MINUTES PLANNING BOARD PUBLIC HEARING

Transcription

1 Richard Thomas Mayor City Planning Board Department of Planning & Community Development City Hall - Roosevelt Square Mount Vernon, New York (914) FAX (914) MINUTES PLANNING BOARD PUBLIC HEARING William Holmes Chair A regular meeting of the City Planning Board will be held on, Wednesday, August 3, 2016 at 6:30 PM. in the City Council Chambers, Second Floor, City Hall, Mount Vernon, New York at which time and place the Board shall consider the following: ITEM # 1 ROLL CALL Present Chairman Holmes Board Member Snyder Board Member Selsey Board Member Zamor Absent Board Member Justino Board Member Gleason ITEM # 2 APPROVAL OF MINUTES 2.1 Approval of the minutes of the regular meeting held on Wednesday, April 6, Approval of the minutes of the special meeting held on Tuesday, June 14, Approval of the minutes of the regular meeting held on Wednesday, July 13, All Minutes were adjourned. ITEM #3 DELIBERATIONS 3.1 Case No Gramatan Avenue (Section , Block 1018, Lot 1) Located in the NB Neighborhood Business Zoning District. The applicant Jessie Rodriguez, of the Caring Tree Child Care Center LLC is proposing to convert the existing vacant retail space into a day-care use. A Special Use Permit is required. SEQRA Determination: This action is a Type II action; therefore, ending the SEQRA process. The Chairman reads the item into the record. Board Member Selsey rescued himself from this application.

2 This application is now in deliberations and the Board reviewed all extra material submitted by staff. The Board still has concerns in regards to the safety of the children drop-off and pick-up. The Board adjourned this application until the September 7, 2016 meeting. Motion to adjourn made by Board Member Snyder, Seconded by Board Member Zamor. All in favor. ITEM #4 CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING 4.1 Case No Bradford Road (Section , Block 2204, Lot 1) Located in the RMF-15 Zoning District The application WP East Acquisitions L.L.C represented by attorney Mark Weingarten of DelBello Donnellan Weingarten Wise and Wiederkehr LLP proposes to erect a 5-story multi family building with associated parking. SEQRA Determination: This action is a coordinated review and classified as an Unlisted Action. The City Council as "Lead Agency" declared a negative declaration on February 26, 2015 ending the SEQRA process. The Chairman reads the item into the record. The architect, Stewart Lach, presents his presentation, explaining to the Board that, the same slide show was presented to the ARB for their comments. The new configuration breaks up the parks mass view and it s now further away from the park entrance. The new configuration has eliminated the free standing garages and now has parking underneath the building, which will reduce the site coverage and the overall size of the parking lot. The original plan had two rows of parking. The proposed plan has a single row of parking and 31 additional parking spaces underneath the building. This revised plan, also gives a larger landscaping view in front of the building. Some of the amenity space will now be moved to the front of the building. The new design proposed is much more articulation with the break up of the size and scale, and it s also one story less in height. The attorney, Janet Giris, explains to the Board that, the drawings are progress drawings and not complete with the landscaping, lighting, security, etc. We wanted to get feed back from the ARB and the Planning Board to see if this is something to move forward with. The Chairman asks for any correspondence. Staff responds that the ARB has correspondence. At a regular meeting of the Architectural Review Board held on Wednesday, July 27, 2016, we the Architectural Review Board reviewed and assessed the mass, scale and shape of the proposed amendment. Accordingly, the ARB suggests: That during our meeting regarding the aforementioned proposal, we did not have enough information to make any definitive assessments based on the

3 information provided. While we feel that the shape, mass, height and scale are more contextually aligned than the previous iterations of the proposal to the topography, the site itself and its surrounding environs, there were still reservations about the shape, height, mass and scale and we still need further information regarding the type, style and location of finished exterior materials prior to making any decisions. We would also like the Planning Board s thoughts regarding the amended layout as it relates to the site plan to assist us with making any further architectural and aesthetic assessments. The Board still has concerns in regards to the mass. Although, the height of the building has decreased, the mass has increased. The F shape building has increased the mass. Design wise architectural, I don t see a significance change in the façade design from the original building. The Architect, Stewart Lach, explains that the re-working of the parking lot and putting some of the spaces underneath, has given them the ability to come up with a different shape and the feeling is that the public isn t confronted with just a long straight building, and that would break up the massing from what the public will see. He continues with comments from the ARB in regards to adding plantings between the islands in the parking area to break up the parking into smaller pieces. The original proposed parking area, the parking came right up to the edge of the building and now with the proposed parking, there s more landscaping. He also explains the proposed floor plan beginning at the basement level where the parking begins. The Board continues with conversations in regards to the previous parking plans and the proposed parking plans. Staff explains that the applicant still must meet the parking lot standards. The Attorney, Janet Giries, explains that this presentation is progress drawings and the actual presentation has not been developed with all of the requirements, such as landscaping, buffers, parking. The extra courtyard is the amenity space, which hasn t been designed yet, but it will be for residents to relax. The Board asks for the applicant to explain the loading and unloading for the residents. The architect explains that there is a designated area for loading and unloading which will be on the back or side entrance. The tenants will not move in and out from the front entrance. The Board has concerns, if cars were parked in there designated parking, near the designated loading and unloading area; how will the tenants move in or out. The architect explains they will review that once the plans are drawn. Chairman Holmes asks if any member of the public wishes to speak.

4 Members of the public speak Nathan Plumber- An alternative use for the area, a family entertainment facility. Karen Scaffie - Wilson Woods is the last green space, the project should complement the area. Jamie Preston Opposes the project. Concerns with parking, and public safety. Would like to see an alternative use. Yolanda Kelley Opposes and would like to see an alternative use. Will not be adequate parking. Should maintain the character of the park. Brenda Campbell Opposes Mt. Vernon is already over populated. Jean Pinick We live in the suburbs, we don t need any more apartments. We need more green space. Chairman Holmes would the applicant like to come forward and respond to the public concerns? The attorney, Janet Giris, states that these concerns were addressed in previous meetings. The environmental study was conducted by the City Council; the site was an industrial site and is currently paved. We are adding green space, we are increasing the impervious surface, there will be added landscaping which is currently not there. The applicant, Rashid Walker, explains there is more green space proposed then currently exists. The owner wants an apartment building there, not a skate park. We feel that this would be a nice project for the City of Mt. Vernon, all the taxes are going to the City. We have revised the project to appeal to the City. We have committed to give the County money for additional parking in the park. The Board has questions in regards to SEQRA amendments for the blasting for the underground parkig, which changes things. The attorney, Janet Giris, states that the original plans had a basement plan and they will take a look into this. We re here to get some feedback in regards to the direction we should go. The Board explains they haven t seen any additional information on the site plan parameters, drainage, structure, landscaping, safety, snow removal, noise, security and lighting. The attorney, Janet Giris, states there wasn t a stone left unturned in regards to the original proposal. With regards to this revised proposal changes, we recognize all of those concerns and have provided this information to the Board. If you feel this is a plan, the Board could work with, we will continue to develop this plan, if not, I will have to converse with my client. The ARB has asked for a visual of what the project will look like.

5 The Board makes a motion to adjourn. Board Member Snyder makes a motion, seconded by Board Member Selsey. All members present are in favor. 4.2 Case No E. Third Street (Section , Block 4037, Lot 2) Located in the CB Commercial Business Zoning District The applicant, Patrick Coleman, represented by, Design Concept Technologies, the construction manager, proposes to construct an extension to the existing warehouse on the same property. SEQRA Determination: This action is a coordinated review and classified as an Unlisted Action. The Planning Board shall declare its intent to be Lead Agency. The Lead Agency shall be established prior to a determination of significance. This application has requested to be adjourned until the September 7, 2016 meeting. The applicant has been advised that, the Board will no longer entertain any further adjournments. 4.3 Case No S. Terrace Avenue (Section , Block 1059, Lot 10,11) The applicant, John Bemal, represented by Errol McIntosh, the architect, proposes to install a prefabricated warehouse for storage of construction equipment and supplies. Accordingly, site plan review is required. SEQRA Determination: This action is a coordinated review and classified as an Unlisted Action. The Planning Board shall declare its intent to be Lead Agency. The Lead Agency shall be established prior to a determination of significance. The Chairman reads the item into the record. Errol McIntosh, the architect presents his presentation. He explains that this project is an indoor storage building for construction material and equipment. He presents his slide show presentation showing the Board the drainage, parking, shape of the building and the elevations. The Board has questions in regards to the type of material being stored. Errol McIntosh, explains its cement powder, no mixing. This completes our presentation. The Board explains to the applicant that they are waiting for the ARB to respond with their recommendations. Staff explains that the Board needs to complete the

6 part 2 of the environmental assessment form. Part one of the EAF is completed by the applicant, part 2 is completed by the Board. The Board goes through the process. Board Member Zamor makes a motion to adjourn till next month meeting waiting for ARB recommendations, seconded by Board Member Snyder. All members present are in favor. ITEM #5 ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIONS SEQRA Determination: This action is a Type II action; therefore, ending the SEQRA process. 5.1 Mount Vernon West Proposed Zoning Ordinance Recommendation According to Section of the Zoning Code If any amendment is to be considered by the City Council, it shall be referred for review and report to the Planning Board, the Corporation Counsel and other board (Architectural Review Board), agency or official of the city which the City Council deems appropriate. All boards, agencies and officials to which such proposed amendments are referred shall not have less than 30 days from the date of forwarding, or from the date of revision by the petitioner whichever is later, to submit their reports. 5.2 Recommendation 545 S. Fulton Avenue (Section , Block 4088, Lot 8) Located in the CB Commercial Business Zoning District. The Zoning Board seeks the Planning Board s recommendation as it relates to the above application. The Applicant Hudson Greenwich, represented by the architect, Francis Turner, proposes to build a (4) four story office building with indoor parking and storage. Staff explains the application is on the agenda for two reasons, one for a recommendation to the Zoning Board and for the part two of the SEQRA. The Board goes thru the SEQRA process. 5.3 Town of Eastchester referral 504 New Rochelle Road (Section 85, Block 4, Lot 1) In accordance with Article 12B, Section 239-NN (1) of NYS General Municipal Law It is the intent and purpose of this section to encourage the coordination of land use development and regulation among adjacent municipalities in order that each adjacent municipality may recognize the goals and objectives of neighboring municipalities, and as a result development occurs in a manner which is supported of the goals and objectives of the general area. Accordingly, the Mount Vernon Planning Board has the

7 ability to review site plan and approval on property that is within five hundred feet of an adjacent municipality. Staff explains that is a site plan application in front of the Town of Eastchester for a gas station along New Rochelle Road. At the last meeting, the Board sent correspondence to Eastchester, thanking them for the notification and the Board would respond if the elect to. The Board has no comments. Meeting Adjourned Note: Work Sessions will be open to the public but closed to public participation subject to the Open Meetings Law, [Section 105 of the New York State Public Officers Law, Article 7]. Note: Items listed on the agenda are subject to change and amendments and/or additions may be placed on the agenda. Note: The Planning Board will hold its work session on Monday, August 1, 2016 at 6:30 pm in the Memorial Room, City Hall, 2 nd Floor. Note: The next regular meeting of the City Planning Board is scheduled to be held on Wednesday, September 7, Wendy Davis Planning Board Secretary cc: Richard Thomas, Mayor George Brown, City Clerk Shawyn Howard, Planning Commissioner Press William Long, Planning Administrator Lobby Kindra Dolman, 1 st Deputy Building Commissioner Lawrence A. Porcari, Corporation Council Brian G. Johnson, 1 st Corporation Council