Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-06-10 - Planning Board Meeting Minutes VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK PLANNING BOARD REGULAR MEETING VILLAGE HALL,938 KING STREET Thursday June 10,2010-8:00 p.m. ............................................................................... ROLL CALL MINUTES 1. Review of Minutes of April 22,2010 PUBLIC HEARING 2. Review of a Subdivision and Site Plan Application by Douglas Vaggi on behalf of Dr. Rothman for construction of a new single family dwelling on a new lot at 2 Elm Hill Drive, Rye Brook NY,parcel ID 135.51-1-1 • Adjourned as requested by the Applicant 3. Review of a Subdivision Application by FHKP LLP(Leo Napior)on behalf of Mr.and Mrs. Frost,to relocate a common property line between two lots located at 3 Hills Point Lane,Rye Brook,NY.Parcel ID's 135.51-14 and 135.51-1-5. • Considering a Resolution to Open the Public Hearing • Considering a Resolution to Close the Public Hearing • Considering a Resolution to Act on the Application NEW BUSINESS 4. Review of an approved Subdivision Plan Amendment regarding the BelleFair meeting house retail space change of use,located at 18 BelleFair Blvd,Rye Brook,NY.Parcel ID 124.73-2- 61. • Consider a Report and Recommendation to the Board of Trustees 5. Review of a Site Plan Application by Mrs. Denise Pirro- Samartino for construction of an addition to the rear of an existing home,various renovations,and a Permit to Perform Work in a Wetland,on the lot located at 225 Betsy Brown Road,Rye Brook,NY.Parcel ID 135.44- 1-11. 6. Review of proposed amendments to the Village Code regarding jurisdiction to review applications involving affordable housing. CONTINUED BUSINESS DISCUSSION ITEMS ACTION ON NON-AGENDA MATTERS Subject to consent of Planning Board Members present at the meeting. Draft Minutes—Version 1 June 10,2010 BOARD Mr.Dominick Accurso Mr.Robert Goodman Mr.William Laufer Mrs.Amy Schoen Mr.Daniel Tartaglia Chairman Gary Zuckerman EXCUSED Mr.John Grzan STAFF Mrs.Marilyn Timpone-Mohamed,Village Planning Consultant Ms.Jennifer Reinke,Village Counsel Mr.Mike Nowak,Acting Village Engineer Ms.Shari Melillo,Planning Board Secretary 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 complete 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 meetings via streaming video on the Village website. The Chairman called for the first item on the agenda: MINUTES 1. Review of Minutes of April 22,2010 There being no discussion or comments,Chairman Zuckerman called for a motion to accept;and on a motion made by Mrs. Schoen and seconded by Mr. Goodman,a voice vote was taken which resulted in a unanimous approval. MOTION APPROVED(6-0) PUBLIC HEARING 2. Review of a Subdivision and Site Plan Application by Douglas Vaggi on behalf of Dr. Rothman for construction of a new single family dwelling on a new lot at 2 Elm Hill Drive,Rye Brook,NY.Parcel ID 135.51-1-1. • Adjourned as requested by the Applicant Chairman Zuckerman explained that the Applicant requested the application be adjourned.As this is a Public Hearing,the Chairman requested a motion to adjourn to July 8"', and on a motion made by Mr. Page 2 of 10 Draft Minutes—Version 1 June 10,2010 Goodman and seconded by Mrs.Schoen,Mr.Nowak called the roll: MR-ACCURSO YES MR-GOODMAN YES MR-LAUFER YES MRS.SCHOEN YES MR-TARTAGLIA YES CHAIRMAN ZUCKERMAN YES MOTION APPROVED(6-0) 3. Review of a Subdivision Application by FHKP LLP(Leo Napior)on behalf of Mr.and Mrs. Frost to relocate the common property line between two lots located at 3 Hills Point Lane,Rye Brook,NY.Parcel ID's 135.51-1-4 and 135.51-1-5. • Considering a Resolution to Open the Public Hearing • Considering a Resolution to Close the Public Hearing • Considering a Resolution to Act on the Application Chairman Zuckerman called for a motion to open the public hearing and on a motion made by Mr. Goodman and seconded by Mrs.Schoen,Mr.Nowak called the roll: MR.ACCURSO YES MR.GOODMAN YES MR.LAUFER YES MRS.SCHOEN YES MR.TARTAGLIA YES CHAIRMAN ZUCKERMAN YES MOTION APPROVED(6-0) Mr. Leo Napior addressed the Board on behalf of the applicants and gave a brief overview of the application. There being no comments or questions from the staff the Planning Board or the public, Chairman Zuckerman asked for a motion to close the Public Hearing and on a motion made by Mrs.Schoen and seconded by Mr.Goodman,Mr.Nowak called the roll: MR ACCURSO YES MR GOODMAN YES MR LAUFER YES MRS.SCHOEN YES MR TARTAGLIA YES CHAIRMAN ZUCKERMAN YES MOTION APPROVED(6-0) Chairman Zuckerman asked if there was any objection to advancing the vote on this application,and as there was none,asked Ms.Jennifer Reinke,Village Counsel to read the resolution approving the application June 10,2010 Page 3 of 10 Draft Minutes—Version 1 June 10,2010 RESOLUTION ADOPTING A SEQRA NEGATIVE DECLARATIONAND GRANTING PRELIMINARY AND FINAL SUBDIVISIONAPPROVAL TO MODIFY THE LOCATION OF THE COMMONSIDE LOT LINE FOR ANEXISTING TWO LOT SUBDIVISIONAT 3 HILLS POINT LANE VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK PLANNING BOARD WHEREAS,Mr.Leo Napior of Friedman,Harfenist,Kraut and Perlstein,LLP representing property owners,James D.and Martha J.Frost,submitted an application to the Village of Rye Brook for approval of a subdivision to modify the location of the common side lot line of an existing two-lot property to remove non- conformities on the developed lot located at 3 Hills Point Lane,in the R-12 Zoning District, Section 135.51, Block 1,Lot 4 and Section 135.51,Block 1,Lot 5 on the Town of Rye Tax Assessor's Map;and WHEREAS,the Planning Board reviewed the information submitted by the applicant in support of the application including a Short Environmental Assessment Form(EAF)and the following plan: 1. Subdivision Map,prepared by The Munson Company,Elmsford,N.Y.,dated March 23,2010; and WHEREAS,the Planning Board,pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act(SEQRA), and after review of the Short Environmental Assessment Form(EAF)prepared by the Applicant, determined proposed action to be an Unlisted Action and proceeded as Lead Agency with an uncoordinated environmental review pursuant to SEQRA;and WHEREAS,on June 10,2010,the Planning Board opened a public hearing on the subject application, at 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 June 10,2010;and WHEREAS,the relocation of the common side lot line would not result in any physical alteration to the subject properties;and WHEREAS,the Planning Board is familiar with the Site and all aspects of the proposed subdivision/lot line relocation and is satisfied that the subdivision/lot line relocation would comply with the standards and requirements of the Village of Rye Brook Code and would not create any environmental impacts. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Village of Rye Brook Planning Board, in accordance with Article 8 of the State Environmental Conservation Law and 6 NYCRR Part 617, and upon review of the EAF and all other application materials that were prepared for this action, hereby adopts a Negative Declaration because the subdivision/lot line relocation would not result in physical changes to the site or any environmental impacts,ending the State Environmental Quality Review process;and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED,as follows: 1. The Planning Board hereby finds that the Final Plat will not be substantively changed from the Preliminary Plat and determines that a public hearing on the Final Plat is not required. Page 4 of 10 Draft Minutes—Version 1 June 10,2010 2. The Planning Board hereby grants both Preliminary and Final Subdivision Plat Approval for the side lot line relocation as shown on the Subdivision Map dated March 23,2010 prepared by The Munson Company,to the Applicant,and the Mayor is authorized to sign such plat subject to the following conditions and modifications which must be satisfied prior to the signing of the Final Plat by the Mayor: a. The Applicant shall prepare a Final Subdivision Plat in accordance with Section 219-32 of the Village of Rye Brook Subdivision Regulations,which shall include the current Town of Rye tax lot designations for both subject lots. Upon obtaining a satisfactory review by the Acting Village Engineer,the Final Subdivision Plat shall be submitted for review and signature to the Westchester County Department of Health. The signature of the Department of Health shall be required prior to the signing of the Final Plat by the Mayor. b. The Applicant shall submit a statement signed by the Town of Rye Receiver of Taxes that all taxes due for both lots have been paid. BE TT FURTHER RESOLVED,that the Final Plat shall not be signed until the Applicant has paid to the Village all applicable fees and professional review fees incurred in connection with review of this Application. After Village Counsel made one change in wording,Chairman Zuckerman called for a motion and on a motion made by Mrs.Schoen and seconded by Mr.Goodman,Mr.Nowak called the roll: MR-ACCURSO YES MR-GOODMAN YES MR-LAUFER YES MRS.SCHOEN YES MR-TARTAGLIA YES CHAIRMAN ZUCKERMAN YES MOTION APPROVED(64)b------------------------------------------------ Comment[GJZ1]:Insert Resolution NEW BUSINESS 4. Review of an approved Subdivision Plan Amendment regarding the BelleFair meeting house retail space change of use located at 18 BelleFair Blvd.,Rye Brook,NY.Parcel ID 124.73-2-61. • Consider a Report and Recommendation to the Board of Trustees Mr. Goodman is a resident of BelleFair and, as the application is in regard to a common facility of BelleFair,he was recused by the Chair. Mr. Steve Frank,Attorney for the BelleFair Homeowners Association,addressed the Board and gave an overview of the proposal,explaining that the building has had multiple uses but is now vacant.The applicant would like to use the space as an expansion of the existing meeting house.The community room,as proposed,is designed for use by the BelleFair residents and their guests exclusively. Page 5 of 10 Draft Minutes—Version 1 June 10,2010 Mr. Frank noted that one concern raised was parking demand, so the Homeowner Association hired LAN Associates to do a parking analysis,which has been distributed to the Board.Currently there are 80 parking spaces available for function parking in addition to the driveway that each resident has. Since only the BelleFair residents can use the facilities there would be no impact in the traffic flow. The Association believes that there is more than adequate parking available for use of the community room as proposed. Chairman Zuckerman asked if there was ever a parking problem at BelleFair,to which Mr. Slonim, former HOA president,responded that there has never been a parking problem.Each home has a 2-car garage and a driveway in addition to on-street parking. Chairman Zuckerman asked to confirm that the use of the meeting house would be controlled by the BelleFair residents,to which Mr.Frank responded,yes. Mr.Laufer asked if an expansion of this room would possibly bring a lot of outside people to an event. Mr. Frank responded that the occupancy of the room would control it. Currently, the limit is 85 people,which is below what is actually allowed. Mr.Tartaglia asked how the village is assured that future Boards don't change the rules on use of the facility. Mr.Frank responded that again the limit of occupancy would be the controlling factor. Mr. Slonim added that there is also a tax consideration with this building in that the Town Assessor does not tax that building as a commercial entity so it can only be used for the BelleFair residents.The portion that is rented to the deli is taxed but the community house is not.The HOA,since inception,is strict about the fact that all BelleFair facilities are limited to BelleFair residents and their guests. Mr.Accurso asked if the building was handicapped accessible and Mr.Frank responded that he is not sure if the door was wide enough.There is handicapped parking and there is a path available with curb cuts.There have been no modifications whatsoever of the footprint of the building in any way shape or form—all of that structure for the building is as it was originally. Mr.Nowak added that BelleFair falls under the building codes and ADA codes of the time when it was built and as there is no construction being done,no upgrades are required.What is there now is still valid as long as there are no structural changes being made. Mrs.Schoen asked what could be done to make the doorways accessible for someone in a wheel chair. The response was that he could not give a correct answer at this time—he is not sure if it is compliant with the current codes—but was compliant with what was in effect in 1998 when the village approved the resolution. Mr. Accurso is questioning why the building is not taxed commercially if it is income producing. Chairman Zuckerman responded that was not an inquiry for the Planning Board.Mr.Tartaglia added that since the facility is limited to the homeowners of BelleFair—they are taxed on that accordingly just as they are for the roads. Mr.Laufer has a problem approving something that is not accessible to a handicapped person. Mr.Nowak responded that under our code the Building Inspector and the design professional would determine what items would be required for compliance. Just because the building is not ADA compliant does not mean it has to be and municipalities cannot enforce that on an applicant unless there are improvements and changes being made to the site. At the request of the Chair, Ms. Reinke read the proposed report to be submitted to the Board of Trustees recommending approval of the proposed change of use. Page 6 of 10 Draft Minutes—Version 1 June 10,2010 Mr. Tartaglia requested that a clause be added stating that the Planning Board recommends that the amendment includes limiting use of the facility to BelleFair residents and their guests. Mr. Accurso requested a clause be added regarding requiring the building to become handicapped accessible.Mr. Nowak believes that should be left up to the Building Inspector as there are other factors involved. Mrs.Schoen added that the ramifications are enormous for handicapped people and believes it should be investigated and changed but understands that it cannot be enforced at this time.The consensus is that while we would all like the building ADA compliant, this is not within the purview of the Planning Board but the Board recommends that the HOA review the degree of handicapped accessibility of the community room.Chairman Zuckerman called for a motion to approve the report and on a motion made by Mr.Laufer and seconded by Mrs.Schoen,the roll was called: MR-ACCURSO YES MR-LAUFER YES MRS.SCHOEN YES MR-TARTAGLIA YES CHAIRMAN ZUCKERMAN YES MOTION APPROVED(5-0) Ms.Reinke read the resolution referring the report to the Board of Trustees and on a motion made by Mrs.Schoen and seconded by Mr.Laufer,the roll was called: June 10,2010 APPROVED RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SUBMISSION OF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES ON THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN MODIFICATION AT BELLEFAH2 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 site plan modification for a change of use and requests the Secretary to the Planning Board forward a copy of the Report to the Board of Trustees and the Village Administrator. MR-ACCURSO YES MR-LAUFER YES MRS.SCHOEN YES MR-TARTAGLIA YES CHAIRMAN ZUCKERMAN YES MOTION APPROVED(5-0) Page 7 of 10 Draft Minutes—Version 1 June 10,2010 7. Review of a Site Plan Application by Mrs.Denise Pirro-Samartino for construction of an additions to the rear and front of an existing home,various renovations and a Permit to Perform Work in a Wetland regarding the lot located at 225 Betsy Brown Road,Rye Brook,NY.Parcel ID 135.44-1-11. Mr. Dupas, Architect for the applicant, Mrs. Denise Pirro-Sammartino, and Mr. Steve Anderson, Engineer for the applicant,addressed the Board and gave an overview of the project. Chairman Zuckerman declared that the Board would treat the appearance as a work session.There are variances required as well as missing calculations and a current survey.Normally the Planning Board would send the application to the Zoning Board of Appeals,but as there are calculations missing the referral cannot be done at this time. Mrs.Timpone-Mohamed stated that there is a variance required from the minimum front yard set back of 30 feet and one for parking within 25 feet of the front property line.As the paved area in question is very large,it appears to be a parking space that would require a variance.Another variance that may be required is from the maximum impervious surface coverage allowable in the front yard;but as the calculations are missing,that is unknown right now. Mr.Nowak spoke with the engineer who is working on the storm water management.The engineer is aware of his comments. Ms.Reinke added that the Board may want to consider requesting documentation from the applicant that the subdivision plat was actually filed with the County Clerk and the Village. Chairman Zuckerman stated there is quite a bit of work to be done, the first and foremost being submission of a current survey.The application is adjourned to July 8"'and he advised the applicant to work with the Village staff on the outstanding issues. 8. Review of proposed amendments to the Village Code regarding jurisdiction to review applications involving affordable housing. Chairman Zuckerman explained that the proposed amendments were referred to the Planning Board by the Board of Trustees for a report and recommendation.The Board of Trustees is proposing to change jurisdiction for the review of applications involving affordable housing,as it will be newly defined,to make the Board of Trustees the final approval authority rather than the Planning Board. Chairman Zuckerman added that the Board of Trustees is not required to refer such an amendment to the Planning Board and he commends them for allowing the Planning Board to comment on the proposal. When the Board of Trustees referred it,Mayor Feinstein made a comment that she is aware that the Chairman is not in favor of the amendment and he is stating it now for public record. Trustee Paul Rosenberg addressed the Board to explain the reasoning of the Trustees that is behind the proposal.The County has a stipulation of agreement that a certain amount of affordable housing units must be built in certain communities,of which Rye Brook is one.That being the case,the Village has begun a study,with the involvement of Mrs.Timpone-Mohamed of Frederick P.Clark Associates,to identify sites within the Village that may be suitable for affordable housing.Mrs.Timpone-Mohamed agreed and stated that one of the issues not yet settled is what the County will require regarding such housing. Trustee Rosenberg added that the Village will be"under a microscope"as they deal with developers and the County and because of that,the Trustees feel that there are certain projects that should remain with the Board of Trustees.As development of affordable housing has the potential to have a Village- wide effect, the Board of Trustees feels elected officials should decide where fair and affordable housing should be located. The Board of Trustees values the opinion of the Planning Board and will welcome all comments in regard to planning issues but feels that the final approval authority should be elected officials. Page 8 of 10 Draft Minutes—Version 1 June 10,2010 Chairman Zuckerman noted that he and Mr. Accurso attended land use seminars dealing exclusively with fair and affordable housing, so they have a certain amount of knowledge in this area. Then the Chairman asked for opinions from the members of the Planning Board. Mr.Goodman had looked into what other communities were doing,but did not find much information. However,he did find a lot of law suits regarding affordable housing.He believes there is something to be said about what Planning Board exposure would be, and in the event that the Planning Board is sued,he would like to know how the Board would be covered. Trustee Rosenberg responded that once a lawsuit is initiated,the Board of Trustees controls our legal defense and the Planning Board would be represented by Village Counsel and the insurance company. In his opinion,there is a high possibility of litigation with affordable housing issues. Chairman Zuckerman added that Planning Board decisions are always open to legal ramifications. Mr. Tartaglia asked if the Village has legislation that requires multi-family developments to have affordable housing components. The response was no. Mr. Tartaglia thinks the Village should look into that.In his opinion,if the intent is to encourage the implementation of fair and affordable housing, politicizing it may not be the best way to handle it. Mr. Laufer asked why the Village was chosen. Chairman Zuckerman explained that the criteria for selection was if a municipality has less than a certain percentage of minority residents,which includes most municipalities in northern Westchester.He also added that it is not just"affordable"housing,it is fair and affordable housing. Such housing would be widely marketed throughout the County and adjacent communities.Mrs.Schoen believes that an argument can be made as Mr.Tartaglia said about politicizing the issue.The scrutiny rises to a higher level and she believes there is a burden to be born by elected officials that might be in order here.What other communities are doing would be pertinent to her supporting or not supporting the amendment and she would prefer to have more knowledge before making a decision. Mr. Accurso believes location of housing requires the approval authority to look at all the issues involved,density,parking,etc.so the Planning Board is best suited to look at these issues.He does not believe it should be the Board of Trustees primarily because affordable or not, it is basic planning issues that the Planning Board is better suited to review and consider. Trustee Rosenberg responded that the Planning Board would be involved in the decision,but only in an advisory capacity. Chairman Zuckerman wondered why the matter has already been determined to be a political issue.It seems to him that we are putting the cart before the horse. There is no County implementation plan yet, so communities don't really know what is going to be required of them. The emphasis on removing jurisdiction seems to be misplaced because, as Mr. Accurso pointed out, the job of the Planning Board is to review planning and the job of the Board of Trustees is to review policy. It should be the job of the Board of Trustees,upon recommendation by the Planning Board,to formulate amendments to the Village Code in which the Board of Trustees sets the standards for fair and affordable housing within the Village. He thinks the Board of Trustees should consider looking at model codes to see how we can bring fair and affordable housing to Rye Brook in an appropriate manner. Chairman Zuckerman thanked Trustee Rosenberg and advised him that the Planning Board would discuss this issue again,and that he is aware that the Board of Trustees has a Public Hearing scheduled in July regarding this topic and is hopeful that a report will be drafted before that. Mr. Accurso asked if Mrs. Timpone-Mohamed could comment on how she feels about the issue. Chairman Zuckerman responded that he does not feel it is appropriate. Page 9 of 10 Draft Minutes—Version 1 June 10,2010 Mr.Laufer asked Trustee Rosenberg if the Board of Trustees has a concept or an idea how they are going to handle some of the issues brought up tonight. Trustee Rosenberg responded that they have not gotten to that point yet. Chairman Zuckerman asked for a consensus of the Board regarding the amendment: Mr.Goodman believes it is premature Mr.Laufer believes it is premature Mrs. Schoen believes our current methods are inherently slow. She is not prepared to say that she is opposed and really wants to think it through. Mr.Tartaglia feels it is a very complex topic and the developers are at risk during the entire process as they don't get reimbursed until closing.The cost of bouncing around between different boards adds to that and makes it more difficult.He feels it is a lot to think about and gives the Board of Trustees a lot of credit for being ahead of the curve. Mr. Accurso also commends the Board of Trustees, but with all due respect to them, believes the Planning Board should retain approval authority. Chairman Zuckerman called for a motion to adjourn and on a motion made by Mrs. Schoen and seconded by Mr.Goodman,the meeting was adjourned at 10:03 pm. Page 10 of 10