|
MINUTES OF REGULAR
MEETING OF JUNE 9, 2010 PRESENT: Shirley J. Thormann, Chairwoman;
Rudolph J. Yacyshyn, Vice-Chairman; Members: Gilbert J. Heim (Absent); Peter E. Streitman;
John J. Sullivan; Christopher J. Carey; Thomas A. Trevor CONSULTANTS: Principal Planner,
Jose Simoes; Deputy Director of Environmental Control Dennis Letson; Building
Plans Examiner Charles Maneri; Deputy Town Attorney Daniel Kraushaar; John
Sarna, Traffic Consultant, for Grand Prize only. Chairwoman
Thormann declared Planning Board Meeting open at 7:00 p.m. Assemblage Saluted the Flag. Roll
call was taken by the Secretary to the Planning Board. See above. FINAL: ST. FRANCIS OF ASSISI CHURCH, WEST NYACK, SL
51.16-3-1 (FKA 55A4) (Proposed
7,650 square foot addition to the existing religious education area plus an
approximately 11,800 square foot separate gym/multi-purpose building. The project site is located on 13.89 acres of
R-22 zoned land on the west side of Member Carey recused himself from this item
as he is a member of the Finance Committee and Building Committee for St.
Francis of Chairwoman Thormann recognized Messrs. Brian
Quinn, attorney, John Fry architect, Tom Skrable, engineer and Ms. Jaclyn Tyler,
architect, then read background information (see file). Building Plans Examiner Maneri read his
recommendations into the record (see file, dated 6/3/10); Deputy Director of
Environmental Control Letson read his recommendations into the record (see file,
dated 6/9/10); Mr. Letson also advised received the soil testing report this
date and it does not respond directly to previous request for test pit ground
water level and percolation test data; this to be provided and carried thru
prior to Chair’s Endorsement. Chairwoman stated there is no correspondence
from the Army Corps of Engineers; Mr. Letson advised spoke with the individual
at the Army Corps and he verified he has received Mr. Torgersen’s revised
delineation and he agreed with same; Chair further advised this to be verified
in writing prior to Chair’s Endorsement: Mr. Letson further stated he provided
the response in his April 28th report and suggested this not be made
a condition prior to endorsement as the Corps takes a while to provide correspondence.
Chairwoman further stated applicant shall provide a copy of the wetland
delineation from the ACoE prior to Chair’s Endorsement. Principal Planner Simoes read his
recommendations into the record (see file, dated 6/4/10). Regarding the protection of the stream, Mr.
Letson suggested, as his staff has indicated, there is a wetlands metes and
bounds table on the survey and follows the wetland delineation and wetland
flagging; this information to be transferred to the site plan map including the
wetlands metes and bounds tables; further suggested the title be changed to
“conservation metes and bounds”.
Attorney Quinn agreed. Chairwoman read the following into the
record: Deputy Town Attorney Kraushaar advised
applicant to provide conservation easement for filing, in a form acceptable to
the Town Attorney’s Office, with recording documents; Title Policy; Metes &
Bounds Description; note to be added to conservation easement, as per Town
DEC: Attorney Quinn advised that has
been e-mailed to Mr. Letson. Mr.
Letson further requested applicant to add Note 24 to site plan for the
conservation easement with filing information from Rockland County Clerk’s
Office. Principal Simoes suggested the conservation
easement on the southern end be drawn directly to the property line and to
include the “sliver” at top of map; there is a larger area in the northeast
corner, which is indicated as “lawn”; further advised at the very least, these
two “slivers” on the southern and northern ends be included in the conservation
easement; further advised this would make it easier to demarcate in the
field. Consensus of Planning Board to
include these areas; A26 to A27 south to adjoining property line, including the
westerly portion between A18 & A17 that intersects property line on north
side and to the west back down to the south to the line that is projected on
A26 to A27. Further, Mr. Letson requested a drainage easement be conveyed to
the Town from the center line of the stream; Attorney Quinn agreed. (continued) MINUTES OF REGULAR
MEETING OF JUNE 9, 2010 (continued) On a Motion of Yacyshyn, Seconded by Sullivan,
and carried 5:0, with Ayes of Thormann, Streitman & Carey, the following
resolution was passed: FINAL
PLANNING BOARD RESOLUTION ST.
FRANCIS OF 51.16-3-1,
WHEREAS, the
applicant, St. Francis of Assisi Church, made application to the Planning Board
on September 2, 2009, for map, block and lot 51.16-3-1 for site plan approval
for the proposed
construction of a 7,650 square foot addition to the existing religious
education area plus an approximately 11,800 square foot separate
gym/multi-purpose building, and WHEREAS, the
short Environmental Assessment Form was distributed by Town Department of
Environmental Control, in a coordinated review of the involved agencies with
the Planning Board, to nine potential involved and interested agencies by
letter dated September 14, 2009, and WHEREAS, public
hearings were held on October 28, 2009, February 24, 2010 and April 28, 2010,
and WHEREAS, at
the meeting of April 28, 2010, a negative declaration pursuant to SEQR was
adopted, public hearing was closed, and Preliminary approval was granted subject
to the following conditions: Deputy Director of Environmental Control Letson, dated
April 28, 2010: 1.
Clarify
phasing of stormwater rain-gardens, revise drainage analysis as needed to
conform to phasing plan. 2.
Add
standard site plan notes to sheet PS-2. 3.
“A”
inlet section should show finished grade line. 4.
Recommend
WWF or fiber-mesh be installed in proposed sidewalk slabs. 5.
Erosion
control plan should show phasing. 6.
Revise
drawing list, and include tree preservation and landscaping plans in the set. 7.
Check
labeling on photo sheet S-3 and revise as needed. 8. Provide test pit, groundwater level and
percolation test data prior to final approval. 9.
Provide
final SWPPP and plan review fee. 10. Provide cost estimate
for determination of inspection fees. Principal Planner
Simoes, dated April 23, 2010: 1.
The Tree Preservation Plan Legend should show a symbol for approximately Tree Location Edge. 2.
The conservation easement to be placed over the wetland area and possibly other areas of the property can be
demarcated with “sho-bolders.” Architecture
& Landscape Commission, dated April 20, 2010, from Ron Haelen: 1. The existing parking is void of any
landscape islands; planting island should be considered for this application
especially along the building side of the parking area. The 2. The proposed rain gardens shown between
the two buildings are rectangular with a very formal appearance. Consider
making the rain garden more natural looking. 3. A planting detail of the rain garden
should be provided. 4. The selection of evergreen trees for
screening will have to be more shade tolerant then the species proposed. 5. North arrow is missing from the Landscape
Plan. 6. The residents at the meeting commented on
the existing lights which stay on all night. The residents would like the
lights turned off when the facility was not in use. The applicant stated that
the lights belonged to O & R and they had no control over them. The resident requested if the light could be
pointed down instead of on an angle. The location of the lights should be shown
on the plans including the direction of light and the approximate angle. 7. Show any proposed lighting. (continued) MINUTES OF REGULAR
MEETING OF JUNE 9, 2010 (continued) 8. Existing trees to remain within the work
area should be shown on the landscape plan as type and size. Deputy
Town Attorney Kraushaar, April 28, 2010:
Rockland
County Department of Environmental Health, dated April 27, 2010: 1. Depending on the configuration of the
sanitary sewer system, this project may need Health Department approval
pursuant to Article IV, Section 4.2.1 of the R.C. Sanitary Code. Additional information is to be provided
including pipe size, slope, location of manholes or cleanouts, etc. 2. Additional information is to be provided
regarding the water service. There is not enough information presented on the
plans to determine whether this would be classified as a water main extension. 3. Application is to be made to the RCDOH for
review of the storm water management system for compliance with the County
Mosquito Code. WHEREAS, on May 5, 2010, the
Architecture & Landscape Commission approved and signed the Site Planting
Plan, and WHEREAS, on May 24th
& May 28th, 2010 narrative, photo simulations, topographic
surveys and Tree Preservation Plan submitted for Final review NOW THEREFORE BE IT
RESOLVED that
the Planning Board of the Town of Building Plans Examiner Maneri, dated
June 3, 2010: 1. Revised
Note 14 to read: Reserve parking shown
on this plan shall be installed when determined to be necessary by the Building
Inspector or the Director of Environmental Control. Deputy
Director of Environmental Control Letson, dated June 9, 2010:
table on the survey that follows the wetland
delineation and wetland flagging; this information to be transferred to the
site plan map including the wetlands metes and bounds tables; further suggested
the title be changed to “conservation metes and bounds”.
Principal Planner
Simoes, dated June 4, 2010: 1.
The area of the conservation easement should be clearly mapped with a distinct boundary
along with metes and bounds. (continued) MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF JUNE 9, 2010
(continued) 2.
The southern-most end of the conservation easement be adjusted so that it
extends from A26 to A27 south to adjoining property line, and the westerly
portion between A18 & A17 that intersects property line on north side and
to the west back down to the south to the line that is projected on A26 to A27. Deputy Town Attorney
Kraushaar, dated June 9, 2010 1.
Applicant
to provide conservation easement for filing, in a form acceptable to the Town
Attorney’s Office, with recording documents; Title Policy; Metes & Bounds
Description. 2.
Note
to be added to Note 24 on site plan for the conservation easement with filing
information from Rockland County Clerk’s Office. AND BE IT FURTHER
RESOLVED that
based upon any fees due and/or legal documents required, said map to be
reviewed at T.A.C. for compliance, and if found satisfactory, may be endorsed
by the Chairwoman as a Final map and filed with the Rockland County Clerk. Member Carey returned
for the remainder of the Planning Board meeting. FINAL: FIRST IMMANUEL BAPTIST CHURCH, SL 65.7-5-33
(FKA 120B20) CENTRAL NYACK (Proposed
removal of the existing two-story dwelling and proposed development of a new,
three-story, 9,720 sq. ft. church, on 0.75 acres R-10 zoned land, east side of
West Broadway, south of West Street).
Chairwoman recognized Messrs. Kier Levesque, Architect; Thomas Skrable,
Engineer & Pastor Everett Newton, then read background information (see
file).
Building Plans Examiner Maneri read his recommendations into the record
(see file, dated 6/3/10); Deputy Director of Environmental Control Letson read
his recommendations into the record (see file, dated 6/9/10); Principal Planner
Simoes had no further comments.
Chairwoman read the following into the record (see file):
Deputy Town Attorney Kraushaar advised consent agreement to be provided
prior to Chair’s Endorsement; and Storm Water Management Agreement with
required fees in accordance with the Local Law to be provided prior to Chair’s
Endorsement.
For the record, correspondence from Rockland County Department of
Planning, dated June 9, 2010 received and is part of the Final Planning Board
resolution.
For the record, a request for recommendations was sent to the
On a Motion of Streitman, Seconded by Yacyshyn, and carried 6:0, with
Ayes of Thormann, Sullivan, Carey & Trevor, the following resolution was
passed: SL 65.7-5-33 WHEREAS, at the meeting of April
28, 2010, Preliminary Approval was granted to First Immanuel Baptist Church,
Site Layout 65.7-5-33, Central Nyack, and the Set of Site Plans dated 2/1/06,
last revised 3/25/10, subject to the following: Deputy
Director of Environmental Control Letson, dated April 28, 2010: 1.
Add
landscape plan to drawing list and approval set. 2.
Provide
3 copies of erosion control plan and plan review fee. 3.
Provide
cost estimate for determination of inspection fees. Principal Planner
Simoes, dated April 23, 2010: 1. The plan to be renamed Landscape and Tree
Preservation Plan. (continued) MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF JUNE 9, 2010
(continued) 2. The tree protection detail to show the
location of tree protection to 80% of critical root radius or drip line, whichever
is larger. 3.
Tree protection fencing to be labeled on the plan. 4.
The applicant to seek a reaffirmation of approval from ALC prior to obtaining Final Approval. Rockland
County Department of Planning, dated April 20, 2010: 1. Public sewer mains requiring extensions
within a right-of-way or an easement shall be reviewed and approved by the R.
C. Department of Health prior to construction. 2. Prior to the start of construction or
grading, a soil and erosion control plan shall be developed and in place for
the entire site that meets the NYS Guidelines for Urban Erosion and Sediment
Control. 3. Water is a scarce resource in 4. If any public water supply improvements
are required, engineering plans and specifications for these improvements shall
be reviewed by the Rockland County Department of Health prior to
construction. In order to complete an
application for approval of plans for public water supply improvements, the water
supplier must supply an engineer’s report pursuant to the “Recommended
Standards for Water Works, 2003 Edition,” that certifies their ability to serve
the proposed project while meeting the criteria contained within the
Recommended Standards for Water Works.
These standards are adopted in their entirety in 10 NYCRR, Subpart 5-1,
and the NYS regulations governing public water
systems. Further, both the application
and supporting engineer’s report must be signed and stamped by a NYS licensed
professional engineer and shall be accompanied by a completed NYS Department of
Health Form 348, which must be signed by the public water supplier. 5. The Village of Nyack is one of the reasons
this proposal was referred to this department for review. The municipal
boundary is directly behind the site, along the eastern property line. NYS GML
states that the purposes of Sections 239-I, 239-m and 239-n shall be to bring
pertinent inter-community and countywide planning, zoning, site plan and
jurisdiction. Such review may include inter-community and county-wide
considerations in respect to the compatibility of various land uses with one
another; traffic generating characteristics of various land uses in relation to
the effect of such traffic on other land uses and to the adequacy of existing
and proposed thoroughfare facilities; and the protection of community character
as regards predominant land uses, population density, and the relation between
residential and nonresidential areas. In addition, Section 239-nn was recently
enacted to encourage the coordination of land use development and regulation
among adjacent municipalities, and as a result development occurs in a manner
that is supportive of the goals and objectives of the general area. The 6. All proposed signage shall be indicated on
the site plan and shall conform to the municipality’s sign standards. 7. There shall be no net increase in
stormwater runoff from the site. Rockland
County Sewer District No. 1, dated April 7, 2010: 1. As this is a non-residential project, R.
C. Sewer District No. 1’s “Commercial/Non-residential Wastewater Questionnaire”
must be submitted to and approved by this office before any sewage is
discharged into the District’s sewerage system. The pastor or a church official must sign the questionnaire. 2. The details for sanitary sewer
construction as shown on the plans comply with the District’s construction
standards. 3. Details for the sanitary sewer connection
are subject to approval by the Town of (continued) MINUTES OF REGULAR
MEETING OF JUNE 9, 2010 (continued) 4. Note 9 on Sheet 2 (Site Plan) states,
“Proposed sanitary sewer installation shall be connected to existing sanitary
sewer lateral within bldg.” However, if the proposed building does not utilize
the existing sanitary sewer lateral, the lateral must be plugged between the
edge of the right-of-way and the curb line with a permanent watertight plug or
cap encased in concrete. 5.
The requested variances for a church or similar place of worship with a stated
membership of fifty-two (52) families do not require the applicant to pay an
impact fee … however, if the membership
of the church increases to one hundred (100) families, the District will
require further review and may impose an impact fee. Fire
Inspector, dated April 2, 2010:
Deputy
Town Attorney Kraushaar, April 28, 2010: Provide Storm Water Management Agreement and
security for same. AND
WHEREAS, the applicant was
further referred to the Architecture Landscape Commission for reaffirmation of
their approval and to return to the Planning Board for Final review, and WHEREAS,
on May
3, 2010, the Architecture Landscape Commission reaffirmed the Landscape Plan,
and WHEREAS,
on
May 21, 2010, revised narrative and plans submitted for Planning Board Final
review NOW
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Board grants Final Approval to First
Immanuel Baptist Church, SL 65.7-5-33 (FKA 120B20) Central Nyack, and the Site
Layout Map Revision 12, dated 4/28/10, subject to the following: Building
Plans Examiner Maneri, dated June 3, 2010: 1.
Add
date when A.L.C. approval was re-affirmed. Deputy
Director of Environmental Control Letson, dated June 9, 2010: 1.
Provide 3 copies of erosion control plan and plan review fee. 2.
Provide cost estimate for determination of inspection fees. Town
Highway Department, dated June 4, 2010: 1. Request the
proposed sidewalk to be 5’ wide for proper maintenance. . Rockland
County Department of Planning, dated June 9, 2010: 1.
Prior to the start of construction or grading, a soil and erosion
control plan shall be developed and in
place for the entire site that meets the NYS Guidelines for Urban Erosion and
Sediment Control. 2. Water is a scarce resource in 3. All
proposed signage shall be indicated on the site plan and shall conform to the
municipality’s sign standards. 4. There shall be no
net increase in stormwater runoff from the site. (continued) MINUTES OF REGULAR
MEETING OF JUNE 9, 2010 (continued) 5. If
any public water supply improvements are required, engineering plans and
specifications for these improvements shall be reviewed by the Rockland County
Department of Health prior to construction.
In order to complete an application for approval of plans for public
water supply improvements, the water supplier must supply an engineer’s report
pursuant to the “Recommended Standards for Water Works, 2003 Edition,” that
certifies their ability to serve the proposed project while meeting the
criteria contained within the Recommended Standards for Water Works. These standards are adopted in their entirety
in 10 NYCRR, Subpart 5-1, and the NYS regulations governing public water
systems. Further, both the application
and supporting engineer’s report must be signed and stamped by a NYS licensed
professional engineer and shall be accompanied by a completed NYS Department of
Health Form 348, which must be signed by the public water supplier. 6. The Village of Nyack is one of the reasons
this proposal was referred to this department for review. The municipal
boundary is directly behind the site, along the eastern property line. NYS GML
states that the purposes of Sections 239-I, 239-m and 239-n shall be to bring
pertinent inter-community and countywide planning, zoning, site plan and
jurisdiction. Such review may include inter-community and county-wide
considerations in respect to the compatibility of various land uses with one
another; traffic generating characteristics of various land uses in relation to
the effect of such traffic on other land uses and to the adequacy of existing
and proposed thoroughfare facilities; and the protection of community character
as regards predominant land uses, population density, and the relation between
residential and nonresidential areas. In addition, Section 239-nn was recently
enacted to encourage the coordination of land use development and regulation
among adjacent municipalities, and as a result development occurs in a manner
that is supportive of the goals and objectives of the general area. Deputy Town Attorney Kraushaar, June 9,
2010: 1. Consent agreement to be provided prior
to Chair’s Endorsement. 2. Storm Water Management Agreement with
required fees in accordance with the Local Law to be provided prior to Chair’s
Endorsement. CONTINUATION OF
REVIEW UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF S.E.Q.R. AND PUBLIC HEARING AT PRELIMINARY:
GRAND PRIZE CHEVROLET-CADILLAC, SL 58.18-1-22 & 23, NANUET (Proposed 1 story
building, 8,776 sq. ft. of new
car showroom and associated space & 4,243 sq. ft. of mezzanine office area, with related parking and
reconfiguration of existing entrances along Route 304. Property is located on
the northeast corner of Route 304 & Chairwoman Thormann recognized Andrew Atzl,
surveyor, William Strasser, Attorney, Michael Haemmerle, Grand Prize and Paul
Going, Traffic Consultant, then read background information (see file). Attorney Strasser advised at the last
Planning Board meeting, reviewed the traffic situation, and a determination was
made, at the request of the Board regarding the Member Sullivan stated is in agreement with
the elimination of the left-hand turn; however, in looking at the site plan,
suggested the island be angled such at a 45 degree angle in and 45 degrees out:
Mr. Atzl advised the island is designed as such for truck routing movements
(see drawing #6); discussion ensued. Mr.
Atzl advised can possibly widen the island slightly. Member Sullivan further
requested signage be place prohibiting left turn; Mr. Going stated can possibly
widen the island and agreed with signage being placed at this location. (continued) MINUTES OF REGULAR
MEETING OF JUNE 9, 2010 (continued) Mr. Atzl exhibited the modifications to the
site plan depicting the right-in and right-out turn off Continuing, Mr. Atzl further advised the
Tree Preservation Plan and Landscape Plan will be sent in for the next
submission; brief discussion ensued. Building Plans Examiner Maneri read his
recommendations into the record (see file, dated 6/3/10); Deputy Director of
Environmental Control Letson read his recommendations into the record (see file,
dated 6/9/10); Principal Planner Simoes read his recommendations into the
record (see file, dated 6/7/10). Chairwoman Thormann read the following
recommendations into the record (see file): Chairwoman announced call for the
Continuation of the Public Hearing: No
one rose: On a Motion of Carey, Seconded by
Streitman, and carried 6:0, with Ayes of Thormann, Yacyshyn, Sullivan &
Trevor, the Public Hearing was closed.
On a Motion of Yacyshyn, Seconded by
Streitman, and carried 6:0, with Ayes of Thormann, Sullivan, Carey &
Trevor, the following resolution was passed: GRAND
PRIZE CHEVROLET-CADILLAC, NANUET SITE
LAYOUT 58.18-1-22 & 23, (FKA 32A1.03 & 2) S.E.Q.R.
DETERMINATION and REFERRAL
TO THE HONORABLE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS WHEREAS,
a
Short Environmental Assessment Form was received by Town Department of
Environmental Control, acting as staff for the Clarkstown Planning Board on
October 27, 2009 from Grand Prize Chevrolet-Cadillac, Bardonia, for tax lot
58.18-1-22 & 23 for a proposed 1 story building, of which 7,993 square feet
is for new car showroom and associated space and 4,093 square feet for
mezzanine office area, with related parking and reconfiguration of existing
entrances along Route 304 on the northeast corner of Route 304 and West Nyack
Road, on 1.20 acres LIO zoned land, and WHEREAS,
said
EAF was referred to nine (9) interested and/or involved agencies by Town
Department of Environmental Control on October 27, 2009, and WHEREAS,
Public
hearings were held on March 24, 2010, May 12, 2010 and June 9, 2010, and WHEREAS,
a
traffic study was requested to be provided by the applicant for review by
Traffic Consultant Sarna, and WHEREAS,
Traffic Studies were
prepared on July 24, 2009 and May 4, 2010 by Atlantic Traffic and Design
Engineers, and on February 22, 2010 by Harry Baker & Associates, and WHEREAS,
said
studies were reviewed by Traffic Consultant Sarna by memos dated December 15,
2009, January 6, 2010, March 17, 2010 and May 6, 2010, and WHEREAS,
at
the Planning Board meeting of June 9, 2010, the Public Hearing was closed, and WHEREAS,
at
said meeting, correspondence received from Deputy Director of Environmental
Control Letson, dated June 9, 2010, stated: 1. Outstanding issues from the previous
meetings and discussions are related to the traffic circulation into the site. 2. The West Nyack Road entrance has been
revised for right in and out movements only. 3. Soil remediation was addressed at the
previous meeting, with correspondence submitted by the applicant’s consultant
from the Rockland County Health Department. This impact is mitigated. 4. Overall the proposed action will be an
improvement to the site. (continued) MINUTES OF REGULAR
MEETING OF JUNE 9, 2010 (continued) WHEREAS, at said meeting of
June 9, 2010, Traffic Consultant Sarna recommended the following: 1.
A
fixed bus stop to the west of the Honda driveway. 2.
The
possibility of changing signal operations at Route 304 & 3.
An
exclusive west turn lane to improve the level of service at the intersection
and the overall level of service. 4.
An
inter-connection between the two properties to keep traffic off the road. 5.
The
possibility of re-configuring the driveway to the east. NOW THEREFORE BE IT
RESOLVED that
the Planning Board of the Town of AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the applicant is referred to the Honorable Zoning Board
of Appeals, and to return to the Planning Board for Preliminary and Final
review.
TOWN BOARD
REFERRAL: AMENDED PETITION OF On a Motion of Streitman, Seconded by Carey,
and carried 6:0, with Ayes of Thormann, Yacyshyn, Sullivan & Trevor, the
Planning Board offers the following comments for the Town Board’s
consideration: WHEREAS,
the
Town Board of the Town of Clarkstown has referred an amended zone change
petition from Normandy Village, Co., from R-10 to MF-3, Map 64.09-1-11, Nanuet,
and WHEREAS,
the
proposed amendment relates solely to the community benefit offered by the
petitioner in order to demonstrate compliance with the Town Comprehensive Plan,
and WHEREAS,
the
prior zone change was granted with the proviso that the petitioner agreed to
sell three (3) one-bedroom units at Normandy Village to Volunteer Emergency
Personnel at below market rates, and WHEREAS,
the
petitioner has been unable to find purchasers that meet the requirements of the
existing zone change petition and has amended their petition to provide for the
fee conveyance of one (1) one-.bedroom unit at Normandy Village to the Town of
Clarkstown for rental to a volunteer emergency service member, and WHEREAS,
the
Planning Board has reviewed the amended petition which relieves the applicant
from providing three (3) one-bedroom units for sale to volunteers at below
market rates in conjunction with the zone change which granted twelve (12)
multi-family units in place of one (1) single-family house, and WHEREAS,
the
apartment that Mr. Torsoe of Normandy Village plans to convey to the Town of
Clarkstown as part of a community benefit relating to receiving the zone change
to multi-family within the Normandy Village complex needs to be in a condition
that protects the Town of Clarkstown from having to expend tax payer money for
costly repairs that are likely to occur, since the apartment is in the original
section of the complex which was built more than forty years ago NOW
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Planning Board of the Town of 1.
Petitioner’s
counsel appeared before the Planning Board and reiterated the offer on the
petition that the unit will be delivered with all new appliances, and be
freshly painted. In addition, the owner
had authorized petitioner’s counsel to offer to install two (2) new air
conditioning units and a new formica kitchen counter-top. (continued) MINUTES OF REGULAR
MEETING OF JUNE 9, 2010 (continued) 2.
The
Town Board should require and have the Town Attorney’s office review a copy of
the prospectus and by-laws along with the last two years financial statements
of the condominium. In particular, it
should be ascertained as to what the common charges are for the unit, what they
include (ie: utilities), the parking and storage associated with the ownership,
whether this includes pool membership, and who is responsible for maintenance
of the roof and external aspects of the unit. 3.
While
certain Town employees and officials visited and inspected unit #20-8, they are
not certified home inspectors. Therefore, the Planning Board recommends the
hiring of a certified home inspector to review the condition of the unit. Since
the Town will be the ultimate owner of the unit, and as such, be responsible
for any future repairs required by the tenant, the Town would be well served to
know in advance any such repairs that my be required in the future. 4.
The
Planning Board, based on the site visit referred in #3 above, is concerned
about the following: a)
The
age, modernity and condition of the kitchen cabinets and all kitchen
counter tops. b)
The
condition of the kitchen floor. c)
The
condition and compliance with code of all electrical outlets. d)
The
condition, age and modernity of the bathroom fixtures, toilet, sink and
medicine cabinet. 5.
The
Planning Board is particularly concerned with the age, condition and energy
efficiency of all of the windows and screens located throughout the unit (note
the exception of the bathroom window which appears to have recently been
replaced). This matter has particular bearing on the cost factor to be absorbed
by any prospective tenant through their monthly gas/electric bills given that
this is supposed to be an affordable unit. 6.
Though
the petition has agreed to install all new appliances, the Planning Board
believes that those appliances should be Energy Star efficient rated for the
same reasons discussed above regarding new windows. 7.
Petitioner
should install a carbon monoxide unit as well as a smoke detector so as to
comply with local and State Code. TOWN BOARD REFERRAL: The Planning Board
and the Clarkstown Special Board for Implementation of the Comprehensive Plan
has reviewed the West Nyack Hamlet Vision Plan and on a Motion of Carey,
Seconded by Sullivan, and carried 6:0 with Ayes of Thormann, Yacyshyn,
Streitman & Trevor, offers the following comments for the Town Board’s
consideration: The Special Board
compliments the West Nyack Hamlet Vision Plan Committee for their hard work putting
together an excellent document. The
recommendations set forth in this document are consistent with those made in
the recently approved Clarkstown Comprehensive Plan. However, there was one area that the Special
Board felt that the Vision Plan could emphasize more, namely the historical
significance of West Nyack. Specifically, we felt
that there should be more mention of the history of Two sections of the
Plan need clarification: 1) Page 6, under the heading “Economics”, states
that “A proposed commuter train stop in the hamlet was seen as both a potential
benefit for local business, but also a burden on the hamlet’s parking
availability.” While a commuter train
stop is being proposed in West Nyack as part of the Tappan Zee Bridge I-87/287
Corridor Study, it is being situated at the Commuter Lot (J) at the MINUTES
OF REGULAR MEETING OF JUNE 9, 2010 (continued) 2) Page 29 describes the existing conditions at
Richard Corners, but does not
follow the format of the rest of the document by providing recommendations for
this area. Once again, The
Planning Board and Special Board applaud the West Nyack Hamlet Vision Plan
committee for their hard work in putting together the Vision Plan for CORRESPONDENCE/MISCELLANEOUS: a)
Request from Robert Geneslaw AICP for Consulting Services for O & R
Transformer Station, North Little a) On a Motion of Sullivan, Seconded by
Streitman, and carried 6:0, with Ayes of Thormann, Yacyshyn, Carey &
Trevor, Escrow Account in the Initial
Amount of $5,000 was established for Robert Geneslaw, AICP, for SEQR Review of
the O & R Transformer Station on North Little Tor Road, New City. b) On
a Motion of Sullivan, Seconded by Trevor, and carried 6:0, with Ayes of
Thormann, Yacyshyn, Sullivan & Carey, Escrow
Account in the Amount of $5,000 was replenished for Robert Geneslaw, AICP, for
the Kury Homes Subdivision. MINUTES OF PREVIOUS
MEETING(S): On a Motion of Yacyshyn, Seconded by
Streitman, and carried 6:0, with Ayes of Thormann, Sullivan, Carey &
Trevor, the Minutes of the Planning
Board of May 12, 2010 were approved as amended. MEETING ADJOURNED AT
APPROXIMATELY 9:45 P.M. |
