1 25 11 https://sleepyhollow.localarchives.org/files/original/31f1aedfe2c2ef3c39b7e8a190dbf5be.pdf ae848539525801ebcd63c2d4130a0c56 PDF Text Text A Regular Meeting of the Planning Board was held on Thursday, August 9, 1990, at 8:00 PM in Village Hall, North Tarrytown, New York. Present: James Galgano, Acting Chairman Richard Ayers Alan Kaplan Steven Baderian Roman Windas Also Present: John Hughes, Village Attorney James Margotta, Building Inspector Joseph Gulino, Consultant. Camce Thomas Gissen, Consultant, Clarke Asso. A motion to approve the July 19, 1990 minutes as written was made by Alan Kaplan and seconded by Richard Ayers. IN THE MATTER OF THE KRINGAS SUB-DIVISION. (WEBBER MEWS) . NORTH TARRYTOWN. N. Y. Mr. Ron Turnquist, architect for the project appeared before the Board. He stated that he addressed the Board last October with a larger scaled project, but has decreased the size to 4 units. There is an existing building on Parcel B with 5 units. Proposed project will have 4 units, Unit A & D, will have 3 bedrooms, and Units B & C will have 2 bedrooms apiece. Mr. Kringas' children will be living in two of the units, and the other two units will be for sale. Mr. Turnquist stated that Parcel A would meet all the present Zoning requirements. He also stated the the proposed plan was submitted to the Mayor and Board of Trustees and they approved the plans. He also noted that the present building does not conform to Zoning Code which permits single family dwellings, and that they will require three variances. There were questions concerning the existing trees on the property, and Mr. Turnquist stated the would preserve as many as they could. Discussion tabled until next meeting of the Board. PUBLIC HEARING: Mr. Philip Zegarilli, president of the Briggsville Neighborhood Association, addressed the Board, wanted to go on record as opposing the proposed project. He also requested copies of any new plans that were submitted, so that the association may review them. IN THE MATTER OF THE SLEEPY HOLLOW CEMETERY. NORTH TARRYTOWN. NEW YORK This is a continuation of last month's hearing. 15 �Mr. Larry Nardeccia appeared before the Board on behalf of the Sleepy Hollow Cemetery and reviewed the project. He presented a letter from Deputy Commissioner Eschwielder, of the Westchester County of planning, with comments that they would like to see a buffer zone required, however the cemetery renovation was a matter of local determination. He also presented letters from the New York state Department of Transportation and the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. The DEC letter stated that 2 items were requested. A permit would be required for piping. The letter further stated that it was not a designated wetlands. A short form EAF form was completed, the full Environmental Assessment has been completed for parts 1, 2 and 3. Under the village's local law for Wetland/Watercourse protection, Sleepy Hollow Cemetery must submit an application to receive a permit from the Planning Board in order to be inMfull compliance with the terms of this local law". Mr. Nardeccia stated that every time he asked for an application for a permit, he was told there wasn't a formal application. Mr. Windas suggestion that a formal application be submitted by following Section 61-10 of the Wetlands/Watercourse Code, articles 1 thru 6 a-k. It was further discussed that under the Village's local law, this application must be treated as a Type I action, under the requirements of the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act. This will require that the procedures of a coordinated review be followed. This requires that the Planning Board declare its intention to become lead agency, that a notice of this intention be sent to all involved agencies and that a waiting period for responses from other involved agencies be adhered to. A motion was made by Richard ning Board act as the lead process and to notify other was seconded by Alan Kaplan. Ayers that the North Tarrytown Planagency in the environmental review involved agencies of same. Motion Motion passed unanimously. There being no further business, meeting adjourned 9:20 PM. Respectfully submitted, // Francesca Lorenz Recording Secretary 16 �X ^u^c<^C^ *y Approved pproved with respect to substance and form: iJflLage Attorney Vi: Dated: P-/3 - ?' Approved by the Planning Board Chairman or Acting Chairma Filed with Deputy Clerk ur Deputy Clerk Dated: fr/f o / <j C1«JL)L i / ?// � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Planning Board Minutes & Resolutions-1990 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource MINS_PLAN_1990-08-09 Subject The topic of the resource Planning Board Minutes & Resolutions-1990 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1990 https://sleepyhollow.localarchives.org/files/original/6aa559ecf4d1b6eadfdf74ac0815b1a4.pdf fb3d961b5203282de069383c959c7081 PDF Text Text A regular meeting of the Planning Board was held on Thursday, October 18, 1990 at 8:25 PM in Village Hall, North Tarrytown, New York. Members Present: Also Present: Ellen Tsangaris, Chairperson Allan Kaplan James Galgano Richard Ayers Ray Windas John O'Leary James Margotta, John J. Hughes, Joseph Gulino, Thomas Gissen, Building Inspector Village Attorney Consultant/CAMCE Consultant/F.P. CLARK ASSOC. A motion to approve the August 9, 1990 minutes as written was made by John O'Leary and the motion was seconded by Richard Ayers and was passed unanimously. IN THE MATTER OF SABASTIAN AMENTA, 23 9 NORTH BROADWAY. NORTH TARRYTOWN. NEW YORK. Mr. Amenta has requested a six month extension of the resolution of site plan approval which was granted by the Planning Board eighteen months ago. A motion was made by Richard Ayers to grant the approval for the extension of the resolution for a six (6) month period, ending April 18, 1991. The motion was seconded by John O'Leary and passed unanimously by the board. IN THE MATTER OF LEONARD RUTILGAN LESSEE OF 9 7 COLLEGE AVENUE. NORTH TARRYTOWN. NEW YORK AND OWNED BY TORRES AND SON CONTRACTORS. INC.. 17 SCHUDY PLACE. NEW ROCHELLE. NEW YORK. A Public Hearing was held by the Planning Board to hear and consider an application of Leonard Rutilgan as above, for final site approval plans to convert the existing storage building into an automotive repair shop at 97 College Avenue. �Mr. Julius Twyne, an architect representing Leonard Rutilgan, explained that the plans would show six repair bases,an office space, a bathroom facility and storage space. Mr. Rutliglan will also add drainage that will take residue from the workers area that is washed out. A new trench drain will be installed, connecting to the same line. In addition to these changes, an exhaust system will be installed through the roof towards the east side of the auto body shop. They will also have a general exhaust fan that will exhaust materials from cars that are being worked on during the day. There are also two skylights that will be left in place. There is a concern about the fumes in a residential area. There are also three vents, which will ventilate the fumes. Mr. Margotta stated that there have been no complaints in the past about the paint fumes. Mr. Gissen mentioned that their main concern was the parking in this residential area. Mr. Rutilgan stated that he will have approximately 12 cars in and out in one day. Employee parking will be in the building. Mr. Margotta recommends that they should put in a sprinkler system because the state code may require one in the future. PUBLIC COMMENT: Mr. Frank Paolontonio, 158 Depeyster Street stated that he was in favor of granting a permit for the automotive repair shop. A motion was made by John O'Leary to grant site plan approval and seconded by Richard Ayers and was passed unanimously by the the board. Comments submitted by Village engineer and consultants are attached hereto and incorporated in this resolution of site plan approval. IN THE MATTER OF SLEEPY HOLLOW CEMETERY. NORTH TARRYTOWN, NEW YORK. A Public Hearing was held by the Planning Board to hear and consider the development of Sleepy Hollow Cemetery. Mr. Larry Narccheia, P.E., who is representing Sleepy Hollow Cemetery, discussed the site plan review. In reviewing the site plan, Mr. Narccheia points out that there is a ravine which is approximately .71 acres in area. The applicability of the wetlands/watercourse legislation was discussed in detail by the consultant. �Mr. Donald Stever addressed the Board. He indicated that the question of whether there were wetlands on the site, as defined by the ordinance, was not as yet adequately clarified. A motion to close the public hearing was made by John O'Leary and Seconded by James Galgano. The motion was passed unanimously. BUSINESS MEETING: After a long discussion it was decided to table the matter until the next meeting. In the interim, a wetlands investigation will be performed by Frederick P. Clarks Associates. A report will be submitted to the Board prior to the next meeting. Being no further business, a motion was made by John O'Leary, seconded by James Galgano to adjourn the meeting at 9:25 PM. The following Planning Board meeting will be held on Thursday, November 15, 1990. Respectfully submitted, Christine A. Y&rkovic Recording Secretary �P H A P I P<5 A M A M H A M A R O t n M H L C D M ' „.?J1" CONSULTING ENGINEERS COURT PLAZA NORTH. 25 MAIN ST. HACKENSACK.NJ 07601-7032 120 EAST 75TH STREET SUITE 8C NEW YORK. NEW YORK 10021 201342-4200 212-683-7712 FAX. 201-342-0790 TABLE OF CONTENTS MEMORANDUMS - PROPOSED SUBDIVISION/SITE PLAN UPDATES VILLAGE OF NORTH TARRYTOWN, NEW YORK (OCTOBER, 1990) MEMORANDUM DESCRIPTION CAMCE REF. NO 1. Sleepy Hollow Cemetery - Proposed subdrain near Route 9 1368R 2. Automotive Repair Shop 97 College Avenue 1384R �CHARLES A. MANGANARO M E M O R A N D U M TO: Village of North Tarrytown Planning Board FROM: Joseph A. Gulino, Project Engineer Charles A. Manganaro Consulting Engineers DATE: October 12, 1990 RE: Sleepy Hollow Cemetery - Proposed Subdrain Near Route 9 CAMCE #1368R As of this date, our comments concerning the hydraulic aspects of the above referenced project have been substantially addressed. Accordingly, we have no other significant objections to the proposed plan. We trust this information satisfies any inquiries you may have. If you require any additional information, please let us know. JAG:ab:958 enc. cc: Mr. William T. Regan, Village Administrator Mr. James T. Margotta, Building Inspector John J. Hughes, Jr., Village Attorney Mr. Thomas Gissen, Assoc. Cons. - Frederick P. Clark Associates (via Facsimile) Mr. Larry Nardecchia, P.E. �CHARLES A. MANGANARO M E M O R A N D U M TO: Village of North Tarrytown Planning Board FROM: Joseph A. Gulino, Project Engineer Charles A. Manganaro Consulting Engineers DATE: October 12, 1990 RE: Lenny's Auto Repair 97 College Avenue CAMCE #1384R Per our review of the site plan dated August 27, 1990, prepared by Mr. Charles Riley, Land Surveyor; our comments concerning potable water, sewage, and storm drainage, are as follows: A. The location of all existing structures a,nd other man-made features of the site, as well as those o n adjacent properties, including existing utility lines (gas & electric). B. The location and design of the proposed water supply, sewage disposal and storm water drainage systems, including the locations, sizes, invert, and rim elevations to the existing water supply, sewage disposal, and storm water drainage systems. C. Existing and proposed topography map of the subdivision, extending at least twenty (20) ft. beyond the site boundaries with contour intervals not greater than rive (5) ft. and referenced to USGS or other approved bench mark and scale. D. The nature and location of all other existing site features, including wetlands, water courses, wooded areas, and rock outcrops. E. The plan shall clearly indicate which site features are existing and proposed, and which will be removed. F. Owner's endorsement. G. Planning Board Chairman's endorsement per subdivision regulations, Part IV, Page 7817 (14C). H. The locations of nearest fire hydrants. I. The widths of streets and avenues encompassing the site. �CHARLES A. MANGANARO Page 2 Memorandum Lenny's Auto Repair CAMCE #1384R J. An area map showing all streets and property within one thousand (1,000) ft. of the applicant's property, at a scale of one (1) inch to four hundred (400) ft. All property owned by the applicant shall be clearly identified. K. Flow and pressure requirements for the fire sprinkler system and backflow preventers, if required. The above-mentioned comments should either be shown or noted on the drawings. Final recommendations will be made to the Planning Board once these comments are addressed. If you require any additional information, please let us know. JAG/gsb.962 cc: Mr. William T. Regan, Village Administrator Mr. James T. Margotta, Building Inspector John J. Hughes, Jr., Esq. Thomas Gissen, Assoc. Cons. - Frederick P. Clark Assoc. (Via Facsimile) Leonard A. Rutiglan �MEMORANDUM To: Village of North Tarrytown Planning Board From: Frederick P. Clark Associates Date: October 18, 1990 Subject: Sleepy Hollow Mitigation Planting Plan. I- INTRODUCTION. On October 17, 1990, Jim Donovan, ASIA and Thomas Gissen, AICP of Frederick P. Clark Associates met with representatives of the Sleepy Hollow Cemetery in order to attempt to develop a mitigation planting plan that would be satisfactory to the applicants and to the Village Planning Board. At the Planning Board meeting of September 27, 1990, the Planning Board and the applicant had agreed that such a meeting of consultants might prove beneficial in developing a satisfactory planting plan. II. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND. Through the course of this application there has been much concern expressed by both the Village Planning Board and the applicant regarding the issue of providing a planting plan as mitigation for the visual and vegetative losses that would be necessitated by the proposed action. The applicant's original two submissions (plans dated April 10, 1990 and May 21, 1990) contained no references to a mitigation planting plan. At the request of the Planning Board, the applicant did prepare a mitigation planting plan on June 16, 1990. However, this plan carried a note that stated, "Exact type of tree and location to be determined by the Cemetery Authorities." This effectively rendered the plan non-binding and unenforceable. Later the applicant proposed to plant several trees along North Broadway (Route 9) instead of providing any required new plantings within the subject site itself. However, at the Planning Board meeting of September 27, 1990, a view was expressed by some members of the Planning Board that mitigation plantings should be provided within the site as well as on North Broadway in order to compensate for the vegetative and aesthetic loss the proposed action would entail. III. PROPOSED PLAN. At the meeting of October 18, 1990 between Clark Associates and the applicant's representatives, the applicant agreed to provide nine American Sycamore trees along North Broadway and to provide five Red Oak trees and five Littleleaf Linden trees within the subject site. All of the trees are to maintain a minimum 3.5 inch caliper �* when planted (this means that the tree trunks will be at least 3.5 inches in diameter at their base). No specific placement for the ten trees that are to be planted in the affected area has been determined. It was agreed that the placement of the trees would be determined after the final grade is set but before the final seeding is performed. The actual placement of the trees shall be subject to approval by either the Village Building Inspector or the Village's Planning Consultants or both, as determined by the Planning Board. The applicant has indicated that they will seek to gain some assistance from the Town in paying for the instillation of the American Sycamore trees along North Broadway. We informed the applicant that while we do not feel it is important that the Planning Board concern itself with who pays for the trees, we recommend that all of the trees be required as a condition of site plan approval. In other words, we recommend that the planting of the trees be a requirement of site plan approval, regardless of whether the applicant can persuade an outside party to assist in paying for the trees. The site plan that the applicant and Clark Associates have agreed to recommend also requires that 20 trees in the affected area be preserved for their natural lifetime and to provide compensatory plantings when those trees die. Furthermore, the applicant agreed that the buffer row of pines along the northern end of the affected area shall be maintained in perpetuity. III. CONCLUSION. There is no doubt that the visual aesthetic of this area will be affected by the proposed action. However, we believe that if the planting plan agreed to by the applicants is implemented in its entirety, then this will constitute suitable mitigation for losses associated with the proposed action. Thomas Gissen, AICP Associate Consultant cc: Mayor Janet Gondalfo William Regan John Hughes, Jr. James Margotta Larry Nardecchia 500\not0-020.tg 2 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Planning Board Minutes & Resolutions-1990 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource MINS_PLAN_1990-10-18 Subject The topic of the resource Planning Board Minutes & Resolutions-1990 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1990 https://sleepyhollow.localarchives.org/files/original/d4d1469310793f3d90733924b1d57102.pdf 17a336c36a14899a7400df0eee4aa55f PDF Text Text NORTH TARRYTOWN, N.Y. September 27, 1990 PUBLIC HEARING A Public Hearing was held before the Planning Board of the Village of North Tarrytown on the above date. PRESENT: Ellen Tsangaris, Chairperson James Galgano John O'Leary Richard Ayers Alan Kaplan ABSENT: Steve Baderian Roman Windas ALSO PRESENT: John J. Hughes, Jr., Village Attorney Chairperson Tsangaris called the meeting to order at 8P.M. Mr. O'Leary moved, seconded by Mr. Galgano that the minues of the meeting held on August 9th, 1990 be approved as submitted. Carried. Chairperson Tsangaris stated that the first order of business would be the following: 1. Public Hearing-E. Massaro & A. Pauluetti. Convert garage to apartment, an addition of a 7th family, at 190 Valley Street. The Clerk read the Public Notice to hear and consider an application of E. Massaro and A. Pauluetti of 952 Knollwood Road, White Plains, N.Y., for final site approval of plans to convert the garage to an apartment, an addition of a 7th apartment, at 190 Valley Street, North Tarrytown, N.Y. duly designated on Village Tax Assessment Map as Section 16, Block 12, Lot 3. Chairperson Tsangaris asked if there was anyone present who would like to address the Board. Mr. Thomas Gissen representing Frederick P. Clark Associates submitted a memorandum stating comments and recommendations to the project. (Copy in Official Minutes). Mr. Joseph Gulino, representing Charles A. Manganaro, Consulting Engineers submitted a memorandum stating their comments and recommendations to the project. (Copy in Official Minutes). Mr. Massaro stated that the apartment was to be an apartment for a handicapped person and all objections by the Planner and Engineer had been or would be met before he would apply for a Certificate of Occupancy. There being no further comments, Mr. Galgano moved, seconded by Mr. Ayers that the Public Hearing be closed. Carried. �-2Mr. Galgano moved, seconded by Mr. 0*Leary that the Site Plan be approved and the Village Attorney be directed to prepare the necessary resolution to be adopted at the next meeting. Carried. 2. Preliminary Hearing-Vincent Margotta, Proposed Alteration to 89 & 91 Cortlandt Street. Mr. Gissen submitted a memorandum stating their comments and recommendations to the project. (Copy in Official Minutes). Mr. Gulino submitted a memorandum stating their comments and recommendations to the project. (Copy in Official Minutes). Mr. Ronald Turnquist, Architect for Mr. Margotta presented plans for the project and advised the Board of the work to be done to the buildings. He stated that the Mayor informed him she wanted the repairs to be completed as soon as possible. He stated one of the buildings was empty and the other had tenants. They hoped they would not have to displace them while construction was going on. He stated that the matter is in the local court and he would make the Court aware of the intent to repair the buildings. After a discussion, Mr. O'Leary moved, seconded by Mr. Galgano that the matter be referred to the Zoning Board. Carried. 3. Preliminary Hearing-Proposed Subdivision-D. Kringas, 149 Webber Avenue. Mr. Gissen submitted a memorandum stating their comments and recommendations to the sub-division. (Copy in Official Minutes). Mr. Gulino submitted a memorandum stating their comments and recommendations to the sub-division. (Copy in Official Minutes). Mr. Turnquist, representing Mr. Kringas, stated that' it was the intention of Mr. Kringas to erect two single family dwellings, one for his son and one for his daughter. Mr. Turnquist outlined the project to the Board. Chairperson asked if there was anyone present who would like to comment. Mr. Arthur Ceconi, Amos Street stated he was representing the Briggsville Association and asked what impactfe the project would have on the sewer system and what variances would be needed. He also asked if an Environmental Study had been completed. •*• m i �-3Mr. Margotta stated that the lots to be sub-divided would be 5,000 square feet as called for in the code. The multi-family dwelling would be non-conforming and would be covered under the grandfather clause. Mr. Turnquist stated that if permission was granted future plans will show re-routing of brook, storm drainage and other items requested by the Board, with a completed environmental study attached. After a discussion Mr. O'Leary moved, seconded by Mr. Galgano that the matter be referred to the Zoning Board. Carried. 4.Preliminary Hearing- Leonard Rutligan, 97 College Avenue, Automotive Repair Shop. Mr. Thomas Gissen submitted a memorandum stating their comments and recommendations to the project. (Copy in Official Minutes). Mr. Gulino submitted a memorandum stating their comments and recommendations to the project. (Copy in Official Minutes). Mr. Rutligan stated that he was a resident of the Village of North Tarrytown and had previously had a repair shop on Cortlandt Street but moved to Tarrytown. He recently lost his lease and wanted to come back to North Tarrytown. The property in question has been vacant for the last two years and he feels that his type of establishment would be good for the area. There would be no cars parked on the street. All the cars would be parked within the building. After a discussion Mr. O'Leary moved, seconded by Mr. Galgano that a Public Hearing be scheduled for the October meeting, contingent on receiving drawings of the project. Carried. Mr. Margotta stated that adjacent to the building is a Body and FendertStnop and he has never received any complaints, and feels there is no objection to a garage in that area. 5. Sleepy Hollow Cemetery-Wetlands Permit & Site Plan. Continued Discussion. Mr. Larry Nardecchia, Jr., Professional Engineer representing Sleepy Hollow Cemetery presented plans for the Cemetery. Mr. Gissen submitted a memorandum stating comments and recommendations to the project. (Copy in Official Minutes). �-4Mr. Gulino submitted a memorandum stating1 comments and recommendations to the project. (Copy in Official Minutes). Mr. Nardecchi stated that a stream disturbance plan will be submitted to the D.E.C. and a permit applied for. He stated that they will disturb the stream but will not displace it. After a discussion Mr. Hughes stated that we should call for a Public Hearing on the matter. Mr. Galgano moved, seconded by Mr. O'Leary that a Public Hearing be held at the next meeting and that a water course and site plan be submitted. Carried. A discussion followed regarding the planting of trees to replace the trees that would be removed. Mr. Nardecchi stated he would be willing to discuss the matter with the Planners to satisfy the Boarcl members as to the type of trees to be planted and the number of trees. Mr. Gerard Weiss, Attorney and member of the Cemetery Association stated that the approval of the application is vital to the Cemetery. The Cemetery is running out of saleable land. If the project is approved it will double the number of two-grave plots. He stated that the sale of plots provides income for the Cemetery. If they have no land to sell the cemetery will not have the income to operate. He would appreciate the Board. making a decision as soon as possible. There being no further business to come before the Board, Mr. O'Leary moved, seconded by Mr. Ayers that the same be duly adjourned. Carried. Respectfully su£mubfeted, f Irene Ama;co Acting Clerk �MEMORANDUM To: Village of North Tarrytown Planning Board From: Frederick P. Clark Associates Date: September 20, 1990 Subject: Massaro and Pauletti Site Plan Review. This application appeared before the Planning Board on July 19, 1990. At that time the Planning Board determined not to engage in a substantive review prior to scheduling a public hearing on the application. As we have received no updated plans since the July Planning Board meeting, we can only assume there have been no revision of the previously submitted plans. Consequently, we have not revisited the submitted plans and our previous comments contained within our memorandum of July 17, 1990 - stand. We have enclosed the previous memorandum for your convenience. Thomas Gissen, AICP Associate Consultant cc: Mayor Janet Gandolfo William Regen John Hughes, Jr. James Margotta Irene Amato Joseph Guilino (By Facsimile) Julius Twyne, Jr. 500\not0-010.tg �MEMORANDUM To: Village of North Tarrytown From: Frederick P. Clark Associates Date: July 17, 1990 Subject: Massaro and Pauletti Proposed Dwelling Unit Addition Site Plan Review. !_•- INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this memorandum is to review the above noted revised application for the conversion of an existing basement garage into a proposed basement handicap dwelling unit. The proposed application is for an existing three story, six-dwelling apartment building located on the corner of Valley Street and Chestnut Street in a C-2 General Commercial Zoning District. The applicants have submitted a revised site plan prepared by JT2 Architects, titled "Proposed Handicapped Dwelling Unit Add.; 190 Valley Street; North Tarrytown, New York." The plan was prepared on December 4, 1989 and last revised June 6, 1990. II. HISTORICAL OVERVIEW: In December of 1989, this office reviewed an earlier version of this plan. At that time, we noted that the existing use was nonconforming relative to the requirements of Chapter 70 of the Code of the Village of North Tarrytown (the Code) . The areas of nonconformity included parking, building coverage, lot area and setback deficiencies. At that time, we also noted that, with the exception of the setback and building coverage deficiencies, all of the above noted areas of non-conformity would be further aggravated by the addition of another apartment. Due to these issues of nonconformity with the Code, the Planning Board informed the applicant that variances from these deficiencies would need to be granted by the ZBA before the Planning Board could consider any approval of the proposed application. It is our understanding, based upon a telephone conversation with Village of North Tarrytown Building Inspector Jim Margotta, that the applicants have received the necessary variances. The variances granted, inclusive of any conditions attached thereto, and the date the variances were granted should be specified on the plan. Provided the necessary variances have been granted, the Planning Board may now review the proposed application, subject to Article VIII of the Code. �III. REVIEW COMMENTS; Handicap Accessibility - Documentation should be provided to demonstrate that the proposed apartment and parking garage space meet all of the requirements of the State of New York and the Village of North Tarrytown for handicapped person accessibility. In addition to various state requirements for door widths, bathroom facilities and counter heights, the proposed handicapped parking space should maintain a minimum width of 13 feet at all points. Toilet Exhaust Fan - Because of the rising elevation at the northeast edge of the site, it would appear that the proposed toilet exhaust fan may be below grade. Obviously, such a location would not work. Furthermore, the applicant should investigate an alternative exhaust system. The proposed system would vent toilet fumes into a narrow alley directly below the windows of an adjacent structure. The adjacent structure appears to support residential uses. Venting toilet fumes in this manner appears to be contrary to the purposes of Section 62-30.B.(4) of the Code. This section of the Code directs the Planning Board to assure the following: "Satisfactory and harmonious relations between the development on the site and the existing and prospective development of contiguous land and adjacent neighborhoods." Site Litter - A pile of trash has been left on the northern corner of the site. It would be appropriate for the Planning Board to withhold any approvals until the site is brought into conformity with general maintenance standards. Thomas Gissen, AICP Associate Consultant 300\not0-002.tg 2 �MEMORANDUM To: Village of North Tarrytown Planning Board From: Frederick P. Clark Associates Date: September 21, 1990 Subject: 89 and 91 Cortlandt Street Site Plan. La. INTRODUCTION: This site plan application involves a proposal to perform a major rehabilitation on two adjoining existing three-story structures situated on an approximately 3,810 s.f. lot, which is located on the southwest corner of the intersection of Cortlandt and Clinton streets in the C-2 (General Commercial) district of the Village of North Tarrytown. The applicant proposes to redevelop this site with the ground floor of the newly unified structure supporting a commercial restaurant use and the upper floors supporting four two-bedroom apartments. It would appear that one effect of this major renovation is to effectively combine the two structures into a single structure. Site Plan approval from the Planning Board is required under Section 62-29.A(4) (b) of the Zoning Code of the Village of North Tarrytown (the Code). This section of the Code requires site plan approval for any development of any site in a commercial district that is located across the street from a residential district. Because the subject site is located within the C-2 district, which is both a commercial and a residential district, and is across the street from an R-6 residential district, site plan approval is mandatory. Additionally, as further delineated below, it appears that several bulk, area and parking variances will be required before this site plan may be implemented. II. ANALYSIS: A. Area and Bulk Standards. 1. Overview. Because the application proposes a mixed-use structure it appears that the structure will need to conform to both the commercial and the residential area and bulk standards for the C-2 district. Residential structures in the C-2 district must conform to the minimum lot size standards of the R-5 district and the maximum lot coverage and setback standards of the R-4 district. This results in numerous area and bulk variances being required for the residential portion of �the structure as well as a single setback variance being required for the commercial portion. 2. Commercial Standards. The only non-conforming area or bulk standard maintained within the commercial portion of the proposed site plan is a deficient rear yard. Commercial structures in the C-2 district are required to maintain a 20-foot rear yard; the application proposes a rear yard of approximately 16 feet. 3. Residential Standards. i. Minimum Lot Size: Multi-family residential uses proposed in the C-2 district must conform with the minimum lot size standard specified in the R-5 district. A minimum lot size of 6,500 s.f. is required for a fourunit multi-family development (5,000 s.f. for the first three units plus 1,500 s.f. per additional unit). The subject site is approximately 3,810 s.f. ii. Maximum Lot Coverage: The residential portion of the structure appears to maintain a footprint of approximately 1,630 s.f. For the 3,810 s.f. lot, this translates into a lot coverage of approximately 42.8 percent. Residential uses in the C-2 district must conform to the lot coverage requirements of the R-4 district, which permits a maximum of 35 percent lot coverage. iii. Yard requirements: Yard setback standards for residential uses in the C-2 district must conform to those standards in the R-4 district. As the chart below demonstrates, the structure does not meet any of the yard setback standards established in the R-4 district. Yard Min. Req'd in R-4 District Proposed Deficiency Front 20 Feet 2 Feet 18 Feet Side - One 3 Feet 1 Foot 2 Feet Side - Both 12 Feet 2 Feet 10 Feet Rear 25 Feet 17 Feet 8 Feet �Parking. Loading and Circulation. 1. Numerical Reguirement. Section 62-14.E. of the Code specifies numerical parking standards required for a variety of uses. Specifically, this section requires that one parking space be provided for each dwelling unit and that one parking space additionally be provided for every two bedrooms in a multi-family housing development. Additionally, one parking space is required for every five seats in a restaurant or bar use. While we do not know the number of seats proposed for this restaurant, it is clear that eight parking spaces are required for the proposed apartments. Since only three parking spaces are proposed, the applicant will require a parking variance from the ZBA. The applicant should be sure to calculate his aggregate parking need based upon the maximum number of seats he thinks the restaurant will ever maintain. Otherwise, if the ZBA grants a parking variance based upon a number of seats less than that actually in place at some point in the future, then the site plan will become void at that time. The ramifications for one's business could be severe. 2. Parking Space Size. Section 62-14.A. of the Code requires that each parking space maintain 180 square feet (s.f.) of space exclusive of all driveway, aisle and turnaround areas. The parking spaces shown on the proposed site plan appear to maintain only about 150 s.f. Consequently, either the size of the spaces should be adjusted or a variance should be sought for undersized parking spaces. 3. Parking Lot Lighting. Section 62-14.D.(5) of the Code requires that the proposed parking area be lit and that the lighting not produce light or glare onto adjoining properties. Consequently, a lighting plan should be included in the site plan. 4. Loading. No loading area is provided. However, there does appear to be offsite parking and loading space available in the vicinity of the subject site during daytime hours. Section 62.14.F. of the Code empowers the ZBA to determine the loading requirements for unlisted uses (a restaurant use is an unlisted use). 5. Driveway Width. Section 62-22.A. requires that all driveways for commercial and industrial uses maintain a width of not less than 15 feet and not more than 25 feet. The proposed driveway appears to be only 11.5 feet. 3 �Also, analysis of the site plan in the field appears to indicate that a chimney extension on the building located immediately to the west of the subject site abuts the western facade of the portion of the building thiat the applicant proposes to remove. Therefore, it would appear that this chimney may impinge on the proposed drix/ev/ay area. This apparent conflict between the site plar** and the field condition should be resolved as it may affect the driveway width. Lastly review rescue family C. as concerns driveway width, the Fire pepartment should this access relative to their fir^ suppression and needs for the proposed commercial restaurant ancl multiresidential uses. Performance Standards. All uses in the C-2 district are required to conform to the Code's performance standards, as articulated, in section 62-16. Other than general building and fire code standards, the only standard pertinent to the proposed application vould appear to concern odors. This standard, as articulated in Section 6216.B. (2), requires that odors not be emauiated beyond the property line. Given the food preparation nature of the proposed ground floor establishment an^5 the adjoining residential uses both proposed for the s i t ^ and existing in close proximity to it, the applicant should c3emonstrate how he proposes to vent kitchen fumes and mitigate their possible impacts. Thomas Gissen, AICP Associate Consultant cc: Mayor Janet Gandolfo William Regen John Hughes, Jr. James Margotta Irene Amato Joseph Guilino (By Facsimile) Ronald Turnquist 500\not0-011.tg 4 �MEMORANDUM To: Village of North Tarrytown Planning Board From: Frederick P. Clark Associates Date: September 20, 1990 Subject: Krinaas Subdivision Sketch Plat (September 12. 1990). The purpose of this memorandum is to provide the Planning Board with our analysis of the above noted sketch plat. The Kringas Subdivision plan of September 12, 1990 represents a major change from the previously submitted proposed subdivision sketch plats for this property. Whereas the previous submissions proposed either five or four new attached dwelling units, the new subdivision plat proposes the creation of two new single family lots of 5,000+ square feet (s.f.) each. The most recent of the previously submitted sketch plats for this site (titled Webber Mews and dated July 27, 1990) proposed the development of four new attached units in addition to the five existing attached units on the property. In addition to subdivision approval and the granting of numerous variances, this previous proposal would have required application of the clustering provisions of New York State's Village Law (Section 7-738). In our review of the July 27, 1990 sketch plat (see the memo from our office of August 7, 1990), we noted that the proposed subdivision would result in the creation of two grossly gerrymandered lots, the elimination of virtually all open recreation areas on one of the lots, a density of development beyond that which is permitted in the R-3 district and the need for multiple variances. The newly revised plat appears to effectively addresses those concerns previously raised by this office. While the newly proposed subdivision would result in one flag lot, this proposal greatly reduces the gerrymandering of lot lines evident in the previous submissions. Consequently, usable open space for recreation and aesthetic purposes has been provided for all proposed properties and units. Also, the density of development now conforms to the minimum standard required under the R-3 district (5,000 s.f. of land area per dwelling unit). Furthermore, the character of the streetscape now should be more in keeping with the single family residential character existing in the area and called for under the R-3 district standards. �Lastly, it appears that the need for all previously required bulk variances has been eliminated under the new proposal. However, the existing five-unit residential structure constitutes a pre-existing non-conforming use due to the fact that only single family homes and certain public uses are permitted principal uses in the R-3 district. Consequently, one use variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals will still be required to permit the existing structure on what amounts to a new lot. Thomas Gissen, AICP Associate Consultant cc: Mayor Janet Gandolfo William Regen John Hughes, Jr. James Margotta Irene Amato Joseph A. Guilino (By Facsimile) Ronald Turnquist 500\not0-009.tg 2 �MEMORANDUM To: Village of North Tarrytown Planning Board From: Frederick P. Clark Associates Date: September 24, 1990 Subject: Leonard Rutialan Automotive Repair Shop. I. INTRODUCTION. This application is for site plan approval for an automotive repair shop use in the C-2 (General Commercial) district of the Village of North Tarrytown. The subject site, which is located at 97 College Avenue, currently maintains a vacant single-story masonry structure of approximately 4,100 square feet (s.f.) in size. It is our understanding that the proposal is to rehabilitate this structure for use as an automotive repair shop. Due to the fact that this site is located within the C-2 district, which is both a commercial and residential district, and is further located directly across the street from a residential district (the R-6 district), the Planning Board maintains site plan review authority under Section 62-29.A. (4) of the Zoning Code of the Village of North Tarrytown (the Code). As further delineated below, numerous bulk variances as well as a use variance will be required from the Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) before this site plan can be implemented. II. ANALYSIS. A. Use Variance: Automotive repair shops are only permitted as-of-right in the C-l (Highway Commercial) district. As an automotive repair shop is not a permitted use in the C-2 district, a use variance will be required from the ZBA. B « Non-Conforming Bulk Standards: 1. Overview. Due to the fact that the existing structure covers virtually the entire lot, the site's physical layout is non-conforming in two regards. 2. Building Coverage. While the existing structure maintains virtually 100 percent building coverage, the �maximum building coverage for a commercial structure in the C-2 district is 60 percent. 3. Rear Yard Setback. A 20-foot rear yard setback is required of commercial structures in the C-2 district; the existing structure is built out virtually to the rear lot line. Performance Standards: Any use in the C-2 district is subject to the performance standards specified in Section 62-16 of the Code. The strict employment of these standards appears to be highly justifiable given the use proposed for this site (an automobile repair shop) and its proximity to residential uses and a residential district. Specifically, the applicant should be required to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Planning Board that necessary measures have been undertaken to assure that no noise, odors, glare or vibrations associated with the proposed automotive repair activity will emanate beyond the property lines either at ground level or at an elevation that could potentially affect neighboring residents in mid-rise apartments. Furthermore, the control of atmospheric pollution and potential groundwater contamination should be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Planning Board. This should include the provision of all procedures and safeguards necessary to assure the proper disposal of engine oil. Lastly, given the proposed use, it is recommended that the Planning Board request that the Fire Marshal review the proposed plans to assure that all necessary fire suppression and safety measures have been employed. Parking Standards: Section 62-14.E. requires that parking for this use be provided at a ratio of one space per 1,000 s.f. or one space per two employees, whichever yields a greater number of parking spaces. Employing the size standard would yield a requirement of five parking spaces. The applicant should provide a liberal estimate of the maximum number of employees per shift and then demonstrate that all required parking can be provided on site. 2 �Given the potential for an unsightly spillover of automobiles from this use onto adjoining lots or onto the public sidewalk and street, we would recommend that any site plan approval that may be forthcoming for this application be conditioned upon a continuous prohibition against employee or client parking anywhere but within the existing structure. E. Miscellaneous: 1. Environmental Assessment Form. As alluded to earlier in the section of this memorandum on "Performance Standards," the applicant should be required to demonstrate that all appropriate mitigation measures will be implemented necessary to prevent any adverse off-site impacts from noise, glare, vibration, or electrical disturbance. He should also be required to demonstrate that there will be no major adverse effect on air quality associated with the proposed auto repair shop. If the applicant cannot demonstrate that these impacts will be sufficiently mitigated, then the answers to sections (d)7 and (d)8 of the submitted short environmental assessment form should be changed from "no" to "yes." 2. Spillover of Neighboring Use onto Subject Site. The applicant should also explain the relationship of the property to the west of the subject site's northwest corner. It appears that part of a three-story wooden porch, that is ancillary to neighboring residential uses, is located on the subject site. Based upon a field investigation, it further appears that a one-half story high portion of the existing structure on the subject site is located below this wooden porch. A detailed explanation of the exact legal nature of any easements involved in this impingement upon a portion of the subject site by another lot's uses should be provided. Furthermore, the Planning Board should employ those restrictions upon the storage or other use of this space below and near the wooden porch that are appropriate and necessary to assure the health and safety of the residents of the neighboring structure. 3 �F. Conclusion. Pending the submission of the additional requested, this concludes our review. information Thomas Gissen, AICP Associate Consultant cc: Mayor Janet Gandolfo William Regen John Hughes, Jr. James Margotta Irene Amato Joseph Guilino (By Facsimile) Charles Riley 500\not0-012.tg �MEMORANDUM To: Village of North Tarrytown From: Frederick P. Clark Associates Date: September 25, 1990 Subject: Sleepy Hollow Wetlands Permit and Site Plan. I- INTRODUCTION The purpose of this memorandum is to provide the Planning Board with our review of the September 17, 1990 "Wetland Watercourse Protection - Chapter 61; Summary of Sleepy Hollow Project" report prepared by Larry Nardecchia, Jr., P.E.; the "Landscape Proposal Alternate" also prepared by Larry Nardecchia, Jr., P.E. and dated September 12, 1990; and to relate to the Planning Board the substance of recent correspondence between this office and Richard Speidel of the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) . II. WETLANDS REPORT A. Overview. The submittal by Larry Nardecchia, Jr., P.E. of additional information to meet the requirements of a formal wetlands application provides almost all of the information needed to process this application. The remainder of this section of the review is devoted to identifying additional information or clarifications we believe are necessary, and to presenting our preliminary comments. B. Additional Information and Clarifications Necessary. i• Information for item 61-10.A.(6)(a). Mr. Nardecchia indicates that there are no wetlands on site. However, the Proposed Drain Plan and Profile sheet, revised 8/5/90, indicates a wet area at the bottom of the ravine. Furthermore, Mr. Nowicki's report in Appendix E indicates the presence of "saturated soils" at the bottom of the ravine. Mr. Nowicki's report also indicates that there is only a very sparse growth of hydrophytic plants in the saturated soil. It is not clear why the soil has been labeled as saturated in one part of the report, while another part of the report indicates a lack of functioning hydric soils in the ravine. Under normal circumstances, this would appear to be a basic inconsistency. It is also not clear if this �saturated soil area extends beyond the limits of the stream, as seems to be indicated on the drawing. However, if it can be clearly shown that the saturated soil is not a functioning hydric soil and that it does not "support a prevalence of hydrophytic vegetation," then the Planning Board can safely agree that there are no wetlands at the bottom of the ravine beyond the edge of the watercourse. ii. Information for item 61-13.A.& B. The Village's Wetland Law, as currently written, requires the submittal of a mitigation plan when losses to a wetland/watercourse are necessary and unavoidable. Mitigation is to be in the form of replacing the lost wetland/watercourse at a 2:1 ratio. The applicant indicates that the requirements for mitigation should not apply to watercourses. From an environmental viewpoint, we would tend to agree. Nevertheless, the law as currently written requires the mitigation plan, even when the loss affects a watercourse only. However, assuming that the applicant can reasonably address the issues raised in the previous comment (i.e. conclusively demonstrate that no wetlands exist), then the Board must decide if the proposed action would result in the loss of the watercourse. If placing the stream in a culvert is considered to be a modification of the stream only, then the stream may be considered not to have been "lost" and no mitigation would be required. However, if the placement of the stream within a culvert is considered to constitute the loss of the watercourse, then a mitigation plan must be submitted. As Mr. Nardecchia states in his submittal, the law provides no indication of what technical date needs to be provided as part of a mitigation plan when only a watercourse is involved (61-13.B. only address the mitigation of lost wetlands). If the Planning Board determines that the stream would be lost under the proposed actions, then some determination from the Board will be necessary as to what will constitute an acceptable mitigation plan. 2 �LANDSCAPE PLAN; A. Landscaping Plan Dated June 16, 1990. The grading plan has been revised to remove the previously proposed grade change directly around the hemlock grove on the north side of the project site. While this will definitely help preserve the hemlocks, even further separation between these trees and the proposed grading may be necessary. Furthermore, the future subdivision of this area into plots ultimately may render all efforts to preserve these trees futile. If the trees are to be saved, then all efforts necessary to protect them should be taken now. This includes providing some perpetual clearing and grading limit area around these trees. Also, while the Landscaping Plan shows some replacement of trees, we think more can be added without jeopardizing the proposed use of the land. We would suggest doubling (at least) the amount of trees planted on the site. The additional trees should be shade trees. such as the proposed oak, rather than the smaller dogwoods. Exact tree species should be specified. Dogwoods come in many forms, from smaller shrubs to flowering trees. Many of these types are not suitable for the proposed planting area. We would recommend Cornus kousa, Kousa Dogwood for this planting. Similarly, there are a number of oak types available; we would recommend Ouercus rubra. Red oak for this planting. B. Landscape Proposal Alternate. The Landscape Proposal alternative provides a good additional start at mitigating the loss of vegetation due to filling. We feel that this proposal, in conjunction with additional planting on the proposed project site, would begin to provide more substantial mitigation. DEC SUBMISSION According to Richard Speidel of the Division of Regulatory Affairs for Region 3 of the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Lake Freemont is a Class B protected waterway. Consequently, the stream running from North Broadway (just south of the ravine site) to Lake Freemont, which is readily identifiable on the Village of North Tarrytown Zoning Map, also takes on the Class B protected status, according to Mr. Speidel. 3 �He further stated that the ravine stream flow is probably also protected, provided it flows on a year-round basis. It appears that this stream probably does flow on a year-round basis. He recommended that the applicant apply to the DEC for a stream disturbance permit. V. CONCLUSION Pending the submission of further information identified above and further direction from the Planning Board, this concludes our review at this time. Jim Donovan, ASIA Landscape Architect Thomas Gissen, AICP Associate Consultant cc: Mayor Janet Gandolfo William Regen John Hughes, Jr. James Margotta Irene Amato Joseph Guilino (By Facsimile) Larry Nardecchia, Jr., P.E. 500\not0-013.tg 4 �CAMCE P M ARI PQ A M A N P A N A P P l ^ n M R L C O M. I V I M I I W H I I M n w CONSULTING ENGINEERS COURT PLAZA NORTH. 25 MAIN ST.. HACKENSACK. NJ 07601-7032 sf^gj SUITE 8C NEW YORK. NCW YORK 10021 1 2 0 £AST Jsm 201-342-4200 212-683-7712 PAX. 201-342-0790 TABLE QF CONTENTS MEMORANDUMS - PROPOSED SUBDIVISION/SITE PLAN UPDATES VILLAGE OF NORTH TARRYTOWN, NEW YORK (SEPTEMBER, 1990) MEMORANDUM DESCRIPTION CAMCE REF. NO 1. E. Massaro & A. Pavluetti Proposed Handicapped Dwelling Unit, 190 Valley St. 1344R 2. Vincent Margotta - Proposed alteration to 89 & 91 Cortlandt St. 1383R 3. Proposed Kringas Subdivision 149 Webber Avenue 1378R 4. Sleepy Hollow Cemetery - Proposed subdrain near Route 9 1368R 5. Automotive Repair Shop 97 College Avenue 1384R �CHARLES A. MANGANAftO M E M O R A N D U M TO: Village of North Tarrytown Planning Board FROM: ' Joseph A. Gulino, Project Engineer Charles A. Manganaro Consulting Engineers DATE: September 21, 1990 RE: Proposed Handicapped Dwelling Unit Addition 190 Valley Street CAMCE #1344R Per our review of the site plan last revised June 6, 1990, by Mr. Julius B. Twyne, Jr., Architect, for the above referenced project, our comments or questions concerning potable water, sewage, and drainage facilities are as follows: A. The site plan should show where the drains located in the ramp area adjacent to the trash bin area and entry door, discharge too, along with pipe sizes and calculations to verify sizes. Final recommendations will be made to the Planning Board once the necessary information has been addressed. If you should have any questions or require additional information, please let us know. JAG/gsb.960 cc: Mr. William T. Regan, Village Administrator Mr. James T. Margotta, Building Inspector John Hughes, Esq. Mr. Thomas Gissen, Assoc. Cons. - Frederick P. Clark Assoc.(Via Facsimile) Mr. Julius B. Twyne, Jr., Architect �CHARLES A. MANGANARO M E M O R A N D U M TO: Village of North Tarrytown Planning Board FROM: Joseph A. Gulino, Project Engineer Charles A. Manganaro Consulting Engineers DATE: September 21, 1990 RE: Proposed Alteration to 89 & 91 Cortlandt Street CAMCE #1383R Per our preliminary review of the site plan last revised September 17, 1990, submitted to us by the North Tarrytown Building Department for the above referenced project, our comments concerning potable water, sewage, and storm water drainage only, are as follows: A. The names of all owners of record of adjacent properties should be shown on the site plan. B. The location of all existing structures and other manmade features on adjacent properties including existing utility lines should be shown on the site plan. C. The design of the proposed water supply, sewage disposal, and storm water drainage systems including the locations, sizes, invert, and rim elevations to the existing water supply, sewage disposal, and storm water drainage systems. In addition, the Village's water and sewer, and public works departments have standards, specifically typical detail sheets on the above mentioned systems. The developer should conform with these standards. D. Existing and proposed topography map of the subdivision should be shown extending at least twenty 20 ft. beyond the site boundaries with contour intervals not greater than five (5) ft. and referenced to USGS or other approved bench mark and scale. E. The Owner's endorsement should be on the site plan. �CHARLES A. MANGANARO Page 2 Planning Board September 21, 1990 CAMCE 1383R F. Planning Board Chairman's endorsement per subdivision regulations, Part IV, Page 7817 (14C) should be shown on site plan. G. The locations of nearest fire hydrants should be shown. H. The widths of streets and avenues encompassing the sites should be shown. I. Fire sprinklers, if required, should be shown or indicated by note on the drawing. Final recommendations will be made to the Planning Board once the necessary information has been received. If you should have any questions or require additional information, please let us know. JAG:ab:959 cc: Mr. William T. Regan, Village Administrator Mr. James T. Margotta, Building Inspector John J. Hughes, Village Attorney Mr. Thomas Gissen, Assoc. Cons. - Frederick P. Clark Associates (via Facsimile) Mr. Vincent Margotta �CHARLES A. MANGANARO M E M O R A N D U M TO: Village of North Tarrytown Planning Board FROM: Joseph A. Gulino, Project Engineer Charles A. Manganaro Consulting Engineers DATE: September 21, 1990 RE: Proposed Kringas Subdivision 149 Webber Avenue CAMCE #1378R Per our preliminary review of the revised site plan dated September 12, 1990, submitted to us by the North Tarrytown Building Department for the above referenced project, our comments concerning potable water, sewage, and storm water drainage only, are as follows: A. The names of all owners of record of adjacent properties should be shown on the site plan. B. The location of all existing structures and other manmade features on adjacent properties including existing utility lines should be shown on the site plan. C. The design of the proposed water supply, sewage disposal, and storm water drainage systems including the locations, sizes, invert, and rim elevations to the existing water supply, sewage disposal, and storm water drainage systems. In addition, the Village's water and sewer, and public works departments have standards, specifically typical detail sheets on the above mentioned systems. The developer should conform with these standards. D. Existing and proposed topography map of the subdivision should be shown extending at least twenty 20 ft. beyond the site boundaries with contour intervals not greater than five (5) ft. and referenced to USGS or other approved bench mark and scale. E. The nature and location of all other existing site features, including wetlands, water bodies, water courses, wooded areas, and rock outcrops should be shown. F. The Owner's endorsement should be on the site plan. �CHARLES A. MANGANARO Page 2 Planning Board September 21, 1990 G. Planning Board Chairman's endorsement per subdivision regulations, Part IV, Page 7817 (14C) should be shown on site plan. H. The locations of nearest fire hydrants should be shown. I. The widths of streets and avenues encompassing the sites should be shown. J. Fire sprinklers, if required, should be shown or indicated by note on the drawing. Final recommendations will be made to the Planning Board once the necessary information has been received. If you should have any questions or require additional information, please let us know. JAG:ab:959 cc: Mr. William T. Regan, Village Administrator Mr. James T. Margotta, Building Inspector John J. Hughes, Village Attorney Mr. Thomas Gissen, Assoc. Cons. - Frederick P. Clark Associates (via Facsimile) Mr. Demitrios Kringas �CAMC r M A Q t PQ A M A N P A N A R n COURT PLAZA NORTH. 25 MAIN ST. HACKENSACK. NJ 07601 -7032 LnMMLCO M. wiMrMvaMi^Mnw 120 ygf 75TH STREET sum K NCW Y0Wt N£w Y0RK l(J021 201-342-4200 212-683-7712 FAX. 201-342-0790 CONSULTING ENGINEERS TO: Village of North Tarrytown Planning Board FROM: Joseph A. Gulino, Project Engineer Charles A. Manganaro Consulting Engineers DATE: September 21, 1990 RE: Sleepy Hollow Cemetery - Proposed Subdrain Near Route 9 CAMCE #1368R As of this date, no further information has been received. Therefore, our sole comment concerning the technical aspects has not been addressed (See attached CAMCE Memorandum of August 9, 1990). Final recommendations will be made to the Planning Board once the necessary item is noted on the drawings. We trust this information satisfies any inquiries you may have. If you require any additional information, please let us know. JAG:ab:958 enc. cc: Mr. William T. Regan, Village Administrator Mr. James T. Margotta, Building Inspector John J. Hughes, Jr., Village Attorney Mr. Thomas Gissen, Assoc. Cons. - Frederick P. Clark Associates (via Facsimile) Mr. Larry Nardecchia, P.E. �CHARLES A. MANGANARO UH&AOO TO: Village of North Tarrytown Planning Board FROM: Joseph A. Gulino Charles A. Manganaro Consulting Engineers DATE: August 9, 1990 RE: Sleepy Hollow Cemetary - Proposed Subdrain Near Route 9 CAMCE #1368R As of this date, no further information has been received. Therefore, our sole comment, concerning only potable water, sewage and storm water, which has not been addressed, is as follows: A. The pipeline shall be sized to withstand the loads of overburden plus those resulting from construction equipment. Subsequently, in some sections of the pipe where deep backfilling would be required, it appears that a more tolerable pipe class be selected. Final recommendations will be made to the Planning Board once the necessary item is noted on the drawings. We trust that this information satisfies any inquiries you may have. If you require any additional information, please let us know. JAG:da:823 cc: Mr. James T. Margotta, Building Inspector Mr. William T. Regan, Village Administrator John J. Hughes, Jr., Village Attorney Mr. Larry Nardecchia, P.E. �CHARLES A. MANGANARO M E M O R A N D U M TO: Village of North Tarrytown Planning Board FROM: 'Joseph A. Gulino, Project Engineer Charles A. Manganaro Consulting Engineers DATE: September 21, 1990 RE: Lenny's Auto Repair 97 College Avenue CAMCE #1384R Per our review of the site plan dated August 27, 1990, prepared by Mr. Charles Riley, Land Surveyor; our comments concerning potable water, sewage, and storm drainage, are as follows: A. The location of all existing structures and other man-made features of the site, as well as those on adjacent properties, including existing utility lines (gas & electric). B. The location and design of the proposed water supply, sewage disposal and storm water drainage systems, including the locations, sizes, invert, and rim elevations to the existing water supply, sewage disposal, and storm water drainage systems. C. Existing and proposed topography map of the subdivision, extending at least twenty (20) ft. beyond the site boundaries with contour intervals not greater than five (5) ft. and referenced to US6S or other approved bench mark and scale. D. The nature and location of all other existing site features, including wetlands, water courses, wooded areas, and rock outcrops. E. The plan shall clearly indicate which site features are existing and proposed, and which will be removed. F. Owner's endorsement. G. Planning Board Chairman's endorsement per subdivision regulations, Part IV, Page 7817 (14C). H. The locations of nearest fire hydrants. I. The widths of streets and avenues encompassing the site. �CHARLES A. MANGANARO Page 2 Memorandum Lenny's Auto Repair CAMCE #1384R J. An area map showing all streets and property within one thousand (1,000) ft. of the applicant's property, at a scale of one (1) inch to four hundred (400) ft. All property owned by the applicant shall be clearly identified. K. Flow and pressure requirements for the fire sprinkler system and backflow preventers, if required. L. Cover letter to the Planning Board, including brief summary of proposed action in letter form, indicating scope of project, purpose and plans for development. JAG/gsb.962 cc: Mr. William T. Regan, Village Administrator Mr. James T. Margotta, Building Inspector John J. Hughes, Jr., Esq. Charles Riley, Land Surveyor Thomas Gissen, Assoc. Cons. - Frederick P. Clark Assoc. (Via Facsimile) �Frederick P. Clark Associates, Consultants Planning/Development. Environment/Transportation Rye. New York and Southport. Connecticut Frederick P dark (1909-1968) David J portman. AICP Frederic* E Wiedle. AICP Howard / Reynolds PL 350 Theodore Fremd Avenue Rye. New York 10580 (914)967-6540 FAX (914)967-6615 August 13, 1990 Larry J. Nardecchia, Jr. P.E. 21 McKinley Place Ardsley, N.Y. 10502 Dear Mr. Nardecchia: At the last Planning Board meeting (August 9, 1990) you voiced a concern that you did not know what materials you should submit in support of the Sleepy Hollow Cemetery's wetlands amplication. You further requested that someone supply you with "a road map" of the materials you will need to submit in support of this application. As we indicated in our memorandum of August 8, 19^0, Chapter 61, The Wetlands/Watercourse Law, of the Code of the Village of North Tarrytown (the Law) clearly specifies information that must be included in any application involving a proposed disturbance to a wetlands/watercourse or associated buffer area, ^s well as the standards the Planning Board must employ in reviewing such applications. Section 61-10, "Applications," clearly spells out exactly what information must be included in every permit application, as well as the information that may be required if certain development thresholds are met. Furthermore, subsection 61-10.c. provides that the Planning Board may require additional information throughout the review process, if analysis of the site and of "the information provided up to that point warrant further information and analysis. The normal procedure is for the applicants' first to provide the information required under the statue and then fot* the approving authority to review that information. However, a t "the Planning Board meeting of August 9, 1990, you indicated that you did not know what information was still missing. An initiai review of the requirements of the Section 61-10 and the materials so far submitted by the applicants indicates that, at ei minimum, the following additional information is required for untfer Section 6110 of the Law and has not yet been submitted by t h ^ Sleepy Hollow Cemetery: �Frederick P. Clark Associates, Consultants Planning/Development/Environment/Transportation 1) 61-10.A. (4): "A statement of the proposed work and purpose thereof and an explanation why the proposed activity cannot be located at another site, including an explanation of how the proposed activity is dependent on wetlands or water-related resources." Please note that this information is important as subsection 61-12.D. (2)& (3) of the Law require the Planning Board to make findings that the proposed activity could not feasibly be accomplished at any other location on the site or at another site. Furthermore, subsection 61-12.C. directs the Planning Board to give preference to applications where the proposed activity is dependent upon a shoreline or a wetlands/watercourse location. 2) 61-10.A. (5); A list of all property owners whose property both adjoins the affected watercourse and is 100 feet or less from the Sleepy Hollow Cemetery property line should be included. 3) 61-10.A.(6)(a): "The location of all wetlands/watercourses as determined bv a qualified ecoloaist/botanist and/or soil scientist no earlier than twelve (12) months prior to the date of filing the application." (emphasis added) You have identified wet areas beyond the stream bank that presumably may constitute wetlands as defined by this Law. However, the Law specifically requires that the actual delineation of this area be performed by persons with certain specific qualifications (i.e. an ecologist/botanist or soil scientist, as defined in Section 61-5 of the Law). The full and accurate delineation of any wetlands that may exist on the subject site is very important for determining the wetlands/watercourse buffer area, which also constitutes a regulated area. �Frederick P. Clark Associates, Consultants Planning/Development/Environment/Transportation 4) 61-10.A.(6)(b): "A description of the vegetative cover of the regulated area, including dominant species.11 5) 61-l0.A.(6Wc); types on site." "A description of the soil Again, a person qualified in identifying and mapping soil types will be needed for this requirement. The following information, which has not yet been supplied fully, is also required under the Law. However, the Planning Board may waive this requirement, provided the proposed action does not exceed certain size or cost thresholds, as specified in Section 6110.B. of the Law. Subsection 61-10.A. ( 6 W d ) ; "The location of the construction area or area proposed to be disturbed and its relation to property lines, roads, and buildings within two hundred fifty (250) feet; and watercourses within one hundred (100) feet. In preparing the required information it may be of use to you to review Section 61-12, Standards for Permit Decisions, of the Law. This section outlines the standards the Planning Board should establish before granting approvals and further specifies a number of findings the Planning Board must be able to make in order to grant approval. Section 63-13 of the Law also requires that if the Planning Board approves the proposed action, then the applicant must prepare a mitigation plan that, if approved, will result in the applicant creating new wetlands at least twice as large as the combined areas of the wetlands, watercourses and associated buffer areas that are to be disturbed by the proposed action. The actual requirements of such a mitigation plan are further explained in Section 63-13 of the Law. �Frederick P. Clark Associates, Consultants Planning/Development/Environment/Transportation If you have any questions regarding the contents of this letter, please do not hesitate to contact Tom Gissen at this office directly. Sincerely, Thomas Gissen, AICP Associate Consultant cc: 'Jim Donovan Landscape Architect Village of North Tarrytown Planning Board John Hughes James Margotta Joe Gulinoi 500\not0-007.tg �'•» PLANNING BOARD VILLAGE OF NORTH TARRYTOWN RESOLUTION: AMENDED SITE PLAN APPROVAL PROPOSED USE: CANOPY ADDITION TO AN EXISTING GASOLINE SERVICE STATION OWNER: JOHN TORNELLO SR. LOCATION: SOUTH EAST CORNER OF BROADWAY AND HUDSON TERRACE ADDRESS: 254-256 NORTH BROADWAY TAX MAP DESIGNATION: SECTION 17, BLOCK 13, LOT 4D ZONING: C-l, HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL WHEREAS, the Planning Board of the Village of North Tarrytown has reviewed an application for amended site plan approval (the Application) pursuant to Zoning Ordinance Article VIII, site plan review, Article VI, Section 62-19, Gasoline Service Station and other requirements of the Village Zoning Ordinance considered pertinent to the application, which application is to construct a 23.5-foot by 23.5-foot canopy above an existing pump area at an existing gasoline service station, subject to the development standards in the C-l zoning district, including but not limited to: parking and loading standards (Section 62-14E), performance standards (Section 52-16) and Site Plan Review standards (Section 62-29); and WHEREAS, the Application is supported by a site plan prepared by Gismondi and Pielli, Architects, 66 South Central Avenue, Elmsford, New York, 10523, prepared on June 5, 1990 and titled "Proposed Canopy Addition to Existing Citco Gasoline Service Station; Broadway and Hudson Terrace, North Tarrytown, N.Y.", and a short form Environmental Assessment Form; and WHEREAS, in the course of its review and acting as Lead Agency pursuant to the provisions of Article VIII of the Environmental Conservation Law, the Planning Board has made the following findings and caused, noted or conducted the following activities: 1. Caused field inspections to be made of the property under review and surrounding areas. 2. Reviewed said application materials. 3. Held a public hearing on said application on June 18, 1990, at which time the applicant, Planning Board, it's consultants and members of the public were given an opportunity to be heard. 4. Acting as Lead Agency, requested, received and reviewed an Environmental Assessment Form (EAF) in compliance with SEQR. �\l 5. As Lead Agency for site plan and subdivision review in the Village of North Tarrytown, the Planning Board, after review of said field conditions, recommendations and environmental assessment form as well as other matters noted above, has determined that the proposed action is an unlisted type and hereby issues a "negative declaration" determination of nonsignificance and environmental impact for this unlisted action. WHEREAS, the Village of North Tarrytown Planning Consultant, Frederick P. Clark Associates, recommended that the site plan be amended to include additional landscaped areas that would extend along the interior of the subject site's western property line extending from the northern property line to a point roughly parallel with the southern end of parking space number three and from the southern end of the western property line north to a point parallel with the northernmost edge of parking space number four; and WHEREAS, the applicant expressed some reservation as to the cost of landscaping this existing paved area and the Planning Board and the applicant agreed that substantial and permanent planter boxes planted with attractive flowering vegetation would provide a suitable alternative to a curbed landscaped area in the ground; and WHEREAS, the Planning Board has requested that the applicant provide a detailed lighting plan demonstrating the placement, inclusive of height, wattage and luminosity of all proposed and existing exterior lighting on the site, and clearly demonstrating that no off-site glare will impact any adjoining properties, including adjoining roadways; and WHEREAS, the Planning Board has requested written detailed explanations of the petroleum recycling program the applicant will employ and of the existing pump system on the site including all technical details of the system and the age of the system's various parts; and WHEREAS, the Planning Board has requested and the applicant has agreed that the existing stockade fence identified on the applicant's site plan as "to be removed" will not be removed but rather will be relocated approximately two feet to the east, to a position where it will form a continuation of the front (or western) facade of the existing one-story concrete block garage structure, and WHEREAS, the Planning Board requested that all of the above additions and modifications to the site plan be presented on the site plan, but the applicant requested that these additions be identified in a written signed document by the applicant rather than on the site plan due to the cost of modifying the site plan, and the Planning Board agreed to allow the substitution of a signed 2 �V statement by the applicant identifying all of the above changes with the exception of the requested lighting plan; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that said site plan application and site plan drawings noted above be and hereby are granted site plan approval and that the applicant may obtain the endorsed approval of the Planning Board Chairman, or as an alternate, the Village Administrator, on a copy of this plan drawing revised as necessary to show compliance with the following conditions, which endorsement shall permit filing in the offices of the Village Building Department for purposes of obtaining a building permit in accordance with this resolution and all building code requirements, provided however that this approval shall expire six (6) months from the date of this resolution if the following modifications and conditions have not been completed to the satisfaction of the Planning Board and the applicant has not obtained a building permit: 1. Lighting Plan - a detailed lighting plan showing the location, inclusive of height, luminosity and direction of all proposed and existing exterior lighting on the site and clearly demonstrating that no glare from said existing or proposed exterior lighting shall be evident to adjacent properties, including adjacent public rights-of-way. 2. A detailed written description of the planter boxes that will be provided by the applicant along the interior of the site's western property line. Two such planters shall be provided, and said planters shall be no less than 2 feet deep, 18 feet long and 3 feet high. Said planters shall be constructed in such a manner as to be placed on the site permanently and shall be located between the site's western property line and parking spaces three and four. 3. A signed written explanation of the petroleum recycling program that is presently employed on the site and that will be employed on the site in the future shall be provided to the satisfaction of the Town Engineer. 4. A written explanation of the existing pump system including its various parts and the age of those parts shall be provided. /V/ft/ "7 I41Q Date €VU^^^M—^ E l l e n T s a n g a r i s Q-/ Planning Board Chairperson 500\not0-002.tg;cs 3 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Planning Board Minutes & Resolutions-1990 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource MINS_PLAN_1990-09-27 Subject The topic of the resource Planning Board Minutes & Resolutions-1990 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1990 https://sleepyhollow.localarchives.org/files/original/fccb08bd0d7bf949219fe48bd34f989c.pdf 6f533a04d9f9fea8ff8f35fdf3318bae PDF Text Text NORTH TARRYTOWN,N.Y. JANUARY 18, 1990 REGULAR MEETING A Regular Meeting of the Planning Board of the Village of North Tarrytown was held on the above date. PRESENT: James Galgano, Chairman Ellen Tsangaris John O'Leary Richard Ayers Alan Kaplan Roman Windas Frank Rey ALSO PRESENT: John Hughes, Jr., Village Attorney Chairman Galgano called the meeting to order at 8 P.M. IMMACULATE CONCEPTION PROJECT - Discussion postponed. ESTATE OF JOSEPH GAULIN SUB-DIVISION - 199 Webber Avenue Chairman Galgano stated that a preliminary hearing on the above topic was required to discuss the sub-division creating an additional building lot. After a discussion a Public Hearing for Sub-Division was set for February 15th, 1990 on premises known and designated on Village Tax Assessment Maps as Section 17, Block 3, Lot 14. Chairman Galgano stated that the applicant should submit topo and all pertinent information prior to the Public Hearing. AMENTA PROJECT - PROFESSIONAL OFFICE BUILDING - Northeast Corner of Broadway (Route 9) and Chestnut Street. Mr. Wiedle presented a Final Resolution for Final Site Plan/Sub-Division Approval for the Board's approval. Mr. Gulino representing Charles Manganaro, Consulting Engineers submitted memo regarding the above project. (Copy in Official Minutes). After a discussion Mr. Rey moved, seconded by Mr. Windas that Final Site Plan be approved after review by Village Attorney. Carried. (Resolution in Official Minutes.) �-2WAYNE JEFFERS, (UNCLE JERRY'S RESTAURANT) - 410 North Broadway Mr. Wiedle presented a Pinal Site Plan Resolution for the above project. (Copy in Official Minutes). Mr. Donal Walsh representing Uncle Jerry and Mr. Jeffers stated they were not asking for a "Canopy" at the present time and the item should not be in the Final Site Plan Resolution and thought that the sidewalk on Old Broadway would not have to be installed, as previously agreed upon. Mr. Walsh stated that if in the future they wanted a "Canopy" they would request it. Mayor Gandolfo stated the Village Board was in favor of the installation of sidewalks on Old Broadway in front of the planned restaurant. They felt it would spruce up the corner and would make it safer for pedestrians. Mr. Gulino submitted a memo regarding installation of oil/water separators in the storm drainage system. Mr. Walsh stated they would comply with all requests in the resolution. After a discussion Mr. Rey moved, seconded by Mr. Windas that a sidewalk be installed on Old Broadway. Chairman Galgano polled the Board as follows: Mr. Kaplan - Yes Mr! 0'Leary - Yes Ms. Tsangaris - Yes Mr. Ayers - Yes Mr. Windas - Yes "CARRIED." Mr. Rey - Yes Mr. Walsh stated that Paragraph 4 on Page 8 and Paragraph 6.2 on Page 9 should be stricken from the final resolution. After a discussion Mr. Windas moved, seconded by Mr. Rey that Counsel Hughes be authorized to finalize Site Plan Resolution incorporating all items discussed. Carried. Mr. Walsh informed the Board that he would be coming before the Board for approval of plans for "Domino's Pizza" to be opened in the building owned by Luberger's on Valley Street. Mr. Walsh reported that Mr. Jeffers and Uncle Jerry would apply for a Building Permit as soon as approval of the Site Plan was received from the Architectural Review Board. �-3Chairman Galgano stated that Board members had received copies of the October, 1989 and December, 1989 minutes and they would be approved at the February meeting. HALPERN PROJECT- Discussion postponed. There being no further business to come before the Board Mr. O'Leary moved, seconded by Mr. Rey that the same be duly adjourned. Respectfully submitted, Irene Amato/ Acting Clerk �R E S O L U T I O N PLANNING BOARD VILLAGE OF NORTH TARRYTOWN RESOLUTION: SITE PLAN APPROVAL PROPOSED USE: PLANNED COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT GROUP; EXISTING GAS STATION IMPROVEMENT WITH RESTAURANT ADDITION; OWNER: MR. WAYNE JEFFERS LOCATION: SOUTHEAST CORNER OF OLD BROADWAY AND GORDON AVENUE; ADDRESS: 410 NORTH BROADWAY TAX MAP DESIGNATION: SECTION 17, BLOCK 21, LOTS 1-9 AND 109-112 ZONING: C-l, HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL WHEREAS, the Planning Board of the Village of North Tarrytown has reviewed an application for site plan approval (the Application) pursuant to Zoning Ordinance Article VIII, Site Plan Review, Article VI, Section 62-19, Gasoline Service Station and other requirements of the Village Zoning Ordinance considered pertinent to the Application, which Application is to construct a Planned Commercial Development Group, subject to the development standards in the C-l Zoning District, including but not limited to: Parking and Loading standards (Section 62-14E), Performance standards (Section 62-16) and Site Plan Review standards (Section 62-29); and WHEREAS, the site plan proposes the alteration, extension and rehabilitation of an existing non-conforming gas station, the conversion of currently unused automotive service bays and the construction of an addition to said service bays so as to house a proposed restaurant/delicatessen on the site supported by such accessory and supplemental uses as parking, off street loading, pedestrian facilities, utilities, signs, lighting, landscaping, drainage and other supportive facilities and uses; and WHEREAS, the Application is supported by a site plan consisting of three sheets of drawings prepared by Badaly and Badaly Architects, 559 Gramatan Avenue, Mount Vernon, New York 10552, more specifically identified as project #8922 and as follows: 1. Sheet A-l BIS, "Site Plan, Addition and Alterations to: 410 N. Broadway, North Tarrytown, New York1*, dated last revised 12/4/89; 2. Drawing A-l, "Site Plan, Site Details'0, scale: As noted, dated last revised 12/4/89; and >$, v?V. •* �3. Drawing A-l TER, "Misceallanous (SIC) Notes and Details11, scale: As noted, dated last revised 12/4/89; and WHEREAS, the Application is further supported by a letter dated 11/29/89 from Donal Walsh, Esq., agent for the Applicant, addressed to F. E. Wiedle, Village Planning Consultant, which letter contains ten (10) attachments relative to the subject Application as follows: * Copy of EAF filed June 89 for site plan; * Copy of building permit application and denial; * Copy of ZBA hearing notice; * Copy of Zoning Board minutes; * Original receipt for site planning fees; * Correspondence from Village Engineer; * Copy of review memo by Frederick P. Clark Associates, dated 9/21/89; * Response to above review memo by Donal Walsh, Esq., dated 10/16/89; * Copy of letter to Planning Board Chairman James Galgano, dated 10/16/89, with attachments, and * Letter dated 11/27/89 from W. T. Jeffers, Applicant, to Donal Walsh, Esq., responding to Planning Board requests, which letter and attachment responds to numerous questions raised by the Planning Board during the course of this review, and WHEREAS, in the course of its review and acting as Lead Agency in site plan review, pursuant to provisions of Article 8 of the New York State Environmental Conservation Law (SEQR), the Planning Board has made the following findings and caused, noted or conducted the following activities: 1. In addition to the above, the proposal involves the removal of an existing gas fuel tank, the relocation of existing gas pumps, the relining and modernization of the remaining gas tanks and pumping system. 2. While the Master Plan (Census Tract 116) of the Village of North Tarrytown, dated April 1980, makes no specific recommendations for xong range land use of the subject property (and in fact, to the knowledge of the Planning Board, said Master Plan was not officially adopted by the then Planning Board), the subject property is nonetheless zoned so 2 �as to permit the uses proposed, albeit subject to the standards and provisions of the Zoning Ordinance as noted above. It should be noted, however, that although the Master Plan focuses on Census Tract 116 (which does not include the subject property) Figure 5 therein, the recommended Generalized Land Use Plan, recommends the subject property in the "medium" to "low" density residential land use category; It is also significant to note that the Master Plan (Page 19) places heavy emphasis upon the importance of street beautification and improvement for pedestrian safety, comfort and general "usability" in all Village commercial areas. (Also see Figures 10, 11 and 12, and Page 20 of the Master Plan); Paramount among the Purposes for zoning control as listed in Section 62-2 of the Zoning Ordinance, is to: "A. Promote orderly development. To protect the character and maintain the stability of residential, business and industrial areas within the Village and promote the orderly and beneficial development of such areas."; The Planning Board is well aware of a recent and growing concern for and interest in the upgrading and improvement of the Village commercial areas, and that the Village administration has, in recent months, spent considerable financial resources for studying and upgrading the physical appearance and usability of the Village's commercial areas in the interest of the health and welfare of its citizenry. These studies have concentrated on (among other things) the methods and opportunities for discouraging further expansion and development of automotive related uses along the Broadway/Route 9 corridor, for eliminating or phasing out such automotive and automotive related uses and for generally revitalizing the Route 9 corridor with commercial, retail and office uses of a nature and character as to be more compatible with the surrounding residential areas, with the various public and semi-public uses and historic landmarks in proximity thereto, and, in general, to be more "pedestrian oriented" in nature; The site of the proposed project lies abutting the south side of and at the base of Gordon Avenue, which street provides the only westerly access to a substantial and well maintained residential neighborhood to the east. Gordon Avenue provides direct access to North Broadway (Route 9) at what may be the most historic portion of the Village - e.g., the Historical Society of the Tarrytow^s Inc., the Old Dutch Church and Burying Ground and the Sleepy Hollow Cemetery. Because of this unique relationship of the site to its surrounding 3 �residential and historic area, its redevelopment could have a profound effect and must be planned in careful detail so as to compliment its residential and historical surroundings; The subject property is the first commercial property one encounters while traveling southbound on Route 9 into the North Tarrytown central business district and as such helps to establish the image and character of the central business district; The existing service station and proposal for redevelopment of the site appears not to be in accordance with the requirements of the following sections of the Zoning Code: a. Section 62-19A - The existing filling station is located within 300 feet of a church, the Sleepy Hollow Cemetery, Kingsland Point Park, the Historic Philipsburg Manor, the Sleepy Hollow Restoration and another gas station; b. Section 62-19B(2) - The fuel tanks are located within 25 feet from the street line and within 15 feet of the side lot line; c. Section 62-l9Bf3) - The fuel pumps are now and are proposed to be relocated within 15 feet of the street line; d. Section 62-19C - Surface drainage contaminated by petroleum products is allowed to flow directly from the site into two existing catch basins and directly into the Pocantico River, less than 150 feet away; e. Section 62-19D - The Applicants have not shown the arrangement of site drainage and flow patterns, nor have they shown the relationship to public or quasi-public uses; f. Section 62-8B - The proposed restaurant use is not specifically listed as a permitted use within the C-l District; g. Section 62-22A - The exit and entrance driveways are now and are proposed to be more than 25 feet wide along the streetline on both Old Broadway and Gordon Avenue; h. Section 62-22B - The entrance and exit driveway to the proposed restaurant parking is less than 15 feet from the side lot line on Old Broadway; i. Section 62-22C - The entrance and exit driveways to the gas service station are located less than 25 feet from 4 �the corner of the intersecting streets of Gordon Avenue and Old Broadway. With respect to the foregoing numbered finding, the Application has received area variances from the Zoning Board of Appeals for items a through f as listed above, but has not received variances for items g through i, and it is the opinion of the Village Attorney that the site plan can be approved by the Planning Board with conditions which adjust or modify items g through i or, in the alternative, if the Applicant revises the site plan so as to comply with the requirements of items g through i; Among the following: requirements for site plan approval are the a. Section 62-30D - No site plan shall be approved by the Planning Board until same has been reviewed and approved by the Village Engineer with respect to the adequacy of proposed facilities for sewerage and for the drainage of stormwater; b. Section 62-30F - No site plan shall be considered for review by the Planning Board until the Applicant for such site plan review submits along with the site plan the required fees for such review, which shall include a site plan fee, a parking space fee and, if said application is referred to designated Village consultants, the consultant's review fee; in addition, SEQR review fees may be required; At the Planning Board's request, the Applicant has engaged a professional engineer who has inspected the rock outcroppings above and immediately to the north and south of the subject building and proposed construction, for structural integrity, and said engineer has recommended both immediate and long term procedures to ensure the safety of patrons and other users of the site, including the removal of portions of the rock as noted in an Inspection and Engineer Report dated November 10, 1989, which report includes, at the request of the Planning Board, certain certifications by Professional Engineer Michael Sterlacci, and dated November 30, 1989; Requested and received a short Environmental Assessment Form (EAF), dated 6/28/89 (2 pages); Caused field inspections to be made of the of the subject property and surrounding areas and received recommendations including, most recently, the Village Police Chief who, by a letter dated 12/6/89 addressed to the Planning Board Chairman James Galgano, concluded: 1. No sidewalk need be installed along Old Broadway. 5 �2. No sidewalk need be installed along Gordon Avenue from the easternmost curb cut to the property border. 3. There would be no public safety detriment if sidewalks are required for aesthetic purposes. 4. A wider curb cut on the Gordon Avenue side (in the 40 foot + length) should be permitted (on that side only) and is needed due to the size of delivery trucks which will generally enter both "straight in" on Gordon Avenue and will permit easier traffic flow from the pumps to the street. 5. In addition to recommending not requiring sidewalks and the larger curb cut, two additional site plan concerns of the Chief are: a. The corner of Old Broadway and Gordon Avenue should be "built up" so that "...the corner will not be •cut1 by motor traffic and the property border will be clearly delineated"; and b. "The Planning Board should recommend to the Board of Trustees that the corner of Gordon at Old Broadway should have a 'no right on red1 sign facing traffic heading west on Gordon, as this will solve the tendency of drivers to attempt forced mergers into rapidly moving Route 9 traffic northbound. Received a letter, dated December 14, 1989 from the Village Administrator, on behalf of himself and the Village General Foreman, strongly disagreeing with the opinion of the Village Police chief as to the value of sidewalks in relation to the subject development, which letter states in summary: 1. Sidewalks are important and are recommended for safety, convenience and aesthetic purposes, to wit: Sidewalks clearly separate pedestrian walking areas from vehicle maneuvering areas, thus offering a modicum of safety; sidewalks and concrete curbing are particularly helpful adjacent to restaurants where pedestrains walk to and from their parked vehicles; the Gordon Avenue sidewalk may ultimately be extended from Holland Avenue along Gordon. Noted that the Applicant and his agents have been responsive and cooperative throughout the Planning Board's review of this project, amending the site plan and augmenting its details as requested during the review process; and 6 �WHEREAS, on the basis of the above findings and activities and acting as Lead Agency in this site plan review action pursuant to SEQR, the Planning Board hereby declares the site plan review to be an Unlisted Action, has taken a "hard look" at the impact of the project upon the Village and hereby issues a Negative Declaration, conditioned upon compliance with the following conditions; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that said site plan application and site plan drawings noted above, be and hereby are granted site plan approval and that the Applicant may obtain the endorsed approval of the Planning Board Chairman, or his designated agent, as authorized by the Planning Board, on a copy of this resolution and upon the site plan drawings, as and when revised as necessary to show compliance with the following conditions, which endorsement shall permit filing in the Office of the Village Building Department for purposes of obtaining a building permit in accordance with this resolution and all building code requirements, provided, however, that this approval shall expire one (1) year after the date of this resolution if the following modifications and conditions have not been completed to the satisfaction of the Planning Board and the Applicant has not obtained the required building permit or permits for construction in accordance with the approved plan(s): 1. Location: Show the location of both sides of the Pocantico River (including the bridge) and of Old Broadway where both are adjacent to the subject site, including the existing sidewalks on the bridge and on the west side of Old Broadway. 2. Unstable Rock: Revise the site plan(s), by appropriate notes thereon or revised drawings or illustrations or written statements as follows: 2.1 3. The identified weakened unstable rock, as identified in the professional engineer's report noted above, shall be removed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. Off Street Parking and Loading: 3.1 On-site occupancy shall be limited to 32 seats (as noted on the site plan) and off-street parking spaces shown and noted as #1 through #7 shall be devoted thereto. Off street parking spaces noted as #8 through #13 shall be devoted and/or designated for employees and customers of the gas station and restaurant. Parking spaces shall be a minimum of 9 feet wide by 20 feet in depth, except for parking space #1, which shall meet "handicapped" width requirements. 7 �3.2 Upon consultation with the Village Attorney, the access to parking spaces #1 through #10 is hereby approved, subject to other conditions of this resolution, and the requirements of Zoning Ordinance Section 62-14,C are hereby waived to that shown on the subject site plan due to the exceptional topographic conditions of the site as noted above and due to other extraordinary and exceptional conditions pertaining thereto. 3.3 The Zoning Ordinance requirments of Sections 62-22A, B, and C as noted in Subsections 8(g) (h)(i) of this resolution are hereby waived and modified to the extent shown on the site plan as approved and modified by the herein conditions due to the unique physical conditions of the site and in consideration of the overall benefit which the site improvement will have upon the neighborhood and the Village. 3.4 The entire vehicle parking, loading and circulation area shall be resurfaced with asphaltic material and all parking and loading spaces shall be striped or marked off at dimensions noted in the Zoning Ordinance (See Zoning Section 62-14D(4)). 3.5 All parking areas shall be contained with poured-in-place reinforced curbing at construction specifications approved by the Village Engineer. The proposed concrete curbing required by Zoning Section 62-22C shall be extended approximately 10 feet easterly along the edge of pavement of Gordon Avenue, so as to comply with the required minimum of 25 feet from the street intersection. The curbs shall be augmented so as to create a fully curbed 3 foot wide (inside dimension) planter along its entire length. So as not to impede sight distance, the proposed pear tree shall be relocated on the site and the planter shall be planted with a low growing, drought tolerant shrub such as juniper and maintained in a healthy growing condition at a height no greater than 3 feet above adjacent ground level, and the landscape plan element shall be revised to reflect the above. In addition, the proposed curb at the southerly end of the site adjacent to parking space #10 shall be extended approximately 17 feet in an easterly direction, thence approximately 17 feet in a northerly direction along the easterly edge of parking spaces #9 and 10 until such curbing merges with the exposed rock face in that area, so as to control erosion and siltation. Utilities: The site plan has been amended to show utility lines as requested by the Planning Board. Storm drainage, water supply and sewage disposal facilities shall be approved 8 �in writing on the site plan by the Village Engineer, including but not limited to the following: 5. 4.1 Stormwater runoff provisions shall comply with Village policy of "0" increase in rate of runoff. 4.2 The Applicant shall submit a written report, with backup calculations to the satisfaction of the Village Engineer, indicating the intention to provide adequate fire flow, water supply and water pressure for the site development. (Zoning Section 62-30D). 4.3 All recommendations submitted in writing by the Village Engineer in letters dated 12/13/89, and those letters submitted previously by the Village Engineer pertaining to this site plan shall be complied with, including but not limited to the provision of oil separators at appropriate locations in the storm drainage system. frindscapinq. the Open Space and Buffers. Sidewalks. Signs and lighting; 5.1 That portion of the site lying east of the major rock cliff base, as noted on the site plan, shall be labeled and maintained as "permanent open space". This permanent open space shall be cleaned and maintained free of trash, refuse, junk, garbage, loose rock and rock formations considered in the opinion of a professional engineer to be unstable either now or in the future, dead or dying trees shall be removed, all as recommended, but not limited to the Inspection and Engineering Report and professional engineer's certification, dated November 10, 1989 and prepared by the Environmental Consulting Group, Inc. and signed by Edward A. Walsh and Michael R. Sterlacci, P.E. Upon written agreement of the Applicant, the permanent open space area and its continued maintenance as noted above, shall be deemed to meet the requirements of a buffer area as noted in Section 62-9C of the Zoning Code. 5.2 Sidewalks: For safety and convenience purposes, the Applicant shall provide a 4 foot wide recessed concrete sidewalk along Old Broadway across the entrance to parking spaces 1 through 10. 5.3 Signs: All exterior signs shall be designed and constructed so as to reflect the historic and residential character of the neighborhood. All exterior signs shall be reviewed and approved by the Village Architectural Review Board (ARB). All recommendations of the ARB shall become conditions of this Planning Board resolution of site plan approval. Any and all existing signs or 9 �outmoded or disfunctional structures or facilities on or adjacent to the site which are considered to be a safety hazard or nuisance by the Building Inspector shall be removed or relocated to an appropriate location. 5.4 Lighting; Site lighting shall be revised so as to reflect the historic residential character of the neighborhood, such as traditional "post and crown" lighting recommended in the Village Master Plan (see Fig. 11) and as exists on the adjacent bridge across the Pocantico River to the north, which lighting shall be approved by the Village Architectural Review Board. At least six (6) such post and crown light fixtures shall be provided on the site to replace the proposed contemporary light pool designated on the site plan detail sheet and in such recommended locations as: Adjacent to parking spaces #1 and #10, two such lights in front (or on the westerly side of) the existing and proposed restaurant buildings, and two such lights along Gordon Avenue (one at the easterly end of the concrete planting island and one at the easterly side of the Gordon Avenue driveway entrance). Pollution Control: 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 The procedures proposed for control of petroleum products spillage and other pollutants, particularly as they may filter into the groundwater and into the Pocantico River, as outlined in response item #2 of a letter dated October 16, 1989 prepared by Donal Walsh, Esq. to James Galgano, Chairman of the Village Planning Board, shall be reviewed and approved by the Village Engineer. The proposed restaurant exhaust system shall be approved by the Village Building Inspector, in conjunction with other requirements of the Village Building Code, and said exhaust system shall be designed so as to achieve a "clean air" exhaust, free of observable odors. The Applicants shall provide oil separators to be placed in the adjacent catch basins or in other locations to the satisfaction of the Village Engineer. The Applicants shall meet all requirements for removal and closure of the fuel tanks to be removed in accordance with NYSDEC and State and Federal regulations. Miscellaneouss 7.1 The site plan shall be referred to the Village Architectural Review Board and said Board's written recommendations regarding their specific concerns shall 10 �be a condition of this site plan and resolution of approval. 7.2 This resolution shall be noted on the site plan. 7.3 The Applicant shall submit payment of all Application review fees as noted and required in Section 62-30 (F) of the Village Zoning Code, as approved by the Village Attorney. 7.4 All elements of this approved site plan shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Village Building Inspector within a period of 18 months from the date of the issuance of a building permit and prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. The Planning Board may issue an extension of this time limit, or may modify any of the above conditions with respect thereto for good cause. 7.5 The Planning Board reserves the right to make a final field inspection of the project after construction of the facilities, upon notice by the Building Inspector but before the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. The purpose of this final inspection is to review the development and to require any modifications to parking, landscaping, signs, drainage, access, paving and other site plan details, "as built" drawings of same, which do not comply with the approved plan. The Applicant shall maintain all elements of the approved site plan, including landscaping, in a neat and healthy condition so as to retain an approved Certificate of Occupancy. 7.6 Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the Applicant shall submit to the Village Building Inspector a mylar reproduction of the site plan, complete with the certification of a professional architect and/or a professional engineer attesting to the construction of the site plan and its improvements as shown thereon. 7.7 Any proposed changes or alterations to the subject property beyond those specified on the cited plans and in this resolution, including but not limited to the construction of a canopy over the fuel service area, shall require a new application to be filed for site plan revision by the Planning Board. 11 �Panning Board Chairman FEW:rr notO-002.few 12/20/89 12/27/89 1/17/90 2/8/90 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Planning Board Minutes & Resolutions-1990 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource MINS_PLAN_1990-01-18 Subject The topic of the resource Planning Board Minutes & Resolutions-1990 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1990 https://sleepyhollow.localarchives.org/files/original/5f413819ce38f3fefbf0dbac0a309ba4.pdf 1b598fca6231d2a53772230170e1bfdc PDF Text Text A regular meeting of the Planning Board was held on Thursday, April 19, 1990 at 8:00 PM in Village Hall, North Tarrytown, New York. Present: Ellen Tsangaris, Chairperson James Galgano Roman Windas Steve Badgerian Alan Kaplan Richard Ayers Also Present: John J. Hughes, Village Attorney James Margotta, Building Inspector Daniel Wery, Engineer, Clarke Associates Joseph A. Gulino, Manganaro Consulting Engineers Francesca Lorenz, Recording Secretary Meeting was called to order at 8:15PM. A motion to approve the March 15 , 1990 Minutes was made by James Galgano and seconded by Ray Windas. Motion pass unanimously. IN THE MATTER OF TORNELLO GAS STATION. NO. BROADWAY. NEW YORK This was a continuation of a preliminary hearing. Mr. Tornello appeared before the Board and stated all variances were approved by the Zoning Board. He plans to renovate the present station by adding canopies over the gasoline pumps and updating the pumps to meet NYS standards and will be adding a three sided sign. He will also provide shrubs and evergreen trees to match the size of the trees planted by the Horseman Restaurant on Hudson Terrace. Ray Windas made a motion to call for a Public Hearing for site plan approval with drawings to be held May 17th, 1990. Mr. Kaplan seconded motion, motion passed unanimously. IN THE MATTER OF THE IMMACULATE CONCEPTION CHURCH. STREET. NORTH TARRYTOWN. N.Y. DEPEYSTER Mr. John Nolan, of Nolan Associates appeared before the Board and stated that the Zoning Board had approved all required variances. He also stated that because of the long process of getting approvals from the Village of North Tarrytown, they were having difficulty with financing the project. Mr. Windas noted that although the Zoning Board may have approved variances, he was not sure the the drainage problems were adequately addressed. At the point, Mr. Guliano of the MANCE Engineers stated that a "perculator" test should be performed before the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. 9 �A Draft of the Resolution granting Site Plan Approval was read aloud by the Village Attorney and some changes were made. A final draft of the resolution of site plan approval will be completed by Frederick P. Clarke Associates. (A copy of the new resolution is attached for review). Mr. Alan Kaplan made a motion to approve the resolution for site plan approval with changes, seconded by Mr. Ray Windas. Motion passed unanimously. A resident, Mrs. Washburn, asked if the bat problem would be resolved before construction work was started. Mr. Windas assured her that the problem would be addressed. Meeting adjourned 9:35 PM Respectfully submi/tted, Trancesca Lorenz & Recording Secretary fl enc. 10 �Frederick P. Clark Associates. Consultants Planning, Devetopment/Environmenl/Transportation Rye. New York and Southport. Connecticut Frederick P Clark (7909-1968) David J Ponman. AK:P Frederick E Wiedle. MCP Howard I Reynolds. P£ 350 Theodore Fremd Avenue Rye. New York 10580 (914)967-6540 FAX (914)967-6615 April 20, 1990 Mr. John Hughes, Jr. Village Attorney Village Hall North Tarrytown, New York 10591 Dear John: Please find enclosed the final draft of the resolution of site plan approval revised as adopted by the Planning Board at the April 19, 1990 meeting. Sincerely, Daniel K. Wery Associate Planner S00\not0-004.dkw:rr �RESOLUTION Adopted at the April 19, 1990 Meeting of the Village of North Tarrytown Planning Board RESOLUTION: SITE PLAN/BUILDING CONVERSION AND REDEVELOPMENT PROPOSED: 6 UNITS OF APARTMENTS OWNER: IMMACULATE CONCEPTION CHURCH LOCATION: DEPEYSTER STREET TAX DESIGNATION: SECTION , BLOCK 15, LOT 3 ZONING: R-5 RESIDENTIAL WHEREAS, the Planning Board of the Village of North Tarrytown has reviewed an application for site plan approval pursuant to Zoning Ordinance Article VIII for the redevelopment of an existing building located on the south side of Depeyster Street, which building is to be converted from an unused church building to six residential units, including related off-street parking, buffer landscaping, storm drainage and other supporting utilities and facilities, on a site approximately 11,527 square feet in size, as shown on one sheets of drawings prepared in the offices of Duo Dickenson Architect, and identified as follows: 1. "Proposed Redevelopment of the Immaculate Church Building", last revised 4/12/90; and WHEREAS, in the course of its review and acting as Lead Agency pursuant to provisions of Article VIII of the Environmental Conservation Law, the Planning Board has made the following findings and caused, noted or conducted to the following activities: 1. Received an application fee of $370; 2. Caused field inspections to be made of the property and the review of the surrounding area; 3. Conducted or caused field inspections to be made of the site so as to ascertain field conditions and determine that: 4. 3.1 The site contains an existing nonconforming building with regard to front and side yard setbacks; 3.2 The site is essentially flat and contains a large black oak tree with an approximately diameter breast height of 50 inches; 3.3 The existing large black oak tree is a specimen tree in the Village of North Tarrytown worthy of protection. Requested and received reports from Village authorities and/or the Applicant on such matters as tree preservation techniques. �water, sewage disposal, storm drainage, fire safety, traffic impact and access safety. 5. Referred the development proposal to the Westchester County Department of Planning pursuant to Sections 239 L, M, and N of the General Municipal Law. 6. Acting as Lead Agency, requested, received and reviewed an Environmental Assessment Form (EAF) in compliance with SEQR. 7. As Lead Agency for site plan in the Village of North Tarrytown, the Planning Board, after review of said field conditions, recommendations and environmental assessment form as well as other matters noted above, has determined that the proposed action is an Unlisted Type and hereby issues a "Negative Declaration" determination of nonsignificance and environmental impact for this Unlisted Action; and WHEREAS, the site plan proposes the creation of a parking area for ten new parking spaces, the removal of an existing detached garage, several new entrances to the existing building, a proposed drainage system for the site and the protection of the large black oak tree; and WHEREAS, the Applicants received variances from the ZBA on August 16, 1989 because the existing building does not comply with the front, rear and side yard setbacks; WHEREAS, the site has been visited by the Village's Planning Consultants and Engineering Consultants and the Planning Board is thoroughly familiar with the site and all aspects of the proposed project; and WHEREAS, in a letter dated August 17, 1989 from John R. Nolan to the Planning Board, special provisions the preservation and protection of the specimen tree on-site were outlined; and WHEREAS, a duly advertised public hearing was held at the Village Hall on 8:15 PM on September 21, 1989 at which time those wishing to be heard were given the opportunity to be heard and the public hearing was adjourned on that date; and WHEREAS, the Planning Board has requested, received and considered comments from the Village Planning Consultants, the Village Engineering Consultants, Building Inspector and concerned neighbors about the proposed project; and WHEREAS, the Applicants have revised the proposed plans numerous times to comply with the comments which have been made about the project; and 2 1 �WHEREAS, in the opinion of the Planning Board, the Applicant has complied with the Village's development regulations except as maybe noted below; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that said site plan application and site plan drawings noted above be and hereby are granted site plan approval and that the Applicant may obtain the endorsed approval of the Planning Board Chairman or, as an alternate, the Village Administrator, on a copy of this site plan resolution and upon the final mylar copy of the site plan drawing revised as necessary to show compliance with the following conditions, which endorsement shall permit filing in the offices of the Village Building Department for purposes of obtaining a building permit in accordance with this resolution and all building code requirements, provided, however, that this approval shall expire twelve (12) months from the date of this resolution if the following modifications and conditions have not been completed to the satisfaction of the Planning Board and/or the Applicant has not obtained a building permit: 1. Use - The site plan is approved for a maximum of six units of housing as shown on the site plan. Accessory uses shall be those permitted in the Zoning District within which the property is located. 2. Utilities - Storm drainage, water supply and sewage disposal shall be approved by the Planning Board or its design engineering representative of the Planning Board: 2.1 Stormwater runoff shall comply with the Planning Board's policy of "zero" increase in rate of runoff. 2.2 The Applicant shall submit a written report, with backup calculations indicating his intentions to provide adequate fire flow, water supply and pressure for the site. 2.3 The Applicants shall designate basins as approved. 2.4 All utilities, including conditions noted above, shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Board or its designated Engineering Consultant. its stormwater catch 3. Landscaping - All landscaping shown on the site plan shall be maintained in a healthy growing conditions and as otherwise specified on the site plan so as to maintain the certificate of occupancy. 4. Exterior Lighting - All exterior light structures shall be screened so as to prevent glare upon adjacent properties. 3 �All driveways and parking reinforced concrete curbs. areas shall be contained by Review Fees - The Applicants shall pay to the Village of North Tarrytown: 6.1 An inspection fee for construction inspection of the proposed site plan to include buildings, drainage system, sewage, landscaping, lighting and other site plan elements for compliance with the approved site plan in accordance with the Village of North Tarrytown Zoning Code. 6.2 A recreation fee of $1,000 per dwelling unit, or $6,000, for the acquisition or maintenance of recreational facilities in the vicinity of the project and available for use by occupants of the housing facility. The site plan should be submitted for the review and approval by the Westchester County Health Department, if required. The plan should be revised to specify whether the existing sewer connection is to a Village lateral or a County trunk line. The Applicants shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Village Engineer and Building Inspector that the existing connections are adequate to accommodate the six residential units or are satisfactorily improved to effect same. Drainage for the proposed parking lot shall be prepared to the satisfaction of the Village Engineer. The site plan shall indicate the connection of the drain in the proposed entry court to the larger drainage system for the parking lot. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the Applicant shall receive approval from the Village Architectural Review Board. The date of this resolution shall be noted on the site plan. The Applicant shall submit payment of all application review fees as noted and required in Section 62-30(f) of the Village Zoning Code, as approved by the Village Attorney. All elements of this approved site plan shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Village Building Inspector within a period of 18 months from the date of the issuance of building permit or prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. The Planning Board may issue an extension of this time limit, or may modify any of the above conditions with respect thereto for good cause. The Planning Board reserves the right to make a final field inspection of the project after construction of the facilities, upon notice of the Building Inspector but before 4 �the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. The purpose of this final inspection is to review the development and to require any modifications to parking, landscaping, signs, drainage, access, paving and other site plan details, N as built" drawings of sane, which do not comply with the approved plan and other site plan details in the interest of safety, convenience and enjoyment and peace and quite of adjacent neighbors and aesthetics. The Applicants shall maintain all elements of the approved site plan, including landscaping in a neat and healthy condition so as to attain and approve a certificate of occupancy. Prior to obtaining a building permit, four (4) copies of this final site plan as revised to meet the above conditions, shall be submitted to the Planning Board office for final approval. This final site plan review shall be accomplished by the Village Engineering Department or Consultant and shall incorporate all applicable conditions of this resolution and the construction standards of the Village of North Tarrytown as they say be appropriate. 14. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the Applicants shall submit the Village Building Inspector a mylar reproduction of the site plan complete with a certification of a professional Architect and/or a professional Engineer attesting to the construction of the site plan and its improvements as shown thereon. PLANNING BOARD VILLAGE OF NORTH TARRYTOWN By^^^^\1^UU^Chairman (j Date /l/lfa H <^_) | 500\not0-00S.dku:rr 4/20/90 5 \fiO �Approved and form Approved with with respect Respect to to substance J Village Attorney * Dated i-rAtUpn^WO Approved by the Planning Board of Appeals Chairman or Acting Chairn(aji Dated F i l e d with Deputy Clerk ] l e r k OK Deputy Clerk Clerk Dated: sJjl,N0 Date o f Meeting MARCH 15, 1990 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Planning Board Minutes & Resolutions-1990 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource MINS_PLAN_1990-04-19 Subject The topic of the resource Planning Board Minutes & Resolutions-1990 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1990 https://sleepyhollow.localarchives.org/files/original/fdc4bb079665eeae984aee0f5a3e5c8f.pdf 83be78944b658291edcf0f69f8a782ab PDF Text Text NORTH TARRYTOWN, N.Y. March 15, 1990 REGULAR MEETING • A Regular Meeting of the Planning Board of the Village of North Tarrytown was held on the above date. PRESENTL James Galgano, Chairman John O'Leary Richard Ayers Roman Windas frank Rey ABSENT: Ellen Tsangaris Alan Kaplan' ALSO PRESENT: John J. Hughes, Jr., Village Attorney Chairman Galgano called the meeting to order at 8 P.M. WALTER LUBERGER ESTATE-143 VALLEY STREET-EXTENSIVE RENOVATION TO BUILDING FOR DOMINO'S PIZZA. Chairman Galgano stated that a Preliminary Hearing on the above topic was required to discuss the renovation to the former Stiloski Liquor Store. Mr. Donal Walsh, representing the Luberger family, presented a check in the amount of $310.00 in payment of Planning Board Application Fee. He stated it was the purpose z-f the Luberger family to rehabilitate the present building and informed the Board of the history of the property. After a discussion Mr. O'Leary moved, seconded by Mr. Windas that the matter be referred to the Zoning Board for action. CARRIED. Mr. Joseph Gulino, representing CAMCE, Consulting Engineers for the Village, presented a memo outlining their recommendations concerning Site Plan Information, Non-conforming Use, Parking, Refuse Dumpster. (COPY IN OFFICIAL MINUTES). Frederick P. Clark Associates presented a memorandum outlining their recommendations concerning Site Plan Information, ^Nonconforming Use, Parking and Refuse Dumpster. (COPY IN OFFICIAL MINUTES). JAMES YOSIFIDES, 60 BEEKMAN AVENUE - FIRE REPAIRS TO THE RESTAURANT AND SECOND FLOOR APARTMENT. Chairman Galgano stated this was a Preliminary Hearing en the above matter. • Mr. Barstow, Architect submitted plans and applied for ^y the Building Inspector. The -hat plans were to be submitted for Mr. Yosifides, stated he had a Building Permit which was denied Building Inspector informed him to the Planning Board. �s -2He felt this was not necessary as the building has not sustained over 50£ damage. Frederick Clark Associates submitted a memorandum regarding the rehabilitation of 60-62 Beekman Avenue regarding Site Plan Approval, Non-Conforming Use and Parking. (COPY IN OFFICIAL MINUTES). Mr. Gulino presented a memorandum regarding the renovations whichJLncluded their recommendations concerning water, sewage, storm drainage. (COPY IN OFFICIAL MINUTES). Mr. Hughes stated that he would consult with the Building Inspector regarding the recent Local Law concerning "Site Plans". After a discussion, Mr. Windas moved, seconded by Mr. O 'Leary that the matter be referred to the Building Inspector and that he issue permits as needed. CARRIED. EARL & MARIE JOYNER - 17-21 PUBLIC HEARING. CLINTON STREET - FINAL SITE APPROVAL The Clerk read the Public Notice to hear and consider an application of Earl C. & Marie Joyner for Final Site Plan approval of plans for property located at 17-21 Clinton Street, North Tarrytown, N.Y. known and designated on Village Tax Assessment Map as Section 16, Block 8, Lots 26 & 28. Chairman Galgano asked if there was anyone present who would like to address the Board on the above matter. Robert Stanziale, representing the Joyners stated that all recommendations of the Board had been responded to, as well as chose presented by Frederick Clark Associates and CAMCE. Mr. Gulino stated that he had just received a copy of the Final Site Plan, and presented a memo relating to the proposed conversion and construction on the property at 17-21 Clinton Street. (COPY IN OFFICIAL MINUTES). Frederick Clark Associates presented a memo regarding Site Plan with their recommendations regarding Retaining Walls, Lighting Details, Fencing and Construction Details. (COPY IN OFFICIAL MINUTES) . There being no further comments Mr. Rey moved, seconded by Mr. 0'Leary that the hearing be closed. CARRIED. After a discussion, Mr. Hughes was instructed to prepare the formal resolution to be adopted at the next meeting. �-3Mr. O'Leary moved, seconded by Mr. Windas that the Minutes of the february 15, 1990 meeting be approved as submitted CARRIED. MISCELLANEOUS Mr. Rey stated that the Rodrigues Project on Valley Street has been at a standstill for sometime, and felt that Mr. Rodrigues should be asked to come before the Board and give an up-date. He stated that contractors should be required to submit a Performance Bond to insure that the projects are completed. There being no further business to come before the Board, Mr. O'Leary moved, seconded by Mr. Windas that the meeting be adjourned. CARRIED. Mr. Galgano stated that the next meeting of the Board would be held on April 19th, 1990. Respectfully submitted, Irene Amato Acting Clerk �Approved with resn^ct to substance and form Vill Dated: oved by the PI ian 'or Acting Chaiptfaln <ty?tf^f&/> F i l e d w i t h Deputy Clerk dfcjDr Deputy Clerk e4«r3fcjDr Dated: ^//(c/cjo � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Planning Board Minutes & Resolutions-1990 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource MINS_PLAN_1990-03-15 Subject The topic of the resource Planning Board Minutes & Resolutions-1990 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1990 https://sleepyhollow.localarchives.org/files/original/69859f74ff9cb100c7278d57e074dc0f.pdf 7c3d0593ccc369084565e7f2b01a42be PDF Text Text -• * A regular meeting of the Planning Board was held on Thursday, February 15, 1990, 8:00 PM in Village Hall, North Tarrytown, N. Y. Present: James Galgano, Chairman Ellen Tsangaris Richard Ayers Ray Windas Frank Rey Also Present: Daniel K. Wery,Consultant, Frederick P. Clarke Associates Joseph Gulino, Consultant, CAMCE Absent: John O'Leary Alan Kaplan Meeting was called to order at 8:10 PM. IN THE MATTER OF THE GAULIN SUBDIVISION. 199 WEBBER AVENUE, NORTH TARRYTOWN. The hearing was held for final site plan approval. The public notice was read aloud by the recording secretary. Mr. Wayne Martell, attorney for his client was seeking to make sion to create an additional lot dwelling. The new lot will meet the Village. the Gaulin estate stated that one lot into a two lot subdivifor the erection of a one family all the zoning requirements of He also stated that there were sufficient water and sewer lines to accommodate one additional home in that area and that this new dwelling would not have any adverse effects to the surrounding area. Mrs. Garrity, who is purchasing the existing house, asked the Board if 15 ft requirement for the side yard be on her side, so that both houses are not too close together. Mr. Windas stated that her request would be included in the final resolution for approval of the subdivision, to be prepared by the consultants. Mr. Windas asked that Mrs. record. Garrity's name be taken for the A motion was made by Mr. Windas that as "a friend of the court", the Board supports Mrs. Garrity's request to have as much distance between the proposed new dwelling and the house she is purchasing. ') 6 �Mr. Dan Wery of Clarke Associates advised the Board that there could be a considerable amount of water shed due to the property decline and made several suggestions for better drainage. Mr. Frank Rey moved that the comments of the consultant be included in the provisions of the resolution concerning construction on the newly subdivided building lot. Ray Windas moved to close the public hearing and seconded by Frank Rey. Motion carried unamiously. Mr. Galgano read aloud a note from Village Attorney John Hughes and stated that he felt the subdivision could be approved tonight. Mr. Windas made a motion to approve the subdivision of the lots with notes 1) granting the request subject to the consultants' suggestions and 2) considering the neighbor's request for distance between the building lots. Motion was seconded by Frank Rey. Motion carried. A final resolution will be prepared. IN THE MATTER OF THE JOYNER SUBDIVISION, 21 CLINTON STREET. NORTH TARRYTOWN. N. Y. This is a continuation of discussion from a previous meeting. Mr. Robert Stanizale, architect, and George Turpee represented the Joyners. Mr. Galgano read a note from Village Attorney John Hughes who stated that the Board could direct to have a resolution prepared to approve the subdivison. Mr. Galgano stated that he understood the Joyner project had been before the Zoning Board and was granted the required variances. A number of questions were brought up by the Board as to easements, location of the proposed buildings on the lots and the comments of the consultants. (Copy attached). At this point, Mr. Turpee , attorney for the Joyners, stated that he had just received the comments of the consultants and did not have sufficient time to review them. Mr. Galgano addressed the consultants and asked if there was any way the Board could receive their comments at least two weeks in advance of the Planning Board meetings so that they could be properly prepared at the meetings. Chairman Galgano suggested that the discussion be continued at the next meeting and a public hearing be held at that time. Mr. Margotta replied that he would make the arrangements for the public hearing. 7 �IN THE MATTER OF THE OLIVEIRA AND GASPAROVIC SUBDIVISION. 304 GORDON AVENUE. NORTH TARRYTOWN. N.Y. This was a continuation of the preliminary hearing held by "the Planning Board. Both Mr. Durafete and Mr. Gasparovic addressed the board along with the architect, Julius Twine. After a very long discussion concerning easements and property lines and sales of property, and reviewing the comments from the consultants (copy enclosed), it was decided to table any further discussions until they went before the Zoning Board with completed plans for any type of development for the property. A motion to adjourn the meeting was made by Frank Rey, by Ray Windas. Meeting adjourned at 9:55 RPM Respectfully submitted, A * du, <^J^y)<fl^Francesca Lorenz Recording Secretary fl encl. 8 seconded �Rav windas moved, seconded by Frank Rey and unanimously carried that the following resolution be adopted as read: WHEREAS, this Planning Board, on the application of Estate of Joseph Gaulin Name of Applicant • , did on February 15, 1990 Date grant permission for a subdivision of their property located at 3,99 Wfihhflr Avenue North Tarry town i N» Y. 10591 Section 17 , Sheet , Block 3 , Lot 14 ; and WHEREAS, the aforesaid subdivision permits the development of u s e s that are i d e n t i c a l t o t h o s e p r e v i o u s l y permitted, i n that the action did not provide f o r any change of zone, or approval of s i t e plan; and WHEREAS, the property contains no s t r u c t u r e or area that i s l i s t e d or e l i g i b l e t o be l i s t e d on the Federal Register of Historic Places or d e s i g n a t e d by t h e l o c a l H i s t o r i c Architectural Review Board a s an h i s t o r i c landmark or d i s t r i c t and the s a i d s u b d i v i s i o n complies with a l l r e g i o n a l , s t a t e and l o c a l land use plans; �NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: 1. The subdivision of the property as above described is an unlisted action pursuant to Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law and Part 617 of the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder, and will, in and of itself, not have a significant effect on the environment, so that no Environmental Impact Statement is required or need be filled therefor. 2. Nothing herein contained, however, shall be deemed to indicate or suggest that subsequent submissions for development of the property will not require the preparation and filing of Environmental Impact Statements. 3. This resolution is a Negative Declaration for the purposes of Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law, Local Law Environmental Quality Review Act for the Village of North Tarrytown, and will be kept on file at the Village Hall and be available for public examination. 2 �Frederick P. Clark Associates, Consultants P'inmprj Of^.e\oorr'fir' E'^.ronrrent T'-irTmorntion Rye N e w far* ana ScL,;noort ConnedCJj' '<J'J-''J68! \, : . - T"- in : ^50 Thrones FrerT!(j ^.er'.t) R V H Ne.v /o'« '0580 9*4,967-6540 -AX i9U)967-56'5 MEMORANDUM To: Village of North Tarrytown Planning-p Board Date: February 15, 1990 Subject: Site Plan for 21 Clinton Street At your request, we have reviewed "Proposed T^hree Family Dwelling and Conversion to a Two Family Dwelling: ; site Plan: Driveway Elevation," prepared by Robert Stanziale, i^H\IA, and last dated January 31, 1990. GENERAL INFORMATION Proposal. Conversion of an existing single-family dwelling to a two-family dwelling with two off-street parkimg spaces on a 9,135square-foot Parcel A, and construction of a t^_hree-family dwelling and six off street parking spaces on a 6, 250-Sssguare-foot Parcel B. Parcel B is proposed to be served by p u b l i c water supply and sewerage facilities, as is currently the ca ; se for the existing building on Parcel A. Tax Map. Section 16, Block 8, Lot 26 (Parcel &\) ; Section 16, Block 8, Lot 27 (Parcel B ) . Location. The northern side of Clinton Street t, approximately 170 feet west of its intersection with Cortland S^treet. Zoning. R-5 residential. Land Use. Residential. Physical Characteristics. A two-story dw^slling with a nonconforming front yard and northern side yard oon Parcel A. Several mature trees stand on the site, with the remaining vegetation being lawn and scrub growth. A retaining wall in poor condition runs along a portion of the southern property line for Parcel A and the rear property line for Parcel B. �have the following comments regarding the proposal: Separate Lots. The proposal encompasses two adjacent tax parcels. However, it is not clear if the site is one property under the Zoning Ordinance—in which case a subdivision would be necessary to provide a separate lot for each building, as required by Section 62-7.C. The applicant should provide individual, filed deeds in each parcel, or he should submit an application for subdivision approval. Driveway for Parcel B. a. A site plan proposes a driveway 20 feet wide in front of the westernmost garage (2.5 feet of that width being on the adjacent Parcel A ) . A driveway of that width will make maneuvering into and out of the garage very difficult. We recommend that the driveway be at least 22 feet wide in front of garages (the standard 24 feet would be preferable). b. The plan shows the driveway for Parcel B extending to a maximum of 3 feet onto Parcel A. At the least, the plan should indicate an easement for access and maintenance within that area. However, we recommend instead that the driveway be placed entirely on Parcel B. This can be accomplished by reducing the width of the proposed dwelling units on Parcel B and by reducing the width of Parcel A. Such a redesign should also allow for adequate separation of the proposed parking on Parcel A from the building on that parcel and from the driveway on Parcel B; we recommend a minimum 5-foot-wide planting strip between the parking on Parcel A and the driveway for Parcel B. c. Access to the easternmost garage will be very difficult, requiring a U-turn within a narrow area for both entering and leaving the garage. We recommend that the garage be relocated to provide more convenient access. Parking. a. The plan proposes two spaces per dwelling unit for the three-family building proposed from Parcel B. However, Section 62-14.E requires multifamily buildings to have one parking space per unit plus 1/2 parking space per bedroom. The plan does not indicate the number of bedrooms for the three proposed dwelling units. That information should be provided, and the plan revised accordingly. 2 �b. Section 62-14.D(3) requires parking areas with more than 3 spaces to have shielded lighting and a screening of fences or plantings. The plans should be revised to show adequate lighting for the parking area on Parcel B (including information showing that the light will be shielded from adjacent properties) and a detailed plan of proposed plantings and fences to ensure that the parking area is adequately screened. We recommend that that screening include plantings along the common property line between parcels A and B. (The Planning Board may also wish a fence or plantings along the southern property line of Parcel B to buffer the proposed residences from the adjacent machine shop.) c. The plan proposes two parking spaces for the two-family dwelling on Parcel A. Although this meets the minimum requirement of the Zoning Ordinance, we note that each of the two proposed dwelling units in the existing structure will have two bedrooms. The Planning Board may wish the applicant to revise the plan to provide two more parking spaces. Open space. Section 62-8.D of the Zoning Ordinance requires multiple dwellings to have 100 square feet of usable open space per dwelling unit. The plan proposes a front lawn of approximately 325 square feet and a rear "seeded area" of 200 square feet. The Planning Board should be satisfied that these areas represent the usable open space required by the Zoning Ordinance. We note that the front usable area, which is divided by the proposed sidewalk, could be enlarged to a single area by relocating the sidewalk to the southern edge of the proposed driveway (and, of course, relocating the second story entrance to the westernmost dwelling unit). Facade of proposed building. The applicant has provided an elevation of the northern facade of the proposed building for Parcel B. The Planning Board may wish elevations of the other three facades of the building. At a minimum, we recommend an elevation for the Clinton Street facade of the building be submitted for the Planning Board's review. Existing retaining wall. A retaining wall in very poor condition stands along a portion of the southern property line of Parcel A and the rear property line of Parcel B. We recommend that the Planning Board seek the advice of its engineer regarding the stability of that existing structure. If necessary, the repair or replacement of that wall should be a condition of site plan approval. Plan information. In addition to the incorrect citation of required parking for multifamily dwellings noted in Item 2 �above, the "Zoning Analysis" on the site plan should be corrected to indicate that the minimum lot area for the twofamily dwelling on Parcel A is 4,000 square feet. The table should also include the minimum lot width—40 feet for twofamily dwellings and 50 feet for multifamily dwellings. In addition, the plan should be revised to include a current survey; a lighting plan; a landscaping construction details plan; and construction details for fences, pavement, and stormwater facilities. The plan should also include topographic data to ensure proper drainage of the parking spaces on Parcel A. Finally, the plan appears to propose curbing for the parking areas on both parcels; the plan should note that curbing is proposed and provide elevations and a detail, if in fact curbing is proposed. David P. Fuller 500\noto\002.dpfrev 4 �MEMORANDUM To: Village of North Tarrytown Planning Board From: Frederick P. Clark Associates Date: February 13, 1990 Subject: Oliveira and Gasparovic Subdivision As requested, we have reviewed the application for subdivision approval consisting of one sheet of plans entitled, "Subdivision Map Prepared for Duarte F. and Elizabeth T. Oliveira and Mary Gasparovic in the Village of North Tarrytown", dated June 23, 1989, prepared by Ward Carpenter Engineers. The subject parcels of land are located in the R-4 (1 and 2 family residence) Zoning District. It is not clear from the submitted plans what the Applicants are proposing other than a subdivision of one lot with frontage on both Dell Street and Gordon Avenue. It appears that since there are two separate lots involved there must be a land transfer between the two lots being proposed. However, without a clear indication of the existing property lines and identification of new property lines and areas to be transferred, there is no way to decipher what the Applicants are proposing. REVIEW COMMENTS 1. Location Map. The plans should be revised to include a location map at a scale no greater than 1" » 400' , which would include the existing property lines of the subject properties, adjacent properties and the zoning boundaries. 2. Property Lines. The Applicants should be required to show the existing and proposed lot lines and lot ownership. The existing plan does not even indicate which lots are owned by the Oliveiras or the Gasparovics. 3. Joint Subdivision. Due to the lack of detail, it is not clear what the Applicants are proposing. However, if there are no land transfers between the two properties, there should be two separate subdivision applications and fees. If there is a land transfer between the two properties the subject parcels should be clearly identified, their area(s) clearly indicated and notes specifying from whom and to whom the areas are being transferred. 4. Roads. The Applicants should be required to show the right-of-ways and edges of pavement (both sides) for both Dell Street and Gordon Avenue. 5. Topography. The Applicants should be required to show a topographic map with two foot contour intervals prepared by a �licensed surveyor. It should be noted that the steep contours and the existing surrounding development may preclude any reasonable development of these lots. Zoning Bulk Compliance Schedule. All applicable standards with regard to the R-4 Zoning District and all proposed dimensions should be indicated in and a Zoning Bulk Compliance Schedule. Separate Lot. The Applicants apparently own a parcel of land on the opposite side of Dell Street from the existing residence which they wish to include as part of the minimum lot area for the lot. Because this lot is not contiguous, we have serious reservations whether it could be counted towards the minimum lot area, and recommend thorough legal review of this proposal. The Applicants should be required to explain how the lot indicated on the plan as 1A was created, if it was ever contiguous with Parcel IB, and whether Dell Street is located in an easement or a formal right-of-way. Garage and Grape Arbor. The Applicants have proposed a property line which would bisect an existing grape arbor and stucco garage. The grape arbor could easily be removed. The stucco garage is built into the hillside so that the existing roof line is roughly equal to the existing grade of the hillside at the southern end of the garage. The garage would have to be removed and would require a significant effort of the part of the Applicants. Frontage. Proposed Lot 3 only has 13.72 feet of frontage along Gordon Avenue. Normally, the Applicants are recommended to provide at least the minimum lot width (in this case 40 feet) for the minimum lot frontage. However, reductions are often allowed for lots fronting on streets with small radius curves. However, we do not recommend the creation of any lot with less than 25 feet of frontage along a public road. Lot width. The minimum lot width in the R-4 District is 40 feet. Proposed Lot 3 does not comply, as almost two thirds of the lot is 30 feet wide or less. Buildable Area. We seriously question the viability of proposed Lot 3 with regard to any suitable buildable area. The lot is extremely long and extremely narrow and consists of several parallel concrete retaining walls and pathways which traverse the steep slopes between two rows of homes on either side. Construction in this area would be extremely difficult and any new structure in this area would seriously affect the value of the neighboring residences. Drainage. if the Applicants wish to pursue this application they should be prepared to conduct a drainage analysis for the proposed development of these properties and their impacts upon the adjacent residences. �• 13. Residence Type. The Applicants should be required to indicate whether the existing hones on the subject properties are occupied by one or more families. 14. Rear Yard Setback. It appears that the proposed lot line between Lots IB and proposed Lot 2 would not meet the required rear yard setback of 25 feet from the existing structure on proposed Lot IB. 15. Proposed Site. If the Applicants should decide to proceed with this application, they should be required to indicate the proposed house locations, driveways, utility connections, drainage and grading plans, driveway profiles, etc... CONCLUSION In general, this is one of the most unrealistic subdivision proposals we have ever reviewed for the Village. It appears that the Applicants are attempting to create buildable lots out of land that is just not available. It appears that the application only achieves the creation of two dimensional areas meeting the minimum square footage requirement for lot area. Upon review of these plans and inspection of the site, we do not see any feasible means of additional residential development on the subject properties, and would not recommend the Applicants pursue this application. However, if they do wish to proceed, the Village should not schedule any further reviews of this application until all of the comments of this memo have been addressed and all requested information has been submitted. Daniel K. Wery Associate Planner 500not0-001.dkw:rr � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Planning Board Minutes & Resolutions-1990 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource MINS_PLAN_1990-02-15 Subject The topic of the resource Planning Board Minutes & Resolutions-1990 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1990 https://sleepyhollow.localarchives.org/files/original/52b5f5b9d5fb35bbff35c521947f1931.pdf b8856ce3e457041f792f81fa9df9b356 PDF Text Text NORTH TARRYTOWN, N.Y. May 17th, 1990 PUBLIC HEARING A Public Hearing was held before the Planning Board of the Village of North Tarrytown on the above date. PRESENT: Ellen Tsangaris, Chairperson James Galgano John O'Leary Richard Ayers Alan Kaplan Steve Baderian ABSENT: Roman Windas ALSO PRESENT: John J. Hughes, Jr., Village Attorney Chairperson Tsangaris called the meeting to order at 8 P.M. Mr. O'Leary moved, seconded by Mr. Galgano that the minutes of the meeting held on April 19th, 1990 be approved as submitted. Carried. Chairperson Tsangaris stated that the first order of business would be the following: 1. SLEEPY HOLLOW CEMETERY-PRELIMINARY DISCUSSION RE-DRAINAGE Mr. Larry Nardecchia representing Sleepy Hollow Cemetery presented a Drainage Analysis for the project to be undertaken by the Cemetery. He explained the project and stated that the purpose of the project was to eliminate the ravine and to create approximately 700 new cemetery plots. (Copy of Analysis in Official Minutes). Mr. William Graham, Superintendent of Sleepy Hollow Cemetery stated that the cemetery was running out of space and wanted to reclaim areas within the boundaries of the cemetery. Mr. Wery, representing Fredrick P. Clark Associates, stated they had reviewed the proposal and submitted a memorandum stating comments and recommendations. (Copy in Official Minutes). Mr. Joseph Gulino representing Manganaro Consulting Engineers, submitted their recommendations to the project. (Copy in Official Minutes). After a discussion Mr. O'Leary moved, seconded by Mr. Kaplan that the Board review the project and report back at the next meeting. Carried. Chairperson Tsangaris stated the Board would schedule a Public Hearing after the next meeting. �-22. JOHN TORNELLO-256 NORTH BROADWAY-PERMISSION TO INSTALL A CANOPY AND A FIRE SUPPRESSION SYSTEM. The Clerk read the Public Notice to hear and consider an application of John Tornello, 256 North Broadway, North Tarrytown, N.Y. for permission to install a canopy and a fire suppression system at 256 North Broadway, North Tarrytown, N.Y., known and designated on Village Tax Assessment Map as Section 17, Block 3, Lot 4D. Chairperson Tsangaris asked if there was anyone present who would like to address the Board on the subject. Mayor Janet Gandolfo stated the applicant had appeared but had to leave and she would speak for him. She stated that Mr. Tornello had given her the plans to submit to the Board regarding the canopy and the fire suppression system. She stated that the Board of Trustees were trying to work with the applicant as it was their intention to continue the rehabilitation of that intersection. Mr. Tornello informed her he was willing to comply with the Board's previous requests. Mayor Gandolfo stated this project would be the first to conform to the new "Canopy Ordinance". Mr. O'Leary moved, seconded by Mr. Ayers that the Public Hearing be continued at the next meeting of the Board. At that time, the applicant should be prepared to address all items contained in the attached memorandum. 3. ENRICO SOLARI-SUB-DIVISION-NEW BROADWAY Mr. Solari stated that he was appearing before the Board in order to renew his variance which had expired, and submitted plans. Mr. Wery stated he had just received the plans and would like to review them. Mr. Margotta stated that a Building Permit would not be issued until all conditions had been met. Mr. O'Leary moved, seconded by Mr. Galgano that the Solari's renew their variance with the Zoning Board and then return to the Planning Board and re-submit their plans. Carried. 4. NORTH TARRYTOWN ASSOCIATES-BEDFORD ROAD & WEBBER AVENUE. A discussion was held regarding the sub-division application which has expired. Mr. O'Leary moved, seconded by Mr. Galgano that due to the sewer moratorium the project had not been completed. A oneyear extension was granted, the extension running until May 17th, 1991. �-3OTHER BUSINESS Chairperson Tsangaris stated that the joint meeting of the Zoning Board, Planning Board and Architectural Review Board would be held next week, to discuss various projects. There being no further business to come before the Board, Mr. O'Leary moved, seconded by Mr. Galgano that the same be duly adjourned. Carried. Respectfully submitted, Irene Amato Acting Clerk �Approved witlj respect to substance and form Attorn S/n/to Approved by the Planning Board of Appeals Chairman or Acting Chairman Dated: ^T//7//fo Filed with Deputy Clerk Clerk dr Deputy Clerk Dated: S/a^/l* Bate of Meeting - efprif if""! ff* � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Planning Board Minutes & Resolutions-1990 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource MINS_PLAN_1990-05-17 Subject The topic of the resource Planning Board Minutes & Resolutions-1990 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1990 https://sleepyhollow.localarchives.org/files/original/83b1b481e67abc461dcc16d17545f67a.pdf 2275894dc6e13ae59ecee8d3e7687f3f PDF Text Text A Regular Meeting of the Planning Board was held on July 19,1990 at 8:00 PM in Village Hall, North Tarrytown, New York . Present: James Galgano, Acting Chairman Allan Kaplan Steven Baderian Roman Windas John O'Leary Richard Ayers Also Present: James Margotta, Building Inspector John Hughes, Village Attorney Joseph Gulino, Consultant, CAMCE Thomas Gissen, Consultant, Clarke Associates Absent: Ellen Tsangaris A motion to approve the minutes of the June 14, 1990 meeting was made by Richard Ayers and was seconded by Roman Windas. John O'Leary made a note that he was not listed as absent at the last meeting. IN THE MATTER OF SLEEPY HOLLOW CEMETERY. NORTH BROADWAY. NO. TARRYTOWN. N. Y. This is a continuation of the Preliminary Hearing from last month. Mr. Larry Nardecchia, representing Sleepy Hollow Cemetery submitted new plans to CAMCE Engineers, however, as far as plot locations requested by Mr. Gulino of CAMCE Engineers, he stated the cemetery must go before the New York Cemetery Board before they can submit final plot sites. Mr. Nardecchia also stated that he contacted DEC and their primary feeling was that they had no jurisdiction regarding the stream that runs thru the cemetery. He also noted that the tree removal would not be a major factor as he felt the most trees the cemetery would lose would be about 20 to 30 trees. Mr. Baderian stated that the landscaping plan was not sufficient and the loss of trees would have a major environmental impact at the Cemetery. Mr. O'Leary asked Mr. Baderian if he had any suggestions to make, so that the Board could hold a Public Hearing for August. Mr. Baderian felt that the Cemetery should submit another revised plan regarding the plantings. At this point, Mr. Donald Stever, a resident of North Tarrytown, and an environmental attorney, stated that he just found out the cemetery was planning to renovate the grounds and that not enough North Tarrytown residents were informed of the work that is to be undertaken. He also informed the Board that the Village had passed a Wetlands ordinance which required a permit before any work was started. He also stated he felt the DEC was not correct in their assumption that they had no jurisdiction over the stream in the Cemetery as the stream is an underground tributary that empties directly into the Hudson River. 13 # -~~*~ ii �He also stated that he felt the Environmental Impact Short Form submitted by the cemetery was inadequate as to the type of undertaking they are planning. John Hughes, Village Attorney suggested the board adjourn the matter until they had time to review the Wetlands Ordinance. Mr. Philip Keimig, North Tarrytown Tree Commission, addressed the board regarding the issue of the trees. He advised the Board that the dogwood and hemlock trees in the cemetery were blighted, and would probably not last another 15 years. He suggested when planting takes place, that a hearty variety of tree be used. The president of the Sleepy Hollow Taxpayers Association addressed the board, and asked that the Board consider the aesthetics of the surrounding neighborhood before considering approval of the proposed plan. Preliminary hearing will be continued at next month's meeting. IN THE MATTER OF MASSARO & PAULETTI. CLINTON STREET. NORTH TARRYTOWN. N. Y. This was a preliminary hearing for site plan approval for the conversion of an existing basement garage into a proposed basement handicap dwelling unit. A memo from Frederick P. Clark Associates (copy attached) was mailed to the Board, giving the board brief background of the proposed dwelling. A motion to have a Public Hearing at the August 9th Planning Board meeting was made by John O'Leary and seconded by Roman Windas. Motion carried. IN THE MATTER OF TORNELLO GASOLINE SERVICE STATION. 254-256 NORTH BROADWAY. NORTH TARRYTOWN. N. Y. A resolution to grant site plan approval for a canopy addition to the existing gasoline station was read aloud by Village Attorney John Hughes, (copy attached). A motion to approve the resolution as read was made by John O'Leary, seconded by Steven Baderian. Motion carried. A motion to adjourn the meeting was made by Roman Windas, seconded by John O'Leary. Motion carried. Meeting adjourned 9:20 PM. Please note, next meeting will be held August 9th. Respectfully submitted; / Francesca Lorenz, Recording Secretary 14 �MEMORANDUM To: Village of North Tarrytown From: Frederick P. Clark Associates Date: July 17, 1990 Subject: Massaro and Pauletti Proposed Dwelling Unit Addition Site Plan Review. JU INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this memorandum is to review the above noted revised application for the conversion of an existing basement garage into a proposed basement handicap dwelling unit. The proposed application is for an existing three story, six-dwelling apartment building located on the corner of Valley Street and Chestnut Street in a C-2 General Commercial Zoning District. The applicants have submitted a revised site plan prepared by JT2 Architects, titled "Proposed Handicapped Dwelling Unit Add.; 190 Valley Street; North Tarrytown, New York." The plan was prepared on December 4, 1989 and last revised June 6, 1990. XL*. HISTORICAL OVERVIEW: In December of 1989, this office reviewed an earlier version of this plan. At that time, we noted that the existing use was nonconforming relative to the requirements of Chapter 70 of the Code of the Village of North Tarrytown (the Code) . The areas of nonconformity included parking, building coverage, lot area and setback deficiencies. At that time, we also noted that, with the exception of the setback and building coverage deficiencies, all of the above noted areas of non-conformity would be further aggravated by the addition of another apartment. Due to these issues of nonconformity with the Code, the Planning Board informed the applicant that variances from these deficiencies would need to be granted by the ZBA before the Planning Board could consider any approval of the proposed application. It is our understanding, based upon a telephone conversation with Village of North Tarrytown Building Inspector Jim Margotta, that the applicants have received the necessary variances. The variances granted, inclusive of any conditions attached thereto, and the date the variances were granted should be specified on the plan. Provided the necessary variances have been granted, the Planning Board may now review the proposed application, subject to Article VIII of the Code. • i I �U L . REVIEW COMMENTS; Handicap Accessibility - Documentation should be provided to demonstrate that the proposed apartment and parking garage space meet all of the requirements of the State of New York and the Village of North Tarrytovn for handicapped person accessibility. In addition to various state requirements for door widths, bathroom facilities and counter heights, the proposed handicapped parking space should maintain a minimum width of 13 feet at all points. Toilet Exhaust Fan - Because of the rising elevation at the northeast edge of the site, it would appear that the proposed toilet exhaust fan may be below grade. Obviously, such a location would not work. Furthermore, the applicant should investigate an alternative exhaust system. The proposed system would vent toilet fumes into a narrow alley directly below the windows of an adjacent structure. The adjacent structure appears to support residential uses. Venting toilet fumes in this manner appears to be contrary to the purposes of Section 62-30.B.(4) of the Code. This section of the Code directs the Planning Board to assure the following: "Satisfactory and harmonious relations between the development on the site and the existing and prospective development of contiguous land and adjacent neighborhoods." Site Litter - A pile of trash has been left on the northern corner of the site. It would be appropriate for the Planning Board to withhold any approvals until the site is brought into conformity with general maintenance standards. Thomas Gisse^i, AICP Associate Consultant 300\not0-002.tg I �I N I T I A L DRAFT R E S O L U T I O N PLANNING BOARD VILLAGE OF NORTH TARRYTOWN RESOLUTION: AMENDED SITE PLAN APPROVAL PROPOSED USE: CANOPY ADDITION TO AN EXISTING GASOLINE SERVICE STATION OWNER: JOHN TORNELLO, SR. LOCATION: SOUTHEAST CORNER OF BROADWAY AND HUDSON TERRACE ADDRESS: 254-256 NORTH BROADWAY TAX MAP DESIGNATION: SECTION 17, BLOCK 13, LOT 4D ZONING: C-l, HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL WHEREAS, the planning Board of the Village of North Tarrytown has reviewed an applicatio for amended site plan approval (the Application) purusant to Zoning Ordinance Article VIII, site plan review, Article Vi, Section 62-19, Gasoline Service Station and other requirements of the Village Zoning Ordinance considered puertinent to the applcation, which application is to construct a 23.5-foot by 23.5-foot canopy above an exsitng pump area at an existing gasoline service station, subject to the development standards in the C-l zoning district, including but not limited to: parking and loacHng standards (Section 62-14E), performance standards (Section 52-16) and Site Plan Review standards (Section 62-29); and WHEREAS, t h e A p p l i c a t i o n i s supported by a s i t e p l a n prepared by Gismondi and pielli, Elms f o r d , New York, "Proposed Canopy Architects, 66 South 10523, prepared on June 5, Addition to Existing Citgo Central 1990 and Gasoline Avenue, titled Service S t a t i o n ; Broadway and Hudson Terrace, North Tarrytown, N.Y.", and a s h o r t form Envrlonmental Assessment Form; and �WHEREAS, in the course of its review and acting as Lead Agency pursuant to the provisions of Article VIII of the Environmental Conservation Lav, the Planning Board has made the following findings and caused, noted or conducted the following activities: 1. Caused field inspections to be made of the property under review and surroudning areas. 2. Reviewd said application materials. 3. Held a public hearing on said application on June 18, 1990, at which time the applicant, Planning Board, it's consultants and members of the public were given an opportunity to be heard. 4. Acting as Lead Agency, requested, received and reviewed an Environmental Assessment Form (EAF) in compliance with SEQR. 5. As Lead AGency for site plan and subdivision review inthe Village of North Tarrytown, the Planning Board, after review of said field conditions, recommendations and environmental assessment form as well as nother matters noted above, has determined that the proposed action is an unlisted type and hereby issues a "negative declaration" determinatio of nonsignificance action. and environmental impact for this unlisted �WHEREAS, the Village of North Tarrtytown Planning Consultant, Frederick P. Clark Associates, recommended that the site plan be amended to include additional landscaped areas that would extend along the interior of the subject site's western property line extending from the northern property line to a point roughly parallel with the southern end of parking space number three and from the southern end of the western property line north to a point parallel with the northernmost edge of parking space number four; and WHEREAS, the applicant expressed some reservation as to the cost of landscaping this existing paved area and the Planning Board and the applicant agreed that substantial and permanent planter boxes planted with attractive flowering vegetation would provide a suitable alternative to a curbed landscaped area in the ground; and WHEREAS, the Planning Board has requested that the applicant provide a detailed lighting plan demonstrating the placement, inclusive of height, wattage and luminosity of all proposed and exsiting exterior lighting on the site, and lclearly demonstrating that no off-site glare will impact any adjoining properties, including adjoining roadways; and WHEREAS, the Planning Board has requested written detailed explanations of the petroleum recycling program the applicant will employ and of the existing pump system on the site, including all �technical details of the system and the age of the system's various parts; and WHEREAS, the Planning Board has requested and the applicant has agreed that the existing stockade fence identified on the applicant's site plan as "to be removed" will not be removed but rather will be relocated approixmately two feet to the east, to a position where it will form a continuation of the front (or western) facade of the existing one-story concret block garage structure, and WHEREAS, the Planning Board requested that all of the above additions and modifications to the site plan be presented on the site plan, but the applicant requested that these additions be identified in a written signed document by the applicant rather than on the site plan due to the cost of modifying the site plan, and the Planning Board agreed to allow the substitution of a signed statement by the applicant identifying all of the above changes with the exception of the requested lighting plan; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT REOLVED, that said site plan aplication and site plan drawings noted above be and hereby are granted site pi a approval and that the applicant may obtain the endorsed approval of the Planning Board Chairman, or as an alternate, the Village Administrator, on a copy of this plan drawing revised as necessary to show compliance with the following conditions, which endorsement shall permit filing in the offices of the Village �Building Departmet for purposes of obtaining a building permit in accordance with this resolution and all building code requirements, provided however that this approval shall expire six (6) months fro the date of this resolution i the following modividations and conditions have not been completed to the satisfaction of the Planning Borad and the applicant has not obtained a building permit: 1. Lighting Plan - a detailed lighting plan showing the location, inclusive of height, luminosity and direction of all proposed and existing exterior lighting on the site and clearly demonstrating that no glare from said exisitng or proposed exterior lighting shall be evident to adjacent properties, including adjacent public rights-of-way. 2. A detailed written descriiption of the planter boxes that will be provided by the applicant along the Interior of the site's western property line. Two such planters shall be provided, and each such said planter shall be no less than 2 feet deep, 18 feet long and 3 feet high. Said planters shall be constructed in such a manner as to be placed on the site permanently and shall be located between the site's western property line and parking spaces three and four. 3. A signed written explanation of the petroleum recycling program that is presently employed on the site and that will �be employed on the site in the future shall be provided to the satisfaction of the Town Engineer. 4. A written explanation of the existing pump system including its various parts and the age of those parts shall be provided to the satisfaction of the Town Engineer. Date 500\not0-002.tg:c» Ellen Tsangaris, Planning Board Chairperson �MEMORANDUM To: Village of North Tarrytown From: Frederick P. Clark Associates Date: July 16, 1990 Subject: Sleepy Hollow Cemetery X* INTRQPUCTtQN: The purpose of this memorandum is to present the findings of this office's review of the amended site plan application materials submitted in support of the Sleepy Hollow Cemetery expansion application. The application proposes to fill and regrade an existing naturally vegetated ravine for the purpose of creating an additional burial area in association with the Sleepy Hollow Cemetery. In support of this application, the applicant's engineer, Larry J. Nardecchia, Jr., P.E., has submitted the following new or revised plans and report. o Proposed Drain Plan & Profile, dated April 10, 1990 and last revised June 22, 1990. o Proposed Grading Plan, dated April 10, 1990 and last revised June 22, 1990. o Landscaping Plan, dated June 16, 1990. o Details and Notes, dated April 10, 1990 and last revised June 22, 1990. o "Analysis of Environmental Impacts; Part 3," dated July 9, 1990. In a memorandum dated May 15, 1990, this office reviewed previous submissions in support of this application. The applicant also appeared before the Village of North Tarrytown Planning Board on June 14, 1990, at which time members of the Board and its consultants requested that the applicant prepare additional documentation of the potential impacts and mitigation measures associated with the proposed action. Primarily, this review focuses on the adequacy of the newly submitted materials. II. PLANTING PLAN: At the request of the Planning Board, the applicant has presented a planting plan purporting to show vegetation that will be removed, vegetation that will remain, and new vegetation to be planted as a mitigation for the impacts associated with lost vegetation. There are a number of outstanding issues associated with this plan, including the following: �1) Landscape Note #1 states, "Exact type of tree and location to be determined by the cemetery authorities." Essentially this note renders the landscape plan useless. We strongly recommend that whatever landscape plan, if any, is ultimately approved by the Planning Board be binding upon the applicant; otherwise the plan serves no purpose. We further recommend that the plan carry a note clearly stating that it is the applicant's responsibility to maintain all plantings shown on the plan in a healthy and vigorous condition and that any plantings that do not remain in such a condition shall be replaced by a similar planting by the applicant, at the applicant's sole expense. 2) The area within the grading limit line shown on the plan should be designated as a permanent openspace reservation. Furthermore, the grading limit line should be adjusted to include all areas within the driplines of all trees designated as an "Existing Tree to Remain." If this is not done, many of the trees designated to remain may die and have to be removed once the area begins to be used for grave sites. At present, grave sites are shown as adjacent to existing and proposed trees. If graves are dug within the drip lines of these trees, it is reasonable to expect that a significant portion of the roots of these trees will be cut and, therefore, many of the trees will die, leading to further defoliation of this scenic and historic area. 3) While it appears as if access to the subject area may be over the area's southern corner (near the intersection of Sylvan Road and the connector road), the grading limit line is presently an enclosed circle. To protect the surrounding vegetated area, specific construction access points should be designated and construction personnel and equipment should be barred from all other areas. 4) The row of "existing pine trees" is shown on the planting plan as though this row will remain. Apparently referring to the same area, the applicant's "Analysis of Environmental Impacts" states, The major hemlock grove at the northern rim of the ravine shall be maintained and protected during ' construction and shall display the continuance of intermittent stands of major Trees." However, much of this area is designated for regrading, according to the "Proposed Regrading Plan." The applicant should either adjust the grading limit line to include this entire stand of trees or the applicant should revise the "Planting Plan" and "Analysis of Environmental Impacts" to reflect the destruction of these trees. 2 �A „ < • • • * " * 5) The limited amount of planting does not appear to be adequate compensation, in type, size or quality, for the planting lost. We recommend that the number, variety and locations of the proposed plantings be enhanced significantly. Hit GRADING PLAN; 1) The erosion control barrier provides no protection against construction associated silt entering the drainage basin at station 0-f58. A note indicating some form of interim protection should be added. This situation should be corrected. 2) "Landfill Notes'1 #13 states, "Grass shall be planted on top of fill when final grade has been achieved." However, note #15 indicates that construction may take up to 12 months to complete. Even with the use of erosion control barriers, barren earth should not be allowed to remain exposed on a steep slope for more than three months. Consequently, some provision for temporary soil stabilization (possibly the spreading of rye grass seed) should be provided if the construction sequence is to exceed three months. 3) It appears that some of the grading along the subject area's southern boundary includes areas of cut, as well as areas of fill. If this cut area were eliminated from the proposed action, it would be possible to save a few more of the existing trees on the site. IV, MISCgLlANSQVS? There are many general references to erosion control, both on the submitted plans and in the "Analysis of Environmental Impacts." However, more detail of the specific erosion control plans should be provided by the applicant. 3L CONCLUSION: In addition to the above specific informational comments, we remain concerned about the loss of vegetation and the loss of a unique, scenic resource associated with this application. Since, according to the applicant, the area being considered constitutes less than one percent of the entire site, we think that it should be clearly established that there are no other similarly sized areas on the site that could serve this function. Only if the Board is satisfied that this is the only possible location for this activity, should the Board consider granting a conditional negative declaration under SEQR. We would recommend that the conditional negative declaration be conditioned upon the following conditions: 3 �1. Submission and approval of improved grading and planting plans providing for greater protection of existing trees and for the planting of more trees of a greater variety, in greater sizes and in superior locations, as identified above. 2• Submission and approval of specific erosion control plans for all phases of construction. Thomas Gissen, AICP Associate Consultant Jim Donovan, ASIA Senior Associate 300\not0-001.tg 4 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Planning Board Minutes & Resolutions-1990 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource MINS_PLAN_1990-07-19 Subject The topic of the resource Planning Board Minutes & Resolutions-1990 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1990 https://sleepyhollow.localarchives.org/files/original/b5360499fb91ea3814fba929ea8e2674.pdf c805019a827698d2ecad72c4b3f641a1 PDF Text Text A Regular Meeting of the Planning Board was held on June 14, 1990 at 8:00PM in Village Hall, North Tarrytown, New York. Present: Ellen Tsangaris, Chairperson Richard Ayers Alan Kaplan Steve Baderian Roman Windas Absent: James Galgano Also Present: J. Gulino, consultant, CAMCE T. Gissen, consultant, Frederick P. Clarke, Assoc. The meeting opened at 8:15 PM. A motion to approve the minutes of the May 17th meeting was made by Richard Ayers, seconded by Alan Kaplan. Motion was passed unanimously. IN THE MATTER OF SLEEPY HOLLOW CEMETERY, ROUTE 9. NORTH TARRYTOWN. NEW YORK This was a continuation of Preliminary Hearing from May, 1990. Both consultants addressed a number of issues concerning the project to be undertaken at the Cemetery. Mr. Gulino referred to his memo addressing the proposed subdrain near Route 9. (copy attached). Mr. Grissen expressed concern over the impact this would have on a historical site, and asked for a comprehensive environmental statement. Mr. Nardecchia stated that a level site would prevent erosion and thus prevent drainage onto already existing drains. Mr. Kaplan questioned the removal of the trees (about 20) from the property. Mr. Baderian asked if they consulted an arborist. Mr. Kaplan asked about the site east of the stream at the cemetery, and Mr. Graham, Superintendent of the Cemetery stated that area would be used for above ground burials. Many members of the Board were concerned about the environmental aspect of the project due to the loss of the trees, and how it would affect the landscaping of the Cemetery as it appears from Route 9. The Board would like to see plans with the layout of the roads (to see if they would be wide enough to provide access to the pipe lines), alleys, burial plots, and landscaping. Mr. Windas made a motion for a Public Hearing to held held in July, seconded by Richard Ayers. Mr. Baderian abstained. Motion passed. 11 �IN THE MATTER OF TORNELLO -CITGO SERVICE STATION CANOPY. NORTH BROADWAY. NORTH TARRYTOWN This was a continuation of a Public Hearing from last month. Mr. Gulino of the Camce feels that some of the items from his memos (copies attached) still not have been addressed. Mr. Windas asked that the plans be resubmitted indicating lighting, planting, buffer zones, etc. Mr. Muldoon stated the costs for new drawings would be too high for his client, and Mr. Windas suggested that they just be indicated on the present ones. Also a statement regarding recycling used motor oil should be submitted to the Board. Mr. Windas made a motion to have the Village Attorney present a resolution for the next meeting granting approval of the site plan provided all of the requested items be addressed by Mr. Tornello by the next meeting. Mr. Richard Ayers seconded motion. Motion passed unanimously. IN THE MATTER OF THE JOY PROJECT. CLINTON STREET. NORTH TARRYTOWN. NEW YORK Mr. John Hughes, Village Attorney read aloud the resolution approving site plan/building conversion and proposed three family dwelling. A motion to approve the resolution as read was made by Ray Windas seconded by Richard Ayers. Motion passed unanimously. Being no other business, meeting adjourned at 9:25 PM. Respectfully submitted, Francesca Lorenz Recording Secretary fl 12 �CAMCE rUADICQ A MAWrJAMAPO V / n n n t c o M. raMiiuMiiMnw COURT PLAZA NORTH. 25 MAIN ST. HACKENSACK. NJ 07801-7038 1202 LEXJNGTON AVE.. SUITE 127. NEW YORK. NY 10028 CONSULTING ENGINEERS 201-342-4200 212-683-7712 MX 201-342-0790 MEMORANDUM TO: James T. Margotta, Building Inspector Village of North Tarrytown, NY FROM: Joseph A. Gulino Charles A. Manganaro, Consulting Engineers DATE: June 8, 1990 RE: Sleepy Hollow Cemetary - Proposed subdrain near Route 9 Village of North Tarrytown, NY CAMCE #1368R Per our review of the drawings last revised on May 2 1 , 1990; submitted to us by Mr. Larry J. Nardecchia, Jr., P.E. for the above referenced project, our comments are as follows: A) Filter fabric should be placed all around the crushed stone. B) Provision shall be made for future excavation as needed for drainage pipe maintenance. C) Show location of field measurement. D) Determine lateral surcharge of ground water to the ravine, if any. E) Manning n for corrugated metal pipe is in a range of 0.02 to 0.025. F) The 24" - 58' long at 5.8% slope CAP has a maximum flow capacity of 34 cfs vs. computed flow for the post development 34.08 cfs. Therefore, the next larger diameter size should be used. Final recommendations will be made to the Planning Board once above mentioned comments have been addressed. • �CHARLES A. MANGANARO Page -2 If you should have any questions or require additional information, please let us know. JG:ab.636 ccs Mr. William T. Regan, Village Administrator Mr. John Hughes, Village Attorney Mr. Dan Wery - Frederick P. Clark Associates Consultants (via Facsimile) Ms. Ellen Tsangaris, Chairperson Board Member Mr. James Galgano, Planning Board Member Mr. Richard Ayers, Planning Board Member Mr. Steve Baderian, Planning Board Member Mr. Roman Windas, Planning Board Member Mr. Alan Kaplan, Planning Board Member Mr. Larry J. Nardecchia, P.E. �CAMCE P H A R I PQ A M A N f t A N A R O COURT PLAZA NORTH JS MAIN ST . HACKENSACK. NJ orsoi-ro32 WnMnLCO M. IWMngMHMnW 1202 201-342-4200* UEXINGTON AVE.. SUITE 127. NEW YORK. NV 10021 CONSULTING ENGINEERS FAX 201.3424790* M E M O R A N D U M TO: James T. Margotta, Building Inspector Village of North Tarrytown, NY FROM: Joseph A. Gulino Charles A. Manganaro Consulting Engineers DATE: June 8, 1990 RE: Tornello - Citgo Service Station Canopy Village of North Tarrytown, NY CAMCE #1343R As of the above referenced date, further information has been received. Therefore, the item relating to the storm drainage of the canopy has not been addressed (see attached CAMCE memorandum of May 14, 1990). Final recommendations will be made to the Planning Board once the necessary information has been addressed. If you should have any questions or require additional information, please let us know. JG: ab.632 enc • cc : Mr. William T. Regan, Village Administrator Joh; n Hughes, Esq. Ms. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. » Elien Tsangaris, Chairperson J R ames Galgano, Planning Board Member S ichard Ayers, Planning Board Member R teve Baderian, Planning Board Member A oman Windas, Planning Board Member Ian Kaplan, Planning Board Member J ohn O'Leary, Planning Board Member ohn J. Muldoon, Land Surveyor V �Rav Windas moved, seconded by Richard Avers and unanimously carried that the following resolution be adopted as read: WHEREAS, this Planning Board, on the application of Joyner family Name of Applicant did on June 14, 1990 Date grant permission for a subdivision of their property located at Section 17-21 Clinton Street 16, Sheet , Block 8 , Lot 26 ; and 28 WHEREAS, the aforesaid subdivision permits the development of uses that are identical to those previously permitted, in that the action did not provide for any change of zone, or approval of site plan; and WHEREAS, the property contains no structure or area that is listed or eligible to be listed on the Federal Register of Historic Places or designated by the local Historic Architectural Review Board as an historic landmark or district and the said subdivision complies with all regional, state and local land use plans; �NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: 1. The subdivision of the property as above described is an unlisted action pursuant to Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law and Part 617 of the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder, and will, in and of itself, not have a significant effect on the environment, so that no Environmental Impact Statement is required or need be filled therefor. 2. Nothing herein contained, however, shall be deemed to indicate or suggest that subsequent submissions for development of the property will not require the preparation and filing of Environmental Impact Statements. 3. This resolution is a Negative Declaration for the purposes of Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law, Local Law Environmental Quality Review Act for the Village of North Tarrytown, and will be kept on file at the Village Hall and be available for public examination. 2 �RESOLUTION Adopted at the % ^ ± 1 1990 Meeting of the •A Tar Village of North Tarrytown Planning Board PLANNING BOARD VILLAGE OF NORTH TARRYTOWN RESOLUTION: SITE PLAN/BUILDING CONVERSION AND PROPOSED THREEFAMILY DWELLING PROPOSED: ONE TWO-FAMILY DWELLING AND ONE THREEFAMILY DWELLING OWNER: EARL C. AND MARIE JOYNER LOCATION: 17-21 CLINTON STREET TAX DESIGNATION: SECTION 16, BLOCK 8, LOTS 26 AND 28 ZONING: R-5 RESIDENTIAL WHEREAS, The Planning Board of the Village of North Tarrytown has reviewed an application for site plan approval pursuant to Zoning Ordinance Article VIII for the construction of a threefamily dwelling unit and the conversion of an existing singlefamily dwelling to a two-family dwelling on Lots 27 and 26, respectively, located along the north side of Clinton Street approximately 300' west of the intersection with Cortland Street, including related off-street parking, buffer landscaping, storm drainage and other supporting utilities and facilities on a site approximately 15,385 square feet in size, as shown on one sheet of drawings prepared in the offices of Robert Stanziale, AIA, and identified as follows: 1. "Site Plan, Driveway Elevation - Proposed Three-Family Dwelling and Conversion into a Two-Family Dwelling" dated December 29, 1989, last revised February 27, 1990; and WHEREAS, in the course of its review and acting as Lead Agency pursuant to provisions of Article VIII of the Environmental Conservation Law, the Planning Board has made the following findings and caused, noted or conducted the following activities: 9 .'(#«64t jy 1. Received an application fee of $390; 2. Caused field inspections to be made of the property and the review of the surrounding area; 3. Requested and received reports from Village authorities and consultants regarding zoning compliance, water supply, sewerage disposal, storm drainage, traffic impact and access safety; 4. Acting as Lead Agency, requested, received and reviewed an Environmental Assessment Form (EAF) in compliance with SEQR; �5. As Lead Agency for site plan approval in the Village of North Tarrytown, the Planning Board, after review of said field conditions, recommendations and Environmental Assessment Fori as well as other natters noted above, has determined that the proposed action is an Unlisted Type and hereby issues a Negative Declaration determination of non-significance and environmental impact for this Unlisted Action; and WHEREAS, the site plan proposes the construction of a threefamily dwelling unit with three single car garages and three outdoor parking spaces, the construction of new utility connections, the reconstruction of existing retaining walls, the planting of buffer landscaping as well as the conversion of an existing single-family dwelling unit to a two-family dwelling unit and creation of two new parking spaces for said building; and WHEREAS, the applicants received variances from the ZBA on 1989 because the existing single-family building does not comply with the front and side yard setbacks; and WHEREAS, the site has been visited by the Village's planning consultants and engineering consultants and the Planning Board is thoroughly familiar with the site and all aspects of the proposed project; and WHEREAS, a duly advertised public hearing was held at the Village Hall on 8:15 PM on 1989 at which time those wishing to be heard were given the opportunity to be heard and the public hearing was adjourned to and closed on that date; and WHEREAS, the applicants have revised the proposed plans numerous times to comply with the comments which have been made about the project; and WHEREAS, in the opinion of the Planning Board the applicant has complied with the Village's development regulations, except as may be noted below; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that said site plan application and site plan drawings noted above be and hereby are granted site plan approval and that the applicant may obtain the endorsed approval of the Planning Board Chairman or as an alternate the Village Administrator, on a copy of this site plan resolution and upon final mylar copy of the site plan drawing revised as necessary to show compliance with the following conditions, which endorsement shall permit filing in the offices of the Village Building Department for purposes of obtaining a building permit in accordance with this resolution and all building code requirements, provided, however, that this approval shall expire twelve (12) months from the date of this resolution if the following modifications and conditions have not been completed to the 2 �satisfaction of the Planning Board and/or the applicant has not obtained a building permit: 1. Density - The site plan is approved for a Maximum of three units on Lot 27 and for a two-family dwelling unit on Lot 26. Accessory uses shall be those permitted in the zoning district within which the property is located. 2. Utilities - Stormwater, water supply and sewage disposal shall be approved by the Planning Board or the design engineering representative of the Planning Board. The site plan shall be revised to show the location of the proposed storm drainage line connection. Storm drainage calculations shall be submitted for review and approval to the Village's Consulting Engineer. 3. Landscaping - The Applicants shall revise the site plan to identify the number, location, size and common and scientific species names of the proposed landscaping plants to the satisfaction of the Planning Board. All landscaping shown on the site plan shall be maintained in a healthy growing condition and as otherwise specified on the site plan so as to maintain the certificate of occupancy. 4. Exterior Lighting - all exterior light structures shall be screened so as to prevent glare upon adjacent properties. 5. Curbing - All driveways and parking areas shall be contained by reinforced concrete curbs. 6. Retaining Walls - A note regarding existing retaining walls for Parcel B (Tax Lot 27) shall be revised to read "Existing retaining wall to be repaired or replaced as required by the Village Engineer". This same note shall be included on the revised plan for Parcel A (Tax Lot 26) . 7. Lighting Details - The plan shall be revised to provide construction and materials specification drawings of the proposed lighting including dimensions of poles and fixtures, in compliance with the Village of North Tarrytown Zoning Ordinance. 8. Fencing - The site plan shall be revised to include details of the fence construction and a note indicating that the "finished" side of the fence will face towards the adjacent properties. The site plan shall also be revised to indicate the location and ownership of the cyclone fence on or near the adjacent property to the east owned by the A&S Machine Shop. The Applicant shall revise the plan to extend the proposed 6foot high wood fence along the entire length of the eastern property line on Parcel B (Tax Lot 27). 3 �9. Drlvevav Construction Detail* - The site plan shall be revised to provide construction details for the proposed driveway and parking lot construction including a dimensional cross-section of the proposed paving Materials and curbing. 10. Drainage - The site plan shall be revised to show the location of the proposed drainage lines as well as the location and connections to the existing storm drainage system, to the satisfaction of the Village Engineer. 11. Owners Signature - The site plan shall be revised to include the appropriate location and signature line indicating the owners signature approval. 12. Review Fees - the applicants shall pay the Village of North Tarrytown: 12.1 An inspection fee for construction inspection of the proposed site plan to include buildings, drainage system, sewage, landscaping, lighting and other site plan elements for compliance with the approved site plan in accordance with the Village of North Tarrytown zoning code; 12.2 A recreation fee of $1,000 per new dwelling unit, or $4,000, for the acquisition or maintenance of recreation facilities in the vicinity of the project and available for use by occupants of the housing facility. 13. The site plan should be submitted for review and approval by the Westchester County Health Department, if required. 14. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall receive approval from the Village Architectural Review Board. 15. Date of this resolution shall be noted on the site plan. 16. The applicant shall submit payment of all application review fees as noted and required in Section 62-30(f) of the Village zoning code, as approved by the Village Attorney. 17. All elements of this approved site plan shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Village Building Inspector within a period of 18 months from the date of issuance of a building permit or prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. The Planning Board may issue an extension of this time limit, or may modify any of the above conditions with respect thereto for good cause. 18. The Planning Board reserves the right to make a final field inspection of the project after construction of the facilities, upon notice of the building inspector but before 4 �the Issuance of occupancy. The purpose of this final Inspection is to review the development and to require any modifications to parking, landscaping, sign, drainage, access, paving, and other site plan details, "as built" drawings of sane, which do no comply with the approved plan and other site plan details in the interest of safety, convenience and enjoyment of peace and quiet of the adjacent neighbors and aesthetics. The applicant shall maintain all elements of the approved site plan, including landscaping in a neat and healthy condition so as to attain an approved certificate of occupancy. Prior to obtaining a building permit, four (4) copies of this final site plan as revised to meet the above conditions, shall be submitted to the Planning Board office for final approval. This final site plan review shall be accomplished by the Village Engineering Department or Consultant and shall incorporate all applicable conditions of this resolution and the construction standards of the Village of North Tarry town as they may be appropriate. 19. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the Applicant shall submit to the Village Building Inspector a mylar reproduction of the site plan complete with certification of a professional architect and/or professional engineer attesting to the construction of the site plan and its improvements as shown thereon. PLANNING BOARD VILLAGE OF NORTH TARRYTOWN Date Chairman 500\not0-007.dkw.c$ June 12, 1990 5 iohul^d �CAMCE A M i n i e c « MAKtr> AKJADrt CHARLES A. MANGANARO COURT PIAZA NORTH. 25 MAINST.. S HACKENSACK. NJ 07601-7032 . NEW YORK. NY 10028 1202 ^ N C T O N AVE . SUITE 127 CONSULTING ENGINEERS 201-342-4200 212-883-7712 PAX. 201-342-0790 MEMORANDUM TO: James T. Margotta, Building Inspector Village of North Tarrytown, NY FROM: Joseph A. Gulino Charles A. Manganaro, Consulting Engineers DATE: June 8, 1990 RE: Sleepy Hollow Cemetary - Proposed subdrain near Route 9 Village of North Tarrytown, NY CAMCE #1368R Per our review of the drawings last revised on May 21, 1990; submitted to us by Mr. Larry J. Nardecchia, Jr., P.E. for the above referenced project, our comments are as follows: Filter fabric should be placed all around the crushed stone. Provision shall be made for future excavation as needed for drainage pipe maintenance. Show location of field measurement. Determine lateral surcharge of ground water to the ravine, if any. Manning n for corrugated metal pipe is in a range of 0.02 to 0.025. The 24" - 58' long at 5.8% slope CAP has a maximum flow capacity of 34 cfs vs. computed flow for the post development 34.08 cfs. Therefore, the next larger diameter size should be used. Final recommendations will be made to the Planning Board once above mentioned comments have been addressed. �CHARLES A. MANGANARO Page -2If you should have any questions or require additional information, please let us know. J6:ab.636 cc: Mr. William T. Regan, Village Administrator Mr. John Hughes, Village Attorney Mr. Dan Wery - Frederick P. Clark Associates Consultants (via Facsimile) Ms. Ellen Tsangaris, Chairperson Board Member Mr. James Galgano, Planning Board Member Mr. Richard Ayers, Planning Board Member Mr. Steve Baderian, Planning Board Member Mr. Roman Windas, Planning Board Member Mr. Alan Kaplan, Planning Board Member Mr. Larry J. Nardecchia, P.E. �CAMCE r U A D t CQ A MAM^AMARn U n M n t C O M. IVIMriVJMI^IMnw COURT PLAZA NORTH. 25 MAIN ST. HACKENSACK. NJ 07801-7032 L E X I N Q T O N AVE.. SUITE 127. NEW VO«K. NY 10028 12fl2 CONSULTING ENGINEERS 201-342-4200 212-«S3-7712 FAX. 201-3424790 M E M O R A N D U M TO: James T. Margotta, Building Inspector Village of North Tarrytown, NY FROM: Joseph A. Gulino Charles A. Manganaro Consulting Engineers DATE: June 8, 1990 RE: Tornello - Citgo Service Station Canopy Village of North Tarrytown, NY CAMCE #1343R As of the above referenced date, further information has been received. Therefore, the item relating to the storm drainage of the canopy has not been addressed (see attached CAMCE memorandum of May 14, 1990). Final recommendations will be made to the Planning Board once the necessary information has been addressed. If you should have any questions or require additional information, please let us know. JG:ab.632 enc . cc: t Mr. William T. Regan, Village Administrator John Hughes, Esq. Ms. Ellen Tsangaris, Chairperson Mr. James Galgano, Planning Board Member Mr. Richard Ayers, Planning Board Member Mr. Steve Baderian, Planning Board Member Mr. Roman Windas, Planning Board Member Mr. Alan Kaplan, Planning Board Member Mr. John O'Leary, Planning Board Member Mr. John J. Muldoon, Land Surveyor �CAMCE CC A M A W P A M A D n u A Q | U n M H U C O M. W l M n U M I I M n U CONSULTING ENGINEERS r COOPT Pl>2A NORTH. 23 MAIN ST. MACKHNSACXMJOrWt-TOK l 2 0 2 ijgxiNGTON AVg.. SUlTe 127. N£W YOflK. NV 10021 201-34J.4200 212-M3-r7l2 ' * * 201.34*0790 M E M O R A N D U M TO: James T. Kargotta, Building Inspector Village of North Tarrytown, NY FROM: Joseph A. Gulino Charles A. Manganaro Consulting Engineers DATE: May 14, 1990 RE: Tornello - Citgo Service Station Canopy Village of North Tarrytown, NY CAMCE'#1343R Per our review of the following site plan dated November 4, 1989 from Mr. John J. Muldoon, Licensed Surveyor (New York State), for the above referenced project, our principle comment is as follows: A) Gasoline station canopies are installed with a roof drainage system and connected to the municipal storm drainage line. A drawing or sketch should be provided detailing the drainage system as well as the connection into the municipal storm drainage system. Final recommendations will be made to the Planning Board once the above mentioned item is addressed. If you should have any questions or require additional information, please let us know. JG:ab.545 cc: t Mr. William T. Regan, Village Administrator Mr. John Hughes, Village Attorney Mr. James Galgano, Planning Board Member Mr. Dan Wery - Frederick P. Clark Associates Consultants (via Facsimile) Ms. Ellen Tsangaris, Chairperson Board Member Mr. Richard Ayers, Planning Board Member Mr. Steve Baderian, Planning Board Member Mr. Roman Windas, Planning Board Member Mr. Alan Kapla.i, Planning Board Member Mr. John J. Muldoon, Land Surveyor �RESOLUTION Adopted at the %t^L 1990 neeting of the Village of Nortn *th Tar Tarrytovn Planning Boarc) PLANNING BOARD VILLAGE OF NORTH TARRYTOWN RESOLUTION: SITE PLAN/BUILDING CONVERSION AND PROPOSED THREEFAMILY DWELLING PROPOSED: ONE TWO-FAMILY DWELLING AND ONE THREEFAMILY DWELLING OWNER: EARL C. AND MARIE JOYNER LOCATION: 17-21 CLINTON STREET TAX DESIGNATION: SECTION 16, BLOCK 8, tf>TS 26 AND 28 ZONING: R-5 RESIDENTIAL WHEREAS, The Planning Board of the Village of Noxrth Tarrytown has reviewed an application for site plan approval pursuant to Zoning Ordinance Article VIII for the construction of a threefamily dwelling unit and the conversion of an existing singlefamily dwelling to a two-family dwelling on Lots 27 and 26, respectively, located along the north side of Clinton Street approximately 300' west of the intersection with Cortland Street, including related off-street parking, buffer landscaping, storm drainage and other supporting utilities and facilities on a site approximately 15,385 square feet in size, as shown on one sheet of drawings prepared in the offices of Robert StanziaXe, AIA, and identified as follows: 1. "Site Plan, Driveway Elevation - Proposed Three-Family Dwelling and Conversion into a Two-Family Dwelling" dated December 29, 1989, last revised February 27, 199 o; and WHEREAS, in the course of its review and acting a s Lead Agency pursuant to provisions of Article VIII of the Environmental Conservation Law, the Planning Board has made thic following findings and caused, noted or conducted the following activities: 1. Received an application fee of $390; 2. Caused field inspections to be made of the property and the review of the surrounding area; 3. Requested and received reports from Village authorities and consultants regarding zoning compliance, water supply, sewerage disposal, storm drainage, traffic impact and access safety; 4. Acting as Lead Agency, requested, received and reviewed an Environmental Assessment Form (EAF) in compliance with SEQR; �5. As Lead Agency for site plan approval in the Village of North Tarrytown, the Planning Board, after review of said field conditions, recommendations and Environmental Assessment Form as well as other matters noted above, has determined that the proposed action is an Unlisted Type and hereby issues a Negative Declaration determination of non-significance and environmental impact for this Unlisted Action; and WHEREAS, the site plan proposes the construction of a threefamily dwelling unit with three single car garages and three outdoor parking spaces, the construction of new utility connections, the reconstruction of existing retaining walls, the planting of buffer landscaping as well as the conversion of an existing single-family dwelling unit to a two-family dwelling unit and creation of two new parking spaces for said building; and WHEREAS, the applicants received variances from the ZBA on 1989 because the existing single-family building does not comply with the front and side yard setbacks; and WHEREAS, the site has been visited by the Village*s planning consultants and engineering consultants and the Planning Board is thoroughly familiar with the site and all aspects of the proposed project; and WHEREAS, a duly advertised public hearing was held at the Village Hall on 8:15 PM on 1989 at which time those wishing to be heard were given the opportunity to be heard and the public hearing was adjourned to and closed on that date; and WHEREAS, the applicants have revised the proposed plans numerous times to comply with the comments which have been made about the project; and WHEREAS, in the opinion of the Planning Board the applicant has complied with the Village's development regulations, except as may be noted below; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that said site plan application and site plan drawings noted above be and hereby are granted site plan approval and that the applicant may obtain the endorsed approval of the Planning Board Chairman or as an alternate the Village Administrator, on a copy of this site plan resolution and upon final mylar copy of the site plan drawing revised as necessary to show compliance with the following conditions, which endorsement shall permit filing in the offices of the Village Building Department for purposes of obtaining a building permit in accordance with this resolution and all building code requirements, provided, however, that this approval shall expire twelve (12) months from the date of this resolution if the following modifications and conditions have not been completed to the 2 -j- �satisfaction of the Planning Board and/or the applicant has not obtained a building permit: !• Density - The site plan is approved for a maximum of three units on Lot 27 and for a two-family dwelling unit on Lot 26. Accessory uses shall be those permitted in the zoning district within which the property is located. 2. Utilities - Stormwater, water supply and sewage disposal shall be approved by the Planning Board or the design engineering representative of the Planning Board. The site plan shall be revised to show the location of the proposed storm drainage line connection. Storm drainage calculations shall be submitted for review and approval to the Village's Consulting Engineer. 3. Landscaping - The Applicants shall revise the site plan to identify the number, location, size and common and scientific species names of the proposed landscaping plants to the satisfaction of the Planning Board. All landscaping shown on the site plan shall be maintained in a healthy growing condition and as otherwise specified on the site plan so as to maintain the certificate of occupancy. 4. Exterior Lighting - all exterior light structures shall be screened so as to prevent glare upon adjacent properties. 5. Curbing - All driveways and parking areas shall be contained by reinforced concrete curbs. 6. Retaining Walls - A note regarding existing retaining walls for Parcel B (Tax Lot 27) shall be revised to read "Existing retaining wall to be repaired or replaced as required by the Village Engineer". This same note shall be included on the revised plan for Parcel A (Tax Lot 26) . 7. Lighting Details - The plan shall be revised to provide construction and materials specification drawings of the proposed lighting including dimensions of poles and fixtures, in compliance with the Village of North Tarrytown Zoning Ordinance. 8. Fencing - The site plan shall be revised to include details of the fence construction and a note indicating that the "finished" side of the fence will face towards the adjacent properties. The site plan shall also be revised to indicate the location and ownership of the cyclone fence on or near the adjacent property to the east owned by the A&S Machine Shop. The Applicant shall revise the plan to extend the proposed 6foot high wood fence along the entire length of the eastern property line on Parcel B (Tax Lot 27). 3 �Driveway Construction Details - The site plan shall be revised to provide construction details for the proposed driveway and parking lot construction including a dimensional cross-section of the proposed paving materials and curbing. Drainage - The site plan shall be revised to show the location of the proposed drainage lines as well as the location and connections to the existing storm drainage system, to the satisfaction of the Village Engineer. Owners Signature - The site plan shall be revised to include the appropriate location and signature line indicating the owners signature approval. Review Fees - the applicants shall pay the Village of North Tarrytown: 12.1 An inspection fee for construction inspection of the proposed site plan to include buildings, drainage system, sewage, landscaping, lighting and other site plan elements for compliance with the approved site plan in accordance with the Village of North Tarrytown zoning code; 12.2 A recreation fee of $1,000 per new dwelling unit, or $4,000, for the acquisition or maintenance of recreation facilities in the vicinity of the project and available for use by occupants of the housing facility. The site plan should be submitted for review and approval by the Westchester County Health Department, if required. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall receive approval from the Village Architectural Review Board. Date of this resolution shall be noted on the site plan. The applicant shall submit payment of all application review fees as noted and required in Section 62-30(f) of the Village zoning code, as approved by the Village Attorney. All elements of this approved site plan shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Village Building Inspector within a period of 18 months from the date of issuance of a building permit or prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. The Planning Board may issue an extension of this time limit, or may modify any of the above conditions with respect thereto for good cause. The Planning Board reserves the right to make a final field inspection of the project after construction of the facilities, upon notice of the building inspector but before 4 �the issuance of occupancy. The purpose of this final inspection is to review the development and to require any modifications to parking, landscaping, sign, drainage, access, paving, and other site plan details, "as built" drawings of same, which do no comply with the approved plan and other site plan details in the interest of safety, convenience and enjoyment of peace and quiet of the adjacent neighbors and aesthetics. The applicant shall maintain all elements of the approved site plan, including landscaping in a neat and healthy condition so as to attain an approved certificate of occupancy. Prior to obtaining a building permit, four (4) copies of this final site plan as revised to meet the above conditions, shall be submitted to the Planning Board office for final approval. This final site plan review shall be accomplished by the Village Engineering Department or Consultant and shall incorporate all applicable conditions of this resolution and the construction standards of the Village of North Tarrytown as they may be appropriate. 19. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the Applicant shall submit to the Village Building Inspector a mylar reproduction of the site plan complete with certification of a professional architect and/or professional engineer attesting to the construction of the site plan and its improvements as shown thereon. PLANNING BOARD VILLAGE OF NORTH TARRYTOWN By ELLetf liSrtiCrfrts, Chairman Date 500\not0-007.dkw.cs i\r* 12, 1990 5 L((<4 I S6 �"% Ray Windas moved, seconded by Richard Avers and unanimously carried that the following resolution be adopted as read: WHEREAS, this Planning Board, on the application of Joyner family Name of Applicant did on June 14, 1990 Date grant permission for a subdivision of their property located at Section 17-21 Clinton Street 16, Sheet , Block 8 , Lot 26 ; and 28 WHEREAS, the aforesaid subdivision permits the development of uses that are identical to those previously permitted, in that the action did not provide for any change of zone, or approval of site plan; and WHEREAS, the property contains no structure or area that is listed or eligible to be listed on the Federal Register of Historic Places or designated by the local Historic Architectural Review Board as an historic landmark or district and the said subdivision complies with all regional, state and local land use plans; �NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: 1. The subdivision of the property as above described is an unlisted action pursuant to Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law and Part 617 of the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder, and will, in and of itself, not have a significant effect on the environment, so that no Environmental Impact Statement is required or need be filled therefor. 2. Nothing herein contained, however, shall be deemed to indicate or suggest that subsequent submissions for development of the property will not require the preparation and filing of Environmental Impact Statements. 3. This resolution is a Negative Declaration for the purposes of Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law, Local Law Environmental Quality Review Act for the Village of North Tarrytown, and will be kept on file at the Village Hall and be available for public examination. 2 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Planning Board Minutes & Resolutions-1990 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource MINS_PLAN_1990-06-14 Subject The topic of the resource Planning Board Minutes & Resolutions-1990 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1990 https://sleepyhollow.localarchives.org/files/original/f07df2ba5672c9059bf533beff0c9d10.pdf 263b29b801df599c782c54a4c1cb6cee PDF Text Text NORTH TARRYTOWN, N.Y. November 15th, 1990 PLANNING BOARD A regular meeting of the Planning Board of the Village of North Tarrytown, New York was scheduled to be held on the above date. PRESENT: Ellen Tsangaris, Chairperson Alan Kaplan ABSENT: James Galgano John O'Leary Roman Windas Richard Ayers Steve Baderian ALSO PRESENT: John J.Hugheb,Jr.Village Attorney James Margotta, Building Inspector Joseph Gulino, Engineer Thomas Gissen, Village Planner At 8:35 P.M. Ms. Tsangaris stated that a meeting would not be held due to lack of a quorum. Respectfully submitted, :ene Amato Acting Clerk �William T.Regan Admlnbtntor John Hughes, Jr. Janet Gandolfo, Mayor Sean Treacy, Deputy Mayor * • TRUSTEES Morris Alter Nicholas Cicchetti Michael Hyland Seane D. Marren Frank Rey VQIAM Counsel Angela Everett Deputy Vffiefe Clerk Frank Anzovino Village Treasurer HISTORIC PAST - GREAT FUTURE NO MEETING WAS HELD OF THE PLANNING BOARD DURING THE MONTH OF DECEMBER, 1990. 7 * ^7 James $. Margotta 28 Beekman Avenue, North Tarrytown, New York 10591 (914)631-0113 �QUVL^JL*^ Janet Gandolfo, Mayor William T. Regan Administrator TRUSTBBS Scan Treacy Morris Alter Nicholas Cicchetti Michael Hyland Seane D. Marren Frank Rey John Hughes, Jr. Village Counsel Angela Everett Deputy Village Clerk Frank Anzovino Village Treasurer HISTORIC PAST- GREATFUTURB 8 January 1991 To: From: PLANNING BOARD James T.s Margotta THERE WILL BE NO MEETING OF THE PLANNING BOARD DURING THE MONTH OF JANUARY, 1991. 28 Beckmnn Avenue, North Thrrytown, New York 10591 (914)631-0113 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Planning Board Minutes & Resolutions-1990 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource MINS_PLAN_1990-11-15 Subject The topic of the resource Planning Board Minutes & Resolutions-1990 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1990