Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001-08-21 - Board of Trustees Meeting Minutes BOARD OF TRUSTEES MEETING Village of Rye Brook Village Hall, 938 King Street Tuesday, August 28, 2001 - 7:30 p.m. CONVENE: The meeting of the Board of Trustees was called to order at 7:34 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 Mr. Ed Beane, Village Counsel David S. Kvinge, RLA, AICP, Village Consultant David H. Stolman, AICD, PP, Village Consultant Chief Robert Santoro, Police Chief Victor Carosi, Village Engineer William Gerety, Building Inspector Paula Patafto, Meeting Secretary AGENDA PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE PUBLIC HEARING 1. CONSIDERING THE BELLEFAIR SIDEWALK ELIMINATION — BELLEFAIR P.U.D. AMENDED SITE PLAN APPROVAL, SECTION 1, BLOCK 3 2. CONSIDERING THE APPLICATION OF 699 WESTCHESTER AVENUE RYE TOWN HILTON HOTEL AMENDED SITE PLAN APPROVAL, SECTION 1, BLOCK 5, LOT 18C 3. CONSIDERING A LOCAL LAW TO AMEND CHAPTER 240, THE VILLAGE VEHICLE AND TRAFFIC LAW 1 RESOLUTIONS 1. 699 WESTCHESTER AVENUE RYE TOWN HILTON HOTEL AMENDED SITE PLAN APPROVAL SECTION 1, BLOCK 5, LOT 18C 2. AUTHORIZING THE CHIEF OF POLICE TO RESTRICT THE USE OF CERTAIN PARKING SPACES IN THE PARKING LOT OF THE VILLAGE HALL OF THE VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK 3. AUTHORIZING THE VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK TO APPLY TO NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR A PERMIT TO ERECT A "DO NOT BLOCK DRIVEWAY" SIGN AT THE ENTRANCE TO THE PORT CHESTER MIDDLE SCHOOL 4. ADOPTING OF LOCAL LAW AMENDING CHAPTER 240, VILLAGE VEHICLES AND TRAFFIC LAW. 5. APPOINTMENT OF OFFICE ASSISTANT (AUTOMATED SYSTEMS) 6. APPOINTMENT OF LABORER 7. APPOINTMENT OF ASSISTANT TO THE VILLAGE ADMINISTRATOR S. APPOINTMENT OF A MEMBER OF THE ADVISORY COUNCIL ON ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION TO SERVE AS A LIASON TO THE AIRPORT ADVISORY COUNCIL 9. APPOINTMENT TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS 10. CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE CONSIDERATION OF THE KOCHER 2-LOT SUBDIVISION, SECTION 1, BLOCK 23, LOTS S AND 9 11, APPROVAL OF MINUTES May 8, 2001 May 22, 2001 July 10, 2001 2 DISCUSSIONS 1. ZONING LAW AND SITE PLAN COMPLIANCE ISSUES AT 900 KUNG STREET 2. VARIOUS DRAINAGE RELATED ISSUES IN BYRAMRIDGE AREA 3.v VILLAGE TREE PLANTING PROGRAM & COMPOSTING OPERATIONS VILLAGE ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT UNFINISHED BUSINESS Mayor Filipowski opened the meeting with a moment of silence for Wally and Bunny Niles. Wally Niles, a IS-year member of the Architectural Review Board, recently passed away. His wife, Bunny, past away earlier this year. The Niles, 45 year residents of Rye Brooks, were contributors in all walks of life — through their Temple, through the School, and through the Village. They will be missed. Mayor Filipowski noted that many residents have commented on the length of the Board of Trustee Meetings. He agreed that they have been running very long. The Mayor, and the Board, has considered using Robert's Rules and the three-minute time limit. In instances such as this meeting, where there is a long agenda with many matters to review, the Board has requested that all speakers limit their comments to three-minutes. Mayor Filipowski also asked that the Board keep this in mind as they discuss the items before them, Further discussion on this topic is scheduled for discussion after the agenda items have been heard. Mayor Filipowski moved to the first item on the agenda under Public Hearings. PUBLIC HEARING 1. CONSIDERING THE BELLEFAIR SIDEWALK ELIMINATION — BELLEFAIR P.U.D. AMENDED SITE PLAN APPROVAL SECTION 1, BLOCK 3. The Public Hearing was opened. 3 Mr. Mark Miller, of the firm of Veneziano & Associates, addressed the Board. He noted that the applicant is seeking the elimination of sidewalks on three streets: Millennium, Reunion and Legendary. As things stand now, based upon the site plan approval that was adopted in January of 1998, the applicant- is obligated to build the sidewalks on these three streets. The applicant is ready, willing, and able to build these sidewalks, however, based on concerns from the residents on the streets affected by this application, the developer has asked to have the site plan amended to eliminate the sidewalk requirements for those streets. Mr. Miller gave an overview of the project. He noted that an application has been made to amend the site plan, which requires approval by the Board of Trustees. The Planning Board, after their review, felt that this was not a minor site plan amendment. One of the issues raised in the most recent memorandum of Frederick P. Clark was a matter of safety. Mr. Miller noted that Bellefair Road also has a width of 24', and it was never the developer's intention to construct sidewalks on that street. The roads on which the applicant is now proposing to eliminate the sidewalks are essentially the same width. People have been walking on these roadways and there have been no safety concerns, Mr. Miller noted that the request to eliminate the sidewalks came from the homeowners themselves. They have landscaped the front of their homes, and constructed mailboxes in the area that would be the sidewalk. At this time, keeping in mind the time of year, the applicant needs direction on this issue. Mr. Miller noted that during the discussions surrounding the elimination of the sidewalks, the topic of the use of Reunion Road for access to the Senior Living Facility was brought up. Reunion Road was always intended to be used for ingress and egress to the Senior Living Facility. It was this way from the very beginning. He respectfully submitted that this topic should be kept separated, and should be scheduled for another time. Mayor Filipowski asked if anyone wished to be heard on this matter. Mr. Richard Goldstein, of 23 Reunion Road in Bellefair, addressed the Board. Mr. Goldstein expressed his opinion that the sidewalks and the use of Reunion Road for egress and aggress to the Senior Living Facility were tied together. He stated that he had no real objection to eliminating the sidewalks. His concern, and that of the other homeowners on Reunion Road, was that Reunion Road would become a major thoroughfare. The homeowners were led to believe that there would be no major connection between Bellefair Boulevard through Reunion Road to the nursing home. It was his opinion that the Board, and the Village, could be exposing itself to a liability because by installing the sidewalks you encourage the use of the sidewalks by the residents of the nursing home. These 4 roads are too narrow and now you will be encouraging the use of this roadway by delivery trucks, ambulances, workers, visitors, residents, etc. Mr. Goldstein felt that the Board should not permit the sidewalk issue to be resolved without a study of the sidewalks in connection with the access to senior living facility. Iie expressed his opinion that the access to this senior living facility should be from King Street. Mr. Goldstein asked that this be tabled until further research can be done. Dr. Flatau, of 17 Reunion Road, addressed the Board. He concurred with Nh-. Goldstein in that Reunion Road should not be used to access the senior living facility. The people who will move into the facility will need assistance. There will be three shifts of people coming and going, there will be ambulets entering and exiting, there will be visitors, and delivery trucks and all of this traffic will be coming through Reunion Road. The sidewalk issue should be tied to the senior living facility access. Since the traffic coming from the Senior Living Facility will be the same amount whether or not they come out from King Sheet or Reunion Road to King Street, the residents cannot understand why the Village is not considering using King Street. Mr. Greg Broudin, of 21 Legendary Circle, addressed the Board. He noted that his home would be impacted by the installation of sidewalks. He felt that putting sidewalks in front of the homes actually would create more of a safety issue. He noted that there is a decline from the roadway to the homes. This slope could be a potential safety hazard. He presented the Board with photographs of the area. He felt that in solving one safety issue, another safety issue should not be created. Mr. Bill Furley, another resident of Bellefair, addressed the Board. He felt that the sidewalks were not appropriate. The placement of the sidewalks needs to be studied as it is not a simple issue of just pouring concrete. A lot of landscaping work has been completed. He also noted that the nursing home access is a problem that needs to be discussed. As the population of the senior living facility age, they will need greater assistance and greater assistance means more vehicles. He also felt that the sidewalk issue and the access to the senior living facility were tied together. He asked that the Board request farther studies be done on both matters. He suggested that a committee be formed to research this issue. He offered to serve on this committee. Dr. Joan Goodman of Reunion Road addressed the Board. She agreed with her neighbors that the trucks and delivery vehicles will be a hazard to the community. It is a concern, especially for the children of Bellefair. She stated that the sidewalks and the access are really one combined issue and should be addressed as such. 5 Dr. Ken Schiffer, Pediatrician, addressed the Board. He is also a resident of Bellefair. He felt that the plan to have all traffic traverse Reunion Road was kept a secret from the purchasers on Reunion Road. The concept of a modern self- sustaining community was kept until now. The noise and the additional traffic will destroy the local property value. Mr. Ken Heller of Lincoln Avenue addressed the Board. He found all of the comments and discussion interesting. He noted that he has attended the meetings over the years and reminded the Board of how the contractor pleaded for substandard roadways. The narrower the roadway, the more homes could be constructed. He felt that the developer dictated what it wanted, and now it is still coming before the Board requesting additional changes. He also noted that Reunion Road was always going to be used as the main thoroughfare to and from the nursing home. He could not understand how, if it was always in the plans, people were now confused. He asked for clarification on this matter. Mr. Neil DeLuca of the Bellefair Home and Land Company addressed the Board. He noted that the Bellefair Home & Land Company is the applicant. He noted that the issue of ingress and egress to the senior living facility was the center of discussion for all of the Village Boards for many months. If the Board wished to revisit that issue, he would be willing. However, lie asked that the issue of sidewalks, the matter before the Board, be discussed. He stated that because the season is ending, it is important for the developer to have direction on this issue. If concrete will be poured, then it must be done soon. He noted that the applicant was responding to concerns from the homeowners who did not want these sidewalks to be constructed. Mr. Deluca noted that there are scores of Bellefair residents walking in the streets everyday -- even those streets that do have sidewalks. The sidewalks were not recommended for safety reasons, but rather to promote the pedestrian friendly nature of Bellefair. As the developer looks to complete the Bellefair construction, it now finds that all major construction needs to be completed as quickly as possible. The 28 homes that have been constructed on Reunion Road are now ready to install the sidewalks, however, the residents have asked that the sidewalks be eliminated. The developer is ready to accept the responsibility and is prepared to construct the sidewalk. The developer is now before the Board of Trustees seeking direction, and will respect any decision made by the Village. Mr. Mitchell Franz, of Legendary Circle, addressed the Board. He noted that he walks around Legendary Circle and never has had any problems. There is a feeling of security and comfort in the area and sidewalks are not needed. 6 Mayor Filipowski reminded everyone that the issue before the Board this evening is the issue of sidewalks and the issue of access to the Senior Living Facility. Having made this clear, he called upon Mr. Kvinge for a brief summary regarding the elimination of sidewalks. Mr. David Kvinge, of Frederick P. Clark Associates, addressed the Board. He noted that initially this was all part of the Planned Unit Development Zone a floating zone which allows for a mix of uses, primarily residential but with other uses, i.e.: the senior living facility. The P.U.D. concept has a process for approval. There is a concept plan presented. Then it moves on to a detailed site plan review. There is a subdivision process in between. There is an Environmental Impact Statement prepared. This process took years to go through. All the potential environmental impacts, including traffic, noise and pedestrian safety were looked at. Pedestrian circulation was an important part of the D.E.I.S. Mr. Kvinge noted that this amendment to the site plan requires that the applicant come back to the Village and formally revisit all of the information that was presented. A lot of study and analysis went into the original approvals for this P.U.D. The issue of eliminating the sidewalks needs to be researched. Mr. Kvinge noted that the Planning Board, after their review of the application, has determined that this proposal does not constitute a minor amendment to the site plan. Thus, a public hearing was scheduled. There were studies and analysis completed on this issue that resulted in the sidewalks being shown on the site plan. The Board must revisit all the information in making their decision. Trustee Larry Rand noted that it was his understanding that when the P.U.D. was approved it incorporated the Senior Living Facility. Although he was not on the Board at the time of the approvals, it is clear that when the original site plan was approved the Senior Living Facility was a part of the P.U.D. Access was laid out before construction began. He asked Mr. Kvinge whether or not these two issues are separate, or if they need to be looked at simultaneously. Mr. Kvinge noted that with regard to Reunion, there will be additional traffic generated from the facility. The original traffic studies need to be reviewed, and perhaps additional studies need to be done. Legendary Circle and Millennium Road could be taken separately. He noted, however, that the issue of ingress and egress to the senior living facility is a separate issue.that, if necessary, can be dealt with at a later date. Trustee Santon noted that there will be a service entrance on King Street, and that King Street will be used for the construction work. He asked for background on the use of Reunion Road for access to the facility. He thought that perhaps in the future a discussion of whether or not the curb cut on King Street could be 7 expanded for use as the primary access to the senior living facility. He did agree, however, that at this time the application before the Board was whether or not eliminating the sidewalks was considered a minor amendment. Phyllis Luftschein, of 10 Reunion Road, addressed the Board. She asked what made these roads the choice roads -- Legendary, Millennium and Reunion -- for sidewalks. Why were some roads chosen and not others? Mr. Kvinge stated that this is a very good question. He suggested that the developer respond to this question. Mr. Kevin McManus, representative for the developer, addressed the Board. He noted that there were many issues in terms of the sidewalks. The choice of sidewalks was established with the intent to encourage pedestrian circulation. Impervious surfaces were discussed at length. The game plan of the project was to provide a pedestrian friendly community. Elaine Winik, of 6 Reunion Road, addressed the Board. She noted that now that construction is complete, and people are living on and using the roads, things have changed. She also noted that a new developer is now handling the Assisted Living Facilities, and changes to the original plans have been made. She felt that the two issues of sidewalks and egress/ingress to the senior living facility were really tied together. She hoped that they would be addressed together. Nancy Flatau of 17 Heirloom Lane addressed the Board. She noted that access of emergency vehicles to the senior living facility is a big concern. Mr. Kvinge noted that the service access from King Street will also serve as an emergency-access to the senior living facility. All large delivery trucks are slated to use this access. Mr. Kvinge stated that research into the conditions of the site plan approval will have to be reviewed. Mayor Filipowski stated that research would have to be done, utilizing the knowledge of the Police Chief, the Fire Chief, and the Building Inspector and Engineer. Bernie Holzman, of 25 Reunion Road, addressed the Board. He noted that he is the owner of the last home on Reunion Road. He stated that he was told that the area of the Assisted Living Facility was going to be blocked off. Furthermore, the sales representative stated that the big empty lot next to the home would be closed off and there would be a parking area adjacent to his property, not a driveway to be used as the entrance to the facility. J The homeowner of 1 Heirloom Circle addressed the Board. He noted that he was the second resident of Bellefair. He spoke in support of eliminating the sidewalks. He felt that the plans that were conceived six years ago need to be reviewed because now that people live in this development they need to -be considered. Carol Goodman, of 6 Legendary Circle, addressed the Board. She stated that in her opinion Reunion Road as an egress/ingrees has not been researched adequately. Issues discussed six years ago need to be revisited. With regard to the sidewalk issue, she questioned what the basis for the conclusion that there is a safety issue. She felt that this matter required further research. Mr. David Kvinge noted that the Planning Board had concerns about pedestrian safety. The concerns centered largely on the reduction in the width of the road from the Village's standard of 28'. These roadways are 24' in width. It is incumbent upon the applicant to provide the analysis required to resolve the concerns to the satisfaction of the Board of Trustees. Mayor Filipowski noted that a number of people have telephoned him. Many people are in favor of sidewalks, but they don't want to make waves. These sidewalks were on the plan and everyone knew that they were going to be there. He read a letter from Jennifer and Peter Schlacker, who wrote in favor of the sidewalks. Mr. Shafer, another resident, also wrote to the Board in favor of sidewalks. Dr. Joan Goodman addressed the Board for a second time. She questioned if the senior living facility was separate from Bellefair, or part of P.U.D. Mr. Kvinge responded that it was always part of the P.U.D. In addition, Forest City Daly, the owner of the Senior Living Facility, has representation on the Bellefair Homeowners Association. It is an important part of the P.U.D. Dr. Goodman noted that speeding in the community is a problem. There are no speed limit signs within Bellefair. She asked for assistance from the Village to control the speed limit. Chief Robert Santoro noted the Village's speed limit is 30 mph. He also noted that the Police Department patrols the roadways in Bellefair Mr. Goldstein addressed the Board for a second time. He asked for clarification of the slightly different use for the nursing home and whether or not the original design called for the main access to the facility to be on King Street. He again reiterated that the representation made to the residents was that the emergency 9 J access was on Reunion Road and the majority of the traffic would be entering and exiting through King Street. Mr. Kvinge noted that the design of the access road has not changed since the site plan was approved. Both the New York State and Connecticut State Department of Transportation held many discussions on this issue. The Town of Greenwich was also involved. The decision was to use Reunion. Road for access once construction is completed. During construction, traffic will come in from King Street. Although there was a change and there is now a slightly different use for the senior living facility, it was always proposed that there would be a senior living facility within the P.U.D. Fiuthermore, going back to 1997 the access to the senior living facility was always on Reunion Road. The plan was approved with one access road—Reunion Road. Mayor Filipowski reiterated that the plans going back to 1997 show Reunion Road as the access road to the senior living facility. Consultants were called in on all of the issues, and that is how the decisions were made regarding the access, the number of units, and the assisted living facility. Mr. Roger Matles, a resident of 2 Heirloom Lane and a member of the Homeowners Association, addressed the Board. He noted that his personal concern surrounded the fact that all of the studies were done six years ago. All results were hypothetical. The entrance on King Street was shown and only restricted access was shown on Reunion Road. The reality could be substantially different now, six years later. It is in the Village's best interest to make sure that safety is addressed. King Street is a very busy street. He suggested looking into installing a traffic signal at the entrance of Bellefair. Ms. Rickoon, of 2 Reunion Road, addressed the Board. She stated that safety is the one issue that carmot be argued against. She felt that corrections need to be made to this plan. She asked that the Board take the time and make these corrections. Susan Avonler addressed the sidewalk issue. She stated that she walks the roadways all the time and she does not feel unsafe walking the roadways. She was in favor of eliminating the sidewalks. Mr. Goldstein, of 23 Reunion Road, noted that Reunion Road is a narrow roadway. He asked that the access through Reunion Road versus King Street be reviewed. He requested the date when the decision was made to use Reunion Road instead of King Street. 10 Mayor Filipowski once again stated that the decision to use Reunion Road as the access road was made in 1997. Ed Beane, Esq., Village Counsel, noted that the decision was made to use Reunion Road and it clearly appears on the site plan. The decision was made, and a Resolution was adopted. The site plan never changed. At this time there is no application being made to review this decision. The application before the Board is only the elimination of the sidewalks on three of the roadways. A sidewalk application cannot be taken and changed into an egress/ingress application. No one on the Board is saying that they will not look at an application to change the access to the senior living facility, they are only saying that no application currently exists. Mayor Filipowski noted that there is a process that needs to be followed. It is a tedious process, but one that needs to be followed through. As there were no more comments or questions about the sidewalks, he asked for a motion to close the public hearing. Trustee Rand expressed his opinion that that the Senior Facility should be part of the process. Trustee Santon commented that when. this application regarding the elimination of sidewalks was first addressed the question was raised regarding where the Homeowners Association fits into this decision. Residents are split between wanting the sidewalks, and not wanting them. He asked for an official resolution from the Homeowners Association telling the Board of Trustees what direction they would like to see this decision go. He asked if they would like the road to remain a private road. Mr. Beane stated that if the residents were seriously considering malting this roadway a-private roadway then he would be happy to discuss this option with them. Kevin McManus responded as the representative for Forest City Daly, and a member of the Homeowners Association. He stated that they have no objection to primary access being on King Street, however, he noted that the original site plans called for access on Reunion Road. Primary emergency access is wherever it can be made into a site. In terms of sidewalks, Forest City Daly is indifferent to the issue. Mr. Bradbury, Village Administrator, noted that there are outstanding issues that need to be addressed. The Village's Consultant, F.P. Clark, has listed several of these issues that need to be addressed and, at this time, many are still outstanding. 11 Ethan Blank of 5 Milestone Road responded to Trustee Santon's comments. He noted that it is not within the Homeowners Association Board's power to make this type of decision. What the Homeowners Association tried to do was facilitate the process, and act as an interface. The Homeowners Association is looking toward the dedication of the roadways. Mr. Deluca offered a potential solution. The dedication of the roadways is a concern. All of the conditions in the approved site plan must be met before the streets can be dedicated. The first proposal is to make a decision on Legendary Circle and Millennium Place. There will be a performance bond left in place by the developer that will be more than adequate to solve the Village's concerns regarding sidewalks. The streets can be dedicated and if at the end of the process it turns out that the Board decides that sidewalks are a safety issue, then the Village would have the money available. The developer will take its lead from the Village's Counsel. Mr. Ken Heller of Lincoln Avenue stressed that all of the roads within Bellefair should be up to speed before the Village takes responsibility for them. Mr, Beane noted that everything that was said tonight will be taken into consideration and a decision will be made with respect to the application before the Board -- the sidewalks. The decision will be rendered and announced at a subsequent meeting. On a motion made by Trustee Brackman, and seconded by Trustee Degling, the public hearing was closed. TRUSTEE BRACKMAN VOTING AYE TRUSTEE DEGLING VOTING AYE TRUSTEE RAND VOTING AYE TRUSTEE SANTON VOTING AYE MAYOR FILIPOWSKI VOTING AYE Mayor Filipowski called for a brief adjournment. Upon the Board's return, he called for the second item under Public Hearings: 12 2. CONSIDERING THE APPLICATION OF 699 WESTCHESTER AVENUE RYE TOWN HILTON HOTEL AMENDED SITE PLAN APPROVAL, SECTION 1, BLOCK 5, LOT 18C. Bruno Gioffre, Esq., of the firm Gioffre & Gioffre, addressed the Board. Also in attendance was Nancy Wilson of the Lauretano Sign Company, and the Senior Representative for the Hilton. Mr. Gioffre noted that this application has already been before the Zoning Board of Appeal and the Architectural Review Board. The Hilton, a stellar force in this community, is requesting permission to replace the existing signage. Mr. Gioffre noted that the Hilton, worldwide, has changed its signs. Just as important, if not more important, is the safety issue that will be addressed by the new signs. The lack of proper signage causes traffic difficulties on Westchester Avenue. The applicant is looking to provide better recognition for the hotel, increase the safety of its patrons, and do this in keeping with the character of the neighborhood. Mr. Gioffre asked Ms. Nancy Wilson to address the Board. She briefly described what the signage will look like, flow it is recognizable, where it will be situated and how the lighting is such that it will permit recognition but not cause any offense to the community. It was noted that the Hilton does not have the ability to install one sign in the triangular area in the beginning of the driveway as this is a right-of-way owned by the State. The consequence is the signage must be put in the manner and locations where it is now proposed. Nancy noted that three signs are proposed. There are two signs proposed for the main entrance and one proposed for the service entrance. These signs will be blue in color, with white lettering. The letters will be illuminated on the two entrance signs only. When it is illuminated, in the evening, only the white letters will show up, the blue part will not. The service entrance sign will not be illuminated. There will also be flood lighting aimed at all of the signs. Ms. Wilson presented the Board with photographs of the proposed signs, and a survey map of Westchester Avenue. Trustee Rand asked what the full name of the facility was. The Director of the Hilton noted that the Hilton has recently their policy regarding the names of their hotels. The new name is the Hilton Rye Town. The purpose of the change was to place the name, Hilton, before the location. 13 On a motion made by Trustee Rand, and seconded by Trustee Brackman, the public hearing was closed. TRUSTEE BRACKMAN VOTING AYE TRUSTEE DEGLING VOTING AYE TRUSTEE RAND VOTING AYE TRUSTEE SANTON VOTING AYE MAYOR FILIPOWSKI VOTING AYE Mayor Filipowski asked that the first item under Resolutions be taken out of order at this time. 1. 699 WESTCHESTER AVENUE RYE TOWN HILTON HOTEL AMENDED SITE PLAN APPROVAL SECTION 1, BLOCK 5, LOT 18C Mr. Bradbury read the following Resolution: RESOLUTION 699 WESTCHESTER AVENUE HILTON RYE TOWN HOTEL AMENDED SITE PLAN APPROVAL SECTION 1, BLOCK 5, LOT 18C WHEREAS, the Applicant, Nancy Wilson, acting on behalf of the property owner, Rye Hilton, has submitted an application to the Village of Rye Brook requesting Amended Site Plan Approval for the proposed replacement of three (3) existing signs with three (3) new internally-illuminated signs for the Hilton Rye Town Hotel located at 699 Westchester Avenue; and WHEREAS, the property is known as Tax Parcel No. 1-5-18C and is located in the H-1 Hotel Zoning District; and WHEREAS, all conditions and stipulations of the previously granted Special Permit and Site Development Plan Approvals are hereby incorporated and made conditions of this approval; and WHEREAS, the Village Board of Trustees has reviewed and accepted as adequate the information submitted by the applicant in support of the application, including a Cover Memorandum describing the proposed action, Site Plan application form, Short Environmental Assessment Form (EAF), photographs of the existing signs prepared by Nancy Wilson, agent for the Lauretano Sign Group on behalf of the applicant, and the following plans: 14 I. Sheet titled "Service Entrance Survey," dated 3130/00, prepared by Ward Carpenter Engineers,White Plains,New York; 2. Sheet titled "Survey of Entrance into Hilton Rye Town," dated 10/7/99, prepared by Ward Carpenter Engineers,White Plains,New York; 3. pour sheets titled"Hilton Rye Town,"various dates, prepared by Lauretano Sign Group, Terryville, Connecticut, depicting the proposed signs; and WHEREAS, the Village Board of Trustees referred the application to the Village's Planning Consultant on June 26, 2001, and the Village's Planning Consultant submitted comments and recommendations to the Village Board of Trustees by memorandum dated August 2, 2001; and WHEREAS, the proposed new signs will be of approximately same area and location as the existing signs; and WHEREAS, the Village Zoning Board of Appeals unanimously granted the required variances at its June 5, 2001 meeting; and WHEREAS, the Village Architectural Review Board granted approval of the sign design, colors, and materials at its July 18, 2001 meeting; and WHEREAS, the Village Board of Trustees is familiar with the Site and all aspects of the Project and has been satisfied that the Project will comply with the Site Development Plan standards and requirements of the Village of Rye Brook Code, except as otherwise noted; and WHEREAS, the Village Board of Trustees determined that the proposed action is an unlisted action pursuant to Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law and 6 NYCRR Part 617 for which the Village of Rye Brook Board of Trustees is the Lead Agency and the only Involved Agency for the environmental review with respect to the approval of said Amended Site Plan; and WHEREAS, a duly advertised public hearing on the application was held on August 28, 2001 in the Rye Brook Village Hall, at which time all those wishing to be heard were given the opportunity to be heard, and the public hearing was closed on that date. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Village of Rye Brook Board of Trustees hereby adopts and incorporates as findings and determinations the recitations and statements set forth above as if fully set forth and resolved herein; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Village of Rye Brook Board of Trustees, in accordance with Article 8 of the State Environmental Conservation Law and 6 NYCRR Part 617, and upon review of the EAF and all other application materials that were prepared for this action, hereby adopts a Negative Declaration since the Project will result in only minor physical changes to the site, visual impacts will be minimal, and any disturbance 15 associated with the Project will be controlled through the proper implementation and maintenance of erosion and sediment controls; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Village of Rye Brook Board of Trustees grants the requested Amended Site Plan Approval, subject to the following conditions: 1. A copy of the final plans, as approved by the Architectural Review Board, shall be submitted to the Building Inspector for inclusion in the file. 2. The sides of the signs facing residential areas, in particular the northwestern most sign, shall be opaque so that internal illumination will not be visible from adjacent residential properties. 3. The applicant shall submit written documentation that all necessary County approvals have been obtained, or that no such approvals were required, prior to issuance of any building permits. On a motion made by Trustee Degling, and seconded by Trustee Brackman the following resolution was adopted: TRUSTEE BRACKMAN VOTING AYE TRUSTEE DEGLING VOTING AYE TRUSTEE RAND VOTING AYE TRUSTEE SANTON VOTING AYE MAYOR FILIPOWSKI VOTING AYE 4. CONSIDERING A LOCAL LAW TO AMEND CHAPTER 240, THE VILLAGE VEHICLE AND TRAFFIC LAW Mr. Bradbury noted that this was a public hearing. Essentially, this is an amendment to install stop signs at Hidden Pond Court and Long Ridge Drive, and Park Ridge Court and Long Ridge Drive. In addition, no parking signs will also be installed 110' from Ridge Street within Hidden Falls. These recommendations have been reviewed by staff and the Traffic Commission. There being no comments, Mayor Filipowski asked for a motion to close the public hearing. 16 On a motion made by Tt-ustee Rand, and seconded by Trustee Degling, the public hearing was closed TRUSTEE BRACKMAN VOTING AYE TRUS'T'EE DEGLING VOTING AYE TRUS'T'EE RAND VOTING AYE TRUSTEE SANTON VOTING AYE MAYOR FILIPOWSKI VOTING AYE At this time the Board moved to the Resolution section of the meeting. RESOLUTIONS: 2. AUTHORIZING THE CHIEF OF POLICE TO RESTRICT THE USE OF CERTAIN PARKING SPACES IN THE PARKING LOT OF THE VILLAGE HALL OF THE VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK Mr. Bradbury read the following Resolution: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CHIEF OF POLICE TO RESTRICT THE USE OF CERTAIN PARKING SPACES IN THE PARKING LOT OF THE VILLAGE HALL OF THE VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK RESOLVED, that the Chief of Police of the Village of Rye Brook is authorized to restrict the use-of four (4) parking spaces in the lower level parking lot of the Village Hall of the Village of Rye Brook, 938 King Street,Rye Brook,New York; and be it further RESOLVED, that the use of two (2) of these parking spaces shall be restricted to use by police vehicles only and a sign shall be erected in front of these spaces specifying the restriction on their use; and be it further RESOLVED, that the use of two (2) of these parking spaces shall be restricted to use for police business only and a sign shall be erected in front of these spaces specifying the restriction on their use; and be it further RESOLVED, that the Chief of Police of the Village of Rye Brook is authorized to execute and deliver all documents necessary or appropriate to accomplish the purpose of this Resolution. 17 On a motion. made by Trustee Rand, and seconded by Trustee Santon the Resolution was adopted. TRUSTEE BRACKMAN VOTING AYE TRUSTEE DEGLING VOTING A'S'E TRUSTEE RAND VOTING AYE TRUSTEE SANTON VOTING AYE MAYOR FILIEPOWSKI VOTING AYE 3. AUTHORIZING THE VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK TO APPLY TO NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR A PERMIT TO ERECT A "DO NOT BLOCK DRIVEWAY" SIGN AT THE ENTRANCE TO THE PORT CHESTER MIDDLE SCHOOL Mr. Bradbury read the following Resolution: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK TO APPLY TO NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR A PERMIT TO ERECT A "DO NOT BLOCK DRIVEWAY" SIGN AT THE ENTRANCE TO THE PORT CHESTER MIDDLE SCHOOL WHEREAS, traffic conditions on Westchester Avenue (Route 120A) and North Ridge Street cause the driveway of the Port Chester Middle School to be blocked by vehicular traffic, and WHEREAS, erecting a sign stating "DO NOT BLOCK DRIVEWAY' within the right-of-way of the Village of Rye Brook, along Westchester Avenue, at the driveway of the Port Chester Middle School, has been proposed as a means to prevent the driveway from being blocked by vehicular traffic traveling along Westchester Avenue, and WHEREAS, the New York State Department of Transportation was consulted since Westchester Avenue is a state road, and WHEREAS, the New York State Department of Transportation advised the Village of Rye Brook to apply for a permit to erect the proposed sign. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Village of Rye Brook is authorized to apply to the New York State Department of Transportation for permission to erect a "DO NOT BLOCK 18 DRIVEWAY" sign at the driveway to the Port Chester Middle School along Westchester Avenue in the right-of-way of the Village of Rye Brook; and it is further RESOLVED, that the Village Engineer is authorized to execute and deliver all documents necessary or appropriate to accomplish the purpose of this Resolution. On a motion made by Trustee Brackman, acid seconded by Trustee Degling the Resolution was adopted. TRUSTEE BRACKMAN VOTING AYE TRUSTEE DEGLING VOTING AYE TRUSTEE RAND VOTING AYE TRUSTEE SANTON VO'T'ING AYE MAYOR FILIPOWSIU VOTING AYE Mr. Ken Heller of Lincoln Avenue felt that this sign would only make the traffic on Westchester Avenue worse. Chief Santoro stated that the sign will say "Do Not Block Driveway," and not stop here on red. This is just a reminder to be a little courteous and let someone out. It should help a.little bit. This sign was requested by the school. 4. ADOPTING OF LOCAL LAW AMENDING CHAPTER 240, VILLAGE VEIIICLES AND TRAFFIC LAW. Mr. Bradbwy read the following Resolution: RESOLUTION ADOPTION OF LOCAL LAW AMENDING CHAPTER 240, VILLAGE VEHICLE,S AND TRAFFIC LAW RESOLVED, that the Local Law amending Sections 240-11 and 240-19 of Chapter 240 (Vehicles and Traffic) of the Code of the Village of Rye Brook to add certain stop intersections and parking regulations be and hereby is enacted into law as Local Law # 4- 2001. 19 On a motion made by Trustee Brackman, and seconded by Trustee Degling the Resolution was adopted. TRUSTEE BRACKMAN VOTING AYE TRUSTEE DEGLING VOTING AYE TRUSTEE RAND VOTING AYE TRUS'T'EE SANTON VOTING AYE MAYOR FILIPOWSKI VOTING AYE Trustee Degling noted that there are other inconsistencies in our local laws, and he hoped that they would be looked at as well. Mr. Beane noted that this is just the surface of a very deep iceberg that needs correction. They will work in conjunction with the Chief and the Police Department in order to make all necessary corrections. 5. APPOINTMENT OF OFFICE ASSISTANT(AUTOMATED SYSTEMS) Mr. Bradbury read the following Resolution: RESOLUTION APPOINTMENT OF OFFICE ASSISTANT (AUTOMATED SYSTEMS) RESOLVED, that Marie Piciulli, of 5 Terrace Court, Rye Brook, New York, is hereby appointed to the position of Office Assistant (Automated Systems) 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 for the position is $37,585 with an effective start date of August 29, 2001, and a probationary period of 26 (twenty-six) weeks. On a motion made by Trustee Brackman, and seconded by Trustee Degling the Resolution was adopted. TRUSTEE BRACKMAN VOTING AYE TRUSTEE DEGLING VOTING AYE TRUSTEE RAND VOTING AYE TRUSTEE SANTON VOTING AYE MAYOR FILIPOWSKI VOTING AYE 20 Mr. Bradbury noted that this is simply a title change and no position was open or filled. G. APPOINTMENT OF LABORER Mr. Bradbury read the following Resolution: RESOLUTION APPOINTMENT OF LABORER RESOLVED, that Paul Vinci, of 44 Poplar Street, Port Chester, New York, is hereby appointed to the position of Laborer with the Village of Rye Brook as per the conditions stated in the letter of offer dated August 8, 2001, subject to the Civil Service procedures of the State of New York; and be it FURTHER RESOLVED, that the annual salary for the position is $46,887 with an effective start date of September 3, 2001, and a probationary period of 26 (twenty-six) weeks. On a motion made by Trustee Brackman, and seconded by Trustee Degling 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 congratulated Mr. Vinci on his new appointment. 21 7. APPOINTMENT OF ASSISTANT TO THE VILLAGE ADMINISTRATOR Mr. Bradbury read the following Resolution. RESOLUTION' APPOINTMENT OF ASSISTANT TO THE VILLAGE ADMINISTRATOR RESOLVED, that Ingrid Richards, of 111 North Broadway, White Plains, New York, is hereby appointed provisionally to the position of Assistant to the Village Administrator 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 $35,640 with an effective start date of August 29, 2001. 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 S. APPOINTMENT OF A MEMBER OF THE ADVISORY COUNCIL ON ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION TO SERVE AS A LIAISON TO THE AIRPORT ADVISORY COUNCIL Mr. Bradbury read the following Resolution: RESOLUTION APPOINTMENT OF A MEMBER OF THE ADVISORY COUNCIL ON ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION TO SERVE AS A LIAISON TO THE AIRPORT ADVISORY COUNCIL RESOLVED, that Harvey Schiller of 26 Meadowlark Road, Rye Brook, New York is hereby appointed as liaison to the Airport Advisory Council for a term that shall expire on the first Monday in April 2003. 22 On a motion made by Trustee Brackman, and seconded by Trustee Degling the Resolution was adopted: TRUSTEE BRACKMAN VOTING AYE TRUSTEE DEGLING VOTING AYE TIIUSTEE RAND VOTING AYE TRUSTEE SANTON VOTING AYE MAYOR FILIPOWSKI VOTING AYE 9. APPOINTMENT TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Mr. Bradbury read the following Resolution: RESOLUTION APPOINTMENT TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS RESOLVED, that Ronald M. Rettner of 34 Bonwit Road, Rye Brook, New York is hereby appointed to the un-expired term of Sheila Davidson which will expire on the first Monday in April 2003. On a motion made by Trustee Brackman, and seconded by Trustee Degling the following resolution was adopted: TRUSTEE BRACKMAN VOTING AYE TRUSTEE DEGLING VOTING AYE TRUSTEE RAND VOTING AYE TRUSTEE SANTON VOTING AYE MAYOR FILIPOWSKI VOTING AYE Trustee Santon felt that all vacancies should be posted in order to allow interested residents to apply. Mayor Fihpowski responded that all vacancies, at the end of a fixed term, are posted. This position became available in the middle of a term due to a resignation and it is the Mayor's right to fill the unexpired term, subject to the Board approval. 23 Trustee Degling stated that in recent months the Zoning Board of Appeals had difficulty reaching a quorum because of the resignation of Ms. Davidson. This appointment ensures that the Zoning Board can function as intended. 10. CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HE, FOR THE CONSIDERATION OF THE KOCHER 2-LOT SUBDIVISION, SECTION 1, BLOCK 23, LOTS 8 AND 9 Mr. Bradbury read the following Resolution: RESOLUTION CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE CONSIDERATION OF THE KOCHER 2-LOT SUBDIVISION SECTION t, BLOCK 23,LOTS 8 and 9 WHEREAS, Maureen and Jay Kocher have made an application to the Village of Rye Brook requesting Preliminary Subdivision Approval to re-subdivide the existing 11,481 square-foot parcel of land into two (2) building lots, 5,743 square feet (Lot A, Tax Lot 8) and 5,738 square feet (Lot B, Tax Lot 9) in size, and WHEREAS, the subject property is located on the north side of Franklin Street approximately 400 feet west of the intersection formed by Franklin Street and Merritt Street, within the R2-F Two-Family Residential Zoning District and is shown on the Tax Map as Section 1,Block 23, Lots 8 and 9. NOW, THEREFORE, 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 Village of Rye Brook Board of Trustees shall conduct a Public Hearing on Tuesday, September 11, 2001 at 7:30 pm at the Village Offices located at 938 King Street, Rye Brook,New York on the subject application; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Clerk shall publish a notice of public hearing as required by law. 24 On a motion made by Trustee Brackman, and seconded by Trustee Degling the following resolution was adopted: TRUSTEE BRACKMAN VOTING AYE TRUSTEE DEGLING VOTING AYE TRUSTEE RAND VOTING AYE TRUSTEE SANTON VOTING AYE MAYOR FILIPOWSIG VOTING AYE 11, APPROVAL OF MINUTES May S, 2001 May 22, 2001 July 10, 2001 Mayor Filipowski asked the Board if the summaries could be taken collectively. Trustee Degling requested a correction to the May 8, 2001 summary, on page lb. Mayor Filipowski read through the paragraph in question and made a minor modification which was acceptable to the Board. Subject to the correction made, Mayor Filipowski asked for a motion to approve all of the summaries. On a motion made by Trustee Brackman, and seconded by Trustee Degling, the Resolution was adopted. TRUSTEE BRACKMAN VOTING AYE TRUSTEE DEGLING VOTING AYE TRUSTEE RAND VOTING AYE TRUSTEE SANTON VOTING AYE MAYOR FILIPOWSKI VOTING AYE Trustee Brackman asked that members of the public wishing to address the Board be allowed to do so at this point because of the late hour. The Board, and Mayor Filipowski, agreed. Mr. Tom Telesca, of 3 Red Roof Drive in the Blind Brook Estate Development, addressed the Board. He stated that the residents of this area are conceived with the proposed ball field at Pine Ridge Park. He presented the Board with a Petition. The concern is that there 25 is a major liability due to the positioning of the field. There are safety concerns for the 18 children who reside in the neighborhood. These children. play in the cul-de-sacs. The proposed position of the baseball field will promote excessive traffic into the area. In addition, he felt that his home was very vulnerable to damage by ball hit towards the house. Trustee Degling asked if there was a suggestion. of what should be done. Mr. Telesca stated that originally the landscape architect proposed to place the held in the northwest corner. This area is screened by large trees and would be the safer choice. Mayor Filipowski noted, for the record, that several communications were received in opposition to Mr. Telesca's request. In addition, there were several factors reviewed by the Village's consultants and staff, that came into play in malting the decision of the positioning of the field. The Mayor asked Mr. Bradbury to review the situation and prepare a report for a subsequent meeting. A request was made to take the discussion items out of order. Mayor Filipowski then called for item #2. DISCUSSIONS: 2. "'VARIOUS DRAINAGE RELATED ISSUES IN BVRAM RIDGE AREA Trustee Santon noted that he placed this item on the agenda for discussion. He noted that the Byram Ridge Area encompasses Hillandale Road, Beechwood Boulevard, Loch Lane, Edgewood Drive, Woodland Drive, and King Street. He presented an Aerial Photograph from 1990, provided by Westchester County, and a CAD Map. Trustee Santon noted that there are a number of storm water issues that effect the entire region. Through research, lie has discovered that this is a regional problem that the Village needs to address and solve. He described the water flow throughout the area, the one and only retention pond which is on the Phillips property at 17 Loch Lane, and the eventual exit to the tributary in the Meadowlark area. He pointed out that the exposed above ground channel that runs between the Albrecht property and the Phillips property does not flow into the pipe. Rather it becomes a river, flooding the Albrecht property. The drainage system cannot handle the volume of water. Mrs. Evelyn Phillips, of Loch Lane, addressed the Board. She noted that silt is now growing in the middle of her pored to the point that it has become an island. This pond was 14" deep and it is now only 1" deep. During a recent storm her property was completely inundated and the water came up to her windows of the home. She noted that a videotape of the problem has been presented to the Board for their 26 review. The houses that were constructed on Little Kings Lane created a problem that has now existed for many years. The Village is responsible for the damage to the pond and the time to correct it is now. She noted that she has been a resident of the area for 50 years. After many, many phone calls, and visits fiom the Village's Engineer, at age 82 she asked how much longer it would be before the Village corrects this problem. Rebecca Albrecht, of Hillandale Road, addressed the Board. She agreed with Trustee Santon that this is a region wide problem and it needs to be dealt with. This problem began in the 1950's. The problem was temporarily fixed in the 1960's when the 48" drainpipe was installed. However, every time someone subdivides it creates another problem because by adding impervious surface you are displacing water. That is where the silt is coming from. The problem is getting much worse. This most recent storm was a summer rain and, as the Board is aware, there was extensive flooding. This area is notorious for being land of the rock and land of the swamp. Lillian Sands, of Hillandale Road, addressed Board. She noted that this area has drainage problems and now is the time to address them. She noted that 20 years ago the Board turned down a .request to subdivide a parcel of property owned by the Altman family because of drainage. Now, a new request to subdivide is before the Board. These drainage issues shill remain. She asked that this matter be given careful consideration. Howard Hoffman, of 812 King Street, addressed the Board. He noted that the development of Little Dings Lane has had a significant effect on his property. He stated that his property was also flooded during the most recent rainfall. He stated that violations were issued approximately 14 months ago but nothing came of it. He asked for the status. Mr. Beane stated that he would investigate the violations and their status. Mayor Filipowski stated that the Village will look into this matter. There being no further discussion, Mayor Filipowski called for the next item on the agenda. 1. ZONING LAS' AND SI'Z'E PLAN COMPLIANCE ISSUES AT 900 KING STREET Trustee Santon noted that in his opinion there is a fundamental underlying zoning issue with 900 King Street. He began by noting that in 1998 when the Resolution was passed, the zoning law was violated. A site plan amendment or review was not 27 referred to the Planning Board, and there was no public hearing held. He noted that he has submitted a variety of documentation on this matter, and he has asked the Village's Counsel to do research on the legal side. Mr. Beane stated that he has reviewed all of the material that has been submitted. He was aware that there was a Court decision, which included a validation of a site plan, He needed to review the 1998 information, including the minutes of the meeting when the Resolution took place in order to respond to Trustee Santon's inquiries. Mr. Beane has been asked if there were non-conformities to the way the Resolution came about and was passed. Mr. Beane noted that this Resolution occurred three years ago, and the statute of limitations has long passed. There is no question that in 1981 the Court validated a specific building with specific dimensions that included 163,000 square feet. There is no question that the 1998 Resolution refers to 170,000 plus square feet. That was based upon a petition that was brought pursuant to the Rye Town Code. He asked for time to review the documents, speak with the Building Inspector and then come back to the Board with the information. The real issue at this time is what avenues the Village has at this time. Mr. Beane noted that there is no application before the Village at this time. He also noted that the .real issue at this time is to find out what remedies the Village has. Trustee Santon asked that Mr. Beane have a response prepared for the next meeting. He felt that this building will have an ongoing impact. He noted that although it was stated that the site plan documents were missing, he found them effortlessly in the archive room in the Town of Rye offices. He even located a copy of the site plan that everyone .in the Building Department told him was lost. He felt that the Town of Rye went through the process, violated SEQRA, and it ultimately became a landmark case. By 1982 when the decision came down the building was already built. He also-noted that there is a record of appeals in the Supreme Court in White Plains with a 700-page document. Mr. Beane noted that much of this issue should be dealt with in an Executive Session. He noted that under the new Zoning Codes, the Board of Trustees has the power to approve whatever modifications may be made to a site plan. The last step in this process is what will happen when this building is occupied. What happened from 1979 on does not preclude the Village from being very much involved in the last step. Trustee Santon noted that this building was supposed to be a two-story building. The problem is that they did not build what was on the site plan. The bottom line is that the counsel for the former owner manipulated the process. Trustee Santon felt that there was going to be an impact to the environment, i.e.; when the building becomes occupied and they stall expanding the parking area 28 Mr. Beane stated that when the occupancy takes place is when the Village Board can get involved. Right now there are no applications before the Board, Trustee Santon felt that the Board should not be entertaining the application from Sprint to install a wireless facility on the rooftop of this building when the building is non-conforming. Mayor Filipowski noted that the findings in the case was that the Town of Rye failed to comply with obligations proposed by SEQRA. That was the decision. The decision also said that if there was going to be one user, a single corporate tenant, then the ratio in use could have been increased. Mayor Filipowski called for the last item on the agenda. 3. VILLAGE TREE PLANTING PROGRAM AND COMPOSTING OPERATIONS It was noted that Trustee Santon put this item on the agenda. Mr. Carosi has supplied Trustee Santon with a list of what trees have been identified for potential new plantings and/or removal. Trustee Santon noted that on the list from Mr. Carosi there was no mention of the various right-of-ways that should be candidates for additional tree planting. He listed several cul-de-sacs that he felt should have trees planted on them. He felt that the Village should consider hiring outside sources to assist with the tree-planting program. " Trustee Santon addressed the Composting Operation. He recently learned that the compost site has some sort of an informal bartering agreement which should be made formal. It was his understanding that several area contractors have the key to this facility. He felt that this situation needs to be evaluated, and control of the situation needs to be taken. He felt that if the Village made the compost more readily available to the residents it may be able to get rid of it much quicker, 29 VILLAGE ADMINISTRATOR REPORT: At 11:11 p.m., Mr. Bradbury was asked for a brief report. Mr. Bradbury noted that the Village has received a letter from Boris Vays of the Department of Transportation looking for final comments with regard to the work at the Hutch. He asked that anyone having concerns contact the Village Administrator's office, in writing. The Village will review the work that the State has completed. The balance of the Administrator's Report, in consideration of the late hour, would be held for the next scheduled meeting. Mayor Filipowski noted that the Board of Trustee meetings have been running too long. He asked for suggestions from members of the Board on ways to limit the agenda. Trustee Rand noted that the Board has the right to adopt any procedure in order to facilitate the work of the Board, A discipline must be applied. The three-minute time limit needs to be adhered to for comments from the general pubic. The Board members also need to limit their comments to the three minutes as well. He noted that the discussion on Bellefair at this meeting lasted for two hours and although it was informative, it did go too long. He suggested special meetings for items such as the Bellefair public hearing. He noted that the agendas have been getting longer and longer. Trustee Brackman agreed with Trustee Rand. In addition she suggested that the number of agenda items placed on the agenda should also be limited. She suggested one item per Trustee per meeting. Trustee Degling noted that historically an agenda meeting was held for the first meeting of the month, and a regular meeting was held for the second meeting. Mayor Filipowski noted that this proposed change was a rule about the Board. He asked that the Board try a three-minute rule on everything. In addition, everyone would have one opportunity to speak, with the exception of the Mayor who is directing the speakers at the meeting. Trustee Rand felt that this would provide everyone with the discipline that is needed. He also noted that previously there was an informal concept that Trustee meetings were called at 11:00 p.m. Trustee Santon pointed out that as elected officials he felt strongly about the right to put things on the agenda and bring things up. Additional meetings can be called. The Trustees are here to serve the residents and he felt that it is his right and privilege to place items on 30 the agenda. Each Trustee has this right. He also felt that the three-minute rule was a form of censorship. Mayor Filipowski stated that it was not censorship but rather limiting the length of time that it takes to make a point. Limiting the Board's comments will be an effective way to shorten the meetings. If this doesn't work, then the Board can work to set up the agenda. Things need to be moved along. Trustee Brackman noted that this is a way of preventing one member of the Board from being unfair and dominating the airways. Having one person dominating the airways, consistently, is unfair to everyone from the volunteers and to the community members that watch the meetings. There are many issues to be covered. She also noted that some issues discussed at Board meetings do not belong at the meeting. A lot of the things can be dealt with administratively or in Executive Sessions. Many issues have been dealing with far too many minute details. There are issues raised that are very interesting, and that should be brought up. On a motion made by Trustee Brackman and seconded by Trustee Degling, a three-minute rule was put into place. This will be placed as a Resolution on the next agenda. Trustee Santon stated that a unanimous decision was required on this issue. Mayor Filipowski stated that the Board of Trustees set its own rules. Trustee Santon persisted. Mr. Beane responded by reading from a Resolution adopted on May 10, 2001, Mayor Filipowski noted that this item will be placed on the agenda and it will include limitationof discussion items, comments from Board members, and also an expansion of the 72-hour amount of time for placing items on the agenda. He suggested a three-day timeframe, Mr. Bradbury agreed, noting that items for agendas should be submitted no later than the Wednesday before a. scheduled meeting, no later than 4:30 p.m. Trustee Santon felt that there would be an impact on free speech by limiting discussion items. He felt that he was being prevented from follow-up comments. Mayor Filipowski noted that the Board was setting policy. All questions are addressed to the Mayor, as Chair of the meeting. This rule is not compromising anyone's ability to free speech. It is simply asking everyone to be brief and direct with their comments; and relevant. Mayor Filipowski noted that the Board needed to go into an Executive Session for litigation and personnel. On a motion made by Trustee Degling, and seconded by Trustee Brackman, the Executive Session was scheduled for immediately following the meeting. Mayor Filipowski asked Ingrid to call the roll: 31 TRUSTEE BRACKMAN VOTING AYE TRUSTEE DEGLING VOTING AYE TRUSTEE RAND VOTING AYE TRUSTEE SANTON VOTING AYE MAYOR FILIPOWSKI VOTING AYE UNFINISHED BUSINESS: Mayor Filipowski reminded everyone that the dedication for the Korean War Monument was scheduled for September 3, 2001 at Crawford Park at noon. He also noted that there is a work session scheduled for September 12, 2001 at 7:30 p.m, concerning Ridge Street. The session will be held at the Village Hall in the Board Room. Any interested resident can attend. Mayor Filipowski noted that the next meetings of the Board of Trustees was scheduled for September 11, 2001 and September 25, 2001 There being no further business before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 11:45 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Christoph r J. Bradbury Village Clerk 32