Loading...
08 - Visual Resources and Community CharacterDEIS 8-1 9/12/2018 Chapter 8: Visual Resources and Community Character 8.1. INTRODUCTION This Chapter analyzes the potential for the Proposed Project to impact the character of the community surrounding the Project Site and the potential for the Proposed Project to create a significant adverse visual impact. As such, these analyses address the potential for the Proposed Action to have one or more significant adverse environmental impacts that were identified in the Lead Agency’s Positive Declaration (see Appendix A-5). As demonstrated by the before and after views from representative vantage points surrounding the Project Site, the appearance of the Site will change with the implementation of the Proposed Project. The potential significance of the changes in visibility as a result of the Proposed Project is evaluated using the thresholds established by the New York State Department of Conservation (NYSDEC), specifically that “mere visibility, even startling visibility of a project proposal, should not be a threshold for decision making. Instead, a project, by virtue of its visibility, must clearly interfere with or reduce the public’s enjoyment and/or appreciation of the appearance of an inventoried resource.”1 The Project Site is dominated by a large-footprint (approximately 94,600 square feet [sf]) three-story white concrete office building and a 5.3-acre surface parking lot. Areas of mature vegetation along the northern and eastern periphery buffer its visibility from adjacent properties. The western portion of the Site is dominated by a large wooded area, containing a wetland and a stream, providing a visual buffer between the interior of the Project Site and the residential neighborhood to the west. The Proposed Project would transform the on-Site visual character from one dominated by a large surface parking area and rectangular three-story office building to a landscaped campus featuring several uses, building sizes, and building types. The western portion of the developed area of the Site would feature two-story townhouse units, which would be similar to the character of The Arbors townhouses located to the west of the Project Site. The northern portion of the developed area of the Site would feature a three- and four-story Independent Living (IL) and Assisted Living (AL) building. The IL and AL building would be three stories closest to Arbor Drive and rising to four stories at approximately 290 feet from Arbor Drive. Buildings of similar height to the Proposed Project within the Village of Rye Brook (the “Village”) include The Atria, Rye Brook, a three- and four-story IL building, and the hotel wings of the Hilton Westchester and Doral Arrowwood. While the Proposed Project would reduce the overall amount of impervious coverage on the Site, the redistribution of the pervious and impervious area within the Site would have the most dramatic effect on the Site’s visual character. The Proposed Project would create areas of landscaping and natural cover interspersed with buildings and driveways. This would be in contrast to the existing condition on the Site that prominently features an approximately 215,000-sf office building and 5.3 acres of surface parking lot. The Proposed Project would utilize façade materials 1 “Assessing and Mitigating Visual Impacts.” DEP-00-2 900 King Street Redevelopment 9/12/2018 8-2 DEIS such as stone, clapboard, and brick and would include architectural features such as gabled roofs and dormers commonly seen on single-family homes within the Village. The Proposed Project would maintain the existing extensive vegetative buffer around the Site’s perimeter. As a result, the interior of the Project Site would be minimally visible from locations off-Site, with the exception of a short area along Arbor Drive. With the Proposed Project, the view into the Site from Arbor Drive would feature residential buildings of similar scale, style and character as found on adjacent properties, as opposed to the existing view of the office building and surface parking lot. The proposed residential buildings would be barely visible from North Ridge Street or King Street and would be minimally visible from the Hutchinson River Parkway (the “Parkway”). Six clusters (“neighborhoods”) of generally similar land uses and characteristics were identified within a ½-mile of the Project Site. The primary land use in five of the six neighborhoods is residential. One neighborhood—the Glenville Town Center Neighborhood—serves as a commercial center for some of the residential neighborhoods. One of the five residential neighborhoods—The Arbors—is a multifamily residential neighborhood. The most predominant house type within the residential neighborhoods are two-story ranch homes with yards and driveways; although various uses and building types, including three public schools, a private pre-school, municipal office buildings, commercial/office and retail buildings, and a nursing home, are also located within ½-mile of the Project Site. Based on the following analysis, it is the Applicant’s opinion that the Proposed Project would not result in significant adverse impacts to the visual resources and community character. 8.2. EXISTING CONDITIONS This section describes current views of the Project Site from locations within and adjacent to the Project Site. At present, the Project Site is dominated by a large-footprint (approximately 94,600 sf) three-story white concrete office building and a 5.3-acre surface parking lot. Areas of mature vegetation along the northern and eastern periphery buffer its visibility from adjacent properties. The western portion of the Site is dominated by a large wooded area, containing a wetland and a stream, providing a visual buffer between the interior of the Project Site and the residential neighborhood to the west. 8.2.1. PROJECT SITE The sections below describe the existing visual resources of the Project Site and provide representative photographs of the Site from the locations shown in Figure 8-1. 8.2.1.1. Location A: Wetland/Vegetative Buffer along the Project Site’s Western Property Line Location A presents the view of the Project Site from the western border toward the Site’s interior (see Figure 8-1). The view from this location (see Figure 8-2) is of tall, lush trees (deciduous and coniferous) and shrubbery that have grown on all sides of a raised berm such that areas to the east (i.e., the interior of the Project Site) are not visible A small portion of maintained lawn on the Project Site, seen in the foreground, is used by residents of the adjacent townhouses. The existing three-story building on the Project Site is thoroughly screened by dense vegetation. Chapter 8: Visual Resources and Community Character DEIS 8-3 9/12/2018 8.2.1.2. Location B: Existing Building from Arbor Drive looking East Location B presents the view from Arbor Drive at the Site’s service driveway looking northeast toward the existing on-Site office building. Looking north towards the Project Site from this location, the view of the interior of the Project Site and the existing building provides a stark contrast between the expansive lawn and the monolithic, white office building (see Figure 8-2). The building’s deep setback from Arbor Drive creates an expansive lawn. Beyond the building and parking lot (visible behind the building), mature trees have grown around the perimeter of the Site. 8.2.1.3. Location C: Existing Building from Arbor Drive looking West Location C presents the view from Arbor Drive between the main Site and service driveways facing northwest. Looking west towards the Project Site, the stark contrast between the lawn and the existing office building dominates the view (see Figure 8-3). A few small trees and bushes adjacent to the existing building soften the appearance of the existing concrete and glass structure; however, the span of the building beyond these trees continues to dominate the views of the Project Site. Due to a change in site grading, the service driveway to the existing building, which is located at a lower elevation than the lawn, is not visible. Beyond the service driveway, the yard slopes upward towards the vegetated section of the Site described for Location A. 8.2.1.4. Location D: Front of Existing Building from Parking Lot Location D is located on the interior of the Project Site, from the existing parking lot facing west toward the existing office building. Looking west towards the existing building, the foreground is dominated by an expansive parking lot (see Figure 8-3). Looking westward across the flat parking lot, the existing building dominates the landscape and its fascia, which extends several feet above the top floor adds height to the structure making it appear taller than its three stories. 8.2.1.5. Location E: Existing Parking Lot Location E presents the view facing west into the Project Site directly east of the main Site driveway. This viewpoint shows the expansive and underutilized parking lot, which runs parallel to the existing building frontage at this location (see Figure 8-4). As shown in Figure 8-5, the parking lot occupies more than twice as much space as the office building. Several tall light poles are located within the parking lot. A single planted median running parallel to the building and two planted islands to the east of the median toward the interior of the parking lot provide the only green space in the parking lot and provide little to no shading. 8.2.1.6. Location F: Existing Parking Lot Location F presents a similar view as Location E, but from further within the interior of the Project Site. A few tall lamp poles rise from the parking lot and contain large-format spotlights (see Figure 8-4). A planted median creates a small visual break in the vast parking lot. In the background, a thick and mature wooded area at the northern perimeter of the parking lot blocks views beyond the bounds of the Project Site. 900 King Street Redevelopment 9/12/2018 8-4 DEIS 8.2.1.7. Location G: Project Site’s Eastern Property Line Location G presents the view of the Project Site facing northeast from approximately 140 feet east of the main Site driveway. This viewpoint shows the dense vegetative buffer at the Project Site’s eastern property line, which blocks views to the exterior of the Project Site (see Figure 8-6). This vegetative barrier is composed of young and mature coniferous and deciduous trees. The cell tower located on the Village Hall, Rye Brook Police Department (RBPD), and Rye Brook Fire Department (RBFD) property to the east of the Project Site is visible above the tops of the trees. 8.2.1.8. Location H: Vegetative Buffer Along the Project Site’s Northern Property Line Location H is the northernmost vantage point, located at the northern corner of the Project Site (see Figure 8-1). Looking southwestward, the view runs parallel to a thick vegetative barrier composed of mature and tall trees along the Project Site’s western property line (see Figure 8-6). North of the vegetative barrier and the Project Site’s northern property line is the Parkway, which cannot be seen through the thick vegetative barrier from this location or other locations along the western property line. Along the eastern edge of the Project Site is an area of maintained lawn, which dominates the view from this vantage point. In the background, the parking lot is dotted with young and almost bare trees. 8.2.1.9. Location I: Existing Parking Lot and Building Location I presents the view from the concrete sidewalk located approximately 500 feet east of the western property line toward the interior of the Project Site. This viewpoint is a birds-eye view of the existing parking lot. There is a portion of the parking lot that is at the same elevation as this vantage point to the north of the building, and stairs were installed for people to walk down to the lower level. The parking lot dominates the view in both the foreground and the background (see Figure 8-7). Due to their distance from this vantage point, the medians described in Locations E and F are barely visible amid the parking lot. In the foreground, a concrete sidewalk provides a walking path through the lawn, however, runoff from the sidewalk has caused pooling in the lawn. 8.2.2. SURROUNDING AREAS This section describes the current visibility of the Project Site from off-Site vantage points, as required by the approved Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) Scoping Document (see Appendix A-1 and Figure 8-8). 8.2.2.1. Vantage Point 1: Lawn Area on the Project Site between The Arbors Residences and the Wetland/Wooded Area Vantage point 1 presents the east-facing view toward the Project Site from its westernmost boundary. This viewpoint was chosen to represent the maximum potential view of the Proposed Project from The Arbors. Specifically, this vantage point was chosen due to its proximity to an area where the vegetation separating the Project Site and The Arbors is sparse, as the bushes have not reached the bottom branches of the trees, and therefore Chapter 8: Visual Resources and Community Character DEIS 8-5 9/12/2018 the roofline of the existing building is visible in the leaf-off condition (see Figure 8-9). Looking towards the Project Site from the rear of the northernmost residences of The Arbors, which directly abut, and in some cases encroach upon the Project Site, the view of the Project Site and the existing three-story building is screened by dense vegetation in the leaf-on condition. Within the vegetation is a raised berm. Tall, lush trees (deciduous and coniferous) and shrubbery have grown on all sides of the berm obscuring the view from the west to the interior of the Project Site. In an area where the existing building is visible from the west, the intervening distance and the topography significantly minimize its visibility. 8.2.2.2. Vantage Point 2: King Street, South of Arbor Drive and North of the High School driveway Vantage point 2 is located on King Street, south of Arbor Drive and north of the high school driveway. Looking northwest towards the Project Site, the view of the interior of the Project Site and the existing building is substantially screened by existing on- and off-Site vegetation (see Figure 8-10) in the leaf- off condition and almost entirely screened in the leaf-on condition. The expansive open space of Harkness Park dominates the view. The mature oak and maple trees located between the park and the Project Site partially screen views of the existing Site building in the leaf-off condition and substantially so during the leaf-on condition. 8.2.2.3. Vantage Point 3: Harkness Park Vantage point 3 is located southeast of the Project Site within Harkness Park. From within Harkness Park, which is at a lower elevation than the Project Site, the existing on-Site building is visible through the on-Site vegetation (see Figure 8-11). The foreground is dominated by Arbor Drive, the open space along that road’s frontage, and the existing Site trees. In the background the three-story office building is clearly visible through the trees in the leaf-off condition and minimally visible in the leaf-on condition. Between this vantage point and the Project Site the land elevation rises from Arbor Drive and then falls again to the north obscuring the view of the existing parking lot. 8.2.2.4. Vantage Point 4a: Arbor Drive between the Main Site and Service Driveways to 900 King Street looking West Vantage point 4a is located along Arbor Drive, just east of the current main Site driveway. From this location, facing northwest the interior of the Project Site is plainly visible from Arbor Drive, a private road serving The Arbors and the Project Site (see Figure 8-12). The manicured lawn, along with low-height landscaping and small, ornamental trees, frames the view of the building, which otherwise dominates this view with its stark and monolithic architecture. 8.2.2.5. Vantage Point 4b: Arbor Drive between the Main Site and Service Driveways to 900 King Street looking North Vantage point 4b is located along Arbor Drive, just west of the current main Site driveway. Looking north directly up the existing driveway, the view is dominated by the 5.3-acre surface parking lot to the right and the existing office building to the left (see Figure 8-13). The parking lot is partially 900 King Street Redevelopment 9/12/2018 8-6 DEIS screened by short, ornamental trees in the foreground. The interior of the parking lot contains minimal landscaping to divide the parking rows and features tall light poles throughout. The existing building features tall fascia panels along its entire frontage, extending from the top of its roof. From this vantage point, the uniformity of the building’s architecture, both in terms of shape and façade, is evident. 8.2.2.6. Vantage Point 5: King Street in the Vicinity of the Driveway to Village Hall, RBPD, and RBFD Vantage point 5 is located along King Street, just south of the driveway to the Village Hall, RBPD, and RBFD. This vantage point was chosen as the only location where potential visibility of the interior of the Project Site would not be blocked by the Village Hall, RBPD, and RBFD or the thick vegetation along the Site’s King Street frontage. The existing building on the Project Site is visible in the background to the left of the Village Hall, RBPD, and RBFD in the leaf-off condition (see Figure 8-14); however, in the leaf-on condition, the building would be blocked by existing vegetation. In the foreground, the sloped, grassy area along King Street dominates the view and provides a natural barrier to views of the Project Site. 8.2.2.7. Vantage Point 6: North Ridge Street at Exit 27S of the Hutchinson River Parkway Vantage point 6 is located along North Ridge Street, at the Exit 27S southbound interchange on the Parkway. This is the only location along North Ridge Street where there is a break in the existing vegetation between North Ridge Street and the Parkway. Looking southwest in the direction of the Project Site, the view is dominated by the Parkway in the foreground (see Figure 8-15). In the background, between the Parkway and the interior of the Project Site is a thick band of deciduous and coniferous trees. These mature trees nearly completely block the view of the Site’s buildings; however, the top story of the existing building is somewhat visible in the leaf-off condition. To the left of the view, one of the houses along King Street, north of the firehouse, is also visible. 8.2.2.8. Vantage Point 7: Village Hall, RBPD, and RBFD Parking Lot Vantage point 7 is located east of the Project Site within the Village Hall, RBPD, and RBFD parking lot, along a similar sight path to the Project Site as vantage point 5, but at a slightly higher elevation. Looking towards the existing building on the Project Site, the view is dominated by the RBPD parking lot, and young trees, grass, and landscaping at the Village Hall, RBPD, and RBFD (see Figure 8-16). In the background, the entire width of the existing office building is plainly visible in the leaf-off condition. In the leaf-on condition, views of the Project Site are obscured by vegetation, though the roofline of the existing building is slightly visible above the tree branches. In both conditions, the intervening distance between this vantage point and the Project Site significantly minimizes the perceived visibility of the existing building. Chapter 8: Visual Resources and Community Character DEIS 8-7 9/12/2018 8.2.2.9. Vantage Point 8a: Ivy Hill Lane between Arbor Drive and the First Guest Parking Area Vantage point 8a is located along Ivy Hill Lane at the southern corner of the Project Site, just to the east of a guest parking lot in The Arbors. In both the leaf-off and leaf-on conditions, views of the Project Site are significantly obstructed by a thick wooded area grown on and around a vegetated berm located between The Arbors and the Project Site (see Figure 8-17). A small part of the existing building is barely visible through a small clearing in the leaves. However, the view of the Project Site and the existing building from this vantage point are largely unnoticeable. 8.2.2.10. Vantage Point 8b: Ivy Hill Lane between Arbor Drive and the First Guest Parking Area, Approximately 10 feet west of Vantage Point 8a Vantage point 8b is located approximately 10 feet west of vantage point 8a at the eastern corner of a guest parking lot in The Arbors (see Figure 8-18). Similar to vantage point 8a, views of the Project Site are obstructed by a dense vegetated berm. A portion of the existing building’s upper floor and fascia are visible through a clearing in the brush during leaf-off conditions; however, the building is not visible during the leaf-on conditions. Given the distance from this vantage point to the building and the intervening topography, the view is dominated by a sloping yard and the vegetative berm. 8.2.2.11. Vantage Point 8c: Southern Corner of the Project Site, Approximately 15 feet north of Vantage Point 8b Vantage point 8c is located just northwest of vantage point 8b. From this viewpoint, which is slightly higher than vantage points 8a and 8b, the top floor of the existing office building is slightly more visible as compared to vantage point 8a (see Figure 8-19). Similar to vantage point 8a, in the leaf-off condition, the view of the office building is obstructed by brush and the vegetative berm; however a greater length of the building can be seen. 8.2.2.12. Vantage Point 9a: King Street northbound Exit Ramp of the Hutchinson River Parkway Vantage point 9a is located on northbound side of the Parkway where the exit lane for King Street begins (see Figure 8-20). Looking southeast, the land adjacent to the Parkway slopes downward to the south until it meets the edge of the on-Site parking lot. The land adjacent to the Parkway is an approximately 15-foot-wide grassy area that runs parallel to the Parkway. Beyond 15 feet, is a wooded area ranging from 20- to 50-feet wide planted with large and small deciduous and coniferous trees. During leaf-off conditions, the approximately 5.3-acre on-Site parking lot and the existing three-story building are visible through the trees. 8.2.2.13. Vantage Point 9b: King Street northbound Exit Ramp of the Hutchinson River Parkway, Approximately 100 feet north of Vantage Point 9a Vantage point 9b is located approximately 100 feet east of vantage point 9a (see Figure 8-21).From this vantage point, a wooded landscape with small and large trees is visible in the foreground as is a wetland area with less dense wooded vegetation. Beyond the trees, the Site’s expansive surface parking lot 900 King Street Redevelopment 9/12/2018 8-8 DEIS dominates the view. The existing on-Site office building is visible on the far-right side and the cell tower on the Village Hall, RBPD, and RBFD property is visible on the left side. 8.2.3. VISUAL AND ARCHITECTURAL CHARACTER WITHIN ½-MILE OF PROJECT SITE Six clusters (“neighborhoods”) of generally similar land uses and characteristics were identified within a ½-mile of the Project Site (see Figure 8-22). The neighborhoods were named according to the primary road(s) in the neighborhood and their respective architectural and visual characteristics are described below. While the neighborhoods identified for this study do not encompass every parcel within ½-mile of the Project Site, they are representative of the range of building types and uses within this area. The primary land use in five of the six neighborhoods is residential. One neighborhood—the Glenville Town Center Neighborhood (see Section 8.2.3.4)—serves as a commercial center for some of the residential neighborhoods. One of the five residential neighborhoods—The Arbors—is a multifamily residential neighborhood (see Section 8.2.3.2). The most predominant house type within all the residential neighborhoods are two-story ranch homes with yards and driveways. 8.2.3.1. Fairlawn Parkway Neighborhood The Fairlawn Parkway Neighborhood generally includes those homes within ½-mile of the Project Site, northwest of the Parkway, on Fairlawn Parkway, Country Ridge Drive, Whipporwill Road, Boxwood Place/Holly Lane, and Country Ridge Drive (see Figure 8-22). The land uses in this neighborhood are residential with the exception of The Ridge Street Country School, Inc., a preschool located in a single-family house, and the Bruno M. Ponterio Ridge Street School, an elementary school within the Blind Brook–Rye Union Free School District (BBRUFSD). The residential land uses in this neighborhood are single-family, two-story, primarily ranch-style homes. Some of the homes have been updated (as shown in the background of Figure 8-23), however, a majority still have the original façade (as shown in the foreground of Figure 8-23). Older façades typically include a mix of brick or concrete on one portion of the home, and wooden shingles or clapboard on another. All homes were setback from the road, creating large, generally well-maintained front yards and driveways leading to attached garages. The similarities in house footprint shape and size, setbacks from the road, and presence of driveways in this neighborhood can be seen in Figures 8-5 and 8-24 where the grey outlines of the buildings are generally situated in the center of each lot (see Figure 8-24) and driveways lead to every home (see Figure 8-5). Roadways are wide, easily accommodating two-way traffic and on-street parking and are not striped, except on North Ridge Street. There are no sidewalks, except for the portion of North Ridge Street in front of Bruno M. Ponterio Ridge Street School. The streets are tree-lined. Chapter 8: Visual Resources and Community Character DEIS 8-9 9/12/2018 8.2.3.2. The Arbors Neighborhood The Arbors is a townhome community located on Arbor Drive, south of the Project Site. The townhomes are attached in groups ranging from three to four units (see Figure 8-25). The groups of townhomes are separated by anywhere from 10 to 40 feet of maintained yard. Compared to the Fairlawn Neighborhood, these townhomes take up more of the lot area. Each grouping varies in size and shape and the townhomes range from one to two stories tall. The roofs are dark-brown gabled roofs, however, some roofs extend to first floor elevations creating the visual of a saltbox roof. The height of the roofs varies within each grouping, creating visual separation between the units. All townhomes are the same caramel-brown color with beige trim. Front doorways are recessed into the structure providing a sense of privacy to the tenant. Private and narrow roadways wind between clusters of townhomes. Roadways are not striped and are often lined with reserved parking spaces for the associated townhomes. As shown in Figure 8-5, there is a small amount of open space within the built out portion of the development in relation to the amount of built space; most open space is in the form of parking bump-outs, narrow front yards between the townhome and parking, or narrow side yards between townhouse groupings. Other areas of open space are provided along the western and southern borders of the property, providing a buffer between The Arbors and adjacent neighborhoods. Trees and bushes have been planted between the roads and the townhomes, space permitted. The narrow roads and dense clusters of townhomes give the feeling of an enclosed, private community. Overall, The Arbors has building coverage of 15.8 percent; if you exclude the area underlying Arbor Drive, the building coverage is 16.65 percent.2 8.2.3.3. Hillandale Road Neighborhood The Hillandale Road Neighborhood is located south of the Project Site and includes Hillandale Road, Loch Lane, Little Kings Lane, and the traffic circle that connects Hillandale Road to Loch Lane. These roads are local streets that branch off of the King Street arterial roadway, creating a curvilinear loop pattern in the road network that is typical of older suburbs. The single-family residential homes that line the streets are significantly larger than the single- family homes on Glenville Street (see Section 8.2.3.5) or on Bishop Drive (see Section 8.3.4.6) as can be seen by the building footprints shown in Figure 8-24. Many homes appear to be relatively new construction and tend to be larger than homes built earlier (see Figure 8-26) and/or on homes on smaller lot sizes like the Fairlawn Parkway Neighborhood (see Figure 8-24). Hillandale Road Neighborhood homes are significantly setback from the street, creating a large front yard and the need for a long driveway and there is a greater ratio of open space to built space as compared to other neighborhoods within a ½-mile of the Project Site (see Figure 8-5). The lots’ boundaries are often identified with large, old-growth deciduous trees such that neighboring homes are often not visible from one another. 2 Source: Westchester County GIS. 900 King Street Redevelopment 9/12/2018 8-10 DEIS There is no typical style of home in this community, however all have attached two- to three-car garages. 8.2.3.4. Glenville Town Center Glenville, a census-designated place within the Town of Greenwich, Connecticut, is located east of the Project Site, approximately ½-mile east of King Street. The Glenville town center has a mix of commercial (retail and office) and single-family and multifamily residential development within walking distance from each other. This mix of land uses contrasts with the surrounding neighborhoods, both in the Town of Greenwich and the Village, which are primarily single-family residential. The town center is an area of relatively dense commercial development along the north side of Glenville Street where the road intersects with Glenville Road and Pemberwick Road (see Figure 8-27). On the west side of the retail strip is a small shopping center with a grocery store, bank, and post office. Retail land uses continue eastward from the shopping center along the north side of Glenville Street. On the south side of Glenville Street on either side of Byram River, is a mix of open parkland, municipal services (Glenville Fire Department), refurbished brick buildings filled with commercial users, and two townhouse communities (see Figure 8-28). The commercial users in the refurbished brick buildings are accessible to the residents of one townhome community shown in Figure 8-28 by way of a footbridge over the Byram River. The irregular road network with streets intersecting Glenville Street at different angles and intersections makes car movement seem disorganized. Many old-growth trees and sidewalks are located throughout the town center; however, large stretches of parking lots located in front of commercial buildings between the building and street, show that the car is still the favored mode of transportation in the dense commercial center. 8.2.3.5. Glen Ridge Road Neighborhood The Glen Ridge Road neighborhood includes homes on Glen Ridge Road and ancillary streets such as Shady Lane and Douglas Drive within Greenwich, Connecticut. The neighborhood is predominantly single-family residential (see Figure 8-29). The homes on and along Glen Ridge Road appear to have been be built more recently than those in the Fairlawn Parkway neighborhood. The ranch homes on and around Glen Ridge Road are built with newer building materials and architectural details as can be seen with the siding. The neighborhood includes ranch-style homes and two-story Greek revival- and country-style homes with cross-gabled roofs. The streets are curvilinear and buildings have more varied setbacks from the road as compared to those on Fairlawn Parkway. 8.2.3.6. Pemberwick Road and Bishop Drive Neighborhood The Pemberwick Road and Bishop Drive neighborhood within Greenwich, Connecticut is bounded by Glenville street to the north, King Street to the west, Pemberwick Road to the east, and Bishop Drive South to the south and includes the homes on the north and south side of Glenville street. The street network has a curvilinear pattern popular in the 1970s often referred to as “loops and lollipops”; the loops are roads like Bishop Drive North and Chapter 8: Visual Resources and Community Character DEIS 8-11 9/12/2018 Bishop Drive South and the lollipops are short, dead-end streets. This neighborhood is similar to the Glen Ridge Road neighborhood in terms of predominant use and different styles of houses, including ranches (both split-level ranches and raised ranches), Cape Cod, and cottage-style homes; however, the houses and lots in the Pemberwick Road and Bishop Drive neighborhood are smaller and closer together (see Figure 8-30). For example, the backyard of one house can be seen from looking at the front yard of another house on an adjacent lot. There are fewer large trees providing visual barriers between the homes and onlookers or neighboring homes than in the Fairlawn and Glen Ridge Road neighborhoods. 8.2.4. OTHER DEVELOPMENTS IN THE VILLAGE In the Applicant’s opinion, there are several other buildings and developments that share certain characteristics with the Proposed Project, including a height of at least four stories. As discussed below, most of these taller buildings are shielded from public rights-of-way and offer limited views from any off-Site vantage point. The Atria, Rye Brook, located to the north of the Project Site along King Street is the most similar to the Proposed Project. As shown in Figure 8-31, The Atria, Rye Brook is a three- and four-story building that provides 168 units of IL facilities. The three-story portion of the structure fronts King Street with the four-story portion located behind it and up a slope; both portions of the building are visible from King Street. The Atria, Rye Brook sits on approximately 4.92 acres and contains approximately 134 parking spaces. The Doral Arrowwood Conference Center, a 473,000-sf conference resort located on Anderson Hill Road in northern Rye Brook, is a similar residential-type facility containing buildings in excess of four stories. Specifically, the hotel component of the conference center is four and five stories (see Figure 8-32). As with the Proposed Project, the conference center and hotel are barely visible from the public right-of-way. With respect to building coverage, the Doral Arrowwood Conference Center has approximately 10.07 percent building coverage. This relatively low percentage of building coverage is due to the fact that the majority of the Site’s acreage is devoted to a golf course. Excluding the areas of the golf course, the Doral Arrowwood Conference Center has approximately 22.34 percent building coverage.3 The Hilton Westchester, located on Westchester Avenue, directly abuts a single-family neighborhood, and contains a four-story hotel component that is within approximately 250- feet of the neighboring single-family homes (see Figure 8-32). As with Doral Arrowwood Conference Center and the Proposed Project, views of these hotel wings are almost completely screened from Westchester Avenue as a result of an intervening wooded area. The Hilton Westchester has approximately 10.69 percent building coverage, but owing to its extensive surface parking lots, has approximately 30.67 percent total impervious coverage.4 The building located at 800 Westchester Avenue is a commercial office facility in the Village containing buildings in excess of four stories (see Figure 8-33). 800 Westchester Avenue is larger than the Proposed Project and includes seven stories on top of a parking garage (560,000 sf). The office building at 800 Westchester Avenue is 3 Source: Westchester County GIS. 4 Source: Westchester County GIS. 900 King Street Redevelopment 9/12/2018 8-12 DEIS partly screened by vegetation from Westchester Avenue and Bowman Avenue, however, the stark white concrete mass is distinctly visible through the vegetation. The Proposed Project would be architecturally varied and designed to be more consistent with neighboring residential architecture. This property encompasses several tax parcels and has a combined building coverage of approximately 12.15 percent. 8.3. POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT 8.3.1. PROPOSED ON-SITE VISUAL CHARACTER As discussed above, the Proposed Project would transform the on-Site visual character from one dominated by a large surface parking area and rectangular three-story office building to a landscaped campus featuring several uses, building sizes, and building types (see Appendix A-4, the full size site plans, contains detailed sections, elevations, and layouts of the Project’s proposed buildings). Currently, the Site’s building and parking lot are contiguous masses of impervious surface. However, the Proposed Project would create areas of landscaping and natural cover interspersed with buildings and driveways. In the Applicant’s opinion, this would create a more human scale with the development of the Proposed Project. The extensive vegetative buffer around the Site’s perimeter would be largely maintained. As a result, the interior of the Project Site would be largely shielded from view from off-Site locations during the leaf-on condition, and visible through bare wooded vegetation in the leaf-off condition. The most prominent view of the interior of the Project Site would be from a short area along Arbor Drive, as described in Section 8.3.2. These vegetated perimeter buffers would also restrict most views out from the interior of the Project Site. The Proposed Project would preserve approximately 10.77 acres (469,141 sf), or 60.6 percent, of the Site as open space, an increase of 35,558 sf from the existing condition (see Table 8-1). Of that space, at least 2.7 acres could be considered parks and recreational space, as discussed in Chapter 10, “Community Facilities.” The Proposed Project would include approximately 445,000 sf of built space and, as such, there would be slightly more open space than built space, however, the ratio of open space is almost 1:1. However, in the Applicant’s opinion, the increase in open space is a more important measure of a Site’s physical and visual character than the ratio of open space to building gsf, especially given that the height of the proposed buildings is consistent with the recommendations of the Comprehensive Plan and the off-Site impacts to the traffic and roadway network would be significantly less than the existing condition. Table 8-1 Open Space on the Project Site Open Space Building gsf Ratio of Open Space to gsf Area Percent of Site Current Condition 448,908 58.0% 215,000 2:1 Proposed Condition 484,466 62.6% 445,000 1:1 The IL building would be the most prominent on-Site structure when viewed from Arbor Drive. The southeastern corner of the IL building would be approximately 115 feet from Arbor Drive. As previously described, this portion of the building would be three stories and would feature a gabled roof. These three-story wings, placed symmetrically along the main building’s east–west axis, break down the perceived effective length of the Chapter 8: Visual Resources and Community Character DEIS 8-13 9/12/2018 building. The height of the building, pursuant to the Planned Unit Development (PUD) zoning regulations, is 44.75 feet, which is in keeping with the Proposed Zoning and the recommendations of the Comprehensive Plan. The height from the ground level to the top of the roof of the three-story section of the building is 33 feet 10 inches and to the top of the roof of the four-story section is 43 feet. Architectural roof details, including fully pitched and false roofs, are proposed for various sections of the building to add visual interest (see Figure 8-34). The façade of the IL building would be varied laterally and vertically and include clapboard, brick, and masonry siding. The northern portion of the IL building, beginning at the main entrance, is set back approximately 290 feet from Arbor Drive, or another 175 feet from the front façade, and rises to four stories. However, as shown in the photosimulations below, the perceived height of this portion of the building is significantly diminished owing its distance from Arbor Drive. Attached and to the northeast of the IL portion of the building, would be the four-story AL portion of the building. This portion of the building would not be visible from Arbor Drive or King Street, and would only be partially visible from the Parkway. The façade of this portion of the building would continue in the style of the IL portion of the building. The western portion of the developed area of the Site would feature two-story townhouse units that would mirror the character of the off-Site townhouses further to the west in The Arbors. Site plans, sections, elevations for each of the buildings are presented in Appendix A-4 and are described in more detail in Chapter 2, “Project Description.” Figure 8-35a and Figure 8-35b provide sections through the entire Site. As shown in Figure 8-35a, the area of the Project Site in which development is proposed is at a lower elevation than the properties to the east and west of the Site (i.e., Village Hall and The Arbors). As shown, the roof elevation of the four-story section of the proposed IL building would be at a similar elevation to the roof of the existing building mechanical equipment enclosures, and only slightly higher than the parapet the extends above the entire perimeter of the existing office building. In addition, this section illustrates the increase in distance from The Arbors to the proposed IL building, as compared to the existing office building. Figure 8-35b illustrates a section of the Proposed Project that runs north to south. As shown, the Project Site sits at a slightly higher elevation than Arbor Drive, to the south, and a considerably lower elevation than the Parkway, to the north, in this location. As shown in the section, and described in previous chapters, the Proposed Project would regrade the Site to create a more level building pad, which is required for the proposed senior living facility. The main Site driveway would be 26-feet wide and feature two-way traffic. The driveway would be landscaped along its edges with new trees and shrubs, and would feature a wide sidewalk along its entire length. The existing pedestrian path on the eastern side of the Project Site would be reconstructed and would be extended to the northern portion of the Project Site. 8.3.2. VISIBILITY OF PROJECT SITE As discussed above, the approved DEIS scoping outline requires that the visibility of the proposed buildings be evaluated from certain vantage points (see Appendix A-1 and Figure 8-8). This section presents the results of this analysis and describes the potential significance of the changes in visibility as a result of the Proposed Project using the 900 King Street Redevelopment 9/12/2018 8-14 DEIS thresholds established by the NYSDEC. Specifically, the NYSDEC guidance states that “mere visibility, even startling visibility of a project proposal, should not be a threshold for decision making. Instead, a project, by virtue of its visibility, must clearly interfere with or reduce the public’s enjoyment and/or appreciation of the appearance of an inventoried resource.”5 To evaluate the potential visual and aesthetic impacts of the Proposed Project, a three-dimensional computer model of the Proposed Project was created to represent the massing and general architecture of the proposed buildings. The model was then superimposed on photographs taken from each vantage point. The photo simulations do not show the elements of the proposed landscaping program. 8.3.2.1. Vantage Point 1: Lawn Area on the Project Site between The Arbors Residences and the Wetland/Wooded Area As with the existing condition, the townhouse buildings of the Proposed Project would be almost completely screened from this vantage point, with only a small portion of the upper floors and roof visible through a small clearing in the existing vegetation (see Figure 8-9). This change in visibility would be barely noticeable and would not result in a significant adverse visual impact. 8.3.2.2. Vantage Point 2: King Street, South of Arbor Drive and North of the High School driveway From this vantage point, the AL and IL building would be visible through the bare, wooded vegetation in the leaf-off condition (see Figure 8-10). The intervening distance, vegetation, and fencing around the tennis court block views of the proposed townhomes. The three-story portion of the IL and AL building that is visible from this vantage point would appear at a similar height as the existing building. Unlike the existing office building, the proposed building would include varied façade colors and materials and the building would not be a singular, rectangular shape, which together would create, in the Applicant’s opinion, a more visually appealing view. During the leaf-on condition, views of the buildings from this vantage point would be nearly completely screened by vegetation. 8.3.2.3. Vantage Point 3: Harkness Park From this vantage point, the proposed buildings would be clearly visible through the existing vegetation along Arbor Drive (see Figure 8-11). The eastern portion of the IL building would be closer to this vantage point than the existing on-Site building, but setback further than the existing parking lot. Looking down Arbor Drive, the proposed buildings would also be visible. Unlike the existing building that is one large rectangle with no variation in façade shape or texture, the three-story wings of the IL and AL building closest to Arbor Drive would be articulated both horizontally and vertically with respect to the roof line. In addition, the texture and color of the façade materials would be varied, adding to the visual interest of the building. Most of the building would be setback, away from Arbor Drive, somewhat minimizing the appearance of density. The proposed buildings are similar to the surrounding 5 “Assessing and Mitigating Visual Impacts.” DEP-00-2 Chapter 8: Visual Resources and Community Character DEIS 8-15 9/12/2018 single-family homes in their use of architectural details such as half-round (also known as half-moon) windows, cross-gabled roofing, and quality materials such as stone and brick. The building shape and architectural features of the proposed buildings give them a more human-scale character than the existing building and vast parking lot. While the Proposed Project would be plainly visible from this vantage point, in the Applicant’s opinion, the change in visibility would not result in a significant adverse visual impact as the buildings would be similar in height and style to surrounding buildings and would not interfere with the public’s enjoyment of any inventoried resource. During the leaf-on condition, much of the building would be obscured from the view. In addition, the proposed landscaping program would add intervening vegetation in between this vantage point and the proposed IL and AL building. 8.3.2.4. Vantage Point 4a: Arbor Drive between the Main Site and Service Driveways to 900 King Street From this vantage point, the view would be of the three-story portion of the IL building beyond the main Site driveway and the landscaped center island. The IL building would feature the architectural characteristics of residential construction within the Village. Various façade treatments, including stone, brick, and clapboard, would be used to break down the perceived scale of the building. Similarly, several roof treatments would be utilized, including gables, flat roofs with decorative railings, and dormers. The four-story portion of the IL building would be visible in the far-right side of the view. However, given the approximately 300-foot setback from this portion of the building and the vantage point, the perceived scale of the building would be similar to that of the three-story portion of the building. In the left of the view, three of the proposed townhouse buildings would be visible. Given the existing rise in topography in this area, which is largely being preserved in the Future with the Proposed Project (the “Build” condition), and the distance to the townhouse units, only the top of the townhouses would be visible. The view of the Project Site from this vantage point would be markedly different than the view in the current condition. Instead of a view dominated by a long, monolithic building, the Proposed Project would have the appearance of a residential-type campus oriented around a central entry court. The new buildings would be consistent with the residential character of the Village, both in terms of scale and architecture. Building materials and sizes would be varied and areas of landscaped lawn would be interspersed throughout the Site, resulting in a more human-scale development. Therefore, while the visibility of the Project Site from this vantage point would be different, the Proposed Project would not create a significant adverse visual impact in the Applicant’s opinion. 8.3.2.5. Vantage Point 4b: Arbor Drive between the Main Site and Service Driveways to 900 King Street From this vantage point, the three- and four-story portions of the IL building would be visible beyond the center planted island and main Site driveway. Similar to vantage point 4a, the architectural character of the IL building would evoke the traditional residential character of the Village. The various 900 King Street Redevelopment 9/12/2018 8-16 DEIS horizontal steps of the building and the varied roof styles would significantly break down the perceived mass of the building. The four-story portion of the IL building, setback approximately 290 feet from Arbor Drive, would be perceived as a similar scale as the three-story portion of the building that is closer to Arbor Drive. Similar to vantage point 4a, the view would be markedly different, with the proposed buildings perceived at a more human scale. Areas of landscaped lawn, along with varied façade and roof styles and the variation in building orientation, would break down the perceived massing of the Proposed Project when viewed from Arbor Drive. The new buildings would be consistent with the residential character of the Village, both in terms of scale and architecture. Therefore, while the visibility of the Project Site from this vantage point would be different, the Proposed Project would not create a significant adverse visual impact in the Applicant’s opinion. 8.3.2.6. Vantage Point 5: King Street in the Vicinity of the Driveway to the Village Hall, RBPD, and RBFD From this vantage point in the leaf-off condition, the top floor and the roof of the three-story portion of the IL building would be visible through the existing vegetation with the Proposed Project (see Figure 8-14). As discussed above, the roofline and the façade of the building would be consistent with the residential architectural character of the Village. This could be a change from the existing condition, where the existing office building is visible; however, this change would not create a significant adverse impact to visual resources or community character in the Applicant’s opinion. In the leaf-on condition, the proposed buildings would be almost completely obscured by vegetation. 8.3.2.7. Vantage Point 6: North Ridge Street at Exit 27S of the Hutchinson River Parkway From this vantage point, the proposed buildings would barely be visible through the existing off-Site vegetation in the leaf-off condition, similar to the existing condition (see Figure 8-15). The façade color was exaggerated in the figure for this alternative to illustrate where portions of the façade are potentially visible. This slight change in visibility would not create a significant adverse impact to visual resources or community character as it would not change the public’s perception of its place in the community or the visibility of an inventoried resource. 8.3.2.8. Vantage Point 7: Village Hall, RBPD, and RBFD Parking Lot From this vantage point, within the Village Hall, RBPD, and RBPD parking lot, a portion of the three-story section of the IL building and the four-story section of the AL building would be visible through the existing vegetation (see Figure 8-16). This is similar to the visibility of the existing on-Site building in the current condition. While the IL building would be closer to the Village Hall, RBPD, and RBFD site than the existing office building, the existing on- and off-Site vegetation would continue to screen the building when viewed from this vantage point. As discussed above, the roofline and the façade treatment of the building would be in keeping with the residential architectural character of the Village and would create visual interest in the proposed building, which, in Chapter 8: Visual Resources and Community Character DEIS 8-17 9/12/2018 the Applicant’s opinion, is not present in the existing condition. In addition, this would be one of the only places within the Village Hall, RBPD, and RBFD parking lot where the proposed buildings would be visible. Therefore, in the Applicant’s opinion, this change in visibility would not create a significant adverse impact to visual resources or community character. 8.3.2.9. Vantage Point 8a: Ivy Hill Lane between Arbor Drive and the First Guest Parking Area The roof of one of proposed townhouses would be visible in the leaf-off condition through the intervening vegetation from this vantage point (see Figure 8-17). This is similar to the slight visibility of the existing Site building from this vantage point. In the leaf-on condition, the Site’s buildings would not be visible. This slight change in visibility would not create a significant adverse impact to visual resources or community character in the Applicant’s opinion. 8.3.2.10. Vantage Point 8b: Ivy Hill Lane between Arbor Drive and the First Guest Parking Area, Approximately 10 feet west of Vantage Point 8a From vantage point 8b, located several feet west of vantage point 8a, the top floor and roof of two of the proposed townhouses are visible in the leaf-off condition (see Figure 8-18). This is similar to the visibility of the top floor of the existing Site building in the existing condition. In the leaf-on condition, the Site’s buildings would not be visible. This slight change in visibility would not create a significant adverse impact to visual resources or community character in the Applicant’s opinion. 8.3.2.11. Vantage Point 8c: Southern Corner of the Project Site, Approximately 15 feet north of Vantage Point 8c Vantage point 8c is located several feet north and west of vantage point 8b. Similar to vantage point 8b, in the leaf-off condition, the top floor of proposed townhouses are partially visible through the existing vegetation and over wooded berm (see Figure 8-19). Given the height of the berm, the first floors of the townhomes are blocked from view. The view of a portion of the townhouses would replace the view of the existing on-Site office building. In the Applicant’s opinion, this change in visibility would not create a significant adverse impact to visual resources or community character. 8.3.2.12. Vantage Point 9a: King Street northbound Exit Ramp of the Hutchinson River Parkway The four-story portion of the IL and AL building would be visible in the leaf- off condition through the relatively dense vegetation from the northbound Parkway (see Figure 8-20). The existing vegetation in the right-of-way would not be disturbed and new trees would be planted in between the IL and AL building and this vantage point. The view of this four-story building would replace the view of the existing three-story office building and 5.3-acre parking lot in the existing condition. In the leaf-on condition, the visibility of the proposed buildings would be extremely limited. This vantage point is at a higher elevation than the Project Site and therefore all stories of the proposed buildings would be visible. Views would most 900 King Street Redevelopment 9/12/2018 8-18 DEIS likely be experienced by motorists on the Parkway, in which case speed would distort views of the Proposed Project and only offer a brief view into the Project Site. In the Applicant’s opinion, the existing view promotes a sense of vacancy as it features a dated office building with an empty parking lot whereas the proposed buildings would be more contextually appropriate and the Site would read as an actively used parcel. 8.3.2.13. Vantage Point 9b: King Street northbound Exit Ramp of the Hutchinson River Parkway, Approximately 100 feet north of Vantage Point 9a Vantage point 9b is north of vantage point 9a along the right-of-way on the side of the northbound Parkway. Similar to vantage point 9a, the four-story IL and AL building would be visible through the existing wooded area along the right-of-way in the leaf-off condition (see Figure 8-21). This view featuring active use would replace the existing view of the vast, largely empty, surface parking lot and, to the sides of the view, the existing office building and the cell tower at the Village Hall, RBPD, and RBFD. Similar to vantage point 9a, the view of the Project Site would be experienced by motorists on the Parkway and the views of the Proposed Project and Project Site would be distorted by speed. In the Applicant’s opinion, the view of proposed buildings behind the vegetative buffer of the Parkway would be similar to the views of other Sites, residential, commercial, and institutional, along the Parkway and would not create a significant adverse visual or community character impact. 8.3.3. CONSISTENCY OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT WITH THE EXISTING VISUAL AND COMMUNITY CHARACTER The Proposed Project includes three primary building components: 24 two-story attached townhouse units on the western portion of the Site, closest to The Arbors; a three- and four-story IL facility at the center of the Site; and a four-story AL facility in the northeast portion of the Site. Most, if not all, of the existing vegetation between the proposed townhouses and the existing Arbors residences to the west would remain, maintaining the existing visual buffer between the two properties. In addition, most of the vegetation to the north and south of the Site would be retained, as would the vegetation on the eastern portion of the Site along King Street, which would minimize views of the interior of the Site from areas off-Site. While the Proposed Project would require the removal of a total of 129 trees with a 10 diameter breast height (dbh) or greater, the proposed landscaping program includes the planting of 438 new trees and 288 new shrubs, as discussed below. To facilitate the Proposed Project, the Proposed Zoning would allow a maximum height of 45 feet for senior living facilities, as recommended by the Village’s Comprehensive Plan. As described above, however, the Proposed Project’s IL and AL building would be limited to three stories closest to Arbor Drive. It would not be until 290 feet from Arbor Drive that the building would step up to four stories. In addition to being consistent with the recommendations of the recently adopted Comprehensive Plan, there is existing precedent within the Village for buildings that are four stories or more. As described above, there are many buildings within the Village that are at least four stories in height, specifically The Atria, Rye Brook and the Hilton Westchester. Chapter 8: Visual Resources and Community Character DEIS 8-19 9/12/2018 The Atria, Rye Brook a 168-unit IL facility on King Street is three and four stories tall, the same height as the proposed IL and AL building. With respect to density, the Atria, Rye Brook has 168 units on 4.92 acres and yields a density of more than 34 units per acre, more than twice the density of the Proposed Project. The Hilton Westchester contains four-story hotel wings that are 250-feet from abutting single-family homes. In comparison, the closest proposed four-story portion of the proposed IL and AL building is approximately 500 feet from the nearest off-Site residence; the closest three-story portion of the proposed IL and AL building is approximately 460 feet from the nearest off-Site residence; and the closest two-story townhouse on the Project Site would be approximately 190 feet from the nearest off-Site residence in The Arbors. In the Applicant’s opinion, the height of the buildings in the Proposed Project is consistent with other structures in the Village, including their location proximate to off-Site residences, as well as the recommendations of the Comprehensive Plan. In addition, the relatively secluded location of the Project Site, which contains extensive on- and off-Site vegetative buffers that substantially screen the view of the Site from off-Site locations, makes the Project Site well-suited for the Proposed Project. With respect to building and site coverage, the Proposed Project would slightly increase the amount of building coverage on the Site from the current condition, but would decrease the amount of surface parking and interior roadways by an even larger amount from the current condition. As a result, the Proposed Project would result in a decrease in gross land coverage on the Project Site from the current condition. In the Applicant’s opinion, the reduction in impervious site coverage is a beneficial impact of the Proposed Project. Additionally, it is the Applicant’s opinion that the relative amount of building and site coverage proposed is consistent with other properties in the Village, especially when considering the Project Site’s location, its visibility from areas outside of the Site, and the reduction in total coverage from the Site’s current condition (see Table 8-2). Specifically, the Proposed Project’s building coverage, relative to its parcel size, would be nearly identical to The Arbors, and only slightly higher than the properties at 800 Westchester Avenue, the Hilton Westchester, and the Doral Arrowwood Conference Center. Table 8-2 Parcel Coverage Comparison Site Parcel Size (ac) Building Coverage (ac) Roads, Drives, Parking (ac) Total Site Coverage (ac) Percent Building Coverage Percent Other Coverage Percent Total Coverage 900 King-Existing 17.77 2.17 5.29 7.46 12.22% 29.77% 41.99% Proposed Project 17.77 2.95 3.98 6.93 16.60% 22.40% 39.00% The Arbors 35.29 5.58 6.26 11.83 15.80% 17.73% 33.53% Arbors (w/o Arbor Dr) 33.49 5.58 5.26 10.83 16.65% 15.70% 32.34% 800 Westchester Ave 44.94 5.46 6.30 11.76 12.15% 14.02% 26.17% Hilton Westchester 35.52 3.80 7.10 10.89 10.69% 19.97% 30.67% Doral Arrowwood Conference Center 105.93 10.67 13.51 24.18 10.07% 12.76% 22.83% Doral (w/o golf) 46.46 10.38 11.89 22.26 22.34% 25.58% 47.92% Sources: Westchester County GIS & 900 King Site Survey and Proposed Project As described in Chapter 4, “Geology, Soils, and Topography,” the existing grade of the eastern portion of the Site (i.e., the location of the existing parking lot), would be raised to allow for the creation of underground parking and to create a more level Project Site, 900 King Street Redevelopment 9/12/2018 8-20 DEIS which is a requirement of senior living communities. This change in the finished grade of the Project Site is reflected in the photo simulations, presented above. With respect to the proposed on-Site tree removal, most of the trees to be removed are not screening the view of the Project Site from the off-Site vantage points described above; rather, they are located directly behind the Village Hall, RBPD, and RBFD, directly behind the existing, off-Site cell tower and building, and in locations interior to the Site, including in the northeast corner. As such, the removal of this existing vegetation would not be expected to have a significant adverse impact on the visibility of the Project Site from off-Site locations. In addition, a significant landscaping program is being proposed, which includes the planting of 438 new trees and 288 new shrubs. The landscaping program includes significant concentrations of vegetation along the Site’s northern and eastern boundary, which would further screen the view of the Site’s interior. To minimize and avoid potential impacts by the Proposed Project to visual resources and community character, the proposed buildings would be consistent with other residential-type buildings within the Village in terms of height and screening from public rights-of-way. In addition, the proposed buildings have been designed to be architecturally compatible with the predominant characteristics of residential construction within the Village, including the use of clapboard and stone siding, as well as the incorporation of dormers and gabled roofs. As such, the height of the proposed buildings and their location within a Site buffered by existing mature vegetation is, in the Applicant’s opinion, consistent with the character of other Village buildings and developments. The Proposed Project, save for views along a small portion of Arbor Drive and the side of the Parkway, would be minimally visible from outside of the Project Site. The proposed buildings would be barely visible from North Ridge Street and would be minimally visible from two points along King Street. As shown in the photosimulations presented above, the Proposed Project would be visible from a small area of the parking lot of the Village Hall, RBPD, and RBFD, similar to the visibility of the existing office building. From the northwestern perimeter of Harkness Park, the Proposed Project would be visible through the existing and proposed vegetation, as the current building and parking lot are in the existing condition. However, the view into the Site with the Proposed Project from this location would be of buildings of a more residential style and character, as opposed to the existing office building and surface parking lot. In addition, as with the existing condition, the view from this vantage point would be significantly screened by existing vegetation. As a result, this change in visibility, in the Applicant’s opinion, would not be an adverse impact on the visual or community character. The Proposed Project would also be plainly visible from Arbor Drive.6 The view into the Project Site from Arbor Drive would be of a landscaped campus, which includes buildings of a residential-type use, scale, and character, instead of a wide expanse of surface parking. The Project Site would be graded, bringing the elevation up in some places and down in others, to create a relatively level surface on which to build. As noted previously, existing vegetation would be maintained to the greatest extent possible and new vegetation would be added to help reinforce vegetated screening of the Proposed Project. 6 Arbor Drive is a private street for which the Project Site is the beneficiary of an access easement; it is not a public street. Chapter 8: Visual Resources and Community Character DEIS 8-21 9/12/2018 8.4. MITIGATION MEASURES In the Applicant’s opinion, the Proposed Project, inclusive of the building design (e.g., articulation, façade materials, height, roof line, location on-Site) and the grading and proposed landscaping program would not result in an adverse impact to visual resources or community character. Rather, the Proposed Project would improve the visual character of the Project Site by constructing buildings with increased visual interest within a landscaped campus setting. While the amount of building space on the Site would increase, the amount of open space on the Site would also increase. In the Applicant’s opinion, this increase in open space is an important visual and community benefit of the Proposed Project. The character of the community would also not be adversely affected by other potential impacts of the Proposed Project. Specifically, as noted in Chapter 12, “Traffic and Transportation,” the Proposed Project would generate significantly lower levels of vehicle trips than the full occupancy of the existing office building. Together with the relatively visually secluded location and the existing precedent for buildings of at least four stories within the Village, it is the Applicant’s opinion that the Proposed Project would be consistent with the character of the Village. Therefore, in the Applicant’s opinion, no additional mitigation measures are required.  5/2/2018 Figure 8-1 On-Site Visual Character Locations 900 KING STREET N E W Y O R K G I C O N N E C T I C U T Rye Brook A B D E F H C Greenwich HUTCHINSON RIVER PKWY LANDS HARKNESS PARK S t a t e H w y 1 2 0 A K i n g S t N Ridge St S h a d y L n Glen RidgeRd Ar bor Dr Hutchinson River Pkwy State Hwy 15 Ramp Tr e e t o p L n Wa t c h H i l l D r Exit 30S W a l ker C t I v y H i l l C r e s Ivy Hill Ln W a l k e r C t Project Site Photograph View Direction and Reference No 0 500 FEET A 5.2.18 Figure 8-2900 KING STREET BExisting building from Arbor Drive looking east AWetland/vegetative buffer along the Project Site’s western property line Locations A & B 5.2.18 Figure 8-3900 KING STREET DFront of existing building from parking lot CExisting building from Arbor Drive looking west Locations C & D 5.2.18 Figure 8-4900 KING STREET Locations E & F FExisting parking lot EExisting parking lot 5 /2 /2 0 1 8 Figure 8-5 Buildings, Roads, Parking Lots within 1/2-mile of the Project Site 900 KING STREET N E W Y O R K C O N N E C T I C U T Greenwich Project Site Study Area Boundary (Half-mile perimeter; NY State only) Parcel Boundaries Paved Roadbeds, Driveways, and Parking Lots Building Footprints 0 1,000 FEET 5.2.18 Figure 8-6900 KING STREET HVegetative buffer along the Project Site’s northern property line GWetland/vegetative buffer along the Project Site’s eastern property line Locations G & H 5.2.18 Figure 8-7900 KING STREET IExisting parking lot and building Location I 5/2/2018 Figure 8-8 Vantage Point Locations 900 KING STREET N E W Y O R K C O N N E C T I C U T Rye Brook VP1 VP2 VP3 VP4aVP4b VP5 VP6 VP7 VP8a VP8b VP8c VP9bVP9a Greenwich HUTCHINSON RIVER PKWY LANDS HARKNESS PARK A r bor Dr N Ridge St S t a t e H w y 1 2 0 A K i n g S t Glen Rid ge R d Hutchinson River Pkwy State Hwy 15 Ramp Exit27 Ettl L n F a i r l a w n P k w y Treetop L n S h a d y L n W a t c h H i l l D r B a y b e r r y L n Exit 30S Brush Hollow Cr es W a l ker C t I v y H i l l C r e s Ivy Hill Ln W a l k e r C t Project Site Photograph View Direction and Reference No 0 580 FEET VP1 5. 2 . 1 8 Figure 8-9900 KING STREET Existing and Proposed Conditions — Vantage Point 1 Proposed Condition (Leaf-off)Existing Condition (Leaf-off) Existing Condition (Leaf-on) 5. 2 . 1 8 Figure 8-10900 KING STREET Proposed Condition (Leaf-off)Existing Condition (Leaf-off) Existing Condition (Leaf-on) Existing and Proposed Conditions—Vantage Point 2 5. 2 . 1 8 Figure 8-11900 KING STREET Proposed Condition (Leaf-off)Existing Condition (Leaf-off) Existing Condition (Leaf-on) Existing and Proposed Conditions—Vantage Point 3 5. 2 . 1 8 Figure 8-12900 KING STREET Existing and Proposed Conditions—Vantage Point 4a Proposed Condition (Leaf-off)Existing Condition (Leaf-off) 5. 2 . 1 8 Figure 8-13900 KING STREET Existing and Proposed Conditions—Vantage Point 4b Proposed Condition (Leaf-off)Existing Condition (Leaf-off) 5. 2 . 1 8 Figure 8-14900 KING STREET Proposed Condition (Leaf-off)Existing Condition (Leaf-off) Existing Condition (Leaf-on) Existing and Proposed Conditions—Vantage Point 5 5. 2 . 1 8 Figure 8-15900 KING STREET Proposed Condition (Leaf-off)Existing Condition (Leaf-off) Existing Condition (Leaf-on) Existing and Proposed Conditions—Vantage Point 6 5. 2 . 1 8 Figure 8-16900 KING STREET Proposed Condition (Leaf-off)Existing Condition (Leaf-off) Existing Condition (Leaf-on) Existing and Proposed Conditions—Vantage Point 7 5. 2 . 1 8 Figure 8-17900 KING STREET Proposed Condition (Leaf-off)Existing Condition (Leaf-off) Existing Condition (Leaf-on) Existing and Proposed Conditions—Vantage Point 8a 5. 2 . 1 8 Figure 8-18900 KING STREET Existing and Proposed Conditions — Vantage Point 8b Proposed Condition (Leaf-off)Existing Condition (Leaf-off) Existing Condition (Leaf-on) 5. 2 . 1 8 Figure 8-19900 KING STREET Proposed Condition (Leaf-off)Existing Condition (Leaf-off) Existing Condition (Leaf-on) Existing and Proposed Conditions—Vantage Point 8c 5. 2 . 1 8 Figure 8-20900 KING STREET Proposed Condition (Leaf-off)Existing Condition (Leaf-off) Existing and Proposed Conditions—Vantage Point 9a 5. 2 . 1 8 Figure 8-21900 KING STREET Existing and Proposed Conditions—Vantage Point 9b Proposed Condition (Leaf-off)Existing Condition (Leaf-off) 5 /4 /2 0 1 8 Figure 8-22 Neighborhoods within a 1/2-Mile from the Project Site 900 KING STREET N E W Y O R K C O N N E C T I C U T Harrison Port Chester Rye Brook Fairlawn Parkway The Arbors Hillandale Road Pemberwick Road and Bishop Drive Glenville Street Glenville Town Center N Ridge St S t a t e H w y 1 2 0 A K i n g S t W e a v e r S t GlenvilleSt Comly Ave Burdsall Dr EttlLn Hutchinson River Pkwy P e m b e r w i c k R d UplandSt Bish op Dr S Bish op D r N State Hwy 15 Anderson Hill Rd Windin g w o o d R d N C a s t l e L n d g G r e e n w i c h Hills D r B o l t o n P l Country Ridge D r StonehedgeDrS Riversville RdHillandaleRd Linden Pl M a y P l Shady L n Boxwood Pl Service Road Dorchester Dr PineTreeDr C o m l y T e r Deep Gorge Rd G r e y R o c k D r MeadowlarkRd W o o d la n d Dr Hawthorne St N Exit 30S B a y b e r r y L n S till v i e w D r KingsPkDr S l e e p y H o l l o w R d Lawridge Dr Riverview Ct A d a m P l C h o cta w L n M a p l e w o o d L n B e t s y Bro w n R d Concord St NedleyLn H o m e s t e a d R d Bobbie Ln Exit27 E B y w a y Parkwood Pl F a i r h a v e n L n Leslie A v e Curt Ter O l d O r c h a r d R d E a g l e s B l f Mansion Pl Country Ridge Dr N Whippoorwill Rd LincolnLn Stonehedge Dr N Ange lus Dr Loch Ln Exit29 Holly Ln M a g n o l i a D r B o w m a n D r Glen RidgeRd F a i r l a w n P k w y R o c k i n g h o r s e T r l R o c k R i d g e D r GlenvilleRd E s s e x R dCambrid g e D r H u n t T e r R i v e r W Guilfo r d L n G r e e n w a y D r E d g e w o o d D r W o o d s A v e C o u n t r y R i d geCir B u e na Vista Dr W a l k e r C t B e e c h w o o d B l v d Oriole P l T r ee Top Ter Mitchell Pl D u n c anDr W e a v e r s H l D r i v e w a y 0 1,000 FEETProject Site Study Area Boundary (Half-mile perimeter) Neighborhoods Within HalfMile 5. 2 . 1 8 Figure 8-23 90 0 K I N G S T R E E T Ty p i c a l S i n g l e - F a m i l y H o m e i n t h e F a i r l a w n P a r k w a y N e i g h b o r h o o d 5 /3 /2 0 1 8 900 KING STREET N E W Y O R K C O N N E C T I C U T Greenwich Project Site Study Area Boundary (Half-mile perimeter; NY State only) Parcel Boundaries Building Footprints 0 1,000 FEET Figure 8-24 Building Footprints within 1/2-mile of the Project Site 5. 2 . 1 8 Figure 8-25 90 0 K I N G S T R E E T The Arbors Neighborhood 5.2.18 Figure 8-26900 KING STREET Hillandale Road Neighborhood 5. 3 . 1 8 Figure 8-27 90 0 K I N G S T R E E T Gl e n v i l l e T o w n C e n t e r C o m m e r c i a l 5. 3 . 1 8 Figure 8-28 90 0 K I N G S T R E E T Gl e n v i l l e T o w n C e n t e r M i x e d - U s e 5.3.18 Figure 8-29900 KING STREET Glen Ridge Street Neighborhood 5.2.18 Figure 8-30900 KING STREET Pemberwick Road and Bishop Drive Neighborhood 5.2.18 Figure 8-31900 KING STREET The Atria, Rye Brook Photo of Atria Rye Brook 3-story 4-story 5.2.18 Figure 8-32900 KING STREET Hilton Westchester Doral Arrowwood Doral Arrowwood and Hilton Westchester 4-story hotel wing 5-story hotel wings 4-story hotel wing Figure 8-33900 KING STREET 5. 1 . 1 8 800 Westchester Avenue 1 2 5. 3 . 1 8 90 0 K I N G S T R E E T IL/AL Typical Sections GRO U N D F L O O R 254 ' - 0 " SEC O N D F L O O R 11' - 6 " TH I R D F L O O R 22' - 0 " FO U R T H F L O O R 32' - 6 " C RO O F 43' - 0 " 1 1 ' - 6 " 1 0 ' - 6 " 1 0 ' - 6 " 9 ' - 0 " 4 7 ' - 7 " E Q E Q GRO U N D F L O O R 254 ' - 0 " SEC O N D F L O O R 11' - 6 " TH I R D F L O O R 22' - 0 " 4 3 8 ' - 9 " 2' - 0 " E Q E Q 1 1 ' - 6 " 1 0 ' - 6 " 9 ' - 0 " GR O U N D F L O O R 254 ' - 0 " SE C O N D F L O O R 11 ' - 6 " TH I R D F L O O R 22 ' - 0 " FO U R T H F L O O R 32 ' - 6 " 4 RO O F 43 ' - 0 " 2' - 0 " 4 4 ' - 8 " 1 1 ' - 6 " 1 0 ' - 6 " 1 0 ' - 6 " 9 ' - 0 " E Q E Q GROUND FLOOR 254' - 0"SECOND FLOOR 11' - 6"THIRD FLOOR 22' - 0"33' - 10"8' - 10"10' - 6"11' - 6" 3 S T O R Y 3 S T O R Y 4 S T O R Y 1 S T O R Y 4 STORY CO U R T Y A R D A CO U R T Y A R D B CO U R T Y A R D C CO U R T Y A R D D MIDPOINT OF ROOF 38''-9" MIDPOINT OF ROOF 44'-8" MIDPOINT OF ROOF 33'-10" MIDPOINT OF ROOF 12'-6" AVERAGE HEIGHT LINEAR FEET 548' 2099'236'185' MIDPOINT OF ROOF 34'-10" 340' MIDPOINT OF ROOF 47'-7" MIDPOINT OF ROOF 49'-8" TOTAL LINEAR ROOF LINE: 4,038'510' 120' WEIGHTED AVERAGE: 44.75'422 Summer Street Stamford, CT 06901 T. +1 203 251 7400 F. +1 203 251 7474 SCALE:SEAL DRAWING TITLE:PROJECT TITLE:PROJECT No:DATENO.ISSUE KEY PLAN Owner:Civil / Site:Planning / Zoning:As indicated 1 0 / 2 6 / 2 0 1 7 1 2 : 1 1 : 3 1 P M C : \ R E V I T L O C A L \ 7 0 7 0 0 _ 9 0 0 K i n g S t r e e t _ A r c h _ R e c o v e r e d _ d e t a c h e d _ k . l o b a l b o . r v t SECTIONS70700900 KING STREET 10/26/2017A-301900 King St, Rye Brook, NY 10573 PUD CONCEPT PLAN AND PRELIMINARY SITE PLANS900 King Street Owner, LLC 200 Madison Ave, 26th Floor, New York, NY 10016 (212) 481-1122 JMC 120 BEDFORD ROAD, ARMONK, NY 10504 (914) 273-5225 AKRF, Inc.34 S Broadway # 314, White Plains, NY 10601 (914) 949-7336 1/ 4 " = 1 ' - 0 " 1 SE C T I O N A T M A I N E N T R Y 1/ 4 " = 1 ' - 0 " 2 TY P I C A L S E C T I O N - 3 S T O R I E S 1/4 " = 1 ' - 0 " 3 TY P I C A L S E C T I O N - 4 S T O R I E S 1/4" = 1'-0"4 TYPICAL FLAT ROOF WE I G H T E D A V E R A G E D I A G R A M Figure 8-34 7. 1 7 . 1 8 Figure 8-35a Project Site Sections 900 KING STREET So u r c e : J M C E n g i n e e r i n g 7. 1 7 . 1 8 Figure 8-35b Project Site Sections 900 KING STREET So u r c e : J M C E n g i n e e r i n g