Planning Board
Village of Tarrytown
Regular Meeting
June 25, 2007 7 p.m.
PRESENT: *Chairman Friedlander; Members **Raiselis, ****Aukland, Tedesco,
D’Avolio, ***Alternate Member Demers; Counsel Shumejda;
*****Village Engineer McGarvey; Landscape Consultant Yarabek;
Planner Geneslaw; Planner Kaplan-Macey; Secretary D’Eufemia
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Mr. Tedesco suggested the following amendments to the minutes of May 29, 2007:
Page 11, #3 – add at end “(Said variances were received on April 1, 2004.)”
Page 11, #6 – add at end “(This plan was approved on April 9, 2007.)”
Page 12, #14 – add at end “(Said payment was made 8/1/06.)”
Mr. Tedesco moved, seconded by Mr. Aukland, that the minutes of May 29, 2007, be approved as amended. Members Raiselis, Aukland, Tedesco, D’Avolio and Friedlander assented.
CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING – C.M. PATEMAN & ASSOCIATES, CONTRACT VENDEE – VACANT LOT FAIRVIEW AVE./ALTAMONT AVE.
*Chairman Friedlander recused himself on this application.
**Ms. Raiselis recused herself on this application
***Alternate Member Demers joined the meeting.
Mr. Tedesco chaired this portion of the meeting.
Mr. Tedesco moved, seconded by Mr. Aukland, and unanimously carried, that the Planning Board declares itself Lead Agency on this application.
Mr. Tedesco stated, “There are six specific items which the Planning Board addressed on two site visits – one in May and one in June – and at our last Planning Board meeting and our last work session. I will discuss each of these, including the Board’s recommendations and requests made of the applicant and the applicant’s response.
1.Steep Slopes – Recently the applicant submitted a steep slopes map done by a surveyor who did an actual field survey taking exact points. It indicates very minimal steep slopes, none within the footprint of the house. There would be some minor steep slope disturbance due to a slight re-grading in the back yard (25% to 25.3%) for which a variance would be requested.
2. The need for a natural looking, wooded green corner in terms of trees and plantings was clearly indicated. Mr. Yarabek was asked to only approve a plan that accomplishes this to the extent possible. The applicant was agreeable to this. The width of the corner to be preserved was found to be fairly large on the site visit – from curb to proposed wall and curb to house – and this should assist in achieving this goal. There will be a site visit after construction when the landscaping/screening plan is in place with the Board and Mr. Yarabek present and the applicant has agreed to do additional plantings that we may require.
The Board asked the applicant’s arborist and Mr. Yarabek to work on the initial plan and this has been done. We have a revised plan. In a recent memo, Mr. Yarabek asked for additional information and items, which will be part of the landscaping plan he approves.
These items include a full tree valuation report (a part of any landscaping plan); enhanced screening along the eastern and northeast corner of the property; specification of full ground landscape restoration to the curb line; and an increase in plant sizes, proportionate to the proposed tree removal.
3. The applicant agreed to a reduction in non-permeable surface by making the entire driveway of permeable pavers, as well as the patio area by the house.
4. The applicant was asked to lower the house into the ground further to reduce the bulk effect of the house on the site – by 2 ft. There are many homes in the Village with driveways that slope toward the garage - in the general area on Altamont Avenue, Crest Drive, Prospect Avenue – many steeply sloped. We recently saw a new home for Lot 4 in Jardim Estates with the driveway sloping down 3 ft. to the garage. It does entail a greater frequency of cleaning and care for the drains provided at the garage level but that is doable and homes deal with this successfully. This would be of great benefit in terms of the visual effect of the home. The applicant said he would agree to a 2 ft. lowering if the Planning Board required this.
5. At the last Planning Board meeting, the applicant agreed to a reduction in the maximum height of the front retaining wall from 6 ft. to 5 ft., tapering to between 3 and 4 ft. at the sides. We made two additional requests at our work session (a) the use of two walls instead of one – to make for a break in the visual height effect – a 2 ft. wall and a 3 ft. wall with terracing between and appropriate plantings. The applicant indicated he would agree to this if the Planning Board requires it. (b) The applicant was asked to provide a natural stone wall with no grout at the joints. The applicant has agreed to do this.
6. The Board asked the applicant to consider architectural details that would make the
home more fitting to the neighborhood of older homes, for example, window treatments and other external elements and details.
The Architectural Review Board would be asked by the Board to approve architectural details to make the home reasonably fitting for the general neighborhood. The applicant has agreed to this.
Mr. Aukland questioned whether Mr. McGarvey has reviewed the new steep slopes map. Mr. McGarvey stated he has.
Mr. Tedesco questioned whether anyone wished to address the Board on this matter.
Ms. Laura Copeland, 70 Fairview Avenue, stated there seem to have been a lot of changes. She questioned whether the public would have an opportunity to look at a picture with the revisions, which should include people so the public can see how the house will look in the neighborhood. She questioned why the Board had requested a 2 ft. reduction in the height – why not 5 ft. In regard to the steep slopes, the Village passed this legislation because they thought in was important to maintain the character of the Village. It appears Mr. Pateman wants the wall so he can level the property. This goes against the spirit of the steep slopes ordinance.
Ms. Angela Schneider, 16 Fairview Avenue, stated the steep slopes ordinance should be adhered to. Variances should not be allowed.
Mr. Tedesco stated when the Board visited the property, they saw the slopes. There is a very small amount of steep slopes and the Board felt if they made a list of priorities, the steep slopes was the least, if they could provide for the other things they wanted to make a good project. They felt that variance would not alter that landscape significantly. The Board pressed the applicant on other issues he has been willing to do.
Ms. Schneider stated Mr. Pateman has just completed two houses on Prospect Avenue and those houses don’t fit in with that neighborhood. Homes are being built in Tarrytown, which are not in keeping with the areas where they are being put.
Mr. Demers stated he too is concerned about over development in Tarrytown and about building on steep slopes. If there were a way to make this house more conforming to the neighborhood he would try to do that. The public must bear in mind the Planning Board is bound by the law and the property owner has certain rights under the law and for the most part what Mr. Pateman has proposed conforms to the law as it is now. The Board has worked very hard with Mr. Pateman to bring the house into a less dominating position and to make it keep in character with the neighborhood.
Mr. Fred Ellman, 30 Fairview Avenue, stated it does seem quite a few incremental changes have happened. Neighbors would like to see what they look like - what the 2 ft. height reduction looks like, what the 5 ft. wall looks like.
Ms. Copeland stated she commends the Board for their hard work. She stated the Village recently passed a Comprehensive Plan and what that needs is information and regulations but that is not there yet. Maybe the Board worked with Mr. Pateman to get the house within the law but the law is in flux. This is an area where there are no new homes and that woods has been there for 100 years and for it to change everyone must be sure they are not making a bum job of it. She suggested there should be a moratorium until a committee can work on the Comprehensive Plan. She urged the Board not to vote on this application. The steep slopes ordinance also prohibits building in areas of significant vegetation.
Mr. Tedesco stated the comprehensive plan does need to be implemented and a committee has been formed to work on the implementation of all the items. That will take some time. In an application like Mr. Pateman’s the Board has to act before that is done unless the Board of Trustees declares a moratorium at some time. Mr. Pateman has been agreeable to listen to the Board’s concerns and he is responding to the Board’s requests. It would be helpful to see what these changes would look like and to see the latest comments from Mr. Yarabek on the landscaping. All those changes should be presented so the Board and the public can see them and then the Board should take action.
Ms. Copeland stated the laws will change once the comprehensive plan is flushed out. Mr. Tedesco stated the Board has to work with the laws as they exist unless a moratorium is declared. The Board has to make sure it is the best possible plan under the current conditions.
Mr. Aukland stated the committee looking at the comprehensive plan, of which he is the head, is focusing on zoning issues. There are many other issues, which will take time to be properly reviewed.
Mr. Pateman stated he felt the Board understood the site much better after the site visits. He had balloons put up to show the height. “I don’t think we can submit anything additional to help everyone understand it better.”
Mr. Aukland stated there have been a lot of changes and a lot of new material has been submitted. He felt it would be appropriate to have something the Board and public can see incorporating all the changes.
Mr. Tedesco stated people should be given the opportunity between now and the next meeting to look at the plans with the changes and then there should be closure on this application. Mr. Pateman stated he would like to request that the Board make a decision, one way or the other, at their meeting next month.
Ms. Copeland questioned why Mr. Pateman wasn’t asked to lower the house 5 ft. Mr. Tedesco stated it was an engineering problem.
Ms. Copeland stated everyone wants what is best for the Village but neighbors are concerned. It is not unreasonable for them to worry since they have horrible models they look at every day.
Mr. Pateman stated he will do the drawing and everything that has been requested. He stated he has done a lot of work in Tarrytown. He has tried to work hard with the Board. This Board is an administrative body and there is a code, which he has to work with and the Board must work with as well. He can’t be told make the house lower if it complies. The Board asked and he agreed. It is time for a decision.
Mr. Demers stated he understands how Mr. Pateman feels and Mr. Pateman has been cooperative out in the field. He is right about the legal side of it. What lies behind the frustration of the neighbors is the type of houses Mr. Pateman has built. It is a question of style. Mr. Pateman replied that is why the Village has an Architectural Review Board.
All agreed to continue the hearing at their next meeting.
*Chairman Friedlander returned to the meeting.
**Ms. Raiselis returned to the meeting.
***Mr. Demers left the meeting.
PUBLIC HEARING – BIRGY – VACANT LOT CORNER OF BEECH LANE AND WILSON PARK DRIVE
Chairman Friedlander read the following Notice of Public Hearing:
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the Planning Board of the Village of Tarrytown will hold a public hearing on Monday, June 25, 2007 at 7:00 p.m. at the Municipal Building, 21 Wildey Street, Tarrytown, New York, to hear and consider an application by:
Paul and Maria Birgy, Contract Vendees
94 Paulding Avenue
Tarrytown, New York 10591
To consider the application for site development plan approval for a new single-family house on vacant property located at the intersection of Wilson Park Drive and Beech Lane, Tarrytown, New York.
The property is shown on the Tax Maps of the Village of Tarrytown as Sheet 5, Parcel 67A and is located in the R-40 (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. Paul Birgy stated he and his wife would like to build a home at Beech Lane and Wilson Park Drive. They have lived in the river towns for 25 years and in Tarrytown for about 15 years. He is a builder/carpenter be trade. He has been doing energy efficient homes for the past 10 or 15 years but felt the technology was lagging behind until recently. Now there is good proven technology. This house will use almost zero energy. They are hoping it will be a model. There will be a solar component, fluorescent
lighting, R-40 walls and R-50 attic insulation. There will be many historic details. They are hoping this will be a positive impact on the neighborhood.
Ms. Mary Ann Halford, 28 Beech Lane, stated she is concerned the house will block the sun coming into her home. She is also concerned about drainage. Chairman Friedlander stated this is a public hearing to review the site plan and as part of that drainage plans and landscaping plans must be submitted and approved.
Upon inquiry from the Chairman, Ms. Halford stated her home is 3,950 sq. ft. including the basement. The Jeffers’ home is about 10,000 sq. ft.
Mr. Birgy stated the proposed house will have 2,750 sq. ft. of living space on the first floor and 600 sq. ft. on the second floor. There is a full basement but that will not be living space.
Mr. Birgy stated the proposed house is north of the Halford house and the sun passes directly overhead and sets in the west so the new house would not cast a shadow or prevent sun coming in to the Halford house. Ms. Raiselis stated Mr. Birgy’s solar technicians can probably provide more information on that.
Upon inquiry, Mr. Birgy stated the height of the new home will be less than 35 ft. It is at a lower elevation than the Halford house. The house was specifically designed to give it a lower siting on the lot because it is more historically accurate and it doesn’t give the house an overbearing presence. The design helps to mitigate digging into a slope site.
Upon inquiry from Ms. D’Avolio, Mr. Birgy stated the proposed house sits back from the street approximately twice as far as the Halford house. Ms. D’Avolio questioned whether it would sit higher. Mr. Birgy stated it would not. The house next door will have a higher ridge line – that house is almost four stories. Ms. D’Avolio questioned the square footage of the basement on the proposed house. Mr. Birgy stated it is the same as the first floor. The basement’s two side yards and rear yard will be enclosed by the ground as much as possible.
Ms. Raiselis stated Mr. Birgy did a great job on the plans but what she had wanted to see is a plain elevation. What has been presented is a good idea of the style of the house but the Board needs to see a measured drawing to see the height and massing.
Upon inquiry from Mr. Tedesco, Mr. Birgy stated no variances will be required.
Upon inquiry from Kathy Ruhland, 17 Walden Road, Mr. Birgy stated the entrance to the property will be from Beech Lane. They will have to remove a few trees but will take down as few as possible since the trees are a valuable asset to the property. Ms. Ruhland stated the house appears to be in keeping with the area.
Mr. McGarvey stated he will need a plan showing how the piping will be done.
Ms. Ann Hull, 111 Wilson Park Drive, stated the Notice of Hearing listed Mr. Birgy as a Contract Vendee. She questioned whether he would be selling this home. Mr. Birgy stated he and his wife will live in the house.
Mr. Mark Fry, a Sleepy Hollow resident, stated this is an attractive proposal and it is beautifully integrated with the other houses on the street. The incorporation of the historic detailing is to be commended.
Ms. Jen Lyons, 57 Walden Road, questioned whether there would be variances needed for the steep slopes. Mr. McGarvey stated the applicant submitted a topographical map showing the steep slopes. The applicant will not be building on the steep slopes or touching them.
Ms. Ruhland questioned how the drainage is being managed. Mr. Birgy stated there will be dry wells and there will be underground pipes. He stated he anticipates improving the drainage on the site.
Mr. Tedesco moved, seconded by Mr. Aukland, and unanimously carried, that the Planning Board declares itself Lead Agency on this application.
Mr. Tedesco moved, seconded by Mr. Aukland, and unanimously carried, to continue the hearing at the Board’s next meeting.
JARDIM ESTATES
Ms. Linda Viertel, 8 Gracemere, stated the Board has two public hearings scheduled tonight for Jardim Estates – Lots 5 and 6. She stated she wished to make a few comments on Jardim Estates before the Board proceeded with those hearings. Ms. Viertel stated she wanted the Village to take steps necessary to make sure the work in Gracemere Park is done before any future work is done at Jardim Estates. It is not fair to the taxpayers. “I hold the Village responsible for action. I want to know who will do what and when. Little has gotten done. There have been meetings at the site. Lots of blame has gone back and forth.” In regard to the post office boxes she questioned why and how the post office was under the impression that the parking lot area was built as a turnaround area
for the postal delivery trucks. Who gave that impression? Was the Village Landscape Consultant informed of this decision and in the process as it was being decided? If so, when and how was it okayed? If not, then he has the power to request appropriate placement according to better park design. Was the landscape designer ever informed of the size and scope of this structure and was it then okayed? If the post office has no intention of delivering outside the development, then all the mailboxes should be on Sheldon for easy access. If residents insist that they be on the private road in from Broadway, the least the village can do is to accommodate the rest of the residents to make the box system parallel to the road, as it has been for 30 some years, and not facing drivers as they enter parkland. Tarrytown did not purchase parkland for $250,000 to look at a massive post office structure when entering the park. The situation is
unacceptable and can be remedied by an easy re-situation of the structure parallel to the road even if the village has to pay the miniscule amount to do so. The ramshackle boxes were situated that way for 30 years and the parking lot was not built to accommodate the post office, but rather to provide for parkland parking when the park is completed and the trails are established. No other roadside/clean-up has been completed – it’s almost three years now – no benches are in, the grass around the white house and in areas of the park has not been cut – the park looks derelict. She stated she would like a report on the DOT work at the light because it looks totally unsightly with dead shrubs, etc. in that area. The stone wall has not been repaired. Mr. Inglis said there was a landscape plan for the grass area in front of the stone wall. Has anyone seen the plan? What about the plans for the retention basin? What
about the landscape plans for the white house? Has there been any follow up from Mr. Inglis about signage on the stone pillars? Has there been notification to the neighborhood about traffic calming measures? Nothing should be done until all Gracemere residents and perhaps Pennybridge residents have been notified of what is being done, both permanently and tentatively so residents are aware of the changes. Notification should come from the Village as well as the land owner since there has been consultation from a traffic expert. Nothing should be done until appropriate notification has gone out and is finalized and overseen by Mr. McGarvey and Mr. Yarabek. Every time the developer has done anything, it needs to be redone, so the Village must sign off on all notification and work from now on so nothing gets torn up and done over due to a lack of communication. The residents are owed a timeline and a punch list. It is time to stop the
meetings and the reactive memos. “The work needs to be done and I hold the professionals responsible. It would be my preference that no work continue until this work is done.”
In regard to the post office boxes, Mr. Yarabek stated the developer approached him a year ago. The boxes used to be at the entrance right off Broadway and he felt it was reasonable to relocate them next to the parking lot and they were to face inward. The post office did not like that drive and wanted the boxes parallel to the entrance drive. They were installed per comments by the post office. Mr. McGarvey stated he has met with the post office. They had no idea that the little parking lot was for a park. They thought it was for them to turn their mail truck around. They said they plan on keeping it and there will be no private delivery to the new homes. There was discussion about moving the boxes toward Sheldon Avenue but that is a different route so it can’t be done. Another
meeting is being scheduled with the Postmaster, Mr. Yarabek and himself. Ms. Viertel stated the mailboxes were parallel to the road. She was only asking the structure be parallel so people don’t see it when coming in. Chairman Friedlander stated, “It doesn’t belong on the parkland and we must tell the post office it won’t be there.”
Chairman Friedlander questioned the status of the landscaping plans for the park. Mr. Yarabek stated there was a meeting and five plans were submitted to him. He has been reviewing those plans. He will make recommendations to the Board before their next work session.
Chairman Friedlander stated the grass in the park should be mowed by the Village and the grass in front of the stone wall should also be done by the Village.
In regard to the stone walls, Mr. McGarvey stated he has looked at the wall. There is a section where the wall has come down. That must be repaired. Some re-pointing was done, but not well. Mr. Inglis agreed that would have to be re-pointed. Mr. Inglis stated the Findings say the wall will be repaired in the area where it is being moved only. Chairman Friedlander stated even if it says that in the Findings, Mr. Inglis is responsible because the walls in the South End have been declared historic. They have to be fixed as soon as possible.
Chairman Friedlander questioned the status of the cleanup of the hill. Mr. McGarvey stated that is not in the Findings; however, the applicant agreed to do that cleanup.
Chairman Friedlander stated Counsel Shumejda and Mr. McGarvey should review all these issues with the applicant and give the Board a timeline as to when things will be done.
Chairman Friedlander questioned the status of the landscaping plan for the paths. Mr. Yarabek stated there is a series of plans for the park. He will cover that in a memo to the Board.
Chairman Friedlander questioned the status of traffic calming measures. Mr. Tedesco stated there was a meeting with the traffic consultant hired by the Village. He will submit a plan and that plan should then be reviewed at a public meeting. Mr. Tedesco noted at that meeting signage was also discussed and residents want to see what is proposed before any signs are put up.
Ms. Mary Bushman Kelly, 548 South Broadway, stated she paid to have a sign with her address put up and the sign was stolen. She has been told she is now going to have a Gracemere address but has received nothing. “I have no sign and no address.” Mr. McGarvey stated all houses must be identified because of Emergency 911 regulations. (Ms. Bushman-Kelly’s house has been identified as 103 Gracemere.) Ms. Kelly stated there are no signs so if there is emergency no one will find them. Mr. McGarvey stated signs have been ordered and will be put up as soon as they arrive.
Ms. Cherie Gaines stated she lives at 612 South Broadway, which is no where near South Broadway. She stated there is a problem with the labeling of the houses. She felt if there is a meeting on traffic calming, Sheldon Avenue residents should be included in that
meeting. Whether Gracemere residents want them using this area or not, they do. Unification Church should repair the historic wall on Broadway. As for the mailboxes, for close to 25 years there were six and now there are ten. They were always parallel to the driveway until recently. “I am one of the people who gets mail in those mailboxes and having those go to Stephen Drive to get my mail is an inconvenience. Ms. Gaines stated she has heard the developer is considering changing something that was agreed to a few months ago regarding Lots 10 and 16. Lot 16 was never submitted to SEQRA. It was stuck in the plan at the FEIS stage. The driveway was a shared driveway as a compromise. If that shared driveway is given up, then the entire compromise should be given up. They got
Lot 16 for the shared driveway. If they don’t want the shared driveway, then they give up Lot 16. “Someone needs to get serious with Unification Church and Lots 4, 5, and 6 should be delayed until we find we are working with a cooperative developer.”
Mr. Michael Inglis, representing the Church, stated they believe all the issues are being dealt with in a timely manner. They have been working cooperatively with Counsel Shumejda, Mr. McGarvey and Mr. Yarabek. “When we have agreement, we are proceeding expeditiously.”
PUBLIC HEARING – EMERALD WOODS (JARDIM ESTATES) – LOT 5
Chairman Friedlander read the following Notice of Public Hearing:
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the Planning Board of the Village of Tarrytown will hold a public hearing on Monday, June 25, 2007 at 7:00 p.m. at the Municipal Building, 21 Wildey Street, Tarrytown, New York, to hear and consider an application by:
Holy Spirit Association for the Unification of World Christianity
4 West 43rd Street
New York, New York 10036
To consider the application for site development plan approval for a new single-family house at 4 Emerald Woods, Tarrytown, New York (Jardim Estates Lot 5)
The property is shown on the Tax Maps of the Village of Tarrytown as Sheet 29, Parcel 65 and is located in the R-60 (Residential) Zone.
Documents are available for inspection in the Planning and Zoning Office. All interested parties are invited to attend and be heard. Access 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. Michael Inglis, representing the applicant, stated this is the second house on the right coming in from Sheldon Avenue. It is a flat lot from front to back. The aqueduct is on the west side of the property. It is a single-family residence with a three-car garage, similar to the house on Lot 9. There is very little grading. They are proposing the addition of significant landscaping.
Mr. Tim Cronin, engineer, stated they have met all the zoning requirements and actually exceed those handsomely in some cases. The house is 6,286 sq. ft., which includes the deck. The actual livable area of the house is 4,900 sq. ft.
Chairman Friedlander questioned whether anyone wished to address the Board on this matter.
Ms. Linda Viertel, 8 Gracemere, questioned the architectural style of the house. Chairman Friedlander stated the Board has not seen a rendering for this home and they should.
Mr. Les Jacobs, Stephen Drive, questioned the height of the house. Mr. Cronin stated it will be a maximum 2-1/2 stories, 30 ft.
Mr. Jacobs stated all the traffic studies were done assuming two-car garages and now the Board is approving three-car garages for some of the houses. He stated the house being built on Lot 7 will tower over the house on Stephens Drive. Chairman Friedlander stated the number of garages does not determine the number of cars a house will produce. Mr. Inglis stated this is only the second house where they have proposed a three-car garage.
Dr. Carole Griffiths, Martling Avenue, questioned the type of insulation being proposed and whether energy efficient methods were being used and whether it is an energy rated home. Mr. Norman Sheer, attorney for the applicant, stated they did not know the energy rating; however, they are meeting all Village and State requirements. Mr. Dennis Serna stated they are trying to be as “green” and energy efficient as possible. These are upper-end homes and the buyers are spending a lot of money. The quality is first class. Ms. Raiselis stated the Board is pushing “green” buildings. Mr. Sheer stated they have a set of approvals for this project and if it was the Board’s intention that this be a “green” project, then that should have been put in the resolutions and it could
have been discussed at that time. They have to meet New York State code and they feel they exceed code in certain ways but it is not appropriate to be discussing it at this point. Chairman Friedlander stated it is an appropriate discussion for the comprehensive plan and it should be done. Dr. Griffiths stated it seems that houses over 4,000 sq. ft. should be “green.”
Mr. Yarabek stated a tree valuation report is being prepared. He requested that all utilities to this home be clearly shown on a plan.
Mr. Jacobs stated someone needs to review the drainage at Jardim Estates because it is not working during storms.
Ms. Raiselis requested the applicant submit an elevation drawing of the entire street and the houses should be added to that plan as the project moves forward.
Mr. Inglis stated he would submit an architectural rendering of the house.
Mr. Tedesco moved, seconded by Mr. Aukland, and unanimously carried, that the Board declares itself Lead Agency on this application.
Mr. Tedesco moved, seconded by Mr. Aukland, and unanimously carried, to continue the hearing at the Board’s next meeting.
PUBLIC HEARING – EMERALD WOODS (JARDIM ESTATES) – LOT 6
Chairman Friedlander read the following Notice of Public Hearing:
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the Planning Board of the Village of Tarrytown will hold a public hearing on Monday, June 25, 2007 at 7:00 p.m. at the Municipal Building, 21 Wildey Street, Tarrytown, New York, to hear and consider an application by:
Holy Spirit Association for the Unification of World Christianity
4 West 43rd Street
New York, New York 10036
To consider the application for site development plan approval for a new single-family house at 2 Emerald Woods, Tarrytown, New York (Jardim Estates Lot 6).
The property is shown on the Tax Maps of the Village of Tarrytown as Sheet 29, Parcel 66 and is located in the R-60 (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. Michael Inglis, representing the applicant, stated this is the corner lot. There is a two-car garage in the back. The driveway comes in between Lots 5 and 6. The buyer is requesting a pool. All the zoning requirements have been met.
Mr. Tim Cronin, engineer, stated the house is 4,670 sq. ft., well under F.A.R. regulations. The height is 2-1/2 stories, 30 ft.
Mr. Inglis stated the tree information will be submitted to Mr. Yarabek.
Chairman Friedlander questioned whether anyone wished to address the Board on this matter.
Mr. Les Jacobs, Stephen Drive, stated there should be significantly tall trees along Stephen Drive.
Mr. McGarvey noted the pool is an accessory structure and the zoning schedule should be amended to show those setbacks.
Mr. Inglis stated an architectural rendering for the house will be submitted to the Board.
Mr. Tedesco moved, seconded by Mr. Aukland, and unanimously carried, that the Board declares itself Lead Agency on this application.
Mr. Tedesco moved, seconded by Mr. Aukland, and unanimously carried, to continue the hearing at the Board’s next meeting.
PRELIMINARY PRESENTATION – EMERALD WOODS (JARDIM ESTATES) – LOT 4
Mr. Michael Inglis stated they have submitted an application to construct a new single-family house on Lot 4 at Emerald Woods (Jardim Estates.) He requested the Board set a public hearing.
Mr. Tedesco moved, seconded by Mr. Aukland, and unanimously carried, that the Board declares its Intent to be Lead Agency on this application.
Mr. Tedesco moved, seconded by Mr. Aukland, and unanimously carried, that the Board sets an escrow account in the amount of $2,500 on this application.
Mr. Tedesco moved, seconded by Mr. Aukland, and unanimously carried, that the Board sets a public hearing on the site plan for Lot 4 at Emerald Woods (Jardim Estates) for the Board’s July 23, 2007, meeting.
PUBLIC HEARING – CORIO – 39 STEPHEN DRIVE
Chairman Friedlander read the following Notice of Public Hearing:
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the Planning Board of the Village of Tarrytown will hold a public hearing on Monday, June 25, 2007 at 7:00 p.m. at the Municipal Building, 21 Wildey Street, Tarrytown, New York, to hear and consider an application by:
Lawrence and Norma Corio
39 Stephen Drive
Tarrytown, New York 10591
To consider the application for site development plan approval for construction of a one-story master bedroom and bath addition with garage under the balcony at the rear of their property at 39 Stephen Drive, Tarrytown, New York.
The property is shown on the Tax Maps of the Village of Tarrytown as Sheet 29A, Block 97, Lot 9 and is located in the R-15 (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. Aukland recused himself on this application.
Mr. Lawrence Belluscio, engineer, stated the proposal is a one-story addition – 436 sq. ft. – with a garage underneath. They will be adding a new driveway and closing up the existing garage. They have included landscaping. Some shrubs will be relocated and others will be added. There is a white beech tree, which is diseased, which will be removed. There will be a trench drain across the existing driveway and the new driveway. All the setbacks are met. No variances are required.
Mr. Tedesco questioned whether the driveway could be done with permeable pavers. Mr. Corio stated that would be acceptable.
Mr. Geneslaw stated a streetscape with elevation drawings should be submitted.
Mr. McGarvey stated the driveway is too wide. It is shown at approximately 27 ft. and the maximum curb cub permitted is 20 ft. Mr. Belluscio stated he could change that on the plans.
Upon inquiry from Ms. D’Avolio, Mr. Belluscio stated the addition will be 17 ft. wide by 25 ft. deep. He stated the house will be wider than surrounding homes but the side yard on the side with the addition will be 14 ft., which is permitted.
Chairman Friedlander questioned whether anyone wished to address the Board on this matter. No one appeared.
Mr. Tedesco moved, seconded by Ms. Raiselis, and unanimously carried, that the Planning Board declares itself Lead Agency on this application.
Mr. Tedesco moved, seconded by Ms. Raiselis, and unanimously carried, that the Planning Board continue this hearing at its next meeting.
****Mr. Aukland returned to the meeting.
PUBLIC HEARING – C-TOWN SUPERMARKET – 114 NORTH BROADWAY
Chairman Friedlander read the following Notice of Public Hearing:
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the Planning Board of the Village of Tarrytown will hold a public hearing on Monday, June 25, 2007 at 7:00 p.m. at the Municipal Building, 21 Wildey Street, Tarrytown, New York, to hear and consider an application by:
Broadway Tarrytown, LLC (C-Town Supermarket)
114 North Broadway
Tarrytown, New York 10591
To consider the application for amended site development plan approval to allow for addition of mezzanine space.
The property is shown on the Tax Maps of the Village of Tarrytown as Sheet 4, Block 15, Lot 11 and is located in the RR (Restricted Retail) 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. Tom Abilama, architect, stated they are proposing an amendment to their previous approval from several months ago. They originally proposed an addition to the front and then there was an alternate plan to keep the front as is with a minor alteration to the porticos. Since then they thought they would link the two porticos together with a second
level to have a café, which would have a terrace with a view to the river. The existing supermarket is 7,000 sq. ft. and the expansion into the existing former bookstore and restaurant will add about 3,000 sq. ft. for a 10,000 sq. ft. supermarket. They have 16 more parking spaces than required by the code. They have added checkout lines. There are two sets of stairs going up to the mezzanine area and a future elevator. The new mezzanine will be 21 ft. wide with an 8 ft. wide terrace.
Chairman Friedlander questioned the height. Mr. Abilama stated it is about 35 ft., which includes the curved roof and raising the mezzanine structure.
Chairman Friedlander questioned whether anyone wished to address the Board on this matter.
Ms. Linda Viertel, 8 Gracemere, stated she was thrilled this expansion is taking place. She questioned whether the south wall could be made “softer.” Mr. Abilama stated they could consider putting windows in. Ms. Raiselis suggested some brick could be added to break the wall.
Mr. Yarabek stated he would like to see the proposed planting information and also what the sidewalk treatment will be.
Discussion followed on parking. Mr. Sal Saleh, owner, stated he would very much like to add parking in the future as a second phase of this expansion process; however, he cannot afford to do it as part of this first phase. It was agreed that initially there should be a guard hired to make sure only customers of the store are using the parking and within one year there should be an automated plan/process proposed to and accepted by the Board. A current traffic parking lot study should be done to determine existing parking needs and that should be submitted to the Board at its next meeting. A second traffic parking lot study should be done six months after the opening of the expanded store and depending on the results of that study, the Board will review additional parking needs. The applicant also agreed to work
with the Village to obtain some traffic control mechanism approved by the D.O.T. to permit left hand turns from the store parking lot onto Route 9.
Mr. Tedesco moved, seconded by Mr. Aukland, and unanimously carried, that the hearing be closed.
Mr. Tedesco moved, seconded by Mr. Aukland, and unanimously carried, that the Board determines there will be no significant adverse environmental impact as a result of the proposed plan amendment.
Mr. Tedesco moved, seconded by Mr. Aukland, and unanimously carried, that the Board approves the amendment to the site development plan approval for C-Town Supermarket
to allow for the addition of mezzanine space as shown on the revised site plans (06/04/07) subject to:
1. Approval by the Building Inspector/Village Engineer.
2. A process/plan to insure that only customers of the store will use the store parking. The Planning Board recognizes that the applicant will initially hire a guard who will monitor the lot for this purpose. However, the Board requires that
an automated plan/process must be proposed and accepted by the Board within one year of the approval of this agreement.
3. The applicant agrees to work with the Village to obtain some traffic control mechanism approved by the Department of Transportation to permit left-hand turns from the store parking lot onto Route 9. This process is to begin at the time of this amended site plan approval.
4. The Board requires that a current traffic parking lot study be done to determine existing parking needs. The Board is to be provided this study by its next meeting. A second traffic parking lot study is to be done six months after the opening of the expanded store. If, as a result of this study, the Board determines that there is a significant deficiency in the number of spaces provided, the following mitigation will be required:
(a) the building of an upper level parking structure; or
(b) the use of alternate methods to be approved by the Board to provide the needed spaces.
If, at some point, the applicant, on his own, decides to build an upper level
parking structure, the Board would look favorably on this.
5. Approval by the Architectural Review Board
6. A revised landscaping/screening plan to be approved by the Village Landscape Consultant
7. Signing of the amended site plan by the Planning Board Chair.
*****Mr. McGarvey left the meeting.
CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING – WILSON PARK HOME & LAND COMPANY, LLC. – WILSON PARK DRIVE – REVISED FINDINGS STATEMENT
The Board reviewed with Village Planning Consultant Melissa Kaplan-Macey revisions to the Findings Statement, which were the results of discussions at the Board’s last meeting and the Board’s last staff meeting. Several additional amendments were suggested.
Ms. Angela Schneider, 16 Fairview Avenue, stated in a conversation with Mr. McGarvey she was advised that when the water quality study was conducted by the applicant the potential for arsenic in the water was not tested. The Board stated they would contact Mr. McGarvey to discuss this.
Mr. Tedesco moved, seconded by Mr. Aukland, and unanimously carried, that the public hearing on the Findings Statement for the Legends at Wilson Park be closed.
Mr. Tedesco moved, seconded by Mr. Aukland, and unanimously carried, that the Board accepts the revised Findings Statement for the Legends at Wilson Park with the amendments added this evening. (The final document is dated 6/25/07 and is attached to the official copy of these minutes.)
CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING – HOLY SPIRIT ASSOCIATION FOR THE UNIFICATION OF WORLD CHRISTIANITY – JARDIM ESTATES EAST
Mr. Tedesco stated at the last meeting the Board took several actions. They made a positive declaration and approved the final Scoping Document subject to inclusion of information presented at that last scoping meeting and the one held on April 17th and requested Mr. Geneslaw, the Village’s Planning Consultant, put this into a final document. That has been provided. Mr. Geneslaw also provided a Wildlife and Plant Biodiversity Assessment Outline and this document is referred to on Page 14 of the Scoping Document and would be attached once the Board approves it. Mr. Tedesco suggested the Board include the recommendations on the wildlife survey received from Dr. Carole Griffiths.
Discussion followed on whether the Scoping Document should be made available to the public. Mr. Norman Sheer, attorney for the applicant, stated he would have no problem with the document being made public as long as the Board limits time for public comment. The Board noted that it reserved the right to amend the Scoping Document based on public comment that may be submitted.
The Secretary was directed to put the Scoping Document and the Wildlife and Plant Biodiversity Assessment Outline on the Village’s website with a notation that written comments must be submitted by July 11, 2007.
The Scoping Document is attached to the Official Copy of these minutes.
ADJOURNMENT
Mr. Tedesco moved, seconded by Mr. Aukland, and unanimously carried, that the meeting be adjourned – 11:40 p.m.
Kathleen D’Eufemia, Secretary
Secretary
| 
