[00:00:02]
[ DRAFT TOWN OF GREENBURGH PLANNING BOARD AGENDA WEDNESDAY, February 16, 2022 – 7:00 P.M. Meetings of the Planning Board will be adjourned at 10:00 p.m. ]
GENTLEMEN.WELCOME TO THE PLANNING BOARD MEETING OF FEBRUARY 16TH, 2022.
MR. SCHMIDT, COULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLE? ABSOLUTELY.
UM, NEXT ON THE AGENDA IS THE APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES.
ANYBODY HAVE ANY CHANGES TO THE MINUTES? YEAH, I HAVE ONE COMMENT.
IT'S UH, ON PAGE FOUR, LAST PARAGRAPH.
I THINK I HAD ASKED TWO QUESTIONS AND, UH, THE QUESTION FIRST ONE IS BEEN NOTED.
THE SECOND QUESTION WAS THAT, UH, COULD WE ASK MIDWAY SHOPPING CENTER IN LIGHT OF PARKING DEDUCTIONS THAT THEY'RE REQUESTING TO IMPROVE THE STATE OF REPAIR RESURFACING OF THE PARKING LOT? OKAY.
WE CAN VERIFY THAT AND ADD IT.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS? CAN I HAVE A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE MINUTES AS AMENDED THEN? SO MOVED.
ALL OPPOSED? ANY ABSTENTIONS? OKAY, MOVING ON.
I'LL GET, UH, AARON, I CAN HANDLE CORRESPONDENCE.
IT'S JUST, IT'S JUST THE BEST.
RIGHT? DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE? UH, NO.
THE ONLY, JUST A, JUST A NOTE THAT WE DID CIRCULATE A UPDATED CASE LIST SO THAT YOU COULD, YOU KNOW, THIN OUT YOUR FILES.
TWO QUICK THINGS I WANNA MENTION, UH, AT TIME OF CORRESPONDENCE.
THE REASON WE HAVEN'T SEEN IT, UH, BACK HERE IS THEY HAVE NOT SUBMITTED THE PAPERWORK NECESSARY TO GET BACK HERE YET.
SO IT'S STILL ON HOLD UNTIL WE GET, GET THE PAPERWORK.
THEY, THEY HAVEN'T DONE THE, UH, ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM FOR EXAMPLE, YET.
AND THEY HAVE NOT RESPONDED TO THE C A C COMMENTS EITHER.
BOTH OF THINGS WE NEED TO GO, GO ON.
SO THAT'S, THAT'S WHERE WE ARE WITH BLOOM, UM, MIDWAY IN GREENVILLE.
THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF BACK AND FORTH IN THE LAST COUPLE OF DAYS BETWEEN MYSELF AND, UH, THE GREENVILLE FIRE DISTRICT.
UH, WE REALLY NEED THEIR COMMENTS TO, UH, HAVE A PRODUCTIVE WORK SESSION.
MY GOAL IS TO GET THEM TO COME TO A WORK SESSION WITH THE APPLICANT AND WORK OUT ANY ISSUES IF THEY HAVE ANY, UM, AT THAT MEETING PRIOR TO US HAVING A PUBLIC HEARING SO THAT WE'VE WORKED OUT ALL THE KINKS BEFORE WE HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING.
TO THAT REGARD, WHAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT, AND THIS WAS ACTUALLY A GREAT SUGGESTION BY MR. GOLDMAN, UH, THANK YOU MICHAEL 'CAUSE IT WORKED OUT VERY WELL, IS WE SET A DEADLINE FOR THE GREENVILLE FIRE DEPARTMENT DISTRICT, EXCUSE ME, TO RESPOND TO US IN WRITING OF FEBRUARY 24TH, UM, IN ANTICIPATION OF A WORK SESSION ON MARCH 2ND OF WHICH THEY'VE BEEN INVITED TO.
THEY'VE BEEN INVITED TO TWO OTHER WORK SESSIONS PRIOR TO THAT, UH, FEBRUARY 2ND AND FEBRUARY 16TH.
UH, AND, AND HAVE DECLINED EITHER TIME, BOTH TIMES.
'CAUSE THEY'RE, THEY'RE NOT READY.
UM, THEY'VE HAD, JUST FOR THE RECORD, THEY'VE HAD THE, THEY SAW, THEY DID A SITE VISIT IN SEPTEMBER WHERE THEY SAW THE REVISED LOCATION OF, OF THE BATTERY STORAGE.
THEY GOT A COMPLETED APPLICATION ON NOVEMBER 19TH.
UH, AARON'S PUT TOGETHER A FULL TIMELINE.
THEY GOT IT AGAIN IN THE BEGINNING OF JANUARY.
'CAUSE THEY COULDN'T FIND THE, THEY, THEY HAD MISPLACED THE ORIGINALS.
SO THEY, THEY HAVE AMPLE TIME TO GET IT TO US BY FEBRUARY 24TH.
AND, UH, MR. GRODEN, UH, WROTE BACK TO ME AND SAID THEY WILL HAVE IT BY, BY FEBRUARY 24TH.
AND SO WE WILL BE ON THE, ON THE CALENDAR ON MARCH 2ND ON THAT.
UM, I THINK THAT'S ALL IN CORRESPONDENCE.
DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD TO THAT, AARON? NO, THAT WAS IT.
THEN LET'S MOVE ON TO OLD BUSINESS, WHICH IS, UH, WE HAVE ONE APPROVAL TONIGHT, WHICH IS, UH, CASE PB 2128 PATEL, WHICH IS LAND
[00:05:01]
WATERCOURSE PERMIT.UH, IT'S A, WE HAVE A COUPLE OF VOTES WE NEED TO DO ON THIS TONIGHT.
SO WE DON'T HAVE, HAVE TO DO A SEEKER VOTE ON THIS.
YOU, YOU WOULD JUST WANT, I THINK YOU WOULD WANT TO TAKE A VOTE, A VOTE TO IDENTIFY OR CLASSIFY AS A TYPE TWO.
CAN SOMEBODY MOVE THAT? UH, THIS IS A TYPE TWO ACTION UNDER SEEKER.
WALTER FIRST AND THEN
AND SO NOW IT'S A TYPE TWO ACTION.
WE DON'T HAVE TO TAKE ANY FURTHER ACTION.
UM, DO YOU WANNA DESCRIBE, UH, WHERE WE ARE ON THIS, UH, AARON AND THE RECOMMENDATION? UM, CAN I, CAN I RAISE ONE QUESTION BEFORE WE YES, SIR.
NO, I KNOW, I KNOW, I KNOW, I KNOW, I KNOW, I KNOW.
ON THE APPROVAL FORM IT'S LISTED AS 2102.
CAN WE GET A CLARIFICATION AS TO WHAT THE RIGHT NUMBER IS? GOOD CATCH.
SO THE CORRECT NUMBER IS, UM, PB 21 DASH 28.
THAT WAS A CARRYOVER, AND I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT FROM THE PRIOR APPLICATION FOR THIS EXACT PROPERTY.
SO IF YOU RECALL, UM, AND I'LL, I'LL MENTION THOSE IN MY OPENING REMARKS.
SO, MICHAEL, THANK YOU FOR POINTING THAT OUT.
UM, AS CHAIRPERSON SCHWARTZ INDICATED, THE PROJECT'S PB 2128 PATEL LOCATED AT 25 BAYBERRY ROAD, PO ELMSFORD IN THE R 41 FAMILY RESIDENCE DISTRICT.
THE APPLICANT SEEKS A WETLAND WATERCOURSE PERMIT IN CONNECTION WITH THE PROPOSED DEMOLITION OF AN EXISTING ONE.
FAMILY DWELLING AND CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW ONE.
FAMILY DWELLING PREDOMINANTLY WITHIN THE FOOTPRINT OF THE EXISTING RESIDENCE, ALONG WITH RELATED IMPROVEMENTS.
THE WATERCOURSE AND WATERCOURSE BUFFER AREA ON THE APPLICANT'S PROPERTY CONSISTS OF APPROXIMATELY 35,591 SQUARE FEET.
AND THE APPLICANT HAS PROPOSED APPROXIMATELY 5,670 SQUARE FEET OF DISTURBANCE ALL WITHIN THE REGULATED BUFFER AREA.
THERE IS NO DIRECT DISTURBANCE TO THE WATER COURSE PROPOSED AS PART OF THE PROJECT.
THE APPLICANT PREVIOUSLY APPLIED FOR AND WAS GRANTED A MINOR WETLAND WATER COURSE PERMIT AS PART OF CASE NUMBER BB 21 DASH ZERO TWO, INVOLVING RESIDENTIAL ADDITIONS TO THE EXISTING RESIDENCE.
FOLLOWING APPROVAL OF THAT PROJECT, THE APPLICANT PROPOSED MODIFICATIONS TO ITS PLANTS, WHICH NECESSITATE A NEW WETLAND WATER COURSE PERMIT APPROVAL AS DETERMINED BY THE BUILDING INSPECTOR AND TOWN WETLANDS INSPECTOR.
THE PROJECT WAS LAST DISCUSSED BY THE PLANNING BOARD ON FEBRUARY 2ND AS PART OF A PUBLIC HEARING.
NO ADDITIONAL COMMENTS HAVE BEEN RECEIVED SINCE THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED.
DRAFT DECISION WITH CONDITIONS HAS BEEN PREPARED FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION THIS EVENING.
THERE ARE NO SPECIAL CONDITIONS TO BRING TO YOUR ATTENTION.
I DID WANT TO NOTE, HOWEVER, THAT THE HISTORIC AND LANDMARKS PRESERVATION BOARD NOW HAS REVIEWED THE APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL AND HAS NO OBJECTION TO THE PROJECT MOVING FORWARD.
AS PROPOSED, YOU'VE ALREADY TAKEN A VOTE ON THE SECRET DETERMINATION.
SO THE BOARD, UNLESS THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS, CONSIDER A VOTE, CAN CONSIDER A VOTE ON THE WETLAND WATERCOURSE PERMIT.
MR. GOLDEN MICHAEL? YEAH, IF, IF, IF I RECALL CORRECTLY, EVER TAPPING, PLEASE STOP THAT OR MUTE YOURSELF.
SORRY, STILL TAPPING, BUT, ALL RIGHT.
UM, AT, AT THE LAST WORK SESSION, UM, I ASKED THE APPLICANT IF THEY DON'T WANTED TO CLEAR AWAY ALL THE UNDERGROWTH BRUSH AND THE INVASIVE SPECIES TO THE RIGHT OF THE STREAM FACING THE HOUSE.
I DON'T HAVE THE PLANS IN FRONT OF ME, SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT DIRECTION THAT IS, BUT IT'S ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE STREAM FROM THE HOUSE.
AND I GUESS MY QUESTION TO AARON IS THAT, DID, DID THEY, DID THEY AMEND THEIR APPLICATION TO INCLUDE THAT OR DOES THE APPROVAL, YOU KNOW, RECOGNIZE THAT FACT? SO THAT WOULD BE SOUTH OF THE WATERCOURSE, I BELIEVE.
UM, WE DIDN'T GET ANY AMENDMENT TO THE APPLICATION OR AN UPDATE ON THE PLANS.
I DON'T BELIEVE WE CAN ASK MR. BUCK ON THAT.
BUT HOWEVER, WE DID LOOK AT THE CODE AND ASIDE FROM GRADING OF THE AREA, IF THEY WANTED TO JUST CLEAR THE VEGETATION, THEY CAN DO THAT ADMINISTRATIVELY.
IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE PART OF A PLANNING BOARD APPROVAL.
YOU MAY HAVE MENTIONED THAT LAST TIME.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS BEFORE WE TAKE A VOTE ON THIS?
[00:10:01]
OKAY, I'LL, UH, I'LL ACCEPT A MOTION TO APPROVE THE WETLAND WATER COURSE AS AMENDED.'CAUSE WE'RE CHANGING THE, UH, 2 21, 28 FROM 2102, CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT.
DO I HAVE A SECOND? MICHAEL MOVED IT.
THANK YOU ALL, ALL FOR YOUR TIME.
WE'RE GONNA GO ON A PUBLIC HEARING NOW.
UM, CYNTHIA, YOU READY? WHERE IS SHE? I DON'T SEE HER.
YOU, YOU TELL US WHEN YOU'RE READY.
SO I'LL ANNOUNCE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
UM, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WE'RE NOW GOING INTO PUBLIC HEARING.
UH, WE HAVE ONE CASE ON FOR TONIGHT.
THAT IS CASE PB 2134 SHAW AT 25 THOMAS STREET.
UH, MR. SCHMIDT, COULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING? SURE.
BUT BEFORE WE GO INTO THE ACTUAL HEARING, UH, WE HAVE SOME SECRET UNFINISHED, UH, SECRET BUSINESS ON THIS.
UH, CAN I HAVE A MOTION TO DECLARE THIS IN UNLISTED ACTION UNDER SEEKER? SO MOVED.
COULD I HAVE A MOTION TO DECLARE A NEGATIVE DECLARATION ON THIS? SO MOVE, WALTER? YES.
I THINK WAS COR ALL IN FAVOR? A AYE.
UH, AARON, WHY DON'T YOU GIVE US A DESCRIPTION AND THEN, UH, LET THE APPLICANT, UH, TELL THE PUBLIC ABOUT THE PROJECT.
SO, AS CHAIRPERSON SCHWARTZ INDICATED, THE NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS CASE NUMBER PB 21 DASH 34.
SHAW LOCATED AT 25 THOMAS STREET, PO SCARSDALE IN THE R 21 FAMILY RESIDENCE ZONING DISTRICT.
THE APPLICANT HAS SUBMITTED A PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION APPLICATION INVOLVING THE PROPOSED RE SUBDIVISION OF TWO LOTS INTO ONE LOT TO FACILITATE AN ADDITION TO AN EXISTING ONE.
FAMILY RESIDENCE PARCEL 19 KNOWN AS 25 THOMAS STREET CONTAINS A ONE FAMILY RESIDENCE AND ASSOCIATED IMPROVEMENTS AND CONSISTS OF APPROXIMATELY 45,302 SQUARE FEET.
PARCEL 18.2 CONTAINS MINOR IMPROVEMENTS, PREDOMINANTLY THE DRIVEWAY FOR THE 25 THOMAS STREET RESIDENCE AND CONSISTS OF APPROXIMATELY 3,485 SQUARE FEET.
THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING IN ADDITION TO THE REAR OF ITS EXISTING RESIDENCE AND IS APPLYING FOR THIS RE SUBDIVISION IN ORDER TO MEET THE FLOOR AREA RATIO REQUIREMENTS OF THE TOWN ZONING ORDINANCE.
THE MAXIMUM FLOOR AREA RATIO PERMITTED ONCE THE LOTS ARE COMBINED IS 8123.3 SQUARE FEET, AND THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A GROSS FLOOR AREA OF 8109.6 SQUARE FEET.
THE PROJECT WAS LAST DISCUSSED AS PART OF A WORK SESSION ON FEBRUARY 2ND, 2022.
SINCE WE HAVE NOW COMPLETED THE SEEKER PROCESS, I WOULD LIKE TO INDICATE THAT THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE IS PRESENT THIS EVENING, MR. ELLI, AND I'D LIKE TO TURN THINGS OVER TO HIM AND HIS TEAM FOR PRESENTATION OF THE APPLICATION TO THE BOARD AND TO MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC.
MR. CHAIRMAN, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD, MY NAME IS STEVEN ELLI FROM VANNA RUSO, KDO SCHWARTZ ANDDO ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT.
UH, HERE WITH ME, UH, THIS EVENING, AS WELL AS MR. SARRO GUAN.
HE'S THE PROJECT ARCHITECT AND HE, UM, SHOULD THE BOARD WISH IS PREPARED TO REVIEW THE PROPOSED WORK AND THE SURVEY AND THE PLANS, UH, THAT ARE BEFORE THE BOARD.
[00:15:01]
UM, AS MR. UH, SCHMIDT HAS ALREADY MENTIONED, THE APPLICANT'S, UH, ONLY ISSUING CONNECTION WITH THE ADDITION TO THE HOUSE IS A GROSS FLOOR AREA.AND ONCE THE TWO PIECES OF PROPERTY ARE COMBINED, THE PROPOSED WORK WILL BE, UM, 100% COMPLIANT WITH THE TOWN OF GREENBERG'S ZONING CODE.
THE PROPOSED WORK INCLUDES A ONE STORY ADDITION, A PROPOSED PATIO, AND A PROPOSED SOLARIUM, UM, ALL AS INDICATED ON THE PLANS THAT HAVE BEEN PROVIDED TO THE BOARD.
UM, ALL OF THE, ALL OF THIS WORK IS, IS, IS ACTUALLY GOING TO BE PERFORMED ON THE NORTHERLY SIDE, WHICH IS THE REAR OF THE EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY STRUCTURE.
UM, ONCE AGAIN, THIS IS A, A, A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE.
UM, IT IS, IT IS THEIR RESIDENCE.
AND I DON'T THINK I HAVE ANYTHING ELSE TO ADD.
ONCE THE TWO PARCELS ARE COMBINED.
UM, THE TOTAL, UM, SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE PROPERTIES US COMBINED WILL BE 48,787 SQUARE FEET, WHICH IS 1.12 ACRES.
UM, IT'S RELATIVELY STRAIGHTFORWARD, UH, UH, PROJECT MR. CHAIRMAN, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD, AGAIN, I HAVE THE PROJECT ARCHITECT HERE, AND SHOULD THE BOARD LIKE TO REVIEW ANY OF THE DETAILS OF THE PROPOSED WORK, UM, HE'S AVAILABLE TO REVIEW THOSE AND ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS OF THE BOARD.
YEAH, I THINK IT WOULD BE GOOD TO SHOW IT TO THE PUBLIC TO SHOW THE PLANS TO THE PUBLIC AND TRY TO DO IT, YOU KNOW, IN A FAIRLY SUCCINCT MANNER.
BUT IT, BUT THAT WOULD BE GOOD.
IF, IF FOR ANY REASON YOU NEED ME TO SHARE THE DRAWINGS, I'M HAPPY TO DO SO.
WE'VE ENABLED THE SHARE SCREEN TO ALLOW YOU TO DO THAT.
I THINK, UM, I THINK MR. SCHMIDT, WE WILL, WE'LL SHARE THE SCREEN AND WE'LL PULL IT UP FOR MORE END.
SO IT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO WALK EVERYONE THROUGH THE TWO LOTS AND THEN, UM, YOU KNOW, SOME COMPONENTS OF THE ADDITION.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT FEED FEEDBACK IS.
CAN EVERYBODY MUTE UNLESS THEY'RE TALKING, PLEASE, BECAUSE THERE'S SOME STRAIGHT, I THINK THE, UH, IT MIGHT BE A FEEDBACK WHEN WE SPEAK AND IT COMES BACK ON, UH, MS. MS. ELLIS AND NOW HE'S MUTED.
I THINK THAT THAT'S WHAT THE THING IS, SO, WE'LL, OKAY.
KEEP QUIET AND WE'LL, UH, MUTE AND HAVE STEVE SPEAK.
UH, CAN ANYONE, CAN EVERYONE SEE THE SCREEN? YES.
SO, UH, CURRENTLY THIS SITE PLAN SHOWS, UM, BOTH PARCELS WITH THE ORIGINAL PARCEL HIGHLIGHTED IN RED.
UH, THIS IS THE PARCEL THAT IS, UH, 45,000 SQUARE FEET AND WHERE THE EXISTING RESIDENCE LIES ON.
AND, UH, HERE IT'S INDICATED THE, UH, EXISTING FOOTPRINT OF THE HOUSE AND THE PROPOSED EXTENSION IN THE REAR.
AND, UM, E ESSENTIALLY IN ORDER TO, UM, HAVE ENOUGH BUILDABLE FLOOR AREA, UH, PARCEL 18.2 WOULD HAVE TO BE ADDED TO, UH, BUILD UP THAT F A R.
BUT NOW I'D ALSO LIKE TO JUST PRESENT VISUALLY WHAT IS PROPOSED.
UH, SO THERE WILL, THERE WILL BE NEW FOUNDATION, UH, WORK, UH, NEW EXCAVATION WORK, UH, FOR THE NEW FOOTINGS FOR THE SOLARIUM AND THE EXTENSION OF THE FIRST FLOOR.
ESSENTIALLY THE, UH, KITCHEN, BREAKFAST ROOM, LIVING ROOM AND DEN THAT REAR PORTION OF THE HOUSE WILL BE DEMOLISHED AND EXTENDED ABOUT SIX FEET.
AND THEN, SORRY, OH, PARDON ME, SORRY.
A SOLARIUM WILL BE BUILT, WHICH WILL BE DOUBLE A DOUBLE HEIGHT SPACE.
UH, AS YOU CAN SEE OVER HERE, WHICH I'VE HIGHLIGHTED, THIS WILL BE THE DOUBLE HEIGHT SPACE.
AND, UM, ONE OF THE PURPOSES OF, UM, GETTING THE ADDITIONAL FLOOR AREA, IN FACT, IS THAT ANY SPACE WITH A CEILING HEIGHT GREATER THAN 15 FEET IS COUNTED TWICE FOR ZONING PURPOSES.
UH, SO YOU'LL SEE HERE ON THE SECOND FLOOR, THE SOLARIUM IS ACTUALLY EXTENDING UP, BUT THERE'S NO FLOOR, USABLE FLOOR THERE.
IT'S JUST A DOUBLE HEIGHT SPACE.
AND THERE WILL BE AN INTERIOR TERRACE IN THERE.
OTHERWISE THERE'S JUST A NEW, UH, ROOF
[00:20:01]
OVER THAT FIRST FLOOR EXTENSION.AND I'D LIKE TO NOW PRESENT, UH, RENDERING A MOCK UP OF THE, UH, SOLARIUM.
THIS IS, UH, WHAT WE HAVE IT IN MIND FOR IT WITH.
UM, IT'LL BE BUILT UP WITH, UH, WITH WINDOWS IN THE INFILL AND, UH, AND COPPER, UH, LEADERS AND GUTTERS.
AND, UM, THAT'S, THAT'S REALLY THE SUMMARY OF WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING.
THERE'S ALSO A TRELLIS TRELLIS IN THE REAR.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR MEMBERS OF THE BOARD? NO.
IS ANYBODY, GO AHEAD, WALTER, YOU JUST GO BACK TO THE ORIGINAL DIAGRAM THAT SHOWS TWO PIECES OF PROPERTY AND JUST OUTLINE THE ADDITION.
I THINK THAT WAS MAINLY DRIVEWAY, WAS IT NOT? YEAH.
UH, SO, UH, THIS SHOWS THE TWO PARCELS AND THE RED IS THE ORIGINAL PARCEL AND THAT THAT PASTA SHAPED PORTION, THAT'S 18.2, THE ELBOW.
ANYBODY ELSE IN THE BOARD? NO.
UM, I CAN'T SEE THE WHOLE, THE WHOLE SCREEN NOW, UH, BECAUSE OF THE SCREEN SHARING.
COULD YOU TAKE THAT DOWN FOR A SECOND SO I CAN SEE IF ANYBODY PUBLICLY WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK? OKAY.
WE, WE DO CHAIR BURRS SCHWARTZ.
WE DO HAVE MR. BODEN WHO DOES WISH TO SPEAK.
UM, FOR THIS ADDITION, WILL THERE BE ANY ADDITIONAL HEATING REQUIREMENTS? AND IF SO, WHAT IS THE CURRENT HEATING PRO, UH, SOURCE? AND IF THERE IS ADDITIONAL HEATING, WHAT WILL IT BE? CONSIDERING THE FACT THAT, UH, YOU CAN'T ADD, UH, FUEL OIL, UH, DIESEL OIL, HOME OIL TO IT, YOU GOTTA USE, UM, ONE OF THE OTHER ONES.
SO I'D LIKE SOME CLARIFICATION ON THAT.
BECAUSE OF GLOBAL WARMING AND THE FACT THAT FOSSIL FUELS ARE BEING PHASED OUT, UM, I NEED TO KNOW, UH, IF THERE'S ANY ADDITIONAL HEATING AND SINCE HE BROUGHT UP THE FACT THAT THEY'RE DOING THIS ADDITIONAL EVENING.
OKAY, LET'S, SORRY, LET'S COLLECT ALL THE QUESTIONS AND SURE.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH MR. BODEN FOR THAT.
AND IT WILL BE ANSWERED, I PROMISE.
ANYBODY ELSE IN THE PUBLIC WANNA SPEAK ON THIS? I DON'T BELIEVE ANYONE ELSE SIGNED UP.
THEN NOW YOU CAN ANSWER THE QUESTION FOR MR. BODEN.
UM, OF COURSE, THAT, THAT IS A CONCERN, UH, ESPECIALLY SINCE THIS IS GOING TO BE A GREENHOUSE.
UH, UH, WE HAVE SPECIFIED, UM, DOUBLE GLAZED WINDOWS, UH, WITH THE NECESSARY, UM, INFILL IN THEM, UH, TO MEET THE ENERGY CODES.
AND OF COURSE, THIS WILL BE A NEW SPACE.
IT, IT HAS TO BE CONDITIONED AND, UH, THAT SPACE WILL BE CONDITIONED, HEATED AND COOLED BY, UH, A HEAT PUMP SPLIT SYSTEM.
UH, I BELIEVE IT'S, IT'S, IT'S THOSE, UH, SPLIT UNITS THAT YOU MIGHT BE FAMILIAR WITH IN, UH, SOME PLACES.
AND THOSE ARE POWERED BY ELECTRICITY, ESSENTIALLY.
THEY'LL, THERE'S NO OIL, UH, FUEL INVOLVED WITH THEM.
THEY JUST DRAW THEIR POWER FROM THE ELECTRIC GRID OTHERWISE.
OTHERWISE, THE, YOU KNOW, UM, THE, WE DON'T, THERE'S NO NEW BATHROOM PROPOSED, SO, UH, THERE'S NO INCREASE TO THE HOT WATER HEATING LOAD OF THE HOUSE.
WE DO INTEND ON REPLACING HOT WATER HEATERS AS WE'LL SPECIFY MORE EFFICIENT, UH, MODELS.
BUT OTHER, OTHER THAN THAT, THERE'S NO INCREASE IN, UH, FOSSIL FUEL LOAD OF THE HOUSE WHEN IT COMES TO OIL OR GAS.
THERE WILL BE AN INCREASED ELECTRICAL LOAD COMMENSURATE WITH THAT SPACE THAT IS IN THERE.
NOBODY ELSE FROM THE PUBLIC? CORRECT.
THEN I WOULD RECOMMEND WE HAVE A, A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE SUBJECT AND LEAVE THE RECORD OPEN FOR HOW LONG, AARON? WE WOULD RECOMMEND TO FEBRUARY THE 23RD.
DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND LEAVE THE RECORD OPEN UNTIL FEBRUARY 23RD? SO MOVED.
ALL OPPOSED? OKAY, THE MOTION CARRIES.
CAN I HAVE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING PORTION OF OUR MEETING THIS EVENING, PLEASE? SO MOVED.
[00:25:02]
ALL OPPOSED? OKAY.WE'RE GONNA GO BACK INTO WORK SESSION.
CYNTHIA, YOUR WORK IS DONE FOR TONIGHT.
WE'LL TRY TO BE TOUGHER IF YOU COME BACK.
AND JUST TO MENTION TO THE APPLICANT, UM, WE WILL PREPARE A DRAFT DECISION FOR THE BOARD'S CONSIDERATION AT ITS NEXT MEETING ON MARCH 2ND.
UH, BACK IN THE WORK SESSION, THE FIRST ONE WE HAVE IS THE JUMBO EYE PROJECT AT 28 FAITH LANE, WHICH IS A, UH, STEEP SLOPE PERMIT AND TREE REMOVAL PERMIT, I BELIEVE FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A SWIMMING POOL, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN.
UM, MR. MR. SCHMIDT, COULD YOU GO INTO THE DETAILS OF THAT PROJECT PLEASE? ABSOLUTELY.
IT IS REGARDING A SWIMMING POOL.
UH, CASE NUMBER PB 21 DASH 17.
JOHN BELAY FOR A PROJECT LOCATED AT 28 FAITH LANE, P O ARDSLEY.
IN THE P U D PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT, THE APPLICANT SEEKS PLANNING BOARD STEEP SLOPE PERMIT AND TREE REMOVAL PERMIT APPROVALS ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION OF AN IN-GROUND POOL AND PATIO AREA TO THE REAR OF AN EXISTING ONSITE RESIDENCE.
THE POOL AREA WOULD RESULT IN DISTURBANCE TO REGULATED STEEP SLOPES AND INVOLVE THE CONSTRUCTION OF TIERED RETAINING WALLS, WHICH ARE PROPOSED TO BE LANDSCAPED.
THE APPLICANT PROPOSES APPROXIMATELY 440 SQUARE FEET OF DISTURBANCE TO STEEP SLOPES AND APPROXIMATELY 1,443 SQUARE FEET OF DISTURBANCE TO VERY STEEP SLOPES AS DEFINED IN OUR PROJECT, REQUIRES APPROXIMATELY 280 CUBIC YARDS OF EXCAVATION AND 416 CUBIC YARDS OF IMPORTED FILL REQUIRING A FILL PERMIT FROM THE BUREAU OF ENGINEERING PROJECT INVOLVES THE PROPOSED REMOVAL OF TWO REGULATED TREES AND THE APPLICANT HAS PREPARED A LANDSCAPING PLAN PROVIDING FOR THE PLANTING OF EIGHT NEW TREES AND VARIOUS SHRUBS AS REPLACEMENT.
THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE IS PRESENT THIS EVENING OF FURTHER DETAIL THE PROJECT AND TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS OF THE BOARD MEMBERS.
I WILL NOW TURN IT OVER TO MR. SHERMAN AND WE'VE ENABLED THE SHARE SCREEN, BUT I ALSO HAVE THE PLANS AVAILABLE IF NECESSARY.
THIS IS DAN SHERMAN, LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT FOR THE AYAS ON FAITH LANE.
WE'VE BEEN PLANNING THIS POOL FOR THE JAMS FOR QUITE A WHILE, AND WHEN I FIRST WENT BACK THERE, IT WAS LIKE THREE FEET DEEP IN SNOW, SO NOW IT'S WINTER AGAIN, BUT WE'RE GETTING THERE AND WE'RE FINALLY ON THE PLANNING BOARD.
AND THE FIRST PLAN IS THE, THE SITE PLAN.
YEAH, IT'S, WE'RE PLANTING A VERY LARGE POOL
UM, SO LET REDUCE IT SO YOU CAN SEE THE WHOLE THING.
TRYING TO MOVE YOU GUYS OVER HERE.
OH, THE POOL IS OVER ON THIS, UH, E NORTHEAST SIDE, AND I'LL ZOOM UP ON IT A LITTLE BIT, BUT YOU CAN SEE THE WHOLE LOT.
IT GOES WAY DOWN INTO A TRIANGLE NEAR THE CUL-DE-SAC ON FAITH LANE.
AND THE HOUSE IS IN THE FLATTEST PART AND THE REST OF IT IS VERY STEEP AND IT COMPROMISES REALLY ANY USE OF THE PROPERTY.
THEN IT HAS A CONSERVATION EASEMENT ALL ACROSS THE BACK, WHICH WE'RE NOT TOUCHING.
UM, I GUESS YOU CAN SEE PRETTY MUCH WHAT WE'RE DOING AT THIS SCALE.
UH, THE POOL IS KEPT TIGHT TO THE HOUSE, UH, AND TO TRY AND STAY OFF THE SLOPES IF WE CAN.
AND, UH, WE ARE SORT OF OFF THE SLOPES, BUT IN ORDER TO GET JUST A LITTLE BIT OF FLATNESS, WE'RE PROPOSING THESE THREE, UH, RETAINING WALLS EACH ARE SIX FEET HIGH AND IT FILLS UP THIS CORNER WITH TERRACES SO THAT THERE'S A LITTLE SPACE AROUND THE POOL.
WE'RE NOT TOUCHING THE CONSERVATION EASEMENT.
AND, UM, THERE'S A FEW TREES UP THAT ARE BEING REMOVED.
THE ONES OVER ON THE LEFT ARE THESE RATTY HEMLOCKS IN A WAY, BUT WE'RE REPLACING NEW TREES.
I CAN SHOW YOU THE PLAN FOR THAT.
LET ME GET THIS ONE OUTTA HERE.
WE DID THE TREE FORMULA WITH BEN AND GOT THAT WORKED OUT.
THANK GOD IT HAPPENS WHEN I CLICKED ON IT.
I DON'T KNOW WHY THAT HAPPENS WHEN I CLICK ON IT.
BUT THE, UM, THERE'S A NEW DOGWOOD TREE AND A SAUCER MAGNOLIA AND THE OTHER NEW TREE AND THE OTHER NEW TREES ARE IN THIS BUFFER IN THIS, UH, TERRACE.
AND THEN THERE'S, LET ME ENLARGE THIS A LITTLE BIT AGAIN.
I DON'T KNOW WHY IT'S, UM, BLUE, BUT IT'S, OH WOW.
AND THEN WE'RE FILLING UP A SHRUBBERY WITH, UM, PLANT INK BERRIES.
THESE ARE NATIVE, UH, A NATIVE EVERGREEN SHRUB.
[00:30:01]
UH, BAYBERRIES ARE NATIVE WINTER BERRIES NATIVE, UH, BAYBERRIES.WE USE THE NATIVE ICS WHERE THEY, EXCEPT FOR THE ARBOR, WHICH WE'RE USING JUST TO BLOCK OFF THE VIEW FROM THE NEIGHBORS INTO THE POOL AND VICE VERSA.
UH, THERE'S A SMALL PATIO THAT'S ALREADY EXISTING.
THEY JUST RECENTLY RECONSTRUCTED THE DECK.
UM, THE POOL TAKES UP MOST OF THE YARD, SO I GUESS I SHOULD ANSWER ANY.
OH, I, I HAVE A SECTION OF THE WALLS I COULD SHOW YOU THAT GET RID OF THIS THING.
IT'S RATHER AMBITIOUS, BUT IT DOES MAKE THE YARD MAKES USE OF THE SPACE AND OTHERWISE IT'S JUST, IT'S A KIND OF A WEEDY SLOPE GOING DOWN.
SO THERE ARE THE THREE RETAINING WALLS.
THESE WERE DESIGNED BY LARRY NYA FOR US.
AND THERE THEY ARE THREE FOOT WALLS WITH AMPLE SPACE IN BETWEEN TO PLANT.
AND THIS IS, UH, THE DESIGN OF THESE WALLS WAS SPACE ON THE BLOCK TYPE WALLS THAT HAVE THE GEOTEXTILE MEMBRANE THAT GOES BACK FABRIC.
AND THEN THAT'S WHY THERE'S SHRUBBERY IN EACH ONE TO FILL THEM UP, STABILIZE 'EM.
THEY'LL MAINTAIN THEMSELVES WITH JUST BAY BERRIES AND INK BERRIES IN THEM.
SO, UM, I GUESS I'LL GO BACK TO THE SITE PLAN AND ENTERTAIN ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? ANY, ANYBODY FROM THE BOARD WANNA START? MR. HAY? UM, I HAVE TWO QUESTIONS.
UM, FIRST OF ALL ABOUT THE RETAINING WALLS.
UM, THE SECTION WAS HELPFUL, BUT WHAT, UH, WOULD BE MORE HELPFUL, AT LEAST TO ME, IS IF YOU COULD, UM, CREATE AN IMAGE OF WHAT THAT SERIES OF WALLS IS GONNA LOOK LIKE FROM BEHIND THE HOUSE.
SO I KNOW IN THE PLANS WE GOT, WE SAW EACH ONE SEPARATELY.
ALSO, I BELIEVE YOU NEED A FENCE AT LEAST ON THE TOP ONE.
I DON'T KNOW IF YOU NEED IT ON ALL OF THEM.
AND THE OTHER QUESTION IS, I BELIEVE THERE IS SOME STORM WATER MITIGATION THAT'S INCLUDED IN THIS PLAN.
I DON'T SEE IT ON THE DRAWINGS.
YEAH, IT'S NOT ON THIS DRAWING.
AND THAT'S A GOOD POINT ABOUT THE RAILING.
WE CERTAINLY WOULD'VE PUT A FENCE THERE AND IT'S SHOWN OVER ON ONE SIDE, BUT IT'S NOT CLEAR THAT IT'S SHOWN THERE.
AND WE COULD DO, UH, THE SKETCHUP RENDERING.
I DID THE ONE RECENTLY FOR THE 1 75 WINTHROP AVENUE SUBDIVISION AND WE KIND OF CONJURED UP THE WHOLE NEIGHBORHOOD IN THREE D.
SO WE, UH, WE CAN DO THAT HERE.
AND I'M NOT SURE IF WE ALREADY HAD, BUT I'M ON A DIFFERENT COMPUTER SO I CAN'T ACCESS IT.
I THINK THAT WE ALREADY DID FOR THE JAMIS, BUT I CAN'T ACCESS IT FROM, I'M AT HOME NOW.
SO LET ME, UM, WHAT WAS THE ANSWER? CERTAINLY BY THE TIME WE GET TO A PUBLIC HEARING, THAT SHOULD BE AVAILABLE, I BELIEVE.
UH, AND MAYBE THIS IS, HANG ON, MICHAEL.
OKAY, MICHAEL THEN COR, BUT HANG ON.
I THINK HE'S STILL ANSWERING THIS QUESTION.
MR. SHE, ARE YOU STILL WORKING ON THIS? WELL, I SAW THE, I SAW THE, THE EROSION CON, THE CALTECH CHAMBERS.
THERE ARE THREE OF THEM OVER ON THE SIDE.
I'M JUST TRYING TO FIND WHICH DRAWING THEY'RE ON.
UM, SITE PLAN, MAYBE BACK ON THIS ONE.
AND IF YOU HAVE ANY FURTHER TROUBLE, I COULD PULL IT UP AS WELL.
SO I THOUGHT I SAW, WHAT DID I SEE THERE WERE THE CALTECH IN MAP PLAN? IT'S, YEAH, THERE'S THREE OF 'EM, IF YOU KNOW WHERE THEY ARE, AARON, BUT I, I COULD UNSHARE MY SCREEN, BUT, UH, AREN'T THEY ON THIS? OH ARE THEY? I DON'T KNOW.
I THOUGHT THEY WERE IN THIS AREA.
I THOUGHT THERE WERE IN ACTUALLY TWO OR THREE DIFFERENT PLACES WHEN I THOUGHT THERE WERE.
I THOUGHT I SAW ONE ON ONE, ONE THAT WAS NEAR THE TERRACES.
NO, BUT THEY'RE NOT ON ON THE DRAWINGS YOU'VE SHOWN TONIGHT.
AND YET I, IF KAREN HAS IT, WHY DON'T YOU JUST LET AARON, DO YOU KNOW WHERE THE CULTS ARE? YEAH, LEMME ASK.
I'M HAPPY TO, I'M HAPPY TO PULL UP THE PLAN SET.
HOW ABOUT, OH, WELL JUST BEAR WITH ME MOMENTARILY.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS WHILE I, MICHAEL, IS YOUR QUESTIONS RELATED TO THIS OR IS SOMETHING ELSE THAT WE CAN GO INTO WHILE AARON'S LOOKING FOR THE CULT? YEAH, IT'S A SIMPLE QUESTION.
ON THOSE, ON THOSE TERRACES BELOW EACH OF THE WALLS MM-HMM.
YOU CAN, OH, I'M NOT SHARING MY SCREEN, BUT YOU ON THE NORTH SIDE, THE, THE LANDSCAPE WILL JUST SLOPE DOWN.
SO YOU COULD ACCESS EACH ONE AS YOU GET TO THAT LEVEL.
SO THEY'LL BE ABLE TO GO DOWN TO TAKE INVASIVE VINES OUT OR ANY LITTER THAT MIGHT BLOW IN OR ANYTHING THAT MIGHT HAPPEN.
OR IF A KID KICKS THE BALL DOWN THERE, YOU CAN GET AT THEM BY APPROACHING THEM FROM THE NORTH, ALONG THE NORTH
[00:35:01]
PROPERTY LINE.UH, 'CAUSE EACH ONE BECOMES EVEN WITH THE GRADE AS YOU WALK DOWN THE SLOPE.
SO LOOKING, LOOKING AT YOUR PLAN, WHICH I HAVE IN MY HEAD, WHICH WAY IS NORTH UP TO, ON THE LEFT, THE LEFT NORTH TO THE LEFT.
WE'RE FACING EAST FROM THE HOUSE.
SO YOU WALK IN FROM THE LEFT? YEAH, FROM THE LEFT.
THAT IT MICHAEL, ANYTHING ELSE? NOPE.
YEAH, I HAVE A QUESTION REGARDING THE ELEVATIONS.
ELEVATIONS THAT YOU'RE SHOWING ON RW THREE DRAWING.
UH OH, THAT WOULD BE THIS ONE.
OH, AARON, SHOULD I GO BACK TO SHARING? UH, BEAR WITH ME.
UM, SO I'M HAVING TROUBLE FINDING THE STONEWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN, BUT I WILL, I WILL BRING UP THE, THE RETAINING WALL PLAN.
MR. DESAI, IS THIS THE PLAN YOU WERE REFERRING TO? CORRECT.
CAN YOU, CAN YOU CLARIFY? IT'S KIND OF CONFUSING WHAT WE, WHAT, WHAT, UH, WE ARE LOOKING AT IT.
WELL, YEAH, IT IS A LITTLE BIT, UH, LARRY PREPARED THESE, IF YOU SCROLL UP, YOU'LL SEE THE SECTIONS AND THEN THESE ARE, YOU ARE LOOKING AT THE WALL.
BUT THAT JUST SHOWS IT THROUGH THE MIDDLE.
SO IF YOU GO BACK TO THESE CONFUSING ONES, THEY LOOK LIKE GRAPHS OR SOMETHING, BUT IT'S, IT'S THE PART OF THE WALL THAT WOULD BE EXPOSED BECAUSE THE, THE STRIPES ARE THE EXPOSED BLOCK THAT YOU WOULD SEE, BUT THE LAND IS SLOPING UP.
AND I THINK IN, IN THIS CASE, IT'S A GOOD EXAMPLE WHERE THE VIEW RENDERINGS WILL CLARIFY THAT BECAUSE THAT WILL TAKE EACH OF THESE, WHAT YOU SEE HERE AND POP THEM INTO A THREE DIMENSIONAL VERSION.
BUT THAT LARRY DREW THIS TO SHOW THE PART THAT WOULD BE EXPOSED, WHICH IS THE STRIPED THING.
AND WHERE IT'S JUST WHITE THAT'S BURIED IN LANDSCAPE.
IT IS A LITTLE HARD TO VISUALIZE.
SO, SO THIS IS A KIND OF FOLDED YEAH, IT'S LIKE YOU TOOK THE WALL AND UNWRAPPED IT AND THE STRIPED PART IS THE BLOCK THAT YOU WOULD SEE.
BUT THEN THERE WOULD BE A, OKAY, SO WHERE IS THE TERRACE THING MEAN? WHAT, WHAT THE TERRACE WHAT POINT THEY KIND OF UNFOLD OR FOLD? WELL SAY THE HIGHEST PART.
YOU GO THE HIGHEST PART, YOU DO YOUR RENDERING OR, OR SOME SORT OF, UH, ELEVATION FOR US TO CLARIFY.
THE SECOND, THE HIGHEST PARTS ARE THESE CENTERS.
AND AARON, IF YOU CAN I DO YOUR THING? NO, I CAN'T TOUCH YOUR DRAWING, BUT IF YOU SCROLL UP, THAT'S WHERE THE SECTION IS DONE THROUGH EACH OF THOSE SIX FOOT SECTIONS.
POINT, POINT, POINT LIKE THAT.
AND THEN IT JUST DIMINISHES AS IT GOES TO THE NORTH AND SOUTH OR TO THE LEFT AND RIGHT.
WHICHEVER WAY THESE ARE, THIS IS AT THE HIGHEST POINT, WHICH IS IN THE CENTER.
BUT I THINK IT WOULD BE GOOD TO, UH, DRAW.
I THINK THE BEST THING IS WHAT, UH, TOM SAID.
HAVE SOME KIND OF RENDERING OR SOMETHING SO THAT MM-HMM.
AND THEN I SUSPECT THAT IF WE HAD DONE IT, WE WOULD'VE SHARED IT.
SO I THINK WE EITHER TALKED ABOUT DOING IT, BUT WE COULDN'T GET A GOOD IMAGE OF THE BACK OF THE HOUSE AT THE TIME.
'CAUSE WE JUST DIDN'T GO BACK.
SO, UM, WE CAN, WE CAN DO THAT.
YEAH, WE'LL MAKE SURE THAT WE, WE GET THAT AHEAD OF ANY PUBLIC HEARING.
I DID FIND THE DRAWING AND THANK YOU MATT, FOR POINTING OUT.
WE HAVE ON THE LEFT SIDE OF THE POOL, THERE'S A COAL TECH PROPOSED.
I HAVE MY CURSOR HOVERING OVER IT, IF YOU SEE MM-HMM.
AND THEN ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE POOL, THERE ARE TWO OTHER DRYWALL UNITS PROPOSED.
SO THEY HAVE A SLOT DRAIN GOING ACROSS THE EDGE OF THE STONE TERRACE TO PICK UP THE WATER AND DIRECT IT INTO THE DRY WELLS TO ENSURE THAT THERE'S NO, UH, RUNOFF INCREASE IN RUNOFF OFF THE SITE.
AND LARRY DID THE PERCOLATION TESTS HIMSELF.
THAT'S WHY THEY'RE UP NEAR THE HOUSE BECAUSE IT'S AN AREA THAT'S EXISTING AND, UH, AND A GOOD PERCOLATION.
ANYBODY? I HAVE DO YOU HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION? CRAIG? GO AHEAD.
YEAH, I HAVE, I HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION.
I THINK, UH, IS IT, UH, CONSIDERING THAT THERE IS NO, UM, NO SPACE LEFT FOR ANY OTHER, UH, ACTIVITY IN THE YARD, HAVE YOU KIND OF, UH, UH, THOUGHT OF ABOUT IT TO INCREASE THE LEVEL AREA THAT, UM, WELL, THIS AREA BEHIND THE DECK, IT'S NOT HUGE, BUT THIS AREA BEHIND THE DECK IS LEVEL, IT'S PRETTY LEVEL NOW.
IT'LL BE MADE MORE SO WITH A LITTLE WALL THAT'S THERE, THERE'S EXISTING WALL THAT'S, THAT'S FLAT.
AND THEN THEY HAVE THE DECK BECAUSE THE PROPERTY'S SO LONG AND TRIANGULAR, THERE'S A LONG AREA OVER TO THE SOUTH THAT, UH, IS FLAT.
AND I GUESS THAT'S THEIR CHOICE TO MAKE WHAT THEY CAN OF THE YARD TO BE A POOL AND A PATIO AND THE BARBECUE AND, AND, UH, SACRIFICE SOME OPEN LAWN.
THEY'RE NOT GAINING A LOT WITH THESE WALLS, BUT THE POOL JUST DOESN'T WORK WITHOUT THEM.
SO IT'S KIND OF AN EXPENSIVE THING.
BUT HAVE YOU CONSIDERED, INSTEAD OF TERRACING AT 11 FEET TO REDUCING IT SO THAT
[00:40:01]
YOU MIGHT HAVE A TOP TERRACE WOULD BE LARGER FLAT AREA ABOUT DOING BY PUSHING THE POOL DOWN, CORRECT? NO, I THINK HE'S TALKING ABOUT DOING TWO TERRACES INSTEAD OF THREE, SO THAT YOU COULD ACTUALLY HAVE, HAVE ONE LEVEL.THE, THE FIRST ONE WOULD BE THE COMBINED.
SO IT WOULD GO ALL THE WAY OUT AND YOU'D HAVE A FLAT AREA TO WHERE THE SECOND TERRACE IS, IS THAT CORRECT? WELL, LARRY DESIGNED THESE WALLS, BUT I SUSPECTED THAT WE THOUGHT SIX FEET WAS THE, THE MAXIMUM THAT WAS EITHER PRACTICAL OR ALLOWABLE.
SO, UM, YEAH, BECAUSE THEY TAKE UP A LOT OF SPACE THAT TAKE UP A LOT OF SPACE.
YOU, YOU'RE ALLOWED TO DO MORE THAN THAT.
WE GENERALLY DISCOURAGE THOSE GIANT WALLS.
WE PREFER THEM BEING ISTS AND THE AESTHETIC.
NO, THE AESTHETIC, WHAT I MEANT WAS THAT YOU CAN REDUCE THE, UH, THE OFFSET INSTEAD OF 11 FEET.
YOU CAN MAKE IT A SIX OR FILE.
UM, THAT'S AN ENGINEERING AND STILL DO THE PLANTING AND YEAH.
AND BUFFERING, BECAUSE I WANTED THEM AS COMPACT AS POSSIBLE.
AND LARRY GAVE THIS, LARRY NOCHI GAVE THIS CAREFUL THOUGHT AND I WAS RATHER JUST MADE TO LOSE SO MUCH SPACE.
IT'S BECAUSE OF THE GEOTEXTILE MEMBRANE THAT HAS TO HAVE A CERTAIN DISTANCE BACK WEIGHTED WITH THE SOIL TO RETAIN THE BLOCK, THE BLOCK WALL.
A MORE COMPACT SYSTEM COULD BE ENGINEERED, POURED CONCRETE RETAINING WALLS, WHICH DIDN'T SEEM VERY RESIDENTIAL.
AND I THINK, SO WE WERE HAPPY THAT THESE COULD BE PLANTED AND NOT LOOK SO SEVERE AND TALL.
UM, A CONCRETE RETAINING WALL WITH REBAR COULD BE HIGHER BY DESIGN.
I DON'T THINK WE'D APPROVE, I DON'T THINK WE'D WANNA APPROVE THAT MR. SHERMAN TELL THE TRUTH.
YEAH, I THINK THIS IS, YOU HAVE A, UH, LANDSCAPING PLAN, RIGHT? HOW YOU GONNA LANDSCAPE THE THINGS OR IT'S JUST GONNA BE HERE? OH, THEY'RE FILLED WITH SHRUBBERY, UH, BAY BERRIES AND INK BERRIES AND WINTER BEARING.
UM, SO THAT THEY'LL, THEY'LL GROW IN REALLY WITHOUT MUCH MAINTENANCE EXCEPT FOR REMOVAL OF INVASIVE VINES AND LITTER IF THERE IS ANY.
BUT THESE THINGS WILL JUST GROW INTO BECOME A THICKET.
AND I, I KEPT ONE PLANT ON TYPE ON EACH LEVEL SO THAT IT COULD JUST LOOK LIKE A NATURAL CLUSTER OF PLANTS THAT GREW IN NATURALLY.
I SEE WHERE YOU PUT THE CALEX.
ONE OF THE THINGS I'M A LITTLE CONCERNED ABOUT, IF YOU'VE ACCELERATED THE RUNOFF DOWN THE HILL BY DOING THE TERRACING AND YOU HAVE NOTHING ON THE, YOU HAVE NO, NO DRAINAGE TO, I GUESS IT'S THE NORTH OF THE POOL, RIGHT? WE'RE LOOKING NORTH THERE, RIGHT TO NORTH OF THE POOL.
WELL, I PERCEIVE NORTH TO THE LEFT, SO WE CAN, IF WE CAN
LOOKING EAST AND NO, EAST NORTHWEST.
EAST, NORTHEAST, EAST, NORTHEAST.
RIGHT BEHIND THE POOL, THERE'S NO, YOU HAVE NO DRAINAGE IN THERE.
I'M JUST WONDERING WITH YOU ARE ACTUALLY INCREASING THE, THE IMPERIAL SURFACE THERE 'CAUSE OF THE WALLS.
AND I JUST WONDER IF YOU CAN ACCELERATE THE RUNOFF GOING DOWN THAT HILL.
WELL, I THINK THERE'S ACTUALLY MORE FLAT SURFACE UNDER THE PROPOSAL THAN THERE IS NOW.
WE'RE CREATING FLAT PLANTED TERRACES WHERE RIGHT NOW IT'S VERY STEEP, SO THE WATER WILL JUST SOAK INTO THOSE TERRACES AND BE MORE STABLE AS FAR AS RUNOFFS IN PRESENTLY.
AND WHAT MATERIAL ARE YOU USING FOR THE BLOCKS? IT'S THE TECHCO BLOCK, THAT SORT OF DECORATIVE CHISELED BLOCK THAT LINKED BLOCKS TOGETHER WITH KEY KEYSTONE AND, BUT IT'S A CONCRETE TEXTURED BLOCK FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING.
I, I WOULD, YOU KNOW, IF YOU COULD JUST SHOW A PICTURE OF WHAT THE, WHAT, WHAT THOSE BLOCKS LOOKS LIKE.
UM, ANY OTHER, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? DAVE, YOU GET YOUR HAND RAISED AND AM MONA'S GOT HER HAND RAISED DAVE FIRST, THEN MONA.
JUST TO FOLLOW UP, UH, WHAT YOU SAID, YOU, I THINK IT MAY ALSO JUST BE, UH, JUST SO PEOPLE CAN SEE IF THEY HAVE A PICTURE OF THE EXISTING, UH, SLOPE NOW TO SEE WHAT IT IS AND COMPARE THAT TO THE TERRACE LEVEL.
I THINK THAT WOULD, UH, MAKE IT EASIER TO UNDERSTAND, UH, THE POINT THAT, UM, MR. HAY MADE ABOUT IT LEVELING OFF.
AARON, DID WE, DID WE GET A PICTURE? I KNOW THAT YOU HAD REQUESTED ONE, OR, AND ANGIE WAS LOOKING INTO IT, BUT DID THAT EVER HAPPEN? UH, SO THEY WERE JUST PICTURES FROM THE EXISTING DECK OR SECOND LEVEL.
WE ADDED THOSE INTO OUR STAFF REPORT, BUT YOU DIDN'T REALLY GET A FULL SENSE OF THE SLOPE BACK THERE.
UH, THAT WOULD BE BENEFICIAL FOR THE BOARD HEADING INTO A PUBLIC HEARING.
I ALSO, IF THERE WEREN'T ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, WANTED TO RAISE A POINT AS WELL RELATED TO CARTING.
AARON, LET LET MONA GO FIRST AND THEN YOU'RE OKAY, MONA.
[00:45:01]
YEAH.UM, I'M JUST WONDERING IF THERE'S ANY LIGHTING PLAN THAT'S GOING ALONG WITH THIS.
OF COURSE THERE'LL BE A LIGHT IN THE POOL SO THE WATER WILL GLOW AND THE, UM, AS POOLS DO.
AND THEN THERE'S A SCOTS LIGHT AT THE BACK DOOR OF THE HOUSE.
UH, THERE'S A BARBECUE THAT'S RIGHT AGAINST THE BACK OF THE HOUSE, BUT WE DIDN'T DO ANY LANDSCAPE MINING.
A I WAS JUST GONNA ADD THAT, UH, TYPICALLY THE PLANNING BOARD, UH, WITH POOL APPLICATIONS, WE WANNA UNDERSTAND HOW THE POOL WATER'S GONNA BE DRAINED.
THE LAST THING THAT WE WOULD WANT IS THE POOL WATER TO BE DISCHARGED DOWN THE SLOPE AND TO OFFSITE PROPERTIES.
SO THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT COULD POSSIBLY COME UP.
UH, TYPICALLY DON'T WE REQUIRE IT TO BE CHARTED OFF IF THEY'RE DRAINING THE POOL WHEN THERE'S A WETLAND WATER COURSE, WETLAND WATER COURSE WITH THE WETLAND WATER COURSE WE DO WITH STEEP SLOPES, WE CAN.
SO IT'S SOMETHING THAT I THINK WOULD BE WISE FOR THE APPLICANT TO BE ABLE TO RESPOND TO HOW THEY, I DON'T KNOW IF THEY, I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU'D HAVE ACCESS TO THE POOL.
WE HAVE TO BE AN AWFUL LONG HOSE, I GUESS.
RIGHT? WELL, WE DO ANOTHER SITUATIONS IF THERE'S A, LIKE A SUM PUMP WITH A HOSE AND IT GOES TO THE SEWER CLEAN OUT WHERE THE, THE HOUSE SEPTIC SEWER IS CONNECTED TO THE STREET SEWER.
SOMEWHERE IN THE FRONT YARD THERE'S A CAP THAT YOU CAN UNSCREW AND THEY PUMP THE WATER INTO THAT.
THAT'S WHAT'S REQUIRED IN SCARSDALE.
IS THAT, WOULD THAT BE ACCEPTABLE TO PUMP IT IN? 'CAUSE IT'S CHLORINE DOESN'T LAST LONG, BUT IT'S THE CHLORINATED WATER AT THE END OF THE SEASON, THEY PUMP HALF THE PULL DOWN.
WE'D WANT THAT TO JUST BE REVIEWED BY OUR BUREAU OF ENGINEERING AHEAD OF GOING INTO THE PUBLIC HEARING TO ENSURE THAT THAT'S ACCEPTABLE.
SO MR. SHERMAN, YOU CAN REACH OUT TO ME TOMORROW AND WE CAN PUT YOU IN TOUCH WITH THE BUREAU OF ANYTHING.
SO MR. SHERMAN, YOU HAVE HAVE THE NOTES FOR TONIGHT.
YOU, YOU WANTED TO SEE SOME, SOME BETTER RENDERINGS OF, OF THE, OF THE, UM, OF THE TERRACES, CORRECT? YEAH, I HAVE PHOTOS, PHOTOS OF THE SITE TO MAKE IT REAL CLEAR WHAT'S THERE.
ACTUALLY I TOOK SOME FROM GOOGLE EARTH WHEN I FIRST STARTED THIS 'CAUSE IT WAS SNOWING.
AND THEY'RE PRETTY GOOD IN THE BINGING AND GOOGLE AERIALS, BECAUSE YOU CAN'T GET INTO THAT CONSERVATION EASEMENT.
IT'S ALL WEEDS AND PRECURSIVE.
BUT THAT, THAT REALLY CLARIFIES WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE IF YOU'RE FLYING OVER IT.
AND THEN THE VIEW RENDERINGS FROM SKETCHUP PROGRAM MATERIAL, SAMPLE PICTURES, AND OF EXACTLY WHAT THE WALL WILL LOOK LIKE AND, AND HOW THE WATER DRAW DOWN IS HANDLED.
SO I I I THINK WE CAN PUT THIS ON FOR, FOR A PUBLIC HEARING, AARON BELIEVE YES.
AND I THINK, DID WE TALK ABOUT THIS THE OTHER DAY OF THE NEW SCHEDULE WHEN THIS WOULD BE WE DID.
SO WE PLANNED FOR, UH, MARCH 2ND.
AND THAT WOULD, SO PUBLIC WOULD BE HERE ON MARCH 2ND.
AND MR. SHERMAN, THAT'S PREDICATED ON, WOULD YOU BE ABLE, DO YOU THINK, TO GET, YOU KNOW, THE, THESE ADDITIONAL MATERIALS IN A WEEK FROM TODAY? YEAH.
IF YOU'RE SAYING FRIDAY, THEN I DON'T KNOW.
WE HAVE SEVERAL DEADLINES, BUT A WEEK FROM TODAY, MONDAY'S THE HOLIDAY.
I MEAN, IT'S UP TO WEEK FROM TODAY.
JUST COORDINATE WITH MR. BRITTON.
I'M GONNA BE OUT OF TOWN, SO, UH, PLEASE COORDINATE WITH MR. BRITTON ON, BUT THAT'S THE 23RD, RIGHT? RIGHT.
WE'LL PREPARE THE PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE AND THE SIGNAGE AND WE WILL GET THAT OUT TO YOU TOMORROW OR FRIDAY MORNING.
I, THIS SEEMS LIKE OKAY, GREAT.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH MR. SHERMAN AND, AND TEAM AND, UH, WE'LL SEE YOU ON MARCH 2ND.
UH, P B K 2136 METROPOLIS COUNTRY CLUB.
UM, IT IS FOR A STEEP SLOPE AND TREE REMOVAL PERMIT, PERMIT FOR, I BELIEVE AN EXPANSION EXPANSION IN THE POOL AREA.
AND, UH, I THINK AN INCREASED DINING AREA.
AARON, DO YOU WANNA GO THROUGH THE DESCRIPTION, THEN HAND IT OVER TO MS. GARRIS PLEASE? ABSOLUTELY.
SO AS CHAIRPERSON SCHWARTZ INDICATED, NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS PB 2136 METROPOLIS COUNTRY CLUB FOR PROJECT LOCATED AT TWO EIGHTY NINE DOBBS FERRY ROAD, P O Y PLAINS IN THE R 21 FAMILY RESIDENCE ZONING DISTRICT.
THE APPLICANT SEEKS PLANNING BOARD STEEP SLOPE PERMIT AND TREE REMOVAL PERMIT APPROVALS ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED RENOVATION OF AN EXISTING POOL AREA ALONG WITH RELATED IMPROVEMENTS.
THE APPLICANT PREVIOUSLY SUBMITTED AND WAS APPROVED FOR A BUILDING PERMIT TO DEMOLISH EXISTING POOLS, RE REGRADE A PATIO AREA, AND CONSTRUCT A NEW SWIMMING POOL AND WAITING POOL ON THE SUBJECT SITE.
THE APPLICANT NOW WISHES TO EXPAND THE SCOPE OF WORK TO INCLUDE RENOVATION TO THE EXISTING DINING TERRACE AND PLAYGROUND AREA.
UH, THE PROJECT IS CURRENTLY PROPOSED, INVOLVES REGULATED STEEP SLOPE DISTURBANCE AND TREE REMOVALS AND INVOLVES THE IMPORTATION OF FILL REQUIRING A FILL PERMIT FROM THE BUREAU OF ENGINEERING.
[00:50:01]
APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVES ARE PRESENT THIS EVENING TO FURTHER DETAIL THE PROJECT AND TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS OF THE BOARD MEMBERS.OKAY, I TURN THINGS OVER TO MS. GURE.
THANK YOU DEPUTY COMMISSIONER AND GOOD EVENING CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE BOARD FOR THE RECORD.
I'M A PARTNER WITH DELBELLO DANELLE AND WEINGART AND WEIS WHITAKER.
AND I'M HERE THIS EVENING ON BEHALF OF METROPOLIS COUNTRY CLUB IN CONNECTION WITH THEIR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2 89 DOTS BERRY ROAD.
JOINING ME THIS EVENING, ZACH PEARSON WITH INSIGHT ENGINEERING, UM, OUR, OUR PROJECT ENGINEERS ON THIS PROJECT.
AND, UH, JUST TO GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND INFORMATION, UH, YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT AARON DID A REALLY, YOU KNOW, GOOD JOB OF JUST DESCRIBING WHAT, UH, WE'RE DOING HERE.
BUT THE OVERALL PROPERTY, UH, IS APPROXIMATELY 125 AND A HALF ACRES, AND IT'S LOCATED IN THE R 21 FAMILY DISTRICT OF THE TOWN.
IT'S CURRENTLY THE LOCATION OF METROPOLIS COUNTRY CLUB, UM, WHICH IS IMPROVED WITH, UH, AN 18 HOLE GOLF COURSE, TENNIS COURTS, SWIMMING POOL, CLUBHOUSE, AND ASSOCIATED ACCESSORY, UM, USES.
AND, UH, FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO ARE FAMILIAR WITH IT, IT IS, UH, RANKED AS ONE OF THE BEST 18 WHOLE GOLF COURSES IN THE NEW YORK METROPOLITAN AREA AND ALSO AMONG THE BEST 500 IN THE WORLD.
SO THEY CONTINUE TO METICULOUSLY MAINTAIN THEIR FACILITIES, UM, AND THEY TRY TO PROVIDE THE BEST EXPERIENCE FOR THEIR MEMBERS.
SO, UM, AS AARON MENTIONED, WE, UH, UH, THE APPLICANT RECENTLY BEGAN RENOVATING THE POOL AREA, WHICH IS LOCATED DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO THE CLUBHOUSE.
THAT RENOVATION INCLUDED THE DEMOLITION OF, UH, THE EXISTING POOL SHELLS AND THE POOL DECK, WHICH REACHED FUNCTIONAL OBSOLESCENCE AND, UH, IN CONNECTION WITH THAT PROJECT.
AND SINCE THAT PROJECT BEGAN, THE SCOPE OF THE RENOVATION EXPANDED A LITTLE BIT TO INCLUDE THE RENOVATION OF THE, UH, EXISTING DINING TERRACE AND PLAYGROUND.
AND ZACH CAN PULL UP, UH, PLANS AND SHOW YOU, UH, IN MORE DETAIL WHAT, WHAT WE'RE, WHAT WE'RE SEEKING.
BUT IN CONNECTION WITH THAT, UH, LITTLE BIT OF EXPANSION AREA, UH, THERE IS SOME GRADING THAT NEEDS TO BE DONE IN THE AREA OF STEEP SLOPES.
AND AS A RESULT OF THAT, WE'RE SEEKING A, A STEEP SLOPE PERMIT FROM THE BOARD, UH, TO ALLOW THE DISTURBANCE OF THOSE STEEP SLOPES.
UM, I'LL LET ZACH TALK TO YOU ABOUT, UH, THE DETAILS OF THAT.
IN ADDITION TO THE STEEP SLOPE PERMIT WE'RE SEEKING FROM THE BOARD, WE ARE ALSO SEEKING A TREE REMOVAL PERMIT FOR THE REMOVAL OF, UH, ONE TREE ON THE PROPERTY.
AND THERE WILL BE, UH, A NUMBER OF PLANTINGS AND TREES TO REPLACE THAT ONE THAT'S BEING REMOVED.
SO ZACH, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANNA TALK ABOUT, SHOW A LITTLE BIT MORE DETAIL ON OUR PLAN AND THEN WE CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE.
PERMISSION TO SHARE MY SCREEN? YES.
SO THIS IS THE, UH, OVERALL PLAN JUST TO KIND OF KEY YOU IN.
UM, THIS IS THE, THE EXISTING POOL AREA HERE, UM, JUST TO THE NORTH OF THE, UM, CLUBHOUSE.
I'M JUST GONNA ZOOM IN MY HAIR.
UM, THIS AERIAL IMAGE, YOU CAN SEE THERE'S THE EXISTING POOL.
THERE'S THE EXISTING KITTY POOL IN THE LOWER LEVEL, UM, IN THE PLAYGROUND.
SO I'M NOW GONNA SWITCH OVER TO THE PROPOSED.
UM, AS YOU CAN SEE HERE, WHAT'S IN WHITE IS THE, THE WHAT WE HAVE A CURRENT, UH, BUILDING PERMIT FOR THE RECONSTRUCTION OF THE EXISTING POOL, UM, AND KITTY POOL.
AND THE PROPOSAL FOR THAT WERE BEFORE YOU THIS EVENING IS THE STEEP SLOPES.
AND REALLY WITH THE NEXUS OF THAT WAS, YOU KNOW, THE EXISTING PLAYGROUND AREA WAS DOWN HERE.
UM, AND REALLY WHAT, WHAT WE WE'RE DOING NOW IS BRINGING THE PLAYGROUND UP TO THIS AREA.
SO, UM, YOU KNOW, THERE'S, THERE'S A LITTLE BIT OF A PATIO EXPANSION AS YOU CAN SEE HERE.
UH, WE DID HAVE STORMWATER, UM, INVOLVED WITH THE EXISTING BUILDING PERMIT FOR THE POOL CONSTRUCTION.
AND WE ARE EXPANDING THAT TO INCLUDE, TO CAPTURE THE, UH, INCREASE IMPERVIOUS ASSOCIATED WITH THE, UM, WITH THIS PORTION OF THE PROJECT.
UM, AS, UH, MS. GARRIS MENTIONED THAT THERE WAS AN EXISTING MAPLE TREE HERE THAT'S PROPOSED TO BE REMOVE OR PROPOSING TWO MAPLES TO GO BACK.
AND WE'RE ALSO PROPOSING SOME LOW, UH, SHRUBS HERE, KIND OF AS A, A BARRIER BETWEEN THE EXISTING POOL AND THE DRIVING RANGE, WHICH IS JUST TO THE EAST.
THIS IS, AS YOU CAN SEE, IS THE STEEP SLOPES PLAN.
THERE'S A, A BAND OF STEEP SLOPES, UM, RIGHT THROUGH THIS AREA.
YOU KNOW, THE EXISTING POOL WAS KIND OF IN A VERTICAL, YOU KNOW, KIND OF NORTH SOUTH ORIENTATION.
UM, AND WITH THIS, YOU KNOW, WE'RE REALLY PROPOSING TO PUSH, PUSH THIS SLOPE OUT JUST A LITTLE BIT, GET A LITTLE BIT OF ROOM UP HERE, UH, ADJACENT TO THE POOL AND BRING THE, THE, THE LOWER PLAYGROUND AREA, WHICH WAS DOWN HERE TO REMAIN KIND OF UP IN THIS AREA AND KIND OF GET EVERYTHING ON THE SAME LEVEL.
UM, THAT'S KIND OF THE PROJECT IN A NUTSHELL, SO.
[00:55:01]
YOU VERY MUCH.ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD? NONE.
THE, THE LAST COMMENT IS THAT YOU PUSHED THE STEEP SLOPE UP AND THE PLAYGROUND WILL BE, DID I HEAR THAT CORRECTLY? WILL BE MORE OR LESS IN THE SAME LEVEL? I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED BY THAT STATEMENT, MAYBE.
SO, UH, THIS IS THE BAND OF EXISTING STEEP SLOPES HERE IN THE, THE, THE AREAS THAT ARE COLORED IN.
WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING TO DO IS, IS TO FILL THIS AREA AND PUSH THE SLOPE OUT A LITTLE BIT, YOU KNOW, THE REALLY THE SLOPE.
WE'RE GONNA A NICE GENTLE SLOPE THROUGH WHERE THIS, THIS AREA IS HERE.
AND WITH THAT, WE PUSH THE SLOPE A LITTLE BIT TO THE NORTH.
IT KIND OF, THE EXISTING PLAYGROUND WAS KIND OF WHERE YOU COULD SEE MY CURSOR THAT NOW COMES UP AT THE TOP OF THE HILL ADJACENT TO THE PLAYGROUND.
SO WE'RE KIND OF, THIS STEEP SLOPE WAS A BARRIER IN THE EXISTING, OR IS A BARRIER IN EXISTING CONDITION TO THE FLAT SURFACES AROUND THE EXISTING POOL.
SO KIND OF WE'RE GONNA FILL THAT OUT, PUSH IT OUT A LITTLE BIT, AND THEN BRING THE PLAYGROUND UP TOP TO KIND OF GET EVERYTHING ON THE SAME LEVEL FOR THE CLUB.
I MISSED THE FACT THAT YOU ADDING FILL.
AND, AND, AND THE PURPOSE OF MOVING THAT PLAYGROUND PRIMARILY IS SO THAT PARENTS CAN SUPERVISE THEIR CHILDREN AT THE SAME TIME THAT THEY'RE AT THE POOL AREA.
THAT MAKES SENSE, MAKES SENSE.
AND ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? YEAH, WELL CORRECT.
IS ANY WALL IN RELATION TO STEEP SLOPE STABILIZING? NO, THERE'S NO PROPOSED RETAINING WALL ASSOCIATED WITH THE STEEP SLOPES.
AND WHAT IS THE LANDSCAPING PLAN? THAT BACK UP.
SO THE LANDSCAPE IS, IS RIGHT HERE.
SO WE'VE GOT, THERE WAS AN EXISTING LARGE MAPLE KIND OF WHERE THIS CURSOR WAS THAT'S BEING REMOVED.
WE'RE GONNA PUT TWO MAPLE TREES BACK, AND THEN THE LANDSCAPING INCLUDES SOME LAURELS AND HOLLY'S THAT KIND OF GETS SPACED IN THIS AREA HERE, WHICH IS THE DIVISION BETWEEN THE, THE POOL AREA AND THE CLUB'S DRIVING RANGE, WHICH I CAN, IF I GO BACK TO THE AERIAL HERE, YOU CAN KIND OF SEE HERE'S THE POOL.
YOU KNOW, THERE'S A, THERE WAS AN EXISTING ROW OF VEGETATION HERE AND THE DRIVING RANGE.
SO WE'RE GONNA DO SOME LOW, YOU KNOW, LOW PLANTINGS ALONG THIS EDGE.
UM, I THINK WE CAN SCHEDULE THIS FOR A PUBLIC HEARING.
I DON'T SEE ANY REASON WHY NOT FOR MARCH 2ND.
UH, THERE ANY OTHER DOCUMENTS YOU NEED TO GIVE US BEFORE THEN? WE'LL, WE'LL LEAVE NOW, RIGHT? THERE'S NO OTHER DOCUMENTS.
SO WE'LL SEE YOU ON MARCH 2ND FOR PUBLIC HEARING.
UM, AND ONE QUESTION THAT I HAVE IS, UH, IF THINGS GO WELL ON MARCH 2ND, UH, IS THERE THE POSSIBILITY OF A RESOLUTION THAT EVENING? PROBABLY NOT, BECAUSE WE HAVE A VERY, VERY TIGHT SCHEDULE.
IT'LL PROBABLY BE ON THE, ON THE 14TH.
IT'S NOT EVEN, IT'S A LITTLE LESS THAN TWO WEEKS.
SO WE'RE MEETING ON THE 14TH, NOT THE 16TH.
I, I APOLOGIZE, BUT WE'RE ACTUALLY SQUEEZING YOU GUYS IN 'CAUSE WE JUST HAVE A, A FEW VERY LARGE PROJECTS ON OUR CALENDAR.
AND, UH, YOU KNOW, I, I HAD TO ASK THAT QUESTION ON BEHALF OF THE CLIENT, BUT I WILL, WE, UH, LOOK FORWARD TO SEEING YOU ON MARCH 2ND, AND WE APPRECIATE THE ACCOMMODATION.
A EVENING, WELL, YOU'LL PREPARE THE, THE PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE AND GET THAT OFF TO YOU TOMORROW OR EARLY FRIDAY ALONG WITH THE SIGNAGE REQUIREMENT TO BE POSTED AT THE SITE.
WE'RE ACTUALLY AHEAD OF SCHEDULE THERE IN A LITTLE BIT, HUH? THAT'S GOOD.
WELL, IF, UM, IF WE HAD STARTED ON TIME, THEN WE WOULD THAT'S TRUE.
I MUST ADMIT IT WAS RANKED TIME WOULD DELAYED FOR THE CHAIR AND I CONGRATULATE THE CHAIR FOR WRAPPING EVERYTHING UP IN ONE HOUR.
OH, WE HAVEN'T WRAPPED ANYTHING OUT YET.
YEAH, NO, THAT WE JUST STARTED OUR EVENING.
UH, WE HAVE ONE MORE ITEM THAT'S KIND OF LARGE.
BUT IT'S NOT ON THE, YOU GONNA PUT THAT YES, IT IS ON THE AGENDA.
YOU SAID THAT A REVISED AGENDA ON THE REVISED AGENDA.
I WAS WONDERING, UH, I HAVEN'T BEEN READING THIS THING ALL DAY, JEFF, TO NOT PUT IT ON THE AGENDA.
OKAY, LET'S, OKAY, LET, LET, LET ME ANNOUNCE IT WHAT THE PROJECT COUPLE OPENING, UH, REMARKS.
AND WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO MAKE SOME DECISIONS
[01:00:01]
ALONG THE WAY TOO, AS TO HOW WE APPROACH IT.AND I'LL HAVE A SUGGESTION AND, UH, WE CAN TALK ABOUT IT.
THIS IS TOMBOY CASE 1802, WHICH IS THE ELMWOOD PRESERVE, WHICH HAS BEEN AROUND SINCE 2018.
WE'VE HEARD IT SEVERAL TIMES, INCLUDING, UH, THROUGH THE D E I SS.
WE'RE NOW AT THE F E S I S PRO PROCESS ON, UH, FEBRUARY 9TH OF THIS YEAR.
THE, UM, TOWN BOARD, UH, ACCEPTED THE F A SS AS COMPLETE.
SO THE NEXT, UH, ORDER OF BUSINESS IS FOR THE TOWN BOARD AND THE INVOLVED AGENCIES TO, UH, REVIEW THE F A A S, THE FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS IN THE F A A S AND COME UP WITH, UM, FINDINGS EITHER AS A, IN RECOMMENDATION FORM, IN OUR CASE TO THE TOWN BOARD, TO THE LEAD AGENCY.
OR IF WE, IF WE DECIDE, WE CAN ACTUALLY MAKE FINDINGS SEPARATE, UH, FROM THE TOWN BOARD AS WELL, WE HAVE THAT CHOICE.
MY RECOMMENDATION, IF POSSIBLE, IT'D BE BETTER IF, IF OUR FINDINGS, IT'S, IT'S CLEANER IF THEY'RE INCORPORATED INTO THE TOWN BOARD'S FINDINGS.
THAT WAY THERE ISN'T CONFUSING LATER ON.
WHETHER THAT HAPPENS OR NOT REALLY DEPENDS ON, UH, WHAT WE, WHAT OUR FINDINGS ARE AND WHAT GETS ACCEPTED.
UH, LET ME TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT TIMING.
'CAUSE I THINK TIMING IS CRITICAL HERE.
UM, THIS IS OUR FIRST TIME SEEING, AND BY THE WAY, I APPRECIATE EVERYBODY WHO JUST GOT THIS ON FRIDAY, AND I KNOW IT'S A BEAR OKAY, UH, TO READ.
AND, UH, GARRETT TRIED TO HELP A LITTLE BIT IN TERMS OF THE, UH, PLANNING BOARD QUESTIONS BY SUMMARIZING THEM AND PUTTING 'EM IN A P D F.
BUT THAT EVEN AND OF ITSELF WAS STILL DIFFICULT 'CAUSE IT JUMPED AROUND AND YOU HAD TO FIND STUFF.
NO FAULT TO GARRETT, HE WAS REALLY TRYING TO HELP US.
THIS IS A, A COMPLICATED, LONG THING WITH ALL SORTS OF, IT ISN'T LIKE WE WE'RE LOOKING AT ONE POSSIBILITY.
WE'RE LOOKING AT FOUR DIFFERENT OPTIONS.
SO IT MAKES THE THING A LOT MORE COMPLICATED THAN OTHER PROJECTS THAT WE MAY HAVE SEEN.
THE TIMING IS WE'RE GONNA DISCUSS THIS.
I'D LIKE TO SPEND THE REST OF THE TIME TILL 10 O'CLOCK.
I DON'T CARE IF WALTER SIMON COMPLAINS OR NOT.
UM, TO DISCUSS THIS TONIGHT, I WOULD LIKE TO THEN DISCUSS IT AGAIN ON THE 14TH, UM, AND THEN COME UP WITH OUR FINAL, UM, RECOMMENDATIONS AND FINDINGS.
AND COME UP WITH A FINAL RECOMMENDATION AND FINDINGS ON THE 14TH.
NOW THE TOWN BOARD IS HAVING A PUBLIC HEARING ON MARCH 9TH.
UM, I WOULD LIKE TO DRAFT A NOTE TO THE TOWN BOARD TO ASK THEM TO WORK WITH THE APPLICANT ASKING FOR AN EXTENSION, UH, TILL AT LEAST I WOULD SAY APRIL 9TH AND A 30 DAY EXTENSION, SO THAT, UH, THEY HAVE TIME TO DO THEIR FINDINGS.
WE HAVE TIME TO DO OUR FI, THEY HAVE TIME TO READ OUR FINDINGS AND INCORPORATE THEM IF THEY WISH THAT WAY.
IF THEY DO, IF WE DON'T, IF WE DON'T EXTEND IT, THAT WOULDN'T HAPPEN.
SO I'D LIKE TO GET THAT OUT OF THE WAY WITH THE, WITH THE CLIENT, UH, THE APPLICANT AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.
HOPE, HOPEFULLY THEY UNDERSTAND THIS IS A BIG UNDERTAKING.
WE'RE TRYING TO MOVE IT ALONG AS FAST AS WE CAN, WHICH IS WHY THIS WASN'T SUPPOSED TO BE A AGENDA TONIGHT.
WE ACCELERATED IT TO TRY TO GET THROUGH IT.
UM, YARA, DO YOU WANNA JUST GO THROUGH THE PRO ANYTHING I HAVEN'T SAID ABOUT THE PROCESS OF MAYBE I MISSED? AND THEN WE HAVE TWO WAYS OF GOING, AND I, I, I'D LIKE SOME INPUT FROM YOU GUYS.
WE COULD GO THROUGH IT FROM PAGE ONE.
THE OTHER OPTION IS FOR GARRETT TO GO THROUGH THE QUESTIONS AND THE RESPONSES TO THE QUESTIONS FROM THE PLANNING BOARD SPECIFICALLY FIRST.
AND THEN ON ROUND TWO, GO THROUGH EVERYTHING ELSE.
IS THERE ANY CONSENSUS OF WHICH YOU'D, YOU'D RATHER DO ON THAT? I PREFER OPTION TWO.
SO DO I AGREE? SO WE'RE GOING THROUGH THE, SO TONIGHT, WHAT WE'LL DO THEN IS HAVE GARRETT GO THROUGH THE PLANNING BOARD QUESTIONS FIRST.
UM, I'D LIKE TO LET GARRETT GO THROUGH THE WHOLE PRESENTATION, TAKE NOTES ON ANYTHING YOU SEE, AND THEN WE'LL COME BACK AND DISCUSS IT.
SO LET'S GET GARRETT'S GARRETT'S PRESENTATION OUT OF THE WAY JUST TO SET UP THINGS, UNLESS YOU HAVE A CLAR QUESTION OF CLARIFICATION, WAIT
[01:05:01]
AND JUST TAKE A NOTE.IF IT'S SOMETHING BEYOND THAT, WAIT AND TAKE A NOTE, IF THAT'S FAIR.
UM, IN LIGHT OF THE FACT WE'RE GOING TILL 10:00 PM UM, IF SOMEONE OUT THERE WATCHING LIVE CAN SEND ME A HALFTIME AND A FINAL SCORE OF THE NICK NETS GAME BY EMAIL, THAT'D BE GREAT.
WHY
WHY? SO WHAT, WHAT I'M GONNA SUGGEST THOUGH IS, UM, I, I DID HAVE WILL FUNCTION AS A BIT OF RECAP.
I, I DID, UH, PREPARE SOME REMARKS WITH REGARD TO THE PROCESS.
SO, UH, I'D LIKE TO DO THAT FOR ABOUT FIVE MINUTES.
UM, AND THEN WHAT I INTENDED TO DO IS BRIEFLY DISPLAY THE FIVE ALTERNATIVES, WHICH I KNOW YOU'VE LOOKED AT CLOSELY, BUT IT MAY HAVE SOME BENEFIT FOR THE PUBLIC OF COURSE.
UM, SO I'D LIKE TO DO THAT AND THEN MAYBE TRANSITION INTO, UH, THE QUESTIONS IF THAT'S THE ORDER OF OPERATIONS THAT YOU'D LIKE.
SO GOOD EVENING, AND I'M HERE TONIGHT AS, AS PLANNING COMMISSIONER TO CONTINUE ASSISTING THE PLANNING BOARD IN UNDERSTANDING ITS ROLE AS AN INVOLVED AGENCY IN THE ONGOING SEEKER PROCESS FOR THE PROPOSED ELMWOOD PRESERVE REDEVELOPMENT.
THE PLANNING BOARD IS AN INVOLVED AGENCY IN THE PROCESS ON MANY LEVELS, BUT SPECIFICALLY DUE TO THE DIRECT APPROVAL AUTHORITIES OF THIS BOARD, THE SPECIFIC APPROVALS OF THE PLANNING BOARD WILL VARY BASED ON THE ULTIMATE DIRECTION OF THE SITE, WHICH WILL BE DETERMINED AT A LATER DATE, WHETHER IT IS SOME FORM OF ONE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION, OR CONVERSELY SOME FORM OF TOWNHOUSE STYLE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT.
IN EITHER INSTANCE, THE PLANNING BOARD NO DIFFERENT THAN OTHER PROJECTS WILL FOR ELMWOOD, HAVE APPROVAL AUTHORITY FOR THE TREE REMOVAL, STEEP SLOPES AND WETLAND WATERCOURSE PERMITS.
IF THE SITE IS TO BE DEVELOPED ONE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, THE PLANNING BOARD FOLLOWING THE SEEKER PROCESS WILL HAVE SOLE DISCRETION ON THE SUBDIVISION APPROVAL PROCESS.
AS YOU ALWAYS DO, IF THE SITE IS TO BE DEVELOPED AS A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, THE PLANNING BOARD FOLLOWING THE SEEKER PROCESS WILL HAVE SOLE DISCRETION ON THE SITE PLAN APPROVAL PROCESS.
AS PART OF MY REMARKS TONIGHT, IN A FEW MOMENTS, I WILL COVER THE PROCEDURAL STEPS, WHICH WILL LEAD TO A DETERMINATION ON THE FORM AND SCALE OF DEVELOPMENT AT THIS SITE.
REGARDING CCRA, THE SCOPING DOCUMENT AND DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENTS HAVE OCCURRED.
THE PROCESS IS NOW BETWEEN THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT FOR F E I SS AND FINDING STATEMENT STAGES.
THE F E I S, WHICH ALL PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS HAVE NOW RECEIVED PARTIALLY AND HARD COPY, AND IN ITS ENTIRETY ELECTRONICALLY CONSISTS OF THE RESPONSES TO THE SUBSTANTIVE PUBLIC COMMENTS MADE ON THE DRAFT D E I S DURING THE D E I SS PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD.
THOSE COMMENTS CAME FROM THE PUBLIC TOWN BOARD PLANNING BOARD, CONSERVATION ADVISORY COUNCIL, NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, ET CETERA.
THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT, OR F E I S IS INTENDED TO SERVE AS A BASIS FOR MAKING ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS.
ALTHOUGH NOT REQUIRED, THE TOWN BOARD HAS CHOSEN TO HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE F E I S, WHICH WILL BE BENEFICIAL AS IT WILL ALLOW THE PUBLIC AND INVOLVED IN INTERESTED AGENCIES TO HAVE A CHANCE TO READ AND DIGEST, DIGEST THE F E I SS AND PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE TOWN BOARD AS LEAD AGENCY.
THE TOWN BOARD CAN THEN FACTOR THESE COMMENTS INTO FUTURE DECISION MAKING ASPECTS OF THE PROJECT.
IT'S A TIMELINE RECAP AND NOW SHARE SCREEN.
SO THE CHAIRMAN, UH, WENT OVER THIS PRETTY WELL, BUT JUST SO YOU CAN SEE IT GRAPHICALLY, I, I HAVE IT UP HERE.
ON FEBRUARY 9TH, THE F E I S WAS ACCEPTED BY THE TOWN BOARD.
OVER THE COURSE OF THE NEXT TWO DAYS, STAFF SENT NOTICE OF THE F E I S AND, AND ITS COMPLETION, AND THE F E I SS WAS CIRCULATED TO ALL INVOLVED IN INTERESTED AGENCIES.
AS WAS NOTED ON MARCH 9TH, THE TOWN BOARD WILL BE HOLDING A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE F E I S WITHIN THE COMMENT PERIOD OF THE F E I S, IT IS ANTICIPATED THAT THE TOWN BOARD WILL RECEIVE COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC AND OTHER AGENCIES SIMILAR TO WHAT I JUST MENTIONED, THE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT, PARKS AND REC ADVISORY BOARD, CONSERVATION ADVISORY COUNCIL, AND SO ON.
AARON, LEMME ASK YOU A QUESTION.
IS THERE, IS THE COMMON PERIOD EXTEND AFTER THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR IS, ARE WE LEAVING THE RECORD OPEN FOR A WEEK, TWO WEEKS AFTER THE PUBLIC HEARING, OR DOES THAT WORK? YES.
TYPICALLY WHEN THE TOWN BOARD CLOSES A PUBLIC HEARING, IT'LL LEAVE A WRITTEN PERIOD OPEN.
UM, I'VE SEEN IT RANGE FROM TYPICALLY SEVEN TO 10 DAYS.
[01:10:01]
THE 16TH AT A MINIMUM PROBABLY TO SUBMIT OUR COMMENTS, RECOMMENDATIONS TO FINDINGS TO THE, TO THE TOWN BOARD.IS THAT CORRECT? THAT MAKES SENSE, YES.
ALRIGHT, SO WITHIN THE COMMENT PERIOD OF THE S E I F E I S, THE PLANNING BOARD CAN CONSIDER ISSUING COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS BASED ON YOUR REVIEW OF THE F E I S AND RELATED ALTERNATIVES.
AND I'LL TOUCH ON THAT IN JUST A MOMENT.
UM, WHEN WE TALK ABOUT WHETHER YOU CONSIDER, AND I KNOW THE CHAIRPERSON INDICATED THAT THERE, THERE IS THAT OPTION, IT'S NOT MANDATORY.
SO I'LL GET INTO THAT IN A MOMENT.
AND THEN FOLLOWING THE F E I S HEARING PERIOD, THE TOWN BOARD WILL ISSUE A FINDING STATEMENT AND I'LL TOUCH IT, TOUCH A BIT ON WHAT EXACTLY A FINDING STATEMENT IS IN A MOMENT HERE.
IT IS IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND THE FINDING STATEMENT, TO HAVE A SENSE OF THE ROADMAP REGARDING HOW A DETERMINATION WILL BE MADE, WHICH WILL LEAD TO A DECISION ON THE FORM, WHETHER IT BEING A TOWNHOUSE OR ONE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT.
THE SCALE, MEANING THE UNIT DENSITY AND LAYOUT, MEANING THE PLACEMENT OF THE ROADS, BUILDINGS, INFRASTRUCTURE, OPEN SPACE WITH REGARDS TO DEVELOPMENT AT THE SITE, FOLLOWING THE CLOSE OF THE F E I S PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD, THE TOWN BOARD WILL MAKE A FINDING STATEMENT.
THE FINDING STATEMENT OF THE TOWN BOARD WILL IDENTIFY THE CONSIDERATIONS THAT HAVE BEEN WEIGHED IN DECIDING TO APPROVE OR DISPROVE AN ACTION.
AND THE ACTION, OF COURSE, IN THIS INSTANCE IS RESIDENTIAL REDEVELOPMENT AT THE SITE.
A POSITIVE FINDING STATEMENT MEANS THAT AFTER CONSIDERATION OF THE FINAL E I S, THE PROJECT OR ACTION CAN BE APPROVED.
AND THE ACTION CHOSEN IS THE ONE THAT MINIMIZES OR AVOIDS ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PRACTICAL.
THE ACTION CHOSEN THAT TERM THAT I JUST REFERENCED IS OFTEN REFERRED TO, IS OFTEN REFERRED TO AS THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE OF THE LEAD AGENCY.
IN THIS INSTANCE, THE TOWN BOARD IN MAKING ITS FINDINGS WILL SELECT A PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE ALTERNATIVE, WHICH AS A RESULT OF THE TOWN BOARD HAVING THE F E I SS HEARING WILL FACTOR IN CONTINUED COMMENTS FROM THE INVOLVED AND INTERESTED AGENCIES AND THE PUBLIC.
THE FINDING STATEMENT OF THE TOWN BOARD WILL CONTAIN A NARRATIVE OF FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS SUPPORTING THAT ALTERNATIVE AND WILL IDENTIFY NECESSARY MITIGATIONS, WHICH WILL BE INCLUDED IN THE DESIGN PLANS FOR THE REMAINDER OF THE PROJECT REVIEW.
REGARDING ACTION ITEMS OF THE PLANNING BOARD, I'D LIKE YOU TO NOTE THE FOLLOWING.
THERE IS NO REQUIREMENT FOR THE PLANNING BOARD TO COMMENT TO THE TOWN BOARD AT THIS TIME OR AT ANY TIME WITH REGARDS TO THE F E I S, HOWEVER YOU MAY WISH TO DO SO, AND WE AS TOWN STAFF ARE CERTAINLY NOT GOING TO DISCOURAGE YOU FROM DOING SO.
RECALL THAT UNDER ANY DEVELOPMENT SCENARIO, THE PLANNING BOARD FOLLOWING CCRA WILL HAVE APPROVAL AUTHORITY ON THE REDEVELOPMENT.
THE PLANNING BOARD CAN MAKE COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS AS A BOARD WITHIN THE F E I S PERIOD REGARDING MITIGATIONS ASPECTS OF THE VARIOUS ALTERNATIVES THAT YOU ARE SUPPORTIVE OF OR NOT SUPPORTIVE OF, ET CETERA.
SUCH COMMENTS CAN ASSIST THE TOWN BOARD IN FORMULATING ITS FINDINGS AND ULTIMATELY PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE.
WHETHER OR NOT THE PLANNING BOARD CHOOSES TO ISSUE F E I S COMMENTS TO THE TOWN BOARD.
YOU WILL ALSO HAVE THE OPTION TO ISSUE PLANNING BOARD SPECIFIC FINDINGS AS EXAMPLE.
THESE CAN BE SPECIFIC TO FORTHCOMING APPROVALS AND CAN BE GEARED TOWARDS THE WETLANDS OR STEEP SLOPE COMPONENTS.
CCRA DOES ALSO SPECIFY THAT INVOLVED AGENCIES CAN ADOPT ALL OR A PORTION OF THE LEAD AGENCY'S FINDINGS.
IF YOU DON'T ADOPT YOUR OWN SPECIFIC FINDINGS, YOU CAN READ THE DRAFT TOWN BOARD FINDINGS, WHICH WILL, WHICH TYPICALLY WOULD BE ANTICIPATED TO COVER ALL THE AREAS OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERN.
AND YOU CAN COMMENT ON THOSE AND, AND ADOPT THOSE IF YOU FIND THAT THEY'RE APPROPRIATE.
LASTLY, FROM A PROCEDURAL PERSPECTIVE, IF A TOWNHOUSE STYLE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT IS SELECTED BY THE TOWN BOARD AS A PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE, AT A LATER DATE, THE PLANNING BOARD WILL ISSUE A REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ON THE APPLICABLE PUD REZONING.
SO MY OVERALL ADVICE TO THE PLANNING BOARD IS TO CONTINUE TO REVIEW THE F E I S AND CONTINUE TO ASK QUESTIONS AS THEY ARISE, WHICH WE'RE GONNA GO THROUGH MANY OF THEM TONIGHT.
IN NOTE IN THAT, IN ADDITION TO THE RESPONSES PROVIDED DIRECTLY TO PLANNING BOARD D E I S, INQUIRIES, THOSE QUESTIONS AND RESPONSES TO OTHER INVOLVED AGENCIES IN THE PUBLIC IN THE F E I S WILL ALSO HELP YOUR EVALUATION OF THE PROJECT.
SO MEANING IT'S GREAT TO READ THE RESPONSES TO THE C A C QUESTIONS, THE D O T QUESTIONS, THEY WILL ALL HELP YOUR KNOWLEDGE BASE IN THIS PROJECT.
BEFORE WE GO ON, I HAVE A COUPLE OF, I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS FOR YOU.
[01:15:01]
ISN'T IT TRUE THAT THE FINDING STATEMENT IS A GUIDING DOCUMENT THAT SHAPES THE APPROVAL PROCESSES GOING FORWARD? IT IT'S KINDA LIKE THEIS THAT CORRECT? YES, THAT'S, THAT'S CORRECT STATEMENT.
THE SECOND QUESTION I HAVE IS ABOUT WE KN WE ALL KNOW THAT A COUPLE OF THE OPTIONS HAVE UPZONING, I'M SORRY, DOWN ZONING IN THEM OR THAT WE'RE TAKING SOME R 30 AND GOING TO R 20.
THE PROCEDURE FOR THAT IS THAT, DOES THAT COME BECAUSE IT'S A ZONING CHANGE, DOES THAT COME TO THE PLANNING BOARD FOR RECOMMENDATION BACK TO THE TOWN BOARD? YES.
WELL, ALL ZONING, UM, PETITIONS COME TO THE PLANNING BOARD FOR RECOMMENDATION AND IS OUR RECOMMENDATION, REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION, YES.
AND DOES OUR RECOMMENDATION, IS THIS ONE OF THE ONES, BECAUSE I KNOW THE DIFFERENT CATEGORIES, IS THIS ONE OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT REQUIRES THE SUPER MAJORITY OF THE TOWN BOARD TO OVERCOME A RECOMMENDATION? YES.
RIGHT ON THAT, UH, I SEE DAVID NODDING HIS HEAD YES.
IN FACT, IT IS THE ONE THAT REQUIRES THE SUPER MAJORITY.
UM, SO WHAT I INTENDED TO DO NOW IS, IS, IS GO THROUGH THE VISUALS OF THE FIVE ALTERNATIVES.
UM, BUT DO OTHER BOARD MEMBERS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ON, ON THE PROCEDURE OR ANYTHING WE JUST DISCUSSED? OKAY, GREAT.
SO WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO IS DISPLAY THOSE VISUALS AND IT'S GONNA BE THE START OF VOLUME TWO OF TWO.
EVERYBODY'S GOTTEN SO SERIOUS, IT'S NOT LIKE THIS GROUP.
SO I'LL LEAN ON YOU TO TELL ME, UM, IF YOU'RE SATISFIED WITH THE SCALE THAT I SHOW HERE, AND, UM, I CAN ZOOM IN IF IF NECESSARY A LITTLE BIT.
TO RECAP WITH REGARD TO THE ALTERNATIVES FOR THE F E PURPOSES OF THE F E I S FIVE ALTERNATIVES, WERE PREPARED.
THREE OF THOSE ARE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS AND TWO OF THEM ARE ONE FAMILY SUBDIVISION LAYOUTS, AND THEY'RE TIED TO, UH, ALTERNATIVES WITH LETTERS.
SO WHAT I'LL DO IS I'LL START WITH THE THREE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS, AND THEN I'LL TRANSITION TO THE ONE FAMILY, EVEN THOUGH OKAY.
DO IT BY LETTER GARRETT, SO THAT WE CAN DO IT BY THE LETTER.
SO, ALTERNATIVE A IS VERY CONSISTENT WITH THE APPLICANT'S ORIGINAL ALTERNATIVE, A, UM, WHICH WAS THE 175 UNIT TOWNHOUSE DEVELOPMENT THAT, UH, HAD AN AGE RESTRICTION AND IT, IT, IT DONATED WHAT YOU SEE IN THE GREEN HERE AS THE 14.2 ACRES, UH, OF, OF, OF PARKLAND.
AND THE APPLICANT IS INCLUDING, UH, FISCAL TO HELP DEVELOP THAT PARK.
UM, IT HAS THE TWO CURB CUTS TO, UM, DOBBS FERRY ROAD PROPOSED AND OF NOTE AND DISSIMILAR FROM THE ORIGINAL, UH, ALTERNATIVE A IN THE D E I S ARISING FROM CONCERNS RAISED BY BOTH RESIDENTS IN THE AREA, PARTICULARLY WESTCHESTER VIEW LANE, AS WELL AS COMMENTS FROM THE D O T I CAN ZOOM IN, BUT THIS DRIVEWAY, THIS SECONDARY DRIVEWAY OPPOSITE WESTCHESTER VIEW LANE, IS NOW SHOWN AS A WRITE-IN, WRITE OUT ONLY IF YOU RECALL FROM THE D E I S THAT WAS PREVIOUSLY IDENTIFIED AS A FULL MOVEMENT DRIVEWAY.
UH, SO IN REVIEWING WITH THE CONSULTANT AND CONTEMPLATING THE COMMENTS THAT WERE RECEIVED, IT WAS DEEMED TO BE, UH, AN UPGRADE AND, AND A SAFER, UH, IMPROVEMENT HERE TO HAVE THIS BE RIGHT OUT, RIGHT IN, RIGHT OUT ONLY.
SO I THINK THAT'S VERY NOTEWORTHY.
AND THE, UH, SECOND DRIVEWAY HERE IS VERY SIMILAR TO WHAT WAS SHOWN ORIGINALLY, WHICH WOULD BE A FULL MOVEMENT DRIVEWAY THAT WOULD INCLUDE A LEFT TURN POCKET INTO, UH, THE SITE.
A ALTERNATIVE G IS A VERY SIM, ALMOST IS, IS A, AN IDENTICAL LAYOUT.
SO EVERYTHING I JUST IDENTIFIED WITH REGARDS TO THE TWO, UH, DRIVEWAYS ON DOBBS FERRY ROAD, UM, ARE, ARE APPLICABLE.
SO RIGHT IN RIGHT OUT OPPOSITE WESTCHESTER VIEW LANE FULL MOVEMENT FOR THE MAIN DRIVEWAY.
UH, THE MAJOR DIFFERENCE HERE IS THAT THIS ALTERNATIVE G UH, DOES NOT HAVE AN AGE, IT DOES NOT PROPOSE AN AGE RESTRICTION.
AND ANOTHER MAJOR DIFFERENCE WITH THIS ALTERNATIVE IS THAT THE UNITS WOULD BE, UH, FEE SIMPLE OWNERSHIP AND
[01:20:01]
TAXATION STRUCTURE.SO THEY WOULD NOT APPLY AS ALTERNATIVE A WOULD TO THE, UH, 60%, UH, ASSESSED VALUATION, UM, FORMULA THAT'S USED FOR CONDOS.
AND THIS, THIS ALTERNATIVE ALSO HAS THE 175 PROPOSED YIELD.
IT ALSO HAS THE 14.2 ACRES AND ALSO HAS THE 1.5, UH, MILLION DOLLAR, UH, ALLOCATION THAT WOULD PROGRAM AND, UM, BE UTILIZED FOR SOME IMPROVEMENTS OF, OF, OF THIS, UH, ESSENTIALLY PARK, UH, EDITION.
GARY, BOTH OF BOTH OF THESE, BOTH OF THESE PODS ARE, JUST FOR THE RECORD, ARE MAXED OUT OF ASSUMING IT DOWN ZONE INTO R 20, CORRECT.
AND BOTH EXAMPLES, IT WOULD REQUIRE THE CURRENT MIX OF R 30 AND R 20 TO BE REZONED FULLY TO R 20, RIGHT.
AND THEN TO PUD TO GET THE 175 YIELDS.
AND THAT WOULD BE, THAT WOULD BE MAXED OUT AT THAT POINT, THE 1 75? YES.
IT, IT WOULD BE MAXED OUT, YES.
AND THE THIRD PLANNED UNIT ALTERNATIVE IS ALTERNATIVE, I, NOW THIS ALTERNATIVE, UH, IS CONSISTENT WITH REGARDS TO WHAT I INDICATED IN TERMS OF THE ACCESS, UH, THIS AREA, THIS, THIS DRIVEWAY, AGAIN, WOULD BE RIGHT IN RIGHT OUT ONLY THIS WOULD BE THE FULL MOVEMENT WITH THE TURN POCKET.
THE DIFFERENCES WITH ALTERNATIVE I ARE THAT I CAN GO BACK TO THE OTHER, BUT THERE IS A REDUCTION IN DENSITY FROM 1 75 TO 1 59.
AND ALTHOUGH THE LAYOUT MAY APPEAR SIMILAR, IF I WERE TO FLASH BACK TO THE OTHER, THE PRIOR 1 75 ALTERNATIVE HAD ANOTHER ROAD CUT THROUGH THAT HAD SOME UNITS IN WHAT IS NOW SHOWN AS COMMON OPEN SPACE.
SO FROM A LAYOUT PERSPECTIVE, THAT'S, THAT'S, THAT'S HOW IT WAS REDESIGNED.
THIS INTERIOR UNITS WERE TAKEN OUT.
ANOTHER DIFFERENTIATING FACTOR OF THE, THIS, THIS ALTERNATIVE EYE IS THAT THE APPLICANT HAS INCLUDED 15 AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS.
SO IN ALL THREE OF THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS, THEY ARE PROPOSED TO BE FOR SALE UNITS.
AND IN THIS INSTANCE, 15 OF THE 159 WOULD BE AVAILABLE TO POTENTIAL PURCHASERS THAT DO NOT HAVE A COMBINED INCOME THAT EXCEEDS 80% OF THE AREA MEDIAN INCOME.
SO THAT'S A DIFFERENTIATING FACTOR.
AND THE LAND, THE LAND IN THIS ONE, AARON.
SO WITH REGARD TO THE, UM, 14.2 ACRE LAND DONATION, IT'S CONSISTENT IN TERMS OF, UH, SIZE AND AND LAYOUT AS THE OTHER.
UH, FOR THIS ALTERNATIVE, THE APPLICANT DOES NOT PROPOSE THE $1.5 MILLION, UH, ALLOCATION TO, TO HELP PROGRAM AND DEVELOP IT.
UM, BUT IT WOULD BE OFFERED FOR DEDICATION TO THE TOWN, UH, AS PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT.
TWO POINTS OF CLARIFICATION, PLEASE.
THE, THE LEGEND SHOWS R 20, R 30 HERE IS THIS, IT'S REALLY ALL DOWN ZONE TO R 20, JUST NOT MAXED OUT.
IS THAT CORRECT? SO, UM, ALMOST CORRECT.
AND I'M, I'M GLAD YOU, YOU, YOU MENTIONED THIS POINT BECAUSE IT'S IMPORTANT.
UM, WE'VE INDICATED TO THE APPLICANT IS THAT ULTIMATELY TO DERIVE AT THE DENSITY FOR A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT.
IT'S, IT'S A MATHEMATICAL FORMULA THAT RIGHT.
WHERE, WHERE, WHERE THE INPUTS ARE, UM, THE SIZE OF THE, THE OVERALL LAND AREA AND THE MIX OF, OF ZONING ON THE SITE.
WHAT WE'VE INDICATED TO THE APPLICANT IS THAT THE REZONING, IF THIS OPTION IS CHOSEN, WILL BE PROPORTIONAL SO THAT THE YIELD, THE MAX YIELD WOULD BE THE 1 5 9.
SO SOME WE'RE NOT ADVISING, SOME OPTIONS STILL BE OUR THIRD, SOME PART OF THE PROPERTY WOULD STILL BE OUR 30, IS WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? YES.
SO IT'S JUST A MATHEMATICAL FORMULA.
SO IT WOULD BE PROPORTIONAL SO THAT THERE'S NOT GREATER THAN A 1 5 9 YIELD, UM, WHICH ESSENTIALLY EQUATES TO, THERE WOULD BE NO SUBSEQUENT, UM, LATER PHASE, UH, ADDITIONS IN TERMS OF UNITS.
SO THAT, THOSE ARE THE, THE DIFFERENTIATING FACTORS.
OH, AND ALSO TH THIS STRUCTURE, UM, WOULD ALSO BE THE FEE SIMPLE.
SO, UH, THESE 159 UNITS WOULD, UM, A HUNDRED PERCENT THEY WOULD PAY TAXES BASED ON A HUNDRED PERCENT TAX VALUATION.
SO ONE O ONE OTHER POINT OF CLARIFICATION ON ACTUALLY ALL THREE OF THEM.
14.2 IS IN FACT NOT REALLY A LAND DONATION.
IT'S LAND IN LIEU OF A REC FEE.
IN FACT, A REC ACTUALLY A LAW REQUIRE, REQUIRES YOU TO GIVE LAND FIRST IF LAND'S AVAILABLE.
THAT'S, THAT WOULD BE CORRECT.
[01:25:01]
IS THE VALUATION OF WHAT THE LAND WAS PER ACRE TIMES, UH, TIMES THAT, WHICH WOULD, THERE'S A VALUATION OF IT, WHICH IS AT ONE 12, UH, 112 AN ACRE, CORRECT? YES, YES.THE, THE, THE, THE WAY THE CODE IS, IS STRUCTURED IS THAT, UM, THE FIRST OPTION SHOULD BE A, A, A DONATION OR
I DONATION, I THINK IT'S INAPPROPRIATE, BUT YEAH.
SO YEAH, I, SORRY, I TRY AND GET THAT WORD OUT OF MY HEAD.
I, I, I HAVE THE NUMBERS HANDY, I'LL BRING THEM UP.
BUT THE, UH, PROPORTIONAL, UH, PARKLAND COMPONENT WOULD, WOULD, I, I WANNA SAY WOULD BE BETWEEN FIVE AND SIX ACRES.
SO IN THIS INSTANCE, UM, FROM A MATHEMATICAL COMPUTATION PERSPECTIVE, TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE, THE PARKLAND REQUIREMENT, 5.6 ACRES WOULD MATCH UP TO THIS 159, UH, PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT.
HOWEVER, UM, WE'RE NOT GETTING THE ONE AND HALF MILLION.
WHAT YOU SEE HERE IS THE 14.2 ACRES.
AND WE'RE NOT GETTING THE ONE AND A HALF MILLION THAT WE WERE GETTING AT 1 75.
ONE OTHER QUESTION ON THE DONATION.
THIS, THIS LAND IS UNDER OUR LAW, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG.
THIS LAND IS DONATED DIRECTLY TO THE PARKS AND REC DEPARTMENT AND IT CAN'T BE USED FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE, IS THAT CORRECT? WELL, IT'S NOT DONATED TO, IT'S DONATED TO THE TOWN OF GREENBURG, UM, WITH THE TOWN BOARD AS THE, UH, YOU KNOW, THE APPROVAL EXECUTE THAT AS PART OF THE SEEKER PROCESS.
UM, BUT AS PART OF THAT, THERE COULD BE, UM, YOU KNOW, A FINDING THAT YES, INDEED, THE LAND, YOU KNOW, SHALL NOT BE USED FOR, FOR OTHER PURPOSES.
UH, IF THAT'S, UM, YOU KNOW, THE DIRECTION THAT IT WOULD HEAD, UH, I WOULDN'T DESCRIBE IT AS, UM, AS SAYING THAT THE PARKS AND REC, UH, BOARD, UH, YOU KNOW, HAS, HAS AN APPROVAL AUTHORITY OR, UH, OWNERSHIP OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
IT COULD, IT COULD BE DONE, IT COULD BE A FINDING, FOR EXAMPLE, THIS IS AN IMPORTANT POINT 'CAUSE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT GREEN SPACE HERE.
I MEAN, YOU, YOU, THEY'RE, THEY'RE CONVEYING, THAT'S THE WORD I'D USE RATHER THAN DONATING THEY CONVEYING THE LAND TO THE TOWN.
I MEAN, TECHNICALLY THE TOWN COULD BUILD A POLICE STATION THERE OR A NEW TOWN HALL THERE, CORRECT.
TECHNICALLY IN THE ABSENCE, WELL, THERE'S AN EXPECTA TO, TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE, THE ZONING ORDINANCE IN THE TOWN CODE.
THERE'S A RECREATION COMPONENT.
SO I, I THINK
SO I, I I THINK THAT'S, I'M ASKING BE RESOLVED VIA THE, UM, FINDING STATEMENT.
CHIME IN FOR A SECOND HERE ON THAT, PLEASE, DAVE.
SO READING, UH, DIRECTLY FROM OUR CODE, AND AS YOU, UH, CORRECTLY NOTED, YOU KNOW, UNDER OUR CODE, THE, UH, PRIME OBJECTIVE, YOU KNOW, IN THE PAST WAS TO PROVIDE RECREATIONAL LAND SAYS THE PROSPECTIVE SUBDIVIDED OR RESIDENTIAL SITE PLAN DEVELOPER SHALL PROVIDE RECREATIONAL LAND WITHIN THE SUBDIVISION OR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT SITE, UH, GOES ON FROM THERE, BUT YES, THAT'S, UH, CONSIDERED AS RECREATIONAL.
NOW, UH, IF THERE WAS A SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNT OF RECREATIONAL AND THERE WAS ADDITIONAL LAND THAT WAS, UH, FOR ANOTHER USE, THAT THAT IS CONCEIVABLE.
BUT, BUT I, YOU KNOW, I JUST READ YOU THE LANGUAGE OF WHAT
AND, AND WE CAN ALSO, WE CAN ALSO CO IT SOUNDS LIKE WE CAN CODIFY IT IN THE FI FINDING STATEMENTS IF WE WANTED TO.
WE CAN, WE CAN INCLUDE THAT IN OUR, UH, FINDING STATEMENT.
SORRY, SORRY TO INTERRUPT, GARRETT.
I JUST THINK THOSE ARE IMPORTANT POINTS.
NO, THEY'RE ALL GOOD QUESTIONS, AND, UH, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY, ANY QUESTIONS THAT ANYONE HAS.
SO AT THIS POINT, WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO IS TRANSITION TO THE TWO ONE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LAYOUTS, AND THOSE ARE IDENTIFIED AS ALTERNATIVES, B AND H E.
DID YOU SAY, UH, B AS IN, UH, BOY.
SO ALTERNATIVE B IS VERY SIMILAR TO I, I WANT TO ALTERNATIVE B FROM THE D E I S.
SO WHAT YOU SEE BEFORE YOU, WHICH IS IN THE F E I S, IS SIMILAR, WELL, I SHOULD SAY SIMILAR IN TERMS OF, UH, UNIT YIELD.
THERE'S 119, UH, ONE FAMILY RESIDENCES PROPOSED.
UM, BUT I, I DO WANNA NOTE SOME DIFFERENCES, WHICH, WHICH ARE NOTEWORTHY.
[01:30:01]
HAVE THE OTHER DRAWING HANDY SO I CAN SHOW IT UP IF ANY BOARD MEMBERS WOULD LIKE TO SEE, BUT I'LL USE MY CURSOR TO TRY AND ILLUSTRATE WHAT I'M GONNA DESCRIBE HERE.THE PRIOR 119 LAYOUT FROM THE D E I SS INCLUDED ONE CURB CUT TO DOBBS FERRY ROAD, WHICH WAS, UM, IN THIS LOCATION HERE, UH, OPPOSITE WESTCHESTER VIEW LANE.
AND THAT PROPOSAL WAS ACTUALLY, UM, ALL MOVEMENT, NO RESTRICTIONS, AND IT WASN'T, AS YOU SEE HERE WITH THIS SECOND, UH, DRIVEWAY CURB CUT.
SO WHAT WAS PROPOSED BEFORE WAS DIVERTING ALL TRAFFIC OPPOSITE WESTCHESTER VIEW LANE IN THE SINGLE FAMILY, UH, LAYOUT B.
UM, AND THEN SECONDARILY, WHAT WAS SHOWN WAS A SECOND, UH, ACCESS TO, UM, THIS CUL-DE-SAC TO THE NORTH OF THE SITE.
AND THOSE WERE THE TWO, UM, INGRESS EGRESS POINTS, UH, SHOWN IN ALTERNATIVE B AS PART OF THE D E I S.
SO IN FACTORING IN, AGAIN, SIMILAR TO, UH, THE RATIONALE THAT I PROVIDED BEFORE WITH REGARDS TO THE, THE WESTCHESTER VIEW LANE ACCESS, UH, FACTORING IN THAT TYPE OF, OF, OF, OF CONCERN AND COMMENT, WHAT, WHAT, WHAT WHAT EVOLVED IS, THIS IS NOW SHOWN AS A ONE, I'M SORRY, A WRITE IN, WRITE OUT ONLY VERY SIMILAR TO WHAT I DESCRIBED FOR THE PLAN UNIT DEVELOPMENTS, BUT WE WORKED WITH THE APPLICANT AND HAD THEM SHOW A SECOND DRIVEWAY THAT WOULD BE OPPOSITE THE ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY, WHICH IS, YOU KNOW, IS SIMILAR TO THE SECOND DRIVEWAY PROPOSED FOR THE, UM, PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS.
SO, UM, AND THEN WHAT'S SHOWN BACK HERE WOULD ESSENTIALLY BE AN EMERGENCY ACCESS ONLY TO THIS CUL-DE-SAC.
UM, IT ALSO CONCEIVABLY COULD BE, UH, YOU KNOW, PEDESTRIAN ACCESS FOR, FOR THOSE WANTING TO, UH, YOU KNOW, TRAVERSE THESE, YOU KNOW, KNOW THE, THE NETWORK.
UM, SO, YOU KNOW, WE, WE, WE FELT THAT THAT THAT'S A, A BIG IMPROVEMENT BECAUSE WHAT IT DOES IS, UM, IT TAKES, RELIEVES A LOT OF THE, UM, POTENTIAL TRAFFIC TRIPS FROM WESTCHESTER NEW LANE, AND IT PLACES THEM AT THE MAIN DRIVEWAY AND MAKES THIS RIGHT OUT RIGHT, RIGHT IN RIGHT OUT ONLY, AND AGAIN, DOES NOT HAVE ANY TRAFFIC GOING TO THE, THE RESIDENTIAL AREA TO THE NORTH MM-HMM.
SO SIMILAR TO THE D I S IN TERMS OF, OF UNIT COUNT, BUT FROM A TRAFFIC PERSPECTIVE, UH, IF, IF THIS, IF THIS, IF THIS SITE IS GOING TO BE DEVELOPED IN THIS FASHION, UM, YOU KNOW, WE'RE CONFIDENT THAT THIS IS, UH, A MUCH SAFER, UH, VERSION THAN THE PRIOR VERSION B, IF YOU WILL.
THERE'S NO LAND CONVEYANCE IN THIS ONE, CORRECT? CORRECT.
SO IN THIS INSTANCE, UH, THIS IS THE 100 IN 19 UNIT YIELD.
AND, UH, THERE, THERE WOULD BE, UM, IT'S ASSUMED THAT A PARKLAND, UH, RECREATION FEE, UH, OF 86 8,640 TIMES THE 119 WOULD BE PAID BECAUSE THERE, THIS, THIS DISPLAY IS NO LAND.
AND THAT, THAT WORKS OUT TO ABOUT A MILLION DOLLARS.
IT'S JUST OVER A MILLION, YES, UNDER 1.1, BUT, UH, A LITTLE BIT OVER, WHICH IS LESS THAN THE, SIGNIFICANTLY LESS THAN THE VALUE OF THAT 14 ACRES.
I THINK THAT'S SAFE TO, I THINK THAT'S SAFE TO SAY.
NOW, THIS IS A NEW ALTERNATIVE, WHICH WAS NOT A PART OF THE D E I S, AND IT'S KNOWN AS ALTERNATIVE H AND WHAT IS SHOWN HERE IS SIMILAR WITH RESPECT TO THE, UH, DRIVEWAY DYNAMIC THAT I JUST DESCRIBED ON DOBBS FERRY ROAD FULL MOVEMENT, THE RIGHT IN, RIGHT OUT OPPOSITE WESTCHESTER VIEW LANE.
UM, BUT AS YOU CAN SEE, OF COURSE, AND AS YOU KNOW, UH, VERY DIFFERENT IN TERMS OF, UH, THERE WOULD BE NO RECREATION FEE PAID.
UH, THIS WOULD BE THE CONVEYANCE OF THE LAND, WHICH WOULD BE A NEXT TO THE TOWN PARK.
SO WHAT'S DISPLAYED HERE IS, IS AN 8.6, UH, PARK DONATION.
AND, AND, AND SO THAT'S, AND, AND, AND A, AND A DENSITY YIELD OF 113 UNITS.
SO D DIFFERENT, DIFFERENT DYNAMIC THAN, THAN THE, ARE THERE ANY, ARE THERE ANY VERSION B THERE, UH, DOWN ZONING IN EITHER OF THE ONE FAMILY? UH, NO, NO.
THE, UM, THERE'S NO ZONING CHANGES PROPOSED.
THERE'S ZONING, THEY'D BE ZONING COMPLIANT COMPLETELY.
NOW, JUST I THINK ONE OTHER NOTE THAT I'D LIKE TO HIGHLIGHT, UM, WITH, WITH, WITH THIS, UM, WITH THIS HERE OR ALTERNATIVE H AS WELL AS ALTERNATIVE B UH, SHOW IS A THIRD CURB CUT ON DOBBS FERRY ROAD, WHICH WOULD BE SITTING ALONGSIDE, YOU KNOW, THE FOURTH CURB CUT, UM, WHICH IS THE EXISTING PARK ENTRANCE, WHICH I HAVE MY CURSOR
[01:35:01]
ON THAT.NOW, UM, ULTIMATELY THIS, THIS IS A CONCEPT PLAN.
SO THERE'S LANGUAGE IN THE F E I S THAT INDICATES THAT SHOULD THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SITE BE DETERMINED TO GO THE ONE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ROUTE, UM, THAT FOR CONCEPT PURPOSES, IT'S UNDERSTOOD, YOU KNOW, FOR EXAMPLE, THAT IT'S, IT'S 8.6 ACRES THAT ARE, ARE DEEMED PROPORTIONAL AND, AND, AND, AND PROPER IN CONNECTION WITH, UH, THE RECREATION COMPONENT.
BUT THERE IS LANGUAGE THAT THE APPLICANT AND, UH, PROVING BOARD, YOU KNOW, SHOULD STRIVE TO SEE IF THERE'S A WAY TO, UM, UPDATE THIS LAYOUT SUCH THAT THERE COULD BE A CONSOLIDATION OF THESE DRIVEWAYS, UM, THAT THAT WOULD BE IDEAL IF YOU COULD ESSENTIALLY ELIMINATE THIS DRIVEWAY.
AND THAT GOES FOR ANY, ANY DEVELOPMENT AT, AT THIS SITE, WHETHER IT'S PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT OR SINGLE FAMILY.
UH, I THINK WITH THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, ULTIMATELY, UH, IF A PARK IS DEVELOPED, UM, THERE IS CERTAINLY OPPORTUNITY TO RESET THE DRIVEWAY BECAUSE THERE'S NO HOMES HERE.
SO THAT, THAT, THAT, THAT CERTAINLY IS SOMETHING FROM A DESIGN PERSPECTIVE THAT WOULD MAKE SENSE IN THE FUTURE, UM, TO AVOID THIS CONFLICT WHERE YOU HAVE, UH, THE TWO, THE OFF RAMP TO THE SPRAIN, VERY CLOSE TO THE EXISTING ENTRANCE TO THE PARK, WHICH, WHICH IS THE CURRENT SETUP RIGHT NOW.
SO, UM, I MEAN THAT, THAT CONCLUDES MY OVERVIEW OF THE FIVE ALTERNATIVES I'VE TOUCHED ON THE PROCESS.
UM, HAVING SAID THAT, ANY, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD? ONE, ONE LAST QUESTION FOR ME, THEN I'LL, I'LL TURN IT OVER TO ANYBODY ELSE.
A REALLY ISN'T AN ALTERNATIVE.
IT, IT'S A CARRYOVER FROM THE D E I S, BECAUSE IF YOU READ, I THINK BECAUSE WHEN YOU READ THROUGH THE F E I S, THEY SAY THERE'S NO AGE RESTRICTED ALTERNATIVE, SO THAT'S ACTUALLY OFF THE TABLE.
IS THAT CORRECT? WELL, OKAY, SO THE LANGUAGE, THE WAY IT, IT'S INTENDED TO, TO THE WAY THE, THEY, THERE MAY BE REFERENCES TO F E I S ALTERNATIVES, WHICH ARE, UM, I GUESS EVERYTHING EXCEPT FOR A, UM, SO WHEN YOU SEE A REFERENCE THAT SAYS THE F E I SS ALTERNATIVES, UM, THEY'RE ESSENTIALLY THE F E I S ALTERNATIVES MINUS ALTERNATIVE A, WHICH IS STILL, UH, DEEMED VIABLE.
SO I, I WOULDN'T ACTUALLY, LEMME JUST, I WOULDN'T CALL THIS AS OFF THE TABLE.
I THINK, UM, THIS IS CERTAINLY, CERTAINLY, UH, AVAILABLE FOR CONSIDERATION.
EXCEPT THAT I'M, I'M READING DIRECTLY FROM THE F A I SS, THE F A F E I S ALTERNATIVE PLANS, WHICH YOU WOULD THINK THOSE ARE THE ONES WE'D BE CONSIDERING DO NOT INCLUDE AN AGE RESTRICTION.
SO TO, ACCORDING TO THE, BUT THE PROPOSED PLAN DOES A, IS TO PROPOSE THE OTHERS, ARE THE ALTERNATIVES HERE? UH, NO.
SO THEY ACTUALLY DON'T THINK IT DOES, TOM, IF YOU READ THROUGH, READ THROUGH IT IN SEVERAL PLACES, THAT'S THE WAY I READ IT.
I, THAT'S, I READ IN, I'VE READ IT IN SEVERAL PLACES, AND IT SAYS THERE WAS NO AGE RESTRICTED PLAN IN THE F A S IN THE ALTERNATIVES.
BUT THE, THE WAY I READ IT, IT WAS ALWAYS THAT A WAS THE PROPOSED, THE OTHERS WERE ALTERNATIVE.
SO I I I WOULDN'T CONSIDER IF A IS PROPOSED A WAS THE, THE ORIGINAL D E I S PLAN.
WHICH IS CARRIED OVER TO THE F E I S.
SO IN COMPARISON, PERHAPS THERE COULD HAVE BEEN A BETTER LANGUAGE THAN WHAT YOU JUST READ THERE.
UM, SCHWARTZ, I, IT'S UNFORTUNATELY IN A LOT OF PLACES, IT'S, IT'S NOT IN JUST THAT ONE PLACE.
'CAUSE I DON'T AGREE WITH TOM THAT YOU COULD READ IT THE WAY TOM INTERPRETED IN THAT ONE PLACE.
BUT YOU GO THROUGH IT AND THEY WILL TELL YOU, IT, IT, I THINK IT'S PRETTY CLEAR IN ANSWERING SOME OF THE RESPONSES THAT THEY HAVE NO INTEREST AT THIS POINT IN DOING AN AGE RESTRICTED, AGE RESTRICTED, UH, DEVELOPMENT.
SO I CAN DIRECT, I, I CAN DIRECT YOU TO LANGUAGE IN, UM, THE F E I S EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND SEVERAL, SEVERAL OTHER LOCATIONS THAT IDENTIFY, UM, THAT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT, YOU KNOW, THE APPLICANT FEELS, UH, WOULD BE BENEFICIAL FOR THE SITE AND WOULD PROCEED IF CHOSEN BY THE TOWN BOARD.
BUT THE APPLICANT'S HERE, I MEAN, ULTIMATELY IF YOU HAVE A QUESTION FOR THEM OR IF YOU WANT TO, SO WE CAN DISCUSS THAT AFTERWARDS.
YOU DON'T NEED TO DISCUSS IT NOW, BUT, UM, OKAY.
THAT WASN'T A TAKEAWAY I GOT FROM IT.
I DO AGREE THE LANGUAGE PROBABLY COULD HAVE BEEN, UM, A LITTLE MORE CLEAR.
THIS, THIS ALTERNATIVE, A HA HAS A, UH, A CLUBHOUSE I THINK IN TENNIS COURTS.
[01:40:02]
ALL OF THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS SHOW CONSISTENCY WITH REGARD TO, UH, TENNIS, UH, CLUBHOUSE AND TENNIS COURTS THAT WOULD REMAIN ON SITE.THEY EXIST AND THEY WOULD BE REFURBISHED, REMAIN ON SITE FOR THE USE OF THE RESIDENTS THAT, UM, AND, AND, AND THE ALTERNATIVES, THE ALTERNATIVES WITH THE SINGLE FAMILY HOUSES ELIMINATE THAT.
AM I CORRECT? NO, I DON'T THINK SO.
SO, OH, THERE, YOU SEE HERE IS HOUSE, HOUSE, UH, IN THAT SAME SECTOR AND THEN GOOD POINT.
THEY SHOW THE HOMES ON TOP OF KIND OF THE GHOST OF WHAT WAS THERE BEFORE, SO IT ALMOST LOOKS LIKE IT'S THERE.
IF, IF IT'S MY GO AHEAD, TOM, GO AHEAD.
WALTER, WALTER, YOU GO FIRST THEN TOM.
OKAY, WELL, GOING BACK TO THE FIR INITIAL DISCUSSION OF PLAN A, UH, I, I, I DON'T THINK AT THIS POINT IS A SERIOUS CONSIDERATION BECAUSE, UH, UH, AND I DON'T THINK THAT, UH, THE APPLICANT, UH, FEELS A, BECAUSE WHAT YOU'RE DOING, YOU ARE SAYING YOU WANT TO BILL A, A FACILITY FOR F FOR PEOPLE 55 AND ABOVE A, UH, A FOUR TO 5,000 SQUARE FOOT, UH, UH, UH, MULTI-LEVEL CONDO WHERE PEOPLE AT THAT AGE, UH, LOOKING TO IZE.
SO I DON'T SEE, YOU KNOW, THE PRACTICAL MARKET FOR SOMETHING THAT LARGE AND, AND BEING AGE RESTRICTED.
SO THE TWO JUST DOESN'T BALANCE OUT TO ME.
AND, UH, AND, UM, AND THE RECORDS IN TERMS OF, UH, UH, IS CONFUSING THAT WHETHER OR NOT WHAT WAS PROPOSED OR WHAT ARE THE ALTERNATIVES.
SO I DON'T THINK IT'S A SERIOUS CONSIDERATION.
BUT THE OTHER THING I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IS THAT, UH, ONE OF THE THINGS, UH, IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, WE, UH, INDICATED THAT WE DID THAT WARRANT, UH, UH, DOWN ZONE.
UH, THE ISSUE WAS NOT DOWN ZONING PER SE, BUT THE ISSUE WAS INCREASE IN DENSITY IN A ONE FAMILY, UH, AREA.
SO I WOULD LIKE TO JUST LOOK AT THE BASE CASE.
I THINK EARLY ON, HUGH, YOU, YOU THOUGHT, UH, MENTIONED THAT IF YOU TAKE THE PROPERTY THAT'S CURRENTLY IN WHAT R 30 AND R 20 ARE THE CURRENT ZONES? YES.
SO YOU TAKE THE R 30 AND SAY HOW MANY UNITS THAT YOU COULD MAKE THAT COULD, COULD BUILD IN THE R 30 AND ASSUME THIS IS ANOTHER DEVELOP AND R 20, HOW MANY UNITS THAT YOU COULD BUILD IN THE R 20.
AND THAT SHOULD BE THE CASE, THE BASE NUMBER, WHICH IS SOMETHING LIKE 1 26 OR HELP ME OUT, AARON, OR YES, IT'S ONE 20, YOU'RE CORRECT.
1 26 WITH THE CUR, THE CURRENT COMPOSITION OF R 20 AND R 30 USING THE DEVELOPMENT FORMULA YIELDS 1, 2, 6.
SO THAT SHOULD BE OUR BASE CASE, 1 26.
THEN FROM THERE WE COULD SAY, OKAY, IF WE GET, UH, UH, UH, A CERTAIN MO MORE OPEN SPACE, THEN YOU COULD MOVE THAT NUMBER.
IF YOU GET A MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING, YOU COULD MOVE THAT NUMBER.
BUT I THINK THAT'S THE WAY WE SHOULD ANALYZE.
IF YOU GET THE OPEN SPACE FOR THE PARK AND YOU LOOK AT THAT NUMBER, BUT RIGHT NOW WE SORT OF COMPARING SO MANY THINGS WITH SO MANY DIFFERENT STANDARDS.
UH, WELL, YOU GET THE PARK SPACE IN ONE CONDITION, BUT YOU DON'T GET THE MONEY TO, UH, DO ANYTHING WITH IT.
AND, AND SO IF WE JUST START FROM THE BASE CASE AND SAY WHAT DO, WHAT, WHAT DOES ANY PARTICULAR LAYOUT THAT IS ABOVE THAT BASE CASE, WHAT DO YOU GET FOR IT? AND I THINK THAT'S A MORE, I THINK THAT'S A MORE STRAIGHTFORWARD WAY OF ANALYZING ALL THESE VARIOUS SCENARIOS JUST COMPARED TO THE BASE CASE AND SEE IF WHAT YOU'RE GETTING, UH, UH, UH, JUSTIFY ADDITIONAL 10 OR 20 OR WHATEVER HOUSING.
[01:45:06]
OKAY.UM, IT WAS TOM, I THINK WAS NEXT.
THANKS, MR. HAY, I'M SORRY TO INTERRUPT BEFORE YOU DO, I, I KNOW MR. FREE'S HAD HIS HAND UP FOR A WHILE.
I THINK HE WANTED TO OFFER THE BOARD JUST A LITTLE BIT OF GUIDANCE BEFORE MR. HAYES QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? OKAY, FINE.
UM, YEAH, THE, UH, THE, THE DEVELOPER IS HERE, AND I'M NOT SUGGESTING AT THAT, UH, THE DEVELOPER COMMENT AT THIS TIME, BUT BEFORE THERE WAS A QUESTION AS TO, UM, PLAN A AND THEN A COMMENT AS TO WHETHER OR NOT, UH, YOU KNOW, THE SERIOUSNESS OF THAT.
I THINK, UM, THE DEVELOPERS WATCHING THIS, ANY QUESTIONS THAT CAME UP, INCLUDING THAT THE DEVELOPER CAN NOTIFY THE BOARD, UH, YOU KNOW, ITS POSITION WITH RESPECT TO ISSUES OF THAT, UH, OF, OF THOSE.
SO RATHER THAN, YOU KNOW, MAKING, UH, YOU, YOU KNOW, KNOWING FOR SURE ONE WAY OR THE OTHER, UH, WE CAN ASK THAT QUESTION AND THE DEVELOPER CAN GET BACK TO US, UM, AS TO, UH, THEIR THOUGHTS.
THEY'RE, THEY'RE VERY THOUGHT PROVOKING QUESTIONS.
UM, I JUST WANNA READ SOMETHING TO YOU GUYS.
JUST IT, AND IT'S A LANGUAGE ISSUE, DAVE, BECAUSE IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY, AS GARRETT POINTED OUT, IT SAYS, OF THE FIVE POTENTIAL VIABLE SITE ALTERNATIVES TO ARE CONVENTIONAL SUBDIVISIONS REQUIRING NO ZONING MAP CHANGE IN THREE PODS, INCLUDING ALTERNATE A, RIGHT? MM-HMM.
YOU WOULD THINK, HOWEVER, IN THE ANSWER TO A COMMENT ON, ON AGE RESTRICTED HOUSING, UH, RESPONSE 2.4, THE F A S, SO IT'S DEFINED AS AN ALTERNATIVE PLAN, BUT THEN IN RESPONSE 2.4, IT SAYS, THE F A S ALTERNATIVE PLANS DO NOT CONTAIN ANY AGE RESTRICTION, RESTRICTIVE CO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ZONING ORD ORDINANCE.
RIGHT? SO THERE'S A CONFLICT THERE.
THERE'S THERE, THERE'S AN, IT'S BAD LANGUAGE.
THE LANGUAGE IS VERY CONFUSING.
RIGHT? AND IT'S, IT WAS RIGHT OF YOU TO UH, POINT THAT POINT THAT OUT AND ULTIMATELY WE CAN HEAR BACK FROM THE DEVELOPER, UH, IF IT MEANT ONE OR THE OTHER, OR BOTH.
YEAH, I MEAN, WE, WE JUST NEED TO KNOW.
SO TO YOUR POINT, LIKE THE LANGUAGE YOU JUST READ, I THINK IT WOULD'VE BEEN CLEAR TO SAY WITH THE EXCEPTION OF ALTERNATIVE A AND THEN YEAH, WHAT YOU JUST READ, OR, OR IF IT'S OFF THE TABLE, GARRETT, WE JUST NEED TO KNOW IF IT'S ON THE TABLE OR IT'S OFF THE TABLE BECAUSE IT'S OFF THE TABLE.
WE DON'T ONLY HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT FOUR ALTERNATIVES, NOT FIVE.
AND I'M JUST LETTING YOU KNOW, I'VE WORKED HEAVILY ON, ON THIS DOCUMENT, AND I KNOW FOR A FACT THAT IF THE APPLICANT WAS NOT WILLING TO BUILD THIS ALTERNATIVE, THEY WOULD'VE NOT, THEY WOULD'VE STRUCK IT.
BUT THIS LANGUAGE, THIS LANGUAGE IS NOT CLEAR.
THE LANGUAGE COULD HAVE BEEN BETTER.
AND THEN I'M LOOKING AT THE PLAN AND IT'S CALLED ALTERNATIVE A.
SO I WAS ASSUMING BASED ON, YOU KNOW, THE ORIGINAL, UM, PROPOSAL THAT A WAS STILL CONSIDERED, CONSIDERED AND LABELED PROPOSED, BUT IT IS LABELED ALTERNATIVE, RIGHT.
AND I'M WONDERING THAT LANGUAGE CAME FROM THE PAST, RIGHT? YOU HAD TO DO IT IN CONTEXT, THAT'S ALL.
AND THEN I, I THINK TOM'S GOT A WHOLE BUNCH OF POINTS HE'D LIKE TO MAKE.
QUICKLY, I APOLOGIZE, I JUST WANTED TO INDICATE THAT MR. REBO IS ON, UM, FROM THE APPLICANT'S SIDE AND, AND HE'S HAPPY TO CLARIFY IF, IF THE BOARD WOULD LIKE THAT AT THIS TIME.
MR. REBO IS A, AN ALTERNATIVE OR ISN'T IT A, IS AN ALTERNATIVE.
AND I APOLOGIZE IF THE LANGUAGE IS CONFUSING.
YOU, THANK YOU THAT THAT ANSWERS.
I GUESS I SHOULDN'T SAY ALTERNATIVE.
I SHOULDN'T SAY ALTERNATIVE IT
MR. SCHWART, THAT'S ALL I NEEDED TO KNOW.
YEAH, I HAVE A NUMBER OF, OF MORE SPECIFIC, OR, UM, YEAH, MORE SPECIFIC QUESTIONS AND YOU KNOW, THERE'S A LOT HERE.
AND I THINK WHAT I'M GONNA DO, GARRETT, IS I'M GOING TO LUCKY YOU, I'M GONNA SEND YOU A BUNCH OF QUESTIONS BEFORE I, I RAISE 'EM IN ANOTHER MEETING.
BUT I, I'M LOOKING AT SOME OF THE KEY MEASUREMENTS OF THESE DIFFERENT PROPOSALS.
UM, THE PLANNING BOARD WAS GIVEN A CHART AND IT WAS IN THE F E I S FOR ANYONE WHO LOOKED AT IT ONLINE.
THERE'S JUST A FEW PLACES I DON'T UNDERSTAND.
AND, AND MR. REBO MIGHT BE ABLE TO HELP YOU IN TERMS OF SITE DISTURBANCE.
THE SITE DISTURBANCE FOR OPTION A AND OPTION G IS 75.3
[01:50:01]
ACRES.OPTION I DROPS ALL THE WAY DOWN TO 46.8.
YOU KNOW, WE'RE ONLY LOSING WHAT, 16 HOMES.
SO I'M JUST, IT'S ONE THING I CAN'T FIGURE OUT WHY THAT WOULD BE SO LITTLE.
SO THAT'S ONE TWO RIGHT UNDER THAT CUT AND FILL THE, UH, THE 2 175 UNITS HAVE, YOU KNOW, 112,000 CUBIC YARD EXCESS, BUT I, WHICH IS 159, DOESN'T SEEM THAT MUCH SMALLER TO ME.
DROPS ALL THE WAY DOWN TO 29,000 IN EXCESS.
I DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW THAT'S POSSIBLE.
PROBABLY A VERY GOOD, GOOD EXPLANATION.
AND THEN THE LAST ONE FOR NOW, IN TERMS OF THE AMOUNT SPENT ON SERVICES, I'M, IT'S CLEAR THAT SOMETHING IS DIFFERENT HERE.
OPTION, UH, ALTERNATIVE A OR OPTION A, IF YOU SUBTRACT THE FISCAL, THE GROSS TAX BENEFIT, UM, IF YOU SUBTRACT, SORRY, THE NET FROM THE GROSS, IT LOOKS LIKE SERVICES ARE COSTING ABOUT 670,000.
I THOUGHT I READ IN THERE THAT THEY'RE GONNA BE HANDLED PRIVATELY AND THAT'S PROBABLY WHY ALL OF THE OTHER OPTIONS, BOTH THE SINGLE FAMILY AND THE TOWN HOMES, IT'S UH, TWO PLUS MILLION FOR SERVICES.
I JUST WANT TO UNDERSTAND IF MY ASSUMPTION IS CORRECT THAT ALL THE OTHER ONES ARE BEING HANDLED BY THE TOWN WHEREAS A IS NOT.
AND JUST TRY TO UNDERSTAND WHY.
SO THOSE ARE THE THREE THINGS.
SITE DISTURBANCE, CUT AND FILL AND THE AMOUNT BEING ALLOCATED FOR SERVICES.
WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO IS JUST COLLECT ALL THESE QUESTIONS AND UM, UH, CONFER WITH, YOU KNOW, THE APPLICANT.
I'LL RE YOU KNOW, CONFER WITH OTHER ASPECTS OF THE DOCUMENT AND WE HAVE OUR ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANT WHICH CAN ASSIST US.
JUST GIVE A PERSPECTIVE ON TOM'S FIRST QUESTION 'CAUSE I ACTUALLY DID THE ARITHMETIC.
IT'S A 38% DECREASE IN SITE DISTURBANCE FROM THE 1 75 TO THE 1 59.
YET IT'S ONLY A 9% DECREASE IN THE NUMBER OF TOWNHOUSES.
UH, AND TO ADD TO THAT, UM, ANOTHER QUESTION THAT WOULD RELATE TO THAT IS WHY WHEN YOU'RE ONLY DOING 119 HOUSES IS ARE WE TAKING DOWN OVER TWICE THE NUMBER OF TREES THAT WE DID WITH THE TOWNHOUSES OVER TWICE? AND THAT I THINK IS PROBABLY AN ANSWER.
THE THIRD THING IS ON THIS, THE SCHOOL CHILDREN, UM, FIRST OF ALL, YOU HAVE ZERO WHEN AN OVER 55, WHICH I DON'T THINK WILL ACTUALLY BE ACCURATE.
HAVING BEEN HAVING A SCHOOL CHILD WHEN I WAS OVER 55, I'M NOT THE ONLY ONE ON THIS BOARD THAT HAD THAT.
I DON'T THINK IT CAN PRECLUDE YOUR A DEPENDENT LEGALLY.
AND SECOND, IF YOU TAKE COMPARE A WITH G, THERE'S 159 ADDED POPULATION IN G OKAY.
WHICH OBVIOUSLY HAS TO BE CHILDREN, RIGHT? I WOULD ASSUME YET WE ONLY HAVE 36 KIDS GOING TO THE SCHOOLS.
WHAT HAPPENED TO THE REST OF THE KIDS? THERE ARE ALL SORTS OF QUESTIONS LIKE THAT, THAT GO, GO THROUGH.
I CAN MAKE, HAVE THE SAME KINDS OF QUESTIONS.
WHEN YOU GET TO, TO TRAFFIC THE TRAFFIC STUDY, YOU HAVE THE SAME KINDS OF ISSUES WHERE WHY, IF YOU HAVE THE SAME, ESSENTIALLY THE SAME NUMBER OF PEOPLE, UM, IN THE, IN THE, UH, IN TWO OF THE ALTERNATIVES IS, IS THERE SO MUCH DIFFERENCE IN TRAFFIC? IT DOESN'T, THERE'S A LOT OF THAT GOING THROUGH THIS THAT IS UNEXPLAINED.
ANYBODY ELSE HAVE QUESTIONS? MONA? GO AHEAD.
YEAH, I CAN ACTUALLY ANSWER THE 55 PLUS WITH ZERO KIDS
'CAUSE THEY DO NOT WANT SCHOOL BUSES RUNNING THROUGH IT.
SO IF YOU'RE GOING TO LIVE IN A 55 PLUS COMMUNITY, YOU'RE NOT ALLOWED TO LIVE THERE WITH A SCHOOL AGE CHILD.
AND DO YOU KNOW THE WHEREABOUTS OF THE OTHER HUNDRED KIDS THAT AREN'T IN THE SCHOOL DISTRICT? THAT I CAN'T ANSWER? ARE THEY ROAMING, AR ARE THEY ROAMING AROUND THE ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY ACROSS THE, THE STREET? I DON'T.
BUT SOMETIMES IF YOU MOVE INTO A 55 PLUS COMMUNITY, UM, THAT'S ONE OF THE HR OKAY.
THAT THAT ANSWERS, THAT ANSWERS THAT QUESTION DOESN'T, THAT'S THE ONLY ONE I CAN'T ANSWER.
BUT THAT'S NOT WHY I RAISED MY HAND.
I RAISED MY HAND WOULD BE BECAUSE I WANTED TO COMMENT, UM, ON SOMETHING THAT WALTER HAD SAID ABOUT HE DIDN'T THINK, UM, PEOPLE 55 PLUS WANT TO LIVE IN LARGE HOMES.
AND I DISAGREE WITH HIM ON THAT.
THAT MANY PEOPLE 55 PLUS DO WANT LARGER HOMES BECAUSE THEY HAVE, UM, CHILDREN WHO HAVE GRANDCHILDREN
[01:55:01]
AND WHEN THEIR CHILDREN WITH GRANDCHILDREN COME TO VISIT, THEY WANT TO HAVE THOSE EXTRA BEDROOMS FOR THEM TO STAY WITH THEM, POSSIBLY THEIR CHILDREN AND GRANDCHILDREN LIVE OUT OF STATE OR LIVE FAR AWAY.AND THEY DO WANT THE LARGER HOMES FOR THAT REASON.
SO I DISAGREE WITH HIM ON THAT ASPECT THAT THEY MAY WANT THE LARGER HOMES.
SO I DON'T AGREE WITH THAT COMMENT.
I WAS SAYING WHAT IS THE, WITH THE BULK OF THE MARKET IS DESIGNED, THE BULK OF THE MARKET IS 30 ACCORDING TO THE, ACCORDING TO THE F E I S.
UH, THEY CITE A OVER 55 OF BEING ABOUT 3,400 SQUARE FEET, WALTER.
OKAY, SO IT'S A BIG DIFFERENCE FROM 4,500 SQUARE FEET.
WELL, IT MAY NOT BE THE BULK BULK OF THE MARKET, BUT THERE MAY BE A MARKET FOR THAT 45 THAT'S BIGGER, THAT'S BIGGER THAN PE MOST HOUSES PEOPLE ARE MOVING OUT OF.
I THINK THAT'S WALTER'S POINT.
AND I THINK
BUT THERE MAY BE A MARKET FOR IT HERE IN WESTCHESTER.
NO, I I THINK THEY MAY BE ABLE TO SELL IT.
I'M, I'M NOT CONVINCED, BUT I THINK THERE MAY BE A MARKET FOR THE
UM, THAT, THAT WAS ONE OF THE THINGS I WANTED TO SAY.
THE OTHER THING IS THAT, UM, I HAD ASKED THEM TO DO A, UM, A COMPARISON FOR ME OF A HYBRID AND IN THIS STUDY, BECAUSE IT WASN'T ASKED IN SCOPING, THEY DIDN'T DO IT AND THEY JUST SAID IT WASN'T MARKETABLE.
AND I THINK THERE IS A MARKET FOR IT AND I WOULD STILL LIKE TO HAVE SOME SORT OF, UM, AND AN EXERCISE DONE WHERE THEY DO SOME SORT OF A HYBRID WITH TOWNHOUSES AND SINGLE FAMILY HOMES AND EXPLAIN TO ME, YOU KNOW, WITH REAL NUMBERS THAT IT'S NOT MARKETABLE.
NOT JUST, IT'S NOT, YOU KNOW, THERE'S NO MARKET FOR THAT BECAUSE I BELIEVE THAT PEOPLE WHO MOVE INTO THIS KIND OF A COMMUNITY, THEY MAY MOVE IN, IN, AS A COUPLE INTO A SINGLE FAMILY HOME AND LIKE THE COMMUNITY AND THEN WANT TO STAY IN THE COMMUNITY AND MOVE INTO A TOWNHOUSE.
SO THAT'S MY IS THAT IT? THAT'S IT.
ANYTHING ELSE, MONA? THAT IT, THAT'S IT.
WALTER? YEAH, I JUST WANNA PIGGYBACK ON WHAT MONA SAID BECAUSE I ACTUALLY HAVE SEEN SOMETHING LIKE THAT IN CHARLOTTE WHEREBY YOU HAVE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, UH, WITH UM, A MASTER BEDROOM AND A GUEST ROOM ON THE FIRST FLOOR AND UH, A SECOND FLOOR.
AND, AND THEN THE INDIVIDUAL HAVE THE OPTION OF, WITH THE SMALLER UNITS PUT IN A BATHROOM AND A, A BEDROOM ON THE SECOND FLOOR IF THEY SO CHOOSE, OR IF THEY BUY THE BUYER, THE LARGER FOOTPRINT, THEY COULD PUT TWO BEDROOMS AND TWO BATHROOMS UP THERE.
SO YOU WIND UP WITH A FOUR BEDROOM HOUSE.
SO YOU HAVE, YOU COULD GO FROM A, A TWO BEDROOM HOUSE TO FOUR BEDROOM HOUSE, A HOUSE ON A SLAB OR A HOUSE ON A BASEMENT.
SO YOU HAVE A WIDE VARIETY, DEPENDING UPON WHAT OPTIONS YOU CHOOSE.
YOU COULD GO FROM A FOUR BEDROOM HOUSE WITH A BASEMENT TO A TWO BEDROOM HOUSE WITH NO BASEMENT.
SO THEY'RE ALL A SINGLE FAMILY HOME.
UH, THE TWO OF, YOU'RE GONNA HATE ME FOR THIS, BUT I'M GONNA SAY IT BECAUSE I THINK IT'S RIGHT.
GARRETT AND DAVE, I I MAY NEED YOUR HELP HERE.
I NEED YOU AS BODYGUARDS 'CAUSE I'M GOING ABOUT TO GET SHOT.
I THINK
SO AT THIS POINT, THE ONLY THING WE CAN CONSIDER, I BELIEVE IS THE ALTERNATIVES THAT ARE IN THE F A S.
I'M JUST, I, I DON'T LIKE IT EITHER, MAR, BUT I THINK THAT'S THE, THE CASE.
WELL, WE ASKED THEM, THEY JUST DIDN'T DO IT.
I, I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT WE'RE NOT THE LEAD AGENCY.
I I, YOUR PROTEST IS ABSOLUTELY RIGHT.
I JUST DON'T THINK WE CAN DO ANYTHING ABOUT THAT.
NOW, AM I CORRECT, UH, GARRETT AND DAVE ON THAT? YEAH, LOOK, I I, YOU HEAR ME? SI I YES, WE HEAR YOU.
AND SO I HAVE SEEN, I HAVE THAT I HAVE SEEN THE HYBRID, UH, SINGLE FAMILY, MULTI-FAMILY, UM, TOWNHOUSE TYPE DEVELOPMENT.
DO YOU LOVE IT? EVEN IN THE HUDSON VALLEY, UM, IN WARWICK, NEW YORK.
WARWICK GROVE IS, IS, IS A PRIME EXAMPLE.
THAT, THAT, THAT JUST CAME OUT AMAZING.
UM, BUT YES, I, THE, YOU CANNOT, UM, FORCE THE APPLICANT TO, UH, CREATE A NEW ALTERNATIVE AT THIS POINT.
[02:00:01]
WAS NOT IDENTIFIED IN THE SCOPING DOCUMENT.I I I I HATE TO BE THE BEAR OF BAD NEWS.
I HATE TO BE, MAKE A COUPLE OF COMMENTS.
OKAY, FIRST OF ALL, I DO, UM, I JUST, OKAY.
I JUST WANT TO COMPLETELY AGREE WITH YOU ON THE SCHOOL TRO THE NUMBERS SEEM RIDICULOUSLY LOW.
I MEAN, HERE WE HAVE 159 TOWNHOUSES WITH ONLY 33 KIDS.
YOU KNOW, WE HAVE 119 SINGLE, YOU KNOW, SINGLE FAMILY HOMES WITH 43 KIDS.
I'D LIKE TO, I'D LIKE TO KNOW WHERE THEY GET THEIR ESTIMATE REGARDING THE SCHOOL CHILDREN FROM, BECAUSE THAT HAS A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ON THE SCHOOL DISTRICTS.
UM, NUMBER TWO, THE PLAN WE'RE LOOKING AT, WHICH I KINDA LIKE, I GUESS THAT'S ALTERNATIVE.
I MEAN, YOU KNOW, I WONDER IF THE APPLICANT CAN, YOU KNOW, PUT STUFF IN THERE LIKE BENCHES, WALKWAYS, A GAZEBO, A PLAYGROUND, YOU KNOW, A LITTLE LIGHTING.
YOU COULD WALK AROUND AT NIGHT.
STROLL, MAYBE A FOUNTAIN FOR THE KIDS IN THE SUMMER.
I MEAN, THERE REALLY SHOULD BE SOMETHING IN THE MIDDLE THERE.
ANYTHING ELSE? MICHAEL? ONLY, ONLY 12 KIDS.
MICHAEL, ANYTHING ELSE MICHAEL? NO, THANK, THANK YOU FOR THE COMMENT FROM THE PEANUT GALLERY.
I THINK I HAVE A, UH, UH, KIND OF A COMMENTS REGARDING THE SIZE OF THE SQUARE FOOTAGES.
AND I, I WANTED TO KIND OF UNDERSTAND WHY IT VARIES INTO A DIFFERENT ALTERNATE.
UH, NOT VERY CLEAR WHAT MAKES IT FROM 45 TO FIVE, 5,000.
UH, BUT, UH, THAT'S, THAT'S EXPLANATION, UH, WOULD BE HELPFUL.
UM, UH, AND THE, I THINK OVERALL MY COME IS THAT, UH, IF THE APPLICANT, BASED ON THEIR MARKET ANALYSIS AND THE FINANCING, UH, THE, THE BASE CASE THAT WE ARE ASKING THEM TO DO IT ISN'T, IS IT, UH, IS IT REALLY, UH, IMPORTANT BECAUSE IT'S NOT VIABLE? WHY IT SHOULD BE A ALTERNATE? UH, IT'S NOT AN ALTERNATE.
LET ME EXPLAIN, EXPLAIN WHY I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO ME, THE ISSUE, AND IN FACT, I THINK IT'S ACTUALLY AGAIN, IS A MISSTATEMENT, I THINK IN, IN THE, IN, IN THE COMMENT SECTION.
UM, I DON'T THINK PUT THE PUT IS A BIG ISSUE.
I DON'T THINK THE, I THINK THE PUT IS A HUNDRED PERCENT CONSISTENT WITH THE COMP PLAN BECAUSE IT PRESERVES OPEN SPACE.
I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY, I REALLY DON'T THINK, I THINK THE PUT PUT IS NOT AN ISSUE, IS FOR, AT LEAST FOR ME, IT'S NOT.
THE ISSUE, AND I HAVEN'T DECIDED ONE WAY OR THE OTHER, AND GARRETT AND I HAVE TALKED ABOUT THIS IN DETAIL, IS THE DOWN ZONING AND THE DOWN ZONING IN ITS, IN AND OF ITSELF IS TECHNICALLY AGAINST WHAT'S IN THE COMP PLAN.
BUT IF THE DOWN ZONING PROVIDES OTHER PLAN, OTHER BENEFITS THAT OUTWEIGH THAT, THAT DOWNSIDE, IT'S SOMETHING WE SHOULD CONSIDER.
UM, FOR INSTANCE, YOU KNOW, IF YOU, IF YOU'VE GAINED 45 ACRES OF GREEN SPACE BECAUSE THEY'RE WILLING TO DO THIS, OKAY.
OR ONE OF THE UNIQUE THINGS HERE IS THIS IS PARKLAND THAT WE'RE GETTING, THAT ISN'T OUT IN THE MIDDLE OF TAXI ROAD, IT'S PARKLAND THAT'S RIGHT NEXT TO A MAJOR RECREATIONAL FACILITY.
AND THIS MAY BE A WAY, ONCE IN A LIFETIME OPPORTUNITY TO GET THAT PARK LAND.
THAT COULD BE, I'M NOT SAYING THAT'S THE RIGHT ANSWER.
WHAT I'M SAYING IS WE NEED TO KNOW WHAT THE IMPACT IS OF THE DOWN ZONING AND THEN NEGOTIATE FROM THERE.
SOMEWHERE, THE ANSWER IS PROBABLY SOMEWHERE BETWEEN THE 1 26 AND 1 75 IF YOU WANNA DO THE POD.
IF, I'M NOT SAYING WE WANNA DO THE POD, BUT IT'S A BASE CASE AND THE REST OF IT.
THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT I DON'T UNDERSTAND.
THAT THE BASE CASE IS WHAT THE MARKET OR, OR THE WORD APPLICANT THINKS THE MARKET GOING TO.
NO, THE BASE CASE IS WHAT THEY NO, IT'S, HOLD ON.
WHAT SECOND? THE BASE CASE IS NOT THAT, THE BASE CASE I'M TALKING ABOUT, THE 1 26 IS, IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE MARKET AND
[02:05:01]
HAS EVERYTHING TO DO WITH OUR ZONING CODE.IT IS WHAT WOULD BE ALLOWED, IT'S MAXIMUM BUILD OUT WITHOUT THE DOWN ZONING.
AND THEY HAVE ALREADY STATED THEY DON'T WANNA BUILD IT.
IT SHOULDN'T BE AN ALTERNATIVE.
IT SHOULD NOT BE ULTIMATE, THAT'S ALL.
'CAUSE THEY DON'T WANNA BUILD IT.
YOU CAN'T FORCE THEM TO PROPOSE SOMETHING THEY DON'T WANT.
THEY HAVE A RIGHT TO PROPOSE WHAT THEY WANT, YOU KNOW, AND, AND THEN WE HAVE A RIGHT TO DECIDE OUT OF THOSE PROPOSALS WITHIN, IN THE, IN THE LAW, WHICH ONE MAKES SENSE.
BUT IN TERMS OF WHAT THE LAW SAYS, I MEAN, THEY CAN TOMORROW WITHOUT ANY VARIANCES OR ANYTHING, BILL THE 113 OR 119 HOUSES.
THE ONE THING I WOULD JUST WANNA QUICKLY ADD THOUGH, UM, IN TERMS OF LIKE FOR COMPARATIVE PURS PURPOSES, THE D E I S DID HAVE ALTERNATIVE E, WHICH WAS 126, UH, ZONING COMPLIANT PLAN, UNIT DEVELOPMENT, NO AGE RESTRICTIONS.
SO WE DO HAVE LIKE, YOU KNOW, THE NUMBERS ON HOW MUCH WATER THAT WOULD USE, HOW MANY PEAK TRIPS THAT WOULD USE, UH, AND SO ON AND SO FORTH.
YOU, YOU CAN, YOU CAN COMPARE THAT AND WE COULD, YOU KNOW, WITH, WITH WHAT YOU SEE HERE, 1, 5, 9 OR WHAT, GARRETT? OH, I ASKED MATT TO, I ASKED AARON, I THINK YOU WERE ON THE PHONE WHEN I DID, IS TO HAVE MATT, MATT JUST PRESENT THAT COMPARISON.
NOT AS AN ALTERNATIVE, BUT JUST SO WE CAN ISOLATE THE IMPACT, THE DOWNSIDE.
AND ALSO THAT'S, THAT'S ALL IT'S THERE FOR.
ALSO, I THINK, UH, THE MORE COMPREHENSIBLE ALTERNATES WILL MAKE A BETTER, UH, REVIEW AND, AND, AND, UH, DISCUSSIONS WITH THE, WHEN IT GOES TO THE PUBLIC HEARING, WHEN YOU HAVE A FIVE ALTERNATES WITH THE, SOME, SOME OF THEM NOT VIABLE, SOME OF THEM ARE TWEAKING ONE THING OR OTHERS ARE JUST MORE CONFUSING THAN TO REALLY GIVE A GOOD PICTURE WHAT IS ACTUALLY BUILDABLE, WHAT IS WHAT THE, WHAT, WHAT THE, UH, GOING TO BE ACTUALLY BE USEFUL.
AND THEN YOU CAN ADD WHAT MICHAEL HAS A COMMENT ABOUT.
LET'S MAKE IT SOMETHING THAT IS GOING TO BE BUILDABLE BY WHATEVER THE DEVELOP BUILDERS OR APPLICANT WANTS TO DO.
IT BE MORE UNDERSTANDABLE, MORE SELLABLE.
FIRST OF ALL, THE FIVE, UH, YOU KNOW, THE TOWN BOARD IS GONNA HAVE A, A PUBLIC HEARING WITH THE FIVE ALTERNATIVES OUT THERE THAT'S THERE, YOU KNOW, THE PUBLIC, UH, FROM PUBLIC DISCUSSION, FROM WHAT BOARD MEMBERS SAY THAT MAY ULTIMATELY, UH, YOU KNOW, SORT OF NARROW THINGS DOWN TO A POINT WHERE ULTIMATELY THERE'S GONNA BE A, UH, ONE ALTERNATIVE AND FOR ONLY FOR, WELL, WHETHER OR NOT IT BECOMES A PUD OR WHETHER OR NOT IT'S A SUBDIVISION, WHATEVER DETERMINATION IS MADE, IT WILL THEN BE IN FRONT OF THIS BOARD AS THE BOARD THAT IS GOING TO, UM, HANDLE THE APPLICATION.
AND SO, UH, ARE THERE GONNA BE TWEAKS? I'M SURE THERE'LL BE TWEAKS THERE.
I'M NOT GONNA GO, YOU KNOW, FURTHER INTO THAT, BUT IT WILL BE IN FRONT OF THIS BOARD AT THAT TIME.
THIS WE'RE DOING IS A SECRET PROCESS.
YEAH, NO, I UNDERSTAND, DAVID.
BUT THE, UH, I MEAN, BEING A PLANNER, I SPEND A LOT OF TIME, IT'S, IT'S, IT'S SORT OF A TWO, UH, TWO KIND OF A DETAIL AND NOT REALLY GIVING US A, UH, LARGER PICTURE, WHICH IS, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT.
AND I THINK IF SOMEBODY
I THINK WE, WE CAN ACTUALLY HANDLE THAT IN OUR FINDINGS TO SOME EXTENT.
LET, LET ME JUST FINISH MY POINT AND 'CAUSE I WANNA BUILD OFF WHAT DAVE SAID BECAUSE I DON'T TOTALLY AGREE WITH YOU, DAVE.
THE, THE F A I S IS, IS AND THE FINDINGS ARE THE GUIDE.
IT KIND OF LOCKS US INTO WHERE WE'RE GOING NOW.
CAN WE BUILD MARK, THE MICHAEL GOLDEN PARK IN THE MIDDLE OF THIS AFTERWARDS? SURE, WE CAN.
BUT WHAT WE ARE DOING HERE IS GIVING THE IDEA OF, OF THE FINDINGS IS TO GIVE THE DEVELOPER DIRECTION OF THIS IS THE ONE YOU SHOULD BE FOCUSING ON.
AND THEN WE MAKE, YOU KNOW, WE MAKE THE ADJUSTMENTS THAT WE GENERALLY DO WHEN WE GET, GET THESE THINGS.
SO IT'S VERY IMPORTANT TO HAVE THE DISCUSSION ABOUT THE ALTERNATIVES NOW, NOT LATER.
[02:10:01]
OUR, OUR FINDINGS OR RECOMMENDATIONS, DEPENDING HOW IT COMES OUT TO THE TOWN BOARD.AND IN THOSE FINDINGS, RECOMMENDATIONS, COMMENTS, DEPENDING ON HOW WE DECIDE TO DO IT, WE CAN SAY, YOU REALLY SHOULD BE FOCUSING ON THESE TWO ALTERNATIVES.
THESE ARE THE ONLY TWO THAT MAKE SENSE.
I AGREE A HUNDRED PERCENT WITH THAT.
UM, LOOK, I, I, I UNDERSTAND WALTER'S POINT, WHICH IS THAT WE SHOULD START WITH, YOU KNOW, THE ZONING COMPLIANT, WHICH IS ALL OF THESE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES AND WORK FROM THERE.
I DON'T KNOW HOW TO DO THAT WITH DUE RESPECT TO WALTER.
UM, WHAT I DO KNOW IS THIS, I MEAN, WE'VE GOT A, YOU KNOW, A HUNDRED ACRE PLUS, YOU KNOW, UM, PLOT TO WORK WITH.
IT SEEMS TO ME THAT THE APPLICANT HAS A, HAS AN OPPORTUNITY TO CREATE A COMMUNITY FROM THIS ENORMOUS PARCEL OF LAND.
THE ONLY ALTERNATIVE TO ME, WHICH SEEMS TO, YOU KNOW, OFFER THAT POSSIBILITY NOW GO UP, IS THE LAST ONE.
I MEAN, ALL, ALL THE OTHER ALTERNATIVES.
THEY'VE GOT ROADS GOING EVERYWHERE.
ALL THE SINGLE FAMILY HOUSES, THEY ELIMINATE THE, YOU KNOW, COMMUNITY HOUSE AND THE, THE COMMON AREAS AND THE TENNIS COURTS.
THE ONLY ALTERNATIVE, WHICH SEEMS TO OFFER A GOOD POSSIBILITY FOR COMMUNITY, FOR PEOPLE TO GET TOGETHER, TO MEET EACH OTHER, TO TAKE THEIR GRANDKIDS AND KIDS TO A COMMON AREA, IS I, UM, I DON'T REALLY CARE ABOUT THE TAX CONTRIBUTIONS OF GREENBURG.
YOU KNOW, ANY OF THESE ALTERNATIVES.
THERE'S GONNA BE A LOT OF TAXES POURING INTO THE TOWN.
I'M NOT SURE I CARE ABOUT THE LANDFILL IN OR OUT.
UM, BUT IT SEEMS TO ME, I MEAN, HERE'S A GOOD OPPORTUNITY TO CREATE A NICE COMMUNITY.
AND THAT'S WHAT I SEE AN ALTERNATIVE EYE, MICHAEL, THAT COULD BE A FINDING.
THAT COULD BE OUR FINDING WHEN WE'RE DONE WITH THIS.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS? 'CAUSE I WANT TO GET TO JOHANN WHO HASN'T SAID ANYTHING YET, THEN WALTER, WHO'S TRYING TO GET US TO GO AFTER 10 O'CLOCK.
SO DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE, MICHAEL? NO, NO.
MICHAEL TOOK THE WORDS OUT OF MY MOUTH, BUT SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE OPTION I IS THE ONLY ONE THAT HAS AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
I UNDERSTAND THAT, YOU KNOW, THE DOORS ARE CLOSED IN TERMS OF THE ALTERNATIVES THAT WE COULD ASK THEM TO, TO EXPLORE.
BUT, UH, BEING THAT, THAT'S THE ONLY OPTION THAT IS MOST INCLUSIVE AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED, AND IT CREATES AN OPPORTUNITY FOR EQUITY.
AND TO MICHAEL'S POINT, BUILDING A COMMUNITY THAT REFLECTS ALL OF GREENBERG AS IT WILL BE A PART OF GREENBERG OPTION NOW WILL BE MY VOTE IN TERMS OF FINDINGS.
I KNOW IT'S EARLY ON, BUT I JUST WANTED TO MAKE THAT COMMENT.
AND THEN I WANT TO RESPOND TO JOHANN.
I SAID THAT'S ONE OF YOUR STRONG POINTS.
I WAS LOOKING TO GET THE, THE, THE BOARD TO COME TO THIS VERY DESIGN.
YOU JUST CUT IT TO THE CHASE TO SAY, THIS IS THE BEST DESIGN.
SO
NOW THE, BUT I HAVE SOME CONCERNS IF, UH, HOW DO, IN ONE OF THE, IN, IN, UM, IN PART OF THE PRESENTATION IN, UH, ON ONE OF THE PAGES 18 OF SECTION TWO, IT INDICATE THAT THE 15 AFFORDABLE HOUSES UNIT WILL BE VALUED AT 2 65, 260 5,000 BUCKS.
NOW, IS THAT SOMETHING THAT THE, UH, DEVELOPER'S COMMITTEE TO THAT, THAT WILL BE IN THAT AFFORDABLE RANGE? 200 AND AND 65,000? SO THAT'S A QUESTIONNAIRE.
SO WE COULD SAY AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
SO THAT HAS TO BE CLEARLY DEFINED WHAT THE RANGE IS.
COULD, IS IT ALL RIGHT, UH, MR. SIMON, IF I ANSWER THAT AT THIS MOMENT? 'CAUSE IT'S A GREAT QUESTION.
SO THIS NUMBER, THE 2 65, UM, I, I, I DIRECTLY WORKED WITH WESTCHESTER COUNTY, UH, PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND, AND THE HOUSING SPECIALIST.
AND I POSED THE QUESTION TO THEM.
I I GAVE THEM THE DEFINITION OF, UH, THE AFFORDABILITY TERMS IN THE TOWN OF GREENBURG, WHICH WOULD, YOU KNOW, HAVE TO COMPLY WITH THE 80% A M I RULE.
AND, UM, I IDENTIFIED THESE WOULD BE OF COURSE, FOR SALE UNITS WITH, UH, CONDO,
[02:15:01]
WITH, WITH SOME SOME LEVEL OF FEES, COMMON FEES, H O A FEES, AND OF COURSE, YOU KNOW, UH, A TAX LEVY.AND, UM, WHAT THE COUNTY DOES IS THEY, YOU KNOW, THEY HAVE A FORMULA THAT THEY USE, AND THEY INDICATED TO ME THAT TO THE BEST OF THEIR KNOWLEDGE, YOU KNOW, IN, UH, JANUARY, 2022, UH, YOU CAN EXPECT A HOME TO BE SOMEWHERE IN THE RANGE OF 2 65 WITH ALL THOSE INPUTS SO THAT THAT SUBSEQUENT OWNER DOES NOT SPEND MORE THAN ONE THIRD OF THEIR INCOME ON TAXES, MORTGAGE, H O A FEES.
SO IT, IT WAS, IT WAS, IT WAS, IT WAS ACTUALLY DRIVE BY THE COUNTY.
UH, COULD, COULD IT GO UP OR DOWN A LITTLE BIT, UM, BASED AT THE TIME OF SALE, OF COURSE.
BUT, UM, I THINK WE'RE RIGHT IN THE BALLPARK, UM, BASED ON WHAT THE COUNTY IDENTIFIED.
SO, UH, I I, I'M, I'M VAGUELY I'M PRETTY FAMILIAR WITH THE FORMULAS, BUT THAT'S, I UNDERSTAND THE WESTCHESTER COUNTY FORMAT.
MY QUESTION IS, IS THE BUILDER COMMITTED TO FOLLOW THAT FORMULA? THAT'S MY QUESTION.
SO ANYHOW, THAT'S THE QUESTION I HAVE FOR, FOR THE DEVELOPER, BUT I'LL, I'LL, YOU CAN ASK THE QUESTION, BUT I MEAN, ULTIMATELY THESE WOULD BE SUBJECT TO FINDINGS OF THE, OF THE TOWN BOARD AS WELL AS, UH, A CONDITION OF YEAH.
THE TOWN BOARD AND THE PLANNING BOARD AND, AND YOU WOULD MANDATE IT, YOU KNOW, THEY, THEY REALLY DON'T HAVE A SAY.
THEY WOULD HAVE TO FOLLOW OUR, OUR CODES FOR OKAY.
YOU KNOW, OUR AFFORDABILITY TERMS. OKAY.
SO I'M, SO, SO I'M JUST INDICATING SOME OF THE CONCERNS THAT I, THAT I THINK SHOULD BE IN OUR EVENTUAL FINDINGS IS THE FACT THAT, UH, HAVE A CLEAR DEFINITION, A CLEAR COMMITMENT FOR THE BUILDER OF, OF THAT GENERAL, UH, UH, FORMULA.
UH, AND AGAIN, UH, THE IDEA OF HAVING THAT OPEN SPACE IN THE MIDDLE, UH, IS AN EXCELLENT ONE.
AND I AGAIN, THINK THAT, UH, I WOULD AGREE THAT THAT SHOULD BE JUST MORE THAN JUST TREES THERE, UH, UH, A WALKWAY, WHATEVER, TO ENHANCE THAT AS THE CENTER AREA FOR, UH, UH, A FOCUS FOR THE COMMUNITY.
UH, AND WITH THAT, AGAIN, IT GOES, UH, WE GET THE, THE TOTAL LAND AND WITH THE DOLLARS FOR DEVELOPMENT, IS THAT INCLUDED IN THIS, UM, NOW PROPOSAL WE GET THE, WE GET, WE GET LESS ACRES.
UM, GARRETT WENT THROUGH THAT, YOU WERE LOOKING AT, OH NO, YOU GET THE SAME 14 POINT ACRES.
ONE AND A HALF MILLION, RIGHT? CORRECT.
SO YOU DON'T GET THE ONE AND A HALF MILLION.
AND THIS WOULD IN I, IN I THE CLUSTER OF P U D, RIGHT? UH, YES, THAT'S CORRECT.
YOU, YOU GET THE, YOU GET THE LAG IS WHAT YOU GET.
YOU JUST GET THE LAG, BUT NO DEVELOPMENT.
THEY DROP, THEY DROP THE NUMBER OF HOUSES, BUT THEN THEY, UH, DECREASE.
THEY DO AWAY WITH THAT 1.5 MILLION, WHATEVER THE NUMBER MIGHT BE.
THEY'RE NOT DEVELOPING THE LAND, THEY'RE JUST GIVING IT, GIVING IT TO THE TOWN.
UM, I HAVE, I WANNA FOLLOW ON BOTH, BOTH JOHANN AND, AND WALTER FOR A SECOND, BECAUSE HE HAS ANOTHER LITTLE TWO LITTLE ELEPHANTS IN THE ROOM.
UM, ONE OF THE, WHEN I SAW THE NUMBER 2 65, I WAS SHOCKED IT WAS THAT LOW.
AND I REALIZED THOUGH, WHY IT IS THAT LOW, OR AT LEAST ONE OF THE REASONS IT'S THAT LOW.
IT'S BECAUSE THESE CONDOS ARE FEE SIMPLE.
THAT MAKES A HUGE DIFFERENCE IN THE, UM, PURCHASE PRICE OF THE HOUSE.
'CAUSE IF THEY WERE NOT FEE, IF THEY WERE, YOU WOULD SAVE 400 A MONTH, ROUGHLY, GIVE OR TAKE.
IF THESE WERE TAXED AS CONDOS.
NOW WHAT'S THE IMPACT OF THAT? WELL, WE KNOW UNDER OUR LAW THAT THE EXTERIOR OF THE AFFORDABLE UNITS HAS TO BE IDENTICAL TO ALL THE OTHER UNITS.
THERE IS NOTHING IN OUR LAW, HOWEVER, AS TO WHAT HAS TO BE INSIDE THE UNIT.
AND I'M A LITTLE BIT CONCERNED BECAUSE WE'RE MAKING THEM FEE SIMPLE THAT WE'RE REALLY GONNA CREATE SUBSTANDARD UNITS.
2 65 IS NOT A LOT OF MONEY TO BILL ONE OF THESE THINGS.
UM, AND WE CLEARLY, ONE OF THE THINGS I WOULD ASK THE DEVELOPER TO DO IF THEY'RE GONNA LIVE WITH THE 2 65 PURCHASE PRICE, GIVE US AN IDEA OF WHAT THE INSIDE OF THOSE PLACES IS GONNA BE LIKE.
WE WENT THROUGH THE SAME ISSUE WITH THE PRESERVE AT NORWOOD WHEN WE DID IT.
UH, WE WENT, WE, WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE, OKAY, MAYBE IT DOESN'T HAVE A WOLF STOVE, OKAY, OUR VIKING STOVE,
[02:20:01]
BUT WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S A, IT'S A NICE LIVABLE APARTMENT AND NOT, YOU KNOW, SOME SHELL AS THE RESULT OF IT, UH, AS A RESULT OF THIS.THE SECOND CONCERN I, I, I BROUGHT UP BEFORE WE STILL, AND I JUST WANNA PUT IT ON THE RECORD, IS WHETHER OR NOT WE CAN ACTUALLY DO THE FEE FEE SIMPLE, IF IT'S ENFORCEABLE FOREVER.
I KNOW, UM, THAT OBVIOUSLY THE LANDING IN DOS FERRY HAS BEEN ABLE, IT LOOKS LIKE THEY'RE GONNA BE ABLE TO REVERSE, UH, AND GO FROM A HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION TO BE ASSESSED AS A CONDO, UH, IN DOBBS FERRY IN THEIR SETTLEMENT WITH THE TOWN.
UH, I KNOW THAT WE PASSED A LAW IN 2018, ABOUT TWO MONTHS AFTER THAT CONVERSION HAPPENED TO MITIGATE THAT ISSUE GOING FORWARD, WHICH SPECIFICALLY SAYS THOU SHALT NOT CONVERT TO A CONDO.
THE ONLY QUESTION I HAVE IS, IS THE LAW EVER BEEN CHALLENGED IN A COURT AND CAN YOU SUPERSEDE, UM, AND DO WE HAVE AN OPINION FROM ANYBODY? DO WE HAVE AN OPINION FROM THE APPLICANT WRITTEN? DO WE HAVE AN OPINION FROM A STATE CONTROLLER, THE AG, SOME OTHER OUTSIDE COUNSEL, INSIDE COUNSEL, ANYONE THAT KNOWS WHETHER OR NOT, IF THAT'S CHALLENGE AND WE'RE GOING UP AGAINST THE CONDO ACT, THE STATE CONDO ACT, WHICH ACTUALLY TAKES PRIORITY.
I JUST DUNNO THE ANSWER TO THAT.
I, I HOPE IT'S ENFORCEABLE, THAT WOULD BE GOOD FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE, BUT I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT.
AND THAT REALLY IS CRITICAL TO THE ECONOMICS OF WHATEVER PLAN WE PICK.
AND I THINK WE DIDN'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT.
I WANNA DO A LITTLE TIME CHECK HERE.
WE'VE GOT ABOUT A HALF AN HOUR.
DO YOU STILL WANT GARRETT TO GO THROUGH THE START GOING THROUGH THE COMMENTS? I MEAN, WE, WE HAVEN'T DONE ANY OF THAT.
WE'VE BEEN, THERE'VE BEEN SOME VERY GOOD DISCUSSION HERE TONIGHT, AND I THINK WE'VE ACTUALLY GOTTEN FURTHER IN SOME WAYS THAN I, I WOULD'VE EXPECTED.
BUT IS THERE A, DO PEOPLE WANNA CONTINUE THIS DISCUSSION OR DO YOU WANT GARRETT TO GO THROUGH THE COMMENTS? IT'S YOUR CHOICE.
JOHANN, YOU WERE THE ONE WHO SAID YOU WANTED HIM TO GO THROUGH THE COMMENTS.
DO YOU STILL WANT HIM TO GO THROUGH THE COMMENTS? UM, YEAH, I'M OKAY WITH THE COMMENTS.
WE HAVE ABOUT HALF HOUR LEFT TO KILL.
OKAY, GARRETT, WE'RE GONNA SHUT UP AND LET YOU GO THROUGH THE COMMENTS.
THERE'S, IT'S, IT'S GONNA BE A LOT OF, I GUESS, JUST RECITING, UM, WHAT WAS GIVEN.
IT'S NOT REALLY 35 PAGES THOUGH, BECAUSE IT'S, THEY'RE SOME THAT REPEATED THREE OR FOUR TIMES IN THAT, IN THAT LIST.
I THINK WHAT HAPPENED WAS WHEN SOMEBODY MERGED THE LISTS, THEY DID IT A FEW TIMES.
I MEAN, WE CAN ONLY GET MORE THAN, DON'T WORRY ABOUT IT.
AND I KNOW THAT WHEN I SENT THE INITIAL BATCH OUT, UH, THERE WERE SOME REFERENCES TO, IN THE RESPONSES TO SEE OTHER COMMENT, AND I DIDN'T NECESSARILY PUT THAT INTO THIS DOCUMENT, SO I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT.
FIRST COMMENT, WHY NO AFFORDABLE UNITS? AND, UM, THE RESPONSE ESSENTIALLY CLARIFIES THAT, THAT THE ALTERNATIVE I, UH, DOES INCLUDE 15 AFFORDABLE UNITS.
UM, AND THEN THEY GIVE SOME DETAIL, UH, REGARDING THAT.
SO, UM, THERE, WHEN YOU SAW THE CLUSTERS OF BUILDINGS WITHIN THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ON THE SCREEN BEFORE, THE WAY THEY'VE ARRANGED IT IS THAT THREE OF THOSE CLUSTERS OF FIVE WOULD, WOULD, WOULD THEN GET YOU TO THE 15 AFFORDABLE UNITS.
AND WHAT IS INDICATED IS THAT THOSE, UH, THREE CLUSTERS OF UNITS ARE RANDOMLY DISTRIBUTED THROUGHOUT THE COMMUNITY.
SO THEY'RE NOT, YOU KNOW, LINED UP ALL IN AROUND.
WHY ARE THEY DOING IT IN CLUSTERS, GARRETT? WELL, THE WHOLE DEVELOPMENT'S IN CLUSTERS.
UM, AND WELL, WHY WOULD YOU PUT, WHY WOULD YOU, WHY WOULDN'T YOU, WHY WOULDN'T IT JUST BE INTEGRATED INTO, YOU KNOW, A REGULAR UNIT, AFFORDABLE UNIT, REGULAR UNIT, FOR INSTANCE? YEAH, SO ULTIMATELY THE, THE UNITS W WILL BE NO LESS THAN 80% THE SIZE OF, UM, THE, THE, THE, THE, THE MARKET RATE UNITS.
SO THEY'LL, THEY'LL BE COMPARABLY SIZED.
BUT MY UNDERSTANDING IS TO, TO TO, TO, TO HAVE THE UNITS BUILT IN THAT FASHION, IT'S MORE EFFICIENT TO HAVE THEM ALL CLUSTERED AS OPPOSED TO HAVING, UM, ONE UNIT THAT'S 80% THE SIZE IN, IN, IN SEVERAL, UH, IN LET'S SAY ONE OF 15 CLUSTERS.
UM, AND THEN WHEN YOU FACTOR IN THE, THAT, UM, THE AFFORDABLE UNITS WOULDN'T HAVE THE, UH, THE FINISHED BASEMENT, YOU KNOW, TO, TO DO THAT FOR JUST ONE UNIT OF A CLUSTER OF, UM, FIVE, IT JUST DOESN'T MAKE, UH, UH, CONSTRUCTION PRACTICABILITY SENSE.
[02:25:01]
YEAH, I, I'VE GOT A PROBLEM WITH THAT, WHICH IS, YOU KNOW, WE'RE MAKING THE AFFORDABLE UNITS, UH, LOWER CLASS CITIZENS.I MEAN, I THINK THE AFFORDABLE UNITS SHOULD BE EXACTLY THE SAME AS EVERY OTHER UNIT.
YOU COULD PUT THAT COMMENT IN OUR, UH, RESPONSE.
WITH THE 80% THAT, UM, THAT FOLLOWS, UH, COUNTY, UH, LO UH, LOCAL LAW, BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES, UM, TO, TO NOT GO LESS THAN 80%.
AND I THINK AT THE END OF THE DAY, IT'S, YOU KNOW, WHEN SOMEONE MENTIONED THAT THESE UNITS, UM, YOU KNOW, IF THEY SELL FOR 2 65, UH, THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE UNITS COULD BE COMPARABLE TO THAT, IF NOT MORE.
UM, I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, THE APPLICANT'S JUST TRYING TO, UM, YOU KNOW, JUST ACCOMMODATE IN THE, IN THE BEST WAY IT CAN AFFORDABILITY.
YEAH, THAT MAY BE, BUT I STILL, I STILL DON'T AGREE WITH IT, AND I THINK IT'S WRONG.
I THINK THE, UH, AS, AS AS ARCHITECT PLANNER, I CAN SAY THAT THEY CAN MAKE, UH, UH, MAKE THE CLUSTER, UH, APPROPRIATELY DESIGNED TO INCLUDE THAT SO THAT IT WOULD, AND I AGREE WITH MICHAEL, THAT IT DON'T WANT IT TO HAVE A CLUSTER OF AFFORDABLE IMAGE INTO ONE.
SO THAT'S, THAT'S DEFINITELY NOT A GOOD STARTING POINT.
AND I THINK THERE IS A WAYS THAT THEY HAVE DONE IT IN NEW YORK CITY, WHERE, WHERE IT IS A, UM, IT, IT IS, IT'S SORT OF FITS INTO THE, THE OVERALL, UH, ARCHITECTURE AND THE DESIGN OF THE CLUSTERS.
SO, UH, I THINK IT'S A DOABLE, IT'S NOT REALLY WELL MUCH TO ASK, COMMENT, NOTICE.
I DON'T SEE HOW, I DON'T SEE HOW GARY, I'M, I'M CONFUSED IN ONE WAY.
'CAUSE THE SHELL OF THE, OF THE AFFORDABLE HOUSES UNDER OUR CODE HAS TO BE VISUALLY IDENTICAL TO THE MARKET VALUE, MARKET PRICED HOUSES.
THE EXTERIOR HAS TO BE THE SAME.
SO INDISTINGUISHABLE UNDER THE SCENARIO WHICH IS PROPOSED, THESE WOULD BE INDISTINGUISHABLE FROM THE OTHER UNITS.
IF IT IS THE 80%, I THOUGHT YOU GOT TO THE 80% BY NOT FINISHING THE BASEMENT.
I THOUGHT THAT'S HOW THEY GOT TO THE 80%.
AM I WRONG? YOU COULD SAY 80% OF THE VALUE, I THINK NOT THE, NO, NO, IT WAS 80% OF THE FLURY.
BUT I THOUGHT IT WAS, I THOUGHT IT WAS BY ELIMINATING THE FINISHED BASEMENT, WHICH JUST DON'T FINISH THE BASEMENT.
LEAVE IT RAW AND NEVER PUT UP THE PANELING IN THE BASEMENT IF THAT'S WHAT IT IS.
WE NEED TO KNOW, WE NEED TO, WE NEED, WE NEED TO KNOW WHAT THESE LOOK LIKE.
AND I COULDN'T AGREE MORE WITH MICHAEL AND CORT THAT THEY SHOULD BE INTEGRATED.
IN FACT, THAT'S THE SPIRIT OF OUR LAW.
SO YEAH, I COULDN'T AGREE MORE WITH THE TWO OF THEM ON THAT.
THE APPLICANT DISCUSS ANY INPUT RECEIVED FROM THE NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, UH, THAT MAY OR MAY NOT IMPACT THE PROPOSED VEHICULAR INGRESS, EGRESS DRIVEWAYS PROPOSED.
UM, SO THE APPLICANT RE RESPONDED WITH, UH, WITH, UH, COMMENTS 1237 THROUGH 1248.
SO THIS IS WHERE IT GETS A LITTLE TRICKY.
UM, I, I HAVE THEM AT THE READY.
I, I, I MEAN, DO WE, DO WE WANNA GO THROUGH THEM ONE BY ONE? UM, I INDICATED BEFORE HERE, YOU CAN GIVE US A GIST, I THINK IN GE IN GENERAL SUMMARY,
THE WRITE IN, WRITE OUT ONLY, UM, THE, WHAT ABOUT A LIGHT AT THE, AT THE ALL PURPOSE DRIVEWAY, WAS THERE ANY ACROSS IN THE, UM, ACRO ACROSS THE ASSISTED LIVING? WAS THERE ANY DISCUSSION OF THAT OR NO? YEAH, THE CONCLUSION IS THAT, UM, THE LIGHT WOULD NOT BE WARRANTED THERE.
UM, ONE THING I'LL, LET ME SEE HERE.
UM, THIS IS AN EXHIBIT OF, OF THE PLAN, WHICH I THINK WAS AN IMPORTANT COMPONENT OF THE D O T, UH, TRANSPORTATION RESPONSES.
SO DID THIS SWITCH, DO YOU NOW SEE A COLOR GRAPHIC? YES.
SO THI THIS IN THE RESPONSE, THIS, THIS ASPECT WAS, WAS DISCUSSED AT LENGTH, AND WHAT THE APPLICANT DID WAS, WAS, WAS, WAS, UH, DEPICT, UM, JUST TO ORIENT YOU, THIS IS THE EXISTING PARK ENTRANCE.
THIS IS THE OFF RAMP TO THE, UH, SPRAINING.
AND THE GREEN IS THE, UH, ON RAMP SOUTHBOUND TO THE SPRAIN AND ISN'T LINED UP.
IT'S, WHICH IS NOT LINED UP RIGHT? YEAH.
SO WHAT, WHAT THE APPLICANT DID WAS, UH, IN RESPONSE TO D O T COMMENTS WAS PREPARE
[02:30:02]
A CONCEPTUAL LINING UP OF THESE TWO RAMPS, WHICH WOULD KEEP THE O THE OFF RAMP FIXED, WHICH I HAVE MY CURSOR ON, ELIMINATE THE EXISTING, UH, SOUTHBOUND ON-RAMP AND THEN RELOCATE IT SO THAT THE GEOMETRY HAS THE MATCH.AND THEN THE APPLICANT WENT AHEAD AND, UH, DID WHAT'S KNOWN AS A WARRANT ANALYSIS.
AND IN SUMMARY, WHAT WAS CONCLUDED IS THAT, UH, WHAT YOU SEE HERE WOULD BE ADVISABLE TO, TO DO TODAY.
AND THAT, UM, AND THAT'S WHETHER OR NOT, YOU KNOW, THIS IS A GOLF COURSE, IT WAS, UM, NEVER DEVELOPED OR IS DEVELOPED WITH ANY VARIETY OF, UM, WHAT, WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT WITH THE FIVE ALTERNATIVES.
UM, SO THIS, THIS IS A, THIS WOULD BE A GOOD UPDATE FOR, FOR, FOR THE AREA IN THE INTERSECTION TO HAVE THESE LINED UP WITH A LIGHT.
UM, SO THAT, THAT WAS A BIG COMPONENT OF, UH, THE ANALYSIS BY THE APPLICANT.
NOW, HAVING SAID THAT, WE WE'RE GOING TO CLEAR CLEARLY THE D O T HAS ALL THE RESPONSES, AND WE'RE GONNA AWAIT TO SEE, UH, THE DOT'S, UM, UH, COMMENTS TO LIKE THIS TYPE OF SETUP, IT'S REVIEW OF THE WARRANT ANALYSIS.
AND, UM, AND THEN, YOU KNOW, REALLY, I, I THINK, YOU KNOW, THE ACTION ITEM IS GOING TO BE, YOU KNOW, FROM NOW UNTIL SOME POINT IN THE FUTURE UNTIL THIS IS DONE, IS TO FIGURE OUT HOW, HOW TO MAKE THIS HAPPEN FOR THE SAFETY OF EVERYONE IN THE AREA.
OKAY, G GARY, WHY DON'T WE FOCUS ON, ON THE SITE RELATED ISSUES.
I MEAN, THAT'S KIND OF, YOU KNOW, WE, WE KNOW THAT THE DEVELOPER, YOU KNOW, IS CONCERNED ABOUT THEY SHOULDN'T FOOT THE BILL FOR THAT, FOR THAT, THAT CHANGE AND ALL THAT STUFF.
SO WHY DON'T WE GO ON TO SOME THE MORE SITE RELATED ONES, IF YOU DON'T MIND.
SO, UM, HAS THE APPLICANT CONSIDERED A VEHICULAR CONNECTION TO THE RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION OFF WORTHINGTON ROAD AS AN ALTERNATIVE TO TWO TOTAL INGRESS EGRESS DRIVEWAYS ALONG DOBBS FERRY ROAD AND FOR THE APPLICANT'S PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE? AND, UM, WHAT WAS IDENTIFIED HERE IS THAT, AND I SHOULD PROBABLY BRING UP AN AERIAL TO SHOW THE CONTEXT OF THAT QUESTION, BUT, UM, WAS IDENTIFIED HERE IS THAT THE GRADES DON'T WORK GREAT TO HAVE, UH, AN, AN ENTRANCE FROM THE, UH, SITE.
YOU KNOW WHAT, I'M GOING TO JUST JUMP HERE TO THE, UH, TO THE EXHIBITS HERE.
SO IN THIS LOCATION, I, I BELIEVE, YES, THERE'S A, UH, FUTURE PLANNED, UH, SUBDIVISION, WHICH WOULD HAVE A CUL-DE-SAC TERMINATE RIGHT IN HERE.
AND I THINK THE CONTEXT OF THE PLANNING BOARD'S COMMENT WAS, COULD THERE BE AN ENTRANCE THAT COMES UP IN THIS DIRECTION AND CONNECTS TO THAT FUTURE CUL-DE-SAC, WHICH I THINK IS UNDER CONSTRUCTION RIGHT NOW, AND ELIMINATE THE WESTCHESTER, UM, VIEW LANE ACCESS AS AN EXAMPLE.
UM, AND WHAT THE APPLICANT INDICATED IS THAT IT, IT, IT'S REALLY DIFFICULT TO DO THAT BASED ON A A A GRADE PERSPECTIVE AND JUST A SITE LAYOUT.
AND WHAT THE APPLICANT DID PROVIDE IS, UM, IF THERE WERE TO BE, UM, AN ALTERNATIVE TO THIS DRIVEWAY, UH, IN INGRESS AND EGRESS, THAT THE OPTIMAL LOCATION WOULD BE TO TAKE OUT THIS TENNIS COURT AND HAVE A DRIVEWAY, UH, COME IN THIS AREA HERE.
YEAH, YOU DON'T WANNA DO THAT.
AND THAT WOULD, THAT WOULD BE OUT, THAT WOULD BE LIKE THE, I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU GAINED BY DOING THAT TRUTHFULLY, EXCEPT UPSETTING A WHOLE BUNCH OF PEOPLE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD BECAUSE ALL THESE CARS ARE GONNA BE GOING THROUGH THE NEIGHBORHOOD RATHER THAN STAYING ON DO STORY ROAD.
THAT'S THE ONLY THING THAT'S ACCOMPLISHED BY THAT, I THINK.
GOING BACK TO, UH, SUB QUESTION, THE Q AND A.
UM, IN REGARD TO FISCAL, THE PROPOSED TOWN HOMES ARE TOO LARGE FOR AN AGE RESTRICTED CLIENTELE.
TOO MANY FACTORS FOR AN AGING POPULATION.
UM, THEY'RE LARGER THAN MOST HOMES IN GREENBURG, IN EFFECT SHUTTING OUT GREENBURG MARKET WHO CANNOT AFFORD THEM.
SO THIS, WE DISCUSSED A BIT, AND DEREK SAID IT AGAIN, ALL THE F E S S DOES IT AGAIN, ALL THE F A S PLANS PROPOSED, ELIMINATING THE AGE RESTRICTION, RIGHT? SO AGAIN, THE, THE WAY THE DOCUMENT READS IS F E I S ALTERNATIVE PLANS, MEANING EVERYTHING, BUT A, UM, BUT NOT MEANING THAT A IS, UH, THAT'S NOT WHAT IT, THE DEFINITION UPFRONT.
SO I'M OKAY, THEN IT GOES ON TO SAY, UM, OKAY, SO THE D E I S ALTERNATIVE, A AND OTHER TOWNHOUSE ALTERNATIVES REPRESENT DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS THAT THE APPLICANT BELIEVES CAN BE SUPPORTED BY THE MARKET AND TARGETED DEMOGRAPHIC ALTERNATIVE.
I PRESENTS NON AGE RESTRICTED OPTION THAT INCLUDES 15 AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS.
[02:35:01]
OKAY, SO WITH REGARD TO SIZE, I, I, I THINK IN GENERAL THE COMMON IS CONCE BECAUSE IT WOULD BE ANTICIPATED THAT CONCEIVABLY LARGER HOMES FOR, UM, NON AGE RESTRICTED.CAN I MAKE A COMMENT? OH, SORRY, MY, MY SURE.
YEAH, UM, THE, THE, I'M JUST LOOKING, I'M JUST LOOKING AT ALTERNATIVE VIBE BECAUSE THAT'S THE PAGE I TURNED OUT.
THIS IS NON AGE RESTRICTED, YOU KNOW, THE, UM, PUD YEP.
THE FLOOR, FLOOR AREA PER UNIT IS 57 60.
THAT'S ABOUT THREE TIMES THE SIZE OF MY HOUSE.
UM, AND I THINK, AND I THINK, YOU KNOW, WITH ALL DUE RESPECT TO MONA, YOU KNOW, I'VE GOT A 2000, JUST FOR COMPARISON'S SAKE, I HAVE A 2000 SQUARE FOOT HOUSE WITH THREE BEDROOMS. I COULD ACCOMMODATE MY KIDS, MY GRANDKIDS WITH A 6,000 FOOT HOUSE.
I COULD ACCOMMODATE MY EXTENDED FAMILY GOING UP TO MY GREAT-GREAT-GRANDFATHER AND GREAT GRANDSONS.
UM, SO THE, THE SQUARE FOOTAGE THAT THEY SHOW, LOOK, YOU KNOW, I GUESS THEY KNOW WHAT THEY WANNA BUILD.
I GUESS THEY KNOW WHAT THE MARKET IS, BUT IT SEEMS RIDICULOUS ENLARGED TO ME.
I THINK IT'S 'CAUSE THEY'RE INCLUDING A BASEMENT.
I THINK THEY WERE, THEY, I THOUGHT THEY FIXED, THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO FIX THAT.
'CAUSE WE HAD THAT QUESTION YOU THAT CAME UP IN THE GE I S ONLY INCLUDE, LET'S FIND OUT IF THEY DID.
YOU ONLY INCLUDE A BASEMENT IF IT'S A FINISHED BASEMENT, IF IT'S AN UNFINISHED BASEMENT, IT DOESN'T COUNT.
SO 57 OR 5,800 SQUARE FEET INCLUDES LIVABLE AREA BATHROOMS, LIVING AREAS, BEDROOMS, IT'S BIG, RIGHT? I THINK THEY'RE CASTING THE BASEMENT.
WE HAVE TO FIND OUT WHAT THEY'RE DOING.
CAN THIS EVEN WITHOUT THE BASEMENT CLOSE TO 5,000 SQUARE FEET? YEAH.
LET'S, IT'S STILL BIG PFIZER'S ON.
CAN SOMEBODY ANSWER? WE'LL, WE'LL COLLECT THOSE, THOSE QUESTIONS AND WE'RE GONNA HAVE A RESPONSE.
THE, THE, THE APPLICANT IS AGAIN IS WATCHING, THIS IS RECORDED.
UM, AND THEY'RE GONNA HEAR YOUR QUESTIONS AND UH, THEY SHOULD GET BACK TO YOU.
OKAY, GARY, LET'S MOVE ON BECAUSE YOU GET ABOUT 15 MINUTES LEFT.
MOST NOT ALL THE HOUSING ALTERNATIVES APPEAR TO OFFER MULTI-LEVEL UNITS ARE ONE LEVEL HOUSING UNITS MORE APPROPRIATE, MARKETABLE FOR AGING SENIORS.
UM, SO MR. SIMON MENTIONED THIS BEFORE.
UH, WILL THE AMENITIES WITH IN THE UNITS BE TARGETED TOWARDS SENIORS? UM, SO EVERYTHING EXCEPT FOR ALTERNATIVE A WOULD HAVE AN AGE RESTRICTION, UH, FOR THE D E I S ALTERNATIVE, A CONCEPTUAL FLOOR PLANS WERE PROVIDED HAS C OVID 19, BUT IT WAS, IT WAS MULTILEVEL, BUT IT WAS MULTILEVEL, CORRECT? YES.
HAS C OVID 19 ALTERED THE APPLICANT'S UNDERSTANDING OF THE MARKETABILITY FOR ONE FAMILY RESIDENCES OR ANY OF THE OTHER ALTERNATIVES? THE REAL ESTATE MARKET HAS SEEN AN INCREASE IN DEMAND FROM PEOPLE LEAVING NEW YORK CITY GENERALLY INCREASING DEMAND FOR A RANGE OF HOUSING TYPES.
CAN THE PREFERRED PLAN, THE 55 PLUS BE BUILT WITH FEWER UNITS? IF NOT, WHY NOT THE ALTERNATIVE PLANS OF THE F E I SS ARE DISCUSSED IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AS INDICATED? IT'S NOT AN ANSWER TRUTHFULLY.
SEE, THIS IS WHERE I RAN INTO, I WAS TRYING TO BE HELPFUL AND I CUT AND PASTED, UH, BECAUSE OKAY, THE RESPONSES, IT'S, IT CHOPS OFF.
UM, SO THERE, THIS RESPONSE GOES ON, I JUST DON'T HAVE IT RIGHT HERE AND I APOLOGIZE.
OKAY, THEN GABE, THAT PART'S NOT RESPONSIVE, OBVIOUSLY.
DEFINITELY PART OF THE F E I S.
UM, FOR THE PUD ALTERNATIVES, AG AND I, THE NEAREST EXISTING, OH, SORRY, THIS COULD BE A RESPONSE TO MAYBE NOT.
IT'S A RESPONSE TO SOMETHING THAT THE QUESTION'S NOT THERE, SO IT'S GOT IT.
AND I'M NOT SURE IF THAT QUESTION WAS A PLANNING BOARD.
HERE'S A PLANNING BOARD IN ALT B.
SO THIS IS THE ONE 19 SINGLE FAMILY HOME.
IT DOES NOT APPEAR THAT ANY STORMWATER BASINS ARE PROPOSED.
IS THE PROPOSED LAYOUT WITH 119 ONE FAMILY RESIDENCES FEASIBLE AS SOME USE OF ACREAGE APPEARS TO BE NECESSARY FOR STORMWATER BASINS? SO THAT'S COMMENT.
1916, THE ALTERNATIVE DEPICTING 119 ONE FAMILY RESIDENCES CONFORMS TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE ADOPTED SCOPE, WHICH STATES THAT THIS ALTERNATIVE DEPICT A ZONING COMPLIANT SUBDIVISION PLAN.
THE APPROACH FOR THE ONE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
[02:40:01]
SUBDIVISION DEVELOPMENTS FROM A STORMWATER PERSPECTIVE WOULD BE TO INCORPORATE A SERIES OF UNDERGROUND STORAGE SYSTEMS OR DRY WELLS ON EACH INDIVIDUAL LOT.AND THIS APPROACH WOULD APPLY WITH COMPLY WITH APPLICABLE REGS.
THE, JUST REAL QUICKLY, THE MULTI-FAMILY, UH, TOWNHOUSE DEVELOPMENTS RELY ON A DIFFERENT METHOD, WHICH WOULD BE, UH, STORMWATER BASIS.
ALTHOUGH ALTERNATE ALTERNATE PLAN D WOULD RENDER MAXIMUM TAX REVENUE, IT ALSO COULD PROVIDE LITTLE OR LESS STAKEHOLDERS FOR OUR SCHOOL SYSTEMS ALONG WITH ZERO SCHOOL CHILDREN.
AND THE LAST SCHOOL BOND FAILED BECAUSE GREENBERG IS PREDOMINANTLY SENIORS WHO DO NOT WANNA INVEST IN SCHOOL AGED CHILDREN.
UM, CAN THIS BE FACTORED INTO THE ANALYSIS RESPONSE? THERE IS NO LOCALLY DERIVED RELIABLE INFORMATION AVAILABLE TO ASSUME THAT SENIORS DO NOT SAY, DO NOT WANT TO INVEST IN SCHOOL-AGED CHILDREN.
AND NOTE THAT THE F E I SS ALTERNATIVES WITH THE EXCEPTION OF ALTERNATIVE A OR NOT AGE RESTRICTED, I GUESS THAT NONE OF THE, NONE OF THEM VOTED IN THE BOND ISSUE.
INTERIOR SIDEWALKS ARE PROPOSED WITHIN THE SITE ARE GOOD FOR AMENITY FOR THE RESIDENTS.
THE PROPOSAL FOR A SIDEWALK CONNECTION BETWEEN THE TWO DRIVEWAYS AND THE APPLICANT'S PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE WOULD PUT SOME SIDEWALK ON THE NORTH SIDE OF DOBBS FERRY ROAD WITH THE REMAINDER OF THE EXISTING SIDEWALK NETWORK IN THE AREA ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF DOBBS FERRY ROAD FOR THE BENEFIT OF NEW RESIDENTS ON THE SITE.
AND THOSE RESIDING WITHIN WALKING DISTANCE OF THE PROJECT, THE APPLICANT CONSIDER EXPLORING THE POTENTIAL FOR THE NEWLY PROPOSED SIDEWALKS ALONG DOBBS FERRY ROAD TO FILL IN GAPS ON THE SAME SIDE OF THE ROAD FOR BETTER CORRIDOR CONSISTENCY AND TO BE CONNECTED WITH CROSSWALK INFRASTRUCTURE.
UM, HAS THE APPLICANT CONSIDERED A NEW SIDEWALK CONNECTION ALONG WORTHINGTON ROAD, AT LEAST THE LENGTH OF THE PROJECTS SITES FRONTAGE WITH THIS ROAD? UM, SO THEY SAY C RESPONSE 12 ONE, SO I PROBABLY DON'T HAVE THAT HANDY ON THIS DOCUMENT, BUT WHAT I CAN RECOLLECT IS THAT, UM, THE APPLICANT IDENTIFIED THAT IT WOULD BE OPEN TO, UH, WORKING WITH THE TOWN AND, UH, IDENTIFYING THE MOST EFFICIENT SIDEWALK LAYOUT.
SO, UM, I WOULD SAY FOR PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS, YOU KNOW, PLEASE DEFINITELY PAY CLOSE ATTENTION TO THIS RESPONSE AND, UM, YOU KNOW, THINK ABOUT THAT AS WE GO FORWARD.
AND, UH, YOU KNOW, I THINK EVERYONE INVOLVED WANTS TO HAVE, YOU KNOW, THE, THE GREATEST BENEFIT FROM A SIDEWALK PERSPECTIVE, HAVE IT BE A LOGICAL LAYOUT.
UM, SO I I THINK WE, WE CAN HAVE A MECHANISM TO GET THERE.
SO GOOD COMMENT AND, UM, THE FOLLOW THROUGH WILL BE KEY THERE.
POPULATION OF 55 PLUS, WE'LL STILL HAVE TWO VEHICLES AND WE'LL STILL IN MANY CASES HAVE TWO PEOPLE WORKING IN THIS AREA OF WESTCHESTER.
VERY FEW PEOPLE RELY TOTALLY ON MASS TRANSIT AND ARE STILL USING THEIR VEHICLES.
THE TRAFFIC ON DOBBS FERRY ROAD IN THE AM WITH SCHOOL BUSES IS DIFFICULT AT BEST.
AND MANY ARE AIMING FOR ENTRANCE TO THE SPRAIN PARKWAY TO GET TO INTERSTATE I 2 87 AND BEYOND.
WHAT COULD BE DONE TO ALLEVIATE THE TRAFFIC DURING PEAK HOURS REGARDLESS OF THE PLAN THAT IS CHOSEN.
THAT'S, THAT'S THE RIGHT RESPONSE, RIGHT? THAT'S THE RESPONSE.
I MEAN, I CAN RECITE IT, BUT I THINK IT, IT, YOU KNOW, IT BUILDS ON A LOT OF WHAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT BEFORE.
UM, IT'S PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED TRAFFIC PROJECTIONS FOR THE D E I S PLAN AND THE F E I S ALT G ARE BASED ON TRAFFIC DATA PUBLISHED FROM I T E, UM, INDUSTRY STANDARD PUBLICATION.
UM, THAT PROJECTS THE NUMBER OF TRIPS ASSOCIATED WITH VARIOUS LAND USES.
THIS PUBLICATION AND TRAFFIC PROJECTIONS ARE BASED ON NUMEROUS STUDIES CONDUCTED AT SIMILAR LAND USES I T E IS THE STANDARD.
SO, UM, THE TRAFFIC STUDY, THE TRAFFIC STUDY FOR THE PROJECT DOES NOT INCORPORATE A TRAFFIC VOLUME CREDIT FOR RESIDENTS UTILIZING MASS TRANSIT.
UM, THE STUDY STUDIED PEAK WEEKDAY, AM AND PM HOURS, WHICH INCORPORATES SCHOOL BUS AND TRUCK TRAFFIC AS DISCUSSED IN THE TRAFFIC STUDY.
THE D E I S PLAN, MEANING ALT A, AH, GEEZ.
CAN, CAN, CAN I ASK QUESTION? SURE, GO AHEAD WALTER.
UM, WE ALL KNOW IN THE MORNING THE TRAFFIC, UH, AT THAT CORNER OF DALE AVENUE AND ONE 19 IS A, A MAJOR ISSUE AND I JUST CAN'T FOLLOW THIS TRAFFIC STUDY TO INDICATE THAT, UH, WHATEVER NUMBER,
[02:45:01]
WHETHER 120 OR 175, WHATEVER NUMBER OF ADDITIONAL HOUSES IS NOT GOING TO HAVE A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ON THAT INTERSECTION IN THE MORNING.SO, SORRY, WALTER, WHICH, WHICH INTERSECTION? NOW? WEST HART AVENUE, THIS IS INTERSECTION AT WEST HARTSDALE AVENUE ONE 19 IN THE MORNING WITH THE SCHOOL BUSES AND EVERYTHING THAT IS, YOU KNOW, IS, THAT'S A HEAVY TRAFFIC AREA.
WEST HARTSDALE AVENUE AND DOBBS FERRY ROAD, NOT ONE 19, RIGHT? THAT'S WHAT I ROAD, I DO FERRY ROAD.
YOU HAVE TO TRAFFIC FOR, UH, MARIA, REGINA, UH, AND SOME OF TRAFFIC GOING DOWN CHAPTER AND WOODLAND AND WOODLANDS ALL.
BUT ANYHOW, IT'S, IT'S HEAVILY RIGHT NOW AND, AND I KNOW WE DO THESE TRAFFIC STUDIES, BUT I'M JUST AMAZED THAT IS NOT A BIGGER IMPACT IF BY PUTTING IN A HUNDRED AND SAY 150 UNITS, WHATEVER THE NUMBER IS.
DO WE HAVE COMMENTS IN THE TRAFFIC STUDY, GARRETT? SO IT'S LABEL BELLA, AND, UM, WE DO AND WHAT CAN THAT, SO AGAIN, IT'S NOT CANNING THAT'S A DIFFERENT COMPANY.
IT'S, UH, LABEL AND, UM, LOOK, WE CAN DIRECT YOU TO ALL THE, UH, INTERSECTIONS AND WHERE IT IDENTIFIES WHAT IMPACT IT WOULD HAVE, THE PERCENTAGE OF TRIPS THAT ARE DERIVED FROM THIS PROPOSAL VERSUS WHAT'S COMING THROUGH THE INTERSECTION.
AND, YOU KNOW, YOU START SEEING, UM, YOU KNOW, NUMBERS LIKE LESS THAN LESS THAN HALF OF 1% CONTRIBUTION TO THE NETWORK, THINGS LIKE THAT.
SO THERE'S SOME SIMPLE TABLES THAT YOU COULD SHOW, SHOW US BY, BY ALTERNATIVE.
YEAH, I THINK YOU CAN, YOU CAN FIND THAT AND SEND THAT TO THE BOARD.
UH, AND IF YOU COULD DO THAT, THAT'D BE GREAT, GARRETT.
WE'RE YOU GOT ABOUT ANOTHER FOUR MINUTES? I NEED FIVE MINUTES FOR HOUSEKEEPING.
UM, YEAH, I, I THINK, UH, GARRETT, I I HAVE A QUESTION REGARDING, UH, IT'S NOT A QUESTION ABOUT THE DRIVING LANE, BUT THE DOS VERY ROAD, PARTICULARLY IN THAT SEGMENT NEEDS TO BE UPGRADED.
SO YOU HAVE A, UH, SHOULDER LANE OR YOU HAVE SOMETHING THAT IT'S A, UH, UM, A VEHICLE, DISABLED VEHICLE CAN MOVE OVER OR PROVIDE THE THINGS.
SO AS THERE KIND OF UPGRADING ALL OF THAT IS THE, I KNOW
I, I, I'M NOT SURE WHAT ON A STATE HI.
SO THE STATE HAS AND FOR WHAT DURATION, RIGHT? THE, I'M SORRY, GO AHEAD.
YEAH, I, I KNOW IT IS A STATE ROAD, BUT, UH, IS THERE STATE HAS ANYTHING PROPOSED OR, OR, OR ANY OF THESE OTHER IMPROVEMENTS THAT IS, UH, VERY, VERY BADLY NEEDED IN THAT AREA? THAT INTERSECTION WAS DONE A COUPLE OF YEARS BACK.
I'M TALKING ABOUT THE, THE ROAD ITSELF? YEAH, NO, THE, I'M NOT AWARE OF ANY STATE PLANS TO, UM, WIDEN THE, THE, THE SHOULDER IN, IN ANY AREAS OF DOBBS.
SOME PLACES THERE IS NO SHOULDER, IT'S ALL OVER.
THAT, THAT'S COMMONPLACE, UM, THROUGHOUT THE TOWN
SO YEAH, JUST, JUST, JUST IF YOU GIVE US A COMPARISON ON, ON SOME OF THE KEY INTERSECTIONS AND YOU KNOW, TO, I ASSUME THEY HAVE THE GRADES IF IT'S A B OR C OR D INTERSECTION, RIGHT? THEY HAVE ALL THAT IN THERE.
UM, I THINK WE'VE GOTTEN ABOUT AS FAR AS WE'RE GONNA GET TONIGHT.
WE HAVE, AND I JUST WANNA GO OVER OUR CALENDAR A LITTLE FOR A MINUTE BECAUSE OUR CALENDAR IS GONNA GET WORSE.
UM, THE NEXT MEETING, JUST SO YOU KNOW, NOT ONLY DO WE HAVE ELMO, WE HAVE THE BEST PROJECTS ON, WE HAVE THE TWO HEARINGS THAT WE PUT ON TONIGHT AND WE HAVE JERRY BYRNE COMING IN FOR, UH, AN APPROPRIATION FOR THE PARKLAND.
SO WE HAVE A VERY LARGE AGENDA AND THEN WE HAVE WALTER WHO WILL BE LATE.
SO WE ADD ANOTHER 10 MINUTES TO, NOT TO MENTION HIS EXCESS TALKING, BUT, UM,
SO WHAT I'M, I'M GONNA PROPOSE IS WE START AT SIX 30 AND WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO AT SIX 30 IS JUST GO THROUGH, JUST DO, JUST START VERY QUICKLY WITH THE ROLL CALL AND MAYBE THE MINUTES, I DON'T KNOW, AND THEN GO RIGHT TO JERRY, GET JERRY OUTTA THE WAY BEFORE SEVEN, AND THEN GO INTO THE REST OF THE HEAR HEARING THAT, THAT'S WHAT I, I
[02:50:01]
WOULD LIKE TO DO ON, I THINK WE NEED TO BECAUSE WE'VE, IT'S NOT GONNA GET ANY BETTER EVEN ON MARCH 14TH.I THINK MONA'S JAW HIT THE FLOOR WHEN YOU SAID THAT IF HE CAN'T, I MEAN, DOES ANYBODY HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT OR UNDERSTAND WHY WE NEED TO DO THAT FOLLOWING WEEK? IT'LL BE SIX.
I I WAS JUST GONNA SAY THAT I, I SPOKE WITH COMMISSIONER BYRNE AND HE FIGURED THAT HIS PRESENTATION TOGETHER WITH THE CONSULTANT THAT THEY'VE, YOU KNOW, HAD TALKS WITH AND AND BEGUN TO ENGAGE WITH WOULD BE ABOUT 10 MINUTES.
UM, IT'LL BE HALF AN HOUR BY THE TIME WE'RE DONE, WE'RE GONNA DISTRIBUTE.
WHAT I WAS GONNA SAY WAS WE ARE GONNA DISTRIBUTE ALL THE MATERIALS, YOU KNOW, IN YOUR UPCOMING PACKAGES AND IF UPON REVIEWING THEM YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS THAT WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO ANSWER AHEAD OF TIME OR GIVE TO COMMISSIONER BURNS SO THAT HE CAN BE PREPARED TO ANSWER THEM AT THE PRESENTATION, I THINK WILL HELP US MOVE THROUGH THAT, RIGHT.
YOU KNOW, AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE.
OUR, OUR REAL PROBLEM IS WE'VE GOT, WHEN THE, WHEN THE BLOOM ENERGY THING GOT DELAYED, IT JUST, AND THE BEST THING GOT DELAYED, IT SCREWED UP OUR WHOLE SCHEDULE BETWEEN THE TWO OF THEM.
AND WHEN AARON AND I WERE, AND TOM WE'RE TRYING TO DO, UH, AND MATT WHO'S NOT ON HERE, THEY'RE SOMEWHERE WE'RE TRYING TO DO WAS BALANCE THE SCHEDULE THE BEST WE CAN AND GET THROUGH THIS IN A REASONABLE TIME PERIOD.
THAT'S WHY I DON'T LIKE TO START MEETINGS EARLY.
AND THE OTHER OPTION IS TO GO TO 10 30.
I THOUGHT IT'D BE BETTER TO GO AND START AT SIX 30 THAN WE WILL BE EXHAUST, I MEAN 10 O'CLOCK'S LATE.
THIS IS A, THIS IS A LOT OF WORK.
IT'S A LOT OF STRESS WITH THIS STUFF AND I'D RATHER JUST GET THROUGH IT, UH, UH, UM, AS EXPEDITED BASIS AS WE POSSIBLY CAN.
JOHANN, DO YOU HAVE YOUR HAND UP? YEAH, A COUPLE OF THINGS.
I WANTED TO COMPLIMENT GARRETT ON HIS BEARD.
I HAVEN'T SEEN YOU IN A WHILE,
I DON'T, DON'T, WE ONLY NEED A QUORUM FOR THE SIX 30 START, RIGHT? RIGHT.
AND THEN EVERYBODY ELSE COMES.
SO THOSE THAT CAN ATTEND SIX 30 THEN SHOW UP AND THEN, YOU KNOW, OTHERWISE, YOU KNOW, WE SHOULD HAVE AN AGREEMENT OF WHO WILL BE IN ATTENDANCE BEFORE SIX 30 SO THAT, YOU KNOW, I I'LL BE THERE.
BE THERE FIRST STARTING HALF HOUR.
IF IF IF IT WAS LIVE IT'D BE MORE DIFFICULT, BUT STILL ZOOM SO WE'RE OKAY.
THE NEXT TWO MEETINGS IS STILL ZOOM.
ONE OTHER THING I'D MAKE A MOTION TO DO THIS.
I REALLY AM CONCERNED ABOUT FALLING THROUGH THE, THE TOWN BOARD FALLING THROUGH THE CRACKS AND NOT GETTING THE EXTENSION THAT WE NEED ON THE F A SS.
I'D LIKE TO SEND IT, I'D LIKE TO THE BOARD TO AGREE TO, UH, HAVE AARON DRAFT A LETTER TO THE TOM BOARD REQUESTING THAT EXTENSION AND OUTLINING WHAT OUR SCHEDULE IS TO FINISH OUR WORK.
CAN I HAVE THAT MOTION? SO MOVED.
DO YOU WANT TO GIVE, DO YOU WANT TO GIVE A, A SPECIFIC PERIOD OF TIME? I KNOW YOU DISCUSSED IT EARLIER, BUT MOTION APRIL.
THAT'S WHAT I RECALL, BUT I WANTED IT AS PART OF IT.
I THINK, I THINK, I THINK THAT GIVES US THE TIME TO FINISH IT AND IT GIVES THE TOWN BOARD THE TIME TO FINISH IT.
I THINK IT, IT MAKES SENSE TO DO THIS UPFRONT.
I KNOW THERE WAS A LITTLE FIREWORKS LAST, LAST TIME.
WE NEED TO, TO WORK WITH THE APPLICANT.
SO WE'RE NOT TRYING TO DELAY THINGS, WE'RE JUST TRYING TO BE REALISTIC HERE.
WE'RE TRYING TO GET THROUGH THIS, THIS IS A PRIORITY FOR US TO GET THROUGH IT, BUT WE GOTTA BE REALISTIC.
I MEAN, WE JUST GOT HANDED A 300 PAGE DOCUMENT OKAY.
THAT WE'RE TRYING TO GET THROUGH AND I THOUGHT WE GOT THROUGH A FAIR AMOUNT TONIGHT.
THANKS TO, FIRST OF ALL GARRETT, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
I THOUGHT YOUR DESCRIPTIONS AT THE BEGINNING WERE VERY, VERY HELPFUL.
I WANNA THANK EVERYBODY FOR, FOR WORKING SO HARD ON THIS OVER THE LAST FEW DAYS 'CAUSE IT'S EXHAUSTING GOING THROUGH IT.
UM, AND UM, I ACTUALLY THOUGHT THERE WAS SOME VERY, VERY GOOD COMMENTS TONIGHT AND I THINK WE MAY BE GOING IN THE DIRECTION ALREADY THAT, UH, WE'LL SEE.
BUT AT LEAST WE'VE GOT, WE KNOW WHAT THE ISSUES ARE, WE'RE OUTLINING THE ISSUES.
THE OTHER THING I WOULD ASK GARRETT AND AARON IS GET WITH THE APPLICANT, GO OVER WHAT OUR CONCERNS WERE TONIGHT ON, ON THESE, ON SOME OF THESE THINGS.
LIKE FOR INSTANCE, THE CLUSTER ISSUE.
MICHAEL BROUGHT UP THE IDEA OF THE QUALITY, ALL THOSE QUESTIONS.
IF THERE'S ANY QUESTION, WHAT THE QUESTIONS ARE, YOU WANNA BOUNCE 'EM OFF, ME OR TOM, UH, FEEL FREE TO DO THAT.
[02:55:01]
OKAY.BEFORE WE DISCUSS SOME OF THE APPLICANT.
BUT I WOULD LIKE THE APPLICANT'S ANSWERS TO THOSE QUESTIONS BEFORE IN TIME FOR THE NEXT MEETING.
THE PACKET WOULD BE GOING OUT ON THE 24TH, CORRECT? RIGHT.
SO I WANTED, I WANTED IN THE PACKET FOR THAT EVENING OKAY.
IT'S 9 59 DESPITE WALTER, IT'S 9 59.
CAN YOU KEEP HIM BACK AN EXTRA THREE MINUTES? JUST IS HE TENSION? YES.
OKAY, I'LL JUST CALL, I'LL JUST CALL HIM ON THE PHONE NOW.
DRIVING HIM CRAZY FOR THE NEXT HALF AN HOUR.