Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000_02_09 Planning Board Minutes MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING BOARD OF THE TOWN OF MAMARONECK FEBRUARY 9,2000,IN THE COURT ROOM,TOWN CENTER 740 WEST BOSTON POST ROAD MAMARONECK,NEW YORK \g_�L Present: Marilyn S.Reader,Chairwoman q,>' �TT / May W.Aisen Linda S.Harrington RFP,FlVEL L , C.Alan Mason MAR 2000 -, Edmund Papazian t)\ PATRICIA A.D?OTO O TOWN Absent: Richard H.Darsky 'taARrN'ca Also Present: Judith M.Gallent,Counsel *MO Anthony Catalano,Consulting Engineer Ronald A.Carpaneto,Director of Building Nancy Seligson,Liaison Kathy Brophy,Public Stenographer Terranova,Kazazes&Associates,Ltd. 40 Eighth Street New Rochelle,New York 10801 CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Chairwoman Reader at 8:15 p.m. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Ms.Reader asked if the Board members had reviewed the draft Minutes of December 8,1999 and January 12,2000 and if there were any amendments. After some discussion and corrections made,on motions made and seconded,the Minutes were unanimously approved. Chairwoman Reader read the application as follows: PUBLIC HEARING-SUBDIVISION-Woodruff/Roxbury-96 Weaver Street-Block 406,Lot 47 (adjourned 12/8/99) On a motion made and,seconded,it was unanimously RESOLVED,that the Public Hearing be,and hereby is,declared open. The Public Stenographer was present for this meeting and her transcript will become a permanent part of this record. Anthony Carbone, Esq., of 320 Westchester Avenue, Port Chester, New York, the attorney for the applicant,C&D Marchese Construction,the contract vendee for this property,appeared, along with Domenick Marchese and Cosmo Marchese,the principles of C&D Marchese. In addition,the owners of the property,Kenneth Roxbury and Lorraine Roxbury,are also present. On December 8,1999,the initial presentation was made. The property is Grant's Florist,located at 96 Weaver Street,Section 4,Block 406,Lot 47. Unfortunately,the architect,John Woodruff,was unable to appear this evening,and Mr. Carbone indicated that he will address whatever questions arise. The Marchese's are present to answer any technical questions with respect to construction on the site. Mr. Carbone said that the site plan is dated December 9, 1999,which incorporates some of the points raised by the Board at the December 8, 1999 meeting. The essential and critical point raised by the Board was Planning Board February 9,2000 Page 2 the issue of whether cars would be backing out onto Weaver Street. The Board had suggested a hammerhead instead and the architect incorporated that suggestion. A long form EAF,dated 11/10/99, was submitted,along with a survey by Aristotle Boumazos,dated 6/18/99,and the revised plan of John Woodruff,dated 12/9/99. Mr. Carbone also indicated that he had appeared before the Coastal Zone Management Commission (CZMC)on February 2,2000 and addressed the one issue they raised—technical questions with respect to the capacity of the drywells in the drainage site. Mr. Carbone reiterated that the application is to convert one lot into two lots. Both lots will have conforming uses on them--two single family dwellings that will conform in all aspects,except for one aspect on one of the lots that requires a variance. In all other aspects, it complies with the Town's requirements. With respect to planning issues,it is a use which is permitted and in character with the neighborhood. It generates far less traffic than the present use. There was a question raised by Dr.Mason at the CZMC meeting regarding Weaver Street at that point. It was reconfigured to create a gore strip. He explained that the key ownership to the gore strip is the County,the State maintains it,but the title company has insured access to these lots through it and they were given affirmative assurance with respect to it. The gore strip almost prohibits backing out onto Weaver Street and he continued to explain the procedure to be used. After further discussion, Mr.Carbone said everything on site will be demolished. He said the property is commercial,with a single family house on site in which the Roxbury's son lives. The Roxbury's live two doors down. The property is not a commercial zone,but a nonconforming use in a residential zone. They will attempt to make the use a conforming use. The renderings submitted will give the Board an idea of what the houses will look like,at which time a discussion ensued. Madeline Soriano,whose property abuts 96 Weaver Street,appeared. Ms.Soriano asked why the property can't be divided in half. Ms.Reader addressed that issue,discussing lot requirements. Mr.Carbone said if the lot was divided down the middle,it would create two substandard lots,rather than one. He suggested that perhaps the two lots can be switched,at which time a discussion ensued. Mr. Carbone said that both lots would have the minimum required side yard,so that is no variance is necessary for that requirement. The house is set back 10 ft.,as required by the zone. Mr.Carbone discussed the building envelope as shown,and explained how the building structure can be positioned according to code. Ms.Soriano asked about the access to Weaver Street,and asked how they will get in and out. Ms.Reader explained that a hammerhead will be used for that purpose. Ms. Soriano explained where her driveway is located and voiced her concern regarding the exit and entrance to her property. After some discussion,Mr.Carbone said they are not touching the gore strip. Ms.Reader said Ms.Soriano will have the same exit and entrance onto her property as she does today. Ms.Soriano asked where the dirt will be piled when they remove it. Mr.Carbone said it will be stockpiled. Ms.Reader asked Mr.Carpaneto about the requirement for stockpiling,which he addressed. Planning Board February 9,2000 Page 3 Ms.Reader asked if there were any other comments. Ms. Gallent informed the Board that the Westchester County Planning Board received the application because it is on a County road and it indicated it had no comment. Ms.Reader asked if there were any other comments from the professional staff. There being none,on a motion made by Ms.Aisen,seconded by Dr.Mason,it was unanimously RESOLVED,that the Public Hearing be,and hereby is,declared closed. Ms.Reader read the proposed Negative Declaration with changes. On a motion made by Dr.Mason, seconded by Ms.Aisen,the following Negative Declaration was unanimously APPROVED: Lorraine Roxbury,by John Woodruff,P.E.,has applied to the Town of Mamaroneck Planning Board for preliminary subdivision approval for a two lot residential subdivision of lot located at 96 Weaver Street(the"Site"). The Site is currently occupied by greenhouses for commercial use.The Proposed Action is an unlisted action pursuant to SEQRA and MEQRA. See 6 N.Y.C.R.R.§§617.4 and 617.5;Town of Mamaroneck Code§§92-7(A)and 92-7(B). The Long Form EAF submitted by the applicant does not reveal any significant environmental impacts. The Town's Consulting Engineer,Malcolm Pirnie,Inc.has reviewed the EAF,and has advised the Board that it does not anticipate any significant adverse environmental impacts associated with the Proposed Action. For the reasons set forth below,the Board agrees. The Proposed Action will have a positive impact on land use conditions in the area. The current commercial use of the Site is non-conforming in the R-7.5 zoning district,which permits only residential uses. The Proposed Action would bring the use of the Site into conformity with the use regulations for the district. According to Malcolm Pimie,the change in the use of the Site from commercial to residential is expected to reduce the overall volume of traffic to and from the Site. Some concern was expressed by members of the Board about the potential for vehicles backing out of the driveways to be constructed as a result of the Proposed Action. However, the Proposed Action now contemplates hammerhead driveways that will permit cars to exit the Site while facing Weaver Street,thereby resulting in improved visibility for exiting vehicles. Moreover,the CZMC has indicated in a letter dated February 4,2000,that the Proposed Action will not hinder the policies set forth on the Local Waterfront Revitalization Plan. Accordingly,the Planning Board finds that the Proposed Action will not result in any significant adverse environmental impacts. This negative declaration has been prepared in accordance with Article 8 of the New York State Environmental Conservation Law. Ms.Reader asked if there were any discussions from the professional staff about the proposed project as described,the one subdivision,two lots,with the frontage of one having 75 ft.and the other less than 52.8 ft. Dr.Mason noted on the northern portion of the property there is an easement that runs along the northerly side of that property. If one is going to crowd over at all that might be the side to do it,because there is a sort of built-in buffer there,at which time a discussion ensued. Planning Board February 9,2000 Page 4 Ms.Reader said the plan as presented is a perfectly viable plan given the shapes of the properties;one lot is of substandard width in the front because of the shape of the property. It has no impact on Ms.Soriano and her property or the use of the road,because the proposed lot maintains the required 10 ft.side yard as a buffer for her property. Dr.Mason said he would like to be sure that the gore isn't touched. A homeowner moving in there might feel that he can do some plantings and whatever in that gore in such a way it might restrict Ms.Soriano's ability to use that gore the way she has been using it. Dr.Mason feels it is incumbent upon the Board to make it clear in the grant that incoming owners buying either of those two houses not in any way decorate, be it with stone,bushes,etc.,to prevent her from coming out the way she is used to coming out. To ask her to come straight out is very difficult. It is incumbent upon the Board to make it clear to the purchaser that that gore isn't to be changed in such a way that would restrict her. Ms.Harrington asked if the Board has the authority to do that. After some discussion,Ms.Aisen said if anything happens in that gore,the person who is infringed upon makes a complaint to the State. Ms.Reader asked if there is anything the property owner can do on his own property that might impinge upon Ms.Soriano. She doesn't see it,but wants to clarify that. Mr.Carbone demonstrated where their property line stops,and demonstrated if a property owner plants a tree somewhere it is not going to impinge the neighbor from entering the strip. Dr.Mason said that gore property,as it exists now,is not privileged. Somebody coming in and buying one or both of those new homes,may want to pretty up the front. They should be made aware,early on, they may not do that. Ms.Gallent said that land is not part of what is being subdivided. Mr.Soriano asked to speak. Ms.Reader informed Mr.Soriano that the public hearing is actually closed,but told Mr.Soriano he can speak. Mr.Soriano said 60 years ago when the state was approached to acquire that property,the gore,they said no way. They tried to landscape it,they said no way. They said you are not to touch it,it is Weaver Street. Ms.Soriano said she thinks Dr.Mason is worried about people doing it without asking. The discussion continued regarding the frontage on the.properties involved,landscaping and exiting the properties. Ms.Reader said one would have to contact the State and the Town Building Department regarding this issue. Ms.Reader said the Board does not have the authority over the State gore strip. Ms.Reader said the Board can put in a non-enforceable statement, but does not see the value of doing that. That is diminishing the Board's authority. On a motion made by Dr.Mason,seconded by Ms.Harrington,the subdivision,Woodruff/Roxbury,96 Weaver Street,Block 406,Lot 47,as shown in the plans dated February 4,2000,with the following conditions was unanimously APPROVED: Planning Board February 9,2000 Page 5 WHEREAS,Lorraine Roxbury,by John Woodruff,P.E.,has submitted an application for Preliminary Subdivision Approval in proper form and complying with all requirements of the Town,other municipal agencies,the comments of the Consulting Engineer to the Town and this Planning Board;and WHEREAS,the Planning Board has reviewed all of the submissions by,and on behalf of the Applicant, all correspondence from Town officials, the Consulting Engineer to the Town, the Coastal Zone Management Commission and members of the public;and WHEREAS,this Board held a Public Hearing on the application for Preliminary Subdivision Approval on February 9,2000; WHEREAS,this application is an unlisted action pursuant to SEQRA;and WHEREAS, the EAF reveals that the action as proposed will not result in any significant adverse environmental impact on the environment and has therefore adopted a Negative Declaration,a copy of which is annexed hereto,by resolution dated February 9,2000; NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED,that Preliminary Subdivision Approval is hereby GRANTED to Lorraine Roxbury pursuant to her application and subject to all terms and conditions set forth below: I. General Requirements All curbs,suitable monuments,water mains,storm drains and sanitary sewer facilities shall be installed in accordance with the latest standards and specifications in force at the time work is started and in accordance with the Preliminary Subdivision Approval Plan, prepared by John Woodruff,P.E.,dated November 8, 1999 last revised February 4, 2000. II. Special Requirements A. Water Retention and Drainage 1. The applicant must provide dry wells or other retention facilities on the site so that the rate of runoff from the property is not increased after construction. Such plans, including the percolation chambers, shall be reviewed by the Consulting Engineer to the Town and the Building Inspector (prior to the issuance of building permits)and their determination shall be conclusive. 2. The filing of the signed, final subdivision plat shall not be made until street opening permits have been secured by the developer from the New York State Department of Transportation. B. Erosion and Sedimentation Control-(During Construction) 1. Erosion and sedimentation control plans should be based upon the standards presented in the"Westchester County Best Management Practices"manual for construction-related activities and the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation standards(1990). 2. Erosion and sedimentation control plans shall be approved by the Consulting Engineer prior to commencement of construction. A control plan shall be submitted which shall include a construction timetable and an inspection schedule. Planning Board February 9,2000 Page 6 3. Erosion control measures must be installed on the building lot prior to excavation of foundations. C. Blasting All rock removal required in conjunction with the development of the property shall be done in accordance with Town of Mamaroneck regulations. ' D. Trees Compliance with the Tree Preservation Law of the Town of Mamaroneck is required before a Building Permit shall be issued. E. Required Documents and Inspections 1. A construction bond will be posted in the amount of$2,500.00 per lot. 2. The applicant shall provide one Mylar reproducible set of approved drawings to the Town and one copy to the office of the Consulting Engineer to the Town. 3. The applicant shall submit to the Town one Mylar reproducible and four copies showing the "as-built" conditions for utility and sewer connections prior to the granting of a Certificate of Occupancy for the residence to be constructed. Chairwoman Reader read the next application as follows: PUBLIC HEARING-FRESHWATER WETLANDS AND WATER COURSES PERMIT-Stephen Land-29 Mohegan Road,Block 208,Lot 546(adjourned 12/8/99) On a motion made by Ms.Aisen,seconded by Ms.Harrington,it was unanimously RESOLVED,that the Public Hearing be,and hereby is,declared open. The Public Stenographer was present for this meeting and her transcript will become a permanent part of this record. John Slaker,with the firm of John Slaker Design Group,the landscape architect from Somers,New York, appeared. He is present with Mr.Stephen Land,the property owner. As presented in December,1999, they are proposing to construct a 20 by 40 ft.in-ground swimming pool in the side area of Mr.Land's property,which requires them to go before the Zoning Board for a variance. That variance was granted at its meeting in January,2000 for the pool location as shown on the plan. Mr.Slaker said they met with the Coastal Zone Management Commission(CZMC)at their last meeting. Their concern was the drainage situation and how runoff to the site is going to be controlled. He said they also received a memorandum from the Town Engineer regarding the requirements for the design of that. They retained Mr.William Morganroth,who is an engineer,who will be doing the percolation tests as soon as the ground thaws out to dig the appropriate holes. He then explained the change they are considering from what was proposed on the plan;infiltrators across the back,they will be shallower,they will be able to intercept more of the runoff from the property,which will be sized according to the Town engineer's requirements. He said the CZMC was concerned about the one-year storm,and said it will be designed to whatever is required. Ms.Reader said that the Board must have the data requested by the Town regarding the 25-year storm, to determine the impact on the wetlands. • Planning Board February 9,2000 Page 7 Mr.Papazian asked where they are getting the excess runoff from. Mr.Slaker explained. He said they are probably going to be using a granite paver around the side of the pool. They are proposing approximately 2500 additional sq.ft.of impervious surface on the lot and that is what they have to accommodate. What they initially designed it for was to accommodate a 2 in.rainfall over this entire new impervious surface,without taking account of percolation. What they are now going to do is size it to the 25-year storm. Mr.Slaker was going to ask if it is possible for the Board to grant approval,as long as they can meet the Town Engineer's requirements. Ms.Reader said that is putting the cart well before the horse. This is a Freshwater Wetlands permit and the Board has to consider the impact that the property has. The flow of water is one of the pieces of the equation that is an important piece. Mr.Slaker said his only problem is the weather. Ms. Reader said the timing of the application and the ability to do these checks conflict. The Board sometimes has to put over an application. Ms.Reader recognized Nancy Seligson,and welcomed Ms.Seligson as the new liaison from the Town Board to the Town Planning Board. Ms.Seligson made a brief statement to the Board. Mr. Slaker said they will make sure that whatever they have done or will do, meets with the Town • Engineer's approval and will bring that back to the Board. After some discussion regarding the next meeting date, on a motion made and seconded, it was unanimously RESOLVED,that the Public Hearing be,and hereby is,adjourned to the March 8,2000 Planning Board meeting. Mr.Land said he may not be able to attend the next meeting,at which time Ms.Reader said that Mrs. Land may attend. The construction is scheduled to begin this March and he voiced his concerns. A discussion ensued regarding the procedures taken when approval is granted and the time frame involved. On a motion made and seconded,it was unanimously RESOLVED,that the Public Hearing be,and hereby is,declared closed. NEXT MEETING The next meeting of this Board will be held on March 8,2000. ADJOURNMENT On a motion made and seconded,the meeting was unanimously adjourned at 10:00 p.m. • Marguerite R ,Recording Secretary