[00:00:01]
JANUARY 15TH,[I. ROLL CALL]
MEETING OF THE PLANNING BOARD OF HASTINGS ON HUDSON.UH, MADAM SECRETARY, WOULD YOU CALL THE ROLE PLEASE CHAIRPERSON.
BOARD MEMBER DANIEL BERKOVITZ HERE.
BOARD MEMBER ANJALI CHEN IS ABSENT.
BOARD MEMBER DAVID GUNTON HERE.
BOARD MEMBER PATRICK DIGGINS HERE.
VILLAGE ATTORNEY LINDA WHITEHEAD HERE BUILDING INSPECTOR CHARLES MENZI HERE.
SO I'M GONNA GUESS BECAUSE WE HAVE SUCH A SMALL QUORUM TONIGHT THAT WE DON'T HAVE THE PEOPLE FOR THE SEPTEMBER 18TH AND DECEMBER 18TH, UH, HEARINGS.
RIGHT? MARIELLE? I ABSOLUTELY KNOW THAT FOR THE EIGHT, THE DECEMBER MEETING BECAUSE YOU WEREN'T HERE.
UM, NO, WE CAN'T DO EITHER ONE.
[III. OLD PUBLIC HEARINGS]
UM, THERE ARE THREE OLD, UH, PUBLIC HEARINGS.THE FIRST TWO ARE DEFERRED TO FUTURE MEETING.
SO IF YOU'RE HERE FOR WARREN STREET AND PEARL STREET, UH, THAT ONE AND 4 4 9 WAR BURTON AVENUE, UH, BOTH ARE DEFERRED TO THE FUTURE.
SO WE'LL MOVE ON TO THE THIRD PUBLIC HEARING OR THE THIRD, THIRD OLD PUBLIC HEARING, WHICH IS FOR NINE DASH 17 WASHINGTON AVENUE.
UH, SAID PROPERTY IS IN THE MR DASH C ZONING DISTRICT AND IS KNOWN AS SBL 4.7 DASH 43 THROUGH 37 AND 38 ON THE TOWN OF GREENBURG TAX MAPS.
I BELIEVE OUR AGENDA'S VERY SHORT.
UH, OUR SOLE PURPOSE IS TO DISCUSS, UH, THE SECRET DETERMINATION, UH, AND DECLARE OURSELVES AS THE LEAD AGENCY.
IS THAT, SO YOU ALREADY DECLARED YOUR INTENT TO BE LEAD AGENCY A LONG TIME AGO, UM, AND THERE WAS NO OBJECTION.
SO YOU'RE REALLY JUST CONFIRMING THAT.
SO, UM, AS YOU KNOW, GOING BACK AND, AND THIS APPLICATION'S BEEN BEFORE YOU FOR OVER A YEAR NOW.
UM, AND OVER THE COURSE OF THAT TIME, WE'VE ASKED THEM FOR A LOT OF INFORMATION.
UM, AND EARLY ON YOU GOT SOME THINGS LIKE TRAFFIC STUDIES.
UM, THEY'VE DONE A LOT OF WORK ON THE DRAINAGE TO THE POINT THAT DOUG HAHN YOUR ENGINEER, IS NOW SATISFIED THAT IT WILL WORK AND WILL NOT HAVE ANY NEGATIVE IMPACTS.
AND WE'VE GONE THROUGH A LOT OF THINGS LIKE THAT.
UM, WHILE WE'VE SPENT A LOT OF TIME ON THE VIEW PRESERVATION, WE ALSO HAVE LOOKED AT A LOT OF THESE OTHER THINGS.
AND AT YOUR LAST MEETING, YOU VOTED TO, UM, RECOMMEND VIEW PRESERVATION TO THE ZONING BOARD AND ALSO SEND THEM TO THE ZONING BOARD FOR THE VARIANCES.
UM, SO YOU, THE NEXT STEP IN YOUR PROCESS, THEY HAD PROVIDED YOU AN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM AS WELL AS A LOT OF THE OTHER THINGS.
SO THE NEXT STEPS ARE, UM, TO LOOK AT A, A TYPE OF PART TWO FOR THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM, WHICH DETERMINES IF THERE'S ANY POTENTIAL MODERATE TO LARGE IMPACTS AN ANALYSIS OF HOW THOSE HAVE BEEN MITIGATED IF NECESSARY.
AND, UM, SO YOUR PLANNER, WHO UNFORTUNATELY COULD NOT BE HERE TONIGHT, 'CAUSE HE'S STUCK AT ANOTHER MEETING, UM, DRAFTED THAT THE PART TWO IS ACTUALLY AT THE END OF THE DOCUMENT, RIGHT.
UM, AND THEN HE ALSO, BASED ON THAT AND THE INFORMATION THAT'S BEEN SUBMITTED, HE DRAFTED A, UM, RESOLUTION FOR A NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND ALSO THE DRAFT NEGATIVE DECLARATION.
THE IMPORTANT DOCUMENT IS REALLY THE ONE THAT STARTS, AND YOU'VE ALL SORT OF SEEN THIS, UM, REASONS SUPPORTING THIS DETERMINATION, WHICH SORT OF GOES THROUGH EACH OF THE AREAS OF POTENTIAL IMPACT AND, UM, DISCUSSES THE PROJECT, THE CHANGES THEY'VE PROPOSED AND INCORPORATE INTO THE PROJECT.
AND HOW BASED ON THAT, UM, YOU CAN REACH A CONCLUSION THAT IT WILL NOT RESULT IN ANY SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS.
SO, UM, THAT SORT OF, CAN YOU JUST TELL ME WHAT PART TWO IS THAT? I JUST WANTED TO WRITE IT DOWN.
UM, SO, UM, PATRICK PREPARED ALL THAT FOR YOU.
I KNOW, UM, MARY ELLEN CIRCULATED IT TO EVERYBODY.
UM, SO HOPEFULLY YOU'VE SEEN IT IF YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS.
UM, BUT THE NEXT STEP WOULD BE TO ADOPT THIS, THE RESOLUTION.
SO DO YOU WANT TO GO OVER, UH, PATRICK'S MEMO OR SHOULD WE JUST HAVE AN OPEN DISCUSSION ON, ON THE, UH, THE FINDINGS AND THE PART TWO, UH, EFF? DOES
[00:05:01]
ANYBODY, DO YOU WANT ME TO GO THROUGH IT? HAVE YOU ALL SORT OF BEEN THROUGH IT? LINDA, WHAT'S THE LEGAL, UM, EFFECT OF THE MEMO BEHIND THE RESOLUTIONS? IS IT, IS THAT SOMETHING THAT'S ENFORCEABLE OR IS IT JUST INFORMATIONAL? NO, SO THEY, UM, THE, THE CONDITIONS AND THE THINGS THAT HE'S PUT IN THERE ARE THINGS THEY HAVE AGREED AND INCORPORATED INTO THE PROJECT.SO THAT, THAT IS IN ORDER FOR THIS NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO BE EFFECTIVE, THOSE THINGS HAVE TO BE PART OF THE PROJECT.
I HAVE, I HAVE ONE QUESTION ON SECTION NINE.
IT WAS THE SAME TOPIC WE DISCUSSED AT THE LAST MEETING MM-HMM
BUT IF THAT'S JUMPING AHEAD OF THINGS TO, TO GO THERE, I CAN WAIT ON THAT.
I MEAN, THE IDEA HERE WAS TO TRY TO GO THROUGH EACH OF THE AREAS OF POTENTIAL IMPACT.
SO I THINK THAT'S A GOOD IDEA IF ANYBODY HAS QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ON ANY OF THOSE.
I THINK, YOU KNOW, AT THE LAST MEETING WE DISCUSSED, UM, THE HEIGHT OF FURNITURE, POTENTIAL FURNITURE ON THE ROOFS, AND I THINK THERE WAS A GENERAL CONSENSUS AMONG THE BOARD IN DECEMBER THAT THE HEIGHT OF ANY FURNITURE OR OTHER ITEMS UP THERE SHOULD NOT BE HIGHER THAN ANY OF THE RAILINGS.
UM, I NOTICED THAT THE, THE MEMO, UM, REFERENCED A FIVE FOOT HEIGHT LIMIT AND IT SHOULD BE CHANGED TO YEAH.
AND, AND YOU ALSO SAW MY DRAFT MEMO TO THE ZONING BOARD.
AND THAT'S ACTUALLY THE LANGUAGE THAT I PUT IN THERE.
AND, BUT I UNDERSTOOD YOUR MEMO.
IF, IF IT IS JUST A SORT OF DISCONNECT, THAT'S TOTALLY FINE.
THANK YOU THAT ALL FURNITURE, UM, WILL BE NO HIGHER THAN THE RAILINGS.
AND IF IT IS, IT'S AN ENFORCEMENT ISSUE FOR THE, THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT.
AND THEN ARE YOU OKAY WITH SAYING THAT THE TEMPORARY UMBRELLAS, UM, OR SHADING STRUCTURES CAN BE HIGHER, BUT THEY HAVE TO COME DOWN WHEN THE LANGUAGE THAT WAS PUT IN HERE FOR THOSE IN PRINCIPLE, YES.
I THINK THE, THE CONCERN THAT THE BOARD HAS DISCUSSED IN THE PAST IS JUST COMPLIANCE AND, AND ENFORCEABILITY.
I MEAN, I, FROM A COMPLIANCE PERSPECTIVE, IT'D BE SIMPLER JUST TO SAY SUCH TEMPORARY UMBRELLAS OR WHAT HAVE YOU WOULD NOT BE PERMITTED.
I KNOW THAT WOULD SIGNIFICANTLY POTENTIALLY RESTRICT, YOU KNOW, PRACTICALLY THE USE OF THE ROOFS.
SO I THINK I CAN LIVE WITH, YOU KNOW, A RULE THAT IT CAN ONLY BE TEMPORARY.
THEY MUST BE TAKEN DOWN WHEN NOT USED.
THEY MAY NOT BE UP WHEN IT'S OVER AT 15 MILES PER HOUR OR WHATEVER.
BUT I HAPPY TO HEAR MY, SO THEY, THEY HAD OFFERED, I BELIEVE LAST MONTH TO ACTUALLY INCORPORATE SOME OF THAT LANGUAGE INTO THEIR CONDOMINIUM, UM, DECLARATION AS A RESTRICTION.
UM, AND I'M ACTUALLY, WE'RE GONNA RECOMMEND TO THE ZONING BOARD THAT IN GIVING THEIR APPROVALS THAT THEY REQUIRE THAT AS A CONDITION, YOU CAN ALSO REMEMBER THEY HAVE TO COME BACK TO YOU FOR FINAL FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL.
SO YOU'LL ALSO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY AS PART OF YOUR SITE PLAN APPROVAL TO INCORPORATE SOME OF THOSE CONDITIONS.
UM, BUT I THINK THE ZONING BOARD IS WILL, YOU KNOW, REQUIRE THAT AS WELL.
AND THEY OFFERED IT, UM, THEY OFFERED IT LAST MONTH.
SO, UM, THAT MEANS THAT THEY CAN ALSO ENFORCE, THE VILLAGE CAN ENFORCE, BUT ALSO A NEIGHBOR OR THE, YOU KNOW, THE CONDO ASSOCIATION OR, OR HOI CAN ENFORCE IT.
UM, AND IT MAKES IT A LITTLE MORE BINDING.
I LOOK, IT'S NEVER GONNA BE PERFECT.
I MEAN I THINK, I THINK IN PRACTICE, LIKE WHETHER OR NOT SOMETHING IS IN THE, THE ASSOCIATION RULES IT, IT'S EXTREMELY UNLIKELY IF SOMEBODY HAS AN UMBRELLA ON THE ROOF THAT THEY'RE GONNA GO UP AND, YOU KNOW, IT'S UNNECESSARILY GO UP AND TAKE IT DOWN IN ADVANCE OF, ESPECIALLY WHEN WIND EVENTS ARE SOMEWHAT UNPREDICTABLE.
UM, I KNOW AT SOME POINT SOME KIND OF HURRICANE PROOF FURNITURE OR SOMETHING HAD BEEN DISCUSSED.
I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW IF THERE ARE UMBRELLAS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
THIS, THIS SEEMS LIKE A VERY REAL CONCERN, RIGHT? YES.
SO WE, WE DID HAVE IN HERE, AND AGAIN, IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD RECOMMEND THAT ZONING BOARD INCORPORATE.
UM, IT DOES SAY THAT, UM, EVERYTHING SHOULD BE FASTENED OR ANCHORED TO A WEIGHTED BASE OF AT LEAST 155 POUNDS TO PROTECT AGAINST WIND RESISTANCE.
YOU MENTIONED THE NEIGHBORS WOULD HAVE SOME, UM, IF IT'S IN THE CONDO DECLAR DECLARATION, THEN YES, THE CONDO ASSOCIATION.
SO IT WOULDN'T, WOULDN'T JUST BE A MATTER OF SELF GOVERNANCE, BUT RATHER NEIGHBORS COULD ALERT THE VILLAGE OR WHOMEVER TOO, OR THE CONDO ASSOCIATION COMES.
I THINK THAT THAT HELPS A LITTLE.
AND I, AND I THINK, YOU KNOW, THAT REQUIRING THEM TO BE ANCHORED.
AND I THINK THE LANGUAGE IN THE MEMO IS NOT JUST THEY NEED TO BE DOWN UNDERNEATH A CERTAIN WIND SPEED, BUT WHENEVER NOT IN USE, THAT COULD ONLY BE RAISED WHEN IN USE.
SO I THINK THAT'S A LITTLE POTENTIALLY EASIER TO OBSERVE OR POLICE, YOU KNOW, IF YOU, IF SOMEBODY SEES UMBRELLAS OR WHATEVER AND THERE'S NO ONE ON THE ROOF, THEN THAT'S A VIOLATION.
IT MUST ONLY BE DEPLOYMENT IN USE AND NOT WHEN I THINK 15
[00:10:01]
MILES PER HOUR.IT'S NOT IDEAL, BUT I, I CAN LIVE WITH THAT COMPROMISE AND THE, THE ZONING BOARD WILL ALSO BE GIVEN THIS DOCUMENT MM-HMM
UM, AND WE WILL BE, UM, AT THEIR MEETING NEXT WEEK, UM, I DON'T KNOW IF THEY'LL APPROVE IT IN ONE MEETING, BUT AT WHATEVER POINT THEY DO APPROVE IT.
UM, I MEAN THE APPLICANT'S ALREADY AGREED TO THESE THINGS, BUT WE'RE GONNA HAVE THEM LISTED AS SPECIFIC CONDITIONS.
IT AND THE, THE, WHICH VERY ARTICULATE THIS EVENING, UM, THE VILLAGE WILL REVIEW THE, THE FOUNDING DOCUMENTS FOR THE CONDOMINIUM.
IS THAT AS PART OF, WE CAN MAKE THAT A REQUIREMENT.
SO IF WE'RE REQUIRING THAT CERTAIN THINGS BE INCLUDED YEAH.
UM, WE CAN REQUIRE THAT THEY PROVIDE THAT FOR, UM, THE VILLAGE ATTORNEYS REVIEW.
I THINK THAT WE SHOULD INCORPORATE THAT.
SO THE QUESTION IS, AS A BOARD, DO WE WANT TO GO THROUGH SECTION BY SECTION OR, UM, WE CAN JUST HAVE A FREE, FREE FLOWING DISCUSSION.
THAT ISSUE I JUST MENTIONED WAS THE ONLY ISSUE I HAD.
I MEAN WE CAN GO THROUGH IT ITEM BY ITEM IF YOU REALLY WANT.
HEY RICHARD'S, YOU'RE A PLANNER.
RICHARD'S PRETTY FAMILIAR WITH THESE.
UM, WE DID GET A COMMENT FROM, IT'S, IT'S, WE DON'T HAVE THE PLANNING CONSULTANT, THE TRAFFIC CONSULTANT HERE.
WE DID GET A COMMENT FROM A CI PRIVATE CITIZEN ABOUT THEIR CONCERN ABOUT THE TRAFFIC STUDY.
UM, BUT IT SEEMS LIKE, I MEAN IT'S READING THIS LANGUAGE, IT SEEMS REASONABLE TO ME.
SO I WE'RE, WE'RE CONFIDENT THAT THE TRAFFIC STUDY IS, IS, WAS PERFORMED ACCURATELY BECAUSE I, THE, THE COMMENT WAS, WAS, WAS SORT OF QUESTIONING THE EFFICACY OF THE, OF THE STUDY, BUT IT, I FELT LIKE AT THE TIME WE FELT THAT IT, WE WERE ADVISED THAT IT WAS DONE SUCCESSFULLY AND EFFICA AND, AND THAT IT WAS A VALID REPORT.
SO I, I GUESS THAT'S THE ONLY OTHER THING I WAS THINKING OF.
AND IT'S, IT'S AN INCREASE OF 14 UNITS AND I BELIEVE THAT WHEN THE TRAFFIC STUDY WAS DONE, IT WAS EARLY ON AND THE BEDROOM COUNT HAS ACTUALLY CHANGED.
WHEN THEY TOOK THE THIRD FLOOR OFF.
SO THE NUMBER OF UNITS IS THE SAME, BUT THE BEDROOM COUNT MM-HMM
UM, IS LOWER, WHICH ALSO BY THE WAY, COULD LOWER THE PARKING REQUIREMENT.
MAKING THAT VARIANCE LESS CORRECT.
SO, UM, A LOT OF THOSE STUDIES WERE DONE BASED ON THE ORIGINAL RIGHT.
WE DID ADJUST THE VARIANCE WHEN WE PUT IT INTO THE ZONING PARK.
WE DID THAT BECAUSE THERE'S FEWER PARKING REQUIRED.
'CAUSE THERE'S FEWER BEDROOMS. PARKING IS IN, MULTIFAMILY IS BASED ON THE NUMBER, THE REQUIRED PARKING IS BASED ON THE NUMBER OF BEDROOMS. YEAH.
THE, THE COMPLAINT OR THE CONCERN, SHOULD I SAY, WAS FROM THE DANCE SCHOOL ACROSS THE STREET PICKING UP KIDS FROM MM-HMM
YOU KNOW, AFTER AND BEFORE DROPPING OFF AND PICKING UP FROM CLASS.
IS WHAT THEIR MAJOR CONCERN WAS.
IS THERE A LOADING ZONE IN FRONT OF THAT SCHOOL? UH, NO.
WELL THE PROBLEM IS, IS THAT THEY ROUTINELY DOUBLE PARK AND WHICH REALLY THE CONCERN IS REALLY FROM THE EXISTING USES PROBLEM.
IT'S LIKE THEY'RE CONCERNED THAT THEIR ADDED USE WITH THEIR ADDED USE IS GONNA BE NOT GOOD TOGETHER.
BUT AS THE ATTORNEYS MENTIONED, YOU KNOW, THE ADDED TRIPS FROM THE TRAFFIC STUDY IS SO, IT'S SO MINIMAL.
IT'S REALLY DE MINIMS AND, AND I THINK, UM, PAT KINDA LAID THAT OUT, RIGHT.
UM, IN HERE, THE, THE, THE PEAK TRIPS.
SO IF YOU REALLY LOOK AT THE NUMBER OF TRIPS THAT WOULD BE ADDED, SAY IN THAT SAME TIME THAT THERE'S PICKUP AND DROP OFF, UM, AND REMEMBERING AGAIN THAT THERE ARE A NUMBER, YOU KNOW, UNITS ALREADY ON THIS PROPERTY.
I JUST, I WANTED TO MAKE SURE, UM, THEY'RE NOT HERE.
WE ADDRESSED IT, BUT I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE ADDRESSED IT FOR ON BEHALF OF THE CITIZEN WHO, WHO WROTE, I HADN'T ADDRESS IT VIA EMAIL.
I HAD SENT THEM THE DOCS THROUGH CHRISTINA SENT.
YOU KNOW, WE, WE, WE OBLIGE THEM WITH WHATEVER THEY NEEDED, SO.
ANY OTHER THOUGHTS? I, I THINK WE'RE GOOD.
UNLESS YOU HAVE A NEED TO READ IT.
SINCE YOU ASKED COVER TO COVER, SHE WAS OUT OF BREATH JUST TALKING ABOUT THE NOTICE TO THE ZB.
NOW THINK ABOUT THE 18, 18 POINTS OF SECRET
I COULD DO THAT IN MY SLEEP ACTUALLY.
UM, ANYWAY, SO WHAT YOU WOULD THEN DO IS, UM, HAVE A MOTION TO ADOPT THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RESOLUTION PROVIDED.
DO I HEAR IS SUCH A MOTION? SO MOVED.
WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
[00:15:01]
SAY AYE.AND THEN WHILE I HAVE YOU, I SENT YOU THE DRAFT OF THE MEMO TO THE ZONING BOARD, JUST WANNA TO SEE IF ANYBODY HAD ANY COMMENTS.
WELL, YOU WEREN'T AT THE MEETING
YEAH, I, I DID READ, I READ, I READ THE MINUTES.
I READ THE MINUTES FROM LAST
AND WE'LL ALSO CHAIR SERIES, LIKE I SAID, THEY'LL ALL, I'M GONNA HAVE, UM, THAT ONE CORRECTION MADE, SO DON'T FINALIZE THAT YET.
WE HAVE THAT ONE CORRECTION TO MAKE IN THIS DOCUMENT THAT I'LL HAVE PAT MAKE TOMORROW.
UM, AND THEN, UM, WE WILL SEND BOTH THE MEMO AND THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO THE ZONING BOARD SO THEY HAVE THE FULL BACKGROUND.
I STARTED DOING THE MEMO AND THEN I WAS LIKE, WAIT, THEY'RE GONNA HAVE THE NEGATIVE DECK.
UM, DO THEY HAVE TO VOTE ON THE MEMO? NO.
THEY ACTUALLY SAID LAST MONTH TO SEND THE MEMO.
I HAD NOTES ABOUT WHAT TO PUT IN THE MEMO.
SO THAT, UM, I THINK THE ONLY THING LEFT IS TO, UH, ADJOURN.
NEXT MEETING IS FEBRUARY 19TH.
IT IS MY BIRTHDAY AND I WILL BE IN CALIFORNIA.
REMEMBER BEING WHO IS THE BABY? I'M TRYING TO REMEMBER FOR YOU
SO YOU CAN ASK FOR A MOTION TO ADJOURN.