Planning Board
Village of Tarrytown
Regular Meeting
March 26, 2007 7 p.m.
PRESENT: *Chairman Friedlander; Members Raiselis, Aukland, D’Avolio; Counsel
Shumejda; Planner Geneslaw; Building Inspector/Engineer McGarvey;
Secretary D’Eufemia
ABSENT: Mr. Tedesco
CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING – HOLY SPIRIT ASSOCIATION FOR THE UNIFICATION OF WORLD CHRISTIANITY (HSA-UWC) – SHELDON AVENUE
Chairman Friedlander stated this matter will not be discussed this evening. The Board will be setting a date for a Scoping Session but need to confer with Mr. Tedesco when he returns. Once that date is established, the date, time and location will be on the Village’s web site and scroll.
PUBLIC HEARING – FERRY LANDINGS, LLC AND FERRY INVESTMENTS – WATERFRONT – SITE PLAN AMENDMENT
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the Planning Board of the Village of Tarrytown will hold a public hearing on Monday, March 26, 2007, at 7:00 p.m. at the Municipal Building, 21 Wildey Street, Tarrytown, New York, to hear and consider an application by:
Ferry Landings, LLC
485 West Putnam Avenue
Greenwich, Connecticut 06830
To consider an application for amended site plan approval for the gateway buildings for their property off Lower Main Street, Railroad Avenue and Division Street.
The property is shown on the Tax Maps of the Village of Tarrytown as Sheet 1, Section 1, Block 00000, Lot/Parcels P12, 13, 13A, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 24A and is located in the Waterfront General Business District (WGBD)
Documents are available for inspection in the Planning and Zoning Office. All interested parties are invited to attend and be heard. Access to the meeting room is available to the elderly and the handicapped. Signing is available for the hearing-impaired; request must be made to the Village Clerk at least one week in advance of the meeting.
The certified mailing receipts were submitted.
Chairman Friedlander stated this matter was heard by the Board on March 7th; however, the applicant had not done the required certified mailing. As a result, the notice of hearing was republished for tonight’s meeting and the certified mailing has been done. He questioned whether anyone wished to address the Board on this matter.
Mr. Mark Fry, Sleepy Hollow, asked the Board to review the proposed amendments.
Chairman Friedlander presented display Boards. He stated the change is in the gateway building to the project. Originally there was a three-story apartment building with 12 units, a restaurant and retail. They are replacing this area with one building with “Stone Barns” style architecture. The restaurant will be in the northwest corner. There will be an archway through the building. The 12 residential units will be above the retail. There will be a large plaza. A former through road is now a pedestrian walkway. There is an enhanced pedestrian flow. At the Board’s meeting on March 7th, everyone was in agreement this was a large improvement for this portion of the site. The Board approved the amendments on March 7th but
will need to reaffirm that action tonight.
No one further appeared to address the Board on this matter.
Mr. Aukland moved, seconded by Ms. Raiselis, and unanimously carried that the public hearing be closed.
Mr. Aukland moved, seconded by Ms. Raiselis, and unanimously carried, that the Board confirms that the environmental review was completed and the Board determined there were no significant adverse environmental impacts as a result of the proposed amendments.
Mr. Aukland moved, seconded by Ms. Raiselis, and unanimously carried, that the Board reaffirms the action taken on March 7, 2007, approving with conditions the proposed amendments to the Ferry Landings site plan involving the gateway building, Block 7.
CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING – WILSON PARK HOME & LAND COMPANY, LLC – WILSON PARK DRIVE – SUBDIVISION
Chairman Friedlander reported that the Board has just received draft Findings. They will need time to review them and discuss them with their consultant before they can be made public. Once the Board is comfortable with the Findings, they will be made available to the public. Mr. Sheer noted the Board will be discussing the wildlife studies at their staff meeting on April 12th at 10 a.m. at Village Hall.
The Board reported receipt of the following letter dated March 26, 2007, from Karen Brown, 5 River Terrace:
“I cannot attend tonight’s meeting but I did wan to enter some comments into the record here tonight. First, I would like to address the issue brought up last month about the reforesting of Wilson Park. Over the past decade scores of large trees have come down from the hilltop and hundreds more were destroyed in the tornado of July 2006. This change in topography greatly affects the quantity and quality of runoff both to the east and west of this site. It may also have affected the assumptions upon which the Storm Water Management Report for the Wilson Park development was based. Replacing trees along Wilson Park Drive and County House Road is essential. Also, planting willows on the lower ‘soccer field’ offers a great system of water filtration. I
understand that our intense need for new playing fields makes laying astro turf an attractive possibility however that may not be the best use of land.
Tarrytown’s tree code calls for the replacement of trees equal in value to those removed for building. The Wilson Park FEIS does not substantiate that value. Certainly it would be difficult to assign a dollar amount to these old trees. Nevertheless, I submit that a monetary amount be assigned to the anticipated tree loss and that part of the total be used to fund the replacement of trees on land that will eventually be turned over to the village. As for the landscaping on the homesteads, Tarrytown must not accept young conifers and shrubs as replacement trees.
Next, I’d like to again suggest the possibility of one house on the southwest corner of Wilson Park Drive and Beech Lane. This change in layout could eliminate one of the lots on Warner Lane which infringe on critical open space, or any one of the ten lots in the northern parcel. There is ample land in that SW quadrant for one lot, a protective easement for the old oak tree and an entrance into the newly created park. A building lot in this area would not encroach on public land and it would have virtually no impact on adjacent homes. In fact, adjacent homeowners have suggested that they prefer a house to the eroding conditions caused by illegal parking in that area.
As we move into the Findings portion of this process, I would like to outline some of the issues not addressed in the FEIS that the public would expect to see in the final Findings document.
1. What is the developer’s responsibility in regards to upgraded drainage systems on land that will be purchased by the Village?
2. Who is responsible for the construction of the parking lot at the end of the village trail on Neperan Road?
3. What other improvements on preserved land is required by the developer? Among these, the issues of sidewalks, trails, signage and the replacement of trees must be addressed.
4. What is the timeline for these improvements and what village body is responsible for its oversight?
Most importantly, Tarrytown has learned from experience that Findings must require these improvements be completed before land is turned over to the village and BEFORE SITE PLANS OR CONSTRUCTION ARE ALLOWED TO MOVE FORWARD.
I would like to thank the Planning Board for allowing this time for public comment on the FEIS even though it is not required by SEQRA. Continued public scrutiny ensures responsible development.”
The Board reported receipt of the following letter, dated March 26, 2007:
“This is a joint statement of the following residents of the Wilson Park Drive area and which we will make available to the Secretary: Leonard and Sandra Cohen, Richard and Veronica DeSanctis, Joseph Queenan and Francespa Spinner and Howard and Mimi Godwin. In the interests of the Board’s time, we have coordinated and combined our views on the Enhanced Park Plan described in the FEIS.
1. We commend the Board for its tireless efforts in considering and evaluating the myriad of comments and concerns that have been raised concerning the development of Wilson Park and for allowing extensive community participation in this important debate, especially regarding the parkland area between Beech and Warner Lanes. Without in any way intending to delay the deliberative process or reintroduce previous concerns, we believe that the community and especially the neighboring homeowners have not had an opportunity to express concerns about the current plan for the beautiful land at the north end described in the FEIS.
2. The Enhanced Park Plan described in the FEIS provides for the location of 10 lots on the northwestern parcel of the property, with four lots and a Village-owned public park on the southwestern parcel. The Enhanced Park Plan is now the preferred alternative in the FEIS.
3. We are among the Tarrytown residents most affected by the location of 10 new homes in the northwestern parcel of the property as we all own property adjoining or in close proximity to the boundary with the northwestern parcel where the great majority of the construction activity would take place. No other development of this magnitude of which we are aware, including The Legends at Pocantico Hills, is so closely appended to an existing neighborhood as is the case with the homes on Wilson Park Drive, River Terrace and Lake Terrace that share or are near a boundary with the northwestern parcel in the Enhanced Park Plan.
4. We do not concede that there should be 10 homes of such size on this exceedingly fragile parcel of land. Allowable square footage for several of the homes in the Enhanced Park Plan exceed by two times or more the average size of the homes in the Wilson Park area. The home permitted to be built on lot 5 would be enormous even by comparison with the others in the Plan. Please consider this in your deliberations.
5. Whatever number of homes and individual home size is ultimately approved for this parcel, we urge the Board, at a minimum, to take the following measures to minimize the severity of the impact on this beautiful land and the quality of life of the neighboring residents:
A. Please require that development follow the topography of the land so as to allow for clustering and take some of the pressure off of the very narrow Wilson Park Drive private road, which despite its private status and width is a busy through-road.
The Enhanced Park Plan shows a driveway off of the Wilson Park Drive private
Road for each of the 10 lots. Homes of this size will most probably have 2-3 cars,
will require cleaning service vehicles, gardening and landscape vehicles and
maintenance and delivery trucks in addition to garbage, postal and school bus
traffic while normal through traffic will not abate. Clustering would take much
of the traffic for these homes off the private road, which is extensively used by
both villages.
Having a cul-de-sac leading off each side of the road at an appropriate spot would
allow some of the new lots to run north/south and have yards that would back
onto existing property, with the houses at the north end of the lots. Such a plan
could create an informal buffer zone between existing and proposed housing.
The construction of The Legends at Pocantico Hills in Sleepy Hollow did not
follow and respect the topography of the land, creating an altering of the land that
can never be restored. Visually this development is offensive and out of proportion
with its neighborhood. However, even this development was not shoe-horned in on
top of an existing stable, quiet neighborhood, as it is located across busy Route 448
from recently-built homes.
B. Please minimize construction nearest the existing homes. Every home that
borders the northwestern parcel was built on rock and many of our basements have
only partial cellars as a result. Outcroppings are visible throughout our yards and considerable portions of our properties are impervious to planting due to below-surface rock formations. The same is no doubt true of the southern portion of the
northwestern parcel. The construction of homes on Lots 5 through 9 on the south portion of the private road will require considerable terrain alteration and, undoubtedly, an unacceptable level of blasting. No doubt, blasting will cause irreparable damage to our foundations and lead to water leaks in our basements and cracks in our walls.
The east/west ridgeline including the two hilltops should really be open space along the entire south boundary of the parcel to create a minimum buffer for the existing homes. We respectfully request that the Board give this serious consideration.
C. Please consider the disproportionality of the home and driveway on lot 5. The Enhanced Park Plan shows a 300 ft. driveway on lot 5 between the two protected steep slopes to a potentially massive (15,000 sq. ft.) home that may be built there. This is unacceptable and disrespectful to our existing neighborhood. This ‘runway’ will have to be lighted and will greatly impact the quality of life of the existing neighborhood. The proposed house and driveway are of such proximity to our homes that one household would have the potential to disrupt 5 existing homeowners with daily comings and goings.
We ask that lot 5 be eliminated from the Plan as the home and driveway contemplated will threaten, if not ravage, the two hilltops, require the most extensive blasting and will occur closest to the existing homes. As mentioned, we request that the ridge lines containing the two hilltops on lot 5 remain open space.
C. We understand that the northwestern parcel is currently zoned for sites of 2 acres. While we would prefer that exceedingly large homes not be built on this parcel, the number of homes and their configuration and location on the parcel concerns us more. We ask that you not approve a reduction in lot size but rather the number of homes, of whatever size, in accordance with our concerns addressed above.
The homeowners of Wilson Park Drive, River Terrace and Lake Terrace have been good citizens of Tarrytown. We have invested significantly in our homes, maintained them well and made them a credit to the village. We request that you have a constructive consultation with the Wilson Park neighborhood who are, like the Board, not only interested in preserving our quality of life but our Village’s wonderful heritage.”
PUBLIC HEARING – MISTRY – 11 BEECH LANE
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the Planning Board of the Village of Tarrytown will hold a public hearing on Monday, March 26, 2007, at 7:00 p.m. at the Municipal Building, 21 Wildey Street, Tarrytown, New York, to hear and consider an application by:
Jagdish V. Mistry
11 Beech Lane
Tarrytown, New York 10591
To consider the application for site development plan approval for property he owns at the above address for construction of a 2-car garage; house expansion over new garage; demolition of existing screened porch; construction of new sunroom and rebuilding of front entrance vestibule.
The property is shown on the Tax Maps of the Village of Tarrytown as Sheet 4, Block 128, Lots 9A and 10 and is located in an R-20 (Residential) Zone.
Documents are available for inspection in the Planning and Zoning Office. All interested parties are invited to attend and be heard. Access to the meeting room is available to the elderly and the handicapped. Signing is available for the hearing-impaired; request must be made to the Village Clerk at least one week in advance of the meeting.
The certified mailing receipts were submitted.
Mr. David Robak, architect, stated the proposed addition will not be built on any steep slopes and they will not put soil on the steep slopes. They have met with Mr. McGarvey and are increasing the drainage to capture more runoff from the upper portion of the property. No water will go off the steep slopes. Mr. Robak stated the neighbor at 30 Suncliff Drive has requested landscaping be planted along that border and they are willing to do that. The bank will also be planted to avoid further erosion. The proposed addition is 22 ft. x 50 ft. There will be a two-car garage with a house expansion over the garage. There will be 640 sq. ft. of additional habitable space.
Mr. McGarvey stated he met with the applicant last week and the issues have been addressed. Mr. Geneslaw stated he had received the revised plans and they appear to address the Board’s concerns.
Mr. Angelo Bragato, 41 Walden Road, stated he objected to the addition to this house. Dr. Mistry is a dentist so the property is already in commercial use. Cars park on the street and sometimes he has to go around Wilson Park to get through. More parking should be provided. Chairman Friedlander stated the garage will provide parking for two cars and take those off the property. Mr. Mistry stated sometimes cars park on the street even though there is room for them on the property. Mr. McGarvey stated a sign should be put up stating people should park on the property. Ms. Raiselis stated Dr. Mistry should speak with the patients and encourage them to park on the property rather than on this residential street.
Chairman Friedlander questioned whether anyone further wished to address the Board on this matter. No one appeared.
Mr. Aukland moved, seconded by Ms. Raiselis, and unanimously carried, that the hearing be closed.
Mr. Aukland moved, seconded by Ms. Raiselis, and unanimously carried, that the Board determines there will be no significant adverse environmental impacts as a result of this proposal.
Mr. Aukland moved, seconded by Ms. Raiselis, and unanimously carried, that the Board approves the garage and house addition at 11 Beech Lane subject to:
1. Approval by the Building Inspector/Village Engineer, particularly in regard to the stormwater/drainage plan for the site.
2. Permeable pavers are to be used for the new driveway area proposed.
3. A concrete or Belgian block curb is to be provided along the edge of the driveway to direct water down the driveway.
4. Topsoil may be added to the slope abutting the driveway, but the topography must not be altered.
5. Approval by the Zoning Board of Appeals for the rear yard setback variance required.
6. Approval of a landscaping/screening plan by the Village Landscape Consultant, particularly with regard to the steep slope and on the border with the property at 30 Suncliff Drive
7. Installation of a sign directing patients to park in the driveway.
8. Payment of any outstanding escrow fee prior to the granting of a building permit.
9. Signing of the final site plan by the Planning Board Chair.
CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING – MOSA – 20 LEGRANDE AVENUE
No one appeared on behalf of the applicant. No one appeared to address the Board on this matter. The Board unanimously agreed to continue the hearing at its April meeting.
CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING – PUTNAM AVENUE HOMES – HILLSIDE STREET – SUBDIVISION
*Chairman Friedlander recused himself from this portion of the meeting. Mr. Aukland chaired this portion of the meeting.
This portion of the meeting was transcribed by a court reporter and that transcript represents the official portion of these minutes.
Mr. Richard Blancato, attorney for the applicant, submitted to the Board a letter dated March 26, 2007, summarizing their objections to Mr. Cohen’s proposal as opposed to their proposal. He requested the Board review and consider these comments prior to the next meeting.
Mr. Blancato stated at the Board’s staff meeting on March 15th certain items were requested and they are working on putting those together. They will make a full submission to the Planning Board before the next meeting.
Mr. Blancato stated they will be providing the following information:
1. volume counts
2. profiles for the property
3. accurate site plan
4. aerial photographs
5. memorandum describing the difference between Mr. Cohen’s plan and their plan
6. what is permitted by zoning.
They are also researching the history of the property that was once a quarry.
Ms. Cherie Gaines, 612 South Broadway stated in an earlier presentation the applicants indicated they needed two houses because that was the only thing that is economically feasible and the developer had a right to make a profit. He has that right if he can. He doesn’t have the right for the Planning Board to guarantee that he makes a profit. All the constitution provides is an opportunity. It does not guarantee success. The Planning Board must protect the Village and the land and citizens of the Village. If two houses is too much traffic for this street, he shouldn’t have two houses whether that affects his profit or not. Mr. Blancato stated they are not asking for a guarantee of making a profit. The issue of this one house, of the two, is what is the best house
not only for the developer but the area and the Village. They feel the house they have proposed is much better than the house proposed by Mr. Cohen for the neighborhood. When his client purchased the property, two legal building lots were just approved by the Planning Board and then the laws changed. “If the Board focuses on the best house for the neighborhood, I think you will agree what we are proposing is far better.” Mr. Cohen stated he was not hired as the architect for this property. It is the architect’s responsibility to design a house that meets the zoning requirements. His study was just to show that the applicant’s house requirements could be achieved in a smaller structure. He made no attempt to design the house.
It was agreed the applicant would meet with the Planning Board at their staff meeting on April 12th.
All agreed to continue the matter at their regular meeting on April 23rd.
*Chairman Friedlander returned to the meeting.
CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING – CRESCENT ASSOCIATES – 155 WHITE PLAINS ROAD
Mr. Don Walsh appeared on behalf of the applicant. He stated they have received written comments in the last several days and they are working at incorporating those comments. The plans will be amended and resubmitted to Mr. Geneslaw and Mr. Yarabek. Hopefully if the Board is satisfied all comments have been addressed, this matter can move forward at the Board’s May meeting.
Chairman Friedlander stated Board members attended a workshop recently and there was discussion of NAHB (National Association of Home Builders) guidelines for model “green” homes. There is an attempt being made to move forward with “green” buildings and roofs. Mr. Walsh noted their approval will be for five years and depending on who the tenant eventually is, they could request the architect at the time review pursuing “green” construction but it really will depend on who the tenant is.
PRELIMINARY PRESENTATION – CANNAVO – 17 NORTH WASHINGTON STREET
Mr. Sam Vieira, architect, stated they are proposing conversion of an existing storage structure into a two-family dwelling. The building consists of a front three-story brick and timber construction and a wood construction in the back. They believe the wooden construction at one time was the stable for the firehouse, which was next door. Subsequently sometime in the early 1900s the front three-story section was constructed. The existing building sits on a 3,300 sq. ft. piece of property. The building’s footprint occupies the majority of the lot. There is only about 1-1/2 ft. of property that is not the building. The proposal is to make the ground floor of the front building parking for four cars. There will also be a mechanical room, entry foyer, stairway, washroom
and a lift. The rear of the structure would be rehabilitated and converted to a three-bedroom apartment. That could be entered from Washington Street or walking along side the building there is access through a side door that presently exists. The second dwelling unit on the second and third floors of the front building would be owner occupied. The owner is a collector of antiques and he wants an area to display some of the items he collects. This is a General Business District. In the Tarrytown zoning schedule under the permitted principal uses, the GB District allows any permitted use in an R-5 zone, which allows two-family homes, or an M-1 zone, which allows multi-family. From a use point, this is an allowable use. This portion of Washington Street is primarily residential. This proposed use would actually be more in keeping with what is currently around it. There will be no additions to the building. The elevator
is to bring up some of the collectibles, some of which are large (e.g., antique motorcycles.) The building will be fully sprinklered. The size of the units will be 2,300 sq. ft. for the rear unit and 3,200 sq. ft. for the front unit. Mr. Vieira noted he had met with the Board at their staff meeting and there had been some concern about coming out the side door onto Hank’s Alley. They have 1-1/2 ft. there and they will put up some type of barrier.
Mr. Aukland moved, seconded by Ms. Raiselis, and unanimously carried, that the Board declares its intent to be lead agency on this project.
Mr. Aukland moved, seconded by Ms. Raiselis, and unanimously carried, that the Board sets a public hearing on this application for April 23, 2007.
Mr. Aukland moved, seconded by Ms. Raiselis, and unanimously carried, that the Board establishes an escrow account in the amount of $2,500 on this application.
PRELIMINARY PRESENTATION – SHAH – 28 EUNICE COURT
Mr. Buddhisagar Shah stated the proposal is for a 12 ft. x 24 ft. kitchen addition in the rear of the house. The addition is 288 sq. ft.
The Board questioned whether any variances are required. Mr. Shah stated they will need a 2 ft. rear yard variance. 28 ft. is required and they will have 26 ft.
Chairman Friedlander questioned whether any trees will have to be removed. Mr. Shah stated he is having the trees evaluated and he will submit a report about the condition of the trees.
Mr. Aukland questioned whether there are any steep slopes. Mr. Shah stated not in the area of the addition – it is a flat area.
Mr. Aukland moved, seconded by Ms. Raiselis, and unanimously carried, that the Board declares its Intent to be Lead Agency on this project.
Mr. Aukland moved, seconded by Ms. Raiselis, and unanimously carried, that the Board sets a public hearing for April 23, 2007, on this application.
Mr. Aukland moved, seconded by Ms. Raiselis, and unanimously carried, that the Board establishes an escrow account in the amount of $2,500 on this application.
Mr. McGarvey stated the applicant’s architect should review the total coverage percentages since what is on the plan does not appear to be accurate.
PRELIMINARY PRESENTATION – C.M. PATEMAN & ASSOCIATES, CONTRACT VENDEE – CORNER OF FAIRVIEW AVENUE AND ALTAMONT AVENUE
This application is for construction of a single-family house on a vacant lot.
Chairman Friedlander and Ms. Raiselis stated they would have to recuse themselves on this application.
Counsel Shumejda stated a Special Meeting could be called after Mr. Tedesco returns for the purpose of scheduling a public hearing on this application.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Ms. Raiselis moved, seconded by Mr. Aukland, and unanimously carried, that the minutes of February 26, 2007, be approved as submitted.
Ms. Raiselis moved, seconded by Mr. Aukland, and unanimously carried, that the minutes of March 7, 2006, be approved as submitted.
MEETING ADJOURNED – 8:45 p.m.
Kathleen D’Eufemia
Secretary
| 
