https://sleepyhollow.localarchives.org/files/original/d93a1a4072789264a00ba5efedc158b7.pdf cfed9af0d33f47e47a9d3d7ec7ab75d7 PDF Text Text Village of Sleepy Hollow Planning Board Minutes December 22, 2022 The regular meeting was called to order at 7:04 PM by Acting Chairperson Krakauer. The Board voted to approve Lindsay Krakauer to act as the Chairperson. Acting Chairperson Krakauer summarized the agenda. Present: Lindsay Krakauer, Acting Chairperson Benjamin Nielsen Matthew Brennan Erin Carney Also Present: Joshua Subin, Village Attorney James Natarelli, Village Engineer David Smith, Village Planner Sean E. McCarthy, Building Inspector Absent: Rachelle Gebler Kersten Harries Pamela Kroll, Secretary to the Planning Board Agenda: 1) Francesco Alesci, 135 Beekman Avenue, Proposed multi-family building, Site plan approval- Continued public hearing 2) 46 Hudson St., LLC/Alex Tseng, 46 Hudson Street, Proposed three-family residence, Site Plan approval - Public hearing Pending ZBA approval 3) Gabe Realty Corp., 305 North Washington Street, Proposed three-family residence, Site Plan approval - Requested adjournment 4) Hudson Pines, LLC, 180 Bedford Road, Amended Site Plan Approval-Requested adjournment 5) Marcello Poguio, 95 College Avenue, Proposed one-story rear addition, Amended Site Plan approval- Preliminary presentation 6) Lighthouse Landing Communities, LLC, Edge-on-Hudson Riverfront Development, Phase II Waterfront Open Space, Site Plan & Wetlands Watercourse Permit- Preliminary Presentation 7) Lighthouse Landing Communities, LLC, Edge-on-Hudson Riverfront Development, Block H, Amended Site Plan and Final ARB Approval- Presentation 8) Approval of minutes, November 17, 2022 1. Franceso Alesci, 135 Beekman Avenue, Proposed multi-family building, Site Plan 1 (12/22/22) �Approval- continued public hearing Motion was made to open the public hearing. Moved: Krakauer Seconded: Carney Vote 4-0 Maximillian Mahalek stated that he is an attorney with Cuddy + Feder LLP representing the applicant. Mr. Mahelek stated that the December 8, 2022 submission addresses the Board’s and the consultants concerns from the November 17, 2022 meeting related to parking, lighting and stormwater runoff. Mr. Mahalek stated that the request received to include a three-bedroom unit, and changing the building front yard setback were not included due to physical building location constraints and lack of Zoning regulations. Mr. Mahalek stated that the proposed building complies with the Zoning Code for the lower Beekman Avenue area. The additional renderings, aerial views, and elevations drawings submitted address the concerns received from David Smith and James Natarelli. Mr. Mahalek stated that the proposed increased building length will have a minimal impact on the neighborhood. Mr. Mahalek stated that they added the leader drainpipes and they lowered the site lighting fixture heights to 14 feet. The applicant would agree to a condition to add shielding to the lighting fixtures if needed. Mr. Mahalek summarized how the proposed application complies with Site Plan and ARB requirements as they relate to the Village Code requirements. Mr. Mahalek requested that the Board close the public hearing and move to draft a resolution of approval. Christopher Barbagli is the architect representing the applicant. Mr. Barbagli stated that they added a fourth parking space back along Beekman Avenue by creating four spaces that would be 19’6” in length. They are unable to move the building back because it would interfere with the parking configurations. Mr. Barbagli stated that the stair shown in the engineering drawings was not necessary and that the revised drawings are accurate with the architectural drawings. The updated aerial renderings and elevation drawings demonstrate where the proposed building would extend back an additional 15 feet. David Smith asked Mr. Barbagli why the applicant is proposing the increased building length. Mr. Barbagli stated that they needed to relocate two one-bedroom apartments to the back of the building in order to construct the gym amenity on the first floor. Mr. Barbagli stated that only the rear elevation would change. Mr. Barbagli summarized the changes to the lighting fixtures and the drainage for the porches. James Natarelli asked if the proposed lighting fixture specifications include an option for glare shields. Mr. Barbagli stated that they would use a third-party shield if necessary and that the proposed lighting fixtures are code compliant. Mr. Natarelli stated that the concern relates to the visibility of the light fixtures from other properties and suggested that they determine if the fixture specified has manufacturer shield capabilities. Mr. Barbagli stated that they he will research the availability of lighting fixtures that have the option for a shield for light spill over. 2 (12/22/22) �Acting Chairperson Krakauer solicited comments from the Board. Benjamin Nielsen asked Mr. Barbagli to describe how the proposed architectural design minimizes the scale of the proposed building in relation to the smaller neighboring buildings. Mr. Barbagli stated that the proposed building is to scale with the properties’ large site. The building design is in keeping with the character of the neighborhood and that the use of a mansard roof will bring the scale and the height of the building down. Mr. Nielsen asked if there are façade transition materials that they could use to improve the visual aesthetics of the building mass. Acting Chairperson Krakauer suggested that the applicant use some material and color variations to articulate dimension to the building façade specifically in the east side elevation where the tower is showing continuous siding. Erin Carney suggested that the applicant rework the rooflines at the two vertical tower elements to create more variation in the design of the façade. Acting Chairperson Krakauer requested that the applicant provide details on the proposed roof railings and to resolve the discrepancies related to the columns. Ms. Krakauer asked if there is equipment proposed on the roof. Mr. Barbagli stated that there would be condensers on the roof and that a sitting area is proposed. Mr. Nielsen asked Mr. Barbagli to describe the location for the proposed rooftop sitting area and asked if there will be railings around it. Mr. Barbagli stated that the proposed rooftop sitting area would be in the back rear of the building with railings around it. Ms. Carney requested that Mr. Barbagli provide consistent elevations drawings that show how the balconies will sit on the building. Mr. Mahalek requested that the Board incorporate their comments from the Work Session, and send to the applicant team to address with Sean McCarthy and the Village consultants at an upcoming meeting. Acting Chairperson Krakauer suggested adding a window in the stairwell to provide more light, and stated that the Board has concerns related to the parking spots and appropriate signage. Ms. Krakauer asked Sean McCarthy to explain the issue with the accessible parking spot near the rubbish alcove. Mr. McCarthy stated that the access isle at the accessible parking spot is required to be 8 feet wide. 3 (12/22/22) �Mr. Nielsen questioned how the curved area of the rooflines relate to the balconies along the west side elevation. Mr. Barbagli stated that the drawing should depict a straight vertical shingled wall at the balconies. The shingled roof will slope down on either end of the balcony. Mr. McCarthy requested that Mr. Barbagli submit a section through the mansard roof and properly detail that area. Mr. McCarthy stated that the Board will not consider having shingles or siding on a vertical roof surface. Acting Chairperson Krakauer suggested that the applicant consider adding more landscaping features to the part of the driveway that is a one-way traffic area into the parking lot. Mr. McCarthy stated that the site plan scales the one-way width of the driveway as 16 feet. The applicant could reduce the width in that area to reconfigure the diagonal parking spaces along the driveway or to add landscaping on one or both sides. Mr. Mahalek asked Mr. McCarthy how narrow the driveway could be to comply with standards. Mr. McCarthy suggested that applicant discuss the options with their traffic consultant. Mr. Barbagli asked Mr. McCarthy to confirm that the front of the driveway needs to be 20 feet wide. Mr. McCarthy stated that the driveway should be a wide as possible where there is two-way traffic. Acting Chairperson Krakauer solicited comments from the Board and the consultants. There were no additional comments from the Board or the consultants. Acting Chairperson Krakauer solicited comments from the public. Anne White lives at 1010 Kendal Way. Ms. White stated that the proposed enlargement of the building is not a minor change and that it will have significant impact on the surrounding area. The rear yards of the properties on Kendall Avenue will face the building and the parking lot. The developer was aware that the owners along Kendall Avenue felt that the height and length of the building would affect their homes, particularly casting shadows on their backyards. Since the Village amended the Zoning Code, this issue is no longer against the Village Code. The applicant is proposing to add an additional 16 feet to the back of the building and this will be an exasperating impact on the small homes on Kendall Avenue. Ms. White stated that the noise from the rooftop seating area would be disruptive to the neighboring properties late at night. Ms. White stated that there is a large tree shown on the rendering for the north side in front of the building on Beekman Avenue that she thinks is critical. The list of planting materials submitted does not indicate a tree of the same size proposed. Ms. White requested that the Village Tree Officer be involved in selecting a tree that will have a large tree pit so that it continues the line of large trees. The existing house contains three low to moderate rentals. The developers stated a 4 (12/22/22) �couple times that they would agree to have three apartments in the new building that would be approximately equal in rent and hopes that this promise can be part of the approval. There were no further comments from the public. Mr. Mahalek stated the proposed building massing is Zoning compliant and there are no variances required. The proposed rooftop space will adhere to the Village’s noise and lighting requirements and that the Village has the ability to enforce the regulations. In regards to the trees, the Village has its requirements for tree enforcement. The landscape plans are incorporated into the site plan and will adhere to the rules and provisions associated with the removal and planting of trees at all elevations. Mr. Mahalek stated the applicant has not made any promises in terms of the rental pricing of the units. There are no affordable housing requirements in the Village Code applicable to the site. Under New York Law, the Planning Board looks at the application to review what it proposed what impact it would have on the neighborhood. The applicant sets the rental prices and it is not in the purview of the Planning Board. Mr. Mahalek requested that the Board close the public hearing since there will be no changes that will materially impact the community. Mr. Mahalek stated that if the Board wishes to keep the public hearing open, he requested that the Board direct staff to prepare a draft resolution for the next meeting. Joshua Subin stated that the rooftop space is not just subject to Village Code enforcement policies and can result in civil complaints against the applicant for noise or nuisance. Mr. Mahalek stated that buildings can also have their own set of rules and regulations that they may enforce and that the applicant is willing to work with the Village to make sure that it doesn’t become an issue. Motion was made to continue the public hearing to the January19, 2023 meeting and to direct staff to prepare a draft resolution. Moved: Krakauer Seconded: Carney Vote 4-0 2. 46 Hudson St., LLC, 46 Hudson Street, Proposed three-family residence, Site Plan approval – continued public hearing The application was adjourned to the January 19, 2023 meeting. No action was taken. 3. Gabe Realty Corp., 305 North Washington Street, Proposed three-family residence, Site Plan Approval – Requested adjournment The applicant has requested an adjournment to the January 19, 2023 meeting. No action was taken. 4. Hudson Pines, LLC, 180 Bedford Road, Amended Site Plan approval- Requested adjournment 5 (12/22/22) �The applicant has requested an adjournment to the January 19, 2023 meeting. No action was taken. 5. Marcelo Poguio, 95 College Avenue, Proposed one-story rear addition, Amended Site Plan approval - Preliminary presentation Steven Costa is the engineer representing the applicant. Mr. Costa stated that the property was originally an auto repair shop and converted into a grocery store in 2012. The application proposes to construct a walk-in box addition in the rear northwest corner of the property at College and Valley Street that will be accessible from the loading area at the north side of the building structure. The proposed addition is a masonry structure that is 10 feet wide by 12 feet long, and 10 feet high with stucco finishes to match the existing building. There are no proposed lighting changes and the addition will be constructed on top of an existing paved area. A roof gutter is proposed to collect water and bring it down to the paved area at grade. Because the property has a high water table, they are unable to install cultecs for the drainage. The proposed addition is Zoning compliant and will not require variances. The proposed addition will be located near an existing parking lot and will be visually hidden from neighboring properties. Acting Chairperson Krakauer asked Mr. Costa to describe the purpose of the proposed addition. Mr. Costa stated that the Board of Health has requested that the applicant store seafood and meats separate from the other items for the store. Benjamin Nielsen asked Mr. Costa if there will be additional mechanical elements required for the addition. Mr. Costa stated that the compressor units will be located on top of the roof in a parapet that is not visible from the street. Acting Chairperson Krakauer asked Mr. Costa how the addition will be accessed. Mr. Costa stated that there will be exterior entrance door on the outside of the walk-in box. The addition will not be accessible from the inside of the main building. Acting Chairperson Krakauer suggested that Mr. Costa confirm that the existing lighting will be adequate for access at night. Mr. Costa stated that there is existing hood lighting on the side and the rear of the structure. The applicant will install additional lighting if Sean McCarthy determines that it is required upon the construction of the addition. Mr. Nielsen solicited comments from James Natarelli regarding the stormwater management. Mr. Natarelli stated that the application does not propose to add additional impervious surface. Mr. Natarelli asked Mr. Costa where the main building drains discharge and asked if the new addition could tie in with existing drainage system. 6 (12/22/22) �Mr. Costa stated that he is not sure but believes that there are interior roof drains sloped towards the center of the building. There was a discussion between Mr. Costa and Mr. Natarelli regarding the existing drop curb at the frontage on Valley Street. Acting Chairperson Krakauer stated that the proposed application seems straight forward and solicited comments from Mr. McCarthy. Mr. McCarthy stated that the Board has the discretion to waive the public hearing as a minor site plan amendment and vote to direct staff to draft a resolution for the January meeting. Mr. Nielsen asked Mr. Costa to describe the adjacent properties. Mr. Costa stated that there is a parking lot and an adjacent delicatessen business to the west of the applicant’s property and multi-family residences to the north of the building. Motion was made to waive the public hearing and to direct staff to prepare a draft resolution for approval at the January 19, 2023. Moved: Krakauer Seconded: Carney Lindsay Krakauer - yes Erin Carney - yes Matthew Brennan- yes Benjamin Nielsen - yes Vote 4-0 APPROVED 6. Lighthouse Landing Communities, LLC, Edge-on-Hudson Riverfront Development Phase II - Waterfront Open Space, Site Plan & Wetlands Watercourse Permit ApprovalPresentation The applicant has requested an adjournment to the January 19, 2023 meeting. No action was taken. 7. Lighthouse Landing Communities, LLC, Edge-on-Hudson Riverfront Development Block H- Amended Site Plan and Final ARB approval- Presentation Craig Tompkins stated that he is an associate of Biddle Real Estate Ventures, LLC. Mr. Tompkins stated that they received approval in February of 2022 that permitted them to go forward with the Block H building. The approval resolution contained stipulations and requirements in order to receive Building Permit approvals. Mr. Tompkins stated that Lighthouse Landing Communities, LLC hired two members of the Hines Development team to build the Block H building for them. Elizabeth Darby is the Vice President of Construction for Hines. Ms. Darby presented a video to show the status of the Block H Building Site. Ms. Darby stated that there were eighteen (18) 7 (12/22/22) �conditions included in the February 22, 2022 approved Amended Site Plan and Limited ARB resolution. Ms. Darby stated that the submission addresses all of the outstanding items. Eight (8) of the outstanding conditions are required prior to the issuance of the Building Permit. Ms. Darby stated that an agreement is required between Sleepy Hollow Residences, LLC at Block F, the future Block K developer, and LL Parcel H, LLC in order to satisfy the parking requirements for the Block H building. They submitted preliminary parking agreements for review. They are working with their legal team to address the comments received from the Building Department. Ms. Darby stated that they are working on how to designate the the forty-five (45) public spaces. Ms. Darby requested that the Planning Board defer the signage requirements from the issuance of the Building Permit and allow them to file separate signage permits in order to coordinate with the signage consultants, the master developer, and to receive opinions from the future retailers that will occupy spaces. Ms. Darby stated that an updated logistics plan has been submitted for review by the Building Department. Benjamin Nielsen asked Sean McCarthy how the Village has handled way-finding signage in other developments. Mr. McCarthy stated that way-finding signage has not been applicable to other developments in the Village. Since parking requirements for one development Block are being shared with other development Blocks, there needs to be mechanisms to direct the residents and the public. Ms. Darby stated that they submitted a final utilities plan for review and approval as part of the Building Permit application submission. All review and permit application fees have been paid. Ms. Darby stated that as part of the final landscape plan, they are proposing to use architectural metal screening in lieu of landscaping to hide utility equipment and to provide the required locations and accessibility for Con Edison. Mr. Nielsen questioned why they are proposing metal screening instead of material that would match the façade of the building. Ms. Darby stated that the proposed metal screening would coordinate with the metal railings proposed along the front of the façade and that they are using similar metal screening for the mechanical equipment on the rooftop. The screening has to provide a gate access for the utility companies. David Smith asked Ms. Darby to display the proposed graphics of the metal screening. Ms. Darby presented an elevation drawing that detailed the proposed screening. Mr. Nielsen requested that Ms. Darby provide a full elevation and a rendering for the proposed metal screening due to the location and visibility along Westward Drive. Ms. Darby stated that she would submit a full elevation drawing and a rendering for the metal screening for the Boards review. Ms. Darby stated that the landscape plan details the additional landscaping that will be installed between Westward Drive and Ichabod’s Landing. Ms. Darby stated that in response to the 10/14/22 consulting engineer’s memo, they are working on revising the peak flow rate of the county manhole and the sanitary sewer report. Ms. Darby stated that they relocated the grease trap to the inside of the garage and out of the right-of-way. They 8 (12/22/22) �relocated the fire department connection to above the water meter room and away from the building façade. The proposed ventilation area on Westward Drive was moved further south so it is setback from the property line and the sidewalk, and set behind the screening, and not visible. They will remove the sanitary manhole on Horseman Boulevard and reroute to filter down to the sanitary manhole on Westward Drive. Acting Chairperson Krakauer solicited comments from the Planning Board, consultants, or the Building Department. Acting Chairperson Krakauer stated that the Boards’ main concern is how the public street parking spaces will be managed because if residents have to rent and pay for their parking spots, what will preclude them from using the street parking spaces for free, and then limiting the parking spaces available for visitors. Ms. Darby stated that they would like to continue their discussions with the Building Department staff and legal teams to finalize the parking agreements while having Building Permits issued. Mr. McCarthy stated that the signage requirements can be deferred as a condition of the issuance of Certificates of Occupancy, Joshua Subin suggested that the parking agreements could be subject to approval from him and Mr. McCarthy. Mr. McCarthy stated that the Board might want the opportunity to weigh in on the parking terms and the directions to other locations. Acting Chairperson Krakauer asked Mr. Smith how the Board would work the signage requirements into a resolution and asked the Board if they are comfortable directing staff to draft a resolution. Mr. Smith stated that they could revise the signage requirements to be condition required before the issuance of a temporary or final Certificate of Occupancy. Mr. Smith asked Mr. Tompkins if the utility landscape screening at Ichabod’s Landing is part of the application. Mr. Tompkins stated that they plan to complete the landscape utility screening at Ichabod’s Landing in the Spring. Mr. McCarthy stated that the Board has requested to see additional details on the metal utility screening, the parking agreements, and the final sanitary sewer report. Acting Chairperson Krakauer suggested that the applicant prepare responses for the next meeting. Ms. Darby asked if the sanitary sewer report is a requirement of the Building Permit issuance. James Natarelli stated that the reason that they are asking that the sewer report be completed prior to issuing the Building Permit is because the Block H building and another building are tributary to a manhole where the pipes leading to it are running close to capacity. In the previous 9 (12/22/22) �approval, the Health Department capped off how much wastewater the developer could send to those pipes. The Boards needs to see if any change to bedroom counts or spaces would increase the amount of wastewater going to the pipes. Ms. Darby stated that the applicant reduced the number of apartments in Block H so the demand should be sufficient for the Health Department. Mr. Nielsen stated that the elevations for the proposed metal screening detail is not just important to consider in the relation to the Block H building but how it would interact with the public space. Ms. Darby stated that the proposed screening would be located on a short distance after the Block H garage entrance and will be not be visible from the park or the River Walk area. Acting Chairperson Krakauer asked Ms. Darby if they considered adding additional plantings along the metal screening. Ms. Darby stated that there would not be room to add additional landscaping and still provide the utility clearance access that Con Edison requires. Mr. Tompkins stated that since the streets currently do not have parking regulations, residents from Northlight are using street parking and not moving their cars. When the Village takes over the street and activates the alternate side parking regulations, there will be more residents willing to pay for parking. Mr. Tompkins stated that it will take approximately two years to build the Block H building and they anticipate occupancy in the third quarter of 2024. Mr. Tompkins asked if the issuance of the Building Permit is pending the approval of a resolution. Mr. McCarthy stated that the current resolution of approval stands until the Planning Board votes to change it. Mr. McCarthy suggested that the Board could approve revisions to the time line of the some of the condition requirements that are not design related. The sanitary sewer report is the only condition that is required to address before issuing the Building Permit. Mr. Nielsen asked Mr. McCarthy if the Building Department is ready to issue a Building Permits. Mr. McCarthy stated that it would be some time before the developer would be constructing the utility screening and parking spaces, and that any significant changes to the design would not alter the work related to the foundation and other pertinent permits required at the beginning of the project. The Board and the consultants had a discussion on which conditions the Board could amend on the resolution in order to issue the Building Permit. Mr. McCarthy stated that the Board could vote to approve amending the language on the adopted resolution and to direct staff to draft a confirmatory resolution. Motion was made to amend the February 17, 2022 resolution of approval modifying condition #5 to require submission of the revised Sanitary Sewer report prior to the issuance of a Building 10 (12/22/22) �Permit, and to modify condition # 3 and #4 requiring that the shared the parking agreements and way-finding signage to be satisfied on or before the March 16, 2023 meeting. Moved: Krakuer Seconded: Carney Lindsay Krakauer - yes Erin Carney - yes Matthew Brennan- yes Benjamin Nielsen - yes Vote 4-0 Vote 4-0 APPROVED David Smith stated he will draft a confirmatory resolution for review at the the January 19, 2022 meeting. 8. Approval of minutes- November 17, 2022 The Board tabled the approval of the November 17, 2022 minutes to the January 19, 2023 meeting. Motion was made to adjourn the meeting at 8:45 PM. Moved: Krakauer Seconded: Carney Vote 4-0 Respectfully submitted, Pamela Kroll Secretary to the Planning Board 11 (12/22/22) � 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-2022 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_2022-12-22_Approved Minutes Subject The topic of the resource Planning Board Minutes & Resolutions-2022 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2022 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Village of Sleepy Hollow All Rights Reserved. Type The nature or genre of the resource Text