https://sleepyhollow.localarchives.org/files/original/29cd5099406655f3f400e64b68af4aba.pdf 7f5385f0688020daeba09a170bba896c PDF Text Text A regular meeting was held by the Planning Board on May 19, 1994 at 8:00 PM in Village Hall, 28 Beekman Avenue, North Tarry town, New York 10591 Members Present: Also Present: Absent: George Hritz, Chairman Ellen Tsangaris Donald Caetano David Perlmutter Edward McCarthy Janet Gandolfo, Esq. James Margotta, Building Inspector Susan Portman, Frederick P. Clark Assoc. Joseph Gulino, CAMCE Steven Salman James Donovan Mr. Hritz called the meeting to order at 8:00 PM. IN THE MATTER OF THE VISCOGLIOSI SUBDIVISION. NORTH TARRYTOWN. NEW YORK. Mr. John Hughes, Esq. has submitted a letter to the Building Inspector requesting an adjournment of the public hearing. (Letter attached in official minutes). Adjournment granted. IN THE MATTER OF PHELPS MEMORIAL HOSPITAL. 701 NORTH BROADWAY. NORTH TARRYTOWN. NEW YORK Phelps Memorial Hospital will not be present at this meeting due to a discussion of ongoing Planning Board fees owned to the Village. They have requested a special meeting, but will most likely be scheduled for next month's meeting. IN THE MATTER OF THE ROCK OF SALVATION CHURCH. 131 CORTLANDT STREET. NORTH TARRYTOWN. NEW YORK 10591 Mr. Turnquist who is the architect for the applicant stated that there have been several meetings prior to this meeting. On May 16th there was a meeting which included all parties, the Fire Department, Police Department and the Building Inspector. The primary concern is about the Fire Departments safety, especially double parking during a fire. Mr. Turnquist stated that two parking spaces would be eliminated and used as a drop-off for the church and it could be used by the Fire Department. At this point the fireman do not have a place to park. The drop off point would be a 15 minute parking zone. �Reverend Santiago suggested creating another parking space in the church's driveway. The gate could be moved back another 20 feet. The Fire Department would have one more additional parking spot. This would be taking a step towards accommodating Union Hose. Kevin Stevens, Esq. from West Nyack, New York stated that the church is in spirit of cooperation. The proposal for discussion for a more final understanding of accommodations can be reached. Mr. John Cellante, President of Union Hose and Deputy Chief of the Training Department stated that there are issues of safety on Cortlandt Street now with parking and traffic without the church. Where the Church and day care center will be, vehicles will constantly be coming in and out. Mr. Cellante said that it was requested in the letter that a traffic impact study be completed for the sake of safety. The Fire Department is not here to fight the church. Mr. Cellante stated that there is a safety issue. The fire apparatus does not belong near pedestrians. Something will happen sooner or later. Ms. Nancy Vargas stated that she is a resident of Ossining and has been a member of the congregation for 30 years. In Ossining there is a day care center next to a fire house. Out of 130 members only two need to be dropped off. Mr. Miquel Valle stated that he is of Spanish decent. He has lived on Cortlandt Street for 15 years and has lived in the Village for 33 years. There is no place for the fireman to park once things get started, there will be less places to park. The fireman are here to serve the community. Now some of the fireman park on the sidewalks. Mr. Vargas stated that he worked for Federal Express and has been driving for six years. He drives through Cortlandt Street all the time and it is very packed with cars. He feels that this issue should have been brought up years ago. Mr. Richard Gross stated that he was the former Fire Chief and also a member of the First Reformed Church. The church is well aware that parking is not available on Cortlandt Street. The First Reformed church left Tarrytown because of the parking situation. The lot used was always filled. Where would the employees of the day care center park? A deeper investigation should be done. This is not a paid fire department. Reverend Santiago stated that they did not move because of a traffic concern. There is a lot more traffic on Broadway than on Cortlandt Street. �Mr. Hritz stated that every Village should have our problems. Many people are going to church and many people are volunteering to fight fires. Mr. Jose Chevere of 95 Beekman Avenue stated that whoever owns the building the same traffic problem will exist and Union Hose will have the same complaints. There is a parking problem Village wide. Mr. Chevere asked if the architect could make concessions to provide a space and a driveway which would be more accommodating also if an alarm sounds people will move. Mr. Richard Chulla is the First Assistant Chief. He is a 17 year member of Union Hose and stated that it is almost impossible to drive the truck up the street. There will be more of a problem with a day care center being there. A traffic study should be done. Mr. Miquel Valle of 15 Chestnut Street works for the Tarrytown School District. When driving a bus it is impossible to get up and down the streets. Imagine a fire truck. How would a problem be avoided if one should occur. Ms. E. Santiago has been a member of the church for 20 years. She stated that there are alternate exits perpendicular from College Avenue. Deliveries are made on Cortlandt Street all the time. She stated the members of the church are educated people. The issue of a day care center would be brought out in later stages. She stated that the church is not trying to cause caos in the Village. Mr. Jiminez stated that he is a member of the church and that this is a tough problem. He has friends on both sides. There is no parking in the Village at all. He also apologized if he offended anyone at an earlier meeting. The church is looking for a solution. He and the church want to go by the book to go to church in peace and worship. Also to make a better community. He believes the Fire Department is fantastic. There needs to be a solution for parking. Mr. Hritz stated that with so much good will on both sides, we should be albe to come up with a solution. Mr. Caetano stated that with respect to the Fire Department, this has been a problem for years. He stated that the complaints have been heard and we are trying to come up with a solution. The Fire Department and the church should cooperate and come up with a solution. Since there is no solution now the problem should be studied further. He suggested that the Reverend and the Board should discuss the situation and come up with a solution in a month or so. -3- l �Mr. John Cappello who has been a member of Union Hose for 38 years stated that he has been attending the meeting and has never heard a discriminatory remark about the church, the Fire Department is only requesting an impact study. Mr. Stevens, Esq. stated that according to the review of the application, question 17 of the EAF asks if there an effect on health and safety, the answer is no. Mr. Hritz stated the the EAF is subject to the Planning Board's review and acceptance. Frederick P. Clark Assoc, only makes recommendations to the Board. Mr. Cellante stated that maybe Clinton Street could be used for parking. Ms. J. Marab is glad to hear that there is no discrimination. The obvious problem is parking maybe the Church could find parking elsewhere. Right now the church is paying the mortgage rental. The concerns of the Fire Department is understandable. The apparatus should not be blocked. There are not a lot of member who drive and a reduction of the building will cause problems. Mr. George Samaras of Valley Street stated that this is a problem for the Fire Department and the church. He asked why the Village isn't spending the money so that both sides could be happy. Mr. Richard Vargas stated that there are goals to be worked out with the community to clean up the street. This can be worked out with the community. We will pray that this will be worked out. Mr. Hritz stated that this is a public problem, not simply a church-fire house problem. A public solution may solve a long overdue problem. Mr. Gonzolez showed the Board and Mr. Turnquist open space behind the building that may or may not be used for parking. Mr. John Morabito who was born on Cortlandt street and who is also the Fire Chief stated that this is a problem for safety. The fireman are only asking for a traffic study. Safety is a concern for both the church and the fireman. Mr. Miquel Valle stated that when Con Edison was there they only did work on the driveway, they never worked on the street. Mr. Cappello stated that at the Zoning Board meeting he saw the plans and the driveway would be designated for buses. Mr. Vargas said that the plan could change and their would be a meeting for safety requirements which would alleviate any accidents. �Mr. Jose Chevere stated that there is illegal double parking in the vicinity which may be caused by the three bars in the area. This should not be a reflection on the church. Mr. Turnquist stated that in addition to all the information, Rev. Santiago has given a list of the meetings and services which was requested by Frederick P. Clark Assoc. There are 41 members in North Tarrytown, 18 in Ossining (5 cars), 8 in Tarrytown and 23 members from White Plains. (6 cars). The parishioners that will be picked up by the mini bus will be determined at a later date. The day care center does not plan to open until 1997. Meeting nights are on Wednesday and Friday from 7:30 to 9:00 Pm. 20 (+)(-) attend at this time. Youth services on Sunday usually consist of 25 people from 10:00 AM to 12 Noon and 16( + ) (-) attend between 4:30 and 6:00 PM. The day care center will begin at 8:30 AM until 5:00PM. Mr. Jiminez of 95 Beekman Avenue is a member of the church and the Fire Department. He stated that both parties should work together as friends. There is a God that will help. Mr. Manvel Navlca has worked with the Fire Department and the church and does not see a great problem in the future. Mr. Caetano made a motion to close the Public Hearing, seconded by Mr. Perlmutter. Motion carried unanimously. Ms. Tsangaris made a motion to declare the Planning Board lead agency, seconded by Mr. McCarthy. Motion carried unanimously. Ms. Portman stated that this use will generate 11 additional cars maximum. Peak hours are different. The traffic engineer feels that this is not a significant impact. Mr. McCarthy stated that there is a parking authority Committee which may be able to help. Mr. Hritz stated that an inquiry could be sent to the Board of Trustees for ideas and comments. Mr. Gulino stated that the water sewers should be checked. Mr. Caetano stated that this is not an every day problem. Ms. Tsangaris stated that this problem needs to be solved because in the future it will come back to the Boards. Also she does not know if a study is needed. Mr. McCarthy stated that maybe the problem could be solved by a sub-committee. -5- �Mr. Caetano made a motion to have a sub-committee from the Boards to meet with representatives from the church and the Fire Department to discuss ideas and comments, in one month, seconded by Mr. Perlmutter. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Perlmutter made a motion to have Mr. Caetano, Mr. Hritz and Mr. McCarthy as a sub-committee, seconded by Ms. Tsangaris. Motion carried unanimously. IN THE MATTER OP PETRY. BEDFORD ROAD. NORTH TARRYTOWN. NEW YORK Ms. Petry stated that the drawings are the same, and as for the sub-divided property Mrs. Petry spoke with engineers and used the engineers requests. Mr. and Mrs. Weeks who reside at 174 Webber Avenue thanked the Board for allowing them to speak. Mr. Weaks stated that according to Frederick P. Clarks memo of March 11, 1994 the parking should exist on Amos street (not Webber Avenue). It was stated at the March meeting the applicant wanted the parking on Webber Avenue due to the type of construction. Mr. Ceconi the executor of the property stated it would be more appealing to have parking off Webber Avenue. Mr. Ceconi stated that it would be in full compliance with the ordinance. Mr. Weaks stated that by having the driveway on Webber off the north sides allow accessibility to three entrances. In regards to drainage there has not been a drainage problem. There has not bee a drainage problem in 77 years. Mrs. Ceconi has lived on Amos street for 65 year and has not had a drainage problem. Mr. Weeks showed the Board pictures of the drainage problem through the property line. There are puddles in the center of the sub-division which is referred to as lot 2. Mr. Reilly the contractor for the applicant stated that by having a driveway there would not be any more puddling. The Board has a policy of zero net increase for run-off situations. There will not be an increase in drainage. Mr. Weaks state that back filling will change the elevation. He does not want the run-off crossing the property line and going into his basement, which is lower than grade. Mr. Caetano asked if they have had water in their basement. Weaks state there has not been any water yet. -6- Mr. �Mr. Reilly stated that he hopes water does not go into the Week's basement, but retaining wall is not needed. There will be hay and silt that will take the water away during the construction. Mr. Weaks asked if the hay collapses and the catch basins were clogged there may be a problem. It was stated that dry walls should solve the problem. Mrs. Weaks stated that more time was needed for sufficient study. A variance is needed concerning the parking space. There could be a condition in the resolution concerning the locations of both driveways. Placement of the driveway onto the property would be up to the Planning board. Mr. Weaks stated that Frederick P. Clarks recommendation should be used. Mr. Weaks also stated that by having the catch basin on the corner of the property may not solve the issue of water drainage to his property. It was stated that this is just a subdivision plan for a variance which is a zoning board issue and is premature at this point. Mr. Brady, Esq. stated that there is a concern for traffic in the cul-de-sac where kids play. It works better if a driveway was put in the back. The Petry's are planning to put in a walking path. As for a sprinkler system, Mr. Gulino stated that this was a manufactured house and a sprinkler system is not needed. Mr. Weeks asked if the drainage issue could be a part of the resolution to have solid concrete walls. Mrs. Weaks stated that she would like more time to discuss the drainage issue. Mr. Caetano made a motion to close the public hearing, seconded by Mr. McCarthy. Motion carried unanimously. DISCUSSION Mr. Caetano stated that the dry well could be installed needed. if Mr. Hritz stated that drainage condition could be put to the Manganaro firm (Joe Gulino) for review. Ms. Tsangaris made a motion to have a condition concerning the drainage situation reviewed and that the applicant comply with Joe Gulino's memorandum of March, 1994, seconded by Mr. Caetano. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Perlmutter stated that it would not be realistic to have parking on Webber Avenue because it is too far from the house. �A motion was made by Mr. Perlmutter to include the conditions that are stated in the Westchester County letter dated March 30, 1994 (attached in official minutes), seconded by Mr. McCarthy. Ms. Tsangaris made a motion to approve the driveway with certain conditions as stated in the above resolution, seconded by Mr. Hritz. VOTE: Mr. Hritz - Aye Mr. Caetano - Nay Mr. McCarthy - Aye Mr. Perlmutter - Nay Ms. Tsangaris - Aye Mr. Caetano made a motion to approve the sub-division subject to the conditions discussed which will be made part of a formal resolution, seconded by Mr. Perlmutter. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTES Mr. Caetano made a motion to approve the minutes of July 16, 1993, seconded by Ms. Tsangaris. Motion carried unanimously. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned. Respectfully submitted, Christine A. Yurkovic u Recording Secretary -8- �C H A R g . E S A . M A N G A N A R O C O N S U L T I N G E N G I N E E R S MEMORANDUM TO: Village of North Tarrytown Planning Board FROM: Mr. Joseph A. Gulino, P.E. Project Engineer DATE: April 28, 1994 RE: Rock of Salvation Church on Cortland Street Village of North Tarrytown, NY CAMCE No. 800-20 As requested, we have reviewed the proposed site plan (dated December 6, 1993) for Rock of Salvation Church and offer the following comments or recommendations: Court Plaza North. ^ Main Street A) The structure is existing and no addition or alteration to the surrounding driveways are intended. Therefore, stormwater runoff from the site should not be altered. To the best of our knowledge, there are no existing problems with drainage in the immediate area. B) The existing water and sewer pipelines and house connections should be shown, as well as all pertinent data to determine the capacity of the existing system. An estimate on flow demand should be established and submitted for review. C) A fire flow test should be performed in the immediate vicinity to determine if adequate fire flow exists for this structure. Once the above information is submitted we can make final recommendations to the Board. If you should have any questions, please let us know. Hackensack. NJ O?"601-7O32 201 342.4200 lax 201342.0790 JAG/jr 120 E 75th St. Su «te8C New York. NY 1 0 0 3 1 212 683 7712 P 0 Box 1007 East Stroudsburg. P A 18301 717 421 1499 cc: Ms. Linda David, Village Administrator Janet A. Gandolfo, Esq., Village Attorney Mr. James T. Margotta, Building Inspector Ms. Susan J. Portman, Associate, Frederick P. Clark Associates Mr. Ronald E. Turnquist, Architect VNT\80O-2OUC042WMJR I �FREDERICK P. CLARK A S S O C I A T E S , I N C . Planning/Development/Environment/Transportation Rye, New York and Southport, Connecticut David J. Portman, A,CP Howard I. Reynolds, PE David H. Stolman, AICP 350 Theodore Fremd Avenue Rye, New York 10580 (914) 967-6540 Michael A. Galante Joanne P. Meder, AICP jjm Donovan, RLA. ASLA MEMORANDUM To: Village of North Tarrytown Planning Board Date: April 22, 1994 Subject: Review of Viscoaliosi Preliminary Subdivision As requested, we have reviewed the subdivision application submitted by Marcello Viscogliosi for a property which is approximately 5,800 square feet in size, located at 176-178 North Washington Street in the R-5 Residence District. The site presently contains a two and a half story one-family dwelling, a two and a half story four-family dwelling and a detached concrete garage. Lot 1 (176 Washington Street) would be 2,725 square feet in size and would contain the existing one-family dwelling. Lot 2 (178 Washington Street) would be 3,083 square feet and would contain the four-family residence and garage. The fact that the property presently contains two principal buildings is a legal nonconformity, which non-conformity would be eliminated through the subdivision of the property (the maximum of one principal building per lot is required in Section 62-7.C of the Zoning Code). The Applicant has submitted the following plan: "Survey of Property Prepared For Marcello Viscogliosi, Situate Village of North Tarrytown, Town of Mount Pleasant, Westchester Co., New York," scale 1" = 10', dated June 12, 1990 and revised May 10, 1992, prepared by John J. Muldoon, Professional Land Surveyor. Connecticut • (203) 255 3100 FAX • (914) 967-6615 Long Island • (516) 364-4544 �FREDERICK P. CLARK ASSOCIATES, INC. Planning/Development/Environment/Transportation REVIEW COMMENTS 1. Subdivision Regulation Compliance; We find that the proposed subdivision line could be better located so that Lot 2 would not have control over a portion (approximately 220 square feet) of the front yard which is currently located behind a chain link fence and would not be accessible to Lot 2. It is possible that some of the area of Lot 2 that would be lost by relocating the western 20 feet of the subdivision line to coincide with the fence could be recaptured by moving the central portion of the subdivision line about three feet to the south. The easements which were discussed in the July 21, 1993 Zoning Board of Appeals1 (ZBA) minutes should be shown on the subdivision plan. The easements should allow both driveway access and parking for both lots. An area map has not been provided for the proposed subdivision. Other required information that was not shown on the plan includes the location of all existing structures on adjacent properties, names of adjoining property owners, location of nearest fire hydrants, utility lines, sidewalks and street width. It is not clear why the application form states that the property is approximately 15 acres in size. 2. Zoning Compliance: In July 1993, the ZBA voted to approve all of the variances it found were necessary for the proposed subdivision, including variances for lot area, building coverage and setback deficiencies. 3. Referrals: According to Section 239-n of the General Municipal Law, if the subject property is located within 500 feet of a municipal boundary (Village of Tarrytown), the Planning Board is required to refer the application to the Westchester County Planning Board for its review. The County Planning Board has a maximum of 30 days to comment. If the subject property is located within 500 feet of a municipal boundary, according to Section 452 of the Westchester County Administrative Code and Section 6.B(l)(g) of the Subdivision Regulations, the Planning Board is required to give notice of a hearing on the application and send a copy of the application at least ten days before the hearing date to the Village of Tarrytown. 2 �FREDERICK P. CLARK ASSOCIATES, INC. Planning/Development/Environment/Transportation 4. Environmental Review; The Applicant has submitted a short Environmental Assessment Form (EAF). According to Part 617 of the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQR), the proposed subdivision is a Type I action because the property is located within the Hudson River Shoreline Critical Environmental Area (CEA). The Applicant is required to submit a full EAF for a Type I action. Unless other involved agencies can be identified (i.e., other agencies with approval authority over this application), the Planning Board is the lead agency in the review of this matter. After receipt and review of the EAF, the Planning Board must make a determination of significance regarding potential environmental impacts of the proposed subdivision. Susan J. Portman, AICP Associate/Planning cc: Linda David, Village Administrator Janet A. Gandolfo, Esq., Village Attorney James T. Margotta, Building Inspector Joseph A. Gulino, PE, Village Engineer Marcello Viscogliosi John J. Muldoon 500\not4-021.sjp 3 �C H A R L E S A . M A N G A N A R O C O N S U L T I N G E N G I N E E R S MEMORANDUM TO: Village of North Tarrytown Planning Board FROM: Mr. Joseph A. Gulino, P.E. Project Engineer DATE: April 28, 1994 RE: Viscogliosi Subdivision Located at 176-178 No. Washington Street Village of North Tarrytown, New York CAMCE No. 800-23 As requested, we have reviewed the subdivision map prepared by John J. Muldoon, L.S., last revised June 12, 1992 and offer the following recommendations: Court Plaza North, 25 Main Street A) The location of all existing structures and other man-made features of the site, as well as those on adjacent properties, including existing utility lines (gas & electric) should be shown on the drawing. B) The location and design of the proposed water supply, sewerage, stormwater drainage systems including the locations, sizes, invert, and rim elevations to the existing water supply, sewage disposal, and storm water drainage systems should be submitted. C) Existing and proposed topography map of the subdivision, extending at least twenty (20) ft. beyond the site boundaries with contour intervals not greater than five (5) ft. and referenced to USGS or other approved bench mark and seals should be shown. Hackensack NJ 07601-7032 201 342 4200 fax 201 342 0790 120 E 75th St. Suite 8C The nature and location of all other existing site features, including wetlands, water courses, wooded areas, and rock outcrops should be shown. New York. NY 10021 212 683 7712 P 0 Box 1007 The plan shall clearly indicate which site features are existing and proposed, and which will be removed. East Stroucsourg. PA 18301 717 421 1499 Owner's endorsement should be shown. �C H A R L E S A . M A N G A N A R O C O N S U L T I N G E N G I N E E R S G) Planning Board Chairman's endorsement per subdivision regulations, Part IV, Page 7817 (14C) should be shown. H) The locations of nearest fire hydrants should be shown. J) An area map showing all streets and property within one thousand (1,000) ft of the applicant's property, at a scale of one (1) inch to four hundred (400) ft. should be shown. All property owned by the applicant shall be clearly identified. Once the above information is submitted, final recommendations will be made to the Board. If you should have any questions or require additional information, please do not hesitate to contact us. JAG/jr cc: Ms. Linda David, Village Administrator Janet A. Gandolfo, Esq., Village Attorney Mr. James T. Margotta, Building Inspector Ms. Susan J. Portman, Associate, Frederick P. Clark Associates Mr. John J. Muldoon, L.S. VNT\80O-23VGO4284M JR1 �Phelps Phelps Memorial Hospital Center /Oi Wort". Broadway . North Tarryiown NY 10591-1096 914-366-3000 April 22, 1994 Mr. Joe Gulino CAMCE Court Plaza North 25 Main Street Hackensack, NJ 07601-7032 Dear Mr. Gulino:' We are pleased to inform you that we have negotiated the reduction of flow from the IBM forced main at their World Trade Center Pump Station. In conjunction with this agreement, IBM is requesting your written approval of this project. Specifically your approval to the plans and specifications prepared by Chas Sells, dated November, 1993, and marked final March, 1994, will be required before we can finalize our agreement with IBM. We must also confirm that your approval will relieve both IBM and Phelps from any further obligation respecting sewage modifications related to the Medical Office Building project. Thank you in advance for your cooperation in this matter. Sincerely, Bruce B. Dfcvidow, FACHE Senior Vice President/ Chief Operating Officer BBD:dg MOB\CAMCE cc: Todd Jack Vincent Del Bagno Keith F. Safian James Margotta �FREDERICK P. CLARK ASSOCIATES, INC. Planning/Development/Environment/Transportation 2. Zoning Compliance: The application meets the zoning requirements of the R-3 Residence District with regard to minimum lot size and minimum lot width. Because of the existing dwelling on Lot 1, that Lot has an existing nonconformity concerning the required minimum front yard. The existing garage is non-conforming concerning the required front and side yard setbacks. The existing garage is proposed to be removed and a dwelling constructed on Lot 2 which would not conform with the required minimum side and front yard setbacks (a minimum total of 15 feet for both side yards and a 20 foot front yard). It appears that a dwelling could be situated on proposed Lot 2 and conform to the required setbacks. However, it is not clear why the proposed dwelling is not situated accordingly. It is our understanding that the Zoning Code was amended a few years ago and, as a result, the Planning Board does not have site plan approval for an individual dwelling in a subdivision of fewer than three lots. In that case, the variances for the setback deficiencies would not be needed until after subdivision approval. The only issue which would appear to require a variance in order for the subdivision itself to be approved would be the fact that the existing parking for the existing dwelling on Lot 1 is being removed (the garage) and the parking as required in Section 62-14E of the Code of the Village of North Tarrytown (one space for each dwelling unit) is not being provided. This issue should be resolved with either a shared driveway, 18 feet in width, off of Amos Street (with the appropriate easements) or the provision of separate driveways off of Amos Street. 3» Access: The Applicants have demonstrated that Amos Street has a wider right-of-way than does Webber Avenue, presumably for the purpose of using Amos Street as the location for determining the front yard setback, as per Section 62-13A of the Code. It appears, due to the proposed location of the driveway, that the rear of the house is proposed to face Amos Street. In any event, we find that the house should face Amos Street and that the driveway access for both lots should be off of Amos Street. Amos Street is a dead-end street with slower traffic than Webber Avenue. Webber Avenue is a through County road. Approval of curb-cuts along Webber Avenue would be subject to the Westchester County Department of Public Works while approval along Amos Street would be subject to the approval of the Village. We advise against the provision of additional curb cuts along Webber Avenue. 2 �FREDERICK P. CLARK ASSOCIATES, INC. Planning- Deveiopment/Environment/Transportation 2. Zoning Compliance: The application meets the zoning requirements of the R-3 Residence District with regard to minimum lot size and minimum lot width. Because of the existing dwelling on Lot 1, that Lot has an existing nonconformity concerning the required minimum front yard. The existing garage is non-conforming concerning the required front and side yard setbacks. The existing garage is proposed to be removed and a dwelling constructed on Lot 2 which would not conform with the required minimum side and front yard setbacks (a minimum total of 15 feet for both side yards and a 20 foot front yard) . It appears that a dwelling could be situated on proposed Lot 2 and conform to the required setbacks. However, it is not clear why the proposed dwelling is not situated accordingly. It is our understanding that the Zoning Code was amended a few years ago and, as a result, the Planning Board does not have site plan approval for an individual dwelling in a subdivision of fewer than three lots. In that case, the variances for the setback deficiencies would not be needed until after subdivision approval. The only issue which would appear to require a variance in order for the subdivision itself to be approved would be the fact that the existing parking for the existing dwelling on Lot 1 is being removed (the garage) and the parking as required in Section 62-14E of the Code of the Village of North Tarrytown (one space for each dwelling unit) is not being provided. This issue should be resolved with either a shared driveway, 18 feet in width, off of Amos Street (with the appropriate easements) or the provision of separate driveways off of Amos Street. 3. Access: The Applicants have demonstrated that Amos Street has a wider right-of-way than does Webber Avenue, presumably for the purpose of using Amos Street as the location for determining the front yard setback, as per Section 62-13A of the Code. It appears, due to the proposed location of the driveway, that the rear of the house is proposed to face Amos Street. In any event, we find that the house should face Amos Street and that the driveway access for both lots should be off of Amos Street. Amos Street is a dead-end street with slower traffic than Webber Avenue. Webber Avenue is a through County road. Approval of curb-cuts along Webber Avenue would be subject to the Westchester County Department of Public Works while approval along Amos Street would be subject to the approval of the Village. We advise against the provision of additional curb cuts along Webber Avenue. 2 �FREDERICK P. CLARK ASSOCIATES, INC. Planning/ Development/Environment/Transportation 4. Dedication; The Applicants1 drawing indicates that Webber Avenue is 49.5 feet in width. As per Section 12B(2) (b) of the Village Subdivision Regulations: Subdivisions that adjoin or include existing streets that do not conform to widths as shown on the Master Plan or Official Map or the street width requirements of this ordinance shall dedicate additional width along either one (1) or both sides of said road. If . . . subdivision is along one (1) side only, one-half (1/2) of the required extra width shall be dedicated. . .[emphasis added]. Assuming that Webber Avenue is a "local street" with a required right-of-way width of 50 feet (see Section 12B(2)(a) of the Regulations), both of the lots would need to dedicate a strip of land three inches wide along Webber Avenue. This should be shown on the plat. 5. Referral: According to Section 239-n of the General Municipal Law, since the subject property is located within 500 feet of a State road (Bedford Road is State Route 448) and a County Road (Webber Avenue), the Planning Board is required to refer this application to the Westchester County Planning Board for its review. The County Planning Board has a maximum of 30 days to comment. 6. Environmental Review: The Applicants have submitted a short Environmental Assessment Form (EAF). According to Part 617 of the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQR), the proposed subdivision is an Unlisted Action. As an Unlisted Action, a coordinated review between agencies is not required. We have completed the second page of the EAF and enclose it for your consideration. Based on our review, we recommend that the Planning Board declare itself the Lead Agency and make a negative declaration finding of non-significance of environmental impacts. Susan J. Portman, AICP Associate/Planning Enclosure cc: Janet A. Gandolfo, Esq., Village Attorney James T. Margotta, Building Inspector Joseph A. Gulino, Village Engineer John and Maureen Petry John J. Muldoon 3 �I /l n'. M ** SEQR 617.21 Appendix C State Environmental Quality Review .'ID NUMEF.R / SHORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM For UNLISTED ACTIONS Only / ART l—PROJECT INFORMATION (To be completed by Applicant or Project sponsor) A Jflhn 4 rrlftU&frf, > h ' 3. PROJECT LOCATION: / / 2,. PROJECT NAME 1. APPLICANT/SPONSOR Municipality f County fry/(fS/O/£"£/&/£_ 4. PRECISE LOCATION (Street address and road Intersection!, prominent landmarks, etc., or provide map) t / / 4/vlO-S S / " 5. IS PROPOSED ACTION: L d New D Expansion D Modification/alteration 6. DESCRIBE PROJECT BRIEFLY: 7. AMOUNT OF LAND AFFECTED: Initially ^ / acres ^ / Ultimately 8. WILL PROPOSED ACTION COMPLY WITH EXISTING ZONING OR^OTHER EXISTING LAND USE RESECTIONS? J2 DYes Q^No If No. describe briefly ^ .• ^ M •\-\ A - #^4-1 8 . WHAT, IS PRESENT LAND USE IN VICINITY OF PROJECT? [^Residential Describe: LJ Industrial [_) Commercial D Agriculture O Park/Forest'Open space D Other 10. DOES ACTION INVOLVE A PERMIT APPROVAL, OR FUNDING, NOW OR ULTIMATELY FROM ANY OTHER GOVERNMENTAL AGENCY (FEDERAL, STATE OR L O C A L ) ? , LiYes 11. LJNO If yes, list agency(s) and permit/approvals DOES ANY ASPECT OF THE ACTIOS HAVE A CURRENTLY VALID PERMIT OR APPROVAL? LJYes LDNo If yes, list agency name and permit/approval 12. AS A RESULT OF PROPOSED ACTION WILL EXISTING PERMIT/APPROVAL REOUIRE MODIFICATION? DYes BNO I CERTIFY THAT THE INFORMATION PROVIDED ABOVE IS TRUE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE Applicant/sponsor Signature: name: <foMtt ?ncsi \?\\^ «* ^ quAU^ Dale \6tT j^2£= ^ If the action is in the Coastal Area, and you are a state agency, complete the Coastal Assessment Form before proceeding with this assessment OVER 1 �P«jfrBT H-ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (To be completed by Agency) A. DOES ACTION EXCEED ANY TYPE I THRESHOLD IN 6 NYCRR, PART 617.12? D Yes II yes, coordinate Ihe review process and use the FULL EAF. S No I B. WILL ACTION RECEIVE COORDINATED REVIEW AS PROVIDED FOR UNLISTED ACTIONS IN 8 NYCRR, PART 617.6? may be superseded by another involved agency. D Yes j If No, • negative declaration (S No j j I C. COULD ACTION RESULT IN ANY ADVERSE EFFECTS ASSOCIATED W I T H THE F O L L O W I N G : (Answers may be handwrllten, If legible) C1. Existing air quality, surface or groundwater quality or quantity, noise levels, existing traffic patterns, solid waste production or disposal, potential for erosion, drainage or flooding problems? Explain briefly: Mo C2. Aesthetic, agricultural, archaeological, historic, or other natural or cultural resources; or community or neighborhood character? Explain briefly: Mo C3. Vegetation or fauna, fish, shellfish or wildlife species, significant habitats, or threatened or endangered species? Explain briefly: N6 C4. A community's existing plans or goals as officially adopted, or a change in use or intensity of use of land or other natural resources? Explain briefly. Mo C5. Growth, subsequent development, or related activities likely to be Induced by the proposed action? Explain briefly. Mo C6. Long term, short term, cumulative, or other effects not identified in C1-C5? Explain briefly. C7. Other Impacts (including changes In use of either quantity or type of energy)? Explain briefly. 0. IS THERE, OR IS THERE LIKELY TO BE. CONTROVERSY RELATED TO POTENTIAL ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS? D Yes E No If Yes, explain briefly PART III—DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE (To be completed by Agency) INSTRUCTIONS: For each adverse effect identified above, determine whether It Is substantial, large, Important or otherwise significant Each effect should be assessed In connection with Its (a) setting (i.e. urban or rural); (b) probability of occurring; (c) duration; (d) Irreversibility; (e) geographic scope; and (0 magnitude, if necessary, add attachments or reference supporting materials. Ensure that explanations contain sufficient detail to show that all relevant adverse impacts have been identified and adequately addre^ed. D Check this box if you have Identified one or more potentially large or significant adverse impacts which MAY occur. Then proceed directly to the FULL EAF and/or prepare a positive declaration. D Check this box if you have determined, based on the Information and analysis above and any supporting documentation, that the proposed action WILL NOT result in any significant adverse environmental Impacts AND provide on attachments as necessary, the reasons supporting this determination: U Name of If ad Agency r / ^ ^ Print or Type r4*Vne of Responsible Officer in I ead Agency Title of Responsible Officer Signature of Responsible O/ficer in l e a d Agency Signature of Prepare^ (If different from responsible officer) Mw Dale 2 �617.21 \ /•' « SEQR Appendix A State Environmental Quality Review FULL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM :: The full EAF is designed to help applicants and agencies determine, in an orderly manner, whether a project n may be significant The question of whether an action may be significant is not always easy to answer. Frequenti are aspects of a project that are subjective or unmeasureable. It is also understood that those who determine jnificance may have little or no formal knowledge of the environment or may be technically expert in environmental •alysis In addition, many who have knowledge in one particular area may not be aware of the broader concerns affecting '* question of significance. The full EAF is intended to provide a method whereby applicants and agencies can be assured that the determination ocess has been orderly, comprehensive in nature, yet flexible to allow introduction of information to fit a project or action. id EAF Components: The full EAF is comprised of three parts: Part 1: Provides objective data and information about a given project and its site. By identifying basic project data, it assists a reviewer in the analysis that takes place in Parts 2 and 3. " Part 2: Focuses on identifying the range of possible impacts that may occur from a project or action. It provides guidance as to whether an impact is likely to be considered small to moderate or whether it is a potentiallylarge impact. The form also identifies whether an impact can be mitigated or reduced. Part 3: If any impact in Part 2 is identified as potentially-large, then Part 3 is used to evaluate whether or not the impact is actually important. DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE-Type 1 and Unlisted Actions Identify the Portions of EAF complete* for this project: « B Part 1 B Part 2 DPart 3 eview of the information recorded on this EAF (Parts 1 and 2 and 3 if appropriate), and any other supporting ation. and considering both the magitude and importance of each impact, it is reasonably determined by the gency that: Q A. The project will not result in any large and important impacts) and, therefore, is one which will not have a significant impact on the environment, therefore a negative declaration will be prepared. 0 B. Although the project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect for this Unlisted Action because the mitigation measures described in PART 3 have been required, therefore a CONDITIONED negative declaration will be prepared.* 0 C. The project may result in one or more large and important impacts that may have a significant impact on the environment, therefore a positive declaration will be prepared. * A Conditioned Negative Declaration is only valid for Unlisted Actions M a t t e r of V i s c o g l i o s i Two LOf >Iubd«VtlJQA Name of Action Planning Board - Village of North Tarrytown Name of Lead Agency HLJ Fof ' Title of Responsible Officer ruicor Type Name of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency reparer (If different from iresponsible officer) Signature of Preparer JOHN J . HUGHES» J R . ^nature of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency May 1 6 , 1994 Date 1 �I Ar PART 1—PROJECT INFORMATION Prepared by Project Sponsor Is NOTICE: This document is designed to assist in determining whether the action proposed may have a significante) Re on the environment. Please complete the entire form. Parts A through E. Answers to these questions will be consid cons* ^ ^ s part of the application for approval and may be subject to further verification and public review. Provide any additff Is ^ B i f o r m a t i o n you believe will be needed to complete Parts 2 and 3. Wl lot inT It is expected that completion of the full EAF will be dependent on information currently available a n d will not new studies, research or investigation If information requiring such additional work is unavailable, so indicate andsp '• ' 5 each instance. 10 D 11. D NAME OF ACTION M a t t e r o f V i s c o g l i o s i TIAJO LO^ JobcWi'jiCio LOCATION OF ACTION (Include Street Address. Municipality and County) 1 7 6 - 1 7 8 N o r t h Washington S t r e e t , N o r t h T a r r y t o w n , Westchester NAME OF APPUCANT/SPONSOR County 12. Ai BUSINESS TELEPHONE Marcello Visjrogliosi (914) 631-8855 ADDRESS c/o J. Hughes, Jr., Esq., 49 Beekman Avenue CfTY/FO STATE N o r t h T a r r y t o w n , NY ZIP CODE 10591 NY 14. BUSINESS TELEPHONE NAME OF OWNER (II different) same as owner < » Is t • ) N/A ADDRESS 15 St: N/A crrY/po N/A STATE ZIP CODE N/A N/A 16. La DESCRIPTION OF ACTION Subdivision - 2 lots 17. Is a) b) 18 Is Se Please Complete Each Question—Indicate N.A. if not applicable A. Site Description 19. Is of Physical setting of overall project, both developed and undeveloped areas. 1. Present land use: OUrban Olndustrial DForest DAgriculture DCommercial OResidential (suburban) 2. Total acreage of project area: . acres. APPROXIMATE ACREAGE Meadow or Brushland (Non-agricultural) PRESENTLY j£L acres acres acres acres acres acres ^cres acres ttr)oAy\LA*d-(\\<»>f\ior\ (btvipleX Forested Agricultural (Includes orchards, cropland, pasture, etc ) Wetland (Freshwater or tidal as per Articles 24. 25 of ECL) Water Surface Area Unvegetated (Rock, earch or fill) Roadsr-buildings and other paved "surJaces|fl.^iC^>M|tw«OZii U nth^FJTnAi^tpr^^r Residential _ t. W h a t ii predominant soil typeKs) on project site? a. Soil drainage: CD Well drained DPoorly drained DRural (non-fijjo. Ha -OOther 100 % of site % of site Q.)S DModerately well drained AFTER COMPLETION B. Pr awf 1 Phy< acre<j . acre; . acre . acre .-acre -fr-Q- JSL DYes ,in o f£'No feet) b. c. d . acre -e— . acre f. % of site b. If any agricultural land is involved, how many acres of soil are classified within soil group 1 through 4 of theK Land Classification System' acres (See 1 NYCRR 370) N/A Are there bedrock outcroppmgs on project site? What is depth to bedrock' Approx. 1 0 - 1 5 a g h In u: i. : i i �slopes 7(t-l6% Dl5% iQb or greater ii project substantially contiguous to. or contain a building, site, or district, listed on the State or the National DYes ©No ni effo Registers of Historic Places? nsiderf Jditioru' Is project substantially contiguous to a site listed on the Register of National Natural Landmarks? What is the depth of the water fahlp?APP.10- fin feet) Folw DYes G5No 1 specif Is site located over a primary, principal, or sole source aquifer? Do hunting, fishing or shell fishing opportunities presently exist in the project area? DYes DYes IS No QDNo Does project site contain any species of plant or animal life that is identified as threatened or endangered? DYes EJNo According to Identify each species Are there any unique or unusual land forms on the project site? (i.e.. cliffs, dunes, other geological formations) DYes ©No Describe : )E ) Is the project site presently used by the community or neighborhood as an open space or recreation area? DYes ©No If yes, explain . \ Does the present site include scenic views known to be important to the community? DYes ©No ->E 5 Streams within or contiguous to project area: None a. Name of Stream and name of River to which it is tributary i Lakes, ponds, wetland areas within or contiguous to project area: a. Name None N/A b. Size ( I n acres) N/A 7 Is the site served by existing public utilities? JSYes DNo DNo a) If Yes, does sufficient capacity exist t o a l l o w connection? {DYes DNo b) If Yes, w i l l i m p r o v e m e n t s be necessary t o allow connection? ©Yes I Is the site located in an agricultural district certified pursuant to Agriculture and Markets Law, Article 25-AA. Section 303 and 304? DYes E3No i Is the site located in or substantially contiguous to a Critical Environmental Area designated pursuant to Article 8 of the ECL, and 6 NYCRR 617? ©Yes DNo Dn-farm j Has the site ever been used for the disposal of solid or hazardous wastes? TION{ acres acres acres acres acres acres acres 3cres i # DYes QJNo Project Description Physical d i m e n s i o n s and scale o f p r o j e c t (fill i n dimensions as appropriate) a. Total contiguous acreage owned or controlled by project sponsor >J6 O* »£acres. b. Project acreage to be developed: •& cO. 1$ acres initially; ' ^ O* '\Z acres ultimately. c.'-Project acreage t o remain u n d e v e l o p e d 0 acres. d. Length of project, in miles: N/A (if appropriate) e. If the project is an expansion, indicate percent of expansion proposed %; f. Number of off-street parking spaces existjnjg_ 6 ; proposed 6 ftfol -jt^Maximum-vehtcular trips-generated-per^hour — -N/A - - (upon cpmplieUoh of project)? N^" CM&W&~; k tf residential: Number and type of housing units: One Family Two Family Multiple Family Condominium 1 Initially _ 2 Ultimately _ i i Dimensions (in feet) of largest proposed structure 35 height; 20* width: j. Linear feet of frontage along a public thoroughfare project will occupy u?APP ^(sbi\ length. �2. How much natural material (i.e.. rock, earth, etc.) will be removed from the site? 3. Will disturbed areas be reclaimed? DYes DNo N/A tons/cub EN/A a. If yes, for what intend .* purpose is the site being reclaimed? b. Will topsoil be stockpiled for reclamation? DYes : ©No c. Will upper subsoil be stockpiled for reclamation? DYes (SNo 4. How many acres of vegetation (trees, shrubs, ground covers) will be removed from site? None a, 5. Will any mature forest (over 100 years old) or other locally-important vegetation be removed by this pre DYes 0No 6. If single phase project: Anticipated period of construction N/A months, (including demolition). 7. If multi-phased: a. Total number of phases anticipated ^' (number). b. Anticipated date of commencement phase 1 ^/A c. Approximate completion date of final phase N A ' month d. Is phase 1 functionally dependent on subsequent phases? 8. Will blasting occur during construction? DYes 9. Number of jobs generated: during construction .10. Number of jobs eliminated by this project N month 'A y& ,r, (including den N/A DYes year. QlNo EJNo N/A ; after project is complete 12. Is surface liquid waste disposal involved? DYes DYes ONo b. Name of water body into which effluent will be discharged 13. Is subsurface liquid waste disposal involved? I' yes, explain (SNo a. If yes, indicate type of waste (sewage, industrial, etc.) and amount DYes N/A N/A QlNo Type 14. Will surface area of an existing water body increase or decrease by proposal? Explain 15. Is project or any portion of project located in a 100 year flood plain? DYes a. If yes, what is the amount per month DV-ss DYes l&No CSNo ©No N/A tons b. If yes, will an existing solid waste facility be used? c. If yes, give name /A N/A 11. Will project require relocation of any projects or facilities? 16. Will the project generate solid waste? N No a d d i t i o n a l waste QQYes N/A ; DNo N location 'A d. Will any wastes not go into a sewa'ge disposal system or into a sanitary landfill? LYes _-N< e. If Yes, explain 17. Will the project involve the disposal of solid waste? DYes a. If yes. what is the anticipated rate of disposal? b. If yes, what is the anticipated site life? 18. Will project use herbicides or pesticides? ENo N/A N/A NO a d d i t i o n a l tons/month. years. DYes CSNo 19. Will project routinely produce odors (more than one hour per day)? DYes __Q_No_ -20^-Will-project produce operating noise exceeding the local ambient noise levels? 21. Will project result in an increase in energy use? If yes . indicate type{s) DYes Total anticipated water usage per day ______________ N/A N/A gallons/minute. gallons/day 24 Does project involve Local, State or Federal funding? If Yes. explain QENo KJNo N/A 22. If water supply is from wells, indicate pumping capacity 23. DYes — DYes N/A 29No . 4 I �City.'^own Village Board DYes ENo City. Town. Village Planning Board 3 Yes 3Yes D No DNo Subdivision C«ty.*Town Zoning Board QlYes D No DNo Variances - already granted City. County Health Department DYes KJNo DYes IS No Other Regional Agencies DYes ffiNo State Agencies DYes ®No federal Agencies DYes ENo her Local Agencies 4/94 C. Zoning and Planning Information 1 Does proposed action involve a planning or zoning decision? ®Yes DNo If Yes. indicate decision required: Dzoning amendment Bzoning variance Dnew/revision of master plan Dspecial use permit Dresource management plan R 2 What is the zoning classification(s)of the site? ^subdivision Dsite plan Dother ~5 3 What is the maximum potential development of the site if developed as permitted by the present zoning? Five ( 5 ) r e s i d e n t i a l u n i t s feiiflMQ 4 What is the proposed zoning of the site? u),ffr V&fi&Hces)' R-5 TyuO hQi-2'fMilu J)|^/|IVKS Nft G k a v ^ g . p€.r &**& h~h} 5 What is the maximum potential development of the site if developed as permitted by the proposed zoning? 5 residential units rVJ A i Is the proposed action consistentrwith the recommended uses in adopted local land use plans? BYes DNo 7 What are the predominant land use(s) and zoning classifications within a V* mile radius of proposed action? __ R e s i d e n t i a l - m u l t i - f a m i l y . Cfn<fr--fa*ti'/l4'. CCmmGK id I Cfrrfci irtJ-Hmftd/lflJ, AIAH«C/$&»>''"P*k J)C p n W R.-j t p-a p-^- £_£ ^ l | C - i ^ I Is the proposed action compatible with adjoining/surrounding land uses within a Vi mile? J If the proposed action is the subdivision of land, how many lots are proposed? a. What is the minimum lot size proposed? EYes DNo L-.-,--..^^,.^—.— P l e a s e see a t t a c h e d feey. ApprflX- 2y7flQ K) Will proposed action require any authorization(s) for the formation of sewer or water districts? S^.ffc DYes ENo 11 Will the proposed action create a demand for any community provided services (recreation, education, police, fire protection)? DYes G9No HAr a. If yes, is existing capacity sufficient to handle projected demand? SYes DNo 12 Will the proposed action result in the generation of traffic significantly above present levels? A/A DYes a. If yes. is the existing road network adequate to handle the additional traffic? ®Yes 0No DNo D. Informational Details Attach any additional information as may be needed to clarify your project. If there are or may be any adverse mpacts associated with your proposal, please discuss such impacts and the measures which you propose to mitigate or jvoid them Oerfticatiou — I certify that the information provided above is true to the best of my knowledge UppKcant/Sponsor Name ^r..r^-./,^ Marcello Viscogliosi ULJ ,£1^ m J*.M*:«j fc. N*** III ' Title Date 5/16/94 2-_H M e action is in the Coastal Area, and you are a state agency, complete the Coastal Assessment Form before proceeding •ilk this assessment. 5 �i <.: - <. — r h O J E G l i t i ( * r A O ' i w A U U ~lhc.iri U'nkCai*i t u u t - Responsibility of Lead Agency General Information (Read Carefully) • In completing the form the reviewer should be guided by the question: Have my responses and determinations b» reasonable? The reviewer is not expected to be an expert environmental analyst. • Identifying that an impact will be potentially large (column 2) does not mean that it is also necessarily signifies Any large impact must be evaluated in PART 3 to determine significance. Identifying an impact in column 2 sirr.: asks that it be looked at further. • The Examples provided are to assist the reviewer by showing types of impacts and wherever possible the threshol: magnitude that would trigger a response in column 2. The examples are generally applicable throughout the Stat?; for most situations. But, for any specific project or site other examples and/or lower thresholds may be appropm for a Potential Large Impact response, thus requiring evaluation in Part 3. • The impacts of each project, on each site, in each locality, will vary. Therefore, the examples are illustrative: have been offered as guidance. They do not constitute an exhaustive list of impacts and thresholds to answer each quest" • The number of examples per question does not indicate the importance of each question. • In identifying impacts, consider long term, short term and cumlative effects. Instructions (Read carefully) a. Answer each of the 19 questions in PART 2. Answer Yes if there-will be any impact. b. Maybe answers should be considered as Yes answers. c. If answering Yes to a question then check the appropriate box (column 1 or 2) to indicate the potential size of* impact. If impact threshold equals or exceeds any example provided, check column 2. If impact will occur but thresh; is lower than example, check column 1 . d. If reviewer has doubt about size of the impact then consider the impact as potentially large and proceed to PARI e. If a potentially large impact checked in column 2 can be mitigated by changes) in the project to a small to mode;impact also check the Yes box in column 3. A No response indicates that such a reduction is not possible Tl must be explained in Part J. 2 Small to Moderate Impact Potential Large Impact • D G Yes DNC • Construction on land where the depth to the water table is less than 3 feet. D D GYes DNC • Construction of paved parking area for 1,000 or more vehicles. G D D D GYes DNC GYes Cvj • Construction that will continue for more than 1 year or involve more than one phase or stage. D D GYes DNC! • Excavation for mining purposes that would remove more than 1.000 tons of natural material (i.e.. rock or soil) per year. D D GYes DNCI S- -G O. G -l-S^es- GNC' IMPACT ON LAND 1 . Will the proposed action result in a physical change to the project site? ENO DYES Examples that would apply to column 2 • Any construction on slopes of 15% or greater, (15 foot rise per 100 foot of length), or where the general slopes in the project area exceed 10%. • Construction on land where bedrock is exposed or generally within 3 feet of existing ground surface. • Construction, orlexpaosion oi a sanitary landfill. — --— •Construction in a designated flood way. '~^4y~-y-S. •' • Other impacts __: " ^ •-"'•' - Can Impact •: Mitigated 6) Project Chanc I i D D GYes GNci GYes GNc I 2. Will there be an effect t- . .iy uii.ijuc or unusual land forms found on the site? (i.e.. cliffs, dunes, geological formations. etc.)ONO DYES • Specific land forms: tf G — Nes .NC �Moderate Impact rc;ei.;iai Large Impact D D D D DYes DYes DNo DNo D D D D D D DYes DYes DYes DNo DNo DNo D D DYes DNo D D D D DYes DYes DNo DNo D D D D DYes DYes DNo DNo l>sed Action requires water supply from wells with greater than 45 _ ons per minute pumping capacity D D DYes DNo Construction or operation causing any contamination ot a water supply system. D D DYes DNo Proposed Action will adversely affect groundwater. .iquid effluent will be conveyed off the site to facilities which presently to not exist or have inadequate capacity. D D D D DYes DYes DNo DNo Roposed Action would use water in excess of 20.000 gallons per D D DYes DNo Proposed Action will likely caum siltation or other discharge into an xisting body of water to tue extent that there will be an obvious visual ontrast to natural conditions. D D DYes DNo roposed Action will require the storage of petroleum or chemical roducts greater than 1,100 gallons. D . D DYes DNo roposed Action will allow residential uses in areas without water r.oVor sewer services. D D DYes DNo roposed Action locates comma J a i and/or industrial uses which may >quire new or expansion of existing waste treatment and/or storage D D DYes DNo D D DYes DNo D r-i DYes DNo Ot i i b i i , . IMPACT ON WATER .Will proposed action affect any water body designated as protected? (Under Articles 15, 24, 25 of the Environmental Conservation Law, ECL) KNO DYES Examples that would apply to column 2 Q^elopable area of site contains a protected water body. t^Pging more than 100 cubic yards of material from channel of a protected stream Extension of utility distribution facilities through a protected water body. Construction in a designated freshwater or tidal wetland. Other impacts: Will proposed action affect any non-protected existing or new body of water? ONO DYES Examples that would apply to column 2 A10% increase or decrease in the surface area of any body of water or more than a 10 acre increase or decrease. Construction of a body of water that exceeds 10 acres of surface area. Other impacts: Will Proposed Action affect surface or groundwater quality or quantity? BNO Examples that would apply to column 2 Can Impact Be Mitigated By Project Change DYES Proposed Action will require a discharge permit. Proposed Action requires use of a sburce of water that does not *iave approval to serve proposed (project) action. « crti^ >ther impacts: proposed action alter drainage flow or patterns, or surface i runoff? BNO DYES • samples that would apply to column 2 oposed Action would change flood water flows. 7 f it �^ ^ > r o p o s e d Action may cause substantial erosion. 2 Small to Moderate Impact Potential Large Impact D D D D • D • Can Impact Be Mitigated By Project Change, DYes ONo DYes DNo DYes DNo D DYes DNo D D DYes DNo • Proposed Action will result in the incineration of more than 1 ton of refuse per hour. D a DYes DNo • Emission rate of total contaminants will exceed 5 lbs. per hour or a heat source producing more than 10 million BTU's per hour. D D DYes DNo • Proposed action will allow an increase in the amount of land committed to industrial use. D D DYes DNo • Proposed action will allow an increase in the density of industrial development within existing industrial areas. D D DYes DNo • Other impacts: D D DYes DNo a D D Y es ONc • • DYes DNo • Application of pesticide or herbicide more than twice a year, other than for agricultural purposes. D D DYes DNo • Other D D DYes DNo • Proposed Action would substantially interfere with any resident or migratory fish, shellfish or wildlife species. D D DYes DNo • Proposed Action requires the removal of more than 10 acres — o f - m a t u r e forest (over~100 yea r s o f age) or other locally important vegetation. D G DYes DNo a D DYes DNo • Proposed Action is incompatible with existing drainage patterns. • Proposed Action will allow development in a designated floodway. • Other impacts: IMPACT ON AIR ENO DYES 7. Will proposed action affect air quality? Examples that would apply to column 2 • Proposed Action will induce 1,000 or more vehicle trips in any given hour. , IMPACT O N PLANTS A N D ANIMALS 8. Will Proposed Action affect any threatened or endangered species? ENO Examples that would apply to column 2 DYES ••• Reduction of one or more species listed on the New York or Federal list using the site, over or near site or found on the site. • Removal of any portion of a critical or significant wildlife habitat. impacts. 9. Will Proposed Action substantially affect non-threatened or non-endangered species? ENO Examples that would apply to column 2 DYES I M P A C T ON AGRICULTURAL LAND RESOURCES 3 Will the Proposed Action affect agricultural land resources? ©NO DYES Examples that would apply to column 2 • The proposed action would sever, cross or limit access to agricultural land (includes cropland, hayfields. pasture, vineyard, orchard, etc.) 8 NMHT �struction activity would excavate or compact the soil profile of ultural land. The proposed action would irreversibly convert more than 10 acres of agricultural land or, if located in an Agricultutal District, more than 2.5 acres of agricultural land. The proposed action would disrupt or prevent installation of agricultural land management systems (e.g.. subsurface drain lines, outlet ditches, strip cropping); or create a need for such measures (e.g. cause a farm field to drain poorly due to increased runoff) Other impacts: IMPACT O N A E S T H E T I C RESOURCES Will proposed action affect aesthetic resources? ENO DYES (If necessary, use the Visual EAF Addendum in Section 617.21, Appendix B.) Examples that would apply to column 2 Proposed land uses, or project components obviously different from or in sharp contrast to current surrounding land use patterns, whether man-made or natural. Proposed land uses, or project components visible to users of aesthetic resources which will eliminate or significantly reduce their enjoyment of the aesthetic qualities of that resource. jBuect components that will result in the elimination or significant l ^ ^ n i n g of scenic views known to be important to the area Other impacts: MPACT O N HISTORIC A N D A R C H A E O L O G I C A L RESOURCES Will Proposed Action impact any site or structure of historic, prehistoric or paleontological importance? K)NO DYES Examples that would apply to column 2 Proposed Action occurring wholly or partially within or substantially contiguous to any facility or site listed on the State or National Register }f historic places. \ny impact to an archaeological site or fossil bed located within the oroject site. Proposed Action will occur in an area designated as sensitive for archaeological sites on the NYS Site Inventory. Other impacts: IMPACT O N O P E N S P A C E A N D RECREATION Wifl Proposed Action affect the quantity or quality of existing or future open spaces or recreational opportunities? ^ b a m p l e s that would apply to column 2 El NO DYES ^^^>ermanent foreclosure of a future recreational opportunity. \ major reduction of an open space important to the community. J)ther impacts: f 1 2 Small to Moderate Impact Potential Large Impact D D DYes DNo D D DYes DNo D D DYes DNo D D DYes DNo D D DYes DNo D D DYes DNo D D DYes DNo D D DYes DNo D D DY es DNO D D CYes DNo D D DYes DNO D D DYes DNO D D D D D D DYes DYes DYes DNo DNo ONo Can Impact Be Mitigated By Project Change �1 Small to Moderate Impact 2 3 Potential Large Impact Can Impact Bi Mitigated ^ y Project Char-ngi • Alteration of present patterns of movement of people and/or goods D a • Proposed Action will result in major traffic problems. a D D GYes GYes GYes D^o Dtr^o D»o a a D GYes G i flo D GYes D No D D GYes G NO a a a GYes O f No D GYes GYes CUNo DUNo IMPACT ON TRANSPORTATION 1 4 . Will there be an effect to existing transportation systems? KINO Examples that would apply to column 2 DYES D • Other impacts: IMPACT O N ENERGY 1 5 . Will proposed action affect the community's sources of fuel or energy supply? S N O ^ DYES Examples that would apply to column 2 • Proposed Action will cause a greater than 5% increase in the use of any form of energy in the municipality. • Proposed Action will require the creation or extension of an energy transmission or supply system to serve more than 50 single or two family residences or to serve a major commercial or industrial use. • Other impacts: N O I S E A N D ODOR IMPACTS 1 6 . Will there be objectionable op*ors, noise, or vibration as a result of the Proposed Action? ENO DYES Examples that would apply to column 2 • b lasting within 1,500 feet of a hospital, school or other sensitive facility. D D • Odors will occur routinely (more than one hour per day). • Proposed Action will produce operating noise exceeding the local ambient noise levels for noise outside of structures. • Proposed Action will remove natural barriers that would act as a noise screen. D • GYes CONo • Other D D GYes QNo • D GYes O -GYes - - O impacts: IMPACT O N PUBLIC HEALTH 1 7 . Will Proposed Action affect public health and safety? BNO Examples that would apply to column 2 DYES • Proposed Action may cause a risk of explosion or release of hazardous substances (i.e. oil. pesticides, chemicals, radiation, etc.) in the event of accident or upset conditions, or there may be a chronic low level discharge or emission. • Proposed Action tnay-restHt4n^the burial^>f "hazardous wastes'- in any form. (i.e. toxic, poisonous, highly reactive, radioactive, irritating. infectious, etc.) Storage facilities for one million or more gallons of liquified natural fgas or other flammable liquids. • Proposed action may result in the excavation or other disturbance within 2.000 feet of a site used for the disposal of solid or hazardous waste. Other impacts: m ' D - Q •'••- G G GYes C3o D C GYes C3 GYes O a �-'• IMPACT ON GROWTH AND CHARACTER OF C O M M U N I T Y OR N E I G H B O R H O O D WiU'propos'ed action affect the character of the existing community? ENO DYES 1 Small to Moderate Impact 2 Potential Large Impact D D DYes DNO • D DYes DNo D D D D D D DYes DYes DYes DNo DNo DNo • DYes DNo DYes DYes DYes DNo DNo DNo 3 Can Impact Be Mitigated By Project Change Examples that would apply to column 2 permanent population of the city, town or village in which the project is located is likely to grow by more than 5%. The municipal budget for capital expenditures or operating services will increase by more than 5% per year as a result of this project. Proposed action will conflict with officially adopted plans or goals. Proposed action will cause a change in the density of land use. Proposed Action will replace or eliminate existing facilities, structures or areas of historic importance to the community. Development will create a demand for additional community services [e.g. schools, police and fire, etc.) Proposed Action will set an important precedent for future projects. D • • Proposed Action will create or eliminate employment. •D D D Other impacts: 19. Is there, or is there likely to be, public controversy related to potential adverse environmental impacts? El N O DYES If Any Action in Part 2 Is Identified as a Potential Large Impact or If You Cannot Determine the Magnitude of Impact, Proceed to Part 3 Part 3—EVALUATION OF THE IMPORTANCE OF IMPACTS Responsibility of Lead Agency rt 3 must be prepared if one or more impact(s) is considered to be potentially large, even if the impact(s) may be itigated. structions scuss the following for each impact identified in Column 2 of Part 2: Briefly describe the impact. Describe (if applicable) how the impact could be mitigated or reduced to a small to moderate impact by project changes). Based on the information available, decide if it is reasonable to conclude that this impact is important. To answer the question of importance, consider: • The probability of the impact occurring • The duration of the impact • Its irreversibility, including permanently lost resources of value — — • Whether the impact can or will be controlled — — ~ > The regional corisequence~6f t H e l m p a c t ~ . " • Its potential divergence from local needs and goals • Whether known objections to the project relate to this impact. ttinue on attachments) 11 & iai .- �Approved/)with respect to substance and form: Village Attorn* Dated: Approved by the Planning Board rvi; lairman ^ r Acting Chainua lated: F i l e d with V i l l a g e Clerk e±GT%r-or Deputy Clerk Dated: ^£?J y W � 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-1994 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_1994-05-19 Subject The topic of the resource Planning Board Minutes & Resolutions-1994 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1994