARE, ARE, ARE COMPLIANCE, ARE YOU COMPLIANCE COMPLIANCE IN THE COMPLIANCE AS FAR AS COMPLIANCE? AS FAR AS THE ORIGINAL? WHAT THE ORIGINAL, UH, YEAH, THERE'S A WHOLE, WHOLE BUNCH OF CONDITIONS WE PUT IN. THERE IS A RAILING ON THE BRIDGE, UH, GUARDRAIL BRIDGE. SO ALL OF THEM ARE THERE OR THEY JUST YEAH, EVERYTHING'S IN COMPLIANCE FROM THE ORIGINAL WHATEVER THE ORIGINAL THING IS. THE ONLY THING WE'RE WORKING ON IS THAT PARTICULAR FENCE. YEAH, NO, I UNDERSTAND. BECAUSE THERE WAS A RIGHT, THERE WAS A COMPLAINT OR, OR THERE WAS SOMETHING HAPPENED. SO YOU GET RIGHT, RIGHT. GOT GOT, UH, GOT CAUGHT INTO DOING THINGS. SO, BUT MY QUESTION IS, THE REST OF THE THINGS IS MAYBE YOU CAN FOLLOW UP ON, FOR INSTANCE, ONE OF THE CONDITIONS IS THAT THE DRIVE WELL DRIVEWAY SHALL BE RESTRICTED TO RIGHT TURNS ONLY, UM, OUT OF THE SITE. YEAH. OH YES. THAT'S ORIGINAL. YOU KNOW, THAT HAPPENS TO BE ONE OF THE CONDITIONS. SO, YOU KNOW, IF YOU GUYS S STRIPPED IT AND MADE IT YEAH. YOU KNOW, TWO WAY THAT WOULD BE OUT OF COMPLIANCE. NO, I THINK THAT'S THE QUESTION. OBJECTION. SO, AND THERE ARE SOME OTHERS AND WE'RE HAPPY TO SHARE THIS WITH YOU IF YOU, IF YOU HAVEN'T SEEN IT, WE HAVEN'T IN A WHILE. WE HAVEN'T SEEN IT. SO YOU WOULD LOVE TO. YEAH, I THINK THAT WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA. ALRIGHT. SO, SO NEXT STEPS ON THIS AREA. IS THERE, RIGHT? I'M SORRY, WHAT? TOM? NO, NO, SORRY, WE DIDN'T PUT THAT THE, THE FENCE, THE CHAIN LINK, THE 400 FEET THAT THEY PUT IN. OKAY. THAT PIPING WAS THERE. HE, TO TALK INTO THE MIC, YOU HAVE TO TALK INTO THE MIC, PLEASE TALK INTO THE MIC. THE 400 FEET OF OF CHAIN LAKE THAT WAS PUT IN THERE WAS ON THE PIPING. THAT WAS, OR NOT ORIGINAL, BUT OKAY. THERE IT'S STRUCTURALLY SOUND THE NEXT 300 FEET. ALRIGHT. THE PIPING IS STILL THERE. SO IT'S THE IDEA OF PUTTING CHAIN LINK, UH, ON ONTO THAT SAME FENCE, ON THE SAME PIPING MM-HMM. . RIGHT. WE, WE UNDERSTAND. OH, OKAY. THAT'S, I WAS JUST ASKING FOR, YOU KNOW, WHAT OUR NEXT STEPS ARE IN THIS. WELL THE NEXT STEP IS, IS I, I THINK ONE MORE QUESTION I HAVE. I THINK CONSIDERING THAT YOU HAVE A CHAIN LINK ON THREE SIDE AND WHICH BEEN REQUESTED TO HAVE A, UH, WOODEN FENCE OR RATHER THAN CHAIN LINK, UH, MY INTERPRETATION IS THAT IT IS FOR AESTHETIC REASON THAT THE, ALL THE HOMEOWNERS IN BEHIND HAVE NOT LOOKING AT THE CHAIN LINKS, BUT HAVE SOME MORE BETTER LOOKING FENCE. COULD BE A WOODEN ONES. AND IF THE WOODEN ONE WAS A PROBLEM, I WOULD, I WOULD ASK YOU THAT, WOULD YOU CONSIDER ALSO LOOKING INTO SOME OTHER KIND OF FENCE, WHICH IS BETTER LOOKING THAN CHAIN LINKS, BUT IT IS NOT, IT WOULD NOT ROT LIKE WOOD, LIKE WOODEN FENCE. I THINK AT THIS POINT WE SHOULD REALLY GET OUT AND SEE IT BECAUSE UN UNTIL YOU SEE IT, UNTIL YOU SEE THE CHANGES IN THE HEIGHT OF ONE PROPERTY VERSUS THE OTHER AND HAVE AN IDEA WHAT THE NEIGHBOR WILL SEE, I THINK IT THEN WILL GIVE US, UH, GIVE YOU A BETTER IDEA OF HOW SIGNIFICANT IS THE DESIGN OF THE FENCE IN TERMS OF WHAT THE NEIGHBOR'S LOOKING AT. AND I, AND I THINK WHAT YOU WANT, I DON'T, SO WHAT, WHAT I WOULD SUGGEST, I, I AGREE. OKAY. WHAT I WOULD SUGGEST . OKAY. WHAT I WOULD SUGGEST IS THAT, UM, WE PUT THIS ON FOR A PUBLIC HEARING, [01:00:01] UH, IN AUGUST, AND THEN WE MAKE ARRANGEMENT FOR THOSE PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS WHO HAVE NOT SEEN THE SITE. I WILL REALLY ENCOURAGE YOU TO LOOK AT IT BECAUSE THAT REALLY GIVES YOU A, A PERSPECTIVE OF WHAT THE NEIGHBORS IS SEEING. AND SO, AND THEN WHEN IT COME UP THE PUBLIC HEARING, THEN I THINK WE WILL ALL BE IN A BETTER POSITION, UH, TO MAKE A COMMENT IN TERMS OF WHAT DO WE THINK IS APPROPRIATE TYPE OF FENCE. THAT WOULD BE A, SO I WOULD ENCOURAGE THAT. YEAH. WE GO OUT THERE AND TAKE A LOOK AT IT. NO, WALTER, I, I HAVE A LITTLE, LITTLE, UH, DIFFERENT ANGLE ONTO IT. OKAY. THIS IS NOT, CAN YOU SPEAK UP A LITTLE BIT? SO I, BECAUSE I, THIS IS NOT A QUESTION ABOUT, UH, APPROVING OR OR, OR SUGGESTING WHAT THAT SHOULD BE. IT IS SOMETHING THAT WE ARE LOOKING AT IT WHAT WAS APPROVED AND WAS AGREED BY THE THEN PLANNING BOARD AND THEN THE APPLICANT. SO IT'S NOT, UH, UH, ONLY I, I AGREE THAT THEY WANTED A, THEY WANTED A REPRIEVE FROM WHAT IS BEING KIND OF, UH, LOOKS LIKE AND NOT VERY AGREEABLE TO THE APPLICANT RIGHT NOW. BUT I THINK WE SHOULD REALLY ALSO UNDERSTAND WHY IT WAS ORIGINALLY APPROVED. AND THAT LOOKS LIKE YES. AND, AND I AGREE A HUNDRED PERCENT WITH YOU AND THAT'S WHY AT THE BEGINNING I SUGGESTED YOU, IT IS VERY READ THE TRANSCRIPT, IMPORTANT TO READ THE TRANSCRIPT TO UNDERSTAND THAT, NUMBER ONE, THE TRANSCRIPT. THE TRANSCRIPT, NOT THE DECISION, THE TRANSCRIPT. AARON SENT THAT SEPARATELY A COUPLE DAYS AGO. IT'S VERY IMPORTANT. BUT TWO, YOU ALSO RAISED ANOTHER POINT, AND IT'S NOT SOMETHING FOR AN ANSWER FOR THE APPLICANT NOW, BUT I KNOW IT WAS DISCUSSED IN, IF ABSENT A WOOD FENCE, IF THERE WERE SOME OTHER MATERIAL THAT MIGHT BE, I DON'T EVEN WANT AN ANSWER AT THIS POINT BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T HEARD FROM THE PUBLIC. SO, UH, BUT IF, IF THAT'S SOMETHING THAT, THAT THE APPLICANT SHOULD, WOULD CONSIDER IN ADDITION, THAT'S SOMETHING WHEN MOVING FORWARD WE CAN DISCUSS. CAN I ANSWER THAT? YEAH. WHAT WE, WHAT COULD BE DONE ON THE, ON THE CHAIN LINK. OKAY. YOU COULD PUT THESE GREEN SLATS THAT'S UGLY GREEN SLATS. I GOT, I GOT PHOTOS OF IT. I COULD BE HAPPY TO SEND IT TO GIVE IT TO THE BOARD. OKAY. OR YOU COULD PUT VEGETATION, FAKE VEGETATION THAT, THAT I, YOU KNOW, I'VE SEEN THAT. WELL I THINK AT THIS POINT WE SHOULD, I YOU SHOULD TALK WITH YOUR CLIENT. WAIT, WAIT, WAIT. I THINK AT THIS POINT, UH, I, I WILL SAY AGAIN, LET'S NOT GET INTO THE DETAILS OF THE FENCE UNTIL WE VISIT THE SITE. THAT THIS IS AN APPLICATION THAT A SITE VISIT WILL HAVE A TREMENDOUS EFFECT ON OUR DECISION. THERE'S SOME, THERE'S SOME THINGS THAT WE CAN MAKE A DECISION ON WITHOUT A SITE VISIT, YOU KNOW? OKAY, THAT'S FINE. OKAY. BUT I THINK THIS IS ONE THAT REQUIRES A SITE VISIT SO WE CAN MAKE THE APPROPRIATE QUESTION MYSELF AND WOULD BE HAPPY TO ENTERTAIN, UH, WHOEVER COMES THERE FROM THE BOARD AND WALK THE SITE, WHETHER IT'S ONE TIME OR TWO SITE, WHATEVER CASE MIGHT BE. OKAY. SO, SO WHAT I WOULD, UH, UH, DO IS TO SCHEDULE THIS FOR PUBLIC HEARING ON, WHAT'S THAT, AUGUST 7TH? AUGUST 4TH. AUGUST 4TH. AND I STRONGLY ENCOURAGE, CAN WE PUSH THAT BACK? I CAN'T, I'M NOT, I'M AWAY THAT WEEK. OKAY. THEN WE, WE HAVE ONE MEETING IN AUGUST, SO IT'LL BE IN SEPTEMBER. OKAY. UM, LET'S GIVE THE DATE NOW. SEPTEMBER. SEPTEMBER 1ST? YEAH. OR THE 14TH. I MEAN, I WOULD SUGGEST THE EARLIER, SO, SO YOU CAN GET IT DONE QUICKER RESTLESS PROJECT. YEAH. OKAY. SEPTEMBER 1ST. OKAY. SO, SO WE HAVE, SO WE HAVE, SO WE HAVE, UH, OVER A MONTH, UH, TO GET EVERY BOARD MEMBER OUT THERE. I THINK MAYBE HALF ALREADY, THREE OR FOUR ALREADY BEEN THERE. BUT, UH, I THINK THAT WOULD BE VERY HELPFUL. LAST, LAST THING, BUT I BELIEVE, WAIT, I BELIEVE, I BELIEVE THAT COULD, WE COULD SUPERIMPOSE ON THESE PARTICULAR PLANS. ALRIGHT. ON, ON THE SURVEY THAT WE HAVE IS WHERE THE SITE WHERE THE NEIGHBORS COULD SEE THROUGH THE OH, THAT'D BE EXCELLENT. YEAH. THAT COULD BE PART OF YOUR PRESENTATION FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING. THAT'S THE PUBLIC HEARING. OH, WE'RE, WE'RE RATHER WILLING TO DO THAT. OKAY, GOOD. YEAH, I MEAN, UH, UH, ANY TYPE OF INFORMATION THAT WILL ADD CLARITY TO WHAT YOUR NEIGHBORS WILL BE HAPPY SEE WILL, WILL BE TO YOUR BENEFIT. OKAY. YEAH. I I I THINK IN THAT LINE, I WOULD RECOMMEND IF YOU CAN HAVE A, [01:05:01] A, UH, A SORT OF ELEVATIONS OR A RENDERING THAT HOW THE, HOW THE NEIGHBORS WOULD LOOK AT IT FROM THEIR BACKYARD OR THEIR GRASS LINE. RIGHT. THAT WILL HELP TO PEOPLE TO UNDERSTAND. RIGHT. WE CAN, OKAY, GOOD. SO WE'LL SEE YOU IN SEPTEMBER. OKAY. OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. PLEASURE MEETING YOU ALL NIGHT. TAKE CARE. THANK YOU. THE, UH, THE NEXT THING HERE IS ON A PRE-SUBMISSION. UH, AND, AND, UH, THE PURPOSE OF A PRESUBMISSION IS TO GIVE, UH, SOME FEEDBACK AND GUIDANCE TO THE APPLICANT. WHAT WOULD BE THE CONCERNS IF THE, IF THE APPLICANT WAS TO GO FORWARD AND, AND SUBMIT A FORMAL APPLICATION? WHAT WILL BE SOME OF THE CONCERNS THAT, UH, THIS PLANNING BOARD WILL BE LOOKING AT? SO THAT'S THE PURPOSE OF TODAY'S MEETING. IT'S NOT TO GO THROUGH THE PLANS AND, AND REDO THE PLANS, BUT TO PINPOINT THOSE CONCERNS THAT THE APPLICANT SHOULD ADDRESS WHEN THEY SUBMIT A FORMAL PLAN. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. UH, MY NAME'S JOHN KIRKPATRICK. UH, I'M A, A LAWYER AND, UH, CITY PLANNER BEEN UH, WORKING THROUGHOUT THE LOWER HUDSON VALLEY FOR ABOUT 40 YEARS NOW. I'M HERE TONIGHT REPRESENTING MARION WOODS, INC. UH, MARION WOODS INC. IS A CORPORATION WHICH IS OWNED BY FIVE ORDERS OF NUNS. THESE ARE THE FIVE ORDERS THAT BUILT THE EXISTING CONVENT AND RETIREMENT HOME, UH, ON THIS PROPERTY. AS YOU PROBABLY KNOW, THIS PROPERTY SITS IN THE MIDDLE OF HARTSBURG PRESERVE. UM, THIS HAPPENED TO OCCUR, UH, BECAUSE THE OWNER OF THE ESTATE, WHICH WAS THE GEISSMAN ESTATE, HAD DEEDED IT TO THE ARCHDIOCESE TO USE AS A NEW SEMINARY IN ABOUT 1955. BUT IT HAD BEEN DEEDED WITH A RIGHT FOR MR. AND MRS. GEMAN TO LIVE THERE FOR THE REST OF THEIR LIVES. UM, HE PASSED AWAY. MRS. GEISSMAN DECIDED TO LEAVE IN ABOUT 1995, UH, AND THERE WAS NO LONGER A NEED FOR A SEMINARY. UH, SO THE ARCHDIOCESE RETAINED ME, UH, TO, UM, INVESTIGATE THE POSSIBILITIES FOR DEVELOPMENT AND SALE OF THE ESTATE DEVELOPMENT AS A RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION. UH, AT ABOUT THIS TIME, THE SISTERS OF MERCY, UH, APPROACHED THE ARCHDIOCESE TO USE THE MANSION ON THE PROPERTY, UH, AS THEIR HEADQUARTERS AND RESIDENTS FOR MANY OF THE SISTERS. AS WE PROGRESSED WITH THE PROPOSAL TO POSSIBLY TURN THIS INTO A RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION, UH, THE SISTERS OF MERCY AND THE FOUR OTHER ORDERS THAT MAKE UP MARION WOODS, UH, MADE A PROPOSAL TO BUILD THIS CONVENT AND RETIREMENT HOME. AND AT ABOUT THE SAME TIME, THE TOWN AND THE COUNTY AND THE STATE APPROACHED THE ARCHDIOCESE TO PURCHASE THE PROPERTY TO CREATE HARTSBURG PRESERVE AND PREVENT DEVELOPMENT. SO IN 1999, YOUR BOARD APPROVED A SUBDIVISION, WHICH CREATED THIS LOT IN THE MIDDLE OF HARTSBURG PRESERVE. UH, IT HAS ON IT, UH, A MANSION, UH, THE CONVENT, UH, SOME GARAGES, UH, AND THE REST OF THE PROPERTY, UH, IS ALL HARTSBURG PRESERVED. ACCESS REMAINS EXACTLY AS IT WAS WHEN IT WAS IN ESTATE. THERE IS A GATED ENTRANCE AT THE WEST END OF THE FRONTAGE, WHICH GIVES IMMEDIATE ACCESS TO THE HEADQUARTERS OF THE PARK, UH, WHICH IS IN THE OLD STABLES. UH, ONE THEN PROGRESSES IN A ONE-WAY PATTERN OUT PAST THE MANSION AND EXITS AT THE EAST GATE. UH, THERE ARE EASEMENTS THAT PROVIDE FOR ALL OF THIS. UH, AND CONSEQUENTLY, WHEN THE, UH, WHEN THE SISTERS, WHEN MARION WOODS DECIDED THAT IT WAS TIME TO SELL THE MANSION BECAUSE THE SISTERS OF MERCY HAD MOVED OUT, WE, THE FIRST THING WE DID WAS TO, UM, HAVE A TRAFFIC STUDY PREPARED, WHICH, WHICH YOU HAVE MM-HMM. , UH, THAT TRAFFIC STUDY PRETTY CONCLUSIVELY DEMONSTRATED THAT THERE WERE REALLY NO ALTERNATIVES WITH REGARD TO ACCESS TO THE [01:10:01] PROPERTY. IT WOULD'VE BEEN A WONDERFUL THING IF THERE COULD HAVE BEEN A SEPARATE DRIVEWAY FOR THE MANSION. THAT WOULD CERTAINLY MAKE IT, UM, UH, MORE SALEABLE. UH, BUT IT SIMPLY DOESN'T WORK. ANY, UH, WAY THAT WE THOUGHT OF, OF CREATING A SEPARATE DRIVEWAY WOULD ONLY MAKE THE TRAFFIC SITUATION, UM, WELL, IT WOULD NOT WORK VERY WELL. WE WERE ADVISED AGAINST IT. SO, I'M HERE TONIGHT, UH, WITH A, UH, PROPOSAL, UH, TO DISCUSS WITH YOU, UH, TO SUBDIVIDE AND, UM, WITH ME HERE, OR, UM, THIS IS JEAN GILLIGAN FROM MARION WOODS INC. UM, SISTER EILEEN DONOVAN, WHO IS THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, AND MICHAEL MULLIN ARCHITECT, WHO HAS DONE MOST OF THE WORK ON PUTTING ALL OF THIS TOGETHER, UH, INCLUDING WORKING OUT WHAT WOULD BE THE BEST, UH, DIMENSIONS OF THIS PARCEL THAT WE'RE PROPOSING FOR THE MANSION. THE KEY TO ALL OF THIS IS THAT WE ARE PROPOSING TO CREATE A PARCEL THAT HAS NO FRONTAGE. IT IS GOING TO BE LANDLOCKED. UH, WE OBVIOUSLY WILL HAVE TO GO TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FOR VARIANCES, BUT WE ARE HIT BEFORE YOU TONIGHT TO DISCUSS IT AND TO SEE, UH, IF THIS IS SOMETHING THAT HAS A REASONABLE CHANCE OF APPROVAL FROM YOUR BOARD, WHERE ARE WE TO GET THE VARIANCES? SO IF YOU FIND THIS ACCEPTABLE, PRELIMINARILY, THAT WOULD BE THE NEXT STEP WE WOULD GO TO. UM, CAN WE ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS? I, I DID WANNA MAKE ONE COMMENT. UM, I WAS, AND WANTED TO MAKE AWARE, UH, THE PROPOSAL TO OUR COMMISSIONER OF PARKS AND RECREATION MM-HMM. , UH, GERARD BYRNE. I DID MAKE HIM AWARE, UNFORTUNATELY, AT A CONFLICT THIS EVENING, OTHERWISE HE WOULD'VE ATTENDED. BUT, UM, ONE THING THAT HE MENTIONED, WHICH, UH, I THINK DIFFERED FROM, FROM YOUR STATEMENT EARLIER, MR. KIRKPATRICK RELATED TO THE EASEMENTS, AND HE WANTED TO BE SURE THAT APPROPRIATE EASEMENTS WOULD BE FILED IF THEY WEREN'T ALREADY. AND IF THEY ALREADY ARE, THAT HE BE ABLE TO OBTAIN A COPY OF THOSE. UM, AS YOU KNOW, THIS PROJECT, IF IT WERE TO PROGRESS, CERTAINLY. THANK YOU. UH, AND IN FACT, THERE IS A FILED EASEMENT, WHICH GIVES THE SISTERS THE RIGHT TO USE THE ENTRY DRIVEWAY TO THE EXTENT THAT IT IS NOT ON THEIR PROPERTY. THERE WAS A PROMISED EASEMENT THAT WAS GOING TO BE GIVEN TO THE TOWN TO GO OVER THE PORTION OF THE DRIVEWAY THAT IS ON THE SISTER'S PROPERTY. THAT DOES NOT SEEM TO HAVE EVER BEEN DONE. UH, BUT AS I INCLUDED IN MY COVER LETTER, UH, WE WOULD CERTAINLY DO THAT. AND, AND, AND THAT'S WHAT I RE RELAYED TO COMMISSIONER BYRNE, THAT YOU HAD MENTIONED THAT IN YOUR COVER LETTER. BUT I JUST WANTED THE BOARD TO BE AWARE OF IT AS WELL. AND I, I ALSO WANTED THE BOARD TO BE AWARE OF SOMETHING. UH, THIS IS A PRE-SUBMISSION CONFERENCE, BUT, UH, AND, AND IT'S SORT OF EVIDENCED, UH, IN, YOU KNOW, PART OF THE INFORMATION YOU HAVE HERE. UM, GARRETT AND MEMBERS OF STAFF HAVE HAD CONVERSATIONS WITH, UH, UM, MR. KIRKPATRICK AND HIS TEAM, BECAUSE THEY PRESENTED THIS AS, BECAUSE THIS IS ADJACENT TO TOWN PROPERTY, THEY PRESENTED THIS AS, UM, AN ISSUE THAT THEY WANTED TO DISCUSS. SO WE'VE HAD PRELIMINARY DISCUSSIONS, UH, SUGGESTING HOW THIS MAY, UH, PLAY OUT. OBVIOUSLY IT GOES TO THE PLANNING BOARD. UH, BUT THERE HAS, YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT LIKE THEY JUST CAME WITH A RANDOM THOUGHT TO, UH, YOU KNOW, UH, WITH THIS IDEA. WE TALKED ABOUT VARIOUS THINGS. WE DISCUSSED THINGS LIKE THE EASEMENTS. UH, WE DISCUSSED ISSUES OF PARKING AND THAT SORT OF STUFF. OBVIOUSLY AS, UH, WE INDI INDICATED THE WAY THIS IS SET UP, UH, THERE CAN'T BE THE, UH, THE TRAFFIC FLOW AND THAT, UH, SO THAT'S HOW THIS GOT TO THIS POINT WHERE IT'S GOING TO THE, UH, PLANNING BOARD OKAY. TO TAKE A LOOK AT LOOKING THROUGH, UM, THE PLANS. UH, MY QUESTION CIRCLE, UH, IT, IT, UH, PERTAINS TO PRETTY MUCH THE, THE ROAD AND THE EASEMENT. UH, IF, UH, THE ISSUES OF EASEMENT, UH, UH, IS, UH, THE COMMISSIONER BURNS IS AWARE OF THAT, AND HE HAS BUY-IN THAT THE EASEMENT WILL, WILL PROTECT THE PARK AND [01:15:01] HE'LL HAVE ACCESS TO THE PARK. AND, UH, THAT'S GOOD. UH, MY OTHER QUESTION IS THE ACTUAL FLOW OF TRAFFIC. NOW, IF I RECALL THE ENTRANCE, WHICH LEMME GET THERE. IT'S ONE WAY. YEAH, YEAH. IT BE THE NO THAT, ISN'T THERE A SIGN THAT SAID THAT, UH, THE PARK CLOSED AT A CERTAIN HOUR? IS THERE A SIGN THERE? I, I DON'T BELIEVE SO, BUT, UM, CHAIRPERSON MAYBE. MAYBE THAT'S THE RICH PARK THAT MAY BE ACROSS THE STREET. OH. UM, ONE THING THAT YOU DID ASK ME TO DO, AND I'M SORRY I DIDN'T BRING THIS UP EARLIER, BUT, UM, YOU ASKED ME TO FIND OUT IF THE GATE, UH, AT THE EXIT WAS CLOSED AT ANY POINT. AND I DID TOUCH BASE WITH COMMISSIONER BYRNE ON THAT. HE ADVISED THAT THE GATE'S OPEN ALL THE TIME. SO, OKAY. SO, SO, UH, UH, SO THAT WOULD, I WOULD THINK WILL BE SOMETHING THAT MUST BE IN ANY APPROVAL THAT THAT GATE HAS TO REMAIN OPEN, IF THAT'S GOING TO BE A RESIDENCE THERE, THAT YOU CAN'T, THE TOWN CAN'T CLOSE THE GATE IF YOUR HOME IS THERE. SO, WELL, THERE'S PEOPLE LIVING IN THIS FACILITY AS WELL RIGHT NOW, SO YEAH, THEY, THEY NEED ACCESS. YEAH. I WOULD SAY 24 HOURS. WE'RE NOT GONNA TO TRY TO PULL THAT ON THEM . NO, NO, NO. RIGHT. BUT I JUST SAID THAT THAT HAS TO BE CRYSTAL CLEAR THAT, UH, THE ACCESS ROAD, UH, REMAIN OPEN TO THE RESIDENCE AND THAT ALL APPROPRIATE, UH, EASEMENTS ARE IN PLACE, SO THE TOWN COULD HAVE ACCESS, FREE ACCESS TO THE PARK, AND THE RESIDENTS COULD HAVE APPROPRIATE ACCESS TO THE BUILDING. SO, YES. UH, I HAVE A, A COUPLE QUESTIONS FOR PROBABLY AARON AND DAVID. SO THE PARK PORTION, I BELIEVE WAS ORIGINALLY ACQUIRED, UH, AS MR. FITZPATRICK SAID BY THE STATE, THE TOWN, AND THE COUNTY. WHO OWNS THAT PROPERTY NOW? IS IT THE STATE, THE TOWN AND THE COUNTY. SO IT'S STILL JOINTLY OWNED. OKAY. YES. IT'S, IT'S JOINT OWNERSHIP. SO IS THERE ANY PRECEDENT WE HAVE FOR PUTTING A RESIDENTIAL, UM, RESIDENT, PUTTING A RESIDENCE SANDWICHED BETWEEN A JOINTLY OWNED PARKLAND AND, UM, YOU KNOW, A, A FACILITY, A RETIREMENT FACILITY, WHATEVER, IT, IT, IT'S SOMETHING I'VE CERTAINLY NOT SEEN IN MY TIME HERE, AND I'M REALLY NOT SURE HOW TO THINK ABOUT IT. I UNDERSTAND THE, UH, THE DESIRE, BUT, UH, BUT LEGALLY, I, I REALLY DON'T KNOW HOW TO THINK ABOUT IT. IT APPEARS THIS IS ALL ON THE MARION WOODS PROPERTY, THOUGH, CORRECT? YEAH, THAT'S RIGHT. YES. IT'S TAKING A CHUNK OF THEIRS, RIGHT? THAT'S CORRECT. BUT I MEAN, I, I'VE GONE IN THERE MANY TIMES, RIGHT? AND IT JUST SEEMS ODD IF THAT WERE SOMEONE LIVING THERE. WELL, SO I LEGALLY, I DON'T KNOW HOW TO THINK ABOUT THAT. YOUR SPECIFIC QUESTION, PROBABLY NOT, BUT MORE GENERALIZED IS RIGHT NOW, THERE IS THE MARION WOODS RESIDENCE, WHICH IS ON THAT PROPERTY ADJACENT TO THE TOWN AND SHARES A DRIVEWAY WITH THEM. IN ADDITION, ALSO ON THE TOWN PROPERTY, THERE IS A HOUSE THAT, UH, YOU KNOW, UM, THAT THE TOWN OWNS, AND THEY HAS, THERE'S A RESIDENCE THERE FOR SOMEONE WHO IS A CARETAKER, UH, OR I BELIEVE IT'S A CARETAKER OF, UH, OF ANTHONY THAT ARE IN PARK AND, AND OTHER THINGS. SO WE DO HAVE RESIDENCES THERE. YOUR SPECIFIC ONE AS TO ONE THAT'S BETWEEN , UH, YOU KNOW, ANOTHER PRIVATE HOUSE AND NOT, I'M NOT AWARE OF ANOTHER ONE IN THE TOWN. YEAH. I MEAN, CONSIDERING THAT MOST OF THEIR FRONT YARD IS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC, IT'S, IT'S JUST BEEN AN UNUSUAL CIRCUMSTANCE. WELL, THE THING IS THOUGH, THAT THAT'S PREEXISTING, THE ONLY DIFFERENCE NOW IS THEY'RE NOW ON A SUBDIVISION TO, UH, MAKE IT SO, YOU KNOW, SO SOMEONE CAN BUY IN AND, YOU KNOW, IF THEY ARE ABLE TO GET A BUYER FOR THAT, AND THERE IS NO OBJECTION FROM THE TOWN, AND THERE'S NO OBJECTION FROM THE SISTERS, AND THERE'S NO OBJECTION TO THE BUYER, THEN, YOU KNOW, I THINK THE MARKET WILL, UH, YOU KNOW, DETERMINE WHAT THE VALUE OF THAT HOUSE IS. YEAH. BUT THE, THERE, MY, I'M STILL NOT VERY CLEAR ABOUT THE PROJECT, AND THEN WHAT THE REQUEST IS IS THAT THIS, THIS, THIS PICTURE, IT SAYS ON A YELLOW LINE IS WHAT THE MARION WOODS PROPERTY? THAT'S CORRECT. CORRECT. AND THEN THE ORANGE IS THE SUBDIVISIONS, THEY'RE REQUESTING PART OF THEIR PROPERTY AND THE ACCESS TO THAT PARTICULAR SUBDIVIDED PLOT WOULD BE THROUGH THEIR DRIVEWAY ACCESS ON THE OTHER SIDE, THIS, THIS, THE OTHER SIDE, WELL, THROUGH THE TOWN PROPERTY, THROUGH THE, SO, SO [01:20:01] THROUGH THE PARK, THROUGH THERE. BUT THEN THERE IS ALSO A ROAD GOES THE EXIT. THAT'S THE ONE WAY. YEAH, IT'S A WAY THROUGH THAT IS ALSO BELONGS TO MARION WOODS OR IT BELONGS TO THE STATE. THE EXIT PART LOOKS LIKE MARION WOODS. THAT'S ON MARION WOODS, THAT'S ON MARION WOODS PROPERTY. AND THERE, THAT SPEAKS TO THE EASEMENT THAT WAS DISCUSSED AS WELL. YES. UM, BEFORE, SO ESTABLISHING, SO, SO THE TWO, I HAVE TWO QUESTION IS THAT WHAT THEY'RE DOING IS, IS A FLAG LOT. UH, WHAT THEY'RE DOING ACTUALLY IS A LOT THAT HAS NO FRONTAGE, AND THEY UNDERSTAND THAT THEY'RE GONNA NEED VARIANCES. AND MR. KIRKPATRICK BRIEFLY TOUCHED ON THE FACT THAT THEY UNDERSTAND THEY'LL NEED TO GO TO THE ZONING BOARD IN CONNECTION WITH THE SUBDIVISION PROPOSAL. OKAY. SO THAT'S, SO, SO THEY WILL CLARIFY WHERE IS THE ACCESS TO THE SUBDIVIDED PROPERTY? ABSOLUTELY. RIGHT. AND THAT WOULD BE, UH, REGARDLESS, IT HAS TO BE A COMMON DRIVEWAY BETWEEN THE LARGER PROPERTY MARION WOODS AND, AND THE SUBDIVIDED PROPERTY. SO THAT SUBDIVIDED LOT WILL NOT HAVE A NEW DRIVEWAY OUT TO THE MAIN ROAD. IT WILL CONTINUE TO UTILIZE WHAT ALREADY EXISTS. SO IN, IN OTHER WORDS, I I'M JUST WANTED TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE, THE CODE IS. IT WOULD BE CLASSIFIED AS A FLAG LOT. NO, NO, IT, IT'D BE CLASSIFIED AS A LOT THAT DOESN'T HAVE FRONTAGE. THAT ORANGE LOT DOESN'T GO OUT TO RIDGE ROAD. SO IT WOULD BE, SO IT IS A, IT IS A LAND, IT'S A LANDLOCKED, IT'S A LAND, LANDLOCKED IS THE BEST WAY TO DESCRIBE IT, LANDLOCKED PARCEL. BUT THAT'S DEVELOPED AND THROUGH THE ZONING PROCESS, THEY'D SEEK TO OBTAIN VARIANCES TO, YOU KNOW, UM, FOR THE FACT THAT THEY DON'T HAVE FRONTAGE ONTO A ROAD AND PROOF TO TOWN STANDARDS. AND THEY DON'T HAVE ACCESS ACROSS FRONTAGE, UH, TO A ROADWAY. NO, THEY HAVE EASEMENT. THEY'LL HAVE EASEMENTS CORRECT. TO DO THAT. SO IT'S A, IT'S A, WE DON'T HAVE ANY PRECEDENCE IN THE TOWN. I'LL RE-ASK MY QUESTION, ACTUALLY. I'M NOT SURE. WELL, THAT'S A DIFFERENT, THAT'S A DIFFERENT QUESTION. THAT'S A DIFFERENT ONE. THAT'S DIFFERENT QUESTION. BUT I, I CAN ANSWER THAT QUESTION. I MEAN, THE ANSWER THAT TONIGHT I HAVE IS, I DON'T KNOW, BUT I, I AM NOT, THERE VERY WELL MAY BE SOME PROPERTIES IN GREENBURG THAT ARE LANDLOCKED THAT HAVE EASEMENTS THAT COME OUT TO A ROAD. SO, UH, WE'D HAVE TO, WE, WE CAN CHECK THAT. BUT THAT, I MEAN, WE'LL LOOK, THAT THAT CERTAINLY HAPPENS. I PURCHASED THE LANDLOCK PROPERTY. THERE YOU GO, . THAT'S RIGHT. SO, UM, OKAY. AND THE SECOND, I MEAN THE, WHAT KIND OF DEVELOPMENT MARIAN WOULD, WOULD LOOK LIKE WHEN, UH, WHEN THE, I MEAN THE, THE WHOLE, I MEAN, I UNDERSTAND THEY'RE LOOKING FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OF THE REMAINING LAND, OR, OR IT'S NOT NO, I DON'T THINK WE'RE JUST TALKING RIGHT NOW ABOUT SELLING ONE HOUSE. ARE YOU PLANNING TO DO FURTHER DEVELOPMENT EXCLUSIVE OF THE R PROPERTY? CORRECT. ARE YOU PLANNING TO DO FURTHER DEVELOPMENT AS ARE THE SISTERS PLANNING FURTHER DEVELOPMENT ON THE SISTER'S PROPERTY? NO. SUCH PLANS? NO. OKAY. NO. OKAY. DO YOU INTEND TO CREATE, DO YOU INTEND TO CREATE PARKING FOR THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY PARKING SPOTS FOR THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY? YEAH, LET ME ASK. OR WILL THEY BE UTILIZING PARKING SPOTS FROM, FROM THE ARCHITECT TO, UH, EXPLAIN EXACTLY HOW THAT'S GOING TO BE REDESIGNED? OKAY, MICHAEL, UH, JUST BEFORE YOU START, YOU KNOW, ANOTHER WAY OF LOOKING AT THIS PROPERTY IS THAT RIGHT NOW THERE ARE TWO RESIDENTS ON, THERE ARE TWO RESIDENTIAL PIECE OF PROPERTY. THE FACT THAT ONE IS A CONVENT AND ONE IS UNLOCKING, BUT BASICALLY IN LOOKING AT THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY, YOU HAVE TWO RESIDENTIAL BUILDING ON THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY RIGHT NOW. THAT'S THE WAY IT EXISTS. AND WHAT THEY'RE DOING IS TAKING ONE PARCEL AND JUST SUBDIVIDING THOSE TWO PARCEL, THAT'S BASIC WHAT'S BEING DONE AND SUBDIVIDING THOSE PARCELS. YOU DON'T MEET ALL THE SETBACKS AND FRONTAGE, AND THAT'S WHERE THE ZONING COMES IN. IS THAT, IS THAT IT'S, IT'S VERY SUCCINCT. YEAH. OKAY. DESCRIPTION. SO, SO, UH, ISN'T IT MAKE SENSE FOR THEM TO GO, TO GET NO SPEAK LOUDER. ISN'T IT MAKE SENSE FOR THEM TO GO TO ZONING AND GET THEIR VARIANCES? BECAUSE THAT'S A MAJOR PIECE OF, UH, YES. IT'S, IT'S A JOINT. IT WOULD BE JOINT, YES. SO SIMILAR TO WHAT THIS BOARD HAS DONE IN CONNECTION WITH PROJECTS THAT ALSO REQUIRE VARIANCES, IS THAT IF FORMAL APPLICATIONS ARE MADE FROM A SEEKER STANDPOINT, REVIEW THIS AS, UM, YOU KNOW, A COORDINATED REVIEW. ONE OF THE BOARDS WOULD BE LEAD AGENCY BEFORE THE PLANNING BOARD WOULD MAKE ANY DECISION. IT WOULD PROBABLY MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO [01:25:01] THE ZONING BOARD, BUT THE APPLICANT WOULD HAVE TO OBTAIN THE VARIANCES BEFORE GETTING ANY DECISION ON THE SUBDIVISION. AND IT'S NOT THAT WE'RE PUTTING THE CART BEFORE THE HORSE, BUT THIS IS A PRE-SUBMISSION CONFERENCE BECAUSE THEY WANT UNDERSTAND FIRST HEAR WHAT, GET FEEDBACK, WHAT ISSUES, WHAT YEAH, YEAH. WHAT ARE IMPORTANT ISSUES. AND I THINK YOU'VE DONE A VERY GOOD JOB OF, UH, RAISING SOME OF THEM. YEAH. I MEAN, MY QUESTION IS, SURE. AND I'M TRYING TO THINK THROUGH WHAT COULD, COULD THIS SET OF PRECEDENT THAT MIGHT CAUSE SOME PROBLEM IN THE FUTURE. THIS IS AN EXISTING RESIDENCE, BEEN THERE A LONG TIME, I DON'T KNOW WHEN IT WAS BUILT, AND WE'RE JUST TALKING ABOUT DOING SOMETHING DIFFERENT WITH IT. COULD THIS HAVE IMPLICATIONS ELSE? I CAN'T THINK OF ANY. IF HE WAS HERE, HE PROBABLY WOULD, BUT THAT'S MY ONLY RESERVATION. I MEAN, AND I'M SORRY, I CALLED YOU MR. FITZPATRICK. I SAW IT WAS KIRKPATRICK AFTERWARDS. MY, MY APOLOGIES. SO I MEAN, WHAT YOU'D HAVE TO SEE THERE ARE, THERE ARE POSSIBLY OTHER PROPERTIES IN THE TOWN THAT HAVE, YOU KNOW, TWO, UH, YOU KNOW, TWO BUILDINGS OR TWO RESIDENCES ON IT. UM, YOU KNOW, THAT'S, YOU KNOW, THERE, THERE'S THAT POSSIBILITY. UM, AGAIN, IS IT UNUSUAL, UNREASONABLE TO THINK THAT SOMEWHERE DOWN THE LINE THEY MIGHT WANT TO SUBDIVIDE, YOU KNOW, THAT, UH, THAT WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, UH, THAT'S NOT UNREASONABLE. ARE THERE SOME OF THEM IN WHICH IT WOULD BE A SITUATION WHERE IT WOULD BE LANDLOCK? IT'S POSSIBLE AS WELL. UM, THE OTHER THING IS, IS AS DAVID MENTIONED, AND AS THE BOARD UNDERSTANDS THAT THIS IS AN EXISTING RESIDENCE VERSUS A VACANT LOT THAT'S LANDLOCKED, AND NOW SOMEBODY WANTS TO PROPOSE A HOUSE ON IT AND SAY, WELL, I CAN GET TO IT THROUGH A SERIES OF EASEMENTS, BUT THERE COULD BE CONCEIVABLY, UH, YEAH. A, A PROPERTY THAT HAS, UH, YOU KNOW, SEVEN ACRES ON IT AND THEY HAVE A MOTHER AND DAUGHTER RESIDENCE OR, OR THAT SORT OF THING WHERE THEY WOULD WANT TO DO THAT. YEAH. IT'S, IT'S POSSIBLE. I MEAN, WE CAN TRY TO TAKE A LOOK ALL INTO THAT AS WELL. AND ONE, I HAVE ONE MORE QUESTION. THE, UM, THIS HOUSE WOULD BE ON ONE ACRES. WHAT'S THE ZONING IN THIS AREA? R 30. R 30, OKAY. SO THIS LOT COULD NOT BE SUBDIVIDED? THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. OUR, I THINK WE'LL DOUBLE CHECK. WE HAVE IT R 20 IN OUR, OUR AGENDA. MY APOLOGIES. R 20, I BELIEVE IT. R 20 BE IT'S R 20. IT'S R 20. IT'S R 20. OKAY. SO THEORETICALLY, UH, THIS PROPERTY COULD BE SUBDIVIDED THEORETICALLY, UH, EVEN IF WE MADE IT SLIGHTLY LESS THAN ONE ACRE, THEORETICALLY ONE COULD APPLY TO THE ZONING BOARD FOR A VARIANCE. SURE. SO, BUT YOU WOULD'VE BE CUTTING THE BABY DOWN THE MIDDLE. I MEAN, THERE'S A, YOU'D HAVE TO BIG BEAUTIFUL MANSION. YOU'D HAVE TO TEAR DOWN THE, THE BIG HOUSE. YEAH. YEAH. WELL, I JUST, BUT THAT HAS BEEN DONE BEFORE. SO TEARING DOWN A BIG HOUSE, NOT, NOT UNPRECEDENTED. IT'S NOT UNPRECEDENTED IN WEST COUNTY. THAT'S WHY I RAISED THE QUESTION. RIGHT. UH, AND IT'S, AGAIN, IT'S A FAIR QUESTION. THE, THE, THE PROCEDURE THOUGH, AT THAT POINT WOULD BE A FUTURE BOARD WOULD TAKE A LOOK AT IT, AND IF IT MADE SENSE TO A FUTURE BOARD AND 75 YEARS FROM NOW, WHICH MIGHT , THEN THAT'S UP FOR THEM, YOU KNOW, WITH RESPECT TO VARIANCES AND ZONING THAT'S APPLICABLE AT THAT TIME. OKAY. I'M SORRY TO INTERRUPT YOU. YOU WERE ABOUT TO MAKE A PRESENTATION, SPEAK ABOUT THE PARKING. YEAH, I THINK THERE WAS A QUESTION ABOUT THE PARKING. PARKING, YES. RIGHT. THANK YOU. UH, MICHAEL MULLIN ELLI, OUR ARCHITECT, UH, HAS DESIGNED, UH, YOU'VE SEEN IT RIGHT UP HERE AND WE CAN SEE IT BEHIND YOU. UM, THE, UH, THE PROPOSAL, UH, TO HANDLE THIS, UM, MICHAEL MOLIN, ELLI, M O L I N E L L I, SO THE PROPERTY LINE THAT SEPARATES THE NEW SUBDIVIDED ONE ACRE RESIDENTIAL LOT AND THE CONTINUING PROPERTY OF MARION WOODS IS, UH, JUST ABOVE THAT VERY BOLD HORIZONTAL LINE, WHICH IS WHERE WE'RE PROPOSING A FENCE. SO THE, THE PROPERTY LINE CUTS ACROSS THE PAGE THERE. SO THE AREA ABOVE REMAINS ON MARION WOODS PROPERTY, AND IT'S THE AREA THROUGH WHICH THE PARK WILL STILL HAVE AN EASEMENT FOR THEM TO ACCESS THE EXIT. WE ARE, UH, CURRENTLY THERE'S A CIRCLE THAT'S COMPLETED. SO OUR PHYSICAL CHANGE IS PROPOSING TO REMOVE THAT CIRCLE ON THE, UH, HOUSE LOT AND THEN PROVIDE SPACES FOR TWO OR THREE CARS, UH, PARKING OUTSIDE, WHICH WOULD BE ON THE PROPERTY OF THE HOUSE WHERE THE ARROW IS NOW. AND THERE WOULD BE SIGNAGE THERE INDICATING THIS IS A PRIVATE RESIDENCE PARKING, SO THAT PEOPLE WOULDN'T DO IT. AND WE WOULD DIVERT ALL THE TRAFFIC THEN TO THE NORTHERN LOOP OF THAT CIRCLE, SLOWING TRAFFIC DOWN, BUT CONTINUING TO GIVE THEM ACCESS. AND SO THE OTHER [01:30:01] PHYSICAL CHANGES, THERE ARE JUST FENCE AND, UH, PLANTINGS TO GIVE THE HOUSE A LITTLE MORE PRIVACY FROM THE PUBLIC THOROUGHFARE. WELL, HOW'S THAT? SIZE IS THREE SPOTS, UH, THREE PARKING SPACE FOR A SINGLE RESIDENCE. THE REQUIREMENT IS TWO, RIGHT? THIS, BUT FOR, ISN'T THAT DEPENDENT ON THE NUMBER OF BEDS OR NO, NO, IT'S TWO PER SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE. ONE OF THE DRIVING FACTORS IS THERE'S A ORIGINAL MANSION IS THERE, UH, THE IDEA IS BY SUBDIVIDING THIS AND SELLING IT TO AN OWNER, IT'S A WAY TO HELP PRESERVE THE MANSION. SO THE GOAL IS TO HAVE THE MANSION SERVE ITS PURPOSE, ONCE AGAIN AS A RESIDENCE. AND CAN YOU EXTEND, CAN YOU ADD SOME MORE PARKING OR NOT? I MEAN, THE, THE, WELL THE RESIDENCE WOULD ONLY REQUIRE TWO SPACES. WE'RE SHOWING THREE. NO, I UNDERSTAND. BUT IF IT NEEDS TO, THEY CAN EXPAND THE P UH, NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES. HE'S ASKING WHETHER YOU COULD FIT IN MORE PARKING. I SUPPOSE WE COULD ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE, UH, OF THE ENTRANCE IF, IF IT BECAME A REQUIREMENT. OKAY. OKAY. ANY OTHER CONCERNS THAT WE WOULD HAVE WITH THIS PROJECT THAT WE HAVE NOT RAISED? YEAH, I THINK THAT WE HAVE NOT, UH, SURFACED. YEAH, I THINK THE LAST, THE, THE, I WAS JUST LOOKING AT THE TRAFFIC, UH, ANALYSIS. SO IT'S ANALYSIS IS FOR THIS SINGLE RESIDENCE THAT HAS BEEN PROPOSED, OR IT'S GONNA BE RE IT WAS, I THINK FOR THE WHOLE, I DON'T HAVE IT IN FRONT OF ME, SO I, I'LL LET THE PPLICANT SPEAK. THE WHOLE TRAFFIC STUDY I SAW WITH THE GRAPH AND ALL THAT STUFF HERE, UH, UNDER, I'M JUST TRYING TO SEE WHAT SUPPORT OF TRAFFIC STUDY, JOHN, IF I RECALL, WASN'T THAT TRACK STUDY DONE TO CONSIDER SOMETHING DIFFERENT AND THEN AS A RESULT YOU DETERMINED THAT THIS IS, UH, THE, THE BEST WAY OF GOING FORWARD? WAY OF GOING FORWARD? YES. THE, UM, OR ORIGINALLY WE ASKED THE TRAFFIC ENGINEER TO HELP US, UH, DETERMINE A WAY FOR THERE TO BE A SEPARATE DRIVEWAY FOR THE MANSION. UH, BECAUSE THEN, UH, IF THE MANSION COULD HAVE ITS OWN DRIVEWAY AND NOT BE SHARING WITH EVERYONE ELSE, IT WOULD BE MORE VALUABLE. UH, THE SISTERS COULD CHARGE MORE, UH, BUT THE TRAFFIC ENGINEER LOOKED AT ALL THE POSSIBILITIES AND IT CAN'T BE DONE. OKAY. SO JUST TO TRANSLATE, THANK SORRY, DID YOU INCLUDE IT? WHAT HAPPENED IS, WHEN THEY CAME, REMEMBER WE HAD, I WAS SAYING WE HAD THESE DISCUSSIONS WHEN THEY CAME TO US, THEY, YOU KNOW, THE FIRST PROPOSAL WAS, WELL, WE'D LIKE TO HAVE OUR OWN, UH, YOU KNOW, UH, UH, TRAFFIC IN AND OUT BY OURSELVES, RIGHT? WE'RE GONNA DO A TRAFFIC STUDY. THE TRAFFIC STUDY BASICALLY SAID THAT IDEA DOESN'T WORK. SO THAT'S WHAT YOU SEE HERE. IT'S NOT NECESSARILY RELEVANT TO THIS CASE OTHER THAN FOR THE FACT OF, SAY, IF, IF YOU KNOW, COR OR TOM SAID, HEY, CAN YOU DO IT THIS WAY? THE ANSWER IS, SORRY, WE DID THE TRAFFIC STUDY AND THE ANSWER'S NO. RIGHT. OKAY. AND LIKE, COULD YOU DO A FLAG LOT? NO. 'CAUSE YOU CAN'T EXTEND. CORRECT. WELL, THAT WAS VERY HELPFUL BECAUSE I WAS LOOKING AT THE TRAFFIC STUDY AND I WAS TRYING TO RELATE TO THIS, AND I, I, I COULDN'T MAKE THE CONNECTION. NOW I'M UNDERSTAND WHY I COULDN'T MAKE THE CONNECTION. I WAS, THANK YOU, DAVID. YOU'RE WELCOME. JACK . GREAT. OKAY. IS THERE, BUT I THINK I WOULD SUGGEST IF YOU CAN MAKE THIS PRESENTATION MORE, UH, COHESIVE OR MORE UNDERSTANDABLE WOULD BE GOOD BECAUSE IT'S A COMBINED EFFORT OF ALL OF US TO UNDERSTAND WHAT'S GOING ON. SO WOULD BE HELPFUL TOO, IF YOU'RE GOING TO THE ZONING BOARD OR TO THE PUBLIC HEARING. YEAH. RIGHT. AND, AND THE BOARD ALSO, IF AND WHEN THERE'S A FORMAL APPLICATION, YOU'LL GET A FULL ON STAFF REPORT THAT WILL HELP GUIDE YOU THROUGH FULLY UNDERSTANDING AS WELL. BUT WE WOULD WANT FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WATCHING AT HOME OR IN PERSON, AND WE CAN DISCUSS THAT AND YEAH, CERTAINLY. THANK YOU. KIRKPATRICK'S VERY FAMILIAR WITH ME. DIAGRAMS OF THE EASEMENT WILL BE EXTREMELY HELPFUL. SO WE, YOU TALKED ABOUT THE EASEMENT, BUT WE, WE HAD TO SORT OF FIGURE OUT HOW THE, WHERE TO RUN. SO IF YOU HAD THAT, THAT WOULD BE VERY HELPFUL. RIGHT. KEEP IN MIND THESE PLANS WILL BE MORE FULLY DEVELOPED TOO. YEAH. YEAH. WELL, THE PURPOSE, WELL, THIS PURPOSE OF PRE PRIME, UH, SESSION IS TO RAISE THOSE ISSUES THAT WE SUGGEST THAT THE APPLICANT SHOULD INCLUDE WHEN THEY MAKE A FORMAL PRESENTATION. AND I THINK, I HOPE WE'LL BE ABLE TO DO THAT THIS EVENING TO GIVE YOU SOME IDEAS OF WHAT [01:35:01] WE WILL BE LOOKING AT IF THIS TURNED INTO A FORMAL APPLICATION. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE REALLY APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU. I, I THINK FOR THE PURPOSE OF THE APPLICANT'S, I'M NOT HEARING ANY MAJOR OBJECTIONS OR ANY BIG OBSTACLES. NO. BUT, SO THEY COULD TAKE AWAY THAT WE'RE NOT OPPOSED TO THIS, IT SEEMS, I KNOW IT'S NOT A FORMAL VOTE. RIGHT. WE'RE OPEN AND WE'VE EXPRESSED OUR COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS. RIGHT. BUT I, BUT I LIKE TO RESERVE IT TO UNDERSTAND THE WHOLE FOOL PACKAGE AND UNDERSTOOD. AND THE THINGS MM-HMM. . OKAY. GREAT. DO YOU HAVE ANY, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OF THE, ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS OF THE BOARD OR YOU, YOU'RE CONFIDENT AS TO WHICH WAY TO GO ON THIS NOW? UM, AS I UNDERSTAND THE PROCESS, UM, OUR NEXT THING IS TO GET A, UM, UH, A LETTER, UH, FROM STAFF. SO WE, UH, HAVE STANDING BEFORE THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS. UM, IF THOSE VARIANCES ARE GRANTED, UM, THE STANDARD PROCESS WOULD BE A PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION, RIGHT. AND THEN A FINAL SUBDIVISION. RIGHT? RIGHT. UH, IS THERE ANY REASON THAT WE CANNOT, UH, GIVE YOU A FINAL PLAT WHEN WE COME IN FOR THE PRELIMINARY APPROVAL? NO, YOU WON'T GET IT. SO I, SO, UH, I WON'T GIVE IT TO YOU A COUPLE OF THINGS AND, AND I WILL DISCUSS WITH THE COMMISSIONER. MY UNDERSTANDING WOULD BE IS THAT YOUR NEXT STEP WOULD BE TO SUBMIT THE PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION APPLICATION MM-HMM. BEFORE THAT COMES TO THE BOARD, WE CIRCULATE THAT TO TOWN STAFF. THAT INCLUDES THE BUILDING INSPECTOR. OKAY. OKAY. AT THAT TIME, THE BUILDING INSPECTOR WILL IDENTIFY THE VARIANCES AND THEN THAT WOULD ALLOW YOU TO FILE WITH THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS. THEN FROM A SEEKER STANDPOINT, UH, THERE WOULD BE, UM, THERE WOULD BE A LEAD AGENCY IDENTIFIED AND WHETHER IT BE THE PLANNING BOARD OF THE ZONING BOARD, BUT THE PROJECTS WOULD RUN ALONG THE SAME COURSE. SO YOU WOULDN'T NECESSARILY JUST GO TO THE ZONING BOARD, SEE IF YOU GET THE VARIANCES AND THEN COME BACK. UM, THERE'D BE A LITTLE BOUNCING BACK AND FORTH. THAT'S JUST THE WAY THE PROCESS IS. OKAY. IN TERMS OF THE PLAT ITSELF, UM, YOU KNOW, MAYBE IF YOU JUST KIND OF WANT TO PREPARE THE PLATT ONE TIME, YOU COULD JUST SAY PLATT, YOU DON'T HAVE TO SAY PRELIMINARY OR FINAL MM-HMM. . UM, ULTIMATELY IF THE PLANNING BOARD ISSUES A PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION APPROVAL, THE PLATT WOULD END UP GOING TO THE COUNTY AND GET ENDORSED AND THEN COME BACK. AND IF A FINAL SUBDIVISION WAS APPROVED, THEN IT WOULD BE SIGNED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE TAX RECEIVER AND OTHERS. SO YOU CAN JUST CALL IT PLAT. OKAY, GREAT. YOU KNOW, WE'RE FINE WITH THAT. THAT'S WHY I SAID THE FINAL, THE FINAL STEP IS LEFT UP TO WESTCHESTER COUNTY. UNDERSTOOD. THANK YOU. THIS, THIS IS VERY HELPFUL. YEAH. UNTIL WE GET THAT IT'S NOT FINALIZED. OKAY. ALSO, JUST PROCEDURE WISE, SO YOU, SO AFTER YOU GET ALL THE APPLICATIONS IN, YOU'RE GONNA PRESENT BACK TO THIS BOARD FIRST? CORRECT. OKAY. THEY WILL NOT, UH, THEY WILL CONDUCT CCRA, UH, AND ALSO AT THE TIME THAT THEY CONDUCT THAT, UM, IT'S ACTUALLY REQUIRED, UH, FOR THIS BOARD TO GIVE A RECOMMENDATION BACK TO THE Z B A. THAT CAN BE POSITIVE, NEGATIVE, OR NEUTRAL. UM, UM, AND THEN, THEN IT'LL GO TO THE Z B A ONCE IT HAS THE RECOMMENDATION, UH, AND CCRA DONE. AND THEN ONCE CCRA IS, UH, RATHER, ONCE THE VARIANCES, YOU KNOW, PRESUMABLY ARE APPROVED, THEN IT WILL COME BACK TO US FOR THE SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION COMPLETION THAT'S DONE. THEN YOU SUBMIT STUFF TO THE COUNTY. MAY TAKE A WHILE. UM, BUT UH, THEN IT WILL COME BACK, UH, FOR US FOR, UH, AND THERE WAS A PUBLIC HEARING, OBVIOUSLY FOR THE SUBDIVISION HERE ON THE PRELIMINARY, CERTAINLY. OKAY. RIGHT. SO I GIVE THE QUICK VIEW AND DAVID GAVE THE THOROUGH, I'M THE LAWYER. ABSOLUTELY. DID DAVID CONFUSE YOU OR CLARIFY THAT? . OKAY. WELL, I HOPE THAT YOU FOUND THIS SESSION HELPFUL. VERY. AND PROVIDED YOU WITH SUFFICIENT GUIDANCE. SO YOU COULD MAKE A DETERMINATION IF YOU SHOULD GO TO NEXT STEP AND ACTUALLY MAKE A FORMAL AND SORRY, AND ACTUALLY MAKING A FORMAL APPLICATION. YES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR, UH, YOUR PATIENCE AND ATTENTION AND, UH, ALL THE GOOD SUGGESTIONS. OKAY. HAVE A GOOD EVENING. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU ALL. THANK YOU. GOOD LUCK EVERYONE. WE'RE DONE RIGHT? WE DON'T NEED, WE ARE DONE. OKAY. SO EVERYONE, PLEASE SHUT YOUR MICS OFF. UH, * This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.