PB Minutes 6-13-06

Minutes

Regular Session of the Planning Board

Village/Town of Mount Kisco

Tuesday June 13, 2006

Meeting called t order at 7:45 pm Tuesday June 13, 2006 at the Municipal Building Mount Kisco, New York.

Members Present: Joseph Cosentino

Anthony Sturniolo

Doug Hertz

Stanley Bernstein

Ralph Vigliotti

Sol Gibbons

Members Absent: Joseph Morreale

Staff Present: Nanette Bourne

Whitney Singleton

Michael Stein

Staff Absent: None

1. Minutes

Chairman Cosentino: Mount Kisco Planning Board meeting. This is Tuesday, June 13, 2006. This is a regular session, and the first thing on our agenda is the minutes of March 25, 2006, that was a regular session also.

Stanley Bernstein: I move that we accept the minutes of March 25, 2006.

Chairman Cosentino: Motion by Mr. Bernstein, do we have a second?

Doug Hertz: I'll second.

Chairman Cosentino: Second by Mr. Hertz, all in favor?

Board All Aye to approve the minutes of March 25, 2006

Chairman Cosentino: Next on our agenda is a special discussion, Connie's Bakery and General Store application. Is anybody here from Connie's? Would you please come up and identify yourself for the record, please?

2. Special Discussion:

Deena Plotka, applicant

Deena Plotka: My name is Deena Plotka, and I represent Connie's Bakery and General Store at 41 South Moger Avenue in Mount Kisco.

Chairman Cosentino: We have a cover letter here. You are interested in putting a popcorn machine which is 18” wide, 16” deep and 70” high out side of your door.

Deena Plotka: Correct.

Chairman Cosentino: Just tell us a little bit about that.

Deena Plotka: We are located down the alleyway from Starbucks, and unfortunately we do not get much foot traffic. We also have a clause; well Starbucks has a clause, in their contract they cannot sell coffee or tea outside. The town will not let us put signage in the front or the back of the alleyway stating there are stores down the alleyway, and we were going to have this popcorn machine in our store, and the Board of Health said, no problem and that we could put it outside, but we needed permission from the town. So we applied for an outdoor permit on private property, because our property is not owned by the town but by the Geiners, and the town said we needed to submit an application with you, and either get your permission and/or your blessing to put it out seasonally just to attract a little attention down the alleyway because we're suffering. We've been there since February. We're a little store with a big heart. We donate one hundred percent of our profits to charity. We're a very old fashioned and unique store, and the machine is very small. It's 16 x 18 inches, and it's old fashioned, and it fits in with the charm of the town. We wanted to ask your permission to be able to put it out seasonally.

Chairman Cosentino: I have a couple of questions. Did you see the memo from Austin Cassidy?

Deena Plotka: I did not.

Chairman Cosentino: He wrote us a memo dated June 1, 2006. It says the device is most likely electrical which means there will be a wire that needs to be safely routed through a routinely closed doorway. How do you intend to hook the electricity up to this? We don't want anybody falling over electrical.

Deena Plotka: Nobody will fall because it will be flush against our window, and if it goes in through the doorway then it will be flush against the side of the door. Actually, there might be a way - there is a brick there that we could put it right through the brick of the wall, so it won't even……

Chairman Cosentino: I would rather see it in the brick of the wall, not the door.

Deena Plotka: Yes, because if it's flush against the door, it won't …….

Chairman Cosentino: Drill a hole. Have somebody drill a hole through the brick.

Deena Plotka: Okay.

Chairman Cosentino: The device may be hot. Surfaces might be accessible by a child.

Deena Plotka: Well, it will always be attended. It will never be unattended. It only pops six one ounce bags of popcorn, so it will never be unattended.

Chairman Cosentino: Well, you're not going to have somebody out there all day.

Deena Plotka: When we keep it out there, we are going to have somebody out there, so maybe we'll keep it out from ten to twelve; have someone out there maybe from two to four. But otherwise, they won't be able to get into the machine. It will be locked, or we'll bring it inside.

Chairman Cosentino: Now, the concrete is not contoured, is it?

Deena Plotka: No.

Chairman Cosentino: It's completely flat in that alleyway?

Deena Plotka: Yes. Here is a picture. The alley way is thirteen feet wide, and this will only be about twelve inches.

Chairman Cosentino: And you have a letter from your landlord stating that you can have that piece of equipment there?

Deena Plotka: Yes. We wouldn't put it out there without our landlord's permission. I did speak to him already, both Stevens and Geiner.

Chairman Cosentino: You'll need to give us a copy of that. I'm sure my planning board members may want to add something else, but we need a copy of that letter stating that it's okay. If we're going to give you permission, we need to know that they gave you permission. I have no other questions.

Stanley Bernstein: I have a comment. Sol, I think you will agree for safety purposes; not just a hole through a brick, but an outdoor base outlet should be out there; a covered receptacle.

Sol Gibbons: It may also need a ground fault interrupter.

Stanley Bernstein: And a ground fault interrupter.

Deena Plotka: What was the last one, I'm sorry?

Stanley Bernstein: A ground fault interrupter or GFI. By doing it that way - what you don't want to do is run an extension cord through a hole in the brick. If you put the receptacle on the outside, the door closes tightly. You don't need the hole in the thing, and then for your own safety you may want to think in terms of putting a switch on the inside so you can kill that receptacle at night when the popcorn machine is not being used to eliminate somebody plugging something in to your receptacle on your Con Ed meter, or something even worse than that.

Deena Plotka: That's a good idea.

Stanley Bernstein: So it's dead at night, and then switches it in the morning.

Chairman Cosentino: Anybody else have any questions on this?

Doug Hertz: No, I think it sounds great, and I love popcorn.

Chairman Cosentino: Nancy, will you tell Mr. Cassidy that we gave our blessings on this?

Anthony Sturniolo: Deena, I just have one last thing. The application you filled out is dated May 26. It was received by the Planning Board with the Planning Board stamp of May 31. The cut off date to receive information is May 24. So, in theory your application should have been dated May 24, and then submitted to the Planning Board by the cut-off time for all documents coming in.

Deena Plotka: I think that date that I did it, Austin said it was moved two days because it was a holiday that week.

Anthony Sturniolo: Austin said that?

Deena Plotka: It was supposed to be in by Tuesday.

Anthony Sturniolo: May 24.

Deena Plotka: I gave it in Monday or something because the meeting was Wednesday.

Anthony Sturniolo: No the meeting was Tuesday. In either case, I'm just bringing it up to you.

Deena Plotka: Do I have to change something?

Anthony Sturniolo: No, you don't have to change something, but for the record, you are not the only one caught in a bad timing situation tonight. For the record, the cut-off date of submitting everything is May 24, and that's what it should have been. However, that has nothing to do with the positive feedback that you're gathering from the Planning Board tonight.

Chairman Cosentino: Okay. Good luck.

Deena Plotka: Thank you all very much. Thank you from Connie.

3 Conceptual Applications:

a. 41 Armonk Road - John Martabano - Application #PB2006-13. Edmond Gemmolla, representing the applicant

Chairman Cosentino: Conceptual applications, 41 Armonk Road, John Martabano. Would you identify yourself for the record, please?

Edmond Gemmola: My name is Ed Gemmola with Gemmola and McWilliams, Architects.

Chairman Cosentino: Why don't you just give us a rundown?

Edmond Gemmola: We were here previously; this is going back over a year ago. We have a piece of property; 41 Armonk Road and it's approximately 28,600 square feet. What we have is a dash line which represents right now; that dash line here - a building which is existing, and it's a gas station. I have some photos if anybody would like to see. The gas station is in the corner, there is a curb cut that goes the entire length of the property front.

Doug Hertz: Mr. Chairman, if I might, this is conceptual.

Chairman Cosentino: Conceptual.

Doug Hertz: So if anyone wants to come up and look, this is open for everyone if anyone is interested.

Edmond Gemmola: In terms of zoning, we meet the zoning, and what we've done - we've put a building on stilts. This heavy dash line represents a building above what you'd have. On the footprint would be no more impervious area than exists now. Basically we've calculated the impervious area that exists between the roof, the existing building, pavement, and we've basically (green) would negate any pluses and minuses. The building would be open under; the core partially under partially out in the open. Access with the sidewalk along the street, and access the front to the core, there's an elevator to get you to the second floor. And that second floor, basically again, this is a little large scale for here, the second floor is just under 5,000 square feet; 4,998 square feet. We don't know, it could be a single tenant, it could be a multiple tenant, we don't know at this time what that tenancy will be, but for office professional use, and what we have tried to do is have openings on the street. There would be a driveway here and then a driveway around the right side to get under the building. We have not shown any landscaping on the site plan or any landscaping on this, nor in colors.

Chairman Cosentino: So it gives the appearance of having a large building, and you can't see the parking.

Edmond Gemmola: Correct. And it's just that story above. We are trying to create the illusion of a colonial traditional type building at the streetscape.

Doug Hertz: Can I just ask you a question on the last plan? And it's just a technicality. Your plan says the bottom is listed as proposed parking level, first floor, but that says second floor space.

Edmond Gemmola: It's the second floor.

Doug Hertz: There is one floor above, and that area above in the roof area, and there's nothing above?

Edmond Gemmola: No, just roof; might be mechanical equipment. This is actually the second floor. The fact that it says first floor is wrong.

Doug Hertz: Okay.

Ralph Vigliotti: What's the size of the building, length and width?

Edmond Gemmola: It's approximately 58 feet depth and 85 ½ feet left to right. And there's a slight bump out here, which is 18 inches just for a little articulation.

Chairman Cosentino: So it's an office building - somebody's going to come, push a button, the garage door is going to open, they are going to park, take the elevator upstairs and do what they have to do?

Edmond Gemmola: Well actually we hadn't planned on the garage door. This was just an open parking structure underneath.

Chairman Cosentino: The picture you showed me has a garage door on it, doesn't it?

Edmond Gemmola: No.

Chairman Cosentino: Oh, that looks like a garage door.

Edmond Gemmola: It's open.

Chairman Cosentino: It looked like a garage door.

Ralph Vigliotti: Can you tell me the set back? I'm going to be asking lots of questions on this project. One, I know the area very well, I live down the street. I'd like to say I'm not only representing the Village at large, but I'm going to be representing that immediate neighborhood there in some form. They are going to be questioning me to death about what's going in there. So my questions to you: as one who resides in that area and who happens to be on the Planning Board, I just wanted to let you know up front, we all have different interests in different projects, so that would be in my interest. Tell me about the landscaping. Anything's an improvement to what's there.

Edmond Gemmola: We haven't gotten that far.

Ralph Vigliotti: What's the setback from the road?

Edmond Gemmola: The front yard setback is twenty feet, from the road it's probably at least another ten feet, so it's probably thirty feet plus or minus to the curb, which would be a new curb because there is no curb there now.

Doug Hertz: And you said the dotted line is the existing structure?

Edmond Gemmola: I don't think you can see it from there. There is a dash line that represents the edge of pavement here, and then if you could see it right there that's the existing structure, the garage structure. That would all come down. And the grade, past here is not bad, and then the grade starts to go up towards the Timber Ridge project.

(Viewing of site plan)

Ralph Vigliotti: So that neighborhood, the twenty foot setback, I don't think is enough for that immediate area. I think you need more green space if you're going to blend in to that hillside. What was there was built forty fifty years ago, and that may have been acceptable at that point in time. I'd like to see more green space off the front of the building. Otherwise there's this appearance that it's right on you.

Edmond Gemmola: Well, it's actually back further than what is existing now.

Ralph Vigliotti: That would never happen today at all. That building that's abutting the property. The existing property with the way the gas station is done probably would not have happened today due to deep slopes and everything else and pavement. You have twenty feet from the building to the property line.

Edmond Gemmola: Then another at least ten twelve feet to the edge of the curb, so there is a considerable buffer there that can be landscaped. To move it back, we're trying to maintain whatever trees are there.

Ralph Vigliotti: Well, it may require the depth of the building not being 58 feet.

Doug Hertz: And if I may comment about that, in terms of your calculations, your spaces I don't believe are compliant. These are all listed as sixteen six in depth.

Edmond Gemmola: There's a two foot bumper overhang.

Doug Hertz: I don't believe we allow bumper overhangs, is that correct?

Edmond Gemmola: Well, that could relieve that. It's the same thing. Basically people will park until they feel tires hit the curb. You get more green doing that and less paving. It's an acceptable standard in Westchester County.

Ralph Vigliotti: It's not acceptable here.

Edmond Gemmola: I understand that. I'm just hopefully making a statement.

Doug Hertz: I see your setback line in the front. What does this line represent; this broken line? This is the front yard setback line, this is the property line. The line between - right in the middle of the front yard set back?

Edmond Gemmola: I'm not sure what we have there. Looks like halfway, looks like ten feet, but I'm not sure there is anything that's required that's 10 feet. The buffer from the front yard would be a twenty foot buffer, so we're going to be planting the entire buffer. I have to clarify that.

Doug Hertz: Okay; just a line.

Edmond Gemmola: I might have been a construction line that was left on but I'm not sure.

Chairman Cosentino: It certainly is a nice looking building.

Edmond Gemmola: I think it hopefully will be attractive in the corner, less of an eyesore, I believe than what is there now, and I think there will be considerably more landscaping with it.

Ralph Vigliotti: So the road itself to the property line, Park Avenue, it's difficult to determine where your property line ends because there's no curbing; there is nothing to outline that one the site, not here.

Edmond Gemmola: Actually there is an existing - like a plant or a curb that's here now. If you were out there, you might be able to see that from here.

Ralph Vigliotti: So it's generally twenty feet, sidewalk, and then some additional green space which would be grass? Is that what we're looking at the curb?

Edmond Gemmola: There would be some amount of grass here, which would be in the right of way, the sidewalk, and twenty foot of landscaping and green to the building.

Ralph Vigliotti: What's the total square footage?

Edmond Gemmola: 4,998. I thought I had that. I don't have a shot of that, if you were out here.

Ralph Vigliotti: 4,900?

Chairman Cosentino: I love the fact that it's going to be a one-tenant building.

Edmond Gemmola: At this point it would be nice to get one tenant, but we don't know what it's going to be. 250 would give you twenty spaces; we actually have twenty one spaces with the handicapped parking space.

Nanette Bourne: Mr. Chairman, on that parking space count, on all three sides we show a bumper overhang; I don't believe that's permitted.

Chairman Cosentino: Yes, we just said that.

Nanette Bourne: Oh, I'm sorry.

Chairman Cosentino: Yes we just told them that the overhang is not permitted.

Ralph Vigliotti: So how much have you taken into account for bumper over hangs?

Edmond Gemmola: Two feet.

Ralph Vigliotti: We have a shortage of four feet, if we're looking at both sides and two feet to the back.

Edmond Gemmola: When you say a shortage? Yes, we'll have to move the curb out to that. The curb would now move out to the bumper overhang.

Doug Hertz: Were you trying to retain impervious surface so that we don't open up a DEP issue?

Edmond Gemmola: We are trying to do that so there's no net increase in the impervious area. But it also keeps a little more green and a little less paving. The parking spaces are still the same depth when you park right up to the curb. But we can modify that.

Chairman Cosentino: I don't have any questions.

Stanley Bernstein: What is the pole with the satellite dish in the lower right hand corner?

Edmond Gemmola: Whatever it is it's existing. I don't know if it's a satellite dish. It looks like maybe some kind of solar panel for something, I'm not sure. That was depicted on the survey. I'm not sure what that is.

Doug Hertz: You don't have anything that shows the topography?

Edmond Gemmola: It could be an existing light, too. No, the only thing I have is -

Chairman Cosentino: That's a light.

Edmond Gemmola: I have some photographs. That's the backdrop. Past the existing dash line which is right here it's fairly level. It's got some pitch, and then it starts to go up. We have to get it surveyed, get a topo done. That's the edge of what you could see, that edge of pavement. We thought it was important to try to keep as much tree line as there. We have some room to move in, we can move somewhat towards that.

Doug Hertz: I appreciate your trying to keep the trees that are there, but I also hear Mr. Vigliotti's concern that the setback is. We find the right medium preserving what's back there and keeping a setback that would work well.

Edmond Gemmola: It does meet the front yard set back and the landscape buffer of the second code. What we could do is try to get a landscape plan the next time here, and we can do an alternate study, and then you can take a look at what's there, hopefully a topo.

Chairman Cosentino: That may help.

Doug Hertz: Another question would be, even keeping your lot almost the same, could the building shift slightly rearward?

Edmond Gemmola: Yes, we probably have room to shift it.

Doug Hertz: It looks like it comes to there; you probably have what's looking like ten feet or so, before you even overhang.

Edmond Gemmola: We have some room. We have maybe three or four feet we could push back, because we want to maintain that isle here, so we could push this a little closer.

Doug Hertz: Or it could, if you wanted to keep this front line, obviously so that you're not uncovering the parking lot in front. It could shift ever so slightly.

Edmond Gemmola: We could try some alternatives.

Chairman Cosentino: You're going in the right direction.

Ralph Vigliotti: I agree. You are certainly heading in the right direction. Is there a reason why the building is shifted north on the property rather than further south?

Edmond Gemmola: Well, again, we were trying to utilize; there is a flat bush in here. Without a topo, this was a flat area and in terms of the area used, it seemed like it made sense, it was flat and then it rose up. So we're trying to work with the grades that were there.

Ralph Vigliotti: You know what it is; the building is so close to that little shopping center there, those four stores that I honestly believe that those stores will take away from the look of sophistication of the building.

Chairman Cosentino: Do you see those people that are parking in that store?

Ralph Vigliotti: It's ridiculous.

Chairman Cosentino: That's an accident waiting to happen right there. Here we're parking underneath. Does anybody else have anything?

Anthony Sturniolo: I just have a general comment. I like the look of the building. I like, obviously the concept of replacing that mess with something classy, and you're going to work on shifting and moving some stuff around, but the overall concept, I think is an addition and an enhancement.

Chairman Cosentino: I like the way it blends in with the building across the street.

Edmond Gemmola: We're trying to make it look like something was there a long time.

Ralph Vigliotti: Can the building be moved any further south? I mean, it's a stand-out building. I think it will become kind of a cornerstone as you enter Mount Kisco there. If it were further south, ten, fifteen feet, it kind of gets away from that building next door, and it will really stand out on its own. Right now it's almost like it kind of blends in. Its twenty feet from that other building, which is really an eyesore. There is nothing right about that building. And this building, I'd love to see it sit center to property with green space on both sides, it looks a little more residential. It does right now, I honestly believe the southern portion as you're coming up has that residential look, then all of a sudden that one building is right on it. I think it takes away from the look.

Edmond Gemmola: I appreciate that.

Ralph Vigliotti: If there is any way of pushing that ten feet, eight feet, six feet, I think it will be an advantage to the site.

John Martabano: If we can do it fine, I'm just concerned about curb space in terms of people coming around that corner. There's a dead corner there, but I'm concerned about safety.

Ralph Vigliotti: That's a good point.

John Martabano: That's the only reason we did it that way so you know.

Edmond Gemmola: We'll be happy to do some alternative studies.

John Martabano: If you can, and you could do it. It's just a matter of safety.

Ralph Vigliotti: Are you looking at clapboard on the building, wood, vinyl?

Edmond Gemmola: We haven't gotten that far. We're showing this additional siding. They have some synthetic material that only a woodpecker would know that it's not real, so they have do have some real very nice samples. I could bring some samples, we're open to that. If its real wood, painted we're open to that. Maintenance wise, the vinyl has - or they have these semi-plank products, which are a concrete plank product which mimics siding, has an embossed grain in it, it's stainable, those are more maintenance free. I could bring some products in and you could take a look at that.

Ralph Vigliotti: I'm just looking for as much architectural detail that gives it an authentic look at least in the front.

Edmond Gemmola: Okay.

Chairman Cosentino: You're only going to fit so much in that area, and that's it. It looks nice. Anybody else?

Whitney Singleton: Mr. Chairman, if they are going to come back with a formal application, I think they should confirm, or we should identify whether or not this is in fact a two story building. I understand the board likes it, but there is one notation of two stories in this zone, and it has the visual impact of three. Most of the buildings in the area are one, and I don't want to see the applicant spend a lot of money in investing plans if that's not consistent with Austin's interpretation. If Austin interprets this to be a two story building, I think that the applicant should get an appropriate ……

Chairman Cosentino: Would you check with Austin and bring these plans to Austin. We want an interpretation. Nanette?

Ralph Vigliotti: What are the plans for the attic? That's a good point made there. What are the plans for the attic space? It is going to be a trussed attic, or is it going to be a full open attic?

Edmond Gemmola: It can be trussed, probably mechanical, because there is no place on the site for mechanical.

Ralph Vigliotti: So it's not going to be for storage of any type at all?

Edmond Gemmola: No. Duct work, mechanical.

Ralph Vigliotti: So that roof line doesn't necessarily have to be that steep. It could change a little bit.

Edmond Gemmola: We could flatten it out. In terms of what it is. It is a two story; it doesn't violate the height in the stories.

Chairman Cosentino: If it doesn't violate the height, putting in a smaller roof may ruin the appearance of that building, because it really looks nice the way it is.

Edmond Gemmola: I agree with that.

Ralph Vigliotti: So what is the actual height now, because it appears to be a three story building?

Edmond Gemmola: The mid point of the roof is twenty nine eight.

Ralph Vigliotti: That's up to where the fence system is up at the top?

Edmond Gemmola: No, mid point of the pitched roof.

Ralph Vigliotti: Tell us what it is all the way to the top of that fence system. What's the maximum height, thirty two?

Whitney Singleton: I think the representative for the applicant is correct in how you measure what the height is. It's two story max.

Edmond Gemmola: Its twenty eight to here and this is an open rail, so it's twenty eight to the ridge. If you figure to the top of the rail, it's thirty nine feet to the top, and approximately forty feet to the top of the railing.

Ralph Vigliotti: That's too high.

Chairman Cosentino: That's counting the rail, though.

Ralph Vigliotti: But that's too high. I don't think we have any building…..

Chairman Cosentino: Do we count the building?

Whitney Singleton: What I was getting at was not the overall height, because I do think that Mr. Gemmola has accurately measured the height. The question is the number of stories. There is a lobby to this building, and it is minimal, but there is a lobby. There's a limitation of not greater than thirty feet in height or two stories. The question is this - three stories? I just don't want to see the applicant go down the road, and find out that there's an interpretation that was wrong.

Chairman Cosentino: Well, check with Austin.

Ralph Vigliotti: Just for the record and I know this is conceptual, it's too high. Forty one feet is not going to look residential there. It will look like an oversized mansion that doesn't belong there. Forty one feet, is that what you said, forty one?

Edmond Gemmola: To the top of the railing, yes. I could gauge what the heights left and right are and what's surrounding it. Residentially it meets the code, but I hear what you're saying though. There was a memorandum, I noticed on the agenda. Is that something we could get a copy of from Austin?

Chairman Cosentino: Yes. We have one here.

Edmond Gemmola: Thank you very much. Thank you for your time and your comments.

Anthony Sturniolo: The memo highlights non-medical and non-dental use.