2016.12.12 Applicant Architect Memo to FP Clark622 STILES AVENUE MAMARONECK NEW YORK 10543 TEL 914 698 8207 FAX 914 698 8208
chnarch@yahoo.com
M E M O R A N D U M
DATE: December 12, 2016
FROM: Clark Neuringer, R.A.; NCARB
TO: Marilyn Timpone Mohamed, AICP
FPC Assoc., Inc.
RE: 259 North Ridge Street /
Lazz Development
As per our recent conversation of last week, you requested that we update our analysis of the
proposed development as a result of the substantial modification that we have made to our
original proposal. You requested that we provide as much quantifiable analysis as possible
and we have worked with various consultants to obtain information in order to do so.
We have also, as you requested, not limit our analysis to comparing the 8 unit versus reduced
5 unit scheme, but rather, provide you with data on a stand-alone basis. We have endeavored
to do so and have included some significant data with respect to Village of Rye Brook Code
requirements and constraints and have noted significant reductions in what is permitted /
allowed compared to what is being proposed (5 unit scheme). I trust this information and data
will be helpful to you regarding your preparation of relevant analysis of our reduced proposal.
Please note the following:
Traffic Generation:
Original traffic generation estimates, 8 unit proposal –
AM Peak Hour: In – 1 Out – 3 Total – 4
PM Peak Hour: In – 3 Out – 2 Total – 5
Current traffic generation estimates, 5 unit proposal –
AM Peak Hour: In – 1 Out – 2 Total – 3
PM Peak Hour: In – 2 Out – 1 Total – 3
Reductions from 8 unit to 5 unit proposal:
AM Peak Hour: 25% less
PM Peak Hour: 40% less
(Source: Ralph G. Mastromonaco, P.E., P.C. 05/04/16 and 12/06/16)
MEMORANDUM
December 12, 2016
Page 2
School Children:
Original estimate, based on proposed 8 unit development – 3 to 7 public school students (pss)
Current estimate, based on proposed 5 unit development – 2.6 to 5 pss
Reductions from 8 unit to 5 unit proposal: 13% to 28% less
(Source: Richard Hyman , 03/16/16 and 12/06/16)
Building Coverage of Site:
Area of proposed building footprint (5 units): 3,152 s.f
Area of Site, Lot 1: 60,417 s.f
Permitted coverage, R15 Zone District: 16% or 9,666 s.f.
Proposed coverage: 5.2% or 3,152 s.f
Reduction from permitted to proposed: 67%
Impervious Coverage:
Area of Site, Lot 1: 60,417 s.f.
Permitted Maximum Impervious Coverage: 15,751 s.f.
Proposed Impervious Coverage (5 unit scheme) 11,681 s.f.
Reduction from permitted to proposed: 25.8%
Permitted Maximum Impervious Coverage,
Front Yard, R15 Zone District: 35%
Proposed Maximum Impervious Coverage,
Front Yard, R15 Zone District: 24%
Reduction from permitted to proposed: 31.7%
Maximum Gross Floor Area:
Area of Site, Lot 1: 60,417 s.f.
R15 Zone District, Permitted GFA: 8,435 s.f.
Proposed GFA (5 unit scheme) 6,304 s.f.
Reduction from permitted to proposed: 25.2%
We should note that, in response to concerns raised by the BOT, there have been notable
reductions made comparing our original development proposal and our modified scheme.
Some key reduction aspects are:
1- Total number of residential units reduced 37%, from 8 to 5 attached homes.
2- Number of buildings reduced 50% from 2 buildings to 1 building.
3- Number of parking spaces reduced 41% from 22 to 14 spaces.
4- Linear footage of retaining walls reduced 44%
5- Linear footage of driveway reduced 73%
MEMORANDUM
December 12, 2016
Page 3
Regarding other site development aspects related to your continuing reviews, we refer you to
our June 29, 2016 memo to the Planning Board in which we commented on many issues
related to the ongoing SEQRA review. Although the proposed site development plan in
question at the time represented two structures of 4 units each, many of the items we
commented on then are still relevant regarding our current modified proposal of one structure
of 5 units. Some of those items we addressed that will not significantly change are:
1- Rock removal: As previously stated and based on current information, we do not have
intention of removing significant rock from the site.
2- Wetlands: We will be appearing in front of the Planning Board to further review and
discuss issues related to the wetland buffer and steep slopes. There will be no activity
at all within designated and mapped wetlands.
3- Site Lighting: We have previously addressed concerns raised and are specifying a
residential type light fixture with downward light distribution and with the heads
mounted on shorter poles.
4- Construction: We previously stated that under no circumstances will North Ridge
Street be utilized for any aspect of construction staging. We further described
sequence of operations with respect to delivery and installation of the off-site pre-
fabricated modular units and their erection upon delivery to the site. Such activities will
take place completely on-site. The nature of the proposed modified 5 unit development
proposal is such that the parking area will provide a perfect staging and construction
area for the location of the crane and related equipment.
5- Energy: We previously noted that the proposed structure will be constructed in
conformance with energy code requirements of NYS; will be equipped with state of the
art highly efficient gas fired condensing boiler(s); and will use Energy Star equipment /
appliances.
Respectfully,
Clark Neuringer, R.A.; NCARB
for Lazz Development, LLZ
cc: Mayor and Board of Trustees
Christopher Bradbury
Michael Izzo
Michael Nowak
Jennifer Gray, Esq.
Steve Feinstein, Esq.
Ralph Mastromonaco, P.E.
Lou Larizza