Town of Eastchester, NY: Minutes, Planning Board Meeting, June 27, 2007

2 EASTCHESTER PLANNING BOARD MEETING

JUNE 27, 2007

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X

6 MINUTES OF THE

7 EASTCHESTER PLANNING BOARD MEETING

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X

11 HELD AT: Eastchester Town Hall

40 Mill Road

12 Eastchester, New York 10709

June 27, 2007 7:00 p.m.

14 BOARD MEMBERS IN ATTENDANCE:

Chairman Raymond DelSavio

16 Joseph Cermele, Member

Robert Pulaski, Member

17 Angela Cascione, Member

James Bonanno, Member

EASTCHESTER EMPLOYEES IN ATTENDANCE:

21 LOUIS REDA, Deputy Town Attorney

MARGARET UHLE, Director of Planning

22 JAY KING, Building Inspector

KERI OUELLETTE, Assistant Planner

24 DINA M. MORGAN, REPORTER

25 COLONIAL ROAD

25 BRONXVILLE, NEW YORK 10708

(914) 469-6353

DINA M. MORGAN, REPORTER

1 EASTCHESTER PLANNING BOARD - 6/27/07

Ms. Cascione: Calls meeting to

3 order.

4 Pledge of Allegiance.

5 Ms. Uhle: Calls roll:

6 Mr. Pulaski: Present.

7 Ms. Cascione: Present.

8 Mr. Cermele: Present.

9 Mr. Bonanno: Present.

10 Mr. Cermele: Present.

11 Ms. Uhle: States Chairman DelSavio

will be arriving shortly.

APPLICATION 07-58, 31 STEWART PLACE

Mr. Salerno: Rocco Salerno,

16 attorney for the applicant. Explains

applicants propose a revision and further

17 subdivision of the property located at 31

Stewart Place. States property is in an

18 R-7.5 zone. Explains in 2002 the

property was subdivided without the need

19 for a variance to create two tax lots,

one fronting on Stewart Place and one

20 fronting on White Plains Road. Explains

last year the applicants appeared before

21 the board to further subdivide and

several variances were required. States

22 Zoning Board of Appeals denied the

applicants' request for the variances.

23 Explains applicants appear before this

board seeking referral to the Zoning

24 Board of Appeals with a similar

application requiring fewer and far less

25 intrusive variances than the former

proposal. Explains subdivision map shows

DINA M. MORGAN, REPORTER

1 EASTCHESTER PLANNING BOARD - 6/27/07

2 proposed revision of lot nine point two

moving the lot line between lot nine

3 point one and nine point two

approximately two feet to the west and

4 lot line between nine point two and the

proposed nine point three approximately

5 twenty-two feet to the south resulting in

three lots all of which would exceed

6 seventy-five hundred square feet as

required for the code, therefore, the

7 issue for the area variance would be

eliminated. States applicants propose to

8 convert the existing three family

dwelling to a two family dwelling thus

9 obviating the need for the parking

variance. Explains applicants need a

10 minor variance with respect to the gross

floor area of the existing three family

11 dwelling, which will be converted to a

two family dwelling, and a variance with

12 respect to effective square. States they

request this board refer application to

13 the Zoning Board.

14 Mr. Pulaski: Asks if they have any

plans showing how they will accommodate

15 the additional parking on the existing

lot.

Mr. Salerno: States they will not

17 require additional parking because they

are converting the house from a three

18 family to a two family and they can

tandem park and there is existing parking

19 on the side. Explains the garage will be

removed.

Ms. Uhle: States existing driveway

21 would have to be relocated so it's at

least three feet from the division line.

Mr. Pulaski: Feels this is not

23 going to be a pretty look with open

parking and no garage.

Mr. Salerno: Explains existing

25 garage is only used for storage right now

and the house is directly next door to

DINA M. MORGAN, REPORTER

1 EASTCHESTER PLANNING BOARD - 6/27/07

2 the Getty Gas Station and across from the

high school field so it's not a house

3 that people will see.

4 Ms. Uhle: Explains when they go to

the Zoning Board they will need a drawing

5 showing the driveway does not require a

variance.

Mr. Cermele: Makes a motion to

7 refer Application 07-58, 31 Stewart Place

to the Zoning Board for consideration for

8 re-subdivision for the area variances.

9 Mr. Bonanno: Seconds motion.

10 (All aye.)

12 APPLICATION 07-59, 83-87 MAPLE STREET

Mr. Davis: Robert Davis, attorney

14 for the applicant. States they are here

for a conceptual review. Explains

15 project involves a ten unit condominium

building. States originally the

16 applicant had proposed eighteen to twenty

units. Indicates property presently

17 consists of three tax lots on Maple

Street which are occupied by two single

18 family homes and a two family dwelling.

Explains the three houses would be

19 demolished and three tax lots merged into

one lot to reflect the ownership of the

20 re-developed property to condominium

form. States project requires no

21 variances. Explains since the property

is bisected by the boundary line between

22 RB and R-6 zoning districts, in order to

use the R-6 portion of the property the

23 project also requires a special permit

under Section 7A. Explains the issue of

24 where the zoning line falls within the

property has been the subject of two

25 separate proceedings before the Zoning

Board, one in 2005 and a rehearing in

DINA M. MORGAN, REPORTER

1 EASTCHESTER PLANNING BOARD - 6/27/07

2 2007. Explains the applicant seeks the

special permit to allow the extension of

3 the RB use into the R-6 portion of the

property which would be effective upon

4 the demolition of the house which would

be a condition of approval. States the

5 extension of that use would be fifty-five

feet to the west of the property line

6 rather than only forty-five feet but it

is still twenty feet or twenty-seven

7 percent less than the seventy-five feet

extension permitted under Section 7A.

8 Indicates applicant is offering two

alternative site plans for the board's

9 consideration. Explains in one the

proposed building is located entirely on

10 the RB side of the zoning line with only

the exit drive, six guest parking spaces

11 and a buffer area located on the R-6 side

of the property. In the other

12 alternative the building would extend

seven to eight feet over the RB line but

13 the guest parking spaces could then be

placed on the RB side of the property

14 along the adjoining commercial uses.

Explains the applicant has chosen a

15 permitted residential use rather than a

permitted commercial use which would have

16 more impact on the neighborhood than the

proposed project.

Mr. Crocco: Joe Crocco, architect

18 for the applicant. Shows plan. Shows RB

district line. Explains each unit has

19 two car garages so all required parking

is internal to the building. States they

20 realize there are going to be guests and

visitors and there should be exterior

21 parking. Explains the other option is

they would provide the guest parking on

22 the more commercial side and you would

see it as you enter the property, leaving

23 the westerly side without any additional

parking and still providing the twenty

24 foot landscape buffer. States they feel

that's the better scenario. Explains

25 they staggered the building in order to

maintain the setbacks. Shows rendering.

DINA M. MORGAN, REPORTER

1 EASTCHESTER PLANNING BOARD - 6/27/07

2 States it would be very residential.

Shows front that faces Maple. Explains

3 front is fifty feet wide.

4 The Chairman: Asks if either

scheme requires variances.

Ms. Uhle: States no. Explains

6 they are here for preliminary review of

the special permit to allow them to

7 extend the multi family use into the

single family residential district.

8 Explains board still has time to look

into this in more detail and police and

9 fire and highway should look at it.

Explains this was not required to be

10 noticed as a public hearing since it is

preliminary review. States no variances

11 are required in either scheme.

12 The Chairman: Asks if gross area

in both schemes is the same.

Mr. Crocco: States yes.

Mr. Davis: States they will have a

15 traffic report for the board the next

time.

Mr. Pulaski: Feels town needs to

17 revise the parking code.

18 Mr. Davis: Explains they could

have a fairly comprehensive retail or

19 office development there without even

seeking a special permit.

Ms. Cascione: Agrees the visitor

21 parking is better situated on the

commercial side. States her concern is

22 what's going on in that end of town.

Feels it's a nightmare driving over there

23 and doesn't see how this will improve the

situation. Feels they should adjourn

24 this until September when they have

further information.

Mr. Davis: Explains they exceed

DINA M. MORGAN, REPORTER

1 EASTCHESTER PLANNING BOARD - 6/27/07

2 the requirements of the code.

3 The Chairman: States traffic

analysis needs to include parking.

Ms. Uhle: Explains the traffic

5 analysis should include an analysis of

other permitted uses on that property.

Ms. Cascione: States application

7 is adjourned. Explains they need to

notice it as a public hearing for the

8 next meeting.

APPLICATION 07-56, 395 WHITE PLAINS ROAD

11 Mr. Yedacedo: John Yedacedo (Ph.),

architect for applicant. Explains

12 applicant is proposing to do interior

alterations to the existing plumbing

13 store. Shows existing and proposed

conditions. Explains they're proposing

14 to reconfigure the existing stair, leave

storage as is on the first floor and

15 retail space as is and create additional

retail space on the second floor.

16 Explains they're proposing to make minor

alterations to the front facade which

17 consists of enlarging the window on the

second floor, removing an existing canopy

18 and installing a new awning, removing an

existing box sign and installing new

19 signage and lighting. States proposed

alteration will effect the required

20 parking. Explains existing plan

currently has six parking spaces, with

21 the alterations they're going to require

nine spaces and they will lose one of the

22 existing spaces in order to provide the

handicapped space. States they will

23 require a variance for four parking