Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009-12-10 - Planning Board Meeting Minutes VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK PLANNING BOARD REGULAR MEETING VILLAGE HALL, 938 KING STREET December 10, 2009 ...................................................................................................... ROLL CALL MINUTES 1. Review of Planning Board minutes (None) PUBLIC HEARING 2. Review of a Site Plan Application by Pedro Vilca to replace a previously removed wrap around porch for the property at 51 Hawthorne Ave, Rye Brook NY,parcel ID 135.75-1-83. • Considering a Resolution to Close the Public Hearing • Considering a Resolution regarding approval of the Application CONTINUED BUSINESS 3. Review of a Site Plan Application by Mr. Michael Keilman for multiple additions and regrading of property located within a scenic roads overlay district for the property at 17 Berkley Drive, Rye Brook NY, parcel ID 135.43-1-8. • Considering a Resolution to schedule a Public Hearing 4. Review of a Proposed Local Law amending chapter 250 of the village code regarding Temporary Certificates of Occupancy(TCO's) • Considering a Report and Recommendation to the Board of Trustees 5. Review of a Proposed Local Law amending chapters 209 and 250 of the village code regarding Scenic Roads Overlay Districts (SROD) 1 NEW BUSINESS 6. Review of a Proposed Local Law amending chapter 250 of the village code regarding As Built Surveys and failure to follow Approved Plans. DISCUSSION ITEMS ACTION ON NON-AGENDA MATTERS Subject to consent of Planning Board Members present at the meeting. PRESENT BOARD Mr. Dominick Accurso Mr. Warren Agatston Mr. Robert Goodman Mr. John Grzan Mr. Bill Laufer Mrs. Amy Schoen Chairman Gary Zuckerman STAFF Mrs. Marilyn Timpone-Mohamed, Village Planning Consultant Ms. Jennifer Reinke, Village Counsel Mr. Mike Nowak, Acting Village Engineer Mrs. Pat Romano, Board of Trustees Liaison Chairman Zuckerman opened the meeting by asking everyone to join him in the Pledge of Allegiance. He then introduced the Board members and the Village Staff to the audience and explained the rules of procedure for the meeting. Additionally, Chairman Zuckerman made note for the public that the compete set of Planning Board Rules and Procedures can be found on the Village website and also announced that the public can now view the Planning Board minutes via streaming video on the Village website. Chairman Zuckerman made note that this would be Ms. Reinke's last meeting as Amanda Kandel has returned from maternity leave. Chairman thanked Ms. Reinke for her diligence and hard work on behalf of the Planning Board. Chairman called for the first item on the agenda: PUBLIC HEARING 2. Review of a Site Plan Application by Pedro Vilca to replace a previously removed wrap around porch for the property at 51 Hawthorne Ave, Rye Brook NY, parcel ID 135.75-1-83. 2 Chairman Zuckerman stated that this is the third public hearing for this application and asked if there were any members of the public wanting to speak. There was no response. He added that since this last appeared before this board, all of the planning related issues have been addressed including the placement of the restricted covenant on the site plan. Mr. Agatston requested a wording change in regard to the covenant adding "as per the Planning Board resolution" with today's date. Board in agreement. There being no further comments or questions, Chairman Zuckerman called for a motion to close the public hearing and on a motion made by Mrs. Schoen and seconded by Mr. Agatston, Mr. Nowak called the roll: MR ACCURSO YES MR. AGATSTON YES MR. GRZAN YES MR. GOODMAN YES MR. LAUFER YES MRS. SCHOEN YES CHAIRMAN ZUCKERMAN YES MOTION CARRIES Chairman asked for any objections to advancing the approval to the current agenda and there being none, Ms. Reinke read the resolution and noted a minor change in regard to one of the conditions and a change of date to the site diagram. December 10, 2009 APPROVED (7-0) RESOLUTION APPROVING A SITE PLAN FOR 51 HAWTHORNE AVENUE VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK PLANNING BOARD WHEREAS, Mr. Pedro Vilca, property owner, has made an application to the Village of Rye Brook for approval of a site plan to reconstruct a front wrap-around porch to an existing home in the R-15A zoning district located at 51 Hawthorne Avenue, Section 135.75, Block 1, Lot 83 on the Tax Assessor's Map; and WHEREAS, the Planning Board reviewed the following plans and application materials: 1. Site Plan Application 2. Short Environmental Assessment Form 3. Exterior Building Permit Application 3 4. Town of Rye Property Description Reports for Lot 83 and Lot 82, Section 135.75, Block 1 5. Letter dated October 30, 2009 from Aldo V. Vitagliano, Esq., Rye, NY, to the Planning Board 6. Topographic Survey, prepared by Richard A. Spinelli, Land Surveyor, Mamaroneck, NY, dated July 20, 2009 and revised October 30, 2009 7. Planting Design Plan,prepared by Tramontano and Rowe, Greenwich , CT, dated 8/19/2009 8. Architect's Plans,prepared by James G. Davis, Architect, P.C., Mamaroneck, NY: Sheet Number Sheet Title Dated 1 of 2 Site Plan December 7, 2009 2 of 2 No Title, Building Plan and Elevations December 7, 2009; and WHEREAS, the Village Planning Consultant, Village staff and the Planning Board reviewed the information, submitted comments and made recommendations to the Applicant regarding the site plan, the landscape plan, the 35-foot vegetative buffer along North Ridge Street and Hawthorne Avenue, zoning, tree protection, storm water management, erosion and sediment control and the restoration of the exterior of the home and the plans were revised according to the comments; and WHEREAS, the Planning Board referred the Application to the Zoning Board of Appeals on June 25, 2009 for review and determination regarding variances required prior to site plan approval; and WHEREAS, on July 7, 2009 the Village Zoning Board of Appeals granted the following variances: 1. A variance of 25.4 feet from the minimum required front yard setback in the R- 15A Scenic Roads Overlay District, §250-20.1.F(1) for the Hawthorne Avenue frontage. 2. A variance of 33.9 feet from the minimum required front yard setback in the R- 15A Scenic Roads Overlay District, §250-20.1.F(1) for the North Ridge Street frontage. 3. A variance of 19.6 feet from Section 250-7.F(6)(c) requiring a 35 foot wide vegetative buffer along the Hawthorne Avenue frontage. 4. A variance of 11.1 feet from Section 250-7.F(6)(c) requiring a 35 foot wide vegetative buffer along the North Ridge Street frontage; and WHEREAS, the Village Zoning Board of Appeals granted the foregoing variances on the condition that such variances shall only apply to the existing historic dwelling and shall not apply to new construction on the property; and 4 WHEREAS, on September 10, 2009, the Planning Board opened a public hearing on the subject application, a which time all persons interested were given an opportunity to speak on behalf of or in opposition to said application and the Planning Board closed the public hearing on December 10, 2009; and WHEREAS, the Planning Board is familiar with the site and all aspects of the project; and WHEREAS, the Planning Board of the Village of Rye Brook, pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act(SEQRA), determined the proposed action to be a Type II Action requiring no additional review under SEQRA; and WHEREAS, the following planning issues are identified by the Planning Board for the consideration upon any future development at this property: 1. The historic nature of the 114 year-old home that was located and built before the adoption of zoning regulations by the Town of Rye 2. The porch would be rebuilt to the size and specifications of the original porch that was demolished because it had deteriorated to the point that it had become unsafe 3. The willingness of the owner to restore the historic exterior of the home thereby preserving the presence of the home in the community 4. The prominent position the home, its stone retaining walls and its historic landscape occupies in the Scenic Roads Overlay District on North Ridge Street 5. The importance of preserving historic buildings in communities to maintain community character and to serve as links to the past for future generations; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, for the reasons stated herein, the Village of Rye Brook Planning Board hereby approves the site plans listed herein to reconstruct an open porch onto the existing house at 51 Hawthorne Avenue subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to the issuance of a Building Permit, the Applicant shall execute a Declaration of Restrictive Covenants in the form annexed hereto and, thereafter, record such Declaration with the Westchester County Clerk's Office, Land Records Office and shall provide Village Counsel with a copy of the recorded Declaration of Restrictive Covenants; and 2. A copy of the fully executed Declaration of Restrictive Covenants shall be annexed to this Resolution and shall be annexed to the Building Permit and Certificate of Occupancy issued for the reconstruction of the open porch onto the existing house at 51 Hawthorne Avenue; and 3. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy an as-built survey shall be submitted to the Village and shall reference the area subject to the Declaration of Restrictive Covenants by Control Number or other 5 identifying information provided by the Westchester County Clerk's Office, Land Records Office upon recording of same. 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. Chairman Zuckerman called for a motion and on a motion made by Mrs. Schoen and seconded by Mr. Agatston, Mr. Nowak called the roll: MR ACCURSO YES MR. AGATSTON YES MR. GRZAN YES MR. GOODMAN YES MR. LAUFER YES MRS. SCHOEN YES CHAIRMAN ZUCKERMAN YES MOTION CARRIES Chairman Zuckerman called for the next item on the agenda: CONTINUED BUSINESS 3. Review of a Site Plan Application by Mr. Michael Keilman for multiple additions and regrading of property located within a scenic roads overlay district for the property at 17 Berkley Drive, Rye Brook NY, parcel ID 135.43-1-5. • Considering a Resolution to schedule a Public Hearing Chairman Zuckerman noted that the applicant has requested an adjournment and, in addition, did not comply with the notice requirements. Application is adjourned to January 14, 2010. Chairman called for the next item on the agenda: 4. Review of a Proposed Local Law amending chapter 250 of the village code regarding Temporary Certificates of Occupancy (TCO's) • Considering a Report and Recommendation to the Board of Trustees A few changes have been made in the draft with one being to delete subsection 3A in regard to the $35,000 because the board believed it should be left to the discretion of the Building Inspector. Another change is the rewording of the guarantee provisions and again, leaving it to the discretion of the Village Administrator and the Village Attorney. 6 A final change has to do with the length of time the TCO can be honored and how many times it can be renewed. Warren asked about the renewal and if the applicant has to pay additional fees. Mr. Nowak responded that there is a fee and it is listed on the fee schedule. Mr. Goodman and Mrs. Schoen suggested some wording changes in regard to separating the house from the property. Mr. Laufer asked why a home could not be inhabited without a kitchen and Mr. Nowak explained it was in accordance with New York State Building Code. Mr. Grzan asked when a house would be put on the tax roll, at the TCO or the CO? Chairman Zuckerman responded it was his understanding that the assessor could add it to the tax roll in a progressive way but does not believe a CO has to be issued for him to do that. He went on to state that this is designed for someone out of occupancy who is attempting to get into the house due to monetary constraints but is not ready for a CO yet.....this allows them to live in the house while the work is finished. M. Grzan asked if all the same inspections are done with a TCO that are done with a CO as his concern is making sure the Village does not open itself up to any liability with an unsafe structure. Mr. Nowak responded yes...all inspections are done. Mrs. Schoen asked if there had to be two additional 30 day TCO's or can we say not to exceed 90 days? Mr. Nowak responded that it was at the discretion of the board. Mrs. Schoen added that she would like to eliminate the extra fees and would it be possible to just state 90 days instead of two additional 30 days? Ms. Reinke does not want to encourage the homeowner to take out a TCO and the goal is to push the homeowner to complete the job by avoiding additional fees. Mr. Accurso believes item number 6 is inherent and does not serve a purpose as the building inspector would not issue a TCO on an unsafe structure. He is also concerned about just addressing this as residential.....what happens in a situation where there is 10 to 20 units in one building. Mr. Nowak believes the language is needed in the code because it is not just the home but the entire property that needs to be looked at because the home may be ready but the site may be unsafe. 7 Chairman Zuckerman added that in regard to multi family buildings, a TCO could also be issued to one unit in a multi family building. Mike explained that it would be at the discretion of the building inspector but that this particular application would apply to all residential units. Mr. Accurso feels that this law should be geared to one or two family structures and not multi family residence where there are 3 or more families. Mr. Grzan asked about the duration of a construction permit and if the TCO has an affect on that. Mr. Nowak explained that it is issued for 18 months and a CO has to be issued within that time frame. A violation can still be issued even with the issuance of a TCO. There was further discussion regarding residential versus commercial or multi family units and issuing temporary certificate of occupancies Board is in agreement now with what the law should say. He asked the board if they were in agreement with the wording of the recommendation/report and asked Ms. Reinke to read the resolution. December 10, 2009 APPROVED (6-1) RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SUBMISSION OF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES ON A PROPOSED LOCAL LAW REGARDING AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 250, ZONING, REGARDING TEMPORARY CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY BE IT RESOLVED, that the Planning Board of the Village of Rye Brook adopts the attached Report and Recommendation to the Village of Rye Brook Board of Trustees on the proposed local law regarding amendments to Chapter 250, Zoning, regarding Temporary Certificates of Occupancy and requests the Planning Board Secretary forward a copy of the Report to the Board of Trustees and the Village Administrator. On a motion made by Mrs. Schoen and seconded by Mr. Goodman, the roll was called: MR ACCURSO NO MR. AGATSTON YES MR. GRZAN YES 8 MR. GOODMAN YES MR. LAUFER YES MRS. SCHOEN YES CHAIRMAN ZUCKERMAN YES MOTION CARRIES Next item on the agenda: 5. Review of a Proposed Local Law amending chapters 209 and 250 of the village code regarding Scenic Roads Overlay Districts (SROD) Chairman noted that there has been a lot of discussion regarding this issue lately. This all started a few years ago when the Board noticed that there were applications before us in a minor nature and the question arose -vvhy it required full site plan review just because it was in the Scenic Roads Overlay District. There are really two separate issues to look at...one is site plan review and one is zoning. Previously, the board came to an agreement that a zoning change would be approved in that the front on a secondary road should not be subject to site plan review. Jen believes that the changes being made will address issues such as came about with the Berkley Lane application. The Chapter 250 addressed not only Berkley Lane but also Hawthorne. Chairman Zuckerman explained that Section 209 basically says that any work done in the Scenic Roads Overlay District is site plan review and the question is why would a minor alteration being made in the backyard be accountable to that particular law. He pointed out that that there are alternatives proposed as well as a no action alternative. Chairman Zuckerman suggests that the board deal with the visibility question. There are two concepts involved— visibility and non visibility— if you build something in the back — it should not be regulated. This came down from the Board of Trustees because staff was not in favor of determining visibility. Another suggestion made by Trustee Romano was waiving—the problem there is who does the waving. Mrs. Timpone Mohamed suggested changing the map based on visibility but it would be a very difficult task to complete. Chairman Zuckerman does not want to get any deeper into this issue if maybe it is not an issue at all. Mr. Nowak was not able to get a figure of how many applications before us were in the scenic roads overlay district and he does not want to pursue this if it is not really a problem. He can recall all of 3 applications but cannot think of one project that would be taken out of our jurisdiction if any of the changes proposed were made and suggested going to the no action option. The change to Chapter 250 would remain but there would be no change to 209 -17. 9 Mr. Goodman asked about the staff reluctance to determine the visibility issue. Mr. Nowak explained that the people that have to make the decisions want a directive to follow— it becomes very subjective when an individual makes a visibility decision. Mr. Grzan believes we should not change the law as it is written and believes the proposed changes would just cause more problems and is advocating no action. Mr. Laufer agrees and would prefer to not make any changes. Board is in agreement that the scope of this discussion is only 209 and that 250 is being changed as proposed. Chairman Zuckerman advised Ms. Reinke to make the changes agreed upon the board with the proposed changes to 250 and no action on 209. Next item on the agenda: NEW BUSINESS 6. Review of a Proposed Local Law amending chapter 250 of the village code regarding As Built Surveys and failure to follow Approved Plans. Chairman Zuckerman noted that this comes from the Building Inspector and asked Mr. Nowak to explain to the board what the purpose of this proposal is and what we are solving with it. The proposed law makes it a violation to build anything that is not in total conformity with the approved plans submitted and requires an as built foundation survey after the foundation is set and then a final property survey prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. Mr. Nowak explained that often when a building permit is issued a set of plans is submitted also and a lot of times, the approved plans were not followed. Under the existing code there are no penalties for not following an approved set of plans and this code would provide legislation for the inspector to enforce and also allow for some minor field changes under his discretion. Chairman Zuckerman feels that his would possibly put every application under violation and brings up the question of field changes and to what extent an allowance would be issued. Foundation inspections should be done when the forms go down, not after the foundation is done when it is too late. He also asked why a property survey has to be done if no exterior work is being done and he has some serious concerns. Mr. Agatston agrees and feels that this proposal is not well founded. The inspector has a right to stop the job if he sees any discrepancies and he does not feel that we need to go any further then what exists now. 10 Further discussion Mr. Nowak would like to table this matter until further discussion with the Building Inspector — he is not comfortable speaking on his behalf and believes the discussion should take place again when he can be here. Board agrees that Building Inspector should be present at these meetings when there are topics of discussion on the agenda that he is directly involved with. Chairman Zuckerman asked for a motion to adjourn and on a motion made by Mrs. Schoen and seconded by Mr. Agatston the meeting was adjourned at 9:40 pm. 11