HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012-04-12 - Planning Board Meeting Minutes Approved: July 2013
VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK
PLANNING BOARD
REGULAR MEETING
VILLAGE HALL, 938 KING STREET
Thursday April 12, 2012 - 8:00 p.m.
ROLL CALL
MINUTES
1. Review of the August 11, 2011 and October 13, 2011 minutes
PUBLIC HEARING
CONTINUED BUSINESS
2. Review of an application by Ms. Moge Agahian on behalf of the Arbors Home
Owners Association, Inc. for approval of an Amended Site Plan and Amended
Subdivision within the entire P.U.D. site located at the intersection of King Street and
the Hutchinson River Parkway.
3. Review of an application by TD Bank, N.A. for approval of a Site Plan to demolish
existing structure and construct a new structure located at 101-5 South Ridge Street,
Rye Brook,NY, Parcel I.D. 141.27-1-27
NEW BUSINESS
4. Review of an application by Sarah Anne Trayner (66 Bowman Ave realty Corp.) for
approval of an Amended Special Use Permit and Amended Site Plan for the property
located at 66 Bowman Ave, Rye Brook,NY, Parcel I.D. 141.27-1-24
5. Review of an application by Kimberley Salvatore for approval of a Site Plan to
construct multiple additions to the existing single family structure located at 9
Edgewood Drive, Rye Brook,NY, Parcel I.D. 135.28-1-20
ACTION ON NON-AGENDA MATTERS
Subject to consent of Planning Board Members present at the meeting.
PRESENT
BOARD Mr. Robert Goodman
Mr.JohnGrzan
Mr. Bill Laufer
Mrs. Amy Schoen
Mr. Dan Tartaglia
Chairman Gary Zuckerman
1
VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK
PLANNING BOARD
REGULAR MEETING
VILLAGE HALL,938 KING STREET
Thursday,April 12,2012- 8:00 p.m.
...............................................................................
EXCUSED Mr. Domenic Accurso
STAFF Mrs. Jennifer Gray, Village Counsel
Mrs. Marilyn Timpone-Mohamed, Village Planning
Consultant
Mr. Mike Nowak, Jr., 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 of Procedure can be found on the Village website, and the public can also
view the Planning Board meetings on streaming video.
MINUTES
1. Review of the August 11, 2011 minutes
Mr. Tartaglia noted one small change in the staff listing.
On a motion made by Mr. Tartaglia and seconded by Mrs. Schoen, the minutes were
approved by unanimous voice vote.
CONTINUED BUSINESS
2. Review of an application by Ms. Moge Agahian on behalf of the Arbors Home
Owners Association, Inc. for site plan approval and P.U.D Amendment within the
entire site.
At the applicant's request the review will be held at the end of the meeting
3. Review of an application by TD Bank, N.A. for approval of a Site Plan to
demolish existing structure and construct a new structure located at 101-5 South
Ridge Street, Rye Brook, NY, Parcel I.D. 141.27-1-27
Adjourned at the applicant's request.
NEW BUSINESS
4. Review of an application by Sarah Anne Trayner (66 Bowman Ave realty Corp.)
for a Special Use Permit and Site Plan Approval for the property located at 66
Bowman Ave, Rye Brook NY, Parcel I.D. 141.27-1-24
2
VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK
PLANNING BOARD
REGULAR MEETING
VILLAGE HALL,938 KING STREET
Thursday,April 12,2012- 8:00 p.m.
...............................................................................
Chairman Zuckerman noted that the use variance required for this application is no longer
necessary per a determination by the Building Inspector. The Zoning Board has requested our
input regarding related planning issues before the ruling on the area variances requested by the
applicant.
Paul Noto, Esq., representing 66 Bowman Avenue Realty Corp., addressed the Board and
gave a summary of the background information regarding the application. He explained the
business has grown and added employees, which required them to amend the special permit
that was originally issued. An architect has been retained and they have proposed changes to
the building. Mrs. Mohamed's memo was reviewed by the applicant, who sees parking as the
primary concern. As per the Building Inspector's determination based on the Village Code, 24
parking spaces are required. However, 12 spaces are proposed because the business is not a
retail operation, and does not generate client visits. The remainder of the FP Clark memo
comments will be addressed with respect to landscaping and tree preservation. As a final item,
they would prefer not to eliminate the existing garage as it provides screening from the
neighbors.
Louis Contadino, Architect for the applicant addressed the Board and gave an overview of the
proposed changes to the building.
Mrs. Schoen asked about the screening for the patio area, to which Mr. Contadino responded
that it will be provided by a stockade fence and shrubs located in front of the fencing.
Mr. Tartaglia asked about deliveries and Mrs. Traynor, the applicant, responded that the only
deliveries they receive are from Staples. Clients are met outside of the office and employees
come to work at staggered hours.
Mrs. Timpone-Mohamed added her opinion that the largest issue after storm water
management is traffic and parking. She believes that the Board should consider
recommending conditions to the approval so parking demand will remain stable in the future.
In her opinion, the only way to determine if the 12 spaces provided are adequate is to require
the applicant to provide a limited parking demand study for review. As for the garage, it is not
currently used for parking. If it was removed, it would allow space for two additional parking
spaces.
John Giancola, Engineer for the applicant addressed storm water management concerns
noting that they propose 18 cultec units, which they believe will address a 25 year storm event
and handle the drainage from all impervious surface coverage on the lot. Mr. Nowak
responded that the plans show a drain inlet that may drain storm water into a water feature,
but this drainage could easily be rerouted into drywells.
Chairman Zuckerman would like to have all these issues addressed before the next meeting,
including making sure that the capacity of the proposed stormwater facilities would be able to
handle any additional impervious that may be added to the lot.
3
VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK
PLANNING BOARD
REGULAR MEETING
VILLAGE HALL,938 KING STREET
Thursday,April 12,2012- 8:00 p.m.
...............................................................................
Mrs. Valerie Nottie, speaking for another homeowner who's English is limited, commented
that the applicant is looking to legalize the expanded parking area and the third floor
bathroom, and they are looking for forgiveness as well. She believes that currently there is
severe flooding on the properties of homeowners adjacent to the site on Barber Place that
causes terrible erosion. The existing fence on the applicant's property is 7 feet tall when the
Village Code calls for 6 feet maximum. The homeowners are concerned and want to maintain
the character of Rye Brook. They believe the business has expanded beyond what the property
can handle. The homeowners ask the Board to protect the surrounding families and homes.
Another resident of Barber Place commented on how the neighborhood is being built up with
the addition of a bank and affordable housing in the near future. The residents of Barber Place
feel their neighborhood is being turned into a commercial zone with only 4 houses left on the
street. The resident is also concerned with the drainage issues from stormwater flowing off the
applicant's property. The resident has already done $30,000 worth of improvements to his
property, including installing drainage, yet he must close up his basement windows because
all the water from the applicant's property comes to his driveway and makes its way into the
basement thru the windows. The resident also asks the Board for their consideration of the
neighborhood when making a report and recommendation for this application. The resident
was not be in favor of expanding the parking lot to accommodate additional parking spaces to
meet the requirements of the Village Code.
The application was adjourned to May 10, 2012
5. Review of an application by Kimberley Salvatore for Site Plan Approval to
construct multiple additions to the existing single family structure located at 9
Edgewood Drive, Rye Brook, NY, Parcel I.D. 135.28-1-20
Chairman Zuckerman noted that the application is before the Planning Board because the
gross floor area is being increased by more than 50 percent, and the application will require
several variances and referral to the Zoning Board of Appeals.
Mr. Griffy, architect for the applicant, requested that the landscape and lighting plan be
waived. Chairman Zuckerman responded that the applicant should meet with Mrs. Timpone-
Mohamed to discuss what landscaping would be appropriate as a landscape plan cannot be
waived.
Mrs. Timpone-Mohamed noted that the Board will remember the home was rendered non-
conforming when the Trustees enacted the contextual front yard setback requirements in the
R-25 zone. The home is closer to the street than some of the other houses on the block. She
stated that there is no need to do a photometric plan if the applicant is not asking for
additional site lighting. The other issue is the bulk of the building— the addition of the second
floor when viewed from the side looks as if it is three stories. There may also be a need for
landscape screening along the adjacent property line.
4
VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK
PLANNING BOARD
REGULAR MEETING
VILLAGE HALL,938 KING STREET
Thursday,April 12,2012- 8:00 p.m.
...............................................................................
Chairman Zuckerman stated he is familiar with the area and in his view the building is not a
problem when viewed from the front. He suggested again that the applicant and Mrs.
Timpone-Mohamed meet to discuss the issue.
Mrs. Jennifer Gray was asked to read the resolution referring the application to the Zoning
Board of Appeals:
April 12, 2012 APPROVED
RESOLUTION
REFERRING AN APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL AT
9 EDGEWOOD DRIVE TO THE VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK PLANNING BOARD
WHEREAS, Kimberly Salvatore, Applicant and property owner, submitted an
application for site plan approval for a rear one-story addition, second story addition and new
roofed front and rear porches located at 9 Edgewood Drive, in the R-25 Zoning District
designated on the Town of Rye Tax Assessor's Map as Section 135.28, Block 1, Lot 20.
WHEREAS, the site plan, as proposed, would require the following variances for
approval of the site plan pursuant to a zoning analysis conducted by the Village Building
Inspector:
1. A front yard setback variance of 30.03 feet is required for the proposed front
porch;
2. A 4.9% front yard impervious surface coverage variance is required for the
proposed front porch; and
WHEREAS, the following planning issues are identified by the Planning Board for the
Zoning Board of Appeals consideration:
1. The front yard setback is currently nonconforming due to the contextual front yard
setback in the R-25 District and the only feature that is being added to the
nonconformity is the front porch. The porch is only one story and the remaining
facade will not change with respect to the front yard setback. Also, the adjacent
house to the south is and will continue to be closer to the street than house on the
subject property.
5
VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK
PLANNING BOARD
REGULAR MEETING
VILLAGE HALL,938 KING STREET
Thursday,April 12,2012- 8:00 p.m.
...............................................................................
2. Less than 400 square feet of impervious surface is being added so no storm-water
management is required by Code, but the Applicant is proposing 8 drywells to
capture runoff from the front roof.
WHEREAS, the Planning Board believes that pursuant to § 179-12(A) of the Village
Code the application should be referred to the Zoning Board of Appeals for a determination on
the required area variances while the Planning Board continues its review of the site plan
application; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Board is familiar with the site and all aspects of the project.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Village of Rye Brook 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, hereby determines
the proposed action to be Type II, requiring no further review pursuant to the requirements of
SEQRA; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, for the reasons stated herein, the Village of Rye
Brook Planning Board hereby refers the site plan application listed herein to the Zoning Board of
Appeals for a determination on the area variances.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, once the determination has been made by the
Zoning Board of Appeals regarding the area variances, the applicant shall return to the Planning
Board for final site plan review with any revisions, if necessary, to the proposed project based
upon the Zoning Board of Appeals determination.
On a motion made by Mrs. Schoen and seconded by Mr. Tartaglia, Mr. Nowak called the roll
and the resolution was approved:
MR. ACCURSO ABSENT
MR. GOODMAN YES
MR. GRZAN YES
MR. LAUFER YES
MRS. SCHOEN YES
MR. TARTAGLIA YES
CHAIRMAN ZUCKERMAN YES
CONTINUED BUSINESS
6. Review of an application by Ms. Moge Agahian on behalf of the Arbors Home
Owners Association, Inc. for site plan approval and P.U.D Amendment within
the entire site.
Mr. James Ryan, John Meyer Consulting, P.C., addressed the Board and thanked them for
accommodating his schedule. He added that the last time they were before the Planning Board
6
VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK
PLANNING BOARD
REGULAR MEETING
VILLAGE HALL,938 KING STREET
Thursday,April 12,2012- 8:00 p.m.
...............................................................................
there were a number of issues to be resolved.
Chairman Zuckerman responded that he understands what the subdivision issues are, and that
the Board is ready to informally agree with those issues. In regard to storm water there are
three issues - one is the capacity of the detention pond, the second is the areas of the site that
are not tributary to the detention pond, and the third is accommodation of future changes at
the Arbors. We have a memo from Mr. Rotfeld that indicates the capacity of the detention
pond seems to be sufficient to detain the current drainage from the properties tributary to it,
and it may have excess capacity to detain some amount of storm water from additional
impervious coverage that may be built in future.
Mr. Ryan added that Mr. Rotfeld requested they provide some type of an analysis for the areas
of the site where the drainage does not flow into the pond. Mr. Rotfeld was involved in the
original subdivision application so we hoped he had information we could use but he does not.
He suggested that for these areas applying the standards that we use today would be
appropriate.
Chairman Zuckerman asked if a homeowner builds a deck or if a parking area is added that
creates an increase in impervious surface coverage in an area not tributary to the pond what
measures would be required to handle the increased storm water run-off? Would anyone who
installs a deck be required to install a cultec unit? Mr. Ryan replied, yes, if this is the standard
being used.
Mrs. Timpone-Mohamed added that without the requested analysis, because we don't have
the original design plan, or the approved storm water plan from the original approval, we
don't know the answer.
Chairman Zuckerman concluded that currently the tributary runoff from additional decks,
roofs, and driveways is being handled by the detention pond. What we don't know is how
much, if any, of the impervious surface coverage in the areas that are not tributary to the pond
is being handled.
Chairman Zuckerman addressed emergency access concerns, stating that the original plan for
the Arbors shows provision for access that was never constructed. Mr. Ryan responded that it
is shown on the site plan as designated for a future emergency access road, and he believes it
was supposed to be built when the development reached a certain size.
Chairman Zuckerman stated he is very concerned that there is no secondary means of entry
for fire vehicles. The roadways in the Arbors are narrower than Village Code requires. He
would like to refer the application to the Fire Department for review.
The applicant was asked to clarify if the current maintenance building could be moved off the
School District property to a location on the Arbors property outside the limits of the wetland
buffer. Mr. Ryan said that he does not believe so, however, the shed in the new location
would be half the size of the existing maintenance building. Mr. Ryan confirmed the
activities that occur in the existing building will continue to occur. They defined the pieces of
equipment to be stored-two bobcats, two large lawnmowers, snow plows, and snow blowers.
7
VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK
PLANNING BOARD
REGULAR MEETING
VILLAGE HALL,938 KING STREET
Thursday,April 12,2012- 8:00 p.m.
...............................................................................
They are not storing any gas, paint, pesticides, etc.
Chairman Zuckerman asked if they are moving the building, why are they maintaining a land
lease with the School District. Mr. Ryan explained that the Arbors would continue to utilize a
paved area in the same location on the School District property. Mr. Flink added that as of
now no decision has been made on the lease and it is currently month to month.
Chairman Zuckerman stated he believes that this area of the School District property is not
being put to a school use, and therefore the Village has land use jurisdiction over the property.
This was confirmed by Jennifer Gray, Village Counsel.
Mr. Ryan addressed lighting issues stating that flood lights would be installed on the new
shed, but fewer lights than on the current maintenance building. All four sides need security
lighting, which would be controlled by a motion sensor.
Rosemary Schlank of 9 Bayberry Lane in the Arbors addressed the Board, asking if the
property owners can make changes, such as lot lines in dispute or her parking easement,that
are not shown on the site plan.
Mrs. Gray responded that the Arbors HOA filed this application on behalf of all the individual
property owners. She should speak to the HOA about any changes she thinks should be made
to the site plan.
Mr. Goodman agreed and stated he believes that the question Mrs. Schlank asked has nothing
to do with the Planning Board review and is a question for the Arbors HOA.
Chairman Zuckerman added that the Planning Board will refer the application back to the
Board of Trustees with a report and recommendations for their final determination. After that
whatever court proceedings are in progress would take into account what the Board of
Trustees has determined.
Mrs. Schlank asked if she as an individual wanted to point out gaps in the Village Code and
wanted changes in the Code, how could she do this? Chairman Zuckerman responded that any
resident who wants to suggest Code changes can write a letter to the Village Administrator.
There being no further questions or comments, 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 by unanimous voice vote at 10:17pm.
8