Planning Board
Village of Tarrytown
Regular Meeting
July 28, 2008 7 p.m.
PRESENT: Members Tedesco, Aukland, D’Avolio, Raiselis; Counsel Shumejda; Engineer/Building Inspector McGarvey; Landscape Architect Yarabek;
Secretary D’Eufemia
ABSENT: Chairman Friedlander
Mr. Tedesco chaired the meeting in Dr. Friedlander’s absence.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The approval of the June 23, 2008, and July 1, 2008, minutes will be held in order to have the required number of assenting votes. (Ms. Raiselis was absent 6/23 and Ms. D’Avolio was absent for a portion of that meeting. Ms. Raiselis and Mr. Tedesco were absent on 7/1/08.)
CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING – HOLY SPIRIT ASSOCIATION FOR THE UNIFICATION OF WORLD CHRISTIANITY – JARDIM ESTATES EAST – BROWNING LANE – SUBDIVISION
Mr. Tedesco stated this matter is being adjourned since the applicant is still preparing the Draft Environmental Impact Statement.
CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING – FORDHAM UNIVERSITY – 100 MARYMOUNT AVENUE – 7-LOT SUBDIVISION
Mr. Tedesco stated this matter is being adjourned at the request of the applicant. He questioned whether anyone wished to address the Board on this matter. No one appeared.
All agreed to continue the public hearing at the Board’s August meeting.
CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING – 455 HOSPITALITY, LLC (DOUBLE TREE HOTEL) – 455 SOUTH BROADWAY
Mr. Richard Blancato, attorney for the applicant, stated he received a copy of a memo from Stephen Yarabek indicating he has approved the landscaping plan, which was the last outstanding item. He noted they submitted plans showing the location for a tent. At this time the application is complete.
Mr. Tedesco questioned whether anyone wished to address the Board on this matter. No one appeared.
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, that the public hearing be closed.
Mr. Tedesco moved, seconded by Mr. Aukland, and unanimously carried, that the Planning Board determines there will be no significant adverse environmental impacts as a result of the proposed site plan amendments.
Mr. Tedesco moved, seconded by Mr. Aukland, and unanimously carried, that the Planning Board approves the site plan amendments for 455 Hospitality, LLC (Double Tree Hotel) subject to:
1. Approval by the Building Inspector.
2. Compliance with the revised landscaping plan dated July 3, 2008, which was approved by the Village Landscape Consultant.
3. Approval by the Village Landscape Consultant of landscaping for the interior courtyard designed to add to the aesthetics without interfering with the desired use for the open area.
4. If use of a tent is desired to accompany a given event being held indoors in the ballroom, a permit must be obtained from the Building Inspector for this purpose.
5. Signing by the Chair of the revised site plan incorporating the modifications in the site plan amendments.
CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARINGS – JARDIM ESTATES – LOTS 2, 3, 12, 13, 14, 15
Mr. Norman Sheer, attorney for the applicant, stated they have been before the Board on several occasions on these lots. There has also been a site visit and several work sessions. The plans have progressed to a point where they are seeking site plan approval.
Mr. Tim Cronin, engineer, stated he believed they have to a great extent addressed the concerns of the Planning Board. Mr. Yarabek has expressed some concern with storm water and/or ground water and those can be addressed without great difficulty. In regard to site layout and orientation and configuration, those are larger scope issues. They feel what they have put together is a reasonable plan. They have some modest areas of steep slopes on Lots 3, 12, and 13 but they have done work to bring those houses out of those slopes as much as possible. The setback requirements of the zoning ordinance have been met.
Lot 2
Mr. Tedesco questioned why the deck on Lot 2 was moved. Mr. Justin Minieri, architect, stated that was done in response to the Board’s comments about having the deck face toward the open space.
Mr. Tedesco referred to the following comment in Mr. Yarabek’s July 21, 2008, memo to the Board: “The proposed grading does not provide adequate side or rear yards for the future homeowners. The proposed grading indicates sloped side and rear yards. The introduction of small, terraced retaining walls would offer the future homeowner more useable portions of the property. The Board should determine if the current grading as proposed is acceptable.” Mr. Cronin stated the slope is 8% to 12% of the yard. If they put retaining walls there would be terraced areas that are 20 ft. to 30 ft. wide. “I think what we are showing, especially in the rear of the house, does have the slope but to the right of the house it is a little flatter. I think what we
have is reasonable.” Mr. Sheer suggested the future homeowner should be given the option of putting in the retaining walls.
Lot 3
Mr. Tedesco referred to the following comment in Mr. Yarabek’s July 21st memo: “The plans must address the storm water runoff from the proposed driveway. Currently, the plans indicate runoff collecting behind the proposed Belgium block curb with no outlet. Item complete, however, the discharge point appears to be in a location that may cause erosion over time. The applicant’s engineer should remedy this conflict.” Mr. Cronin stated there is a yard drain in the driveway with a discharge. They could extend the pipe farther down or make the level spreader larger. “I think what we show is fine but we could add 80 ft. of 6” pipe.”
Mr. Tedesco referred to the following comment in Mr. Yarabek’s memo: “The applicant should provide details for the treatment of the slopes/terraced walls behind the proposed residence. Item complete, however, drainage pipe behind the wall should be added to the proposed detail.” Mr. Cronin stated, “We can do that.”
Lot 12
Mr. Tedesco referred to the following comments in Mr. Yarabek;s July 21st memo:
“Elongate or relocate the proposed rear terrace. Item not addressed.”
“Add a small stone retaining wall or cut the corner of the proposed pavement to the northeast of the proposed garage. Item not addressed. A small retaining wall would eliminate disturbance to steep slope area.”
Mr. Cronin stated Mr. Yarabek is suggesting a small 3 ft. or 4 ft. retaining wall which would relax the slope and that is fine.
Mr. Tedesco referred to the following comment in Mr. Yarabek’s memo:
“Revise the proposed grading (contours 210 to 216) to the west of the proposed residence to save more existing trees, especially those that are part of the historic allee. In my opinion, there is still too much disturbance within the root systems of the existing historic tree allee which will render these trees unsalvageable. Maple trees of this
size and age will not withstand the amount of construction activity as proposed. The submitted tree assessment and evaluation report lists the value of these trees at $227,282.00. If the applicant cannot redesign this site to provide adequate non-disturbance areas for the long term survival of these trees to the satisfaction of the Board, then these trees should be marked for removal and the required value paid to the Village’s tree replacement fund at their assessed value.”
Mr. Inglis of HSA-UWC suggested the Board hold approval of this lot and they can further review this lot.
Lot 15
Mr. Tedesco referred to the following comment in Mr. Yarabek’s July 21st memo:
“Appropriate erosion control measures must be added to the plans. Item complete, however, proposed silt fence should be located parallel to contour lines.”
Mr. Cronin stated, “That is fine.”
Mr. Aukland noted Mr. Yarabek’s July 21st memo made various comments about runoff and drainage and he questioned whether Mr. Cronin was okay with those comments. Mr. Cronin stated he was.
Lot 13
Mr. Tedesco noted on Lot 13 they made an attempt to reposition the house to avoid steep slopes. Mr. Cronin stated they slid the house slightly to the west. There is one section of steep slopes where the house is located that they could do nothing about. He noted he had pointed that out to the Board in the field. They can grade it and put in a retaining wall.
Mr. Aukland stated he will be agreeing to the encroachment on the steep slopes only because the subdivision has been approved and there is no way to avoid the steep slopes.
Mr. Tedesco questioned whether anyone wished to address the Board on any of the site plans – Lots 2, 3, 12, 13, 14, and 15. No one appeared.
LOT 2 – SITE PLAN APPROVAL – 55 GRACEMERE
Mr. Tedesco moved, seconded by Mr. Aukland, and unanimously carried, that the public hearing on the Site Plan for Lot 2 at Jardim Estates, 55 Gracemere, be closed.
Mr. Tedesco moved, seconded by Mr. Aukland, and unanimously carried, that the Planning Board determines there will be no significant adverse environmental impact as a result of the Site Plan for Lot 2 at Jardim Estates, 55 Gracemere.
Mr. Tedesco moved, seconded by Mr. Aukland, and unanimously carried, that the Planning Board approves the Site Plan for Lot 2 at Jardim Estates, 55 Gracemere, with the following conditions:
1. Approval by the Building Inspector/Village Engineer.
2. Compliance with all items contained in the resolution of approval for the preliminary subdivision dated November 24, 2003, and revised January 26, 2004.
3. The above-noted resolution included but was not limited to the following:
(a) approval of the final landscaping and screening plan by the Village Landscape Consultant; all plantings must be native species or non-invasive ornamentals and any deviation from this must be approved by the Village Landscape Consultant.
(b) approval by the Architectural Review Board.
(c) payment of applicable recreation and escrow fees before the issuance of a building permit.
(d) a detailed tree protection and tree preservation plan to be approved by the Village Landscape Consultant.
(e) if any trees which are designated to be preserved are damaged due to site work and subsequently need to be removed, the applicant agrees to replace them in kind. If this is not possible, payment of the assessed values of the trees to the Village tree replacement fund will be required or the planting of multiple trees approved by the Village Landscape Consultant.
4 Adherence to the section of the zoning code dealing with the tree replacement fund for the removal of any trees with a 10 inch caliper or greater or alternative remediation elsewhere on the project as approved by the Village Landscape Consultant with a proportionality schedule approved by the Village Landscape Consultant.
5. The applicant agrees to perform any treatment and pruning of existing trees deemed necessary by the Village Landscape Consultant at a time the consultant deems most appropriate.
6. Use of construction equipment no larger than a 315 CAT excavator and a 416 CAT backhoe without approval by the Building Inspector to prevent damage to trees.
7. The driveway will be permeable pavers (eco-pavers) or pavers approved by the Building Inspector.
8. Landscape Consultant or Arborist chosen by the Planning Board is to be on site when trees are removed. Trees that have been approved for removal will be marked in the field. The cost of the consultant will be borne by the applicant.
9. The signing of the final site plan by the Planning Board chair.
10. The Planning Board approves the needed variance in height of the building (32 feet). The Board approves this variance given that the home was sited to best fit the natural topography and, in doing so, sits low in that topography. In addition, the house is set back from the road and affords a maximum protection of trees to preserve the wooded nature of the site.
11. The proposed grading indicates sloped side and rear yards. The buyer of the home should be presented the option of adding small, terraced retaining walls which could make the property more useable by providing larger yards.
LOT 3 – SITE PLAN APPROVAL – 8 EMERALD WOODS
Mr. Tedesco moved, seconded by Mr. Aukland, and unanimously carried, that the public hearing on the Site Plan for Lot 3 at Jardim Estates, 8 Emerald Woods, be closed.
Mr. Tedesco moved, seconded by Mr. Aukland, and unanimously carried, that the Planning Board determines there will be no significant adverse environmental impact as a result of the Site Plan for Lot 3 at Jardim Estates, 8 Emerald Woods.
Mr. Tedesco moved, seconded by Mr. Aukland, and unanimously carried, that the Planning Board approves the Site Plan for Lot 3 at Jardim Estates, 8 Emerald Woods, with the following conditions:
1. Approval by the Building Inspector/Village Engineer.
2. Compliance with all items contained in the resolution of approval for the preliminary subdivision dated November 24, 2003, and revised January 26, 2004.
3. The above-noted resolution included but was not limited to the following:
a. approval of the final landscaping and screening plan by the Village Landscape Consultant; all plantings must be native species or non-invasive ornamentals and any deviation from this must be approved by the Village Landscape Consultant.
b. approval by the Architectural Review Board.
c. payment of applicable recreation and escrow fees before the issuance of a building permit.
d. a detailed tree protection and tree preservation plan to be approved by the Village Landscape Consultant.
e. if any trees which are designated to be preserved are damaged due to site work and subsequently need to be removed, the applicant agrees to replace them in kind. If this is not possible, payment of the assessed values of thetrees to the Village tree replacement fund will be required or the planting
of multiple trees approved by the Village Landscape Consultant.
4. Adherence to the section of the zoning code dealing with the tree replacement fund for the removal of any trees with a 10 inch caliper or greater or alternative remediation elsewhere on the project as approved by the Village Landscape Consultant with a proportionality schedule approved by the Village Landscape Consultant.
5. The applicant agrees to perform any treatment and pruning of existing trees deemed necessary by the Village Landscape Consultant at a time the consultant deems most appropriate.
6. Use of construction equipment no larger than a 315 CAT excavator and a 416 CAT backhoe without approval by the Building Inspector to prevent damage to trees.
7. The driveway will be permeable pavers (eco-pavers) or pavers approved by the Building Inspector.
8. Landscape Consultant or Arborist chosen by the Planning Board is to be on site when trees are removed. Trees that have been approved for removal will be marked in the field. The cost of the consultant will be borne by the applicant.
9. The signing of the final site plan by the Planning Board chair.
10. The Planning approves the needed variance in height of the building (36’ 10”) The Board approves this variance given that the home was sited to best fit the natural topography and, in doing so, sits low in that topography. In addition, the house is set back from the road and affords a maximum protection of trees to preserve the wooded nature of the site.
11. The Board approves the needed disturbance of steep slopes to do necessary
grading in the rear of the home. Moving the home away from the small steep
slope area would result in significant loss of trees and place the house very close
to the road.
12. The applicant will install a fence around the perimeter of the storm water retention basin, this fencing to be approved by the Building Inspector/Village Engineer.
13. The discharge point for storm water run-off from the proposed driveway appears to be in a location that may cause erosion over time. The applicant’s engineer
should remedy this problem. Such remedy is to be approved by the Village Engineer and shown on the final approved site plan.
14. For the terraced walls behind the proposed residence, the drainage pipe behind the wall should be added to the proposed detail.
LOT 13 – SITE PLAN APPROVAL – 58 GRACEMERE
Mr. Tedesco moved, seconded by Mr. Aukland, and unanimously carried, that the public hearing on the Site Plan for Lot 13 at Jardim Estates, 58 Gracemere, be closed.
Mr. Tedesco moved, seconded by Mr. Aukland, and unanimously carried, that the Planning Board determines there will be no significant adverse environmental impact as a result of the Site Plan for Lot 13 at Jardim Estates, 58 Gracemere.
Mr. Tedesco moved, seconded by Mr. Aukland, and unanimously carried, that the Planning Board approves the Site Plan for Lot 13 at Jardim Estates, 58 Gracemere, with the following conditions:
1. Approval by the Building Inspector/Village Engineer.
2. Compliance with all items contained in the resolution of approval for the preliminary subdivision dated November 24, 2003, and revised January 26, 2004.
3. The above-noted resolution included but was not limited to the following:
a. approval of the final landscaping and screening plan by the Village Landscape Consultant; all plantings must be native species or non-invasive ornamentals and any deviation from this must be approved by the Village Landscape Consultant.
b. approval by the Architectural Review Board.
c. payment of applicable recreation and escrow fees before the issuance of a building permit.
d. a detailed tree protection and tree preservation plan to be approved by the
Village Landscape Consultant.
e. if any trees which are designated to be preserved are damaged due to site work and subsequently need to be removed, the applicant agrees to replace them in kind. If this is not possible, payment of the assessed values of the trees to the Village tree replacement fund will be required or the planting of multiple trees approved by the Village Landscape Consultant.
4 Adherence to the section of the zoning code dealing with the tree replacement fund for the removal of any trees with a 10 inch caliper or greater or alternative remediation elsewhere on the project as approved by the Village Landscape Consultant with a proportionality schedule approved by the Village Landscape Consultant.
5. The applicant agrees to perform any treatment and pruning of existing trees deemed necessary by the Village Landscape Consultant at a time the consultant deems most appropriate.
6. Use of construction equipment no larger than a 315 CAT excavator and a 416 CAT backhoe without approval by the Building Inspector to prevent damage to trees.
7. The driveway will be permeable pavers (eco-pavers) or pavers approved by the
Building Inspector.
8. Landscape Consultant or Arborist chosen by the Planning Board is to be on site when trees are removed. Trees that have been approved for removal will be marked in the field. The cost of the consultant will be borne by the applicant.
9. The signing of the final site plan by the Planning Board chair.
10. The Planning Board approves the very small variance needed for minimum street frontage (147.4 feet.)
11. The Planning Board approves the very small disturbance of steep slopes, given that the home was best sited to fit the natural topography, resulting in the maximum protection of trees to preserve the wooded nature of the site and also to set the house back from the road.
LOT 14 – SITE PLAN APPROVAL – 56 GRACEMERE
Mr. Tedesco moved, seconded by Mr. Aukland, and unanimously carried, that the public hearing on the Site Plan for Lot 14 at Jardim Estates, 56 Gracemere, be closed.
Mr. Tedesco moved, seconded by Mr. Aukland, and unanimously carried, that the Planning Board determines there will be no significant adverse environmental impact as a result of the Site Plan for Lot 14 at Jardim Estates, 56 Gracemere.
Mr. Tedesco moved, seconded by Mr. Aukland, and unanimously carried, that the Planning Board approves the Site Plan for Lot 14 at Jardim Estates, 56 Gracemere, with the following conditions:
1. Approval by the Building Inspector/Village Engineer.
2. Compliance with all items contained in the resolution of approval for the preliminary subdivision dated November 24, 2003, and revised January 26, 2004.
3. The above-noted resolution included but was not limited to the following:
a. approval of the final landscaping and screening plan by the Village Landscape Consultant; all plantings must be native species or non-invasive ornamentals and any deviation from this must be approved by the Village Landscape Consultant.
b. approval by the Architectural Review Board.
c. payment of applicable recreation and escrow fees before the issuance of a building permit.
d. a detailed tree protection and tree preservation plan to be approved by the Village Landscape Consultant.
e .if any trees which are designated to be preserved are damaged due to site work and subsequently need to be removed, the applicant agrees to replace them in kind. If this is not possible, payment of the assessed values of the trees to the Village tree replacement fund will be required or the planting of multiple trees approved by the Village Landscape Consultant.
4. Adherence to the section of the zoning code dealing with the tree replacement fund for the removal of any trees with a 10 inch caliper or greater or alternative remediation elsewhere on the project as approved by the Village Landscape Consultant with a proportionality schedule approved by the Village Landscape Consultant.
5 The applicant agrees to perform any treatment and pruning of existing trees deemed necessary by the Village Landscape Consultant at a time the consultant deems most appropriate.
6 Use of construction equipment no larger than a 315 CAT excavator and a 416 CAT backhoe without approval by the Building Inspector to prevent damage to trees.
7. The driveway will be permeable pavers (eco-pavers) or pavers approved by the Building Inspector.
8. Landscape Consultant or Arborist chosen by the Planning Board is to be on site when trees are removed. Trees that have been approved for removal will be marked in the field. The cost of the consultant will be borne by the applicant.
9. The signing of the final site plan by the Planning Board chair.
LOT 15 – SITE PLAN APPROVAL – 54 GRACEMERE
Mr. Tedesco moved, seconded by Mr. Aukland, and unanimously carried, that the public hearing on the Site Plan for Lot 15 at Jardim Estates, 54 Gracemere, be closed.
Mr. Tedesco moved, seconded by Mr. Aukland, and unanimously carried, that the Planning Board determines there will be no significant adverse environmental impact as a result of the Site Plan for Lot 15 at Jardim Estates, 54 Gracemere.
Mr. Tedesco moved, seconded by Mr. Aukland, and unanimously carried, that the Planning Board approves the Site Plan for Lot 15 at Jardim Estates, 54 Gracemere, with the following conditions:
1. Approval by the Building Inspector/Village Engineer.
2. Compliance with all items contained in the resolution of approval for the preliminary subdivision dated November 24, 2003, and revised January 26, 2004.
3. The above-noted resolution included but was not limited to the following:
a. approval of the final landscaping and screening plan by the Village Landscape Consultant; all plantings must be native species or non-invasive ornamentals and any deviation from this must be approved by the Village Landscape Consultant.
b. approval by the Architectural Review Board.
c. payment of applicable recreation and escrow fees before the issuance of a building permit.
d. a detailed tree protection and tree preservation plan to be approved by the
Village Landscape Consultant.
e. if any trees which are designated to be preserved are damaged due to site work and subsequently need to be removed, the applicant agrees to replace them in kind. If this is not possible, payment of the assessed values of the trees to the Village tree replacement fund will be required or the planting of multiple trees approved by the Village Landscape Consultant.
4. Adherence to the section of the zoning code dealing with the tree replacement fund for the removal of any trees with a 10 inch caliper or greater or alternative remediation elsewhere on the project as approved by the Village Landscape Consultant with a proportionality schedule approved by the Village Landscape Consultant.
5. The applicant agrees to perform any treatment and pruning of existing trees deemed necessary by the Village Landscape Consultant at a time the consultant deems most appropriate.
6. Use of construction equipment no larger than a 315 CAT excavator and a 416 CAT backhoe without approval by the Building Inspector to prevent damage to trees.
7. The driveway will be permeable pavers (eco-pavers) or pavers approved by the Building Inspector.
8 .Landscape Consultant or Arborist chosen by the Planning Board is to be on site when trees are removed. Trees that have been approved for removal will be marked in the field. The cost of the consultant will be borne by the applicant.
9. The signing of the final site plan by the Planning Board chair.
10. The Planning Board approves the very small variance needed for minimum width at the front of the building (145.1 feet) and also the variance needed for minimum street frontage (104 feet.) The Board approves these variances given the special characteristics of the lot. The home was best sited to fit the natural topography, resulting in a maximum protection of trees to preserve the wooded nature of the lot. This lot will probably be the most wooded lot in the subdivision and will also have the house well set back from the road.
11. The proposed silt fence should be located parallel to the contour lines.
PUBLIC HEARING – LENIKA REALTY, LLC – 132 NORTH BROADWAY
The Chairman 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, July 28, 2008, at 7:00 p.m. at the Municipal Building, One Depot Plaza, Tarrytown, New York, to hear and consider an application by:
Lenika Realty, LLC
132 North Broadway
Tarrytown, New York 10591
To consider the application for site development plan approval for property they own at the above address to construct one four-unit apartment building with 9 additional parking spaces.
The property is shown on the Tax Maps of the Village of Tarrytown as Sheet 4, Block 15, Lot 1 and is located in an M-2 (Multi-Family) 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 Jankovitz, architect, stated the building is at the intersection of Broadway and Cobb Lane. There is an existing eleven unit building and there is parking along Broadway and Cobb Lane. There are approximately 17 spaces today. They are proposing to have 27 spaces. The building will be four stories in the rear and three stories facing Broadway. There is a six-story brick apartment building to the south of this property. Site runoff will be in tanks under the parking area. Landscaping will be enhanced along Cobb Lane and Broadway. The proposed building will mimic the existing eleven unit building. The apartments will all be two-bedroom units.
Upon inquiry from Mr. Tedesco, Mr. Jankovitz stated 40 parking spaces are required. Mr. Tedesco stated the Board would need to see a plan showing how those 40 spaces could be laid out on the property without disturbing the steep slopes and allowing fire access. Mr. Jankovitz stated they sent a letter to the fire department on July 4th. They have not heard back from them. He stated they can show they can place 37 spaces which would stay out of the steep slopes and not affect circulation for the fire department. They cannot meet the requirements of 40 parking spaces for the site. Ms. Raiselis stated if they reduced the proposal to three units, they could then meet the parking requirement of 37 spaces.
Mr. McGarvey stated at the last meeting the Village Attorney said the setback needed to be 60 feet. Mr. Jankovitz stated if that interpretation is used, then this building would not be able to fit on the site. The ordinance only allows four units per building. Counsel Shumejda stated he had referred to Section 305-14 of the Zoning Ordinance which says that separate buildings have separate setbacks. He added that a plan must also be submitted that shows 40 parking spaces. The steep slopes also need to be shown on the plan.
Mr. Tedesco reported that the Board received a letter dated July 8, 2008, from the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation requesting a Phase I archeological study and building plans. Mr. Jankovitz stated they have sent the drawings to New York State Parks and asked them to recommend an archeologist.
Mr. Jankovitz stated the major issue is the setback. Sixty feet would negate the project.
Ms. Gina Kotaj, a prinicipal of the property, stated they were under the impression they met the setback and the only issue was the parking. She noted she would have had her attorney present tonight if she had known the setback was an issue. Mr. McGarvey stated he would look into how this section of the ordinance has been interpreted in the past.
Mr. Jankovitz stated they reviewed the current parking on the site. The eleven units have fifteen cars. Board members noted the property actually has twelve units because there is also a carriage house on the property.
Mr. Frank Kotaj, a principal of the property, stated the eleven unit apartment building has small rooms and four are studios. Three are one bedroom; three are two bedrooms; and one has three bedrooms. There are 16 tenants in total. Mr. Kotaj stated the building has been that way since he bought it.
Mr. Tedesco stated the Planning Board needs to see the maximum attempt to comply with all zoning issues and then they can take into account specific situations.
Ms. D’Avolio noted the Board had also asked for a plan showing the exterior of the property being upgraded. Mr. Kotash stated he had no problem providing that.
Mr. Tedesco moved, seconded by Mr. Aukland, and unanimously carried, that the Planning Board declares itself Lead Agency on this application.
All agreed to continue the hearing at the Board’s next meeting.
PRELIMINARY PRESENTATION – CREEGAN PROPERTIES, LLC – 109 CENTRAL AVENUE
Mr. Tedesco reported that the applicant’s architect could not be present this evening and has requested an adjournment.
Mr. Tedesco moved, seconded by Mr. Aukland, and unanimously carried, to set an escrow account of $2,500 on this application.
Mr. Tedesco moved, seconded by Mr. Aukland, and unanimously carried, that the Board declares its Intent to be Lead Agency on this application.
PRELIMINARY PRESENTATION – SLEEPY HOLLOW GARDENS – 177 WHITE PLAINS ROAD
Mr. James Staudt, attorney for the applicant, stated the application is to amend the site plan for Sleepy Hollow Gardens to add 60 new parking spaces. Parking is short at this complex and it would be beneficial to increase the parking count.
Mr. Steve Grogg, engineer, stated the existing property is 22.7 acres. There is R7.5 zoning to the east, M-3 and OB zoning to the west and across the street is MU and OB. They are proposing the parking at three different locations on the property. One area will have 17 spaces, another 21, and a third will have 22. There are 215 apartments which currently have 242 parking spaces. The additional 60 will bring that up to 302 which increases the ratio to 1.4 spaces per unit. The parking will increase the impervious area. There will be underground storm water systems designed for a 25-year storm. There is a small area of steep slope where there will be a low 2 ft. to 3 ft. retaining wall to save an existing tree.
Mr. Tedesco stated the Board would need to see the drainage details and the square footage of steep slopes. Mr. Grogg stated Parking Area 1 is approximately 225 sq. ft. of steep slopes and Parking Area 3 is approximately 4,100 sq. ft. of steep slopes. He stated he would add the numbers to the plan.
Ms. Raiselis stated the Village’s Landscape Architect needs to review the trees proposed to be removed.
The Board stated the 10 ft. separation between parking and buildings needs to be shown.
Mr. Tedesco stated there should be a zoning table showing all variances that would be required. It should also show the number of units, current amount of parking, proposed amount of parking, steep slopes, percentage of impervious surface currently and with this proposal.
Upon inquiry from Mr. Tedesco, Mr. Grogg stated there are 82 garages.
Mr. Tedesco stated parking at this complex has been a problem for over thirty years. He questioned why they were proposing the increase at this time. Mr. Brian McCarthy from Samson Management stated the parking is affecting their rental of the units. They have been studying this for about a year.
Mr. Tedesco stated, “I appreciate your trying to do this for the tenants. What concerns me is Area 3 with 4,100 sq. ft. of steep slopes and an 11 ft. retaining wall. You should deal with that in some way and perhaps think of permeable material for the new spaces.”
Mr. Aukland questioned whether they had considered parking structures. Mr. Grogg stated there would not be enough room for ramping at any of the proposed locations.
The Board requested that 15% to 25% slopes be hatched on the plans.
Mr. Tedesco moved, seconded by Mr. Aukland, and unanimously carried, to set an escrow account of $2,500 on this application.
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 a public hearing on this application for the August meeting.
PRELIMINARY PRESENTATION – CRESCENT ASSOCIATES – 153-155 WHITE PLAINS ROAD – SUBDIVISION
Mr. Don Walsh, representing the applicant, stated they have been working on a subdivision plan for the site. They have a not-for-profit looking at the proposed building in the back and they will require ownership. They have worked on a plan with the least intrusive variances.
Mr. Tedesco stated the subdivision plan should show the approved site plan for the new building. They will need an easement over the property for access. All the conditions that apply to the site plan approval for the new building would have to be adhered to by the new owner of the property.
Mr. Tedesco moved, seconded by Mr. Aukland, and unanimously carried, to set an escrow account of $2,500 on this application.
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 a public hearing on this application for the August meeting.
PRELIMINARY PRESENTATION – JOSEPH DENARDO – 118 SHELDON AVENUE
The Secretary advised that the project architect had called to say he could not be present this evening because of a scheduling conflict.
Mr. Aukland stated the application is not complete. The plans are not conforming with the zoning ordinance. He requested the Village Attorney send a letter to the applicant citing the areas of non-compliance; e.g. F.A.R., coverage, impervious surface.
Mr. Tedesco moved, seconded by Mr. Aukland, and unanimously carried, to set an escrow account of $2,500 on this application.
Mr. Tedesco moved, seconded by Mr. Aukland, and unanimously carried, that the Board declares its Intent to be Lead Agency on this application.
PRELIMINARY PRESENTATION – WRIGHT/MARVIN – 3 HALF MOON LANE
The Secretary advised that the project architect had called to say he could not be present this evening.
Mr. Aukland stated additional information should be requested – proposed tree removals, additional landscaping plans and proposed screening for the front porch.
Mr. Tedesco moved, seconded by Mr. Aukland, and unanimously carried, to set an escrow account of $2,500 on this application.
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 a public hearing on this application for the August meeting.
ADJOURNMENT
Mr. Tedesco moved, seconded by Mr. Aukland, and unanimously carried, that the meeting be adjourned – 8:50 p.m.
Kathleen D’Eufemia
Secretary
| 
