[00:00:01]
PROGRESS.WELCOME TO THE FEBRUARY, WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 5TH, 2025, UH, PLANNING BOARD MEETING.
AND AARON, CAN YOU TAKE THE CALL,
AND, UH, THIS EVENING, BOARD MEMBERS K DESAI AND JOHAN SNAGS ARE NOT PRESENT.
CAN WE, MICHELLE, SORRY, BEFORE WE CONTINUE.
MICHELLE, UH, CAN YOU PLEASE TURN ON YOUR CAMERA TO BE A VOTING MEMBER? THANK YOU.
SO WE'RE GONNA GO OVER THE APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FROM LAST, UH, TIME THAT WE WERE HERE, WHICH WAS JANUARY 15TH.
ARE THERE ANY COMMENTS? NO, NO, NO CORRECTIONS.
SO I'D LIKE SOMEONE TO PUT FORTH A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES.
OKAY, SO THE MINUTES ARE APPROVED.
UH, DO WE HAVE ANY CORRESPONDENCE FOR THIS ONE? NO, NOTHING THAT'S NOT ASSOCIATED WITH A PROJECT THAT'S ALREADY ON THE AGENDA.
SO WE'RE GONNA MOVE RIGHT IN TO THE NEW BUSINESS CASE NUMBER PB 24 0 9.
YOU WANT ME DO THE PODIUM OR THE TABLE? PODIUM.
I'M THE ATTORNEY FOR, UH, THE APPLICANT.
THE APPLICANT IS, UH, DAVID CHOW AND MARYANNE LAND CHOW.
UH, THIS IS A, AN APPLICATION FOR A RE SUBDIVISION.
UM, THE, UH, PROPERTY AT ISSUE WAS, UM, SUBDIVIDED, UM, INTO A SINGLE LOT SUBDIVISION TWO YEARS AGO.
AND, UH, UH, WHEN IT WAS SUBDIVIDED AT THAT TIME, IT WAS ACTUALLY A MERGER OF THREE TAX LOTS.
IT'S VACANT LAND OFF OF CLAYTON ROAD.
AND, UH, THE, UH, THE PLAN WAS TO SELL IT TO A, A, A PURCHASER WHO WANTED TO PUT UP A SINGLE HOME THERE.
BUT THAT DEAL FELL THROUGH AFTER THE APPROVAL WAS GRANTED.
SO IN ORDER FOR THE CHOWS TO BE ABLE TO SELL THEIR LAND, THEY FEEL IT'S APPROPRIATE TO MAKE IT INTO A TWO LOT SUBDIVISION, UM, IN ORDER TO MAKE IT INTO A TWO LOT SUBDIVISION.
UM, THERE'S, IT'S CERTAINLY, IT'S AN R 30 ZONE.
THERE'S, UH, THERE ARE TWO LOTS THAT ARE PROPOSED.
UM, UH, BUT IN ORDER TO MAKE IT NOT A FLAG LOT, WE ARE PROPOSING THE CREATION OF A THIRD LOT, WHICH IS, UH, GONNA BE WHERE THE, UH, SHARED DRIVEWAY WOULD BE LOCATED.
UM, THAT THIRD LOT ACTUALLY HAS THE SAME DIMENSIONS AS THE ORIGINAL TAX LOT THAT WAS MERGED TO CREATE THE THREE LOT, THE, THE, THE, THE ONE LOT SUBDIVISION ORIGINALLY.
SO, UM, IT'S ACTUALLY RECREATING THAT THIRD LOT FOR THIS DRIVEWAY.
UM, THE, UH, WHAT ELSE CAN I TELL YOU ABOUT THIS PROJECT? UM, IT'S, UH, UH, WE UNDERSTAND FROM THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT THAT, UH, THERE WILL BE VARIANCES REQUIRED.
UH, THE, UH, THE VARIANCES ARE, UH, ESSENTIALLY, UH, IN ORDER TO, TO CREATE THIS, UM, LOT, UH, NORMALLY THE, THE TOWN CODE REQUIRES THAT ALL LOTS HAVE A MINIMUM OF 25 FEET, UM, FRONTAGE ON A PUBLIC STREET.
AND, UH, HERE, UM, WE'RE NOT, WE WE'RE, BY CREATING THE LOTS, UM, OFF OF THAT ACCESS STRIP, THE FRONTAGE IS NO LONGER ON A PUBLIC STREET.
IT'S RATHER ON ON THE ACCESS STRIP.
SO THE VARIANCES FOR EACH LOT WOULD BE TO REDUCE THE, UH, THE LOT, UH, THE FRONTAGE REQUIREMENT FROM 25 TO ZERO, UH, ON EACH LOT.
IN ADDITION, THE ACCESS STRIP ITSELF, THE, THE DRIVEWAY IS, I'M SORRY, WOULD
[00:05:01]
YOU HOLD ON FOR A MOMENT? SORRY.THE ACCESS STRIP, UM, CALLS FOR A 20 FOOT WIDE DRIVEWAY.
UH, BOB STEIN, LET HIM 'CAUSE HE IS ON LIVE AND WE'RE GETTING FEEDBACK.
SO THE DRIVEWAY IS 20 FEET WIDE, UM, IN AN R 30 ZONE.
UH, THERE, UH, IT NEEDS TO BE 18 FEET ON EACH SIDE.
UM, WE, THE, UH, BUILDING INSPECTOR SEES THAT YOU NEED A VARIANCE BECAUSE, UH, HERE IT'S 15 FEET ON EACH SIDE RATHER THAN 18.
UM, SO, UH, THOSE WOULD BE THE VARIANCES.
AND WE WOULD, UM, IN TIME BE ASKING THIS BOARD TO RECOMMEND, UH, TO THE ZONING BOARD THAT, UH, UM, THOSE VARIANCES BE, UH, APPROVED.
UM, THE, THE CONCEPT OF DOING IT THIS WAY, UM, HAS A PRECEDENT.
UM, THERE'S ANOTHER APPLICATION THAT YOU GUYS HAVE FOCUSED ON CALLED VAN COT, OR INVOLVING, UH, VAN COT WAS THE, UH, UM, I GUESS THE NAME OF THE, THE STREET, UM, WHERE THE TOWN, UH, IT WAS A THREE LOT SUBDIVISION THAT WAS ACCESSED THROUGH A, UH, A PRIVATE ROAD.
UM, AND, UH, UH, THE SAME TYPES OF VARIANCES WERE APPROVED, UM, RECOMMENDED BY THE PLANNING BOARD IN ORDER TO ALLOW FOR THE SUBDIVISION TO GO THROUGH.
SO WE'RE BASICALLY DOING THE, THE EXACT SAME THING.
UM, UH, ANOTHER ISSUE, UH, THAT WAS RAISED WITH THE TOWN STAFF AND ME IN CONVERSATION WAS, YOU KNOW, WHY, WHY, UM, IS THERE A WAY TO DO IT WITHOUT VARIANCES AT ALL? AND THE ANSWER IS, YEAH, THERE IS.
UM, YOU COULD MAKE THE ROAD 26 FEET WIDE, WHICH IS THE NORMAL ROAD WIDTH FOR, FOR A ROAD IMPROVED TO TOWN STANDARDS IS 26 FEET WIDE.
YOU COULD ALSO CREATE A SUB, UH, A, A CUL-DE-SAC.
UM, YOU COULD DO THOSE THINGS, BUT IF YOU DID, YOU WOULD, FIRST OF ALL, YOU WOULD STILL NEED VARIANCES BECAUSE THE VARIANCES ON THE SIDE OF THE DRIVEWAY WOULD BE EVEN GREATER.
BUT YOU'RE CREATING A SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNT OF IMPERVIOUS SURFACE.
UH, IT WOULD ALSO BE INCONSISTENT WITH, UH, WHAT'S GO, WHAT, WHAT EL THE SHARED DRIVEWAYS IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD, OF WHICH THERE ARE QUITE A FEW.
UH, AND SO NO ONE WOULD WANT THAT.
NO ONE WOULD WANT A 26 FOOT WIDE ROAD, UM, ACCESSING THESE LOTS IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD.
UH, UH, AND, AND IN ADDITION TO THE, TO THE IMPERVIOUS SURFACE PROBLEM, THE DRAINAGE ISSUES THAT WOULD BE CREATED BY DOING THAT, UM, IT JUST AESTHETICALLY WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT NO ONE WOULD WANT THERE.
UM, SO THAT'S THE APPLICATION.
UH, AND, UH, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS IF YOU HAVE ANY.
AARON, A COUPLE ADDITIONAL THINGS.
SORRY, UM, JUST TO COMPLETE THE PRESENTATION, THERE'S A WATER COURSE ALONG THE FRONTAGE YES.
AND TREE REMOVAL, RIGHT? I'M SORRY.
THERE IS A WATER COURSE THAT RUNS ALONG CLAYTON ROAD AND, UH, UH, WE WOULD, WE ARE PROPOSING TO DO WHAT WE DID A LAST TIME, WHICH IS TO PIPE THE WATER, UM, HAVE A PIPE THAT RUNS UNDERNEATH THE DRIVEWAY THAT WOULD BE BUILT, UH, WHICH IS SIMILAR TO WHAT, UH, WAS DONE AT THREE 15 CLAYTON AND 3 0 5 CLAYTON.
UM, WHICH ARE THE TWO PROPERTIES ON EITHER SIDE OF THE ACCESS STRIP.
THEY ALSO HAVE, UH, THAT PIPE TO CHANNEL THE WATER, UH, THAT RUNS ALONG, UH, THE CULVERT ALONG CLAYTON, UH, THEN TREES.
WHAT'S THAT? THE TREE REMOVAL, THE, THE 19 OH AND THE TREE REMOVAL.
THERE'LL BE 19 TREES PROPOSED TO BE REMOVED.
SO WE'LL HAVE A TREE REMOVAL PLAN THAT CALLS FOR THEIR PLANTING OF I THINK NINE OR, OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
SO, I, I JUST GOT ONE QUESTION ON THAT.
IF YOU'RE REMOVING 19, WHY ARE YOU ONLY PLANTING NINE? HOW DOES THAT WORK WITH THE, UH, TOWN HAWK? SO, WE HAVEN'T YET CONFIRMED THAT THE PROPOSAL MEETS, UM, THE REQUIREMENTS OF TWO 60.
IT COULD, UH, FOR INSTANCE, IF THERE ARE DEAD TREES BEING REMOVED, BUT STANDING, THEY WOULD BE REGULATED AND THEY WOULDN'T HAVE ANY ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS.
SO YOU'RE GONNA CHECK THAT OUT.
SO WE'RE GONNA DOUBLE CHECK THAT AHEAD OF ANY PUBLIC HEARING OR SEEKER DETERMINATION I SHOULD SAY.
SO I'VE GOT A COMMENT AND A COUPLE QUESTIONS.
[00:10:01]
YES.UM, I APPLAUD YOU FOR THE NARROW DRIVEWAY AND NOT DOING THE ROUNDABOUT.
UM, YOU KNOW, OUR STREET IS 16 FEET WIDE, GETS A LITTLE TIGHT AT TIMES.
SOMETIMES YOU HAVE TO WAIT FOR FEDEX, BUT IT WORKS.
UM, AND YOU'RE A STREET WHERE YOU LIVE.
AND I KNOW, I KNOW THAT AND THE ROUNDABOUT, I MEAN, IF YOU'VE WATCHED ME BEFORE, I THINK THEY'RE ABSOLUTELY RIDICULOUS.
SO I APPLAUD YOU FOR, UM, FOR NOT PUTTING A PAYMENT ON THE, UM, THE, THE ACCESS ROAD IS NOT GONNA BE MAINTAINED BY AN HOA.
HOW DOES THAT WORK? THE ACCESS ROAD? UM, YEAH.
IT WILL BE MAINTAINED BY THE RESIDENTS.
THEY'LL HAVE TO BE WHOEVER, YOU KNOW, UH, THEY JUST HAVE TO AGREE ON SOMETHING, RIGHT? IT'LL BE, IT'LL BE, IT'LL BE SOMETHING THAT IT'S NOT, THE PLAN IS NOT TO DEDICATE IT TO THE TOWN.
SO I KNOW YOU CAN'T, UH, AND, AND, UH, YOU KNOW, THE TOWN ISN'T GOING TO PLOW IT.
THE TOWN ISN'T GONNA PICK UP GARBAGE, UH, AT THEIR HOMES.
IT'S GONNA GONNA, THEY'RE GONNA HAVE TO GET THE GARBAGE CANS DOWN TO THE CLAY.
OH, WELL, WHAT, AND NO, I'M NOT DONE YET.
UM, YOU MAY WANT AN HOA IN CASE THE TWO FUTURE NEIGHBORS DON'T AGREE.
SOMETHING TO COMPEL, YOU KNOW, AN AGREEMENT FOR MAINTENANCE, SNOW, AND SO ON AND SO FORTH.
UM, AND MY FINAL QUESTION IS THIS, IF THIS IS APPROVED, IS YOUR CLIENT GONNA DO ANY WORK? I TAKE IT NOT, NO.
THE, THE, THE PLAN IS TO, IS TO OFFER THIS FOR SALE, AND A DEVELOPER WILL COME IN AND THE DEVELOPER MAY FEEL THAT IT'S APPROPRIATE TO, TO, TO, TO PUT AN HOA IN TO MAKE SURE THAT THESE THINGS ARE, ARE, UH, UM, MAINTAINED, UH, AND THAT THERE ARE RULES IN EFFECT FOR HOW, HOW THIS IS GONNA WORK.
UM, I GUESS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT IN THE INTERIM WE HAVE TO DO IS DESIGNATE WHO OWNS THE ACCESS STRIP.
UM, PROBABLY WE WILL DESIGNATE THAT, YOU KNOW, LOT TWO OWNS THE ACCESS STRIP WITH LOT ONE HAVING THE RIGHT OF ACCESS TO IT OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
WELL, I SUGGEST YOU SPEAK TO THE, UM, YOU KNOW, THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
THEY HAVE A LOT OF EXPERIENCE WITH THIS.
AND, UH, I DON'T KNOW, DOES THE H-O-L-A-H-O-A OWN THE ACCESS TRIP? SO, WELL, WE DON'T HAVE TO.
AMANDA AND I, DO YOU GUYS FIGURE IT OUT? I MEAN, I MEAN, IT SEEMS SIMPLE WITH ONLY TWO HOMEOWNERS, BUT YOU KNOW HOW PEOPLE CAN DISAGREE OVER THINGS.
WELL, I THINK, I THINK WHAT, YOU KNOW, EITHER WE DO IT BY AN HOA OR, OR, UM, THE DEVELOPER PUTS IN COVENANTS WITH RESPECT TO EACH PROPERTY O THAT THEY SELL.
SO IT, IT, IT'S SOMETHING THAT YOU CAN'T SELL THE LOTS AND DEVELOP THEM WITHOUT AN UNDERSTANDING UPON, UH, THAT HA THAT'S BINDING ON THE BUYERS THAT THEY HAVE TO MAINTAIN THAT ROAD TO GET THERE.
UH, AND, AND, AND THERE, THERE ARE SHARED DRIVEWAYS THROUGHOUT THAT PART OF EDGEMONT, AND SOMEHOW OR OTHER OVER THE DECADES IT'S WORKED.
UM, UH, BUT, UH, THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT THEY HAVE TO DO.
I'M SORRY, AMANDA, DID YOU HAVE ANY? OKAY.
SO I DON'T KNOW NECESSARILY WHAT THE TWO LOTS COMING OFF OF A, IT'S REALLY A PRIVATE ROAD SLASH SHARED DRIVEWAY SINCE IT'S KIND OF NARROW AND, UM, IT ONLY ACCESSES TWO HOUSES.
I DON'T KNOW IF AN HOA WOULD BE NECESSARY, I THINK MORE APPROPRIATE WOULD PROBABLY BE LIKE A SHARED MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT OR AN EASEMENT AGREEMENT THAT'S RECORDED.
I THINK THAT'S FOR THE FUTURE.
I TAKE MY, I REVOKE ALL OF MY HOA COMMENTS.
AND SO I, I, I HAVE TWO SORT OF RELATED QUESTIONS.
SO, UM, THE FIRST QUESTION WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, IF, IF, IF THIS PLAN WERE TO MOVE FORWARD AND THE CHOWS WERE TO SELL THE PROPERTY TO A DEVELOPER, UM, ASSUMING THE DEVELOPER WERE TO DEVELOP SINGLE FAMILY HOMES WITHIN THE EXISTING CODE, WOULD THEY HAVE TO COME BACK TO THIS BOARD? OR COULD THEY JUST DO THAT THROUGH, YOU KNOW, IS THERE THE POSSIBILITY THIS COULD COME BACK IN FRONT OF US AGAIN? OR WOULD THAT JUST BE DONE INTERNALLY AT THAT POINT? SO IT'S UNLIKELY.
UM, WHAT TYPICALLY WILL HAPPEN IS THE APPLICANT WILL IDENTIFY ITS LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE, AND THAT'S WHAT THE BOARD'S GONNA LOOK AT.
IF THE HOME SHIFTS SLIGHTLY WITHIN THAT FOOTPRINT THAT'S APPROVED BY THIS BOARD, THEN IT WOULD NOT COME BACK.
IT WOULD, IF, YOU KNOW, THEY SHOWED A FAR COMPLIANT HOME, AND THEN THE DEVELOPER WANTS TO BUILD SOMETHING THAT'S, YOU KNOW, REQUIRES A VARIANCE.
IT WOULD COME BACK TO A BOARD OF THE TOWN.
BUT OTHERWISE, IF THEY WORK WITHIN THAT LIMITED DISTURBANCE, IT WOULD NOT.
SO THIS, THIS VERY WELL COULD BE THE, THE FIRST AND ONLY TIME THAT, THAT WE'LL SEE THIS, UM, AND, AND THROUGH THE, THE PROCESS OF THE SUBDIVISION.
UM, IN, IN TERMS OF THE 20 FOOT DRIVEWAY, YOU KNOW, I, I ECHO THE SENTIMENTS OF
[00:15:01]
PERMEABLE SURFACE AND, AND YOU KNOW, THAT, THAT'S CERTAINLY A COMMENDABLE EFFORT.I GUESS MY ONLY HESITATION IS, YOU KNOW, IF IT'S A DRIVEWAY AND HOMEOWNERS USE IT AS A DRIVEWAY, UM, YOU KNOW, WOULD WHAT RESTRICTIONS OR, OR WOULD THERE BE ANY RESTRICTIONS FROM THE HOMEOWNERS TO PARKING ON THE, THE ACCESS STRIP? UM, AND IF THERE ARE, YOU KNOW, IF THERE'S EVEN ONE CAR, YOU KNOW, ON, ON THE SIDE OF THE DRIVEWAY, HOW COULD THAT IMPACT, UH, FIRE APPARATUS FROM, FROM ACCESSING THE HOMES? RIGHT.
SO I THINK THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT CAN PROBABLY SPEAK BETTER TO THIS, BUT I BELIEVE THEY HAD PREVIOUSLY COMMENTED THAT YOU WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO PARK ON THE ACCESS PART OF IT.
AND, AND HOW WOULD THAT BE ENFORCED? UM, I THINK IT'S EITHER FROM SIGNS AND FIRE, FIRE CODE OR BUILDING CODE, AND THEY COULD BE ISSUED VIOLATIONS.
AND THE CONCEPT OF THE PLAN IS THE WHY, AND THE, SO THERE'S, THEY CAN PARK IN THE Y MM-HMM
AND, AND, AND, UH, THAT THE IDEA ABOUT PARKING IN THE ACCESS STRIP WOULD BE DISCOURAGED BECAUSE YOU COULD PARK AT THE Y WHICH IS CLOSEST TO THE HOMES ANYWAY.
AND THESE, THESE ARE BIG LOTS.
YOU KNOW WHAT, 20,000, 30, 30,000 FEET? 38.
THREE QUARTERS OF AN ACRE EACH.
SO YOU DON'T HAVE TO WALK UP THE ACCESS FOR AGREED.
I JUST WANT TO SPEAK TO THE WHYS AS THE TWO SHOOTS.
UM, WHAT WAS DONE IN THE VAN COT SUBDIVISION THAT MR. BERNSTEIN REFERRED TO, IT WASN'T A Y TERMINATION, IT WAS LIKE A K TERMINATION OR A HAMMERHEAD TERMINATION.
AND, UM, THE PIECE THAT WENT ONTO THE PRIVATE LOT ACTUALLY HAD, UM, AN EASEMENT FOR FIRE ACCESS ONLY.
SO I BELIEVE IN THIS CASE, AND WE'LL DOUBLE CHECK AND WE'LL GET BACK TO THE APPLICANT, BUT THE TWO POINTS, AND THEY'RE EASIER TO LOOK AT KIND OF ON THIS PLAT, BUT WITHIN THIS IDENTIFIED FIRE ACCESS EASEMENT TO EACH LOT, THERE WOULD NOT BE PERMISSIBLE PARKING.
AND THAT WOULD BE A CONDITION OF PLANNING BOARD APPROVAL, UH, SO THAT IF A FIRE APPARATUS HAS TO GET INTO THE SITE, THEY HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO UTILIZE THE, THOSE AREAS.
SO DOES THIS, DOES THIS PLAN SHOW A HYDRANT? UH, NO.
I DON'T THINK WE HAVE A HYDRANT.
UM, AND, UH, WE DID NOT NEED ONE WHEN WE DID THE ONE LOT SUBDIVISION.
UM, SO I DON'T THINK WE HAVE COMMENTS YET FROM THE GREENVILLE FIRE DISTRICT.
UH, BUT THERE WAS NO REQUIREMENT, AS I SAID, FOR, FOR A HYDRANT WITH RESPECT TO ONE LOT SUB, WELL, THERE MAY BE ONE ON CLAYTON ROAD.
I, NO, THERE IS THE, THE, THE ISSUE IS WHETHER WITH TWO, WOULD THEY FEEL THEY NEED A SECOND ONE? AND I HAVEN'T HEARD SO, SO WHEN WOULD THAT COME UP? I CAN, I CAN SPEAK TO THAT.
UM, I HAD A, I SPOKE WITH, UH, CHIEF GUS GREENVILLE FIRE DISTRICT ABOUT THIS PROJECT, AND HE REPRESENTED THAT THERE'S A HYDRANT NEARBY ON CLAYTON ROAD THAT WOULD BE ABLE TO SERVE THESE PROPERTIES IN THE EVENT OF A FIRE EMERGENCY.
SO HE DIDN'T FEEL THAT A NEW, UH, HYDRANT WAS NEEDED.
UM, AND HE KIND OF ECHOED, UH, DYLAN'S SENTIMENTS ABOUT THERE BEING NO PARKING ON THE FIRE ACCESS STRIP, UH, SO THAT HIS ENGINES HAVE ACCESS IF NEEDED.
SO THEY WOULD JUST PARK BEYOND THAT STUFF AS DEMARCATED ON THE PLANTS? YES.
AND, AND I GUESS, HOW WOULD THAT BE DE ELIMINATED? WOULD THAT BE LIKE A, A STONE, A STONE EDGE ON THE DRIVEWAY COMING OFF THE, THE ACCESS ROAD PORTION? THE SHARED ACCESS ROAD.
SO THAT'S A REASONABLE ITEM TO DISCUSS.
HOW COULD IT BE EASILY IDENTIFIABLE TO, YOU KNOW, A VISITOR TO THE SITE OR THE OWNERS THEMSELVES? UH, THAT MAY BE ONE WAY, YOU KNOW, IS THERE A LITTLE APRON WITH, UH, COBBLESTONE OR PAVERS OR SOMETHING TO THAT EFFECT TO DELINEATE IT, THAT SOMETHING WE CAN DISCUSS DURING THE COURSE OF THE PROJECT.
UM, REGARDING THE DRIVEWAY, THE OWNERS, IT IS NOT UNUSUAL FOR AN OWNER TO PARK IN THEIR OWN DRIVEWAY WHAT THEY CONSIDER THEIR OWN DRIVEWAY.
BUT IN TERMS OF, OF OTHER PEOPLE AND VISITORS AND PEOPLE WHO DON'T HAVE PERMISSION TO PARK IN THE DRIVEWAY, IS THAT NORMALLY AN ISSUE? I DON'T EXPECT THAT IT WOULD FOR THIS, BECAUSE THESE ARE VERY LARGE LOTS, UM, UH, THOSE VISITING MM-HMM
WILL WANT TO PARK AS CLOSE TO THE HOUSE AS PO AS POSSIBLE BECAUSE, UH, IT'S QUITE A SCHLEP TO WALK FROM THE ACCESS STRIP OVER TO THE, UH, TO THE HOUSES WHERE THEY WOULD BE LOCATED.
SO I THINK IT'S UNLIKELY THAT THEY WOULD BE PARKING THERE, UM, BECAUSE IT'S, UH, IT'S, IT'S, IT'S QUITE A DISTANCE.
[00:20:01]
A, IT'S A, IT'S A NARROW STRIP.UM, SO, UH, WE HAVEN'T SEEN THAT WITH, UH, YOU KNOW, I, I'M FAMILIAR WITH THE, THERE'S A SHARED DRIVEWAY, UM, OFF OF UNDERHILL THAT SERVICES HOMES, UM, IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND THERE ARE NO CARS PARKED ALONG THERE.
SO I'VE NOT SEEN THAT, THAT THAT ONE SERVICES 1 55 UNDERHILL, 1 65 UNDERHILL, AND, AND I THINK, I THINK THERE'S AT LEAST FOUR HOUSES ALONG THAT SHARED DRIVEWAY.
I MEAN, I DO UNDERSTAND THAT THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THIS IS THIS IS ALSO THE ONLY ACCESS YES.
FOR THE FIRE DEPARTMENT, RIGHT? YES.
DO YOU KNOW IF, AND I KNOW THESE ARE CONCEPTUAL HOMES, I DO KNOW THE AREA OR THE NEIGHBORHOOD, I IMAGINE THERE WILL BE GARAGES, UH, OR IN THIS DESIGN ANYWAY, OF COURSE, TWO CAR GARAGES.
SO, YOU KNOW, THINKING ABOUT PARKING FOR VISITORS, RIGHT? THEY'RE PROBABLY NOT GONNA WANT TO PARK OUT ON CLAYTON AND SCHLEP AS MR. BERNSTEIN SAID, UP THE DRIVEWAY TO GO TO THE BARBECUE AT THE HOME ON THE LEFT.
SO IF YOU'VE GOT A TWO CAR GARAGE AND THEN PARKING FOR TWO, THREE, MAYBE FOUR ADDITIONAL VEHICLES IN THE DRIVEWAY OUTSIDE THE FIRE ACCESS, UH, STRIP OR EASEMENT, YOU KNOW, THAT MAY BE SOMETHING THAT THE BOARD WANTS TO CONSIDER AS IT MOVES ALONG THIS PROCESS TO ALLOW FOR THAT VISITOR PARKING.
UM, IT, IT HAS, I I WANTED TO ADD ONE OTHER ITEM.
WHILE IT'S NOT OFTEN THE BOARD WOULD HAVE THE ABILITY TO, UH, CONDITION THE PROJECT THAT IT SEE ARCHITECTURAL ELEVATIONS OF THE PROPOSED HOMES, UM, AT THE TIME, THOSE THAT SUBMISSION'S MADE TO THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT TO CONFIRM THAT THERE'S A TWO CAR GARAGE AND AMPLE SPACE FOR ADDITIONAL VE PARKING OF VEHICLES, UM, THAT WOULDN'T BE AN ISSUE IF THE CONCERN IS THAT THE POTENTIAL WOULD BE TO PARK ON THE ACCESS STRIP AS THERE'S NO OTHER ALTERNATIVE.
SO THAT'S SOMETHING THAT COULD BE DONE.
OR, YOU KNOW, YOU COULD REQUEST THAT STAFF VERIFY THAT PRIOR TO ANY BUILDING PERMIT ISSUANCE, AND THEN WE CAN REPORT BACK TO THE BOARD IN A CORRESPONDENCE LIKE FASHION.
I THINK ALSO IT COULD BE A CONDITION OF THE APPROVAL.
AND AS A CONDITION, YOU KNOW, THE, WHEN THE, WHEN THE PLANS ARE SUBMITTED TO THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT FOR BUILDING PERMIT, THEY WOULD LOOK TO SEE WHETHER THE CONDITIONS ARE SATISFIED, INCLUDING ABSOLUTELY.
THAT THERE IS A TWO CAR GARAGE WITH ROOM TO PARK FOR THREE OR WHATEVER YOU WANT, WHATEVER CONDITION YOU WANT TO PUT IN.
BUT THAT'S HOW I THINK IT WOULD WORK WITHOUT HAVING TO GO BACK TO THE BOARD, UM, FOR APPROVAL.
BUT, YOU KNOW, IT'S, YOU'RE UP TO YOU.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS? YEAH, I HAVE A QUESTION.
THE, UM, LOCATION OF THE REPLACEMENT TREES AND THE DRYWALL IS THAT BOTH OF THOSE ARE STILL JUST CONCEPTS.
WHEN WOULD THEY GET FINALIZED WHEN THE BUILDING PLANS ARE BUILT? UH, NO, I THINK WE, WE ARE REQUIRED TO PUT IN A LANDSCAPE PLAN, UH, THAT THAT DEALS WITH THE REPLACEMENT OF THE TREES AND THAT HAS TO BE AVAILABLE FOR THE PUBLIC TO SEE, UH, FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING.
UM, BECAUSE, UH, UH, THAT'S WHAT'S GETTING APPROVED.
UH, AND, AND, UH, PEOPLE SHOULD SEE WHAT IT IS.
UH, SO, UM, IT'S, AND I'M ASKING MORE BECAUSE OF THE CONFLICT, POTENTIAL CONFLICT WITH WHERE THE DRY WELLS ARE.
SO IS THAT LOCATION DETERMINED? NO.
SO AS I UNDERSTAND IT, IT'S UM, THEY'VE DONE SOME TEST PITS 'CAUSE THAT WAS REQUIRED OUT ON THE SITE TO VERIFY THAT THE PRELIMINARILY DESIGNED SYSTEMS CAN IN FACT WORK IN THOSE AREAS.
ARE THEY SUBJECT TO SLIGHT RELOCATION, YOU KNOW, AS PART OF A STORMWATER MANAGEMENT CONTROL PERMIT THROUGH THE TOWNS BUREAU OF ENGINEERING PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMITS BEING ISSUED? YES.
THE RE REASON I'M ASKING, RIGHT.
IF IT'S CALED, THEN NORMALLY SAY DON'T PLANT ANYTHING WITHIN 15 FEET OF IT IF YOU DON'T WANNA HAVE IT GROWN OVER BY ROOTS.
AND IN LOOKING AT THIS PLAN, UM, YOU KNOW, IT APPEARS THAT THERE'S DECENT SEPARATION FROM ANY NEW PLANTINGS ANYWAY.
SO, AND THE TOWN ENGINEERS, UH, COGNIZANT OF THAT AND WOULD TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION AT THE TIME OF STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PERMIT REVIEW.
ED HAS A QUESTION, UM, IS FOLLOWING UP ABOUT ONE OF THE POINTS THAT MICHAEL RAISED.
UH, IS THERE A TOWN REQUIREMENT FOR HOW WIDE THAT FIRE ACCESS
[00:25:01]
HAS TO BE? SO TO RESPOND TO THAT, UH, THE TOWN RELIES ON NEW YORK STATE FIRE CODE.UM, AND WE SPECIFICALLY HAD THE PROJECT ENGINEER LOOK AT THE NEW YORK STATE FIRE CODE TO ENSURE THAT, UH, WHAT THEY WERE PROPOSING MET OR MEETS THAT CODE.
AND IT DOES, SO IT'S A 20, YOU CAN HAVE A 20 FOOT WIDE ACCESS STRIP FOR FIRE APPARATUS THAT FORKS OUT INTO TWO 60 FOOT LONG SPURS, UH, IN THIS Y TYPE CONNECTION.
AND IS THAT 20 FEET ALSO WHAT'S GONNA BE PAVED FOR THE, AS THE ACCESS DRIVE? YES.
THAT WOULD BE, SO THAT'S PRETTY TIGHT FOR TWO, IF TWO CARS ARE COMING IN THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION, 20 FEET IS LIKE PRETTY TIGHT, RIGHT? NO, IT'S NOT.
IF YOU GOT A FIRETRUCK COMING UP, THE CAR'S JUST GONNA JUMP OFF THE CURB AND LET THE FIRETRUCK BY
AND THE ACCESS EASEMENT THAT'S ON THE PLAN.
SO IS, IS IT, IS PART OF THE EASEMENT GONNA BE, UH, GRANTED TO THE TOWN FOR FIRE ACCESS? NO.
IT'D JUST BE MAINTAINED TO SHOW THAT EMERGENCY ACCESS, UM, IS AVAILABLE ON THE TWO PROPERTIES.
AND WHAT HAPPENS, I MEAN, IN TERMS OF THE OWNERSHIP OF THAT ACCESS ROAD AND WHETHER IT'S AN HOA OR, YOU KNOW, ONE PROPERTY OWNER OWNS IT AND THERE'S, YOU KNOW, AN AGREEMENT COVENANTS, WHAT HAPPENS IF SOMEONE, I MEAN, THAT'S GOTTA BE OBVIOUSLY PLOWED.
'CAUSE IF GOD FORBID THERE'S A FIRE ON A SNOWY DAY, THE TRUCK'S GOTTA GET IN THERE.
AND IF YOU HAVE TWO OR THREE FEET OF SNOW, WHAT HAPPENS? IF THERE'S A DISAGREEMENT, SOMEONE'S AWAY.
ONE PARTY DOESN'T WANT TO DO IT.
SO THAT'S A PRIVATE ACTION BETWEEN THE TWO PROPERTY OWNERS.
BUT AS FAR AS EMERGENCY ACCESS, I BELIEVE WE HAVE EMERGENCY VEHICLES THAT HAVE A PLOW ON THE FRONT.
AND, AND THEY COULD CHARGE BACK TO AND THE COST AND THEY CHARGE BACK.
AND WE ACTUALLY DISCUSSED THAT RECENTLY.
I MEAN, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE YOU CAN HAVE ALL THE WRITTEN WORDS YOU WANT, BUT RIGHT.
WHEN YOU GOTTA GET IN THERE, YOU GOTTA GET IN THERE.
AND THE ONLY OTHER COMMENT I HAVE IS THE PARKING MAY BE ADEQUATE WHEN YOU HAVE LIKE A, YOU KNOW, A A A SMALL EVENT, 3, 4, 5 CARS COMING.
BUT WHEN YOU HAVE A BIGGER EVENT, A GRADUATION PARTY, A YOU KNOW, WEDDING, A WHATEVER, YOU KNOW, YOU COULD HAVE 20, 30 PEOPLE, YOU KNOW, COMING TO THE HOUSE.
AND AGAIN, YOU COULD PUT NO PARKING THERE, BUT SOMEONE'S GOTTA ENFORCE IT.
AND I DON'T KNOW WHERE THOSE PEOPLE ARE GONNA PARK.
WELL, I MEAN, SO I COULD EQUATE THAT TO ANYBODY THAT HAS A SMALLER DRIVEWAY THAT YOU CAN ONLY PARK ABOUT FOUR CARS IN, OR, YOU KNOW, ONE CAR GARAGE AND ONLY TWO SPACES, AND THAT IT'S, IT'S THE SAME YEAH.
I MEAN, YOU KNOW, I REMEMBER YEARS AGO I WAS TRYING TO GET UP OLD LANE.
A WHOLE SIDE OF OLD LANE FROM THE TOP TO THE BOTTOM WAS THE LINE WAS CLOSED, LEAVING ONE LANE LEFT.
I DON'T KNOW, MAYBE SOMEBODY DIED, SOMEBODY GOT, BUT IT HAPPENS.
UM, YOU CAN'T PLAN FOR THE ABSOLUTE WORST CASES, OTHERWISE EVERY HOUSE IS GONNA HAVE TO HAVE A, UH, DRIVEWAY THAT ACCOMMODATES 15 CARS.
AND WHEN WE'VE HAD PARTIES AT OUR HOUSE, WE CALL UP OUR NEIGHBORS, CAN WE HAVE OUR PEOPLE PARK THERE? THEY SAID, SURE.
WHAT ABOUT IN THAT SITUATION? WHAT ABOUT A FIRE TRUCK GETTING IN IF PEOPLE ARE PARKED ON THE SIDE? SO THEN THAT'S A SITUATION WOULD BE VIOLATION.
THEY CLOSED, THEY CAN GET, THEY RUN UP TO THE HOUSE, THEY DRIVE THE HOSES.
MICHAEL WAS A FORMER FIRE COMMISSIONER.
SO HE WOULD KNOW SPECIFICALLY.
UM, SO IN TERMS OF PROCEDURE PROCEDURE, YES.
WOULD WE LIKE TO, UM, DECLARE OUR INTENT TO BE A LEAD AGENCY? RIGHT.
SO BEING JUST FOR OUR NEWER MEMBERS, BEING THAT THERE'S THE SUBDIVISION, THE WETLAND WATERCOURSE PERMIT, AND THE TREE REMOVAL PERMIT THAT REST WITH THE PLANNING BOARD.
BUT THERE ARE ALSO VARIANCES, UH, REQUIRED THROUGH THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FROM THE STATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY REVIEW STANDPOINT.
IT MAKES SENSE TO COORDINATE THAT REVIEW.
SO BOTH BOARDS, BOTH BOARDS DON'T DO THEIR INDEPENDENT REVIEW AND TYPICALLY WITH THE SUBDIVISION, WHICH, UM, AT A MINIMUM IS AN UNLISTED ACTION UNDER SEEKER, THE PLANNING BOARD WOULD SEEK TO BE THE LEAD AGENCY AND HAVE THE ZONING BOARD AS AN INVOLVED AGENCY IN THE PROCESS.
[00:30:01]
DAVIS, UH, MADE THE APPROPRIATE SUGGESTION THAT THE PLANNING BOARD CONSIDERED DECLARING ITS INTENT, WHICH IF YOU DO VOTE ON THAT, WE WILL CIRCULATE TO ALL INTERESTED.SO WE, UM, THE PLANNING BOARD WILL BE, UH, LEAD AGENTS.
AND THIS WILL BE A 30 DAY PERIOD? YES.
SO IT'S A 30 DAY PERIOD FOR CIRCULATION.
WE WILL CIRCULATE, UH, EITHER TOMORROW, WHETHER, WHETHER PERMITTING OR FRIDAY, UH, WE'LL GET THAT OFF TO THE ZONING BOARD.
THE ZONING BOARD DOESN'T HAVE TO HAVE A MEETING TO DISCUSS.
UH, IT TYPICALLY GOES TO THE CHAIR AND THE CHAIR GETS US, GETS IT BACK TO US.
UM, WE'LL CIRCULATE TO ANY OTHER INTERESTED AGENCIES, FOR INSTANCE, THE CONSERVATION ADVISORY COUNCIL, UM, BECAUSE OF THE WETLAND WATER COURSE PERMIT.
AND THEN WE'LL COME BACK FOR A FOLLOW-UP WORK SESSION, UH, AFTER THE PERIOD CLOSES TO HOPEFULLY ESTABLISH THE PLANNING BOARD AS LEAD AGENCY FOR SEEKER PURPOSES.
UH, WE CAN BEGIN TO DRAFT UP A SEEKER DETERMINATION.
AND IF THE BOARD BRIEFLY WANTS TO DISCUSS WHAT IT THINKS ABOUT THE VARIANCES, YOU CAN GIVE US SOME DIRECTION ON MAYBE PREPARING A DRAFT, UH, RECOMMENDATION TO THE ZONING BOARD.
WE'RE NOT GONNA DO THAT TODAY.
UH, YOU CAN, YOU DON'T HAVE TO.
I DON'T THINK IT'S GONNA TAKE MORE THAN FIVE MINUTES TO TALK ABOUT THE VARI FIVE OR 10 MINUTES TO TALK ABOUT THE VARIANCES.
WE DON'T HAVE MUCH ON THE AGENDA, SO I THINK IT'S WORTHWHILE TO GIVE US THE DIRECTION SO WHEN WE COME BACK AT THE NEXT WORK SESSION, WE COULD HAVE SOMETHING DRAFTED UP IN THE EVENT THE BOARD'S READY TO MOVE FORWARD.
I I, I HAVE ONE OTHER QUESTION.
THIS KEEPS, THIS IS STARING AT ME.
UM, THE EXISTING TENNIS COURT HAS A FENCE AROUND IT.
WHERE, WHERE IS THE ACCESS INTO THE TENNIS COURTS? IS THAT CLOSER TO THIS DRIVEWAY OR ON THE FURTHER SIDE? IT'S ON THE OTHER SIDE.
UH, IT'S, UH, YEAH, THAT, THAT TENNIS COURT IS THE, IS OWNED BY ANOTHER PROPERTY OWNER.
BUT THEY DON'T ACCESS IT THROUGH THE ACCESS STRIP.
ALTHOUGH THERE'S A GATE THERE.
I, I DON'T KNOW THAT THERE, UH, THERE IS, THERE IS, TRUST ME, I WAS JUST THERE THE OTHER DAY.
I DON'T THINK IT'S HAS, I DON'T THINK IT'S BEEN USED IN DECADES.
I MEAN, LOOK, BY THE WAY, THE WATERCOURSE, JUST SO PEOPLE KNOW, IT'S BASICALLY A DRAINAGE STITCH.
AND WHATEVER THEY DO WILL BE AN IMPROVEMENT BECAUSE NOW IT LOOKS LIKE THE WATER HAS TO GO THROUGH A BUNCH OF LEAVES AND GARBAGE AND, AND YOU'RE GONNA PUT A PIPE THERE, WHICH IS NICE.
LOOK, I JUST HAVE ONE COMMENT ON THE, UH, ZONING VARIANCES.
NOW FOR QUESTION, UM, IS IT CORRECT THAT THE REDUCTION OF THE ACCESS ROOF FROM 26 TO 20 FEET CREATED THE NEED FOR VARIANCES? SO, UM, I'LL SAY THIS, THE, BY THE APPLICANT NOT PROPOSING TO BUILD A ROAD IMPROVED TO TOWN STANDARDS, THAT, UM, RESULTS IN THE REQUIREMENT FOR TWO OF THE VARIANCES, WHICH IS LACK OF FRONTAGE FOR EACH LOT ONTO A ROAD IMPROVED TO TOWN STATE.
SO WHAT I WOULD SAY IS THIS, THIS WOULD BE MY, I'M NOT GONNA MAKE A MOTION, BUT THIS IS MY THOUGHT.
LOOK, I LIKE NARROW ROSE, AS I'VE SAID BEFORE, I'M NOT GONNA, YOU KNOW, REITERATE THAT.
SO TO THE EXTENT THAT THE, YOU KNOW, REASONABLY SIZED ROAD 20 FEET CREATED THESE TWO VARIANCES, I WOULD GIVE A POSITIVE RECOMMENDATION TO THE VARIANCES BECAUSE THE EFFECT IS POSITIVE BY REDUCING, YOU KNOW, IMPERMEABLE SURFACE, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH.
WITH RESPECT TO THE OTHER S UM, WHICH HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THE ROAD, I TAKE IT.
SO WHAT THEY HAVE TO DO WITH IS, UM, BEING THAT THIS, THIS EXTRA ACCESS STRIP IS BEING REFERRED TO AS A DRIVEWAY.
THERE ARE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS FOR DRIVEWAYS.
AND IN THIS ZONING DISTRICT IT'S 18 FEET.
UM, JUST BASED ON THE SHEER WIDTH OF THE ACCESS STRIP, WHICH IS 50 FEET.
AND THEY ROUGHLY 50 FEET AND THEY HAVE A 20 FOOT WIDE PAVED STRIP.
YOU CAN'T HAVE 18 FEET ON EACH SIDE.
THEY ARE SHOWING 15 FEET ON EACH SIDE.
SO, SO IF IT WERE, IF IT 15 FEET, YOU'D HAVE 18 FEET ON EACH SIDE.
BUT THAT WOULD'VE BE 14 FEET EFFICIENT FOR EMERGENCY PURPOSES.
AND ACTUALLY BY DOING A 20, SORRY, 20 FOOT WIDE ROAD, IT'S, IT'S A TRADE OFF.
YOU HAVE ACCESS TO, YOU HAVE A TOWN STANDARD ROAD, YOU HAVE ACCESS.
SO, SO, SO, OR YOU HAVE A GREATER DRIVEWAY WITH RESPECT TO THAT.
[00:35:01]
I GUESS I'D SAY THE ROAD IS AS NARROW AS REASONABLY PRACTICAL.UM, SO I GIVE A POSITIVE RECOMMENDATION TO THAT 15 FEET SETBACK, WHATEVER.
IT'S AS WELL VERSUS 18 REQUIRED.
SO YOU'RE SAYING, 'CAUSE IF THEY GOT THE 18 REQUIRED, THE ROAD WOULD BE TOO NARROW.
IT WOULD CREATE SAFETY ISSUES, YOU KNOW, CARS, I MEAN, FORGET 14, IT WOULDN'T MEET THE FIRE CODE.
THEY WOULD NOT MEET FIRE CODE.
IT WOULDN'T MEET THE FIRE CODE.
IT HAD TO BE DANGEROUS EVEN FOR NORMAL CARS PASSING BACK AND FORTH.
SO YOU'RE SAYING YOUR JUSTIFICATION FOR A POSITIVE RECOMMENDATION IS BASED ON PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS.
JUST GOING BACK TO THAT MEMO THAT, UH, THE PLANNING BOARD REVISITED ABOUT MAKING POSITIVE VERSUS NEGATIVE VERSUS NEUTRAL RECOMMENDATIONS.
YEAH, BECAUSE THERE WERE MORE NARROW, IT WOULD BE DANGEROUS.
IT WOULDN'T BEAT THE FIRE CODE AND UM, IT WOULD BE IMPRACTICAL.
AND IF IT WAS WIDER, IT WOULD BE WASTEFUL OF PAVEMENT.
CREATE MORE IMPERVIOUS SURFACE.
IT'S NOT TOO WIDE AND IT'S NOT TOO NARROW.
SO THAT DOESN'T RESULT IN THE NEED FOR VARIANCE.
WE'RE GONNA DISCUSS, I HAVE TO REVIEW.
OH, THANK MR AS FILLING IN AS FORESTRY OFFICER, I HAVE TO REVIEW TO ENSURE THAT IT MEETS THE CODE.
PRELIMINARILY IT DID, BASED ON THE NUMBERS I SAW, BUT I HAVE TO RUN MY OWN CALCULATIONS.
UH, THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT THE BOARD, EVEN IF THE 19 REMOVALS RESULT IN NINE REPLACEMENTS AND THAT SATISFIES THE CODE, IF THE BOARD WANTS TO SEE, FOR INSTANCE, SOMETIMES, UH, IT LIKES TO SEE ALONG THE INTERIOR PROPERTY LINES, SOME EVERGREEN PLANTINGS.
THOSE ARE CERTAINLY THINGS THAT CAN BE DISCUSSED WITH THE APPLICANT.
BY, BY THE WAY, THESE, THESE 19 TREE REMOVALS IS JUST FOR THE ACCESS ROAD, RIGHT? UM, NO, THEY SHOW IN THE BUILDING FOOTPRINT TOO.
ALSO IN THE BUILDING FOOTPRINT, YES.
IT'S A VERY HEAVILY WOODED AREA.
I KNOW, IT'S, I'M SURPRISED IT'S, I'M SURPRISED IT'S SO FEW AT 19 BETWEEN THE HOUSES AND THE ACCESS ROAD, I WOULD'VE EXPECTED A LOT MORE REGULATED.
SO THERE ARE SOME SMALLER CALIPERS.
SO IT'S THE FOUR VARIANCES AGAIN ARE LOT ONE, UH, LACK OF STREET FRONTAGE.
SO 25 FEET REQUIRED, ZERO PROPOSED BECAUSE THE ACCESS STRIP ISN'T BEING BUILT TO THE TOWN STANDARD.
SO THAT'S ONE AND TWO, THREE AND FOUR ARE THE DRIVEWAY SETBACKS TO THE PROPERTY LINES FROM 18 FEET REQUIRED TO 15 FEET PROPOSED.
ARE THE, IS THERE ANY OTHER DISCUSSION OR DOES ANYONE MAYBE DISAGREE WITH MICHAEL OR IS EVERYONE IN AGREEMENT? I, I AGREE WITH MICHAEL.
SO THE, THE BOARD'S TRENDING TOWARDS A POSITIVE RECOMMENDATION TO THE ZONING BOARD, LESLIE? YES.
AND, UH, THIS WILL BE OFF WHILE WE CIRCULATE THAT NOTICE OF INTO, OF INTENT TO THE LEAD AGENCY.
WE'LL DRAFT UP, UH, SECRET DETERMINATION FOR THE PLANNING BOARD'S CONSIDERATION AND A RECOMMENDATION FOR ITS NEXT AVAILABLE.
AND, AND YOU'LL INVITE ME BACK
AND, UH, IN THE MEANTIME WE WILL APPLY FOR THE VARIANCES.
WE JUST RECEIVED THE, UH, BUILDING INSPECTOR'S LETTER TODAY.
AND, AND, UH, SO OUR INTENT WOULD BE TO TRY TO GET AN APPLICATION ON FILE WITH THE ZBA BY THE 15TH OF FEBRUARY SO THAT WE CAN BE ON THEIR AGENDA IN MARCH.
I'M SORRY, DO YOU HAVE A MEETING WITH THE CAC? OH, YES.
AND WE HAVE A MEETING WITH THE CAC FOR THE 13TH.
AND, UM, AND I, I ACTUALLY HAVE THE, UH, MATERIALS FOR THE CAC THAT I NEED TO GIVE EITHER TO MATT OR TO YOU AARON.
I, I WOULD BRING 'EM TOMORROW, BUT BECAUSE OF THE WEATHER, YOU CAN LEAVE THEM RIGHT HERE.
LEMME PUT 'EM TOGETHER AND I'LL, I'LL LEAVE 'EM WITH YOU.
SO WITH THAT SAID, UM, IT'S BEING FEBRUARY 5TH.
THERE'S A CHANCE I'LL HAVE TO LOOK AT THE SCHEDULE, BUT, UM, ACTUALLY LET'S LOOK NOW.
SO THERE'S A MARCH 5TH MEETING, AND THEN THE, AND THERE'S A MARCH 19TH
[00:40:01]
MEETING.UM, THE ZONING BOARD MEETING LIKELY WILL BE MARCH 20TH.
SO THAT GIVES US SOME TIME TO BE ABLE TO, I THINK, I THINK ED HAD INDICATED THAT IT WAS THE SECOND SECOND EARLIER.
SO WE'LL CHECK IN WITH STAFF ON THAT.
UM, BUT JUST IN TERMS OF COORDINATING THE TIMEFRAMES, IF, FOR INSTANCE, AND I'LL SPEAK TO AMANDA IN MORE DETAIL, IF WE HEAR BACK FROM ALL INTERESTED AND INVOLVED AGENCIES IN LESS THAN 30 DAYS, I BELIEVE THE PLANNING BOARD CAN MOVE FORWARD.
YOU DON'T AUTOMATICALLY HAVE TO RUN OUT THE TIME CLOCK IF WE HEAR FROM ALL AGENCIES.
SO THAT COULD COME INTO PLAY AS WELL.
WELL I'LL KEEP MY CALENDAR OPEN.
I'M GONNA TAKE A COUPLE MINUTES.
OH, 'CAUSE WE WE'RE GONNA GO INTO PUBLIC HEARING.
SO WE'RE GONNA TAKE FIVE MINUTES AND WE'LL COME BACK FOR PUBLIC HEARING.
ONCE AGAIN, THIS IS THE WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 5TH, 2025 PLANNING BOARD MEETING WE ARE IN GOING INTO, WE'RE OPENING UP THE, UH, SECTION, WHICH IS PUBLIC COMMENTS, PUBLIC HEARING.
THE FIRST CASE IS GOING TO BE CASE NUMBER PB 2311 COLLINS AT 19 PINE LANE AND AT THE PODIUM.
I'M SORRY, WE HAVE TO TAKE THE ROLL CALL.
MS. MOYER, IN NOTE FOR THE RECORD THAT BOARD MEMBERS SAI AND JOHAN SNAGS ARE NOT PRESENT THIS EVENING.
AND WE WANNA WELCOME NICOLE WHO'S FILLING IN FOR BARBARA THIS EVENING.
SO AGAIN, CASE NUMBER PB 2311 COLLINS.
THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING TO DISCUSS A PLANNING BOARD STEEP SLOPE PERMIT APPLICATION INVOLVING THE PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION OF A PARLA RETAINING WALLS AND EXPANDED DRIVEWAY.
AND AT THE PODIUM WE HAVE STEVEN ANDERSON.
I'M FROM GABRIEL SENIOR PC, UH, LAND SURVEYORS AND ENGINEERS.
AND WE'VE BEEN BEFORE THE BOARD BEFORE ON THIS STEEP SLOPE.
WE DID, UH, HAVE TO GET A REFERRAL TO ZONING FOR AREA VARIANCES.
AND UH, WE DID GET THOSE, UH, ESSENTIALLY FOR THE DRIVEWAY AND, UH, THE PATIO AREA.
UH, THERE WERE ISSUES THAT WERE BROUGHT UP BY NEIGHBORS ABOUT DRAINAGE.
AND THE ZONING BOARD ALSO PUT IN THEIR RESOLUTION THAT WE SHOULD TERRACE THE PROPERTY AND, UM, YOU KNOW, SHOULD TRY TO STOP SOME OF THE STORM WATER FROM COMING DOWN.
SO I'M GONNA SHARE THE, THE PLAN.
AND I'LL JUST QUOTE THE ZONING BOARD CONDITION WHILE YOU'RE PULLING UP THE PLAN.
SO, CONDITION FOUR, AND WE DID CIRCULATE THE DECISION OF THE ZONING BOARD IN CASE NUMBER 23 DASH 29.
IT WAS DATED DECEMBER 14TH, 2023.
AS MENTIONED, CONDITION FOUR UH, INDICATES THAT, UH, GRANTING THE VARIANCES WILL NOT HAVE AN ADVERSE EFFECT OR IMPACT ON THE PHYSICAL OR ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR DISTRICT IE DRAINAGE, STEEP SLOPES, WETLANDS, AESTHETICS, IMPERVIOUS SURFACE FLOODING CONDITIONS, ET CETERA.
BECAUSE THE APPLICANTS ARE ATTEMPTING TO LEGALIZE AN EXISTING DRIVEWAY AND PREVIOUSLY INSTALLED PATIO.
ALSO, CONDITIONS ARE TO BE MET TO MITIGATE THE STORMWATER RUNOFF EFFECTS CREATED BY THE INTRODUCTION OF ADDITIONAL IMPERVIOUS SURFACE MATERIAL BY INTRODUCING A CULTEC DRAINAGE SYSTEM AND ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPING AND TERRACING MEASURES.
SO WE'LL LET MR. ANDERSON SPEAK TO THOSE MEASURES.
UH, AND I CAN SHARE IF YOU'RE HAVING TROUBLE.
YEAH, MAYBE IT'S EASY FOR YOU TO SHARE 'CAUSE OF USING THE PLUSES LAPTOP AND OF COURSE NO INSTRUCTIONS WHY SO
'CAUSE IT WAS ALSO PREPARED, UH, FOR, FOR THE ZBA, UH, WELL FOR THE TOWN ENGINEER, UH, TO REVIEW.
'CAUSE AT THE SAME TIME WE GAVE A NEW DRAINAGE REPORT.
UH, 'CAUSE AT THAT POINT WE HAD DONE DETEST PITS AND PERCOLATION TESTS.
AND WHAT'S NEW TO THAT FROM ZONING.
AND LET'S SEE, WE GET THIS, SO WE PUT IN A WALL HERE ON THAT SIDE, ANOTHER WALL BECAUSE THE WATER TENDS TO COME DOWN THE HILL AND ONTO THE NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTY.
NOW, AS FAR AS DRAINAGE, WE HAVE HOOKED UP ALMOST THE ENTIRE HOUSE NOW,
[00:45:01]
WHICH DOESN'T HAVE ANY SYSTEM AS IT IS.UM, SO THERE'RE ALL, THERE'S A COAL TECH IN THE FRONT YARD AND THERE'S A SERIES IN THE BACK.
NOW WE REALLY NEED TO GET THIS MITIGATION DONE BECAUSE OF THE EFFECTS ON THE NEIGHBOR AND EVERYTHING.
SO, UH, RIGHT NOW THERE IS NO DRAINAGE SYSTEM.
EVERYTHING JUST DUMPS OUT ON THE GROUND.
UH, WE NEED TO DO LANDSCAPING, UH, THE TERRACE WALL.
AND, UH, RIGHT NOW THERE'S A, A CURTAIN DRAIN BEHIND THE PATIO, WHICH ACTUALLY FILLS UP WITH WATER ON BIG STORMS. AND THEY, UM, IT THEN GOES, IT FILLS UP AND KEEPS GOING, BUT THE FULL INTENTION IS TO GET THAT CURTAIN DRAIN HOOKED UP, WHICH IS WHAT'S GOING ON RIGHT NOW.
SO, AND WE DO HAVE WATER THAT COMES FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UH, I DON'T KNOW IF WE NEED TO SHOW THAT OR WE CAN SHOW A VIDEO.
DO YOU KNOW WHICH DATE? UH, EITHER THEY'RE ALL THE SAME.
YEAH, LET ME SEE IF I CAN, UH, UM, I BELIEVE THE TOWN ENGINEER WAS LOOKING AT THE SITUATION AGAIN TODAY.
I'M GONNA TRY AND PLAY IT A DIFFERENT WAY.
BUT IF YOU COULD EXPLAIN YEAH.
YOU KNOW, THE SITUATION, I THINK THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL.
ESSENTIALLY
UM, IT'S A VERY STREET, STEEP STREET.
AND THERE IS NO DRAINAGE TOWN DRAINAGE ON IT AT ALL.
AND IT COMES FLYING DOWN THE STREET.
WISH I COULD, UH, I HAVE ON MY PHONE WITH THAT.
BUT, UH, YOU WANT ME TO EMAIL IT? OR I COULD PUT IT ON THE I CAN.
IT'S A PROBLEM WITH THE SHARING, SO, BUT, UM, ESSENTIALLY COMES FLYING DOWN THE STREET.
WHAT, WHAT DOES THE VIDEO SHOW? WATER FLOWING DOWN? UH, FLOWING DOWN PINE, I CAN IMAGINE IT.
ABOUT THE ONE THAT WE'RE YEAH, THE OTHER SILT.
SO THE ONE WITH SILT, UH, MIGHT BE SOME OF THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY UP ABOVE ON MOUNT ON MOUNT PLEASANT LANE.
UH, THE CURBING IS ONLY A STONE CURB WITH LARGE GAPS AND NOT EVEN SET TO A HEIGHT THAT WOULD PREVENT THE WATER.
SO IT PROBABLY IS JUMPING, UH, AS IT COMES SHOOTING DOWN MOUNT PLEASANT LANE.
AND THERE'S ALSO SECTIONS WHERE, UH, THE DRIVEWAY, IT MIGHT BE HAVE A HUMP ON THE BLACKTOP, BUT THERE IS A FLAT SECTION, WHICH I'M PRETTY SURE, UH, BY, BY THE WAY, IF YOU KNOW, IF THE, IF THE LACK OF CURB STONES, IF YOU HAVE LOW CURB STONES OR AN ISSUE MM-HMM
YOU SHOULD SPEAK TO THE TOWN BUILDING DEPARTMENT.
YEAH, WELL THAT'S, I'VE DONE THAT.
WE, THEY, YOU KNOW, THEY MAY COME IN AND PUT IN A, AN ASPHALT RIGHT CURB OR REBUILD IT WITH THE STONE.
I THINK THAT'S IT IS DOES BELONG TO THE TOWN.
AND I BELIEVE JASON NOW HAS ALL THAT INFORMATION HE DOES IN ALRIGHT.
HE, YOU KNOW, SO, BUT AT THIS POINT WE JUST NEED TO GET OUR END OF IT.
WE CAN'T SOLVE THE WHOLE NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT WE NEED TO GET OUR MITIGATION.
SPEAKING TO THE VIDEOS VERY BRIEFLY, SO THERE WAS CORRESPONDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE DOWNHILL SLOPE NEIGHBOR.
UH, THAT GENTLEMAN CANNOT BE HERE THIS EVENING.
HE HAD A PRIOR ENGAGEMENT, BUT I DID ASSURE HIM THAT HIS COMMENTS IN THE VIDEO WERE FORWARDED TO THE PLANNING BOARD, FORWARDED TO THE PROJECT TEAM, MADE PART OF THE OFFICIAL RECORD FOR THE PROJECT AND REVIEWED BY TOWN STAFF, INCLUDING OUR OFFICE, THE TOWN ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, AND THE TOWN'S, UH, THE TOWN ENGINEER AS WELL.
UM, SO THAT WAS ALL TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION.
THE MR. ANDERSON SUBMITTED A SERIES OF VIDEOS THAT HE RECEIVED FROM THE OWNERS, UH, TODAY.
I EMAILED YOU DIRECTLY, IF THAT HELPS.
AND, UM, THAT SHOWS THAT EVEN IN SMALLER RAIN EVENTS, UM, HALF INCH RAIN, ONE AND A HALF INCHES OF RAIN VIDEOS I SAW SHOW A STREAM OF WATER COMING DOWN PINE LANE.
UM, SO IT JUST SHOWS WHAT I'LL CALL THE CONTRIBUTING WATERSHED.
UM, IF YOU WERE TO TRAVEL TO PINE LANE, IT'S NEARLY A 45 DEGREE ANGLE FOR SEVERAL HUNDRED FEET
[00:50:01]
UP TO WHERE IT STARTS TO LEVEL OFF SOME AT THE UPPER ROADS.AND THEN THE GRADE AND TOPOGRAPHY CONTINUES TO CLIMB UP INTO TAX RIDGE.
SO THERE'S A LARGE, A VERY SIGNIFICANT AREA THAT'S DRAINING DOWN, IF YOU WILL, TOWARDS PINE LANE AND DOWN TO TAXI ROAD AND ULTIMATELY DOWN, UM, THE BROOK THAT RUNS ALONG THAT AREA AND THEN ULTIMATELY INTO THE, THE HUDSON RIVER.
SO IT'S A, A VERY LARGE CONTRIBUTING WATERSHED.
I'LL TURN THINGS BACK OVER TO THE APPLICANT.
UM, JUST WALK US AND THE, SORRY, COULD I, AARON, COULD I JUST INTERRUPT AND ASK A QUESTION? SURE.
UM, MY, MY UNDERSTANDING FROM, UM, THE DOWN, DOWN SLOPE, UM, NEIGHBORS, UM, CORRESPONDENCE IS THAT THE RUNOFF INTO THEIR PROPERTY WAS AN ISSUE THAT OCCURRED AFTER 13 AND NOT BEFORE.
OR AM I MISUNDERSTANDING THERE? SAY THAT ONE MORE TIME.
MICHELLE, PLEASE AM MY UNDERSTANDING FROM THE HOMEOWNER DOWNHILL OF 19 PINE, SO FROM 17 PINE, IS THAT THE RUNOFF INTO THEIR LAND ONLY STARTED IN 2019.
UM, SO AS I UNDERSTAND IT, THAT WAS THE FIRST VIDEO THAT WE RECEIVED OF THERE BEING AN ISSUE.
WHEN I SPOKE WITH THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNER, UM, EARLIER TODAY, HE INDICATED THAT, UM, HE WAS, LET ME SAY IT THIS WAY, THAT THE WATER THAT HE HAS GOTTEN OF LATE, INCLUDING 2019, INCLUDING 2024, WERE A RESULT OF THE DISTURBANCES THAT TOOK PLACE ON THE PROPERTY.
THAT WAS, THOSE WERE HIS WORDS.
SO, SO THE RUNOFF FOR THE NEIGHBORS DOWN, DOWN THE ROAD FROM 19 PINE WAS BECAUSE OF CHANGES MADE IN 2019, CORRECT.
OR THAT'S HIS TAKE? THAT'S HIS TAKE, YES.
NOW IS THAT 20, IS THERE ANYONE IS A DIFFERENT TAKE? WELL, WE'LL LET THE APPLICANT ENGINEER SPEAK TO THAT.
UM, WHAT I CAN TELL YOU IS THAT THERE WAS WORK DONE WITHOUT NECESSARY AND APPROPRIATE PERMITS.
SO THERE WAS A STOP WORK ORDER ISSUED THERE ALSO, AND I MENTIONED THIS TO, UH, THE NEIGHBOR ON THE PHONE THIS AFTERNOON CURRENTLY, AND AS MR. ANDERSON INDICATED, THERE ARE ABSOLUTELY ZERO, UM, STORMWATER MANAGEMENT FACILITIES ON THE PROPERTY.
AND THE PROPERTY HAS BEEN SITTING, UH, MORE OR LESS IN THIS STATE AWAITING THESE VARIOUS APPROVALS FOR A FEW YEARS NOW.
UM, SO THERE HASN'T BEEN ANY INSTALLATION OF THESE, UH, STONEWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS, WHICH THEY ARE NOW PROPOSING.
WHAT, WHAT CONNECTION WITH THIS PROJECT, WHAT WORK WAS DONE IN 2019 THAT WAS NOT PERMITTED OR PERMITTED? THE GR YOU GOTTA, YOU COME TO THE, TO THE PLEASE IF YOU WANNA TALK, YOU HAVE TO COME TO THE, UH, THANK YOU MICHAEL.
AND JUST STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD.
AND, UM, IT WAS ACTUALLY DONE 2019.
WE HAD A DIFFERENT ENGINEER, BUT THE, UM, THE STOP WORK ORDER WAS ACTUALLY DUE TO THE DRIVEWAY THAT YOU SEE AT THE BOTTOM OF THE DRAWING THERE.
AND IT WAS JUST ORIGINALLY BUILT OVER 30 FEET, WHICH IS THE REGULATION.
UM, SO THEN WE WENT BACK AND REDID IT AND NOW IT'S 30 FEET.
WHAT WORK WORK DID YOU DO IN 2019? DID YOU WIDEN THE DRIVEWAY, NARROW IT, PAVE IT WIDE, WIDENED FROM WHAT TO WHAT? I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY OF ABOUT, I DON'T KNOW.
IT WOULD BE APPROXIMATELY 35 FEET.
IT WAS MUCH A LITTLE BIT WIDER THAN THAT.
YEAH, BECAUSE YOU CAN SEE IT WAS PROBABLY 17, 15 TO 17 BEFORE.
SO THERE, THERE WASN'T ANY SLOW LANDSCAPING WORK IN 2019 IN THE REAR THERE WAS SOME MODIFICATION TO THE REAR YARD.
IS THAT ACCURATE? YEAH, THE VIDEO, THE VIDEO SUBMITTED RIGHT BY THE HOMEOWNER SHOWS THE RUNOFF COMING DOWN FROM THE REAR YARD INTO THE NEAR WHERE THE DRIVEWAY IS.
WE'LL LET THE HOMEOWNER SPEAK TO THAT.
SORRY, WHAT WAS THE QUESTION AGAIN? WAS THERE REAR YARD WORK, WHETHER IT WAS PERMITTED OR NOT MM-HMM
WAS THERE A MANIPULATION OR A MODIFICATION TO THE REAR YARD? YEAH, AS PART OF THE PATIO IN THE BACK.
AS PART OF THE PATIO INSTALLATION? YES.
WHICH YOU HAD A BUILDING PERMIT FOR.
AND DID THAT INVOLVE GRADING? UH, YES.
SO THERE WAS SOME GRADING DONE.
[00:55:01]
ALRIGHT.WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO, JUST FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE MEMBERS THAT DON'T HAVE THE HISTORY OF THE PROJECT, UM, AS WELL AS ANYONE FROM THE PUBLIC THAT'S WATCHING, IF YOU, WE KIND OF JUMPED RIGHT INTO THE CHANGES YOU MADE AND EVERYTHING LIKE THAT, BUT YEAH, IF YOU COULD SPEAK A LITTLE BIT MORE TO OKAY.
WE WERE HIRED AFTER HE DID GET A STEEP SLOPE PERMIT, UH, BACK IN MARCH OF 2020.
A CLEARANCE FORM? YEAH, CLEARANCE FORM.
NEVER CAME TO PLANNING BOARD AT THAT POINT, I GUESS BECAUSE OF, UH, UH, YOU KNOW, DIDN'T DISTURB ENOUGH STEEP SLOPES.
AND THE PLAN AT THAT TIME, UH, WHEN WE RECEIVED IT IS ESSENTIALLY HOW IT'S GRADED NOW.
AND MAYBE IT WAS, UM, UH, WHAT'S CALLED, UH, A LITTLE MORE FOR THE PATIO, BUT, UH, IT DIDN'T SHOW ANYTHING SIGNIFICANT.
UH, WE WERE ASKED AT ONE POINT BY THE, UH, TOWN ENGINEER WHO FELT THAT WE BROUGHT IN PHIL.
SO WE DID, DID DO A STUDY A LITTLE PHIL WAS BROUGHT IN AND HE ASKED US TO GO BACK TO 2004, UH, TOPOGRAPHY, WHICH IS THE AVAILABLE NUMBER OF SOURCES, WHICH IS THE GIS AND EVERYTHING.
AND IT WAS A MUCH STEEPER SLOPE.
BUT, YOU KNOW, THERE WASN'T ANY SIGNIFICANT FILL BROUGHT IN THEN IT, SO AT THAT POINT IT WOULD BE AN IMPROVEMENT.
WHAT WE, WHAT'S THERE NOW FOR IF, IF THAT SLOPE WAS THE WAY IT WAS SUPPOSEDLY IN 2004, UH, THAT WATER WOULD BE, HAVE A REALLY QUICK TIME OF CONCENTRATION AND HAVE A HIGHER FLOW.
SO, SO RIGHT NOW WE'RE PRETTY MUCH WHERE IT WAS FOR THE 2020 STEEP CLEARANCE FORM.
AND WE WENT ONCE FOR STORMWATER REVIEW AND PLANNING BOARD ASKED US TO LOOK AT IT A LOT MORE BECAUSE OF THE FRONT DRIVEWAY.
AND, UH, SO WE, WE DID, I'M SORRY, CAN YOU CLARIFY? YOU SAID THE PLANNING BOARD ASKED YOU YEAH.
LIKE WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? YEAH, DO A, DO A REAL, UH, LIKE A DRAINAGE REPORT, UH, FULL STUDY OF, OF THE FLOWS ON THE PROPERTY.
AND, UH, IT, THERE'S A, THERE IS A, UM, PROGRAM THAT WE USE CALLED HYDRO CAD, WHICH UH, IS, IS ALMOST LIKE A GOVERNMENTAL, UH, TR 55, TR 20.
IT'S AN ENGINEERING, UH, IT'S A STANDARD NEW YORK STATE USES IT D-O-T-D-E-C.
AND UH, YOU KNOW, SO IT'S A GENERAL METHOD.
THEN WE WENT AGAIN TO ZONING BOARD, WHICH FOR AREA VARIANCES AND THEY BROUGHT UP DRAINAGE.
SO WE, UH, WE COMPLIED WITH THAT.
WE, I AGREE WITH THE TERRACING AND PUTTING THE WALL THERE 'CAUSE THAT WOULD PREVENT THAT FLOW OR SLOW MUCH FURTHER THAT, UH, NOW INTO THE NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTY.
AND WE THEN AGAIN, UH, DID ANOTHER STUDY BECAUSE WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE, UH, AND WE EXAMINED ALL THE ROOF LEADERS AND WE'RE, WE'RE, LIKE I SAID, RIGHT NOW IT JUST DUMPS ON THE STREET, BUT UH, NOW WE'RE GOING TO MITIGATE IT BY PUTTING INTO CULTEC SYSTEMS. SO IT'S JUST A QUESTION THAT WE COULD DO OUR PART RIGHT.
MIGHT NOT BE ABLE TO SELL THE NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT WE CAN DO OUR PART TO PREVENT, PREVENT IT FROM GOING FAST DOWN TO THE NEIGHBOR.
SO IS THE, IS THE WATER FROM THAT DRIVEWAY GONNA BE COLLECTED ON EC UH, NO.
THERE'S TOO MUCH ROCK IN THAT SECTION, BUT WE DID A STUDY AS TO WHETHER, YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU DO THE STUDY, YOU DO A CALCULATION OF THE IMPERVIOUS SURFACE AND, AND ANY OF THE GRASS AREA.
SO MOST OF IT GOES STRAIGHT INTO THE CULEX, BUT WHATEVER'S LEFT, HE JUST MAKES SURE THAT THE FLOWS ARE LESS THAN THE PRE-DEVELOPMENT.
SO IF I MAY, UM, YOU KNOW, THE ZONING BOARD LOOKED AT IT AND GRANTED THE VARIANCES, THE PLANNING BOARD HAS LOOKED AT THIS PREVIOUSLY.
UM, AND YOU KNOW, THE PRIMARY CONCERN HERE IS, UM, OR ONE OF THE PRIMARY CONCERNS IS THE FLOWS THAT HAVE BEEN SEEN THROUGH THE VIDEOS TO THE DOWN SLOPE NEIGHBOR WHERE HIS PROPERTY, YOU KNOW, THERE WAS A LOT OF WATER ON THE PROPERTY.
IT LOOKED TO BE LIKE THAT, UH, VIDEO WAS TAKEN OR THE TWO VIDEOS WERE TAKEN DURING A PERIOD WHEN
[01:00:01]
THERE WAS SILT FENCE THAT WAS INSTALLED IMPROPERLY.UM, WITH A LARGE VOLUME OF WATER.
THERE WERE PLANTINGS THAT WERE INSTALLED THAT WERE WASHED OUT.
UM, BUT THAT'S ALL ABSENT THE PROPOSED STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM.
UNITS THAT ARE PROPOSED IN THE REAR YARD, AND THEN THE ONE I BELIEVE IN THE FRONT YARD.
UM, SO I WANT, IF YOU CAN YEAH.
TO EXPLAIN TO THE BOARD THE BENEFIT OF TERRACING.
SO ONE OF THE VIDEOS THAT WAS PROVIDED, AND I THINK EVEN THE PICTURE MM-HMM
MORE SO THAT WAS PROVIDED BY THE NEIGHBOR, SHOWED THAT THE SLOPED LANDSCAPED AREA, WHICH WAS MULCHED AND THERE WERE PLANTINGS AND EVERYTHING INSTALLED AFTER ONE OF THE RAIN EVENTS.
THERE WAS ALSO A CHAIN LINK FENCE THAT KIND OF DELINEATED THE EDGE OF THE LAWN AND THEN THE LANDSCAPING DOWN BELOW DUE TO THAT SIGNIFICANT VOLUME OF WATER, AT LEAST IN THE RAIN EVENT THAT WAS DEPICTED, I THINK JUNE 14TH, 2024.
IT WASHED OUT AND ERODED A FAIRLY SIGNIFICANT PORTION OF THAT LANDSCAPED AREA.
AND I BELIEVE YOU PROBABLY HAD THIS DISCUSSION WITH THE ZONING BOARD BECAUSE ULTIMATELY THEY CONDITIONED THAT YOU TERRACE IT.
SO IF YOU COULD SPEAK TO THE BOARD A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE BENEFITS OF TERRACING IN A LANDSCAPED AREA VERSUS IT JUST HAVING A, A, A ALMOST 45, 35, 40 5% SLOPE.
WELL, ESSENTIALLY A, A RAINDROP FALLS, I MEAN, AND AS IT GOES DOWN THE STEEP SLOPE, IT GATHERS SPEED AND THAT'S WHERE YOU GET THE, THE MAJOR FLOWS.
UM, SINCE WE BEGAN THE PROJECT, UM, THAT RAIN DROP NOW WOULD GO TO A FLAT SURFACE AND THEN DOWN AN INCLINE, BUT TERRACING IT NOW WILL MAKE THE RAIN DROP, HAVE TO STOP, GO DOWN, STOP AND GO DOWN.
SO THAT, THAT CHANGES THE, THE PEAK RUNOFF.
SO IT WOULD REDUCE THE PEAK RUNOFF, UH, FOR THE, FOR THE STORM.
SO WHEN YOU COMPARE IT TO A POST DEVELOPMENT BE A HIGHER NUMBER, I BELIEVE WE WE'RE ABOUT LIKE, UH, 11%.
UH, SO THAT'S, THAT'S THE PURPOSE OF THAT.
AND IF YOU LOOK ON THAT AGAIN ON THAT SCREEN, THE GRAVEL, THE GRAVEL, UM, CURTAIN DRAIN, WHICH WAS SUPPOSED TO PICK UP THE PATIO KIND OF LINES UP WHERE, WHERE THE PROBLEM WAS.
AND RIGHT NOW IF IT FILLS WITH WATER, BUT IT'S GOT NO PLACE TO GO.
AND SO BETWEEN THE TERRACE, THE WALL AND HOOKING IT INTO A STORM WATER SYSTEM, IT'S GONNA REDUCE IT QUITE A BIT.
SO WOULD, WOULD IT BE FAIR TO SAY THAT THE CURTAIN DRAIN THAT WAS INSTALLED WAS YEAH.
IMPROPERLY INSTALLED? NO, IT'S, IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE HOOKED UP ORIGINALLY TO A CULTEC OR STUFF.
BUT IT, BECAUSE IT'S STOP WORK ORDER CAN'T DO ANYTHING, YOU KNOW, SO.
SO IT, IT IS CURRENTLY NOT HOOKED UP.
NOT, IT IS NOT HOOKED UP TO A UNIT.
SO WHEN A, WHEN, SO IT OVERFLOWS, IT JUST WILL RUN DOWNHILL, JUST RUN RUNNING DOWNHILL.
SO, SO DO YOU NEED THIS BOARD FINAL APPROVAL TO HOOK UP ALL OF THE DRAINER SYSTEM? YEAH.
THAT'S PART OF THE STEEP SLOPE FROM IT.
UH, ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS REGARDING THE STORM DRAINS AND, AND THE STORM WATER PLAN THAT THEY'RE GOING TO INSTALL? MICHELLE? YEP.
SO IN THE, IN THE DRAINAGE REPORT WITH THIS PROPOSED, UM, STORM WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN, I THINK, UM, FOR THE BACKYARD YOU'RE EXPECTING A 16 OR 17% DECREASE IN RUNOFF.
THAT, THAT'S CALCULATIONS TO SHOWING BECAUSE WE, WE'VE, UH, PUT IN THE DRAINAGE PATH AND WE USE THE STANDARD, UH, TR 55 TR 20 AND THAT'S WHAT'S SHOWING US YES.
SO I, I I AM SORRY, I'M AGAIN REFERRING TO THE JUNE VIDEO, WHICH WAS LIKE A HALF INCH OF BRAIN OR THREE QUARTERS OF AN INCH OVER TWO HOURS.
IF YOU'RE ONLY REDUCING THAT FLOW BY 16 OR 17%, WELL IT'S, LIKE I SAID, WE CAN'T CURE THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, AND THAT'S WHAT'S HAPPENING.
THE NEIGHBORHOODS HAVING OVER THE PAST COUPLE OF YEARS, MAJOR STORMS AND, AND IT ALL, YEAH.
THAT'S NOT, THAT'S NOT A MAJOR STORM THOUGH, RIGHT? A HALF INCH STORM ISN'T A MAJOR STORM.
UM, THE WAY IT'S BEEN ACTIVE, WELL, ON THAT STREET WITH MOUNT PLEASANT LANE, WHEN IT COMES FLYING DOWN, IT, IT'S, IT'S A GOOD RAIN AND IT'S A LARGE DRAINAGE BASIN.
SO, YOU KNOW, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, BUT I BELIEVE PREVIOUSLY IT WAS DISCUSSED THAT YOU WERE BUILDING IT
[01:05:01]
TO A HUNDRED YEAR STORM INSTEAD OF THE OH, YES.WE, WE DESIGNED TO A HUNDRED YEAR STORM.
SO, WHICH IS, WHICH IS NINE INCHES OF RANGE.
BUT, BUT THAT 9.2 INCHES STILL FROM THE NORTH EXPERIENCE THAT COMES BETWEEN, SHE DOESN'T UNDERSTAND THAT THE WAS 17% INCREASE YES.
IF THAT, THAT'S HOW THE PROGRAM WORKS.
I'VE BEEN DOING IT FOR 40 YEARS AND THAT'S, BUT WE CAN'T SOLVE THE NEIGHBORHOOD PROBLEM, THE DRAINAGE BASIN GOES.
BUT, BUT I, WHAT I THINK I'M STILL HAVING A TOUGH TIME WITH IS THERE'S THE NEIGHBORHOOD CATCH BASIN PROBLEM, AND THERE WAS THIS PROBLEM FROM 2019 AND ONLY SOLVING THE 2019 PROBLEM BY REDUCING IT BY 17%.
DOES THAT HELP THE NEIGHBOR? YEAH.
THAT 17%, THAT PERCENT OF WATER IS NOT COMING THERE ANYMORE.
SO SPEAKING, I SHOULD SPEAK TO THE CODE.
I SHOULD SPEAK TO THE CODE BRIEFLY.
UM, AND WE DID SUBMIT A RESPONSE.
I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO SEE IT, MICHELLE, BUT, UM, THE CODE REQUIREMENT FOR STORMWATER MANAGEMENT IS THAT THERE BE ZERO NET INCREASE.
SO I JUST WANNA FINISH MY THOUGHT IF I CAN.
UM, SO THE, YOU KNOW, THE TOWN ENGINEER WHEN, UH, STONEWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS, UM, PROPOSED AND THEY RUN THE DRAINAGE CALCULATIONS IN THE REPORTS AS THE APPLICANT HAS DONE HERE, YOU KNOW, THE TOWN ENGINEER HAS TO LOOK AND IS CHARGED WITH ENSURING THAT THERE'S NO NET INCREASE FROM PRE-EXISTING CONDITIONS.
SO, BUT WHAT THE TOWN ENGINEER SAID WAS, LOOK, WE WANT YOU TO LOOK AT THE PRE-EXISTING CONDITIONS BEFORE THEY CONDUCTED THIS DISTURBANCE.
AND GO BACK TO THE 2000 FOURS, UM, TOPOGRAPHY, WHICH THEY DID.
THEY EVALUATED THAT, THEY EVALUATED THE 2019.
OBVIOUSLY THERE APPEARS TO BE AN ISSUE WITH THE FACT THAT THERE WAS A DRAIN INSTALLED ALONG THE EDGE OF THE PATIO THAT WAS NEVER HOOKED UP INTO ANYTHING.
AND THE APPLICANTS DID PROVIDE A VIDEO THAT SHOWS WHEN THAT DRAIN FILLS UP, IT OVERFLOWS AND THE PITCH OF THE PROPERTY GOES TOWARDS THE NEIGHBOR.
SO IT WOULD ONLY BE REASONABLE TO ASSUME THAT WHEN THAT, UM, WHEN THAT, THAT THAT DRAIN FILLS UP AND OVERFLOWS, IT STARTS TO PITCH ACROSS THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY TOWARDS THE DOWN SLOPE NEIGHBOR.
SO WITH ALL THAT SAID, WE MET WITH THE TOWN ENGINEER YESTERDAY AND TODAY, AND HE WAS ABLE TO CONFIRM THAT THE PROPOSAL MEETS AND OR EXCEEDS THE CODE REQUIREMENT.
UM, THERE WILL BE A STONEWATER IF THIS PROJECT MOVES FORWARD.
THERE WILL BE A STONEWATER MANAGEMENT CONTROL PERMIT REQUIRED, UH, TO BE OBTAINED OR SUBMITTED TO THE TOWN ENGINEER AND OBTAINED BY THE APPLICANT PRIOR TO OBTAINING A BUILDING PERMIT.
AND AT THAT TIME, HE WILL ENSURE THAT THE DESIGN, UH, MEETS OR EXCEEDS THE CODE.
CAN, CAN I JUST SAY ONE THING ABOUT THE VIDEO? UM, PLEASE.
YOU, YOU'RE REALLY SEEING THERE A POINT DISCHARGE BECAUSE IT LOOKS TO ME LIKE THE GROUND FAILED.
A LITTLE DIVOT CAME OUT TOP OF SLOPE.
SO ALL THAT WATER'S GOING TO HAVE A, WHAT WE CALL POINT DISCHARGE.
IT'S LIKE A PIPE AND IT'S SHOOTING THE WATER OUT.
BUT ONCE WE GET THE TERRACING IN THAT, THE ZONING BOARD RECOMMENDED, UH, IT WILL BE KIND OF LIKE A SHEET FLOW.
IT'S ACTUALLY SHALLOW CONCENTRATED FLOW, BUT IT'S NOT A POINT DISCHARGE, WHICH IS MORE, MORE CORROSIVE THAN A SHALLOW CONCENTRATED FLOW OR A SHEET FLOW.
SO IT ALMOST LIKE CHANNELIZED.
I BELIEVE THAT'S WHAT HAPPENED.
I I I'M SORRY IF I MAY, A COUPLE OF THINGS.
YOU TALKED ABOUT THE TERRACE THING.
WELL, I WANNA GO TO MICHELLE'S POINT AND KIND OF COMBINE IT WITH YOUR POINT IN TERMS OF SOLVING FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, IF YOU ARE TO CODE OR EXCEEDING CODE ON YOUR PROPERTY, THEN MY QUESTION IS, UM, WITH THE INCREASE, BECAUSE YOU KNOW, WE'VE MOVED FROM 25 TO 50 TO A HUNDRED YEAR STORMS WITH THAT INCREASE, WHAT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY OTHER, UH, PROPERTIES AROUND THERE TO MAYBE INCREASE THEIR ABILITY TO TAKE ON WATER? AND IS THAT, WOULD THAT BE PART OF IT? NOT THAT WE'RE SOLVING FOR THAT TODAY, BUT
SO THE CODE, YOU KNOW, WE CAN ONLY, UM, WE CAN'T GO IN AND MANDATE THAT PEOPLE UPGRADE THEIR STONE WATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS WHO ARE INSTALL A SYSTEM ON A PROPERTY WHERE ONE'S NOT PRESENT IN A SITUATION LIKE THIS.
THERE WERE, THERE ARE NO SYSTEMS PRESENT ON THE PROPERTY TODAY, ON THAT PROPERTY.
BUT THEY CAME INTO THE TOWN, THEY WERE SEEKING PERMITS AND APPROVALS AND THE TOWN NOW HAS THE ABILITY
[01:10:01]
TO SPEAK WITH THE APPLICANT ABOUT INSTALLING A SYSTEM.THEY WERE AGREEABLE TO THE INSTALLATION OF A SYSTEM.
THEY HAVE TO DEMONSTRATE THAT THEY MEET THE CODE REQUIREMENT.
AND THEY'RE IN THE PROCESS OF DOING THAT.
UM, WE CAN'T GO OUT TO OTHER, NO PROPERTY OWNERS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND REQUEST THAT IT BE DONE.
BUT ONE THING, AND EVEN MICHAEL SAID, MAYBE THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY TO WALK MOUNT PLEASANT LANE AND PINE LANE WITH OUR DPW TO SEE IF THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY WHERE THERE MIGHT BE SOME CURBING ISSUES AND TO SEE IF WE CAN, UM, YOU KNOW, IMPROVE UPON THAT TO GET, BECAUSE WHAT APPEARS TO BE HAPPENING IS ROAD WATER, POTENTIALLY AN UPHILL WATERS NOT MAKING ITS WAY INTO THE SYSTEMS ALONG THE ROADWAYS BECAUSE THERE MIGHT BE BLOCKS OF CURB MISSING AND THEN IT'S SHOOTING ONTO PRIVATE PROPERTY AND ACROSS PRIVATE PROPERTY AND ONTO OTHER PRIVATE PROPERTIES.
SO WE WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY IF THERE IS AN ISSUE TO CORRECT THAT.
IF IT IS, I CAN'T SAY THAT THERE IS.
BUT WE'RE GONNA TAKE A LOOK AT THE AREA AND SEE IF THERE'S A CURB STONE MISSING.
MAYBE IT'S SOMETHING WE CAN REPLACE AND THAT MIGHT IMPROVE UPON THE SITUATION.
SO THE QUESTION IS, WITHIN ALL OF THE PARAMETERS THAT WERE LAID OUT FOR THIS PROPERTY ON THIS APPLICANT, 2311, THAT IS WHAT HE'S MEETING.
AND SO SOME OF THE EXTRA ADDITIONAL WATER MAY NOT BE SOMETHING THAT HE CAN CONTROL AT THIS TIME.
I MEAN, I THINK MR. ANDERSON MENTIONED THEY CAN DEMONSTRATE THAT WITH RESPECT TO THEIR SITE.
AND WHAT THEY'RE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE POST-DEVELOPMENT CONDITION.
IF THE PROJECT IS APPROVED, EVEN UP TO A 100 YEAR STORM EVENT, WHICH IS EXCEEDING THE CODE REQUIREMENT, EVEN THOUGH THE PLANNING BOARD OFTEN ASKS APPLICANTS TO EXCEED, YOU KNOW, IF THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY TO EXCEED THE CODE REQUIREMENT, THEY'RE DEMONSTRATING THAT THERE WOULD BE A REDUCTION EVEN WITH A HUNDRED YEAR STORM EVENT FOR WHAT THEY'RE RESPONSIBLE FOR.
THEY CAN'T BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE ENTIRE AND DRAINAGE AREA.
WHEN YOU SAY, UM, WHEN I'M STILL NOT CLEAR ON ARE WE, IS THERE A 16 OR 17% REDUCTION AGAINST TODAY'S CONDITIONS, OR 2000 FOURS CONDITIONS OR 2000 NINETEENS CONDITIONS? SO I WOULD HAVE TO ASK THE TOWN ENGINEER SPECIFICALLY.
'CAUSE I THOUGHT, UM, MR. ANDERSON, YEAH.
WELL, IN 2004, IF IT WAS THAT CONDITION, IT'D BE WORSE, RIGHT? IT WOULD, IT IT'S A STEEP SLOPE AND IT WOULD'VE JUST KEPT GOING.
YOU KNOW, I, I THINK, I THINK WE SHOULD ALSO BEAR IN MIND THAT UP UNTIL NOW, THE WATER ON THE ROOF AND THROUGH THE LITERS AND GUTTERS WENT RIGHT ONTO THE GROUND, RIGHT? YES.
AND AFTER THIS STORM SYSTEM IS INSTALLED, ALL OF THAT WATER WAS DIRECTED INTO CALEX.
WHICH IS A FAIRLY SIGNIFICANT SQUARE FOOTAGE.
I DID HAVE ONE QUESTION ON THE PLANS.
'CAUSE I REMEMBER WHEN YOU'D COME TO THE PLANNING BOARD THE FIRST TIME AND THERE WAS DISCUSSION ABOUT THE DRIVEWAY AND WHETHER YOU COULD PUT CULT X IN, AND I THINK WE TALKED ABOUT THE FACT THAT THERE WAS A LIMESTONE OR, OR SHALLOW ROCK AND YOU WEREN'T ABLE TO DO THAT.
AND I THINK THE TOWN ENGINEER HAD RECOMMENDED OTHER POTENTIAL PRACTICES, MAYBE PLANTS ALONG THE EDGE THAT COULD ABSORB WATER.
I DON'T KNOW IF THAT WAS POSSIBLE EITHER BASED UPON THE EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY, BUT IT LOOKS LIKE IN LOOKING AT THIS, UH, I THINK IT'S SHEET TWO OKAYS P TWO, THERE'S A SWALE ALONG THE EDGE OF THE PROPERTY.
IS THAT ON THE, IS THAT EXISTING OR IS THAT BELIEVE THAT'S EXISTING? UH, SWALE THERE? I CAN BRING IT UP.
YEAH, I BRING IT UP FOR A SECOND.
AMANDA, WHEREABOUTS? SO IT IS BOTTOM LEFT.
WHAT SHEET NUMBER? SHEET NUMBER.
YEAH, THAT'S ON THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY.
THAT SHOULDN'T BE THERE BECAUSE YOU CAN'T TOUCH THAT AREA.
YEAH, I MEAN, THE WAY I WOULD READ THIS YEAH.
WOULD BE, IT'S A SWALE PITCHING IN TOWARDS THE NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTY.
YEAH, THAT'S DEFINITELY, UH, COULD YOU ZOOM ON IN FOR A SECOND? IT'S DEFINITELY SHOULD BE GOING THE OTHER WAY.
'CAUSE THE, THE BOTTOM OF WALL'S AT 3 0 8 3 AND YOU KNOW, THE STREET'S PRACTICALLY FLAT AND THAT'S ON THE NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTY.
SO I DON'T THINK THERE'S, I THINK THAT'S JUST A DRAFTING,
[01:15:01]
DRAFTING ERROR.IT'S A ELEVATION SHOW THAT'S SLOPING, UH, TOWARDS THE, TOWARDS THE STREET.
SO, YOU KNOW, SPOT ELEVATIONS THERE AND OKAY.
DOES THAT ANSWER THE QUESTION? WE, WE CAN'T TOUCH THAT AREA, BUT BASED ON OUR SURVEYED SPOT ELEVATIONS, IT GOES TOWARDS THE STREET.
AND THE LEFT HAND SIDE OF THIS DRAWING IS HOW IT PRE-EXISTED AND THE RIGHT HAND SIDE IS YES.
SO THIS INCLUDES ALL THE LANDSCAPING YEAH.
AND YOU CAN SEE WE COULD PUT LANDSCAPING ABOVE THE, THAT NEW TERRORIST WALL.
AND, UH, IF I MAY, REGARDING THE TERRACE.
HOW, I GUESS THAT WOULD BE THE RUN, IS THAT WHAT YOU CALL IT? IT'S KIND OF LIKE STEPS.
HOW DEEP IS IT? UH, WE KEPT IT BELOW 24 INCHES, I BELIEVE 24 INCHES ARE, ARE, YOU KNOW, THE, THE TERRACE IS, IS JUST 24 INCHES, I BELIEVE.
AND THEN WHAT'S THE RUN? SO IT'S PROBABLY FOUR FEET, FOUR, BUT IT GETS CLOSE TO THE EXISTING WALL, SO, AND IT COULD GET UP TO SIX FEET.
SEE IF YOU, IF THE, THAT NEW TERRACE WALL THAT WE ADDED FOR, FOR THE ZONING BOARD MM-HMM
IT MIGHT EVEN BE 10 FEET THERE, UM, AT THAT END.
AND THEN IT KIND OF IS FOUR FEET FROM THE END OF THE EXISTING WALL THAT'S THERE NOW AND CONTINUES ON A LITTLE BIT MORE BEYOND THE REAR.
SEE THE LINE WITH ABOVE THE SEA, THAT WOULD BE THE REAR PROPERTY LINE OF THE PERSON NEXT DOOR.
SO IT WOULD, THAT WALL WOULD CONTINUE ON AND, YOU KNOW, AND THIS, THIS WALL EXISTS THAT CROSSED THE PROPERTY LINE.
AND LIKE I SAID, I THINK THE POINT DISCHARGE WAS IN LINE WITH THE CURTAIN DRAIN AND THAT'S BECAUSE IT WAS FILLING UP AND JUST STRAIGHT, YOU KNOW, SENDING IT OUT.
SO YOUR BELIEF IS THAT WHEN THIS YEAH.
OVERFILLED RIGHT NOW AS, AS EXISTED, IT FILLS OUT ACROSS YEAH.
AND THEN DOWN ONTO THE NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTY.
AND I DID ASK THE NEIGHBOR WHEN I SPOKE WITH HIM THIS AFTERNOON IF, BECAUSE THE VIDEO THAT WAS PROVIDED AND THE PHOTOS PROVIDED WERE FROM JUNE, 2024, IF HE WAS AWARE OF THIS HAPPENING SINCE THEN.
AND HE DID INDICATE THAT HE HASN'T, BUT HE ALSO INDICATED, WHICH IS ACCURATE, THAT, YOU KNOW, IT WAS QUITE A DRY SPELL.
THAT'S QUITE, QUITE A DRY SPELL FOR A SIGNIFICANT NUMBER OF MONTHS.
SO WHO, UH, WHO INSTALLED THE RETAINING WALL THAT IS ON BOTH SIDES OF THE PROPERTY LINE AND HOW LONG? HOW LONG HAS IT BEEN THERE? YEAH, HOW DO YOU, WAS THERE WHEN YOU PURCHASED THE BRO? YEAH, THAT, THAT I WOULDN'T KNOW.
THAT'S NOT, THAT'S NOT NEW FOR SECOND.
WHEN, WHEN DID YOU PURCHASE, WHEN DID THEY PURCHASE THE PROPERTY? 2017.
AND, AND WHAT'S THE CONDITION OF THE, OF THE RETAINING WALL? UH, IT'S IN GOOD CONDITION.
IT'S NOT IN VALUE OR ANYTHING.
SO ARE THERE WEED HOLES IN THE EXISTING RETAINING WALL?
IT'S NOT HIGH ENOUGH REALLY FOR AN ENGINEERING, UH, ANYTHING UNDER FOUR FEET.
YOU REALLY DON'T HAVE TO DO AN ENGINEERING DRAWING FOR IN THE OLD DAYS.
UH, SO WHETHER IT HAS ANY DRAINAGE WE PULLS YEAH.
IS IS THERE AN EASEMENT OR LIKE, WHO, WHO, WHO OWNS THE WALL THAT'S, YOU KNOW, IT COULD HAVE BEEN THERE FOR 50 YEARS.
A HUNDRED? WELL, NOT A HUNDRED, BUT, YOU KNOW, COULD BE, COULD HAVE BEEN THERE QUITE SOME TIME.
SO ABSENT AND EASEMENT, IT WOULD BE FOR THE PORTION THAT'S ON YOUR CLIENT'S PROPERTY, THAT PORTION WOULD BE THEIR RESPONSIBILITY.
AND THEN ONCE IT CROSSES THE PROPERTY LINE, THE OTHER PORTION WOULD BE THE DOWNHILL SLOPE PAPER.
IF THERE AREN'T ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, WE'RE GONNA OPEN IT UP FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.
SORRY, I JUST, I I, I'M STUCK IN THIS ONE.
THE, THE, THE REQUIREMENT IS NO NET INCREASE.
WE KNOW THAT THERE'S A 16 OR 17% DECREASE FROM THE BACKYARD, BUT WE DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S AGAINST 2004 2019 OR 2024.
AM I CORRECT IN SAYING THAT? SO IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING, REVIEWED IT AND WE CAN HAVE HIM RESPOND IN WRITING, BUT THE, IT WOULD BE FROM PRIOR TO THE INSTALLATION OF THE IMPROVEMENTS IN 2019.
SO I CA I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S EXACTLY FROM 2004, BUT BASED UPON THAT'S HOW THEY WOULD RUN THE, THE, UM, COMPARISON.
[01:20:01]
THE AMOUNT OF RUNOFF COLLECTED.WHEN THERE'S WORK DONE THAT'S UNAUTHORIZED, THEY LIKE TO SEE WHAT, LIKE TO SEE WHAT THE TOPOGRAPHY AND THE, UM, LAYOUT OF THE SITE WAS PRIOR TO.
SO THAT'S PROBABLY WHY THEY HAD THE PROJECT TEAM ENGINEER LOOK AT TOPOGRAPHY FROM 2004, BECAUSE THAT'S READILY AVAILABLE IN THE WESTCHESTER COUNTY GIS.
SO YEAH, I BELIEVE THAT TO BE THE CASE.
AND LIKE I SAID, IF I USE THAT NUMBER, IT WILL BE MUCH HIGHER THE PRE PRE-DEVELOPMENT RUNOFF TO, IN, INTO WHAT IT IS NOW.
SO, SO IT WOULDN'T BE 16 OR 17% YOU'RE SAYING IT WOULD BE HIGHER? YEAH, IT WOULD PROBABLY BE HIGHER.
IT'D PROBABLY BE, UH, NOT AS SIGNIFICANT IN, IN THE DECREASE 'CAUSE ALL RIGHT.
THAT, THAT CONFLICTS A LITTLE WITH THE YEAH.
SO THE 16 OR 17% YOU USED, WHICH NUMBER TO CALCULATE THAT? WHICH, WHICH TOPOGRAPHY? UH, WE USED THE ONE OF THE STEEP SLOPE CLEAR.
WELL, ESSENTIALLY THE, WHAT'S, WHAT'S THERE, THAT PRETTY MUCH IS IN LINE WITH THE 2020 APPROVED STEEP SLOPE CLEARANCE.
SO, SO THE, THE STEEP SLOPE CLEARANCE WITH, WHICH SHOWED THE PRE-EXISTING CONDITION.
THAT WAS PRIOR TO THE DISTURBANCE TAKING PLACE.
SO, AND IN THAT 2020 STEEP SLOPE CLEARANCE FORM, ASSUMING THE PROPERTY HADN'T CHANGED IN THE REAR BETWEEN 2004 AND 2020, YEAH.
YEAH, THAT WOULD, IT'S PRETTY MUCH THERE.
I MEAN, TOPOGRAPHY SURVEYING, YOU HAVE A DISCREPANCY.
YOU CAN HAVE A, A DIFFERENCE OF A HALF A FOOT.
IT'S ALLOWABLE BY THE STANDARDS FOR LAND SURVEYING OR A TOPOGRAPHY
SO WITH THAT SAID, I THINK ONLY BECAUSE IT WOULD BE WORTHWHILE TO GET A DIRECT ANSWER TO MICHELLE, EVEN IF, AND WE STILL HAVE YET TO, UM, SEE IF THERE'S ANY PUBLIC COMMENT, BUT, UM, WHETHER OR NOT THE BOARD DECIDES TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING THIS EVENING, WE WILL CERTAINLY GET A RESPONSE TO MICHELLE ON EXACTLY WHAT YEAR AND, UH, THAT THE TOWN ENGINEER REQUESTED WITH RESPECT TO THE DESIGN OF THE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM AND HOW THIS AND WHICH YEAR THE, UM, 16 TO 17% REDUCTION APPLIES TO.
SO WE'RE GONNA OPEN IT UP FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.
IS THERE ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WISHES TO SPEAK? IS THERE ANYONE ON THE ZOOM CALL THAT WISHES TO SPEAK ON THIS PROJECT? OKAY.
SO WE'RE GONNA CLOSE IT TO SEE THING AND, AND KEEP IT OPEN THE RECORD.
OPEN FOR, SO YEAH, I THINK THERE SHOULD BE JUST A BRIEF POLL OF MEMBERS.
IF IT, IF SO, THE BOARD CAN CHOOSE TO, UH, ADJOURN THE PUBLIC HEARING, OR IT CAN CHOOSE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
LEAVE THE RECORD OPEN FOR ONE WEEK, WHICH IS STANDARD IN THE INTERIM MYSELF.
AND, UH, MS. MAGNA WILL MEET WITH THE TOWN ENGINEER TO GET, UH, AN ANSWER FOR MICHELLE AND TO THE ENTIRE BOARD ON THE 16 TO 17% PRODUCTION.
I HOPE WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND LEAVE THE RECORD OPEN A WEEK.
SO WE, UM, CAN I HAVE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING? AND I JUST MADE IT.
ALL OPPOSED? MICHELLE, YOU'RE IN FAVOR.
I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S, I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOUR DISCUSSION WAS, AARON WAS, WHAT WE'RE DOING? I'M, I I CAN EXPLAIN IT.
SO MICHAEL MADE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS PROJECT TO LEAVE THE WRITTEN RECORD FOR ADDITIONAL COMMENTS OPEN FOR ONE WEEK THROUGH FEBRUARY 12TH.
AND WITH THAT SAID, FOR STAFF TO GET A RESPONSE TO YOUR QUESTION ON, UM, WHAT YEAR THE 16 TO 17% REDUCTION WAS, UM, DIRECTED TOWARDS, WAS IT THE 2020, THE 2 0 0 4? WE WILL GET THAT RESPONSE.
CAN I, BETWEEN NOW AND, AND A WEEK FROM NOW? CAN I JUST SAY THE 2 0 4 WAS ESSENTIALLY TO SEE IF IT NEEDED A FILL PERMIT? 'CAUSE THAT WAS ALSO A QUESTIONABLE AT THE TIME.
AND THAT'S, I BELIEVE, I FORGET WHO WAS THE ENGINEER AT THE TIME.
[01:25:01]
SEE WAS WAS NO, JIM IAN.AND THAT WAS, WHY DON'T YOU DISCUSS THIS AFTER THE MEETING? YEAH, WE CAN DO THAT.
SO THE, IF YOU DIDN'T HEAR THAT, THE PROJECT ENGINEER INDICATED THAT ENGINEERING ACT, OUR BUREAU OF ENGINEERING ACTUALLY WANTED THEM TO PULL THE TOPOGRAPHY FROM 2004 TO COMPARE IT TO THE 2019 2020 BECAUSE HE WASN'T SURE IF PHIL WAS BROUGHT ONTO THE SITE.
THAT WAS THE PURPOSE OF LOOKING AT THE 2004 IN TERMS OF THE DRAINAGE SYSTEM.
THAT WAS BASED OFF, THAT'S WHAT THE DESIGN, THE, THE TWO DESIGN, THE TWICE REVIEWED DESIGN BY JASON, UH, WAS BASED ON THE 2019, 2020 IS PRE-DEVELOPMENT.
SO THAT'S WHAT IT SHOULD BE IN THIS REPORT.
SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE GONNA GET CONFIRMATION ON FROM THE TOWN ENGINEER.
SO HOW IS MICHELLE VOTING ON THIS MOTION? RIGHT.
SO DO YOU UNDERSTAND IT, IAIN? OKAY.
SO THE RECORD'S OPEN UNTIL FEBRUARY 12TH.
WE'LL ALSO DRAFT UP A DECISION FOR THE BOARD'S CONSIDERATION ON FEBRUARY 19TH.
OKAY, SO OUR NEXT CASE IS PB 24 23 INDY LAB AT 10 53 SAWMILL RIVER ROAD.
GOOD EVENING TO THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE PUBLIC.
IF YOU CAN GIVE US A BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT.
COULD YOU JUST STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD PLEASE? MY NAME IS FRIDA MATOO.
I'M THE FOUNDER AND OWNER OF THE INDY LAB.
UM, IF I MAY, WHILE YOU'RE SETTING UP, IS THERE ANYONE ON ZOOM THAT WISHES TO SPEAK ON THE PROJECT? IF SO, IF YOU COULD USE THE RAISE HAND FUNCTION JUST SO WE CAN GET A SENSE.
'CAUSE THERE ARE A LOT OF PARTICIPANTS, BUT I DON'T KNOW IF THEY ALL WISH TO SPEAK OR IF THEY'RE JUST OBSERVING.
OUR FAMILY IS, THEY'RE HERE TO SUPPORT US, OF COURSE.
WE'LL CERTAINLY GIVE THEM AN OPTION TO SPEAK.
UH, JUST TO PROVIDE A LITTLE BIT OF AN OVERVIEW FOR THE PLANNING BOARD AGAIN AND THE PUBLIC.
THE INDIE LAB IS A PRESCHOOL AND A PARENTING CENTER.
WE'VE WON A GRANT TO BUILD A DAYCARE AT 10 53 SAWMILL RIVER ROAD IN ARDSLEY.
THIS IS THE LOCATION OF THE BUILDING.
THE BUILDING HAS 54 SQUARE FEET FOR OUR SCHOOL.
1900 SQUARE FEET WILL BE USED FOR AN OUTDOOR PLAYGROUND.
AND WE WERE IN FRONT OF THE PLANNING BOARD FOR THAT REASON, FOR THE SITE WORK IN THE EXTERIOR PART OF THE SCHOOL.
THE SCHOOL HAS TWO TODDLER CLASSROOMS, THREE PRESCHOOL CLASSROOMS LICENSED BY OCFS, AND WE PLAN TO BUILD AN OUTDOOR PLAYGROUND THAT WE WILL BE TALKING ABOUT TODAY.
UH, WE HAVE THE CAPACITY FOR 64 FAMILIES IN ORDER TO BUILD THAT OUTDOOR PLAYGROUND.
WE HAVE LOOKED AT, UH, TODAY WE HAVE RALPH TI HERE WHO'S OUR SITE ENGINEER, AND HE'LL SPEAK TO THE EXTERIOR WORK IN MORE DETAIL.
WE HAD TO REMOVE PARKING SPACES TO MAKE SPACE FOR THE PLAYGROUND TO ALSO MAKE DRIVE AISLES FOR FIRE EMERGENCY VEHICLES, UH, FIRE TRUCKS, POLICE EMERGENCY VEHICLES, THINGS LIKE THAT.
SO WE HAD TO REMOVE 18 PARKING SPACES.
WE, UH, WERE ABLE TO ADD SEVEN BACK IN OTHER PARTS OF THE PARKING AREA.
SO WE HAD A NET LOSS OF 11 PARKING SPACES.
WE WERE ABLE TO RESERVE WITH OUR LANDLORD, 10 FOR SCHOOL DROP OFF.
AND BECAUSE WE HAVE DIFFERENT PROGRAMS THAT END AT DIFFERENT TIMES OF THE DAY, WE CAN MANAGE THE PICKUP TIMES FOR STUDENTS WITH BE MORE EASE AT DIFFERENT TIMES OF THE DAY, WHICH INCLUDE 3:00 PM 4:00 PM 5:00 PM 6:00 PM THE SITE REQUIRES 145 OFF STREET PARKING SPACES.
WE WILL BE PROVIDING 154, WHICH MEETS CODE.
THIS IS THE OUTDOOR PLAYGROUND, UH, WHICH IS A CONCEPT DESIGN.
UH, IT'S NOT THE BUILDING ITSELF, BUT IT'S JUST AN IDEA TO GIVE YOU WHERE WE HAVE REDUCED
[01:30:01]
OUR IMPERVIOUS SPACE FROM 52.6% TO 51.5, WHERE 65 IS PERMITTED BY CODE.THAT'S JUST A BRIEF INTRODUCTION, SO I'LL LEAVE IT NOW TO RALPH TO SHARE SOME PLANS AND THE ACTUAL SITE WORK.
UH, RALPH ZEDI, THE ENGINEER FOR THE PROJECT.
UM, I WILL SHARE MY DRAWINGS FOR EVERYONE.
SO THAT'S THE EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN.
UM, JUST TO ORIENT EVERYONE, SAWMILL RIVER ROAD IS ON THE TOP OF THE SHEET.
UM, THE BUILDING IS IN THIS LOCATION AND OUR WORK AREA IS OUTLINED BY THIS DASHED, UM, BOX IN THIS AREA.
AND THE SECOND PAGE KIND OF ZOOMS IN ON THAT.
SO THE INDIE LAB WILL TAKE THIS PORTION OF THE BUILDING HERE WHERE MY CURSOR IS, IF EVERYONE CAN SEE THAT.
UM, AND THEN WE'RE GONNA HAVE TWO DOORS OPENING UP INTO A, UH, PLAYGROUND, WHICH WILL HAVE, UH, A FENCE IN PLAYGROUND WITH, UM, THERE'LL BE GATES ON THAT ALSO WITH, UM, LATCHES, UM, THAT WILL LET KIDS OUT IN CASE OF AN EMERGENCY.
UM, AS FRIDA SAID, WE ARE REMOVING SOME PARKING SPACES ON THE REAR, UH, CURB LINE.
UM, THAT IS TO, UM, ALLOW FOR THE REQUIRED DRIVE AISLE THAT THAT WILL MEET CODE.
UM, IN REMOVING THOSE SPACES, WE, WE KIND OF SHIFT AROUND SOME OTHER SPACES.
WE ADD SOME, AND WE DO HAVE A SLIGHT REDUCTION ON WHAT'S THERE NOW, BUT WE ARE STILL OVER THE REQUIRED FOR THE ENTIRE SITE.
UM, THE CURB LINE IS ALSO BEING PUSHED BACK APPROXIMATELY THREE AND A HALF FEET.
UM, AS FRIDA SAID, THERE IS A REDUCTION IN THE IMPERVIOUS AREA IN THE, IN THE ENTIRE SITE.
UM, IT'S APPROXIMATELY 1200 TO 1300 SQUARE FEET.
UM, WE DON'T REQUIRE ANY VARIANCES.
THERE'S MINOR SITE WORK OTHER THAN THE CURB, A LITTLE BIT OF DRAINAGE WORK, JUST, UH, UM, TO REMOVE A TOP OF A CATCH BASIN AND PUT A FLAT TOP INSTEAD OF A CURB BOX.
UM, THINGS LIKE THAT HERE TO ANSWER.
ANY QUESTIONS? I TWO BUMPING THE CURB OUT THREE AND A HALF FEET.
IS THAT INTO EXISTING LAWN AREA, WOODED AREA? UM, WHAT EXISTS NOW? WHAT EXISTS NOW? IT'S, UM, IT'S WEEDS.
IT'S NOT, THERE'S NO TREES ARE GONNA BE COMING DOWN.
IT'S SOME GRAVEL DEBRIS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
UH, SECOND QUESTION IS, OR SECOND POINT, UH, STAFF IDENTIFIED THAT DUE TO SOME OF THE MODIFICATIONS IN THE PARKING LOT WAS IDENTIFIED THAT THAT ROW OF PARKING ON THE LEFT HAND SIDE OF THE BUILDING AS SHOWN ON THE DRAWING WOULD, UM, INVOLVE SIX 15 OR MORE PARKING SPACES WITHOUT A LANDSCAPED CURVED ISLAND, WHICH IS A REQUIREMENT UNDER OUR CODE.
UM, SO WE WANTED TO HAVE THAT ON THE RECORD.
UH, WHAT STAFF HAS IDENTIFIED AS WHILE YOU DO NOT HAVE A LANDSCAPED CURVED ISLAND ON THAT SIDE, YOU HAVE PROPOSED A LANDSCAPED CURVED AREA TO THE RIGHT HAND SIDE WHERE YOUR CURSOR IS NOW WITH TWO NEW TREES BEING PLANTED.
AND STAFF WOULD BE RECOMMENDING TO THE BOARD THAT IT CONSIDER ISSUING THAT WAIVER GIVEN THAT YOU ARE PROPOSING A LANDSCAPED ISLAND TO MEET THE SPIRIT OF THE CODE WITH RESPECT TO HAVING LANDSCAPING WITHIN PARKING AREAS.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD MEMBERS? NO.
AND YOU SAID THERE'S NO PUBLIC COMMENT.
IS THERE ANYONE ON ZOOM THAT WISHES TO SPEAK? SO IF THE BOARD APPROVES, I'D LIKE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC COMMENTS.
SO, UM, JUST TO REITERATE WHAT WAS KIND OF DISCUSSED AT THE LAST WORK SESSION, UM, THE BOARD DISCUSSED WITH THE APPLICANT IF THERE WASN'T ANY SIGNIFICANT PUBLIC COMMENT MADE, THAT THE BOARD WOULD CONSIDER CLOSING THE PUBLIC HEARING THIS EVENING, CLOSING THE WRITTEN RECORD PERIOD.
SO NOT EXTENDING THAT AND KEEPING IT OPEN FOR ONE WEEK LIKE WE JUST DID IN THAT OTHER CASE THAT WAS BEFORE THE BOARD, AND THEN CONSIDERING A DECISION DOWN AS PART OF OUR WORK SESSION THIS EVENING.
SO IF THAT'S THE PLEASURE OF THE BOARD, UM, WE CAN DO THAT.
WE WOULD HAVE A, A MOTION AND A VOTE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS PROJECT WITHOUT KEEPING ANY WRITTEN RECORD PERIOD
[01:35:01]
OPEN.AND THEN WE'D HAVE ANOTHER VOTE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING SESSION OF THIS MEETING.
SO, SO MOVED TO, TO, UH, WELL, SO AARON CAN'T, YOU CAN'T PUT FORTH THE MOTION, CAN YOU? SO I'LL, I'LL, I'LL MAKE THE MOTION.
AND DO WE HAVE A SECOND? AND CAN WE SEE MICHELLE I'LL SECOND.
LET ME, CAN YOU TAKE DOWN THE, UH, SHARE SCREEN? SURE.
SO THIS IS THE MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING I AND WITH NO OPEN WRITTEN RECORD.
SO WE WILL ALSO NOW HAVE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE, UM, THE PUBLIC HEARING THIS EVENING.
SO WE'RE GONNA COME RIGHT BACK DOWN TO THE TABLE.
CAN WE HAVE THE FO CALL AGAIN? UH, DO WE NEED TO NO, NO.
WE CAN GO RIGHT INTO INDIE LAB.
SO RIGHT NOW WE'RE GONNA HAVE A WORK SESSION ON CASE NUMBER PB 24 23 INDIE LAB.
SO I CAN SORT OF LEAD THIS, UM, PLANNING BOARD.
JUST HAD ITS PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS PROJECT, WHICH INVOLVES AN AMENDED SITE PLAN AND PLANNING BOARD LANDSCAPED PARKING ISLAND WAIVER REQUEST FROM THE APPLICANT.
UH, THE PLANNING BOARD HEARING NO, UH, SUBSTANTIVE COMMENTS FROM
[01:40:01]
THE PUBLIC THAT WARRANTED A A, AN ADJOURNMENT OF THE PUBLIC HEARING.IT CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING AS IT PREVIOUSLY DISCUSSED AT ITS PRIOR WORK SESSION.
IF THERE WERE NO SUCH COMMENTS, IT WOULD NOT LEAVE THE WRITTEN RECORD PERIOD OPEN AND WOULD COME BACK INTO WORK SESSION TO CONSIDER A DECISION THIS EVENING.
SO IT HAS DONE THAT AND STAFF CIRCULATED A DRAFT DECISION FOR THE BOARD'S CONSIDERATION.
THERE ARE A COUPLE OF VOTES THAT WOULD TAKE PLACE THIS EVENING.
UH, I'LL GO THROUGH ALL OF THEM AND THEN WE CAN GO BACK AND GET ALL THE MOTIONS.
THE FIRST WOULD BE TO, UH, CLASSIFY THE PROPOSED ACTION AS A TYPE TWO ACTION.
SECOND WOULD BE TO CONSIDER THE AMENDED SITE PLAN APPLICATION.
THIRD WOULD BE TO CONSIDER THE PLANNING BOARD LANDSCAPED PARKING ISLAND WAIVER REQUEST.
UM, IN TERMS OF CONDITIONS, THERE REALLY AREN'T, UM, ANY TO BRING UP THAT ARE OUT OF THE ORDINARY.
UM, WE NOTE THAT THE APPLICANT'S REQUIRED TO OBTAIN THE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT CONTROL PERMIT, UM, THAT LIGHTING'S TO BE DARK SKY COMPLIANT, THAT WITH RESPECT TO TREE PROTECTION AND LANDSCAPING THAT IT CONFORMS WITH THE PLANS.
BUT THERE ARE NO OTHER SUBSTANTIVE COMMENTS THAT WERE, UM, IN NEED OF ME BRINGING UP.
SO IT'S UP TO THE BOARD IF IT WANTS TO MOVE FORWARD.
BUT AGAIN, THE TYPE TWO ACTION WOULD BE FIRST, WHICH IS A SECRET DETERMINATION FOLLOWED BY AMENDED SITE PLAN, AND THEN THE PARKING LOT ISLAND WAIVER.
IN RE IN REFERENCE TO CLASSIFYING THIS AS A TYPE TWO ACTION, I'D LIKE TO MOVE THAT WE CLASSIFIED AS A TYPE TWO ACTION UNDER SEEGER.
THE NEXT THING IS THE, UM, THE LANDSCAPE PARKING ISLAND WAIVER.
DO WE NEED TO VOTE ON THAT? YES.
WE NEED TO VOTE ON THE LANDSCAPE PARKING ALL IN WAIVER.
AND I'D LIKE TO, UM, MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE THE WAIVER.
AND THE LAST ONE IS THE AMENDED SITE PLAN, AND I THINK THAT WAS IN, WITHIN THE DOCUMENT THAT YOU GAVE US, RIGHT? ABSOLUTELY.
SO THE AMENDED SITE PLAN, AND I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE THE AMENDED SITE PLAN.
DID WE HEAR MR. MICHELLE? THERE'S A LITTLE DELAY.
WE WILL FINALIZE THE DECISION AND LOOK TO GET IT OFF TO YOU BY WEEKS END.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR ALL OF YOUR HELP AND YOUR SUPPORT AND WE APPRECIATE IT.
AND I JUST WANNA COMMEND THE STAFF.
I KNOW THAT THIS WAS ON A, A SLIGHTLY EXPEDITED TIMELINE AND, UM, WHEN THE APPLICANT FIRST CAME TO US THERE, THERE WAS SOME DEADLINES AND, UM, I, I COMMEND THE STAFF FOR DOING EVERYTHING IT COULD TO STAY ON THAT TIMELINE AS, AS WELL AS MY COLLEAGUES ON THE BOARD.
I THANK SO MUCH TO MATT BURTON AND, UH, ALL OF YOU TO HELP US GET THERE AS A SCHOOL.
IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT AND I KNOW OUR FAMILY IS ONLINE.
THE NEXT CASE IS CASE NUMBER PB 2326, WHITE PLAINS FOUR 50 RE REALTY.
SO, UM, AS MR. VI WALKS UP TO THE MIC, I, I JUST WANTED TO NOTE THAT THIS PROJECT IS ON FOR CONSIDERATION OF A DECISION ON THE PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION APPLICATION, BUT IT WILL MAKE SENSE FOR MR. ALI FOR THOSE THAT WEREN'T ON THE BOARD WHEN THIS WAS LAST BEFORE.
AS TO BRIEFLY EXPLAIN THE NEED, UM, FOR THE REASON WHY THE PLANS WERE MODIFIED AND THEY HAD TO GO BACK TO THE ZONING BOARD.
I THINK IT COULD PROBABLY BE DISCUSSED WITHIN A COUPLE OF MINUTES JUST TO BRING EVERYONE UP TO SPEED.
IF WE NEED TO SHARE A PLAN, WE WILL TO SHOW.
AND THEN, UM, I CAN WALK THE BOARD THROUGH IF IT'S DESIRES TO MOVE FORWARD WITH, UH, DECISION THIS EVENING.
AS YOU KNOW, INTRODUCE YOURSELF.
WOULD YOU LIKE TO BRING THE PLAN? Y YEAH, I THINK IT WOULD BE HELPFUL.
I'M IN THE ZOOM MEETING SO I I CAN SHARE.
IF THAT'S OKAY WITH THE BOARD? ABSOLUTELY.
UH, AGAIN, JUST FOR THE RECORD, DIEGO VI WITH JMC, THE PLANNING AND ENGINEERING CONSULTANT HERE ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANTS.
[01:45:01]
THANK YOU FOR HAVING US, UH, HERE THIS EVENING.UH, AS MR. SCHMIDT HAD INDICATED, WE'RE HERE REQUESTING, UH, PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN OR PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION APPROVAL FOR THE PROJECT.
AGAIN, THE PROJECT ITSELF JUST CONSISTS OF RELATIVELY SIMPLE TWO LOT SUBDIVISION.
UH, THE PROPERTY IS A LITTLE UNDER TWO ACRES IN SIZE.
UH, IT'S THE FOUR 50 AND FOUR 60 BUILDING ON TARRYTOWN ROAD.
ONE IS CURRENTLY BEING RENOVATED AS THE NEW NISSAN DEALERSHIP, AND THAT'S THE BUILDING ON THE LEFT SIDE.
IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE PLAN, THAT'S THIS BUILDING RIGHT THERE.
UM, THAT ONE IS ABOUT TO BE OCCUPIED.
IT'S ACTUALLY GETTING RELATIVELY CLOSE TO BEING COMPLETED THE RIGHT BUILDING.
THE FOUR 50 BUILDING IS VACANT AT THIS TIME.
UH, BUT IN THE HOPES, UH, AS PART OF THIS SUBDIVISION PLAN IS TO, UH, PUT THAT PROPERTY IN A POSITION WHERE IT COULD BE REOCCUPIED, UH, WITH A NEW TENANT OR SOLD, WHICH IS REALLY, UH, I BELIEVE THE INTENTION AT THE END OF THE DAY.
SO THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A TWO LOT SUBDIVISION, WHICH IS ESSENTIALLY DRAWING A LINE DOWN BETWEEN THOSE TWO BUILDINGS.
EACH PROPERTY WOULD BE A LITTLE UNDER AN ACRE, ABOUT NINE TENTHS OF AN ACRE.
UH, AS PART OF THIS, THERE WAS A NUMBER OF VARIANCES THAT WERE REQUIRED, SEVERAL OF WHICH WERE PART OF THE PROPERTY ALREADY COVERAGE, UH, SIDE YARD SETBACK, THINGS LIKE THAT WERE ALREADY VARIANCES THAT WERE PREVIOUSLY GRANTED.
BUT BY DRAWING THAT SUBDIVISION LINE DOWN THAT CENTER BETWEEN THE TWO BUILDINGS, IT CREATED ADDITIONAL SIDE YARD VARIANCES THAT WERE REQUIRED SINCE IT DOESN'T MEET THE 20 FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK REQUIREMENTS, SIMPLY BECAUSE THE SPACING BETWEEN THE BUILDING IS 20 FEET.
SO THERE IS REALLY NO WAY TO ACCOMPLISH IT WITHOUT REQUIRING SOME TYPE OF VARIANCE.
SO AGAIN, THE, THE SUBDIVISION, UH, DID RECEIVE A NUMBER OF VARIANCES FROM THE ZONING BOARD.
WE DID HAVE TO GO BACK TO REAFFIRM TWO OF THE SIDE YARD SETBACK VARIANCES.
AND THAT WAS FOR THE, UH, FOUR 60 BUILDING.
THE ONE ON THE LEFT HAND SIDE, THE ONE CURRENTLY UNDER CONSTRUCTION.
AND THE REASON FOR THAT WAS THE FACADE IMPROVEMENT THAT THEY'RE DOING AROUND THE PERIMETER OF THE BUILDING INCREASE THE THICKNESS OF THE FACADE BY A LITTLE OVER AN INCH.
SO IT REDUCED THE SIDE YARD SETBACK FROM 9.3 FEET TO 9.2 FEET.
SO AGAIN, IT WAS SUCH A DI MINIMIS CHANGE.
IT, WE WE'RE PREPARING A LEGAL SUBDIVISION PLA WE NOTICED THE CHANGE.
WE BROUGHT IT UP TO THE ATTENTION OF STAFF.
STAFF SAID REGARDLESS OF THE SIZE OF THE CHANGE, YOU HAVE TO GO BACK.
SO WE WENT BACK TO THE ZONING BOARD.
UH, WE REQUESTED THAT THEY AMEND THAT THEY DID, UH, THEY REGRANTED THE SIDE YARD SETBACK VARIANCES SPECIFICALLY FOR THAT BUILDING AT THEIR LAST MEETING.
AND THAT BRINGS US BACK BEFORE THIS BOARD RIGHT NOW, AGAIN, RESPECTFULLY REQUESTING THAT THIS BOARD CONSIDER GRANTING PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION APPROVAL, ALLOWING US TO GO TO THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT AND FILE THIS APPLICATION WITH THEM, WHICH AGAIN IS REQUIRED FOR US TO BE ABLE TO FILE THE FINAL SUBDIVISION PLAT.
ONE IS, UM, THERE'S AN AGREEMENT AND IT WOULD BE, AND IT'S LIKELY A CONDITION IN HERE, UM, YES, CONDITION 5.2 OF THE DRAFT DECISION, WHICH SPEAKS TO THE APPLICANT FILING A PERMANENT ACCESS EASEMENT TO THE REAR OF THE SITE LOCATED BETWEEN THE TWO EXISTING BUILDINGS.
SO, UH, DIEGO, IF YOU BRING UP THE PLAN CURRENTLY, EVEN WITHOUT THE SUBDIVISION, THERE'S ACCESS TO THE REAR OF THE TWO BUILDINGS IS BETWEEN THE TWO BUILDINGS THROUGH A PAVED DRIVE AREA.
SO WE WANTED TO ENSURE THAT WITH THE SUBDIVISION, POSSIBLY ONE OR BOTH THE LOTS BEING SOLD OFF, OFF AND IN DIFFERENT OWNERSHIP, THAT THERE'S MAINTAINED A FREE AND CLEAR ACCESS TO THE REAR OF THE SITE TO ACCESS.
UM, SO THAT WILL REQUIRE, UM, THIS PERMANENT ACCESS EASEMENT.
AND SO THAT WAS, UM, IDENTIFIED AND THAT'S TO ALLOW, UH, EMPLOYEES, DELIVERY DRIVERS AND OR PATRONS OF THE SITE, UM, ACCESS.
AND THAT SHALL BE, UH, FILED PRIOR TO, UH, THE FINAL SUBDIVISION BEING CONSIDERED BY THE PLANNING BOARD.
AND IT'S TO BE FILED WITH THE WESTCHESTER COUNTY CLERK'S OFFICE, A COPY OF WHICH SHALL BE PROVIDED TO THE TOWN ATTORNEY'S OFFICE.
SO, UH, I WANTED TO MENTION THAT THE ONLY OTHER THING I WANTED TO MENTION IS THAT THIS SITE WAS, UM, THE SUBJECT OF A SITE PLAN APPROVAL YEARS AGO.
UH, I BELIEVE IT WAS A 2013 CASE WHEREIN THERE WERE SOME LANDSCAPING IMPROVEMENTS SHOWN AND CONDITION BY THE PLANNING BOARD.
THE APPLICANT HAS AGREED TO INCORPORATE THE LANDSCAPING ELEMENTS THAT FALL WITH, ON THESE TWO PROPERTIES INTO THIS OVERALL, UH, DESIGN AND IMPROVEMENT OF THE SITE.
SO THAT WILL BE CONDITIONED IN CONNECTION WITH THE PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION.
AND JUST TO BUILD ON WHAT, UH, AARON HAD INDICATED THERE, THIS IS THE SUBDIVISION PLAT THAT WAS SUBMITTED AND IT ILLUSTRATES THE LOCATION OF THAT EASEMENT THAT AGAIN SECURES
[01:50:01]
ACCESS AND PROVIDES ACCESS TO THE BACKSIDE OF EACH BUILDING.SO THAT IS SHOWN ON THE SUBDIVISION PLOT, BUT OBVIOUSLY THERE'LL BE A LEGAL DOCUMENT ATTACHED TO IT THAT, UH, WE WOULD FILE WITH COUNTY LAND RECORDS.
AND THEN THIS IS THE SUBDIVISION, OR EXCUSE ME, LANDSCAPING PLAN THAT WAS, UH, SHARED WITH THE BOARD AT THE LAST MEETING.
AND IT SPECIFICALLY SHOWS THESE LOTS HERE.
WE DO NOT OBVIOUSLY CONTROL THE LOT FURTHEST ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE OF THE PAGE, BUT THESE ARE THE LANDSCAPING IMPROVEMENTS THAT WOULD BE DONE AS PART OF THE PROJECT.
IT'S THE ISLANDS ALONG THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY AS WELL AS A COUPLE OF ISLANDS BEING INCORPORATED INTO THE ASPHALT PARKING LOT IN THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY.
AND SOME OF THAT FRONT FRONTAGE LANDSCAPING, AS THEY'LL CALL IT ALONG ONE 19 DOES FALL WITHIN THE DOT RIGHT OF WAY.
SO THEY'D BE SUBJECT TO OBTAINING, UH, A DOT WORK PERMIT.
JUST, JUST SO I UNDERSTAND YOU ANSWER, YOU DID ANSWER MY QUESTION ABOUT THE LANDSCAPING.
YOU'RE TAKING CARE OF BOTH OF THE BUILDINGS, EVEN THE UNOCCUPIED BUILDING, THE, SO IT IT'S A SUBJECT OF, THAT'S A QUESTION I GUESS I'D HAVE TO ASK STAFF AS WELL.
IS IT WHEN THE LANDSCAPING, WOULD IT BE DONE WHEN THE BUILDING IS BEING OCCUPIED? CLEARLY THE ONE ON THE LEFT IS IN THE PROCESS OF BEING RENOVATED.
AND WILL BE OCCUPIED NOW, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE CONDITION WOULD INCLUDE IF IT WOULD HAVE TO BE SOMETHING THAT'S DONE NOW OR WHEN THE BUILDING IS BEING OCCUPIED.
I I I WOULD HAVE TO ASK STAFF WOULD THAT OR, AND THE BOARD ACTUALLY, QUITE FRANKLY, IT'S THE BOARD'S, UH, CONSIDERATION ON ON THE TIMING OF THAT.
AND AND THE SECOND BUILDING, IS IT HABITABLE? IS IT SAFE? YEAH, IT'S NOT A, YEAH, IT'S NOT, IT'S JUST A VACANT BUILDING AT THIS POINT.
CLEARLY IT WOULD NEED SOME IMPROVEMENTS JUST LIKE THE BUILDING THAT'S CURRENTLY UNDER CONSTRUCTION.
IT'S NOT IN ANY WAY A CONDEMNED BUILDING OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
IT'S JUST A VACANT BUILDING AND HAS BEEN VACANT FOR A LONG TIME.
AND AGAIN, THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF THIS SUBDIVISION IS REALLY TO GIVE THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY A TOOL, WHICH IS TO BE ABLE TO SELL THAT LOT.
THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT ARE INTERESTED IN THE BUILDING BUT DON'T WANT A LONG-TERM LEASE.
THEY WANT TO BE ABLE TO PURCHASE THE PROPERTY.
IF THEY'RE GOING TO INVEST, QUITE FRANKLY A MILLION DOLLARS OR MORE INTO THAT PROPERTY, THEY WANT THE PROPERTY TO COME WITH THAT, NOT JUST A LONG-TERM LEASE NECESSARILY.
SO THAT'S REALLY THE TOOL AND WHAT'S HAPPENING HERE.
AND IT'S REALLY JUST THE INTENTION IS TO OCCUPY AND BE ABLE TO DO SOMETHING WITH THAT ADJACENT BUILDING AS OPPOSED TO LEAVING IT VACANT.
I'M SORRY IF I'VE MISSED SOMETHING.
YOU MENTIONED THERE'S A 2013 CONDITIONS WHERE THOSE CONDITIONS NEVER SATISFIED OR IS IT JUST RETAINING THE CONDITIONS? THE THE PROJECT WAS NEVER BUILT OUT.
IT WAS A RAY CATINA PROJECT, SO GOT IT.
BUT STAFF BEING, HOW LONG I'VE BEEN HERE REMEMBERS THE LANDSCAPING PLAN AND WE BELIEVE THAT THE SITE COULD, UM, BE IMPROVED FROM A LANDSCAPING STANDPOINT.
IT WOULD BE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION THAT THE PLANNING BOARD SEEK TO HAVE THE APPLICANT CARRY OUT THE LANDSCAPING ON BOTH LOTS IN CONNECTION.
I THINK, YOU KNOW, JUST DRESSING UP THAT AREA, IT'S BEEN VACANT AND OVERGROWN FOR A PERIOD OF TIME.
IT'S NICE TO SEE THAT NISSANS COME IN AND DOING SOME SIGNIFICANT IMPROVEMENTS.
THE FOUR 60, SO THE 2013 CONDITION WAS THAT THEY HAD TO BE SATISFIED BASED ON, UM, CONSTRUCTION AND BECAUSE CONSTRUCTION NEVER OCCURRED.
THE CONDITIONS WERE NEVER, WERE NEVER MET.
THE BUILDINGS HAVE BEEN VACANT FOR SOME TIME NOW.
AND SO THIS CONVERSATION NOW WOULD BE WHETHER WE ENFORCE THE CONDITION, YOU KNOW, CERTAINLY THIS ONE BUILDING IS, IS UNDER CONSTRUCTION NOW, BUT FOR THE SECOND BUILDING, SIMILARLY TO 2013, ONLY, ONLY MAKE IT A CONDITION UPON CONSTRUCTION, WHICH SOUNDS LIKE IT WILL HAPPEN, BUT MAY OR MAY NOT HAPPEN IN THE FUTURE.
UM, OR ENFORCE, ENFORCE THE IMPROVEMENT NOW REGARDLESS OF, OF THE FUTURE OF THAT SECOND BUILDING.
SO THE PLANNING BOARD COULD CONDITION THAT ALL LANDSCAPING BE INSTALLED PRIOR TO CONSIDERATION OF THE FINAL SUBDIVISION COULD SAY WITHIN THE NEXT PLANTING SEASON, FOLLOWING FINAL SUBDIVISION, WHICH WOULD BE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION TO GIVE THEM A LITTLE BIT MORE TIME WOULD NOT PRIOR TO FINAL SUBDIVISION.
THAT WOULD BE CHALLENGE, I MEAN, UPON COMPLETION OF THE SUBDIVISION AS SOON AS POSSIBLE THEREAFTER.
I, WITHIN THE WHY SHOULD PUT THAT IN WITHIN ONE PLANTING.
I'M SUSAN, I'M SORRY, BEFORE WE YEAH, GO THERE
YOU'LL HAVE THE YEAH, I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHEN.
MY POINT IS THAT IF YOU'RE DOING THE LANDSCAPING FOR THE BUSINESS, I BELIEVE THE LANDSCAPING FOR THE THE, UH, BUILDING NEXT DOOR SHOULD BE DONE AT THE SAME TIME.
AS WHEN YOU, WHEN YOU DO THAT.
AND NOT WAIT UNTIL THIS CONSTRUCTION OR THE SECOND ONE IS SOLD.
HOW, HOW, HOW LIKELY WOULD IT BE THAT IF, IF THAT SECOND LOT IS SOLD AND IMPROVED IN THE FUTURE, THAT THAT THAT REQUEST WOULD COME BACK TO THIS BOARD?
[01:55:02]
YOU MEAN TO INSTALL THE LANDSCAPING? WELL JUST, JUST SAY AND YOU KNOW, BIG MODIFICATIONS.SAY IT'S SOLD AND THEY WANNA MODIFY THAT BUILDING OR INSTALL IT WOULD DEPENDS.
SO IT REALLY DEPENDS ON THE SCOPE.
IT MAY NOT END UP NEEDING TO COME BACK TO THIS BOARD.
UM, YOU KNOW, IF IT'S AN INTERIOR MODIFICATION TO THE BUILDING AND VERY LIMITED SITE IMPROVEMENTS AND THE USE FALLS WITHIN THE DISTRICT MM-HMM
AND IN ALL LIKELIHOOD IT WOULD NOT.
UM, SO I THINK IT'S REASONABLE AND THE APPLICANT'S, UM, REPRESENTATIVE HAS IDENTIFIED THAT.
AND LET ME JUST GET CLARITY ON THIS LANDSCAPING TO BE INSTALLED FOR BOTH, BOTH LOTS PRIOR TO FINAL CO ISSUANCE ON THE FOUR 60 SITE.
I SEE THAT I, I WOULD HAVE TO QUESTION THAT JUST BECAUSE AGAIN, THIS IS A CONDITION OF THE SUBDIVISION.
THE APPLICANT HAS MOVED FORWARD AND THEY'RE IN THE PROCESS OF OCCUPYING THAT BUILDING TO CONDITION THE C OF O ON THAT OTHER BUILDING.
WITH THIS, WE STILL HAVE A DOT PERMIT TO PROCESS, RIGHT.
USE AND OCCUPANCY PERMIT IS REQUIRED FOR THIS LANDSCAPING THAT COULD TAKE SOME TIME AND TO NOT ALLOW THEM TO OPEN THIS BRAND NEW NISSAN DEALERSHIP, THEN IT DOESN'T MAKE FO SENSE TO MOVE FORWARD.
IT'S NOT A CONDITION RIGHT NOW AS FAR AS THE NISSAN DEALERSHIP.
IT'S BECOMING A CONDITION AS PART OF THE SUBDIVISION, WHICH WE'RE HAPPY TO KEEP IT AS PART OF THE SUBDIVISION AND, AND, BUT I DON'T THINK IT'S FAIR TO TIE IT TO.
SO I GUESS REALISTICALLY AS, AS WRITTEN NOW, HOW WOULD THIS PLAY OUT? UH, AS WRITTEN NOW? IT'S, IT'S A LITTLE SUBJECTIVE.
I MEAN, UH, WE DIDN'T SPECIFY EXACTLY WHEN WE JUST WANTED THE LANDSCAPING INSTALLED.
SO I THINK, UM, IT WOULD MAKE SENSE.
I THINK IF WE CAN COME UP WITH A REASONABLE, I AGREE WITH THE CHAIRPERSON ABOUT INSTALLING IT ALL AT THE SAME TIME, I THINK THAT'S A REASONABLE AND QUITE FRANKLY FAIR REQUEST.
IT'S THE CHALLENGE OF WHEN, BECAUSE AGAIN, IT'S SUBJECT, IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT'S IN OUR CONTROL.
WHEN WHEN IS THE EARLIEST YOU CAN INSTALL THE LANDSCAPING FOR NISSAN AT FOUR 60? IT DEPENDS ON THE APPROVAL OF THE DOT FOR A USE AND OCCUPANCY PERMIT.
THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING MEAN, WHICH I COULD ASSURE THIS BOARD WHAT'S DT APPROVAL IS NO LESS THAN A SIX MONTH PROCESS, RIGHT? NO, NO.
WHEN IS THE EARLIEST YOU COULD PUT THE LANDSCAPING IN OF FOUR 60 AFTER YOU GET DOT APPROVAL? YES.
WHEN'S THE EARLIEST YOU CAN PUT IN THE LANDSCAPING AT FOUR 50? SAME THING.
THEY'RE ALL, AND AGAIN, IT'S, IT'S THE ALONG THE FRONTAGE IS WHAT REQUIRES, I'M JUST TRYING, I'M JUST TRYING TO WORK WITH YOU.
NOT PUT YOU UNDER ANY BIND, BUT GET THE LANDSCAPING END THERE AS EARLY AS WE CAN.
CAN WE, SO HOW ABOUT THE NEXT PLANTING SEASON AFTER APPROVAL FROM DOT RECEIPT OF DOT RECEIPT OF DECISION FROM DO TT.
'CAUSE IF THEY DENY IT, WE WANT ALL THE OTHER ONSITE LANDSCAPING, WHICH IS FINE.
YOU DON'T, YOU DON'T, THEY CAN OPEN WITHOUT DOING THE LANDSCAPING, IS THAT WHAT WE'RE SAYING? THEY ARE BECAUSE IT'S RIGHT.
THAT PERMIT IS OPEN ABSENT ANY REVIEW BY THE PLANNING BOARD.
SO ONE, ONE THOUGHT MAYBE TO CONSIDER IS YOU COULD SAY, UM, AFTER
DID YOU DEFINE NEXT PLANTING SEASON? WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? YEAH, SO FOR INSTANCE, IF TODAY, UH, THE DOT APPROVED THE LANDSCAPING, WE WOULD, THE NEXT PLANTING SEASON IS, IT'S GENERALLY FROM APRIL 1ST TO JUNE 1ST.
WE WOULD DEFINE THAT THAT'S THE SPRING PLANTING SEASON.
AND THEN THE FALL PLANTING SEASON'S USUALLY SEPTEMBER 15TH TO NOVEMBER 15TH, THEY'RE USUALLY TWO MONTHLY WINDOWS LANDSCAPING.
YOU DON'T WANT PLANT IN THE MIDDLE OF WINTER BECAUSE I UNDERSTAND THAT LIKELIHOOD OF SUCCESS FOR THE PLANTS, THAT'S REALLY WHAT'S GEAR TOWARDS.
I DON'T WANNA PLANT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE SUMMER.
I THOUGHT THEY WERE GONNA BE LIKE, OKAY, FINE.
NO, IT'S FLOWERS, THERE'S TREES, THERE'S SHRUBS, THERE'S UH, IT'S ACTUALLY A FAIR AMOUNT OF LANDSCAPING.
IT'S GONNA ADDRESS UP THE SITE, WHICH IS WHY I'M HAPPY THAT I WAS AWARE OF THE FORMER PROJECT TO BRING THAT TO THE BOARD'S ATTENTION.
AND YOU KNOW, IT'S BEEN A LONG TIME COMING, BUT WE'RE GONNA GET THESE PROPERTIES CLEANED UP AND HOPEFULLY THEY'RE FOLLOWING THE SUBDIVISION.
THEY'LL BE ABLE TO SELL IT OFF TO SOMEBODY WHO WANTS TO REHABILITATE THE FOUR 50 SITE.
AND THEN WE HAVE TWO NEW USES IN THESE.
UH, SO IF I'M HEARING MICHAEL CORRECTLY, AND IF THE BOARD AGREES, I'M SORRY, GO AHEAD MICHELLE.
THE COVENANT ACCESS RATE THAT'S OPENING UP INTO SOMEBODY'S PARKING SPACE, LIKE WHAT, WHAT IS LIKE,
[02:00:01]
DOES ANYONE NEED TO AGREE TO THAT? WHO OWNS THAT LAND? CAN YOU, CAN YOU REPEAT THAT AGAIN? WHICH, THE PERMANENT ACCESS ROAD AT THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY WAS THAT OPENING? IT'S IT'S NOT A PERMANENT ACCESS ROAD.WHAT THE, WHAT THE TOWN STAFF IS ASKING IS THAT NOW THAT THIS PROPERTY IS BEING SUBDIVIDED, THEORETICALLY YOU COULD HAVE TWO OWNERS RIGHT.
THAT SHARE THE SAME DRIVEWAY, WHEREAS RIGHT NOW IT'S ONE OWNER AND IT'S ONE DRIVEWAY THAT ACCESSES THE BACK.
SO TO PROTECT THE FUTURE OWNER'S INTEREST TO BE ABLE TO CONTINUE TO ACCESS THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY, WE'RE PUTTING THIS EXISTING DRIVEWAY INTO AN EASEMENT THAT BENEFITS BOTH PROPERTY OWNERS.
AND THAT ROAD DOESN'T SERVE FOUR 50 OR FOUR 60 THAT DRIVE THE DRIVEWAY DOES, IT RUNS RIGHT BETWEEN THE TWO BUILDINGS.
SO THEY'RE NOT INVOLVED IN THE EASEMENT.
THEY WOULD BE CURRENT OWNER OF THE PROPERTY.
WHO IS ONE ENTITY RIGHT NOW WOULD DEFINE AN EASEMENT BETWEEN THOSE TWO SO THAT IN THE EVENT THAT THEY SELL THE FOUR 50 BUILDING, THAT NEW OWNER STILL HAS ACCESS VIA THAT DRIVEWAY.
AND WHAT ABOUT THE NEW LOTS? THERE ARE NO, THE NEW LOTS, IT'S, IT'S ONE LOT THAT IS BEING CUT IN HALF.
SO I DON'T WANT YOU TO THINK THAT WE'RE CREATING, UM, ADDITIONAL LOTS IN THE BACK OR ANYTHING.
IT'S REALLY THE TWO LOTS THAT ARE BEING CREATED ARE BENEFITING FROM THIS EASEMENT.
AND THEY MAY, BUT THEY MAY BE SOLD OFF TO SEPARATE OWNERS.
THEY, SOMEONE COULD PUT, THEY COULD BE.
AND SO NOW YOU HAVE FOUR, I JUST WANT TO UNDERSTAND.
NO, NO, WE ONLY HAVE TWO LOCKS.
NO, YOU HAVE, YOU HAVE FOUR 50.
NO, THAT'S, NO, THESE ARE NOT SEPARATE LOTS.
BUT IN THE END YOU COULD HAVE FOUR.
FOUR 60 IS THIS WHOLE THING AND FOUR 50, IS THAT RIGHT? SO THIS IS JUST THE REAR WHERE THERE'S SOME PARKING SPACES CORRECT.
THAT'S THE AREA BEHIND THE BUILDING.
THERE WERE TWO BUILDINGS ON ONE LOT AND NOW THEY WANT TO SPLIT IT.
IT'S THE EASIEST WAY TO SAY IT.
ALRIGHT, SO, UM, FOR MIKE'S SUGGESTION, WE WOULD LIKE, I I BELIEVE WE'D LIKE TO TIE IT TO THE DOT APPROVAL FOR BOTH THE LOTS AND LEAVE IT THAT WAY.
AND THEN FIRST PLANTING SEASON AFTER APPROVAL FROM THE D-O-T-O-T DECISION.
IT, IT'S WHATEVER THEY DECIDE, THEY, THEY COULD DENY THE USE AND OCCUPANCY PIECE.
BUT TO AARON'S POINT, THAT STILL LEAVES THE LANDSCAPING IN THE BACK.
THERE'S STILL A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT WOULD BE DONE IN THE FRONT, CORRECT.
IT'S STILL SOME THINGS THAT WOULD BE DONE.
DO YOU WANNA SAY, DO YOU WANNA SAY FIRST SPRING OR FIRST FALL? I KNOW OUR LANDSCAPER DOESN'T LIKE TO PLANT IN THE FALL, SO JUST ASKING.
THAT'S ACTUALLY OUR PREFERENCE QUITE FRANKLY.
WE'VE ACTUALLY FALL IS A PREFERRED PLANTING SEASON.
THINGS ARE TRENDING THAT DIRECTION.
WHAT DIRECTION? MORE FALL PLANTING BECAUSE YOU HAVE THE REST STRESS OF THE FALL INTO THE WINTER AND THEN ALL SPRING FOR THE ROOT SYSTEM TO ESTABLISH BEFORE THE SUMMER HEAT PLANTS GO DORMANT IN THE WINTERTIME AS OPPOSED TO BEING STRESSED IN THE SUMMER.
SO IT'S ACTUALLY BETTER IN THE FALL.
SO THAT'S WHAT WE'LL REFINE IT BASED ON THE DISCUSSION TONIGHT.
WE'RE HAPPY TO MOVE FORWARD AND FOR THE BOARD TO CONSIDER A DECISION ON THE PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION APPLICATION.
SO ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS? I WOULD SAY AS AMENDED, WE'RE TAKING ONE VOTE NO, DON'T WE HAVE TO? UM, NOPE.
SEEKER'S BEEN DONE? UH, THE ONLY VOTE IS ON THE PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION.
TAKE CARE EVERYBODY ALRIGHT TOO.
UM, BEFORE WE CLOSE, I, I DID SPEAK WITH YOU INDIVIDUALLY, BUT IN TERMS OF ATTENDANCE FOR THE FEBRUARY 19TH MEETING, LESLIE, YOU INTEND TO BE HERE FEBRUARY? YES.
MICHAEL ED? POSSIBLY VIA ZOOM.
MICHELLE, ARE YOU BACK IN TOWN FOR THE 19TH? YEAH.
JUST I WANTED TO SAY MICHELLE.
YOU KNOW I WAS THINKING ABOUT DURING THE MEETING WHAT YOU SAID.
I WAS, DID YOU SEE THAT REPORT WITH DO YOU WANT ME TO CLOSE? OH, I'M SORRY.
SO, UM, WE'LL CLOSE AT NINE 15.