|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Minutes, Planning Board Meeting, May 24, 2006
1
1
2 EASTCHESTER PLANNING BOARD MEETING MAY 24, 2006 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X 4
5
6 MINUTES OF THE
7 EASTCHESTER PLANNING BOARD MEETING
8
9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X 10
11 HELD AT: Eastchester Town Hall 40 Mill Road 12 Eastchester, New York 10709 May 24, 2006 7:00 p.m. 13
14 BOARD MEMBERS IN ATTENDANCE:
15 Angela Cascione, Member 16 JoAnn Murphy, Member Robert Pulaski, Member 17
18 EASTCHESTER EMPLOYEES IN ATTENDANCE:
19
20 LOUIS REDA, Deputy Town Attorney MARGARET UHLE, Director of Planning 21 JAY KING, Building Inspector
22
23 DINA M. MORGAN, REPORTER 24 43 CENTRAL DRIVE BRONXVILLE, NEW YORK 10708 25 (914) 469-6353
DINA M. MORGAN, REPORTER
2
1 EASTCHESTER PLANNING BOARD - 5/24/06
2 Ms. Cascione: Calls meeting to order. 3 (Whereupon the Pledge of Allegiance was 4 said.)
5 Ms. Murphy: Calls roll:
6 Ms. Cascione: Present.
7 Mr. Pulaski: Present.
8 Ms. Murphy: Present. States Chairman DelSavio and Mr. Cermele will not be attending. 9 Ms. Uhle: Present. 10 Mr. King: Present. 11 Mr. Reda: Present. 12 Ms. Ouellette: Present. 13 Ms. Cascione: Explains there is a Board 14 of three tonight and applicants need a unanimous vote for their application to pass. 15 States when applications come up the applicant will be given an opportunity to state whether 16 they want to move forward or wait for a full Board. 17
18 APPLICATION 05-88, 292 WHITE PLAINS ROAD
19 Ms. Uhle: States application is before 20 Board for final site plan and architectural review approval for additions and alterations 21 to an existing single family residence and a garage. States application was before Board 22 previously for preliminary review. States applicant received a use variance from the ZBA. 23 States there are conditions of approval that the Zoning Board imposed. 24 Mr. Reda: Asks applicant whether they 25 wish to proceed with a Board of three.
DINA M. MORGAN, REPORTER
3
1 EASTCHESTER PLANNING BOARD - 5/24/06
2 Mr. Hero: States yes.
3 Ms. Uhle: States application was reviewed by the ARB. States ARB's comments 4 were with regard to housing for a garage door they wanted to be better screened and add 5 bollards or a knee wall to separate parking areas between adjacent properties. States ARB 6 felt the architectural improvements that were proposed were appropriate for this site. 7 Mr. Hero: Martin Hero. States this is 8 for an auto detailing shop. Explains this is an existing structure that has a two and a half 9 story wood frame house that has been there for over a century and the other is a concrete deck 10 garage that has been there well over fifty years. States the objective is a car detailing 11 operation. Explains this operation would not use mechanical equipment. States all 12 maneuvering of the cars would happen inside the garage. States operations would be by 13 appointment only. States there will be no queuing of cars on White Plains Road. Explains 14 applicants have gotten insurance where they will pick up the customers' cars at their 15 house. Explains they pushed the structure back fifteen feet from the property line to permit 16 them a full length car to be on the property. States all parking will be within the garage. 17 States there is sufficient room inside the garage to provide their employee parking. 18 States owner conceded to remove a portion of the porch which allows them to have two 19 separate residential parking spaces on site. Discusses proposed roll coil steel door. 20 Explains ARB found door objectionable and they have reorganized that by placing the gate 21 behind the parapet wall and cutting a slot in the concrete roof deck that allows the garage 22 door to pass through the deck and build a weather tight enclosure around that garage 23 door. Discusses oil separator system. States DEC disclosed they did not see any harmful 24 effects of any detergents or oils going in, however, they are proposing to put an oil 25 interceptor unit on the property that will be
DINA M. MORGAN, REPORTER
4
1 EASTCHESTER PLANNING BOARD - 5/24/06 hooked up to existing floor drains and there 2 will be a holding tank maintained. States another concern was exhaust from the garage 3 itself. Explains at ground level one foot above the slab there will be an intake grill 4 and at mid point there are intake grills and ventilation ducts branch into a roof top unit 5 which is a three thousand CFM roof top mounted fan. Explains another concern was the 6 separation of driveways. States they have proposed a row of bollards along the property 7 line that would separate the two different properties and keep a good visibility of the 8 street and pedestrians going back and forth.
9 Ms. Cascione: States the only thing she doesn't see is that the signage would indicate 10 in the front it's by appointment only.
11 Mr. Hero: States there would be a sign saying by appointment only and they would like 12 to have their telephone number on the signage.
13 Mr. Pulaski: States they had talked about sheet draining and typically they require 14 a trench drain at the driveway.
15 Mr. Hero: States they plan to handle the storm water runoff in this particular area with 16 a dry well and driveway area will all be sloped toward that dry well. 17 Mr. Pulaski: Feels that's not the best 18 answer. Discusses using a trench drain.
19 Mr. Hero: Asks if he is suggesting a trench train along the common line of the 20 sidewalk and drive.
21 Mr. Pulaski: States yes.
22 Mr. Hero: States that is something they could put forth. 23 Mr. Pulaski: States they could do a 24 stone curb between the sidewalk and drive. Discusses stucco. 25
DINA M. MORGAN, REPORTER
5
1 EASTCHESTER PLANNING BOARD - 5/24/06 Mr. Hero: States all new finishes will 2 be stuccoed to a beige color to down play the background. 3 Ms. Cascione: Makes a motion to open the 4 public hearing on Application 05-88.
5 Ms. Murphy: Seconds motion.
6 (All aye.)
7 (No comments.)
8 Ms. Cascione: Makes a motion to close the public hearing on Application 05-88. 9 Ms. Murphy: Seconds motion. 10 (All aye.) 11 Ms. Cascione: States with the conditions 12 listed and discussed from the Zoning Board, ARB and additional information on the exhaust and 13 oil filters and trench drain she would make a motion to approve Application 05-88. 14 Mr. Pulaski: Asks if building department 15 has any problem resolving the item of trench drain and working out that detail. 16 Ms. Uhle: Asks if only condition of 17 approval above and beyond what the Zoning Board already proposed is with regard to providing 18 the trench drain?
19 Mr. Pulaski: States yes.
20 Ms. Uhle: Asks with regard to the garage door that's now behind the parapet, are they 21 raising the parapet.
22 Mr. Hero: Explains it has to come up six inches in order to address the ARB's concerns. 23 Ms. Uhle: Asks if the only difference is 24 it's six inches higher.
25 Mr. Hero: States yes.
DINA M. MORGAN, REPORTER
6
1 EASTCHESTER PLANNING BOARD - 5/24/06 Mr. Pulaski: States with regard to the 2 drain it's not the intention to make the slope that exists any steeper, they're moving the 3 drain out to the sidewalk trying to funnel some of the water to the drain. 4 Ms. Murphy: Seconds motion. 5 (All aye.) 6
7 APPLICATION 06-46, 737 WHITE PLAINS ROAD
8 Ms. Uhle: States application appeared 9 before this Board twice before. States initially applicant proposed an eleven thousand 10 square foot three story office building with two levels of parking below which required a 11 number of area variances. States Planning Board asked applicant to prepare a fully 12 conforming as of right plan, which they did. States at January meeting Planning Board 13 requested the applicant come up with something somewhere between the as of right plan and ten 14 thousand square foot building and referred applicant to the Zoning Board with regard to 15 the variances. States applicant put together the application and came up with a third scheme 16 with a building of approximately two thousand eight hundred forty square feet. States Zoning 17 Board reviewed it and was concerned because the site plan is quite different and orientation is 18 quite different. Explains building is now perpendicular to White Plains Road and showing 19 a zero lot line on the southern side of the building. States Zoning Board wanted comments 20 of the Planning Board to see if there are any concerns. 21 Ms. Cascione: Asks if applicant wishes 22 to proceed with a three member Board.
23 Mr. Chirogianis: States yes. Discusses as of right plan. Explains a horizontally 24 located building parallel to White Plains Road will not allow them to design the maximum 25 spaces and it would reduce the square footage
DINA M. MORGAN, REPORTER
7
1 EASTCHESTER PLANNING BOARD - 5/24/06 of the building. Explains if they continue the 2 building facade starting from Swift Avenue and running northerly towards Maple Avenue they 3 were able to design a building perpendicular to White Plains Road which gave them a reasonable 4 square footage and the right amount of parking spaces required. 5 Ms. Cascione: Asks if they're short one 6 parking spot.
7 Mr. Chirogianis: States they have nineteen but one is voided because of the 8 handicapped space.
9 Mr. Pulaski: Asks if they need a variance for the landscaping. 10 Mr. Chirogianis: Discusses landscaping. 11 States the other reason they rotated the building is the site would only be able to be 12 entered in a southerly bound traffic pattern because you could not cross over in a northerly 13 direction and as you're coming in a southerly direction you will see the full elevation of 14 the building and the frontage would be visible from every direction. States that was more 15 desirable than putting the building on the other side because if you're coming in a 16 southerly direction you would be seeing a blank wall. 17 Mr. Pulaski: States he thought they 18 talked about putting the building on stilts. Discusses retaining wall. States wall may have 19 to be built to a different standard.
20 Ms. Uhle: States Doctor Blank who owns the building directly adjacent on the south 21 side submitted a letter to the Zoning Board expressing concern about his ability to 22 maintain his wall and his building having the adjacent wall directly adjacent to it. 23 Mr. Chirogianis: Explains if they place 24 a building up against his building it eliminates any problems regarding maintenance 25 on that side wall totally.
DINA M. MORGAN, REPORTER
8
1 EASTCHESTER PLANNING BOARD - 5/24/06
2 Mr. Pulaski: Feels this is quite a 3 divergence from what our code allows. States a concern about giving this a positive 4 recommendation because he doesn't see any motivating factor on how this is going to 5 enhance the town.
6 Ms. Uhle: States Zoning Board is interested in the Planning Board's comments and 7 concerns with regard to a general site planning perspective. 8 Mr. Reda: States Zoning Board wanted to 9 know what Planning Board thought about the new plan. 10 Mr. Pulaski: States a concern regarding 11 the landscaping. States he would prefer to see the building in the middle. 12 Ms. Cascione: Feels this is better than 13 the first two plans. States she would like more landscaping. 14 Ms. Murphy: Suggests doing some type of 15 box planting in the front.
16 Ms. Uhle: Explains there's the minimum twenty-five foot aisle width. States any 17 planting at grade would interfere with the cars backing up. States the only thing they could 18 do is put in hanging baskets.
19 Mr. Chirogianis: States hanging plants could be put in. 20 Ms. Murphy: States she doesn't have any 21 problem with this. Feels they worked very hard to make something viable. |