Town of Eastchester, NY: Minutes, Planning Board Meeting, April 23, 2008

2 EASTCHESTER PLANNING BOARD MEETING

APRIL 23, 2008

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 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

April 23, 2008 7:00 p.m.

14 BOARD MEMBERS IN ATTENDANCE:

Chairman Raymond DelSavio

16 Joseph Cermele, Member

Robert Pulaski, Member

17 James Bonanno, Member

EASTCHESTER EMPLOYEES IN ATTENDANCE:

20 MARGARET UHLE, Director of Planning

ROBERT TUDISCO, Deputy Town Attorney

21 JAY KING, Building Inspector

KERI OUELLETTE, Assistant Planner

DINA M. MORGAN, REPORTER

24 25 COLONIAL ROAD

BRONXVILLE, NEW YORK 10708

25 (914) 469-6353

DINA M. MORGAN, REPORTER

1 EASTCHESTER PLANNING BOARD - 4/23/08

3 The Chairman: Calls meeting to order.

4 Pledge of Allegiance.

5 Ms. Uhle: States Ms. Cascione will not

be able to attend tonight's meeting. Calls

6 roll:

7 Mr. Pulaski: Present.

8 The Chairman: Present.

9 Mr. Bonanno: Present.

10 Mr. Cermele: Present.

12 APPLICATION 07-07, SIWANOY COUNTRY CLUB

Mr. Null: William Null, attorney for

14 Siwanoy Country Club. Believes they were able

to address the issues that were open at the

15 close of the public hearing the last session.

Discusses letter he submitted. States they are

16 here to answer any questions the board may

have.

Mr. Ryan: Jim Ryan, principal with the

18 firm of John Meyer Consulting. States he had a

chance to look at Mr. Pilch's letter. Explains

19 they are down to some minor technical issues

related to the storm drainage system they have

20 and work the town may or may not undertake in

the future with regard to the drainage which

21 effects the easement. States there were four

comments but two of them relate to some

22 encroachment into this easement they're

proposing for the town. States they had a

23 chance to move the patio area to avoid that

encroachment. States there was another comment

24 Mr. Pilch had about drainage. Explains they

are trying to get as much of the drainage into

25 the storm drainage system as possible.

Explains they can accommodate that and are

DINA M. MORGAN, REPORTER

1 EASTCHESTER PLANNING BOARD - 4/23/08

accommodating Mr. Pilch's request on that.

2 Feels providing this easement gives the town an

opportunity to make some improvements which may

3 help them in the future with drainage. States

they are doing their best to keep all the

4 encroachments off of that area. Believes this

is a positive effort on their part in terms of

5 long range planning for drainage.

6 Mr. Pilch: Alan Pilch with Evans

Associates. States he had an opportunity to

7 review the revised utility plan. Explains the

plans do address the concerns they had

8 regarding the drainage issues that have been

studied at length by both John Meyer Consulting

9 and Maclaren Engineering Group. Discusses

easements. Shows location of easements.

10 Explains the objective is by removing some of

the flow from the thirty-six inch pipe it frees

11 up some capacity and assists the town in being

able to address some of those drainage issues.

12 Feels this new plan does address the concerns

that they had addressed previously and offers

13 the town the opportunity to construct a storm

drainage pipe from Crawford Street into the

14 channel to relieve some of the drainage issues

that have been occurring in the Crawford Street

15 area.

16 The Chairman: Asks if anyone from the

public has any comments.

(No comments.)

Ms. Uhle: Explains there was an error on

19 the agenda, the public hearing was closed last

meeting. States the town is continuing to work

20 with the applicant and applicant's attorneys

and engineers to draft the easements. States

21 they drafted two conditions of approval.

States assuming the board is granting site plan

22 approval the conditions will be: Site plan

approval is granted provided, however, that no

23 building permit shall be issued by the Town of

Eastchester Building Department unless and

24 until, A: All final utility, drainage and

associated engineering plans, drawings and

25 specifications are deemed acceptable and

complete by the town engineer and/or

DINA M. MORGAN, REPORTER

1 EASTCHESTER PLANNING BOARD - 4/23/08

engineering consultants in the reasonable

2 exercise of his or their discretion. Explains

those are very minor details at this point. B:

3 The declaration of easements encumbering the

Siwanoy Country Club and in favor of the town

4 relating to both the existing and proposed

drainage improvements and/or installations

5 deemed acceptable as to form and content by the

town attorney and/or special counsel to the

6 town and approved by the town board for

execution by the supervisor. Explains that's

7 deferring the review of the engineering issues

to the town attorney and engineer.

Mr. Bonanno: States Planning Board has

9 determined that the proposed unlisted action

will not have a significant adverse impact as

10 noted on the environmental assessment form and

hereby adopts a negative declaration.

Mr. Pulaski: Seconds motion.

(All aye.)

The Chairman: Entertains as motion on

14 Application 07-07 for both final site plan

approval and architectural review approval

15 subject to the conditions read by Ms. Uhle.

16 Mr. Cermele: Seconds motion.

17 (All aye.)

18 The Chairman: Compliments the entire

team on this application for their consistency

19 and completeness of the responses.

APPLICATION 07-67, 737 WHITE PLAINS ROAD

22 Mr. Chirigianis: Steven Chirigianis,

architect on behalf of the applicant. States

23 since the last meeting he has met several times

with Ms. Uhle and Mr. King. States they have

24 indicated on the drawings all the items that

were discussed with Ms. Uhle and Mr. King.

25 Explains they enlarged the erosion control

system, indicated that all the parking spaces

DINA M. MORGAN, REPORTER

1 EASTCHESTER PLANNING BOARD - 4/23/08

are nine feet wide as required, indicated there

2 is a handicapped space within the parking lot,

indicated that prior to construction a gravel

3 area has to be indicated at the entrance to

eliminate dust and mud from exiting the

4 property. States they have indicated the

materials, indicated where lights would be

5 installed. States they indicate the flashing

detail. Shows rendering of completed project.

6 Shows material samples. Shows sample of brick.

Shows sample of aluminum. States they provided

7 a traffic study indicating that the traffic

flow is very small in the area due to the size

8 of the project. Discusses traffic. States

they examined the existing retaining walls.

9 States the west wall is in very good shape.

States south wall is not structurally sound.

10 Explains Mr. Koppelman of Keen & Koppelman

(Ph.) indicated since the parking is sixteen to

11 eighteen feet away from the retaining wall it

will not be imposing any undue load on that

12 wall so it will be of no issue.

13 Ms. Uhle: States there are a couple of

outstanding issues. One is with regard to

14 storm water management. Explains zoning law

requires that they provide a storm water

15 management plan prepared by an engineer

designed for a fifty year storm. Explains they

16 had an engineer review this and he submitted a

letter that asked for some additional

17 information from the applicant including

drainage calculations prepared by a licensed

18 professional engineer architect. States Mr.

Chirigianis indicated he will provide the

19 Planning Board with a mutually agreeable water

disposal system. Explains the requirement is

20 they have to have no net increase in runoff

designed for a fifty year storm. Explains

21 either Mr. Chirigianis would need to

demonstrate that the proposed facilities can

22 accomplish that or he'll need to get a permit

to tie into a storm drain on White Plains Road

23 which would be from the state. States that's

one issue that's still unresolved. States

24 another issue is the backup aisle for the

spaces on the northern side of the lot as drawn

25 is twenty feet to the sidewalk where it needs

to be twenty-five feet. States in order to

DINA M. MORGAN, REPORTER

1 EASTCHESTER PLANNING BOARD - 4/23/08

accomplish the twenty-five feet Mr. Chirigianis

2 is showing the sidewalk eliminated. Explains

technically he could revise this to meet the

3 zoning requirement for that twenty-five foot

back up but she's not sure from a site plan

4 whether that's a safe alternative to have the

pavement going directly to the building.

5 States he's also reducing the curb cut from

eighteen feet to twelve feet. States another

6 issue is the retaining wall that's not in good

shape, she's not sure the Planning Board's

7 concern was the load of the cars on top of

that. Asks if they are proposing another

8 retaining wall adjacent to the existing

retaining wall.

Mr. Chirigianis: States yes.

Ms. Uhle: Asks if he has a detail for

11 that.

12 Mr. Chirigianis: States no. Feels it

would be hard to give one for that because that

13 would be a continuation of the foundation wall.

14 Mr. Pulaski: Discusses his concern over

the retaining walls. Feels if the wall has a

15 problem they need to be aware of it and also

what the maintenance is that's required.

Mr. Cermele: States board needs details

17 of this new wall they are proposing. Explains

board needs to have what they intend to

18 construct. States since they're proposing to

reduce the curb cut from eighteen to twelve

19 feet this is a busy spot, asks if they propose

all traffic to exit southbound.

Mr. Chirigianis: States they have no

21 choice.

22 Mr. Cermele: States a concern about

people backing up and making u-turns.

23 Discusses twelve foot curb cut. Feels twelve

feet is not going to be sufficient and for the

24 traffic situations on Route 22 it's impossible.

25 Mr. Chirigianis: States that's what

exists at the next shopping center also.

DINA M. MORGAN, REPORTER

1 EASTCHESTER PLANNING BOARD - 4/23/08

Ms. Uhle: Explains the reason it was

3 reduced from eighteen to twelve is so they

don't have to retain a permit from DOT. States

4 the fact that the zoning law allows this

doesn't mean there might not be a better site

5 plan when you're on a busy road like this.

6 Mr. Pulaski: Discusses his concern over

a twelve foot curb cut. States he endorses an

7 eighteen foot curb cut.

8 Mr. Cermele: Feels they need a sidewalk.

9 The Chairman: Discusses sidewalk.

10 Ms. Uhle: Asks if sidewalk is four feet

wide.

Mr. Chirigianis: States they scale it at

12 five feet.

13 The Chairman: Feels they should have a

sidewalk.

Ms. Uhle: Feels not having a sidewalk is

15 dangerous.

16 Mr. Cermele: Feels they need a sidewalk.

Feels they should reduce the width of the

17 building as needed. States he would be very

concerned about a twelve foot curb cut.

The Chairman: Suggests moving the

19 building across the back of the property with

the same square footage.

Mr. Chirigianis: Explains he would need

21 another variance from the rear yard. Explains