* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting. WHEN. [00:00:02] ALL RIGHT. GOOD [ TOWN OF GREENBURGH PLANNING BOARD AGENDA WEDNESDAY, July 15, 2026 – 7:00 P.M. Meetings of the Planning Board will be adjourned at 10:00 p.m. ] EVENING EVERYONE, AND WELCOME TO THE WEDNESDAY, JULY 15, 20, 26, PLANNING BOARD MEETING. IT IS 7:04 PM UH, TOWN PLANNER. BRIT, UH, CAN YOU CONDUCT THE ROLE? SURE. MS. ANDERSON? HERE. MR. WEINBERG? HERE. MR. PATEL? HERE. MR. PINE? HERE. MS. ROBINSON? HERE. AND MR. PILLINGER HERE. ALRIGHT. AND BECAUSE WE HAVE A FULL HOUSE THIS EVENING, UM, OUR TWO ALTERNATES, MS. ROBINSON AND MR. PATEL WILL BE SPLITTING, UH, THE DECISIONS THIS EVENING. UH, MR. PATEL WILL BE ON CASE PB 25 0 6, UH, AS WELL AS THE MINUTES. AND MS. UH, MS. UH, ROBINSON WILL BE ON PB 25 37, AS WELL AS TB 25 0 4. UH, DID EVERYONE HAVE A CHANCE TO REVIEW THE MINUTES THAT WERE DISTRIBUTED? YES. YES. YES. ALRIGHT. AND DID EVERYONE SEE THE SECOND VERSION OF THE MINUTES THAT WERE DISTRIBUTED BY EMAIL? UH, FOR THOSE WHO RECEIVED PAPER PACKETS? YES. YEAH. COULD SOMEONE LIKE EXPLAIN WHAT THE CHANGES WERE? 'CAUSE I UNDERSTAND THEY'RE NOT, THEY WEREN'T MATERIAL, BUT WHAT WERE THEY, UH, FIRST, FIRST, UH, DEPUTY TOWN ATTORNEY? MAGNA. SO I HAD SOME JUST CORRECTIONS, TYPOS. UM, NOTHING REALLY SUBSTANTIVE. OKAY. THANKS. ALRIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ON THE MINUTES? THEN I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO APPROVE THE JULY 1ST. 20, 26 MINUTES. SO MOVED AS DISTRIBUTED BY EMAIL. SO, MOVED. MOVED. MR. PATEL. SECOND. SECOND. MR. PILLINGER. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. AYE. CHAIR VOTES. AYE. UM, ALRIGHT. UH, FIRST UP ON OUR WORK SESSION FOR OLD BUSINESS, WE HAVE CASE NUMBER PB 25 0 6, KINDRED MASON, LLC, UH, AT 1440 SAW RIVER ROAD PO. WHITE PLAINS. THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING A PLANNING BOARD STEEP SLOPE PERMIT, A WETLAND WATERCOURSE PERMIT, AND A MOVABLE PERMIT. UH, WELCOME BACK. THANK YOU. WE WELCOME. UH, THANK YOU FOR RECEIVING ME. UM, WE PRESENTED, UH, UH, THE LAST TIME WE WERE TOGETHER, A PROPOSED, UM, HOUSE ON A LOT. JUST YOUR NAME FOR THE EMILIO ESCALADAS. UM, I'VE DONE SO MANY BAD THINGS. I THINK EVERYBODY KNOWS ME ALREADY. EMILIO ESCALADAS ARCHITECTS AND ENGINEERS. UM, POSTOPERATIVE, UH, I HAVE A BIG OPERATION, SO I'M LIMPING ANYWAY, UM, THE HOUSE THAT'S BEING PROPOSED IS FOR AN OVERSIZED LOT. UH, THAT COULD ACTUALLY, UH, AS I SAID LAST TIME, UH, BE DESIGNED FOR TWO LOTS, BUT WE DECIDED NOT TO DO THAT. WE HAVE, UH, AN ENTRANCE FROM, UM, GRANTED BY THE DOT, FROM THE SOUL MILL RIVER, ENTERING ON THE PROPERTY. THE, THE, THE HOUSE IS, UM, BASICALLY EXCAVATED ONTO THE PROPERTY. AND THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE. WE DISTURB MORE THAN, UH, THE 500 SQUARE FEET OF WHATEVER THE CODE SAYS. SO WE HAVE PRESENTED PLANS TO ENGINEERING TO ALL OF THE, UH, UH, UH, BRANCHES OF THE TOWN. AND WE HAVE WORKED WITH THEM AND BACK AND FORTH UNTIL WE HAVE SATISFIED ALL THEIR COMM. THERE WAS ONE OUTSTANDING MEMO THAT, UH, THE BOARD DID NOT RECEIVE ON TIME, LAST TIME, WHICH WAS FROM THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT REQUIRING THAT WE SEEK HELP, UH, OR A VARIANCE IN TWO ITEMS THAT WE PRESENTED IN THE DRAWINGS. ONE WAS FOR THE OVERSIZED OF THE PAVEMENT IN FRONT OF THE DRIVEWAY, WHICH THEY, THEY CALL IT WIDTH, DRIVEWAY WIDTH. AND THEY MAXIMIZE IT AT 30 FEET BECAUSE OF THE GEOMETRY THAT WE HAVE TO SURVIVE WITH. WE CANNOT DO IT IN 30 FEET. SO WE ARE PROPOSING 40 FEET. SO OF COURSE, THAT WOULD BE A MATTER WITH YOUR UNDERSTANDING AND SUPPORT TO GO TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS AND SEEK THAT VARIANCE. AND THE SECOND ONE IS THE LOCATION OF THE PROPOSED POOL. UH, WE CAN'T PUT IT IN THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY AS IT'S REQUIRED BY CODE BECAUSE OF THE GEOMETRY ON THIS, THE TIGHTNESS OF THE LOT. SO THE SETBACK, THE HOUSE, AND THEN THE REAR BACK. UH, SINCE IT'S VERY, VERY STEEP, WE, WE DIDN'T WANT TO GO. WE COULD PUT IT IN THERE, BUT THE STEEP, UH, THE, THE WORK ON STEEP SLOPES WOULD BE TREMENDOUS. AND IT JUST DIDN'T MAKE ANY SENSE TO DO THAT. IT WOULD BE HURTFUL. UH, AND, AND THE DESIGN WORKED AROUND IT. WE HELD THE, THE, UH, THE HOUSE AROUND IT, AND SO THEREFORE WE HAVE A WELCOMING SIDE FOR THE POOL AND SO ON. UM, WE'RE SATISFIED WITH IT, OF COURSE, UH, AFTER VARIOUS, UH, ATTEMPTS AND DIFFERENT DESIGNS. SO THAT'S IT. THAT'S, UH, IN ESSENCE WHY WE COULDN'T AGREE ON A, ON A, ON A DATE, UH, FROM YOUR BOARD TO, UH, THE PUBLIC HEARING AND A SUBSEQUENT MEETING WITH THE PLAN ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS. WE HAVE SUBMITTED, UH, THE SAME DRAWINGS THAT WE HAVE SUBMITTED TO YOU, TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS BOARD, AND WE HAVE REVIEWED IT WITH KYRA. SHE HAS, UH, MADE SOME COMMENTS. I THINK WE RETURN, UH, [00:05:01] ALL THE COMMENTS THAT WERE NECESSARY. SO WE'RE WAITING FOR YOUR, UH, GUIDANCE AND YOUR PUSH TO GO TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS ONCE WE HOPEFULLY SUCCESSFULLY GET IT, OR IF WE DON'T, WE'LL SIMPLY RE REDO, UH, WHATEVER NEEDS TO BE REDONE TO SATISFY THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT AND COME BACK TO YOU FOR A PUBLIC HEARING, WHICH I HOPE WE WOULD SCHEDULE TODAY. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. ARE THERE, WERE THERE ANY OTHER, UH, SUBSTANTIVE CHANGE TO THE CHANGES TO PLANS? YES, THERE WAS. THERE WAS ONE PROMISE MADE AND ONE, UH, ITEM THAT, UM, I BROUGHT, I BROUGHT IT HERE SO THAT YOU UNDERSTAND. UH, IT'S SIMPL, IT'S SIMPLE. IT'S THE, WE HAD AN APPROVED, UM, UM, UM, APPLICATION FOR PLANTINGS, UH, IN SUBSTITUTION OF ALL THE TREES I HAVE HERE, THE LATEST. I WILL GIVE YOU A COPY. AND OF COURSE, THE LETTER FROM THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT THAT WE NEVER GOT ON TIME LAST TIME, SO, OKAY. I COPIES THAT. YES. YEAH, THAT'S YOURS. YOU, I THINK WE HAD THE LETTERS IN OUR PACKETS. OH, OKAY. THE UPDATED ONE. THEY CHANGED THE, ALRIGHT, THAT'S FINE. THEY CHANGED THE DATE. THIS IS THE LATEST. I DON'T, I DIDN'T HAVE TIME TO EMAIL THE DEPARTMENT. OKAY. THIS IS PHYSICALLY WHERE THE TREES ARE BEING ADDED HERE. NOW, WHO KNOWS? AT THE END OF THE CONSTRUCTION, IF YOU CAN TALK INTO THE, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'RE GETTING PICKED UP ON THE MICROPHONE. UM, I'M SORRY. I'LL BE BACK. I'M JUST WANT TO GIVE, I CAN, I CAN TAKE CARE OF THIS. THE, THE PLANNING OF, OF PLANTING OF TREES, THE IMPORTANT THINGS TO THE, TO THE TOWN IS ALWAYS TO HAVE A SUBSTITUTE VALUE TO THE TREES THAT ARE BEING CUT. UM, WE HAD A VERY SOPHIST SOPHISTICATED STUDY, UH, FROM A A, A YOUNG LADY THAT SPECIALIZES IN THIS, THE, THE PLANNING BOARD. AND THE TREE DEPARTMENT WAS VERY HAPPY WITH THE STUDY THAT WAS PERFORMED. ALL THE TREES WERE IDENTIFIED BY SPECIES, BY, BY TYPE, AND BY CONDITION. AND, UH, DECISIONS WERE MADE FOR THE TREES THAT HAD TO BE REMOVED. I BELIEVE THERE WERE 49 TO BE REMOVED. SOME OF THEM HAVE ALREADY DIED FROM, FROM STORMS. EVERY BIT OF 12 OR 14 WE'VE COUNTED THAT ARE ALREADY DOWN. UH, NEVERTHELESS, WE STUCK WITH THE ORIGINAL, UH, UH, UH, UH, DIGESTION OF WHAT'S THERE AND THE PROPOSED NUMBER OF TREES, UH, WE ADDED. UM, WHAT, WHAT I'M SHOWING YOU IS THE ADDITION OF, OF, UH, ABO AROUND THE POOL AS PER, UH, AARON'S, UH, CHOICE, UH, AND SUGGESTION AS IT ALWAYS HAPPENS WHEN THE HOUSE GETS BUILT AND THE DEVASTATED AREAS GET RESHAPED AND, AND REGRADED. I ALWAYS GO WITH AARON IN ALL THE BUILDINGS I'VE EVER DONE. EVEN THOUGH WE HAVE A PLAN TO FOLLOW, WE STICK TO THE NUMBER THAT WAS PROMISED. WE, WE BASICALLY ALWAYS DO MORE THAN WHAT WE SAY BECAUSE WE END UP SEEING THE, THE, THE EMPTY SPOTS. AND ALL HOMEOWNERS THEMSELVES SAY, WELL, WHAT ABOUT IF WE PLANT MORE? SO, OF COURSE WE CAN'T. THE, THE, THE TOWN WOULD LOVE IT. AND THAT'S WHAT WE END UP DOING. AND AARON, UH, AND I AND THE OWNER, IF THE OWNER IS, IS, IS, IS, IS UP TO IT, WE DECIDE WHERE THE FINAL PLACEMENT OF THE TREES ARE. AND SOMETIMES SPECIES, SOMETIMES WE CAN'T FIND CERTAIN SPECIES. AND AARON SAYS, YOU KNOW WHAT, JUST GIVE ME THESE, AND I I WILL, I WILL REPORT BACK, UH, AND, AND ACCEPT THEM. SO WE FEEL VERY COMFORTABLE IN THAT RESPECT. SOME OTHER VILLAGES ARE NOT LIKE THAT, BUT HERE AARON IS, UH, VERY ACCOMMODATING AND, AND, AND VERY MUCH PART OF THE FINAL, UH, PROCESS OF OBTAINING THE CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY. SO I ALWAYS FEEL COMFORTABLE AND FLEXIBLE WHEN IT COMES TO THIS REPLACEMENT AND REPLACEMENT. UH, AND AS, AS, AS THE CLIENT SUGGESTED, WE'RE GONNA HAVE A LOT MORE THAN WHAT WE PROMISED. UH, BUT, UH, YOU KNOW, WE'LL START WITH THE NUMBER OF WHATEVER WE PROMISED, BUT WE'RE, WE, WE'RE SURE WE WE'RE GONNA BE ADDING MORE BECAUSE OF THE WAY THAT THE HOUSE IS AND THE, THE LOCATION WHERE IT'S AT. IT'S, IT'S IN A ROAD, A TRAFFIC AREA WITH A HIGH DECIBEL OF OVER 75, 78. SO WE'RE GONNA USE, UH, TREES TO LESSEN THAT, THAT AIRBORNE SOUND. AND THAT'S IT. THAT'S ARE, ARE, UH, ARE ALL THE TREES YOU'RE PROPOSING THE PLANT NATIVE OR THEY'RE ALL AS WE, WE WENT THROUGH WITH AARON AND AARON, UH, CHECKED THE, THE SCHEDULE AND YOU SAID YES. GREAT. YES, THEY'RE ALL NATIVE. YEAH. GREAT. UH, MS. ROBINSON, SO YOU MENTIONED THAT THE TREES, UM, MAY NOT GO WHERE THEY'RE POSITIONED NOW. ARE THE SIX ADDITIONAL TREES, UH, BY THE POOL, WILL THAT BE WHERE IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE? YES. THAT'S THE PROPOSED RIGHT NOW. OKAY. YES. THE, UH, THE, SORRY, THE POOL ON THE SIDE OF THE HOUSE. YES. IS THAT VISIBLE FROM THE, WILL THAT BE VISIBLE FROM THE ROADWAY IMPOSSIBLE OR THE OTHER? GOOD QUESTION. IT, IT'S IMPOSSIBLE BECAUSE OF THE DIFFERENCE IN ELEVATION. OKAY. UH, UH, YOU WILL SEE THE TREES, BUT YOU'LL NEVER SEE THE POOL NOR THE PLATFORM WHERE IT'S BUILT UPON. YEAH. YEAH. I HOPE TO SEE THE TREES. IT'S GOOD FOR US TOO, BECAUSE WE DON'T WANNA SEE THE ROAD . NO. IF I COULD JUST ADD TO THAT, JUST TO, IF YOU CAN JUST STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD. YEAH. LINDA TERRELL. I'M THE SOLE MEMBER OF, UM, KINDRED MEISON. THE, UH, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION [00:10:01] OWNS THE FIRST 85 FEET FROM THE ROAD TO WHERE MY LOT IS. AND IN THAT 85 FEET, IT'S, IT'S VERY MUCH WOODEN, SO WE'RE NOT TAKING THEIR TREES DOWN. UM, SO I CAN ASSURE YOU BETWEEN THE ELEVATION YEAH. AND THE FOREST THAT'S ALREADY THERE, YOU'RE NOT GONNA SEE. THANK YOU. YOU, YOU'RE NOT TAKING TREES DOWN FOR THE DRIVEWAY THOUGH. YES. FOREST. THAT'S THE DOT PROPERTY DRIVEWAY. THE DOT IS ALREADY APPROVED. THE, THE SEGMENT WHERE THE ROAD IS GOING, THERE ARE NO TREES. OKAY. CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG. THE, THE LOT TO THE RIGHT ON, ON THE PLAN YOU PROVIDED? NO, IT'S THE SAME LOT. IT'S THE SAME LOT. OKAY. YEAH. YEAH. WE'RE NOT SEPARATING THE LOT. THAT'S JUST THE TRAIL END THAT WE'RE GONNA LEAVE. WILD. OKAY. AND THEN THE NEIGHBORING LOT, I THINK YOU SAID LAST TIME WAS VACANT, LIKE WOODED PARCEL. THAT THAT AREA THAT WE'RE NOT TOUCHING IS STAYING THAT WAY. OKAY. AND WE DID IT THAT WAY BECAUSE THERE'S A NATURAL DRAINAGE DEEP ERODED CHANNEL AND WE DON'T WANT TO TOUCH THAT. 'CAUSE THAT'S EMPTYING THE DRAINAGE FROM ABOVE SO THAT WE, WE ARE NOT TOUCHING IT. WE DON'T NEED TO, WE'RE, WE'RE, WE'RE SO FAR AWAY FROM IT. AND IT'S THE NATURAL DIVIDE. NOW, MAYBE WHEN THEY, THEY LIVE THERE, THEY MAY DO BUILD A PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE TO ACCESS IT, BUT THAT'S, WE'LL DEAL WITH THE BUILDING IF THAT'S REQUIRED. IF, IF, IF THAT TYPE OF A BRIDGE, LIKE, YOU KNOW, ONE OF THOSE JAPANESE BRIDGES, IF THAT'S REQUIRED, WE'LL GET A BUILDING PERMIT. BUT DON'T NORMALLY THAT'S WHAT, WHAT PEOPLE END UP DOING WHEN THEY HAVE AN OBSTACLE AND THEY WANT TO GO, UH, GRACIOUSLY TO THE OTHER SIDE. I'LL, I'LL BUILD A BRIDGE. . YEAH, WHY NOT? ALRIGHT. WE HAVE FUN WITH THAT. ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD? I HAVE JUST ONE OTHER UNRELATED QUESTION TO WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. IF, IF, IF THE DRAINAGE OVERFLOWS THE SYSTEM YOU'RE PUTTING IN AND GOES DOWN TO SELMA RIVER ROAD. YES. THERE'S A CULVERT UNDER THERE, RIGHT? YES. THERE'S A T THAT CULVERT WHO, WHO'S RESPONSIBLE FOR THAT AND WHO MAINTAINS IT? DOT OWNS IT. THEY REQUIRED A STATEMENT AND A LETTER FROM US STATING THAT THAT WAS IN GOOD SHAPE. UH, BECAUSE, AND AS WELL AS ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT, THEY WANTED TO KNOW THE TRAJECTORY OF THE FINAL FLOW. MM-HMM . SO WE'VE TVD THE, THE WHOLE SEGMENT AND WE'VE SHARED THAT WITH EVERYBODY. SO IT'S, IT'S IN HEALTHY CONDITION. IT'S NOT SILTED IT UP, SILTED UP IN ANY WAYS. AND IT GOES ACROSS, ACROSS UNDERNEATH TO THE OTHER SIDE. INTO THE SUMMER RIVER? YES. OKAY. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD? NO. OKAY. THEN WE HAVE, UH, TWO VARIANCES THAT WE ARE IN A POSITION TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION ON. UM, AS A REMINDER FOR A RECOMMENDATION TO THE ZBA, WE CAN EITHER GO POSITIVE, NEUTRAL, OR NEGATIVE BASED ON THE STANDARDS THAT WE'VE DISCUSSED BEFORE AND HAVE DISTRIBUTED IN THE MEMO. UM, TYPICALLY WE WOULD GO POSITIVE IF THERE IS A SIGNIFICANT PLANNING, POSITIVE PLANNING IMPLICATION FOR THE VARIANCE. UM, IF THERE'S A, A NEGATIVE, UH, REASON FOR THE VARIANCE PLANNING CONSIDERATION, WE'D GO NEGATIVE. OTHERWISE, NORMALLY WE WOULD GO NEUTRAL. UH, THE TWO VARIANCES THAT WE HAVE THIS EVENING, UM, AS WAS, UH, OUTLINED BY MR. ESCAL, WAS THE POOL, THE POOL RESTRICTED TO THE REAR YARD. TYPICALLY IT'S REQUIRED IN THE REAL YARD AND THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING FOR IT TO BE INSTALLED IN THE SIDE YARD, UH, BASED ON THE TOPOGRAPHY OF THE LOT. UM, AND THEN ALSO THE MAXIMUM DRIVEWAY WIDTH. TYPICALLY, UH, THE MAXIMUM IS 30 AND THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING 40. UH, DOES ANYONE ON THE BOARD HAVE ANY THOUGHTS OR REACTIONS TO THE PROPOSED VARIANCES? I WOULD SUGGEST WE, UH, THAT WE ADOPT THE POOL AS A NEUTRAL VARIANCE RATHER THAN A POSITIVE 'CAUSE. IT DOES SET A PRECEDENT AND I WOULD BE CONCERNED IN THE FUTURE OF SOMEBODY COMING TO US WITH THE SAME APPLICATION WITH A POOL ON THE SIDE OF THE HOUSE THAT WOULD BE VISIBLE TO NEIGHBORS AND THE ROADWAY. ALRIGHT. ANYONE HAVE ANY, ANY COMPETING THOUGHTS? I, I WOULD BE VOTING NEUTRAL FOR BOTH. YEP. NEUTRAL FOR BOTH? SAME. I'M FINE WITH THAT. ALRIGHT, THEN I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO MAKE A NEUTRAL RECOMMENDATION TO THE ZBA ON THE TWO REQUIRED VARIANCES. SO MOVED. MOVE MR. PILLINGER. SECOND. SECOND. MR. PATEL. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. A AYE. CHAIR VOTES. AYE. AYE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT. UH, SO NOW WE ARE MOVING INTO OUR PUBLIC HEARING. UH, I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO OPEN THIS EVENING'S. SORRY, ONE QUESTION FOR MY CLIENT. THE, WE, WE, WE WILL BE SCHEDULING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR WHENEVER IF WE FIT IN THE SCHEDULE, CORRECT? YEAH. SO ONCE YOU GO TO THE ZBA AND YOU GET YOUR, OH, I SEE. ASSUMING YOU GET YOUR VARIANCES ONCE THEY'VE MADE THEIR DECISION, UH, THEN YOU COME BACK TO US AND THE FUND CONTINUES. VERY, HAVE YOU SUBMITTED TO THE ZONING BOARD YET? YES. YOU DID. OKAY. YEAH, WE SUBMITTED. SIT DOWN. [00:15:02] I BELIEVE WE'RE IN, UM, THE AUGUST MEETING, THE NEXT MEETING. I, I THINK NOT SURE. I'M CHECK WE HER TOMORROW. TOMORROW, NOT TOMORROW. WELL ACTUALLY HAVE TO BRING ONE. I HAVE TO BRING SOMETHING OVER TO HIM TOMORROW, SO I'LL ASK FOR THE MINUTE. OH, SO YOU'RE PROBABLY IN THE AUGUST MEETING. OKAY. OKAY. ALRIGHT. I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING PORTION OF THIS EVENING'S MEETING. SO MOVED. MOVE, MR. PILLINGER. SECONDED. SECOND. MS. ANDERSON. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. CHAIR VOTES. AYE. UH, WELCOME TO THIS EVENING'S PUBLIC HEARING. UH, IT IS STILL WEDNESDAY, JULY 15TH, 2026. AND THIS IS STILL THE PLANNING BOARD. IT IS SEVEN 20, UH, PM UH, OUR FIRST AND ONLY PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS EVENING IS CASE NUMBER PB 25. OH, THANK YOU. UH, TOWN PLANNER. BRI, MAY YOU CONDUCT THE ROLE? SURE. UH, MS. ANDERSON. HERE. MR. WEINBERG? HERE. MR. PATEL? HERE. MR. PINE? HERE. MR. ROBINSON? HERE. MR. PILLINGER? HERE. ALL RIGHT. UH, AND AS I STATED EARLIER, UH, MR. UH, SORRY, MS. ROBINSON WILL BE THE VOTING ALTERNATE FOR, UH, PB 25 37, UH, AS WELL AS 25 0 4. SO FIRST UP, WE HAVE CASE NUMBER PB 25 37, UH, A-C-P-I-I, FAIRVIEW, LLC AT 1 0 2 FAIRVIEW PARK DRIVE PO ELMSFORD, NEW YORK. THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING A WETLAND WATERCOURSE PERMIT. GOOD EVENING. IF YOU COULD BRIEFLY SUMMARIZE, UH, THE APPLICATION FOR THE RECORDS. YES. AND STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD. SURE. UH, MY NAME IS JOE FERNANDEZ. I'M THE ARCHITECT FOR THE PROJECT. UM, WE WERE IN FRONT OF THE BOARD, UH, LAST MEETING AND, UM, WE HAD DISCUSSED, UH, SOME VARIOUS THINGS THAT WERE DONE, UM, ON SITE. AND, UM, THE BOARD HAD, UH, SHOWED SOME CONCERN ABOUT THE STORMWATER RETENTION TO GO FROM, UH, 25 YEAR TO, UM, 50 YEAR. UM, AND SECONDLY, UM, THERE WAS, UH, SOME INTEREST OF THE WATER AS IT, UH, GOES INTO THE SAWMILL RIVER FROM OUR SITE. AND THEN LASTLY, UH, THE BOARD WAS LOOKING FOR SOME, UH, PHOTOGRAPHS, UH, TO, UH, IDENTIFY VEGETATION THAT'S CURRENTLY ON SITE. AND YOU'LL SEE NOW WHAT WE'VE PROPOSED, UH, IN THE INTERIM. GREAT. AND, AND IF YOU CAN JUST BRIEFLY, UH, ZOOM OUT A A LITTLE BIT AND JUST BRIEFLY SUMMARIZE, UM, THE, THE COMPONENTS OF THE APPLICATION, HOW THIS IS A LEGALIZATION, AND, UM, JUST A LITTLE BIT MORE CONTEXT FOR THE RECORD. CERTAINLY. SO, UM, THE SITE, UH, IT'S AN INDUSTRIAL SITE. UH, IT'S SURROUNDED, UH, BY, UH, A PARKING LOT AS YOU CAN SEE. CAN YOU SEE, HMM. NO, YOU CAN'T SEE, HOLD ON A SECOND, I APOLOGIZE. OKAY. OKAY, THERE WE GO. SO YOU HAVE A LARGE INDUSTRIAL BUILDING WITH THE PARKING LOT THAT SURROUNDS IT. AND, UM, IN THE FRONT THERE WAS A, A TURNAROUND HERE THAT YOU CAN SEE IS POCHE, AND THAT WAS ENCLOSED, UH, AND NOW LANDSCAPE WITH GRASS AND SOME OTHER VEGETATION. SO, UH, PARKING SPOTS WERE CREATED THERE, UH, TO HELP, UH, WITH THE SITE AND, AND TO FACILITATE TRAFFIC ON THE SITE. UH, SECONDLY, UM, THERE WAS A, UH, UH, A WALL, A SHORT WALL, FIVE FOOT HIGH THAT, UH, GOES FROM FAIRVIEW PARK DRIVE HERE UP AT THE TOP AND RUNS ALL THE WAY AROUND THE SITE DOWN AND THEN BACK AND RETURNS TO THE BUILDING. AND ESSENTIALLY IT'S, UM, KEEPING WATER OUT, RIGHT? SO THERE WAS AN EXISTING SYSTEM THAT WAS HERE AND THAT WAS FILED AND THAT WAS APPROVED BY THE TOWN, UH, YEARS AGO. UM, AND THIS AREA IN THE FRONT THAT WE'VE CREATED THE PARKING AND, AND, UM, UH, CUT OFF THE DRIVEWAY HERE. WE'VE PROVIDED NOW A REVISED STORMWATER SYSTEM FOR 50 YEARS. UM, WE'VE ALSO, UH, LOOKED AT THE OTHER END, ALL THESE CATCH BASINS [00:20:01] THAT RUN AROUND THE PROPERTY, UH, THEN, UH, EVENTUALLY EXIT OUT INTO THE SAWMILL RIVER DOWN HERE AT THIS PART OF THE SITE. AND WE'VE INTRODUCED A NEW, UM, OIL SEPARATOR BASED ON THE DESIGN OF THIS SYSTEM THAT WAS APPROVED BY THE TOWN. SO WE'RE MANAGING THE GALLONS THAT FLOW. OKAY. SO OUR NEW SEPARATOR CAN HANDLE THAT. UH, AND THEN LASTLY WAS, UM, ON FAIRVIEW PARK DRIVE. SO, AND, AND UNFORTUNATELY WE HAD, BECAUSE IT JUST GOT TOO BIG THAT WE JUST SCALED DOWN THE DRAWING A LITTLE BIT TO SHOW JUST THE PARKING AREA AND THE FRONT, WHICH WE'LL DISCUSS. THERE'S A BUNCH OF, UM, FOLIAGE THERE THAT, THAT IT'S LABELED WITH AN E AND THAT THOSE ARE EXISTING. AND THERE'S PICTURES HERE THAT DEMONSTRATE THAT. AND THEN WE HAD, UM, FOUR OTHER PLANTINGS, WHICH ARE NATIVE TO THIS AREA, UM, BASICALLY, UH, AT THE ENTRANCE TO KIND OF JAZZ THAT UP A LITTLE BIT, UH, BECAUSE THE REST OF IT HAS SOME, SOME KIND OF MATURE TREES AND GRASS AND IT'S REALLY NOT WHAT YOU'RE GONNA SEE. SO WHEN YOU COME IN, IT'LL BE NICE RIGHT THERE AT THE ENTRANCE. AND, AND, AND THAT'S PRETTY MUCH IT. SO WE'VE TRIED TO ADDRESS THE CONCERNS OF THE BOARD AND, UM, YEAH. AND SO HERE WE ARE. GREAT. THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD BEFORE WE GET INTO THAT? JUST ONE SECOND. I JUST WANNA STATE THAT THE APPLICANT DID APPEAR BEFORE THE CONSERVATION ADVISORY COUNCIL LAST WEEK. THEY RECEIVED A POSITIVE RECOMMENDATION FROM THE CONSERVATION ADVISORY COUNCIL, UH, WITH THE FOLLOWING RECOMMENDATIONS, UH, THAT A MAINTENANCE SCHEDULE FOR THE OIL AND WATER SEPARATOR BE ESTABLISHED WITH A REPORTING PROGRAM TO REPORT MAINTENANCE VISITS TO THE TOWN TO ENSURE ADHERENCE TO THE SCHEDULE AND THAT ALL NEW PLANTINGS ARE NATIVE PLANTS. YES. GREAT. THANK YOU. UH, MS. ROBINSON, UH, IN YOUR T TWO SITE PLAN? YES. MIDPOINT, RIGHT THERE AT THE BOTTOM HERE, THERE'S A DRAINAGE SYSTEM THERE. OKAY. JUST WONDERING IF THE APPLICANT WAS CONSIDERING SOME KIND OF FILTRATION FOR THAT AS WELL. WAS THAT GONNA BE TIED INTO THE PROPOSED, UH, DRAINAGE SYSTEM? SO, I, I, WE, WE DID NOT LOOK AT THAT AND, UH, PARTIALLY BECAUSE THAT IS, UH, DRAINAGE DIRECTLY FROM THE ROOF. SO, UM, THE, THE OIL SEPARATOR DOES EXACTLY WHAT IT SAYS IT DOES, RIGHT. YOU HAVE CARS AND TRUCKS THAT COULD LEAK SOME OIL AND THEN WHEN IT RAINS, IT'S JUST GONNA GO AWAY. RIGHT? SO ANYTHING OFF THE ROOF IS BASICALLY JUST DIRTY RAINWATER. SO THAT, AND, AND THAT WAS AGAIN, THAT WAS PREVIOUSLY APPROVED THIS PLAN. SO, UM, OUR NEW SECTION OBVIOUSLY WAS SOMETHING THAT WE HAD TO CONCENTRATE ON, AND THEN WE WENT BACK TO LOOK UP THE RECORDS FOR THE OLD SYSTEM IN THE PARKING LOT TO DESIGN THAT, UH, STORM STORMWATER, UH, OIL SEPARATOR. THANK YOU. GREAT. SURE. THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD? NO. ALRIGHT. WELL, THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING. IS THERE ANYONE FROM THE PUBLIC WHO, UH, IS HERE TO SPEAK ON THIS APPLICATION? YOU HAVE A QUESTION? SURE. MR. SIMON. WALTER SIMON, FORMER CHAIR OF THE PLANNING BOARD. I KNOW YEARS AGO WHEN WE WAS LOOKING AT, UH, THE STANDARD OF A 25 YEAR STORM VERSUS A 50, WE WERE ADVOCATING THAT THE TOWN GOES TO A MINIMUM 50 YEAR STORM. UH, SINCE THEN, THE STATE RECALCULATED WHAT A 25 YEAR STORM IS, AND BASED UPON THE OLD CALCULATION, IT CAME UP TO BE ABOUT 45 OR 46. SO, YOU KNOW, WE DIDN'T, WE JUST, SO WHAT STANDARD ARE WE USING NOW? ARE WE USING THE 50 YEAR STORM UNDER THE OLD CA CALCULATION OR A 50 YEAR YEAR STORM BASED UPON THE STATE REGULATION? THE STATE? YEAH. YEAH. SO, SO THE TOWN CODE, UH, STILL REQUIRES A 25 YEAR STORM STORM UNDER HOW A 25 YEAR STORM IS CURRENTLY DEFINED, WHICH IS THE EQUIVALENCE OF PREVIOUSLY, [00:25:01] YOU KNOW, ROUGHLY A 46, 47 YEAR STORM. RIGHT. OKAY. UM, AS A BOARD, WE, WE STILL MAKE A PRACTICE OF ENCOURAGING APPLICANTS, UM, TO GO ABOVE AND BEYOND WHAT THE CODE REQUIRES. AND, AND WE STILL ENCOURAGE THEM WHEN, WHEN, WHEN WHEREVER POSSIBLE, UM, TO CONSIDER A 50 YEAR STORM UNDER THE CURRENT DEFINITION OF WHAT A 50 YEAR STORM IS. UM, WHICH I'M, I'M NOT GONNA, UH, GUESS WHAT THAT IS UNDER THE OLD EQUIVALENCE, BUT IS IS EVEN MORE THAN, THAN WHAT, WHAT A 50 YEAR STORM WAS SOME YEARS AGO. I'M GLAD. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. UH, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE PUBLIC OR ANY OTHER, UH, COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC? IS THERE ANYONE ON ZOOM FOR THIS APPLICATION? ALRIGHT, SEEING NONE, UH, I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND KEEP THE WRITTEN RECORD OPEN THROUGH JULY 22ND. SO MOVED, MOVED, MS. ROBINSON. SECOND. SECOND. MR. PILLINGER ALL CHAIR BOTHS EYE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, SO NEXT UP WE HAVE A PUBLIC DISCUSSION ON, UH, THE COMPREHENSIVE CHAPTER 2 85 AMENDMENTS. UM, TO PROVIDE A A LITTLE BIT OF CONTEXT ON THIS PROCESS BEFORE, UH, COMMISSIONER DUQUESNE COMES UP AND, AND PROVIDES, UH, SOME BACKGROUND ON THE SPECIFIC CHANGES. SO TOWN STAFF, UH, OVER THE PAST YEAR OR SO, 18 MONTHS, UM, HAVE BEEN WORKING TOGETHER AS A WORKING GROUP, UM, TO REALLY STUDY, UH, UH, YOU KNOW, CHANGES TO CHAPTER 2 85. UM, THOSE PROPOSED CHANGES WERE ULTIMATELY DELIVERED TO THE TOWN BOARD, UH, WHICH IS THE, THE LEAD AGENCY AND THE DECISION MAKING BODY ON ANY ZONING, TEXT AND, UH, ZONING TEXT AMENDMENTS. UM, THOSE WERE DELIVERED TO THE TOWN BOARD, UH, LATE MARCH, EARLY APRIL. UH, THE TOWN BOARD, AS THE CODE REQUIRES REFERRED THOSE CHANGES TO THE PLANNING BOARD, UH, IN EARLY APRIL. AND OVER THE PAST FEW MONTHS, THE PLANNING BOARD HAS RECEIVED, UH, BITE-SIZED PRESENTATIONS FROM TOWN STAFF ON, UH, SPECIFIC CHANGES AND SPECIFIC ADJUSTMENTS WITHIN THE CODE. UM, UH, AND ULTIMATELY THE, THE PLANNING BOARD, UH, OVER THE NEXT COUPLE MONTHS WILL BE WORKING ON A RECOMMENDATION DOCUMENT THAT WE WILL SUBMIT BACK TO THE TOWN BOARD BEFORE THEY BEGIN THEIR, UH, PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS AND ULTIMATELY MAKE ANY ADDITIONAL CHANGES AND PRESUMABLY, UH, ADOPT SOME, SOME OR ALL CHANGES TO CHAPTER 2 85. UM, THIS EVENING IS A PUBLIC COMMENT SESSION FOR THE PUBLIC TO, UH, PROVIDE PERSPECTIVE AND COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING BOARD AS WE WORK TO MAKE OUR RECOMMENDATIONS BACK TO THE TOWN BOARD. UM, I'LL SAY THAT, THAT THIS WAS HAVING THIS PUBLIC COMMENT SESSION THIS EVENING, UH, GOES ABOVE AND BEYOND WHAT THE CODE REQUIRES. UH, TYPICALLY THE PLANNING BOARD WOULD NOT HAVE A PUBLIC COMMENT SESSION BEFORE MAKING A RECOMMENDATION TO THE TOWN BOARD. BUT BECAUSE OF HOW SIGNIFICANT THESE CHANGES, UM, MAY BE TO THE TOWN CODE, UH, WE FELT STRONGLY THAT WE WANTED TO HEAR FROM THE PUBLIC AND BE INFORMED FROM THE PUBLIC, UH, BEFORE WE MAKE OUR RECOMMENDATIONS. AND SO THAT, THAT BRINGS US TO THIS EVENING. UH, I AM REALLY LOOKING FORWARD TO HEARING FROM THE PUBLIC AND HEARING WHAT, WHAT THOUGHTS AND REACTIONS THEY HAVE, UH, TO CHAPTER 2 85. UH, AND WITH THAT I WILL PASS IT OVER TO COMMISSIONER DUQUESNE. THANK YOU. GOOD EVENING, CHAIRPERSON PINE AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING BOARD, THOSE IN ATTENDANCE AND THOSE WATCHING FOR THE RECORD, I'M GARRETT DUANE, COMMISSIONER OF THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND CONSERVATION. THANK YOU CHAIRPERSON PINE. FOR THAT BACKGROUND. I'D LIKE TO BRIEFLY BUILD ON THAT BACKGROUND PRIOR TO HEARING COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC. PRIOR TO MY TIME WORKING FOR GREENBURG RESIDENTS, TOWN PLANNING STAFF, TOWN BOARD AND PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS AROUND 2007 PROACTIVELY IDENTIFIED THAT A COMPREHENSIVE UPDATE TO CHAPTER 2 85, WHICH IS THE ZONING ORDINANCE WAS NEEDED WITH THE LAST PRIOR UPDATE. THE MAJOR UPDATE HAVING OCCURRED DECADES PRIOR, WHICH LARGELY BUILT OFF OF A 1957 ZONING ORDINANCE, A ZONING ORDINANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE WAS FORMED BY THE TOWN IN 2007. THAT COMMITTEE PUT TOGETHER A GREAT FRAMEWORK FOR FUTURE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATES THAT COMMITTEE'S WORK WAS ACTUALLY PAUSED WHEN THE TOWN THEN COMMISSIONED THE CREATION OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, WHICH WAS ULTIMATELY ADOPTED IN 2016. THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAID THE FOUNDATION THROUGH A SERIES OF GUIDING PRINCIPLES, GOALS, [00:30:01] OBJECTIVES, AND POLICIES FOR FUTURE ZONING MAP AND ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS. SINCE THE COMPREHENSIVE PLANS 2016 ADOPTION, MAJOR LEGISLATIVE ACTIONS BY THE TOWN BOARD OCCURRED WITH PLANNING BOARD INVOLVEMENT THROUGH REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS. AND THOSE SUCCESSFULLY INCLUDED A PARTIAL REMOVAL OF THE UR DISTRICT. FROM THE ZONING MAP CREATION OF A SENIOR HOUSING ZONING DISTRICT UPDATED THE ZONING ORDINANCE WITH RESPECT TO ASSISTED LIVING FACILITIES AND LIKE SENIOR HOUSING USES CREATION OF A CONTINUUM OF CARE, SENIOR HOUSING USE CATEGORY IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE, ZONING IMPLEMENTATION RELATED TO REGENERON. AND ITS SIGNIFICANT AND ONGOING RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT EXPANSION IN FOUR CORNERS RELATED PLANNING AND REZONING EFFORTS WERE FORMULATED. AND THOSE ARE STILL ACTIVE TODAY SINCE THE COMPREHENSIVE PLANS ADOPTION. THERE'S ALSO BEEN A SERIES OF INCREMENTAL ZONING ORDINANCE AND ZONING MAP AMENDMENTS. SOME OF THOSE HAVE BEEN PETITIONED PRIVATELY OR OTHERS WERE INITIATED BY THE TOWN, LIKE THE CURRENT CHAPTER 2 85 PROCESS. THOSE INCREMENTAL PROCESSES HAVE IMPROVED THE ORDINANCE AND THE TOWN, HOWEVER, THE INTENT REMAIN. AND THE NEED HAS ALWAYS REMAINED TO COMPREHENSIVELY UPDATE THE ZONING ORDINANCE BY REMOVING INCONSISTENCIES, REMOVING OUTDATED TERMS AND REFERENCES, ENSURE CLARITY FOR RESIDENTS AND THOSE SEEKING TO INVEST IN THE TOWN. AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, TO ALIGN WITH THE TOWN'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. WHILE THE INCREMENTAL ZONING AMENDMENTS THAT HAVE OCCURRED OVER THE PAST 10 YEARS HAVE BEEN, HAVE HAD BENEFICIAL IMPACTS. THE REALITY IS ALMOST ALL OF THE DIFFERENT ZONING SECTIONS OF CHAPTER 2 85 ARE CONNECTED IN SOME WAY OR ANOTHER, THEREFORE, TO MODERNIZE SMALL PORTIONS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE IN DIFFERENT SEGMENTS AND OR IN DIFFERENT PROCESSES OVER THE COURSE OF SEVERAL YEARS, THAT WILL NEGATIVELY IMPACT THE GOAL OF REMOVING INCONSISTENCIES AND HAVING A COHESIVE OVERALL ZONING ORDINANCE THAT ACHIEVES SUSTAINABILITY, QUALITY OF LIFE, ECOLOGICAL AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT GOALS THAT IT SEEKS TO BALANCE. SINCE THE TIME THE TOWN SOUGHT TO COMPLETELY COMPREHENSIVELY UPDATE THE ZONING ORDINANCE WAY BACK IN 2007 OR SO, AS WAS NOTED, THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WAS ADOPTED. THE OFFICE AND RETAIL MARKETS HAVE SHIFT SHIFTED SIGNIFICANTLY. THE RESTAURANT INDUSTRY HAS EVOLVED. TRAVEL MEANS AND PATTERNS HAVE SHIFTED, AND THE NEED FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING IS ONLY INTENSIFIED WHILE OVERDUE. THE TIME FOR COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS IS EXCELLENT AT THIS TIME AS IT CAN LEAD TO INTO A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, UPDATE REVIEW PROCESS SOMETIME IN THE NEAR FUTURE, HOPEFULLY NEXT YEAR. THE REVIEW THAT THE PLANNING BOARD IS UNDERTAKING AND THE HOURS UPON HOURS THAT YOU HAVE INVESTED ARE APPRECIATED. THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS WERE THE PRODUCT OF OVER A YEAR PLUS EFFORT OF TOWN STAFF WITH CONSULTATION THAT INCLUDED SOME OF THOSE THAT WERE ON THE ORIGINAL ZONING ORDINANCE COMMITTEE WAY BACK IN 2007, TAKING ADVANTAGE OF THAT INSTITUTIONAL KNOWLEDGE. I'M PLEASED TO NOTE THAT WESTCHESTER COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT HAS OPINED FAVORABLY ON THE AMENDMENTS SINCE THE CIRCULATION OF THE AMENDMENTS IN MARCH OF THIS YEAR. RESIDENTS AND BUSINESSES, BUSINESS OWNERS HAVE PROVIDED HELPFUL COMMENTS WHICH WILL IMPROVE THE EFFORT IN THE DOCUMENTS. I WANNA CONCLUDE WITH THE MAJOR DISTINCTION ABOUT WHAT THE CHAPTER 2 85 MODIFICATIONS ARE VERSUS WHAT THEY ARE NOT. AND I'LL DO THAT THROUGH A FEW EXAMPLES. THE MODIFICATIONS RECTIFY GAPS IN ZONES THAT DO NOT REQUIRE AFFORDABLE HOUSING SET SET-ASIDES BY NOW, REQUIRING THEM BY NOW REQUIRING THEM. BUT THE MODIFICATIONS DO NOT ESTABLISH NEW MIXED USE RESIDENTIAL OPPORTUNITIES, NOR DO THEY ALLOW FOR CONVERSIONS OF BUILDINGS IN EXISTING OFFICE DISTRICTS TO BE CONVERTED TO RESIDENTIAL. BOTH OF THOSE ARE CONCEPTS THAT ARE MORE APPLICABLE TO A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE PROCESS WITH ROBUST COMMUNITY OUTREACH. THESE ARE GOOD DISCUSSIONS TO HAVE, BUT IN THE CONTEXT OF A FUTURE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE PROCESS, THAT'S NOT THE GOAL THAT WE'RE TRYING TO SEEK RIGHT NOW. THE MODIFICATIONS WILL MAKE SUBTLE TWEAKS TO ALLOWABLE USES IN THE MIXED USE QUARTERS OF THE TOWN TO MINIMIZE VACANCIES WITH COMPATIBLE USES. THE MODIFICATIONS, HOWEVER, DO NOT CONTAIN AMENDMENTS THAT WILL LEAD TO A SHORT OR LONG-TERM EVOLUTION OF THE CORRIDORS IN A DIRECTION NOT INVIS ENVISIONED BY THE RESPECTIVE, UH, ZONING DISTRICTS THAT THEY ARE IN OR THE TOWN'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. THE MODIFICATIONS WILL CREATE NON-COMPLEX CLASSIFICATIONS FOR FOOD AND BEVERAGE ESTABLISHMENTS IN THE TOWN, BUT NOT RELAXED STANDARDS FOR MORE INTENSE DRIVE-THROUGH USES. IN FACT, THE REGULATIONS BECOME MORE RESTRICTIVE IN THIS REGARD FOR THOSE USES. THE MODIFICATIONS WILL STANDARDIZE PROCESS AND PROCEDURES FOR SPECIAL PERMIT AND SITE PLAN APPLICATIONS, BUT NOT LIMIT OR REDUCE THE DISCRETION THAT THE TOWN AND PLANNING BOARD HAVE IN REVIEWING AND APPROVING PROJECTS. THE MODIFICATIONS TO OFF STREET PARKING ARE SUBTLE, SUCH AS INTRODUCING LAND BANK PARKING CONCEPTS AND INTRODUCING [00:35:01] ALLOWANCES FOR COMPACT CAR SPACES. HOWEVER, THE MODIFICATIONS WILL NOT ALLOW INFILL DEVELOPMENT AND SHOPPING CENTERS WHERE PARKING ROUTINELY APPROACHES CAPACITY. AS WAS NOTED EARLIER, THERE ARE NUMEROUS WAYS FOR ANYONE WITH INTEREST TO QUICKLY BRING THEMSELVES UP TO SPEED ON THE FULL SCOPE OF THE MODIFICATIONS, WHETHER THAT BE THROUGH WATCHING INFORMATIONAL VIDEOS, PREPARED BY TOWN STAFF VIEWING THE PLANNING BOARD DISCUSSIONS, WHICH HAVE BEEN EXCELLENT IN REVIEWING THE TRACK CHANGE VERSION OF THE EDITS. THE PUBLIC COMMENT THAT WE HEAR TONIGHT, WHETHER POSITIVE, CRITICAL, OR OTHER IS APPRECIATED AND I LOOK FORWARD TO IT. RESIDENT INPUT WE HAVE RECEIVED TO DATE THAT WE WILL RECEIVE TONIGHT AND THAT WE WILL RECEIVE OVER THE NEXT SEVERAL MONTHS WILL HELP THE PROCESS AND LEAD TO IMPROVEMENTS. I'M CONFIDENT IN THAT AND I WANNA REMIND ALL THAT THE TOWN BOARD WILL ALSO BE HOLDING A SERIES OF PUBLIC HEARINGS ON THE UPDATES LATER THIS YEAR. UH, AND LASTLY, THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND CONCERT. THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PAGE ON THE TOWN WEBSITE HAS ITS OWN TAB DEVOTED TO THIS PROCESS AND THAT CONTAINS ALL RELEVANT INFORMATION, LINKS, UPDATES, VIDEOS, ET CETERA. SO WITH THAT, THANK YOU. I LOOK FORWARD TO HEARING FROM THE PUBLIC. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER DUQUE. UM, SO JUST SOME SIMPLE GROUND RULES. UH, THERE IS A SIGNUP SHEET, UH, HERE AT THE END OF THE DAIS. AND SO IF YOU HAVE NOT ALREADY SIGNED UP AND YOU INTEND TO SPEAK, UH, PLEASE SIGN UP. UH, BECAUSE OF THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO ARE HERE THIS EVENING, UH, WE WILL HAVE A FIVE MINUTE, UH, LIMIT ON SPEAKING. UH, IF WE, UH, IF WE ARE IN A POSITION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC, UH, PUBLIC DISCUSSION THIS EVENING, WE'LL HAVE A SECOND ROUND OF FIVE MINUTES. UM, IF THE BOARD DECIDES THAT WE WANT TO HEAR MORE AND WE WANNA CONTINUE THIS TO OUR NEXT MEETING IN AUGUST, THEN THERE WILL NOT BE A SECOND ROUND. UM, SO WITH THAT SAID, UH, MS. MAGANA, CAN YOU INTRODUCE THE FIRST PERSON ON THE SIGNUP SHEET? MS. SHERRY YUJI. ALRIGHT, I'M SORRY IF I DIDN'T SAY YOUR LAST NAME CORRECTLY. OKAY, GOOD. I HAD THE LAST MEETING ONLINE. I WAS, I'M NOT EXCESSIVE, I'M JUST SAYING I'M CLOSER TO 10, NO, OR THANK YOU BE BECAUSE OF THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE HERE THIS EVENING. AND TYPICALLY WE END OUR MEETINGS BY BY 10 O'CLOCK. OKAY. UM, I'M HAPPY TO GO LAST IF THAT'S, OTHERWISE I'LL JUST HAVE MY HUSBAND GET UP AND HE CAN READ THE SECOND HALF AND, AND THAT WOULD AND THAT WOULD BE FINE. SO YOU'RE GONNA HEAR IT, BUT I'LL HAVE TO READ . THANK YOU. IS IT OKAY TO BREAK IT UP OR DO YOU NEED TO, UH, I THINK IT'D BE BETTER FOR YOU GUYS AND I'M HAPPY TO GO AT THE END IF YOU WANT US TO BE TOGETHER. THAT'S, THAT'S FINE. ALRIGHT. DOES ANYONE ON THE LIST MIND IF, UM, MR. YUI GOES AFTER, UM, HIS WIFE SPEAKS? UM, ANY COMPLAINTS? OKAY, THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. OH, OKAY. OKAY. I AM GONNA START THE CLOCK. OKAY. UH, GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS SHERRY YUJI. TONIGHT I WANT TO DISCUSS THREE SPECIFIC PARTS OF THE PROPOSED CHAPTER 2 85 AMENDMENTS. FIRST, THE PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE SPECIAL PERMIT STANDARDS FOR SENIOR HOUSING, PARTICULARLY CONTINUING CARE RETIREMENT COMMUNITIES OR CRCS. SECOND, THE PROPOSED CHANGE TO THE DEFINITION OF ACCESS WAY AND THIRD CHANGES REGARDING RETAINING WALLS AND THE IMPACT OF TO SETBACKS AND HEIGHT REQUIREMENTS. UH, THESE PROVISIONS ARE NOT MERELY HOUSEKEEPING CHANGES OR GENERAL UPDATES. THEY COULD SUBSTANTIALLY ALTER RESIDENTIAL DENSITY, BUILDING HEIGHT, MASSING, AND SETBACKS TO THE DETRIMENT OF NEIGHBORING RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES. MY SPECIFIC REQUESTS TONIGHT ARE AS FOLLOWS, SENIOR HOUSING AMENDMENTS BE REMOVED FROM THIS GENERAL 2 85 PACKAGE AND RECEIVE A SEPARATE FULLY NOTICED REVIEW AND ACCESS WAY AND RETAINING WALL PROVISIONS BE CLARIFIED SO THAT MEANINGFUL RESIDENTIAL PROTECTIONS ARE PRESERVED. UM, AS BACKGROUND, MY FAMILY AND I LIVE NEXT TO AND DOWNHILL FROM THE KNOWLES, THE TOWN'S ONE AND ONLY CCRC, WHICH HAS A PENDING APPLICATION SINCE LAST YEAR TO ADD 74 INDEPENDENT LIVING UNITS [00:40:01] DURING THE PLANNING BOARD'S REVIEW PROCESS. AND BEFORE THESE CHAPTER 2 85 AMENDMENTS WERE INTRODUCED PUBLICLY, MY ATTORNEY SUBMITTED A LEGAL MEMO IN OCTOBER IDENTIFYING SEVERAL WAYS IN WHICH THE KNOWLES APPLICATION DID NOT COMPLY WITH THE EXISTING ZONING CODE OR WAS MISSING REQUIRED VARIANCES. AND A COPY OF THAT LETTER IS IN WHAT I HANDED OUT TO YOU, THE PROPOSED CHAPTER 2 85 AMENDMENTS NOW PROPOSED CLOSELY TRACK ALMOST EXACTLY TO THOSE DISPUTED NOELS ISSUES WITH REMARKABLE PRECISION. THESE AMENDMENTS APPEAR TO RESOLVE OR SUBSTANTIALLY REDUCE KEY COMPLIANCE PROBLEMS AFFECTING THE PENDING APPLICATION POINT BY POINT, THIS APPEARANCE ALONE WARRANTS A SEPARATE AND TRANSPARENT REVIEW. WHAT DOES THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ACTUALLY SAY? POLICY 10.1 0.1 STATES CONSISTENT WITH FUTURE LAND USE MAPS PRESERVE THE DENSITY OF EXISTING UNDERLYING ONE FAMILY RESIDENCE DISTRICTS. SENIOR HOUSING SPECIAL PERMIT USES FALL ALONG A CONTINUUM FROM STRICTLY INSTITUTIONAL TO OVERWHELMINGLY RESIDENTIAL. A NURSING HOME IS PRIMARILY INSTITUTIONAL ASSISTED LIVING, PREDOMINANTLY CARE ORIENTED. A CONTINUUM OF CARE CARE FACILITY IS A HYBRID 40 TO NOW PROPOSED A LIMIT OF 60% INDEPENDENT LIVING. AND A-C-C-R-C IS PREDOMINANTLY INDEPENDENT LIVING. THE PROPOSED NOS CONFIGURATION WOULD APPROACH 90% INDEPENDENT LIVING APARTMENTS WITH MUCH SMALLER ASSISTED LIVING AND NURSING COMPONENTS. CCCS AND CRCS ARE UNUSUAL BECAUSE THEY PLACE SUBSTANTIAL NUMBERS OF COMPLETELY RESIDENTIAL APARTMENTS INSIDE ONE FAMILY ZONING DISTRICTS AS SPECIAL PERMITS. THEY RIGHTFULLY SHOULD HAVE A LINK TO THE UNDERLYING RESIDENTIAL ZONE. THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAY GENERALLY SUPPORT INDEPENDENT SENIOR HOUSING, BUT IT RECOGNIZES DIFFERENT HOUSING USE TYPES. IT DOES NOT SAY THAT EVERY SENIOR HOUSING CATEGORY SHOULD RECEIVE IDENTICAL DENSITY HEIGHTENED STORY STANDARDS, NOR DOES IT SAY THAT PREDOMINANTLY INDEPENDENT LIVING DEVELOPMENTS SHOULD BE DISCONNECTED FROM THE DENSITY OF THE UNDERLYING RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS. THEREFORE, I DO NOT AGREE WITH THE RATIONALE THAT CCRC CRITERIA SHOULD BE ALIGNED WITH ASSISTED LIVING AND CCF CRITERIA. UM, ALSO, I OPPOSE THE DENSITY, THE DENSITY CHANGE THEY'RE PROPOSING TO REMOVE, UH, THE LINK TO UNDERLYING DENSITY AND REPLACE IT WITH BEDS PER ACRE. I MEAN, YOU CAN'T COMPARE A ONE BEDROOM APARTMENT WITH A DEN AND A BALCONY TO A BED IN A NURSING HOME. THAT MAKES NO SENSE AND THAT WOULD COMPLETELY CHANGE. UM, THE KNOLLS, ACCORDING TO THE CURRENT, WOULD ALLOW 126 UNITS. WE'VE DISPUTED THAT THROUGH OUR ATTORNEY. UM, THEY'VE TRIED TO USE A PROVISION TO MAKE IT 2 52. THIS PROPOSED PROVISION WOULD INCREASE IT TO 435 BEDS. THAT'S AN INCREASE OF DENSITY NO MATTER HOW YOU SLICE IT, CALL IT BEDS, CALL IT UNITS, CALL IT WHATEVER YOU WANT. IT'S AN INCREASE OF DENSITY THAT'S NOT ALIGNED WITH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. I ALSO DISAGREE WITH THE HEIGHTENED STORY CHANGES THAT'S PROPOSING TO GO FROM TWO AND A HALF TO THREE STORIES AND POSSIBLY, UH, FOUR STORIES, UH, WITH IF IT'S SCREENED, UH, THAT'S NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. 11.9 0.14, UH, STATES. IT MUST BE ENFORCEABLE PROVISIONS THAT'S NOT ENFORCEABLE. THANK YOU. YOU'RE FIVE MINUTES. YOUR FIVE MINUTES IS UP. OKAY. OKAY. JUST, UH, MOTION, JUST REALLY QUICKLY. JUST PROTECTION. JUST HAVE MY FIVE MINUTES. YEAH, I'LL GO AT THE END IF THAT'S NO, EVERYBODY JUST LET HER HAVE MY, IS THAT OKAY? WHETHER IT'S MY VOICE, HER VOICE READING, I, I, I'D, I'D RATHER US NOT, UH, NOT DEVIATE FROM PLANS. OKAY. I GET IT. OKAY. UM, READ ACCESS WAY, JUST ACCESS WAY DOWN. ACCESS WAY. AND NOT RETAIN WALLS. NO. AND RETAIN WALLS. ACCESS WAY, RETAIN WALLS. ACCESS WAY DEFINITION. MY, OUR NEXT CONCERN IS, OKAY, THE PROPOSED REVISION TO THE DEFINITION OF ACCESS WEIGHT. WE RAISED THIS QUE THIS IS A QUESTION BECAUSE WE DO NOT UNDERSTAND THE PURPOSE OF CHANGING THAT DEFINITION. IS THE AMENDMENT INTENDED TO ELIMINATE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS FOR LOOP ROADS, CIRCULATION DRIVES, AND OTHER INTERNAL PRIVATE ROADWAYS? THE TOWN CLEARLY REQUIRES SETBACKS FOR ORDINARY DRIVEWAYS AND IS CLARIFYING DRIVEWAY DEFINITIONS IN THE SAME UPDATE. [00:45:01] BUT THE DELETION FROM THE ACCESSWAY DEFINITION COULD PERMIT AN ARGUMENT THAT PRIVATE AND LOOP ROADS ARE NOT SUBJECT TO SETBACKS AT ALL. DOES THE TOWN INTEND TO REQUIRE SETBACKS FOR AN ORDINARY RESIDENTIAL DRIVEWAY WHILE ALLOWING A MAJOR PRIVATE CIRCULATION ROADWAY TO HAVE NO STATED SETBACK? THE SAME AMENDMENT PACKAGE PROPOSES A 30 FOOT SETBACK FOR CHICKEN COOPS. PLEASE TELL ME, THE TOWN DOES NOT INTEND TO REQUIRE GREATER SEPARATION FOR A CHICKEN COOP THAN FOR A MAJOR PRIVATE CIRCULATION ROAD. IF ELIMINATING ROADWAY SETBACKS IS NOT THE INTENT, THE LANGUAGE MUST BE CORRECTED. IF IT IS THE INTENT, THE TOWN MUST OPENLY EXPLAIN AND EVALUATE THE CONSEQUENCES. A CIRCULATION ROAD CARRYING CONTINUOUS TRAFFIC, HEADLIGHTS AND NOISE IMMEDIATELY BESIDES A RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY LIKE OURS WITH NO REQUIRED SETBACK WOULD BE DIFFICULT TO RECONCILE, RECONCILE WITH SECTION TEN'S DIRECTIVE TO PROTECT ESTABLISHED RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS RETAINING WALLS. THE AMENDMENT'S OVERVIEW THIS, THE AMENDMENT'S OVERVIEW STATES EXCLUDING RETAINING WALLS FROM SETBACKS, BUT THE LANGUAGE COULD BE READ TO EXCLUDE RETAINING WALLS FROM THE HEIGHT REGULATIONS MORE THAN SETBACKS. SO WHAT IS THE OBJECTIVE WITH THIS? RETAINING WALLS CAN BE NECESSARY. NO ONE IS ARGUING OTHERWISE. BUT EXCLUDING RETAINING WALLS FROM ALL SETBACKS AND OR NOT REGULATING ITS HEIGHT AT ALL CAN HAVE A DRAMATIC EFFECT ON NEIGHBORHOOD PROPERTIES THAT COULD ALLOW A LARGE ENGINEERED RETAINING WALL IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO A RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY LINE. IMAGINE IF YOUR NEIGHBOR CONSTRUCTED A 12 FOOT RETAINING WALL IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO YOUR PROPERTY LINE. THIS COULD HAPPEN. AND HOW DOES A RETAINING WALL PROVIDE LESS OF AMASSING OR VISUAL IMPACT THAN A REGULAR WALL AT THE KNOLLS? AN APPROXIMATELY EIGHT FOOT RETAINING WALL WOULD SUPPORT AN ELEVATED ROADWAY PROPOSED ROUGHLY 24 TO 25 FEET FROM MY PROPERTY. THE SETBACK IS 75 FEET TODAY. THEY WERE LOOKING FOR BASICALLY 50 50 FEET LESS. A WALL OF THAT SCALE AND FUNCTION IS NOT A MINOR LANDSCAPING FEATURE. IT CREATES A SUBSTANTIAL VISUAL MASS AND ELEVATES THE NOISE, HEADLIGHTS AND ACTIVITY OF ROAD OF THE ROADWAY. IT SUPPORTS ELIMINATING SETBACKS AND HEIGHT LIMITS FOR SUCH STRUCTURES, DOES NOT PROTECT OR ENHANCE THE CHARACTER OF THE ADJOINING ONE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD. IN ADDITION, THIS COULD HAVE OTHER IMPACTS. PEOPLE WILL PUT LIGHT POLES OR SIMILAR CIRCULAR RETAINING WALLS TO ALLOW GREATER THAN 14 FEET HEIGHT. I DON'T THINK THIS WAS INTENDED. THIS IS A SIGNIFICANT LAND USE POLICY CHANGE. IT IS NOT ZONING. HOUSEKEEPING UPDATES. CLOSING OUR REQUEST IS STRAIGHTFORWARD. REMOVE THE CCRC AND OTHER SENIOR HOUSING SPECIAL PERMIT AMENDMENTS FROM THIS GENERAL CHAPTER 2 85 PACKAGE AND RETURN THEM FOR A SEPARATE, FULLY NOTICED REVIEW, PRESERVE AND CLARIFY SETBACK REQUIREMENTS FOR EXCESS ACCESSWAY LOOP ROADS AND MAJOR PRO UH, PRIVATE CIRCULATION DRIVES AND DO NOT ELIMINATE SETBACKS OR HEIGHT LIMITS FOR RETAINING WALLS. THE CODE SHOULD TEST THE PROJECT. THE PROJECT SHOULD NOT BECOME THE TEMPLATE FOR REWRITING THE CODE. THANK YOU. APPRECIATE YOUR TIME AS ALWAYS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. NEXT UP, NEXT UP WE HAVE MR. WALTER SIMON. GOOD EVENING . UH, UH, CHAIRMAN DILL, SORRY. CHAIRMAN PINE MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING BOARD. MY NAME IS WALTER SIMON. UH, I HAVE A LONG HISTORY OF THESE CODES. YEARS AGO I WAS APPOINTED TO A COMMITTEE, UH, A A CONSULTANT THAT DRAFTED CODE CHANGES. UH, AND, AND THEN RIGHT AROUND THE SAME TIME, THE TOWN DECIDED TO GO INTO A MASTER PLAN. SO I WENT FROM BEING ON THE COMMITTEE THAT DRAFTED THE CODE CHANGES TO A MEMBER OF THE MASTER PLAN THAT, UH, THAT WE SPENT ALMOST EIGHT YEARS IN DEVELOPING. PART OF THE MASTER PLAN INCLUDED CHANGES TO THE CODE AND A WHOLE LONG LIST OF, OF RECOMMENDED CHANGES TO THE CODE. I COMMEND THE COMMISSIONER BECAUSE EVIDENTLY HE WENT THROUGH THAT LIST [00:50:01] AND LOOKED AT THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WERE IN THE MASTER PLAN AND CAME UP WITH THIS DOCUMENT, 415 PAGES, WHICH IS MORE THAN THE MASTER PLAN ITSELF, WHICH WAS ONLY 318. SO THIS IS A MASSIVE DOCUMENT. A LOT OF WORK WENT INTO IT. AND THE SAME AMOUNT OF EFFORT THAT WENT INTO IT SHOULD, UH, SHOULD BE, UH, UH, UH, ASSIGNED. NOT NECESSARILY A WHOLE YEAR, BUT A MAJOR EFFORT SHOULD GO INTO ANALYZING AND SEEING WHAT THE EFFECTS ARE. IT'S ONE THING TO WRITE A CODE, BUT THEN YOU LOOK INTO THE SPECIFICS OF THE CODE. THERE'S ONE PART OF THE CODE THAT TALKS ABOUT, UH, SIDEWALKS. AND THIS, UH, PLANNING BOARD HAS A LONG HISTORY OF ADVOCATING FOR SIDEWALKS. THAT'S WHY WE HAVE 12 MILES OF SIDEWALKS IN THE TOWN. AND THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS DONE BY THE PLANNING BOARD AND BY, UH, THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO DECIDE WHERE SIDEWALKS WOULD GO. THE FACT THAT THIS NEW PLAN IS SAYING WE WILL CONTINUE THAT EFFORT OF BUILDING SIDEWALK, BUT WHEN YOU READ INTO THE CODE, IT SAYS THAT THE, UH, PUBLIC WORKS HAVE TO APPROVE IT. NOW IT'S THE PLANNING ISSUE. YOU HAVE PUBLIC WORKS SHOULD DECIDE WHETHER OR NOT, UH, UH, WHAT TO DO WITH THE FIRE HYDRANT, WHAT TO DO WITH THE LAMPPOST. UH, WILL THERE BE A BY PUTTING IN THE SIDEWALK, WILL THERE BE A GOOD A, A A GRADE CHANGE? OR, BUT YOU DON'T KNOW THOSE UNTIL YOU LOOK INTO THE CODE. IT'S NOT ENOUGH TO SAY, WE DOING SITE, WE WILL CONTINUE SIDEWALK. AND THE SAME THING IS WITH THE, UH, URBAN RENEWAL. I WAS A BIG ADVOCATE OF REMOVING THE URBAN RENEWAL. WE DID IT ON THE, UM, RESIDENTIAL AREA. BUT THE ARGUMENT WAS, WAIT A MINUTE, LET'S DO A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ON THE ENTIRE, UH, ONE 19. SO LET'S NOT DO A PIECEMEAL. SO WHEN I, WHEN WE SEE THAT THERE IS, UH, REMOVAL OF THE, UM, URBAN RENEWAL ON ONE 19, I SAID, OH FINE. BUT THEN WHEN YOU LOOK INTO THE CODE, IT, IT, UH, UH, WE TALKED ABOUT, AND I KNOW WE TALKED ABOUT THAT, UH, ONE 19 SHOULD BE A MIXED USE, BUT THE CODE SAID NO, IT'S NOT GONNA BE MIXED. UH, A MIXED USE. IT WILL ADOPT THE CODE ON CENTRAL AVENUE. SO WHY I THINK THAT JUST NEEDS FURTHER DISCUSSION. MAYBE THERE'S A GOOD REASON FOR DOING IT, BUT THAT JUST TELLS YOU THAT THIS, UH, A, THIS CODE CHANGES NEED MORE TIME FOR CAREFUL CONSIDERATION. I KNOW THAT THE, THE PLANNING BOARD MADE AN EFFORT TO HAVE THESE MEETINGS IN, UH, PREVIOUSLY, BUT YOU LOOK AT THE TIMING, IT'S IN THE MIDDLE OF THE SUMMER. IT WAS THE TIME WHEN THE, THE, THE TOWN BOARD WAS ESSENTIALLY, UH, UH, DYSFUNCTIONAL. UH, WE HAD AN ELECTION GOING ON. WE HAD THE ISSUE OF THE, OF, UM, THE MEDICAL BENEFITS. ALL ATTENTION WAS ON THESE ISSUES. SO YOU HAD VERY FEW PEOPLE TAKING ADVANTAGE OF THE GOOD INTENTION THAT WAS IMPLIED, WHICH YOU TRIED TO DO. YOU JUST DIDN'T GET THAT TYPE OF INPUT. INPUT. SO YOU NEED TO SLOW DOWN, EXTEND THESE HEARINGS. SO, AND BREAK IT UP IMPARTIAL SO WE COULD HAVE A FULL DISCUSSION OF ALL THE WORK THAT WENT INTO THIS. 14, 415 PAGES. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR. SIMON. ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. NEXT UP, NEXT UP WE HAVE MR. MURRAY BODEN. MY NAME IS MURRAY BODEN. I LIVE IN HARTSDALE. THIS IS 2026. THE THINKING THAT YOU'VE HAD FOR THE LAST 200 YEARS HAS BEEN UPENDED. I'M CONCERNED WITH ROADS AND SIDEWALKS AND THINGS LIKE THAT. HOW DO YOU LIKE THIS? FOR AN EXAMPLE, THE SIDEWALK NEEDS TO BE SHARED WITH THE PEDESTRIAN AND THE DELIVERY TRUCK. WE'RE GETTING MORE AND MORE DELIVERIES. AND WHEN THEY CAN'T GO UP ON A SIDEWALK AND LET YOU SEE IT GO AROUND [00:55:01] THEM SAFELY, IT'S A PROBLEM. IN TARRYTOWN, THEY HAVE SIDEWALKS OF ASPHALT. ONE, IT'S CHEAPER. TWO, IT'S EASIER ON YOUR FEET. 'CAUSE I USED TO BE A MARATHON RUNNER AND I'D RATHER RUN ON ASPHALT THAN CONCRETE ANY DAY. SO YOUR CHALLENGE IS TO DISREGARD THE EXPERTS THAT HAVE BEEN HERE FOR THE LAST 50 YEARS BECAUSE IT DOESN'T WORK TODAY. WHY ARE YOU MAKING CURBS TO START WITH? THOSE ROADS HAVE BEEN THERE FOR 200 YEARS AND THEY HAVEN'T DISAPPEARED. WHAT'S THE ADVANTAGE OF THE CURBS THAT YOU'RE PUTTING IN? MAKES IT LOOK. THEY PUT CURBS ON AREAS WHERE THERE ARE NO PEOPLE. THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN MAKING THOSE DECISIONS SHOULD BE RETIRED. GET RID OF THEM. BUT MY GRANDCHILDREN, MY ADDRESS IS OLD. ALWAYS BEEN CONCERNED. GRANDFATHER, I'M THINKING OF THE FUTURE. ARE YOU THREE MINUTES LEFT? NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION. BRILLIANT, BRILLIANT. YOU SEE THE SIGNS THEY PUT UP THERE, THEY GOT LITTLE DIAGRAMMATIC SIGNS. AND YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO READ THOSE LITTLE DOTS THERE AND FIGURE OUT WHERE YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO GO. AND THE KAHIKO BRIDGE, THE NEWEST ONES THAT THE STATE HAVE APPROVED ARE AN ARROW, ARROW PER LANE. AND YET YOU PERMIT NEW YORK STATE DOT TO PUT DIAGRAMMATIC SIGNS UP. AND THEY CAN'T PUT THE LINES ON THE ROAD CORRECTLY. IT'S, YOU CAN'T CROSS OVER. IT'S YELLOW ON YOUR LEFT. BUT THEY'RE USED TO USING IT WHITE BECAUSE THAT'S THE WAY THEY DID IT 50 YEARS AGO. SO YOU HAVE TO FIRE THE FA THE CURRENT COMMISSIONERS OF TRANSPORTATION AND THE PAST ONES AND THEY WERE ON THE BOARDS. HOW ARE YOU GOING TO, HOW ARE YOU GONNA GO FORWARD? IT'S A SERIOUS MORAL ISSUE. DO YOU WANT IT TO BE SAFE FOR YOUR CHILDREN AND YOUR GRANDCHILDREN? OR DO YOU WANNA FOLLOW THE RULES THAT ARE OUTDATED? THIS IS A MORAL QUESTION WHERE THE CURRENT RULES DON'T MEET THE MORALITY OF SAFETY IN THE FUTURE. IT'S YOUR RESPONSIBILITY TO CHANGE 'EM. I'M 93. I CAN'T LAST MUCH LONGER. I'M GONNA DIE PRETTY SOON. I CAN'T HELP YOU, LET THE KIDS HELP YOU. ONE OF THE PROBLEMS I HAVE, UH, EARLY DEMENTIA AND I CAN'T GET MY MIND TO WORK AS FAST AS IT WANT. THAT'S WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE. PEOPLE LIKE ME CAN'T FIND THE WORDS ANYMORE. I COME UP HERE AND I KEEP PUSHING BECAUSE KEEP PUSHING WILL SLOW DOWN MY DETERIORATION. AND IF YOU DON'T THINK I'M DETERIORATING, I AM. I ADMIT IT. ANYTIME I MAKE A MISTAKE, PLEASE CORRECT ME 'CAUSE I DIDN'T CATCH IT. THE FUTURE IS IN YOUR HANDS AND YOUR CHILDREN'S HANDS AND THE NEXT GENERATION, THE MISTAKES THAT WE ARE CURRENTLY MAKING, IT'S YOUR RESPONSIBILITY TO FIND SOMEBODY TO CORRECT THEM. GO TO THE SAFETY, THE RULES. RULES ARE NO GOOD. GET RID OF THEM. THANK YOU. THANK YOU MR. BODEN. NEXT UP WE HAVE MR. SCHWARTZ. I NEED MORE THAN 39 SECONDS. AMANDA . HOLD ON. FIRST TIME USING THE CLOCK. OKAY, READY? YEAH, I'M READY. THANK YOU FOR MENTIONING IT'S THE FIRST TIME YOU'RE USING THE CLOCK. IN FACT, I THINK THIS IS THE FIRST TIME IN THE HISTORY OF THE PLANNING BOARD WE EVER USED A CLOCK. WE NEVER USED IT IN THE 21 YEARS I WAS ON THE BOARD. JUST SO YOU KNOW, I WON'T GO INTO THE PROCESS. I'VE ALREADY, UH, DOCUMENTED THAT IN AD NAUSEUM, I THINK IN MY LETTERS. SO, UH, WHERE I THINK OF THE PROCESS. BUT I THINK YOU WERE SHORT SHIFTING THE, UH, PUBLIC'S ABILITY TO, TO COMMENT ON THIS. YOU SHOULD BE ASHAMED OF YOURSELF FOR THAT, BUT I'LL GO ON FROM THAT. FIRST OF ALL, I'D LIKE TO CONGRATULATE GARRETT. THIS WAS A HUGE AMOUNT OF WORK. ABSOLUTELY HUGE AMOUNT OF WORK. A LOT OF THIS COMES FROM JUST EXPERIENCES WE HAD WHEN I, WALTER AND OTHER PEOPLE SAT IN YOUR SEATS. AND, UH, THE FEEDBACK THAT WE GOT FROM THE PUBLIC. AND I THINK THERE ARE A LOT OF IMPROVEMENTS IN THE PLAN. I THINK THERE ARE A LOT OF THINGS IN THE PLAN IN WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED THAT AREN'T PARTICULARLY GOOD. UM, UH, LET ME GO OVER A COUPLE OF THE POSITIVES. FIRST, THE MARIJUANA CHANGES IS SOMETHING THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN DONE INITIALLY. SO I CONGRATULATE, [01:00:01] UH, GARRETT FOR PROPOSING THEM. NOW, UNFORTUNATELY, I THINK IT MAY BE TOO LITTLE TOO LATE FOR CENTRAL AVENUE BECAUSE THERE WERE ALREADY RIGHT ON THE GREENBERG BORDER ON BOTH THE YONKERS AND WHITE PLAINS. WE MAY END UP WITH ONE ON ONE 19 MIGHT. SO I THINK THAT'S POSITIVE. NOT TOUCHING THE PARKING REGULATIONS WAS THE RIGHT IDEA, EVEN THOUGH WE KNOW THAT THERE'S CERTAIN PLACES WHERE WE ARE UNDER PARKED OR I'M SORRY THAT WE OVERREGULATE PARKING. UH, THE REASON FOR THAT IS THAT THE PLANNING BOARD HAS DONE A TERRIFIC JOB OVER THE YEARS OF BEING FLEXIBLE WITH PARKING WAIVERS AND SHARED PARKING TO MAKE UP FOR THAT. AND I THINK THAT, UH, DECISION MAKING POWER SHOULD STAY WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND NOT BE LEGISLATED. SO I THINK THAT'S THE RIGHT THING. AND FRANKLY, ONE SIZE DOES NOT FIT ALL. WHAT HAP WHAT'S GOOD AT MIDWAY, EVEN THOUGH OVERALL YOU WOULD HAVE ONE, ONE ANSWER. WE ACTUALLY HAD TO BREAK MIDWAY UP INTO LITTLE PIECES AND DECIDE BEFORE WE DECIDED HOW TO PARK MIDWAY. AND THAT ONLY CAME FROM HARD WORK BY THE PLANNING BOARD. SO KEEP THAT DISCRETION. I THINK THAT'S EXTREMELY IMPORTANT. THOSE ARE MY POSITIVES. A COUPLE OF, UH, THINGS THAT I'D LIKE TO GET AND HOPEFULLY I'LL GET A SECOND CHANCE 'CAUSE I DON'T THINK I'LL GET THROUGH EVERYTHING. UM, THE, JUST THE, THE UH, DEFINITION OF FAMILY, FAMILY IS ABSURD. I'LL GIVE YOU A PERFECT EXAMPLE. IF YOU HAVE CHILDREN, THEY GO AWAY FROM TO COLLEGE FOR OUR FOUR YEARS, COME BACK, THEY'RE NO LONGER FAMILY. KIND OF UNDER THAT NEW DEFINITION. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU REALIZE THAT, BUT THEY'RE NOT. OKAY. THAT IS NOT WHAT FAMILY IS ABOUT. THAT FAMILY, I DON'T KNOW WHO WHO WROTE THAT. BUT IT SEEMS TO BE DESIGNED FOR ONE SPECIFIC INSTANCE AND ONE SPECIFIC INSTANCE ONLY. AND GO BACK TO THE DEFINITION THAT YOU ALREADY HAVE IN THE CODE. YOU FIX THE CONSTITUTIONAL ISSUE. LEAVE IT AT THAT FOR NOW. UM, WORKFORCE HOUSING, WHICH I KNOW IS GONNA BE CHANGED TO, UH, WHAT LOWER THE MARKET RATE HOUSING, I BELIEVE IS WHAT, WHAT IT'S GONNA BE CALLED. I, I THINK IT'S GREAT TO PUT A DEFINITION IN FOR THAT. UM, THE PROBLEM IS YOUR DEFINITION I THINK IS INACCURATE. UH, AS CO-CHAIR OF THE UH, ACCESSIBLE VIABLE LIVING COMMITTEE, WHICH IS OUR AFFORDABLE HOUSING COMMITTEE, I CAN TELL YOU WE DID A YEAR LONG STUDY ON THIS AND CUTTING OFF AFFORDABLE HOUSING AT 60% A MI IS TOO HIGH. SECTION EIGHT HOUSING ONLY HELPS PEOPLE UP TO 40%. THE RIGHT DEFINITION IS 40 TO 80%. AND ALSO, UNLESS YOU REALLY BELIEVE IN ROBERT MOSES, THE IDEA ISN'T TO HAVE ONE KIND OF INCOME IN ONE BUILDING AND ONE KIND OF INCOME IN ANOTHER BUILDING. YOU WANT A BLEND OF PEOPLE. AND TO GET STATE FUNDS, WHAT YOU NEED TO DO IS TARGET 60%, BUT THAT CAN BE WITH PEOPLE AT 40% AND PEOPLE AT 80% AND BLEND IT TOGETHER. THAT'S WHAT YOU WANT. YOU WANT PEOPLE TOGETHER. THAT'S WHAT GREENBERG'S ABOUT AND THAT'S WHAT AFFORDABLE HOUSING SHOULD BE ABOUT. NOT ISOLATING PEOPLE. CCF FACILITIES. MY ONLY COMMENT ON THAT IS I THINK THERE'S SOMETHING IN THERE ABOUT, ABOUT THESE NEW RATIOS BEING IN ONE BUILDING. WELL, IF YOU HAVE A LARGE PIECE OF PROPERTY, I CAN WIRE AROUND THAT VERY SIMPLY. I'LL TAKE THE BUILDING, DIVIDE IT IN TWO AND PUT 'EM ABOUT FIVE FEET APART AND I GET AROUND DOWN THERE. YOU NEED TO LOOK AT THAT LANGUAGE. IMPERVIOUS SURFACES, YOU INCLUDED AFTER TURF. TURF IS NOT IMPERVIOUS AT ALL. IN FACT, ONE OF THE PROBLEMS WITH TURF IS THE FACT THAT IT IS NOT. I HOPE I GET A SECOND CHANCE. I STILL HAVE A WHOLE BUNCH OF OTHER THINGS AND I'VE SPENT FIVE HOURS DOING THIS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. NEXT WE HAVE MR. COURT, MR. CHAIRMAN, MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING BOARD. I CONCURRED WITH WHAT WAS SAID BEFORE BY PREVIOUS SPEAKERS. HENCE, AT THIS TIME I MOST HUMBLY GIVE MY TIME THE REMAINDER OF MY TIME OVER TO THE NEXT SPEAKER. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU FOR YOUR REMARKS. SO THERE'S NOT A NEXT SPEAKER LISTED ON MY LIST. UM, I THINK WE HAVE A FEW ON ZOOM. THERE ARE A FEW ON ZOOM. MATT TOWN PLANNER OR BRI, DO YOU WANT TO, UH, WHAT IS THAT [01:05:01] CLOCK? YEAH. UH, SOMEONE ON ZOOM WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK. UH, PLEASE UNMUTE YOURSELF AND STATE AS MUCH. AND SO MR. COURT HAS GIVEN HIS ADDITIONAL TIME AND I DON'T THINK IT WORKS LIKE THAT. IT'S UP TO YOU. NO. UH, WHO'S THE FIRST SPEAKER ON ZOOM? MR. SBA? ALRIGHT, I SHOW ANYONE. UM, GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS BRIAN SVA. ATTORNEY IS, UM, I, I JUST WANNA SPEAK TO YOU THIS EVENING WITH REGARD TO A COUPLE OF THE PROVISIONS, UM, WITHIN THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT. UM, FIRST I'M JUST GONNA BE VERY QUICK. THE PROVISION IN SECTION 2 85 DASH 40 C ONE, WHICH IS FOR WORKFORCE HOUSING. UM, I'M GONNA STRONGLY SUPPORT THAT MODIFICATION. I THINK THAT THE CURRENT CODE DOES DISCOURAGE SOME HOUSING DEVELOPERS FROM PROVIDING, UM, ADDITIONAL UNITS FOR DOING SO WHERE WOULD REQUIRE AN ADDITIONAL AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNIT DUE TO, TO ROUNDING UP. SO YOU MIGHT FIND SOMEONE WHERE THEY'RE AT 1.1, THEY MAY NOT, IF THEY GO ADD ONE ADDITIONAL UNIT AND THEY MAY NOT WANT TO DO THAT JUST BECAUSE OF THE TWO ADDITIONAL AFFORDABLE UNITS AND IF THEY HAVE A TIGHT BUDGET. THERE HAVE BEEN SOME PROJECTS THAT HAVE COME BEFORE THE TOWN RECENTLY THAT HAVE RUN INTO THAT ISSUE. UM, AND MAKING THAT CHANGE WILL HOPEFULLY INCREASE HOUSING STOCK AND REDUCE OVERALL HOUSING COSTS FOR BOTH DEVELOPERS AND RESIDENTS. UM, SECOND ITEM I WANT TO DISCUSS IS, UM, SELF STORAGE. SO THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT'S BEING CURRENTLY PROPOSED, BUT I WOULD ASK THAT BE ADDED TO THE LIST OF AMENDMENTS. UM, SELF STORAGE IS CURRENTLY PERMITTED IN THE FOLLOWING DISTRICTS. THE OFFICE BUILDING OR OB, MID OFFICE BUILDING, LOB IB, WHICH IS THE INTERMEDIATE MEDIA BUSINESS, LI FLIGHT, INDUSTRIAL, AND THE NON-RESIDENT PLAN DEVELOPMENT OR PD. UM, SINCE THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC DEMAND FOR OFFICE SPACE HAS DRASTICALLY REDUCED, UM, AS A RESULT WE HAVE SEEN SOME EXISTING OFFICE BUILDINGS, UM, BEING ADAPTIVELY REUSED FOR CERTAIN USES, INCLUDING SELF STORAGE. THAT EXAMPLE WOULD BE 5 5 5 ROAD. UM, THERE IS A STRONG DEMAND FOR SELF STORAGE. SO YOU MAY SEE THIS IN OTHER AREAS, BUT IT'S A LOW IMPACT USE. SO THE REDUCTION IN PARKING DEMAND FOR SELF STORAGE USES IN COMPARISON TO THE OFFICE USE, YOU END UP WITH A LARGE, EXPANSIVE, UNUSED PARKING AREA, UM, THAT CAN BEST BE USED TO SATISFY STRONG MARKET DEMAND FOR OUTDOOR STORAGE VEHICLES. UM, GIVEN THAT, I WOULD ASK THAT IT BE CONSIDERED THAT THE, UM, CLOSED ZONING MAY INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING CHANGES. AND, UM, IF I CAN SHARE MY SCREEN, I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S OPTION ON HERE. UM, JUST SO I CAN SHOW YOU WHAT I'M DISCUSSING. UM, SO I'D BE ASKING TO INCLUDE IN THIS AMENDMENT TO AMEND WITHIN THE OB L-O-V-I-B-L-I PD DISTRICT. BASICALLY BE PARTIAL. YEAH, WE'RE WE'RE, WE'RE SEEING IT PRETTY SMALL IN HERE IF WE'RE ABLE TO ZOOM IN BEHIND. TELL WHEN I'M, KEEP GOING. ALL RIGHT. HOLD ON. UH, THAT'S GOOD. OKAY. UM, SORRY ABOUT THAT. SO, ASKING FOR THE AMEN. THE PERMITTED U USES WITHIN THE OB L-O-B-I-V-L-I-P-D DISTRICT, UH, AS THEY RELEASE TO SELF STORAGE TO INCLUDE WHAT I HAVE IN THE SIZE AND UNDERLYING LANGUAGE TO SAY IT'S SELF STORAGE, INCLUDING THE OUTDOOR STORAGE OF VEHICLES IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 2 85 DASH THREE SIX. I'D LEFT THE BLANK HERE. UM, JUST KNOWING THAT THERE'S BEEN MULTIPLE CHANGES WITHIN THAT SECTION PROPOSED. UM, AND SECONDARILY ADDING SUPPLEMENTARY USE REGULATION FOR SELF STORAGE, WHICH WOULD FALL WITHIN THAT SECTION 2 85 DASH THREE SIX. UM, WHAT I PROPOSED HERE IS, UM, SOME REGULATIONS THAT WOULD RESTRICT THE USE TO ENSURE THAT IT COMPLIMENTS THE SURROUNDING DISTRICT AND DOES NOT ADVERSELY IMPACT THE SURROUNDING AREAS. SO IMPORTANTLY, LIMITING IT TO PASSENGER CARS, VANS TO TRUCKS, UM, SCREENING, ENSURING ADEQUATE SCREENING OF THE SURROUNDING AREA. UM, IMPORTANTLY, THIS IS ONE ITEM THAT I'M TRYING TO LIMIT HERE, IS THE EXTERIOR STORAGE AREAS SHALL BE LOCATED ONLY WITHIN PRE-EXISTING PAVED AREAS OF THE SITE. SO BASICALLY WE'RE STATING THAT IT SHOULD BE ADAPTIVE REUSE. IT SHOULD NOT EXPAND ANY EXISTING DEVELOPMENT ON THAT SITE. UM, ALSO NO REPAIR, MAINTENANCE, SALES OR HABITATION. SO YOU'RE JUST LOOKING AT JUST THE OUTDOOR STORAGE AND VEHICLES, NO LOADING AND UNLOADING OF STORED ITEMS, UM, OFF THE SITE THAT SHALL ALL BE DONE ON SITE TO ENSURE NO IMPACTS ON SURROUNDING AREAS OR TRAFFIC IN PEDESTRIAN USE. UM, ALSO THE ACCESSORY STORAGE, UM, SHALL NOT RESULT IN NON-COMPLIANCE WITH THE TRAFFIC, MINIMUM OFF STREET PARKING. SO IT CANNOT DISPLACE OR SUPPLY [01:10:01] ANY OF THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS ALREADY IN PLACE FOR SELF STORAGE. YOU'RE JUST LOOKING AT THE EXTRA SPACES. UM, BASICALLY WHAT WE HAVE HERE AND WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS LIMIT IT TO CERTAIN AREAS. WE'RE NOT TRYING TO CREATE, UM, A PROVISION WHERE, I'M SORRY, I'M JUST TRYING TO STOP SHARING. NOT TRYING TO CREATE A PROVISION HERE WHERE YOU WOULD ALLOW CONTRACTORS YARD THROUGH OTHER DISRUPTIVE USES. WE'RE REALLY LOOKING AT LIMITED, SUCH AS THOSE PERMITTED FOR, UM, THE OVERFLOW OF PARKING FROM, SAY, DEALERSHIPS OR PARKING FROM, SAY, AMAZON, UH, VEHICLES. THANK YOU, MR. ZIBELL. YOUR TIME IS UP. THANK. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. UH, NEXT UP WE HAVE, UH, LANE COBB, OR I GUESS WE HAVE JAMES. I THINK MR. RAMONE WAS BEFORE MEETING. THAT'S ALRIGHT. THEN NEXT UP IS, UH, JAMES RAMONE. HI, UH, GOOD EVENING. UH, MY NAME'S JAMES RAMONE AND I'M HERE REPRESENTING NEW LEAF ENERGY ON THE EV CHARGING TEAM. UH, WE'RE A RENEWABLE ENERGY DEVELOPER THAT HAS A PROPOSED EV SITE, UH, LOCATED IN GREENBURG. UH, WE ARE IN SUPPORT OF THE AMENDMENTS REGARDING EV CHARGING STATIONS. THAT'S, UH, CODE SECTION 2 85 DASH 37.3. UH, I JUST WANTED TO SAY COMMISSIONER DUQUE AND THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HAVE BEEN TRANSPARENT AND RECEPTIVE TO OUR FEEDBACK REGARDING THE EV CHARGING SECTION OF THE CODE, UH, TO TRY AND, UM, ENSURE IT'S CONSISTENT WITH OTHER MUNICIPALITIES AND IN INDUSTRY STANDARDS. WE HAVE WORKED WITH, UH, WE ARE EAGERLY AWAITING THE ADOPTION OF THE ZONING CODE AND ARE LOOKING FORWARD TO BRINGING A NEW EV CHARGING STATION TO YOUR COMMUNITY. GREAT. THAT'S ALL. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU SO MUCH MR. RAMONE. UH, NEXT UP AND WE HAVE, UH, LANE COBB, UH, GOOD EVENING. UM, AND, UH, SO LANE COBB AND, UM, RESIDENT OF TARRYTOWN, AND ALSO CO-CHAIR OF THE GREENBERG, UM, HUMAN RIGHTS ADVISORY COMMITTEE. AND THAT'S WHY I'M SPEAKING TODAY ABOUT, UH, THE DEFINITION OF FAMILY AS MR. SCHWARTZ UH, MENTIONED. BUT BEFORE I EVEN GET INTO THAT MAY, I ALSO, I WANNA KIND OF THANK THE PLANNING BOARD FOR DOING THIS PAINSTAKING WORK. I KNOW THAT IT'S REALLY COMPLICATED AND I TRIED TO READ THIS WHOLE DOCUMENT. AND JUST TO SAY, AS SOMEBODY WHO REALLY HAS NO EXPERIENCE WITH THIS, I ALSO SUPPORT MR. SIMON'S SUGGESTION THAT MAYBE IT'S A POSSIBILITY THAT THESE CAN BE BROKEN OUT INTO CATEGORIES. THERE IS SO MUCH IN THIS DOCUMENT, UM, AND MANY, MANY, MANY OF WHICH, IF NOT ALL, ARE REALLY CONSEQUENTIAL FOR THE FUTURE OF GREENBERG. AND IT WOULD BE REALLY GOOD FOR PEOPLE TO BE ABLE TO REALLY UNDERSTAND, UM, WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED. UM, OVERALL, I REALLY THINK THAT THE UPDATES ARE, UM, ESSENTIAL AND WONDERFUL. AND OF COURSE, AS ANYTHING, THERE ARE ALWAYS PROBLEMS. SO MY CONCERN, UM, TO SPEAK TO RIGHT NOW, AGAIN, IS THE DEFINITION OF FAMILY AS IT SPECIFICALLY RELATES TO, UM, FAIR AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING. UM, I AM VERY PLEASED TO HEAR THAT THE TOWN OF GREENBERG IS ACTUALLY, UM, CREATING SOME SET ASIDE, UM, ZONES THAT'S WELL OVERDUE. UM, BUT IT OCCURS TO ME THAT, UM, SOME OF THIS DEFINITION OF FAMILY COULD HAVE DISPAR, UH, DISPARATE IMPACT AND, UM, THAT IS POTENTIALLY DISCRIMINATORY. SO, UH, THERE'S A COUPLE OF THINGS. ONE IS, UH, THAT PERMANENT AND STABLE REQUIREMENT, UM, KIND OF THING TO QUALIFY AS A FAMILY THAT, UH, THAT WOULD, UM, LIMIT ELIGIBILITY. THE REQUIREMENT THAT A HOUSEHOLD BE PERMANENT AND STABLE IS REALLY SUBJECTIVE. AND I, I FEEL LIKE IT, IT DISADVANTAGES YOUNG PROFESSIONALS AND STUDENTS AND CAREGIVERS, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE WHO ARE, UH, FOSTER FAMILIES OR MILITARY FAMILIES, UH, AND RECENTLY FORMED HOUSEHOLDS. PEOPLE ARE TRANSIENT NOT OFTEN BY, UH, ON PURPOSE, RIGHT? IT'S BECAUSE OF THEIR JOBS. IT'S BECAUSE OF THEIR, UM, FAMILY STRUCTURE. UM, JUDGING A FAMILY'S ELIGIBILITY BY VOTER REGISTRATION WHERE THEY'RE, YOU KNOW, REGISTERED TO VOTE OR WHERE THEIR DRIVER'S LICENSES REGISTERED OR THEIR TAX REF WHERE THEY FILE TAXES. I, I THINK THESE CRITERIA REALLY DISPROPORTIONATELY AFFECT, UM, PEOPLE WHO HAVE MAYBE RECENTLY MOVED OR STUDENTS OR, OR IMMIGRANTS, PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES, PEOPLE WHO DON'T DRIVE, RIGHT? THEY'RE THE, THE, THESE, I DON'T KNOW WHY THIS DEFINITION OF FAMILY NEEDS TO BE THIS COMPLICATED. UM, THE SCHOOL ENROLLMENT CRITERIA FAVORS HOUSEHOLDS WITH CHILDREN. I I HONESTLY THINK THAT THESE, UM, DEFINITION, UM, DISADVANTAGES SENIOR CITIZENS, UM, AND [01:15:01] AS MR. SCHWARTZ SAID, FAMILIES WHO HAVE GROWN CHILDREN AND STILL LIVING AT HOME, WHICH IS HAPPENING MORE AND MORE, UM, AT THIS POINT, UH, THE ONE YEAR RESIDENCY REQUIREMENT. I DON'T KNOW WHY A HOUSEHOLD SHOULD HAVE TO LIVE TOGETHER, UH, FOR A YEAR. UH, WHAT ABOUT NON-MARRIED COUPLES? WHAT ABOUT NEWLY MARRIED COUPLES? UH, PEOPLE WHO HAVEN'T BEEN TOGETHER, UH, FOR A YEAR? UM, I'M NOT SURE AGAIN, WHY THIS NEEDS TO BE THIS COMPLICATED. UM, FIVE UNRELATED PERSONS. I FOUND THIS VERY, VERY CONFUSING. UM, LIMITING UNRELATED PERSONS TO FIVE, UM, COULD CONFLICT WITH THE MODERN HOUSING REALITIES OF THAT PEOPLE NEED TO LIVE TOGETHER FOR FINANCIAL, UM, AFFORDABILITY REASONS. UM, UH, I MYSELF AM A LIVE-IN CAREGIVER FOR MY 90 SOMETHING YEAR OLD PARENTS. UM, MY BROTHER HELPS ME. UM, WE MAY HAVE PEOPLE COMING AND GOING AT DIFFERENT TIMES TO, FOR CAREGIVING. UM, PEOPLE WITH NON-TRADITIONAL FAMILY STRUCTURES ARE PENALIZED UNDER THIS DEFINITION OF FAMILY, UH, JUST BECAUSE THEY DON'T ALIGN WITH A TRADITIONAL FAMILY STRUCTURE THAT IS FROM A BYGONE ERA. QUITE FRANKLY, THIS IS NOT THE REALITY ANYMORE OF HOW PEOPLE LIVE. UM, AND I WOULD SAY THAT IT POSSIBLE FOR THE PLANNING BOARD TO ACTUALLY INCREASE ITS FOCUS NOT ON KIND OF SUBJECTIVE, UM, PERSONAL, UM, CRITERIA, UM, BUT MORE SO ABOUT THE IMPACTS ON, ON NEIGHBORHOODS AND HOW A HOUSING CODE TO PROMOTE AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND ELIGIBILITY TO HELP HOUSE PEOPLE, UM, WOULD PROVIDE GREATER FAIRNESS AND REDUCE THE RISK OF DISCRIMINATION. AND I WOULD SAY THAT THIS DEFINITION OF FAMILY ACTUALLY GOES IN THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION. UM, PERHAPS JUST ANY ONE OR MORE PERSONS OCCUPYING THE DWELLING UNIT AND LIVING TOGETHER IN A SINGLE HOUSEKEEPING UNIT. UM, THANK YOU MS. COBB, YOUR TIME'S UP. AH, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ALL RIGHT. ARE THERE ANY OTHER SPEAKERS ON ZOOM? ARE THERE ANY OTHER SPEAKERS HERE IN THE AUDIENCE? SO TO GET A, A TEMPERATURE CHECK FROM THE BOARD RIGHT NOW FROM, AS WE SHARED EARLIER, UM, IF, IF WE THINK WE'LL BE IN A POSITION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC DISCUSSION THIS EVENING, THEN WE CAN GIVE, UH, SPEAKERS A SECOND OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK. UM, IF WE'D LIKE TO HOLD OPEN THE PUBLIC DISCUSSION TO THE NEXT MEETING, UM, I GUESS WE CAN STILL, UH, HEAR FROM PEOPLE IF WE'D LIKE, BUT, UH, OTHERWISE WE'D, WE'D HOLD IT OPEN AND CONTINUE THE DISCUSSION AT THE NEXT MEETING. UM, WE'VE HEARD ARGUMENTS FOR HOLDING THE DISCUSSION OPEN. WE'VE HEARD ARGUMENTS FOR A SECOND ROUND THIS EVENING. UM, WHERE DO WE FEEL WE ARE AT THIS POINT? I'D LIKE THE PEOPLE, UH, WHO HAVE ATTENDED AND WE APPRECIATE YOUR COMING OUT, ESPECIALLY IN VIEW OF THE WEATHER AND THE ATMOSPHERE THAT WE'RE LIVING IN TO HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO COMPLETE THEIR PRETI THEIR DISCUSSION TONIGHT, RATHER THAN HOLDING IT OVER FOR SOME FUTURE MEETING OR, OKAY. I, I AGREE. BUT I ALSO, IF, IF WE THINK THAT THE COMMUNITY HAS MORE COMMENTS ON THIS, I HAVE NO IF, IF KEEPING HOLDING THE HEARING OPEN UNTIL ANOTHER TIME, EVEN AFTER GIVING THEM THE OPPORTUNITY TO COMPLETE WHAT THEIR COMMENTS ARE TODAY, I WOULD BE, I WOULD BE IN SUPPORT OF THAT. SURE. YEAH. SO, SO IT'S CURRENTLY, UM, THAT, THAT SOUNDS FINE. IT'S CURRENTLY EIGHT 30. UM, WE DO HAVE THE, THE BULLETS SUMMARIZING THE PROPOSED RECOMMENDATIONS THAT, UH, WERE ACCUMULATED FROM OUR PAST FORWARD DISCUSSIONS THAT STAFF DISTRIBUTED. AND SO I, I THINK ONCE WE CLOSE THIS PUBLIC DISCUSSION, UH, WE WILL THEN GO INTO REVIEWING THOSE BULLETS. UM, IF ANYONE HAS ANY ADDITIONAL BULLETS THAT THEY WOULD LIKE, UH, TO DISCUSS ADDING, UM, I HAVE A, A WHOLE PAGE OF BULLETS THAT, THAT I'D LIKE TO DISCUSS. UM, AND THEN I BELIEVE THE PLAN FROM HERE WOULD BE STAFF WOULD CONTINUE TO, IF, IF, IF WE DECIDE TO CLOSE THE DISCUSSION THIS EVENING, UM, THEN STAFF WOULD WORK ON SORT OF FINALIZING THAT RECOMMENDATION MEMO, UH, SO THAT WE CAN REVIEW IT BEFORE OUR NEXT MEETING AND HOPEFULLY BE IN A POSITION TO APPROVE THAT RECOMMENDATION AT THE NEXT MEETING. UM, IF AFTER RECEIVING THE DRAFT RECOMMENDATION, WE, WE STILL HAVE MORE FINE TUNING THAT WE FEEL, UM, NEEDS TO BE MADE, THEN, UH, WE CAN CONSIDER ADOPTING THE RECOMMENDATION AT [01:20:01] THE MEETING AFTER THAT. UM, OH, I, UM, YOU, I'M NOT SURE YOU KEEP SAYING NEXT MEETING. NEXT MEETING. YEAH. SO THE NEXT MEETING IS AUGUST 2ND, AND WE HAVE ONE MEETING IN AUGUST 2ND, AUGUST 5TH. AUGUST 5TH. SO THE CLOSED TIMELINE FOR THIS IS WE WOULD CONTINUE THE PUBLIC COMMENTS TONIGHT AND THEN POTENTIALLY, AND THEN CLOSE THE PUBLIC, POTENTIALLY CLOSE IT, AND THEN, THEN GO OVER THE BULLETS. CORRECT. WHICH YOU WOULD LIKE TO DO TONIGHT, OR YOU WOULD LIKE TO DO TO, TO THE EXTENT THAT WE HAVE TIME BEFORE OUR 10 O'CLOCK, UH, FINISHED TIME. AND THEN, SO, SO WHAT MEETING ARE YOU SAYING IS THE END DATE FOR HAVING, FOR THE RECOMMENDATION MEETING? SO I THINK THE GOAL WOULD BE, I THINK THE GOAL WOULD BE AT THE VERY LATEST TO ADOPT THE RECOMMENDATIONS AT OUR FIRST MEETING IN SEPTEMBER. WE ONLY MEET ONCE IN AUGUST, SO WE HAVE OUR NEXT MEETING AUGUST 5TH, AND THEN THERE'S FOUR WEEKS BEFORE OUR MEETING THE FIRST WEEK IN SEPTEMBER. YEAH. UM, I MEAN, THAT TIMEFRAME SEEMS FINE TO ME. I DID FIND PUBLIC COMMENTS TO BE HELPFUL. UM, IT WAS A NEW PERSPECTIVE AND, UM, AND BROUGHT TO LIGHT SOME THINGS I WASN'T THINKING ABOUT. UM, SO TO THE EX EXTENT, I WOULD LIKE TO FINISH SHARING FROM EVERYBODY. SO WE'RE HERE FROM THE PUBLIC AND THEN, UH, COMMISSIONER DUQUESNE, DO YOU WANNA RESPOND OR WERE YOU INTENDING ON RESPONDING TO ANY COMMENTS TONIGHT? OR WHAT WERE YOUR, YOUR THOUGHTS ON THAT? NO, I JUST WANNA ABSORB EVERYTHING. ME. YEAH, I AGREE. HEARING COMMENTS AND, UH, HERE TO LISTEN. COOL. I'M, I'M REALLY GLAD YOU SUGGESTED HAVING THE PUBLIC HEARING. THANK YOU, MR. SO, ALRIGHT. PUBLIC DISCUSSION. SO DISCUSSION, PUBLIC DISCUSSION. SORRY, . UM, YOU'RE RIGHT. ALRIGHT, SO LET'S, WE'LL, WE'LL GO IN THE ORDER OF THOSE WHO, WHO SPOKE THE FIRST ROUND. UH, AND IF YOU HAVE MORE TO SAY, PLEASE COME UP IF YOU'D LIKE TO PASS. UH, NO, NO. SHAME IN PASSING. SO, UH, FIRST WOULD BE MISS YUJI. WOW. SO I DO GET AN EXTRA FIVE MINUTES, . ALRIGHT. SO I'M BASICALLY JUST GONNA BE COMPLETING WHAT I, WHAT I DIDN'T COMPLETE BEFORE. SO FORGIVE THE CHOPPINESS, BUT, UH, I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT YOU HEAR WHAT I HAVE TO SAY. UM, SO, SENIOR HOUSING USES ARE NOT ALL THE SAME. SENIOR HOUSING SPECIAL PERMIT USES FALL ALONG A CONTINUUM FROM STRICTLY INSTITUTIONAL TO OVERWHELMINGLY RESIDENTIAL. A NURSING HOME IS PRINCIPALLY AN INSTITUTIONAL HEALTH USE. AN ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY IS PREDOMINANTLY CARE ORIENTED WITH NO INDEPENDENT LIVING COMPONENT. A CONTINUUM OF CARE FACILITY. A CCF IS A HYBRID CONTAINING AT LEAST 40% INDEPENDENT LIVING. AND THESE AMENDMENTS SEEK TO LIMIT IT TO 60%. A-C-C-R-C IS PREDOMINANTLY INDEPENDENT LIVING. THE PROPOSED KNOWLES CONFIGURATION WOULD APPROACH 90% INDEPENDENT LIVING APARTMENTS WITH MUCH SMALLER ASSISTED LIVING AND NURSING COMPONENTS. CCFS AND CRCS ARE UNUSUAL BECAUSE THEY PLACE SUBSTANTIAL NUMBERS OF COMPLETE RESIDENTIAL APARTMENTS INSIDE ONE FAMILY ZONING DISTRICTS AS SPECIAL PERMITS. THEY RIGHTFULLY SHOULD HAVE A LINK TO THE UNDERLYING RESIDENTIAL ZONE. THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAY SUPPORT, UH, GENERALLY SUPPORT INDEPENDENT SENIOR HOUSING, BUT IT RECOGNIZES DIFFERENT SENIOR HOUSING USE TYPES. IT DOES NOT SAY THAT EVERY SENIOR HOUSING CATEGORY SHOULD RECEIVE IDENTICAL DENSITY HEIGHTENED STORY STANDARDS, NOR DOES IT SAY THAT PREDOMINANTLY INDEPENDENT LIVING DEVELOPMENTS SHOULD BE DISCONNECTED FROM THE DENSITY OF THE UNDERLYING DISTRICTS. AS I SAID BEFORE, I DON'T AGREE WITH THE RATIONALE THAT CCRC CRITERIA SHOULD BE ALIGNED WITH ASSISTED LIVING AND CCF RECOGNIZE THE DIFFERENCES. UM, I DIDN'T GET TO FULLY TALK ABOUT THIS. SO, PROPOSED DENSITY CHANGES. SO THE EXISTING CCRC STANDARDS LINKED TODAY TO PERMIT DENSITY TO THE UNDERLYING RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT. IT ALLOWS INDEPENDENT LIVING UNITS AT THREE TIMES THE NUMBER OF UNITS THAT WOULD OTHERWISE BE PERMITTED. YOU TAKE THE LOT SIZE, YOU DIVIDE BY THE ZONE, AND THEN YOU TIMES BY THREE, THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT WOULD REPLACE THAT RELATIONSHIP WITH A BLANKET STANDARD OF 15 BEDS PER ACRE. FOR THE KNOWLES PROPERTY, WHICH IS APPROXIMATELY 29 ACRES, THE EXISTING, UH, UM, CALCULATION WOULD BE 126. THE APPLICANT HAS ADVANCED A DISPUTED INTERPRETATION WANTING TO BORROW SOMETHING FROM THE NURSING HOME SECTION THAT ALLOWS THEM TO DOUBLE IT TO 2 52. UH, THAT MEANS IT, UM, YOU WOULD, AT 15 BEDS PER ACRE FORMULA WOULD [01:25:01] MEAN 435 BEDS. THAT'S AN INCREASE IN DENSITY NO MATTER WHICH WAY YOU SLICE IT, CALL IT BEDS, CALL IT UNITS, CALL IT A BUNGALOW, WHATEVER THEY WANNA CALL IT IN THEIR LUXURY BROCHURE. IT'S AN INCREASE IN DENSITY THAT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IS AGAINST. UH, I DIDN'T GET TO THIS PART. SO HEIGHT AND STORIES. CURRENTLY IT'S TWO AND A HALF STORIES AND 35 FEET. THIS PROPOSAL WANTS TO RAISE IT TO, TO 40 FEET, UH, THREE STORIES AND 40 FEET. AND THEN WE ARE ALLOWED, UH, WHERE TOPOGRAPHY IS, RIGHT, FOUR STORIES AND 55 FEET. WHAT DOES ADEQUATE MEAN? IT'S BASED ON IF THE TOWN BOARD FINDS IT ADEQUATE, IS IT SCREENED? HOW DO THEY DECIDE THAT BASED ON TREES THAT MIGHT GROW IN 10 YEARS? UM, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICY 11.9 0.1 0.4 STATES THAT SPECIAL PERMIT PROVISIONS MUST CONTAIN ENFORCEABLE PROVISIONS, PROTECTING HEALTH, SAFETY, CONVENIENCE, COMFORT, AND GENERAL WELFARE. ADEQUATE SCREENING IS NON-OBJECTIVE STANDARD. SO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IS SAYING, DON'T HAVE THESE WISHY-WASHY STANDARDS IN YOUR SPECIAL PERMITS. PROTECTIONS THAT SHOULD BE DISCUSSED. AND IN THE SPECIAL PERMIT STANDARDS. THIS IS THE MAIN PART, GARRETT, I WANT YOU TO HEAR. IF THE TOWN IS REVIEWING SENIOR HOUSING STANDARDS, IT MUST ALSO CONSIDER STRONGER AND MORE OBJECTIVE PROTECTIONS FOR ADJOINING ONE FAMILY PROPERTIES. AT A MINIMUM, I WOULD PROPOSE A MINIMUM A HUNDRED FOOT PRINCIPAL BUILDING SETBACK FROM ADJOINING ONE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES. UH, GO LOOK AT BRIGHTVIEW METROPOLIS. IF YOU THINK THIS IS NOT RISE. I MEAN, THEY'RE 50 FEET. IT'S RIDICULOUSLY TOO CLOSE. I'M GLAD YOU MENTIONED THAT. I WENT, TOOK A DRIVE BY THE OTHER DAY. AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, A CLEAR PROHIBITION AGAINST BALCONIES, PATIOS, TERRACES, PORCHES, ROOF DECKS, AND SIMILAR OUTDOOR LIVING SPACES FACING OR DIRECTLY OVERLOOKING ADJOINING RESIDENTIAL LOTS. LANDSCAPING SHOULD NOT BE A SUBSTITUTE FOR THESE. A BALCONY IS PERMANENT. A PROMISE TO PLANT A TREE IS NOT. THESE PROTECTIONS WOULD DIRECTLY IMPLEMENT SECTION TEN'S CLEAR INSTRUCTION TO PROTECT ESTABLISHED RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS AND THE DIRECTION TO PROTECT, ENHANCE ONE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER. I'M NOT ASKING THE BOARD TO ADOPT FINAL SENIOR HOUSING STANDARDS TONIGHT. I'M ASKING THE BOARD TO RECOGNIZE THAT THESE QUESTIONS REQUIRE FAR MORE DISCUSSION, FOCUSED DISCUSSION, AND SHOULD NOT BE PLACED INTO A BROAD CODE UPDATE PACKAGE WITHOUT SUBSTANTIAL REVIEW. ALL WHILE THE TOWN'S ONLY CCRC HAS AN ACTIVE AND DISPUTED EXPANSION APPLICATION. THAT'S, THANK YOU MS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR LETTING ME FINISH. OKAY. THANK YOU. NEXT WE HAVE MR. SIMON. UH, THANK YOU. UH, I WOULD IMPLORE PLANNING BOARD NOT THE CALL. NOT TO CLOSE THE HEARING TONIGHT. BY YOUR OWN ADMISSION. YOU HAD VERY FEW INPUT FROM RESIDENTS UP TO TONIGHT. TONIGHT IS THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF INPUT THAT YOU, YOU'RE GETTING FROM RESIDENTS FOR ALL THE REASONS I PREVIOUSLY, UH, CITED. THIS IS THE FIRST TIME YOU ARE HEARING ALL OF THE ISSUES THAT THE RESIDENTS HAVE WITH THIS 415 PAGE DOCUMENT. UM, UH, SO WHAT IS THE RUSH? WHY IT HAS TAKEN, UH, THE COMMISSIONER OVER A YEAR OF HARD WORK AND I COMMEND HIM FOR THE HARD WORK HE'S HE HAS DONE TO CREATE THIS DOCUMENT. SO OVER A YEAR AND A HALF. SO WHY IS THE RUSH OF DOING IT NOW? WHY CAN'T THE, WHY CAN'T YOU WAIT UNTIL SEPTEMBER? UNTIL SEPTEMBER WHEN MORE PEOPLE ARE HERE? PEOPLE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO READ THE DOCUMENT. I SKIMMED THROUGH THE DOCUMENT. THE ONLY PERSON THAT I KNOW OF WHO READ IT ENTIRELY IS YOU SCHWARZ. YOU DIDN'T GET, I ONLY DROPPED THROUGH ABOUT I. OKAY. BUT SEE, THAT IS THE ISSUE. THE ISSUE IS IN THE DETAILS. WHEN YOU READ THE CODE AND THEN YOU LOOK AT THE UNDERLINING, HOW DOES THAT AFFECT THE TOWN? HOW DOES THAT AFFECT, THAT'S WHEN, THAT'S WHEN THE LIGHT SHINES. WHEN YOU ABLE TO READ THE, THE CODE ITSELF AND FIGURE OUT WHAT EFFECT IT HAS IN THE TOWN. THAT'S WHAT WE NEED. NOT JUST A, A CODE CHANGE, BUT TO COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND THE IMPACT OF THOSE CODE CHANGES. UH, THIS COUPLE HERE INDICATED THAT READING THAT CODE WOULD, IT HAD WHAT EFFECT IT WOULD [01:30:01] HAVE ON THEIR PROPERTY. AND THIS IS THROUGHOUT ALL OF THESE CODE CHANGES, YOU HAVE TO GO TAKE THE TIME TO SEE WHAT THE IMPACT IS. WE HAD A, A CLASSIC EXAMPLE, UH, THAT, UH, UH, DR. KABB AND YOU TALKED ABOUT. YOU HAVE THE DEFINITION OF FAMILY FINE, BUT THEN WHEN YOU READ THE CODE, YOU SEE WHAT THAT EFFECT IS. AND THAT'S TRUE OF EVERY SINGLE CHANGE. YOU HAVE TO READ THE CODE AND SEE HOW THAT AFFECTS THE TOWN, HOW THAT AFFECTS EVERYTHING ELSE. SO I WOULD HOPE THAT THIS PLANNING BOARD WOULD NOT SHUT DOWN THIS HEARING AND GIVE THE PUBLIC ENOUGH TIME TO READ THE CODE, UNDERSTAND THE CODE, AND COME BACK WITH VALID INFORMATION ABOUT THE CODE. SO I ASK YOU, PLEASE DO NOT, UH, UH, AND THE, UH, THE, THE PUBLIC, THE HERRING TONIGHT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR. SIMON. THANK YOU. NEXT UP WE HAVE MR. BODEN, WHO I THINK LEFT. HE LEFT. HE LEFT. OKAY. UM, THEN WE HAVE MR. YUJI, IF YOU'D LIKE TO SAY ANYTHING ADDITIONAL. SORRY I DIDN'T PUT YOU AFTER YOUR WIFE BEFORE. THERE IS AN . OKAY. ALL RIGHT. AND THEN, UH, MR. COURT, WE HAVE NEXT MR. COURT. OH, I'M SO SORRY. I'M SO SORRY MR. SCHWARTZ. YOU'RE TRYING IN TERMS OF THE PROCESS, I'LL BE REAL QUICK, WHICH IS, YOU'VE SPENT FOUR MONTHS DOING THIS. YOU'VE HAD IT SINCE APRIL. I'VE HAD THIS DOCUMENT SINCE LAST WEEK. SO TO EXPECT ME TO COME OUT HERE AND GIVE YOU ALL THE ANSWER, ALL THE COMMENTS TONIGHT IS, UH, RIDICULOUS. I WANNA GO BACK TO THE, UH, DEFINITION OF FAMILY FOR A SECOND. THERE ARE A COUPLE OTHER LITTLE, LITTLE BIT, UH, LITTLE THINGS IN THERE. THEY'RE REQUIRED TO COOK TOGETHER. SO I GUESS IF THEY GO OUT TO EAT, ONE OF 'EM GOES OUT TO EAT AND DOESN'T COOK TOGETHER. IF THEY'RE NOT A FAMILY, THEY'RE ALSO REQUIRED TO BE EMPLOYED IN THE AREA. YOU KNOW WHAT? NOT EVERYBODY IN A FAMILY IS EMPLOYED. ASK PEOPLE WHOSE KIDS JUST CAME BACK FROM COLLEGE, THEY'RE NOT EMPLOYED. OKAY? THAT, THAT DEFINITION IS, IT HAS TO BE CHANGED. UH, I DO WANT TO GO BACK TO, UH, THE COMMENTS THAT, UH, LANE COBB MADE ON, UH, THE HOUSING. THE SETBACK ITSELF IS WINDOW DRESSING. IT WILL NOT GET YOU A LOT OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING. AND IF YOU THINK IT DOES GO LOOK AT THE HISTORY, AND I THINK GARRETT WILL EVEN CORROBORATE THIS FOR ME. WE'VE HAD A, A SETBACK, 10% SETBACK, SET ASIDE, SET ASIDE, EXCUSE ME, SET ASIDE FOR YEARS, I THINK 15, ALMOST 20 YEARS NOW PROBABLY. WE'VE HAD THAT. WE HAVE, I THINK ABOUT 70 UNITS AND ALL THAT TIME. AND THE MAJORITY OF THOSE UNITS, ABOUT 75 OR 80% OF THOSE UNITS ARE IN ONE, ONE, UH, PROJECT, WHICH WAS AVALON GREEN. SO DON'T THINK FOR A MINUTE THAT THIS IS GONNA DO ANYTHING MUCH. THE CHANCES OF HAVING ANOTHER PRI SINGLE FAMILY HOME DEVELOPMENT IN GREENBURG THAT WOULD GENERATE ANY SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF THESE HOUSES IS VERY SMALL. THE LAST ONE I CAN THINK OF, UH, WAS ELM ELMWOOD. AND WE HAD A CHANCE TO GET AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND THE TOWN BOARD TURNED DOWN THAT PROPOSAL, JUST SAYING, OKAY, SO THE SET ASIDES AREN'T, AREN'T THERE EITHER. JUST A COUPLE OTHER LITTLE HOUSEKEEPING THINGS. AND AGAIN, AS I SAID, I HAVE NOT HAD A CHANCE TO GO THROUGH IT. I, I WISH I WAS AS FAST A READER AS MR. SIMON THINKS I AM. BUT I READ ABOUT 130 PAGES OF THE DOCUMENT, UH, TODAY, UM, THIS WEEK, THE BEDROOM, YOU HAVE A DEFINITION OF BEDROOM. THIS IS A GREAT EXAMPLE. IT SAYS IT CAN'T BE A LIVING ROOM OR A KITCHEN. HAS ANYBODY EVER HEARD OF A STUDIO APARTMENT? IT MEANS YOU CAN'T HAVE A STUDIO APARTMENT IN GREENBURG. OKAY? IF THAT'S WHAT YOU WANT. I DON'T THINK SO. UM, YOU, YOU HAD A VERY COMPLICATED DECI UH, UH, COMPLICATED, UH, DEFINITION OF COMMERCIAL VEHICLES IN THERE. YOU KNOW WHAT? NEW YORK STATE REQUIRES COMMERCIAL PLATES. WHY DON'T YOU JUST USE THAT? VERY, VERY SIMPLE, UH, FOR COMMERCIAL VEHICLES. UM, WHAT ELSE DO I HAVE? OH, ONE OTHER THING I FORGOT TO TELL YOU. ON THE POSITIVE SIDE, THANK GOD FOR THE SIMP FOR SIMPLIFYING THE DEFINITION OF RESTAURANTS. THIS HAS BEEN A PROBLEM IN, IN THE TOWN FOR YEARS. AND THE REAL ISSUE, AND [01:35:01] GARRETT REALLY HIT THE NAIL ON THE HEAD IN THIS IS DRIVE-THROUGHS. THERE REALLY IS NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A FAST CASUAL AND A FORMAL RESTAURANT IN TERMS OF ANYTHING ELSE. MAYBE THE PARKING IS A TURNOVER, MAYBE EVEN A LITTLE QUICKER AND A FAST CASUAL THAN IT IS IF YOU'RE IN A SIT DOWN RESTAURANT. THE REAL ISSUE, AND WHEN IT COMES TO TRAFFIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT IS WHEN THERE'S A DRIVE THROUGH. ASK US WHO ARE ON THE PLANNING BOARD WHO HAD TO GO THROUGH AND APPROVE CHICK-FIL-A, WHICH WAS A MAJOR, MAJOR, UH, THING TO, TO APPROVE. YET, YOU KNOW, WINGSTOP IS RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET, BY DEFINITION, INDUSTRY DEFINITION. AND I, I USED TO WORK IN THAT INDUSTRY. UH, WINGSTOP WOULD BE FAST FOOD AND NOT ALLOWED, BUT THEY DON'T HAVE A DRIVE THROUGH. THEY, THEY HAVE NO MORE IMPACT THAN THE GLI. SO THAT DEFINITION IS GOOD. PLEASE, PLEASE LEAVE THIS OPEN. YOU'VE WORKED HARD. YOU GUYS HAVE WORKED HARD AND I KNOW IT, IT, ESPECIALLY, YOU HAVEN'T HAD, HAD THE EXPERIENCE THAT OTHER PEOPLE HAVE AND WHY SOME OF THESE THINGS HAPPENED. YOU HAD TO LEARN THAT STUFF OVER THE LAST FOUR MONTHS. AND I COMMEND YOU FOR ALL THE WORK YOU'VE DONE ON IT. DON'T STOP NOW. GIVE THE PUBLIC AN OPPORTUNITY, AN EXTRA OPPORTUNITY. AND AUGUST ISN'T THE TIME. A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE AWAY. THAT'S WHY MR. SIMON WAS SUGGESTING A SEPTEMBER MEETING. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. UM, MR. COURT, SINCE I WENT OUTTA ORDER, DID YOU NEED A SECOND ROUND OR NO, THAT'S OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. AND MR. ZABAR, ARE YOU STILL ON ZOOM? I AM. I NO FURTHER HONOR. AND WHO WAS NEXT? MR. RAMONE? THANK YOU. ANY FURTHER COMMENT? NO FURTHER COMMENT FROM ME. THANK YOU, MR. COBB. ANY FURTHER COMMENT? YEAH, I WANT TO THANK MR. SCHWARTZ FOR, UH, TALKING ABOUT THE PART THAT I LEFT OUT. UH, YOU KNOW, THE THING ABOUT EMPLOYED IN THE AREA, AND ALSO I DID CATCH THAT PART ABOUT THE KITCHEN AND THE BEDROOM AND THE WEIRDNESS. IT'S VERY WEIRD. UM, ONE OF THE THINGS ABOUT AFFORDABLE HOUSING IS WE KNOW HOW DIFFICULT IT IS TO GET IT ACT TO GET ANYTHING ACTUALLY DONE. AND SO BECAUSE PEOPLE FIGHT TOOTH AND NAIL FOR WHATEVER REASON, I WOULD REALLY ENCOURAGE THIS, UM, PLANNING BOARD TO REALLY DIG DEEP, UM, FOR SOME OF THESE CHANGES THAT YOU'RE MAKING AND SEE IF THERE'S ANYTHING THAT YOU CAN PUT IN HERE THAT WOULD HAVE, UM, A GREATER IMPACT THAN WHAT HAS ALREADY BEEN ACCOMPLISHED. I KNOW THAT IT'S NOT THE PLANNING BOARD, UM, NECESSARILY THAT ENFORCES, UM, AFFORDABLE HOUSING. RIGHT? YOU, YOU'RE PROBABLY PUTTING IN WHAT ISN'T WHAT YOU CAN DO, UM, IN TERMS OF THE BREADTH OF THIS, UM, DOCUMENT, I THINK IT MIGHT BE WORTH HAVING SOME TOWN HALLS OR SOMETHING, UM, OVER A COUPLE OF MONTHS TO EXPLAIN TO THE PUBLIC EXACTLY WHAT'S IN THIS. AS I SAID, PEOPLE CAN'T READ THESE DOCUMENTS. I THINK THAT A LOT OF TIMES GOVERNMENTS KNOW THAT PEOPLE DON'T READ THESE DOCUMENTS BECAUSE THEY LOOK AT IT AND THEY SAY, FORGET IT. I JUST DON'T HAVE THE TIME. OR I CAN'T DO IT, OR I DON'T UNDERSTAND. AND THEN THEY JUST LET STUFF GO BY AND HOPE AND CROSS THEIR FINGERS THAT NOTHING BAD IS HAPPENING, RIGHT? AND I DON'T, I DON'T, I WOULD LIKE TO THINK THAT THIS PLANNING BOARD IS NOT, THAT THAT'S NOT YOUR WAY OF DOING BUSINESS. UM, I, UM, YOU KNOW, I KNOW A COUPLE OF YOU PERSONALLY, AND I FEEL LIKE I WANT TO BE ABLE TO REALLY TRUST THAT YOUR, UM, REALLY GOING TO THE MAT FOR THE RESIDENTS OF GREENBURG. THESE CHANGES TO THE ZONING CODE ARE CRITICAL, AS YOU KNOW. AND IT IS WORTH TAKING A LITTLE MORE TIME TO REALLY GET THE INPUT OF THE, OF THE RESIDENTS TO EDUCATE THE RESIDENTS ABOUT WHAT THESE CHANGES ARE, BECAUSE THE QUALITY OF LIFE IS GONNA BE SIGNIFICANTLY IMPACTED. AND I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT. UM, AND I WANT TO THANK COMMISSIONER DUQUE FOR, UH, DOING THE, THIS WORK AND ALSO FOR HELPING TO, UH, OFFERING TO MEET WITH ME TO TALK ABOUT WHY ADUS ARE BEING CONSIDERED IN AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING, UM, MEASURE. BECAUSE I DIDN'T THINK THAT AGUS, UH, HAD ANYTHING, WELL, THEY HAVE TO DO WITH INCREASING HOUSING AVAILABILITY, BUT IT SHOULDN'T BE CONSIDERED AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND, AND A MUNICIPALITY, UM, UH, EFFORT TO INCREASE THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING. AND APOLO, I APOLOGIZE. I AM WORN OUT. I'M VERY TIRED, , SO I KNOW I'M NOT MAKING A LOT OF SENSE. THANK YOU FOR YOUR WORK AND THAT, THAT'S ALL I'M GONNA SAY THIS EVENING. I HOPE YOU HOLD THIS OVER AND, AND HAVE SOME MORE, UH, HEARINGS ON THIS. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. THANK YOU. UM, WE ACTUALLY HAD ONE MORE SPEAKER, [01:40:01] UM, SIGN UP IF THEY, SURE. OKAY. SO, MR. K, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I APOLOGIZE FOR SIGNING UP LATE. UH, REALLY WAS INTENDING ON LISTENING TO SEE EXACTLY WHAT WAS HAPPENING. UH, I REPRESENT GAME ON GOLF CENTER. I'M ONE OF THE PARTNERS. UH, WE ARE, HAVE BEEN A PART OF THE COMMUNITY FOR ALMOST 80 YEARS. UM, WE, UH, LOVE BEING IN THE TOWN. I'M ALSO A RESIDENT OF THE TOWN OF THE, UH, OF THE TOWN IN TARRYTOWN. UM, CARE DEEPLY ABOUT WHAT'S GOING ON, UH, IN THE COMMUNITY. UM, WE'VE TRIED OUR BEST TO, UH, NOT JUST MAINTAIN THIS TREMENDOUS RESOURCE IN THE COMMUNITY, BUT MAKE SIGNIFICANT IMPROVEMENTS OVER THE YEARS. I THINK WE'VE ACHIEVED A LOT OF THAT IN THE PAST, PROBABLY ABOUT 10 YEARS OR SO. I THINK WE'VE GOT A GREAT WORKING RELATIONSHIP WITH THE, WITH THE TOWN. I APPRECIATE VERY MUCH, UM, WORKING WITH, UH, WITH MR. DU KANE. UM, AND I KNOW HE'S PUT A LOT OF WORK INTO THIS. WE'VE JUST LEARNED REALLY, AND JUST BEEN ABLE TO STUDY THIS AND, AND HAVEN'T REALLY HAD MUCH TIME TO UNDERSTAND HOW IT WOULD IMPACT US. UM, AND AFTER HEARING EVERYBODY HERE WHO HAS THEIR THOUGHTS AND THEIR FEELINGS ABOUT THEIR, THEIR PARTICULAR, UM, ISSUES AND CONCERNS, UH, WE ALSO SORT OF FEEL, UH, THAT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE TO KEEP THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN OR AT LEAST OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO, IT IS A PUBLIC DISCUSSION, THE DISCUSSION, PUBLIC HEARING WILL, THE PUBLIC DISCUSSION, APOLOGIES. UM, SO THAT AT LEAST WE HAVE ENOUGH TIME TO, UM, STUDY, UNDERSTAND AND COME BACK WITH OUR THOUGHTS AND HOW, UM, IT MAY IMPACT US. UM, HAVE AN AMPLE TIME TO BE ABLE TO, TO DO THAT AND CONTINUE THAT, THAT DISCUSSION. THANK YOU. SO I APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. SO ARE THERE, ARE THERE ANY PROCESS QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD AT THIS POINT? UH, MR. WEINBERG, I UNDERSTAND THAT THE COMMISSIONER DUQUE AND THE PLANNING STAFF HAS HAVE SPENT A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF TIME, UH, WORKING ON THE, UH, DRAFT ZONING CHANGES. WHEN THIS CAME UP TO THE BOARD A NUMBER OF MONTHS AGO, AND I ASKED WHAT THE TIMEFRAME WAS, I BASICALLY SAID THIS WAS OVER ZEALOUS. I SAID, THIS IS VERY COMPLICATED AND IT'S THE FUTURE OF THE TOWN. AND IT REQUIRES A LOT OF THOUGHT. THERE ARE A LOT OF INTRICACIES, INTERACTIONS BETWEEN PROVISIONS THAT HAVE TO BE CAREFULLY REVIEWED AND ADDRESSED AND ALSO TIED INTO THE MASTER PLAN. UH, AT THIS POINT, UH, FOR ME TO BE COMFORTABLE VOTING FOR IN, IN FAVOR OF A CHANGE, I HAVE TO BE COMFORTABLE THAT I UNDERSTAND EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE DOING AND THAT IT MAKES SENSE. AND TO BE HONEST, I'M SO FAR AWAY FROM THAT POSITION THAT THERE'S ABSOLUTELY NO WAY I COULD, YOU KNOW, SUPPORT CLOSING THIS, UH, PUBLIC DISCUSSION AND NOT KEEPING THE PUBLIC INVOLVED AND HAVING OPPORTUNITIES. BECAUSE JUST TONIGHT WE'VE LEARNED A LOT. THERE HAVE BEEN A LOT OF, YOU KNOW, COMMENTS FOR CHANGES TO PROVISIONS, GIVING THOUGHT TO PROVISIONS. I THINK THOSE HAVE TO BE FLESHED OUT. AND I THINK IT'S ONLY FAIR TO EVERYONE THAT, YOU KNOW, WE CONTINUE THESE DISCUSSIONS AND TAKE THE TIME THAT'S NECESSARY. AND WHEN WE'RE ALL COMFORTABLE THAT WHATEVER TRADE OFFS NEED TO BE MADE ARE MADE, BUT WHEN WE'RE ALL COMFORTABLE THAT WE'VE ACTUALLY LOOKED INTO THIS AND WE UNDERSTAND WHAT WE'RE VOTING ON, THEN WE CAN VOTE. BUT FOR ME, I'M SO FAR AWAY FROM THAT THAT I'M HOPING THAT WE KEEP THE PUBLIC DISCUSSION OPEN, WE GET THE PUBLIC MORE INVOLVED IF THEY WANT TO BE AND, AND DEAL WITH ALL OF THESE ISSUES. AGAIN, I KNOW HOW HARD COMMISSIONER DUQUE HAS WORKED ON THIS, BUT TO ME AND, AND THE PLANNING STAFF, BUT TO ME, THIS DOESN'T HAVE AN ARTIFICIAL DEADLINE. THIS THE DEADLINE FOR THIS IS WHEN WE'RE READY TO SIGN OFF ON IT AND WE KNOW WHAT WE'RE DOING. THANK YOU. SO I GUESS, I GUESS COMMISSIONER DUQUE, I, I THINK IT'D BE HELPFUL IF, IF YOU PROVIDED MAYBE SOME CONTEXT ON, UM, YOU KNOW, REGARDLESS OF WHAT WE END UP DOING TONIGHT, YOU KNOW, ONCE WE GET TO A POINT OF MAKING A RECOMMENDATION TO THE TOWN BOARD, UM, HOW THAT RECOMMENDATION WILL BE USED, UM, AND, AND WHAT THE PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT PROCESS WILL LOOK LIKE ONCE THIS GETS TO THE TOWN BOARD. YEAH, SURE. UM, I GUESS THE FIRST THING I WANT TO MAKE CLEAR IS THAT, UM, WE'RE CERTAINLY NOT, UH, EXPECTING, YOU KNOW, THIS PROCESS TO CONCLUDE, YOU KNOW, ANYTIME SOON, RIGHT? LIKE, THERE'S NOT A SEPTEMBER, OCTOBER, [01:45:01] NOVEMBER, UM, YOU KNOW, MANDATE OR EXPECTATION THAT WE'RE GONNA CLOSE. I ALWAYS HAD FULL EXPECTATION THAT, THAT THIS WOULD BE MINIMUM YEAR LONG PROCESS. UM, SO WE'VE HEARD A LOT OF GOOD FEEDBACK TONIGHT. UM, CERTAINLY THERE'S DISCUSSIONS WE NEED TO HAVE, RIGHT? WE GOT TO LOOK INTO A LOT OF THE THINGS THAT RESIDENTS HAVE RAISED. UM, SOME OF WHAT'S BEEN RAISED IS MY FOCUS. I APPRECIATE, UM, ANY, UH, APPLAUSE FROM THE SPEAKERS ON THE WORK THAT I'VE DONE. BUT I DO WANNA NOTE THAT IT'S NOT . I, I APPRECIATE THE, THE, THOSE THAT HAVE THANKED ME FOR MY HARD WORK. WHAT I MEANT TO SAY IS IT'S NOT JUST ME. IT'S NOT JUST ME. THERE'S NUMEROUS STAFF WORKING ON THIS. THERE'S THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT, THERE'S LEGAL, WE'VE CONSULTED ACROSS MANY DEPARTMENTS. SO, UM, I DON'T HAVE ALL THE ANSWERS TO WHAT WAS RAISED TONIGHT. I'M GONNA BE CONSULTING LEGAL, I'M GONNA BE CONSULTING, UH, BUILDING DEPARTMENT, OTHER DEPARTMENTS. UM, WE'VE HEARD, WE'VE HEARD THAT THERE'S A LOT OF POSITIVE IN THE DOCUMENT. WE'VE HEARD THAT THERE'S THINGS THAT, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE WANT TO BE STRICKEN. WE'LL HAVE TO TALK ABOUT THE RATIONALE BEHIND THE DECISIONS THAT WERE MADE. AND IT MAY BE THAT YOU AGREE, UM, THAT CERTAIN THINGS SHOULD BE REMOVED FROM THE CODE. WE'LL HAVE TO SEE. BUT WE'LL GET YOU THE INFORMATION SO THAT YOU CAN BE INFORMED THERE. UM, THE TOWN BOARD PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS, I DO ANTICIPATE BEING, UH, DIFFERENT THAN THIS. UM, THEY'RE THE LEGISLATIVE BODY, ULTIMATELY. THEY'RE THE ONES THAT WILL APPROVE OR NOT, UH, ZONING AMENDMENTS IN SOME AMENDED FORM FROM WHAT WE'VE PROPOSED THUS FAR. UH, AND THAT'S GOING TO INVOLVE NUMEROUS PUBLIC HEARINGS. UM, NUMEROUS. UH, SO THERE WILL BE ROBUST PUBLIC INPUT PROCESS. UM, I'VE DONE, UM, LIKE FRIDAY OPEN DROP-IN SESSIONS FOR PLANNING, BOARD CONSERVATION ADVISORY COUNCIL, ZONING BOARD MEMBERS, UM, JUST SITTING HERE TODAY, UM, THINKING THAT I WANT TO DO THAT FOR THE PUBLIC, YOU KNOW, WE'LL DO, I CAN ACCOMMODATE SOMETHING LIKE THAT. WE'RE OPEN HOURLY, UH, DROP IN SESSION ON LIKE FRIDAY MORNINGS OR SOMETHING LIKE FOR, FOR LIKE THAT, FOR PEOPLE THAT HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT THE CODE. UM, I WILL SAY, LIKE, YOU KNOW, OF COURSE SOME ZONING AND PLANNING, UH, GEEK, IF YOU WILL, , BUT WE HAVE 46,000 RESIDENTS, RIGHT? SO, UM, I THINK, YOU KNOW, WE ALSO HAVE TO BE REALISTIC THAT, UM, THERE'S NO WAY TO, YOU KNOW, EVEN HIT 3% OF RESIDENTS UNDERSTANDING, UM, EVEN A SMALL PERCENTAGE OF WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED. I THINK YOUR AVERAGE RESIDENT HAS NO INTEREST IN WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED. THAT'S NOT TO DISCOURAGE PUBLIC INPUT, BUT, UM, WE'LL DO OUR BEST. YOU KNOW, WE, WE, YOU KNOW, SOME OF THESE ARE VERY TECHNICAL, UM, YOU KNOW, NON EXCITING, NON-GLAMOROUS TOPICS. UM, BUT WE'LL DO OUR BEST TO INFORM ANYONE THAT HAS INTEREST. UM, AND, YOU KNOW, I DO APPRECIATE WHAT WAS SAID TONIGHT, AND I, I KNOW THAT I'LL LIKELY, IT'LL LEAD TO CHANGES. UM, SO, UM, YEAH. HERE TO WORK TOGETHER AND THAT'S, YOU KNOW, UNISON WITH THE BOARD, MY STAFF, THE PUBLIC, AND I THINK WE'LL GET AN IMPROVED DOCUMENT. YEAH, I THINK THAT'S GREAT THAT YOU'RE OFFERING TO HAVE THE DROP IN HOURS FOR THE PUBLIC AS WELL. IT, UM, I JUST, AND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS, NOTWITHSTANDING THIS PUBLIC DISCUSSION TONIGHT, THERE WILL BE A NUMEROUS MORE OPPORTUNITIES FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS ON THE, SO THIS IS NOT THE, THE END OF THE DISCUSSION FOR THE PUBLIC, BUT ONLY THE BEGINNING, RIGHT? SO I JUST WANNA BUILD ON THAT. SO ONCE THE PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDATION'S DELIVERED, IT'S NOT AS IF, OKAY, EXCELLENT, LET'S LAUNCH INTO PUBLIC HEARINGS WITH THE TOWN BOARD. I NEED TO THINK ABOUT WHAT I'VE HEARD FROM THE PLANNING BOARD. WE, WE HAVE A RUNNING LIST OF AT LEAST 20 TO 30 SUBSTANTIVE EDITS THAT YOU'RE LOOKING FOR. UM, WE'VE HEARD HALF THAT TONIGHT, RIGHT? SO WE HAVE TO THINK ABOUT THOSE. IT'S NOT JUST, YOU KNOW, GET A RECOMMENDATION FROM A PLANNING BOARD LEAP INTO A PUBLIC HEARING WITH A TOWN BOARD, YOU KNOW, DO FOUR OR FIVE OF THOSE AND, AND BE DONE. UM, THERE WILL LIKELY BE, UH, ONE TO TWO MONTH PAUSE WHERE, UH, WE REALLY, YOU KNOW, THINK CRITICALLY ABOUT WHAT WE'VE HEARD TONIGHT AND FROM THE PLANNING BOARD AND MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE TOWN BOARD, HOW THE VERSION THAT GOES OUT FOR PUBLIC HEARING SHOULD BE IMPROVED, UM, AND BE AS RESPONSIVE AS POSSIBLE, UM, TO WHAT WE'VE HEARD FROM THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE RESIDENTS. SO, UM, THERE'S THAT TIME, TIME PERIOD WHERE, YOU KNOW, RESIDENTS CAN BRING THEMSELVES UP TO SPEED. UM, SO, UM, IT WILL BE AN EVOLVING PROCESS. UH, JUST, UH, JUST AGAIN, TO RECAP THAT, YOU KNOW, THIS IS, THERE'S NO EXPECTATION THAT THIS IS GONNA BE APPROVED OCTOBER, NOVEMBER. UM, BUT YOU KNOW, YOU CAN SEE THE PLANNER IN ME. I, I, I DO, YOU KNOW, WANNA SEE THIS THROUGH. AND REALLY THE, THE, THE FUN PLANNING, IF YOU WILL, UH, NOT THAT I'M NOT HAVING FUN, IS THE COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING UPDATE TO, YOU KNOW, TALK ABOUT OUR MIXED USE QUARTERS AND THINK ABOUT HOW, YOU KNOW, [01:50:01] THE TOWN MAY OR MAY NOT NEED TO EVOLVE BEYOND WHAT WE THOUGHT ABOUT IN 2016 WITH OUR COMP PLAN. YOU KNOW, THAT'S LIKE THE COLLABORATIVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING THAT'S, YOU KNOW, VERY EXCITING. AND, YOU KNOW, WE REALLY NEED TO GO OUT NEIGHBORHOOD, NEIGHBORHOOD BY NEIGHBORHOOD AND, AND, AND TALK TO RESIDENTS. UM, AND AGAIN, THAT'S NOT TO DISCOURAGE THIS PROCESS, BUT RIGHT NOW WE'RE JUST TRYING TO CHECK NON-COMPLEX SUSTAINABILITY BOXES, YOU KNOW, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT BOXES. UM, THAT'S REALLY WHAT WE'RE DOING. OKAY. THANK YOU. UM, MS. ROBINSON. SO, AS FAR AS WHAT WE RECEIVED TONIGHT, I HONESTLY FEEL LIKE WE, WE DO NEED TO DIGEST WHAT WE HEARD, UM, OUR NEXT MEETING, WE COULD DISCUSS IT, UM, AND THEN, YOU KNOW, KEEP THE PUBLIC DISCUSSION OPEN UNTIL OUR, UNTIL SEPTEMBER 16TH. I'M ASSUMING OUR NEXT MEETING IS SEPTEMBER 9TH, AFTER THE FIFTH, SEPTEMBER 2ND IN SEPTEMBER 2ND, SEPTEMBER 2ND. SECOND. YEAH, I CAN SCHEDULE IF YOU WANT SEPTEMBER 2ND. YEAH. SO KEEPING IT OPEN UNTIL SEPTEMBER 9TH, AND THEN EACH WEEK WE CAN HAVE, CONTINUE OUR DISCUSSION, UM, IN REFERENCE TO, WELL, I THINK AT A MINIMUM WE WOULD, WE WOULD, YOU KNOW, ADJOURN THE PUBLIC DISCUSSION TO THE AUGUST 5TH MEETING. AND THEN BASED ON WHERE WE ARE AT THAT POINT, WE CAN CLOSE IT OR, OR HOLD IT OPEN AGAIN DEPENDING ON WHAT WE RECEIVE. OKAY. YEAH. DEPEND ON WHAT WE RECEIVE. SOUNDS GOOD. UM, AND, AND TO THE EXTENT THAT WHERE I'M LEANING RIGHT NOW, I, I AGREE WITH ALL OF YOU. UH, I AM LEANING TOWARDS, UH, KEEPING THE PUBLIC DISCUSSION OPEN UNTIL AUGUST, UH, UNTIL OUR NEXT MEETING ON, ON AUGUST 5TH. UH, I WILL SAY, JUST TO REITERATE WHAT COMMISSIONER DUQUESNE, UM, SHARED, YOU KNOW, WHILE, WHILE WE WILL KEEP THE PUBLIC DISCUSSION OPEN, AND WHILE I CERTAINLY ENCOURAGE THE PUBLIC, UH, TO, YOU KNOW, EE EVEN IF WE WERE TO HAVE CLOSED THE, THE PUBLIC DISCUSSION TONIGHT AND, YOU KNOW, KEEP THE WRITTEN RECORD OPEN FOR A WEEK, LIKE WE WOULD NORMALLY WOULD, YOU KNOW, ULTIMATELY THE, THE PUBLIC, YOU KNOW, CAN AND WILL AND SHOULD CONTINUE TO, UH, PROVIDE THEIR FEEDBACK TO, TO COMMISSIONER DUQUESNE AND TO THE TOWN STAFF, REALLY UP UNTIL THE VERY MOMENT THAT THE TOWN BOARD, UH, IT MAKES THE ULTIMATE DECISION ON, ON THESE PROPOSED CHANGES. UM, YOU KNOW, THE, THE STEP WE ARE IN THE PROCESS IS AS THE, THE SUBJECT MATTER EXPERTS FOR, FOR LAND USE HERE IN THE TOWN. UM, YOU KNOW, WE ARE MAKING, MAKING RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE TOWN BOARD, UM, THAT I HOPE THEY, THEY WILL CONSIDER AND INCORPORATE. UM, BUT ULTIMATELY, LIKE MANY OF THE OTHER RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WE MAKE WITH PROJECTS, UM, YOU KNOW, THEY ARE, THEY ARE JUST RECOMMENDATIONS. UH, AND SO WE, WE ARE NOT THE ONES WHO ARE ULTIMATELY, YOU KNOW, WE, WE ARE NOT THE LEGISLATIVE BODY HERE IN THE TOWN. WE ARE NOT THE ONES WHO WILL HAVE THE FINAL SAY ON, ON THESE CHANGES. UM, I THINK SOME RECOMMENDATIONS ALREADY THAT I'VE JUST JOTTED DOWN HERE BASED ON SOME OF THE FEEDBACK THAT WE'VE HEARD FROM THE PUBLIC, THIS, UH, THE, FROM THE PUBLIC THIS EVENING. UM, YOU KNOW, I, I ABSOLUTELY THINK THAT THE DEFINITION OF FAMILY SHOULD BE RE-REVIEWED. UM, I DON'T NECESSARILY THINK THIS BOARD WILL COME TO A PLACE WHERE WE ARE SPECIFICALLY RECOMMENDING WHAT THAT DEFINITION IS, BUT I ABSOLUTELY THINK THAT THE DEFINITION, UH, SHOULD BE, SHOULD BE REVIEWED AND, AND THE FEEDBACK THAT WE'VE RECEIVED TONIGHT, UM, SHOULD BE TAKEN, SHOULD BE TAKEN ACCORDINGLY. UM, IN TERMS OF, UH, MR. SIMON'S COMMENTS REGARDING MIXED USE, UM, I CERTAINLY UNDERSTAND WHY, UH, YOU KNOW, THE PROPOSED CHANGES WEREN'T MORE AGGRESSIVE IN TERMS OF MIXED USE. UM, AT THE SAME TIME, YOU KNOW, I, I THINK THAT THE FOUR CORNERS REVITALIZATION, UH, COMMITTEE, UH, IS HAVING PRODUCTIVE CONVERSATIONS ON WHERE, UH, MIXED USE CAN BE INCORPORATED INTO THAT SPECIFIC, UH, SPACE THROUGH AN OVERLAY. UM, AND A RECOMMENDATION THAT WE MIGHT WANT TO CONSIDER IS THE TOWN IDENTIFYING OTHER AREAS WHERE SIMILAR COMMITTEES AND SIMILAR OVERLAYS COULD, COULD ULTIMATELY BE, UH, PROPOSED, YOU KNOW, PERHAPS MOUNT JOY IN CENTRAL AVENUE, UM, OR OTHER SORT OF, UH, YOU KNOW, O OTHER AREAS, OTHER CORNERS WITHIN, WITHIN THE TOWN. UM, YOU KNOW, IN TERMS OF THE SELF-STORAGE, I, I THINK THAT'S AN INTERESTING CONCEPT IN TERMS OF, UH, OUTSIDE STORAGE OF VEHICLES AND SOMETHING THAT I THINK IS WORTH STUDYING FURTHER. UM, YOU KNOW, ADDITIONALLY, UH, I DON'T KNOW IF EV CHARGING IS, UH, AN APPROVED ACCESSORY USE FOR STORAGE RIGHT NOW, BUT CONSIDERING WE RECENTLY, UM, APPROVED AN ACCESSORY USE FOR EV CHARGING IN [01:55:01] A SHOPPING CENTER, YOU KNOW, PERHAPS THAT'S, THAT'S ALSO AN OPTION FOR THESE, UH, STORAGE CENTERS THAT OTHERWISE HAVE UNDERUTILIZED PARKING. UM, SO, SO THOSE ARE SORT OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT, THAT WE WILL COME TO, IN ADDITION TO REC, YOU KNOW, THE BULLETED RECOMMENDATIONS OR THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WE'VE MADE OVER THE COURSE OF OUR FOUR, UH, PREVIOUS MEETINGS, UH, THAT STAFF, UH, HAVE COMPILED AND DISTRIBUTED TO US. UM, I ALSO THINK THAT SOME OF THE, ONE OF THE COMMENTS THAT CAME UP TONIGHT WAS ABOUT SENIOR LIVING. MM-HMM . I'D LIKE TO DIGEST THAT AS WELL. AND, AND EVERYTHING THAT EVERYBODY SAID TODAY, I THINK, ARE WE GONNA GET A COPY OF THE TRANSCRIPT? YEAH. SO, SO WE'LL, WE'LL GET A COPY OF THE TRANSCRIPT. YEAH. UM, YOU KNOW, I, I WOULD IMAGINE, AND THIS IS WHERE I'M, I'M PROBABLY GETTING A LITTLE BIT OVER MY SKIS, BUT, BUT I WOULD IMAGINE, UH, THE TIMELINE FOR THE SPECIFIC PROJECT THAT, THAT WAS DISCUSSED THIS EVENING, OR REFERENCED THIS EVENING, THAT THAT'LL PROBABLY BE COMPLETED FAR. YOU KNOW, A DECISION WILL BE MADE IN, IN ANY DIRECTION BEFORE THESE, THESE CHANGES ARE ULTIMATELY ADOPTED. UM, THAT, THAT'S, AND TO THE EXTENT THAT WE MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO STRIP THAT OUT, UM, AT THIS POINT, THAT THAT IS CERTAINLY A RECOMMENDATION THAT, THAT WE COULD CONSIDER. RIGHT. WELL, AND I'M NOT EVEN SAYING THAT I WANNA DO THAT NECESSARILY. I JUST WANNA CONSIDER ALL THE COMMENTS THAT WE'RE SAYING WERE SURE WERE BROUGHT UP. SO, SO ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS SPECIFICALLY ON WHAT WE HEARD TONIGHT WITHIN THE PUBLIC HEARING OR PUBLIC DISCUSSION? UM, ONCE WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC DISCUSSION, WE CAN DIG INTO THE BULLETS FOR THE, THE REMAINING TIME WE HAVE, AND THEN WE CAN CERTAINLY CONTINUE TO DIG INTO THEM AT OUR NEXT MEETING. JUST WANNA THANK EVERYBODY FOR COMING OUT TONIGHT. UH, WE APPRECIATE YOUR INPUT, YOUR INSIGHT, AND YOUR EDUCATING US. WE'RE WORKING, ALL OF US HERE ARE WORKING FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE TOWN, AND IT'S COLLEGIAL, AND I JOINED WITH EVERYBODY IN THANKING THE COMMISSIONER FOR HIS HARD WORK AND IS EDUCATING US YES. AND ANSWERING OUR QUESTIONS. YES. THANK YOU. YEAH. AND, AND I, I ALSO WANT TO THANK THE COMMISSIONER AS WELL AS, UM, I KNOW THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT THAT WAS ACTIVELY, UH, INVOLVED IN, IN THE WORKING GROUP AND, AND THE LEGAL TEAM. UM, AND, AND AGAIN, I DON'T WANNA LEAVE ANYONE OUT, BUT, BUT EVERYONE WHO IS INVOLVED IN ULTIMATELY GETTING TO A POINT WHERE THIS DRAFT COULD BE FIRST PRESENTED TO THE TOWN BOARD AND THEN REFERRED TO US, UM, AND I KNOW THE, THE PROPOSED CHANGES HAVE IMPROVED EVERY STEP OF THE WAY. AND, AND ULTIMATELY THE PRODUCT THAT IS ULTIMATELY ADOPTED BY THE TOWN BOARD, I'M CONFIDENT, UM, WE'LL, WE'LL MOVE OUR TOWN FORWARD. EXCELLENT. THANK YOU. YES, THANK YOU. UM, YEAH, I HAVE TO AGREE WITH MY FELLOW PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS. I, I, I, WE GOT A LOT OUT TONIGHT. UM, A LOT OF INFORMATION THAT WE DIDN'T EVEN THINK ABOUT AND IT'S, IT'S GOOD TO HEAR FROM THE PUBLIC AND, YOU KNOW, WE, I'M SURE THIS TOOK A COUPLE OF YEARS TO EVEN PUT IT TOGETHER, RIGHT? SO WE NEED A LITTLE BIT MORE TIME AS WELL. GREAT. ALRIGHT, THEN I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO ADJOURN THE PUBLIC DISCUSSION TO OUR AUGUST 5TH MEETING. SO, MOVED, MOVED, MS. ROBINSON. SECONDED. SECOND. MS. ANDERSON. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. CHAIR VOTES. AYE. UH, AND I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, PUBLIC DISCUSSION PORTION, UH, OF OUR MEETING. SO MOVED. SECONDED. MOVE, MOVE MS. ROBINSON. SECOND TO MR. PILLINGER. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. AYE. CHAIR VOTES. AYE. ALRIGHT. HOW ARE WE FEELING? SO IT'S 9 0 3, SO WE HAVE JUST ABOUT AN HOUR. UM, DO WE WANNA TAKE A BRIEF RECESS OR DO WE WANNA JUMP INTO, UM, I, I THINK WHAT, WHAT I WOULD ASK US TO CONSIDER IS, UH, SINCE WE'RE GONNA BE DISCUSSING THE BULLETS THAT HAVE BEEN DISTRIBUTED AT THE NEXT MEETING, UM, I HAVE A LIST OF BULLETS THAT, ADDITIONAL BULLETS THAT I'VE COME UP WITH THAT I'D, I'D LOVE TO JUST SORT OF SHARE OKAY. SHARE OUT THERE FOR EVERYONE TO CONSIDER, AND THEN TO THE EXTENT THAT THEY CAN BE INCORPORATED INTO THE BULLETS THAT WERE ALREADY DISTRIBUTED. UM, AND THEN WE CAN CONSIDER ALL OF THE BULLETS, THE ENTIRE UNIVERSE OF BULLETS, UM, AT, AT OUR NEXT MEETING. BUT FIRST, DO WE WANT TO TAKE A QUICK RECESS OR HOW ARE WE FEELING? YEAH, I'M FINE'S. WE'RE GOOD. ALRIGHT. IS THERE ANYTHING, UH, ANY OTHER, UH, WORDS OF WISDOM? NO, I'M JUST GONNA HANG AROUND BEFORE WE JUMP INTO IT, I'M JUST GONNA HANG AROUND AND, UH, SEE IF I COULD BE HELPFUL IF I CAN, WE HAVE A LOT OF WORDS COMPLIMENTS. I'M GONNA LET, OKAY. SO TOWN PLAN, BRITON WANTS TO USE THE RESTROOM AND SINCE HE'S [02:00:01] THE ONE, OKAY. OKAY. ALRIGHT. SO WE'RE, WE'RE GONNA, WE'RE GONNA TAKE A, A FIVE MINUTE RECESS, COME BACK AT NINE 10. OKAY, SOUNDS GOOD. BACK, UH, IT IS 9:10 PM THIS IS THE WEDNESDAY, JULY 15TH, 2026 PLANNING BOARD MEETING. UH, NEXT UP WE HAVE OLD BUSINESS WORK SESSION, UH, CONTINUING OUR INTERNAL DISCUSSION ON TB 25 0 4, THE COMPREHENSIVE CHAPTER 2 85 AMENDMENTS, WHICH INCLUDES THE REFERRAL FROM THE TOWN BOARD ON THE ZONING TEXT AND THE ZONING MAP AMENDMENTS. UM, I THINK IN THE NEXT 50 MINUTES, UH, I THINK THIS WOULD BE A GOOD TIME FOR ANYONE, FOR THOSE WHO HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO REBUT THE BULLETS. UM, IF THERE'S ANY ADDITIONAL BULLETS THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO SORT OF PUT ON THE TABLE, UM, THAT WAY, UH, WHEN AT OUR NEXT MEETING WE REVIEW ALL OF THE BULLETS THAT'LL ULTIMATELY BE, BECOME THE, THE MEAT OF THE RECOMMENDATION THAT WE MAKE BACK TO THE TOWN BOARD. OKAY. UM, SO I KNOW MS. ROBINSON, YOU, YOU HAVE A FEW, UH, ADDITIONAL ITEMS THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO PROPOSE, AND SO I'LL, I'LL ASK YOU TO START. SURE. SO THE JUNE 3RD, UH, COMMENTS, UM, THE PLANNING BOARD ASKS THAT THERE WOULD BE A MINIMUM AGE REQUIREMENT FOR THE FAMILY MEMBERS RESIDING IN ADUS. I JUST WANNA MAKE CLEAR THAT THAT'S SPECIFICALLY FOR THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS. MM-HMM . NOT FOR ALL ADUS. UM, THE OTHER THING IS, I DO LIKE THE FIRST BULLET AS IT TALKS ABOUT, UM, YOU KNOW, 99 YEARS AS OPPOSED TO THE 50 YEARS, UM, IN SUPPORT OF THE WORKFORCE HOUSING UNITS. UM, MY ONLY COMMENT TO THAT IS FOR US TO CONSIDER, UM, POSSIBLY, UM, FOR SINGLE FAMILY CONDOS AND CO-OPS, MAYBE WE THINK ABOUT, UM, EACH TIME THERE IS A NEW OWNER OR A NEW BUYER, WE THINK ABOUT RESETTING THE TIME LIMIT. THAT WAY WE CAN KEEP THESE PARTICULAR UNITS WITHIN OUR AFFORDABLE HOUSING SYSTEM. AND WE TALKED ABOUT, UH, YOU KNOW, HOUSING, WE'RE NOT GETTING ANY MORE LAND AND WE DON'T KNOW WHEN WE'RE GETTING ANY MORE DEVELOPMENTS. SO AS A WAY TO KEEP SOME UNITS WITHIN THE SYSTEM STONE, I WAS, I WAS LIKE REVIEWING THE, I KNOW A LOT OF THE COMMENTS TALKED ABOUT, UM, THEY DIDN'T HAVE TIME TO DIGEST, BUT THE FOUR HOUR VIDEO THAT TERRANCE AND I FORGOT HIS NAME PUT TOGETHER, UM, THAT WAS SENT OVER, IS LIKE, IT REMINDED ME OF THE THINGS WE DISCUSSED. AND ONE OF THE THINGS WE TALKED ABOUT, EVEN THE, THE CHART THAT YOU GAVE GARRETT, IT SHOWED THAT SOME UNITS, LIKE IN THE NEXT 20 YEARS ARE FALLING OFF OF THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING. SO WHAT CAN WE DO TO KEEP UNITS, UM, AFFORDABLE, WHETHER IT'S A ACTUAL UNIT OR A PROPERTY, WHAT, WHAT CAN WE DO? SO THAT'S WHY I MENTIONED THINK ABOUT MAYBE IT RESETTING FOR THOSE TYPE OF UNITS. IT ALSO, IT, IT KEEPS THE AREAS DIVERSE. UM, YOU KNOW, I, I DIDN'T WANNA PUSH RENTALS, YOU KNOW, BUT IT'S SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT. YOU KNOW, WE DON'T WANNA SAY, OH, IT'S 50, IT'S BEEN 50 YEARS, OR IT'S BEEN 99 YEARS NOW. YOU KNOW, THERE'S NO MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR YOU. WE DON'T WANT TO SAY THAT. SO, UM, THAT WAS MY COMMENT ON THAT. OH, IF I COULD JUST TAG ONTO THAT. OF COURSE. I THINK IN GENERAL, LIKE OUR APPROACH TO A COMMENT LIKE THAT IS, WE'RE NOT GONNA LIMIT IT TO JUST WHAT YOU SEE HERE. YOU KNOW, JUST EXPLORING 99 YEARS OR A POTENTIAL RESET. I THINK WHAT WE NEED TO DO IS GO TO THE COUNTY OR WHOEVER, UM, ARE THE EXPERTS IN THIS REALM AND JUST REALLY TRY AND IDENTIFY WHAT ARE THE COMMUNITIES THAT ARE REALLY PUSHING, UM, THIS ISSUE, YOU KNOW, IN THE MOST PROGRESSIVE MANNER. MAKE SURE THAT WHATEVER MENU OPTIONS ARE AVAILABLE IN THAT REGARD, WE MAKE YOU AWARE OF. AND, UM, YOU KNOW, IF THEY'RE WORKING IN NEW YORK STATE, IN, IN THE COUNTRY, UM, WE'LL TRY AND GET YOU AS MANY, YOU KNOW, MENU OPTIONS AS POSSIBLE. BASICALLY SEE WHO'S BEING VERY SUCCESSFUL AT IT. YEAH. AND, AND SEE IF WE CAN USE OR IMPROVE ON IT. MM-HMM . I AGREE WITH YOU 100%. MY OTHER COMMENT [02:05:01] WAS, UH, THE JUNE 17TH, UH, THIRD BULLET WHEN IT CAME TO THE EV UH, SIGNED REGULATIONS, UM, I TOTALLY AGREED WITH, UH, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER SCHMIDT AS FAR AS THE SECOND PORTION OF IT, YOU KNOW, THE SPECIFYING THAT SIGNAGE IS MARKED AS FREE OR FEES APPLY. AND THEN, YOU KNOW, IF WE WANTED TO GO AS FAR AS MAYBE LISTING THE TYPES OF FEES, UM, THAT APPLY, BUT AS FAR AS TAKING THE TIME TO WRITE, THE ACTUAL PRICE OF THE SIGN DOES NOT MAKE SENSE IN THE FACT THAT IT'S CONSTANTLY CHANGING THROUGHOUT THE DAY, DEPENDING ON HOW MANY CARS. IT'S JUST A LOT OF VARIABLES THAT GOES INTO PRICING AND HAVING TO POST THAT. AND AGAIN, AS I MENTIONED THAT THAT'S SOMETHING THAT IS GENERALLY IN THE APP. THE APP TELLS YOU EVERYTHING BEFORE YOU GET STARTED. OKAY. THOSE ARE MY COMMENTS. ALRIGHT, SO, SO THESE BULLETS THAT, THAT I'M ABOUT TO, TO WALK THROUGH THESE ARE, THESE ARE IN CODE SECTIONS THAT WE DIDN'T REVIEW OVER THE PAST FOUR MEETINGS. UM, SO ALL THE COMMENTS THAT I HAD ON, ON THOSE SECTIONS I SHARED DURING THOSE MEETINGS. THESE ARE, UH, ADDITIONAL COMMENTS OUTSIDE. UM, I, I WILL SHARE THIS BULLET WITH, WITH YOU, COMMISSIONER DUQUESNE AND, AND TOM PLANNER BRITTON. UM, SO YOU FEEL FREE TO TAKE NOTES, BUT DON'T, DON'T, DON'T FEEL A NEED TO WRITE DOWN EVERY SINGLE WORD. UM, SO IN 2 85, 10 A ONE B, THERE IS REFERENCE TO, UH, GOVERNMENTAL AUTHORITY. THE, THE CONTEXT IS, UH, PUBLIC PARKS, PLAYGROUNDS, OR SIMILAR RECREATIONAL AREAS OWNED AND OPERATED BY A GOVERNMENTAL AUTHORITY. TO THE EXTENT THAT, YOU KNOW, WE'VE PREVIOUSLY DISCUSSED THAT THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE, AND TOWN GENERALLY, UM, DOESN'T HAVE JURISDICTION OVER SCHOOL DISTRICTS. AND SCHOOL DISTRICTS ARE A GOVERNMENTAL AUTHORITY, AND ESPECIALLY WITH SCHOOL DISTRICTS OFTEN HAVING PLAYGROUNDS. UM, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT IT'S, IT'S MADE CLEAR THAT YOU KNOW, THIS, THIS IS REALLY DISCUSSING PLAYGROUNDS OR SIMILAR RECREATIONAL AREAS THAT'S ACTUALLY UNDER THE JURISDICTION OF, OF THIS MUNICIPALITY AND THE JURISDICTION OF THIS CODE. UM, 2 85, 10 A THREE A ONE, WHICH REFERENCES WHERE, UH, WHERE COUNTRY CLUB SPECIAL PERMITS, UM, THE, OR THE REQUIREMENTS FOR COUNTRY CLUB SPECIAL PERMITS. IT SAYS THAT THE PROPERTY, AND THIS IS NEW LANGUAGE, THE PROPERTY MUST BE ON A STATE ROADWAY. UM, I, I CAN THINK OF AT LEAST SUNNINGDALE COUNTRY CLUB THAT'S ON UNDERHILL ROAD. THAT'S NOT A STATE ROADWAY THAT, THAT WOULDN'T MEET THIS CRITERIA. UM, I KNOW METROPOLIS ON IS ON DOPPS FERRY ROAD, THAT IS A STATE ROADWAY. I I CAN'T LIST OFF ALL OF THE COUNTRY CLUBS IN THE TOWN, BUT I WOULD, I WOULD JUST MAKE SURE THAT AT LEAST EXCLUDE EXISTING FACILITIES POTENTIALLY YEAH. TO THE EXTENT THAT THAT, THAT, UM, WAS A SOLUTION. UM, THAT'S ONE WAY TO APPROACH. BUT I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE WOULDN'T, UH, INADVERTENTLY, YOU KNOW, MAKE, MAKE, MAKE LIFE HARDER FOR, FOR EXISTING, EXISTING, UH, CLUBS. UM, THIS IS MORE OF A, OF A CURIOUS OBSERVATION IN THE CODE. THE R DISTRICTS ARE DESCENDING WHILE THE M DISTRICTS ARE ASCENDING. I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S A REASON FOR THAT, BUT THAT, THAT SEEMED ODD TO ME. UM, 2 85, 24 B THREE C, UH, THERE'S REFERENCE TO, UM, BAD WEATHER AND ELSEWHERE IN THE CODE, UH, THERE'S NEW LANGUAGE THAT, UH, REFERENCES AS A RESULT OF STORM EVENTS. UM, YOU KNOW, AN EXAMPLE OF THAT IS 2 85, 34 5 C. AND SO TO THE EXTENT THAT THE NEW LANGUAGE IS, IS BETTER, I WOULD JUST MAKE SURE THAT THAT NEW LANGUAGE IS ALSO COPIED OVER TO 24 B. UM, DO YOU MIND IF I COMMENT BACK A LITTLE BIT? SURE. BEFORE I GO TOO FAR. SO, UM, REGARDING THE GOLF COURSES ON STATE ROADS, UM, JUST SO YOU'RE AWARE THEY WOULD, THEY'RE ALREADY GRANDFATHERED IN. SO I THINK THE CONTEMPLATION BOARD NEEDS TO CONSIDER IS WHETHER THE PROPOSAL TO, UH, REQUIRE THAT FUTURE GOLF COURSES BEYOND A STATE ROAD IS SOMETHING THAT THEY SHOULD CONSIDER. IS IT GRANDFATHER? IF THEY, IF THEY DO A MAJOR REDEVELOPMENT FOR AN EXISTING GOLF COURSE? I MEAN, IF SUNNINGDALE DECIDED AND, AND THEY'RE CONSTANTLY UPGRADING THAT PROPERTY MM-HMM . UH, THEY DID IT A FEW YEARS AGO. I MEAN, DID THEY HAVE TO COMPLY? I MEAN, THEY'RE NOT ON A STATE ROAD, IS THAT GONNA BLOCK THEM FROM REDEVELOPING THEIR PROPERTY? SO THE FACT THAT THEY'RE NOT ON A STATE ROAD, IT WOULDN'T, SO THEY WOULD EXPAND THEIR [02:10:01] USE, WHICH WOULD BE, I'M NOT ASKING YOU TO GIMME AN ANSWER. NO, NO, NO, NO. SOMETHING CONTEMPLATE. BUT I THINK KNOW THESE, THIS IS THE KI THESE ARE THE KINDS OF THINGS THAT JUST OPEN UP QUESTIONS, YOU KNOW, WHETHER IT'S THE PUBLIC, WHETHER IT'S US, YOU KNOW, WHETHER IT'S, YOU KNOW, YOUR DEPARTMENT. AND I THINK THAT'S WHY I THINK THE CHAIRPERSON WANTS TO MAKE SURE THAT, UM, THAT GRANDFATHERING IS, UM, YOU KNOW, STRONG AND EXPRESSED AS OPPOSED TO, UM, YOU KNOW, AMBIGUOUS. RIGHT. SO, UM, YEP. WE'LL GET BACK TO YOU ON THAT. I'M SORRY. I THINK WHAT IT'S BRINGING UP IS IF YOU HAVE A SIGNIFICANT CHANGE TO THE USE OF THE PROPERTY, DOES THAT DEFEAT THE GRANDFATHERING? SO FOR INSTANCE, IF YOU HAVE A BUILDING THAT WAS BUILT IN 1920, IT HAS TO MEET THE 1920 B BUILDING CODE BY ANALOGY. THEY COME IN IN 2026 AND THEY DO A GUT RENOVATION OF THE BUILDING. THEY THEN HAVE TO BRING IT UP TO CURRENT CODE. SO I'M, I THINK IT'S PRETTY CLEAR THAT NOBODY HERE WANTS TO PUT AN EXISTING COUNTRY CLUB OUTTA BUSINESS. 'CAUSE THEY CAN'T BE ON A, SO WHAT, WHAT HAPPENS? SO THE INTENT IS ABSOLUTELY, YOU KNOW, NOT, NOT TO ALLOW THEM NOT TO EXPAND AND DO THE ROUTINE THINGS. THAT'S RECOMMENDATION. BUT I WOULD ASSUME THAT IF YOU, SORRY, I JUST, WELL I'M SURE THERE'S SOMETHING IN THE ZONING CODE ABOUT NON-CONFORMING USES AND IF, IF A CERTAIN PORTION OF A PROPERTY IS DESTROYED, YOU'RE NOT A NON-CONFORMING USE ANYMORE WHERE YOU CAN MAINTAIN IT. RIGHT. THAT'S THE KIND OF THING THAT WE, YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE ANSWER IS, BUT THAT'S WHAT'S GOTTA BE CONSIDERED BECAUSE IF SUNNINGDALE BURNS DOWN THEIR MAIN, YOU KNOW, BUILDING BURNS DOWN, WHERE DOES THAT LEAVE THEM? I MEAN, WHERE DO WE WANT IT TO LEAVE THEM? RIGHT. SO THAT'S, THAT'S OUR QUESTION. SO THE COUNTRY CLUB, YOU MENTIONING STATE ROAD, SO YEAH, SO I'LL, I'LL READ THE FULL SENTENCE, JUST SO, SO THE, THE PROPERTY MUST BE ON A STATE ROADWAY OTHER THAN PARKWAYS AND INTERSTATE HIGHWAYS WITH AT LEAST A HUNDRED FEET FRONTAGE THERE ON. SO, SO HOW, HOW DOES NORWOOD COUNTRY CLUB, BECAUSE NORWOOD ROAD IS A STATE ROAD, RIGHT? MM-HMM . YES. SO THAT'S NOT THE STATE ROADWAY, BUT, BUT IT'S ALSO, THE ADDRESS IS NOT NORWOOD ROAD, I DON'T BELIEVE, BUT IT, YOU KNOW, PARTIALLY FALLS ON, UH, YOU KNOW, UH, NORWOOD ROAD, AND THEN THE OTHER HALF IS ALL RESIDENTIAL SIDE. I THINK THERE'S A REFERENCE IN THERE TO, UM, YOU KNOW, HAVING FRONTAGE OR, UH, YOU KNOW, AN ENTRANCE FROM THAT STATE ROAD, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN. BUT, SO I THINK YOUR, I THINK YOUR, YOUR COMMENT A MOMENT AGO, UM, YOU KNOW, EXCLUDING EXISTING COUNTRY CLUBS AS OF THE DATE OF ADOPTION, RIGHT. THAT, THAT WOULD, THAT MAKES, THAT WOULD LIKELY CURE THAT, THAT CONCERN. WE'LL LOOK INTO THAT. MM-HMM . SO, UM, SO MOVING ON, UH, 2 85, 24 B THREE C, UH, UPDATE BAD WEATHER TO, AS A RESULT OF STORM EVENTS LIKE THE LANGUAGE AND 2 85, 34 5 C. UM, REFERRAL REFERRALS ARE REFERENCED, UH, THROUGHOUT THE CHAPTER, AND IT SEEMS, UH, EVERY REFERENCE OF REFERRAL IS, IS JUST SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT. UM, THE, THE BEST ONE THAT I FOUND WAS, OR IN, AGAIN, MY OPINION WAS 2 85 57 D, WHICH STATES THE PLANNING BOARD MAY CO MAY FORWARD ONE COPY OF THE SITE PLAN APPLICATION TO THE TOWN ENGINEER, THE BUILDING INSPECTOR, THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS, THE WATER DEPARTMENT, THE TOWN'S FIRE MARSHAL. I WOULD RECOMMEND ADDING A FIRE DISTRICT OR FIRE COMPANY, UH, THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, THE CAC WESTCHESTER COUNTY, THE NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, IF THE SITE PLAN SHOWS FRONTAGE ALONG THE STATE HIGHWAY AND ANY OTHER LOCAL STATE, COUNTY, REGIONAL AND FEDERAL AGENCIES HAVING JURISDICTION AS WELL AS TO ANY TECHNICAL CONSULTANTS THAT THE PLANNING BOARD AT ITS DISCRETION DEEMS NECESSARY OR APPROPRIATE FOR A THOROUGH REVIEW OF THE APPLICATION. UM, AND SO EVERYWHERE ELSE WHERE THERE'S REFERENCES TO WHERE, WHERE THE SITE PLAN SHOULD BE REFERRED TO, I THINK THAT'S THE, THE MOST COMPREHENSIVE LIST OF, OF WHO WOULD MAKE SENSE FOR, FOR THAT TO BE REFERRED. UM, IN 2 85, 24 D TWO B. UM, THIS IS THE ONLY PLACE WHERE THERE, THERE IS A SPECIFIC, UH, FIXED COSTS FOR, FOR APPLICATIONS, UM, ELSEWHERE. IT WAS UPDATED TO, TO STATE, YOU KNOW, ASSET FROM THE TOWN BOARD. UM, I THINK AN EXAMPLE OF THAT IS 2 85, 34, 2 B. UM, AND SO, YOU KNOW, ULTIMATELY THAT, THAT ALLOWS THE TOWN BOARD FLEXIBILITY TO SET A FEE STRUCTURE BY RESOLUTION INSTEAD OF GOING THROUGH THE WHOLE PROCESS OF A AMENDING THE CODE. AND SO I THINK THAT THAT SHOULD BE AFFIXED THERE. UM, SIMILAR 2 85, 24 D 2D. UM, THERE, THERE'S DIFFERENT CADENCES OF, YOU KNOW, SOME, IT'S [02:15:01] A 90 DAY WINDOW WITH A 30 DAY EXTENSION ELSEWHERE. IT'S A 60 DAY WINDOW WITH TWO 30 DAY EXTENSIONS. UM, I THINK EVERY, FOR THE MOST PART, IT'S, I THINK THE RECOMMENDATION LANDED ON 90 DAYS WITH A 30 DAY EXTENSION. I THINK THIS ONE SECTION, UH, HAD THE OLD LANGUAGE, AND SO CONFORMING WITH THAT 120 DAY PROCESS, UM, WOULD, WOULD ALLOW MORE CONSISTENCY. UM, YEAH, 2 85, 24 D THREE B HAD, AGAIN, THE, THE OLDER REFERRAL LANGUAGE, UM, 2 85, 24 D THREE B. UM, I WOULD, I WOULD ADD LANGUAGE THAT, THAT REFERENCES, UH, THE AMENDMENTS TO THE MAP SHALL NOT TAKE EFFECT UNTIL THE SITE PLAN IS APPROVED BY THE PLANNING BOARD. I KNOW IN THE PAST THERE'S BEEN SOME, SOME TIMING ISSUES WHERE THE MAP CHANGES WERE ADOPTED BEFORE SITE PLAN WAS APPROVED, AND THAT, THAT CREATED, CREATED CHALLENGES DOWN THE ROAD. UM, 2 85, 25, 2D. UM, I, I DON'T KNOW IF WE EVEN HAVE ANY INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER EDUCATION IN THE TOWN WHERE, WHERE THEY HAVE HOUSING, UM, BUT TO THE EXTENT IT'S IN THE CODE. UM, AND, AND THIS IS SOMETHING THAT I ACTUALLY HAVE SOME, SOME SUBJECT MATTER EXPERTISE ON. UM, THERE, THERE'S A BROAD REFERENCE TO FRATERNITY AND SORORITY HOUSING. UM, AND, AND THERE THERE IS PRIVATELY OWNED FRATERNITY AND SORORITY HOUSING, AND THEN THERE'S INSTITUTION OWNED AND OPERATED. UM, MY RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE TO CLARIFY THAT THE ONLY FRATERNITY AND SORORITY HOUSING PERMITTED AS AN ACCESSORY USE TO AN INSTITUTION OF HIGHER ED IS THE, THE OWNED AND OPERATED BY THE INSTITUTION. BECAUSE THAT, THAT THEN INHERENTLY WILL PROVIDE SORT OF MORE GUARDRAILS INSTEAD OF JUST FIVE PEOPLE, YOU KNOW, BUYING A HOUSE AND ALL OF A SUDDEN CALLING THEMSELVES A FRATERNITY. UM, AND THEN THE, THE POTENTIAL CONSEQUENCES OF THAT. UM, WHERE WERE WE? UH, 2 85, 28 0.1, E TWO. UM, I THINK THIS IS CLARIFIED AT THE VERY END OF THE DOCUMENT, BUT I WOULD ALSO MAKE A REFERENCE HERE. UH, THE TIMELINE THAT THE PLANNING BOARD IS REQUIRED TO ISSUE A REPORT BACK TO THE TOWN BOARD, THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN, IT'S, IT'S PRETTY OPEN-ENDED. AND, YOU KNOW, ONE COULD ARGUE THAT IF THE PLANNING BOARD NEVER MAKES A RECOMMENDATION, THEN IT BASICALLY IS, IS POCKET VETOING, UH, YOU KNOW, THE, THE, THE PROPOSAL. UM, YEAH, SO WITH THE CA DISTRICT SIGN STANDARDS BEING REMOVED OUT OF 2 85, 29 0.1, UH, AND PUT IN THE CHAPTER TWO 40, UM, I THINK THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO REVISE AND ENHANCE THE SIGN STANDARDS FOR OUR MAJOR COMMERCIAL CORRIDORS. UM, WE'RE ALSO INTRODUCING A NEW ZONING DISTRICT, THE TR DISTRICT, UH, IN, IN 2 85. AND SO TO THE EXTENT THE, THE CONCEPT IS FOR THE TR DISTRICT TO, TO OPERATE AND LOOK SIMILAR TO THE CA DISTRICT, UM, I THINK THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO, TO REALLY, YOU KNOW, AND CONSIDERING IT'S A RELATIVELY SMALL CHAPTER, I THINK THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO, TO UNDERTAKE A REVISION OF TWO 40, UM, CONSIDER THE TR DISTRICT IN THE SIGN STANDARDS AND SORT OF RE REFRESH AND MODERNIZE THE, THE SIGN CHAPTER. UM, AND AS THE BULLETS THAT WERE DISTRIBUTED SAID, YOU KNOW, AT A MINIMUM IF WE'RE REMOVING THE CA SIGN STANDARDS OUT OF 2 85, THEY HAVE TO GO SOMEWHERE, AND THAT HAS TO BE DONE CONCURRENTLY. OTHERWISE, IF THERE'S ANY GAP, UH, THEN THE CA THE CA SIGN STANDARDS WOULD, WOULD EFFECTIVELY JUST DISAPPEAR. UM, 2 85, 29 0.2 E THREE. UM, THIS IS THE, IN REGARDS TO THE HARTSDALE CONTEXTUAL REVIEW COMMITTEE, UM, I FIND IT A LITTLE BIT UNUSUAL. NOT THAT I, I DON'T THINK THE, THE STAFF DO UNBELIEVABLE JOBS. IT'S, IT'S A LITTLE UNUSUAL TO HAVE A BOARD THAT IS COMPRISED OF BOTH RESIDENTS AND STAFF MEMBERS WHERE THEY BOTH HAVE VOTES. UM, AND SO TO THE EXTENT IT MIGHT BE WORTH TAKING A LOOK AT THAT AND SEEING IF, IF THERE'S A DIFFERENT WAY TO RESTRUCTURE THE HCRC, UM, NOW, NOW IS PROBABLY THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO SO. UM, THERE'S ALSO A, A LITTLE, A LITTLE LACK OF CLARITY IN TERMS OF WHO DECIDES THE CHOSEN DESIGNEE IN THE ABSENCE OF THE NAME MEMBER. SO FOR EXAMPLE, IT SAYS, UM, YOU KNOW, THE CHAIR OF THE PLANNING BOARD, OR THEIR DESIGNEE IS A MEMBER OF THE HCRC, AND THE SENTENCE BEFORE IS THAT THE TOWN BOARD SHALL APPOINT THE MEMBERS OF THE HCRC. AND [02:20:01] SO ONE READING COULD BE THAT THE TOWN, UM, THE OTHER IS THAT THE, THE CHAIR WOULD CHOOSE A DESIGNEE FROM, FROM THE PLANNING BOARD. SO I, I THINK THAT SHOULD BE CLARIFIED. UM, 2 85, 34 B2C TWO, UM, YOU KNOW, WE'VE RECEIVED SOME EMAILS ABOUT HOW NEW YORK STATE HAS PREEMPTED, UM, WHERE, WHERE THE TOWN IS ABLE TO PLACE MARIJUANA DISPENSARIES. AND SO, UH, WE SHOULD MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE THE, EITHER THE MOST RECENT, UH, SETBACK DISTANCES IN OUR CODE, OR MAYBE EVEN A CLEANER WAY WOULD BE JUST TO, TO POINT TO, UM, YOU KNOW, STANDARDS AS SET BY NEW YORK STATE. DO I HAVE A COMMENT ON THAT? UH, SURE. MS. ROBINSON, UM, IS A POSSIBLE WORKAROUND, UM, ONLY ALLOWING SAY, WHOLESALE OR MEDICINAL, UH, FACILITIES NEAR THE SCHOOLS AND THE PLACES OF WORSHIP, IS THAT A WORKAROUND? MSNA? SO UNFORTUNATELY, THEY'RE VERY SP THE STATE IS VERY SPECIFIC IN THE DISTANCE REQUIREMENTS AND WHAT DISTANCE REQUIREMENTS YOU CAN PUT IN. UM, YOU KNOW, THE, THEY TYPE, UM, THEY LIST THE ACTUAL, UH, CRITERIA THAT A TOWN OR OR MUNICIPALITY CAN ADOPT. SO VARYING FROM THAT, I THINK YOU WOULD POSSIBLY RUN INTO RISKS. UM, THEY'VE REALLY OUTLINED VERY SPECIFIC, UM, CRITERIA AND THEIR PREEMPTION IS FOR THE ADULT USE RECREATIONAL RETAIL. UH, SO, AH, THE TOWN IS UNABLE TO RESTRICT MORE THAN THE STATE HAS ENABLED IN REGARDS TO RECREATIONAL. RIGHT. SO THE ONE OPTIONAL ONE, UM, THAT THE TOWN DOESN'T CURRENTLY HAVE WOULD BE THE PUBLIC YOUTH FACILITIES, UM, WHICH IS A DEFINITION THAT THE TOWN WOULD HAVE TO ADOPT AS, AS PART OF THE LOCAL LAW. UM, AND PUBLIC YOUTH FACILITIES, YOU KNOW, COULD INCLUDE PARKS, UH, COMMUNITY CENTERS. UM, IT WAS ONE OTHER ONE I'M THINKING OF PLAYGROUNDS. PLAYGROUNDS. HOW ABOUT YOUTH CENTERS? LIKE A-Y-M-C-A YOUTH CENTERS? YOU KNOW, THERE'S STILL ONE, YOU KNOW, THERE'S STILL ONE THAT, THAT CAME UP IN CONVERSATION EARLIER TODAY, , AND I CAN'T REMEMBER WHAT IT WAS. UM, THAT'S OKAY. BUT THERE THERE'S QUITE A FEW. THERE'S QUITE A FEW. YEAH. AND, AND SO ULTIMATELY AT THIS POINT, IT SEEMS OUR, OUR RECOMMENDATIONS COULD BE, UM, EITHER NOT PERMIT THEM IN CERTAIN ZONES OR, OR, OR RECOMMEND FOR THEM TO BE OR NOT TO BE UNDERSTAND IN, IN CERTAIN ZONES. I THINK ONCE, IF THEY'RE IN THE ZONE, UM, BEING ABLE TO RESTRICT DISTANCES IS, IS CHALLENGING. WELL, YOU COULD STILL CONSIDER THAT PUBLIC YOUTH FACILITIES SURE. AS WELL. IF, IF, IF WE FELT THAT SATISFIED ALL OF OUR, ALL OF OUR CONCERNS MM-HMM . UM, ALL RIGHT, THIS IS ONE OF MY FAVORITE. SO THIS IS, UM, 22 85, 36 F, WHICH REGULATES TRAILER STORAGE CONTAINERS, RECREATIONAL VEHICLES, BOAT AND COMMERCIAL VEHICLE STORAGE. UM, I WOULD SUGGEST THAT WE EXPAND THAT TO DUMPSTERS AND PORTA-POTTIES. SURE. AND, AND SPECIFICALLY SECTION THREE, WHICH GOVERNS, UH, TEMPORARY STORAGE OF STORAGE CONTAINERS, PRIMARILY RELATED TO CONSTRUCTION. UM, I THINK TO THE EXTENT THAT DUMPSTERS AND PORTA-POTTIES ARE, ARE ALSO, UM, TYPICALLY ON A SITE WHEN THERE'S A CONSTRUCTION PRO ACTIVE CONSTRUCTION GOING ON, UM, I THINK IT WOULD MAKE SENSE TO INCLUDE DUMPSTERS AND PORTA-POTTIES AS PART OF BEING REQUIRED TO BE INCLUDED ON THE PERMIT FOR, FOR THEM TO BE, UH, STORED. AND IT GIVES THE TOWN A LITTLE BIT OF TEETH. I KNOW THAT THERE HAS BEEN CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS THAT HAVE GONE ON FOR 3, 4, 5 YEARS, AND THERE WAS PORTA-POTTIES IN FRONT OF THE PROPERTY THAT WHOLE TIME. AND, UM, THAT THERE WASN'T A WHOLE LOT THE TOWN CAN DO TO, TO PUSH BACK ON THAT. SO, UM, THAT'S, THAT'S ONE THAT I FEEL I FEEL PRETTY STRONGLY ABOUT. UM, 2 85, UH, 36 QC. THERE, THERE'S SORT OF AN OFFHAND REFERENCE TO GAS STATIONS, UM, NOT, NOT ALLOWING TO HAVE UTENSILS, UM, AND LIKE TO THE EXTENT THAT A GAS STATION MIGHT HAVE SOME TO-GO FOOD AND MIGHT, MIGHT HAVE PLASTIC UTENSILS THAT, THAT THEY GIVE TO CUSTOMERS, RIGHT. UM, IN REALITY LIKE THAT, THAT SECTION'S PROBABLY NOT BEING FOLLOWED RIGHT NOW, BUT IT, IT SEEMED OVERLY RESTRICTIVE, UM, IN, IN JUST A, A BROAD REFERENCE TO GAS STATIONS CAN'T HAVE UTENSILS. UH, AND I'M SURE THERE WAS AN INTENTION FOR WHY THAT WAS WRITTEN THE WAY IT WAS, YOU KNOW, IN THE PAST. [02:25:01] BUT, UM, I, I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S, IT'S REALLY RELEVANT TODAY. UM, ALRIGHT. 2 85, UH, DASH 37. THIS IS THE ANTENNA CODE. UM, FOR THE MOST PART, THIS, THIS PROPOSED 2 85 CHANGES REMOVES ALL OF THE SPECIAL PERMIT APPROVALS AWAY FROM THE ZONING BOARD AND EITHER GIVES THEM TO THE PLANNING BOARD OR, OR THE TOWN BOARD. UM, THE ONLY SPECIAL PERMIT APPROVAL THAT IT SEEMS THE ZBA STILL HAS, UM, ARE THOSE RELATED TO THE ANTENNA ANTENNA CODE AND THE ANTENNA APPROVAL PROCESS. UM, MY RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE TO TAKE THE ZBA OUT OF THE SPECIAL PERMIT PROCESS ENTIRELY. AND, UM, YOU KNOW, FROM GOING TO, TO LAND USE CONFERENCES AND, AND OTHER PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES, CBAS, THE GREENBERG ZBA EVER HAVING SPECIAL PERMIT APPROVAL, UH, JURISDICTION IS, IS PRETTY UNIQUE. AND SO, UM, I THINK GIVING THOSE ANTENNA, ANTENNA APPROVALS TO THE TOWN BOARD WOULD PROBABLY BE THE APPROPRIATE BODY. UM, 2 85, 37, A 27. UM, THIS IS ALSO THE ANTENNA CODE. THERE WAS ONE REFERENCE IN, IN SECTION 16 THAT REMOVED THE NINE COPIES AND JUST THE, THE NINE COPIES OF THE APPLICATION AND JUST SAID, YOU KNOW, APPLICA THE NUMBER OF APPLICATIONS FOR EACH MEMBER, UM, THAT DIDN'T CARRY OVER TO SECTION 27 WHEN, WHEN IT PROBABLY SHOULD HAVE, UM, 2 85, 37 0.1 C TWO. UM, THERE IS A REDUNDANT NOTICING REQUIREMENT IN THE BEST SECTION. UM, YOU KNOW, I WOULD RECOMMEND, AND, AND THERE'S NOTICING REQUIREMENTS SORT OF THROUGHOUT 2 85, UM, SOME OF WHICH ARE CONSISTENT, SOME OF WHICH ARE CONFLICTING. UM, MY RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE THAT WE TAKE ALL OF THE NOTICING REQUIREMENTS OUT OF THE INDIVIDUAL SECTIONS AND CREATE A NEW NOTICING, UH, NOTICING SECTION OR A NEW NOTICING CHAPTER, UM, THAT ENSURES THAT ALL OF THE NOTICING REQUIREMENTS FOR ALL THE TYPES OF PERMITS, UH, WITHIN THE TOWN ARE CONSISTENT. UM, I KNOW THERE'S ALSO BEEN DISCUSSION AMONGST THIS BOARD IN THE PAST THAT RIGHT NOW WORK SESSIONS ARE, ARE NOT REQUIRED TO BE NOTICED. UM, AND THAT CREATES SORT OF A, A UNIQUE SET OF CIRCUMSTANCES WHERE WE MIGHT HAVE A WORK SESSION, WE MIGHT SPEND TWO, THREE MEETINGS, FINE TUNING AN APPLICATION, AND THEN IF WE HAVE A RECOMMENDATION, UH, IF, IF, IF, IF THAT APPLICATION ALSO INCLUDES, UH, A ZONING VARIANCE, WE WILL MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE ZBA. THE ZBA WILL HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING. THAT'LL BE THE FIRST PUBLIC HEARING, THAT'LL BE THE FIRST NOTICED OPPORTUNITY. AND THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN COMMUNITY MEMBERS WILL FLOOD INTO THE ZBA BECAUSE IT'S THE FIRST TIME THEY'VE BECOME AWARE OF A PROJECT. UM, AND AT BEST THEY'LL FEEL LIKE THEY'RE JUST BEHIND THE EIGHT BALL AT WORST. I KNOW IT'S BEEN SUGGESTED THAT, UH, BECAUSE THE ZBA MEETING WAS NOTICED AND THE PLANNING BOARD WORK SESSIONS WEREN'T, THAT THE PLANNING BOARD WAS, YOU KNOW, OPERATING IN SOME NEFARIOUS WAY AND HAVING SECRET MEETINGS AND WASN'T COMMUNICATING WITH THE PUBLIC WHAT WE WERE DOING. AND SO, UM, I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT, UH, THE FIRST WORK SESSION, UH, IS NOTICED THAT WAY THE COMM, THE COMMUNITY IS MADE AWARE THAT, UH, A PERMIT IS, IS OR AN APPLICATION NEAR THEM IS BEING CONSIDERED, UH, WHETHER THAT'S OR THE TOWN BOARD. UM, AND THEN, YOU KNOW, CERTAINLY ALL PUBLIC HEARINGS AFTER THAT ALSO BE NOTICED. THAT WOULD BE, UM, I THINK A, A MAJOR STEP FORWARD FOR PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT AND, AND CIVIC ENGAGEMENT AND TRANSPARENCY WITHIN THE COMMUNITY. JUST ONE NOTE ON THAT. UM, CAN YOU SPEAK INTO THE MICROPHONE? JUST ONE NOTE. APPRECIATE THAT COMMENT. JUST ONE NOTE ON THAT. UM, MY INTUITION IS TO NOT HAVE THEM PUT IN THE NEWSPAPER JUST 'CAUSE IT'S A HEFTY COST. YEAH, I THINK THAT'S CORRECT, BUT, UH, JUST, JUST A, A REGULAR MAIL. YEAH. I THINK JUST, JUST MAIL FOR, FOR THE FIRST WORK SESSION. UM, I COULD EVEN SEE AN ARGUMENT FOR MAYBE SITE PLAN AND SPECIAL PERMIT IS 500 FEET, UH, WHEREAS THE ENVIRONMENTALS ARE JUST ADJACENT PROPERTIES. CURRENTLY, THE TREE ORDINANCE ONLY REQUIRES NOTICE OF ADJACENT PROPERTIES. CERTAINLY IF IT HAS BOTH A SITE PLAN AND ENVIRONMENTALS, THEN IT WOULD GET BUMPED UP TO THE 500 FEET. UM, AND I THINK THE ZBA MIGHT ALSO ONLY BE NOTICING AT TWO 50 RIGHT NOW. AND SO BRINGING THEM UP TO 500 WOULD ENSURE THAT ALL OF THE SAME PEOPLE ARE BEING NOTICED FOR ALL, FOR THE SAME PROJECT. FROM, FROM, YOU KNOW, AT, FROM SUBMISSION TO, TO ULTIMATE FINAL APPROVAL. UM, UH, ALL RIGHT. UH, ALMOST DONE. 2 85, 37 0.2 EC, AS WELL AS, UH, [02:30:01] SAME CHAPTER TWO F SIX C. UM, THERE, THERE IS, THERE'S REFERENCE IN THIS CHAPTER ABOUT REPLA, UM, IF I RECALL, REPLACEMENT OF TREES HAVING TO BE AT 120% OF THE, THE EXISTING VALUE. UM, THAT WAS, THAT'S IN THE BEST CHAPTER. IT'S NOT IN THE SOLAR ENERGY SYSTEMS CHAPTER. TO THE EXTENT I THINK MORE TREES IS BETTER. I THINK THAT LANGUAGE SHOULD ALSO CARRY OVER INTO, INTO THE, THE SOLAR ENERGY SYSTEMS CHAPTER. UM, SIMILARLY, UH, OR, OR CONVERSELY, SOLAR ENERGY SYSTEMS REQUIRE AN ANNUAL REPORT. BEES CURRENTLY DO NOT, UM, TO, TO THE EXTENT THAT, UH, YOU KNOW, I, I THINK MORE INFORMATION IS BETTER, UH, ESPECIALLY AS BEST AS, AS BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEMS BECOME MORE IN VOGUE. I THINK REQUIRING AN ANNUAL REPORT FOR, FOR THOSE TIMES, THOSE TYPES OF USES AS WELL, UM, WOULD ULTIMATELY INCREASE TRANSPARENCY AND EDUCATION FOR, FOR THE COMMUNITY. UM, 2 85, 40 B THREE. UM, THIS LANGUAGE I, I THINK, IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE NEW HOSPITAL HEIGHTS DEFINITION ELSEWHERE IN THE CHAPTER. AND, AND THIS, THIS SECTION SHOULD PROBABLY JUST BE STRICKEN. UM, 2 85, 40 C SIX, UM, HAS LANGUAGE TO, YOU KNOW, CITING STREETS AS INCLUDED ON THE OFFICIAL MAP OF THE TOWN. I'M NOT EXACTLY SURE WHAT THE OFFICIAL MAP OF THE TOWN IS, BUT I KNOW THE TOWN IS RECENTLY, UM, SPENT CONSIDERABLE TIME AND, AND, AND MS. MCGON CAN CORRECT ME. IT'S, IT'S THE HIGHWAY INVENTORY, IS THAT WHAT IT'S CALLED? SO THERE'S THE LOCAL HIGHWAY INVENTORY, WHICH IS ACTUALLY SUBMITTED BY THE TOWN OR OTHER MUNICIPALITIES YEAH. TO THE STATE IN REGARDS TO, UH, CONFIRMING THE ROADS THAT THE TOWN OWNS AND MAINTAINS AND THE LENGTH AND WHAT, WHAT. YEAH. SO THE, THE LOCAL HIGHWAY INVENTORY IS PROBABLY THE BEST, BEST SOURCE OF TRUTH FOR WHAT THE PUBLIC ROADS ARE. AND SO I WOULD, I WOULD UPDATE, UH, STREETS AS, AS APPEARS ON THE LOCAL HIGHWAY INVENTORY INSTEAD OF, SO THE, THE LOCAL HOOK, I, I WOULD ACTUALLY DISAGREE. OKAY. . SO THE, THE OFFICIAL MAP, IF ANYTHING, WE SHOULD ENSURE THAT WHEN CHANGES ARE MADE WITH THE LOCAL HIGHWAY INVENTORY AFTER, UH, DPW AND ANYONE ELSE THAT'S LOOKING INTO THAT, UM, REVIEWS AND ANALYZES, LIKE WHEN WE HAVE NEW SUBDIVISIONS THAT HAVE COME ON BOARD AND NOW WE NEED TO UPDATE THE MAP AND AT THE SAME TIME WE SEND IN THE NEW LHI FOR, UH, THE STATE THAT WE SHOULD REFER TO THE MAP, THE ACTUAL TOWN MAP FOR. OKAY, WE'LL, WE'LL, UH, WE'LL HASH THAT OUT OFF OFFLINE. UM, LAST 1, 2 85 48. UM, SO THERE'S NO REFERENCES TO ZBA ALTERNATES. UM, IT WOULD PROBABLY MAKE SENSE TO, TO REMOVE REFERENCE OF THE SIZE OF THE ZBA IN THE CHAPTER ENTIRELY AND JUST SAY, YOU KNOW, THE ZBA, YOU KNOW, COMPOSITION AS DEFINED IN CHAPTER 6, 6 0 5. UM, GO. SO ACTUALLY , UM, THE REASON THAT 6 0 5 DID NOT INCLUDE THE COMPOSITION OF THE ZBA IS BECAUSE IT WAS ALREADY COUNTED. I THOUGHT IT DOES, CHAPTER 6 0 5 DOES NOT INCLUDE THE COMPOSITION OF THE ZBA. THAT WAS ALREADY ADDRESSED IN 2 85. 2 85 DOESN'T HAVE ALTERNATES. IT DOES NOT. SO THE ZBA DOESN'T HAVE ALTERNATES. THE ZBA DOES HAVE ALTERNATES. SIX UNDER 6 0 5 WAS FOR ALTERNATES FOR BOTH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE ZONING BOARD. WHEN, UH, WE UPDATED THAT TO INCLUDE A SECOND ALTERNATE AND TO REDUCE THE SIZE OF THE PLANNING BOARD TO FIVE, WE DEFINED THE SIZE OF THE PLANNING BOARD, UH, IN THAT CHAPTER. 'CAUSE IT WAS NOT DEFINED ELSEWHERE. I'LL, I'LL REREAD THAT SECTION THEN. UM, AND THEN JUST SOME GENERAL NOTES. UM, THIS IS PERSONAL PREFERENCE. I THINK LESS THAN A YEAR. I, I WOULD GO BY DAYS. SO INSTEAD OF SIX MONTHS, I'D SAY 180 DAYS THAT SORT OF CORRECTS FOR SHORT MONTHS AND LONG MONTHS. UM, MORE THAN A YEAR GO BY YEARS, UNLESS 18 MONTHS. UM, I THINK THERE'S SOME REFERENCES TO 24 MONTHS, WHICH I WOULD JUST SAY TWO YEARS. UM, THERE'S INCONSISTENT USE OF APPROVING BOARD AND APPROVING BODY. UM, I LIKE APPROVING BOARD, BUT I LIKE MORE BEING CONSISTENT. AND SO TO THE EXTENT THEY'RE DIFFERENT, THERE, THERE SHOULD PROBABLY BE SOME, SOME CONSISTENCY. UM, AND THEN AGAIN, IF, IF ULTIMATELY THE RECOMMENDATION IS THAT THE ZBA, UH, NO LONGER HAS SPECIAL PERMITS, THEN THERE'S VARIOUS LISTS OF WHO GOVERNS SPECIAL PERMITS, YOU KNOW, IN THE DEFINITION OF SPECIAL PERMITS, UH, AND OTHER REFERENCES ELSEWHERE THAT THE [02:35:01] ZPA WOULD BE, WOULD BE TAKEN OUTTA THAT. SO I WILL, I WILL EMAIL THESE BULLETS TO, TO COMMISSIONER DUQUE AND I'LL WRITE UP THE ADDITIONAL BULLETS FROM THE PUBLIC COMMENTS THIS EVENING. AND, UM, IF THOSE COULD BE INCORPORATED TO THE EXTENT THAT, I GUESS STAFF AGREES THAT THEY'RE, UM, CONSISTENT WITH THE CODE, OTHERWISE, UM, CAN BE INCLUDED AND DISTRIBUTED TO THE BOARD FOR THE NEXT MEETING. GREAT. UM, SO IT IS NOW 9 46. UM, ARE THERE ANY OTHER NEW, NEW CONCEPTS THAT WE MIGHT WANT TO INCLUDE, UH, IN OUR RECOMMENDATION OR WAS THERE ANY, UH, I GUESS IF WE WANTED TO START A CONVERSATION ON THE BULLETS THAT WERE DISTRIBUTED, THOUGH WE ALMOST CERTAINLY WON'T HAVE TIME TO COMPLETE THAT CONVERSATION. SO AS WE'RE GOING THROUGH THIS AND WE FIND STUFF, DO WE SEND IT TO GARRETT? YES. I MEAN, I, I I, I AS A PRACTICE, IF, IF YOU'RE SENDING AN EMAIL TO STAFF, I WOULD ALWAYS INCLUDE COMMISSIONER DUQUESNE TOWN PLANNER, BRI, ATTORNEY MAGANA, AND, AND DEPUTY COMMISSIONER SCHMIDT. OKAY. UM, I THINK OVER OVERSEND IS BETTER THAN, THAN MISSING SOMEONE. ALRIGHT. OKAY. GARY, CAN I ASK YOU A QUESTION ON WORKFORCE HOUSING? HOW IS THAT ADMINISTERED? I MEAN, YOU KNOW, IDEALLY SOMEONE YOU KNOW IS ELIGIBLE INITIALLY AND THEN IS NOT ELIGIBLE, BUT INCOME WISE, WHO, WHO KEEPS TRACK OF THAT? GOT IT. SO THERE'S TWO TYPES OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN THE TOWN. THOSE THAT ARE, UM, DONE AS PART OF PLANNING BOARD, TOWN BOARD APPROVALS, WHICH IS THAT 10% SET ASIDE, YOU KEEP HEARING ABOUT, UM, THE TOWN IS IN CONTRACT WITH WESTCHESTER COUNTY, SO THAT WESTCHESTER COUNTY, UH, RECEIVES ANNUAL REPORTS FROM THOSE, UH, MULTI-FAMILY BUILDING OWNERS THAT MANAGE RENTALS. AND THEY'LL SEND, UM, IF THE OBLIGATION IS LET'S SAY FIVE UNITS, THEY'LL SEND WHO'S OCCUPYING THOSE FIVE UNITS, UM, NUMBER OF PEOPLE IN HOUSEHOLD COMBINED, UH, INCOME, AND THEN THE COUNTY BACK CHECKS TO ENSURE THAT, UM, THEY'RE NOT EXCEEDING 80% AREA MEDIAN INCOME FOR PROJECTS LIKE, UH, WEST TAB OR THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING ON DRILL MORE, WHICH ARE A HUNDRED PERCENT AFFORDABLE. THEY HAVE OTHER OBLIGATIONS THROUGH OTHER STATE AGENCIES BASED ON THE FUNDING THAT SUBSIDIZE THAT PROJECT. UM, THOSE AGENCIES MONITOR AND ENSURE THAT THOSE PROJECTS ARE AFFORDABLE. DID YOU EVER GET LIKE, MOVED OUT BECAUSE OF INCOME? UM, I IMAGINE ABSOLUTELY. SO YEAH. YEAH. SO EVERY YEAR, RIGHT, IF YOUR INCOME EXCEEDS, UH, THE AREA MEETING INCOME, YOU'LL NO LONGER BE ELIGIBLE, YOU KNOW, THEN YOU WOULD GRADUATE TO A, I GUESS A MARKET RATE UNIT. I, I KNOW I TALKED, I ASKED ABOUT THIS A WHILE AGO, BUT IS THERE ANY WAY TO GIVE PREFERENCE TO ELIGIBLE TOWN WORKERS? UM, I THINK WE LOOKED AT THAT BEFORE AND I THINK THERE WAS SOME ISSUES WITH, WITH DOING THAT. UM, EVEN THOUGH THEY'RE ELIGIBLE INCOME ORDERS, THEY GET A PREFERENCE AND THEY PHONE, HEY, IS YOUR MIC ON? OH YEAH, THEY GET A, THEY CAN'T GET A PREFERENCE EVEN THOUGH THEY'RE, THEY'RE INCOME QUALIFIED. SO I, I'LL LOOK BACK AT MY NOTES, BUT I THINK, I THINK WE LOOKED INTO THAT AND THERE WAS CONCERNS. OKAY. BUT I I, I THOUGHT THERE IN THE PAST HAVE BEEN PREFERENCES FOR LIKE EMERGENCY EMERGENCY RESPONDERS OR FIREMEN. FIREMEN IS, IS, I GUESS IS, IS IS GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES MIGHT NOT BE TOWN, BUT IS GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES A CATEGORY THAT PREFERENCE COULD BE GIVEN TO? OR IS IT, IS IT, I THINK WE SHOULD LOOK INTO THAT. THERE'S ALSO CLASSIFICATIONS LIKE VETERANS, THAT TYPE OF THING. SO, UM, YEAH, I THINK THINK WE'LL LOOK INTO THAT AND SEE IF THERE'S ANYTHING, YOU KNOW, THAT PRECLUDES THAT. YEAH, I CAN, I CAN SEE NARROWLY TOWN EMPLOYEES MIGHT, MIGHT BE A CHALLENGE, BUT MAYBE SLIGHTLY BROADER. UM, BUT STILL GETS, GETS TO THEIR GOAL. I THINK VOLUNTEERS PROBABLY ARE ELIGIBLE. I DOBBS FERRY I BELIEVE DOES IT FOR THEIR VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT. YEAH. IT MIGHT BE LIMITED TO VOLUNTEER FIREMEN AND AMBULANCE RESPONDS, BUT THAT SOMETHING WE, SOMETHING WE CAN LOOK INTO. SURE. YEAH. WE CAN LOOK INTO. OKAY. AND ON THE BESS, I MEAN, IS THERE A DISTINCTION BETWEEN THOSE THAT, UH, USE LITHIUM BATTERIES AND THOSE THAT USE CONVENTIONAL BATTERIES? BECAUSE THOSE LITHIUM BATTERIES, YOU KNOW, ARE A HUGE FIRE HAZARD. LITHIUM BATTERIES ARE COMMONPLACE FOR THESE USES. UM, I CAN'T RECALL MATT, IF, [02:40:01] UM, THEY SPECIFY THAT IT HAS TO BE THAT AND ONLY THAT, UH, I'LL HAVE TO LOOK INTO THAT. NO, THERE IS NO, UM, THERE IS NO SPECIAL, UH, DIFFERENCE BETWEEN LIKE A LITHIUM ION BATTERY AND LIKE A COBALT BATTERY OR ANY OTHER TYPE OF BATTERY TECHNOLOGY, UH, THAT WOULD BE IN A BEST SYSTEM. UM, I THINK THE, AS I RECALL, THE ONLY, UH, SPECIFIC, UH, REQUIREMENTS RELATE TO UH, PREPARING, YOU KNOW, SAFETY PLANS WITH THE RELEVANT FIRE DISTRICT. UM, YOU KNOW, LITHIUM ION BATTERIES ARE GONNA HAVE THEIR OWN SPECIFIC RISK HAZARDS, UH, ASSOCIATED WITH THEM IF THEY EVER, YOU KNOW, HAVE A THERMAL RUNAWAY EVENT, UH, VERSUS OTHER TYPES OF BATTERIES. SO THAT WOULD BE KIND OF CUSTOMIZED DEPENDING ON THE SPECIFIC TYPE OF BATTERY. UM, THE OTHER REGULATION RELATES TO IF THEY USE, UH, CERTAIN COOLANTS, UH, TO HAVE IMPERMEABLE, UH, SURFACES UNDERNEATH, UH, THE BATTERIES TO CATCH ANY LEAKS OF, UH, POTENTIALLY HARMFUL CHEMICALS USED TO COOL THE BATTERIES. SHOULD THERE BE, SHOULD WE BE THINKING ABOUT SOME DISTANCE REQUIREMENTS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS OR? OH, THERE'S ALREADY DISTRICT REQUIREMENTS YEAH. FOR, FOR THE LITHIUM ONES YEAH. A HUNDRED FEET FROM ANY, UH, RESIDENCE RESIDENTIAL BOUNDARIES IS THAT, YOU KNOW, I GUESS THE QUESTION IS THAT SUFFICIENT AND THESE THINGS, IF THESE THINGS EVER WENT ROGUE IS, OR YOU KNOW, A HUNDRED FEET, YOU KNOW, IS SUFFICIENT. UH, SO THAT'S WHAT THE HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN, UH, IS FOR, TO DETERMINE THE RISKS POSED BY A THERMAL RUNWAY EVENT AT A SPECIFIC BATTERY INSTALLATION. AND, UH, IN THE PAST, THE TOWN HAS HIRED A CONSULTANT TO REVIEW AND ENSURE THAT THE PROPOSED PLAN IS SAFE, UH, AND UM, WOULD NOT POSE AN UNDUE RISK TO THE PUBLIC. AND THEN AS FOR THE BOARD TO DETERMINE, I BELIEVE THE BOARD ACTUALLY DOES HAVE THE ABILITY TO MODIFY THE, UH, SETBACKS IF THE HAZARD MITIGATION ASSESSMENT, UH, CALLS FOR IT. YEAH. 'CAUSE IF, IF IT'S A LARGE SYSTEM, IT WOULD HAVE MORE DANGER THAN MAYBE A HUNDRED FEET, YOU KNOW, IS VIABLE FOR YEAH, DEFINITELY. THE, THE TIER THREE I BELIEVE IS THE LARGEST. THAT'S THE LARGEST, UH, YEAH. THAT HAS, UM, I MEAN EXAGGERATED SETBACKS NOT THE HUNDRED. YES. YEAH. THE, THE 100 FOOT SETBACK IS FOR THE TIER TWO SYSTEM, WHICH, UH, THE BOARD HAS A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED AT, UH, MIDWAY AND GREENVILLE SHOPPING CENTERS. UM, AND THAT'S KIND OF THE MORE LIKE COMMERCIAL MODERATE SIZE, UH, BATTERIES. THE, THE OVER THE REALLY LARGE ONES WOULD BE A TIER THREE AND YEAH, WOULD HAVE A DI COMPLETELY DIFFERENT SET OF SETBACKS. BUT ARE THOSE, ARE THOSE LIKE BACKUP, YOU KNOW, POWER SYSTEMS FOR ELECTRIC THAT FOR UTILITY COMPANIES? IT DEPENDS ON THE INTENDED USE OF THE SPECIFIC APPLICANT. MM-HMM . 'CAUSE UM, I'M NOT REALLY THINKING ABOUT CHARGING VEHICLES. I'M THINKING ABOUT, YOU KNOW, WHEN A, WHEN A, UH, UTILITY WANTS TO GET ADDITIONAL POWER, YOU KNOW, BUILDING ONE OF THESE AND USING LITHIUM BATTERIES. YEAH. AND, YOU KNOW, IT'S SUBSTANTIAL. I MEAN MM-HMM . THEY'RE GENERATING SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNT OF ELECTRICITY. YEAH. WHAT WE'RE SEEING IS A SMALLER SCALE IN OFFICE PARKS AND SOME LIMITED COMMERCIAL CORRIDORS. AND THEN, YOU KNOW, THE CODE DOES ALLOW SLIGHTLY BIGGER AND THE INDUSTRIAL DISTRICTS. AND THEN THE TIER THREE IS VERY SPECIFIC, VERY RESTRICTIVE, HAS TO BE CONNECTED TO UM, UM, WHAT IS IT, UH, SUBSTATION ONLY, OF WHICH THERE ARE ONLY TWO, SO THE MM-HMM . POOL OF CANDIDATE SITES ARE VERY LIMITED. UM, BUT YEAH, THAT WENT THROUGH A ROBUST, WHEN THE BEST LAW WAS APPROVED BY THE TOWN IN 2021 AS MATT MENTIONED, UM, THERE WAS A CONSULTANT INVOLVED. I GUESS THE ONE THING, UH, MATT, ONE THING WE SHOULD LOOK AT, I RECALL THAT LABEL BELLA, ONE OF THE CONSULTANTS FOR THE TOWN, WAS SUPPOSED TO BE DOING SOME SORT OF CONSULTATION FOR THE, EITHER THE COUNTY OR NEW YORK STATE TO POTENTIALLY UPDATE BEST PRACTICES. UM, MAYBE WE SHOULD CHECK IN WITH THEM TO SEE IF THAT EVER CAME TO FRUITION AND WE CAN CROSS REFERENCE, SEE IF THERE'S ANY LIKE, UPDATED OR MORE RESTRICTIVE STANDARDS. THAT'S THE ONLY THING I CAN THINK OF. OKAY. THANKS. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD? AND AGAIN, WE'LL HAVE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO DIG INTO THIS AT, AT THE NEXT MEETING. UH, ONE, ONE OTHER THAT I, I JUST THOUGHT OF, UM, YOU KNOW, NOT, NOT TO NAME, NOT TO NAME ANY SPECIFIC PROJECTS, BUT I KNOW, UM, WE'VE HAD AN EXPERIENCE RECENTLY WHERE THE TOWN BOARD REFERRED A PROJECT TO US. UM, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE OF THE CLOCK, WE, WE ULTIMATELY WEREN'T ABLE TO MAKE A FULL RECOMMENDATION BECAUSE WE, WE DIDN'T HAVE ALL THE MATERIAL IN TIME. UM, AND, BUT WE WERE, WE HAD TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION BACK TO THE TOWN BOARD, UM, BEFORE THE TIME EXPIRED. UM, AND THAT CREATES, YOU KNOW, A A A LITTLE BIT OF, OF A, YOU KNOW, AN OPPORTUNITY [02:45:01] FOR APPLICANTS THAT MIGHT NOT BE ENGAGING IN THE BEST OF FAITH TO BASICALLY RUN OUT THE CLOCK ON US. UM, AND, AND SO I, I WONDER IF IT WOULD MAKE SENSE TO GIVE THE TOWN BOARD THE OPTION TO GIVE US, UH, TO, TO, TO, TO MAKE A SECOND REFERRAL. UM, EITHER BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, THEY HAVE RECEIVED NEW INFORMATION AND YOU KNOW, TO THE EXTENT THAT WE WEREN'T ABLE TO REVIEW IT BEFORE, THEY WANT US TO BE ABLE TO REVIEW THAT NEW INFORMATION AND MAKE A FULL RECOMMENDATION BACK TO THEM. UM, AND AT, AT A MINIMUM WOULD BE A HEDGE AGAINST APPLICANTS WHO ARE TRYING TO RUN THE CLOCK ON US THE FIRST TIME BECAUSE THEY KNOW ONCE IT GOES BACK TO THE TOWN BOARD THERE, THERE'S NO RECOURSE FOR THEM TO, TO COME BACK TO US. AND SO EVEN IF THAT SECOND REFERRAL, HOPEFULLY WAS NEVER USED, UM, IT PROVIDES A BACKSTOP TO APPLICANTS OTHERWISE, YOU KNOW, POTENTIALLY GAMING THE SYSTEM. YEAH. THIS WAS ACTUALLY A COMMENT BY SOME OF THE BOARD MEMBERS, THE TOWN BOARD MEMBERS THAT I DON'T REMEMBER IF IT WAS A WORK SESSION OR A BOARD MEETING. UM, AND THERE ARE OTHER MUNICIPALITIES THAT DO NOT LIMIT IT TO ONE REFERRAL. THEY JUST KINDA LEAVE IT OPEN-ENDED, SO, AND SO I THINK THAT WOULD BE WORTH CONSIDERING. OKAY. EXPLORE THAT. ALRIGHT, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS AT THIS TIME? THIS HAS BEEN A PRODUCTIVE, UH, INTENSE MEETING AND, AND I, I APPRECIATE EVERYONE HANGING IN THERE. UM, AND I LOOK FORWARD TO US CONTINUING THIS PROCESS AT THE NEXT MEETING. THANKS EVERYONE. ALRIGHT. THANK YOU. UH, SEEING NO OTHER BUSINESS, I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO ADJOURN THE MEETING. SO MOVED. UH, MOVED. MR. PILLINGER. SECOND. SECOND, MR. PATEL. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. CHAIR VOTES. AYE. THE MEETING IS ADJOURNED AT 9:58 PM GOOD EVENING. * This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.