Planning Board Minutes - February 14, 2006

Minutes

Regular Session of the Planning Board

Village/Town of Mount Kisco

Tuesday February 14, 2006

Members Present: Anthony Sturniolo

Stanley Bernstein

Ralph Vigliotti

Doug Hertz

Members Absent: Joseph Cosentino

Joseph Morreale

Sol Gibbons

Staff Present: Whitney Singleton

Nanette Bourne

Michael Stein

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: Please stand for the pledge of allegiance. Welcome to the Mount Kisco, planning Board meeting, for Tuesday, February 14. This is a regular meeting, and we will be conducting the meeting under that format. The meeting was called to order at 7:50 p.m. The first item on our agenda is the minutes from November 22, 2005.

Stanley Bernstein: I move to approve the minutes of November 22, 2005.

Doug Hertz: I was not present at that meeting. Please make that adjustment.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: So Doug will not be voting on this?

Whitney Singleton: You do not have a sufficient number of members to hold a vote.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: So let's hold approval of the minutes for our next meeting. To save a little bit of time Stan, are you comfortable with the minutes?

Stanley Bernstein: I have already gone over them.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: So we can pick it out at a vote at the next meeting. We have three conceptual applications, tonight as part of a very lengthy agenda. The first conceptual application is MRE Development- Lexington Avenue and Radio Circle.

a. MRE Development - Lexington Avenue & Radio Circle

Application #PB2005-08

Scot Blakley, Dan Montroy, John Martabano, owner

Scott Blakley: The subject property is located on the corner of Lexington Avenue and radio Circle. It is a three acre vacant parcel. There is a drainage course that runs through the center of the property. Wetlands were flagged by Beth Evans, surveyed and put on the concept plan that you have been reviewing. The site is cleared and is basically an open grass field. There is a small pocket of wetlands in the northern portion of the property. It appears that it was created by some minor earthwork that was done in the past.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: Do you know who did that minor earthwork?

Scott Blakley: I do not. The property contains three acres. It is in the commercial zone. The bulk of the project is to construct a two-story office retail building. About 15,360 square feet, each floor, for a total of a little over 30,000 ft.². We are also proposing a parking garage underneath the building that will house 54 cars. The on-site parking is located in the front on either end and parking in the rear. There are two proposed access points, and they are proposed at the furthest distance from the intersection of Lexington and radio Circle. There is an entrance off of Lexington, with an ingress and egress lane. Also, there is a new way onto radio Circle. Circulation through the building is two-way. We have a one-way circulation around the back of the building. We set aside, a proposed drive-through, for a potential bank or drug store, or retail tenant. The loading space is located in this area of the property. Our storm water management plan that we have developed and have been working with DEP. We have had numerous discussions and meetings with them. We are proposing a storm water basin between the parking area and Lexington Avenue. This would be a dry basin. We have another basin located in the northern portion. These two basins will handle the drainage from the front portions of the property. There is a storm water basin to the north of the building. This will be a wet basin. This will handle the building, and the access drive around the building. The existing drainage course that runs through the property. It is a rough kind of eroded channel that goes to the property. The Martabanos' in the past at the request of the village cleaned out debris and other things recently. So it has been cleaned up a little bit. It is a very eroded and defined channel that runs through the property. Our proposal to chorus that drainage course in two locations with the access drive, and to create an almost park like atmosphere through the center portion of the site. Heavily landscaped, we will have a mix of plant materials there, placed boulders, so we can get the water to meander through there. We are also proposing heavy landscaping along the front of Lexington. There is a proposed fence along the frontage. The plantings and the fence will help buffer, storm water basin from Lexington Avenue. Of course we will have all of this in accordance with DEP and DEC requirements and of course the requirements of the village. We have public sewer and water that we will connect into. The project architect has a conceptual elevation that we would like to present to the board.

Dan Montroy: I will start with the initial sketch of the building. It is a brick building with limestone trim. It appears as two floors above grade, retail and commercial office. Parking is below and it is completely below grade line. I'm going to show you the plans. The first one is the parking garage. It is 57 spaces in the garage. The plan before you has 53. When we actually laid out the building the net plus is four from what you have there. The ground floor is retail. At the moment it is just an empty box. It will be broken up depending on the retail that goes in there. There is an entry in the front for the commercial tenants upstairs. There are multiple entries for the retail tenants in the front. There is service and loading in the back. The second floor is commercial office space; very flexible, according to size, and it would be a multiple tenant plan, probably two to four tenants.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: just looking at the width of the parking stalls, you show them at 9 feet, and the village code calls for 9.5. I will also be happy to share with you a memo that we received from our building inspector, going through a lot of items. This also is a non-medical use?

Scott Blakley: In terms of the office tenants upstairs?

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: Yes.

Scott Blakley: I am not certain, I would defer to my client on the actual tenants that might be in the market. I don't know .Is there a zoning restriction?

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: The drive-in window as your colleagues said, is either going to be used for a bank, or you are thinking in terms of a drugstore. The concern that jumps out at me is just the overall traffic flow around the site, and the potential for a bottleneck at the northern end of the site. I'm not going to debate it. I'm just going to tell you, where my thoughts are, because this is only a conceptual and how it is going to impact the traffic flow on Lexington Ave. there is a lot of interest in developing Lexington Avenue. From some of the smaller to the larger properties, this piece of property has the potential to be a showcase and an inviting aspect of Mount Kisco, especially as you enter it in the village from Route 128. The building -and this is my personal opinion- and it is not a criticism of your drawings, the building really has to stand out as a signature building, both visually and architecturally and how the building sits on the piece of property. You have issues with wetlands; you have a wetland detention basin in the corner. The building really has to represent something, very inviting and very interesting for the village as well. The other question I have, on your parking requirements, where you talk about 15,360 feet of retail and 15,360 all the retail again, but over here you talk about 15,360 feet for retail, and the same 15,360 for office. Is this just a typo? On the parking requirements, it looks like it is just duplicated.

Scott Blakley: It should state: retail and the other one state: office.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: Nancy I am going to probably ask this question, of you many times. If you would be kind enough to double-check, starting tomorrow, that all applications fees have been paid, and all appropriate escrow fees have been put into place, for this project.(to Scot Blakley) I would like to leave this memo with you. This is just some thoughts and comments and Mike I'm sure you have a few words, before we go around the table.

Michael Stein: As far as the conceptual none; not until it becomes a formal site plan.

Stanley Bernstein: Are you going to excavate for the parking under the building?

Scott Blakley: Yes, we are.

Stanley Bernstein: How deep?

Dan Montroy: The elevation of the garage at the moment is 299.

Stanley Bernstein: That is the floor of the garage?

Dan Montroy: Yes.

Stanley Bernstein: What is the grade?

Scott Blakley: It is roughly 304. It is about 5 feet.

Stanley Bernstein: I remember the water table being about 5 feet. Have you taken any borings where the water table is?

Scott Blakley: We have done testing is in this area, and we found no evidence of ground water.

Stanley Bernstein: Since this is a conceptual, and we are not going to debate, I just wanted you to know my thoughts. One thought is I am opposed to a curb cut on Lexington Avenue, and I am also opposed to piping that stream in any way, shape or form. I see here about one third of it is going to be piped through the property and the rest is open. You mentioned the eroded bank. Someone has been filling in that land for many years. One of the things that that person or group of people has done, is that they have narrowed the stream bed considerably. Now it is about 2 feet across, it used to be a very wide stream at one time. Nanette, what is the regulation of a watercourse? Shouldn't there be 100 foot buffer on either side of the watercourse?

Nanette Bourne: Yes. That would involve a natural resource disturbance permit.

Stanley Bernstein: It is also a Main Street area.

Nanette Bourne: Yes, they definitely need a Main Street area regulation, which has to do with DEP. The buffer has to deal with the village and wetlands permits.

Stanley Bernstein: There should be a 100 foot buffer. On either side of the stream, this would preclude any development on this piece of property. Now you say you have been in touch with DEP and have had many meetings with them?

Scott Blakley: We have had two meetings with them.

Stanley Bernstein: There has been no mention at all about the problems with the watercourse? It is not under their purview, but I am surprised they have not mentioned it.

Dan Montroy: They may require us to get a piping permit for this section, and this section.

Stanley Bernstein: We will have to give you a piping permit.

Scott Blakley: We will need wetlands permit. The only area that we are piping is this 60 foot section, and this 60 foot section.

Stanley Bernstein: It looks like more than 60 feet.

Scott Blakley: You have parking, which is 20 feet. And then you have an access aisle.

Stanley Bernstein: What is happening at north of that, where you have the drainage wall.

Scott Blakley: This is remaining open.

Stanley Bernstein: I see channel and I did not realize that before.

Ralph Vigliotti: The drive-through, that you had mentioned, and I guess it is on the record at this point, that the drive-through would be there to house or assist a pharmacy and/or bank. That is all that you are limiting it to. A pharmacy and or bank, is that true?

Dan Montroy: Any retail tenant that would enjoy a drive-through.

Ralph Vigliotti: So it could be a McDonald's, a Friendly's or it could be any food establishment. I need to get this on the record.

Dan Montroy: I do not know who would lease the property.

Ralph Vigliotti: Conceptually, and I do not want to debate the point. And that is not the road I want to travel, and I do not think that this is the road this board wants to travel down. I want this on the record. Will there be a basement below the underground parking?

Scott Blakley: No.

Ralph Vigliotti: Can we place that on the record that there will not be a basement below the parking garage. We've had a problem with that at some point. I think the building is much too large and much too tall for that corridor. I think you are pushing the envelope. I agree with Mr. Bernstein. There should not be ingress egress onto Lexington Avenue. It is one of the few roadways in this town that works. And to have cars sitting to make a left hand turn, or piled up to make a right hand turn into the complex would exacerbate a traffic situation that we certainly do not need. There is a traffic light there and we need to take advantage of the traffic light, make your right hand turn, and then make your right hand turn again to get into the complex. I do recall that stream, and I've been down in that section of town for 28 years, to be much wider. Over the course of 30 years it has become deeper and narrower. So it was wider, Mr. Bernstein you are correct in your assessment.

Doug Hertz: I have one question. The proposed first floor retail space, what is the elevation of that?

Scott Blakley: I believe, 308.

Doug Hertz: The current grade is?

Scott Blakley: It is roughly 304 at this end and 300 at this end. You want the existing grade of the site to be able to access the lower level of the building for the parking.

Doug Hertz: on the north side of the building. There will be three full floors exposed.

Dan Montroy: Yes, three full floors exposed to here. You will come in at grade and enter in the retail at grade there.

Doug Hertz: how tall is the building and take a slice or right through the center.

Dan Montroy: 40 feet, 16 feet for the retail and about 14 feet for the commercial offices.

Doug Hertz: The parking lot at one end will be partially exposed and on the north end be completely exposed?

Scott Blakley: Correct. The elevation across the front will be at 308. You will have about three floors exposed here. We will probably make some sort of grade change, wrapping around this corner.

Doug Hertz: it feels like a very large building, for that site. Other buildings in that area typically are two stories or a single story.

Scott Blakley: Using the grade it is in fact, two stories.

Doug Hertz: You just said that the starting grade on the south side will be 4 feet above current grade and on the North Side will be 8 feet above current grade.

Dan Montroy: Correct, but we will be filling to bring this up.

Doug Hertz: you can fill all you want nevertheless that building is going to sit at that height. No matter how you get there. Whether you climb a mountain. It doesn't change.

Dan Montroy: The elevation of this building is the elevation of the road cut here.

Doug Hertz: I understand. I will just reiterate my feelings. I am concerned about the curb cutting on Lexington. I think if we were to even consider that type of curb cut, I think having a right hand turn in and left hand out, would be the only scenario that could work for that space so that you don't have traffic queuing across the street. It is only two lanes at that point. You cannot fix that cross. And there is a lane right there. I would ask you to rethink the navigation around the building. If you are going to keep going with this configuration used the radio Circle ingress and egress.

Dan Montroy: Right turn in at the light only.

Doug Hertz: Right turn in, right turn out. Similar to what is at Staples.

Scott Blakley: We will have our traffic people take a look at this.

Doug Hertz: No curb cuts at all on Lexington.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: it is counterproductive to what we have been trying to achieve.

Doug Hertz: There is a tremendous amount of development currently underway on radio Circle and on the Lexington corridor. It seems that half of our business in the last few months has been businesses up-and-down Lexington. Keeping that traffic flow to an acceptable level is going to be absolutely imperative.

Ralph Vigliotti: I would like to leave you with one thought. And please move away from any drive-through that would bring any kind of fast food to Lexington Avenue. I would like to see that as part of the resolution. It is one thing if it is a bank and or pharmacy, but I would like to see as part of the resolution that there would be absolutely unequivocally no fast food drive-through.

Scott Blakley: We will double-check with our client. But I know what they wanted to is that they would want to have a very upscale building here and really do a nice job on the site, and I think based on our initial meetings with the staff. We were made very aware of that.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: Nanette or Whitney, do you have any thoughts?

Whitney Singleton: I will make note to Ralph's concerns basically drive-through is it not be anything other than a bank. And with 14 or 15 banks in town I don't know how well they would do.

Nanette Bourne: The procedure is to look at conceptual once. In this particular case because this is a very critical gateway parcel as Mr. Sturniolo mentioned, I would recommend to ask the applicant to come back as a conceptual again., and showing you some various site studies, citing the locations for the building, looking at the building in alternate locations. Maybe a different side so that you can give constructive feedback. The natures of your comments tonight are serious, and I think it warrants for discussion and dialogue as to where this application goes.

Doug Hertz: I would like to make one more comment, and this concerns me: the underground parking. I foresee a scenario where because of the high water table that shouldn't this is considered. In some form underground parking, be approved. We see a scenario down the line this subterranean parking is not successful. During construction, and the building is being raised higher than anticipated. I am extremely concerned with any scenario that anticipates parking below grade in that area so close to the Mount Kisco River. I think you should think long and hard about how this is going to work. I am concerned that ultimately, what will happen, this building will be much taller, if that fails.

Scott Blakley: We have done preliminary soil testing out there. We have to do borings for the building foundation and soil testing will have to be done there. We will be developing more tests out their based on our initial tests throughout the site this and the other side. Especially on this side. There is no ground water.

Dan Montroy: based on tests to date. Do not have a groundwater issue. Should we encounter a groundwater at any point, we are very comfortable at the elevation and the efforts that we would take to mitigate to subsurface water. We are comfortable with this.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: You have heard comments, and you have a good sense of where the board is coming from and where the very major concerns are. Why don't you take your notes, take the feedback, take the memo I gave you and let's redo this again in a second version of a conceptual.

Scott Blakley: I would like some clarification, do you publish minutes of this meeting. I want to respond, and our intention here is to make a showcase for Mount Kisco. And make this Lexington Avenue corridor, a very special place, by virtue of this building. If I could get those comments. We will respond directly to them, and we can move this along at each meeting so that you see a better building.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: Ok

Whitney Singleton: Just to be realistic we are just looking at November minutes.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: Based on the notes that you took tonight.

Scott Blakley: We certainly took our own notes.

Whitney Singleton: We cannot release the minutes until they are approved by the board. I just don't want you to be operating under any misapprehension.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: thank you. The next item on the agenda is Flippo Simone 120 N Bedford Rd.

Daniel Simone, architect for the applicant

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: In our packet. We have a letter from the engineer and the application for conceptual review. And again, Nancy as in the previous application if you would double-check that all the fees have been paid and the appropriate escrow fees have been on deposit before we go further along.

Daniel Simone: I am here on behalf of the applicant. The application in front of you is for a piece of property, located on the north side of Barker Street, just behind the existing BP gas station at the corner of North Bedford Road and Barker Street. The property is approximately 11000 ft.². And we are in limited commercial zone. The proposal is for the construction of a two-story office building. There would be parking in the front location here. This property was the subject of a sub division, going back about 10 years. One of the main concerns that were raised at that time of the application was the location of the curb cuts and sight distance, along Barker Street. The location that is shown here is the location that was shown during that subdivision review. Additional issues of concern were screening from the existing residential district. The RS6 at this location. The plan for the building is a two-story office building with a gable roof, a residential type structure in keeping with the residential units, behind and the current law offices across the street. The east portion of the property has an existing stockade fence, which runs the entire perimeter, adjacent to the existing residents. There are multiple existing deciduous trees, at that location. Some evergreens could be supplemented in there also to assist in the screening. There is an existing row of evergreens, located at the rear of the service area. Also, the BP station provides a little bit of screening from North Bedford Road at that location. The applicant is also the owner of the adjacent piece of property, and is looking to utilize the lower portion in the basement, for overflow parking for the service area at this time. The basement would house the mechanical equipment. HVAC units and have an overhead door, located at this area so vehicles could be placed inside to store. Currently there are not any parking spaces showing, in accordance with the proposed office use. It is within the required setbacks, 30 feet from the residential zoning. It is 15 feet from the adjacent property over here, and more and then 50 feet from the road. There is existing water and sewer from Barker Street for connection. Storm water issues would be handled with on-site retention and recharge.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: A couple of quick thoughts that I have. You have to show parking space for handicapped spaces. You need to show snow storage. Retaining walls are going to be an issue. Whitney as far as the gas station and additional parking, is that a zoning issue?

Whitney Singleton: the gas station is required to have all its own parking on its own lot. It is also supposed to be a certain set back from the property line, under a special use regulation.

Daniel Simone: The gas station has its own parking. Sometimes he has additional cars, which remained stacked at the rear. So he was looking to utilize this to take away some of the congestion off of the gas station parcel. This gas station and the parking associated were approved under site plan; probably about 15 or 16 years ago.

Whitney Singleton: That's when it was one parcel of land.

Daniel Simone: Correct but it was reviewed under subdivision also and was in compliance with the regulations.

Whitney Singleton: But not to put gas station parking on a vacant lot.

Daniel Simone: Correct.

Whitney Singleton: When this lot is developed. It is not only it going to have to be compliant with the existing Mobile station is going to have to be compliant as well. There are required setbacks for vehicles on the service station. They are required to be on the lot, and I think there's required to be a certain length, at least 30 feet from the property line.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: I guess that part and parcel of it, Danny, would cover all zoning changes that have taken place since the subdivision was approved, may impact both individual sites. The vested rights only last for X amount of years.

Whitney Singleton: If they are able to demonstrate the compliance of the zoning regulations then they are okay.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: I also have some comments that Austin Cassidy gave us that I would be more than happy to give you in an effort to help you.

Stanley Bernstein: I am curious about this long dashed line. Is this a misnomer: building envelope?

Daniel Simone: That is the building setback lines, under the zoning. I believe there is a 20 foot front yard.

Stanley Bernstein: Why do you call it building envelope? It is very confusing.

Daniel Simone: That is the area within where the building can be located.

Stanley Bernstein: It is difficult terminology. As far as the parking spaces are concerned, 16.5 should be 18.5. That is a lot of impact upon the aisle, going in.

Daniel Simone: We had permitted within the walk for a 2 foot overhang, adjacent to the building.

Stanley Bernstein: A 2 foot overhangs where?

Daniel Simone: On the sidewalk.

Stanley Bernstein: On the concrete walk? In other words, you are saying that the cars can encroach upon that concrete walk?

Daniel Simone: With a 2 foot overhang.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: They need to be 18.5 in length.

Nanette Bourne: That provision is no longer in the code.

Daniel Simone: There is ample room to expand it towards the building. It would not have to go up to the aisle.

Stanley Bernstein: those were a couple of things that I wanted to find out. I have got to tell you that is a very difficult site. In order for it not to be a real botched job, you're going to have some really close oversight on this project. That is all I have.

Ralph Vigliotti: Do you have a rendering of what the building will look like?

Daniel Simone: No, at the present time we did not go that far. We are trying to get a feel for the board feels. How the building is going to sit and how it is going to be cited are kind of dependent upon the overall layout of the site. So we did not take it to that level. It would be to stories in the front. The property drops off, probably about 10 feet from this corner to this corner, so the front and side elevations to the east would be to stories to the south and to stories and then transition down the back of the building.

Ralph Vigliotti: I believe we are going to have to see a rendering of the building. I would like to see what it looks like it to Windows the doors. I think that type of roof does not fit into the neighborhood. It is a conceptual and I think we need to see what you have in mind. It is an entry street to that neighborhood, and I would like to take a close look of what that would look like. Just to put on the record, and I think everyone that is on the board during the process over the last three or four years, recognizes that it is going to be very difficult as far as sight line and safety to get in and out of the site. I don't know what we can do about that. It is inherited with the site, and certainly that something will have to live with, but it certainly is inherited to the site. We have a couple of new board members that are on as they may not be familiar with that. It's something during the process that we will need to discuss.

Doug Hertz: The only thing that I have is what we touched on earlier is the zoning issues, using this building is a parking area for another lot. How do we address that? Is that something Whitney that you were going to look into?

Whitney Singleton: I will certainly look into it. There are general basic requirements, with all the users. All parking for the use must be on the site of the building. We have been through this before, putting parking for one use on another lot. It is generally something that is only permitted hour.

Doug Hertz: just as only one board member I have a very hard time looking at the site plan that allows access and egress, only to park. On another piece of property, not from any public space. These properties are subdivided. So what happens when a change hands, now you have a nightmare on your hands. Unless you can provide a compelling reason why these two properties need to be done out why, for a recombine them, as one property, so that they flow. I can't see how that can possibly work.

Daniel Simone: if the owner had wanted a continual use of a combined access, then it would require access and easement agreement to access those sites. I don't think it is the owners and tension. To utilize this for any other reasons other than overflow parking for himself. I don't know it is necessarily something that the owner is 100% vested in, if it makes the board uncomfortable. It is something that we will discuss with the owner.

Doug Hertz: Just a quick comment and I think it was brought up earlier. Placement of handicapped spots, I believe it has to be the most and closest realistic spot to the front.

Daniel Simone: The way the property slopes the parking lot will slope. Generally down towards North Bedford Road, so the most logical place for the handicapped spot is at this location, where grade will not be an issue to the front entrance of the building.

Nanette Bourne: My comments are similar to the last one. This is a real showcase site. It would be very visible, and it should be a wonderful addition to the village. I would recommend that you asked the applicant to come back. Showing some alternative layouts, maybe some fresh thinking on this. I think it is important Topo be shown on this. Even though you may not have surveys done afresh for this site. There is enough survey that you can put on this site so that the board has an idea of what kind of grade would be required, a retaining wall. It looks like a fairly substantial retaining wall, would be required in the back.

Daniel Simone: It would be required at this location here. Transition between the parking and the lower-level. If there is no lower-level that may be an issue. As far as the wall is concerned.

Nanette Bourne: Also get some feedback from DEP on what kind of storm water and Water quality facility. Even get that before you come back to the board. Our experiences are that their requirements have been strict on these sites.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: We have one more conceptual 25-35 Kiscona Rd.

3. Biagio Cantisani - 25-35 Kiscona Rd - Application #PB2006-06

Mark Cantisani - representing applicant

Mark Cantisani: The engineer that was preparing this is out of town, due to the airport backlog. He still could not get a flight in. I will be able to answer as many questions, and I will be able to give you an idea of what we plan here. You should have a copy of this plan. You can see that our main use year is of a storage yard, and as an office and residents in the existing building. It is located on Kiscona Rd, amongst other commercial and industrial applications. To keep within the parameters of that neighborhood, we plan on doing what is already being done considering other across the road. There is an electrical contractor within office and residents, and also diagonal. Then right next door is the Whalen's moving and storage yard. Behind it are further operations that I am sure you are aware of. That is what we plan on doing on this site. Is to have a storage yard for minor construction equipment.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: Like what?

Mark Cantisani: Like block and Brick, concrete forms that kind of stuff. You can see on the plan. There is a fence enclosing it with some screening and front. The parking spaces will be on site. After further rehabilitation and renovation, we plan on using the first-floor as an office and the second floor as a residence. It could be my father's residence. If it all works out this way. We are conforming to the same use as the properties in the area.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: I am not sure that that second-floor residence conforms to the zoning. Be that as it may, continue.

Mark Cantisani: That is about all of it. The building already exists, so we don't plan on putting any other buildings up. Once there's fencing and secured and screened it won't really be an eyesore. When you drive through there.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: Right now, the two vacant lots are just why all the trees and brush are growing. When you start to see construction materials, and everything else associated with it, then the word that you chose to use a moment ago, eyesore, kind of comes to the surface. There are a host of concerns about this property. I just want to briefly share a couple with you. You need to address drainage issues, lighting issues, the fence is not compliant with a 4 foot maximum height in the front. The second story residential use is not permitted by zoning. You would have to get a variance. There is a buffer missing on the west side of the property. There are a host of issues that you are facing. And I will be happy once again, as I did with the other applicants, to give you a copy of this memo that the building inspector generated. What I need to say just personally. You are aware that near you is the transfer station. That transfer station has a lease that is going to run out sometime in the near future. They very well may choose to leave that location. As we have said, with two other property owners before ,as far as gateways situations( the Mobil station and the property on Lexington Avenue and radio circle) although this does not fall exactly in that category, The potential for the redevelopment of the site of the transfer station is something very important to the village. As you approach that location, passing your property on the right I personally would not want to see an open, vacant storage yard. It is not attractive, and it is not the kind of business that the village of Mount Kisco would like to encourage. A little later on in this agenda tonight there is going to be an applicant who has another piece of property close by yours that wants to store equipment, but it is going to be a building, and a warehouse storage facility. That is a lot different than an open, to use your words, eyesore. I am not in favor of this concept as you presented to us tonight for a host of reasons. A lot of which you already have detailed.

Mark Cantisani: You are aware that the screening will be put in front of there also. We would just be adding to those trees. It will look good. You will not see anything. We will review it again and do as you request.

Stanley Bernstein: There are very few open storage yards in the village. Lumber yards for instance, which are now all gone. I don't know of any building with open yards. It is a tremendous expense and a burden upon your father for us to request a closed warehouse building but that may be the best for Mount Kisco and this particular area, which is being upgraded over the next few years. Also, I think Tony mentioned about the six-foot-high fence. It should be four, and the lack of a 10 foot buffer on the west side. That has to be addressed. Of course, what Tony said about the noncompliant second-story residential is something that you will have to address as well.

Mark Cantisani: We will address those issues.

Ralph Vigliotti: I think everything that has been said I would have said, in some form. The open yards storage I am against. I don't think that we need open yard storage. It is prohibitive to enclose a storage area, but that is what we asked a neighbor to do and they did. There will be storage rocks and supplies in an interior storage building not to be seen by the public. Although Kiscona Road is making a slight change from residential to kind of an office residential that is probably the extent of where we want to go. I think what you are trying to do in changing the residence to an office, residence is something that has been done on that street, and is being done as we speak. But to convert to lots into an open storage yard is not the way that we would like to go.

Doug Hertz: I don't have anything to add, other then I would like to make a comment. There seems to be two sets of plans. The same site and they are not matching that of circulating here. Mr. Vigliotti's plans do not match mine. I cannot make an intelligent comment. They are all stamped the same date.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: The one you have right now is the one for reference?

Mark Cantisani: Yes.

Doug Hertz: I am going to withhold any comments, the plan I am reviewing is not the plan you are using.

Nanette Bourne: The only comment that I have, this plan needs a topo. The area where the proposed parking is chose grass Crete. The Board has been very careful when they have permitted grasp Crete. I hope that you have some direction for the applicant as to what you would prefer seeing there. Is there a reason why you have grasp Crete back there. Is it a proposed condition or an existing condition?

Mark Cantisani: A proposed condition.

Nanette Bourne: You are proposing grass Crete because?

Mark Cantisani: It is for its aesthetic quality, and preserve the grass and you still have the concrete strong enough to drive a car on.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: When you say grass Crete was equivalent.

Mark Cantisani: Different companies make it. It is like a tile that you set in.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: I am familiar with it.

Nanette Bourne: Your storage area would be dirt?

Mark Cantisani: Yes, or gravel, if necessary.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: Just in conclusion, I need to make sure that you are 100% clear and understanding the sentiment of this board, and our feelings for this open storage yard area.

Mark Cantisani: I understand.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: I just want make sure. That is one of the very key components to your application. Whether you choose to go forward for take into consideration what you heard tonight, and maybe rethink it.

Mark Cantisani: We will definitely consider your opinion, it is very valuable.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: Thank you. The next item on the agenda on their final action is N4Fitness 293 Lexington Avenue.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: In front of us, we have a resolution of approval for modification to an approved site plan. Some correspondence from Mr. Grenier, and if you would come forward. Nancy, once again, regarding the applicant for Kiscona, if we could double-check all fees and escrow accounts. I have two questions Whitney about the resolutio