Planning Board Meeting

Croton-on-Hudson, NY · · More Croton-on-Hudson, NY meetings · More New York meetings

View original source →

This meeting has a video, but ChampDS only streams it inside its own player, so we can't play it here. Watch it on ChampDS's page for this meeting.

Transcript

Download: Text · SRT
SOURCE TRANSCRIPT

This transcript is downloaded from the source you provided but we haven't reviewed it for accuracy. Treat it as a starting point, not a verbatim record. You can also request an AI-transcription of the audio file with the button to the left.

[0:11] Good evening.
[0:11] I'd like to call the Village of Croton-on-Hudson Planning Board meeting
[0:18] Croton-on-Hudson Planning Board meeting for Tuesday,
[0:19] July 28th, 2026, to order.
[0:21] We have A couple of items on our agenda, first being a new business item.
[0:27] Carmel Riverside LLC, 425 South Riverside Avenue, applications for a special permit,
[0:35] site plan approval, and a steep slope permit for a new 49-unit multifamily
[0:41] permit for a new 49-unit multifamily building.
[0:42] Um, I have a relationship with one of the principals in this, uh, application, uh,
[0:49] who I have ongoing business with, uh, Mr.
[0:53] Leggio, and therefore am recusing myself from the application and will turn over
[0:59] the, uh, chairmanship of the meeting and the review of this application to our
[1:06] Deputy Chairman, uh, Geoff Haynes.
[1:09] So I'll be stepping down now, and I'll come back at the end of the meeting.
[1:16] All right, so we respect Rob's decision.
[1:19] Um, he is concerned about the integrity of the Village Planning Board and wants to
[1:26] make sure there's no perception at all of, of any kind of favoritism.
[1:31] So, um, we respect that.
[1:33] Going to miss him greatly in this application, his expertise. Thank you,
[1:39] application, his expertise. Thank you, John.
[1:39] He's incredible. In fact,
[1:41] he was named by Westchester Municipal Planning Federation the Planner of the
[1:47] Planning Federation the Planner of the Year.
[1:48] So his, his skills are great. We're going to miss him for this application.
[1:54] So we're beginning tonight a long, long process.
[1:58] Okay, the village residents are concerned that we give this a thorough review.
[2:04] We're going to do that.
[2:06] We're going to give this a thorough review, and that of course takes time.
[2:12] There's a number of moving parts to this application, and it's fairly sprawling,
[2:18] and we're going to be tracking each and every one of the loose ends to see that
[2:25] every one of the loose ends to see that they
[2:25] are fully evaluated.
[2:27] The way this will play out over the next few weeks Tonight we're going to have a
[2:33] period where we're— we have many questions for the applicants.
[2:38] Those of you that have read the backup material that's provided on the website
[2:44] material that's provided on the website will
[2:45] see a report from our planning consultant that works for the village, NPV,
[2:51] represented by Bo Brady over here,
[2:53] that outlines 31 areas that Are pointed out as needing some additional
[2:59] out as needing some additional clarification
[3:00] or some additional information.
[3:03] We also have some accompanying documentation on traffic studies and
[3:08] documentation on traffic studies and school
[3:08] enrollment impact and water and sewer impact and community benefits.
[3:14] So there's a lot of supporting documentation that came with this.
[3:19] This is you know a six-inch high.
[3:22] Packet of information that the planning board gets for this.
[3:27] So we're going to be going through that tonight,
[3:30] asking questions about that supporting information, the traffic study,
[3:36] the water and sewer hookups, etc.
[3:39] This meeting tonight, just so everybody's aware,
[3:43] is going to be a discussion with a developer where we have a lot of gaps.
[3:49] In this application that we need clarified before we can go into a full presentation
[3:55] of where everything's going to be laid out on the property,
[4:00] how tall it's going to be, what color it's going to be,
[4:04] where the car chargers are going to be. We're not there yet.
[4:09] Where we are right now is with an application that that has a lot of gaps,
[4:15] and until we have all that information in hand.
[4:19] We're not ready to get a presentation from the developer.
[4:24] With any luck, that information comes to us by the next meeting,
[4:29] and we might be able to entertain a presentation at that point.
[4:34] I know this might be news to you guys, but just want to explain to you that the—
[4:40] what we see is the process going forward, be transparent about that.
[4:46] This application includes a special permit.
[4:49] And a site plan review,
[4:51] 2 actions that the planning board has to take and 2 approvals or denials that the
[4:58] planning board will be responsible for.
[5:01] There'll be public hearings on both of those. Tonight is not a public hearing.
[5:07] Tonight is going to be one-on-one with the applicant.
[5:11] Bill Brady, our NPV planning consultant, will be going through point by point The,
[5:18] uh, 31 areas that we need more information on.
[5:22] And then planning board members will have a bunch of questions as well,
[5:27] perhaps the village engineer, to flesh out the application.
[5:32] So we're not at the point yet where we can get a presentation nor public comment
[5:39] until we have a common set of facts that everybody understands what this project
[5:45] entails. It's premature to start making points about it.
[5:50] So let the process play out.
[5:52] I know some of you came here wishing to speak,
[5:55] but give us some time to do our due diligence.
[5:59] Have some patience, and we will get a better application,
[6:04] a better group of information for you to react to as a result of this.
[6:09] Thank you.
[6:11] Um, so that's kind of where— what I wanted to lay out.
[6:14] Um, this is going to be several meetings.
[6:17] There's, there's going to be a lot of loose ends to track down and follow
[6:22] loose ends to track down and follow throughout
[6:23] the meeting. There may be some zoning board variances that need to be pursued.
[6:28] We'll find out about that tonight.
[6:30] So there's a lot of things that are going to transpire.
[6:34] Obviously, no decisions are going to be made tonight.
[6:37] Nor anytime in the immediate future.
[6:40] So just so everybody's aware,
[6:42] this is something that the planning board is really going to weigh carefully and dig
[6:47] into like we have. And, you know, rest assured, that's,
[6:51] that's where we're going with this.
[6:53] Anybody have anything else they'd like to add to this?
[6:57] No. Do you want to have the attorney tee up some of what our protocols and
[7:03] up some of what our protocols and abilities
[7:04] are? Yeah.
[7:06] So That's a good point, Steve. So what we'll do is we'll turn it over.
[7:11] Introducing our team here: Bill Brady from MPV, Lori Lee Dickinson— Dixon,
[7:16] I'm sorry— the village attorney, and Vincent Salanitro is our village engineer.
[7:21] Karen Stapleton is our representative from the engineering department,
[7:26] and planning board members who you have probably seen in previous meetings.
[7:31] So we're going to be working with,
[7:34] with the developer to To answer these questions and flesh it out.
[7:38] And during the course of this process, the planning board cannot just say, no,
[7:44] we don't like this, and vote no.
[7:46] We've got certain criteria we have to weigh and some criteria we can't weigh.
[7:51] So to kind of flesh some of that out, Lori,
[7:54] if you don't mind giving people an overview of some of the things that the
[8:00] overview of some of the things that the planning
[8:00] board will be able to consider in this application.
[8:04] Sure. And I think the concerns are specific to the special permit.
[8:09] So of course, there's a site development plan that goes along with that.
[8:15] But since this is the first application to be entirely within the purview of the
[8:21] planning board, I thought maybe just to explain the process for a special permit,
[8:27] a special use permit. And the, the criteria is clearly in the code.
[8:33] I did an educational memorandum to you. It's not privileged and confidential.
[8:39] It will be uploaded along with the rest of the documents.
[8:43] It just explains what a special permit is, what it entails,
[8:48] and the decision by the Village Board of Trustees to assign you with the primary
[8:54] responsibility of the special use permit.
[8:57] Thank you.
[8:59] Was because of your unique qualifications and expertise in, um, these,
[9:05] these planning aspects.
[9:07] The Village Board of Trustees has enacted local legislation in your,
[9:13] your village code which defines uses permitted as of right and indicates that
[9:19] permitted as of right and indicates that in,
[9:19] in your use tables, and also defines what uses are permitted by special permit.
[9:26] So they've already predetermined by legislation that the use proposed is
[9:32] legislation that the use proposed is permitted
[9:33] in this zone, at this location, in this zone,
[9:37] pursuant to additional conditions and additional criteria.
[9:42] So, so you're not allowed as a planning board to legislate otherwise.
[9:48] You can find by reviewing the criteria in the code,
[9:52] and it's Article 10 of the Village Code, zoning code.
[9:57] Article 10 in its complete current state is also included in the memo that I
[10:04] provided and will be uploaded.
[10:06] So you can see in its entirety the areas to be considered by the planning board.
[10:13] And the applicant is aware of the responsibilities to meet the minimum
[10:19] responsibilities to meet the minimum requirements.
[10:20] And the project, once it's determined to be the project and presented publicly,
[10:27] will then have an opportunity—
[10:30] you'll have an opportunity to look at the project as proposed and to determine what
[10:37] additional information you may require,
[10:40] what other records or evidence that you need.
[10:44] And again, you'll need to find substantial evidence in the record to either approve
[10:51] it, approve it with conditions, or deny it in its entirety.
[10:56] But that substantial evidence must be present. in your record.
[11:02] Your record is the development starting with this initial conversation and
[11:08] continuing throughout the public hearing process.
[11:12] This project, once it's ready in answering all of the necessary information that may
[11:20] or may not be missing from the, the plans that you have in front of you,
[11:26] will need to go to the county planning board for review and comment before you
[11:33] board for review and comment before you can
[11:33] reach a decision. And also, under the code provision as adopted recently,
[11:39] will need to be transmitted to the Board of Trustees for consideration as to
[11:46] providing you with comments. So that's a 30-day process.
[11:51] The, the project, having appeared this evening on your agenda,
[11:56] can now be placed on a Board of Trustees agenda,
[12:00] and the 30 days will run from the date of that meeting.
[12:05] So you do have time to obtain more information from the developer,
[12:10] a set of revised plans if appropriate, under the planning—
[12:15] your planning consultant's recommendations.
[12:19] And then you'll have time to consider comments you may receive from the county.
[12:26] Again, that's a 30-day requirement and comments you may receive from the Board of
[12:33] Trustees.
[12:34] Mm-hmm.
[12:34] Again, the criteria is clearly set forth in the code, and you are limited.
[12:40] If, if you can determine that those factors and that criteria is met through
[12:47] evidence provided by the developer, then you can approve this,
[12:52] approve it with conditions,
[12:54] or if you feel that it hasn't met the necessary criteria based upon substantial
[13:00] evidence in the record, You can deny it in its entirety. So that's the limitation.
[13:07] You can't legislate it and say this use is not appropriate because the Board of
[13:14] Trustees has already determined this use is permitted by special permit in this
[13:20] zoning district.
[13:22] Okay, thank you. So there's obviously some time ahead of us for things to be
[13:27] investigated. Tonight, as I mentioned,
[13:30] we'll have the collaborative discussion with the developer where Bill Brady is
[13:36] with the developer where Bill Brady is going
[13:36] to walk through the memo that mentions the gaps that we saw in the application so
[13:42] that perhaps next meeting we can come back and have an application that's closer to
[13:49] being complete and we can move on from there.
[13:52] So perhaps, Andrew, if you want to come up to the Microphone, bring your team up,
[13:58] introduce everybody, and, um, we'll— I'll turn it over to Bill to walk through, um,
[14:04] his questions.
[14:05] Thank you, thank you. Uh, good evening, my name is Andrew Cortese.
[14:10] Um, I'm the applicant of Carmel Riverside LLC.
[14:14] I have my managing partner here, Robert Leggio.
[14:17] Um, we're here to present our multi- Family project. A little bit about myself.
[14:23] I've been doing development,
[14:25] real estate development and construction for the last 30 years within Westchester
[14:31] County, from typically, most likely through the real estate,
[14:35] through the river towns from Yonkers all the way up to Peekskill.
[14:40] We, within the 30 years, we acquired some property and we hold it in our portfolio.
[14:46] Thank you.
[14:47] And we manage it as well. So typically we build and manage our own projects.
[14:52] So that's what we're looking to do here. We take pride in our work.
[14:56] And a little bit about this project, we purchased it, myself and my partner,
[15:01] probably 2 and a half years ago. There were some violations on the property.
[15:06] We cleaned those up. There were some tenants there.
[15:09] We kind of— they're still there as well right now.
[15:12] We were We were transparent with our goals to redevelop the property, um,
[15:17] so they were well aware that we are looking to do that.
[15:22] Um, and—
[15:24] oh, sorry, sorry.
[15:26] There you go. Thank you.
[15:30] So yeah, we're well— you know, the,
[15:32] the tenants are well aware that we're looking to redevelop the property.
[15:36] We've been transparent with them,
[15:38] and we look forward to working with your board board, uh,
[15:41] in the future for this development here.
[15:45] Thank you. Um, just a few words. Good evening, Deputy Chair, board members,
[15:50] evening, Deputy Chair, board members, staff.
[15:50] My name is Jacob Amir from Zarin and Steinmetz.
[15:53] Our firm is the attorney on the project, and, um, I,
[15:57] I just want to kind of supplement very briefly—
[16:00] I'm not going to take up too much time— what you opened with, and,
[16:05] and that this is a Serious, long— we hope not too long, but, but a serious process.
[16:10] And, and I'm, I'm happy that the members of the community are here behind us,
[16:15] this table, to hear this project from the, from the outset,
[16:20] because I think it's important from the beginning to get a good perspective of
[16:25] beginning to get a good perspective of what
[16:25] the project is. It's much easier to go through it that way.
[16:29] And, and we look forward to hearing Mr.
[16:32] Brady's And your village consultant's comments.
[16:35] A few seconds just overall so everybody hears what, what this is.
[16:39] So the project proposes the development of a building with 49 units,
[16:44] a combination of 1 and 2-bedroom units,
[16:47] I believe 79 parking spaces including 5 handicapped spaces, 5 affordable units,
[16:52] e-bike, bike storage, various amenities and improvements.
[16:56] Your planning consultant has identified this as a Type 2 action under SEQR.
[17:01] There are variances that are required,
[17:04] so we will be asking your board to refer to the zoning board so that we can proceed
[17:09] with that. But again,
[17:11] what's important to especially note for the people behind Andrew and me is that it
[17:16] doesn't obviously end with the zoning board.
[17:19] That is just one small, relatively Speaking component of this.
[17:24] It will go back to this, to this board for, for site plan and special use permit,
[17:29] as you had mentioned before.
[17:31] I want to just sort of introduce very quickly,
[17:34] and then we're going to turn it over to the consulting team because there's a lot
[17:40] the consulting team because there's a lot of
[17:40] info to get through, who's here.
[17:42] And the reason why I want to introduce is because you said there are components
[17:47] here. There's stormwater and lighting and landscaping. Yes.
[17:51] And traffic flow and school impact.
[17:54] So I think all of that needs to be addressed at the outset,
[17:58] not just because we want to show off that we have a project that's really great for
[18:03] the village, but that the team has gone through great efforts to try to get us
[18:09] through great efforts to try to get us here.
[18:09] There's a lot to put in, but that's— it's important to lay out.
[18:13] Lou Demasi of Demasi Architects is going to go through architectural plans to the
[18:19] extent We're able— Jim Annichiarico from Cronin Engineering and Michael
[18:24] Mastrogiacomo from Mastrogiacomo Engineering are going to handle
[18:28] Engineering are going to handle engineering aspects
[18:29] of the project. Robert Sherwood is going to talk to you about some landscaping,
[18:35] and Paul Vernon and Tars Schroff of Kimley Horn are going to talk to you about some
[18:40] fiscal issues, school impact or non-impact, and traffic memo.
[18:45] So Hopefully we get a wide scope on this meeting, and then we intend to
[18:49] meeting, and then we intend to incorporate,
[18:50] um, your planning consultant's comments into a further submission.
[18:55] So as we go through this process,
[18:57] the issues and the open points become less and less and less and less till we get to
[19:03] a place where your board is comfortable with the site plan and special use permit.
[19:08] Okay, that's great. Thank you.
[19:10] Just to add one more piece of detail, To explain some of the process,
[19:14] we do anticipate that we will use an issues actions tracking sheet to keep
[19:19] issues actions tracking sheet to keep track of
[19:20] all the loose ends that we have in this project,
[19:23] things that we may be asking you to come back with.
[19:26] And it would just be a central document, you know,
[19:29] a single source of truth that we would share with you and— And the public.
[19:33] And the public, yeah. It's going to be part of the public meeting backup.
[19:38] And it would show what the loose ends are, who's responsible,
[19:42] and the promised delivery date of those things.
[19:45] It's just common, you know, project management tracking type mechanism.
[19:49] So that'll be incorporated into, into this process as well.
[19:53] So I imagine the points that Bill's bringing up tonight will fall into that
[19:58] bringing up tonight will fall into that sheet.
[19:58] Some additional ones that the group here comes up with tonight would fall into that
[20:03] sheet.
[20:03] That'll be great. It keeps us on our, on our toes. With the checklist.
[20:07] So that's, that's, that's great. Sure.
[20:10] Do you want to take— want Lou to step in?
[20:12] All right. So with that, I think—
[20:15] Again, Mr., Mr. Acting Chair, just so we're clear,
[20:19] the board isn't necessarily interested in taking a full-blown presentation
[20:26] tonight. I think that they're interested clearly in The elements that the
[20:32] planning consultant has, has indicated.
[20:36] So maybe instead of taking the experts' presentations on the project,
[20:42] you can start by just having that review in public of the items that the
[20:49] planning consultants have determined may be missing from this.
[20:54] And also the planning board seeking clarifications on some of the questions
[21:01] clarifications on some of the questions and
[21:02] comments Yeah, exactly.
[21:04] I mean, that's, that's the intention for tonight.
[21:07] It would not be a full-blown presentation.
[21:10] Glad you guys have your subject matter experts on hand.
[21:13] They may be able to help fill in some gaps that Bill raises.
[21:17] So we could use them for, for that part of it.
[21:20] So with that, Bill, if you want to run down the list.
[21:24] Thank you very much, Chairman.
[21:25] Again, as you noted, our memo was in the materials that are online,
[21:29] and if you want to review those, you'll kind of can play along.
[21:33] Um, we put together this memo to kind of also give the board and the public
[21:38] background on what can appear complicated.
[21:40] There's a lot of different pieces to the things that need—
[21:44] this board's going to be approving. So get nice and closer.
[21:47] Thank you.
[21:49] And reviewing. And it's a good opportunity for the applicant to understand kind of
[21:54] going and all be on the same page as we've discussed on the various pieces.
[21:59] And again, this is our initial review of— again,
[22:02] we'll get into some of the general and procedural comments that we've pulled
[22:07] together. As has already been said,
[22:09] the board is going to be looking at this for a site plan approval by the planning
[22:14] board, and a public hearing will be conducted by the planning board for site
[22:19] conducted by the planning board for site plan
[22:19] approval. The planning board will also be reviewing this,
[22:23] as the attorney also mentioned, for special permit approval.
[22:27] It requires a special permit by— from the planning board,
[22:30] and a public hearing will also be conducted by the planning board for the
[22:35] conducted by the planning board for the special
[22:36] permit. As already mentioned too,
[22:38] this application is categorized as qualifying exemption under the New York
[22:42] qualifying exemption under the New York State
[22:43] Environmental Conservation Law.
[22:45] No further SEQR action is required for this application.
[22:48] Thank you.
[22:49] That doesn't mean that this board will not be looking at the many,
[22:53] many environmental impacts of this project, though.
[22:57] As already mentioned, this project will be—
[23:00] the application referred to Westchester County Department of Planning,
[23:04] Westchester County, due to its— due to the special use permit.
[23:08] There are also additional local land use permits.
[23:12] We list them in here, everything from A deep slope permit, a tree removal permit,
[23:17] and an excavation and filling permit.
[23:19] We've requested that the application—
[23:22] that the applicants submit those application materials to the village as we
[23:27] application materials to the village as we go
[23:27] further along. I think it's also mentioned that this application not only is in the
[23:33] C-2 commercial district— C-2 general commercial district— it's also located in
[23:38] commercial district— it's also located in the—
[23:38] Sorry, the Harmon South Riverside Gateway Overlay Zoning District.
[23:42] So it's got, it's got its underlying zoning, the C-2, and also the, uh,
[23:47] HSRG Overlay Zoning District.
[23:49] So we'll get into some of those details on those 2 districts.
[23:53] Um, we note that the, um,
[23:55] we've outlined what we believe are potential zoning variances that the
[24:00] potential zoning variances that the application
[24:00] would be would require based on the current submission,
[24:04] and we request some additional information as we go through some of these specific
[24:09] variances that would, again, as mentioned,
[24:12] would have to go through the Zoning Board of Appeals.
[24:16] We note that the— per the zoning code,
[24:18] the maximum floor area ratio shall be 0.8 And the applicant needs to provide an
[24:24] exact calculation so that we all understand what floor area ratio is
[24:28] understand what floor area ratio is proposed for
[24:29] this project. The next one is regarding the height of the project.
[24:33] The maximum height is 35 feet.
[24:35] In addition, the— for buildings located in their entirety more than 5 feet from the
[24:41] street line, the height in feet and in stories shall be established by the
[24:46] stories shall be established by the village
[24:46] engineer in such a way that no building shall be prevented from attaining at least
[24:52] at one point the maximum height permitted in the district in which such building is
[24:57] proposed to be erected,
[24:59] such height to be measured above the elevation of the pre-construction grade
[25:04] abutting such building at this point.
[25:06] We noted that in the site plan drawings, we need to see—
[25:10] they need to provide that the calculations regarding the height of the building
[25:15] relation to the site is And those will be provided to the village engineer for his
[25:21] review. Also, another variance is that we note that the front yard setback does not
[25:26] comply with for the C2 zoning district and for lots within 25 feet of a residential
[25:32] district boundary. So a variance will be required related to that setback,
[25:37] and the front yard setback does not comply with the HSRG overlay zoning district.
[25:42] A variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals will be required.
[25:46] So regarding parking, um, in the code specifically says,
[25:50] notwithstanding any other provisions of the code,
[25:53] for mixed-use and multi-family residential buildings in that HSRG gateway overlay
[25:59] area, there shall be provided at least the following amount of parking for each
[26:04] residential dwelling unit:
[26:06] 1 parking space plus 1 additional parking space for each bedroom in the unit in
[26:11] excess of 1 bedroom.
[26:12] And we say, for example, studio apartment, 1 space; 1-bedroom apartment, 1 space;
[26:18] 2-bedroom apartment, 2 spaces.
[26:20] So the proposed project will, will meet the minimum parking requirements,
[26:24] but the zoning table has the wrong calculation for the required parking.
[26:29] Again, the applicant will give the correct information and provide that to the
[26:34] board. So then we get into the area and bulk Regulations relating to the maximum
[26:40] building square footage.
[26:41] The code says, with the exception of lots within the C-2 zoning district and the
[26:47] Municipal Place gateway area fronting on Municipal Place,
[26:51] the maximum permissible square footage for any single building should not exceed
[26:56] 20,000 square feet. It appears that the building will be larger than 20,000 square
[27:01] feet, so a variance from the ZBA will be required.
[27:05] And we are asking that the applicant confirm the building's total square
[27:09] confirm the building's total square footage.
[27:10] So now we're going to get into some of the design regulations,
[27:14] and this has to do with off-street parking placement and design.
[27:18] The code states that all the parking shall be located along the side and in the rear
[27:24] of buildings unless the applicant demonstrates to the planning board that
[27:29] demonstrates to the planning board that site or
[27:29] business constraints prevent conformance with this requirement.
[27:34] The proposed project does not meet this requirement.
[27:37] And we are requesting that the applicant provide more information whether or not
[27:42] they're going to be seeking a waiver from the planning board for that requirement.
[27:48] Another requirement is related to curb cuts and sidewalks.
[27:52] Quote, properties within the gateway area shall be permitted a maximum of one
[27:57] vehicular curb cut per lot per street frontage unless the property owner can
[28:02] demonstrate the planning board that this standard cannot be achieved or is not
[28:07] appropriate to the specific site.
[28:09] And the project does not meet this requirement,
[28:12] and we're asking the applicant to seek a waiver from the Planning Board related to
[28:18] that curb cut and sidewalk requirement.
[28:20] Another requirement related to open space, quote,
[28:24] to enhance the appearance of the gateway areas and contribute to Croton's open
[28:29] areas and contribute to Croton's open space
[28:29] character, a minimum, a minimum of 15% of the lot shall be set aside as open space.
[28:35] Applicants will be required to submit a landscape plan as part of the site plan
[28:40] application.
[28:41] Thank you.
[28:42] The applicant has submitted a landscape plan,
[28:45] but additional information is needed to determine if the project complies with
[28:50] determine if the project complies with this
[28:50] section. If any of the components do not comply,
[28:53] the applicant will need to either seek a variance from the ZBA or a waiver from the
[28:58] planning board. So then, related to signage,
[29:00] all signs in the Gateway District must conform to the village's signage
[29:05] conform to the village's signage regulations.
[29:05] In addition, no sign in the Gateway District shall exceed 48 square feet in
[29:10] District shall exceed 48 square feet in area.
[29:10] And the application— the applicant will be—
[29:13] would—
[29:14] is required to provide more information if they're going to be having any signs at
[29:19] the proposed site, and again, the sizes of those signs.
[29:23] Regarding lighting, a lighting and photometric plan is required at the time
[29:27] photometric plan is required at the time of site
[29:28] plan application. That has not been submitted, and the application—
[29:32] the applicant should provide this to confirm that the lighting plans will meet
[29:37] confirm that the lighting plans will meet the
[29:37] requirements of the lighting section of the code. So more about parking.
[29:41] Regarding the size of the parking spaces,
[29:44] 300 square feet shall be considered one parking space,
[29:47] and it's to provide room for standing area and aisles for maneuvering.
[29:52] The applicant should provide parking dimensions on the site plan to confirm the
[29:56] proposed project meets the zoning regulations for that requirement.
[30:01] Related to access, Unobstructed access to and from a street shall be provided.
[30:05] Such access shall consist of at least one 10-foot lane for parking areas with less
[30:10] than 20 spaces and at least two 10-foot lanes for parking areas with 20 or more
[30:15] spaces. So the applicant is requested to provide the parking aisle and access
[30:20] dimensions on the site plan to confirm that the project meets those zoning
[30:25] requirements. We get into another list of Regulations, more regulations.
[30:29] The project will need to meet— we discussed this before—
[30:32] the project will need to meet the regulations related to the village's
[30:37] regulations related to the village's affordable
[30:37] housing requirements.
[30:39] This project, the planning board will need to make a determination regarding the
[30:44] reservation of parkland.
[30:45] So the planning board will determine whether a proper case exists for requiring
[30:50] whether a proper case exists for requiring such
[30:50] land reservation in accordance with the code.
[30:53] Related to the village's local waterfront revitalization consistency,
[30:57] the board will need to make it its consistency determine—
[31:01] determination with the village's LWRP as part of its final site plan approval,
[31:06] and the applicant has provided a coastal consistency form.
[31:09] The project will need to conform to the village's requirements for stormwater
[31:14] pollution prevention.
[31:15] They'll need to provide a plan for that,
[31:18] but because the site is greater than 1 acre,
[31:20] a stormwater pollution plan will be required.
[31:23] Thank you.
[31:24] The site— excuse me—
[31:26] falls within the Indian Brook Croton Gorge overlay and must meet the performance
[31:31] criteria of those— of that part of the code.
[31:34] The applicant should provide a narrative on how the project will meet the criteria
[31:39] of that overlay. So we also—
[31:41] that's just the background on all the different approvals and requirements of
[31:46] different approvals and requirements of this
[31:46] project. We then took a look at the site plan and we had the following comments
[31:51] regarding the landscaping plan.
[31:53] We recommended that the applicant provide an irrigation plan for all the new
[31:58] plantings, plantings,
[32:00] and can please confirm that the rear plantings will not be in constant shade,
[32:05] and if so, select another species,
[32:07] and also provide information on how the rear area of the project will be
[32:12] rear area of the project will be maintained.
[32:13] We had a comment on the retaining walls.
[32:15] We note that 3 tiers of retaining walls are proposed for with the site plan.
[32:20] Additional details on the construction of the walls should be provided.
[32:25] We're requesting whether or not geotechnical studies have been conducted
[32:30] geotechnical studies have been conducted on the
[32:30] stability of the slopes.
[32:32] The planning board may want to consider having a structural engineer review those
[32:37] structural plans related to water and sewer and the capacity of those utilities
[32:42] sewer and the capacity of those utilities in
[32:42] the area. So in accordance to the— with the code,
[32:46] the location of all proposed water lines, valves,
[32:49] and hydrants And of all sewer lines with profiles should be provided indicating
[32:54] connections with existing lines or alternative means of water supply or
[32:59] alternative means of water supply or sewage
[32:59] disposal and treatment.
[33:01] Again, related to stormwater, related—
[33:03] the code requires that a stormwater pollution prevention plan—
[33:07] we discussed this already— shall be required for any site development plan,
[33:12] and that it will need to be submitted. Still needs to be submitted.
[33:16] Tree removal— related to tree removal,
[33:19] the code requires that a tree removal plan be provided.
[33:23] Related to blasting or rock removal,
[33:25] we are requesting information on whether blasting or rock removal will be happening
[33:30] at the site, and if so, what mechanism is proposed to remove the rock.
[33:35] Related to emergency access,
[33:37] we noted that one of the plans do include include a fire truck access plan,
[33:42] but it still needs to show the ability for a fire truck to access the garage or show
[33:47] adequate maneuvering space.
[33:49] And we were requesting that they discuss whether or not the project meets the New
[33:54] York State Building Code fire access requirements,
[33:58] and a turning diagram on the proposed site should be provided.
[34:02] We also recommend that the planning board refer this application to the village fire
[34:07] department for their review and Related to visual impacts and elevations,
[34:12] architectural elevations have been provided,
[34:15] but no context montage is included as required by code.
[34:19] A context montage, a streetscape montage that shows adjacent buildings within 200
[34:24] feet of the proposed building, is required,
[34:27] and the applicant should provide photo simulations of the project in the context
[34:32] simulations of the project in the context of
[34:32] the surrounding properties.
[34:34] In addition, we ask that they provide rear elevations of the proposed building and
[34:39] its retaining walls.
[34:41] Regarding lighting, a lighting diagram is required that shows the areas of
[34:45] illumination. The code requires that the proposed location, direction, power,
[34:51] and time— the timing of the proposed outdoor lighting is provided by means of
[34:56] outdoor lighting is provided by means of data
[34:56] details and an illumination contour plan.
[34:59] Which shows that lighting equal to or greater than 1/2 footcandle will not splay
[35:04] greater than 1/2 footcandle will not splay off
[35:04] the site as required. We get into— we discussed trash collection.
[35:08] So we note that the trash storage and removal appear to be located at the garage
[35:14] door or refuge area shown on the plans,
[35:16] but the garbage truck can only back into the site,
[35:19] blocking the driveway and the sidewalk.
[35:22] Additionally, in the preliminary set of The first floor plan,
[35:26] a trash room is shown adjacent to the refuge area without an internal
[35:30] refuge area without an internal connection.
[35:31] So we're asking that the applicant clarify the proposed trash collection process.
[35:37] Also, the garbage truck turning diagram shows that the truck must back into the
[35:42] shows that the truck must back into the site
[35:42] from South Riverside Avenue, blocking the driveway and the proposed sidewalk.
[35:47] And we're requesting that they discuss how often the trash will be picked up.
[35:52] And also, all dumpsters and refuge storage areas shall be fully screened from the
[35:57] street and adjacent properties as per the code.
[36:01] We discussed the proposed walkway that was shown on the, on the drawings.
[36:05] The applicant will discuss a little bit more of that and whether or not there will
[36:11] be an entrance to the building through the walkway on site.
[36:15] Delivery and loading area, we are asking for more information on delivery vehicles,
[36:20] uh, where, where they will be, what area that will be located, uh,
[36:24] whether or not there's a loading or delivery vehicle zone.
[36:28] And if so, we're requesting that they mark that on the site plan.
[36:32] Um, the code also requires a construction, a construction management plan.
[36:37] And in those, in that management plan,
[36:40] the applicant will be also providing information on phasing and staging during
[36:45] construction, duration of construction Truck traffic during construction,
[36:50] construction noise, and construction dust.
[36:53] So in that construction management plan, they're required to provide that.
[36:57] So it's a long list, and again, we're at the beginning,
[37:01] but they have a lot to get back to us. Thank you very much, Chairman.
[37:06] Thanks, Bill. It's really complete. I really appreciate all your hard work on
[37:10] really appreciate all your hard work on that.
[37:11] So I'm assuming you guys will come back with something in the next meeting,
[37:15] something in writing, give you time to digest this.
[37:18] Meanwhile, while we're here together, do you have any initial questions, feedback,
[37:23] comments on what you heard so far?
[37:26] So, no, we don't have any comments per se.
[37:29] We want to second that we appreciate the thorough memo.
[37:33] This is a great roadmap for us, so it's very, very helpful.
[37:38] I don't know if— look, we have our team here.
[37:41] It may be helpful for them to just give a little bit of their thoughts on the
[37:47] project, at least aspects of the project.
[37:50] We don't want to be long-winded, but at least since everyone's here,
[37:56] have them come up and just give some sort of facets of it to put into context what
[38:02] we just heard from Mr. Brady.
[38:04] Yeah, no, I mean, we don't have a complete application at this point,
[38:09] and I think it might be premature to Bring people up and start talking about the
[38:13] project. Unfortunately, you assembled your team for this, and you know,
[38:18] sorry that they're here and not able to speak.
[38:20] But really want to keep the focus on these outstanding issues.
[38:24] Get a complete application together.
[38:26] I think that'll facilitate the project more than anything else.
[38:30] We come back; we all got a common set of facts to deal with.
[38:33] We all know what needs to be done.
[38:35] So that's kind of how I was hoping we would we would proceed tonight.
[38:40] And also because there are so many questions on here,
[38:44] adding or subtracting from the list of variances, that's, you know,
[38:50] a very essential question that should be answered.
[38:54] Some of the missing items and details and information may impact your ability to
[39:00] refer this at some point because you're not really sure what variances they're
[39:07] seeking and what needs to be sought and whether, you know,
[39:11] they're aware of the extent that the project didn't meet the code.
[39:17] And if, you know, they have members of their team that can speak to one or more
[39:23] their team that can speak to one or more of
[39:23] the comments, the architectural comments or the site plan comments or the— you
[39:29] or the site plan comments or the— you know,
[39:30] it's, it's important for you to— And the public.
[39:34] To have a project that is as complete as possible and ready for public comment,
[39:40] ready for referrals, ready for, you know,
[39:43] the necessary distributions under the general municipal law, et cetera. So I
[39:49] general municipal law, et cetera. So I don't—
[39:50] Thanks.
[39:50] I don't know if there's any clarification that your team members
[39:56] might have available.
[39:57] I, you know, I realize that, yeah, it's very short notice, but, um,
[40:03] you can see from 7 pages it's, it's pretty thorough.
[40:08] So let me just, let me just comment.
[40:10] So there are— we would like, if it's possible, to,
[40:13] to get the referral to the zoning board.
[40:15] And the reason why I'm going back to that is there are,
[40:19] there are a couple of variances that we're clearly going to need that are not going
[40:24] change as we go through this, you know, setback, for instance.
[40:27] I think, I think Robert Sherwood, if he can,
[40:30] can probably talk about the open space because that I know is one item that may
[40:35] because that I know is one item that may be
[40:35] up in the air as to whether we need a variance, whether we're asking for a
[40:39] variance, whether we're asking for a waiver.
[40:40] So if it's possible, if, you know, if we could just touch on that, on that one,
[40:45] because if that is somewhat satisfying to you this evening.
[40:48] I'm hopeful that we can get the referral to the zoning board.
[40:52] And look, just to be open, it's on the applicant to get a full variance request,
[40:57] right? If we go to the zoning board with a request for 2 or 3 variances and we
[41:01] needed 4, let's say it's hypothetical, we're just wasting our own— I mean,
[41:06] wasting your time, but we're wasting our own time.
[41:09] We're going to go through this process.
[41:11] So the onus is on us to make as complete a variance request as possible.
[41:15] Otherwise, we're going to have to go back there, which is why I, I would—
[41:20] I'm hopeful we can get that process started now.
[41:23] But if, if it's okay, if we can speak to the open space item.
[41:26] Yeah, I mean, if, if we stick our comments strictly to the
[41:30] questions that were raised, uh, your responses, um,
[41:34] we can entertain that.
[41:35] Okay.
[41:42] Okay, but Jeff, just point of reference, um,
[41:47] my own opinion is that I don't— is this on?
[41:52] Yeah.
[41:53] I don't want to be sending stuff, just as, um, the attorney just said,
[41:57] I don't want to be sending stuff to the zoning board piecemeal.
[42:00] And I don't want to—
[42:01] I don't want to submit anything to the zoning board until the application's
[42:05] zoning board until the application's complete
[42:06] to our Yeah, that's all.
[42:08] Yeah, we just, we just conversed. I think that, that makes sense.
[42:11] We— let's supplement what we have. And at the next meeting, okay.
[42:15] I think that's the most efficient way to handle it.
[42:19] If per chance the project will be amended or in some way changed as a result of the
[42:26] need for this significant number of variances or whether other variances are
[42:33] necessary. It would be important to get the actual project as proposed.
[42:39] And certainly, the inability to get variances would foreclose the opportunity
[42:46] variances would foreclose the opportunity to
[42:46] come back here to proceed.
[42:48] So you do want to make sure that there's coordination and that the project is ready
[42:55] for a public presentation, as you know, is routinely intended for the first meeting.
[43:02] But in speaking with the acting chair and the board members earlier this evening,
[43:09] in light of the significance and this list, both site plan and special permit,
[43:16] we thought it best to provide you the opportunity to supplement to the point
[43:23] opportunity to supplement to the point where
[43:23] you can make that presentation and the public can be satisfied that this is what
[43:30] you're proposing, right?
[43:32] Yeah. So just a couple of housekeeping items then, since, since we'll go that
[43:38] items then, since, since we'll go that way.
[43:38] One is, are the notices to the related agencies and county,
[43:42] is that going to be held in abeyance till the next meeting? Or is that the time?
[43:48] Is that going out now?
[43:49] So there's a notice that goes to Westchester County Planning Board.
[43:53] But I don't think that goes to them until we declare, uh, declare a public hearing.
[43:58] So I think that, that wouldn't start— we—
[44:01] that we wouldn't send it to the West Chester Department of Planning until we
[44:05] Chester Department of Planning until we declare
[44:06] when the public hearing is going to be on this matter.
[44:09] Okay.
[44:10] Um, I, I'm not aware of what the procedure process is, so it does— it,
[44:16] it really is incumbent for this to be ready for public Before it's
[44:21] distributed. I know that the code also requires the transmittal,
[44:27] and the Board of Trustees, once they add it to their agenda—
[44:32] and they have an agenda upcoming, Len?
[44:35] August 19th.
[44:36] August 19th. Thank you. What day is it? August 19th.
[44:40] It will appear on their agenda and give them the opportunity,
[44:44] and the 30 days will run from the date that it appears on their agenda as well.
[44:50] So I guess I'm, you know, I've known you a long time, Jacob. I'm just—
[44:55] Yep.
[44:55] I want to encourage— and Mr.
[44:58] Cortese, I've advised on other projects at other communities that you were
[45:04] developing. I just want to make sure that this is the project.
[45:09] And with so many things missing and being suggested to be added.
[45:14] I think it would be helpful for the public to know what the project is.
[45:20] So that makes sense.
[45:21] So just, just in, in terms of chronology based upon that,
[45:25] so if we're coming back to this board's next meeting, obviously assuming we,
[45:30] we have all our ducks in order, um, I know the, the memo from the, uh,
[45:34] planning consultant was— came out, I think, on the 24th.
[45:38] So we had to go through that right after that.
[45:41] I don't know if there's a timing on—
[45:43] assuming we get everything that we're going to get, I mean,
[45:47] it's on us to do that as quickly as possible.
[45:50] Is there a timing on when the consultant can return a memo?
[45:54] And also, will the next meeting be a public meeting?
[45:57] Will it be open to the public, a public hearing?
[46:00] Likely not a public hearing, but Vince,
[46:02] if you want to talk about the submission of documents and the deadline to submit
[46:06] documents before the next meeting.
[46:09] It's usually 15 days before the meeting.
[46:11] We have 2 meetings per month.
[46:13] We have a schedule, we can provide that to you. Okay. Like that.
[46:17] Okay.
[46:18] So we would envision—
[46:19] The code says a public presentation is usually the first,
[46:23] which isn't a public hearing.
[46:25] But generally, the, the chair has established public comments are available.
[46:31] But We were reluctant to go with a presentation this evening because the
[46:37] presentation this evening because the comments
[46:37] would be based upon sort of incomplete data.
[46:41] And we want to make sure that public is— we're being transparent.
[46:46] You're being transparent and that the public knows the project that you're
[46:51] proposing. And there wasn't really enough information for that to happen.
[46:57] But I don't think you're necessarily—
[47:00] No, I'm not.
[47:00] and I'm not speaking for you, ready to call for a public hearing.
[47:03] Nope.
[47:04] You want to—
[47:05] Yeah. So the document deadline, according to what Vincent said, 15 days.
[47:10] I believe that would be Friday of this week in order to get it submitted for our
[47:17] next regularly scheduled meeting. That's aggressive, understand.
[47:22] But, you know, if we can have some, some solid responses at that point,
[47:28] And can put this on the agenda.
[47:30] Potentially we can have the presentation, presentation at that point,
[47:36] and then potentially the public hearing thereafter. Okay, great.
[47:41] All right, I think that's it.
[47:43] That's it.
[47:44] Thank you, guys.
[47:45] All right, so anything else that you guys want to add based on what you heard here
[47:48] so far?
[47:49] Last call for the consultants. Any questions?
[47:52] There's a whole group behind me that are itching to speak.
[47:55] There are a lot of questions in here, but we understand the timing is—
[47:59] I have one very basic question. Is the plan for these to be for sale or for rent?
[48:06] We're still undecided on that, but—
[48:09] Okay, fair enough.
[48:11] Probably for rent, but we'll—
[48:13] A little louder, please.
[48:14] Probably for rent, but we're still not 100% certain.
[48:16] Thank you.
[48:17] Okay.
[48:18] So I do have several questions having gone through the documentation,
[48:23] the supporting documentation for water supply and sewer and parking, etc.,
[48:30] supply and sewer and parking, etc., traffic,
[48:30] etc., if you'll bear with me.
[48:33] So referring to the supporting documentation about the preliminary water
[48:39] documentation about the preliminary water engineering
[48:40] report, page 3.0, On that document, on the very bottom of the page.
[48:46] Based on the testing of the existing 6-inch water main on South Riverside,
[48:52] can supply domestic needs to the projects.
[48:55] In other words, we got a 6-inch water main on South Riverside.
[49:01] Mm-hmm.
[49:02] However, fire flow, fire flow at the 6-inch water main provides less than
[49:07] specification required for fire protection. Water flow demand.
[49:12] So then I mentioned we got 2— we got a couple options.
[49:16] One is to build an on-site water storage and pump system.
[49:21] And the other is if we're able to bring down a water connection from Wayne Street
[49:27] that would supply— potentially supply this.
[49:31] That—
[49:32] Vince, you might be able to speak to the status of that,
[49:35] but I think that easement is—
[49:37] Yes.
[49:38] been under discussion for quite a while.
[49:41] And I think we may continue to be under discussion for a while.
[49:46] We may want to consider the water storage and pump system on site to be a pretty
[49:52] good likelihood that how we might have to support this.
[49:56] Yes, currently our design does have the pump and tank system.
[50:01] Yeah. Anything you want to add to that, Vince?
[50:05] No, still in the works, that easement language for Waterman.
[50:09] So that's— and any other members,
[50:13] you guys have any questions,
[50:16] feel free to jump in while I'm doing this.
[50:21] I had one— I'm sorry, one quick question for Bill, actually,
[50:25] going back to your memo on item 7 under design design regulations.
[50:30] Um, why wouldn't that trigger an additional zoning variance as opposed to a
[50:36] waiver from the planning board?
[50:38] If these are in the— um,
[50:41] it depends on if it's in the code for, um,
[50:45] or if it's a special permit requirement, right?
[50:50] Number 7, this is regarding the, the sizes, right?
[50:56] Off-street parking placement design, that one under design regulations.
[51:00] Oh, under design. I'm sorry, I thought you said 7, right? Under design.
[51:04] So number 8 then, right?
[51:06] I'm asking about number 7, Bill.
[51:09] On page 3.
[51:10] On page 3.
[51:11] 3 of 7. Design regulations has a 7 right there.
[51:17] All right. Oh, got it.
[51:20] Oh my goodness.
[51:21] Sorry about that.
[51:21] I don't know why that happened. So, okay, so, uh, number 7.
[51:25] Um, so the proposed spot does not meet this requirement,
[51:28] is seeking a waiver from the planning board per— so I'm assuming that this is,
[51:32] board per— so I'm assuming that this is, uh,
[51:32] when we talk about waivers from the planning board,
[51:35] that is a special permit requirement.
[51:37] Um, but again, we can get clarification on that. So it's a good question, Steve.
[51:42] I, again, I can look it up in the code and we'd talk with the applicant on on
[51:46] seeking a waiver from that parking off-street parking requirement.
[51:50] So yeah, if I may, I can chime in also to that.
[51:54] You'll notice in the code provisions, and again,
[51:58] I put Article 10 in its entirety in the memo that we'll be uploading for special
[52:06] permits, you're permitted to waive from that list of criteria.
[52:11] But Anything that needs a variance from an actual dimensional requirement in the
[52:18] code, in the zoning code itself, would need to go to the Zoning Board of Appeals.
[52:25] So you can waive certain items in, in the special permit criteria,
[52:31] but you cannot waive requirements that are actually part of the zoning code.
[52:38] code itself. So a dimensional requirement, minimum number requirement,
[52:44] those need to go to the Zoning Board of Appeals.
[52:48] So those are not available to be waived, only available as a variance process.
[52:55] So it is under our purview and not the zoning board?
[53:01] Is that correct? Okay, a waiver is Specifically yours.
[53:06] Okay. Thank you.
[53:08] It's more of a, you know, every site's different.
[53:11] You know, where is this going to be located?
[53:14] The code, the special permit requirements talk about having them in the side and the
[53:19] rear.
[53:20] But because the site is different,
[53:21] then just don't want to send the applicant to the wrong board for an approval.
[53:24] Right?
[53:25] Thank you.
[53:26] That's a waiver.
[53:27] One last question. Go ahead, John. Is the building going to be steel or wood?
[53:33] It's going to be steel on the first floor
[53:37] deck, concrete floor,
[53:39] and then wood frame above.
[53:41] Okay, so I'm going to move on to the school analysis and
[53:48] schools impact report.
[53:50] So page 2 has an inconsistency in the table.
[53:55] When we talk about the, uh, low point of enrollment at, uh,
[54:02] Groton-Harmon schools being 2021— 2020-2021— of 1,394,
[54:09] table below it has a different number for that year.
[54:15] So there's just an inconsistency.
[54:18] I'm not sure which number is correct there.
[54:23] Typo.
[54:28] Yeah. A lot of work went into this report describing the cost to educate a student
[54:34] and how many students are expected and how much revenue would be generated, um,
[54:41] how much, how much tax revenue would be generated to the school district and
[54:46] generated to the school district and whether
[54:47] that would essentially cover the cost of adding new students.
[54:52] So That's, you know, really valuable information.
[54:55] It's based on what we expect will be the assessed value of the apartment complex,
[55:02] and it would be nice to get a more accurate number of these potential
[55:07] accurate number of these potential assessed
[55:08] values so we can determine how accurate or not these figures might be.
[55:13] In other words, whether the additional students will be covered by the additional
[55:19] tax revenue, uh, generated to the school district.
[55:23] I don't know how we can— if we can get any sort of, uh,
[55:27] preliminary estimate on what the assessed value might be.
[55:32] Um, if we don't have an assessor—
[55:38] yeah, the town handles that. So you're—
[55:42] Bill, how have you guys handled that in other applications?
[55:45] you've been involved with?
[55:46] Yeah, I guess we could work with the town again.
[55:49] Again, work— it's often we have them— if the town does the assessment assessments,
[55:54] right? It's, uh, trying to get a preliminary number from them.
[55:57] So that would be helpful. Yeah, maybe you guys could pursue that. Yeah, thank you.
[56:02] Yeah, I mean, based on the preliminary estimate,
[56:04] the tax revenue that we generated for the school district would more than cover the
[56:09] additional students who will be coming into the District,
[56:12] or expected number of students. Yep, which is a good thing.
[56:15] Um, good point, Jeff.
[56:17] So wherever we can show math in, in these tables is, is really helpful.
[56:24] So that's the school report. Uh, let's move on to the traffic study.
[56:31] Um, this is going to be a— just so you know,
[56:35] it's going to be a point of focus for us. There's It's a busy part of our town.
[56:43] What's unaddressed in this traffic study is Blaze, the Blaze,
[56:49] the Historic Hudson Valley's event that takes place for about 45 days in the fall.
[56:57] And it runs for 10 weeks.
[57:00] Yeah, if you've been down there, it is It is a crowded scene.
[57:05] We'd need some sort of at least acknowledgement that that's there and is
[57:11] acknowledgement that that's there and is an issue,
[57:12] and then a sense about how it you can potentially mitigate it.
[57:17] You're going to have residents that are trying to get home after a workday and
[57:23] trying to get home after a workday and stuck
[57:24] in a line with people who are going into historic Hudson Valley.
[57:29] Van Cortlandt Manor.
[57:31] So it would be good to have some thought put into that and,
[57:36] and how that could be mitigated.
[57:39] Um, right across— and there was a really thoughtful letter to the Gazette that
[57:45] someone wrote about—
[57:47] right across from the building that you're proposing is a driveway that goes down to
[57:54] ShopRite that is not for pedestrian use.
[57:58] Um, when the ShopRite— when the plaza was modified,
[58:02] they put the ADA access on the far side of that parking lot.
[58:07] In other words, closest to Van Cortlandt Manor.
[58:11] So that is the preferred way that people are supposed to enter—
[58:16] pedestrians are supposed to enter ShopRite, to walk all the way down. Nobody
[58:23] ShopRite, to walk all the way down. Nobody does.
[58:23] Instead, everybody walks down this ramp. It's two-way traffic and it's very tight.
[58:30] Especially if people are lugging groceries up that hill.
[58:35] And your— that pedestrian walkway from the apartment complex leads directly across
[58:42] the street to that ramp that is not pedestrian-friendly and not meant for
[58:48] pedestrians. So presumably it would add some pedestrian traffic of people that
[58:55] some pedestrian traffic of people that want
[58:55] to pick up some quick groceries.
[58:58] Want to run down, walk down there, grab some things.
[59:02] Um, it's something that needs— I'd love to give it some thought and,
[59:08] and how that could potentially be addressed.
[59:12] Obviously, this is not on your property. This is ShopRite owner's, uh, property.
[59:18] But if there's a way to address that as part of this, you know,
[59:24] that would be wonderful. We could put some, some thought into that. Okay.
[59:30] Yeah, the number of trips that are expected to be generated is a result of
[59:36] expected to be generated is a result of the is a
[59:37] result of the apartment complex.
[59:40] We've got the numbers are generated, I think, based on.
[59:44] A table that comes from, I believe, Rutgers University,
[59:49] which provides data to all planning entities.
[59:53] That is a table that says if it's an apartment complex with 30 to 50 units,
[59:59] the number of average trips is X. So that's where these numbers are derived
[1:00:05] that's where these numbers are derived from.
[1:00:06] It would be. Desirable if we could instead, or in addition,
[1:00:11] use numbers that refer to apartment complexes we've just built here in Croton.
[1:00:18] It might be a more like-for-like comparison,
[1:00:21] which would be Maple Commons and North Riverside. Is it— is it 425 North
[1:00:27] Riverside. Is it— is it 425 North Riverside?
[1:00:28] Yeah.
[1:00:28] 25 North Riverside, which is Still being occupied.
[1:00:32] However, for both of those projects,
[1:00:35] and even for one Chrome Point Avenue for that point, for that matter,
[1:00:41] estimates were provided that said here's what we expect to be our estimated number
[1:00:47] of trips. And if we can incorporate those three residential units into the study,
[1:00:54] obviously some have more units, some have less, or they all have more.
[1:00:59] Well, Maple Commons has less, and we could adjust accordingly.
[1:01:04] But it's good to do a like-for-like comparison.
[1:01:08] I think, Steve, you're at the Westchester—
[1:01:11] the Pace University Land Use Law Center meeting where some of the planners said
[1:01:18] meeting where some of the planners said it's
[1:01:18] best to use as a point of reference local projects as opposed to some table The
[1:01:24] addresses you just threw out, were one of them, uh, the Baked by Susan apartments?
[1:01:32] Because there's 8 or 10 units there that could be studied.
[1:01:35] People coming in and out of there,
[1:01:37] that might be comparable in terms of geography and the demographic.
[1:01:41] Possibly, possibly. But something that kind of fleshes out this data is kind of
[1:01:48] kind of fleshes out this data is kind of what
[1:01:48] we're looking for, that uses some of our local buildings.
[1:01:53] Okay, uh, I think that's it for that.
[1:01:57] And all right, so community benefits was, uh, kind of a—
[1:02:01] the summary of all these other documents, um,
[1:02:05] in terms of what the complex would bring to the community, property taxes, etc.
[1:02:12] And, um, again, it's based on projected assessed value of the building.
[1:02:18] If there's a way to,
[1:02:20] to get a number that we feel is a little bit more accurate or dialed in to drive
[1:02:27] these numbers, that would be desirable.
[1:02:30] And I don't know, Bill, if that's something you can help with.
[1:02:36] Definitely, yes.
[1:02:38] Because, you know, we've got it generating a fair amount of taxable
[1:02:44] revenue for both The town, the village,
[1:02:47] and the schools in Westchester County.
[1:02:50] Just if I can chime in, please.
[1:02:53] It, it isn't a use that you can regulate.
[1:02:58] But if these were offered for sale in a condominium format,
[1:03:05] the assessment is based upon a different formula or calculation.
[1:03:12] So you might want to look at ownership under a condominium formula.
[1:03:19] Those assessments are much different than a multifamily rental
[1:03:26] property.
[1:03:27] Yep, great point.
[1:03:29] Also, we can— we, you know,
[1:03:30] we have done a pro forma based on the rent roll that would generate the value of the
[1:03:35] building also. So maybe we can have a An appraiser look at it just to get a value
[1:03:39] appraiser look at it just to get a value of
[1:03:40] what they think its projection would be, and then talk to the assessment—
[1:03:44] the town assessor.
[1:03:45] Yeah, as much coordination and cooperation between
[1:03:50] the applicant and the consultants is appreciated.
[1:03:55] Absolutely.
[1:03:57] Okay, I think that's all I have for the documents.
[1:04:02] Anybody else from the planning board have questions that they want to
[1:04:09] add to the mix here?
[1:04:12] They don't.
[1:04:13] Just one comment regarding the traffic—
[1:04:17] speak into the microphone.
[1:04:20] Yeah, regarding traffic study,
[1:04:22] I think should be more comprehensive to traffic flow through the South Riverside
[1:04:28] Avenue and Croton Point.
[1:04:30] Where, you know, you're gonna have Lot A gonna be developed.
[1:04:35] Maybe that traffic study can be expanded, show how much impact it's gonna have.
[1:04:41] Okay, the cumulative—
[1:04:45] yes, accumulate time into the other projects, right?
[1:04:47] Yeah.
[1:04:51] Okay, Vincent, do you have anything?
[1:04:52] Not at this time.
[1:04:56] So I think that's where we are for tonight, uh, for this agenda item, um,
[1:05:00] unless there's anything else or questions that you guys have.
[1:05:04] Um, I have one question.
[1:05:05] In the event we come back with all our, you know, responses to your comments, uh,
[1:05:10] will our professionals be heard at the next meeting, or is—
[1:05:15] will the presentation be heard at the next meeting? Um, What's your sense, Laura?
[1:05:21] I think it's highly likely that if,
[1:05:24] if we can get clarifications and answers to comments and questions,
[1:05:30] that the board certainly would entertain a project presentation.
[1:05:36] Yeah.
[1:05:36] Okay.
[1:05:37] I think that's something once we get our responses to you,
[1:05:40] probably the planning consultant and the village attorney in our office can sort of
[1:05:45] have a conversation so we know, I mean, that there's a comfort level for that,
[1:05:50] right?
[1:05:51] Like you said, the list of questions will shrink, will shrink,
[1:05:54] and we'll focus on certain ones, right?
[1:05:55] Yeah.
[1:05:56] And, you know, again,
[1:05:58] the village engineer is really the intake point.
[1:06:02] So, you know, keeping the lines of communication open is always—
[1:06:07] everyone's gonna, everyone's gonna be on.
[1:06:08] Thank you. I'm standing in for the planning board attorney for this evening,
[1:06:15] but we confer daily. So, you know, she probably is even watching this evening.
[1:06:21] But, you know, we'll do what we can to move this to streamline it.
[1:06:27] The opportunity exists in here.
[1:06:29] As you know, the opportunity exists in Article 10 for you to streamline the
[1:06:35] Article 10 for you to streamline the process
[1:06:36] and look at the site development plan simultaneously with the requirements for
[1:06:42] Article 11. So we would like to see that happen. And that would be to your benefit.
[1:06:49] So that's why this memo covered both the site development plan and also the special
[1:06:56] permit.
[1:06:57] So, great.
[1:06:59] All right, gentlemen, thank you. Thank you.
[1:07:02] Thank you.
[1:07:02] Appreciate it.
[1:07:06] Okay, we're going to move on to our next agenda item.
[1:07:10] And Rob, if you'd like to rejoin us.
[1:07:12] Good job,
[1:07:18] Geoff.
[1:07:23] Is that
[1:07:28] weird
[1:07:31] sitting back
[1:07:40] there?
[1:07:44] I've had the
[1:07:53] experience
[1:08:00] myself.
[1:08:07] So I think they just went through and— I can hear you guys pretty well.
[1:08:14] Good.
[1:08:20] Get the mic a little bit closer to Mr. Cortese. He was hard to hear a little bit.
[1:08:25] He's a little soft-spoken.
[1:08:27] Right.
[1:08:27] Yeah.
[1:08:28] Which—
[1:08:29] something like this from the early '70s.
[1:08:31] I wish they gave the same big note here saying, look, it's like—
[1:08:36] what the heck's that?
[1:08:38] Print out the memo and cross it out.
[1:08:42] Mics are still on. I'm just saying.
[1:09:11] We're in the middle of a meeting.
[1:09:27] All right, so we're going to move on to our next agenda item.
[1:09:34] It's a referral from the Village Board of Trustees to review Local
[1:09:41] Law Introductory 10 of 2026, the CAF and EAF,
[1:09:46] to amend Chapter 230 zoning of the Village Code that seeks to amend
[1:09:54] the text of Chapter 230 zoning to provide clarification as to the
[1:10:01] harboring or keeping of animals in the village.
[1:10:06] You guys, anybody take a look at this one yet?
[1:10:11] Yeah, I have.
[1:10:12] Okay.
[1:10:15] So this does have a short environmental assessment form.
[1:10:20] It has a coastal assessment form, which are largely blank, and appropriately so,
[1:10:26] because there's just really no impact. So there's really not much to review there.
[1:10:32] The law itself, the changes themselves, has to do with fowl— definition of fowl,
[1:10:38] I think, is where it started from.
[1:10:41] Right.
[1:10:42] And along the way, we clarified a few things.
[1:10:46] Most prominently, the keeping of roosters and pigeons shall be prohibited.
[1:10:52] Where I don't believe that was spelled out in a previous law.
[1:10:58] So that might be one of the bigger changes that's involved here.
[1:11:04] Okay, seems to me like a prudent
[1:11:09] thing. And we're referred to it to
[1:11:14] refer it back, or are we taking action
[1:11:20] on it?
[1:11:21] Yeah, they're asking for comments if you have any.
[1:11:24] Okay. Um, I mean, I think that this has been added to the use provisions.
[1:11:31] So it's clear what's permitted in what zones.
[1:11:35] It's also clear the number of animals, minimum lot size for certain animals.
[1:11:41] So they, they did— I can speak from experience.
[1:11:45] And I can get a nod from our 2 trustees in the, in the audience.
[1:11:50] They, they looked at this many ways on how to handle it.
[1:11:55] And they thought it best that we drafted it at their suggestion to include it in
[1:12:02] it at their suggestion to include it in the
[1:12:02] use provisions. So it's going to be included in this table.
[1:12:07] So everyone's clear, it's clarified what's permitted, what's not permitted.
[1:12:13] Mm-hmm.
[1:12:18] I would point out that in— if you look at the setback that's required for, say,
[1:12:24] somebody wants to have a chicken coop,
[1:12:28] it says that shall be penned or housed within 50 feet of any lot line.
[1:12:34] And on my particular house, I'm in— not sure if I'm in RA-5 or RA-9,
[1:12:39] or the smaller one is.
[1:12:41] RA-5.
[1:12:42] 5, I think.
[1:12:42] 5. I can't really have a chicken coop. Because I have a fairly standard lot.
[1:12:48] It's narrow. I can only have it exactly in the middle, which really,
[1:12:53] even with the 50 feet, probably doesn't work because the chicken coop is wider.
[1:12:59] I would just like to, on the record, note that I can have an ADU on my property,
[1:13:05] but I can't have a chicken coop. I think there's some inconsistency to that rule.
[1:13:12] I'm not opposing the chicken coop, not suggesting we change it.
[1:13:16] It's just an inconsistency with our thinking. That's all.
[1:13:21] Is there—
[1:13:24] well, I think we can include that on as a recommendation back to the Village Board
[1:13:29] of Trustees.
[1:13:30] I'd like to review that provision.
[1:13:33] Thank you.
[1:13:34] Public aware of this?
[1:13:36] Yes, it's, it's part of our agenda, so it's posted on the village website.
[1:13:41] And the, and the Board of Trustees has been discussing it, um, of course, uh,
[1:13:47] at multiple, um, work sessions and then also on the agenda for its referral to
[1:13:53] also on the agenda for its referral to you.
[1:13:54] So yes, the public is—
[1:13:55] Feedback, letters coming in saying that the support chicken Like that,
[1:14:00] or don't support chickens?
[1:14:03] I'm not aware of— I'm not aware of that.
[1:14:06] Um, hasn't been scheduled for public hearing yet.
[1:14:08] What's that?
[1:14:10] Okay.
[1:14:11] Yeah, yeah, they're, they,
[1:14:13] they're collecting comments in advance of scheduling it for a public hearing.
[1:14:19] So at the public hearing,
[1:14:20] it's possible that members of the public would weigh in or send letters or Support
[1:14:26] or otherwise.
[1:14:31] I don't have chickens, just so you know. I don't have chickens.
[1:14:35] A friend of mine does, and I follow him around that field.
[1:14:39] He doesn't have a rooster. He gets eggs from the chickens anyway.
[1:14:44] So it's a matter of I have to feed my family. Shouldn't be a problem.
[1:14:49] Right.
[1:14:52] Have to wait for answers to come in. Maybe people have different thoughts.
[1:14:55] Yeah.
[1:14:57] Oh, my, my parents, when they lived in a larger property,
[1:15:00] had chickens on the property, and they didn't have a rooster.
[1:15:04] They got plenty of eggs, right?
[1:15:07] That's great. Nothing like a farm-fresh egg.
[1:15:10] Really fun to follow you around. You can pick out each one.
[1:15:15] One's the boss, and the other follow him.
[1:15:18] It's going to take off that way, but they don't make any noise, right?
[1:15:24] All right, so any, any other thoughts?
[1:15:27] Okay, so I think what we can, um, include a note about the, the, uh,
[1:15:34] setbacks for chicken coops and specifically in versus an ADU and
[1:15:40] specifically in versus an ADU and specifically
[1:15:41] on, uh, You know, smaller properties within RA-5.
[1:15:46] RA-5, I think it'd be hard to achieve that setback. Yeah, if not impossible.
[1:15:53] RA-5 is the 25 feet.
[1:15:56] It says 25 feet.
[1:15:57] And then all other districts is 50
[1:16:01] feet. RA-5 in the middle, right?
[1:16:05] Because the 50-foot lot.
[1:16:06] Yep.
[1:16:07] It's almost precluding it from happening.
[1:16:10] Yep, but I can have a second house.
[1:16:12] All right, so I think we can include that in, um,
[1:16:16] a referral note back and you guys can work on that,
[1:16:20] then we'll take it from there.
[1:16:23] Um, the only other item we had on our agenda was— well, actually, Steve,
[1:16:28] you had something about—
[1:16:30] We were gonna ask an engineer report, um, on the issue about Um, at our last— yeah,
[1:16:37] at our last meeting we resolved that there were going to be some landscaping
[1:16:44] improvements for, uh, 425 South Riverside, uh,
[1:16:48] as it related to the signage and landscaping application.
[1:16:53] So, uh, just my question is, has, uh, Andrew Cortese, uh, fulfilled his, uh,
[1:17:00] requirements?
[1:17:01] Oh, I have to check up on that one.
[1:17:03] Okay.
[1:17:08] 425. He was here before the board last—
[1:17:11] Yeah, I remember. But I think we misspoke by saying 425, which is the report,
[1:17:16] the project you just looked at. So it's the 3.
[1:17:19] Yeah, same address.
[1:17:20] Same address.
[1:17:21] Oh, it is?
[1:17:21] Yeah.
[1:17:22] So it was fulfilling a prior requirement for site
[1:17:26] plan modification that needed to be buttoned up.
[1:17:30] So I was just looking for an update, which Vincent will get back to us on,
[1:17:34] it sounds like.
[1:17:34] No problem.
[1:17:35] Yeah, great.
[1:17:36] And the only other thing, just—
[1:17:38] I don't know if we've followed up or where we're at with this
[1:17:43] garden center down the way.
[1:17:45] It's a good question.
[1:17:46] Um, as far as I know, they have been reaching out to the DOT and Last I saw,
[1:17:51] I think it was in DOT's court to give them an answer.
[1:17:54] I don't think that they have, and that was like 2 months ago.
[1:17:58] I could follow up on that though. That'd be great.
[1:18:01] It's been 2 months or so since I saw the emails being exchanged,
[1:18:04] so I'll look into that.
[1:18:06] Thank you.
[1:18:07] DOT takes some time.
[1:18:09] Yeah, well, we know, several years.
[1:18:11] We know.
[1:18:12] I, I, uh, I, I said this to the Board of Trustees recently.
[1:18:16] There's another community that's been trying to obtain surplus property along
[1:18:23] trying to obtain surplus property along the
[1:18:23] Sawmill River Parkway for 6 years from the DOT.
[1:18:27] This goes back about as long, quite frankly. No, I'm not exaggerating.
[1:18:30] To be used as a public park. It's taken 6 years.
[1:18:34] That's tough.
[1:18:36] Vincent, do you know the status on that clothing drop box that's opposite?
[1:18:42] They're trying to get rid of it.
[1:18:44] They tried to get rid of it, I think Yesterday,
[1:18:46] but it was too heavy for the truck that they had.
[1:18:49] So today they were using a forklift or something.
[1:18:52] So, um—
[1:18:52] They being the people that put it there?
[1:18:53] The management company. We don't know who put it there, how it got there.
[1:18:56] Really?
[1:18:57] Yeah. So they're trying to get rid of that.
[1:19:00] That's nuts. Okay, thank you.
[1:19:01] I think they might have done it by today, but they're working on it for sure.
[1:19:04] They don't want it there.
[1:19:04] So the people that own the shopping center are trying to get rid of it?
[1:19:07] Yeah, they've got to get rid of it.
[1:19:08] Great.
[1:19:09] They don't want it there either.
[1:19:10] That's good. Thank you.
[1:19:11] That's good news.
[1:19:12] All right, so I think the only other thing we have on our agenda then would
[1:19:18] be the minutes from our prior meeting. I think they're in my— oh, here we go.
[1:19:25] I did not have any comments
[1:19:29] or changes. Great job, Karen.
[1:19:34] Yep, looks good.
[1:19:38] I have no comment.
[1:19:39] Neither do I.
[1:19:40] Okay, uh, John, you want to make a motion on the minutes?
[1:19:45] Uh, I'd like to make a motion
[1:19:50] that the minutes from June
[1:19:54] 20th—
[1:19:55] July—
[1:19:55] July be accepted without any corrections.
[1:20:04] Second.
[1:20:04] All in favor?
[1:20:06] Aye.
[1:20:06] All right, thank you guys. So we're adjourned for tonight.