Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002_07_10 Planning Board Minutes (11," MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING BOARD OF THE TOWN OF MAMARONECK JULY 10, 2002, IN THE COURT ROOM, TOWN CENTER 740 WEST BOSTON POST ROAD MAMARONECK, NEW YORK Present: Marilyn S. Reader, Chairwoman May W. Aisen 03 -IN Robert A. Cohen Cb� Edward Z. Jacobson 4 C. Alan Mason 00 RECEIVED Edmund Papazian � � . Marc H. Rosenbaum ' 2002 Also Present: Judith M. Gallent, Counsel O�CLERK Ronald A. Carpaneto, Director of Building c4 Antonio V. Capicotto, Consulting Engineer [ Elizabeth Paul, Environmental Coordinator Nancy Seligson, Liaison Denise M. Carbone, Public Stenographers Carbone &Associates, Ltd. 111 N. Central Park Avenue Hartsdale, New York 10530 41110 Marguerite Roma, Recording Secretary CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Chairwoman Marilyn Reader at 8:40 p.m. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Ms. Reader asked if the Board members had reviewed the draft Minutes of April 10, 2002 and if there were any amendments. There being none, on a motion made by Mr. Papazian, seconded by Mr. Cohen, the April 10, 2002 Minutes were approved. Ms. Reader asked if the Board members had reviewed the draft Minutes of May 8, 2002,with the attached transcript, and if there were any amendments. There being none, on a motion made by Mr. Rosenbaum, seconded by Mr. Cohen, the May 8, 2002 Minutes were approved. 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. Ms. Reader read the application as follows: PUBIC HEARING - SPECIAL PERMIT RENEWAL - SAVATREE/Frank and Ann Auricchio- 633- 4110 635 Fifth Avenue - Block 132, Lots 175 and 643 (adjourned 6/12/02) Planning Board July 10,2002 Page 2 On a motion made and seconded,it was unanimously RESOLVED,that the Public Hearing be,and hereby is,declared closed. After some discussion, on a motion made by Dr. Mason, seconded by Mr. Papazian, the following resolution was unanimously APPROVED: WHEREAS, SAVATREE submitted an application for a renewal of a Special Permit for use of the premises at 633-635 Fifth Avenue and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 132 Lots 175 and 643 to operate a plant health care business with pesticide storage;and WHEREAS,a Public Hearing having been held on July 10,2002 pursuant to notice;and WHEREAS,the Planning Board having considered the application for a renewal of a Special Permit,the plans and zoning report and environmental analysis submitted by the applicant,comments and responses to questions by the applicant,the reports and comments of the Consulting Engineer to the Town and having heard interested members of the public;and WHEREAS, this is a Type II action having no significant impact on the environment pursuant to 6 NYCRR§617 et seq. Accordingly,no further action under SEQRA is required. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED,that this Board approves the application of SAVATREE for a renewal of a Special Permit,with the same conditions in the previous permit dated January 12,2000, to operate a plant health care business with pesticide storage subject to the following terms and conditions: 1. The applicant will continue to utilize a self-contained wash down system,consisting of a Plia-Pad liquid containment system. The trucks will drive into the center of the Plia- Pad,where the wash down will occur. The waste wash water will be contained within the pad,which is similar to a pool. The waste wash water will then be recycled back into the truck tanks. The Plia-Pad will remain on top of sand,which will provide an additional safeguard without adversely affecting the integrity of the Plia-Pad pool. 2. Any spills of pesticides within the garage will be contained by a double berm containment system. A 6"berm will be constructed at the garage door entrance. The trucks will be required to drive over the berm and into the garage to load the pesticides into their tanks. The 8"berm that has been installed directly in front of the pesticide storage area to create a containment system that is larger than the maximum volume of liquid that will be permitted to be stored in the garage,will be maintained. 3. The Plia-Pad liquid containment system will be stored in the garage during the off- season. 4. The walls and floors of the garage will continue to be epoxied to a height of 8"to create an impervious seal. SAVATREE will periodically inspect,maintain and repair the epoxy coating to insure that it will remain in an impermeable condition. 5. The applicant will not be permitted to store in the garage any pesticides that persist in the environment. 6. There will be no storage of pesticides in quantities greater than 445 gallons at any time. 7. A plan of emergency response in case of spillage must be submitted to and accepted by the Town of Mamaroneck Fire Department,Town of Mamaroneck Building Department, • Planning Board July 10,2002 Page 3 New York State Department of Environmental Conservation and New Rochelle Medical Center. The Fire Department must be notified annually regarding the types and quantities of pesticides stored. 8. The pesticides to be stored on site will be limited to those listed on Plan 2,dated June 28,1996,and as listed in the letter from Dr.Richard Porcelli to Donald C.Becker dated July 24,1996. "Miscellaneous"chemicals referred to in the June 28,1996 plan shall be limited to Earth Friendly Fruit Spray and Guardian. 9. Permit shall expire after two(2)years. 10. This Special Permit is subject to the termination requirements set forth in Section 240-64 and 240-65 and the use restrictions set forth in Section 240-31 of the Zoning Code of the Town of Mamaroneck. Ms.Reader read the next application as follows: CONSIDERATION-FRESHWATER WETLANDS AND WATER COURSES PERMIT-Hampshire Country Club/Tony Campanella-1025 Cove Road-Block 414,Lot 20(adjourned 6/12/02) Ms.Reader asked if anyone was present for this application. Tony Campanella appeared to represent Hampshire County Club for a FWWP. © Ms.Reader asked Mr.Campanella to give the Board an overview of what the project is. Mr.Campanella said it's a car path,71/2 ft.wide along the golf hole,it's our number 16th hole. It's asphalt. Ms.Reader asked why is this a Freshwater Wetlands? Mr.Carpaneto said it's already built,correct? Mr.Campanella said that's correct. Mr.Carpaneto said basically already built and it runs in an area that's part of the Town. The reason why there weren't any drawings,I was not able to get in touch with Mr.Campanella. I just wanted to offer an appeal to see what he would need. Mr.Capicotto asked,what's the approximate length of this. Mr.Campanella said the new car path is 900 ft. After some discussion,Mr.Campanella said because it's on a line,I can bring those maps next time. Ms.Reader said Mamaroneck? Mr.Campanella said yes. Dr.Mason asked,have they taken a position on it? QMr.Carpaneto said not to my knowledge. Dr.Mason asked you just put the path in and one place to start? Planning Board July 10,2002 Page 4 Mr.Carpaneto said it goes from the maintenance building,correct? Mr.Campanella said yes,you're going in reverse. Mr.Carpaneto said out to Hommocks Road,more or less on the left side if you're looking Mr.Campanella said along the Fairway Green. A portion of it's along Fairway Green and then it cuts across further away from the 5th. Ms.Reader said on the west side. Mr.Carpaneto said toward the Post Road. Dr.Mason said did you ever ask why we're hearing about this,after the fact? Mr.Carpaneto said it came in as a complaint actually. We were called in probably a couple of days after it was actually done. Mr.Campanella said I wasn't aware that I should do this ahead of time and now anything else of course I would. Really,I just didn't know. Mr.Cohen asked,where's the material of this hole? Mr.Campanella said the base is item four,which is a gravel material,and an asphalt on top. Ms.Reader said it's 71/2 ft.wide. How long is it. Mr.Campanella said it's 900 total. We're not sure how much is in the area(?). Ms.Reader said 900 total,but that should say not all of it's in our jurisdiction,but we don't know how much is. Mr.Campanella said I wrote that down for next time,to find that out. Ms.Reader I know the part that is within our jurisdiction,that is within the wetlands? Is sit across that stream? Mr.Carpaneto said no,it's just runs along side of a wetlands. Ms.Gallent asked,is it in a buffer? Mr.Carpaneto said it's in a buffer,yes. Dr.Mason asked,does it transect in the low lay or anything like that that's going to change the flow? Mr.Campanella(?)said no,there's no streams. Mr.Carpaneto said I haven't been out there in a while. Dr.Mason said how about the runoff,just a normal runoff. Q Mr.Capicotto said that's going to be the only concern I can think of is the increase in impervious area and runoff. • Planning Board July 10,2002 Page 5 Ms.Reader asked,what was there before,just grass? Mr.Capanella said yes,just grass. Mr.Carpaneto said there was a complaint. Ms.Reader said there was a violation then. Mr.Carpaneto said we had gotten a complaint in the Building Department. Ms.Reader asked,was a violation actually filed? Ms.Gallent said it's called a Notice of Violation. Mr.Carpaneto said we actually got it fairly quickly,so a summons wasn't issued. Just a violation. Ms.Gallent said it only reaches a court...Notice of Violation is notifying that there is a violation. Then if it's not good,it becomes a summons if not answered. Dr.Mason asked,what's the cure? Mr.Capicotto said they would need an engineer to come up with an solution of how to remediate this extra runoff. The extreme thing would be put a curb on the whole thing,put in a catch basins,collect it all and put it into an infiltrator,but it's such a narrow,long strip it just is not logical. An engineer could probably come up with a solution,either maybe dig a trench along the down stream measure of the paths and put in gravel to collect the runoff and then let it absorb into the ground or something along those lines or possibly,if the Board prefers,make some other improvements to the vegetation along this water body to compensate for the increase in runoff. Dr.Mason said this will transect the normal flow with possibly a culvert underneath. Ms.Reader asked,a culvert underneath what? Dr.Mason said underneath the walkway. Dr.Mason said I'm not suggesting that it happen either,I'm just,we have nothing to go on. Mr.Campanella said if you've ever played my golf course,drainage is an ongoing issue. Adding drainage for us is very,very easy. The area is wet,so adding drainage would be a very,very simple thing for us to do and we'd be very willing to do it. Dr.Mason said I'm not even suggesting that it's necessary. The point I'm trying to make is that we don't even know what the options are or if any remediation is required. We're not suggesting that we're going to put you through. Ms. Reader said and the ...inaudible line, obviously this is getting adjourned. I'm wondering if we shouldn't adjourn it though for another consideration as opposed to a public hearing. After some discussion: RESOLVED,that this matter be,and hereby is,adjourned to a Public Hearing at the August 14,2002 Planning Board meeting. Mr.Papazian said just one question. What did you say the wetlands was. What stream is running by this path? Is it a stream or is it • • Planning Board July 10,2002 Page 6 Mr.Campanella said I think it's more like a swampy area. It's high weeds. Mr.Papazian said so it's not a body of water as opposed to a swamp or wetlands. Mr.Campanella said yes. Ms.Reader said it goes to the CZMC. She asked,what about SEQRA? Ms.Gallent said it's unlisted. Ms.Reader said so we're the lead agent. Ms.Gallent said I wouldn't go on the agency,so we don't have to do that. After further discussion,Ms. Gallent said it still has to be approved. You just have to comply with SEQRA's levels. Ms.Gallent said there was an environmental form submitted. Mr.Papazian asked Mr.Campanella,do you know what you have to do? Mr.Campanella said no. Ms.Reader said I think you need to talk to both Mr.Carpaneto,Mr.Capicotto and also Elizabeth Paul, our Environmental Coordinator. At the very least,I imagine you will need engineer's drawings. What needs to be in those engineer's drawings,because you are going to need to have them complete,you should Qcheck with all three of them. First check with one and then find out what information you might need. Mr.Reader said this is a referral to the Westchester County Planning Board,Marguerite. Ms.Reader said when you meet with the CZMC,possibly you should bring your engineer with you. I would recommend that. Ms.Reader asked CZMC if that meeting is in August? Elizabeth Paul said there's one in July. Ms.Reader informed Mr.Campanella if he can make the July meeting,Ms.Paul will give you the date. Ms.Paul said it's on Tuesday,July 23,2002 at 8:00 p.m. Ms.Reader said the Zoning Board is also on July 23,2002. Ms.Reader asked,is there anything else? Mr.Campanella said I just have a question. The engineer drawings,that would be by a surveyor? Mr.Capicotto said it would be by a professional engineer. If you have an existing site plan of the whole area,he can just trace off the area that's in question,traced on the path. He'll need just that and then a detail as to how he plans on cross section to the path and have a physical detail if he's going to do something with gravel or whatever. Ms.Reader said he has to be a P.E.or landscape architect. Mr.Capicotto said a landscape architect can do it. Ms.Reader said the P.E.has to be licensed. • Planning Board July 10,2002 Page 7 Dr.Mason said it would appropriate for a landscape architect. Ms.Reader said that the record should reflect that Board member,Edward Jacobson,arrived at this time, 8:40 p.m. Ms.Roma asked if this matter is being held over as a consideration? Ms.Reader said no,a public hearing. A discussion ensued regarding public notice given. Ms.Roma said the Town notices the neighbors by certified mail. Ms.Reader read the next application as follows: CONSIDERATION-FRESHWATER WETLANDS AND WATER COURSES PERMIT-Michael Targoff/Michele Callisto-Country Road-Block 315,Lot 463 Mark Mustacato,the engineer,appeared to represent the applicants. Mr.Mustacato said what we're proposing is a new single-family house on a vacant piece of property. We are adjacent to a wetland area,there's a pond the neighboring property. Ms.Reader asked,what address is it in between? QAfter some discussion,Mr.Mustacato said it became 50 and 54. Mr.Mustacato said we did some percolation tests on the property,submitted a design,which I think you have a copy of,the runoff erosion control application,for a zero increase in runoff for a 25-year storm which is the only criteria that the Town normally uses. There's an existing big long driveway. The area is now grass and lawn area,planted area. We're planning to install some trench drains along the driveway to pick up some of the water that now sits there and tie that into an existing pipe that's feeding the pond and then continuing down the stream. Ms.Reader said so you are planting it directly into the pond through front. Mr.Mustacato said that portion of it. Mr.Reader said it says,existing asphalt drive. Mr.Mustacato said that's indicating the adjacent driveway next door. Ms.Reader said,I'm a little confused. The flagpole,is that between two driveways? Mr. Mustacato said no,just one. Where it says existing asphalt drive,that's pointing to the adjacent property. Mr.Cohen said that's servicing two other lots,that driveway. Is that correct? Mr.Mustacato said that driveway services one lot. The other neighboring driveway is on the other side of the property. After some discussion with Board members, Mr. Mustacato used the tax map to indicate where the property is located. • Planning Board July 10,2002 Page 8 © Ms.Reader asked,is one of these lots which runs through....inaudible property? Do you know which property..inaudible. Mr.Carpaneto said I'm not familiar with that. He said just as you enter the cul-de-sac,it's on the left- hand side. The driveway to#50 is there,then pond. It's the pond,the driveway to#50 and this proposed driveway,#54. Ms.Reader asked,that's off Fenimore,right? Mr.Carpaneto said Fenimore,Country Road. Ms.Aisen asked,where is he building? They looked at the tax map. Mr.Mustacato demonstrated where the house is going. This is where the driveway will be. Ms.Aisen said it could be the proposed driveway. Where is the driveway that goes to the...inaudible property? Mr.Mustacato pointed that out. Ms.Aisen said they're already parallel. Mr.Mustacato said it's two driveways. They're just parallel to each other. © Ms.Reader asked,...inaudible wetland because of the pond? THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION THAT CAN'T BE CLEARLY HEARD ON TAPE. Ms.Reader said what makes this freshwater wetlands? There's a pond on an adjacent property and you said the golf course. That's Winged Foot? Mr.Mustacato said I believe it is on the adjacent property. Mr.Carpaneto said behind the flagpole(?). Mr.Mustacato said the property is long distance off from Fenimore,where Country intersects to this property. It's quite a long way,which is why it's not on that tax map. Ms.Aisen asked,on what road,that I might recognize,do you get to this property? Mr.Mustacato said from Fenimore,but it has to be a long distance. Ms.Reader said Fenimore into Country Road...inaudible. Dr.Mason said 1-95 is not far away. He asked,do you have any zoning problem here the frontage. Mr.Mustacato said no. It's an legal existing lot. Ms.Aisen asked how large is the lot you're building on? © Mr.Mustacato asked,how large is the property? It's 1.2 acres. Mr.Cohen asked,what is going to be the address? • Planning Board July 10,2002 Page 9 Mr.Mustacato said it will be 52 Country Road. Mr.Cohen said it now sits between 50 and 54. Mr.Capicotto said it is my understanding that currently a lot of ponding takes place. Mr.Mustacato said a certain amount of ponding does take place. What it is,is there are pipes that drain into the pond. However, there are portions of it that are below those pipes and therefore it can't be drained. The doesn't get to the pipes until then and it fills up which is why we put the trench drains,so that we'll be able to relieve that. Mr.Capicotto said also under the no net increase and runoff of water. How do you plan to address the runoff from the driveway itself. Mr.Mustacato said what we're doing is we're storing enough on site. We have a 1.6 factor to safety use. We have a trough drain at the top of the driveway to pick up the top portion of the driveway. Ms.Reader said how do you know north,south. I just want to know what you're talking about. Is that an error to north? Mr.Carpaneto said north is pretty much the back of the property. The driveway is running pretty much north/south. North is to the left-hand side. Ms.Reader asked Mr.Capicotto if there is anything in addition that you need? QMr.Capicotto said I did prepare a memo with some ordinary comments that you have received by now. Mr.Mustacato said no,I did not receive it. Do you happen to have a copy? Mr.Capicotto provided a copy for Mr.Mustacato. Dr.Mason asked,what's the length of that driveway? Mr.Mustacato said the length of the driveway is 396 ft. Mr.Reader asked how wide is that proposed. Mr.Mustacato asked,the driveway? It's 12 to 13 ft.wide. Mr.Papazian asked,what did you say the driveway was going to be made out of? Mr.Mustacato said it's proposed to be asphalt. Mr.Capicotto said there were some comments on the erosion control review to the Town,which will be forwarded to you. There are several things as far as the Freshwater Wetlands including the 100-year flood elevation and the 100 ft.wetland buffer line. It will all be in the letter to you. It mentioned accounting for the flood volume that's occupied by that proposed driveway. In addition to that,there are several comments rest of the application,the erosion control portion. I'll make sure you'll have it tomorrow. Also there was correspondence I received from the engineer of the homeowner that I was copied on,which I will get a copy to you. They had some similar comments regarding runoff. Ms.Reader asked,is this just for the driveway or the whole construction. • Planning Board July 10,2002 • Page 10 © Mr.Capicotto said for the whole construction. Ms.Reader asked,any possibility of considering alternatives for you to get asphalt as far as gravel or rock. Mr.Mustacato said yes,we'd be open to that. Ms.Reader asked,is there anything else anyone wants to add? Dr.Mason said we were looking at the elevation over the length of the driveway,because that appears to be 10 ft.over. Mr.Mustacato said it's not a steep pitch at all. It's long. Dr.Mason said and you're talking about dry wells on the property for the runoff and the factor over and above what's necessary. Mr.Mustacato said the calculation we did factored in the entire length of the driveway,even though that portion of the driveway,the flagpole portion,isn't draining into the dry wells and is draining into the existing pipes and into the pond. The stream system,while our calculation to dry wells and the volume that we have,compensates for that amount of runoff. We're over compensating. What we had to do was increase the runoff,including that amount of asphalt. Dr.Mason said in our view we could just divorce the house site until you address the driveway,do you also have a decrease rate of runoff or in fact is that...inaudible. © Mr.Mustacato asked,what is that? Dr.Mason said if you were to just cut if off at the top of the driveway and the driveway was the only project,would that in itself be a decreased rate of runoff or would that be an increased rate of runoff? Mr. Mustacato said it the driveway were the only project and the dry wells were going up above the driveway? Dr.Mason asked,what provisions have you made for the driveway by itself? Mr.Mustacato said for the driveway by itself we can only drain into the existing drain system or deal with some kind of alternative surfacing that would allow water to remain there. In order to get it into our dry wells,we would have to pump into our dry wells. Ms.Reader said your...inaudible to put trench drains down. Mr.Mustacato said the purpose for that is just to relieve it. The reason why there is standing water is because it's not draining properly. So,we're proposing to regrade that area and provide trench drains under the area that we're grading,so that we'll feed it into the existing system and allow that area to drain and water will no longer sit there. That's the reason for the trench drain. Ms. Reader said let me understands this then. One of the advantages of water sitting someplace, if I understand,is that by water sitting there it slows down the flooding issues allowing this to be absorbed slowly. Ms.Reader said from a social point of view,you want to change that because you don't want some water standing. How are you not increasing the rate of runoff with trench drains and it's getting it © down into the grounds subsurface faster. How do you prevent it from...how does the surface absorb this so it doesn't impact. • Planning Board July 10,2002 Page 11 Mr.Mustacato said if you think it's better to have water sitting there,with the pond there and pool there, we could do that.... SORRY,YOU'RE BOTH SPEAKING AT ONCE! Ms.Reader said that's why we have Mr.Carpaneto Mr.Mustacato said I guess technically from the aspect of it,you're increasing the rate of runoff,you have a puddle of water that's sitting here and can't drain and now they can drain it,you'll increase the rate of runoff until you drain it. Once you drain it,I don't think you increase the rate anymore. Ms.Reader said one of the things you know,I'm referring this to CZMC. That's an issue that you know ...inaudible. You'll discuss it with them and they will make recommendations back to us. Mr.Capicotto will certainly..inaudible. This,quite frankly,is an issue. That's why whatever alternatives you might want to seek,you might want to do what you want with that. Mr.Jacobson said I have a question. I noticed that the upper end of the driveway the elevation of the driveway is about 4/5 or 5/6 ft.above the adjacent property. I see you've got a retaining wall coming down the side. What are they made of and what's the legal impact on the adjacent property. Mr.Mustacato said they are proposed stone walls. Mr.Jacobson said so they'll be stone retaining walls of...inaudible. 1111) Mr.Mustacato said the proposal is,I think I had a little more detail on your original..inaudible. We're proposing stone retaining walls. There's a detail on page 2. Basically a dry stone wall. Mr.Jacobson said they are within a few feet of the property line of this property. Mr.Mustacato said by the driveway,yes. Mr.Jacobson asked,how close are they to the property line? Mr.Mustacato said by the driveway,on the flag portion of it,they are about 4/5 ft.off the property line. Mr.Jacobson said within the property line. Mr.Mustacato said within the property line. Dr.Mason asked,how high? Mr.Mustacato said at their highest,they will be about 4 ft.high. Mr.Jacobson asked,are you going to put guardrails on the side of them or what do you do about it? Mr.Mustacato said probably not. It might be necessary to put some kind of a fence or combination fence and planting so you can't fall off of it. Mr.Jacobson said from the adjacent property,you'll see inaudible and stone foundation wall. You're going to be planting against the base of it,to soften the look of the pole? Mr.Mustacato said sure. • Planning Board July 10,2002 Page 12 Ms.Reader said if I understand what you're saying,the two retaining walls,extensions 4 or 5 ft.off the driveway and on one side where that existing asphalt driveway is,there will now be a stone wall,which is the driveway. Mr.Mustacato said yes. Mr.Jacobson said one will be kind of up in the air. Ms.Aisen asked,what is the reason why one driveway has to be stone. Mr.Mustacato said where our house sits is considerably higher than that driveway. Ms.Aisen said in order to get to the house. Mr.Mustacto said the retaining walls start about 15/20 ft.before the end of the other driveway. So for most of the driveway length,they're adjacent to each other...inaudible. Ms.Reader said,so the stone wall is not for the whole thing. Mr.Mustacato said it's just for the rear portion. On that flagpole,for the lack of a better word,it's about 75 ft. Dr.Mason asked,do you propose any lighting on that driveway? QMr.Mustacato said we haven't really gotten that far yet. Mr.Rosenbaum said just so you don't drive off. Mr.Papazian asked,how many square feet is the house? Mr.Mustacato said the house is about 5,000 sq.ft. Ms.Gallent said it's a big lot. Ms.Reader asked,anything else? As I told you earlier,CZMC meets on July 23,2002. You can speak to Ms.Paul. I suggest that whatever changes are recommended,you have them done before you meet with CZMC. Pass them by Mr.Capicotto first and Mr.Carpaneto. Mr.Mustacato asked,do you have the comments,Ron? Mr.Capicotto said I can fax them,as I only have my file copy. Ms.Gallent asked Ms.Roma to refer this to the Westchester County Planning Board and the CZMC. Ms.Reader said it's a Type II under SEQRA,so further action is involved. A gentleman said with the chair's permission,I would like to be heard on the application that you were just discussing. Ms.Reader asked,who are you? © rr The gentleman said,my name is Jonathan Kraut. My law office represents Ken and Annette Steer who have bought this property. Planning Board July 10,2002 Page 13 Ms.Reader said this is a consideration. Mr.Kraut said I understand that it is,but I think it will be beneficial particularly in light of some of the comments I heard this evening. Ms.Reader said I have no problem,but I just wanted you to know. Mr.Kraut said I'm aware that it's not a public hearing. I appreciate your consideration. Again,my name is Jonathan Kraut. My law offices represent Ken and Annette Steer,who won 50 Country Road which is immediately adjacent to the subject property. He said the subject property is as you know 52 which lies between 50 and 54. He said 50 and 54 are both flag lots. The proposed structure 52 I suppose could be considered a flag lot. I believe probably the Town archives show it as originally part of an estate that actually had frontage on Old White Plains Road,I believe and this was a form of further access to the site. He said,there's a saying in the construction business the toughest sites always get developed last and that's certainly the case here. The site is comprised largely of rock. It is a fairly hilly site that's why you have not only a long driveway but one that requires a substantial retaining wall in order to make a sensible grade on the approach. It is as I said both rocky and hilly. It also contains an area that really is quite wet. Mr. Kraut said the application that's before you for the permit, is based on the Building Inspector's identification,two wetlands areas. One is a pond area that is on 50 Country Road,my client's property. The other one is on the golf course beyond. Although I am not a wetlands scientist,having done enough land use I can tell you that there probably is a third wetland on the other side of the driveway. If you look less than 100 ft.away,you'll certainly see indicia of a wetland area although not necessarily so significant but I do mention that in passing. Mr.Kraut said my have obtained a P.E.,Nunzio Pietrosanti,who did submit some preliminary comments to Dolph Rotfeld's office and I know that they will be reviewed. We have reviewed both the SEQRA submission to you as well as the plans. Mr.Pietrosanti's comments I think made clear that the plans in certain significant respects are lacking information that would enable a homeowner to come to some future public hearing and to comment adequately on them. Simple things like the height of the retaining walls are not indicated on there. Although there has been a runoff calculation submitted by Mr.Mustacato's office it does show a perc test for proposed dry wells. I do not know where the dry wells are proposed to be located. I withdraw that. I know where they're proposed to be located. I don't know where the perc tests were taken. I presuppose from looking at the site that with the amount of rock that's on it I would be very,very surprised if the runoff calculations actually work in the field. Mr.Kraut said the question is raised,and it's a good one,how will deal with runoff in the driveway area? I will tell you that the driveway area presently serves as a natural detention basin. That was a comment that we discussed earlier. It's at the top of the hill and yes,in our anti-flood mode,we want waters to stay there and gradually release into the stream and eventually into the sound. Mr. Kraut said I believe submitted to the Building Inspector, although I don't know if they made the rounds,I can certainly pass this around,the series of pictures. This area that has the balls in it,there are two pictures here, 1 and 2. The first picture shows the proposed driveway location. That location,you can see from the picture, is completely inundated with water after a storm event. That is precisely...interrupted. Dr.Mason said be more specific. Is that a storm event,what date,what was the...interrupted. Mr.Kraut said the date of the storm that the picture was taken that's on the picture. Planning Board July 10,2002 Page 14 Dr.Mason asked what was the storm intensity. Mr.Kraut said I would have to check on that to tell you. To tell you that when I was retained,which was only a couple of weeks ago and I made a site walk as is customary and I don't remember. Dr.Mason said we don't need the history of it. Mr.Kraut said I'm just saying somewhere in the middle of June there was a rain event that was not one for the record books and it certainly was not a 25-year storm. Nevertheless,when Ron was there a day and one-half or two days after the storm,it was still a wet area. Now,Mr.Mustacato has indicated that through inserting drains in the driveway area and allowing them to flow into the pond,which is principally located on my client's property,that will alleviate the water runoff. Capacity is always the question when you propose to put water somewhere. The reason that that area serves as a natural detention basin is because the pond,which is depicted in the second picture that's being passed around,I don't believe has the present capacity for the additional runoff. Ms.Aisen asked,where is that on in the second...inaudible. Mr.Kraut said that is at 50 Country Road,which is my client's property. Ms.Reader said I have a question. On your client's property on the first one,is the driveway we see ..inaudible. Mr.Kraut said that is where the proposed driveway location is. Right in that area. Q, Ms.Reader said and the water is proposed. Mr.Kraut said yes. Ms.Reader the asphalt driveway....interrupted. Mr.Kraut said is my client's driveway,that's correct. Ms.Reader said but for similar reasons before,they had a driveway that may have been more of their choice. Mr.Kraut said,obviously it was before my client's ownership of the property which is not there that long, but I'm sure that if we went far enough back that the entire area up in there was a natural basin because if you go two driveways over,that's the other wetland area I was referring to. Mr.Kraut said certainly my client's position,I want to be clear,is not one of that nothing ever can be built there. It is that this is a difficult site. It is one that requires some very careful engineering and that has not been submitted in the present documents. They have other concerns that obviously go beyond the wetlands permit having to do with aesthetics. I've heard some mention of that and obviously rock removal is a concern,but really the particular concern for this Board is the wetland and the runoff. Mr.Kraut said the answer to this plan as presently before the Board,will it be able to handle water runoff with a zero gain in a 25-year storm. I don't believe that an engineer can give you that opinion based on the documents that are there. We submitted,in effect,a letter to that effect. I think that if I can sum up in two requests to the Board. One is that certainly further engineering review of this is required in order © for the Board to act responsibly and the second is that this is a site that does require a site walk by the Board members in order to really appreciate it,because what you talking about is your going to have three flag driveways side by side and the third one there's going to be a natural detention basin between them. Planning Board July 10,2002 • Page 15 Ms.Reader said thank you very much. I think we've already noted that Mr.Capicotto indicated that he needs more information inaudible. Mr.Capicotto said actually my comments are attached to one of your pictures. Mr.Kraut said I haven't seen them like Mr.Mustacato hasn't seen them,but I'm sure I will. Mr.Capicotto said that storm back in'98,March 9,1998,I believe it was one to two inches of rain that fell,and inch or inch and one-half,maybe two inches of rainfall. It wasn't a very...inaudible storm. Mr.Kraut said I have other storm event pictures and I certainly can provide what was. I think that the lay person,my client,from whether the simple prospective is in not such a big storm you get water there and it stays there for several days. So you have an issue before you that needs to be engineered and perhaps the applicant needs an engineer to work on that. Ms.Reader asked,anything else? This will be adjourned for a public hearing to August 14,2002,at 8:15 p.m. We are referring it to SEQRA as well as the Westchester County Planning Board and the CZMC. The Board said it's a Type II action. Ms.Reader asked,anything else? There was nothing else. Ms.Reader said we'll see you next month. Ms.Reader read the next application as follows: CONSIDERATION-FRESHWATER WETLANDS AND WATER COURSES PERMIT-Valerie Werter Green-30 Rockland Avenue-Block 222,Lot 1 John Knoetgen,the architect for the Greens,addressed the Board. Mr.Knoetgen said what we are proposing is a rear yard addition which encroaches into the buffer of the Leatherstocking Trail. If there are any questions,I am here to answer them. Ms.Reader asked,what are you proposing? Mr.Knoetgen said we are proposing a family room and breakfast area to the rear of the house. Ms.Reader asked,an addition. Mr.Knoetgen said an addition. Mr.Cohen asked,how many feet is the addition? Mr.Knoetgen said it's 25 ft.4 in. The square footage is 723 sq.ft.,single story. Ms.Aisen said 25 ft.closer to the Leatherstocking,with which Mr.Knoetgen agreed. Ms.Aisen asked the width,which Mr.Knoetgen said is about 30 ft. Ms.Gallent asked,how much of an area variance? Mr.Knoetgen said we don't need it. We need a front yard setback variance. Planning Board July 10,2002 Page 16 Dr.Mason said,can you clear up a question here? We're trying to figure out on your application who Valerie Werter Green is. A gentlemen said I am Charles Green,this is my wife,Valerie Werter Green. Mr.Rosenbaum said even in the twenty-first century,I thought that this was a residence that was really environmentally friendly. Mr.Knoetgen said I'll take whatever consideration I can get. What's required is a front yard setback which is pretty much on the side of the house. It's a corner lot. Mr.Cohen said the entrance to the house is on Rockland,is that correct. Mr.Knoetgen said that's correct. The driveway is on the side from Hommocks Road. Mr.Capicotto said,what is their wetlands? Mr.Knoetgen said the wetlands is in the back near the Leatherstocking Trail,much closer to Weaver Street. This is three short blocks up Rockland. Ms.Reader asked,you're closer to Weaver Street? Mr.Knoetgen said yes,much closer. © Ms.Reader asked are you near Holly? Mr.Knoetgen said yes,we're very close to Holly. Ms.Aisen said walking to your house from Weaver,your house is on the left side of Rockland? Mr.Knoetgen said that is correct. Dr.Mason asked,where is it in relation to Carroll Place or Hudson. Charles Green said it is one block up from Carroll. After some discussion,Mr.Capicotto said we'll need to see,and I can send you a note on this letter,that 100 ft.buffer from the wetland,which is from the edge of the Trail,property line,and also the 100-year flood elevation for that area you can get off the flood maps. Mr.Knoetgen asked,was that on the comments? Mr.Capicotto said no,because at that time you hadn't done the wetlands yet. Mr.Green said actually the wetland behind the house,there is no running water there. It's an area that gets swampy when it rains. After further discussion,Ms.Aisen said that doesn't negate that he still has to get permission to build. (SORRY, 1'1T>RE IS SOME DISCUSSION THAT CAN'T BE HEARD ON TAPE!) Dr.Mason said you're adding how many square feet? Mr.Knoetgen said 723 sq.ft. Planning Board July 10,2002 Page 17 Dr.Mason asked,on one level or two levels? Mr.Knoetgen said one level. Actually,I take that back. It's two levels. It actually drops down 18 in. into the family room. Ms.Reader asked,this is all a family room? Mr.Knoetgen said no. It's family room,and expanded kitchen and a breakfast area. Ms.Reader said you're extending the kitchen? Mr.Knoetgen said yes and a breakfast area. Mr.Rosenbaum asked,the patio doesn't exist? Mr.Knoetgen said no. Mr.Rosenbaum said that's where you are going to be building? Mr.Knoetgen said yes. Mr.Rosenbaum asked,what's that going to be. Mr.Knoetgen said that will be blue stone,york(?)stone and stone walls. Mr.Rosenbaum asked,what's there now? Mr.Knoetgen said in that exact location there is nothing. It's just grass right now. They currently have a concrete patio off the back. Mr.Papazian asked,can you show us on the map what is there now that you're going to remove and where you're going to place a seat over here. Mr.Knoetgen said this is currently the outline. The thin dash line represents sun room and then there's another thin line that runs across the periphery and then there's a concrete patio. All that will be removed. Ms.Reader said that's the current concrete patio. Mr.Knoetgen said the current concrete patio and enclosed porch,which is this think line here. Ms.Reader said the enclosed porch is now becoming part of the kitchen and then you're getting a breakfast LOOM. Mr.Knoetgen said that's right. We're adding that portion and a portion of the family room,which goes over the concrete patio and beyond. Mr.Cohen said the new patio behind the family room is made of what? Mr.Knoetgen said it's made of stone,stone walls and a blue stone top. Mr.Cohen asked,it's elevated. Mr.Knoetgen said it's about 3 ft.above the grade in the back. Planning Board July 10,2002 Page 18 Mr.Papazian said you have the existing house in the front. Mr.Knoetgen said this thin dash line represents the existing house. This is the existing covered patio. The existing house stops at the garage. Mr.Papazian asked,where's the garage,which Mr.Knoetgen pointed out. Mr.Papazian asked,the area,to what I call the north,is the new section. Mr.Knoetgen said this is the new porch,the one that has the dark walls. Mr.Papazian said,that's going to be the family room. Mr.Knoetgen said yes,this is the family room. He then pointed out the breakfast area which you step down into. Mr.Papazian said in the new breakfast area,there's nothing there now. Mr.Knoetgen said no. It partially encroaches on the enclosed porch. Ms.Reader said using that,show what encroaches by 25 ft.into the wetlands. Mr.Knoetgen said I believe the existing house is already encroaching into the buffer zone,not into the wetlands. The new portion is increasing that encroachment into the buffer zone. ® Ms.Aisen said,but you said it was a front yard. The front yard doesn't....interrupted. Ms.Reader said....inaudible Highland Place....inaudible front. Mr.Carpaneto said that's an area variance. Ms.Reader said it doesn't matter whether it goes front or whatever,because it intrudes. Ms.Aisen said but Leatherstocking came into it. There are two things. There are wetlands and then there's a Leatherstocking. You talked about the Leatherstocking buffer and you're also talking about a variance of the front yard. Ms.Reader asked,where's Leatherstocking. Mr.Knoetgen said it's from this line back. Ms.Reader said that's going to encroach...inaudible to the back. Ms.Aisen said on the left-hand drawing. Mr.Knoetgen said this is the encroachment,horizontal. Ms.Reader asked,what's the new encroachment,the additional encroachment from there to the pool? Mr.Knoetgen said it's moving closer. Ms.Gallent said she wants to see physically on the drawing(SORRY,YOU'RE ALL TALKING AT ONCE)what's there. • Planning Board July 10,2002 • Page 19 Mr.Knoetgen pointed that out. Ms.Reader said you already have patio. The patio past before. The patio is made out of concrete. From the patio forward,what's new? Mr.Knoetgen said approximately 15 ft.by 18 ft. Ms.Reader said of impervious. Ms.Aisen said additional impervious. You're getting closer to both. Ms.Reader asked,from the rear of your deck,when you say 15 ft.by 18 ft.,that's including the new patio,right? Mr.Knoetgen said no,that is not. Ms.Reader said,but the new patio is impervious too. Mr.Knoetgen said I added all this for impervious calculation. Ms.Reader said right,so what would be the impervious. It's the family room plus the patio,what's the encroachment? Mr.Knoetgen said the patio is an additional 12 ft.3 in. © Ms.Reader said that's 27 ft.by 18 ft. Mr.Knoetgen said it's wider. About 28 ft.wide including the patio. Ms.Reader said from the end of the patio to the end of your property line,what's the distance? Mr.Knoetgen said about 53 ft. Ms.Reader said from the end of the patio,with which Mr.Knoetgen agreed. After further discussion,Mr.Knoetgen said it's 41 ft.6 in. It's 53 from the house. Ms.Reader said from the end of your property line in the rear to Leatherstocking,is there a distance or are you right on Leatherstocking. Mr.Green said to the actual trail? Ms.Reader said no,to the buffer,beyond you and back onto Leatherstocking,is that right? Mr.Green said the actual trail,no. Ms.Reader asked,is there any house? Mr.Green said there is no house behind me. © Ms.Reader said Leatherstocking,there's a distance between the trail and your house. Mr.Green said correct. Planning Board July 10,2002 Page 20 © Ms.Reader said that's 15 ft. Mr.Green said it's actually much further. At that point the trail is closer to the house on the far side. Ms.Reader said so how far from your house. Mr.Green said probably to my property line is a good 40 ft.into the woods that the trail actually exists. Ms.Reader said so you actually back on to it. Do you have to go to the zoning board? Mr.Knoetgen said for an area variance. Ms.Reader said for an area variance off of Highland. Do they need an area variance off of the rear? Mr.Green said no. Just for a little clarification,we actually have two lots. They were joined in the most recent sale as one. There is a lot on Highland that is 50 ft.by 90 ft.and the property that I'm on is approximately 60 ft.by 100 ft.and they form an"L". We,at this point,are not at all touching the back lot. With this extension,the patio will extend just a few feet into the back lot side line. There is still a remainder of that entire lot behind the house. Additionally behind that lot,there's another 20 ft.swap of grass before the woods even start and then it's 40 ft.to the trail. The house as it exists now is within 100 ft. Mr.Knoetgen said the 100 ft.line is right about the middle of the existing house. QMr.Capicotto said right under the word,frame. Ms.Reader asked if there was anything else. Mr.Papazian asked,how are you compensating for the rate of runoff? Mr.Knoetgen said we have two dry wells that are going in and the calculations have been...inaudible. He pointed out where they are located. He said it's behind the property,at the end of the patio it's 11 ft. beyond. Ms.Reader asked,any other questions? There were none. Ms.Reader said this is a Type II action under SEQRA,so we don't have to take any further action. I will refer it to the CZMC. You probably were here when we found out that CZMC is meeting July 23,2002. You can speak to Ms.Paul,who is in the second row,to find exactly where and what time. I think you need to have some additional information on your plans as submitted even before you go to CZMC. You should confirm all that. Get the whole list from Mr.Capicotto and Mr.Carpaneto. Dr.Mason said and give us the contour lines and carry those contour lines into the Leatherstocking area ...inaudible because you do have the...inaudible stream running through there and then it comes around and down alongside Weaver Street under the Rockland bridge. It will be of interest to know what ...inaudible....particularly when get involved with CZMC,have that information available. Mr.Capicotto said the Town has Topo maps. Mr.Knoetgen said it's on my list from your letter. Ms.Reader said if there's nothing further,the matter is adjourned for a Public Hearing to August 14,2002 at 8:15 p.m. • Planning Board July 10,2002 Page 21 ® Ms.Reader said thank you all for doing a wonderful job last month. NEXT MEETING The next meeting of this Board will be held on August 14,2002. ADJOURNMENT There being no other business,the meeting was unanimously adjourned at 9:30 p.m. L ZD Marguerite Roma ecording Secretary