Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1986_05_14 Planning Board Minutes MINUTES OF A SPECIAL MEETING OF THE PLANNING BOARD OF THE TON OF MAMARONECK MAY 14, 1986, IN THE COURTROOM, TOWN OFFICES 740 WEST BOSTON POST ROAD MAMARONECK, NEW YORK CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by the Chairman at 8:16 p.m. ROLL CALL Present: Mr. Sanford Bell, Chairman Ms. Mary Carlson Ms. Pat Latona Mr. Anton Schramm Mr. Gaetano Scutaro Absent: Mr. Lester M. Bliwise Mr. Emil Nicolaysen Mr. Lee Hoffman, Town Attorney Also Present: Mr. Gary Trachtman, Town Engineer Ms. Jean A. Marra, Board Secretary SCHEDULING The Board stated the next meeting of the Planning Board would be held on June 11, 1986. PROCEDURE The Chairman stated to all present that Ms. Caryl B. Mahoney has resigned as a member of the Planning Board due to the fact that she moved out of state. He also stated that Ms. Pat Latona, Chairperson of the Traffic Commissioner, was appointed to the Board on April 16, 1986 and her term runs until the year 1990. The Board welcomed Ms. Latona as their new member. The Chairman opened for discussion the Old Road matter. OLD ROAD John P. Seligman, Esq. of the Fink, Weinberger, Fredman, Berman & Lowell Law Firm, 81 Main Street, White Plains, New York, appeared on behalf of the developer and introduced Mr. Panayotou. Mr. Nick F. Panayotou, of Raymond Keyes Associates Inc., 44 Executive Blvd., Elmsford, New York, appeared on behalf of the developer and stated he is a licensed engineer in New York and Connecticut. Mr. Panayotou summarized for the Board that at the November meeting, they had been given preliminary subdivision approval subject to several conditions as finalized in a communication dated January 27, 1986. He stated that he would provide details responding to the various conditions of the preliminary approval resolutions. Mr. Panayotou stated that his firm is very sensitive in the area of blasting at the site and is prepared to conduct a test blast to see what impact it would have on the neighboring community. In addition, and as part of the final approval, Raymond Keyes Associates requested that the Board consider granting final subdivision subject to a successful result of the test blast to be performed subsequent to approval. Mr. Panayotou indicated that the Town can send representatives to the site to see the results for themselves and whether the level of the blast did cause any adverse impact on the surrounding area. Also, it would be arranged to have on-site inspection during the construction process to look for ground water. The drains that would be installed alongside the roadway would then be directed to a drainage facility. Mr. Panayotou announced that an Erosion Control Plan was previously provided by the Keyes firm and Performance Bonds will be submitted by their carrier. Mr. Panayotou submitted that the plot plan states that they are offering the roadways, irrevocably, to the Town of Mamaroneck and this will be further clearly identified. - 2 - It was also presented by Mr. Panayotou that his firm had been in touch with the persons supplying the sanitary sewers as well as persons for the gas, telephones and electrical work along with the adjacent developer, in order to coordinate their activities. One of the remaining questions was as to whether or not they would be allowed to connect directly to the existing manhole. The Chairman questioned Mr. Panayotou as to what the time frame would be. Mr. Panayotou answered that he hoped to have an understanding with his neighbor (the adjacent developer) prior to the next Planning Board meeting. Mr. Scutaro asked that instead of connecting directly to his line (the other developer) if another manhole could be established. Mr. Panayotou answered that if they connected directly to his line, they would construct a manhole, but the County of Westchester wants them to connect to an existing one. Ms. Latona inquired as to when the firm planned to do a test blast. Mr. Panayotou replied that he believed sometime perhaps in September. Ms. Latona questioned as to whether or not it made a difference where the test was done. Mr. Panayotou responded it would be done in order that no neighbors would be bothered and it is being tentatively planned to be done at Gatehouse Lane. It is still a very sensitive area he stated, perhaps near Lot #4. Ms. Latona posed the question concerning surrounding area homes near the proposed test blasting site being inspected. - 3 - Mr. Panayotou said there was a sphere of influence from the property line and he felt it was a reasonable location with the type of velocity that they are thinking about -- it being a low charge he added, was why. It was further stated by Mr. Panayotou that three or four feet from the property line or a point in the property where rock is located — the rock usually being located in the high ground -- would most likely be the spot to conduct such a test. The Chairman inquired as to whether or not the Board had all of the information they are supposed to have: 1. Site plan map. 2. Two pages of the tree survey. Mr. Panayotou explained that the landscape plans would be forthcoming. Mr. Bell announced that legal counsel was not present and the Board was desirous of his opinion as to whether the sewers that are constructed would be deeded to the Tam at a public hearing, even if the property is not within the Town of Mamaroneck Sewer District. Mr. Gary Trachtman covered the question of possibly getting copies of any correspondence the Keyes firm had with any of the persons and/or concerns Mr. Panayotou mentioned earlier. Mr. Panayotou stated that plans were filed with them and an easement has to be obtained from their neighbors in order to connect to the manhole. Mr. Seligman submitted that they just wanted to clean out the brush on the property and not do anything further with it for now. The Chairman stated that there is some proposed legislation regarding the Water Conservation Committee and the issue was going to be questioned at the next Town Council meeting with Counsel to the Town, Lee Hoffman. Mr. Trachtman wanted to know how Lot #4 had been determined as the best place for a test blast. - 4 - Mr. Panayotou explained that the rock is fairly uniform and they just wanted to pick a convenient area for the test blast and Lot #4 is close to people living on Gateway. Mr. Trachtman voiced that perhaps this particular area would not be representative of what might be encountered in some other location. Mr. Panayotou covered the fact that they will move it to a place that is more dense then because this had to be a valid test at a point where there is dense rock. Mr. Trachtman requested Keyes Associates to submit an evaluation of the proposed test site and Mr. Panayotou said his request would be honored and that it would be submitted shortly. The Chairman read a memo from Mr. William Paonessa, Building Inspector, wherein it was suggested that the applicant submit site plan grades. Mr. Panayotou commented that landscape plans would be submitted as soon as possible. The Chairman then opened the hearing to comments from the audience. Mr. Lawrence Lerman, Town Councilman, requested a copy of all documents submitted including the grading plan. Mr. Joel Negrin commented on the proposed test blast by saying, "Don't do it in a place that's convenient. Why not right on Gatehouse Lane? We would like you to test rock that is closer to us." He further stated that what was presented was a contingency arrangement pending final approval which is contingent upon test blasting. Mr. Negrin expressed his feelings as to the test blast being done and "the Town being invited." He said the Town should not be "invited". Rather, the Town should be there (at the test blasting site). Mr. Negrin then questioned why there was going to be gravel parking if the property is going to be cleared of debris. - 5 - Mr. Seligman responded by saying the gravel area was for snow-removal purposes -- to be used as a turn-around for the snow plows. Mr. Panayotou stated that it was his opinion that the rock could be safely removed by blasting and the only question was the level of the charge to be used in order to provide a safe condition for all concerned and that it will be conducted properly and in a safe manner. Mr. Gaetano Scutaro asked if a test blast is always done to which Mr. Panayotou answered yes, that it was being done elsewhere -- a test blast prior to construction because heavy equipment is necessary and very expensive to keep moving. Mr. Scutaro also asked if all of this equipment had to be in place for a test to which Mr. Seligman replied that it did. Mr. Panayotou stated they would start off with a very small charge and further determination would be made from there. Also, the charge would be increased gradually in order to get the proper results. The main problem is if someone was in a rush or wanted to save money. Mr. Panayotou further commented that Mr. Dinan had made a presentation and the Board took it favorably but that they did not want to limit themselves to one person. Also, that a licensed blaster would have to be hired and Mr. Dinan would be reviewing the blasting procedure. The Chairman asked Mr. Trachtman for his analysis and Mr. Trachtman stated he would have comments for the applicant and the Board in time for them to respond prior to the next meeting on the matter. This was done with the Fenbrook subdivision, Mr. Trachtman stated; the information provided by the technical engineering firm was reviewed with respect to the location of the seismograph and representatives of Malcolm Pirnie were present at the site during the testing. He stated he was satisfied with the way that procedure worked out. The Chairman stated that the firm representing the Town was present subject to the ruling of the Board. - 6 - Mr. Scutaro asked if the (Keyes) firm wanted to be ready to do the excavating when they are doing the test. Mr. Panayotou said yes. They are just trying to avoid a high cost and the specifications have been drawn. The Chairman requested a copy of the specs. Mr. Trachtman questioned not only the size of the charge but what appropriate methods were used to derive the proper method. Mr. Panayotou stated that performance specifications will be provided and if the test is successful, the equipment will not have to be removed from the site. Mr. Trachtman asked if any attempt was being made to review information regarding prior blasting that took place near Gatehouse Lane and Mr. Panayotou said no. Mr. Negrin stated that Felix and Mt. Vernon did some blasting and that they did cause some damage. The Chairman asked the Board if they were ready to hold a public hearing on this matter and stated that there had to be some discussion with their engineer and the developer first. Mrs. Carlson asked if that would be the June llth meeting to which the Chairman responded that it would be June llth. Mr. Trachtman stated that they might be ready but he doubted it. Ms. Latona said she would prefer June because in July, during the middle of the summer, it is not fair with people being away on vacation and all. Mr. Schramm said that he cannot believe everyone is going to get everything together in only one month. Mr. Seligman announced that fourteen days is needed for publishing a public notice and that he will communicate with the Town by June 1st regarding this. - 7 - The Chairman made a motion to set the Old Road matter down for a public hearing on June 11, 1986; it was seconded by Mr. Schramm and unanimously carried. * * * * * The Chairman opened the Garfield matter and stated that there were some minor changes that may improve safety. He then read a letter from the Town Administrator, Stephen Altieri, dated May 6, 1986. GARFIELD The Chairman stated that the Town had requested that the median on Jefferson Street be of concrete instead of grass in order to provide a pedestrian walkway for safety and that the Town also requested that certain trees be reduced in height to permit access of fire equipment. He said that the Board considered these to be minor matters but they do promote public goals and it was in the Board's purview to incorporate them in their final determination. Mr. Scutaro expressed his opinion as to dirt being needed around the base of the trees and that trees were necessary for a country look and for atmosphere. Mr. Schramm inquired as to whether the developer could use something more decorative rather than concrete or blacktop for the walkway. The Chairman read a letter from Stephen Altieri wherein it authorized the firm to begin construction. He stated that if the Board was in doubt about anything, they should obtain specific clarification. Mrs. Carlson voiced that she would like more information on the parking situation. The Chairman then asked for further comments or questions from the Board members. There being no further questions, Mrs. Carlson made a motion to limit the height of the trees to be planted as requested in Mr. Altieri's letter. The motion was seconded by Mr. Scutaro and unanimously carried by the Board. - 8 - Mr. Trachtman indicated that the direction of :the arrow (on the detour sign) should be modified so faffic goes to Myrtle. Mr. Schramm announced that the-eveloper should fix the pot holes in the road to make them safer. The Chairman stated that a discussion is needed with Mr. Altieri in order to ascertain concerns regarding the proposed parking for the Garfield development. * * * * * The Chairman then opened for discussion the proposed amendments to the Zoning Ordinance and the proposed density change from R-30 to R-50 was discussed at length. ZONING LAW AMENDMENTS Mr. Lerman stated that the increase in zoning density will prevent obstruction of the waterfront which is a necessity. The Chairman indicated that the Board had to act on these proposed changes within 45 days. After an informal discussion, on motion by the Chairman, seconded by Mrs. Carlson, it was unanimously resolved to recommend changes in the Town Law regarding zoning from a designated R-30 area to an R-50 classification. The Chairman said the change is justified because of the environmental areas involved and stated it would also be a scenic benefit as well. * * * * * The Chairman opened for discussion the proposed Fresh Water Wetlands Law and stated that the Town will now be issuing the permits and that every action which comes before a Town agenda must be sent to the Coastal Zone Management Commission for their approval. - 9 - 0 FRESH WATER WETLANDS The Chairman further stated that on matters coming before both Boards, timing would be parallel and not sequential regarding the implementation of this new law. He also announced that Mr. Steve Altieri is the Environmental Officer for the Town of Mamaroneck. After an informal discussion, the Chairman reported that no final action could be taken until more input was obtained. Mr. Lerman suggested that it even might be necessary to have a Public Hearing on each of the proposed new laws. Mr. Trachtman questioned the impact this new legislation would have on the Town and then read excerpts from the proposed Fresh Water Wetlands Law. The Chairman suggested that, due to the late hour, some other time be allotted to review the proposals. ::) Mrs. Carlson suggested that the Board undertake to draft an updated Zoning Master Plan and the Board took this under advisement. ADJOURNMENT On motion by Mrs. Carlson, seconded by Mr. Bell, the meeting was unanimously adjourned at 11:35 P.M. Jean A. Marra Board Secretary - 10 -