[00:00:01]
UH, RESCHEDULED.ORIGINALLY IT WAS THE ZONING BOARD MEETING OF JANUARY 23RD.
UM, BUT, UH, WE, LIKE MUCH OF THE TOWN ARE SUFFERING FROM THE FLU RIPPING THROUGH THE BOARD.
SO, UM, ONE OTHER JUST GENERAL ANNOUNCEMENT, UM, OUR CHAIRMAN JERRY QUINLAN, IS NOT ABLE TO BE HERE TONIGHT, SO WE WILL, UH, DO OUR BEST TO, UM, PROCEED WITHOUT HIM.
UM, SO WANNA CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER.
UM, JUST A QUICK NOTE ON WHAT WE'LL DO.
UM, THE APPLICANT WILL PRESENT THEIR CASE.
UM, WE WILL HAVE QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD, A CHANCE FOR THE APPLICANT TO ANSWER.
THEN WE'LL HAVE, UM, TIME FOR COMMENT FROM THE PUBLIC.
UM, SO IF YOU, UH, WANNA HAVE, IF YOU'RE HERE TO SAY SOMETHING ON ONE OF THESE CASES, PLEASE COME UP TO THE MICROPHONE.
UH, GIVE YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS, UH, AND THEN GO AHEAD AND LET US KNOW, UH, WHAT YOU WANT US TO HEAR.
UM, ANYTHING ELSE BEFORE WE GET STARTED? DO WE KNOW IF WE HAVE, UH, LIVE VIDEO HERE SINCE WE'RE LATE? I WOULD ASSUME HE CAN'T WAVE IT ANYMORE.
DID HE? HE SAID HE CAN'T DO IT ANYMORE.
[Case No. 20-24]
CALL CASE NUMBER 2024 ANTONIO YOUNG THREE WHITMAN STREET.I, I SHARE IF IT CHARLES DOES IT.
JUST TAKE A SECOND FOR THE DONGLE? YEAH, IT JUST TAKES A SECOND.
DOES IT MATTER THAT THIS ONE IS ON HDMI TWO AND THIS ONE IS THREE.
THAT'S WHAT IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE.
THEY, THEY USUALLY TAKES A MINUTE.
MY DAUGHTER JUST SENT ME A PICTURE OF HER.
I DUNNO WHAT'S GOING ON WITH IT.
IT SAYS CHECK CABLE CONNECTION.
I'LL TELL HER YOU TAKE IT OUT AND JUST WAIT A MINUTE AND THEN PUT, SEE.
YOU'LL TURN IT OFF AND ON AGAIN.
THE OLD FENCE IS SEVEN INCHES ON THE PROPERTY BEHIND IT.
I REALLY AM, BECAUSE I SWEAR I LOOKED AT THIS.
I THINK THIS MEETING IS MORE ABOUT VARIANCES, SO YOU HAVE TO, WE'RE GONNA SPEAK UP.
HELLO? NO, JUST BECAUSE WE TRANSCRIBED.
UM, I AM HERE TO SEEK VARIANCES FOR MY PROPERTY, THREE WHITMAN STREET IN HASTINGS.
WE'RE TRYING TO CONVERT THE DETACHED GARAGE INTO AN ACCESSORY UNIT.
UM, SO THIS IS THE SITE PLAN HERE.
IT'S ABOUT 375 SQUARE FEET, THE GARAGE IN THE BACK, AT THE BOTTOM OF THE DRIVEWAY.
[00:05:01]
AND THEN, UM, YEAH, THE, THERE ARE FOUR PARKING SPACES RIGHT NOW.THE ZONING VARIANCES THAT WE'RE SEEKING ARE FOR THE REAR YARD SETBACK.
'CAUSE IT'S AN EXISTING STRUCTURE.
SO WE'RE LOOKING TO SEEK A VARIANCE FOR THAT SETBACK.
UM, THE SECOND IS INCREASING THE HABITABLE SPACE IN A NONCONFORMING STRUCTURE.
AND THEN THE THIRD IS, UH, PAVING IN A REQUIRED YARD.
UM, THAT IS FOR THE PROPOSED, UH, PATIO ON THE LEFT SIDE OF THE GARAGE.
UH, 66 SQUARE FEET, UM, IN THE YELLOW OVER THERE.
ANYTHING ELSE YOU WANNA ADD? I DON'T THINK SO.
UNLESS YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR ISSUES? ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD? SO THIS ALREADY WENT TO PLANNING BOARD AND IT WAS, UM, IT, IT HAS, IT'S BEEN REFERRED TO THIS BOARD FOR APPROVAL.
THE PLANNING BOARD HAD PUBLISH.
THE PLANNING BOARD WAS COMFORTABLE WITH IT.
MATTER IF THEY WERE VERY SUPPORTIVE OF IT.
SO, AND AGAIN, THE, JUST, JUST SO YOU CAN UNDERSTAND THAT THE CODE ALLOWS ACCESSORY APARTMENTS IN AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, BUT IT SAYS IN A CONFORMING ACCESSORY STRUCTURE.
SO SINCE THIS, UM, ACCESSORY STRUCTURE DOES NOT CONFORM TO THE SETBACKS, IT'S, IT'S AN OLD STRUCTURE.
SO IT'S LEGALLY NON-CONFORMING.
SO IT REQUIRES A VARIANCE TO PUT THE ACCESSORY APARTMENT IN IT.
AND THEN THE THIRD VARIANCE, WHICH IS, UM, SO YOU ALSO, YOU ALSO CAN'T INCREASE THE HABITABLE SPACE IN A EXISTING NON-CONFORMING STRUCTURE.
SO AGAIN, BECAUSE IT'S AN EXISTING NON-CONFORMING STRUCTURE TO PUT THE HABITABLE SPACE IN IT, IT REQUIRES A VARIANCE.
I WAS ACTUALLY INQUIRING JUST ABOUT, YEAH, ABOUT, SO YOUR CODE DOESN'T ALLOW PAVING IN A REQUIRED YARD.
WE'VE, YOU SEE A LOT OF THOSE VARIANCES.
UM, SO, UM, IN ORDER TO PUT THAT PATIO, THE PATIO IS WITHIN THE SETBACK, WITHIN THE, UM, IS IT THE REAR MM-HMM
REAR YARD SETBACK, OR A PORTION OF IT IS.
SO MAYBE CAN YOU TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE NEED OR USE OF THAT PATIO? OH.
UM, TO BE HONEST, IT'S NOT NECESSARILY SOMETHING THAT LIKE, IS A HUGE NEED.
I'D SAY IT'S FOR THE PURPOSE OF BEING ABLE TO HAVE A BIT OF PRIVACY FROM THE MAIN HOUSE.
UM, IN CASE, YOU KNOW, THE PURPOSE OF THIS PROJECT FOR ME IS HAVING GROWN UP HERE AND RECENTLY INHERITED THIS HOUSE, I'D LOVE TO STAY HERE.
IT'S JUST VERY EXPENSIVE TO LIVE HERE.
SO I'D LIKE TO BE ABLE TO LIVE IN THIS SMALL GARAGE WHILE RENTING THE MAIN HOUSE IN ORDER TO, YOU KNOW, KEEP THIS PROPERTY.
UM, THAT BEING SAID, THE PATIO WOULD ALLOW US TO HAVE A LITTLE OUTDOOR SPACE THAT'S SANCTIONED, OFTEN A LITTLE MORE PRIVATE FROM THE REST OF THE HOUSE AND THE REST OF THE USAGE OF THE YARD.
UM, YEAH, THAT'S PRETTY MUCH MY, THE ASK.
DO WE HAVE ANY, UM, COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC EITHER RECEIVED BY YOUR OFFICE OR HEARSAY? WELL, WE'VE GOT ONE COMMENT IN FAVOR OF, UM, OF THIS PROJECT, UH, ON JANUARY 19TH, WHICH I DID DISTRIBUTE TO THE BOARD.
ANYONE HERE WHO WANTS TO SPEAK? OKAY.
UM, I MEAN, UH, MY GENERAL FEELING HERE IS THAT WE ARE MOSTLY LOOKING AT, UM, THE BULK MASSING AND, UH, CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND THIS PROPOSAL DOESN'T CHANGE THAT.
UH, AND SO I'M VERY COMFORTABLE WITH IT.
UM, DOES ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? I, I HAVE ONE QUESTION ABOUT THE, THE ANSWER TO YOUR QUESTION ABOUT THE IMPERVIOUS, UM, LAND, BECAUSE THERE'LL BE A PATIO INSTEAD OF SOMETHING THAT MIGHT HELP WITH DRAINAGE AND THAT THAT'S A SELF-CREATED, UM, VARIANCE INSTEAD OF SOMETHING, UM, ELSE.
SO IS IT FAIR FOR US TO ASSUME THAT THE PLANNING BOARD HAS ALREADY TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT WHETHER HAVING LESS, UH, LAND THAT CAN ADDRESS ANY KIND OF STORM WATER HAS ALREADY BEEN CONSIDERED AND THERE'S NOT GOING TO BE A MEANINGFUL IMPACT? SO STORM WATER IS HANDLED PARTIALLY A PLANNING BOARD, NOT IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, BUT IT WILL BE HANDLED DURING BUILDING, BUILDING PERMIT PHASE.
THEY HAVE TO ACCOUNT FOR THEIR STORM WATER.
MAYBE I CAN ASK THAT QUESTION ANOTHER WAY.
THE VARIANCE IS BECAUSE IT'S IN THE SIDES, IT'S IN THE LOT SETBACK.
BUT YOU'RE NOT ASKING FOR A VARIANCE ON COVERAGE.
[00:10:01]
ON COVERAGE.BUT ALSO, JUST, JUST SO THE BOARD KNOWS, YOU KNOW, ANY NEW IMPERVIOUS SURFACE THAT'S EVER BUILT ON ANY LOT PART OF THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT REVIEW, WHEN THEY DO A BUILDING PERMIT REVIEW, IS TO HAVE THE DRAINAGE LOOKED AT.
AND THE LAW REQUIRES THAT ANY ADDITIONAL RUNOFF FROM NEW IMPERVIOUS SURFACE HAS TO BE ACCOMMODATED ON SITE.
SO IT DOESN'T IMPACT ON NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES.
ANYONE ELSE? WOULD ANYONE CARE TO MAKE A MOTION? SORRY, WERE YOU GONNA SAY SOMETHING? NO, NO, NO.
AS A MATTER OF FACT, THAT WAS, I, I HAD BEEN KIND OF INTERESTED IN THE, UM, IN THE, IN THE SURFACING OF THE PATIO AS WELL.
AND THAT WAS THE ONLY QUESTION, UH, THAT I HAD.
UM, WELL, I CAN MAKE A MOTION IN THIS CASE.
AND ANTONIO YOUNG ON THREE WHITMAN STREET.
UM, UH, MOTION TO APPROVE RELIEF FROM THE STRICT APPLICATION OF SECTIONS 2 95 DASH 67 D TWO B, UH, 2 95 DASH 55 A AND 2 95 DASH 20 C TWO OF THE VILLAGE CODE, UH, FOR PROPOSED CREATION OF AN ACCESSORY APARTMENT IN AN EXISTING NON-CONFORMING DETACHED GARAGE ON A PROPERTY AT THREE WHITMAN STREET.
UM, SAID, PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN THE R UH, 7.5 ZONING DISTRICT AND IS KNOWN AS SBL FOUR 30 DASH 24 DASH EIGHT ON THE TOWN OF GREENBERG TAX MAPS.
ANYBODY CARE TO SECOND? I SECOND.
CONGRATULATIONS AND GOOD LUCK.
UH, THE NEXT CASE IS CASE 21 24 2 70 PARTNERS INC.
TWO 70 FARGATE AVENUE, ALSO KNOWN AS 2 64.
UM, AND WOW, WE'RE GETTING SET UP THERE.
UM, JUST A COUPLE OF NOTES ON THIS ONE.
THIS CASE WAS BEFORE US AT OUR LAST MEETING.
UM, WE DID HAVE A DISCUSSION, UH, AMONGST THE BOARD, UM, AND WE HAD SOME PUBLIC COMMENT.
UM, FORTUNATELY, UH, ALL FOUR BOARD MEMBERS WHO ARE HERE TONIGHT SURE.
WE'RE HERE AT THE LAST BOARD MEETING.
ALSO, EVERYTHING THAT WAS ON THAT MEETING IS ON THE RECORD.
SO TONIGHT, UM, I WOULD SAY, UM, THAT THE APPLICANT, IF YOU HAVE NEW INFORMATION, UH, THAT YOU WANT TO PROVIDE, WE'D BE HAPPY TO HEAR THAT.
AND IF THERE'S ANYONE HERE IN THE PUBLIC COMMENT WHO, UH, DIDN'T SPEAK LAST TIME OR HAS NEW INFORMATION, UH, OR SOMETHING THEY'D LIKE TO ADD, UH, PLEASE DO.
BUT I JUST REMINDING EVERYBODY, UM, THAT LAST MONTH'S DISCUSSION IS FULLY ON THE RECORD.
UH, AND WE HAVE REVIEWED IT AND WE ARE FAMILIAR WITH IT.
SO I SHOULD JUST PRESENT THE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.
ANYTHING THAT YOU FEEL IS NEW SINCE THE LAST TIME, OR, OR IN RESPONSE TO DISCUSSION OR COMMENTS AT THE LAST MEETING.
IS THIS AN UPDATED IMAGE? THIS WAS NOT, I THINK THIS IS A NEW, THIS IS ACTUALLY NOT A CHANGE IN PLAN.
THIS IS JUST SOME INFORMATION.
JUST
MY COMPU MY COMPUTER IS TOO BIG FOR, SO ANYWAY,
[Case No. 21-24]
MY NAME IS VIVIAN HEIM.I WORK WITH EDWARD WEINSTEIN FOR EDWARD WEINSTEIN ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING.
AND WE'VE WORKED TOGETHER ON THIS PROJECT.
SO HE'S UNFORTUNATELY UNAVAILABLE.
SO I AM PRESENTING THE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION THAT WE HAVE RESEARCHED.
SO BASICALLY WE, WE KNOW THAT WE, OUR PROJECT,
[00:15:02]
UM, THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT THE FLAG LOT IDEA.AND WHAT I, WE HAVE DONE IS WE HAVE RESEARCHED THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND WE HAVE CREATED THIS DRAWING TO SHOW HOW IN CHARACTER OUR PROJECT REALLY IS TO THE OTHER PARTS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, WOULD YOU LIKE THE WIRELESS MICROPHONE? CHARLES WOULD, YES.
MAYBE I CAN HOLD ON OR I CAN DO IT.
BASICALLY I CAN ZOOM IN AND THIS PROJECT HERE IS HALL PLACE.
AND YOU CAN SEE HOW THESE ARE FOUR FLAG LOTS THAT HAVE BEEN CREATED PROBABLY IN THE SEVENTIES.
AND OUR PROJECT IS JUST HERE SEVENTIES.
AND WE HAVE TWO FLAG LOTS RIGHT NEXT TO US, 97 ROWS AND 95 ROWS.
CAN YOU, THIS ONE HERE, AND YOU CAN SEE THE PROPERTY IS PRETTY BIG.
AND WE ARE, THE, THE BUILDINGS THAT ARE ON THESE THREE PROPERTIES THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO CREATE ARE REALLY IN KEEPING IN SIZE WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD WE'RE REALLY TRYING TO FIT IN RATHER THAN CREATE, YOU KNOW, BIGGER MA MORE MCMANSION TYPE BUILDINGS THAT AN R 10 MIGHT BE ABLE TO ACCOMMODATE.
AND THEN HERE BY THE HIGH SCHOOL, WE HAVE ANOTHER FLAG LOT.
AND AGAIN, IT ISN'T THAT UNCOMMON IN THE VILLAGE OF HASTINGS TO HAVE FLAG LOTS.
SO, UM, AND THEN I CAN, WE HAVE, SO THIS IS THE RESEARCH FOR THAT.
AND THEN I'M JUST SHOWING ALSO THE SIZE OF THE ENTRANCES TO THESE FLAG LOTS TO 1 42 HIGH STREET.
THE, THE ACCESS ROAD TO THAT IS 11 FEET.
THIS LITTLE PIECE THAT'S THE FRONTAGE TO, TO HIGH STREET.
AND THE ONE NEXT DOOR IS 15 FEET FRONTAGE TO HIGH STREET.
THEN THESE TWO EACH HAVE ABOUT 11, 10 FEET TO THE ROUNDABOUT AT TALL PLACE.
AND ON HILLSIDE, THE DRIVEWAY IS 10 FEET.
AND OUR DRIVEWAY AND OUR LITTLE DEVELOPMENT IS 14 FEET.
SO AGAIN, WE ARE NOT CO WE ARE NOT NOT COMPLYING TO THE FABRIC OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO THAT WAS JUST THE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION I WANTED TO SHARE WITH YOU.
THAT, UM, IN LOT SIZE IN BUILDING SIZE, IF YOU LOOK AT THIS DRAWING, WE DON'T LOOK LIKE WE DON'T BELONG.
I FEEL THAT WE ARE IN THE, IN THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE BUILDINGS THAT WE ARE CREATING IN FLORA AREA AND VOLUME ARE GOING TO BE IN CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD WE WANT TO FIT IN.
OUR CLIENT IS A LONG TIME, UH, PROPERTY OWNER IN HASTINGS AND HAS NO INTENTION OF, UM, NOT FITTING IN, OF WANTING TO CREATE SOMETHING THAT IS GOING TO BE OUT OF SCALE.
SO THIS IS, UM, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING THESE DRAWINGS? I DO.
UH, YOU SAID THAT THE FLAG LOTS ON, WAS IT ON THE CUL-DE-SAC OR OFF HIGH STREET WERE CREATED IN THE SEVENTIES.
WELL, THE ONE ON HALL PLACE, ALL THESE BUILDINGS, THESE BUILDINGS HERE, THEY WERE BUILT IN THE SEVENTIES.
I HAVE SEEN, I'VE LOOKED UP THE, I'VE RESEARCHED THE PROPERTY CARDS.
IT'S THE LATE SEVENTIES AND THEN THE BUILDINGS THAT CREATED THE FLAG FLAG LOTS, THE ONES THAT ARE NOT HIGHLIGHTED, THEY HAVE BEEN CREATED IN THE SEVENTIES.
UM, YOU CAN SEE THAT THIS USED TO BE A BIG PROPERTY.
YOU CAN JUST BY THE OUTLINE, YOU CAN SEE THERE WERE TWO BIG HOMES.
AND THEY THEN WERE SUBDIVIDED TO CREATE THE LITTLE PROPERTIES AND TO CREATE MORE HOUSING.
DIDN'T EXIST BEFORE THAT HALL PLACE WAS BUILT AS A SUBDIVISION, WHICH INCLUDED THOSE
[00:20:01]
FLAG LOTS.AND THIS WOULD BE, WHILE THERE, THERE HAD ALREADY BEEN THE ZONING TEXT.
UM, AND THESE WERE CREATED AFTER, CORRECT? YES.
THERE WAS NO FLAG LOT LANGUAGE WHEN THESE HOUSES WERE BUILT EITHER.
I HAVE, YOU KNOW, RESEARCHED IT AND THERE IS NO, UM, LANGUAGE REALLY, YOU KNOW, DETERMINING THIS IS WHAT A FLAG LOT HAS TO DO
SO IT'S VERY FRUSTRATING FOR ALL OF US.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD AT THIS TIME? NO, I THINK I ASKED EVERYTHING LAST WEEK OR LAST SESSION.
IN THAT CASE, UM, WE'LL OPEN IT UP IF THERE'S ANY, UM, NEW MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC OR PEOPLE WITH, UM, NEW INFORMATION THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO, UM, PUT ON THE RECORD.
JUST A REMINDER TO GIVE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS PLEASE.
UM, PERTAINING TO THE NEW BUILD, I AM DIRECTLY MY GA MY GARDEN, MY BACK GARDEN IS WHERE I THINK IT'S LOT C IS PROPOSED TO BE BUILT.
UM, AND I'VE BEEN COMING TO THESE MEETINGS FOR A FEW TIMES AND EACH TIME I HEAR, UM, YOU KNOW THAT IT'S GONNA BENEFIT THE COMMUNITY AND HOW IT'S GONNA BENEFIT THE COMMUNITY.
WELL, I FAIL TO UNDERSTAND HOW TAKING AWAY GREEN SPACE, UPSETTING THE ECOSYSTEM, UM, BASICALLY BUILDING A HOUSE IN MY BACKYARD.
UM, I HAVE TWO MEMBERS OF MY HOUSEHOLD WHO ARE ASTHMATIC.
SO HAVING TO DEAL WITH THE NOISE POLLUTION, DUST POLLUTION.
UM, WE HAVEN'T MENTIONED THE SAFETY OF THE PEDESTRIANS WHILE THIS ALL GOES ON.
UM, THINKING ABOUT THE CONSTRUCTION VEHICLES FOR THE CONSTRUCTION WORKERS, THE CONSTRUCTION VEHICLES, IE THE CEMENT MIXERS, THE BULLDOZERS, WHATEVER ELSE IS NEEDED FOR THIS.
UM, AND SO I WOULD REALLY LIKE TO UNDERSTAND AS A COMMUNITY MEMBER, UM, WHAT THE BENEFIT IS TO ME.
'CAUSE I JUST HAVEN'T HEARD THAT, UM, BEING TALKED ABOUT.
I KNOW THAT THERE'S BEEN TALK ABOUT GIVING SOME OF THE LAND BACK TO HASTINGS FROM THE PROPERTY, BUT THE LAND IS UNUSABLE.
AND AGAIN, IT'S NOT A BENEFIT TO ME WHO IS A PART OF THE COMMUNITY, UM, UNLESS I'M NOT SEEN AS PART OF THE COMMUNITY.
SO I JUST WOULD LIKE TO UNDERSTAND THAT.
WE ARE, WE ARE HAVING A PLANTING PLAN AND THE, THE PROPERTY IS GOING TO BE AS DEVELOPED AS MINIMAL AS POSSIBLE IN TERMS OF, I MEAN WE COMPLETELY, IN TERMS OF COVERAGE, WE ARE KEEPING ALL OF THE TREES, PRETTY MUCH ALL OF THE TREES THAT ARE ON THE PROPERTY.
MAYBE THERE'S GOING TO BE THREE REMOVED.
WE ARE PLANTING, WE ARE PROPOSING TO PLANT NEW ONES.
I MEAN, THIS IS NOT A DESERT THAT WE ARE PROPOSING.
WE ARE PROPOSING GREEN SPACES AROUND THESE BUILDINGS.
THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE GARDENS.
AND I MEAN THIS BACK PROPERTY, PROPERTY SEA IS PRETTY SPECTACULAR BECAUSE IT DOES HAVE THAT STEEP SLOPE AND THE ROCKS AND ALL THAT IS STAYING AND ALL THE FERN AND YOUR GRASS IS, YOUR TREES ARE ALL STAYING ALL ALONG.
THAT BACK PROPERTY IS NOT BEING TOUCHED.
YOU HAVE THE PLANTING PLAN THAT THEY'VE PROPOSED.
ANYONE ELSE? EVENING? UH, MY NAME IS LES RADMAN.
THAT'D BE, UH, TWO, TWO HOMES, UH, SOUTH I GUESS OF BUILDING C.
MY ONLY COMMENT IS YOU'RE MAKING THE WHOLE THING HERE IS TO MAKE MONEY.
I MEAN, THAT'S THE WAY I SEE IT.
YOU HAVE A LONG DRIVEWAY GOING IN THE YOU MOVING HOUSES A AND B FURTHER NORTH AND SOUTH.
THESE POOR HOUSES ARE ACTUALLY GONNA BE LIKE CORNER HOUSES.
YOU GOT THIS LONG DRIVEWAY GOING TO THE BACK.
[00:25:01]
FROM WIDTH, LENGTH AND LOT SIZES.THERE'S NO VARIANCE FOR LOT SIZES, JUST TO CLARIFY.
BUT THIS LONG DRIVEWAY, IT'S NEXT TO YOUR KITCHEN, NEXT TO YOUR YOUR BEDROOM.
IT'S LIKE HAVING ANOTHER ROAD.
GARBAGE HAS TO BE TAKEN ALL THE WAY TO THE FRONT.
SANITATION, I DOUBT WILL, WILL GO ALL THE WAY TO THE BACK.
IF YOU WANNA SELL THE HOUSES, SELL THE TWO, REBUILD THEM, HAVE NICE BIG BACK LOTS, BACKYARDS.
PERSONALLY, I THINK IT'S A POOR DESIGN.
IT NEEDS A LOT OF VARIANCES FROM THE BOARD.
PEOPLE WOULD NEED HOUSING AND TAX BASE IS, THAT'S NICE, BUT THERE'S OTHER THINGS THAT COULD BE DONE ON THIS.
ANYONE ELSE, ANY FOLLOW UP, UH, QUESTIONS TO THE APPLICANT FROM THE BOARD BEFORE WE DISCUSS? I HAVE ONE QUESTION.
UM, AND IT HAS TO DO WITH THE PULVER WOODS THAT IS BEHIND THAT AND, AND KIND OF RUNS ALONGSIDE THE, THE, THE TAIL END OF, OF PROPERTY C.
UM, IS THAT USED THAT PUBLIC PROPERTY USED AS A CUT THROUGH FOR LIKE ANY OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD KIDS? AND IF SO, IF YOU KNOW, AND IF SO, WILL THE PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK ANY, YOU KNOW, KIND OF LIKE TRAILS THAT THE KIDS USE FOR GOING TO SCHOOL OR SHORTCUTS OR THOSE KINDS OF OF THINGS? I DON'T KNOW.
YEAH, WOODS DOESN'T EXTEND DOWN TO FARGATE.
SO THEY WOULD HAVE TO BE CUTTING THROUGH THROUGH PRIVATE PROPERTY ANYWAYS.
IT'S SURROUNDED BY PRIVATE PROPERTY.
IT'S VERY, IT'S A VERY STEEP KIDS AROUND HERE HAVE TO BE MOUNTAIN GOATS TO GET AROUND HASS.
ANYWAY, SO ANYBODY ELSE QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? I HAVE A QUESTION.
UM, IT MIGHT BE FOR THE TOWN'S ATTORNEY INSTEAD OF THE APPLICANT, BUT UM, IS IT APPROPRIATE FOR APPROVAL OF THE VARIANCES TO BE CONTINGENT UPON, UM, ADHERING TO THE PLAN THAT WE'RE RELYING ON FOR THE PLANTINGS? YEAH, YOU CAN ABSOLUTELY IMPOSE CONDITIONS.
SO YOUR CONDITION CAN BE THAT THE, UM, PLANTING PLAN BE, YOU KNOW, INSTALLED AS PER THE PLANS THAT THAT, THAT THOSE BUFFER PLANTINGS, UM, BE PROVIDED.
YOU COULD HAVE REASONABLE CONDITIONS, YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT THE IMPACT OF THE VARIANCE.
I HAVE TO SAY THE LOCATION OF THAT HOUSE ISN'T REALLY AN IMPACT OF THE VARIANCE.
'CAUSE THE HOUSE COULD BE THERE ANYWAY.
IT'S NOT A SETBACK VARIANCE, BUT YOU STILL, YOU COULD CONDITION IT.
THEY'VE PROPOSED THAT PLANTING, SO I'M SURE THEY HAVE NO PROBLEM IF YOU MAKE IT A CONDITION THAT THEY HAVE TO INSTALL THOSE PLANTINGS.
AND THE PLANNING BOARD ASKED FOR PLANTINGS ALSO.
UM, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? IF NOT, I THINK, UM, WHAT MIGHT BE HELPFUL IS IF WE, UM, UH, DISCUSS THIS, UM, AMONGST US USING THE, UH, THE FIVE SORT OF TEST QUESTIONS THAT WE ARE, UM, BY LAW CONSTRUCTED TO USE IN BALANCING THE, UM, NEEDS OF THE APPLICANT AND THE NEEDS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO THE FIRST ONE OF THOSE IS, UM, THE QUESTION OF WHETHER, UH, THE PROPOSED VARIANCES, UH, CREATE AN UNDESIRABLE CHANGE TO THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY THOUGHTS OR COMMENTS ON THAT? CAN I JUST JUMP IN WITH ONE THING? SURE.
BEFORE YOU START TO DO THIS? 'CAUSE I, I WANNA MAKE SURE IN CONTEXT, AND I FORGOT THIS BEFORE, YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT THESE IN TERMS OF THE IMPACT OF THE VARIANCE.
SO IT'S NOT NECESSARILY THE IMPACT OF A HOUSE BEING BUILT, BUT IT'S THE IMPACT OF THE VARIANCE.
SO THE FACT THAT THE LOTS DON'T MEET THE LOT WIDTH ARE PAR, PRIMARILY THE VARIANCES, SORRY, GO AHEAD.
UM, BUT JUST TO RESTATE AGAIN, UH, WHETHER THE VARIANCES, UH, CREATE AN UNDER CHANGE, UH, CHANGE TO THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
I'LL JUST REITERATE THE CONCEPT.
IT MIGHT BE FOR ONE OF THE OTHER FACTORS, BUT, UM, AS WE HEARD ABOUT POTENTIAL DETRIMENT TO APPROVING THESE VARIANCES, IF OUR APPROVAL COULD BE CAVEATED THAT THE PLANTING PLAN AS PROPOSED, UM, UNDER WHICH FACTS WERE MAKING OUR DECISION ON.
IF THEY DO NOT HAPPEN, THEN THEY NEED TO COME BACK TO US.
[00:30:01]
WOULDN'T GET COS FOR THE HOUSES IF IT WASN'T DONE.UM, I THINK THAT AS FAR AS THE VARIANCE ITSELF IS CONCERNED, UM, AND, AND AS FAR AS YOU KNOW, THE, THE, THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, I I I, I DON'T KNOW IF THIS WILL BE COVERED IN ANOTHER QUESTION, BUT YOU KNOW, FOR THE VARIANCE, WHICH IS ESSENTIALLY THE, THE THE FLAG POLE ITSELF AND, AND, AND THE, UH, THE FRONTAGE ON THE STREET, UM, WILL THE, UM, WILL THE OWNER BUILDER BE RESPONSIBLE FOR RUNNING ALL POWER AND MAINTENANCE AND ALL THOSE THINGS THAT ARE, YOU KNOW, KIND OF, UM, YOU KNOW, THE PART OF THAT FLAGPOLE ITSELF? YES.
THE, THE REASON WE HAVE THAT WIDTH IS SO THAT WE CAN RUN THE POWER LINES AND WATER LINES ALONGSIDE THE ROAD SEWER, SEWER, SEWER, YEAH.
WITHOUT, WITHOUT EASEMENTS ON THE OTHER PROPERTIES.
THAT'S MY QUESTION THERE, JOSH.
I, I THINK WE DISCUSSED THIS IN, IN THE LAST MEETING, BUT THE CURB CUTS AND THE, THE SPACING OF THE CURB CUTS IS SORT OF ONE OF THE CENTRAL QUESTIONS ABOUT THE, THE IMPACT TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, WITH THE REALLOCATION THEY ARE SPACED, OBVIOUSLY THEY'RE TIGHTER THAN THEY MIGHT BE IF THE, THE LOTS WERE AS WIDE AT THE STREET FRONTAGE.
UM, BUT I, I DO THINK THAT THE PRECEDENTS PROVIDED, UH, THE FLAG LOTS GIVE SOME CONTEXT FOR, UM, FOR THE IMMEDIATE NEIGHBORHOOD AND FOR PAST INTERPRETATIONS.
YEAH, I MEAN, I THINK, UM, FOR THIS PARTICULAR FACTOR FOR ME, UM, IF YOU LOOK AT THE PLAN, YOU KNOW, THE HOUSES ALONG FARGATE LOOKED LIKE THE OTHER HOUSES ALONG FARGATE.
UM, I DID GO, I MEAN, I, I PASSED THIS TWICE A DAY, EVERY DAY.
UM, BUT I ACTUALLY WENT BY A FEW TIMES SINCE THE LAST MEETING, UH, AND WALKED IT ON FOOT.
YOU KNOW, THERE WAS A LOT OF COMMENTARY THAT WE TOOK VERY SERIOUSLY FROM, FROM PEOPLE WHO SPOKE ABOUT ALL THE KIDS WALKING TO SCHOOL.
UM, AND I THINK THAT'S A, A, A REASONABLE CONSIDERATION.
BUT, YOU KNOW, I THINK THE NATURE OF THAT WALK IS THAT THEY ARE CROSSING DRIVEWAYS, UM, BETWEEN HERE AND SCHOOL AT, YOU KNOW, ROUGHLY THE SAME, UM, RATE THAT THEY WOULD BE IN UNDER THIS PLAN.
AND A LOT OF WHAT WAS TALKED ABOUT AT THE LAST MEETING, UM, WAS THE FACT THAT THESE HOUSES ARE CURRENTLY USED AS A DEFACTO PARKING LOT FOR THE VALERO.
SO I THINK ACTUALLY MAKING THEM HOUSES, UH, WITHOUT, YOU KNOW, HAVING SIX CARS PARKED ON THEM, UH, I THINK WOULD BE MORE IN THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAN WHAT'S THERE.
AND AGAIN, THE, THE, THE SEA PROPERTY IS ALSO CONTEXTUALLY SIMILAR TO THE TWO PROPERTIES THAT ARE THERE.
UM, YOU KNOW, SO FOR ME, UH, THAT'S, THAT'S MY THINKING ALONG THE, THE FIRST QUESTION ABOUT WHETHER IT'S CREATING A, AN UNDESIRABLE CHANGE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD AS SORT OF A CONTEXT QUESTION.
ANY OTHER THOUGHTS ON THIS ONE OR MOVE ON TO THE NEXT? UH, THE OTHER, THE NEXT FACTOR IS WHETHER THE BENEFIT ACHIEVED BY THE VARIANCES, UH, COULD BE ACHIEVED IN ANOTHER WAY WITHOUT THE VARIANCES.
I DON'T SEE HOW THAT'S POSSIBLE.
PART OF THE BENEFIT IS ADDITIONAL HOUSING FOR, FOR THE VILLAGE AND WITH THE STREET FRONTAGE AND THE REQUIREMENTS THAT, UM, THAT EXIST, IT IS NOT POSSIBLE WITHOUT A NON-CONFORMING LOT.
SO ALL THREE ARE NON-CONFORMING TO SOME EXTENT.
WELL, ONE OF THEM IS ACTUALLY MORE CONFORMING THAN THE EXISTING MM-HMM
UM, BUT ALL THREE ARE, ALL THREE REQUIRE VARIANCES FOR THE LOT WIDTH AND THE FRONTAGE.
AT THE PLANNING BOARD, THEY DID DISCUSS OTHER OPTIONS OF HOW TO MAKE OTHER HOUSES WORK WITH DIFFERENT CONFIGURATIONS, BUT THE OFFSET WOULD BE TO DISTURB MORE OF THE STEEP SLOPES AND ACTUALLY CAUSE MORE DRAINAGE ISSUES AND, AND OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS.
THAT'S, UM, WHEN THEY CAME UP WITH THIS PLAN THAT WOULD REQUIRE PUTTING A NEW ROAD IN WITH A CUL-DE-SAC.
SO IT WOULD BE A LOT OF PA A LOT OF IMPERVIOUS SURFACE AND PUSH THE HOUSES BACK AND CREATE MUCH MORE DISTURBANCE.
AND AGAIN, THIS FACTOR, IT'S, IT'S THE BENEFIT SOUGHT BY THE APPLICANT.
[00:35:01]
SO THE BENEFIT SOUGHT BY THE APPLICANT IS TO HAVE THREE LOTS ON, ON THIS SIDE.YES, THAT'S WHAT I WAS GONNA SAY.
JUST TO FRAME IT, I THINK THE BENEFIT IS THREE HOUSES INSTEAD OF TWO.
AND I DO THINK IT'S IMPORTANT, AND THIS WAS SPOKEN ABOUT LAST TIME, THAT EVEN IF THE TWO WERE TO BE REPLACED, THEY'D NEED VARIANCES BECAUSE THE TWO LOTS ARE EXISTING NONCONFORMING OR IF THEY BOTH, THE LOTS ARE ALREADY NONCONFORMING.
AND I ALSO THINK IT'S NOT INSIGNIFICANT THAT THE LOT IS 52,000 SQUARE FEET.
AND SO BY, UM, LOT SIZE, THIS IS ESSENTIALLY A FIVE HOUSE LOT.
UM, AND SO, YOU KNOW, THE FACT THAT ALL OF THE OTHER BULK MASSING REQUIREMENTS ARE BEING MET, THAT THIS IS ALL THE SETBACKS ARE BEING MET, ALL THE COVERAGES ARE BEING MET AND ALL THE SIZES ARE BEING MET, I THINK, UM, IS AN IMPORTANT FACTOR FOR ME.
YEAH, I MEAN, AS FAR AS THE QUESTION ABOUT WHETHER IT'S NECESSARY, UM, I MEAN THIS IS A, YOU KNOW, A, A, A LONG LOT AND THE VARIANCE REQUESTED IS ESSENTIALLY FOR ACCESS TO THAT THIRD PIECE OF PROPERTY.
SO I MEAN, I, I DON'T THINK THAT THERE'S ANY OTHER CREATIVE CON CONFIGURATION THAT WOULD, UM, THAT WOULD ALLOW FOR ACCESS.
BETH, ANYTHING YOU WANT TO ADD ON THIS FACTOR OR NOTHING TO ADD? THANK YOU.
ALRIGHT, IF WE'RE GOOD WITH THAT ONE.
MOVING ON TO, UM, THE QUESTION OF WHETHER THE VARIANCE IS SUBSTANTIAL, AND THIS IS ONE, I THINK THAT WE DID SPEAK SOME A LITTLE BIT ON THE LAST, UM, MEETING.
SO DOES ANYONE WANT TO DISCUSS THAT? I, I MEAN I THINK THAT GOING BY THE NUMBERS, IT IS SUBSTANTIAL.
UM, I THINK IT WOULD BE HARD TO ARGUE OTHERWISE, YOU KNOW, LOOKING AT, AT, YOU KNOW, AT AT, AT THE STREET FRONTAGE AND WHAT'S REQUIRED AND WHAT'S BEING REQUESTED.
UM, ON THE OTHER HAND, I THINK THAT, UM, THAT THE ACCESS TO THE LOT THAT EXPLAINS WHY THE VARIANCE IS BEING REQUESTED.
SO, UM, SO I WOULD, I WOULD SAY THAT YES, IT IS SUBSTANTIAL, BUT I THINK THAT BY, BY NUMBER, UH, THAT WE ALSO UNDERSTAND YES.
MAY MAYBE BEFORE THE ANYONE ELSE ON THE BOARD TAKES SEVEN, UM, MAYBE WE CAN ASK THE APPLICANT.
HOW WOULD YOU, UM, RESPOND TO THE IDEA THAT, UM, UH, IF, IF 70 FEET IS REQUIRED AND, AND WE'RE PROPOSING 14 FEET, THAT 56 FEET ISN'T A SUBSTANTIAL VARIANCE? UM, THERE WAS AN YEAH, YEAH, IN OUR LETTER, I THINK WE HAD ADDRESSED THAT.
UM, BASICALLY WHAT WE WERE SAYING IS THAT, UM, ALTHOUGH THE 70 FEET IS REQUIRED AND THE 14 FEET ARE PROVIDED, THE IMPACT IS NOT, UM, SIGNIFICANT TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD BECAUSE YOU CAN SEE ALL THE OTHER, THESE OTHER LOTS HAVE THE SAME ISSUE WITH SMALLER FRONTAGES OR SMALLER ACCESS TO THE BACK LOTS.
UM, AND THE OTHER THING THAT HAPPENS IS THAT IF YOU, YOU KNOW, IF YOU GRANT A 14 FEET REALLY THAT STREET FROM WHAT IT IS NOW, REALLY THAT FEEL IS NOT GOING TO CHANGE BECAUSE YOU STILL HAVE TWO HOUSES THAT ARE THE VISIBLE HOUSES, ONE HOUSE IN THE BACK THAT IS TUCKED AWAY.
AND WHEN YOU DRIVE DOWN, WHEN YOU WILL DRIVE DOWN FARGO PARKWAY, IT WILL LOOK THE SAME AS IT DOES NOW.
YOU WILL HAVE TWO SINGLE FAMILY HOUSES.
SO IS THE IMPACT IN THAT RESPECT, WE DIDN'T FEEL THAT THE IMPACT OF THE VARIANCE IS SUBSTANTIAL OR THANK YOU.
BACK TO THE BOARD? NO, YOU DON'T HAVE TO.
NO FURTHER, NO FURTHER, NO FURTHER, NO.
UM, MOVING ON TO, UH, THE FOURTH FACTOR, WHICH IS, UM, WHETHER THE VARIANCES CREATE AN ADVERSE EFFECT OR IMPACT ON THE COMMUNITY, ON THE PHYSICAL OR ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS.
AND AGAIN, THE PLANNING BOARD WAS THE LEAD AGENCY FOR THE STATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY REVIEW ACT, AND IT HAS MADE A FINDING THAT THERE WERE NO POTENTIAL
[00:40:01]
SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS, WHICH REALLY GOES TO THIS FACTOR.WELL THEN WE CAN MOVE ON TO THE FIFTH FACTOR, UM, WHICH IS, UM, IT WAS A CONDITION ESSENTIALLY SELF-CREATED.
DO YOU WANNA READ THAT EXACT LANGUAGE OF THAT? SURE.
THIS ONE'S INTERESTING BECAUSE OVERALL YOU DON'T HAVE TO SATISFY ALL FIVE FACTORS.
AGAIN, IT'S BALANCING, BUT THE STATE LEGISLATURE, WHEN THEY WROTE THIS WAS VERY SPECIFIC IN PUTTING RIGHT IN THERE THE LANGUAGE THAT THIS ONE REALLY CAN'T SERVE.
WELL, IT'S SOMETHING TO CONSIDER.
IT CAN'T SERVE AS THE BASIS FOR A DENIAL.
UM, AND, AND GENERALLY, YOU KNOW, YOU LOOK AT THINGS LIKE, WELL, IT'S, THE NEED FOR THE VARIANCE IS CAUSED IN PART BY THE SHAPE OF THE LOT, BUT ALSO BY THE APPLICANT'S DESIRE TO HAVE A THIRD LOT.
THE APPLICANT OWNS THIS PROPERTY, YOU KNOW, IN SINCE THE SIXTIES, LATE FIFTIES, SIXTIES.
SO, UM, PEOPLE DO HAVE PROPERTY RIGHTS AND, AND THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF A ZONING BOARD, JUST TO TAKE IT BACK TO THE VERY BASIC YOU ARE HERE, ANY, UM, MUNICIPALITY IN NEW YORK STATE THAT HAS A ZONING ORDINANCE IS REQUIRED BY LAW TO HAVE A ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS.
THE REASON FOR THAT IS THAT THERE ARE SITUATIONS WHERE IT IS APPROPRIATE TO GRANT VARIANCES FROM THE APPLICATION OF THE ZONING.
AND THESE ARE HOW YOU DETERMINE WHETHER THIS IS AN APPROPRIATE CASE TO GRANT VARIANCES FROM THAT ZONING.
YOU'RE WHAT'S CALLED A RELIEF VALVE FROM THE, UM, STRICT REQUIREMENTS OF ZONING.
SO I THINK AS SORT OF A LESSON ON ZONING
UM, THERE ARE TWO LOTS, THERE ARE TWO STRUCTURES.
UM, THE NEED TO CREATE A THIRD IS NOT, I WOULD SAY, NOT BEING IMPOSED ON THE, ON THE LANDOWNERS.
UM, THAT SAID, AND TO YOUR POINT ABOUT, UH, OUR, OUR JOB AS A RELIEF VALVE, AND MAYBE THIS DOESN'T ADDRESS THIS QUESTION SPECIFICALLY.
IT DOES, IT DOES, BUT THAT'S WHY IT'S NOT, IF IT BEING SELF-CREATED DOES NOT PRECLUDE GRANTING OF THE VARIANCE.
THAT'S WHY THAT LANGUAGE IS IN THERE.
AND IT, IT'S PRETTY CLEAR THAT THE LANGUAGE AS WRITTEN WAS, DID NOT PROVIDE PARAMETERS ABOUT A FLAG LOT AND THE REQUIREMENTS OF WHAT WOULD BE A SATISFACTORY FLAG LOT, BUT THAT CLEARLY THERE HAVE BEEN, UH, INSTANCES OVER THE DECADES WHERE THOSE HAVE BEEN CREATED.
UM, AND SO PART OF OUR JOB AS THAT RELIEF VALVE, AS YOU SAY, IS TO, IS TO DETERMINE WHEN, UH, YOU KNOW, WHETHER THIS IS AN APPROPRIATE, UH, AN APPROPRIATE CONDITION FOR THAT BASED ON THE PRESSURE.
AND JUST A REMINDER THAT THE OTHER TWO LOTS ALSO NEED VARIANCES.
ONE OF THEM IS ACTUALLY BECOMING MORE CONFORMING THAN IT IS TODAY.
UM, BUT ALSO IF YOU LOOK AT THE NEIGHBORHOOD, EVEN THE LOTS ALONG FARGATE, UM, ARE ONLY, MOST OF ON THE OTHER SIDE ARE ONLY 60 FEET IN WIDTH.
TO THE POINT EARLIER ABOUT THE C OF O, EACH LOT WOULD BE CONSIDERED INDEPENDENTLY, IS THAT CORRECT? YES, THEY'RE, THEY WILL BE SEPARATE LOTS SEPARATE HOUSES.
THEY COULD HAVE SEPARATE OWNERSHIP.
AND IF MOVING FORWARD WITH THE PLAN, ONCE THERE'S A SUBDIVISION, UM, THERE COULD BE RESTRICTIONS ABOUT THE PLANTING OR ONE OR MORE OF THE LOTS, BUT THOSE WOULD BE INDEPENDENT AT THAT POINT.
BUT EACH INDIVIDUAL LOT WOULD NOT GET A CO IF THE PLANTING REQUIRED ON THAT LOT WAS NOT INSTALLED.
UM, SO WE HAVE GONE THROUGH THE FIVE FACTORS.
ARE THERE ANY MORE GENERAL COMMENTS OR THOUGHTS BEFORE WE, UM, DISCUSS HOW WE ARE THINKING OF GOING? AND AGAIN, YOU TAKE THOSE FIVE FACTORS AND YOU USE THEM TO BALANCE THE BENEFIT TO THE APPLICANT AGAINST THE DETRIMENT TO THE HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD OF THE COMMUNITY.
REMEMBERING PEOPLE DO HAVE PROPERTY RIGHTS, THAT'S WHY THE ZONING BOARD EXISTS.
[00:45:01]
OKAY, WELL, UM, I'LL SAY THAT, UH, I THINK THIS WAS, UM, DEFINITELY A CASE THAT REQUIRED SOME THOUGHT.UM, AND WE APPRECIATE EVERYBODY'S COMMENTS AND, AND THAT THIS IS IMPORTANT TO A LOT OF PEOPLE.
WE TOOK THAT VERY SERIOUSLY, UM, AND, UM, LISTENED TO EVERYBODY.
I KNOW ALL OF MY, I DON'T KNOW WHAT MY COLLEAGUES ARE THINKING, BUT I KNOW THAT THEY SPENT A LOT OF TIME THINKING ABOUT THIS.
UM, FOR ME PERSONALLY, I THINK THIS IS A PRETTY, UM, UH, CLEAR CASE IN WHETHER OR NOT IT'S APPROPRIATE TO HAVE THREE HOUSES ON THIS LOT.
THE VARIANCES COME FROM HAVING THE THREE HOUSES.
THE CONCEPT OF THE FLAG LOTT COMES FROM HAVING THE THREE HOUSES.
UH, AND CLEARLY HAVING THREE HOUSES IS A BENEFIT TO THE APPLICANT.
SO IN TRYING TO BALANCE THAT BENEFIT TO THE APPLICANT WITH THE COMMUNITY, UH, YOU KNOW, FOR ME, I WAS CONSIDERING THE THINGS THAT ARE VERY SPECIFIC ABOUT THIS LOT, UM, THAT IT IS OVER 52,000 SQUARE FEET, UM, AND THAT IT IS ONE OF VERY FEW LOTS THAT SIZE IN HASTINGS.
UM, AND SO IF THERE WAS A LOT THAT IT WAS INAPPROPRIATE TO HAVE, YOU KNOW, MORE THAN TWO HOUSES, THIS MIGHT BE IT.
I THINK WE'RE HERE AND VARIANCES ARE GIVEN BECAUSE, UM, IN REAL LIFE WE DON'T HAVE FLAT, SQUARE, RECTANGULAR, SIMPLE LOTS.
UM, THE DESIGN THAT'S BEING PROPOSED AND WORKED THROUGH AT THE PLAN DEPARTMENT WORKS BECAUSE CONTEXTUALLY ALL THE HOUSES FIT IN.
UM, THE ONES ON FARGATE ARE VERY MUCH LIKE THOSE ALREADY ON FARGATE.
AND THE ONE IN THE BACK LOT IS VERY MUCH LIKE, UH, THE ONES THAT ARE ALREADY OFF ROSE STREET.
SO IN MY OPINION, I AM INCLINED TO IMPROVE THIS.
ANYBODY ELSE WANT TO VOICE THEIR OPINION? YEAH, I'LL, I'LL START, I'LL, I'LL ADD TO YOURS.
I DON'T DISAGREE WITH WHAT OUR ACTING CHAIR HAD SAID, BUT I AM BALANCING NOT JUST THE PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS, BUT ALSO ADHERENCE TO ZONING CODE AND THAT WE HAVE PASSED THAT BECAUSE WE WOULD LIKE THE VILLAGE TO BE REDEVELOPED, WHICH THIS IS WITHIN THE ZONING CODES.
I THANK EVERYBODY IN THE COMMUNITY FOR COMING AND VOICING THEIR CONCERNS ABOUT POTENTIAL DETRIMENT.
AND I DID VERY MUCH TAKE TO HEART, UH, THE SELF-CREATED NATURE OF THIS IS PURELY FROM TWO HOUSE DEVELOPMENT TO THREE HOUSE DEVELOPMENT.
BUT THAT SAID, ON BALANCE, I AM IN FAVOR AS, AS I PREVIOUSLY COMMENTED, I KNOW THAT THERE IS A FAIL SAFE FOR THE PLANTINGS, BUT I'M NOT IN FAVOR OF THIS VARIANCE.
AND UNLESS THOUGH THAT PLANTING PLAN IS FOLLOWED THROUGH SO THAT THE NEIGHBORS HAVE, UH, LESS OF A DETRIMENT, UM, YEP.
AND I WOULD LIKE TO, UM, TO ALSO SAY THAT I, THAT I DO APPRECIATE THE INVOLVEMENT AND INPUT FROM EVERYONE WHO TOOK THE TIME TO GET UP AND, AND SPEAK, UM, BECAUSE OF SOME OF THE COMMENTS THAT, THAT, THAT, YOU KNOW, WE LISTENED TO LAST TIME.
I DID WANT TO FIND OUT MORE ABOUT THIS PROPERTY.
I DID GO AND, AND, AND WALK THE PROPERTY BOTH THE, THE, THE FRONT, UM, AND, AND AND BEHIND TO GET A GOOD IDEA.
UM, NOT JUST, UH, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE WE'VE CERTAINLY GOT THE, THE, THE PLOTS IN FRONT OF US, BUT IT DOES HELP IN HUMAN TERMS TO BE ABLE TO, UM, TO LOOK AT THE PROPERTY AS WELL.
UM, SO, UM, WHEN CONSIDERING, UH, THE, THE VARIANCE I DO TEND TO BE, UM, UH, IN, IN, IN FAVOR OF ALLOWING, UH, FOR THAT VARIANCE AS WELL.
WELL, YOU ONLY DO NEED THREE, BUT
UM, I HAVE CERTAINLY IN MY OWN MIND GOING BACK AND FORTH ON THIS BECAUSE IT IS A COMPLEX QUESTION.
UM, I THINK THE, THE HISTORY OF VILLAGE AND THE HISTORY OF THE ZONING, UH, THE ZONING TEXT AND THE WAY THEY HAVE BEEN APPLIED HISTORICALLY IS, IS IMPORTANT TO ME.
UM, I WAS AWARE OF FLAG LOTS THAT EXIST, OF COURSE, UM, FOUND THEM AS AN INTERESTING QUIRK OF, UH, AN UNUSUAL, UM, LAYOUT FOR, FOR A VILLAGE.
AND THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SOME OF THESE OTHER LOTS AND THE TIMING OF, OF THE ZONING RESOLUTION IS, UH, IMPORTANT TO MY THINKING TO HELP TO UNDERSTAND, UM, THE, THE INTENTION OF HOW THEY FIT INTO THE, UH, THE INTENT OF THAT, OF THAT ZONING.
UM, I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S, UM, BETH, TO YOUR, TO YOUR POINT, I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S POSSIBLE WE CAN CONDITION THE APPROVAL.
[00:50:01]
UM, WELL, IN, IN ADDITION TO, I WANT TO, CAN I CONDITION A CONDITION? I BELIEVE SOUM, SO IF WE WERE TO LOCK IT IN EXACTLY AS IT IS THAT IT DOESN'T ALLOW THAT ADDITIONAL FLEXIBILITY, UM, AGAIN, BEING MINDFUL OF, UM, OF THE NEIGHBORS AND OBVIOUSLY, UH, YOU WANNA BE A GOOD NEIGHBOR IN THIS DEVELOPMENT, UH, IF IT WERE POSSIBLE TO LEAVE OPEN THAT POSSIBILITY, UM, IT GETS PRETTY COMPLICATED AND I KNOW IT'S PLANTINGS AND COULD BE CHANGED, BUT THAT POSSIBILITY IS ALWAYS AN OPTION FOR THE BUILDER TO MEET WITH THE NEIGHBORS IF THEY WANT TO INCREASE WHAT'S BEEN APPROVED IN ADDITION TO WHAT'S APPROVED.
COURSE, OF COURSE, YOU WANNA BE CAREFUL.
YOU DON'T WANT SOMEBODY TO GET TO, TO GIVE THE NEIGHBOR THE ABILITY TO HOLD SOMETHING UP.
AND THE PLANNING BOARD HAS ALSO LOOKED AT THE PLANTING PLAN.
UM, BUT CERTAINLY, UM, JUST LOOKING AT IT, UM, IF THEY WERE TO EXCEED THIS PLANTING BASED ON A REQUEST, IT WOULDN'T BE A NON-COMPLIANCE AND THEY DO HAVE TO GO BACK TO THE PLANNING BOARD.
AND WE CAN ALSO LET THE PLANNING BOARD KNOW YOUR CONCERNS AND HAVE THE PLANNING BOARD KIND OF GET MORE DETAIL ON THE PLANTING PLAN.
THAT'S AT LEAST THE, THE MINIMUM OF, OF THIS.
UM, YES, THIS DOESN'T HAVE A LOT OF DETAIL ON, ON THE MATERIALS AND EVERYTHING, SO WE COULD, UM, LET THE PLANNING BOARD KNOW THAT THIS WAS SOMETHING YOU WANNA MAKE SURE IS, IS COVERED AND IS SATISFACTORY.
I, I THINK WE COULD DEFINITELY DO THAT, BUT I THINK IT IS AGAIN, WORTH NOTING THAT, UM, ALTHOUGH THERE WAS A VARIANCE REQUESTED FOR THE WIDTH OF THE LOTS, NO VARIANCES WERE REQUESTED FOR THE SIDE SETBACKS.
SO THESE HOUSES ARE ALL COMPLIANT WITH THEIR DISTANCES FROM THEIR NEIGHBORS.
SO NOBODY IS BEING IMPOSED, UM, MORE PROXIMITY THAN THE CODE ALLOWS.
SO FOR INSTANCE, AND I KNOW THIS WAS MENTIONED, UM, I BELIEVE BY THE ACTING CHAIR AT THE LAST MEETING, THAT EVEN WITHOUT SUBDIVIDING THIS PROPERTY, EVEN WITHOUT COMING TO THIS BOARD, IF THE HOUSE AT THE FRONT WAS TORN DOWN, THEY COULD REBUILD A HOUSE IN THIS EXACT LOCATION WITHOUT EVER HAVING TO COME TO THIS BOARD.
AND THERE WOULD BE NO MECHANISM FOR REQUIRING THE TO PUT PLANTINGS THERE.
SO, UM, THE NEIGHBORS ARE GETTING MORE PROTECTION SPEAKER, SORRY.
UM, WOULD ANYBODY LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION, INCLUDING THE CONDITION AND UM, TYPICALLY LINDA WILL HELP WITH THAT LANGUAGE.
IF YOU STRUGGLE ANY VOLUNTEERS, I CAN GO AHEAD AND MAKE THE MOTION.
UM, FOR CASE NUMBER 21 DASH 24 2 70 PARTNERS INC.
2 69 DASH TWO 70 FARGATE AVENUE.
RELIEF FROM THE STRICT APPLICATION OF SECTIONS 2 95 DASH 68 E 2 95 DASH 41 A AND 2 95 DASH 19 A OF THE VILLAGE CODE FOR THE RE SUBDIVISION OF TWO EXISTING LOTS INTO THREE NEW LOTS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THREE NEW SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS LOCATED AT 2 64 DASH TWO 70 FARGATE AVENUE.
SAID, PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN THE R 10 ZONING DISTRICT AVENUE.
DO I NEED TO GO AND DO THE REST? AND IS KNOWN AS SBL, UM, 4.1 10 TO 1 0 8 DASH 73 74 75 OF THE VILLAGE TAX MAPS.
DO YOU WANT ME TO GIVE YOUR CONDITION WITH THE CONDITION THAT THE, UM, THE PLANNING BOARD'S APPROVED PLANTINGS PLAN IS IN FACT, UM, ADHERED TO AND IMPLEMENTED AS PLANNED AND THAT IT'S AT A MINIMUM WHAT'S SHOWN WHAT WAS PROVIDED TO YOU.
AND AT A MINIMUM OF WHAT IS SHOWN PLANNING PROVIDED, THE PLANNING BOARD REQUIRE A PLANTING PLAN THAT'S A MINIMUM OF THIS, UH, A MINIMUM OF WHAT THIS BOARD CONSIDERED TONIGHT.
OH WAIT, YOU NEED A SECOND? SECOND.
OH, SORRY, WE DIDN'T VOTE A VOTE.
CAN WE NEED A SECOND? UH, SECOND.
APPROVE, APPROVE, APPROVE, APPROVE.
[Case No. 1-25 ]
NEXT CASE, UH, IS CASE NUMBER 1 25 DIANE REEDY, 76[00:55:02]
CLIFF STREET.MY NAME IS KEVIN
UH, UNFORTUNATELY I WAS NOT FULLY INFORMED THAT IT IS A, IT IS A DIGITAL PRESENTATION, SO I BROUGHT HARD COPIES OF THE PLANS.
I DON'T KNOW IF I'M ALLOWED TO USE HARD COPY.
WELL WE GOT A DIGITAL COPY EARLIER.
IF YOU HAVE ANYTHING WITH YOU, WE CAN PUT UP AN EASE.
UM, SO YEAH, UH, OUR APPLICATION IS VERY, WALK UP TO THE PLANS.
JUST HAVE TO SPEAK IT TO THE MIC.
SO, YEAH, OUR APP APPLICATION IS VERY SIMPLE.
WE ARE PROPOSING A PREFABRICATED SHED AT THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY.
UM, THE PROPERTY IS IN A CORNER LOT, UH, LOCATED RIGHT AT THE CORNER OF CLIFF STREET, UH, INTO SAWMILL PARKWAY RIGHT HERE, RIGHT BEHIND THE PROPERTY.
UH, THE MANUFACTURED SHED IS GOING TO BE ABOUT, UH, 24 BY 12 FEET, WHICH IS A TOTAL OF 2088 SQUARE FEET.
WE'RE REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THREE THINGS, WHICH ONE OF 'EM IS THE SETBACK FROM THE REAR YARD OF THE PROPERTY, WHICH IS ONE FOOT EIGHT INCHES.
WE'RE ALSO REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR THE BUILDING COVERAGE, WHICH IS REQUIRED, UH, WHICH PERMITTED 25%.
AND WE'RE REQUIRE, WE'RE PROPOSING 25.2%, WHICH IS A 0.2% VARIANCE.
WE'RE ALSO REQUESTING, UH, DEVELOPMENT COVERAGE, UH, REQUIRED OR PERMITTED RATHER IS 35% AND WE'RE PROPOSING 36.1%, WHICH IS 1.1% INCREASE.
AND JUST TO, TO REITERATE, THE, THE THIRD AND THE SIGNIFICANT VARIANCE IS FOR THE REAR SETBACK, WHICH IS REQUIRED EIGHT FEET, AND WE'RE PROPOSING ONE FOOT EIGHT INCHES IN THE REAR YARD.
SO, UM, THE PROPERTY LINE, THAT'S ONE FOOT EIGHT INCHES IS THE FIRST LINE ON YOUR PLAN, BUT THEN THERE'S A ZONE.
IS THAT PARK LAND, IS THAT PART OF THE SAWMILL? THAT'S STATE PROPERTY.
IT'S ALONG THE SAWMILL PARKWAY.
SO IT'S UNBUILDABLE, THERE'S NO NEIGHBOR? NO.
IT'S THAT ZONE AND THEN THE SAWMILL PARKWAY.
SO THE, THE, THE, UM, THE LOT LINE THAT YOU ARE CLOSE CLOSER TO THAN CODE REQUIRES, UH, IS THERE IS NO NEIGHBOR AND IN FACT A STATE OWNED BUFFER BETWEEN YOU AND THE HIGHWAY? YES SIR.
ANY QUESTIONS? UM, IS IT FAIR TO ASSUME WE'VE RECEIVED NO LETTERS OR COMMENTS ABOUT ANY ON, WE RECEIVED NOTHING ON THIS CASE.
IS THERE ANYONE HERE TONIGHT TO SPEAK ON THIS CASE? OKAY.
UM, DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS OR THINGS THEY WANNA PUT OUT THERE? WELL, I MEAN, I, I, I CERTAINLY THINK THAT THE, THE FACT THAT THERE IS, THAT BUFFER SPACE IS, IS SOMETHING THAT CERTAINLY, YOU KNOW, THAT, THAT, THAT'S A CONSIDERATION FOR ME.
THERE'S NO NEIGHBOR BACK THERE AT THE IMPACT.
WE DID NOT GET A LETTER FROM, WE DID NOT GET A LETTER FROM THE SAWMILL.
AND NOT ONLY THAT, BUT LIKE ANOTHER SIDE OF THE BUFFER THERE IS THE SAWMILL, WHICH, YOU KNOW, SO THAT, UM, TO ME AS FAR AS THE, THE SETBACK VARIANCE CERTAINLY DOES MAKE A DIFFERENCE.
THE OTHER TWO WERE FAIRLY DOMESTIC.
I, I WAS GONNA SAY, I WOULD SAY THAT WE, WE ALWAYS SAY DI MINIMIS, WE TALK ABOUT SUBSTANTIAL 0.2% IS AS CLOSE TO A SMALL VARIANCE AS I THINK YOU COULD ARGUE.
IT ALSO APPEARS AS THOUGH THERE'S NOT MUCH THERE FOR AN ALTERNATIVE.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS BEFORE WE ASK FOR A MOTION? SOMETHING LIKE THIS? I THINK THE, THE COMMENTS THAT YOU'VE MADE SORT OF GO TO THE FACTORS, BUT I DON'T THINK YOU NEED TO REALLY GO THROUGH ALL FIVE.
YOU, YOU SAID IT'S NOT SUBSTANTIAL.
THERE'S NO IMPACT ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
YOU, YOU KIND OF HIT THE MAIN, THERE'S NO ALTERNATIVE.
[01:00:02]
SO YOU DID REALLY HIT THE MAIN ONES.ALRIGHT, IN THAT CASE, WOULD SOMEBODY LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION? UH, I'LL MAKE AN A MOTION AGAIN.
UH, DIANE RETI, 76 CHRIS, UH, CLIFF STREET.
UM, MOTION TO APPROVE FOR RELIEF FROM THE STRICT APPLICATION OF THE VILLAGE CODE SECTIONS 2 95 DASH 68 F1 B AND 2 95 DASH 65 F TWO, A ONE AND TWO FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A PREFAB SHED IN THE REAR AT THEIR SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING LOCATED AT 76 CLIFF STREET.
ALRIGHT, I'M GONNA VOTE AGAIN.
UM, APPROVED, APPROVED, APPROVED, APPROVED.
[Case No. 2-25]
THE NEXT CASE IS CASE NUMBER 2 25.LUIGI GRECO, 1 54 JAMES STREET.
YOU NEED THAT FLASH DRIVE? NO, I, I OH, YOU GOT IT.
MY NAME IS BRIAN CHICO AND ON BEHALF OF, UH, LUIGI GRECO, UM, WE'RE REQUESTING A VARIANCE FOR A PREFABRICATED SHED THAT WE ARE LOOKING TO PLACE IN THE RIGHT REAR OF THE PROPERTY.
UM, CURRENTLY THE SETBACKS FOR THE TOWN ARE EIGHT FEET.
WE'RE REQUIR WE ARE REQUESTING A FOUR FOOT VARIANCE SO WE COULD GET IT CLOSER TO THE RIGHT REAR OF THE PROPERTY AS YOU COULD SEE.
'CAUSE IF WE DID IT EIGHT FEET FROM THE REAR OR THE SIDE, IT WOULD BE RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE YARD.
THIS IS KIND OF LIKE AN UNDERSIZED LOT.
AND THEN THAT'S A PICTURE OF THE SHED, WHICH PRETTY MUCH MATCHES THE HOUSE AND THE OTHER HOUSES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
YOU WANT TO ASK THE QUESTION? UH, I'LL ASK THE QUESTION.
SO IN YOUR SUBMISSION, YOU SHOWED A PICTURE OF THE FORMS OF THE FOUNDATION GOING RIGHT UP AGAINST THE FENCE LINE, BUT YET YOU HAVE A FOUR FOOT SETBACK.
IS THAT FENCE SETBACK FOUR FEET? NO.
SO THERE'S A FOOT IN BETWEEN THE FENCE AND THE FORM.
THERE'S A FOOT FROM THE FENCE TO THE PROPERTY LINE.
AND THEN WE WERE GONNA SET THE SHED TWO FEET, LIKE AWAY FROM OKAY.
YOU HAVE TO, THE SLAB HAS TO BE FOUR FEET OFF OF THE PROPERTY LINE.
THAT'S WHAT YOUR VARIANCE IS FOR.
NO, I JUST WANTED YOU TO KNOW BECAUSE THAT'S ANOTHER VARIANCE.
SO THEN YEAH, THAT'S NO PROBLEM.
WE COULD AMEND THAT AND THEN JUST GRAVEL IT AROUND.
I JUST WANTED TO BE CLEAR FOR THE BOARD.
YEAH, I THOUGHT IT WAS THE ACTUAL SHED.
SO IF IT'S THE PAD, ALSO IT'S ACTUAL SLED BECAUSE WE HAVE A, WE HAVE, AS WE DISCUSSED EARLIER IN, IN ONE OF THE CASES, YOU CAN'T PAVE IN A REQUIRED YARD RIGHT.
SO THAT WOULD BE TECHNICALLY PING IN A REQUIRED YARD.
YEAH, I I KNOW WE'LL JUST ADJUST IT TO, I KIND OF FIGURED AS MUCH.
THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING THAT TO THE BOARD MEMBERS.
SO, SORRY, JUST A QUESTION FOR THE ATTORNEY.
SO I THINK IT'S REPRESENTED IN DRAWINGS CORRECTLY, BUT IN PHOTOS IS, CAN, CAN WE, MY QUESTION IS, CAN WE STILL VOTE ON IT TODAY? YEAH.
'CAUSE THE, THE PLAN THAT YOU HAVE SHOWS FOUR FEET.
SORRY, BRIAN, WHAT WERE YOU GONNA SAY? NO, SAME.
UH, ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD? THE, THE QUESTION I WOULD HAVE WAS WHETHER OR NOT WE CAN ASSUME THAT NO ONE HAS, UM, CLAIMED ANY KIND OF DETRIMENT NO.
WE, WE HAVE NO CORRESPONDENCE FOR THIS CASE.
AND JUST FOR CLARITY OF ALL OF OUR DIFFERENT FACTORS, I'LL MAKE THE SAME COMMENT I DID LAST TIME ABOUT A SHED AND THAT THERE'S REALLY NOT A REASONABLE ALTERNATIVE IN MY OPINION.
AND NOBODY IS HERE TO SPEAK ON THIS FROM THE PUBLIC.
UH, ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS OR WOULD SOMEBODY LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION? DO DO, DOES OUR MOTION NEED TO HAVE SOME SORT OF CAVEAT BASED ON THE DIFFERENCE OF THE PICTURES OR? NO, THE VARIANCE YOU'RE GRANTING IS FOR FOUR FEET.
[01:05:01]
SO THEY ARE GONNA HAVE TO, UM, AFTER THEY BUILD THE SHED, THEY'RE GONNA HAVE TO PROVIDE AN AS-BUILT SURVEY.
THAT SURVEY THAT'S GONNA HAVE TO SHOW FOUR FEET, A MINIMUM OF FOUR FEET.
MAY, MAY WE HAVE A MOTION? UM, I'LL PROVIDE A MOTION.
THANK YOU FOR CASE NUMBER TWO DASH 25, LUIGI GRECO 1 54 JAMES STREET.
MOTION TO A GRANT, TWO GRAND TO APPROVE, UH, RELIEF FROM THE STRICT APPLICATION OF THE VILLAGE CODE SECTIONS 2 9 5 DASH 70 E TWO B AND C FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A SHED IN THE REAR YARD AT HIS TWO FAMILY DWELLING LOCATED AT 1 54 JAMES STREET.
SAID, PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN THE TWO R ZONING DISTRICT AND IS KNOWN AS SB 4 1 10 DASH ONE 15 DASH EIGHT ON THE TOWN OF GREENBURG TAX MAPS.
AND THE VARIANCE IS FOR FOUR FEET TO ALLOW A SETBACK OF FOUR FEET WHERE EIGHT FEET IS REQUIRED.
APPROVED, APPROVED, APPROVED, APPROVED.
SO NOW WE'RE GONNA GO FROM TWO SHEDS TO, OH MY GOD, I KNOW YOU, THERE'S NO ONE HERE FOR THE NOT PRESENTATION PLANNING.
I THOUGHT THEY I THOUGHT THEY DID.
YEAH, BECAUSE WE GOT ONE LETTER ON PRE PRESENTATION JUST TO, UM, SO THIS HAS ALSO BEEN BEFORE THE PLANNING BOARD, UM, FOR SEVERAL MONTHS, THE PLANNING BOARD DID MAKE THEIR RECOMMENDATION, ADOPTED THEIR RECOMMENDATION UNDER REVIEW PRESERVATION APPROVAL.
UM, AND THE PLAN'S BEEN THROUGH A FEW ITERATIONS TO ADDRESS SOME COMMENTS AND CONCERNS THAT THE PLANNING BOARD HAS.
UM, AND AGAIN, IT REACHED A POINT WHERE THE PLANNING BOARD WAS COMFORTABLE ENOUGH WITH THE PLAN TO SEND IT HERE FOR THE REQUIRED VARIANCES ANSWERS.
SO WE DID RECEIVE ONE LETTER, THE LETTER WAS CONCERNED ABOUT THE HEIGHT VARIANCE FOR THE BULKHEAD MM-HMM
BUT THE HEIGHT, IT WAS A VIEW PRESERVATION CONCERN, BUT THE HEIGHT VARIANCE FOR THE BULKHEAD IS NOT, DOES NOT AFFECT THE VIEW PRESERVATION.
IT'S THE NORTH END OF THE BUILDING ACTUALLY, WHICH AFFECTS, POTENTIALLY AFFECTS THE, POTENTIALLY AFFECTS THE VIEW PRESERVATION.
AND THAT DOES NOT REQUIRE A VARIANCE.
SO, UM, THAT THE LETTER WAS AGAINST, AGAINST THE, THE VIEW FOR THE VIEW PRESERVATION, BUT IT WAS SLIGHTLY, UM, IN, IN INACCURATE ABOUT WHERE THE VARIANCES WERE.
AND I THINK THERE WAS BEEN SOME CONFUSION ABOUT WHAT THE HEIGHT VARIANCE IS FOR.
AND THEY EXPLAIN IT, THERE ARE VISUAL REPRESENTATIONS THAT DEAL WITH THAT ISSUE VERY SPECIFICALLY.
THE, SO IT'S THE 20 FOOT MAXIMUM HEIGHT VARIANCE THAT YOU'RE REFERRING TO.
SO IT'S, IT'S THE VARIANCE THAT IS, I MEAN, THEY'LL DO IT.
WELL FIRST OF ALL IT'S THE, IT'S THE 20 FOOT VARIANCE THAT THAT'S THE, THAT DOES NOT HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH VIEW PRESERVATION.
THAT PARTICULAR PORTION OF THE BUILDING, THE PORTION OF THE BUILDING THAT DOES HAVE TO DO WITH VIEW PRESERVATION IS COMPLIANT IN HEIGHT.
AND THANK YOU GUYS BOTH, BUT THE ROOKIE CHAIRMAN FORGOT TO CALL THE CASE.
SO, UH, THIS
[Case No. 3-25]
THE KISSES.UM, 5 5 5 WAR BURTON AVENUE, LLC 5 5 5 WAR BURTON AVENUE, N 15 SPRING STREET.
I'M THE, UH, ARCHITECT, UM, PRINCIPAL OF CGA STUDIO ARCHITECTS.
I'M HERE WITH KAREN BECK, PROJECT ARCHITECT AND THE OWNER'S REP MICHAEL LANG.
AND WE'RE HERE TO REQUEST, UM, A FEW VARIANCES AND I'M GONNA GO THROUGH THEM FOR YOU AND LET YOU KNOW, UM, WHY WE ARE MAKING THIS REQUEST.
UM, THIS IS, UH, A VERY EXCITING OPPORTUNITY TO RENOVATE THIS BUILDING.
VERY BEAUTIFUL BUILDING AT THE CORNER OF WARBURTON IN SPRING.
WHAT WE'RE PLANNING TO DO IS, UM, RENOVATE THE OLD BUILDING, RESTORE THE FACADE, AND ADD AN ADDITION, A THREE STORY ADDITION THAT WRAPS AROUND THE BUILDING AND TO THE SIDE.
I'M JUST GONNA SHOW YOU, UM, THE EXISTING CONDITION OF THE BUILDING IS, UH, SHOWN ON THESE PHOTOGRAPHS RIGHT HERE.
IT'S BEEN VACANT FOR ABOUT 15 YEARS.
UM, THERE IS A, UM, SURE IS GENERAL PARLOR THAT'S DILAPIDATED AND IT'S BEEN SHUT DOWN FOR I THINK TWO YEARS, SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
UH, OUR PLAN IS TO TAKE THIS BUILDING DOWN, PUT A NEW BUILDING UP, UM, THAT
[01:10:01]
WILL TIE INTO THE EXISTING BUILDING AND THEN RENOVATE, DO A TOTAL RENOVATION OF, UH, THE OLD BUILDING AT 5 5 5 WARBURTON.SO THIS IS A RENDERING OF THE, UM, BUILDING WITH THE ADDITION THREE STORY ADDITION ON THE LEFT.
UM, AND THEN THERE IS ALSO, IT WRAPS AROUND THE BUILDING.
THERE'S ALSO AN ADDITION, UH, TO THE RIGHT ON WARBURTON AVENUE ON THE NORTHERN END.
THIS IS THE ADDITION ON THE NORTHERN END.
UM, AND THESE ARE JUST DIFFERENT VIEWS.
I'M JUST GIVING YOU AN INTRODUCTION SO YOU CAN UNDERSTAND GENERALLY WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO ACHIEVE.
UM, AS HIS VIEWS, LOOKING AT THE BACK, UH, BACK OF THE BUILDING, WE'VE DECIDED TO TREAT THE, THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING, UH, AS THE FACADE FACING WAR BURTON AVENUE.
THIS IS THE FRONT OF THE LOT WE'RE ACTUALLY GOING TO USE.
UM, I'M TRYING TO SEE IF I CAN FIND THE CLICKER.
OH, IT DOESN'T SEEM TO WORK, DOESN'T.
WE'RE USING THE HISTORICAL ENTRANCE OF THE OLD BUILDING AS THE ENTRANCE TO THE RESIDENTIAL UNITS, AND WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO USE THE FIRST FLOOR AS A COMMERCIAL SPACE.
WE'RE ADDING A NEW STOREFRONT ON THIS SIDE OF THE BUILDING, A NEW STOREFRONT ON THE OTHER SIDE.
UM, AND THESE ARE JUST DIFFERENT VIEWS, AND MOST OF THE VIEWS LOOKING DOWN CAN SHOW YOU THE BULKHEAD THAT WE'RE GONNA TALK ABOUT IN A MINUTE, WHICH, UH, IS HERE.
THIS IS, UH, CONTAINS A STAIR EGRESS STAIR AND ELEVATOR THAT ALLOWS US TO MAKE ALL THE UNITS, UH, HANDICAP ACCESSIBLE, UH, A DA COMPLIANT, UM, UNITS.
AND, UM, AND THIS IS, UM, JUST DIFFERENT, THE FACADE FACING, UH, SPRING STREET, WE'RE ACTUALLY, UH, THAT'S GOING TO REPLACE THE OLD, UM, FUNERAL PARLOR BUILDING AND THEN THE FACADE FACING SEVEN SPRING.
WE'VE DESIGNED THE BUILDING TO TRY TO, TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT PRESERVING THESE TWO BEAUTIFUL BUILDINGS ON EACH SIDE OF THE NEW BUILDING, AND WHICH IS ONE REASON WHY WE WILL NEED A VARIANCE.
UM, AND FOR PARKING, WHICH I'LL EXPLAIN IN A MINUTE, THIS IS JUST AERIAL VIEW.
I THINK EVERYONE KNOWS WHERE THE BUILDING'S LOCATED.
UH, THIS IS ANOTHER AERIAL VIEW.
YOU'LL SEE THE BULKHEAD IN THE MIDDLE OF THE BUILDING.
ANOTHER VIEW, LOOKING DOWN, THIS IS LOCATION PLAN.
THIS IS THE TAX MAP ON THE LEFT, ANOTHER AERIAL VIEW, LOOKING DOWN AT THE RIGHT, SHOWING THE SITE, AND BRIGHT BLUE.
OKAY, SO THIS IS OUR SITE PLAN.
UM, AND BY THE WAY, WE'VE BEEN TO FOUR MEETINGS WITH THE PLANNING BOARD, ONE WITH THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD.
UH, SO FAR WE'VE RECEIVED A LOT OF, UM, UH, VERY POSITIVE, UM, INPUT FROM THESE BOARDS.
UH, AND NOW WE'RE HERE, UM, TO SHOW YOU OUR CURRENT SITE PLAN.
UM, THE GRAY AREA IS EXISTING 5 5 5 WABURN AVENUE.
THE, UM, THIS, UM, UH, LAVENDER COLOR IS ACTUALLY THE THREE STORY ADDITION THAT WE'RE PLANNING TO ADD.
AND THEN THE BLUE AREA IN THE BACK IS A ONE STORY PIECE.
NOW, THESE, UH, THIS BUILDING MEETS THE, UH, SETBACKS BOT COVERAGE, EXCEPT FOR THESE DECKS THAT ARE IN YELLOW.
UH, WE'RE ASKING FOR A VARIANCE SO THAT WE CAN HAVE A, TO HAVE A 15 FOOT SETBACK TO THESE DECKS.
THE BUILDING ITSELF IS 20, HAS THE 20 FOOT SETBACK THAT'S REQUIRED FOR THE REAR YARD, UH, AT THE SECOND AND THIRD FLOOR.
AND AT THE FIRST FLOOR, YOU'RE ALLOWED TO HAVE A 10 FOOT SETBACK.
THOSE, THOSE, UM, THOSE RECTANGLES IN LIGHT BLUE ARE DECKS THAT CAN GO INTO THAT SETBACK BY 10 FEET.
AND THEY'RE ALSO, UH, CO COMPLIANT.
I'M GOING TO, UH, NOW BLOW UP OUR ZONING DATA CHART SO THAT I CAN GO THROUGH THE VARIANCES.
UM, WE ARE ASKING FOR A PARKING VARIANCE, AND THAT IS SO THAT WE CAN HAVE A RATIO OF ONE TO ONE, UH, ONE SPACE PER UNIT.
WE HAVE 15 UNITS IN THIS BUILDING.
UM, AND THE PARKING'S REQUIRED JUST FOR THE RESIDENTIAL UNITS BECAUSE ALL THE COMMERCIAL SPACES ARE UNDER 2,500 SQUARE FEET AND ARE EXEMPT FROM PARK OFF STREET PARKING.
UH, WE ARE ASKING FOR ONE-TO-ONE RATIO BASED ON MEETING THE DEFINITION OF TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT, UM, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE WESTCHESTER COUNTY GUIDELINES AND ALSO WITH OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, UM, REVISIONS.
UH, THE NEXT VARIANCE WE ARE REQUESTING
[01:15:01]
IS FOR, UH, THE SETBACK TO THE REAR YARD.WE'RE ASKING FOR A VARIANCE INSTEAD OF 20 FEET, 15 FEET TO THE DECKS THAT ARE ON THE, UH, WEST SIDE OF THE BUILDING.
UM, AND THEN WE'RE ASKING FOR HEIGHT VARIANCE.
AND THIS HAS THREE COMPONENTS.
ONE, WE'RE ASKING FOR A VARIANCE TO THE HEIGHT OF THE PROPOSED ROOF, WHICH IS, UM, 1.6 FEET ABOVE THE MAXIMUM, UH, HEIGHT REQUIRED.
UH, THE NEXT ONE IS WE'RE ASKING FOR A VARIANCE TO THE, UM, TWO, UH, UH, PARA PARAPET WALL, WHICH IS GONNA BE 1.3 FEET ABOVE THE, UM, MAXIMUM ALLOWED.
AND A THIRD PART OF OUR HEIGHT VARIANCE IS FOR THE BULKHEAD.
WE'RE ASKING FOR 20.8 FEET ABOVE THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT, BUT ACTUALLY THIS BULKHEAD IS ONLY 15.5 FEET ABOVE THE ROOF OF THE EXISTING BUILDING.
AND THERE HAS BEEN, THERE WAS A PREVIOUS APPLICATION WHERE THE ZONING BOARD APPROVED OF A BULKHEAD THAT WAS 17 FEET ABOVE THE EXISTING ROOF.
AND BY THE WAY, THERE'S A LITTLE CALCULATION HERE THAT SHOWS THAT THE, UH, BULKHEAD IS ONLY, UH, 5%, 5.3% OF THE TOTAL ROOF AREA.
THESE ARE OUR, UM, OUR CALCULATIONS FOR HEIGHT, UH, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE HASTINGS ZONING CODE TO SHOW DIFFERENT PLANES AND DIFFERENT, UH, ELEVATIONS.
AND, UH, A LIST OF ALL THE, UM, GRADE PLANE CALCULATIONS DOWN BELOW.
AND AS A RESULT OF THESE CALCULATIONS, WE HAVE, UH, SHOWN A DIAGRAM FOR EACH FACADE OF THE BUILDING, SOUTHEAST, NORTH, AND WEST.
UM, AND THE, THERE IS A DARK RED LINE ON EACH OF THESE DIAGRAMS TO SHOW THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT ALLOWED.
IT VARIES DEPENDING ON THE, UH, THE HEIGHT PLANES THAT WE ARE REQUIRED TO FOLLOW, UM, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ZONING CODE.
THE DARK TEAL COLOR IS OUR PROPOSED BULKHEAD.
NOW, I WANNA GO THROUGH EACH OF THESE.
UM, THERE'S THREE COMPONENTS FOR THE HEIGHT VARIANCE.
UH, STARTING WITH THIS ONE HERE.
UH, LET'S SEE IF I CAN BLOW THIS UP A LITTLE.
THE FIRST, UM, COMPONENT OF THE HEIGHT VARIANCE IS THAT OUR PROPOSED ROOF IS SLIGHTLY, IS 1.6 ABOVE THE 40 FOOT, UH, MAXIMUM HEIGHT.
AND IT'S THAT LITTLE SPACE, UH, PLACE, UH, UH, WHERE YOU SEE THE DARK, UH, TEAL COLOR, THAT IS THE PIECE OF BUILDING THAT GOES ABOVE THE 40 FOOT MAXIMUM.
AND THEN MOST OF THE BUILDING ACTUALLY IS UNDER THE 40 FOOT MAXIMUM, UH, THAT IS TO THE ROOF.
ANOTHER COMPONENT OF OUR HEIGHT VARIANCE IS THAT, UM, HERE ON THE NORTH AND EAST SIDE OF THE BUILDING, WE HAVE A PARAPET WALL.
AND I'LL SHOW YOU THE ELEVATIONS WHERE WE HAVE A PARAPET WALL FOR AESTHETIC REASONS, BECAUSE WHEN THIS BUILDING IS, IS UP AGAINST THE TALL FIVE FIVE WAR, WHICH IS LIKE 7.3 FEET ABOVE THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT.
THIS, UM, OUR NEW BUILDING NEEDS TO HAVE ENOUGH HEIGHT AND SCALE AND NICE TO HAVE THE RIGHT PROPORTIONS TO LOOK GOOD NEXT TO THAT BUILDING.
AND THIS IS WHY WE DESIGNED THE BUILDING WITH THE PARAPET WALL ON THOSE FACADES.
AND THEN ON THE, UH, A MINOR ZONING VARIANCE.
AND THEN THE, UH, THIRD COMPONENT.
AND THE THIRD COMPONENT IS THE, UH, VARIANCE FOR THE BULKHEAD.
AND, UM, I THINK THAT'S PRETTY CLEAR, IS JUST LOOK AT EACH FACADE.
OH, CHRISTINA, CAN YOU PLEASE SPEAK INTO THE MICROPHONE? OR YOU COULD TAKE THE, THE HANDHELD IF YOU WANT.
THAT'S THE, UH, DARK BLUE, THAT'S OUR BULKHEAD.
AND, UM, AS YOU GO AROUND THE BUILDING, YOU SEE ON THE SOUTH SIDE, THAT IS THE BUILDING FACING, UM, SPRING STREET AND SHOWING THE BULKHEAD IN THE MIDDLE, APPROXIMATELY IN THE MIDDLE OF THE BUILDING.
THIS WILL SERVE BOTH THE OLD AND THE NEW BUILDINGS.
AND THEN ON THE EAST ELEVATION, YOU SEE LESS OF IT BECAUSE THE OLD BUILDING IS VERY TALL, YOU KNOW, MUCH TALLER THAN THE, UH, ADDITION.
[01:20:02]
SO HOPEFULLY, AND AS YOU GO AROUND, YOU SEE IN THE NORTH SIDE, YOU SEE MORE OF THE BULKHEAD, UM, BECAUSE OF THE WAY THE BUILDING STEPS DOWN.AND THEN ON THE WEST SIDE IS WHERE YOU'RE SEEING THE BULKHEAD BEYOND.
UM, BUT THE, THAT PART OF THE BUILDING, WHICH IS THE PROPOSED BUILDING, IS LOWER THAN THE EXISTING.
UM, IF IT TO PLUG THIS BACK IN.
I THINK WE'LL JUST KEEP GOING.
BUT I NEED TO, UM, JUST GIVE US A SECOND HERE.
IT'S WORKING, ISN'T IT? I'M SORRY.
THINGS WERE, LOOKS NOT WORKING.
THESE, THESE ARE, THESE, THESE 3D UH, MODELS ARE HERE, JUST SO YOU CAN SEE THAT WHEN WE TURN THE MODEL, SO THAT IT WAS, UM, AT THE EYE LEVEL OF A PEDESTRIAN WALKING AROUND THE BUILDING.
THE, THE ONE ON THE TOP LEFT IS FROM THE EYE LEVEL OF SOMEONE ACROSS THE STREET.
YOU CAN'T SEE THE BULKHEAD, EVEN THOUGH IT IS ON THAT MODEL.
AND THEN WHEN YOU GO AROUND THE BUILDING AND LOOK ON FROM THE EAST SIDE, YOU ALSO CAN'T SEE THE BULKHEAD.
MOST OF THIS BULKHEAD IS VISIBLE FROM ABOVE.
NOW, I'D LIKE TO GO TO THE NEXT VARIANCE IS, WHICH IS FOR PARKING.
CHRISTINA, CAN I JUST, UM, BECAUSE MOST OF THIS BOARD IS NEW, SINCE BOTH OF THESE PROP, BOTH OF THESE PROPERTIES PREVIOUSLY RECEIVED VARIANCES.
UM, 5 55 PREVIOUSLY HAD A VARIANCE FOR THE BULKHEAD HEIGHT.
AND 15 SPRING HAD A LARGER VARIANCE FOR THE SIDE YARD SETBACK.
I THINK ON THE PRIOR PLAN THAT WAS APPROVED, I THINK THOSE BOTH PREDATE.
YOU MIGHT HAVE BEEN HERE FOR 15 SPRING.
IT CAME WELL, NO, IT, THEY, THEY GOT APPROVALS.
THEY JUST DIDN'T, DIDN'T GO AHEAD AND BUILD IT.
ARE, ARE WE TO CONSIDER WHY THEY DIDN'T BUILD IT? NO.
I THINK, I THINK YOUR POINT IS THAT, THAT THERE HAVE BEEN APPROVALS OF VARIANCES ALREADY, RIGHT? BUT IT WAS PROBABLY A DIFFERENT PLAN.
OR IS THIS THE EXACT SAME BUILDING PLAN? NO, IT WAS TWO DIFFERENT PLANS.
IT WAS TWO DIFFERENT, THEY WERE SEPARATE BUILDINGS.
UH, THEY, THEY'RE, THEY'VE ONLY NOW BEEN PUT TOGETHER AS A SINGLE PROJECT.
IT'S A TOTALLY DIFFERENT PROJECT.
I TOOK A FRESH LOOK AT THIS FOR A LOT OF REASONS.
FIRST OF ALL, THE NEW OWNER WANTED TO HAVE COMBINED NEW AND OLD, YOU KNOW, YOU MIGHT HAVE LOOKED AT A, A PROJECT FOR JUST 15 SPRING.
UM, AND ALSO WE KNEW THAT, UM, THAT THAT COULD HAVE BEEN A VERY EXPENSIVE SCHEME BECAUSE IT HAD A RAMP GOING DOWN TO UNDERGROUND PARKING.
THIS IS A MUCH MORE PRACTICAL DESIGN WHERE WE ARE TRYING TO AVOID ANY KIND OF, UM, DISRUPTION TO THE FOUNDATIONS OF THESE BEAUTIFUL BUILDINGS.
ONE BUILT IN LIKE 19 18, 5, 5, AND THE OTHER ONE I THINK WAS BUILT IN LATE 18 HUNDREDS.
SO WE ARE NOT GOING TO UNDERMINE, WE WERE GONNA AVOID GOING, DOING UNDERPINNING.
WE'RE GONNA AVOID, UH, YOU KNOW, ANY CHANCE OF UNDERMINING THESE BUILDINGS.
SO THEREFORE WE PUT THE, THE, THE, ACTUALLY THE CURB CUT FOR THE PARKING LOT IS EXACTLY WHERE IT IS NOW.
AND WE ARE GOING TO CUT THE GRADE SO IT'S NOT SO STEEP.
SO WE CAN CREATE A PARKING AREA THERE.
AND, UM, BUT I'LL EXPLAIN, UM, WHY WE ENDED UP WITH, UM, A ONE-TO-ONE PARKING RATIO.
UM, FIRST OF ALL, UM, WE KNEW FROM THE BEGINNING THAT WE, UM, COULD MEET THE WESTCHESTER COUNTY DEFINITION OF TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT.
THEY CALL IT, UH, TOD, BECAUSE, UH, IT'S, THIS IS A PROJECT THAT IS WITHIN A HALF MILE, UM, DISTANCE TO, UM, TRAIN STATION.
IT'S ACTUALLY 0.1 MILES FROM THE TRAIN STATION, TWO MINUTE WALK.
AND IT ALSO HAS A BUS STATION IN THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING ON WARBURG AVENUE.
AND, UH, THE IDEA TO THE, THE COUNTY IS PROMOTING THIS IDEA TO HELP TO, UM, UH, TO FOCUS ON DEVELOPMENT AROUND DOWNTOWN'S NEAR, UM, MASS TRANSIT AND TO PUT LESS OF THE BURDEN ON, UH, THE INFRASTRUCTURE THAT EXISTS.
UM, AND, UH, SO, UM, THE NEXT ITEM ON THIS PAGE IS THE WESTCHESTER COUNTY 2025.
IT IS, UH, A LIST OF, UH, RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE FUTURE ABOUT HOW TRANSIT SERVICES MUST BE REIMAGINED TO FIND COST EFFECTIVE ALTERNATIVES FOR AUTO USE.
AND THEY DO SUPPORT A REDUCED, UM, HAVING HOUSING NEAR TRANSIT AREA SO THAT WE CAN REDUCE THE DEPENDENCE ON AUTOMOBILE USE.
UM, WE ALSO, UM, MENTION ON THIS SLIDE THE, UM, WEST HASTINGS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS,
[01:25:01]
UH, ON THE LATEST UPDATE, UH, UPDATED PLAN, IT INDICATES THAT REDUCING PARKING, MINIMUM PARKING, MINIMUMS, BALANCES, ADDRESSING HOUSING NEEDS AND AFFORDABILITY WHILE PROMOTING SUSTAINABLE TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT.THIS PROJECT WILL HAVE TWO AFFORDABLE UNITS IN IT, TWO OUT OF THE 15.
UM, AND THEN, UH, THERE IS A COUNTY LETTER THAT REVIEWED THE PROJECT THAT WE SENT TO YOU IN THE SUBMISSION.
UM, IT ACTUALLY INDICATES THAT THE REQUIREMENT OF 1.5 SPACES PER ONE BEDROOM UNIT IS VERY HIGH COMPARED, IS HIGH COMPARED TO OTHER NEIGHBORHOODS, NEW TRADE STATIONS WITHIN THE COUNTY, WHICH TEND TO ONLY REQUIRE ONE PER UNIT.
UM, ENSURING THAT THE TRANSPORTATION NEEDS OF NEW RESIDENTS ARE ACCOMMODATED THROUGH MEANS OTHER THAN PRIVATE AUTOMOBILES IS AN IMPORTANT FACTOR IN REDUCING SPACE DEVOTED TO PARKING, REDUCING THE DEPENDENCY ON CARS, AND ENCOURAGING RESIDENTIAL GROWTH WITHOUT OVERBURDENING THE STREET NETWORK AND EXISTING PARKING.
OUR RESPONSE IS TO THIS, THAT THIS IS TRULY, UM, A, UM, TRANSIT ORIENTED ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT, AND IT IS VERY CLOSE TO, UH, SOURCES OF MASS TRANSIT.
SO OUR PLAN SHOWS 15 SPACES, AND THIS, UM, IS OUR PARKING LAYOUT SHOWING THE ENTRANCE IN THE SAME LOCATION IT IS NOW, YOU COME IN INSTEAD OF THAT RAMPED AREA.
WE'VE, UM, KIND OF FLATTENED THIS AS A VERY SLIGHT SLOPE.
UM, AND BY THE WAY, UM, THE HARDSHIP IN CREATING ANY MORE, UH, PARKING IS REALLY, WE HAVE, WE HAVE MADE THIS FIT BETWEEN THESE TWO BUILDINGS.
WE HAVE SEVEN SPRING STREET HERE, UH, WHICH IS BUILT RIGHT ON THE PROPERTY LINE.
AND THEN OVER HERE, 5 5 5 WARBURTON.
AND BETWEEN THESE TWO BUILDINGS, THIS IS AS MUCH PARKING AS WE'RE ABLE TO PROVIDE.
UM, SO THESE ARE JUST THE LAYOUTS OF THE UNITS.
UM, WE ARE PLANNING TO HAVE, UM, UH, JUST FOR YOUR INFORMATION, UM, YOU KNOW, COMMERCIAL IN THE, ON THE FIRST FLOOR, JUST AS IT WAS HISTORICALLY.
AND THEN WE HAVE FOUR RESIDENTIAL UNITS PER FLOOR.
WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THREE ONE BEDROOM, 11, TWO BEDROOM, ONE THREE BEDROOM.
AND INCLUDED IN THE 15 UNITS, WE WILL HAVE TWO AFFORDABLE UNITS.
THE BULKHEAD IS ESSENTIAL FOR CREATING THE EGRESS THAT WE NEED FOR THE NEW BUILDING, AND IS ALSO TO MEET A DA REQUIREMENTS FOR THE ENTIRE BUILDING, BOTH EXISTING AND NEW.
THAT'S OUR SECOND FLOOR PLAN SHOWING THE, THE NEW CORE AND YELLOW, THE STAIR AND THE ELEVATOR, WHICH, AND THIS IS OUR THIRD FLOOR.
OUR THIRD FLOOR ACTUALLY HAS THE, UH, WE ARE SHOWING THESE DECKS IN THAT BRIGHT TEAL COLOR.
THOSE ARE THE DECKS WHICH HAVE A 15 INSTEAD OF A 20 FOOT SETBACK.
WE ARE TRYING TO PROVIDE OUTDOOR SPACE FOR EVERY UNIT, INCLUDING AFFORDABLE UNITS.
UM, SO THAT THESE ARE VERY SUSTAINABLE TYPE LIVING DWELLINGS WHERE PEOPLE WILL HOPEFULLY STAY FOR A LONG TIME BECAUSE THEY HAVE A LOT OF ESSENTIAL THINGS THAT THEY NEED.
THEY'RE EVEN, UH, WHEREVER POSSIBLE WE'RE TRYING TO SQUEEZE IN, UM, HOME OFFICES, WHICH IS A, A VERY IMPORTANT, UM, TREND, UH, TO CONSIDER.
THIS IS OUR ROOF PLAN, JUST FOR YOUR INFORMATION TO SHOW YOU HOW WE'VE LAID OUT THAT BULKHEAD THAT NEEDS THE HEIGHT VARIANCE.
WE'VE TRIED TO, YOU KNOW, REALLY KEPT IT IN THE CENTER OF THE BUILDING SO IT'S BURIED AND YOU WOULDN'T SEE IT AS MUCH WHEN YOU'RE DOWN ON THE STREET LEVEL AT LEAST.
AND THIS LEADS TO, UH, THE OUTDOOR SPACE THAT WE WANT TO GIVE.
WE HAVE A COMMON AREA FOR ALL THE UNITS, AND THEN WE HAVE A FEW PRIVATE DECKS.
UH, IT'S JUST, SO FOR YOUR INFORMATION, THIS IS, UH, OUR, UM, OUR ELEVATION ON THE EAST SIDE.
AND THIS, UM, ADDITION IS ON THE RIGHT.
THIS ADDITION HAS A, UH, PARAPET WALL THAT NEEDS, UH, A SLIGHT VARIANCE.
AND WE FELT THAT IT WAS NECESSARY FOR US TO GO SLIGHTLY ABOVE THE 40 FOOT MAXIMUM SO THAT WE COULD DESIGN A BUILDING THAT FELT COMFORTABLE NEXT TO THIS, TO THE TALLER, UM, 5 5 5 WAR BURTON BUILDING.
AND WITHOUT THAT PARAPET, IT FEELS LIKE IT DOESN'T HAVE THE RIGHT PROPORTIONS.
UM, FOR THE SITE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE BUILDING, WE DID DROP THE BUILDING DOWN TO BE, UM, JUST, UM, IT'S JUST SLIGHTLY ABOVE ON THE END HERE, ABOVE THE 40 FOOT MAXIMUM.
AND THIS HAS A GLASS ROOF THAT A GLASS RAILING THAT'S SET BACK FROM THE EDGE OF THE ROOF, SO PROBABLY WOULDN'T BE TOO VISIBLE, BUT WE FELT THAT,
[01:30:01]
UM, WE WOULDN'T NEED THE PARAPET WALL HERE.AND, UM, SO WE NEED A VARIANCE FOR THE HEIGHT OF THIS ROOF, UM, BECAUSE IT'S JUST SLIGHTLY ABOVE THE MAXIMUM.
THESE ARE JUST OTHER ELEVATIONS OF THE BUILDING.
SORRY, I DON'T WANNA GO TOO FAST.
BUT THE BULKHEAD IS HERE BEYOND, THIS IS THE NORTH ELEVATION SHOWING THAT, YOU KNOW, UH, WE WE'RE TRYING TO, UH, REALLY FOLLOW A LOT OF THE PATTERNS THAT ARE ALREADY IN THE VILLAGE.
AND SO MANY OF THE BUILDINGS HAVE A, A REALLY NICE FACADE WITH BRICK AND LOTS OF DETAIL FACING THE STREET.
SO WE, WE CONTINUE THAT PATTERN AND WANNA KEEP THIS PARAPET AS PART OF THIS BUILDING THAT FACES THE STREET.
AND THEN AS YOU GO TO THE BACK OF THE BUILDING, IT GETS, IT'S SIMPLE, IT'S SIMPLIFIED AND THE VERY MUCH LIKE THE BUILDINGS IN THE DOWNTOWN.
BUT ON THE RIGHT YOU SEE THE RETURN OF THAT, OF THIS, UM, CORNICE DETAIL THAT WE HAVE AT THE TOP OF THE BUILDING.
UM, AND THAT IS A, SOME, THAT IS AN EXPLANATION OF ALL THE, THE, THE MINOR HEIGHT VARIANCES THAT WE NEED.
UH, I ALSO WOULD LIKE TO DESCRIBE THE VIEW PRESERVATION STUDIES THAT WE'VE PREPARED.
UH, WE PRESENTED THIS TO THE PLANNING BOARD, UM, AND THE TOP SLIDE SHOWS THE EXISTING BUILDING, THE BOTTOM SHOWS PROPOSED.
WE'VE BLOWN THAT UP SO THAT YOU CAN SEE HERE, THIS IS THE ADDITION ON THE RIGHT.
WE'VE TAKEN PHOTOS FROM NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTIES AND THE BULKHEAD IS THAT PIECE THAT YOU SEE COMING UP, WHICH YOU DO SEE WHEN YOU'RE UPHILL FROM THE BUILDING.
WHERE IS THIS TAKEN FROM? IS THIS ON THE V-F-W-V-F-W? MM-HMM
ARE THERE ANY PICTURES FROM THE SIDE OR ARE THEY ALL JUST FROM STRAIGHTFORWARD FROM THE SIDE OF THE BUILDING? YEAH, FROM A VANTAGE POINT OF LOOKING AT EITHER WAY.
BUT THEY'RE ALL, JUST FROM THAT VANTAGE POINT FROM THE VFW STRAIGHT ON, UM, WE, UM, WEREN'T ABLE TO GET A VIEW OF THE BUILDING FROM THE NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTIES BECAUSE, UM, YOU CAN'T GET, UM, IT'S VERY HARD TO FIND.
THEY, THEY HAVE, UH, THE STREET, THE HOUSES ON WHITHAM VERY CLOSE TOGETHER AND THERE ARE SOME THAT HAVE, ALMOST ALL OF THEM HAVE A GARAGE AT THE END OF THEIR DRIVEWAY.
AND WE CONTACTED A FEW NEIGHBORS AND WE HA WE WEREN'T ABLE TO GET A RESPONSE SO THAT WE COULD ACTUALLY WALK IN INTO THEIR PROPERTY.
BETH, WHERE WERE YOU LOOKING FOR A VIEW FROM PRESERVATIONS? YEAH, ALSO, YEAH, WE ACTUALLY STARTED OUT BY THINKING WE COULD ASK FOR A WAIVER, BUT IT WASN'T CLEAR, UM, WHETHER WE WERE AFFECTING THE VIEW OR NOT.
UM, BECAUSE THERE'S SUCH A MINOR DIFFERENCE BETWEEN BEFORE AND AFTER.
BUT, UM, WHEN WE, UH, DID, UH, WE ACTUALLY DID THIS STUDY TWICE SO THAT WE COULD GET A, A BETTER PHOTO, UM, DURING, UM, UH, THE TIME AFTER THE LEAVES FELL DOWN.
AND WE COULD SEE THAT THERE IS SOME IMPACT, BUT IT IS MINIMAL BECAUSE WITHOUT THE, THE BUILDING THERE, IF YOU GO IN CLOSE, I GONNA SEE IF I CAN, YOU SEE, UH, OTHER BUILDINGS DOWN BELOW.
AND ALSO, I DON'T THINK YOU SEE THE RIVER, YOU SEE THE PALISADES
THAT'S BE, THAT'S BEFORE AND THAT'S AFTER I CAN ASK THE QUESTION AFTER THE PRESENTATION.
I'M JUST LIKE, YEAH, I CAN ASK IT AFTERWARDS.
I I, I JUST, I I WASN'T SURE IF SHE WAS ANSWERING YOUR QUESTION, SO I WANTED TO NO, BUT THAT'S WHAT, LIKE, I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND HOW THE TOWN KNEW WHO TO NOTICE SO THAT THE COMMUNITY COULD WE HAVE A, IT'S A FOOT, IT'S, IT'S A 300 FOOT RADIUS.
SO DOES THIS, THESE, THIS VIEW PRESERVATION STUDY REFLECT THAT RADIUS? YES.
IT AFFECTS THE HOUSES ON WHITMAN STREET, NOT A, EXCUSE ME, IT INCLUDED THE HOUSES ON WHITMAN STREET.
THE NOTICE INCLUDED THE HOUSES ON WHITMAN STREET.
I, I THINK WHAT THEY'RE TRYING TO, SO OBVIOUSLY THE EXISTING BUILDING IS THEY ARE AN ALREADY BLOCKS.
SO THE, THE CONCERN AND THE REASON WHY IT DIDN'T GET A WAIVER IS THE ADDITION ON THE SIDE.
THAT'S THE ONLY PIECE WHERE THERE WAS A NEW RIGHT ON, ON THE NORTH, ON THE NORTH SIDE BLOCKAGE OF THE VIEW OF THE PALISADES MM-HMM
WITHIN THE VERTICAL HEIGHT, SORT THE HORIZONTAL WIDTH MORE THAN THE VERTICAL HEIGHT.
'CAUSE THE VERTICAL HEIGHT ISN'T REALLY CHANGING EXCEPT FOR THE BULKHEAD, WHICH ONLY BLOCKS USE OF THE SKY
[01:35:01]
PRESERVATION ONLY PROTECTS THE VIEWS OF THE PALISADES IN THE RIVER.AND WE COULDN'T GET A VIEW OF THE RIVER FROM ANY OF THE NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTIES THERE.
I THINK THERE'S OTHER BUILDINGS THAT REALLY BLOCK YEAH.
SO IT'S ONLY A LITTLE BIT OF THE VIEW TO THE PALISADES.
AND BEFORE I FINISH THE PRESENTATION, I JUST WANNA MENTION, AFTER GOING TO FIVE MEETINGS SO FAR FOR THIS PROJECT, WE HAVE, WE ACTUALLY WOULD LIKE TO, AND WE WANTED TO JUST BRING IT UP TODAY 'CAUSE WE MIGHT LIKE TO SUBMIT A SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT SCHEME THAT STILL NEEDS A 15 FOOT SETBACK.
UM, AND, AND INSTEAD OF HAVING THE DECKS HERE, WE MIGHT GIVE, UM, THESE UNITS ON THE THIRD FLOOR, THE ROOF DECKS, AND THEN JUST BRING THE BUILDING OUT 15 TO THE 15 FOOT SETBACK BECAUSE, UH, THESE ARE VERY TIGHT UNITS.
UM, BUT I KNOW THAT'S A TOPIC FOR ANOTHER MEETING AND I JUST, THAT'S A DIFFERENT VARI WANNA SURPRISE YOU IF WE COME BACK FOR THAT.
IT'D HAVE TO BEAND AND WE'D HAVE TO GO START BACK AT THAT PLANNING BOARD AGAIN.
WE'LL HAVE TO GO BACK TO PLANNING ANYWAY.
YEAH, BECAUSE IT'S A SOLID, IT'S THE BUILDING.
SO THAT WOULD BE DIFFERENT'S A DIFFERENT VARIANCE.
IT WAS NOTICED AS THE DECKS DECK WAS NOT NO, WHAT WAS NOTICED WAS THE, JUST THE SETBACK, 15 FEET FROM 20 FEET, BUT THE PLANS ARE, SHOW THE DECKS IN THAT AREA.
SO A DECK IS DIFFERENT THAN A BUILDING.
YOU MEAN BECAUSE THE NOTICE INCLUDED THE PLANS, IS THAT RIGHT? WELL, THE NOTICE, THE PLANS THAT WERE AVAILABLE AND THE PLANS THAT THIS BOARD IS VIEWING SHOW THE DECKS WITHIN THE SETBACK.
SO ONE OF THE QUESTIONS I WOULD'VE HAD WAS, YOU KNOW, WHAT IS THE NATURE AND THE THICKNESS OF, OF THE NON-CONFORMING PIECE? AND YOU WOULD'VE SHOWN US THE ELEVATION OF THE DECK WITH ITS RAILING HEIGHT.
AND THAT'S A DIFFERENT INCURSION THAN IF YOU MOVE THE HOLE BUILDING FORWARD.
I UNDERSTAND, BUT SHOULD WE RULE ON WHAT'S SUBMITTED AND IF THEY CHOOSE TO COME BACK, THEY WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK.
UNLESS THEY DON'T WANT YOU TO, WE'D LIKE THEM TO RULE ON PLEASE.
SORRY, DID YOU FINISH OR THANK YOU.
I AM FINISHED AND I DON'T SEE ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS, SO, UM, ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD? I HAVE A FEW, AND IT'S ALONG THE LINES OF MY EARLIER COMMENTS.
I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THE NEIGHBORS WERE NOTICED, BUT WE HAVE NO LETTERS FROM THE COMMUNITY ONE.
JUST THE ONE THAT WE TALKED ABOUT.
AND WAS THAT LETTER FROM SOMEONE WHO WAS NOTICED? NOT ON WHITMAN STREET.
AND THEN I AM A LITTLE CURIOUS.
YOU HAD POINTED US TO, UM, THE LETTER FROM WESTCHESTER COUNTY PLANNING BOARD REFERRAL REVIEW.
BUT IN THAT REVIEW THEY SAID THEY DID NOT CONSIDER THE BUILDING ELEVATIONS, THEY WEREN'T PROVIDED WITH THAT INFORMATION.
IS THAT SOMETHING THAT, AN ERROR BY THE, THAT MIGHT HAVE BEEN AN ERROR ON THE VILLAGES.
WHAT WAS THAT? THE COUNTY LETTER SAYS THEY DIDN'T HAVE THE ELEVATIONS.
WE DON'T, THE LETTER DOES SAY THAT.
IT'S JUST THE, WE BELIEVE THE PLANNING BOARD DIDN'T PROVIDE THEM.
I THINK IT WAS AN ERROR BY THE VILLAGE AND NOT INCLUDING THE ELEVATIONS.
WHAT SAID? AND THEN, UM, CAN WE GO BACK AND LOOK AT THE EAST SIDE FOR THE VARIANCE? FOR THE HEIGHT? I WAS TRYING TO UNDERSTAND.
WE'VE HEARD THAT IT'S MINIMAL, BUT I THINK IT'S 20 FEET, WHICH COULD BE, THAT'S FOR THE BULKHEAD SUBSTANTIAL, BUT THEN ALSO THERE'S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE RED LINE RIGHT THERE.
THAT, SO THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE RED LINE ON THE EAST VIEW, THIS ONE MM-HMM
WHAT'S THAT DIFFERENTIAL BETWEEN THE RED LINE? I THOUGHT EVERYTHING ABOVE THE RED LINE IS WHAT IS BEING ASKED FOR AS A VARIANCE IN HEIGHT.
ACTUALLY IT IS, BUT THE WHITE IS EXISTING.
THE WHITE IS THE EXISTING BUILDING.
5, 5, 5 WAR BURDEN IS, UH, ABOVE THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT.
AND THE PROPOSED IS THE, UM, BUILDING IN THIS LIKE PURPLISH LIGHT, LIGHT LAVENDER COLOR ON THE RIGHT HERE AT IT'S SLIGHTLY ABOVE THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT.
AND THEN AT THE PLANNING BOARD LEVEL, DID, UM, WERE THERE DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THE BULKHEADS DIFFERENT DESIGNS FOR A BULKHEAD THAT MIGHT NOT NEED A 20 FOOT VARIANCE AS AN ALTERNATIVE? IT WASN'T DISCUSSED, IT WAS ACCEPTED AS
[01:40:01]
DRAWN, BUT THOSE ARE SOME OF THE QUESTIONS.WELL, MAYBE, MAYBE IT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO TAKE THESE ONE AT A TIME.
DOES THAT MAKE ANY SENSE? SO EACH OF THE VARIANCES.
EACH OF THE VARIANCES OF THE VARIANCES, AND THEN WE CAN, SO, BUT WE, BUT WE DID START WITH THE HEIGHT.
UM, AND, AND AGAIN, THERE'S TWO ELEMENTS TO THE HEIGHT.
ONE IS THE BULKHEAD AND NO, NOT EVEN TO YOU, ON THE HEIGHT VARIANCE ITSELF, RIGHT? MM-HMM
THERE'S THE BULKHEAD AND THEN THERE'S THAT SMALL PIECE OF THE PARAPET, THE OF THE ADDITION ON THE PARAPET.
SO EVEN THOUGH IT'S THE THIRD ONE HERE, WE STARTED TALKING ABOUT HEIGHT AND MAYBE WE JUST FOCUS THE DISCUSSION ON HEIGHT AND THEN WE CAN MOVE ON TO THE OTHER ONES.
I, I HAD SOME OF THE SAME QUESTIONS.
YOU KNOW, IS THE ONLY THING IN THE BULKHEAD, THE STAIR OVERRUN AND THE ELEVATOR OVERRUN IN THE ELEVATOR MACHINE ROOM.
IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE IN THERE? UM, WE HAVE A, UM, BLOW UP OF IT IF YOU'D LIKE TO KNOW.
UM, UH, WELL FIRST OF ALL, WE HAVE THE, UM, THE ROOF BLEND TO SHOW.
WELL, ON THE A OR B SUBMISSION, WE BLEW UP THE, UM, BULKHEAD.
SO YOU CAN SEE HOW WE DESIGNED IT.
THIS IS, UM, THIS IS WHAT THE PLAN CONTAINS.
YOU COME UP THE ELEVATOR AND THERE'S A SMALL VESTIBULE, UM, THERE'S A DOOR DIRECTLY INTO THE EGRETE, AND THEN WE HAVE AN UPPER LEVEL, UM, BECAUSE THE ELEVATOR HAS TO GO UP ANOTHER UPPER LEVEL TO GET CONNECTED TO THE ROOF DECK ON THIS SIDE.
UM, AND WE DESIGNED IT IN CASE YOU'D LIKE TO KNOW.
UM, WE PUT A LOT OF THOUGHT INTO TRY TO JUST KEEPING DOWN THE HEIGHT OF THIS BULKHEAD BY, UH, THE STAIR.
THE, THE STAIR BULKHEAD FOLLOWS THE SHAPE OF THE STAIRCASE SO THAT IT HUGS, YOU KNOW, THE SORT OF A MINIMUM HEIGHT ABOVE THE STAIR.
AND THE ELEVATOR IS BASED ON A SPECIFIC ELEVATOR.
AND WE, UM, UH, WHEN WE, WE KNEW THAT THE PREVIOUS SUBMISSION, UM, THAT WAS APPROVED WAS HIGHER.
WE WERE TRYING TO GET OUR BULKHEAD THAT HEIGHT OR LOWER, AND WE WERE SUCCESSFUL, WE GOT IT TO 15.5 FEET ABOVE THE EXISTING ROOF.
AND THAT'S BASED ON, UM, THE SIZE OF ELEVATOR THAT WE NEED TO MEET CODE FOR THIS, UM, TYPE OF CHRISTINA, DO YOU KNOW WHAT, HOW HIGH THE BULKHEAD WAS THAT WAS PREVIOUSLY APPROVED? YES, WE HAVE THAT INFORMATION.
AND I, BEFORE, I GUESS I HAD TO GO RIGHT TO THE SLIDE AND PUT IT HERE.
THE, THE, UM, BULKHEAD THAT WE ARE PROPOSING, THE 15.5 FEET ABOVE THE EXISTING ROOF, THE BULKHEAD APPROVED IN 2019 WAS 17 FEET ABOVE.
I MEANT THE ONE THAT WAS APPROVED HIGHER WE'RE LOWER THAN THAT BY 1.5 FEET
AND EVEN IF YOU, I KNOW THAT NOBODY LIKES THEM, BUT IF YOU DID A, A PIT ELEVATOR OR HYDRAULIC ELEVATOR OR UH, THE MACHINE ROOM IN THE BASEMENT, YOU'D STILL HAVE THE STAIR OVERRUN, RIGHT? COULD YOU REPEAT THAT? YEAH, SORRY.
I WAS SAYING EVEN IF YOU CONSIDERED, UM, A PIT ELEVATOR, A HYDRAULIC ELEVATOR, A MACHINE ROOM IN THE, IN THE BASEMENT, YOU WOULD STILL HAVE THE STAIR OVERRUN AND YOU'D HAVE THE ELEVATOR STOP.
RIGHT? SOME OF THAT HEIGHT IS, YOU KNOW, OVERRUN OF THE, AND THE MACHINE, I'M ASSUMING.
AND THE MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT FOR THE ELEVATOR, UH, IS SOME OF THE HEIGHT.
UM, KAREN DID A LOT OF RESEARCH ON IT.
UM, MAYBE YOU WANNA DESCRIBE, COULD YOU SPEAK KAREN? YOU HAVE TO COME UP.
UM, SO I MEAN, I, THE STAIR GOES ABOVE THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT.
SO THE STAIR BULKHEAD WOULD REQUIRE VARIANCE.
THAT VARIANCE WOULD BE LOWER IF IT WAS JUST FOR THE STAIR.
UM, BUT THE BUILDING, UH, TO HAVING AN ELEVATOR GO UP THERE WOULD REQUIRE A HIGHER HEIGHT VARIANCE.
AND WE DIDN'T INVESTIGATE, UH, HYDRAULIC OR OTHER TYPES OF ELEVATORS AS WE DISCUSSED.
WE'RE TRYING TO MINIMIZE EXCAVATION RIGHT NEAR, UM, 5 0 5.
AND AS YOU CAN SEE IN PLAN, THE BULKHEAD COMES UP RIGHT BETWEEN THE TWO BUILDINGS BECAUSE ALSO WE'RE HAVING ONE BULKHEAD CONNECT BOTH ROOF LEVELS.
SO IN ORDER FOR THE BULKHEAD TO ACCESS A HIGH ROOF AND A LOW ROOF, IT NEEDS TO BE LOCATED CLOSE TO THAT JUNCTURE POINT.
UM, SO WE DIDN'T INVESTIGATE OTHER TYPES OF VALE AREAS.
I I DON'T KNOW IF THEY WOULD BE THAT MUCH LOWER.
I MEAN, YOU ARE BUILDING RIGHT NEXT TO 5 5 5,
[01:45:02]
YOU BECAUSE OF THE ENTRANCE TO THE, THE PARKING, IT IS LOWER THAN THE GROUND LEVEL OF 5 5 5, RIGHT? THE PARKING, IS THAT CORRECT? NO, ACTUALLY BECAUSE OF THE SLOPE OF SPRING, THE, AT THAT, UM, THE, UH, THE PARKING LOT IS, UH, THIS, THIS PARKING LOT, IS THAT THE SAME LEVEL AS THE BASEMENT OF FIVE BY FIVE? THE BASEMENT? OKAY.IS THAT SO WE WOULDN'T HAVE TO DO ANY UNDERPINNING.
AND THE ELEVATOR IS RIGHT UP AGAINST THE WALL OF FIVE BY FIVE, BUT THEN THE, IN THE BASEMENT.
SO THERE, THERE HAS TO BE SOME SORT OF PIT UNDER THE ELEVATOR THOUGH, RIGHT? SO IT DOES GO LOWER THAN THE FOUNDATION OF FIVE OR LOWER THAN THE BASEMENT OF FIVE BY FIVE.
BUT WE DON'T WANT TO GO TOO LOW.
WE DON'T WANT TO HAVE TO UNDERPIN OR UNDERMINE IT.
I ACTUALLY WORKED ON PHASE ONE OF THIS BUILDING AND THERE'S A WHOLE NEW STEEL SKELETON TO HOLD THESE WALLS TOGETHER BECAUSE THE BUILDING HAD STRUCTURAL PROBLEMS. MM-HMM
AND, AND WE'RE TRYING TO MINIMIZE ANY CHANGES.
BUT, UM, WE HAVEN'T GOTTEN INTO THAT LEVEL OF DETAIL DETAIL YET TO KNOW WHAT'S REQUIRED.
WE PICKED AN ELEVATOR, BUT WE HAVEN'T GOTTEN INTO THAT.
UM, BUT I MEAN, IT WILL REQUIRE A PIT, BUT ANY ELEVATOR THAT DOES NOT HAVE OVERHEAD EQUIPMENT WOULD REQUIRE A DEEPER EDGE.
THE, THE BULKHEAD IS QUITE STRIKING FROM CERTAIN, UH, ANGLES AS THE STANDOUT.
UH, YOU, WELL, IT'S NOT MEANT TO BE A FEATURE OBVIOUSLY, BUT, UH, BY DEF FACTO BY BEING, UH, AN ELEMENT THAT IS SO MUCH TALLER AND IT IS, IT IS MEANT TO ACCESS THE ROOF OF 5 5 5 AS WELL AS THE AS 15 SPRING.
THAT'S, WE WANNA GIVE OUTDOOR SPACE TO ALL UNITS, UM, TO MAKE THEM BETTER LIVING AREAS.
'CAUSE THERE ISN'T ANY PROPERTY.
SO IT'S EITHER THE ROOF DECK OR THE OUT OR THE BALCONIES.
AND WE WANT TO GET A DA, UM, COMPLIANCE FOR ACCESS TO THOSE ROOF DECKS.
IF YOU WOULD LIKE, I CAN SHOW YOU THESE 3D UH, VIEWS AGAIN THAT SHOW THE BULKHEAD.
THAT'S ONE REASON WHY I WAS GONNA SAY WHERE DO YOU SEE IT FROM? 'CAUSE I KNOW IT'S CENTERED IN THE BUILDING.
UM, 'CAUSE THE MODEL, OUR RENDERER PUT BULKHEAD ON THE RENDERING AND IT'S ON THE RENDERING.
YOU CAN'T SEE IT FROM THIS VIEW, BUT YOU CAN SEE IT LOOKING DOWN AT THE BUILDING.
UM, MAYBE BIRD'S EYE VIEW, SECOND ONE, BUT, BUT AT CERTAIN VANTAGE POINTS YOU MAY SEE IT.
AND ESPECIALLY I THINK YOU SEE IT LOOKING DOWN THE HIP, BUT I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED.
BUT THERE'S ROOF DECKS FOR THIS PLAN, CORRECT? THE WHOLE ROOF WILL BE A, A DECK.
AND THAT DOESN'T, THAT SOUNDS LIKE MAYBE THIS IS JUST FOR YOU BUDDY.
THE ROOF DECKS DID NOT REQUIRE ANY KIND OF VARIANCE.
ARE THERE ANY LIMITS ON THINGS THAT CAN BE PLACED THEM, PLACED ON THEM IN TERMS OF HEIGHT, YOU KNOW, TRELLIS AND YES.
SO THE ANTICIPATION IS THAT THERE'LL BE FURNITURE ON THEM? YES.
BUT THEY CAN'T BE ANY LIKE FENCES OR THAN TRELLIS OR ANYTHING.
AND THE, THE GLASS RAILING IS SET BACK FROM THE PARAPET, IS THAT CORRECT? THREE FEET? MM-HMM
EXCEPT AT THE OLD BUILDING, WE'RE ATTACHING IT TO THE INSIDE EDGE OF THE OLD PARAPET WALL BECAUSE IT'S, UM, A BETTER WAY OF SUPPORTING IT.
BUT THE NEW BUILDING HAS A SETBACK OF THREE FEET.
I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAN SEE IT, BUT THE, THE CORNER PIECE ON THE RIGHT HAS THE PARAPET TO, IT'S REALLY FOR AESTHETIC REASONS.
AND THEN AT SOME POINT IT TRANSITIONS TO THAT GLASS RAILING THAT'S SETBACK THREE FEET.
I LOOKING FOR THIS IMAGE IN THE SUBMISSION.
DO YOU KNOW THE SHEET? THIS IS ON P FOUR.
IT IS NOT IN SUBMISSION IS NOT, IT'S JUST FOR PURPOSES.
SO WE, WE'VE TAKEN THE HEIGHT PIECE.
WE'VE MOSTLY BEEN TALKING ABOUT THE PARAPET.
DOES ANYONE HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT THE, SORRY, MOSTLY BEEN TALKING ABOUT THE A BULKHEAD.
DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE SORT OF SMALLER PIECES OF PARAPET OR ROOF HEIGHT?
[01:50:01]
DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY MORE COMMENTS ON THE HEIGHT OR DO WE WANT TO DISCUSS SOME OF THE ISSUES? WE CAN CIRCLE BACK TO HEIGHT AND WE ALSO HAVE THE VIEW PRESERVATION.DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE PARKING COMING IN? PARKING HAD BEEN ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I HAD BEEN CONSIDERING JUST FROM LOOKING AT THE PROPOSAL, UM, UH, THE MOST.
BUT AS WE'VE, YOU KNOW, GOTTEN SOME CLARITY ON, UM, YOU KNOW, THE PROXIMITY TO THE TRAIN STATION AND, AND, AND, AND, AND SOME OF THE GUIDANCE ABOUT THAT, I, I, I FEEL LESS CONCERN PERSONALLY ABOUT THE, THE, THE PARKING ISSUES THAN I DID COMING IN HERE TONIGHT.
I MEAN, I THINK, UM, YOU KNOW, THE, THE PARKING ISSUE, YOU KNOW, IN TERMS OF WEIGHING THE BALANCE OF THE APPLICANT TO THE COMMUNITY, I DON'T SEE ANYTHING THERE.
I MEAN, I GUESS THE ARGUMENT WOULD BE THERE IF SOMEBODY HAD TWO CARS, THEY WOULD PARK THEIR OTHER CAR ON THE STREET, WHICH WOULD COMPETE WITH STREET PARKING OR ONE OF THE PUBLIC LOTS.
BUT I DON'T THINK THAT'S ANY DIFFERENT THAN ANY OTHER RESIDENT WHO CHOOSES TO PARK THEIR CAR ON THE STREET.
I MEAN, THAT HAPPENS, RIGHT? SO I, I DON'T, THIS ONE'S NOT PARTICULARLY AN ISSUE FOR ME.
I, I JUST WAS CURIOUS 'CAUSE YOU HAD MENTIONED ABOUT THE FOUNDATIONS.
IS THIS GARAGE ONE LEVEL UNDERGROUND AS WELL AS AT THE GROUND LEVEL? OH, I, I THINK, UM, I, IT'S, IT'S A, I I SEE WHY YOU'RE ASKING THAT QUESTION.
IT'S WHAT'S FUNNY IS THAT EVEN THOUGH, UH, THIS, YOU ENTER THE, THE DRIVEWAY WHERE IT IS NOW, AND, AND, AND THIS HAS A VERY GENTLE SLOPE, AND IT HAPPENS TO BE AT THE SAME LEVEL AS THE BASEMENT OF THE OLD BUILDING BECAUSE THERE'S SUCH A DROP IN GRADE ON SPRING STREET.
AND, AND IT'S, IT'S, I GUESS I WOULD SAY IT'S PARTIALLY ENCLOSED, RIGHT? YES.
THE, THE, THE BACK PIECE IS OPEN, UH, ON THE BACK AND THE SIDE.
IT'S OPEN BECAUSE WE'RE, UH, WE WANT THE BUILDING ABOVE TO MEET THE SETBACKS.
SO THOSE, SOME OF THOSE CARS ARE PARKED IN THE SETBACK? YES.
WELL, SUBTERRANEAN BUT VISIBLE FROM THE STREET, IS THAT CORRECT? THERE'S A GATE, UH, SORRY, THERE'S A GATE TO THE WASTE AREA ON SPRING STREET.
ARE YOU SAYING THAT THE CARS WOULD BE NOT FROM SPRING? I THINK THEY'RE VISIBLE.
OUR, OUR GOAL WAS TO MAKE THIS, UM, PEDESTRIAN FRIENDLY AND TO, AND CREATE A STREET WALL AND HAVE THE CARS CONCEALED FROM VIEW.
SO FROM SPRING STREET, YOU WON'T BE ABLE TO SEE THE CARS.
MAYBE IF YOU COULD DRAW A RECTANGLE OF THE PARKING ROUGHLY WITH YOUR, OF WHERE IT IS IN THIS ELEVATION, THAT MIGHT BE HELPFUL.
YEAH, RIGHT HERE ON THIS LEVEL.
THIS IS PART, THIS IS THE PARKING, THIS IS THE PARKING GARAGE HERE.
THIS IS A ENTRANCE TO THE PARKING GARAGE.
THERE'S A HALF, THERE'S A HALF LEVEL.
YOU HAVE TO COME UP TO THE MICROPHONE.
I, I COULD JUST FOLLOW, I WAS LOOKING AT THE ADJACENT GATE, UM, NEXT TO THE, NOT THE GATE THAT YOU WERE, THERE'S AN OUT OUTLET RIGHT NEXT TO YOU OVER THERE, CLOSE BY IF YOU NEED IT.
IS IT FAIR TO ASSUME THAT THE PLANNING BOARD CONSIDERED ALTERNATIVES SUCH AS LIKE A SECOND LEVEL OF, OF PARKING AND THOSE DIFFERENT, THE PLANNING BOARD WAS ACTUALLY COMFORTABLE WITH THE PARKING.
SORRY, WHERE WAS THE OPPORTUNITY? SO THEY WERE NOT THERE.
HER WAYS TO ADD MORE PARKING, THEY WERE COMFORTABLE WITH THE AMOUNT OF PARKING.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON PARKING? NO.
UH, SO THE, THE SECOND VARIANCE IS ON REAR YARD SETBACK.
AND, UM, WE, WE SORT OF DISCUSSED THIS FOR A MOMENT.
UM, BUT MY QUESTION WOULD BE JUST TO DEFINE, UM, IN THREE DIMENSIONS, HOW, WHAT, WHAT WILL BE IN
[01:55:01]
THAT, UH, SETBACK WHEN YOUR COMPUTER COMES BACK ONAND, UM, DECKS ARE ALLOWED IN THE SETBACK, BUT ONLY ON THE FIRST FLOOR.
SO WHEN YOU GO ABOVE THAT LEVEL, UM, YOU NEED, WE, YOU NEED A VARIANCE.
JUST FOR THE THIRD FLOOR DECKS.
BUT THESE BALCONIES, THEY'RE, THEY'RE MORE BALCONIES.
I THINK THE DECK, I THINK IMPLIES THAT IT'S ON THE ROOF OF AN ENCLOSED SPACE.
HOW MANY FEET ARE THE BALCONIES? I BELIEVE THEY PROTRUDE FIVE FEET.
FIVE, FIVE FEET INTO THE SETBACK.
I'M TRYING TO GET THE 3D TO SHOW THE THANK YOU.
I THINK IT'S A, I THINK EITHER AN ELEVATION OR IN THE MODEL MIGHT BE, YEAH.
OR ON THE WEST SIDE, THEY'RE LIKE 12 BY FIVE FEET.
BUT THE PART THAT PROJECTS OUT INTO THE SETBACK THAT YOU'RE ASKING FOR, A VARIANCE FOR IS A SLAB AND A GLASS RAIL.
THEY'RE ACTUALLY, UH, THEY'RE ACTUALLY, I THINK, UH, REALLY SHOULD BE CALLED BALCONIES.
I, I THINK AGAIN, UM, GIVEN THAT THEY ARE A SLAB AND A GLASS WALL, FOR ME THAT'S A MINIMUM PROJECTION.
BUT TO THE POINT OF WHAT YOU MIGHT DO IN THE FUTURE, THAT'S VERY DIFFERENT THAN MOVING THE WHOLE WALL OF THE BUILDING TO THAT POINT.
AND THAT IT IS TRANSLUCENT WITH CLASS.
SO WILL THIS RENDERING BE DRAMATICALLY DIFFERENT WITH THE NEW PLAN FROM WHERE YOU ARE ON YOUR RED DOT THERE? WELL, YOU'RE NOT APPROVING THE NEW PLAN.
WHAT WE WERE THINKING OF, IF WE COULD, IT ACTUALLY, UM, OUR PREFERENCE IS TO MOVE THIS WALL TOWARDS THIS WEST THREE FEET AND THEN MAYBE GIVE THE, UM, GIVE THESE TWO UNITS, UH, EACH ONE A ROOF DECK.
BUT THAT'S NOT IN FRONT OF YOU TONIGHT.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THE, UM, THE SECOND VARIANCE, THE, SO THEN I THINK, UM, THE THING WE HAVEN'T DISCUSSED IS THE VIEW PRESERVATION, UM, PIECE OF THIS.
SO I THINK WHAT YOU'VE PRESENTED IS ESSENTIALLY THOSE TWO IMAGES, IF I WILL SHOW THE EXISTING SO THEY CAN SEE WHAT THE, OF THE EXISTING WITHOUT, SO THE EXISTING WITHOUT THE, THE NOTION IS THAT THERE'S NO RIVER VIEW AND THERE'S A SMALL PALISADE VIEW.
AND SO WHAT WE BELIEVE, I THINK THAT'S THE, UM, BACK OF THE, UM, THE FIREHOUSE, THE WHITE STUCCO WALL.
AND WE DON'T HAVE AN IMAGE FROM THE VANTAGE POINT OF THE NEIGHBORS THAT WERE NOTICED, CORRECT? NO, WE, THEY COULD, THEY COULDN'T GET ACCESS.
THE FW IS ONE OF THE NEIGHBORS WHO WAS NOTICED
THE ONLY, THE, THE ONLY ACCESS THEY HAD FROM THE NEIGHBORS WAS DOWN THE DRIVEWAYS AND THEY WERE BLOCKED BY GARAGES.
WE, WE HAVE LOTS OF PHOTOS, BUT NOT A SINGLE ONE WAS, COULD GIVE US ANY, ANY VIEW BECAUSE AT THE END OF EACH DRIVEWAY IS THE GARAGE, AND WE DON'T STEP ON PEOPLE'S PROPERTIES WITHOUT THEIR PERMISSION.
SO WE DID TRY TO CONTACT THEM.
AND FROM, FROM WHITMAN, YOU'RE BLOCKED BY THE HOUSES AND THE GARAGES FROM THE ACTUAL STREET.
SO THAT'S, THAT'S THE, THAT'S THE PUBLIC WAY VIEW.
BUT IF SOMEBODY HAD A SECOND FLOOR WINDOW ON WHITMAN, THEY MAY HAVE A VIEW, BUT IT'S IMPOSSIBLE TO DO VIEWS PRESERVATION BY CONSIDERING A HUNDRED PEOPLE'S BEDROOMS, RIGHT? I MEAN, YEAH, IT'S NOT, AND, AND YOU CAN SEE, I MEAN, SO MUCH OF THE VIEW IS ALREADY BLOCKED.
IT'S GONNA BE BLOCKED FROM WHITMAN JUST AS IT'S BLOCKED.
I MEAN, THE EXISTING BUILDING IS HIGH.
THERE'S EXISTING BUILDINGS BEHIND.
THIS ISN'T A PLACE THAT HAD A BIG OPEN VIEW.
THOUGHTS OR QUESTIONS? ANYBODY? I, AND AGAIN, IT'S JUST THE, THE ONLY THING THAT WOULD BE BLOCKING A VIEW IS THE, THAT ADDITION ON THE SIDE AND THE BULKHEAD.
[02:00:01]
BLOCK.NO, THE BULKHEAD DOESN'T BLOCK THE VIEW.
OH, BECAUSE IT'S TOO HIGH VIEW OF THE SKY
EVEN FROM THE SIDE, IT DOESN'T BLOCK THE PALISADES.
I'M, I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT BETH WAY YOU'RE GETTING AT.
'CAUSE I WANT, I FEEL LIKE YOU'VE ASKED THE QUESTION AND NOBODY'S ANSWERED.
SO I THINK VIEW PRESERVATION IS GENERALLY TAKEN ONLY IN THIS DIRECTION.
WELL, 'CAUSE IT'S THE VIEW OF THE RIVER OR THE PALISADES.
AND I THINK WHAT, AND MAYBE THE APPLICANT CAN COMMENT ON THIS, WHAT WAS SAID BEFORE IS THAT AS YOU WALK AROUND THE BUILDING FROM EITHER WARBURTON OR SPRING, FROM A EYE LEVEL OF A PEDESTRIAN, YOU CAN'T SEE THE BULKHEAD.
SO THERE IS NO SIDE VIEW BECAUSE UNLESS YOU'RE HIGH ENOUGH ABOVE IT, UNLESS YOU'RE, YEAH.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT IS NEXT TO THE VFW.
IT WOULD BE NORTH ON WHITMAN STREET.
AND THEN YOU HAVE OTHER, THE PROBLEM WITH THIS PARTICULAR SITUATION IS THERE'S OTHER STRUCTURES, INCLUDING THE STRUCTURES ON WAL BURTON AVENUE.
THERE'S A LOT IN YOUR WAY FOR THIS PARTICULAR VIEW PRESERVATION, UH, HEARING THE BEST VIEW IS THE ONE THEY'RE SHOWING.
'CAUSE THAT IS THE PUBLIC VIEW AND THE CLEAREST VIEW.
EVERYTHING ELSE NORTH OF THIS IS SUPER BLOCKED BECAUSE YOU'D ALSO BE DEALING WITH THE BUILDINGS ON THE EAST SIDE OF WARBURG.
YOU KNOW, WE SHOWED SOME OF THESE IMAGES AT THE PLANNING BOARD, AND I THINK WE, SINCE WE HAD SO MUCH TO SHOW TONIGHT, WE JUST FOCUSED ON THIS VIEW, WHICH IS THE ONE THAT DOES, IS UM, DOES HAVE A TINY SMALL VIEW, I THINK OF THE PALISADES, YOU KNOW, SOMEHOW IF YOU'RE GOING CLOSE, YOU KNOW.
SO IF YOU ZOOM IN ONE MORE TIME THERE, IT'S, IT'S REALLY THE, THE EXISTING VIEW THAT'S BEING LOST IS OF THE ADES ABOVE WHAT YOU'RE CALLING THE FIREHOUSE, WHICH I'M NOT DOUBT THAT'S THE BANK BUILDING, BUT YEAH.
IS IT? YEAH, THE WHITE BUILDING'S, THE BANK BUILDING, THE WHITE BUILDING, THAT'S THE CHA THE CHASE BUILDING, RIGHT? I DON'T THINK, NO, THAT'S THE OLD ASTORIA BUILDING.
NO, IT'S RIGHT NEXT TO THE VFW PARK THERE.
THAT'S THE BANK BUILDING, YOU KNOW? YOU'RE RIGHT BUDDY.
YEAH, THAT'S ON THE VFW SIDE OF WAR OF WAR.
THIS SECTION OF THE VIEW, THEY'RE INTENDING ON BLOCK.
IF YOU, IF YOU LOOK, SO THIS IS, THIS IS WHERE THEY ARE.
THE THE, THAT ADDITION IS GOING RIGHT HERE, RIGHT? YEAH, IT IS THE BANK BUILDING.
SO, SO THE EXTENT OF WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT BEING BLOCKED IS THAT SMALL SLIVER.
AND THAT'S ALSO IN THE WINTERTIME.
SUMMERTIME WAS COMPLETELY BLOCKED.
SO THEY WERE THE ORIGINAL VIEWS, THEY SHOWED ENOUGH.
THE ORIGINAL VIEWS, THEY SHOWED THE PLANNING BOARD WERE NOT WINTER VIEWS.
AND NOTHING WAS BLOCKED BECAUSE IT WAS ALREADY BLOCKED BY THE TREES.
AND THE PLANNING BOARD SAID WE, WE NEED A WINTER VIEW.
SO THEY KIND OF HAD TO WAIT UNTIL THEY COULD
SO I THINK WE'VE DISCUSSED, UM, THE THREE VARIANCES, NV PRESERVATION AT LEAST INITIALLY.
UM, IS THERE, ARE, ARE THERE ANY OF THESE THAT, UH, ANYONE HAS PARTICULAR QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS ABOUT? IS THAT A FAIR QUESTION? I THINK MAYBE THE, THE, THE BALCONIES, IT'S A QUESTION OF THE, YOU KNOW, WHETHER IT'S A SELF-CREATED, WHETHER IT'S NECESSARY.
OBVIOUSLY IT'S, UH, VERY NICE AMENITY FOR A SPACE, UH, FOR, FOR A UNIT FOR MARKETABILITY TO HAVE OUTDOOR SPACE, UH, ESPECIALLY PRIVATE OUTDOOR SPACE.
UM, YOU KNOW, THE BUILDING COULD EXIST WITHOUT, SO I THINK THAT'S WORTH CONSIDERING IS WHETHER THAT IS, UM, WHAT'S ALSO NICE ABOUT THIS IS THAT THE PERSON THAT IS DIRECTLY AFFECTED BY THOSE BALCONIES IS NOT HERE TONIGHT.
SHE WAS COMFORTABLE AT THE PLANNING BOARD MEETING.
SHE'S BEEN AT SEVERAL OF THE SEV SEVERAL MEETINGS.
WHERE'S THE OWNER OF SEVEN SPRING? THAT'S CORRECT.
SHE'S ACTUALLY THE OLD PLAN FOR 15 SPRING.
BROUGHT THE WHOLE BUILDING MUCH CLOSER TO THAT PROPERTY LINE.
SO THIS APPLICANT HAS, THEY'VE WORKED VERY HARD TO PULL THIS AWAY SO THAT THE ONLY VARIANCE ON THAT SIDE IS FOR THIRD FLOOR DECKS.
AND SHE WAS NOT CONCERNED ABOUT THE THIRD FLOOR BALCONIES BECAUSE THEY'RE UP ABOVE, THEY DON'T AFFECT HER PROPERTY.
SHE WAS WORRIED ABOUT HER WINDOWS.
[02:05:01]
OUR FACTORS.SO FOR THE DETRIMENT, THERE WAS NO NOTED DETRIMENT FROM ANY OF THE NEIGHBORS.
THE ONE THING, JUST TO, UM, ALSO COMMENT ON THE SELF-CREATION.
I MEAN, THE CURRENT OWNER IS THE ONE THAT ALLOWED THE BUILDING THERE TO BE DILAPIDATED AND BE AN EYESORE FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD, NOT, NOT THIS OWNER.
OH, WELL, HOW, HOW LONG HAS THE CURRENT OWNER OWNED THE BUILDING, THE FUNERAL PARLOR? HE DIDN'T OWN, HE DIDN'T OWN THE OPERATING FUNERAL PARLOR.
WHEN DID HE PURCHASE THE PROPERTY? BUT WHY DOES IT MATTER THAT IT'S DILAPIDATED? I MEAN, IT'S NOT BEING USED AS A FUNERAL PARLOR.
'CAUSE I THOUGHT PART OF THE APPLICANT'S, UH, UH, PRESENTATION ABOUT THE BENEFIT AND WHY WE SHOULD APPROVE THE VARIANCES IS BECAUSE THERE'S A DILAPIDATED BUILDING THERE NOW.
IT'S JUST, IT WAS A VACANT, IT WAS A VACANT BUILDING WHEN HE BOUGHT IT.
IT DOESN'T HAVE TO DO WITH WHETHER IT'S DILAPIDATED.
HIS BENEFIT DOESN'T RELATE TO DILAPIDATED.
HIS BENEFIT RELATES TO, HE WANTS TO BUILD A MULTIFAMILY BUILDING ON THE TWO.
LOTS TO, TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION.
CAN YOU JUST IDENTIFY YOURSELF? UH, MICHAEL LANG OWNER'S REP, UH, WE CLOSED ON THE 5 55 BUILDING IN JUNE OF 2023.
WE CLOSED ON THE FUNERAL HOME IN NOVEMBER OF 23.
SO WE DID NOT BUY 'EM AT THE SAME TIME.
OUR ORIGINAL PLAN WAS TO FIX UP 5 55 AND THEN THE OPPORTUNITY PRESENTED ITSELF TO PURCHASE THE FUNERAL HOME AS WELL.
UM, I THINK, UM, IT CERTAINLY MAKES SENSE AND I, I THINK WE'VE, WE'VE COME AROUND TODAY THAT IT'S, THERE'S A LOT OF STUFF THAT WOULD BE HARD TO SAY IS NOT SELF-CREATED.
UM, BUT I THINK, YOU KNOW, IN THE BALANCE AS KIND OF LIGHT AND GLASS TERRACES, THEY DON'T SEEM TO HAVE TOO MUCH DETRIMENT, PARTICULARLY IF THAT NEIGHBOR DOESN'T, WAIT A MINUTE.
THEY CAN'T BE TERRACES NOW TOO.
THEY'RE BALCONIES, THEY'RE BALCONIES.
THEY'RE BALCONIES OWN BALCONIES.
I ALSO WANNA MENTION SOMETHING ABOUT THESE BALCONIES.
YOU KNOW, I'VE WORKED WITH A LOT OF, UM, DIFFERENT, UM, DEVELOPERS AND BUILDING OWNERS AND, AND, AND THE OUTDOOR SPACE IS SO IMPORTANT BECAUSE IT, PEOPLE STAY LONGER IN APARTMENTS WITH OUTDOOR SPACE.
AND IF THEY DON'T HAVE THAT OUTDOOR SPACE, THEN THEY, THEY DON'T HAVE THEIR OWN PRIVATE OUTDOOR SPACE.
AND, UM, EVEN IF IT'S NOT JUST FOR MARKETABILITY, IT'S ALSO, I KNOW THE BUILDING OWNERS WHEN THEY RENT, THEY LET, THEY SAY THAT FAMILIES STAY LONGER WHO HAVE THE OUTDOOR SPACE VERSUS THE ONES THAT DO NOT.
UM, ANY OTHER THOUGHTS OR COMMENTS OR ARE WE READY TO BRING THIS TO A MOTION AND A VOTE? I, UH, I WOULD BE READY TO BRING IT TO A MOTION.
WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO MAKE THAT MOTION? SURE.
FOR CASE NUMBER THREE DASH 25 5 5 5 WAR BURTON AVENUE, LLC AT, UM, 5 5 5 WAR BURTON AVENUE AND 15 SPRINGS STREET MOTION TO GRANT THE VARIANCES FOR VIEW PRESERVATION APPROVAL UNDER 2 95.
I'M SORRY, IT'S NOT A VARIANCE FOR VIEW PRESERVATION APPROVAL.
IT'S JUST VIEW PRESERVATION APPROVAL.
MOTION TO GRANT VIEW PRESERVATION APPROVAL UNDER SECTION 2 95 DASH 82.
AND FOR RELIEF FROM THE STRICT APPLICATION OF THE VILLAGE CODE SECTIONS 2 95 DASH 36 A AND 2 95 DASH 76 E TWO AND FOUR FOR A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT.
AND IN ADDITION TO AN EXISTING BUILDING, CREATING THREE COMMERCIAL SPACES, 15 RESIDENTIAL UNITS WITH 16 PARKING SPACES AND TWO ADDITIONAL BUILDING LOTS LOCATED AT 5 5 5, UH, WARBURTON AVE.
SAID PROPERTY IS IN CC ZONING.
DISTRICT KNOWN, ALSO KNOWN AS SBL FOUR DASH FOUR 30, DASH 22 DASH ONE AND 34 ON THE TOWN OF GREENBURG TAX MAPS AND MOTION TO GRANT THE VARIANCES FOR NON-CONFORMITY.
OFF STREET PARKING PROPOSAL, REAR YARD SETBACKS, PROPOSAL, AND MAXIMUM HEIGHT PROPOSAL.
WHO SECONDED THAT, BRIAN? I DID.
[02:10:01]
TO MAKE CORRECTION.UM, IT DOES SAY 16 SPOTS IN THE TEXT.
SO WE SHOULD WAS THE NOTICE IT'S ACTUALLY IN THE, YEAH.
'CAUSE IN THE NON-CONFORMITY DETAILS IT SAYS 15.
[Approval of Minutes]
NEXT ITEM IS THE APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES.UM, DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY COMMENTS OR CORRECTIONS TO THE MINUTES FROM THE DECEMBER 5TH, 2024 BOARD MEETING? I BELIEVE WE WERE ALL THERE.
UH, WE NEED A MOTION TO APPROVE THEM.
I THINK WE, TERRY ALWAYS SAYS THIS ONE IS ALL IN FAVOR.
[Announcements]
JUST, UM, TWO OTHER THINGS VERY QUICKLY? SURE.UM, THE LEAD AGENCY NOTICE FOR 16 SHELDON FOR THE OT SUBDIVISION WAS CIRCULATED TO YOU.
YOU HAVE NO OBJECTION TO THE PLANNING BOARD BEING THE LEAD AGENCY FOR THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW.
I JUST NEED YOU TO ALL TELL ME YOU HAVE NO OBJECTION TO IT.
WE HAVE NO OBJECTION TO IT, BUT WE NO OBJECTION.
BUT WE'D APPRECIATE IT IF THEY'D WRITE A MEMO.
WE'LL TALK TO THEM ABOUT THAT.
AND, UM, THEN ALSO, WHY, WHY ARE THEY NOT DOING IT? WHY ARE THEY ONE OF US HAS TO WRITE THE MEMO? WELL, I'LL TALK TO 'EM ABOUT IT.
UM, AND THEN I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE EVERYBODY WAS GOOD WITH WHAT WE PROPOSED FOR THE WEBSITE.
YEAH, I THINK IT'S GONNA BE EXCELLENT.
UM, WE NOW WE NEED A MOTION TO ADJOURN.
DATE IS FEBRUARY 27TH AND WE ARE ADJOURNED.