https://sleepyhollow.localarchives.org/files/original/d2ca0d05f4e49096ab4e4f1e98d6ccd9.pdf 2d20af3ad735c589c7c9405975fd31c8 PDF Text Text RECEIVED VILLAGE OF SLEEPY HOLLOW PLANNING BOARD MEETING September 19,2002 QQf - g 2002 VILLAGE CLERK The meeting was called to order at 8:03p.m. by Nicholas Robinson, Chairman. The Cfc*air noted that a quorum was present. Present: Nicholas Robinson, Chairman Nicholas Cicchetti George Tanner David Perlmutter Ed Napoleon Absent: Ed McCarthy Dorota Szwem-Kopczynski Also Present: Dave Smith (Saccardi & Schiff/Village Planner) Dan Pennella (Charles A. Manganaro/Village Engineer) Anthony DelVecchio (Recording Secretary) Ed Lammers (Murphy, Stecich & Powell/Village Attorney) Bob Stiloski (Director, Department of Fire and Life Safety) / lO/f Announcements: The Chair stated that parking for Planning Board members would be discussed at the end of the meeting. Agenda; 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7) 8) 9) 10) 11) 12) 13) Douglass Hill sub-division SMSA/ Verizon Wireless GEISAVireless Location Study Omnipoint Karl Dibble Ichabod's Landing Antonio Rodrigues Laurentino Rodrigues Kendal on Hudson Monopole permit application status McMansions zoning Other Business Minutes David Perlmutter made a motion to adopt the revised agenda. George Tanner seconded. It was unanimous (5-0). I/O c^ �1) Douglass Hill sub-division Andy Tung is representing this application along with John Marwell. Andy Tung explained the proposed sub-division. He spoke about the one-acre driveway to be added to lot "A". He spoke about the proposed easement and covenant. He spoke about the no disturbance zone to protect the view from Kykuit. He also spoke about the pedestrian easement to maintain the existing trails. George Tanner asked if the entire parcel could be placed in a no disturbance zone. Andy Tung responded that the proposed parcels would be for residential use. Nicholas Cicchetti asked about the Waterfront Advisory Committee's decision concerning LWRP policies 5 and 5(b). Andy Tung spoke about the future use of Gory Brook Road and its maintenance. The Chair asked if the covenant would be recorded at the same time as the sub-division. Andy Tung responded yes. Dave Smith stated that any future sub-divisions must come before the Planning Board. The Chair opened the public hearing. Since there were no public comments, George Tanner made a motion to close the public hearing. David Perlmutter seconded. It was unanimous (5-0). The Chair read the draft Resolution aloud for the record. Ed Lammers stated that a copy of the covenant should be added to the Resolution. Nicholas Cicchetti made a motion to adopt the Resolution as amended. George Tanner seconded. It was unanimous (5-0). 2) SMSA/ Verizon Wireless Leslie Snyder is representing the application on behalf of Verizon/SMS A. She stated that she has met with the Village Trustees and they have agreed on a lease. The Chair asked if she had seen a copy of the draft Resolution. Leslie Snyder responded yes. Planning Board Meeting, September 19,2002 2 �The Chair stated that the application conforms to the Village Code by not abutting a residential district. He also stated that this location has the least impact on the Beekman Avenue corridor and which provides the applicant with adequate coverage. The Chair asked the Village consultants if they had any comments on the amended application. There were none. The Chair read the draft Resolution aloud for the record. George Tanner made a motion to adopt the Resolution. David Perlmutter seconded. It was unanimous (5-0). The Chair thanked Snyder & Snyder and Verizon for their patience with regards to this application. 3) GEIS/Wireless Location Study The Chair asked if there were any public comments. Jeffrey Anzavino (Scenic Hudson) spoke. He stated that he has prepared a small presentation concerning cell towers. The presentation consisted of the impacts of cell towers on municipalities and it reviewed the different types of wireless facilities available. The Chair thanked Jeffrey Anzavino for his efforts. The Chair spoke about the scoping outline. He stated that the Village is looking for a systematic approach for allowing cellular companies to provide service to the Village. The Chair read the Resolution aloud for the record. George Tanner made a motion to adopt the Resolution. David Perlmutter seconded. It was unanimous (5-0). The Chair stated that once the DEIS is submitted to the Board, a public hearing will be scheduled. 4) Qmnipoint Mike Peters is representing Omnipoint on this application. Planning Board Meeting, September 19,2002 3 �Mike Peters spoke about Omnipoint's application at 95 Beekman Avenue. He stated that his client would like to seriously look into changing the location to 28 Beekman Avenue. George Tanner asked if Omnipoint's technology would work with a monopole structure. He also asked if Omnipoint's technology would work with other applicant's at Village Hall. Mike Peters responded that he would look into it. David Perlmutter asked Mike Peters to come back to the Board with the visual impact to Village Hall. Mike Peters responded that he would provide all necessary documentation that the Board requires. The Chair informed Mike Peters to contact the Village Administrator concerning a possible lease agreement. 5) Karl Dibble Richard Blancato is the attorney representing this application along with Karl Dibble. He stated that based on last meeting's progress, the Board would be in a position to adopt the draft Resolution this evening. David Perlmutter stated that the applicant was supposed to remove trucks from the property and has not done so. He stated that he is against voting for the Resolution this evening. He stated that he wants the Village to take action to correct the problem. Richard Blancato responded that the bus on the property has been sold and Karl Dibble is waiting for the new owner to have it towed. George Tanner stated that three (3) months have passed since the applicant was asked to have the property cleared of vehicles not associated with his property. Richard Blancato responded that the applicant is currently in court. He stated that as per the agreement with the court, Karl Dibble would have the vehicles removed before the next court date. He also stated that the Board could place conditions on the Resolution. George Tanner stated that he has no faith that the applicant will adhere to the conditions on a Resolution. Ed Lammers stated that the Resolution needs four (4) yes votes in order to pass. The Chair read the Resolution aloud for the record. The Chair asked if the Board had any comments. Planning Board Meeting, September 19,200? 4 �There was an open discussion on the parked and stored vehicles on the property. David Perlmutter wants the signage and parking issues addressed. George Tanner made a motion to have the Resolution voted on tonight. David Perlmutter seconded. The motion was disapproved by a 2-3 vote (Chair, Cicchetti, Napoleon). The Chair stated that the Resolution would be carried over to the next meeting. He also stated that the applicant should speak to the Village attorney and try to resolve the Board's concerns. David Perlmutter stated that the trucks should be removed immediately. 6) Ichabod's Landing The Chair stated that the Planning Board is an interested agency in this application. He stated that the Village Trustees are the lead agency. He stated that the Board has had previous informal discussions with the applicant. Henry Hocherman is the attorney representing this application along with Bruce Lozito. Henry Hocherman stated that they are here tonight to keep the Board updated on the status of the application. Dave Smith stated that the property is in the Riverfront. He also stated that the Planning Board is an involved agency. He stated that the Planning Board would make final site plan approval. The Chair stated that comments could be submitted until October 9, 2002. Bruce Lozito gave an overview of the proposed project via a site plan. He spoke about the number of residential units that would be created. He spoke about emergency vehicle access and other various planning concepts that were used to develop the site plan. He spoke about the building's exterior details. George Tanner asked if the applicant has spoken to the GM developer concerning the possible construction of an additional roadway to the GM site. Bruce Lozito responded yes. He stated that he has spoke to the GM developer at length concerning the entrances to both properties and how they would mesh together. Planning Board Meeting, September 19, 2002 5 �The Chair stated that the Board would prepare comments for the applicant. 7) Antonio Rodrigues Sean McCarthy is the project architect and is representing this application. Sean McCarthy discussed the original proposal from 1996. He stated that the applicant did not complete the project due to cost overrun. He discussed the traffic flow in and out of the proposed site with relation to the existing commercial building. He discussed the drainage for the complete site. He also discussed the landscape plan. The Chair asked if there was an underground storage tank on site. Sean McCarthy responded that it was abandoned. The Chair asked about the contents of the tank. Sean McCarthy responded that he did not know. Antonio Rodrigues stated that the previous tenant was not a filling station. George Tanner stated that the tank could have contained hydraulic fluid. Dave Smith asked if a phase 1 or phase 2 environmental report was completed. Sean McCarthy responded that he did not know. George Tanner made a motion to act as the lead agency. Nicholas Cicchetti seconded. It was unanimous (5-0). The Chair stated that a traffic analysis is required. George Tanner asked if any blasting would be performed. Sean McCarthy responded that based on the boring samples taken that blasting would not be required. Nicholas Cicchetti asked if the zoning requirements had been met. Sean McCarthy responded yes. This was adjourned to the next meeting. 8) Laurentino Rodrigues Vitali Santo is the project architect. He is representing the application along with Laurentino Rodrigues. Planning Board Meeting, September 19, 2002 6 �The Chair asked if an application has been filed. Dave Smith responded yes but it is incomplete. The Chair stated that the applicant would be allowed to very quickly summarize the project since the application is incomplete. Vitali Santo briefly summarized the project. He discussed the proposed parking plan. George Tanner asked about the number of units to be created. Vitali Santo responded nine (9). George Tanner asked about the number of bedrooms. Vitali Santo responded thirteen (13). The Chair stated that this application would be resumed once a completed application had been filed with the Building Department. 9) Kendal on Hudson Andy Tung is representing this application. He stated that he is before the Board tonight to respond to two (2) conditions in the site plan approval. 1) Roof drainage system and roof penetrations. 2) Garage facade. Andy Tung stated that gutters would be used around the property. He stated that the gutters would connect into drainage piping. Andy Tung spoke about the mechanical equipment on the roof. He also spoke about the roof vent piping penetrations. Andy Tung spoke about the parking facade. The Chair asked why the rock facade was not being used on the lower garage floors. Andy Tung responded that the vegetation would hide it. Ed Napoleon asked if the well for the cooling towers would be open. Andy Tung responded yes. He stated that it would have a safety fence installed on three (3) sides. Dave Smith asked if there was anything else that could attenuate the sound of the cooling towers. Planning Board Meeting, September 19,2002 7 �Andy Tung stated that the sound is being attenuated at the intake and at the exhaust. The Chair stated that this would be carried over to the next meeting so that the Village consultants could properly review. 10) Monopole permit application status Ed Lammers stated that Omnipoint was performing calculations as to the actual height of the monopole. Mike Peters (attorney representing Omnipoint) stated that he has not received the results as of yet. The Chair spoke about ways to provide adequate coverage without a monopole. He also spoke about protecting the Kykuit view shed. The Chair stated that a meeting needs to be scheduled between the monopole proprietor and the occupants to discuss necessary corrections. 11) McMansions zoning The Chair stated that he has received a letter from Westchester County stating that they have no concerns on this matter. Dave Smith stated that it is on the Waterfront Advisory Committee's agenda for their next meeting. He stated that the Trustees could adopt it at their October 8, 2002 meeting. 12) Other Business The Chair stated that another letter needs to be sent to the Village Trustees concerning rezoning the Rockefeller property from one (1) acre to five (5) acres. Dave Smith will send another letter to the Village Trustees repeating the Planning Board's recommendation. The Chair stated that he received a letter from Daniel Beaton concerning the Tappan Motors property. Bob Stiloski stated that he would speak to TomehVs gas station concerning parking at the gas station for the Board members. Planning Board Meeting, September 19,2002 8 �13) Minutes • The minutes for July 2002 will be reviewed at the next meeting. George Tanner made a motion to adjourn. Nicholas Cicchetti seconded. It was (5-0). Adjourned at 10:47 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, (^QkuP^mL Anthony Del Vecchio Planning Board Meeting, September 19,2002 �VILLAGE OF SLEEPY HOLLOW PLANNING BOARD RESOLUTION Adopted at the September 19,2002 Meeting of the Village of Sleepy Hollow Planning Board RESOLUTION: SPECIAL PERMIT APPROVAL PROPOSED: EJusfe*Mounted Antennas and Related Equipment at the Top Of 28 Beekman Avenue APPLICANT: New York SMSA Limited Partnership d/b/a Verizon Wireless LOCATION: 28 Beekman Avenue Sleepy Hollow, New York WHEREAS, the Planning Board has reviewed the following materials: 1. Special Permit Application dated October 30,2001, submitted on behalf of the applicant by Leslie Snyder of the law firm Snyder & Snyder LLP containing: A. B. C. D. E. F. G. H. I. Verizon Wireless' FCC License; Health and Safety Engineers Report from Scinetics Corporation prepared on or about September 26,2001; Radio Frequency Engineer Report prepared by Michael Primich dated October 30,2001; Structural Engineers Report prepared by A. Reginatto Consulting Engineer P.C. dated October 30,2001; Site Plan drawings prepared by H2M Group, dated October 31, 2001; Short Form Environmental Assessment Form prepared by Snyder & Snyder LLP dated October 31, 2001; Long Environmental Assessment Form with Visual EAF Addendum prepared by Snyder & Snyder LLP dated October 31,2001; Coastal Assessment Form prepared by Snyder & Snyder LLP dated October 31, 2001; Engineering reports prepared by Lawler Matusky & Skelly, Engineers, LLP, the Village's Radio Frequency Engineer for the project, dated December 19, 2001 and January 15, 2002; and �2. Review Memoranda from Saccardi and Schiff, Inc., Village Planners, dated November 9, 2001, and from Charles Manganaro Consulting Engineers, dated November 14,2001; 3. Letter dated July 8,2002 from Snyder and Snyder providing coverage maps with facilities being installed on the roof of 28 Beekman Avenue; 4. Letters dated August 14,2002 and August 21,2002 from Snyder and Snyder; 5. Letter dated September 4,2002 from Snyder and Snyder containing an alternative application to install panel antennas and related communication facilities to the roof of 28 Beekman Avenue as an alternative to its application to install the communication facilities to the roof of 95 Beekman containing the following materials: A. B. C. D. E. F. G. H. Memorandum in support of its alternative application prepared by Snyder & Snyder LLP dated September 4,2002; Radio Frequency Engineer Report and affidavit prepared by Michael Primich dated July 2, 2002; Radio-frequency analysis prepared by Paul A. Testagrossa, RF Engineer, Bell Laboratories dated September 3,2002; Visual Analysis prepared by Creative Visuals, Inc. & Virtual Real, Inc., dated August 12,2002; Site Plan drawings prepared by H2M Group, dated August 28,2002; Short Form Environmental Assessment Form prepared by Snyder & Snyder LLP dated August 16, 2002; Long Environmental Assessment Form with Visual EAF Addendum prepared by Snyder & Snyder LLP dated August 16,2002; Coastal Assessment Form prepared by Snyder & Snyder LLP dated August 16,2002; 6. Memorandum of Lawler Mutusky & Skelly Engineers dated September 11, 2002; 7. Revised Radio-frequency analysis prepared by Paul A. Testagrossa, RF Engineer, Bell Laboratories dated September 17, 2002; 8. Letter dated September 18, 2002 from Snyder and Snyder; 9. Letter prepared by Michael Musso, Lawler Mutusky & Skelly Engineers dated September 19, 2002; �WHEREAS, the proposals were discussed by the Planning Board at public Meetings held at Village Hall on November 15,2001, December 20,2001, January 17, 2002, February 21, 2002, March 21,2002, April 18,2002, May 16,2002, June 20, 2002, July 18,2002 and September 19,2002 at which times those wishing to be heard were given the opportunity to be heard; and WHEREAS, The Village of Sleepy Hollow Waterfront Advisory Committee (WAC) reviewed the applications at their December 5,2001 and September 4, 2002 meetings and found the application to install the facilities at 28 Beekman to be consistent with the goals and objectives of the Village's Local Waterfront Revitalization Plan; and WHEREAS, the Planning Board commenced a public hearing at their March 21, 2002 meeting, and closed the public hearing at the April 18,2002 meeting; all those wishing to be heard at the public hearings were given the opportunity to be heard; and WHEREAS, the Planning Board having reviewed Verizon's application to install the facilities to the top of 95 Beekman Avenue and having determined pursuant to Village Code §62-22.2 that the building located at 95 Beekman abuts a residential district, and that adequate coverage could be achieved by siting the facility at 28 Beekman Avenue, a lot which does not abut a residential district; WHEREAS, the Planning Board also having determined that the installation of the facilities on top of 28 Beekman complies with §62-22.2E(2) which states that "the siting of communication facility on property owned by the Village of Sleepy Hollow shall be encouraged"; WHEREAS, on September 17,2002, the Board of Trustees having passed a resolution authorizing the Mayor of Sleepy Hollow to enter into a lease to install the communication facilities to the roof of 28 Beekman (the "Lease") subject to Planning Board approval, Architectural Review Board approval, a determination under SEQRA with respect to the Lease and review and approval of the Village Attorney; WHEREAS, in the course of its review, the Planning Board has made the following findings and caused noted or conducted the following activities: 1. Received an Application Fee; 2. Caused Field Inspections to be made of the property and surrounding areas; 3. Requested, received considered comments from the Village Planner, Village Engineering Consultants, Department of Fire Life Safety about the proposed project; �4. Requested, received and reviewed Short and Long Environmental Assessment Form in compliance with the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) and a Coastal Assessment Form; 5. After review of the field conditions, public comments, recommendations and the Short Environmental Assessment Form as well as other items noted above, has determined that the proposed action will not have a significant adverse effect on the environment and that an environmental impact and that an environmental impact statement will not need to be prepared. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the said application for special permit approval relative to the installation of antennas and related facilities to the top of the existing building at 28 Beekman Avenue as shown on the site plan prepared by H2M Group; dated August 28,2002, is hereby granted approval and that the Applicant may obtain the endorsed approval of the Planning Board Chairman on a copy of this resolution and upon the site plan drawings as necessary to show compliance with the following conditions, which endorsement shall permit filing in the Office of the Village Building Department for purposes of obtaining a building permit in accordance with this resolution and all building code requirements, provided, however, that this approval shall expire one year after the date of this resolution if the following modifications and conditions have not yet been completed to the satisfaction of the Planning Board and the Applicant has not obtained the required building permit or permits for the construction in accordance with the approved plan(s): 1. Prior to the issuance of a building permit the Applicant shall pay the Village of Sleepy Hollow all application and review fees as required by the Village Code, as approved by the Village Attorney. 2. Prior to the issuance of a building permit the Applicant shall appear before and obtain an approval from the Architectural Review Board. * 3. The Applicant is to provide a structural engineers report certifying the structural integrity of the proposed communication facilities. 4. The Applicant shall post a bond in an amount to be determined by the Village Engineer pursuant to Village Code Section §62-22.2(0) and/or as determined by the Village Administrator on advice of the Village Engineer. 5. The granting of this permit is subject to the approval and execution of the Lease by the Mayor on behalf of the Board Trustees. �6. The Applicant shall comply with all applicable Federal, State and Local law with respect to the installation, modification and/or removal of the facilities. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Planning Board expresses its concern that the subject property not become overburdened with excessive and unsightly telecommunications facilities and that this Resolution should not be construed as precedent for future applicants to install telecommunications facilities at this site. PLANNING BOARD VILLAGE OF SLEEPY HOLLOW , Chairman Date /• LAST REVISED 9-I9-02 �RESOLUTION Adopted at the September 19,2002 Meeting of the Village of Sleepy Hollow Planning Board RESOLUTION: Negative Declaration and Final Subdivision Plat Approval of Parcel known as Section 115.08, Block 1, Lot 2 PROPOSED: Subdivision of an existing 56.9± acre parcel into two lots, Lot A consisting of ±33.3 acres, Lot B of ±22.2 acres. The application also includes the transfer of 1.4± acres to the owners of two existing adjoining parcels (115.08-1 -35 and 115.08-1-36) and the transfer to Lot A of ±1.0 acres of land from David Rockefeller, the owner of property immediately to the north, under an existing driveway that will serve Lot A. OWNER: David Rockefeller Fund LOCATION: West of Webber Avenue TAX MAP DESIGNATION: Part of Section 115.08, Block 1 Lot 2 ZONING: R-l WHEREAS, the Planning Board of the Village of Sleepy Hollow (the Planning Board) has reviewed a preliminary plat application dated June 5,2002, including long environmental assessment form and preliminary subdivision map submitted on behalf of the David Rockefeller Fund (the Applicant); and WHEREAS, the Planning Board has, after following the requirements of the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) declared themselves to be the Lead Agency in this action; and WHEREAS, Planning Board, after finding the application to be complete, did direct the Applicant to appear before the Village of Sleepy Hollow Waterfront Advisory Committee (WAC) for a consistency review with respect to the goals and policies outlined in the Village's Local Waterfront Revitalization Plan (LWRP); and WHEREAS, the WAC, at its July 2002 meeting did review the application and found it to be consistent with the goals and policies outlined in the LWRP; and WHEREAS, at its July 18, 2002 meeting, the Planning Board did approve the preliminary subdivision plat and directed the Applicant to circulate the preliminary subdivision plat to a list of interested and involved agencies as outlined in Chapter 78-7 of the Village's Subdivision Regulations; and WHEREAS, on September 19, 2002, the Planning Board held a duly noticed public hearing in which all persons wishing to be heard were; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Board, after a complete review �1 of the application materials, including environmental assessment form, coastal assessment form, and Consistency Findings from the Waterfront Advisory Committee does hereby declare that the proposed action will not have a significant adverse effect on the environment and that an environmental impact statement will not need to be prepared; and be it further RESOLVED, the Planning Board does hereby grant final subdivision plat approval for the subdivision of the subject 56.9 iyproperty into two lots: and be it further . ^ 'cur**" ififajL+A**^ C~»*+4*h~*> RESOLVED, that prior to the signing of the final subdivision plat by the Planning Board Chairman all applicable professional review fees, environmental charges and other Village fees shall be paid to the Village, < * * ^ ^ <^p rf 0*- tif^^i - j j j - i I ritx • • / /%< PLANNING BOARD VILLAGE OF SLEEPY HOLLOW Nicholas Robinson, Chairman F:\M\M-720 Sleepy Hollow\Resolutioiu\final Douglass Hill wpd ' ' Date �September 19, 2002 VILLAGE OF SLEEPY HOLLOW PLANNING BOARD RESOLUTION ADOPTING GEIS SCOPING OUTLINE WHEREAS, the Village of Sleepy Hollow Planning Board (the "Planning Board") is provided the authority u^der Chapter 62-22.2.N of the Zoning Code of the Village of Sleepy Hollow (the "Village Code") to grant special use and site plan permits for location, construction and installation of wireless communications facilities; and WHEREAS, the Planning Board is concerned with the unplanned proliferation of wireless communication facilities throughout the Village and the potential visual and aesthetic impacts associated therewith; and WHEREAS, the Planning Board is desirous, after reviewing several completed and pending applications to create a comprehensive Village-wide wireless antenna siting plan; and WHEREAS, the Planning Board recognizes the importance of co-locating facilities in strategic locations a*id incorporating stealth technology to mitigate potential aesthetic impacts; and WHEREAS, the Planning Board has requested from the Mayor and Board of Trustees, the authorization for the necessary funding to prepare a generic environmental impact statement (GEIS) analyzing co-locationai, aesthetics and other issues of sound planning and public policy; and WHEREAS, the Planning Board did cause to be prepared a draft scoping outline which was circulated with a notice for a public scoping session; and WHEREAS, on July 18, 2002, the Planning Board held a duly noticed public scoping session in which all rriembers of the public were provided an opportunity to be heard and were; and WHEREAS, the Planning Board extended the public comment period on the GEIS in which written material could be transmitted until September 9, 2002 and to date the Village has not received any written continents on the GEIS scoping outline: and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, thai the Planning Board does hereby adopt the scoping outline and directs the Villages Planning Consultant to coordinate with the Village Administrator and the other Village consultants regarding the preparation of the GEIS document to address the impacts of anticipated wireless communication facilities and to ultimately create a comprehensive village-wide wireless antenna plan l^Lt^fOC— N lcnoias Robinson, Chairman F >.y>M-*20 SKcpy H<Xio»CHS\(.J 15 K W Mfeffc *0C V-1?, a^jL. Date , /, ^T i 1 '* H^^^Y\ J") i w ' J �Scoping Outline: Proposed Wireless Communication Facility Locational Plan Village of Sleepy Hollow, New York Lead Agency: Village of Sleepy Hollow Planning Board. FttMk Scoping Sesnon: July 18, 2002, Village Hall, 28 Bcckman Avenue, Sleepy Hollow, New York 10591. Comment period held open until: September 9,2002, contact Robert Stiloski, Director of Fire and Life Safety, Village Hall, 28 Beekman Avenue, Sleepy Hollow, NY 10591 Lift of other interested, involved and other agencies: Hon. Philip Zcgarelli, Mayor and Board of Trustees Village of Sleepy Hollow Village of Sleepy Hollow Waterfront Advisory Committee, Richard Weiss, Chairman Village of Sleepy Hollow Architectural Review Board, James Nazemetz, Chairman Westchester County Department of Planning Town of Mt. Pleasant Supervisor's Office Town of Greenburg Supervisor's Office Mayor Village of Tarrytown Public School district of the Tarrytowns, Howard Smith, Superintendent New York State Office of Parks. Recreation and Historic Preservation New York State Department of Environmental Conservation and Region HI Scenic Hudson Description of Proposed Action The Village of Sleepy Hollow Planning Board (the Planning Board) is responsible for the review and issuing of special permits and site plan approvals for wireless communication facilities under Section 62-22.2 of the Zoning Code. The Planning Board has become concerned about the proliferation of wireless communication facilities (WCF's) throughout the Village and the potential cumulative impact of these facilities on the landscape. In an effort to coordinate the siting of these facilities, the Planning Board is conducting a wireless communication facility locational plan for the entire Village. The goal of the GEIS is to evaluate where the optimal $ite(s) for co-locating multiple carriers and how those prospective facilities can be constructed so that they present the least impact cumulatively as possible. I. Executive Summary A B C D. £ Brief Description of Proposed Action Need for the Project Summary of Relevant Environmental Conditions Summary of Significant Beneficial and Adverse Impacts Mitigation Measures Proposed �Draft Scoping Outline Village of Sleepy Hollow Page 2 F. G. Summary of Alternatives Involved and Interested Agencies, Required Permits/Approvals II. Description of Proposed Action 1. Telecommunications Act of 19% 2. Identification of Different Personal Wireless Services Providers a. b. c. d e. Cellular Personal Communication Services (PCS) Enhanced Specialized Mobile Radio (ESMR) Specialized Mobile Radio (SMR) Paging 3. Viewsheds of Local/Regional Significance (L WRP) 4. Existing Wireless Carriers in the Village and Surrounding Area. III. Existing Environmental Conditions, Anticipated Impacts and Mitigation 1. Siting requirements a. Site Identification and Preliminary Screening (1) elevation (2) physical setting (3) aesthetics (4) proximity to sensitive receptors (5) proximity to historic landmarks 2 Identification of potential co-locational sites 3. Impact Evaluation of Each Site (a) (b) (c) 4 aesthetics physical disturbance cumulative impacts Proposed Mitigation (a) stealth �Draft Scoping Outline Village of Sleepy Hollow P»ge3 (b) (c) (d) IV. camouflage landscaping other Alternatives Alternative Sites Considered V. Applicability to Other Village Refutations 1 2. 3 LWRP Tree Ordinance Other VI. Adverse environmental impacts that cannot be avoided or adequately mitigated if the proposed action is implemented. VII. Irreversible and irretrievable commitments of environmental resources that would be associated with the proposed action should it be implemented. VIII. Any growth inducing impacts of the proposed action. IX. Appendix Field measurement survey analysis F \M\M-720 Skcpy Hc4U>w\GEIS\A**w* Wntku Cmm Fac ColocMKmil M M ~ p * �Saccardi & Schiff, Inc. RECEIVED JUL 2 2 ?nn? VILLAGE CLERK Planning and Development Consultants TRANSMITTAL TO: Angela Everetts, Village Clerk 245 Mam Street White Plains New York 10601 Tel 914-761 3582 FAX 914-761 3759 sands@saccschiff com 33 Front Street Hempstead New York 11550 Tel: 516-486-0610 FAX-516-486-0615 DATE: Jury 19, 2002 PROJECT: Resolutions THE FOLLOWING REASON VIA 0 Originals 0 Your Comments 0 Hand Delivery/Messenger X Resolutions X Your Distribution 0 First Class Mail 0 Agreement 0 Your Information 0 Express Mail/Next Day/Fed Ex 0 Copy 0 As Per Your Request X UPS DESCRIPTION/COMMENTS: Enclosed find the following resolutions; 1. Notice of Intent to Act as Lead Agency Village-Wide Wireless Communications Facility Siting Plan 2. Subdivision of Parcel Known as Section 115.08, Block 1, Lo2 John J. Saccardi, AICP David B Schiff. AICP PP 3. Syrette Dym, AICP David B Smith. AICP Margaret H Uhle, AICP RLA Bonita J VonOhlsen. RIA County House Road Cluster Subdivision Final Subdivision Plat Approval 4. Planning Board SEQRA Finding Statement Kendal on Hudson Continuing Care Retirement Community 5. Kendal on Hudson Continuing Care Retirement Community Site Plan and Wetland Permit Approval Csaba Teglas. AICP Consultant Land Development Comprehensive Planning Zoning Real Estate Economics Environmental Studies Housing ^tori murnty Development F:\M\M-720 Sleepy HoUovATraiumidabVAngeU-ViUage Clok Sent By: David B. Smith, ACIP �VILLAGE OF SLEEPY HOLLOW PLANNING BOARD DECEIVED RESOLUTION im o 9 otiM L c L NOTICE OF INTENT TO ACT AS LEAD AGENCY 'mi VILLAGE-WIDE WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY VILLAGE C L P D RK SITING PLAN WHEREAS, the Village of Sleepy Hollow Planning Board (the "Planning Board") is provided the authority under Section 62-22.2.N of the Zoning Code of the Village of Sleepy Hollow (the "Village Code*') to grant special use and site plan permits for location, construction and installation of wireless communications facilities; and WHEREAS, the Planning Board is concerned with the unplanned proliferation of wireless communication facilities throughout the Village and the potential visual and aesthetic impacts associated therewith; and WHEREAS, the Planning Board is desirous, after reviewing several completed and pending applications to create a comprehensive Village-wide wireless antenna siting plan; and WHEREAS, the Planning Board recognizes the importance of colocating facilities in strategic locations and incorporating stealth technology to mitigate potential aesthetic impacts; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Planning Board does hereto declare its intent to act as Lead Agency under the State Environmental Quality Reviev/(SEQR^rkw» for the preparation of a generic environmental impact statement (GEIS) analyzing colocational, aesthetics and other issues of sound planning and public policy; and, be it further RESOLVED, that the Planning Board will be holding a public scoping session on July 18,2002, at 8:00 PM at Village Hall, 28 Beekman Avenue, Sleepy Hollow, New York 10591 on the attached draft scoping outline; and, be it further fv> RESOLVED, that the public comment period will held open until Styfir <? ' during which time written comments can be submitted for the Planning Board's consideration and such correspondence should be directed to Mr. Robert Stilowski, Director of Fire and Life Safety at Village Hall, 28 Beekman Avenue, Sleepy Hollow, New York 10591. Nic/iolas Robinson, Chairman F \M\M-720 Sleepy Hollow\Resolutions\M720.22 - Wireless GEIS noi.wpd Date �RESOLUTION Adopted at the July 18,2002 Meeting of the Village of Sleepy Hollow Planning Board «... JUL * 2 9f\(y VILLA RESOLUTION: Subdivision of Parcel known as Section 115.08, Block 1, Lot 2 PROPOSED: Subdivision of an existing 56.9± acre parcel into two lots. Lot Aconsisting of ±33.3 acres, Lot B of ±22.2 acres the transfer of l.4± acres toQie owners of two existing parcels (115.08-1-35 and 115.08-1-36) and the transfer to Lot A of ±1.0 acres of land from David Rockefeller, the owner of property immediately to the north, under an existing driveway that will serve Lot A. OWNER: David Rockefeller Fund LOCATION: West of Webber Avenue TAX MAP DESIGNATION: Part of Section 115.08, Block 1 Lot 2 ZONING: R-l WHEREAS, the Planning Board of the Village of Sleepy Hollow (the Planning Board) has reviewed a preliminary plat application dated June 5,2002, including long environmental assessment form and preliminary subdivision map submitted on behalf of the David Rockefeller Fund (the Applicant); and WHEREAS, the Planning Board has, after following the requirements of the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) declared themselves to be the Lead Agency in this action; and WHEREAS, Planning Board, after finding the application to be complete, did direct the Applicant to appear before the Village of Sleepy Hollow Waterfront Advisory Committee (WAC) for a consistency review with respect to the goals and policies outlined in the Village's Local Waterfront Revitalization Plan (LWRP); and WHEREAS, the WAC, at its July 2002 meeting did review the application and found it to be consistent with the goals and policies outlined in the LWRP; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Board does hereby grant preliminary plat approval and directs the Applicant to distribute the preliminary plat to the appropriate agencies as outlined in Article III.6B of the Village of Sleepy Hoi low-Subdivision Regulations for comment prior to submission of the application for Final Subdivision Plat Approval. PLANNING BOARD Jc^<*^*2* Date F:\M\M-720 Sleepy Hollow\Resolutions\Dougtass Hill.wpd �RECEIVED RESOLUTION COUNTY HOUSE ROAD CLUSTER SUBDIVISION FINAL SUBDIVISION PLAT APPROVAL J "L 2 2 WO? w-1 VILLAGE CLERK WHEREAS, on May 25, 1999, the Village Board of Trustees (Village Board) initiated a proposal to rezone all non-public lands located east of the Old Croton Aqueduct and south of Bedford and County House Roads in the Village of Sleepy Hollow from R-3, Single Family Residence/Moderate Density (5,000 sq.ft. minimum lot size) to R-1, Single Family Residence/Open District (43,560 sq. ft. minimum lot size); and WHEREAS, as required under Section 62-53.B of the Village Zoning Code, the Village of Sleepy Hollow Planning Board (Planning Board) reviewed the proposed rezoning and made recommendations that would result in a lower on-site density and would allow for the application of clustering as provided under New York State Village Law; and WHEREAS, on September 19,1999, County House Road, LLC (the "Applicant") submitted an application, consistent with existing zoning, to the Village of Sleepy Hollow requesting preliminary subdivision approval to subdivide approximately 11.9 acres of property designated on the Village of Sleepy Hollow Assessment Maps as Section 115.12 Block 2, Lots 35 and 36; and WHEREAS, on October 12, 1999, after completing the requirements of the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) the Village Board did rezone the subject site from R-3 to R-l and did authorize Planning Board to utilize the clustering provisions as provided under Section 7-738 of the New York State Village Law; and WHEREAS, on October 21, 1999 the Planning Board declared its intent to act as Lead Agency with respect to the proposed action; and WHEREAS, on December 16, 1999, the Planning Board declared itself to be the Lead Agency with respect to the proposed action; and WHEREAS, the Lead Agency, after careful examination and review of a conventional 11 lot subdivision, did determine that an 11 lot conventional subdivision could be properly laid out on site; and WHEREAS, on February 17,2000, the Lead Agency held a properly noticed public hearing on the preliminary subdivision plat application and draft expanded full EAF at which members of the Planning Board, Village staff, Village consultants and members of the public provided comments, and the Planning Board has duly considered all such comments; and WHEREAS, on April 5,2000 the Village of Sleepy Hollow Waterfront Advisory Committee (W AC) conducted a consistency review comparing the proposed project with policies outlined in the Village's Local Waterfront Revitalization Program (LWRP); and Page 1 of 5 �WHEREAS, after review of the proposed action, the WAC unanimously concluded that the proposed action was consistent with the overall goals and policies of the LWRP; and WHEREAS, the Planning Board, acting as Lead Agency under SEQRA has required the preparation of a draft expanded full Environmental Assessment Form (EAF) with accompanying reports, caused such draft expanded full EAF form to be circulated for public review; provided a public hearing where all those wishing to be heard were heard and on May 1, 2000 adopted a Negative Declaration accompanied by a Findings of Fact, thus completing the required process of environmental review for the proposed action; and WHEREAS, on May 1 2000, the Planning Board granted preliminary approval for the 11 lot clustered subdivision; and WHEREAS, on July 7, 2000, the Applicant submitted a request for final subdivision approval; and WHEREAS, on May 16,2002, the Planning Board held a properly noticed public hearing on the final subdivision plat at which hearing all those wishing to be heard were heard; and WHEREAS, the application for final subdivision plat approval consists of the following drawings which have been reviewed in detail by the Planning Board: a. b. c. d. e. f. g. h. I. j. k. 1. Illustrative Site Plan prepared by Robert Lamb Hart, last revised July 6,2000; Subdivision Plat prepared by Stephen T. Johnson, P.L.S. July 6,2000; Area Map for final subdivision plat, no author, dated July 6,2000; Site Utility Plan prepared by Michael Wein, P.E. last revised July 6,2000; Site Grading Plan prepared by Michael Wein, P.E. last revised July 6,2000; Erosion Control Plan prepared by Michael Wein, P.E. last revised May 12, 2000; Road and Sewer Profile, prepared by Michael Wein, P.E. last revised August 28, 2000; Detail and Notes, prepared by Michael Wein, P.E. last revised July 24,2000; Erosion Control Details, prepared by Michael Wein, P.E. dated September 1, 1999; Conceptual Tree Preservation and Landscape Plan, prepared by Robert Lamb Hart, last revised July 6,2000; Conceptual Design Guidelines, prepared by Robert Lamb Hart, dated July 6, 2000: January 7, 2000; and NYSDOT Improvements, prepared by Michael Wein, P.E., dated April 28,2000; and WHEREAS, the Applicant is required to secure the completion of certain subdivision improvements as shown on the Subdivision Plat, including roads, sanitary sewers, water mains, and stormwater drainage facilities; and WHEREAS, the Applicant has submitted an estimate of costs for the construction of such Page 2 of 5 B �facilities to Charles A. Manganaro Consulting Engineers (CAMCE), engineering consultants to the Planning Board; and WHEREAS, CAMCE has confirmed that the estimate of $275,000 is a correct estimate; and NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that said Application for final subdivision plat approval relative to the cluster subdivision of 11.9± acres into 11 residential lots and one open space lot as shown on the Subdivision Plat dated July 6, 2000 is hereby granted approval and that the Applicant may obtain the endorsed approval of the Planning Board Chairman on the final subdivision plat provided, however, that the following items are to be completed before filing the final plat, or as otherwise appropriate: 1. The road design standards for the proposed cul-de-sac shall be amended as allowed under the cluster authorization to reduce the paved portion of the road width to 18 feet and the diameter of the paved portion of the proposed cul-de-sac to 80 feet. This design consideration is consistent with planning publications reviewed by the Planning Board and recommendations from the Westchester County Planning Board (January 31, 2000). 2. The proposed open space components reflected on the final plat shall consist of a 0.46± acre passive recreation area located at the vicinity of Bedford and County House Road, a 1.07± acres portion with a stormwater detention facility linked by a 15 foot wide trail system (1.53± acre open space component to be dedicated to the Village), and 0.84± acres of conservation buffer easement along Bedford and County House Roads. The Applicant has agreed to improve the open space parcel with a scenic overlook, at its expense and in accordance with a plan approved by the Village Board of Trustees, prior to the dedication of said open space parcel to the Village of Sleepy Hollow and prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for thefirstunit. The cost of said improvement shall be limited to $40,000. If the actual cost of such improvement is less than $40,000, the difference shall be donated by the Applicant to the Village Recreation Fund for recreational purposes, pursuant to Section 19B-5 of the Village Code. 3. The Applicant has agreed to provide an access easement to the stormwater detention facility using a stabilized sub-surface material designed to the satisfaction of the Village Engineer, and suitable for access by the Village of Sleepy Hollow Department of Public Works for maintenance of such. 4. The Applicant has agreed to deposit $15,000 into a dedicated fund prior to the filing of the final subdivision plat and to be held in trust by the Village, the interest of which is to be utilized to offset the cost to maintain the stormwater detention facility in perpetuity. 5. Prior to the signing of the subdivision plat, all outstanding professional review fees, environmental charges and other Village fees shall be paid to the Village, satisfactory to the Mayor and or the Village Attorney. Page 3 of 5 �6. The Applicant has agreed that the development of the proposed subdivision shall be phased such that lots 1 and 2 shall be the last lots developed. A sight line analysis was prepared for the proposed curb cuts, the results of which indicate that there is sufficient sight distance to allow for safe ingress and egress to andfromthe project site. The Planning Board notes that the ability to coordinate the design process for lots 1 and 2 with the neighboring Village of Tarrytown provides the potential for eliminating an additional curb cut onto County House Road which would provide further mitigation; but it is not a condition of this approval. 7. Erosion control measures to be utilized during construction shall be provided in accordance with Westchester County Best Management Practices. 8. To the extent that determinations of the Architectural Review Board (ARB) would result in material changes to the approved subdivision plat, the Applicant is required to return to the Planning Board to for an amendment to the final subdivision plat. 9. The Appl icant has agreed to provide landscaping as shown on the approved Conceptual Tree preservation and Landscape Plan last revised July 6, 2000 and must fully comply with the Village's Tree Ordinance. Trees to be provided as part of the landscape plan shall be a minimum of 3" caliper. Prior to the issuance of any building permit, the Applicant is required to appear before the Village's Tree Commission for a tree permit, if one is required. 10. The proposed action incorporates typical specification clauses for rock excavation and controlled blasting (Blasting Plan contained in EAF Appendix titled Preliminary Subsurface Investigation and Addendum, prepared by Tectonic Engineering Consultants, dated November 3, 1999) which mitigates potential impacts related to rock removal. The Applicant has agreed to file a Blasting Plan with the Village and the Applicant will coordinate with the Village Engineer prior to the start of rock removal activities. Rock removal activities shall occur during normal construction hours as provided in the Village Code. 11. In an effort to maintain and enhance the scenic and visual quality of the site and surrounding area, the Planning Board and the Applicant agree that all on site utilities shall be placed underground. 12. Consistent with the planning principles espoused in the clustering provisions authorized under Section 7-738 of the New York State Village Law, the Applicant proposes and the Planning Board hereby establishes the following modified setback requirements for the proposed action: Minimum front yard: 25 feet; Minimum rear yard 35 feet; Minimum side yard 15 feet; Minimum setback from Bedford Road and County House Road: 40 feet and such setbacks are indicated on the final plat. Page 4 of 5 �13. In accordance with the provisions of Section 16.A(1) of the Village of Sleepy Hollow Subdivision Regulations, the Planning Board estimates the amount of the bond to secure subdivision improvements as shown on the subdivision plat to be $275,000 and requires the Applicant to post a bond with the Sleepy Hollow Village Board in that amount prior to the signing of the plat. Dated: May 16,2002 Sleepy Hollow, New York Sleepy Hollow Planning Board ij&a$4~~- By:_ NicholaS Robinson, Chairman F VMXM-720 Sleepy Hotlow\ReJo)ubonj\M720 05 cohouierd final plat approval wpd A*. M^* ^ ^ uiU<^ Page 5 of 5 �RECEIVED JUL 2 2 W9 April 18,2002 VILLAGE CLERK Revised May 13,2002 VILLAGE OF SLEEPY HOLLOW PLANNING BOARD SEQRA FINDINGS STATEMENT KENDAL ON HUDSON CONTINUING CARE RETIREMENT COMMUNITY WHEREAS, on or about June 11, 1999, Kendal on Hudson, a New York not-for-profit corporation and Phelps Community Corporation, a New York not-for-profit corporation (jointly the" "Applicant") did submit a formal petition for amendments to the Village of Sleepy Hollow Zoning Code ("Zoning Code") and an application for Site Plan Approval (collectively, the "Petition") to the Mayor and Board of Trustees of the Village of Sleepy Hollow for the construction of a not-for-profit continuing care retirement community ("CCRC") as defined in and regulated under Article 46 of the New York Public Health Law to be called "Kendal on Hudson," on a leased parcel of land on the grounds of the Phelps Memorial Hospital ("the Action") also known and designated on the tax assessment map of the Town of Mount Pleasant as Section 110.11, Block 1, Lots 1, 2 and 3 and on the tax assessment map of the Village of Sleepy Hollow as Section 11, Blockl, Lots 3A, 3a.l and 3A.1M (the "Site"); and WHEREAS, the Applicant's initial proposal called for a CCRC comprising 225 independent living apartments, 40 enriched housing ("assisted living") units, 42 skilled nursing rooms, related accessory uses and parking for 397 vehicles contained within 449,955± square feet of building program (the "Project"); and WHEREAS, said Petition did include, among other items, a site plan application form, Village fee agreement form, site plan application checklist, text of the proposed zoning 2476/02/168284 VI 5/13/02 �amendment, coastal assessment form, full environmental assessment form, a grant of conservation and access easement made by Laurance S. Rockefeller in favor of Phelps Ommunity Corporation and a Project description and conceptual site plan; and WHEREAS, on July 13, 1999, the Mayor and Board of Trustees for the Village of Sleepy f o l l o w ("Village Board") did declare their intent to act as the Lead Agency under the State Environmental Quality Review Act "SEQRA") for this Action and did cause to be circulated a Notice of Intent to Act as Lead Agency to all other interested and involved agencies for their comment; and WHEREAS, the Planning Board of the Village of Sleepy Hollow (the Planning Board) is cm involved agency as defined in Section 617.2(s) of the SEQR regulations by virtue of the planning Board's ability to grant site plan approval and a wetlands permit; and WHEREAS, the Planning Board did not object to the Village Board acting as Lead ^Agency; and WHEREAS, on September 14, 1999, after circulation of the Notice of Intent to Act as Xead Agency, the Village Board, at a regularly scheduled meeting, did declare itself to be the Xead Agency for this Action ; and WHEREAS, the Lead Agency did conduct a thorough environmental review process -which included a formal scoping process, review and acceptance of a Draft Environmental impact Statement (DEIS), review and acceptance of a Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) and preparation and adoption of an Environmental Findings Statement; and 2476/02/168284 V l 5/13/02 �WHEREAS, the Lead Agency held a series of public hearings on both the DEB and FEIS in which all members of the public were encouraged to be heard; and WHEREAS, the Planning Board did meet with the Applicant on several occasions during the formal environmental review process and did submit to the Lead Agency comments on the preliminary DEIS for the proposed Project; and WHEREAS, in response to the Applicant's Petition, the Village Board drafted and thereafter circulated Proposed Local Law #1 of 2001 of the Village (the "Local Law"X which Local Law would amend the Zoning Code to make a CCRC a special permit use within the HHospital District and to set forth certain definitional, lot and bulk criteria specifically related to such CCRC uses; and WHEREAS, on February 15, 2001, the Planning Board adopted and forwarded to the Village Board recommendations on the proposed Local Law as required under the Zoning Code; and WHEREAS, the Village Board, acting in both its corporate governmental capacity and as Lead Agency, scheduled concurrent public hearings on the FEIS and on the proposed Local Law for February 27, 2001; and WHEREAS, on February 27, 2001, concurrent public hearings on the FEIS and the proposed Local Law were opened and the Village Board, acting in its corporate governmental capacity and as Lead Agency, Village staff, Village consultants and members of the public did comment on the FEIS and proposed Local Law; and 2476/02/168284 VI 5/13/02 �WHEREAS, on February 27, 2001, the Village Board, acting in both its corporate governmental capacity and as Lead Agency, closed the public hearing on the FEIS but adjourned the public hearing on the proposed Local Law without fixed date; and WHEREAS, by letter to the Applicant's attorneys dated April 26, 2001, the Lead Agency requested further information from the Applicant with respect to comments on the FEIS, particularly with regard to the overall scale and density of the Project, the affordability of the Project to Village residents and the condition of existing trees on the Site; and WHEREAS, by letters dated May 18, 2001 and May 25, 2001, the Applicant responded to the Lead Agency's request for further information; among other things, the letter provides additional information regarding a potential reduction of the total number of CCRC units (reduction of 16 enriched housing living units from 40 to 24) of the Project and a reduction of the maximum height of Project buildings to five stories, consistent with "Alternative C - Project Modifications" as set forth at pages IV-8 through IV-13 of the accepted DEIS, along with a concomitant reduction in overall bulk; and WHEREAS, it is noted that the Village Board acted as the Lead Agency under SEQRA and did determine in the Environmental Findings Statement adopted June 19, 2001, that the proposed Project, with the mitigative measures identified therein, would not have a significant environmental impact and a copy of said Environmental Findings Statement is attached hereto; and 2476/02/168284 VI 5/13/02 �WHEREAS, following the completion of the environmental review process for the proposed action, the Village Board took the following actions: • On July 10, 2001, following submission of a zoning petition by the Applicant, held a duly noticed public hearing on the proposed zoning text amendments which would permit a CCRC use as a special permit use in the H-Hospital District; • Enacted a Local Law to allow for an amendment of the Sleepy Hollow Zoning Ordinance to permit CCRC's as special permit uses within the HHospital District; • Held a duly noticed public hearing on August 21, 2001, following submission of a special permit application by the Applicant, on the special permit application during which all persons interested were provided an opportunity to be heard; • Granted a special permit to the Applicant on September 18, 2001, to permit the construction of the proposed CCRC facility on the western portion of the Phelps campus; and WHEREAS, on September 6, 2001, the Applicant submitted an application for site plan and wetlands permit approvals to the Village of Sleepy Hollow Planning Board; and WHEREAS, on September 20, 2001, October 18, 2001 and November 5, 2001, the Planning Board did publicly discuss the contents of the proposed site plan application and the format in which it would be reviewed; and WHEREAS, on November 21, 2001, December 3, 2001, December 20,2001, January 17, 2002 and February 21, 2002 the Planning Board conducted and/or continued a public hearing on the detailed site plan and wetlands permit application upon due notice and all persons wishing to be heard were afforded an opportunity to be heard; and WHEREAS, on October 24, 2001 and again on November 7, 2001, the Applicant met with the Village of Sleepy Hollow Architectural Review Board (ARB) as required under the 2476/02/168284 VI 5/13/02 -5- �special permit approval. The ARB did discuss the application at length and did provide a unanimous recommendation to the Planning Board regarding their comments on the proposed site plan; and WHEREAS, on March 18, 2002, the Applicant appeared before the Village of Sleepy Hollow Tree Commission (Tree Commission) as required under Chapter 52A of the Village Code of the Village of Sleepy Hollow. At a duly noticed public hearing, the Tree Commission discussed the proposed site plan. Based on comments raised by Tree Commission, the Applicant was able to modify the site plan to save additional mature trees located in the western portion of the site. After a complete review of the application and modifications to the site plan, the Tree Commission granted the Applicant the requested tree permit with the requirement that the sum of $10,000 to be provided to the Tree Commission as mitigation for the removal of trees and the Applicant agreed to the provision of said sum; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that having reviewed the DEIS, the FEIS, supporting and related documents, comments received from the public, involved and interested agencies and from the Village's staff and consultants, the Village's Architectural Review Board, and the Applicant's responses thereto, and upon the entire record of the proposed action, the Planning Board hereby concurs with the environmental findings made by the Mayor and Board of Trustees acting as the Lead Agency and makes the following additional findings and determinations pursuant to 6 N.Y.C.R.R. Section 617.11: 1. Temporary noise levels will increase in the area during the construction of the Project and long-term minimal noise levels will be generated by residents, employees, service providers, deliveries, visitors and exterior mechanical equipment (e.g., roof-mounted cooling towers and 2476/02/168284 VI 5/13/02 -6- �exhaust fans). Specific mitigation measures include the landscape enhancements in the buffer area in the southern portion of the site and the use of a decorative rooftop element to shield and attenuate noise resulting from proposed cooling towers and compressors. These increases are likely not to be perceptible to the human ear and have been minimized or mitigated by incorporating noise attenuation or dampening measures where appropriate, and vegetative screening as discussed above. The Applicant is required to take appropriate steps to minimize noise impacts arising from construction, including limiting construction activities to daytime hours and in accordance with all applicable rules, regulations and Village Codes. The Planning Board finds that there will be no significant adverse noise impacts from construction, vehicular traffic and operation of the proposed Project. 2. Air quality may be temporarily impacted due to dust emissions during site disturbance for construction. These impacts will terminate when construction is completed. The Applicant will be required to use best construction management practices as indicated on Site Plan Drawing 7.2 and otherwise to take all appropriate steps to control dust emissions, including watering of exposed areas and mandatory dust covers for trucks. As a means to mitigate potential impacts to air quality, the Applicant will be required to consider the use of natural gas as an alternative to oil as a source of fuel for its heating. The Planning Board finds that with the implementation of the indicated control measures during construction, there will be no significant adverse air quality impacts from fugitive dust emissions. 3. The Proposed Action is located within the Hudson River Drainage Basin. Existing stormwater runoff from the Site generally flows westward discharging into a wetland area 2476/02/168284 VI 5/13/02 �adjacent to the Metro-North Railroad tracks and the Hudson River. Construction of new buildings, parking areas and associated roadways will not result in increased peak stormwater flows for Hudson River discharge points if proposed drainage measures, including water quality basins, are implemented. During large storm events (100 year storm) the stormwater management system has been designed to pipe the overflow from the stormwater quality basins directly to the wetland area in the southwest corner of the site. Stormwater from the site is I directed to the wetlands in a controlled manner, diverting high flow events directly to the wetland to eliminate overtopping of the water quality basins. Metro-North Railroad has reviewed the stormwater management plan and provided correspondence which indicates that they are satisfied with the analytical methodology. Metro-North Railroad has stated that their concerns regarding the potential impact of runoff on the adjacent railroad have been satisfied. I Regrading of the Site will increase the potential for erosion and sedimentation. ^^ An erosion and sediment control plan has been prepared in accordance with Westchester County's Best Management Practices for Erosion and Sediment Control. The Project will involve disturbance to more than five acres of land. Accordingly, the New York State DEC guidelines, as contained in the SPDES General Permit for Stormwater Discharges from Construction Activities, have been incorporated into the design of the Stormwater Management Plan. It is the Applicant's obligation to maintain the stormwater management system. Further, the Applicant has agreed to and shall be required to reimburse the Village for routine inspection of the on-site stormwater management system once the site construction is completed and the site is open. Such inspections would occur periodically throughout the year, but not less than twice per year. Afc The Village inspector would, when required, identify where repairs or other maintenance would need to be made to maintain the stormwater management facility. If the 2476/02/168284 VI 5/13/02 -8- HP^a^£ittiiiSI£B9^BSHHHHHIHHI^IBIHil^^^lHHHH^^H^HH^IHIHMI^HnHHHHIi^HHBH^H �Applicant does not make improvements in a timely manner, the Village will make the improvements or required maintenance and charge the Applicant for the cost of such improvements. Upon the failure of the Applicant to pay the cost of the maintenance and or improvements this would constitute a lien against the property. The proposed Stormwater Management Plan includes two water quality basins to reduce nutrient loading into the on-site wetland area and eventually to the Hudson River and to provide detention of stormwater runoff. The Applicant also incorporates "stormceptor" devises to further remove sediments and other materials from the stormwater runoff. The Applicant will prepare and adhere to a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan as is required under the SPDES General Permit. The Planning Board finds that the proposed stormwater quality and erosion control program minimizes potential stormwater impacts to the maximum extent practicable. 4. Approximately 0.97 acres of upland areas that are protected under Village law as wetland buffer will be disturbed as a result of the proposed action. No impacts to Village regulated wetlands are anticipated as a result of the Proposed Action. The Applicant has prepared a wetland mitigation program, which includes supplementing the existing wetland buffer area on the southern end of the Site with woodland and flowering trees as well as evergreens. The presently eroded stream channel will be stabilized and replanted to provide additional habitat and erosion control. The Planning Board finds that the existing wetland functions will be maintained or enhanced by the Applicant's activities. 5. There are no unique or rare habitats on the Site that could potentially be impacted by the Project. Construction related activity will result in disturbance of approximately 15 acres within the Site and an additional 3± acres in the easement area. Approximately 1,200 trees 2476/02; 168284 VI 5/13/02 -9- �within the proposed disturbance area will be removed. Of thisfigure,the tree survey reveals that 37 percent are already dead or in poor condition and another 29 percent were found to have only marginal value. The Applicant has proposed a comprehensive landscape plan, including an infill planting program for the identified buffer adjacent to the Sleepy Hollow Manor neighborhood and a series of landscaped berms in the vicinity of Rockwood Hall. The infill planting and overall landscape plan include the replanting of approximately 607 trees and which shall range for deciduous treesfrom1 inch to 4 inches in caliper and for evergreen trees height ranging from 8-10 feet in height to 10-12 feet. The number of trees proposed to be planted as part of the overall Project landscaping plan exceeds that initially shown and considered as part of the environmental review and is now roughly equivalent to the number of healthy trees proposed to be removed as part of the proposed Project. The Planning Board finds that the removal of some vegetation is an unavoidable impact of the Project and that the Applicant has appeared before the Village Tree Commission and received a permit subject to Chapter 52 A of the Village Code. In addition, the Tree Commission requested as mitigation, that the Applicant provide to the Village, a fee in the amount of $10,000 to mitigate the impact of proposed tree removal. The infill planting program and comprehensive landscaping plan will also mitigate the loss of existing vegetation and will provide screening to minimize the potential visual impacts of the Project to the maximum extent practicable. Installation of landscaping in the proposed landscape buffers shall be initiated as early as practicable during the construction process. No significant species or habitats will be displaced by the proposed Project. 6. The Applicant has agreed to provide the Village with fees in lieu of reservation of parkland and open space as defined under Section 62 of the Village Code, such fee amounting to 2476/02/168284 VI 5/13/02 -10- �Six Hundred Sixty Two Thousand Five Hundred and No/100 ($662,500.00) Dollars, the payment of which is spelled out in the Development Fee Agreement adopted by the Village Board on September 18,200-1. 7. The western 21± acres of the 61± acre Phelps Memorial Hospital campus is currently vacant and is characterized by a meadow area and a stand of primarily deciduous trees which provide a limited view of the Hudson River in the winter months and block the view of the Hudson River in the spring, summer and fall. The Project will alter the visual character of the Site. The majority of the vacant, wooded and meadow portions of the Site will be developed with buildings, access roadways, walkways and ornamental plantings. The Applicant has proposed to establish an approximately seven acre wooded buffer in the southern portion of the Site separating the Project facilities from the residential neighborhood in this vicinity. Provisions will be made for the preservation and maintenance of this buffer, which will vary in depth between 150 and 400 feet. In order to mitigate adverse effects on the site the Applicant has agreed to include a pedestrian trail system starting at the site loop road and extending south into the buffer area. The proposed trail system in this part of the site does not connect through to Birch Close. The comprehensive landscaping plan incorporates the planting of more than 600 deciduous and evergreen trees. Landscape plantings will be concentrated on the southern portion of the Site in the vicinity of the seven acre wooded buffer, proposed loop road and in the northern portion of the Site in the vicinity of the easement over the parkland. A decorative border element and additional landscape plantings are proposed in the immediate surrounding of the James House. 2476/02/168284 VI 5/13/U2 -11- �To mitigate potential adverse visual impacts of the Project the following conditions will be imposed: a) The Applicant shall adhere to the landscaping plan presented in the FEIS, as modified by the letter submitted by the Applicant to the Village Board dated May 18, 2001, and as supplemented by the incorporation of additional landscape plantings; including infill planting in the wooded buffer area separating the Project facilities from the residential neighborhood to the south and the construction of landscaped berms within the Rockwood Hall access easement area. b) That landscaping proposed within the southern buffer areas or otherwise outside of the temporary construction zone, shall be installed during the first planting season, but in no case later than six months after the issuance of the building permit, subject to drought conditions. The landscaping proposed within the northern buffer area shall be installed during the first planting season following completion of site work (carriage trail/berm/rough grading of Loop Road) in area and relocation of construction fence to top of berm. c) Incorporation of specific design elements as part of the architectural program including the use of: a continuous stone facing of one or more stories; projecting bay windows and other window treatments to vary the facade; use of tower elements to vary the massing and vertical 2476/02/168284 VI 5/13/02 -12- �dimensions of the buildings; and the use of lantern elements and dormers to provide a more residential character to the roofline. d) Provision of a publicly accessible riverfront promenade and overlook connecting to the Rockwood Hall State Park Preserve carriage paths. The Planning Board has identified three (3) potential future locations for a trail connection between the proposed pedestrian walkway on the project site and the neighboring residential community to the south, west to the Hudson River, north to Route 9A or to the south. e) Provision of an additional sidewalk on the north side of ILU East and ILU West and more clearly delineated crosswalks which enhance pedestrian circulation on site. f) The Applicant has provided for a conceptual design treatment for the roofscape which incorporates decorative elements for rooftop penetrations. 8. The Applicant has prepared more detailed drawings and discussed at length with the Planning Board the potential visual impacts associated with the development and construction of the proposed parking structure. The Applicant has included details of proposed lighting fixtures that would be used on both levels of the parking facility. Light spill off from the parking garage has been mitigated through the incorporation of specific light fixtures as indicated on Site Plan drawing A-4.0. Such fixtures use specific lighting elements and shields which focus their illumination to the maximum extent practicable. Further, the first level (partially below grade) of the proposed garage structure has been designed to house the fixtures within the ceiling structure 2476/02/168284 VI 5/13/02 -13- �such that there is no direct glare resulting from the interior of the parking structure. Further, -the Applicant has been directed to prepare, as part of subsequent building facade and roof %op treatment review provided as a condition of site plan approval, details of the parking garage facade. The garage facade detail shall specify color and detailing and be architecturally complementary in character to the balance of the building program. In addition, the Applicant has enhanced the initially proposed landscape program to further screen the lower level of the parking structure from points due west and south. Further, it is noted that there is approximately 240 feet of existing woodland separating the proposed parking facility from the resideivtial homes to the south. This buffer area is proposed to be further enhanced with additional ir»fill plantings. Given that these infill plantings are located outside the limit of disturbance line, tt*.ese plantings shall be installed immediately after the issuance of a building permit, if said permit is issued during the planting season, or no later than six months from the issuance of said mulcting permit, if said permit is not issued during the growing season. 9. As a result of the Proposed Action, the current informal parking arrangement on Rockwood Road for those patrons of Rockwood Hall will be eliminated. To mitigate -this impact, the Planning Board requested and the Applicant agreed to a provide a 15 sj^ace temporary parking area within the grounds of Rockwood Hall subject to OPRHP approval. In the event of an overflow parking situation, signage will be provided directing patrons to the n^rtb end of the Hospital parking lot. The hospital has set aside no less than 30 spaces to be used o n a temporary basis for Rockwood Hall overflow parking. Before Completion of the Project, the Applicant agrees to provide for a forty-five ( 4 5 ^ car parking area subject to the approval of NYSOPRHP. Until such time, the temporary parking will continue. 2476/02/168284 VI 5/13/02 -14- �10. Approximately 0.97 acres of upland areas that are protected under Village law as wetland buffer will be disturbed as a result of the proposed action. No impacts to Village regulated wetlands are anticipated as a result of the Proposed Action. The Applicant has prepared a wetland mitigation program, and the Applicant has applied to the Village of Sleepy Hollow Planning Board for a wetland disturbance permit as required under the Village's Wetland/Watercourse Protection ordinance. Mitigation proposed as part of the Project, includes supplementing the existing wetland buffer area on the southern end of the Site with woodland and flowering trees as well as evergreens. The presently eroded stream channel will be stabilized and replanted to provide additional habitat and erosion control. The Planning Board finds that the existing wetland functions will be maintained or enhanced by the Applicant's activities. The Planning Board finds that the impact of the Project on views from surrounding properties will be mitigated to the maximum extent practicable through the implementation of the conditions set forth above. Subject to the implementation of the mitigation measures identified herein by the Planning Board as required to be made, the Planning Board of the Village of Sleepy Hollow hereby certifies with respect to the site plan application and the wetlands permit application that: 1. The requirements of 6 NYCRR Part 617 have been met and fully satisfied; 2. Consistent with the social, economic and other essential considerations from among the reasonable alternatives thereto, the Proposed Action with the mitigation measures imposed herein is one which minimizes or avoids adverse environmental effects to the maximum extent practicable, 2476/02/168284 VI 5/13/02 -15- �including effects disclosed in the DEIS, FEIS and set forth in this Findings Statement. 3. Consistent with social, economic and other essential considerations, to the maximum extent practicable, adverse environmental effects revealed in the environmental impact statement process will be minimized or avoided by incorporating as conditions to the decision, those mitigation measures which were identified as practicable. 4. After due consideration, the Planning Board finds that this action will achieve a balance between the protection of the environment and the need to accommodate social, economic and other considerations of sound public policy. ^JMSJJ & \ 4)U«*t^-, Dated: Nicholalsu Robinson, Chairman ^JjL^ If; 3-00 ^L " 2476/02/16tt* 284 VI 5/13/02 -16- �RECEIVED JUL 2 2 ?nn? VILLAGE CLERK April 18,2002 V I L L A G E CLERK R e y i s e d M a y 1 3 2 ( K ) 2 RESOLUTION KENDAL ON HUDSON CONTINUING CARE RETIREMENT COMMUNITY SITE PLAN AND WETLANDS PERMIT APPROVAL WHEREAS, on September 6, 2001 Kendal on Hudson and the Phelps Community Corporation (jointly the "Applicant"), including its successors and assigns submitted an application to the Village of Sleepy Hollow Planning Board ("the Board") requesting site plan and wetlands permit approvals to develop a continuing care retirement community ("CCRC"); and WHEREAS, the proposed CCRC is situated on approximately 24 acres on the western portion of the existing Phelps Memorial Hospital Center ("Phelps") campus designated on the tax assessment maps of the Town of Mount Pleasant as Section 110.11, Block 1, Lots 1,2 and 3; and WHEREAS, the proposed CCRC consists of 225 independent living apartments, 24 enriched housing units and 42 skilled nursing beds along with common facilities provided in approximately 435,000 square feet of building area, serviced by 393 parking spaces (the "project"); and WHEREAS, the proposed project was the subject of a comprehensive environmental review conducted by the Mayor and Board of Trustees acting as the Lead Agency under the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) and that the Mayor and Board of Trustees did issue an Environmental Findings Statement on June 19, 2001, which Findings Statement 2476/02/168275 V2 5/13/02 �concluded that with the mitigation measures imposed, the project minimizes or avoids environmental effects to the maximum extent practicable and that after due consideration, the Proposed Action will provide a balance between the protection of the environment and the need to accommodate social, economic and other considerations of sound public policy; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 59A of the Village Code, the proposed project was reviewed by the Village of Sleepy Hollow Waterfront Advisory Committee (WAC) for consistency with the goals and policies in the Village's Local Waterfront Revitalization Plan (LWRP); and WHEREAS, on June 18, 2001, the WAC found and made a recommendation to the Mayor and Board of Trustees that, on balance, the proposed project was consistent with the goals and policies of the LWRP; and WHEREAS, on July 17, 2001, the Mayor and Board of Trustees conducted their own LWRP consistency review and issued findings concluding that, on balance, the proposed project is consistent with the goals and policies of the LWRP; and WHEREAS, following the completion of the environmental review process for the proposed action, the Village Board took the following actions: • On July 10, 2001, following submission of a zoning petition by the Applicant, held a duly noticed public hearing on proposed zoning text amendments which would permit a CCRC use as a special permit use in the H-Hospital District; 2476/02/168275 V2 5/13/02 -2- �• Enacted Local Law #1 of 201 to allow for an amendment of the Sleepy Hollow Zoning Ordinance to permit CCRC's as special permit uses within the H-Hospital District; • Held a duly noticed public hearing on August 21, 2001, following submission of a special permit application by the Applicant, on the special permit application during which all persons interested were provided an opportunity to be heard; • Granted a special permit to the Applicant on September 18, 2001, to permit the construction of the proposed CCRC facility on the western portion of the Phelps campus; and WHEREAS, the Applicant has included in support of the site plan and wetlands permit applications the following large scale plans generally entitled: SP-1.0 SP-2.0 SP-2.1 SP-3.0 SP-3.1 SP-4.0 SP-5.0 SP-5.1 SP-6.0 SP-7.0 SP-7.1 SP-7.2 SP-8.0 SP-8.1 SP.9.0 DP.9.1 Title Scale Cover Sheet Master Site Plan Site Layout Plan Site Layout Plan Site Grading Plan Site Grading Plan Site Utility Plan Landscape Concept Plan Landscape Concept Plan Driveway Profiles Erosion Control Plan Erosion Control Plan Erosion Control Details Tree Survey & Protection Plan Tree Survey & Protection Plan Boundary/Topographic Survey Site Details Utility Details 1"=100' 1" = 50' 1" = 50' r = 50' 1" = 50' 1" = 50' 1" = 50' 1" = 50" 1" = 50' As Noted 1" = 50" 1" = 50' As Noted 1" = 50' 1" = 50' 1"=100' As noted As noted 2476/02/168275 V2 5/13/02 -3- Last Revised 02/05/02 02/05/02 03/11/02 02/05/02 04/04/02 02/05/02 03/11/02 04/04/02 04/04/02 07/19/01 03/11/02 03/11/02 03/11/02 02/05/02 02/05/02 03/17/99 04/04/02 04/04/02 Source DTS* DTS DTS DTS DTS DTS DTS DTS DTS DTS DTS DTS DTS DTS DTS CHS** DTS DTS �Last Revised 02/05/02 PEA*** 1/32 = r-0" 02/05/02 PEA*** Floor Plan Levels 89s = 102s 1/32 = r-0" 02/05/02 PEA*** Floor Plan Levels 113s = 123-4'1/4 Floor Plan Levels 133' 81/4"s=Roof Building Elevations Site Sections Parking Deck 1/32" =r-0" 02/05/02 PEA*** 1/32" - r - 0 " 02/05/02 PEA*** i/i6"=r-o" 02/05/02 1/32" -1MT 02/05/02 02/05.02 As noted PEA*** PEA*** PEA*** Title Scale r-o" A-l.l Composite Floor Plan levels 40s=50sl/32" = Floor Plan Levels 65s = 76'-51/2" A-1.2 A-1.3 A-1.0 A-1.4 A-2.0 A-3.0 A-4.0 Source * DTS (Divney Tung Schwalbe, LLP) ** CHS (Charles H. Sells, Inc) *** PEA (Perkins Eastman Architects, PC); and WHEREAS, on September 20, 2001, October 18, 2001 and November 5, 2001, the Planning Board did publicly discuss the contents of the proposed site plan application and the format in which it would be reviewed; and WHEREAS, on November 21,2001, December 3,2001, December 20, 2001, January 17, 2002 and February 21,2002 the Planning Board conducted and/or continued a public hearing on the detailed site plan and wetlands permit application upon due notice and all persons wishing to be heard were afforded an opportunity to be heard; and WHEREAS, the Planning Board also received written correspondence from Scenic Hudson dated November 16, 2001 and January 17, 2002 and from Metro-North Railroad dated March 8,2002; and 2476/02/168275 V2 5/13/02 -4- �WHEREAS, the Planning Board did discuss in detail with the Applicant issues related to construction and site preparation, architecture and landscaping, circulation, utility systems and wetland buffer activities; and WHEREAS, as a result of public input during the public hearing process and comments raised by the Planning Board, Village staff, and Village consultants, modifications were made to the proposed site plan application; and WHEREAS, the proposed development would result in the temporary disturbance to approximately 0.97 acres of wetland buffer area; and WHEREAS, to offset approximately 0.97 acres of temporary wetland buffer impacts, the Applicant has prepared a wetland buffer mitigation plan consistent with the requirements of Section 61 of the Village's Wetland/Watercourse Protection law which plan will result in supplementing the existing wetland buffer area on the southern end of the site with woodland and flowering trees as well as evergreens. Further, the presently eroded stream channel will be stabilized and replanted to provide additional habitat and erosion control; and WHEREAS, the Applicant has prepared a soil and sediment erosion control plan which conforms to the Westchester County Best Management Practices Manual Series for controlling stormwater runoff which will rriinimize potential impacts to the on-site wetlands; and WHEREAS, the Applicant, as a condition of the Special Permit issued approving the project, did appear before the Village of Sleepy Hollow Architectural Review Board ("ARB") at its regularly scheduled meeting on October 24, 2001, at a special work session on November 7, 2001, and at the ARB's regularly scheduled meeting of November 28,2001; and 2476/02/168275 V2 5/13/02 �WHEREAS, the ARB provided written recommendations to the Planning Board for its review and consideration; and WHEREAS, under Chapter 52A Tree Conservation, of the Village Code, the Applicant was required to prepare a comprehensive tree survey, landscape planting plan and meet with the Village's Tree Commission to seek a tree permit; and WHEREAS, on March 18, 2002. the Applicant did meet with and discuss the proposed site plan with the Tree Commission. Comments raised by the Tree Commission led to modifications of the proposed site plan to preserve an area of mature trees in the western portion of the site. After further discussion the Applicant received a tree removal permit from the Village's Tree Commission, said permit was conditioned upon a fee in the amount of $10,000 to be paid to the Tree Commission to mitigate the impact of the proposed tree removal; and WHEREAS, the Planning Board, as an involved agency as defined under Article 8 of the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) and the regulations promulgated thereunder, after thorough review of the environmental documentation, determined that the proposed project is consistent with the Environmental Findings Statement adopted by the Mayor and Board of Trustees as attached to the Planning Board's environmental findings; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that in accordance with Section 59A of the Village Code and after careful review of the Consistency Findings recommendation by the Village's WAC and Consistency Findings adopted by the Mayor and Board of Trustees, the Planning Board hereby determines that the proposed project is consistent with the goals and policies of the Village's LWRP; and, be it further 2476/02/168275 V2 5/13/02 -6- �RESOLVED, that the site plan and wetlands permit approval incorporate by reference the legends on the site plan drawings and any material variation from the approved site plan shall require a resolution from the Planning Board approving said changes; and RESOLVED, that the final site plan approval and wetlands permit, as defined in the recitals are granted and approved, the Planning Board Chairman is authorized to sign the plans, and permits may be issued, subject to the conditions and modifications identified below: CONDITIONS TO BE COMPLETED BEFORE THE SITE PLAN IS SIGNED 1. The Applicant's submission to the Village's Special Counsel for review of a fully executed lease agreement by and between Kendal on Hudson and Phelps Community Corporation (the Lease Agreement) for the Project, said lease to contain terms and conditions drawn to the satisfaction of counsel which protect and prohibit development on that portion of the site denoted as the "buffer area" of approximately seven acres and more fully described on Site Layout Plan SP-2.0. 2. Said Lease Agreement shall also contain terms and conditions drawn to the satisfaction of the Village's Special Counsel which will provide for public pedestrian access in accordance with the conditions of approval by the approving authorities and as shown on the approved site plans (including site plan drawing SP-2.0). Kendal on Hudson shall provide public pedestrian access over its walkway system within the western portion of its site from and to the Rockwood Hall portion of the Rockefeller State Park Preserve to the north within 90 days from the issuance of a certificate of occupancy and from and to the Village of Sleepy Hollow street system or future greenway or coastal trail connecting to the "Buffer Area" to the south (said connection to the street system at the south or to any future greenway or coastal trail connecting 2476/02/168275 V2 5/13/02 -7- �to the "Buffer Area" to be determined at a future date by the Village of Sleepy Hollow). Such public pedestrian access shall be permitted and provided for throughout the term of the lease, generally during the daylight hours, subject to reasonable restrictions regarding time, nature and manner in which public access shall be provided as established by Kendal on Hudson with the approval of the Village Administrator. CONDITIONS TO BE COMPLETED BEFORE BUILDING PERMITS ARE ISSUED OR ANY CONSTRUCTION COMMENCED 1. Prior to the issuance of any building permits, a 100% performance bond shall be submitted in a sum determined by the Village's Engineer and shall be furnished to and accepted by the Village, to guarantee the satisfactory and complete installation and construction of all infrastructure, as determined appropriate by the Village Engineer, including sewage, water, drainage, roads, sediment and erosion control measures, stormwater detention, wetlands buffer mitigation and traffic improvements. It is the Applicant's obligation to maintain the stormwater management system. Further, the Applicant has agreed to and shall be required to reimburse the Village for inspection of the on-site stormwater management system once the site construction is completed and the site is open. Such inspections would occur periodically throughout the year, but not less than twice per year. The Village inspector would, when required, identify where repairs or other maintenance would need to be made to maintain the stormwater management facility. If the Applicant does not make improvements in a timely manner, the Village will make the improvements or required maintenance and charge the Applicant for the cost of such improvements. Upon the failure of the Applicant to pay for the required maintenance and or improvements related to the stormwater management facility, this would constitute a lien against the property. I * ? * * ! 1*8275 V2 5/13/02 �2. The Applicant shall review with the Planning Board the proposed roof drainage system, including the type of materials if gutters and leaders are used, or in their absence, how drainage would be accommodated away from the building and directed to the stormwater management system. 2. The Applicant shall prepare, subject to Planning Board review and approval, drawings illustrating the organization and aesthetic treatment of the roof penetrations and roof scape treatment which shall include sound attenuation and shielding for any use of cooling towers and compressors for the facility's air conditioning system(s). Further, the Applicant shall include facade treatment details for the proposed garage facility, using materials which complement the already proposed buildings. 3. The Applicant shall provide to the Village landscape maintenance bonds the amount of which is to be determined by the Village Administrator and Engineer. Two bonds shall be posted: a) maintenance of A bond with a minimum term of two years shall be posted for the general site landscaping, the landscaping to thereafter be maintained and replaced as necessary. b) A bond with a term of five years shall be posted to guarantee plantings and the maintenance thereof for all planting in the "buffer area", to be thereafter maintained and replaced as necessary. 4. The Applicant shall co-ordinate with the Village of Sleepy Hollow's Director of Life and Fire Safety, Chief of Police and Fire Chief regarding the preparation and implementation of 2476/02/168275 V2 5/13/02 �the blasting protocol program. Such program shall include notification and inspection (pre and post blasts) procedures for those buildings located within 500 linear feet from the proposed blasting area. The blasting protocol shall also include coordination with the Hospital during times of blasting events. 5. The Applicant shall prepare a written report to the Planning Board detailing the final grading and landscape plans as approved by the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation (NYSOPRHP) for that area located within Rockwood Hall State Park portion of the Rockefeller State Park Preserve. As a condition of this site plan approval, the Applicant is required to construct the proposed trail connections leading to Rockwood Hall utilizing design standards as specified in the NYSOPRHP "Carriage Path System, Rockefeller State Park Preserve, Manual for Design, Construction and Maintenance." The Applicant must, subject to New York State Parks Department practices, provide appropriate public access at reasonable times between the Kendal property walkway system and Rockwood Hall State Park pursuant to the approved site plan. In the event that these other site plan approvals for those areas outside the Village of Sleepy Hollow differ substantially from the site plans approved herein, then the Applicant shall be required to submit said changes to the Planning Board for review and approval. 6. Submission for review and comment to the Architectural Review Board of the finalized project facade designs and materials. OTHER CONDITIONS 1. Prior to the issuance of a temporary certificate of occupancy (TCO), the Applicant shall offer for dedication water lines and corresponding easements to the Village of Sleepy 2476/02/168275 V2 5/13/02 -10- �Hollow as generally denoted on Site Utility Plan SP 4.1, said improvements to be constructed and installed to the satisfaction of the Village Engineer. 2. As early during the construction process as practicable, the Applicant shall prepare and install landscaping in those buffer areas located on the northern and southern portions of the site in the vicinity of Rockwood Hall and the neighboring Sleepy Hollow Manor residents. Infill planting within the southern buffer areas shall be installed during the initiation of site work, if work is initiated during the planting season, but not later than six months from the initiation of site work, if said work does not begin during the growing season, subject to drought conditions. Landscape screening on the northern portion of the site shall be installed immediately following completion of site work (carriage trai^erm/rough grading of loop road) and relocation of construction fence to top of berm if such completion takes place during the planting season or during the next subsequent planting season. 3. As part of the construction of the site access road, the Applicant shall construct, subject to NYSOPRHP approval, a temporary parking area which would serve patrons using Rockwood Hall. During that time when the site is under construction, the Applicant has agreed to make approximately 30 parking spaces available for overflow parking for visitors to Rockwood Hall. Signage will be posted in the temporary parking lot in Rockwood Hall directing overflow traffic to the Hospital's northern parking lot. The installation of the site loop road in the northern portions of the site shall also incorporate the proposed landscape buffers as early as practicable during the construction process (see Condition 2 above). Subject to NYSDOT and NYSOPRHP approval, the Applicant will seek to incorporate signage and walkways which 2476/02/168275 V2 5/13/02 �would enhance pedestrian circulation and safety. Before completion of the project, Applicant agrees to provide for a forty-five (45) car parking area subject to the approval of NYSOPRBP. Until such time, the temporary parking will continue. 4. Although reviewed in the Environmental Impact Statement document, the Applicant is not proposing a pedestrian only connection to the neighboring Sleepy Hollow Manor residence neighborhood. The plan shall indicate a potential location where such a connection could be made if and when the Village requests. If such request is made, the Applicant must insure that appropriate public access be provided at reasonable times between the Kendal walkway system and areas to the south, pursuant to the approved site plan. Such a connection would be constructed utilizing NYSOPRHP design standards. 5. Prior to the issuance of a temporary certificate of occupancy, the Applicant shall make application and diligently seek a New York State Department of Transportation permit and undertake to construct a dedicated turning lane at the Route 9/Route 117 westbound intersection as discussed in the FEIS and Environmental Findings Statement. As part of this process, the Applicant will post with NYS DOT a bond for said improvements as required. If the permit has not been issued by NYSDOT or work has not begun under the permit at the time of issuance of said certificate of occupancy, then a $100,000 letter of credit shall be posted with the Village. Said letter of credit may be drawn on by the Village of Sleepy Hollow to obtain the permit and undertake this work at the Village's sole discretion. If said permit has not been issued and substantial construction undertaken within two years from the posting of the letter of credit, the letter of credit shall be returned to the Applicant. 2476/02/168275 V2 5/13/02 -12- �6. The Applicant shall prepare a detail for Planning Board review of any proposed entry signage, including location, use of materials, overall design and color. 7. Substantial construction of 'the Project" commencing within one year of the date of adoption of the site plan approval and thereafter being diligently pursued to completion with the opportunity for extensions of the site plan approval and wetlands permit to be granted for good cause by the Planning Board at the request of the Applicant for a period of six months. Nichoh 2476/02/(68275 V2 5/13/02 -13- �vl *\ * Saccardi & Schiff, Inc. w Planning and Development Consultants 245 Main Street White Plains New York 10601 Tel: 914-761-3582 FAX: 914-761-3759 sands@saccschiff.com 33 Front Street Hempstead New York 11550 Tel: 516-486-0610 FAX: 516-486-0615 t DATE: July 9,2002 TO: Hon. Philip Zegarelli, Mayor and Board of Trustees FROM: David B. Smith, AICP CC: Dwight Douglas, Administrator Brian Murphy/Ed Lammers, Murphy, Stecich & Powell Nicholas Robinson, Planning Board Chairman RE: Oversized Residential Development Zoning Text Amendment The following is an updated draft of proposed zoning text amendments relative to regulating the size of new residential development. This particular issues has been discussed at length with the Planning Board, the Village Administrator and most recently with the Chairman's Committee. The most recent revisions reflect the input for the aforementioned plus a review of recently enacted language in nearby Westchester communities. Our office is currently working on a companion piece to the proposed text amendments which would include a neighborhood character survey. As suggested by the Village Administrator, the survey would start with the R-2 and R-2A zones and focus on: John J. Saccardi, AICP David B. Schiff. AICP, PP Syrette Dym, AICP Oavid B. Smith, AICP Margaret H. Uhle, AICP, RLA Bonita J. Von Ohlsen, RLA Csaba Teglas, AICP Consultant Land Development Comprehensive Planning Zoning Real Estate Economics Environmental Studies ising munily Development # 1. lot coverage for both principal and accessory buildings. This portion' of the survey would use existing mapping to be provided by the Town of Mt. Pleasant. 2. Building height - number of stories conducted by windshield survey 3. Building type - inventory of building types to be a basis for describing building characteristics including such items as roof line treatment, materials and garage placement. The inventory information would become a resource for the Architectural Review Board during their review of individual projects. �To: Hon. Philip Zegarelli, Mayor and Board of Trustees July 9, 2002 Page 2 Proposed new zoning text indicated using italics font. Section 62-4 Definitions. FLOOR AREA - The sum of the gross horizontal area of the several floors of a structure and its accessory buildings. "Floor area" shall not include cellar space, stairways, unenclosed porches, decks, patios and breezeways, accessory off-street parking space or loading berths or any floor-toceiling height of less than seven (7) feet. FLOOR AREA RATIO - the ratio of gross floor area of all structures on a lot to the total lot area. Section 62-9. D. Purpose and Applicability. The distinctive character of the different residential neighborhoods in the Village of Sleepy Hollow is based on the diversity in the style and design of homes as well as the general uniformity in the scale of homes located on similarly-sized lots in the different neighborhoods throughout the community. The potential for tearing down existing home and replacing them with substantially larger homes or building large additions to existing home threatening the appearance and impacts upon the health, safety, welfare and quality of life for the residents of the Village of Sleepy Hollow. Maximum Floor Area Ratio as indicated in Table 62-9. D-l herein, the maximum floor area ratios (FAR) for houses in single family districts shall be as follows: Table 62-9.D-1 Illustrative Table of Maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR) Lot Size FAR Maximum Building Site (s.f.) > 80,000 0.14 11,200 70,000 0.15 10,500 60,000 0.15 9,000 50,000 0.15 7,500 43,560 0.16 6,969 30,000 0.22 6,600 20,000 0.31 6,200 15.000 0.40 6,000 10,000 0.42 4,200 5,000 0.55 2,750 4,000 0.60 2,400 3,000 0.62 1,860 �To: Hon. Philip Zegarelli, Mayor and Board of Trustees July 9, 2002 Page 3 62-9. E Special Permit for Land Consolidation and Development in Residential Districts. In all residence districts, a special permit shall be required when two or more building lots are combined for the purpose of constructing a residential building or buildings. Special Permit Approval The Planning Board may authorize the issuance of a special permit for the merging ofone or more lots in a residential district for the purpose of constructing a residential building(s), after a public hearing and provided that it shall find that the following conditions and standards have been met: J. The proposed building shall relate to the surrounding neighborhood by way of a quality of building and overall site design which will enhance and protect the character and property values ofthe adjacent neighborhood. The Planning Board shall evaluate bulk, dimensions, materials, location on the site and in relation to development on adjoining properties, the natural terrain and vegetation, where applicable. 2. The Planning Board shall also consider whether the proposed structure has a striking dissimilarity, visual discord or inappropriateness with respect to other structures located or proposed to be located within the same residential neighborhood. Should you have any question regarding the proposed zoning text amendments indicated above please feel free to call. I look forward to discussing this matter with the Board at your next meeting. F \M\M-720 Sleepy HollowvMemos\M-720.28-oversized resident dev ord �Saccardi & Schiff, Inc. Planning and Development Consultants 245 Main Street White Plains New York 10601 Tel: 914-761-3582 FAX: 914-761-3759 sands@saccschiff com 33 Front Street Hempstead New York 11550 Tel: 516-486-0610 FAX: 516-486-0615 John J. Saccardi, AICP David B Schiff. AICP, PP Syrette Dym. AICP David B. Smith, AICP Margaret H. Utile, AICP, RIA Bonita J Von Ohlsen, RLA July 16,2002 To: Hon. Philip Zegarelli, Mayor and Board of Trustees From: David B. Smith, AICP cc: Dwight Douglas, Administrator Brian Murphy, Village Attorney Nicholas Robinson, Planning Board Chairman Re: Supplemental Information for Neighborhood Character Study The Village is currently considering zoning text amendments which would begin to address the issue of inappropriately sized homes being built within existing established neighborhoods. The proposed zoning text addresses the issue of overall size of new construction or additions to existing homes, but does not go into detail with respect to the compatibility of the new residence to its neighbors and/or surrounding area. This was one of the issues raised by the Village Administrator in his initial review of the proposed zoning text amendments. What has been suggested is the preparation of a neighborhood character survey, a sample of which is attached hereto. It has been suggested that the survey include a photograph of each residence, along with an accompanying map to illustrate overall lot coverage. The purpose of which is to provide the Planning Board and the Architectural Review Board with a building inventory which would be a basis for describing the range of building characteristics including: building height, roof treatment, architectural elements, garage location, and typical building materials. From the survey a series of acceptable design guidelines could be prepared for alterations, additions and new construction, all drawn from and supported by the inventory. This would be similar in concept to the illustrations prepared for the Village of Scarsdale Design Review Guidelines For Houses in Residence Districts which was circulated to the Board previously. Csaba Teglas. AICP Consultant Land Development Comprehensive Planning Zoning Real Estate Economics Environmental Studies rtousing community Development Before continuing much further with the survey I wanted to provide the Village with an opportunity to comment on both the scope and level of detail. I look forward to discussing this matter further with the Board, should you have any questions or comments on the above or attached please feel free to call. �• — ••»««.<.•* .,*-%*«!tM''iMWftBlS'i«fiiffJ: � 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-2002 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_2002-09-19 Subject The topic of the resource Planning Board Minutes & Resolutions-2002 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2002