Planning Board Minutes - October 25, 2005

Minutes

Work Session of the Planning Board

Village/Town of Mount Kisco

Tuesday October 25, 2005

Meeting called to order at 8:00 p.m. Tuesday April 26, 2005 at the Municipal Building Mount Kisco, New York

Members Present: Anthony Sturniolo

Stanley Bernstein

Doug Hertz

Ralph Vigliotti

Members Absent: Joseph Cosentino

Joseph Morreale

Staff Present: Whitney Singleton

Nanette Bourne

Michael Stein

Lester Steinman

David Stolman

Austin Cassidy

Vice Chairman Sturniolo opened the meeting with the Pledge of Allegiance.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: The first thing on our agenda is minutes that are in a draft form.

Stanley Bernstein: No Nancy submitted the final minutes.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: Has everyone had a chance to read them? In that case I would entertain a motion from Stan.

Stanley Bernstein: I move to except the minutes of Tuesday October 11th 2005.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: Is there a second?

Ralph Vigliotti: I will second.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: Will the secretary please poll the board.

Stanley Bernstein - Aye

Ralph Vigliotti - Aye

Sol Gibbons - Aye

Doug Hertz - abstain

Vice Chairman Sturniolo - Aye

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: The next item on the agenda is the public hearing for a wetlands permit at 333 N. Bedford Rd, Diamond Properties. In our packets, we have an affidavit of publication from the Journal News with the notice pertaining to the public hearing was printed. This was circulated. We also have application notarized, and if there is anyone in the room that wants to speak, later on at this public hearing. There is a sign-up sheet, and I encourage you to put your name down.

Public Hearing

Jin Diamond, owner Peter Catazone, Michael Gallin, Larry Dwyer, Neil Alexander

Michael Gallin: We are back in front of you in a public forum to discuss specifically at this point in time the storm water mitigation. This was presented to you previously. Since we last presented it there have been no significant changes to the design. We have supplemented several memorandums. Additional information regarding the conditions at the site, and the proposed solution. We are here to answer your questions and address any concerns that you may have.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: The plan that you're showing the drainage plan tonight is, am I correct basically, one of the same as the original plan during the first presentation? By that, I mean, the 30 inch pipe, replacing the 24 inch, which was buried in leading into its swale area at the southwestern corner of the property. Tying into new manhole cover area by the construction and building capturing water from the building and directing it back down toward the unnamed tributary.

Peter Catazone: That is correct. There have been no changes since our last presentation.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: It is a separate side issue. But the water tower, the tank storage, the game plan for that tower is to be demolished?

Michael Gallin: Yes, we have retained an engineer to investigate the overall fire protection system of the building. We also had discussions with the town engineer, regarding the proposed solutions and that does include the removal, the water tower at the south end of the site. In future submissions to the board, we will reflect that.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: Would you be kind enough just to go into a little bit more detail how you are going to capture the rainwater from the roof through a leader system, and where it is a tie in, and ultimately, how does it, wind up at the far end?

Peter Catazone: How does that wind up here?

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: Yes, specifically, the roof.

Peter Catazone: I did do some time ago a field survey to identify the different roof drainage that are present in the building. And basically we are talking about, approximately this half of the building. It is even less than that. There are distant roof drains here, which discharge into these inlets here. There is a leader that discharges to grade on the side here. Ultimately that flows either by overland or through a direct pipe connection flows into these three inlets in front of the loading dock. It is conveyed it to 24 inch existing concrete pipe.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: the purpose of the new manhole that you are putting adjacent to the building is for?

Peter Catazone: This one here? The existing manhole that is they are now is an old 30 inch diameter manhole. We are proposing 30 inch diameter pipe. We had to go up a little bit in pipe size to match the capacity of the existing, because the slope is flatter. We wanted to make sure that we had a modern four foot diameter pre-cap concrete manhole at that location to have a reliable connection.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: That new manhole of 4 foot at what depth in relation to the others surrounding it?

Peter Catazone: This manhole is replacing an existing.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: Higher or lower than the existing?

Peter Catazone: Then the existing manhole that it is replacing? We are going to match that elevation, exactly. Within reason. We are going to call to the exact elevation there. The top is higher, then these inlets in front of the loading docks. It is a relatively deep manhole.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: So the inlets in front of the loading docks. In theory, there should be no problem for water gravity wise, just to feed straight down.

Peter Catazone: To feed into the existing pipe into the new manhole?

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: Into the new one.

Peter Catazone: And out into the unnamed tributary.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: In that grass areas forgive me it is 555 feet that the new 30 inch pipe. The length or somewhere around there?

Peter Catazone: Yes. It is actually about 500.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: That area is earmarked as a ball field. What happens if there is a ball field and a 30 inch pipe buried underneath second base or a soccer field. What ever you want to call it. Are we going to run any kind of risks of having to dig that up and maintain it? Or are you going to have to run the risk of digging it up, maintaining it, cleaning it?

Peter Catazone: obviously, the pipe, as in all stoned systems needs to be maintained and that is usually a routine yearly cleaning out of the basin and flushing of the lines at the ends. So there is no need to dig up the ball field, for that purpose. This will be HDPE pipe, which is a stable material. We haven't had many problems with them in the past. Assuming that there is adequate cover on there. One thing to remember is there is no traffic loading on this. Can something go wrong with the pipe at some point in the future? Yes. As in any other storm system, things can happen. Assuming at the pipe is accurately installed as per the manufacturer's recommendation. We don't anticipate long-term problems.

Jim Diamond: if there was a problem with it. It certainly would be our responsibility to dig up the field to fix the pipe and restore the field to previous conditions.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: in one of the many documents here. You are referring to this as drainage area, A and design point A. Design point A specifically refers to what section?

Peter Catazone: Design point A is basically where the water from unnamed tributary exits the site. We did a simplified analysis, and we are going to take the entire watershed. We just basically analyzed the amount of water coming from off-site to our site and exiting at this corner of this site to the adjacent properties. We wanted to make sure that we are not increasing the flow from our contribution for anything that flows through our site at that location.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: I am just drying your attention to the September 6 letter TRC Raymond Keyes Assoc. The one that is addressed to the chairman and members of the planning Board. What it does is highlight some questions that this board asked on October 9^th. One of the issues that this board brought up was your capability to store drainage water on site, and we threw out some ideas of underwater galleys or what ever. You also handed us and I accepted it. Even though it is late. A letter of today's date, which further amplifies this letter here. How deep is the water, would you guess, tonight in front of the loading the bays.

Peter Catazone: To be honest with you I have not visited this site. You can see this contour here. That is about the limits of flooding. Majority of the space is in the first two bays. The other four bays adjacent.

Austin Cassidy: About 12-15 inches of standing water.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: Is it fair to say, this is the same depth after October 8 or ninth, the remains of Hurricane Katrina about the same?

Michael Gallin: one thing to keep in mind to matter how much rain. The way this site is configured. The low point is flooding, and as it floods, fully, it overflows. It reaches a maximum point, and it never floods more. So no matter how much rain, we reach that maximum point.

Doug Hertz: the only question I have, it is just to further get some information on today's memo. Basically you're feeling is that any on-site retention would be insignificant. If that is the way I am reading this. Can you just amplify that a little bit?

Peter Catazone: the overall watershed for this district area is over. 400 acres. And basically, we have a very small percentage of that. 15.6 acres, which is contributory from our site and off-site areas. The theory being that, can you build detention? Yes. Is detention affective? If you are not routing, a significant portion of that watershed of the 2400 acres through this site, then the impacts are going to be very small. What you are trying to do and storm water is offset peak flows. If you are offsetting flow from 2400 acres, with an offset from 16 acres, that is really.

Doug Hertz: I don't think anyone was expecting that you would take the entire village load.

Peter Catazone: In the situation where you have a large off-site area flowing through your site. There could be opportunity for detention and having an impact off-site. Because it is such a small percentage of the watershed, there are really insignificant improvements, unnoticeable. It would not be anything that anyone could say yes, we noticed a drastic change.

Doug Hertz: I am more concerned at this point, not what you are doing would necessarily improve the state of the village to a significant degree that it would not further stress, the village system. That being said, I hear your argument for not having adequate water table being as high as it is right next to that.

Peter Catazone: To address your question. And as Michael pointed out at this low area fills, it overflows, and it overflows through this area and into this swale. The September 6 calculations show that actually connecting this pipe is an improvement over the existing conditions. If you could think of it as filling your sink at home. Turn on the water, you keep it on for 10 minutes, and you have the sink plugged. At some point that water is going to overflow. If you can let some of that water out, while the force that is on obviously, given that effect is an improvement. You are getting a more consistent flow through the whole duration of the storm, rather than allowing that to fill and just flowing out in a larger quantity, once it overflows. So our calculations of September 6 do show that impact.

Doug Hertz: the only comment I would like to make at this point, if we agree and moving forward in the direction of giving you this mitigation and giving you this drainage plan. I just hope it wouldn't end the discussion as to what else what off-site mitigation can be done. In a future point in connection with what the village is currently doing. Find other ways to mitigate some of that storm water. As to what was pointed out earlier, while it is no fun for you to have a pond on site. That is supposed to be a parking lot. It does have a certain absurd function in collecting the storm water.

Michael Gallin: We appreciate that. For example, the additional landscaping that is proposed, where existing and impervious surfaces will help the overall flooding issue in the village. We will continue to embrace opportunities that make sense.

Jim Diamond: I think putting our site aside for a second; I think we are very enthusiastic about playing a role. However, we can throughout the village addressing the overall flooding issue. One thing we did. We had Carmine Labriola and discuss the work that was done in 2000. When the berm was added here, along the south side of that stream. What he explained that it actually blocked the flow of water to the wetlands that are on the Target site between our site, and the Target site. His recommendation is that if that berm is removed, opened up a tremendous amount of the water. That is flowing down here and wrapping around and going into the downtown will instead end up in those wetlands. His conclusion is that the wetlands are currently drying it out. In fact dying, and that berm needs to be removed in order to replenish those wetlands. That is not actually our property. That is the adjacent property owner. We are anxious to play a role there, in terms of helping to make that happen.

Doug Hertz: I for one would like to get those wetlands back and healthy. One question related to that. Does the way it you are capturing, storm water and moving it through the pipe out to the tributary? Will being able to move some of that water, should the berm be removed into the wetlands?

Peter Catazone: I do not think so. There is a drainage pipe, which collects off-site water, which discharges here. Right now this basically does not flow through our site. I guess that is the issue. Jim? Right now, just going into this swale in here, and off-site. I guess some of this water could be directed into the wetlands. By removing the berm.

Austin Cassidy: If that berm was down at you would also have the sheet flow above on the surface. That would find its way.

Peter Catazone: There is some sheet flow there are now.

Doug Hertz: That is not going to get captured?

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: By the presence of the berm, but once the berm is removed.

Austin Cassidy: That manhole is not a collector. That is a manhole.

Peter Catazone: all of our man holes typically have slotted covers. At its location, if it had a solid cover. It really wouldn't be that big of the deal.

Austin Cassidy: The whole function is for maintenance, and for drainage.

Peter Catazone: Right. Most of the drainage is flowing into these three inlets. This way, that manhole doesn't collect much.

Austin Cassidy: It is not exactly low point.

Peter Catazone: exactly. If you want us to change that to a solid cover.

Austin Cassidy: No. I am not recommending anything, I am just clarifying. I think the segway into the current dialog is that when we were discussing that we the village for alluding to the fact. It was perceived that there was off-site downstream mitigation that was probably minimal. In total expenditures that could be pursued. Not exclusively by individuals, but collectively, perhaps. The village has taken some initiative that we have benefited from the last few weeks, and it has deflated, some of the protection mode in before, because we were so sensitive, and so vulnerable to almost instant flooding. We seem to be handling ourselves better. We did have a high point in that first week of rain in which the water did leave the water course in the back and did find its way over to the curb line behind the stores. One is left to wonder if your site was draining in, that have been at a normal rate of flow on the correction. Whether or not, that would be enough to push up over the curb line and flood the stores. We don't know. Maybe there is more similar mitigation that can be made downstream. As you have already said and offered a collective effort that would benefit your property certainly as well as the village.

Stanley Bernstein: everything that Austin said, I agree with very much so. One small point. You said there is 24,000 acres in the waters to shed draining?

Peter Catazone: 2,400.

Stanley Bernstein: 2400.

Peter Catazone: The water that is entering through here and contributing to our design point is about 15.6 acres.

Stanley Bernstein: what Austin pointed out that last week the water overflowed the banks of Branch Brook and came up to the curb line. 16 acres is another 16 acre-feet in a short period of time might have breached that curbs. That little bit of extra water might have just pushed it over the line. We are all glad to hear that you are interested in helping to mitigate the problems. We have got some lucky news about flooding and downstream operations that have worked out fairly well. I think it would work out. With your cooperation, it would work out. The existing 24 inch pipe, is -----?

Peter Catazone: I thought it was a concrete pipe.

Stanley Bernstein: I think you should investigate that and if so it has to be abated by licensed asbestos of abated company. And we have to be very careful about that. They just can't come in and blasted out and throw it in a landfill. Please take that under consideration.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: Mike, some input on this. You have reviewed it all. And we have seen your memo.

Michael Stein: one of the things that we had gone over several times was specifically the drainage, coming off the site. As far as making sure that the flows didn't exceed what the original capacity of the 24 inch pipe. What affect Austin raised a very good point. What affect now that we are returning that flow to its original condition. What affects that might have.

Austin Cassidy: From the model that the applicant used a few minutes ago, in describing the issue on site. The equalization and displacement of water arriving and water leaving and the one thing that we do not want to do. Obviously is now that we actually have far better drainage happening throughout the village as a result of the Village initiative. We don't want to then open the gates, if you will, and then have circumstance of water coming in. We are going to have that horizontal expansion and push that water over the curb line into the stores.

Michael Gallin: What we were trying to allude to before. What this proposal, incorporated was opening the gates, prior to the storms so that the flooding situation is draining, when they are not at peak flow. The current situation for example, during the rains associated with the aftermath of Katrina. The depression was full. So any water coming down was overflowing and sheet flowing directly, whereas if the pipe had been operational, the retention basin for the depression would have been empty and dry. If the load had exceeded the capacity of the pipe, as we discussed previously. We would end up with minor flooding on our property, and the net result would be that the peak flow would be reduced. At both the sheet flow that currently occurs once the depression is full.

Austin Cassidy: we are getting a whole bunch of benefits, because if you watched the stream, in the back. Even it's a rate of passage is much faster than what we have seen in the past. Because it is back watering in the past. So, you also have scouring effect going on, which we have had the problem of siltation in the bed, rising up. Obviously, decreasing the volume and capability of the stream. Again seizing on the concept that there is perhaps the very simple. Rather than reinvent the wheel, very simple things that can be done. We have talked about displacing sheet flow onto the wetlands. I am not a wetlands expert, but I can understand the root system over there, that is as such that it has greatly diminished, the absorbency of the wetlands. You wet already noted the fact that it is drying out. So certainly, that if we can enhance, not necessarily you but to agree to enhance the displacement. I think displacement is the keyword in the overall system. If we can keep displacing water when it arrives. We are not going to have flooding. If we can't we will flood.

Michael Stein: Their systems still will be prone to back up, because they're pipe will still be the controlling factor in the flow leaving the site. So if you do get larger storms. You won't have potential for ponding.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: The pipe meaning the diameter?

Michael Stein: Correct.

Doug Hertz: But they have brought it from a 24 inch to a 30.

Michael Stein: Right but the capacity is actually a little bit less because of the slope of the pipe has decreased. You can still end up with the same ponding effect that you have now, but the idea to get it at least to move out continuously.

Peter Catazone: Also, the pipe that connects the low point inlet to the main drainage line is a 12 inch pipe. You are not talking about a lot of flow.

Doug Hertz: Those pipes are remaining the same?

Peter Catazone: Those pipes are remaining the same size. As Michael pointed out, they will be subject to minor flooding. The key is when a storm starts this area is empty. You have the ability to store water as needed. Rather than now, last week we had rain, the area of filled up, and it has been sitting there for a week. This rainfall, you had no positive impacts from the standing water. All that storage has been occupied.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: David, do you have any thoughts?

David Stolman: I am really going to defer to Michael for this information.

Michael Stein: Just one other thing that I had spoken to Peter about. The existing piping on site, before all the work is done. They are going to have it all inspected and cleaned to make sure that all the existing pipes are in decent condition.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: Inspected meaning video camera.

Michael Stein: Televised yes.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: Would you spend a few moments and talk about what you are going to create in the southwest corner, where the 30 inch pipe hits the area and its functionality regarding siltration and filtration.

Peter Catazone: Basically rather them providing a flared end section. We are actually providing a depression. That will help reduce the velocity of the water entrance of the pipe, and also provide removal of silt. So it is a water quality enhancement. It will essentially fill and overflow through a broad section and sheet flow into the existing main tributary.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: Minus the silt?

Peter Catazone: Minus the silt.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: Which has been captured?

Austin Cassidy: That would be an ongoing maintenance issue.

Peter Catazone: Correct.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: Does anybody else have a question?

Austin Cassidy: For the purpose of record there are two signatures on the list to comment.

Bob Liebman: (Chairman of CAC Board), first of all for the record. It wasn't Katrina, the caused the rain, I believe it was Tammy. We went over the application and came up with a few comments. The applicant must show in the storm water plan how they propose to control peak flows at 2, 5, 10, 25 and 100 year storms. We submitted this by email. I do not know if you received it. Suzanne Grant has sent it or will be sending it. You will have a record. As presented the proposal lacks sufficient storm water quality and quantity treatment. The second point. The applicant has used a correct rain data. The attached data provided by the soil and water conservation service should be used to quantify the two-year 24-hour storm, and all the storms, must be quantified in calculation. Required to meet storm water regulations. They used data from 1960. The one I have is 1990 data. It is a little different. A little more rain for the storms. It is unclear as to what the applicant plans to do in the wetlands and wetland buffers. They should be clarified in the plan and the applicant should show clearly, what mitigation will be provided. The storm water plan should also provide for downstream channel protection and long-term maintenance. The plan should ensure that the downstream resources are not burdened by a proposed development, and that the village will not assume additional maintenance after the construction is complete. Regarding the proposed ball field mentioned in the planning Board minutes of August 9, which is not part of the application. We are concerned that the field will be on usable following heavy rainfall, due to flooding. A storm water plan must be prepared that details how storm water was managed on site and delivered off-site. Finally, we propose that be mentioned ball field he designated specifically as a soccer field for public and village use. To minimize the overuse of Leonard Park, and Mount Kisco elementary field.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: Can you leave a copy of what you just read with Nancy?

Bob Liebman: We will submit one on our letterhead.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: Also so the application will have access to it. What you just said, you have on hard copy that you can leave with us.

Bob Liebman: Suzanne Grant has submitted it.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: I am sure it was. In both case, if you could just get another copy from her and give it to Nancy. We are just making sure that all of your concerns are articulated well as you just presented. And part of the overall record.

Richard Beusman: (representing Saw Mill River Tennis Club) I have not been involved in the process. But I think I can be some experiential information. We have been on site across the tracks for 33 years. If anyone knows about the problems of drainage back there it is certainly us. During hurricane Floyd, at one point. We had 3 feet of standing water on the first floor of our facility. This is when we really became aware of the change that is going on in the last 50-60 years. In terms of drainage coming out of the wetlands area. That is located right behind us. Our club, there are wetlands here that abut up against the Saw Mill Parkway and that is really a drainage area for all of the hill in around Bedford, and over in the Green Lane area. So it all began with us. I don't know if you are aware of this, it is my understanding in the early part of the century. The wetland behind us was actually the ice pond for Mount Kisco. As such, it was maintained in a manner in which vegetation was clear, because they needed the depth to make ice. Just for informational purposes that stopped in the 30s and 40s. In over the last 50 or 60 years, you have had a lessening of capacity in what was the biggest storage basin in the area. So what you have is where water starts every year. We are getting less and less storage capacity, because it is filling with vegetation. We noticed in 2000, and we could never figure out what happened. I think it is directly related to the berm that was put in by the town. We have noticed since 2000 that will we get a fast hard rain that the water in the stream between ice and the self storage property. We don't know where it starts, but we see the streams run backwards into the swamp. This is very disturbing for us. What you have, you have flow going the wrong way. The flow downstream is being hampered or stopped. You are creating a damn. The water is flowing, but it is not flowing fast enough. Having experienced Floyd and having seen what could happen when you don't move water out of that area. We are very concerned about what has happened in terms of drainage in town. I don't know if you are aware of this. But water literally runs backwards into the swamp.

Austin Cassidy: Because he cannot get out of its own way. In the last few storms, how have you been making out?

Richard Beusman: another interesting fact, I am really sympathetic to you and the applicant. I'll also tell you, when it rains, very hard. You have drained spouts on this side of the building. About six to eight of them. Those things look like fire hoses. The water that is coming off of that roof. You have water coming down into this area that is dead. I don't know what you can do and I don't know if the goal is to get the water all moved this way. Just so that you know when it rains, you have a tremendous flow of water, coming off that roof. Directly this way and then downstream.

Austin Cassidy: That is what they were talking about before. They have a mixed system where they have roof drainage that can handle internally. Also, liters that are taking it down and dumping it on the surface. Have you noticed that reversal phenomenon in the last storms?

Richard Beusman: we did and particularly, we had people. Just so that you understand, we have people when it rains at our facilities that spend the night. We have emergency pumps, that if water is starting to back up into the wetland. We have 4 inch gas powered pumps to get flow down. We have agreements with the self storage place. To move water as quickly as possible. We are very actively involved when it starts to rain; we are trying to get flow downstream. We understand how important it is. We have this terrible problem, and evidently something happened. We have guys at two o'clock in the morning on Tuesday or Wednesday of two weeks ago. Very concerned about the slow flow backing up into our wetland area. Suddenly, it changed.

Austin Cassidy: There you go.

Richard Beusman: The word that we have gotten was that some agency, whether it was Labriola or someone downstream even passed Diplomat Towers had found some kind of natural dam.

Austin Cassidy: It was the village. The village had taken initiatives down there.

Richard Beusman: Now we have had letters to Metro-North. Understand the stream runs here from us and all so, next to these guys, and it all joins up down here to where they are coming in. Last summer Metro-North replaced 50 to 60% of the ties. Between the Chappaqua, and Kisco. We watch them go by, and rip ties out. A lot of them fell to the side, and they did their best to replace them. But I can guarantee you that between our properties, Martabano's property, the Telephone Company and all away down the line, there are railroad ties, in that bed. We have written Metro-North on numerous occasions. Saying you have the capacity with backhoes on the railroad tracks to clean out the tributaries. And I think you mentioned, it has not been cleaned and a longtime. I cannot more strongly endorse that we would be happy to be involved. We send crews downstream of us, every spring, trying to get flow. I cannot more strongly endorse the town, and I think Metro-North should be part of that process. They need to get the silt out of those beds. My sense is and what I'm hearing is a faster flow sooner is going to solve the problem in the town of Mount Kisco. When we flood you flood. I was astonished when I drove around today how your flow is much better by the new bridge that is being built by Shoppers Park. Just in general, I want to say if you can remove the berm, I believe that is a tremendous idea. It has got to be stopping the flow across their property into that storage area. That would be a great idea.

Austin Cassidy: That has to be two-step mitigation. Otherwise it will simply flow across the surface into the Target parking lots.

Richard Beusman: My comment is consider what ever these guys are doing and there has to be consideration of down stream flow. Increasing capacity and speed. I agree with what everyone is saying. Once it backs up. When you have negative flow past my property into the wetlands. We are all in trouble. Particularly if it rains long and hard for a long period of time. We are here to help you because I truly know that we have more experience than anyone. We have been on site for 33 years and I will tell you in the last four or five years. We are terrified. We have never seen this of the capacity of the water to back up and flood. It is a very deep concern that we have. As much as I understand what you guys are trying to do. There is a lot of impervious surface. That means water hits fast, and it moves fast. It is not being drained, and it is not percolating. And there is nothing they can do but it is a fact. We should be well aware of what happens. It is not my place to say, and I agree to get their water off their site. Let them do that, while we are making sure that everything downstream is moving fast.

Austin Cassidy: Not to be repetitive. The displacement from their site needs to be at least equal to the displacement of the village is experiencing. Otherwise, their drainage along with the village.

Richard Beusman: If the goal is to get the water off the roof. That is currently not happening.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: is there anyone else that would like to speak that has not signed up at this public hearing? We are hearing a common theme, and that is the positive work of a Real-Life Development is in the area between a Lexington, and the pump Station, recently. And how it has affected Diamond Properties, and also how it has impacted the Saw Mill. It is all kind of tying into the date that they did that work, and then the heavy rains from Katrina. Having said that I am in a position that I could ask for a motion to close the public hearing at this point.

Lester Steiman: the only question is, and I know they heard it tonight. If there was any response of the applicant to the comments of this conversation. You can keep the written record open.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: we could keep the written record open. Although response to the applicant to your comments tonight. We can close the public hearing now and keep it open to accept written comments such as what you were referring to earlier about the e-mail. To except your written comments. Then the applicant will respond to them. Having said that I would entertain a motion to close the public hearing on the wetlands permit for 333 N. Bedford Rd, Diamond properties.

Stanley Bernstein: So Moved.

Ralph Vigliotti: Second.

Stanley Bernstein: I would like to motion also to keep written record open for 10 days.

Stanley Bernstein - Aye

Ralph Vigliotti - Aye

Sol Gibbons - Aye

Doug Hertz - Aye

Vice Chairman Sturniolo - Aye

Board All Ayes.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: The public hearing is now closed. The next item on our agenda is continuing review of 333 N. Bedford Rd.

Michael Gallin: We understand that there are other people waiting here. And I don't know the length of those matters. If they can be handled in a relatively quick manner we would be willing to wait if it you think it would be appropriate.

Memorandum from Austin Cassidy

293 Lexington Avenue

Austin Cassidy: These are all individual shots. You have a front curb along the front of the building. As you can see in most of the shots. You have a grassy area between the curb, and the walking surface in front of the stores. That grassy area is angular and is elevated upward. You can plainly see by the wear and it particularly in this one. The pedestrians are walking from their cars over the grass and up onto the walking surface. I made the observation, last winter, when there is no there that people are nonetheless, you can see footprints that people are walking through the snow, and it is very hazardous. The way the plate is laid out that the access to the walking surfaces at both ends, which is counter to the human behavior. People are going to take the shortest distance. They have also contacted me more recently about six weeks ago. They have had to separate slip and falls, because it is muddy and there is no grass and bare spots, and so forth. They would prefer to install a running step, if you will. This will be a maintainable walking surface. Between the curb line, so the step off would be to the walking surface.

Ralph Vigliotti: They want to put in a paver?

Austin Cassidy: I did not get into the material. I would think more likely being that it wouldn't be affective because of the angular surface. It would probably be either a slab or a concrete one or the other. I haven't gotten to the specifics. I wanted to get some ideas from the board to see whether or not we could remedy this.

Ralph Vigliotti: Your proposal would be continuous?

Austin Cassidy: the continuous is probably more easily maintained.

Stanley Bernstein: I would say it would probably be best to have its scored, concrete.

Austin Cassidy: You would want it textured surface of some form.

Stanley Bernstein: I think it would be better than pavers. Pavers can get slippery very easily.

Ralph Vigliotti: Could we get some shrubbery every 10 yards?

Austin Cassidy: I don't know if it would grow, but I can put that in.

Ralph Vigliotti: Just to soften it. The idea originally was to kind of soften the walk.

Austin Cassidy: So then we can break it out within the large sections of the walking surface. It would get afternoon light, and it would be hardy enough to weather the snow.

Doug Hertz: I was fine to say the same thing. Are we interfering with any threshold of coverage of drainage?

Austin Cassidy: No the step would be to my memory; they are not that tight on coverage.

Doug Hertz: Is there width about 2 feet or 3 feet wide?

Austin Cassidy: it is equivalent to a stair tread.

Doug Hertz: The whole width of that? The width of that area right now from the curb to the walking surface.

Austin Cassidy: That is about 20 to 24 inches.

Ralph Vigliotti: It would be creating a step. Don't you think it would be more dangerous? I don't think that would be a very good idea. Could we design something with a slight angle?

Austin Cassidy: You would not want a hard walking surface on an angle.

Ralph Vigliotti: How much of an angle is that?

Austin Cassidy: It would probably be an elevation change at a guess. Standing at the top of the curb, up to the sidewalk, probably an elevation change of about 4 inches.

Ralph Vigliotti: I think you are creating just as much of a hazard for the long-term.

Austin Cassidy: That is what I am saying it would be an intervening; you have a walking surface and then an intervening walking tread.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: So they are walking up over it now. So that doesn't change. What changes is the surface.

Austin Cassidy: You are leveling the walking surface, and also providing something that's more tenable.

Doug Hertz: I agree with Ralph. If we could break it out.

Austin Cassidy: I am clear on that. We would probably break it up into at least, maybe 4-5 breakpoints.

Ralph Vigliotti: The whole length?

Austin Cassidy: Yes.

Doug Hertz: Line it up with the pillars that would be the natural breakpoints. You would have to see how that relates to the parking spaces are striped.

Austin Cassidy: Alright. I will get the details back to the board. All I want to know is that I can continue discussion.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: Ok.

Buckingham Properties - Morgan Drive