Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2016-01-14 - Planning Board Meeting Documents
January 14, 2016 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SUBMISSION OF A REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO THE RYE BROOK BOARD OF TRUSTEES ON AN APPLICATION BY SUN HOMES FOR APPROVAL OF A PUD SITE PLAN FOR A RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY OF 110 SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING UNITS ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1100 KING STREET BE IT RESOLVED, that the Rye Brook Planning Board hereby submits the attached Report and Recommendation to the Rye Brook Board of Trustees on an application by Sun Homes for approval of a PUD Site Plan for a residential community of 110 single-family dwelling units on real property located at 1100 King Street. On a motion by second by , Mr. Michael Nowak, Village Engineer, called the roll: APPROVING THE REFERRAL RESOLUTION: Ayes: Nays: Abstain: Excused: ACCURSO, GOODMAN, GRZAN, MORLINO, RICHMAN, SCHOEN, TARTAGLIA REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION FROM THE RYE BROOK PLANNING BOARD TO THE RYE BROOK BOARD OF TRUSTEES ON AN APPLICATION BY SUN HOMES FOR APPROVAL OF A PUD SITE PLAN FOR A RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY OF 110 SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING UNITS ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1100 KING STREET I. APPLICATION OVERVIEW The Rye Brook Board of Trustees is currently considering an application by Sun Homes ("Applicant") for approval of a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Site Plan for a residential community consisting of 110 dwelling units on real property located at 1100 King Street (the "Property"). Specifically, the Applicant seeks approval of a Site Plan for the construction of a residential community on Parcel 129.25-1-1, located directly behind the Reckson Executive Park on King Street. The development will include 100 attached and detached market rate dwellings, 10 affordable housing units as well as a pool, club house, streets, on-street parking areas, communal open space and storm water retention areas. On July 28, 2015, the Board of Trustees adopted a Negative Declaration for the proposed action which included certain amendments to Zoning Code, rezoning the property from OB-1 to the PUD Zoning District, approval of a PUD Concept Plan and PUD Site Plan, as well as all related approvals and permits, such as a Steep Slopes permit and any necessary Wetland Permit approval or extension. The Negative Declaration which culminated the BOT's SEQRA review included a full and comprehensive review of potential impacts such as traffic, stormwater, wetlands, steep slopes, wildlife, tree removal, community character and other relevant categories of potential environmental impact. At the same meeting, the Board of Trustees adopted a local law which made certain text amendments to Section 250-7.E of the Village Zoning Code concerning PUD developments, including authorization for the Board of Trustees to waive the floor area limitation for residential developments and to waive certain buffer area requirements. On August 18, 2015, the Board of Trustees re-zoned to the PUD Zoning District and approved a PUD Concept Plan. Thereafter, on or about September 17, 2015 the Applicant submitted its PUD Site Plan application to the Board of Trustees which was referred to the Planning Board on October 2, 2015 for consideration and for a report and recommendation. On November 24, 2015, the Board of Trustees referred to the Planning Board the Applicant's request for an extension of its existing Wetland Permit Approval. The Planning Board reviewed the PUD Site Plan application at its meetings on October 8, 2015, November 12, 2015, December 10, 2015, and January 14, 2016 and reviewed the Wetland Permit extension request at its December 10, 2015 meeting. II. DISCUSSION The following topics are those which the Planning Board primarily focused discussion upon: -2- 1. Density/Floor Area Waiver The approved PUD Concept Plan permits up to 110 residential units in the general configuration shown on the Concept Plan. The number of units proposed by the Applicant translates to a density of approximately 3.6 units per acre which is consistent with the neighboring development of Bellefair (1.9 units per acre), the Arbors (6.8 units per acre) and Doral Greens (7.9 units per acre). The proposed units per acre also falls under the maximum of 6 units per acre permitted with a PUD, as per the Village Code. The Applicant is proposing a total floor area which exceeds the 9,000 square-foot floor area per acre limitation set forth in the Village's PUD requirements. Specifically, the PUD Site Plan proposes 12,109 square feet of floor area per acre. Therefore the Applicant is requesting a 3,109 square foot waiver which is a 35% increase over the allowable floor area. On July 28, 2015 the Board of Trustees adopted a local law which amended Section 250-7.E(3) of the Zoning Code to allow the Board of Trustees to waive the 9,000 square foot/acre floor area limitation applicable to PVDs, in whole or in part, if an applicant provides affordable housing units equivalent to 10% of the proposed market rate units. This amendment to the Zoning Code applies to this PUD and any future proposed PUDs within the Village. It is the Planning Board's understanding that the Zoning Code amendment does not state an applicant is entitled to a floor area waiver if the requisite number of affordable housing units is provided, but only that an applicant is elm for a waiver. It should be noted that the PUD Site Plan must contain at least 10 affordable housing units based on the schedule set forth at Section 209-3.F. Here, the -3- Applicant is providing 10 affordable housing units which is equivalent to 10% of the 100 market rate units. Thus, the Applicant is eligible for a floor area waiver. As justification for the waiver, the Applicant points to three grounds: (1) inclusion of affordable housing units which are significantly larger than the minimum size required; (2) attached garages; and (3) walk-out basements. The Planning Board does not agree that providing the required affordable housing units constitutes a valid justification for granting the waiver. Although the affordable units provide a benefit to the community, they are required by code and should not serve as the basis for a gross floor area waiver. Detached garages and walk-out basements are included in the Village's definition of Gross Floor Area. However, these features contribute positively to the design and layout of the residential community but they are included in the Villages definition of GFA and thus increase the overall GFA calculation. While it may have been possible for the Applicant to design the development without these features and comply with the floor area limitation, the inclusion of the additional floor area in the overall development does not create any adverse impacts as the property is capable of supporting the additional buildable area. Therefore, based only on the second and third ground referenced above, the Planning Board supports the requested floor area waiver. 2. Lighting Plan The revised Lighting Plan replaces the originally proposed bollard lighting with traditional lighting standards which provide more comprehensive street lighting. However, the Applicant requested consideration for eliminating some of the street -4- lighting standards to provide more minimal lighting throughout the development, keeping only the lighting standards located along the proposed extension of International Drive at internal roadway intersections, and adjacent to visitor parking spaces. In determining whether to eliminate some of the proposed lighting standards, the Board of Trustees should consider the following factors: whether the level of lighting desired (i) promotes the avoidance of car accidents involving users of the vehicular roadways that are also used by pedestrians as walkways with special consideration to vulnerable groups, e.g. pedestrians, cyclists, the elderly, the disabled, and children; (ii) enhances the nighttime environment by eliminating or mitigating lateral glare and sky lighting; and (iii) promotes energy efficiency. 3. Steep Slopes/Grading Based on the Grading Plan, approximately 175,000 cubic yards of fill will be required. For the purposes of determining the controls necessary for managing construction traffic, the Applicant should advise how much fill will be imported to the site and how much will be sourced from the site itself. The Applicant is proposing to increase the amount of slopes on the property that exceed 35% by approximately 0.61 acres, increase the amount of 25%-25% slopes by approximately 0.3 acres, decrease the amount of 15%-25% slopes by approximately 0.84 acres and decrease the amount of 0%-15% slopes by approximately 0.08 acres. The disturbance to existing slopes and creation of new slopes shown on the Grading Plan has -5- been minimized through the utilization of retaining walls, particularly between the property and the adjacent Bellefair residential development. When implementing the Grading Plan, it will be important to ensure that limits of construction are established, temporary and permanent slope stabilization measures are employed, and existing vegetation in areas adjacent to grading work is protected so as to ensure survival post construction. 4. Landscape Screening The Planning Board is concerned that the removal of existing vegetation and grading of the property may create visual impacts to neighboring properties within Doral Greens and Bellefair. To address this concern, the Applicant added a note to the landscape plan requiring all existing trees within certain buffer areas to be evaluated by a certified arborist for safety and survivability to determine whether they should remain. All healthy trees in these areas will be retained. To ensure the effectiveness of the buffer vegetation in screening the proposed development from adjacent properties, the note should be revised to state that where trees are removed from the buffer areas, additional trees shall be planted to eliminate gaps created in the existing vegetation resulting from the removal of dead, dying or diseased trees. 5. Stormwater The SWPPP submitted by the Applicant has been reviewed by DRE and determined to be acceptable. The stormwater management plan has been designed such -6- that discharge rates remain at less than 76% of the predevelopment rates and the project will achieve a 68% Runoff Reduction Volume (RRv) where 30% is required. The design of the Stormwater Management plan remains reliant upon the approved and partially constructed detention basins at the rear of the property and also includes green infrastructure techniques such as porous pavement, vegetative swale, and tree planting. 6. Water Flow/Pressure On October 9, 2015 United Water Westchester Incorporated (UWWI) issued a "Willingness to Serve" letter in which UWWI certifies it has the ability and willingness to serve the Sun Homes development. It states that "UWWI has adequate pressure and volume to serve [Sun Homes] subject to the following: the fire flow data provided was noted by Sun Homes as requiring confirmation." In a subsequent email to the Applicant dated October 28, 2015, UWWI stated the following: Please be aware that we are doing some further studies along Anderson Hill Road and will continue to study this area and that, in addition to normal maintenance activities, we may make some improvements such as water main replacements that will positively affect water service for our customers. UWWC has a Long Term Water Main Replacement Program and we continuously review and update plans and studies so we can optimize the water system improvements we make throughout our system. To confirm that surrounding properties will not experience pressure or flow issues as a result of the added demand on the water system, DBE's November 3, 2015 memorandum requests fire flow data and its December 8, 2015 memorandum requests -7- information regarding UWWI's proposed improvements, some of which information must come from UWWI. Specifically, DRE's December 8, 2015 memorandum states: United Water proposed improvements in support of this application must be detailed. A hydraulic analysis must be submitted demonstrating that surrounding properties will not experience pressure or flow issues as a result of the added demand on the system. We will gladly meet with the water company to discuss our thoughts on how to evaluate existing vs. proposed conditions. These items remain outstanding and must be addressed by the Applicant. 7. PUD Guidelines Although the Applicant has stated that no site modifications will be permitted and that such limitation will be stated in the Homeowner's Association documents, such limitation is not realistic over time. In the Village's experience, it is common for PUDs or the individual residents within a PUD to request permission for the construction of sheds, patios, decks, retaining walls, and other site modifications. According to the Applicant's consultant, an additional 11,000 square feet of impervious surface coverage could be added to the site and accommodated by the proposed stormwater management system. The Board of Trustees should consider adopting a local law similar to that adopted for the Arbors PUD to define the process and review standards for any increase in impervious surface coverage, or include in any approval resolution appropriate conditions for establishing such parameters. -8- 8. Reckson Phase I and Phase 2 As noted in the December 7, 2015 memorandum from Michael J. Izzo, Building and Fire Inspector, as well as the January 8, 2016 memorandum from F.P. Clark Associates, the PUD Site Plan is contingent upon certain revisions to the approved Reckson Phase 1 and Phase 2 Site Plans, subject to review by the Building Inspector, including the following: a. The Phase 1 and Phase 2 Site Plan shows International Drive with two traffic lanes in each direction. The PUD Site Plan shows the extension of International Drive (including the portion within Phase 1 and Phase 2) as containing only one traffic lane in each direction. Although the footprint for International Drive remains the same, the reconfiguration of the traffic lanes on Phase 1 and Phase 2 may require review and approval of an amended site plan for those parcels. b. According to the 12/7/15 memorandum from Mr. Izzo, two stone pillars located along King Street at the north end of the Phase 1/Phase 2 frontage must be relocated or removed to provide a minimum 20-foot clearance to serve as an unobstructed fire apparatus access road. Such revision may require an amendment to the approved Phase 1/Phase 1 site plan(s). C. Relocation of the existing trash enclosure and maintenance yard for Phase 1/Phase 2 may require an amendment of the approved Phase 1/Phase 2 site plan(s). Such amenities are currently in the same location as the proposed interior emergency access road and AFFH units. The Planning Board recommends that any approval of the PUD Site Plan should be conditioned upon the submittal of an application for an Amended Site Plan for Reckson Phase 1 and Phase 2 to accommodate these and any additional overall site changes that are precipitated by the proposed PUD Site Plan. -9- III. RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the foregoing, the Planning Board hereby recommends that the Board of Trustees approve the PUD Site Plan Application, including the requested floor area waiver, provided the following items are satisfactorily addressed by the Applicant: 1. Demonstrate that surrounding properties will not experience pressure or flow issues as a result of the added demand on the water system. 2. Prior to the issuance of a Building Permit, all outstanding comments of the Emergency Services Task Force in its December 7, 2016 memorandum shall be satisified. 3. Prior to the issuance of a Building Permit, submit a maintenance agreement for stormwater management facilities, including rain gardens and permeable pavers, for review of the Village Attorney as to form. Such agreement shall be recorded in the Westchester County Clerk's Office and proof of recording shall be submitted prior to the issuance of a Building Permit. 4. Prior to the issuance of a Building Permit, the approved site plan(s) for Reckson Phase 1 and Phase 2 shall be modified as necessary to accommodate aspects of the PUD Site Plan, including fire access, changes to International Drive, and relocation of the existing trash enclosure and maintenance yard at the rear of the existing parking area. 5. Prior to the issuance of a Building Permit, the note on the Landscape Plan should be revised to state that where trees are removed from the buffer areas, additional trees shall be planted to eliminate gaps created in the existing vegetation resulting from the removal of dead, dying or diseased trees. -10- 6. Introduce a proposed Local Law (similar to that established for the Arbors development) or establish conditions that define the procedural and substantive standards for subsequent increases in impervious surface coverage within the PUD Site Plan up to a maximum of 11,000 square feet of impervious surface coverage beyond that shown on the PUD Site Plan. Dated: Rye Brook, New York January 14, 2016 On motion by , seconded by , Mr. Michael Nowak, Superintendent of Public Works, called the roll: APPROVED AT THE JANUARY 14, 2016 MEETING OF THE RYE BROOK PLANNING BOARD BY A VOTE OF ACCEPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: Ayes: Nays: Abstain: Excused: ACCURSO, GOODMAN, GRZAN, MORLINO, RICHMAN, SCHOEN, TARTAGLIA -11- Dolph Rotield Engineering, P.C. CONSULTANTS & DESIGNERS 200 White Plains Road, Tarrytown, NY 10591 • (914) 631-8600 M E M O TO: Michal Nowak, Village Engineer Robert Goodman, Chairman, Planning Board FROM: Dolph Rotfeld, P.E., BCEE SUBJECT: Sun Homes Phase 3 Reckson Executive Park Village of Rye Brook DATE: January 07, 2016 As per your request, we have reviewed the following submission materials with regard to the Sun Homes, Phase 3, Reckson Executive Park Site Plan proposal, received Wednesday December 23, 2015: • Plan entitled "Sun Homes, Reckson Executive Park, Rye Brook, NY" prepared by Divney-Tung-Schwalbe revised 12/23/15; • Report entitled "Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan" prepared by Divney-Tung-Schwalbe dated December 2015; The following are our comments: Stormwater: 1 . The Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) is acceptable; the applicant has demonstrated discharge rates to remain less than 76% of the predevelopment rates and 68% Runoff Reduction Volume (RRv) to be achieved. 2. The methodology for the drain pipe sizing is questionable in that the rainfall intensity 'T' utilized seems to be the direct input value from the idf runoff curves. the value of 'T' should be based on the one hour 25 year storm event and adjusted for the time of concentration of the drainage areas. This value is typically on the order of 8 in/hr for Westchester County. Water: 1 . Details of the area wide proposed water main improvements and hydraulic analysis information from Suez North America has not yet been provided to verify that surrounding properties will not experience Dolph Rot#eld Engineering, P.C. Mr. Michal Nowak / Mr. Gary Zuckerman Page 2—January 7, 2016 pressure or flow issues as a result of the added demand on the system. Sewer: 1 . Sewer main profiles indicate a 10" sewer connection to the County Tunk sewer at the Blind Brook (plan denotes and 8" line). This pipe seems to be at a very shallow (flat) slope; no inverts or slope information has been provided. The capacity of this critical connection must be verified so as to be able to accomodate the additional flow from this development. In addition, our records indicate that there may be an additional sewer manhole prior to the County Trunk connection, this should be field verified. We will be happy to continue our review once additional information is provided. DR C: G. Schwalbe VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK Planning Board Village Hall 938 King Street Thursday, June 11, 2015 @ 7:30 p.m. AGENDA ROLL CALL MINUTES (Review of Minutes) AFFORDABLE HOUSING 1) Review of a Site Plan Application by Buckingham Partners / Sun Homes for a Planned Unit Development with a Fair and Affordable Housing component located at 1100 King Street, Rye Brook, New York, Parcel ID 129-25-1-1. • Possible Report and Recommendation PUBLIC HEARING: 2) Review of an Application by 8 Edgewood, LLC, (Frank Chiarello) for Site Plan Approval, and a Wetlands Permit to tear down an existing home and construct a new single-family dwelling on the property located at 8 Edgewood Drive, Rye Brook, New York, Parcel ID 135.28-1-28. • Considering Resolution 3) Review of an Application by Frank Madonna for approval of a Site Plan, Subdivision (Lot Merger) and Petition for Re-Zoning, to construct a mixed use Multi-Family/Retail Building on property located at 80 Bowman Avenue, Rye Brook, New York, Parcel ID.141.27-1-26, 31, 32. • Determination of Significance pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act CONTINUED BUSINESS NEW BUSINESS LOCAL LAW CONSIDERATION: Planning Board Meeting June 11, 2015 Page 1 4) Local Law Expanding Area for Professional Office Uses in the R2-F and R- 15A Zoning Districts ACTION ON NON-AGENDA MATTERS THE NEXT PLANNING BOARD MEETING: July 9, 2015 BOARD Mr. Domenic Accurso Mr. John Grzan Mr. Sal Morlino Mr. Robert Goodman Mrs. Amy Schoen Mr. Dan Tartaglia Chairman Gary Zuckerman STAFF Philip Butler, Esq., Village Counsel Marilyn Timpone-Mohamed, Village Planning Consultant Mike Nowak, Jr., Public Works Superintendent Fred Siefert, Public Access Coordinator/IT BOARD OF TRUSTEES LIAISON: Trustee David Heiser Chairman Gary Zuckerman opened the meeting by asking everyone to join him in the Pledge of Allegiance. He welcomed everyone to the June 11, 2015 Planning Board meeting, asked that all cell phones be turned off, and that anyone addressing the Board do so from the podium, using the microphone. Chairman Zuckerman introduced the Board members and the Village Staff, explaining the rules of procedure for the meeting. He made note for the public that the complete set of Planning Board Rules of Procedure can be found on the Village's website and that the meeting could be viewed on streaming video and on the Village's public access channel. Chairman Zuckerman called for the first item on the agenda. AFFORDABLE HOUSING: Planning Board Meeting June 11, 2015 Page 2 1. Review of a Site Plan Application by Buckingham Partners / Sun Homes for a Planned Unit Development with a Fair and Affordable Housing component located at 1100 King Street, Rye Brook, NY Parcel ID 129.25-1-1 William Null, Esq., of the firm of Cuddy & Feder, on behalf of Sun Homes, addressed the Board. Bill McGuinness, the applicant and principal of Sun Homes, and Jerry Schwalbe of Divney, Tung, Schwalbe were also in attendance. Mr. Null noted that on May 27th responses to comments were submitted. Mr. McGuinness addressed the Board to review one significant change. The Club House was moved from its former location at the entrance to the development on south side of the extension of International Drive to the north side so it may be seen as one enters the development; also changed was the number of parking spaces serving the Club House. Otherwise, the site plan is unchanged. Attorney Null noted that there was now a second means of egress. He hoped that the Planning Board would be making a favorable recommendation to the Village Board. Chairman Zuckerman reviewed the draft report and recommendations, and there was discussion of each item. Attorney Philip Butler, Village Counsel, read the recommendations, which include recommendations based on the April 25th site visit. Trustee Goodman noted that the review so far has been very positive; however, the project has not been developed enough to make a strong recommendation. Mr. Goodman believed the Planning Board is in favor of the application, and he agreed that the Village was in need of more affordable housing. Attorney Null noted that he believed housing was preferred to an office building. Mrs. Schoen noted that generally she favored the proposed plan. She noted that she was not taking a position as to the character of her support or lack of support. Both Chairman Zuckerman and Mr. John Grzan agreed with Mrs. Schoen. What is before the Board is a PUD Concept Plan for 110 residential units on the property. Dan Tartaglia noted that a number of other reviews and recommendations were required of the Planning Board regarding the project. Attorney Butler moved to Section B of the report and recommendations. He noted that one specific recommended change was changing the detached garages to attached garages for the 10 affordable housing units. There is concern that the units would be clustered in the Northeast corner of the property, which may create social separation for the occupants. The recommendation is for the applicant to give further consideration to positioning of the affordable units throughout the development. Also discussed were the amenities being offered to the two unit types, market and affordable. Planning Board Meeting June 11, 2015 Page 3 Mr. Grzan questioned whether the applicant was the property-owner. Attorney Null noted that there is a signed contract for the sale of the property to the Applicant. Traffic impacts were determined not to be an issue. F.P. Clark's traffic engineers reviewed the traffic study and issued a memorandum stating that outstanding comments were addressed; however, following the issuance of the memorandum, additional comments were raised by the public, including that the traffic study should include study of more than the two intersections already included. Therefore, there is a recommendation that the traffic study should be expanded to include additional intersections. Divney, Tung, Schwalbe submitted a study regarding the number of school-aged children that may be generated by the development. The study was reviewed by F.P. Clark, who noted that the study was performed using accepted methodologies and the estimates are appropriate. Concern was raised that the study numbers are too low. It was noted that the School Board has also expressed concern over this issue. Members of the Planning Board agreed that the methodology used was too generic for use with confidence in Rye Brook. Therefore, the Planning Board believed that the issue should be vetted further by the Board of Trustees. When the Board of Trustees reviews the project, it will look at the impacts of the entire community on the traffic on King Street. Mr. Goodman hoped that the community-wide impacts would be considered by the Planning Board and the Board of Trustees. Mr. Tartaglia concurred with Mr. Goodman's comments. This is an expensive project that will generate taxes for the school district. Attorney Butler reviewed concerns regarding future development in the Reckson Executive Park. The recommendation is that at a later date the applicant supply the information. The next area of discussion was the reduced size of the perimeter buffer. It was noted that the affordable units would be close to the common property line and the Reckson office parking area. Chairman Zuckerman stated that he felt that the buffer should be increased. Mr. Accurso addressed landscaping and screening. The resolution verbiage was changed in response to the comments made. The Emergency Services Task Force is involved in the review regarding fire response access and safety. Also discussed was the gross floor area (GFA) of the affordable housing units. The Planning Board recommends granting a waiver for Planning Board Meeting June 11, 2015 Page 4 the GFA of the affordable units, which are larger than the minimum required by the Village Code, but for cost reasons cannot be as large as the larger GFAs of the market-rate units. The zoning text amendments were also reviewed. Mrs. Timpone-Mohamed noted that the proposed GFAs of the buildings were not clear and should be determined so that informed decisions may be made by the reviewing Boards. Attorney Null noted that the matter will be considered and the Board of Trustees will be provided with the requested additional information. Attorney Null noted that attached and detached garages, and walk-out basements affect the total GFA of each of the units. He stated that the Applicant is not looking for more density, i.e., more units. The PUD regulations allow six units per acre, which would be a total of 180 units on the site. The Applicant proposes only 110 units. Chairman Zuckerman stated that the waiver requested would affect the size of the units, and the size of the units will determine the land area consumed by development. Chairman Zuckerman stated that the issue is the size of the units. Attorney Null felt that the discussion was a discussion for site plan review, not the Concept Plan. The walkout basements and attached garages increase the proposed GFA beyond the allowable GFA per acre of 9,000 square feet. Attorney Butler requested a general sense regarding the recommendations to be given to the Trustees. He read the draft recommendations, for which discussion ensued that included addressing the following issues: distribution of the affordable housing units throughout the project; clustering affordable housing units could require a variance; need to develop a satisfactory method for charging the affordable housing units for maintenance and amenities; demonstrating the feasibility of the dead-end turn-arounds; update of the traffic impact study; providing an increased buffer between the affordable housing units and the Reckson office parking area; providing the accurate gross floor area information for all units; providing information on covenants, easements and performance bonds; and recommending that the Board of Trustees waive certain zoning requirements in the PUD regulations for the development. Chairman Zuckerman noted that although the meeting was not a public hearing, he would call for members of the public wishing to address the matter. There being no one, on a motion by Mr. Grzan, seconded by Mrs. Schoen the roll was called to accept the following revised report and recommendations: Domenic Accurso Voting Aye John Grzan Voting Aye Sal Morlino Voting Aye Planning Board Meeting June 11, 2015 Page 5 Robert Goodman Voting Aye Amy Schoen Voting Aye Dan Tartaglia Voting Aye Chairman Gary Zuckerman Voting Aye REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION FROM THE RYE BROOK PLANNING BOARD TO THE RYE BROOK BOARD OF TRUSTEES ON AN APPLICATION BY BUCKINGHAM PARTNERS/SUN HOMES FOR APPROVAL OF A CONCEPT PLAN, ZONE CHANGE AND ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT FOR A RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY OF 110 SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING UNITS ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1100 KING STREET I. APPLICATION OVERVIEW The Rye Brook Board of Trustees is currently considering an application by Buckingham Partners/Sun Homes ("Applicant") for approval of a PUD Concept Plan, zone change and zoning text amendment for a residential community consisting of 110 dwelling units on real property located at 1100 King Street (the "Property"). Specifically, the Applicant seeks approval of a Concept Plan for the construction a residential community on Parcel 129.25-1-1, located directly behind the Reckson Executive Park (the "REP") on King Street, currently in the OB-1 Zoning District. The development will include 100 attached and detached market rate dwellings, 10 affordable housing units as well as a pool, club house, streets, on-street parking areas, communal open space and storm water retention areas. The Applicant has also mentioned the possibility of a local trail network as part of the project. To facilitate the project, the Applicant requests that the Board of Trustees re-zone the Property from the OB-1 to the PUD Zoning District and that the PUD zoning regulations be amended to allow the Board of Trustees to alter or waive certain floor area and buffer zone requirements to permit larger units than would otherwise be permitted in the PUD development. Proposed text changes were submitted to the Village on pages 4- 5 of the letter from William S. Null, Esq., dated February 10, 2015. On February 24, 2015, the Board of Trustees referred the application to the Planning Board for consideration and for a report and recommendation thereon pursuant to Section 209-3 of the Village Code. The Planning Board reviewed the application at its meetings on March 12, 2015; April 9, 2015; May 14, 2015, and June 11, 2015. In addition, the Planning Board members met with the Applicant for a site visit on April 25, Planning Board Meeting June 11, 2015 Page 6 2015, at the Applicant's residential development in Darien, Connecticut, to observe the Applicant's work first-hand. II. MATERIALS REVIEWED The Planning Board reviewed the following printed materials in connection with its review of the application and preparation of the within Report and Recommendation: 1. Full Environmental Assessment Form Part 1 and EAF Mapper Summary 2. Traffic Impact Study by Maser Consulting, P.A., Hawthorne, N.Y., dated January 14, 2015 3. ALTA/ACSM Land Title Survey prepared by Joseph Link, Mahopac, N.Y., dated as of January 26, 2015, signed February 9, 2015 4. Letter and Petition to the Mayor Rosenberg and the Board of Trustees prepared by Cuddy and Feder, LLP, White Plains, N.Y. dated February 10, 2015 5. Memorandum to the Village Engineer and the Planning Board prepared by Dolph Rotfeld Engineering, P.C.,Tarrytown,N.Y. dated March 3, 2015 6. Memorandum to the Chairman and Planning Board prepared by F.P. Clark Associates, Inc., dated March 9, 2015 7. Memorandum to the Chairman and Planning Board prepared by F.P. Clark Associates, Inc., dated March 31, 2015 8. Letter to the Chairman and Planning Board prepared by Cuddy and Feder, LLP, White Plains, N.Y. dated May 7, 2015 9. School Aged Children, Sun Homes, Rye Brook prepared by Divney, Tung, Schwalbe, LLP, White Plains, N.Y. no date 10. Revised Rendered Illustrative Plan, Affordable Home Plans and Elevations, illustrative plan prepared by Divney, Tung, Schwalbe, LLP, White Plains, N.Y., no date 11. Rendered Illustrative Plan, Home Plans and Elevations, illustrative plan prepared by Divney, Tung, Schwalbe, LLP, White Plains, N.Y.,no date 12. Memorandum and Revised Traffic Impact Study, prepared by Maser Consulting, P.A., Hawthorne, N.Y. dated April 15, 2015 13. Letter to Chairman and Planning Board prepared by Cuddy& Feder, LLP, White Plains, N.Y., dated May 7, 2015 14. Rye Brook Emergency Service Task Force Review Memorandum to William Null, Esq. prepared by the Rye Brook Building and Fire Inspector, dated May 7, 2015 15. Memorandum to the Chairman and Planning Board prepared by F.P. Clark Associates, Inc., dated May 13, 2015 16. Memorandum to the Village Engineer, Chairman and Planning Board prepared by Dolph Rotfeld Engineering, P.C., Tarrytown, N.Y., dated May 14, 2015 17. Memorandum to the Chairman and Planning Board prepared by F.P. Clark Associates, Inc., dated May 19, 2015 18. Memorandum to Planning Board and Village Planning Consultant prepared by Maser Consulting, P.A., Hawthorne, N.Y., dated May 26, 2015 19. Letter to Chairman and Planning Board prepared by Cuddy and Feder, LLP, White Plains, N.Y., dated May 27, 2015 20. Memorandum to the Chairman and Planning Board prepared by F.P. Clark Associates, Inc., dated May 29, 2015 Planning Board Meeting June 11, 2015 Page 7 21. Memorandum to the Chairman and Planning Board prepared by F.P. Clark Associates, Inc., date June 1, 2015 22. Engineer's Plans, prepared by Divney, Tung, Schwalbe, LLP, White Plains, N.Y.: Sheet Number Sheet Title Date SP-0.1 Illustrative Plan Undated SP-1.0 Conceptual Site Plan 02/09/15, revised 5/7/15, 5/13/15, 5/27/15 SP-2.0 Conceptual Grading&Utility Plan 02/09/15,revised 5/13/15 No Number Misc. site cross-sections and Undated, revised 5/13/15, floor plans 5/27/15 III. DISCUSSION The Planning Board, upon review of the aforementioned materials and based upon discussions at its March 12, April 9, May 14 and June 11, 2015 meetings, and the Darien site visit on April 25, 2015, makes the following observations, comments and recommendations with respect to the application: A. General Comments The Planning Board notes that the scope of the Report and Recommendation is limited to review of the PUD Concept Plan, proposed re-zoning and zoning text amendments requested by the Applicant. Review at this stage is considered Phase 1 of the two-phased review for all Planned Unit Developments in the Village pursuant to Section 250-7(E)(4) of the Village Code. Phase II shall include subdivision approval (if applicable) and detailed site plan review, which shall include all necessary drawings, specifications and such details concerning covenants, easements, conditions and performance bonds. B. Affordable Housing Units 1. Configuration The proposal includes ten (10) affordable housing units clustered together near the northeast corner of the site. As currently proposed, these units will be architecturally indistinguishable and, like the market rate units, will feature full-length (i.e. 20 foot) driveways and garages located beneath the homes. They will also have screened and landscaped rear yards similar to those of the market rate units. They will also be the largest affordable housing units in the County to date. Planning Board Meeting June 11, 2015 Page 8 Originally, these units did not feature attached garages or driveways. Rather, attached garages were located across the street from the proposed units. In addition, the units stood out from the market rate units in that they were attached in groupings of five (split between two buildings) rather than being detached or grouped together in buildings of two or three units apiece. The Planning Board also noted that the units were clustered together in the northeast corner of the property rather than being interspersed among the market rate units. Overall, the Planning Board favors the proposed design of the affordable units and commends the Applicant on developing a creative design that will make the units visually indistinguishable from the rest of the development. The changes made to these units so far will greatly enhance their cohesion with the rest of the proposal. However, the Planning Board continues to express concern over the clustering of the units in a single location. The Village Code requires: AFFH Units shall be physically integrated into the design of the development and shall be distributed among the various housing unit sizes ... in the same proportion as market-rate units in the development. The AFFH Units shall not be distinguishable from the market-rate units from the outside or building exteriors. Interior finishes and furnishings may differ in quality from those of the market-rate units. Village Code § 250-26.11'(4)(b). The Planning Board feels that clustering the units in a single area might violate this section of the Village Code and engender social separation between families residing in the affordable housing units and those residing in the rest of the development. Therefore, the Planning Board recommends that the Applicant give further consideration to the placement of the affordable housing units. 2. Maintenance Costs and Amenities The Planning Board asked the Applicant how the owners of the affordable units will be charged for maintenance of common improvements, such as landscaping and access roads, and for use of recreational amenities, including the club house and pool. The Board cautioned the Applicant that excluding the owners of the affordable housing units from using the amenities may be viewed as discriminatory. The Board expressed doubt that the Applicant will be able to set up an organizational structure which creates two separate homeowners associations (one for the market rate unit owners and one for the affordable housing unit owners), or in the alternative, provide the affordable unit owners an a la carte option to purchase membership to use the amenities, without inviting discrimination claims. Planning Board Meeting June 11, 2015 Page 9 The Applicant explained that if the affordable housing unit owners are required to pay the same charges as the market rate unit owners, the cost will likely be more than the affordable unit owners can afford. Conversely, allowing the affordable housing units owners to pay less for the same amenities would require the market rate unit owners to subsidize the affordable housing units. An acceptable resolution of this issue still needs to be determined, but is more appropriately addressed during the Phase 11 site plan review. Regardless of the outcome, the Planning Board urges the Board of Trustees to seek a resolution which is consistent with the requirements for affordable housing units established by the Monitor appointed pursuant to the affordable housing settlement with the County and best achieves the Village's goal of fully-integrated affordable housing. C. Traffic The Applicant provided a Traffic Impact Study by Maser Consulting, P.A., dated January 14, 2015, concerning the predicted traffic impacts associated with the Project. This study was later supplemented by memoranda from Maser dated April 15, 2015 and May 26, 2015. The Village Planning Consultant, Michael Galante, of F.P. Clark Associates, provided responsive comments to each of these documents in a series of memoranda dated March 31, 2015, May 19, 2015 and June 1, 2015. At the conclusion of his review of the Applicant's supplemented traffic study, Mr. Galante was satisfied that, with adjustment to traffic signal timing, the proposal will not cause significant adverse traffic impacts. The traffic signal timing adjustments would need to be approved by both the NYS DOT and the Connecticut DOT, which has jurisdiction over the intersection of Anderson Hill Road and King Street. The only outstanding comment from Mr. Galante is his recommendation that two dead ends located within the development be converted to turnabouts. Mr. Galante accepts the Applicant's representation that turnabouts at these locations are not feasible due to lack of available space, but noted that he will investigate the matter further during formal site plan review. Several Planning Board members continue to express concern about the scope of the Maser Study. It has been noted that the Study covers only two intersections: (i) Anderson Hill Road and King Street and (ii) International Drive and King Street. However, based on the size of the proposed development, the Planning Board members question whether there may be significant impacts on other intersections and roads as well. The Planning Board observes that cumulative traffic impacts are slowly congesting many of the Village's heavily trafficked roadways and intersections, a condition which may worsen as a direct result of this development. Therefore, the Planning Board members feel that consideration should be given to expanding the scope of the Traffic Planning Board Meeting June 11, 2015 Page 10 Impact Study to determine if mitigation measures may be needed elsewhere than at the two intersections noted above. D. School Children The Applicant provided an undated analysis by Divney, Tung, Schwalbe, LLP, entitled "School Aged Children, Sun Homes, Rye Brook" (the "Divney Analysis") concerning the estimated number of school aged children that will enter the Blind Brook/Rye Union Free School District if the Project is built as currently proposed. The Divney Analysis concluded that, depending on the methodology, either 39, 46 or 72 school aged children are expected to attend Blind Brook schools in connection with this Project. On review, the Village Planning Consultant, Marilyn Timpone-Mohamed of F.P. Clark Associates, concluded that the Divney Analysis was based on accepted methodology and assumptions used in calculating school aged children and, in fact, was based on more reliable assumptions than would have been used under the Rutgers Study standard, which is often used as a metric for the calculation of school aged children. However, at the Planning Board meeting on May 14, 2015, Chairman Zuckerman noted that the number of school aged children from the Bellefair development was significantly greater than the number of school aged children estimated for that project. Doubt was also expressed regarding these numbers at a recent meeting of the Blind Brook School Board and at a joint meeting of the School Board and the Rye Brook Board of Trustees on June 8, 2015, during which it was claimed that more than 100 children could attend Blind Brook schools from the development. The Board members also noted that an increase in school aged children could also have an indirect impact on traffic in certain areas of the Village. Therefore, the Board of Trustees may wish to collect additional information on this subject to further assess the potential impact associated with school aged children generated by the development. E. Buffering The Board expressed concern over the level of screening separating the development and the REP parking lot to the north/northeast of the project site. In particular, the Planning Board felt that the buffer between the affordable housing units and the REP parking lot might not be sufficient to sufficiently screen the rear of those units from the parking lot. In response to these comments, the Applicant has increased the proposed buffer on this side of the project site from 30 feet to 50 feet. The Board remains concerned about the buffer, however, and has suggested that the Applicant contact the owner of the REP and explore whether the REP owner is be willing to give up or reduce some of the parking lot to increase the width of the buffer. In its letter of May Planning Board Meeting June 11, 2015 Page 11 27, 2015, the Applicant stated that it contacted the owner of the REP concerning this issue and is awaiting a response. F. Emergency Services The Applicant was provided with a Memorandum prepared by the Rye Brook Emergency Services Task Force (the "ESTF") concerning the Project. Although the Applicant has since addressed several of the comments set forth in the ESTF's memo, the Applicant deferred several items to the formal site plan review stage (Phase II). These items include: 1. Updating the site plan to reflect minimum 26- foot- wide streets for 20 feet in length at each fire hydrant throughout the Project site; 2. Review of the road naming and numbering scheme with the ESTF; 3. Preparation of an emergency vehicle routing and turning radius plan; and 4. Line of sight calculations for the traffic signal at the intersection of International Drive and King Street. These items should be addressed at the appropriate time if this application moves forward under the current proposal. G. Zoning Text Amendment The proposed amendments to the PUD regulations would allow the Board of Trustees to waive dimensional requirements under the Village Zoning Ordinance to allow greater development within PUD developments. The proposed amendment mentions specifically the Board of Trustees' ability to waive the 9,000 square foot gross floor area limit prescribed for housing units in a PUD development if the applicant proposed affordable housing units equal to 10 percent of the market rate units proposed. The amendment would also allow the Board of Trustees to reduce the mandatory buffer, as determined under Section 250-7(E)(2)(e) of the Village Code. The proposed amendment to Section 750-7.E.(3) reads: Authority. The Village Board shall be the municipal authority designated to grant approval for rezoning to a PUD District, as well as the PUD concept plan, after recommendation of the Planning Board. The Village Board shall retain the jurisdiction to waive dimensional requirements of the Zoning Ordinance to allow for flexibility of design in the site plan, including but not limited to: La) The standards and requirements set forth in Section 250-7.E.(2)(d)f ll may be waived to permit additional floor area to be developed in such PUD development, beyond the Planning Board Meeting June 11, 2015 Page 12 9,000 square foot limit, if the development provides Affordable Housing equivalent to ten (10) percent in number of the market-rate dwelling units in such development, provided that such Affordable Housing is restricted for a fifty (50) year term consistent with the Westchester County settlement and is marketed in accordance with the terms of such settlement. The buffer areas set forth in Section 250-7.E.(2)(e) may be reduced where the PUD development abuts commercial office improvements. The Planning Board feels this text should be modified to insert the phrase "in whole or in part" following the word "waive" where it appears in Sections 250-7.E.(3) and 250-7.E.(3)(a). The effect of this additional text is to clarify that, in modifying the PUD bulk zoning requirements, the Board of Trustees retains authority to waive the bulk requirements or reduce them. Also, the legal cite to the County's affordable housing settlement should be inserted into the language in Section 250-7.E.(3)(b) to provide specific reference to that matter. The Applicant heard these suggested changes and consented to them at the Planning Board meeting on June 11, 2015. In addition, as per the Planning Consultant's request, the Applicant should provide gross floor area calculations for all unit models showing what the gross floor area would be (a) if the walk-out basements and attached garages are factored into the gross floor area; and (b) if the walk-out basements are excluded from the gross floor area calculations. This information should be provided during the formal site plan stage (Phase II). H. COVENANTS,EASEMENTS AND PERFORMANCE BONDS Consistent with Section 250-7(E)(4)(b)(2) of the Village Code, the Applicant should provide the Board of Trustees with general information concerning any restrictive covenants, easements, conditions and/or performance bonds it expects will be needed as part of Phase 11 of the Application, with the understanding that preparation of actual transaction documents will not take place until the latter portion of Phase 11 of the application. IV. RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the foregoing, the Planning Board hereby recommends to the Board of Trustees that the Application for a PUD Concept Plan, re-zoning and zoning text amendment be GRANTED, provided (i) the zoning text amendment should be revised as discussed herein, (ii) the Applicant should provide the information noted in Section H, Planning Board Meeting June 11, 2015 Page 13 above; and (iii) the Applicant should address the following outstanding issues/comments during the formal site plan (Phase II) of the application: 1. Develop a satisfactory method for charging the owners of the affordable housing units for maintenance of common improvements and use of the on-site amenities without overburdening them. 2. Demonstrate the infeasibility of turnabouts in the locations of the two dead ends depicted on the Conceptual Site Plan. 3. Provide an explanation concerning the scope of the Maser Traffic Impact Study and demonstrate to the Board of Trustees that further analysis of roads and intersections beyond those covered in the existing study is not necessary. 4. Explore options for increasing or augmenting the proposed buffer between the affordable housing units and the REP parking lot. 5. Provide the gross floor area information requested by the Village Planning Consultant. 6. Address outstanding ESTF comments. In addition, the Board of Trustees should consider requiring that the Applicant disperse the affordable housing units among the market rate units in accordance with Section 250- 26.1.F.(4)(b) of the Village Code. Dated: Rye Brook, New York Philip Butler, Esq., Village Counsel, read the following resolution: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SUBMISSION OF A REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO THE RYE BROOK BOARD OF TRUSTEES ON AN APPLICATION BY BUCKINGHAM PARTNERS/SUN HOMES FOR APPROVAL OF A CONCEPT PLAN, ZONE CHANGE AND ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT FOR A RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY OF 110 SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING UNITS ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1100 KING STREET BE IT RESOLVED, that the Rye Brook Planning Board hereby submits the attached Report and Recommendation, as amended, to the Rye Brook Board of Trustees on an application by Buckingham Partners/Sun Homes for approval of a Concept Plan, zone change and zoning text amendment for a residential community of 110 single- family dwelling units on real property located at 1100 King Street. On a motion by Mr. Grzan, seconded by Mrs. Schoen the resolution was adopted.The roll was called by Michal Nowak, Superintendent of Public Works: Planning Board Meeting June 11, 2015 Page 14 Domenic Accurso Voting Aye John Grzan Voting Aye Sal Morlino Voting Aye Robert Goodman Voting Aye Amy Schoen Voting Aye Dan Tartaglia Voting Aye Chairman Gary Zuckerman Voting Aye 2) Review of an application by 8 Edgewood, LLC, (Frank Chiarello) for Site Plan Approval, and a Wetlands permit to tear down an existing home and construct a new single-family dwelling on the property located at 8 Edgewood Drive, Rye Brook, New York, Parcel ID 135.28-1-28. • Considering a Resolution Chairman Zuckerman recused himself from the matter as his home was within the notification area. Robert Goodman became the Acting Chairman. Acting Chairman Goodman noted that th application was on the agenda for a public hearing. He called for a motion and a second to open the public hearing. On a motion and second, the roll was called and the public hearing was opened: Domenic Accurso Voting Aye John Grzan Voting Aye Sal Morlino Voting Aye Amy Schoen Voting Aye Dan Tartaglia Voting Aye Acting Chairman Robert Goodman Voting Aye The applicant was asked to present the project. A representative of the Applicant addressed the Board. He explained that the project was a tear down with the goal of constructing a new home. There would be site modifications, which include moving the location of the driveway. He noted that the property is surrounded by wetlands. The only proposed activity in the wetlands would be the removal of invasive plant species and planting of other plants in order to keep the wetland healthy. Planning Board Meeting June 11, 2015 Page 15 The Applicant had been before the Zoning Board of Appeals. The number of variances was reduced because changes were made to the plans by the Applicant. The remaining required variances were granted by the Zoning Board of Appeals, so the Applicant is back before the Planning Board for approval of the site plan and wetlands permit. Mrs. Marilyn Timpone-Mohamed noted that the Applicant submitted a revised landscaping plan. There is a note on the landscape plan regarding proposed improvement of the wetlands. Mr. Nowak noted that the Village was reviewing storm water runoff and the storm water management plan. There are some areas of concern regarding the ability of the site to handle the run-off on-site. Acting Chairman Goodman noted that a resolution would not be considered because additional review was required. The storm water issues must be addressed. He asked that the public hearing remain open. Acting Chairman Goodman called for members of the public wishing to address the Board. Mr. Don Moscato, 5 Edgewood Drive, addressed the Board. He noted an issue with storm water management in the area. He recounted that he and his wife moved into their home in 1976, and that there was an easement for the Town of Rye for the drainage system that was installed from Edgewood Drive to Rich Manor Park to collect water run- off from Edgewood Drive for discharge into the wetlands in the park. He noted that the Applicant's stormwater management plan includes Cultec units, which would drain into this system. He observed that water flows into this area during a heavy rain. Since 5 and 7 Edgewood Drive are situated at the lowest point, and storm water cannot flow onto Beechwood Circle, it is diverted onto his property. Mr. Moscato believed that the proposed plan for 8 Edgewood would exacerbate the existing drainage problem of storm water ponding in the rear yards of 5 and 7 Edgewood Drive, which is a hazard. He wanted the Planning Board and the Village Engineering Consultant to review the matter. Acting Chairman Goodman thanked Mr. Moscato for the information, which would be taken into consideration. The Applicant's representative noted that his job, when planning storm water management for the property, was to reduce the run-off peak flow. He believed that the proposed plan does this, and it reduces the amount of water coming off of the property that enters the catch basin across the street. Andrew Kaminsky, 4 Edgewood Drive spoke in support of Mr. Moscato's comments. He noted that he constructed his home nine years ago and his plans made sure that water Planning Board Meeting June 11, 2015 Page 16 runoff from his property was controlled. He noted that no one actually knows what is going on in the underground drainage pipes. He believed that it was time to address the matter. Mr. Accurso noted that there are problems in this area, including that many homes have sump pumps and illegal drainage connections that send flood water from basements into the sanitary sewer system. He suggested that the new home should not be built with a basement. Mr. Nowak noted that there were a number of areas that needed to be addressed with respect to drainage. The Applicant must meet the management requirement for a 25-year storm. After construction, if the stormwater management system is designed correctly, the amount of run-off leaving the site will decrease because it will be captured by the Cultec units. The over flow from the Cultec storage will drain into the storm water system via a catch basin. He observed that after a rain there is some standing water in the area, but it does not have flow during a normal day. The drain pipe mentioned by the speakers discharges into Rich Manor Park. He stated that the storm water system will be reviewed, as will the man hole where the backup occurs. The sewer line is shallow, so during a tremendous storm event, the sewer backs up. Smoke testing was done in the area and no illegal connections were found. Leo Goldman of Edgewood Drive addressed the Board. He noted the poor condition of the property and that nothing changed since the Zoning Board of Appeals meeting. In his opinion, the property is an eye sore. The Applicant said he would keep the property tended, but he has not done so. The Acting Chairman asked that the matter be adjourned to the July meeting of the Planning Board. The roll was called and the matter was adjourned: Domenic Accurso Voting Aye John Grzan Voting Aye Sal Morlino Voting Aye Amy Schoen Voting Aye Dan Tartaglia Voting Aye Acting Chairman Robert Goodman Voting Aye 3) Review of an Application by Frank Madonna for approval of a Site Plan, Subdivision (Lot Merger) and Petition for Re-Zoning, to construct a mixed Planning Board Meeting June 11, 2015 Page 17 use Multi-Family/Retail Building on property located at 80 Bowman Avenue, Rye Brook, New York, Parcel 1D.141.27-1-26, 31, 32. Determination of Significance pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) Chairman Zuckerman returned to the Board. Chairman Zuckerman gave a procedural review of the application. At the meeting the Planning Board would attempt to make the determination of significance as required by SEQRA. Mr. Anthony Federico, architect for the applicant, addressed the Board. A comment memorandum was received from F.P. Clark; and the requested information was submitted. The Westchester County Planning comments also were addressed. Once the site plan approval is in place, Westchester County Department of Transportation will be contacted regarding the curb cut as Bowman Avenue is a County Road. Issues such as storage space for bicycles, recycling containers, sanitary flow have been addressed. Mrs. Timpone-Mohamed noted that the information Mr. Federico referenced was provided. SEQRA requirements regarding the determination of significance must be met, now that all of the information necessary to make the determination is before the Board. She reviewed the potential impacts, and the areas of no impact of the project for the Board. Chairman Zuckerman explained the proposed negative declaration. Any minor impacts to the land that may incur will be mitigated. The buildings will be landscaped to mitigate the visual impact. Best management practices will be used during construction. Traffic and parking was analyzed by a traffic and parking study, which was reviewed by the Village's consultants. A construction logistics plan will also be submitted. Hazardous materials on the project site, if encountered, will be handled appropriately. The Phase I Environmental Site Assessment looked at the site and documented hazardous material spills. A Phase II investigation was done, and it was noted that hazardous materials had not migrated to the subject property. Mr. Accurso noted his belief that the site plan is not consistent with the Village's Comprehensive Plan recommendations for the area. Attorney Butler noted that the application is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, as it is a recommendation for what Planning Board Meeting June 11, 2015 Page 18 should be considered in the area. As long as any departure from the Comprehensive Plan is a reasoned departure, such a plan would be considered consistent. It was agreed that a paragraph would be added to the Negative Declaration attachment regarding consistency of the project with the Comprehensive Plan. Attorney Butler read the following resolution: RESOLUTION ADOPTING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION IN CONNECTION WITH AN APPLICATION FOR LOT MERGER, ZONE CHANGE AND SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A MIXED-USE BUILDING ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 80 BOWMAN AVENUE WHEREAS, an application (the "Application") has been submitted to the Village of Rye Brook Planning Board by Frank and Virginia Madonna, for Bowridge Realty, LLC (the "Applicant"), for approval of a lot merger, zone change and site plan approval to construct a three-story, mixed-use building, consisting of ground-floor retail space, residential apartments and associated parking and improvements (the "Proposed Action") on property located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Bowman Avenue and Barber Place in the FAH District. Said premises being further identified as Section 141.27, Block 1, Lots 26, 31, and 32 on the Town of Rye Tax Assessor's Map; and WHEREAS, the Planning Board has considered the following plans and application materials: 23.Site Plan Application 24.Site Plan Submittal Review Checklist 25.Application for Subdivision Approval 26.Architectural Review Board Checklist for Applicants 27.Exterior Building Permit Application 28.Full Environmental Assessment Form 29.Draft Construction Management Plan prepared by Bowridge Realty, LLC, Pleasantville, N.Y., dated March 20, 2015 30.Petition Letter to Rezone Tax Lots dated October 29, 2014, to the Board of Trustees from Federico Associates 31.Parking Analysis Memorandum prepared by Parish and Weiner, Inc., White Plains, N.Y., dated March 24, 2015 32.Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment Report, prepared by Team Environmental Consultants, Inc., Middletown, N.Y., dated May 2, 2012 Planning Board Meeting June 11, 2015 Page 19 33.Letter to the Planning Board from Frederico Associates, White Plains, N.Y., dated March 20, 2015 34.Letter to the Planning Board from Bowridge Realty, LLC, Pleasantville, N.Y. dated February 6, 2015 35.Letter to the Planning Board from Frank C. Madonna, Bowridge Realty, LLC, Pleasantville, N.Y. dated November 26, 2014 36.Letter to Michael Izzo, Rye Brook Building and Fire Inspector from Frank C. Madonna, Bowridge Realty, LLC, Pleasantville, N.Y. dated September 18, 2014 37."Topography of Property," prepared by Thomas C. Merritts Land Surveyors, P.C., Pleasantville, N.Y. dated August 20, 2012, last revised November 26, 2014 38. "Preliminary Merger and Reapportionment Map," prepared by Thomas C. Merritts Land Surveyors, P.C., Pleasantville, N.Y. dated July 12, 2012, revised September 20, 2012 39.Letter to Frank and Virginia Madonna from Keane and Beane, P.C., Village Counsel dated October 6, 2014 40.Memorandum to the Planning Board from Michael J. Izzo, Rye Brook Building and Fire Inspector dated April 17, 2015 41.Memorandum to the Planning Board from Michael J. Izzo, Rye Brook Building and Fire Inspector dated April 6, 2015 42.Memorandum to the Planning Board from Michael J. Izzo, Rye Brook Building and Fire Inspector dated December 5, 2014 43.Architect's Plans, prepared by Federico Associates, White Plains, N.Y.: Sheet Number Sheet Title Dated 1 of 11 Cover Sheet 9/18/2014 rev. 3/20/2015 2 of 11 Existing Conditions 9/18/2014 rev. 3/20/2015 3 of 11 Preliminary Site Plan and Zoning Table 9/18/2014 rev. 3/20/2015 4 of 11 Preliminary Site Layout Plan and Zoning Table 9/18/2014 rev. 5/19/2015 5 of 11 Preliminary Utility Plan 9/18/20 rev. 3/20/2015 6 of 11 Preliminary Grading/Sediment &Erosion Control & Tree Protection Plan 9/18/2014 rev. 3/20/2015 7 of 11 Preliminary Landscape Plan 9/18/2014 rev. 3/20/2015 8 of 11 Details 9/18/2014 rev. 3/20/2015 Planning Board Meeting June 11, 2015 Page 20 9 of 11 Details 9/18/2014 rev. 3/20/2015 10 of 11 Details 9/18/2014 rev. 3/20/2015 11 of 11 Aerial Fire Apparatus Access Plan 9/18/2014 rev. 5/19/2015 Al of 6 Bowman Avenue Elevation 9/18/2014 rev. 3/20/2015 A2 of 6 Barber Place Elevation 9/18/2014 rev. 3/20/2015 A3 of 6 Basement Plan 9/18/2014 rev. 3/20/2015 A4 of 6 First Floor Plan 9/18/2014 rev. 3/20/2015 A5 of 6 Second Floor Plan 9/18/2014 rev. 3/20/2015 A6 of 6 Third Floor Plan 9/18/2014 rev. 3/20/2015 WHEREAS, the Board also reviewed a series of memoranda from the Village Planning Consultant, F.P. Clark Associates concerning the application; and WHEREAS, the Proposed Action is an Unlisted Action pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA); and WHEREAS, the Planning Board, upon issuance of a Notice of Intent to Declare Lead Agency and expiration of the required thirty-day period, declared itself Lead Agency, by resolution adopted February 5, 2015, for purposes of a coordinated review pursuant to SEQRA; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that after taking a "hard look" at the Full EAF and all plans and materials associated with the Application, the Rye Brook Planning Board, as Lead Agency, hereby adopts the annexed Negative Declaration with respect to the Proposed Action, and finds that, based upon the information contained in the Full EAF, (i) the Proposed Action will not have any significant adverse impacts on the environment; (ii) no environmental impact statement (EIS) needs to be prepared and (iii) the SEQRA process is complete. On a motion by Mrs. Schoen, and a second by Mr. Goodman, Mr. Michal Nowak, Superintendent of Public Works, called the roll and the revised Negative Declaration was adopted: Planning Board Meeting June 11, 2015 Page 21 Domenic Accurso Voting Aye Robert Goodman Voting Aye John Grzan Voting Aye Sal Morlino Voting Aye Amy Schoen Voting Aye Dan Tartaglia Voting Aye Chairman Zuckerman Voting Aye Chairman Zuckerman called for residents wishing to address the Board. He noted that this was not a public hearing, but he offered residents the opportunity to speak. A resident of Bowman Avenue addressed the Board. She noted that her father's property was on the corner of Barber Place and Bowman Avenue, across the street from the Applicants' property. She pointed out her opinion that a tremendous number of cars will be entering the property from Bowman Avenue. She was very concerned about the traffic flow onto Barber Place, and where the entrance and exit driveways would be located. She also felt that there was the potential for delivery and UPS trucks to block Barber Place if they could not find a parking space on the property. She believed all of the impacts were not reviewed, and stated that her father also had concerns about Barber Place. There are children who cut through Barber Place to get to the Middle School, as do residents who are going to the shopping center or to municipal transportation where there are no sidewalks. She was informed that the project will include sidewalks. She asked that the street infrastructure be taken into consideration. She stated that there is tremendous congestion on Bowman Avenue associated the start and end of school. Mrs. Timpone-Mohamed noted that the new plans have reduced the number of parking spaces by one parking space. She also noted that an exit on Bowman Avenue is no longer part of the plan. The Applicant is providing sidewalks on Bowman Avenue and Barber Place. There will be a requirement for cars coming out of the retail spaces onto Bowman Avenue, that they cannot make a left turn. It was noted that there are multiple ways to get to Ridge Street, including Division Street and Hawthorne Avenue. Chairman Zuckerman noted that Barber Place would be widened by two feet along the frontage of the property in response to comments from the Emergency Services Task Force. Everyone is aware of the traffic on Bowman Avenue. The Board is trying to balance the needs of the Applicant with the requirements of the Village. A second resident, Mr. Grippo from Division Street, addressed the Board. He felt that the building is too big and it is oversized for the area. He could not understand the need Planning Board Meeting June 11, 2015 Page 22 for 16 units, and requested that they consider downsizing to perhaps 8 units instead. He expressed concern over the number of employees that may park on the property, and the number of retail parking spaces provided. 4) Local Law Expanding the Area for Professional Office Use in the R2-F and R-15A Zoning Districts. The Planning Board had many reservations regarding the proposed amendments. They did not feel the code change was appropriate for the areas affected. Discussion ensued regarding how the allowable number of professionals should be tied to the square footage of the office space to be occupied. The Board also discussed how to define "professional." Trustee David Heiser offered his opinion regarding the proposed amendments. The Planning Board agreed that more discussion and thought would be required before the Board could provide a final report and recommendations to the Trustees regarding the amendments. The consideration of the local law was adjourned to the July Planning Board meeting. There being no further business before the Board, the meeting was adjourned. Planning Board Meeting June 11, 2015 Page 23 Dolph Rotield Engineering, P.C. CONSULTANTS & DESIGNERS 200 White Plains Road, Tarrytown, NY 10591 • (914) 631-8600 M E M O TO: Michal Nowak, Village Engineer Robert Goodman, Chairman, Planning Board FROM: Dolph Rotfeld, P.E., BCEE SUBJECT: Sun Homes Phase 3 Reckson Executive Park Village of Rye Brook DATE: January 13, 2016 As per your request, we have reviewed additional submission materials with regard to the Sun Homes, Phase 3, Reckson Executive Park Site Plan proposal, received via email Friday January 8, 2016. Comments from our January 7, 2016 memo have been satisfactorily addressed with the exception of the question regarding the adequacy of the water system. With regard to this issue, we met with Frank McGlynn of Suez to discuss field tests necessary to determine if the construction of the Sun Homes project would have an impact on the water supplied to Belle Fair. Hydrant(s) would be opened at Belle Fair to flow at the average peak rate. Pressure would be taken before, during and after the flow. This procedure would then be repeated with hydrant flow in the Executive Park at the peak rate expected in the Sun Homes Development at maximum build out. At Belle Fair hydrant flow would be measured along with pressure in their system. Mr. McGlynn would like the above requested procedure submitted to him so that he could calculate the cost to the water company for conducting the testing. That cost would have to be paid to the water company. DR C: G. Schwalbe Building Permit Check List & Zoning Analysis Address: Z,'Ci r S-t- . L o—, - ( SBL: l L L Zone: 1�,- l 5-Use: 2-7_, Const.Type: Other: _--2-o r-3 c- -t ASem Submittal Date: Cp ( 1 ! 3c Revisions Submittal Dates: Applicant:—:?AuJl.t P4 4 Ch.1 P! j S / . Nature of Work: Z Z S t•r r A -14 - �&o I`-t�.I r-15 C EA•G14 �'� S r pi 4,1-r r-&&-.c Reviews: ZBA: j 1 11_2&�T PB: BP: Other: NE OK ( ( ) FEES: Filing: BP: C/O: Legalization: ( ( ) APP.: Date Stamped: Properly Signed: SBL Verified: Other: (� ( ) Scenic Roads: Steep Slopes: Wetlands: Storm Water Review: Street Opening: ( ) ENVIRO.: Long: Short: Fees: N/A: ( ) (� SITE PLAN: Topo: Site Protection: S/W Mgmt.: Tree Plan: Other: (✓f ( ) SURVEY: Dated: Current: Archival: Sealed: (� ( ) PLANS.-Date Stamped: Sealed: Copies (✓j ( ) License: Workers Comp: Liability: Coml (J� ( ) Code 753#: 4 ] (✓� ( ) HIGH-VOLTAGE ELECTRICAL: Plans: Permit: ( ( ) LOW-VOLTAGE ELECTRICAL: Plans: Permit: (� ( ) FIRE ALARM/SMOKE DETECTORS: Plans: Permit 1- �'L 13 FL,b n-0, (� ( ) PLUMBING: Plans: Permit: Nat. Gas: LP (� O FIRE SUPPRESSION: Plans: Permit: N/A: _ l (� ( ) 2010 NY State ECCC: N/A: Other: Z _ l2 (� ( ) Final Survey: Final Topo: RAPE Sign-off Letter ( ) ( ) BP DENIAL LETTER: C/O DENIAL LETTER: (� ( ) Other: I ( ARB mtg. date: approval: notes: `�' �`` ( )ZBA mtg. date: approval: notes: (4PB mtg. date: approval: notes: REQUIRED EXISTING PROPOSED NOTES Area: t<- k 641, (oa, k tZ OL- Circle: l -Circle: t.oC) loo Q1_ Frontage: T.S Front: Front: Ga Sides: Ic 110 Rear: o Main Cov: l b f O�L_ _ Accs.Cov: Ft. WSb: • G o Sd.H/Sb: (, GD GFA: -43..y 3 S tzl sow ZSo-Zo . E - k3 d 4� ata lurv�� 'i7A aa. Tot.Imp: S TS 7- Ft. Ft.Imp: ° o Parte: 7-00 ok Height/Stories: v 2 Z Oh, notes: 2.,o. A USg v Amt&jcfL µtvt- ,nim t�Lc�N z F• � s Z.-SV- -V 3 S ' vF 7 zetz co i 5La&-.3 S -20. A .3 .c..►�. - utR_ vAm AocRn.. o -Cz t t! rtiac. �����„-� vAJ 1 �— Building Permit Check List & Zoning Analysis Address: 7_.!�_(3 W - ___F 1.6 S& << / oZ- —Z SBL: l 3S,3S- l — l L • t Zone:Z- 15- Use: Z( r-> Const.Type: Other: Submittal Date: (p l t ( S Revisions Submittal Dates: Applicant: ALJ U 0/, P00bc Nature of Work: -t;;> t D t A 0 ,-j4 \ l 1.5 fes- L U t i. '" OSS c(S L rt —Tf=AIL Reviews: ZBA: J UN 1 0 2015 PB: BP: Other: NEED OK (�✓ - ( ) FEES: Filing: BP: C/O: Legalization: (✓f ( ) APP.: Date Stamped: Properly Signed: SBL Verified: Other: (✓� ( ) Scenic Roads: Steep Slopes: Wetlands: Storm Water Review: Street Opening: (� ( ) ENVIRO.: Long: Short: Fees: N/A: ( ) (✓�SITE PLAN: Topo: Site Protection: S/W Mgmt.: Tree Plan: Other: (� ( ) SURVEY: Dated: Current: Archival: Sealed: Unacceptable: ( ( ) PLANS:Date Stamped: Sealed: Copies: Incomplete: N Other: (� ( ) License: Workers Comp: Liability: Comp. Waiver: Other: (Jf ( ) Code 753#: Dated: N/A: (� ( ) HIGH-VOLTAGE ELECTRICAL: Plans: Permit: N/A: Other: (� ( ) LOW-VOLTAGE ELECTRICAL: Plans: Permit: N/A: Other: (� ( ) FIRE ALARM /SMOKE DETECTORS: Plans: Permit: N/A: Other: PLUMBING: Plans: Permit: Nat. Gas: LP Gas: N/A/: Other: FIRE SUPPRESSION: Plans: Permit: N/A: Other: (� O 2010 NY State ECCC: N/A: Other: (� ( ) Final Survey: Final Topo: RAPE Sign-off Letter: As-Built Plans: Other: ( ) ( ) BP DENIAL LETTER: C/O DENIAL LETTER: Other: ( ) ( ) Other: ( ARB mtg. date: approval: notes: 2ZBA mtg. date: approval: notes: PB mtg. date: approval: notes: REQUIRED EXISTING PROPOSED NOTES Area: 1_<'k_ 7Z 6tib tiS i (o S 3 01?_ Circle: t o o Frontage: Z 5 Front: Front: (0 0 28 ok, q�+c►SZ • �,or� -�„_, F. Sides: Ir � 02, Rear: y 0 3 ZS 9k. Main Cov: t(o fa q < t tD 6L Accs.Cov: Ft.H/Sb: c Sd.WSb: GFA: Tot.Imy t 3 o Ft Imn: 'o 0 Parking: M Z (& Hei t/Stories: notes: Building Permit Check List & Zoning Analysis Address: Z.S-9 )� ' ::Wr��rl_ S i • L-O l - 3 SBL: t 3S•3.5 t " 1 • Z Zone: 2- t Use: Const. Type: _7TI. Other: 5rZo3> Submittal Date: (D t l l Revisions Submittal Dates: Applicant: A.0VA a �6 r_�t x3l S -L Z Nature of Work: S t a 4 L fL F6A,-t i L Wt�Lt-r,J t''� c GAnA- FL Reviews: ZBA: JUN 10 2015 PB: BP: Other: NEED OK (✓� ( ) FEES: Filing: BP: C/O: Legalization: APP.: Date Stamped: Properly Signed: SBL Verified: Other: (� ( ) Scenic Roads: Steep Slopes: Wetlands: Storm Water Review: Street Opening: ENV IRO.: Long: Short: Fees: N/A: ( ) ( ) SITE PLAN: Topo: Site Protection: S/W Mgmt.: Tree Plan: Other: (� ( ) SURVEY: Dated: Current: Archival: Sealed: Unacceptable: ( �) PLANS:Date Stamped: Sealed: Copies: Incomplete: -N/Am (� O License: Workers Comp: Liability: Comp. Waiver: Other: (� ( ) Code 753#: Dated: N/A: (� ( ) HIGH-VOLTAGE ELECTRICAL: Plans: Permit: N/A: Other: (� ( ) LOW-VOLTAGE ELECTRICAL: Plans: Permit: N/A: Other: (� ( ) FIRE ALARM/SMOKE DETECTORS: Plans: Permit: N/A: Other: (� ( ) PLUMBING: Plans: Permit: Nat. Gas: LP Gas: N/Ah Other: (� ( ) FIRE SUPPRESSION: Plans: Permit: N/A: Other: (� ( ) 2010 NY State ECCC: N/A: Other: (� ( ) Final Survey: Final Topo: RAPE Sign-off Letter: As-Built Plans: Other: ( ) ( ) BP DENIAL LETTER: C/O DENIAL LETTER: Other: ( ) ( ) Other: (4RB mtg. date: approval: notes: ( )ZBA mtg. date: approval: notes: (-YPB mtg. date: approval: notes: REOUIItED EXISTING PROPOSED NOTES Area: IS-k- 177rb4(0. (o'Z, S-G ro qo(z„ Circle: 10 o '• loo Frontage: Z Front: Front: &� rr G Sides: (S- y o Rear: 110 Z Qp dp Main Cov: !(D jo Li Y2 O'L, Accs. Cov: Ft.H/Sb: (+� Sd. WSb: GFA: i!o, (98)Z ZS o 5� ck, Tot I=: Qo ZZ Ft. Imp: 3S Parking: Z 7 Z 4E- Height/stories:�' z 3o qi notes: rt BUILDI g D ' TMENT ['D h..VILI.?� E OFRY OOK�� NY 10573938 KING$ , ET RYEBR(914)939 t68 F'�7(�Q1 39-5801AUG � 8 2U15 (OFR�fEBROOK DING DEPARTMENT **t****************t*t****************t*t******************ttt*t*t**************t************************t* FOR OFFICE USE ONLY: BOT Approval Date: PB Approval Date: BOT Disapproval Date: PB Disapproval Date: Attach Resolution Hereto: BOT[ ] PB[ ] ZBA[ ] Chairman: SUBDIVISION FEE: J- DATE PAID: ENVIRONMENTAL FEE: DATE PAID: OTHER: FEE SCHEDULE° Preliminary Platt Application: $900.00 + $650.00 /Additional Lot(application fees are non-refundable) Final Platt: / Recreation: Residential =$10,000.00/acre+$2,000.00/dwelling unit Commercial = $10,000.00/acre+$2,000.00/2,000 sq.ft *********************t********tttt******************************tttt*t**********t******************t***t*** APPLICATION FOR SUBDIVISION OF LAND Application dated, I Qj 1.!:- is hereby made to the Village of Rye Brook for a Subdivision of Land,Lot Merger,or other land use function in accordance with§20 and all other applicable sections of the Code of the Village of Rye Brook,as per detailed statement described below. sstsstssssss*ssstsstss*ss*s*s*ss**********sstsss*ssssssssttttsstssssssssssssssssssssts*stssts*s****s*ss*ttssttttttss� 1. Property Address: �g &IovA lcbe Sh-ve1` SBL: /311�'31"-liZone: 45 2. Property Owner: j Address: _,q Qq inQ� R �'Up. j� /U email: Tel.: q 3. Applicant: .�� t, Address: �Nemail:�Q(:�Z ('Z, (?�0�CUeI.: I 7 1� 4. Professional Engineer: 2 pa. Address: /3 f�� v (/h �i? Oss o. �r`9/7`� �-0�0 o � 5. Licensed Land Surveyor: ( '!/ ills Y n C Address: emai : o�4C� Tel.: 6. Subdivision Name/Identifying Title: p _i /f ZZC- 7. Abutting Streets: h L ) & 8. Does property connect directly into channel lines as established by the Westchester County Commissioner of Public Works? �4NO ( )YES: 9. Is lot within 500 feet of the Municipal Boundary? Y NO O YES: (if yes list all adjacent Municipalities below 10. Size of Existing Lot: . .R-S 11. Size(s)of Proposed Lot(s): .� '�p /T (P�/� t7 I �)L214 12. Are proposed road centerlines staked? BYES O NO(if no,indicate anticipated date of staking) REVISED 8/14/15 13. Has the proposed lot(s)been staked? O YES V)NO(if no indicate anticipated date ofstakmg) 14. Number of Proposed Dwelling Units: 8 A EEO Z S I a<L C- FA 15. Estimated Cost of Construction:$ Additional Information required to be submitted: a. Proof of ownership of the subject parcel(s). b. Certificate of Title Company covering all interests,liens,judgements,objections to title if any. C. Formal offers of cession to the Village of all streets&park areas not to remain private. d. Written agreement authorizing entry onto the property(s)by Village employees&officials. e. Any list of waivers requested by the applicant. f. Engineers estimated cost of construction of all streets,buildings,and site improvements. g. Final Subdivision plat and final subdivision plans. h. Proof of Approval by NY State DOT and/or Westchester County DOT for any proposed State or County street/intersection. i. Proof of Approval by Westchester County DPW for drainage lines if connecting directly into County established channel lines. j. Proof of Approval from the appropriate Utility Company for all proposed utilities&equipment. k. Proof of Approval from Westchester County DPW Division of Stream Control,if applicable. 1. Properly completed Environmental Impact Statement.(available on the NYS DEC website) M. Any additional information as requested by the Village of Rye Brook. ****************************************************************************************** Please note that this application must include the notarized signature(s) of the legal owner(s)of the above-mentioned property, in the space provided below. Any application not bearing the legal property owner's notarized signature(s)shall be deemed null and void, and will be returned to the applicant. *********************************************************************************************************** STATE OF NEW YORK,COUNTY OF WESTCHESTER ) as: L.D., L ka-(-z-z A ,being duly sworn,deposes and states that he/she is the applicant above named, (print name of individual signing as the applicant) and further states that (s)he is the legal owner of the property to which this application pertains, or that (s)he is the A2n i,i C A'- t _for the legal owner and is duly authorized to make and file this application. (indicate drchitect,contractor,agent,attorney,etc.) That all statements contained herein are true to the best of his/her knowledge and belief, and that any work performed, or use conducted at the above captioned property will be in conformance with the details as set forth and contained in this application and in any accompanying approved plans and specifications,as well as in accordance with the New York State Uniform Fire Prevention &Building Code,the Code of the Village of Rye Brook and all other applicable laws,ordinances and regulations. Sworn to before me this Sworn to before me this /2'r day of , 20day of , 20Jr r STEVEN CO.FEINSTEIN Notary Public. 647o Now York ota bli Qualified in We citl6tv NoPu i X Commission Expires S' treOf Pr ttywer Sie o p i an -/\ \SRI iLc, LaNz Print Nam 1Yt a of New York; Print Name of Applicant M 01 ME6160063 Cualifled In Westchester County REVISED 8;14-15 Commission Expires January 29.20. 7E�5 Short Environmental Assessment Form � � � �Part 1 -Project Information VILLAGE Instructions for Completine _ RYE BROOK n BUILDING DEPARTMENT Part 1-Project Information. The applicant or project sponsor is responsible for the completion of Part 1. Responses become part of the application for approval or funding,are subject to public review,and may be subject to further verification Complete Part I based on information currently available. If additional research or investigation would be needed to fully respond to any item,please answer as thoroughly as possible based on current information. Complete all items in Part 1. You may also provide any additional information which you believe will be needed by or useful to the lead agency;attach additional pages as necessary to supplement any item. Part 1-Project and Sponsor Information Lou Larizza Name of Action or Project: North Ridge Street Subdivision for Lou Lariva Project Location(describe,and attach a location map): 259 North Ridge Street,Rye Brook,NY 10573 Brief Description of Proposed Action: Project is to subdivide a 3.96 acre property in the R-15 Zoning District and the Scenic Road Overlay District into three lots. No construction is proposed at this time. Name of Applicant or Sponsor: Telephone: 914-879-7905 Lou Lariva,Contract Vendee E-Mail: Address: 8 Hilltop Drive City/PO: State: Zip Code: Port Chester NY 10573 1.Does the proposed action only involve the legislative adoption of a plan,local law,ordinance, NO YES administrative rule,or regulation? If Yes,attach a narrative description of the intent of the proposed action and the environmental resources that Ft/1 R may be affected in the municipality and proceed to Part 2. If no,continue to question 2. 2. Does the proposed action require a permit,approval or funding from any other governmental Agency? NO YES If Yes,list agency(s)name and permit or approval: Westchester County Department of Health:Plat Approval El ❑✓ 3.a.Total acreage of the site of the proposed action? 3.96 acres b.Total acreage to be physically disturbed? 0.75 acres c.Total acreage(project site and any contiguous properties)owned or controlled by the applicant or project sponsor? 3.96 acres 4. Check all land uses that occur on,adjoining and near the proposed action. ❑Urban [:]Rural(non-agriculture) ❑Industrial [—]Commercial ®Residential(suburban) ❑Forest ❑Agriculture [3 Aquatic ❑Other(specify): ❑Parkland Page 1 of 3 5. Is the proposed action, NO YES N/A a.A permitted use under the zoning regulations? ❑ RI ❑ b.Consistent with the adopted comprehensive plan? ❑ ❑✓ ❑ 6. Is the proposed action consistent with the predominant character of the existing built or natural NO YES landscape? ❑ a 7. Is the site of the proposed action located in,or does it adjoin,a state listed Critical Environmental Area? NO YES If Yes,identify: 21 ❑ 8. a.Will the proposed action result in a substantial increase in traffic above present levels? NO YES b.Are public transportation service(s)available at or near the site of the proposed action? ❑ ❑ c.Are any pedestrian accommodations or bicycle routes available on or near site of the proposed action? ❑ ❑ 9.Does the proposed action meet or exceed the state energy code requirements? NO YES If the proposed action will exceed requirements,describe design features and technologies: ❑ ❑ 10. Will the proposed action connect to an existing public/private water supply? NO YES If No,describe method for providing potable water ❑ RI 11.Will the proposed action connect to existing wastewater utilities? NO YES If No,describe method for providing wastewater treatment ❑ a 12. a.Does the site contain a structure that is listed on either the State or National Register of Historic NO YES Places? RI ❑ b.Is the proposed action located to an archeological sensitive area? ❑ 13.a.Does any portion of the site of the proposed action,or lands adjoining the proposed action,contain NO YES wetlands or other waterbodies regulated by a federal,state or local agency? El 21 b.Would the proposed action physically alter,or encroach into.any existing wetland or waterbody? ❑ If Yes,identify the wetland or waterbody and extent of alterations to square feet or acres: 14. Identify the typical habitat types that occur on,or are likely to be found on the project site. Check all that apply ❑Shoreline ❑Forest ❑Agricultural/grasslands ❑Early mid-successional ❑Wetland ❑Urban 0 Suburban 15.Does the site of the proposed action contain any species of animal,or associated habitats,listed NO YES by the State or Federal government as threatened or endangered? a ❑ 16.Is the project site located in the 100 year flood plain? NO YES 17.Will the proposed action create storm water discharge,either from point or non-point sources? NO YES If Yes, ❑ a.Will storm water discharges flow to adjacent properties? Q NO [—]YES b.Will storm water discharges be directed to established conveyance systems(runoff and storm drains)? If Yes,briefly describe- ❑NO AYES There are existing Morm drains in North Ride Street. Storm water will he confined to the site in the event of any construction. Page 2 of 3 18.Does the proposed action include construction or other activities that result in the impoundment of NO YES water or other liquids(e.g.retention pond,waste lagoon,dam)? If Yes,explain purpose and size: ❑ ❑ 19.Has the site of the proposed action or an adjoining property been the location of an active or closed NO YES solid waste management facility? If Yes,describe: a F] 20.Has the site of the proposed actioirbran adjoining property bee*,the subject of remediation(ongoing or NO YES completed)for hazardous waste? If Yes,describe: 21 ❑ I AFFIRM THAT THE INFORMATION PROVIDED ABOVE IS TRUE AND ACCURATE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE Applicant/sponsor name: ariz Date: July 28,2015 Signature: PRINT FORM Page 3 of 3 622 STILES AVENUE MAMARONECK, NEW YORK 10543 TEL 914-698-8207 FAX 914-698-8208 chnorch@yohoo.com Clark NeudngerArchitect CONNECTICUT DELAWARE FLORIDA MARYLAND NEW YORK May 15, 2015 The Honorable Paul S. Rosenberg, Mayor; Members of the Board of Trustees Village of Rye Brook Village Hall 938 King Street Rye Brook, NY 10573 RE: Petition of Pawling Holdings, LLC to rezone Town of Rye tax lot Section 135.35; Block 1; Lot 11 from zoning district R-15 to Fair and Affordable Housing District("FAH") Dear Mayor Rosenberg and Members of the Board of Trustees, We represent PAWLING HOLDINGS/LAZZ DEVELOPMENT, LLC,the petitioner in connection with their property located at 259 North ridge Street, Rye Brook, NY(Section 135.35; Block 1; Lot 11). On behalf of the petitioner and in accordance with Section 250-26.1 of the Code of the Village of Rye Brook, we respectfully make this petition regarding the proposed development. The parcel is composed of one lot located within in the R15 zoning district.The lot is 3.96 acres (172,647.17 s.f.) in area and contains one single family residence structure.The lot is proposed to be sub- divided into three lots,with two improved with a proposed single family residence on each conforming to the underlying R15 zoning controls and the third lot, improved with proposed two 2-story structures containing 4 dwelling units each for a total of eight(8) new AFFH residential dwelling units, conforming to FAH zoning requirements. Multi-family housing is a permitted use within the FAH overlay zone as per sec. 250- 26.1 F(1)(c).The uses surrounding the parcel are predominantly low scale, low density residential. Neighborhood shopping is available to the south along South Ridge Street which has several shopping centers of different sizes. The proposed AFFH parcel's topography is steeply sloped and we propose the construction of three terraced retaining walls to mitigate the present land contours. The site will be served by public sanitary sewer located in North Ridge Street and public water also located within the street. Natural gas and electricity is available to the site via existing Con Ed facilities within North Ridge Street. The Honorable Paul S. Rosenberg, Mayor; Members of the Board of Trustees May 15, 2015 Page 2 The proposed 259 North Ridge Street Residences development is proposed as for-sale, condominium homes comprised of eight(8)fair and affordable dwellings on 1.38 acres. The eight (8) units will be located within two 2-story multi-family residential buildings.The housing units will be made up of eight(8)two-bedroom condominium units and the residential community will have a homeowners association (HOA). Off-street parking will be provided on site and will consist of 24 parking spaces, which allows for two(2) spaces for each two-bedroom residential unit and one (1)space for visitors.The buildings will be 2 stories in height and will be designed in a traditional vernacular consistent with the prevalent architecture of the neighborhood. Rezoning one parcel of the three lot sub-division as proposed,from the R15 District to a Fair and Affordable Housing District will conform to the intent of the Village of Rye Brook Board of Trustees to provide an additional eight(8) units of affordable housing within the village. By permitting flexible use regulations and a streamlined permitting process, rezoning this parcel will further the goals of the Westchester County Fair and Affordable Housing Implementation Plan in order to provide a more balanced demographic within the village of Rye Brook. In order to construct the 259 North Ridge Street Residences affordable housing development and to maintain the economic viability of the development proposal, modifications or waivers are being requested from the R15 Zoning District. The 259 North Ridge Street Residences affordable housing development is consistent with the purpose and intent of the village of Rye Brook zoning code and Official Map in that the development will allow for a more equitable distribution of affordable housing within the village and will compliment the existing zoning established by the current code.The proposed development will be furthering affordable housing in the village by virtue of the fact that the eight(8) multi-unit condominium development will be 100% affordable. The location of the proposed residential buildings is appropriate for the orderly development of the area in that the development will be of low density, low scale, comprising an overall proposed residential development of the parcel of 1 dwelling unit per 7,552 s.f. of lot area. Impact to the orderly development and the quality of life for the neighboring areas should improve by rezoning this property to permit a small, low density multi-family residential development. The addition of eight families at the location of the proposed site should have a positive effect on the advancement of economic development within the immediate neighborhood specifically, and the village as a whole, in general.The impact of the modifications or waivers requested will be lessened by the significant landscaping proposed that will screen the proposed development as well as for the neighboring properties.The proposed architecture of the residential structures will be traditional in style so as to be in harmony with adjacent residential buildings.All the surrounding properties are developed and therefore the proposed development will not discourage future development or substantially impair the value of adjacent lands or buildings.The proposed development will have little or no impact on the environment.The modifications or waivers requested are the minimum necessary to maintain the economic viability of the development in that the entire project is to be an affordable housing development with eight residential units. Prior to the enactment of the Fair and Affordable Housing District,we received comments concerning our original development plan. Based on comments received,the plan has been further fine tuned and modified in order to respond to various comments and recommendations.Attached as part of this communication to you and the Board is a sketch plan prepared by our consulting site engineer, Ralph Mastromonaco, P.E. This preliminary site plan contains a zoning table for each of the three proposed lots; the number of AFFH dwelling units(8)on one of the sub-divided parcels; a location map indicating adjacent streets, rights of way, adjacent properties, etc; easements;topography;wetland boundary delineations; steep slopes;, all as per the requirements of sec. 250-26.1.E(1)(b). The Honorable Paul S. Rosenberg, Mayor; Members of the Board of Trustees May 15, 2015 Page 3 As stated within sec. 260-26.1.E.(1),we respectfully ask that a Pre-submission sketch plan conference be scheduled in anticipation of our formal submission of a Petition to your honorable Board. Thank you very much for your consideration of our petition. Very truly yours, CLARK NEURINGER ARCHITECT clarle Neurbvtger Clark H. Neuringer, R.A.; NCARB CC: Mr. Louis Larizza CHN/nc RALPH G. MASTROMONACO, P.E., P.C. Civil/Site / Environmental Consulting Engineers www.rgmpepc.com 13 Dove Court, Croton-on-Hudson, New York 10520 Te: (914) 271-4762 Fax: (914) 271-2820 To: Michael Nowak ASG ' 8 Village of Rye Brook, NY 2015 From: Ralph G. Mastromonaco, PE VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK BUILDING DERARTMENT Re: Lou Larizza /North Ridge Street Subdivision Rye Brook, NY Date: August 14, 2015 1 am aware that the Village Code asks for a SWPPP as part of a subdivision application. In this case, we are merely subdividing one (1) lot into three (3) lots with no construction proposed. We do not need roads for this project and all utilities are in the street along the front. A SWPPP is required by your code prior to any construction on any of these lots since the disturbance will be over 400 square feet. Your subdivision code does not require that applications show proposed houses or grading, hence we feel the SWPPP may not be required. Accordingly, we would like you to waive the SWPPP application requirement until construction is actually proposed on any lot. Q Ik P Ralph G. Mastromonaco, PE Cc: Lou Larizza 622 STILES AVENUE MAMARONECK, NEW YORK 10543 TEL 914-698-8207 FAX 914-698-8208 chnorch@yahoo.com Clark NeuringerArchitect CONNECTICUT DELAWARE FLORIDA MARYLAND NEW YORK May 12, 2015 [EQC E �n/]IE The Honorable Paul S. Rosenberg, Mayor; JUN - 1 2015 Members of the Board of Trustees VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK Village of Rye Brook BUILDING DEPARTMENT Village Hall 938 King Street Rye Brook, NY 10573 RE: Petition of Pawling Holdings, LLC to rezone Town of Rye tax lot Section 135.35; Block 1; Lot 11 from zoning district R-7 to Fair and Affordable Housing District("FAH") Dear Mayor Rosenberg and Members of the Board of Trustees, We represent PAWLING HOLDINGS/ LAZZ DEVELOPMENT, LLC, the petitioner in connection with their property located at 259 North ridge Street, Rye Brook, NY(Section 135.35; Block 1; Lot 11). On behalf of the petitioner and in accordance with Section 250-26.1 of the Code of the Village of Rye Brook, we respectfully make this petition regarding the proposed development. The parcel is composed of one lot located within in the R15 zoning district. The lot is 3.96 acres (172,647.17 s.f.) in area and contains one single family residence structure. The lot is proposed to be sub- divided into three lots, with two improved with a proposed single family residence on each and the third lot, improved with proposed two 2-story structures containing 4 dwelling units each for a total of eight(8) new AFFH residential dwelling units. The uses surrounding the parcel are predominantly low scale, low density residential. Neighborhood shopping is available to the south along South Ridge Street which has several shopping centers of different sizes. The proposed AFFH parcel's topography is steeply sloped and we propose the construction of three terraced retaining walls to mitigate the present land contours. The site will be served by public sanitary sewer located in North Ridge Street and public water also located within the street. Natural gas and electricity is available to the site via existing Con Ed facilities within North Ridge Street. The Honorable Paul S. Rosenberg, Mayor; Members of the Board of Trustees May 12, 2015 Page 2 The proposed 259 North Ridge Street Residences development is proposed as for-sale, condominium homes comprised of eight(8)fair and affordable dwellings on 1.38 acres. The eight (8) units will be located within two 2-story multi-family residential buildings. The housing units will be made up of eight(8)two-bedroom condominium units and the residential community will have a homeowners association (HOA). Off-street parking will be provided on site and will consist of 24 parking spaces, which allows for two (2) spaces for each two-bedroom residential unit and one (1) space for visitors. The buildings will be 2 stories in height and will be designed in a traditional vernacular consistent with the prevalent architecture of the neighborhood. Rezoning one parcel of the three lot sub-division as proposed, from the R15 District to a Fair and Affordable Housing District will conform to the intent of the Village of Rye Brook Board of Trustees to provide an additional eight(8) units of affordable housing within the village. By permitting flexible use regulations and a streamlined permitting process, rezoning this parcel will further the goals of the Westchester County Fair and Affordable Housing Implementation Plan in order to provide a more balanced demographic within the village of Rye Brook. In order to construct the 259 North Ridge Street Residences affordable housing development and to maintain the economic viability of the development proposal, modifications or waivers are being requested from the R15 Zoning District. The modification or waiver being requested from the R15 zoning district is as follows: 1 —a use variance is required for a multi-family dwelling within an R15 zoning district. The 259 North Ridge Street Residences affordable housing development is consistent with the purpose and intent of the village of Rye Brook zoning code and Official Map in that the development will allow for a more equitable distribution of affordable housing within the village and will compliment the existing zoning established by the current code. The proposed development will be furthering affordable housing in the village by virtue of the fact that the eight(8) multi-unit condominium development will be 100%affordable. The location of the proposed residential buildings is appropriate for the orderly development of the area in that the development will be of low density, low scale, comprising an overall proposed residential development of the parcel of 1 dwelling unit per 7,552 s.f. of lot area. Impact to the orderly development and the quality of life for the neighboring areas should improve by rezoning this property to permit a small, low density multi-family residential development. The addition of eight families at the location of the proposed site should have a positive effect on the advancement of economic development within the immediate neighborhood specifically, and the village as a whole, in general. The impact of the modifications or waivers requested will be lessened by the significant landscaping proposed that will screen the proposed development as well as for the neighboring properties. The proposed architecture of the residential structures will be traditional in style so as to be in harmony with adjacent residential buildings. All the surrounding properties are developed and therefore the proposed development will not discourage future development or substantially impair the value of adjacent lands or buildings. The proposed development will have little or no impact on the environment. The modifications or waivers requested are the minimum necessary to maintain the economic viability of the development in that the entire project is to be an affordable housing development with eight residential units. Prior to the enactment of the Fair and Affordable Housing District, we received comments concerning our original development plan. Based on comments received, the plan has been further fine tuned and modified in order to respond to various comments and recommendations. The Honorable Paul S. Rosenberg, Mayor; Members of the Board of Trustees May 12, 2015 Page 3 As stated within sec. 260-26.1.E.(1), we respectfully ask that a Pre-submission sketch plan conference be scheduled in anticipation of our formal submission of a Petition to your honorable Board. Thank you very much for your consideration of our petition. Very truly yours, CLARK NEURINGER ARCHITECT 04 • Clark H. Neuringer, R.A.; NCARB CC: Mr. Louis Larizza CHN/nc BUILDRY%R�� ENT VI OK 938 KING NY 10573 (914) 99-5801 w FOR OFFICE USE ONLY: BOT Approval Date: PB Approval Date: BOT Disapproval Date: PB Disapproval Date: Attach Resolution Hereto: BOT[ ] PB[ ] ZBA[ ] Chairman: SITE PLAN FEE: DATE PAID: ENVIRONMENTAL FEE: DATE PAID: OTHER: PRELIMINARY FOR LOT 2 OF NORTH RIDGE STREET SUBDIVISION APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL Submission of this application does not assure placement on any Planning Board Agenda.The Applicant will be notified of such placement. This application references but is not limited to the following sections of the Code of the Village of Rye Brook; §250 ZONING, §209 SITE PLAN REVIEW, §235 TREES, §107 DEMOLITION OF BUILDINGS, §224 SWIMMING POOLS, §121 EXCAVATION&TOPSOIL REMOVAL, §118 EROSION&SEDIMENT CONTROL, §213 STEEP SLOPES PROTECTION, §219 SUBDIVISION OF LAND, §250-40 NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS.Applicants and their Design Professionals are strongly advised to review the above mentioned code sections online at,www.ryebrook.org prior to completing and/or submitting this application. APPLICATION FEE SCHEDULE: Residential Dwellings- $325,plus$200 per additional dwelling unit. Non-Residential Buildings - $475 plus $30 per parking space. Planned Unit Development-$575 per acre PUD Amendment- $300 Site Plan Amendment- $575 Wetlands&Watercourse- $1,150 Consultant Review(Escrow)Fee: Minimum fee$250-maximum fee$2,500,to be determined by the Village Engineer. Application fees are non-refundahle.The applicant's Escrow Account must have a positive balance at all times prior to any Consultant,Attorney,or Village review. Escrow Fees and Site Plan Fees must he paid on separate checks made payable to the Village of Rye Brook. Subdivision Lot#2 1. Site Address: 259 North Ridge Street ParcellD#: 135.35-1-11 Zone: R-15 2. Property Owner: Dan Greto Address: 209 Central Avenue Rye, NY 10580 E-Mail: Tel. #: 914-447-4444 Other: 3. Applicant: Lou Larizza Address: 8 Hilltop Avenue Port Chester, NY 10573 E-Mail: Tel.#: 914-879-7905 Other: 4. Design Professional: Ralph G. Mastromonaco, P.E., P.C. Address: 13 Dove Court Croton-on-Hudson, NY 10520 E-Mail: Tel.#: 914-271-4762 Other: 5. Designate to whom correspondence is to be sent: Applicant, Lou Larizza Note:If applicant is a"Contract Vendee",please attach a copy of the contract summary with financial and confidential terms deleted. REVISED 8/10/15 6. Street which property abuts: North Ridge Street at West Ridge Drive 7. Does property connect directly into State or County highway? (X)NO ( )YES: 8. Is site within 500 feet of Village Boundary? (X)NO O YES if yes note all bordering municipalities: 9. Total area of site: 49,663 SF (1.14 Acres) Area of site activity: 4,000 SF 10. Site coverage: 10% (Impervious coverage) %; Building coverage: 4% % 11. Existing building size: 2,200 SF New/additional building size: Renovate existing dwelling 12. Existing parking spaces: 2 New parking spaces: 2 13. Nature of proposed activity. To renovate an existing single family dwelling Please note that this application must include the notarized signature(s) of the legal owner(s) of the above-mentioned property, in the space provided below. Any application not bearing the legal property owner's notarized signature(s) shall be deemed null and void, and will be returned to the applicant. STATE OF NEW YORK, COUNTY OF WESTCHESTER ) as: ,being duly sworn,deposes and states that he/she is the applicant above named, (print name of individual signing as the applicant) and further states that (s)he is the legal owner of the property to which this application pertains, or that (s)he is the for the legal owner and is duly authorized to make and file this application. (indicate architect,contractor,agent,attorney,etc.) That all statements contained herein are true to the best of his/her knowledge and belief, and that any work performed, or use conducted at the above captioned property will be in conformance with the details as set forth and contained in this application and in any accompanying approved plans and specifications,as well as in accordance with the New York State Uniform Fire Prevention &Building Code, the Code of the Village of Rye Brook and all other applicable laws, ordinances and regulations. Sworn to before me this Sworn to before me this day of , 20 day of 20 Notary Public Notary Public Signature of Property Owner Signature of Applicant Print Name of Property Owner Print Name of Applicant REVISED 8/10/15 BUILDRY%R�� ENT VI OK 938 KING NY 10573 (914) 99-5801 w FOR OFFICE USE ONLY: BOT Approval Date: PB Approval Date: BOT Disapproval Date: PB Disapproval Date: Attach Resolution Hereto: BOT[ ] PB[ ] ZBA[ ] Chairman: SITE PLAN FEE: DATE PAID: ENVIRONMENTAL FEE: DATE PAID: OTHER: PRELIMINARY FOR LOT 3 OF NORTH RIDGE STREET SUBDIVISION APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL Submission of this application does not assure placement on any Planning Board Agenda.The Applicant will be notified of such placement. This application references but is not limited to the following sections of the Code of the Village of Rye Brook; §250 ZONING, §209 SITE PLAN REVIEW, §235 TREES, §107 DEMOLITION OF BUILDINGS, §224 SWIMMING POOLS, §121 EXCAVATION&TOPSOIL REMOVAL, §118 EROSION&SEDIMENT CONTROL, §213 STEEP SLOPES PROTECTION, §219 SUBDIVISION OF LAND, §250-40 NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS.Applicants and their Design Professionals are strongly advised to review the above mentioned code sections online at,www.ryebrook.org prior to completing and/or submitting this application. APPLICATION FEE SCHEDULE: Residential Dwellings- $325,plus$200 per additional dwelling unit. Non-Residential Buildings - $475 plus $30 per parking space. Planned Unit Development-$575 per acre PUD Amendment- $300 Site Plan Amendment- $575 Wetlands&Watercourse- $1,150 Consultant Review(Escrow)Fee: Minimum fee$250-maximum fee$2,500,to be determined by the Village Engineer. Application fees are non-refundahle.The applicant's Escrow Account must have a positive balance at all times prior to any Consultant,Attorney,or Village review. Escrow Fees and Site Plan Fees must he paid on separate checks made payable to the Village of Rye Brook. Subdivision Lot#3 1. Site Address: 259 North Ridge Street ParcellD#: 135.35-1-11 Zone: R-15 2. Property Owner: Dan Greto Address: 209 Central Avenue Rye, NY 10580 E-Mail: Tel. #: 914-447-4444 Other: 3. Applicant: Lou Larizza Address: 8 Hilltop Avenue Port Chester, NY 10573 E-Mail: Tel.#: 914-879-7905 Other: 4. Design Professional: Ralph G. Mastromonaco, P.E., P.C. Address: 13 Dove Court Croton-on-Hudson, NY 10520 E-Mail: Tel.#: 914-271-4762 Other: 5. Designate to whom correspondence is to be sent: Applicant, Lou Larizza Note:If applicant is a"Contract Vendee",please attach a copy of the contract summary with financial and confidential terms deleted. REVISED 8/10/15 6. Street which property abuts: North Ridge Street at West Ridge Drive 7. Does property connect directly into State or County highway? (X)NO ( )YES: 8. Is site within 500 feet of Village Boundary? (X)NO O YES if yes note all bordering municipalities: 9. Total area of site: 62,566 SF (1.43 Acres) Area of site activity: 4,000 SF 10. Site coverage: 7% (Impervious coverage) %; Building coverage: 4% % 11. Existing building size: N/A New/additional building size: 3,500 SF 12. Existing parking spaces: 0 New parking spaces: 2 13. Nature of proposed activity: To construct a new single family dwelling Please note that this application must include the notarized signature(s) of the legal owner(s) of the above-mentioned property, in the space provided below. Any application not bearing the legal property owner's notarized signature(s) shall be deemed null and void, and will be returned to the applicant. STATE OF NEW YORK, COUNTY OF WESTCHESTER ) as: ,being duly sworn,deposes and states that he/she is the applicant above named, (print name of individual signing as the applicant) and further states that (s)he is the legal owner of the property to which this application pertains, or that (s)he is the for the legal owner and is duly authorized to make and file this application. (indicate architect,contractor,agent,attorney,etc.) That all statements contained herein are true to the best of his/her knowledge and belief, and that any work performed, or use conducted at the above captioned property will be in conformance with the details as set forth and contained in this application and in any accompanying approved plans and specifications,as well as in accordance with the New York State Uniform Fire Prevention &Building Code, the Code of the Village of Rye Brook and all other applicable laws, ordinances and regulations. Sworn to before me this Sworn to before me this day of , 20 day of 20 Notary Public Notary Public Signature of Property Owner Signature of Applicant Print Name of Property Owner Print Name of Applicant REVISED 8/10/15 Building Permit Check List & Zoning Analysis Address: ,7,S( 7ll1 �.��'f-z i - ( SBL: l 3S•�,�'-- L � L Zone: - l S'Use: 2-Z Const.Type: Other: 20 c—+(z- I,::> S e� Submittal Date: (P l l ! 3C Revisions Submittal Dates: Applicant:_,?ALXi 04 94D Chi 05 S / G,.4ZL -j'5mAj Nature of Work: Z - Z S t y r A •u 3o i`�i raj C EPrG{-F S r w<Lr-;. FAQ Reviews: ZBA: j UN 1 0 nn c PB: BP: Other: NE OK ( ( ) FEES: Filing: BP: C/O: Legalization: ( ( ) APP.: Date Stamped: Properly Signed: SBL Verified: Other: (� ( ) Scenic Roads: Steep Slopes: Wetlands: Storm Water Review: _ Street Opening: (� ( ) ENVIRO.: Long: Short: Fees: N/A: ( ) (v� SITE PLAN: Topo: Site Protection: _S/W Mgmt.: Tree Plan: Other: (✓S ( ) SURVEY: Dated: Current: Archival: Sealed: T PLANS: Date Stamped: Sealed: Copies: (✓j ( ) License: Workers Comp: Liability: Com f Code 7534: 1 l l(2 -DJRLL-4 i`J4 HIGH-VOLTAGE ELECTRICAL: Plans: Permit: (� ( ) LOW-VOLTAGE ELECTRICAL: Plans: Permit: (� ( ) FIRE ALARM/SMOKE DETECTORS: Plans: Permit 1- �'L '-t3h,b n-0 9 --k (� ( ) PLUMBING: Plans: Permit: Nat. Gas: LP (� ( ) FIRE SUPPRESSION: Plans: Permit: N/A: 1 (� ( ) 2010 NY State ECCC: N/A: Other: Z :�, lZ (� ( ) Final Survey. Final Topo: RAPE Sign-off Letter ( ) ( ) BP DENIAL LETTER: C/O DENIAL LETTER: (� ( ) Other: 6 O 1 - GARB mtg. date: approval: notes: ( )ZBA mtg. date: approval: notes: (�PB mtg. date: approval: notes: REQUIRED EXISTING PROPOSED NOTES Area: l 57fc 02 b_L(L loaf k t7 Dh_ Circle: x,00 l0� Q1 Frontage: TS- Front: Front: (.0 O' 2.5�-?-�.!�. + Z sfl 1•f. 5 3 O w Ai vFj- Sides: S o 06 Rear: 0k_ Main Cov: l b t D 3' O�t_ Accs.Cov: Ft. H/Sb: . 60 Sd.H/Sb: (, (0,0 GFA: 0,Li tz� gaa zSy-Zo . E - k3�� d 4pa- WA-iuw^. i-zr,.xa. Tot. ft: '7S Z Ft.11,12: ° o Parking: 7- 0 o4c Height/Stories:t/Stories: ,0 Z `12- oh, notes: 0 %9V— Z.o. A .-&. ` 0_S v AatkjCFL a.. 1,4vL wrL wR.LC_1N z - F 5 .V- Lc - 3 S Y 7?e,1 S SL9N - X' -2o. X4 .3 .C. �>, - Ulk wK A-JcR ni O -Cz t l'VWbAL, 2.4,,— Building Permit Check List & Zoning Analysis Address: 75�'(3 N is S& S<< /0 -Z SBL: 19S,3S- l - l L • t Zone: "L 15- Use: Const.Type: Other: STLfl� Submittal Date: (p 1 L ( S Revisions Submittal Dates: Applicant: :?ALJ Lt 04, PO 0b i r,+ / Nature of Work: cri Sc-� 0 xt rr-rI-J \ R_ L l.5 F- L L,l a "70SS cT3 LFc -'1=r4R.11 www Reviews: ZBA: JUN 1 0 2015 PB: BP: Other: NEED OK ( ) FEES: Filing: BP: C/O: _ _Legalization: (✓f ( ) APP.: Date Stamped: Properly Signed: SBL Verified: Other: Scenic Roads: Steep Slopes: Wetlands: Storm Vl'ater Review: _Street Opening: (� ( ) ENVIRO.: Long:_ Short: Fees: N/A: ( ) (✓� SITE PLAN:Topo: Site Protection: S/W Mgmt.: _ Tree Plan: _Other: SURVEY: Dated: Current: Archival: Sealed: Unacceptable: (� ( ) PLANS: Date Stamped: Sealed: Copies: Incomplete: N/A: Other. License: _Workers Comp: Liability: Comp. Waiver: _ Other: _ (� ( ) Code 7534: Dated: _ N/A: (•� ( ) HIGH-VOLTAGE ELECTRICAL: Plans: Permit: N/A: Other: (� ( ) LOW-VOLTAGE ELECTRICAL:Plans: Permit: N/A: Other: FIRE ALARM/SMOKE DETECTORS: Plans: Permit: N/A: Other: PLUMBING: Plans: Permit: Nat. Gas: LP Gas: N/A/: Other: (� O FIRE SUPPRESSION: Plans:_ Permit: N/A: Other: (� ( ) 2010 NY State ECCC: N/A: Other: (� O Final Survey: __Final Topo: RAPE Sign-off Letter: As-Built Plans: Other: ( ) ( ) BP DENIAL LETTER: C/O DENIAL LETTER: Other: O O Other: - -- --- — - -- (-,�ARB mtg. date: approval: _notes: XZBA mtg. date: approval: notes. mtg, date: approval: notes: REQUIRED EXISTING PROPOSED NOTES Area: tK'tI 11-1 (0Itkq 6.s 0 Circle: C o D 7 o� Frontage: Front: Front: G 2g ok. x131 . lJor-+ F. Sides: Rear: y o 3 ZS OIL Main Cov: t G t(o d.L Accs.Cov: Ft. H/Sb: o Sd.WSb: ( . Ca c GFA: 7. 2xn Z zt o .ok Tot.Imp: t Ft Imp: - Parkin e: 'L Z OL - Hei t/Stories: notes: Building Permit Check List & Zoning Analysis Address: Zit )� , ::g Vb Zr2- S 1-0 1 SBL: 6 3E,-3 t "- t k • Z Zone: lZ- t s Use: Z l 0 Const.Type: S[T�- Other: fizz :i Submittal Date: (o t l l S' Revisions Submittal Dates: Applicant: AXJ L L kZ �6 t,�IN t A3 4 S Nature of Work: S t tJ 4 L Cx_ L �..�(!-LLr,.1 w 4AnA k_ Reviews: ZBA: JUN 10 2015 PB: BP: Other: NEED OK ( O FEES: Filing: _BP: C/O: Legalization: (J� O APP.: Date Stamped: Properly Signed: SBL Verified: Other: (� ( ) Scenic Roads: Steep Slopes: Wetlands: Storm Water Review: Street Opening: ENVIRO.: Long: , Short: Fees: _ _N/A: ( ) ( ) SITE PLAN: Topo: Site Protection: S/W Mgmt.: Tree Plan: Other: (� ( ) SURVEY: Dated: Current: Archival: Sealed: Unacceptable: (� O PLANS:Date Stamped: Sealed: Copies: ___Incomplete: N/A: Other: (� O License: Workers Comp: Liability: Comp. Waiver: Other: Nr' ( ) Code 753#: Dated. N/A: (yam ( ) HIGH-VOLTAGE ELECTRICAL: Plans: Permit: N/A: Other: (� ( ) LOW-VOLTAGE ELECTRICAL:Plans: Permit: N/A: Other: (� O FIRE ALARM /SMOKE DETECTORS:Plans: Permit: N/A: Other: (� ( ) PLUMBING: Plans: Permit: Nat. Gas: LP Gas: N/Ah Other: (� ( ) FIRE SUPPRESSION: Plans: Permit: N/A: Other: 2010 NY State ECCC: N/A: Other: (� ( ) Final Survey: Final Topo: RAPE Sign-off Letter: As-Built Plans: Other: ( ) ( ) BP DENIAL LETTER: C/O DENIAL LETTER: Other: O O Other: _ — --- -- - -- (--�ARB mtg. date: _ _— approval: notes: ( )ZBA mtg. date: approval: notes: (OB mtg. date: approval: notes: REQUIRED EXISTING PROPOSED NOTES Area: [S k- 177 16h . 6z� SL 04L Circle: low } too 406_ Frontage: -t Front: Front: &c. G G Ch- Sides: t SA 0 u C at _ Rear: 410 Z Qa ck-A Main Cov: 16 a Lt Y2 _ t7H1� Accs.Cov: Ft.H/Sb: Cao Sd. WSb: GFA: Yo, (o 9)2 ZS o Tot.IM2: Uv,V tl Ft. Imp: 3S Parking: 7— Height/Stories: plo — Hei t/Stories:ploz- 3 06er notes: BUILDING=DARTMENT n n VILIE LAGE OF RYE$KOOK U - �J 938 KING ET RYE BRO &,NY 10573 AUG 8 2015 L (914)939,0668-FAX Old- X139-5801 ww -.nehruoh.ory VILLAGE OF RYE Bt? Z' BUILDING Dr-rnA .--OK *********************************************************************************************************** FOR OFFICE USE ONLY: BOT Approval Date: PB Approval Date: BOT Disapproval Date: PB Disapproval Date: Attach Resolution Hereto: BOT[ ] PB[ ] ZBA[ ] Chairman: SUBDIVISION FEE: - 2� � -' DATE PAID: ENVIRONMENTAL FEE: DATE PAID: OTHER: FEE SCHEDULE: Preliminary Platt Application: $900.00 +$650.00/Additional Lot(application fees are non-refundable) Final Platt: / Recreation: Residential =$10,000.00/acre+$2,000.00/dwelling unit Commercial = $10,000.00/acre+$2,000.00/2,000 sq.ft. APPLICATION FOR SUBDIVISION OF LAND Application dated, _ NC' is hereby made to the Village of Rye Brook for a Subdivision of Land,Lot Merger,or other land use function in accordance with§21 and d all other applicable sections of the Code of the Village of Rye Brook,as per detailed statement described below. **s**s******s*s****s**s**ss*s*s****s***s*s**s**ss*ssss*sssss*s**sss*sss*****sss**sssss*sss"sss*sss**ss**ssss*sssss**� 1. Property Address: SBL: ! '4 Zone: T 2. Property Owner: f,/ Address: /U email: Tel.: /`� 3. Applicant: ,�Q1L Address: email:o LL LQ 2 V[ C101.CM-ki-el.: / 7 /S 4. Professional Engineer: /��IJ- y)Q k 7(pZ Address: /� J� �r � D U11 ' detail: o5s o.C / -07 -o`ZE1 5. Licensed Land Surveyor: L>e1�V (AS PC Address: emat� Tel.: 6. Subdivision Name/Identifying Title: U rt z G- 7. Abutting Streets: &T1 Pt(JQP- Jif 8. Does property connect directly into channel lines as established by the Westchester County Commissioner of Public Works? 1100 ( )YES:_______ - - 9. Is lot within 500 feet of the Municipal Boundary? 04NO ( )YES: (if yes list all adjacent Municipalities below) 10. Size of Existing Lot: _ 11. Size(s)of Proposed Lot(s): J ' 12. Are proposed road centerlines staked? b-YES ( )NO(if no,indicate anticipated date of staking) REVISED 8/14/15 13. Has the proposed lot(s)been staked? ( )AYES (A NO(if no indicate anticipated date of staking) 14. Number of Proposed Dwelling Units: 8 A H14 51 N S L E FAwl STA �- Q 15. Estimated Cost of Construction:$ Additional Information required to be submitted: a. Proof of ownership of the subject parcel(s). b. Certificate of Title Company covering all interests,liens,judgements,objections to title if any. C. Formal offers of cession to the Village of all streets&park areas not to remain private. d. Written agreement authorizing entry onto the property(s)by Village employees&officials. e. Any list of waivers requested by the applicant. f. Engineers estimated cost of construction of all streets,buildings,and site improvements. g. Final Subdivision plat and final subdivision plans. h. Proof of Approval by NY State DOT and/or Westchester County DOT for any proposed State or County street/intersection. L Proof of Approval by Westchester County DPW for drainage lines if connecting directly into County established channel lines. j. Proof of Approval from the appropriate Utility Company for all proposed utilities&equipment. k. Proof of Approval from Westchester County DPW Division of Stream Control,if applicable. 1. Properly completed Environmental Impact Statement.(available on the NYS DEC website) in. Any additional information as requested by the Village of Rye Brook. ****************************************************************************************** Please note that this application must include the notarized signature(s) of the legal owner(s)of the above-mentioned property, in the space provided below. Any application not bearing the legal property owner's notarized signature(s)shall be deemed null and void, and will be returned to the applicant. *********************************************************************************************************** STATE OF NEW YORK,COUNTY OF WESTCHESTER ) as: 1,o-j L 4 2.t Z z A ,being duly sworn,deposes and states that he/she is the applicant above named, (print name of individual signing as the applicant) and further states that (s)he is the legal owner of the property to which this application pertains, or that (s)he is the t.t C A c`u► for the legal owner and is duly authorized to make and file this application. (indicate chitect,contractor.agent,attorney,etc) That all statements contained herein are true to the best of his/her knowledge and belief, and that any work performed,or use conducted at the above captioned property will be in conformance with the details as set forth and contained in this application and in any accompanying approved plans and specifications,as well as in accordance with theNew York State Uniform Fire Prevention &Building Code,the Code of the Village of Rye Brook and all other applicable laws,ordinances and regulations. Sworn to before me this Sworn to before me this (� day of , 20� day of , 20JJ 7�� STEVEN D.FEIN$TEIN 19 No"Public 48th e o �� . otat blic (It ed in We No Pu li Commission Expires S' tur f Pr rty Owner Srfe o p ' ant IIrSI�RI I ZZC, Print NamX41VFd0W4v§W9 of New Yorlf Print Name of Applicant o.01 ME6160063 Cuailfied In Westchester County REVISED 8/14/15 Commission Expires January 29.20 p EC WEj Short Environmental Assessment Form 0 Part 1 -Project Information s? VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK Instructions for Comuletin BUILDING DEPARTMENT Part 1-Project Information. The applicant or project sponsor is responsible for the completion of Part 1. Responses become part of the application for approval or funding,are subject to public review,and may be subject to further verification Complete Part 1 based on information currently available. If additional research or investigation would be needed to fully respond to any item,please answer as thoroughly as possible based on current information Complete all items in Part 1 You may also provide any additional information which you believe will be needed by or useful to the lead agency;attach additional pages as necessary to supplement any item. Part 1-Project and Sponsor Information Lou Larizza Name of Action or Project: North Ridge Street Subdivision for Lou Larizza Project Location(describe,and attach a location map): 259 North Ridge Street,Rye Brook,NY 10573 Brief Description of Proposed Action: Project is to subdivide a 3.96 acre property in the R-15 Zoning District and the Scenic Road Overlay District into three lots No construction is proposed at this time. Name of Applicant or Sponsor: Telephone 914879-7905 Lou Larizza,Contract Vendee E-Mail Address: 8 Hilltop Drive City/PO: State: Zip Code: Port Chester NY 10573 1.Does the proposed action only involve the legislative adoption of a plan,local law,ordinance, NO YES administrative rule,or regulation? If Yes,attach a narrative description of the intent of the proposed action and the environmental resources that R1 F1 may be affected in the municipality and proceed to Part 2. If no,continue to question 2. 2 Does the proposed action require a permit,approval or funding from any other governmental Agency? NO YES If Yes,list agency(s)name and permit or approval: Westchester County Department of Health:Plat Approval El ❑✓ 3.a.Total acreage of the site of the proposed action? 3.96 acres b Total acreage to be physically disturbed? 0.75 acres c Total acreage(project site and any contiguous properties)owned or controlled by the applicant or project sponsor? 3.96 acres 4. Check all land uses that occur on,adjoining and near the proposed action. ❑Urban []Rural(non-agriculture) ❑Industrial [:]Commercial 0 Residential(suburban) ❑Forest ❑Agriculture [:1 Aquatic ❑Other(specify): ❑Parkland Page 1 of 3 5. Is the proposed action, NO YES N/A a.A permitted use under the zoning regulations? ❑ ❑✓ ❑ b.Consistent with the adopted comprehensive plan? ❑ ❑✓ ❑ 6. Is the proposed action consistent with the predominant character of the existing built or natural NO YES landscape? ❑ 0 7. Is the site of the proposed action located in,or does it adjoin,a state listed Critical Environmental Area? NO YES If Yes,identify: ❑✓ ❑ 8. a.Will the proposed action result in a substantial increase in traffic above present levels? NO YES 0 ❑ b.Are public transportation service(s)available at or near the site of the proposed action? ❑ F-1- c. c.Are any pedestrian accommodations or bicycle routes available on or near site of the proposed action? ❑ ❑ 9.Does the proposed action meet or exceed the state energy code requirements? NO YES If the proposed action will exceed requirements,describe design features and technologies: ❑ ❑ 10. Will the proposed action connect to an existing public/private water supply? NO YES If No,describe method for providing potable water: ❑ ❑ 11.Will the proposed action connect to existing wastewater utilities? NO YES If No,describe method for providing wastewater treatment: ❑ Fvl 12. a.Does the site contain a structure that is listed on either the State or National Register of Historic NO YES Places? RI ❑ b.Is the proposed action located in an archeological sensitive area? Fv� ❑ 13.a.Does any portion of the site of the proposed action,or lands adjoining the proposed action,contain NO YES wetlands or other waterbodies regulated by a federal,state or local agency? a b.Would the proposed action physically alter,or encroach into,any existing wetland or waterbody? ❑ If Yes,identify the wetland or waterbody and extent of alterations in square feet or acres: 14. Identify the typical habitat types that occur on,or are likely to be found on the project site. Check all that apply ❑Shoreline ❑Forest ❑Agricultural/grasslands ❑Early mid-successional ❑Wetland ❑Urban ©Suburban 15.Does the site of the proposed action contain any species of animal,or associated habitats,listed NO YES by the State or Federal goverment as threatened or endangered? R1 ❑ 16.Is the project site located in the 100 year flood plain? NO YES 17.Will the proposed action create storm water discharge,either from point or non-point sources? NO YES If Yes, ❑ a.Will storm water discharges flow to adjacent properties? ❑✓ NO [–]YES b.Will storm water discharges be directed to established conveyance systems(runoff and storm drains)? If Yes,briefly describe: ❑NO AYES There are exisfing storm drains in North Ridge Street. Stone water will he confined to the site in the event of any construction. Page 2 of 3 18.Does the proposed action include construction or other activities that result in the impoundment of NO YES water or other liquids(e g retention pond,waste lagoon,dam)? If Yes,explain purpose and size: ❑ ❑ 19.Has the site of the proposed action or an adjoining property been the location of an active or closed NO YES solid waste management facility? If Yes,describe: ❑V1 20.Has the site of the proposed action•bt an adjoining property beerithe subject of remediation(ongoing or NO YES completed)for hazardous waste? If Yes,describe: a I AFFIRM T11[AT THE INFORMATION PROVIDED ABOVE IS TRUE AND ACCURATE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE Applicant/sponsor name: 484 Date: July 28,2015 Signature: PRINT FORM Page 3 of 3 622 STILES AVENUE MAMARONECK, NEW YORK 10543 TEL 914-698-8207 FAX 914-698-8208 chnorch@yohoo.com Clark NeuringerArchitect CONNECTICUT DELAWARE FLORIDA MARYLAND NEW YORK May 15, 2015 The Honorable Paul S. Rosenberg, Mayor; Members of the Board of Trustees Village of Rye Brook Village Hall 938 King Street Rye Brook, NY 10573 RE: Petition of Pawling Holdings, LLC to rezone Town of Rye tax lot Section 135.35; Block 1; Lot 11 from zoning district R-15 to Fair and Affordable Housing District("FAH") Dear Mayor Rosenberg and Members of the Board of Trustees, We represent PAWLING HOLDINGS/LAZZ DEVELOPMENT, LLC,the petitioner in connection with their property located at 259 North ridge Street, Rye Brook, NY(Section 135.35; Block 1; Lot 11). On behalf of the petitioner and in accordance with Section 250-26.1 of the Code of the Village of Rye Brook, we respectfully make this petition regarding the proposed development. The parcel is composed of one lot located within in the R15 zoning district.The lot is 3.96 acres (172,647.17 s.f.)in area and contains one single family residence structure. The lot is proposed to be sub- divided into three lots,with two improved with a proposed single family residence on each conforming to the underlying R15 zoning controls and the third lot, improved with proposed two 2-story structures containing 4 dwelling units each for a total of eight(8) new AFFH residential dwelling units, conforming to FAH zoning requirements. Multi-family housing is a permitted use within the FAH overlay zone as per sec. 250- 26.1 F(1)(c).The uses surrounding the parcel are predominantly low scale, low density residential. Neighborhood shopping is available to the south along South Ridge Street which has several shopping centers of different sizes. The proposed AFFH parcel's topography is steeply sloped and we propose the construction of three terraced retaining walls to mitigate the present land contours. The site will be served by public sanitary sewer located in North Ridge Street and public water also located within the street. Natural gas and electricity is available to the site via existing Con Ed facilities within North Ridge Street. The Honorable Paul S. Rosenberg, Mayor; Members of the Board of Trustees May 15, 2015 Page 2 The proposed 259 North Ridge Street Residences development is proposed as for-sale, condominium homes comprised of eight(8)fair and affordable dwellings on 1.38 acres. The eight (8)units will be located within two 2-story multi-family residential buildings.The housing units will be made up of eight(8)two-bedroom condominium units and the residential community will have a homeowners association (HOA). Off-street parking will be provided on site and will consist of 24 parking spaces,which allows for two(2) spaces for each two-bedroom residential unit and one(1)space for visitors.The buildings will be 2 stories in height and will be designed in a traditional vernacular consistent with the prevalent architecture of the neighborhood. Rezoning one parcel of the three lot sub-division as proposed,from the R15 District to a Fair and Affordable Housing District will conform to the intent of the Village of Rye Brook Board of Trustees to provide an additional eight(8) units of affordable housing within the village. By permitting flexible use regulations and a streamlined permitting process, rezoning this parcel will further the goals of the Westchester County Fair and Affordable Housing Implementation Plan in order to provide a more balanced demographic within the village of Rye Brook. In order to construct the 259 North Ridge Street Residences affordable housing development and to maintain the economic viability of the development proposal, modifications or waivers are being requested from the R15 Zoning District. The 259 North Ridge Street Residences affordable housing development is consistent with the purpose and intent of the village of Rye Brook zoning code and Official Map in that the development will allow for a more equitable distribution of affordable housing within the village and will compliment the existing zoning established by the current code.The proposed development will be furthering affordable housing in the village by virtue of the fact that the eight(8) multi-unit condominium development will be 100%affordable. The location of the proposed residential buildings is appropriate for the orderly development of the area in that the development will be of low density, low scale, comprising an overall proposed residential development of the parcel of 1 dwelling unit per 7,552 s.f. of lot area. Impact to the orderly development and the quality of life for the neighboring areas should improve by rezoning this property to permit a small, low density multi-family residential development. The addition of eight families at the location of the proposed site should have a positive effect on the advancement of economic development within the immediate neighborhood specifically, and the village as a whole, in general.The impact of the modifications or waivers requested will be lessened by the significant landscaping proposed that will screen the proposed development as well as for the neighboring properties.The proposed architecture of the residential structures will be traditional in style so as to be in harmony with adjacent residential buildings. All the surrounding properties are developed and therefore the proposed development will not discourage future development or substantially impair the value of adjacent lands or buildings.The proposed development will have little or no impact on the environment.The modifications or waivers requested are the minimum necessary to maintain the economic viability of the development in that the entire project is to be an affordable housing development with eight residential units. Prior to the enactment of the Fair and Affordable Housing District,we received comments concerning our original development plan. Based on comments received,the plan has been further fine tuned and modified in order to respond to various comments and recommendations.Attached as part of this communication to you and the Board is a sketch plan prepared by our consulting site engineer, Ralph Mastromonaco, P.E. This preliminary site plan contains a zoning table for each of the three proposed lots; the number of AFFH dwelling units (8)on one of the sub-divided parcels; a location map indicating adjacent streets, rights of way, adjacent properties, etc; easements;topography; wetland boundary delineations; steep slopes;, all as per the requirements of sec.250-26.1.E(1)(b). The Honorable Paul S. Rosenberg, Mayor; Members of the Board of Trustees May 15, 2015 Page 3 As stated within sec. 260-26.1.E.(1),we respectfully ask that a Pre-submission sketch plan conference be scheduled in anticipation of our formal submission of a Petition to your honorable Board. Thank you very much for your consideration of our petition. Very truly yours, CLARK NEURINGER ARCHITECT Clary Newikiger Clark H. Neuringer, R.A.; NCARB CC: Mr. Louis Larizza CHN/nc RALPH G. MASTROMONACO, P.E., P.C. Civil/Site/ Environmental Consulting Engineers www.rgmpepc.com 13 Dove Court,Croton-on-Hudson, New York 10520 Tel: (914)271-4762 Fax: (914)271-2820 To: Michael Nowak L ' Village of Rye Brook, NY AUG From: Ralph G. Mastromonaco, PE VILLAGE OOOK BUILDINGENI Re: Lou Larizza /North Ridge Street Subdivision Rye Brook, NY Date: August 14, 2015 1 am aware that the Village Code asks for a SWPPP as part of a subdivision application. In this case, we are merely subdividing one (1) lot into three (3) lots with no construction proposed. We do not need roads for this project and all utilities are in the street along the front. A SWPPP is required by your code prior to any construction on any of these lots since the disturbance will be over 400 square feet. Your subdivision code does not require that applications show proposed houses or grading, hence we feel the SWPPP may not be required. Accordingly, we would like you to waive the SWPPP application requirement until construction is actually proposed on any lot. Ralph G. Mastromonaco, PE Cc: Lou Larizza 622 STILES AVENUE MAMARONECK, NEW YORK 10543 TEL 914-698-8207 FAX 914-698-8208 chnorch@yahoo.com Clark NeuringerArchitect CONNECTICUT DELAWARE FLORIDA MARYLAND NEW YORK May 12, 2015 D fE C IEP W The Honorable Paul S. Rosenberg, Mayor; JUN - i 2015 Members of the Board of Trustees VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK Village of Rye Brook BUILDING DEPARTMENT Village Hall 938 King Street Rye Brook. NY 10573 RE Petition of Pawling Holdings, LLC to rezone Town of Rye tax lot Section 135.35; Block 1; Lot 11 from zoning district R-7 to Fair and Affordable Housing District("FAH") Dear Mayor Rosenberg and Members of the Board of Trustees. We represent PAWLING HOLDINGS/ LAZZ DEVELOPMENT, LLC, the petitioner in connection with their property located at 259 North ridge Street, Rye Brook, NY(Section 135 35; Block 1, Lot 11). On behalf of the petitioner and in accordance with Section 250-26.1 of the Code of the Village of Rye Brook, we respectfully make this petition regarding the proposed development The parcel is composed of one lot located within in the R15 zoning district. The lot is 3.96 acres (172,647.17 s f.) in area and contains one single family residence structure. The lot is proposed to be sub- divided into three lots, with two improved with a proposed single family residence on each and the third lot, improved with proposed two 2-story structures containing 4 dwelling units each for a total of eight(8) new AFFH residential dwelling units. The uses surrounding the parcel are predominantly low scale. low density residential. Neighborhood shopping is available to the south along South Ridge Street which has several shopping centers of different sizes. The proposed AFFH parcel's topography is steeply sloped and we propose the construction of three terraced retaining walls to mitigate the present land contours. The site will be served by public sanitary sewer located in North Ridge Street and public water also located within the street. Natural gas and electricity is available to the site via existing Con Ed facilities within North Ridge Street. The Honorable Paul S. Rosenberg, Mayor; Members of the Board of Trustees May 12, 2015 Page 2 The proposed 259 North Ridge Street Residences development is proposed as for-sale, condominium homes comprised of eight(8)fair and affordable dwellings on 1.38 acres. The eight (8) units will be located within two 2-story multi-family residential buildings. The housing units will be made up of eight(8)two-bedroom condominium units and the residential community will have a homeowners association (HOA). Off-street parking will be provided on site and will consist of 24 parking spaces, which allows for two(2) spaces for each two-bedroom residential unit and one (1) space for visitors. The buildings will be 2 stories in height and will be designed in a traditional vernacular consistent with the prevalent architecture of the neighborhood. Rezoning one parcel of the three lot sub-division as proposed, from the R15 District to a Fair and Affordable Housing District will conform to the intent of the Village of Rye Brook Board of Trustees to provide an additional eight(8) units of affordable housing within the village. By permitting flexible use regulations and a streamlined permitting process, rezoning this parcel will further the goals of the Westchester County Fair and Affordable Housing Implementation Plan in order to provide a more balanced demographic within the village of Rye Brook. In order to construct the 259 North Ridge Street Residences affordable housing development and to maintain the economic viability of the development proposal, modifications or waivers are being requested from the R15 Zoning District. The modification or waiver being requested from the R15 zoning district is as follows: 1 —a use variance is required for a multi-family dwelling within an R15 zoning district. The 259 North Ridge Street Residences affordable housing development is consistent with the purpose and intent of the village of Rye Brook zoning code and Official Map in that the development will allow for a more equitable distribution of affordable housing within the village and will compliment the existing zoning established by the current code. The proposed development will be furthering affordable housing in the village by virtue of the fact that the eight(8) multi-unit condominium development will be 100% affordable. The location of the proposed residential buildings is appropriate for the orderly development of the area in that the development will be of low density, low scale, comprising an overall proposed residential development of the parcel of 1 dwelling unit per 7,552 s.f. of lot area. Impact to the orderly development and the quality of life for the neighboring areas should improve by rezoning this property to permit a small, low density multi-family residential development. The addition of eight families at the location of the proposed site should have a positive effect on the advancement of economic development within the immediate neighborhood specifically. and the village as a whole, in general The impact of the modifications or waivers requested will be lessened by the significant landscaping proposed that will screen the proposed development as well as for the neighboring properties. The proposed architecture of the residential structures will be traditional in style so as to be in harmony with adjacent residential buildings. All the surrounding properties are developed and therefore the proposed development will not discourage future development or substantially impair the value of adjacent lands or buildings. The proposed development will have little or no impact on the environment. The modifications or waivers requested are the minimum necessary to maintain the economic viability of the development in that the entire project is to be an affordable housing development with eight residential units. Prior to the enactment of the Fair and Affordable Housing District, we received comments concerning our original development plan. Based on comments received, the plan has been further fine tuned and modified in order to respond to various comments and recommendations. The Honorable Paul S. Rosenberg, Mayor; Members of the Board of Trustees May 12, 2015 Page 3 As stated within sec. 260-26.1.E.(1), we respectfully ask that a Pre-submission sketch plan conference be scheduled in anticipation of our formal submission of a Petition to your honorable Board. Thank you very much for your consideration of our petition. Very truly yours, CLARK NEURINGER ARCHITECT 04 Clark H. Neuringer, R.A.; NCARB CC: Mr. Louis Larizza CHN/nc Buildiniz Permit Check List & Zonintz Analysis Address: Zsc; -P,"srz S-t- • LO i - ( SBL: Zone: 5�Use: 2-7— Const.Type: Other: --2_0 p-5 t- -t%� Sem Submittal Date: !p l l I S� Revisions Submittal Dates: Applicant:_,?AL4Lt P4 Cho S / Nature of Work: Z Z S y r A •14 Reviews: ZBA:i I IUN10294j-PB: BP: Other: NE OK ( ( ) FEES: Filing: BP: C/O: Legalization: ( ( ) APP.: Date Stamped: Properly Signed: _ SBL Verified: Other: (� ( ) Scenic Roads: Steep Slopes: Wetlands: Storm Water Review: Street Opening: (� ( ) ENVIRO.: Long: Short: Fees: N/A: ( ) (� SITE PLAN: Topo: Site Protection: S/W Mgmt.: Tree Plan: Other: (✓j ( ) SURVEY: Dated: Current: Archival: Sealed: (� (-) PLANS:Date Stamped: Sealed. Copies: (✓j ( ) License: Workers Comp: Liability: Coml (Jj ( ) Code 753#: 1 (� ( ) HIGH-VOLTAGE ELECTRICAL: Plans: Permit: (� ( ) LOW-VOLTAGE ELECTRICAL: Plans: Permit: (� ( ) FIRE ALARM/SMOKE DETECTORS: Plans: Permit i- �'L -[3Fi,b(us--A (� ( ) PLUMBING: Plans: Permit: Nat. Gas: LP (� ( ) FIRE SUPPRESSION: Plans: Permit: N/A: t (� ( ) 2010 NY State ECCC: N/A: Other: (� ( ) Final Survey: Final Topo: RAPE Sign-off Letter Z ( ) ( ) BP DENIAL LETTER: C/O DENIAL LETTER: Other: 13 o 1 - `' 0 (4ARB mtg. date: approval: notes: �`' ��ti t.l.t o f4-0 ,n, ( )ZBA mtg. date: approval: notes: (4PB mtg. date: approval: notes: REQUIRED EXISTING PROPOSED NOTES Area: I<--k l?Zrb�i f� &4>0 k r7 Oh_ Circle: L•c D (0 0 QZ Frontaee: ZS' Front: OFront: Sides: S Af o t 06 Rear: 440 $:J 012. Main Cov: L b (Oil O� Accs.Cov: Ft. H/Sb: • G Sd. H/Sb: GFA: !i5.Lf-,S IT, 0,0.51 ZSD-Zo . E 49A- Ft. I D: l ,?S7- Ft. Imn:�° o Parking: 7-0 o4c Hei t/Stories: o Z Z Oh, notes: © t&jcfL ti Wvc- "LSI Z F s Z50- .`r S -20. A.t3, .C.11 - UM uA(L A-)cR n, o -C2. S 11*3 - bAL ri���� ►� v,., 1 Gq,— Building Permit Check List & Zoning Analysis Address: N • __0 ib S R., S<< / OT —Z SBL: ( 3S, l — t l . t Zone: Zj= 1 Use: Z( I=> Const.Type: Z3 Other: STLo�> Submittal Date: (p L ( ..5- Revisions Submittal Dates: Applicant: :� AW 1,t 04, POCb (t, �S ZI-A7,1_ __!>F'V . Nature of Work: t>t� t D t1 A 1?0� roct SV t-J 91 1-3 L Fz 900,V-4,L S� L,3 F_ L t.l ,. `.' CESS (5 t�f� -TRAIL Reviews: ZBA: J UN 1 O 2015 PB: BP: Other: NEED OK ( ) FEES: Filing: BP: C/O: Legalization: (✓j ( ) APP.: Date Stamped: Properly Signed: SBL Verified: Other: (� ( ) Scenic Roads: Steep Slopes: Wetlands: Storm Water Review: Street Opening: (� ( ) ENVIRO.: Long: Short: Fees: N/A: ( ) (✓�SITE PLAN: Topo: Site Protection: S/W Mgmt.: Tree Plan: Other: (� ( ) SURVEY: Dated: Current: Archival: Sealed: Unacceptable: (� ( ) PLANS:Date Stamped. Sealed: Copies: Incomplete—. N/A: Other:------ - - H/ ther:----- -H/ ( ) License: Workers Comp: Liability: Comp. Waiver: Other: (� ( ) Code 753#: Dated: N/A: (� O HIGH-VOLTAGE ELECTRICAL: Plans: Permit: _N/A: Other: (� ( ) LOW-VOLTAGE ELECTRICAL: Plans: Permit: N/A: Other: (� ( ) FIRE ALARM /SMOKE DETECTORS: Plans: Permit: N/A: Other: (� ( ) PLUMBING: Plans: Permit: Nat.Gas: LP Gas: N/A/: Other: (� ( ) FIRE SUPPRESSION: Plans: Permit: N/A: Other: (� ( ) 2010 NY State ECCC: N/A: Other: Final Survey: Final Topo: RAPE Sign-off Letter: As-Built Plans: Other: ( ) ( ) BP DENIAL LETTER: C/O DENIAL LETTER: Other: ( ) ( ) Other: ( ARB mtg. date: approval: notes: ( ZBA mtg. date: approval: notes: (✓ 13 mtg. date: approval: notes: REQUIRED EXISTING PROPOSED NOTES Area: [S I,- kS' (O's 3 0(%_ Circle: C o O -ok- Frontage: 7 5 Front: Front: (00 ck iT_ 01 - F. Sides: lS'I'ti� tffi lug Ch- Rear: 'to 3 ZS dk Main Cov: L(c o W• q < Accs.Cov: Ft.H/Sb: & o Sd.WSb: 1 , G o GFA: 'T, ZD-1, ZZt o ,p{, Tom: CS, o Ft.Imp: ° o Parking: 'Z. Z ole Height/Stories: z notes: Building Permit Check List & Zoning Analysis Address: Z l )� , ::�W 6_ S r LO 13 - SBL: 13S.3S t 1 • Z Zone: Z- t Use: -Z I Const.Type: Other: z c, Submittal Date: (D I l 19- Revisions Submittal Dates: Applicant: A ,)t.t PZ {-b t�c&5l S �-d Z Z _MV - Nature of Work: S t jJ4 L fL FA ,-A i L -.�(!-�LL�,J W Reviews: ZBA: JUN 10 2015 PB: BP: Other: NEED OK (✓� O FEES: Filing: BP: C/O: Legalization: (J� ( ) APP.: Date Stamped: Properly Signed: SBL Verified: Other: (� ( ) Scenic Roads: Steep Slopes: Wetlands: Storm Water Review: Street Opening: ENVIRO.: Long: Short: Fees: _ N/A: ( ) ( ) SITE PLAN: Topo: Site Protection: S/W Mgmt.: Tree Plan: Other: (� ( ) SURVEY: Dated: Current: Archival: Sealed: Unacceptable: (� ( ) PLANS:Date Stamped: Sealed: Copies: Iomislete: N/A- (� ( ) License: Workers Comp: Liability: Comp. Waiver: Other: (� ( ) Code 753#: Dated: N/A: (� ( ) HIGH-VOLTAGE ELECTRICAL: Plans: Permit: N/A: Other: (� ( ) LOW-VOLTAGE ELECTRICAL: Plans: Permit: N/A: Other: (� ( ) FIRE ALARM/SMOKE DETECTORS: Plans: Permit: N/A: Other: (� ( ) PLUMBING: Plans: Permit: Nat. Gas: LP Gas: N/A/: Other: (� ( ) FIRE SUPPRESSION: Plans: Permit: N/A: Other: 2010 NY State ECCC: N/A: Other: (� ( ) Final Survey: Final Topo: RAPE Sign-off Letter: As-Built Plans: Other: ( ) ( ) BP DENIAL LETTER: C/O DENIAL LETTER: Other: O O Other: (BARB mtg. date: approval: notes: ( )ZBA mtg. date: approval: notes: (4,P13 mtg. date: approval: notes: REQUIRED EXISTING PROPOSED NOTES Area: ISh Circle: 10--> } too �h_ Frontage: Z�- Front: Front: Sides: (r yo ti+ tri c4r. Rear: '40 2pp p Main Cov: 16 a �'(� _ Oki Accs.Cov: Ft.H/Sb: Sd.H/Sb: GFA: i!o, (pt 2 ZS o 5� oh., Tot. l=: Qo�ZZ.`i Ft.Imn: 3.5 Parkin g: 7- Heigh Hei t/Stories:3o z 3o qi notes: BUILDING - TMENT ED VI CEOF RYE OOK � LD 938 KING- ET R.YE BRQj NY 10573(914)939 6$FAx(9114)939-580115NN V% 11 ehrook.oro BROOKTMENT *******************************************************************»****************************»********** FOR OFFICE USE ONLY: BOT Approval Date: PB Approval Date: BOT Disapproval Date: PB Disapproval Date: Attach Resolution Hereto: BOT[ ] PB[ ] ZBA[ ] Chairman: SUBDIVISION FEE: DATE PAID: IT- ENVIRONMENTAL FEE: DATE PAID: OTHER: FEE SCHEDULE: Preliminary Platt Application: $900.00 +$650.00/Additional Lot(application fees are non-refundable) Final Platt: / Recreation: Residential =$10,000.00/acre+$2,000.00/dwelling unit Commercial = $10,000.00/acre+$2,000.00/2,000 sq.ft. APPLICATION FOR SUBDIVISION OF LAND Application dated, I 19,1 1 S is hereby made to the Village of Rye Brook for a Subdivision of Land,Lot Merger,or other land use function in accordance with§21 and all other applicable sections of the Code of the Village of Rye Brook,as per detailed statement described below. s»sssss*sssssssssssssssssssssssss*ssss*ssssssssssss»sssssssssssssssssssss»»*s»*s»»s»*»»»s»�»»*»*»»*»»*»*ssss»»s»ss*s/ 1. Property Address: _ `? �L2Y f� �IC�Qle h__00 t SBL: 35-1--liZone: 2. Property Owner:) C_-,G Address: email: Tel.: f -7 7�/�`7 -7 L/ 3. Applicant: .I11L t1 Address: 4. Professional Engineer: omen Q 1� �j'k rI - 7&2 Address: / Cl2d1l� L-+ �U�1 te�tr Y O:% o. 0 NW � -o/91-oq 86 5. Licensed Land Surveyor: --- Address: ��[,� y 11 email: Tel.: 6. Subdivision Name/Identifying Title:A/CeM 4J ,"nt> 7. Abutting Streets:Ao 4h S("0,4- iks e(JQZ D(A 8. Does property connect directly into channel lines as established by the Westchester County Commissioner of Public Works? 15�NO ( )YES: 9. Is lot within 500 feet of the Municipal Boundary? �4 NO O YES: (if yes list all adjacent Municipalities below) 10. Size of Existing Lot: 11. Size(s)of Proposed Lot(s): 12. Are proposed road centerlines staked? YES O NO(if no,indicate anticipated date of staking) REVISED 8/14/15 13. Has the proposed lot(s)been staked? ( )AYES (,4 NO(if no indicate anticipated date of staking) 14. Number of Proposed Dwelling Units: 8 A t:14 Z S t N S L r— F✓a AZA L- (rte 15. Estimated Cost of Construction:$ Additional Information required to be submitted: a. Proof of ownership of the subject parcel(s). b. Certificate of Title Company covering all interests,liens,judgements,objections to title if any. C. Formal offers of cession to the Village of all streets&park areas not to remain private. d. Written agreement authorizing entry onto the property(s)by Village employees&officials. e. Any list of waivers requested by the applicant. f. Engineers estimated cost of construction of all streets,buildings,and site improvements. g. Final Subdivision plat and final subdivision plans. h. Proof of Approval by NY State DOT and/or Westchester County DOT for any proposed State or County street/intersection. L Proof of Approval by Westchester County DPW for drainage lines if connecting directly into County established channel lines. j. Proof of Approval from the appropriate Utility Company for all proposed utilities&equipment. k. Proof of Approval from Westchester County DPW Division of Stream Control,if applicable. 1. Properly completed Environmental Impact Statement.(available on the NYS DEC website) M. Any additional information as requested by the Village of Rye Brook. ****************************************************************************************** Please note that this application must include the notarized signature(s) of the legal owner(s)of the above-mentioned property, in the space provided below. Any application not bearing the legal property owner's notarized signature(s)shall be deemed null and void, and will be returned to the applicant. *********************************************************************************************************** STATE OF NEW YORK,COUNTY OF WESTCHESTER ) as-. I.0.j 1.4-2.t-z-2-A ,being duly sworn,deposes and states that he she is the applicant above named, (print name of individual signing as the applicant) and further states that (s)he is the legal owner of the property to which this application pertains, or that (s)he is the km t,I C A'-- t for the legal owner and is duly authorized to make and file this application. (indicate drchitect,contractor,agent,attorney,etc.) That all statements contained herein are true to the best of his/her knowledge and belief, and that any work performed, or use conducted at the above captioned property will be in conformance with the details as set forth and contained in this application and in any accompanying approved plans and specifications,as well as in accordance with the New York State Uniform Fire Prevention &Building Code,the Code of the Village of Rye Brook and all other applicable laws,ordinances and regulations. Sworn to before me this ops Sworn to before me this day of , 20�� day of , 20�� STEVEN 0.FEINSTEIN Nomy Public St6 e o New York . ota �blLcfQualified in esishdIMA911161v NotapPu i X Commission Expires S' tore f Pr rty Owner Sign e o p ' ant Print Nam S6 a of New Yodt Print Name of Applicant M 1 ME6160063 Ouallfled In Westchester County REVISED 8/14/15 Commission Expires January 29.20, p Short Environmental Assessment Form f� ENE D " 10 � Part I -Project Information VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK Instructions for Completing BUILDING DEPARTMENT Part 1-Project Information. The applicant or project sponsor is responsible for the completion of Part 1. Responses become part of the application for approval or funding,are subject to public review,and may be subject to further verification Complete Part 1 based on information currently available. If additional research or investigation would be needed to fully respond to any item,please answer as thoroughly as possible based on current information. Complete all items in Part 1. You may also provide any additional information which you believe will be needed by or useful to the lead agency;attach additional pages as necessary to supplement any item. Part I-Project and Sponsor Information Lou Larizza Name of Action or Project: North Ridge Street Subdivision for Lou Larizza Project Location(describe,and attach a location map): 259 North Ridge Street,Rye Brook,NY 10573 Brief Description of Proposed Action: Project is to subdivide a 3.96 acre property in the R-15 Zoning District and the Scenic Road Overlay District into three lots. No construction is proposed at this time. Name of Applicant or Sponsor: Telephone: 914-879-7905 Lou Larizza,Contract Vendee E-Mail Address: 8 Hilltop Drive City/PO: State: Zip Code: Port Chester NY 10573 1.Does the proposed action only involve the legislative adoption of a plan,local law,ordinance, NO YES administrative rule,or regulation? If Yes,attach a narrative description of the intent of the proposed action and the environmental resources that R1 ❑ may be affected in the municipality and proceed to Part 2 If no,continue to question 2 2. Does the proposed action require a permit,approval or fundmg from any other governmental Agency? NO YES If Yes,list agency(s)name and permit or approval: ❑ Westchester County Department of Health:Plat Approval 3.a.Total acreage of the site of the proposed action? 3.96 acres b.Total acreage to be physically disturbed? 0.75 acres c.Total acreage(project site and any contiguous properties)owned or controlled by the applicant or project sponsor? 3.96 acres 4. Check all land uses that occur on,adjoining and near the proposed action. ❑Urban ❑Rural(non-agriculture) [:]Industrial ❑Commercial ®Residential(suburban) ❑Forest ❑Agriculture ❑Aquatic ❑Other(specify): ❑Parkland Page 1 of 3 5. Is the proposed action, NO YES N/A a.A permitted use under the zoning regulations? ❑ 21 ❑ b.Consistent with the adopted comprehensive plan? ❑ ❑✓ ❑ 6. Is the proposed action consistent with the predominant character of the existing built or natural NO YES landscape? ❑ a 7. Is the site of the proposed action located in,or does it adjoin,a state listed Critical Environmental Area? NO YES If Yes,identify: ❑✓ ❑ 8. a.Will the proposed action result in a substantial increase in traffic above present levels? NO YES 21 ❑ b.Are public transportation service(s)available at or near the site of the proposed action? ❑ ❑ c.Are any pedestrian accommodations or bicycle routes available on or near site of the proposed action? ❑ ❑ 9.Does the proposed action meet or exceed the state energy code requirements? NO YES If the proposed action will exceed requirements,describe design features and technologies: ❑ ❑ 10. Will the proposed action connect to an existing public/private water supply? NO YES If No,describe method for providing potable water: ❑ Rl 11.Will the proposed action connect to existing wastewater utilities? NO YES If No,describe method for providing wastewater treatment: ❑ 12. a.Does the site contain a structure that is listed on either the State or National Register of Historic NO YES Places? Z ❑ b.Is the proposed action located in an archeological sensitive area? Fv�' ❑ 13.a.Does any portion of the site of the proposed action,or lands adjoining the proposed action,contain NO YES wetlands or other waterbodies regulated by a federal,state or local agency? b.Would the proposed action physically alter,or encroach into,any existing wetland or waterbody? ❑ If Yes,identify the wetland or waterbody and extent of alterations in square feet or acres: 14. Identify the typical habitat types that occur on,or are likely to be found on the project site. Check all that apply ❑Shoreline ❑Forest ❑Agricultural/grasslands [:]Early mid-successional ❑ Wetland ❑Urban ®Suburban 15.Does the site of the proposed action contain any species of animal,or associated habitats,listed NO YES by the State or Federal government as threatened or endangered? Z ❑ 16.Is the project site located in the 100 year flood plain? NO YES 17.Will the proposed action create storm water discharge,either from point or non-point sources? NO YES If Yes, ❑ a.Will storm water discharges flow to adjacent properties? ❑✓ NO ❑YES b.Will storm water discharges be directed to established conveyance systems(runoff and storm drains)? If Yes,briefly describe: ❑NO AYES Tharp are agms ing stnrm drains in Nnrth Ridge Street Stnrm water will he rnnfined to the site in the event of any construction. Page 2 of 3 18.Does the proposed action include construction or other activities that result in the impoundment of NO YES water or other liquids(e.g.retention pond,waste lagoon,dam)? If Yes,explain purpose and size: ❑ ❑ 19.Has the site of the proposed action or an adjoining property been the location of an active or closed NO YES solid waste management facility? If Yes,describe: a ❑ 20.Has the site of the proposed actiorrbran adjoining property beemhe subject of remediation(ongoing or NO YES completed)for hazardous waste? If Yes,describe: v], F I AFFIRM THAT THE INFORMATION PROVIDED ABOVE IS TRUE AND ACCURATE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE Applicant/sponsor name: L ari Date: July 28,2015 Signature: PRINT FORM Page 3 of 3 622 STILES AVENUE MAMARONECK, NEW YORK 10543 TEL 914-698-8207 FAX 914-698-8208 chnarch@yahoo.com Clark NeuringerArchWo CONNECTICUT DELAWARE FLORIDA MARYLAND NEW YORK May 15, 2015 The Honorable Paul S. Rosenberg, Mayor; Members of the Board of Trustees Village of Rye Brook Village Hall 938 King Street Rye Brook, NY 10573 RE: Petition of Pawling Holdings, LLC to rezone Town of Rye tax lot Section 135.35; Block 1; Lot 11 from zoning district R-15 to Fair and Affordable Housing District("FAH") Dear Mayor Rosenberg and Members of the Board of Trustees, We represent PAWLING HOLDINGS/LAZZ DEVELOPMENT, LLC, the petitioner in connection with their property located at 259 North ridge Street, Rye Brook, NY(Section 135.35; Block 1; Lot 11). On behalf of the petitioner and in accordance with Section 250-26.1 of the Code of the Village of Rye Brook, we respectfully make this petition regarding the proposed development. The parcel is composed of one lot located within in the R15 zoning district.The lot is 3.96 acres (172,647.17 s.f.) in area and contains one single family residence structure. The lot is proposed to be sub- divided into three lots, with two improved with a proposed single family residence on each conforming to the underlying R15 zoning controls and the third lot, improved with proposed two 2-story structures containing 4 dwelling units each for a total of eight(8) new AFFH residential dwelling units, conforming to FAH zoning requirements. Multi-family housing is a permitted use within the FAH overlay zone as per sec. 250- 26AF(1)(c).The uses surrounding the parcel are predominantly low scale, low density residential. Neighborhood shopping is available to the south along South Ridge Street which has several shopping centers of different sizes. The proposed AFFH parcel's topography is steeply sloped and we propose the construction of three terraced retaining walls to mitigate the present land contours.The site will be served by public sanitary sewer located in North Ridge Street and public water also located within the street. Natural gas and electricity is available to the site via existing Con Ed facilities within North Ridge Street. The Honorable Paul S. Rosenberg, Mayor; Members of the Board of Trustees May 15, 2015 Page 2 The proposed 259 North Ridge Street Residences development is proposed as for-sale, condominium homes comprised of eight(8)fair and affordable dwellings on 1.38 acres. The eight (8) units will be located within two 2-story multi-family residential buildings.The housing units will be made up of eight(8)two-bedroom condominium units and the residential community will have a homeowners association (HOA). Off-street parking will be provided on site and will consist of 24 parking spaces, which allows for two (2) spaces for each two-bedroom residential unit and one (1)space for visitors. The buildings will be 2 stories in height and will be designed in a traditional vernacular consistent with the prevalent architecture of the neighborhood. Rezoning one parcel of the three lot sub-division as proposed,from the R15 District to a Fair and Affordable Housing District will conform to the intent of the Village of Rye Brook Board of Trustees to provide an additional eight(8) units of affordable housing within the village. By permitting flexible use regulations and a streamlined permitting process, rezoning this parcel will further the goals of the Westchester County Fair and Affordable Housing Implementation Plan in order to provide a more balanced demographic within the village of Rye Brook. In order to construct the 259 North Ridge Street Residences affordable housing development and to maintain the economic viability of the development proposal, modifications or waivers are being requested from the R15 Zoning District. The 259 North Ridge Street Residences affordable housing development is consistent with the purpose and intent of the village of Rye Brook zoning code and Official Map in that the development will allow for a more equitable distribution of affordable housing within the village and will compliment the existing zoning established by the current code.The proposed development will be furthering affordable housing in the village by virtue of the fact that the eight(8) multi-unit condominium development will be 100%affordable. The location of the proposed residential buildings is appropriate for the orderly development of the area in that the development will be of low density, low scale, comprising an overall proposed residential development of the parcel of 1 dwelling unit per 7,552 s.f. of lot area. Impact to the orderly development and the quality of life for the neighboring areas should improve by rezoning this property to permit a small, low density multi-family residential development.The addition of eight families at the location of the proposed site should have a positive effect on the advancement of economic development within the immediate neighborhood specifically, and the village as a whole, in general.The impact of the modifications or waivers requested will be lessened by the significant landscaping proposed that will screen the proposed development as well as for the neighboring properties.The proposed architecture of the residential structures will be traditional in style so as to be in harmony with adjacent residential buildings.All the surrounding properties are developed and therefore the proposed development will not discourage future development or substantially impair the value of adjacent lands or buildings.The proposed development will have little or no impact on the environment.The modifications or waivers requested are the minimum necessary to maintain the economic viability of the development in that the entire project is to be an affordable housing development with eight residential units. Prior to the enactment of the Fair and Affordable Housing District,we received comments concerning our original development plan. Based on comments received,the plan has been further fine tuned and modified in order to respond to various comments and recommendations.Attached as part of this communication to you and the Board is a sketch plan prepared by our consulting site engineer, Ralph Mastromonaco, P.E. This preliminary site plan contains a zoning table for each of the three proposed lots; the number of AFFH dwelling units(8)on one of the sub-divided parcels; a location map indicating adjacent streets, rights of way, adjacent properties, etc; easements;topography; wetland boundary delineations; steep slopes;, all as per the requirements of sec. 250-26.1.E(1)(b). The Honorable Paul S. Rosenberg, Mayor; Members of the Board of Trustees May 15, 2015 Page 3 As stated within sec. 260-26.1.E.(1),we respectfully ask that a Pre-submission sketch plan conference be scheduled in anticipation of our formal submission of a Petition to your honorable Board. Thank you very much for your consideration of our petition. Very truly yours, CLARK NEURINGER ARCHITECT Glade Neurb"ktger Clark H. Neuringer, R.A.; NCARB CC: Mr. Louis Larizza CHNInc RALPH G. MASTROMONACO, P.E., P.C. Civil/Site/ Environmental Consulting Engineers www.rgmpepc.com 13 Dove Court,Croton-on-Hudson,New York 10520 Tel: (914) 271-4762 Fax: (914) 271-2820 MBUIL�DING To: Michael Nowak ' $Village of Rye Brook, NY 2015FFrom: Ralph G. Mastromonaco, PE DEFrE BRGO ARTMENT Re: Lou Larizza / North Ridge Street Subdivision Rye Brook, NY Date: August 14, 2015 1 am aware that the Village Code asks for a SWPPP as part of a subdivision application. In this case, we are merely subdividing one (1) lot into three (3) lots with no construction proposed. We do not need roads for this project and all utilities are in the street along the front. A SWPPP is required by your code prior to any construction on any of these lots since the disturbance will be over 400 square feet. Your subdivision code does not require that applications show proposed houses or grading, hence we feel the SWPPP may not be required. Accordingly, we would like you to waive the SWPPP application requirement until construction is actually proposed on any lot. 1 it W° Ralph G. Mastromonaco, PE Cc: Lou Larizza 622 STILES AVENUE MAMARONECK, NEW YORK 10543 TEL 914-698-8207 FAX 914-698-8208 chnorch@yahoo.com Clark NeuringerArchitect CONNECTICUT DELAWARE FLORIDA MARYLAND NEW YORK May 12, 2015 D (c � IE �W The Honorable Paul S. Rosenberg, Mayor; JUN - 1 2015 ] ID Members of the Board of Trustees VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK Village of Rye Brook BUILDING DEPARTMENT Village Hall 938 King Street Rye Brook, NY 10573 RE: Petition of Pawling Holdings, LLC to rezone Town of Rye tax lot Section 135.35; Block 1; Lot 11 from zoning district R-7 to Fair and Affordable Housing District("FAH") Dear Mayor Rosenberg and Members of the Board of Trustees, We represent PAWLING HOLDINGS/ LAZZ DEVELOPMENT, LLC, the petitioner in connection with their property located at 259 North ridge Street, Rye Brook, NY (Section 135.35; Block 1; Lot 11). On behalf of the petitioner and in accordance with Section 250-26 1 of the Code of the Village of Rye Brook we respectfully make this petition regarding the proposed development. The parcel is composed of one lot located within in the R15 zoning district. The lot is 3.96 acres (172,647.17 s.f.) in area and contains one single family residence structure. The lot is proposed to be sub- divided into three lots, with two improved with a proposed single family residence on each and the third lot, improved with proposed two 2-story structures containing 4 dwelling units each for a total of eight(8) new AFFH residential dwelling units. The uses surrounding the parcel are predominantly low scale, low density residential. Neighborhood shopping is available to the south along South Ridge Street which has several shopping centers of different sizes. The proposed AFFH parcel's topography is steeply sloped and we propose the construction of three terraced retaining walls to mitigate the present land contours. The site will be served by public sanitary sewer located in North Ridge Street and public water also located within the street. Natural gas and electricity is available to the site via existing Con Ed facilities within North Ridge Street. The Honorable Paul S. Rosenberg, Mayor; Members of the Board of Trustees May 12, 2015 Page 2 The proposed 259 North Ridge Street Residences development is proposed as for-sale, condominium homes comprised of eight(8)fair and affordable dwellings on 1.38 acres. The eight (8) units will be located within two 2-story multi-family residential buildings. The housing units will be made up of eight(8)two-bedroom condominium units and the residential community will have a homeowners association (HOA). Off-street parking will be provided on site and will consist of 24 parking spaces, which allows for two(2) spaces for each two-bedroom residential unit and one (1) space for visitors. The buildings will be 2 stories in height and will be designed in a traditional vernacular consistent with the prevalent architecture of the neighborhood. Rezoning one parcel of the three lot sub-division as proposed, from the R15 District to a Fair and Affordable Housing District will conform to the intent of the Village of Rye Brook Board of Trustees to provide an additional eight(8) units of affordable housing within the village. By permitting flexible use regulations and a streamlined permitting process, rezoning this parcel will further the goals of the Westchester County Fair and Affordable Housing Implementation Plan in order to provide a more balanced demographic within the village of Rye Brook. In order to construct the 259 North Ridge Street Residences affordable housing development and to maintain the economic viability of the development proposal, modifications or waivers are being requested from the R15 Zoning District. The modification or waiver being requested from the R15 zoning district is as follows: 1 —a use variance is required for a multi-family dwelling within an R15 zoning district. The 259 North Ridge Street Residences affordable housing development is consistent with the purpose and intent of the village of Rye Brook zoning code and Official Map in that the development will allow for a more equitable distribution of affordable housing within the village and will compliment the existing zoning established by the current code. The proposed development will be furthering affordable housing in the village by virtue of the fact that the eight(8) multi-unit condominium development will be 100% affordable. The location of the proposed residential buildings is appropriate for the orderly development of the area in that the development will be of low density, low scale, comprising an overall proposed residential development of the parcel of 1 dwelling unit per 7,552 s.f. of lot area. Impact to the orderly development and the quality of life for the neighboring areas should improve by rezoning this property to permit a small, low density multi-family residential development. The addition of eight families at the location of the proposed site should have a positive effect on the advancement of economic development within the immediate neighborhood specifically, and the village as a whole in general. The impact of the modifications or waivers requested will be lessened by the significant landscaping proposed that will screen the proposed development as well as for the neighboring properties. The proposed architecture of the residential structures will be traditional in style so as to be in harmony with adjacent residential buildings. All the surrounding properties are developed and therefore the proposed development will not discourage future development or substantially impair the value of adjacent lands or buildings. The proposed development will have little or no impact on the environment. The modifications or waivers requested are the minimum necessary to maintain the economic viability of the development in that the entire project is to be an affordable housing development with eight residential units. Prior to the enactment of the Fair and Affordable Housing District, we received comments concerning our original development plan. Based on comments received, the plan has been further fine tuned and modified in order to respond to various comments and recommendations. The Honorable Paul S. Rosenberg, Mayor; Members of the Board of Trustees May 12, 2015 Page 3 As stated within sec. 260-26.1.E.(1), we respectfully ask that a Pre-submission sketch plan conference be scheduled in anticipation of our formal submission of a Petition to your honorable Board. Thank you very much for your consideration of our petition. Very truly yours, CLARK NEURINGER ARCHITECT • Clark H. Neuringer, R.A.; NCARB CC: Mr. Louis Larizza CHN/nc BUILDS "" TMENT ® �� D VILA E OF RYE I OOK 938 KING 9 RYE BR ,NY 10573 SEP (914)93 gET 66 FAs-(9IS939-5801 P 20f� ,yy w ryebrookxr>: UQ�a9c ORk,� , FOR OFFICE USE ONLY: BOT Approval Date: PB Approval Date: BOT Disapproval Date: PB Disapproval Date: Attach Resolution Hereto. BOT[ ] PB[ ] ZBA[ ] Chairman: SITE PLAN FEE: DATE PAID: ENVIRONMENTAL FEE: DATE PAID: OTHER: PRELIMINARY FOR LOT 2 OF NORTH RIDGE STREET SUBDIVISION APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL Submission of this application does not assure placement on any Planning Board Agenda.The Applicant will be notified of such placement. +++++++++++*+++++++++*+++++************+***+++++++++*++*++++++++++++*****************++++++*+*+++*+**++*+++ This application references but is not limited to the following sections of the Code of the Village of Rye Brook; §250 ZONING,§209 SITE PLAN REVIEW, §235 TREES,§107 DEMOLITION OF BUILDINGS, §224 SWIMMING POOLS, §121 EXCAVATION&TOPSOIL REMOVAL,§118 EROSION&SEDIMENT CONTROL, §213 STEEP SLOPES PROTECTION,§219 SUBDIVISION OF LAND, §250-40 NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS.Applicants and their Design Professionals are strongly advised to review the above mentioned code sections online at,www.ryebrook.org prior to completing and/or submitting this application. APPLICATION FEE SCHEDULE: Residential Dwellings- $325,plus$200 per additional dwelling unit. Non-Residential Buildings - $475 plus $30 per parking space. Planned Unit Development-$575 per acre PUD Amendment- $300 Site Plan Amendment- $575 Wetlands&Watercourse- $1,150 Consultant Review(Escrow)Fee: Minimum fee$250-maximum fee$2,500,to be determined by the Village Engineer. Application fees are non-refundable The applicant's Escrow Account must have a positive balance at all times prior to any Consultant,Attorney,or I'illage revie». Escrox Fees and Site Plan Fees must be paid on separate checks made parable to the Village of Rye Brook. Subdivision Lot#2 1. Site Address: 259 North Ridge Street Parcel ID#: 135.35-1-11 Zone: R 15 2. Property Owner: Dan Greto Address: 209 Central Avenue Rye, NY 10580 E-Mail: Tel.#: 914-447-4444 Other: 3. Applicant: Lou Larizza Address: 8 Hilltop Avenue Port Chester, NY 10573 E-Mail: Tel.#: 914-879-7905 Other: 4. Design Professional: _ Ralph G. Mastromonaco, P.E., P.C. Address: 13 Dove Court Croton-on-Hudson, NY 10520 E-Mail: Tel.#: 914-271-4762 Other: 5. Designate to whom correspondence is to be sent: Applicant, Lou Larizza Note:If applicant is a"Contract Vendee',please attach a copy of the contract summary with financial and confidential terms deleted REVISED 8 1015 6. Street which property abuts: North Ridge Street at West Ridge Drive 7. Does property connect directly into State or County highway? (X)NO ( )YES: 8. Is site within 500 feet of Village Boundary?(X)NO ( )YES If yes note all bordering municipalities: 9. Total area of site: 49,663 SF(1.14 Acres) Area of site activity: 4,000 SF 10. Site coverage: 10% (Impervious coverage) 0o; Building coverage: 4% % 11. Existing building size: 2,200 SF New additional building size: Renovate existing dwelling 12. Existing parking spaces: 2 New parking spaces: 2 13. Nature of proposed activity: _ To renovate an existing single family dwelling ****************************************************************************************** Please note that this application must include the notarized signature(s) of the legal owner(s) of the above-mentioned property, in the space provided below. Any application not bearing the legal property owner's notarized signature(s)shall be deemed null and void, and will be returned to the applicant. STATE OF NEW YORK,COUNTY OF WESTCHESTER ) as: ,being duly sworn,deposes and states that he/she is the applicant above named, (print name of individual signing as the applicant) and further states that (s)he is the legal owner of the property to which this application pertains, or that (s)he is the for the legal owner and is duly authorized to make and file this application. (indicate architect,contractor,agent,attorney,etc) That all statements contained herein are true to the best of his her knowledge and belief, and that any work performed, or use conducted at the above captioned property will be in conformance with the details as set forth and contained in this application and in any accompanying approved plans and specifications,as well as in accordance with the New York State Uniform Fire Prevention & Building Code,the Code of the Village of Rye Brook and all other applicable laws,ordinances and regulations. Sworn to before me this Sworn to before me this day of_ 120 day of 20 Notary Public Notary Public Signature of Property Owner Signature of Applicant Print Name of Property Owner Print Name of Applicant REVISED 8 1015 BUILDI $TMENT VIL W E OF RYE OOK SEP 938 KING - ET RYE BRr�� NY 10573 , ?0, t (914)939- '68 Fax�(9.1 �39-5801 �vicw.ryebrook.orls FOR OFFICE USE ONLY: BOT Approval Date: PB Approval Date: BOT Disapproval Date: PB Disapproval Date: Attach Resolution Hereto. BOT[ ] PB[ ] ZBA[ ] Chairman: SITE PLAN FEE: DATE PAID: ENVIRONMENTAL FEE: DATE PAID: OTHER: *********************************************************************************************************** PRELIMINARY FOR LOT 3 OF NORTH RIDGE STREET SUBDIVISION APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL Submission of this application does not assure placement on any Planning Board Agenda.The Applicant will be notified of such placement. This application references but is not limited to the following sections of the Code of the Village of Rye Brook; §250 ZONING,§209 SITE PLAN REVIEW, §235 TREES, §107 DEMOLITION OF BUILDINGS, §224 SWIMMING POOLS, §121 EXCAVATION&TOPSOIL REMOVAL,§118 EROSION&SEDIMENT CONTROL,§213 STEEP SLOPES PROTECTION,§219 SUBDIVISION OF LAND, §250-40 NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS.Applicants and their Design Professionals are strongly advised to review the above mentioned code sections online at,www.t-vebrook.org prior to completing and/or submitting this application. APPLICATION FEE SCHEDULE: Residential Dwellings- $325,plus$200 per additional dwelling unit. Non-Residential Buildings - $475 plus $30 per parking space. Planned Unit Development-$575 per acre PUD Amendment- $300 Site Plan Amendment- $575 Wetlands&Watercourse- $1,150 Consultant Review(Escrow)Fee: Minimum fee$250-maximum fee$2,500,to be determined by the Village Engineer. Application fees are non-refundable The applicant's Escrow Account must have a positive balance at all tunes prior to am Consultant,Attoi71ev.or Pillage review Escrotit Fees and Site Plan Fees nruust be paid on separate checks made parable to the Pillage of Rve Brook. *********************************************************************************************************** Subdivision Lot#3 1. Site Address: 259 North Ridge Street Parcel[D#: 135.35-1-11 Zone: R-15 2. Property Owner: Dan Greto Address: 209 Central Avenue Rye, NY 10580 E-Mail: Tel.#: 914-447-4444 Other: 3. Applicant: Lou Larizza Address: 8 Hilltop Avenue Port Chester, NY 10573 E-Mail: Tel.#: 914-879-7905 Other: 4. Design Professional: Ralph G. Mastromonaco, P.E., P.C. Address: 13 Dove Court Croton-on-Hudson, NY 10520 E-Mail: Tel.#: 914-271-4762 Other: 5. Designate to whom correspondence is to be sent: Applicant, Lou Larizza Note:if applicant is a"Contract Vendee',please attach a copy of the contract summary with financial and confidential terns deleted REVISED 8 1015 6. Street which property abuts: North Ridge Street at West Ridge Drive 7. Does property connect directly into State or County highway? (X)NO ( )YES: 8. Is site within 500 feet of Village Boundary?(X)NO ( )YES If yes note all bordering municipalities: 9. Total area of site: 62,566 SF(1.43 Acres) Area of site activity: 4,000 SF 10. Site coverage: 7% (Impervious coverage) %; Building coverage: 4% °a 11. Existing building size: N/A New/additional building size: 3,500 SF 12. Existing parking spaces: 0 New parking spaces: 2 13. Nature of proposed activity: To construct a new single family dwelling ****************************************************************************************** Please note that this application must include the notarized signature(s) of the legal owner(s) of the above-mentioned property, in the space provided below. Any application not bearing the legal property owner's notarized signature(s)shall be deemed null and void, and will be returned to the applicant. STATE OF NEW YORK,COUNTY OF WESTCHESTER ) as: ,being duly sworn,deposes and states that he/she is the applicant above named, (print name of individual signing as the applicant) and further states that (s)he is the legal owner of the property to which this application pertains, or that (s)he is the for the legal owner and is duly authorized to make and file this application (indicate architect,contractor,agent,attorney,etc) That all statements contained herein are true to the best of his her knowledge and belief, and that any work performed,or use conducted at the above captioned property will be in conformance with the details as set forth and contained in this application and in any accompanying approved plans and specifications,as well as in accordance with the New York State Uniform Fire Prevention & Building Code,the Code of the Village of Rye Brook and all other applicable laws,ordinances and regulations. Sworn to before me this Sworn to before me this day of 20 day of -, 20 Notary Public Notary Public Signature of Property Owner Signature of Applicant Print Name of Property Owner Print Name of Applicant REVISED 810/15 row BUILDCI,�r_& RTMENT t- 4 /J IL�LWA E OF RYE, �OOK DV NG ST , ET RYE BROO I NY 10573 S75 ( )9396`68 FAx(91939-5801 Nsirtw.ryebrookIorp- FOR OFFICE USE ONLY: BOT Approval Date: PB Approval Date: BOT Disapproval Date: PB Disapproval Date: Attach Resolution Hereto: BOT[ ] PB[ ] ZBA[ ] Chairman: SITE PLAN FEE: DATE PAID: ENVIRONMENTAL FEE: n DATE PAID: OTHER: *********************************************************************************************************** PRELIMINARY FOR LOT 1 OF NORTH RIDGE STREET SUBDIVISION APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL Submission of this application does not assure placement on any Planning Board Agenda.The Applicant will be notified of such placement. *********************************************************************************************************** This application references but is not limited to the following sections of the Code of the Village of Rye Brook;§250 ZONING,§209 SITE PLAN REVIEW, §235 TREES, §107 DEMOLITION OF BUILDINGS, §224 SWIMMING POOLS, §121 EXCAVATION&TOPSOIL REMOVAL,§118 EROSION&SEDIMENT CONTROL,§213 STEEP SLOPES PROTECTION,§219 SUBDIVISION OF LAND, §250-40 NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS.Applicants and their Design Professionals are strongly advised to review the above mentioned code sections online at,www.[yebrook.org prior to completing and/or submitting this application. APPLICATION FEE SCHEDULE: / Residential Dwellings- $325,plus$200 per additional dwelling unit. Non-Residential Buildings - $475 plus $30 per parking space. Planned Unit Development-$575 per acre PUD Amendment- $300 Site Plan Amendment- $575 Wetlands&Watercourse- $1,150 J Consultant Review(Escrow)Fee: Minimum fee$250-maximum fee$2,500,to be determined by the Village Engineer. Application fees ar e mutt-refundable. The applicant's Escrow Account must have a positive balance at all times prior to arty Consultant,Attomey,or Village review. Escrow Fees and Site Plan Fees nnust be paid on separate checks made payable to the Village of Rye Brook. *********************************************************************************************************** 1. Site Address: 259 North Ridge Street ParcellD#: 135.35-1-11 Zone: R-15 2. Property Owner: Dan Greto Address: 209 Central Avenue Rye, NY 10580 E-Mail: Tel.#: 914-447-4444 Other: 3. Applicant: Lou Larizza Address: 8 Hilltop Avenue Port Chester, NY 10573 E-Mail: Tel.#: 914-879-7905 Other: 4. Design Professional: Ralph G. Mastromonaco, P.E., P.C. Address: 13 Dove Court Croton-on-Hudson, NY 10520 E-Mail: Tel.#: 914-271-4762 Other- 5. th -5. Designate to whom correspondence is to be sent: Applicant, Lou Larizza Note:If applicant is a"Contract Vendee",please attach a copy of the contract summary with financial and confidential terms deleted. REVISED 8110115 6. Street which property abuts: North Ridge Street at West Ridge Drive 7. Does property connect directly into State or County highway? (X)NO ( ) YES: 8. Is site within 500 feet of Village Boundary?(X)NO ( )YES if yes note all bordering municipalities: 9. Total area of site: 60,417 SF , 1.3 Acres Area of site activity: 36,000 SF 10. Site coverage: 23% (Impervious coverage) %; Building coverage: 10% % 11. Existing building size: N/A New/additional building size: 2 Buildings of 3,200 SF Each 12. Existing parking spaces: 0 New parking spaces: 24 13. Nature of proposed activity. To construct eight units of affordable housing in two buildings with parking area. ****************************************************************************************** Please note that this application must include the notarized signature(s) of the legal owner(s) of the above-mentioned property, in the space provided below. Any application not bearing the legal property owner's notarized signature(s)shall be deemed null and void, and will be returned to the applicant. *********************************************************************************************************** STATE OF NEW YORK,COUNTY OF WESTCHESTER ) as: ,being duly sworn,deposes and states that he/she is the applicant above named, (print name of individual signing as the applicant) and further states that (s)he is the legal owner of the property to which this application pertains, or that (s)he is the for the legal owner and is duly authorized to make and file this application. (indicate architect,contractor,agent,attorney,etc.) That all statements contained herein are true to the best of his/her knowledge and belief, and that any work performed,or use conducted at the above captioned property will be in conformance with the details as set forth and contained in this application and in any accompanying approved plans and specifications,as well as in accordance with the New York State Uniform Fire Prevention &Building Code,the Code of the Village of Rye Brook and all other applicable laws,ordinances and regulations. Sworn to before me this Sworn to before me this day of 520 day of , 20 Notary Public Notar.VPuplic Signature of Property Ownerr of p licant Print Name of Pro erty Owner Print Name o Applicant REVISED 8110115 On a motion made by Trustee Heiser and seconded by Trustee Rednick,the following resolution was adopted. RESOLUTION REFERRING A PETITION FOR ZONING MAP AMENDMENT,APPLICATION FOR SUBDIVISION APPROVAL AND APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR PROPERTY AT 259 NORTH RIDGE STREET TO THE VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK PLANNING BOARD FOR REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK BOARD OF TRUSTEES WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees is in receipt of an application by Louis Larizza, contract vendee,for approval of a petition for a zoning map amendment to rezone property from the R-15 zoning district to the Fair and Affordable Housing(FAH)zoning district,3-lot subdivision application and site plan application for eight (8) units of affordable housing located at 259 North Ridge Street, at the intersection of West Ridge Street and North Ridge Street, designated as Parcel ID 135.35-1-11 on the Town of Rye Tax Map and located in the R-15 Zoning District and the Scenic Roads Overlay District; and WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees is the Approval Authority for the application pursuant to Village Code§250-6.1.E(2);and WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees determines the proposed action to be an Unlisted Action pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act(SEQRA). NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Trustees hereby refers the petition for a zoning map amendment to rezone property from the R-15 zoning district to the Fair and Affordable Housing (FAH) zoning district, 3-lot subdivision application and site plan application for eight(8)units of affordable housing to the Village of Rye Brook Planning Board for review and a report and recommendation on the condition that the following materials and information are submitted in complete form for review by the Planning Board no later than October 1,2015 for the October 8, 2015 Planning Board meeting, or if the Applicant is unable to submit prior to that date then no later than October 29,2015 for the November 12,2015 Planning Board meeting: 1. Current Topographical Survey, 2. Preliminary Grading Plan; 3. Draft Stormwater Management Plan; 4. Wetland Delineation and Report with Functional Analysis; 5. Individual Site Plans for each Proposed Lot;and 6. Proposed Elevations. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Board of Trustees directs that, pursuant to General Municipal Law §239-m and Westchester County Administrative Code§277.61,the application shall be referred to Westchester County Department of Planning for comment no less than 30 days prior to the public hearing concerning the application. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Board of Trustees directs that,pursuant to SEQRA, Notice of Intent to Declare Lead Agency shall be circulated to all Involved Agencies. TRUSTEE EPSTEIN AYE TRUSTEE HEISER AYE TRUSTEE KLEIN AYE TRUSTEE REDNICK AYE MAYOR ROSENBERG AYE State of New York County of Westchester ss: Village of Rye Brook I hereby certify that this is the Resolution adopted by the Board of Trustees of the Village of Rye Brook which was duly passed by said Board on September 24,2015. IN WITNESS WHEREOF,I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the Seat of the Village of Rye Brook,this 25th Day of September,2015 0j ?r� Village Merk Christopher Bradbury From: Christopher Bradbury Sent: Tuesday, September 01, 2015 2:48 PM To: 'chnarch@yahoo.com' Cc: Mike Izzo; 'Nowak, Michal (mnowak@ryebrook.org)';Jennifer Gray Ogray@kblaw.com); Butler, Philip A. (pbutler@kblaw.com); Sarah Bledsoe; loulazz@aol.com Subject: Message re Larizza Project Dear Clark- As per our discussion, it is recommended that you submit the following to make the September 8 Village Board meeting to refer to Planning Board: • Subdivision Application-Village Board is final approval authority(submitted already). • Any supporting environmental review documents necessary to make a SEQRA determination on the subdivision, including information regarding the wetland delineation,grading plans, stormwater management plan,traffic generation, number of school children to be generated by the project,etc. (submit what you have before this Friday to get on 9/8 Village Board agenda- any additional docs can be sent prior to the October PB meeting). • Petition to Rezone to AFFH-Village Board is final approval authority(submitted already). • One Site Plan Application for the AFFH lot-Village Board is final approval authority. (submit before Friday to get on 9/8 Village Board agenda). • Two Site Plan Applications-one for each of the market rates homes (Planning Board is final approval authority. Can be sent now as informational for the Village Board OR just submit to the Planning Board before October). • Wetlands application (and possibly a Steep Slopes application)—Can be submitted prior to October Planning Board meeting—PB is final approval authority. If your goal is to have this item on the September 8 Village Board agenda for referral to the Planning Board,we will need these documents before Friday(or when we arrive to work on Friday). It is very important that all documents be sent to us electronically as well as in print. Chris Bradbury Philip A Butler Associate KEANEfABEANEPC. ATTORNEYS AT LAW Multi-FaccW lAw Sm.Singular Clieut Rxim 445 Hamilton Avenue, Suite 1500 White Plains, NY 10601 1 (914)946-4777 Ext: 344 (914) 946-6868 (Fax) pbutler(ftblaw.com www.kbiaw.com Follow us on Twitter PERSONAL&CONFIDENTIAL The information transmitted herein may contain privileged and/or confidential material.Any disclosure,copying, distribution or other use of,or taking of any action in reliance upon, information contained herein or attached hereto by persons or entities other than the intended recipient(s) is prohibited.Any misdirection or other error in the transmission of this information is not and shall not be considered a waiver of any applicable privileges. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately notify the sender and destroy the original transmission and its attachments without saving,distributing or copying in any manner. Please consider the environment before printing this email message. 2 RALPH G. MASTROMONACO, P.E., P.C. Civil /site / Environmental Consulting Engineers www.rgmpepc.com 13 Dove Court, Croton-on-Hudson, New York 10520 Tel: (914) 271-4762 Fax: (914) 271-2820 PROJECT: NORTH RIDGE STREET Subdivision and Site Plan for Affordable Housing SCOPE: PRELIMINARY STORM WATER REPORT DATE: OCTOBER 19, 2015 INTRODUCTION: The 3.96 acre site is proposed for development of one new single family home and 8 affordable townhomes. In addition, there is a single family home on the lot that will be re-constructed on its foundation. To mitigate the effects of the new imperviousness, a storm water plan is proposed that meets the requirements of the NYS DEC storm water rules and the Storm water Design Manual. Figure: Site Location and Zoning Hew imsoN z - 2.15 Aa SD Rich nor Perk 1D.42 Aa D I W RID PD. f 50' — = O Un ro e DR. 50' I O C F Pine Ridge rk T'2 N S IF BB M FOS � BETSY North Ridge Street Storm Water Report METHODOLOGY: The overall watershed was determined from NYS GIS topographical maps. Runoff Curve Numbers we determined from Soil mapping of the Natural Resources Conservation Division. There is no specific mapping of the soils on the site as they are characteristically urban and disturbed. Therefore, we widened the area of interest and noted outlying soil types. Accordingly, the site is principally a `B' hydrologic grouping with a `C' grouping within the wetland area. Travel time in the watershed was determined using the longest hydraulic time in the watershed. To determine the travel time a profile was created of the travel path and appropriate velocities were computed along each leg. The Hydrocad computer software was used to compute runoff from watersheds and routings through the control structures, water quality basins and detention basins. The purpose of this analysis is to ensure that peak flows after development do not exceed the peak flows that occur currently for a range of storms. This report analyzes the 2 through 100 years storm frequencies. The required water quality volume is captured in a subsurface chamber system. The water quality volume is treated by processing the flows through a cartridge filter for eventual discharge to the design point. After the capture of the water quality volume the flow passes through a controls structure that allows some flow to enter into a detention basin that mitigates any increases in peak flow. The results of the analysis are contained in a simple Table below: Table: Results of Study at Design Point #1 Storm Existing Peak Flow Proposed Peak Flow (yr) (cfs) (cfs) 100 12.59 12.28 50 10.89 10.39 25 7.68 7.41 10 4.79 4.76 5 3.5 3.2 2 1.38 1.29 North Ridge Street Storm Water Report F ure: Aerial Photograph Showing Property+ Boundaries L i!' v, { W b' i ' s Note:The site is completely wooded with the exception of the single family house along North Ridge Street. - North Ridge Street Storm Water Report Figure: Watersheds and Site Plan NO_ Rio T EET i OUTER J WATERSHED .r J26843 BOUNDARY 409,_7.5 f. .0.941 cres 0.616 acres i -,.DE WATERSHED 50865 TOWNHOUSES . 5 / WETLAND-C SOIL 6. 0 C59 8. � TRAVEL PATH f , + v } 25 REMAINING 0.58 Cres WATERSHED WATERSHED NEW HOUSE i North Ridge Street Storm Water Report Figure: Soil Map (UIC soil throughout— Urban Land) 3 Soil Map—Westchester County,New York 3 (North Ridge Street) 9 >n � 610610 610690 610670 610700 610730 610760 610790 610870 41°1'30'N 41°1'3TN COW a a 1 e � t e i S so R a N 6 � v a � R7 e � p � ti e � a 41°1'20'N 41°1'20'N 610610 610640 610670 610700 610730 610760 610790 610620 3 3 h Map Scale:1:1,420 iF prir�Ged on A porbait(8.5'x 11")sheet. � t"kMs 3 NN0 20 40 80 120 0 50 100 200 300 A Map projecbm Web Merohx Corr rdirehs:WGS64 Edge t m 11TM Zine 18N WGS84 usDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 10/17/2015 Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 1 of 3 North Ridge Street Storm Water Report Figure: Hydrogroups and Soil Types in the Surroundings v 0092454 OOMK3, OobZtSb 0o£ZbSb ooRbSb OOTZ454 o00Z454 006T454 008T454 OOLT454 009TKt, M.LC.00 aU r� R g g g r rr 8 0 T N C N Orn Y U 4, o K V o 0 o g �Z 8 � o � m � 2 N },r ,r • o_ rn U_ I IF m MAP LEGEND Area of Interest(AOI) 13 C Area of Interest(AOI) CID •� Soils . D Soil Rating Polygons TS O A 0 Not rated or not available ((ttSS)) F�J• Q A/D Water Features C� 8 Streams and Canals B B/D Transportation 0 S i-r-r Rails $ o ,-0 Interstate Highways 0 CID US Routes 0 D Major Roads 0 Not rated or not available Local Roads M.eE.lb o£LNor= r 0092454 005Ztsb OobZb54 o0£Zbsb ooZZbSb OoTZbsb o0oZb54 006T4S4 OO8T4S4 OoLTbsb 009T454 z z � M. - North Ridge Street Storm Water Report Figure: Site Plan I 6 ! ; 4 k I •:4+• n I 'I ------------ =3� � - ��+'!�J Vic: • �l '� �I y. �s p } e� o C I�o.o•�T I 1 `s. '�,' '/� •.,� � � g�J 111 � 1 P � Y n / �o sw_ /tY / / It I m Ji - North Ridge Street Storm Water Report Table: Computation of Runoff Curve Numbers EXISTING WATERSHED LAND USE CONDITION AREA HSG CN AMOUNT WETLAND WOODS GOOD 50865 C 70 3560550 IMPERVIOUS 2000 B 98 196000 WOODS GOOD 211525 B 55 11633875 264390 58.2 15390425 WS A-TOWNHOMES EXISTING LAND USE CONDITION AREA HSG CN AMOUNT IMPERVIOUS 23236 B 98 2277128 OPEN SPACE GOOD 17761 B 61 1083421 IMPERV 40997 82.0 3360549 57% WS B-REMAINING LAND USE CONDITION AREA HSG CN AMOUNT WETLAND WOODS GOOD 50865 C 70 3560550 IMPERVIOUS 2000 B 98 196000 WOODS GOOD 145221 B 55 7987155 198086 59.3 11743705 WS C-NEW HOUSE LAND USE CONDITION AREA HSG CN AMOUNT IMPERVIOUS 6330 B 98 620340 OPEN SPACE GOOD 18977 B 61 1157597 IMPERV 25307 70.3 1777937 25% CHECK TOTAL AREA 264390 OK - North Ridge Street Storm Water Report Table: Computation of Travel Time WATERSHED EXISTING AND PROPOSED SCS TR-55 TRAV EL TI ME COMPUTATIONS WATERSHED 3 PROPOSED CONDITIONS LENGTH sheetflow ELEV1 ELEV2 SLOPE MANNIN 2YRPRP DELTA TRAVEL G (FT) PERCENT n (INCHES) (FT) TIME 95 196 194 2.105 0.4 3.3 2 0.331 SHALLOW CONCENTRATED FLOW(UN- PAVED PATH) LENGTH ELEV1 ELEV2 SLOPE DELTA Y TRAVEL (FT) PERCENT (FT) TIME 139.9 194 180 10.007 14 0.008 CHANNEL FLOW(UN-PAVED PATH) CHANNEL WETTED HYDRAULIC LENGTH ELEV1 ELEV2 SLOPE WIDTH DEPTH MANNIN AREA PERIMETER RADIUS VELOCITY DELTA TRAVEL G (FT) PERCENT (FT) (FT) n a Pw RADIUS (FT) TIME 258.6 180 176 1.547 3 2 0.03 6 7 0.857142857 6.92854649 4 0.010 TOTAL TOTAL DELTA TOTAL LENGTH DELTA Y TRAVELT (FT) (FT) (HRS) 493.5 20 20 0.349 Lag 0.210 Tc(mins) 21.0 Table: Computation of Water Quality Volume at Townhouses NYSDEC WQv AREA Imp. Area I P Rv WQv System (sq ft) (sq ft) % in ft (cu. Ft.) 1 40,997.00 23,236.00 57% 1.3 0.56 2,487.58 North Ridge Street Storm Water Report 100 YEAR STORM Time span=0.00-48.00 hrs,dt=0.01 hrs,4801 points Runoff by SCS TR-20 method,UH=SCS,Weighted-CN Reach routing byStor-Ind method - Pond routing byStor-Ind method Subcatchment 1:EXIST DPI RunoffArea=264,390 sf 0.00%Impervious Runoff Depth=2.78" Tc=21.0 min CN�=58.20 Runoff=12.59 cfs 61,157 cf Subcatchment 2:TOWNHWES Runoff Area=40,997 sf 0.00%Impervious Runoff Depth=5.39" Tc--6.0 min CW82.00 Runoff=5.83 cfs 18,402 cf Subcatchment 3:REMAINING Runoff Area=198,806 sf 0.00%Impervious Runoff Depth=2.89" Tc=21.0 min CW59.30 Runoff=9.92 cfs 47,880 cf Subcatchment 5:NEW HOUSE Runoff Area=25,307 sf 0.00%Impervious Runoff Depth=4.07" Tc--6.0 min CN--70.30 Runoff=2.77 cfs 8,585 cf Pond CS:CS Peak EI ev=80.87' I nfl ow--5.42 cfs 9,607 cf Primary--2.84 cfs 8,115 cf Secondary--2.58 cfs 1,492 cf Outflovv=5.42 cfs 9,607 cf Pond DET:DETENrnON BASIN PeakElev=79.30' Storage=3,339 cf Inflovv=2.84 cfs 8,115 cf Discarded=0.01 cfs 220 cf Primary--l.38 cfs 7,896 cf Outflovv=1.39 cfs 8,116 cf Pond DW:DRYWELL PeakElev=62.96' Storage=1,001 cf Inflovv=2.77 cfs 8,585 cf Discarded=0.20 cfs 5,871 cf Primary--2.55 cfs 2,714 cf Outflovv=2.75 cfs 8,585 cf Pond WO,:WQBASIN PeakElev=83.69' Storage=3,990 cf Inflow-5.83 cfs 18,402 cf Primary=5.42 cfs 9,607 cf Secondary--O.15 cfs 8,567 cf 0utHovv=5.57 cfs 18,175 cf Link 4:OFFSITE Inflovv=10.97 cfs 50,594 cf Primary=10.97 cfs 50,594 cf Link RN:PROP DP1 Inflovv=12.28 cfs 68,549 cf Primary=12.28 cfs 68,549 cf Link JCT:JUNCTION Inflo%-2.98 cfs 17,955 cf Primary--2.98 cfs 17,955 cf Total Runoff Area=529,500 sf Runoff Volume=136,024 cf Average Runoff Depth=3.08" 100.00%Pervious=529,500 sf 0.00%Imperv4ous=0 sf North Ridge Street Storm Water Report 50 YEAR STORM Time span=0.00-48.00 hrs,dt=0.01 hrs,4801 points Runoff by SCS TR-20 method,UH=SCS,Weighted-CN Reach routing byStor-Ind method - Pond routing byStor-Ind method Subcatchment 1:EXIST DPI RunoffArea=264,390 sf 0.00%Impervious Runoff Depth=2.43" Tc=21.0 min C1�58.20 Runoff=10.89 cfs 53,507 cf Subcatchment 2:TOWNHWES Runoff Area=40,997 sf 0.00%Impervious Runoff Depth=4.92" Tc--6.0 min CW82.00 Runoff=5.34 cfs 16,796 cf Subcatchment 3:REMAINING Runoff Area=198,806 sf 0.00%Impervious Runoff Depth=2.54" Tc=21.0 min CW59.30 Runoff=8.62 cfs 42,001 cf Subcatchment 5:NEW HOUSE Runoff Area=25,307 sf 0.00%Impervious Runoff Depth=3.65" Tc--6.0 min CN--70.30 Runoff=2.49 cfs 7,697 cf Pond CS:CS Peak EI ev=80.86' 1 nfl ovv=5.14 cfs 8,348 cf Primary=2.83 cfs 7,118 cf Secondary=2.32 cfs 1,230 cf Outflovv=5.14 cfs 8,348 cf Pond DET:DETENrnON BASIN PeakElev=79.02' Storage=3,152 cf Inflovv=2.83 cfs 7,118 cf Discarded=0.01 cfs 209 cf Primary=1.11 cfs 6,909 cf Outflovv=1.12 cfs 7,118 cf Pond DW:DRYWELL Peak Elev=62.86' Storage=991 cf Inflovv=2.49 cfs 7,697 cf Discarded=0.20 cfs 5,507 cf Primary--2.27 cfs 2,191 cf Outflovv=2.47 cfs 7,697 cf Pond WO,:WQBASIN PeakElev=83.67' Storage=3,990 cf Inflow-5.34 cfs 16,796 cf Primary=5.14 cfs 8,348 cf Secondary--O.15 cfs 8,344 cf 0utHovv=5.29 cfs 16,692 cf Link 4:OFFSITE I nfl ovv=9.54 cfs 44,192 cf Primary--9.54 cfs 44,192 cf Link RN:PROP DP1 Inflovv=10.39 cfs 60,674 cf Primary=10.39 cfs 60,674 cf Link JCT:JUNCTION Inflo%-2.68 cfs 16,483 cf Primary--2.68 cfs 16,483 cf Total Runoff Area=529,500 sf Runoff Volume=120,001 cf Average Runoff Depth=2.72" 100.00%Pervious=529,500 sf 0.00%Imperv4ous=0 sf ® North Ridge Street Storm Water Report 25 YEAR STORM Time span=0.00-48.00 hrs,dt=0.01 hrs,4801 points Runoff by SCS TR-20 method,UH=SCS,Weighted-CN Reach routing byStor-Ind method - Pond routing byStor-Ind method Subcatchment 1:EXIST DPI RunoffArea=264,390 sf 0.00%Impervious Runoff Depth=1.77" Tc=21.0 min CN�=58.20 Runoff=7.68 cfs 39,066 cf Subcatchment 2:TOWNHWES Runoff Area=40,997 sf 0.00%Impervious Runoff Depth=3.99" Tc--6.0 min CW82.00 Runoff=4.36 cfs 13,622 cf Subcatchment 3:REMAINING Runoff Area=198,806 sf 0.00%Impervious Runoff Depth=1.86" Tc=21.0 min CW59.30 Runoff=6.14 cfs 30,872 cf Subcatchment 5:NEW HOUSE Runoff Area=25,307 sf 0.00%Impervious Runoff Depth=2.83" Tc--6.0 min CN--70.30 Runoff=1.92 cfs 5,975 cf Pond CS:CS Peak EI ev=80.80' Inflow--3.73 cfs 5,611 cf Pd mary=2.69 cfs 5,169 cf Secondary--1.02 cfs 441 cf Outfl ovv=3.73 cfs 5,611 cf Pond DET:DETENrnON BASIN Peak Elev=78.48' Storage=2,675 cf Inflovv=2.69 cfs 5,169 cf Discarded=0.01 cfs 187 cf Primary--0.47 cfs 4,982 cf Outflovv=0.48 cfs 5,169 cf Pond DW:DRYWELL PeakElev=62.66' Storage=972 cf Inflovv=1.92 cfs 5,975 cf Discarded=0.20 cfs 4,735 cf Primary--1.54 cfs 1,240 cf Outflow=1.74 cfs 5,975 cf Pond WO,:WQBASIN PeakElev=83.54' Storage=3,990 cf Inflovv=4.36 cfs 13,622 cf Primary=3.73 cfs 5,611 cf Secondary--O.14 cfs 7,863 cf OutHovv=3.87 cfs 13,473 cf Link 4:OFFSITE I nfl ovv=6.82 cfs 32,111 cf Primary--6.82 cfs 32,111 cf Link RN:PROP DP1 Inflovv=7.41 cfs 45,397 cf Primary--7.41 cfs 45,397 cf Link JCT:JUNCTION Inflo%-1.29 cfs 13,286 cf Primary--1.29 cfs 13,286 cf Total Runoff Area=529,500 sf Runoff Volume=89,534 cf Average Runoff Depth=2.03" 100.00%Pervious=529,500 sf 0.00%Imperv4ous=0 sf North Ridge Street Storm Water Report 10 YEAR STORM Time span=0.00-48.00 hrs,dt=0.01 hrs,4801 points Runoff by SCS TR-20 method,UH=SCS,Weighted-CN Reach routing byStor-Ind method - Pond routing byStor-Ind method Subcatchment 1:EXIST DPI RunoffArea=264,390 sf 0.00%Impervious Runoff Depth=1.18" Tc=21.0 min C1�58.20 Runoff=4.79 cfs 26,038 cf Subcatchment 2:TOWNHWES Runoff Area=40,997 sf 0.00%Impervious Runoff Depth=3.08" Tc--6.0 min CW82.00 Runoff=3.39 cfs 10,519 cf Subcatchment 3:REMAINING Runoff Area=198,806 sf 0.00%Impervious Runoff Depth=1.25" Tc=21.0 min CN--59.30 Runoff=3.90 cfs 20,778 cf Subcatchment 5:NEW HOUSE Runoff Area=25,307 sf 0.00%Impervious Runoff Depth=2.06" Tc--6.0 min CN--70.30 Runoff=1.38 cfs 4,345 cf Pond CS:CS Peak EI ev=80.42' 1 nfl ovv=1.86 cfs 3,147 cf Primary=1.69 cfs 3,036 cf Secondary=0.17 cfs 112 cf Outfl ovv=1.86 cfs 3,147 cf Pond DET:DETENrnON BASIN PeakElev=77.48' Storage=1,501 cf Inflovv=1.69 cfs 3,036 cf Discarded=0.01 cfs 140 cf Primary--0.26 cfs 2,896 cf Outflovv=0.27 cfs 3,036 cf Pond DW:DRYWELL PeakElev=62.35' Storage=940 cf Inflovv=1.38 cfs 4,345 cf Discarded=0.20 cfs 3,938 cf Primary--0.51 cfs 407 cf Outflovv=0.71 cfs 4,345 cf Pond WO,:WQBASIN PeakElev=83.33' Storage=3,866 cf Inflow-3.39 cfs 10,519 cf Primary=1.86 cfs 3,147 cf Secondary--O.13 cfs 7,317 cf OutHovv=1.99 cfs 10,464 cf Link 4:OFFSITE I nfl ovv=4.33 cfs 21,185 cf Pri maty=x.33 cfs 21,185 cf Link RN:PROP DP1 Inflovv=4.76 cfs 31,510 cf Primary=x.76 cfs 31,510 cf Link JCT:JUNCTION Inflo%-0.45 cfs 10,325 cf Primary--0.45 cfs 10,325 cf Total Runoff Area=529,500 sf Runoff Volume=61,680 cf Average Runoff Depth=1.40" 100.00%Pervious=529,500 sf 0.00%Imperv4ous=0 sf North Ridge Street Storm Water Report 5 YEAR STORM Time span=0.00-48.00 hrs,dt=0.01 hrs,4801 points Runoff by SCS TR-20 method,UH=SCS,Weighted-CN Reach routing byStor-Ind method - Pond routing byStor-Ind method Subcatchment 1:EXIST DPI RunoffArea=264,390 sf 0.00%Impervious Runoff Depth=0.92" Tc=21.0 min CN�=58.20 Runoff=3.50 cfs 20,183 cf Subcatchment 2:TOWNHWES Runoff Area=40,997 sf 0.00%Impervious Runoff Depth=2.64" Tc--6.0 min CW-82.00 Runoff=2.91 cfs 9,006 cf Subcatchment 3:REMAINING Runoff Area=198,806 sf 0.00%Impervious Runoff Depth=0.98" Tc=21.0 min CW59.30 Runoff=2.89 cfs 16,218 cf Subcatchment 5:NEW HOUSE Runoff Area=25,307 sf 0.00%Impervious Runoff Depth=1.70" Tc=6.0 min CN--70.30 Runoff=1.12 cfs 3,575 cf Pond CS:CS Peak EI ev=80.08' I nfl ovv=1.07 cfs 1,940 cf Primary--1.02 cfs 1,920 cf Secondary--0.05 cfs 20 cf Outflovv=1.07 cfs 1,940 cf Pond DET:DETENrnON BASIN PeakElev=76.98' Storage=853 cf Inflovv=1.02 cfs 1,920 cf Discarded=0.01 cfs 105 cf Primary--0.21 cfs 1,815 cf Outflovv=0.22 cfs 1,920 cf Pond DW:DRYWELL PeakElev=62.16' Storage=921 cf Inflovv=1.12 cfs 3,575 cf Discarded=0.20 cfs 3,529 cf Primary=0.12 cfs 46 cf Outflow=0.32 cfs 3,575 cf Pond WO,:WQBASIN Peak Elev=83.23' Storage=3,788 cf Inflow-2.91 cfs 9,006 cf Primary--1.07 cfs 1,940 cf Secondary--0.13 cfs 7,017 cf Outflow=1.19 cfs 8,956 cf Link 4:OFFSITE Inflow=2.89 cfs 16,264 cf Primary--2.89 cfs 16,264 cf Link RN:PROP DP1 Inflovv=3.20 cfs 25,116 cf Primary--3.20 cfs 25,116 cf Link JCT:JUNCTION Inflow=0.33 cfs 8,852 cf Primary--0.33 cfs 8,852 cf Total Runoff Area=529,500 sf Runoff Volume=48,982 cf Average Runoff Depth=1.11" 100.00%Pervious=529,500 sf 0.00%Imperv4ous=0 sf North Ridge Street Storm Water Report 2 YEAR STORM Time span=0.00-48.00 hrs,dt=0.01 hrs,4801 points Runoff by SCS TR-20 method,UH=SCS,Weighted-CN Reach routing byStor-Ind method - Pond routing byStor-Ind method Subcatchment 1:EXIST DPI RunoffArea=264,390 sf 0.00%Impervious Runoff Depth=0.46" Tc=21.0 min CN�=58.20 Runoff=1.38 cfs 10,148 cf Subcatchment 2:TOWNHWES Runoff Area=40,997 sf 0.00%Impervious Runoff Depth=1.78" Tc--6.0 min CW-82.00 Runoff=1.97 cfs 6,090 cf Subcatchment 3:REMAINING Runoff Area=198,806 sf 0.00%Impervious Runoff Depth=0.50" Tc=21.0 min CN--59.30 Runoff=1.20 cfs 8,339 cf Subcatchment 5:NEW HOUSE Runoff Area=25,307 sf 0.00%Impervious Runoff Depth=1.02" Tc--6.0 min CN--70.30 Runoff=0.65 cfs 2,161 cf Pond CS:CS PeakElev=79.30' Inf1ovN-0.00 cfs 0 cf Primary=0.00 cfs 0 cf Secondary=0.00 cfs 0 cf Outflovr-0.00 cfs 0 cf Pond DET:DETENrnON BASIN Peak Elev=76.10' Storage=0 cf Inflow=0.00 cfs 0 cf Discarded=0.00 cfs 0 cf Primary=0.00 cfs 0 cf Outflow=0.00 cfs 0 cf Pond DW:DRYWELL PeakElev=56.63' Storage=365 cf Inflov%=0.65 cfs 2,161 cf Discarded=0.20 cfs 2,161 cf Primary=0.00 cfs 0 cf Outfl ovv=0.20 cfs 2,161 cf Pond WO,:WQBASIN PeakElev=82.80' Storage=3,463 cf Inflow-1.97 cfs 6,090 cf Primary--0.00 cfs 0 cf Secondary--O.11 cfs 6,052 cf OUtflov�=0.11 cfs 6,052 cf Link 4:OFFSITE Inflovv=1.20 cfs 8,339 cf Primary--1.20 cfs 8,339 cf Link RN:PROP DP1 Inflo\&=1.29 cfs 14,391 cf Primary--1.29 cfs 14,391 cf Link JCT:JUNCTION Inflovr-0.11 cfs 6,052 cf Primary=0.11 cfs 6,052 cf Total Runoff Area=529,500 sf Runoff Volume=26,738 cf Average Runoff Depth=0.61" 100.00%Pervious=529,500 sf 0.00%Imperv4ous=0 sf ® North Ridge Street Storm Water Report CONCLUSION: The proposed water quality treatment system and the proposed storm detention system will mitigate the impacts of the development as to quality and quantity of storm water. The water quality treatment system will filter the runoff of the first flush of storm water in accordance with the methods of the NYS DEC. The detention system is designed to maintain peak flows to the same level that exists currently. Submitted by: Ralph G. Mastromonaco, PE North Ridge Street Stormwater Report October 19, 2015 0 ROUTING DIAGRAM EXIST DP1 TOWNHOMES Design Point 1 O O Existing Flow Q BAtSIN REMAINI G NEW OUSE 1 CB `\ Cartridge Filters Control Structure cs Outlet �DRYWELL S � a � 4 OFF ITE � 1 `4 4 JCT ^ FIN a a DETENTION BASIN JUNCTION PROP DP1 Design Point 1 Proposed Flow RALPH G. MASTROMONACO, PE, PC Consulting Engineers Croton-on-Hudson, NY 10520 Subcat Reach and EHydr,)CA Routing Diagram for laz_greto_model_MIN_full Prepared by Microsoft, Printed 10/18/2015 D®10.00 s/n M16359 ©2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr A-100 Rainfall=7.50" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 2 Time span=0.00-48.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs, 4801 points Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN Reach routing by Stor-Ind method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method Subcatchment1: EXIST DP1 Runoff Area=264,390 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=2.78" Tc=21.0 min CN=58.20 Runoff=12.59 cfs 61,157 cf Subcatchment2: TOWNHOMES Runoff Area=40,997 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=5.39" Tc=6.0 min CN=82.00 Runoff=5.83 cfs 18,402 cf Subcatchment3: REMAINING Runoff Area=198,806 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=2.89" Tc=21.0 min CN=59.30 Runoff=9.92 cfs 47,880 cf Subcatchment5: NEW HOUSE Runoff Area=25,307 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=4.07" Tc=6.0 min CN=70.30 Runoff=2.77 cfs 8,585 cf Pond CS: CS Peak EIev=80.87' Inflow=5.42 cfs 9,607 cf Primary=2.84 cfs 8,115 cf Secondary=2.58 cfs 1,492 cf Outflow=5.42 cfs 9,607 cf Pond DET: DETENTION BASIN Peak EIev=79.30' Storage=3,339 cf Inflow=2.84 cfs 8,115 cf Discarded=0.01 cfs 220 cf Primary=1.38 cfs 7,896 cf Outflow=1.39 cfs 8,116 cf Pond DW: DRYWELL Peak EIev=62.96' Storage=1,001 cf Inflow=2.77 cfs 8,585 cf Discarded=0.20 cfs 5,871 cf Primary=2.55 cfs 2,714 cf Outflow=2.75 cfs 8,585 cf Pond WQ: WQ BASIN Peak EIev=83.69' Storage=3,990 cf Inflow=5.83 cfs 18,402 cf Primary=5.42 cfs 9,607 cf Secondary=0.15 cfs 8,567 cf Outflow=5.57 cfs 18,175 cf Link 4: OFFSITE Inflow=10.97 cfs 50,594 cf Primary=10.97 cfs 50,594 cf Link FIN: PROP DP1 Inflow=12.28 cfs 68,549 cf Primary=12.28 cfs 8,549 cf Link JCT:JUNCTION Inflow=2.98 cfs 17,955 cf Primary=2.98 cfs 17,955 cf Total Runoff Area = 529,500 sf Runoff Volume = 136,024 cf Average Runoff Depth = 3.08" 100.00% Pervious = 529,500 sf 0.00% Impervious = 0 sf North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr A-100 Rainfall=7.50" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 3 Summary for Subcatchment 1: EXIST DP1 Runoff = 12.59 cfs @ 12.30 hrs, Volume= 61,157 cf, Depth= 2.78" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr A-100 Rainfall=7.50" Area (sf) CN Description 264,390 58.20 EXISTING 264,390 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 21.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 1: EXIST DP1 Hydrograph 14 13 12.59 cfs Runoff 12 Type III 24-hr 11 A-100 Rainfall=7.50" 10 Runoff Area=264,390 sf 9 N 8 Runoff Volume=61,157 cf 3 Runoff Depth=2.78" LL Tc=21.0 m i n 5 CN=58.20 4 3- 2- 0 2-0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr A-100 Rainfall=7.50" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 4 Summary for Subcatchment 2: TOWNHOMES Runoff = 5.83 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 18,402 cf, Depth= 5.39" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr A-100 Rainfall=7.50" Area (sf) CN Description 40,997 82.00 TOWNHOMES 40,997 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 6.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 2: TOWNHOMES Hydrograph 6 5.83 cfs Runoff Type III 24-hr 5 A-100 Rainfall=7.50" Runoff Area=40,997 sf 4 Runoff Volume=18,402 cf 3 Runoff Depth=5.39" LL 3 Tc=6.0 min CN=82.00 2 1 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr A-100 Rainfall=7.50" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 5 Summary for Subcatchment 3: REMAINING Runoff = 9.92 cfs @ 12.30 hrs, Volume= 47,880 cf, Depth= 2.89" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr A-100 Rainfall=7.50" Area (sf) CN Description 198,806 59.30 REMAINING AREA 198,806 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 21.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 3: REMAINING Hydrograph 11 9.92 cfs Runoff 10- 9 Type III 24-hr A-100 Rainfall=7.50" g Runoff Area=198,806 sf 7 Runoff Volume=47,880 cf 3 6- Runoff Depth=2.89" LL 5 Tc=21.0 m i n 4 CN=59.30 3- 2- 0 -20 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr A-100 Rainfall=7.50" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 6 Summary for Subcatchment 5: NEW HOUSE Runoff = 2.77 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 8,585 cf, Depth= 4.07" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr A-100 Rainfall=7.50" Area (sf) CN Description 25,307 70.30 NEW HOUSE WS 25,307 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 6.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 5: NEW HOUSE Hydrograph Runoff 5 Type III 24-hr A-100 Rainfall=7.50" 4 Runoff Area=25,307 sf Runoff Volume=8,585 cf 3 2.77 cfs Runoff Depth=4.07" LL Tc=6.0 m i n 2 CN=70.30 1 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr A-100 Rainfall=7.50" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 7 Summary for Pond CS: CS Inflow Area = 40,997 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 2.81" for A-100 event Inflow = 5.42 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 9,607 cf Outflow = 5.42 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 9,607 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary = 2.84 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 8,115 cf Secondary= 2.58 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 1,492 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 80.87'@ 12.09 hrs Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 79.95' CS1_Primary_ratings Elev. (feet) 79.95 80.34 80.52 80.73 80.78 80.83 80.85 80.88 80.91 80.92 Disch. (cfs) 0.000 0.341 0.751 1.175 1.255 1.328 1.359 1.398 1.438 1.458 #2 Secondary 79.95' CS1_Secondary_ratings Elev. (feet) 79.95 80.34 80.52 80.73 80.78 80.83 80.85 80.88 80.91 80.92 Disch. (cfs) 0.000 0.140 0.210 0.268 0.668 1.510 1.946 2.848 3.754 4.207 #3 Primary 79.30' 7.0"Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Primary OutFlow Max=2.84 cfs @ 12.09 hrs HW=80.87' (Free Discharge) �--1=CS1_Primary_ratings(Custom Controls 1.39 cfs) 3=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 1.46 cfs @ 5.45 fps) Secondary OutFlow Max=2.57 cfs @ 12.09 hrs HW=80.87' (Free Discharge) L2=CS1_Secondary_ratings(Custom Controls 2.57 cfs) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr A-100 Rainfall=7.50" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 8 Pond CS: CS Hydrograph 6 5.42 cfs m Inflow �Outflow Inflow Area=40,997 sf Primary 5 _'r_______'i _ Secondary Peak Elev=80.87' 4 ---------- ------ ---- a U 3 3 2.84 cfs 0 2.58 cfs LL 2 1 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr A-100 Rainfall=7.50" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 9 Summary for Pond DET: DETENTION BASIN Inflow Area = 40,997 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 2.38" for A-100 event Inflow = 2.84 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 8,115 cf Outflow = 1.39 cfs @ 12.46 hrs, Volume= 8,116 cf, Atten= 51%, Lag= 22.5 min Discarded = 0.01 cfs @ 11.97 hrs, Volume= 220 cf Primary = 1.38 cfs @ 12.46 hrs, Volume= 7,896 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs/2 Peak Elev= 79.30'@ 12.46 hrs Surf.Area= 1,656 sf Storage= 3,339 cf Plug-Flow detention time=76.1 min calculated for 8,114 cf(100% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 76.1 min ( 847.2 - 771.1 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1A 96.10' 2,172 cf 30.00'W x 80.761 x 3.50'H Field A 8,480 cf Overall - 3,049 cf Embedded = 5,431 cf x 40.0% Voids #2A 96.60' 3,049 cf ADS_StormTech SC-740 x 66 Inside#1 Effective Size= 44.6"W x 30.0"H => 6.45 sf x 7.121 = 45.9 cf Overall Size= 51.0"W x 30.0"H x 7.561 with 0.44' Overlap Row Length Adjustment= +0.44' x 6.45 sf x 6 rows #3 116.10' 9,000 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic)Listed below(Recalc) #413 76.10' 1,505 cf 20.50'W x 80.761 x 3.50'H Field B 5,795 cf Overall - 2,033 cf Embedded = 3,762 cf x 40.0% Voids #513 76.60' 2,033 cf ADS_StormTech SC-740 x 44 Inside#4 Effective Size= 44.6"W x 30.0"H => 6.45 sf x 7.121 = 45.9 cf Overall Size= 51.0"W x 30.0"H x 7.561 with 0.44' Overlap Row Length Adjustment= +0.44' x 6.45 sf x 4 rows 17,759 cf Total Available Storage Storage Group A created with Chamber Wizard Storage Group B created with Chamber Wizard Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 116.10 900 0 0 126.10 900 9,000 9,000 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 76.10' 3.0"Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 #2 Discarded 76.10' 0.01 cfs Exfiltration at all elevations #3 Primary 78.30' 0.50' long Sharp-Crested Rectangular Weir 2 End Contraction(s) Discarded OutFlow Max=0.01 cfs @ 11.97 hrs HW=76.60' (Free Discharge) L2=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 0.01 cfs) Primary OutFlow Max=1.40 cfs @ 12.46 hrs HW=79.30' (Free Discharge) �11=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 0.41 cfs @ 8.44 fps) 3=Sharp-Crested Rectangular Weir(Weir Controls 0.98 cfs @ 3.27 fps) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr A-100 Rainfall=7.50" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 10 Pond DET: DETENTION BASIN Hydrograph Inflow Outflow =Discard 5 --- Inflow Area=40,997 sf Primary Peak Elev=79.30' 4 - ------ -- Storage=3,339 cf 3 2.84 cfs 3 _o LL 2 1.38 cfs 1 0.0 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type Ill 24-hr A-100 Rainfall=7.50" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 11 Summary for Pond DW: DRYWELL Inflow Area = 25,307 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 4.07" for A-100 event Inflow = 2.77 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 8,585 cf Outflow = 2.75 cfs @ 12.10 hrs, Volume= 8,585 cf, Atten= 1%, Lag= 0.6 min Discarded = 0.20 cfs @ 11.51 hrs, Volume= 5,871 cf Primary = 2.55 cfs @ 12.10 hrs, Volume= 2,714 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 62.96'@ 12.10 hrs Surf.Area= 101 sf Storage= 1,001 cf Plug-Flow detention time=25.6 min calculated for 8,583 cf(100% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time=25.6 min ( 852.7- 827.0 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 53.00' 1,005 cf 8.00'D x 10.00'H Vertical Cone/Cylinderx 2 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 62.00' 12.0" Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 #2 Discarded 53.00' 0.20 cfs Exfiltration at all elevations Discarded OutFlow Max=0.20 cfs @ 11.51 hrs HW=53.10' (Free Discharge) L2=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 0.20 cfs) Primary OutFlow Max=2.57 cfs @ 12.10 hrs HW=62.95' (Free Discharge) L1=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 2.57 cfs @ 3.33 fps) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr A-100 Rainfall=7.50" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 12 Pond DW: DRYWELL Hydrograph Inflow Outflow =Discard 5 ----- Inflow Area=25,307 sf —Primary Peak Elev=62.96' 4 ----- ------ -- Storage=1 ,001 cf 3 _0 1 2.55 cfs LL 2 1 0.20 cfs 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr A-100 Rainfall=7.50" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 13 Summary for Pond WQ: WQ BASIN Inflow Area = 40,997 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 5.39" for A-100 event Inflow = 5.83 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 18,402 cf Outflow = 5.57 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 18,175 cf, Atten= 4%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary = 5.42 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 9,607 cf Secondary= 0.15 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 8,567 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs/2 Peak Elev= 83.69'@ 12.09 hrs Surf.Area= 1,859 sf Storage= 3,990 cf Plug-Flow detention time=230.6 min calculated for 18,175 cf(99% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time=222.9 min ( 1,023.4- 800.5 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1A 80.00' 1,679 cf 25.25'W x 73.64'L x 3.50'H Field A 6,508 cf Overall - 2,311 cf Embedded = 4,197 cf x 40.0% Voids #2A 80.50' 2,311 cf ADS_StormTech SC-740 x 50 Inside#1 Effective Size= 44.6"W x 30.0"H => 6.45 sf x 7.121 = 45.9 cf Overall Size= 51.0"W x 30.0"H x 7.56'L with 0.44' Overlap Row Length Adjustment= +0.44' x 6.45 sf x 5 rows 3,990 cf Total Available Storage Storage Group A created with Chamber Wizard Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 82.50' 18.0" Vert. Orifice/Grate X 0.00 C= 0.600 #2 Primary 83.00' 3.00' long Sharp-Crested Rectangular Weir 2 End Contraction(s) #3 Secondary 80.00' Special & User-Defined Head (feet) 0.00 10.00 Disch. (cfs) 0.000 0.400 Primary OutFlow Max=5.41 cfs @ 12.09 hrs HW=83.69' (Free Discharge) 11=Orifice/G rate ( Controls 0.00 cfs) 2=Sharp-Crested Rectangular Weir(Weir Controls 5.41 cfs @ 2.72 fps) Secondary OutFlow Max=0.15 cfs @ 12.09 hrs HW=83.69' (Free Discharge) L3=Special & User-Defined(Custom Controls 0.15 cfs) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr A-100 Rainfall=7.50" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 14 Pond WQ: WQ BASIN Hydrograph _ ____ 5.83 cfs m Inflow 6 �Outflow 5.42 cfs —Primary Inflow Area=40,997 Sf Secondary 5 Peak Elev=83.69' 4 Storage=3,990 cf 3 0 3 LL 2 1 0.15 cfs 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr A-100 Rainfall=7.50" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 15 Summary for Link 4: OFFSITE Inflow Area = 224,113 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 2.71" for A-100 event Inflow = 10.97 cfs @ 12.30 hrs, Volume= 50,594 cf Primary = 10.97 cfs @ 12.30 hrs, Volume= 50,594 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Link 4: OFFSITE Hydrograph 12 10.97 cfs Inflow 11 Primary 10 Inflow Area=224,113 sf 9 8 w 7 v 3 6 0 LL 5- 4- 3-.43 2 1 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr A-100 Rainfall=7.50" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 16 Summary for Link FIN: PROP DP1 Inflow Area = 265,110 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 3.10" for A-100 event Inflow = 12.28 cfs @ 12.32 hrs, Volume= 68,549 cf Primary = 12.28 cfs @ 12.32 hrs, Volume= 68,549 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Link FIN: PROP DP1 Hydrograph 13 12.28 cfs Inflow Primary 12 11 Inflow Area=265,110 sf 10 9 w 8 v 7 3 0 LL 6 5 4 3- 2. 1 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr A-100 Rainfall=7.50" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 17 Summary for Link JCT: JUNCTION Inflow Area = 40,997 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 5.26" for A-100 event Inflow = 2.98 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 17,955 cf Primary = 2.98 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 17,955 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Link JCT: JUNCTION Hydrograph Inflow Primary 5 Inflow Area=40,997 sf 4 w v 2.98 cfs 3 3 0 LL 2 1 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type /// 24-hr 8-50 Rainfall=7.00" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 18 Time span=0.00-48.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs, 4801 points Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN Reach routing by Stor-Ind method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method Subcatchment1: EXIST DP1 Runoff Area=264,390 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=2.43" Tc=21.0 min CN=58.20 Runoff=10.89 cfs 53,507 cf Subcatchment2: TOWNHOMES Runoff Area=40,997 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=4.92" Tc=6.0 min CN=82.00 Runoff=5.34 cfs 16,796 cf Subcatchment3: REMAINING Runoff Area=198,806 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=2.54" Tc=21.0 min CN=59.30 Runoff=8.62 cfs 42,001 cf Subcatchment5: NEW HOUSE Runoff Area=25,307 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=3.65" Tc=6.0 min CN=70.30 Runoff=2.49 cfs 7,697 cf Pond CS: CS Peak EIev=80.86' Inflow=5.14 cfs 8,348 cf Primary=2.83 cfs 7,118 cf Secondary=2.32 cfs 1,230 cf Outflow=5.14 cfs 8,348 cf Pond DET: DETENTION BASIN Peak EIev=79.02' Storage=3,152 cf Inflow=2.83 cfs 7,118 cf Discarded=0.01 cfs 209 cf Primary=1.11 cfs 6,909 cf Outflow=1.12 cfs 7,118 cf Pond DW: DRYWELL Peak EIev=62.86' Storage=991 cf Inflow=2.49 cfs 7,697 cf Discarded=0.20 cfs 5,507 cf Primary=2.27 cfs 2,191 cf Outflow=2.47 cfs 7,697 cf Pond WQ: WQ BASIN Peak EIev=83.67' Storage=3,990 cf Inflow=5.34 cfs 16,796 cf Primary=5.14 cfs 8,348 cf Secondary=0.15 cfs 8,344 cf Outflow=5.29 cfs 16,692 cf Link 4: OFFSITE Inflow=9.54 cfs 44,192 cf Primary=9.54 cfs 44,192 cf Link FIN: PROP DP1 Inflow=10.39 cfs 60,674 cf Primary=10.39 cfs 60,674 cf Link JCT:JUNCTION Inflow=2.68 cfs 16,483 cf Primary=2.68 cfs 16,483 cf Total Runoff Area = 529,500 sf Runoff Volume = 120,001 cf Average Runoff Depth = 2.72" 100.00% Pervious = 529,500 sf 0.00% Impervious = 0 sf North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type Ill 24-hr 8-50 Rainfall=7.00" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 19 Summary for Subcatchment 1: EXIST DP1 Runoff = 10.89 cfs @ 12.30 hrs, Volume= 53,507 cf, Depth= 2.43" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr B-50 Rainfall=7.00" Area (sf) CN Description 264,390 58.20 EXISTING 264,390 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 21.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 1: EXIST DP1 Hydrograph 12 10.89 cfs Runoff 11- 10: 110 Type III 24-hr 9 B-50 Rainfall=7.00" Runoff Area=264,390 sf 7 Runoff Volume=53,507 cf 3 6 Runoff Depth=2.43" LL 5 Tc=21.0 m i n 4 CN=58.20 3- 2 1' 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type Ill 24-hr 8-50 Rainfall=7.00" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 20 Summary for Subcatchment 2: TOWNHOMES Runoff = 5.34 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 16,796 cf, Depth= 4.92" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr B-50 Rainfall=7.00" Area (sf) CN Description 40,997 82.00 TOWNHOMES 40,997 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 6.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 2: TOWNHOMES Hydrograph 5.34 cfs Runoff 5 Type III 24-hr B-50 Rainfall=7.00" 4 Runoff Area=40,997 sf Runoff Volume=16,796 cf 3 3 Runoff Depth=4.92" LL Tc=6.0 min 2 CN=82.00 1 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 13 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type Ill 24-hr 8-50 Rainfall=7.00" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 21 Summary for Subcatchment 3: REMAINING Runoff = 8.62 cfs @ 12.30 hrs, Volume= 42,001 cf, Depth= 2.54" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr B-50 Rainfall=7.00" Area (sf) CN Description 198,806 59.30 REMAINING AREA 198,806 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 21.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 3: REMAINING Hydrograph 9 8.62 cfs Runoff 8 Type III 24-hr 7 B-50 Rainfall=7.00" Runoff Area=198,806 sf 6-Runoff Volume=42,001 cf 5-Runoff Depth=2.54" 0 LL 4 Tc=21.0 m i n CN=59.30 3- 2- 6 29 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type Ill 24-hr 8-50 Rainfall=7.00" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 22 Summary for Subcatchment 5: NEW HOUSE Runoff = 2.49 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 7,697 cf, Depth= 3.65" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr B-50 Rainfall=7.00" Area (sf) CN Description 25,307 70.30 NEW HOUSE WS 25,307 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 6.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 5: NEW HOUSE Hydrograph Runoff 5 Type III 24-hr B-50 Rainfall=7.00" 4 Runoff Area=25,307 sf Runoff Volume=7,697 cf 3- .2 2.49 cfs Runoff Depth=3.65" LL Tc=6.0 m i n 2 CN=70.30 1 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type Ill 24-hr 8-50 Rainfall=7.00" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 23 Summary for Pond CS: CS Inflow Area = 40,997 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 2.44" for B-50 event Inflow = 5.14 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 8,348 cf Outflow = 5.14 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 8,348 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary = 2.83 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 7,118 cf Secondary= 2.32 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 1,230 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 80.86'@ 12.09 hrs Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 79.95' CS1_Primary_ratings Elev. (feet) 79.95 80.34 80.52 80.73 80.78 80.83 80.85 80.88 80.91 80.92 Disch. (cfs) 0.000 0.341 0.751 1.175 1.255 1.328 1.359 1.398 1.438 1.458 #2 Secondary 79.95' CS1_Secondary_ratings Elev. (feet) 79.95 80.34 80.52 80.73 80.78 80.83 80.85 80.88 80.91 80.92 Disch. (cfs) 0.000 0.140 0.210 0.268 0.668 1.510 1.946 2.848 3.754 4.207 #3 Primary 79.30' 7.0"Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Primary OutFlow Max=2.82 cfs @ 12.09 hrs HW=80.86' (Free Discharge) �--1=CS1_Primary_ratings(Custom Controls 1.37 cfs) 3=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 1.45 cfs @ 5.43 fps) Secondary OutFlow Max=2.31 cfs @ 12.09 hrs HW=80.86' (Free Discharge) L2=CS1_Secondary_ratings(Custom Controls 2.31 cfs) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr 8-50 Rainfall=7.00" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 24 Pond CS: CS Hydrograph m Inflow 5.14 cfs Outflow Primary 5 - -- --- - ---- Inflow Area=40,997 Sf Secondary Peak Elev=80.86' 4 --L------ -----L - U 3 2.83 cfs 3 _o LL 2.32 cfs 2 1 01 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type Ill 24-hr B-50 Rainfall=7.00" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 25 Summary for Pond DET: DETENTION BASIN Inflow Area = 40,997 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 2.08" for B-50 event Inflow = 2.83 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 7,118 cf Outflow = 1.12 cfs @ 12.50 hrs, Volume= 7,118 cf, Atten= 60%, Lag= 25.0 min Discarded = 0.01 cfs @ 12.02 hrs, Volume= 209 cf Primary = 1.11 cfs @ 12.50 hrs, Volume= 6,909 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs/2 Peak Elev= 79.02'@ 12.50 hrs Surf.Area= 1,656 sf Storage= 3,152 cf Plug-Flow detention time=80.1 min calculated for 7,116 cf(100% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 80.1 min ( 850.1 - 770.0 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1A 96.10' 2,172 cf 30.00'W x 80.761 x 3.50'H Field A 8,480 cf Overall - 3,049 cf Embedded = 5,431 cf x 40.0% Voids #2A 96.60' 3,049 cf ADS_StormTech SC-740 x 66 Inside#1 Effective Size= 44.6"W x 30.0"H => 6.45 sf x 7.121 = 45.9 cf Overall Size= 51.0"W x 30.0"H x 7.561 with 0.44' Overlap Row Length Adjustment= +0.44' x 6.45 sf x 6 rows #3 116.10' 9,000 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic)Listed below(Recalc) #413 76.10' 1,505 cf 20.50'W x 80.761 x 3.50'H Field B 5,795 cf Overall - 2,033 cf Embedded = 3,762 cf x 40.0% Voids #513 76.60' 2,033 cf ADS_StormTech SC-740 x 44 Inside#4 Effective Size= 44.6"W x 30.0"H => 6.45 sf x 7.121 = 45.9 cf Overall Size= 51.0"W x 30.0"H x 7.561 with 0.44' Overlap Row Length Adjustment= +0.44' x 6.45 sf x 4 rows 17,759 cf Total Available Storage Storage Group A created with Chamber Wizard Storage Group B created with Chamber Wizard Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 116.10 900 0 0 126.10 900 9,000 9,000 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 76.10' 3.0"Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 #2 Discarded 76.10' 0.01 cfs Exfiltration at all elevations #3 Primary 78.30' 0.50' long Sharp-Crested Rectangular Weir 2 End Contraction(s) Discarded OutFlow Max=0.01 cfs @ 12.02 hrs HW=76.61' (Free Discharge) L2=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 0.01 cfs) Primary OutFlow Max=1.11 cfs @ 12.50 hrs HW=79.02' (Free Discharge) �11=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 0.40 cfs @ 8.05 fps) 3=Sharp-Crested Rectangular Weir(Weir Controls 0.71 cfs @ 2.78 fps) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr B-50 Rainfall=7.00" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 26 Pond DET: DETENTION BASIN Hydrograph Inflow Outflow =Discard 5 --- Inflow Area=40,997 sf Primary Peak Elev=79.02' 4 -- ------ -- Storage=3,152 cf 3 2.83 cfs 3 _o LL 2 1.11 cfs 1 0.0 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type /// 24-hr 8-50 Rainfall=7.00" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 27 Summary for Pond DW: DRYWELL Inflow Area = 25,307 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 3.65" for B-50 event Inflow = 2.49 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 7,697 cf Outflow = 2.47 cfs @ 12.10 hrs, Volume= 7,697 cf, Atten= 1%, Lag= 0.6 min Discarded = 0.20 cfs @ 11.59 hrs, Volume= 5,507 cf Primary = 2.27 cfs @ 12.10 hrs, Volume= 2,191 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 62.86'@ 12.10 hrs Surf.Area= 101 sf Storage= 991 cf Plug-Flow detention time=26.3 min calculated for 7,696 cf(100% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time=26.3 min ( 856.5- 830.2 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 53.00' 1,005 cf 8.00'D x 10.00'H Vertical Cone/Cylinderx 2 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 62.00' 12.0" Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 #2 Discarded 53.00' 0.20 cfs Exfiltration at all elevations Discarded OutFlow Max=0.20 cfs @ 11.59 hrs HW=53.10' (Free Discharge) L2=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 0.20 cfs) Primary OutFlow Max=2.27 cfs @ 12.10 hrs HW=62.86' (Free Discharge) L1=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 2.27 cfs @ 3.16 fps) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr 8-50 Rainfall=7.00" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 28 Pond DW: DRYWELL Hydrograph Inflow Outflow =Discard 5 Inflow Area=25,307 sf —Primary Peak Elev=62.86' 4 Storage=991 cf 3 3 _o 2.47 cfs LL 2.27 cfs 2 1 0.20 cfs 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type Ill 24-hr B-50 Rainfall=7.00" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 29 Summary for Pond WQ: WQ BASIN Inflow Area = 40,997 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 4.92" for B-50 event Inflow = 5.34 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 16,796 cf Outflow = 5.29 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 16,692 cf, Atten= 1%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary = 5.14 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 8,348 cf Secondary= 0.15 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 8,344 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs/2 Peak Elev= 83.67'@ 12.09 hrs Surf.Area= 1,859 sf Storage= 3,990 cf Plug-Flow detention time=240.0 min calculated for 16,692 cf(99% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time=236.1 min ( 1,039.1 - 803.0 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1A 80.00' 1,679 cf 25.25'W x 73.64'L x 3.50'H Field A 6,508 cf Overall - 2,311 cf Embedded = 4,197 cf x 40.0% Voids #2A 80.50' 2,311 cf ADS_StormTech SC-740 x 50 Inside#1 Effective Size= 44.6"W x 30.0"H => 6.45 sf x 7.121 = 45.9 cf Overall Size= 51.0"W x 30.0"H x 7.56'L with 0.44' Overlap Row Length Adjustment= +0.44' x 6.45 sf x 5 rows 3,990 cf Total Available Storage Storage Group A created with Chamber Wizard Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 82.50' 18.0" Vert. Orifice/Grate X 0.00 C= 0.600 #2 Primary 83.00' 3.00' long Sharp-Crested Rectangular Weir 2 End Contraction(s) #3 Secondary 80.00' Special & User-Defined Head (feet) 0.00 10.00 Disch. (cfs) 0.000 0.400 Primary OutFlow Max=5.12 cfs @ 12.09 hrs HW=83.67' (Free Discharge) 11=Orifice/G rate ( Controls 0.00 cfs) 2=Sharp-Crested Rectangular Weir(Weir Controls 5.12 cfs @ 2.67 fps) Secondary OutFlow Max=0.15 cfs @ 12.09 hrs HW=83.67' (Free Discharge) L3=Special & User-Defined(Custom Controls 0.15 cfs) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr B-50 Rainfall=7.00" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 30 Pond WQ: WQ BASIN Hydrograph !Inflows utflowrimary5 Inflow Area=40,997 Sf econdary Peak Elev=83.67' 4 Storage=3,990 cf 3 3 0 LL 2 1 0.15 cfs 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr 8-50 Rainfall=7.00" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 31 Summary for Link 4: OFFSITE Inflow Area = 224,113 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 2.37" for B-50 event Inflow = 9.54 cfs @ 12.30 hrs, Volume= 44,192 cf Primary = 9.54 cfs @ 12.30 hrs, Volume= 44,192 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Link 4: OFFSITE Hydrograph 10 9.54 cfs Inflow Primary 9 Inflow Area=224,113 sf 8- 7- -0 7w 6 0 5 LL 4- 3- 2: 1-32- 1- 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr 8-50 Rainfall=7.00" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 32 Summary for Link FIN: PROP DP1 Inflow Area = 265,110 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 2.75" for B-50 event Inflow = 10.39 cfs @ 12.32 hrs, Volume= 60,674 cf Primary = 10.39 cfs @ 12.32 hrs, Volume= 60,674 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Link FIN: PROP DP1 Hydrograph 11 10.39 cfs Inflow Primary 10 Inflow Area=265,110 sf 9- 8- 7- 6 876 3 0 LL 5- 4320 4- 3- 2- 0. 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr 8-50 Rainfall=7.00" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 33 Summary for Link JCT: JUNCTION Inflow Area = 40,997 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 4.82" for B-50 event Inflow = 2.68 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 16,483 cf Primary = 2.68 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 16,483 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Link JCT: JUNCTION Hydrograph Inflow Primary 5 Inflow Area=40,997 sf 4 w v 3 2.68 cfs 0 LL 2 1 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type /// 24-hr C-25 Rainfall=6.00" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 34 Time span=0.00-48.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs, 4801 points Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN Reach routing by Stor-Ind method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method Subcatchment1: EXIST DP1 Runoff Area=264,390 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=1.77" Tc=21.0 min CN=58.20 Runoff=7.68 cfs 39,066 cf Subcatchment2: TOWNHOMES Runoff Area=40,997 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=3.99" Tc=6.0 min CN=82.00 Runoff=4.36 cfs 13,622 cf Subcatchment3: REMAINING Runoff Area=198,806 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=1.86" Tc=21.0 min CN=59.30 Runoff=6.14 cfs 30,872 cf Subcatchment5: NEW HOUSE Runoff Area=25,307 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=2.83" Tc=6.0 min CN=70.30 Runoff=1.92 cfs 5,975 cf Pond CS: CS Peak EIev=80.80' Inflow=3.73 cfs 5,611 cf Primary=2.69 cfs 5,169 cf Secondary=1.02 cfs 441 cf Outflow=3.73 cfs 5,611 cf Pond DET: DETENTION BASIN Peak EIev=78.48' Storage=2,675 cf Inflow=2.69 cfs 5,169 cf Discarded=0.01 cfs 187 cf Primary=0.47 cfs 4,982 cf Outflow=0.48 cfs 5,169 cf Pond DW: DRYWELL Peak EIev=62.66' Storage=972 cf Inflow=1.92 cfs 5,975 cf Discarded=0.20 cfs 4,735 cf Primary=1.54 cfs 1,240 cf Outflow=1.74 cfs 5,975 cf Pond WQ: WQ BASIN Peak EIev=83.54' Storage=3,990 cf Inflow=4.36 cfs 13,622 cf Primary=3.73 cfs 5,611 cf Secondary=0.14 cfs 7,863 cf Outflow=3.87 cfs 13,473 cf Link 4: OFFSITE Inflow=6.82 cfs 32,111 cf Primary=6.82 cfs 32,111 cf Link FIN: PROP DP1 Inflow=7.41 cfs 45,397 cf Primary=7.41 cfs 45,397 cf Link JCT:JUNCTION Inflow=1.29 cfs 13,286 cf Primary=1.29 cfs 13,286 cf Total Runoff Area = 529,500 sf Runoff Volume = 89,534 cf Average Runoff Depth = 2.03" 100.00% Pervious = 529,500 sf 0.00% Impervious = 0 sf North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr C-25 Rainfall=6.00" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 35 Summary for Subcatchment 1: EXIST DP1 Runoff = 7.68 cfs @ 12.32 hrs, Volume= 39,066 cf, Depth= 1.77" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr C-25 Rainfall=6.00" Area (sf) CN Description 264,390 58.20 EXISTING 264,390 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 21.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 1: EXIST DP1 Hydrograph 8 7.68 cfs Runoff 7 Type III 24-hr C-25 Rainfall=6.00" 6 Runoff Area=264,390 sf 5 Runoff Volume=39,066 cf 3 Runoff Depth=1 .77" LL 4 Tc=21.0 m i n 3 CN=58.20 2 1 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr C-25 Rainfall=6.00" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 36 Summary for Subcatchment 2: TOWNHOMES Runoff = 4.36 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 13,622 cf, Depth= 3.99" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr C-25 Rainfall=6.00" Area (sf) CN Description 40,997 82.00 TOWNHOMES 40,997 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 6.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 2: TOWNHOMES Hydrograph Runoff 5 Type III 24-hr 4.36 cfs C-25 Rainfall=6.00" 4 Runoff Area=40,997 sf Runoff Volume=13,622 cf 3 3 Runoff Depth=3.99" LL Tc=6.0 min 2 CN=82.00 1 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr C-25 Rainfall=6.00" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 37 Summary for Subcatchment 3: REMAINING Runoff = 6.14 cfs @ 12.32 hrs, Volume= 30,872 cf, Depth= 1.86" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr C-25 Rainfall=6.00" Area (sf) CN Description 198,806 59.30 REMAINING AREA 198,806 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 21.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 3: REMAINING Hydrograph 6.14 cfs Runoff 6 Type III 24-hr 5 C-25 Rainfall=6.00" Runoff Area=198,806 sf 4 Runoff Volume=30,872 cf 3 Runoff Depth=1 .86" U- 3 Tc=21.0 m i n CN=59.30 2 1 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type /// 24-hr C-25 Rainfall=6.00" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 38 Summary for Subcatchment 5: NEW HOUSE Runoff = 1.92 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 5,975 cf, Depth= 2.83" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr C-25 Rainfall=6.00" Area (sf) CN Description 25,307 70.30 NEW HOUSE WS 25,307 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 6.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 5: NEW HOUSE Hydrograph Runoff 5 Type III 24-hr C-25 Rainfall=6.00" 4 Runoff Area=25,307 sf Runoff Volume=5,975 cf 3 Runoff Depth=2.83" LL Tc=6.0 m i n 1.92 cfs 2 CN=70.30 1 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 13 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type /// 24-hr C-25 Rainfall=6.00" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 39 Summary for Pond CS: CS Inflow Area = 40,997 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 1.64" for C-25 event Inflow = 3.73 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 5,611 cf Outflow = 3.73 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 5,611 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary = 2.69 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 5,169 cf Secondary= 1.02 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 441 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 80.80'@ 12.09 hrs Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 79.95' CS1_Primary_ratings Elev. (feet) 79.95 80.34 80.52 80.73 80.78 80.83 80.85 80.88 80.91 80.92 Disch. (cfs) 0.000 0.341 0.751 1.175 1.255 1.328 1.359 1.398 1.438 1.458 #2 Secondary 79.95' CS1_Secondary_ratings Elev. (feet) 79.95 80.34 80.52 80.73 80.78 80.83 80.85 80.88 80.91 80.92 Disch. (cfs) 0.000 0.140 0.210 0.268 0.668 1.510 1.946 2.848 3.754 4.207 #3 Primary 79.30' 7.0"Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Primary OutFlow Max=2.69 cfs @ 12.09 hrs HW=80.80' (Free Discharge) �--1=CS1_Primary_ratings(Custom Controls 1.28 cfs) 3=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 1.41 cfs @ 5.29 fps) Secondary OutFlow Max=0.94 cfs @ 12.09 hrs HW=80.80' (Free Discharge) L2=CS1_Secondary_ratings(Custom Controls 0.94 cfs) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr C-25 Rainfall=6.00" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 40 Pond CS: CS Hydrograph !mlnflow utflowrimary------ Inflow Area=40,997 Sf econdary Peak Elev=80.80' 4 --L----f3.73cfs ---L- i I i a i � U 3 3 2.69 cfs _o LL 2 1.02 cfs 1 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type /// 24-hr C-25 Rainfall=6.00" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 41 Summary for Pond DET: DETENTION BASIN Inflow Area = 40,997 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 1.51" for C-25 event Inflow = 2.69 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 5,169 cf Outflow = 0.48 cfs @ 12.67 hrs, Volume= 5,169 cf, Atten= 82%, Lag= 34.9 min Discarded = 0.01 cfs @ 12.10 hrs, Volume= 187 cf Primary = 0.47 cfs @ 12.67 hrs, Volume= 4,982 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs/2 Peak Elev= 78.48'@ 12.67 hrs Surf.Area= 1,656 sf Storage= 2,675 cf Plug-Flow detention time=90.1 min calculated for 5,168 cf(100% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 90.1 min ( 857.6- 767.5 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1A 96.10' 2,172 cf 30.00'W x 80.761 x 3.50'H Field A 8,480 cf Overall - 3,049 cf Embedded = 5,431 cf x 40.0% Voids #2A 96.60' 3,049 cf ADS_StormTech SC-740 x 66 Inside#1 Effective Size= 44.6"W x 30.0"H => 6.45 sf x 7.121 = 45.9 cf Overall Size= 51.0"W x 30.0"H x 7.561 with 0.44' Overlap Row Length Adjustment= +0.44' x 6.45 sf x 6 rows #3 116.10' 9,000 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic)Listed below(Recalc) #413 76.10' 1,505 cf 20.50'W x 80.761 x 3.50'H Field B 5,795 cf Overall - 2,033 cf Embedded = 3,762 cf x 40.0% Voids #513 76.60' 2,033 cf ADS_StormTech SC-740 x 44 Inside#4 Effective Size= 44.6"W x 30.0"H => 6.45 sf x 7.121 = 45.9 cf Overall Size= 51.0"W x 30.0"H x 7.561 with 0.44' Overlap Row Length Adjustment= +0.44' x 6.45 sf x 4 rows 17,759 cf Total Available Storage Storage Group A created with Chamber Wizard Storage Group B created with Chamber Wizard Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 116.10 900 0 0 126.10 900 9,000 9,000 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 76.10' 3.0"Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 #2 Discarded 76.10' 0.01 cfs Exfiltration at all elevations #3 Primary 78.30' 0.50' long Sharp-Crested Rectangular Weir 2 End Contraction(s) Discarded OutFlow Max=0.01 cfs @ 12.10 hrs HW=76.62' (Free Discharge) L2=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 0.01 cfs) Primary OutFlow Max=0.47 cfs @ 12.67 hrs HW=78.48' (Free Discharge) �11=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 0.35 cfs @ 7.23 fps) 3=Sharp-Crested Rectangular Weir(Weir Controls 0.11 cfs @ 1.38 fps) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr C-25 Rainfall=6.00" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 42 Pond DET: DETENTION BASIN Hydrograph Inflow Outflow =Discard 5 --- Inflow Area=40,997 sf Primary Peak Elev=78.48' 4 -- ------ -- Storage=2,675 cf N 3 3 2.69 cfs _o LL 2 1 0.4 7 7cfs 0.0 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type /// 24-hr C-25 Rainfall=6.00" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 43 Summary for Pond DW: DRYWELL Inflow Area = 25,307 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 2.83" for C-25 event Inflow = 1.92 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 5,975 cf Outflow = 1.74 cfs @ 12.13 hrs, Volume= 5,975 cf, Atten= 10%, Lag= 2.6 min Discarded = 0.20 cfs @ 11.66 hrs, Volume= 4,735 cf Primary = 1.54 cfs @ 12.13 hrs, Volume= 1,240 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 62.66'@ 12.13 hrs Surf.Area= 101 sf Storage= 972 cf Plug-Flow detention time=27.3 min calculated for 5,975 cf(100% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time=27.3 min ( 864.8- 837.5 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 53.00' 1,005 cf 8.00'D x 10.00'H Vertical Cone/Cylinderx 2 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 62.00' 12.0" Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 #2 Discarded 53.00' 0.20 cfs Exfiltration at all elevations Discarded OutFlow Max=0.20 cfs @ 11.66 hrs HW=53.10' (Free Discharge) L2=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 0.20 cfs) Primary OutFlow Max=1.52 cfs @ 12.13 hrs HW=62.66' (Free Discharge) L1=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 1.52 cfs @ 2.76 fps) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr C-25 Rainfall=6.00" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 44 Pond DW: DRYWELL Hydrograph Inflow Outflow =Discard 5 Inflow Area=25,307 sf Primary Peak Elev=62.66' 4 - ----------- - Storage=972 cf N 3 3 _o LL 1.92 rfs 2 JL 1 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type /// 24-hr C-25 Rainfall=6.00" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 45 Summary for Pond WQ: WQ BASIN Inflow Area = 40,997 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 3.99" for C-25 event Inflow = 4.36 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 13,622 cf Outflow = 3.87 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 13,473 cf, Atten= 11%, Lag= 0.5 min Primary = 3.73 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 5,611 cf Secondary= 0.14 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 7,863 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs/2 Peak Elev= 83.54'@ 12.09 hrs Surf.Area= 1,859 sf Storage= 3,990 cf Plug-Flow detention time=283.1 min calculated for 13,470 cf(99% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time=276.7 min ( 1,085.6- 808.9 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1A 80.00' 1,679 cf 25.25'W x 73.641 x 3.50'H Field A 6,508 cf Overall - 2,311 cf Embedded = 4,197 cf x 40.0% Voids #2A 80.50' 2,311 cf ADS_StormTech SC-740 x 50 Inside#1 Effective Size= 44.6"W x 30.0"H => 6.45 sf x 7.121 = 45.9 cf Overall Size= 51.0"W x 30.0"H x 7.561 with 0.44' Overlap Row Length Adjustment= +0.44' x 6.45 sf x 5 rows 3,990 cf Total Available Storage Storage Group A created with Chamber Wizard Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 82.50' 18.0" Vert. Orifice/Grate X 0.00 C= 0.600 #2 Primary 83.00' 3.00' long Sharp-Crested Rectangular Weir 2 End Contraction(s) #3 Secondary 80.00' Special & User-Defined Head (feet) 0.00 10.00 Disch. (cfs) 0.000 0.400 Primary OutFlow Max=3.62 cfs @ 12.09 hrs HW=83.53' (Free Discharge) 11=Orifice/G rate ( Controls 0.00 cfs) 2=Sharp-Crested Rectangular Weir(Weir Controls 3.62 cfs @ 2.37 fps) Secondary OutFlow Max=0.14 cfs @ 12.09 hrs HW=83.53' (Free Discharge) L3=Special & User-Defined(Custom Controls 0.14 cfs) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr C-25 Rainfall=6.00" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 46 Pond WQ: WQ BASIN Hydrograph 4.36 cfs Inflow =Outflow �Primary 4 -- ---- 3.73 cfs Inflow Area=40,997 sf Secondary Peak Elev=83.54' 3 Storage=3,990 cf 3 0 LL 2 1 0.14 cfs 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr C-25 Rainfall=6.00" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 47 Summary for Link 4: OFFSITE Inflow Area = 224,113 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 1.72" for C-25 event Inflow = 6.82 cfs @ 12.30 hrs, Volume= 32,111 cf Primary = 6.82 cfs @ 12.30 hrs, Volume= 32,111 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Link 4: OFFSITE Hydrograph 6.82 cfs Inflow 7 m Primary Inflow Area=224,113 sf 6 5 w 4 3 0 LL 3 2 1 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr C-25 Rainfall=6.00" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 48 Summary for Link FIN: PROP DP1 Inflow Area = 265,110 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 2.05" for C-25 event Inflow = 7.41 cfs @ 12.30 hrs, Volume= 45,397 cf Primary = 7.41 cfs @ 12.30 hrs, Volume= 45,397 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Link FIN: PROP DP1 Hydrograph 87.41cfs7.41 cfs mPrimary 7 Inflow Area=265,110 sf 6 5 w v 0 4 LL 3 2 1 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr C-25 Rainfall=6.00" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 49 Summary for Link JCT: JUNCTION Inflow Area = 40,997 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 3.89" for C-25 event Inflow = 1.29 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 13,286 cf Primary = 1.29 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 13,286 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Link JCT: JUNCTION Hydrograph Inflow Primary 5 Inflow Area=40,997 sf 4 w v 3 3 0 LL 2 1.29 cfs 1 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type /// 24-hr D-10 Rainfall=5.00" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 50 Time span=0.00-48.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs, 4801 points Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN Reach routing by Stor-Ind method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method Subcatchment1: EXIST DP1 Runoff Area=264,390 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=1.18" Tc=21.0 min CN=58.20 Runoff=4.79 cfs 26,038 cf Subcatchment2: TOWNHOMES Runoff Area=40,997 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=3.08" Tc=6.0 min CN=82.00 Runoff=3.39 cfs 10,519 cf Subcatchment3: REMAINING Runoff Area=198,806 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=1.25" Tc=21.0 min CN=59.30 Runoff=3.90 cfs 20,778 cf Subcatchment5: NEW HOUSE Runoff Area=25,307 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=2.06" Tc=6.0 min CN=70.30 Runoff=1.38 cfs 4,345 cf Pond CS: CS Peak EIev=80.42' Inflow=1.86 cfs 3,147 cf Primary=1.69 cfs 3,036 cf Secondary=0.17 cfs 112d Outflow=1.86 cfs 3,147 cf Pond DET: DETENTION BASIN Peak EIev=77.48' Storage=1,501 cf Inflow=1.69 cfs 3,036 cf Discarded=0.01 cfs 140 cf Primary=0.26 cfs 2,896 cf Outflow=0.27 cfs 3,036 cf Pond DW: DRYWELL Peak EIev=62.35' Storage=940 cf Inflow=1.38 cfs 4,345 cf Discarded=0.20 cfs 3,938 cf Primary=0.51 cfs 407 cf Outflow=0.71 cfs 4,345 cf Pond WQ: WQ BASIN Peak EIev=83.33' Storage=3,866 cf Inflow=3.39 cfs 10,519 cf Primary=1.86 cfs 3,147 cf Secondary=0.13 cfs 7,317 cf Outflow=1.99 cfs 10,464 cf Link 4: OFFSITE Inflow=4.33 cfs 21,185 cf Primary=4.33 cfs 21,185 cf Link FIN: PROP DP1 Inflow=4.76 cfs 31,510 cf Primary=4.76 cfs 31,510 cf Link JCT:JUNCTION Inflow=0.45 cfs 10,325 cf Primary=0.45 cfs 10,325 cf Total Runoff Area = 529,500 sf Runoff Volume = 61,680 cf Average Runoff Depth = 1.40" 100.00% Pervious = 529,500 sf 0.00% Impervious = 0 sf North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr D-10 Rainfall=5.00" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 51 Summary for Subcatchment 1: EXIST DP1 Runoff = 4.79 cfs @ 12.34 hrs, Volume= 26,038 cf, Depth= 1.18" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr D-10 Rainfall=5.00" Area (sf) CN Description 264,390 58.20 EXISTING 264,390 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 21.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 1: EXIST DP1 Hydrograph Runoff 5 4.79 cfs Type III 24-hr D-10 Rainfall=5.00" 4 Runoff Area=264,390 sf Runoff Volume=26,038 cf 3 3 Runoff Depth=1 .18" LL Tc=21.0 m i n 2 CN=58.20 1 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr D-10 Rainfall=5.00" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 52 Summary for Subcatchment 2: TOWNHOMES Runoff = 3.39 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 10,519 cf, Depth= 3.08" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr D-10 Rainfall=5.00" Area (sf) CN Description 40,997 82.00 TOWNHOMES 40,997 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 6.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 2: TOWNHOMES Hydrograph Runoff 5 Type III 24-hr D-10 Rainfall=5.00" 4 Runoff Area=40,997 sf 3.39 cfs Runoff Volume=10,519 cf w w 3 3 Runoff Depth=3.08" LL Tc=6.0 min 2 CN=82.00 1 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr D-10 Rainfall=5.00" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 53 Summary for Subcatchment 3: REMAINING Runoff = 3.90 cfs @ 12.34 hrs, Volume= 20,778 cf, Depth= 1.25" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr D-10 Rainfall=5.00" Area (sf) CN Description 198,806 59.30 REMAINING AREA 198,806 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 21.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 3: REMAINING Hydrograph Runoff 5 Type III 24-hr D-10 Rainfall=5.00" 4 3.90 cfs Runoff Area=198,806 sf Runoff Volume=20,778 cf 3 3 Runoff Depth=1 .25" LL Tc=21.0 m i n 2 CN=59.30 1 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr D-10 Rainfall=5.00" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 54 Summary for Subcatchment 5: NEW HOUSE Runoff = 1.38 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 4,345 cf, Depth= 2.06" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr D-10 Rainfall=5.00" Area (sf) CN Description 25,307 70.30 NEW HOUSE WS 25,307 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 6.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 5: NEW HOUSE Hydrograph Runoff 5 Type III 24-hr D-10 Rainfall=5.00" 4 Runoff Area=25,307 sf Runoff Volume=4,345 cf 3 Runoff Depth=2.06" LL Tc=6.0 m i n 2 CN=70.30 1.38 cfs 1 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type /// 24-hr D-10 Rainfall=5.00" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 55 Summary for Pond CS: CS Inflow Area = 40,997 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.92" for D-10 event Inflow = 1.86 cfs @ 12.20 hrs, Volume= 3,147 cf Outflow = 1.86 cfs @ 12.20 hrs, Volume= 3,147 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary = 1.69 cfs @ 12.20 hrs, Volume= 3,036 cf Secondary= 0.17 cfs @ 12.20 hrs, Volume= 112 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 80.42'@ 12.20 hrs Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 79.95' CS1_Primary_ratings Elev. (feet) 79.95 80.34 80.52 80.73 80.78 80.83 80.85 80.88 80.91 80.92 Disch. (cfs) 0.000 0.341 0.751 1.175 1.255 1.328 1.359 1.398 1.438 1.458 #2 Secondary 79.95' CS1_Secondary_ratings Elev. (feet) 79.95 80.34 80.52 80.73 80.78 80.83 80.85 80.88 80.91 80.92 Disch. (cfs) 0.000 0.140 0.210 0.268 0.668 1.510 1.946 2.848 3.754 4.207 #3 Primary 79.30' 7.0"Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Primary OutFlow Max=1.69 cfs @ 12.20 hrs HW=80.42' (Free Discharge) �--1=CS1_Primary_ratings(Custom Controls 0.52 cfs) 3=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 1.17 cfs @ 4.38 fps) Secondary OutFlow Max=0.17 cfs @ 12.20 hrs HW=80.42' (Free Discharge) L2=CS1_Secondary_ratings(Custom Controls 0.17 cfs) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr D-10 Rainfall=5.00" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 56 Pond CS: CS Hydrograph !Inflowutflowrimary5 -- Inflow Area=40,997 sf econdary Peak Elev=80.42' 4 -L--------------- a U 3 3 _o LL 2 1.69 cfs 1 0.17 cfs 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type /// 24-hr D-10 Rainfall=5.00" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 57 Summary for Pond DET: DETENTION BASIN Inflow Area = 40,997 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.89" for D-10 event Inflow = 1.69 cfs @ 12.20 hrs, Volume= 3,036 cf Outflow = 0.27 cfs @ 12.85 hrs, Volume= 3,036 cf, Atten= 84%, Lag= 39.3 min Discarded = 0.01 cfs @ 12.22 hrs, Volume= 140 cf Primary = 0.26 cfs @ 12.85 hrs, Volume= 2,896 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs/2 Peak Elev= 77.48'@ 12.85 hrs Surf.Area= 1,656 sf Storage= 1,501 cf Plug-Flow detention time=69.5 min calculated for 3,035 cf(100% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 69.5 min ( 838.1 - 768.5 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1A 96.10' 2,172 cf 30.00'W x 80.761 x 3.50'H Field A 8,480 cf Overall - 3,049 cf Embedded = 5,431 cf x 40.0% Voids #2A 96.60' 3,049 cf ADS_StormTech SC-740 x 66 Inside#1 Effective Size= 44.6"W x 30.0"H => 6.45 sf x 7.121 = 45.9 cf Overall Size= 51.0"W x 30.0"H x 7.561 with 0.44' Overlap Row Length Adjustment= +0.44' x 6.45 sf x 6 rows #3 116.10' 9,000 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic)Listed below(Recalc) #413 76.10' 1,505 cf 20.50'W x 80.761 x 3.50'H Field B 5,795 cf Overall - 2,033 cf Embedded = 3,762 cf x 40.0% Voids #513 76.60' 2,033 cf ADS_StormTech SC-740 x 44 Inside#4 Effective Size= 44.6"W x 30.0"H => 6.45 sf x 7.121 = 45.9 cf Overall Size= 51.0"W x 30.0"H x 7.561 with 0.44' Overlap Row Length Adjustment= +0.44' x 6.45 sf x 4 rows 17,759 cf Total Available Storage Storage Group A created with Chamber Wizard Storage Group B created with Chamber Wizard Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 116.10 900 0 0 126.10 900 9,000 9,000 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 76.10' 3.0"Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 #2 Discarded 76.10' 0.01 cfs Exfiltration at all elevations #3 Primary 78.30' 0.50' long Sharp-Crested Rectangular Weir 2 End Contraction(s) Discarded OutFlow Max=0.01 cfs @ 12.22 hrs HW=76.63' (Free Discharge) L2=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 0.01 cfs) Primary OutFlow Max=0.26 cfs @ 12.85 hrs HW=77.48' (Free Discharge) �11=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 0.26 cfs @ 5.39 fps) 3=Sharp-Crested Rectangular Weir( Controls 0.00 cfs) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr D-10 Rainfall=5.00" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 58 Pond DET: DETENTION BASIN Hydrograph Inflow Outflow =Discard 5 Inflow Area=40,997 Sf —Primary Peak Elev=77.48' 4 Storage=1 ,501 cf 3 3 _o LL 2 1.69 cfs 1 0.26 cfs 0.0 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type /// 24-hr D-10 Rainfall=5.00" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 59 Summary for Pond DW: DRYWELL Inflow Area = 25,307 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 2.06" for D-10 event Inflow = 1.38 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 4,345 cf Outflow = 0.71 cfs @ 12.26 hrs, Volume= 4,345 cf, Atten= 49%, Lag= 10.3 min Discarded = 0.20 cfs @ 11.75 hrs, Volume= 3,938 cf Primary = 0.51 cfs @ 12.26 hrs, Volume= 407 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 62.35'@ 12.26 hrs Surf.Area= 101 sf Storage= 940 cf Plug-Flow detention time=28.8 min calculated for 4,344 cf(100% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time=28.8 min ( 875.7- 846.9 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 53.00' 1,005 cf 8.00'D x 10.00'H Vertical Cone/Cylinderx 2 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 62.00' 12.0" Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 #2 Discarded 53.00' 0.20 cfs Exfiltration at all elevations Discarded OutFlow Max=0.20 cfs @ 11.75 hrs HW=53.11' (Free Discharge) L2=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 0.20 cfs) Primary OutFlow Max=0.50 cfs @ 12.26 hrs HW=62.35' (Free Discharge) L1=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 0.50 cfs @ 2.02 fps) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr D-10 Rainfall=5.00" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 60 Pond DW: DRYWELL Hydrograph Inflow Outflow =Discard 5 Inflow Area=25,307 sf —Primary Peak Elev=62.35' 4 -- ------- ---- Storage=940 cf N 3 3 _o LL 2 1.38 cfs 0.71 cfs 1 0.51 cfs 0.20 cfs 0 14 111 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type /// 24-hr D-10 Rainfall=5.00" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 61 Summary for Pond WQ: WQ BASIN Inflow Area = 40,997 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 3.08" for D-10 event Inflow = 3.39 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 10,519 cf Outflow = 1.99 cfs @ 12.20 hrs, Volume= 10,464 cf, Atten= 41%, Lag= 6.8 min Primary = 1.86 cfs @ 12.20 hrs, Volume= 3,147 cf Secondary= 0.13 cfs @ 12.20 hrs, Volume= 7,317 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs/2 Peak Elev= 83.33'@ 12.20 hrs Surf.Area= 1,859 sf Storage= 3,866 cf Plug-Flow detention time=335.0 min calculated for 10,464 cf(99% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 331.7 min ( 1,148.0- 816.3 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1A 80.00' 1,679 cf 25.25'W x 73.641 x 3.50'H Field A 6,508 cf Overall - 2,311 cf Embedded = 4,197 cf x 40.0% Voids #2A 80.50' 2,311 cf ADS_StormTech SC-740 x 50 Inside#1 Effective Size= 44.6"W x 30.0"H => 6.45 sf x 7.121 = 45.9 cf Overall Size= 51.0"W x 30.0"H x 7.561 with 0.44' Overlap Row Length Adjustment= +0.44' x 6.45 sf x 5 rows 3,990 cf Total Available Storage Storage Group A created with Chamber Wizard Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 82.50' 18.0" Vert. Orifice/Grate X 0.00 C= 0.600 #2 Primary 83.00' 3.00' long Sharp-Crested Rectangular Weir 2 End Contraction(s) #3 Secondary 80.00' Special & User-Defined Head (feet) 0.00 10.00 Disch. (cfs) 0.000 0.400 Primary OutFlow Max=1.85 cfs @ 12.20 hrs HW=83.33' (Free Discharge) 11=Orifice/G rate ( Controls 0.00 cfs) 2=Sharp-Crested Rectangular Weir(Weir Controls 1.85 cfs @ 1.89 fps) Secondary OutFlow Max=0.13 cfs @ 12.20 hrs HW=83.33' (Free Discharge) L3=Special & User-Defined(Custom Controls 0.13 cfs) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr D-10 Rainfall=5.00" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 62 Pond WQ: WQ BASIN Hydrograph 3.39 cfs Inflow Outflow Primary Inflow Area=40,997 sf Secondary 3 - ------- -- Peak Elev=83.33' Storage=3,866 cf a 1.99 cfs 2 1.86 cfs 3 0 LL 1 0.13 cfs 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr D-10 Rainfall=5.00" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 63 Summary for Link 4: OFFSITE Inflow Area = 224,113 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 1.13" for D-10 event Inflow = 4.33 cfs @ 12.32 hrs, Volume= 21,185 cf Primary = 4.33 cfs @ 12.32 hrs, Volume= 21,185 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Link 4: OFFSITE Hydrograph Inflow Primary 5 Inflow Area=224,113 sf 4.33 cfs 4 w v 3 3 0 LL 2 1 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr D-10 Rainfall=5.00" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 64 Summary for Link FIN: PROP DP1 Inflow Area = 265,110 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 1.43" for D-10 event Inflow = 4.76 cfs @ 12.30 hrs, Volume= 31,510 cf Primary = 4.76 cfs @ 12.30 hrs, Volume= 31,510 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Link FIN: PROP DP1 Hydrograph Inflow Primary 5 4.76 cfs Inflow Area=265,110 sf 4 w v 3 3 0 LL 2 1 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr D-10 Rainfall=5.00" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 65 Summary for Link JCT: JUNCTION Inflow Area = 40,997 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 3.02" for D-10 event Inflow = 0.45 cfs @ 12.24 hrs, Volume= 10,325 cf Primary = 0.45 cfs @ 12.24 hrs, Volume= 10,325 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Link JCT: JUNCTION Hydrograph Inflow Primary 5 Inflow Area=40,997 sf 4 w v 3 3 0 LL 2 1 0.45 cfs 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr E-5 Rainfall=4.50" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 66 Time span=0.00-48.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs, 4801 points Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN Reach routing by Stor-Ind method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method Subcatchment1: EXIST DP1 Runoff Area=264,390 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=0.92" Tc=21.0 min CN=58.20 Runoff=3.50 cfs 20,183 cf Subcatchment2: TOWNHOMES Runoff Area=40,997 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=2.64" Tc=6.0 min CN=82.00 Runoff=2.91 cfs 9,006 cf Subcatchment3: REMAINING Runoff Area=198,806 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=0.98" Tc=21.0 min CN=59.30 Runoff=2.89 cfs 16,218 cf Subcatchment5: NEW HOUSE Runoff Area=25,307 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=1.70" Tc=6.0 min CN=70.30 Runoff=1.12 cfs 3,575 cf Pond CS: CS Peak EIev=80.08' Inflow=1.07 cfs 1,940 cf Primary=1.02 cfs 1,920 cf Secondary=0.05 cfs 20 cf Outflow=1.07 cfs 1,940 cf Pond DET: DETENTION BASIN Peak EIev=76.98' Storage=853 cf Inflow=1.02 cfs 1,920 cf Discarded=0.01 cfs 105 cf Primary=0.21 cfs 1,815 cf Outflow=0.22 cfs 1,920 cf Pond DW: DRYWELL Peak EIev=62.16' Storage=921 cf Inflow=1.12 cfs 3,575 cf Discarded=0.20 cfs 3,529 cf Primary=0.12 cfs 46 cf Outflow=0.32 cfs 3,575 cf Pond WQ: WQ BASIN Peak EIev=83.23' Storage=3,788 cf Inflow=2.91 cfs 9,006 cf Primary=1.07 cfs 1,940 cf Secondary=0.13 cfs 7,017 cf Outflow=1.19 cfs 8,956 cf Link 4: OFFSITE Inflow=2.89 cfs 16,264 cf Primary=2.89 cfs 16,264 cf Link FIN: PROP DP1 Inflow=3.20 cfs 25,116 cf Primary=3.20 cfs 25,116 cf Link JCT:JUNCTION Inflow=0.33 cfs 8,852 cf Primary=0.33 cfs 8,852 cf Total Runoff Area = 529,500 sf Runoff Volume = 48,982 cf Average Runoff Depth = 1.11" 100.00% Pervious = 529,500 sf 0.00% Impervious = 0 sf North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr E-5 Rainfall=4.50" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 67 Summary for Subcatchment 1: EXIST DP1 Runoff = 3.50 cfs @ 12.35 hrs, Volume= 20,183 cf, Depth= 0.92" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr E-5 Rainfall=4.50" Area (sf) CN Description 264,390 58.20 EXISTING 264,390 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 21.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 1: EXIST DP1 Hydrograph Runoff 5 Type III 24-hr E-5 Rainfall=4.50" 4 Runoff Area=264,390 sf 3.50 cfs Runoff Volume=20,183 cf w 3 3 Runoff Depth=0.92" LL Tc=21.0 m i n 2 CN=58.20 1 01 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr E-5 Rainfall=4.50" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 68 Summary for Subcatchment 2: TOWNHOMES Runoff = 2.91 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 9,006 cf, Depth= 2.64" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr E-5 Rainfall=4.50" Area (sf) CN Description 40,997 82.00 TOWNHOMES 40,997 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 6.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 2: TOWNHOMES Hydrograph Runoff 5 Type III 24-hr E-5 Rainfall=4.50" 4 Runoff Area=40,997 sf Runoff Volume=9,006 cf 2.91 cfs 3 Runoff Depth=2.64" LL Tc=6.0 m i n 2 CN=82.00 1 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr E-5 Rainfall=4.50" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 69 Summary for Subcatchment 3: REMAINING Runoff = 2.89 cfs @ 12.34 hrs, Volume= 16,218 cf, Depth= 0.98" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr E-5 Rainfall=4.50" Area (sf) CN Description 198,806 59.30 REMAINING AREA 198,806 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 21.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 3: REMAINING Hydrograph Runoff 5 Type III 24-hr E-5 Rainfall=4.50" 4 Runoff Area=198,806 sf w Runoff Volume=16,218 cf 3 3 2.89 cfs Runoff Depth=0.98" LL Tc=21.0 m i n 2 CN=59.30 1 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr E-5 Rainfall=4.50" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 70 Summary for Subcatchment 5: NEW HOUSE Runoff = 1.12 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 3,575 cf, Depth= 1.70" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr E-5 Rainfall=4.50" Area (sf) CN Description 25,307 70.30 NEW HOUSE WS 25,307 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 6.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 5: NEW HOUSE Hydrograph Runoff 5 Type III 24-hr E-5 Rainfall=4.50" 4 Runoff Area=25,307 sf Runoff Volume=3,575 cf 3 Runoff Depth=1 .70" LL Tc=6.0 m i n 2 CN=70.30 1.12 cfs 1 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 111 24-hr E-5 Rainfall=4.50" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 71 Summary for Pond CS: CS Inflow Area = 40,997 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.57" for E-5 event Inflow = 1.07 cfs @ 12.32 hrs, Volume= 1,940 cf Outflow = 1.07 cfs @ 12.32 hrs, Volume= 1,940 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary = 1.02 cfs @ 12.32 hrs, Volume= 1,920 cf Secondary= 0.05 cfs @ 12.32 hrs, Volume= 20 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 80.08'@ 12.32 hrs Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 79.95' CS1_Primary_ratings Elev. (feet) 79.95 80.34 80.52 80.73 80.78 80.83 80.85 80.88 80.91 80.92 Disch. (cfs) 0.000 0.341 0.751 1.175 1.255 1.328 1.359 1.398 1.438 1.458 #2 Secondary 79.95' CS1_Secondary_ratings Elev. (feet) 79.95 80.34 80.52 80.73 80.78 80.83 80.85 80.88 80.91 80.92 Disch. (cfs) 0.000 0.140 0.210 0.268 0.668 1.510 1.946 2.848 3.754 4.207 #3 Primary 79.30' 7.0"Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Primary OutFlow Max=1.02 cfs @ 12.32 hrs HW=80.08' (Free Discharge) �--1=CS1_Primary_ratings(Custom Controls 0.12 cfs) 3=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 0.90 cfs @ 3.37 fps) Secondary OutFlow Max=0.05 cfs @ 12.32 hrs HW=80.08' (Free Discharge) L2=CS1_Secondary_ratings(Custom Controls 0.05 cfs) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr E-5 Rainfall=4.50" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 72 Pond CS: CS Hydrograph !Inflowutflowrimary5 Inflow Area=40,997 sf econdary Peak Elev=80.08' 4 --'-- U 3 3 _o LL 2 1.02 cfs 1 0.05 cfs 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr E-5 Rainfall=4.50" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 73 Summary for Pond DET: DETENTION BASIN Inflow Area = 40,997 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.56" for E-5 event Inflow = 1.02 cfs @ 12.32 hrs, Volume= 1,920 cf Outflow = 0.22 cfs @ 12.89 hrs, Volume= 1,920 cf, Atten= 79%, Lag= 34.1 min Discarded = 0.01 cfs @ 12.36 hrs, Volume= 105 cf Primary = 0.21 cfs @ 12.89 hrs, Volume= 1,815 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs/2 Peak Elev= 76.98'@ 12.89 hrs Surf.Area= 1,656 sf Storage= 853 cf Plug-Flow detention time=51.6 min calculated for 1,920 cf(100% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 51.6 min ( 823.9- 772.4 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1A 96.10' 2,172 cf 30.00'W x 80.761 x 3.50'H Field A 8,480 cf Overall - 3,049 cf Embedded = 5,431 cf x 40.0% Voids #2A 96.60' 3,049 cf ADS_StormTech SC-740 x 66 Inside#1 Effective Size= 44.6"W x 30.0"H => 6.45 sf x 7.121 = 45.9 cf Overall Size= 51.0"W x 30.0"H x 7.561 with 0.44' Overlap Row Length Adjustment= +0.44' x 6.45 sf x 6 rows #3 116.10' 9,000 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic)Listed below(Recalc) #413 76.10' 1,505 cf 20.50'W x 80.761 x 3.50'H Field B 5,795 cf Overall - 2,033 cf Embedded = 3,762 cf x 40.0% Voids #513 76.60' 2,033 cf ADS_StormTech SC-740 x 44 Inside#4 Effective Size= 44.6"W x 30.0"H => 6.45 sf x 7.121 = 45.9 cf Overall Size= 51.0"W x 30.0"H x 7.561 with 0.44' Overlap Row Length Adjustment= +0.44' x 6.45 sf x 4 rows 17,759 cf Total Available Storage Storage Group A created with Chamber Wizard Storage Group B created with Chamber Wizard Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 116.10 900 0 0 126.10 900 9,000 9,000 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 76.10' 3.0"Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 #2 Discarded 76.10' 0.01 cfs Exfiltration at all elevations #3 Primary 78.30' 0.50' long Sharp-Crested Rectangular Weir 2 End Contraction(s) Discarded OutFlow Max=0.01 cfs @ 12.36 hrs HW=76.61' (Free Discharge) L2=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 0.01 cfs) Primary OutFlow Max=0.21 cfs @ 12.89 hrs HW=76.98' (Free Discharge) �11=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 0.21 cfs @ 4.20 fps) 3=Sharp-Crested Rectangular Weir( Controls 0.00 cfs) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr E-5 Rainfall=4.50" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 74 Pond DET: DETENTION BASIN Hydrograph Inflow Outflow �Discarded 5 Inflow Area=40,997 Sf —Primary Peak Elev=76.98' 4 --',-- Storage=853 cf 3 3 _o LL 2 1.02 cfs 1- 0.21 cfs 0.0 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr E-5 Rainfall=4.50" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 75 Summary for Pond DW: DRYWELL Inflow Area = 25,307 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 1.70" for E-5 event Inflow = 1.12 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 3,575 cf Outflow = 0.32 cfs @ 12.49 hrs, Volume= 3,575 cf, Atten= 72%, Lag= 23.8 min Discarded = 0.20 cfs @ 11.81 hrs, Volume= 3,529 cf Primary = 0.12 cfs @ 12.49 hrs, Volume= 46 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 62.16'@ 12.49 hrs Surf.Area= 101 sf Storage= 921 cf Plug-Flow detention time=29.6 min calculated for 3,575 cf(100% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time=29.6 min ( 882.3- 852.7 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 53.00' 1,005 cf 8.00'D x 10.00'H Vertical Cone/Cylinderx 2 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 62.00' 12.0" Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 #2 Discarded 53.00' 0.20 cfs Exfiltration at all elevations Discarded OutFlow Max=0.20 cfs @ 11.81 hrs HW=53.10' (Free Discharge) L2=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 0.20 cfs) Primary OutFlow Max=0.11 cfs @ 12.49 hrs HW=62.16' (Free Discharge) L1=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 0.11 cfs @ 1.35 fps) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr E-5 Rainfall=4.50" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 76 Pond DW: DRYWELL Hydrograph Inflow Outflow �Discarded 5 Inflow Area=25,307 sf —Primary Peak Elev=62.16' 4 -- - ----- ---- Storage=921 cf N 3 3 _o LL 2 J32cfs 1 cfs 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr E-5 Rainfall=4.50" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 77 Summary for Pond WQ: WQ BASIN Inflow Area = 40,997 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 2.64" for E-5 event Inflow = 2.91 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 9,006 cf Outflow = 1.19 cfs @ 12.32 hrs, Volume= 8,956 cf, Atten= 59%, Lag= 14.0 min Primary = 1.07 cfs @ 12.32 hrs, Volume= 1,940 cf Secondary= 0.13 cfs @ 12.32 hrs, Volume= 7,017 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs/2 Peak Elev= 83.23'@ 12.32 hrs Surf.Area= 1,859 sf Storage= 3,788 cf Plug-Flow detention time=375.4 min calculated for 8,954 cf(99% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 372.2 min ( 1,192.9- 820.7 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1A 80.00' 1,679 cf 25.25'W x 73.641 x 3.50'H Field A 6,508 cf Overall - 2,311 cf Embedded = 4,197 cf x 40.0% Voids #2A 80.50' 2,311 cf ADS_StormTech SC-740 x 50 Inside#1 Effective Size= 44.6"W x 30.0"H => 6.45 sf x 7.121 = 45.9 cf Overall Size= 51.0"W x 30.0"H x 7.561 with 0.44' Overlap Row Length Adjustment= +0.44' x 6.45 sf x 5 rows 3,990 cf Total Available Storage Storage Group A created with Chamber Wizard Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 82.50' 18.0" Vert. Orifice/Grate X 0.00 C= 0.600 #2 Primary 83.00' 3.00' long Sharp-Crested Rectangular Weir 2 End Contraction(s) #3 Secondary 80.00' Special & User-Defined Head (feet) 0.00 10.00 Disch. (cfs) 0.000 0.400 Primary OutFlow Max=1.05 cfs @ 12.32 hrs HW=83.23' (Free Discharge) 11=Orifice/G rate ( Controls 0.00 cfs) 2=Sharp-Crested Rectangular Weir(Weir Controls 1.05 cfs @ 1.56 fps) Secondary OutFlow Max=0.13 cfs @ 12.32 hrs HW=83.23' (Free Discharge) L3=Special & User-Defined(Custom Controls 0.13 cfs) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr E-5 Rainfall=4.50" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 78 Pond WQ: WQ BASIN Hydrograph 3 2.91 cfs Inflow Outflow Primary Inflow Area=40,997 sf Secondary Peak Elev=83.23' 2 Storage=3,788 cf 3 _o LL 1.19 cfs 1.07 cfs 1 0.13 cfs _ 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr E-5 Rainfall=4.50" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 79 Summary for Link 4: OFFSITE Inflow Area = 224,113 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.87" for E-5 event Inflow = 2.89 cfs @ 12.34 hrs, Volume= 16,264 cf Primary = 2.89 cfs @ 12.34 hrs, Volume= 16,264 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Link 4: OFFSITE Hydrograph Inflow Primary 5 Inflow Area=224,113 sf 4 w 2.89 cfs 3 3 0 LL 2 1 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr E-5 Rainfall=4.50" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 80 Summary for Link FIN: PROP DP1 Inflow Area = 265,110 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 1.14" for E-5 event Inflow = 3.20 cfs @ 12.35 hrs, Volume= 25,116 cf Primary = 3.20 cfs @ 12.35 hrs, Volume= 25,116 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Link FIN: PROP DP1 Hydrograph Inflow Primary 5 Inflow Area=265,110 sf 4 w 3.20 cfs v 3 3 0 LL 2 1 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr E-5 Rainfall=4.50" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 81 Summary for Link JCT: JUNCTION Inflow Area = 40,997 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 2.59" for E-5 event Inflow = 0.33 cfs @ 12.85 hrs, Volume= 8,852 cf Primary = 0.33 cfs @ 12.85 hrs, Volume= 8,852 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Link JCT: JUNCTION Hydrograph Inflow Primary 5 Inflow Area=40,997 sf 4 w v 3 3 0 LL 2 1 0.33 cfs 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr F-2 Rainfall=3.50" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 82 Time span=0.00-48.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs, 4801 points Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN Reach routing by Stor-Ind method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method Subcatchment1: EXIST DP1 Runoff Area=264,390 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=0.46" Tc=21.0 min CN=58.20 Runoff=1.38 cfs 10,148 cf Subcatchment2: TOWNHOMES Runoff Area=40,997 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=1.78" Tc=6.0 min CN=82.00 Runoff=1.97 cfs 6,090 cf Subcatchment3: REMAINING Runoff Area=198,806 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=0.50" Tc=21.0 min CN=59.30 Runoff=1.20 cfs 8,339 cf Subcatchment5: NEW HOUSE Runoff Area=25,307 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=1.02" Tc=6.0 min CN=70.30 Runoff=0.65 cfs 2,161 cf Pond CS: CS Peak EIev=79.30' Inflow=0.00 cfs 0 cf Primary=0.00 cfs 0 cf Secondary=0.00 cfs 0 cf Outflow=0.00 cfs 0 cf Pond DET: DETENTION BASIN Peak EIev=76.10' Storage=0 cf Inflow=0.00 cfs 0 cf Discarded=0.00 cfs 0 cf Primary=0.00 cfs 0 cf Outflow=0.00 cfs 0 cf Pond DW: DRYWELL Peak EIev=56.63' Storage=365 cf Inflow=0.65 cfs 2,161 cf Discarded=0.20 cfs 2,161 cf Primary=0.00 cfs 0 cf Outflow=0.20 cfs 2,161 cf Pond WQ: WQ BASIN Peak EIev=82.80' Storage=3,463 cf Inflow=1.97 cfs 6,090 cf Primary=0.00 cfs 0 cf Secondary=0.11 cfs 6,052 cf Outflow=0.11 cfs 6,052 cf Link 4: OFFSITE Inflow=1.20 cfs 8,339 cf Primary=1.20 cfs 8,339 cf Link FIN: PROP DP1 Inflow=1.29 cfs 14,391 cf Primary=1.29 cfs 14,391 cf Link JCT:JUNCTION Inflow=0.11 cfs 6,052 cf Primary=0.11 cfs 6,052 cf Total Runoff Area = 529,500 sf Runoff Volume = 26,738 cf Average Runoff Depth = 0.61" 100.00% Pervious = 529,500 sf 0.00% Impervious = 0 sf North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 111 24-hr F-2 Rainfall=3.50" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 83 Summary for Subcatchment 1: EXIST DP1 Runoff = 1.38 cfs @ 12.43 hrs, Volume= 10,148 cf, Depth= 0.46" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr F-2 Rainfall=3.50" Area (sf) CN Description 264,390 58.20 EXISTING 264,390 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 21.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 1: EXIST DP1 Hydrograph Runoff 5 Type III 24-hr F-2 Rainfall=3.50" 4 Runoff Area=264,390 sf w Runoff Volume=10,148 cf 3 3 Runoff Depth=0.46" 0 LL Tc=21.0 m i n 2 CN=58.20 1.38 cfs 1 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 111 24-hr F-2 Rainfall=3.50" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 84 Summary for Subcatchment 2: TOWNHOMES Runoff = 1.97 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 6,090 cf, Depth= 1.78" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr F-2 Rainfall=3.50" Area (sf) CN Description 40,997 82.00 TOWNHOMES 40,997 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 6.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 2: TOWNHOMES Hydrograph Runoff 5 Type III 24-hr F-2 Rainfall=3.50" 4 Runoff Area=40,997 sf Runoff Volume=6,090 cf 3 Runoff Depth=1 .78" LL 1.97 cfs Tc=6.0 m i n 2 CN=82.00 1 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 111 24-hr F-2 Rainfall=3.50" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 85 Summary for Subcatchment 3: REMAINING Runoff = 1.20 cfs @ 12.40 hrs, Volume= 8,339 cf, Depth= 0.50" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr F-2 Rainfall=3.50" Area (sf) CN Description 198,806 59.30 REMAINING AREA 198,806 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 21.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 3: REMAINING Hydrograph Runoff 5 Type III 24-hr F-2 Rainfall=3.50" 4 Runoff Area=198,806 sf Runoff Volume=8,339 cf 3 Runoff Depth=0.50" .2 Tc=21 .0 m i n 2 CN=59.30 1.20 cfs 1 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 111 24-hr F-2 Rainfall=3.50" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 86 Summary for Subcatchment 5: NEW HOUSE Runoff = 0.65 cfs @ 12.10 hrs, Volume= 2,161 cf, Depth= 1.02" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr F-2 Rainfall=3.50" Area (sf) CN Description 25,307 70.30 NEW HOUSE WS 25,307 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 6.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 5: NEW HOUSE Hydrograph Runoff 5 Type III 24-hr F-2 Rainfall=3.50" 4 Runoff Area=25,307 sf Runoff Volume=2,161 cf 3 Runoff Depth=1 .02" LL Tc=6.0 m i n 2 CN=70.30 1 0.65 cfs 01 1 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr F-2 Rainfall=3.50" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 87 Summary for Pond CS: CS Inflow Area = 40,997 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.00" for F-2 event Inflow = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0 cf Outflow = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0 cf Secondary= 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 79.30'@ 0.00 hrs Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 79.95' CS1_Primary_ratings Elev. (feet) 79.95 80.34 80.52 80.73 80.78 80.83 80.85 80.88 80.91 80.92 Disch. (cfs) 0.000 0.341 0.751 1.175 1.255 1.328 1.359 1.398 1.438 1.458 #2 Secondary 79.95' CS1_Secondary_ratings Elev. (feet) 79.95 80.34 80.52 80.73 80.78 80.83 80.85 80.88 80.91 80.92 Disch. (cfs) 0.000 0.140 0.210 0.268 0.668 1.510 1.946 2.848 3.754 4.207 #3 Primary 79.30' 7.0"Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Primary OutFlow Max=0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs HW=79.30' (Free Discharge) �--1=CS1_Primary_ratings( Controls 0.00 cfs) 3=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs) Secondary OutFlow Max=0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs HW=79.30' (Free Discharge) L2=CS1_Secondary_ratings( Controls 0.00 cfs) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr F-2 Rainfall=3.50" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 88 Pond CS: CS Hydrograph !Inflowutflowrimary5 Inflow Area=40,997 sf econdary Peak Elev=79.30' 4 a U 3 3 _o LL 2 1 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr F-2 Rainfall=3.50" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 89 Summary for Pond DET: DETENTION BASIN Inflow Area = 40,997 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.00" for F-2 event Inflow = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0 cf Outflow = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Discarded = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0 cf Primary = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs/2 Peak Elev= 76.10'@ 0.00 hrs Surf.Area= 1,656 sf Storage= 0 cf Plug-Flow detention time=(not calculated: initial storage exceeds outflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= (not calculated: no inflow) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1A 96.10' 2,172 cf 30.00'W x 80.761 x 3.50'H Field A 8,480 cf Overall - 3,049 cf Embedded = 5,431 cf x 40.0% Voids #2A 96.60' 3,049 cf ADS_StormTech SC-740 x 66 Inside#1 Effective Size= 44.6"W x 30.0"H => 6.45 sf x 7.121 = 45.9 cf Overall Size= 51.0"W x 30.0"H x 7.56'L with 0.44' Overlap Row Length Adjustment= +0.44' x 6.45 sf x 6 rows #3 116.10' 9,000 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic)Listed below(Recalc) #413 76.10' 1,505 cf 20.50'W x 80.761 x 3.50'H Field B 5,795 cf Overall - 2,033 cf Embedded = 3,762 cf x 40.0% Voids #513 76.60' 2,033 cf ADS_StormTech SC-740 x 44 Inside#4 Effective Size= 44.6"W x 30.0"H => 6.45 sf x 7.121 = 45.9 cf Overall Size= 51.0"W x 30.0"H x 7.56'L with 0.44' Overlap Row Length Adjustment= +0.44' x 6.45 sf x 4 rows 17,759 cf Total Available Storage Storage Group A created with Chamber Wizard Storage Group B created with Chamber Wizard Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 116.10 900 0 0 126.10 900 9,000 9,000 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 76.10' 3.0"Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 #2 Discarded 76.10' 0.01 cfs Exfiltration at all elevations #3 Primary 78.30' 0.50' long Sharp-Crested Rectangular Weir 2 End Contraction(s) Discarded OutFlow Max=0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs HW=76.10' (Free Discharge) L2=Exfiltration (Passes 0.00 cfs of 0.01 cfs potential flow) Primary OutFlow Max=0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs HW=76.10' (Free Discharge) �__1=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs) 3=Sharp-Crested Rectangular Weir( Controls 0.00 cfs) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr F-2 Rainfall=3.50" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 90 Pond DET: DETENTION BASIN Hydrograph Inflow Outflow =Discard 5 Inflow Area=40,997 Sf —Primary Peak Elev=76.10' 4 Storage=0 cf 3 3 _o LL 2 1 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type Ill 24-hr F-2 Rainfall=3.50" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 91 Summary for Pond DW: DRYWELL Inflow Area = 25,307 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 1.02" for F-2 event Inflow = 0.65 cfs @ 12.10 hrs, Volume= 2,161 cf Outflow = 0.20 cfs @ 11.97 hrs, Volume= 2,161 cf, Atten= 69%, Lag= 0.0 min Discarded = 0.20 cfs @ 11.97 hrs, Volume= 2,161 cf Primary = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 56.63'@ 12.49 hrs Surf.Area= 101 sf Storage= 365 cf Plug-Flow detention time=9.4 min calculated for 2,160 cf(100% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 9.4 min ( 877.7- 868.3 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 53.00' 1,005 cf 8.00'D x 10.00'H Vertical Cone/Cylinderx 2 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 62.00' 12.0" Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 #2 Discarded 53.00' 0.20 cfs Exfiltration at all elevations Discarded OutFlow Max=0.20 cfs @ 11.97 hrs HW=53.11' (Free Discharge) L2=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 0.20 cfs) Primary OutFlow Max=0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs HW=53.00' (Free Discharge) L1=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr F-2 Rainfall=3.50" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 92 Pond DW: DRYWELL Hydrograph Inflow Outflow =Discard 5 Inflow Area=25,307 sf —Primary Peak Elev=56.63' N 4 -- Storage=365 cf 3 3 _o LL 2 1 0.65 cfs 0.20 cfs 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr F-2 Rainfall=3.50" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 93 Summary for Pond WQ: WQ BASIN Inflow Area = 40,997 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 1.78" for F-2 event Inflow = 1.97 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 6,090 cf Outflow = 0.11 cfs @ 14.59 hrs, Volume= 6,052 cf, Atten= 94%, Lag= 149.8 min Primary = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0 cf Secondary= 0.11 cfs @ 14.59 hrs, Volume= 6,052 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs/2 Peak Elev= 82.80'@ 14.59 hrs Surf.Area= 1,859 sf Storage= 3,463 cf Plug-Flow detention time=483.2 min calculated for 6,052 cf(99% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time=479.4 min ( 1,311.3- 832.0 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1A 80.00' 1,679 cf 25.25'W x 73.641 x 3.50'H Field A 6,508 cf Overall - 2,311 cf Embedded = 4,197 cf x 40.0% Voids #2A 80.50' 2,311 cf ADS_StormTech SC-740 x 50 Inside#1 Effective Size= 44.6"W x 30.0"H => 6.45 sf x 7.121 = 45.9 cf Overall Size= 51.0"W x 30.0"H x 7.561 with 0.44' Overlap Row Length Adjustment= +0.44' x 6.45 sf x 5 rows 3,990 cf Total Available Storage Storage Group A created with Chamber Wizard Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 82.50' 18.0" Vert. Orifice/Grate X 0.00 C= 0.600 #2 Primary 83.00' 3.00' long Sharp-Crested Rectangular Weir 2 End Contraction(s) #3 Secondary 80.00' Special & User-Defined Head (feet) 0.00 10.00 Disch. (cfs) 0.000 0.400 Primary OutFlow Max=0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs HW=80.00' (Free Discharge) 11=Orifice/G rate ( Controls 0.00 cfs) 2=Sharp-Crested Rectangular Weir( Controls 0.00 cfs) Secondary OutFlow Max=0.11 cfs @ 14.59 hrs HW=82.80' (Free Discharge) L3=Special & User-Defined(Custom Controls 0.11 cfs) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr F-2 Rainfall=3.50" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 94 Pond WQ: WQ BASIN Hydrograph 1.97 cfs m Inflow 2 -- ---- Outflow =Primary Inflow Area=40,997 Sf Secondary Peak Elev=82.80' Storage=3,463 cf 3 0 1 LL 0.11 cfs 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr F-2 Rainfall=3.50" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 95 Summary for Link 4: OFFSITE Inflow Area = 224,113 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.45" for F-2 event Inflow = 1.20 cfs @ 12.40 hrs, Volume= 8,339 cf Primary = 1.20 cfs @ 12.40 hrs, Volume= 8,339 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Link 4: OFFSITE Hydrograph Inflow Primary 5 Inflow Area=224,113 sf 4 w v 3 3 0 LL 2 1.20 cfs 1 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 111 24-hr F-2 Rainfall=3.50" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 96 Summary for Link FIN: PROP DP1 Inflow Area = 265,110 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 0.65" for F-2 event Inflow = 1.29 cfs @ 12.41 hrs, Volume= 14,391 cf Primary = 1.29 cfs @ 12.41 hrs, Volume= 14,391 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Link FIN: PROP DP1 Hydrograph Inflow Primary 5 Inflow Area=265,110 sf 4 w v 3 3 0 LL 2 1.29 cfs 1 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr F-2 Rainfall=3.50" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 97 Summary for Link JCT: JUNCTION Inflow Area = 40,997 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 1.77" for F-2 event Inflow = 0.11 cfs @ 14.59 hrs, Volume= 6,052 cf Primary = 0.11 cfs @ 14.59 hrs, Volume= 6,052 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Link JCT: JUNCTION Hydrograph Inflow Primary 5 Inflow Area=40,997 sf 4 w v 3 3 0 LL 2 1 0.11 cfs 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr G-1 Rainfall=1.30" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 98 Time span=0.00-48.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs, 4801 points Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN Reach routing by Stor-Ind method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method Subcatchment1: EXIST DP1 Runoff Area=264,390 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=0.00" Tc=21.0 min CN=58.20 Runoff=0.00 cfs 0 cf Subcatchment2: TOWNHOMES Runoff Area=40,997 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=0.24" Tc=6.0 min CN=82.00 Runoff=0.21 cfs 829 cf Subcatchment3: REMAINING Runoff Area=198,806 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=0.00" Tc=21.0 min CN=59.30 Runoff=0.00 cfs 0 cf Subcatchment5: NEW HOUSE Runoff Area=25,307 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=0.04" Tc=6.0 min CN=70.30 Runoff=0.00 cfs 93 cf Pond CS: CS Peak EIev=79.30' Inflow=0.00 cfs 0 cf Primary=0.00 cfs 0 cf Secondary=0.00 cfs 0 cf Outflow=0.00 cfs 0 cf Pond DET: DETENTION BASIN Peak EIev=76.10' Storage=0 cf Inflow=0.00 cfs 0 cf Discarded=0.00 cfs 0 cf Primary=0.00 cfs 0 cf Outflow=0.00 cfs 0 cf Pond DW: DRYWELL Peak EIev=53.00' Storage=0 cf Inflow=0.00 cfs 93 cf Discarded=0.00 cfs 93 cf Primary=0.00 cfs 0 cf Outflow=0.00 cfs 93 cf Pond WQ: WQ BASIN Peak EIev=80.48' Storage=357 cf Inflow=0.21 cfs 829 cf Primary=0.00 cfs 0 cf Secondary=0.02 cfs 827 cf Outflow=0.02 cfs 827 cf Link 4: OFFSITE Inflow=0.00 cfs 0 cf Primary=0.00 cfs 0 cf Link FIN: PROP DP1 Inflow=0.02 cfs 827 cf Primary=0.02 cfs 827 cf Link JCT:JUNCTION Inflow=0.02 cfs 827 cf Primary=0.02 cfs 827 cf Total Runoff Area = 529,500 sf Runoff Volume = 922 cf Average Runoff Depth = 0.02" 100.00% Pervious = 529,500 sf 0.00% Impervious = 0 sf North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 111 24-hr G-1 Rainfall=1.30" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 99 Summary for Subcatchment 1: EXIST DP1 Runoff = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0 cf, Depth= 0.00" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr G-1 Rainfall=1.30" Area (sf) CN Description 264,390 58.20 EXISTING 264,390 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 21.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 1: EXIST DP1 Hydrograph Runoff 5 Type III 24-hr G-1 Rainfall=1 .30" 4 Runoff Area=264,390 sf w Runoff Volume=0 cf 3 Runoff Depth=0.00" LL Tc=21 .0 m i n 2 CN=58.20 1 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 111 24-hr G-1 Rainfall=1.30" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 100 Summary for Subcatchment 2: TOWNHOMES Runoff = 0.21 cfs @ 12.11 hrs, Volume= 829 cf, Depth= 0.24" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr G-1 Rainfall=1.30" Area (sf) CN Description 40,997 82.00 TOWNHOMES 40,997 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 6.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 2: TOWNHOMES Hydrograph Runoff 5 Type III 24-hr G-1 Rainfall=1 .30" 4 Runoff Area=40,997 sf Runoff Vol u me=829 cf 3 .2 Runoff Depth=0.24" 2 Tc=6.0 m i n CN=82.00 1 0.21 cfs 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 111 24-hr G-1 Rainfall=1.30" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 101 Summary for Subcatchment 3: REMAINING Runoff = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0 cf, Depth= 0.00" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr G-1 Rainfall=1.30" Area (sf) CN Description 198,806 59.30 REMAINING AREA 198,806 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 21.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 3: REMAINING Hydrograph Runoff 5 Type III 24-hr G-1 Rainfall=1 .30" 4 Runoff Area=198,806 sf w Runoff Volume=0 cf 3 Runoff Depth=0.00" LL Tc=21 .0 m i n 2 CN=59.30 1 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 111 24-hr G-1 Rainfall=1.30" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 102 Summary for Subcatchment 5: NEW HOUSE Runoff = 0.00 cfs @ 13.66 hrs, Volume= 93 cf, Depth= 0.04" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr G-1 Rainfall=1.30" Area (sf) CN Description 25,307 70.30 NEW HOUSE WS 25,307 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 6.0 Direct Entry, Subcatchment 5: NEW HOUSE Hydrograph Runoff 5 Type III 24-hr G-1 Rainfall=1 .30" 4 Runoff Area=25,307 sf Runoff Volume=93 cf 3 LL Runoff Depth=0.04" 2 Tc=6.0 m i n CN=70.30 1 0.00 cfs 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr G-1 Rainfall=1.30" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 103 Summary for Pond CS: CS Inflow Area = 40,997 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.00" for G-1 event Inflow = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0 cf Outflow = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0 cf Secondary= 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 79.30'@ 0.00 hrs Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 79.95' CS1_Primary_ratings Elev. (feet) 79.95 80.34 80.52 80.73 80.78 80.83 80.85 80.88 80.91 80.92 Disch. (cfs) 0.000 0.341 0.751 1.175 1.255 1.328 1.359 1.398 1.438 1.458 #2 Secondary 79.95' CS1_Secondary_ratings Elev. (feet) 79.95 80.34 80.52 80.73 80.78 80.83 80.85 80.88 80.91 80.92 Disch. (cfs) 0.000 0.140 0.210 0.268 0.668 1.510 1.946 2.848 3.754 4.207 #3 Primary 79.30' 7.0"Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Primary OutFlow Max=0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs HW=79.30' (Free Discharge) �--1=CS1_Primary_ratings( Controls 0.00 cfs) 3=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs) Secondary OutFlow Max=0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs HW=79.30' (Free Discharge) L2=CS1_Secondary_ratings( Controls 0.00 cfs) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr G-1 Rainfall=1.30" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 104 Pond CS: CS Hydrograph !Inflowutflowrimary5 Inflow Area=40,997 sf econdary Peak Elev=79.30' 4 a U 3 3 _o LL 2 1 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type Ill 24-hr G-1 Rainfall=1.30" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 105 Summary for Pond DET: DETENTION BASIN Inflow Area = 40,997 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.00" for G-1 event Inflow = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0 cf Outflow = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Discarded = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0 cf Primary = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs/2 Peak Elev= 76.10'@ 0.00 hrs Surf.Area= 1,656 sf Storage= 0 cf Plug-Flow detention time=(not calculated: initial storage exceeds outflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= (not calculated: no inflow) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1A 96.10' 2,172 cf 30.00'W x 80.761 x 3.50'H Field A 8,480 cf Overall - 3,049 cf Embedded = 5,431 cf x 40.0% Voids #2A 96.60' 3,049 cf ADS_StormTech SC-740 x 66 Inside#1 Effective Size= 44.6"W x 30.0"H => 6.45 sf x 7.121 = 45.9 cf Overall Size= 51.0"W x 30.0"H x 7.56'L with 0.44' Overlap Row Length Adjustment= +0.44' x 6.45 sf x 6 rows #3 116.10' 9,000 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic)Listed below(Recalc) #413 76.10' 1,505 cf 20.50'W x 80.761 x 3.50'H Field B 5,795 cf Overall - 2,033 cf Embedded = 3,762 cf x 40.0% Voids #513 76.60' 2,033 cf ADS_StormTech SC-740 x 44 Inside#4 Effective Size= 44.6"W x 30.0"H => 6.45 sf x 7.121 = 45.9 cf Overall Size= 51.0"W x 30.0"H x 7.56'L with 0.44' Overlap Row Length Adjustment= +0.44' x 6.45 sf x 4 rows 17,759 cf Total Available Storage Storage Group A created with Chamber Wizard Storage Group B created with Chamber Wizard Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) 116.10 900 0 0 126.10 900 9,000 9,000 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 76.10' 3.0"Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 #2 Discarded 76.10' 0.01 cfs Exfiltration at all elevations #3 Primary 78.30' 0.50' long Sharp-Crested Rectangular Weir 2 End Contraction(s) Discarded OutFlow Max=0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs HW=76.10' (Free Discharge) L2=Exfiltration (Passes 0.00 cfs of 0.01 cfs potential flow) Primary OutFlow Max=0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs HW=76.10' (Free Discharge) �__1=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs) 3=Sharp-Crested Rectangular Weir( Controls 0.00 cfs) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr G-1 Rainfall=1.30" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 106 Pond DET: DETENTION BASIN Hydrograph Inflow Outflow =Discard 5 Inflow Area=40,997 Sf —Primary Peak Elev=76.10' 4 Storage=0 cf 3 3 _o LL 2 1 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 111 24-hr G-1 Rainfall=1.30" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 107 Summary for Pond DW: DRYWELL Inflow Area = 25,307 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.04" for G-1 event Inflow = 0.00 cfs @ 13.66 hrs, Volume= 93 cf Outflow = 0.00 cfs @ 13.67 hrs, Volume= 93 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.6 min Discarded = 0.00 cfs @ 13.67 hrs, Volume= 93 cf Primary = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 53.00'@ 13.67 hrs Surf.Area= 101 sf Storage= 0 cf Plug-Flow detention time=0.8 min calculated for 93 cf(100% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 0.8 min ( 1,025.3 - 1,024.5 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 53.00' 1,005 cf 8.00'D x 10.00'H Vertical Cone/Cylinderx 2 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 62.00' 12.0" Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 #2 Discarded 53.00' 0.20 cfs Exfiltration at all elevations Discarded OutFlow Max=0.20 cfs @ 13.67 hrs HW=53.00' (Free Discharge) L2=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 0.20 cfs) Primary OutFlow Max=0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs HW=53.00' (Free Discharge) L1=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr G-1 Rainfall=1.30" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 108 Pond DW: DRYWELL Hydrograph m Inflow �Outflow �Discarded 5 Inflow Ar"=25;307 sf Primary Peak Elev�=53.60' I I14I-Stor-lage--O cf---------- ------- 3 3- .2 LL 2 1 0.00 cfs 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr G-1 Rainfall=1.30" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 109 Summary for Pond WQ: WQ BASIN Inflow Area = 40,997 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.24" for G-1 event Inflow = 0.21 cfs @ 12.11 hrs, Volume= 829 cf Outflow = 0.02 cfs @ 15.08 hrs, Volume= 827 cf, Atten= 91%, Lag= 178.4 min Primary = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0 cf Secondary= 0.02 cfs @ 15.08 hrs, Volume= 827 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs/2 Peak Elev= 80.48'@ 15.08 hrs Surf.Area= 1,859 sf Storage= 357 cf Plug-Flow detention time=306.9 min calculated for 827 cf(100% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 305.7 min ( 1,201.4- 895.7 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1A 80.00' 1,679 cf 25.25'W x 73.641 x 3.50'H Field A 6,508 cf Overall - 2,311 cf Embedded = 4,197 cf x 40.0% Voids #2A 80.50' 2,311 cf ADS_StormTech SC-740 x 50 Inside#1 Effective Size= 44.6"W x 30.0"H => 6.45 sf x 7.121 = 45.9 cf Overall Size= 51.0"W x 30.0"H x 7.561 with 0.44' Overlap Row Length Adjustment= +0.44' x 6.45 sf x 5 rows 3,990 cf Total Available Storage Storage Group A created with Chamber Wizard Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 82.50' 18.0" Vert. Orifice/Grate X 0.00 C= 0.600 #2 Primary 83.00' 3.00' long Sharp-Crested Rectangular Weir 2 End Contraction(s) #3 Secondary 80.00' Special & User-Defined Head (feet) 0.00 10.00 Disch. (cfs) 0.000 0.400 Primary OutFlow Max=0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs HW=80.00' (Free Discharge) 11=Orifice/G rate ( Controls 0.00 cfs) 2=Sharp-Crested Rectangular Weir( Controls 0.00 cfs) Secondary OutFlow Max=0.02 cfs @ 15.08 hrs HW=80.48' (Free Discharge) L3=Special & User-Defined(Custom Controls 0.02 cfs) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr G-1 Rainfall=1.30" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 110 Pond WQ: WQ BASIN Hydrograph 0.23 --------------------- ----------- 0.22 ------ ------------ ------- m nflow 0.21 cfs 0.21 ---------------------- ---------- Outflow 0'2 ------ ------- ------ ------ �Primary --- ec Inflow Area=40,997 sf Sondary 0.19 ------ -------------- ------'---- 0.18 ------y-------------- ---------- 0.17 ------ ------ ---- Peak Elev=80.48' 0.16 --------------------- -----'---- 0.15 ------ ---- Storage=357 cf 0.14 ------y-------------- --------- 0.13 0.12 _0 0.11 LL 0.1 0.09 0.08 0.07 0.06 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.02 cfs 0.02 0.01 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr G-1 Rainfall=1.30" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 111 Summary for Link 4: OFFSITE Inflow Area = 224,113 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.00" for G-1 event Inflow = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0 Cf Primary = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Link 4: OFFSITE Hydrograph Inflow Primary 5 Inflow Area=224,113 sf 4 w v 3 3 0 LL 2 1 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr G-1 Rainfall=1.30" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 112 Summary for Link FIN: PROP DP1 Inflow Area = 265,110 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 0.04" for G-1 event Inflow = 0.02 cfs @ 15.08 hrs, Volume= 827 cf Primary = 0.02 cfs @ 15.08 hrs, Volume= 827 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Link FIN: PROP DP1 Hydrograph Inflow Primary 5 Inflow Area=265,110 sf 4 w v 3 3 0 LL 2 1 0.02 cfs 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) North Ridge Street laz_greto_model_MIN_full Type 11124-hr G-1 Rainfall=1.30" Prepared by Microsoft Printed 10/18/2015 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n M16359 @2013 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 113 Summary for Link JCT: JUNCTION Inflow Area = 40,997 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 0.24" for G-1 event Inflow = 0.02 cfs @ 15.08 hrs, Volume= 827 cf Primary = 0.02 cfs @ 15.08 hrs, Volume= 827 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Link JCT: JUNCTION Hydrograph Inflow Primary 5 Inflow Area=40,997 sf 4 w v 3 3 0 LL 2 1 0.02 cfs 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time (hours) WETLAND DELINEATION AND FUNCTIONAL ASSESSMENT Proposed Residential Development North Ridge Street Village of Rye Brook Westchester County New York Prepared for: Lou Larizza Prepared By: Steve Marino, PWS Tim Miller Associates, Inc. 10 North Street Cold Spring, New York 10516 (845) 265-4400 October 26, 2015 Introduction The contract vendee of the property at North Ridge Street in the Village of Rye Brook is proposing a residential subdivision with an affordable housing component. Town-regulated wetlands have been identified on the site; none of the wetlands are within the proposed construction envelope. Size of the overall parcel is 3.96 acres. Steve Marino, PWS of Tim Miller Associates delineated the wetland in April of 2015. This report will also address the functions of the wetland as it currently exists, potential impacts of the proposal and consider some potential mitigation measures. Existing Conditions The site is the location of a single family residence in a suburban area (See Figure 1). The undeveloped portion of the site is downslope of the residence and is currently vegetated (see attached photos 1 through 6). The vegetation in the upland areas and within the delineated wetlands is second growth forest. This is the only remaining large parcel in the neighborhood. The site drains from west to east, within the Blind Brook watershed. There is no direct surface connection to the Blind Brook or its tributaries. Wetlands on site were delineated on April 16, 2015, in conformance with the Village of Rye Brook Code. A total of 56 flags were set on the site. The wetland includes the lower portions of the site, east of the existing dwelling and North Ridge Street. Total area of the wetland is 50,965 square feet (1.17 acres). The subject wetland is predominantly a forested wetland, with open areas where fallen trees have opened the canopy and allowed for denser herbaceous and shrub layers. This wetland does not appear on either the DEC or Federal NWI mapping (Figures 2 and 3). Vegetation in the wetland as delineated is dominated by a number of locally common species. Trees are predominantly red maple (Acer rubrum) green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica), and cottonwood (Populus deltoides). Spicebush (Lindera benzoin) is the dominant shrub, and skunk cabbage (Symplocarpus foetidus) is the dominant herbaceous plant, with soft rush (Juncus effusus), purple-leafed willow herb (Epilobium coloratum), tussock sedge (Carex stricta), fringed sedge (Carex crinita), cinnamon fern (Osmunda cinnamomea) and common reed (Phragmites australis) as lesser herbaceous plants. Upland vegetation is dominated by sugar maple (Acer saccharum), with occasional white oak (Quercus alba) and black cherry (Prunus serotina). The shrub layer is almost entirely the invasive and non-native morrow honeysuckle (Lonicera morrowii), multifloral rose (Rosa multiflora), winged euonymus (Euonymus alatus) and barberry (Berberis thunbergii). There is a substantial patch of Japanese holly (Ilex crenata) along the transition between the wetland and upland in the southern part of the site, near flags 8 through 12. These appear to have been planted at some time in the past and are thriving as a dense buffer between the property to the south and the wetland. The NRCS Westchester County Soil Survey shows the site as having Urban Chatfield-Charlton and Charlton soil complexes, which typically are upland soils with a stony substrate (Figure 4). No hydric soils are indicated on the available mapping. A copy of the detailed NRCS soils report is attached. A closer examination of the site revealed hydric soils within the central part Larizza Rye Brook Wetland Assessment Page 2 of the site, with Munsell 2.5Y3/1 soils within the central part of the flagged wetland area, and 10YR4/2 soils with 10YR4/6 mottling along the upper edges of the wetland. These are both hydric soils. The upland soils on the site are 10YR4/4. Hydrology to the site is provided by overland runoff from the surrounding residential neighborhood. A pipe network captures runoff and discharges it to the western end of the site through a 12" diameter pipe. At this topogpraphic low spot the runoff from the adjacent residences to the north and south, including the existing dwelling on the property, drain to this wetland as shallow lateral flow. Overflow leaves the site via an existing headwall structure through a 36" pipe. Wetland Functional Evaluation As seen on the attached aerial photo, the subject wetland is an island of undeveloped land in a suburban setting. As such it represents important open space and aesthetic value for the immediate neighbors. However, from a functional standpoint its relative small size and location in such a developed area limits some of the functions associated with wetlands. The wetland does provide important stormwater benefits, including water quality and quantity control. The depressional area allows for the slowing and filtering of stormwater runoff, and the dense vegetation provides uptake of nutrients from the urban runoff. The input from roads does carry a significant amount of sand with it, and the initial flow into the site has high velocity and is entering off a slope so that erosion is an issue at the western end. In terms of wetlands serving to protect downstream waters from siltation and sedimentation, this wetland functions at a high level Regarding vegetation and wildlife, the wetland is limited by its size and location in a suburban setting. At 1.17 acres, the wetland is too small to provide adequate cover or unique habitat for most wetland dependent species, and doe snot provide habitat for any known threatened or endangered species. Common suburban species were observed, including mourning dove, American robin, downy woodpecker and eastern gray squirrel. It is likely that green frogs and American toads live in and adjacent to the wetland in this landscape context. The observed vegetation in the wetland is a mix of native and non-native species. The wetland hydrology is on the dry side of the wetland scale, and does not provide the annual hydroperiod for the development of unique or unusual wetland plant species. A small number of species (less than 10) dominate the wetland vegetation and adjacent areas. As noted above, however, the density of vegetation is such that the wetland does provide significant filtering of stormwater runoff. Current Proposal as Reviewed The owner of the property proposes to construct eight units of fair affordable housing, one new residential dwelling and renovate the existing single family dwelling. All of the new units will front on North Ridge Street. A driveway access to rear parking for the affordable units will be constructed off of North Ridge Street at the north end of the site. There will be no direct impact to the site wetlands. Activities are proposed within the 100 foot buffer, but these will be minimized with the use of retaining walls. None of the affordable units Larizza Rye Brook Wetland Assessment Page 3 are in the wetland buffer; on the north part of the site only the parking will be in the regulated area. The single family residence will be within the buffer, which extends up to the adjacent property line. This encroachment is necessary to allow for the construction of the market rate dwelling and a small but reasonable rear yard area. Impacts to Site Wetlands From a functional standpoint, this proposal will not affect the most important functions of the wetland system, i.e., the treatment and control of stormwater runoff. The wetland itself will not be touched, and runoff from those areas of the buffer that are disturbed by development will be captured and treated prior to discharge back into the wetland system. The stormwater management plan for the project controls post-development runoff and provides for treatment of new impervious surfaces after construction. Flow patterns and drainage channels will remain undisturbed. A buffer planting plan will be prepared to enhance those areas of the buffer between the new retaining walls and the wetland to ensure a buffer to that wildlife that does use the wetland and a visual barrier between the developed areas and the wetlands. Since the wetland will remain in its entirety, it will continue to be a valuable open space to the neighborhood, and those remaining areas of buffer will provide green space and visual relief from the new development. The new plantings will be installed from the list below, which are all native species adapted to wetland and adjacent areas and common in these locations in southern Westchester. Shrubs Mountain laurel Kalmia latifolia Winterberry flex verticillata Witch hazel Hamamelis virgfnfana Spicebush Lindera benzoin Arrowwood Viburnum dentatum Trees Red maple Acer rubrum Sugar maple Acer saccharum Red oak Quercus rubra White oak Quercus alba Sycamore Platanus occidentalis Black gum N ssa s Ivatica Hickory Carya spp Mitigation Measures It is proposed to implement the following mitigation and enhancement plan for the remaining wetland and adjacent areas. 1. Nuisance and nonnative vegetation will be removed from within the wetland area, including phragmites, multifloral rose, climbing bittersweet, Japanese barberry and Morrow honeysuckle. No native species will be removed. The use of retaining walls rather than graded slopes will allow for the preservation of more than 24 trees that would have otherwise been removed. Larizza Rye Brook Wetland Assessment Page 4 I A minimum of seven large trees and 40 shrubs will be planted to enhance the buffer plant community on site as per the plant list above. These trees and shrubs will be in addition to those planted as part of the Landscape Plan for the affordable housing component. Larizza Rye Brook Wetland Assessment Page 5 IUL Map Aerial Photos Street Label UEADDWkgRK , LL__ • —JI �4:3 15 .,C is II O LCM PF 0' Pi x W I JI I ROSS ft* Fcf- Site w . i J v a gtiRISLEY 6R r WL Ilk" t - �- WINTHROP,dR 1r � •� �- a _ a 7 d , 1 OEVONSHIRECTr Larizza Rye Brook DEC �1 Classified Streams Classified Ponds State-Regulated Freshwater Wetlands D1Vot Und ChoCkzona State-RoguUtod Frashwater %Vol Unds Rare Plants and Rare Animals Interstate Highways Site R OOK n _ ` f K _ �. s. j --- A Disclaimer: This map does not show all natural resources regulated by NYS DEC,or for which permits from NYS DEC maybe required. Please contact your DEC Regional office for more information. Disclaimer:This map was prepared by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation using the most current data available. It is deemed accurate but is not guaranteed. NYS DEC is not responsible for any inaccuracies in the data and does not necessarily endorse any interpretations or products derived from the data. Figure 2: DEC Mapping Larizza Rye Brook Larizza Rye Brook OINII awlli IJFY. 7�J•aL4'1['6 Fish * Wildlife NWI National Wetlands Inventory "{- Oct 21,2015 Wetlands Freshwater Emergent .-ti. Freshwater ForesledlShrub Estuarine and Marine Deepwater Sit ` 1r} Esluarine and Marine - Freshwater Pond - Lake Riverine - Other Riparian Herbaceous ForestedlShrub Riparian Status Digital Data f -b 00 esn �yv !. This map is for general reference only.The US Fish and Wildlife Service is not responsible for the accuracy or currentness of the base data shown on this map.All wetlands related data should be used in accordance with the layer metadata found on the Wetlands Mapper web site. User Remarks: Figure 3: NWI Mapping Larizza Rye Brook Custom Soil Resource Report Soil Map 610620 610650 610680 610710 610740 610770 41°1'29"N � 41°1'29"N 4 M O V M !T N O V N O 4v O N O V N O N O V N O O N O V O n O V O 410 1'22"N 410 1'22"N 610620 610650 610680 610710 610740 610770 En Map Scale:1:1,170 i printed on A portrait(8.5"x 11")sheet. Meters N n 0 15 30 60 90 /V 0 50 100 200 300 Map projection:Web Mercator Corner coordinates:WGS84 Edge tics:UTM Zone 18N WGS84 8 • 11 � k a tty d pat �':���..�•. '�.FJ�! yGvYF�e. .5r4�i'� -S .. Ix 3 ��.t�►a r+l! -- ..� :�4• _� ,. Photo 1: Wetland view looking west S - y Em1 J fie^ rl Ma t.... f�. N� ' ..•k ���1 � �1r Jit i�.i 4�g a I�t,. `s�°^LYY ` R;� `•� .13�d[a+r � ..a�r+.�.�T,.w�:P Ry� i y Photo 2: Wetland view looking east *r ' r � � y, Y L •} y�i tom' - ar r Gk� • -�tik-, 3L /1 WE t IPA i �� fes" '` '�„} • �� �' 01 Ft mill „a' f • • • •• • • � J - Mt- N l ' I Ar k ' Al. * 1 -£ 1 ��A-^ � r IF'�-x��Fv _ �� �,��h�Vty,�•t1 �'\�! F���rt�'�� �.'i S __ Mme`` N IT01• • • �••- •� • USDA United States A product of the National Custom Soil Resource Department of Cooperative Soil Survey, Agriculture a joint effort of the United Report for n RCS States Department of Agriculture and other Westchester Federal agencies, State Natural agencies including the Resources Agricultural Experiment County, I Conservation Stations, and local Service participants York Larizza Rye Brook NRCS P dOt fS �4 k r s" 11111111111,111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111�.��� �+ .�� October 21, 2015 Preface Soil surveys contain information that affects land use planning in survey areas. They highlight soil limitations that affect various land uses and provide information about the properties of the soils in the survey areas. Soil surveys are designed for many different users, including farmers, ranchers, foresters, agronomists, urban planners, community officials, engineers, developers, builders, and home buyers. Also, conservationists, teachers, students, and specialists in recreation, waste disposal, and pollution control can use the surveys to help them understand,protect,or enhance the environment. Various land use regulations of Federal, State, and local governments may impose special restrictions on land use or land treatment. Soil surveys identify soil properties that are used in making various land use or land treatment decisions.The information is intended to help the land users identify and reduce the effects of soil limitations on various land uses.The landowner or user is responsible for identifying and complying with existing laws and regulations. Although soil survey information can be used for general farm, local, and wider area planning,onsite investigation is needed to supplement this information in some cases. Examples include soil quality assessments (http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/ nres/main/soils/health/)and certain conservation and engineering applications. For more detailed information, contact your local USDA Service Center(http:// offices.sc.egov.usda.gov/locator/app?agency=nres) or your NRCS State Soil Scientist (http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/soils/contactus/? cid=nres142p2_053951). Great differences in soil properties can occur within short distances. Some soils are seasonally wet or subject to flooding. Some are too unstable to be used as a foundation for buildings or roads. Clayey or wet soils are poorly suited to use as septic tank absorption fields. A high water table makes a soil poorly suited to basements or underground installations. The National Cooperative Soil Survey is a joint effort of the United States Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local agencies. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) has leadership for the Federal part of the National Cooperative Soil Survey. Information about soils is updated periodically. Updated information is available through the NRCS Web Soil Survey, the site for official soil survey information. The U.S. Department of Agriculture(USDA)prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means 2 for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.)should contact USDA's TARGET Center at(202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or(202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. 3 Contents Preface....................................................................................................................2 How Soil Surveys Are Made..................................................................................5 SoilMap..................................................................................................................7 SoilMap................................................................................................................8 Legend..................................................................................................................9 MapUnit Legend................................................................................................10 MapUnit Descriptions........................................................................................10 Westchester County, New York......................................................................12 UhC—Urban land-Charlton complex, 8 to 15 percent slopes.....................12 UIC—Urban land-Charlton-Chatfield complex, rolling, very rocky...............13 References............................................................................................................15 4 How Soil Surveys Are Made Soil surveys are made to provide information about the soils and miscellaneous areas in a specific area.They include a description of the soils and miscellaneous areas and their location on the landscape and tables that show soil properties and limitations affecting various uses. Soil scientists observed the steepness, length, and shape of the slopes; the general pattern of drainage; the kinds of crops and native plants; and the kinds of bedrock.They observed and described many soil profiles.A soil profile is the sequence of natural layers, or horizons, in a soil. The profile extends from the surface down into the unconsolidated material in which the soil formed or from the surface down to bedrock. The unconsolidated material is devoid of roots and other living organisms and has not been changed by other biological activity. Currently,soils are mapped according to the boundaries of major land resource areas (MLRAs). MLRAs are geographically associated land resource units that share common characteristics related to physiography, geology, climate, water resources, soils, biological resources, and land uses (USDA, 2006). Soil survey areas typically consist of parts of one or more MLRA. The soils and miscellaneous areas in a survey area occur in an orderly pattern that is related to the geology, landforms, relief, climate, and natural vegetation of the area. Each kind of soil and miscellaneous area is associated with a particular kind of landform or with a segment of the landform. By observing the soils and miscellaneous areas in the survey area and relating their position to specific segments of the landform,a soil scientist develops a concept,or model,of how they were formed.Thus, during mapping, this model enables the soil scientist to predict with a considerable degree of accuracy the kind of soil or miscellaneous area at a specific location on the landscape. Commonly, individual soils on the landscape merge into one another as their characteristics gradually change. To construct an accurate soil map, however, soil scientists must determine the boundaries between the soils. They can observe only a limited number of soil profiles. Nevertheless, these observations, supplemented by an understanding of the soil-vegetation-landscape relationship, are sufficient to verify predictions of the kinds of soil in an area and to determine the boundaries. Soil scientists recorded the characteristics of the soil profiles that they studied. They noted soil color, texture, size and shape of soil aggregates, kind and amount of rock fragments, distribution of plant roots, reaction, and other features that enable them to identify soils. After describing the soils in the survey area and determining their properties, the soil scientists assigned the soils to taxonomic classes (units). Taxonomic classes are concepts. Each taxonomic class has a set of soil characteristics with precisely defined limits. The classes are used as a basis for comparison to classify soils systematically. Soil taxonomy, the system of taxonomic classification used in the United States, is based mainly on the kind and character of soil properties and the arrangement of horizons within the profile. After the soil scientists classified and named the soils in the survey area, they compared the 5 Custom Soil Resource Report individual soils with similar soils in the same taxonomic class in other areas so that they could confirm data and assemble additional data based on experience and research. The objective of soil mapping is not to delineate pure map unit components; the objective is to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. Each map unit is defined by a unique combination of soil components and/or miscellaneous areas in predictable proportions. Some components may be highly contrasting to the other components of the map unit. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The delineation of such landforms and landform segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas. Soil scientists make many field observations in the process of producing a soil map. The frequency of observation is dependent upon several factors, including scale of mapping, intensity of mapping, design of map units, complexity of the landscape, and experience of the soil scientist. Observations are made to test and refine the soil- landscape model and predictions and to verify the classification of the soils at specific locations. Once the soil-landscape model is refined, a significantly smaller number of measurements of individual soil properties are made and recorded. These measurements may include field measurements, such as those for color, depth to bedrock, and texture, and laboratory measurements, such as those for content of sand, silt, clay, salt, and other components. Properties of each soil typically vary from one point to another across the landscape. Observations for map unit components are aggregated to develop ranges of characteristics for the components. The aggregated values are presented. Direct measurements do not exist for every property presented for every map unit component. Values for some properties are estimated from combinations of other properties. While a soil survey is in progress, samples of some of the soils in the area generally are collected for laboratory analyses and for engineering tests. Soil scientists interpret the data from these analyses and tests as well as the field-observed characteristics and the soil properties to determine the expected behavior of the soils under different uses. Interpretations for all of the soils are field tested through observation of the soils in different uses and under different levels of management. Some interpretations are modified to fit local conditions, and some new interpretations are developed to meet local needs. Data are assembled from other sources, such as research information, production records, and field experience of specialists. For example, data on crop yields under defined levels of management are assembled from farm records and from field or plot experiments on the same kinds of soil. Predictions about soil behavior are based not only on soil properties but also on such variables as climate and biological activity. Soil conditions are predictable over long periods of time, but they are not predictable from year to year. For example, soil scientists can predict with a fairly high degree of accuracy that a given soil will have a high water table within certain depths in most years, but they cannot predict that a high water table will always be at a specific level in the soil on a specific date. After soil scientists located and identified the significant natural bodies of soil in the survey area, they drew the boundaries of these bodies on aerial photographs and identified each as a specific map unit.Aerial photographs show trees, buildings,fields, roads, and rivers, all of which help in locating boundaries accurately. 6 Soil Map The soil map section includes the soil map for the defined area of interest, a list of soil map units on the map and extent of each map unit, and cartographic symbols displayed on the map. Also presented are various metadata about data used to produce the map, and a description of each soil map unit. 7 Custom Soil Resource Report M Soil Map N 610620 610650 610680 610710 610740 610770 41°1'29"N - I I _ 41°V29"N 0ZL 10 UIC N � o 1 N O � N � ifr N— O � N 7 7 N V 7 O N M a � v 8 N � p N O n ! O 7 O 7 � N 7 41°1'22"N 41°V22"N 610620 610650 610680 610710 610740 610770 Map Scale:1:1,170 f punted on A portrait(8.5"x 11")sheet Meters N 0 15 30 60 90 AFeet 0 50 100 200 300 Map projection:Web Mercator Corner coordinates:WGS84 Edge tics:UTM Zone 18N WGS84 8 Custom Soil Resource Report MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION Area of Interest(AOI) Spoil Area The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 1:12,000. 0 Area of Interest(AOI) Stony Spot Soils Very Stony Spot Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. 0 Soil Map Unit Polygons Wet Spot Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause r Soil Map Unit Lines Other misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil line � Soil Map Unit Points placement.The maps do not show the small areas of contrasting w- Special Line Features soils that could have been shown at a more detailed scale. Special Point Features Vo Blowout Water Features ,— Streams and Canals Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map Borrow Pit measurements. Transportation Clay Spot �--I--F Rails Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Closed Depression Interstate Highways Web Soil Survey URL: http://websoilsurvey.nres.usda.gov Gravel Pit US Routes Coordinate System: Web Mercator(EPSG:3857) Gravelly Spot r Major Roads Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator Landfill r Local Roads projection,which preserves direction and shape but distorts distance and area.A projection that preserves area,such as the Lava Flow Background Albers equal-area conic projection,should be used if more accurate Marsh or swamp . Aerial Photography calculations of distance or area are required. Mine or Quarry This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of Miscellaneous Water the version date(s)listed below. Perennial Water Soil Survey Area: Westchester County, New York Rock Outcrop Survey Area Data: Version 11,Sep 25,2015 Saline Spot Soil map units are labeled(as space allows)for map scales 1:50,000 tr Sandy Spot or larger. 4g� Severely Eroded Spot Date(s)aerial images were photographed: Ju121,2014—Aug 27, Sinkhole 2014 Slide or Slip The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were a Sodic Spot compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps.As a result,some minor shifting of 1948P umit boundaries mlay be evidemt. 9 Custom Soil Resource Report Map Unit Legend Westchester County,New York(NY119) Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI UhC Urban land-Charlton complex,8 0.0 0.1% to 15 percent slopes UIC Urban land-Charlton-Chatfield 4.2 99.9% complex, rolling,very rocky Totals for Area of Interest 4.2 100.0% Map Unit Descriptions The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent the soils or miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions, along with the maps, can be used to determine the composition and properties of a unit. A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one or more major kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas.A map unit is identified and named according to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within a taxonomic class there are precisely defined limits for the properties of the soils.On the landscape, however,the soils are natural phenomena, and they have the characteristic variability of all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of some observed properties may extend beyond the limits defined for a taxonomic class. Areas of soils of a single taxonomic class rarely, if ever, can be mapped without including areas of other taxonomic classes. Consequently, every map unit is made up of the soils or miscellaneous areas for which it is named and some minor components that belong to taxonomic classes other than those of the major soils. Most minor soils have properties similar to those of the dominant soil or soils in the map unit, and thus they do not affect use and management. These are called noncontrasting, or similar, components. They may or may not be mentioned in a particular map unit description. Other minor components, however, have properties and behavioral characteristics divergent enough to affect use or to require different management.These are called contrasting,or dissimilar,components.They generally are in small areas and could not be mapped separately because of the scale used. Some small areas of strongly contrasting soils or miscellaneous areas are identified by a special symbol on the maps. If included in the database for a given area, the contrasting minor components are identified in the map unit descriptions along with some characteristics of each. A few areas of minor components may not have been observed, and consequently they are not mentioned in the descriptions, especially where the pattern was so complex that it was impractical to make enough observations to identify all the soils and miscellaneous areas on the landscape. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The objective of mapping is not to delineate pure taxonomic classes but rather to separate the landscape into Iandforms or landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. The delineation of such segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If 10 Custom Soil Resource Report intensive use of small areas is planned, however, onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas. An identifying symbol precedes the map unit name in the map unit descriptions. Each description includes general facts about the unit and gives important soil properties and qualities. Soils that have profiles that are almost alike make up a soil series. Except for differences in texture of the surface layer, all the soils of a series have major horizons that are similar in composition, thickness, and arrangement. Soils of one series can differ in texture of the surface layer, slope, stoniness, salinity, degree of erosion, and other characteristics that affect their use. On the basis of such differences, a soil series is divided into soil phases. Most of the areas shown on the detailed soil maps are phases of soil series. The name of a soil phase commonly indicates a feature that affects use or management. For example, Alpha silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is a phase of the Alpha series. Some map units are made up of two or more major soils or miscellaneous areas. These map units are complexes, associations, or undifferentiated groups. A complex consists of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas in such an intricate pattern or in such small areas that they cannot be shown separately on the maps. The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar in all areas. Alpha-Beta complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes, is an example. An association is made up of two or more geographically associated soils or miscellaneous areas that are shown as one unit on the maps. Because of present or anticipated uses of the map units in the survey area, it was not considered practical or necessary to map the soils or miscellaneous areas separately. The pattern and relative proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar. Alpha- Beta association, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example. An undifferentiated group is made up of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas that could be mapped individually but are mapped as one unit because similar interpretations can be made for use and management. The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas in a mapped area are not uniform. An area can be made up of only one of the major soils or miscellaneous areas, or it can be made up of all of them. Alpha and Beta soils, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example. Some surveys include miscellaneous areas. Such areas have little or no soil material and support little or no vegetation. Rock outcrop is an example. 11 Custom Soil Resource Report Westchester County, New York UhC—Urban land-Charlton complex, 8 to 15 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: bd7l Mean annual precipitation: 46 to 50 inches Mean annual air temperature: 46 to 52 degrees F Frost-free period: 115 to 215 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Urban land: 40 percent Charlton and similar soils: 35 percent Minor components: 25 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Charlton Setting Landform: Ridges, hills, till plains Landform position (two-dimensional): Shoulder Landform position (three-dimensional): Crest Down-slope shape: Convex Across-slope shape: Convex Parent material: Acid loamy till derived mainly from schist, gneiss, or granite Typical profile H1 -0 to 8 inches: loam H2-8 to 24 inches: sandy loam H3 - 24 to 60 inches: sandy loam Properties and qualities Slope: 8 to 15 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water(Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 5.95 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 7.5 inches) Minor Components Chatfield Percent of map unit: 5 percent Leicester Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Depressions Sutton Percent of map unit: 5 percent Udorthents Percent of map unit: 5 percent 12 Custom Soil Resource Report Sun Percent of map unit: 3 percent Landform: Depressions Hollis Percent of map unit: 2 percent UIC—Urban land-Charlton-Chatfield complex, rolling, very rocky Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: bd7n Elevation: 100 to 1,000 feet Mean annual precipitation: 46 to 50 inches Mean annual air temperature: 46 to 52 degrees F Frost-free period: 115 to 215 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Urban land: 40 percent Charlton and similar soils: 20 percent Chatfield and similar soils: 15 percent Minor components: 25 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Charlton Setting Landform: Ridges, hills, till plains Landform position (two-dimensional): Shoulder Landform position (three-dimensional): Crest Down-slope shape: Convex Across-slope shape: Convex Parent material: Acid loamy till derived mainly from schist, gneiss, or granite Typical profile H1 -0 to 8 inches: loam H2-8 to 24 inches: sandy loam H3-24 to 60 inches: sandy loam Properties and qualities Slope: 2 to 15 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water(Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 5.95 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 7.5 inches) 13 Custom Soil Resource Report Description of Chatfield Setting Landform: Ridges, hills Landform position (two-dimensional): Shoulder Landform position (three-dimensional): Crest Down-slope shape: Convex Across-slope shape: Convex Parent material: Loamy till derived mainly from granite, gneiss, or schist Typical profile H1 -0 to 7 inches: loam H2- 7 to 24 inches: flaggy silt loam H3-24 to 28 inches: unweathered bedrock Properties and qualities Slope: 2 to 15 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 20 to 40 inches to lithic bedrock Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water(Ksat): Low to high(0.01 to 5.95 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 1 percent Available water storage in profile: Low(about 3.2 inches) Minor Components Leicester Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Depressions Sutton Percent of map unit: 5 percent Udorthents Percent of map unit: 5 percent Rock outcrop Percent of map unit: 5 percent Hollis Percent of map unit: 2 percent Sun Percent of map unit: 2 percent Landform: Depressions Palms Percent of map unit: 1 percent Landform: Marshes, swamps 14 References American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials(AASHTO).2004. Standard specifications for transportation materials and methods of sampling and testing. 24th edition. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 2005. Standard classification of soils for engineering purposes. ASTM Standard D2487-00. Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deep-water habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service FWS/OBS-79/31. Federal Register. July 13, 1994. Changes in hydric soils of the United States. Federal Register. September 18, 2002. Hydric soils of the United States. Hurt,G.W.,and L.M.Vasilas,editors.Version 6.0,2006. Field indicators of hydric soils in the United States. National Research Council. 1995. Wetlands: Characteristics and boundaries. Soil Survey Division Staff. 1993. Soil survey manual. Soil Conservation Service. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 18. http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/ deta il/national/soils/?cid=n res 142p2_054262 Soil Survey Staff. 1999.Soil taxonomy:A basic system of soil classification for making and interpreting soil surveys. 2nd edition. Natural Resources Conservation Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 436. http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/ nres/detail/national/soils/?cid=nres142p2_053577 Soil Survey Staff. 2010. Keys to soil taxonomy. 11th edition. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/ portal/nres/deta il/national/soils/?cid=n res 142p2_053580 Tiner, R.W., Jr. 1985. Wetlands of Delaware. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, Wetlands Section. United States Army Corps of Engineers, Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers wetlands delineation manual. Waterways Experiment Station Technical Report Y-87-1. United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National forestry manual. http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/soils/ home/?cid=nres142p2_053374 United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National range and pasture handbook. http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/ detail/national/landuse/rangepasture/?cid=stelprdb1043084 15 Custom Soil Resource Report United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National soil survey handbook, title 430-VI. http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/ nres/deta il/soils/scientists/?cid=nres142p2_054242 United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2006. Land resource regions and major land resource areas of the United States, the Caribbean, and the Pacific Basin. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 296. http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/national/soils/? cid=nres142p2_053624 United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1961. Land capability classification. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 210. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/lnternet/FSE—DOCUMENTS/nrcsl42p2_052290.pdf 16 Full Environmental Assessment Form Part 1 -Project and Setting Instructions for Completing Part 1 Part 1 is to be completed by the applicant or project sponsor. Responses become part of the application for approval or funding, are subject to public review,and may be subject to further verification. Complete Part 1 based on information currently available. If additional research or investigation would be needed to fully respond to any item,please answer as thoroughly as possible based on current information;indicate whether missing information does not exist, or is not reasonably available to the sponsor;and,when possible,generally describe work or studies which would be necessary to update or fully develop that information. Applicants/sponsors must complete all items in Sections A&B. In Sections C,D&E,most items contain an initial question that must be answered either"Yes"or"No". If the answer to the initial question is"Yes", complete the sub-questions that follow. If the answer to the initial question is"No",proceed to the next question. Section F allows the project sponsor to identify and attach any additional information. Section G requires the name and signature of the project sponsor to verify that the information contained in Part lis accurate and complete. A.Project and Sponsor Information. Name of Action or Project: North Ridge Street Subdivision Project Location(describe, and attach a general location map): 259 North Ridge Street,Rye Brook,NY 10573 Brief Description of Proposed Action(include purpose or need): Project is to subdivisde a 3.96 acre property in the R-15 zoning district and the Scenic Road Overlay District into three lots. Lot#1 is proposed for eight(8)units of Fair and Affordable Housing in two(2)buildings. Lot#2 contains an existing single family dwelling that is to be refurbished. Lot#3 is proposed for a new single family dwelling. Name of Applicant/Sponsor: Telephone: 914-879-7905 Lou Larizza,Contract Vendee E-Mail: Address: 8 Hilltop Drive City/PO: Port Chester State: New York Zip Code: 10573 Project Contact(if not same as sponsor;give name and title/role): Telephone: E-Mail: Address: City/PO: State: Zip Code: Property Owner (if not same as sponsor): Telephone: 914-967-5892 Daniel J. Greto E-Mail: Address: 209 Central Avenue City/PO: State: Zip Code: Rye New York 10580 Page 1 of 13 B.Government Approvals B. Government Approvals,Funding,or Sponsorship. ("Funding"includes grants, loans,tax relief,and any other forms of financial assistance.) Government Entity If Yes:Identify Agency and Approval(s) Application Date Required (Actual or projected) a. City Council,Town Board, ®Yes❑No Zoning Map Amendment September 25,2015 or Village Board of Trustees Subdivision Approval b. City,Town or Village ®Yes❑No Review and recommendation to Village Board September 25,2015 Planning Board or Commission of Trustees c. City Council,Town or ❑Yes❑No Village Zoning Board of Appeals d. Other local agencies ❑Yes®No e. County agencies ®Yes❑No WCDH Subdivision Plat Approval County Road Permit f.Regional agencies ❑Yes®No g. State agencies ❑Yes®No h.Federal agencies ❑Yes®No i. Coastal Resources. i. Is the project site within a Coastal Area,or the waterfront area of a Designated Inland Waterway? ❑Yes®No ii. Is the project site located in a community with an approved Local Waterfront Revitalization Program? ❑Yes®No X. Is the project site within a Coastal Erosion Hazard Area? ❑Yes®No C.Planning and Zoning C.I.Planning and zoning actions. Will administrative or legislative adoption, or amendment of a plan,local law,ordinance,rule or regulation be the ❑Yes®No only approval(s)which must be granted to enable the proposed action to proceed'? • If Yes,complete sections C, F and G. • If No,proceed to question C.2 and complete all remaining sections and questions in Part 1 C.2.Adopted land use plans. a.Do any municipally-adopted (city,town,village or county)comprehensive land use plan(s)include the site ®Yes❑No where the proposed action would be located? If Yes,does the comprehensive plan include specific recommendations for the site where the proposed action ❑Yes®No would be located? b.Is the site of the proposed action within any local or regional special planning district(for example: Greenway ❑Yes®No Brownfield Opportunity Area(BOA); designated State or Federal heritage area; watershed management plan; or other?) If Yes,identify the plan(s): c. Is the proposed action located wholly or partially within an area listed in an adopted municipal open space plan, ❑Yes®No or an adopted municipal farmland protection plan? If Yes,identify the plan(s): Page 2 of 13 C.3. Zoning a. Is the site of the proposed action located in a municipality with an adopted zoning law or ordinance. ®Yes❑No If Yes,what is the zoning classification(s)including any applicable overlay district? R-15 zoning district and the Scenic Road Overlay District b. Is the use permitted or allowed by a special or conditional use permit? ®Yes❑No c. Is a zoning change requested as part of the proposed action? ®Yes❑No If Yes, i. What is the proposed new zoning for the site'? Lot#1 to be rezoned from the R-15 District to the Fair and Affordable Housing District(FAH) CA.Existing community services. a.In what school district is the project site located? Blind Brook Scholl District b.What police or other public protection forces serve the project site? Village of Rye Brook c.Which fire protection and emergency medical services serve the project site? Village of Rye Brook d. What parks serve the project site? Rich Manor Park,Pine Ridge Park, Crawford Park D.Project Details D.I.Proposed and Potential Development a. What is the general nature of the proposed action(e.g.,residential,industrial,commercial,recreational;if mixed,include all components)? Residential b. a. Total acreage of the site of the proposed action? 3.96 acres b.Total acreage to be physically disturbed? 1.75 acres c. Total acreage(project site and any contiguous properties)owned or controlled by the applicant or project sponsor? 3.96 acres c. Is the proposed action an expansion of an existing project or use? ❑Yes®No i. If Yes,what is the approximate percentage of the proposed expansion and identify the units(e.g.,acres,miles,housing units, square feet)? % Units: d.is the proposed action a subdivision,or does it include a subdivision? OYes❑No If Yes, i. Purpose or type of subdivision?(e.g.,residential,industrial,commercial; if mixed, specify types) Residential ii. Is a cluster/conservation layout proposed? ❑Yes OIVo iii. Number of lots proposed? g iv. Minimum and maximum proposed lot sizes? Minimum 1.1 Acres Maximum 1.4 Acres e. Will proposed action be constructed in multiple phases? ❑YesONo i. If No,anticipated period of construction: 6 months ii. If Yes: • Total number of phases anticipated • Anticipated commencement date of phase l (including demolition) month year • Anticipated completion date of final phase month year • Generally describe connections or relationships among phases,including any contingencies where progress of one phase may determine timing or duration of future phases: Page 3 of 13 f.Does the project include new residential uses? ®Yes❑No If Yes, show numbers of units proposed. One Family Two Family Three Family Multiple Familyf�or more Initial Phase 10 At completion of all phases 10 g.Does the proposed action include new non-residential construction(including expansions)? ❑YesONo If Yes, i. Total number of structures ii. Dimensions(in feet)of largest proposed stricture: height; width; and length iii. Approximate extent of building space to be heated or cooled: square feet h.Does the proposed action include constriction or other activities that will result in the impoundment of any ❑YesONo liquids,such as creation of a water supply,reservoir,pond,lake,waste lagoon or other storage? If Yes, i. Purpose of the impoundment: ii. If a water impoundment,the principal source of the water: ❑ Ground water❑Surface water streams ❑Other specify: iii. If other than water,identify the type of impounded/contained liquids and their source. iv. Approximate size of the proposed impoundment. Volume: million gallons; surface area: acres v. Dimensions of the proposed dam or impounding structure: height; length vi. Construction method/materials for the proposed dam or impounding structure(e.g.,earth fill,rock,wood,concrete): D.2. Project Operations a.Does the proposed action include any excavation,mining,or dredging,during construction,operations,or both? ❑YesONo (Not including general site preparation,grading or installation of utilities or foundations where all excavated materials will remain onsite) If Yes: i.What is the purpose of the excavation or dredging? ii. How much material(including rock,earth, sediments,etc.)is proposed to be removed from the site? • Volume(specify tons or cubic yards): • Over what duration of time? iii. Describe nature and characteristics of materials to be excavated or dredged, and plans to use,manage or dispose of them. iv. Will there be onsite dewatering or processing of excavated materials? ❑Yes❑No If yes,describe. v. What is the total area to be dredged or excavated? acres vi. What is the maximum area to be worked at any one time? acres vii. What would be the maximum depth of excavation or dredging? feet viii. Will the excavation require blasting? ❑Yes❑No ix. Summarize site reclamation goals and plan: b.Would the proposed action cause or result in alteration of,increase or decrease in size of,or encroachment ❑YesONo into any existing wetland,waterbody,shoreline,beach or adjacent area? If Yes: i. Identify the wetland or waterbody which would be affected(by name,water index number,wetland map number or geographic description): Page 4 of 13 ii. Describe how the proposed action would affect that waterbody or wetland,e.g. excavation,fill,placement of structures,or alteration of channels,banks and shorelines. Indicate extent of activities,alterations and additions in square feet or acres: iii. Will proposed action cause or result in disturbance to bottom sediments? ❑Yes❑No If Yes,describe: iv. Will proposed action cause or result in the destruction or removal of aquatic vegetation? ❑Yes❑No If Yes: • acres of aquatic vegetation proposed to be removed: • expected acreage of aquatic vegetation remaining after project completion: • purpose of proposed removal(e.g. beach clearing,invasive species control,boat access): • proposed method of plant removal: • if chemical/herbicide treatment will be used, specify product(s): v. Describe any proposed reclamation/mitigation following disturbance: c.Will the proposed action use,or create a new demand for water? ®Yes❑No If Yes: i. Total anticipated water usage/demand per day: 1.000 gallons/day ii. Will the proposed action obtain water from an existing public water supply? ❑Yes❑No If Yes: • Name of district or service area: United Water Westchester • Does the existing public water supply have capacity to serve the proposal? ®Yes❑No • Is the project site in the existing district? ®Yes❑No • Is expansion of the district needed? ❑Yes®No • Do existing lines serve the project site? ®Yes❑No iii. Will line extension within an existing district be necessary to supply the project? ❑Yes ON If Yes: • Describe extensions or capacity expansions proposed to serve this project: • Source(s)of supply for the district: iv. Is a new water supply district or service area proposed to be formed to serve the project site? ❑Yes®No If.Yes: • Applicant/sponsor for new district: • Date application submitted or anticipated: • Proposed source(s)of supply for new district: v. If a public water supply will not be used,describe plans to provide water supply for the project: vi.If water supply will be from wells(public or private),maximum pumping capacity: gallons/minute. d.Will the proposed action generate liquid wastes? ®Yes❑No If Yes: i. Total anticipated liquid waste generation per day: 1,000 gallons/day ii. Nature of liquid wastes to be generated(e.g., sanitary wastewater,industrial.;if combination,describe all components and approximate volumes or proportions of each): Sanitary watewater iii. Will the proposed action use any existing public wastewater treatment facilities? ®Yes❑No If Yes: • Name of wastewater treatment plant to be used: Blind Brook Wastewater Treatment Plant • Name of district: Blind Brook Sewer District • Does the existing wastewater treatment plant have capacity to serve the project? ®Yes❑No • Is the project site in the existing district? ®Yes❑No • Is expansion of the district needed? ❑Yes®No Page 5 of 13 • Do existing sewer lines serve the project site? ®Yes❑No • Will line extension within an existing district be necessary to serve the project? ❑Yes❑No If Yes: • Describe extensions or capacity expansions proposed to serve this project: iv. Will a new wastewater(sewage)treatment district be formed to serve the project site? ❑Yes®No If Yes: • Applicant/sponsor for new district: • Date application submitted or anticipated: • What is the receiving water for the wastewater discharge? V. If public facilities will not be used,describe plans to provide wastewater treatment for the project,including specifying proposed receiving water(name and classification if surface discharge,or describe subsurface disposal plans): vi. Describe any plans or designs to capture,recycle or reuse liquid waste: e.Will the proposed action disturb more than one acre and create stormwater runoff, either from new point ❑Yes®No sources(i.e.ditches,pipes, swales,curbs,gutters or other concentrated flows of stormwater)or non-point source(i.e. sheet flow)during construction or post construction? If Yes: i. How much impervious surface will the project create in relation to total size of project parcel? Square feet or acres (impervious surface) Square feet or acres (parcel size) ii. Describe types of new point sources. iii. Where will the stormwater runoff be directed(i.e. on-site stonnwater management facility/structures,adjacent properties, groundwater,on-site surface water or off-site surface waters)? • If to surface waters,identify receiving water bodies or wetlands: • Will stormwater runoff flow to adjacent properties? ❑Yes❑No iv. Does proposed plan minimize impervious surfaces,use pervious materials or collect and re-use stormwater? ❑Yes❑No f. Does the proposed action include,or will it use on-site,one or more sources of air emissions,including fuel ❑Yes®No combustion,waste incineration,or other processes or operations? If Yes,identify: i. Mobile sources during project operations(e.g.,heavy equipment,fleet or delivery vehicles) ii. Stationary sources during construction(e.g.,power generation, structural heating,batch plant, crushers) iii. Stationary sources during operations (e.g.,process emissions,large boilers,electric generation) g. Will any air emission sources named in D.2.f(above),require a NY State Air Registration,Air Facility Permit, ❑Yes®No or Federal Clean Air Act Title IV or Title V Permit? If Yes: i. Is the project site located in an Air quality non-attainment area? (Area routinely or periodically fails to meet ❑Yes❑No ambient air quality standards for all or some parts of the year) ii. In addition to emissions as calculated in the application,the project will generate: • Tons/year(short tons)of Carbon Dioxide(CO2) • Tons/year(short tons)of Nitrous Oxide(NO) • Tons/year(short tons)of Perfluorocarbons(PFCs) • Tons/year(short tons)of Sulfur Hexafluoride(SF6) • Tons/year(short tons)of Carbon Dioxide equivalent of Hydroflourocarbons(HFCs) • Tons/year(short tons)of Hazardous Air Pollutants(HAPS) Page 6 of 13 h.Will the proposed action generate or emit methane(including,but not limited to, sewage treatment plants, ❑YesENo landfills,composting facilities)? If Yes: i. Estimate methane generation in tons/year(metric): ii. Describe any methane capture,control or elimination measures included in project design(e.g.,combustion to generate heat or electricity,flaring): i.Will the proposed action result in the release of air pollutants from open-air operations or processes, such as ❑YesiZNo quarry or landfill operations? If Yes: Describe operations and nature of emissions(e.g.,diesel exhaust,rock particulates/dust): j.Will the proposed action result in a substantial increase in traffic above present levels or generate substantial ❑YesRJNo new demand for transportation facilities or services? If Yes: i. When is the peak traffic expected(Check all that apply): ❑Morning ❑Evening ❑Weekend ❑Randomly between hours of to ii. For commercial activities only,projected number of semi-trailer truck trips/day: iii. Parking spaces: Existing Proposed Net increase/decrease iv. Does the proposed action include any shared use parking? ❑Yes❑No v. if the proposed action includes any modification of existing roads,creation of new roads or change in existing access,describe: vi. Are public/private transportation service(s)or facilities available within'/2 mile of the proposed site? ❑Yes❑No vii Will the proposed action include access to public transportation or accommodations for use of hybrid,electric ❑Yes❑No or other alternative fueled vehicles? viii.Will the proposed action include plans for pedestrian or bicycle accommodations for connections to existing ❑Yes❑No pedestrian or bicycle routes? k.Will the proposed action(for commercial or industrial projects only)generate new or additional demand ❑YesONo for energy? If Yes: i. Estimate annual electricity demand during operation of the proposed action: ii. Anticipated sources/suppliers of electricity for the project(e.g.,on-site combustion,on-site renewable,via grid/local utility, or other): iii. Will the proposed action require a new, or an upgrade to,an existing substation? ❑Yes❑No 1.Hours of operation. Answer all items which apply. i. During Construction: ii. During Operations: • Monday-Friday: 8 AM-3 PM • Monday-Friday: Not Applicable • Saturday: 8 AM-3 PM • Saturday: • Sunday: None • Sunday: • Holidays: Nnne 0Holidays: Page 7 of 13 in. Will the proposed action produce noise that will exceed existing ambient noise levels during construction, ❑Yes 0No operation,or both? If yes: i. Provide details including sources,time of day and duration: ii. Will proposed action remove existing natural barriers that could act as a noise barrier or screen? ❑Yes❑No Describe: n.. Will the proposed action have outdoor lighting? ❑Yes®No If yes: i. Describe source(s),location(s),height of fixture(s),direction/aim,and proximity to nearest occupied structures: ii. Will proposed action remove existing natural barriers that could act as a light barrier or screen'? ❑Yes❑No Describe: o. Does the proposed action have the potential to produce odors for more than one hour per day? ❑Yes 0No If Yes,describe possible sources,potential frequency and duration of odor emissions,and proximity to nearest occupied structures: p.Will the proposed action include any bulk storage of petroleum(combined capacity of over 1,100 gallons) ❑Yes 0No or chemical products 185 gallons in above ground storage or any amount in underground storage? If Yes: i. Product(s)to be stored ii. Volume(s) per unit time (e.g.,month,year) iii.'. Generally describe proposed storage facilities: q.Will the proposed action(commercial,industrial and recreational projects only)use pesticides(i.e.,herbicides, ❑Yes 0No insecticides)during construction or operation? If Yes: i. Describe proposed treatment(s): ii. Will the proposed action use Integrated Pest Management Practices? ❑ Yes ❑No r.Will the proposed action(commercial or industrial projects only)involve or require the management or disposal ❑ Yes ONo of solid waste(excluding hazardous materials)? If Yes: i. Describe any solid waste(s)to be generated during construction or operation of the facility: • Construction: tons per (unit of time) • Operation: tons per (unit of time) ii. Describe any proposals for on-site minimization,recycling or reuse of materials to avoid disposal as solid waste: • Construction: • Operation: iii. Proposed disposal methods/facilities for solid waste generated on-site: • Construction: • Operation: Page 8 of 13 s.Does the proposed action include construction or modification of a solid waste management facility? ❑Yes 0 No If Yes: i. Type of management or handling of waste proposed for the site(e.g.,recycling or transfer station,composting,landfill,or other disposal activities): ii. Anticipated rate of disposal/processing: • Tons/month,if transfer or other non-combustion/thermal treatment,or • Tons/hour,if combustion or thermal treatment iii. If landfill,anticipated site life: years t. Will proposed action at the site involve the commercial generation,treatment, storage,or disposal of hazardous ❑YesE]No waste? If Yes: i. Name(s)of all hazardous wastes or constituents to be generated,handled or managed at facility: ii. Generally describe processes or activities involving hazardous wastes or constituents: iii. Specify amount to be handled or generated tons/month iv. Describe any proposals for on-site minimization,recycling or reuse of hazardous constituents: v. Will any hazardous wastes be disposed at an existing offsite hazardous waste facility? ❑Yes❑No If Yes:provide name and location of facility: If No: describe proposed management of any hazardous wastes which will not be sent to a hazardous waste facility: E. Site and Setting of Proposed Action E.I.Land uses on and surrounding the project site a.Existing land uses. i. Check all uses that occur on,adjoining and near the project site. ❑ Urban ❑ Industrial ❑ Commercial 0 Residential(suburban) ❑ Rural(non-farm) ❑ Forest ❑ Agriculture ❑ Aquatic ❑ Other(specify): ii. If mix of uses,generally describe: b.Land uses and covertypes on the project site. Land use or Current Acreage After Change Covertype Acreage Project Completion (Acres+/-) • Roads,buildings,and other paved or impervious surfaces 0.10 0.75 0.65 • Forested 2.59 1.70 0.89 • Meadows,grasslands or brushlands(non- agricultural,including abandoned agricultural) • Agricultural (includes active orchards,field,greenhouse etc.) • Surface water features (lakes,ponds,streams,rivers,etc.) • Wetlands(freshwater or tidal) 1.17 1.17 0 • Non-vegetated(bare rock,earth or fill) • Other Describe: Residential landscaping 0.10 0.34 0.24 Page 9 of 13 c. Is the project site presently used by members of the community for public recreation? ❑Yes❑✓ No i. If Yes: explain: d.Are there any facilities serving children,the elderly,people with disabilities(e.g.,schools,hospitals,licensed ❑Yes®No day care centers,or group homes)within 1500 feet of the project site? If Yes, i. Identify Facilities: e. Does the project site contain an existing dam? ❑Yes®No If Yes: i. Dimensions of the dam and impoundment: • Dam height: feet • Dam length: feet • Surface area: acres • Volume impounded: gallons OR acre-feet ii. Dam's existing hazard classification: iii. Provide date and summarize results of last inspection: f.Has the project site ever been used as a municipal,commercial or industrial solid waste management facility, ❑Yes®No or does the project site adjoin property which is now,or was at one time,used as a solid waste management facility? If Yes: i. Has the facility been formally closed? ❑Yes❑ No • If yes,cite sources/documentation: ii. Describe the location of the project site relative to the boundaries of the solid waste management facility: iii. Describe any development constraints due to the prior solid waste activities: g. Have hazardous wastes been generated,treated and/or disposed of at the site,or does the project site adjoin ❑YcsONo property which is now or was at one time used to commercially treat, store and/or dispose of hazardous waste? If Yes: i. Describe waste(s)handled and waste management activities,including approximate time when activities occurred: h. Potential contamination history. Has there been a reported spill at the proposed project site,or have any ❑Yes® No remedial actions been conducted at or adjacent to the proposed site? If Yes: i. Is any portion of the site listed on the NYSDEC Spills Incidents database or Environmental Site ❑Yes❑No Remediation database? Check all that apply: ❑ Yes—Spills Incidents database Provide DEC ID number(s): ❑ Yes—Environmental Site Remediation database Provide DEC ID number(s): ❑ Neither database ii. If site has been subject of RCRA corrective activities,describe control measures: iii. Is the project within 2000 feet of any site in the NYSDEC Environmental Site Remediation database? ❑YesONo If yes,provide DEC ID number(s): iv. If yes to(i), (ii)or(iii)above,describe current status of site(s): Page 10 of 13 v. Is the project site subject to an institutional control limiting property uses? ❑Yes❑No • If yes,DEC site ID number: • Describe the type of institutional control(e.g.,deed restriction or easement): • Describe any use limitations: • Describe any engineering controls: • Will the project affect the institutional or engineering controls in place? ❑Yes❑No • Explain: E.2. Natural Resources On or Near Project Site a. What is the average depth to bedrock on the project site? 0-6' feet b.Are there bedrock outcroppings on the project site? OYes❑No If Yes,what proportion of the site is comprised of bedrock outcroppings? 1 % c.Predominant soil type(s)present on project site: Urban Land-Charlton Complex 100 % d. What is the average depth to the water table on the project site? Average: 0-61 feet e. Drainage status of project site soils:0 Well Drained: 40%of site 0 Moderately Well Drained: 30%of site 0 Poorly Drained 30%of site f.Approximate proportion of proposed action site with slopes: 0 0-10%: 75_%of site 0 10-15%: 20 %of site 0 15%or greater: 5 %of site g.Are there any unique geologic features on the project site? ❑YesONo If Yes,describe: h. Surface water features. i. Does any portion of the project site contain wetlands or other waterbodies(including streams,rivers, OYes❑No ponds or lakes)? ii. Do any wetlands or other waterbodies adjoin the project site? ❑YesONo If Yes to either i or ii,continue. If No, skip to E.2.i. iii. Are any of the wetlands or waterbodies within or adjoining the project site regulated by any federal, OYes❑No state or local agency? iv. For each identified regulated wetland and waterbody on the project site,provide the following information: • Streams: Name Classification 0 Lakes or Ponds: Name Classification • Wetlands: Name Village regulated wetland Approximate Size 1.17 Acres • Wetland No. (if regulated by DEC) v. Are any of the above water bodies listed in the most recent compilation of NYS water quality-impaired ❑Yes ONo waterbodies? If yes,name of impaired water body/bodies and basis for listing as impaired: i.is the project site in a designated Floodway? ❑Yes ONo j. Is the project site in the 100 year Floodplain? [-]Yes ONo k.Is the project site in the 500 year Floodplain? ❑Yes ONo 1. Is the project site located over,or immediately adjoining,a primary,principal or sole source aquifer? [-]Yes ONo If Yes: i.Name of aquifer: Page 11 of 13 in. Identify the predominant wildlife species that occupy or use the project site: n. Does the project site contain a designated significant natural community? ❑Yes®No If Yes: i. Describe the habitat/community(composition,function,and basis for designation): ii. Source(s)of description or evaluation: iii. Extent of community/habitat: • Currently: acres • Following completion of project as proposed: acres • Gain or loss(indicate+or-): acres o. Does project site contain any species of plant or animal that is listed by the federal government or NYS as ❑YesoNo endangered or threatened,or does it contain any areas identified as habitat for an endangered or threatened species? p. Does the project site contain any species of plant or animal that is listed by NYS as rare,or as a species of ❑Yes®No special concern? q. Is the project site or adjoining area currently used for hunting,trapping,fishing or shell fishing? ❑YesRjNo If yes,give a brief description of how the proposed action may affect that use: E.3. Designated Public Resources On or Near Project Site a. is the project site,or any portion of it, located in a designated agricultural district certified pursuant to ❑YesRJNo Agriculture and Markets Law,Article 25-AA, Section 303 and 304? If Yes, provide county plus district name/number: b.Are agricultural lands consisting of highly productive soils present'? ❑YesR]No i. If Yes: acreage(s)on project site? ii. Source(s)of soil rating(s): c. Does the project site contain all or part of,or is it substantially contiguous to,a registered National ❑Yes®No Natural Landmark? If Yes: i. Nature of the natural landmark: ❑Biological Community ❑ Geological Feature ii. Provide brief description of landmark,including values behind designation and approximate size/extent: d.is the project site located in or does it adjoin a state listed Critical Environmental Area? ❑Yes©No If Yes: i. CEA name: ii. Basis for designation: iii. Designating agency and date: Page 12 of 13 e. Does the project site contain,or is it substantially contiguous to,a building,archaeological site,or district ❑YesO No which is listed on,or has been nominated by the NYS Board of Historic Preservation for inclusion on,the State or National Register of Historic Places? If Yes: i.Nature of historic/archaeological resource: El Archaeological Site ❑Historic Building or District ii. Name: iii. Brief description of attributes on which listing is based: f.Is the project site,or any portion of it, located in or adjacent to an area designated as sensitive for ❑Yes ONo archaeological sites on the NY State Historic Preservation Office(SHPO)archaeological site inventory? g. Have additional archaeological or historic site(s)or resources been identified on the project site? ❑Yes ONo If Yes: i. Describe possible resource(s): ii. Basis for identification: h.Is the project site within fives miles of any officially designated and publicly accessible federal, state,or local ❑Yes ONo scenic or aesthetic resource? If Yes: i. Identify resource: ii. Nature of,or basis for,designation(e.g.,established highway overlook,state or local park, state historic trail or scenic byway, etc.): iii. Distance between project and resource: miles. i. Is the project site located within a designated river corridor under the Wild, Scenic and Recreational Rivers ❑YesONo Program 6 NYCRR 666? If Yes: i. Identify the name of the river and its designation: ii. is the activity consistent with development restrictions contained in 6NYCRR Part 666? ❑Yes❑No F.Additional Information Attach any additional information which may be needed to clarify your project. If you have identified any adverse impacts which could be associated with your proposal,please describe those impacts plus any measures which you propose to avoid or minimize them. G. Verification I certify that the information provided is true to the best of my knowledge. Applicant/Sponsor Name Lou Larizza Date January 7,2016 Signature Title PRINT FORM Page 13 of 13 EAF Mapper Summary Report Thursday, January 14, 2016 2:02 PM Disclaimer: The EAF Mapper is a screening tool intended to assist project sponsors and reviewing agencies in preparing an environmental 95.26 d6 1 35g2}-1r 34 _5.2} $ assessment form(EAF).Not all questions asked in the EAF are 135.2 7-1-1 8 } l 135 27=1-57 answered by the EAF Mapper.Additional information on any EAF 135.26-1-53 35.2}-1-1 35.27-1-33t 135 2} 1-19 135 27 129question can be obtained by consulting the EAF Workbooks. Although 135.2 6-1-62 S � �- 135.2}- i the EAF Mapper provides the most up-to-date digital data available to 1 5.2 7-1=2 ti �1 35.2 7-1 28L 7 _� 13 .27-1 9135.2} =2 135.2} 1-32 r DEC,you may also need to contact local or other data sources in order 135.26-1-551 1-35'27 1=8'--'135.2 7_1=�1 1 35.2'7 1-� to obtain data not provided by the Mapper.Digital data is not a 1~3 '26_1-61)135.27-1-3 i • } --135.2}-1131 135.27-1-2 7, substitute for agency determinations. 1 '7 1-21=1 ti 1 r 1 5.2}-1-4 13 271-47135.27-1-42 1'3527-1-25 135+261-6 + I '135.2.7-1.-`24 1.35.2 6-1-5, 16-1-71 1 5.2}-1-43 \ T 1 5.2}- 13 27-1 46 � tlr;� Montre7l 135.2,7-1-2315.27-1 3 0 13 5.2 6 1- 91 35.2 6-1- 2 /13,51.2}) 44 1 5.27- -45 - 1.35 5 1-6 e 15.35-1-2 135.35-1 35rnoneufr kuur+ 135.341' 1 5.35-1--I f r r_ 135.35-1 115.35-1;23 1 5.35-i.- 4�! � onlo 13M.34-1-2 61 5.34 1 2 8' r C o n c ord t .35-1'-22 - c• � �� . '-2.1 f i 5.35-1-38 Roehestrr�� ��,! 135..341 32 135.35-'1-' 35-1-2.1 J t3atrflit Butt.)10 Poston .�- �G dihap�f� 4353`41 34 /135.35-1-29 . 135.35 11 �rovidrncc 135�3d 1 33 135.35 1-8 1 5.35 1 2 Cfeveiand } .135.35 1:3 1:35.354--l-)1 {:� ti a ' 1-35.34-1'31135.35-1 1 `ti°FS � m , u 135.35-1-7 nterm ihQ t Car f J�y ri raY�v.:Y. � .J� � Es L Tvurc�s ri;tE, 5. 41 47 r ur? 35 35-1 2safE71, Es sfrrs.:,+i31a314i Pitt-13U C Inter map, 135.341 48 f r ¢ r, iiarrisbnrg ° e °a �y r T 135.35p1 ;lend F Ind; u-i-.S e � 7 rnhus ire zma-i arp.. WR rJ, 135x341-55 135.341 2 1.35.35-1f4 un 1-45 Warhington,Eari.spsr.., R-IETI, Esri Chins B.i.i [Coastal or Waterfront Area] No B.i.ii [Local Waterfront Revitalization Area] No C.2.b. [Special Planning District] Digital mapping data are not available or are incomplete. Refer to EAF Workbook. E.1.h [DEC Spills or Remediation Site- Digital mapping data are not available or are incomplete. Refer to EAF Potential Contamination History] Workbook. E.1.h.i [DEC Spills or Remediation Site- Digital mapping data are not available or are incomplete. Refer to EAF Listed] Workbook. E.1.h.i [DEC Spills or Remediation Site- Digital mapping data are not available or are incomplete. Refer to EAF Environmental Site Remediation Database] Workbook. E.1.h.iii [Within 2,000' of DEC Remediation No Site] E.2.g [Unique Geologic Features] No E.2.h.i [Surface Water Features] No E.2.h.ii [Surface Water Features] Yes E.2.h.iii [Surface Water Features] Yes- Digital mapping information on local and federal wetlands and waterbodies is known to be incomplete. Refer to EAF Workbook. E.2.h.v [Impaired Water Bodies] No E.2.i. [Floodway] No E.2.j. [100 Year Floodplain] No E.2.k. [500 Year Floodplain] No E.2.1. [Aquifers] No E.2.n. [Natural Communities] No E.2.o. [Endangered or Threatened Species] No E.2.p. [Rare Plants or Animals] No Full Environmental Assessment Form - EAF Mapper Summary Report l E.3.a. [Agricultural District] No E.3.c. [National Natural Landmark] No E.3.d [Critical Environmental Area] No E.3.e. [National Register of Historic Places] Digital mapping data are not available or are incomplete. Refer to EAF Workbook. E.3.f. [Archeological Sites] No E.3.i. [Designated River Corridor] No Full Environmental Assessment Form - EAF Mapper Summary Report 2 January 14, 2016 RESOLUTION CONSIDERING A SITE PLAN APPLICATION FOR CONSTRUCTION OF AN ADDITION ON AN EXISTING RESIDENCE AT 5 ARGYLE ROAD VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK PLANNING BOARD WHEREAS, John and Tonia Annunziata, property owners, submitted an Application for Site Plan approval to construct a side addition, including a rear patio, relocated driveway and extended front patio, at 5 Argyle Road in the R-10 zoning district and the Scenic Roads Overlay District, said premises being further identified as Section 135.51, Block 1, Lot 50 on the Town of Rye Tax Assessor's Map; and WHEREAS, the Planning Board reviewed the following plans and application materials in connection with the Application: 1. Short Environmental Assessment Form 2. Building Permit Check List and Zoning Analysis 3. Exterior Building Permit Application 4. Application for Site Plan Approval and Submittal Checklist 5. Property Survey,prepared by Richard A. Spinelli, Mamaroneck, N.Y. dated July 17, 2015 6. Waiver Request Letter from RMG Associates, Rye, N.Y. to the Rye Brook Village Engineer dated November 5, 2015 7. Architect's Plans,prepared by RMG Associates, Rye, N.Y.: Sheet Number Sheet Information Dated A-1 Location Map/Notes/Zoning Calculations 10/27/15 A-2 Site Plan/Tree Protection/Details 10/27/15 A-3 Front Elevation/Height Setback Calculations 10/27/15 A-4 Right and Rear Elevations 10/27/15 A-5 Existing First Floor Plan 10/27/15 A-6 Proposed First Floor Plan 10/27/15; and WHEREAS, the Planning Board reviewed a memorandum from the Village Planning Consultant, F.P. Clark Associates, dated December 8, 2015, concerning the application; and WHEREAS, Village Code §250-22.G(1) requires a minimum front yard setback of 30 feet and the Applicant proposes a front yard setback of 26.5 feet on the south elevation of the home fronting Argyle Road, requiring a front yard setback variance of 3.5 feet; and WHEREAS, Village Code §250-22.G(3) requires a minimum rear yard setback of 30 feet and the Applicant proposes a rear yard setback of 10.2 feet, requiring a rear yard setback variance of 19.8 feet; and WHEREAS, Village Code §250-37.13 requires a maximum main building coverage of 20% and the Applicant proposes a main building coverage of 21.5%, requiring a main building coverage variance of 1.5%; and WHEREAS, on December 10, 2015 the Planning Board referred the application to the Zoning Board of Appeals for consideration of the above-referenced variances, including any additional variances determined by the Building Inspector to be necessary; and WHEREAS, a duly advertised public hearing was held on January 14, 2016, at which time all those wishing to be heard on the Application were given such opportunity, and the public hearing was closed on January 14, 2015; and WHEREAS, the Proposed Action is a Type II Action pursuant to the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA), and accordingly, no further environmental review is required; and WHEREAS, the Village Planning Consultant, Village staff and the Planning Board have reviewed the information and submitted comments regarding the Application. NOW THEREFORE BE, IT RESOLVED, that upon recommendation of the Village of Rye Brook Superintendent of Public Works/Village Engineer, the Village of Rye Brook Planning Board hereby approves the waiver requested by the applicant for the submission of a current topographic survey and lighting plan. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Village of Rye Brook Planning Board hereby approves the Application for Site Plan approval to construct a side addition, including a rear patio, relocated driveway and extended front patio, at 5 Argyle Road, subject to the following conditions: 1. Approval by the Zoning Board of Appeals of the above-referenced variances. If during the Zoning Board of Appeals' review of the variance application minor modifications are made to the Site Plan intended to reduce, eliminate or mitigate the requested variances, the Applicant is not required to return to the Planning Board for approval of such minor modifications. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that no permits shall be issued until the Applicant has paid to the Village all applicable fees and professional review fees incurred in connection with review of this Application. -2- On motion by , seconded by Mr. Michel Nowak, Superintendent of Public Works/Village Engineer, called the roll: Domenic Accurso, Jr. Voting John Grzan Voting Sal Morlino Voting Jeffrey Richman Voting Amy Schoen Voting Daniel Tartaglia Voting Robert Goodman, Chairman Voting -3- BUELDIN+G DEz--ATMENT VILL'X E OF RYE REIOK v,t• 438 KING R1E,BRp`Ox,NY 10573 (914)93 Qf68 . 91` 39-5801 FOR OFFICE USE ONLY: BOT Approval Date: PS Approval pate: BOT Disapproval Datn: PS Disapproval Date: Attach Resolution Hereto: BOT[ PB[ ] ZBA[ ) Chairman: SITE PLAN FEE: DATE PAID: ENVIRONMENTAL FEE: DATE PAID: OTHER: APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL Submission of this application does not assure placement on any Planning Board Agenda.The Applicant will be notified of such placement This application references but is not limited to the following sections of the Code of the Village of Rye Brook,§250 ZONING,§209 SITE PLAN REVIEW,§235 TREES,§107 DEMOLITION OF BUILDINGS,§224 SWIlVIlvENG POOLS,§121 EXCAVATION&TOPSOIL REMOVAL,§118 EROSION&SEDIMENT CONTROL,§213 STEEP SLOPES PROTECTION,§219 SUBDIVISION OF LAND, §250-40 NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS.Applicants and Their Design Professionals are strongly ad-Osedlo reviewthe above mentioned code sections online at,www.ryebrook,orrr prior to completing andlor submitting this application. APPLTCATf0K PER SCHEDULE: Residential Dwellings- $325,plus$200 per additional dwelling unit Non-Residential Buildings - $475 plus $30 per parking space. Planned Unit Development-$575 per acre PUD Amendment- $300 Site Plan Amendment- $575 Wetlands&Watercourse- $1,150 Consultant Review(Escrow)Fee: Minimum fee$250-maxim-am fee$2,500,to be determined by the Village Engineer. tiplicalioal csarenoar-r,fividahle.Treinusthave aprs'WVbalance atall thnespriorroan,iConsultant,4ttarnri,or11711 - re=pier. Escrow Fees and Site Plan Fees roust be paid on separate cherks made pl{yable to the Pillage a)Rye Brook. 1. Site Address: rJ �S12�YL1 - � ParcelID#: VbS S0/60 Zone: -I-c> 2. Property owner: --I c{.)J-� Tot l )A% /A11 ).1 U},1 Z I A'CA%. Address: 15AW YLE- 9P.jW&VACEW,AJ•Y01-3E-Mail: ... GS1J i.1u1.321[aTAG� L.GvM Tei.#: 9:�)q " & Other:em52 3. Applicant: —1oN-Q A�JJ�xl!-1Z1�' Address: 0 SLE Kp1 E-Mail: .,P*�iJU�1Z>AT�+G�,4oL. Gyt�t Tel.#: Other. 651 - g2$`-a (C.-L6) 4. Design Professional: `�4DS� tL =- �1 {Zt�►rv. p�s�c Address: 35v 3149n9211! d''r�DAUC� J*I`1� E-Mail: Tel.#: _Other: 15-74— 6c>4-2 L Ce L(,) 5. Designate to whom correspondence is to be sent: �4p.K Mo S rAc-&-2'v If applicant is a"Contract Vendee",please attach a copy of the contract summary with 5mancial and confidential terms deleted. REVISED BIIC116 VILLAGE QF.RY>��tOOK 938 King S 64: Brgpk I.Y. 10573 (914)939-6'.7-)fir {91 439-5801 www TVbrOOK Y1 SITE PLAN SUBMITTAL REVIEW CHECKLIST This form shalt serve as a checklist for site plan submittal and review by the Village of Rye Brook. The use of this plan review checklist by the applicant is to ensure compliance with the technical provisions of§209 of the Code of the Village of Rye Brook. entitled, Site Plan Review, pertaining to preliminary and final plan preparation. The Village Code is available on the Village Website at: www.ryebrook.org. Prior to the appearance before ANY meeting or hearing of the Planning Board,the applicant must comply with all Notification Requirements of Code Section 250-40. SITE PLAN SUBMITTAL SHALL INCLUDE: 1. APPLICATIONS. Completed and signed including correspondences. 2. CHECKLIST. Completed and signed. 3. PLANS. Signed, Sealed&Dated. Fifteen paper(15)copies or twenty(20)copies when Board of Trustees approval is required and one (1) electronic version. One (1) record set with original signatures, dates and seals may be provided and submitted with fourteen(14)copies or nineteen (19) copies that clearly indicate the signatures, dates, and seals shown on the record set. 4. FEES: All application fees and Environmental fee. A separate check for filing fee and Environmental fee. 5. Environmental Assessment Form. Form available on the NYS DEC website, 6. Electronic Copy. Complete copy of all plans and shall be submitted electronically at time of submission. 7. Notarized Affidavit of Sign Posting&Mail Notification. I, Vg)J AIQJ. U)J Z ha A (Appii=es signacare)have read the Notification Requirements of Code Section 250-40 and will provide notification as required. IDENTIFICATION OF APPLICANT (S): Identification of Applicant: EJ1d.lWC-9 Applicant: -J)01-WA-t-4 u3 3zwr^ Address: V LC PkvrlD IZ1 K U. , 10 95 7"6 Tel.#: T'�f'" GL�31-7 Fax: E-Mail:-iA1itJU1JZIA D,CAot- GflM Project Name: P -z-CR 171cQS 4 ArVrVV-AT1 tm-,IS Project Address: 15 a&e-YL/C— C)Al--> Current Property Owner: . Address: FVt- f5lZICNOK f 1, (0573 Tel.#: 01 CF?1-7 Fax: E-Mail: lao ilJ{Jf.��F �P�Ga Ayl-•E-t�-�( IDENTIFICATION OF PROPERTY: Identifying Title: LG- .,C:0c17-> Tax Designation:Section: MS-S1 , Block: Lot: 00 Zoning District: V-10 Street which property abuts: �Y L l: Plan Submission Date: L /10 Site Plan Checklist Page 1 of 7 6. Street which property abuts: LC— ' g 1 C4,C' 'SZrz q-� 7. Does property connect directly into State or County highway? { 0 ( )YES: S. Is site within 500 feet of Village Boundary?(--Y<O ( }YES If yes note art bordering municipalities: 9. Total area of site: •� �I. �F-'T� Area of site activity. 0_'_P 10. Site coverage: %; Building coverage: 1121- S % 11. Existing building size: 'Sk;:r New/additional building size: 12. Existing parking spaces:. _W New parking spaces: 2 13. Nature ofproposed activity: 1?;UL(,D XW A'MMCA,.) A"rt Tpt-91"Ir�tpee t (cam Please note that this application must include the notarized signature(S)of the legal owners)of the above-mentioned property, in the space provided below. Any application not bearing the legal property owner's notarized signature(s)shall be deemed null and void, and will be retumed to the applicant. STATE OF NEW YORK,COUNTY OF WESTCHESTER ) as: Jot 1 A-),")3 Z)AMA ,being duly sworn,deposes and states that he/she is the applicant above named., (print name ofindividual signing as the applicant) and further states that (s)he is the legal owner of the property to which this application pertains, or that (s)he is the for the legal owner and is duly authorized to make and file this application. (indicate architect,contractor,agent,anomey,etc,) That all statements contained herein are true to the best of his/her.knowledge and belief, and that any work performed,or use conducted at the above captioned propertywill be in conformance with the details as set forth and contained in this application and in any accompanying approved plans and specifications,as well as in accordance withtheNew York State UniformFire Prevention &Building Code,the Code of the Village of Rye Brook and all other applicable laws,ordinances and regulations, Sworn to before me this Swom to before me this lff day of Nd. ,20 f 5 day of /Y/6(/, , 20 /5 Notary c No=Pr -� Si tore of Property Owner Si raze of Applicant l cel-3�1 AI-W U 12i�Z"j4 Jb4j 1fJ U;J 2 l Pel Print Name of Property Owner Print Name of Applicant HENRY MUSTACATO HENRY MUSTACATO Notary public,State of New York Notary public,State of New York No.piMU5012198 Qualified in Westchester County No.01MU5012198 Commission Expires June 15 v f No. in Westchester Count Commission Expires June 15-� q U f f REVISED fi1t Y15 Project Address [� JZC 36c 7 Y N NA PLAN REOUIREMENTN 000 15-20 copies of plans prepared and signed by a registered Land Surveyor,Engineer or Architect. O O O One(1)electronic copy of all submitted plans. 0 O &*�'Topographic Survey stamped by New York State band Surveyor with license number and seal.(1NA I-J64 fZ—'QV6 S7'r-P) O O 01"'Topographic survey scale of one(1)inch per twenty(20)feet or larger. 015-0 Section, block and lot numbers of the property taken from the latest tax records along with a copy of the most recent property card on file with the Town of Rye Tax Assessor's office, 0--0-0 Name of the proposed subdivision plan. t"0 O Name and address of the owner of record. " O Name and address of the applicant. O Deed reference(s). 0`0 O Names, addresses and signature of every Engineer, Architect, Land Surveyor or Soil Scientist whose professional seal appears on any site plan submitted to the Board. O North arrow and scale. 6 'O O Location neap at the minimum scale of I"equals 1,000 feet. 00 Or'�Arca of all lots,in square feet. (+YO O Engineering notes on plans as stated in application packages. 00 @Copies of all existing and proposed deed restrictions or covenants applying to the property, including,but not limited to, covenants and agreements restricting the use and establishing future ownership and maintenance responsibilities for all private roads,recreation,and open space areas. O O W"A y prior land use approvals with respect to the subject property. 015-0 Date the plans were first drafted. Any revisions)made to any of the sheets first submitted are to be so noted in the revision block. The revision block is to be placed on the originals of the revised sheets. Additional paper copies are to be made& submitted for the Planning Board&Building Dept.to replace those sheets previously submitted. W1 O Other existing site improvements,including,but not limited to,fences,landscape or retaining walls,landscaping & screening. woo Location of all buildings and structures on the premises and approximate location of all neighboring buildings or structures within 100 feet of the lot line. O O O Fees paid to The Village of Rye Brook Building Department. O O Any revisions to plans shall be identified with a revision cloud and numbered revision triangle Y N NA ARUTHNG PR OPER TYINFORMATION O O 6r"The names and addresses of all abutting property owners within 250 ft as indicated in the Municipal records. O O A''Zoning and use of abutting properties noted on plans. O O l"5hape,size,height and location of existing buildings and driveways within one hundred(100)feet of the site. O O t�Location and description of existing easements within one hundred(100)feet of the site. O O 01Location of existing private or public trails within one hundred(100)feet of the site. 0"0 O Location of existing roads,scenic roads and/or driveways within two hundred(200)feet of the site. 000--'L cation of proposed parkland.Ifnone state nearest recreation facility 00 0Location of existing septic system leach fields within two hundred(200)feet of the site. 00 01"focations,dimensions,grades and flow direction of existing sewers,culverts,waterlines as well as other underground utilities within and adjacent to the property. Site Plan Checklist Page 2 of 7 Project Address tE5 YLX- RCA V O O The location of all existing watercourses,intermittent streams,wetland areas and springs,consistent with the definitions set forth in Chapter 245,Wetlands and Watercourses,of the Code of the Village of Rye Brook. Y N NA PROPOSED SITE PLAN INFORMATION ,$`O O Sufficient,acceptable information to readily determine the location,bearing„and length of every street line, lot line, and property boundary line. 0`-O" O Location of all building setback lines. O O Topographic data at a minimum contour interval of 2'-0"increments,showing existing and proposed contours on the property and extending a minimum of 25 feet into all adjacent properties.`WAI V la� fitG MflJ R� O The location and characteristics of the different areas of vegetation,including the identification of all individual trees 12 or more inches in diameter at breast height("DBH"),protected trees of any size,as well as stands of trees and wooded areas, within areas of proposed disturbance, consistent with the provisions of Chapter 235,Trees, of the Code of the Village of Rye Brook. O O W"'Location and proposed development of all buffer areas,including existing vegetative cover. O O Location and description of any zoning district and municipal boundaries including a zoning compliance chart for the existing and proposed lots. tiYO O Shape,size,height and location of all existing and proposed buildings. 00 O'Location and description of any existing and proposed easements. GYU O Location and dimensions of all existing and proposed streets,driveways,sidewalks,parking spaces,bicycle parking, loading areas and other facilities associated with the proposed use. 00 Ge"Identification of the location and amount of building area proposed for retail sales or similar commercial activity. 00 O Location of existing and proposed utilities(water,sewer,gas,electrical,telephone,oil tank etc.). 00 W"Design and location of all existing and proposed wells,septic tanks and leach field systems,or methods of waste water disposal. 00 A'�'Location,type and size of all existing and proposed landscaping and screening including fences and walls. 00 0""!Acation,size and proposed screening of outdoor storage areas,if any. OHO O Location, design and construction material of all existing or proposed site improvements, including drains, culverts, retaining walls,landscape walls and fences. 00 W"—Exterior lighting plan and proposed signs to be located on site,including sign orientation,size,height,and elevation view. Wb O Storm drainage plan and plans for snow removal and storage. Of0 l�Pedestrian and automobile circulation plan. "O O Construction drawings for pavements,walks,steps,curbing;,drainage&other structures associated with the proposed use. 0"0 O Erosion and sedimentation control plan,including installation details of proposed control measures,directive construction notations and a schedule for the installation and maintenance of proposed control measure. W-0 O Description of measures planned to assure proper erosion and sedimentation control in accordance with the requirements of Chapter 118 entitled"Erosion and Sediment Control,"of the Code of the Village of Rye Brook- (Y'O' rook(YO O Drawing and computation for storm water detention design for a 25-year storm in accordance with the Westchester County Best Management Practices O O Rock outcroppings and areas of steep slope consistent with the definitions set forth in Chapter 213,Steep Slope Protection, of the Code of the Village of Rye Brook. O O 0" Location of any common lands and/or public lands. O O a�'Phasing or an estimated project construction schedule. O O & Supporting documents,including deeds,maintenance,condominium agreements,etc. Site Plan Checklist Page 3 of 7 Project AddressGy C- R� W10 O Location of proposed construction or area of disturbance and its relationship to any property line, easement, building, structure, road, wall, fence, sewage disposal system, well, wetland feature or tree exceeding six inches in diameter measured at a height of four feet from the ground 00 W"'E-stimate of earthwork showing the quantity of any material to be imported to and/or removed from the site including a chart with the number/species and size of any trees to be removed. 00 Location and size of areas of soils by soil types in the area of proposed disturbance and to a distance of 100 feat surrounding the area of disturbance- 0 O Bw Cross sections of steep slope areas. O O 01"'Retaining walls or like constructions,with details of construction. O O W Approximate boundaries of any areas subject to flooding or stormwater overflows, including areas of special flood hazard and coastal high-hazard areas, consistent with the definitions set forth in Chapter 130, Flood Damage Prevention, of the Code of the Village of Rye Brook Approximate Wetlands and wetland buffer boundaries shall be clearly delineated. O O __ /Location of fire and other emergency zones,including the location of fire hydrants. O O 9' Studies to include,but not necessarily limited to: environmental impact analysis,wildlife,traffic,stormwater management,recreation,public service,fiscal impact,visual impact and historic significance documentation,or a written request to waive the submission requirements for these studies. O O 0""Amount of any bonds required. O O & Amount of excavated material to be removed from site,if any. Y N NA OTHER as applicable) O O t"Record of application for and approval status of all necessary permits from state and county officials and local utility companies. O O Er"'Identification of any federal,state or county permits required for the project's execution,including project referrals, if any,&environmental review procedures mandated by Article 8,Environmental Quality Review,of the Environmental Conservation Law(SEQRA). O O O Any other information felt necessary by the Planning Board to allow the Board to proceed with consideration&to make an informed decision. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW CHECKLIST WESTCRESTER COUNTY PLANNING BOARD Notice to Applicants/Developers: At some point during the development review process your project may be referred to the Westchester County Planning Board for review and comment in accordance with state and county laws that require local planning boards, zoning boards of appeals and governing bodies to refer certain development applications to the County Planning Board. Referral to the County Planning Board may not occur until your project has progressed well along through the design process. Since the Planning Board's comments may impact project design,this checklist is provided to encourage early consideration of these areas of concern by applicants to avoid project changes later. For information on the County Planning Board review process and to access an electronic copy of this checklist, go online to www.westchestergov.com/planningreferrals or contact Lukas Herbert at Iah5@westchestergov.eom. I.COUNTY PLANNING BOARD POLICIES: Written policies underlie all recommendations of the County Planning Board, Westchester 2025-Contest far County and Municipal Planning and Policies to Guide County Planning,adopted by the County Planning Board on 5/6108,amended 115110,can be found at ww.westchestergov.com/2025. o Westchester 2025:Policies should be reviewed to determine how they relate to the development proposal. IZ.EUPACTS TO COUNTY FACILITIES AND SERVICES: The County Planning Board coordinates the review of development projects with Westchester County departments to identify and address potential impacts on County services and infrastructure.In some situations,permits and approvals may be required that could change project design, Site Plan Checklist Page 4 of 7 Project Address 5 AVe,'YL& j CA1:> ❑ Map of County Facilities: Review the State&County Roads and Parks map (which also includes county channel lines)to identify proximity to County facilities at: www.westchestergov.com/planningdocs/Pdfmaps/countystateroadsparks.pdf. Other useful map links for information about environmental features, septic/sewer map, county sewer districts neap, etc can be found at: www.westchestergov.com/niaps ❑ COUNTY ROAD:Applications for development on sites that abut a County road must be submitted for review by the County Department of Public Works. Information and forms can be found at:www.westchestergov.com/dpw/bldgperm.htni. Former County Roads do not need review by the Department of Public Works,but will still likely trigger a review by the County Planning Board. ❑ COUNTY CHANNEL LINES:Applications for development on sites within 100 feet of a designated County Channel Line require a stream control permit from the County Department of Public Works. Information and forms can be found at: ww%v.westchestergov.com/dpwlbldgperin.btm ❑ COUNTY PARK:New construction&land alteration projects adjacent to County parks are expected to address screening& buffer of new uses from the park, as appropriate. Stormwater should not drain from a developed site onto a County park without acceptable quantity and quality controls.County parks are designated as Critical Environmental Areas. ❑ SEWAGE TREATMENT AT COUNTY TREATMENT PLANT: Local municipalities are required to reduce and eliminate inflow and infiltration(I&I)into the sanitary sewage systems tributary to County treatment plants.New development will be expected to reduce I&I in relation to generation of new flow at a ratio of three to one. This requirement must be discussed with local officials. ❑BEE-LINE BUS SERVICE: Bee-Line bus stops serving a development site should be identified on plans or noted if located off-site. If a bus stop is located along the site's frontage, the applicant should contact the County Department of Transportation to discuss impacts and the need for improvements.Safe and separate pedestrian access should be provided to link a bus stop and sidewalk with building entrances. Information on County bus service and design guidelines can be found at: westchestergov.com/transportaf on/images/Bus%20Service°/n2OGuidelines.pdf ❑FAIR AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING: Many municipalities require inclusion of fair & affordable units in new developments. Financial assistance to achieve fair & affordable housing development is available through Westchester County & other sources. Applications that include new residential units to be affirmatively marketed&sold or rented subject to fair& affordable housing provisions should be tied to Westchester County guidelines on affordability including income guidelines of eligible households that can be found at: http://homes.wegchestergov.com/. If County funding is sought to develop fair & affordable housing,the County Board of Legislators must be included as an involved agency under SEQK ❑RECYCLING: New buildings must contain a designated area of sufficient size for separation and storage of recyclables and trash.Building expansions should also include sufficient space for separation and storage of recyclables.For more information about County recycling requirements go to:ivww.westchestergov.com/environment_recycling.htm ❑STORM SEWER SYSTEM: Any connections to a County storm sewer line will require a permit from the Department of Public Works in accordance with the County Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination (IDDE)law. Information &forms can be found at:www.westchestergov.com/dpw/bldgperrn.htm Non-stormwater discharges to the County storm sewer system are prohibited. III.DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Tac County Planning Board's land use policies focus attention on several aspects of development that may have intermunicipal and quality of life impacts.The list below includes areas most frequently commented on by the County Planning Board. ❑WATER: All development plans should include sufficient provisions for stormwater management, water quality measures and mitigation of flooding. ❑Plans should identify the major drainage basin or watershed the site is located in (Croton River, Upper Hudson River, Lower Hudson,Upper Long Island Sound, Bronx River and Lower Long Island Sound).An interactive map with watershed boundaries can be found at www.westchestergov.com/p€anning/maps&lists/drainbasinsllxl7.ht nl ❑Watershed plans have been developed for several of the County's watersheds -the Croton, Indian Brook-Croton Gorge, Bronx River & Long Island Sound watersheds - that include specific recommendations that apply to development projects. See recommendations in watershed plans at:planning.westchestergov.com/index.php?option=com content&task=view&id= 1231& Itemid=2204 Site Plan Checklist Page 5 of 7 Project Address IF P)JZGyLE CjPrZ�, ❑Development that involves filling, creation of impervious surfaces or buildings and substantive loss of natural vegetation in, a floodplain or flood prone area should be avoided. ❑Above ground,vegetated retention/detention basins or devices are preferred because they perform better,are easier to inspect and maintain and provide additional environmental benefits over subsurface structural devices. Any such treatments should not be constructed within wetlands or buffer areas around wetlands. ❑The development should treat and retain as much stormwater on-site as possible,particularly when the site is located in a drainage basin with known flooding problems.A Construction Stormwater Toolbox with tools and sources of technical information related to the construction activities and stormwater management best practices is available from the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation at:�vww.dee.ny.gov/chemical/8694.html ❑New development should include protection of aquatic resources. For more information about protection of aquatic resourc-es& buffer areas,go to:planning.westchestergov.com/index.php?option=com_content&task--view&id=1431<emid=2458 [Impervious cover should be minimized.Permeable paving surfaces should be used where feasible.Vegetative rain gardens should be used,particularly in areas of overland or channelized stormwater flow,to improve stormwater quality and reduce runoff volume. For more information,go to: www.westchestercov.com/stomiwater ❑Buildings along coastlines and low lying area should consider the impacts of sea level rise. Specific consideration is required of potential impacts to surface and subsurface drinking water supplies, ❑ SITE LAYOUT.Aesthetic design,building orientation and community character should be considered in the site layout and building appearance. ❑In most locations,buildings should face the street and have pedestrian access from the street. El Commercial buildings should be located near the front street line with the majority of parking located in the rear of the building, Even gas stations and convenience stores should be upfront in a landscaped setting with parking,pumps and canopy toward the rear. ❑Buildings should be of pedestrian-scale when seen from the sidewalk. ❑Building facades should contribute to and enhance the character of the community. ❑Driveway and pathway connections should be provided to adjacent sites when possible and crosseasements provided. ❑ STREETS.Street design should reduce unwarranted paving and promote connectivity. ❑New streets should connect with adjacent streets wherever feasible to prevent the proliferation of dead-end streets and promote neighborhood integration. El Connections could be vehicular or pedestrian/bicycle only,where appropriate. ❑Street widths should be minimized for streets with low traffic volume to reduce speeds and impervious surfaces.Lane widths of 12 feet are only appropriate for major roadways. ❑Driveway widths should be no more than 9 feet to reduce impervious surfaces. ❑Permeable paving surfaces should be used where feasible. ❑ GREEN TECHNOLOGY.New development should include as many green building elements as possible,such as:renewable building materials,energy efficient heating/cooling systems and fixtures,water saving devices,green roofs and permeable paving surfaces.Information can be obtained from the U.S.Green Building Council at:www.usgbc.org. ❑ LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING.The site improvements should enhance community character. Site Plan Checklist Page 6 of 7 Project Address 1 j P4Zr yL — 4ZcgY_)> ❑Landscaping should consist of native plant species appropriate for the location.Invasive plant species should be prohibited. Invasive plant information available at:mvw.westchestergov.com/planninWeavir=nental/Reports/InvasivePlantsBroch©8.pdf ❑ Pollutant tolerant plantings should effectively shield parking,loading areas and refuse collection sites. ❑ Site lighting should be provided at the lowest safe levels and lowest heights,avoiding all spillage off site. ❑ PEDESTRIANS.Safe,convenient and ADA accessible pedestrian access is provided. ❑A sidewalk should be provided along the site frontage along each street. ❑ Direct pedestrian connections should be made from the front of the building to the sidewalk.Pedestrian crossings of drive-ways& parking lots should be minimized or avoided.If they must be provided,painted crosswalks should be provided through parking lots. ❑ADA accessibility must be provided. ❑ BICYCLISTS.Provisions for bicyclists should be incorporated into project design. ❑ Bicycle parking should be provided in commercial and residential developments. Guidelines can be found at: www.apbp.org/resoureetresmgr/publications/bicycle_parking_gui delines.pdf ❑If near a trailway or bicycle route,extra consideration should be given to bicycle accessibility such as bike lanes on internal roadways,bicycle parking and other amenities. ❑ Drive-thru lanes at uses such as banks and fast-food restaurants should also be accessible for bicycles. Waiver.Upon finding by the Building Inspector,Village Engineer,Planning Board or Board of Trustees that, due to the particular character or limited nature of development or change in use or to special conditions peculiar to a site,the submission of a final site plan,or certain portions of information normally required as part of the site development plan,is inappropriate or unnecessary or that strict compliance with said submission requirements will rause extraordinary and unnecessary hardship,such official or Board may waive such submission requirements wherever,in the opinion of such official or Board, such waiver will be consistent with the goal of promoting the public health, safety and general welfare of the community.The findings for granting such waiver shall become a part of the public record. Any waiver request must be made in writing,and include sufficient detailed information for the appropriate authority to make an informed decision. Desitan Professional's Certification of Coffluletion of,Checklist I have fully reviewed the Village of Rye Brook's requirements and certify this application to be a complete submission. I understand that an incomplete plat or incomplete checklist shall be deemed an incom ssion and shall be returned to the applicant upon determination of such by the appropriate authority. f ":kF-D q, � Name(Print) i-AA' � til[�yTA<i. ?��C� f' Signature �1= n Date �� �f I5 .V��•��ys;g� o 0 Professional Seal Site Plan Checklist Page 7 of 7 RESIDENTIAL BULK REGULATION SCHEDULE r,FNFRnI NrlTFS All r taetrmttbn,Glttrital,pluaNng and Heating aria our caditionMg work RESIDENTIAL IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE Shall be installed in wlct accordance wRh all. sect'wr of the Residential Code ��O SCHEDULE MAXIMUM GROSS FLOOR AREA FORMULA: 4,000 s((LOT AREA-21,780)%0.114784217 Of New York State(2010 Editor),ant all Cedes and Regf Ntler5 of the Village of Rye Break2820.4 S.F. MAXIMUM GROSS FLOOR AREA: �( Workmanship shall be first class In Every respect. TOTAL MAXIM M PERMITTED EXISTING GROSS FLOOR AREA: 7578 The contractor shall leten,all cOnstructln permits and Irepectlois and appro✓al as required. COVERAGE BY IMPERVIOUS Permit fees are to be paid by the Owner. SURFACES MAX MUM PERMITTED TOTAL PROPOSED GROSS FLOOR AREA ' S.F. The contractor shall lay ont each stage efthe work to verify all eordltioe and dimensions LOT AREA ZONING IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE IN �( ant shall notify tIe Architect of any 5ignficant dlserepancles,prior to l ginning Bald work. SQUARE FEET FORE ASE LOT MR LOT AREA DISTRICT FRONT YARD(%7 759 OF MAXIMUM GROSS FLOOR AREA: • AREA OVER BASE LOT IN The contractor shall protect the existing tracers throLonei coetn¢ton and shall FOOT q AREA(Z) R-zs zee HEIGHT SETBACK RATIO(SELECT ONE) notify the Architect and the Owner immedlatdy upas firdlno any structural deflaencies FOOT(S.F. Tl he Architect l not respoonsiAnfor the pratettia orcorrettioh or concealdplur , oT04,000 o ss R-2o 3o ZONE EXISTING PROPOSED REQUIRED x-1.or HVAC comp nts adjacent to the work area.The Ca4racter shall examlre 4,001 TO 6,000 2,200 35 R-15 35 FROM: FRONT: FROM: edjacent areas exposed during and shell be responsible for notlfyirg the Arch-and 9-25 Owner of such compawnts to review correction ai protection prior to closing-in areas. 6,001 TO 12,000 21900 27 R-15A 35 SIDE; SIDE: SIDE: The contractor shall visit the ante and be familiar with the exiting cadlaoro prior 000 4, 001 TO 16, 520 26 R-12 40 R-20 FRONT: FRONT: to submlttin0 the bid 12, SIDE: SIDE:: SIDE:FROSIDE: 1T. .60 MirordeTall rotusually shownaspaified,but necessary for proyrand ac"Faale 16,001 To 20,000 5,560 25 9-10 45 FRONT: FRONT: FROM': 0.60 cons. tan,,-Ilse on,a aperatwn of any part of the Work,shall be Included In the R 15 ova 20,001'f0 30,000 6,560 24 R-7 40 SIDE: SIDE: SIDE: 1.60 Sanding sentacks are to be computed by a Stare oP New Yolk licensed Surveyor to verHy FRONT: FRONT: FRONT: 0.80 Z NZ code conformance prior to beglnnirrgg any work The Artheect has ro relachis MY for the 30,001 70 40,000 B,9fi0 23 R3 30 code leycon or ca prior t of setbacks. R'15A SIDE: SIDE: SIDE: 2.40 �_ (1L Min eo l bearing capacity:2 taro P.5F:in cglol with Section 401 and Table 40L4.1 40.001 ANO LARGER 11,260 22 R-2F 30 of the Ni Resdentlal Code. R_12 FRONT: FRONT: FAONT: O.fi9 �-< �Q AREA OF LOT 115fal S,F. EXISTING ALLOWED PROPOSED SDE: SIDE: SIDE: 1.60 Qom, Li>- -F- Minimum-,71r: ra 'vis 5trengeFe of oonorete used aro tots In campllanw with Table4022 FRONT:0.41 A 0.62 FRONT:0.41 A 0.77 FRONT: 0.80 p[N •• oP the NYS Residential Code az Polbws: TOTAL IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE 2555 S.F. 4385.75.F. 3616 S.F. R'1� Basement Walls,fcudat'lon walls,footings.interior clan q=Al(other than garage floor SIDE: SIDE: SIDE: 2.40 1J-J Z Iah).exxerwr and o[her walls expesed to the weather.33PP7707 FRONT IMPERVOUSCOVERAGE 88 458 148 Porches,and steps exposed to the weather,AM garage floor slab:3500 P51. R-7 FRONT: FRONT; FRONT: 0.96 < U All footings min.3'-6"below grade our to wild rock. NOTES: SDE: SIDE: SIDE: 3.00 Q J Cl.. Step 4mtings to be 1 vertical au 2 hwrizontaL FRONT: FRONT: FRONT: 1.20 <Z C1 Z Finish grades to sbpe away from builAing fluidal IMPERVIOUS SURFACES(DEFINITION)ALL BUILDINGS,AS DEFINED HERIN,AND ALL AREAS ON THE R-5 SIDE; SIDE: SIDE: 400 Q GROUND OR ELEVATED ABOVE THE GROUND WHICH ARE COMPROMISED OF MATERIALS THROUGH WHICH Cornett new footing dralre to existing drain system. WATER CANNOT READILY FLOW,INCLUDING,BUT NOT LIMITED TO ASPHALT,CONCRETE,MASONRY,WOO D, FRONT: FRONT; FRONT: 1.20 Y][ GRAVEL AND CLAY,AND WHICH D]N515T OF THE ELEMENTS INCLUDING,BUT NOT LIMITED T0, R'2F SIDE: SIDE: 400 Correct leaders to Dry-H,as indicated. D]URttAR05,SPORTS COURTS,SWIMMING POOLS,PATIOS,SIDEWALKS,RAMPS,TERRACES AND SDE: U C DRIVEWAYS. NOTES: w O C Driveway ton asphalt surfaced. New footinge to se poured at same elevaten as exiting adjacent footings. 2.)"BASE LOT AREA"IS THE MINIMUM ENO OF THE LOT SIZE RANGE IN THE'LOT AREA'COLUMN 1 R E RELATION TO THE RATS G EGRADE OF A E CORRESPONDING OTO REGULATE THE HEIGHT OF A BUILDING IN RELATION TH THE AVERAGE GRADE OF THE CORRESPONDING PORTON IL THE LOT UNE FROM WHICH EIT IS SETBACK.THE RATS MODIFIES THE MAXIMUM G THE PO HEIGHT OF BUILDING LI BY FORMING H INCLINED Z •0�CLX All steel to is A.36 grade V PLANE BEGINNING AT THE AVERAGE GRADE ALONG THE PORTION OF THE LOT LINE FROM WHICH THE O Provde top&bottom plates at Will c.- SETBCK IS MEASURED AND RISING TOWARD THE BUILDING AT THE SPECIFIES RATS ABOVE WHICH NO PART I` F OF ANY BUILDING,OTHER THAN MINOR ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES SUCH AS CHIMNEYS,SKYLIGHTS AND Provide Wall BrachW In Accordance With Section 9602.%7&T"R602.10.1 Of CI DORMER WINDOWS NOT COVERING MORE THEN I OR OF THE ENTIRE ROOF AREA,SHALL BE PERM17TEO TO Q LL The 9esdarclal Crile of New York Scans,Using MetM.d 3 Ps Outlined N EXTEND. •--• Sectkn R602.103 Of Sarre , All fraln ng lumber to be Douglas fir#2.Pretnglneaed I~to es by Tnn.blst y 2.)HEIGHT/SETBACK SHALL BE CALCULATED USING THE FOLLOWING FORMULA: (D 01 } aR..-�., HEIGHT/SETBACK=X. McMlllan,nstalled as per marufactirers spec 4I-Kne, 4- WHERE%IS THE REQUIRED 510E OR FRONT YARD RATS FOR THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH A PROPERTY IS ,p„gYi, LOCATEDAS SPECIFIED IN ARTICLE VIII OF CHAPTER 250. Double jolxs anter paralbl partkbro. 14, Double end joists dlrsct(V over 5115 running parallel to fkwr spore. 3J COMPLETE ELEVATION VIEWS FOR THE PROPOSED IMPROVEMENT MUST BE INCLUDED ON THE Provide 51#,well bH Ing maxmin 8ft Or-in floors framed with dimisinil - S DRAWINGS C dd�q Il Bracing at 1 a TToa you'ste as per manufacturers specs icauore. O Protide-1 2-2x4 posts under each ad of headers. ZONING SCHEDULE RESIDENTIAL LOT AREA LU +' Provide min 2-2x10 headers over openings in bearing wall 6-0'm krger. - U (ALL REQUIRED DATA SHALL BE AS PER VILLAGE LOGE COVERAGE SCHEDULE Al posts,beams and girders to be taken to Solid fo rdation. SECTION 250 AND ACTUAL FIELD DATA) SELECT ZONE AREA IN MAIN ACCESS. DECKYOUR CI Stair treads:91/2 r nosing/ri5ere:73/4"max d"-` ;# ZONE DISTRICT SQUARE MAX MAX MA%8 C� O AO windows ant glass doors to be Andersen,with Hlgh-rerfomtance Low-E4 PROPERTYOWNER; JOM&Tata Amr¢lata C'D- suernsrt glazing. PROPERTY ADDRESS:5 Ar&lc Road ❑ 9-25 25,000 148 3.5A 4.08 Protide u red gglazing at rgumed bcadae as per section 9908&R30B.4 R:'' ZONE:9-10 ❑ R-20 20,000 148 3S8 408 of The Residential GMe of NY 5. OCOu"NCY DONSTRULTON ❑ rR-7 15,000 168 3.58 408 Job 4-.14-36 3/4 Fir rated door At Garage(self-closing). GROUP: One FamilyResidence CLASSIFICATION: 58 Kitchen tooktop to Pave 150 CF.M.exhaa5t fan ZONING DATA RED'0. EXIST. PROP. ❑ 15A 15,000 rix 3.58 4.02 Date:10/27/15 Drywall 7/2 and 5/B"gyyun baand shall be Sed Waghout the project and fastened with LOT AREA: gA00 gF. 11,50:k75F. R$W]BF. ❑ 12,500 178 408 408 drywall screws Drywall shall be teyA with three coats of taping compound And where butt _ 1 ori jonte are taped,t shall be feathered aut for two feet. - HORIZONTAL CIRCLE: 75 FG 75 FG 75 FC IM 10,000 208 4.58 3.58 F.A.I.denotes fresh air make At fireplaces and heat ng units. ❑ 7,500 238 4.58 3.5FRONTAGE: EO Ft. 155689 155.68 FCAll framng lumber at platform 0 be pressu s treated.Decking ant mill to se As selected ❑ 5,000 308 5.08 3.58 Prov aemetale.hersatearectlanogo-xrsampoststotontreteplersxeekMINIMUM YARD DIMENSIONSGonnectors to be approved for use with PCA pressure treated lumbo. pRON, 50Ft- 23P& 23.8& ❑ 5,000 308 5.08 3.58 Profile flashing at all roof/wall junctures,roofing hitersectiats,valleys as rrµulrw,coy SIDE(LEAST ONE} p R 83�/-Ft. 42A Ft. AREA OF LOT ? at Slat)viuhed roof hhersect'wns,chlmney5,exhaust caps,grills,stacks,ledgers, Property Owners; window heads,doors ant all cher ayllcahis areas as per gersm accepted sxardards. LOT AREA' 1WA7 SF. John&Tonna AmY uta s Provide caulking at all applicable areas as per generally accepted standards and product SIDE(TOTAL OF TROT. NA. NA NA 5 MgYle Road 4 LOCATION M A AREA OF HOUSE 9ve 590-9015 73 REAR: 30 Ft. 15 R- 102 Ft. COVERAGE OF MAIN BUILDING: 9146 -9025 >Q a rg manufacturers irotaatuon specifications. _ _u n 2474 S.F. Q�n Q 9emove all debris during eonstrucaon and at I.compktion of the project- MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT AREAOFpi ST FLOOR OIVOED BY AREA 215 8 RM.�50G.-chitecPssoclates U i No scale DF LOT x Ino: & e Climatic &Geographic Design Criteria IN STORIES: 2 1 1 µhl Fremd Pw& C� o g d AREA OF ACCESSORY BLDG. _ IN FEET: 90 FL 15 Fre. 18 FG AREA OF ACCESSORY BUILDING: 0 S.F. al 9 � < s arra o.wr� �,r�;*mx< new core umiaor: 1578sq.fc O FirxFmr 2asgeq.rc OHEIGHT/SETBACK RATIO OAFE�TX71 OfL00ROIVOEDBYAREA 8 �ryg2aa Rdne�Mus taco GYF YKVIq C gess 42 7°F Yes w�n,is�wroi max Max-mm Now =28m.4 sq. ) _ _ FR1NT: PO Al&01020.41&0.77 nssxiatcs AREA OF DECK nIIReM=R�eme Insulation&Fenestration R uirement5 By Com orient SIDE: COVERAGE DF oficK o s.F. M,= es gn Loads used SO safely III bads nciud'ng,dead bads,vis loads,roof IoaAs, qtr - AREA OF DECK OIWOEO BY AREA floor bads,srow loads,w rid loads anA se sin c loads,are to be h compfance w th Section g,�� raea�v°x'r Ry t..•awr wr Ry v wr utr.e w plate corrply with the Eror�Cazrvatbn 0 8 93011 of the NYS Residential Code as follows' Co.eetraction Cod oP New Yark State,5totbn 402 DFSIrN I DADS(Per SZa Fl-): 4 095 w` NR 3g s Nn s w` NA NA 15eA off ti e December 2B,2010 Me-40#LL115#O.L. Attlee 20#LLIO#D.L. rnwaw 092 NA M 3B 19 NA 30 NA NA tLY Interior Wall:12.5# 30i L1115#D.L r N1 IR Yr NA Yr N1 NA fN Mark Mustacato.AWA (4'6"&Mgher) Frederik F.GrppL NA Exferior Wall:15# Asphalt Driveway k � `I E. PWc/ortn65ugc, J 9eerbrm,a'O'lora A-1 ExKC PVrcFmce glag Wa Patb To3. � �rGlieb /_\\ 5[eNTrviM Owa Grate � ExKt.Oo.Wtll Fxbc P�Ferca Spt FeroiN Per fktall a bttt 1\ �I FROSION OONTROI.5CHE IIIF a'P.v.G P(e Coneatbn N $ 3D.a' G ID �� Pr d—py� j D) rloNry vumge Bldg a a start Up Dau At DETAIL: TROUGH DRAIN TOraae ' R'a�e?�erx5a,rr'Set m De LeastSDays Prbr TO Start rbt TO Srile Ex'mung Oe IF+ 1t9"x25'-td'x 3'-6"Of Grvshed Stora ' j SroD'RmBwee IIL 11 J '!i (Per Oetalll Far Roof Leaders � i IrTll /� a�r�ato(M1rt 1O4'Fran Oulldlna r l rq+crcY lNe) 1),Iretall4O"arow 4aee,past O B'-0'(mar.)wtth YTree I 1_Il l it y T-? m 41ker 4dbl'Ie prla to startM rcletrllctbR () yfwtiLlJ1/ro,Ta I 2).Call for Irepectlat frau Vlllage at bast 2 daysf, h P[ I\ Prapmed 3 Per Dema TyA \ {PBLy'�YtE 9LorY MdKbri�TP-�.$ Z VILLAGEINSPFLTICN C0 N Er�mfrima Plttform I e<�is 'r=„ f y Trz To Oe Prorated +y & astePa J�n. a O Q P MNNTENANCE: � O 1).Canractor to irspect sml sedlnerlt caltrol'metliM after rJ O EMsi:P_✓C Fa�m _ �. o.52'x90'.305'GJtec' atp rain calsirg cutoff and rurave ary e.cessNe sedlhtent Z N B3°3500'W. E.b p pry,.y - i RocM1arger 330%L Cluriwr SeC h <:--' n} 2}Irspectlon shall be docurrmtrA N Wlrlting ard�esN.rmted 12'R'Of�ra ._be To Be RmwaE EA•'x 10-0”x J'6"Of Crushed (V r. T2'-MOPT gspM1alc Wlb Stoa(per 0ettaci9yFor DrKvwy, (3'Ms) OWater Asphalt O,rb Prop.Qab Cut Thb Secdm Of6be Hopes Mh1O-0"Fr 5m BwHlnB Lu Z Mh ( Excavadan roc water a ldevices may 4 TO BcRxoim 6AAyproperty L'ro) 1—�Q J= bngln if pm-caltructkn Irepectlon passed A r I e Road —I Z u MLLAGEIN5PECT1ON Fercz it W 9Y Qzo IF— MAINI'ENANCE:as mr p nor—1 0,2.r4r—(T, ••�e DRAINAGE: TREE PROTECTION DETAIL SITE PLAN uj°c p.Iratalldrvwdwapiping.wrapyelk.veauda,sape No Scale 2):Relnw ttavaCcedmaterlal-d*-hags. Scale:T'=20'-0" I^ 9}Callfor Village lrspectlon atlsast2dayeprlartofk KO ls)V NO-e rP Ta 1 Re .d LPL— opased 5�Q n LL wire or sm,.Ferclre stapbe '-- .} VILLAGE INSPECTION Tc Posts.Examire mm Tremn w/seaward snored,Famrn Cs O3 GaV5F./Mr Attached TO The FNefed Gude Flte�r rmrb �KS LC1�� Force&Ex+erdirg Lrto TrercM1 MNNTENANGE: Steel Cranrob Or Wood SCakes, �4 1}Cartracta to Irrpect soil sedlmettt control method after 2a'Ines G,o 41O-0o.G. any rain causlrg ru'aff and ro e any exceselve sediment. 6/ 2).repe Nor shall be do—rtes In writing and sutmitted Ta the Villa Fn inset. Ba:kPlll Ab CanpaC Q L QC Excaxed Sal 1 UY To T Pa Broken sroa 0 g Lu 3ackrlll and raga erode sdl -111 IIII II IIII— b© L.— lIITII Lglou� admeaa O c ATb LM W Pssv II� VIII- Filter Fabric O L O IIII {L O (S)_ NLLAGEINSPECTION rwo: H" 52 52" w• O U_ nN' otmm ._ tt�. e"stoae m PL MAINTENANCE: 1}CatraS I L T F E N C E D E T A I L 2aetOr to Inspect still sedlrrelrt contra method atter aI lo„shad� I`w Ing��Win" S E C T I O N D E T A I L: ,�x:14-36to rte Vulage laer. No Scale C U L T E C 3 3 0 X L CHAMBERS Date:10/27/15 VLLAGEINSPFlTioN - - Not To Scale TREE PROTECTION NOTES < TTY gWNg aYd gYaad cav restaetbn (ALL PHASES OF CONSTRUCTION INCLUDING CLEARING AND GRUBBING, PRELIMINARY SITE PREPARATION,UTILITY INSTALLATION,PRELIMINARY @ GRADING,ROAD CONSTRUCTION,BUILDING LOT PREPARATION,ETC., $g VILLAGE IN5FEMON - REQUIRE TREE PROTECTION MEASURES TO BE IN PLACE. y NO CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES OF ANY KIND SHALL OCCUR WITHIN THE Grads Lin FINAL INSPECTION; LIMITS OF PROTECTED AREAS INCLUDING,BUT NOT LIMITED TO GRADING, Patio On G— E XCAVATION,STOCKPILING OF MATERIALS,STORAGE OF CONSTRUCTIONR. Q All—m carK measures rymaysd and EQUIPMENT,VEHICLE PARKING,MOVEMENT OF WORKERS OMACHINERY, grass fully established. OR DUMPING OF CONSTRUCTION DEBRIS: a6"Topall e_ (TREES TO REMAIN SHALL BE FIELD MARKED AND SAFETY FENCING' FiW Fahr U U Q ANDIDR WOOD BARRIERS FOR INDIVIDUAL TREES AND GROUPS-OF TREES J•'x12•e�usted 4"Pert.PVC Pipe To Dryweu — TO BE PROTECTED SHALL BE INSTALLED.FENCING OR BARRIERS SHALL 5..&d x BE PLACED OUTSIDE THE-DRIP LINE'OF ALL TREE OR TREES; ((WARNING SIGNS,INDICATING AREAS OF PROTECTED VEGETATION AND Coryr < PROHIBITED ACTIVITIES IN PROTECTED AREAS,SHALL BE PLACED ON SITE. DETAIL: DRAIN A T F A T 10 Rbhau Mus-'rttsawD'GryI (THE EFFECTIVENESS OF PROTECTION SHALL BE MONITORED AND Wt To 5caleABiOL18LG6 MAINTAINED THROUGHOUT THE CONSTRUCTION PERIOD. All Rm-Reserved (PRQTECTED TREES SHALL BE INSPECTED BY A CERTIFIED ARBORIST TO DETERMINE CONDITION AND HEALTH AFTER COMPLETION OF CONSTRUCTION.INSPECTIONS SHALL BE MADE ONCE AYEAR,DURING THE GROWING SEASON,FOR AT LEASTTHREE GROVANG SEASONS AFTER' COMPLETION OF CONSTRUCTION. (PROTEQTED TREES DAMAGED OR KILLED BY CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES $HALL BE IMMEDIATELY REPLACED TO THE SATLRFACITOU OF THE MUNICIPALITY. r N a Z 0 N w AWI SWNg W ue a EtleLg RtN � Z � ❑ O Q 0 F a' �< pC <_ ILD} Mrw�aeterod�.der, �N .. W Z +' ❑❑ 1--Dp 05 ° ❑❑❑ �� JZQJLL Q Z O L ❑�®� ���� �V�hD 0 _ _ _ _ _ ❑❑❑❑ ❑❑❑❑ Y� oC March FMx Floorth ❑❑❑❑ ❑❑❑❑ A�proxlmate GYaEc O! Prryoem Roof Wer - _ _ ❑❑❑ 1:1 11D]❑❑ O lS)0 fL Erereee Pletlarm .- V Execrd Exbdg Ererarcx I GrailFbor lte J�Q L LL Pbsiormd Frarc Srep. Q.6 LD �C FRONT ELEVATION hero Foo[ug Scale:1/4"=1'-0" Macon otPtn or E~'s`he �C PrcpomG neaaen �� .� W Cn U C O W — OL i i Job P.14-36 / Date:10/27/15 �0 Q F xr°i uta OD rg�aow Rena, aw GroR neeot� M Rghrn RmwveG HEIGHT TO SETBACK RATIO ELEVATIONS Scale:1/8"=1'-0" Rd N�plltls sno-�n:Roon , 0 Nrrivn Guttar�i Nadere jL 11 Mw VMI SMlnnn To MatchHIM El ExbSkg C)� ]C c Fx+�ePbcbnn ~ O C MarcM1F CFlmr LLe <..-< LD} LLIZ O Gang Floorth J Z p J LL —��- - - - Ayprouma[e Grafi Q _- LII .6 C------------------ ---------J --�� QC --- --------- — LLJ O Mia cc n oeocn or'"�,Ietuy J—C RIGHT SIDE ELEVATION Scale:114"=1'-0" i p LD} 06LD A Q �C p i O ❑ uj12 +' (n U 0 — nt,��.r�Gacce� LL- Qs PL > Q- ❑❑❑ JGb P.1436 o Mat'cM1 EvIK lI QatB:10/27A5 naxn RseRoer ue 0 mo Pypronimaee Grade u_$ --------------======= ___ _________I oa$!3 & t � x Matc'M1 Ogic OPE 15ving � s REAR ELEVATION Rlcna�M 9x Gyp ,�au�ee NI Rlglrts Reeervrd Lt Z a 0 N w Z O <V.- OC Q< Ln} w N LLI O no n-z• LCl — n�• �ZQ Q 2 JLL Z n-w O h O O Mud Room <w c Bedroom Y Dining RoomU C Kitchen W O C Z .rmcc 0 Garage Lc)zz� t--�Q LL O L} 06 In Oe Living Room p L p C $fir room O li PL Q- a'd Job#:14-36 Date:10/27/15 a'ag' S� m� Existing FIRST F L 0 0 R PLAN o a 1 5ca1c:1/4"=P-0" =U—o X20U�� c � U Y get 2014 RtMu r a[oGrp� �ssaaYa /J PJgMs RescrveA Z 0 ,9s � ApPrex Lme OF %.9" 3'3" _ ExiSTing PaTp 01ZBaefarcn[9tQrin�a1 C -- — I 4 W New RsofeE a G aAa O< O C flrtfo m / I I b 5 O O g-T � gSWe \r—, ln} I A G es�r to N 00 $ Kitchen L1_.I Z +' tte' 0 05 �w JZ< ttdL tt-7VZ' g1 Z O b Bedroom LO ` Bedroom Dining Roomw U C � � o 93V2' 312' %Y4" (S J C C Q �V } � .6 LD DO Family Room Q Living Room s Q L C Lu .s312 s12'.. f sue U 0 n Bedroom RLL/ \ / \ O LL. OC W- e z:a�•••xea•Garaae ren � 3$ a•o• job#,.14-36 Date:10/27/15 yv3.. a' Proposed FIRST F L 0 0 R PLAN Scale:1/4"=T-o E2'jFlrst Floor. 1578�:5qc{��Ft. First Floor Mdition: 86CYq.Ft. Q Total Floor Area: 74585q Max.Floor Area Al,.: / z L✓ gM2014 Rtlw r Grp Asssciafw 11 RgMs ReserveA BU LD, :D%W!)�:.TMENT VIIaLA3�E'U:E_��YE� �OOK 938 KING SEarR'sr ;BR �o ,NY 105'73 (914)93' ' ._' 9-5801 www'v. lYU� FOR OFFICE USE ONLY: Approval Date: Permit# :Application # Approval Signature: :ARCHrTECTURAL REVIEW BOARD: Disapproved: ; Date: BOT Approval Date: Case # Chairman: PB Approval bate: Case # Secretary: ZBA Approval Date: Case# Other: Application Fee; Permit Fees: Exterior_Building Permit Application Application dated: 5 IS is hereby made to the Building Inspector of the Village of Rye Brook,NY,for the issuance of a Permit for the construction of buildings,structures,additions,alterations or for a change in use,as per detailed statement described below. 1. JobAddress: �5 LC— ?. Parcel IDM 1!a) S l l GC--> Zone: ~t C;7 3. Proposed Improvement(Describe in detail): 150 14-D ADJ 14::V-rc v-. AT "Mt tzfablr SfDr- ft—'UP AVE' A- '24 Arp ^ 4-�'t c,E 54JL4YV.GE-44-u' krr'G�-tel -z:64t-t- aur. - fD� z 4. Property Owner: .-JOP43.) Address: 5e,YLi Phone#—'I*J1 " Ga 5l'"1 Cell#-66z— S2 s'Et Fax# List All Other Properties Owned in Rye Brook: 0!Ac Applicant: -1.4 QQ Z )D—VP% Address: 5 6;YL% oA-J.�:> FVC— 15)Z001 41 $--1• t0S�J Phone# '�� �� � Cell# 862— 826S) Fax# Architect: �1 V�Z'�ON 'M 1A N1G•. A .-��i j Address: Phone# 6A'b —5'a� Cell# _ �^7 --�-' 4�L Fax# 09, Engineer: Address: Phone# Cell# Fax# General Contractor: Address: Phone# Cell# Fax# 5. Occupancy, (1-Fam.,2-Fam.,Comm.,etc...)Prior to construction: .A'M. After construction: 1 tN1 6. Will the proposed project require the installation of a new,or an extension/modification to an existing automatic fire suppression system?(Fire Sprinkler,ANSL System,FM-200 System,Type I Hood,etc...)Yes:_No:_V-11f yes,you must submit a separate Automatic Fire Suppression System Permit application&2 sets of detailed engineered plans) 7. Will the proposed project disturb 400 sq.ft.or more of land,or create 400 sq.ft.or more of impervious coverage requiring a Stormwater Management Control Permit as per§217 of Village Code? Yes: �No: ,„Area: 10C-1 -!�G?. P-'. 8. Will the p;oposed project require a Site Plan Review by the Village Planting Board as per§209 of Village Code? Yes: v/ No: . (if yes,you must submit a Site Plan Application,&provide detailed drawings) 9. Will the proposed project require a Steep Slopes Permit as per§213 of Village Corte Yes: No: ✓(ifyes,you must submit a Site Plan Application,&provide a detailed topographical survey) 10. Is the lot located within 100 ft of a Wetland as per§245 of Village Code? Yes: No: ✓if yes,the area of wetland and the wetland buffer zone must be properly depicted on the survey&site plan) 11. Is the lot or any portion thereof located in a Flood Plane as per the FIRM Map dated 9/28/07? Yes: No: (if yes,the area and elevations of the flood plane must be properly depicted on,the survey&site plan) 12. Will the proposed project require a Tree Removal permit as per§235 of Village Code?Yes: No-�/ (ifyes,you must submit a Tree Removal Permit Application) 13. Does the proposed project involve a Home-Occupation as per§250-38 of Village Code? Yes: No: ✓ if yes,indicate: TIER I: TIER II: TIER 111: (if yes,a Home Occupation Permit Application is required) 14. Area of proposed building in square feet: Basement: b 249 1"fl.: 86t�n 2°d fl.: '"-' 3rd fl.: --� 15. What is the total Gross Floor Area of the proposed new construction: g�� 16. What is the total Square Footage of the proposed renovation to the existing structure: `!)�J 17. What is the total estimated cost of construction: S jibe coo, CX.-, (The estimated cost shall include ail site improvements,labor,material,scaffolding,fixed equipment,professional fie professional fees,including any material and labor which may be donated gratis.) 18. Area of lot: Square feet:_ ?• Acres: (�• 2 19. Dimensions from proposed building or structure to lot lines. front yard: -S rear yard: 10.2' right side yard: "" left side yard: f other: 2 g" Y 'O 0. If building is located on a corner to which street does it front an' �E" ��__ 21. N.Y.State Construction Classification: �.�� N.Y.State Use Classification: 1 fk%-MLL 22. Number of stories: Overall Height: 2 3 Median Height: �g 23. Will the basement be full,or partial:_- , 2TI DrG- finished or unfinished: Uu f'I{J� '!"✓"� 24. What material is the exterior finish: 'N/ 25. Will roof be peaked,hip,mansard,flat,etc:. . Roofing material: 8!5Vftb-GT x..1'11.19 bsS 26. What system of heating. 27. If private sewage disposal is necessary,approval by the Westchester County Health Department must be submitted with this application. 28. Estimated date of completion: - MME52 2>=s1�e 29. The State Workman's Compensation Law provides that before a Building Permit is issued,the Contractor,Owner, Architect,etc.,shall produce the following information: Name of Compensation Insurance Carrier: Policy Number: Date of Expiration: This application must be properly completed in its entirety by a N.Y. State Registered Architect or N.Y. State Licensed Professional Engineer&signed by those professionals where indicated. It must also include the notarized signature(s) of the legal owners) of the subject property, and the applicant of record in the spaces provided. Any application not properly completed in its entirety and/or not properly signed shall be deemed null and void, and will be returned to the applicant Please note that application fees are non-refundable. STATE OF NEW YORK,COUNTY OF WESTCHESTER ) as: __AC14--S e��Uwz_)AMA' being duly sworn,deposes and states that he/she is the applicant above named, (print name of individual signing as the applicant) and further states that (the is the legal owner of the property to which this application pertains, or that (4)he is the for the legal owner and is duly authorized to make and file this application. (indicate architect,contractor,agent,attorney,etc.) That all statements contained herein are true to the best of his/.her knowledge and belief, and that any work performed, or use conducted at the above captioned property will be in conformance with the details as set forth and contained in this application and in any accompanying approved plans and specifications,as well as'in accordance with the New York State Uniform Fire Prevention&Building Code, the Code of the Village of Rye Brook and all other applicable laws, ordinances and regulations. Sworn to before me this Sworn to before me this 69 r day of /(/G�bIS , 20 day/ of � r 1" 20,._.,_..._ .- �5 S' afore of Propeely Owner Si ature of Applicadt Print Name of Property Owner Print Name of Applicant Notary Public Notary Public HENRY MUSTAi KFO Notary Public,State of New York HENRY MUSTACATO No.o1MU5012198 Notary Public,State of New York Qualified in Westchester County No.01MUS012198 Commission Expires June 15 1-017 Qualified in Westchester County g Commission Expires June 15 '7-01 BUILDING DEPARTMENT VILLAGE OF RYE$ROOK 938 KING STREET RYE.BRom,NY 10573 (914)939-0668 FAX(914)939-5801 RESIDENTIAL LOT AREA COVERAGE Address: rJ AIZ95,7'(A-- POAt7' Section: ��5�.�� ( Block: j Lot: O PERMITTED COVERAGE RATIOS IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS (Local Law 3-88) YOUR ZONE AREA IN MAIN ACCESS. DECK ZONE DISTRICT SQ. FEET BLDG. BLDG. MAX. CHECK MAX. R-25 25,000 14% 3.5% 4% R-20 20,000 14% 3.5% 4% R-15 15,000 16% 3.5% 4% R-15A 15,000 12% 3.5% 4% R-12 12,500 17% 4% 4% R-10 10,000 20% 4.5% 3.5% R-7 7,500 23% 4.5% 3.5% R-5 5,000 30% 5% 3.5% R-2F 5,000 30% 5% 3.5% Existing: Proposed: 1.AREA OF LOT 11503.7 Sq. Ft. X3.7 Sq. Ft. 2. AREA OF HOUSE a. Coverage of Main Building (including Attached Garage or Accessory Building) Sq. Ft. 247 Sq. Ft. b.Area of 1"Floor Divided By Area of Lot x 100 %n % 3. AREA OF ACCESSORY BUILDING (Includes Detached Garages,Tool Shed, Playhouses) 12o Sq. Ft. Sq. Ft. a. Coverage of Accessory Building Area of Accessory Building Divided By Area of Lot x 100 4.AREA OF DECK Sq. Ft. Sq. Ft. a. Coverage of Deck Area of Deck Divided By Area of Lot x 100 � % � % I attest to the best of my knowledge and belief,the above information is correct. Architect's Signature BUILDING DEPARTMENT VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK 938 KING STREET RYE BROOK,NY 10573 (914) 939-0668 Fax (914) 939-5801 IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE RATIOS RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS Address: 5 A1ZC-YL~ RCPI:�, Section: I-Se.5' 1 Block: 1 Lot: r30 Zone: IMPERVIOUS SURFACES (Definition): All buildings, as defined herein, and all areas on the ground or elevated above the ground which are comprised of materials through which water cannot readily flow, including, but not limited to asphalt, concrete, masonry, wood, gravel and clay, and which consist of elements including, but not limited to, court yards, sports courts,swimming pools,patios, sidewalks,ramps,terraces and driveways. TOTAL MAXIMUM PERMITTED MAX. PERMITTED COVERAGE Zoning IMPERVIOUS LOT AREA BY IMPERVIOUS SURFACES District COVERAGE IN FRONT (sq.ft.) For Base Lot For Lot Area YARD(%) Area (sq.ft.)* Over Base R-25 20 Lot Area(%} R-20, 30 0 to 4,000 0. 55 R-15 35 4,001 to 6,000 2,200 35 6,001 to 12,000 2,900 27 R-15A 35 12,001 to 16,000 4,520 26 R-12 40 16,001 to 20,000 5,560 25 R-10 45 20,001 to 30,000 6,560 24 30,001 to 40,000 8,960 23 R-7 40 40,001 &larger 11,260 ' 22 R-5 30 R2-F 30 *"Base Lot Area"is the minimum end of the lot size range in the"Lot Area"column Area of lot: 11,9�v3.r7 sq.ft. Existing Allowed Pro used Total impervious coverae = 2 5S5 S .ft. �313ra."7 S , ft. Z6 (o S .ft. Front im ervious coverae = % �-CJ % 1�- % I attest to the best of my knowledge and belief,the above information is correct. Architect's Signature !0.11.06 BuiLDING DEPARTMENT VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK 938 KING STREET RYE BROOK,NY 10573 (914)939-0668 FAX(914)939-5801 BULK REGULATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS Address: t5 Y{• QAV Section: t3S.15{ Block: L Lot: 1�70 MAXIMUM GROSS FLOOR AREA USE FORMULA: Maximum Gross Floor Area =4,000+ [(Lot Area—21,780) x 0.11478429 ]: a. Allowed - 2OW-4" Sq. Feet b. Existing — 15 '8 Sq. Feet c. Proposed — 2` 3 Sq. Feet HEIGHT/SETBACK RATIOS FOR RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS DEFINITION: A standard designed to regulate the height of a building in relation to the average grade of the corresponding portion of the lot kine from which it is set back. The ratio modifies the maximum permitted Height of Building by forming an inclined plane beginning at the average grade along the portion of the lot line from which the setback is measured and rising toward the building at the specified ratio above which no part of any building, other than minor architectural features such as chimneys, skylights and dormer windows not covering more than 10%of the entire roof area,shall be permitted to extend.Height and Setback shall be calculated using the formula; Height/Setback=X,where X is the required side or front yard ratio for the zoning district in which a property is located as specified.in Article VII I of Chapter 250. A complete elevation view for the proposed improvement must be included on the drawings. FILL IN YOUR RATIOS: ZONE EXIS AM PROPOSED REQUIRED FRONT: FRONT: FRONT: .48 R25 SIDE: SIDE: SIDE: 1.30 FRONT: FRONT: FRONT: .60 R20 SIDE: SIDE: SIDE: 1.50 FRONT: FRONT: FRONT: .60 R-95 SIDE: SIDE: SIDE: 1.60 FRONT: FRONT: FRONT: .80 R-15A SIDE: SIDE: SIDE: 2.40 FRONT: FRONT: FRONT: .69 R-12 SIDE: SIDE SIDE: 1.60 FRONT: 0.�2 FRONT:o.4. 110.*17 FRONT: .80 R-f0 SIDE: SIDE: SIDE: 2.40 FRONT: FRONT: FRONT: .96 R7 SIDE: SIDE: SIDE: 3.00 FRONT: FRONT: FRONT: 1.20 0_5 SIDE: SIDE: SIDE: 4.00 FRONT: FRONT: FRONT: 1.20 R2F SIDE: SIDE: SIDE: 4.00 I attest to the be f m k ledge and belief, the above information is correct. '_�'<57 Architect's Signature 6Mp'g/-}o-1—LgL6g\6Mp\JIDIGIIa8 aa-1 L9LLS # 9of mJ ry 090E rf/L/WSuiD/d a/yrll Prasad s14 //N vu/ siaaui6u3 jwuadioq PIvH 9l0Z N 146u042 'SNUNN0 1107035 S 110 SNO/1/1L(lW 76%UCJ/L/006'01-779W-7Y"kW kW!ON 3116' aPI1.3r7' ie/ 77lo3DlUOf1/ f� S��wzy/1&F0 urpual ay{10 saa 4-0 a4/0{puv uoaiaV palsy uayn�ysur .foua6v/v1uaruueana6 :fuvdurv0 a/u ey1.o)1/ayaq sy ua puo Sf/uo parodwd sy .(awns ay1 ruoysr uo1 uasrad ay1 v1 ani pays suoyovyyraa Rog sra•favng P-7/vuvssalard 10 uvyoioossy WNS'-PO( a41�f9 paldapv s.�avng puo7 rot a?gvcvd 10 apov 6m/srxa ay/v,,- ari moo ui palvd-d sox.(avns sr41 lvyj�ruG•rs uoaia4 pa/ogrpui sugjoor•/iya,2 �/ /I � \J "��/l J//'1('/f ✓•%l/(]/, •.(dw pgvt puo 0-1 o P-aRsuo.�aq pvys/oas P-r-slafavns P"/ay/VA-pa.�uoru'r-/our6uo e4/J.--d--19u0 W07 rroyW17P3 61v7S VO?MON 941 M Z uorsrnrp-glrs 6'OZL ua1• '/o uo/1v/ou v s/•dura.favus o w--mRD ro suogmal/v pe,Pwgn-a voaray-044 lou acv Jsixa.fav j, sluaruyvaarvua{rayl puo sainl.�iu/s a.�oynsgn,, 71 6•s•095V -'Y 117 5£F9Z ON duly-!a/o 41ui%0 -6661 Zl/.vd6 -/.0 Puv 6661 1 'qa2 Parrnau 1sv/ 8661 ! .29a -100.Alvdwa•O P410.p aur0//-110ra11-99 Al o ,00'id�ivlal/ag ,(0 duly uosIArP949 P,-IA--,V. pa1jW- dour o - -Oqe-SZ 107 61110q sesW-O'NZ SLOZ `ZZ O •�• N ` iC�uno� .� a�sa � ��saM J.o u nn oL 3jooa8 elAw J-CD a5C) 111/\ aql ui -AoJ. paD rDd D- d A Gdo A-An � B,,e /ate Jod �\O9LLr` os•rarX � 's�S2 ''� r��. Z °moo�9ls�Lr Novi S2 e ` \O \zo ° SY 107 6.s o 0 99•szr mz1rX m tasrFX esalr Na h y +N!lF.N! //vnY ,r•� BIF� 0�1 993°lF.HB' � V �T Asir.lu ser � ° �9vlr f4* LL 107 ' 98YlF a. °\O I/WE • � C user .�N � +�•ei�r F .`a' rnr'st. ��, •�gym`! ro• !rte °.e( lzsor Zy ag` � Z' Z, � y �oPea r! a N � � �. mak. eL-B!r ��'�� �•� 1�W \!r!F �. a� ®„ , V-7 1y gz. D � $ Ilk \\moo �lyj�,� Zl SbF• .a< 1Z90L' S ®°^/y'1. . =4 14 rl O 110A6 s!mr \ •d'gory �,osJ S/ 6MP'9Lio-i pavasay sJ4�E///Y su/ siaaur6u�JaJuadiO4�prnM 966! �s� Jy6ufdoj 10901 ;(N suiv/d 9#114f anuaf .�auoJowO 'SE3NM0 1N3/J03S1q//S dr0 SNO!//1/lLSN/ 7Y MA70Y 01 379!&.WNYW JON 39 Y a 9L SN0!!6'9/�/l&V ua)n�ysa 6uiPua/ay)t0 s0arr6-0 ay) o)pun uoaray pa)sy uognlysui +41�ff 6ulPua/AMC.fsua60 .fuodar47 OM ayj o)//oyaq sry ua P'- qua pa�cdsid si .fauns ayJ —00-j—ad ayJ o) —//nys suoyOOW#.A" 0.10S :riafswn5•pun?/Ouo1ssata1d aJnJS-Y-,( .MON 049-Irl?POMOVO-"—IT Pu17 Jot a?gorvd/0 Opus ffW-Wo '�O�Q//'' a4J 4dur esunFUossa ui P--O Pid sar.frons s14J IW;L//u6is uawa4 PBJ.�•? i suaya?Uip*o .fid •.fdn of/- 09//oys/Oas lFAll parsoqura Jo payor sJa(avns pun/ayJ V;/*PaW—.fauns jo sardos,f/ua u —7 uagnsnP•7 a)o)S VO4 wAN 0441/O "L -M"10—gns b'OlL ua)sas/o tmgaan o si dow,fauns o o) suaJ�o Ja suogwa)/oanylnou� ffI I 06'/9Z oiy dn/y-wa/.7 4unoo Jao'so uoaray mMoys uoyouuorui MAN •WON �!do 06191 'ON -*r 4JWO 10-0 sa 966/ SZ Purr/'Pa/41 PuO B66/ Li DIY Pasx+sv)sa POn 966J F8 O—nrra4 pa)Op.Amoduloo Pun?ry--#i111/0//a9 Jo/ pwodv l nota//eg/0 &W uasµrpgnrPa/J4ua dvw o uo unroys so 9L J07�!"aq sasiwald ay/ 8661 ` LZ •�-00 ,OZ=„ L. •� �� `/�qunoo � a�sau ��saM a/<Z�:j I o u nn o 3joo.ag a/Cb 40 a6rDll!A Gq4 ui AUIwCI auotD pua-1 so awoM -AoJ- pa-jpda-Ad _4o AaA-An5 %G 147 tQ i �h Nm snun b h I O'1` .rrr� •r by J07 / tfbFla.Js�a I 1 �°3I LL l07 tb a / s•lo� I I ' .F y tai,, yo, � � -r-,•�n�:1sJ,�fi X•r_ �Cipt a �/� alotia•�� .19 V FREDERICK P. CLARK ASSOCIATES, INC. PLANNING, TRANSPORTATION, ENVIRONMENT AND DEVELOPMENT RYE, NEW YORK FAIRFIELD, CONNECTICUT DAVID H. STOLMAN MEMORANDUM AICP, PP PRESIDENT To: Robert I. Goodman, Chairman, and the MICHAEL A. GALANTE EXECUTIVE Planning g y Board of the Village of Rye Brook VICE PRESIDENT 35o THEO.FREMD AVE. Date: January 11, 2016 RYE, NEW YORK 1058o 914 967-6540 FAX: 914 967-6615 Subject: 34 BelleFair Road—Applications for CONNECTICUT Approval of a Site Plan and a Steep Slopes Permit 203 255-3100 HUDSON VALLEY As requested, we reviewed applications, supporting documents and plans 845 297-6056 submitted by property owner, Lisa D. Levine, for approval of a site plan LONG ISLAND and Steep Slopes Work Permit to grade the rear yard, and in the rear yard, 5i6 364-4544 replace the exterior exit steps, install a patio, demolish existing retaining www.fpdark.com walls, and construct a new retaining wall with steps on the property located email@fpclark.com at 34 BelleFair Road in the BelleFair Planned Unit Development District, Section 124.73, Block 1, Lot 63 as shown on the Town of Rye Tax Assessor's Map. Property Description The 5,980 square-foot property is currently developed with a two-story residence with an attached garage, an exterior front stairway, a drive way and curb cut, and an exterior exit-stairway and two retaining walls in the rear yard. The rear yard is disturbed by grading and the construction of one of the retaining walls that was started without a Building Permit and remains unfinished. The unfinished retaining wall is partially located on the adjacent lot and within a utility easement partially located on the property. The property slopes down to the northwest approximately 21 feet from a high point along the east (rear) property line. There are mature trees and other landscape plantings on the property. The rear yard of the property is adjacent to one of the common open areas scattered throughout the development. Project Description The Applicant proposes to remove the two existing retaining walls, and lower the grade of most of the rear yard to create a larger level open area by FREDERICK P. CLARK ASSOCIATES, INC. PLANNING, TRANSPORTATION, ENVIRONMENT AND DEVELOPMENT RYE, NEW YORK FAIRFIELD, CONNECTICUT cutting into the slope at the back of the yard and constructing a masonry retaining wall to support what remains of the slope. A new patio would be installed adjacent to the rear of the home. Other work would include new wood steps into the rear yard and stone facing on the front steps and street-facing grade-level building walls. Review We reviewed application materials and plans submitted by the Applicant that include the following items: 1. Short Environmental Assessment Form dated December 23, 2015 2. Exterior Building Permit Application 3. Site Plan Application and Checklist 4. Letter to the Building Department from Rohde, Soyka and Andrews, Consulting Engineers, P.C., Poughkeepsie, N.Y., dated December 22, 2015 5. Photographic survey of property 6. Topographic Survey, prepared by Ward Carpenter Engineers, Inc., White Plains, N.Y. dated October 22, 2015 7. Engineer's Plans, prepared by Rohde, Soyka and Andrews, Consulting Engineers, P.C., Poughkeepsie, N.Y.: Sheet Number Sheet Title Dated C-1 Site Plan and Notes 9/15 rev. 12/15/15 C-2 Partial Site Plan and Details 9/15 rev. 12/15/15 C-3 Details — 1 9/15 rev. 12/15/15 C-4 Details — 2 9/15 rev. 12/15/15 Please note that our review is limited to planning and environmental issues. We offer the following comments regarding the application: 1. Site and Grading Plans. The proposed site plan would include grading and excavation in the rear yard for a new retaining wall that will require approval of a Steep Slopes Work Permit from the Planning Board. The new wall would be required to comply with the requirements of Section 250-6 B.(1)(g) of the Village Code regarding residential retaining walls. The grading, and disturbance of the backyard slopes would be required to comply with the requirements of the Village Code regarding steep slopes. Removal of one of the existing walls will require restoration of the grade and vegetation on the adjacent lot that was disturbed by 2 FREDERICK P. CLARK ASSOCIATES, INC. PLANNING, TRANSPORTATION, ENVIRONMENT AND DEVELOPMENT RYE, NEW YORK FAIRFIELD, CONNECTICUT construction of one of the existing walls. During construction, every effort should be made to minimize disturbance of the remaining vegetation and slopes in the rear yard of the lot. 2. Steep Slopes and the Proposed Retaining Wall. The site plan details include alternatives and options for the construction of sections of the wall. The proposed construction of the wall should be detailed to the satisfaction of the Village Engineer. 3. Tree Preservation and Protection. It appears that the current land disturbance occurred and the proposed grading and excavation for the new retaining wall would occur within the drip line of a 12-inch diameter Ash located in proximity to the location of the new wall. The excavation that occurred during construction of the new existing wall probably has already impacted the root system of the tree. The additional excavation will add to the impacts potentially affecting the health and long term viability of the tree. We recommend review of Ash and any other regulated trees proximate to the new wall by a certified arborist to ascertain if the stability of any of the trees was compromised. Pursuant to Chapter 235 of the Village Code, removal of the tree would require installation of a replacement tree. 4. Visual Impacts. The proposed wall, and stair handrail will be visible from adjacent properties. We recommend the installation of landscape plantings to help screen views of walls and handrails from neighboring residences. We look forward to discussion with the Planning Board. Marilyn Timpone-Mohamed, ASLA, AICP Senior Associate/Planning/Environment cc: Honorable Mayor and the Village Board of Trustees Christopher Bradbury, Village Administrator Michal Nowak, Superintendent of Public Works/Village Engineer Jennifer L. Gray, Esq., Village Attorney Wilfred A. Rohde, P.E., for the Applicant J IDOCS215001Rye Brook 1538.h71.34 BelleFair Road.Site Plan and Steep Slopes Permit.intr,o memo.nitni.docx 3 Building Permit Check List & Zoning Analysis Address: 3L� —i 2> SBL: 1"LLJ . 7--S - 3 Zone: •073> Use: Z I D Const.Type: Other: LF.-6,AL 1-L A,71 0 w-j Submittal Date: i I D S- Revisions Submittal Dates: Applicant: LF,V I IF— Nature of Work: --I 2V /L- yea —PC-%-AAtj [n J!� "LAI " Reviews: ZBA: SEP 1 4 2015 PB: BP: Other: NEF OK O ( ) FEES: Filing: BP: C/O: Legalization: ( ) (- APP.: Date Stamped: ✓ Properly Signed: ./ SBL Verified: / Other: (� O Scenic Roads: Steep Slopes: Wetlands: Storm Water Review: Street Opening: (✓l ( ) ENVIRO.: Long: Short: Fees: N/A: ( (• ) SITE PLAN: Topo: Site Protection: S/W Mgmt.: Tree Plan: Other: ( ( ) SURVEY: Dated: Current: Archival: Sealed: Unacceptable: ( ) (t FLANS:Date Stamped: 7 Sealed: f Copies: a' Incomplete: N/A: Other: (v� ( ) License: Workers Comp: Liability: Comp. Waiver: Other: (� ( ) Code 753#: Dated: N/A: ( ) ( ) HIGH-VOLTAGE ELECTRICAL: Plans: Permit: N/A: Other: ( ) ( ) LOW-VOLTAGE ELECTRICAL: Plans: Permit: N/A: Other: ( ) ( ) FIRE ALARM/SMOKE DETECTORS: Plans: Permit: N/A: Other: ( ) ( ) PLUMBING: Plans: Permit: Nat.Gas: LP Gas: N/A/: Other: ( ) ( ) FIRE SUPPRESSION: Plans: Permit: N/A: Other: ( ) ( ) 2010 NY State ECCC: N/A: Other: (� ( ) Final Survey: Final Topo: RAPE Sign-off Letter: As-Built Plans: Other: ( ) ( ) BP DENIAL LETTER: C/O DENIAL LETTER: Other: ( ) (✓-Other: t,4 t-- }A.0• ll LF_-ryZ�_ (,I ARB mtg. date: approval: notes: ( )ZBA mtg. date: approval: notes: (-)PB mtg. date: approval: notes: REQUIRED EXISTING PROPOSED NOTES Area: Circle: Frontaee: Front: Front: Sides: Rear: Main Cov: Accs.Cov: Ft.H/Sb: Sd.H/Sb: GFA: Tot imp: Ft.Imp: Parking: Height/Stories: notes: — L 7� 13' ,C'`-00 << fri /fi /t-is-it Af" ,E/pr_y 1Vf'=.At BUILD MENT D E C E � v VIL E OF Ry OK SEP 1 .0 2015 938 KING ET RYE BR ,NY 1 3 (914)93 1*=. VW06912.1�r2 39-580 VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK BUILDING DEPARTMENT ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD CHECK LIST FOR APPLICANTS This form must be completed and signed by the applicant of record and a copy shall be submitted to the Building Department prior to attending the ARB meeting. Applicants failing to submit a copy of this check list will be removed from the ARB agenda. Job Address:34 Belle Fair Road Phone#845-452-7515 Parcel ID#: 124.73-1-63 Zone:P.U.D. Date of Submission: February 9, 2015 Proposed Improvement(Describe in detail): Replace rear yard retaining walls with 8' high APPLICANT CHECK LIST: The following items must be submitted to the Building wall. Replace rear stair. Stone/masonry Department with the application-no exceptions. clad front stair assembly. 1. (✓)Completed Application Lisa D. & Douglas G. Levine 2. (✓) Eight(8)sets of sealed plans. mmar.size ?6 rat Property Owner: g 3. (✓)Eight(8)copies of the property survey. Address: 34 Belle Fair Road, Rye Brook, NY 10573 4. (✓)Eight(8)copies of the proposed site plan. Phone#914-319-8294 5. (✓)One electronic disc copy of the complete application materials. Applicant appearing before the Board: 6. (✓)Filing Fee. $75.00 Lisa D. Levine 7. ( )Any supporting documentation. 8. (vfHOA approval letter. (fapp/icable) Address:34 Belle Fair Road, Rye Brook, NY 10573 9. (✓) Photographs. 914-319-8294 10.( )Samples of finishes color chart. (a sample board or Phone# model may be presented the night of the meeting) Architect Engineer: Wilfred A. Rohde, P.E. By signature below, the owner/applicant acknowledges that he/she has read the complete Building Permit Instructions&Procedures,and that their application is complete in all respects.The Board of Review reserves the right to refuse to hear any application not meeting the requirements contained herein. Sworn to before me this Sworn to before me this day of W, , 2 day of , 20 Signature of Property Owner Signature of Applicant Lisa D. Levine Print Name of Property Owner Print Name of Applicant o ry Public Notary Public SHARI MELILLO lotary Public, State of New York No.01 ME6160063 luallfied In Westchester County ilssion Expires January 29.20_199 2 10/2015 BUM D�IN `�-*A�,,,RTMENT VILA E OF RYE+�B OOK 938 KING / ET RYE BRQb ,NY 10573 (914)M 6$F 4 39-5801 w�vW eb X•rL, y ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD CHECK LIST FOR APPLICANTS This form must be completed and signed by the applicant of record and a copy shall be submitted to the Building Department prior to attending the ARB meeting. Applicants failing to submit a copy of this check list will be removed from the ARB agenda. Job Address:34 Belle Fair Road Phone#845-452-7515 Parcel ID#: 124.73-1-63 Zone: P.U.D. Date of Submission: December 18, 2015 Proposed Improvement(Describe in detail): Replace rear yard retaining walls with 8' high APPLICANT CHECK LIST: The following items must be submitted to the Building wall. Replace rear stair. Stone/masonry Department with the application-no exceptions. clad front stair assembly. Steep Slope 1. (✓)Completed Application erml LiD & Douglas G. Levine 2. (,0 Eight(8)sets of sealed plans. (max.size 36•'.x-!' Lisa D.Property Owner: g I (✓)Eight(8)copies of the property survey. Address: 34 Belle Fair Road, Rye Brook, NY 10573 4. (✓)Eight(8)copies of the proposed site plan. 914-319-8294 5. (✓)One electronic/disc copy of the complete Phone# application materials. Applicant appearing before the Board: 6. (✓)Filing Fee. $75.00 Lisa D. Levine 7. ( )Any supporting documentation. 8. ( )HOA approval letter.(lfapplicable) Address:34 Belle Fair Road, Rye Brook, NY 10573 9. (✓)Photographs. 914-319-8294 10.( )Samples of finishes/color chart.(a sample board or Phone# model may be presented the night ofthe meeting) Architect/Engineer. Wilfred A. Rohde, P.E. By signature below, the owner/applicant acknowledges that he/she has read the complete Building Permit Instructions&Procedures,and that their application is complete in all respects. The Board of Review reserves the right to refuse to hear any application not meeting the requirements contained herein. �d Sworn to before me this Z I s Sworn to before me this , a day of OtCA"r , 20 day of 120 (5 Signature 6fPropdty Owner Signa re of ppl-icant Lisa D. Levine ! uVtl�gl (�,,�n t U); 4re-A AIS ZDc11� Print Name of erty O er Print Name of Applicant Notary Public Notary Public SUSAN E NAGUERI Notary Publk•State of New YbAt CHRISTOPHER J.BRADBURY ci Uisw�ee c�,rllwa b+uleNr Ceun to Notary Public,State of New York MY co�eke E> No.01 BR6159985 Com Qualified ssion Exp,es tchester County 2/10/2015 January 29,20 IL BUILDING DUPARTMENT VILLAGE�O,�' F k;?kRROOK 938 KING� r*F T RYE B� li ,NY 10573 (914)93t0 ' 68 FAX(91 1I)439-5801 .ryebroo .brg FOR OFFICE USE ONLY: Approval Date: Permit# :Application # Approval Signature: : ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD: Disapproved: :Date: BOT Approval Date: Case # :Chairman: PB Approval Date: Case # :Secretary: ZBA Approval Date: Case # Other: Application Fee: Permit Fees: Exterior Building Permit Application Application dated: December 18,2015 is hereby made to the Building Inspector of the Village of Rye Brook,NY,for the issuance ofa Permit for the construction of buildings,structures,additions,alterations or for a change in use,as per detailed statement described below. 1. JobAddress:34 Belle Fair Road, Rye Brook, NY 10573 2. Parcel ID#•124.73-1-63Zone•P.U.D. 3. Proposed Improvement(Describe in detail): Replace rear yard retaining walls with 8' high wall. Replace rear stair. Stone/masonry clad front stair assembly.4. Property Property Owner: Lisa D. Levine Address: 34 Belle Fair Road, Rye Brook, NY 10573 Phone#914-319-8294 Cell# e-mail List All Other Properties Owned in Rye Brook: Applicant: Address: Phone# Cell# e-mail Architect: Address: _ Phone# Cell# e-mail Engineer: Address: Phone# Cell# e-mail General Contractor: Address: Phone# Cell# e-mail (1) 2/4/2015 5. Occupancy;(1-Fam.,2-Fam.,Commercial.,etc...)Pre-construction: 1-Family Post-construction: 1-Family 6. Area of lot: Square feet:5,980 SF Acres: 7. Dimensions from proposed building or structure to lot lines: front yard: 70 FT rear yard: 14 FT right side yard: 1 FT left side yard: 1 FT other: 8. If building is located on a corner lot,which street does it front on:N/A 9. Area of proposed building in square feet: Basement: 1"fl: 2"d fl: 3'd fl: 10. Total Square Footage of the proposed new construction: 123 SF WALL TOP, 280 SF PATIO 11. For additions,total square footage added: Basement: N/A 1"fl: 2"d fl: 3rd fl: 12. Total Square Footage of the proposed renovation to the existing structure: N/A 13. N.Y.State Construction Classification: RESIDENTIAL N.Y.State Use Classification: RESIDENTIAL 14. Construction Type&Location:()Typical Western Lumber Frame;()Timber Frame[TC];()Wood Truss ITT]; ()Pre-engineered wood [PW];Located;()Floor Framing[F];()Roof Framing 1111;() Floor&Roof Framing[FR1; Other: REAR MASONRY WALL, PATIO AND CLADDING OF FRONT STAIRS 15. Number of stories: N/A Overall Height: Median Height: 16. Basement to be full,or partial: N/A , finished or unfinished: 17. What material is the exterior finish:MASONRY WALL AND CLADDING 18. Roof style;peaked,hip,mansard,shed,etc: N/A Roofing material: 19. What system of heating:N/A 20. If private sewage disposal is necessary,approval by the Westchester County Health Department must be submitted with this application. 21. Will the proposed project require the installation of a new,or an extension/modification to an existing automatic fire suppression system?(Fire Sprinkler,ANSL System,FM-200 System,Type I Hood,etc...)Yes:_No:X_ ('(yes,applicant must submit a separate Automatic Fire Suppression System Permit application&2 sets ofdetailed engineered plans) 22. Will the proposed project disturb 400 sq.ft.or more of land,or create 400 sq.ft.or more of impervious coverage requiring a Stormwater Management Control Permit as per§217 of Village Code? Yes:_No: X Area: 23. Will the proposed project require a Site Plan Review by the Village Planning Board as per§209 of Village Code? Yes: No: X (f yes,applicant must submit a Site Plan Application,&provide detailed drawings) 24. Will the proposed project require a Steep Slopes Permit as per§213 of Village Code Yes: No: X ('(yes,you must submit a Site Plan Application,&provide a detailed topographical survey) 25. Is the lot located within 100 ft.of a Wetland as per§245 of Village Code? Yes: No: X (f yes,the area of wetland and the wetland buffer zone must be properly depicted on the survey&site plan) 26. Is the lot or any portion thereof located in a Flood Plane as per the FIRM Map dated 9/28/07? Yes: No: X (i(yes, the area and elevations of the flood plane must be properly depicted on the survey&site plan) 27. Will the proposed project require a Tree Removal Permit as per§235 of Village Code?Yes: No: X (if yes,applicant must submit a Tree Removal Permit Application) 28. Does the proposed project involve a Home-Occupation as per§250-38 of Village Code? Yes: No: X Indicate:TIER I: TIER II: TIER III: ('Eyes,a Home Occupation Permit Application is required) 29. What is the total estimated cost of construction: $80,000 Note:estimated cost shall include all site improvements,labor,material,scaffolding,fixed equipment,professional fees,including any material and labor which may be donated gratis.If the final cost exceeds the estimated cost,an additional fee will be required prior to issuance of the C O. 30. Estimated date of completion:45 DAYS FROM PERMIT ISSUANCE ('_) 2/4/2015 BUILDING DEPARTMENT VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK 938 KING STREET RYE BROOK,NY 10573 (914)939-0668 FAX(914)939-5801 RESIDENTIAL LOT AREA COVERAGE Address: Section: Block: Lot: PERMITTED COVERAGE RATIOS IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS (Local Law 3-88) YOUR ZONE AREA IN MAIN ACCESS. DECK ZONE DISTRICT SQ. FEET BLDG. BLDG. MAX. CHECK MAX. R-25 25,000 14% 3.5% 4% R-20 20,000 14% 3.5% 4% R-15 15,000 16% 3.5% 4% R-15A 15,000 12% 3.5% 4% R-12 12,500 17% 4% 4% R-10 10,000 20% 4.5% 3.5% R-7 7,500 23% 4.5% 3.5% R-5 5,000 30% 5% 3.5% R-2F 5,000 30% 5% 3.5% Existing: Proposed: 1. AREA OF LOT Sq. Ft. Sq. Ft. 2. AREA OF HOUSE a. Coverage of Main Building (Including Attached Garage or Accessory Building) Sq. Ft. Sq. Ft. b. Area of 151 Floor Divided By Area of Lot x 100 % % 3. AREA OF ACCESSORY BUILDING (Includes Detached Garages,Tool Shed, Playhouses) Sq. Ft. Sq. Ft. a. Coverage of Accessory Building Area of Accessory Building Divided By Area of Lot x 100 % % 4. AREA OF DECK Sq. Ft. Sq. Ft. a. Coverage of Deck Area of Deck Divided By Area of Lot x 100 % % I attest to the best of my knowledge and belief, the above information is correct. Architect's Signature (3) 2/10/2015 BUILDING DEPARTMENT VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK 938 KING STREET RYE BROOK,NY 10573 (914)939-0668 FAx(914)939-5801 BULK REGULATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS Address: Section: Block: Lot: MAXIMUM GROSS FLOOR AREA USE FORMULA: Maximum Gross Floor Area =4,000 + [(Lot Area—21,780) x 0.11478421 ]: a. Allowed = Sq. Feet b. Existing = Sq. Feet c. Proposed = Sq. Feet HEIGHT/SETBACK RATIOS FOR RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS DEFINITION: A standard designed to regulate the height of a building in relation to the average grade of the corresponding portion of the lot line from which it is set back. The ratio modifies the maximum permitted Height of Building by forming an inclined plane beginning at the average grade along the portion of the lot line from which the setback is measured and rising toward the building at the specified ratio above which no part of any building, other than minor architectural features such as chimneys, skylights and dormer windows not covering more than 10%of the entire roof area, shall be permitted to extend. Height and Setback shall be calculated using the formula; Height I Setback=X, where X is the required side or front yard ratio for the zoning district in which a property is located as specified in Article VIII of Chapter 250. A complete elevation view for the proposed improvement must be included on the drawings FILL IN YOUR RATIOS: ZONE EX/ST/NG P?OPOSED /7E011/RED FRONT: FRONT: FRONT: .48 R25 SIDE: SIDE: SIDE: 1.30 FRONT: FRONT: FRONT: .60 R20 SIDE: SIDE: SIDE: 1.60 FRONT: FRONT: FRONT: .60 R-f5 SIDE: SIDE: SIDE: 1.60 FRONT: FRONT: FRONT: .80 RL ISA SIDE: SIDE: SIDE: 2.40 FRONT: FRONT: FRONT: .69 RL 12 SIDE: SIDE: SIDE: 1.60 FRONT: FRONT: FRONT: .80 R-10 SIDE: SIDE: SIDE: 2.40 FRONT: FRONT: FRONT: .96 R-7 SIDE: SIDE: SIDE: 3.00 FRONT: FRONT: FRONT: 1.20 /75 SIDE: SIDE: SIDE: 4.00 FRONT: FRONT: FRONT: 1.20 R-2F SIDE: SIDE: SIDE: 4.00 1 attest to the best of my knowledge and belief, the above information is correct. Architect's Signature (5) 2/10/2015 This application must be properly completed in its entirety by a N.Y. State Registered Architect or N.Y. State Licensed Professional Engineer & signed by those professionals where indicated. It must also include the notarized signature(s) of the legal owner(s) of the subject property, and the applicant of record in the spaces provided. Any application not properly completed in its entirety and/or not properly signed shall be deemed null and void, and will be returned to the applicant. Please note that application fees are non-refundable. STATE OF NEW YORK,COUNTY OF WESTCHESTER ) as: Wilfred A.Rohde ,being duly sworn, deposes and states that he/she is the applicant above named, (print name of individual signing as the applicant) and further states that (s)he is the legal owner of the property to which this application pertains, or that (s)he is the Engineer for the legal owner and is duly authorized to make and file this application. (indicate architect,contractor,agent,attorney,etc) That all statements contained herein are true to the best of his/her knowledge and belief, and that any work performed, or use conducted at the above captioned property will be in conformance with the details as set forth and contained in this application and in any accompanying approved plans and specifications, as well as in accordance with the New York State Uniform Fire Prevention& Building Code, the Code of the Village of Rye Brook and all other applicable laws,ordinances and regulations. s�- h V� Sworn to before me this 2( Sworn to before me this oW61 day of IV2Cof1L4_ , 20 day of , 20 �S Signature of Property Owner Signature of Applicant Print Name o roperty Owner Print Name of Applicant cru Notary Public Notary Public CHRISTOPHER J. BRADBURY ENOWy •iew YolkNotary Public,State of New York No.OlBR6159985 s County,.es tchester County Commission ssion Expl eualfied in s J nuary 29,20 jL Npp�lEAl of Now ra+k No.011MA48"M 0"MM in ulaw Z� My ComaiW"EapUa (6) 2 10 15 1 , BUILDINGJDEPARTMENT VILL ROOK D � C IEWE 938 KING T RYE B ,NY 10573 (914)9 668 FAx(91 9-5801 SEP 10 2015 c.ireb l f i` VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK 19o2 BUILDING DEPARTMENT *************************************************** ****************************** FOR OFFICE USE ONLY: Approval Date: Permit# :Application # Approval Signature: : ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD: Disapproved: :Date: BOT Approval Date: Case # :Chairman: PB Approval Date: Case # :Secretary: ZBA Approval Date: Case # Other: Application F : -T� ermit Fees: Exterior BuildinE Permit Application Application dated: February 9, 2015 is hereby made to the Building Inspector of the Village of Rye Brook,NV,for the issuance ofa Permit for the construction of buildings,structures,additions,alterations or fora change in use,as per detailed statement described below. 1. JobAddress:34 Belle Fair Road, Rye Brook, NY 10573 2. Parcel ID#: 124.73-1-63 Zone: P.U.D. 3. Proposed Improvement(Describe in detail): Replace rear yard retaining walls with 8' high wall. Replace rear stair. Stone/masonry clad front stair assembly. G�r�/iI� f GO"J�er f AI&4AIC �r, 4. Property Owner: Lisa D. Levine Address: 34 Belle Fair Road, Rye Brook, NY 10573 Phone#914-319-8294 Cell# e-mail List All Other Properties Owned in Rye Brook: Applicant: Address: Phone# Cell# e-mail Architect: Address: Phone# Cell# e-mail Engineer: Address: Phone# Cell# e-mail General Contractor: Address: Phone# Cell# e-mail (I) 2/4/2015 5. Occupancy;(1-Fam.,2-Fam.,Commercial.,etc...)Pre-construction: 1-Family Post-construction: 1-Family 6. Area of lot: Square feet:5,980 SF Acres: 7. Dimensions from proposed building or structure to lot lines: front yard: 94 FT rear yard: 10 FT right side yard: 0.5 FT left side yard: 0.5 FT other: 8. If building is located on a corner lot,which street does it front on: N/A 9. Area of proposed building in square feet: Basement: 0 fl: 2nd fl: 3rd fl: 10. Total Square Footage of the proposed new construction: 87 SF WALL TOP, 308 SF PATIO 11. For additions,total square footage added: Basement: N/A 1"fl: 2nd fl: 3rd fl: 12. Total Square Footage of the proposed renovation to the existing structure. N/A 13. N.Y.State Construction Classification: RESIDENTIAL N.Y.State Use Classification: RESIDENTIAL 14. Construction Type&Location:()Typical Western Lumber Frame;()Timber Frame iTCi;()Wood Truss(TTI; () Pre-engineered wood IPWI; Located;()Floor Framing iFI;()Roof Framing IRI;()Floor&Roof Framing iFRI; Other: REAR MASONRY WALL, PATIO AND CLADDING OF FRONT STAIRS 15. Number of stories: N/A Overall Height: Median Height: 16. Basement to be full,or partial: N/A ' finished or unfinished: 17. What material is the exterior finish:MASONRY WALL AND CLADDING 18. Roof style; peaked,hip,mansard,shed,etc: N/A Roofing material: 19. What system of heating:N/A 20. If private sewage disposal is necessary,approval by the Westchester County Health Department must be submitted with this application. 21. Will the proposed project require the installation of a new,or an extension/modification to an existing automatic fire suppression system?(Fire Sprinkler,ANSL System,FM-200 System,Type I Hood,etc...)Ves:_No:X_ (tf yes,applicant must submit a separate Automatic Fire Suppression System Permit application&2 sets ofdetai/ed engineered plans) 22. Will the proposed project disturb 400 sq.ft.or more of land,or create 400 sq.ft.or more of impervious coverage requiring a Stormwater Management Control Permit as per§217 of Village Code? Yes:_No: X Area: 23. Will the proposed project require a Site Plan Review by the Village Planning Board as per§209 of Village Code? Yes: No: X (if yes,applicant must submit a Site Plan Application,&provide detailed drawings) 24. Will the proposed project require a Steep Slopes Permit as per§213 of Village Code Yes: No: X (if yes,you must submit a Site Plan Application,&provide a detailed topographical survey) 25. Is the lot located within 100 ft.of a Wetland as per§245 of Village Code? Yes: No: X (f yes,the area of wetland and the wetland buffer zone must be properly depicted on the survey&site plan) 26. Is the lot or any portion thereof located in a Flood Plane as per the FIRM Map dated 9/28/07? Yes: No: X (rf yes,the area and elevations of the flood plane must be properly depicted on the survey&site plan) 27. Will the proposed project require a Tree Removal Permit as per§235 of Village Code?Yes: No: X ('dyes,applicant must submit a Tree Removal Permit Application) 28. Does the proposed project involve a Home-Occupation as per§250-38 of Village Code? Yes: No: X Indicate:TIER 1: TIER iI: TIERiII: ('dyes,a Home Occupation Permit Application is required) 29. What is the total estimated cost of construction: $80,000 Note:estimated cost shall include all site improvements,labor,material,scaffolding,fired equipment,professional fees, including any material and labor which may be donated gratis.If the final cost exceeds the estimated cost,an additional fee will be required prior to issuance of the C O. 30. Estimated date of completion:45 DAYS FROM PERMIT ISSUANCE 214/2015 BUILDING DEPARTMENT VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK 938 KING STREET RYE BROOK,NY 10573 (914)939-0668 FAx(914)939-5801 BULK REGULATIONS IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS Address: Section: Block: Lot: MAXIMUM GROSS FLOOR AREA USE FORMULA: Maximum Gross Floor Area =4,000 + [(Lot Area—21,780) x 0.11478421 ]: a. Allowed = Sq. Feet b. Existing = Sq. Feet c. Proposed = Sq. Feet HEIGHT/SETBACK RATIOS FOR RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS DEFINITION: A standard designed to regulate the height of a building in relation to the average grade of the corresponding portion of the lot line from which it is set back. The ratio modifies the maximum permitted Height of Building by forming an inclined plane beginning at the average grade along the portion of the lot line from which the setback is measured and rising toward the building at the specified ratio above which no part of any building, other than minor architectural features such as chimneys, skylights and dormer windows not covering more than 10%of the entire roof area, shall be permitted to extend. Height and Setback shall be calculated using the formula; Height/Setback=X, where X is the required side or front yard ratio for the zoning district in which a property is located as specified in Article VIII of Chapter 250. A complete elevation view for the proposed improvement must be included on the drawings FILL IN YOUR RATIOS: ZONE EXIS77NG P?OPOSED /TEOMWED FRONT: FRONT: FRONT: .48 R25 SIDE: SIDE: SIDE: 1.30 FRONT: FRONT: FRONT: .60 P-20 SIDE: SIDE: SIDE: 1.60 FRONT: FRONT: FRONT: .60 f5 SIDE: SIDE: SIDE: 1.60 FRONT: FRONT: FRONT: .80 ?-15A SIDE: SIDE: SIDE: 2.40 FRONT: FRONT: FRONT: .69 ?-f2 SIDE: SIDE: SIDE: 1.60 FRONT: FRONT: FRONT: .80 ?-f0 SIDE: SIDE: SIDE: 2.40 FRONT: FRONT: FRONT: .96 ?-7 SIDE: SIDE: SIDE: 3.00 FRONT: FRONT: FRONT: 1.20 /75 SIDE: SIDE: SIDE: 4.00 FRONT: FRONT: FRONT: 1.20 ?-2F SIDE: SIDE: SIDE: 4.00 1 attest to the best of my knowledge and belief, the above information is correct Architect's Signature (5) 2/102015 This application must be properly completed in its entirety by a N.Y. State Registered Architect or N.Y. State Licensed Professional Engineer & signed by those professionals where indicated. It must also include the notarized signature(s) of the legal owner(s) of the subject property, and the applicant of record in the spaces provided. Any application not properly completed in its entirety and/or not properly signed shall be deemed null and void, and will be returned to the applicant. Please note that application fees are non-refundable. STATE OF NEW YORK,COUNTY OF WESTCHESTER ) as: L,\ 6 C l_.ev ,n e. , being duly sworn, deposes and states that he/she is the applicant above named, (print name of individual signing as the applicant) and further states that (s)he is the legal owner of the property to which this application pertains, or that (s)he is the for the legal owner and is duly authorized to make and file this application. (indicate archneLt contractor agent,attomey etc) That all statements contained herein are true to the best of his/her knowledge and belief, and that any work performed, or use conducted at the above captioned property will be in conformance with the details as set forth and contained in this application and in any accompanying approved plans and specifications, as well as in accordance with the New York State Uniform Fire Prevention& Building Code, the Code of the Village of Rye Brook and all other applicable laws, ordinances and regulations. Sworn to before me this �0 Sworn to before me this day of r , 20day of , 20 14 Signature of Property Owner Signature of Applicant \_,1 5 a __S� 1.-ev�;-,e Print Name of Property Owner Print Name of Applicant Ahotary Public Notary Public SHARI MELILLO Notary Public, State of New York No.01 ME6160063 Cuali ied In Westchester County Commission Expires January 29.201 4) (6) 2 10 15 f BUILD I�TMENT VI E OF Ry OOK C� V �� ~-' 938 KING ET RYE BR • NY 10573 (914)93 68 FAX(91 39-5801 9,742�2115 wv�v.ryehi�Oli':4r� I� � Pu- nR WQ.F , * FOR OFFICE USE ONLY: BOT Approval Date: PB Approval Date: BOT Disapproval Date: PB Disapproval Date: Attach Resolution Hereto: BOT[ ] PB[ ] ZBA[ ] Chairman: SITE PLAN FEE: a d _ _ DATE PAID: 12 — l 2 ENVIRONMENTAL FEE: DATE PAID: OTHER: APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL Submission of this application does not assure placement on any Planning Board Agenda.The Applicant will be notified of such placement. *##*#*###########*#################**####*#############*##########*#######*############*##*####**########## This application references but is not limited to the following sections of the Code of the Village of Rye Brook;§250 ZONING,§209 SITE PLAN REVIEW,§235 TREES,§107 DEMOLITION OF BUILDINGS,§224 SWIMMING POOLS,§121 EXCAVATION&TOPSOIL REMOVAL,§118 EROSION&SEDIMENT CONTROL,§213 STEEP SLOPES PROTECTION,§219 SUBDIVISION OF LAND, §250-40 NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS.Applicants and their Design Professionals are strongly advised to review the abc%e mentioned code sections online at.www.!yebrook.org prior to completing and/or submitting this application. APPLICATION FEE SCHEDULE: Residential Dwellings- $325,plus$200 per additional dwelling unit. Non-Residential Buildings - $475 plus $30 per parking space. Planned Unit Development- er acre PUD Amendment- $300 Site Plan Amendment- $575 Wetlands&Watercourse- $1,150 Consultant Review(Escrow)Fee: Minimum fee$250-maximum fee$2,500,to be determined by the Village Engineer. Application fees are non-refundable. The applicant's Escroir:Account must haw a positive balance at all tunes prior to any Connillaw.Attorney,or l illage revieii. Fstrory Fees and.Vlc Plan I ees•must be paid on separate checks made papable to the 1711aYe of Rve Brook 1. Site Address: 34 Belle Fair Road, Rye Brook, NY Parcel ID#: 124.73-1-63 Zone: P.U.D. 2. Property Owner: Lisa D. Levine Address: 34 Belle Fair Road, Village of Rye Brook E-Mail: lisadlevine@gmail.com Tel.#:914-319-8294 Other: 3. Applicant: Lisa D. Levine Address: 34 Belle Fair Road, Village of Rye Brook E-Mail: lisadlevine@gmail.com Tel.#:914-319-8294 Other: 4. Design Professional: Wilfred A. Rohde, P.E. -Rohde, Soyka&Andrews Consulting Engineers, P.C. Address: 40 Garden Street, Poughkeepsie, NY 12601 E-Mail:wrohde@rsaengrs.com Tel.#:845-452-7515 Other: 5. Designate to whom correspondence is to be sent: Lisa D. Levine-Owner/Applicant Nate:If applicant is a-Contract Vendee".please attach a cop)of the contract summary %%ith financial and con fidenfial Icrms deleted. REVISED 811015 6. Street which property abuts: Belle Fair Road 7. Does property connect directly into State or County highway? (VrNO ( )YES: 8. Is site within 500 feet of Village Boundary?�/(N O ( )YES If yes note all bordering municipalities: 9. Total area of site: -14 Acres Area of site activity: 2,800 SF 10. Site coverage:38 0o; Building coverage: 20.6 % 11. Existing building size: 1258 SF New,additional building size: 0 12. Existing parking spaces: 4 New parking spaces: 0 13. Nature of proposed activity: Replace rear yard retaining walls with a 6'block wall, replace rear stair, rear patio addition Per instructions received we are also seek a Steep Slope Permit for this work. ****************************************************************************************** Please note that this application must include the notarized signature(s) of the legal owner(s) of the above-mentioned property, in the space provided below. Any application not bearing the legal property owner's notarized signature(s)shall be deemed null and void, and will be retumed to the applicant. STATE OF NEW YORK,COUNTY OF WESTCHESTER ) as: Wilfred A.Rohde being duly sworn,deposes and states that he ,he is the applicant above named, (print name of individual signing as the applicant) and further states that (s)he is the legal owner of the property to which this application pertains. or that (s)he is the Engineer for the legal owner and is duly authorized to make and file this application. (Indicate architect,contractor,agent,attorney d, ) That all statements contained herein are true to the best of his her knowledge and belief, and that any work performed,or use conducted at the above captioned property will be in conformance with the details as set forth and contained in this application and in any accompanying approved plans and specifications,as well as in accordance with the New York State Uniform Fire Prevention &Building Code,the Code of the Village of Rye Brook and all other applicable laws,ordinances and regulations. si- Sworn to before me this (� Sworn to before me this r�-^^Iy�� day of , 20 lS day of _Z.AZ , 20LM � 5--r'_ Notary P lic Notary Public ux �i. Signa re of Property Own�e�r� Signature of Applicant / Print Name f Property Owner Print Name of Applicant :pubsc E NAGLIERI Npl -Stale o!Naw York CHRISTOPHER J. NA1lo M BRADBURy XPMI Notary Public,State of New yorkcat No.01 BR6159985 Qualified in Westchester County Commission Expires January 29,20 L REVISED 8110115 VILLAm:OF RYE BROOK 938 King Sfre't,Rye Brook,N.Y. 10573 (914)934'-0753 Fax(914)939-5801 w iyebrookn.org SITE PLAN SUBMITTAL REVIEW CHECKLIST This form shall serve as a checklist for site plan submittal and review by the Village of Rye Brook. The use of this plan review checklist by the applicant is to ensure compliance with the technical provisions of§209 of the Code of the Village of Rye Brook entitled, Site Plan Review, pertaining to preliminary and final plan preparation. The Village Code is available on the Village Website at: www.ryebrook.org, Prior to the appearance before ANY meeting or hearing of the Planning Board,the applicant must comply with all Notification Requirements of Code Section 250-40. SITE PLAN SUBMITTAL SHALL INCLUDE: 1. APPLICATIONS. Completed and signed including correspondences. 2. CHECKLIST. Completed and signed. 3. PLANS. Signed, Sealed& Dated. Fifteen paper(15) copies or twenty(20)copies when Board of Trustees approval is required and one (1) electronic version. One (1) record set with original signatures, dates and seals may be provided and submitted with fourteen (14) copies or nineteen (19) copies that clearly indicate the signatures, dates, and seals shown on the record set. 4. FEES: All application fees and Environmental fee. A separate check for filing fee and Environmental fee. 5. Environmental Assessment Form. Form available on the NYS DEC website. 6. Electronic Copy. Complete copy of all plans and shall be submitted electronically at time of submission. 7. Notarizgo AfJAeAXA/$__ af Sign Posting& Mail Notification. I, (Applicant's signature)have read the Notification Requirements of Co a Section 250-40 and will provide notification as required. IDENTIFICATION OF APPLICANT(S): Identification of Applicant: Consulting Engineer Applicant: Wilfred A. Rohde - Rohde, Soyka & Andrews Consulting Engineers, P.C. Address: 40 Garden Street, Poughkeepsie, NY 12601 Tel. #:845-452-7515 Fax.845-452-8335 E-Mail: wrohde@rsaengrs.com Project Name: Revised Site Plan Application for Lisa D. and Douglas G. Levine Project Address:34 Belle Fair Road, Rye Brook, NY Current Property Owner: Lisa D. Levine Address:34 Belle Fair Road, Rye Brook, NY Tel. #:914-319-8294 Fax: E-Mail: IDENTIFICATION OF PROPERTY: Identifying Title:Lisa D. and Douglas G. Levine Tax Designation: Section: 124.73 Block: 1 Lot:63 Zoning District:P.U.D. Street which property abuts: Belle Fair Road Plan Submission Date: December 18, 2015 Site Plan Checklist Page 1 of 7 34 Belle Fair Road,Rye Brook,NY Project Address Y N NA PLANREOUIREMENTS 000 15-20 copies of plans prepared and signed by a registered Land Surveyor,Engineer or Architect. 0 O O One(1)electronic copy of all submitted plans. 0 O O Topographic Survey stamped by New York State Land Surveyor with license number and seal. 0 O O Topographic survey scale of one(1)inch per twenty(20)feet or larger. 0 O O Section, block and lot numbers of the property taken from the latest tax records along with a copy of the most recent property card on file with the Town of Rye Tax Assessor's office. O O 0 Name of the proposed subdivision plan. O O O Name and address of the owner of record. 0 O O Name and address of the applicant. O O 0 Deed reference(s). 0 O O Names, addresses and signature of every Engineer, Architect, Land Surveyor or Soil Scientist whose professional seal appears on any site plan submitted to the Board. 0 O O North arrow and scale. 0 O O Location map at the minimum scale of 1"equals 1,000 feet. O O 0 Area of all lots, in square feet. 0 O O Engineering notes on plans as stated in application packages. O O 0 Copies of all existing and proposed deed restrictions or covenants applying to the property, including, but not limited to, covenants and agreements restricting the use and establishing future ownership and maintenance responsibilities for all private roads,recreation,and open space areas. 000 Any prior land use approvals with respect to the subject property. 000 Date the plans were first drafted. Any revision(s)made to any of the sheets first submitted are to be so noted in the revision block. The revision block is to be placed on the originals of the revised sheets. Additional paper copies are to be made& submitted for the Planning Board&Building Dept.to replace those sheets previously submitted. 000 Other existing site improvements,including,but not limited to,fences, landscape or retaining walls,landscaping & screening. 000 Location of all buildings and structures on the premises and approximate location of all neighboring buildings or structures within 100 feet of the lot line. 0 O O Fees paid to The Village of Rye Brook Building Department. O O 0 Any revisions to plans shall be identified with a revision cloud and numbered revision triangle Y N NA ABUTTING PROPERTYINFORMATION O O 0 The names and addresses of all abutting property owners within 250 ft as indicated in the Municipal records. O O 0 Zoning and use of abutting properties noted on plans. O O 0 Shape,size,height and location of existing buildings and driveways within one hundred(100)feet of the site. 0 O O Location and description of existing easements within one hundred(100)feet of the site. O O 0 Location of existing private or public trails within one hundred(100)feet of the site. O O 0 Location of existing roads,scenic roads and/or driveways within two hundred(200)feet of the site. O O 0 Location of proposed parkland. If none state nearest recreation facility O O 0 Location of existing septic system leach fields within two hundred(200)feet of the site. O O 0 Locations,dimensions,grades and flow direction of existing sewers,culverts,waterlines as well as other underground utilities within and adjacent to the property. Site Plan Checklist Page 2 of 7 34 Belle Fair Road,Rye Brook,NY Project Address 000 The location of all existing watercourses, intermittent streams,wetland areas and springs,consistent with the definitions set forth in Chapter 245, Wetlands and Watercourses,of the Code of the Village of Rye Brook. Y N NA PROPOSED SITE PLAN INFORMATION 000 Sufficient, acceptable information to readily determine the location, bearing, and length of every street line, lot line, and property boundary line. 000 Location of all building setback lines. 000 Topographic data at a minimum contour interval of 2'-0"increments,showing existing and proposed contours on the property and extending a minimum of 25 feet into all adjacent properties. 000 The location and characteristics of the different areas of vegetation,including the identification of all individual trees 12 or more inches in diameter at breast height("DBH"), protected trees of any size, as well as stands of trees and wooded areas, within areas of proposed disturbance, consistent with the provisions of Chapter 235, Trees, of the Code of the Village of Rye Brook. 000 Location and proposed development of all buffer areas,including existing vegetative cover. 0041 Location and description of any zoning district and municipal boundaries including a zoning compliance chart for the existing and proposed lots. O O • Shape,size,height and location of all existing and proposed buildings. O O • Location and description of any existing and proposed easements. O O ® Location and dimensions of all existing and proposed streets,driveways,sidewalks,parking spaces,bicycle parking, loading areas and other facilities associated with the proposed use. O O 8 Identification of the location and amount of building area proposed for retail sales or similar commercial activity. O O 0 Location of existing and proposed utilities(water,sewer,gas,electrical,telephone,oil tank etc.). O O 0 Design and location of all existing and proposed wells,septic tanks and leach field systems,or methods of waste water disposal. O O O Location,type and size of all existing and proposed landscaping and screening including fences and walls. O O • Location,size and proposed screening of outdoor storage areas, if any. ® O O Location, design and construction material of all existing or proposed site improvements, including drains, culverts, retaining walls,landscape walls and fences. O O ® Exterior lighting plan and proposed signs to be located on site,including sign orientation,size,height,and elevation view. O O • Storm drainage plan and plans for snow removal and storage. O O • Pedestrian and automobile circulation plan. ® O O Construction drawings for pavements,walks,steps,curbing,drainage&other structures associated with the proposed use. ® O O Erosion and sedimentation control plan,including installation details of proposed control measures,directive construction notations and a schedule for the installation and maintenance of proposed control measure. ® O O Description of measures planned to assure proper erosion and sedimentation control in accordance with the requirements of Chapter 118 entitled"Erosion and Sediment Control,"of the Code of the Village of Rye Brook. O O 0 Drawing and computation for storm water detention design for a 25-year storm in accordance with the Westchester County Best Management Practices O O • Rock outcroppings and areas of steep slope consistent with the definitions set forth in Chapter 213,Steep Slope Protection, of the Code of the Village of Rye Brook. O O • Location of any common lands and/or public lands. ® O O Phasing or an estimated project construction schedule. O O A Supporting documents, including deeds, maintenance, condominium agreements,etc. Site Plan Checklist Page 3 of 7 34 Belle Fair Road,Rye Brook,NY Project Address 000 Location of proposed construction or area of disturbance and its relationship to any property line, easement, building, structure, road, wall, fence, sewage disposal system, well, wetland feature or tree exceeding six inches in diameter measured at a height of four feet from the ground 0 0 O Estimate of earthwork showing the quantity of any material to be imported to and/or removed from the site including a chart with the number/species and size of any trees to be removed. O O 0 Location and size of areas of soils by soil types in the area of proposed disturbance and to a distance of 100 feet surrounding the area of disturbance. • 00 Cross sections of steep slope areas. 000 Retaining walls or like constructions,with details of construction. O O • Approximate boundaries of any areas subject to flooding or stormwater overflows, including areas of special flood hazard and coastal high-hazard areas, consistent with the definitions set forth in Chapter 130, Flood Damage Prevention, of the Code of the Village of Rye Brook.Approximate Wetlands and wetland buffer boundaries shall be clearly delineated. 000 Location of fire and other emergency zones,including the location of fire hydrants. O O V Studies to include,but not necessarily limited to: environmental impact analysis,wildlife,traffic,stormwater management,recreation,public service,fiscal impact,visual impact and historic significance documentation,or a written request to waive the submission requirements for these studies. 000 Amount of any bonds required. 000 Amount of excavated material to be removed from site,if any. Y N NA OTHER(as applicable) 000 Record of application for and approval status of all necessary permits from state and county officials and local utility companies. O O e Identification of any federal,state or county permits required for the project's execution,including project referrals, if any,&environmental review procedures mandated by Article 8,Environmental Quality Review,of the Environmental Conservation Law(SEQRA). 000 Any other information felt necessary by the Planning Board to allow the Board to proceed with consideration&to make an informed decision. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW CHECKLIST WESTCHESTER COUNTY PLANNING BOARD Notice to Applicants/Developers: At some point during the development review process your project may be referred to the Westchester County Planning Board for review and comment in accordance with state and county laws that require local planning boards, zoning boards of appeals and governing bodies to refer certain development applications to the County Planning Board. Referral to the County Planning Board may not occur until your project has progressed well along through the design process. Since the Planning Board's comments may impact project design, this checklist is provided to encourage early consideration of these areas of concern by applicants to avoid project changes later. For information on the County Planning Board review process and to access an electronic copy of this checklist, go online to www.westchestergov.com planningreferrals or contact Lukas Herbert at lah5@westchestergov.com. I. COUNTY PLANNING BOARD POLICIES: Written policies underlie all recommendations of the County Planning Board. Westchester 2025-Context for County and Municipal Planning and Policies to Guide County Planning,adopted by the County Planning Board on 5/6/08,amended 1/5/10,can be found at ww.westchestergov.com/2025. ❑ Westchester 2025: Policies should be reviewed to determine how they relate to the development proposal. I1. IMPACTS TO COUNTY FACILITIES AND SERVICES: The County Planning Board coordinates the review of development projects with Westchester County departments to identify and address potential impacts on County services and infrastructure. In some situations,permits and approvals may be required that could change project design. Site Plan Checklist Page 4 of 7 34 Belle Fair Road,Rye Brook,NY Project Address ❑ Map of County Facilities: Review the State& County Roads and Parks map (which also includes county channel lines) to identify proximity to County facilities at: www.westchestergov.com planningdocs/pdfinaps/countystateroadsparks.pdf. Other useful map links for information about environmental features, septic/sewer map, county sewer districts map, etc can be found at: www.westchestergov.com maps ❑ COUNTY ROAD: Applications for development on sites that abut a County road must be submitted for review by the County Department of Public Works. Information and forms can be found at: www.westchestergov.com dpw/bldgperm.htm. Former County Roads do not need review by the Department of Public Works,but will still likely trigger a review by the County Planning Board. ❑ COUNTY CHANNEL LINES: Applications for development on sites within 100 feet of a designated County Channel Line require a stream control permit from the County Department of Public Works. Information and forms can be found at: www.westchestergov.com dpw bldgperm.htm ❑ COUNTY PARK: New construction & land alteration projects adjacent to County parks are expected to address screening& buffer of new uses from the park, as appropriate. Stormwater should not drain from a developed site onto a County park without acceptable quantity and quality controls.County parks are designated as Critical Environmental Areas. ❑ SEWAGE TREATMENT AT COUNTY TREATMENT PLANT: Local municipalities are required to reduce and eliminate inflow and infiltration(I&1)into the sanitary sewage systems tributary to County treatment plants.New development will be expected to reduce I&I in relation to generation of new flow at a ratio of three to one. This requirement must be discussed with local officials. ❑BEE-LINE BUS SERVICE: Bee-Line bus stops serving a development site should be identified on plans or noted if located off-site. If a bus stop is located along the site's frontage, the applicant should contact the County Department of Transportation to discuss impacts and the need for improvements. Safe and separate pedestrian access should be provided to link a bus stop and sidewalk with building entrances. Information on County bus service and design guidelines can be found at: westchestergov.com/transportati on/images/Bus%20Serviceo o2OGuidel in es.pdf ❑FAIR AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING: Many municipalities require inclusion of fair & affordable units in new developments. Financial assistance to achieve fair & affordable housing development is available through Westchester County & other sources. Applications that include new residential units to be affirmatively marketed & sold or rented subject to fair& affordable housing provisions should be tied to Westchester County guidelines on affordability including income guidelines of eligible households that can be found at: http://homes.westchestergov.com/. If County funding is sought to develop fair & affordable housing,the County Board of Legislators must be included as an involved agency under SEQR ❑RECYCLING: New buildings must contain a designated area of sufficient size for separation and storage of recyclables and trash. Building expansions should also include sufficient space for separation and storage of recyclables. For more information about County recycling requirements go to: www.westchestergov.com/environment recycling.htm ❑STORM SEWER SYSTEM: Any connections to a County storm sewer line will require a permit from the Department of Public Works in accordance with the County Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination (IDDE) law. Information & forms can be found at:www.westchestergov.com/dpw/bidgperm.htm Non-stormwater discharges to the County storm sewer system are prohibited. III.DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS The County Planning Board's land use policies focus attention on several aspects of development that may have intermunicipal and quality of life impacts.The list below includes areas most frequently commented on by the County Planning Board. ❑WATER: All development plans should include sufficient provisions for stormwater management, water quality measures and mitigation of flooding. ❑Plans should identify the major drainage basin or watershed the site is located in (Croton River, Upper Hudson River, Lower Hudson, Upper Long Island Sound, Bronx River and Lower Long Island Sound). An interactive map with watershed boundaries can be found at www.westchestergov.com/planning/maps&lists/drainbasinsl lxl7.htmi ❑Watershed plans have been developed for several of the County's watersheds - the Croton, Indian Brook-Croton Gorge, Bronx River & Long Island Sound watersheds - that include specific recommendations that apply to development projects. See recommendations in watershed plans at: planning.westchestergov.com index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id 1231& Itemid=2204 Site Plan Checklist Page 5 of 7 34 Belle Fair Road,Rye Brook,NY Project Address ❑Development that involves filling, creation of impervious surfaces or buildings and substantive loss of natural vegetation in a floodplain or flood prone area should be avoided. ❑Above ground,vegetated retention/detention basins or devices are preferred because they perform better, are easier to inspect and maintain and provide additional environmental benefits over subsurface structural devices. Any such treatments should not be constructed within wetlands or buffer areas around wetlands. ❑The development should treat and retain as much stormwater on-site as possible, particularly when the site is located in a drainage basin with known flooding problems. A Construction Stormwater Toolbox with tools and sources of technical information related to the construction activities and stormwater management best practices is available from the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation at:www.dec.ny.gov/chemical/8694.11tmi ❑New development should include protection of aquatic resources. For more information about protection of aquatic resourc-es& buffer areas,go to: planning.westchestergov.com/index.php?option=com_content&task. view&id=1491<emid=2458 El Impervious cover should be minimized. Permeable paving surfaces should be used where feasible. Vegetative rain gardens should be used, particularly in areas of overland or channelized stormwater flow, to improve stormwater quality and reduce runoff volume. For more information,go to: www.westchestergov.com/stoimwater ❑Buildings along coastlines and low lying area should consider the impacts of sea level rise. Specific consideration is required of potential impacts to surface and subsurface drinking water supplies. ❑ SITE LAYOUT. Aesthetic design,building orientation and community character should be considered in the site layout and building appearance. ❑In most locations,buildings should face the street and have pedestrian access from the street. El Commercial buildings should be located near the front street line with the majority of parking located in the rear of the building. Even gas stations and convenience stores should be upfront in a landscaped setting with parking,pumps and canopy toward the rear. ❑Buildings should be of pedestrian-scale when seen from the sidewalk. ❑Building facades should contribute to and enhance the character of the community. ❑Driveway and pathway connections should be provided to adjacent sites when possible and crosseasements provided. ❑ STREETS. Street design should reduce unwarranted paving and promote connectivity. ❑New streets should connect with adjacent streets wherever feasible to prevent the proliferation of dead-end streets and promote neighborhood integration. ❑Connections could be vehicular or pedestrian/bicycle only,where appropriate. ❑Street widths should be minimized for streets with low traffic volume to reduce speeds and impervious surfaces.Lane widths of 12 feet are only appropriate for major roadways. ❑Driveway widths should be no more than 9 feet to reduce impervious surfaces. ❑Permeable paving surfaces should be used where feasible. ❑ GREEN TECHNOLOGY.New development should include as many green building elements as possible,such as:renewable building materials,energy efficient heating/cooling systems and fixtures,water saving devices,green roofs and permeable paving surfaces. Information can be obtained from the U.S.Green Building Council at:www.usgbc.org. ❑ LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING.The site improvements should enhance community character. Site Plan Checklist Page 6 of 7 34 Belle Fair Road,Rye Brook,NY Project Address ❑ Landscaping should consist of native plant species appropriate for the location. Invasive plant species should be prohibited. Invasive plant information available at: www.westch estergov.coin planning/environmental Reports InvasivePlantsBroch08.pdf ❑ Pollutant tolerant plantings should effectively shield parking,loading areas and refuse collection sites. ❑ Site lighting should be provided at the lowest safe levels and lowest heights,avoiding all spillage off site. ❑ PEDESTRIANS. Safe,convenient and ADA accessible pedestrian access is provided. ❑ A sidewalk should be provided along the site frontage along each street. ❑ Direct pedestrian connections should be made from the front of the building to the sidewalk.Pedestrian crossings of drive-ways& parking lots should be minimized or avoided. If they must be provided,painted crosswalks should be provided through parking lots. ❑ ADA accessibility must be provided. ❑ BICYCLISTS. Provisions for bicyclists should be incorporated into project design. ❑ Bicycle parking should be provided in commercial and residential developments. Guidelines can be found at: www.apbp.org/resource resmgr/publications/bicycle_parking_guidel ines.pdf ❑ If near a trailway or bicycle route, extra consideration should be given to bicycle accessibility such as bike lanes on internal roadways,bicycle parking and other amenities. ❑ Drive-thru lanes at uses such as banks and fast-food restaurants should also be accessible for bicycles. Waiver: t'pon finding by the Building Inspector, Village Engineer. Planning Board or Board of Trustees that, due to the particular character or limited nature of development or change in use or to special conditions peculiar to a site,the submission of a final site plan,or certain portions of information normally required as part of the site development plan, is inappropriate or unnecessary or that strict compliance with said submission requirements will cause extraordinary and unnecessary hardship, such official or Board may waive such submission requirements wherever, in the opinion of such official or Board, such waiver will be consistent with the goal of promoting the public health, safety and general welfare of the community.The findings for granting such waiver shall become a part of the public record. Any waiver request must be made in writing,and include sufficient detailed information for the appropriate authority to make an informed decision. Design Professional's Certification of Completion of Checklist I have fully reviewed the Village of Rye Brook's requirements and certify this application to be a complete submission. I understand that an incomplete plat or incomplete checklist shall be deemed an incomplete submission and shall be returned to the applicant upon determination of such by the appropriate authority. _ Name(Print) �Q, Wilfred A. Rohde, P.E. q Signature A, eff Date December 18, 2015 P fessi a Seal Site Plan Checklist Page 7 of 7 PON 2157 Appendix G State Environmental Quality Review SHORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM For UNLISTED ACTIONS Only PART I-PROJECT INFORMATION To be completed by A licant or Project Sponsor) 1. APPLICANT/SPONSOR 2. PROJECT NAME Lisa&Douglas Levine Revised Site Plan Application 3. PROJECT LOCATION: Municipality Village of Rye Brook County Westchester 4. PRECISE LOCATION(Street address and road intersections,prominent landmarks,etc.or provide map) 34 Belle Fair Road,Village of Rye Brook Parcel No. 124.73-1-63 5. PROPOSED ACTION IS: ❑ New ❑ Expansion Modification/alteration 6. DESCRIBE PROJECT BRIEFLY: Enlarge rear yard to create a safe play area for young children by installing a 6-ft high masonry retaining wall within a steep slope area. Also work to include making masonry facade renovations to the front stair assembly and creating a small patio in the rear yard, complete with concrete/masonry steps to the rear door. 7. AMOUNT OF LAND AFFECTED: Initially 0.137 acres Ultimately 0.137 acres 8. WILL PROPOSED ACTION COMPLY WITH EXISTING ZONING OR OTHER EXISTING LAND USE RESTRICTIONS? ✓❑Yes ❑ No If No,describe briefly 9. WHAT IS PRESENT LAND USE IN VICINITY OF PROJECT? 0 Residential []Industrial Commercial Agriculture ❑ Park/ForesUOpen Space ❑ Other Describe: Project is within a Planned Unit Development(PUD) 10. DOES ACTION INVOLVE A PERMIT APPROVAL,OR FUNDING,NOW OR ULTIMATELY FROM ANY OTHER GOVERNMENTAL AGENCY (FEDERAL,STATE OR LOCAL)? ❑Yes 0 No If Yes,list agency(s)name and permit/approvals: 11. DOES ANY ASPECT OF THE ACTION HAVE A CURRENTLY VALID PERMIT OR APPROVAL? 0 Yes F] No If Yes,list agency(s)name and pennittapprovals: Certificate of Occupancy from the Village of Rye Brook after the house was constructed in 1998. 12. AS A RESULT OF PROPOSED ACTION WILL EXISTING PERMIT/APPROVAL REQUIRE MODIFICATION? 2/ Yes 11 No I CERTIFY THAT THE INFORMATION PROVIDED ABOVE IS TRUE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE ApplicanUsponsor name: Wilfred A.Rohde PE (Consulting Engineer for the Applicant) Date Dec 18,2015 Signature If the 6tion is in the Coastal Area, and you are a state agency, complete the Coastal Assessment Form before proceeding with this assessment OVER 1 Reset PART II- IMPACT ASSESSMENT To be completed by Lead Agency) A DOES ACTION EXCEED ANY TYPE I THRESHOLD IN 6 NYCRR,PART 617.4? If yes,coordinate the review process and use the FULL EAF Yes ❑ No B WILL ACTION RECEIVE COORDINATED REVIEW AS PROVIDED FOR UNLISTED ACTIONS IN 6 NYCRR,PART 617.6? If No,a negative declaration may be superseded by another involved agency. ❑Yes [] No C. COULD ACTION RESULT IN ANY ADVERSE EFFECTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE FOLLOWING:(Answers may be handwritten,if legible) C1. Existing air quality,surface or groundwater quality or quantity,noise levels,existing traffic pattern,solid waste production or disposal, potential for erosion,drainage or flooding problems? Explain briefly: C2. Aesthetic,agricultural,archaeological,historic,or other natural or cultural resources;or community or neighborhood character?Explain briefly C3. Vegetation or fauna,fish,shellfish or wildlife species,significant habitats,or threatened or endangered species?Explain briefly: C4. A community's existing plans or goals as officially adopted,or a change in use or intensity of use of land or other natural resources?Explain briefly C5. Growth,subsequent development,or related activities likely to be induced by the proposed action?Explain briefly: C6. Long term,short term,cumulative,or other effects not identified in C1-05? Explain briefly: C7. Other Impacts(including changes in use of either quantity or type of energy)? Explain briefly: D. WILL THE PROJECT HAVE AN IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL CHARACTERISTICS THAT CAUSED THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL AREA(CEA)? 11 Yes ❑ No If Yes,explain briefly: E. IS THERE,OR IS THERE LIKELY TO BE,CONTROVERSY RELATED TO POTENTIAL ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS? Yes ❑ No If Yes,explain briefly: PART 111-DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE(To be completed by Agency) INSTRUCTIONS: For each adverse effect identified above,determine whether it is substantial,large,important or otherwise significant. Each effect should be assessed in connection with its(a)setting(i.e.urban or rural);(b)probability of occurring; (c)duration;(d)irreversibility; (e) geographic scope; and (f)magnitude. If necessary, add attachments or reference supporting materials. Ensure that explanations contain sufficient detail to show that all relevant adverse impacts have been identified and adequately addressed. If question D of Part II was checked yes,the determination of significance must evaluate the potential impact of the proposed action on the environmental characteristics of the CEA. 0 Check this box if you have identified one or more potentially large or significant adverse impacts which MAY occur. Then proceed directly to the FULL EAF and/or prepare a positive declaration. Check this box if you have determined,based on the information and analysis above and any supporting documentation,that the proposed action WILL NOT result in any significant adverse environmental impacts AND provide,on attachments as necessary,the reasons supporting this determination Dec 18,2015 Name of Lead Agency Date Print or Type Name of Responsible Officern Lead Agency Title of R sponsible Officer Signature of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency ignature of Preparer(If different from responsible officer) Reset ROHDE, SOYKA 40 Garden Street & ANDREWS Poughkeepsie,NY 12601 Phone: (845)452-7515 Fax: (845)452-8335 Consulting Engineers,P.C. E-Mail Address: wrohde@rsaengrs.com Wilfred A.Rohde, P.E • John V.Andrews,Jr.,P.E. December 22,2015 Building Department Village of Rye Brook 938 King Street Rye Brook,NY 10573 Attn: Michal Nowak RE: Lisa D.Levine 34 Belle Fair Road,Village of Rye Brook Site Plan Application Building Permit Application Dear Mr. Nowak: Enclosed herewith in support of the above referenced applications are fifteen (15) copies the following document in anticipation of being placed on the January 2016 Planning Board Meeting agenda: 1. One(1) original Site Plan Application Form, fully executed and notarized 2. One(1) Full Set Site Plan Drawings with original signature and seal, and fourteen(14) copies of Full Set Site Plan Drawings 3. One (1) original and fourteen(14) copies Short Form EAF, Part 1 4. Fifteen (15) copies Libertystone Catalogue Pages 5. Fifteen (15) copies of Survey prepared by Ward Carpenter, L.S. 6. One(1) original copies Building Permit Application Form, fully executed and notarized 7. Eight (8) copies of Survey prepared by Ward Carpenter, L.S. 8. Eight(8) copies of signed and sealed Site Plan 9. Photographs Please note the all applicable fees and escrow fees will be delivered under separate cover by the homeowner. In addition to the above documents, the following comments are offered for your consideration: 1. A notation has been placed on the Building Permit Application indicating that pursuant to instructions received that we are asking for a Steep Slope Permit also. Pagel of 2 Building Department Village of Rye Brook December 22,2015 Page 2 of 2 2. The reason for shifting the retaining wall back to the position shown on the plans is to create a larger and safer play area for the children. 3. A fence is to be placed along the top of the wall since the drop-off is more than 3 ft. This fence will be similar to On-Guard Fence System, complete with a smooth top railing. Anchorage into the wall is to be rated at 50 pounds per foot horizontal load or 300 pounds horizontal load per post when spaced at 6 ft on center. 4. The color and type of patio stone is to be selected by the Mr. and Mrs. Levine. The stone should be the type selected to be safe for small children(free of tripping hazards). 5. The color of Libertystone wall units is to be selected by Mr. and Mrs. Levine per the attached catalogue. If there are any questions, or if you require any additional information, please do not hesitate to contact us. Sincerely, ROHDE SOYKA&ANDREWS Co sulting Engineers,PC Wilfred A. Rohde, PE Enclosures cc: Lisa D. Levine w/ ROHDE SOYKA&ANDREWS CONSULTING ENGINEERS,P.C. Hamsownsr'adssacrabon,Inc. Board afDirsctars 24 Bar Faw Bird Rrs Brook,N.Y.10573 D EC�EOVE SEP 10 2015 BelleFair ARB VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK BUILDING DEPARTMENT "APPROVAL" Thursday, September 18, 2014 Douglas and Lisa Levine 34 BelleFair Road Rye Brook, NY 10573 Re: Pushing back retaining wall Dear Mr. and Mrs. Levine; We write in response to your request to the ARB for approval of pushing back the retaining wall in the rear of your home 11 feet. We are happy to inform you that based on the details in your application; your application has been approved. Prior to beginning the work please be sure to obtain any necessary permits from the Village. Once this installation is complete please contact an American Leisure representative so that a final inspection may take place. Please be advised that our approval will be expressly conditioned upon your continued compliance with Schedule D of the Declaration. Accordingly, if the aforementioned installation fails at any time to comply with the Regulations, the ARB reserves the right to direct modification or the removal of the improvements at your sole expense to ensure compliance. Please also note that approvals are valid for one year beginning from the date of this letter. If you have any questions, you may contact a member of the ARB at any time. We thank you for your cooperation and patience, The Architectural Review Board VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK BOARD OF TRUSTEES MEETINGS VILLAGE HALL, 938 KING STREET THURSDAY, JANUARY 29, 2015 AGENDA 7:00 P.M. - EXECUTIVE SESSION: Property Acquisition 7:30 P.M. - REGULAR MEETING PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE REPORT/PRESENTATIONS AFFORDABLE HOUSING PUBLIC HEARINGS RESOLUTIONS: 1) Referring an application to the Planning Board for a report and recommendation on a Special use permit and Site Plan Application for an attached public utility wireless telecommunications facility at 965 Anderson Hill Road (a/k/a Doral Arrowwood Hotel) 2) Considering participation in the Westchester County Consolidated Government Efficiency Plan 3) Considering entering into agreements for the 2015 Rye Brook Spring Carnival event 4) Setting a public hearing for a local law to amend Chapters 215, 235, 245 and A258 of the Village Code for the creation of a Sustainability Committee. 5) Considering an amendment to the Surplus Equipment bid awarded on January 13, 2015. 6) Considering the approval of minutes for the Village Board meeting held on January 13, 2015. Board of Trustees January 29, 2015 Page 1 ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT OLD BUSINESS NEW BUSINESS DISCUSSION ITEMS ACTION ON NON-AGENDA MATTERS SUBJECT TO THE CONSENT OF THE TRUSTEES PRESENT AT THE MEETING THE NEXT SPECIAL AND REGULAR TRUSTEES MEETINGS: February 10, 2015 and February 24, 2015 BOARD: Trustee David M. Heiser Trustee Jeffrey B. Rednick Mayor Paul S. Rosenberg Excused: Trustee Susan R. Epstein Trustee Jason A. Klein VILLAGE STAFF: Christopher Bradbury, Village Administrator Sarah Bledsoe, Assistant to the Village Administrator Greg Austin, Chief of Police Edward Beane, Esq., Village Counsel Michel Nowak, Superintendent of Public Works Fred Seifert, Public Access Coordinator/IT Paula Patafio, Meeting Secretary Mayor Paul Rosenberg called the Thursday, January 29th meeting of Board of Trustees meeting to order. He noted that the meeting was postponed from Tuesday as a result of the snow storm. He apologized for the late start of the meeting, and noted that the Board held an Executive Session prior to the meeting on property acquisition that ran a little longer than expected. It was noted that Trustee Jason Klein and Trustee Susan Epstein were both excused from the meeting. Mayor Rosenberg introduced Sarah Bledsoe, the Village's new Assistant to the Village Administrator. The Board welcomed Ms. Bledsoe. Board of Trustees January 29, 2015 Page 2 Mayor Rosenberg noted that as only three Board members were in attendance, three yes votes would be required in order for a resolution to be adopted. Mayor Rosenberg called for the first matter on the agenda. RESOLUTIONS: 1) Referring an application to the Planning Board for a report and recommendation on a Special use permit and Site Plan Application for an attached public utility wireless telecommunications facility at 965 Anderson Hill Road (a/k/a Doral Arrowwood Hotel) Mr. Bradbury read the following resolution: RESOLUTION REFERRING AN APPLICATION TO THE PLANNING BOARD FOR A REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ON A SPECIAL USE PERMIT AND SITE PLAN APPLICATION FOR AN ATTACHED PUBLIC UTILITY WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY AT 965 ANDERSON HILL ROAD (AKA DORAL ARROWWOOD HOTEL) WHEREAS, New York SMSA Limited Partnership d/b/a Verizon Wireless ("Applicant") has made an application to the Village of Rye Brook Board of Trustees for approval of a Special Use Permit and Site Plan for an attached public utility wireless telecommunications facility and appurtenances on real property located at 965 Anderson Hill Road, also known as the Doral Ar owwood Hotel, designated as Parcel ID 129.34-1-45 on the Town of Rye Tax Map and located in the PUD Zoning District; and WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees is the Approval Authority for this application in accordance with Sections 209-1(A)(1)(b) and 250-39(D) of the Village Code; and WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees, pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA), determines the proposed action to be an Unlisted Action pursuant to SEQRA. Board of Trustees January 29, 2015 Page 3 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that pursuant to Section 209-3 of the Village Code, the Board of Trustees hereby refers the application to the Rye Brook Planning Board for Report and Recommendation; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the application is also referred to HDR, Inc. for an engineering and environmental review and report. Michael Sheridan, the representative for applicant, addressed the Board. He gave a brief overview of the application, and noted that the equipment will be housed in a stealth flagpole structure and a shed on the ground. Mr. Sheridan requested that public hearing be scheduled now. Mr. Christopher Bradbury. Village Administrator noted that application will move thru the process. The first step is the referral to the Planning Board. Edward Beane, Esq., Village Counsel noted that the applicant is working with the Village's Planning Consultant. Because of the proximity near the airport, the FAA will also be involved. The Planning Board has a notification provision and a timeframe for submissions. This matter will be on the March agenda for the Planning Board. Nicholas Lyras, President of the Doral Greens Homeowners Association, how the equipment would be housed on the ground when Doral Arrow-wood cannot build not even one more square foot. Mr. Lyras noted his disappointment in Airowwood as they did not contact Doral Greens about this project. On a motion made by Trustee David Heiser, and seconded by Trustee Jeffrey Rednick, the resolution was adopted. Ms. Sarah Bledsoe, Assistant to the Village Administrator, called the roll: Trustee David M. Heiser voting aye Trustee Jeffrey Rednick voting aye Mayor Paul Rosenberg voting aye The next item on the agenda was called before the Board: 2. Considering participation in the Westchester County Consolidated Government Efficiency Plan Mr. Bradbury read the following resolution: Board of Trustees January 29,2015 Page 4 RESOLUTION CONSIDERING PARTICIPATION IN THE WESTCHESTER COUNTY CONSOLIDATED GOVERNMENT EFFICIENCY PLAN WHEREAS, New York State has established the Property Tax Freeze Credit to provide tax reimbursement to qualifying homeowners for increases in local property taxes on their primary residences; and WHEREAS, local taxing jurisdictions must comply with the New York State Property Tax Cap and must also submit a qualifying efficiency plan in order for their residents to be eligible for the program; and WHEREAS, the State has recommended that multiple taxing jurisdictions convene to create consolidated Government Efficiency Plan; and WHEREAS, Westchester County has offered to be the lead agency for the submission of a consolidated Government Efficiency Plan for both the county and any interested municipalities or districts. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, The Village Board of Trustees hereby expresses its intent to join Westchester County in their submission of a consolidated Government Efficiency Plan to be submitted to New York State prior to June 1, 2015. Mr. Bradbury reviewed some of the requirements and conditions needed to comply with this particular plan. Westchester County started looking at this program last July. The communities that intend to join this plan must provide communication through the County. The Village is now preparing the information that is required. The County is confident that they will meet the requirements, including those of the State. Mayor Rosenberg noted that this is a `no brainer.' On a motion made by Trustee Heiser, and seconded by Trustee Rednick, the resolution was adopted. Board of Trustees January 29, 2015 Page 5 Ms. Bledsoe called the roll: Trustee David M. Heiser voting aye Trustee Jeffrey Rednick voting aye Mayor Paul Rosenberg voting aye 3. Considering entering into agreements for the 2015 Rye Brook Spring Carnival event Mr. Bradbury read the following resolution: RESOLUTION CONSIDERING ENTERING INTO AGREEMENTS FOR THE 2015 RYE BROOK SPRING CARNIVAL EVENT WHEREAS, the Village of Rye Brook Parks and Recreation Department desires to hold a carnival featuring amusement rides, games and food May 15-17, 2015; and WHEREAS, Request for Proposals (RFP) were solicited from carnival vendors and posted on Empirebids.com and three (3) proposals were submitted; and WHEREAS, after review of the RFP's by the Parks and Recreation Superintendent and the Village Administrator it was determined that All Star Midway of Port Jefferson Station, NY submitted the most desirable proposal. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Village of Rye Brook is hereby authorized to enter into an agreement with All Star Midway of Port Jefferson Station, NY to run a carnival event for the Village of Rye Brook from May 8th through May 10, 2015; and be it FURTHER RESOLVED, the agreement is subject to the approval of the village attorney for insurance and indemnification provisions; and be it FURTHER RESOLVED, the All Star Midway agreement is subject to approval of agreements, insurance and indemnification with Rye King Associates, Inc. (900 King Board of Trustees January 29,2015 Page 6 Street) and the Arbors Homeowners Association, Inc. in a form acceptable to the village attorney; and be it FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor and Administrator are hereby authorized to execute and deliver all documents necessary or appropriate to execute the agreements with All Star Midway, Rye King Associates, Inc. and the Arbors Homeowners Association. Trustee Rednick noted that although this event was being scheduled for Mother's Day Weekend because of the availability of the vendor and the Village's calendar. This is a valuable event as it promotes comradely. The last two years this event was held there were days that the carnival was rained out. He was in favor of this event. He noted that this event almost broke even last year, but should start to show a profit this year. Trustee Hesier noted that this is a great event, but it is not necessary to have it every year. There is a chance that Mother's Day would not be a profitable day. If the event did not conflict with Mother's Day he would be open to scheduling the event. Mayor Rosenberg also felt that holding this event on Mother's Day would not be a good idea. The following weekend is the Junior Class Trip, but the carnival company is available. It would be a better weekend for this event which appeals to the younger children. Mr. Bradbury noted that they reviewed other possible dates for this event. He agreed that this event is geared more to the younger children in the community. The first year the event lost money. Last year it was pretty close to making money. This year the outreach would be wider throughout the county and Greenwich and it should show a profit for the Village. After a brief discussion with the members of the board present tonight, it was decided that the event should be held again this year but at the amended dates of May 15-17. 4. Setting a public hearing for a local law to amend Chapters 215, 235, 245 and A258 of the Village Code for the creation of a Sustainability Committee. Mr. Bradbury read the following resolution: Board of Trustees January 29, 2015 Page 7 RESOLUTION SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR A LOCAL LAW TO AMEND CHAPTERS 215, 235, 245 AND A258 OF THE VILLAGE CODE FOR THE CREATION OF A VILLAGE SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE WHEREAS, the Village of Rye Brook Comprehensive Plan recommends the creation of a Sustainability Committee to educate the public on issues of environmental importance to the Village and to oversee sustainability initiatives undertaken by the Village; and WHEREAS, the mission and objectives of such a committee would be substantially similar to the Village's existing Advisory Committee on Environmental Conservation (the "ACEC"); and WHEREAS, by letter dated January 9, 2015, the members of the ACEC made a recommendation and request to the Village Board that the ACEC be converted into the Village of Rye Brook Sustainability Committee, and further, that the mission and objectives of the ACEC and Sustainability Committee be merged; and WHEREAS, the Village Board finds that the membership of the ACEC is well- suited to undertake the proposed functions of the Sustainability Committee. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Trustees of the Village of Rye Brook determines that the proposed action is a Type 11 Action pursuant to the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA), and therefore, no further environmental review is required; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Board of Trustees of the Village of Rye Brook shall hold a public hearing on February 24, 2015 at 7:30p.m. at Village Hall, 938 King Street, Rye Brook, New York, to consider a proposed local law (i) creating the Village of Rye Brook Sustainability Committee; and (ii) merging the mission, objectives and membership of the ACEC into the Sustainability Committee. Board of Trustees January 29, 2015 Page 8 Mayor Rosenberg made a minor correction to the resolution. He thanked the DCEC for a letter sent to the Village. On a motion made by Trustee Heiser, and seconded by Trustee Rednick, resolution was adopted. The roll was called: Trustee David M. Heiser voting aye Trustee Jeffrey Rednick voting aye Mayor Paul Rosenberg voting aye 5. Considering an amendment to the Surplus Equipment bid awarded on January 13, 2015. Mr. Bradbury read the following resolution: RESOLUTION CONSIDERING AN AMENDMENT TO THE SURPLUS EQUIPMENT BID AWARDED ON JANUARY 13, 2015. WHEREAS, On January 13, 2015 the Village Board awarded bids to various vendors for surplus equipment totaling $48,891 utilizing the Municibid program; and, WHEREAS, The 2001 Elgin Sweeper was awarded to Brian Mcgourty in the amount of $13,800; and, WHEREAS, The Village was notified in writing on January 21, 2015 by Municibid that there was a reporting error that resulted in one bid item being awarded to the wrong vendor, but for the correct amount. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the January 13, 2015 bid award for the 2001 Elgin Sweeper is hereby amended and the item is awarded to Philip Spatz in the amount of$13,800. Board of Trustees January 29, 2015 Page 9 This resolution makes a correction to the award. On a motion made by Trustee Heiser, and seconded by Trustee Klein, the resolution was adopted. The roll was called: Trustee David M. Heiser voting aye Trustee Jeffrey Rednick voting aye Mayor Paul Rosenberg voting aye 6. Considering the approval of minutes for the Village Board meeting held on January 13, 2015. Mr. Bradbury read the following resolution: RESOLUTION CONSIDERING THE APPROVAL OF MINUTES: JANUARY 13, 2015 NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Village of Rye Brook Board of Trustees hereby certifies the approval of the minutes for the meetings held on January 13, 2015. On a motion made by Trustee Heiser, and seconded by Trustee Rednick minutes were adopted as submitted. The roll was called: Trustee David M. Heiser voting aye Trustee Jeffrey Rednick voting aye Mayor Paul Rosenberg voting aye Board of Trustees January 29, 2015 Page 10 ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT: Mr. Bradbury noted that the Village was prepared and ready for the storm. The Highway Department did a great job of clearing the snow. Although we were prepared for something big, everyone is glad that it did not happen. Residents did a great job staying off the roads. The cars parked on the streets were moved and it made the Highway's Department jobs easier. Potholes are starting to surface. There is state, county and village roads involved. Residents are asked to report any concerns to the Village. Mr. Bradbury noted that there is a website, RyeBrook.org/pothole that residents can access to report potholes. The Dissolution study of the Town of Rye is still active. Mamaroneck will be making a submission. There will be further discussions coming up soon, and a vote will be taken in February. There were no residents wishing to address the Board. There being no further business before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 8:15.m. Board of Trustees January 29, 2015 Page 11 PLANNING BOARD RULES OF PROCEDURE (Revised 11/14/13) 1. REGULAR MEETINGS. Regular meetings of the Planning Board of the Village of Rye Brook(hereinafter referred to as the"Planning Board") shall be held on the second (2"d) and fourth (4th) Thursdays of each month, except that if any such day is a holiday on which Village offices are closed, that regular meeting may be held as scheduled by the Chair. Regular meetings shall be called to order at 7:30 P.M. 2. SPECIAL MEETINGS. Special meetings may be called by the Chair by a written notice which shall contain a statement of the purpose for which the special meeting shall be called, and shall also state the date, time and place for the holding of such meeting. a)Notice. The Chair shall cause written notice of a special meeting to be left at the residence or place of business of each member of the Planning Board, or sent to each member by email, at least seventy-two hours before the time for which such special meeting is called. Notice requirements may be waived by the written acknowledgment of a Planning Board Member that actual notice of the Special Meeting had been received. b) Transaction of Business. At special meetings the business to be transacted thereat shall be only that stated in the notice of such meeting. c) Order of Business. The order of business at special meetings of the Planning Board shall conform as closely as practicable to the order of business at a Regular Meeting. 3. REACHING THE PLANNING BOARD AGENDA. a) An Application will be accepted for the Planning Board Agenda upon the referral to the Planning Board by the Village Board of Trustees (referred to below as "Village Board"), or by the Village Engineer, or another authorized member of the Building Department, for administrative consideration when it complies in every material respect with the applicable submission requirements imposed under the Village Code and/or Building Department Checklist for conceptual review or formal site plan review, as the case may be. b) An Application referred to the Planning Board will be reviewed by the Planning Board at a regularly scheduled meeting. To reach a Planning Board agenda, a complete initial application package must be received by the Building Department at least twenty-one (2 1) calendar days prior to a scheduled meeting. If the Application is complete, as determined by the Building Department/Village Engineer in consultation with the Planning Board Chair, the Application will be placed on the next available Planning Board agenda that is at least twenty-one -1- (2 1) calendar days after the Application is accepted as complete by the Building Department/Village Engineer. The Application shall be provided to the Planning Board's planning consultant, the Village Engineer and the Planning Board's legal counsel for review at least fourteen (14) days prior to the Planning Board's first meeting on the Application for formal land use review. Any revisions to pending applications must be submitted at least two (2)weeks prior to the date the application will be heard, unless such time limit may be waived by the Chair upon good cause shown. c) An Application may also reach the Planning Board Agenda for a conceptual review (Sketch Plan Conference)prior to its submission for review as a formal site plan, subdivision, or other land use application, upon the recommendation of the Village Engineer and the approval of the Planning Board Chair and payment of an initial escrow fee to reimburse professional fees incurred by the Village. A Sketch Plan Conference is solely for conceptual review, to allow an applicant to present a concept plan to the Planning Board for discussion and feedback and to pose questions and request guidance from the Planning Board prior to submitting a formal application. It also allows the Planning Board to identify concerns, requirements or regulations pertinent to the application. A Sketch Plan Conference is generally confined to one meeting, and no vote of approval or disapproval shall be taken on the subject application. The Village's requirements regarding notification of an application to neighbors shall not apply to a Sketch Plan Conference. 4. SETTING THE AGENDA. a) The Village Engineer, at the direction of the Chair, shall prepare an agenda for each Regular Meeting of the Planning Board, which shall list the matters to be considered by the Planning Board at such meeting An agenda for a Regular Meeting shall list the matters to be considered by the Planning Board insofar as is possible in the order set forth in these Rules. b) The Village Engineer shall arrange for the delivery of a copy of the agenda of each meeting of the Planning Board to each member of the Planning Board not later than the morning of the sixth day preceding the date of the meeting. c) Items not listed on the agenda of a regular meeting may be considered by the Planning Board as new matters only upon the unanimous consent of all members of the Planning Board present at the regular meeting or by the Chair when deemed by the Chair to be a matter of public importance. 5. ORDER OF BUSINESS. The order of business at regular meetings of the Planning Board shall be as follows: a) Roll Call and Pledge; -2- b) Review of Minutes; c)Applications Proposing Fair and Affordable Housing; d)Public Hearings; e) Resolutions; f) Old/Unfinished Business; and g)New Business. However, the regular order of business at a stated meeting may at any time be suspended by the affirmative vote of the majority of the members of the Planning Board. 6. CONDUCT OF PUBLIC HEARINGS. a) If the Planning Board is the approval authority for an Application, after no more than two appearances on the Planning Board Agenda of a completed Application, the Planning Board shall set the date to open a Public Hearing on the completed Application before it. The date for the Public Hearing shall be determined with due regard to the schedules of the Applicant and the Planning Board consultants, and the number of items already on upcoming Planning Board agendas. b) Though the Planning Board will endeavor to process Applications before it with reasonable dispatch, at any time after convening a public hearing the Planning Board may recess or adjourn that hearing and schedule its continuance on another date and time. A motion for continuance may be made by any member of the Planning Board on the member's own initiative or by a member upon request or recommendation of the Building Department, or upon the request of the Applicant. In order to be considered, such motion must receive a second by another member and then be approved by a majority of the members of the Planning Board. c) A public hearing may be adjourned for the purpose of conducting a "Site Visit." d) Presentations at Public Hearings will generally be made in the following order (provided that each presenter shall accept pertinent questions from the Chair, and other members of the Planning Board): (i) Introduction by the Chair; (ii) Applicant (personally, and/or by its representatives and consultants); -3- (iii) Experts employed or retained by the Village; (iv) Members of the public; (v) Comments and discussion by the members of the Planning Board. e) All speakers at Planning Board Hearings are informed that public comments are to be limited to the Application at hand. Persons whose comments are deemed by the Chair to be outside the scope of the Application, the SEQR process or land use review generally may be ruled out of order by the Chair and denied the opportunity for further comment on that Application for the rest of the meeting. The Chair also reserves the right to limit a speaker's presentation as the Chair determines in its sole discretion. f) Written comments from members of the public may be submitted to the Village of Rye Brook Building Department at least one day in advance of the public hearing. The Planning Board will also give a copy of these written comments to the Applicant upon receipt. No written comments from the public will be accepted or considered after the close of the public hearing. g) The Planning Board does not intend to interact with the public or Applicants outside of meetings of the Planning Board on the subject of pending or proposed Applications. Planning Board members shall not engage in debates on the merits of pending or proposed Applications with Applicants or the public, outside of Planning Board meetings. A Planning Board member subjected to ex parte communication shall disclose such communication to the other Planning Board members. 7. CONDUCTING OTHER BUSINESS AT MEETINGS. Advisory reviews, workshops and Sketch Plan Conferences shall be conducted so as to follow the order of presentations provided for Public Hearings, except that comments by members of the public shall be heard at the discretion of the Chair, and that questions from the Planning Board are acceptable at any time. 8. SITE VISITS. The following shall apply to Site Visits. a) A "Site Visit" is a visit by one or more members of the Planning Board to a location which is the subject of an Application pending before the Planning Board, in the company of the Applicant (or their agents or employees) and involves entering onto the property or visiting areas not customarily available for public access. (This does not include a view of a site from adjoining public streets or other observations that can be made without entering on the property.) -4- b) When the Planning Board deems it appropriate for the adequate consideration of an Application, the Planning Board shall ask the Applicant to allow a Site Visit by the Planning Board. c) A Site Visit is an opportunity for the Planning Board to physically view the property that is the subject of an Application. A Site Visit by Planning Board members shall not be a meeting for conducting the substantive business of the Planning Board. Planning Board members shall not discuss the merits of an application or any part thereof with each other or the Applicant during the site visit. Individual visits by Planning Board members to a property without prior notice to the Applicant are discouraged. d). A list of attendees and the date of at the Site Visit shall be provided to the Secretary and made a part of the Planning Board's file. 9. VOTING. a) Each member of the Planning Board shall have one vote. A majority of the total authorized voting power is necessary to pass any matter, except as provided herein. b) Every member of the Planning Board present at any meeting thereof, when a vote is taken, shall vote for or against. However, a member may be recused by the Chair only in cases of actual conflict of interest, in which case such permitted abstention shall be recorded as "Excused." In all other cases an abstention or silence shall be considered a positive vote in favor of the proposed resolution for purposes of determining the final vote on a matter. Although rulings of the Ethics Board shall be controlling, in the absence of such Board's ruling, the disclosure of a Planning Board member's business dealings with an Applicant shall serve to excuse the member from voting on that Application. c) A vote upon any question shall be taken by a"yes" or a "no", and the names of the members present and their votes shall be entered in the minutes, except that in minor matters the Chair may ask for a general consensus of the Board. d) Roll call votes shall be called in alphabetical order of the last name of the Member. The Chair shall be the last one to cast a vote. e) Resolutions of the Planning Board. (i) All Resolutions to memorialize any action of the Planning Board shall be in writing. (ii) The Resolution as to an Application that has been the subject of a Public Hearing that has been closed shall be presented for a vote at the next regular meeting of the Planning Board after the close of the Public -5- Hearing,provided, however, that upon agreement of at least 4 members of the Planning Board who are present when the Public Hearing is closed, the vote on a resolution may be accelerated to occur at the meeting in which the Public Hearing is closed. (iii) The business of adopting a Resolution does not re-open the record of proceedings. No comment or testimony of the parties is in order for the adoption of a Resolution. This does not preclude discussions between the Planning Board and its professionals as to the text (and intentions) set forth in any proposed Resolution, which shall not be deemed to reopen the record. 10. WITHDRAWAL OF MEMBER FROM MEETING. No member shall withdraw from a meeting of the Planning Board without the permission of the Chair, except as set forth in rule 6(f), above. 11. COMMENTS BY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC. a) The Chair shall entertain comments from members of the public as to the merits of any item set forth on the agenda for a Public Hearing. Such comments shall be limited to statements not to exceed three minutes in length, and shall adhere to rule 6 (e), above. b) Members of the public may also be heard on other items set forth on the Agenda at the discretion of the Chair. The Chair shall have the discretion to withhold recognition of members of the public on such items until the agenda has been completed. d) Any member of the public may be granted additional speaking time at the discretion of the Chair. 12. RECORDING OF PROCEEDINGS OF MEETINGS. In order for all members of the public to observe the proceedings of the Planning Board without obstruction, members of the public, television or other media who wish to tape record, audio/video record,photograph or otherwise record any aspect of the meeting or hearing shall do so only if they can keep the aisles in the Village Board Room at 938 King Street (or any other location where a meeting or hearing may be held) free of encumbrances to secure exit or for fire or other emergencies and such recording shall only be made from the seats at the back of the room, so as not to obstruct the public view of the proceedings. Anyone wishing to record a meeting or hearing may do so on the condition that they comply with these rules and submit a form seeking permission to record a meeting or hearing to the Village of Rye Brook Building Department or the Chair prior to commencement of the meeting or hearing to be recorded. Said form may be obtained at the Village of Rye Brook Building Department. -6- 13. EXECUTIVE SESSIONS. Upon a majority vote of its total membership, taken in an open meeting pursuant to a motion identifying the general area or areas of the subject or subjects to be considered, the Planning Board may conduct an executive session for matters which federal, state, or local law permits an executive session. 14. ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER REVISED FOR DELIBERATIVE ASSEMBLIES TO BE USED. All questions of order or procedure of the Planning Board not herein provided for shall be decided in accordance with Robert's Rules of Order Revised for Deliberative Assemblies. 15. CONFLICT WITH LAWS. These rules are not intended to modify the provisions of the Code of the Village of Rye Brook or any New York State or Federal law and all conflicts with these rules and procedures are to be resolved in favor of the Village Code, laws of the State of New York and laws of the United States. -7- FOR ANY OTHER RECENT DOCUMENTS RELATED TO THE APPLICATIONS ON THIS MONTH'S AGENDA, PLEASE LOOK BACK TO THE ATTACHED DOCUMENTS OF THE DECEMBER 10, 2015 AGENDA. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS PLEASE CALL THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT AT 939- 0753. THANK YOU.