Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001_06_26 Coastal Zone Management Commission Minutes Town of Mamaroneck — Village of Larchmont COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT COMMISSION TOWN CENTER: 740 West Boston Post Road, Mamaroneck, NY 10543 ' = 914-381-7845 CZMC Minutes - Draft June 26,2001 A regular meeting of the Coastal Zone Management Commission(CZMC) was held on June 26, 2001 in Conference Room A, Town Center, 740 West Boston Post Road, Mamaroneck,New York. The meeting was called to order at 8:10 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Madelaine Berg, Chairperson Lili Andrews Dickson Brown Frank Buddingh Elizabeth Cooney Katherine Dehais Marc Godick REGRETS: William Bailey p Bernard Kaplan Dr. C. Alan Mason Howard McMichael OTHERS PRESENT: Nancy Seligson Councilwoman, Town of Mamaroneck Phyllis Wittner Councilwoman, Liaison, Town of Mamaroneck Chris Verni Liaison, Village of Larchmont Elizabeth Paul Environmental Coordinator, Town of Mamaroneck Benny Salanitro 162 East Brookside Drive Roger Weiss 162 East Brookside Drive Jim Fleming Architect, 13 Addison Street& 14 Bonnie Way Larry Gordon Winged Foot Golf Club Donald S. Mazin Stop& Shop Supermarket Corp. Ron Fuerst Stop& Shop Supermarket Corp. Bryan Hosterick Stop & Shop Supermarket Corp. Carol Coleman 1 Cedar Island Margaret Piccone 1 Cedar Island 1. Approval of Minutes The minutes of the meeting of 5/22/01 were accepted with revisions. CZ_060I M CZMC—5/22/01,Page I of 9 `J Printed on Recycled Paper 2. Referrals a. Freshwater Wetlands and Watercourses Permit 162 East Brookside Drive—Block 220, Lot 115 Referred by the TOM Planning Board Benny Salanitro, Engineer and Roger Weiss, home owner were present to present plans for a rear addition,the enclosure of a sunroom and the relocation of the driveway. The amount of impervious surface area will increase by 140 sq ft for the kitchen and 1200 sq ft for the driveway and garage. Did not account for the removal of the driveway in drywell calculations. Comments were received from the Town's Engineer requesting additional information including the 100 yr flood elevation, 100 ft wetlands buffer zone boundary and the location of the proposed drywell connection. A location map was presented to the CZMC. M. Godick asked what the total depth of the drywell is. The engineer explained that there are two differently sized drywells. The one for the driveway&garage is 6 feet in diameter by 6feet deep and the one for the rear addition is four feet in diameter by three feet deep. M. Godick asked if a test pit was done yet. The engineer answered that the perc test calculations were done to a depth of 16"for the depth of water drop. Probe tests were done to a depth of 60 inches at two locations in the front and rear of the property. M. Berg asked if the covered porch was to be enclosed in the proposal. The engineer said it was. OL. Andrews asked what the surface area of the driveway being removed is. The engineer stated that the existing driveway is approximately 900 sq ft, it will be replaced with lawn. The homeowner added that the retaining walls around the driveway will be removed and area will be regraded. M. Godick asked how they proposed to handle the runoff from the new garage. The Engineer explained that the leaders from the garage would be tied into the drywell along with the driveway as indicated on the revised plans. K. Dehais asked if all of the new runoff created by the new driveway was included in the calculations. The Engineer responded that it was. K Dehais stated that the existing driveway is relatively flat and slopes towards the house but the proposed driveway slopes more steeply towards the Sheldrake River. A large increase in runoff will result from this change. B. Salanitro responded that a trench drain would capture this runoff. M. Godick: the end of the proposed driveway is currently pitched towards the street. If the trench drain is moved farther in from the street and the pitch of the end of the driveway is changed,the water will run back to the homeowners property instead of into the street, giving the homeowner more of an incentive to maintain the trench drain if it becomes blocked. B. Salanitro added that this could be done with a slight change in slope. The engineer was concerned about collecting street water in the trench drain. CZ 0601 M CZMC—5/22/01,Page 2 of 9 K. Dehais pointed out that the proposed overflow pipe from the drywell is connected to the street's catch basin, which in turn flows into the Sheldrake River. Several members of the CZMC discussed their position on this practice and noted that the homeowner will never know if drywell needs to be cleaned out if it overflows into a catch basin. A backup needs to be noticed by the homeowner. The engineer stated that an overflow would be visible from the leaders and other parts of the system, since the overflow is located at the highest point of the system. The CZMC and the engineer discussed the elevations of the proposed system and decided that the overflow pipe should be eliminated altogether or placed on the homeowner's property. An overflow pipe is not necessary in the design and should be eliminated. F. Buddingh and L. Andrews commented on the property's trees. Two cedar and 2 holly trees will be relocated to other parts of the property. P. Wittner asked if hollys are considered trees for a tree permit. E. Paul will check this. F. Buddingh asked what provisions had been made to protect the trees. The homeowner responded that they would want to protect the trees. F. Buddingh stated that a detail should be added to the plans specifying the protection of the existing trees. The CZMC has determined that the proposed additions to the house are consistent with the policies set forth in the Local Waterfront Revitalization Program provided that the drywell design is modified to eliminate the overflow pipe to the catch basin and that the driveway be re-graded so that the trench drain will prevent runoff from entering the street. The applicant has agreed to incorporate these changes into their proposal. b. Construction of a Mixed Occupancy Building 13 Addison Street Referred by the Village of Larchmont Planning Commission James Fleming,the Architect for'13 Addison Street presented plans for the construction of a mixed-use building. The building is a small green building that is not in use at this time. The interior of the building is very old and had not changed much since the turn of the century. Mr. Fleming told a story about when he was a child, the building had a bicycle repair shop and instructions for the repair of the bicycles were left on a blackboard for the deaf repairman. Madelaine Berg suggested contacting the Larchmont Historical Society to photograph the interior before the building is demolished. The owner of Carpet Fair bought the building and would like to move his business into the first floor. Two apartments will be built on the second floor. According to Mr. Fleming, The Village of Larchmont Planning Commission has approved the proposal and they have been to the Architectural Review Board and are going back to them for some minor changes to the facade and the windows. The zoning board needs to approve the variances. The proposed apartments are just under the Larchmont village required minimum size for an apartment. The required size is 700sq. ft. and the proposed apartments are 697 sq. ft. The parking plan adds a space on the street. The building will cover 80%of the lot. M. Berg—asked where the open space on the lot would be located. Mr. Fleming indicated where the open space on the lot would be located. The Village of Larchmont requested that the easement along the side of the building be made wider in order to allow trucks to collect garbage from the rear of the property. The proposed p building will have roof drains connected directly to storm sewer. Existing utility connections are present to connect the proposed building. The structure will have a basement in addition to the two upper floors. The Board of Architectural Review recommended a more elaborate top to the building and some minor changes to the windows. CZ_060I M CZMC—5/22/0I,Page 3 of 9 © K. Dehais commented that there would be an increase in traffic by converting a non- commercial use to an active store. Fleming replied that it was an active store a long time ago, and has been vacant. The owner recently passed away and the property was purchased by his client. F. Buddingh asked if any street trees would be removed during construction. Mr. Fleming stated that they would not remove any trees and will protect the street tree during construction. The CZMC has determined that the proposed construction of a mixed-occupancy building at 13 Addison Street are neither consistent nor inconsistent with the policies set forth in the Local Waterfront Revitalization Program. c. Construction of a Deck in the Vicinity of a Freshwater Wetland 14 Bonnie Way Request for Consideration by James Fleming, Architect James Fleming, Architect,presented plans for the Yamaguchi residence. They are proposing to build a deck on the rear of the house. A branch of the Sheldrake River crosses the center of the property behind the house and the proposal will require a wetlands permit. The proposed deck will be a rectangle with a 3.5' catwalk over the garage. The deck will be supported by footings that will be placed into the existing rock, vegetation and macadam driveway underneath. O K. Dehais pointed out that there is a lack of vegetation around the brook. Grass clippings are dumped into the water and the brook becomes clogged. A buffer is needed to prevent fertilizers from entering the brook. Most of the neighboring properties have vegetative buffers around the brook. Mark Godick recommended that a"no-mow"zone be established along the brook. M. Godick discussed the CZMC's recommendations for the design of a deck. At least 'A" of space should be provided between the slats of the deck to allow water to freely flow through it. Mr. Fleming stated that decks are typically built with 'A"of space between each of the deck's slats. Stone should be placed beneath the deck to prevent any erosion. If the grass under the deck will die,gravel should be placed under the deck. Mr. Fleming agreed to modify his proposal to place gravel under the deck if the existing vegetation should dies and he will have the contractor place cobblestone edging around the area under the deck to contain the gravel. The Planning Board will be reviewing the proposal next for the Wetlands Permit. A copy of the CZMC consistency review letter will be sent to the Planning Board. The CZMC finds the proposed construction of a deck at 14 Bonnie Way to be consistent with the policies set forth in the Local Waterfront Revitalization Program provided that there be no soil erosion from the site during or after construction and the homeowner agrees to replace any vegetation beneath the deck with gravel if the existing vegetation should die. The CZMC also suggests that a"no-mow"zone or a vegetative buffer be maintained along both sides of the brook crossing the property. © The CZMC discussed the approval process for decks. Decks do not require sediment/erosion control permits. According to Mr. Fleming,the soil removed from the postholes gets used to backfill the holes. CZ_060I M CZMC—5/22/01,Page 4 of 9 ® d. Site Plan Approval—Winged Foot Golf Club 851 Fenimore Road Referred by the Town of Mamaroneck Planning Board Larry Gordon,the Architect and Benny Salanitro,the Engineer for the Winged Foot Golf Club presented the proposal for the construction of additional employee housing. The site is located off of the Fenimore Road entrance next to the pool parking area. The proposed building will be a single-story structure located next to the existing employee residence with a patio connecting the two buildings. The proposed building will be a 30 foot wide by 90 foot long modular building, with bedrooms, bathrooms and a common meeting area. The structure requires the approval of New York State because the building is modular. The Board of Architectural Review has approved the proposal and the applicant has visited the Town of Mamaroneck Planning Board once. The site is a level grass area. No trees will be removed to complete this project. At the end of the clearing, there is a wooded area that slopes towards Poccia Circle. Lili Andrews asked if the structure would be used only during the summer. According to Mr. Gordon, the golf club has year round employees but this structure will be primarily for summer staff. Many college students work at the golf club during the summer maintaining the grounds. They provide housing in order to compete with other golf clubs. © Mr. Salanitro showed the location of the proposed building on the flood zone map to indicate that the site is not in a flood zone. Several areas of the Golf Club may contain wetlands, but not where the proposed structure would be located. E. Paul had previously visited the site and confirmed that there were no wetlands on site. Mr. Salanitro explained that a percolation test was done this past weekend. A rate of 13 minutes per inch was observed. The drywell size was based on this preliminary percolation test. The percolation test and the proposed plans will be finalized in a few days. The test pit was dug to approximately 54 inches. The drywells will be 6 feet in diameter and 6 feet deep with only a few inches of cover over them. They will be located in a low-traffic area. M. Godick suggested that the test pits are at least as deep as the proposed drywells are. Mr. Salanitro agreed to do this in the future. He added that the soil found was well draining in this area. No rock outcrops were noted. The CZMC has determined that the proposed construction of a building for employee housing is neither consistent nor inconsistent with the policies set forth in the Local Waterfront Revitalization Program. It was noted during the review, however,that the test pits dug to determine the size and location of the drywell were not representative of the actual design. This is a common occurrence. In the future,when the applicants are digging test pits for the sizing and placement of drywells, the test pit should be equal in depth to the proposed drywell depth. In this case, however,the test pits were close enough to the actual design to allow extrapolation. CZ 060I M CZMC—5/22/01,Page 5 of 9 e. Site Plan Modification—Stop & Shop Supermarket Co. 1326 Boston Post Road Referred by the Town of Mamaroneck Planning Board Donald Mazin, Ron Fuerst and Brian Hosterick presented the plans for the re-grading and redesign of the Stop and Shop parking lot. Stop and Shop will be shutting the store down for a three-week period this summer to do interior renovations. During that time, they are proposing to work on correcting several problems with the parking lot. The current parking area has a large depression in the center where slopes are too steep. Stop & Shop proposes to re-grade the parking area so the slope will be between 1 and 2 %. The existing drainage system and catch basins will be reused. In some cases double inlets will be added to the catch basins instead of single inlets to catch some more of the runoff. A retaining wall will be constructed both sides of the parking lot. The wall on the southern side of the property will be 3 to 4 feet high. A soil and erosion plan will be provided indicating the location of silt fencing that would be used during the projects construction. The existing oil separators would be cleaned out and utilized. The existing trees and the islands in the center of the parking lot will be removed and the islands located near Weaver Street will be enlarged to make them more visible. The islands will still be designed to require a right turn onto Weaver Street. P. Wittner asked if the remainder of the parking lot in front of the CVS would be C included in the work. Mr. Fuerst explained that only the area in front of the Stop and Shop would be regraded and repaved. Nancy Seligson asked if the Stop and Shop would consider the Planning Board's suggestion of installing a staircase between the Stop and Shop parking lot and the Gap parking lot. Mr. Mazin stated that this would be a liability problem and this would violate the Gap's lease agreement by allowing Stop & Shop patrons to park at the Gap. Having school children cross the parking lots and skateboarders would also be a liability. Members of the CZMC explained that parents wait to pick up their children from school in the Stop& Shop lot and people should not have to get into their cars to get from one store to another. Mr. Fuerst stated that they plan to repave the path that leads from Weaver Street to the Central School, but they will not include a staircase in their proposed design. Mr. Fuerst reviewed the proposed changes to the islands. M. Berg asked if there would be a gain in the total number of trees. He answered that there would be a loss of one tree but a gain in planting space near the southern retaining wall. The CZMC has determined that the proposed re-grading, site modifications and repaving of the Stop& Shop parking area is neither consistent nor inconsistent with the policies set forth in the Local Waterfront Revitalization Program. C CZ 060I M CZMC—5/22/01,Page 6 of 9 f. Subdivision of Property to Create a Conservation Area 7 Durham Road Referred by the Town of Mamaroneck Town Council Town Councilwoman,Nancy Seligson presented the Town's proposal for the subdivision of the property at 7 Durham Road to create a conservation area. On the corner of Durham and York off of Fenimore Rd. In March, Susan Carpenter of the Westchester Land Trust contacted Nancy Seligson to tell her that a homeowner had wanted to put a conservation easement on their property. The property is a one-acre site with a house on one half of the property. The other half of the property is wooded. The property owner wanted to sell the property, but wanted to preserve the undeveloped portion. When the owner tried to sell the parcel, several of the prospective buyers were not interested in purchasing the property with a conservation easement on half of the parcel. The developed portion of the property has a house, located high up on a rock ledge. The natural portion of the property is wooded, covers about one-half of an acre and is lower in elevation. Members of the CZMC asked if there are wetlands on the property. Nancy Seligson and Phyllis Winner described the property as being wet at times and acts as a retention area for storm water. When subdivided, the natural area will be protected as a conservation area and never developed. The subdivision requires a variance from the zoning board because the property is in a R-20 zone and the proposed parcel that would be created is less than 20,000 square feet. A lot can only be subdivided into conforming parcels without a variance. Members of the CZMC discussed the creation of conservation easements and why homeowners in the area are apprehensive about creating them. Perhaps the use of the term"conservation easement" should be replaced with the term"land trust". The CZMC has determined that the subdivision of Block 227, Lot 138 on Durham Road to create a conservation area is consistent with the policies set forth in the Local Waterfront Revitalization Program. Members of the CZMC are pleased that the property owner has generously offered to donate the land to the Town to preserve it as open space and hope to see more of this in the future. 3. Old Business a. One Cedar Island Madelaine Berg gave the following updates to the One Cedar Island Proposal: The CZMC received several letters from the residents who live near Cedar Island objecting to the proposed rehabilitation of the seawall and construction of a hip wall at One Cedar Island. Many residents attended the Meeting of the Board of Trustees of the Village of Larchmont on June 18, 2001 to voice their objections to the proposed reconstruction of the seawall. An article that appeared in the Times was distributed to all CZMC members along with copies of any letters received from residents. CZ 0601 M CZMC—5/22/01,Page 7 of 9 • Dan Natchez is supplementing the application to the NYS Department of State with additional material. Several of the residents expressed an interest in being allowed to comment on the proposal. The CZMC meetings are not necessarily the proper forum for a public commenting session,however, in the past,CZMC has heard the views of the residents. The Department of State has also expressed an interest in having a public commenting period. If the CZMC receives the additional information that is being submitted by Mr. Natchez, the CZMC will revisit the issue at our next meeting. Mr.Natchez and residents will be invited to come and speak on this issue. Carol Coleman and Margaret Piccone,neighbors of the Falk's at Cedar Island, came to the CZMC meeting to voice their concerns with the proposal. Ms. Coleman and Ms. Piccone stated that Mr. Falk had apparently agreed to withdraw his application and obtain a second opinion on the repair of the seawall. But did not volunteer to do this at the Village Board meeting. Madelaine Berg asked if the neighbors had any plans to get a second opinion on the repair of the seawall. They had not considered this but may decide to get a consultant in to look at it. The residents questioned Mr. Natchez's opinion that the smaller stone would have to be replaced with larger stone in order to repair it. Several of the neighbors have yearly maintenance programs for their walls. They believe that years of neglect most likely caused this extensive damage. They are also concerned about the appearance of the concrete hip wall. The stone textured finish may negatively change the appearance of the island. They feel that Mr. Natchez's report did not mention that the area is used for recreation and that the wall would not impact the aesthetics. Madelaine Berg asked if a Town Wetlands permit was needed. The Town only requires permits for freshwater wetlands,New York State issues Tidal Wetlands permits. Marc Godick explained why the CZMC made the decision finding consistency with the proposal, highlighting the potential environmental damage that may occur if the wall is removed and reconstructed. Members discussed the condition of the seawall,the issue of neglect and the responsibility of the homeowner to maintain their property. The neighbors were asked to attend the next meeting when the discussion of the proposal would continue. Dixon Brown discussed the methods used to repair the seawall at his property. Most of the work was initially done at low tide, until the wall was high enough to be above sea level. The discussion will be continued at the next meeting. b. Open Space Inventory Elizabeth Paul,the Environmental Coordinator and Nancy Seligson described the open space inventory. Kate Jenkins,the Intern for the Conservation Department will be reviewing the tax rolls to identify open space and identify lots that may be legally subdivided. Members of the CZMC will be needed to field-check these parcels and describe the environmental features of the property. These parcels will be kept on a list for future reference and used as a planning tool. CZ 060I M CZMC—5/22/01,Page 8 of 9 4. New Business No new business to discuss. The meeting was adjourned at 10:45 p.m. The next scheduled CZMC meeting will be held on July 24, 2001. Anyone unable to attend this meeting should contact Elizabeth Paul at(914) 381-7846. 11) CZ_0601 M CZMC-5/22/01,Page 9 of 9