Planning Board

November 19, 2018


Attending: John Kincart, John Savoca, William LaScala, Rich Fon, Robert Garrigan




1. Stahmer Minor Subdivision, Birdsall Drive

The applicant is working through the final DEP documents. The board voted for a second 90 day extension.


2. Hilltop Associates, Hilltop Road

In response to the applicant’s response for a reapproval of the original 2008 approval while he awaits a decision on sewers, it was pointed out that as a decision on the sewers might not be made for 1-2 years, the applicant might want to consider two other options: letting the 2008 approval based on a 2-lot subdivision with septics expire and reapply for a 3-lot subdivision if an when sewers become available, or proceed with the 2-lot subdivision now.


After considerable back and forth, the board decided to grant the applicant a 90 day reapproval of the 2008 plan.


The applicant’s engineer said there was still a possibly that the developer could connect to an existing sewer line on Sultana Drive via a town drainage easement but that the applicant said he had had difficulty getting the needed information about the easement and whether it could also be used for sewers.


3. Adrian Auto Body, Route 202

Mr. Ciarcia advised the board that he had received written approval from the DEP. Acting on Mr. Tegder’s suggestion, the board approved the amended site plan with the conditions that the applicant provide a signed DEP approved stormwater plan and a completed SWPPP and that no work be commenced until the conditions were fulfilled,.


4. Northern Westchester Restorative Care, Lexington Avenue

Without any discussion, and with the applicant not present, the board approved the amended site plan now that all the needed approvals had been obtained. (Note: this plan dates back to 2015.)


5. Colangelo subdivision, Jacob Road

The applicant showed a revised plan that showed an easement for four unpaved parking spaces on the shoulder of the road for trail users. The board said it appreciated the change.  Still to be finalized is the 5 acre conservation easement to the Westchester Land Trust and the maintenance agreement for the trail.  It was agreed that these two documents would be needed at the time of final plat approval. 


Although the above discussion took place in a work session mode, the board returned to regular session mode and approved the preliminary plan.




6.  Spirelli subdivision, Buckhorn Street

(See Planning Board, 11-5-2018.)  At issue is a ZBA decision that limits the site to a total of three units. The existing house on the site currently has three units; if the subdivision is approved it would result in 4 units on the site. Mr. Kincart suggested that the owner might consolidate the three existing units into two, or leave the small studio unit vacant in order to comply with the ZBA ruling. The applicant will review his options and return to the board.  In the meantime, the owner said he has cleaned up the site.


7. Breslin  Realty subdivision (Lowes)

Representing Breslin, attorney Michael Grace advised the board that there was an agreement between this client and the Old Crompond Road residents and that all that was left was executing the final agreement that will have Breslin pay to bring sewers to the properties.  However, Ann Kutter advised the board that there were still issues that had to be resolved and that nothing had been signed yet. Mr. Grace and Mr. Rosenberg from Breslni said they would provide the board with copies of the signed agreements. A public hearing will be held on the subdivision plan on December 3.


In a separate brief discussion, Supervisor Gilbert, who was attending the meeting, advised Mr. Rosenberg that the town still hadn’t received the final agreement for the maintenance of the site’s water supply system. Mr. Rosenberg said he would send a copy. Mr. Grace, who was supervisor when the town initially agreed to assume ownership of the site’s water supply lines, questioned why Breslin needed to pay for the lines’ maintenance. (See 2017 notes below.)


8. Crystal Court subdivision

(See Town Board 10/24/2017.) The applicant showed the board a revised plan for a 3-lot subdivision on 5.07 acres in a R1-20 zone that takes into account the trees that were illegally cut down last year.  The new plan calls for the applicant to plant 16 saplings to replace the 16 large trees that were taken down.


9. Tesla charging station, Staples Plaza

(See Planning Board 11-5-2018.) The applicant showed a revised plan that addressed the board’s earlier concerns regarding landscaping and lighting. The board went into special session and approved the amended plan.


10. Summit Hill rezoning request, East Main Street, Jefferson Valley

According to David Steinmetz, the applicant’s attorney, the purpose of the meeting was to clarify the roles of the Town Board and the Planning Board as the application moves through the review process. Based on a meeting Mr. Steinmetz had with the supervisor, Mr. Fon and Mr. Tegeder, it was agreed that wile the Town Board will be the lead agency for SEQRA purpose and will have the final say over the rezoning, the Planning Board will be involved in both the SQERA review and the conceptual site plan. A resolution setting out the roles of both boards will be prepared and a draft shown to the Planning Board.   


The board identified the following issues of concern: stormwater, parking, the number of units and the traffic impact on East Main Street.  Mr. Steinmetz advised the board that the applicant would provide documentation addressing each of these concerns.


11. Quinlan Street cell tower

(See Planning Board 11-5-2018.) The applicant showed the board the results of its viewshed analysis and coverage maps. The board was concerned about the need for more landscaping, especially for the houses closest to the tanks. Mr. Fon wanted to see a viewshed analysis that showed what the towers would look like when they contained more co-locators.  In response to his question about whether the utility’s equipment coud be placed on existing telephone poles as opposed to a tower, the applicant explained that for several technical reasons, the telephone pole option was not feasible.


The board will send a memo in support of the Town Board in support of the towers with some recommendations regarding screening.


12. Roma Building rezoning request

Members of the development team made a presentation to the board. Members of the board expressed concern about the traffic impact, especially turns into the access point on Saw Mill River Road, and also whether the plan had sufficient parking spaces. When several members expressed concern about the costs associated with constructing the underground garage and whether the commercial space would be affordable, the applicant explained that the developer had reviewed the costs and was confident that the rental fees from the apartments would cover the costs needed to keep the retail rents reasonable.  The applicant also said she would demonstrate the availability of adequate parking, some of it based on using off site spaces; she indicated one possibility might be more underground parking on the Weyant site. She also defended the design of the building.


When asked if one story of apartment could eliminated, the developer said that 42 units were needed and that their planning had started with 53 units.


The Planning Board will continue to review the project in conjunction with Town Board.


During the discussion, the issue came up about hook ups to the town’s sewage treatment plant; while the plant currently has the capacity to handle additional hookups, there’s a cap on the number of potential hookups. So the issue becomes who gets there first.