Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013-11-14 - Planning Board Meeting Minutes Approved:January 9,2014 VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK PLANNING BOARD REGULAR MEETING VILLAGE HALL, 938 KING STREET Thursday November 14, 2013 - 8:00 p.m. ROLL CALL MINUTES Review of minutes from the following Planning Board meetings: May 9, 2013; June 13, 2013; July 11, 2013 PUBLIC HEARING 1. Consideration of a Site Plan Application by Scott Oling to construct a new 2 car garage at 2 Hillandale Road, Rye Brook,NY, Parcel I.D. 135.28-1-41 • Applicant submitted request for adjournment CONTINUED BUSINESS 2. Consideration of a Site Plan Application and a Special Use Permit Application by Linda Seltman to legalize a professional office at 561 Westchester Ave, Rye Brook, NY, Parcel I.D. 135.82-1-11 • Consideration of a Report and Recommendation 3. Discussion of a Local Law referral from the Board of Trustees regarding amendments to Chapters 8 and 209 of the Village Code regarding site plan review for one-family dwellings • Consideration of a Report and Recommendation NEW BUSINESS 4. Consideration of a Site Plan Application by Malek Samad to demolish an existing single family dwelling and construct a new single family dwelling at 20 Beechwood Boulevard, Rye Brook,NY, Parcel ID 136.29-1-9 • Consideration of a Resolution to Set a Public Hearing 5. Consideration of a Site Plan Application by Kevin Teo for the legalization of site work and proposed site work, including but not limited to reconstruction of a pool deck and patio, widening of existing driveway, construction of retaining walls, construction of paved pathways, placement of fill and re-grading of the rear yard at 70 Winding Wood Road South, Rye Brook, NY, Parcel ID 135.34-1-36 0 Consideration of a Resolution to Set a Public Hearing 6. Consideration of Proposed Site Plan and Wetlands Permit Applications by Frank Chiarello to demolish an existing single family dwelling and construct a new single family dwelling at 8 Edgewood Drive, Rye Brook,NY, Parcel ID 135.28-1-28 • Sketch Plan Review 7. Consideration of an amendment to the Planning Board Rules of Procedure to change the time of regular meetings of the Planning Board from 8:00 pm to 7:30 pm • Consideration of a Resolution PRESENT BOARD Mr. Domenic Accurso Mr. Robert Goodman Mr. John Grzan Mr. Bill Laufer Mrs. Amy Schoen Mr. Dan Tartaglia Chairman Gary Zuckerman STAFF Mrs. Jennifer Gray, Village Counsel Mrs. Marilyn Timpone-Mohamed, Village Planning Consultant Mr. Mike Nowak, Jr., Village Engineer/Superintendent of Public Works Ms. Shari Melillo, Planning Board Secretary Mr. David Heiser— Planning Board 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 complete set of Planning Board Rules of Procedure can be found on the Village's website along with streaming video of the Planning Board meetings. The Chairman called for review of the minutes from the May 9, 2013, June 13, 2013, and July 11, 2013 Planning Board meetings. On a motion made by Mrs. Schoen and seconded by Mr. Goodman, Mr. Nowak called the roll and the three sets of minutes were approved: MR. ACCURSO YES MR. GOODMAN YES MR. GRZAN YES MR. LAUFER YES MRS. SCHOEN YES MR. TARTAGLIA YES 2 Rye Brook Planning Board November 14,2013 CHAIRMAN ZUCKERMAN YES Chairman Zuckerman called for the first item in the order of business. 1. Consideration of a Site Plan Application by Scott Oling to construct a new 2 car garage at 2 Hillandale Road, Rye Brook,NY, Parcel I.D. 135.28-1-41 • Applicant submitted request for adjournment Chairman Zuckerman explained that the application was on the December Zoning Board of Appeals agenda, and adjourned the Public Hearing to the December 12, 2013 Planning Board meeting. Chairman Zuckerman called for the next item in the order of business. 2. Consideration of a Site Plan Application and a Special Use Permit Application by Linda Seltman to legalize a professional office at 561 Westchester Ave, Rye Brook, NY, Parcel I.D. 135.82-1-11 • Consideration of a Report and Recommendation Chairman Zuckerman stated that the Applicant requested an adjournment to the December 12, 2013 meeting, which was granted. Chairman Zuckerman asked that the next item of business, review of a local law referral from the Trustees, be moved to the end of the agenda. The Chairman then called for the following item in the order of business. 4. Consideration of a Site Plan Application by Malek Samad to demolish an existing single family dwelling and construct a new single family dwelling at 20 Beechwood Boulevard, Rye Brook,NY, Parcel ID 136.29-1-9 • Consideration of a Resolution to Set a Public Hearing Mr. Laufer explained that his home is located just under 250 feet away from the lot that is the subject of the application; however, he believed that he could impartially review the application. He declined to recuse himself from review of the application and asked whether the applicant had any objection to his participation in the review of the application. The applicant responded that he had no objections to Mr. Laufer's participation in the review. Keith Potensky, Esq., the attorney representing the applicant, addressed the Board and gave an overview of the project. He explained that the proposed site plan would not require any variances. He received comments from the Village consultants and staff, noting that most of the comments were technical in nature, which can be addressed in the next plan revisions. 3 Rye Brook Planning Board November 14,2013 Mrs. Mohamed addressed the Board stating that she has reviewed the application and noted the plans include two grading plans that are inconsistent, which should be corrected. In regard to tree removal, the plans show that at least 15 trees, including one significant tree, would be removed during construction; however, the exact number of trees to be removed should be clarified. In addition, the landscape plan may not include the appropriate number of replacement trees required by the Village Code. Mrs. Gray added that the application forms raise a question as to who is the property owner, which needs to be clarified. If the Applicant is not the property owner, a letter of authorizing the applicant to apply for site plan approval should be provided. Mr. Nowak stated that the application was sent to Dolph Rotfeld for review of the stormwater management plan, and Mr. Rotfeld's office issued a comment memo. He noted that most of Mr. Rotfeld's comments were minor issues that could be easily addressed. The gravel driveway is considered to be an impervious surface by the Village Code, so the driveway surface area must be included in the stormwater calculations. Chairman Zuckerman added that additional information regarding the attic space over the garage and attic space over the main area of the home must be provided so the Building Inspector can determine if the gross floor area (GFA) of the home complies with the maximum allowable GFA of the lot. Given the additional information required, the Chairman asked the Board to consider whether it wants to call for a Public Hearing or wait until the next meeting when the Board has all the information requested. Mr. Brad Demott, architect for the applicant, addressed the Board, stating his belief that 18 trees were proposed to be removed. He also stated that the landscape plan would be revised as requested and that he believed that the GFA proposed is compliant with the Village Code GFA requirement for the district. A draft Construction Management Plan also will be submitted for review, as requested by the Planning Board. Chairman Zuckerman added that the Construction Management Plan would be approved by the Village Engineer. Mr. Laufer expressed concern regarding construction and the Construction Management Plan because there may be construction occurring on a lot across the street around the same time as the construction occurring at the subject property. He suggested that the neighborhood should be advised when construction starts so they know what to expect. Mr. Tartaglia stated that the Zoning Table treats the existing structure as if it is demolished; however, it is still standing. He wanted to see the current zoning compliance of the site compared to the proposed compliance of the new site plan because it is important information that the public should have for the Public Hearing. Mr. Accurso asked if water that may enter the basement would be pumped out of the basement into the proposed storm water management system, to which Mr. Massaro responded "Yes" and he added that percolation tests were performed which confirmed that the water from a 25 year storm can be retained on site; however, stormwater beyond what is expected from a 25-year storm would be discharged into the Village's storm water system. Mr. Nowak added that stormwater would enter the stormwater system through the underground Cultec units and excess water that cannot be retained would be piped to flow into the Village storm sewer system. The 4 Rye Brook Planning Board November 14,2013 intent of the design is that there would be no net increase in stormwater runoff from the lot post construction. Mrs. Gray was asked to read the resolution setting the Public Hearing: RESOLUTION _SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING CONCERNING AN APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR 20 BEECHWOOD BOULEVARD VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK PLANNING BOARD WHEREAS, Mr. Malek Samad submitted an application for approval of a site plan to demolish an existing residence and construct a new two-story residence with attached garage, parking court, driveway, and rear-yard patio at 20 Beechwood Boulevard, in the R-25 District designated by Property ID 136.29-1-9 on the Town of Rye Tax Assessor's Map. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Village of Rye Brook Planning Board shall hold a Public Hearing on December 12, 2013 at 7:30 p.m., at Village Hall, 938 King Street, Rye Brook, New York to consider the application for site plan approval; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Planning Board, pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) determines the Proposed Action to be a Type 2 Action requiring no further review pursuant to the requirements of SEQRA; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that pursuant to General Municipal Law X239-m and the Westchester County Administrative Code, the Site Plan application shall be referred to Westchester County Department of Planning no less than 30 days prior to the public hearing concerning the application and pursuant to General Municipal Law 5239-nn and the Westchester County Administrative Code, notice of the public hearing shall be given to the Village of Port Chester no less than 10 days prior to the public hearing. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Applicant is directed to comply with Section 250-40 of the Village Code regarding notification. 5 Rye Brook Planning Board November 14,2013 On a motion made by Mrs. Schoen and seconded by Mr. Goodman, Mr. Nowak called the roll and the resolution was approved: MR. ACCURSO YES MR. GOODMAN YES MR. GRZAN YES MR. LAUFER YES MRS. SCHOEN YES MR. TARTAGLIA YES CHAIRMAN ZUCKERMAN YES Chairman Zuckerman called for the next item in the order of business. 5. Consideration of a Site Plan Application by Kevin Teo for the legalization of site work and proposed site work, including but not limited to reconstruction of a pool deck and patio, widening of existing driveway, construction of retaining walls, construction of paved pathways, placement of fill and re-grading of the rear yard at 70 Winding Wood Road South, Rye Brook, NY, Parcel ID 135.34-1-36 • Consideration of a Resolution to Set a Public Hearing Nathaniel Holt, P.E., engineer for the applicant, addressed the Board and provided an overview of the project, noting that the work would correct an eroding slope around an existing swimming pool and deck with new grading and retaining walls, and create a parking area adjacent to the driveway, as well as install some stormwater management. Although impervious surface coverage on the lot would be reduced by 450 square feet, a stormwater management system to handle storm water runoff from the driveway and parking area would be installed. Mrs. Mohamed addressed the Board advising that the Building Inspector did not complete a zoning analysis of the site plan because there were set back dimensions missing from the plans. She also noted that a portion of an existing retaining wall on the property is located in the right of way of Winding Wood Road South. With respect to tree removals, it was unclear how many trees were removed and would be removed from the site, so the number of replacement trees to be added to the landscape plan was not determined. Mr. Nowak added that the storm water management plan captures run off from the house and the driveway for a 25 year storm, but capturing runoff from the patio is difficult because there is no way to channel the water into a drywell. The landscape plan and tree removals were still an open issue because some of the trees in question may be located on the neighbor's property. Mrs. Gray asked if the retaining wall in the right of way would remain in the right of way or if it would be removed, to which Mr. Teo, the applicant responded that he was willing to remove it. Mrs. Gray was asked to read the resolution setting the Public Hearing: 6 Rye Brook Planning Board November 14,2013 RESOLUTION SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING CONCERNING AN APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL OF A SITE PLAN AND A STEEP SLOPES WORK PERMIT FOR 70 WINDING WOOD ROAD VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK PLANNING BOARD WHEREAS, Mr. Kevin Teo, property owner, submitted an application for approval of a site plan and a steep slopes work permit to construct decks surrounding an existing swimming pool and adjacent to the home, install storm water management facilities, add fill to the rear yard, construct retaining and landscape walls, construct walkways, remove trees, install a shed, and expand the existing driveway at 70 Winding Wood Road, in the R-15 District, designated as Section 135.34, Block 1, Lot 36 on the Town of Rye Tax Assessor's 1Nlap. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Village of Rye Brook Planning Board shall hold a Public Hearing on December 12, 2013 at 7:30 p.m., at Village Hall, 938 King Street, Rye Brook, New York to consider the application for site plan approval; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Planning Board, pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) determines the Proposed Action to be a Type 2 Action requiring no further review pursuant to the requirements of SEQRA; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Applicant is directed to comply with Section 250-40 of the Village Code regarding notification. The Chairman called for a motion on the resolution setting the Public Hearing for 70 Winding Wood Road and a motion made by Mrs. Schoen and seconded by Mr. Goodman. However, due to the necessity to vote on the proposed change to the start-time for Planning Board meetings before setting the public hearing, the motion was tabled to proceed with the procedural resolution. Chairman Zuckerman called for the amendment to the Planning Board Rules of Procedure, the next item in the order of business. 6. Consideration of an Amendment to the Planning Board Rules of Procedure to change the time of regular meetings of the Planning Board from 8:00pm to 7:30pm • Consideration of a Resolution 7 Rye Brook Planning Board November 14,2013 Mrs. Gray was asked to read the resolution: RESOLUTION CONSIDERING AN AMENDMENT TO THE PLANNING BOARD RULES OF PROCEDURE VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK PLANNING BOARD BE IT RESOLVED, that the Planning Board Rules of Procedure are hereby amended to change the time of regular meetings of the Planning Board from 8:00 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. On a motion made by Mrs. Schoen and seconded by Mr. Tartaglia, Mr. Nowak called the roll and the resolution to change the meeting time to 7:30 pm was approved: MR. ACCURSO YES MR. GOODMAN YES MR. GRZAN YES MR. LAUFER YES MRS. SCHOEN YES MR. TARTAGLIA YES CHAIRMAN ZUCKERMAN YES Chairman Zuckerman called for the previous item in the order of business, and called for a motion on the resolution setting the Public Hearing for 70 Winding Wood Road. On a motion made by Mrs. Schoen and seconded by Mr. Goodman, Mr. Nowak called the roll and the resolution setting the public hearing was approved: MR. ACCURSO YES MR. GOODMAN YES MR. GRZAN YES MR. LAUFER YES MRS. SCHOEN YES MR. TARTAGLIA YES CHAIRMAN ZUCKERMAN YES Chairman Zuckerman called for the next item in the order of business. 7. Consideration of Proposed Site Plan and Wetlands Permit Applications by Frank Chiarello to demolish an existing single family dwelling and construct a new single family dwelling at 8 Edgewood Drive, Rye Brook,NY, Parcel ID 135.28-1-28 • Sketch Plan Review 8 Rye Brook Planning Board November 14,2013 Chairman Zuckerman recused himself from review of the sketch plan because his property is adjacent to 8 Edgewood Drive along the common rear property line. Mr. Goodman was chosen to act as Chairman for the application review. Mr. Edward Lombardi and his associate Rick Lafontaine gave the Board an overview of the proposed project that would demolish the existing two bedroom home and construct a new, larger, home. The developer proposed a home with a 2,200 square-foot footprint. The wetlands on the property and drainage in the area flow into and through the property. The back yard of the property is partially within the wetlands that were flagged. The new site plan would increase impervious surface coverage on the lot 670 square feet over the current imperious surface coverage. The proposed site plan locates the new house in the same location as the current home, and the proposed stormwater management system would utilize a Cultec system to capture all stormwater run off from the roof. Mrs. Mohamed stated that the wetlands regulations in the Village Code require that a complete wetland delineation report with field notes be submitted. She had questions regarding the extent and quality of the wetland and the location of what the applicant calls mitigation that cannot currently be answered without a complete wetland delineation report, soil sample data and a functional analysis of the wetland, which should be submitted when the Applicant files a site plan application. When the Board reviews the full application, it should consider the impacts of the site plan on the buffer and the wetland, as the Village Code requires that the site plan be designed to create the smallest possible impact. Mr. Nowak stated that he could not presently comment on the storm water management proposed because the site is unique, and development of the site will require a unique stormwater management system. He asked that the Board give the applicant direction regarding the proposed site plan. He added, with regard to stormwater management that the applicant performed percolation tests that indicated the ground water table is located 5 feet below grade. Mrs. Gray advised the applicant that when a full application is submitted, the Village requires the new EAF form, the name of the property owner should be revised to be 8 Edgewood, LLC, and the applicant should submit a letter of authorization from the owner. Mr. Accurso had a discussion with the applicant regarding the design of the storm water management plan. Mr. Nowak added that the stormwater management system proposed must comply with all the requirements of the Village Code. Mr. Goodman agreed that the lot is part of a very complicated area drainage system; however, he expressed the belief that review of the proposed site plan cannot proceed until the Board received the requested information and analysis regarding the wetlands. He believes the applicant needs to work with the Village consultants and the Village Engineer to design an acceptable and adequate stormwater management system. He asked if the current basement is dry, to which the applicant responded that the basement is dry because a sump pump was installed to keep water out of the basement. Mr. Grzan expressed his belief that the drainage problems on the lot cannot be solved at this time, but impacts to the wetlands can be reduced by sizing and placing the house where it would create the smallest impacts to the wetlands and wetland buffer. Mrs. Schoen agreed with most of what was said. There were a lot of unknowns about the site plan and the property that should be resolved when the applicant works with the Village staff and consultants. She was interested in any mitigation required and the landscape plan but agreed until the issues are defined, the appropriate design for the site cannot be determined. 9 Rye Brook Planning Board November 14,2013 Mr. Tartaglia agreed that all the details of the site design will be driven by the wetland information, and he wanted to visit the property. Mrs. Gray advised the applicant the next step was to submit a formal, complete application to the Village for review. When the application is complete and is before the Board at a meeting, the Board would consider setting a Public Hearing, and could schedule a site visit. Mr. Laufer believed that the Board knows the applicant wants the project to improve the site, and by working with the Board he believed the project can be designed to implement the desired improvement. Mr. Goodman explained that any engineering issues will be resolved through a team effort. He advised the applicant that the Village staff and consultants are accessible and are very good at what they do. He strongly suggested the applicant work with the Village staff and consultants to utilize their expertise. Mr. Goodman stepped down as Acting Chairman. Chairman Zuckerman returned to the Board and called for the next item in the order of business. 8. Discussion of a Local Law referral from the Board of Trustees regarding amendments to Chapters 8 and 209 of the Village Code regarding Site Plan Review for One-Family Dwellings • Consideration of a Report and Recommendation Chairman Zuckerman explained that the proposed amendments in the Local Law would eliminate Planning Board review of the site plans for existing single family home applications that would increase the gross floor area (GFA) of the existing home by 50% or more when no variances are required. He reminded the Board that recommendations were made at the last meeting to include existing two family home applications in the amendments, and to modify some of the language in the amendments. The recommendations were added to the Board's draft report. Mrs. Gray was asked to read the draft Report and Recommendation: PLANNING BOARD OF THE VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK BOARD OF TRUSTEES ON THE PROPOSED LOCAL LAW AMENDING CHAPTERS 8 AND 209 OF THE VILLAGE CODE REGARDING SITE PLAN REVIEW I. PROJECT OVERVIEW On September 10, 2013, Village of Rye Brook Board of Trustees ("BOT") referred a to the Village of Rye Brook Planning Board ("Planning Board") for submission of a Report and Recommendation a proposed local law amending Chapters 8 and 209 of the Village of 10 Rye Brook Planning Board November 14,2013 Rye Brook Code ("Village Code") regarding site plan review for additions to existing one- family dwellings. Currently, Chapter 209 of the Village Code requires site plan review for additions, exterior alterations or major expansions of existing buildings (residential and commercial) which result in an increase of 50% or more of the existing gross floor area ("GFA") — commonly referred to as the "50% rule." The proposed local law would exclude one-family dwellings from the 50% rule, but only if the addition, alteration or major expansion does not require any variances. The proposed addition, alteration or major expansion of an existing one-family dwelling would remain subject to the other existing site plan review triggers set forth at Section 209-1(B) of the Village Code. For example, if a proposed addition would require a Steep Slopes Permit or Wetland Permit the addition would still require site plan review. In addition, the proposed local law would amend the site plan review trigger set forth at Section 209-1(B)(10). Currently, Section 209-1(B)(10) requires site plan review for any land disturbance that results in a change of elevation greater than one foot across an area of 300 square feet. The local law would amend this provision to increase the area to 400 square feet to be consistent with the area of site disturbance that requires storm water management, as set forth in Chapter 217. II. PLANNING BOARD DISCUSSION The Planning Board reviewed this local law at its September 19, 2013, October 10, 2013 and November 14, 2013 meetings, discussed to what extent site plan review for 11 Rye Brook Planning Board November 14,2013 expansions to one-family and two-family dwellings should be required, and provided the following comments: 1. The local law should be revised to expand its scope to two-family dwellings. 2. More applications should be handled administratively, but there is a concern that without site plan review by the Planning Board there is loss of control over preserving the existing character of a neighborhood. However, even though additions that increase the existing GFA by more than 50% would not be reviewed by the Planning Board under the proposed local law, the Architectural Review Board would retain jurisdiction to review the architectural plans and such review provides safeguards against additions may be out of character with the existing neighborhood. III. PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS After discussion and consideration of the comments provided by Village Staff and the Village's Planning Consultant, the Planning Board recommends approval of the proposed local law, subject to the following revisions: The first sentence of Section 209-1(B)(2) of the local law should be revised as follows to include two-family dwellings within its scope and to set forth the exception at the beginning of the provision: Except where an addition, exterior alteration or major expansion is performed to an existing one-family or two-family dwelling and no variances are required, Aadditions, exterior alterations or major expansions performed to an existing building which result in an increase of 50% or more of the gross floor area of the existing building. Dated: Rye Brook, New York November 14, 2013 The Board discussed the proposed amendments and the draft report and recommendations. Mr. Grzan was concerned that the amendments would allow construction of large additions to homes without the benefit of site plan review by the Planning Board. Chairman Zuckerman responded that the areas of concern regarding site plans, i.e. stormwater management and engineering matters, steep slopes disturbances, visual impacts to scenic roads, site plans requiring variances, large site disturbances by grading plans, disturbances of wetlands and wetland buffers would still be required to be reviewed by the Planning Board. Mr. Tartaglia asked if, under the new law, any of the items on the agenda that night would come to the Planning Board for review. Mrs. Gray responded that all the items on the agenda would be 12 Rye Brook Planning Board November 14,2013 reviewed by the Planning Board if the amendments are adopted. She further explained that any new construction or tear down applications would require site plan review under the new regulations. Mr. Tartaglia responded with his belief, based on Mrs. Gray's answer, that the Planning Board would still review applications that need the expertise of the Planning Board if the amendments are adopted. Mr. Laufer expressed belief that the amendments would undermine the synergy between the Planning Board and the Building Department. He believed the Board provides a check and a balance to the Building Department, and it provides the public with the right and opportunity to come before us to make their concerns regarding a project known. It was his opinion both benefits would be lost if the amendments are adopted. Mrs. Timpone-Mohamed reminded the Board that earlier amendments to the Village Code regarding building bulk, setbacks, scenic roads, impervious surface coverage, storm water management, steep slopes, wetlands and large lot subdivisions would remain in effect after the amendments are adopted. The current regulations will continue to guide site plan and building design. So, if a house is proposed to be expanded by 50% or more and it does not require a variance, the regulations in the Code will still work together to influence the design of the house, its location on the lot, and minor site work to be appropriate for the neighborhood whether or not the Planning Board also reviews the application. Mr. Accurso agreed with Mrs. Mohamed, but he believed that the bulk standards should be reviewed and perhaps amended. With respect to the amendments currently before the Board, he expressed his belief that the Architectural Review Board (ARB) looks at elevations, and the ARB would not look at the issues that the Planning Board reviews. Mrs. Schoen added that the Architectural Review Board is mainly concerned with the look of a proposed building or addition. The ARB does not discuss the issues relative to the site design that the Planning Board reviews. Mr. Goodman added his concern that applicants may become creative to circumvent the regulations. He was concerned that there may be a lot of applications that succeed in slipping thru the Planning Board process. Chairman Zuckerman stated the Board appeared to be divided on the amendments before it. He suggested adjourning the discussion to the next meeting, and asking the Village staff to research applications over the last 5 years to get a sense of how many applications would not have been reviewed by the Planning Board under the proposed amendments. The Board asked David Heiser, the Board of Trustees liaison to the Planning Board, to explain the genesis of the proposed amendments. Trustee Heiser explained the amendments were part of an overall desire on the part of the Board of Trustees to streamline and simplify the land use application review process for applicants in Rye Brook. Mr. Goodman believed there may be another approach to the concerns of the Trustees. He suggested developing a procedure to allow an application being reviewed by the Building Department to come to the Planning Board if there were issues with the application. After further discussion, Trustee Heiser stated that he found it difficult to imagine that a proposed 95% increase in the GFA of a home would not create other issues that would trigger site plan review by the Planning Board. 13 Rye Brook Planning Board November 14,2013 There was a motion made by Mr. Laufer and seconded by Mr. Accurso to vote on the draft Report and Recommendation. Mr. Nowak was asked to call the roll, and the Report and Recommendations was adopted: MR. ACCURSO NO MR. GOODMAN YES MR. GRZAN NO MR. LAUFER NO MRS. SCHOEN YES MR. TARTAGLIA YES CHAIRMAN ZUCKERMAN YES Mrs. Gray was asked to read the resolution referring the adopted Report and Recommendations to the Board of Trustees: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SUBMISSION OF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK BOARD OF TRUSTEES ON THE PROPOSED LOCAL LAW AMENDING CHAPTERS 8 AND 209 OF THE VILLAGE CODE REGARDING SITE PLAN REVIEW 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 amending Chapters 8 and 209 of the Village Code regarding site plan review and requests the Secretary to the Planning Board 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. Grzan, Mr. Nowak called the roll, and the resolution referring the Report and Recommendations was approved: MR. ACCURSO NO MR. GOODMAN YES MR. GRZAN YES MR. LAUFER YES MRS. SCHOEN YES MR. TARTAGLIA YES CHAIRMAN ZUCKERMAN YES On a motion made by Mrs. Schoen and seconded by Mr. Tartaglia, the meeting was adjourned at 10:52 pm by unanimous voice vote. 14 Rye Brook Planning Board November 14,2013