Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001-05-22 - Board of Trustees Meeting Minutes VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK Board of Trustees Meeting Village Hall, 938 King Street Tuesday, May 22,2001 -- 7:30 p.m. AGENDA EXECUTIVE SESSION ON PERSONNEL ISSUES (6:15 p.m.) PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE PRESENTATION: 1. BELLEFAIR SENIOR HOUSING APPLICATION FOR FINANCING TO THE WESTCHESTER COUNTY INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AGENCY(IDA) RESOLUTIONS: 1. BELLEFAIR SENIOR HOUSING APPLICATION TO THE WESTCHESTER COUNTY IDA 2. APPOINTMENT OF SUPERINTENDENT OF RECREATION 3. APPOINTMENTS TO THE VILLAGE BOARDS, COUNCILS, COMMITTEES AND COMMISSIONS 4. AWARDING CONTRACT#01-02 VALLEY TERRACE, ARGYLE ROAD AND TAMARACK ROAD UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS CONTRACT NO. 01-02 5. CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE CONSIDERATION OF THE SPRINT APPLICATION TO BUILD AN ATTACHED WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATION FACILITY AT 900 KING STREET 6. CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON A PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE RYE BROOK CODE OF ETHICS REGARDING POLITICAL ACTIVITIES GUIDELINES 1 DISCUSSIONS: 1. AMENDING THE RULES OF PROCEDURE OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES 2. FOLLOW-UP ON VARIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL AND PARKLAND ISSUES 3. VARIOUS CODE ENFORCEMENT MATTERS CONVENE: The meeting of the Board of Trustees was called to order at 7:30 p.m. by Mayor Filipowski, and the Pledge of Allegiance followed. PRESENT: Mayor Francis L. Filipowski Trustee Jody H. Brackman Trustee Donald Degling Trustee Dean Santon Trustee Lawrence A. Rand STAFF: Christopher Bradbury, Village Administrator Ingrid Bent,Assist. to the Village Administrator Kenneth Powell, Village Attorney David H. Stolman, AICP, PP, Village Consultant David S. Kvinge, RLA, AICP, Village Consultant Chief Robert Santoro, Police Chief Victor Carosi, Village Engineer William Gerety, Building Inspector Robert Bartolacci, Superintendent of Recreation Paula Patafio, Meeting Secretary Mayor Filipowski called the meeting to order calling for the first item on the agenda. PRESENTATION: 1. BELLEFAIR SENIOR HOUSING APPLICATION FOR FINANCING TO THE WESTCHESTER COUNTY INDUSTRICAL DEVELOPMENT AGENCY(IDA) Joe Ariele, Esq,, from the firm of Veneziano & Associates addressed the Board. The purpose of his presentation was to describe the project and update the Board with regard to the status of the discussions with the IDA and the application. He noted that the applicant's 2 goal was to provide the Village with whatever information and assurances necessary regarding the benefits of this facilities. The proposed project is a 166 unit, state-of-the-art senior living facility. This facility will have a five unit affordable component and, in doing so, the facility meets two very clear needs in the County of Westchester. It will meet the need of the seniors, keeping them in the County, and it will increase the number of affordable units. Forest City Daly is a well-established and well-regarded residential developer with other successful senior living facilities. It hopes to bring the senior component of the project to the Village. This will place a fully operational, and fully occupied, senior living facility on the tax roll. In addition, it will provide 250 construction jobs during the construction period and, once completed, will provide 60-75 permanent positions. This project has undergone significant reviews in the context of the PUD and the impacts of the project are fully mitigated. It is also important to note that there will be no impact on the schools, a negligible impact on traffic, and it fulfills the anticipated vision for the property. Another benefit to the Village is the opportunity to enter into a pilot agreement with respect to the revenues that it can expect over time in conjunction with this facility. The applicant has always maintained that it will not seek benefits with respect to the real estate taxes. The Village will set taxes or set a pilot agreement for the real estate tax revenue. The pilot agreement would fix the line item in the budget for a good many years. The applicant is amenable to either arrangement, and is prepared to negotiate with the Village, and answer any questions and concerns. Mayor Filipowski thanked Mr. Ariele for his presentation. He then turned to the Board for questions or comments. Trustee Lawrence Rand noted that he was confused by the complex application. He noted that he is not a specialist in real estate law and, therefore, asked for clarification. Although everything sounds right, including that it is good for the school system, he was concerned that it was too_good to be true. He asked, specifically, for information about the pilot agreement. Mr. Ariele noted that the benefit that his client is seeking through the IDA is such that what it hopes to accomplish can be accomplished in the context of what the Village's concerns are. The applicant is looking to work with the Village but he noted that negotiations cannot begin until there is an approval in place. In addition, no work has been done on the pilot agreement and he noted that it is never too early to start working on it. Mr. Ariele pointed out that Westchester County does not make the pilot agreement. That task is left to the applicant and the Village. By approving this concept the Village does not waive its rights in the process and the law regarding this issue, simply says that during this 30 day period the Village does not object to the project. Trustee Dean Santon asked a fundamental question. He noted that his understanding was that this was a potential $50M project of which $9.2M has been spent to acquire the land. 3 The benefits that the applicant is seeking are approximately a $475,000 sales tax benefit and a $300,000 mortgage tax concession. He expressed his concern that out of a $50M project the applicant was looking for a $300,000 mortgage tax concession. Mr. Ariele responded that money saved is money saved. The senior living facility market is a very competitive market. The bottom line is that all the line items are relevant to the facility's ability to be viable. Although these breaks don't make or break the deal, all of the issues do enter into the calculations of whether or not the facility will survive. Among the benefits that the applicant could have sought through the IDA were bond financing, mortgage tax and sales tax. This applicant is taking advantage of less of the benefits that he might otherwise take advantage of and he should not be penalized for it. The applicant is trying on all levels to put together a viable project without crippling either the locality or the County in terms of the benefits that he is seeking. Trustee Donald Degling also noted that he is not an expert in this area. He asked Mr. Ariele if he could provide a rough estimate of what the revenues on 161 standard units and 5 affordable units would be. Mr. Ariele responded that he did not have a response to this question at this time. Trustee Degling commented that the IDA application notes that the 4.8 acres were acquired for $9,25M and that this is a $50M project. He also noted that the mortgage tax benefit would be approximately $100,000, of which the Town would get $70,000 and the Village of Port Chester would receive some $30,000. He asked the applicant what would be a proper assessment for the property. Mr. Ariele stated that neither he nor the applicant were qualified to make this assessment, all they are looking for is a fair price. The answer to this question must come from the Village. Even if the applicant was to suggest a number, it would be subject to review by the Village's Assessor. Tony Veneziano addressed the Board. He felt that the lack of specific response, and the lack of experience with this type of application, was causing suspicion. He noted that this situation was really a win-win situation. The applicant is trying to take advantage of a financial opportunity that the IDA offers. The benefits have been calculated into the financial formula when the business was redesigned. At this time all Village needs to do in order to give the.applicant the latitude to discuss a pilot, is to go ahead and work with them. The applicant's intention is to be provided with a fair assessment and then have it taken out for ten years. The applicant is looking to move forward. The worse case scenario is that the applicant will get the sales tax benefits and the mortgage tax relief and the Village will get a top-notch project with an excellent company and a pilot program for ten years. After the discussion, Mayor Filipowski asked the Village's consultant if there was a need for a Resolution accepting this. Mr. Mark Tulis stated that under the Code if you do not object to the inducement, which would include the mortgage tax and the sales tax, then it is deemed that you are consenting and the County will go forward. He noted that the Village has five alternatives. They are as follows: 1) Do nothing, which deems consent; 2) Say no; 3) Say yes, subject to a pilot; 4) Say yes subject to pilot and portion of the mortgage tax; and finally, 5) Say yes, subject to the pilot and all of the mortgage tax. 4 Mayor Filipowski asked if the negotiations on the mortgage tax could be waived. Mr. Tulis responded that it could be waived during negotiations. Mr. Veneizano felt that the best alternative for the Village would be to do nothing and keep its options open. Mr. Christopher Bradbury asked Mr. Tulis if he felt that he and counsel could work out the issue of the mortgage tax. Mr. Tulis stated that he was very confident that no matter what was put in the resolution the applicant would be able to work things out and go forward. Trustee Jody Brackman asked if there was.any chance that Forest City Daly would spin this facility off and make it a not-for-profit facility. Mr. Veneizano stated that the applicant develops, owns and maintains its own facility. This is a long-term holding, Trustee Santon felt that since the Village was concerned about the loss of the mortgage tax, there should be a sixth alternative. Mr, Veneizano stated that the applicant wants the mortgage tax benefit, and it is approximately 50% of this package. When the Village was approached over three months ago regarding this application, no mention of objecting to the mortgage tax was made. If it had been, then the applicant would not have proceeded. The applicant is open to discussions regarding the pilot agreement and wishes to work with the Village to negotiate a fair agreement. Trustee Santon felt that the Board needed more time to review this application. He noted that the Board could adjourn and the application could be continued at the next meeting. Mr. Ken Heller of Lincoln Avenue addressed the Board. He noted that a CPI should be written into the pilot, as an adjustable pilot is much more favorable program for the Village. Mayor Filipowski moved to the Resolution portion of the meeting. RESOLUTION: 1. BELLEFAIR .SENIOR HOUSING APPLICATION TO THE WESCHESTER COUNTYIDA Mr. Bradbury read the following Resolution: RESOLUTION CONSENTING TO WESTCHESTER COUNTY INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AGENCY FUNDING OF A PROPOSED SENIOR RESIDENCY FACILITY WHEREAS, a letter dated May 1, 2001 from the Westchester County Industrial Development Agency(IDA) was received by the Village of Rye Brook, and WHEREAS, the letter represents a notification under the General Municipal Law §859-a and § 923-a to the Village of the Agency's intention to provide financial assistance 5 for a proposed senior residence facility project located at 1104 King Street in Rye Brook, and WHEREAS, General Municipal Law § 923-a grants the Village 30 days in which.to adopt a resolution objecting to the use of the IDA funding. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Village of Rye Brook hereby waives the right to object to the Project by resolution within thirty(30) days after the 923-a Notice; and be it FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Westchester County Industrial Development Agency will provide financial assistance for a proposed senior residence facility; and be it FURTHER RESOLVED, that this agreement is contingent upon the applicant entering into a pilot agreement satisfactory to the Village in which full taxes will be paid under the Real Property Tax Law and reimbursement will be made to the Village and the Town for mortgage taxes; and be it FURTHER RESOLVED, that a certified copy of this resolution shall be delivered to the Westchester County IDA prior to the expiration of the 30 day period to object under General Municipal Law § 923-a and a copy shall also be transmitted to the applicant's attorney. Mayor Filipowski asked that the Resolution be amended with regard to the mortgage tax resolution clause. He then asked for a motion on the amended Resolution. On a motion made by Trustee Degling, and seconded by Trustee Brackman, the Resolution was approved. TRUSTEE BRACKMAN VOTING AYE TRUSTEE DEGLING VOTING AYE TRUSTEE RAND VOTING AYE TRUSTEE SANTON VOTING AYE MAYOR FILIPOWSKI VOTING AYE 2. APPOINTMENT OF SUPERINTENDENT OF RECREATION Mr. Bradbury read the following Resolution; 6 RESOLUTION APPOINTMENT OF SUPERINTENDENT OF RECREATION RESOLVED, that Robert Bertolacci of 17 Maywood Avenue, Rye Brook, New York, is hereby appointed provisionally to the position of Superintendent of Recreation with the Village of Rye Brook, subject to the Civil Service procedures of the State of New York; and be it FURTHER RESOLVED, that the annual salary is $58,100 with an effective start date of May 23, 2001. Mayor Filipowski noted that Mr. Bertolacci has been with the Village for many years. He congratulated him on his promotion. Mr. Bertolacei thanked the Village Board and Mr. Bradbury for their support. The Recreation Department has come up with new programs, i.e. the Baseball Opening Day Parade, He thanked the Advisory Council for its support. He noted that along with his qualified and hardworking staff they will begin establishing more goals for the Recreation Department. On a motion made by Trustee Brackman, and seconded by Trustee Rand, the Resolution was adopted. TRUSTEE BRACKMAN VOTING AYE TRUSTEE DEGLING VOTING AYE TRUSTEE RAND VOTING AYE TRUSTEE SAN,TON VOTING AYE MAYOR FILIPOWSKI VOTING AYE 3. APPOINTMENTS TO THE VILLAGE BOARDS, COUNCILS, COMMITTEES AND COMMISSIONS Mr, Bradbury read the following Resolutions: 7 RESOLUTION APPOINTMENTS TO THE ADVISORY COUNCIL ON ENVIRONMENT CONSERVATION RESOLVED, that Joanne Henrick of 33 Winding Wood Road North is hereby reappointed for a term that shall expire on the first Monday in April 2004; and be it FURTHER RESOLVED, that William Irwin of 3 Phyllis Place is hereby reappointed for a term that shall expire on the first Monday in April 2004; and be it FURTHER RESOLVED, that Michael Siegel of 22 Pine Ridge Road is hereby appointed Chairperson. APPOINTMENTS TO THE ADVISORY COUNCIL ON PARKS AND RECREATION RESOLVED, that Joanne Citrin of One Old Oak Road is hereby reappointed for a tenn that shall expire on the first Monday in April 2004; and be it FURTHER RESOLVED, that Jon Horwitz of 15 Sleepy Hollow Road is hereby reappointed for a term that shall expire on the first Monday in April 2004; and be it FURTHER RESOLVED, that Kip Konigsberg of 44 Lincoln Avenue is hereby reappointed for a term that shall expire on the first Monday in April 2004; and be it FURTHER RESOLVED, that Susan Stockel of 6 Little Kings Lane is hereby reappointed for a term that shall expire on the first Monday in April 2004. APPOINTMENTS TO THE AIRPORT ADVISORY COUNCIL RESOLVED, that Marcia Teschner of 6 Doral Greens Drive East is hereby appointed to the un-expired term of Julian Juster which will expire on the first Monday in April 2003; and be it FURTHER RESOLVED, that Ranjini Logue of 5 Vintage Court is hereby appointed for a term that shall expire on the first Monday in April 2004. 8 APPOINTMENTS TO THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD RESOLVED, that Richard Romm of 89 Country Ridge Drive is hereby reappointed for a term that shall expire on the first Monday in April 2004; and be it FURTHER RESOLVED, that Alan Willig of 3 Bayberry Close is hereby reappointed for a term that shall expire on the first Monday in April 2004; and be it FURTHER RESOLVED, that Richard Romm is hereby reappointed.Chairperson, APPOINTMENTS TO THE ETHICS BOARD RESOLVED, that Michael Goldstein of 62 Bowman Avenue is hereby reappointed for a term that shall expire on the first Monday in April 2002; and be it FURTHER RESOLVED, that Barbara Bernstein of 5 Mark Drive is hereby reappointed for a term that shall expire on the first Monday in April 2002; and be it FURTHER RESOLVED, that Barry Erner of 5 Candy Lane is hereby reappointed for a term that shall expire on the first Monday in April 2002; and be it FURTHER RESOLVED, that Michael Stolzar of 19 Rockinghorse Trail is hereby reappointed for a term that shall expire on the first Monday in April 2002; and be it FURTHER RESOLVED, that Michele Mendicino of 9 Phyllis Place is hereby appointed for a term that shall expire on the first Monday in April 2002; and be it FURTHER RESOLVED, that Michael Goldstein is hereby reappointed Chairperson, APPOINTMENT TO THE FACILITIES COMMITTEE RESOLVED, that David Heiser of 2 Oriole Place is hereby appointed Chairperson. APPOINTMENT TO THE PLANNING BOARD RESOLVED, that Lawrence Engle on 12 Churchill Road is hereby reappointed for a term that shall expire on the first Monday in April 2004. 9 APPOINTMENTS TO THE TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION RESOLVED, that Mark Klapper of I Charles Lane is hereby appointed for a term that shall expire on the first Monday in April 2004; and be it FURTHER RESOLVED, that Mark Guffey of 3 Meadowlark Road is hereby appointed for a term that shall expire on the first Monday in April 2004; and be it FURTHER RESOLVED, that David Bromberg of 4 Hillandale Road is hereby reappointed for a term that shall expire on the first Monday in April 2004; and be it FURTHER RESOLVED, that Lori Hecker of 80 Country Ridge Drive is herby reappointed for a term that shall expire on the first Monday in April 2004. APPOINTMENTS TO THE TRAFFIC COMMISSION RESOLVED, that Gerald Appelbaum of One Country Ridge Drive is hereby reappointed for a term that shall expire on the'first Monday in April 2004; and be it FURTHER RESOLVED, that Robert Riordan of 4 Valley Terrace is hereby reappointed for a term that shall expire on the first Monday in April 2004; and be it FURTHER RESOLVED, that Angelo Pace of 34 Woodland Drive is hereby appointed for a term that shall expire on the first Monday in April 2004; and be it FURTHER RESOLVED, that James DiSanto of 151 North Ridge Street is hereby reappointed for a term that shall expire on the first Monday in April 2004; and be it FURTHER RESOLVED, that Mary Ann Ferraro of 165 Betsy Brown Road is hereby reappointed for a term that shall expire on the first Monday in April 2004; and be it FURTHER RESOLVED, that Mansour Harik of 10 Woodland Drive is hereby appointed for a term that shall expire on the first Monday in April 2004; and be it FURTHER RESOLVED, that Peter Raider of 80 Valley Terrace is hereby appointed for a term that shall expire on the first Monday in April 2004; and be it FURTHER RESOLVED, that Gerald Appelbaum is hereby reappointed Chairperson. 10 APPOINTMENTS TO THE ZONING BOARD RESOLVED, that Joel Hecker of 80 Country Ridge Drive is hereby reappointed for a term that shall expire on the first Monday in April 2004; and be it FURTHER RESOLVED, that John Munnick of 13 Wyman Street is hereby reappointed for a term that shall expire on the first Monday in April 2004; and be it FURTHER RESOLVED, that Mark Harmon of 16 Hillandale Road is hereby appointed Chairperson. On a motion made by Trustee Rand, and seconded by Trustee Brackman, the Resolution was approved. TRUSTEE BRACKMAN VOTING AYE TRUSTEE DEGLING VOTING AYE TRUSTEE RAND VOTING AYE TRUSTEE SANTON VOTING AYE MAYOR FILIPOWSKI VOTING AYE Trustee Rand noted that a year ago the Board has adopted a procedure for those who wish.to serve the Village. Everyone that submitted an application has been appointed to a position. 4. AWARDING CONTRAT #01-02 VALLEY TERRACE, ARGYLE ROAD AND TAMARACK ROAD UTILITY IMRPROVEMENTS CONTRAT NO. 01-02 Mr. Bradbury read the following Resolution: RESOLUTION AWARDING CONTRACT #01-02 VALLEY TERRACE, ARGYLE ROAD AND TAMARACK ROAD UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS CONTRACT NO. 01-02 WHEREAS, the Village of Rye Brook has solicited bids for contract # 01-02 "Valley Terrace, Argyle Road and Tamarack Road Utility Improvements", and WHEREAS, a public notice was duly advertised in an official newspaper of the Village of Rye Brook on April 19t11, 2001, and 11 WHEREAS, at 10:00 a.m., Wednesday, May 9th, 2001, all bids were opened as summarized below, and BIDDER BID AMOUNT BID BOND 1. Joken Development Corporation $148,975.00 Yes 2. Bilotta Construction Corp. $214,490.00 Yes 3. Hudson Canyon Construction, Inc. $243,650.00 Yes WHEREAS, upon reviewing the bids, the Village Engineer and Consulting Engineer, Dolph Rotfeld Engineering, P.C. have determined that the lowest responsible bidder meeting the requirements of the contract documents is Joken Development Corporation for the total bid price of$148,975.00. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED, that contract 401-02 "Valley Terrace, Argyle Road and Tamarack Road Utility Improvements" is hereby awarded to Joken Development Corporation for the total bid price of$148,975.00; and be it FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Mayor is hereby authorized to execute and deliver all documents necessary or appropriate to accomplish the purposes of this resolution, Mr. Ben Miloro of Hillcrest Avenue noted that prior work done by Joken within the Village was unsatisfactory. He asked that the Village reconsider this award. Trustee Brackman asked if the Village had any experience with this company. Mr. Victor Carosi, Village Engineer, noted that he has not had the opportunity to work with this company. It has, however, done work with the New York American Water Company. This work was not under contract with the Village. Mr. Carosi stated that in his previous employment he did work with the company and found it reliable and efficient. The price of this contract is very good and the Village's Building Department will be watching over this prof ect. On a motion made by Trustee Degling, and seconded by Trustee Brackman, the Resolution was adopted. TRUSTEE BRACKMAN VOTING AYE TRUSTEE DEGLING VOTING AYE TRUSTEE RAND VOTING AYE TRUSTEE SANTON VOTING AYE MAYOR FILIPOWSKI VOTING AYE 12 5. CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING FOR.THE CONSIDERATION OF THE SPRINT APPLICATION TO BUILD AN ATTACHED WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATION FACILITY AT 900 KING STREET. Mr. Bradbury read the following Resolution: RESOLUTION CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE CONSIDERATION OF THE SPRINT APPLICATION TO BUILD AN ATTACHED WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATION FACILITY AT 900 KING STREET RESOLVED, that the Board of Trustees of the Village of Rye Brook shall conduct a public hearing on Tuesday, June 12, 2001 at 7:30 pm at the Village Offices located at 938 King Street, Rye Brook, New York on the Sprint Application to install a proposed attached wireless telecommunications facility consisting of nine panel antenna and three sectors to be pipe-mounted on the roof of the existing penthouse together with equipment cabinetry on a building located at 900 King Street(also known as the Atrium Office Building); and be it FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Clerk shall publish a notice of public hearing as required by law. Dan Tartaglia, Esq. addressed the Board as representative for the Arbors Homeowners Association. He noted that this application has been before the Planning Board and a question raised at that time was whether or not this is a permitted use within the P.U.D. Mr. Powell responded that this is a Special Use Permit. Mh Tartaglia asked if there was a pilot agreement in effect with regard to this building. Mayor Filipowski stated that to the best of his knowledge there was none, Trustee Santon commented that there are a number of zoning related issues with regard to this application. He noted that the Planning Board recommend approval with nine conditions. As there were so many conditions, he asked whether the Village felt that it needed to do more research before calling for a public hearing. Mayor Filipowski responded that any issues with regard to this application could be raised at this time. He noted that the issue regarding the P.U.D. has been responded to by the Village's Counsel. The Board is also aware of the co-location issues, however, these types of issues can only be responded to by the applicant, Therefore he felt that it would be more appropriate to deal with these issues at the public hearing because the applicant will be in attendance. 13 Trustee Santon commented that he did have concerns with the fundamental zoning. When this building received its approvals back in the 1970's it was approved for a certain height, bulk, total square footage, setback requirements. He noted that the purpose of the 1998 Resolution was because the building was non-conforming in all aspects. He wanted to be sure that the Planning Board was able to review all of the information. Mayor Filipowski responded that the Village's staff will be dealing with these issues. Mr. David Kvinge of F.P. Clark and Associates suggested that a memo be prepared listing all information to be clarified or supplemented prior to the public hearing. A copy will be supplied to the applicant and members of the public wishing to review the information. He felt that there was no need to postpone the public hearing at this time. Trustee Rand stated that he appreciated the work that was done on this application and strongly suggested that the Planning Board attend the public hearing. Trustee Brackman felt that the public hearing will give the members of the public a chance to raise their questions, and it will give the developer a chance to clarify the issues. Mr. Tartaglia asked what the procedures would be if a variance was required. He felt that scheduling a public hearing with regard to a Special Permit was premature. Mr, Powell stated that he was not aware of any variance that was required. However, in the event that a variance was identified during the public hearing, the public hearing would be adjourned and the application would be referred to the Zoning Board of Appeals. Ms. Dee Dee Mitchell of the Arbors asked why there would not be a variance required if the application goes beyond what the P.U.D. requirements are. She felt that allowing a variance to the P.U.D. would open the door for other applicants. She also questioned the issue of co- location, and expressed her concern regarding the emissions. Mr. Powell responded that his opinion regarding the P.U.D. has been presented in the form of a memorandum. Trustee Santon stated that the 1999 Telecommunications Amendment paved the way for these types of antenna and does modify the prior P.U.D. zoning. In the May 1998 Resolution, where the Board acknowledged that certain aspects of the building were non- conforming, it was stated that this building would be no more than 35' in height. The top of the parapet wall is 38', which exceeds the height restriction. In addition the building is almost 194,000 square feet, plus an additional 23,000 at ground level, which exceeds the bulk restriction. It appears that this building is more than two stories in height, and now the applicant is proposing placing antenna on the top of the penthouse, He felt that the structure already violates the Zoning. He again expressed his opinion that some of these fundamental zoning issues need to be clarified. He asked if there was a timeframe that the Board needed to call for a public hearing. Trustee Santon stated that he viewed this application as an incomplete application. 14 Mr. Powell noted that the Federal Telecommunications Act of 1996 does not place particular or exact timeframe, but it does give a time limit. The Public Hearing can be adjourned, and continued. On a motion made by Trustee Brackman, and seconded by Trustee Degling, the Resolution was approved. TRUSTEE BRACKMAN VOTING AYE TRUSTEE DEGLING VOTING AYE TRUSTEE RAND VOTING AYE TRUSTEE SANTON VOTING NO MAYOR FILIPOWSKI VOTING AYE 6. CALLING FOR A PUBIC HEARING ON A PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE RYE BROOK CODE OF ETHICS REGARDING POLITICAL ACTIVITIES GUIDELINES Mr. Bradbury read the following Resolution: RESOLUTION CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON A PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE RYE BROOK CODE OF ETHICS REGARDING POLITICAL ACTIVITIES GUIDELINES RESOLVED, that the Board of Trustees of the Village of Rye Brook shall conduct a public hearing,on Tuesday, June 12, 2001 at 7:30 pm at the Village Offices located at 938 King Street, Rye Brook, New York on a proposed local law amending Section 24-9, Ethics: Board members duties and powers, of the Code of the Village of Rye Brook in relation to establishing political activity guidelines for members of the Rye Brook Board of Ethics; and be it FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Clerk shall publish a notice of public hearing as required by law. Trustee Rand noted that he had requested an advisory opinion from the Ethics Board as to whether members of the Ethics Board can participate in certain aspects of Village politics. The Ethics Board adopted a set of Guidelines for participation. The Board shared its Guidelines with the Mayor and members of the Village Board and at this time the Village Board is being asked to adopt the Guidelines that the Ethics Board has already adopted — and amend the Village Code. 15 Trustee Degling noted that the first nine provisions apply to the members of the Ethic's Board and that number nine applies to everyone who considers themselves a part of the household of a member of the Board of Ethics. The tenth provision exempts one member, --- the one who is required to be a municipal officer or employee. In essence he felt that this allowed one member of the Board to do exactly what the rest of the Board could not do. He asked for clarification. Trustee Rand responded that under State Law one member of the Ethics Board must be a municipal official or employee. It would be hard to ask a municipal official, who is presumably an elected official, not to work on his or her own election. Trustee Brackman agreed with the point that precluded family members because otherwise the Ethic's Guidelines could be circumvented very easily. Trustee Rand stated that the objective here is to take the Ethic Board's Code of Conduct and adopt and make part of the Village Code. The Board also has the option of not taking the Ethic's Code in its entirety. On a motion made by Trustee Brackman, and seconded by Trustee Rand, the Resolution was adopted. TRUSTEE BRACKMAN VOTING AYE TRUSTEE DEGLING VOTING AYE TRUSTEE RAND VOTING AYE TRUSTEE SANTON VOTING AYE MAYOR FILIPOWSKI VOTING AYE Mayor Filipowski moved to the Discussion portion of the agenda. DISCUSSIONS: 1. AMENDING THE RULES OF PROCEDURE OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES Mayor Filipowski stated that this discussion item to deal with the manner by which members of the Board of Trustees were able to place items on the agenda. Placing an item on the agenda on a Friday evening before the meeting makes it difficult for the staff to keep up with its daily work and prepare the documents required. Items to be placed on the agenda are directed to Mr. Bradbury who then prepares the documentation necessary on behalf of the Mayor. Trustee Santon noted that currently an item can be placed on an agenda so long as it is 72 hours in advance. Mayor Filipowski stated that the Board was trying to redirect certain items that should be addressed by the Staff or that requires research by the Staff. He also noted that meetings have become very lengthy and this decision was an attempt to shorten 16 these meetings. In addition,members of the Staff have been put on the spot when they were not fully informed about the issue and asked to answer questions that they were not prepared to answer. Trustee Santon stated that several of the items that he has brought before the Board required policy direction. He felt that it was an important function of the Board to place these items on the agenda in order to bring them to the public's attention. 2. FOLLOW-UP ON VARIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL AND PARKLAND ISSUES He also asked how updates could be supplied regarding issues such as hiring a licensed surveyor to help identify where the Village's parkland begins and ends, or on the small parkland behind Rye Ridge ,Shopping Center called Chester Terrace Park and the Revereter Clause in that Deed. Mr. Bradbury noted that he has been in contact with Mr. Doscher. In addition, Village Staff is available to assist with these issues. The Village's Staff will be looking into the encroachment issues on Village parkland, as well as the illegal dumping that has been occurring. With regard to the Chester Terrace parkland, the Village is working with its counsel on this issue, 3. VARIOUS CODE ENFORCEMENT MATTERS Trustee Santon noted that a number of residents have expressed a concern about Village procedures and laws which are qot being enforced. An example is the timeframe that trash is to be placed curbside for pick-up. He noted that some residents have been leaving debris outside for almost a full week, Mr. Bradbury stated that in order to re-educate the residents about these laws., the rules and regulations will be posted on the government access channel and the Village's website, as well as included in the Village's newsletter. Trustee Santon also commented on a condition on North Ridge Street which is becoming hazardous. A portion of the Village's right-of-way has been paved and a small parking area has been created where approximately four vehicles are parked during the day. This is a narrow roadway and this situation violates several sections of the Village Code. He asked that this be looked into. Mr. Bradbury stated that the Director of the Nursery School has been contacted and she is willing to discuss this situation and alternatives. Mayor Filipowski thanked Trustee Santon for his comments. 17 Trustee Santon noted that residents have commented about the speed that people travel within the Village. He felt that enforcement is the best remedy. There being no further business before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 9:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Christopher JVBdb y Village AdmiClerk 18