Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998_07_15 Town Board Regular Minutes TOWN OF MAMARONECK TOWN BOARD AGENDA REGULAR MEETING -Wednesday, July 15, 1998, Town Center Court Room, 8:15 PM. THE TOWN BOARD WILL CONVENE at 6:30 PM into a Work Session to discuss grants and a study of the Myrtle Boulevard/Madison Avenue area and at 7:45 PM adjourn i Executive Session to discuss personnel and certiorari. 1 into are CONVENE REGULAR MEETING CONVENE INTO WORK SESSION RECESS WORK SESSION CONVENE EXECUTIVE SESSION RECONVENE REGULAR MEETING CALL TO ATTENTION - Location of Exits PROCLAMATIONS - Beverly Villa Brewer - Mamaroneck Co-op Summer School & Day Camp PUBLIC DISCUSSION -Alternate Uses of Monroe School Building BOARD OF FIRE COMMISSIONERS 1. Fire Claims 2. Other Business AFFAIRS OF THE TOWN I. Approval of Certiorari 2. Authorization - Property Sales Ratio Analysis 3. Authorization - Planning Study - Myrtle Boulevard/Madison Avenue Area 4 Consideration of Amendment of Parking Fees for Senior Citizens 5. Authorization -Sale of Equipment 6. Salary Authorization - Police Department - Recreation ORAL COMMUNICATIONS WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS SUPERVISOR REPORTS REPORTS OF COUNCIL ADJOURNMENT - IN MEMORY OF ELEANOR ELIZABETH WASSMAN Next regularly scheduled meetings -August 12, 1998 -September 2, 1998 Any physically handicapped person needing special assistance in order to attend the meeting should call the Town Administrator's office at 381-7810. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE TOWN BOARD OF THE TOWN OF MAMARONECK AND THE BOARD OF FIRE COMMISSIONERS HELD ON JULY 15, 1998 AT 8:15 PM IN THE COURT ROOM OF THE TOWN CENTER, 740 W. BOSTON POST ROAD, MAM.ARONECK, NEW YORK PRESENT: Supervisor Elaine Price Councilman Paul A. Ryan Councilwoman Valerie M. O'Keeffe Councilman Barry Weprin Councilwoman Phyllis Wittner ALSO PRESENT: Patricia A. Samela, Deputy Town Clerk Stephen V. Altieri, Town Administrator Charlene Indelicato, Town Attorney CONVENE EXECUTIVE SESSION The Board convened into a Work Session at 6:30 PIl7 in Conference Room A of the Town Center to discuss grants and a study of the Myrtle Boulevard/Madison Avenue are:1, then adjourned into an Executive Session at 7:45 PM to discuss.personnel and certioral i. On motion duly made and seconded the Board adjourned at 8:15 PM to the Court Room to reconvene the regular meeting. CALL TO ORDER The regular meeting of the Town Board was called to order by Supervisor Price at 8:25 PM, who then pointed out the location of exits. PUBLIC DISCUSSION -ALTERNATE USES OF MONROE SCHOOL BUILDING Mr. Altieri opened the discussion by reading the following item into the record: Monroe School Property Alternate Use Analysis The operator of the Early Beginnings Learning Center notified the Town in March ,)f this year that the daycare program would be discontinued at the end of June. Word of the closing prompted the Town to consider what alternatives were available for the future o1' the Monroe Property. In this report information will be presented on the alternatives available for the property. The sale of the property has not been considered as ari alternative for purposes of this report since there appears to be no lack of opporb for community use of the site. It is important to decide those uses that are most mities compatible with each other and provide effective community outreach. There are basically two alternatives that are being considered for the building and grounds at Monroe. Daycare, which has been operated in the building since 1991 will bo considered as one of the alternatives. A group of residents has prepared a proposal to continue the use of Monroe as a daycare center. Another alternative is to use Monroe a3 a recreation center that would house the LIFE Center and provide programs with an environmental theme. Program opportunities and :1Iso financial analysis have been prepared for the evaluation of both alternatives. The research for this report visitations to similar facilities P rt includes and meetings with personnel operating these facilities. Before addressing the alternatives for the site, it is important to step back and review the history of Monroe and how the Town became interested in acquiring the property. Before the purchase of the property, Monroe operated successfully for many years as a private July 15, 1998 nursery school and day camp. In 1989, the Town was made aware that the family operating the school had decided to close down and move on to other opportunities. Actually, the Town was contacted by the family operating the facility because they envisioned the continued operation of Monroe as a site to serve children in the community. The Town's interest in the property was twofold. A critical problem for the Town has long been the lack of available space to conduct recreation programming and other municipal functions. Although the Monroe building required updating for compliance with new state building and fire codes, the property was designed to serve the needs of young children. Therefore, it was clear that the Town could almost instantly turn the facility into a nursery school, daycare center, and/or camp. In a report to the Town Board at the time of the purchase a list of advantages for the facility was presented. The advantages of purchasing the facility were; total control of the site and building, a facility designed for small children, greater flexibility for program scheduling, and minimal startup costs. Also, control of the site allowed the Town better program quality. A second reason for the purchase was the neighboring Larchmont Reservoir Property. In the,1980's, the Village of Larchmont took the initiative of guaranteeing open space by dedicating the reservoir property as conservation and parks land. Although the Town did not consider dedicating the Monroe parcel, the purchase of the property further expanded the open space character of this section of the Town. The Town believed that the two properties could mutually serve the community and provide a facility for residents to enjoy. The Town Board, at the time, decided that the Town would use the facility for daycare and a day camp. Daycare would be provided by a private operator with the conditions that space be made available in the summer for a preschool age day camp. Renovations were made to the building to meet new code requirements and the building was reopened for use in 1991. Since the property was reopened, the Town has added an outdoor pavilion to expand programming capabilities and minor improvements have been made to the driveway for drainage of storm water. A new playground was constructed on a sand base and fencing was installed around the ball field. Other than the original code compliance renovation in 1990, building improvements include the replacement of the roof and the oil burner. Monroe remains a facility that is well suited for children's programming. The alternatives for the future of Monroe continue the Town's commitment to this type of programming. Since 1991, the Early Beginnings Learning Center, has provided full day daycare to Preschool children. Children in the program have been enrolled on both a full time and part time basis. New York State Dept. of Social Services, and the Westchester County Health Department certified the use of the building For daycare and licensed the facility for up to forty-four children. Under the terms of the original lease agreement between Early Beginnings and the Town, preference for the program is to be provided to Town residents. Upon the announcement of the closing of the Early Beginnings, the Town received several inquiries from parties interested in continuing a daycare program at Monroe. Written proposals were received from Theresa Augustine, a resident of the Town, who currently provides in-home daycare and a group of residents representing parents from the Early Beginnings Program. The latter group submitted a proposal to create a daycare program to be known as the Monroe Center for Creative Learning. After the Town's initial contact with both parties, it appears that Theresa Augustine and the Monroe Center have joined to develop a single daycare proposal for Monroe. The Board has previously received this proposal so it will not be detailed in this report. It is a complete proposal that lists the organization structure of the Monroe Center for Creative Learning, proposed fees, and the program philosophy. At the time the proposal was submitted a list of twenty-two families expressed an interest in enrolling in the program. Of the twenty-two, five are not residents of the Town. The group's belief is that, if daycare is approved at Monroe, further marketing will result.in a greater enrollment and that demand in the community is high for this type of daycare. Maximum enrollment would be forty-four children accordin g to the Count Department. y Health p 2 July. 15, 199,2 The financial information presented shows an annual budget of$237,900 per year. According, to the financial documentation, twenty-three children are necessary for the program to meet all expenses. On average the fee per child would be $900 per month. The basic fee provides forty-five hours per week of daycare. Additional fees are charged for hours above the basic forty-five. Tuition for a child in the program full time from 8:30 AM - 6:30 PM would be $1,000 per month for a toddler and $955 per month for a preschooler. The documents submitted do not say specifically how the finances of the center will be guaranteed or what the source of seed money will be for the program. When speaking with representatives of the group, the Town learned that a one month deposit will be required from all enrollees. Based upon twenty-three children the deposK amount would equal $20,700. These funds could serve as seed money, however the actual funds required to start the program is unknown. The budget presented by the Center includes rent payments equal to those in the current: lease agreement with Early Beginnings. Also, the Center acknowledged that during the summer, the Monroe facility would be shared with the Recreation Department when the Monroe Camp is in session. If the Center program was to operate with twenty-three children, the Monroe Camp would have a maximum enrollment of sixty children. Should the Center's enrollment expand beyond twenty three, the maximum enrollment at the Monroe Camp would be decreased. One of the difficulties, when considering the daycare proposal is learning the true demand in the community for full day daycare. In the seven years that Early Beginnings operated, it never reached its maximum enrollment. At one time early in the program there were approximately thirty-five children in the program. Also, the percentage of Town children in the program varied from year to year. To try to get a handle on demand the Town spoke with other daycare centers. The Saxon Woods center on Old White Plains Road is licensed for seventy children and at this time there are fifty-five enrolled. Although the operator does not want to operate the center at full capacity there is some space in the program for additional children. Also, the Town spoke with the operator of the Liberty Montessori School located on Boston Post Road in the Village of Mamaroneck. In September the school will be licensed for up to 140 children. Currently forty six are enrolled. There are some variations in the program hours. For instance Saxon Woods operates until 5:00 PM Effective in September of 1998 Liberty Montessori will operate from 7:00 AM to 6:00 PM When comparing rates, the proposed Monroe Center and the Liberty Montessori are ver), comparable. Other daycare centers in the area are the Little School in Scarsdale and two centers in New Rochelle. Unfortunately information from these centers was not available at the time of this report. The second alternative for the Monroe property is to expand our current offerings in the Recreation Department and to enter into a partnership with both the Friends of the Reservoir and the LIFE Center for environmentally related programming. To evaluate this alternative, the Recreation Department and LIFE was asked to prepare a program list that was considered realistic and estimate the demand for their programs. As a way of drawing comparisons, we visited and met with representatives of similar type centers in Rye, Greenburgh, Scarsdale, and New Canaan, Connecticut. The potential programming for the Monroe facility under this proposal can be divided in-b three main categories, Recreation Department programs, LIFE Center Programs, and joi;It programming by the two agencies. In addition, there is a school district use of the facility that is available for consideration. The Town has experienced great success with the preschool summer camp at Monroe. In 1998, there are 100 children enrolled in the program and some children were wait listed because of the limitation of the facility. The summer camp is a known success that can continue in the future. Also, the Town woul(l develop a teen leader training group. Targeted at 11 and 14 year olds, this program Provides special events and training for future camp counselors. Also, the Recreation Department would administer the rental of the facility for picnics and other private functions in much the same way the Town rents the community room at the ice rink. With the cooperation and assistance of the LIFE Center a series of env ol nursery program all m related programs would be offered. During the school year a prescho would be operated out of the Monroe site. We discovered that almost all of the nature 3 '..'•:..'.,.::ill•,. .... July 15, 1998 centers in this area offer some type of nursery school program. In each case the programs are fully enrolled and popular in their communities. The setting of Monroe would allow the program to have a nature/ecology theme. Similar programs were found to be very much hands on and the resources of the property and environment become the playground and classroom for the children. The nursery school program would be run in two semesters and we have estimated conservatively twenty children in each semester. During school vacations, the program proposal is to hold vacation mini-camps. Again, with the cooperation of LIFE, these camps would be offered to children in kindergarten through third grade from 9:00 AM to 4:00 PM during the vacation period. Approximately twenty participants would be expected in this program. In the past the Town has been asked to consider offering an all day camp option for preschoolers during school vacations. Another program offering developed with LIFE is to offer an afternoon nature camp in the summer as a supplement to our preschool morning camps. Operated from 1:00 PM-4:00 PM, this camp would provide an all day option with a specific theme. Children from the other preschool camps could be brought to Monroe for this program as well. There are then the programs that would be offered exclusively by the LIFE Center in conjunction with the Friends of the Reservoir. Included here are the toddler nature club, public service events and activities, and programs with the school district. The toddler nature club is currently provided in the potting shed at the Reservoir. LIFE's plan is to expand this program using space at Monroe. During the past year seventy-nine classes were offered during the school year. Under the category of public service events, LIFE offers such things as naturalist training, Beautification Day, and other similar programs. Also, under the category of public service, LIFE prepares newsletters and other periodicals for the community. Space in the schools for the LIFE Center has been dwindling as student enrollment expands. LIFE would expand its administrative space to create a small library and maintain materials on environmental subjects. In addition to these offerings, the LIFE Center proposes weekend nature craft classes in the fall and spring. Also, their current lecture series can be expanded at Monroe. A large component of the LIFE program is assistance to the school district for conservation and nature subjects. In December of '1997, the school district issued a draft report on changes and improvements to the science curriculum for grades K-5. The report speaks to the use of community members, businesses and government agencies as resources to enhance the science learning experience. Outlined in the report specific curriculum for each grade, but a common thread for each grade level is the concept of an outdoor classroom. The School Superintendent said that the Monroe facility can serve as a satellite facility for the district to use as part of the elementary science curriculum. Small labs can be set up for water testing and other projects as part of the science program. A'conceptual schedule of the use of the Monroe school would be as follows. During the school year, September through June, the nursery school program would be offered during the mornings. Afternoons would be set aside for the LIFE Center and School District to conduct classes and programs. LIFE Center's toddler program would be offered during this time of the year as well. The vacation mini-camps would be operated during the school year and weekends would be set aside for special events, rentals, birthday parties, and crafts programs. In the summer the Town's preschool camp and the afternoon nature camp would be in operation in July and August. On the attached spreadsheets, we have prepared an income and expense statement for the LIFE and Recreation department programs. A summary of the spread sheets is as follows: Total Revenue - $163,620 Total Expenses - 139,636 Set Aside for Building - 12.850 Net Revenue $ 11,134 Our conservative estimates of program participation suggest that revenues will exceed expense and there is a set aside for the operation of the building. The analysis does not 4 July 15, 1993 consider a-financial arrangement for the school districts use of the building. As proposed the expenses for the day to day operation of the building are almost completely covered by the building set aside. Net revenue can be placed in a reserve for future building repairs and improvements. This type of arrangement would be identical to the Ice Rink Trust Fund whereby excess revenues are set aside for certain repairs and improvements to the rink. Earlier, mention was made of centers in other communities that operate programming in much the same way as we have proposed here. The individual centers viability in each case is dependent upon some form of municipal support and we found the support varied. At the Greenburgh Nature Center, the Town funds all expenses for the operation and maintenance of the building and also, subsidizes 33% of the nature center operating budget. In Rye and Scarsdale the operations are completely run by the local governments. Staff are employees of the communities and the building-expense is part of the municipal budget. At the Rye Nature Center Fees and donations comprise 38% of the total revenue of the nature center. The balance is funded from the city government, budget transfers and grants. Direct city funding makes up the largest part of the government subsidy. In New Canaan, the nature center is fully responsible for its program costs and staff salaries. Municipal support is in the form of building maintenance, snow removal, leaf removal and other similar services. All of the centers, except Scarsdale offer nursery programs during the school year. The centers all provide special programming, and summer camps. Also, all the centers provide programming to their home school districts and other school districts. What was Interesting was the similarity of the operations and programs and that they each enjoy reasonable success. Although the municipal support is a key component to their success, the centers program revenues generally exceed program expenses. Net revenues are usually set aside as reserves for expansion programs or program development. Some public service type programs are a type of loss leader product that do not generate excess revenue. Each center has a "friends organization" that conduct:; fund raising efforts and provides volunteer staff support for the programs. One other fact learned in visits to the centers is that their success has come over time. The Town and the LIFE Center have purposely kept estimates of program participation and revenues at conservative levels. The LIFE Center will need several years to develop, with the Town, and the right program mix at Monroe. However, the basic elements exist between the Town and the LIFE Center to implement a program plan. In the end, the Board is left to consider the best alternative for the community. Daycare is an important element of the lifestyle of families today and there has been much said about the lack of daycare. The question for the Town is whether to continue to commit the physical } resources of the Monroe property for this type of programming. We did find that alternate daycare does exist in the area, understanding that there are some differences in program times and philosophies. By virtue of the size of the facility and the limitations of the State and County regulations, a maximum of forty-four children can be served in daycare un less the building is expanded. Although arrangements can be made to continue our summer camp program along with a daycare center, enrollment at the camp will be dependent upon enrollment in the daycare program. The daycare alternative is certainly the easiest path for the Town to follow. As long as the daycare operator remains financially successful, the Town receives a net revenue of$20,000 to $30,000 based upon the lease agreement There would be no staffing concerns and our sole responsibility rests in the maintenance and upkeep of the building. Allowing the LIFE Center and Recreation Department to utilize the building will require time as the programs develop. An ambitious schedule calls for the nursery school program to begin in January. A more realistic schedule for the.nursery program to begin is September of 1999. Camp programs would begin in the summer of 1999. In the fall of 1998, LIFE can begin some of their special programs as well as the vacation mini-camps. It should not be forgotten that development of the nature center concept is a function of our working with the Village of Larchmont since there is an impact upon the reservoir property. The Friends of the Reservoir and the LIFE Center have worked with an architect to develop schematic matt c design 5 July 15, 1998 of an expanded Monroe building and nature center. The plan will take some time to implement and will depend upon an aggressive fund raising effort by the Friends and LIFE. Despite these considerations, the nature center/recreation proposal will serve a broad band of the community. Although the effort to produce the nature center is greater, the benefits in the number of residents served is significant. Program diversity is also a key component to the recreation/nature center alternative. The administrative and program experience of the Recreation Department establishes a strong foundation for the center. Our camp programs have experienced outstanding success and the department seems to have found the formula to provide solid programming that is desired by the community. Overall success will also be dependent upon the commitment of the Friends of the Reservoir and the LIFE Center. Their commitment will be the driver for expansion and development of the nature center concept. It would appear that they are willing to provide the necessary commitment. The following proposal was submitted by the LIFE Center: 6 PROPOSED FACILITY PROGRAMMING I , 00 ROOM RENTAL-T PICNIC i TEEN LEA—DER f VACATION LEA—D ! PRE-SCHOOL P H NATU R i pq M 0) RENTALS! TRAINING GROUP MINI-CAMPS NURSERY I NURSERY 1 CAMP PARTY THEME ; PRESCHOOL ` i L Ld Recreation Dept i in Cooperation I SEMESTER 1 j SEMESTER 2 j in Cooperation I PACKAGES CAMP Sponsored ! /LIFE I in Cooperation in Cooperation Z, j w/LIFE In Cooperation i Recreation Dept w/LIFE ! w/LIFE w/LIFE Sponsored i I I I I I i I I INCOME: FEES 1,800.00 750.00 ; 6,200.00 6,000.00 ; 25,200.00 39,600.00 J 6,000.00 36,000.00 ; 123,230.00 i I I I EXPENSES: STAFF 3,828.00 3,150.00 15,750.00 ! 24,750.00 ' 4,176.00 I 420.00 ; 35,550.00 87,624.00 SUPPLIES/EQUIP. - - I 720.00 ; 450.00 j 700.00 j 900.00 I 400.00 i 204.00 ` 4,105.00 j 7,479.00 j i Admin. Cost at 11%**` 500.00 ; 396.00 ' 1,810.00 2,822.00 503.00 69.00 ' 4,362.00 '. 10,462:00 *BLDG EXPENSES! I I at 13% 234.00 , 98.00 ; 591.00 ' 468.00 1 2,138.00 1 3,335.00 ! 595.00 ; 81.00 5,155.00 ' 12,695.00 NET REVENUE 1,566.00 737.00 561.00 1,536.00 ' 4,802.00 7,793.00 ' 326.00 906.00 "-13172 ' 18,227.00 *TOTAL BUILDING EXPENSE OF$12,695.00 SHALL BE APPLIED TO MONROE SCHOOL BUILDING OPERATIONS I i I —THE FIGURE REPRESENTS THE CURRENT LEVEL OF BUDGETED SUBSIDY AT A RATE OF 30% ***THE ADMINISTRATIVE COST IS SELECTED AS 11% OF THE SUM OF STAFF AND SUPPLY EXPENSE FOR EACH PROGRAM I ExCEUREC i July.15, 1998 Current Outdoor Facility.Programming Sponsored by LIFE @ Potting Shed and Reservoir Property *DISTRICT SCHOOL! `"TODDLER ­PUBLIC SERVICE `: —MISC PROGRAMS ' CLASSES(LIFE) NATURE EVENTS/ACTIVITIES (LIFE) SPONSORED) CLUB CLASSES (LIFE) _ (LIFE) FEES 8,500.00 9,500.00 12,250.00 ' 4,500.00 EXPENSES: i STAFF 3,000.00 3,100.00 - I - I ! SUPPLIES/EQUIP. - 300.00 5,000.00 I 1,350.00 1 Current programs do not require the (Include Awards) use of building. I A! ADMIN COST: 5,850.00 5,850.00 7,800.00 500.00 _ i "BLDG EXPENSE& at 13% N/A N/A N/A ! N/A ! NET REVENUE (350.00) 50.00 (550.00)! 2,650.00 i " Districts classes are presently offered at the Conservation area and Resorvoir. In 1997, a total of of 149 classes were conducted, 109 classes were conducted outdoors at Conservation/Resorvoir location. Annual average of 4,000 students were served during this program. ! 1 i Tod_dler nature club classes o-ered at LIFE potting shed total 79 classes serving 632 visits during this past year. 'Public service events/activities offered during 1997 include: Town wide Beautification Day in April; International Coastal(Beach)clean-up in September; naturalist training classes; Ice cream social w/friends; Community outreach which includes informational newsletters and periodicals. 1 i NARRATIVE ONLY: ! i Miscellaneous programs currently offered include: Lectures and book talks by natural science authorities. A-native plant sale to educate the community -- Award of scholarships for children to attend Ecology camps in the Metropolitan region. � PROPOSED FACILITY PROGRAMMING PROPOSED ADD-L PROPOSED WEEKEND I TOTAL- TODDLER NATURE ' NATURE CRAFTS j ---� CLUB CLASSES CLASSES 1 FALUSPRING FALUSPRING I ---� (TWO SEMESTERS) 1 — i INCOME: FEES 4,200.00 1,440.00 40,390.00 EXPENSES: STAFF 390.00 360.00 6,850.00 SUPPLIES/EQUIP. 40.00 400.00 7,090.00 Admin.Cost at 11%" 47.00 84.00 20,131.00 ` 'BLDG EXPENSES at 13% 56.00 99.00 1 155.00 NET REVENUE I 3,667.00 497.00 5,964.00 "THE ADMINISTRATIVE COST IS SELECTED AS 11%OF THE SUM OF STAFF AND SUPPLY EXPENSE FOR EACH PROGRAM. 8 July 15, 1993 Supervisor Price asked if any of the Board Members had questions for Mr. Altieri. There not being any she then asked if anyone in the audience had any questions. There were.several in attendance who wished to respond: 1. Deborah Leidermann - New Rochelle Ms. Leidermann asked Mr. Altieri why he referred to the term "we" in the report. He explained that this was a partnership between the Town of Mamaroneck Recreation Department, the LIFE Center and the Friends of the Reservoir. 2. Allison Lowey - Forest Avenue, Larchmont Ms. Lowey is on the Board of the LIFE Center. She prepared a calendar showing the use of the facility with reference to the programs that Mr. Altieri had just reported on. 3. Susan Blum - 1526 N. James Street, Mamaroneck Ms. Blum asked how the facility would accommodate parking for such large numbers of people and wouldn't it be counterproductive to have to chop down trees and destroy the environment in order to make way for parking? Mr. Altieri stated that a proposal for parking was made by Don Watson to the Friends and the LIFE Center. Establishment of parking in an area of the property over the bridge behind the field where there are not a lot of trees. This area now acts as an access for Con Edison to the transformer pad. 4. Amy Brelia -Town of Mamaroneck Ms. Brelia asked who owned the reservoir property that Mr. Altieri was referring to. He said that the property was owned by the Village of Larchmont. Amy then asked how the Village of Larchmont had responded to the parking proposal. Mr. Altieri stated that most: of the programs were drop-off programs and that there was no need for a lot of parking. The issue of parking had not been addressed with the Village of Larchmont at this time. 5. Susan Goldberger-20 Lafayette Road, Larchmont She asked of the proposed programs what is new programming and what is a continuation of programs that currently exist. Mr. Altieri responded -all of the Programming is new with the exception of the summer camp and the toddler program that LIFE runs now, although they would run it in an expanded fashion. Supervisor Price asked if there were any other questions regarding the report. There not being any, she read the following letter from Susan Goldberger into the record: STEWART A.AULT SUSAN L. GOLDBERGER 20 LAFAYETTE ROAD LARCHMONT, NEW YORK 90538 (994) 833-2780 June 24, 1998 Ms. Elaine Price, Supervisor Town of Mamaroneck 740 W. Boston Post Road Mamaroneck, New York 10538 RE: Beginnings Early Learning Center 685 Weaver Street Dear Supervisor Price: In response to the Town Board's request for additional information regarding enrollment at Beginnings, enclosed please find a partial compilation which I believe is a fair estimate of enrollment during four of the seven years that Beginnings was in operation. Please understand that these numbers were compiled from class lists distributed to parents early in the school year to enable families to become better acquainted with one another. These statistics are not official enrollment data in that they were not obtained from Michelle Washington's files. Furthermore, to the extent that new children were enrolled later in any given year(and others may have left for various reasons), the numbers only reflect the situation at one point in time during each particular year. In addition, there were certain instances where parents requested that their names, 9 July 15, 1993 addresses and phone numbers not be included on these lists and Michelle was respectful of these wishes. The lists utilized as the source of this data make no distinction between part and full time enrollment and therefore we are unable to provide the Board with that sort of an analysis. Also, there were times that the center was not at full capacity but certain rooms were full with unmet demand for particular age groups(i.e. room for toddlers but no space for pre-K children or visa-versa). I feel the need to point out that these statistics reflect a regime that represents the past, Whereas the parent group that is committed to the continuation of daycare at the Monroe site represents the future. The past management was not a part of the Town and therefore was not necessarily allied with the interests, concerns and goals of the Town. Going forward, we envision that the Educational Director as well as the Board of Directors will be rooted in the community which I believe will go a long way toward achieving much higher enrollment of Town residents. Furthermore, to the extent that Beginnings was never formally marketed to the public at large, we feel that with a little advertising and local word of mouth, enrollment will naturally increase. As we hope to offer infant care, there will be built in enrollment for the older classes and a ready source of care for babies that are born while an older sibling is attending the center. Also enclosed in this package is a revised list of local child care and nursery school programs. We have corrected the errors that were pointed out during our recent meetings and also augmented the list with information on several other centers as new information became available to us. As we clarified the availability of childcare locally, we found that, to a large extent,providers operate according to a school calendar. In those instances, working parents are forced to patch together a myriad of programs to create the simulation of full time care. For example, the Liberty Montessori program on the Boston Post Road in Mamaroneck operates on such a calendar and offers a camp program during the summer and will provide care on school holidays and vacations on an "as requested"basis. This is not the same as full time(i.e. 10-12 hrs.per day), 52 week per year reliable childcare. I cannot emphasize enough the peace of mind of knowing that there is a reliable, safe, convenient, affordable facility when one is entrusting their most precious possessions to the care of any provider. Lastly, as you know, the Monroe site is physically superior to any other daycare or nursery school facility in the immediate area. It is the physical attributes of the Monroe site(as well as the fact that it has met DSS licensing criteria) which push us to exert any influence we may have to persuade the Board to retain at least a portion of this site for daycare. I greatly appreciate the time and attention that you, the Board and the Town Administrator have spent on this issue and hope that you will continue to be open minded and equitable as you proceed through the decision making process. Please distribute copies of this letter and enclosures to Steve Altieri and the Board and feel free to contact me at any time with any questions or requests for additional information that you may have. Very truly yours, Susan L. Goldberger BEGINNINGS EARLY LEARNING CENTER ENROLLMENT STATISTICS 1991-1998 # of Town of % of Enrollment SCHOOL Mamaroneck residing within YEAR #of Students* Residents Town of Mamaroneck 1991/1992 199211993 37 19 51 1993/1994 199411995 29 13 45% 199511996 30 14 47% 1996/1997 199711998 26 16 62% Total 122 62 51 *based on Class List distributed at beginning of academic year. These lists may be incomplete due to some parents not wishing to be included in a Class Directory and additional enrol lees during the course of the school year. 10 July 15, 1998 CHILI) CARE PROGRAMS IN :.ARCHMONT/MAMARONECK AREA - May 1998 FULL-'rIME CHILD CARE-ALL Yl AR SAME HOURS AGES CAPACITY COMMENTS L rchiliont/Mamaroneck Begimi Lngs Early Learning Center 7:30 a.m. - l Viand up Pre-K: 16-20 THIS CENTER IS CLOSING._UNE 26, 685 Weaver Street,Larchmont 6:30 p.m. 2-3: 10-13 1998 Toddlers: 10 Saxon Woods Country,School 9:00 a.m. - 2.0 and up 70 OFFERS EXTENDED HOUR!)7:45-9:00 2 Faim.-ay Drive,Mamaroneck 4:00 p.m. A.M AND 4:00-5:20 P.M.AT ADD. (SEE COMMENT'S) CHARGE FOLLOWS SCHOOL CALENDAR WITH NO COVERAGE DU RING BR1;AKS&HOLIDAYS(E:CCEPT SUNIMER CAMP) DOE'SN'T OPERATE AT FU I,L CAFACITY WESC'OP Mamaroneck Child Devel 7:30 a.m. - 3 and up 24 WAITING LIST 134 Center Ave.,Mamaroneck 5:30 p.m. HEAD START PROGRAM �Iarrfson The Hjjrrison Children's Center I 7:30 a.m. - 2.9 and up I: 30 WAITING LIST CENTER I'N/ and Il,Harrison 5:30 p.m. II: 47 PREFERENCE HARRISON RESIDENTS $L "Little Angels Child Care Ctr. 7:00 a.m. - 2 mo and up 24 601 Midland Ave.,Rye 6:00 m P• . Scarsd-de Childrens Corner Nursery School 7:30 a.m. - 1 V2 to 4 20 AT FULL CAPACITY AT THIS TIME 10 Alkamont Ave., Scarsdale 6:00 p.m. The Little School 9:00 a.m. - 3 and u 307 Mamaroneck Road,-Scarsdale 3:00 p.m. P 117 FOR RESIDENTS OF SCAT SDALE SCHOOL DISTRICT ONLY EXTENDED HOURS 7:30-9:00 AND 3:00-6:30 FOLLOWS SCHOOL CALENDAR W/SUMMER CAMP New Rochelle Kiddie Korner 8:00 a.m. - 1.6 and up 10 OFFERS EXTENDED HOURS 7:30 TO 2433 P(ilmer Avenue,New Rochelle 5:30 p.m. 6;00(ADD.CHARGE) Liberty Montessori School 8:30 a.m. - 1.6 and up 12 155 Beuchmont Dr., OFFERS EXTENDED IIRS 7;30-8:30 flew Rochelle 3:30 p.m, AND)3:30-5:30 AT ADD.CHARGE FOLLOWS SCHOOL CALENDAR WITHOUT GUARANTEED COVERAGE"DURING VACATION AND HOLIDAY BREAKS(EXCEPT 06/24/98 SUA4MER CAMP) * Under consideration are`vacation camps"on as-needed basis 11 July 15, 1998 NAME HOURS AGES CAPACITY COMMENTS Martin Luther King Day Care Ct. 7:30 a.m. - 3 and up 36 95 Lincoln Ave.,New Rochelle 5:30 p.m. New Rochelle Day Nursery 7:30 a.m. - 1.6 and up 20 115 Clinton Avenue,New Rochelle 5:30 p.m. United Child Day Care'Center 6:30 a.m. - 8 weeks and 59 40 Willow Drive,New Rochelle 6:30 p.m. up Pelham Pelham Children's Center 7:30 a.m. - 1.6 and up 14 WAITING LIST 20 Fifth Avenue,Pelham 6:00 p.m. NOTE: Information provided by Child Care Council of Westchester in May 1998,w/update June 23, 1998 School age children not considered in this summary OTHER CHILD.CARE PROGRAMS/NURSERY SCHOOLS HOURS AGES CAPACITY COMMENTS Creative Playtime 9:00 a.m. - 2 and up 14 59 Grand Boulevard,Scarsdale 2:45 p.m. Discovering Me Nursery School 7:30 a.m. - 2.9 and up 30 OFFERS SUMMI?R CAMP 2051 Palmer Ave.,Larchmont 5:30 p.m. Hudson Country Montessori School •9:00 a.m. - 2 and up 18 OFFERS EXTENDED HRS 8:('0 TO 3:00 340 Quaker Ridge Rd.,New Rochelle 3:00 p.m. _. � TODDLERS AND&7:45 TO i;:UO PRE- Larchmont Avenue Preschool SCHOOL 60 Forest Park Avenue,Larchmont 3:15 p.m. 2.9 and up 30 Liberty Montessori School 8:30 a.m. - I Viand up 140 PLANS FOR SEP.'98:, 631 W. Boston Post Road, 3:30 p'm. Mamaroneck WILL OFFER EXTENDED HF:S.7:30- 8:30 AND 3:30-6:30 AT ADL,.CHARGE WILL CONTINUE TO FOLLOW SCHOOL CALENDAR,BUT WITH SUMMER CAMI'AND COVERAGE DURING VACATION BREAK S ON"AS Mount Tom Day School 9;00 a.m.- 2 and up 20 NEEDED"BASIS 48 Mount Tom Rd.,New Rochelle 3:30 p.m. St.Gregory the Great 8:00 a.m.- 94 Broadway,Harrison 4 and up n/a 2:30 p.m. The Caring Place 7:30 a.m. - 2.9 and up 30 53 6"Street,New Rochelle 5:30 p.m. Transitional Learning Center 8:45 a.m. - 21 mo and 40 OFFERS EXTENDED HOURS �:00 TO 555 Davenport Ave.,New Rochelle 3:15 p.m. up 4:00 Westchester Day School 8:45 a.m. - 2.9 and up 60 OFFERS SUMMER CAMP 856 Orienta.Avenue,Mamaroneck 4:00 p.m. - Westchester Jewish Center .9:00 a.m.- 3.6 and up 40 OFFERS SUMMER CAMP Rockland anti Palmer Ave.:. 2:00 p.m, Marmaroneck NOTE: Information provided by Child Care Council of Westchester in May 1998,w/update June 18, 1998 School age children not consideredn this-summary 12 July 15, 1998 Supervisor Price asked if anyone would like to comment on the letter. 1. Elizabeth Nolan -530 Stanley Avenue - Murray Avenue School Teacher Ms. Nolan asked if there was any way of knowing which facilities provide daycare for the working poor. Supervisor Price stated that the programs were limited but that there was the Head Start program and the CAP Center. 2. Perry Ferguson -Villa Avenue, Mamaroneck Mr. Ferguson responded to Ms. Nolan's question by saying that when Michelle was running Beginnings she did provide scholarship programs for the underprivileged. Supervisor Price asked if there were any other comments or questions. There being none, she stated that the Board had looked at a lot of information and has visited several sites. The Town has been involved in the property now for 6-7 years in terms of the best use of the property. She thanked everyone for taking the time to weigh in on this. There was never an intention of pitting one group against another. Even though there were those who may feel this way, the Town's property and the direction taken is up to the Board. The Supervisor asked if any of the Board members would like to make any comments. At this time Warren Goodman of 17 N. Chatsworth Avenue asked if he could speak. He stated that he is the attorney for the Monroe Center for Creative Learning. He had prepared a proposed business plan and asked if he could present it to the Board. Mr. Altieri asked how this would differ from the plan that the Board had already received at the last meeting. Mr. Goodman explained that it was a supplement to that proposal that would aid the Board in reaching it's final conclusion. Jeremy Geelan said a few words regarding this proposal. Supervisor Price explained that the Board members would have to take a few minutes to review this proposal. On motion by Councilwoman O'Keeffe, seconded by Councilwoman Wittner the meeting was adjourned at 9:15 PM On motion by Councilwoman O'Keeffe, seconded by Councilman Ryan, the meeting was reconvened at 9:35 PM Supervisor Price thanked everyone for the time and effort put into the proposal. She then asked if any of the Board members would like to comment on the proposal. Councilman Ryan also thanked everyone for their input and stated that a decision on the property had to be made at this evening's meeting based on two different uses of the site. No one is against child care or the environment. A decision had to be made that benefits the largest number of people in the community. He felt that an Environmental Resource Center would benefit both children and adults and would be the best use for the property and that a Nursery School was not feasible for the property at this time although daycare is a very important issue. Councilwoman O'Keeffe, thanked all present. As an elected official she felt that the LIFE Center would be the best use for the site. Councilman Weprin felt that the LIFE Center was more likely to yield the most benefits for the Town of Mamaroneck and its residents. Councilwoman Wittner commented in favor of the LIFE Center saying that it was the best use for the most residents in the Town of Mamaroneck. 13 July 15, 19913 Supervisor Price said that she would like to see if the Town could meet its goals and objectives concerning this property. Although we have owned the property, we have never controlled it. The Recreation Department has a record of running good programs. She has visited several daycare centers in the area. She feels comfortable that professional couples in our community have the resources to obtain very good daycare. Down the road, if there was another site that could be utilized as a daycare center, the Town Board would work with the community. She then asked if there were an comments from the Y floor. 1. Susan Goldberger said she had visited the Saxon Woods School and was very impressed but was told that there was no space available for her child. It was recommended that at the conclusion of the June 17th Town Board meeting that representatives of the daycare group meet with representatives of LIFE and the Friends of the Reservoir to explore the feasibility of sharing the Monroe space. Ms. Goldberger said that on July 1st after two telephone calls to Allison Lowy (at the suggestion of the Town Supervisor), this message was left on her answering machine: "I'm sorry that I haven't gotten back to you yet. I still haven't gotten together with my board and we're still working on what our programs would entail in terms of space and the bottom line is that I'm not in a position to talk to you about it at this time because really don't have any additional information. I'm sorry about that. If things change, I'll certainly get in touch with you." It is now July 15th , we have not heard anything from LIFE or the Friends of the Reservoir with whom we have made a good faith effort to collaborate, and therefore we continue to be troubled by their complete unwillingness to even consider the possibility of sharing the space. If in fact they have no clear understanding of their space requirements, how can they be so certain that they require the use of the entire building and surrounding property? Furthermore, how can the Board decide to dedicate this facility to use by the LIFE proponents when their plans and potential sources of financing are so undefined. In addition, none of the programs and classes historically offered by LIFE and the Friends of the Reservoir would be jeopardized if the Monroe site is not made available to them, but rather they may continue to be constrained by the space they already have. Evicting daycare from this space virtually eliminates any possibility of continuing the good work started by the existence of Beginnings at this location and deprives the community of a scarce and valuable resource. 2. Irene Oaks commented. She has lived in the community for 9 years and her children attended Beginnings. She feels that the daycare center is an important part of the community and as a commuting parent it was very convenient. Also, as a working parent her children would not be able to use the LIFE Center. She feel that the Board is making a big mistake. Supervisor Price urged the parents to look into the daycare facilities in the area. She said that the Board had weighed all possibilities before making their decision. Amy Brelia stated the grant had been filed and that she felt that the Board had already made their decision in May. Councilwoman O'Keeffe explained that this was not the case. On motion by Councilman Ryan, seconded by Councilwoman O'Keeffe the regular meeting was adjourned at 10:10 PM BOARD OF FIRE COMMISSIONERS The meeting was called to order by Commissioner Price at 10:15 PM in the Court Room. Present were the following members of the Commission: 14 July 1.5, 1998 Commissioner: Elaine Price Commissioner: Paul A. Ryan Commissioner: Valerie M. O'Keeffe Commissioner: Barry Weprin Commissioner: Phyllis Wittner i 1: Fire Claims: Commissioner Weprin presented fire claims for authorization of payment, thereafter on motion by Commissioner Ryan, seconded by Commissioner Wittner, it was unanimously: RESOLVED, that this Commission hereby authorizes payment of the following Fire Department claims as approved by the Fire Chief and audited by the Comptroller's Office: OPERATING FUIJD AAA Emergency Supply Co., Inc. $ 40.00 AT & T Capital 39.03 Arthur J. Gallagher& Co., BBS 1,064.00 AT &T Wireless 106.55 Cleaning Systems 190.23 Cleaning Systems 57.11 Dri-Chem 156.00 Excelsior Fire Equipment Sales 1,733.49 Excelsior Garage & Machine Works., Inc. 174.00 Fire Hooks Unlimited Inc. 731.99 Giacomo Service Center Inc. 505.68 Lawrence Heat& Power Corp. 90.50 NYS Department of State Office of Fire Prevention 50.00 Printwear Plus 836.00 Poland Spring 58.73 Quest Diagnostics 449.66 R.G. Brewer, Inc. 81.91 Rickert Lock & Safe Co. 68.20 State Line Fire & Safety Inc. 1,266.00 Thomas Landau MD. 250.00 Thomas Landau MD. 610.00 Thomas Landau MD. 1,115.00 Town of Mamaroneck Fire Department 375.00 Town of Mamaroneck Professional Fire Fighters 220.08 Westchester Italian Bakery 260.00 $ 10,519.16 Fire Hooks Unitd. CAPITAL 1,275.00 GRAND TOTAL 11 794.16 2. Other Business - Fire Report for the month of June 1998 The following report outlines responses to calls made during the month of June 1998. It summarizes the nature and origin of calls, the number of men responding and the total times spent at fire calls. NATURE OF CALLS: ORIGIN OF CALLS: GENERAL 19 FIRE PHONE MINOR 21 22 STILLS TOWN POLICE 09 00 LARCHMONT 01 FALSE 18 OUT OF TOWN 01 COUNTY CONTROL 01 MONTHLY DRILL 03 911 04 TOTAL 43 OTHER 03 TOTAL 40 TOTAL NUMBER OF MEN RESPONDING• 36�.2 TOTAL HOURS RESPONDING: 18 HOURS AND 05 MINUTES 15 July 15, 1998 Respectfully submitted P Y Michael J. Acocella CHIEF AFFAIRS OF THE TOWN 1. Approval of Certiorari On motion of Councilman Ryan, seconded by Councilwoman Wittner, the following certiorari were unanimously approved for settlement: 2138 Boston Post Road Realty-2138 Boston Post Road Block 613 Lot 18 (Village of Larchmont) The subject property is a retail building with apartments above. The petitioner submitted a preliminary analysis estimating value at$570,000. The rents for this property are in line with market rents although the vacancy allowance and management costs were slightly higher than the norm. After negotiation with the petitioner, a value of$650,000 was agreed to- Based on the negotiated assessment agreed to for 1993, 1994 and 1995 was $32,500 and for 1997 was $28,000 due to the fall in the equalization rate. Year Assessment Reduced to Amt. of Reduction 1993 50,000 32,500 17,500 35% 1994 50,000 32,500 17,500 35% 1995 50,000 32,500 17,500 35% 1997 50,000 28,000 22,000 44% The refund is approximately $1,000. The amount of taxes lost is approximately $300. Ruth Sheppard and Regina Shull - 611 Fayette Avenue Block 829 Lot 215 (Village of Mamaroneck) The subject property is a warehouse. The petitioner supplied an analysis of income and expenses arriving at a value of$510,000-The rents used were higher than the estimated rents that are used by the assessor. An offer to value the property at$600,000 was accepted. The assessment decreases due to the decrease in the equalization rate. Year Assessment Reduced to Amt. of Reduction 1995 35,000 30,000 5,000 14% 1996 35,000 271500 7,500 21% 1997 35,000 25,000 10,000 28% The Town will refund approximately $296. The loss to the Town in taxes will be approximately $138. Paul and Marcia Hendier-315 Center Avenue Block 831 Lot 40 (Village of Mamaroneck) This is a small office building consisting of 4,500 sq. ft. settled at a fair market value of $360,000, or roughly $80.00 per sq. ft. of building. The assessment would be reduced to $18,000 for the 1994-1997 years and $15,000 in 1998 based upon the State equalization rate. Year Assessment Reduced to Amt. of Reduction 1994 36,400 18,000 18,400 50% 1995 36,400 18,000 18,400 50% 16 July 15, 1998 1996 36,400 18,000 18,400 50% 1997 36,400 18,000 18,400 50% 1998 36,400 15,000 21,400 58% The Town will refund approximately $1,016. The loss to the Town will be approximately $300. Larchmont Owners Corp. - Palmer Avenue (West) Block 408 Lot 1 (Town of Mamaroneck) Index Nos: 16955193, 16116194, 15992195, 16416/96, 15287197 Although this apartment building is a co-op of which seventy-five (75) apartments have been sold, the law requires that we value the property based on ETPA. The petitioner used actual rents averaging approximately $550.00 per month. The assessment is presently $294,000.00 which has been negotiated to $275,000.00 by the assessor. Year Assessment Reduced to Amt. of Reduction 1993 294,000 275,000 19,000 7% 1994 294,000 275,000 19,000 7% 1995 294,000 275,000 19,000 7% 1996 294,000 275,000 19,000 7% 1997 294,000 275,000 19,000 7% The Town will refund approximately $27,000. The loss to the Town will be approximately $5,500. 2. Authorization - Property Sales Ratio Analysis Mr. Altieri stated that while reviewing the components of a Town-wide revaluation consideration was given to preparing some type of impact analysis that would tell us how a revaluation would effect the community. The attached documentation includes a memorandum from the chairperson of the committee and a proposal from a Mr. Mark Butryn to conduct a sales ratio study. I am writing at this time to advise you of a change in the process concerning the completion of the study. Since this proposal was submitted and approved by the committee, Mr. Butryn has taken ill and will not be able to complete the study. In view of this fact the Town Assessor has spoken with another consultant that can prepare the study. I will be meeting with the consultant Wednesday morning July 15. It is not anticipated that the methodology and work product described in Mr. Butryn's proposal will change. I did however want you to be aware of these changes in the plan and of course you will receive a full update at our work-session. The following memo was submitted by George Roniger, Chairman, Revaluation Committee: The Revaluation Committee on June 29, 1998, reviewed the proposal by Mark Butryn regarding an analysis of the impact of town-wide revaluation. The analysis would provide some initial information on possible impacts of revaluation on residential properties by location, type and age of property on the basis of information from the total of residential sales in the Town during the past three years. The sense of the Committee was to recommend to the Town Council that the analysis be undertaken. The Committee feels that such analysis would provide information that may be of interest and use to the Board as it thoroughly examines the revaluation process, that the _ information would be helpful toward explaining the impact of revaluation to the community at large, and also that it might expose problems that would need to be dealt with to assure a successful revaluation, should the Council so decide. I wish to report also that all the members of the Revaluation Committee are working intensively to gather information and to analyze the issues related to revaluation. We expect to provide a report to the Council in September. The following is the analysis of impact of Town-Wide Revaluation proposal submitted by Mr. Burtryn: 17 July 15, 1998 Based on our meeting of Monday, June 15th, with the Town Manager and Citizens Advisory Committee on Revaluation, it is my understanding that the Town would like a proposal on analyzing the impact of a Town-wide revaluation. The following tasks would be undertaken to gather further data regarding revaluation impact: A) Sales Ratio Analysis This analysis would include approximately one thousand(1,000) sales over three (3) year period. At a minimum, one thousand sales will be analyzed. One of the initial steps will be to determine what, if any, time adjustment should be applied to the sales. It is quite apparent by the decrease in the Towns residential assessment ratio (RAR) that market values have been increasing in the Town. EX: 1996 RAR-4.11 1997 RAR-4% 1998 RAR-3.94% The RAR is a function of sale price and assessment. The ratio will only decrease, in this case, because the sales price is increasing. Once the time adjustment has been determined, a sales ratio will be developed for all of the sales in the sample. Assessment=Sales Ratio Sales Price EX: 22,00 =4.40% $500,000 What the sales ratio is doing is explaining, in percentage terms, the relationship between assessed value and sales price. In the example above, the residence that sold for$500,000 is assessed at 4.40% of its value. Once the sales ratios are calculated for each sale, they will be compared against the Town-wide Residential Assessment Ratio, 3.94%. The Town of Mamaroneck RAR is 3.94% for 1998 year and is developed each year by the State Division of Equalization and Assessment(SOFA). Continuing the use of our example from above: $22.000 (A 10 =4.40% (Sales Ratio) $500,000(SP) =4.40% (Sales Ratio) 3,94% (Town-Wide RAR) +.46% (Difference) $500,00(Sale Price)X 3.94% (Town RAR) _ $19,700 $22,000-$19,700=$2,300 X$660 per thousand(Tax Rate) _$1,518 The parcel.in our example would see their taxes decrease$1,518 if everything else held equal as a result of the Town wide revaluation. One of the important caveats are budgets. When sending out an impact notice to a taxpayer, the calculations are based on last year's budget. 18 July 15, 1998 Therefore if there are budget increases in Town/County/School they would impact the size of the potential decrease or increase in a taxpayers taxes. Once an individual sales tax liability has been calculated using the sales ratios, the sales will be broken down into various homogenous groupings. For example, Village, School District(Mamaroneck and Scarsdale), neighborhood, tax map, waterfront property, building style, year built, etc. It is hoped that by doing this one or more indicated pattern will emerge. B) Roll Section Roll Section 5(Special Franchise Properties) and Roll Section 6 (utilities). When doing a revaluation all properties in the Town will be revalued. Two types of property, RS 5 and RS 6, will have their value calculated by the State Division of Equalization and Assessment(SBEA). It is important to look at what has happened over previous years to these assessments. C) Pictures A picture will be taken of any sale in our sample that does not have one already. D) Commercial Properties At his time it is my understanding that the Town will be considering the use of the Homestead option. if this option is chosen it could mitigate, or all together eliminate, any tax shift from Non-Homestead properties to Homestead properties. When doing my analysis of any potential impact from a Town-wide revaluation, at this time, the commercial/Industrial properties are not being considered. If there were a desire to sample the commercial properties in the future I would be more than happy to. For the work I have described herein, the fee would be seventeen thousand eight hundred dollars ($17,800). I would be able to begin the work on Monday, July 13, with a completion date of the 1st or 2nd week in September. In advance, I thank you for your consideration in this most important matter. Sincerely, Mark Butryn Mr. Altieri stated again that Mr. Butryn had taken ill and would not able to continue working on this study. Paul Jonke would replace Mr. Butryn. Mr. Jonke's resume was entered into the record by Mr. Altieri. PAUL E. JONKE, JA 4 CHASE DRIVE FISHKILL, NY 92524 (994) 839-5049 EDUCATION: Bachelor of Arts: State University of New York, College at Cortland, New York-August, 9986 WORK HIS TORY. 2193-Present Town of Southeast, Brewster, New York Assessor-State Certified Assessor Advanced by the State Board of the Office of Real Property Tax Services. -Professional Assessor by the Institute of Assessing Officers(1A 0) incorporated by the Board of Regents of the University of the State of New York. -President of the Putnam County Assessors Association. Valuation of 7,000 parcels many of which are complex commercial and industrial parcels. 19 July 15, 1998 -Responsible for Equalization rate complaint which resulted in a positive change of 29.64%in 1993. -Project Administrator for County-wide revaluation which began in June 1994. -Advisor to New York State Assembly ranking minority member on the Real Property Tax Committee(1995) 10188-1193 Town of Carmel, Mahopac, New York Real Property Appraiser- Certified by the State Board of Equalization and Assessment. - Value 12,000 parcels including new construction, additions, alterations, land subdivisions and merges. - Understanding of Real Estate Appraisal methods: Market Date Approach, Income Approach. and Cost Approach. -Knowledge of Real Property Tax laws. -Instrumental in the creation of a Sewer Use formula which calculated actual usage by both Commercial and Residential entities. -Appraisal of both Commercial and Residential properties. 1979-1985 Yonke Bros. and Son Inc., Mahopac, New York (Part Time) Real Estate Manager 1986- 10188 -Marketed houses, condominiums, and vacant land. (Full Time) REFERENCES: Available upon request. George Roniger said that the Committee took a look at the proposal and that this information would be very useful for Council and the residents of the Town. 3. Authorization - Planning Study - Myrtle Boulevard/Madison Avenue Area Mr. Altieri proposed that a land use, and parking and traffic study be conducted for the area of the Town at Myrtle Boulevard and Madison Avenue. This area was last studied in 1986 when the Master Plan study of the Palmer Avenue Corridor was completed. The study was conducted jointly with the Village of Larchmont. In the last twelve years there have been changes in this area of the Town that warrant a formal review. The Supervisor had requested Board members to look at this area of the Town. First, parking has become an increasing problem. What makes the development of parking plans so difficult in the area, is the variety of needs for parking. There is a long term parking requirement for residents in the apartments, a short term parking requirement for the retail stores and professional offices and a medium term parking need for those that work in this area. We try to adapt the needs of the residents without allowing commuters to use the street as free commuter parking. Within the last two years, a publishing company has taken occupancy of the entire second floor of the Clock Tower Building at the corner of Myrtle Boulevard and Madison Avenue. Over 150 employees now work in this building causing a squeeze on existing parking. The popularity of the Total Fitness Gym and the renovated restaurant on Madison Avenue adds to the parking crunch. In the future the former Gold Lake Delicatessen building will be renovated with two, possibly three new retail shops. Therefore, we need to consider alternatives for efficient parking to insure a safe flow of traffic and insure the viability of the businesses in the area. Future land uses in this section of the Town should also be addressed. There remains between Byron Place and Maxwell Avenue a large tract of land that is semi-vacant at this time. Three single family homes currently exist on Maxwell Avenue but it is possible that the parcels of land could be consolidated in the future with the larger tract. In the past we have seen several different proposals for the property that would have had varying impacts on the area. The Town has recently been contacted by a developer interested in developing this tract of land. We therefore propose to consider the best uses of the property and determine the compatibility of our zoning. The following proposal from Ferrandino and Associates lays out the plan into two main work elements. Should the Town decide that a zoning change is appropriate, a third optional work element has been described to redraft the zoning ordinance and conduct the SEAR review. 20 July 15, 1998 To complete the first two work elements, the cost of the study is $19,750. Ferrandino is prepared to begin the work immediately and would provide a draft of the complete report by November. Drafts of the individual work elements would be provided in August and October. The changes in this area over the-last twelve years and the prospect of more development warrant us evaluating our land use and arkin options. p 9 p The following Zoning Study was submitted by Ferrandino and Associates: Town of Mamaroneck ATTACHMENT I-Myrtle Avenue Zoning Study 1.0 INTRODUCTION The Town of Mamaroneck wants to re-evaluate the district regulations for the BMUB zone in the Myrtle Avenue area of the Town in order to provide for a more compatible mix of uses. This analysis will take into consideration existing and projected land uses, traffic and parking, and visual impacts, among others. More specifically, an analysis will be undertaken to document existing conditions in the area and identify the need, if any, for the adoption of amended zoning provisions to encourage a mix of uses more in keeping with the changing character of the area. This analysis will include: 1) conducting research to prepare a study so that proposed regulations are reasonable and meet the current and future needs of this area; 2) assistance in drafting the zoning text amendments in accordance with the recommendations made in the study and in keeping with the Comprehensive Plan (this may involve amending the Comprehensive Plan), and 3) ensuring that the proposed zoning amendments are not prohibitive. 2.0 SCOPE OF SERV ICES Given the parameters noted above, our discussions with the Town, and a field visit to the area, out lined below is a proposed scope of services: ❑ Work Element 1: Inventory of Existing Uses and Currently Permitted Uses, Parking and Traffic Conditions Ferrandino &Associates Inc. (hereinafter referred to as F&A) will conduct an inventory of existing land uses in the area, and will map same on an existing zoning base map. F&A will also inventory existing on and off- street parking and will map existing on-street metered and non-metered spaces, as well as existing public and privately-operated parking lots. Surveys of parking space occupancy at varying times of day will also be undertaken. Finally, existing traffic routing patterns will be inventoried and mapped, noting one way, two way patterns, etc. Work Products: Existing conditions report to include: • Narrative and statistical inventory • Map overlays: • Existing zoning • Existing land use • Existing parking • Existing traffic routing patterns • Conclusions as to existing conditions Time frame: Within six(6) weeks from an authorization to proceed. ❑ Work Element 2:-Impact Analysis • Land Use and Zoning Utilizing the data gathered in Work Element 1, F&A will recommend alternative zoning scenarios, focusing 21 July 15, 1998 primarily on vacant and underdeveloped sites. Considerations such as traffic and parking generation, land use compatibility, visual impact and marketability will be factored into our recommendations. • Parking and Traffic . Utilizing traffic counts from existing traffic and parking studies, as well as on-site observations in the field, F&A will recommend actions to improve and/or augment existing parking, as well as potential re- routing of traffic through an alternative traffic flow system. Work Products: Implementation report to include: • Land use plan and recommended zoning • Traffic and parking plan Timeframe: Within six(6) weeks of completion of Work Element 1 and an authorization to proceed Work element 1 and 2 will comprise the Myrtle Avenue Plan. ❑ Work Element 3: Prepare Amended Zoning Text and Map Change(s) and SEQRA Documentation (OPTIONAL) Following completion of Work Element 2, if so warranted, F&A will assist in preparing amended zoning text and map changes to accommodate the recommendations made in the Myrtle Avenue Plan. At a minimum, this will Involve preparing a Long Form EAF with addenda. Work Product: Amended zoning text and map change (s) and SEQRA documentation Timeframe: Within four(4) weeks of completion of Work Element 2 and an authorization to proceed 3.0 TIMETABLE F&A will complete the work elements described above in accordance with the tentative timetable outlined below, providing sufficient time for staff and Town Board input and review. Completion On Or About: Work Element: July 15,1998 Contract authorization by Town of Mamaroneck officially begin work August 31, 1998 Existing conditions report p (Work Element 1) completed and submitted to the Town staff for review October 23, 1998 Impact analysis completed and submitted to Town staff for review (Work Element 2) November 13,1998 If necessary, F&A to prepare and submit draft zoning text amendments to Town Attorney and Town Administrator for review(portion of Work Element 3) 22 July 15, 1998 December 4, 1998 Final comments received from Town Attorney and zoning amendments finalized by F&A for submission to Town Board 4.0 MEETINGS In addition to the field visit and meeting with Town staff on June 11, 1998, F&A will attend up to two (2) meetings with Town staff and/or the Town Board through November 13, 1998, These meetings may include a "mark- up session with Town staff upon submission of the draft report and zoning text amendment and/or attendance at one Town Board work session to be scheduled on this matter in the coming months. Attendance at any additional meetings and/or public hearings will be billed hourly(see Section 5.0 of this proposal). 5.0 FEE 5.1 FIXED FEE The fee for preparation of Work Elements 1 and 2 described in Section 2.0 of this proposal is broken down as follows: Work Element 1: $ 8,000 Work Element 2: $11,500 Work Element 3: TBD Total: $19,500 In addition reimbursement for out of pocket expenses, (travel, graphics, reproduction) is estimated to be an additional$250, for a total fee of $19,750. Payment shall be rendered at the completion of each work element. Nine (9) bound copies and one (1) unbound copy of the final report(with black and white graphics) will be provided to the Town Board. A disk will also be provided. 5.2 OTHER SERVICES In addition to the above, should our services be required to assist in work elements beyond those outlined above and/or attendance at meetings beyond those noted above, the following hourly rate schedule shall be in effect for 1998: Principal $195 Senior Planner/Project Manager $155 Planner(s) $115 Graphic/Research/Staff Support $ 65 6.0 STAFFING Vince Ferrandino will serve as principal-in-charge. Two other staff planners will complete the bulk of the research and fieldwork and draft ordinance text. If detailed analysis is required, a traffic engineer will be assigned. This will involve a separate fee proposal and scope. On motion by Councilman Ryan, seconded by Councilwoman Wittner it was unanimously, 23 July 15, 1998 RESOLVED, that the Town Board does hereby authorize the Town Administrator to act on behalf of the Town of the Mamaroneck in executing the contract with Ferrandino and Associates to conduct a Land Use and Zoning Study for the area of the Town located at Myrtle Boulevard and Madison Avenue; and BE IT FURTHER, RESOLVED, that the Town Comptroller is hereby authorized to transfer funds in the amount of$19,750 from the Part-Time General Fund Unreserved Account to Account#68020.4035 for payment of said contract. 4. Consideration of Amendment of Parking Fees for Seniors This item was held over for the next Town Board Meeting 5. Authorization -Sale of Equipment On motion by Councilman Ryan, seconded by Councilman Weprin it was recommended that the Town Board declare the following piece of equipment surplus and authorize the Town Administrator to sell said equipment. Vehicle# 150 - 1978 Chevy Pickup Truck ID# CCL24813153241. A minimum bid of$75.00 is being set. 6. Salary Authorizations - Police Department - Recreation Police Department On motion by Councilwoman Wittner, seconded by Councilwoman O'Keeffe it was unanimously, RESOLVED, that the Town Board does hereby authorize the payment of salary as follows: Paul Creazzo $72,163 Police Lieutenant effective 7/9/98 Nelson Flores $61,303 Detective effective 7/9/98 Gerald McCarthy $68,846 Detective Sergeant effective 7/9/98 Martin Pfeiffer $65,636 Police Sergeant effective 7/9/98 An award ceremony will be held at a September Board Meeting. Recreation On motion of Councilman Ryan, seconded by Councilwoman O'Keeffe it was unanimously, RESOLVED, that as provided for in the 1998 Town Budget, authority is hereby given for the payment of salary to the following: Bobby Lunde, Alternate Hommocks Pool Manager, $10.00 per hour Mary Lynn Rappaport, Alternate Hommocks Pool Manager, $10.00 per hour. Wendy Johnson, Lifeguard, Hommocks Pool, $7.00 per hour. 24 July 15, 1998 Josie Blanckmeister, Bubble Babies Instructor, Hommocks Pool, $12.50 1class. Richard Harrison, Tennis Instructor, $13.00 per hour. Steven Lee, Tennis Instructor, $12.00 per hour. Jennifer Linker, Tennis Instructor, $12.00 per hour. Francesca Ermini, Fitness Specialist, $18.00 per hour. Stefanie Rennert, Recreation Assistant, Music Workshop, $400.00 for program. Sarah Brown, Counselor, Monroe Pre School, $120.00 per week. Elana Horowitz, Counselor, Monroe Pre School, $160.00 per week. Martin Reilly, Counselor, Monroe Pre School, $122.00 per week. Christopher Siano, Counselor, Monroe Pre School, $146.00 per week. Aisha Stocks, Counselor, Monroe Pre School, $155.00 per week. Juliet Alston, Counselor, Murray Pre School, $137.00 per week. Pamela Banach, Counselor, Murray Pre School, $130.00 per week. Sabrina Bennett, Counselor, Murray Pre School, $105.00 per week. Christine Fraioli, Counselor, Murray Pre School, $130.00 per woek. Donne Hughes, Counselor, Murray Pre School, $130.00 per week. Wanda Manns, Counselor, Murray Pre School, $133.00 per week. Farida Moynihan, Counselor, transferred from Monroe to Murray, $132.00 per week. Todd Alessandro, Counselor, Hommocks Playground, $165.00 per week. Chris Auchterlonie, Counselor, Hommocks Playground, $210.00 per week. Charlie Chubet, Counselor, Hommocks Playground, $175.00 per week. William Farrell, Counselor, Hommocks Playground, $236-00 per week. Mike Galeano, Counselor, Hommocks Playground, $180.00 per week. Remi Reid, Counselor, Hommocks Playground, $188.00 per week. Nicholas Tamagna, Counselor, Hommocks Playground, $230.00 per week. John D. Thompson, Counselor, Hommocks Playground, $175.00 per week. David Farber, Counselor, Hommocks Playground, change in salary to $171.00 per week. THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTIONS WERE TAKEN OUT OF ORDER PROCLAMATIONS - Beverly Villa Brewer - Mamaroneck Co-op Summer School and Day Camp PROCLAMATION BEVERLY BREWER VILLA WHEREAS, Beverly Brewer Villa has worked for over twenty-five.(25)years at The CAP Center, primarily as its Director;and WHEREAS, she was instrumental in developing programs at the CAP Center that were creative and sensitive to the needs of:ill:from daycare and preschool activities to food pantries and after schoa/enrichment Programs;from the development and nurturing of artistic talent in our children to instilling techno logical awareness in our pre-schoolers;and WHEREAS, Beverly was identified as the compassionate force who has worked tirelessly to spearhead and maintained programs which have fostered spiritual and educational growth in our children of all ages. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that I Elaine Price, Supervisor, and the members of the Town Council of the Town of Mamaroneck hereby present this PROCLAMATION to BEVERLY BREWER VILLA to honor and recognize her for her extraordinary service to this community. 25 July 15, 1998 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the seal of the Town of Mamaroneck to be affixed this 27th day of June 1998. Elaine Price, Supervisor Paul A. Ryan, Councilman Valerie Moore O'Keeffe, Councilwoman Barry A. Weprin, Councilman Phyllis Wittner, Councilwoman Attested to by. Patricia A. DiCioccio, Town Clerk PROCLAMATION MAMARONECK CO-OP SUMMER SCHOOL & DAY CAMP WHEREAS, the Mamaroneck Co-op Summer School& Day Camp has touched the lives of thousands of youngsters in our community for three (3) decades;and WHEREAS, the Town of Mamaroneck has supported this Camp for thirty (30) years and we owe the continued development and success to the teachers and volunteers who have given so willingly of themselves through the years;and WHEREAS, Ed Cofino, as Director of the Co-op Camp has continued in the fine tradition of the previous directors in nurturing the special talents of our children;and WHEREAS, the Mamaroneck Co-op Summer School& Day Camp has actively engaged in activities to further develop the academic, social and recreational skills of our youth. It has also sought to build a stronger bond between Mamaroneck Avenue School and the community and to become "FOREVER A PART OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD". NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that I Elaine Price, Supervisor of the Town of Mamaroneck and the Town Board members do hereby proclaim that Wednesday, July 15, 1998 be proclaimed as a special day in the Town of Mamaroneck in recognition.of the services the Mamaroneck Co-op Summer School& Day Camp has provided to our community. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the seal of the Town of Mamaroneck to be affixed this 15th day of July 1998. Elaine Price, Supervisor Paul A. Ryan, Councilman Valerie Moore O'Keeffe, Councilwoman Barry A. Weprin, Councilman Phyllis Wittner, Councilwoman Attested to by; Patricia A. DiCioccio, Town Clerk ADJOURNMENT On motion of Councilman Ryan, seconded by Councilman Weprin the meeting was adjourned at 10:50 PM in memory of Eleanor Elizabeth Wassman. Patricia A. Samela, Deputy Town Clerk C:IMSOFFICEIWINWORD1Minutes 198MINF17-15x.doc 26