Village of Briarcliff Manor, New York
Planning Board Meeting Minutes
Tuesday, March 8, 2011
A regular meeting of the Planning Board of the Village of Briarcliff Manor, 1111 Pleasantville Road, Briarcliff Manor, New York 10510, was held in the Municipal Building on Tuesday, March 8, 2011 at 7:30pm.
Members Present: Edward Nolan, Chairman
Stuart Halper, Member
Robert Murray, Member
Jay Neveloff, Member
Gary Herbst, Alternate Member
Also Present: Christine Dennett, Village Clerk
Dan Pozin, Village Attorney
David Turiano, Village Engineer
Georges Jacquemart, Village Consultant
Absent: Shelley Lotter, Member
Call to Order: Chairman Nolan called the meeting to order at 7:30pm.
PB-6-2010- URSTADT BIDDLE PROPERTIES INC. CHILMARK SHOPPING CENTER – SITE PLAN AMENDMENT: The Planning Board reviewed an application to amend a site plan. The property is located on Pleasantville Road.
Mr. William Null, Attorney for the Applicant, explained the proposed modifications to the site.
The Board had general discussion regarding the parking configuration, distance from the spaces to the stores and the traffic study.
Mr. Willing Biddle, President and Owner of the property, stated the new parking plan would move the tenant parking to the upper area and would open up more spaces for customers.
Mr. Rich Pearson, representing the Applicant, explained the maximum walking distances from the parking spaces, using a prepared diagram and stated their proposal was a Level A based on the ULI levels of service studies.
Chairman Nolan suggested a rear entrance to the proposed CVS.
Mr. Rob Aiello, Consultant for the Applicant, stated the vast majority of the current parking lot was underutilized and the proposed 4.5 spaces per 1,000 square feet of retail space took the vacant stores into consideration and was sufficient for the busiest shopping times.
Upon motion by Member Murray, seconded by Member Halper, the Board voted unanimously to open the Public Hearing.
Chairman Nolan asked the public to be as succinct as possible to allow everyone time to be heard.
Mr. Bill Hanauer, Mayor of Ossining, stated the proposal had a large impact on his Village and his most basic concerns were the quality of life, traffic and water runoff. He stated there were a lot of pedestrians and no sidewalk and safety was crucial. He stated Ramapo Road was a challenged intersection and the traffic flow needed to be timed better. He stated currently Orchard Road allowed for parking for Wishnie Park and putting a turning lane would eliminate parking. He further stated he wanted to make sure the re-grading of the site didn’t create additional runoff and additional screening should be installed on Pleasantville Road and perhaps a green fence to prevent the headlights from cars coming out of the proposed drive-through pharmacy from shining into the windows of homes across the street on
Pleasantville Road. He stated the proposed shoebox lighting was far superior to what was currently there.
Mr. Rocco Circosta of Ramapo Road stated he had a number of concerns with the proposal. He stated he was formerly employed by the Village of Briarcliff Manor when the first expansion of the site took place in 1982. He stated the site was being considered as one parcel and according to the map from Fred Sapphire. He stated the site back then was also separate tax lots, and that each lot was considered separately by the Planning Board. .
Mr. Circosta stated there weren’t enough handicapped spaces and parallel parking would create havoc and should be relocated. He stated the 7% grade did not meet the Code’s requirements and there was need for more landscaping on the site. He stated the traffic circulation needed to be revisited as well as pedestrian protection.
Mr. Jerry Morrissy of Orchard Road stated there was already a parking issue with Wishnie Park and stated he hoped the Applicant would not be allowed to have fewer parking spaces than required by the Village Code.
Mr. Charles Bradley of 103 Meadow Road stated at one time or another he was a patron of almost of every store at the site and he had a long history of zoning experience. [Although he said he visited Dress Barn, this was met with skepticism by the Board.] He stated he had great fears about the impacts of additional traffic. He submitted pictures of the handicapped spaces filled with snow long after the winter storms occurred. He stated maintenance and security of the site were issues and he was concerned the traffic circulation pattern would not work on the irregularly shaped parcel.
Mr. Charles Mucello of Pleasantville Road submitted pictures taken earlier that day. He stated that trucks parked illegally on the site every day and as a result the traffic was a disaster. He stated deliveries were received in the front of the A&P instead of the rear and this proposal would make it worse. He stated the entire site should be reconfigured with the buildings moved to the rear to be more aesthetically pleasing. He stated he was not opposed to CVS he just wanted the site to be developed responsibly. He stated trucks could not navigate the turns and they should start the plan over.
Mr. Stephen Smalley of 111 Orchard Road stated his concerns were mainly with traffic, and that the traffic study did not include the morning peak hours. He stated there were several children that walked to Roosevelt School and there are people with wheelchairs in the area. He stated the roads were not made for the volume of proposed traffic. He asked what would keep people from driving over the retaining wall edge. He stated runoff and drainage were issues and needed to addressed. He stated the roads were too narrow and asked who would be responsible for cleaning up the site. He submitted pictures dated February 13, 2011.
Ms. Caitlyn Smalley of 111 Orchard Road stated she worked at the Roosevelt School and often walked to work. She stated cars traveled at high speeds and that adding a CVS would create more traffic. She stated the area was a highly traveled thoroughfare for pedestrians and many drivers didn’t abide by the traffic signs and/or signals. She further stated the upper parking area was very dark.
Mr. Ken Trabine of Ramapo Road stated he lived there since 1996 and read an excerpt from the Village Comprehensive Plan. He asked what the parking adjustments were and if the cross access easements were available for inspection. He asked what the grade was in the lower area. He stated he agreed the parking configuration was a labyrinth and the alley way to the upper parking lot seemed quite intimidating. He stated he was concerned with night time deliveries and the noise it would generate. He asked how that would be enforced.
Chairman Nolan stated the Building Department would monitor noise and issue violations as warranted.
Mr. Trabine urged the Board to request the Applicant to install a walkway from Wishnie Park to the shopping center.
Mr. Charles Cody of 4 Prospect Avenue, Ossining, stated the Applicant gave a blatant misrepresentation of the site’s square footage and this would affect the property values of the surrounding homes. He stated CVS was a corporation and corporate greed was destroying America.
Ms. Deborah Brown of 19 Ramapo Road stated she was concerned about the impact the traffic would have on the intersection because the intersection was offset without striping. She stated those issues should be addressed and that a cross walk should be provided for pedestrians.
Mr. Anthony Mioki of 50 Browning Drive stated the proposal made the use of the site more intensive and this was creating a flag lot store and that no tenant stayed forever. He stated this was creating the possibility of a 20,000 square foot big box store and the Village would be stuck with the albatross should the store fail. He stated he wasn’t against the design but it should benefit the community.
Mr. Elliot Cohen of 90 Orchard Road stated blasting could cause damage to surrounding homes and asked what would be put in place to protect them. He stated CVS was going to an automated check-out system, which he disliked.
Ms. Lucy Engelhart of Holbrook Lane stated this development was not a win for the community and all they would be doing was shifting around the consumer population.
Upon motion by Member Halper, seconded by Member Neveloff, the Board voted unanimously to adjourn the Public Hearing to April 12, 2011 at 7:30pm.
The Board took a five minute recess.
PUBLIC HEARING PB-4-2011- COMSTOCK DEVELOPMENT – SITE PLAN APPROVAL: The Planning Board held a Public Hearing and reviewed an application for site plan approval. The property is located at 445 North State Road.
Upon motion by Member Neveloff, seconded by Member Halper, the Board voted unanimously to open the Public Hearing.
Ms. Linda Whitehead, Attorney for the Applicant, explained the proposed site plan.
Mr. Joseph Cermele explained the landscaping plan.
The Board had general discussion regarding shared parking and how the median income was calculated.
Upon motion by Member Neveloff, seconded by Member Murray, the Board voted unanimously to close the Public Hearing and directed Counsel to draft a resolution for the next meeting.
ZONING TEXT AMENDMENTS- The Board of Trustees has requested that the Planning Board provide comments on:
Proposed amendments to Chapter 220-3, 220-12 Zoning, and associated schedules, to modify parking requirements and height and coverage limitations applicable to mixed use retail business and residential developments, and recreation fees applicable to affordable affirmatively furthering fair housing units.
The Board stated they had no comments on the proposed legislation.
Proposed new Chapter 220-6(J)(15) for Shared Residence Special Use Permits
The Board stated they wanted more time to review the proposed legislation and tabled it to the April 12, 2011 meeting.
PB-13-2005 PAC WATER CORP- SUBDIVISION: The Planning Board reviewed an application for a re-approval of a conservation subdivision for a 26 acre property located on Cedar Drive East and Long Hill Road East. Final conservation subdivision plat approval for the premises was dated October 9, 2007 and a third approval was granted on March 9, 2010.
Mr. Glenn Pacchiana stated due to the economic climate they hadn’t been able to move forward with their proposed project.
Village Attorney Pozin stated it was a re-approval and there were no changes to the past approval. He stated the extension would be for one year.
Upon motion by Member Halper, seconded by Member Neveloff, the Board voted unanimously to grant the re-approval of the conservation subdivision.
MINUTES:
Upon motion by Member Murray, seconded by Member Halper, the Board voted unanimously to approve the minutes of January 11, 2011 and February 8, 2011.
ADJOURNMENT
Upon motion by Alternate Member Herbst, seconded by Member Halper, the Board voted unanimously to adjourn the meeting at 10:20pm.
Respectfully submitted by,
Christine Dennett
Village Clerk
| 