https://sleepyhollow.localarchives.org/files/original/49a49cf07b984ec4679c72439b5b120a.pdf 3454db3c74092363042d982cecd16caa PDF Text Text *~_J=^1 -•-A-/- ^ ' <^*<r_ .fA ^ REGULAR MEETING y • 2.. -rz NORTH TARRYTOWN, NEW YORK OCTOBER 21st, 1993 A regular meeting of the North Tarrytown Planning Board was held on October 21st, 1993 at 8:15 P.M. in the Village Hall, 28 Beekman Avenue, North Tarrytown, New York 10591. PRESENT: George Hritz, Chairman Ellen Tsangaris Donald Caetano Edward McCarthy Roman Windas James Donovan ABSENT: Steven Salman ALSO PRESENT: Janet Gandolfo, Attorney Susan Portman, Clark Assoc. Joe Gulino, CAMCE James Margotta, Building Inspector Chairman Hritz called the meeting to order at 8:15 P.M. 1. C M . Pateman, F. Racanelli, T. Lupetin, North Broadway Car Wash Continued. Chairman Hritz stated that a letter had been received from the applicant's attorney requesting that the matter be adjourned sine die until it is determined what final action will be taken by the Board of Trustees regarding the moratorium. Mr. Caetano moved, seconded by Mr. Donovan that the matter be adjourned as requested. Carried. 2. Mr. & Mrs. A. Ruivo, 39 Depeyster Street-Public Hearing Three family residence. Mr. Hritz read the public notice hearing upon the application of Mr. and Mrs. Arlindo Ruivo for approval of a sub-division of property located at 39 Depeyster Street, North Tarrytown, New York and for approval of a Site Plan Application for the construction of a two and one-half story, three family residence at the site of one of the sub-divided parcels. The number of parking spaces proposed at the site of the three family residence is six (6). Mr. Hritz stated that a Memo was received by the Board from Clark Associates stating they had reviewed the application and recommended several minor changes. (Copy in official minutes). <• Mr. Hritz stated that a memo was received from the consulting engineers with several recommendations concerning storm water, potable water and sewerage. (Copy in official minutes). �-2Mr. Sam Vieira, Architect for the project stated that a revised set of drawings was submitted for the Borad to review. Plans were for the new construction on the "new" sub-divided lot. c . •:• : ; Discussion followed on trees that would be removed and the number of parking; spaces needed. Mr. Vieira stated there would be three garages and three parking spaces on the property. Mr. Hughes, Attorney for the applicant stated that they will comply with the recommendations of the Planner. Mr. Hughes stated that the applicant has submitted a full Environmental Assessment form for the Board to review. Discussion followed regarding a wall to be constructed at the rear of the property and the type of fencing to be installed. Mr. Vieira stated the property would be landscaped and there will be sufficient lighting on the east side of the house for the parking area. Mr. Vieira stated there will be dry wells for drainage and the property will be regraded. He also stated that the N.Y.S. Building Code requires a turnaround on the property. Ms. Tsangaris moved, seconded by Mr. McCarthy that the Planning Board be named the Lead Agency in the review of this Type I Action. Carried. The Board reviewed the environmental impact statement and Ms. Tsangaris moved, seconded by Mr. McCarthy that no significant impacts have been identified and recommends that the Board make a Negative Declaration. Carried. Mr. Margotta stated that due to changes in the Site Plan required by the N.Y.S. Housing Code that the matter be referred to the Zoning Board. Mr. Caetano moved, seconded by Mr. Donovan that the plans be accepted as submitted. Carried. 3. Phelps Memorial Hospital Center, North Broadway,-New Parking Spaces-Continued. Mr. Hritz read the Public Notice Hearing upon the application of Phelps Memorial Hospital Center, for approval of an amendment to a dite plan which was approved by the Village of North Tarrytown Planning Board on April 14, 1992. The land on said site plan being located at 701 North Broadway, North Tarrytown, New York within the H Hospital District. The applicant proposes to amend the site plan to change the location and number of parking spaces at the site and to reduce the size of the proposed Phelps Professional Building. The �-3original approval was for the development of a 62,000 square foot medical office building and approximately 300 additional parking spaces. Representatives for the Hospital stated that a new ite Plan and Drainage Plan has been submitted along with an Envirionmental Assessment Form. It was stated that the new plans submitted are the actual plans they will be using during construction, and the number of parking spaces are the same as originally submitted. Mr. Hritz stated a memo was received from Clark Associates dated October 20th, 1993 with their review comments on the Amended Site Plan. Ms. Portman stated that various changes had been made in parking and islands located on the property. Ms. Portman stated their concerns appear to be parking and traffic circulation and they recommend that wider travel lanes be constructed and appropriate STOP signs be installed. (Copy in official minutes). Mr. Hritz stated that a memo was received from the Consulting Engineers dated October 14, 1993 stating they have reviewed the drawings as submitted and recommended that a written agreement between IBM and Phelps Memorial Hospital be drated on the proposed reduction in sewerage entering the Village through the IBM force main due to existing problems with the Village sewer system (i.e. surcharging). He also stated that storm water runoff calculations, pipe sizing and pipe profiles should be submitted for review. (Copy of memo in official minutes). Mr. Hritz stated he was concerned with the changes being made that the Board was not aware of. Mr. Caetano stated that the meeting should be adjourned in order to confer with the Building Inspector and the Village Planning Consultants and the matter be resoleved before the plans were approved. Mr. Margotta stated that all construction should be halted until the matter is resolved. Mrs. Martha Bick, Terrace Close stated she is the nearest neighbor to the construction site and that many promises made by the hospital have not been kept. Mr. Caetano moved, seconded by Mr. Donovan that the matter be adjourned in order to confer with the Building Inspector, the Engineer and the Planning Consultants and the Representatives of the Hospita; that the Building Inspector meet and inspect the construction area and the various parking areas-«and the matter be resolved before the amended site plans are approved, thaf the hospital may proceed with construction of the building but there be no further construction on the parking areas in question, specifically the parking area containing 62 parking spaces. �-4If the Building Inspector finds any deviation from the motion as agreed the Building Inspector was to halt all work on the Building and the parking lots, and the Building Inspector was instructed to notify the hospital of any corrections to be made and that they be corrected before the next meeting with the Board. Unanimously carried. Mr. Margotta was to meet with the Hospital representatives on the following Monday. Discussion followed regarding the various changes proposed by the hospital and it was noted that the building has been moved ten feet from the approved site. Mr. Hritz stated the hospital has made changed and not informed the Board and he was very concerned. Mr. Margotta stated that the Building with the changes still conformed to the Building Code, and Zoning Ordinance. Representative for hospital stated they were redoing the parking lot and the lot will be restriped and they will meet the requirements. He also stated the existing parking lot has been there for many years. Representative stated that the building was moved so that the Emergency Room waiting area could be enlarged. Mr. Hritz stated if the hospital and Mr. Margotta resolved the matter at their meeting on Monday the Board would call for a Special Meeting and review the plans for the revised site plans. Mr. Gulino was directed to continue to resolve the matter of sewage treatment and that an agreement between IBM and the hospital be obtained by October 31st, 1993 and presented to the Board for their approval. Mr. Donovan moved, seconded by Mr. Caetano that the issued raised by Mrs. Bick be resolved and that all correspondance on the matter be submitted to the Board for their review. Carried. Mr. McCarthy moved, seconded by Ms. Tsangaris that the Planning Board declare itself the Lead Agency in the review of this action. Carried. Ms. Gandolfo stated that certain legal requirements must be met and informed the hospital representatives to notify all agencies that were involved. Mr. Hritz stated that the next regular meeting of the Board would be held on November 18th, 1993. Discussion followed regarding ownership of the proposed building and Ms. Tsangaris stated it was her understanding that the hospital would not own the building but it would be privately owned by a group of Doctors, and therefore it would not be a non- �-5profit project. Mr. M^rgotta stated that the building would be assessed and would pay property taxes. There being r*o further business to come before the Board Mr. McCarthy mov^d, seconded by Mr. Donovon that the same be duly adjourned. Carried. Respectfully submitted, Irene Amato Acting Clerk �03/1-P/94 11:34 2- JEANNE E METTLER PAGE r RESOLUTION Adopted at the October 21, 1993 Meeting of the Village of North Tarrytown Planning Board RESOLUTION: S I T E PLAN A N D S U B D I V I S I O N A P P R O V A L PROPOSED: 2-LOT S U B D I V I S I O N A N D C O N S T R U C T I O N O F THREE-FAMILY R E S I D E N C E I N 2 1/2 S T O R Y B U I L D I N G OWNER: MR. AND M R S . A R L I N D O R U I V O LOCATION: 39 D E P E Y S T E R S T R E E T (AT N O R T H W E S T C O R N E R WITH WASHINGTON STREET) TAX DESIGNATION: S E C T I O N 16, B L O C K 12, L O T 2 ZONING: R-5 R E S I D E N T I A L WHEREAS, the Planning Board of the Village of North Tarrytown has reviewed an application for site plan and subdivision approval pursuant to the Subdivision Regulations of the Village of North Tarrytown, Chapter 62, Zoning, of the Code of the Village of North Tarrytown and other requirements of the Village Code considered pertinent to the application, which application is to subdivide a property that is approximately 14,000 square feet in size and is located at the northwest corner of Washington Street and Depeyster Street, and is known as tax Lot 16A of Section 15, Block 13, into two lots, to construct a three-family 2 1/2-story residence with three paved parking spaces and three garage spaces on the smaller lot, and to construct three paved parking spaces and to provide for the potential future development of three landbanked spaces on the larger lot, which contains an existing three-family residence, as shown on the drawing prepared in the office of Samuel F. Vieira, R.A., and further identified as follows: "Site Plan, Proposed Sub-division for: Mr. & Mrs. Arlindo Ruivo, 39 Depeyster St., N. Tarrytown, NY,H dated 9/7/93 and last revised 10/19/93, scale l" « 20'; and WHEREAS, the plan proposes the subdivision of the property into two lots, the larger to be approximately 8,100 square feet and the smaller to be approximately 5,800 square feet in size; and WHEREAS, the larger lot will contain the existing three-family three-story frame residence and the Applicant proposes to build a new macadam driveway and three paved spaces shown as P4, P5 and P6 on the plan, with spaces PI, P2 and P3 to be shown as "future parking" and to be landscaped until they may be needed or required by the Planning Board in the future; and WHEREAS, the Applicant proposes to construct a 2 1/2 story three-family residence with three garage parking spaces, a macadam driveway and three paved parking spaces on the smaller lot; and WHEREAS, evergreen hedges will be placed along the Washington street side of the property to screen the view of the paved parking spaces on the larger lot as shown on the plan; and 02 �03/1/,••'94 11:34 2- JEANNE E METTLEP P««SE 03 WHEREAS, the smaller lot will be landscaped and a 5-foot high attractive fence will be located on the western boundary of the lot to screen parking spaces Pi, P2 and P3; and WHEREAS, fencing, for safety purposes, will also be provided on the top of the proposed retaining walls; and WHEREAS, the Applicant has stated that the lighting in the parking areas will be controlled with motion detectors for energyefficiency and that the fixtures will be directed downward onto the property so that there will not be glare onto other properties; and WHEREAS, the Applicant has received an area variance for the size deficiency of the rear yard of the larger lot from the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Village of North Tarrytown; and WHEREAS, the site has been visited by the Village's Planning and Engineering Consultants and the Planning Board is thoroughly familiar with the site and all aspects of the proposed project; and ^ WHEREAS, a duly advertised public hearing was held at the Village Hall on October 21, 1993, at which time those wishing to be heard were given the opportunity to be heard; and WHEREAS, in the course of its review and acting as Lead Agency pursuant to Part 617 of the implementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law, the Planning Board has made the following findings and caused, noted, or conducted the following activities: } 1. Received an application fee of $250; 2. Caused field inspections to be made of the property and of the surrounding areas; 3» Requested, received and considered comments from the Village Planning and Engineering consultants and the Building Inspector? 4. Acting as Lead Agency, requested, received and reviewed a Full Environmental Assessment Form (EAF) in compliance with the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA); 5. After review of the application, EAF, and property as well as other information submitted by the Applicant, the Planning Board declared itself Lead Agency and circulated a "Negative Declaration," dated October 21, 1993, in which the Planning Board stated its determination of non-significance of environmental impact for this Type I action; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that said application for site plan and subdivision approval and the plan noted above be and hereby are granted site plan and subdivision approval and that the Applicant may obtain the endorsed approval of the Planning Board Chairman or, as an alternate, the Village Administrator, on a copy �;:/17/\4 11:34 2- JEANNE E METTLER PAGE r of this site plan and subdivision resolution and upon the final mylar copy of the site plan and the final mylar copy of the subdivision plat drawing revised as necessary to show compliance with the following conditions, and the Applicant may obtain the endorsement of the Westchester County Department of Health on the final subdivision plat which endorsements shall permit filing in the offices of the Village Building Department, for purposes of obtaining a building permit in accordance with this resolution and all building code requirements, and the offices of the Westchester County clerk, provided, however, that this site plan approval shall expire within twelve (12) months of the date of this resolution if the following modifications and conditions have not been completed to the satisfaction of the Planning Board and/or the Applicant has not obtain a building permit and the subdivision approval shall expire within ninety (90) days from the date of this resolution if the following modifications and conditions have not been completed to the satisfaction of the Planning Board: 1. All references to the "Applicant" Applicant's successor and assigns. 2. Fees - The Applicant Tarrytown: 3. shall include the shall pay to the Village of North 2.1 An inspection fee for construction inspection of the property for compliance with the approved site plan in accordance with the Village of North Tarrytown Zoning Code; 2.2 A recreation fee in the amount of subject to the approval of the Village Board of Trustees; 2.3 The reimbursement of all application review fees as noted and required in Section 62-30(f) of the Village Zoning Code, as approved by the Village Attorney. Revision of the above noted plan, to the satisfaction of the Planning and Engineering Consultants, to demonstrate the following: 3.1 The signature block shall be revised to comply with the wording in Section HA(l)c(14c) of the Subdivision Regulations and to provide a line for the endorsement of the Westchester County Department of Health; 3.2 Parking spaces PI, P2 and P3 shall be shown on the plan as "future parking" to be implemented by the Applicant as needed or within 18• days of being determined necessary by the Planning Board; 3.3 The plan drawing shall be revised and titled "Final Site Plan" and a separate drawing showing the subdivision line but not including the proposed development shall be submitted and titled "Final Subdivision Plat"; �03/17/94 11:34 3.4 2- JEANNE E METTLEP PAGE The date of this resolution shall be noted on the final subdivision plat and on the final site plan. 4. The landscaping to be provided on the smaller lot and the additional hedges and other landscaping materials shown to be provided on the larger lot shall be maintained in a healthy growing condition. There shall be diversity in the species of vegetation planted. 5. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the Applicant shall submit to the Village Building Inspector a mylar reproduction of the site plan complete with the certification of a professional architect and/or a professional engineer attesting to construction of the site plan and its improvements as shown thereon. 6. All elements of this approved site plan shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Village Building Inspector within a period of eighteen (18) months from the date of the issuance of the building permit and prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. The Planning Board may issue an extension on this time limit, or may modify any of the above conditions with respect thereto, for good cause. 7. The Planning Board reserves the right to make a final field inspection of the project after construction of the facilities, upon notice of the Building Inspector, and before the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. The purpose of this final inspection is to review the development and to require any modifications to parking, drainage, access, paving and other site plan details, which do not comply with the approved plan and Interest of safety, convenience, aesthetics and the enjoyment and peace and quiet of adjacent neighbors. PLANNING BOARD VILLAGE OF NORTH TARRYTOWN By: .^^r 1 \ • / 7 Date: •itz, Chairman forth Tarrytown Planning Board 500\not3-045.«Jp.crc 4 r/n/tv �F R E D E R I C K P. C L A R K 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 Jim Donovan, RLA ASLA MEMORANDUM To: Village of North Tarrytown Planning Board Date: October 20, 1993 Subject: Review of Amended Site Plan Application for Phelps Professional Office Building !• Introduction As requested, we have reviewed the amended site plan application for the proposed medical office building on the Phelps Memorial Hospital Center property. The Applicant proposes to reduce the size of the building from 62,000 square feet to 45,700 square feet and from 4 stories to 3 stories (by 10 feet in height) , re-arrange the proposed locations of parking areas and reduce the number of parking spaces to be added. The Applicant has submitted the following items: 1. "1A, Campus Site Plan, Phelps Professional Building, Phelps Memorial Hospital Center, North Tarrytown, New York," dated 5/16/91 and last revised 11/6/91, scale 1" = 50', prepared by Mediplex Medical Building Corporation; 2. "1, Existing Hospital Site Plan, Proposed Medical Office Bldg., Phelps Memorial Hospital Ctr., North " Tarrytown, New York," dated 2/21/91 and last revised 11/6/91, scale 1" = 50', prepared by Mediplex Medical Building Corporation; 3. "IB, Amended Campus Site Plan, Phelps Professional Building, Phelps Memorial Hospital Center, North Tarrytown, New York," dated 10/6/93, scale 1" = 5 0 ' , prepared by Mediplex Medical Building Corporation; 4. "Revised Grading Plan, West Parking Expansion," dated 8/23/93 and last revised 9/21/93, scale 1" = 3 0 ' , prepared by Mediplex Medical Building Corp.; 5. Aerial photo, scale 1" = 200'; and 6. Full Environmental Assessment Form. Connecticut • (203) 255-3100 FAX • (914) 967-6615 Long Island • (516) 364-4544 �FREDERICK P. CLARK ASSOCIATES, INC. Planning/Development/Environment/Transportation II- REVIEW COMMENTS 1. Amended Site Plan - The Applicant proposes to have 98 fewer parking spaces on the site than were proposed in the approved site plan. The proposed medical office building has been reduced in size and height as noted above. The building has also been moved approximately 10 feet to the west. The existing MRI building and its improvements have been added to the site plan. Some of the parking spaces previously proposed near the speech center have been removed and spaces have been added to the northeast parking lot. A new parking lot has been proposed approximately 50 feet to the northwest of the proposed building and approximately 100 feet to the southwest of the James House, which will have one point of access and 62 parking spaces. The parking spaces previously proposed to the northeast of the medical office building (near the connector to the Hospital) have been removed. The 10 existing parallel parking spaces opposite the main entrance to the Hospital appear to have been removed. The parking in front of the Hospital has been changed to angle parking as opposed to the 90-degree parking which was previously approved. The emergency room drop-off area has been enlarged, made more square in shape, redesigned to eliminate the planted island and seven parking spaces have been added. A large tree to the south of the James House will apparently be preserved through the construction of a retaining wall. This will result in the loss of at least six of the previously approved parking spaces. The location of the proposed west parking lot will cause the removal of some of the vegetation which may currently assist in blocking the view of the Hospital facility from the Hudson River. However, combined with the reduction in height of the building, this minimal removal of vegetation should not significantly impact any views of the property from the Hudson River shoreline. Also, the proposed parking area is at least 500 feet from the nearest residence. The newly proposed west parking lot will be more convenient to the medical office building than was the previously proposed parking located near the speech center. Many of the parking islands throughout the site have been changed in shape from what was previously approved. Some of the proposed shapes appear to be more similar to the shape of the existing islands rather than what was approved. For example, the island at the main entrance 2 �FREDERICK P. CLARK ASSOCIATES, INC. Planning/Development/Environment/Transportation to the Hospital has been reduced in size and the island at the emergency room drop-off area has been removed. The shapes approved in the previous application were superior to the existing islands as they better aided traffic circulation. These islands should be made consistent with those previously approved, where possible. A review of the amended site plan shows that many of the parking aisles measure less than 22 feet wide. In some cases the aisles actually measure 18 feet and in one instance, at the entrance to the James House, a few parking spaces would only have an aisle which measures approximately 12 feet in width. Parking aisles less than 22 feet wide will create problems for motorists entering and exiting individual parking spaces. Therefore, the plan should be modified to reflect a standard 22-foot wide aisle with a perpendicular parking space that measures 9 x 20 feet. The site plan has been amended to reduce the number of parking spaces in the speech center parking area. It is our recommendation that "dead end" parking aisles not be built and that circulation be provided between aisles to eliminate vehicles backing up or turning around within aisles. Also, in the speech center area and the parking lot opposite the north-south roadway, the parking islands have been relocated and are now offset. Although this may be more aesthetically pleasing, it is our opinion that the aisles should be aligned to improve traffic flow between parking areas. By the speech center, where curb parking has been provided, the parking spaces measure 9 x 18 feet and should be 9 x 22 feet. An 18-foot parking space will be too tight and motorists will tend to take up "two parking spaces for one vehicle. The proposed new west parking lot is a long dead end lot which, in our opinion, should be avoided. The Applicant should study the feasibility of connecting this parking lot back into an existing parking area to create better circulation. The revised amended site plan should include adequate information to show where each proposed directional sign will be placed and a detailed description of each sign should be provided. For example, the type and size of sign as well as its height should be provided for review. 3 �FREDERICK P. CLARK ASSOCIATES, INC. Planning/Development/Environment/Transportation Between the Environmental Assessment Form (EAF) and the proposed amended campus site plan, it is difficult to understand the number of parking spaces to be added. Question B.f on the EAF states that there are 688 existing spaces and 178 will be added for a total of 876 spaces. That actually adds up to 866 spaces. The amended site plan states that 188 spaces are proposed to be added for a total of 876. Our count of the parking added up to 886 spaces as opposed to either 876 or 866 spaces (not including the three-service vehicle parking spaces). Similarly, we counted 806 spaces as opposed to the 796 spaces stated on the plan under "total hospital parking." Although the parking summary on the amended site plan states that there are 35 spaces at the child care center, it appears that there is only enough space for 21 or 22 spaces. On the plan, the reference to "City" should be changed to "Village." 2. Lighting and Landscaping - The Applicant should distinguish between the existing and proposed trees and shrubs and mark any proposed plantings on the plan. The Applicant should provide information regarding the number, type and size of the plantings. We suggest that plantings be added to the islands and recommend that the Applicant locates any such plantings carefully so as not to block sight distances. In addition, the Applicant should provide diversity in planting. Lighting should be coordinated with the existing and proposed planting. The light from the existing pole light which is being relocated to the parking area to the north will be blocked by the tree next to it." Also, the new pole shown below the word "center" in speech center should be relocated closer to the proposed parking area. 3. Environmental Assessment Form - We have a few comments concerning the EAF (see enclosed). Question A. 19 was revised, since the property is located within the Hudson River shoreline critical environmental area. Question B.l.g., regarding maximum number of vehicle trips per hour, was not answered by the Applicant. However, since the proposed site plan calls for a reduction in the size of the building and the previously approved plan received a negative declaration, it is not likely that a significant traffic impact will result. Question B.f was 4 �FREDERICK P. CLARK ASSOCIATES, INC. Planning/Development/Environment/Transportation discussed above. Question C.7, regarding adjacent land uses, was revised to add "park" and to add the R-l and R2A residential zoning districts. Under Section E, we assume that the date is October 10, 1993, not 1991. 4. Environmental Review - The application is a Type I action under the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) . We recommend that the Planning Board declare its intent to be the Lead Agency and circulate a notice of its intent to the recommended circulation list provided below. Following the 30-day circulation period, assuming no involved agency objects, the Planning Board may declare itself the Lead Agency in the review of this matter. Based upon our review of the EAF, there do not appear to be any significant environmental impacts that should result from this proposal. Unless new information surfaces during the circulation period which indicates otherwise, we would recommend that, after the Planning Board becomes the Lead Agency, the Board makes a Negative Declaration determination of non-significance of the potential impacts. Circulation List for Coordinated Review Ms. Jean-Ann McGrane, Regional Director New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Department of Regulatory Affairs 21 South Putt Corners Road New Paltz, New York 12561 Mr. Richard Peters, Planning and Program Management Director New York State Department of Transportation 4 Burnett Boulevard Poughkeepsie, New York 12603 Mr. Al Caccese New York State Department Historic Preservation Empire State Plaza Agency Building 1 Albany, New York 12238 of Parks, Recreation and Westchester County Planning Board c/o Ms. P. Lynn Oliva, Commissioner Westchester County Planning Department 432 Michelian Office Building White Plains, New York 10601 5 �FREDERICK P. CLARK ASSOCIATES, INC. Planning/Development/Environment/Transportation Ms. Laura E. Tessier, District Manager Westchester County Soil and Water Conservation District 414 Michelian Office Building White Plains, New York 10601 Dr. Mark Rappaport, Commissioner of Health Westchester County Health Department 19 Bradhurst Avenue Hawthorne, New York 10532 Ms. Kathryn Fries, Town Clerk Town of Mount Pleasant 1 Town Hall Plaza Valhalla, New York 10595 III. Conclusion The most important issues at this time appear to be parking and traffic circulation. It is recommended that the Applicant modify the amended site plan to incorporate the comments noted above. The plan should show wider travel lanes and parking areas and sufficient information with regard to directional sign location and type. The plans should incorporate, where appropriate, STOP signs and any other directional signs. These signs must conform to the New York State Department of Transportation Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices. Michael A. Galante Vice President/Transportation Susan J. Portman, AICP Associate/Planning Enclosure cc: William T. Regan, Village Administrator Janet A. Gandolfo, Esq., Village Attorney James T. Margotta, Building Inspector Joseph A. Gulino, P.E., Village Engineer Vincent DelBagno Todd Jack 500\not3-007„sjp:ev 6 �» 14-lb-i U 67)-7c •17.*. AppenJIx A Stat* Envlronnwiial Quality Review I 4 SEQF FULL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM Purpose: The full EAF is designed to help applicants and agencies determine, in an orderly manner, whether a projec or action may be significant. The question of whether an action may be significant is not always easy to answer Frequent ly. there are aspects of a project that are subjective or unmeasureable It is also understood that those who determine significance may Have little or no formal knowledge of the environment or may be technical expert in environmenta analysis In addition, many who have knowledge in one particular area may not be aware of the broader concerns affecting the question of significance. The full EAF is intended to provide a method whereby applicants and agencies can be assured that the determination process has been orderly, comprehensive in nature, yet flexible to allow introduction of information to fit a project or action Full 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 potentiall\large 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 completed for this project: JS Part 1 JQ Part 2 OPart 3 Upon review of the information recorded on this EAF (Parts 1 and 2 and 3 if appropriate), and any other supporting information, and considering both the magitude and importance of each impact, it is reasonably determined by the lead agency that: D A The project will not result in any large and important impacKs) and, therefore, is one which will not have a significant impact on the environment, therefore a negative declaration will be prepared. O 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.* • 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 HecVia^ office $*;&«*^ pfceys He***.M U&fJT*i Ct^t^ Name of Action Name of Lead Agency Print or Type Name of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency Title of Responsible Officer Signature of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency Signature of Preparer (If different from responsible officer) Date 1 �PART 1-PROJECT INFORMATION Prepared by Project Sponsor NOTICE This document is designed to assist in determining whether the action proposed may have a significant eft on the environment Please complete the entire form. Parts A through E Answers to these, questions will be c o m i d e as part of the application for approval and may be subject to further verification and public re v i e * Provide any addit>o information you believe will be needed to complete Parts 2 and 3 It is expected that completion of the full EAF will be dependent on information currently available and will not m \ c new studies, research or investigation If information requiring such additional work is unavailable, so indicate and spec each instance. ' NAME OF ACTION LOCATION OF ACTION (Includt StrMt Addrmt. Municipality and County) NAME OF APPLICANT/SPONSOR BUSINESS TELEPHONE VlN&feMT C*±. g * f i N P ; D t e C } f t g cP OJftiMgPglNgi 1 ^ - 3 6 6 - \OQO ADDRESS io i NcTcra aeoApWAY CITY/PO IPO STATE NAME OF OWNER (If difl*r«Qt) BUSINESS TELEPHONE feuiLPtNfi ADDRESS / ^_ . Co.fL.r I rtl*-g6fe-IOCg \ ( e A M £ Ae Afrgyg ) CITY/PO ZIP CODE STATE ZIP CODE DESCRIPTION OF ACTION wew MftacAL- or&c-e. eojL.piNci, 2>-erc*it*, 4z.f>1*> &6p4e> 4QUM&- F&er T & ACCOMMC?PATT& A f p ^ x i M A T E i - r <LO - 2 5 PHYSICIAN'S . F>UX-> ©UTPArT»ENr AhctU-AZf Please Complete Each Question—Indicate N.A. if not applicable A. Site Description Physical setting of overall project, both developed and undeveloped areas 1 2 Present land use: DUrban Dlndustrial DForest DAgnculture T o t . , acreage of project area: OCommercial DResidential (suburban) JSOther ffrril&^M- C f r acres. ^ U APPROXIMATE ACREAGE M e a d o w or Brushland (Non-agricultural) D R u r a l (non-fa MEOlCAl M A * * * * * * PRESENTLY Forested in. Agricultural (Includes orchards, cropland, pasture, etc ) _C2_ AFTER C O M P L E T I O N !£. acres SSe. SL acres acres acres acre.; acre* acres Wetland (Freshwater or tidal as per Articles 24, 25 of ECL) acres Water Surface Area acres acre* Unvegetated (Rock, earth or fill) acres acre> iS. £L Roads, buildings and other paved surfaces Other (Indicate t y p e L _ _ _ ie. acres acres acres acre* What is predominant soil type{s) on project site? D W e l l drained \QO % of site Soil drainage: b If any agricultural land is involved, how many acres of soil are classified within soil group 1 through 4 of the \ D P o o r l y drained % of site E & t o d e r a t e l y well drained a % of site Land Classification System? f i C f c 4 f c acres (See 1 NYCRR 370) Are there bedrock outcroppings on project site? a What is depth to bedrock? Q«» t O Yes (in feet) DNo �\ ? *pp f ox'"^:e percer.ii.gi c proposed project site ...w^o •^•^»» S O *«, # 1 5 9 i or greater pClO-IS^t, _^& P "^ * % r b Is project substantially contiguous to. or contain j building, site, or district, listed on the State or the Nat ione Registers of Historic Places? DYes fljNo A 7 Is project substantially contiguous to a site listed on the Register of National Natural landmarks' £ A B What is the depth of the water t a b l e > / L l 2 — (in feet) 9 Is site located over a primary, principal, or sole source aquifer? DYes CYes ^fv $^o 10. Do hunting, fishing or shell fishing opportunities presently exist in the project area? DYes J4NO 11 Does project site contain any species of plant or animal life that is identified as threatened or endangered DYes MNO According to « _ ______ - Identify each species 12. Are there any unique or unusual land forms on the project site? (i.e., cliffs, dunes, other geological formations DYes • * Jtfhlo Describe ' __ 13. Is the project site presently used by the community or neighborhood as an open space or recreation area DYes J_.No If yes, explain ____ 14. Does the present site include scenic views known to be important to the community? JffYes DNo 15. Streams within or contiguous to project area: _ a. Name of Stream and name of River to which it is tributary 16. Lakes, ponds, wetland areas within or contiguous to project area: a. Name „ b. Size (In acres) 17 Is the site served by existing public utilities? pYes ONo a) If Yes. does sufficient capacity exist to allow connection? ^Yes b) If Yes. will improvements be necessary to allow connection? BfYes DNo DNo 18 Is the site located in ah agricultural district certified pursuant to Agriculture and Markets Law, Article 25-A A Section 303 and 304? DYes J_(No 19 Is the site located in or substantially contiguous-** a Critical Environmental Area designated pursuant to Article 6 of the ECL. and 6 NYCRR 617? J&Yes ( W P ) 20. Has the site ever been used for the disposal oTsolid or hazardous wastes? DYes J^No B. Project Description 1. Physical dimensions and scale of project (fill in dimensions as appropriate) a. Total contiguous acreage owned or controlled by project sponsor b. Project acreage to be developed: t»Q acres initially; \0&> acres. jS^Li^xabflBfafracres ultimately c. Project acreage to remain undeveloped . d. Length of project, in miles: (If appropriate) je. If the project is an expansion, indicate percent of expansion proposed (f.^slumber of off-street parking spaces existing Q?W& g Maximum vehicular trips generated per hour h If residential: Number and type of housing units: One Family Two Family Initially OOfeS. HOT L2 %; _«_«»__ g>7<£> ( n f t newepfcy ; proposed (upon completion of project)? Multiple Family Condominium A^fLT Ultimately — . i. Dimensions (in feet) oi largest proposed structure JB£X. height; | v C > width; j Linear feet of frontage along a public thoroughfare project will occupy is? \a?— 3 —i [ y O ft length �2 Hovy much natural material (i t . rock. e«r»V etc.) will be removed from the site' 3 Will disturbed areas be reclaimed' OYes )^go tons'cubic yard* ON/A a If yes. for what intend., purpose i* the site being reclaimed? b. Will topsoil be stockpiled for reclamation? kfPNfe DYes ____ f^No c Will upper subsoil be stockpiled for reclamation? DYes jfiNo 4 How many acres of vegetation (trees, shrubs, ground covers) will be removed from sJCe^fiLNl^aJfexacres 5 Will any mature forest (over 100 years old) or other locally-important vegetation be removedby this project' OYes .JjNo 6 If single phase project Anticipated period of construction . . months, (including demolition) 7. If multi-phased: - a Total number of phases anticipated (number) b Anticipated date of commencement phase 1 month year, (including demolition) c. Approximate completion date of final phase month year. d Is phase 1 functionally dependent on subsequent phases? 8 Will blasting occur during construction? OYes DYes DNo )4NO 9. Number of jobs generated: during construction . _ ; after project is complete 10. Number of jobs eliminated by this project _ 11 Will project require relocation of any projects or facilities? 12 Is surface liquid waste disposal involved? OYes DYes ((No If yes. explain 5JNo a. If yes. indicate type of waste (sewage, industrial, etc.) and amount b. Name of water body into which effluent will be discharged 13 Is subsurface liquid waste disposal involved? DYes ^INO 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? 16 Will the project generate solid waste? RYes a. If yes, what is the amount per month OYes JANK "J&lo CtNo »^» tons b. If yes. will an existing solid waste facility be used? c If yes, give name OYes OYes . )E0No ; location d Will any wastes not go into a sewage disposal system or into a sanitary landfill? e If Yes. - p l a i n - h t e P t C A L , ' W 4 » r f e - IS PtSpCfrKO f * jtfVes ° * p H > * * * I Y - *JtOlt4-tNa WH-U U4VC A L&ZC KoutXiCN 17 Will the project involve the disposal of solid waste? DYes tons/month b If yes. what is the anticipated site life? years. DYes J3(NO 19 Will project routinely produce odors (more than one hour per day)? DYes |£NO 20 Will project produce operating noise exceeding the local ambient noise levels? 21 Will project result in an increase in energy use? jtfYes If y « . md.cate type(s) g t - t t C T ^ C ^^fSJ.Ce.f DNo /^IL 22 If water supply is from wells, indicate pumping capacity 23 tMfA^T jS&lo a If yes. what is the anticipated rate of disposal? _ 18 Will project use herbicides or pesticides? DNo Total anticipated water usage per day DYes ftg&O jQNo l-OII g g « * gallons/minute. gallons/day. 24 Does project involve Local, State or Federal funding? DYes If Yes. explain . )^>lo . 4 _—.—___—„ —__ �t 25 Approval* Required r City. Town. Village Board Submittal Date Type DYes DNo City. Town. Village Planning Board JSVes DNo City. Town Zoning Board DYes DNO City. County Health Department DYes DNO Other Local Agencies DYes DNo Other Regional'Agencies DYes DNo State Agencies RVes DNo Federal Agencies DYes DNo Mire g*rs PUN VAL. C. Zoning and Planning Information 1 Does proposed action involve a planning or zoning decision? XYes DNo If Yes. indicate decision required: Dzoning amendment Dzoning variance Dnew/revision of master plan Dspecial use permit Dresource management plan Dsubdivision JHsite plan Dother 2 What is the zoning classification(s)of the site? 3 What is the maximum potential development of the site if developed as permitted by the present zoning? What is the proposed zoning of the site? SAME. What is the maximum potential development of the site if developed as permitted by the proposed zoning' Is the proposed action consistent with the recommended uses in adopted local land use plans? Jftes O What are the predominant land use(s) and zoning classifications within a V* mile radius of proposed action' 8 Is the proposed^ action compatible with adjoining/surrounding land uses within a V* mile? 9 If the proposed action is the subdivision of land, how many lots are proposed? J^Yes O a. What is the minimum lot size proposed? DYes 10 Will proposed action require any authorization(s) for the formation of sewer or water districts? 11 Will the proposed action create a demand for any community provided services (recreation, education, pohc fire protection)? j^Yes DNo a. If yes. is existing capacity sufficient to handle projected demand? 12 JBffYes DNo Will the proposed action result in the generation of traffic significantly above present levels? a. If yes, is the existing road network adequate to handle the additional traffic? ^ ^Yes DYes J^N* DNo D. Informational Details Attach any additional information as may be needed to clarify your project If there are or may be any advert impacts associated with your proposal, please discuss such impacts and the measures which you propose to mitigate c avoid them. E. Verification L I certify that the information provided above is true to the best of my knowledge Applicant/Spqru££-Name jl**ft*Jn^^ If the action is in the Coastal Area, and you are a state agency, complete the Coastal Assessment Form before proceedin: with this assessment. 5 �Part 2 — F R C J E C T * / A v - ' . S A N J '...>..,. Responsibility of Lead Agency ,»,Aw.*nuDt General Information (Read Carefully) • In completing the form the reviewer should be guided by the question Have my responses and determinations beer 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 significant. Any large impact must be evaluated in PART 3 to determine significance. Identifying an impact in column 2 simpK asks that it be looked at further. • The Examples provided are to assist the reviewer by showing types of impacts and wherever possible the threshold o: magnitude that would trigger a response in column 2. The examples are generally applicable throughout the State arte for most situations. But, for any specific project or site other examples and/or lower thresholds may be appropriate 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 anc have been offered as guidance. They do not constitute an exhaustive list of impacts and thresholds to answer each question • 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 the impact. If impact threshold equals or exceeds any example provided, check column 2. If impact will occur but threshold 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 PART 3 e. If a potentially large impact checked in column 2 can be mitigated by changes) in the project to a small to moderate impact, also check the Yes box in column 3. A No response indicates that such a reduction is not possible. This must be explained in Part 3. 2 IMPACT ON LAND Will the proposed action result in a physical change to the project site? DNO BCVES 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 the depth tathe water table is less than 3 feet. Construction of paved parking area for 1,000 or more vehicles. Construction on land where bedrock is exposed or generally within 3 feet of existing ground surface. Construction that will continue for more than 1 year or involve more than one phase or stage. Excavation for mining purposes that would remove more than 1,000 tons of natural material (i.e., rock or soil) per year. Construction or expansion of a sanitary landfill. Construction in a designated floodway. Other impacts Will there be an effect t*. ...iy unique or unusual land forms found on the site? (i.e., cliffs, dunes, geological formations, etc.))RfKJO DYES Specific land forms: : Small to Moderate Impact Potential Large Impact Can Impact Be Mitigated By Project Change D DYes DNo D D DYes DNo n D D DYes DYes DNo DNo D DYes DNO D D DYes DNO D D D D D D DYes DYes DYes DNo DNO D D DY es DNi DNO �T IMPACT O N WATER 3 Will proposed action affect any water body designated as protected' (Under Articles 15.24.25 of the Environmental Conservation Law. ECU SfNO DYES Examples that would apply to column 2 • Developable area of site contains a protected water body 1 2 Small to Moderate Impact Potential Large Impact D DYes DNC DYes DNC Can Impact 6 Mitigated B> Projact Chang • Dredging more than 100 cubic yards of material from channel of a protected stream a D D • Extension of utility distribution facilities through a protected water body. D D D D D D DYes DNC DYes DNC DYes DNC a a a D DYes DNC D D DYes DYes DNC D D DYes DYes DNC • Proposed Action requires water supply from wells with greater than 45 gallons per minute pumping capacity. a a a D DYes DNC • Construction or operation causing any contamination of a water supply system. a D DYes DNO • Proposed Action will adversely affect groundwater • Liquid effluent will be conveyed off the site to facilities which presently do not exist or have inadequate capacity. D D D DYes DYes DNC DNO • Proposed Action would use water in excess of 20.000 gallons per day. D D DYes CNO a D DYes • D N O • Proposed Action will require the storage of petroleum or chemical products greater than 1,100 gallons. D n DYes CNO • Proposed Action will allow residential uses in areas without water and/or sewer services. D D DYes I iN'o i DYes CNO D DYes l_'Nc • Construction in a designated freshwater or tidal wetland. • Other impacts: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 4 Will proposed action affect any non-protected existing or new body of water? J(NO DYES Examples that would apply to column 2 • A 10% 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: 5 Will Proposed Action affect surface or groundwater quality or quantity? J-JNO Examples that would apply to column 2 GNC DYES • Proposed Action will require a discharge permit. • Proposed Action requires use of a source of water that does not have approval to serve proposed (project) action • Proposed Action will likely cause siltation or other discharge into an existing body of water to the extent that there will be an obvious visual contrast to natural conditions. a • • Proposed Action locates commercial and/or industrial uses which may require new or expansion of existing waste treatment and/or storage facilities. a • Other a impacts. Will proposed action alter drainage flow or patterns, or surface water runoff? X N ° DYE5 Examples that would apply to column 2 • Proposed Action would change flood water flows 7 DNO 6 & I DYes CNO �2 3 Can Impa Mitlpat* ProJactCt Small to Modarata Impact Potential Largt Impact D D D D D D D D DYe$ DYes DYes DYes D D DYes I • Proposed Action will result in the incineration of more than 1 ton of refuse per hour. D D DYes I • 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 [ • Proposed action will allow an increase in the amount of land committed to industrial use. D D DYes [ • Proposed action will allow an increase in the density of industrial development within existing industrial areas. D D DYes [ • Other impacts: D D DYes C • Reduction of one or more species listed on the New York or Federal list, using the site, o\/er or ne*t site or found on the site. D D D Y es • Removal of any portion of a critical or significant wildlife habitat. D D D D DYes D D Dv es L • Proposed Action would substantially interfere with any resident or migratory fish, shellfish or wildlife species. D D DY es i_ • Proposed Action requires the removal of more than 10 acres of mature forest (over 100 years of age) or other locally important vegetation D D DYes C D D DYes • Proposed Action may cause substantial erosion • Proposed Action is incompatible with existing drainage patterns • Proposed Action will allow development in a designated floodway • Other impacts: IMPACT ON AIR 7 -Will proposed action affect air quality? WNO DYE-S Examples that would apply to column 2 • Proposed Action will induce 1.000 or more vehicle trips in any given hour. " IMPACT ON PLANTS A N D ANIMALS 8 Will Proposed Action affect any threatened or endangered species? J^NO Examples that would apply to column 2 DYES • Application of pesticide or herbicide more than twice a year, other than for agricultural purposes. • Other 9 impacts: ,,. Will Proposed Action substantially affect non-threatened or non-endangered species? JBNO Examples that would apply to-column 2 DYes DYES IMPACT ON AGRICULTURAL LAND RESOURCES 10 Will the Proposed Action affect agricultural land resources? pgNO DYES Examples that would apply to column 2 • The proposed action would sever, cross or limit access to agricultural land (includes cropland, hayt'ields, pasture, vineyard, orchard, etc ) 8 �r Construction activity would excavate or compact the soil profile of agricultural land. The proposed action would irreversibly convert more than 10 acres of agricultural.land or, if located in an Agricultural District, more than 2.5 acres 6f agricultural land. The proposed action would disrupt or prevent installation of agricultural land management systems (e.g.. subsurface drain tines, 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 ON AESTHETIC RESOURCES Will proposed action affect aesthetic resources? UNO 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. Project components that will result in the elimination or significant screening of scenic views known to be important to the area. Other impacts: ___^ 1 2 Small to Modtratt Impact Pottntial Largt Impact D D DYes I D D DYes I D DYes [ D D 3 Can Imps Mitlgattc Project Cr D Y es 11 • • • • IMPACT O N HISTORIC AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES 12 Will Proposed Action impact any site or structure of historic, prehistoric or paleontological importance? J^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 of historic places. • Any impact to an archaeological site or fossil bed located within the project site. • Proposed Action will occur in an area designated as sensitive for archaeological sites on the NYS Site Inventory. • Other impacts: IMPACT O N OPEN SPACE AND RECREATION Will Proposed Action affect the quantity or quality of existing or future open spaces or recreational opportunities? Examples that would apply to column 2 JJNO DYES • The permanent foreclosure of a future recreational opportunity. • A major reduction of an open space important to the community • Other impacts: D D DYes r D D DYes [ D D DYes L D D DYes D D DYes C D D DYes L D D DYes C D D DY es C D D D D D D DYes DYes DYes Z Z Z r- 13 �IMPACT O N TRANSPORTATION Can Impact Be Mltigatad By Projact Change^ Small to Modarata Impact Potential LarQt Impact D D D D D D DYes D D • 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. D D • Other impacts: D • Blasting within 1,500 feet of a hospital, school or other sensitive facility. • Odors will occur routinely (more than one hour per day). 14 Will there be an effect to existing transportation systems? *NO Examples that would apply to column 2 DYES • Alteration of present patterns of movement of people and/or goods. Ohio DYes Ohio DYes D N O DYes DNO DYes DNO D DYes DNO D D DYes D N O D D D D DYes DYes DNO • Proposed Action will remove natural barriers that would act as a noise screen. D D DYes DNO • Other D D DYes DNO * 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. D D DYes DNo * Proposed Action may result in the burial of "hazardous wastes" in any form (i e. toxic, poisonous, highly reactive, radioactive, irritating. infectious, etc.) D D DYes DNo * Storage facilities for one million or more gallons of liquified natural gas or other flammable liquids. D D DYes DNo * 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 D D DYCS DNO * Other impacts D D DYes D N O • Proposed Action will result in major traffic problems. • Other impacts: _ — IMPACT O N ENERGY 15 Will proposed action affect the community's sources of fuel or energy supply? JBNO 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. . NOISE A N D ODOR IMPACTS 16 Will there be objectionable odors, noise, or vibration as a result of the Proposed Action? X N O DYESExamples that would apply to column 2 • Proposed Action will produce operating noise exceeding the local ambient noise levels for noise outside of structures. impacts: DNO IMPACT O N PUBLIC HEALTH 17 Will Proposed Action affect public health and safety? DNO XYES Examples that would apply to column 2 W "-*- W * P t i B TUfc UfcdaUTUgAgg, 10 �FREDERICK P. CLARK ASSOCIATES, INC. 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 Jim Donovan, RLA. ASLA MEMORANDUM To: Village of North Tarrytown Planning Board Date: October 14, 1993 Subject: Ruivo Site Plan and Subdivision Review As requested, we have reviewed the application of Mr. and Mrs. Arlindo Ruivo for site plan and subdivision approval for a proposed two-lot subdivision of a 14,000 square foot parcel, with the tax designation Section 16, Block 12, Lot 2, located on North Washington Street at the northwest corner of Depeyster Street in the R-5 Residence District. The Applicant has submitted the following subdivision and site plan prepared by Samuel F. Vieira, R.A. : "Proposed Sub-division For: Mr. and Mrs. Arlindo Ruivo, 39 Depeyster St., N. Tarrytown, NY," dated 9/7/93. REVIEW COMMENTS 1. Proposed Subdivision: The Applicant proposes to subdivide the property into two lots, one to be approximately 5,800 square feet and the other to be 8,100 square feet in size. The property contains a three-story, three-family residence which will remain on the larger lot. The plan generally satisfies the requirements of a preliminary subdivision plat, although certain information, such as the names of adjoining property owners, is not provided. Also, the area map is not to scale. 2. Proposed Site Plan: On the smaller lot, the Applicant proposes the construction of a two and a half story, threefamily residence with three outdoor parking spaces and three garage spaces. The Applicant also proposes to provide six parking spaces on the larger lot for the existing residence. 3. Zoning: The Applicant received an area variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) for the rear yard of the larger lot. The plan generally complies with the Zoning Code of the Connecticut • (203) 255-3100 M X • (914) 96/-6615 Long Island • (516) 364-4544 �FREDERICK P. CLARK ASSOCIATES, INC. Planning/Development/Environment/Transportation Village of memorandum. North Tarrytown, except as noted in this 4. Parking: As shown on the plan, the size and number of proposed parking spaces are consistent with the Zoning Code. At the Planning Board meeting in September, the Applicant questioned whether the Planning Board would want the Applicant to provide the six proposed parking spaces on the larger lot. The Applicant stated that the spaces are being added to serve the needs of the residents of the property. Through the use of landscaping, the parking area could be sufficiently screened from the neighboring properties. Although on-street parking is allowed in the area surrounding the site, there are some restrictions as to permitted days and times. Still, in order to reduce the amount of pavement and retain some of the green space on the property, if the Board agrees with the reduction of the number of spaces, it may request that certain spaces be "landbanked" and shown on the plan with dashed lines and designated as "future parking." If at any time the property owner or the Planning Board found that these spaces were needed to serve the residents of the property, the spaces would be paved in accordance with the approved layout. If the spaces are landbanked, we recommend landbanking not more than three of the spaces on the larger lot (specifically, PI, P2 and P3 - unless one of the other spaces contains the existing tree). If the spaces are not landbanked, we recommend the driveway be widened to not more than 20 feet. 5. Buffers and Landscaping: The plan shows a solid hedge along a portion of Washington Street to buffer the proposed on-site parking. It is not clear whether this is an existing hedge or a new hedge. It should be noted that a fence is not shown within the buffer area. It is the Planning Board's prerogative to require a fence if the Board determines that a fence is necessary for screening the parking area. Depending on the type of hedge and its location, the Planning Board may find that a hedge is sufficient for screening purposes. If any of the parking is landbanked, it may be possible to save the existing tree which is located on the Washington Street side of the larger lot, near proposed spaces 3 and 4. The landscaped area in the southeastern corner of the larger lot should not contain plantings which may affect sight distance from the street. A sight triangle measuring approximately 18 feet north and 18 feet west from that corner should be maintained. Regarding the fence that is shown along the rear lot line of the smaller lot, the fence should be located on the inner side of a five-foot wide buffer area, as required in Section 622 �FREDERICK P. CLARK ASSOCIATES, INC. Planning/Development/Environment/Transportation 14D(2). This buffer area is not shown on the plan and should be added. The location of the existing trees near the proposed parking area on the smaller lot should be shown on the plan so it is clear whether the trees are on the property and are to be removed or whether action can be taken to safeguard and preserve these trees. The Applicant should provide information concerning the type, size and number of plantings to be added on the site. Also, lighting for both parking areas should be provided in accordance with Section 62-14D(5) and the Applicant should affirm that the lighting will not cause a glare onto neighboring properties. 6. Environmental Review: The Applicant submitted a full Environmental Assessment Form (see attached). We have corrected a few of the items in Part 1, including questions A.19, B.l(g), B.l(h), B.23, C.l and C.9. The Planning Board should declare itself the Lead Agency in the review of this Type I action. As no significant environmental impacts have been identified, we recommend that the Board make a Negative Declaration. Susan J. Portman, AICP Associate/Planning Attachment cc: William T. Regan, Village Administrator Janet A. Gandolfo, Esq., Village Attorney James T. Margotta, Building Inspector Joseph A. Gulino, PE, Village Engineer John Hughes, Jr., Esq. Sam Vieira 500\not3-004.sjp 3 �1 4 - ^ 2 (2/S7)-7c 617.21 Appendix A State Environmental Quality Review SEQR FULL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM Purpose: The full EAF is designed to help applicants and agencies determine, in an orderly manner, whether a. project or action may be significant. The question of whether an action may be significant is not always easy t o answer. Frequently, there are aspects of a project that are subjective or unmeasureable. It is also understood that those who determine significance may have little or no formal knowledge of the environment or may be technically expert in environmental analysis. In addition, many who have knowledge in one particular area may not be aware of the broader concerns affecting the question of significance. The full EAF is intended to provide a method whereby applicants and agencies can be assured that the determination process has been orderly, comprehensive in nature, yet flexible to allow introduction of information to fit a project or action. Full EAF Components: The i u l l EAF is comprised of three parts: Part 1 : Provides objective data and information about a given project and its site. By identifying basic projt ct 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 completed for this project: 0 Part 1 S) Part 2 DPart 3 'Upon review of the information recorded on this EAF (Parts 1 and 2 and 3 if appropriate), and any other supporting information, and considering both the magitude and importance of each impact, it is reasonably determined by the lead agency that: 13 A. The project will not result in any large and important impacts) and, therefore, is one which w i l l not have a significant impact on the environment, therefore a negative declaration will be prepared. D 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.* D 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 ARLINDO RUIVO Name of Action Planning Board - Village of North Tarrytown Name of Lead Agency WILLIAM T. REGAN Administrator Print or Type Name of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency Title of Responsible Officer Signature of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency c — _ x / i' s Signature of Preparer (1f different from responsible officer) October 1 3 , 1993 Date 1 �PART 1-PROJECT INFORMATION Prepared by Project Sponsor NOTICE. This document < designed to assist in determining whether the action proposed may have a significant effect on the environment Please romplete the entire form. Parts A through E. Answers to these questions will be considered as part of the application fo* c oproval and may be subject to further verification and public review Provide any additional information you believe will be needed to complete Parts 2 and 3. It is expected that completion.of the full EAF will be dependent on information currently available and will not involve new studies, research or investigation If information requiring such additional work is unavailable, so indicate and specify each instance. NAME OF ACTION ARLINDO RUIVO LOCATION OF ACTION (Includ* Straet Address. Municipality and County) 39 Depeyster S t r e e t , North T a r r y t o w n , Westchester NAME OF APPLICANT/SPONSOR BUSINESS TELEPHONE ( 9 1 4 ) 631-8855 ARLINDO RUIVQ ADDRESS Lawrence Avenue STATE CITY/PO ZIP CODE 10591 NY North Tarrytown NAME OF OWNER (If different) BUSINESS TELEPHONE ( same ) same ADDRESS same CITY/PO STATE ZIP CODE same DESCRIPTION OF ACTION Subdivision of premises to permit construction of three (3) family residence Entire premises consist of 14,000 s.f. Please Complete Each Question—Indicate N.A. if not applicable A. Site Description Physical setting of overall project, both developed and undeveloped areas. 1. Present land use: DUrban Dlndustrial DForest DAgriculture 2. Total acreage of project area: ---" DCommercial ^Residential (suburban) DRural (non-farm) DOther »33 acres. APPROXIMATE ACREAGE Meadow or Brushland (Non-agricultural) PRESENTLY acres Forested Agricultural (Includes orchards, cropland, pasture, etc.) acres AFTER COMPLETION acres acres acres acres Wetland (Freshwater or tidal as per Articles 24, 25 of ECU acres acres Water Surface Area acres acres Unvegetated (Rock, earth or fill) acres acres Roads, buildings and other paved surfaces acres acres Other (Indicate rypp) .33 Residential r What is p edominant soil type(s) on project site? _ a. Soil drainage: SWell drained DPoorly drained 100 acres ^il acres N/A % of sJte % of site OModerately well drained % of site b. If any agricultural land is involved, how many acres of soil are classified within soil group 1 through 4 of the NY! V Land Classification System? N/A a c r e s (See 1 NYCRR 370). 4 Are there bedrock outcroppings on project site? a. What is depth to bedrock? Approx. 10-15 DYes SNo (m feet) L L �§ $. Approximate percentage of proposed project site with slopes r 6 Is oro/ect substantially contiguous to. or contain a building, s *e. or district, listed on the State or the National Regufers of Historic Places? DYes BNo 1 EO-10% 100 D 1 5 % or greater % Dl0-1596 % 7 Is preset substantially contiguous to a site listed on the Register on National Natural Landmarks? % CYes ENo 8 What is the depth of the water table? Approx. (j n f e et) 9. Is site located over a primary, principal, or sole source aquifer? OYes BNo 10. Do hunting, fishing or shell fishing opportunities presently exist in the project area? DYes ENo 11 Does project site contain any species of plant or animal life that is identified as threatened or endangered? DYes ©No According to Identify each species ' 12 Are there any unique or unusual land forms on the project site? (i.e., cliffs, dunes, other geological formations) DYes ENo Describe : 13. Is the project site presently used by the community or neighborhood as an open space or recreation area? DYes 63 No If yes. explain _______________»_. 14. Does the present site include scenic views known to be important to the community? DYes ®No 15. Streams within or contiguous to project area: ___£__: -__-___-_____ a. Name of Stream and name of River to which it is tributary 16. Lakes, ponds, wetland areas within or contiguous to project area: a. Name None. Is the site served by existing public utilities? GSYes b. Size (In acres) DNo a) If Yes, does sufficient capacity exist to allow connection? SYes b) If Yes, will improvements be necessary to allow connection? DNo SI Yes DNo 18 Is the site located in an agricultural district certified pursuant to Agriculture and Markets Law. Article 25-AA, Section 303 and 304? DYes ®No 19. Is the site located in or substantially contiguoys-Xo a Critical Environmental Area designated pursuant to Article 8 of the ECL, and 6 NYCRR 617? JgJYes (pte 20 Has the site ever been used for the disposal of solid or hazardous wastes? DYes ENo B. Project Description 1. Physical dimensions and scale of project (fill in dimensions as appropriate) a Total contiguous acreage owned or controlled by project sponsor b. Project acreage to be developed. "33 c. Project acreage to remain undeveloped d. Length of project, in miles: N/A «33 acres initially; None acres. «33 acres ultimately. acres. (If appropriate) e. If the project is an expansion, indicate percent of expansion proposed f. Number of off-street parking spaces existing None g. Maximum vehicular trips generated per hour -> ^ ' %• 1 2 - Subject t o P l a n n i n g Boar* (upon completion of project)? h. If residential: Number and type of housing units: One Family Two Family MultipleTamily Initially ^ / Ultimately i Dimensions (in feet) of largest proposed structure 100 proposed Approx. 2 ( _>-*=w*il"p 2 35 Condominium ( height; I Linear feet oi frontage along a public thoroughfare project will occupy is? • 3 width; 65 length. Subject to AR* ft. �'.Ml^U- *|£ None 2 How much natural material (i e . rock, earth, etc.) will be removed from the site' 3. Will disturbed areas be reclaimed' DYes ENo ' tons/cubic y*i*d> ON/A a. If yes. for what i n t e n d . , purpose is the site being reclaimed? b. Will topsoil be stockpiled for reclamation? DYes . DNo c. Will upper subsoil be stockpiled for reclamation? C DYes DNo 4 How many acres of vegetation (trees, shrubs, ground covers) will be removed from site? None acres. 5. Will any mature forest (over 100 years old) or other locally-important vegetation be removed by this project? DYes ®No 6. If single phase project: Anticipated period of construction 6-8 months, (including demolition). 7. If multi-phased: a. Total number of phases anticipated I N ' A (number). | b. Anticipated date of commencement phase 1 month c. Approximate completion date of final phase 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 DYes year. I DNo * ' / • A N ; after project is complete / A | A 11. Will project require relocation of any projects or facilities? 12. is surface liquid waste disposal involved? : BNo N N year, (including demolition) DYes DYes BNo If yes, explain | SNo a. If yes, indicate type of waste (sewage, industrial, etc.) and amount b. Name of water body into which effluent will be discharged J 3. Is subsurface liquid waste disposal involved? DYes BNo 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? 16. Will the project generate solid waste? DYes DYes DYes BNo BNo BNo a. If yes, what is the amount per month tons b. If yes, will an existing solid waste facility be used? DYes c. If yes, give name DNo ; location d. Will any wastes not go into a sewage disposal system or into a sanitary landfill? DYes DNo e. If Yes, explain 17. Will the project involve the disposal of solid waste? DYes BNo a. If yes, what is the anticipated rate of disposal? b tons/month. If yes, what is the anticipated site life? 18 Will project use herbicides or pesticides? years. DYes BNo 19 Will project routinely produce odors (more than one hour per day)? DYes BNo 20 Will project produce operating noise exceeding the local ambient noise levels? 21. WiJI project result in an increase in energy use? DYes DYes BNo BNo If yes , indicate type(s) If water supply is from wells, indicate pumping capacity • K Total anticipated water usage per day N 'A >9S ^gallons/day 24 Does project involve Local, State or Federal funding? DYes gallons/minute. ^ ^ ^ t °~^ \ ENo If Yes, explain l. it �I 25: Approval* Required: r City. Town. Village Board OYes BNo J City. Town. Village Plaur ng Board ®Yes DNo City. Town Zoning Board ®Yes DNo City, County Health Department DYes DNo Other Local Agencies DYes DNo Other Regional Agencies DYes DNo State Agencies DYes DNo Federal Agencies DYes DNo Submittal Date Type Subdivision/Site Plan 9/93 Variance - Rear Yard Received 8/93 • •. C. Zoning and Planning Information 1 Does proposed action it volve a planning or zoning decision? BYes DNo If Yes, indicate decision required Ozoning amendment Ezoning variance Dnew/revision of master plan Dresource management plan_ 2. What is t h e zoning classification(s)of the site? 3 Dspecial use permit ^Subdivision rfsite plan Dother R-5 What is t h e maximum potential development of the site if developed as permitted by the present zoning? Nitie (9) dwelling u n i t s 4 What is t h e proposed zoning of the site? N/A 5. What is the maximum potential development of the site if developed as permitted by the proposed zoning? N/A ; Is the proposed action consistent with the recommended uses in adopted local land use plans? BYes DNo What are t h e predominant land use(s) and zoning classifications within a V* mile radius of proposed action? Residential and light commerical uses Is the proposed action compatible with adjoining/surrounding land uses within a V* mile? If the proposed action is the subdivision of land, how many lots are proposed? a. What is the minimum lot size proposed? EYes DNo DYes BNo 2 5TdC>0 £a n - 10 Will proposed action require any authorization(s) for the formation of sewer or water districts? 11 Will the proposed action create a demand for any community provided services (recreation, education, police, fire protection)? DYes BNo a. If yes, is existing capacity sufficient to handle projected demand? 12 DYes DNo Will the proposed action result in the generation of traffic significantly above present levels? a. If yes, is the existing road network adequate to handle the additional traffic? DYes DYes ElNo DNo D. informational Details Attach any additional information as may be needed to clarify your project. If there are or may be any adverse impacts associated with your proposal, please discuss such impacts and the measures which you propose to mitigate or avoid them. E. Verification I certify that the information provided above is true to the best of my knowledge. Ipplicant/Sponsor Name Signature ^-< ARLINDO RUIVO J ^ *'---?-^-> - A~ - Date 10-13-93 Title 4 & £ i £ J If the action is in the Coastal Area, and you are a state agency, complete the Coastal Assessment Form before proceeding with this assessment5 # i �Part 2—PROJECT IMPACTS AND THEIR MAGNITUDE Responsibility of Lead Agency General Information (Read Carefully) •• in completing the form the reviewer should be guided by ti r question: Have my responses and determinations been^ t>?sonable? The reviewer is not expected to be an expert environmental analyst. £ » ro^ntifying that an impact will be potentially large (column 2) does not mean that it is also necessarily significant, Any large impact must be evaluated in PART 3 to determine significance. Identifying an impact in column 2 .simply asks that it be looked at further. • The Examples provided are to assist the reviewer by showing types of impacts and wherever possible the threshold of magnitude that would trigger a response in column 2. The examples are generally applicable throughout the State and for most situations. But, for any specific project or site other examples and/or lower thresholds may be appropriate 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 and have been offered as guidance. They do not constitute an exhaustive list of impacts and thresholds to answer each question. • 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. j | . f f [ Instructions (Read carefully) a. Answer each of the 19 questions in PART 2. Answer Yes if there will be any impact. T b. Maybe answers should be considered as Yes answers. I c. If answering Yes to a question then check the appropriate box (column 1 or 2) to indicate the potential size of the impact. If impact threshold equals or exceeds any example provided, check column 2, If impact will occur but threshold 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 PART 3. e. If a potentially large impact checked in column 2 can be mitigated by changes) in the project to a small to moderate impact, also check the Yes box in column 3. A No response indicates that such a reduction is not possible. This must be explained in Part 3. r 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%. 1 Small to Moderate Impact Potential Large Impact D D DYes DNo • D D Y es DN< n D D D DYes DYes DNO D D DYes DNO 2 Can Impact Be Mitigated By Project Change • Construction on land where the depth to. the water table is less than 3 feet. • Construction of paved parking area for 1,000 or more vehicles. • Construction on land where bedrock is exposed or generally within 3 ieet of existing ground surface. • Construction that will continue for more than 1 year or involve more than one phase or stage. • Excavation for mining purposes that would remove more than 1,000 tons of natural material (i.e., rock or soil) per year. • Construction or expansion of a sanitary landfill. • Construction in a designated floodway. • Other impacts D D DYes DNO D D D D D DYes DYes DYes DNO DNO Will there be an effect t<. ...iy unique or unusual land forms found on the site? (i.e., cliffs, dunes, geological formations, etcjENO DYES Specific land forms: D DYes DNo • D DNo DNO �2 r IMPACT ON WATER Will proposed action affect any water body designated as protected' (Under Articles 15. 24. 25 of the Environmental Conservation Law. ECL) ENO CYES Examples that would apply to column 2 Developable area of site contains a protected water body Dredging 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-proi ?cted existing or new body of water? ENO DYES Examples that would apply to column 2 • A 1 0 % increase or decrease in the surface area of any body of water or more than a 10 acre increase or decrease. Small to Moderate Impact Potential Large Impact • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 3 Can Impact Be Mitigated By Project Change •Yes •Yes •No •NO •Yes DNO •Yes DNO •Yes DNo 4 • Construction of a body of water that exceeds 10 acres of surface area. • Other impacts: 5. Will Proposed Action affect surface or groundwater quality or quantity? ®NO Examples that would apply to column 2 Proposed Action requires use of a source of water that does not have approval to serve proposed (project) action. Proposed Action requires water supply from wells with greater than 45 gallons per minute pumping capacity. Construction or operation causing any contamination of a water supply system. Proposed Action will adversely affect groundwater. Liquid effluent will be conveyed off the site to facilities which presently do not exist or have inadequate capacity. Proposed Action would use water in excess of 20.000 gallons per day. Proposed Action will likely cause siltation or other discharge into an existing body of water to the extent that there will be an obvious visual contrast to natural conditions. Proposed Action will require the storage of petroleum or chemical products greater than 1,100 gallons. Proposed Action will allow residential uses in areas without water and/or sewer services. Proposed Action locates commercial and/or industrial uses which may require new or expansion of existing waste treatment and/or storage facilities. impacts: Will proposed action alter drainage flow or patterns, or surface water runoff? ENO DYES Examples that would apply to column 2 Proposed Action would change flood water flows 7 DN< •Yes •Yes •No •No •Yes •Yes •NO •NO •Yes •NO •Yes • NO •Yes •Yes •NO •Yes •NO •Yes • NO •Yes DNo •Yes DNo •Yes DNo • • Yes DNo • • Yes CNO DYES • Proposed Action will require a discharge permit. Other •Yes • NO �1 Small to Moderate Impact r a 2 Potential Largo Impact D D D D D D D • Proposed Action wili result in the incineration of more than 1 ton of refuse per hour. • Proposed Action ' ^ay cause substantial erosion Proposed Actio?, is incompatible with existing drainage patterns. Can Impact Be Mitigated By Project Change DYes DNo DYes . DNo DYes DNo DYes DNo D DYes DNo D D 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 • 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. D D DYes DNo • Removal of any portion of a critical or significant wildlife habitat. D D D D DYes DNo DYes DNo DYes DNo • Proposed Action will allow development in a designated floodway. • Other impacts: . IMPACT ON AIR 7 - W i l l proposed action affect air quality? 0NO DYES Examples that would apply t o column 2 • Proposed Action will induce 1.000 or more vehicle trips in any given hour. IMPACT ON PLANTS A N D A N I M A L S Will Proposed Action affect any threatened or endangered species? BNO Examples that would apply to column 2 DYES • Application of pesticide or herbicide more than twice a year, other than for agricultural purposes. • Other 9 impacts: D w, Will Proposed Action substantially affect non-threatened or non-endangered species? BNO Examples that would apply to column 2 DYES • 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 of mature forest (over 100 years of age) or other locally important vegetation. D D DYes DNo D D DYes DNo IMPACT ON AGRICULTURAL L A N D RESOURCES 10 Will the Proposed Action affect agricultural land resources? ENO DYES Examples that would apply to column 2 ^ H i e proposed action would sever, cross or limit access to agricultural ^ ^ a n d (includes cropland, hayfields, pasture, vineyard, orchard, etc.) 8 i 1 �J I r i » • Construction activity would excavate or compact the soil profile of agricultural 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 oi 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 AESTHETIC RESOURCES W i l l proposed action affect aesthetic resources? BNO DYES (If necessary, use the Visual EAF Addendum in Section 617.21. Appendix B.) Examples that would apply t o 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. Project components that will result in the elimination or significant screening of scenic views known to be important to the area. Other impacts, 2 3 Small to Moderate Impact Potential Large Impact Can Impact Be Mitigated By Project Change D D DYes DNo D D DYes DNo DYes DNo DYes DNo D D 11 IMPACT O N HISTORIC A N D ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES 12. Will Proposed Action impact any site or structure of historic, prehistoric or paieontological importance? ENO 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 of historic places. • Any impact to an archaeological site or fossil bed located within the project site. • Proposed Action will occur in an area designated as sensitive for archaeological sites on the NYS Site Inventory. • Other impacts: 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 D D D D DYes DYes DYes DNo DNo DNo IMPACT ON OPEN SPACE AND RECREATION 13 Will Proposed Action affect the quantity or quality of existing or future open spaces or recreational opportunities? Examples that would apply to column 2 ENO DYES The permanent foreclosure of a future recreational opportunity. • A major reduction of an open space important to the community. • Other impacts: 9 �1 2 Small to Moderate Impact Potential Larc? Impact D D D D D D • Y e s ' _ONO •Yes DNo DYes DNo D • •Yes DNo • Proposed Action will require the creation.or extension of an energy transmission or supply system to serve more than SO single or two family residences or to serve a major commercial or industrial use. D D •Yes DNo • Other impacts: D D •Yes DNo D D •Yes •No D D • D •Yes •Yes •No •No • Proposed Action will remove natural barriers that would act as a noise screen. D D •Yes •NO • Other D • •Yes •NO • 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. D D •Yes DNo • Proposed Action may result in the burial of "hazardous wastes" in any form (i.e. toxic, poisonous, highly reactive, radioactive, irritating, infectious, etc.) D D •Yes DNo • Storage facilities for one million or more gallons of liquified natural gas or other flammable liquids. D D •Yes DNo 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. D D •Yes DNO D D • Yes DNo IMPACT O N TRANSPORTATION 14 Will there be an effect to exiting transportation systems? BNO Examples that would apply to c lumn 2 DYES • Alteration of present patterns of movement of people and/or goods. • Proposed Action will result in major traffic problems. • Other impacts: Can Impact Be Mitigated By Project Change/ IMPACT O N ENERGY 15. Will proposed action affect the community's sources of fuel or energy supply? E)NO 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. NOISE A N D ODOR IMPACTS 16 k» Will there be objectionable odors, noise, or vibration as a result of the Proposed Action? BNO DYES Examples that would apply to column 2 Blasting within 1,500 feet of a hospital, school or other sensitive facility. • 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. impacts: IMPACT ON PUBLIC HEALTH 17 Will Proposed Action affect public health and safety? BNO Examples that would apply to column 2 • Other impacts: 10 DYES �r, 8 IMPACT ON GROWTH AKD CHARACTER OF COMMUNITY OR NEIGHBORHOOD Will proposed actio.- affect the character of the existing community? EJNO DYES Examples that woulc apply to column 2 The 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. Proposed Action will create or eliminate employment. Other impacts: ______ "" 1 2 3 Small to Moderate Impact Potential Large Impact Can Impact Be Mitigated By Project Change D • DYes ' -DNo .D D DYes DNo D D D D D a DYes DYes DYes DNo DNo DNo D D DYes DNo D D D D D D DYes DYes DYes DNo DNo DNo 19. Is there, or is there likely to be, public controversy related to potential adverse environmental impacts? JSlNO DYES If Any Action fn Pari 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 Part 3 must be prepared if one or more impact(s) is considered to be potentially large, even if the impact(s) may be mitigated. Instructions Discuss the following for each impact identified in Column 2 of Part 2: 1. Briefly describe the impact. 2. Describe (if applicable) how the impact could be mitigated or reduced to a small to moderate impact by project changefs). 3. 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 consequence of the impact • • Its potential divergence from local needs and goals • Whether known objections to the project relate to this impact. (Continue on attachments) 11 �RESOLUTION Adopted at the October 21, 1993 Meeting of the Village of North Tarrytown Planning Board RESOLUTION: SITE PLAN AND SUBDIVISION APPROVAL PROPOSED: 2-LOT SUBDIVISION AND CONSTRUCTION OF THREE-FAMILY RESIDENCE IN 2 1/2 STORY BUILDING OWNER: MR. AND MRS. ARLINDO RUIVO LOCATION: 39 DEPEYSTER STREET (AT NORTHWEST CORNER WITH WASHINGTON STREET) TAX DESIGNATION: SECTION 16, BLOCK 12, LOT 2 ZONING: R-5 RESIDENTIAL WHEREAS, the Planning Board of the Village of North Tarrytown has reviewed an application for site plan and subdivision approval pursuant to the Subdivision Regulations of the Village of North Tarrytown, Chapter 62, Zoning, of the Code of the Village of North Tarrytown and other requirements of the Village Code considered pertinent to the application, which application is to subdivide a property that is approximately 14,000 square feet in size and is located at the northwest corner of Washington Street and Depeyster Street, and is known as tax Lot 16A of Section 15, Block 13, into two lots, to construct a three-family 2 1/2-story residence with three paved parking spaces and three garage spaces on the smaller lot, and to construct three paved parking spaces and to provide for the potential future development of three landbanked spaces on the larger lot, which contains an existing three-family residence, as shown on the drawing prepared in the office of Samuel F. Vieira, R.A., and further identified as follows: "Site Plan, Proposed Sub-division for: Mr. & Mrs. Arlindo Ruivo, 39 Depeyster St., N. Tarrytown, NY," dated 9/7/93 and last revised 10/19/93, scale 1" = 20'; and WHEREAS, the plan proposes the subdivision of the property into two lots, the larger to be approximately 8,100 square feet and the smaller to be approximately 5,800 square feet in size; and WHEREAS, the larger lot will contain the existing three-family three-story frame residence and the Applicant proposes to build a new macadam driveway and three paved spaces shown as P4, P5 and P6 on the plan, with spaces PI, P2 and P3 to be shown as "future parking" and to be landscaped until they may be needed or required by the Planning Board in the future; and WHEREAS, the Applicant proposes to construct a 2 1/2 story three-family residence with three garage parking spaces, a macadam driveway and three paved parking spaces on the smaller lot; and WHEREAS, evergreen hedges will be placed along the Washington Street side of the property to screen the view of the paved parking spaces on the larger lot as shown on the plan; and �WHEREAS, the smaller lot will be landscaped and a 5-foot high attractive fence will be located on the western boundary of the lot to screen parking spaces PI, P2 and P3; and WHEREAS, fencing, for safety purposes, will also be provided on the top of the proposed retaining walls; and WHEREAS, the Applicant has stated that the lighting in the parking areas will be controlled with motion detectors for energyefficiency and that the fixtures will be directed downward onto the property so that there will not be glare onto other properties; and WHEREAS, the Applicant has received an area variance for the size deficiency of the rear yard of the larger lot from the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Village of North Tarrytown; and WHEREAS, the site has been visited by the Village's Planning and Engineering Consultants and the Planning Board is thoroughly familiar with the site and all aspects of the proposed project; and WHEREAS, a duly advertised public hearing was held at the Village Hall on October 21, 1993, at which time those wishing to be heard were given the opportunity to be heard; and WHEREAS, in the course of its review and acting as Lead Agency pursuant to Part 617 of the implementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law, the Planning Board has made the following findings and caused, noted, or conducted the following activities: 1. Received an application fee of $250; 2. Caused field inspections to be made of the property and of the surrounding areas; 3. Requested, received and considered comments from the Village Planning and Engineering Consultants and the Building Inspector; 4. Acting as Lead Agency, requested, received and reviewed a Full Environmental Assessment Form (EAF) in compliance with the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA); 5. After review of the application, EAF, and property as well as other information submitted by the Applicant, the Planning Board declared itself Lead Agency and circulated a "Negative Declaration," dated October 21, 1993, in which the Planning Board stated its determination of non-significance of environmental impact for this Type I action; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that said application for site plan and subdivision approval and the plan noted above be and hereby are granted site plan and subdivision approval and that the Applicant may obtain the endorsed approval of the Planning Board Chairman or, as an alternate, the Village Administrator, on a copy 2 �of this site plan and subdivision resolution and upon the final mylar copy of the site plan and the final mylar copy of the subdivision plat drawing revised as necessary to show compliance with the following conditions, and the Applicant may obtain the endorsement of the Westchester County Department of Health on the final subdivision plat which endorsements shall permit filing in the offices of the Village Building Department, for purposes of obtaining a building permit in accordance with this resolution and all building code requirements, and the offices of the Westchester County Clerk, provided, however, that this site plan approval shall expire within twelve (12) months of the date of this resolution if the following modifications and conditions have not been completed to the satisfaction of the Planning Board and/or the Applicant has not obtain a building permit and the subdivision approval shall expire within ninety (90) days from the date of this resolution if the following modifications and conditions have not been completed to the satisfaction of the Planning Board: 1. All references to the "Applicant" Applicant's successor and assigns. 2. Fees - The Applicant Tarrytown: 3. shall include the shall pay to the Village of North 2.1 An inspection fee for construction inspection of the property for compliance with the approved site plan in accordance with the Village of North Tarrytown Zoning Code; 2.2 A recreation fee in the amount of $ , subject to the approval of the Village Board of Trustees; 2.3 The reimbursement of all application review fees as noted and required in Section 62-30(f) of the Village Zoning Code, as approved by the Village Attorney. Revision of the above noted plan, to the satisfaction of the Planning and Engineering Consultants, to demonstrate the following: 3.1 The signature block shall be revised to comply with the wording in Section HA(l)c(14c) of the Subdivision Regulations and to provide a line for the endorsement of the Westchester County Department of Health; 3.2 Parking spaces PI, P2 and P3 shall be shown on the plan as "future parking" to be implemented by the Applicant as needed or within 180 days of being determined necessary by the Planning Board; 3.3 The plan drawing shall be revised and titled "Final Site Plan" and a separate drawing showing the subdivision line but not including the proposed development shall be submitted and titled "Final Subdivision Plat"; 3 �3.4 The date of this resolution shall be noted on the final subdivision plat and on the final site plan. 4. The landscaping to be provided on the smaller lot and the additional hedges and other landscaping materials shown to be provided on the larger lot shall be maintained in a healthy growing condition. There shall be diversity in the species of vegetation planted. 5. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the Applicant shall submit to the Village Building Inspector a mylar reproduction of the site plan complete with the certification of a professional architect and/or a professional engineer attesting to construction of the site plan and its improvements as shown thereon. 6. All elements of this approved site plan shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Village Building Inspector within a period of eighteen (18) months from the date of the issuance of the building permit and prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. The Planning Board may issue an extension on this time limit, or may modify any of the above conditions with respect thereto, for good cause. 7. The Planning Board reserves the right to make a final field inspection of the project after construction of the facilities, upon notice of the Building Inspector, and before the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. The purpose of this final inspection is to review the development and to require any modifications.to parking, drainage, access, paving and other site plan details, which do not comply with the approved plan and interest of safety, convenience, aesthetics and the enjoyment and peace and quiet of adjacent neighbors. PLANNING BOARD VILLAGE OF NORTH TARRYTOWN 500\not3-0A5.sjp.crc 4 �Approved with respect to substance and form; Villager Attorney Dated: J^tJ?y Approved by the Planning Board Chairman of Aotinq^Chairman Dated: / Filed with Village Clerk Clerk or Deputy Clerk Dated: ^ ^ y S^pk^Us Date of Heeti Heetmg 2 3 M3 �FREDERICK P. CLARK ASSOCIATES, INC. Planning/Development/Environment/Transportation 4. Referral. Under Section 239-M of the General Municipal Law, this application will need to be referred to the Westchester County Planning Board, because the property has frontage on State Route 9 and because the property is located within 500 feet from the boundary of the Village. Of course, we are willing to meet with the Applicant to review our comments, if the Applicant so desires. Susan J. Portman, AICP Associate/Planning cc: William T. Regan, Village Administrator Janet A. Gandolfo, Esq., Village Attorney James T. Margotta, Building Inspector Joseph A. Gulino, P.E., Village Engineer Vincent Del Bagno 500\not3-021.sjp:aj:ev 3 �FREDERICK P. CLARK ASSOCIATES, INC. Planning/Development/Environment/Transportation Rye, New York and Southport, Connecticut David J. Portman, AICP Howard!- Reynolds, PE David H. Stolman, AICP 350 Theodore Fremd Avenue Rye, New York 10580 (914) 967-6540 Michael A. Galante Joanne P Meder, AICP Jim Donovan, RLA. ASLA MEMORANDUM To: Village of North Tarrytown Planning Board Date: September 21, 1993 Subject: Review of Revised Site Plan for Serina Proper-tv As requested, we have reviewed the revised site plan for the Serina property. The site is 2,207 square feet in size and is located on the western side of Lawrence Avenue, in the R-5 Residential District. The Applicant is proposing the demolition of the existing garage and construction of a two-story, 1,200 square foot building to contain one office and one apartment. According to the Applicant, all necessary variances have been obtained from the Village of North Tarrytown Zoning Board of Appeals. The Applicant has submitted the following revised plan: "Proposed Mixed-Use / 2 Story, Emma B. Serina, 9 Lawrence Ave., N. Tarrytown, N.Y.," scale 1" = 10', dated April 25, 1993 and revised August 1, 1993, prepared by Barstow Architects. REVIEW COMMENTS 1. Plan Revisions: The floor area of the proposed building has been reduced by 60 square feet to 1,200 square feet, reducing the building lot coverage by three percent. The location of the proposed building has been moved towards the center of the property. As a result, although the undersized rear yard decreases by approximately six inches, the front yard setback is increased by three and a half feet. This new design allows for adequate side yards and proper size parking spaces. A four foot wide walk is shown between the street and the building. 2. Landscaping: The Applicant should indicate whether landscaping or pavement will be placed in the areas on the site to the north and south of the proposed building. The area directly to the east of the proposed building is shown as landscaped. The Applicant should provide more information regarding landscaping, including the location of the Connecticut -(203)255-3100 FAX • (914) 967-6615 Long Island •(516)364-4544 �FREDERICK P. ClXARK ASSOCIATES, INC. Planning/Developmer—it/Environment/Transportation plantings, their sizes and species. It is also not clear whether a hedge is to be provided along the side yards to screen the parking area. We recommend that a hedge be provided. Susan J. Portman, AICP Associate/Planning cc: William T. Regan, Village Administrator Janet A . Gandolfo, Esq., Village Attorney James T . Margotta, Building Inspector Joseph ^A. Gulino, P.E., Village Engineer Robert £3arstow 500\not3-062.sjp:ev 2 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Planning Board Minutes & Resolutions-1993 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_1993-10-21 Subject The topic of the resource Planning Board Minutes & Resolutions-1993 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1993