Skip Navigation
This table is used for column layout.
  • Citizen Action Center
  • Online Payments
  • Online Forms
  • Subscribe to News
  • Send Us Comments
  • Contacts Directory
  • Projects & Initiatives
  • Community Links
  • Village Code
 
 
Planning Board Minutes 02/03/04
VILLAGE OF CROTON ON HUDSON, NEW YORK

PLANNING BOARD MEETING MINUTES – TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 3, 2004:


A regular meeting of the Planning Board of the Village of Croton-on-Hudson, New York was held on Tuesday, February 3, 2004 in the Municipal Building.


MEMBERS PRESENT:        Ann Gallelli, Chair
                                        Fran Allen
                                        Ted Brumleve
                                        Thomas Burniston
        
        ABSENT:        Joel Klein

        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.


PUBLIC HEARINGS:

Croton Free Library – 171 Cleveland Drive (Sec. 79.05 Blk. 1 Lot 23) – Application for Amended Site Plan Approval

Mary Donnery, Director of the Croton Free Library, was present for this application.

Chairman Gallelli stated that, as part of this Amended Site Plan application, the Applicant proposes to change a pair of existing exterior doors in the Children’s Room to a window to make the Children’s Room area more secure. The Planning Board had a preliminary discussion on this application at the last meeting.  Chairman Gallelli noted that, at the last meeting, there were concerns raised about safety in case of a fire. There were questions asked about the proximity/number of emergency exits required.  Chairman Gallelli asked the Village Engineer if he could provide follow-up information.  The Village Engineer told the Board members that he reviewed the New York State Fire Code, and he agrees with the comments made by the Applicant’s architect that the proposed application meets the standards of the state code.

Chairman Gallelli stated that the Planning Board has received the minutes from the Advisory Board on the Visual Environment (VEB) regarding this application. The VEB has no objections.

Chairman Gallelli opened the public hearing on this Amended Site Plan application.  She asked if there were any comments, to which there were none. Chairman Gallelli asked the Planning Board if they had comments, to which there were none.  Chairman Gallelli closed the public hearing.

Chairman Gallelli read aloud the draft resolution.  She asked the Board members if there were any further conditions to be incorporated into the Planning Board resolution.  There were none.

Chairman Gallelli entertained a motion to approve this Amended Site Plan application.  The motion to approve was made by Mr. Burniston, seconded by Mr. Brumleve and carried by a vote of 4 to 0.

Lakomota Realty Co. – 2 Maple Street (Sec. 79.09 Blk. 1 Lot 66) – Application for an Amended Site Plan Approval for Croton Cleaners & Launderers

Luis Saavedra, owner of Croton Cleaners & Launderers, was present for this application.

Chairman Gallelli stated that this Amended Site Plan application is for interior alterations including the installation of double doors in the front of the building and the fireproofing of both sides of an interior wall. The Applicant’s intention, in making these interior alterations, is to sub-lease the laundromat side of his store.

Chairman Gallelli opened the public hearing.  She asked if there were any comments from the public, to which there were none.  There were no comments from the Planning Board members. The public hearing was closed.

Chairman Gallelli stated that the VEB reviewed this application at its meeting of January 21st and has no objections.  The VEB reminded the Applicant at the meeting that, when the new space is rented, the Applicant would have to come back before the VEB with a sign permit application.

Chairman Gallelli read aloud the draft resolution.  

Chairman Gallelli asked the Planning Board if there were any conditions to be added to the resolution, to which there were none.

Chairman Gallelli entertained a motion to approve this Amended Site Plan application.  The motion to approve was made by Mr. Burniston, seconded by Mr. Brumleve and carried by a vote of 4 to 0.


OLD BUSINESS:

Hudson National Golf Club – (Sec. 67.12 Blk. 1 Lot 2 and Sec. 67.16 Blk. 1 Lots l, 2 & 27) – Application for Amended Site Plan Approval for a ‘Practice Hole’

The following individuals were present to represent the Applicant:  Brad Saunders of Sasaki Associates Inc.; Gregg Stanley, former Superintendent of Grounds at Hudson National Golf Club; Chris Smith, the new Superintendent of Grounds at Hudson National Golf Club; and David Tyson, General Manager and Chief Operating Officer at the golf club.

Chairman Gallelli suggested a possible way to organize tonight’s discussion.  Mr. Saunders could review his proposed planting plans for the project first.  Then, the Planning Board would pass its resolution declaring itself the Lead Agency for the ‘practice hole’ project. Finally, the Planning Board could spend the remainder of the meeting reviewing possible topics to be included in the Applicant’s Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS).   

Mr. Saunders stated that planting plans have been submitted for three different areas of the property.  An attempt was made by the Applicant and the Board members to identify locations that still exist on the golf course property where additional plantings could be placed.  Much of the course has been replanted.  The areas identified for new plantings were: the Finney Farm Lane area; the back side of the driving range; and that area of the golf course where there is an existing sod nursery.  Mr. Saunders noted that the Applicant has a proposal to establish an old field habitat in this area. The proposal for an old field habitat would be addressed in the environmental impact statement.  

Mr. Saunders stated that the Applicant is in receipt of Bruce Donohue’s comments on the proposed ‘practice hole’, and Mr. Donohue’s comments would be addressed in the DEIS.  

Ms. Allen asked where, on the golf course property, the sod nursery is located, to which Mr. Saunders pointed to the location of the sod nursery on the map.  Ms. Allen noted that the highest point in the Village is located in this area.  The Highland Trail goes near this area and there is a magnificent view of the Hudson River from this spot.  Ms. Allen hoped that any plantings that would be installed in the old sod nursery would not obstruct the view from the Highland Trail.  

Ms. Allen stated that there has recently been efforts made to look at wildlife corridors and open space in this region.  Michael Clemens is the head of a group that is taking a lead in this effort.  There are maps starting to appear.  Ms. Allen stated that a wildlife corridor that she would want to look at would include the old driving range and sod nursery.  She would like to take advantage of this new open space on the golf course property to create a wildlife corridor that would connect with other corridors/open space.  Mr. Saunders stated that, in this region of the northeast, the loss of field habitat has had the greatest effect on wildlife species.  Ms. Allen noted that Mr. Clemens’ objective is to identify potential wildlife corridors in large undeveloped areas.  

Mr. Saunders stated that it is his recollection that, when the golf course was being proposed, the Applicant and the Village’s consultant, Bruce Donohue, worked together to develop replacement planting plans to maintain wildlife corridors.  Plantings were installed in areas where it would be possible to re-establish those corridors.  Ms. Allen noted that a proposal is now before this Planning Board to amend the original site plan to accommodate a ‘practice hole.’  She thought that, while this proposal is before the Board, the Planning Board might want to take another look at the possibility of establishing additional wildlife corridors.  Chairman Gallelli agreed and stated that she, too, thinks it would be a good opportunity, while this Amended Site Plan is being reviewed, to enhance these wildlife corridors.  

Mr. Saunders pointed to an area on the map where tree plantings are being proposed.  He suggested that, in order to create a new wildlife corridor, this area could be kept a meadow rather than planting trees. This meadow would lead into another meadow, which is four acres in size.  The Village Engineer asked if a meadow area would need to be maintained, to which Mr. Saunders stated that it would need to be cut (mowed) once or twice a year.  

Chairman Gallelli asked Mr. Saunders what the value of a meadow would be versus a wooded area.  Mr. Saunders stated that, over the last 100 years, the greatest loss of habitat has been for species associated with old field habitats.  These fields have become woodlands.  The bird surveys that have been conducted since the 1960’s have demonstrated that species that have been hit the hardest are those associated with old field habitats.  The beauty of old field species of birds is that they only need a small area to breed. Chairman Gallelli asked if the field habitat would be used by woodland species, to which Mr. Saunders replied that woodland species would not use the field habitat for breeding but they would move across it.  Ms. Allen asked Mr. Saunders if it would be reasonable to add, as a wildlife corridor, the old sod nursery, to which Mr. Saunders replied that, perhaps, it would be something to think about.  He noted that field habitat species are not sensitive to human disturbance.

Ms. Allen noted that particular species of trees are included in the Applicant’s planting plan(s).  She wondered why these particular species were chosen.  Mr. Saunders explained how the type and quantity of trees were selected.  As part of the process of selecting the replacement trees, they did a tree survey of the site and prepared an overlay of the area of the driving range in order to determine the species of trees that would have to be removed.  They also looked at the mitigation planting plan that was developed in the 1990’s to come up with quantities/sizes of trees.  Ms. Allen stated that she spoke with Craig Stevens on the proposed tree plantings.  Mr. Stevens made a comment that it would be interesting to have more of a variety of trees, for example, Crimson King Maple rather than Red Maple and River Birch rather than Black Birch.  Mr. Saunders noted that other varieties of trees could be selected as long as they are not non-native species.  He pointed out that River Birch trees would not do well in hillside areas such as the golf course terrain.  Ms. Allen pointed out that, due to on-going development in the area, Chestnut Oak trees have been lost.  Perhaps, it would be possible to include these trees in the planting plan(s).  Chairman Gallelli suggested that this topic regarding the species of trees to be used could be further explored in the DEIS.  

Chairman Gallelli noted to the other members that the Planning Board needs to address, at tonight’s meeting, the resolution, which states that the Planning Board declares itself the Lead Agency for this application. This resolution also states that the Planning Board is issuing a Positive Declaration, and a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) is required.  Chairman Gallelli read aloud the draft resolution.  The Planning Board changed the fourth “whereas” clause of the draft resolution to read as follows:  “Whereas, no involved agencies responded in opposition to the Planning Board acting as the Lead Agency for this application.”  Chairman Gallelli entertained a motion to approve the resolution, as amended.  The motion to approve was made by Mr. Burniston, seconded by Ms. Allen and carried by a vote of 4 to 0.

Ms. Allen stated that she has reviewed the material that has been prepared for determining the scope of issues to be included in the DEIS.  She wanted to know what specific area(s) would be covered by this scope of issues. Would it be the ‘practice hole’ itself or an expanded area.  Chairman Gallelli noted that this matter was discussed at the meeting Ms. Allen was unable to attend.  It was concluded that the project area would be comprised of the two newly acquired properties and the area(s) on the existing golf course where the ‘practice hole’ would be located.  Ms. Allen said that, as she understands it, the ‘practice hole’ project would include Finney Farm Lane, the newly acquired parcels which are at the core of the new ‘practice hole’, some of the existing golf course, and the old driving range and sod nursery.  Chairman Gallelli told Ms. Allen that this is, indeed, the case.

Mr. Saunders asked what area(s) would be included for calculating the steep slopes on the site.  Chairman Gallelli told Mr. Saunders that the project area for determining steep slopes would be the Swee property, the other newly acquired property, and the area of the existing golf course upon which the ‘practice hole’ extends.

Chairman Gallelli stated that the Planning Board members have before them tonight two different versions of a proposed Table of Contents for the DEIS.  The first version was prepared by the Village Engineer and herself and is based on the Table of Contents for the Prickly Pear DEIS. The second version was prepared by Mr. Saunders. The Village Engineer has put together a chart to facilitate the review.  This chart (also) contains comments from Environmental Design Consulting (Bruce Donohue) and the Village Engineer, respectively.  Chairman Gallelli stated that Mr. Donohue has prepared a report for the Planning Board dated January 19, 2004 which contains items that have to be covered in the DEIS.  Also, the Planning Board has received tonight the first response from the Village’s drainage consultants, Dvirka & Bartilucci.  On page 2 and 3 of the D&B report are 16 items that would need to be addressed in the DEIS.  Finally, the Planning Board received a fax earlier today from Bruce Donohue listing several items that Mr. Donohue thinks were not thoroughly covered in the Table of Contents prepared by Mr. Saunders.

Ms. Allen asked if the word “water,” in the Table of Contents prepared by Mr. Saunders, refers to ground water, surface water or both.  She thought that the Applicant might want to make a distinction between surface and ground water.  Mr. Saunders noted that the section entitled “Site Hydrology” is referring to surface water and the section entitled “Water Quality” is referring to both ground and surface water.  

Chairman Gallelli stated that, in the original Table of Contents for Prickly Pear, “Traffic and Transportation” were included under the section “Environmental Setting/Impacts/Mitigation Measures.”  In the Applicant’s version, this item has been removed.  Chairman Gallelli asked if traffic is now being addressed under “Construction Management,” to which Mr. Saunders said that, indeed, it is.  He noted that the traffic to be addressed for the ‘practice hole’ would just be construction traffic.

Ms. Allen thought that items 1 through 15 should all be included under “Environmental Setting/Impacts/Mitigation Measures.”  She did not think that they should be eliminated altogether.  She thought that, even though some of these items might not be relevant for the ‘practice hole’ project, it would be useful for the public to know that these items were considered and were not left out.  Should a topic not be relevant, the Applicant could make a brief statement to that effect.

Ms. Allen reiterated that a distinction should be made between surface and ground water in the section entitled “Water Quality.”  

Chairman Gallelli thought that the Applicant should include “Air Quality” in the section covering the construction.  Mr. Saunders asked if this item, “Air Quality,” should be listed under “Construction Management,” to which Chairman Gallelli replied that it would fall under the global impacts of construction. Mr. Brumleve noted to Mr. Saunders that the Planning Board would be looking at the impacts of the construction of this ‘practice hole’ on the environment.  Mr. Saunders suggested that a section could be added called “Construction Impacts,” which would include noise, traffic, air quality, etc., to which the Planning Board agreed.

Ms. Allen thought that “Visual Resources/Lighting” should be included under “Environmental Setting/Impacts/Mitigation Measures.”  

Mr. Burniston asked why the Applicant removed from the Table of Contents the section entitled “Identification of Significant Beneficial and Adverse Impacts,” to which Mr. Saunders replied that this topic of discussion would be covered in the section entitled “Site Hydrology.”

Mr. Saunders referred to item 2, “Alternative Layout,” under the section entitled “Project Alternatives.”  He noted that the alternative layout would be the layout recommended by Mr. Donohue to shift the ‘practice hole’ closer to the 15th hole.   

Chairman Gallelli referred to page 3 of the chart, prepared by the Village Engineer, and asked Mr. Saunders to explain why the topic “Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitment of Resources” was removed from the “Summary” of the Table of Contents.  Mr. Saunders stated that the topic in question is a required section of the DEIS and comes under its own heading.  It can now be found as Section VI on page 9.  Mr. Saunders noted that the same holds true with the topic “Growth Inducing Impacts.”  

Chairman Gallelli told the others that she thinks Section II, “Description of the Proposed Action,” is straightforward.  

Mr. Burniston referred to item #8, “Construction Management,” on page 4.  He stated that, as he understands it, this item is now going to be removed from the “Project Description” category and placed in the beginning of the Table of Contents, to which Mr. Saunders said that this is, indeed, true. This item is now going to be under the “environmental impact” category on page 2.  

Chairman Gallelli reiterated that all of the items/issues raised by Mr. Donohue in his report to the Planning Board should be addressed in the DEIS.  Mr. Saunders noted that, with respect to the construction access route, the DEIS would specify the route being used.  Ms. Allen stated that the DEIS should also say that no other route will be used other than the one specified.

Mr. Saunders noted that cut/fill estimates would come under “Topography and Soils.”  Mr. Brumleve wanted to know where blasting would be addressed, to which Mr. Saunders replied that blasting would be covered under “Geology.”

Chairman Gallelli stated that, in Mr. Saunders’ version, the monitoring program is noted in the “Water Quality” section.  The Planning Board will be working with Stuart Cohen of Environmental & Turf Services on the monitoring program.  Mr. Brumleve asked what IPM stands for, to which Chairman Gallelli said, “Integrated Pest Management.”      

Ms. Allen referred to the section entitled “Site Ecology” on page 6 and asked if a separate category should be created under this section for “wildlife corridors.” Mr. Saunders suggested that “wildlife corridor enhancement/expansion” could fall under item #3, “Mitigation Measures.”

Ms. Allen stated that, on page 6, the section on “Noise” was removed from Mr. Saunders’ version of the Table of Contents, and she thought it should be included.  

Mr. Brumleve raised a concern to Mr. Saunders about changing the format of the Table of Contents for the DEIS.  He questioned if it was advisable.  He thought that it might be confusing to the reader who is being asked to review this document.  He asked if there was a document that tells a reviewing person that certain standard areas have been omitted in the scoping exercise.  Mr. Saunders stated that only the EAF form has the extensive list of categories. Chairman Gallelli said that she would want to make sure that all the categories in the EAF were covered.  

Chairman Gallelli referred to the “Environmental Setting/Impacts/Mitigation Measures” section on page 2.  She suggested that, for item #7, “Traffic and Transportation (Construction Related),”the Applicant could say where in the document this item is being addressed. In fact, for each item in this mitigation section, the Applicant could say where the particular item is covered in the DEIS.  Mr. Brumleve added that, when there are no impacts relating to a specific item, the Applicant could simply say that there are no impacts.  For example, for traffic and transportation, the Applicant could say that, “There are no traffic impacts; however construction-related traffic impacts are addressed in the section on construction.”  Mr. Saunders stated that, as he understands it, the Planning Board is suggesting that the “Summary” section should include the entire list of items under “Environmental Setting/Impacts/Mitigation Measures.”  Then, the reader should be referred to the place in the document where each of these specific items is addressed.  

Ms. Allen noted that the Applicant has removed “Community Services” from the list, and this item should also be included.  Chairman Gallelli agreed, and she reiterated that, in the “Summary” section, the Applicant could simply refer the reader to the section, further along in the document, where the topic is addressed.  

Chairman Gallelli thought that the Village Engineer’s comments about the impact of the construction of the ‘practice hole’ on the Village’s water supply should be included; however, it could be elsewhere e.g., under “Site Utilities.”   

Chairman Gallelli noted that for item #11, “Visual Resources/Lighting,” the Applicant would probably want to look into how this ‘practice hole’ project would affect the people living on Finney Farm Road.

Mr. Burniston thought that there should be a section on what the impacts would be on the neighborhood.  Ms. Allen added that the impact(s) on the Finney Farm pool should be adequately addressed.

Ms. Allen stated that item #12, “Community Character,” should also be included.

Chairman Gallelli noted that, under the Applicant’s proposal, Finney Farm Lane is being eliminated and plantings are being installed.  Mr. Saunders stated that the Applicant thought that the Planning Board would be in favor of removing Finney Farm Lane and having it replanted.  It does not have to be done.  Mr. Stanley thought that there could be a discussion in the DEIS of the pros and cons of removing (and replanting) Finney Farm Lane, to which Chairman Gallelli stated that the impact(s) could, indeed, be discussed.

Mr. Burniston stated that he would want to see a section in the document on “neighborhood character.”  He thought that eliminating this section altogether would be improper.  Chairman Gallelli suggested that the Applicant might want to discuss the issue, raised earlier by Ms. Allen, about the Finney Farm pool.  It should be shown that the water flowing into the Finney Farm pool would not be adversely affected.

Chairman Gallelli noted that, with respect to the next category, “History/Archaeology,” the Applicant has already had a considerable discussion on the subject of archaeology with Planning Board member, Joel Klein.

The Village Engineer referred to his comments on page 7 regarding the water main extension/water for fire fighting.  He stated that, if there is a fire on top of Finney Farm Road, the Fire Department is going to want to be assured of the availability of water.  Availability might be disrupted by the construction of the ‘practice hole.’  Mr. Saunders asked if the Village Engineer would want to be assured that there would be a fire hydrant that is accessible, to which the Village Engineer said that, indeed, he would.

Mr. Brumleve noted that, for the ‘practice hole,’ the golf club is still going to have to fertilize the grounds, treat the problem of insects, etc.  He asked if this would fall under “Health Issues,” to which Mr. Saunders stated that it would not. It would fall instead under “Water Quality.”  Mr. Saunders noted that the monitoring program for the golf course (the affect on wells, ground water, etc.) is included under “Water Quality.”  

Mr. Saunders referred to Section IV entitled “Adverse Environmental Impacts that cannot be Avoided if the Project is Implemented” and stated that an example would be the loss of trees, which cannot be mitigated.

Chairman Gallelli stated that, in Section V entitled “Project Alternatives,” the Applicant would compare the Applicant’s proposed layout for the ‘practice hole’ with the layout suggested by Bruce Donohue.  

Mr. Saunders referred to the section entitled “Growth Inducing Impacts” and noted to the Planning Board members that most projects do not have that.

Chairman Gallelli stated that the issues raised in the Dvirka and Bartilucci report, dated February 2, 2004, should all be addressed in the DEIS, and these issues would fall into logical designations.  

Chairman Gallelli suggested to the Board members that the Planning Board should allow itself a two-week time frame to address issues that might not have been covered at the meeting tonight.  She asked Mr. Saunders to put together a revised Table of Contents including the items discussed tonight and the items mentioned in the Dvirka and Bartilucci report.  

The Village Engineer asked if the Planning Board had heard yet from Stuart Cohen of Environmental & Turf Services (E&TS) on the ‘practice hole’ project, to which Chairman Gallelli stated that the Board has not yet heard from E&TS.  Chairman Gallelli noted that Dr. Cohen’s area of expertise is to manage the water quality (surface and ground water).  

Mr. Saunders pointed out that, for the ‘practice hole’ project, the Applicant would need to propose the water quality monitoring and where, on the site, it should occur.  He suggested that he could be in touch with E&TS who would know better where the locations should be.  Mr. Saunders stated that E&TS has been, and continues to be, in charge of the monitoring program at the golf course and would know better where the monitoring points should be put.   Ms. Allen said that she thought the Village Engineer should also be a part of that discussion.  

Chairman Gallelli stated that she would not have any objection to the Applicant’s having a discussion with Dr. Cohen on the ‘practice hole,’ monitoring program, etc.  The Village Engineer noted that the Planning Board would want to have Dr. Cohen’s input on the proposed scoping document/Table of Contents for the DEIS.  Chairman Gallelli suggested that, once the Applicant has revised the Table of Contents, a copy could be passed on to Dr. Cohen.  At the appropriate time, the Village Engineer and the Applicant could speak to Dr. Cohen about the project/proposed scope.

Mr. Burniston thanked the Village Engineer for preparing the chart showing the two versions of the Table of Contents for the DEIS.  He said that this chart facilitated the Planning Board’s review and saved a lot of time.

Chairman Gallelli stated that the next meeting on this application would take place on Tuesday, February 24th.

Ms. Allen noted that she would not be present at the next Planning Board meeting.  She asked when the revised document would be ready, to which Mr. Saunders replied that the revised Table of Contents could be ready by the end of this week.

David Tyson, General Manager and Chief Operating Officer of the golf club, came forward and introduced himself to the Planning Board members.
Gregg Stanley, former grounds superintendent at HNGC, told the Planning Board that he has taken a new position at a golf club on Long Island.  He introduced to the Board the new Superintendent of Grounds at HNGC, Chris Smith.  Mr. Stanley stated that Mr. Smith was his “right hand man” when HNGC was built.  He was certain that Mr. Smith would interact very well with the various departments in the Village.  Chairman Gallelli stated that, for many years, Mr. Stanley has been an asset to the golf club and to the Village in terms of his positive relationship with the Village.  The Planning Board members all wished Mr. Stanley the best of luck in his new position.


OTHER BUSINESS:

Chairman Gallelli stated that the Planning Board has received a letter from Spectrum Communities, dated January 29, 2004, requesting a time extension to complete construction of the Half Moon Bay project.  In March 2000, the Planning Board approved a motion to grant an extension to April 6, 2004. The Applicant is now requesting an additional extension of one year, from April 6, 2004 to April 6, 2005, to complete the project.  Chairman Gallelli entertained a motion to grant the one-year extension.  The motion was approved by Mr. Brumleve, seconded by Ms. Allen and carried by a vote of 4 to 0.

Chairman Gallelli stated that the Planning Board has received a letter from Cuddy & Feder LLP, the attorneys for the CVS drugstore. The letter states that they (CVS) have asked experts to look into the 18-wheeler (truck) delivery situation at the Van Wyck Shopping Center. Chairman Gallelli noted that, when the Planning Board approved the Zeytinia Gourmet Market at the shopping center, one of the conditions was that the owner of the shopping center, Mark Giordano, was to come back before the Planning Board to discuss deliveries by 18-wheeler trucks.  The resolution of approval stated that Mr. Giordano must come back by the end of January 2004.  Chairman Gallelli stated that the attorneys for CVS have asked that they be permitted to come before the Board the last meeting in March.  She suggested that the date in the resolution could be changed from January to the end of March, to which the other members agreed.  Chairman Gallelli entertained a motion to extend the time frame for the 18-wheeler discussion to the last meeting in March.  The motion was made by Mr. Burniston, seconded by Ms. Allen and carried by a vote of 4 to 0.

Chairman Gallelli stated that the next Planning Board meeting would take place on Tuesday, February 24th.  The items on the agenda are: continued discussion of the scoping document for the HNGC ‘practice hole’; preliminary discussion of Velardo Subdivision – Lot #3; and continued discussion of Hudson View Subdivision (Galena Feit).


APPROVAL OF MINUTES:

The minutes of the Tuesday, December 2, 2003 meeting were approved, subject to the Planning Board’s agreement of Mr. Klein’s changes.  The motion to approve was made by Mr. Burniston, seconded by Ms. Allen and carried by a vote of 3 to 0.  Board member, Ted Brumleve, abstained.

Approval of the minutes of the Tuesday, January 6, 2004 meeting was adjourned until the next Planning Board meeting.

ADJOURNMENT:

There being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was duly adjourned at 10:45 P.M.

Sincerely,



Sylvia Mills,
SECRETARY





RESOLUTION

WHEREAS, the Planning Board held a public hearing on an Amended Site Plan application on Tuesday, February 3, 2004 for the Croton Free Library, hereafter known as “the Applicant,” said property located at 171 Cleveland Drive and designated on the Tax Map of the Village of Croton-on-Hudson as Section 79.05 Block 1 Lot 23; and

WHEREAS, the proposal is for renovations to the Children’s Room, including new flooring, ceilings, lighting and furniture, and the replacement of a pair of doors leading to the exterior with a window, 6 feet wide by 5 feet high; and

WHEREAS, under the requirements of Local Law 7 of 1977, the Planning Board has determined that there will be no adverse impacts resulting from the proposed application that cannot be properly mitigated.

NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Amended Site Plan application as shown on Sheet #A-100 entitled “Proposed Floor Plan” and Sheet #A-101 entitled “Existing Floor Plan,” prepared by Lothrop Associates Architects, dated November 25, 2003, be approved.

In the event that this Amended Site Plan is not implemented within three (3) years of this date, this approval shall expire.

                                                The Planning Board of the Village of
                                                Croton-on-Hudson, New York

                                                Ann H. Gallelli, Chairperson
                                                Fran Allen
                                                Ted Brumleve
                                                Thomas Burniston
                                        Joel Klein
                                                
                                                
Motion to approve by Mr. Burniston, seconded by Mr. Brumleve and carried by a vote of 4 to 0.  Mr. Klein was absent from the meeting.

Resolution accepted with the minutes of the meeting held on Tuesday, February 3, 2004.






RESOLUTION

WHEREAS, the Planning Board held a public hearing on an Amended Site Plan application on Tuesday, February 3, 2004 for Croton Cleaners & Launderers, hereafter known as “the Applicant,” said property located at 2 Maple Street and designated on the Tax Map of the Village of Croton-on-Hudson as Section 79.09 Block 1 Lot 66; and

WHEREAS, the proposal is for interior alterations, including the installation of new double doors and the closing/fireproofing of a wall; and

WHEREAS, under the requirements of Local Law 7 of 1977, the Planning Board has determined that there will be no adverse impacts resulting from the proposed application that cannot be properly mitigated.

NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Amended Site Plan application as shown on Sheet #1 of 1 of a plan entitled “Proposed Alterations,” prepared by Philip A. Tully, P.E., dated December 30, 2003, be approved.

In the event that this Amended Site Plan is not implemented within three (3) years of this date, this approval shall expire.
                                                The Planning Board of the Village of
                                                Croton-on-Hudson, New York

                                                Ann H. Gallelli, Chairperson
                                                Fran Allen
                                                Ted Brumleve
                                                Tom Burniston
                                        Joel Klein
                                        
                                                

Motion to approve by Mr. Burniston, seconded by Mr. Brumleve and carried by a vote of 4 to 0.  Mr. Klein was absent from the meeting.

Resolution accepted with the minutes of the meeting held on Tuesday, February 3, 2004.





RESOLUTION


WHEREAS, Hudson National Golf Club has submitted an application to the Planning Board of the Village of Croton-on-Hudson, New York for an Amended Site Plan Approval for a ‘practice hole’ to be located at the top end of Finney Farm Lane, said properties being designated on the Tax Maps of the Village of Croton-on-Hudson, New York as Sec. 67.12 Blk. 1 Lot 2 and Sec. 67.16 Blk. 1 Lots 1, 2 & 27; and

WHEREAS, the Planning Board has determined that the proposed project is a Type 1 Action under the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA); and

WHEREAS, the Planning Board declared its Intent to Act as the Lead Agency for this application on November 4, 2003 and circulated its Notice of Intent to the involved and interested agencies on November 5, 2003; and

WHEREAS, no involved agencies responded in opposition to the Planning Board acting as the Lead Agency for this application.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Planning Board of the Village of Croton-on-Hudson, New York declares itself the Lead Agency for the proposed application by Hudson National Golf Club.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Full Environmental Assessment Form (FEAF) has been reviewed and a determination made that one or more impacts are considered large and therefore the Planning Board is issuing a Positive Declaration (attached).  A Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) is required.


The Planning Board of the Village of
Croton-on-Hudson, New York

Ann Gallelli, Chair
Fran Allen
Ted Brumleve
Tom Burniston
Joel Klein

03112004_14420_0.bmp

03112004_14420_1.bmp

03112004_14420_2.bmp