[1:59] Mhm.

[3:54] » Mhm.

[4:42] » All right. Let us begin.

[4:47] She did. I gave her 3 minutes, so Okay, I think we're right.

[4:54] All right, welcome. Excuse me.

[4:58] We're ready to roll. Thank you.

[5:03] Hey, y'all. Welcome to the Village of Rye Brook Planning Board meeting.

[5:08] And I'd like to rise for the Pledge of Allegiance.

[5:31] Thank you and welcome again. My name is Robert Goodman. I'm chair of the

[5:34] Planning Board. Um my colleagues also in attendance tonight are Kevin Branch,

[5:40] John Grizzan, Amy Shown, and Lenny Baseman.

[5:45] Uh Scott Mendelson and Ed Teague are excused for tonight. Also in attendance

[5:51] is our liaison from the Board of Trustees, David Heiser.

[5:56] Give him a hand. I always miss it. There There you go.

[6:00] There you go. Mhm? >> Right or left?

[6:03] » Yeah. Um

[6:06] Yeah. Yeah. Oh. Oh, yes. And and Trustee Frome

[6:12] for the air. Okay.

[6:15] You see You Okay. I wasn't going to invite him. But anyway, our village

[6:18] attorney, um, is Pamela Veña, our Superintendent

[6:22] of Public Works, Michael Noack, and our village planning consultant from

[6:26] Hardesty and Hanover, Sarah Brown. Our, uh, planning board secretary is

[6:31] Tara Orlando, and, uh, who does all the minutes and

[6:35] does all the organization behind the scenes. So, thank you, Tara.

[6:39] Uh, I'll remind everyone that, uh, we do have streaming videos, so videos of past

[6:45] planning board meetings can be accessed through the Rye Brook, uh, uh, website.

[6:51] Uh, also our board rules and, uh, and past minutes.

[6:56] Uh, we don't have any

[7:01] minutes to consider, so we can start our agenda,

[7:06] uh, which is 15 Lock Lane. >> Um, Mr. Chairman, can I just say

[7:11] something? I would just like to plead with everybody to speak into your

[7:16] microphones because you don't realize it, but you can't hear anything, even on

[7:21] broadcast. There are only certain microphones that

[7:24] come through. And particularly at the podium, it's very hard to hear with the

[7:29] air conditioning, and people tend to forget and don't speak You have to talk

[7:33] right into it. You can't just go to the side. Speak into it, please.

[7:39] Thank you. >> Um, just a preliminary with this

[7:42] application. How many here for this application out there in the public?

[7:49] Okay. All right, uh, Jessica.

[7:52] » Yes. >> Why don't you wrap this wrap this on up?

[7:55] » Of course. Um, good evening. Uh, for the record, my name is Jessica Zelen with

[7:59] the law firm of Cuddy and Feder LLP appearing on behalf of the applicants

[8:03] Jonathan and Victoria Steiner. I am joined tonight by Matthew Oscar, the

[8:07] project architect, Nicholas Sherer of Hudson Engineering, the project

[8:11] engineer, Eliana Becerra of William Kenny

[8:14] Associates, the wetlands consultant and landscape architect for the project, and

[8:19] we are all here tonight in connection with the continued public hearing on

[8:23] this application, uh, for site plan and wetland permit approval for the proposed

[8:26] addition to the existing residence, the installation of the proposed new

[8:30] swimming pool and cabana within the rear yard and associated

[8:34] site. Getting some feedback. Site improvements

[8:38] to the property located at 15 Locust Lane.

[8:42] Uh, it's been a few months since we were last before the board. Um, there are no

[8:46] members of the public here. Um, so I'll take a step back and let the board, uh,

[8:51] direct me how much you'd like to hear from me and my team or whether you'd

[8:55] like to lead the conversation. >> I think the major issue related to the

[9:00] flood rise. And that has been a technical issue that

[9:05] has consumed the parties, both the village and your team for quite some

[9:09] time. I gather the DEC flood plain management agency has signed off

[9:17] on the, uh, engineering. So, that is really the last issue

[9:21] that we were, uh, dealing with with this particular

[9:25] application. Um,

[9:28] we do have a, uh, does any member of the planning board have any additional

[9:32] questions for the applicant? >> No.

[9:35] » Okay. Um,

[9:37] we have a if there's anyone that wants to speak to this application in the

[9:42] public, we still have a public hearing. If not, I'd like a motion and second to

[9:48] close the public hearing. >> Moved.

[9:52] » Second.

[9:57] » Mr. Branch. >> Yes.

[9:59] » Mr. Graziano. >> Yes.

[10:00] » Mr. Shawn. >> Yes.

[10:01] » Mr. Basement. >> Yes.

[10:02] » Chairman Goodman. >> Yes.

[10:04] » Thank you. >> Okay, now Pam, we have a a resolution.

[10:08] Um, you can summarize it, but for the most part, but I would focus on

[10:13] the conditions for the most Thanks.

[10:21] » The resolution addresses the application for site plan approval,

[10:26] wetland permit, and flood plain development permit for 15 Lock Lane. As

[10:31] the applicant has discussed, it involves construction of a two-story addition,

[10:35] removal of an existing deck, construction of a pool, a new rear deck,

[10:41] patio, cabana, and new exterior basement stairs, among

[10:45] other things. The Village of Rye Brook is the appropriate authority for site

[10:49] plan approval, as well as wetland permit approval. The applicant does propose

[10:55] development within an area of special flood hazard. Therefore, a flood plain

[10:59] development permit is required, which, if approved, will be issued by the

[11:03] Village Superintendent of Public Works. The Planning Board and its staff and

[11:09] consultants reviewed a variety of documents listed in the resolution.

[11:14] This proposed action is a type two action under SEQRA, requiring no further

[11:18] environmental review. The Planning Board, the Village Planning

[11:23] Consultant, and the Village Engineering Consultant, as well as Village staff,

[11:26] have all reviewed all application materials

[11:30] and made recommendations. A public hearing was opened on April

[11:34] 9th. It was continued until today, August 13th, and has now been closed.

[11:40] Since portions of the project's swimming pool and cabana will be built in the

[11:43] FEMA floodway for the Hillside Avenue Brook, the project will require

[11:48] mitigative regrading for flood conveyance within the floodway to

[11:52] achieve no rise in floodway elevation.

[11:57] The uh proposed addition to the residence and the new deck, swimming

[12:01] pool, patio, cabana, and area of regrading are all proposed to be located

[12:06] within the 100 wet foot wetland buffer, and will result in an area of

[12:10] disturbance of 6,135 square feet.

[12:14] As required under the village code, this will mandate that mitigation for

[12:19] disturbance of the wetland buffer be made at a ratio of 2:1, which will

[12:23] involve 12,270 square feet of mitigation that has been

[12:28] proposed. The planning board has considered the

[12:32] wetland permit standards, as well as the site plan approval standards, and

[12:37] subject to the applicant's compliance with the conditions set forth herein,

[12:42] the applicant's proposed to provide 6,839

[12:45] square feet of that wetland mitigation on site through

[12:50] a wetland buffer habitat enhancement plan, which will include native

[12:53] vegetation, as well as 5,435 square feet of offsite wetland

[12:58] mitigation at the Edgewood Drive at Edgewood Drive and Bluebird Hollow.

[13:04] The planning board resolves to uh

[13:08] and determines that the site plan and wetland permit applications meet all the

[13:12] applicable standards set forth in village code, and will grant the site

[13:16] plan approval and wetland permit if they affirmatively vote on it.

[13:21] I will recite the non-standard conditions uh verbatim, so everyone can

[13:25] hear them. Um

[13:28] First, and this isn't the first condition, but the first I'm going to

[13:31] recite is that prior to issuance of a building permit or wetland permit, the

[13:35] applicant shall grant access to the New York State Department of Environmental

[13:38] Conservation for inspection, testing, and if necessary, remediation of toxic

[13:44] chemicals and/or heavy metals. In the alternative, prior to the issuance of a

[13:48] building permit or wetland permit, should the New York State Department of

[13:52] Environmental Conservation determine that inspection and testing on the

[13:55] property is not warranted upon completing their

[14:00] um ins- planned inspection and testing outlined in their site characterization

[14:04] work plan, this condition would be satisfied.

[14:08] In addition, another condition is that prior to issuance of the building

[14:12] permit, a drainage easement to the Village of

[14:15] Rye Brook in the location shown on the approved plans shall be submitted for an

[14:20] existing underground culvert in a form acceptable to the Village Attorney and

[14:24] approved by the Village Board of Trustees.

[14:27] The applicant will be required to record the easement in the Westchester County,

[14:32] and proof of recording must be submitted to the Building Department.

[14:37] An additional con- uh condition is that prior to issuance of the building

[14:40] permit, the applicant shall submit a declaration of restrictive covenants on

[14:44] the property applicable to the applicant as well as all successors and assigns in

[14:49] a recordable form that's acceptable to the Village Attorney. The declaration of

[14:53] restrictive covenants shall state that after the certificate of occupancy has

[14:57] been issued for all components of the proposed project, no further disturbance

[15:01] shall be permitted within the floodway as shown on a map with exhibits

[15:07] without prior written approval of the Village of Rye Brook Planning Board. The

[15:10] declaration of restrictive covenants shall be recorded

[15:14] and um prior to issuance of the certificate of

[15:19] occupancy. In addition, the applicant must uh

[15:23] conform to all comments of the village consulting engineer

[15:27] as uh referenced in the June 10th, 2026 memo. And in addition, prior to issuance

[15:36] of a building permit, the applicant shall secure a flood plain development

[15:39] permit from the village superintendent of public works.

[15:44] All plantings that will be required in the wetland buffer habitat enhancement

[15:47] plan shall be maintained by the property owner and replaced as necessary or as

[15:52] determined by the village superintendent of public works.

[15:56] Prior to the issuance of the building permit, additional wetland mitigation of

[16:00] 5,435 square feet shall be added to the

[16:04] approved plans to the satisfaction of the village planning consultant.

[16:09] In a form either of offsite wetland mitigation

[16:13] as described earlier, onsite mitigation and restoration.

[16:19] The applicant shall submit a two-year monitoring and maintenance bond for

[16:22] offsite mitigation if such mitigation is authorized by the Board of Trustees.

[16:27] If offsite mitigation is pursued prior to the issuance of building permit, the

[16:32] applicant shall obtain liability and workers compensation insurance specific

[16:36] to the work to be completed at Edgewood Drive and Bluebird Hollow stormwater

[16:41] detention basin.

[16:46] The The remaining conditions are all standard conditions.

[16:49] And the resolution says no permits shall be issued until applicants have paid the

[16:55] village all applicable fees and professional review fees

[16:58] that were incurred in connection with the application.

[17:04] And that is in sense sum and substance the resolution.

[17:08] » Are there any comments by members of the board concerning the resolution?

[17:13] » Once we approve the resolution, what is the

[17:16] Once you approve we approve the resolution, what is the duration of the

[17:19] approval? Because all of these conditions on the

[17:22] building permit, I mean, take years. >> Do you have an answer to that question?

[17:32] They may have to come back for an extension, I would presume.

[17:40] » Um condition 12 of the resolution states that the planning board's wetland permit

[17:46] approval shall be valid for a period of 1 year from the date of the resolution,

[17:50] and the any permit issued is also valid for 1 year.

[17:55] » Okay, I have another question. >> So, with regards to a building permit, a

[18:01] building permit is is valid for 6 months if no work is performed um once issued.

[18:07] Once issued and work begins, that permit is valid for 18 months. So,

[18:12] » with all those conditions, it may take time before you are in a position to

[18:15] issue the building permit. So, our approval may be void by then.

[18:21] » But that's that's within the code. >> Yeah.

[18:23] » Okay, so yeah. >> They may have to come back.

[18:25] » They have to come back with >> They have to come back

[18:26] » I have a >> Um after the 2-year uh monitoring and

[18:31] the maintenance bond, what happens?

[18:36] » So, which point the bond would be uh sunsetted and returned back to the

[18:41] applicant, and the bond would be closed out, and at that point then the

[18:44] landscaping becomes part of the village's uh property and maintenance.

[18:48] » Okay, thank you. >> You said they come back. Would they come

[18:52] back asking for an extension? They come back with a new project.

[18:55] » No, extension. >> It's an extension.

[18:58] » Any changes to the project would require further planning board review and would

[19:02] be an amendment to any approved uh site plan application.

[19:06] » I just I just hope it's just an extension that they don't have to go

[19:09] through this process again. I don't We hope the same.

[19:12] » think to. >> Thank you.

[19:15] » Our applicant, are you satisfied with the language of the uh

[19:18] » I I do have one uh comment. Um Ms. Vania and I have been discussing the uh first

[19:24] red condition all repeatedly throughout the day. Uh we

[19:28] just have a request that um it

[19:31] the first uh

[19:34] clause we add to it um to note that prior to

[19:38] the issuance of the building permit or wetland permit for any work that

[19:41] requires excavation of soils, um these conditions would have to be

[19:45] fulfilled. So, in the event that the applicant wants to do some interior work

[19:50] that requires a building permit or wants to do work that does not require

[19:53] disturbance of the soils, um we would not have to wait for the

[19:58] full term of the investigation to be completed.

[20:01] » I think I think that's reasonable. >> Great.

[20:04] Thank you. Would you like me to reread that condition?

[20:08] » Yeah, why don't you reread it?

[20:13] » So, this is condition two after the now therefore now therefore be it resolved

[20:18] clause. It will now read, prior to the issuance of a building permit or wetland

[20:22] permit for work that requires excavation of soils

[20:27] the application the applicants, excuse me, shall grant access to the New York

[20:31] State DEC for inspection, testing, and if necessary remediation of toxic

[20:35] chemicals and or heavy metals. In the alternative

[20:38] prior to the issuance of a building permit or wetland permit for work that

[20:42] requires excavation of soils should the New York State DEC determine

[20:47] that inspection and testing on the property is not warranted

[20:51] this condition shall be satisfied. I left some things out, but

[20:55] substantially that's >> Well, you can amend you can you know,

[20:58] we'll we'll adopt it as amended. And you can circulate

[21:03] the revised All right, uh

[21:06] unless there are further comments regarding the the resolution.

[21:10] Can I Do we have to have a motion to close the

[21:13] public hearing? >> No, we already did. The public hearing

[21:16] is closed. >> Do we want to make a motion second for

[21:20] the amended to accept the amendment?

[21:23] » Yes. I mean, if we need to do that. Do we

[21:26] need to do that? Moved. All right. >> Second.

[21:30] » So, Amy and Lenny.

[21:35] » Mr. Branch. >> Yes.

[21:37] » Mr. Grizan. >> Yes.

[21:39] » Michonne. >> Yes.

[21:39] » Mr. Weisman. >> Yes.

[21:41] » Chairman Goodman. >> Yes.

[21:46] » Yes.

[21:51] » Okay, now Right. Now, since we have an amended

[21:55] resolution, can I have a motion to second to adopt that resolution as

[21:59] amended? >> Moved.

[22:01] » Second.

[22:05] » So, we're approving the resolution as amended. Mr. Branch.

[22:09] » Yes. >> Mr. Grizan.

[22:11] » Yes. >> Mr.

[22:13] Michonne. >> Yes.

[22:16] » Mr. Weisman. >> Yes.

[22:17] » Chairman Goodman. >> Yes.

[22:20] » All approved. Thank you. >> Thank you everyone for your time and

[22:24] working on this project with us.

[22:27] » Yeah, I know.

[22:31] Okay, our next matter is Dorchester Drive and 20 19 Dorchester

[22:39] Drive and 23 Dorchester Drive. Just out of curiosity, how many people in

[22:44] attendance are here for that application?

[22:50] Okay. >> We have to open the public hearing.

[22:53] » Yep. Can I have a motion to second to open

[22:56] the public hearing? >> Moved.

[22:58] » Second.

[23:02] » Mr. Branch. >> Yes.

[23:05] » Mr. Grizan. >> Yes.

[23:06] » Ms. Shawn. >> Yes.

[23:09] » Mr. Teague. Uh I'm sorry. Mr. Weisman. >> Yes.

[23:12] » Chairman Goodman. >> Yes.

[23:14] » Thank you.

[23:16] Okay. Now, how we will like to proceed with this is

[23:20] » the mic's off. >> Yeah, sorry.

[23:22] How we would like to proceed with this is that the public hearing is open.

[23:26] So, we will entertain some comments from the public relating to the proposed

[23:32] project. But, as we've probably been in contact

[23:37] with you, there are certain documents that need to be

[23:41] sort of firmed up. Um and I will

[23:45] ask our professionals just to detail what additional what what additional

[23:51] things they need from you. >> Right.

[23:54] » And then we'll we can have a more substantive, you know, conversation, but

[23:59] I think the public knows the project in general. And so, the comments may be

[24:04] helpful. Um

[24:07] uh Sarah, why don't we start with the planning consultant? What

[24:12] What do we have and what do we need? >> So, we did receive some updated

[24:18] materials today um from the applicant um and it looks like it was a complete

[24:23] submission from what I was able to briefly look at uh before the meeting.

[24:28] We were waiting from our end uh an updated site plan with uh the new

[24:32] plantings on them with all the species information. We're also waiting for

[24:38] details on the fencing around and the screening around the tennis court and

[24:43] some sound attenuation information, which has also been submitted. So, our

[24:48] office will we like I said, we just received that today, so we'll be

[24:52] reviewing that for your next meeting. >> Okay. Uh Michael, any anything from your

[24:56] corner? >> From stormwater management perspective,

[25:00] I believe we're wrapped up. Um I'm going to re-review it pending whatever happens

[25:04] here in the um public hearing if there any changes made, but I think overall on

[25:09] my end >> Okay. All right. Um

[25:13] so we we understand what needs to be done.

[25:17] We got submissions today, so I can't expect the staff to review these

[25:21] submissions. >> update on the

[25:23] actual uh sound.

[25:26] » Right. That's That's actually a obviously the sound issue is is a

[25:31] significant issue. So the screening and any sound

[25:36] attenuation equipment or materials um I would

[25:43] you know, I I would let our professionals know what you're planning

[25:47] on doing so that they can review them with you.

[25:50] Uh there may be some materials that work and some that do not.

[25:54] Um but on that score, we do have members of

[25:58] the public that have made their you know

[26:02] Yeah, go ahead. >> I read the draft resolution, which I

[26:06] know we're not going to get to it today. >> Right.

[26:09] » But when you read that for the first time

[26:11] » Talking to the >> that's why I would like Chris to go

[26:14] over. It's really not sure what is it that the we are approving. Is it a

[26:19] tennis court? Is it a tennis court plus basketball?

[26:22] With lights, no lights, or something like that. So I I think uh

[26:26] uh there's going to be some conditions along the way on that resolution, but I

[26:30] think for the public benefit, it would be good if Chris goes over the plan and

[26:36] describe what is it that really they are proposing.

[26:40] » Okay, Jessica. >> Remember we saw initially just a tennis

[26:43] court and then along the way came the basketball.

[26:46] Is it one hoop, two hoops? I think it's it would be nice to know that.

[26:49] » Okay. >> I think I know it, but I think it would

[26:52] be nice for everybody to know. >> let's get it on the record. So, why

[26:55] don't you why don't you at least uh

[26:59] you know, provide some recapitulate your the the the project.

[27:04] » yeah, we've had two prior meetings. Um

[27:11] obviously the immediate neighbors uh attending those. So, this is basically

[27:17] our first official uh public hearing.

[27:20] » Right. Correct. >> So, I assume we're kind of starting from

[27:25] scratch in case there are other people that received the notice

[27:29] um within the 250-ft radius. >> Yeah, I think since we're on the record

[27:35] for the public hearing, I think John is right. I think we should probably be a

[27:38] good start. >> through the whole

[27:40] thing as if we were starting from scratch just so that it Yeah, I mean,

[27:44] most of us I think in the room are fully aware of what's

[27:46] » abbreviated at at selected points you choose, but I think I think it would be

[27:52] good for the public to have an idea of of what the project is. And of course,

[27:56] what we were we were talking about 5 minutes ago was firming up the plan so

[28:01] that our professionals can do uh some some technical evaluation of

[28:06] what the plan sort of mean from the standpoint of

[28:10] » Right. >> landscaping and

[28:12] etc. So. >> Yeah, as far as the site plan goes, that

[28:15] was um nothing has been modified in way of

[28:18] grading, contours we did um uh designate the steep slope area

[28:24] uh also. But, I'll

[28:26] get the show on the road, I guess and uh I'm Chris Galfo,

[28:31] uh owner and project manager of Optimum Building.

[28:34] And I'm here this evening on behalf of Jason and Angela Ryan

[28:39] regarding the proposed lot merger associated resident associated

[28:43] residential site improvements at 19 and 23 Dorchester Drive.

[28:48] Uh since our prior appearances before the planning board, we have continued to

[28:52] work closely with the village staff and the consultants, professionals, and

[28:57] uh our own design and engineering team to respond to the comments and concerns

[29:01] raised during the review process. >> Just

[29:03] I'm sorry. Uh something just occurred. You keep saying 1923. What is the

[29:07] address going to be of this home? >> 19.

[29:10] » Okay. Thank you. >> So, right. The 23 is the uh

[29:13] » Once we merge the lots, I will Once we merge them,

[29:17] right. We'll work on the number.

[29:21] » Okay. Um we have taken the comments received

[29:24] during the prior meeting seriously, and and the plans have been revised in

[29:28] several important areas. In particular, we have focused on the

[29:31] issues that appeared to generate the greatest concern during the review

[29:35] process. Stormwater management, uh drainage, landscaping,

[29:40] visual screening, steep slope conditions, and sound mitigation

[29:43] associated with the proposed tennis court.

[29:46] Uh the stormwater management plan has been substantially reviewed and revised

[29:50] since our earlier meetings, and our engineers have continued to respond to

[29:53] the technical comments provided through the village's engineering review, and

[29:58] the drainage design has been revised accordingly.

[30:02] The revised uh system is intended to collect and manage stormwater associated

[30:06] with the proposed tennis court, pool house,

[30:10] uh pool area, and existing residential improvements on the property

[30:15] uh with the objective of managing that runoff on site and minimizing the

[30:18] impacts to the surrounding properties.

[30:27] Uh

[30:30] There has also been discussions regarding areas of the steep slopes on

[30:34] the property, and those areas have now been identified on the plans, and we

[30:37] understand that a separate steep slopes work permit

[30:41] application will be required as part of the approval process.

[30:46] Um landscaping, the landscaping plan has also been uh substantially revised in

[30:51] response to comments received during the prior meetings.

[30:55] Our objective has been to provide meaningful screening of the proposed

[30:58] tennis court while maintaining an appropriate residential landscape for

[31:02] the property and the surrounding neighborhood.

[31:05] Uh the revised plan incorporates substantial evergreen screening around

[31:09] the court together with additional deciduous shade trees throughout the

[31:13] property. Since our last appearance, the the large

[31:18] 28-in maple uh existing uh along the Dorchester

[31:23] frontage was unfortunately lost uh during the storm.

[31:26] And as part of the revised landscape plan, we are we are proposing three red

[31:30] maple trees along the front of the property as

[31:33] replacement uh trees in the village right-of-way.

[31:37] Uh the overall landscaping plan has been designed not to

[31:41] uh not simply to meet planting requirements, but to create a

[31:44] substantial visual buffer between the proposed improvements, Dorchester Drive,

[31:49] and the adjoining properties as the plantings mature.

[31:53] The proposed tennis court uh remains located towards the rear portion

[31:58] of this approximately 1-acre residential property.

[32:02] One point that I think is important when uh viewing the site plan is the actual

[32:07] scale and relationship of these improvements to the street and

[32:10] neighboring properties. The proposed court is approximately 75

[32:14] ft. >> Do you have

[32:17] I keep looking uh at the screen. Hopefully, that some drawing is going to

[32:20] appear, but nothing is appearing. >> I'm not a Mac guy, so I didn't I tried

[32:25] to figure out

[32:28] landscape

[32:36] That's right, right? Right here.

[32:39] Yeah.

[33:19] » Okay, so you did Uh the proposed tennis court remains

[33:22] located toward the rear portion of the uh

[33:25] We said that. Uh the proposed court is approximately 75 ft back from the from

[33:30] the curb. Uh and the proposed pool house is

[33:33] approximately 150 ft from the street. Uh

[33:37] the court will have no lighting. As the board is aware, portions of the

[33:42] proposed tennis court uh fencing are 10 ft in height and the required zoning

[33:47] relief for that fencing has been addressed through the separate zoning

[33:52] board process. Uh the additional fence height is

[33:55] functional for the use of the court and also provides an opportunity to

[33:58] incorporate additional visual screening and sound mitigation measures into the

[34:03] overall design. We also recognize that uh that sound

[34:08] associated with the use of this court has been an important concern expressed

[34:12] during the prior review process. We have not ignored that concern.

[34:17] We are continuing to evaluate the appropriate sound mitigation system and

[34:21] the supporting technical information so that what is ultimately submitted to the

[34:25] board is accurate, appropriate for the specific

[34:28] installation, and can be properly reviewed by the board and its

[34:32] consultants. That work is being developed and we

[34:35] intend to provide the board with the appropriate specifications and

[34:38] supporting documentation as part of the continuing review process.

[34:43] This application has now been before the planning board on more than one occasion

[34:47] and with each review we have attempted to respond constructively to the

[34:51] comments we have received.

[34:55] Uh the project before you tonight reflects those efforts. The the drainage

[35:00] design has been revised. The landscaping and screening plan has

[35:03] been revised. Steep slope areas have been identified

[35:07] and will be addressed through the required permitting process.

[35:11] And we continue to work on the appropriate sound mitigation measures

[35:14] associated with the tennis court. Uh we understand that some of the most

[35:19] recent revised materials may require additional time for review by the board

[35:24] through which staff and consultants and we certainly respect that process.

[35:27] » You want to go through your sound John?

[35:31] » Yeah, so we'll just go to

[35:35] So with the the landscaping plan here um

[35:39] the changes that were made were uh

[35:42] within the tennis court area on the uh

[35:46] left side in the rear which original landscape design had deciduous trees.

[35:53] They were changed to um native evergreens to have a constant

[35:59] coverage of the fencing and the court as opposed to deciduous.

[36:03] » Could you point out I'm sorry. >> Could you point out your entry and

[36:06] egress points for the court? >> Thank you.

[36:09] » So we have a 10-ft fencing on the rear the left side and the and the front.

[36:16] We have 10-ft comes back at 18 ft from the front and the rear 18 ft and then it

[36:23] drops down to 5 ft in the center portion from from this

[36:27] area to here and our entry is dead center at the net.

[36:31] » So, one. >> One entry.

[36:34] » Do you have the rendering available in your hands? If you show the rendering it

[36:38] would save you a lot of time explaining it. I think it really shows how well you

[36:42] are doing this. >> And also if you could just tell us what

[36:46] kind of evergreens

[36:49] » Uh the evergreens are white spruce along the rear and the left side.

[36:55] And then the front section

[37:03] Uh across the front with emerald greens

[37:05] arborvitae.

[37:08] Uh and then along the street line

[37:13] is a green giant arborvitae here and up this side stop at that point and then we

[37:18] go to white spruce from the front of the tennis court to

[37:21] the rear. And white spruce continues across the

[37:26] back. And then we go to sugar maple across the

[37:31] back by the pool area.

[37:34] » Please, you keep Again, I I apologize for interrupting you. You keep referring

[37:38] to tennis court but if you look at the middle drawings, that's a basketball

[37:43] court there, correct? >> Yes.

[37:44] » I think we need to make that known so that everybody is aware that there will

[37:49] be one basketball hoop on it so there will be no surprises later on once we go

[37:54] through the approval. >> Yeah, there's plans for for one

[37:57] one hoop on the rear on the back side. Um there's also

[38:03] the neighboring properties on the rear here have a large uh

[38:08] green giant arborvitae across the back. They're standing right now at about 12

[38:12] to 14 ft. And then continue across the other

[38:15] property here at about 10 which I have a picture of.

[38:22] So, that's the neighboring property. Those are the existing Arborvitae's that

[38:27] are here. And again, some are standing as tall as

[38:30] 14 ft. Uh this particular PVC fence that you

[38:35] see in the picture here is being uh removed and relocated

[38:40] to be put along the the entire rear of the property.

[38:44] So we have several layers of um somewhat sound control, right? The neighboring

[38:49] property plus the new plantings that we're we're going to uh install along

[38:54] with the 6-ft fencing. >> Did you have a rendering?

[38:59] » Yeah. Let me just go through them.

[39:03] » And the zoning board did approve the give you a variance for a 10-ft fence.

[39:09] » Yes. >> They did, yes.

[39:16] Uh these were just uh snapshots of um

[39:22] other tennis courts in in Rye Brook on down on Lincoln Avenue.

[39:31] Um as far as fencing goes, this fence is a 10-ft, so this is the

[39:36] similar fencing that we're we're proposing to install.

[39:40] And again, on the interior side of the property, the fence is going to drop

[39:44] down to 5 ft.

[39:49] And that's of course to control the errant balls that

[39:54] so they're not winding up in the neighbor's uh backyard.

[39:59] » And the sound absorbing barrier material would

[40:04] That's correct. >> Correct. Yeah, so on the on the on the

[40:08] left side in the rear. >> Okay.

[40:11] » Have you had the chance to investigate sort of what materials

[40:15] you're you may be thinking about? >> what's the question?

[40:18] » Yes, Sonic sound guard is one particular material we're looking at.

[40:23] » Right. >> Um right now which I

[40:25] which we're going to submit. That's part of that um study that uh was presented

[40:31] to the village. Um that's got a whole full report of the

[40:35] actual site. >> Have you Have you provide you've

[40:38] provided that? >> We did today.

[40:40] » Oh, today? >> It's just Yeah.

[40:42] » All right. >> Yeah, we just received it today and that

[40:44] was submitted. >> All right.

[40:45] » This is a rendering of uh both properties.

[40:49] The Ryans' existing home here. Proposed pool house in the back. Again,

[40:54] 150 ft off the street. Tennis court here with the arborvitaes.

[41:00] And the white spruce along the left side and the rear.

[41:04] Um this is not showing cuz that was just recent. The red maples are going to be

[41:09] planted along the village right-of-way.

[41:14] Uh that's an existing birch tree. Uh

[41:18] That's existing.

[41:21] Uh eventually that's the evergreen arborvitaes that are quite quite mature

[41:27] in this picture. But that's ultimately what what will wind up in front of the

[41:31] tennis court. >> Mhm.

[41:32] » I mean, we're planting uh the exist the new plantings will start at uh 7 ft. Um

[41:39] and they grow 1 to 2 ft a year.

[41:43] » Okay. >> It was requested that any evergreens

[41:46] that we plant along the left side, especially the white spruce, have some

[41:50] good spacing so that they're not growing into each other in 2 years. So, within

[41:56] within a 10-year period, they'll just touch and

[42:00] and not be ripped out in in 10 years because they're overgrowing and dying.

[42:04] » Right.

[42:09] » I recall at the last meeting, the open issue was really the sound attenuation.

[42:14] » Right. >> Yes. And that's And that's where all

[42:16] this is about. The The landscaping, uh the the character of

[42:20] the landscaping. >> was the lighting also.

[42:23] » That I think has been resolved. They're not putting lights.

[42:25] » There is no lights. That was said at the very first time we met.

[42:28] » Right. Right. >> I hope that sound attenuation material

[42:32] is uh green color, not uh >> So it blends well with the uh greenery.

[42:40] » really see it. Sorry, John. You were saying the color of the

[42:43] screening? >> Yes.

[42:45] » Yes, I believe we were going back and forth between black and green, but

[42:49] obviously >> Something that would blend well with the

[42:51] with the surrounding >> No pink?

[42:53] » The black chain link fence from from 80, you know, 80 ft away almost disappears.

[42:58] » Yeah. >> Um so with the with the green of the

[43:01] emerald green, I'd say green. >> green today.

[43:04] » It's green, yeah. >> Yeah, makes sense. Yeah.

[43:06] » And you say you submitted a test data on that material?

[43:10] » This is, yeah. >> as far as the attenuation

[43:12] » So yeah, this is um a sound study

[43:16] um showing the existing uh property

[43:20] and uh and the surrounding homes. Um

[43:24] Again, this is This is fresh. Uh

[43:27] they have decibel levels um from from the court. Um

[43:33] The closest neighboring property is at 31 decibels.

[43:37] Um And then as you get further away, of

[43:39] course, the decibel levels uh is decreased.

[43:43] » How does 31 decibels compare to say kids frolicking in a pool?

[43:47] » I'm Elliot Seenar, the engineer. Um conversation is around 60.

[43:52] » What? >> Conversation is around 60

[43:55] » is lower than >> F is much

[43:57] » Okay. >> And every I think it's um every 3

[44:01] decibels sounds half as loud. Don't quote me on that, but I think

[44:05] that's correct. >> Well, well, give me something else to

[44:08] reference like uh you know uh kids playing basketball and you know,

[44:12] what what would that be at? >> That would be much higher.

[44:16] » Yeah, it's it's not so much the conversation

[44:18] of the thing, it's the bouncing of the ball.

[44:20] » right. >> Is the loud part of it.

[44:23] And um he actually uh I showed the video at

[44:26] this point. >> It's a logarithmic.

[44:27] » So So he actually has a >> Uh it's not linear.

[44:31] » a video of the uh material on a fence uh with people

[44:35] playing uh behind it.

[44:38] » So just for information, I mean a Google search of tennis was 45 to 60 where

[44:46] basketball is 90 to 115. Roughly. That's just a Google search, so

[44:51] it's not certified, but >> Understood. So I imagine like music

[44:55] playing in a backyard when people are entertaining is even louder than that

[44:58] for instance, right? >> So this this is a very normal

[45:01] neighborhood activity.

[45:06] which shows

[45:09] pickleball being played and you hear the noise reduction once they get behind the

[45:13] screening. >> Normal conversation is a 60 to 70

[45:18] decibel. >> Wow.

[45:20] » So if you notice in the video and it's not the particular site, but it's them

[45:25] playing basketball. Once you go behind the screen, you don't hear the you don't

[45:28] hear the ball anymore. You hear the conversation still, but you don't hear

[45:31] the ball uh in the

[45:33] in the back court.

[45:40] » And that's right behind the the screen. >> Yes.

[45:44] » So the the Right. So the the nearest property is

[45:48] how far away? >> The nearest the the closest neighboring

[45:52] property to the structure from the tennis court is probably

[45:57] 35 40 ft. >> But the the property line is only 10 10

[46:01] ft off the fence. >> No, it's closer than that.

[46:04] » That's our property. >> Right.

[46:06] » I'm I'm talking about the neighbor from the left left side.

[46:11] » Yeah, well yeah, well yeah, well

[46:16] » It's only 10 or 15 ft. 15. >> Yeah.

[46:19] » 15 ft. >> Oh, his that's his

[46:21] » That's the property line. >> Hey, Chris.

[46:24] On the left side of the property, where the court is, from the property line to

[46:29] the left neighbor, approximately to the structure.

[46:32] » 20 20 >> From the property line. So, from the

[46:35] tennis fence, about 30 35 ft roughly. >> ft from the property line to the court.

[46:41] » So, you're looking at about 35 ft roughly. So, roughly 35 ft. Okay.

[46:45] » yeah. I mean, it looks like his short side is

[46:50] on the left garage. So, if he has 15, he should have 25 on the other.

[46:55] » Currently, if you're on Dorchester, you can see the house the house on the left,

[47:00] you can see the houses uh um on Country Ridge.

[47:06] » From our prop- from the right angle >> if you if you're on Dorchester

[47:10] » Can't see through it because >> Yes, I was there today. You can.

[47:14] You don't you don't see the full house, but you see glimpses the backs of their

[47:18] houses, yes. >> Walking horse?

[47:20] » Uh um No. The the

[47:23] Wherever the backs are of these houses, you can see at least two houses.

[47:28] » Yeah, I'll go back to that. >> Not totally, but you can see

[47:31] probably half the house.

[47:39] And I'm assuming if you're putting the trees in, that is going to

[47:45] close that in. >> That's the rear.

[47:48] » Well, it's doesn't look exactly like that if you're on Dorchester now.

[47:52] » I know that cuz I've been there back back there looking

[47:56] uh south. I could probably see Mr. Feldman's

[48:00] » Looking Looking towards uh if you're parallel they are parallel

[48:04] with Dorchester. >> In that image, where are you standing on

[48:07] the property in that image? >> Right there I am at the where where the

[48:11] back where the back of the house was. >> So you're basically in the middle of the

[48:14] property in that image looking towards that the back of the houses on Country

[48:19] Ridge. >> Looking at the rear

[48:20] » So from there to the road is probably what another 50 ft maybe 65 ft?

[48:25] » Uh probably yeah. >> Roughly.

[48:27] » Okay. >> Yeah. I think right now pretty where

[48:30] that picture is is where the tennis court ends.

[48:34] Closest to the street.

[48:43] » Any other comments by the board? >> No. Okay.

[48:46] » Okay. Members of >> You know the neighboring property um

[48:51] with the arbor vitae's there. That that is standing about 10 ft tall.

[48:56] » And you can see the bit of the house in the back there.

[48:58] » Right.

[49:01] » I I actually do have another question. I noticed there was a neighbor uh letter

[49:05] from a neighbor regarding pickleball as a concern. Um

[49:10] » Right. >> Are there any activities besides tennis

[49:13] and basketball that you expect to generate volume on this?

[49:19] » From my understanding it's uh full full use. Uh

[49:24] Tennis, basketball, pickleball, but the primary use is tennis because

[49:31] we could save a lot of money by just doing a pickleball court and that's not

[49:34] the objective. We're really looking for tennis play and basketball.

[49:39] But there is there is uh >> Well, pickleball is is louder.

[49:43] » Correct. >> From what I gather, right? So

[49:45] » I mean any any research I'm doing I'm researching

[49:49] as if I'm doing pickleball because assuming that it gets played,

[49:54] that yeah, we want to be able to cover all all the bases.

[49:57] » Right, so that should be your your decimal levels that you're quoting

[50:00] should be for pickleball, for instance, not necessarily for

[50:02] » Right. That that would be the loudest use.

[50:06] » I believe the study is based on pickleball, because again, I wanted the

[50:09] extreme to cover

[50:14] uh the neighbors. >> Okay.

[50:17] So, um well, well, you've submitted everything

[50:21] that you need to submit. Um for the moment, I think uh our

[50:27] professionals will take a look at it. And they'll, you know, they'll hopefully

[50:31] be a dialogue between you and them if they if they have uh questions or

[50:36] recommendations. Uh because the issue is sound and sound

[50:40] attenuation. And so, um you know, whatever,

[50:46] you know, can be done to mitigate that potential issue

[50:51] would be uh welcome. Now, as far as as the the public hearing

[50:56] today is concerned, I'm I'm happy to entertain comments.

[51:01] Uh it it may be more fruitful to wait until next month when the final

[51:09] plans are actually submitted and on our website that you can take a look at.

[51:16] Um but I I'll leave that, you know, up to

[51:20] you. Uh does anyone want to speak to this

[51:23] application? Uh yes, sir, with the hand up.

[51:27] » Yeah, I think uh it would be a good idea. Yes, let let uh them

[51:32] have their due to speak. This way, if there's any other concerns that we you

[51:35] know, we're not uh >> Uh sir, um identify yourself and and uh

[51:42] your your residential location.

[51:46] » My name is Philip Schiller and I reside at 84 Country Ridge Drive.

[51:52] Uh I'm against having a tennis court on 23

[51:55] Dorchester as well as the combining of the properties because it is out of

[52:00] character with the rest of the neighborhood

[52:04] and would set a dangerous precedent. And I have three main points that I would

[52:08] like to go over with the board. In my opinion, the property is too small

[52:14] to have a 4,200 square-foot house, a pool,

[52:19] a pool house, and a tennis court on less than 1 acre of land.

[52:26] The combined size of both lots. I also learned last week's at last

[52:32] week's uh zoning board meeting that 10 ft of the setback is to be used

[52:39] in order to accommodate everything. So, instead of there being a distance of 5

[52:44] ft from the house behind 23 Dorchester, there is now 15,

[52:50] resulting in 10 ft less of the setback in front of the house.

[52:55] I don't know how this is even possible. The other point I have is that some

[53:01] neighbor some neighbors at last week's zoning board meeting expressed some

[53:07] concerns. If you read between the lines, what

[53:11] they're really saying is that they are concerned that the

[53:14] current plans will have a negative effect on their property values.

[53:19] Something that might sour the relationship with the neighbors.

[53:24] And last, if the project is completed, my estimate of the value of the property

[53:30] is approximately between 5.5 and 6 million dollars.

[53:35] The current value of the house and pool plus the cost of the land on 23

[53:39] Dorchester plus all of the demolition and construction costs of the pool

[53:45] house, tennis court, landscaping, and drainage.

[53:49] A very tough sell in a neighborhood that barely hits 2

[53:54] million. In conclusion, what I would like to see

[53:58] on 23 Dorchester is another house. Thank you for your time.

[54:05] » Thank you, sir. Any Would anyone else? Yes, sir.

[54:18] » Hello, my name is Richard Shapiro. Together with my wife, Rhoda,

[54:22] we live and have lived for almost 48 years at 120 Country Ridge Drive, which

[54:28] indeed is the property immediately behind the proposed

[54:33] tennis court, basketball court. Um

[54:38] If this project it um is indeed to be approved as has

[54:44] been referenced in just a few moments ago,

[54:48] what about pickleball? Our big concern in the world of

[54:53] noise mitigation is the additional

[54:57] sound that pickleball represents. And indeed, it has been concurred in the

[55:03] conversation this evening that of the various

[55:07] levels of noise that may come from this project, the one that is the greatest

[55:14] would be indeed pickleball. And as I said,

[55:18] it has been stated in the conversation that yes, the principal intention is for

[55:25] tennis and for basketball, but yes,

[55:29] this project will be constructed to accommodate pickleball. So, we should

[55:35] assume, even if it isn't the primary usage, that it will be available

[55:41] for use for pickleball. It is our view

[55:46] based on our understanding of the noise level of

[55:50] pickleball and everyone who we have talked to, who we have said, "Well, we

[55:54] may have a pickleball court behind us." Uh they said, "Oh my gosh, the noise

[55:58] from that." Um

[56:01] we believe that any resolution regarding this property should have as a condition

[56:08] that there would not be pickleball allowed on this property

[56:13] um as part of the approval process. Um

[56:18] the the nature of the ball, the racket,

[56:23] the hard court that we're talking about, the rapidity of the back and forth that

[56:28] is clearly part of pickleball,

[56:31] in our view, makes the sound level, even with noise mitigation, and we look

[56:38] forward to seeing the material that is put together and presented to this

[56:41] board, um will simply be an unreasonable level of noise concern for a

[56:47] neighborhood that is as tight as this. We're not talking about you We've been

[56:53] shown some pictures involving Lincoln Avenue. Country Ridge is not Lincoln

[56:58] Avenue. Country Ridge and the property in

[57:01] question is simply is is not Pine Ridge Park. These These are tight residential

[57:08] lots. This lot is proposed to be a little bit

[57:12] under an acre. That will be large for Country Ridge, and we're talking about

[57:17] putting all of this stuff into a very, very small area. And as I said before,

[57:23] the back of the tennis court between the

[57:27] proposed fence, and we approved that at the higher fence, clearly,

[57:32] uh to our property line is all of 15 ft. Not a lot of space.

[57:39] That's um what we'd like to impart to the board

[57:43] this evening. Thank you. >> Thank you.

[57:45] » Thank you, sir. Anybody else?

[57:48] Yes, ma'am.

[57:56] » This I'm Nancy Schiller. I live at 84 Country View Drive.

[57:59] And I'll bring up whatever wasn't brought up before. Um they mentioned

[58:04] last week about the fencing. And they were originally going to have 5

[58:08] ft along the side by the house. And then

[58:12] they're going to have 18 and 18, but they're still going to have 5 ft.

[58:15] So, there's a big distance where there's 5 ft and not everybody plays tennis

[58:19] well. Ball can still go over, go out into the street, hit me, hit dogs,

[58:24] hit cars. So, I don't see why it can't be 10 ft

[58:27] entirely. But, regardless, you can't Nobody's

[58:31] going to be happy because you need at least 10 ft behind for the

[58:35] house behind you. And the people that live right across the street said they

[58:38] don't want 10 ft because that's all they're going to see from their house.

[58:42] So, it was an eyesore. Um

[58:48] is also if you put if you don't put a house, you can have less property taxes

[58:52] versus the tennis court. And

[58:56] um

[58:59] I agree there should be no pickleball, but even so, even if you agree to that,

[59:04] what about the next owner? They could play pickleball.

[59:07] And who's to stop them? And for Originally, it was just supposed

[59:10] to be a tennis court. Now, there's going to be basketball, which is louder, and

[59:13] then possibly pickleball, which is even louder. And people that are living in

[59:18] like um you know, gated communities with

[59:21] pickleball, they're going crazy. And it doesn't have to be It could be so far

[59:24] away, and they still hear it. It doesn't belong here. The properties on Lincoln

[59:28] Avenue and the show and the ones that have tennis courts are two and three

[59:31] acres, not less than an acre. Um, and to me, when we were at the uh

[59:38] the zoning board meeting, we all had concerns and we were told before the

[59:42] meeting we were talking to the um the chairman

[59:45] that there's five five uh circumstances that you have to meet,

[59:50] none of which it doesn't matter if the neighbors disapprove. So, why is there a

[59:54] public meeting if they don't care what the neighbors have to say?

[59:58] I'm hoping it's different here.

[1:00:03] » It should be. >> Good.

[1:00:04] » And I think and I think the zoning board also takes, you know, you know,

[1:00:09] » Well, they got letters, but they said they would we would

[1:00:11] it doesn't matter. It's it do they do they meet the five criteria? If so, it

[1:00:16] doesn't matter. >> Well, I'll let the zoning board respond

[1:00:19] to you, but I can only speak for the planning board, but uh I find and I

[1:00:24] think my colleagues would agree that public hearings are very important to

[1:00:29] take the temperature of a project. And um

[1:00:34] and it does impact upon our view of a project.

[1:00:38] Uh I think all of these comments have been very reasonable

[1:00:42] and and and uh and analytical and we'll have to

[1:00:47] you know, we we we can't do anything but take them into consideration. So, we

[1:00:51] really appreciate your comments and uh and your input because it it will

[1:00:56] definitely inform our decision. >> Okay.

[1:01:00] That's all I have to say. >> Thank you for your participation.

[1:01:03] Anybody else? Yes, ma'am.

[1:01:12] » Hi, my name is Ellen Harmon. I'm at 16 Hillandale Road. I'm not an adjacent

[1:01:17] neighbor. I really have a question more than anything else, although my heart

[1:01:21] goes out to the adjacent neighbors whose peace and tranquility of years and years

[1:01:25] is about to be destroyed. Um and never to be turned back. Uh it's

[1:01:31] I think it's egregious. But, my question is Chris referred to a tennis court or

[1:01:37] tennis courts, I'm not sure which, on Lincoln Ave. And I'm wondering, because

[1:01:42] I'm sure that one of your guiding criteria are character of the

[1:01:45] neighborhood, is it out of character? I've lived here for 43 years. I don't

[1:01:50] know of any courts in Rye Brook. I really don't. So, I was wondering if you

[1:01:54] had a take on how many tennis courts there are in Rye Brook.

[1:01:59] And where they're located, because this seems to me to be completely out of

[1:02:03] character with the neighborhood. That's all I wanted to know.

[1:02:06] » Thank you.

[1:02:10] » Uh well, I only know of

[1:02:13] three. One is, of course, the public park on Pine Ridge. Uh but, both tennis

[1:02:18] courts that I know of are both on Lincoln within 1,000 ft of each other.

[1:02:23] And, of course, the it's hard to get a tennis court on a

[1:02:26] 15,000 sq ft lot. Um but, in a case like this, where we have

[1:02:31] uh just again, just shy of an acre we're able to accommodate one within the

[1:02:35] zoning laws. So, to answer your question, yes. I only

[1:02:39] know of two. I There's some There's a bunch of sports courts here and there,

[1:02:43] but full full-blown tennis court, I only know of those two.

[1:02:48] » Okay. Any other comments?

[1:02:51] Yes, sir.

[1:03:00] » Jim Beldesman, 37 Rocking Horse Trail. Uh

[1:03:05] two houses away. >> Speak up.

[1:03:08] » That's not usually my problem. Uh

[1:03:13] it'll be what it'll be. My biggest concern still is, even though I heard

[1:03:18] that the drainage has been uh satisfied or will be satisfied.

[1:03:24] Um but I actually took the time this afternoon to look at the site plan on

[1:03:29] the village website. Not that I understood it

[1:03:33] cuz I'm far from being an an architect uh

[1:03:38] or anything along that line. There was one

[1:03:41] um point where it talks about Chris a um

[1:03:47] prop- aco drain if you look at the foot of the driveway.

[1:03:53] Could you explain that? I I have no idea what that means.

[1:03:57] » Okay. So, my engineer could

[1:03:59] » Well, one of the two of you. I'll accept any one of them.

[1:04:05] » Did you want me to answer? >> Yeah. Yeah, come up to the microphone

[1:04:08] and if you have a res- if you have a response

[1:04:11] » They can't answer it. >> If you have a response, sure.

[1:04:14] » Um the An aco drain is a um also known as a zipper drain or a trench

[1:04:19] drain at the bottom of the driveway. It covers the full width. The aco is the

[1:04:23] name brand of the particular one that uh we show on our detail sheet.

[1:04:28] » So, that is going to be inserted as to what they formally had, which we

[1:04:34] spoke about before the meeting and they actually told me how bad it was

[1:04:39] which I had no clue. Um so, you're going to be adding a drain there. That's one.

[1:04:45] » Oh, yes. >> concern everybody is the

[1:04:47] » up to the come up to the microphone so you can

[1:04:50] » everything flows down. >> Okay.

[1:04:52] Um so, where where um our system is designed for all the

[1:04:56] improvements on the property, the existing house, the driveway, the

[1:05:00] um the pool and the pool patios, etc., as well as the tennis court. So, yes,

[1:05:05] we're adding a um a zipper drain, a trench drain across the front of the

[1:05:08] driveway that is being directed to um culverts or dry well system Uh just

[1:05:15] behind the proposed sport court. Um and that's going to take all the

[1:05:19] water, all the all the additional runoff as required by the code.

[1:05:25] » Yeah. >> Sports is going to be over here. The

[1:05:27] drain is over here. How are they at the that

[1:05:32] Sorry. What do you turn this on?

[1:05:39] » Pipes. Pipes.

[1:05:42] » Pipes. No, I But that's but he has it going the other

[1:05:46] way. So it's supposed to come down.

[1:05:51] » Pumps. >> Believe me, I know about pipes. I have

[1:05:54] one going across my property. >> So what he's asking is are you going to

[1:05:58] have a a pump system to push it up the elevation cuz there is

[1:06:03] a change of elevation in that location.

[1:06:08] » No, there's no pump there's no pump required.

[1:06:11] So um I brought a hard copy because I can't

[1:06:14] see the screen. Um so the the trench drain in the

[1:06:19] driveway is at an elevation of 223.8 and the invert the pipe the bottom of

[1:06:25] the pipe is at 222.8 about a foot deep. And it's directing the water across the

[1:06:31] um across the dri- across the property here

[1:06:34] this pipe going from the from the trench drain that just here at the driveway

[1:06:38] across this way to the cultec. Uh the cultec the bottom elevation is

[1:06:44] 219.5. So 219.5 to 222.8

[1:06:50] or 223 is about um 4 ft lower.

[1:06:54] » Yep. >> Right? 4 ft lower. So there's a 4 ft

[1:06:58] slope from the trench drain to the bottom of the cultec. The cultec are

[1:07:03] about 3 ft high. Uh the invert uh that we show at this

[1:07:07] point here where it enters is 221.15.

[1:07:12] Uh so the pipe is at a 1 and 1/2%. So that's a little less than a quarter per

[1:07:16] foot. Um so it's sloping to that direction.

[1:07:20] » It it the project improvements will definitely improve the water runoff.

[1:07:24] » Okay. >> That's one way it will might be and I I

[1:07:28] always look at that. >> I I

[1:07:30] and I appreciate >> Cuz I have a problem on

[1:07:32] on my own property, yes. >> And I really don't want to be calling uh

[1:07:37] snow way to uh

[1:07:38] » No, I don't think I don't think Mike wants any more calls on even

[1:07:42] It's not what he told me. >> Uh there's nothing to do with much, but

[1:07:45] it's I stone curbs uh replacement to newer

[1:07:49] replacements. Is that Yeah, is that

[1:07:53] what Again, that's going to affect the water?

[1:08:00] I it was on the site plan that talked about the water.

[1:08:07] » I mean there is a stone curb there now. I think in the area where there was a

[1:08:11] driveway curb cut, we're going to replace that at a standard height curb.

[1:08:15] » Close up to the right thing. >> Is that going to be asphalt or is that

[1:08:18] going to be uh Belgium block? >> stone curb This part of the existing

[1:08:21] curbing >> Makes sense.

[1:08:27] » And I promised you I would say it. You really going to put a flag pole by

[1:08:31] the house?

[1:08:36] You can answer. >> Yeah, I I mean I answer I I appreciate

[1:08:39] it. At least I appreciate it. I know. No, thank you. It's uh

[1:08:43] appreciate everybody's comments. Jason Ryan, 19 Dorchester.

[1:08:47] Uh it is in the plans for us to put a a flag pole. We

[1:08:50] um we love this country, love America, and the goal is to have a flag pole with

[1:08:53] American flag in our property.

[1:08:58] Yeah, yeah. >> Okay. Um

[1:09:01] » Thank you. >> Thank you so much.

[1:09:04] What we'll do is we're going to continue the public hearing next month.

[1:09:09] By that time there should be additional information plans up to be reviewed. And

[1:09:16] I think that there are certain reports and other studies that will also be

[1:09:19] reviewed by our professionals so we'll have some feedback on that.

[1:09:24] So on that score

[1:09:28] we'll adjourn till next month. And

[1:09:32] and hopefully we will have additional input from the public

[1:09:37] and you'll give us additional input as well.

[1:09:41] Okay. Thank you all.

[1:09:49] Okay. Our Our final matter is

[1:10:22] We have We have another application coming up. If you have If you have some

[1:10:25] comments, we'll take them next week. You know what you can do, you can always

[1:10:33] send a letter. If you have If you have additional

[1:10:36] comments beyond what you've done,

[1:10:39] send send a letter to Michael.

[1:10:47] Okay. You We're the only two

[1:10:51] left in our area in the wintertime. And so enjoy

[1:10:59] something. >> Yeah.

[1:11:01] Yeah. Yeah. >> 10th 10th September

[1:11:04] I think it's the >> 14th of September 14th of September

[1:11:09] » September 10th >> 10th

[1:11:10] » All right. >> It happens.

[1:11:12] » All right. We have another We have another

[1:11:14] application. >> Please.

[1:11:16] » So, thank you. We'll see you next month.

[1:11:21] » All right.

[1:11:24] » Okay, the Anderson Hill Road project.

[1:11:28] » Spin Anthony

[1:11:33] How are you? >> Ready?

[1:11:38] » Okay. Um >> Any pickleball?

[1:11:41] » No. >> Yes, we do have pickleball.

[1:11:42] » Do pickleball. >> have pickleball.

[1:11:44] » Yeah. Uh >> I know you have bocce, but uh yeah.

[1:11:47] » What? Uh okay. What we'll do is is let's have

[1:11:51] a presentation and then let's talk about the DEIS

[1:11:55] because I think that's our principal task here is to go through

[1:12:00] your uh sort of the

[1:12:03] the framework for that document and discuss it, see if there any additional

[1:12:08] comments the board may have. I think you are going to be before the Board of

[1:12:13] Trustees what next month on this? >> 8th is.

[1:12:17] » So, this is basically just a discussion. We have time to uh I think put our

[1:12:22] comments together if we have any. Um but you know, now you're here.

[1:12:28] So, give us your pitch.

[1:12:30] » Okay, my name's Tony Veneziano. I'm here on behalf of Erickson.

[1:12:34] And we have our full team here tonight. Now, may be for you a very simple matter

[1:12:39] to comment on the scope. But for us, it's a big deal. It's really

[1:12:43] one of our our first full presentations. >> Of course.

[1:12:47] » So, we submitted our petition on June 11th

[1:12:50] to the Village Board. And on June 25th, they adopted a resolution saying they

[1:12:56] intend to be lead agency. On June 25th, we submitted a letter and on July 28th,

[1:13:02] they confirmed their lead agency, adopted a positive declaration, and set

[1:13:06] the scope for the 8th. So, we thought it would be a good idea to come here so

[1:13:10] that you had the information you need cuz we I don't know what you all each

[1:13:15] one of you know. So, we want to make sure you have enough information to

[1:13:18] actually comment at the village board meeting on the 8th or you'll have 10

[1:13:23] days for written comments if they should close that hearing. We submitted a

[1:13:26] 38-page a 38-page scoping outline. So, we think we've hit most of the issues,

[1:13:31] but >> I read it.

[1:13:33] » Was it good? >> It's It's long.

[1:13:36] » It's telling us what you're going to do. >> It's chock-full.

[1:13:39] What?

[1:13:42] » It's telling us what you're going to do. So,

[1:13:45] it's spelled out very well. >> You ready to vote? What do we

[1:13:49] » No, no. I mean, you gave us the questions. Now, we're waiting for the

[1:13:52] answers. >> Yeah, well, we're drafting the answers.

[1:13:55] If we can cajole AKRF to move along here.

[1:14:01] Um >> What I did learn from reading this

[1:14:04] 28-page document, you finally have the number

[1:14:06] of the units.

[1:14:09] » Yeah. >> 870 is what? Some

[1:14:11] » 834. >> 834.

[1:14:13] » Do you want to go? You want to do this? >> No, I I don't know what's going on here

[1:14:16] right now. >> Yeah, no. So, that's I got to get

[1:14:18] everybody up to the baseline. >> Okay.

[1:14:20] » So, Erickson Living Properties LLC closed on the on the property last week.

[1:14:26] Okay. So, they went into contract in the fall. It was an unconditional contract,

[1:14:31] and we did a lot of work, planning work, site work, soils work,

[1:14:37] work with neighbors to get where where we were where they were comfortable to

[1:14:41] close. The petition requests

[1:14:45] basically a new PUD, 975 Anderson Hill Road. It is just the density, the

[1:14:50] height, the FAR, etc. There's a new use a continuum of care

[1:14:55] retirement community which is in the zoning.

[1:14:59] The concept plan has 750 independent units and 84 assisted living units, 834

[1:15:05] units. This density is below what other PUDs in

[1:15:10] the village have have on the books. For For example, 900 King

[1:15:14] Street. Now, the abutters that we Oh, we have

[1:15:18] the right map up. Good job, Peter. So, across So, north is at the top of

[1:15:24] the screen. To the south is the Blind Brook Country Club. It's 650 ft away

[1:15:28] from our front buildings. To the east is Doral Greens, which is

[1:15:33] 350 ft away. And to the north is Kingsfield, which is

[1:15:37] 425 ft away at the closest point. And to the left is a forest SUNY purchase where

[1:15:44] the kids go. Um Now, when we first started planning

[1:15:48] this, I'm just going to take a few minutes. It's a I'm at 50,000 ft. When

[1:15:51] we first started this, we we had a title impediment. Right? We had as part of the

[1:15:57] prior approvals, we had an agreement restricting what we could do on the golf

[1:16:01] range, which was the southwestern quadrant of the site, where we could

[1:16:07] only do office. Which is why the Cohen proposal when it

[1:16:11] came into the village had medical office there because they didn't quite have

[1:16:15] that resolved. So, we went to the Doral Greens in the fall and we worked with

[1:16:19] them for months. Um and they we have an agreement with

[1:16:22] them. We met with them today. And they fully support the project at this point.

[1:16:27] We originally had a an a landscape berm along our common property line. They

[1:16:31] said you could take it down. Interestingly, they never had a concern

[1:16:35] regarding conflicting traffic patterns. And they never really had a concern as

[1:16:40] as as we stayed a little bit away with what would be on that site and this use

[1:16:44] it's like where they're going to go. I mean, within the first two or three

[1:16:48] meetings they they sort of like the Erickson and they

[1:16:51] sort of see it as their next place and it's right next door and their their

[1:16:57] people were trying to bring them right along. So,

[1:17:03] we have that in place. They're going to submit a letter and they'll come to

[1:17:06] hearings. The as of right plan under PUD is 490

[1:17:11] senior living units. We're above that. Our original plan was 1,034 units and we

[1:17:17] did that because when you look at the prior use of the property, the Arrowwood

[1:17:21] Conference Center, the Arrowwood Conference Center,

[1:17:24] that generated a number of impacts that

[1:17:29] Let me just see where that that piece is.

[1:17:35] Doral Doral generated 287 vehicle trips in the AM peak and 355 in the PM peak.

[1:17:43] We generate 233 as opposed to 287 and 175 as opposed to 355.

[1:17:50] This The average entry age to this site is 80.

[1:17:55] The average occupant age is 85. So, the traffic numbers are really

[1:18:00] employee numbers. The people that come to give the

[1:18:04] services and you're going to hear from Maryann Navarro who's going to from

[1:18:07] Erickson tonight about all the services they provide for their people.

[1:18:12] Um 900 King Street, which I mentioned

[1:18:14] before, really set the highest bar for the PUD,

[1:18:19] which Peter and I both worked on. So, the PUD has 900 9,000 square feet or six

[1:18:24] units you can have per acre. King Street has 19,175

[1:18:30] square feet and 12.3 units per acre. We're under

[1:18:34] both of those, but I just want you to know that we looked at the impacts. This

[1:18:38] site, if you look at the surrounding properties,

[1:18:41] and you assume that everyone supports this, there's very little opposition in

[1:18:45] this area. There's There's very little traffic that can't be handled by And

[1:18:48] this part of town. Um And the visual impacts will You saw in

[1:18:53] the in the document we'll have a full view visual impact study. And our taxes

[1:18:57] are projected to be right now 8.1 million to you at full build out.

[1:19:06] So, when we were working and there's two members of the of the village board are

[1:19:10] here. They're here to monitor me.

[1:19:14] It's specific. So,

[1:19:18] we we were at the point where we were looking at the code and there's there's

[1:19:21] sort of a conflict. There's this 10% affordable housing.

[1:19:26] So, Erickson supports of the concept of putting the affordable housing. And we

[1:19:30] placed it in the southwestern, right off the entry drive.

[1:19:35] We had a separate building. And we would We met a few times with the

[1:19:41] village board and they sort of didn't like that.

[1:19:43] » Right. >> It was segregated.

[1:19:46] » So, I don't think they liked it. >> They didn't like it enough that they

[1:19:49] persuaded us to think very hard about how we could accommodate this affordable

[1:19:56] component. Now, you're going to hear tonight about the fact that to enter

[1:20:02] into an Erickson community, and they're a national company, Mary Ann

[1:20:06] will tell you about that. You have an entry fee, which is substantially

[1:20:10] refunded upon your last act on the planet or if you leave, you get 80-90%

[1:20:16] of it back. And there's services There's a service uh number.

[1:20:21] They have a lifetime commitment. Once you're in an Erickson community, they

[1:20:25] can't kick you out. So, they do it They're sort of do the

[1:20:29] economic due diligence at the beginning. And then they let you in but if for some

[1:20:33] reason you have to go into this this is they have to bear that and lose that.

[1:20:38] So, we ended up committing to 5% affordable units, same

[1:20:43] size. We have two sizes but same size as the other units. A lot of people put

[1:20:47] affordable housing at a discounted they discount the size of the units.

[1:20:51] Um and that was all sort of generally

[1:20:54] thought to be a peaceful place to end up. Now, I will

[1:20:59] say cuz they're here but the village board said that they still want to

[1:21:03] review the overall density and we said fine. So, that's a fair butter fight.

[1:21:07] We'll bring our butter knives and we'll we'll figure that out. Um

[1:21:12] we also Peter Furrow and I sort of came up with

[1:21:15] this way to look at this analytical model which was

[1:21:21] for every 50 units you deduct the cuz there's no reason

[1:21:28] to limit the number just because a few is like a high number.

[1:21:31] One of the village board members at one at the first meeting

[1:21:35] when we had 1,034 units said that's 10% of our community and we said okay,

[1:21:40] sorry. So, and that that really resonated with

[1:21:45] with the client. So, we we addressed that but for every 50 units you lose

[1:21:49] $490,000 a year in taxes and you lose 14 vehicle

[1:21:55] trips against 233 total. So, you have to look at how much is the

[1:22:01] benefit to you versus what we get out of it because

[1:22:07] this is there's a risk there with the affordable component. I've sort of said

[1:22:11] way too much about it but it's at the heart of why we need this density in

[1:22:16] this project.

[1:22:20] Um

[1:22:25] Part of our due diligence, just I have a few wrap-up points. Part of our due

[1:22:28] diligence led us to water.

[1:22:33] It was a whole water find water, water where are we going to get water? So, we

[1:22:38] went to Veolia and we work with them. And Diego basically New York City sells

[1:22:45] water to Veolia. It all worked out. We have a will serve

[1:22:49] letter and they've asked for a tank, a storage tank.

[1:22:53] Which we've contractually agreed to. It's going to be at right now they're

[1:22:58] looking for place to aerate with pumps to pressurize it, but that's something

[1:23:02] that'll help a lot of people in that portion of the village.

[1:23:06] Um, we also in the right off our entry drive to the left here, oops, there's a

[1:23:12] marketing building that they built for the or the facilities.

[1:23:17] And I think it's just after the first phase,

[1:23:20] right Steve? You have to convert it. So, after the first phase, which is right

[1:23:23] now 300 units, they'll take that and convert it to a recreational building

[1:23:27] for the village. We've spoken to the village board about

[1:23:32] what the village would want. Um, God's

[1:23:37] They can't come up with two things in a row. So,

[1:23:40] we're going to work with them and start to work with them right now to help

[1:23:45] design something because we're going to actually give it to you.

[1:23:49] Uh, we'll fix it up and give it to you and you'll have to maintain it. So, we

[1:23:52] feel that there's a a barrier towards, you know, too much

[1:23:56] because you're going to have to put the money into maintain it, but it's going

[1:23:58] to be it's not even going to be age restricted. It's going to be for the

[1:24:01] everyone right now. It could be whatever you want, but for everyone in the

[1:24:04] village. We met with Doral Greens today. I could say this, right Steve?

[1:24:11] And they

[1:24:15] They have like one bike for a gym. I said, "You have a gym?"

[1:24:19] Oh, yeah, it's right around the corner. There's like a bike in there and a place

[1:24:25] to do sit-ups. So, we I told them, "Well, we're going

[1:24:28] to have a gym here for everyone in the village."

[1:24:32] And they said that when Darrel uh Arrowwood was originally put in, they

[1:24:36] had a gym, they had a pool, they had tennis courts, they had a golf It was

[1:24:39] like their own private country club. So, I told them that

[1:24:44] they could use this gym. And so, they're going to they're going to start to

[1:24:47] participate in that design. They have a meeting in early September.

[1:24:51] Um

[1:24:54] I think

[1:24:58] I think that's where we're going to close this time.

[1:25:01] » I I I Can I just >> to say something while

[1:25:03] » Only because I'm I'm going to forget if I don't say it.

[1:25:07] In looking at the maps on on and the material that was sent to us,

[1:25:12] you have Harrison, you have Purchase, you have Port Chester, and you have Rye.

[1:25:17] Did you mean Rye or was that supposed to be Rye Brook?

[1:25:21] » Well, I don't know what you're You know?

[1:25:26] » You're talking about the figure with the map?

[1:25:28] » Yeah, I am. >> That was an earlier version that I

[1:25:32] didn't use exactly right. >> So, you meant Rye Brook?

[1:25:35] And that's going to be changed. Okay. >> Excuse me, sir. Can you identify

[1:25:40] yourself? >> I'm Jason Metzer. I work as part of the

[1:25:43] project team. I'm with AKRF. >> He's actually drafting.

[1:25:46] » Thank you. >> Um

[1:25:48] And it's interesting because Diego keeps trying to get me to meet

[1:25:53] with the city of Rye because of the storm water issue.

[1:25:57] So, I tell him we're going to have a zero

[1:25:59] increase in storm water runoff, and why do I need with Rye? But they'll be

[1:26:02] writing a letter saying, "Please don't affect us downstream."

[1:26:06] » Which makes sense. >> Ready to go?

[1:26:09] Should I move my mic? >> Sure.

[1:26:14] » Everyone, uh

[1:26:16] Peter Ferro with AKRF. So, we're the project planners, uh, environmental

[1:26:21] engineers. Um, I'm going to start and just give you kind of the more,

[1:26:28] um, boring overview of the site, the

[1:26:31] project, and the very specific zoning asks and site plan asks that we have

[1:26:36] just to kind of level set. So, just as Tony mentioned, right, we're at

[1:26:41] 975 Anderson Hill Road. It's about 83 acres in the Village of Rye Brook.

[1:26:46] Um, portions of the property that Erickson

[1:26:48] owns are in the Town of Harrison and in Greenwich, Connecticut. Those portions

[1:26:54] of the site are not included in that 83 acres and there are no plans to improve

[1:27:00] those pieces. So, all the development, um, is on the formerly, um,

[1:27:06] improved site of the Arrowwood Conference Center in Rye Brook.

[1:27:11] Um, the site is currently zoned as a PUD.

[1:27:15] And obviously, you know, it was developed with the Arrowwood Hotel

[1:27:19] Conference Center. So, 200, uh, 393 key hotel, about 110,000 square foot

[1:27:26] conference center, 718

[1:27:29] parking spaces, a nine-hole golf course, and as we all know, it closed in 2020.

[1:27:34] Since that time, the site has been cleared, uh, down all the buildings have

[1:27:39] been removed down to the foundations. The site still retains its access from

[1:27:44] Anderson Hill Road and we propose to maintain that access. There is secondary

[1:27:49] access through Doral Greens from the Arrowwood site to through Doral Greens

[1:27:55] and from Doral Greens actually through the Arrowwood site to Anderson Hill

[1:27:58] Road. So, there's several emergency means of access.

[1:28:02] One of the things that's important to note is is the topography on the site.

[1:28:07] Um, I don't know why I I've never I don't play golf, so I never walked the

[1:28:11] site, um, before, but it there's a lot more topography than I would have

[1:28:16] thought, and it slopes down from east to west. Um, more than 80 ft. So, a

[1:28:22] significant amount of topography that we're we're dealing with, and I want to

[1:28:26] just have that in the back of our minds when we start talking about

[1:28:30] the proposed site plan. So,

[1:28:33] in laying out the buildings and the plan, Tony alluded to the fact that

[1:28:38] we've been at this for a while. Erickson's been at this for a long time.

[1:28:41] They are as Maryanne will tell you, they have

[1:28:45] you know, over two dozen communities throughout the country,

[1:28:48] over 30,000 residents in their communities, and they they plan

[1:28:53] things out very well because they're not a developer. They're an owner. They're a

[1:28:58] manager. These are their communities. They don't sell them. They want them to

[1:29:02] work. They know how to make them work, and so they've been very thoughtful

[1:29:05] about laying these out. So, the goal here is to situate um, lower height

[1:29:10] buildings closer to Doral Greens at the higher portion of the site, closer to

[1:29:15] Anderson Hill Road, but still set way back.

[1:29:19] And take advantage of that sloping topography to go vertical a little bit.

[1:29:24] Vertical works really well with these uh, with this use because it's all about

[1:29:29] limiting walking distance. Elevators are wonderful, so vertical works really well

[1:29:34] here. Um,

[1:29:38] So, the project as Tony mentioned, 834 units of a continuum of care retirement

[1:29:44] community or CCRC. It'll be split up between

[1:29:48] what we'll think of as more independent living units,

[1:29:51] one and two bedroom units varying in size. They'll probably be

[1:29:56] eight different sizes or more. Um, and then 84 assisted living memory

[1:30:01] care units. >> Peter.

[1:30:03] » Yes, sir. >> The 834 units, they are spread over how

[1:30:07] many buildings? Of the Of the I can count them but how many buildings off

[1:30:10] the top? >> It's 12, I believe.

[1:30:14] I believe it's 12. 1 2 3

[1:30:18] Well, it's 12 total buildings, I'm sorry. 10 residential

[1:30:22] 11 residential buildings. Apologies. >> You're splitting up the 84 into assisted

[1:30:27] and memory care because they're two different things.

[1:30:29] » Correct. Correct. So, the 84 would be split and that'll be split based on the

[1:30:36] need. They're they're different regulations as you know for

[1:30:40] assisted living and memory care. And once you start building that need, the

[1:30:44] licenses often go by floors. So, you know, you've got to be careful about how

[1:30:48] much you put in and when and when your license triggers. And what Erickson does

[1:30:53] is they don't build all 834 units year one.

[1:30:57] Right? You start with and let me just tell you a little bit about how the um

[1:31:04] community lays out and I'll come back here. Um so, the community, and this is

[1:31:09] going to answer your question, I promise. The community's geared around a

[1:31:13] clubhouse, a a community building. Um

[1:31:18] and all the residential buildings are attached to that community building.

[1:31:22] And attached to each other through enclosed conditioned hallways. And so,

[1:31:27] the the those those community buildings serve as

[1:31:31] the hub. And so, this proposal would have two community buildings. So, what

[1:31:36] would happen is you'd start with community building one, you'd build the

[1:31:39] first few residential buildings, and then you'd bring more residential

[1:31:44] buildings online, build the second community building, build more

[1:31:47] residential. And usually the assisted living memory care comes at the end of

[1:31:53] that because it's not it it's for the residents that are there.

[1:31:58] And so, as those first residents to in need that higher level of care,

[1:32:02] they're able to have a full facility dedicated to them. If a resident needs

[1:32:07] that level of care before that facility is built, Erickson can provide it in

[1:32:11] that independent living unit. They can still provide it and they will provide

[1:32:15] it. >> The assisted living

[1:32:20] facility, it's kind of filled from your uh residents. You don't take uh somebody

[1:32:27] directly into the >> Generally speaking, yes.

[1:32:30] » I can answer. >> Oh, sorry.

[1:32:32] » I'm sorry. >> Yeah.

[1:32:33] » I can come up, Mary Ann, and >> Hello.

[1:32:36] » Speak into our microphone. >> Yes, that's right. Um Mary Ann Navarro

[1:32:40] with Erickson Senior Living. Um we actually can welcome um

[1:32:47] members of the public, people from the outside. I mean, I you know, I I think

[1:32:51] ideally, yes, it's for the residents, so that it's available to them. We offer

[1:32:54] that continuum of care, but um if there is availability and space, then members

[1:33:00] uh from the larger community can can join.

[1:33:05] » And so, when you look at this product, and for those of you who had a chance to

[1:33:08] view um the the the Erickson community in in Cedar Crest, New Jersey, you'll

[1:33:13] know, and for those who haven't had a chance yet,

[1:33:16] open invitation. We're happy to arrange that. Um I think it actually it it made

[1:33:21] a big difference to me to see it. Um it might for you as well. Um

[1:33:26] this is really a service-oriented product. This is not a it people live

[1:33:30] there and it's their residence, but this is a service-oriented product. And if

[1:33:33] you break it down by fee, actually, um almost three quarters of the fees go

[1:33:38] toward services. We're talking dining, health care, wellness, social,

[1:33:43] security, all sorts of things, and that's really what separates this type

[1:33:48] of CCRC product from a senior living just generic senior living project, or

[1:33:53] even other independent living products that you might have um

[1:33:58] in the region. >> And I I I think that that very

[1:34:02] term service-oriented facility

[1:34:05] I think it's important when we talk about the density.

[1:34:09] That you really can you're almost comparing apples to oranges if you

[1:34:12] compare it to two different projects. >> You do and I think one of the things

[1:34:17] that's interesting to me when we started looking at the numbers is that

[1:34:22] the employment that's generated by this this use

[1:34:28] is not insignificant. Right? We talked about the traffic, but we're talking

[1:34:32] between 3 and 400 people who who could be working at this

[1:34:37] facility at everything from management to maintenance to health workers to

[1:34:44] dining to facilities management everything in between.

[1:34:49] » Hospitality. >> Hospitality and so now you've got this

[1:34:53] built-in workforce and unlike the office parks around here

[1:34:57] those jobs don't go somewhere else, right? These jobs have to stay here

[1:35:02] and AI's not replacing them. >> I think the only thing you don't have is

[1:35:05] the funeral director. You have just about everything else.

[1:35:11] » I don't think you want to go there. I wouldn't recommend that.

[1:35:15] » So moving right along. So the uh >> But what I mean by that it's a positive.

[1:35:20] » It is. >> You don't have to leave the site. This

[1:35:22] is the >> It's modeled more after

[1:35:24] » after >> Connecticut.

[1:35:25] » Yeah. >> Connecticut has done that way before so

[1:35:29] many in the Northeast. >> You don't have to leave the site, but

[1:35:31] what we find is what Erickson has found is that their residents like to engage

[1:35:36] in the community, so they have a lot of them have their own cars, but

[1:35:40] they also have transportation. They look for opportunities to volunteer in the

[1:35:44] communities. Most of these people are are

[1:35:48] above average in their affluence Um, want to take that opportunity to give

[1:35:53] back. That's kind of what we see. So, you get this opportunity also to

[1:35:56] integrate with the community, plus the 3 to 400 people who work here, anyone from

[1:36:01] a high school student who's bussing tables,

[1:36:05] um, up. And it really provides a great a great range, we think.

[1:36:10] Um, to facilitate the project, right? We are

[1:36:13] asking for a PUD zoning amendment, just like the other PUDs, a site-specific PUD

[1:36:20] to approve the zoning and the concept plan.

[1:36:23] Uh, we're requesting buildings of four stories and then in select locations on

[1:36:27] the site up to five stories. And that's only for the buildings farthest away

[1:36:32] from Doral Greens, farthest from King Field, farthest from Anderson Hill Road.

[1:36:36] Really at the bottom of the site next to Sunny Purchase.

[1:36:39] » down >> Uh, south of the pond, yeah. And

[1:36:42] adjacent to the the woods. >> Um,

[1:36:46] and so, the density we're requesting is 9.1 dwelling units per acre. So, the

[1:36:51] independent living units are dwelling units. They have full kitchens,

[1:36:54] bathrooms, and up to and 10.1 units total units. So, that includes the

[1:36:59] assisted living. Your current PUD

[1:37:03] at base is six dwelling units per acre. So, that's six townhouses. We're

[1:37:08] requesting nine CCRC units. Um, we want to limit the coverage to

[1:37:13] 25%. We proposed a parking ratio and then

[1:37:17] specific setbacks, right? 150 ft from Anderson Hill Road, 100 ft from the

[1:37:22] sides, and 200 ft from the rear. That's the northern King Field,

[1:37:27] um, boundary. And as Tony said,

[1:37:30] we have this new um, this new this new consideration of

[1:37:35] of CCRC attainable unit, an affordable unit. Um, because these units are not

[1:37:41] for sale and they're not for rent. So, right now, almost everyone's affordable

[1:37:46] unit, um, code says for sale and for rent, here are the rules. These are not

[1:37:51] for sale or for rent. You pay an entrance fee when you come in. It's

[1:37:55] highly refundable. That secures your spot in the facility. That secures your

[1:38:00] independent living unit. Generally, people sell an asset, a house, what have

[1:38:05] you, and then you pay a monthly service fee.

[1:38:08] There is no landlord-tenant relationship and there's no title transfer. It's a

[1:38:14] contractual agreement that's entered into, a residency and care agreement,

[1:38:19] that's secured by that entrance fee. So, we had to come up with another model.

[1:38:24] Because this is mostly service-oriented, we also knew that we couldn't just have

[1:38:28] the same rent levels as the monthly service fee

[1:38:32] because the monthly service fee includes food, includes health care, includes

[1:38:37] other things that you would be spending your money on.

[1:38:40] And so, we came up with this model, um to make these units affordable to

[1:38:46] people who are at 80% of AMI, up to 80% of AMI.

[1:38:52] And they in return, they get a guaranteed home for life, just like any

[1:38:57] other Erickson resident, guaranteed entry to assisted living and memory

[1:39:01] care, and we're prorating the um monthly service fee.

[1:39:06] Right? So, we're we're pegging it at the affordable rent

[1:39:10] published by Westchester County, right, for a one-bedroom unit, plus

[1:39:16] the additional monthly service fee. Erickson units, a traditional Erickson

[1:39:21] unit, if it was a couple that moved in, would pay a fee for that unit, a monthly

[1:39:27] service fee, and then they would pay an additional

[1:39:30] person service fee. That's less because the first service fee includes your

[1:39:34] housing as well. So, what we said is let's decouple it, just like that. You

[1:39:39] pay for the rent at the affordable rate, and then you pay that if there's a

[1:39:43] second person, you pay that >> But the entry fee is

[1:39:48] fixed. >> The entry fee is fixed. So, what we what

[1:39:51] the way the >> Whether you are affordable,

[1:39:52] non-affordable, there is no break on that.

[1:39:55] » Correct. And the way it works is they have a range of entry fees, and that

[1:39:59] they secure different sizes of units, basically, is what what they do. So, we

[1:40:04] would Erickson proposes to make the lower

[1:40:07] the most affordable two tiers as as eligible for these attainable units.

[1:40:13] It would not be um

[1:40:16] it would not be prorated, but what we're targeting is someone who has an asset

[1:40:21] who's, you know, over 62 years of age, maybe they're 80.

[1:40:25] And maybe they're looking to sell their house, but they don't have a large

[1:40:29] income. They don't have a large pension. They don't have something, you know,

[1:40:33] investment income they're living off of. But they do have some income. So, they

[1:40:37] have an asset to secure this. Um and then they have their income, and

[1:40:43] that's a pretty sizable chunk of the population who probably fall into that

[1:40:47] category. Um and that's what we're targeting.

[1:40:51] In addition, those units that Erickson would make as

[1:40:55] affordable units are not any different, as Tony said, than any other unit. In

[1:41:01] fact, the um

[1:41:04] the Broadview site in Sunny Purchase has an affordable program.

[1:41:09] Their affordable are only in the smallest of the smallest units. In fact,

[1:41:13] they made a whole 'nother size for them. They're kind of very small.

[1:41:17] Erickson will make um they are going to have these, you know, tiers of units. Um

[1:41:24] there will be affordable and non-affordable in that same tier. There

[1:41:28] will be no distinction from the outside, from the inside. You will not be able to

[1:41:32] tell walking in there if you're in an affordable unit or not,

[1:41:36] because there will be some smaller units that someone who's not an affordable

[1:41:42] um resident will pay and some that aren't. And so it's really integrated

[1:41:46] into the community. >> And you receive the same level of

[1:41:49] services. >> Absolutely same level. No one would

[1:41:51] know. Um

[1:41:54] So Look, I'll give you the pitch. We

[1:41:57] believe this is a low-impact use relatively um in a pretty good site. As

[1:42:03] Tony said we're projecting over $8 million in annual property taxes, more

[1:42:08] than 5 and 1/2 million a year to the school.

[1:42:10] That's 9% of their budget from last year.

[1:42:14] Um about a million seven to the village. It's about 6% of their budget last year.

[1:42:20] And unlike the office buildings or hospitality

[1:42:24] we're not going anywhere. These are folks who live here and people who work

[1:42:28] here. We're stable. Um We'll go into it in the EIS, but we have

[1:42:33] less traffic than Arrowwood. Um similar land

[1:42:36] coverage, less parking. Um less traffic than if you were to do an as-of-right

[1:42:41] town home development, significantly less traffic. Um Erickson Communities

[1:42:46] typically have about 1.3 people per unit if you were to average

[1:42:50] it across all their residents. Um average household size in Rye Brook

[1:42:54] is 2.87. Right? So we're less than half of the population density.

[1:43:00] » You're going to be making available ballroom space, uh banquet space for for

[1:43:06] the for for the outside or no? >> No, so this is a very

[1:43:11] again community center. >> unit.

[1:43:13] » Very much. Um

[1:43:16] Tony talked about the setbacks. Um And then obviously up to the top of that

[1:43:21] screen is 1100 King Street, right? The former Reckson

[1:43:24] building. So you got about half a million square feet of

[1:43:28] of office space. Since I am a planner and you are the

[1:43:31] planning board. I'd be remiss if I didn't talk about the comprehensive

[1:43:35] plan. Um we believe this use and the zoning is

[1:43:38] consistent with the comprehensive plan. Some of the goals that were laid out,

[1:43:42] right? Providing an enduring economic base,

[1:43:44] preserving natural, cultural, recreational, historic assets.

[1:43:49] Um This land has already been developed.

[1:43:51] It's already been graded. It's already been heavily disturbed.

[1:43:55] It provides a much-needed product. Um provides a diversity, you know, adds

[1:44:00] to the diversity of housing choices. And again,

[1:44:04] changing the density um is consistent with what was

[1:44:08] recommended in the comprehensive plan. Well, no one really wants to necessarily

[1:44:12] hear that that it it the comprehensive plan says

[1:44:16] we should adjust the density requirements for residential uses in the

[1:44:19] PUD to a less restrictive regulation. >> Yeah. The comprehensive plan was also

[1:44:24] created well before, say, 900 King was brought online.

[1:44:28] » It was. Yep. Yep. >> Yeah.

[1:44:31] » No, absolutely. Absolutely. But I the the point is I I think and and again,

[1:44:37] we'll go into it, but that six units an acre

[1:44:40] um that's base in the PUD, there are very few if any PUDs that meet that

[1:44:46] today. Um and so when we start looking at what

[1:44:49] the densities are, what the FAR is, will be about the same

[1:44:54] FAR as the Arbors, for example. Um

[1:44:58] » I mean, I'm just speaking to the diversity of housing choices. I'm not

[1:45:00] sure that that point is accurate at all. >> I see. I see what you're saying. Well, a

[1:45:05] group I disagree a little bit, but I hear what

[1:45:08] you're saying only because this is a this is this is going to be a very

[1:45:11] different product than a Sunrise product, than an Atria product. Um

[1:45:16] » shouldn't compare to those at all then when looking at density, for instance.

[1:45:19] » Well, it it >> I think it's always I think it's always

[1:45:22] worth it to compare, but I think there are differences.

[1:45:25] » Yeah, I just just to interject, when one of the interesting things about this

[1:45:30] community that we saw in New Jersey is that the way it's laid out, there

[1:45:36] there seem to be a lot of units. But essentially they have have sort of

[1:45:41] hubs with apartments spiraling out separated by a lot of green space to

[1:45:48] other hubs. So it's not like like you know other residences where you have

[1:45:55] single buildings that are have to be you know

[1:46:00] fairly large in order to accommodate all the residents.

[1:46:03] » It differs from Sunrise. >> It Well, it's it's it's an interesting

[1:46:08] » compare that's the compare. >> If you if you a couple of things if you

[1:46:12] maybe you can touch on because as I understand the procedure and anyone

[1:46:17] can interrupt me if I'm wrong at usually it

[1:46:21] we would get a a referral from the Board of Trustees for a report and

[1:46:25] recommendation on the concept plan. But it's only it's a report and

[1:46:29] recommendation. It's not insignificant so report and recommendation but we're

[1:46:32] not the ones that are going to be voting for it but our jurisdiction are is

[1:46:37] wetlands and steep slopes. Um and to the I think the discussion

[1:46:42] about about density, can you comment on your sort of concept of use of green

[1:46:47] space which I thought was sort of interesting and maybe you can comment on

[1:46:52] whatever wetlands issues and steep slopes issues. We You did discuss at the

[1:46:57] at the head of the conversation about how the slope is actually going to be

[1:47:01] used to enhance the sort of the the sort of the building plan.

[1:47:07] » Yeah, I appreciate that. So the way that this

[1:47:10] works and I it I apologize if it's hard to see on the screen. The yellow are the

[1:47:15] the the roof prints. They're not really

[1:47:17] footprints. Roof prints of the of the residential buildings.

[1:47:21] What what they've done is they've designed those buildings

[1:47:25] into the hill so that the parking, almost all of the parking, not all,

[1:47:30] almost all of the parking is below those buildings. Every residential unit will

[1:47:34] have a covered parking space under a building.

[1:47:38] And so we're able to do that because of the slope. So interspersed in between

[1:47:43] those residential buildings are green spaces. They might be programmed, they

[1:47:49] might not be. There could be courtyards. There There are a number of other

[1:47:54] landscape features. And so what you'll see is you'll see this um you see the

[1:48:00] the residential building as kind of a C or

[1:48:03] an L. If you square that off and make a

[1:48:06] rectangle, that's the footprint of the garage. And so on top of that is space

[1:48:10] that we're able to utilize, Erickson's able to utilize for amenity spaces.

[1:48:15] Diego's able to utilize them for stormwater and other places. So in

[1:48:20] addition to having larger stormwater areas that will need, obviously, we're

[1:48:24] able to intersperse um some stormwater features throughout those buildings. And

[1:48:30] so by by breaking them up, we're we're really

[1:48:34] able to kind of reduce kind of the the the kind of scale and massing a

[1:48:39] little bit. Um it Look, it's still

[1:48:43] it's still like a good size development program. I'm not

[1:48:46] going to say it's not. Um but the way that it's been laid out,

[1:48:52] really kind of takes advantage of that opportunity. Um in terms of wetlands, um

[1:48:58] we shouldn't have much of any wetland direct wetland impact.

[1:49:03] Most of that forest in SUNY Purchase, right? There's wetland in there, right?

[1:49:07] You got the Blind Brook and you've got wetlands. Um

[1:49:10] we might be grading a little in the wetland buffer,

[1:49:14] but the wetland is really on the SUNY Purchase side. Um the tree line is more

[1:49:18] or less the property line and it's grass up to that tree line. So, it's

[1:49:23] already been disturbed. We might be grading it a little bit, um but we're

[1:49:27] not planning on going into the wetlands. There are a couple pockets of steep

[1:49:31] slopes that we would um be modifying as well.

[1:49:35] » Peter, just out of curiosity, out of 83 acres when it's all said and done, what

[1:49:39] percentage of the site would be remaining impervious?

[1:49:43] » Um impervious would be about 23 24%.

[1:49:52] » I can tell you how much green space you >> Diego can make any comments.

[1:49:55] » I just I just want to add one thing. I apologize. Diego Villarreal with JMC,

[1:49:59] um the engineers with the applicant. No, it just I wanted to just emphasize a

[1:50:05] point. I think the area of development that you're seeing right now, two things

[1:50:10] that Peter spoke about. A lot of the area is already disturbed and we're all

[1:50:13] really focused in even though it's a sprawling development area.

[1:50:17] Um the previous building that was there when you look at an aerial photograph of

[1:50:21] the existing conditions, it really was a sprawling building extended pretty far

[1:50:24] south, extended pretty far north. And all of these areas is focused in what

[1:50:29] was already disturbed areas, whether or not it was the golf course or the

[1:50:33] previous hotel with the parking areas that were there. And the steep slopes

[1:50:37] that are being disturbed as a result of this project, were really manufactured

[1:50:41] steep slopes as result of that. Uh the golf course itself has all these

[1:50:45] fabricated hills and sand traps that was created as part of the golf course. You

[1:50:50] don't really have any pristine areas that were trying to be protected within

[1:50:54] the development area. The natural areas that occur along the perimeter of the

[1:50:58] property, that wooded area on the south and western side of the property, all of

[1:51:02] that is being maintained. And what you actually see is those areas that were

[1:51:06] disturbed by the golf course, some of it's going to be restored along the

[1:51:09] northern end, that buffer between uh Kingsfield and the property, the area of

[1:51:15] parking between Doral Greens, all of that is being restored back to a more

[1:51:20] natural condition. So, uh even though it is somewhat of a sprawling development,

[1:51:24] again, what was there before was a sprawling development as well, and we're

[1:51:28] really working within those boundaries and in a lot of cases bringing it back

[1:51:32] in a little bit tighter. Um and and re-emphasizing again the parking under

[1:51:37] the building. It was something that we worked with with Erickson and

[1:51:40] significantly reduces the amount of impervious area that would otherwise

[1:51:44] need to be created. The building is the building, putting the parking underneath

[1:51:47] those areas, that added cost with the construction, working within the

[1:51:51] hillside, again, significantly reduces the amount of impervious area and gives

[1:51:56] us a lot of opportunities to do stormwater management between the

[1:51:59] buildings. Uh Erickson has a landscape architect that we've been working with

[1:52:03] hand-in-hand that has already incorporated a lot of those features in

[1:52:07] between the building and those things. These are just Again, all of which will

[1:52:11] be vetted through the DEIS process, but just wanted to make the board aware that

[1:52:15] these things were all considered in the development of this plan. It's not just

[1:52:19] a picture, it's something that's really been vetted and designed and worked

[1:52:23] through with a number of design professionals taking into consideration

[1:52:27] all of these things that we know uh this board, the village board, and the town

[1:52:31] and the village is going to be interested in as we go through this

[1:52:34] process. >> that you would have any steep slopes in

[1:52:36] the Fulton and Fifth, yeah. >> It's really not much that's out there.

[1:52:40] It's again, fabricated as a result of the construction of the building

[1:52:44] previously, and then the golf course itself. When you When I think of steep

[1:52:48] slopes, I think of wooded hillsides. Those are the things that you're trying

[1:52:52] to preserve and protect as a result of that ordinance, and that's just not what

[1:52:55] you have in this case. >> You did You may have mentioned it at the

[1:52:59] beginning, but I was asleep, so I apologize.

[1:53:01] How does the density here compare to the 900 King Street? I should know that. I

[1:53:05] worked on it for you. >> Well, so

[1:53:09] the density is um we're less. So, number one, we're lower.

[1:53:14] Um 900 King Street is 13.1 units per acre.

[1:53:19] We're at 10.1. Um they are at 0.45 FAR.

[1:53:26] We're at 0.39 FAR. The Arbors is about 0.37 just as a

[1:53:33] comparison. It's not I'm not making any value

[1:53:37] judgments. >> Can you Can you Can you comment on on

[1:53:41] the pond that's on the north I guess northwest?

[1:53:45] What is What I I'm that that that feature I mean is that a man-made

[1:53:50] feature or is that >> I don't know if it I it probably was

[1:53:54] man-made. I'm not positive. I think it was for the golf course, but it is part

[1:53:57] of the the Blind Brook at this point. I mean,

[1:54:00] it's connected. >> Right.

[1:54:02] » It's directly connected. There's an inlet and an outlet to it.

[1:54:07] Um and that's again one of the features that we talked about early on. It's an

[1:54:11] area that's going to be preserved, incorporated into the design,

[1:54:15] um removing the golf course features that

[1:54:18] are around it, restoring some of the >> expanding the pond?

[1:54:21] » They as part of this application, no. We are not looking at expanding the pond.

[1:54:25] It's maintaining its current location. We are proposing a relatively large

[1:54:30] stormwater basin on the southern portion of the site. You see the area that's

[1:54:34] there. Uh Tony alluded to it you know, early on

[1:54:37] with stormwater management. We have an obligation no net increase, no runoff,

[1:54:41] no increase to downstream properties. I know that's it's an engineering

[1:54:45] requirement not only by your village, but the New York State DEC where we have

[1:54:48] to comply with all of those requirements. Uh but we are looking at

[1:54:52] enhancements to that pond as well as a significant stormwater management

[1:54:56] measure down on the southern portion of the property in addition to everything

[1:55:00] else that's going to be done. >> to

[1:55:01] » a passive pond or are you going to have recreational boats or anything like

[1:55:05] that? >> I hope no boats. I'll ask Steve and Mary

[1:55:09] Ann. I don't That I don't know. That I don't know.

[1:55:12] Hold on. What do you want to say? >> Mr. Cohen was going to have boats.

[1:55:16] » This is great. So, I just want to say one thing. So, with less impact when you

[1:55:21] look at this from an impact point of view,

[1:55:24] it's less impacts than the the Arwood. And the Arwood gave the village a

[1:55:29] million seven plus $350,000 in hotel tax.

[1:55:34] We're at 8.1. That's all That's all. So, less offsite

[1:55:38] impacts and we're quadrupling the tax to the village.

[1:55:42] That's all I got to say. >> So,

[1:55:45] we went through all the approvals and everything. I think enough of us

[1:55:48] talking. I apologize. I would like to ask Mary Ann Navarro with Erickson

[1:55:53] Senior Living to come up and just talk about Erickson as a company. So, both

[1:55:58] Erickson both Mary Ann is here and Steve Montgomery is here from Erickson.

[1:56:03] They plan to be here regularly. You will get to know them so you don't have to

[1:56:07] just look at us. But, I do want to take the chance cuz I

[1:56:11] it is a very interesting company. >> Peter, before you before you go, could I

[1:56:15] just ask you one more other question? Regarding emergency services. Can you

[1:56:19] talk about the impact of those? >> Yeah. So, that is going to be right one

[1:56:23] of the areas we need to really focus on. We've already started the conversations

[1:56:27] with Chris. Mary Ann's going to go into it a little

[1:56:30] bit. Um basically, as part of Erickson's model,

[1:56:35] their model is really caring for the person, the resident.

[1:56:40] They will be providing the lift assist. They have their own

[1:56:44] Erickson Health Group, which is the largest provider of primary

[1:56:49] primary geriatric care in the country. They have them in their facilities.

[1:56:53] There are emergency medical responder EMR certified

[1:56:57] staff everywhere.

[1:57:01] They respond basically to about 87% of the calls for service within their

[1:57:06] community. They're doing

[1:57:09] basically everything you can. They're doing the lift assist. They're doing all

[1:57:12] of that. There will still be calls for 911 service.

[1:57:17] There will be. We're working on figuring out that

[1:57:21] number. We're working with We're going to be

[1:57:23] working with Chris. We've already started setting things up to talk about

[1:57:27] what does that do to the EMS service now? I don't have that answer for you.

[1:57:32] But we need that answer and we're going to get it and figure it out and

[1:57:37] um that's one of the biggest.

[1:57:40] » That goes for I would assume police, fire.

[1:57:43] » Correct. >> And and what about

[1:57:46] kind of service? Gas and electric? >> Um we're beginning to reach out with

[1:57:50] them now. We haven't reached out yet. We're just We're still there.

[1:57:56] Uh-huh. >> Well, wait. I I don't Well, I'm sorry.

[1:57:59] Go ahead. I So, they I just have to laugh. This

[1:58:03] this plan is

[1:58:07] almost a preliminary site plan. There has been so much thought and

[1:58:12] money. The people they have on staff in house.

[1:58:16] » just asking. >> There's a land No, I know. I'm just

[1:58:18] going to tell you. The landscape architect is like in Minnesota. The

[1:58:21] other architects over here. Things are generated within hours.

[1:58:25] » Tony, you're not telling us that we don't have to review it, are you?

[1:58:28] » No, no, no. I just >> what I I I apologize, but that's what

[1:58:30] I'm hearing from you. >> But it's just you got

[1:58:33] oil and gas or gas and electric. I mean, this is normally you get a cartoon.

[1:58:38] This is what we're thinking about doing. >> is an issue in this area now.

[1:58:41] » Yes. So, we're we need to start looking at that and the loads and everything

[1:58:46] else. Obviously, there's gas and electric there. There was a big user.

[1:58:51] We're coming up with the loads now and and that's our next reach out.

[1:58:54] » Well, I mean this is part of the DIS. I mean this is this is this

[1:58:57] » I mean, what I will say is the good news is we have a will serve

[1:59:00] from Veolia. We have a will serve for sewer.

[1:59:05] So, we're we're pretty far ahead, but gas and electric not yet.

[1:59:10] » Can you just speak a little bit to the um the need for um a zoning and or use

[1:59:14] change here? >> Yeah. So, the use is permitted. Um

[1:59:18] the the PUD >> Sorry. Let Let me just

[1:59:21] use is specifically the the change in use is being specifically

[1:59:25] refined and defined, right? Here. So, yeah, that's that's one of my questions,

[1:59:29] and the other one is just why is there um a zoning change required here also?

[1:59:33] » Yeah. So, the um currently the PUDs permit senior living

[1:59:37] facilities, which are which are defined as

[1:59:41] residential uses for those 62 years of age and older. So, that's permitted.

[1:59:45] That's what we are. We're proposing as part of our zoning

[1:59:49] text amendment to refine that use and specifically define the CCRC use

[1:59:55] as a type of senior living facility. The reason we're doing that is because we

[2:00:00] are attaching a separate um affordable housing requirement to that use.

[2:00:08] Because without redefining that, we're stuck because we don't have a for sale

[2:00:13] product or a for rent product. So, we're defining the subset of a senior living

[2:00:18] facility for the sole purpose of advancing a uh separate affordable

[2:00:24] housing requirement. That's the that's the requirement. The rest of the zoning

[2:00:28] is bulk and density requirements and dimensional requirements for the

[2:00:33] specific concept plan. >> Thank you.

[2:00:37] » Sorry, Maria.

[2:00:40] » Hi again, everybody. Our team did a really good job of of

[2:00:45] telling our story, so uh there's not a whole lot for me to say, but they

[2:00:49] really have dug in and learned a lot about Erickson and our product and

[2:00:54] our residents and our community, so um they were able to share a lot of

[2:00:59] information, but I will I will just say that

[2:01:03] we are a growing company. Uh we Erickson, we were

[2:01:08] founded in Baltimore over 40 years ago. Our offices, Stephen and I, like our

[2:01:14] offices are actually right on the

[2:01:17] grounds of our very first community. So we're part of the senior, you know,

[2:01:23] senior living environment every every day um

[2:01:27] in Baltimore and I think that just is a is an example that we are the long-term

[2:01:33] owners, operators, managers of our communities and so

[2:01:39] we have really developed a product over time and refined that product and

[2:01:44] continue to refine that product constantly

[2:01:47] um in order to serve our residents, our seniors, and that

[2:01:51] very unique population, you know over over 80 years old

[2:01:57] and and to meet their needs, so I think that's

[2:02:00] um really part of our story and why we get

[2:02:03] so involved in in developing the properties because we're going to own

[2:02:08] them, manage them, operate them long-term. But again, um

[2:02:12] we were founded in Baltimore. Now we we are we've grown over the years. We're

[2:02:17] one of the top five senior living providers

[2:02:20] in the country and we currently are in 11 states. If we

[2:02:26] have a community here in New York, it'll be the 12th,

[2:02:29] our 12th state. We don't have any um any properties here in New York, but

[2:02:33] we've we've been wanting to be here for a very long time.

[2:02:37] Um you know, our mission is to help people

[2:02:39] build um, help people live better lives, and that's really for our residents,

[2:02:44] over 33,000

[2:02:47] residents, I think now, and our employees.

[2:02:49] » Yeah. I have a question I have a question for you. When we were visiting

[2:02:52] your facility in New Jersey, one of the things that impressed me, because I have

[2:02:56] a mother who's 88 years old, um, is the internal medical facilities

[2:03:02] that you have, and your concept behind that, and how you differ from other

[2:03:08] other you know, like, you know, uh, products

[2:03:12] with with that. >> Sure.

[2:03:14] » on that, I would appreciate that. >> Yes. Um, actually,

[2:03:19] if actually, there are a couple of things that really set Erickson apart

[2:03:23] from other senior living providers, and really that top one would be

[2:03:28] health care and access to health care. So, um, all of our communities have an

[2:03:32] on-site medical center. Um, our residents can see

[2:03:38] doctors, they're Erickson doctors, Erickson Health Medical Group, exclusive

[2:03:41] to our residents, and also our employees.

[2:03:44] Um, they can see them same day, you know, manage their care. Um,

[2:03:50] probably in a community this size, we would have probably

[2:03:53] three or four dedicated physicians just for our our residents. In addition,

[2:03:59] we would have, um, all of the, like, nurse practitioners,

[2:04:03] nurses, um, social workers, medical aids, uh,

[2:04:08] all the tech staff. Uh, so we would we really offer that um, that whole primary

[2:04:14] care provi- um, environment, and then also,

[2:04:18] uh, we bring in specialists as well. Um, and then we work very closely with the

[2:04:24] neighboring, uh, with neighboring health systems. We develop very strong

[2:04:28] relationships with them, so that if our resident is going to have surgery, or

[2:04:32] they're going to be, um, they have a hospital stay, and then they're

[2:04:35] transitioning back, or they're um coming from rehab, you know, our

[2:04:40] on-site care coordinators are working regularly with the hospital staff to

[2:04:44] make sure that that those residents are transitioning back successfully.

[2:04:48] » how how does the how does that work? Are they Are they private physicians? Is it

[2:04:50] part of the service fees of Erickson? Or are they required to carry medical

[2:04:51] insurance like everybody?

[2:05:02] » They are The physicians group is Erickson Health

[2:05:05] is Erickson Health Medical Group. So, they are a practice that's exclusive to

[2:05:11] our residents, but they are um

[2:05:15] regular doctors. >> do they contract with Medicare? Do they

[2:05:18] » We accept Medicare. >> Right. Yes.

[2:05:20] » Mhm. Yes. And we also have a product we have

[2:05:24] a Medicare Part D product um that some of our Yes, we do. Erickson um Health

[2:05:29] Advantage and our residents can elect into that if they they want. They're not

[2:05:33] required to do that, but many of them do and we've seen some very good outcomes

[2:05:38] for the residents that that have that that um

[2:05:43] extra service as far as their you know, ability to

[2:05:46] stay out of the hospital and shorter stays and you know, we have a lot of um

[2:05:50] data around that. So, yes, so definitely that is a major component. We also

[2:05:56] talked a little bit about the um We have 24/7 safety and security

[2:06:02] protocols and staff in place. They're um all the staff is emergency management

[2:06:07] uh response certified, trained as well as um a number of staff like have the

[2:06:13] basic um life safety CPR. So, we're able to uh

[2:06:18] we have an in-house communication system and protocols. We're able to respond to

[2:06:23] all of the um the needs of our residents, you know, if it's a fall,

[2:06:27] they're feeling, you know, light-headed. Uh we check daily on our our residents.

[2:06:33] We make sure that they're getting up out of their unit. Um, you know, if they

[2:06:37] have not gotten out of their unit and no one's, you know, seen them that day,

[2:06:40] we're going in, we're doing a welfare check. We use electronic monitoring to

[2:06:44] do >> Here's another question.

[2:06:45] » Mhm. >> Are you, um,

[2:06:48] certified or How How does How does it work with, uh,

[2:06:54] um, as a wellness and health facility? How

[2:06:58] does it work with New York State Department of Health? How does it work

[2:07:01] or does it with the Joint Commission accreditation, things like that? Your

[2:07:07] Your specifically, your medical services. Who Who serve Who surveys it?

[2:07:13] Who makes you accountable? What requirements are are

[2:07:17] Are they >> do not have a community in New York yet,

[2:07:21] we haven't been through that process, but we have a full regulatory group, and

[2:07:25] they actually are part of Stephen I's team.

[2:07:28] » I see. So, they've done some >> They've done some initial, um,

[2:07:32] documentation with the Attorney General's Office in New York,

[2:07:35] understanding, um, the CCRC senior living requirement regulations in in the

[2:07:41] state of New York, um, and how the different levels of care, the continuum

[2:07:47] of care will be regulated here. Yes, in New York. And we know, and so we're

[2:07:51] » We're the most regulated regulatory state in the country.

[2:07:54] » Yes. So, our team we have we we have a team that's very experienced. You know,

[2:07:59] we also are um, getting a team put together. We We actually have two

[2:08:03] properties in California, so we're working, um,

[2:08:06] there as well, moving through those regulatory, uh,

[2:08:11] hurdles. So, I So, as as we get closer to, um, developing a community, you

[2:08:17] know, if we're successful, then, um, you know, we would we have a whole on-site

[2:08:22] health, um, or we have a whole in-house like health operations group, the

[2:08:26] regulatory group, and so they've already started to do their

[2:08:30] their due diligence and there.

[2:08:33] » Thanks. >> You got it.

[2:08:35] » So, again, um so we talked a little bit about some of the

[2:08:39] um success we've had with managing those uh

[2:08:43] those calls for service or the internal needs of residents in house. We achieved

[2:08:49] nearly 90% of the calls um our residents make

[2:08:53] um we're able to address their needs directly. Um

[2:08:58] and then about but you know, 10% of them would would

[2:09:01] have to be transferred outside to 911, the 911 system, or police and fire. And

[2:09:07] we have relationships, we develop relationships with um the local

[2:09:11] » Mhm. >> jurisdictions.

[2:09:14] And we look forward to to working with Chris. We've had a preliminary meetings

[2:09:17] with him. So, I think we look forward to working

[2:09:20] with him. And then I'll just say just some again

[2:09:23] I think another differentiator for Erickson is just the scale of our

[2:09:27] community and and how we're offering our residents uh the level of service. And

[2:09:32] we're able to provide the lifestyle lifestyle to many more residents to meet

[2:09:37] that need um for the growing senior population and and how we've refined our

[2:09:41] program and architecture and community over time

[2:09:46] to address those needs. >> Thank you.

[2:09:47] » Um I've been reminded by our attorney that we actually have a task to to

[2:09:52] perform, but um I want to ask in terms of timing

[2:09:57] when do you need >> Sorry.

[2:10:00] » When do you need the planning board's comments with respect to the DEIS?

[2:10:04] » Scope. >> The scope.

[2:10:06] » So, that >> 10 days.

[2:10:10] » Hopefully >> If they shut it down on the 8th, which

[2:10:12] they probably will. >> So, you have

[2:10:14] » The 18th of September, or anytime after that if

[2:10:17] » Right.

[2:10:19] » Because what I'm I'm thinking of I I I assume every

[2:10:22] » to have a special meeting. >> Um

[2:10:26] » You may have. >> You have a meeting on the on the 10th.

[2:10:31] » Okay. But then maybe we should schedule

[2:10:34] something. >> I think we should have a meeting.

[2:10:38] » Have what? >> I mean we're not going to be able to

[2:10:42] I mean I think we can >> I mean we have a document now.

[2:10:45] We don't have to wait till the 8th to comment on this.

[2:10:48] » Yeah. >> We are commenting on the proposed scope

[2:10:50] of this document. Do we want them to consider some other things?

[2:10:54] Oh >> I mean

[2:10:56] » That's pretty much what I That's my understanding.

[2:10:58] » I mean my I mean my thinking is this. I unless I mean I I open the floor if

[2:11:03] there's any issue in and having reviewed this document that any board member has

[2:11:09] with the DEIS, I mean I looked at it myself. There's nothing that sprung out

[2:11:15] at me that was sort of unusual that we needed to include. It's a pretty

[2:11:19] comprehensive document. It's pretty standardized.

[2:11:22] Um I don't know. >> may be some other you know, few things

[2:11:25] that we wanted to consider in addition to what they are proposing, but I think

[2:11:28] the document is pretty much complete scope.

[2:11:31] » I mean my my thinking is is that is that we um

[2:11:37] we have some time in order to people can provide comments to to

[2:11:42] » we don't have to wait till the 8th of September.

[2:11:45] We can do the >> Right.

[2:11:47] » I understand. >> That's my

[2:11:48] » However, do take into account that you have two board members who are not here,

[2:11:52] who may have other opinions and may have other comments that we may not be

[2:11:58] including. Um we do have the meeting on September

[2:12:01] 10th. That's within the time uh period. >> Okay.

[2:12:04] » Um there other persons who are on vacation, other staff members, other

[2:12:10] professionals who may not be here. So to do a special meeting between now and

[2:12:13] September 10th may be a little difficult.

[2:12:17] » Yeah. >> So

[2:12:19] Well >> Can we meet the 18th of September

[2:12:22] deadline? >> Yeah, cuz we're meeting on September

[2:12:24] 10th. >> Well, the

[2:12:25] » September 10th. >> Yeah,

[2:12:27] we have a regular meeting on September 10th anyway, and the agenda only has one

[2:12:31] or two items on it. >> what I think we should do is is that any

[2:12:34] board member that has has comments with respect to this, you know, send them to

[2:12:39] Pam. Uh and and and what we'll do is is that

[2:12:45] whatever comments are received by Pam, she and I will review them and then

[2:12:49] we'll review whatever feedback we've given by our next meeting.

[2:12:54] » I remember the 900 King our comments were minimal.

[2:12:58] » Well, it's even well, there there were there were some, you know, issues with

[2:13:03] with some wetlands there and some other things which do not exist with this

[2:13:07] particular application. So, I I think for us at least, you know, my opinion is

[2:13:13] that there's not a lot of legwork to be done.

[2:13:16] » So, if if you can coordinate all that, if you want us back on the 10th, let us

[2:13:21] know. And And is it this full presentation or we're going to be here

[2:13:24] to answer a few questions? Either way, we'll do whatever you'd like.

[2:13:27] » think that's necessary personally.

[2:13:31] » Yeah, no, just >> Yeah, I I I I think I think you guys

[2:13:35] have been pretty comprehensive. >> I I I think you know, personally I'm at

[2:13:38] a maybe at an advantage because I have been in the we in the

[2:13:42] discussions with you three four times. So, I think I've get a little better

[2:13:45] feel for the project. >> Yeah, right. And if there are any

[2:13:48] questions, you know, similarly give them to Pam and

[2:13:52] we can get them to us and we can try to get responses. It doesn't have to wait.

[2:13:56] Like we'll >> I I I I think

[2:13:59] I think the goal is by the by our next meeting, we are going to be done with

[2:14:03] what we are entrusted to do. So, that by the

[2:14:07] time the Board of Trustees meets 8 days later,

[2:14:11] they'll have whatever additional comments if we have any additional

[2:14:14] comments with respect to that. >> I I do have a question. I think you made

[2:14:17] an activity in the document that the build out time frame you're looking 6 7

[2:14:22] years. I hope that's not continuous

[2:14:25] construction for 6 7 years because that would be very disruptive to the

[2:14:31] community and the area. >> It's not.

[2:14:36] » It's phased in, right? >> in. However, the the thought now is and

[2:14:41] Diego hasn't finished all the plans yet, I don't think. But the thought is you

[2:14:44] would we would do most of the the grading, the excavation, getting the

[2:14:48] pads ready, the roads, the storm water. Get all that in.

[2:14:52] » Mhm. >> So that the buildings are more or less

[2:14:54] pad ready. So you'd do the first couple in the first phase and then you're

[2:14:58] talking about putting up one more building when that's full, one more

[2:15:02] building when that's full. So yes, there would be construction, but it wouldn't

[2:15:06] be this >> going to have cement trucks driving down

[2:15:09] for 7 years in the road. Okay.

[2:15:13] » Well, not conti- not continuously for 7 years.

[2:15:18] » It would be, but in a phased manner. >> Not continually for 7 years, but yes,

[2:15:22] for 7 years. >> But I don't mean 24 hours every single

[2:15:25] day of the week, yeah. >> And I'll just add that by the time it

[2:15:27] gets to 7 years like we'll have a full community of residents living there that

[2:15:32] would complain also. So >> I was hoping you were going to say that.

[2:15:37] » residents and our neighbors. >> How about this?

[2:15:40] » Just real quick before we as part of the DEIS scope, there's a

[2:15:44] construction section within there. There will be a detailed

[2:15:47] » schedule >> construction um

[2:15:50] schedule, construction management information. There'll be information

[2:15:53] that's going to be provided that I think will answer each of those questions

[2:15:56] there about the sequence of construction, the timing, the duration,

[2:15:59] and uh the sequencing of the plan as well.

[2:16:03] » All right. >> Okay.

[2:16:05] » Thank you. >> All right.

[2:16:06] » it. Thank you all. >> Thank you.

[2:16:11] » Are we done? >> Yeah.

[2:16:13] » Can we uh

[2:16:16] » That's the goal. >> A motion and a second to adjourn? Or we

[2:16:20] have something All in favor?

[2:16:22] » I. >> I.

[2:16:23] » Any opposed? Thank you. >> I.

[2:16:26] » Only Only those that sleep want

[2:18:30] » Mhm.

Planning Board - 13 Aug 2026 @ 6:30 PM

Transcript