VILLAGE OF CROTON ON HUDSON, NEW YORK
PLANNING BOARD MEETING MINUTES – TUESDAY, OCTOBER 22, 2002:
A regular meeting of the Planning Board of the Village of Croton-on-Hudson, New York was held on Tuesday, October 22, 2002 in the Municipal Building.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Ann Gallelli, Chair
ABSENT: Fran Allen
ALSO PRESENT: Daniel O’Connor, P.E., Village Engineer
1. Call to Order:
The meeting was called to order at 8:00 P.M. by Chairman Gallelli.
Gross Property – 220 Grand Street (Sec. 68.17 Blk. 3 Lot 33) – Application for Final Subdivision Approval
Ronald Wagner of Cronin Engineering and Henry Gross, owner of the property, were present for this application.
Chairman Gallelli stated that the first item of business tonight is the Final Subdivision Application for the Gross property on 220 Grand Street.
Chairman Gallelli stated that the Planning Board has received from the Applicant the final subdivision map.
Chairman Gallelli asked the Applicant if he had any comments. The Applicant’s engineer, Ronald Wagner, stated that the parcel in question is situated on the west side of Grand Street. The Applicant received Preliminary Subdivision Approval in March 2002. The Applicant has since sought, and has received the required approval(s) from the Westchester County Department of Health. Mr. Wagner stated that the Applicant believes he has complied with the conditions of the preliminary resolution and is here before the Planning Board tonight for final approval.
Chairman Gallelli asked the Board members if they had any comments, to which there were none.
Chairman Gallelli entertained a motion to approve this application for Final Subdivision Approval. The motion was made by Mr. Brumleve, seconded by Mr. Klein and carried by a vote of 4 to 0.
Michael DiVitto and Tim Puff – Morningside Drive (Sec. 79.09 Blk. 6 Lot 32) – Referral from the Village Board for a Steep Slopes Hardship Permit, Continued
The Applicant, Michael DiVitto, and his engineer, Ronald Wagner of Cronin Engineering, were present.
Mr. Wagner stated that his firm represents Messrs. DiVitto and Puff in their application for a Steep Slopes Hardship Permit to build a single-family residence on Morningside Drive. The plans that are being presented tonight address the Planning Board’s comments at previous meetings. The first issue pertains to drainage. The Applicant proposes to run the drainage along the side of the property and capture it into a dry well, which will sustain run-off up to a 100-year storm. Mr. Zelman wanted to know if this drainage system would require any maintenance. He asked what the top of the yard drain is going to be, to which Mr. Wagner said that it will be a grate. Mr. Zelman expressed concern that leaves would clog up the drain, to which Mr. DiVitto stated that if everything is run
underground, then, nothing should go down into the drain.
Mr. Zelman raised the question, if there is no maintenance of the drainage system being provided, is water going to be overflowing outside the yard drains. Mr. Wagner stated that in the event that there is a surcharge of the system, any excess water will flow out. There is a deep sump in the bottom of the yard drain should any silt get in there. Mr. Klein wanted to know how deep these sumps are going to be. He asked what the depth of the yard drain(s) is going to be, to which Mr. Wagner stated that a 1 ?” sump is being provided in the bottom of the yard drain. A sump is being provided in the bottom where sediment can be caught before going into the dry well.
Chairman Gallelli stated that the Village Engineer, Daniel O’Connor, has provided his comments to the Planning Board. She wanted to make sure that the Applicant receives a copy of Mr. O’Connor’s comments.
Chairman Gallelli asked the Applicant to address the issue of how high the proposed house is going to appear compared to the neighboring houses. Mr. Wagner stated that the neighboring house to the north is not all that high. The proposed house will be higher than this house, but the height can be adjusted. Mr. Wagner stated that the Applicant’s proposed house is going to be somewhat distanced from the house to the south by a parking area.
Chairman Gallelli asked how the Applicant would propose to adjust the new house so that it would not appear as tall. Mr. Wagner said that he would lower the elevation of the new house. Mr. DiVitto stated that his house will probably have the same elevation as the house situated next to his neighbor's house (two houses down).
Chairman Gallelli stated that the Planning Board members all have questions about how, exactly, the construction of this house is going to occur. She noted that there is very little space between the new house and the existing structures, and there is potential for a great amount of disturbance to these structures. Mr. Wagner told the Planning Board that the intention is to minimize the amount of excavation by constructing a two-tiered basement.
Mr. Brumleve stated that, in essence, the new house is (will be) a four-story building from the rear. Mr. DiVitto stated that the rear basement wall is 14’, to which Mr. Wagner stated that this can be adjusted, if need be. Mr. DiVitto stated that, on the plan that was originally submitted, there was a 14’ basement; but, an adjustment was made to keep the disturbance down. Mr. DiVitto stated that, with respect to the height in the rear, he did not realize that 6’ had been added to the rear wall. He noted that every effort has been made to accommodate what the Planning Board wants and to eliminate the steep slopes disturbance as much as possible. Mr. Brumleve told the Applicant that it is worth noting that he is going to have a 40’ wall in the rear. Chairman Gallelli
asked what the reason for this was, to which Mr. Wagner responded that, with the two-tiered basement, the Applicant was looking for a full height basement in the front of the house which, however, can be lowered. The two-tiered basement was being proposed to minimize the amount of excavation.
Chairman Gallelli stated that there is a Village-owned sewer line that runs through the backyard of the property. The existence of the sewer creates a dilemma for the Applicant in that the house has to be situated up front or in back of the sewer line, but not over it. Chairman Gallelli asked if the Applicant had looked into alternative locations for the house, or is the proposed location of the house being presented tonight the only one that will work. Mr. Wagner stated that, given the location of the sewer line, the only alternative would be to place the house way in the back of the property. By placing the house in the front of the property, as proposed, it is consistent with the siting of all of the other (neighboring) houses on the street.
Chairman Galleli asked if the Applicant had gone out to the site with representatives of the DPW, to which Mr. Wagner stated that they had.
Mr. Klein asked if a cut and fill balance had been done, to which Mr. Wagner stated that it has not been done.
Chairman Gallelli wanted to know if, when the house is built and there is the 40’ wall, will there be another house behind it or does the property go to the street, to which Mr. Wagner replied that there is another house behind it.
Chairman Gallelli asked what is going to remain of the trees on the lower part of the lot, to which Mr. DiVitto responded that whatever is on the lower part will remain. Chairman Gallelli wondered what this would look like to the neighbors. Mr. Wagner pointed out to the Board members that the neighbors who live behind the Applicant’s property have a tree line.
Mr. Klein stated that there is an issue, being raised tonight, about what the proposed house is going to look like from the back. Mr. Klein wanted to know if the neighbors in the back had a deck, to which the Applicant said that he did not know.
Mr. Brumleve stated that the Applicant should provide the Planning Board with a location plan to see exactly where the neighboring properties are. The Applicant should also locate on the site plan the existing trees and indicate which trees are anticipated to be removed. He reiterated that the Planning Board needs to see a tree survey (map). The Village Engineer stated that it appears that almost all the trees between the sewer easement and the proposed house would be removed. Also, there are no trees where the drainage is being proposed.
Chairman Gallelli stated that when the Planning Board makes its recommendation to the Village Board, the Planning Board needs to look at the issue of whether the construction of the house can be accomplished with the least amount of disturbance and whether everything around it can be adequately protected. The key issue is whether or not there will be disturbance. The Planning Board needs to know the exact way that the house is going to be constructed. Chairman Gallelli pointed out to the Applicant that the Village Engineer has provided a number of comments/questions that need to be addressed. The Planning Board needs to know how the equipment is going to operate on the site, how the foundation will be put in, what equipment is going to be used, etc. The Planning Board will need to know
how cut and fill will be stockpiled.
Mr. Klein stated that the Applicant should provide the Planning Board with a narrative description of the project, including information on what kind of equipment is going to be used, how the site is going to be accessed and how much soil is going to be taken out. Information should be provided on erosion control. The Planning Board will (also) need to know how much of the site is intended to be clear-cut. Mr. Klein stated that the Applicant should provide any other information that would help the Board to evaluate the situation.
Mr. Wagner stated that, as part of tonight’s submission, his office provided a construction sequence. He asked if the Planning Board wanted an expansion of that, to which Chairman Gallelli replied that the Applicant should provide all of the items mentioned by Mr. Klein (above). Mr. Wagner stated that, with respect to the information being requested on erosion control, this information is (already) on the plan.
Mr. Klein asked where the top soil is going to be stockpiled, to which Mr. DiVitto stated that the top soil will probably be taken off site and stored somewhere else. Chairman Gallelli told the Applicant that he needs to document that. The Planning Board needs to know, as completely as possible, how the construction process is going to be carried out.
Chairman Gallelli stated that she would also like to know, from the perspective of the people living in the house behind the Applicant, exactly how the 40’ high wall is going to appear. Mr. Brumleve noted that the basement elevation of the rear floor is 22’ above the elevation of the property line. The Village Engineer wondered if, perhaps, some images could be taken to show what the 40’ high wall would look like. Mr. Brumleve suggested that the Applicant could provide the Planning Board with a cross section map. Mr. DiVitto suggested that he could take pictures from the road out, and from side to side. He could show the house on the north side to see exactly what these people are (will be) looking at. Mr. Klein said that he wonders what this new house will look like
from Truesdale Avenue. Mr. DiVitto stated that the new house will be 6’ higher than the house north of it, to which Mr. Klein told the Applicant that he needs to take a picture of that as well.
Mr. Zelman stated that in one of the memoranda, there was a discussion about the materials. The Applicant talks about the materials being delivered for the workday. Mr. Zelman wanted to know if this means 5, 6 or 7 deliveries of sand and, if so, is it all going to be used for that day. Mr. DiVitto stated that his house is a modular home. As far as the deliveries of sand are concerned, he has his own trucking company for the deliveries. Mr. Klein asked if when the contractor does the forms, the contractor will be working off of the truck, to which Mr. DiVitto stated that they will unload off the truck as needed. Mr. Zelman told the Applicant that he should include in his plans information on what materials are going to be used; what materials he expects to be stored; and where he is
going to store them.
Chairman Gallelli noted that the Village Engineer had made a number of comments in his memorandum to the Planning Board. She asked the Village Engineer if he wanted to add any comments to those that had already been made tonight.
The Village Engineer stated that all proposed contours must be shown on the Applicant’s plan. Two of the stone walls on the property are acting like small retaining walls. The impact of construction on these walls needs to be evaluated. Two of the stone walls cross property lines, and this is a matter that will have to be worked out. The Village Engineer noted to the Applicant that, if the Applicant removes the stones on his property, it will create a problem. He asked that the Applicant note on his revised plan what sections of wall are going to be removed.
Chairman Gallelli told the Applicant that, if the Planning Board makes a positive recommendation, then, the Village Board is going to hold a public hearing. Neighbors will come and express their concerns. It needs to be shown on the Applicant’s plan(s) what mitigation measures are being taken.
Chairman Gallelli told the Applicant that, for the next meeting, the Applicant should provide answers to the questions posed tonight by the Village Engineer and the Planning Board members.
Chairman Gallelli reiterated that she would like to know how the new house is going to appear from the house behind it.
Mr. Klein stated that the Applicant should review the suggestions in the Village Engineer’s memorandum on modifying the erosion control(s).
Mr. Brumleve stated that he would like to see a rough schematic section that goes from Truesdale Avenue to Morningside Drive. He stated that the Applicant needs to address the issue of drainage/run-off during construction, should there be a torrential rainstorm. Also, the Applicant needs to provide the Board with a location plan.
Chairman Gallelli told the Applicant that the Planning Board will need a letter from the Applicant extending the time period for the Planning Board to review this Steep Slopes Hardship application. She suggested that the Applicant might agree to extend consideration of the permit until such time as the application is heard again, i.e., the Planning Board meeting date. Chairman Gallelli stated that there will be a meeting on the 12th and 26th of November and on the 3rd of December. Mr. Wagner thought that the plans could be ready for the meeting of the 26th. Chairman Gallelli stated that the Applicant should put a time frame in the letter that he thinks he can adhere to.
Malom Development Corp. (Kieran Murray ) – Croton Point Avenue (Sec. 79.13 Blk. 2 Lots 18, 19 & 20) – Application for Site Plan Approval, Preliminary Discussion, Continued
Kieran Murray, owner of the property, was present.
Chairman Gallelli stated that the Planning Board members received in their packets the Applicant’s landscaping plan. Mr. Murray stated that the landscaping plan shows the new placement of the garbage containers.
Mr. Murray told the Planning Board that, since the last meeting, he has purchased a computer software package to demonstrate to the Planning Board tonight how the new building will appear on Croton Point Avenue. He “built” a 3-D model of Croton Point Avenue showing the new building. He incorporated into this model his landscaping plan. Mr. Murray demonstrated to the Planning Board, on a laptop computer, what the new building would look like if one were walking down Croton Point Avenue; driving off of Route 9 and going north; etc.
Mr. Murray stated that, for the most part, the elevations being shown in these computer renderings are accurate. The placement of the parking area for the new building is close to what it will actually look like. Mr. Murray pointed out the shrubs along the front. He noted that the garbage will be shielded from view. Mr. Murray stated that he has created three different designs for the new building, which he will show to the Planning Board tonight.
The Village Engineer asked if landscaping could be put in next to the Exxon gas station, to which Mr. Murray said that he cannot put landscaping in there. The property the Village Engineer is referring to belongs to Exxon.
Mr. Murray showed the Planning Board his first design for the new building. Mr. Zelman stated that he thought that the cantilever design in the middle changes the appearance of the façade a great deal. Chairman Gallelli noted that, “you need to break it (the surface) up like that.” Mr. Brumleve thought that the cantilever design is a very significant enhancement to the façade. He noted that it creates shadows that shutters do not create.
The Planning Board looked at the other two designs and decided that the first design (Design 1) was the preferred one.
Chairman Gallelli stated that, in order to hold a public hearing on this application, the Applicant will have to provide the Planning Board with a complete set of architectural drawings. She noted that the computer imagery being shown tonight is very helpful to visualize what the building will look like; however, for the public hearing, actual plans will have to be submitted. The Applicant’s architect, Mr. Lentini, will have to provide a complete set of site plan drawings showing how the façade will look; what materials will be used; how the building will fit on the site, etc. Elevation plans will need to be submitted.
Chairman Gallelli asked Mr. Murray if the proposed landscaping is bermed at all, to which Mr. Murray answered that it is bermed by virtue of the elevations.
Chairman Gallelli stated that the Planning Board has been informed by the Village Board that the garbage pick-up for the new building is on Croton Point Avenue, and the garbage pick-up for the existing building is still on Wayne Street. Chairman Gallelli stated that the Applicant needs to refine, to some degree, the garbage pad for the Wayne Street entrance.
Chairman Gallelli stated that the Planning Board has asked the Applicant to provide construction plans. The Planning Board needs information on exactly how the excavation is going to occur; how equipment will be moved off and on site; how materials will be stored; etc.
Mr. Klein stated that he is concerned about what the boring samples showed. He would want the Village Engineer to look at these samples.
Mr. Brumleve asked that the Applicant state the strategy for containing all the debris on the site.
Chairman Gallelli stated that the Applicant is going to have mitigation and protection measures in place, and he is going to have to explain these mitigation measures to the Planning Board.
Mr. Murray asked if, during construction, there could be a break between 5:30 P.M. and 7:00 P.M. This is a high-traffic period. The construction workers could take off during that time and work, instead, from 7:30 P.M. to 9:00 P.M. Mr. Murray stated that, with respect to public safety, he thought this might help to mitigate the risk(s). Chairman Gallelli stated that she thinks the Village Law has restrictions on construction taking place at night; however, she will check into this.
Mr. Murray summarized what he needs to submit for the next meeting. He noted that, with respect to the house design, the Planning Board wants to go with his Design 1. He will provide the Planning Board with the modular house plans and the foundation plan. A more detailed plan for the garbage container will be submitted.
Mr. Murray asked if there was anything else he should prepare for the next meeting. Mr. Brumleve stated that Mr. Murray can identify the locations on the plan for the signs. Mr. Brumleve stated that Mr. Murray is showing a permanent canopy in one of his drawings. He could draw in a dashed rectangular area where the proposed signs would be located.
Mr. Zelman asked about the shutters on the windows (which were) drawn in by the Applicant’s architect at the last Planning Board meeting. Chairman Gallelli noted that, at that meeting, the members present thought that the shutters looked good. She suggested that the architect could put them in. If the Planning Board decides against them, they can always be removed.
Chairman Gallelli stated that she would like to see an outline of where the proposed sign(s) would be.
Chairman Gallelli stated that the Applicant will have to go to the VEB for review and recommendation. The VEB meets the first Tuesday of every month. The Applicant should plan to meet with them as soon as possible so that they can provide their comments to the Planning Board.
The Village Engineer stated that the lighting being proposed should appear on the Applicant’s site plan. Chairman Gallelli noted that there is nothing on the lighting to date, and a lighting plan should be included. The lighting plan should show where the fixtures are going to be located. A detail of the lighting fixtures should be provided. There should be no off-site glare.
Chairman Gallelli stated that the Planning Board is prepared to call a public hearing on this application; however, the materials/information asked for tonight must be submitted.
The Village Engineer stated that, in the landscaping plan, there is a section of land in the right-of-way on the south side of the entrance and nothing shown on the north side. He questioned whether this land on the north side is also a right-of-way. Mr. Murray said that he understood that this is Exxon’s land. Chairman Gallelli told Mr. Murray that he needs to find out if this land is a County right-of-way or if it belongs to Exxon.
The Planning Board scheduled the public hearing for November 26th.
Hudson Valley Ventures – 35 South Riverside Avenue (Sec. 78.08 Blk. 5 Lot 61) – Application for Amended Site Plan Approval for the Croton Medical Building, Preliminary Discussion, Continued
Neil Carnow, Architect, was present for this application.
Mr. Brumleve asked what the total increase in the number of parking spaces at the Medical Center would be, to which Mr. Carnow said that the number of added spaces would be 17. The number of spaces would go from 40 to 57.
Mr. Carnow stated that, since the last meeting, the Applicant’s plan has been “fine-tuned.” The dark line identifies the new retaining wall. The shaded-in area represents the extended area of paved spaces.
Mr. Carnow stated that the Applicant will be top-coating and re-striping the whole parking lot.
Mr. Carnow stated that, with respect to the formwork on the wall, the Planning Board members said, at the last meeting, that they liked the look of a block wall. The Applicant will have a pre-cast top on it and a railing on top for safety purposes.
Chairman Gallelli referred to the plan and told Mr. Carnow that he might want to show what is being planted (here). Chairman Gallelli wanted to know if any greenery will remain, to which Mr. Carnow responded that it should come back in a year or so.
Chairman Gallelli stated that she has received phone calls from neighbors about the sewer line. She asked if this is a public sewer line, to which Mr. Carnow stated that only these several (neighboring) houses use it. He did not know whether it was a public or private sewer. Chairman Gallelli wanted to know if the construction being proposed would, in any way, affect the sewer line. The Village Engineer told the Planning Board that he visited the site today. He “popped” the manhole cover to see if the line continues. The Village Engineer stated that the Village needs to find out where the manhole is and draw this line in. Mr. Carnow stated that it may hook in on the lower side. The leakage problems were coming out of the ground. The pipe was leaking and causing
damage to the retaining wall, which is, in part, why the Applicant has to replace the wall. Mr. Brumleve stated that the Village needs to make sure that the sewer problem is resolved. The Village Engineer suggested that one could possibly put a snake “up here” and get a metal detector. He stated that there are two possible solutions: to continue the sewer pipe under the wall or to reroute it around the wall. Mr. Carnow thought that it would be necessary, first of all, to find out if the Village owns the sewer line, to which the Village Engineer stated that the former Village Engineer, Kary Ioannou, told him that this is a private sewer line.
Chairman Gallelli stated that Mr. Carnow needs to have a copy of the comments on this application prepared by the Village Engineer.
The Village Engineer stated that the contractor may have to install temporary supports to keep the retaining wall from collapsing. Chairman Gallelli stated that it would be helpful to obtain this information from the contractor and incorporate it into the Applicant’s plan(s).
Mr. Carnow stated that the Medical Center will probably have to do valet parking during the construction process.
Chairman Gallelli told Mr. Carnow that the Applicant’s neighbors will want to know about the sewer line. The issue is whether or not something should be done about the sewer at this juncture. Mr. Carnow stated that he did not know if the Applicant (Hudson Valley Ventures) would have the ability (right) to work on the sewer line if it is not theirs. Chairman Gallelli suggested that there may be reasonable dialogue that could take place between the Applicant and these neighbors about this sewer issue. Mr. Carnow stated that he did not think the hospital could take up the expense of replacing the retaining wall and repairing someone else’s sewer line. Chairman Gallelli wanted to know whose responsibility it is to fix the sewer line if it is, indeed, a private sewer. Mr. Brumleve
thought that the title insurer would be able to say who owns the sewer line. Chairman Gallelli stated that the issue for the neighbors is (will be) whether what the Applicant intends to do is going to affect them. She asked the Village Engineer to look into this matter of who owns the sewer line.
The Planning Board decided to schedule the public hearing on this application for Tuesday, November 12th.
Chairman Gallelli asked Mr. Carnow to stay a few minutes longer at the meeting to discuss the Croton Autopark application. She told Mr. Carnow that the Village Engineer, Fran Allen and herself went, at night, to the Kerekes’ house on 62 Beekman Avenue for the purpose of seeing firsthand the problem with the off-site glare. There are, indeed, two lights that shine brightly onto the Kerekes’ property. Chairman Gallelli wondered if these lights could be moved. Mr. Brumleve pointed out that the Village Ordinance prohibits off-site glare onto adjacent properties. Mr. Carnow suggested that, perhaps, shields could be put on these two lights to cut down on the glare. Chairman Gallelli told Mr. Carnow that the Planning Board cannot tell the Applicant exactly what to do to solve the
problem; however, the problem of these two light sources has to be addressed. Mr. Carnow stated that he will talk to Lou Giordano about this lighting issue, and they will look into a way to resolve it.
John Boulos – Piney Point Avenue (Sec. 79.13 Blk. 4 Lot 44) – Referral from the Village Board for a Steep Slopes Hardship Permit
John Boulos, owner of the property, and Robert Phelan, the Applicant’s engineer, were present.
Mr. Phelan stated that the property in question is located on Piney Point Avenue.
Mr. Phelan stated that, from the street level, the property slopes severely downward to the rear. The elevation is 57 at the back. The invert on the sewer is 93.5 and the rim is at 100. The street slopes slightly downward from where the manhole is.
Mr. Phelan stated that the drawing the Planning Board members have in front of them tonight shows the topography of the land. It indicates the trees and the proposed footprint for a residential structure. It also shows a garage to the left of the main residence.
Chairman Gallelli raised the issue of whether or not the Applicant actually meets the qualifications for applying for a Steep Slopes Hardship Exemption. She noted that, in order to be eligible to apply, the Applicant would have to have owned the subject property prior to 1989 when the Steep Slopes Law came into effect. Mr. Boulos stated that he has owned the property since 1991. He told the Planning Board that, at that time, he received a letter from Phil Tully, the Village Engineer, saying that the lot in question is a buildable lot.
Chairman Gallelli stated that there are two possible ways of looking at this. The first is that the Applicant has a buildable lot that does not require a Steep Slopes Hardship Permit. The second is that there is, indeed, a steep slopes problem that would otherwise make the lot unbuildable. In order for the Applicant to apply for a hardship permit, the Applicant has to have owned the property prior to the passage of the Steep Slopes Law. Chairman Gallelli stated that, with respect to the term “buildable,” it is her understanding that “buildable” means that a house on a lot meets setbacks; meets the requirements for steep slopes; wetlands, etc. Chairman Gallelli stated that the Planning Board needs to review the letter from Mr. Tully and, then, pass it on to the Village
Attorney for an opinion.
Mr. Boulos stated that his attorney, Maria Modica-Snow, spoke with the former engineer, Kary Ioannou, and Mr. Ioannou said that Mr. Boulos had to apply for a Steep Slopes Hardship Exemption.
Chairman Gallelli pointed out that a third possibility would be that this lot is a buildable lot even with the steep slopes restriction(s), at which point the Applicant does not need a Steep Slopes Hardship Permit. Chairman Gallelli stated that she has visited this lot, and it appears very unlikely that this is the case.
Chairman Gallelli stated that she will discuss this matter with Kary Ioannou to find out what the basis was for sending this Applicant to the Planning Board.
Chairman Gallelli stated that, if the Village Attorney decides that the Applicant is eligible to apply for a permit, then, the Planning Board will review the application and make a recommendation to the Village Board.
Chairman Gallelli stated that she does not think it is worthwhile to pursue this matter until the issue of eligibility is resolved.
Chairman Gallelli suggested that the Applicant’s attorney could discuss this matter with the Village Attorney.
Chairman Gallelli asked if the other Planning Board members had visited the property, to which the other members stated that they had done so.
Chairman Gallelli stated that the back wall of this (the proposed) house would be extremely high for the people living on Nordica Drive. Joe Lippolis, also representing the Applicant, was present. He stated that he had spoken to Kary Ioannou and had submitted plans. Mr. Ioannou told Mr. Lippolis that this was, indeed, a Steep Slopes Hardship case.
The Village Engineer pointed out to the Applicant that if he were to “shrink” the disturbance down to 9.9%, then, he would not need to apply for a Steep Slopes Hardship Permit. It has to be below 10%.
Chairman Gallelli told the Board members that she will not be at the Planning Board meeting of November 26th. She will ask Fran Allen to chair the meeting in her absence. The two December meetings are scheduled for the 3rd and 24th, respectively. Chairman Gallelli suggested that the meeting scheduled for the 24th (Christmas Eve) could be moved to Tuesday, the 17th or, if there is not a lot of business to come before the Board, the meeting could be cancelled altogether.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
The minutes of the Tuesday, August 27, 2002 Planning Board meeting were approved, as amended, on a motion by Mr. Brumleve, seconded by Mr. Zelman and carried by a vote of 3 to 0. Chairman Gallelli abstained.
The minutes of the Tuesday, September 3, 2002 Planning Board meeting were approved, on a motion by Mr. Brumleve, seconded by Mr. Zelman and carried by a vote of 4 to 0.
Approval of the minutes of the Tuesday, September 24, 2002 Planning Board meeting and the Tuesday, October 1, 2002 Planning Board meeting was adjourned until the meeting of November 12th.
There being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was duly adjourned at 10:45 P.M.
RESOLUTION GRANTING FINAL SUBDIVISION APPROVAL FOR A
TWO-LOT SUBDIVISION OF PROPERTY OF HENRY & SIEGFRIED GROSS
WHEREAS, the Planning Board adopted a Resolution at its regular public meeting held on March 5, 2002, on the application of Henry & Siegfried Gross (the “Applicant”) which granted preliminary Subdivision Plat Approval of certain property located at 220 Grand Street, which property consists of approximately 1.073 acres identified as Section 68.17, Block 3, Lot 33 on the Tax Map of the Village of Croton on Hudson, on the terms and conditions more particularly set forth in said Resolution; and
WHEREAS, the recitals in the March 5, 2002 Resolution summarize the proceedings on the application of Henry & Siegfried Gross to and including the date thereof; and
WHEREAS, on October 11, 2002, the Applicant submitted a proposed Final Subdivision Plat to be considered by the Planning Board at its regular meeting to be held on October 22, 2002; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Board reviewed the proposed Final Subdivision Plat at its October 22, 2002 meeting and deemed same to be officially submitted; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Board, at its October 22, 2002 meeting, determined that the proposed Final Subdivision Plat was in substantial agreement with the approved Preliminary Subdivision Plat, and that no public hearing was required pursuant to Village Law Section 7-728 6.(b); and
WHEREAS, the Planning Board carefully considered all comments received during the course of the Planning Board’s consideration of the application up to and including the date hereof, including those received during the public hearing held March 5, 2002; and
WHEREAS, the Final Subdivision Plat which is the subject of the following resolutions is entitled “Subdivision Map Known as Gross Acres Situate in the Town of Cortlandt Village of Croton-on-Hudson Westchester County New York” prepared by Cronin Engineering, P.E., P.C., dated June 29, 2001, last revised June 13, 2002; and
WHEREAS, the following resolutions are also predicated on the Final Subdivision Plan entitled “Subdivision of Property for Henry & Siegfried Gross,” prepared by Cronin Engineering, P.E., P.C., drawings S-1/3 dated September 10, 2001, last revised October 11, 2002; S-2/3 dated November 27, 2001, last revised October 11, 2002; and S-3/3 dated November 27, 2001, last revised October 11, 2002.
NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved: (i) That the foregoing recitals are incorporated in the resolution of approval, (ii) That the Final Subdivision Plat and Final Subdivision Plan hereinbefore referred to are approved subject to the conditions set forth below; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Chairman and Secretary of the Planning Board are authorized to endorse the Final Subdivision Plat subject to the following conditions:
The Applicant shall have received all the following permits, approvals, or letters, and shall have delivered to the Planning Board a copy of each of them certified by the Applicant to be a true copy thereof:
Approval of the Final Subdivision Plat by the Westchester County Department of Health as required by the County Sanitary Code;
Approval of the Westchester County Department of Environmental Facilities of all connections to public utilities, or delivery to the Planning Board of evidence satisfactory that such approval is not required.
This approval of the Final Subdivision Plat may be rendered void if:
Within 180 days hereof, all requirements set forth in this Resolution have not been completed as required by Village Law Section 7-728 7.(c), and said periods shall not be extended for more than two additional periods of 90 days each and said extensions(s) shall not be granted unless, in the Planning Board’s opinion, such extension is warranted by the particular circumstances in effect.
The Applicant shall file, in the Westchester County Clerk’s Office, Division of Land Records, the approved Final Subdivision Plat within 62 days from the date of final approval, as final approval is defined in Village Law Section 7-728 11.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the foregoing Resolution was adopted at a public meeting of the Planning Board in the Village of Croton-on-Hudson held on the 22nd day of October, 2002.
THE PLANNING BOARD OF THE VILLAGE OF
CROTON-ON-HUDSON, NEW YORK
Ann H. Gallelli, Chairperson
The Motion to approve was made by Mr. Brumleve, was seconded by Mr. Klein, and was carried by a vote of 4 to 0. The Resolution was accepted with the minutes of the Planning Board Meeting held on October 22, 2002.