Planning Board Meeting

Village of Nyack Planning Board January 4, 2021 Minutes Members Present: Also Present: Peter Klose - Chair Walter Sevastian, Village Attorney Peter Voletsky Don Yacopino - Chief Building Inspector Alan Englander Bob Galvin—Village Planner Seth Kestenbaum Jennifer Knarich alternate Absent: Karen Roberts alternate COVID-19 PANDEMIC STATUS~ another PUBLIC meeting held since the NYS “Pause” to address and contend with the world- wide CoronaVirus Pandemic that has ravaged our communities and our nation. This meeting is held subject to the provisions of Gov. Cuomo’s Executive Order 202.1 (the Order), issued on March 13, 2020, which temporarily suspended the requirements to provide public in-person access to meetings and authorizes the meetings to be held remotely “by conference call or similar service.” The Order which was extended through at least January 2021, requires that the public have the ability to view or listen to the proceedings and requires that all virtual meetings be “recorded and later transcribed.” This meeting is being conducted with public notice by Deputy Village Clerk, Rosa Martinez, at a scheduled Zoom.com meeting [Topic: Village of Nyack Planning Board Meeting Time: January 4th 2021 07:00 PM Eastern Time (US and Canada) Join Zoom Meeting ID 83005412532]; and will be recorded and stored by the Village Conflict Check: The Chairman polled the members of the Board regarding the issue of possible conflicts of interest regarding the application. Klose recused from the application involving 90 Jefferson Street. Kestenbaum recused from the application of 117-125 Main Street. All others affirmed there were no conflicts of interest or reasons for recusal, unless otherwise noted. Other Business: Chairman stated that the minutes for the December 7, 2020 meeting were distributed to the Planning Board Members for their review prior to this meeting and at that time asked if there were any corrections. As there were no corrections, Chairman made a motion to approve the December 7, 2020 Minutes as distributed. Motion seconded by Englander and then Approved by a Vote of 4-0. 1. 140 North Highland Avenue. Oak Hill Cemetery. Site Plan application for the construction of a mausoleum and request for recommendation to ZBA for required Area Variance. Property is in the SFR-1 zoning district. VILLAGE OF NYACK PLANNERS’ COMMENTS - AWAITING REVISED PLANS-SEQRA – the proposed action is an Unlisted Action. The Planning Board declared its intent to be lead agency at the November meeting. Notice of Intent (NOI) and GML referrals sent to Rockland County Planning, NYSDOT, Thruway Authority, the Town of Clarkstown and Village of Upper Nyack. We received responses from Rockland County Planning and Town of Clarkstown (which indicated a matter of local determination with no adverse impact.). The Planning Board can assume lead agency status at its December 2, 2020 Planning Board meeting. Applicant has provided the following information: • Short Form EAF (SEAF) dated 11/23/20 • Village of Nyack Coastal Assessment Form (CAF) to assist in determining consistency of the project  Village of Nyack- Planning Board - (4th January 2021) with the Village LWRP dated 11/30/20 • NYS DOS Federal Consistency Assessment Form (FCAF) dated 10/12/20 (Applicant should be asked if the FCAF is required and if so, what is the status of the FCAF at this time) • Project Narrative dated 10/14/20 • Set of Plans submitted w/Application dated 6/15/20 and rev. 8/10/20 (Site Utility Plan – 3/5/20; Site Grading Plan – 3/4/20) • Applicant needs to provide revised set of plans to reflect among other items Rockland County Planning’s GML comments (9/15/20) • Rockland County Department of Health provided approval of the individual sewage disposal system plan dated 10/9/19. • Updated SWPPP revised 11/30/20. (This will be sent to the Village Engineer for her review.) The Village Engineer provided a site plan review for the project dated 10/30/20. In her review, she made the following comments: • An existing conditions survey shall be provided. All existing utilities and the existing stormwater management system shall be shown. • A Site Plan shall be developed, and a Zoning Table shall be affixed to the Site Plan. • Proposed signage shall be shown on plans. • The limits of vegetation/ tree removal shall be shown. • A Lighting and Landscaping Plan shall be provided. • Current NYSDEC SPDES General permit shall be noted. • The SWPPP refers to sheet C-4.1 and C-5.1 for details of the stormwater management system. These were not received by the Village Engineer. The Village Engineer’s provided a positive review of the stormwater system. “The means of addressing stormwater management has been noted in the SWPPP as a Blue Roof supplemented by stormwater planters. The stormwater planters are proposed to as an infiltration system and recharge the aquifer. Percolation tests in the area of the proposed infiltration shall be performed and results submitted to the building department and my office. Due to the nature of the existing, steep site topography, stormwater run-off is of concern. There shall be no adverse impact due to stormwater run-off to N. Highland Avenue or nearby properties.” Applicant’s Engineer should address the Village Engineer’s comment re: stormwater cited above. The Applicant should formally address the Village Engineer’s comments in her review dated 10/30/20. As part of any resolution, a stormwater maintenance agreement will be required to be executed with the Village and filed with the Rockland County Clerk’s Office prior to issuance of any building permit. Stormwater Management-Runoff reduction shall be achieved by infiltration, groundwater recharge, reuse, recycle, evaporation/evapotranspiration of 100 percent of the post-development water quality volume to replicate pre-development hydrology by maintaining pre-construction infiltration, peak runoff flow, discharge volume, as well as minimizing concentrated flow by using runoff control techniques to provide treatment in a distributed manner before runoff reaches the collection system. This requirement can be accomplished by application of on-site green infrastructure techniques, standard stormwater management practices with runoff reduction capacity, and good operation and maintenance. The following is a list of practices used during the design stage of the Mausoleum. 2  Village of Nyack- Planning Board - (4th January 2021) • Reduction of Clearing and Grading – Clearing and grading limit was delineated to be the minimum required for utility and Mausoleum construction. This disturbed area will be restored as a Dry Swale to mitigate heavy rains. A Limit of Disturbance (LOD) is delineated and established based on the maximum disturbance zone, shown on the Overall Site Plan, Sheet C-3, Site Utility Plan, Sheet C-3.1, and Stormwater Management Plan, Sheet C-4.1 • Locating Development in less sensitive areas – The utility trench location was located as to create the least impact possible on the terrain • Soil restoration – original properties of soil will be restored to the best of the contractor’s abilities, in most cases, soil properties will be improved. • Reduction of Impervious Cover – by locating the Mausoleum adjacent and within close proximity of the exiting roadway, driveway reduction has been implemented by minimizing driveway area to reduce site impervious area. • Stormwater Planters locations to be under roof top drains at each corner of the proposed Mausoleum, and/or by each side of the building entrance. These planters create an aesthetic landscape, as well as provide treatment of water pollutants. Recommendation- Village Engineer should review the updated SWPPP for the Planning Board. Applicant should provide a set of revised plans reflecting County Planning’s GML comments. Applicant should address Village Engineer’s 10/30/20 comments and provide a memo summarizing the status of these items and other changes on the plans. In reviewing Part 2 of the EAF, the one item identified as having potential for moderate impact was stormwater. Applicant appears to be addressing this issue which should be reviewed by the Village Engineer. The Planning Board can authorize the Village Planner to prepare a Neg Dec and draft resolution for the Board’s January meeting. Applicant requires an area variance for the height of the accessory structure. Applicant-- meeting adjourned without appearance PUBLIC- NONE BOARD-- Applicant appears to be addressing this issue which should be reviewed by the Village Engineer. The Planning Board can authorize the Village Planner to prepare a Neg Dec and draft resolution for the Board’s January meeting. Applicant requires an area variance for the height of the accessory structure. Board authorized the Planner to prepare the Neg Dec. 3  Village of Nyack- Planning Board - (4th January 2021) 2. 90 Jefferson Street. Denonno. Request for referral to Zoning Board of Appeals for required variances associated with an application to erect a storage shed in front yard. Property is in a TFR zoning district. Building Inspector --Proposal is to install a 10’ x 10’ x 12’ high storage shed in north front yard. Pursuant to 360-3.2E(4)(b) – listed below – On a corner lot, front yards are required on both street frontages for buildings in residential districts. Area variances will be required from article III VON§360- 3.2E(c)(e)(f) for an accessory structure located in the front yard, not located at least four feet behind the front of the building and, at greater than 80 sq. ft., located less than 25 feet from any street line or three feet from any side or rear lot line. VILLAGE OF NYACK PLANNER’S COMMENTS FOR 12/07/2020-- SEQRA - The proposed action is a Type II action under 617.5 (c)(12) “construction, expansion or placement of minor accessory/appurtenant residential structures, including garages, carports, patios, decks, swimming pools, tennis courts, satellite dishes, fences, barns, storage sheds or other buildings not changing land use or density;” No further environmental review is necessary. The subject property is a corner property with several utility sheds in the rear yard. The shed in the front yard is readily visible from both adjacent streets. The shed in the front yard is an accessory structure and does not comply with several provisions of the Code (see Section 360-2E with highlighted provisions on accessory uses provided below by the Building Inspector.) The project has received complaints from neighboring property owners. The construction was stopped by the building department and required the project to go to the ZBA for an area variance regarding the accessory structure. Based on the noncompliance of the accessory structure with numerous provisions of the Code and its very visible location on a corner property with two front yards, the Planning Board would be justified in making a negative recommendation to the ZBA for this application. VON 360-3.2E Accessory uses. (1) Accessory building or structure. (a) Accessory buildings and structures shall be compatible in design with the principal building and shall be designed to fit in with the existing development pattern in a neighborhood and overall character of the area. (b) The Architectural Review Board shall review the design of accessory buildings and structures for design compatibility within the area of visual impact, except for garden or storage sheds less than 140 square feet in area. [Amended 5-26-2011 by L.L. No. 6-2011] (c) An accessory building may be located in any required side or rear yard, provided that: [1] Such buildings shall be set back three feet from any lot line and, if separated from the principal building, it shall not be located less than five feet from said principal building. [2] All such buildings in the aggregate shall not occupy more than 30% of the area of the required rear and side yards in which it is located. (d) Accessory buildings constructed at the same time may be located in pairs or groups in the required rear or side yard along the common side lot line or rear lot line of contiguous lots. (e) Any accessory building shall be located at least four feet behind the front facade of the principal building on the lot. Accessory buildings in the SFR, TFR, MFR and CC Districts shall be 4  Village of Nyack- Planning Board - (4th January 2021) located to the rear of the principal building. Freestanding garages in the SFR and TFR Districts should be located in the rear corner of the lot when possible. (f) Accessory buildings with a floor area greater than 80 square feet shall be located no less than 25 feet from any street line or three feet from any side or rear lot line, except that party wall private garages for not more than two cars may be erected in any residential district across a side lot line between two adjacent lots. (g) No accessory building shall exceed 12 feet in height measured at the peak or high point of the roof structure and one story in height. (h)No accessory building in a residential zoning district shall exceed 7% of the maximum building coverage. (i) Any accessory building attached to a principal building, including attachment by means of a breezeway or a roofed passageway, shall comply in all respects with the requirements of this chapter applicable to the principal building. 360-2.3E(4)(b): Rear and side yards. On a corner lot, front yards are required on both street frontages, and one yard other than the front yards shall be deemed to be a rear yard, and the other or others, side yards. The minimum district requirements for each shall be complied with. VILLAGE OF NYACK PLANNER’S COMMENTS FOR 1/4/21 SEQRA - The proposed action is a Type II action under 617.5 (c)(12) “construction, expansion or placement of minor accessory/appurtenant residential structures, including garages, carports, patios, decks, swimming pools, tennis courts, satellite dishes, fences, barns, storage sheds or other buildings not changing land use or density;” No further environmental review is necessary. The subject property is a corner property with several utility sheds in the rear yard. The shed in the front yard is readily visible from both adjacent streets. The shed in the front yard is an accessory structure and does not comply with several provisions of the Code (see Section 360-2E with highlighted provisions on accessory uses provided below by the Building Inspector.) The project has received complaints from neighboring property owners. The construction was stopped by the building department and required the project to go to the ZBA for an area variance regarding the accessory structure. Based on the noncompliance of the accessory structure with numerous provisions of the Code and its very visible location on a corner property with two front yards, the Planning Board would be justified in making a negative recommendation to the ZBA for this application. Applicant- Andre- old house and he was having a problem with theft-- wanted to remove items from the yard-- started building-- stopped by building department. The proposed shed needs variance because two front yards-- yard is too close to the side yards, applicant is unwilling or unable to re-locate-- Planning Board is negotiating with the applicant to reconsider and re-submit the location. Building department would need to consider the size and location and let the building inspector to calculate. He will resubmit Board- BOARD-- Motion by Kestenbaum - to adjourn to see if there is an alternative location Motion to adjourn for recommendation and the variance-- if re-located-- applicant will return-- leave application open for further comment--to be re-submitted-- not opposed, adjourned -- to reconsider the location. Public Comment-- NONE-- BOARD -- NO VOTE. 5  Village of Nyack- Planning Board - (4th January 2021) 3. 1 Orchard Street. Adler. Site Plan application for rear addition. Building Inspector -Property is in SFR-1 zoning district. Proposal is to construct a rear yard addition. Proposal complies with zoning requirements. ARB approved the application on December 16, 2020 VILLAGE OF NYACK PLANNER’S COMMENTS FOR 1/4/21- SEQRA – The proposed action is a Type II action under 617.5 (c)(11) “construction or expansion of a single-family, a two-family or a three- family residence on an approved lot.” No further environmental review is necessary. LWRP – as a Type II action, considered to be consistent with the LWRP according to the Village Code. There are no planning issues associated with this application. The rear addition complies with setbacks and does not require a variance. After hearing any public comment, the Planning Board can close the public hearing and make a motion to approve the site plan for this application. Applicant--Kier Levesque- one story addition-- east side --245 square feet-- lands on existing patio-- Adler’s will update landscaping-- currently Public- NONE Board---- Motion by Klose - to close the public meeting with respect to site plan dated - November 23, 2020 (consisting of three pages). Motion made to close the public hearing. Seconded by Voletsky - Motion to close the public hearing passed. Vote 5-0 to close. BOARD -- Klose made a motion to accept and designate this as a Type II action based on 617.5 (c)(11) and consistent with the LWRP policies and to approve Site plan as discussed there are no significant planning issues associated with this application. The rear addition complies with setbacks and does not require a variance. Seconded by Englander. Vote 5-0- application approved. 4. 117-125 Main Street. Nyack Fresh Market. Site Plan Application for exterior property alterations associated with the creation of a supermarket. Building Inspector-- Property is in DMU- 1 Zoning District. Project includes exterior lighting, loading dock and sidewalk repair and replacement. Portions of the sidewalk appear to be partially or wholly on Village property. The applicant will be required to obtain easements or a licensing agreement with the Village to perform the work. Application was conditionally approved by the ARB on 12/16/2020. a. They requested further clarification of the sidewalk and loading dock area. b. They expressed concern about how shopping carts would be removed from the parking lot and with what frequency. PARKING- The site provides no parking spaces to the building. A 10,340 sq. ft. retail establishment is proposed to replace the previous theater. With one space required for each 150 sq. ft. the theater would require 69 parking spaces. With one space required for each 400 sq. ft. of floor area, the retail establishment would require 26 parking spaces. Pursuant to the following Village Code section parking requirements have been met: 6  Village of Nyack- Planning Board - (4th January 2021) 360-4.5B(3) Change of use. When the use of a lot or building changes, additional off- street parking facilities must be provided when the number of parking or loading spaces required for the new use exceeds the number of spaces required for the use that most recently occupied the building, based on the minimum parking standards of this Zoning Chapter. In other words, the owner must provide (or receive a variance for) parking equal to the difference between the parking requirement for the existing use and the parking requirement for the new use, not the difference between the actual existing parking and the parking requirement for the new use. VILLAGE OF NYACK PLANNER’S COMMENTS FOR 1/4/21 Applicant has provided a signed copy of the Short Form EAF. SEQRA – The proposed action is a Type II action under 617.5 (c)(18) “reuse of a residential or commercial structure, or of a structure containing mixed residential and commercial uses, where the residential or commercial use is a permitted use under the applicable zoning law or ordinance, including permitted by special-use permit” No further environmental review is necessary. LWRP – as a Type II action, considered to be consistent with the LWRP according to the Village Code. Adaptive Re-Use. Applicant-- Site Plan approval 10K square foot [Need to confirm square footage - sales floor and storage] replacement of existing theater. Alex Lame Boller -Site Parking to the west is the Riverspace -- 71 spaces and 4 handicapped spaces-- municipal-- within the site there are two ADA accessible spaces-- will be improving the entrance for ADA- signage will be pursued separately because requires a variance as non-street facing. Parallel loading zone. Operations-- daily deliveries-- Tom LaPuma-- most deliveries very early in AM-- one to two large trucks per week. Operating issues-Board mostly concerned about the operation and parking issues associated with new use: Trash and Recycling--trash -- waste management guidelines and schedule-- necessary -- need to see how this will be enclosed-- Carts-- providing 10 spaces near location- Indemnity Agreement -- Licensing Agreement for parking-- location of the cart corral -- might take up parking spaces-- ? Lighting-- Commentary about how it complies with Village Code requirements-- foot candle Farmers Market-- interaction Parking for Employees-- Roof top tonnage-- HVAC-- runs down center span of roof-screening etc. to be provided. Public- NONE Board--meeting remains open seconded by Englander - Motion to close the public hearing passed. Vote 5-0 to close. BOARD -- No action, awaiting further clarification and operation parameters for purposes of resolution. OTHER BUSINESS-- Motion to adjourn by Klose, seconded by Voletsky- passed by a vote of 5-0. Meeting adjourned at 8 PM. 7