Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1994-07-26 - Board of Trustees Meeting Minutes AGENDA VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK BOARD OF TRUSTEES REGULAR MEETING JULY 269 1994 5:30 P.M. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ACTION i PUBLIC HEARING 1. PROPOSED LOCAL LAW INTRODUCTORY #9-1994 ENTITLED: A LOCAL LAW AMENDING THE CODE OF THE VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK TO ADD A NEW CHAPTER 47 TO PROVIDE FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF PROFESSIONAL CONSULTING FEES RESOLUTIONS 2. SETTING PUBLIC HEARING FOR PROPOSED LOCAL LAW INTRODUCTORY #10-1994 ENTITLED: A LOCAL LAW AMENDING THE CODE OF THE VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK TO ADD A NEW CHAPTER 245 TO PROVIDE FOR WETLAND AND WATERCOURSE PROTECTION 3. APPROVING THIRD PARTY CUSTODIAN AGREEMENT WITH BANK OF NEW YORK AND BANK OF NEW YORK TRUST COMPANY 4. APPROVING PAYMENT FOR GENERAL CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT #9302 ANTHONY J. POSILLIPO COMMUNITY CENTER 5. DETERMINING SUB-DIVISION APPLICATION HOWARD LOEWENTHEIL, INC./6 HAWTHORNE AVENUE SECTION 1, BLOCK 15, LOT 38 6. INCREASING 1994-1995 RECREATION FEES 7. CHECK REGISTER i WRITTEN COMMUNICATION 8. JOSEPH TUTERA RE: PROPERTY AT 62 BOWMAN AVENUE REQUEST TO OPERATE FUNERAL HOME I i j 9. MARY A. BROWN 11 RE: FUNDING OF PORT CHESTER PUBLIC LIBRARY NEXT MEETING DATES TUESDAY, AUGUST 9. 1994 - 7:30 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING - 1. PROPOSED LOCAL LAW INTRODUCTORY 10-1994 ENTITLED: A LOCAL LAW AMENDING THE CODE OF THE VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK TO ADD A NEW CHAPTER 245 TO PROVIDE FOR WETLAND AND WATERCOURSE PROTECTION TUESDAY, AUGUST 23, 1994 - 7:30 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING - 1. CONTINUATION OF OPEN SPACE EASEMENT FOR THE BLIND BROOK CLUB PROPERTY (Continuation) 2. TO CONSIDER APPROVAL OF FIRE CONTRACT FOR 1994-1995 FISCAL YEAR (Continuation) 005406 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK BOARD OF TRUSTEES VILLAGE OFFICES 90 SOUTH RIDGE STREET RYE BROOK, NEW YORK JULY 26, 1994 CONVENE MEETING The Meeting was called to order at 5:30 p.m. by Mayor Cresenzi in the Meeting Room and the Pledge of Allegiance followed. Present were the following members of the Board: I Mayor Salvatore M. Cresenzi Trustee Michele Daly Trustee Joseph Pellino I Trustee Randy A. Solomon Trustee Gary J. Zuckerman i Also present were: Christopher J. Russo, Village Administrator Lori Ann DeMarco, Assistant to Village Administrator Rocco V. Circosta, Director of Public Works Kenneth E. Powell, Village Attorney Elizabeth Bottali, Secretary to the Village Board Village Treasurer, Joseph Cortese was not in attendance. 1 i I July 26, 1994 005407 Mayor Cresenzi announced that the Board would be deviating from the agenda this evening and that we would deal with a correspondence from Mary Brown, who is also present this evening. WRITTEN COMMUNICATION 1. MARY A. BROWN RE: FUNDING OF PORT CHESTER PUBLIC LIBRARY Mary Brown, a resident of 8 Jennifer Lane stated that she was President of the Public { Library Directors Association of Westchester County and it is in that capacity that she was here this evening. The association has reviewed the situation with regard to the Port Chester Public Library and has written a letter to the Village of Rye Brook Board of Trustees in regard to that. The letter was read into the Minutes as part of the record. i i 2 005408 P PUBLIC LIBRARY DIRECTORS' ASSOCIATION OF WESTCHEST'Elk COUNTY, N.Y. 20 June 1994 Salvatore Cresenzi , Mayor Village of Rye Brook 90 South Ridge Street Rye Brook, New York 10573 Dear Salvatore Cresenzi , I am writing at the request of the Public Library Directors Association of Westchester County to convey the Association 's views on the suggestion that the Village of Rye Brook contract with some entity other than the Port Chester Public Library or establish your own library to provide library service to the Village . This is an important decision , involving as it does both the quality of an e important municipal service and Villa P P 9 resources in this time of stringent municipal finance . From time to time questions arise which affect County- wide issues related to library finance and service. These matters are governed for all of us by the Code of Service, a document agreed to by all the Library Boards in the County . The Code of Service governs our relationships as independent entities with each other , making the cooperative network which is the Westchester Library System possible . The Code of Service is the mechanism which opens the services of all the County ' s libraries to a card holder in any one of them. It reflects over 30 years ' experience, through good times and bad, with library cooperative relationships . Because contractual relationships are relatively common in Westchester, the Code of Service addresses them specifically. It requires that a municipality without a library who chooses to contract with a neighboring municipality or library pay the per capita support amount of the library with whom it contracts, and that the contracting area cannot pay a rate below the average per capita expenditure for all public libraries in Westchester . These provisions exist so that no one is getting a free ride , that is , access to the cooperative network without paying' a reasonable portion of the cost of providing that network. A review of the figures shows that the Port Chester jPublic Library is operating at a cost well below the County ' s per 00540 capita average of $40 . 00 as well as the Rye Free Reading Room' s $45 . 60 . The per capita cost of starting one ' s own library, ,or upgrading a school library and making it available 52 hours a week needs to be evaluated carefully . The capital cost of such a startup or upgrade with regard to size of collections and automation with associated telecommunications is extensive. Such a library , if it were to be a gateway to the County cooperative network and afford your citizens access to other libraries they currently enjoy using , would have to receive approval from the Westchester Library System and the State Library. Such approval is their area of expertise, but it is unclear to us that it would be forthcoming . Finally, we would like to make a couple of observations about the Port Chester Public Library itself. Holding over 100, 000 items, Port Chester has the largest collection in your area and thus is a regional resource . With that , it offers a full range of programs and services for all ages and interests . The Library is first in the County to acquire new best- selling books and therefore was the first library asked to participate in our new cooperative cataloging network. This promptness speaks both for the Library' s efficient management and for its responsiveness to the needs of its customers . The Library also was one of the first in the County to acquire on-line database computer terminals and make them available to the public. Again , thoughtful and forward-looking management has benefitted the communities served . I apologize for the length of this letter, but the issues you address are complex. I appreciate your giving the Association a hearing and look forward to working with you in any way you may' find helpful in the future as you work on this most important issue . Sincerely, Mary A V Brown President cc : Trustees , Village of Rye Brook Rocco Tirone, President Board of Trustees Port Chester Public Library Maurice J . Freedman , Ph . D. , Director Westchester Library System July 26, 1994 005410 Ms. Brown thanked the Board for their time. RESOLUTIONS 2. SETTING PUBLIC HEARING FOR PROPOSED LOCAL LAW INTRODUCTORY #10-1994 ENTITLED: A LOCAL LAW AMENDING THE CODE OF THE VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK TO ADD A NEW CHAPTER 245 TO PROVIDE FOR WETLAND AND WATERCOURSE PROTECTION On Motion made by Trustee Pellino, seconded by Trustee Daly, the following resolution was hereby adopted: RESOLUTION SETTING PUBLIC HEARING FOR PROPOSED LOCAL LAW INTRODUCTORY 10-1994 ENTITLED: A LOCAL LAW AMENDING THE CODE OF THE VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK TO ADD A NEW CHAPTER 245 TO PROVIDE FOR WETLAND AND . WATERCOURSE PROTECTION RESOLVED, that a public hearing will be held by the Village of Rye Brook Board of Trustees on Tuesday, August 9, 1994 at 7:30 p.m. at the Village Offices, 90 South Ridge Street, Rye Brook, NY on proposed Local Law Introductory #10-1994 regulating wetlands and watercourses. C TRUSTEE DALY VOTING AYE TRUSTEE PELLINO VOTING AYE TRUSTEE SOLOMON VOTING AYE TRUSTEE ZUCKERMAN VOTING AYE MAYOR CRESENZI VOTING AYE 3. APPROVING THIRD PARTY CUSTODIAN AGREEMENT WITH BANK OF NEW YORK AND BANK OF NEW YORK TRUST COMPANY Administrator Russo explained that in the past the monies have been secured with the Bank of New York, however the State Controller does not want the money secured with the same entity that you are investing it with. They want the pledged collateral to come from a totally separate entity and this resolution is authorizing such. fOn Motion made by Trustee Zuckerman, seconded by Trustee Solomon, the following Resolution was hereby adopted: I 3 II July 26, 1994 005411 RESOLUTION APPROVING THIRD PARTY CUSTODIAN AGREEMENT WITH BANK OF NEW YORK AND BANK OF NEW YORK TRUST COMPANY RESOLVED, that the Village of Rye Brook is authorized to enter into a Third Party Custodian Agreement with the Bank of New York and the Bank of New York Trust Company; and it is FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Mayor is authorized to execute and deliver all documents necessary or appropriate to accomplish the purposes of this Resolution. TRUSTEE DALY VOTING AYE TRUSTEE PELLINO VOTING AYE TRUSTEE SOLOMON VOTING AYE TRUSTEE ZUCKERMAN VOTING AYE MAYOR CRESENZI VOTING AYE f 4. APPROVING PAYMENT FOR GENERAL CONSTRUCTION { CONTRACT #9302 ANTHONY J. POSILLIPO COMMUNITY CENTER I Administrator Russo read a resolution authorizing payment of $19,166.10 to Marathon Orbit. i Mayor Cresenzi stated that on behalf of the entire Board, he did not feel it was appropriate to continue paying this contractor when the building is behind schedule. The deadlines have not been met and the kitchen is not even installed. Administrator Russo stated that this bill is for work that has been completed. We are holding out retainages on everything else and after discussions with our architect, Mr. Circosta sent them a letter as to what we feel based on delays caused on both sides, is a fair date to impose penalties. We came up with the date of August 5, 1994 as to the date when we should start imposing the penalties. Trustee Pellino questioned if there has been a response to Mr. Circosta's letter. Mr. Circosta stated that we have had one response from the Electrician as of this date. The electrician was in the process of preparing a letter to us explaining the items that we call for in the punchlist and giving us times of completions. There has been no written response from any of the other contractors. Trustee Zuckerman questioned the status of the landscaping and whether or not they will ,be doing it. 4 July 26, 1994 0 Q r-5 41 a} Mr. Circosta stated that the landscaping is on hold until the end of August and whether or not they will complete it or the Village will is still in discussion. Trustee Zuckerman questioned when the Food Service Equipment was being delivered. Mr. Circosta replied that the delivery date for the Food Service Equipment if August 19, 1994. When we assigned the August 5, 1994 deadline date, we did not know the delivery date. We are still awaiting the appliances such as the dishwasher and the stove. The Stainless steel has been installed on the walls and what is being fabricated is the stainless steel counters. The refrigerator and freezer have been delivered. Trustee Zuckerman questioned if these people are moving along and addressing the problems. Mr. Circosta stated that the General Contractor has been going through the punchlist and taking care of those items. The only received the revised list on Friday but they are addressing the problems. The took care of the driveway and many other little things. The concrete has been completed. This application covers through June 30, 1994. Ms. DeMarco stated that several of the items have been attended to, however the f punchlist is quite voluminous. Administrator Russo stated that a lot of the delays we've had is really seeing that they install and order exactly what we wanted in the specifications. We caused some delays but they caused some delays by just ordering or installing the wrong thing. We stopped a lot of work when we found that it was not in the specifications. Mr. Circosta stated that there is a balance of work to be completed and the retainage is in the vicinity of $32,000.08. Trustee Pellino suggested that the resolution be withdrawn and held over to the August 9, 1994 meeting and between now and then enter into discussion with Marathon Orbit which would be more conciliatory. Mayor Cresenzi stated that the original completion date was the end of May. Trustee Zuckerman added that the General Contractor stated that he thought that it was an outside figure and it may even be completed earlier. Mr. Circosta stated that for a clarification, the monies in question this evening are for work that has been performed. 5 00; 4.1 to July 26, 1994 On Motion made by Trustee Pellino, seconded by Trustee Solomon, the Resolution was tabled to August 9, 1994. TRUSTEE DALY VOTING AYE TRUSTEE PELLINO VOTING AYE TRUSTEE SOLOMON VOTING AYE TRUSTEE ZUCKERMAN VOTING NAY MAYOR CRESENZI VOTING NAY 5. DETERMINING SUB-DIVISION APPLICATION HOWARD LOEWENTHEIL, INC./6 HAWTHORNE AVENUE SECTION 1, BLOCK 15, LOT 38 Attorney summarized the resolution for the Board and stated that basically, it is a denial. On Motion made by Trustee Solomon, seconded by Trustee Daly, the following Resolution was hereby adopted: RESOLUTION DETERMINING SUBDIVISION APPLICATION MADE BY HOWARD LOWENTHEIL INC. AND PETER MURRAY - 6 HAWTHORNE AVENUE SECTION 1, BLOCK 15, LOT 38 WHEREAS, an application has been received by the Village of Rye Brook from Howard Lowentheil Inc. and Peter Murray for preliminary plat approval of property situated at 6 Hawthorne Avenue of the Village of Rye Brook, seeking approval to subdivide the approximately 1.36 acre parcel into five (5) lots with another portion of property denominated as Parcel A; and WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees conducted a public hearing on the application on July 14, 1994. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that a review of an application to determine compliance with technical requirements is not subject to SEQR review, and, in any event, a denial of this application will have no significant adverse impact on the environment; and it is FURTHER RESOLVED, that the preliminary subdivision application is denied for the following reasons: 1. The Preliminary Subdivision Application is Incomplete. 6 July 26, 1994 0054 1 4 a. Section 219-38 of the Code of the Village of Rye Brook, constituting a portion of the Subdivision of Land Regulations, establishes specifications for preliminary subdivision plats and plans. Section 219-38 (B) requires that a preliminary subdivision plat show the "approximately location and dimensions of all property lines." In the preliminary plat presented, the side lot lines have not been dimensioned and, therefore, the application does not set forth the information required in accordance with the specifications of §219- 38 of the Code and the application is, therefore, incomplete. b. Section 219-38(D) of the Code of the Village of Rye Brook, constituting a portion of the Subdivision of Land Regulations, a preliminary subdivision plat is required to show the location and layout of new streets, including approximate 'curve radii." The preliminary subdivision plat fails to set forth curve radii for the intersection of the proposed street with Hawthorne Avenue and, therefore, the application does not set forth the information required in accordance with the specifications of §219-38 of the Code and the application is, therefore, incomplete. C. Section 219-38(E) of the Code of the Village of Rye Brook, constituting a portion of the Subdivision of Land Regulations, requires that a preliminary subdivision plat shows that "proposed names for new streets." The preliminary subdivision plat does not set forth a proposed name for the new street and, therefore, the application does not set forth the information required in accordance with §219-38 of the Code and is, therefore, incomplete. 2. The Preliminary Subdivision Plat Does Not Comply With Subdivision Regulations. a. Under §219-31(E) of the Code of the Village of Rye Brook, constituting a . portion of the Land Subdivision Regulations, a permanent dead-end street "shall be separated from [the] boundary" of the subdivision "by a distance not less than the minimum required lot depth." Under the applicable R15A zoning district, 130 feet is the minimum lot depth pursuant to Zoning Law §66-20A. The cul-de-sac is proposed to be set back from the property lines less than five feet in one area and less than 18 feet in another area. These separation distances are not in conformity with the 130 foot separation requirement. b. Under §219-33(A) of the Code of the Village of Rye Brook, constituting a portion of the Subdivision of Land Regulations, the: 7 July 26, 1994 00541 %) "lot arrangement shall be such that there will be no foreseeable difficulty, for reasons of topogrophy or other conditions, in securing building permits to build on all lots in compliance with the Zoning Law, the Wetlands Law and the County Health Department regulations. The preliminary subdivision plat delineates a parcel as Parcel A without specifying a purpose, use or future ownership, which is not in conformity with the provisions of §219-33(A). A notation on the preliminary plat stating that the ownership of Parcel A shall remain with the fee of a separate parcel, Lot 5, is in conflict with the preliminary plat itself which plat sets forth a lot line separating Parcel A from Lot 5. 3. The Preliminary Plat Does Not Comply With the Zoning Law. a. Under §219-20(2) of the Rye Brook Code, constituting a portion of the E Subdivision of Land Regulations, a subdivision application is required to comply with all requirements of the Subdivision Regulations and Zoning Law. The preliminary plat does not comply with the following provisions of the Zoning Law: (1) The minimum lot area of 15,000 square feet established under §66- 20A of the Zoning Law: (a) Lot 1 is shown as being 9,853 square feet; Lot 2 is shown as being 8,490 square feet; Lot 3 is shown as being 5,655 square feet; Lot 4 is shown as being 7,230 square feet; Lot 5 is shown as being 5,594 square feet; Parcel A is shown as being 7,020 square feet. (2) Section 66-20A of the Zoning Law requires a minimum average lot depth of 130 feet for each lot. At least three lots (Lots 2,3 and 5) do not comply with average lot depth requirements-and possibly all five lots are not in compliance with the applicable requirement. (3) Section 66-20A of the Zoning Law requires an average lot width of 80 feet for each lot. Four lots (Lots 2, 3, 4 and 5) do not meet the minimum lot width requirement. TRUSTEE DALY VOTING AYE TRUSTEE PELLINO VOTING AYE TRUSTEE SOLOMON VOTING AYE TRUSTEE ZUCKERMAN VOTING AYE MAYOR CRESENZI VOTING AYE 8 July 26, 1994 1005416 6. INCREASING 1994-1995 RECREATION FEES Trustee Zuckerman requested that this resolution be put over to the night of August 9, 1994 so he could compare the fees to the cost analysis that was done. Mr. Hroncich stated that the Recreation Department is currently working on their Fall Newsletter and it is possible to wait until the August 9, 1994 meeting, but we will be cutting it short. Trustee Zuckerman stated that he only received the fee increases this weekend. 1 Mr. Hroncich stated that the memo is dated July 13, 1994 and was put in the Board boxes on that same day. The cost analysis was distributed on July 15, 1994. Administrator Russo read the proposed changes in fees. Trustee Pellino stated that he was in the process of analyzing the fee increases with the cost analysis and he felt that Youth Bowling should be raised from $6.00 to $10.00 as there is a large amount of money being spent on the annual get together and we could probably incorporate some of that into the collection of fees for the program. r I ' Mr. Hroncich explained that the Finance Committee, which is a sub-committee of the Recreation Commission felt that $8.00 was a sufficient number because bowling is every week and runs for over twenty weeks. Each week, every child purchases a soda or food and that becomes expensive for many parents to put out each week. He added that we don't have as many participants as we did when we had the Ridge Bowl. Trustee Pellino questioned where the children will be bowling this year. Mr. Hroncich stated that last year we bowled in Greenwich, however, this year we will have to look into White Plains Bowl or the Post Bowl and see what kind of arrangement we can work out. Administrator Russo stated that in the Greenwich newspaper, there were comments made by activists in the Bowling issue and they feel that the area is now lacking a sports center and perhaps we could contact some of those people from Greenwich and look into a facility for multi-activities. Mr. Hroncich questioned if the Recreation Commission should be present at the next meeting to answer any questions that the Board may have. Mayor Cresenzi stated that it would be a good idea for Mr. Josephson to attend the next meeting and we will deal with that as the first item on the agenda. Trustee Zuckerman stated that he was interested in the thought process that went into determining the increases as the Board should be made aware of the reasoning. 9 July 26, 1994 00541 � On Motion made by Trustee Solomon, seconded by Trustee Pellino, the following resolution was hereby adopted: RESOLUTION INCREASING 1994-1995 RECREATION FEES RESOLVED, that the following fee increases for Recreation Programs be hereby adopted: 93-94 RECOMM'D 94-95 REG. PROGRAM 93.94 FEE INCREASE DIFFERENCE 22 Drop-In-Center $ 40 (Monthly) $ 50 (Monthly) $ 10 250 (Annually) 300 (Annually) 50 47 Y-Bowling $ 6 (reg. fee) $ 8 $ 2 (Weekly) 29 Y-Bowling. $ 6 (reg. fee) $ 10 $ 4 Tournament 2wks $ 6 $ 8 $ 2 167 Y-Basketball $ 35 $ 40 $ 5 54 Y-Soccer $ 20 $ 30 $ 10 72 Girls Softball $ 15 $ 20 $ 5 (Fall) 75 Ice Skating $ 120 $ 130 $ 10 25 Men's Basketball $ 25 (Non res.) $ 40 (Non res.) $ 15 (Wednesday) 15 (Resident) 25 (Resident) 10 12 RB/PC Pitching $ 20 $ 25 $ 5 Girl's Softball 6 Doyle Clinic $ 5 $ 10 $ 5 Contractor 25 Broad. Dance I & II $ 50 $ 55 $ 5 18 Men's Basketball $ 45 $ 50 $ 5 (Saturday) 30 & over 19 Volleyball Co-Ed $ 0 (20 weeks) $ 10 (8wks) $ 10 TRUSTEE DALY VOTING AYE TRUSTEE PELLINO VOTING AYE TRUSTEE SOLOMON VOTING AYE TRUSTEE ZUCKERMAN VOTING AYE MAYOR CRESENZI VOTING AYE 10 July 26, 1994 005418 7. CHECK REGISTER On Motion made by Trustee Pellino, seconded by Trustee Zuckerman, the following Resolution was hereby adopted as amended: RESOLUTION CHECK REGISTER WHEREAS, the following checks, representing payment for services rendered, have been submitted to the Treasurer's Office for payment and have been certified to by the Village Administrator: On Line Checks: 9394-9506 Pre-Paid: 8920, 9289, 9290 & 9392 Payroll Checks: NONE Environmental: 430 Recreational Trust: NONE Capital: 2159 Birthday Run: NONE NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that this board hereby approves payment of the above-mentioned claims and authorizes payment thereof. i TRUSTEE DALY VOTING AYE TRUSTEE PELLINO VOTING AYE f TRUSTEE SOLOMON VOTING AYE TRUSTEE ZUCKERMAN VOTING AYE MAYOR CRESENZI VOTING AYE WRITTEN COMMUNICATION 8. JOSEPH TUTERA RE: PROPERTY AT 62 BOWMAN AVENUE REQUEST TO OPERATE FUNERAL HOME Administrator Russo read a letter requesting to operate a Funeral Home at 62 Bowman Avenue. He is making this request to the Board because the Building Department informed him that the Village has no rules and regulations against such operation. Mr. Circosta stated that previously there was a request by the Strombergs to sub-divide this property and it was denied by the Planning Board. Mayor Cresenzi stated that the Board has not received an application on this matter so cannot make any determination until receiving an application. Mr. Circosta stated that he would inform Mr. Tutera to submit and application for a Special Use Permit. One of the concerns that we had was the fact that we do not have specific parking regulations for that type of use. 11 July 26, 1994 00549 ,3 Mayor Cresenzi announced the next meeting dates and the items that will be on the agenda. NEXT MEETING DATES TUESDAY AUGUST 9. 1994 - 7:30 P.M. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. PROPOSED LOCAL LAW INTRODUCTORY 10-1994 ENTITLED: A LOCAL LAW AMENDING THE CODE OF THE VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK TO ADD A NEW CHAPTER 245 TO PROVIDE FOR WETLAND AND WATERCOURSE PROTECTION TUESDAY, AUGUST 23. 1994 - 7:30 P.M. i PUBLIC HEARING 1. CONTINUATION OF OPEN SPACE EASEMENT FOR THE BLIND BROOK CLUB PROPERTY (Continuation) 2. TO CONSIDER APPROVAL OF FIRE CONTRACT FOR 1994-1995 FISCAL YEAR (Continuation) Trustee Zuckerman questioned if the Board could change the regular meeting date for August and make it on August 30, 1994, as he will be away and does not want to miss the two very important public hearings. Trustee Daly stated that she will be away on August 30, 1994. Trustee Zuckerman suggested August 16, 1994. Mayor Cresenzi stated that we would have a notice problem if we were to change the meeting to August 16, 1994. After much discussion the Board decided to leave the meeting date for August 23, 1994. Mayor Cresenzi stated that he had two items that he wanted to put on the table for discussion for a future meeting. The first item relates to the terrible Winter that we had and the cleaning of sidewalks. The way our law is currently written, it is up to the homeowner to take care of cleaning their sidewalks and during the Winter months, given the amount of snow and ice we had, it was impossible for the average homeowner to take care of. Mayor Cresenzi asked the Board to think about the Village, in order to have the sidewalks safe and passable, undertake the process of cleaning the sidewalks. This would necessitate a change in our Village Code, require us to either purchase equipment or to sub-contract out that idea of cleaning the sidewalks, which might be the best way to do it. Before we can decide how we are going to clean them, the Board has to make a decision as to whether or not we want to undertake that under the Village umbrella. 12 July 26, 1994 Trustee Zuckerman stated that we don't really have any sidewalks. Q 5420 Mayor Cresenzi stated that there are more sidewalks than people think. Administrator Russo stated that the other issue is whether to do residential versus commercial. Mayor Cresenzi stated that the issue is really residential. Trustee Daly questioned if all of the homeowners who do not have sidewalks have to pay for the people who have sidewalks. Mayor Cresenzi stated that currently, the maintenance of the sidewalks is the homeowners responsibility. Mr. Heller pointed out that the Village will then have to deal with the issue putting snow on private property. Mr. Circosta pointed out that the Highway Department consists of 7 or 8 men. Trustee Zuckerman questioned if there are any communities that do this. Mayor Cresenzi replied yes and added that Pelham Manor takes care of the sidewalks. Trustee Zuckerman informed the Board that he directed Administrator Russo to obtain a copy of the City of Rye Noise Ordinance regarding leaf blowers. I recently noticed that in the paper there is a proposal by New Rochelle to make this a County Wide ordinance. If we are going to discuss sidewalks and snow removal, we should at least discuss the question of noise from leaf blowers, snow blowers, etc. Mayor Cresenzi stated that we recently received a letter from High Point Hospital in the OB1 Zone requesting that the residential zone be that of an R20. We held discussions and looked into that and it would require a SEQR process. Trustee Pellino stated that this was clearly an act of omission on the part of the original authors of the Code or it could have been ommited when the Village of Rye Brook adopted the Code in 1982. Clearly the pattern is broken in the Code, whereas other zoning districts, most notably the other OB Districts and the H1 District in particular have that underlay R20 designation. This is the same kind of underlay issue for residential housingunderneath that zone and I really don't understand why this has to be Y Y a complex procedure to go through. It is more a matter of bringing our current pattern for the rest of the Code to conformity or bringing the OB1 District in conformity with the rest of the Code. Attorney Powell stated that there is still the issue of the Planning Board review. 13 July 26, 1995 005421 Trustee Zuckerman stated that it may have not been just an oversight. There may have been a reason that that close to the airport they don't want a bunch of houses. It is extremely difficult to put the value on the land without an underlying and residential zone because the PUD is so flexible that it is difficult to make a determination as to what that property is really worth. If that is a realistic reason for placing a underlay zone than we should consider it in that light. Either way, it will have to go to the Planning Board and our Planning Consultants will probably have to review it and make a recommendation. 1 Mayor Cresenzi stated that when discussing the Heritage site, we decided we wanted to put an R20 back on the property because that was going from an H1 to a residential use and that is our largest residential zone and it makes sense there. At this time, I would be in favor of doing that and the rest of the Board seems to feel the same way. He added that we should follow the normal process, whatever that may be, however we need to contact High Point Hospital and say right now the Village Board seems to be leaning towards an R20 but we have to go through a process and there are no guarantees. Trustee Zuckerman suggested that we write a letter stating that we feel that because under any circumstances, it involves a zoning change and it must go to the Planning Board and we should refer the letter to the Planning Board as well. Attorney Powell and the Board agreed with Trustee Zuckerman and stated that he would work on the letter on Friday. fTrustee Solomon stated that the Board needed to schedule meetings with the Recreation Commission, Planning Commission, Village of Port Chester regarding Fire Services and i we also need to discuss Boards, Committees and Commissions appointments. Mayor Cresenzi stated that we could handle the Boards, Committees and Commissions appointments at the August regular meeting and from there we can schedule the other meetings. Mr. Circosta stated-that the Planning Board has made a recommendation that the Village Board make a Positive Declaration on the K & M Realty application. Mayor Cresenzi questioned on what the Planning Board based their recommendation. Mr. Circosta stated the applicant made a presentation with regard to planning and zoning issues, however did not make a presentation on the environmental issues. Mayor Cresenzi questioned how they could make a recommendation without first hearing the environmental issues. Mr. Circosta explained that they want to have a meeting with the Village Board regarding this matter. Trustee Zuckerman stated that they should just fill out the checklist that we ask them to do and make a determination, giving us the reasons why they did that. 14 July 26, 1994 005422 Mayor Circosta questioned that unless the environmentals have been discussed at the Planning Board level, what will there be to discuss. Mr. Circosta stated that he will address a letter to the Planning Board Chairman based on the discussions that came up tonight. Trustee Zuckerman stated that he would agree to meet with them, however it seems that if we meet with them, we are doing what they are supposed to be doing. Mr. Circosta stated that one of the concerns was that the Village Board has to make the determination of a Positive or Negative Declaration on the project. The Village Board has to review the Environmental Impacts of such a project. The Planning Board is a recommending board and does not have the official powers to grant final approval. Mr. Heller stated that he was present at the Planning Board meeting and it appeared that they want the long form completed prior to it coming to them rather than piece mealed. Trustee Zuckerman questioned if the Planning Board is supposed to look into these issues and report to the Village Board under our process. Attorney Powell replied yes and explained that the Village Board is the Lead Agency and they are the people in charge. Mayor Cresenzi questioned how the Planning Board could make the determination until they discuss the Environmentals. Does the Board want to ask the Planning Board if they want to step aside on this one and turn it over to the Village Board. Mr. Circosta stated that one of the concerns of the Planning Board was to make that determination either positive or negative so that they can proceed with the other site plan issues and I am not sure if there is a time frame involved in the SEQR process to make the positive or negative declaration but the Planning Board would like to meet with the Village Board to review the environmental issues of the project as a joint board versus them reviewing it alone. The whole environmental process must be undertaken by the Village Board, as the lead agency, regardless of what the Planning Board recommends. Trustee Zuckerman questioned why the Village Board does not just take it from here and start all over again and do everything. If the Planning Board isn't going to do it, then we might as well do it. Mayor Cresenzi questioned that if we meet Board to Board, what are we going to talk about. How can the Planning Board discuss the environmental issues with us if they have not even discussed them with the applicant. Trustee Zuckerman questioned why we need the Planning Board to do this, we can do it without them. Mr. Circosta stated that if the Board has concerns and questions, they appointed Eugene Strum as the Chairman of the Planning Board and he is the person to talk to. 15 July 26, 19940 0542 43 Mayor Cresenzi stated that he did not mind a meeting but he would like an agenda as to what will be discussed that night. Once we get the agenda, we will set the meeting. Trustee Pellino questioned if this has any impact on the time clock that is ticking for this application. Attorney Powell stated that the application is not complete until a negative or positive declaration is completed. One of the issues with the environmentals is that the negative or positive declaration is supposed to be done up front so you are planning for the application at the same time doing whatever environmentals so they are both in tandem. Trustee Zuckerman stated that the applicant filled out a long form and it is on file and he is stating that the project has environmental impacts, so isn't it up to the Planning Board to investigate this and to state whether they agree or disagree and give a recommendation to the Village Board. Mr. Circosta stated that the Planning Board leaves the review of the environmental assessment forms to Frederick P. Clark Associates. Trustee Zuckerman questioned if Frederick P. Clark Associates has made an analysis of the environmental assessments yet because they could be the key to the whole issue. Mr. Circosta stated that no analysis has been made as of today, but that he would to look into that. Mayor Cresenzi directed Mr. Circosta to inform the Planning Board that we will need an agenda from them in order to schedule a meeting and also to contact Frederick P. Clark Associates and find out if an analysis has been made. PUBLIC HEARING 9. PROPOSED-LOCAL LAW INTRODUCTORY #9-1994 ENTITLED: A LOCAL LAW AMENDING THE CODE OF THE VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK TO ADD A NEW CHAPTER 47 TO PROVIDE FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF PROFESSIONAL CONSULTING FEES Mayor Cresenzi opened the public hearing at 6:55 p.m. Attorney Powell explained that this a proposed Professional Fees Law and it allows the Board of Trustees, Planning Board and the Zoning Board of Appeals while they are reviewing an application to essentially transfer to the applicant the need to pay for the costs of any planning, legal or technical or environmental consulting on any application. You can either require that the Village be reimbursed for the use of their own consultant or require an escrow fund. There are already provisions in the site plan regulations and the SEQR regulations but this one broadens the scope of those reimbursable items. i I 16 July 26, 1994 005424 Attorney Powell stated that this law would duplicate some of the procedures that are now in place, partially but it would broaden the kinds of scope of what would be requested. Trustee Solomon questioned if this would include court costs if a developer were to sue the Village. Attorney Powell replied no and explained that it was a different issue. Once the Board makes a determination and have a proceeding against you, you have the responsibility of defending the consequences of that determination. He added that he has never seen a law drafted that way. Trustee Pellino questioned if an application is before the Planning Board and the escrow account if used up to within the third, time passes, it is not replenished and the Planning Board suspends the application, does that have an affect on the 62 day review requirement. Is this law saying that an application can be deemed incomplete after it has gone well into the planning process. Attorney Powell replied yes, that would be the theory. Trustee Pellino questioned if it is defendable. Attorney Powell replied yes, that it is defendable. One of the issues is whether you elect that course of action at that time, it does provide an incentive for the applicant to replenish the fund. Trustee Zuckerman suggested that we include in the law that any failure to replenish the suspension itself shall be instantly deemed an incomplete application or shall be deemed the act of the applicant to fail to go forward because isn't it true that the time clock does not run if the applicant fails to go forward. Attorney Powell stated that if they abandon the application, it would stop and if the wanted to re-start it, they would have to submit a new application and start all over which would really be an incentive to replenish the fund. Trustee Pellino stated that his main concern is that the Village is covered. In the event we reach a point of having to enforce this and we deem an application is incomplete for non-replenishment of the escrow account, does that give the applicant fuel to initiate a court proceeding against the Village and can we defend this action? Attorney Powell answered that it may be defendable, but did not know how a court would look at it. Trustee Pellino questioned any other jurisdictions professional fees laws have ever been challenged. Attorney Powell replied that he did not know of any. 17 Trustee Pellino stated that he feels that this is a good law and perhaps we should 00" possibly leave it the way it is and amend our application requirements to cross reference this law and make it applicable during the entire application phase. If we can do that, then I have no problem with the law. Mayor Cresenzi questioned if Trustee Pellino had a problem with Attorney Powell putting it in the law. Trustee Pellino stated that it seems that the application regulation that we have should cross reference it so perhaps we should do both. Attorney Powell questioned if the Board wanted another local law drawn up. Trustee Pellino stated that the procedure process that is followed for filing an application with the Village should be referencing this law or applicable laws for the applicant to adhere to and that failure to adhere to those local laws shall be grounds to deem the application incomplete or abandoned at any time. If we reference that in the application procedural process and also in this law, that would be sufficient. Attorney Powell stated that the application forms in the Building Department would have to be revised as well. On Motion made by Trustee Solomon, seconded by Trustee Zuckerman, the public hearing was closed at 7:05 p.m. TRUSTEE DALY VOTING AYE TRUSTEE PELLINO VOTING AYE TRUSTEE SOLOMON VOTING AYE TRUSTEE ZUCKERMAN VOTING AYE MAYOR CRESENZI VOTING AYE ADJOURNMENT There being no further discussion, the meeting was adjourned at 7:10 p.m. TRUSTEE DALY VOTING AYE TRUSTEE PELLINO VOTING AYE TRUSTEE SOLOMON VOTING AYE TRUSTEE ZUCKERMAN VOTING AYE MAYOR CRESENZI VOTING AYE Respectfully submitted, IIJ " JZ Elizabeth Bottali Secretary to the Village Board 18