1 25 25 https://sleepyhollow.localarchives.org/files/original/10cf01894d2773cb8f84594dd2c97a0c.pdf 7debc43214c84c7517b4518a540ee786 PDF Text Text Village of Sleepy Hollow Planning Board Minutes December 19, 2024 Chairperson Krakauer called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM. Chairperson Krakauer stated that SDC Lighthouse Landing Realty, LLC has requested an adjournment. Since the public hearing was noticed, the Board will hear public comments. Chairperson Krakauer stated that Lighthouse Landing Communitiees, LLC, for the Edge-onHudson Riverfront Development, Phase III Waterfront Open Space, has requested an adjournment. A work session to discuss the application is scheduled for Thursday, January 9, 2024. Present: Lindsay Krakauer, Chairperson Ken Anderson Benjamin Nielsen Rachelle Gebler Also Present: Joshua B. Subin, Village Attorney David Smith, Village Planner James Natarelli, Village Engineer Sean E. McCarthy, Building Inspector Absent: Chris Camia Richard Gross Pamela Kroll, Secretary to the Planning Board Agenda: 1) SDC Lighthouse Landing Realty, LLC, Edge-on-Hudson Riverfront Development, Block A Proposed medical office building, Site Plan and Architectural Review ApprovalPublic hearing, Pending ZBA Approval- requested adjournment 2) KWD Realty, LLC, 309-315 North Broadway, Proposed mixed-use building, Site Plan & Architectural Review Approval- Presentation 3) Lighthouse Landing Communities, LLC, Edge-on-Hudson Riverfront Development, Phase III- Waterfront Open Space, Site Plan & Wetlands Watercourse Permit ApprovalDiscussion 4) 16 Hudson Street Realty, 16 Hudson Street, Proposed parking area, Site Plan ApprovalPreliminary Presentation 5) Cortlandt Development, LLC, 377 North Broadway, Proposed deli/market, Site Plan and Architectural Review Approval- Preliminary Presentation 6) Approval of minutes, November 21, 2024 1 (12/19/24) �1. SDC Lighthouse Landing Realty, LLC, Edge-on-Hudson Riverfront Development Block A Proposed medical office building, Site Plan & Architectural Review- Public Hearing, pending ZBA approval- requested adjournment. The Board received an adjournment request from the applicant’s attorney on December 17, 2024, to adjourn the public hearing to the January 16, 2025 meeting. Benjamin Nielsen moved to open the public hearing. Moved: Nielsen Seconded: Gebler Vote 4-0 Chairperson Krakauer solicited comments from the public. There were no public comments. Benjamin Nielsen moved to continue the public hearing to the January 16, 2025, meeting. Moved: Nielsen Seconded: Gebler Vote 4-0 Chairperson Krakauer stated that the Board received and reviewed written comments. (See Exhibit #s 1-6) 2. KWD Realty, LLC, 309-315 North Broadway, Proposed mixed-use building, Site Plan & Architectural Review Approval -Presentation Mark Constantine stated that he is an attorney representing the Applicant. Mr. Constantine stated that the proposed 100,000-square-foot self-storage facility in the C-1 zoning district would supplement and complement the ongoing high-density residential development in the Village. Mr. Constantine stated that the applicant had made changes to address concerns from the Planning Board. Mr. Constantine stated that the current proposal requires variances. Although the variance approvals are in the hands of the Zoning Board of Appeals, the applicant would like to proceed with the understanding that the Planning Board is in favor of the use, concept, and approach, and to the extent that the law tasks him in satisfying the requirements for the required variances. He requested to proceed to the Zoning Board to make the presentation. The applicant wants to satisfy the Planning Board regarding the benefit, viability, and overall enhancement the self-storage facility would provide to the Village without impacting municipal services. Benjamin Nielsen stated it is not the Board's purview to evaluate a permitted Zoning Code use of the property or the economic viability of the proposed project. The Board evaluates how the requested variances would impact the project's planning and architectural review components related to site plan development, stormwater, and traffic. The variances required for lot coverage and building height affect the architectural look of the building. The Board evaluates if the proposed building for excessive dissimilarity to adjacent properties. Mr. Constantine stated that the size of the building would have a significant impact on economic viability. 2 (12/19/24) �Bruno Pietrosanti is the architect representing the owner, Mr. Karl Dibble. He stated that the comments received from the Village Architect related to vehicle maneuverability, loading area, and landscaping will be adjusted during the site plan and engineering review. Changes were made to improve the view of the building along the streetscape, including a tower element and brick and precast façade materials. The proposed building mass is similar to the three and fourstory structures along Beekman Avenue and would not be noticeable from the street level due to the property elevations. Mr. Pietrosanti requested that the Board refer the current application and concept plan to the Zoning Board of Appeals. There was a discussion regarding the areas of the building that require a height variance. Chairperson Krakauer stated that no changes were made to the proposed height and massing. Outstanding items related to vehicular maneuverability, loading dock, stormwater, landscaping, signage, and curb cuts still need to be submitted. Mr. Pietrosanti described the design and intentions for the loading spaces. Mr. Nielsen said the original application proposed a mixed-use building that didn't request additional lot coverage. Mr. Pietrosanti said that eliminating the drive-thru café reduced the required parking calculations but created a need for more self-storage space to offset the desired income. Mr. Constantine stated that although including the food element would reduce the building FAR, the applicant would need more space for queuing vehicles, which may create a traffic burden. Adding the design elements and features results in higher building costs that will not contribute to a return on investment for a service where people look for a safe, efficient, and economical way to store goods. The proposed square footage is required to cover the development and construction costs. The applicant needs to determine the building height and coverage approvals to return to the Planning Board and address the outstanding items accordingly. Joshua Subin stated there is a recommendation process from the Planning Board, but the applicant may insist on going before the Zoning Board without it. The application would still need to return to the Planning Board to review the architectural review component. Sleepy Hollow is unique in that if the plans are determined before you go to the Zoning Board of Appeals, the applicant will not have to worry about it coming back to the Planning Board. Mr. Constantine stated that the Planning Board has stated that the Zoning Board grants requested variances, yet the Board’s two main concerns relate to the proposed building height and massing. Mr. Constantine requested a referral to the Zoning Board, as it is the law that while the items are being discussed with the Planning Board, the decision to grant the variances is up to the Zoning Board. The Zoning Board of Appeals may have valuable input. Regardless of the Zoning Board's decision, they will return to the Planning Board to discuss the outstanding concerns. He asked if the process requires the application to be at a point where the Planning Board says they would approve the project and then go to the Zoning Board. 3 (12/19/24) �Mr. Subin stated that the Planning Board focuses on excessive dissimilarity because it has an ARB component that overlaps with what the Zoning Board would consider. Chairperson Krakauer stated that the Board commonly requests items for other project reviews, including how proposed lot coverage compares with neighboring residences and commercial facilities, streetscape views, and renderings from all sides of the structure to provide a perspective on how the building would fit in the neighborhood's character. Ms. Krakauer suggested that the applicant consider reducing the building height and massing to better fit in the neighborhood. Mr. Nielsen requested that the applicant provide the heights of the adjacent buildings, including the Open Door building. He suggested considering architectural choices to reduce the scale of the building's massing. No action was taken. 3. Lighthouse Landing Communities, LLC, Edge-on-Hudson Riverfront Development, Phase III-Waterfront Open Space- Site Plan & Wetlands Watercourse Permit Approval- Discussion, requested adjournment The Board received a request to adjourn the application to the next scheduled Work Session. 4. 16 Hudson Street Realty, 16 Hudson Street, Proposed parking area, Site Plan Approval – Preliminary Presentation Sam Vieira stated that he is the Project Architect representing the owner, Aniello Ricchiuti. It was determined that Mr. Ricchiuti owns a small piece of land that the previous owner purchased from the Village of Sleepy Hollow, which was never included in the property survey. A Stop Work Order was issued for work started to extend the parking areas without the required permit approvals. Mr. Vieira presented the site plan, stated that they propose constructing a retaining wall, and paved parking area to store customer's cars waiting for service. Although the plan delineates three parking spaces, they should not be reviewed for required space size and maneuverability. Landscaping screening is proposed to screen the parking area from the neighboring house, along Hudson Street, and along the property line bordering the Village of Tarrytown. The height of the retaining wall is proposed to be 5 feet at the highest point. He will submit the requested railing details and ensure proper clearance at the existing fire hydrant. Mr. Vieira requested the Board’s approval to use a 6-foot high commercial chain link fence and gate with opaque barrier inserts to handle the repetitive business uses. Mr. Vieira asked the Board to reconsider the request to extend the sidewalk to the curb cut due to the obstacles of the existing utility pole, stabilizing wires, and street signage. Although the owner has retained Hudson Engineering to provide the stormwater management calculations, he asked the Board if they require the full engineered drawings to take action or if it could be a condition of the approval. Chairperson Krakauer asked James Natarelli what he requires to review stormwater retention. James Natarelli stated that the architect is asking if the Board is comfortable with the engineer designing the stormwater calculations based on the plan presented. 4 (12/19/24) �Chairperson Krakauer solicited comments from the Board. Benjamin Nielsen asked Mr. Natarelli if the applicant should complete a percolation test. Mr. Natarelli stated that previous applications on Hudson Street have illustrated that infiltration would not be an issue and that he does not see an issue with getting the engineer involved now. Ken Anderson asked if a sidewalk extension would affect the impervious surface calculations. Mr. Vieira stated that the sidewalk extension won't impact impervious surfaces because it is on Village property. Mr. Natarelli stated that sidewalks are pitched toward the street, and runoff is not collected. Mr. Nielsen stated that the landscaping should include Westchester County native species, suggested including larger trees on the southern strip, and asked Mr. Vieria if the retaining wall elevations have been studied for sidewalk compatibility. There should be more appealing options than a chain-link fence. Mr. McCarthy stated that the material used for an enclosure on Dell Street has proved to hold up well. Mr. Veira stated that the retaining wall is well within the property lines, and the return is being eliminated. All landscaping is proposed on the 16 Hudson Street property. The entrance is located at the southern property line, and larger trees would be an obstruction. Residential fencing material may not hold up to commercial use. Mr. Veira stated that they would review the options for using synthetic decking materials for the fence and gate. The Board agreed that the concept plan was acceptable and that the engineer should prepare the civil drawings. Rachelle Gebler moved to schedule the public hearing for the January 16, 2024 meeting. Moved: Gebler Seconded: Nielsen Vote 4-0 Chairperson Krakauer Rachelle Gebler Benjamin Nielsen Ken Anderson Vote 4-0 5. Cortlandt Development LLC, 377 North Broadway, Proposed deli/market, Site Plan & Architectural Review Approval- Preliminary Presentation 5 (12/19/24) �Jonathan Merheb stated that he is an engineer from JMER Engineering P.C. representing the property owner. The lot is located on the corner of Pocantico Street and North Broadway, containing a Sunoco gas station and a mechanic shop. The application proposes to convert the building into a deli market/ convenience store. The existing gas station will remain operational with no proposed changes. The application proposes to reorganize and delineate the parking spaces, include a handicap parking space on the Pocantico Street side and relocate and enclose the dumpster area to the rear of the building. Other improvements include raising the sidewalk area in front of the garage bays and replacing the gravel transition to asphalt. Mr. Merheb presented the site plans and renderings. The owner plans to maintain and restore the buildings’ brick and stone façades, replace the garage bays with glass doors and storefront windows, and install a 3-foot-in-diameter sign on the roof over the middle bay. Although the interior layout is not finalized, a kitchen, seating area, and shelving displays are proposed. Chairperson Krakauer asked Mr. Merheb to describe the proposed rear parking lot lighting and if there would be vehicular maneuverability issues with the spot proposed directly behind the building. Mr. Merheb stated that since they are proposing ten parking spaces, where eight are required, they could remove a parking space if it poses a maneuverability issue. He will complete a lighting plan based on requirements for building-mounted fixtures. They want to avoid excavation for bringing conduits to poles. Chairperson Krakauer stated that the Board is concerned about the downspouts discharging where pedestrians would be walking. Mr. Merheb stated that he is discussing the need for adding dry wells in the rear of the building with James Natarelli. Chairperson Krakauer asked Mr. Merheb to describe if a landscaping plan is proposed. Mr. Merheb stated that there is no room to add landscaping. Chairperson Krakauer suggested using movable flowerpots to screen the seating area in front of the building, eliminating a curb cut on Pocantico Street, and adding low shrubbery along the front of the sidewalk. David Smith said he would provide Mr. Merheb with the native planting suggestions. Benjamin Nielsen suggested a decorative screen wall instead of bollards if there is no room for a planter. He asked if moving back the parking spaces along the northeast corner would allow room to create a landscape strip along the property line of the adjacent house. This would also assist in reducing the impervious surface and stormwater challenges. Mr. Natarelli agreed that since the main stormwater concern is the downspout discharging for pedestrian safety, he agrees that pulling the parking spaces back would increase the buffer between the rear parking spots and the property line. 6 (12/19/24) �Mr. Nielsen asked Mr. Merheb to consider alternative fence options for the garage enclosure instead of chain link fencing and asked how the garbage truck would enter the site. Mr. Merheb stated that the garbage enclosure and fencing would not be visible. Chairperson Krakauer stated that the garbage truck would not enter the site and suggested Mr. Merheb consult with the owner regarding the approach for bringing garbage to the curb. Mr. Merheb stated that he would reconsider the size of the dumpster and discuss the enclosure options with the owner. Sean McCarthy asked Mr. Merheb to describe where the kitchen exhaust is proposed. Mr. Merheb stated that the kitchen exhaust location has not been finalized. Mr. Nielsen suggested adding a bike rack on site. Ken Anderson moved to schedule the public hearing for the January 16, 2024, meeting. Moved: Anderson Seconded: Gebler Vote 4-0 Chairperson Krakauer Rachelle Gebler Benjamin Nielsen Ken Anderson Vote 4-0 6. Approval of minutes, November 21, 2024 Chairperson Krakauer tabled the November 21, 2024, minutes to the January 16, 2024, meeting. Benjamin Nielsen moved to adjourn the meeting at 8:42 PM. Moved: Nielsen Seconded: Gebler Vote 4-0 Respectfully submitted, Pamela Kroll Secretary to the Planning Board 7 (12/19/24) �From: Benjie Sirota <beonjie@gmail.com> To: Subject: Sean McCarthy Medical Office Building Exhibit #1 Hi SeanI am writing about the medical office. The building height is actually taller at 57'-6 which is a 15' variance and the east facade should match the other facades with brick as it faces the whole village. Circulation doesn't look totally figured out and it's going to be a mess trying to get into and out of the parking area. They can easily have an entry/exit onto the road from the parking garage. There are also many parking spaces that are shown at 8'-6" in the parking lot. Why is the parking garage in the back? Is it municipal parking? Will the lot be open to anyone and will it cost money to park? These questions should be answered before any variance is granted. 1 �Benjamin Sirota Beonjie@gmail.com 2 �Exhibit #2 ���Exhibit #3 Chairman Timothy Church C/O Village of Sleepy Hollow Department of Architecture, Land Use Development, Buildings, and Building Compliance 28 Beekman Avenue Sleepy Hollow, NY 10591 Re: Zoning Board of Appeals Public Hearing December 18, 2024 Dear Mr. Church, We are writing to oppose the granting of height variances for the proposed medical office building and parking garage across the street from our Lofts condo residence at 100 Legend Drive in Sleepy Hollow. We understand a request has been made to increase the maximum building height from 42 to 52 feet, to accommodate a 5-level parking garage and office building structure. We feel strongly that height variances, especially for a parking garage, should not be allowed. We have lived in Sleepy Hollow since 2016, and spent the past 8 years watching the Edge on Hudson property develop from a cement wasteland to a vibrant residential community with a growing number of activities for residents and families. We looked forward to moving into this neighborhood and purchased a Loft unit in late 2023. We expected to buy into a suburban-like residential community with amenities such as a grocery store, restaurants, and offices, but we were not expecting it to include a 5-level parking garage that may not have aesthetics comparable to the rest of our community. As new proposals come forward for plan variances, the focus seems to be moving away from home ownership and residential appeal. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Joseph and Mary Louise Grotzinger �Exhibit #4 Sean McCarthy From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: chrispeulerbs@gmail.com Sean McCarthy Opposition to Height Variance for Medical Office Building Parking Garage - Zoning Board Public Hearing on December 18th/19th 2024 Dear Mr. McCarthy, I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed variance to increase the height of the parking garage for the medical office building from 3 levels (42 feet) to 5 levels (58 feet including the mechanical penthouse). This increase would have a significant negative impact on Loft 2 residents, particularly those with southeast-facing units, as it would obstruct views of the Beekman streetscape and reduce the overall aesthetic harmony of our low-profile residential area. The proposed height would make the parking garage nearly as tall as Northlight or the DeCicco tower, which seems incompatible with the surrounding structures and detrimental to our community. While I understand the need for a parking structure, I strongly believe that a 3-level garage is a more appropriate solution, preserving the character of the area and minimizing the adverse effects on residents. I urge you and the Zoning Board to carefully consider the impact of this variance and to deny the request for a 5-level garage. Thank you for your time and attention to this matter. Sincerely, Christopher Peuler Resident, Loft 2 unit 204 1 �Exhibit #5 Sean McCarthy From: Xin Dai <daixin1225@gmail.com> To: Subject: Sean McCarthy Opposition to Medical Building’s Proposal Dear Mr. McCarthy, I am writing to formally express my opposition to the proposed variance to increase the height of the parking garage for the medical office building from 3 levels (42 feet) to 5 levels (58 feet, including the mechanical penthouse). As a resident of Loft Building 2, which faces both Decicco’s parking lot and the proposed medical building, we have significant concerns regarding the impact this change may have on our home and community. While we understand the need for additional parking spaces, we believe the height increase will negatively affect both the aesthetics of our views and the overall visual character of the surrounding area. Furthermore, we are particularly concerned about our privacy, as our bedroom is located on the 4th floor of our building. The proposed height increase could result in a direct line of sight into our living space, compromising our sense of privacy. We respectfully request that you consider these concerns as you evaluate the proposed variance. Thank you for your time and attention to this important matter. Sincerely, Xin Dai Resident, Loft 2 unit 301 1 �Exhibit #6 Sean McCarthy From: Kenneth Chan <chanken88@gmail.com> To: Subject: Sean McCarthy Concerned Resident Zoning Parking Dear Mr. McCarthy, I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed variance to increase the height of the parking garage for the medical office building from 3 levels (42 feet) to 5 levels (58 feet including the mechanical penthouse). This increase would have a significant negative impact on Loft 2 residents, particularly those with southeastfacing units, as it would obstruct views of the Beekman streetscape and reduce the overall aesthetic harmony of our low-profile residential area. The proposed height would make the parking garage nearly as tall as Northlight or the DeCicco tower, which seems incompatible with the surrounding structures and detrimental to our community. While I understand the need for a parking structure, I strongly believe that a 3-level garage is a more appropriate solution, preserving the character of the area and minimizing the adverse effects on residents. I urge you and the Zoning Board to carefully consider the impact of this variance and to deny the request for a 5-level garage. Thank you for your time and attention to this matter. Happy Holidays ! Sincerely, Kenneth Chan Resident, Loft 2 unit 203 1 � 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-2024 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_2024-12-19 Approved Planning Board Minutes Subject The topic of the resource Planning Board Minutes & Resolutions-2024 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2025 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Village of Sleepy Hollow All Rights Reserved. Type The nature or genre of the resource Text https://sleepyhollow.localarchives.org/files/original/12e6811eb009edc27415b657ca0847ba.pdf e4ad2370bb76e94ff7bd7450502d2b9d PDF Text Text Village of Sleepy Hollow Planning Board Minutes November 21, 2024 Chairperson Krakauer called the meeting to order at 7:04 PM. Chairperson Krakauer read the agenda and stated that Quality High LLC has withdrawn their application for the proposed cannabis dispensary at 36-38 Beekman Avenue. The applicant for 16 Hudson Sreet has also requested an adjournment. The public hearing procedure requirements for the application submitted by SDC Lighthouse Landing Realty, LLC, were discussed. Present: Lindsay Krakauer, Chairperson Richard Gross Ken Anderson Chris Camia Rachelle Gebler Also Present: Joshua B. Subin, Village Attorney David Smith, Village Planner James Natarelli, Village Engineer Sean E. McCarthy, Building Inspector Absent: Benjamin Nielsen Pamela Kroll, Secretary to the Planning Board Agenda: 1) Joshua Egan and Jennifer Schwartz, 120 Gorey Brook Road, Proposed detached garage with accessory dwelling, Site Plan & Architectural Review Approval 2) Quality High, LLC, 36-38 Beekman Avenue, Proposed cannabis dispensary, Site Plan & Architectural Review- Public hearing-Application withdrawn 3) SDC Lighthouse Landing Realty, LLC, Edge-on-Hudson Riverfront Development, Block A Proposed medical office building, Site Plan and Architectural Review ApprovalPublic hearing, Pending ZBA Approval 4) One Kingsland Owner, LLC, 308-318 Legend Drive, Proposed (6) unit townhome building, Amended Site Plan & Architectural Review Approval- Presentation 5) KWD Realty, LLC, 309-315 North Broadway, Proposed mixed-use building, Site Plan & Architectural Review Approval- Presentation 6) Lighthouse Landing Communities, LLC, Edge-on-Hudson Riverfront Development, Phase III- Waterfront Open Space, Site Plan & Wetlands Watercourse Permit ApprovalPresentation 1 (11/21/24) �7) 16 Hudson Street Realty, 16 Hudson Street, Proposed parking area, Site Plan ApprovalPreliminary Presentation-Requested adjournment 8) Approval of minutes, October 17, 2024 1. Joshua Egan and Jennifer Schwartz, 120 Gorey Brook Road, Proposed detached garage with accessory dwelling, Site Plan and Architectural Review Approval- Public Hearing David Smith read the conditions of the draft resolution. Richard Gross moved to approve the resolution. Moved: Gross Seconded: Gebler Chairperson Krakauer- yes Richard Gross- yes Rachelle Gebler- yes Chris Camia- yes Ken Anderson- abstained Vote 4-0-1 2. Quality High, LLC, 36-38 Beekman Avenue, Proposed cannabis dispensary Site Plan and Architectural Review – Public Hearing The Board received a request from the applicant to withdraw the application. 3. SDC Lighthouse Landing Realty, LLC, Edge-on-Hudson Riverfront Development Block A Proposed medical office building, Site Plan & Architectural Review- Public Hearing, pending ZBA approval Richard Gross moved to open the public hearing. Moved: Gross Seconded: Camia Janet Giris is a partner with the law firm DelBello Donnellan Weingarten Wise & Wiederkehr, LLP, and is presenting on behalf of the Applicant. Ms. Giris acknowledged that although the Board opened the public hearing, it will be adjourned and re-noticed for next month. At the June meeting, the Planning Board expressed concerns regarding the proposed parking spaces and architecture of the medical office building and parking structure. A new architect modified the architectural design of the medical office building and added a new parking structure with 52 parking spaces. This would provide 238 parking spaces in the structure and 426 parking spaces on the site. Ms. Giris stated that although the height of the parking structure requires a variance, it would not be higher than the building’s bulkhead and the DeCiccos Supermarket. Ms. Giris stated that the Zoning Board of Appeals requested additional information, which will be provided for the December meeting. Chairperson Krakauer solicited comments from the public. 2 (11/21/24) �Ted Lai stated that he is the owner of 102 Legend Drive. He appreciates the applicant moving of the loading zone to the back of the building and that a variance request for parking is a compromise. Chairperson Krakauer adjourned the public hearing to the December 19, 2024 meeting. 4. One Kingsland Owner, LLC, 308-318 Legend Drive, Proposed (6) unit townhome building, Amended Site Plan & Architectural Review Approval - Presentation Peter Chavkin stated that he is the Managing Partner of Sun Homes. Mr. Chavkin stated changes have been made to address the comments from the Planning Board and the Building Department. Changes include the removal of the planters and trees between the roof terraces on the proposed application and the previously approved buildings. Owners will have options for individual planter boxes. Unit designation numbers have been reduced from 8 inches to 4 inches in height. The precast concrete lintel material was thickened above and below the windows and on top of the door to match the brick at 3 ½ inches, and window boxes were added. Details were added to the plans to detail the locations of the gas meters, electric meters, and vapor mitigation system ports. Utility meters will be screened with perennial plantings to satisfy requests from the Building Department. Signage was added for the Fire Department as required. The rooftop mechanical equipment will be fully enclosed. He described the construction and proposed materials for the Washington Wall separating the front yards from the sidewalk. He said the wall would not exceed 24 inches or include horizontal seams. He presented the brick façade material samples to show how colors would delineate the units. Chris Camia asked if the same brick colors are proposed for all 90 townhome units and if underground utility lines will run from the front of the building to connect the meters on the sides of the building. Mr. Chavkin stated that the brick colors are for this building and may differ for the buildings facing the park. The utility lines are proposed to run around the building, not underground. Chairperson Krakauer asked Mr. Chavkin if the design for the rooftop shade structures had been finalized. Mr. Chakin stated that they are not currently proposing rooftop shade structures. They do not intend to install rooftop pergolas but may develop an idea for some retractable awnings in a future application. Richard Gross stated that the Fire Department Sprinkler connection signage should be indicated correctly. Mr. Chavkin stated that the location for the signage will be confirmed with the Building Department during the Building Permit drawings review David Smith asked Mr. Chavkin to confirm the roof coverage on the end units. 3 (11/21/24) �Mr. Chavkin stated that they show approximately 72% coverage and the Board was previously comfortable with a condition to allow them to increase from the required 50% coverage on the low visibility end units. Chairperson Krakauer stated that she is comfortable with the coverage condition and polled the Board for their comments. The Board members were amenable to the additional coverage condition on the end units. Mr. Camia suggested backlighting the unit numbers for visibility. Mr. Chavkin stated that they intend to have the unit numbers lighted. Chairperson Krakauer requested that David Smith read the draft resolution David Smith read the conditions of the draft resolution. Rachelle Gebler asked if the condition regarding pergolas should be removed since it is not part of the proposed plan. There was a discussion regarding the applicability of some of the previously approved resolution conditions. The Planning Board agreed that approval was based on the current site plan drawings and agreed to keep conditions as limitation restrictions. Richard Gross moved to approve the amended draft resolution. Moved: Camia Seconded: Gebler Chairperson Krakauer- yes Richard Gross- yes Rachelle Gebler- yes Chris Camia- yes Ken Anderson- yes Vote 5-0 5. KWD Realty, LLC, 309-315 North Broadway, Proposed mixed-use building, Site Plan & Architectural Review Approval -Presentation Bruno Pietrosanti stated that he is the project architect representing the owner, Mr. Karl Dibble. Changes to the application include removing the drive-through restaurant, shifting the building within 10 feet of the property line along North Broadway, and adding planter base retaining walls along the property line. The building structure was redesigned to step in and out to reduce the view impacts from the street, and the parking area is proposed to be covered. An architectural tower element and a combination of brick and precast façade materials were added. The current plan would require variances for a front yard setback of 10 feet where 20 feet is required, a 5-foot rear yard setback variance where 20 feet is required, limited height variance for the rear yard, and lot coverage for covering the parking area. Mr. Pietrosanti presented view renderings 4 (11/21/24) �of the proposed building and stated that architectural details are open for improvements. He plans to address the Village Engineers' stormwater comments upon approval of the concept plan. Chairperson Krakauer stated that the proposed building height and massing are viewed as excessive and asked Mr. Pietrosanti if they could design a structure that is as of right and in conformance with the Code and permitted uses. Mr. Pietrosanti stated that the applicant desired 100,000 square feet to be successful, where they would expect 60% occupancy and adequate rentable space availability. Providing the requested architectural details and covered parking area would increase construction costs. Approval of the requested variances would allow the applicant to address the Board’s concerns. Chairperson Krakauer stated that the Planning Board has the authority to recommend the application to the Zoning Board of Appeals and requested that the applicant consider a design for that meets the allowable requirements for the intended use. Karl Dibble, the property owner, stated that several changes have been made to the proposed structure's aesthetics to address the Board’s request to bring the building forward and to close the parking entranceways. Spaces are proposed with garage doors for car storage. Several variances for bulk and height have been approved for residential structures at the Riverfront Development, where he seeks to build a commercial building. Joshua Subin stated that the Zoning Board of Appeals reviews applications for variance approvals. The Planning Board can provide a positive or negative recommendation regarding the proposed site plan. The Planning Board is expressing concerns that the site plan is too massive. Comparisons to other Village properties, reasons why the applicant feels variances are warranted, and what the market would tolerate for what is needed for a return on investment for the structure should be presented to the Zoning Board of Appeals. The Zoning Board of Appeals has the purview to make an independent determination. Mr. Dibble provided a history of his experience obtaining Planning Board approvals for this property and expressed how the village has discontinued utilizing his commercial and retail services with prejudice. Without a positive referral from the Planning Board, the Zoning Board may not approve the variance requests. The self-storage facility examples provided in David Smith’s review were from Somers and a rural area in Pawling, New York. Examples should have been provided to show self-storage facility designs from neighboring river towns in Westchester County. Height variances are required to provide the step-back design for a building when the property is situated on a hill. The current property use is approved as a general contracting yard, recycling facility, mixed-use with residential, and a material supply yard. A self-storage facility use would have the least impact on the school system, traffic, and the environment. If the approved recycling business were fully operational, a line of dump trucks would be waiting on North Broadway to get on site. A self-storage facility would greatly benefit the Village because the residential riverfront development provides very little storage and parking capabilities for extra vehicles. 5 (11/21/24) �Mr. Subin stated it is his role to establish a good record and to avoid liability for the Village. There has been no animosity from the Planning Board or Mr. Smith. He requested that David Smith have the opportunity to address the comments directed at him. David Smith stated that he agrees with Mr. Dibble concerning his comments about the comparison with a self-storage facility in Pawling. His comments were intended to show that a storage facility doesn’t have to look like a storage facility. Huge is a term of art. The proposed building in its context is what the Board has to determine Rachelle Gebler stated that the Planning Board has concerns regarding the height variance of 52 ½ feet, where 35 feet is permitted, and the lot coverage of 83.7%, where 60% is permitted. Mr. Pietrosanti stated that the building's mass has been reduced. Bringing the building forward to the street line adds to the coverage impact with the covered parking. He asked the Board to consider the similarity of the Open Door facility in relation to its massing and parking structure. Sean McCarthy stated that the Board's intention was to suggest shielding the parking area from the street view. Enclosing the area isn’t necessary. Mr. Pietrosanti stated that they could revert to the 24-foot front setback and install landscape screening along the 10-foot setback line to eliminate the issue of covering the parking area. Mr. McCarthy asked Mr. Pietrosanti how increasing the setback would help with the coverage and desire to obtain 100,000 square feet of space. Mr. Pietrosanti said they could add square footage below grade. Mr. McCarthy suggested that aligning the building setback with the adjacent street-line structures would provide a more attainable variance than height or coverage. The Planning Board suggested the applicant consider making improvements to step down the building massing, relocate loading bays and the refuse area, and be conscious of impacts to the residences along Lawrence Avenue. Richard Gross asked Mr. Pietrosanti why the applicant removed the café use. Mr. Pietrosanti stated that they determined that the café would cause further traffic impact Mr. Camia stated that the Board suggested that the applicant evaluate the traffic impact of a drive-through café and did not instruct the applicant to remove it. James Natarelli requested that applicant considering stormwater management now so to be sure that the proposed site plan could provide 100% retainage of the 100 year storm on the site based on the new construction. 6 (11/21/24) �No action was taken. 6. Lighthouse Landing Communities, LLC, Edge-on-Hudson Riverfront Development, Phase III-Waterfront Open Space- Site Plan & Wetlands Watercourse Permit Approval- Preliminary Presentation Peter Chavkin stated that he is representing Lighthouse Landing Communities, LLC and has nothing new to present. Woodard & Curran and WSP have communicated regarding questions related to the North Buffer / North Meadow section. He attended a Board of Trustees work session, which some Planning Board members attended. He requested to be included in the upcoming Work Session to discuss the proposed uses of the Boat House. A work session was held with the Board of Trustees to discuss proposed uses of the Boat House. Mr. Chavkin said he would resubmit the operating cost study prepared for the proposed ice skating rink options. Chairperson Krakauer asked Mr. Chavkin if wall alternatives have been designed. Mr. Chavkin stated that the Art Colonnade is an important park design feature. He is willing to consider alternating its length or removing it at the Board's request. The design and material finishes could be discussed at the upcoming work session. No action was taken. 7. 16 Hudson Street Realty, 16 Hudson Street, Proposed parking area, Site Plan Approval – Preliminary Presentation The Board received an adjournment request from the Applicant’s architect. The application was adjourned to the December 19, 2024 meeting. 8. Approval of minutes, October 17, 2024 Richard Gross moved to approve the October 17, 2024 meeting minutes. Moved: Gross Seconded: Gebler Chairperson Krakauer- yes Richard Gross- yes Rachelle Gebler- yes Chris Camia- yes Ken Anderson - abstained Vote 4-0-1 Chris Camia moved to adjourn the meeting at 9:00 PM. Moved: Camia Seconded: Gross Vote 5-0 Respectfully submitted, Pamela Kroll Secretary to the Planning Board 7 (11/21/24) � 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-2024 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_2024-11-21 Approved Planning Board Minutes Subject The topic of the resource Planning Board Minutes & Resolutions-2024 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2025 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Village of Sleepy Hollow All Rights Reserved. Type The nature or genre of the resource Text https://sleepyhollow.localarchives.org/files/original/417a182421c0dcb8a642481ed4eac8bb.pdf 6e8affc0faf30c14229bf3977bf118e9 PDF Text 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 Planning Board Minutes & Resolutions-2024 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_2024-11-21_120 Gorey Brook Road Approved Planning Board Resolution Subject The topic of the resource Planning Board Minutes & Resolutions-2024 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2024 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Village of Sleepy Hollow All Rights Reserved. Type The nature or genre of the resource Text https://sleepyhollow.localarchives.org/files/original/a15b8336cff57bf8af412ecb0998e592.pdf afa12a0d126858edd92bfa4b18656f41 PDF Text 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 Planning Board Minutes & Resolutions-2024 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_2024-11-21_308-318 Legend Drive Approved Resolution Subject The topic of the resource Planning Board Minutes & Resolutions-2024 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2024 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Village of Sleepy Hollow All Rights Reserved. Type The nature or genre of the resource Text https://sleepyhollow.localarchives.org/files/original/aaa8beeebbc243e4ac7bf2b6adcbae6c.pdf 7f88c227cfcd86ae2b0d5d0d21b6c63a PDF Text Text Village of Sleepy Hollow Planning Board Minutes October 17, 2024 Benjamin Nielsen called the regular meeting to order at 7:00 PM. Mr. Nielsen read the agenda and stated that Quality High LLC submitted an adjournment request for the proposed cannabis dispensary at 36-38 Beekman Avenue. Adjournment requests were also received from KWD Realty, LLC and 16 Hudson Street Realty. Present: Lindsay Krakauer, Chairperson Richard Gross Benjamin Nielsen Chris Camia Rachelle Gebler Also Present: Joshua B. Subin, Village Attorney David Smith, Village Planner James Natarelli, Village Engineer Sean E. McCarthy, Building Inspector Absent: Clare Trappasso Pamela Kroll, Secretary to the Planning Board Agenda: 1) SDC Lighthouse Landing Realty, LLC, Edge-on-Hudson Riverfront Development, Block A Proposed medical office building, Site Plan and Architectural Review ApprovalPresentation 2) Lighthouse Landing Communities, Edge-on-Hudson Riverfront Development, Block OP & N Amended Preliminary Subdivision Plat- Resolution 3) Quality High, LLC, 36-38 Beekman Avenue, Proposed cannabis dispensary, Site Plan & Architectural Review- Public hearing 4) Joshua Egan and Jennifer Schwartz, 36-38 Beekman Avenue, Proposed cannabis dispensary, Site Plan Approval- Public Hearing 5) Toll Landscape LLC, 213 Palisades Blvd., Proposed larger pergola with screens, Amended Site Plan & Architectural Review- Discussion 6) One Kingsland Owner, LLC, 308-318 Legend Drive, Proposed (6) unit townhome building, Amended Site Plan & Architectural Review Approval- Presentation 7) KWD Realty, LLC, 309-315 North Broadway, Proposed mixed-use building, Site Plan & Architectural Review Approval- Preliminary Presentation 8) 16 Hudson Street Realty, 16 Hudson Street, Proposed parking area, Site Plan ApprovalPreliminary Presentation 1 (10/17/24) �9) Lighthouse Landing Communities, LLC, Edge-on-Hudson Riverfront Development, Phase III- Waterfront Open Space, Site Plan & Wetlands Watercourse Permit ApprovalPreliminary Presentation 10) LL Parcel E, LLC, 201 Horseman Blvd., Proposed fourth-floor pergola and exterior changes, Amended Site Plan & Architectural Review Approval-Revised resolution 11) Approval of minutes, September 19, 2024 1. SDC Lighthouse Landing Realty, LLC, Edge-on-Hudson Riverfront Development Block A Proposed medical office building, Site Plan & Architectural Review- Draft Resolution Janet Giris is a partner with the law firm DelBello Donnellan Weingarten Wise & Wiederkehr, LLP, and is presenting on behalf of the Applicant. Ms. Giris stated that the applicant has been working with a new architect, G3 Architecture Interiors Planning, to address the concerns related to the number of parking spaces provided in the previous plan and the appearance of the medical office building. The revised plan proposes to reduce the medical office building by a few hundred square feet and to add a level to the parking structure to add 48 parking spaces. The proposed 52-foot height of the parking structure requires a variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals for approval of an increase over the 42-foot height limitation. Ms. Giris stated that height restrictions do not limit the rooftop mechanical penthouse. Ms. Giris requested that the Planning Board refer the application to the Zoning Board of Appeals to request a variance for the parking structure height. Instead of submitting it to the Board of Trustees for approval of the shared parking agreement, they will also request a variance for the proposed number of parking spaces versus the required number for the site. Ms. Giris stated that she is comfortable reopening and noticing for a Planning Board public hearing and requested that the Board schedule a public hearing for the November meeting. Brooks Slocum is an Architect from G3 Architecture Interiors Planning. He described the proposed changes to the front entry, parking structure screening material, exterior façade materials, and roof style. The mechanical penthouse is proposed at the same height as the parking structure. He presented views of the proposed medical office building and parking structure from different street locations and Barnhart Park. Richard Gross stated that the building section drawing indicates a height of 58 feet. Mr. Slocum stated that the mechanical penthouse parapet is 58 feet high. The parking structure's height is calculated from the floor level at 51 feet, 7 inches, where they are requesting 52 feet. He presented illustrations of the perforated garage screening and stated that the artwork images could easily be added to the Barhart Park view. Mr. Nielsen asked if the perforated screens are proposed to preserve the openness and eliminate conditioning of the garage space and if the artwork can still be achieved. Mr. Slocum stated that the perforated screens are proposed for the openness of the parking structure and that the artwork can be designed to work well. Mr. Slocum presented the site plan 2 (10/17/24) �and stated that the circulation of the drop-off area is sufficient for trucks maneuvering through the site. Chris Camia asked Mr. Slocum to describe the heights of the individual parking levels. Mr. Slocum stated that each level of the parking structure will have 8 feet clear to the underside of the trusses and can accommodate modern SUV vehicles. There will be a smaller area for handicap vans on the first level. Richard Gross moved to refer the application to the Zoning Board of Appeals and to schedule a Planning Board public hearing for the November 21, 2024 meeting. Moved: Gross Seconded: Nielsen Chairperson Krakauer- yes Richard Gross- yes Rachelle Gebler- yes Benjamin Nielsen -yes Chris Camia- yes Vote 5-0 2. Lighthouse Landing Communities, LLC, Edge-on-Hudson Riverfront Development, Block OP & N Amended Preliminary Subdivision Plan- Resolution Chairperson Krakauer asked David Smith to read the draft resolution. David Smith read the resolve clauses of the draft resolution. Richard Gross moved to approve the resolution. Moved: Gross Seconded: Gebler Chairperson Krakauer- yes Richard Gross- yes Rachelle Gebler- yes Benjamin Nielsen -yes Chris Camia- yes Vote 5-0 3. Quality High, LLC, 36-38 Beekman Avenue, Proposed cannabis dispensary Site Plan and Architectural Review – Public Hearing The Board received an adjournment request from the Applicant. The public hearing was adjourned to the November 21, 2024 meeting. 3 (10/17/24) �4. Joshua Egan and Jennifer Schwartz, 120 Gorey Brook Road, Proposed detached garage with accessory dwelling, Site Plan and Architectural Review Approval- Public Hearing Julie Evans is the project architect representing the applicants. Ms. Evans presented the site plans and photographs of the existing conditions and views, and stated that the application proposes to contruct a 750 square foot two-car garage structure with a 750 square foot accessory structure on the second story with a deck. A new front terrace is proposed to enjoy the south west views from the house. Chairperson Krakauer asked Ms. Evans if the view easement report was submitted. Ms. Evans stated that the view easement document was submitted with the Zoning Board of Appeals Application. The Zoning Board of Appeals granted the variance for the proposed structure height. Ms. Evan stated that revised stormwater engineering drawings were completed based on percolation tests on October 8, 2024, requiring them to add five cultecs. An existing site drain and the locations for existing AC condenser pads were added to the drawings. Chairperson Krakauer asked James Natarelli if he had any open concerns. James Natarelli witnessed the percolation tests. He requested that the revised plans be formally submitted to the Building Department for record and review. Benjamin Nielsen moved to open the public hearing. Moved: Nielsen Seconded: Gebler Vote 5-0 Chairperson Krakauer solicited comments from the public. There were no public comments. Chairperson Krakauer moved to close the public hearing. Moved: Krakauer Seconded: Camia Vote 5-0 Chairperson Krakauer requested that David Smith prepare a resolution for the November 21, 2024 meeting. 5. Toll Landscape LLC, 213 Palisades Blvd., Proposed larger pergola with screens Amended Site Plan & Architectural Review Approval – Presentation Karin Magnuson, the owner and the Board discussed the limitation of the screen closures and the Homeowner’s Association approval. Chairperson Krakauer requested that David Smith read the draft resolution. David Smith read the resolve clause and conditions of the draft resolution. 4 (10/17/24) �Rachelle Gebler moved to approve the resolution. Moved: Gebler Seconded: Gross Chairperson Krakauer- yes Richard Gross- yes Rachelle Gebler- yes Benjamin Nielsen -yes Chris Camia- yes Vote 5-0 6. One Kingsland Owner, LLC, 308-318 Legend Drive, Proposed (6) unit townhome building, Amended Site Plan & Architectural Review Approval – Preliminary Presentation Bill McGuiness is from SunHomes. He stated that changes made since the last presentation include stepping up the bays on three units to the main cornice line between the third and fourth floors and changing four lite casement windows to double-hung eight lite units. The rooftop mechanical equipment will be fully enclosed, and the gas meters will be screened. He will add the front Washington Wall details to the drawings and provide physical samples for the Board to review. He presented photographs of awnings installed on other projects with the proposed fabric. He stated that although the fabric is not fire-rated, it is not flammable and comes with a 10-year manufacturer warranty. The awning fabric is 100% acrylic dyed to the fiber's core and is water, stain, and UV resistant. Chairperson Krakauer asked Mr. McGuiness to describe the wind resistance ratings. Mr. McGuiness stated that he cannot detail how the awnings are attached to the building, but the fabric is used on boats, so it is wind-resistant. Peter Chavkin is the Managing Partner of Biddle Real Estate Ventures and stated that the photographs show that the awning material they have been using for over 15 years is a longlasting product. The maintenance of the awning is the responsibility of the Condominium and Homeowner’s Association, not each owner. Mr. McGuiness presented a diagram and stated that the gas meter banks will be located on either end of the building, where there are 15 feet between each building and a path that is 4 feet wide. He requested that they be permitted to work with the Building Department to finalize the landscape screening and locations based on access constraints. Per a consultation with Lanie McKinnon from Nelson Byrd Woltz Landscape Architects, four types of trees were recommended for the rooftop conditions, including American Hornbeam, Japanese Snowbell, River Birch, or Sweet Baby Magnolia. He proposes planting one tree type per building and varying it from building to building. He requested to work with the Building Department to address the concerns related to the planters on private terraces. Chris Camia stated that although the trees would provide an aesthetic element, the functionality and durability of planting trees on the rooftop will be challenging in the wind conditions. There should be a contingency in place for trees in planters. 5 (10/17/24) �Chairperson Krakauer stated that she is concerned about the safety and maintenance of the tree growth and health. Mr. McGuiness stated that he would remove the trees if the Board prefers. They are not a critical part of the application. Mr. Chavkin stated that the rooftop trees would be located in a limited common element, and each person would not own the space individually. The Condominium Association would be responsible for maintaining the trees. Mr. Gross stated that the overgrown rooftop trees would obstruct the fire department’s roof access and suggested the tall shrubbery. Mr. Chavkin stated that they need the ability to articulate a plan to the potential buyers. They would be willing to work with the Building Department to resolve the concerns. Chairperson Krakauer requested that Mr. McGuiness work through the concerns and submit solution options as part of the Architectural Review. Mr. Camia asked Mr. McGuiness if details were submitted for the rooftop mechanical screening. Mr. Chavkin stated that the submission details a full enclosure for the rooftop mechanical equipment that does not include a gate or removable panel. Benjamin Nielsen asked Mr. McGuiness when he would submit a plan for the rooftop terrace shade structure. Mr. McGuiness said he will submit the plans for the proposed rooftop terrace shade structures. David Smith requested that Mr. McGuiness ensure that the options for the rooftop trees are Westchester County native species and detail the full-grown expected heights. Mr. McGuiness requested that the Planning Board permit them to work with the Building Department to address the review memo items on the permit drawings and to approve the application. Mr. Chavkin stated that they are not seeking approval for the rooftop terrace shade options as part of this application, which is why they are not shown on the drawings. Mr. Chavkin stated that pergolas would not be offered for this building, and they are discussing the options for retractable awnings, but they have not determined the details. Mr. Camia stated that he objects to moving forward with approval at this meeting. Mr. Nielsen suggested that a draft resolution be prepared for the next meeting based on the receipt of a submission from the applicant to address the open items related to the Building 6 (10/17/24) �Department reviews and more details on the proposed rooftop trees and fourth-floor terrace structure. Chairperson Krakauer adjourned the application to the November 21, 2024 meeting. 7. 16 Hudson Street Realty, 16 Hudson Street, Proposed parking area, Site Plan Approval – Preliminary Presentation The Board received an adjournment request from the Applicant’s architect. The application was adjourned to the November 21, 2024 meeting. 8. KWD Realty, LLC, 309-315 North Broadway, Proposed mixed-use building, Site Plan & Architectural Review Approval – Preliminary Presentation The Board received an adjournment request from the Applicant’s architect. The application was adjourned to the November 21, 2024 meeting. 9. Lighthouse Landing Communities, LLC, Edge-on-Hudson Riverfront Development, Phase III-Waterfront Open Space- Site Plan & Wetlands Watercourse Permit Approval- Preliminary Presentation Peter Chavkin stated that he is representing Lighthouse Landing Communites, LLC. Mr. Chavkin stated that the new design improved water access. Mr. Chavkin provided a history of the prior discussions with the Village’s Public Spaces Council and the Planning Board. Mr. Chavkin stated that the Palisades Green runs from the edge of Overlook to the lighthouse and the nose of Kingsland Point Park. The Planning Board approved a partial Site Plan and Wetlands Permit Approval for Phase II, including the Kingsland North Buffer and the third leg of Tappan Zee Park. The submission includes site plans, engineering plans and preliminary architectural plans for the Boathouse. Mr. Chavkin presented illustrations and Palisades Park Site plan designs prepared by Nelson Byrd Woltz, Landscape Architects. He described the intentions for the Lighthouse Terrace, Palisades Green lawn and seasonal ice skating rink, Meadow Circle, Tilted Lawn, Shrub and Groundcover, Primary Walkways, Trees, Unit Pavers, Secondary Pathways, Site Furnishings, Colonade Art Piece, and the Kayak Launch and water access. Mr. Chavkin stated that the plan includes an ADA-accessible pathway to the kayak launch area and a staircase from the upper to the lower pathway, providing a straight shot to the launch area. The paved pathway to the Sandy Cove and Beach will remain. Chris Camia asked Mr. Chavkin to describe the kayak launch material. Mr. Chavkin presented the engineering plan and stated that Race Marine engineers designed the kayak ramp as a gravel pathway with geogrid pavers for water durability and low maintenance. Mr. Chavkin presented and stated the Boathouse plan and stated that it is proposed as a single roof skylight columned structure that includes a kayak storage area, outdoor shower area, office space for rental business capabilities, breezeway entry, two lavatories, and a non-commercial kitchen and café facilities. The pathway to the Boathouse is not intended for frequent vehicle use. Mr. Chavkin stated that the two lavatories would be the only public restrooms in the park. 7 (10/17/24) �The hotel may have public restrooms, and DeCicco’s Supermarket will provide an exterior access bathroom for people not going into the store. Rachelle Gebler asked if they are providing flatter rocks at the rip rap for pedestrian access to the water. Mr. Chavkin stated that they had contemplated the flatter rocks in the area where the kayak launch is now proposed. They are already pulling the rip rap back to create the launch. Physical and cost restraints would prohibit them from continuing with the idea. Upon the Planning Board's approval, they are required to submit it for approval with the DEC and Army Corp of Engineers. The Board expressed concerns about the Boathouse's programming, including the structure's entrance, location, kayak launch bulkhead wall, and the circulation of the main pathways through the Park leading to Kingsland Point Park. Mr. Chavkin suggested scheduling a joint work session with the Planning Board and the Board of Trustees to discuss the boathouse programming, including the engineer from Race, to discuss the water access and grading capabilities related to FEMA data. The Planning Board agreed to schedule a joint Work Session to discuss the plans further. No action was taken. 11. Approval of minutes, September 19, 2024 Richard Gross moved to approve the September 19, 2024, meeting minutes. Moved: Gross Seconded: Camia Chairperson Gebler- yes Richard Gross- yes Rachelle Gebler- yes Benjamin Nielsen -yes Chris Camia- yes Vote 5-0 12. LL Parcel, E, LLC, 201 Horseman Blvd., Proposed fourth-flooor pergola and exterior changes, Amended Site Plan & Architectural Review Approval- Amended Resolution Sean McCarthy asked if the Board if they are comfortable amending the resolution to eliminate the condition regarding the louvers. Chairperson Krakauer moved to amended the resolution approved at the June 20, 2024 meeting. Richard Gross moved to approve the September 19, 2024, meeting minutes. Moved: Nielsen Seconded: Gebler Chairperson Gebler- yes 8 (10/17/24) �Richard Gross- yes Rachelle Gebler- yes Benjamin Nielsen -yes Chris Camia- yes Vote 5-0 Chairperson Krakauer moved to adjourn the meeting at 9:35 PM. Moved: Krakauer Seconded: Nielsen Vote 5-0 Respectfully submitted, Pamela Kroll Secretary to the Planning Board 9 (10/17/24) � 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-2024 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_2024-10-17 Approved Planning Board Minutes Subject The topic of the resource Planning Board Minutes & Resolutions-2024 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2024 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Village of Sleepy Hollow All Rights Reserved. Type The nature or genre of the resource Text https://sleepyhollow.localarchives.org/files/original/83bc1561a2000eb57db05a7c70bbaad7.pdf 01e98f053f1cd7e74c19c98c553be56a PDF Text 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 Planning Board Minutes & Resolutions-2024 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_2024-10-17_213 Palisades Blvd Approved Resolution Subject The topic of the resource Planning Board Minutes & Resolutions-2024 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2024 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Village of Sleepy Hollow All Rights Reserved. Type The nature or genre of the resource Text https://sleepyhollow.localarchives.org/files/original/c3c1db1671610eee78ae57a00f3aa254.pdf 5066dec2161e7e88d3df262fa1c431dd PDF Text 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 Planning Board Minutes & Resolutions-2024 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_2024-10-17_201 Horseman Blvd Amended Resolution Subject The topic of the resource Planning Board Minutes & Resolutions-2024 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2024 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Village of Sleepy Hollow All Rights Reserved. Type The nature or genre of the resource Text https://sleepyhollow.localarchives.org/files/original/398f7c009a3225c4bbb5d063c00494be.pdf 71834289be00d7badf768298e293c5ab PDF Text 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 Planning Board Minutes & Resolutions-2024 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_2024-10-17_Block OP&N Townhome Two Amended Preliminary Subdivision Plat-Approved Resolution Subject The topic of the resource Planning Board Minutes & Resolutions-2024 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2024 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Village of Sleepy Hollow All Rights Reserved. Type The nature or genre of the resource Text https://sleepyhollow.localarchives.org/files/original/99f49da4e5545cfc431e5f45e5a9b611.pdf 3faf4eaea761d5c122390416b56165d2 PDF Text Text Village of Sleepy Hollow Planning Board Minutes September 19, 2024 Chairperson Krakauer called the regular meeting to order at 7:00 PM. Chairperson Krakauer announced that Caroline Chen resigned from the Planning Board and thanked her for her service. The Village is looking for residents interested in serving as Planning Board members. Please contact Mayor Rutyna if you are interested in self-nominating or nominating a resident interested in volunteering. Chairperson Krakauer read the agenda and stated that there were a few adjournment announcements. SDC Lighthouse Landing Realty LLC submitted an adjournment request to the next meeting. Quality High LLC submitted an adjournment request for the proposed cannabis dispensary at 36-38 Beekman Avenue due to new information. The applicant for 16 Hudson Street has also requested an adjournment. Present: Lindsay Krakauer, Chairperson Richard Gross Benjamin Nielsen Clare Trapasso Chris Camia Also Present: Joshua B. Subin, Village Attorney David Smith, Village Planner James Natarelli, Village Engineer Sean E. McCarthy, Building Inspector Absent: Rachelle Gebler Agenda: 1) SDC Lighthouse Landing Realty, LLC, Edge-on-Hudson Riverfront Development, Block A Proposed medical office building, Site Plan and Architectural Review ApprovalDraft Resolution 2) Pokahoe Riverview Manor, LLC, 17 Pokahoe Drive, Proposed single-family residence, Amended Site Plan & Architectural Review Approval- Public Hearing 3) Phelps Hospital-Northwell Health, 701 North Broadway, Proposed Behavioral Health Garden, Amended Site Plan & Architectural Review- Draft Resolution 1 (9/19/24) �4) Quality High, LLC, 36-38 Beekman Avenue, Proposed cannabis dispensary, Site Plan Approval- Public Hearing 5) Toll Landscape LLC, 213 Palisades Blvd., Proposed larger pergola with screens, Amended Site Plan & Architectural Review- Presentation 6) One Kingsland Owner, LLC, 308-318 Legend Drive, Proposed (6) unit townhome building, Amended Site Plan & Architectural Review Approval- Preliminary Presentation 7) 16 Hudson Street Realty, 16 Hudson Street, Proposed parking area, Site Plan ApprovalPreliminary Presentation 8) KWD Realty, LLC, 309-315 North Broadway, Proposed mixed-use building, Site Plan & Architectural Review Approval- Preliminary Presentation 9) Joshua Egan and Jennifer Schwartz, 120 Gorey Brook Road, Proposed detached garage with accessory dwelling, Site Plan & Architectural Review Approval – Preliminary Presentation 10) Lighthouse Landing Communities, LLC, Edge-on-Hudson Riverfront Development, Block OP&N Amended Preliminary Subdivision Plat- Preliminary Presentation 11) Approval of minutes, July 18, 2024 1. SDC Lighthouse Landing Realty, LLC, Edge-on-Hudson Riverfront Development Block A Proposed medical office building, Site Plan & Architectural Review- Draft Resolution The Board received an adjournment request from the applicant's attorney on September 18, 2024. The application was adjourned to the October 17, 2024 meeting. 2. Pokahoe Riverview Manor, LLC, 17 Pokahoe Drive, Proposed single-family residence Amended Site Plan & Architectural Review Approval - Draft Resolution Chairperson Krakauer asked David Smith to read the draft resolution. David Smith stated that the Planning Board held a public hearing on July 18, 2024. The Planning Board closed the public hearing and kept the written comment period open for tonight's meeting. No additional written comments have been received. Mr. Smith read the conditions of the draft resolution. Richard Gross moved to approve the resolution. Moved: Gross Seconded: Nielsen Chairperson Krakauer- yes Richard Gross- yes Clare Trapasso- yes Benjamin Nielsen -yes Chris Camia- yes Vote 5-0 2 (9/19/24) �3. Phelps Hospital- Northwell Health, 701 North Broadway, Proposed Behavioral Health Garden, Amended Site Plan & Architectural Review Approval - Draft Resolution Donna Maiello stated that she is associate with DTS Provident Design Engineering, LLP. Jeffrey Meade stated he is the Associate Executive Director of Operations for Phelps Hospital. Chairperson Krakauer solicited comments from the applicant and the Board. There were no comments from the applicants or the Board. Chairperson Krakauer asked David Smith to read the draft resolution. David Smith read the conditions of the draft resolution. Benjamin Nielsen moved to approve the resolution. Moved: Nielsen Seconded: Gross Chairperson Krakauer- yes Richard Gross- yes Clare Trapasso- yes Benjamin Nielsen -yes Chris Camia- yes Vote 5-0 4. Quality High, LLC, 36-38 Beekman Avenue, Proposed cannabis dispensary, Site Plan Approval- Public Hearing The Board received an adjournment request from the Applicant on September 19, 2024, to provide time to review information they received from the New York State Office of Cannabis Management. The public hearing was adjourned to the October 17, 2024 meeting. Several written comments were received (See attached Exhibit #s 1 – 9) 5. Toll Landscape LLC, 213 Palisades Blvd., Proposed larger pergola with screens Amended Site Plan & Architectural Review Approval – Presentation Karin Magnuson stated that she lives at 213 Palisades Blvd. She stated that her 2022 sales contract and closing documents with Toll Brothers agreed to install a 10’ x 16’9” motorized pergola with motorized screens. When Toll Landscape filed for a Building Permit in April 2023 to replace the installed 10’ x 12’ pergola, they were informed that the application required Planning Board Approval. Ms. Magnuson stated that the Planning Board expressed concerns about the retractable screens' aesthetics and precedent-setting nature. At the May meeting the applicant stated that the screens' main purpose was insect protection. Ms. Magnuson stated that solar protection is the main goal from the retractable screens. Ms. Magnuson described her autoimmune and immunocompromised conditions and stated that she purchased a premium park and river-facing unit with full sun exposure with the understanding that the pergola design and screens would be installed. Ms. Magnuson stated that approving her application would not create 3 (9/19/24) �a precedent because Toll Brothers and the Edge-on-Hudson Home Owners Association confirmed that they have not offered, and will not approve future requests for retractable screens from homeowners. Ms. Magnuson presented renderings to show the screens' appearance and stated that screens would not be down more than two hours in a given day and that they don’t need to be fully closed to provide the protection she requires. Ms. Magnuson provided photographs of alternate sun protection using umbrellas and pop-up sunshade tents and stated that she doesn’t believe the alternatives are aesthetic solutions. Ms. Magnuson presented photographs of the views of her unit from the ground, the screen color options, and the size of the pergola. The Planning Board reviewed the screen samples. Chris Camia asked Ms. Magnuson to clarify the pergola size, showing where the existing pergola structure extends on the terrace. Ms. Magnuson described where the existing structure ends and stated that the proposed pergola ends 18 inches before the front edge of the building because of the roof scuppers. Clare Trappasso asked Ms. Magnuson if Toll Brothers or the Edge-on-Hudson HOA put the pergola restrictions for future homeowners in writing and if Toll Brothers has encountered cases similar to hers. Ms. Magnuson stated that she has a written document from Toll Landscape and can request that the HOA provide the restrictions in writing. Toll Brothers said they have not received similar requests for the Edge-on-Hudson development. Chairperson Krakauer asked if the sun penetrates the terrace's front and sides. Ms. Magnuson stated that the sun penetrates mostly at the front and one side of the terrace. Chris Camia asked if the same company manufactures the pergola and solar screens or if the screens are retrofitted. Ms. Manguson stated that although a different vendor manufactures the screens, the same company will install the pergola and screens together. Benjamin Nielsen stated that the Board has received other requests from owners who desire to enhance or add aftermarket pergolas. Consistency is the best way to ensure that applicants follow the same guidelines as part of the architectural review approval process. Since pergolas add an architectural element to the building, the Board has defined pergolas to include restrictions of 75% limited floor area coverage and 75% openness for the roof. Ms. Magnuson said that Toll Landscape told her that she was the only person who requested pergola screens and asked if the Board has received other applications. Sean McCarthy stated the Planning Board is working on the design challenges of a pergoloa application submitted for the Block H development. Applications have been received for the 4 (9/19/24) �Block E development, and other inquiries have been received related to the Block O&P development. Mr. Nieslen asked Ms. Magnuson if there was a way to achieve sun protection while leaving 75% of the side areas open. Ms. Magnuson stated that she may not have purchased this lot if she had known the pergola screens would be an issue. The retractable screens are more aesthetic and structurally sound than anchored umbrellas. She would agree to limit the screens to 25% down. Mr. Camia asked if she would consider keeping the current size of the pergola with the retractable screens. Joshua Subin stated that written restrictions from Toll Brothers or the Edge-on-Hudson Homeowners Association could be submitted for the record but may not be binding on future applications as there wouldn’t be a contract between the Village and the developers. The Board could consider them if the HOA bylaws included the restrictions. Richard Gross asked Ms. Magnuson if she would have control over limiting the screens to close only a quarter of the way down. Mr. McCarthy stated that there might be a manual stop-limit switch option that the manufacturer could install. David Smith asked Mr. Subin if a condition could be added to the resolution requiring the screens to be removed if the unit is sold. Mr. Subin stated that it could be an agreement with the homeowner, but it could not be a mandatory condition of approval. Ms. Magnuson said she would agree to the condition as she is not planning on moving. Chairperson Krakauer stated that the Board would consider her presentation and adjourn for a discussion at the October 17, 2024 meeting. 6. One Kingsland Owner, LLC, 308-318 Legend Drive, Proposed (6) unit townhome building, Amended Site Plan & Architectural Review Approval – Preliminary Presentation Bill McGuiness stated that he is from SunHomes. Mr. McGuiness stated that the building would include six units, two 22-foot-wide end units and four 20-foot-wide interior units. He intends to follow the design guidelines related to the “Kit of Parts” elements related to balconies, bay windows, and brick color. The massing is proposed to step in and out by two feet, with the parapet height lines going up and down by one foot with black railing. The proposed changes include two-story bay elements on the two end units and a one-story mid-block recessed bay with a balcony and awning over it. Exterior spaces will have a patio below and a deck above it. Mr. McGuiness stated that he received the review letter and clarification notes have been added, and the changes have been made, including adding more windows to the side elevation of the 5 (9/19/24) �ground floor. He requested not changing the details related to those identical to the approved kit of parts items from the previously approved building and cited the shrouds around the HVAC equipment as an example. Chris Camia stated that the on-site constructed HVAC shrouds are not enclosed, and the equipment is visible to homeowners. Mr. Camia suggested that fully enclosing the HVAC equipment would improve the visual element of a dense development site. Mr. McGuiness stated that the application proposes an enclosure with three-foot openings for equipment access. Since the equipment would face the ends of the building and not the front, he doesn’t see angles where exposed equipment would be visible from below. Mr. Camia suggested using a secure removable panel without changing the material or making it a parapet wall. The equipment's visibility relates to its impact on the homeowners' view from fourth-floor balconies. Mr. McGuiness stated that he would add panels for the mechanical equipment enclosure. Chairperson Krakauer stated that the delineation of the vertical lines and staggering of the building at the rear elevation seem uniform compared to the front elevations. Mr. McGuiness stated that he would consider changing the proportions of the window sizes and patterns and periodically raising and lowering the tops of the bays along the back. Mr. Camia asked if the bricks would be different colors from unit to unit. Mr. McGuiness stated that two different brick colors are proposed from unit to unit. Benjamin Nielsen asked Mr. McGuiness to describe the proposed trees between the units. Chairperson Krakauer asked Mr. McGuiness if the drainage for the planter boxes was sufficient. Mr. McGuiness stated that the trees proposed between the units are an important design element. Honey locust trees were suggested for handling the wind load and unattentive watering. The drainage for the planter boxes is worked out. The design intends to create privacy between the units without fencing and walls. Richard Gross suggested using bushes between the units and stated that the Honey Locust trees grow tall and would not provide privacy. Mr. McGuiness stated that the trees are an architectural gesture and not intended to provide privacy. Mr. Nieslen asked if the option for elevators will be offered, how accessibility would be provided at the front of the units and if all the units have a uniform number of front steps. Mr. McGuiness stated that accessibility access would be provided from the garage and that no accommodations are proposed from the front of the units. The architectural renderings do not 6 (9/19/24) �match the civil plans, which detail the steps correctly. He will add notes to the architectural illustrations to show how the steps differ from unit to unit. Mr. Nielsen asked if pergolas or shade structures are proposed for the fourth floor. Mr. McGuiness stated that he plans to offer solutions that do not include a structure on the fourth floor. He is considering awnings or overhangs to provide options to expand coverage of the outdoor spaces. Mr. Nielsen requested that the proposed option for the fourth-floor outdoor spaces be included and submitted with the current application. Chairperson Krakauer requested that Mr. McGuiness consider fabric alternatives for the awnings and submit detailed renderings and material specifications. Mr. McGuiness stated that he would submit a sample of the awning fabric. Chris Camia asked if the Home Owner’s Association (“ HOA”) would be responsible for the warranty and replacement of the awnings and if an extended warranty would be offered. Mr. McGuiness stated that he is not prepared to discuss the details of extending the manufacturer's warranty. The HOA would be responsible for it. Mr. Nielsen requested that the gas meter locations and proposed screening be submitted on the drawings. Mr. McGuiness stated that he intends to cluster the meters on the ends of the buildings so they are not visible from prominent building elevations. He will submit details for the meter locations and the proposed screening. James Natarelli asked if the end unit fireplaces include exhausts on the end walls. Mr. McGuiness stated that the fireplaces would be ventless and not offered in bedrooms. All air intakes and exhaust penetrations, besides the bathroom exhaust, vent through the roof. Chairperson Krakauer adjourned the application to the October 17, 2024 meeting. No action was taken. 7. 16 Hudson Street Realty, 16 Hudson Street, Proposed parking area, Site Plan Approval – Preliminary Presentation 7 (9/19/24) �The Board received an adjournment request from the Applicant’s architect on September 17, 2024. The application was adjourned to the October 17, 2024 meeting. 8. KWD Realty, LLC, 309-315 North Broadway, Proposed mixed-use building, Site Plan & Architectural Review Approval – Preliminary Presentation Bruno Pietrosanti stated that he is the project architect representing the owner, Mr. Karl Dibble. Mr. Pietrosanti stated that the proposed self-storage building and two-story drive-thru café would appropriately use the site’s topography slopes and highly visible location. Self-storage buildings would generate less traffic than retail buildings and be utilized by occupants of newly constructed multi-residence buildings on the waterfront, which do not include large closets or storage space. Mr. Pietrosanti described where the entrance driveways, parking, and structures are proposed on two levels. The application requires variance approvals from the Zoning Board of Appeals for the building height and drive-thru fast food use. The proposed building complies with zoning regulations for bulk and setbacks. Since the Village of Sleepy Hollow Code does not include specific legislation or written parking requirements for self-storage structures, they used the National Storage Organization standards to determine that the parking is compliant. Mr. Pietrosanti asked if the Planning Board interprets parking requirements or if the Zoning Board of Appeals reviews the parking requirements based on the recommendation by the Board. Sean McCarthy stated that when the Zoning Code doesn’t specifically designate land-use parking requirements, the Planning Board will decide based on staff input. Mr. Pietrosanti described the renderings and stated that upon the Board’s recommendation to move forward with the concept plan, he would prepare more detailed renderings using the actual site photographs and include more landscaping details. Chairperson Krakauer stated that the site is a critical gateway to the inner Village from Route 9. Due to the topography of the sloping site, the height of a big building would appear larger. She suggested that the architect consider incorporating step-back designs to minimize the aesthetics of the buildings massing. Ms. Krakauer suggested having most of the parking spaces at the property's rear to shield visibility from the street. Mr. Pietrosanti stated that the parking would be well-hidden behind retaining walls, landscaping screening, and setback from the street. Ms. Krakauer suggested that changing the façade materials could produce a less industrial appearance for a storage facility and suggested that Mr. Pietrosanti consider some of the architectural details of the Edge-on-Hudson Development as a reference. Mr. Pietrosanti stated that windows are not typical for storage facilities. The plans proposes translusant panel materials that would allow light into the buildings and create the appearance of windows. Karl Dibble stated that he is the owner of the property. Mr. Dibble stated that the site of the Southside Bank in Irvington was used to create the renderings for the storage buildings and that the design is similar to neighboring buildings and the proposed medical office building. The 8 (9/19/24) �examples of existing self-storage facilities provided to him from the Village Planner would not fit with the neighboring buildings. The footprints of the proposed buildings are designed to fit with the different property grades. The existing site parking is open, and the proposed plan would include landscape screening and walls that would look better from the road. Mr. Piestrosanti stated that the plan was based on the zoning requirements of a commercial building. Mr. Dibble stated that gas stations in the Village and his current business utilize drive-thru conditions, which deal with traffic difficulties. A self-storage facility would have less traffic impact on the Village than the current business use or an apartment building and would have the least impact on the water, sewer, or school systems. Chris Camia asked Mr. Dibble to describe how the self-storage building relates to the café. Although the storage facility traffic would be periodic, the drive-thru café would result in traffic. Mr. Dibble stated that a drive-thru establishment like Dunkin Donuts or Starbucks would benefit him economically when the storage business is slow and frequently used by the Village residents. The two-lane driveway would help accommodate traffic for both uses and provide a balance to the site. Clare Trappasso expressed concern about traffic during peak commute times and school hours and requested that a traffic study be completed. She also suggested that the applicant consider making the buildings aesthetically pleasing. Chairperson Krakauer asked the applicant to submit site turning radius diagrams to ensure emergency vehicle access. Mr. Dibble stated that if he eliminated the café, he would request a larger self-storage building, requiring more variances. The proposed buildings will look better than the trucks currently parked on site. Benjamin Nielsen and Chris Camia expressed concerns regarding the proposed building massing and height from an architectural review perspective. They explained that the Planning Board considers whether there would be excessive dissimilarity with adjacent properties and whether the uses are needed in the Village. They described the five-factor criteria methods the Zoning Board of Appeals will review for the requested height variance. Mr. Nieslen suggested lowering the building height, expanding the footprint, and having the building overhang the parking. The Board, applicant, and architect discussed how the building's mass could be reduced and incorporated into the street frontage, and how the concept plan conforms with the zoning setback requirements. Mr. Camia asked Mr. Piestrosanti to describe the basement levels. 9 (9/19/24) �Mr. Piestrosanti described the two property grade levels, with the basement levels below and exposed above grade. Mr. Dibble stated that the three existing curb cuts would remain, and the drive-thru café would be at street level. Chairperson Krakauer requested that a landscape plan be submitted. Chairperson Krakauer solicited comments from the consultants. James Natarelli stated that he can't start his review until the site engineering plans are submitted to include grading, utilities, stormwater management, erosion control, construction logistics, Mr. Piestrosanti asked who would be the lead agency. Mr. McCarthy stated that the Planning Board is the lead agency and that the concept plan should be finalized before it is submitted to the Zoning Board of Appeals. Mr. Dibble requested that the Planning Board be comfortable moving forward with the concept plan before completing the engineering drawings and landscape plan. Mr. Nieslen asked Mr. Piestrosanti if rooftop mechanical equipment was proposed and if there would be an elevator tower. Mr. Piestrosanti stated that the proposed hydraulic elevators would include a slight bulkhead, and the roof parapets would limit the view exposure. Mr. Dibble described the neighboring properties and stated that the rooftop mechanical equipment would not obstruct residential views. Mr. Dibble asked the Planning Board if they preferred the all-storage or the mixed-use concept. Joshua Subin stated that if the applicant wants to discuss what would be a good use for the site, he should discuss it with the Board of Trustees. The Planning Board reviews the application submitted. The Planning Board expressed concerns related to traffic and agreed that a study should be completed focusing on how the change of use would impact the intersection. David Smith decribed how a traffic engineer performs an analysis in relation to existing and proposed conditions for traffic flow on a main road intersection. The Planing Board can make a descision on the appropriateness of the application, specifically the drive-thru restaurant component. The application was adjourned to the October 17, 2024 meeting. No action was taken. 9. Joshua Egan and Jennifer Schwartz, 120 Gorey Brook Road, Proposed detached 10 (9/19/24) �garage and accessory dwelling. Site Plan & Architectural Review Approval – Preliminary Presentation Julie Evans is the architect representing the applicants. Ms. Evans stated that the applicants are proposing site improvements and a new garage with a second-story level for accessory uses, such as a home office or a dwelling unit. Jennifer Schwartz stated that she owns the property and described the existing property conditions. They intend to use the garage’s second story as a home office. A full bathroom is proposed to prepare the space for an accessory dwelling that may be needed for a relative or livein childcare provider. The additional parking area outside the garage would provide more accessibility for deliveries and parking on the property. Joshua Egan is the property owner and stated that he currently works in the basement, and when it rains, water comes through the brick. Ms. Evans described the property's conditions and stated that the applicant would remove the old shed and access drive located uphill on the property. She summarized the proposed renovations. The removal of the paved paths and driveway will reduce the amount of impervious surface. Ms. Evans presented context views and described how the garage would be viewed from the neighboring properties. The applicants will be requesting variance approval for the garage height. She described the proposed garage floor plans. Mr. Egan stated that there is a view easement agreement with their uphill neighbor. The proposed garage is within the acceptable building areas and will not obstruct their views. Chairperson Krakauer asked the consultants if a title report was necessary. Ms. Evans stated that they would submit the title report and easement agreement if they were not included in the submission. Based on the relative average grade, they determined that the roof height is 17 feet to the middle of the garage hip roof. She described the elevations and plans. Benjamin Nielsen stated that the west garage roof elevation is proposed to be higher than the main residence and asked if the garage could be relocated. There was a discussion with the Board, owners, and the architect regarding the placement of the garage and the roof height in relation to the main residence. Chairperson Krakauer asked Ms. Evans for the height difference between the garage and the main house. Ms. Evans stated the garage is proposed at eight feet taller than the main house. Chris Camia asked Ms. Evans to describe how water is mitigated coming down the hill. Ms. Evans stated that a drainage plan has been designed. James Natarelli stated that he could discuss his comments with the engineer directly. 11 (9/19/24) �Ryna Lustig is the landscape designer. Ms. Lustig stated the landscape plan is intended to manage the existing slopes behind the existing and proposed retaining walls and relocate as much of the existing plantings as possible. One Weeping Willow tree is proposed for removal. Ms. Lustig stated that the landscape plan includes tree and boulder steps. Ms. Lustig described the approach for the landscape designs. Chairperson Krakauer asked Ms. Lustig how many new trees were proposed. Ms. Lustig stated that two new trees are proposed. Chairperson Krakauer stated that the Village encourages planting native canopy species trees and suggested that the applicant consider planting a larger tree on the property similar to the one being removed. Ms. Schwartz stated they are restricted from planting trees in the view easement. Ms. Lustig stated that a tree could be added to the driveway area. Mr. Egan planted nine trees recently and said they would plant additional trees if requested. Chairperson Krakauer asked staff to confirm that if the proposed accessory dwelling unit is occupied for a purpose other than the owner's permitted use, an employment application would be required for someone else to live in it. Ms. Schwartz agreed that if they employed a live-in nanny, they would supply an employment agreement for them to live in the accessory dwelling. Mr. McCarthy stated that the applicants propose to use the space as a home office. If the accessory dwelling is approved and constructed, the owners will receive a Certificate of Occupancy based on the approval. The R-1 zoning district permits accessory dwelling quarters for full-time domestic employees, home professional use, or home office. Laurel Gaffney is the application engineer. Ms. Gaffney summarized the engineering plans related to impervious coverage, drainage and stormwater plans, and how the basement and site water issues will be mitigated. The percolation tests have not been completed yet. James Natarelli requested that the engineer perform the percolation tests. Chairperson Krakauer moved to refer the application to the next available Zoning Board of Appeals agenda and to schedule a Planning Board public hearing pending ZBA approval. Moved: Gross Seconded: Camia Chairperson Krakauer- yes Richard Gross- yes Clare Trapasso- yes Benjamin Nielsen -yes Chris Camia- yes 12 (9/19/24) �Vote 5-0 10. Lighthouse Landing Communities, LLC, Edge-on-Hudson Riverfront Development, Block OP & N Amended Preliminary Subdivision Plan- Preliminary Presentation Craig Tompkins is the Construction Manager for Lighthouse Landing Communities, LLC A title company determined that minor corrections are required to the approved map, which defined the lots for Block O/P & N and the future waterfront north buffer. Only one remaining lot is on the subdivision map, which will ultimately be a tax lot by for Simone Development. The corrections do not include changes to lot sizes. Corrections include adding and removing distances and renaming easements. Chairperson Krakauer stated that consultants need to review the map. Mr. Tompkins asked if accommodations could be made so that the subdivision map could be signed before the next meeting. Joshua Subin stated that he has no objection to the Chair signing the map contingent on the ministerial changes as a condition of the approval so they can vote on it tonight. David Smith stated that the Board could vote to approve the application now and direct him to draft a resolution, provided the map is subject to the review of the Village Engineer and the Building Department. Chris Camia moved to approve the application now and direct David Smith to draft a resolution, with the condition that the approval be contingent on the Village Engineer and the consultants' review. Moved: Camia Seconded: Nielsen Chairperson Krakauer- yes Richard Gross- yes Clare Trapasso- yes Benjamin Nielsen -yes Chris Camia- yes Vote 5-0 9. Approval of minutes, July 18, 2024 Benjamin Nielsen moved to approve the July 18, 2024, meeting minutes. Moved: Nielsen Seconded: Trappasso Chairperson Gebler- yes Richard Gross- abstained Clare Trapasso- yes Benjamin Nielsen -yes Chris Camia- yes Vote 4-1-0 13 (9/19/24) �Chairperson Krakauer adjourned the meeting at 9:55 PM. Respectfully submitted, Pamela Kroll Secretary to the Planning Board 14 (9/19/24) �Exhibit #1 �Exhibit #2 �Exhibit #3 �Exhibit #4 RECEIVED SEP 1 9 2024 BUILDING DEPT VILLAGE OF SLEEPY HOL LO -----Original Mcssagc----From: Dara Murano <dara.morano@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday. September 19. 2024 12:29 PM To: James I lussclbce <Jhusselbcc@slccpyhollowny.org>: Thomas Andruss <tandruss@slccpyhollowny.org>: Lauren Connell <lconnell@slccpyhollowny.org>: Jared Rodriguez <jrodriguez@sleepyhollowny.org>: Denise Scaglione <dscaglione@slecpyhollowny.org>: Patrick Sheeran <PShccran@slccpyhollowny.org>: Scan McCarthy <smccarthytgslccpyhol lO\vny .org> Subject: 36-38 Beckman Public Comment To Chairperson Krakauer and the Planning Board : /\s a Village resident. it is important to 111) famil) that the Village docs not permit a cannabis dispensary at 36-38 Beckman which is in extremely close proximity to the Morse Elementary School and the school's playground. This is an incredibly inappropriate and unsal"c location lor this type of business. Please do everything possible to ensure this docs NOT open at this location. The safety of the children of this community should be cveryone·s number I priority. Thank you for your efforts. Dara Morano W �Exhibit #5 �Exhibit #6 �Exhibit #7 �Exhibit #8 �Exhibit #9 � 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-2024 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_2024-09-19 Approved Planning Board Minutes Subject The topic of the resource Planning Board Minutes & Resolutions-2024 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2024 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Village of Sleepy Hollow All Rights Reserved. Type The nature or genre of the resource Text https://sleepyhollow.localarchives.org/files/original/09578287ed191ace4c21273db784ad36.pdf 2dd47076a8d6492dc0f15dbc481ead58 PDF Text Text Village of Sleepy Hollow Planning Board Minutes July 18, 2024 Chairperson Gebler called the regular meeting to order at 7:11 PM. Chairperson Gebler stated that SDC Lighthouse Landing Realty, LLC has requested an adjournment to the September 19, 2024 meeting. Present: Rachelle Gebler, Acting Chairperson Richard Gross Benjamin Nielsen Clare Trapasso Chris Camia Also Present: Joshua B. Subin, Village Attorney David Smith, Village Planner James Natarelli, Village Engineer Sean E. McCarthy, Building Inspector Absent: Lindsay Krakauer Caroline Chen Agenda: 1) Marcelo Poguio, 80 Depeyster Street, Proposed three-family residence, Site Plan and Architectural Review Approval- Continued Public Hearing /Draft Resolution 2) Kendal-on-Hudson, 1010 Kendal Way, Proposed additions and alterations, Amended Site Plan and Architectural Review- Draft Resolution 3) T-Mobile Northeast, LLC, 28 Beekman Avenue, Wireless Communications Permit, Site Plan Approval- Draft Resolution 4) SDC Lighthouse Landing Realty, LLC, Edge-on-Hudson Riverfront Development, Block A Proposed medical office building, Site Plan and Architectural Review ApprovalDraft Resolution 5) One Kingsland Owner, LLC, 401-403 Legend Drive, Proposed revisions to the Amenities Building, Amended Site Plan & Architectural Review Approval- Draft Resolution 6) Pokahoe Riverview Manor, LLC, 17 Pokahoe Drive, Proposed single-family residence, Amended Site Plan & Architectural Review Approval- Public Hearing 7) Quality High, LLC, 36-38 Beekman Avenue, Proposed cannabis dispensary, Site Plan Approval- Presentation 1 (7/18/24) �8) Phelps Hospital-Northwell Health, 701 North Broadway, Proposed Behavioral Health Garden, Amended Site Plan & Architectural Review- Preliminary Presentation 9) Lighthouse Landing Communities, LLC, Edge-on-Hudson Riverfront Development, Phase III-Waterfront Open Space, Proposed transformer location- Discussion 10) Approval of minutes, June 20, 2024 1. Marcelo Poguio, 80 Depeyster Street- Proposed three-family residence, Site Plan and Architectural Review Approval- Continued Public Hearing/Draft Resolution Pat Costabile stated that he represents the Applicant on behalf of the engineer. Mr. Constabile stated that the Applicant has agreed to the recommended Site Plan changes discussed with the Building Department. Chairperson Gebler solicited comments from the public. There were no comments from the public. Benjamin Nielsen moved to close the public hearing. Moved: Nielsen Seconded: Trapasso Vote 5-0 David Smith read the revised resolve clauses and conditions of the draft resolution. Richard Gross moved to approve the resolution. Moved: Gross Seconded: Trapasso Chairperson Gebler- yes Richard Gross- yes Clare Trapasso- yes Benjamin Nielsen-yes Chris Camia- yes Vote 5-0 2. Kendal-on-Hudson, 1010 Kendal Way, Proposed additions and alterations, Amended Site Plan & Architectural Review Approval- Draft Resolution John Hughes is the attorney representing the Applicant. Mr. Hughes stated that the Applicant has reviewed the draft resolution and has no requests for changes. David Smith read the conditions of the draft resolution. Richard Gross moved to approve the resolution. Moved: Gross Seconded: Trapasso Chairperson Gebler- yes Richard Gross- yes Clare Trapasso- yes Benjamin Nielsen -yes 2 (7/18/24) �Chris Camia - yes Vote 5-0 3. T-Mobile Northeast LLC, 28 Beekman Avenue, Wireless Communications Permit Site Plan Approval David Kenny is an attorney with Snyder & Snyder, LLP, representing the Applicant. Mr. Kenny stated that he approves the revisions to the draft resolution discussed at the Work Session. David Smith read the conditions of the draft resolution. Benjamin Nielsen moved to approve the resolution. Moved: Nelsen Seconded: Gross Chairperson Gebler- yes Richard Gross- yes Clare Trapasso- yes Benjamin Nielsen -yes Chris Camia- yes Vote 5-0 4. SDC Lighthouse Landing Realty, LLC, Edge-on-Hudson Riverfront Development Block A Proposed medical office building, Site Plan & Architectural Review- Draft Resolution The Board received an adjournment request from the applicant's attorney on July 17, 2024 The application was adjourned to the September 19, 2024 meeting. 5. One Kingsland Owner, LLC, 401-403 Legend Drive, Proposed revisions to the Amenities Building, Amended Site Plan & Architectural Review- Preliminary Presentation Bill McGuiness stated that he is present to answer questions and does not have a presentation for the meeting. Chairperson Gebler solicited comments from the Board. Benjamin Nielsen asked if the concerns related to the outdoor shower and sanitary sewer connections have been adequately addressed. James Natarelli stated that the revised plans show the shower basin is pitching to drain away from the pool deck. Mr. Natarelli suggested that the Applicant provide additional pitch details to show that stormwater would be prevented from entering the shower basin. Mr. McGuiness stated that the plans were revised based on the recommendations from his pool designer. He agreed to provide additional documentation as a condition of the approval. 3 (7/18/24) �Mr. Natarelli stated that the outdoor shower might also be subject to Westchester County Board of Health approval as part of the pool approval. There was a discussion regarding the conditions of the draft resolution. Chairperson Gebler moved to approve the resolution. Moved: Gebler Seconded: Gross Chairperson Gebler- yes Richard Gross- yes Clare Trapasso- yes Benjamin Nielsen -yes Chris Camia- yes Vote 5-0 6. Pokahoe Riverview Manor, LLC, 17 Pokahoe Drive, Proposed single-family residence Amended Site Plan & Architectural Review Approval – Public Hearing Benjamin Nielsen moved to open the public hearing. Moved: Nielsen Seconded: Camia Vote 5-0 Chairperson Gebler requested that the Applicant describe the proposed changes from the original Site Plan approval. Gregg Caccioppoli is the engineer representing the Applicant. Mr. Caccioppoli stated that no design changes have been proposed since the last meeting. Drawings were submitted to confirm that the property line setback to the driveway is five feet and to show vehicle maneuverability. Sean McCarthy requested that the Applicant summarize the proposed project for the public hearing. Ronald Pohl stated he owns the property. Mr. Pohl stated that changes from the original Site Plan include reducing the size of the house, eliminating the attic space, centering the house on the property, and relocating the garage to the front of the house. The exterior facade material changes include a combination of Hardie Board siding and brick. The size of the back porch has been reduced, and the pool has been centered. Benjamin Nielsen asked if the proposed siding is Hardie Board shake style. Mr. Pohl stated that a Hardie Board shake with a brick base wrapping around the back of the house is proposed. Mr. McCarthy requested that the Applicant present the rendering. Mr. Pohl stated they do not have the rendering presented at the last meeting. Chairperson Gebler asked the Applicant to describe the change in the amount of impervious surface. 4 (7/18/24) �Mr. Caccioppoli stated that reductions in proposed impervious surfaces include the number of cultecs, 1400 square feet of hardscape materials from the elimination of walls and walkways, and the relocation and reduction of the driveway size. Mr. Nielsen asked the Applicant to describe what is planned on the north side of the property where the driveway was previously approved. Mr. Caccioppoli presented the landscape plan and described the plantings proposed to screen the house from the neighboring property. Mr. Nielsen asked if this application proposes to preserve more of the existing trees and if more canopy trees are proposed. Mr. Pohl stated that the proposed tree removals remain the same. Chairperson Gebler stated that the Board suggests that Village Arborist re-evaluate the landscape plan based on the Site Plan changes. Mr. Nielsen stated that a review from the Village Arborist was a condition of the original approval and that removing trees that may fall in the future would affect Sleepy Hollow's character. Mr. Nielsen asked the Applicant to confirm if the proposed house height remains the same as originally approved. Mr. Pohl stated that the height of the proposed house remains the same. Chairperson Gebler solicited comments from the consultants. David Smith asked Mr. Caccioppoli to summarize the responses submitted to address the concerns received from Metro-North Railroad on July 16, 2024. ( See Exhibit #1) Mr. Caccioppoli stated that Metro-North questioned whether the integrity of the soil could support the pool's loads and that the construction would not encroach on their property or cause a collapse of retaining walls in the rear. The proposed walls are 3 ½ feet tall and are not considered structural. Deep soil testing confirms that there is bedrock at 5 feet deep. The stormwater plan includes a level spreader in the rear for storms larger than a 100-year storm event. James Natarelli stated that the level spreader is close to the property line on the south side. Mr. Natarelli suggested the engineer determine if the grades would allow for the level spreader to be moved to 10 feet from the property line. Mr. Natarelli asked Mr. Caccioppoli to describe how the previous house drainage performed, how the site drains now, and how the proposed drainage will handle stormwater in a 100-year storm event. Mr. Caccioppoli stated that the demolished house had roof leaders that flashed onto the ground, with water flowing onto the surface and onto the Metro-North property. The proposed stormwater plan includes an infiltration system that directs rain water runoff from the roof and 5 (7/18/24) �impervious surfaces into underground piping systems that store, percolate, and recharge groundwater. This will reduce stormwater runoff from flowing onto Metro-North property. Chairperson Gebler solicited comments from the public. There were no comments from the public. Benjamin Nielsen moved to close the public hearing, to receive written public comments to September 19, 2024, and to draft a resolution. Moved: Nielsen Seconded: Trapasso Vote 5-0 7. Quality High, LLC, 36-38 Beekman Avenue, Proposed cannabis dispensary, Site Plan Approval- Presentation Chairperson Gebler asked the Applicants if they had any further updates or communication from New York State. Matthew Nicoletti, one of the owners of Quality High, LLC, stated that New York State has confirmed communication with the Village but will not disclose details. Mr. Nicoletti offered to share the presentation documents and the proximity map that clarifies the setback requirements. He also submitted a copy of the New York State regulations for keeping children protected so the business does not appeal to anyone under 21 regarding packaging, advertisement, marketing, and displays. Chairperson Gebler requested that Mr. Nicoletti provide the Building Department with a digital copy of the State regulations and asked him to present the proximity map. Mr. Nicoletti asked Chairperson Gebler if the Board could confirm whether the Village had spoken with New York State. Mr. McCarthy stated that the Village has communicated with New York State. Mr. Nicoletti presented a labeled aerial view of the village to provide more details on the proximity setback calculations from schools and churches to the proposed dispensary location and surrounding businesses that sell alcohol and tobacco products. Mr. Nicoletti stated that the business is not a licensed consumption location. There will be no product consumption at the store. Chris Camia asked Mr. Nicoletti what protections would be in place to monitor patrons from consuming the products outside the store. Mr. Nicoletti stated that the guard at the door would monitor and enforce that products are not consumed outside the store. Clare Trappasso asked Mr. Nicoletti for the proposed hours of operation. 6 (7/18/24) �Mr. Nicoletti stated that they intend to be open from approximately 11:00 AM to 8:00 PM, seven days a week, but they are not sure if they will have staff to sustain those hours since it will be either himself or his partner running the store with the security guard. Chris Camia asked Mr. Nicoletti if New York State has restrictions on operation hours. Mr. Nicoletti stated that the State does not have restrictions on hours of operation, but they would be happy to discuss it with the Village. Richard Gross asked if the security guard would be armed. Mr. Nicoletti stated that the security guard would not be armed and that having guns at the facility would not create a comfortable environment. Nathan Lyons is a co-owner of Quality High, LLC and stated that they do not anticipate the need for an armed guard. Benjamin Nielsen asked Mr. Nicoletti to confirm the available parking for the business. Mr. Nicoletti stated that the building's parking lot is not intended for public use by its patrons. The dispensary would utilize available street parking like other businesses along Beekman Avenue. Sean McCarthy stated that there is no increase in parking demand based on the proposed use. Benjamin Nielsen asked if there were any concerns for the residents on the floor above. Mr. Nicoletti stated that their New York State small micro-business license restricts the cultivation or packaging of the products at the store's location. The cultivation facility is located in Peekskill, and a third party would transport products to the dispensary location. New York State tracks the product from seed to sale. Mr. Camia asked what type of vehicle would be used for the third-party transport from the cultivation facility to the store. Mr. Nicoletti stated that they are in the process of interviewing transport companies, but they anticipate using an unmarked van specializing in the cannabis industry. Mr. Nielsen asked Mr. Nicoletti to describe the proposed signage. Mr. Nicoletti presented a rendering of the proposed signage and stated that only the business's name Quality High would be on the building, and the front door would include painted lettering that says Quality High Farm & Dispensary. New York State has specific regulations regarding exterior and interior signage and product displays that they will inspect before approving the business to open. Sean McCarthy asked Mr. Nicoletti if they planned to include a sign within the building’s directory signage. 7 (7/18/24) �Mr. Nicoletti said he would include his business name in the directory signage if the Village permits it. Chairperson Gebler stated that directory signage is permitted as per the Code. Mr. Nielsen asked what color is proposed for the building signage. Mr. Nicoletti stated that the sign would be cream with deep purple lettering. Mr. McCarthy asked what they proposed for the sign material and size. Mr. Nicoletti stated that they have considered a hand-painted wood sign and are planning to meet with the local sign company to discuss other machine-painted options. Mr. McCarthy stated that the lettering needs to have dimension. Benjamin Nielsen moved to schedule a public hearing for the September 19, 2024, meeting. Moved: Nielsen Seconded: Gross Chairperson Gebler- yes Richard Gross- yes Clare Trapasso- yes Benjamin Nielsen –yes Chris Camia- yes Vote 5-0 8. Phelps Hospital- Northwell Health, 701 North Broadway, Proposed Behavioral Health Garden, Amended Site Plan & Architectural Review Approval – Preliminary Presentation Jack Carman is a landscape architect representing the Applicant. Mr. Carmen stated that the proposed behavioral garden is specifically designed to meet the needs of the hospital's patients. Donna Maiello stated that she is a Senior Associate with DTS Provident Design Engineering, LLP, representing the Applicant for engineering. Mr. Carman presented an aerial view of the site and stated that the proposed garden location is on the north side of the main building, where open lawn space and picnic tables currently exist. Richard Gross asked Mr. Carman if the proposed garden location is in front of the 755 North Broadway building. Mr. Carman presented the Site Plan and stated that the proposed garden includes outdoor sitting areas, a covered pergola, seat walls, water features, and two arbors to mark the entrances from the building pathways. The proposed to replace the existing white concrete pathways along the building with colored tinted concrete. Recycled rubber porous material is proposed for the interior garden pathways. The lawn area would be eliminated. The landscape plan includes 8 (7/18/24) �plantings that would attract nature and sensory plantings that are therapeutic to patients and visitors. Arbor and pathway lighting is proposed not to over light the garden area. Chris Camia asked Mr. Carman if the garden would be ADA-accessible and if there would be tables that would accommodate wheelchairs. Mr. Carmen stated that the garden area design is ADA-compliant. Some tables will not have benches and could accommodate wheelchairs. Richard Gross asked Mr. Carman if the garden would be available for patients from 1 South. Jeffrey Meade is the applicant's Director of Operations. Mr. Meade stated that 1 South is an inpatient-locked psychiatric unit. The patients from the unit would not have access to the proposed behavioral garden area. David Smith asked Mr. Carmen if the proposed plantings were native species. Mr. Carmen stated that the landscape plans include a balance of native species and therapeutic species James Natarelli asked Mr. Carmen if the pathway rubberized material was loose, granular material, or cohesive and how much impervious surface was proposed. Mr. Carmen stated that pathway material is similar to what is found under playground equipment but is 100 percent porous and ADA-compliant. Ms. Maiello stated that the application proposes an 850-square-foot increase in impervious surface coverage. Replacing the lawn with permeable material and planting beds would allow the area to drain more efficiently. Ms. Maiello stated that a narrative and calculations would be submitted to detail how the garden project affects the overall Stormwater Management plan for the site. Chairperson Gebler moved to waive the public hearing requirement and to direct staff to prepare a resolution for the September 19, 2024 meeting. Moved: Gebler Seconded: Trapasso Chairperson Gebler- yes Richard Gross- yes Clare Trapasso- yes Benjamin Nielsen -yes Chris Camia- yes Vote 5-0 9. Lighthouse Landing Communities, LLC, Edge-on-Hudson Riverfront Development, Phase III-Waterfront Open Space, Proposed transformer location- Discussion 9 (7/18/24) �Benjamin Nielsen requested that details be provided to confirm that the transformer and service disconnect are not located at trail intersections or the park's main entrances. Mr. Nielsen suggested that the transformer be moved 25 to 30 feet north of Hollows Pass. Chris Camia stated that landscape screening should be provided to prevent the permanent structures from being a visual focal point from the riverfront parkland and the lighthouse. Richard Gross moved to waive the public hearing requirement. Moved: Gross Seconded: Camia Chairperson Gebler- yes Richard Gross- yes Clare Trapasso- yes Benjamin Nielsen -yes Chris Camia- yes Vote 5-0 David Smith read the resolve clauses and the conditions of the draft resolution. Benjamin Nielsen moved to approve the resolution. Moved: Nielsen Seconded: Gross Chairperson Gebler- yes Richard Gross- yes Clare Trapasso- yes Benjamin Nielsen -yes Chris Camia- yes Vote 5-0 9. Approval of minutes, June 20, 2024 Chris Camia moved to approve the June 20, 2024 meeting minutes. Moved: Camia Seconded: Nielsen Chairperson Gebler- yes Richard Gross- yes Clare Trapasso- yes Benjamin Nielsen -yes Chris Camia- yes Vote 5-0 10 (7/18/24) �Chairperson Gebler adjourned the meeting at 8:31 PM. Respectfully submitted, Pamela Kroll Secretary to the Planning Board 11 (7/18/24) �Exhibit #1 7-16-24- Correspondence from Metro-North Railroad Tuesday, July 16, From: Harrington, James <Harrington@mnr.org> Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2024 7:10 AM To: Sean McCarthy <smccarthy@sleepyhollowny.org> Cc: Hollander, Robyn <Robyn.Hollander@mtacd.org>; Kenny, Kevin <KKENNY@mnr.org>; Norris, Christopher <Christopher.Norris@mtacd.org>; Penders, Michael <MPenders@mnr.org>; Patel, Mae <MaePatel@mnr.org>; Buder, Andy <andrew.buder@mnr.org>; Bonilla, Anamaria <AnamariaBonilla@mnr.org>; Webster, Richard <RWebster@mnr.org> Subject: 17 Pokahoe Drive Greetings, We have reviewed the documents indicated in the Public Notice we received regarding 17 Pokahoe Drive.  Please have the applicant provide plans and supporting engineering to Metro-North Railroad, addressing the below concerns:  1. Per EAF Section 17, Storm water will discharge flow to adjacent properties, and detention systems are proposed.  Please provide the complete stormwater management plan, together with supporting drainage calculations, confirming that any proposed mitigating measures will prevent an increase in the rate of runoff resulting from proposed new impervious surfaces. This should include details/calculations for drainage/leaching of the proposed detention structures. 2. Engineering for the pool structure, including soil engineering supporting the pool. 3. Details for removal of the retaining wall from the proposed work (per cover letter from G. Michale Finelli, RA) to see if it was engineered for soil stabilization or an aesthetic detail. 4. Sections and details of the proposed grading at the rear of the property, including slope stabilization. 5. The proposed earthwork and construction of improvements at the rear of the property may require a Metro-North Entry Permit.  Please provide means and methods for the work. Please confirm receipt of our comments. Thank you, Jim James M. Harrington, R.A. �Deputy Chief - Special Projects harrington@mnr.org P# 914-686-8747 C# 646-852-2754   Confidentiality Note: This e-mail, and any attachment to it, may contain privileged and confidential information and is intended for the use of the individual(s) or entity named on the e-mail. Unauthorized disclosure of this message is prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail and destroy this message and all copies thereof, including all attachments. � 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-2024 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_2024-07-18_Approved Planning Board Minutes Subject The topic of the resource Planning Board Minutes & Resolutions-2024 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2024 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Village of Sleepy Hollow All Rights Reserved. Type The nature or genre of the resource Text https://sleepyhollow.localarchives.org/files/original/42fcb88af26901d5c63bf86d2e62d51c.pdf a508e782b560fc104f8d26823b969bc9 PDF Text 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 Planning Board Minutes & Resolutions-2024 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_2024-07-18_WOS III _Approved Resolution Subject The topic of the resource Planning Board Minutes & Resolutions-2024 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2024 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Village of Sleepy Hollow All Rights Reserved. Type The nature or genre of the resource Text https://sleepyhollow.localarchives.org/files/original/a636c034b3f30406889a58f7c701b4dd.pdf 8ae11950caf2a79b292b57b8b06f480c PDF Text 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 Planning Board Minutes & Resolutions-2024 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_2024-07-18_Kendal on Hudson_Amended Site Plan- Appproved Resolution Subject The topic of the resource Planning Board Minutes & Resolutions-2024 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2024 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Village of Sleepy Hollow All Rights Reserved. Type The nature or genre of the resource Text https://sleepyhollow.localarchives.org/files/original/9e16e047b558b1cd324a83b78399de09.pdf 5e87f9f350a2ce5df1e9bf6850101dd2 PDF Text 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 Planning Board Minutes & Resolutions-2024 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_2024-07-18_401-403 Legend Drive_Amended Site Plan_ Approved Resolution Subject The topic of the resource Planning Board Minutes & Resolutions-2024 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2024 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Village of Sleepy Hollow All Rights Reserved. Type The nature or genre of the resource Text https://sleepyhollow.localarchives.org/files/original/e6a3d47ff0adda17130e7735ce9c7ad8.pdf 59a32b9ed7e18c6736d5320eb8add75f PDF Text 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 Planning Board Minutes & Resolutions-2024 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_2024-07-18_28 Beekman Ave_Approved Resolution Subject The topic of the resource Planning Board Minutes & Resolutions-2024 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2024 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Village of Sleepy Hollow All Rights Reserved. Type The nature or genre of the resource Text https://sleepyhollow.localarchives.org/files/original/a754f34eabdd16d037cce93ffbad9b9f.pdf dad27a3a93b024a86003bd9adcb54781 PDF Text Text RESOLUTION Adopted at the June 20, 2024 Meeting of the Village of Sleepy Hollow Planning Board RESOLUTION: Amended Site Plan and Architectural Review Approval PROPOSED: Fourth-Floor Pergola & Exterior Building Changes LOCATION: 201 Horseman Boulevard, Building E-3 and Unit 3406 TAX MAP DESIGNATION: Section I 15.10, Block I, Lots 1.42, 1.42/3406 ZONING: RF - Riverfront District WHEREAS, the Planning Board of the Village of Sleepy Hollow received an application for an Amended Site Plan and Architectural Review-approval pursuant to the Village Zoning Ordinance,·­ Article X, Site Plan Review, Chapter 9, Architectural Review Board of the Village Code, and to applicable laws and regulations considered pe11inent to the Application, for approval of the addition of two fixed windows and brick materials on the fourth-floor stairwells of Building E3 and a 338 square foot pergola constructed on the rooftop terrace of Unit 3406 (the "Application") WHEREAS, the Planning Board granted the original Site Plan and Preliminary Subdivision approval as part of the Phase I Edge-on-Hudson Development on I 0/22/15 and subsequent Site Plan Amendment and Subdivision approvals on 10/19/17, 3/18/18, 10/18,18, 2/17/22, and 11/17/22; and WHEREAS, on 5/1/24, the Application was submitted by Toll Brothers Inc. on behalf of LL Parcel E, LLC (the "Applicant"); and WHEREAS, as the Planning Board reviewed the following documents at the 5/19/24 Work Session and 5/16/24 regularly scheduled meeting: I . Email correspondence by Peter Galotti, Senior Construction Manager, Toll Brothers, dated 5/ l /24 2. Planning Board Application by Peter Galotti, Senior Construction Manager, Toll Brothers, dated 4/30/24 Page 1 of 3 ��the Village Code the Proposed Action includes minor site plan adjustments to the approved plan; and, be it further RESOLVED, that said Application is hereby granted Amended Site Plan & Architectural Review approval, and the Applicant may obtain the endorsed approval of the Planning Board Chair on a copy of this resolution and upon the site plan drawing dated 4/25/24; and The Applicant shall pay the Village of Sleepy Hollow all application and review fees as required by the Village Code prior to the issuance of Perm its or Certificate of Occupancy; and RESOLVED, all other conditions identified in the Village Board·s 6/7/1 I Special Permit and the Planning Board's Site Plan Approvals shall remain in full force and effect. Louvers of the approved pergola shall remain in an open position. PLANNING BOARD VILLAGE OF SLEEPY HOLLOW Kersten Harries, Chairperson Jun 28, 2024 ' the undersigned 1,·��� $( • Clerk/DeputyClerk, doherebycertify� the foregoing is a true copy of an extract duly adopted by the Board of Trustaes/P1anning/Zoning of the Village of Sleepy HoHow, , 2oll and of on the '2cL.dayof � the whole thereof, and I further certifythat the same was entered into the minutes of the meeting of said Board of Trustees/Planning/Zoning held on said date. • IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have reunto set my 20· -�dayof UY!€ andoffi'ls !JtY Page3of3 � 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-2024 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_2024-06-20_201 Horseman Blvd _Amended Site Plan _Approved Resolution Subject The topic of the resource Planning Board Minutes & Resolutions-2024 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2024 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Village of Sleepy Hollow All Rights Reserved. Type The nature or genre of the resource Text https://sleepyhollow.localarchives.org/files/original/5995694de8e7ffdaea20b9f5e5ec00f2.pdf 7076ad21192912f18858389ee021f26b PDF Text Text Village of Sleepy Hollow Planning Board Minutes June 20, 2024 The Board held an advice of council session from 6:37 PM to 7:21 PM. Chairperson Harries announced that she is resigning from the Planning Board. Chairperson Harries called the regular meeting to order at 7:23 PM. SDC Lighthouse Landing Realty, LLC has requested an adjournment to the July 18, 2024 meeting with a 30-day extension to take action. Present: Kersten Harries, Chairperson Richard Gross Rachelle Gebler Benjamin Nielsen Also Present: Joshua B. Subin, Village Attorney David Smith, Village Planner James Natarelli, Village Engineer Sean E. McCarthy, Building Inspector Pamela Kroll, Secretary to the Planning Board Absent: Lindsay Krakauer Caroline Chen Clare Trapasso Agenda: 1) Marcelo Poguio, 80 Depeyster Street, Proposed three-family residence, Site Plan and Architectural Review Approval- Continued Public Hearing 2) LL Parcel E, LLC, 201 Horseman Blvd., Proposed fourth-floor pergola and exterior changes, Amended Site Plan & Architectural Review Approval- Draft Resolution 3) SDC Lighthouse Landing Realty, LLC, Edge-on-Hudson Riverfront Development, Proposed medical office building, Site Plan & and Architectural Review ApprovalDiscussion 4) Kendal-on-Hudson, 1010 Kendal Way, Proposed additions and alterations, Amended Site Plan and Architectural Review- Preliminary Presentation 5) T-Mobile Northeast, LLC, 28 Beekman Avenue, Wireless Communications Permit, Site Plan Approval- Preliminary Presentation 6) Quality High, LLC, 36-38 Beekman Avenue, Proposed cannabis dispensary, Site Plan Approval 1 (6/20/24) �7) Pokahoe Riverview Manor, LLC, 17 Pokahoe Drive, Proposed single-family residence, Amended Site Plan & Architectural Review Approval - Preliminary Presentation 8) One Kingsland Owner, LLC, 401-403 Legend Drive, Proposed revisions to the Amenities Building, Amended Site Plan & Architectural Review- Preliminary Presentation 9) Approval of minutes, May 16, 2024 1. Marcelo Poguio, 80 Depeyster Street- Proposed three-family residence, Site Plan and Architectural Review Approval- Continued Public Hearing Chairperson Harries moved to open the public hearing. Moved: Harries Seconded: Nielsen Vote 4-0 Pat Costabile stated that he represents the Applicant on behalf of the engineer. Mr. Costabile described the changes to the proposed site plan related to landscaping, rear yard access, impermeable material details, and curb cut removals and replacements. Mr. Constabile described the changes to the floor plans related to additional access from the garage and the setback of the front entranceway. Mr. Constabile presented the elevation drawings. David Smith asked Mr. Constabile to confirm the existing grade of the property. Mr. Constabile stated that the existing grades will remain the same. Chairperson Harries asked Mr. Constabile if the garage elevations would be at the same level as Valley Street and if the proposed basement elevation would be higher than the existing basement. Mr. Constabile stated that the garage elevation would be slightly higher than Valley Street to provide a slope to control water runoff. The basement elevation would remain the same as the existing structure. Mr. Constabile described the proposed lighting, presented photographs of the existing conditions, and detailed the curb cuts and parking spaces on Depeyster Street and Valley Street proposed for elimination, where parking spaces will remain, and where repairs would be needed. Mr. Constabile stated they propose removing the existing chainlink fence and installing landscaping screening. Rachelle Gebler asked if removing the fence would create an additional parking space. Mr. Constabile stated that the proposed driveways would encroach into the space and would not provide room for an additional parking space. Chairperson Harries suggested further articulations to gable roof line elevations and façade materials. Chairperson Harries asked Mr. Constabile to confirm the foundation material. 2 (6/20/24) �Mr. Constabile stated that the foundation would be concrete with a stucco finish. Benjamin Nielsen asked Mr. Constabile if the proposed landscaping trees and planting are native species and asked him to describe details of the retaining wall at the corner of Depeyster and Valley Street. Mr. Nieslen suggested reconfiguring the orientation of the stairs off the back porch with the stairs between the terraces and the garden. Mr. Nielsen suggested adding a gate at the entrance to the backyard from Valley Street. Mr. Constabile stated that the plantings included in the landscape plan were chosen from the Native Species list. The retaining wall would taper with the slope, and landscaping is proposed to define the corners. A gate or fencing was not proposed to secure the backyard. Mr. Pogiou said he would agree to install fencing and a gate to secure the backyard. Mr. Nielsen stated that chainlink fencing should not be used. Chairperson Harries asked Mr. Constabile to describe the proposed stormwater plan. Mr. Constabile stated that the application proposes adding a catch basin on the property to catch stormwater runoff from the hill and tie it into the existing catch basin across the street. Chairperson Harries stated that the Village proposes creating a community benefit agreement in which the owner would agree to allow the Village to utilize the value of their proposed stormwater plan in conjunction with Village services to complete drainage infrastructure improvements to the existing stormwater lines on Valley Street. Mr. Constabile stated that he would discuss the proposed agreement with Mr. Poguio. Chairperson Harries solicited comments from the public. There were no comments from the public. Chairperson Harries moved to adjourn the public hearing to the July 18, 2024, meeting and to direct staff to prepare a draft resolution. Moved: Harries Seconded: Gebler Vote 4-0 2. LL Parcel E, LLC, 201 Horseman Blvd, Proposed fourth-floor pergola and exterior changes, Amended Site Plan & Architectural Review Approval- Draft Resolution Chairperson Harries asked David Smith to read the highlights of the draft resolution. Chairperson Harries polled the Board members on adding a condition related to the pergola louvers. The Board agreed that the louvers of the constructed pergola should remain in an open position. David Smith read the amended resolve clauses of the draft resolution. Richard Gross moved to approve the resolution as amended. 3 (6/20/24) �Moved: Gross Seconded: Nielsen Chairperson Harries- yes Richard Gross- yes Rachelle Gebler- yes Benjamin Nielsen -yes Vote 4-0 3. SDC Lighthouse Landing Realty, LLC, Edge-on-Hudson Riverfront Development Block A Proposed medical office building, Site Plan & Architectural ReviewDiscussion The Board received an adjournment request from the applicant's attorney on June 20, 2024 The application was adjourned to the July 18, 2024 meeting. 4. Kendal-on-Hudson, 1010 Kendal Way, Proposed additions and alterations, Amended Site Plan & Architectural Review Approval- Preliminary Presentation Craig Battisto is an architect from Amenta Emma Architects who is representing the Applicant. Mr. Battisto stated that the application proposes interior renovations to the central amenity areas and an addition. The alterations to the ground-level floor plan include renovations to the lobby and gathering area. The plans include creating a new café and bistro lounge, adding dining options, and a new main kitchen. The alterations to the community-level floor plan include renovations to the Human Resources suite and conference areas on either side. The plans include creating a new ping-pong and community room over the pool area. The alterations to the terracelevel floor plan propose creating a new salon, fitness, and resident care area and renovating the existing pool finishes. The application is before the Planning Board because of the proposed terrace lounge addition. The proposal is to re-program the terrace for easier elevator access for the tenants and to construct an enclosed addition on the terrace that includes a new vestibule, a lounge area, a storage area, and a pantry area. The proposed addition will not add to the existing building footprint as it would be constructed over the existing terrace. Renovations to the existing terrace terrace include the addition of a garden area with raised planters, and a recreation lawn area. Chairperson Harries solicited comments from the Board. There was a discussion regarding the possibility of planting additional trees on site along the riverbank. James Natarelli asked Mr. Battisto to confirm that there is no new impervious surface proposed and if new gutters are required for the addition. Mr. Battisto stated that new gutters and downspouts are proposed for the addition that will disapate on the existing patio and tie into the existing system. 4 (6/20/24) �Chaiperson Harries stated that application proposes a minimal impact to the exterior of the building. Chairperson Harries moved to waive the public hearing and to direct staff to prepare a resolution for the July 18, 2024 meeting. Moved: Harries Seconded: Gebler Chairperson Harries- yes Richard Gross- yes Rachelle Gebler- yes Benjamin Nielsen -yes Vote 4-0 5. T-Mobile Northeast LLC, 28 Beekman Avenue, Wireless Communications Permit Site Plan Approval David Kenny is an attorney with the law firm of Snyder & Snyder, LLP, representing the Applicant. Mr. Kenny stated that the application proposes to upgrade and replace ( 2 ) equipment cabinets and (9) antennas on the existing pipe mounts. The new equipment would be slightly smaller than the existing. Mr. Kenny provided the requirement details for an eligible facilities request approval. Chairperson Harries moved to waive the public hearing and to direct staff to prepare a resolution for the July 18, 2024 meeting with a condition that the Applicant will complete any roof repairs required. Moved: Harries Seconded: Gebler Chairperson Harries- yes Richard Gross- yes Rachelle Gebler- yes Benjamin Nielsen -yes Vote 4-0 Mr. Kenny stated that the Applicant agrees to repair roofing as needed in their proposed work area. 6. Quality High, LLC, 36-38 Beekman Avenue, Proposed cannabis dispensary, Site Plan Approval Marco Mandra is the architect representing the Applicant. Mr. Mandra stated that they are excited for the opportunity to be the first boutique cannabis dispensary in Sleepy Hollow. Mr. Mandra stated that they are seeking to renovate the interior of a 500 square foot retail space located in the center first floor space of the building and install a 10 foot long sign with a 12 inch custom font handpainted lettering. Renderings of the interior space are being developed. Matthew Nicoletti stated that he and his partner Nathan Lyons are the owners, co-founders, managing partners, and the only employess of Quality High, LLC. Mr. Nicoletti stated that the State of New York approved their cannabis micro-bussiness license. The approved license 5 (6/20/24) �specifically provides for a fully integrated small businesses that allows them to cultivate, process, and have their own retail dispensary that is exclusively for cannabis. Their license includes limitations on employee count, restricts them to have only one dispensary location, and limits the size of the cultivation facility. Since their business model allows them to have their own product, it seperates them from other dispensaries because they anticipate less volumn. Benjamin Nielsen asked Mr. Nicoletti to describe how many customers they anticipate daily and how it relates to parking requirements. Mr. Nicoletti stated that plan to utilize municipal and street parking similar to the other businesses on Beekman Avenue. As part of their business model, they are working to expedite the experience in the store by providing pre-paid options on their website so customers are coming in and out quickly to pick up their order. Mr. Nielsen asked Mr. Nicoletti to describe the proposed security. Mr. Nicoletti stated that someone would be stationed inside the front door entrance to check identification, ensure customers are 21 years of age or older before entering the facility, and control the flow of customers. Chairperson Harries asked how many spaces are in the front parking lot and how many are dedicated to the building's tenants. Mr. Nicoletti stated that the parking lot has 13 spaces dedicated to the building tenants and 1 space dedicated to their use. They would inform their customers that they cannot park in the lot. Rachelle Gebler asked Mr. Nicoletti to describe the customer experience entering the store and how many customers would be permitted at once. Mr. Nicoletti described the proposed store layout, how the products would be displayed in the store, and how they intend to handle pre-paid purchases. The back office would be a secured room for storing cannabis products in locked containers and keeping their security equipment. An employee bathroom and mechanical room will be in the rear of the store. Mr. Nicoletti estimated they could simultaneously have 15-20 people in the store. Chairperson Harries stated that the Village sent a letter to New York State objecting to their license approval because the store is less than 500 feet from the required distance of school property. The Village has not received a response from New York State stating why they approved the license. Chairperson Harries asked Mr. Nicoletti if he knew of the Village’s objection letter. Mr. Nicoletti stated that this was the first time he had heard that the Village submitted an objection. New York State measures the 500-foot distance from the school's entrance. The distance from the school's front entrance to the store's front entrance is over 500 feet. Confirmation of how they determined the measurements was included in their submission. Joshua Subin stated that New York State has an obligation to respond in writing to objections. Mr. Subin asked Mr. Nicoletti if he has received any correspondence from the State. 6 (6/20/24) �Mr. Nicoletti stated that, as required, he sent a notice to Sleepy Hollow informing the Village that they were applying for the cannabis license. He didn’t receive a response from the Village or New York State. Mr. Nicoletti stated that to apply for a cannabis license, New York State required them to obtain a leased space. They have been paying rent and insurance for the space since November. Richard Gross asked Mr. Nicoletti how he measured the 500-foot distance to the Morse School. Mr. Nicoletti stated that the measurements were taken using a straight line from the proposed store facility's front entrance to the school's front door. Nathan Lyons stated that they determined that the distance from the store's front door is 590 feet from the Morse school and 600 feet from the high school. Mr. Gross stated that the school property started at the corner of Washington Street and Beekman Avenue and asked what the distance was from the store’s back door to both schools. Mr. Lyons stated that the law states that the requirements are based on the location of the store's front entrance door. Mr. Nicoletti stated that New York State issued their license because they met the distance requirements. The state also requires that no other dispensary be permitted to open within 1000 feet of their location. Chairperson Harries asked Mr. Nicoletti to confirm that a daycare facility or afterschool program at the library is not included in the definition of a public youth facility. Mr. Nicoletti stated that the state determined that the distance requirements apply to schools and religious institutions. If private facilities were included, it would be difficult to find a location and could restrict new businesses from being established. Mr. Nielsen stated that it needs to be determined if a variance is required. David Smith suggested that the Planning Board defer from taking action until the Village has received a response to the objection submitted for the proposed location of the dispensary and the issue has been resolved. Chairperson Harries suggested that the Applicant contact New York State requesting that they respond to the Village’s objection. No action was taken. 7. Pokahoe Riverview Manor, LLC, 17 Pokahoe Drive, Proposed single-family residence Amended Site Plan & Architectural Review Approval – Preliminary Presentation Michael Finelli is the architect from GMF Architecture and Design, P.C., representing the Applicant. Mr. Finelli presented the proposed renderings, floor plans and site plans. Mr. Finelli 7 (6/20/24) �described the revisions, which include relocating the house to the middle of the property, moving the garage and the driveway to the front of the house, changing the roof style to gable, reducing the size of the rear terrace, removing the retaining and other walls along the sides of the property, removing the attic dormers, reducing the impervious surfaces by 20 percent, increasing the side yard setbacks, eliminating brick at levels above the basement and replacing it with cedar shakes. Mr. Finelli stated that the proposed house has been reduced to 4400 square feet, eliminating 500 square feet or approximately 900 square feet if you include the attic space. Mr. Finelli stated that the application proposes to remove the same number of trees. Chairperson Harries asked Mr. Finelli if trees could be saved by the relocation of the house and if they are proposing to plant new canopy trees with the required 2 to 1 ratio. Ronald Pohl stated that the same trees must be removed for drainage and existing root damage. The landscape plan proposes canopy tree replacements. Benjamin Nielsen suggested that the Applicant consider adding details to break up the articulation of the gable ends on the side elevation. The Board agreed that the proposed changes and finishes for the house are more to scale, provide larger view corridors to the neighbors, and are more appropriate for the neighborhood. Chairperson Harries moved to schedule the public hearing for the July 18, 2024 meeting. Moved: Harries Seconded: Gebler Chairperson Harries- yes Richard Gross- yes Rachelle Gebler- yes Benjamin Nielsen -yes Vote 4-0 8. One Kingsland Owner, LLC, 401-403 Legend Drive, Proposed revisions to the Amenities Building, Amended Site Plan & Architectural Review- Preliminary Presentation Bill McGuiness stated that he is from Sun Homes and is seeking approval to revise the architectural site plan for the approved clubhouse and pool at Block N. Mr. McGuiness stated that the approval included two equally 30 x 42-foot pavilions on either end of a lap pool. He proposed reducing the pool deck's size and the pool's length to increase the size of the fitness center by adding 22.3 feet to the building on the south end of the property to create a 52.3-foot by 42-foot footprint and reducing the size of the lap pool to a 75-foot length. The overall length and width of the two buildings would remain the same. The roof height of the building is proposed to be 2 feet, 6 inches higher. Mr. McGuiness presented comparison views of the approved and proposed plans and stated that the square footage of the southern pavilion building would increase by 935 square feet. All the other approved site plan elements would remain the same. Chairperson Harries asked Mr. McGuiness how the rooftop mechanical equipment would be accessed. 8 (6/20/24) �Mr. McGuiness stated that there would be a hatch inside the storage closet between the bathrooms, with a ladder going up into the space between the ceiling and the mechanical area. The condensers are proposed to be wall-mounted heat pumps. Rachelle Gebler asked Mr. McGuiness if the showers were proposed to move outside the building. Mr. McGuiness stated that the pool designer told him that the Board of Health accepts moving the showers outside the building. Chairperson Harries asked if modifications are proposed to the screened wall along the sidewalk since it would be close to the showers. Mr. McGuiness stated that they are proposing a solid fence to ensure privacy. James Natarelli expressed concern that the shower area drain would be exposed to rainwater and asked how it would connect to the sanitary sewer line. Mr. McGuiness stated that a drain would connect to the sanitary sewer, and a canopy would cover the shower's footprint, which is acceptable to the Board of Health. Mr. Natarelli requested that a border be placed around the base of the shower to prevent water from entering from the pool patio. Mr. McGuiness said that the pool designer showed him details that would be included to prevent water from entering, which they have completed on other projects. Chairperson Harries asked Mr. McGuiness for the current status of the project. Mc. McGuiness stated that the piles are driven, and they have submitted a Building Permit Application. They have requested that the Building Department allow them to proceed on the north pavilion building while the approvals are processed for this application. James Natarelli requested that the shower drain details be submitted to the Board. Benjamin Nielsen moved to waive the public hearing and to direct staff to draft a resolution for the July 18, 2024, meeting. Moved: Nielsen Seconded: Gross Chairperson Harries- yes Richard Gross- yes Rachelle Gebler- yes Benjamin Nielsen -yes Vote 4-0 9. Approval of minutes, May 16, 2024 9 (6/20/24) �Richard Gross moved to approve the May 16, 2024 meeting minutes. Moved: Gross Seconded: Nielsen Chairperson Harries- yes Lindsay Krakauer- yes Caroline Chen- yes Richard Gross- yes Clare Trapasso- yes Benjamin Nielsen -yes Vote 4-0 Chairperson Harries moved to adjourn the meeting at 9:12 PM. Moved: Harries Seconded: Nielsen Vote 4-0 Respectfully submitted, Pamela Kroll Secretary to the Planning Board 10 (6/20/24) � 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-2024 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_2024-06-20_Approved Planning Board Minutes Subject The topic of the resource Planning Board Minutes & Resolutions-2024 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2024 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Village of Sleepy Hollow All Rights Reserved. Type The nature or genre of the resource Text https://sleepyhollow.localarchives.org/files/original/cfbb0dac68e9039f2ec70525b3795a3c.pdf 130c287dc003b139a557de5d3f4cedca PDF Text Text Village of Sleepy Hollow Planning Board Minutes May 16, 2024 Chairperson Harries called the regular meeting to order at 7:04 PM. Present: Kersten Harries, Chairperson Richard Gross Benjamin Nielsen Lindsay Krakauer Caroline Chen Clare Trapasso Also Present: Daniel Pozin, Village Attorney David Smith, Village Planner Anthony Catalano, Consulting Engineer Sean E. McCarthy, Building Inspector Pamela Kroll, Secretary to the Planning Board Absent: Rachelle Gebler Agenda: 1) LL Parcel F, LLC, 1 Legend Drive, DeCicco & Sons supermarket, Proposed generator Relocation, Amended Site Plan approval- Draft Resolution 2) Rock of Salvation Church, 135 Cortlandt Street, Proposed parking lot, Site Plan Approval-Draft Resolution 3) Rock of Salvation Church, 131 Cortlandt Street, Proposed addition, Amended Site Plan Approval-Draft resolution 4) Marcelo Poguio, 80 Depeyster Street, Proposed three-family residence, Site Plan and Architectural Review Approval- Public Hearing 5) Toll Landscape LLC, 213 Palisades Blvd., Proposed larger pergola with screens, Amended Site Plan & Architectural Review Approval- Preliminary Presentation 6) LL Parcel E, LLC, 201 Horseman Blvd., Proposed fourth-floor pergola and exterior changes, Amended Site Plan & Architectural Review Approval- Preliminary Presentation 7) SDC Lighthouse Landing Realty, LLC, Edge-on-Hudson Riverfront Development, Proposed medical office building, Site Plan & and Architectural Review ApprovalDiscussion 8) Proposed Zoning Code Amendments, Article VI, 450-34.B, Applicability of regulations, non-conforming buildings and lots, Village Board of Trustees referral Discussion 9) Approval of minutes, April 18, 2024 1. LL Parcel F, LLC, 1 Legend Drive, DeCicco & Sons supermarket, Proposed generator 1 (5/16/24) �relocation, Amended Site Plan Approval - Draft Resolution Lucio DiLeo is the Principal of Studio Rai Architects, representing the Applicant. Mr. DiLeo stated that the revised plans propose moving the location of the transformer and adding a stonewall and landscaping around the perimeter. Chairperson Harries asked Mr. DiLeo to confirm that the generator's location would not conflict with the Westchester County Sewer easement. Mr. DiLeo stated that the generator would not conflict with the Westchester County sewer easement. Benjamin Nielsen asked Mr. DiLeo if Westchester County would be notified of the proposed work near the easement. Mr. DiLeo stated that the generator would not impact the County sewer line because it is a freestanding structure with two screw piles to hold up the slab. Chairperson Harries asked David Smith to read the conditions of the draft resolution. David Smith read the conditions of the draft resolution. Lindsay Krakauer moved to approve the resolution. Moved: Krakauer Seconded: Nielsen Chairperson Harries- yes Lindsay Krakauer- yes Caroline Chen- yes Richard Gross- yes Clare Trapasso- yes Benjamin Nielsen - yes Vote 6-0 2. Rock of Salvation Church, 135 Cortlandt Street, Proposed parking lot, Site Plan Approval- Draft Resolution Jorge B. Hernandez is the architect representing the Applicant. Mr. Hernandez stated that outstanding engineering items need to be addressed. Chairperson Harries stated that 139 Cortlandt Street's owners must consent to a portion of the proposed drainage improvements. David Smith read the conditions of the draft resolution. Richard Gross moved to approve the resolution. Moved: Gross Seconded: Chen 2 (5/16/24) �Chairperson Harries- yes Lindsay Krakauer- yes Caroline Chen- yes Richard Gross- yes Clare Trapasso- yes Benjamin Nielsen - yes Vote 6-0 3. Rock of Salvation Church, 131 Cortlandt Street, Proposed addition, Amended Site Plan Approval- Draft Resolution Jorge B. Hernandez is the architect representing the Applicant. Mr. Hernandez stated he would revise the drawings to show the proposed covering of the stairs and the proposed addition. David Smith read the conditions of the draft resolution. Clare Trapasso moved to approve the resolution. Moved: Trapasso Seconded: Chen Chairperson Harries- yes Lindsay Krakauer- yes Caroline Chen- yes Richard Gross- yes Clare Trapasso- yes Benjamin Nielsen - yes Vote 6-0 4. Marcelo Poguio, 80 Depeyster Street- Proposed three-family residence, Site Plan and Architectural Review Approval- Public Hearing Chairperson Harries read the public notice. Lindsay Krakauer moved to open the public hearing. Moved: Krakauer Seconded: Trapasso Vote 6-0 Pat Costabile stated that he is representing the Applicant on behalf of the engineer. Mr. Costabile presented the site plan and stated that the application proposes demolishing the existing building and constructing a three-story, three-family residence. The Zoning Board of Appeals approved variances for the lot area, the front and side yard setbacks, and parking for three vehicles, where five are proposed on-site, and eight parking spaces are required. Mr. Costabile described the existing drainage system and stated they propose adding a catch basin on Depeyster Street to accommodate the drainage from the property. Chairperson Harries asked Mr. Costabile to describe how the proposed curb cuts would affect street parking spaces. 3 (5/16/24) �Mr. Costabile stated that an 11-foot curb cut is proposed on Depeyster Street to provide two tandem parking spaces on site. The existing curb cut on Depeyster Street would be eliminated, creating one parking space. A 23-foot curb cut is proposed on Valley Street for the two garages to provide three parking spaces. The existing curb cut on Valley Street would be eliminated, creating one parking space. Lindsay Krakauer asked Mr. Costabile to confirm that the number of available street parking spaces will not change. Mr. Costabile confirmed that there would be no change to the number of parking spaces available on the streets. Benjamin Nielsen asked about the proposal for the space behind the building. Mr. Costabile stated that the rear yard would be an open green space for the tenants. A retaining wall is proposed to screen the low and high sides of the yard, and landscaping is proposed above the retaining wall and around the property's perimeter. Ms. Krakauer asked Mr. Costabile how tenants would access the rear open spaces if different sides were designated for them. Mr. Costabile stated that the bottom side of the open space would be accessible from the front yard. The open space will be available for all the tenants to utilize. Benjamin Nielsen suggested adding larger native canopy trees in the rear yard space. Mr. Krakauer suggested they establish a connection point between both sides of the rear yard for tenants to use. The property owner, Marcelo Poguio, said he would construct a stair at the retaining wall to connect the two sides of the rear yard. Caroline Chen stated that the proposed curb cuts seem larger than the existing ones and is concerned that street parking spaces will be lost. Chairperson Harries requested that the applicant provide drawings detailing the number of onstreet parking spaces and how the proposed application would affect them. Mr. Constabile presented the floor plans and stated that the basement level proposes a one-car garage, a two-car tandem garage, a shared storage room, and a utility room. A common entranceway is proposed for the three units. Each unit would have three bedrooms, a living room, a dining room, a kitchen, one bathroom and a rear balcony. Chairperson Harries suggested adding a separate door from each garage into the common area. Mr. Nielsen asked Mr. Constabile if the rear balconies and stairs were intended for outdoor living space or as a second means of egress. 4 (5/16/24) �Mr. Constabile stated that the proposed balconies are 3 feet wide and are primarily a second means of egress. Mr. Nielsen suggested that the applicant widen the balconies to provide outdoor space for the tenants. Mr. Constabile stated that he would determine if there is enough space within the rear yard setback to expand the width of the balconies. Clare Trapasso asked Mr. Constabile for the monthly unit rental rates and the square footage per unit. Mr. Poguio stated that the monthly rental costs would be approximately $2,500.00. Mr. Constabile stated that each unit would have approximately 1,530 square feet. Mr. Constabilie presented the elevation drawings. Chairperson Harries suggested expanding the size of the front entrance, changing the roof type from hipped to gable style, eliminating shutters, and articulating the building mass to give it more architectural character. Mr. Constabile stated that the garages and the tandem driveway spaces would be designated for the units. Chairperson Harries stated that outstanding items include providing a lighting plan and a more detailed landscape plan. James Natarelli stated that there are outstanding items related to the proposed grading and the utility connections. Mr. Natarelli requested that the applicant provide details to confirm the dimensions of where the driveway ends and the lawn area begins, as well as the different surface treatments proposed. Chairperson Harries stated that the applicant could consult with the Village Arborist for recommendations for native tree species and suggested adding a tree in each property corner. Chairperson Harries asked Mr. Constabile what is proposed for the mechanical systems. Mr. Poguio stated that he intends to utilize gas and electricity for the building utilities and use mini-split units. Mr. Constabile stated that the Applicant plans to prep the roof of the building for solar panels. Chairperson Harries solicited comments from the public. There were no comments from the public. Chairperson Harries moved to adjourn the public hearing to the June 20, 2024 meeting. 5 (5/16/24) �Moved: Harries Seconded: Krakauer Vote 6-0 5. Toll Landscape LLC, 213 Palisades Blvd., Proposed larger pergola with screens, Amended Site Plan and Architectural Review Approval - Preliminary Presentation Jeff Eldridge is an associate of Toll Landscape LLC. Mr. Eldridge stated that the application proposes to install motorized retractable screens with a sensor on the pergola, which would automatically retract when wind speeds go above 31 miles per hour. Chairperson Harries asked Mr. Eldridge to describe the screen visibility compared to how it appears in the rendering. Mr. Eldridge stated that it is similar to a normal insect screen. Benjamin Nielsen stated that rooftop pergolas must be open on three sides. Providing an option to enclose a pergola would allow the structure to act similarly to a three-season porch. Mr. Eldridge stated that the automatic wind sensor would prevent the screens from being closed 100 percent of the time. Lindsay Krakauer asked Mr. Eldridge if the screening is intended to provide privacy and if the application proposes to install the screens on all sides of the pergola. Mr. Eldridge stated that the property owner is seeking insect protection. The existing pergola is up against the unit, and the screening is proposed on the three open sides. Clare Trapasso stated that the top of the pergola also appears to be screened in, so the pergola will be completely enclosed when the screens are down. Mr. Eldridge stated that the top of the pergola has motorized louvered fins and agreed that if the screens were down, the pergola structure would be completely enclosed. Chairperson Harries asked Sean McCarthy if other pergolas have been installed with motorized screening. Mr. McCarthy said he was unaware of any pergolas installed with motorized screening. Chairperson Harries stated that the approval of this application would create a precedent for future applications and conflict with the requirement and intentions for pergolas to be open on three sides. Ms. Krakauer stated that adding screening would change the architectural intent of pergolas. Mr. Eldridge presented a photograph of the existing pergola on the building unit. Mr. Eldridge stated that the current pergola structure is 10 feet wide and 12 feet long. The application proposes to enlarge the length to 16 feet. 6 (5/16/24) �Ms. Krakuer asked Mr. Eldridge for the roof area coverage of the proposed pergola. Mr. Eldridge stated that the proposed pergola would result in less than 68% coverage of the roof area. Mr. Eldridge presented photographs to show how the pergola would be viewed from the neighboring building. Benjamin Nielsen stated that increasing the size of the pergola would not have an impact. The proposed screen enclosure would affect the building aesthetically and create a precedent for owners seeking protection from different elements, essentially creating a three-season room. Ms. Trapasso agreed that the definition of a pergola is intended to be an open framework, not enclosed on the top or sides and that even if the screens are retractable, the structure would be considered enclosed. Chairperson Harries requested that Mr. Eldridge provide additional data regarding the screens' visibility and wind speeds to determine the percentage of time they would be in the down position. Caroline Chen asked Mr. Eldridge how many units currently have pergola structures and if wind sensors for screens can be adjusted. Mr. Eldridge stated that a quarter of the units have pergolas, and most have motorized louvered roof fins. The screen wind sensors can be adjusted for wind speeds under 31 miles per hour. Ms. Chen stated that she is concerned that different manufacturers make the screen systems and that, if approved, they will not be uniform throughout the development. Ms. Krakauer stated that the proposed screening goes against the pergola definition and the intended design approval. She is not in favor of the proposed screening. Chairperson Harries stated that the Board is open to approving the increased size of the pergola but agrees they are not comfortable with the proposed screening. Ms. Harries stated that Mr. Eldridge could modify the application or provide additional documentation to persuade them about the screening for the next meeting. No action was taken. 6. LL Parcel E, LLC, 201 Horseman Blvd., Proposed fourth-floor pergola and exterior changes, Amended Site Plan & Architectural Review Approval- Preliminary Presentation Peter Galotti is the Senior Construction Manager for Toll Brothers. Mr. Galotti stated that the application requests approval for exterior changes made to the third lofts building. Mr. Galotti presented the approved elevation drawings and stated they added two fixed windows and brick materials on the fourth floors of the building to be consistent and bring natural light into the stairwells during the day. The pergola added to the fourth floor covers 53% of the terrace roof surface area and is open on three sides. Mr. Galotti presented photographs of the building showing where the windows and pergola were added. 7 (5/16/24) �Chairperson Harries asked Mr. Galotti if the pergola was on a private terrace. Mr. Galotti stated that the pergola was constructed for a large private terrace. The pergola has fin louvers that open and close to shade the terrace. Benjamin Nielsen stated that the pergola had already been constructed. Mr. Nielsen asked if pergolas were approved as part of the original site plan approval for the buildings. Chairperson Harries stated that an amended site plan application should have been submitted before constructing the pergola. Mr. Galotti stated that the pergolas were an option provided to the buyer. Pergolas were approved, provided they met maximum coverage requirements. Sean McCarthy stated that coverage requirements for the pergola options were not included until the Phase II townhouse construction approvals. Chairperson Harries stated she has no objection to the added windows because they improve the building facades. She is also not opposed to the pergola's configuration if it remains open on three sides; however, she doesn’t agree with the louvers on the top. Mr. Nielsen stated that the pergola top louvers do not comply with the requirement to be open and that pergolas are becoming an architectural element of buildings. Mr. Nielsen asked Mr. Galotti for the size of the constructed pergola. Mr. Galotti stated that the pergola is 300 square feet and constructed on a 600 square foot terrace. Caroline Chen agreed that the pergola fits within the building, but it should have been approved before construction. Ms. Chen asked if other pending units opted to have a pergola. Mr. Galotti stated that the building is finished, so there are no pending approvals for pergolas. He stated that they are working on constructing the twenty brownstone units for Block OP. He will clarify to buyers that choosing a pergola option will require Planning Board approval. Mr. Nielsen stated that if they approve this pergola, it doesn’t mean the they will approve future applications that may come before the Board for architectural review. Zach Mongiovi is an associate with Toll Brothers, Inc. Mr. Mongiovi asked the Board if they would consider approving pergola model options that they may include as buyer options. Chairperson Harries stated that the Board would need to review documentation and renderings to determine if they are open to Mr. Mogiovi’s suggestion. David Smith asked Mr. McCarthy if the Building Code permits motorized roof louvers on a pergola. 8 (5/16/24) �Mr. McCarthy stated that the Village Code does not define pergolas. The language added to the approval conditions was intended to define the criteria for pergolas. Chairperson Harries polled the members of the Board for approval of the application. The members unanimously agreed that they would approve this application. Mr. Nielsen requested that the approval include a condition prohibiting any changes to the sides of the pergola. Chairperson Harries moved to waive the public hearing and to direct David Smith to draft a resolution for approval at the June 20, 2024 meeting. Moved: Harries Seconded: Trapasso Chairperson Harries- yes Lindsay Krakauer- yes Caroline Chen- yes Richard Gross- yes Clare Trapasso- yes Benjamin Nielsen - yes Vote 6-0 7. SDC Lighthouse Landing Realty LLC, Edge-on-Hudson Riverfront Development, Block A proposed medical office building, Site Plan and Architectural Review ApprovalPublic Hearing Janet Giris is a Partner with DelBello Donnellan Weingarten Wise & Wiederkehr, LLP, representing the applicant. Ms. Giris stated that the Board closed the public hearing at last month’s meeting and requested they address some architectural issues. The revisions submitted include proposed changes to the garage screening material and a mural on the rear wall of the building structure. Mr. Giris stated that the items requested in the Village Architects' letter are typically conditions of the approval. Chairperson Harries requested that the applicant describe the changes made to the parking garage orientation. Umberto Annunziata is the Development Manager for Simone Development. Mr. Annunziata presented a revised parking garage plan layout and stated that the revised configuration would restrict cars to park in the east/west direction. This change would eliminate cars from parking towards the residential building or the on-grade parking lot. The continuous ramp inside the garage was adjusted to run in the north/south direction with a level floor in areas. Handicapped parking spots were added at grade level with a two percent slope. A turn-around was added on the roof level of the garage. Chairperson Harries asked Mr. Annuniziata to confirm that the revised garage configuration will not affect the number of parking spots provided or whether the garage's top floor is open to the air. 9 (5/16/24) �Mr. Annuniziata stated that the number of parking spaces will not change, and the garage's top floor is open to air. Mr. Annuniziata stated that they propose to have a local artist design a mural for the architectural element on the building wall facing the park and the train tracks. Chairperson Harries asked Mr. Annuniziata to describe how the mural would be designed with the wall's uneven elevation articulations. Mr. Annuniziata stated that the revised design of the parking garage would eliminate the uneven elevations of the building wall. Anthony Stark is an architect from Perkins Eastman. Mr. Stark stated they intend for the mural to be continuously level across the building wall. Benjamin Nielsen asked Mr. Stark for the dimensions of the wall. Mr. Stark stated that the building wall is 150 feet long by 42 feet tall. Mr. Annuniziata stated that the mural size is open for discussion and doesn’t have to fill the entire wall space. Chairperson Harries stated they would seek advice from a Village Committee being formed for public art projects. Mr. Annuniziata suggested working with a non-profit organization to design a mural and described an organization they were familiar with. Mr. Nielsen asked Mr. Annuniziata how the mural would be maintained in the areas along the bottom of the wall. Mr. Annuniziata stated that the mural may not need to extend to the bottom of the building wall. Lindsay Krakauer asked for the budget allowed for the mural. Megan Guy is the Senior Vice President of Development at Simone Development Companies. Ms. Guy stated that they have not priced out the cost of the mural or determined a budget. In other projects they have completed, the cost has ranged from $25,000 to $75,000. Chairperson Harries asked Mr. Annuniziata to confirm that Simone Development would sponsor and cover all of the associated execution costs of the mural on the building. Mr. Annuniziata stated they would be responsible for all associated costs to complete the mural on the parking garage's building wall. Mr. Annuniziata presented photographs of murals they completed on other Westchester County buildings. 10 (5/16/24) �Mr. Annuniziata stated that they are proposing tighter screening material for the parking garage walls to address the public’s concerns and shield the visibility of cars in the garage. Mr. Annuniziatar presented revised renderings of the proposed medical office building parking garage and photographs of completed projects to illustrate the revised materials installed. Ms. Giris stated that the proposed screening material complies with ventilation requirements. Mr. Nielsen stated they received several public comments expressing concerns about the proposed loading zone. Mr. Nielsen asked the applicant to describe the anticipated frequency of deliveries, types of materials, and the size of the trucks that will utilize the loading zone. Ms. Giris said they expect the deliveries to be the same as those for a residential home. Deliveries from FedEx, UPS, and Amazon would generally be received during business hours. The medical office building would not receive deliveries during non-operational hours. Mr. Nielsen stated that a medical office building would have more deliveries than a residential home. Ms. Giris stated that they could try to determine the anticipated frequency of deliveries in the medical office building program. Still, she doesn’t see it being more frequent than other businesses. Ms. Guy stated that medical office supplies would be delivered. There may be pick-up for lab work. Mr. Nielsen stated that the applicants are requesting a loading zone on a public street to serve the operations of a medical office building. Ms. Giris stated that the proposed loading zone would not be exclusive to the medical office building or other buildings on the street. They also plan a drive-through in the front of the building to accommodate on-site loading. They propose adding the loading zone to serve the medical office building and the community. Mr. McCarthy stated that there are not loading areas for every development block on the site. David Smith asked Sean McCarthy if the loading zones on public streets require the Board of Trustees' approval. Mr. McCarthy stated that the loading zones on Village streets required the approval of the Board of Trustees. Ms. Krakauer stated that the community expressed concerns about transporting hazardous medical wastes from the proposed loading zone on Legend Drive. Ms. Giris stated that there would not be needles on the sidewalk. Mr. Stark stated that the trash collection enclosure area is located at the back of the building, and all trash, including medical waste, will be disposed of properly. 11 (5/16/24) �Caroline Chen asked Ms. Giris if the applicant would indicate that the primary loading spaces would be located at the drop-off area and that the proposed Legend Drive loading zone location should be used as a secondary area. Ms. Giris stated that no thought was given to what loading area would be considered the primary or secondary location. Although they could provide loading spaces on-site, it would be appropriate to provide additional loading spaces on Legend Drive that are consistent with other community blocks. Ms. Chen asked how many other spaces would be available for drop-off and pick-up if two 350square-foot loading spaces were proposed in the drop-off circle. Mark Gratz is an engineer from DTS Provident Design & Engineering LLP. Mr. Gratz stated that, as part of a plan that has not been submitted to the Planning Board, they propose widening the driveway, which encompasses the drop-off circle, from 20 feet to 22 feet wide as you exit. This would provide two loading spaces 10 feet wide by 35 feet long in striped areas where a vehicle could still pass. Mr. Gratz stated that the secondary loading zone on Legend Drive would help spread the traffic and benefit the shopping center. Chairperson Harries stated that the plan indicated a receiving area on the side of the building without an elevator and asked Mr. Annuziata to confirm how deliveries would be moved to the upper floors. Mr. Annuziata stated that they plan to provide two base elevators. The potential tenant could propose an additional elevator at their expense when they determine their program and the area they would be using. There have been discussions regarding an additional elevator. Chairperson Harries asked if they propose visual screening or an access enclosure for the generator at the east end of the site, facing the parking lot and easement. Mr. Gratz stated that the space between the garage and the railroad tracks would be well screened with the 6-foot high solid wall that runs along the property line. James Natarelli asked Mr. Gratz if Westchester County would been notified that lines for the generator electrical panel will cross the county trunk line. Mr. Gratz said they will notify Westchester County of the proposed generator work. Chairperson Harries asked Mr. Start what is proposed for the back corner of the property. Mr. Stark stated that the back corner of the property would be landscaped to allow for emergency fire access. The Board, consultants, and applicant team discussed how the collection of shopping carts would be managed within the shared parking agreement and the challenges a parking garage brings versus a surface parking lot. 12 (5/16/24) �Ms. Guy stated that DeCicco’ s management would be responsible for providing cart collection procedures for their operations. Chairperson Harries requested an extension of the 60-day action deadline following the closed public hearing. Ms. Giris agreed to an extension to the June 20, 2024, meeting and requested that the Board draft an approval resolution. Ms. Giris stated that documents would be submitted to address some of the outstanding items by the June meeting submission deadline date. They will be requesting that the remaining items be considered as conditions of approval. Daniel Pozin stated that the Applicant has agreed to an extension of action to the June 20, 2024 meeting. No action was taken. 6. Proposed Zoning Code Amendments, Article VI, 450-34.B, Applicability of regulations, Non-conforming buildings and lots, Village Board of Trustees referral- Discussion Chairperson Harries stated that the proposed Zoning Code Amendments were approved by the Board of Trustees and are supported by the Planning Board. 7. Approval of the minutes, April 18, 2024. Richard Gross moved to approve the April 18, 2024 meeting minutes. Moved: Gross Seconded: Chen Chairperson Harries- yes Lindsay Krakauer- yes Caroline Chen- yes Richard Gross- yes Clare Trapasso- yes Benjamin Nielsen -yes Vote 6-0 Lindsay Krakauer moved to adjourn the meeting at 9:12 PM. Moved: Krakauer Seconded: Nielsen Vote 6-0 Respectfully submitted, Pamela Kroll Secretary to the Planning Board 13 (5/16/24) � 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-2024 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_2024-05-16_Approved Planning Board Minutes Subject The topic of the resource Planning Board Minutes & Resolutions-2024 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2024 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Village of Sleepy Hollow All Rights Reserved. Type The nature or genre of the resource Text https://sleepyhollow.localarchives.org/files/original/41fbe404dc7ee6fb1083fa5850d77671.pdf 3526e9bf12cfaa28cc5406fa1b4a1100 PDF Text Text Village of Sleepy Hollow Planning Board Minutes April 18, 2024 Chairperson Harries called the regular meeting to order at 7:20 PM. Chairperson Harries stated that the written correspondences submitted to the Board would be included in the public records. Present: Kersten Harries, Chairperson Rachelle Gebler Richard Gross Benjamin Nielsen Lindsay Krakauer Caroline Chen Clare Trapasso Also Present: Joshua Subin, Village Attorney David Smith, Village Planner Anthony Catalano, Consulting Engineer Sean E. McCarthy, Building Inspector Pamela Kroll, Secretary to the Planning Board Absent: James Natarelli, Village Engineer Agenda: 1) Lighthouse Landing Communities, LLC, Edge-on-Hudson Riverfront Development, Phase II- Waterfront Open Space, Site Plan & Wetlands Watercourse Permit ApprovalContinued Public Hearing 2) SDC Lighthouse Landing Realty, LLC, Edge-on-Hudson Riverfront Development, Proposed medical office building, Site Plan & and Architectural Review ApprovalContinued Public Hearing 3) Rock of Salvation Church, 135 Cortlandt Street, Proposed parking lot, Site Plan Approval-Public hearing 4) Rock of Salvation Church, 131 Cortlandt Street, Proposed addition, Site Plan ApprovalPreliminary Presentation 5) LL Parcel F, LLC, 1 Legend Drive, DeCicco & Sons supermarket, Proposed generator relocation, Amended Site Plan Approval - Preliminary Presentation 6) Proposed Zoning Code Amendments, Article VI, 450-34.B, Applicability of regulations, non-conforming buildings and lots, Village Board of Trustees referral Discussion 7) Approval of minutes, March 21, 2024 1. Lighthouse Landing Communities, LLC, Edge-on-Hudson Riverfront Development, 1 (4/18/24) �Phase II- Waterfront Open Space, Site Plan & Wetlands Watercourse Permit ApprovalContinued Public Hearing Clare Trapasso moved to open the public hearing. Moved: Trapasso Seconded: Gross Vote 7-0 Peter Chavkin is an associate of Biddle Real Estate Ventures and the President of Lighthouse Landing Communities, LLC, which owns the property. Mr. Chavkin stated that after the April 4, 2024 Work Session, they submitted a concept design that reflected some revisions and improvements to the North Buffer. Mr. Chavkin stated that they have additional details about the proposed plantings. The current flow calculations for the potential of off-site water coming over the train tracks determined that there is an opportunity to increase the number of plantings in the buffer while maintaining the base flood elevation and protecting the development’s housing. Mr. Chavkin presented a revised plan dated April 18, 2024. He said the revisions include adjusting the Kingsland Point Park side grading to feather the slopes and create an additional pedestrian pathway in the channel. The proposed plan included the relocation of the shrub plantings and additional tree plantings. A vegetation meadow mix is proposed in the North Buffer depression areas to increase visual interest and enhance water infiltration along the pathway. Three new crosswalks were added for additional connectivity along Hollows Pass. Chairperson Harries asked Mr. Chavkin to describe the pathway materials. Mr. Chavkin presented images and stated that the pathways are proposed as mown grass. They propose to raise the pathways in the slope to stay dry most of the time. The pathways in the low areas of the North Buffer may be wet. Details reflecting these changes will be included in a full set of revised Site Plan engineering drawings that he hopes to submit as a condition of approval. Mr. Chavkin stated that they will be submitting updated flow calculations. Should the calculations determine that a lesser flow volume could be managed, they propose raising the transect pathways. Chairperson Harries asked Mr. Chavkin if he would propose raising the pathways on a boardwalk structure or a berm and what materials are proposed for the emergency pathway. Mr. Chavkin stated that berms would be proposed for the transect pathways. The emergency access pathway would be constructed of a mesh rubber reinforcement between the grass and the soil. Mr. Chavkin presented photographs of the proposed plantings area and described the areas of the North Buffer that will include them. Chairperson Harries stated that the Board has not received the materials that Mr. Chavkin is presenting and requested that he submit them for the record. Benjamin Nielsen asked Mr. Chavkin how the water would leave the North Buffer area and how long it would take. 2 (4/18/24) �Mr. Chavkin stated that the depression areas' design intent, along with the meadow grass habitat, is to help absorb water during a normal storm event. Lindsay Krakauer asked Mr. Chavkin if there were concerns about erosion of the natural pathways. Mr. Chavkin stated that the revisions proposed since the last set of engineering drawings submitted in September have flattened the grading where the pathways are and shouldn’t require structural support or present erosion concerns. Caroline Chen asked Mr. Chavkin how long water would sit in the depression areas and if there were concerns for insects. Ms. Chen asked how the areas would perform in a 100-year storm event. Mr. Chavkin stated that the North Buffer channel is designed to convey water in a 100-year storm event. The area is not a pond, and the Buffer should improve what currently exists. Mr. Nielsen suggested that Mr. Chavkin consider elevating the low-line pathways or using subgrade permeable materials. Mr. Nielsen asked Mr. Chavkin where the water would go if it crossed the tracks before the area was connected to the Hudson River. Mr. Chavkin stated that if a 100-year storm event occurs when only the North Buffer area is completed, the flood water would follow Hollows Pass and go into the area behind the existing curved linear wall. Mr. Catalano stated that depending on the permeability function of the soils, the flood waters in a 100-year storm event would either sit there or drain through. Clare Trappasso asked Mr. Chavkin where the water would flow when the remainder of the park was completed, and if the grades would need to be raised. Mr. Chavkin stated that the area would be subject to the Planning Board’s review when the future site plan application is submitted. The intention is for the water to flow directly to the Hudson River. Chairperson Harries asked Mr. Chavkin when the Board will receive the balance of the Waterfront Open Space design. Peter Chavkin stated that they are agreeing to submit a Site Plan application for the balance of the Waterfront Open Space, including the waterfront access, in October of this year. Chairperson Harries solicited comments from the public. Ted Lai stated he lives at 102 Legend Drive. Mr. Lai suggested that changing the pathway material from mowed grass to pepple base to avoid damage from dogs and to prohibit dogs on the pathways. 3 (4/18/24) �Chairperson Harries stated that the revised presentation and full Site Plans and Engineering drawings must be submitted for the approval. Chairperson Harries asked David Smith to read the highlights of the draft resolution. David Smith read whereas clauses and conditions of the draft resolution. Chairperson Harries asked if there is a proposed lighting plan for the North Buffer. Peter Chavkin stated there is no lighting proposed in the North Buffer. Chairperson Harries moved to approve the resolution. Moved: Harries Seconded: Gebler Chairperson Harries- yes Rachelle Gebler - yes Lindsay Krakauer- yes Caroline Chen- yes Richard Gross- yes Clare Trapasso- yes Benjamin Nielsen - yes Vote 7-0 2. SDC Lighthouse Landing Realty LLC, Edge-on-Hudson Riverfront Development, Block A proposed medical office building, Site Plan and Architectural Review ApprovalPublic Hearing The Board received written public comments. ( see attached Exhibits #s 1-4) Lindsay Krakauer moved to open the public hearing. Moved: Krakauer Seconded: Gebler Vote 7-0 Mark Weingarten is a Partner with DelBello Donnellan Weingarten Wise & Wiederkehr, LLP representing the Applicant. Mr. Weingarten summarized the proposed application and described the modifications made since the original application. Mr. Weingarten stated that he is hopeful the Board will close the public hearing at tonight’s meeting. There will be brief presentations on the modifications submitted to address the issues from the March 21, 2024 meeting. The application is part of a mixed and balanced plan designed for many years. The previously approved elements are now before the Board at the Site Plan stage with legal rights. While they are not asserting their legal rights, they believe the application is a fair and balanced plan. Mr. Weingarten stated that the owners and the developers are very committed to the site as they need to sell another 600 units and would not consider a plan that would harm the development. Mark Gratz is an engineer with DTS Provident Design Engineering, representing the Applicant. Mr. Gratz described the changes related to the proposed loading zone and crosswalks. Mr. Gratz described the traffic analysis details for the external and internal intersections, including the peak usage times for the supermarket, retail, and medical office spaces. Creating an internal T4 (4/18/24) �intersection, as suggested, would result in losing 18 parking spaces in front of DeCicco’s market, which would fall below the shared parking analysis limit. Anthony Stark is an architect from Perkins Eastman who represents the Applicant. Mr. Stark presented new rendering views and a signage plan. He described the reductions proposed for the building signage. The two signs proposed at the parking garage would only be seen from Beekman Avenue and would not be seen from the residences. All of the signage would be backlit and have no light projecting out. Chairperson Harries asked for the intended hours of signage illumination. Ms. Harries suggested that the sign viewed from Beekman Avenue may warrant a larger size. Mr. Stark stated they could limit the signage illumination to during operation hours. Chairperson Harries asked Mr. Stark if he had more details regarding the garage screening material and the concrete wall pattern facing the railroad tracks. Umberto Annunziata is the Development Manager for Simone Development Companies. Mr. Annuziata stated they are still evaluating the back end facing the train tracks. Chairperson Harries solicited comments from the public. Henry Dong stated that he is a resident of 100 Legend Drive. He stated that a grocery-anchored center requires enough parking in the front of the store to succeed. Because the store loading area is located in the front of the building, all the parking spaces are located on the site's eastern end. The 60-surface parking spaces are 300 feet from the DeCicco store entrance. The users of the medical office building will be inclined to utilize the surface parking spaces closest to the lobby entrance instead of walking from the parking garage. This will eliminate the surface parking spaces needed for the DeCicco patrons because the parking garage would not accommodate shopping carts. Surface parking spaces are critical for the DeCicco market and retail store. Lewis Fishman stated that he lives at 311 Palisades Boulevard. Mr. Fishman stated that most of the residents in the Edge-on-Hudson development paid seven figures for their homes and have increased the Sleepy Hollow tax base significantly, allowing the Village to complete different projects. The neighborhood comments should be heard. Mr. Fishman cited magazine and newspaper articles advertising for potential residents from the past three years and stated that a medical office building has never been mentioned. The traffic studies are based on hypothetical statistics, and the amount of traffic that would be generated is incompatible with the concept of a residential community. Chairperson Harries asked Josh Subin to clarify the process for approving the zoning regulations for medical office uses and the Planning Board’s role in the decision. Joshua Subin stated that the medical office use was approved a while ago. The zoning process for text amendments is reviewed by the Board of Trustees by petition or request. The Board of Trustees refers the zoning amendments to the Planning Board for review. The Planning Board approved the request referred from the Board of Trustees to permit medical office uses for an entire building, including the first floor, and it is a part of the current zoning table. 5 (4/18/24) �Sean McCarthy stated that the Zoning Code was amended to clarify that medical offices are permitted, as of right, in the Riverfront District. It also allowed medical offices to be located on the lower building levels instead of just the upper floors. Chairperson Harries asked David Smith to provide details on the previous traffic studies completed. David Smith stated that an extensive traffic review, prepared as part of the initial environmental review, analyzed all the project's different components, followed the standard protocols, and included 37 intersections throughout Sleepy Hollow and the Village of Tarrytown. The developer was required to mitigate anticipated impacts. The current applicant prepared an additional conservative traffic analysis that shows the site will perform at acceptable service levels. This doesn’t mean that there won't be traffic. The site has always been intended to be a busy, thriving community that provides pedestrian safety and incorporates some complete street components. All environmental review documentation is available on the Village website for public review. Benjamin Nielsen asked if the Block A site was a commercial hub in the original plan. David Smith stated that the 2007 Riverfront Development Concept Plan contemplated that the site would include a market, office space, and a residential component. The residential portion will be shifted to another part of the site while keeping with the original plan for retail and residential components of the overall development. They are not proposing anything that hasn’t been reviewed in general concept or approved as part of the 2011 Special Permit approval. Lindsay Krakauer asked David Smith to clarify that the original concept for residential vs. commercial uses still falls within the development's intended mixed uses in different site areas. Mr. Smith stated that Lindsay Krakauer is correct. Chairperson Harries solicited additional public comments. Ted Lai stated that he resides at 102 Legend Drive and disagrees with increasing the size of a sign visible from Beekman Avenue. He doesn’t think the garage screening is appropriate, and the parking garage should be fully enclosed. The proposed loading zone should be located on-site and not on Legend Drive. Mr. Nielsen asked the applicant to describe the screening level proposed for the parking garage. Mr. Stark stated they propose maintaining a 50 percent opening to allow natural ventilation instead of providing mechanical ventilation. Ms. Krakauer asked if cars would be visible from outside the garage. Mr. Stark stated that the intention was to match the window areas. He suggested they could include 2 ½ foot high solid panels, similar to the window openings, above the parking decks where car lights and the bottoms of the cars are more visible. 6 (4/18/24) �Mr. Nielsen asked Mr. Stark how the site would be impacted if they located the loading area on the site's interior. Mr. Subin stated that the loading zone is not intended just for the medical office’s use. He has not restricted it to the medical office. It can be used by Amazon or other deliveries to the residences across the street. Mr. Weingarten stated that the loading zone request reflects the modern day and is happening everywhere. They do not have enough room in the back of the medical office building and can't afford to lose parking spaces for a loading zone. Rachelle Gebler stated that the Board wants to confirm that anybody can use the proposed loading zone for deliveries. Ms. Krakauer asked how many parking spaces would be lost by moving the loading zone to the site's interior. Anthony Stark stated that at least a dozen parking spaces would be eliminated if they located the loading zone on site. Adding the loading zone to the garage structure would require them to raise the floor, change the ramps, and require a height variance. Mr. Dong questioned how 378 shared spaces would be sufficient when the Zoning Code requires 517 spaces between the retail and office uses. Chairperson Harries requested that David Smith respond to Mr. Dong's question. Mr. Smith stated that there are fluctuations in the use patterns of the proposed retail and office uses and suggested that the applicant’s traffic engineer describe their study. Chairperson Harries stated that the Board requested that the applicant confirm with the owner of DeCicco Market that they support the medical office site plan and are comfortable with the proposed shared parking arrangement. John DeCicco Jr. is the owner of the DeCicco & Sons. Mr. DeCicco stated they were informed in late 2021 that a medical office building was proposed on the site. Since 2021 they have been working with Simone Development to address their concerns related to parking. He consulted with other real estate developers to find out what he should consider to ensure he would have enough parking counts. He was advised that the worst he could consider is having 7 parking spaces per square foot. He said he would be comfortable with the shared parking agreement if he and the medical office building had 200 spots each because their busy times are different. He feels comfortable with the completed parking studies. Brian Dempsey is a traffic consultant from DTS Provident Design Engineering LLP. Mr. Dempsey described the shared parking study and peak usage times for each use. 7 (4/18/24) �Mr. Weingarten stated that, as previously requested by the Planning Board, they will provide parking studies for the development built to date that include available and proposed parking spaces. Peter Chavkin is an associate of Biddle Real Estate Ventures and the President of Lighthouse Landing Communties, LLC, which owns the property. Mr. Chavkin displayed a diagram showing the current on-street parking spaces located south and north of Maxwell Drive. Mr. Chavkin stated that every block has satisfied the site parking requirements, and the diagram shows 446 additional on-street parking spaces. Mr. Chavkin described the completed parking garage locations, the number of spaces provided and the requirements for a future parking garage. Mr. Chavkin said he would revise and submit the parking diagram, including total residential parking requirements, to the Planning Board tomorrow. Ms. Krakauer asked Mr. Chavkin to explain how the future development of the South Parcel will affect the parking on the Block A site. Mr. Chavkin stated that they will address the parking requirements when they submit a site plan proposal for the south parcel development. They are not planning on proposing another shared parking agreement unless analysis shows it is warranted. Mr. Nielsen asked Mr. McCarthy to confirm that the Board of Trustees typically approves shared parking and asked if an agreement was approved for Block A. His understanding was that shared parking was considered with the South Parcel. Mr. McCarthy stated that the Board of Trustees would approve a shared parking mechanism for this project and others in the RF zoning district. The Special Permit contained language that endorsed shared parking throughout the site. However, no mechanism linking this site has been approved. Mr. Smith provided the history of the shared parking considered when a cinema was proposed on the South Parcel. Ms. Krakauer asked if an additional surface parking structure could be added to the east end of the Block A site if needed. Mr. Chavkin stated that the surface parking could not be extended due to the county sewer main and the Metro-North easement. There was a discussion regarding the turning radius needed for DeCicco’s delivery trucks and the site's inability to accommodate more surface parking. Mr. Weingarten stated that the Village’s parking requirements are very heavy compared to those of its sister municipalities, and the additional 466 on-street parking spaces are not counted in the site plan calculations. The proposed parking for this development is way over-parked compared to any other developments in Westchester County in the last ten years. A request may be submitted in the future to reduce parking requirements. 8 (4/18/24) �Lisa Reich lives at 209 Palisades Boulevard. She said the residents are getting a bait-and-switch because everything advertised did not include a medical office building. Ms. Reich stated that she is concerned that residents would be unable to leave the site in an emergency and that traffic will affect pedestrian safety. Ms. Reich suggested that the applicant designate and reserve parking spaces in front of the DeCicco’s market for customers stopping in for a few items. Mr. Fishman stated that the study needs to calculate employee parking to determine the number of parking spaces available for customers in the market and the medical office building. Christopher Peuler stated that he lives at 100 Legend Drive. Mr. Peuler stated that he lives in the building in front of the proposed loading zone and suggested that they consider using some of the spots on the Emerson building side instead of having it on Legend Drive. Mr. Weingarten stated that they are not proposing a loading dock. The application proposes temporarily parking a delivery van in parking spaces on Legend Drive. Chairperson Harries asked Mr. Gratz to describe how the parking study considered employees versus visitors to the site. Mr. Gratz stated that the study was based on the building's square footage, and the shared parking analysis accounts for employees and patrons parking at the site. Nancy Fishman lives at 311 Palisades Blvd. and doesn’t need signage lighting during the day other than during daylight savings when it is dark at 4:30 PM. Chairperson Harries suggested that the lighting be installed on a daylight sensor and on during the hours of operation. Mr. Stark stated that the lighting would be on a daylight sensor. Mr. Weingarten requested that the Board close the public hearing. Chairperson Harries polled the Board members to see whether or not they wanted to close the public hearing. Richard Gross suggested that the Board close the public hearing but allow written comments to be submitted. Chairperson Harries stated that the applicant needs to provide outstanding architectural items she and is concerned about the 60-day clock that applies if they close the public hearing. Mr. Weingarten asked Chairperson Harries to clarify the open items. Chairperson Harries stated that outstanding items include the rear concrete garage wall design and options for the parking garage screening. The Board and Mr. Stark discussed the interior crosswalks and pedestrian circulation between the buildings. 9 (4/18/24) �Rachelle Gebler stated that if the applicant can address the comments before the 60-day time limit, she is comfortable closing the public hearing. The Board members agreed. There was a discussion regarding the time limit for written public comments. Chairperson Harries moved to close the public hearing and to receive written public comments for 21 days. Moved: Harries Seconded: Gebler Chairperson Harries- yes Rachelle Gebler- yes Lindsay Krakauer- yes Caroline Chen- yes Richard Gross- yes Clare Trapasso- yes Benjamin Nielsen - yes Vote 7-0 3. Rock of Salvation Church, 135 Cortlandt Street, Proposed parking lot, Site Plan Approval- Public Hearing Lindsay Krakuer moved to open the public hearing. Moved: Krakauer Seconded: Gebler Vote 7-0 Jorge B. Hernandez is the architect representing the applicant. Mr. Hernandez stated that the application proposes to construct a parking lot with 17 spaces. Per the Planning Board's request, he enlarged the sidewalk at the corner of the building, added a gate to access the landscaped area, and enlarged the landscaped area between the neighboring property at 139 Cortlandt Street. He is working with James Natarelli to finalize the stormwater management plan and is hopeful the issues will be resolved before next month's meeting. Chairperson Harries solicited comments from the public. There were no public comments. Chairperson Harries requested that David Smith prepare a draft resolution for the May 16, 2024, meeting. Lindsay Krakuer moved to close the public hearing. Moved: Krakauer Seconded: Nielsen Vote 7-0 4. Rock of Salvation Church, 131 Cortlandt Street, Proposed addition, Site Plan Approval- Preliminary Presentation 10 (4/18/24) �Jorge B. Hernandez is the architect representing the applicant. Mr. Hernandez stated that the application proposes to enlarge an existing covered rear platform storage area by 78 square feet. The stairs and the chairlift will be relocated. Chairperson Harries asked Mr. Hernandez about the proposed elevation change and if the building envelope is changing. Mr. Hernandez said that the stair elevation will change by 7 feet, and the building envelope will be enlarged by 100 square feet. Chairperson Harries asked Mr. Hernandez to confirm that the platform addition would only be visible from the Fire House. Mr. Hernandez stated that Ms. Harries is correct and that they extended the structure to increase inside storage space. Benjamin Nielsen asked if the proposed addition would cause aesthetic impacts or setback issues to the building. Mr. Hernandez stated that the building will have no visual impacts and that the proposed addition does not require a variance. It was determined that the request is for Amended Site Plan approval. Chairperson Harries moved to waive the public hearing and direct David Smith to draft a resolution for the May 16, 2024, meeting. Moved: Harries Seconded: Krakauer Chairperson Harries- yes Rachelle Gebler - yes Lindsay Krakauer- yes Caroline Chen- yes Richard Gross- yes Clare Trapasso- yes Benjamin Nielsen - yes Vote 7-0 5. LL Parcel F, LLC, 1 Legend Drive, DeCicco & Sons supermarket, Proposed generator relocation, Amended Site Plan - Preliminary Presentation Lucio DiLeo is the Principal of Studi Rai Architects representing the Applicant. Mr. DiLeo presented the site plans and stated that the application proposes installing a generator in the rear of the market building and the transformer for market building at the back of building on a peninsure with bollards and and landscaping. John DeCicco stated that the approved site plan was originally approved for the two generators on the roof of the market building since they were close to the apartments across the street at the 11 (4/18/24) �third-floor level. They propose moving one of the generators to the rear of the building, where it won't be visible from the street and further away from the residences. Chairperson Harries asked if the proposed generator location would interfere with the easement. Is there a better spot for the transformer. Mr. DeCicco stated that generator would be located next to the easement. The proposed transformer location is behind the crosswalk and should not interfere with customer circulation. They neglected to include it on the original plan. Chairperson Harries asked for the size of the transformer. Mr. DeCicco stated that the size of the transformer is approximately 3 feet by 4 feet. Benjamin Nielsen suggested installing a low stone wall around the transformer instead of bollards. Mr. DeCicco stated that he would install a low, 3-foot-high stone wall around three sides and landscape the side where ConEdison needs access. Mr. DiLeo stated that he would confirm they have the proper clearance for a wall. There was a discussion regarding alternative locations for the transformer and why the proposed location is the best option. Chairperson Harries requested that the Applicant revise the plans as discussed for review. Rachelle Gebler moved to waive the public hearing and directed David Smith to draft a resolution for the May 16, 2024, meeting. Moved: Gebler Seconded: Harries Chairperson Harries- yes Rachelle Gebler - yes Lindsay Krakauer- yes Caroline Chen- yes Richard Gross- yes Clare Trapasso- yes Benjamin Nielsen - yes Vote 7-0 6. Proposed Zoning Code Amendments, Article VI, 450-34.B, Applicability of regulations, Non-conforming buildings and lots, Village Board of Trustees referral- Discussion Chairperson Harries tabled the discussion to the May 16, 2024 meeting. 7. Approval of the minutes, March 21, 2024 meeting. 12 (4/18/24) �Chairperson Harries moved to approve the March 21, 2024 meeting minutes. Moved: Harries Seconded: Krakauer Chairperson Harries- yes Rachelle Gebler- abstained Lindsay Krakauer- yes Caroline Chen- yes Richard Gross- yes Clare Trapasso- yes Benjamin Nielsen - abstained Vote 5-2-0 Respectfully submitted, Pamela Kroll Secretary to the Planning Board 13 (4/18/24) �Exhibit #1 Subject: Block A Comments Received from 100 Legend Drive Resident From: GUY DEVYATKIN Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2024 7:00 PM To: Sean McCarthy <smccarthy@sleepyhollowny.org> Subject: Concern from a resident Greetings Mr. McCarthy, My wife and I have lived in the Edge on Hudson development for about 6 months, and we have tremendously enjoyed the surrounding towns and the friendly neighbors. A primary attraction of this development is the peaceful, safe and quiet family-oriented environment. We are concerned that the construction of a medical building across the street from our residence will have significant negative consequences. This structure was never mentioned in any of the development plans that we received, and most alarming is the size of the structure, and the number of visitors and vehicles that will be driving by and parking in this location. If the structure is to be built, certainly an additional access road would first need to be added. We were also told that a large lit sign will be added, which would be literally outside of our windows. This would be a serious eyesore that would diminish the positive experience of living in our home, and could lower the property value. Please share our concern with relevant parties, and consider scaling back on this portion of the project, particularly the visibility and scale of the medical facility. Thank you for your work! Guy and Natalia Devyatkin 100 Legend Dr, unit 205 Sleepy Hollow, NY 718-687-2763 �Exhibit #2 Subject: 4-18-24_ Public Comment Letter from Susan Geisler Re: Proposed Medical Office Building in Edge on Hudson From: Susan Geisler Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2024 12:06 PM To: Sean McCarthy <smccarthy@sleepyhollowny.org> Cc: Pamela Kroll <pkroll@sleepyhollowny.org> Subject: Letter for Public Hearing: Proposed Medical Office Building in Edge on Hudson April 18, 2024 Dear Chairperson Harries, Mr. McCarthy, and Members of the Sleepy Hollow Planning Board, We live on Legend Drive in Edge on Hudson, and we would like to express our continued concern about the proposed Medical Office Building and adjacent Parking Structure.  We know that a revised proposal was submitted to the Board on April 4, 2024.  This revised proposal includes a traffic analysis which concludes that "the provision of the planned Block A will not have a significant traffic impact on Legend Drive or the overall site."  However, when looking at the specifics of this analysis, several points seem very problematic: 1. The tables that accompany this traffic analysis indicate that "all traffic movements would operate at good Levels of Service (Level of Service "C" or better)."  What is the definition of Level of Service "C" and how does it compare to Level of Service "A" or "B"?  It is important to note that these tables indicate that the Level of Service for the main intersection of this proposed project, the Site Driveway/Maxwell Drive/Legend Drive intersection, is projected to operate at Level of Service "C."  Will traffic flow moving at Level "C" be adequate for such a crucial intersection within this project? 2. Does this analysis take into consideration the potential impact on traffic once the entire Edge on Hudson community is completed?  This will include the completion of 100 units at The Daymark, 90 town homes to be built by Sun Homes, 2 additional Brownstone buildings that are currently under construction, and the addition of a planned 140 room Boutique Hotel. At the  present time our community is at approximately 50% capacity.  How will traffic flow in and out of our area when Edge on Hudson is at 100% capacity? 3. This traffic analysis deals with the 2 key intersections within this project.  However, how will this project impact traffic flow in the rest of our community and the surrounding area? As Edge on Hudson homeowners, we remain extremely concerned about the scope and size of this proposed project and how it will negatively impact our community.   Respectfully submitted, Susan and Alan Geisler 102 Legend Drive �Exhibit #3 Subject: 4-18-24 Public Comment Received Re: EOH Black A Medical Office Building Site Plan From: Chris Camia <ccamia@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2024 9:28 AM To: Paula Mccarthy <pmccarthy@sleepyhollowny.org> Cc: Martin Rutyna <mrutyna@sleepyhollowny.org>; Patrick Sheeran <PSheeran@sleepyhollowny.org>; Denise Scaglione <dscaglione@sleepyhollowny.org>; Thomas Andruss <tandruss@sleepyhollowny.org>; Lauren Connell <lconnell@sleepyhollowny.org>; Jared Rodriguez <jrodriguez@sleepyhollowny.org>; rleon@sleepyhollowny.org; Lauren Perrotta <lauren.perrotta@gmail.com> Subject: Re: Public Comment on EOH Black A Medical Office Building Site Plan Hi Paula, I want to provide the below additional comments to the Planning Board as part of the ongoing public hearing. I’ve reviewed the applicants' revised proposal for the Medical Office Building. First, I’d like to thank the applicant for simplifying the internal pedestrian walkways, which I believe will make a big difference in traffic flow. I also appreciate that some of my neighbors' comments were considered with respect to signage. Finally, the traffic study provided is a big step in the right direction. However, I’d still like to address the traffic flow and the applicants' traffic study provided by DTS Provident. My concern remains the same. Will the one vehicular access point to DiCicco’s, retail south and the MOB be adequate given the expected volumes and design? I worry that the DTS Provident memo summarizing the traffic findings obfuscates what are otherwise subpar findings. The word “conservative” or some variation thereof, was used at least seven times. Where I found this most troubling was in the following statement, "these volumes were then added to the roadway network and then background traffic for the rest of the Edge on Hudson project was obtained from the FEIS, thus considering full buildout of the entire site, to be conservative.” Considering the background traffic (otherwise known as us Sleepy Hollow residents) is not conservatism. It’s realism. The site will eventually be built out and “background traffic” will exist. The software modeling tool utilized by DTS Provident, Syncro, provided Level of Service results. The scale ranges from A to F, best to worst. Maxwell / Legend Drive is the most important intersection for this particular application and the genesis for the letter I sent the planning board on March 18. The level of service result was a C! I don’t believe the vision for Edge on Hudson was a grade of C. The study itself �highlights that there will in fact be queuing along Legend Drive. Specifically the LOS grades for this intersection are: East Bound Traffic: C West Bound: B North Bound: C South Bound: A   Internally, where the applicant has autonomy on design, the LOS is a B. I can understand that some conservatism may have been built into this model but the board should be scrupulous with respect to this analysis. As many of my neighbors have highlighted in written and verbal comments, what is designed on paper rarely matches up with real world results. We should mandate design to A standards so that when as built conditions vary, there is some buffer. Thank you again for your attention to this matter.    Regards, Chris   Christopher Camia ccamia@gmail.com (914) 497-8732     �Exhibit #4 From: To: Subject: Date: Pamela Kroll Pamela Kroll 4-18-24_Public Comments Received Re: Block A Proposed Medical Office Building Thursday, April 18, 2024 5:24:35 PM From: Theresa Doran Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2024 4:56 PM To: Sean McCarthy <smccarthy@sleepyhollowny.org>; Paula Mccarthy <pmccarthy@sleepyhollowny.org> Subject: EOH medical office building Dear Mr. McCarthy, My name is Theresa Doran and I live at 102 Legend Drive Unit 305.  Unfortunately, I am unable to attend tonight’s planning board meeting regarding the proposed medical office building.  EOH was described to me as an active new community with some retail and a boutique hotel but mainly it would be a residential river town.  I think the medical building will make the community less residential and cause major issues with traffic and parking.  There are already cars parked on Legend Drive and the buildings are not yet fully occupied.  My preference would be for the building to be denied.  The more significant issues I have are as follows: 1. Traffic will be a nightmare.  EOH needs better infrastructure and a second egress bridge prior to constructing a building this size that will create more vehicle traffic on EOH roads. 2. The 4-story parking garage should be fully enclosed and not as planned with transparent screens where we will see the cars inside.  Also, the number of people that will be employed at such a large building will look for free parking on the roads on EOH.  EOH owners (not renters) should have resident parking permits and privileges for their guests. 3. The loading zone should not be on a public street.  It should be in their parking lot in the rear. 4. The developer should not be allowed to put a 4 by 20 foot illuminated vertical sign on the building's corner on Legend Drive.  I do not want to see a huge sign every time I leave my building or walk in the neighborhood.  I think the sign should be denied.    These signs will make the area feel more commercial and less residential. Thank you for your attention to this matter, Theresa Doran  � 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-2024 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_2024-04-18_Approved Planning Board Minutes Subject The topic of the resource Planning Board Minutes & Resolutions-2024 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2024 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Village of Sleepy Hollow All Rights Reserved. Type The nature or genre of the resource Text https://sleepyhollow.localarchives.org/files/original/7afe58116da4b989dc455560f14732df.pdf 854820c08107cd339fc9660645e4cba5 PDF Text Text Village of Sleepy Hollow Planning Board Minutes March 21, 2024 Chairperson Harries called the regular meeting to order at 7:06 PM and identified the members of the Board present. Chairperson Harries revised the order of the applications on the agenda. Present: Kersten Harries, Chairperson Richard Gross Lindsay Krakauer Caroline Chen Clare Trapasso Also Present: Joshua Subin, Village Attorney James Natarelli, Village Engineer David Smith, Village Planner Anthony Catalano, Consulting Engineer Joseph Kirby, Consulting Engineer Sean E. McCarthy, Building Inspector Pamela Kroll, Secretary to the Planning Board Absent: Rachelle Gebler Benjamin Nielsen Agenda: 1) Todd and Wendi Strier, 5 Birch Close, Proposed additions and alterations, Site Plan and Architectural Review Approval- Draft Resolution 2) AECOM, 52-60 Elm Street, Soil vapor extraction and interim remedial measures, Site Plan Approval- Public Hearing 3) SDC Lighthouse Landing Realty, LLC, Edge-on-Hudson Riverfront Development, Proposed medical office building, Site Plan & and Architectural Review ApprovalPublic Hearing 4) LL Parcel E, LLC, Block O/P Townhomes One, Proposed backflow device enclosure, Amended Site Plan Approval- Draft Resolution 5) Lighthouse Landing Communtieis, LLC, Edge-on-Hudson Riverfront Development, Phase 3, Block Q, Proposed concrete crushing operation- Site Plan Approval - Draft Resolution 6) Lighthouse Landing Communities, LLC, Edge-on-Hudson Riverfront Development, Phase II- Waterfront Open Space, Site Plan & Wetlands Watercourse Permit ApprovalContinued Public Hearing 7) Lighthouse Landing Communities, LLC, Edge-on-Hudson Riverfront Development, Phase I, Block A, Sanitary sewer easement, Amended Site Plan Approval- Discussion 1 (3/21/24) �8) Rock of Salvation Church, 135 Cortlandt Street, Proposed parking lot, Site Plan Approval-Presentation 9) Marcelo Poguio, 80 Depeyster Street, Proposed three-family residence, Site Plan and Architectural Review Approval- Preliminary Presentation 10) Approval of minutes, December 21, 2023, February 22, 2024 1. Todd and Wendi Strier, 5 Birch Close, Proposed additions and alterations, Site Plan Approval - Draft Resolution Jennifer Gray stated that she is an attorney with the law firm Keane & Beane P.C. representing the applicants. Ms. Gray stated that they reviewed the draft resolution and requested that the Board act on the approval. David Smith read the conditions of the draft resolution. Lindsay Krakauer moved to approve the resolution. Moved: Krakauer Seconded: Trapasso Chairperson Harries- yes Lindsay Krakauer- yes Caroline Chen- yes Richard Gross- yes Clare Trapasso Vote 5-0 2. AECOM, 52-60 Elm Street, Soil vapor extraction interim remedial measures, Site Plan Approval- Public Hearing Chairperson Harries read the public notice. Lindsay Krakauer moved to open the public hearing. Moved: Krakauer Seconded: Chen Vote 5-0 Michael Doherty is an engineer with AECOM who is representing the Gillette Company. He described the history of the remediation work performed at the site and the proposed soil vapor extraction project, including the treatment structure, system operation process, and proposed restoration measures. Lindsay Krakauer asked if the treatment structure exhaust pipe could be moved further toward the parking lot side. Mr. Doherty stated that the exhaust stack extends from the top of the equipment trailer, and they may have room to move a foot or two in either direction. Caroline Chen suggested that the applicant could install a curved exhaust pipe, and asked Mr. Doherty to describe what exhausts from the pipe. 2 (3/21/24) �Mr. Doherty stated that treated and tested air would be vented through the exhaust system. There was a discussion regarding the plans for tree restoration. Clare Trappasso asked if the Gillette Company approved having art on the treatment trailer. Mr. Doherty stated that the Gillette Company approves of the Village adding art to the treatment trailer. Chairperson Harries solicited comments from the public. Adam Labode stated that he lives at 209 Palisades Blvd and requested that the applicant be sensitive to the treatment center's location and its proximity to the Senior Center. Richard Gross requested that the applicant maintain the plantings along the last house on the lefthand side of Elm Street, which blocks the house from the parking lot. Chairperson Harries moved to close the public hearing. Moved: Harries Seconded: Gross Vote 5-0 David Smith read the conditions of the draft resolution. Richard Gross moved to approve the resolution. Moved: Gross Seconded: Trapasso Chairperson Harries- yes Lindsay Krakauer- yes Caroline Chen- yes Richard Gross- yes Clare Trapasso Vote 5-0 3. SDC Lighthouse Landing Realty LLC, Edge-on-Hudson Riverfront Development, Block A proposed medical office building, Site Plan and Architectural Review ApprovalPublic Hearing Chairperson Harries read the public notice. Lindsay Krakauer moved to open the public hearing. Moved: Krakauer Seconded: Trapasso Vote 5-0 Janet Giris stated that she is a Partner with DelBello Donnellan Weingarten Wise & Wiederkehr, LLP representing the applicant. Ms. Giris stated that the 2011 Special Permit Approval for Block A included a four-story building in the location of the proposed medical office building containing a market on the lower level, 35,000 square feet of office space above it, and two-level structured parking from end to end above the surface parking. Ms. Giris stated that the plan for the property was later modified to include 70,000 square feet of retail space along with 35,000 square feet of office space and related parking. Modifications to the Block A Site Plan were 3 (3/21/24) �approved in 2021 to include a 40,000-square-foot DeCicco’s Market, a 9,000-square-foot adjacent retail building and a 9,200-square-foot North Retail Building. After the office space was removed in 2021, there were discussions on how to get office users at the Block A location. The Master Developer negotiated with Simone Development to develop a medical office building on the property. The Village Board modified the Zoning Ordinance to permit medical offices on the first floor instead of just the upper floors. Simone Development has been negotiating with the most successful medical provider in New York State to provide medical care to the Village and the Edge-on-Hudson Development. Ms. Giris stated that the design has been revised since the application was submitted in April of 2023 based on comments from the Planning Board. Ms. Giris stated that the current plan proposes a 43,212 square foot medical office building with 378 parking spaces to serve the DeCicco’s and medical office buildings. The Village Board approved and encouraged shared parking in all Edge-on-Hudson Development blocks as part of the 2011 Special Permit approval. The submitted shared parking analysis demonstrates that the proposed parking is adequate for all uses on Block A. Umberto Annunziata is the Development Manager for Simone Development Companies. Mr. Annuziata stated that the proposed building is 43,212 square feet with a three-story 186-space parking garage and 192 on-grade parking spaces. He presented the ground floor plan and described the location for the patient drop-off area, the entrance to the parking garage, the trash area, and the generator location. He presented the second-floor and third-floor plans and stated that each floor would be similar and have 15,000 square feet. He presented the roof plan, which proposes a mechanical penthouse and a garage turnaround area. Mr. Annuniziata presented the elevation drawings and stated that the roof line is proposed at the maximum permitted height of 42 feet, and is the same height as the DeCicco’s building. He presented a site section and rendering to show that the proposed building would not impact river views from Barnhart Park. Mr. Annuziatta presented rendering views of the proposed medical office building from different locations within the development. Anthony Stark is an architect from Perkins Eastman who is representing the applicant. Mr. Stark presented material samples and described the materials for the exterior brick façade, window mullions, trim, and louvers. Mr. Stark described the proposed garage façade and screening. Chairperson Harries asked Mr. Stark for details of the impressions proposed for the east-facing garage concrete facing Barnhart Park. Mr. Stark said the concrete garage wall design plan has not been developed. Richard Gross asked Mr. Stark to provide the proposed garage entrance and floor-to-floor heights. Mr. Stark said the garage entrance height is 9 feet. The ground floor will be 12 feet from floor to floor to allow accessible vans to enter. The upper garage would have a clearance of 7 feet, 6 inches for vehicles with 10 feet from floor to floor. Mr. Gross asked if electric vehicle charging stations are proposed in the garage. Mr. Start said they have not developed that level of detail. 4 (3/21/24) �Mr. Gross suggested that charging stations be limited to outside or on the garage's top floor to allow the Fire Department to extinguish fires caused by electric vehicles. Chairperson Harries requested the applicant describe the changes to the crosswalks. Mark Gratz is an engineer with DTS Provident Design Engineering who represents the applicant. Mr. Gratz stated that the crosswalks were intentionally located on the site plan as a traffic calming measure. The crosswalks are designed to allow patrons to walk to and from different buildings. Mr. Gratz stated that a crosswalk was added to the site plan. Lindsay Krakauer suggested creating one-way roadways to the rear of the site to reduce traffic congestion coming in and out at a five-directional intersection. Mr. Gratz stated that he would consider Ms. Krakauer's suggestion. Chairperson Harries asked Mr. Gratz to describe the minimum number of spaces they need to utilize for the loading zone. Mr. Gratz stated that the Block I buildings have at least two spaces for drop-offs and deliveries. The nature of the medical office building requires more spaces along Legend Drive to allow for temporary parking of delivery trucks and vehicles dropping off or picking up patients. Chairperson Harries asked how many parking spots the Zoning Code requires for the proposed use. Mr. Gratz stated that they have calculated the parking requirements as 378 to 517 spaces depending on the standard applied. The site was originally designed as office space, which requires one parking space per 250 square feet. Medical offices require one space per 150 square feet. Mr. Gratz stated that the shared parking analysis was based on square footage and national standards for the land uses of the three on-site uses. They deducted the square footage of the lobby areas. Chairperson Harries asked Mr. Gratz for a comparable square footage per parking spot ratio for the calculations, and asked if they had completed a traffic study or modeling to anticipate the number of cars coming in and out of the site. Mr. Gratz stated that a traffic study was not completed for this site. However, the traffic studies completed in 2011 studied 37 intersections throughout Sleepy Hollow and Tarrytown. The improvements completed were designed to handle the approved larger development project, which included more residential units and retail space. Block A proposes to build the approved 72,000 square feet of retail space. In 2021, the applicant was asked to remove the 9,000-squarefoot retail facility shown on the site plan because the Village wanted to explore better opportunities to use the space. Chairperson Harries asked what parking ratio would be required for retail use. Mr. Gratz said the retail parking ratio is based on one parking space per 200 square feet. 5 (3/21/24) �Chairperson Harries asked if the traffic studies completed in 2011 included areas within the site. Mr. Gratz stated that the traffic studies were based on the broader external network. Ms. Giris stated that the community was designed to accommodate the traffic generated by all the land uses approved at the time. Because of the construction, some roadways are temporarily one-way, where they are designed to be two-way. Chairperson Harries requested that the applicant model the internal traffic at the site's intersection. Mr. Gratz stated they could prepare a theoretical study based on estimates of the fully built-out site. Clare Trapasso asked for the proposed tenant and operation hours of the medical office building. Mr. Annunziata said they can't disclose a tenant program because they do not have a signed lease. The hours of operation would be 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM on weekdays and limited hours on Saturdays. Chairperson Harries stated that the Board received correspondence from members of the public before the meeting, which has been added to the Village website. (See Exhibits #s1-9) Chairperson Harries solicited comments from the public. Christopher Peuler lives at 100 Legend Drive. He stated that the medical office building would face his backyard. He is concerned about the noise and traffic generated by having one entrance into the site. He questioned why the medical office building isn’t proposed towards the back of the site instead of abutting Legend Drive. The proposed loading zone will eliminate parking spaces for visitors and potentially have delivery trucks idling on the road. Chairperson Harries stated that the Planning Board encouraged the applicant to site the building to keep a street presence and to put the parking garage towards the rear of the site to hide the parking and buffer the sound from the railroad tracks. Ted Lai stated he lives at 102 Legend Drive. He requested that the Board restrict or modify the proposed signage sizes, designs, locations, and requested that the Board deny the applicants request for the fourth sign. Mr. Lai requested that the parking garage be modified to include solid walls so that vehicles are not visible from Legend Drive. Mr. Lai stated that the proposed loading zone on Legend Drive should be denied because it would allow constant idling and parking of delivery trucks, medical waste litter, disruption of the pedestrian traffic flow along the sidewalk, and create a dangerous traffic pattern on a private street that should not be used for commercial use. The parking spots should remain public for the use of the residents. He suggested the loading zone be relocated on-site in the parking garage. Mr. Lai expressed concerns about traffic from Beekman Avenue and the anticipated volume of cars entering the Block A site. He suggested that a second egress bridge be constructed from the Edge-on-Hudson development to Continental Street and that the applicant obtain funding from New York State. Mr. Lai stated that 6 (3/21/24) �the internal drop-off circle and the four-way crosswalk will cause a backload of cars on Legend Drive. He suggested that the generator be fueled by natural gas instead of diesel to be better for the environment and have less noise pollution. He expressed his concern about tenants being non-profit and tax-exempt. (See Exhibit #9 for further comments) Chairperson Harries suggested that Mr. Lai submit his written comments. Chairperson Harries requested the applicant address the anticipated operating hours and illumination of signage for the building. Ms. Giris stated that the medical office building hours would be 8:00 AM to 6:00 PM, Monday through Friday, and 8:00 AM to 12:30-1:00 PM on Saturdays. The applicant has not determined the proposed signage illumination times. She will discuss with the applicant and provide the intentions to the Board. Jen Saul stated that she lives at 2 Maxwell Drive and is purchasing a unit at 201 Horseman Boulevard. When making the big investment, she was promised a luxury home that included the waterfront, markets, shopping, dining, boutique hotel, and lots of walking, biking, and hiking. Having a medical office building outside her front door is not what she signed up for when she decided to move from New York City. She would not have purchased a home here if she knew a medical office building was planned. A medical office building will drive the price of homes down. Robyn Beavers lives at 314 Horseman Boulevard. She suggested that the decision to approve the medical office building should wait until the DeCicco’s market is up and running to conduct a traffic study that includes internal community use and the external patrons coming to the grocery store. Using pedestrians as traffic calming measures is dangerous. The national parking average for healthcare facilities should be based on a semi-urban dense development, and she requested that the applicant provide more details on the averages used to determine if they are outdated or irrelevant. Brian Palmer lives at 201 Palisades Boulevard. Mr. Palmer stated that he also concerned about traffic and wonders if there is a need for a traffic light at the corner of Maxwell Drive and Legend Drive. Mr. Palmer suggested that the Board request examples from the applicant where a medical office building has been constructed in community similar to the Edge-on-Hudson development. The office buildings that Simone Development has constructed in Westchester, the Bronx, and Long Island are in massive commercial spaces without a residential presence. Rene Hernandez lives at 25 Barnhart Avenue and asked who the tenant would be and what kind of medical services would be offered. Mr. Hernandez suggested that the medical office building be reduced to a two-story building. Chairperson Harries stated that the applicant has not provided details regarding the potential tenant and services. The Planning Board has worked with the applicant to reduce the proposed building height. Cara Fulva lives at 100 Legend Drive. She requested that the Board review the documents from 2007 and 2011 referenced by the applicant and consider whether the proposed medical building 7 (3/21/24) �aligns with the development's goals of being transit and pedestrian-oriented and providing waterfront open space access and recreation. She questioned whether a community need study was conducted regarding a healthcare facility and how the Board can determine if a need exists without a confirmed tenant and services. Although a plan was developed and approved twenty years ago, the plan should be adjusted for the moment. Long-term efforts are not a reason for approval. Adam Labode lives at 209 Palisades Boulevard. Mr. Labode stated that the people who live in the Edge-on-Hudson development do not want a medical office building and are hostile. He asked what the Planning Board is supposed to do when the residents oppose the proposal. Josh Subin stated that the Planning Board reviews applications based on approved uses and what is zoned for the area. Community pressure is not in the Planning Board’s purview. Problems concerning the Zoning Code are a Village Board issue. Mr. Labode stated it is a use issue, not a Zoning issue. If the Planning Board dodges the question of what Board is responsible for addressing the community's concerns, it will become a civic issue. Lee Ann Slinkard lives at 214 Legend Drive. Ms. Slinkard stated that she views the proposed medical office building as adding more conflict to a small space. Adding more congestion to the site will be dangerous and cause residents to move out. Chairperson Harries proposed to keep the public hearing open. Chairperson Harries moved to adjourn the public hearing to the April 18, 2024 meeting. Moved: Harries Seconded: Krakauer Vote 5-0 4. LL Parcel E, LLC, Block O/P Townhomes One, Proposed backflow device enclosureAmended Site Plan Approval - Draft Resolution Chairperson Harries stated that the revised drawing shows that the backflow enclosure was moved closer to the building. Mark Gratz is an engineer with DTS Provident Design Engineering LLP representing the applicant. Mr. Gratz stated that they moved the enclosure closer to the building while still allowing room for the lid to flip over when opening. Chairperson Harries requested that future site plan applications anticipate the need for backflow enclosures, be included on the initial site plans, and, when possible, be located underground. David Smith read the condition of the draft resolution. Chairperson Harries moved to approve the resolution. Moved: Harries Seconded: Gross Chairperson Harries- yes Lindsay Krakauer- yes 8 (3/21/24) �Caroline Chen- yes Richard Gross- yes Clare Trapasso- yes Vote 5-0 5. Lighthouse Landing Communities, LLC, Phase III, Block Q, Proposed concrete Crushing operation, Amended Site Plan Approval –Draft Resolution Craig Tompkins stated that he received the draft resolution and has no objections. David Smith read the conditions of the draft resolution. Richard Gross moved to approve the resolution. Moved: Gross Seconded: Chen Chairperson Harries- yes Lindsay Krakauer- yes Caroline Chen- yes Richard Gross- yes Clare Trapasso- yes Vote 5-0 6. Lighthouse Landing Communities, LLC, Edge-on-Hudson Riverfront Development, Phase II Waterfront Open Space, Site Plan & Wetlands Watercourse Permit ApprovalContinued Public Hearing Craig Tompkins stated that correspondence has been circulating with staff, and they are working to address additional work and questions posed by Woodard & Curran. They agree to adjourn the public hearing. Chairperson Harries asked Mr. Tompkins for updates regarding the approved piers work. Mr. Tompkins stated that the DEC requires the construction of the fishing pier and the boat dock during September and October. They are putting the project to bid in April and plan to submit for Building Permits and be ready to start on September 1, 2024. They expect to have the piles in the ground during September and October, finish the tops in November, and be completed by the end of the year. Chairperson Harries asked Mr. Tompkins when the design for the balance of the Phase II Waterfront Space will be submitted. Mr. Tompkins stated that he can't provide a submission date yet, but the design team is working on it. Chairperson Harries moved to adjourn the public hearing to the April 18, 2024, meeting. Moved: Krakauer Seconded: Trapasso Vote 5-0 7. Lighthouse Landing Communities, LLC, Edge-on-Hudson Riverfront Development, 9 (3/21/24) �Phase I, Block A, Sanitary sewer easement and maintenance agreement- Amended Site Plan Approval - Discussion David Smith read the conditions of the draft resolution. Craig Tompkins questioned the condition of the Certificate of Occupancy and asked Sean McCarthy to confirm the easement dedication process. Sean McCarthy stated that the condition relates to the offer of dedication, not the acceptance of the easement. Richard Gross moved to approve the resolution. Moved: Gross Seconded: Harries Chairperson Harries- yes Lindsay Krakauer- yes Caroline Chen- yes Richard Gross- yes Clare Trapasso- yes Vote 5-0 Mr. Tompkins stated that DeCicco’s Market is set to open in the first quarter of 2025, so they are rushing to install the utilities. Lindsay Krakauer asked Mr. Tompkins if the staircase on Beekman Avenue would be installed before the DeCicco buildings opened. Mr. Tompkins stated that the staircase will be installed before the openings at DeCicco’s. 8. Rock of Salvation Church, 135 Cortlandt Street, Proposed parking lot, Site Plan Approval- Presentation Jorge B. Hernandez is the architect representing the applicant. Mr. Hernandez presented revised site plans and stated that percolation tests were completed, and they started developing the stormwater plans. The prior approval for the parking lot contained more spaces. The revised plan proposes 17 parking spaces, including 1 ADA space. They submitted title documents to show that the property never had an easement. There is no intention to create an easement between the two properties. The plans show the landscaping locations and the nearby fire hydrants. The property has proper ingress and egress for cars to turn around, and they plan to use the existing curbcut. Chairperson Harries suggested that Mr. Hernandez reduce the two-way traffic to one-way at the right corner and provide a continuous sidewalk and curb. Ms. Harries also suggested that a gate be installed for patrons to access the green space on the back left corner of the property, increase the green buffer, and reduce the impervious surface between the neighboring property on the right side. Mr. Hernandez agreed to make the requested changes. 10 (3/21/24) �Chairperson Harries move to schedule a public hearing for the April 18, 2024 meeting. Moved: Harries Seconded: Krakauer Chairperson Harries- yes Lindsay Krakauer- yes Caroline Chen- yes Richard Gross- yes Clare Trapasso- yes Vote 5-0 Chairperson Harries requested that Mr. Hernandez submit revised plans to reflect the comments from the Board. 9. Marcelo Poguio, 80 Depeyster Street, Proposed three-family residence, Site Plan and Architectural Review Approval- Preliminary Presentation Steven Costa is the engineer representing the owner of the property. Mr. Costa stated that the current structure is a non-conforming two-family dwelling. The applicant proposes to demolish the existing structure and construct a three-family dwelling. The application will require the Zoning Board to grant variances for the front yard setback, lot area, and parking. Mr. Costa presented the front elevation drawings and stated that tandem parking is proposed on the side and in garages below the house. The application proposes to connect to existing water and sanitary sewer utility services and install sprinkler systems in the building. Deep hold testing was performed where groundwater was found a foot below the existing grade. He is working with James Natarelli on designing the stormwater system. Richard Gross asked Mr. Costa if the front entrance would remain on Depeyster Street. Mr. Costa confirmed that the front elevation will remain on Depeyster Street. Lindsay asked Mr. Costa to describe how they will provide five parking spaces on site. Mr. Costa stated they propose two tandem spaces in the driveway and three in the garages under the basement. Clare Trapasso asked Mr. Costa how many bedrooms they proposed in each apartment. Ms. Trapasso asked why some windows had shutters and why there were no windows in other locations. Mr. Costa presented the elevations and floor plan drawings and stated that they didn’t include windows at the side elevations on Valley Street to avoid light from cars and the living rooms facing the adjacent neighbors. Mr. Costa said he would add windows in both elevations and eliminate shutters if the Board prefers. Chairperson Harries requested that Mr. Costa consider providing more architectural articulation to the building. Ms. Harries asked if the residents would share the green space on the south side of the property. 11 (3/21/24) �Mr. Costa stated that each apartment would have a private rear covered porch and share the two levels of the rear yard green space. Stair access is planed from all levels of the balconies to provide two means of egress. Chairperson Harries asked Mr. Costa what is proposed for the heating and cooling systems and suggested that the applicant consider energy-efficient methods. Mr. Costa stated that air conditioning and direct vent gas-fired boilers are proposed. The applicant plans to construct the roof to be solar-ready. Richard Gross asked if there were plans to demolish the building. Sean McCarthy stated that the owner gutted the inside of the house and that he can apply to demolish the structure. Mr. Costa said he would apply to attend the May Zoning Board meeting. Chairperson Harries moved to schedule a public hearing for the May 16, 2024, Planning Board meeting, pending approval from the May 15, 2024, Zoning Board of Appeals meeting. Moved: Harries Seconded: Gross Chairperson Harries- yes Lindsay Krakauer- yes Caroline Chen- yes Richard Gross- yes Clare Trapasso- yes Vote 5-0 Chairperson Harries requested that Mr. Costa develop the elevation drawings and stormwater plans for presentation at the April 18, 2024 Planning Board meeting. 10. Approval of minutes, December 21, 2023, February 22, 2024 Chairperson Harries moved to approve the December 21, 2023 minutes. Moved: Harries Seconded: Vote 5-0 Chairperson Harries- yes Lindsay Krakauer- yes Caroline Chen- yes Richard Gross- yes Clare Trapasso Vote 5-0 Chairperson Harries tabled the February 22, 2024, minutes to the April 18, 2024, Planning Board meeting. Chairperson Harries moved to adjourn the meeting at 9:30 PM. 12 (3/21/24) �Moved: Harries Seconded: Vote 5-0 13 (3/21/24) Respectfully submitted, Pamela Kroll Secretary to the Planning Board �Exhibit #1 Christopher and Lauren Camia 330 Horseman Blvd Sleepy Hollow, NY 10591 March 18, 2024 Dear Chairperson Harries, Mr. McCarthy and Members of the Sleepy Hollow Planning Board, We are writing as a matter of public record for the public hearing regarding the Medical Office Building (“MOB”) Site Plan and Architectural Approval at Edge on Hudson (“EOH”). We make reference to the presentation made to the board on February 22, 2024. The Board understandably raised questions with respect to programming and traffic flow. However, we would urge the board to even more carefully analyze and consider the implications on traffic and spillover onto Legend Drive. We have to get this right from the start as the nature of the site’s elevation will prevent remedies in the future. Our concern is very simply that the flow of vehicular traffic entering and exiting the commercial site and parking lot from Legend Drive will not be adequately handled by the current infrastructure. The plan as presented envisages just one vehicular entrance to serve a busy supermarket, retail building and the MOB. The parking lot and parking garage will have over 375 parking spaces and constant vehicular and pedestrian traffic, including large commercial vehicles accessing the loading docks at DiCicco’s. As shown in the screenshot from the application below, almost immediately upon entering the commercial site via the singular access point, cars will encounter a FIVE WAY cross walk, further complicated by cars entering and exiting a covered drop off point for the MOB. Given the expected volumes, it is hard to imagine that traffic will flow smoothly through this area. As congestions takes root, cars will back up onto Legend Drive, awaiting their turn to enter the commercial site. This would then in effect restrict vehicular traffic to ALL subsequent residential areas of EOH as Legend Drive is the only two way street beyond the traffic circle at the entrance to EOH. Lighthouse Landing is currently configured for one way traffic. Westward is construction access only. We understand that parking capacity has been thoroughly studied by the applicant, but we saw no such attention paid to traffic. �While we trust that the Planning Board will diligently consider and make appropriate recommendations to the applicant, we think there are at least three mitigating elements to consider: 1) Simplify the pentagon pedestrian crosswalk just beyond the entrance to the commercial site a. While pedestrian safety is of utmost importance, the current design is complex and will undoubtedly hinder traffic flow 2) Relocate or eliminate the MOB drop off point a. The exit for the drop off point intersects with the very short and what will be a very busy singular access road, further complicating flow 3) Relocate the entrance to the MOB parking garage from the South side of the building in the commercial site parking lot to the North side with its own access via Legend Drive a. We recognize that this relocation may require reconfiguration of a portion of the Emerson parking lot, but it will relieve substantial pressure on the main entrance Please excuse the amateur sketch below but thought it would be helpful in illustrating the aforementioned. We thank you very much for your attention to this matter and ensuring the best possible outcomes for EOH, its residents and the Sleepy Hollow community at large. �Exhibit #2 ��������Exhibit #3 From: To: Subject: Date: Pamela Kroll Pamela Kroll Comments Received 3-21-24 from Resident on 102 Legend Drive Thursday, March 21, 2024 3:57:47 PM From: Susan Geisler Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2024 3:17 PM To: Sean McCarthy <smccarthy@sleepyhollowny.org> Subject: Statement for Public Hearing re: Medical Office Building at Edge on Hudson March 21, 2024 Dear Chairperson Harries, Mr. McCarthy, and Members of the Sleepy Hollow Planning Board, We live on Legend Drive in Edge on Hudson, and we have major concerns about the proposed 3 story Medical Office Building and 186 space attached Parking Structure. Since we will not be able to attend the Public Hearing scheduled for this evening, we submit our concerns, for the record, via this email. Our main issue with this proposed project concerns the traffic flow within Edge on Hudson and the surrounding community.  Currently, as you know, Beekman Avenue, RIver Street, and Legend Drive converge at a small traffic circle which provides access to  our community.  It is important to note that this is the ONLY access to our community.  The number of residents who use this access has grown as construction continues and more and more people move into Edge on Hudson, and once the community is finished, with the completion of the boutique hotel, 100 units currently under construction by Daymark, and an additional 90 townhomes to be built by Sun Homes, this access will become that much more utilized both by vehicles and pedestrians. We have serious concerns that the addition of a three story Medical Office Building and adjacent Parking Structure will seriously impact the traffic in this area.  As it stands now, the only entrance to the parcel of land that will house the DeCicco's Supermarket and the retail space is on Legend Drive. Imagine the nightmarish congestion that will ensue in the area, specifically on Legend Drive, by the addition of a constant flow of cars, supply trucks, medical transports, ambulances, etc, going in and out of a three story medical building.  The surrounding infrastructure simply cannot handle it.  Having only one entrance on a small, two lane road within a residential community would be simply intolerable. In short, we are most definitely opposed to the construction of the proposed three story medical office building and attached parking structure within our community, and we respectfully ask the board to reconsider its approval. Thank you, Susan and Alan Geisler 102 Legend Drive Sleepy Hollow, NY �Exhibit #4 From: To: Subject: Date: Pamela Kroll Pamela Kroll Comments Received 3-21-24 from 100 Legend Drive Owner Thursday, March 21, 2024 2:54:48 PM From: Sarah Wolf   Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2024 2:09 PM To: Sean McCarthy <smccarthy@sleepyhollowny.org> Subject: Concerns Regarding the Proposed Medical Office Building at Block A in the Edge-on-Hudson Riverfront Development Sarah Wolf 100 Legend Dr #105 Sleepy Hollow, New York 10591 Thursday March 21, 2024 Planning Board of Sleepy Hollow C/O Village of Sleepy Hollow, Department of Architecture, Land Use Development, Buildings and Building Compliance 28 Beekman Avenue Sleepy Hollow, New York 10591 Subject: Concerns Regarding the Proposed Medical Office Building at Block A in the Edgeon-Hudson Riverfront Development Dear Chairperson Harries and Members of the Sleepy Hollow Planning Board, I am writing to express my concerns regarding the proposed medical building across from the Lofts at Edge on Hudson. As a new resident and owner in this community, I was initially under the impression that the building would be a small-scale establishment, perhaps housing a pharmacy or retail space. However, the proposed plans presented to us indicate that the building will be significantly larger than anticipated, with a parking structure included. My primary concern is the potential impact this oversized building will have on traffic flow and safety in our neighborhood. With only one entrance and exit point, I fear that the influx of vehicles associated with the medical facility will overwhelm Legend Drive and create congestion, particularly during peak hours. This could not only disrupt the tranquility of our �community but also pose safety hazards for pedestrians crossing streets and walking along sidewalks. Furthermore, the proposed drop-off location for ambulettes raises additional concerns about noise pollution, especially during late hours. Given the proximity of the medical building to residential areas like ours, such disturbances could significantly diminish our quality of life.  Additionally, the conversion of parallel parking spaces on Legend Drive into a loading zone is troubling, as it will reduce the already limited parking options available to residents. This decision not only exacerbates congestion but also raises concerns about noise and pollution from idling trucks and medical waste disposal. In light of these concerns, I urge the Planning Board to reconsider the size and scope of the proposed medical building and explore alternative solutions that prioritize the well-being and interests of residents in the surrounding community. Collaborative efforts between developers and residents are essential to ensuring that any future developments align with the character and needs of our neighborhood. Thank you for your attention to this matter. I look forward to hearing your response and participating in constructive dialogue moving forward. Sincerely, Sarah Wolf �Exhibit #5 ��Exhibit #6 From: To: Subject: Date: Pamela Kroll Pamela Kroll Comments Received 3-21-24 from 220 Legend Drive Thursday, March 21, 2024 2:07:02 PM From: Gillian Wakabayashi Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2024 12:50 PM To: Sean McCarthy <smccarthy@sleepyhollowny.org> Cc: Mark Wakabayashi Subject: Medical Building Size Increase Hello Sean, I want to add my concern and support to letters sent to you and SL planning board for the meeting this evening by my fellow EOH neighbors. The proposed massive increase in size of the medical building would further complicated the traffic situation and change the development way beyond the community we were sold. One access, hundreds of added cars, I will not be able to access my own home on Legend Dr. let alone the obvious safety concerns. Sincerely, Gillian Wakabayashi 220 Legend Dr �Exhibit #7 Subject: Date: 3-21-24 Comments Received from Owners of 102 Legend Drive Unit 302 March 21, 2024 PM Hello, I am officially writing a letter of opposition to the medical office being built next to Decicco's market.  I live directly across from the space and am incredibly upset about this.  I would not have moved to the area had I known.  I thought this was going to be RETAIL space.  Beekman Avenue simply cannot handle up to 250 cars per hour which is expected!  This will not be safe and will not be a good place to raise our 2-year-old son.  This was not supposed to be what Edge on Hudson was about. Unfortunately, I have no babysitter and cannot attend tonight's meeting. This is incredibly disappointing to hear and I am just sick over this. Michele & Aaron Abramson 100 Legend Drive, Unit 302 Sleepy Hollow, NY 10591 �Exhibit #8 From: To: Subject: Date: Pamela Kroll Pamela Kroll Comments Received 3-21-24 from Resident of EOH Development - Moschella Thursday, March 21, 2024 2:56:24 PM From: Michael Moschella Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2024 2:17 PM To: Sean McCarthy <smccarthy@sleepyhollowny.org> Subject: Comments for tonight’s hearing on proposed medical office building at block A in edge on Hudson development Dear Planning Board, I am sure you’re inundated with nimby emails about the proposed medical office building. I would like to express a clear preference in favor of rapidly developing the Sleepy Hollow waterfront to make it a true destination for all of New York.  The trouble is this: the way this medical building is laid out could really destroy your opportunity. Before moving forward, I would like you and the developer to simulate 300 cars going in and out of that little space in a short period of time.  Imagine rush hour with people getting lost over the bridge, confused by the roundabout, driving around a big loading dock that is wildly placed right next to residences, and having only one way out.  Is there even a 2% chance this isn’t an utter disaster? You’ll be backed up to route 9! Train parking will be wrecked, police will be stretched, and it will be incredibly loud as a 40 car backups blast their stereos.  The way I see it, you have 3 options: 1. Scale back to the original promised plan. 2. Change the whole parking structure keeping loading off the street and building an entire new access road in and out. 3. Add budget to build an additional monument next to the medical build - a Lincoln Memorial decorated to silly urban planning gone wrong, so students of smart city development can come and visit to learn what NOT to do for generations, and your family names will be inextricably intertwined with foolhardy planning in the legends of Sleepy Hollow. Thanks, Mike Moschella Owner of the condo closest to the development �Exhibit #9 Subject: 2024-03-21_ Comments Presented At Meeting By Ted Lai From: Ted Lai <tedglai@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, April 3, 2024 1:36 PM To: Pamela Kroll <pkroll@sleepyhollowny.org> Subject: Comments for proposed EOH MOB Signage: 1. 2. 3. The applicant states that they are allowed 3.25 signs and is requesting 4. I ask that the Planning Board 4. deny this request. 3 signs are ample signage. 5. 2. 3. 4. For Proposed Signage A - Legend Dr, the applicant is proposing the installation of a vertical sign that 5. is 21 feet tall and 4 feet wide that will be visible from View 1 Looking South on Legend Dr and clearly visible by residents living in 101 Legend and 102 Legend. This should be denied. No sign should be placed at this intersection. Having such a large sign 6. immediately adds a commercial feel to the street and it definitely doesn’t blend well with the residential neighborhood. Additionally, considering all visitors to �the building are coming in from Beekman, this sign on Legend has no purpose besides branding for the tenant, which I believe is Northwell. 7. 8. 9. 10.   11. For Proposed Signage B - Entrance, the applicant is proposing the installation of an illuminated vertical 12. sign that is 21 feet tall and 4 feet wide that will be visible from View 2 From Maxwell Dr and clearly visible by residents living in 101 Legend and 2 Maxwell. For similar reasons to Proposed Signage A, this sign should be denied. 13. 14. 15.   16. For Proposed Signage D - Canopy - the applicant is proposing the installation of an illuminated horizontal 17. sign that is 4 feet tall and 21 feet wide that will be visible from View 2 From Maxwell Dr and clearly visible by residents living in 101 Legend and 2 Maxwell. This proposed sign should be modified to be smaller and it should not be illuminated. Light pollution 18. is already rampant in EOH and should be minimized. 19. 20. 21.   22. For Proposed Signage C - Monument/Directional Sign - the applicant is proposing the installation of 23. an illuminated monument 8 feet tall by 12 feet wide. This proposed stone wall that doubles as a sign should be modified to be smaller. 24. Parking Structure 1. 2. �3. The applicant is proposing a 4 story parking structure with a transparent screen barrier. Parked vehicles 4. will be visible from Legend Dr and around the entire parking structure. Residents living in their homes, residents walking in along Legend Dr, and residents and guests driving along Legend Dr should not be able to see into a parking structure. This destroys 5. the neighborhood feel. Just as it was done in Northlight, the walls surrounding a parking structure need to be enclosed and there should be no visible evidence of a parking garage from the street. If desired, exterior walls facing the railroad tracks can be 6. left with a screen barrier. Additionally, since the garage is not covered on the 4th floor, the exterior walls should be tall enough to block any view. 7. Loading/unloading zone on Legend Drive 1. 2. 3. The applicant is proposing a striped loading/unloading zone on Legend Drive. This should be denied. 4. Having a permanent loading/unloading zone would allow for the constant parking and idling of delivery trucks, medical waste to be littered on the ground, the constant disruption of pedestrian traffic along the sidewalk, and the creation of a dangerous traffic 5. pattern with the steady flow of trucks parking and leaving the loading/unloading zone. 6. Additionally, the constant flow of handtrucks, carts, pallet jacks and even forklifts traveling from Legend Drive onto the public sidewalk to either the interior drop off circle or receiving on the corner of the building adjacent to the parking garage is not a desirable situation.  Furthermore, I don’t know of any singular commercial building in Westchester County or NYS for that matter that has a public street for private use. Parking is already strained at EOH. These are public parking spots that should remain public parking spots.  �The applicant should relocate the building’s loading/unloading off Legend Drive and place it in the interior. Perhaps the parking structure’s height clearance should be adjusted to allow for delivery vehicles to enter and park in a designated delivery zone adjacent to the current receiving area.  I am confident that all delivery personnel would appreciate garage access vs parking on Legend and traversing a block-long residential sidewalk before maneuvering onto the applicant’s sidewalk around the corner of the building and down an alleyway or sidewalk to enter.  Traffic Safety 1. 2. 3. Currently, EOH has only 1 egress via Beekman Avenue. The applicant’s parking study estimates that at 4. peak times, there could be upwards of over 350 cars on site. This is in addition to the hundreds of cars expected to be at DeCicco’s and the cars of the projected 4000 residents of EOH. How is the current EOH infrastructure prepared to handle this volume of 5. traffic if the applicant is allowed to proceed without any other site improvements? 6. A second egress bridge from EOH to Continental needs to be built. This is imperative for the safety of residents and visitors. A plan to fund and build this bridge needs to be in place before the applicant is allowed to put a shovel in the ground. I have spoken to the Mayor and Board of Trustees before regarding the significance of the second egress bridge to the success and safety of EOH. The hold up on constructing the bridge is funding and ideally securing state and/or federal grants for the construction of the second egress. Considering, Simone Development’s vast experience dealing with New York State and federal officials during the construction of previous projects and �Northwell Health’s CEO Michael Dowling’s close ties to the governor and state and federal government, I am asking the applicant and its tenant to be a good neighbor and help the Village secure funding for the construction of the second egress bridge by either A) providing direct funding, or B) leveraging their government contacts to bring attention to the needs of a second egress bridge along with securing the necessary funding.  2. 3. 4. The internal drop off circle and 4 way crosswalk is a short distance from Legend Drive. It will cause 5. a backlog of cars (stopping to allow pedestrians to cross) that will cause vehicles to queue outside of the parking lot and onto Legend leading to traffic and congestion. This needs to be addressed by the applicant. 6. 3. 4. 5. The only entrance currently into EOH is either down Beekman Ave or down River Street, around the traffic 6. circle and into EOH. How are all of the projected 4000 residents and hundreds of cars projected to be at DeCiccos and the applicant’s building going to safely and efficiently traverse this traffic circle and surrounding roads that lead to EOH? 7. Additionally, does the planning board or applicant know where the school bus stop is for EOH? At the traffic circle. Does the planning board or applicant know where dozens of cars park and wait to drop off or pick up children from the bus? At the traffic circle. The applicant’s parking study concludes that peak vehicular demand is 3pm. Does the planning board or applicant know what time multiple school buses make stops at the traffic circle? 3pm. How is the singular traffic circle that allows entry into EOH going to function at 3pm? It’s not, and patients who have a 3pm appointment better get to the parking lot by 2pm to avoid getting stuck behind a school bus.  There needs to be further traffic studies done to understand what the impact would be of an additional large scale commercial tenant and if EOH can sustain the additional traffic, and, most importantly, a second egress needs to be built for EOH immediately.  �Taxation 1. 2. 3. I want to make a comment to the planning board about the possibility of Northwell becoming a tenant. 4. Northwell, and other potential tenants, is a non-profit. The last thing the town and village needs is a non tax paying tenant. Does the applicant plan to sign a triple net lease with the tenant? If so, will Northwell, or other non profit tenants, be exempt 5. from paying county, town, village, and school taxes? Or will the applicant guarantee to pay for any and all real estate taxes regardless of whether or not the tenant is non profit? 6. � 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-2024 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_2024-03-21_Approved Planning Board Minutes Subject The topic of the resource Planning Board Minutes & Resolutions-2024 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2024 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Village of Sleepy Hollow All Rights Reserved. Type The nature or genre of the resource Text https://sleepyhollow.localarchives.org/files/original/8789331610487167f53bb130ed5fd875.pdf 40948e2130cc351a577ee3a970ea5eb7 PDF Text 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 Planning Board Minutes & Resolutions-2024 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_2024-03-21_5 Birch Close Site Plan & ARB Approved Resolution Subject The topic of the resource Planning Board Minutes & Resolutions-2024 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2024 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Village of Sleepy Hollow All Rights Reserved. Type The nature or genre of the resource Text https://sleepyhollow.localarchives.org/files/original/62acc67d7a549ffd93c29d1fe44b0c81.pdf df5509729f605a5a35015dc6e2631905 PDF Text 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 Planning Board Minutes & Resolutions-2024 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_2024-03-21_52-60 Elm Street_Approved Site Plan Resolution Subject The topic of the resource Planning Board Minutes & Resolutions-2024 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2024 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Village of Sleepy Hollow All Rights Reserved. Type The nature or genre of the resource Text https://sleepyhollow.localarchives.org/files/original/db589bf8337abba4c91114d0218f7237.pdf 54d4598e7815da7e3a67c848901f1a6f PDF Text 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 Planning Board Minutes & Resolutions-2024 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_2024-03-21_300 Palisades Blvd Amended Site Plan Approved Resolution Subject The topic of the resource Planning Board Minutes & Resolutions-2024 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2024 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Village of Sleepy Hollow All Rights Reserved. Type The nature or genre of the resource Text https://sleepyhollow.localarchives.org/files/original/6c617c3c82d918b03a5573d9026e5d5d.pdf d7c2d876656031c98c0ef092f6e6acde PDF Text Text Village of Sleepy Hollow Planning Board Minutes February 22, 2024 Chairperson Harries called the regular meeting to order at 7:04 PM, read the list of the applications on the agenda, and identified the members of the Board present. Present: Kersten Harries, Chairperson Rachelle Gebler Lindsay Krakauer Richard Gross Also Present: Joshua Subin, Village Attorney James Natarelli, Village Engineer David Smith, Village Planner Sean E. McCarthy, Building Inspector Pamela Kroll, Secretary to the Planning Board Absent: Caroline Chen Benjamin Nielsen Clare Trapasso Agenda: 1) Francesco Alesci, 135 Beekman Avenue, Proposed 14-unit apartment building, Site Plan Approval Extension- Draft Resolution 2) Lighthouse Landing Communities, LLC, Edge-on-Hudson Riverfront Development, Phase II- Waterfront Open Space, Site Plan & Wetlands Watercourse Permit ApprovalContinued Public Hearing 3) Todd and Wendi Strier, 5 Birch Close, Proposed additions and alterations, Site Plan Approval- Continued Public Hearing 4) Lighthouse Landing Communities, LLC, Edge-on-Hudson Riverfront Development, Phase I, Block A, Sanitary sewer easement, Amended Site Plan Approval- Discussion 5) AECOM, 52-60 Elm Street, Soil vapor extraction and interim remedial measures, Site Plan Approval- Presentation 6) SDC Lighthouse Landing Realty, LLC, Edge-on-Hudson Riverfront Development, Proposed medical office building, Site Plan and Architectural Review Approval Presentation 7) Marcelo Poguio, 80 Depeyster Street, Proposed three-family residence, Site Plan and Architectural Review Approval- Preliminary Presentation 8) LLC Parcel H, LLC, 2 Lighthouse Landing, proposed signage, Architectural Review Approval- Preliminary Presentation 9) LL Parcel E, LLC, Block O/P Townhomes One, Proposed backflow device enclosureAmended Site Plan Approval- Preliminary Presentation 1 (2/22/24) �10) Lighthouse Landing Communities, LLC, Phase III, Block Q, Proposed concrete crushing operation, Site Plan Approval - Preliminary Presentation 11) Lighthouse Landing Communities LLC, Zoning Code Amendment Petition, Section 450-38- Height exceptions- Discussion 12) Approval of minutes, December 21, 2023, January 18, 2024 1. Francesco Alesci, 135 Beekman Avenue, Proposed 14-unit apartment building, Site Plan Approval extension – Draft Resolution Maximillian Mahalek stated that he is the applicant's attorney from Cuddy + Feder LLP. Mr. Mahalek stated that he agrees with the Board's suggestion to grant a (1) one-year extension for the Site Plan and Architectural Review Board's approval. The Planning Board suggested granting one-year extensions of both approvals to February 22, 2025. David Smith read the resolution. Lindsay Krakauer moved to approve the resolution. Moved: Krakauer Seconded: Gross Chairperson Harries- yes Lindsay Krakauer- yes Rachelle Gebler- yes Richard Gross- yes Vote 4-0 2. Lighthouse Landing Communities, LLC, Edge-on-Hudson Riverfront Development, Phase II- Waterfront Open Space, Site Plan & Wetlands Watercourse Permit ApprovalContinued Public Hearing Chairperson Harries moved to open the public hearing. Moved: Harries Seconded: Krakauer Vote 4-0 Peter Chavkin is an associate of Biddle Real Estate Ventures, representing Lighthouse Landing Communities, LLC. Mr. Chavkin presented the revised site plan and stated that they propose additional crosswalks to create pedestrian connections on Hollows Pass at the midpoint of the park between Blocks O & P and to tie into the sidewalk at the roundabout. The Sleepy Hollow Local Development Corporation engaged WSP to complete the flow calculations and flooding model in the East Parcel and how it would affect the West Parcel. Lighthouse Landing Communities, LLC worked with WSP and the Village entity to design the North Buffer to accommodate the flow calculations and capture the needed volumes away from the residences. Woodard and Curran’s reviews concluded that the flow calculations are overstated and that the North Buffer has been designed more conservatively than necessary. If Woodard & Curran’s conclusions are proven, the North Buffer could be graded and planted differently to create a more enjoyable park. Mr. Chavkin stated that WSP stands by its modeling techniques and 2 (2/22/24) �believes the flow calculations are correct. Completing the North Buffer is a Special Permit requirement for Certificates of Occupancy of the townhomes along Hollows Pass. Mr. Chavkin stated that if FEMA determines that the flow calculations are lower, he would come back and propose a new design. Mr. Chavkin requested that the Planning Board grant approval to build the current design with a clause in the resolution or a separate agreement, holding them responsible for returning to the Planning Board and changing the North Buffer. Chairperson Harries asked Mr. Chavkin when they anticipate completing the townhomes on Hollows Pass and the North Buffer. Mr. Chavkin estimated the first townhome building on Hollows Pass will be completed by May 2025, and they would like to complete the plantings this spring. He agrees to construct the North Buffer twice if their engineer is wrong. Chairperson Harries asked Mr. Chavkin if adding another walking path in the middle of the park is possible and when will the design for the balance of the Waterfront Open Space will be completed. Mr. Chavkin stated that he would review the request with their engineer. Mr. Chavkin stated that they are working on plans to accommodate waterfront access and should be ready to discuss the designs in a Work Session shortly after the North Buffer is approved. Chairperson Harries requested that David Smith start working on the draft resolution. Rachelle Gebler moved to adjourn the public hearing to the March 21, 2024 Planning Board meeting. Moved: Gebler Seconded: Krakauer Vote 4-0 3. Todd and Wendi Strier, 5 Birch Close, Proposed additions and alterations, Site Plan Approval - Continued public hearing Chairperson Harries invited the applicant to present the application. Frank Marsella is the architect representing the applicants. Mr. Marsella presented neighboring property studies that included photographs, square footage, and heights of other houses. Mr. Marsella stated that homes built in the 1950s range from 2,500 to 3,000 square feet. Homes that appear new or renovated range from 4,000 to 5,500 square feet. The study was based on information found online for the first and second floors and may not include basement or garage square footage. Mr. Marsella presented an average height analysis based on the relationship between the front of the houses and the curb line. Mr. Marsellas stated that the applicant’s house sits below the curb line and proposes a height of 21.6 feet, where the Zoning Code permits 35 feet. Mr. Marsella stated that they propose 375 square feet of flat-roofed area in the rear of the house for solar panels. Chairperson Harries stated that the information provided shows that the application complies with the Zoning Code and is within the average size range of other homes in the neighborhood. 3 (2/22/24) �Alan Pilch is the project engineer. Mr. Pilch presented the revised site plan and stated that the changes propose the creation of a 10-foot-wide Village access easement from Birch Close to the center line of the existing 18-inch diameter drain pipe that traverses the property southeast to the northwest. As requested by the neighboring property owner, they propose to replace the White Fir trees near the garage with smaller Rhododendrons, Witch Hazel, and Mountain Laurels. Three street trees have been added to the streetscape frontage. A distribution box was added to the north edge of the utility plan to dissipate the velocity from the sewage ejector pump, which carries the waste water out of the house. Jennifer Grey stated that she is an attorney with the law firm of Keane & Beane, assisting with the process for two access easements. Ms. Grey stated that legal issues were raised in the second objection letter submitted by the owners of 34 Hemlock Drive, expressing their concerns with the views being impacted over the applicant's property. Ms. Grey quoted part of the letter that cited “ property rights regarding protected view corridors of the adjacent owners” Ms. Grey stated that the applicants revised the landscape plan to propose shorter trees to respect and preserve the neighbors' views of the river. Ms. Grey stated that she reviewed the applicable title documents for 5 Birch Close and is unaware of any rights held by the owners of 34 Hemlock Drive or any other property owner over the Striers property. There is no view shed easement or similar document in the chain of title for 5 Birch Close; therefore, there are no legally protected view shed rights over private property. Ms. Grey said it was discovered that the Village doesn’t have an easement for the existing drainage pipe. The Applicants are offering an access easement for the Village Infrastructure, including an extension of the drainage pipe and maintenance improvements to cover the pipe and create a safer condition on the property. Chairperson Harries solicited comments from the public. Robert Tobey stated that he is the owner of 34 Hemlock Drive. Mr. Tobey stated that the State of New York recognizes the value of view shed corridors, and a Hudson Valley law mandates that view shed corridors be maintained for public and private use. Mr. Tobey stated that he looked at the Village guidelines for development, which date back to 2011 when the property was being transferred from General Motors to the Village of Sleepy Hollow. Mr. Tobey stated that the document clearly states that one of the development issues is maintaining physical and scenic access to the Hudson River. Mr. Tobey stated that he appreciates the owners' effort to reduce the size of the trees. Mr. Tobey stated that the house is rather large for the community. There are 205 houses in Sleepy Hollow Manor, and none are as large as this house. This house will set a standard of difference for the community. The view from his dining room window will be filled with a building. Mr. Tobey submitted a photograph to the Board. (See attached Exhibit #2) Chairperson Harries stated that the LWRP speaks to view sheds from the street between the existing homes. The setback laws that require homes to be a certain distance from the property lines protect views of the Hudson River from the street. The Planning Board weighs the appropriateness of houses in the neighborhood. If there are concerns about the size of homes permitted, the next step would be to go to the Board of Trustees to recommend changes to the Zoning Code. The proposed application for 5 Birch Close complies with the Village’s Zoning Code. Chairperson Harries solicited additional comments from the public. 4 (2/22/24) �There were no additional comments from the public. Chairperson Harries stated that comments received from the public will be part of the record and included in the meeting minutes. (See attached Exhibit #1) James Natarelli requested that the engineering plans be updated to reflect the proposed improvements for the drainage easement. Chairperson Harries requested more detail on the proposed drainage pipe improvements. Ms. Grey stated that they propose to extend the drainage pipe further to the west and to cover it. Mr. Pilch stated that 20-30 feet of the pipe is exposed. The pipe has caused erosion, extending the wetland into the owners' property. They propose supporting the pipe with soil and regrading the slope so the Village can maintain it. Mr. Gross asked David Smith how far the applicant could extend the pipe into the wetlands. David Smith stated that the applicant can extend the pipe as far as they want with additional mitigation plantings if they plan to disturb more wetlands than originally anticipated. Ms. Grey stated that maintaining Village Infrastructure would be exempt from the wetland permit and mitigation requirements. Chairperson Harries moved to close the public hearing. Moved: Harries Seconded: Krakauer Vote 4-0 Chairperson Harries requested that a draft resolution be prepared for the March 21, 2024 Planning Board meeting pending receipt of the revised drawings. 4. Lighthouse Landing Communities, LLC, Edge-on-Hudson Riverfront Development, Phase I, Block A sanitary sewer easement, Amended Site Plan Approval-Discussion Craig Tompkins is the representative for Lighthouse Landing Communities, LLC. Mr. Tompkins stated that the application proposes the installation of a sewer manhole in the driveway of the approved DeCicco retail building. Mr. Tompkins stated that the draft maintenance agreement and exhibits are ready for approval. The Westchester County Department of Health could be a fourto six-month approval process. Since the buildings are under construction, they are pressed for time to get the application approved for installation. Mr. Tompkins stated that with the introduction of the medical office building, they are proposing work to the water line. Mr. Tompkins presented the proposed easement location and stated that two 6-inch water line stubs were installed in 2017 in anticipation of retail development. They propose installing a water line running to the rear of the Market Retail Building. Chairperson Harries asked Mr. Tompkins if DeCiccos Market has their water line off Legend Drive. 5 (2/22/24) �Mr. Tompkins stated that the approved plan included opening Legend Drive and installing a 6-inch and a 2-inch water line to serve the DeCicco supermarket; and is planned to be completed in the spring. James Natarelli questioned if the two services shown on Legend Drive were proposed but not stubbed out. Mr. Tompkins stated that the two services were not proposed when the Market Retail building was approved because they believed the two 6-inch lines would be adequate. After confirming the interior layout of the market retail building, they determined it would be better to run the water line to the rear rather than going under the building from Legend Drive. They propose eliminating the two services on Legend Drive and having one 6-inch stub serving the DeCicco Market building and the other 6-inch stub serving the medical office building. Chairperson Harries asked Mr. Tompkins to confirm the water lines they are discussing are to remain private. Peter Chavkin is an associate of Biddle Real Estate Ventures, LLC. Mr. Chavkin requested that the water services remain private and not be included in the sanitary sewer easement agreement. Mr. Chavkin requested that the Board approve the sewer easement so that the Will Serve letter and form can be prepared and submitted to the Department of Health. They want to ensure that water and sewer services are installed to fulfill the obligation to have a public restroom in the Market Retail building. Mr. Chavkin stated that a public water main extension is unnecessary. If a public water main extension is required, the Medical Office Building developer is responsible for amending the maintenance agreement and getting the Department of Health approval. Mr. Natarelli asked Mr. Tompkins if this proposal was discussed with the developers of the Medical Office Building. Mr. Tompkins stated that Mark Gratz from DTS Provident Engineering is the engineer for both applications, and this has been discussed with the Medical Office Building developers. Mr. Natarelli stated that the proposed second private water line and hydrant would require a large preventer and asked Mr. Tompkins where that would be located. Mr. Tompkins stated that the Medical Office Building developers are working with Mr. Gratz to determine the location of the backflow equipment. Mr. Natarelli stated that the sewer easement agreement and the Medical Office Building plan should be considered in parallel, and he is concerned about approaching them separately. Chairperson Harries solicited comments from the Board. Richard Gross asked Mr. Tompkins where they would pick up the water service behind the building. 6 (2/22/24) �Mr. Tompkins stated they propose connecting the water line on Legend Drive to the two 6-inch stubs. Mr. Gross asked Mr. Tompkins where the hydrant will be located. Mr. Tompkins stated that the hydrant will be part of the Medical Office Building application. The Market Retail Building Site Plan was approved without a hydrant. Mr. Natarelli asked Mr. Gratz about the horizontal separation between the water and sewer lines. Mr. Gratz is an engineer with DTS Provident Engineering. Mr. Gratz stated that the plan is a service model with a horizontal separation of approximately 12 feet. Mr. Natarelli stated that if the service becomes a public water main, it would not meet the Board of Health separation requirements. Mr. Gratz stated that the current plan shows the service connection from the valve on the left southern edge to serve the Market Retail Building, and the connection on the right to feed the Medical Office Building. If they use the connection on the right of the proposed water line connections, they will have the required horizontal separation for a public water main. Mr. Natarelli asked if the proposed medical building would prevent the water main separation from being further out. Mr. Gratz stated that there are options for a publicly dedicated water main extension or a private hydrant. One option would be to service the connections from the building going out and eliminate the second connection. Mr. Natarelli stated that he needs to analyze applications to anticipate water and sewer issues and determine whether other options would comply with the Board of Health. Mr. Natarelli asked Mr. Gratz to confirm that they have looked at a solution that would comply with the Department of Health requirements. Mr. Chavkin stated they would continue working with Mr. Natarelli to address his concerns and requested that the Board consider drafting a resolution for approval at the next meeting. Chairperson Harries asked Mr. Chavkin for the anticipated completion date for DeCicco’s Market and Retail buildings. Mr. Chavkin said he would ask the developers and inform the Board at the next meeting. Chairperson Harries asked David Smith to prepare a draft resolution for the March 21, 2024 meeting. 5. AECOM, 52-60 Elm Street, Soil vapor extraction interim remedial measures, Site Plan Approval - Presentation 7 (2/22/24) �Kelly Lurie is an associate of AECOM. Ms. Lurie stated that updated site plans include shifting the treatment structure northeast so it will not be adjacent to the new buildings at 30 Andrews Lane. They propose to change the privacy fencing material from chain link to an 8-foot high stockade fence. Ms. Lurie stated that the applicant is comfortable with a Village artist putting a mural on the front of the structure facing the parking lot. Ms. Krakauer requested that Ms. Lurie confirm if the exhaust stack could be moved to the parking lot-facing side, or shifted further away from the adjacent buildings. Mr. Lurie stated that she would address the request with the team. Sean McCarthy asked Ms. Lurie if there was a minimum distance from the discharge point to the operable window Ms. Lurie stated that she wasn’t sure. Mr. Lurie described the sedimentation and erosion control methods proposed during the construction and operation phases of the project. The concrete pad and the treatment system will slope toward the parking lot to direct stormwater. Ms. Lurie stated that a vegetation restoration plan includes the plantings currently on-site, recommendations on whether they should be removed, moved or replaced, and a schedule of proposed plantings. Ms. Lurie stated that the restoration plan may be subject to change based on conditions found during excavation and construction. Chairperson Harries asked James Natarelli if the applicant addressed all the stormwater concerns. James Natarelli stated that the presentation verbally addressed his questions. Mr. McCarthy asked Mr. Lurie how they proposed to get power to the treatment structure. Ms. Lurie stated that she didn’t include how to get power and would add to the list of items that must addressed. Chairperson Harries moved to schedule a public hearing for the March 21, 2024 Planning Board meeting. Moved: Harries Seconded: Krakauer Chairperson Harries- yes Lindsay Krakauer- yes Rachelle Gebler- yes Richard Gross- yes Vote 4-0 6. SDC Lighthouse Landing Realty LLC, Edge-on-Hudson Riverfront Development, Block A Proposed medical office building- Site Plan and Architectural Review Approval- Presentation 8 (2/22/24) �Janet Giris stated that she is a Partner with DelBello Donnellan Weingarten Wise & Wiederkehr, LLP representing the applicant. The applicant has been working with the potential tenant to accommodate the building design with their proposed programming needs. Minor changes include additional square footage on the second and third floors by cantilevering over the awning and drop-off area. Additional parking spaces were added to the parking garage. Ms. Giris stated that the applicant believes they have a design program that works for the potential tenant and the Planning Board. Umberto Annunziata is the Development Manager for Simone Development Companies. Mr. Annuziata presented a concept plan and summarized the original application. Mr. Unnuziata presented a revised site plan and stated they propose to add 5,000 square feet to the second and third levels by extending the building above the drop-off location. Mr. Annuziata stated that the medical office building would have a strong street presence on Legend Drive. The entrance to the parking garage would be located at the back of the property. The medical office building proposes 12,759 square feet on the ground floor, 15,000 square feet on the second floor, and 15,000 square feet on the third floor. The mechanical equipment will be located on the roof. The proposed height of the building is 42 feet and will not require a variance. Chairperson Harries asked Mr. Annunizata to describe how visitors will access the medical offices from the upper levels of the parking garage. Mr. Annuniziata stated that one entrance is proposed at the lobby level for security purposes. There will be an elevator in the parking structure. They may consider having entrances on the upper levels of the garage for employees. Patrons would enter and exit the garage at the same location. Lindsay Krakauer asked how the cars would maneuver in the garage. Mr. Annunziata stated that the cars would need to make K-turns. Mr. Annunziata presented the elevation drawings and building sections. Mr. Annunziata presented a site section drawing along Legend Drive and described the heights of the adjacent buildings. Mr. Annuniziata presented site section photographs of the existing and proposed views from Barnhart Park and said that the building will not block views of the Hudson River as the North Light building is visible above their building. Chairperson Harries asked if the view of the parking garage from Barnhart Park would be a solid-facing wall. Anthony Stark is an architect from Perkins Eastman. Mr. Stark stated that the façade would be a solid pre-cast concrete wall. They have discussed adding impressions of trees and leaves to give the wall a more natural feel. Mr. Annunziata presented renderings and described the views looking south on Legend Drive, Maxwell Drive, and west from Beekman Avenue. He also stated that trees are proposed along the parking garage. Ms. Kakauer asked if four cars could park with room to pass at the drop-off. 9 (2/22/24) �Mr. Stark stated that the site plan includes temporary parking for four cars with room to pass. Chairperson Harries asked Mr. Annunziata to speak about the tenant's program. Mr. Annuniziata stated they have not received a finalized program from the potential tenant and cannot provide additional information. Mr. Stark presented the building's exterior plan and stated that they have introduced more red into the brick color mix while keeping the dark grey accent on the bottom. The stone walls along the sidewalks will match the adjacent properties. Window sizes have been reduced, the glass will be less reflective, and they have introduced more cornice work and stacked brick details at the openings. The weathered wood has been eliminated from the parking structure, and they propose a black-painted open screen to mimic the shapes of the windows. The parking structure will have the same brick design as the building. Richard Gross asked Mr. Stark to confirm the height of the parking garage levels and if it would be open to air. Mr. Stark stated that two sides of the parking garage will be open to air, and the screens will mimic the window framing. The garage structure is 12 feet to floor to floor, with angling up by 5%, and the medical office building is 14 feet floor to floor. Mr. Stark presented and described the proposed signage plan and stated that they are seeking approval to install four signs, of which three are permitted. Chairperson Harries asked Mr. Stark to describe how pedestrians from the garage would safely visit the other retail buildings. Mr. Stark stated that pedestrians would access the sidewalk from the ground level near the elevator, use the sidewalk to get back on Legend Drive or use the crosswalk to go to the retail stores. Stop signs are proposed at four corners. Ms. Krakauer suggested adding a crosswalk at the elevator access area to avoid the high vehicular traffic anticipated at the drop-off area and stated she is concerned that the four-way stop intersection may cause vehicular traffic to back up into the street or the parking garage during peak hours. Mr. Annuniziata stated that typical medical office hours are 8:00 AM to 6:00 PM on weekdays and abbreviated hours on Saturdays. They anticipate the hours to be scheduled visits and not urgent care. Chairperson Harries asked Mr. Gratz to describe the proposed shared parking plan and how they accommodated the increase in square footage. Mr. Gratz is an engineer with DTS Provident representing the applicant. Mr. Gratz stated the revised plan would add 16 parking spaces to the shared parking analysis. The completed shared parking analysis follows the Urban Land Institute and National Parking Association guidelines. 10 (2/22/24) �The study used the square footage of the three sites, including the DeCicco’s Market, the Market Retail Building, and the Medical Office building. The analysis showed they should have 362 parking spaces. They deducted the square footage for the Medical Office Building lobbies as common areas that would not generate a use. While the total square footage of the building is 43,212 square feet, they used 39,736 square feet in the model for the analysis. The lobby is larger than usual to provide access from the parking garage and Legend Drive. The shared parking analysis demonstrates that the peak demand for 362 parking spaces occurs between 2:00 PM and 4:00 PM in December. Mr. Gratz stated that they based their analysis on the assumption that 100% of the employees would be driving to work for all three uses, 90% of the patrons visiting the DeCicco’s Market and the Market Retail building would be driving, and 95% of the patrons would be driving to the medical office building. Ms. Krakauer asked Mr. Gratz for the operational hours used to analyze the retail uses. Mr. Gratz said they assumed retail hours would be from 9:00 AM to 9:00 PM. David Smith stated that DeCicco’s is a local market for the Westchester Community. Mr. Smith suggested that Mr. Gratz check to see if they have parking survey data and consider providing a way to determine how many vacant spots are available in the garage. Mr. Gratz stated that there will be constant turnover in the retail and medical office uses. The Board discussed the view from Tappan Zee Park, how the signage would be viewed, the proposed landscaping plan, and suggestions for adding additional street trees to the site. Mr. Gratz presented the site plan and summarized the areas proposed for tree and low shrubbery plantings. The generator and transformer were relocated to the back of the building. The applicant proposes to put the hydrant in the middle of the island at the turnaround to shorten the hose runs required to get to the back end of the garage. James Natarelli requested that Mark Gratz indicate on the plans whether the hydrant and lateral connections are proposed as a private service and to clarify the grade difference between the parking garage exit door sill and the I-3 Building parking lot. Mr. Gratz stated that they still need to work out the details. The curb height would be no greater than 18 inches. The 6-foot chain link fence along the Block I property line will remain. Mr. Natarelli stated that the entrance to the stairs along Beekman Avenue is hazardous from a stormwater perspective. Peter Chavkin stated that the bump-out at the crosswalk intersection is causing the stormwater issue. He said they could remove the bump-out, extend the crosswalk, or leave the bump-out and cut in a trench drain with a curb. Chairperson Harries asked if the garage screening would have a pattern. Mr Stark stated that they are considering a perforated metal. 11 (2/22/24) �Chairperson Harries requested they submit a design for review. Ms. Krakauer asked Mr. Annunziata if the tenant would supply valet parking. Mr. Annunziata said the tenant would decide. Chairperson Harries asked how many parking spaces the Code requires versus what is proposed in the shared parking agreement and if the Board of Trustees needs to amend the Special Permit. Ms. Harries questioned whether the applicant would allow residents to use the parking lot during non-operational hours and whether they would charge for the on-grade parking or garage parking. Ms. Giris stated they are not required to return to the Board of Trustees regarding the shared parking agreement. Shared parking was approved for the overall development by the Village Board as part of the Special Permit. The Planning Board determines if what they provide is reasonable. The Medical Office Building programming will not be finalized before approval. The use of parking spaces during non-operation hours would have to be discussed with the commercial condominium since it is private property. Mr. Stark stated that the design meets the parking requirement of 1 space per 150 square feet. Mr. Smith stated that the shared parking requirements require additional discussion. Rachelle Gebler moved to schedule a public hearing for the March 21, 2024 Planning Board meeting. Moved: Gebler Seconded: Harries Chairperson Harries- yes Lindsay Krakauer- yes Rachelle Gebler- yes Richard Gross- yes Vote 4-0 7. Marcelo Poguio, 80 Depeyster Street, Proposed three-family residence, Site Plan and Architectural Review Approval- Preliminary Presentation The applicant requested adjournment to the March 21, 2024 Planning Board meeting. 8. LL Parcel H, LLC, 2 Lighthouse Landing, Proposed signage, Architectural Review Approval- Preliminary Presentation Peter Chavkin stated that he has reviewed the draft resolution. Chairperson Harries solicited comments from the Board. There were no comments from the Board. 12 (2/22/24) �Chairperson Harries moved to waive the public hearing. Moved: Harries Seconded: Gebler Vote 4-0 David Smith read the resolve clauses of the draft resolution. Chairperson Harries moved to approve the resolution. Moved: Harries Seconded: Krakauer Chairperson Harries- yes Lindsay Krakauer- yes Rachelle Gebler- yes Richard Gross- yes Vote 4-0 9. LL Parcel E, LLC, Block O/P Townhomes One, Proposed backflow device enclosureAmended Site Plan Approval - Preliminary Presentation Mark Gratz is an engineer with DTS Provident Design who represents the applicant. Mr. Gratz stated that Toll Brothers requests approval to build an enclosure for the backflow preventer device needed to protect the irrigation system for the first twenty townhome units fronting Palisades Boulevard. The above-ground structure would be 50 feet from the street and have an underground meter pit and landscape screening. Chairperson Harries asked Mr. Gratz if the device could be completely underground, closer to the building, or have more landscaping. Mr. Gratz stated that the device needs to be above-ground for emergency maintenance. Chairperson Harries asked Mr. Gratz if other development sites would request this enclosure. Mr. Gratz stated that the owners of Block OP & N Townhome Two may have two or three more devices. Chairperson Harries moved to waive the public hearing and to draft a resolution for the March 21, 2024 Planning Board meeting. Moved: Harries Seconded: Krakauer Chairperson Harries- yes Lindsay Krakauer- yes Rachelle Gebler- yes Richard Gross- yes Vote 4-0 10. Lighthouse Landing Communities, LLC, Phase III, Block Q, Proposed concrete Crushing operation, Amended Site Plan Approval – Preliminary presentation 13 (2/22/24) �Craig Tompkins stated approval was granted in 2022 to relocate the concrete crushing area. Mr. Tompkins stated they propose to crush 2000 cubic yards in two weeks starting in March or April. The operation will be 500 feet from any occupied residence and 700 feet from the North Light building. They will adhere to regular operation hours of 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM on weekdays and will not operate on weekends. Chairperson Harries moved to approve the application and to draft a resolution for the March 21, 2024 Planning Board meeting: Moved: Harries Seconded: Gebler Chairperson Harries- yes Lindsay Krakauer- yes Rachelle Gebler- yes Richard Gross- yes Vote 4-0 11. Lighthouse Landing Communities, LLC, Zoning Code Amendment Petition, Section 450-38- Height exceptions- Discussion Peter Chavkin is an associate of Biddle Real Estate Ventures representing Lighthouse Landing Communities, LLC. Mr. Chavkin stated that the purchasers interested in signing contracts for the units initiated the interest in the pergolas on the four fourth-floor terraces of the Daymark building. They decided the best solution was to request a text amendment to the Zoning Code to permit them. Mr. Chavkin stated that if pergolas are not permitted on the fourth-floor terraces, the residents will use other methods to provide shading, such as umbrellas, canopies and temporary structures. The approval to build more architecturally uniform structures would provide better views from the parks. The language proposed to the Board of Trustees included parameters for size, height and coverage, and requested to amend the Zoning Code to have acceptable pergolas as part of Site Plan approval and at the Planning Board’s discretion. Mr. Chavkin provided photographs to demonstrate where the pergola structures would not be noticeable, as well as a drawing detailing 9 feet by 20 feet dimensions and up to 33 percent coverage. Janet Giris is a Partner with DelBello Donnellan Weingarten Wise & Wiederkehr. Ms. Giris stated that the proposed Zoning Code amendment could be applied to the entire Village or restricted to the RF Zoning District, with the discretion to waive it. She also stated that the Design Guidelines encouraged pergolas and shade structures. Chairperson Harries stated that the approval of the Zoning Code amendment wouldn’t prohibit owners from putting other shade devices on the terraces. Joshua Subin asked Mr. Chavkin if the HOA could restrict other shading devices. Mr. Chavkin stated that HOA restrictions could be applied to future buildings, but the Daymark purchase contracts were based on current association documents. Chairperson Harries stated that a joint session with the Board of Trustees will be scheduled for March 5, 2024. 14 (2/22/24) �No action was taken 12. Approval of minutes, December 21, 2023, January 18, 2024 Chairperson Harries tabled the approval of the December 21, 2023 minutes. Chairperson Harries moved to approve the January 18, 2024, minutes. Moved: Harries Seconded: Krakauer Vote 4-0 Chairperson Harries- yes Lindsay Krakauer- yes Rachelle Gebler- yes Richard Gross- yes Vote 4-0 Chairperson Harries moved to adjourn the meeting at 9:50 PM. Moved: Harries Seconded: Gebler Vote 4-0 Respectfully submitted, Pamela Kroll Secretary to the Planning Board 15 (2/22/24) �Exhibit #1 ��Exhibit #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-2024 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_2024-02-22 Approved Planning Board Minutes Subject The topic of the resource Planning Board Minutes & Resolutions-2024 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2024 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Village of Sleepy Hollow All Rights Reserved. Type The nature or genre of the resource Text https://sleepyhollow.localarchives.org/files/original/2a9b60432d0801fb224ef6df18dd789f.pdf bae3eb7b1473f25282d24d782046e604 PDF Text 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 Planning Board Minutes & Resolutions-2024 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_2024-02-22_Block H Daymark Signage -Approved Resolution Subject The topic of the resource Planning Board Minutes & Resolutions-2024 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2024 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Village of Sleepy Hollow All Rights Reserved. Type The nature or genre of the resource Text https://sleepyhollow.localarchives.org/files/original/fd9f1d2a024e443df538ce40d8adb586.pdf 8510855de5cce6468a75dc1701f73cd1 PDF Text Text Village of Sleepy Hollow Planning Board Minutes January 18, 2024 Chairperson Harries called the regular meeting to order at 7:05 PM. Chairperson Harries read the list of the applications on the agenda. Present: Kersten Harries, Chairperson Benjamin Nielsen Rachelle Gebler Clare Trapasso Lindsay Krakauer Also Present: Joshua Subin, Village Attorney James Natarelli, Village Engineer David Smith, Village Planner Anthony Catalano, Consulting Engineer Sean E. McCarthy, Building Inspector Pamela Kroll, Secretary to the Planning Board Absent: Caroline Chen Richard Gross Agenda: 1) Lighthouse Landing Communities, LLC, Edge-on-Hudson Riverfront Development, Phase II- Waterfront Open Space, Site Plan & Wetlands Watercourse Permit ApprovalContinued Public Hearing 2) Todd and Wendi Strier, 5 Birch Close, Proposed additions and alterations, Site Plan Approval- Public Hearing 3) Sleepy Hollow Residences, LLC, 2 Maxwell Drive, Parking garage kiosk and signage, Amended Site Plan & Architectural Review Approval- Presentation 4) Lighthouse Landing Communities, LLC, Edge-on-Hudson Riverfront Development, Phase I, Block A, Sanitary sewer easement and maintenance agreement, Amended Site Plan Approval- Presentation 5) AECOM, 52-60 Elm Street, Soil vapor extraction and interim remedial measures, Site Plan Approval- Preliminary Presentation 6) Francesco Alesci, 135 Beekman Avenue, Proposed 14-unit apartment building, Site Plan Approval Extension- Presentation 7) Rock of Salvation Church, 135 Cortlandt Street, Proposed parking lot, Site Plan Approval- Preliminary Presentation 8) Lighthouse Landing Communities LLC, Zoning Code Amendment Petition, Section 450-38- Height exceptions, Village Board of Trustees referral- Discussion 9) Approval of minutes, December 21, 2023 1 (1/18/24) �1. Lighthouse Landing Communities, LLC, Edge-on-Hudson Riverfront Development, Phase II- Waterfront Open Space, Site Plan & Wetlands Watercourse Permit ApprovalContinued Public Hearing Chairperson Harries opened the public hearing and solicited comments from the public. There were no public comments. Chairperson Harries invited the applicant to speak on the application. Peter Chavkin is an associate of Biddle Real Estate Ventures, representing Lighthouse Landing Communities, LLC. Mr. Chavkin stated that he is unaware that Woodard & Curran requested additional information since the off-site culvert measurement information was submitted on December 21, 2023. Mr. Chavkin asked Mr. Catalano to inform him of the outstanding items requested. Mr. Chavkin stated that the flow information for the culvert is the Local Development Corporations’ (“LDC”) responsibility. Mr. Chavkin stated that their responsibility is to manage the flows presented to them. Mr. Chavkin said he would work with the LDC to get additional survey information. Mr. Chavkin stated that he is very anxious to receive approval to build this section and move on with the rest of the waterfront. Anthony Catalano is the Consulting Engineer from Woodard & Curran. Mr. Catalano stated there have been ongoing conversations with WSP, in which he assumed they have communicated with Mr. Chavkin on their requests. Mr. Catalano stated that WSP was very clear about what was requested. Mr. Catalano stated that Woodard & Curran ran their own flooding models to demonstrate certain conditions to WSP that were unclear or disagreed. They pointed out to WSP that they need to address the model quality control issues and have asked for certain information for several months. Mr. Catalano suggested scheduling a meeting when their updated memo has been finalized and submitted to the Board. Mr. Catalano stated they have met with DTS for the channel sizing. DTS requires the flow calculations from WSP to move forward. Chairperson Harries stated that the public hearing would continue at the Planning Board meeting on February 22, 2024. 2. Todd and Wendi Strier, 5 Birch Close, Proposed additions and alterations, Site Plan Approval - Public hearing Chairperson Harries read the public notice. Chairperson Harries stated that the Board received correspondence from members of the public. The comments are published on the Village website and will be included in the meeting minutes. (See Exhibit #s 1, 2, and 3) Lindsay Krakauer moved to open the public hearing. Moved: Krakauer Seconded: Gebler 2 Vote 5-0 (1/18/24) �Chairperson Harries invited the applicant to present the application. Frank Marsella stated that he is the architect representing the applicants. Mr. Marsella presented photographs of the existing house and renderings of the proposed renovations viewed from the street and the rear of the property. Mr. Marsella summarized the design and stated that the application would result in 820 square feet of additional building coverage. Mr. Marcella presented the architectural drawings and described the design and the exterior materials. Chairperson Harries asked Mr. Marcella to confirm the height of the existing roof ridgeline and the proposed height with the additions. Mr. Marcella stated that the proposed average roof elevation is 26.8 feet. The existing roof elevation is 20.4 feet. They propose increasing the ridge height by 6 feet from the ridge and the center of the roof. Benjamin Nielsen asked Mr. Marsella if they had submitted a survey of the properties showing the architecture of the adjacent homes. Mr. Marsella stated that they submitted photos of neighboring houses. Many of the renovated homes are not modulated and are straight-up additions. Mr. Marsella stated that the property slopes down from the street level, making the house's first floor slightly lower. Mr. Marsella stated that the introduction of the front porch weaving into the garage would be keeping in theme with the one-story roofline. Lindsay Krakauer stated that she appreciates the efforts to reduce the bulk by keeping with the one-story feel and aligning the design with other traditional homes in the neighborhood. Rachelle Gebler asked Sean McCarthy if the application requires zoning variances. Sean McCarthy stated that the current application does not require zoning variances. Clare Trapasso asked Mr. Marsella to confirm the house's existing and proposed square footage. Mr. Marsella stated the FAR for the 1.34-acre lot permits 7,900 square feet. The current square footage is 4,347 square feet, including the basement and the garage. The proposed square footage of 7,516 square feet includes the garage and 95 percent of the 1,900 square foot walkout basement. They are adding approximately 3,000 square feet. The basement square footage has no impact on the neighborhood as viewed from the street. Without the basement, the square footage is approximately 5,174 square feet, with the actual living space on the first and second floors around 4,500 square feet without the garage. Chairperson Harries asked Mr. Marsella to explain how the additional 820 square feet of building coverage fits into the calculations. Mr. Marsella stated that building coverage calculations include decks, garages, and anything in the house footprint that requires a foundation. Removing the deck and associated structures reduced the proposed increased building coverage. 3 (1/18/24) �Chairperson Harries stated that the modulated one-story design reduces the impact of the proposed growth of the additions on the house to fit with the neighborhood. Ms. Harries asked for the species of the (3) evergreen trees proposed by the garage. Alan Pilch is the engineer for the project and stated that they propose to plant Fraser Fir trees to provide screening of the garage from the neighbor to the south. Mr. Pilch stated Mr. Natarelli witnessed the completion of deep hole and percolation testing. The soil percolation on the property's south side, where the stormwater pipe is installed, is slower in comparison to the faster flow speed on the north side of the property. The proposed stormwater management plan provides adequate infiltration in a 100-year storm event. Chairperson Harries asked Mr. Pilch to describe the mitigation plan for the wetlands buffer disturbance area. Mr. Pilch stated that the total disturbance to the wetlands buffer would be 62-64 feet. The rear yard drops down to a steep slope to the wetlands area. Mr. Pilch presented the landscape plan and stated they propose native plantings in the 254-square-foot area at a 4:1 mitigation ratio to stabilize the impacted buffer area. Mr. Nielsen asked if plantings are proposed in the stormwater easement area. Mr. Pilch stated that plantings are proposed ten feet from the storm pipe. They plan to establish an access easement with the Village. Mr. Natarelli stated that one of the three trees proposed at the corner of the driveway appears to be directly over the Village drain pipe. Mr. Natarelli requested the applicants formalize an access agreement with the Village. Mr. Pilch and Mr. Natarelli agreed that a 15-foot easement would be sufficient. Mr. Nielsen stated that having large canopy trees between the homes is a defined characteristic of Sleepy Hollow Manor. Mr. Nielsen asked Mr. Pilch if there were opportunities to add canopy trees to the site. Mr. Pilch stated that there is room where the Fraser Fir trees are proposed. There is minimal space between the house's north side and the property line. Mr. Pilch suggested they could add canopy trees in the front yard or the left side of the driveway. Chairperson Harries solicited comments from the public. Robert Tobey stated that he is the owner of 34 Hemlock Drive. Mr. Tobey stated that the three Fraser Fir trees would be in his sight line, reducing the view shed to the river and decreasing the value of his house. Mr. Tobey requested that low vegetation be planted instead of the Fir trees. Mr. Tobey asked if there were drawings submitted showing perspectives from other properties. Mr. Tobey presented a photograph of the view from his deck. (See Exhibit #4) 4 (1/18/24) �Chairperson Harries stated that the Board requested photographs to show the proposed design and that the elevations were similar to the homes in the neighborhood. Mr. Tobey expressed his concerns about the proposed increase in the building size and height of the house. Mr. Tobey asked the Board to consider that the proposed application would result in a house that would be out of character with the size of the houses in the neighborhood and affect the views of the river. Jennifer Ostfield stated that she lives at 32 Hemlock Drive. Ms. Ostfield stated that DEA Mapping shows that the site of the proposed action is located in or adjoining a state-listed Critical Environmental Area. Ms. Ostfield questioned if the increased driveway size would affect the proposed access easement and take away the natural watershed, wildlife pathways and drainage. Chairperson Harries asked the applicants' consultants to clarify the increase of impervious surface and the elevation differences between the proposed driveway and the land area above the stormwater pipe. Mr. Marsella stated that the garage addition would consume a large portion of the existing driveway and be at the same level. Mr. Natarelli stated that the engineer’s site plan shows the corner of the driveway as graded and does not include the retaining wall. The engineering plans show that the retaining wall ends at the end of the hammerhead. Mr. Pilch stated that there is no retaining wall and suggested that the driveway be used for the access easement rather than driving on a landscaped area. Ms. Gebler asked Mr. Natarelli if he had any concerns with the proposed stormwater management system. Mr. Natarelli said he witnessed the deep hole and percolation tests and reviewed the model calculations. The stormwater system is appropriately sized and would infiltrate the impervious surfaces, including the driveway and the rooftop, in a 100-year storm. There was a discussion regarding the DEA Mapping and how it relates to the stormwater management for properties adjacent to the Hudson River. Chairperson Harries asked Mr. McCarthy where the village stormwater pipe collects run-off. Mr. McCarthy stated that the pipe collects run-off from Birch Close and Hemlock Drive, and some private pipes from adjoining residences go to the disposal point. Mr. Nielsen requested that the applicant provide documentation that provides architectural views or height surveys of the adjacent homes. 5 (1/18/24) �Mr. Marsella stated that the proposed building height is 10 feet below the permitted Zoning building height regulations. There was a discussion about documents other applicants have submitted for architectural review. Chairperson Harries suggested that the applicants review the comments from the Board, Village Staff, and the public. Chairperson Harries moved to adjourn the public hearing to the February 22, 2024 meeting. Moved: Harries Seconded: Trapasso Vote 5-0 3. Sleepy Hollow Residences, LLC, 2 Maxwell Drive, Parking garage kiosk and signage Amended Site Plan and Architectural Review Approval - Presentation Diana Kolev stated that she is an associate from the firm of DelBello Donnellan Weingarten Wise and Wiederkehr, LLC. representing Sleepy Hollow Residences, LLC. Ms. Kolev stated that a parking agreement between the applicant and Block H obligates the applicant to have parking available for Block H retail uses and residents. Ms. Kolev stated that there would not be public parking other than what would be provided for the Daymark. The signage labeled public parking was intended to differentiate the parking from the onsite parking for the Block F residents. They are not looking to provide public parking now and then transfer it to Daymark. They are requesting approval to set up the parking meter and the signage and wait until the Daymark building is complete. Chairperson Harries asked Ms. Kolev to confirm that the proposed kiosk and signage will only be used for Daymark. Ms. Kolev stated that 45 parking spaces would be assigned for Daymark retail uses, and 5 spaces would be reserved for the Daymark residents. Chairperson Harries asked Ms. Kolev to confirm that they are not planning on using the 50 spaces for other uses before the Daymark building requires them. Mr. Kolvev stated that the applicant will not utilize the parking spaces until Daymark requires them. Chairperson Harries asked Ms. Kolev how they would ensure that only the Daymark retail space patrons use the 45 parking spaces. Sophie Nitkin is an associate of Sleepy Hollow Residences, LLC. Ms. Nitkin stated that the Parking Agreement between the two sites was submitted to the Village and reviewed by the Village Attorney in March of 2022. When the agreement was created, it included stipulations between the two sites that dedicated the parking spots for the required retail and residential uses of the Daymark building. Ms. Nitkin stated that the parking is not public for anyone at any point. As the operations of the site next door go into place, there are stipulations for the potential valet or other arrangements between the two groups. Since retail doesn’t exist yet, the stipulations are not in play. 6 (1/18/24) �Ms. Kolev stated that they propose changing the signage to Daymark Retail Parking instead of Public Parking to make it clear. Ms. Nitkin stated that they reviewed the resolution an hour ago and could submit the revised signage as a condition of approval or present it to the Board. Chairperson Harries asked Ms. Nitkin to confirm why they are seeking this approval so far in advance of the Daymark building completion and the need for the required parking spaces. Ms. Nitkin stated that they wish to install the kiosk and signage now to mitigate and prevent anyone from using the parking and to stop NorthLight residents who do not pay for parking from using the spaces. The signage will specify that there will be no overnight parking and ensure that the spaces are understood as public parking for the moment, which could be Daymark retail, just so long as it is not being used by other people on the site overnight or by residents of NorthLight overnight. Craig Tompkins stated that he is from Biddle Real Estate Ventures. Mr. Tomkins described a parking diagram for the required parking for Block H and how it is broken out between Block F and Block K for retail and residential use. Mr. Tompkins stated that he would prepare a comprehensive diagram that tracks all the developments' parking. Chairperson Harries requested that David Smith read the conditions of the draft resolution. Mr. Smith stated that the conditions in the draft resolution were included based on the proposal for the public parking signage. Mr. Smith reviewed the language of the resolution conditions with the Board and the applicant representatives. Ms. Kolvev stated that the main concern is that the applicant is accommodating the parking for Block H. Block H has its own site plan resolution and requirements to satisfy way-finding signage and certificates of occupancy. The applicant is looking for approval to put the signage up. Chairperson Harries stated that the applicant is requesting approval to install signage needed to designate the parking spaces required for the Daymark building that are not yet needed. Ms. Nitkin stated that they are requesting approval to install the signage now to keep the residents of NorthLight from parking in the spaces overnight. Ms. Nitkin suggested that the 45 required spaces have already been dedicated to the Daymark building and are not temporary. Joshua Subin asked Ms. Nitkin if the “unassigned public spaces” terminology in the parking agreement meant that the spaces had already been dedicated to the Daymark. Mr. Subin suggested referencing the parking agreement in the resolution. Mr. Smith reviewed the language of the resolution conditions with the Board and the applicant representatives in terms of the requirements needed for the application. 7 (1/18/24) �Peter Chavkin, representing Lighthouse Landing Communitites LLC, stated that a Building Permit has already been issued for the Daymark building that covers the retail space. Mr. Chavkin suggested that in order to accomplish what the Board wants, a condition be tied to a Certificate of Occupancy for the Daymark retail space. Chairperson Harries questioned why the application is required if the 50 required spaces are not needed yet and asked the applicant to clarify the language in the Parking Agreement related to the parking garage kiosk. Mr. Subin stated the parking agreement states that the applicant is permitted to charge what the Village charges. The metered parking rates are tied to the Village’s street meters. Mr. Smith reviewed the suggested conditions of the resolution. Chairperson Harries moved to approve the resolution. Moved: Harries Seconded: Gebler Chairperson Harries - yes Rachelle Gebler - yes Benjamin Nielsen - yes Clare Trapasso - yes Lindsay Krakauer - yes Vote 5-0 APPROVED 4. Lighthouse Landing Communities, LLC, Edge-on-Hudson Riverfront Development, Phase I, Block A sanitary sewer easement and maintenance agreement, Amended Site Plan Approval - Presentation Craig Tompkins is the representative for Lighthouse Landing Communities, LLC, and stated that the attorneys are reviewing the maintenance agreement, and the Site Plan has been revised to increase the width of the easement to 30 feet. Mr. Tompkins stated that they are seeking approval for James Natarelli to release the Will Serve letter to the DOH in order to obtain permits to complete the work for DeCiccos and the other tenant to connect to the public sewer. Chairperson Harries asked Mr. Tompkins for the desired timeline to complete the work. Mr. Tompkins stated that they would need the sewer connection ready before the DeCicco opening and estimated that the process would require four to six months. James Natarelli stated that the public sewer is not required for DeCicco Market to use it. The public sewer is only required for another tenant to tie into it. Mr. Natarelli asked if another tenant was ready to tie into the connection. Peter Chavkin, representing Lighthouse Landing Communities, LLC, stated that the retail building at the site would be ready to tie into the sewer connection. 8 (1/18/24) �Chairperson Harries stated that the Planning Board would refer the application review to the Board of Trustees for approval. Mr. Tompkins requested approval for Mr. Natarelli to release the Will Serve ahead of meeting with the Board of Trustees. Mr. Natarelli stated that the Village has not made a decision on the proposal. There was a discussion between the Planning Board, consultants, and the applicant regarding the requirement for an amended site plan resolution in conjunction with the Board of Trustees' decision. The application was referred to the Board of Trustees for review and adjourned to the February 22, 2024 Planning Board meeting. 5. AECOM, 52-60 Elm Street, Soil vapor extraction interim remedial measures, Site Plan Approval - Preliminary Presentation Michael Doherty is an engineer with AECOM as the applicant. Mr. Doherty presented the signed consent order's site history with the DEC and the former Duracell, Inc. site related to the remediation phases, including soil remediation and groundwater investigations completed on Village properties. Mr. Doherty stated that the groundwater investigation detected select VOCs above the New York State criteria. Since the Village does not use groundwater, the DEC does not require groundwater remediation. The soil vapor investigation results required the mitigation of seven properties. Six sub-slab mitigation systems, similar to radon gas systems, were installed and are operating in residences based on the DEC guidance and requirements. Mr. Doherty stated that the application proposes to install a larger-scale soil vapor extraction system to remove and treat VOCs. Mr. Doherty presented slides and described the treatment structures, the system's operation process, and the proposed restoration measures. Benjamin Nielsen asked Mr. Doherty if the system would be noisy for the neighboring properties. Mr. Doherty said they would insulate the treatment equipment's container housing and install silencers on the blowers for noise mitigation. A pre-construction noise survey would be conducted prior to the installation. Chairperson Harries asked Mr. Doherty to clarify where privacy fencing is proposed. Mr. Doherty stated a six-foot high chain link fence with green privacy screening would be installed to shield the treatment structure from the neighboring residential properties. Fencing would not be installed to shield the structure in the parking lot. Lindsay Krakauer asked Mr. Doherty if there is a top-down view of the structure and for the position of the pipe coming out of the top. Mr. Doherty stated the pipe would be located at the mid-point of the structure. 9 (1/18/24) �Ms. Krakauer suggested they position the pipe towards the parking lot side of the structure to shield the view from the new development. Mr. Krakauer asked Mr. Doherty if the Village could temporarily integrate the structure with artwork or a cover. Mr. Doherty stated that he would discuss the pipe location and the suggestions for integrating the structure with the owner. Chairperson Harries requested that they update the Site Plan to remove the single-family residence that no longer exists so that the Board can see the relationship between the container location and the residential buildings. Mr. Nielsen suggested using different fencing materials. There was a discussion regarding stormwater management relating to the temporary structures, grass area, and proposed landscaping. Mr. Doherty stated that revised plans would be submitted showing which trees will be removed, proposed stormwater management, and a restoration plan. No action was taken. 6. Francesco Alesci, 135 Beekman Avenue, Proposed 14-unit apartment building, Site Plan Approval Extension- Presentation Maximillian Mahalek stated that he is the attorney with the firm of Cuddy + Feder, LLP, representing the owner of 135 Beekman Avenue. Mr. Mahalek requested that the Board grant a one-year extension of the approved Site Plan. Chairperson Harries directed David Smith to draft a resolution for the February 22, 2024 meeting. 7. Rock of Salvation Church, 135 Cortlandt Street, Proposed parking lot, Site Plan, Approval - Preliminary Presentation Jorge Hernandez stated that he is the architect representing the Rock of Salvation Church. Mr. Hernandez stated that the applicant is seeking site plan approval to construct an off-street parking lot with 17 spaces on the vacant lot for the church parishioners. Mr. Hernandez stated he received the requests from the Building Department and the Village Engineer. Mr. Hernandez presented the proposed site plan drawings and described the details of the application. A discussion ensued with the Board and Mr. Hernandez regarding the history of the property ownership, proposed access and restrictions for the use of the parking spaces, and the possibility of an easement agreement with the owner of 139 Cortlandt Street. James Natarelli recommended that if the drainage from 139 Cortlandt Street is managed by the existing drywells on the subject property, they should continue to serve that purpose. 10 (1/18/24) �Mr. Hernandez stated that he would submit a supplemental submission to address the comments received from the Board and Village staff for the February meeting. No action was taken. 8. Lighthouse Landing Communities, LLC, Zoning Code Amendment Petition, Section 450-38- Height exceptions, Village Board of Trustees referral- Discussion The applicant requested an adjournment to the February 22, 2024 Planning Board meeting. 9. Approval of minutes, December 21, 2023 Chairperson Harries moved to table the minutes to the February 22, 2024 meeting. Moved: Harries Seconded: Gebler Vote 5-0 Chairperson Harries moved to adjourn the meeting at 9:20 PM. Moved: Harries Seconded: Krakauer Vote 5-0 Respectfully submitted, Pamela Kroll Secretary to the Planning Board 11 (1/18/24) �Exhibit #1 Subject: Date: Comments Received for 5 Birch Close Wednesday, January 17, 2024 12:38:11 PM From: E Tobey Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2024 12:25 PM To: Sean McCarthy <smccarthy@sleepyhollowny.org>; Subject: Building Permit - Birch Close #3 Dear Sean and Paula,  Robert and I are objecting to the requested remodel building permit for #3 Birch Close. We are in receipt of the application and have studied it closely. The remodel/expansion would double the size of the current building. Not only is the size more than double of the average house in our neighborhood, it would compromise our view corridor by more than 70% according to our calculations.   We strongly object. Please make sure the planning board receives this message.  Thank you.  Robert would like to speak at the meeting tomorrow evening.  We have many concerns and questions that we would like to express and be taken seriously.   Thank you again. Ellen Tobey 34 Hemlock Drive Mobile 434-882-1577 �Exhibit #2 �Exhibit #3 �Exhibit #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-2024 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_2024-01-18 Approved Planning Board Minutes Subject The topic of the resource Planning Board Minutes & Resolutions-2024 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2024 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Village of Sleepy Hollow All Rights Reserved. Type The nature or genre of the resource Text