Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005-01-11 - Board of Trustees Meeting Minutes REGULAR MEETING VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK BOARD OF TRUSTEES MEETING VILLAGE HALL, 938 KING STREET TUESDAY, JANUARY 11, 2005-7:30 P.M ROLL CALL PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1) Consideration of a Local Law to amend Chapter 240 of the Code of the Village of Rye Brook to prohibit parking along portions of West Ridge Drive. 2) Consideration of a Local Law to amend Chapter 240 of the Code of the Village of Rye Brook to prohibit parking along portions of Talcott Road. 3) Consideration of a Local Law amending Chapter 250 of the Code of the Village of Rye Brook regarding hours of operation for home occupations. 4) Consideration of a Local Law amending Chapters 78 and 170 of the Village Code regarding the use of Rye Hills Park for dog walking. RESOLUTIONS: 1) Consideration of a Local Law to amend Chapter 240 of the Code of the Village of Rye Brook to prohibit parking along portions of West Ridge Drive. 2) Consideration of a Local Law to amend Chapter 240 of the Code of the Village of Rye Brook to prohibit parking along portions of Talcott Road. 3) Consideration of a Local Law amending Chapter 250 of the Code of the Village of Rye Brook regarding hours of operation for home occupations. 4) Consideration of a Local Law amending Chapters 78 and 170 of the Village Code regarding the use of Rye Hills Park for dog walking. Board of Trustees Meeting January 11,2005 Page 1 5) Referring an application by Nextel for Special Use Permit and Site Plan approval to construct a wireless telecommunications facility adjacent at Village Hall property, 938 King Street, Rye Brook, New York, Section 1, Block 129.68, Lot 14. 6) Authorizing the law firm of Sive, Paget and Reisel to act as special counsel for the Village of Rye Brook regarding a Nextel cellular phone tower application. 7) Setting a Public Hearing date on a Local Law adopting the provisions of real property tax law, Section 1903, concerning homestead base proportions. 8) Setting a Public Hearing on a Local Law to amend Chapter 250 of the Village Code regarding Special Use Permits for Home Occupations. 9) Designating polling locations and hours for the 2005 Village election on March 15, 2005. 10) Authorizing an amendment to the agreement between the Village of Rye Brook and the Thomas Group for architectural services for the King Street Athletic Fields proj ect. 11)Setting a date for a Public Hearing on a Local Law to amend the Village Code concerning permit parking on Neuton Avenue, Tamarack Road and College Avenue. 12)Approving the 2005 DWI agreement between Westchester County and the Village of Rye Brook. 13)Approving Minutes: July 13, 2004; August 10, 2004; September 14, 2004; September 28, 2004; October 12, 2004; October 18, 2004; October 26, 2004; November 9, 2004; November 23, 2004; December 14, 2004. ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT OLD BUSINESS NEW BUSINESS Board of Trustees Meeting January 11,2005 Page 2 DISCUSSION ITEM 1) Planning Board authority Local Law modification. 2) Direction on amendments to Chapter 214 of the Village Code regarding Sprinkler Systems. ACTION ON NON-AGENDA MATTERS SUBJECT TO THE CONSENT OF THE TRUSTEES PRESENT AT THE MEETING THE NEXT TRUSTEES MEETINGS: January 25, 2005 and February 8, 2005 BOARD Mayor Lawrence Rand Trustee Richard Buzin Trustee Joan Feinstein Trustee Robert Harris Trustee Dean Santon STAFF: Christopher Bradbury, Village Administrator Keith E. Rang, Assistant to the Village Administrator Edward Beane, Esq., Village Counsel Marilyn Timpone-Mohamed, Village Consultant Fred Seifert, Public Access Coordinator CONVENE Mayor Rand called the meeting to order, beginning with the Pledge of Allegiance. He welcomed everyone to the January 11, 2005 Board of Trustees meeting. Board of Trustees Meeting January 11,2005 Page 3 Mayor Rand called for the first item on the agenda: PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1) CONSIDERATION OF A LOCAL LAW TO AMEND CHAPTER 240 OF THE CODE OF THE VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK TO PROHIBIT PARKING ALONG PORTIONS OF WEST RIDGE DRIVE. Mayor Rand opened the public hearing, and asked for comments from members of the Board. Trustee Richard Buzin noted that at the last Traffic Commission meeting this issue was discussed. He felt that there seems to be a difference of opinion between different segments within in the Village regarding whether or not parking should be prohibited on West Ridge. He felt that additional input is required, especially from the residents of West Ridge before a decision is made. Trustee Joan Feinstein asked if there was any type of accident record available for this area. She was concerned about safety. Chief Theodore Sabato addressed the Board. He noted that he reviewed this matter and found that there really have not been any accidents in this area. It was his opinion that this was not a safety issue as the width of the roadway can accommodate on-street parking. Mr. Donald Cassone, the owner of the property on the corner of West Ridge and North Ridge Street, addressed the Board. He noted that a traffic survey was completed, but he was unable to obtain a copy. This matter came up when the residents of this area expressed a concern regarding the Verizon trucks that were parking in tandem at this corner. At this time the trucks have stopped parking in this area and the residents do not see a need to prohibit parking on West Ridge. Trustee Dean Santon noted that the genesis of this matter was the parking of the Verizon trucks, and the safety issue that these trucks caused. There was a recommendation to prohibit parking 50' from the corner of West Ridge. Mr. Bradbury noted that state Statue prohibits parking within 30' of a stop sign. Trustee Santon suggested a sign that says, "No Parking Here to Corner" be installed at this intersection. Mr. Victor Carosi, Village Engineer, noted that he reviewed this matter and found this to be one of the wider roads within the Village. As noted, the existing state laws prohibit parking in that area. There are no further safety issues on this street that would require no parking areas. He stated that it would not be a problem to install a sign, which would also enable the police department to enforce the law. Board of Trustees Meeting January 11,2005 Page 4 Bruce Yaowitz of 3 West Ridge Drive addressed the Board. He noted that no one parks between his driveway, the coiner property, and the stop sign. He also felt that there was no hazard and that parking should not be prohibited. He also felt that the installation of a sign was unnecessary. Mayor Rand called for a motion to close the public hearing. On a motion made by Trustee Santon, and seconded by Trustee Feinstein, the public hearing was closed. TRUSTEE BUZIN VOTING AYE TRUSTEE FEINSTEIN VOTING AYE TRUSTEE HARRIS VOTING AYE TRUSTEE SANTON VOTING AYE MAYOR RAND VOTING AYE Mayor Rand called for the resolution on this matter. 1) CONSIDERATION OF A LOCAL LAW TO AMEND CHAPTER 240 OF THE CODE OF THE VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK TO PROHIBIT PARKING ALONG PORTIONS OF WEST RIDGE DRIVE Mr. Bradbury read the resolution. RESOLUTION CONSIDERATION OF A LOCAL LAW TO AMEND CHAPTER 240 OF THE CODE OF THE VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK TO PROHIBIT PARKING ALONG PORTIONS OF WEST RIDGE DRIVE RESOLVED, that the Board of Trustees hereby adopts Local Law #1-2005 to amend Chapter 240 of the Code of the Village of Rye Brook to prohibit parking along portions of West Ridge Drive. On a motion made by Trustee Santon, and seconded by Trustee Feinstein, the resolution was opened to discussion. The consensus of the Board was that there was no need to prohibit parking on West Ridge. Board of Trustees Meeting January 11,2005 Page 5 The roll was called: TRUSTEE BUZIN VOTING NAY TRUSTEE FEINSTEIN VOTING NAY TRUSTEE HARRIS VOTING NAY TRUSTEE SANTON VOTING NAY MAYOR RAND VOTING NAY Mayor Rand called for the second public hearing on the agenda. 2) CONSIDERATION OF A LOCAL LAW TO AMEND CHAPTER 240 OF THE CODE OF THE VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK TO PROHIBIT PARKING ALONG PORTIONS OF TALCOTT ROAD. Mr. Bradbury noted that this proposed amendment would prohibit parking on Talcott Road. Steven Prince, the President of the Talcott Woods Homeowners Association, addressed the Board. He presented the Board with a rendering of the area. He noted that the traffic has been increasing over the years. The residents appreciate whatever can be done to help keep this area safe. No parking on the blind curves would be helpful. He also suggested the installation of two stop signs on Talcott, the installation of 15 mph speed limit signs, and speed bumps. Mr. Bradbury noted that these issues would be referred to the Traffic Commission for review and recommendation. The resident of 4 Talcott Road addressed the Board. He agreed that the cars on Talcott are speeding. He felt that lowering the speed limit would be helpful. The resident of 68 Talcott addressed the Board. He noted that there are blind curves on Talcott, and that over the years there have been many near misses. He felt that prohibiting the parking would help. On a motion made by Trustee Santon, and seconded by Trustee Feinstein, the public hearing was closed. Board of Trustees Meeting January 11,2005 Page 6 Mr. Rang called the roll: TRUSTEE BUZIN VOTING AYE TRUSTEE FEINSTEIN VOTING AYE TRUSTEE HARRIS VOTING AYE TRUSTEE SANTON VOTING AYE MAYOR RAND VOTING AYE Mayor Rand called for the resolution on this matter. 3) CONSIDERATION OF A LOCAL LAW TO AMEND CHAPTER 240 OF THE CODE OF THE VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK TO PROHIBIT PARKING ALONG PORTIONS OF TALCOTT ROAD. Mr. Bradbury read the resolution. RESOLUTION ADOPTING A LOCAL LAW TO AMEND CHAPTER 240 OF THE VILLAGE CODE TO PROHIBIT PARKING ALONG PORTIONS OF TALCOTT ROAD WHEREAS, the Village of Rye Brook Traffic Commission has requested that Ch. 240 of the Code of the Village of Rye Brook be amended to prohibit parking and standing along portions of Talcott Road; and WHEREAS, a local law has been proposed to amend Ch. 240 to prohibit parking and standing along Talcott Road from Lincoln Avenue to a point 250 feet east thereof, and from 19 Talcott Road to 25 Talcott Road, a distance of approximately 463 feet; and WHEREAS, a duly noticed public hearing was held at a meeting of the Board of Trustees of the Village of Rye Brook on January 11, 2005, at which time all those wishing to be heard on behalf of or in opposition to the proposed local law, or any part thereof, were given the opportunity to be heard and the hearing was closed on January 11, 2005; and Board of Trustees Meeting January 11,2005 Page 7 WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees of the Village of Rye Brook has complied with the provisions of the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act and has determined that the adoption of the proposed local law is a "Type IP" action and, therefore, no further environmental review of the proposed action is required; and WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees of the Village of Rye Brook after due deliberation, finds it is in the best interest of the Village to adopt such local law. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Trustees of the Village of Rye Brook adopts the proposed local law to amend Chapter 240 of the Code of the Village of Rye Brook to prohibit parking and standing along Talcott Road from Lincoln Avenue to a point 250 feet east thereof, and from 19 Talcott Road to 25 Talcott Road, a distance of approximately 463 feet; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Mayor and the Village Clerk are authorized to sign all necessary documents to implement the purposes of this resolution. On a motion made by Trustee Santon and seconded by Trustee Buzin, the following resolution was adopted: TRUSTEE BUZIN VOTING AYE TRUSTEE FEINSTEIN VOTING AYE TRUSTEE HARRIS VOTING AYE TRUSTEE SANTON VOTING AYE MAYOR RAND VOTING AYE 4) CONSIDERATION OF A LOCAL LAW AMENDING CHAPTER 250 OF THE CODE OF THE VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK REGARDING HOURS OF OPERATION FOR HOME OCCUPATIONS. Mayor Rand declared the public hearing open. Mr. Bradbury noted that these proposed amendments were in connection with Tier II and Tier III home occupation uses. These amendments would change the hours of operations based upon the review of the particular characteristics of the use. Tier I is the least Board of Trustees Meeting January 11,2005 Page 8 intrusive home occupation. It is low volume, with no visitors. Tier II and Tier III are the more commercial uses and have heavier traffic. Trustee Robert Harris stated his objections on this matter. He felt that the way that the Village was going about these amendments was unfair. He noted that many of these home occupations serve our community and it was unfair to change their hours of operation. Trustee Feinstein stated that the need for residents to have a home occupation must be weighed against the needs of the surrounding residents. She also felt that many of these home occupations have served the community very well for many years and that they should be grandfathered. Trustee Santon stated that the prior Board passed a law to require an annual registration of home occupations. He noted that very few residents registered. He felt that if there were uses that would be harmed by these changes then they should register, and come before the Board with their concerns and requests for relief. He noted that there have been many complaints from residents regarding uses that have gotten out of hand. If a home occupation has adverse impacts, then they should be reviewed. Trustee Feinstein noted that the hours of operation have been reviewed over the past several months. She felt that changing the time unilaterally was unfair and that each home occupation should be reviewed on its own merits. The Board understands that many home occupations have been around for many years and this must be taken into consideration. Trustee Buzin agreed, noting that it would be unfair to change what residents have been doing for years based upon this law. Mayor Rand stated that the residents' rights and the rights of the neighboring homeowners must be taken into consideration. Codes and policies should not be created to deal with specific situations. There are other ways that these matters can be handled, i.e. a variance or litigation. He stated that he was not in favor of the amendments. Jim Staudt, Esq., of the firm of McCullough, Goldberger and Staudt, addressed the Board as legal counsel for Dr. Stanley Okun. He stated that a letter was submitted by his firm to the Village. He submitted additional letters from residents and patients in support of this home occupation. He felt that a resident that has practiced for over 20 years, serving the community, should be allowed to continue to do so. As he felt that it was the sense from the Board that they would not move Board of Trustees Meeting January 11,2005 Page 9 forward, he curtailed his comments but stated that if the circumstances changed he reserved the right to return before the Board. Trustee Buzin noted that he would not vote in favor of the amendments unless there was a grandfather clause. He felt that it would be unfair to the residents who have been conducting home occupations for years to be effected by these changes. Trustee Santon stated that these amendments, in his opinion, were not aimed at a specific use. He felt that it would be impossible to target the problem uses if there was no specific local law. There are certain Home Occupation that do have impacts on the community, whether it be parking or excessive comings and goings at all hours of the day. People are entitled to earn a living, but people are also entitled to the enjoyment of their residence. After a brief discussion, Edward Beane, Esq., Village Counsel, stated that the change being suggested in this resolution was a change that would require all of the uses to obtain a Special Use Permit. The resolution, as written, simply reflects a reduction of two hours at the end of the day. There is an ordinance that tells users that they cannot practice a Tier II home occupation after 6:00 p.m. or on the weekends, or before 8:00 a.m. Issues regarding parking are Zoning issues and are handled that way. Extreme issues can be handled by the Supreme Court. The Village of Rye Brook is interested in having everyone comply with the law. The purpose of the registration of home occupation is to make sure that the Tier I, Tier II, and Tier III Home Occupations, particularly the pre-existing non-conforming uses, continue the way they were. This ordinance permits anyone who feels that they are not being treated fairly to come in and explain why their operation, their use, should have special hours. You can't grandfather a specific use. Former Village Trustee Jody Brackman addressed the Board. She noted that this is a society where a lot of people live in close proximity to each other. We all have to learn how to get along, and make compromises. She felt that this ordinance would create a less-friendly Village as time goes on. She asked the Board to consider how much regulation makes sense. The resident of 274 North Ridge Street addressed the Board. He noted that he has lived directly across the street from Dr. Okun for the past 20 years. He stated that he has no problem with his occupation. He did, however, have a problem with the Board trying to regulate pre-existing uses that happened before the Village was even formed. He felt that these uses should be grandfathered. He felt that there should be some flexibility regarding the hours, especially in the case of an emergency. Board of Trustees Meeting January 11,2005 Page 10 The resident of 48 North Ridge Street addressed the Board. He noted that there was a Home Occupation next to his residence. Currently the Village Code allows for operation of a Home Occupation five days a week, from 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. That is 60 hours a week. He noted that his neighbor books approximately 125 patients in that period of time. These are not "emergency" cases. This Home Occupation user puts dollars first, and does not want to pay for commercial space. Tier II does not allow for more than five visits per week, however, this Home Occupation has more than five visits per week. He asked that the Village grant some relief. The Home Occupations do have an effect on neighbors, and their quality of life. He felt that changing the hours from 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. for a residential area was generous. This is a home first, and a business second. He stated that no one would like over 100 cars a week going in and out of a neighbors' property with alarms beeping, doors slamming, and headlights shinning into their home. Another resident, and neighbor of the doctor, addressed the Board. She stated that having doctors in the community was to everyone's benefit. Being a working mother and knowing that she can schedule a visit after work hours is a benefit. Mr. Ken Heller of Lincoln Avenue addressed the Board. He noted that Rye Brook was known as the friendly Village. Things are changing with all of the "musts" that are being put forth by the Village. He felt that there were simpler ways to solve the problems of Home Occupations without setting down regulations that will affect the entire community. Mayor Rand called for a motion to close the public hearing. On a motion made by Trustee Buzin, and seconded by Trustee Harris, the public hearing was closed. TRUSTEE BUZIN VOTING AYE TRUSTEE FEINSTEIN VOTING AYE TRUSTEE HARRIS VOTING AYE TRUSTEE SANTON VOTING AYE MAYOR RAND VOTING AYE Mayor Rand called for the resolution. Board of Trustees Meeting January 11,2005 Page 11 RESOLUTION: 3) ADOPTING A LOCAL LAW TO AMEND CHAPTER 250 OF THE CODE OF THE VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK REGARDING HOURS OF OPERATION FOR HOME OCCUPATIONS. Mr. Bradbury read the resolution: RESOLUTION ADOPTING A LOCAL LAW TO AMEND SECTION 250-38 OF THE CODE OF THE VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK REGARDING HOURS OF OPERATION FOR NEW AND EXISTING TIER II AND TIER III HOME OCCUPATIONS WHEREAS, the Village of Rye Brook is considering a local law to amend Section 250-38 of the Village Code regarding hours of operation for new and existing Tier II and Tier III home occupations; and WHEREAS, a duly noticed public hearing was held at a meeting of the Board of Trustees of the Village of Rye Brook on January 11, 2005, at which time all those wishing to be heard on behalf of or in opposition to the proposed local law, or any part thereof, were given the opportunity to be heard and the hearing was closed on January 11, 2005; and WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees of the Village has complied with the provisions of the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act and has determined that adoption of such local law is a "Type 11" action and, therefore, no further environmental review of the proposed action is required; and WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees of the Village of Rye Brook after due deliberation, finds that it is in the best interests of the Village to adopt such local law. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Trustees of the Village of Rye Brook hereby adopts the proposed local law to amend Section 250-28 of the Village Code regarding hours of operation for new and existing Tier II and Tier III home occupations; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Mayor and the Village Clerk are authorized to sign all necessary documents to implement the purposes of this resolution. Board of Trustees Meeting January 11,2005 Page 12 On a motion made by Trustee Feinstein and seconded by Trustee Santon, the following resolution did not pass: TRUSTEE BUZIN VOTING NAY TRSUTEE FEINSTEIN VOTING NAY TRUSTEE HARRIS VOTING NAY TRUSTEE SANTON VOTING AYE MAYOR RAND VOTING NAY Mayor Rand noted that the next item on the agenda was a continuation from the December meeting. Before re-opening the public hearing, Mayor Rand took a poll of how many people wanted to speak on this issue. He noted that as this matter had been previously discussed, not only at the Board of Trustees meeting but also at a Recreation Council meeting, that he would be limiting the length of time for each of the speakers. The public hearing was re-opened. Trustee Feinstein took exception to the 3-minute rule being imposed, and that everyone should have the opportunity to speak. Trustee Buzin agreed with Trustee Feinstein. 4) CONSIDERATION OF A LOCAL LAW AMENDING CHAPTERS 78 AND 170 OF THE VILLAGE CODE REGARDING THE USE OF RYE HILLS PARK FOR DOG WALKING. Mr. Bradbury noted that the local law before the Board would allow for dog walking in Rye Hills Park. It also states that no dog would be allowed in Rye Hill Park, between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m., and that all dogs must be on leashes not to exceed 6'. There is a penalty provision, noting not more than $250.00 for each violation—but this is not a fixed amount. Former Trustee Jody Brackman addressed the Board. She felt that the new regulation, as proposed, deserved a little more attention. There are public spaces for residents to enjoy. Some people don't use these spaces — others do. Some people walls with their dogs. She felt that it was unfair to restrict the use of this public park by setting these strange hours. The Village must require owners to have their dogs on a leash, and that the owners clean up after their dogs. She felt that limiting the ability to walk your dog in one park didn't make sense. She asked that the matter be tabled, a task force be set up to Board of Trustees Meeting January 11,2005 Page 13 further review this matter, and that the Village attempt to come up with something that is a little bit more equitable. Mayor Rand noted that this issue has been around for several years. He felt that a decision needed to be reached, and this matter be brought to closure. A member of the Advisory Council for Parks and Recreation, Joanne Cintrin, addressed the Board. She noted that she is a dog owner that she walks throughout the Village. She would like to see the Village allow dogs in parks, without limiting the hours or the park. A resident of Beacon Lane addressed the Board. She noted that everyone knows that dogs need to be walked. There are not a lot of sidewalks in the Village. She felt that the request before the Board was reasonable. The dogs should be restrained, and the owners must pick up after their dogs. A resident of 13 Parkridge Court addressed the Board. He hoped that this issue could be resolved. He felt that trying this issue at Rye Hills Park, to see if it worked, would be a good idea. Then the Village could consider other parks. William Kelly of 2 Parkridge Court addressed the Board. He noted that dogs are being walked in Rye Hills Park at this time, and a great many of them are not on leashes. In addition, a great many of them are not cleaned up after. Trustee Harris noted that this resolution would actually make it more restrictive for residents wishing to walk their dogs in Village parks. On a motion made by Trustee Buzin, and seconded by Trustee Feinstein, the public hearing was closed. TRUSTEE BUZIN VOTING AYE TRUSTEE FEINSTEIN VOTING AYE TRUSTEE HARRIS VOTING AYE TRUSTEE SANTON VOTING AYE MAYOR RAND VOTING AYE Mayor Rand noted that there were two resolutions. He asked Mr. Bradbury to chose one. Mr. Bradbury stated that he would read resolution #1, restricting the hours dogs may be walked in Village Parks. Board of Trustees Meeting January 11,2005 Page 14 5) CONSIDERATION OF A LOCAL LAW AMENDING CHAPTERS 78 AND 170 OF THE VILLAGE CODE REGARDING THE USE OF RYE HILLS PARK FOR DOG WALKING. Mr. Bradbury read the following resolution. RESOLUTION (Not Adopting Local Law) CONSIDERING A LOCAL LAW AMENDING CHAPTERS 78 AND 170 OF THE VILLAGE CODE REGARDING THE USE OF RYE HILLS PARK FOR DOG WALKING WHEREAS, the Village of Rye Brook has held public hearings on December 14, 2004 and January 11, 2005 to receive comments on the draft local law amending Chapters 78 and 170 of the Village Code regarding the use of Rye Hills Park for dogs on leashes with certain restrictions; and WHEREAS, the public hearing on the draft local law was closed on January 11, 2005. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Trustees of the Village of Rye Brook, after due deliberation on this matter, hereby determines that it is not in the best interests of the Village to adopt this draft local law at this time. On a motion made by Trustee Santon and seconded by Trustee Harris, the following was adopted. TRUSTEE BUZIN VOTING AYE TRUSTEE FEINSTEIN VOTING AYE TRUSTEE HARRIS VOTING AYE TRUSTEE SANTON VOTING AYE MAYOR RAND VOTING AYE Board of Trustees Meeting January 11,2005 Page 15 Mayor Rand commented that this portion of the Code is now enforceable. Residents are expected to uphold this local law. If a situation should be brought to the attention of the authorities, then it will be acted upon. Mayor Rand called for resolution #5: 5) REFERRING AN APPLICATION BY NEXTEL FOR SPECIAL USE PERMIT AND SITE PLAN APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT A WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY ADJACENT AT VILLAGE HALL PROPERTY, 938 KING STREET, RYE BROOK, NEW YORK, SECTION 1, BLOCK 129.68, LOT 14. Mr. Bradbury read the resolution. RESOLUTION REFERRING AN APPLICATION BY NEXTEL TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT AND SITE PLAN REVIEW TO CONSTRUCT A WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATION FACILITY AT VILLAGE HALL 938 KING STREET RYE BROOK, NY SECTION 1, BLOCK 129.68, LOT 14 WHEREAS, Nextel of New York, Inc., d/b/a Nextel Communications ("Nextel") is seeking to enter into an agreement with the Village of Rye Brook to construct a wireless telecommunications facility consisting of a one hundred twenty foot tall (120') monopole with capacity for collocation of other wireless carriers and a fifteen hundred (1,500) square foot equipment shelter at the pole base at the Village Hall, 938 King Street, Rye Brook New York; be it RESOLVED, that the Village of Rye Brook Board of Trustees declares itself Lead Agency for the project; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the subject application is referred to the Village Planning Board, the Technology and Communications Committee and the Advisory Council on Environmental Conservation for a report and recommendation; and Board of Trustees Meeting January 11,2005 Page 16 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Applicant shall deposit Fifteen thousand dollars ($15,000) into the Village's professional fees/environmental review fund, and such additional sums as may be requested, to defray the cost of review of this application. On a motion made by Trustee Santon and seconded by Trustee Feinstein, the resolution was opened to discussion. Anthony Gioffre, Esq., of the law firm of Cuddy & Feder & Worby, addressed the Board as the representative for the applicant. He gave the Board an overview of the project. He noted that Nextel is seeking an agreement with the Village to install a wireless telecommunications facility on Village Hall property. It will be accessed by the existing access drive, with an extension. He also noted that site plans have been prepared. The facility will consist of a 120' tall stealth flagpole. This is a good way of providing services while mitigating impacts. The antennas will be intra-mounted, within the flagpole. At grade, at the base of the flagpole, will be a single communication equipment shelter, for all four carriers. The shelter will be landscaped to mitigate visual impacts. On top of the shelter will be nine GPS antennas that are about the size of a man's fist. These antennas help the various carriers' equipment communicate to the wire line. These also comply with the FCC's e-911 regulation. A visual impact analysis has been completed, as well as an emission analysis. Mr. Gioffre noted that Sprint has an existing facility in the area. There are four other wireless carriers that provide service to this area. They are Nextel, Cingular, T-Mobile, and Verizon. This facility will provide coverage for the four main carriers. There will be four sets of antennas. The Village previously made a request that the application not move forward until all four carriers were on board. This was a very difficult task to accomplish. At this time all four carriers have expressed an interest, and two have current signed an agreement (Verizon and Nextel). There being no further comments, the roll was called: TRUSTEE BUZIN VOTING AYE TRUSTEE FEINSTEIN VOTING AYE TRUSTEE HARRIS VOTING AYE TRUSTEE SANTON VOTING AYE MAYOR RAND VOTING AYE Board of Trustees Meeting January 11,2005 Page 17 6) AUTHORIZING THE LAW FIRM OF SIVE, PAGET AND REISEL TO ACT AS SPECIAL COUNSEL FOR THE VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK REGARDING A NEXTEL CELLULAR PHONE TOWER APPLICATION. Mr. Bradbury read the resolution. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE LAW FIRM SIVE, PAGET AND REISEL TO ACT AS SPECIAL COUNSEL FOR THE VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK REGARDING A NEXTEL CELLULAR PHONE TOWER APPLICATION NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the firm Sive, Paget and Riesel is hereby authorized to act as special counsel regarding a Nextel cellular tower application, for a tower located at Village Hall, 938 King Street, Rye Brook, New York in accordance with the terms of the proposal dated January 6, 2005. AND BE IT FUTHER RESOLVED, that the firm of Lawler, Mutusky and Skelly Engineers LLP, are retained for engineering review of this application. On a motion made by Trustee Santon, and seconded by Trustee Harris, the resolution was adopted. Mr. Bradbury noted that the firm of Keane & Beane has a conflict with Nextel. This firm, Sive, Paget and Reisel, a firm previously used by the Village, will be retained. The matter will also be referred to the firm of Lawler, Matusky & Skelly Engineers LLP for review. TRUSTEE BUZIN VOTING AYE TRUSTEE FEINSTEIN VOTING AYE TRUSTEE HARRIS VOTING AYE TRUSTEE SANTON VOTING AYE MAYOR RAND VOTING AYE Board of Trustees Meeting January 11,2005 Page 18 7) SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING DATE ON A LOCAL LAW ADOPTING THE PROVISIONS OF REAL PROPERTY TAX LAW, SECTION 1903, CONCERNING HOMESTEAD BASE PROPORTIONS. Mr. Bradbury read the resolution. RESOLUTION SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING DATE ON A LOCAL LAW ADOPTING THE PROVISIONS OF REAL PROPERTY TAX LAW, SECTION 1903, CONCERNING HOMESTEAD BASE PROPORTIONS NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Trustees of the Village of Rye Brook, shall hold a public hearing on January 25, 2005 at 7:30 p.m., at Village Hall, 938 King Street, Rye Brook, New York to consider a proposed local law to adopt the provisions of Real Property Tax law, Section 1903, concerning homestead base proportions. He noted that there would be subsequent resolutions that the Board will have to adopt annually on the actual proportions. On a motion made by Trustee Santon, and seconded by Trustee Buzin, the resolution was approved. There was no discussion on this matter. Mayor Rand asked that the roll be called. Board of Trustees Meeting January 11,2005 Page 19 TRUSTEE BUZIN VOTING AYE TRUSTEE FEINSTEIN VOTING AYE TRUSTEE HARRIS VOTING AYE TRUSTEE SANTON VOTING AYE MAYOR RAND VOTING AYE 8) SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING ON A LOCAL LAW TO AMEND CHAPTER 250 OF THE VILLAGE CODE REGARDING SPECIAL USE PERMITS FOR HOME OCCUPATIONS. Mr. Bradbury read the resolution. RESOLUTION SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING DATE ON A LOCAL LAW TO AMEND CHAPTER 250 OF THE VILLAGE CODE CONCERNING SPECIAL PERMIT REQUIREMENTS FOR HOME OCCUPATIONS WHEREAS, a local law has been proposed to amend section 250-38 of the Village Code to add a definition of non-resident employee, amend the criteria required regarding certifications to the Building Inspector and to require special permits for newly created home occupations, except for those classified as Tier I home occupations; and WHEREAS, the local law was referred to the Planning Board on September 14, 2004 for review and comment; and WHEREAS, on December 9, 2004, the Planning Board reviewed the proposed local law and recommended that such law be adopted. Board of Trustees Meeting January 11,2005 Page 20 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Trustees of the Village of Rye Brook shall hold a public hearing on January 25, 2005 at 7:30 p.m., at Village Hall, 938 King Street, Rye Brook, New York to consider a proposed local law to amend section 250-38 of the Code of the Village of Rye Brook to add a definition of non-resident employee, amend the criteria required regarding certifications to the Building Inspector and to require special permits for newly created home occupations, except for those classified as Tier I home occupations. On a motion made by Trustee Buzin, and seconded by Trustee Feinstein, the following resolution was adopted: There was no discussion on this matter. TRUSTEE BUZIN VOTING AYE TRUSTEE FEINSTEIN VOTING AYE TRUSTEE HARRIS VOTING AYE TRUSTEE SANTON VOTING AYE MAYOR RAND VOTING AYE 9) DESIGNATING POLLING LOCATIONS AND HOURS FOR THE 2005 VILLAGE ELECTION ON MARCH 15, 2005. Mr. Bradbury read the resolution. RESOLUTION DESIGNATING POLLING LOCATIONS AND HOURS FOR THE 2005 VILLAGE ELECTION ON MARCH 15, 2005 RESOLVED, that voting machines owned by the Town of Rye shall be used at the next Village Election to be held Tuesday, March 15, 2005; and be it further Board of Trustees Meeting January 11,2005 Page 21 RESOLVED, that if said voting machines are not available, the use of paper ballots is hereby authorized; and be it further RESOLVED, that the polls in each of the nine Election Districts in the Village of Rye Brook shall be opened at 7:00 AM in the morning and remain open until 9:00 PM in the evening of said day; and be it further RESOLVED, that the polling places be hereby designated for the respective Election Districts as follows: Election District #20-Port Chester Middle School-Bowman Ave.(Main Lobby) Election District #21-Port Chester Middle School-Bowman Ave.(Main Lobby) Election District #22-Blind Brook High School-King Street (Main Lobby) Election District #23-Ridge Street School-North Ridge Street (Gymnasium) Election District #26-Port Chester Senior High-Neuton Ave.(Main Lobby) Election District #27-Ridge Street School-North Ridge Street (Gymnasium) Election District #29-Ridge Street School-North Ridge Street (Gymnasium) Election District #30-Blind Brook High School-King Street (Main Lobby) Election District #31-BelleFair Meeting House (Main Lobby) Trustee Santon noted that there were two seats that were the subject of the March election. On a motion made by Trustee Santon, and seconded by Trustee Feinstein, the resolution was adopted. TRUSTEE BUZIN VOTING AYE TRUSTEE FEINSTEIN VOTING AYE TRUSTEE HARRIS VOTING AYE TRUSTEE SANTON VOTING AYE MAYOR RAND VOTING AYE Board of Trustees Meeting January 11,2005 Page 22 10) AUTHORIZING AN AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK AND THE THOMAS GROUP FOR ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES FOR THE KING STREET ATHLETIC FIELDS PROJECT. Mr. Bradbury read the resolution. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AN AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK AND THE THOMAS GROUP FOR ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES FOR THE KING STREET ATHLETIC FIELDS PROJECT WHEREAS, on September 27, 2002 the Village of Rye Brook and The Thomas Group entered into an AIA Standard Form of Agreement with respect to providing architectural/engineering services for the King Street Athletic Fields Project; and WHEREAS, the budget and scope of the project has been significantly expanded to include the development of a softball field and multipurpose soccer/football field, both with artificial turf playing surfaces, a bathroom facility, and additional amenities included on the architect drawing entitled "King Street Athletic Field Design Option" dated January 3, 2005; and WHEREAS, The Thomas Group has provided an amended agreement on January 4, 2005 requesting an increase in their total compensation for architectural/engineering services to reflect the additional scope of services. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Trustees of the Village of Rye Brook, authorizes the Mayor to sign the amended agreement received on January 4, 2005 from The Thomas Group, to provide architectural/engineering services for the King Street Athletic Fields project for a new contract amount of$181,400, in accordance with the terms and conditions of the amended agreement. Trustee Feinstein directed her comments to legal counsel. She asked, with respect to the proposed amendment to the agreement, that the language be changed in the third Whereas Clause (the $2M Legacy Grant has not yet been approved — but is Board of Trustees Meeting January 11,2005 Page 23 expected). She also asked for clarification on a second point concerning the agreement, or agreements. On a motion made by Trustee Santon, and seconded by Trustee Harris, the resolution was adopted. TRUSTEE BUZIN VOTING AYE TRUSTEE FEINSTEIN VOTING AYE TRUSTEE HARRIS VOTING AYE TRUSTEE SANTON VOTING AYE MAYOR RAND VOTING AYE 11) SETTING A DATE FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON A LOCAL LAW TO AMEND THE VILLAGE CODE CONCERNING PERMIT PARKING ON NEUTON AVENUE, TAMARACK ROAD AND COLLEGE AVENUE. Mr. Bradbury read the resolution. RESOLUTION SETTING DATE FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON A LOCAL LAW TO AMEND THE VILLAGE CODE CONCERNING PARKING ON NEUTON AVENUE TAMARACK ROAD AND COLLEGE AVENUE WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees of the Village of Rye Brook would like to make certain parking areas along portions of Neuton Avenue, Tamarack Road and College Avenue available to employees of Port Chester High School; and WHEREAS, a local law has been proposed to restrict parking along certain portions of Neuton Avenue, Tamarack Road and College Avenue to holders of a parking permit issued by the Clerk of the Village of Rye Brook; Board of Trustees Meeting January 11,2005 Page 24 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Trustees of the Village of Rye Brook shall hold a public hearing on March 8, 2005 at 7:30 p.m., at Village Hall, 938 King Street, Rye Brook, New York to consider a proposed local law to amend Chapter 240 of the Code of the Village of Rye Brook to restrict parking along certain portions of Neuton Avenue, Tamarack Road and College Avenue to holders of a parking permit issued by the Clerk of the Village of Rye Brook. Mr. Bradbury noted that the Village has been reviewing this legislation. Assemblyman George Lattimer will be working with the Village on this matter. At this time the Village is asking for opinion of the Attorney General's office as to whether or not permit parking would be allowed. Mayor Rand felt that adopting this resolution would be premature. He proposed that this matter be tabled for the time being. Trustee Buzin felt that the public hearing should be set. Mr. Beane suggested setting a public hearing for the first Board of Trustee Meeting in March. This would allow the Attorney General the time needed to respond to this matter. On a motion made by Trustee Santon, and seconded by Trustee Feinstein, the resolution, as amended, was adopted. TRUSTEE BUZIN VOTING AYE TRUSTEE FEINSTEIN VOTING AYE TRUSTEE HARRIS VOTING AYE TRUSTEE SANTON VOTING AYE MAYOR RAND VOTING AYE 12) APPROVING THE 2005 DWI AGREEMENT BETWEEN WESTCHESTER COUNTY AND THE VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK. Board of Trustees Meeting January 11,2005 Page 25 Mr. Bradbury read the resolution. RESOLUTION APPROVING THE 2005 STOP DWI AGREEMENT BETWEEN WESTCHESTER COUNTY AND THE VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK RESOLVED, that the Village of Rye Brook is authorized to enter into a 2005 Stop DWI Patrol Project Reimbursement Contract with Westchester County for reimbursement of overtime and added patrol costs to enforce DWI/DWAI laws in the amount not to exceed $8,400.00; and it is further RESOLVED, that the Mayor is authorized to execute and deliver all documents necessary and appropriate to accomplish the purposes of this resolution. There was no discussion on this matter. On a motion made by Trustee Santon, and seconded by Trustee Feinstein, the resolution was adopted. TRUSTEE BUZIN VOTING AYE TRUSTEE FEINSTEIN VOTING AYE TRUSTEE HARRIS VOTING AYE TRUSTEE SANTON VOTING AYE MAYOR RAND VOTING AYE 13) APPROVING MINUTES: July 13, 2004; August 10, 2004; September 14, 2004; September 28, 2004; October 12, 2004; October 18, 2004; October 26, 2004; November 9, 2004; November 23, 2004; December 14, 2004. Trustee Feinstein asked that the November 9, 2004, November 23, 2004, and December 14, 2004 be held over for further review and be placed on the agenda for the next meeting. Board of Trustees Meeting January 11,2005 Page 26 Mayor Rand noted that he had submitted his comments and changes. He called for a vote on the remaining summaries, subject to the corrections that were submitted being made. TRUSTEE BUZIN VOTING AYE TRUSTEE FEINSTEIN VOTING AYE TRUSTEE HARRIS VOTING AYE TRUSTEE SANTON VOTING AYE MAYOR RAND VOTING AYE Mayor Rand noted that there was a 14`h item on the agenda. Mr. Bradbury read the resolution: 14) AMENDING THE VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK EMPLOYEE PROVIDED AUTOMOBILE POLICY. Mr. Bradbury read the resolution. RESOLUTION AMENDING THE VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK EMPLOYER—PROVIDED AUTOMOBILE POLICY WHEREAS, the Village Board finds that it is appropriate and in the best interest of the Village to provide the General Foreman of the Public Works department with a Village vehicle, as the person in this title is expected to be available to respond to public works calls for service outside of regular working hours. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Village Board of the Village of Rye Brook hereby amends the employer-provided automobile policy dated January 6, 2004, to include the title of General Foreman. On a motion made by Trustee Santon, and seconded by Trustee Feinstein, the resolution was adopted. Board of Trustees Meeting January 11,2005 Page 27 TRUSTEE BUZIN VOTING AYE TRUSTEE FEINSTEIN VOTING AYE TRUSTEE HARRIS VOTING AYE TRUSTEE SANTON VOTING AYE MAYOR RAND VOTING AYE ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT Mr. Bradbury noted that a meeting had been scheduled with the King Street Athletic Fields Project to be held at Village Hall. Mr. Bradbury noted that, with the closing of United Hospital, meetings were scheduled with the EMS team and the fire department. Also to be discussed were firehouse staffing issues. Mr. Victor Carosi, Village Engineer, noted that the new recycling schedule had been sent out to all residents, and was posted on the Village's website for review. Streets have been consolidated, and the operation has been streamlined. The new schedule began this past Monday. There will be a learning period, but then everything should run smoother than before. A new pick-up has been added. Large metal items, that were usually put out with the recycling now is a separate collection — bulk metal. There will be a savings for the Village, and holidays will not affect pick-up as much as they had in the past. The Village will continue its education process. Mr. Carosi noted that the Village has been salting the roads, and the crews have been out during the freezing rain as they would be during the snowfall. Mayor Rand called for the Discussion Items on the agenda: Board of Trustees Meeting January 11,2005 Page 28 DISCUSSION: PLANNING BOARD AUTHORITY LOCAL LAW MODIFICATION Mayor Rand noted that the Board of Trustees referred to the Planning Board some recommendations that came from the Task Force in connection with providing final authority to the Planning Board on certain issues. Mr. Warren Agatston, Chairman of the Planning Board, made a presentation on this matter. The Planning Board asked for some feedback so that this matter could be addressed at their upcoming meeting, scheduled for the following Thursday. The scope of the referral was reviewed at a number of meetings. The conclusion was that to incorporate the changes, as suggested by the Task Force would create more confusion — not only for the Planning Board in interpreting the law, but also for the applicants and the community at large to understand the law. The main difficulty in interpreting the draft and the changes would be in the areas where there would be a shared review process. Where there is a split authority it would be next to impossible to determine which application should be heard by which Board, and/or if the application should be acted upon. A PUD or a large lot subdivision coupled with a wetland application or a steep slope application, both Boards would have final authority. Which would come first? Neither Board could approve the application without the other Board's approval. In addition, especially in Chapter 219, becomes difficult because of the either or language. In order to comply with statutory time for review, this confusion would cause problems. The goal was to streamline the process rather than make it more difficult. By giving the Planning Board final authority for all land use applications, except for Special Use Permit, will clearly separate the planning issues with the legislative issues. The Planning Board not trying to ask for everything. He referred the Board to Keane & Beane's memorandum submitted to the Board. Two resolutions are being reviewed. There has been an enlargement of what was originally recommended to the Planning Board. Mr. Beane noted that the underlying issues, from his point of view, was whether or not all of the planning authority should be in the hands of the Planning Board and the legislative functions should be in the hands of the Village Board— or if there should be a split. If the answer to this question is the latter — then there is a way to draft the local law, which would be complex. Mr. Agatston disagreed with Mr. Beane's position. Trustee Feinstein noted that the drafting, although complicated, can come together and be rectified. She stated that she has heard concern from the members of the Planning Board regarding the terms and the ongoing education that has been requested. Board of Trustees Meeting January 11,2005 Page 29 Mr. Agatston noted that the majority of the members of the Planning Board are willing to commit to the length of the terms, and are willing to undertake the educational requirements. A suggestion was made that the Board of Trustee members be required to take the same educational courses. Trustee Santon noted that members of the Planning Board, former members, prior chairman, and a former Trustee, were all involved in the discussions. The majority of that task force requested a different treatment on certain applications — large lot subdivisions, etc. The Board of Trustees is an elected office. The public chooses who they want and who they don't want. Mr. Agatston noted that the purpose of the changes were to streamline and simplify the process, and not get into time constraints. Mayor Rand noted that this was a discussion item. The Planning Board has been requested to make a recommendation to the Board of Trustees. Mr. Agatston noted that the Planning Board was requesting that the scope be enlarged, understanding that it will still come before the Board of Trustees for legislation. He noted that the legal counsel must be given direction as to which law to draft. He asked for direction from the Board of Trustees. The simpler the draft, the less cost to the Village. Mr. Beane noted that these changes would significantly expand the scope of the Planning Board's authority. If the issue is finding a way to make it simpler then that is one issue. If the issue is that the Planning Board feels that they should have more planning functions, then that is another issue. Trustee Santon pressed that the Task Force put a lot of time into this and has made its recommendations. Mayor Rand asked that the Planning Board continue its review and come back with something that is considered a workable legislative piece. There will be a hearing, and the members of the Task Force will have an opportunity to be heard. Mayor Rand called for the final item under discussions: Board of Trustees Meeting January 11,2005 Page 30 DIRECTION ON AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 214 OF THE VILLAGE CODE REGARDING SPRINKLER SYSTEMS. Mr. Bradbury noted that this issue has been before the Village for a long time. The Board was asked to look at possible amendments to the Sprinkler Code. Many alternatives have been reviewed. These alternatives have included sprinklering only the living areas and eliminating the requirement entirely. There is a balancing act between the Village and the rights' of the property owners, as well as New York State laws that apply to commercial properties. There are different areas that need to be balanced. At this time the committee needs direction from the Board of Trustees. Trustee Feinstein stated that this was very complicated. The real issue deals with one and two family homes and when the Village will place the burden on a homeowner to require a sprinkler system. The purpose of the sprinkler system must be determined. Is it to allow for more time for the occupant to get out? These are all policy decisions, and the Board must know exactly what the goal and the legislative intent is. Trustee Santon noted that the majority of the applications before the Zoning Board of Appeals have claimed a financial hardship. This portion of the Code is unclear. He noted that replacing the windows on your home constitutes a renovation, which may require installation of a sprinkler system. The smaller the property, the larger the percentage of renovation that means that applicant is required to install a sprinkler system. The Board of Trustees must examine what the original intent was. If the concern is safety, then the sprinklers should be required—why wait for a resident to renovate? Mayor Rand noted that this could be a hardship for a number of people who are making modest improvements. He asked for a sense of where the Village was going on this matter. Mr. Bradbury stated that the direction of the Board was required. The feeling was that more dialogue was needed on this matter. Further discussion needs to be had on residential versus commercial, new constructions, and renovations. Mayor Rand noted that the next Board of Trustees meetings were scheduled for January 25, 2005 and February 8, 2005. There being no further business before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 10:30 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Christopher J. Bradbury Village Administrator/Clerk Board of Trustees Meeting January 11,2005 Page 31