Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987_03_11 Planning Board Minutes MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING BOARD OF THE TOWN OF MAMARONECK MARCH 11, 1987, IN THE COURTROOM, TOWN OFFICES 740 WEST BOSTON POST ROAD MAMARONECK, NEW YORK CALL TO ORDER The Chairman called the meeting to order at 8:15 P.M. ROLL CALL Present: Sanford A. Bell, Chairman Mary Carlson Anton Schramm Gaetano Scutaro Lester M. Bliwise Patricia Latona Norman L. Cannon Also Present: Lee A. Hoffman, Jr., Town Attorney Gary B. Trachtman, Town Engineer Shirley Tolley, CL MC Phyllis Whittner, CZ MC Public Stenographer from: Carbone, Kazazes & Associates Mamaroneck, NY Jean A. Marra, Recording Secretary SCHEDULING The Chairman stated that the next meeting of the Planning Board will be held on April 8, 1987. 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The Minutes of December 10, 1986, were presented and on motion by Mrs. Latona, seconded by Mr. Cannon, were unanimously approved. The Minutes of January 14, 1987, were presented and on motion by Mrs. Latona, seconded by Mr. Bliwise, were unanimously approved. The Minutes of February 11, 1987 were presented and on motion by Mrs. Latona, seconded by Mr. Scutaro, were unanimously approved. March 11, 1987 At this time, Chairman Bell stated that the order of the agenda would not be adhered to and Item #5 was heard first. 5. PUBLIC HEARING - FINAL SUBDIVISION APPROVAL 10 Burton Road Block 407 Parcel 335 Mr. L. Goldstein The Public Stenographer was present for this application. On motion by Mr. Scutaro, seconded by Mrs. Latona, it was unanimously RESOLVED, that the Public Hearing be, and it hereby is, declared open. There being no one who wished to be heard, on motion by Mrs. Latona, seconded by Mr. Scutaro, it was unanimously RESOLVED, that the Public Hearing be, and it hereby is, continued to April 8, 1987. In answer to a question raised by Chairman Bell, Mr. Trachtman stated that the application was not complete insofar as the grading of the property was concerned. - 2 - March 11, 1987 2. CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED RESOLUTION FOR PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION APPROVAL Salem Drive & Boulder Circle Block 304 Parcels 1799 & 3 Mr. Robert Armour Attorney Hoffman presented the proposed resolution for Preliminary Subdivision Approval and a discussion followed concerning language to be inserted and/or deleted and on motion by Mr. Schramm, seconded by Mr. Bliwise, the following resolution was unanimously adopted: PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION APPROVAL WHEREAS, William S. Morgenroth, P.F., as agent for Robert N. Armour, has submitted an application for Preliminary Subdivision Approval for a parcel of land currently located on Boulder Circle and Salem Drive in the Town of Mamaroneck, New York; and WHEREAS, the Planning Board has conducted and completed proceedings pursuant to SEAR and the Town of Mamaroneck Environmental Quality Review Law (Chapter 23 of the Town Code which also is known as Local Law No. 4 of 1985, as amended) and on February 11, 1987, resolved that the proposed action is "non-significant" within the meaning of SEAR and Chapter 23 of the Town Code of the Town of Mamaroneck; 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 interested residents and a Public Hearing having been held; and WHEREAS, it appears that the major controversial issues are the locations and layouts of lots and the use of common driveways or common entrances for the residents with an entrance to Boulder Circle to be shared with a neighbor; - 3 - March 11, 1987 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that Preliminary Subdivision Approval be, and it hereby is, granted on the application of Robert N. Armour, by William S. Morgenroth, P.E. , subject to all terms and conditions set forth below: 1. General Requirements All curbs, suitable monuments, water mains, storm drains, sanitary sewer facilities and street trees shall be installed all in accordance with the latest standards and specifications in force at the time work is started and in accordance with the approval plan, particularly with respect to Preliminary Subdivision Approval Plan #1, dated September, 1986. All easements and other deed restrictions which are imposed as conditions of this Preliminary Subdivision Approval and any subsequent Final Subdivision Approval must be approved as to form and content by Counsel to the Town prior to the signing of the Final Subdivision Plat by the Chairman of the Town of Mamaroneck Planning Board. 2. Compliance with SEOR A. Consistent with social, economic, and other essential considerations of State policy, to the maximum extent practicable from the reasonable alternatives thereto, the action to be carried out or approved is one which minimizes or avoids adverse environmental effects, including the effects disclosed in the relevant Environmental Assessment Form; and B. All practicable means will be taken in carrying out or approving the action to minimize or avoid adverse environmental effects, including effects disclosed in the relevant Environmental Assessment Forms and addendum thereto and all special requirements and modifications set forth herein. - 4 - March 11, 1987 3. Special Requirements A. Water Retention and Drainage 1. Plans for water retention facilities or galleries, if any, and drainage facilities, including use of existing swales or modification or construction of new swales, shall be submitted in the application for Final Subdivision Approval on this application. 2. On lots in which there are swales, retention areas or galleries, there must be deed restrictions which prevent any construction in retention areas and provide that the owners must maintain the grades within the swales or said retention areas. The deed restriction must be approved as to form by Counsel to the Town. 3. All easements shall provide for additional agreements between the owner of the premises and the Town, for the Town to provide, at its option and with- out obligation to the Town, emergency maintenance in the event the owner of the lot does not, and also to provide for the Town to restore the retention areas and swales if the owner does not. These easements and agreements shall provide that any expenses incurred by the Town shall be charged back to the particular lot on the next tax assess- ment. All such easements and agreements shall be approved by Counsel to the Town as to form. 4. Provision shall be made for drainage from the swale between Salem Drive and Boulder Circle to enter the municipal storm drainage system in the Fenbrook Subdivision to prevent possible flooding of Boulder Circle during and after land clearing and construction. 5. Plans for all retention galleries and/or foundation drains shall be submitted to and approved by the Consulting Engineer prior to Final Subdivision Approval. - 5 - March 11, 1987 B. Building Envelopes & Specific Drainage Requirements 1. Prior to any construction, specific on-site soil investigations shall be conducted on each lot and the areas of the proposed driveways. The findings shall be discussed with the Consulting Engineer with a view toward designing proper mitigating measures to control the ground water (footing drains for foundations/underdrains for driveways) . Recommendations of the Consulting Engineer shall be determinative. C. Erosion & 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 con- struction-related activities. 2. The control plan shall include a con- struction timetable and an inspection schedule. D. Plans Prior to Final Approval 1. Prior to the approval of the Final Subdivision plat, the applicant shall submit an improvement plan showing all proposed improvements. This plan shall be in conformity with the requirements of the Department of Highways, Town of Mamaroneck, and shall be approved by the Consulting Engineer and any conditions set forth herein. 2. Prior to the approval of the Final Subdivision plat, the applicant shall submit a grading plan showing all pro- posed grading. This plan shall be in conformity with the requirements of the Highway Department of the Town of Mamaroneck and shall be approved by the Consulting Engineer. - 6 - March 11, 1987 3. On the application for Final Subdivision Approval, the applicant shall present several alternatives for a common curbcut and possible shared driveway between Lot #3 in the proposed sub- division and Lot #3 in the Fenbrook Subdivision. 4. Any easements or agreements regarding the use and maintenance of any shared or joint driveway shall be approved by Counsel to the Town prior to the signing of the Final Subdivision Plat of the Chairman of the Planning Board. E. Status of Boulder Circle and Fenbrook Drive 1. If Boulder Circle and/or Fenbrook Drive have not been accepted as public streets pursuant to Town Law Section 278, prior to final plat approval, the applicant shall submit to the Planning Board a copy of an easement agreement between him and Fenbrook Associates Limited Partners pursuant to which he and every succeeding owner of Lot #3 in the proposed subdivision will have the right to use Boulder Circle and Fenbrook Drive for ingress and egress to Fenimore Road. F. Trees Trees on the site are to be retained in conformance with the Tree Preservation Law of the Town of Mamaroneck. G. Preliminary Approval Preliminary Approval should be construed as such and not as Final Approval. * * * * * - 7 - March 11, 1987 4. CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED RESOLUTION FOR PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION APPROVAL 1 Gaillard Place Block 504 Parcel 252 Mr. & Mrs. Mark Rocconi The status of the application was explained by Attorney Hoffman and he then summarized the conditions of the proposed resolution for Preliminary Subdivision Approval. Mrs. Latona raised a question regarding the portion of the property lying in New Rochelle being incorporated into the Town property and being considered as one parcel to which Attorney Hoffman answered the question by stating that the property in New Rochelle could not be annexed into the Town, adding that there may be some difficulty having New Rochelle sign off on it because they were so inundated with the David's Island issue. If that presented a problem, Attorney Hoffman said the Board could decide to waive that particular requirement. The question of the opening of Gaillard Place by New Rochelle joining the road was brought up by Mrs. Carlson and Mrs. Phyllis Whittner, of the CZ MC, said that the issue was still open regarding that matter. In answer to a question raised by Mr. Rocconi, Attorney Hoffman said that the language regarding any restrictions imposed by the Town relating to the roadbed would be worked out before Final Subdivision Approval. Thereafter, on motion by Mr. Schramm, seconded by Mr. Cannon, the following resolution was unanimously adopted: PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION APPROVAL WHEREAS, Mark Rocconi has submitted an application for Preliminary Subdivision Approval for a parcel of land located on Dillon Road and Gaillard Place in the Town of Mamaroneck, New York; and - 8 - March 11, 1987 WHEREAS, the Planning Board has conducted and completed proceedings pursuant to SEQR and the Town of Mamaroneck Environmental Quality Review Law (Chapter 23 of the Town Code which also is known as Local Law No. 4 of 1985, as amended) and on January 14, 1987, resolved that the proposed action is a Type II Action within the meaning of State and Town Environmental Quality Review Laws; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that Preliminary Subdivision Approval is hereby granted on the application of Mark Rocconi, subject to all terms and conditions set forth below: 1. General Requirements All required curbs, suitable monuments, water mains, storm drains, sanitary sewer facilities and street trees shall be installed all in accordance with the latest standards and specifications in force at the time work is started and in accordance with the survey of property by Roland K. Link, dated December 28, 1985, as amended. All easements and other deed restrictions which are imposed as conditions of this Preliminary Subdivision Approval and any subsequent Final Subdivision Approval must be approved as to form and content by Counsel to the Town prior to the signing of the Final Subdivision Plat by the Chairman of the Town of Mamaroneck Planning Board. 2. Compliance with SEOR A. Consistent with social, economic, and other essential considerations of State policy, to the maximum extent practicable from the reasonable alternatives thereto, the action to be carried out or approved is one which minimizes or avoids adverse environmental effects, including the effects disclosed in the relevant Environmental Assessment Form; and - 9 - March 11, 1987 B. All practicable means will be taken in carrying out or approving the action to minimize or avoid adverse environmental effects, including effects disclosed in the relevant Environmental Assessment Forms and addendum thereto and all special requirements and modifications set forth herein. 3. Special Requirements A. Water Retention and Drainage 1. Prior to Final Subdivision Approval, the applicant shall submit results of a percolation test to demonstrate the capacity of the surrounding soils for ex-filtration of water from drywells. The drywells must be designed to retain runoff from the roof of the proposed house. If the percolation test results indicate that drywells would not perform effectively, the applicant must convey runoff from the roof as well as the remainder of the site to the Town drainage system in Pryer Manor Road. 2. Plans for water retention facilities and drainage facilities shall be submitted in the application for Final Subdivision Approval and shall be subject to accept- ance by the Consulting Engineer to the Town prior to Final Subdivision Approval. B. Erosion & 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 con- struction-related activities. 2. The control plan shall include a con- struction timetable and an inspection schedule. - 10 - March 11, 1987 3. The applicant shall comply with all recommendations made by the Coastal Z one Management Commission. C. Plans Prior to Final Approval 1. Prior to the approval of the Final Subdivision plat, the applicant shall submit an improvement plan showing all proposed improvements. This plan shall be in conformity with the requirements of the Department of Highways, Town of Mamaroneck, and shall be approved by the Consulting Engineer and any conditions set forth herein. 2. Prior to the approval of the Final Subdivision plat, the applicant shall submit a grading plan showing all proposed grading. This plan shall be in conformity with the requirements of the Highway Department of the Town of Mamaroneck and shall be approved by the Consulting Engineer. D. Status of Gaillard Place 1. Prior to Final Subdivision approval, the applicant shall submit to Counsel for the Town, a title search indicating ownership and easements of record in the bed of Gaillard Place. 2. Prior to Final Subdivision Approval, the applicant shall submit an easement to the Town for utility, sewer and drainage easements for access, maintenance and repair for the portion of the bed of Gaillard Place to which the applicant has title. Such easements shall be in a form approved by Counsel to the Town. 3. The Final Subdivision Plat shall contain a notation of an irrevocable offer of dedication of any rights, title and interest of the applicant, and the proposed new lot owner, in the bed of Gaillard Place. - 11 - March 11, 1987 4. The Final Subdivision Plat or the Site Plan submissions shall indicate all existing utilities, including sewers, in the bed of Gaillard Place. 5. Any deed transferring title to the proposed new lot shall contain a reference to the irrevocable offer of dedication and to the subdivision map. E. Status of Property in the City of New Rochelle 1. The applicant shall, prior to Final Subdivision Approval, submit to Counsel to the Town, an executed covenant and restrictions stating that the portion of the applicant's property currently in the City of New Rochelle be merged with the portion in the Town of Mamaroneck and shall forever be considered one building lot pursuant to the Town of Mamaroneck Zoning Ordinance. These restrictions and covenants shall be executed by the applicant, the Town of Mamaroneck and the City of New Rochelle, and in a form acceptable to Counsel to the Town. F. Performance Bond/Letter of Credit ].. Prior to issuance of any building permits or the commencement of any construction activities, a Letter of Credit and/or a Performance Bond, to the Town of Mamaroneck, shall be filed in amounts and periods of time to be determined by the Consulting Engineer. A Performance Bond will be accepted only up to seventy-five (75%) percent of the amount determined by the Consulting Engineer to the Town, and the balance shall be secured by a Letter of Credit. - 12 - March 11, 1987 2. The Final Subdivision Plat shall contain the notation concerning an irrevocable offer of dedication as required by Town Law 278. G. Trees 1. Trees on the site are to be retained in conformance with the Tree Ordinance of the Town of Mamaroneck. The applicant shall specifically consult with the Shade Tree Commission prior to Final Subdivision Approval with respect to the 24 inch twin trees near the southwest corner of the proposed residence. H. Preliminary Approval Preliminary Approval should be construed as such and not as Final Approval, and the Town specifically reserves the right to impose additional conditions to Final Subdivision Approval. * * * * * 7. APPLICATION FOR FRESHWATER WETLANDS & WATER COURSES PERMIT 130 East Brookside Drive Block 220 Parcel 171 Andrea Kirby Mr. Robert Ciamei, the applicant's architect, presented the application. Mr. Trachtman offered that the applicant had responded to his comments and that he had no further questions regarding the application. - 13 - March 11, 1987 There being no further questions or comments, on motion by Mr. Schramm, seconded by Mrs. Carlson, it was unanimously RESOLVED, that the Planning Board is the Lead Agency and solely responsible for determining whether the proposed action has a significant impact on the environment. Thereafter, on motion by Mrs. Latona, seconded by Mr. Scutaro, it was unanimously RESOLVED, that this is a Type II Action having no significant impact on the environment, as determined by New York State Department of Environmental Conservation or corresponding local law, therefore requiring no further action under SEQR. On motion by Mr. Cannon, seconded by Mr. Bell, it was unanimously RESOLVED, that a Public Hearing on the Kirby application be dispensed with. At this time, Mr. Schramm questioned if this matter had to go before the Zoning Board to which Attorney Hoffman replied in the affirmative. Attorney Hoffman then outlined and summarized the proposed conditions of the proposed approval resolution and on motion by Mr. Schramm, seconded by Mr. Cannon, the following resolution was unanimously adopted: - 14 - March 11, 1987 WHEREAS, Andrea Kirby has applied for a permit pursuant to Local Law #7 of 1986; and WHEREAS, this Planning Board has previously determined that the proposed action is a Type II Action and that this Planning Board is the appropriate Lead Agency with respect to Environ- mental Quality Review; and WHEREAS, the Consulting Engineer to the Town has submitted comments and recommendations in writing regarding this application to the Planning Board; and WHEREAS, this Planning Board has determined, pursuant to Local Law #7, Section 88-6 (D) , that the activity proposed is of such a minor nature and is compatible pursuant to 6 NYCRR 665.7; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that this Board makes findings of fact as follows: 1. The activity proposed is of such a minor nature as not to effect or endanger the balance of systems in a controlled area; 2. The proposed activity will be compatible with the preservation, protection and conservation of the wetland and its benefits, because (A) the proposed activity will have only a minor impact, (B) it is the only practical alterna- tive, and (C) is compatible with the economic and social needs of the community and will not impose an economic or social burden on the community; 3. The proposed activity will result in no more than insubstantial degradation to, or loss of, any part of the wetland, because of the minor impact of the activity and the protective conditions imposed by this resolution; 4. The proposed activity will be compatible with the public health and welfare, because of its minor impact in the controlled area; - 15 - March 11, 1987 AND IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED, that this Board determines that a hearing pursuant to Local Law #7 of 1986 be, and hereby is, dispensed with; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the application of Andrea Kirby for a permit, pursuant to Local Law #7 of 1986, be, and it hereby is, granted subject to the following terms and conditions: a. This permit shall expire upon completion of the proposed activity or one year from the date of its issuance, whichever first occurs; b. This permit is personal to the applicant and may not be transferred to any other individual, entity, or a combination thereof; c. The applicant is required to deposit $500 with the Town Comptroller to ensure satisfactory completion of the proposed project and the rehabilitation of any effected or disturbed areas; d. Work involving site preparation shall only take place from Monday through Friday, between the hours of 8:00 A.M. and 4:30 P.M.; e. The recommendations regarding technical aspects are hereby made conditions of this permit, to wit: (1) Certified plans being furnished by the surveyor to the Consulting Engineer indicating that proposal is not within 35 feet of the high water mark; (2) Compliance with Erosion Control Plans being submitted by the Applicants and approval of said plans by the Consulting Engineer; (3) Providing hay bales at the locations to be shown on the Temporary Protective Barrier Plan to be received by the Consulting Engineer and in accordance with the specifications of the Westchester Best Management Practices Guidelines for Construction Related Activities. - 16 - March 11, 1987 3. CONSIDERATION OF STATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY REVIEW 178 Myrtle Blvd. Block 133 Parcel 627 Coughlin Realty Corp. Mr. Donald Mazin, the attorney for the applicant, stated that they were here tonight for consideration of SEAR and he proceeded to introduce Mr. William P. Widulski, the new Professional Engineer for the proposed project. A written reply from Mr. Widulski in reponse to Gary Trachtman's letter to him of March 4th was submitted by Mr. Mazin. Following a brief presentation of the document, Mr. Widulski proceeded to read from the memo and explain its contents, addresseng each item one at a time. A nicely done rendering of the proposed building reflecting its impact on the apartment building in the rear was presented together with a schemetic plan which depicted the height of the building in relation to the rear of the premises. Mr. Meltzer, the architect from Design Collaborative, stated that in order to provide screening of the parking area, a low brick planter which holds shrubbery, will be placed around the rear and sides of the building. Test pits were done up and down and across the property on March 7th and no rock or water was incurred at a 9 feet depth, explained Mr. Widulski. Excavation of the building was questioned by Mr. Schramm and Mr. Widulski replied that excavation could be done with no blasting or water problems. In answer to Mrs. Carlson's question, Mr. Widulski stated that the storage tanks which were on the property had been removed. The matter of the air conditioner on the roof making too much noise was discussed and Mr. Widulski said with new equipment, the noise generated would be minor. - 17 - March 11, 1987 Mr. Trachtman said protective shields could be used as a buffer but Mr. Widulski offered that the bulkheads on the roof would be sufficient to block any sound. Chairman Bell asked Mr. Trachtman if he was satisfied with the answers presented and Mr. Trachtman said he believed those issues have been cleared up and added that some points which were brought out regarding their (the applicants' ) interpretation of "little impact" were issues which the Planning Board may have different opinions on. A zoning variance is required on this application, Attorney Hoffman offered, adding that if the Board felt this matter would have a significant impact, then it must be discussed. In Mr. Scutaro's opinion, a visual impact was being presented and Mr. Trachtman added that the cross-sections and elevations which were presented have shown how this building would look in the surrounding area. To answer a question raised by Mr. Bliwise, Attorney Hoffman said that procedurally, the engineer indicated that the technical issues were responded to or that they can be sufficiently mitigated. What remained was whether there were non-technical issues which related to this proposal that would have a significant impact on the environment, Mr. Hoffman added. Compared with the height of the Clock Tower, the impact was not so great, stated Mr. Schramm, adding that an office building would be an asset as it would enhance the area. Mrs. Carlson expressed her concerns about drainage into the Myrtle Blvd. gutter and Mr. Widulski explained that the problem lies with the drains in the area but Mrs. Latona said the problem would be increased by the addition of a new building. Mr. Widulski was not in agreement as any work done at the new building would reduce the amount of water to the area, he stated. The representatives from the CL MC were asked by Chairman Bell to speak on the matter to which Mrs. Tolley stated that since Mr. Kellogg's report was superseded by Mr. Widulski's, she did not feel she could comment on it and that she would rely on Mr. Trachtman's opinions. - 18 - March 11, 1987 The largeness of the building and its visual impact was the concern expressed by Mrs. Latona — having a coverage of 65% of the area instead of the allowable 25%. Mrs. Carlson presented a sketch she made which depicted what the proposed building would look like on the property versus what was permissible under the Zoning Ordinance and it was displayed to the members of the Board. It was Mr. Meltzer's opinion that, from an aesthetic point of view, the proposed building would be an improvement over what would be allowed and they did not just want to put another taxpayer's building on the property. The proposed building would be better than having a smaller building with parking all around it, Mr. Bliwise stated, adding that the smaller building would not be as pleasant looking as the one that was being proposed. Chairman Bell pointed out that the building would fit in with the surrounding buildings and also that no green areas would be disturbed in that location. Mr. Bernie Alexrod, a local resident, stated that the visual impact would be substantial for the people in the apartment building as it would block off a good deal of light and air. Mr. Stanley Bierman, attorney for the Clock Tower Building, together with the owner of the Clock Tower Building, expressed their objections to the proposal stating that gas fumes would come onto their property from the parking garage; light and air would be cut off; and that the water retention pits would overflow onto their property. Chairman Bell asked Mr. Hoffman if this was an environmental issue or site plan issue to which Attorney Hoffman replied that the issues raised sould be considered on both SEQR and site plan proceedings, and that under site plan law, the applicant could be required to take into account the impact on neighboring properties. A discussion followed concerning the gas fumes generated by this proposal and Mr. Meltzer stated that there would be no trapping or concentration of gas fumes as they would be mechanically removed. - 19 - March 11, 1987 Significant impact is to be considered for the entire neighborhood or area, not just for one individual and, Mr. Mazin stated, Gary Trachtman would never allow a building to be put up if there was a problem. Mr. Trachtman stated that the Board can request the applicant to provide more information if they feel this impact would create a hazardous condition to anyone or anything. Mr. Bliwise asked Mr. Trachtman if the Board members could assume there are ventiliation systems that will take fumes and dissipate them into the air and Mr. Trachtman replied that he did not think there would be a pollution problem with the number of cars in involved. Mr. Meltzer contributed that an office building was considered as a clean use. At this time, on motion by Mr. Schramm, seconded by Mr. Bliwise, the following resolution was adopted by a 4 to 3 vote of the Board: RESOLVED, that the Planning Board has determined this Unlisted Action as Non-Significant and therefore it is being issued a Negative Declaration under SEQR and the Environmental Quality Review Law of the Town of Mamaroneck. Attorney Hoffman requested it be noted for the record that this matter concluded at 10:40 P.M., having started at 9:00. At this time, Attorney Hoffman requested permission to submit the Cohenca application, requiring mandatory referral, to CZM and on motion by Mrs. Carlson, seconded by Mrs. Latona, it was - 20 - March 11, 1987 RESOLVED, that the Cohenca application be submitted to CZM for mandatory referral. Attorney Hoffman also requested permission to submit the Donatelli application, which lies in a Critical Environ- mental Area, to CZ M and on motion by Mr. Bell, seconded by Mr. Cannon, it was RESOLVED, that the Donatelli application be submitted to CM for mandatory referral. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Board, on motion by Mrs. Latona, seconded by Mrs. Carlson, the meeting was unanimously adjourned at 10:50 P.M. Jean A. Marra Recording Secretary - 21 -