Planning Board

MEETING MINUTES PLANNING BOARD REGULAR MEETING for April 7, 2021 A regular meeting of the City Planning Board will be held on Wednesday, A p ril 7, 2 02 1 at 6:30 PM via ZOOM (https://zoom.us/) at which time the Board shall consider the following: Please see the City’s Website (www.cmvny.com) for “ZOOM” Instructions: Meeting ID: 898 4047 0735 Password: 072289 Dial In: (646) 876-9923 ITEM #1 ROLL CALL Chairman called the roll: In addition to Chairman Selsey, attending were the following Commissioners: Mr. Thompson, Ms. Thompson-Njenga, Mr. Whites, Mr. Trolio, and Mr. Zamor. Commissioner Boncardo was excused. Also attending Marlon Molina, Deputy Commissioner, Shanitra Lockett, Land Use Counsel and Bob Galvin, Planning Administrator. Chairman indicated that there was a quorum present and opened the meeting. ITEM #2 APPROVAL OF MINUTES • April March 3, 2021 The Chairman asked if the Commissioners had an opportunity to review the minutes of March 3, 2021 and were there any corrections. There being none, the Chair asked for a motion to approve the minutes of March 3, 2021. Motion was made by Commissioner Whites, seconded by Commissioner Thompson and carried with a vote of 6 – 0. City of Mount Vernon Meeting Date Planning Board Agenda April 3, 2021 ITEM #3 PUBLIC HEARING The Chairman read the following Case No. 3-2021 115 South Macquesten Parkway (Section 164.75, Block 1060, Lots 1, 2, 3, 6, 8, and 29) Located in the Mount Vernon West – Hub Transit Oriented zone (MVW-H). Request for Site Plan Review. The Chairman explained that the Applicant is currently working on supplemental information for the EAF and has requested an adjournment until the Planning Board’s May meeting. The Planning Board has not received any objection to their intent to act as lead agency and, therefore, can assume lead agency status at their May meeting. The Planning Board has received a GML review from the Westchester County Department of Planning dated March 19, 2021. The Board also received comment from the City of Yonkers as an interested agency which have been sent to the applicant. The public hearing for the application was adjourned until the Planning Board’s May 5, 2021 meeting. Item #4 ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION The Chair provided the explanation of the request from the City Council for the Planning Board recommendation for the following three rezoning petitions. Four petitions were reviewed by the Planning Board at their March 3, 2021 meeting. The Planning Board made a positive recommendation to the City Council for the 434 Gramatan Avenue rezoning petition (gas station renovation and convenience store conversion) based on Pat Cleary’s review memo and comments made by the Planning Board members. The Chair explained that the following three petitions were heard by the Planning Board at their March meeting. The Applicants are now returning with new information in response to comments and recommendations by the Planning Board. The Chair indicated that Mr. Cleary and Mr. Zarin were present to discuss the recommendations found in Mr. Cleary’s memoranda. The Chair described the petition for Vernon Commons, 65 W. Second Street - 8 townhouse units; variances also required. The Chair indicated that the Applicant proposes to construct two 3-story townhouse buildings separated by a central courtyard driveway. The northern building would contain three 3-bedroom townhouses and the southern building would contain five 3-bedroom townhouses, for a total of 8 dwelling units. Mr. Addesso, the Attorney for the petitioner, indicated that he had read Mr. Cleary’s updated memo and recommendation. He also indicted that he had provided a clarification to the Planning Board advising that the proposed project was a condominium project. If approval is granted for the zone change and site plan approval, as well as ARB approval, the applicant would file the appropriate documents with the Attorney General’s Office. Mr. Addesso discussed Mr. Cleary’s recommended approach which develop specific standards for townhouses in the RMF 6.75 zone. Mr. Addessso stated that the Applicant has no objection to this approach and would proceed to the City Council. The Chair asked Mr. Addesso to address the amount of open space in the proposed project. Mr. Addesso discussed the space between the two buildings and the open area to the north of the project that is a landscaped area and gazebo. The Chair asked about the projected taxes for the proposed property. Mr. Addesso indicated that he could make a request to the Assessor’s office for an estimate. Mr. Mahalek, Associate Attorney working with the City Council, was asked to share his screen and showed the plans. Mr. Addesso went through the plans with the Planning Board. He was asked about the total amount of open space. A discussion ensued on the usable open space shown on the plans. Mr. Zarin, the Attorney for the City Council, indicated that Mr. Cleary’s proposed zoning specifications include 500 sf per unit for useable open space. This is found in Mr. Cleary’s revised memo dated April 2, 2021 to the Planning Board. The required useable open space for 8 townhouses would be 4,000 sf. Useable open space would need to be defined in the Zoning Code. Mr. Cleary stated that he could provide a definition for useable open space. Commissioner Zamor indicated his preference to keep the two buildings of the same size with lesser density and more open space. He thought that the standards could be modified to result in a better project with a total of six units instead of 8 units. Mr. Zarin stated that six units is the permitted density in the RMF 6.75 zone and Commissioner’s Zamor’s comment would be consistent with the zone’s density. Mr. Addesso indicated that this can be addressed upon Applicant’s return to the City Council. The lot area can be easily adjusted. Mr. Zarin summarized the recommendation for the City Council including the reduction to six townhouse units instead of 8 units; definition for useable open space and the other standards identified in Mr. Cleary’s memo. He indicated that Mr. Cleary would write up the modified recommendation and present to the City Council. The Chair asked if the Commissioners had any other comments. There none made. The Chair made a motion for a recommendation to the City Council for the Vernon Commons Proposal for a total of six townhouse units and include text changes to allow townhouses and provide standards for townhouses in the RMF-6.75 zone as specified in Mr. Cleary’s memo. The recommendation does not include the rezoning of the subject. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Zamor and carried 6-0. The Chair indicated that the second petition was for a five story self-storage, mixed use facility known as the Attic at 219 W. Third Street. The applicant is proposing retail with a drive-thru on the first floor. The Chairman indicated that the Applicant has provided a market study as requested by the Planning Board at the March meeting. The Chari requested that the plans be showed on the screen. Mr. Addesso, the Attorney for the Applicant, discussed the market study. Mr. Cleary in his memo to the Planning Board indicated an increasing demand for self-storage space. The 5- story height for the proposed building results from the higher floor to ceiling height for ground level retail space with parking underneath the building. The actual height for the self-storage is 4 stories. The proposed building is attractive and has been designed to appear as a mixed-use office building. Mr. Mahalek was asked to pull up the visual renderings on his screen. Mr. Addesso stated that the Board should look at the proposed building against the rest of the area. There are existing buildings that are 3 stories with no parking and no loading spaces. He stated that the visual rendering does not overpower the area. Commissioner Zamor asked if there was a shadow study done for the project. Mr. Addesso indicated that no shadow study had been done. Mr. Cleary’s first memo listed everything that had been provided and no shadow study was listed. Commissioner Zamor indicated that the surrounding area is very residential. He agreed that the building itself is not a bad looking building but does not fit into the character of the area. The Project presents an opportunity review streetscape and reduce the scale for a softer building. The mass of the building can be reduced. The Chair asked about additional tax revenue. Mr. Addesso indicated that currently the existing building’s tax revenue is $72,000 . The Project would increase for self -storage facility plus the retail use. There will be approximately 5,000 sf of retail use. Commissioner Zamor asked who decides the type of retail that will go into the building and how could we confirm the type of retail with zoning. Mr. Whites questioned the market study and we should think about how we might control the type of retail. Mr. Cleary indicated that pursuant to a special permit, we have created 14 – 15 specific criteria to control the use. We can provide design criteria for the retail use. Mr. Zarin proposed an incentive for the fifth story. The Applicant would not get the fifth floor without high quality retail and specific types of retail. Mr. Addesso indicated that he had no problem with the approach. An attractive building would be better able to get high quality retail. Mr. Zarin asked Mr. Cleary to revise his recommendation to include an incentive for the fifth story. He also asked that a shadow study be done and define the quality of retail use to qualify for the fifth story bonus. The Chair stated that the type of design needs to be specified to raise the bar for self- storage facilities. Mr. Zarin requested Mr. Cleary to write this into the recommendation to the City Council. The Chair made a motion for a recommendation to the City Council including the support of the incentive approach with the comments and notes regarding massing, landscape scale and refine the special permit use criteria. Commissioner Zamor stated that he desired setbacks to be included for the building. The Chair requested a second for the motion. Commissioner Zamor seconded the motion and carried with a vote of 6 – 0. The Chair described the third rezoning petition for the Armory Terraces, 208 N. Fifth Avenue which is proposed for an 8-story senior living facility; waivers and variance would be required. The architect for the proposed building did not appear at the previous meeting and the matter was adjourned until the April meeting. Subject property is located at 208 N. 5th Avenue, on the corner of North Street, across from The Armory and just southwest of the Columbus Elementary School, and 1 block west of Hartley Park. Site is 10,200 square feet in area and supports an existing 1 ½ story brick building that housed the Italian Civic Association. The existing building is in poor condition. Proposed action involves applying the RMF-SC Senior Citizen Housing Floating Overlay Zone to a 10,200 square-foot parcel of land that is currently located in the RMF-10 zoning district. Proposed development calls for demolishing the existing building and constructing in its place an 8-story senior housing building containing 73 dwelling units (72 senior apartments and 1 superintendent’s apartment). Building amenities include a swimming pool, roof deck, community room with kitchen and fitness center. 24 off-street parking spaces (which includes 5 handicapped spaces) are proposed in a ground level parking garage accessed from N. 5th Avenue. The petition for 434 Gramatan Avenue for Gas Station/C-Store received a favorable recommendation from the Planning Board to provide a special permit for this type of operation. The recommendation was forwarded to the City Council. The Chair requested that Deputy Commissioner Molina promote the architect and principal for the Amory Terraces zoning petition. The Chair welcomed the panelists. Mr. Yuriy Menzak, the Project Architect, shared his screen and showed the plans. The architect went through the plans and discussed the details of the project. He indicated that constructions costs have increased approximately 15 – 20%. He also indicated that he could provide the finishes on request. Density was the issue at the beginning. The architect stated that he was open to discussing each of the waivers individually. The Chair indicated that we need to begin with the Project’s P&L without going through each waiver. Mr. Cleary indicated that the design waivers need to be based on the economics of the Project. The Project is requesting significant waivers and the Planning Board is asking for the Pro Forma. Commissioner Zamor indicated that the height is approximately 90’. Mr. Addesso indicated that the question is about reducing density. We would need to adjourn to develop the Pro Forma requested. Mr. Zarin indicated that the first item is to justify the density. Mr. Addesso indicated that the Pro Forma would do that. The density may even be approximately 40 units instead of the 73 units. Commissioner Zamor stated that Applicant can redesign the project instead of providing a Pro Forma. Mr. Zarin agreed indicating that in lieu of a P&L Applicant can come back with a redesign of the project. Mr. Kahn, the Principal, addresses the Planning Board. He wanted to go over the waivers. Mr. Addesso stated that the issue is that we will not be getting the waivers even if number of units is reduced. Mr. Kahn the P&L is not going to help since it gets changed. Mr. Addesso raised the issue of parking. Affordable housing gets a reduced parking requirement while market rate senior housing does not. The Chair stated that applicant should go back to Prop Forma. Mr. Addesso indicated that the applicant will work on either a redesign or the Pro Forma and return to the Planning Board. . He requested an adjournment. The Chair indicated for the record that the Petition for Armory Terraces at 208 North Fifth Avenue has been adjourned. Real Estate Committee Recommendation The Chair explained that the Real Estate Committee requested Planning Board recommendation regarding the potential use of these properties for municipal use. He indicated that there was a total of sixteen properties referred by the Real Estate Committee. The Planning Administrator developed a report for each property including information that the Planning Board may consider, property information (size, market value, zoning, current use, proximity to parkland, photograph of the property, land use map and aerial map w/zoning. The Real Estate Committee has also provided tax parcel maps for each property. Additionally, the Planning Department provided a digital document with a photograph and data for each property for the convenience of the Commissioners to assist with their review. There are fourteen residential and vacant properties listed below. The two commercial properties at 114 and 120 Stevens Avenue were not included in the list. The Subject Properties are listed below: 1) 4 Brookfield Road – vacant; R1-7; 900 sf – on border of Mount Vernon/Eastchester (sliver of property to be sold to adjoining landowner in Town of Eastchester) 2) 16 Glen Avenue – Two-family residence; RMF-15; 6,970 sf (near Metro North East Station) 3) 32 North High Street – 1 family residence; MCW-T (TOD mixed use); 3,050 sf 4) 52 Mersereau Avenue – 1 family residence; R1-7; 6,100 sf 5) 106 Twelfth Avenue - vacant (corner lot); RMF-6.75; 3,920 sf 6) 106 Hillside Avenue – Two-family residence; R2-4.5; 4,800 sf 7) 114 Stevens Avenue – vacant (used for parking); NB; 3,030 sf (adjacent to 120 Stevens Avenue, another city owned property for sale – one story commercial building w/two office tenants) 8) 120 Stevens Avenue – Commercial (one-story commercial building w/two office tenants); NB; 6,100 sf 9) 127 Dell Avenue – 1 family residence; R1-4.5; 5,660 sf 10) 145 South Fulton Avenue – I family residence; RMF-10; 4,356 sf 11) 224 North Seventh Avenue – Three-family residence; RMF-10; 4,800 sf 12) 234 East Fifth Street – Two-family residence (corner lot); R2-4.5; 9,585 sf (not recommended for sale) 13) 328 South First Street - Three-family family; RMF-6.75; 3,485 sf 14) 331 South Second Avenue – I family residence; RMF-6.75; 5,225 sf 15) 365 Union Avenue – 1 family residence; RMF-6.75; 2,180 sf 16) 467 East Fifth Avenue – 1 family residence; R2-4.5; 4,356 sf The Planning Commissioners reviewed the 14 residential and vacant properties listed above. The Commissioners did not see need for municipal use of the properties but indicated that 234 East Fifth Street has historical significance. The Chair asked the Commissioners if they agreed to vote on the reviewed residential and vacant properties together in one motion. The Planning Board agreed that the Board saw no need for the municipal use of the listed properties above with the exception of 234 East Fifth Street and recommended that these properties go to auction to realize the maximum value for these properties. Motion made by the Chair, seconded by Commissioner Thompson and carried with a vote of 6-0. The Planning Board left off 114 and 120 Stevens Avenue from the list and supported the suggestion of the Real Estate Committee Chair, Assessor Stephanie Vanderpool, that the City retain these two properties for future development for Mount Vernon youth and young adults in her email dated April 7, 2021. There was a general discussion on the need for an updated Comprehensive Plan as well as the need for infrastructure funding from developments coming before the City for review. The Chair adjourned the application until the Planning Board’s April meeting. With no further matters before the Commission, the Chair made a motion to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Commissioner Thompson with vote of 6-0. Bob Galvin, AICP Planning Administrator