https://sleepyhollow.localarchives.org/files/original/c4dcbb01e5f697666c8b73a2b14a0f71.pdf 97404d2ff2e0953d0badad63cd8e14c7 PDF Text Text VILLAGE OF SLEEPY HOLLOW PLANNING BOARD MEETING - APPROVED September 15, 2005 The meeting was called to order at 8:01 pm by Nicholas Robinson, Chairman. The Chair noted that a quorum was present. Present: Nicholas Robinson, Chairman David Perlmutter Gary Malunis Ed McCarthy Nicholas Cicchetti George Tanner Ed Napoleon Absent: None Also Present: Owen Wells (Saccardi & Schiff/Village Planner) Sean McCarthy (Village Architect, Village of Sleepy Hollow) Anthony DelVecchio (Recording Secretary) Mike Stein (Dolph Rotfield/Village Engineer) Dave Smith (Saccardi & Schiff/Village Planner) Nicholas Ward-Willis (Keane & Beane/Village Special Land-Use Counsel) Proposed Agenda: 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7) 8) 9) 10) 11) 12) 13) James Kennedy Construction Pokahoe Drive Mill Point Partners 300 North Broadway KWD Realty 309-313 North Broadway Robert Scott 187 Webber Avenue Miller 24 Lakeview Drive Phelps Memorial Hospital Master Plan Minutes of June and July 2005 meetings Site Plan Compliance Executive Session Carol Lyden Gorey Brook Road Presbey-Leland Memorials Private Mausoleum Building Doorley Palmer Avenue Other Announcements – Ed McCarthy made a motion to adopt the revised agenda. David Perlmutter seconded. It was unanimous (6-0) (Tanner absent). 1) James Kennedy Construction This is a continuation from previous meetings. �The Chair stated that the report that was required at the last meeting was not received. Sean McCarthy stated that he has been advised by the applicant that the report should be submitted to the Village in a week. Gary Malunis made a motion to re-open the public hearing. Ed McCarthy seconded. It was unanimous (6-0) (Tanner absent). The Chair summarized the events of this application from the last meeting. He noted a letter from Len Andrews. Since there were no further public comments, David Perlmutter made a motion to adjourn the public hearing to the November meeting. Ed McCarthy seconded. It was unanimous (6-0) (Tanner absent). 2) Mill Point Partners Sean McCarthy stated that the applicant informed his office that it is revising the plans and will present in October. This was adjourned to the next meeting. 3) KWD Realty Karl Dibble is the owner and is representing this application. Karl Dibble apologized for submitting the revised plans late. He stated that he just received the plans from his engineer. He presented a proposed layout of the site, which included site lighting, proposed ingress, egress, etc. The Chair asked about the sidewalk repairs. Karl Dibble responded that the repairs have not been completed yet. The Chair asked the applicant to meet with the Village consultants to try and resolve the outstanding issues. Nick Ward Willis stated that a narrative should be submitted by the applicant to indicate that the property will be used exclusively as a retail business. APPROVED - Planning Board Meeting, September 15, 2005 2 �4) Robert Scott – Robert Scott is representing this application. Robert Scott described his existing property layout. He stated that the series of retaining walls are proposed so that his property could be leveled for his children and for a patio. The Chair stated that the applicant should be referred to the Waterfront Advisory Committee for consistency with the Local Waterfront Revitalization Plan (LWRP). 5) Miller – This is a continuation of previous meetings. Marcus Luck is representing this application. Marcus Luck summarized the previous meetings. He stated that the project is currently proposing a 6x6 spa. The Chair referred to the Village Architect for comments. Sean McCarthy responded that the retaining walls need to be approved by the ARB. Nicholas Cicchetti made a motion to send to the applicant to the Architectural Review Board for approval. Ed McCarthy seconded. It was unanimous (6-0) (Tanner absent). 6) Phelps Memorial Hospital Andy Tung is representing this application along with Phelps CEO Keith Safian, Bruce Allen and Steve Silverberg. Keith Safian spoke about the Hospital’s master plan. He stated that the recent closings of two Westchester hospitals have significantly increased the services that the hospital must provide. He stated that the proposed parking garage will help patients access the hospital. Andy Tung discussed the existing Hospital Master Plan. He spoke about the proposed parking garage and its relation to the new medical services building. He spoke about the reduction of on-grade parking spaces. He stated that there would be a total of 1.5 acres less of impervious land and 2.0 acres of undisturbed land. Andy Tung spoke about the proposed structure. He stated that it would be a pre-cast concrete structure. He spoke about the proposed methods to access the parking garage. APPROVED - Planning Board Meeting, September 15, 2005 3 �The Chair asked if the Board had any questions. There were none. The Chair stated that some initial questions would include visual screening of the proposed structure. He also stated that the 4-way intersection into the NY Life property needs to be re-evaluated. Andy Tung responded that after one-year after opening the medical services building, the traffic would be re-evaluated. The Chair stated that the proposal adds an additional 250 cars to the intersection. Andy Tung stated that the program is still the same. Andy Tung spoke about the existing vegetation that would assist in screening the structure. The Chair asked if the Village consultants had reviewed the plans. Owen Wells stated that his comments focus on the bulk of the structure. He also spoke about the pedestrian connections. Andy Tung spoke about the walkway connections into Rockwood Hall. Owen Wells asked the applicant to explain how they calculated the height of the structure. Andy Tung explained the calculation. Michael Stein asked if the applicant is considering using gravel to provide a temporary parking lot while the parking garage is under construction in order to minimize the amount of impervious area. Andy Tung responded that the suggestion would be considered. Nicholas Cicchetti asked about the main traffic entrances into the site. Andy Tung responded that both entrances will be kept to public access. Keith Safian responded that the hospital encourages people to use Route 117 instead of Route 9. David Perlmutter made a motion to circulate a notice of intent to act as lead agency. Gary Malunis seconded. It was unanimous (6-0) (Tanner absent). 7) Minutes of the June and July meetings – The minutes from the June and July 2005 meetings will be reviewed at the next meeting. APPROVED - Planning Board Meeting, September 15, 2005 4 �8) Site Plan Compliance a) Kendal-on-Hudson – Sean McCarthy stated that the project is nearing completion. The Chair asked the Village Architect to investigate the pedestrian trail towards the South. He stated that the trail is part of the approved site plan. b) Frank’s Home Improvements Sean McCarthy summarized the off-street parking issue. He stated that the employees are supposed to park on-site. He stated that an inspection was performed and the applicant was complying. c) 315 North Broadway – Sean McCarthy stated that a notice of violation was issued for illegally parking cars on the site. d) Ichabod’s Landing – Sean McCarthy stated that building # 4 has several units ready for occupancy. e) Monopole – Sean McCarthy stated that a letter has been drafted. He stated that he would discuss in executive session. f) 309-313 North Broadway culvert Sean McCarthy stated that the owner has been notified that the sidewalk must be repaired. 9) Executive Session David Perlmutter made a motion to go into executive session. Gary Malunis seconded. It was unanimous (6-0) (Tanner absent). The Board entered into executive session at 8:50 pm to confer with and seek the advise of 5 APPROVED - Planning Board Meeting, September 15, 2005 �counsel. Ed Napoleon made a motion to resume the meeting. George Tanner seconded. It was unanimous (7-0). The meeting resumed at 9:25pm. No action was taken. 10) Presbey-Leland Memorials Gary Malunis made a motion to ratify the notice of the public hearing. Ed McCarthy seconded. It was unanimous (7-0). The Chair asked if the public had been properly noticed. Sean McCarthy responded yes. David Perlmutter made a motion to open the public hearing. Gary Malunis seconded. It was unanimous (7-0). Ed Napoleon recused himself from this application. Nancy Dillon from Presby-Leland Monument Company is representing this application. Nancy Dillon stated that the proposed structure is 1300sf. She stated that the proposed material is granite which is consistent with other mausoleums. The Chair stated that this is a Type II action under SEQRA. Mike Stein stated that proper drainage needs to be provided. Sean McCarthy responded that the drainage would be coordinated with his office. George Tanner asked about the removal of trees. Nancy Dillon responded that 7 trees have been removed. Sean McCarthy responded that the trees have been removed and the enforcement is being handled by the Building Department. He stated that a donation could be made to provide trees in the Village. Len Andrews (member of the Sleepy Hollow Cemetery Board) requested an opinion of the Board regarding future direction. The Chair stated that the Village Code includes the cemetery but the Board might recommend to the Village Trustees to amend the code to not require site plan approval in APPROVED - Planning Board Meeting, September 15, 2005 6 �the cemetery. Since there was no further public comments, George Tanner made a motion to close the public hearing. Gary Malunis seconded. It was unanimous (6-0) (Napoleon abstained). The Chair read the draft Resolution aloud. George Tanner made a motion to adopt the Resolution. Nicholas Cicchetti seconded. It was unanimous (6-0) (Ed Napoleon abstained). 11) Carol Lyden – Bob Snyder is representing this application on behalf of the applicant. Bob Snyder gave an explanation of the zoning restrictions and conservation easements placed on the property from the Rockefeller family. He gave an overview of the proposed horse stable and pasture. The Chair asked the Village consultants if the action is a Type I or Type II. The consultants investigated the action type. George Tanner asked if the stable would be a commercial stable. Bob Snyder responded that the stable is private. He stated that the stable would accommodate a maximum of 5 horses. Ed Napoleon made a motion to declare the Planning Board as the lead agency. Nicholas Cicchetti seconded. It was unanimous (7-0). The Chair recommended that the applicant be referred to the Waterfront Advisory Committee for consistency with the Local Waterfront Revitalization Plan (LWRP). David Perlmutter made a motion to schedule the public hearing for the October meeting. Ed Napoleon seconded. It was unanimous (7-0). 12) Doorley Geraldine Tortanello is the attorney representing this application along with Landscape Architect, John Slaker, and owners Mr. and Mrs. Doorley. Geraldine Tortanello reviewed the application to date. She reviewed the individual lots. She stated that the lots meet the FAR and setback requirements. She reviewed the lot on APPROVED - Planning Board Meeting, September 15, 2005 7 �Palmer Avenue in further detail. The Chair asked the applicant to review the Waterfront Advisory Committee’s findings. Geraldine Tortanello responded that the Waterfront Advisory Committee referred to 2 policies which it found the project was not consistent with. She stated that the scenic resources that the Waterfront Advisory Committee refers to are not specifically identified in the LWRP. David Perlmutter asked the applicant to return to the Waterfront Advisory Committee and present the revised information to the Committee that was recently presented to the Planning Board. Geraldine Tortanello responded that the applicant was before the Waterfront Advisory Committee two different times. She reviewed the two previous Waterfront Advisory Committee meetings. Nicholas Cicchetti asked if the site plan has changed since the Waterfront Advisory Committee meetings. Geraldine Tortanello responded that the site plan has never changed. George Tanner stated that the plans are dated April 2005 and the Waterfront Advisory Committee meetings were prior to the revised plans. Geraldine Tortanello responded that the size of the lots and the number of the lots has not changed. George Tanner stated that the applicant appeared before the Waterfront Advisory Committee back in 2002. He stated that the Board had indicated that the proposed application was not viewed favorably by the Board at the last meeting. He stated that the Committee might be interested in hearing the enhanced environmental analysis that the applicant has compiled. He recommended that the applicant return to the Waterfront Advisory Committee. Geraldine Tortanello cited a paragraph from the Committee’s June 2002 findings noting that the Planning Board would have to generate findings of their own contrary to the advice of the Waterfront Advisory Committee. David Perlmutter stated that the Waterfront Advisory Committee are experts on the LWRP. He stated that since the applicant is not willing to return to the Waterfront Advisory Committee, they are unwilling to have experts comment on the revised plan. The Chair stated that the applicant should present the Expanded Environmental Assessment Form (EAF) to the Waterfront Advisory Committee. Geraldine Tortanello responded that back in June, it was discussed whether returning to the Waterfront Advisory Committee’s review was necessary or not. She stated that the other large scale projects have been found to be consistent with the LWRP. APPROVED - Planning Board Meeting, September 15, 2005 8 �David Perlmutter stated that the applicant should return to the experts for a determination instead of trying to convince the Planning Board otherwise. Geraldine Tortanello asked if the applicant returned to the Waterfront Advisory Committee and they gave a negative recommendation, how the Board would view the application. The Chair stated that the Board would have to generate written findings to overrule the Waterfront Advisory Committee. He stated that the Board has never overruled the Waterfront Advisory Committee. Geraldine Tortanello requested a 5-minute recess. Geraldine Tortanello responded that the applicant is willing to return to the Waterfront Advisory Committee. She stated that her client is willing to agree extend the time period for the Board to make a decision within 62 days after close of the public hearing. She agreed to extend the period for the Board to make a decision until its next meeting. She also asked for the Board to request that the Committee generate written findings quickly thereafter. This was adjourned to the next meeting. 13) Other The Chair stated that the Draft Final EIS on the GM property is expected in earlyOctober. He stated that also the NYS Department of Environmental Conservation will make a determination on the Brownfield site is also due in October. He stated that if the Brownfield site is approved, the Village needs to make sure that appropriate measures are in place. He stated that the Village needs the following: 1) Briefing from consultants on different types of potential of Planning Board problems. 2) GM Draft FEIS comments. The Chair stated that the staged analysis needs to be planned. He stated that advice needs to be given to the Village Trustees. He suggested to start with the Brownfield Act issues. The Board agreed. Adjourned at 10:27 pm to the next meeting. APPROVED - Planning Board Meeting, September 15, 2005 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-2005 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource MINS_PLAN_2005-09-15 Subject The topic of the resource Planning Board Minutes & Resolutions-2005 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2005