PB Minutes 2-12-27-08

Minutes

Combined Meeting of the Planning Board

Regular/Work Session

Village/Town of Mount Kisco

Tuesday, February 12, 27, 2008

Meeting called to order at 8:00 PM at the Municipal Building Mount Kisco, New York.

Members Present: Vice Chairman Anthony Sturniolo

Sol Gibbons

Doug Hertz

Ralph Vigliotti

Stanley Bernstein

Members Absent: Chairman Joseph Cosentino Joseph Morreale

Staff Present: Nanette Bourne

Anthony Oliveri

Whitney Singleton

Minutes:

January 8, 2008

Motion: Stanley Bernstein

Second: Doug Hertz

Aye: Sol Gibbons

Aye: Stanley Bernstein

Aye: Doug Hertz

Aye: Vice Chairman Sturniolo

Conceptual Application:

The Vitamin Shoppe

156 North Bedford Road

PB2008-01

Present: Steven Finkelstein, Property Owner

Peter Finkelstein, Property Owner

Jeffrey Taylor, A.I.A., President, Taylor Associates, Architect

Steven Finkelstein: It is almost divided into three spaces; the back 5,000 square feet is the auto parts storage, approximately 10,000 square feet is what we are looking to rent (the front half of the building) to the Vitamin Shoppe. That would be taking 4,900 square feet, with the knowledge of what we are going to have to put in the middle 5,000 square feet in a future date. We do realize that parking is the number one issue here, according to Austin's letter. We have had the property on the market for about six months, and we now feel “The Vitamin Shoppe” is a use that the parking requirements, although it does not pass within what the town is looking for, would work very well for the front half of this building.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: You feel this even though you don't have sufficient parking?

Steven Finkelstein: Yes.

Peter Finkelstein: We realize that we would need to go for a variance.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: How old is the building?

Peter Finkelstein: 1980 the last part was built and 1964 the first part.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: You are faced with an older building that is too big to support the parking from a business point of view. Whether you need to tear down part of the building or the whole building, my suggestion is to call AKRF and have a staff meeting with Nannette and the Village Staff and let them guide you through what can and cannot be done. If you go around 117 you will see the Village is trying to encourage as much greenery as possible, and where you are now with this building, there is not much greenery in front. We have all seen Austin's memo, and you are deficient for “The Vitamin Shoppe” let alone all the other square footage in the rear.

Steven Finkelstein: We didn't want to tear the building down. When I was here last with the car dealership, I learned a lot from hearing you folks and I understand the push for the greenery. We are willing to do whatever to make that work. What my brother Peter was getting at is we've been taking a lot of phone calls for this property, and some wholesale retail we didn't even entertain, because we know what the Village is looking for because we've been in business in town since the '50's and still are. The particular use of “The Vitamin Shoppe” alone we felt was a perfect fit. We realize that the middle section would be absolutely restricted to dead storage or a mattress shop or somebody that has one customer alone. Because we knew that Austin's letter denied the parking, we were hoping to get a good feeling about this use and then take it to the next step, as opposed to talking with Nannette and re-doing the building.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: To me, this doesn't even work for “The Vitamin Shoppe”, let alone addressing all the other issues; and I think your time and dollars would be better spent trying to figure out something that could work there.

Peter Finkelstein: According to Austin's figures, we are six spots short, 20% short on the spots of what we need for the entire property. Retail is a use that is permitted on this location, and we have found the least impact parking use that we would find. We are willing to work with the parking issue, but the other facts of how they run their business and the parking requirements have indicated that they should have no problem there, and there will not be a parking impact from their use.

Steven Finkelstein: “The Vitamin Shoppe” has maybe one or two customers at a time; that's why we like this use. Plus we want to beautify the building.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: I am still suggesting that you still sit down with staff. You are deficient in parking spaces just for “The Vitamin Shoppe” concept alone, let alone the ancillary square footage behind the building and the second building.

Sol Gibbons: The parking space would have to conform to today's standards, and unfortunately some of them don't. The parking problem has to be solved.

Peter Finkelstein: I was in front of the board 15 years ago for a property on Lexington Avenue. It took me 11 months to get through the board, and I learned a lot then. I understand everything is a process, and we understand that we don't have the parking available right now for this use. We knew that on every phone call I got, which is probably upward of 100 phone calls for this property. With us having the knowledge of what you were looking for from our experience 15 years ago, I think this use needs to be looked at in a positive way of beautifying the building and having a low impact use for that property.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: At this point, you have a couple of choices. Because this is a conceptual meeting, you're getting a sense of where this board is. It is within your right to go ahead with an application or take one half steps backward and spend some time with Nannette.

Steven Finkelstein: I understand your point. One other time we were before the ZBA, we got a variance for a specific use only. If you guys gave us a thumb up and you liked the idea, we would be willing to make the parking variance issue for this use only. They are looking to sign a long lease.

Ralph Vigliotti: We probably shouldn't compare the site on Lexington Avenue with this site at all. Austin's memo is based on square footage, and we go by square footage and that's just for “The Vitamin Shoppe” alone; never mind the potential warehouse space that's behind. The problem with this site is that there is no overflow parking here. There is no place to put parking. You have more unknown square footage than the one known you are presenting to us. You have 4,900 square feet and 4,950 behind that, and behind that is another 5,000. We haven't even discussed parking for those areas. Right now I would not suggest at all moving forward with any kind of variance. It doesn't match. We certainly want to improve the site and we encourage you to do that. I've seen a number of renderings of “The Vitamin Shoppe” you showed from the different locations around Westchester County and whether we move forward or not, this is a conceptual approach. I am not happy with the signage. The entire rendering that you showed us does not have a Town and Country feel at all. What you presented to us may in your mind improve that spot, but I don't see improvement. It's a lot of aluminum and glass.

Peter Finkelstein: I agree with you, but I think it has the potential to have that country feeling.

Ralph Vigliotti: Once you get passed the parking issues.

Peter Finkelstein: Being that it is a retail use, and we feel it is the lowest impact of retail use that we can find, are we saying that retail use cannot be used on this property right now for the parking situation?

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: I think Austin's memo stands on its own.

Stanley Bernstein: My thoughts are that you don't correct the parking problem by getting a variance to say that it's okay. That does not correct the parking problem. When the comprehensive plan was worked on, I'm not saying that the people involved are all prescient and can see in the future, but the way things were going at that point and up until now, the use of the order was increasing. Cars were bigger, therefore we made the spaces bigger and any retail use will generate a lot of traffic and a lot of parking; not the way it was in the past. Now, of course, things can turn around. With the global climate change situation and municipalities looking at eliminating individual cars and going to public transportation, that might put a brake on the situation, but we don't know when that will happen. This Village is working on that right now. If you get a variance, and based on your looking at the other Vitamin Shoppe places around the county; and you say that the impact is not great because there are only one or two cars coming in and out, which I believe, then comes the situation where they all come at once. Unpredictable, it just happens. And at that location on North Bedford Road it would be a disaster. Variances don't solve problems; variances make it easier for the property owner to proceed; which is a good thing. Nobody wants to stop you from building and using the property, so it takes a lot of thought.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: Then with the variance you still have the issue of self-created hardship to think about with the ZBA.

Steven Finkelstein: What is that?

Whitney Singleton: If you were going for an area variance relative to the parking requirements, you would be subjected to review balancing requirements under 7-712 B of the Village Law and one of the factors relative to area variances is whether or not this hardship is self-created. A self created hardship means that you purchase premises knowing the restrictions were in place at the time of the acquisition.

Steven Finkelstein: My family operated an auto parts store out of there for a good part of 30 years, so wholesale/retail mix, and let's call it a paint supplier. The whole rest of the building was loaded with paint cans. That would have a heck of a lot more traffic than The Vitamin Shoppe but would meet the parking requirements. I fully understand how a variance doesn't solve the problems, but there are uses that will conform, like our auto parts business when it was in there; that was a heck of a lot busier with cars and delivery cars in and out. I am just trying to get direction here on what kind of tenant you are actually looking for.

Doug Hertz: I agree a great deal of what's been said on the table. I think “The Vitamin Shoppe” would be an asset to the Town. On the other hand, if you wanted to proceed with the application you would have to really work hard at proving what the traffic impact would be. That all being said you still have 10,000 square feet of space that's not “The Vitamin Shoppe.” Anything that you do that proceeds with The Vitamin Shoppe is going to impact your ability to use that space at all, and I think one of the things that the Village and this board has done that Tony said, and I agree with strongly, is we have worked very diligently with every applicant along that strip that has come in here, to create a green space buffer. That green space buffer, if anything, will not be giving you more parking. It's important to the Village in the long term to keep 117 from becoming a strip mall, but it's not going to help your situation Vis a vie parking. If you want to proceed with this, and you feel strongly that you can validate the fact that the parking for this one use is so low that it would meet, or there would be access parking on that site, do so, but this board is going to be extraordinarily careful to critique that information.

Peter Finkelstein: How do we show you the low impact other than taking our word for it?

Ralph Vigliotti: I want to remind you that although the name of the retail business is called The Vitamin Shoppe we have to look at it as a retail business. We have no idea what this may evolve into two years down the road. We have to look at the 4900 square feet as retail, and “The Vitamin Shoppe” just happens to be the name of this business and the way you're going to conduct it. But in 18 months, it could evolve into something very, very different. I remember the days when Dunkin Donuts only sold coffee and donuts. Now you can get breakfast, lunch and stop by for an ice cream. That is an evolution. For me, your case is not on “The Vitamin Shoppe”, it's on the 4900 square feet of retail.

Steven Finkelstein: Is there any way for the board to police that after the fact?

Ralph Vigliotti: Code says "X" number of spaces for "X" number of square feet, and that's the way we move on this. You still, as Doug said, have 10,000 more square feet that hasn't even been discussed.

Nanette Bourne: The 5,000 for the retail use, and even though the information The Vitamin Shoppe has provided of 10, 15 cars an hour, makes this almost an ideal use for the best of a retail operation, but once you go in there as retail, the board has no authority if “The Vitamin Shoppe” leaves to require any additional parking for the next retail that goes in.

Peter Finkelstein: If it was to move ahead and for the variance, would it possibly be just for this use?

Nanette Bourne: This is something that the Planning Board has been challenged with for a number of these uses; how to require a change of use permit if there is a higher parking requirement or a higher parking demand. That's very difficult to do with zoning. The board may come up with that in the future, but we don't have that in place right now.

Whitney Singleton: One of the other factors I was evaluating under 712 B is whether or not you can accomplish your goal without the necessity for a variance. I think what the chairman has indicated to you tonight is that you have in your ability 10,000 additional square feet on site that can be utilized for parking with the re-demising of the building. 15,000 square feet of building on a site that probably doesn't even have that as far as parking. There is a reason for this awareness that is why the Vice-chairman is suggesting you contact Nannette.

Continuing Review:

Westchester Residence and Club

Kisco Avenue

PB2006-19

Present: Patrick Hewes, Project Planner, Saccardi and Schiff

Kory Salomone, Attorney-at-Law, Veneziano & Associates

Nanette Bourne: The applicant has submitted a revised a preliminary Environmental Impact Statement to respond to your comments. We reviewed that, and there were some additional issues that need to be addressed. They have provided you some changed pages showing how they would address those, and as you can see from our review, the way they have addressed it is consistent with what I believe you were expecting. We did, however, identify a couple of non-substantive issues that need to be corrected. They are more of a typo nature, including correcting the pagination. You would be in a position tonight to accept this as complete subject to all of the corrections being made and that a proof copy of a document that incorporates all of those changes be provided to staff so we can review it to make sure that it's all acceptable. If it is, then the document can be circulated to interested involved agencies for review. You would also be in a position tonight, if you choose to accept it as complete, to schedule a public hearing. In scheduling the public hearing, you need to allow for about a weeks' time to make the changes, get the copies produced so they could be sent out, and you could be looking at a public hearing perhaps your second meeting in March.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: Is that something time-frame wise you can produce?

Patrick Hewes: Very much so. We have the changes that Nannette referred to in adopted printed form in anticipation of the document meeting your satisfaction, and in fact those can be circulated very soon. It's completely logistically do-able to achieve the calendar date.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: You can have a clean copy of Nannette's review?

Patrick Hewes: Yes. You can make that available today or tomorrow if you wanted it.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: In ten minutes?

Patrick Hewes: I have one here.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: And that's what we have here, and for the purpose of the Planning Board at this point of just swapping those pages out and then we would get the verification from Nannette.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: Any other thoughts?

Stanley Bernstein: On the public hearing, does that include the steep slopes? There's got to be another hearing.

Nanette Bourne: It would include the steep slopes, because you submitted your steep slopes application.

Patrick Hewes: Wetlands and steep slope permits.

Nanette Bourne: Yes, it's a natural resource disturbance permit.

Stanley Bernstein: So it will be done the same day?

Ralph Vigliotti: Are you going to be doing a Power Point presentation for the public hearing?

Patrick Hewes: We will do whatever you think is going to be best for you and the public, whether it's boards or Power Point.

Doug Hertz: I think it would be nice to have a Power Point. Certainly easier for the public. We're talking about accepting the DEIS as complete and then we're going to schedule a public hearing to discuss the substance of it, but this is still a preliminary.

Nanette Bourne: Once you accept it as complete, it would be a complete Draft Environmental Impact Statement. So all that is saying is that the information that is included in it is acceptable for the public to review and consider and respond to the board as lead agency with their comments.

Doug Hertz: Within that document are alternatives. How can we have a real discussion of steep slopes impact, things like that, if what comes out through this public hearing, or what we hear from the public may be an alternative; may be the most viable option that we want to pursue? In which case it may impact the entire steep slopes concept.

Nanette Bourne: If I understand where you're going with this, we don't have to close the public hearing. You can keep it open subject to potential modifications. You can reopen if need be.

Whitney Singleton: Nor does it send you down a particular course. When you eventually adopt your findings, it's not going to relegate you to "Plan A" for the applicant. The point of having the public hearing is to allow the public to comment and give you their input so that you may evaluate the merits of the application as well as the impacts on the environment.

Doug Hertz: I want to move forward and get into the substance of this. If we can open all these avenues simultaneously it seems like we are making certain assumptions that may not turn out to be correct.

Ralph Vigliotti: Doug and I and various members of the board have had conversations with regard to the size and length of the building, steep slopes and driveways, etc. We're progressing along, but I still haven't seen any of these changes that we've discussed as a board. So we're getting to this public hearing, and I still haven't seen an alternate to the original design as far as length. I know we talked about the view from Kisco Avenue and from the Village, and whether it would be shortened or lengthened as opposed to being very wide. We talked about the steep slopes up on it, getting to it, the driveway up, and here we are moving along to this public hearing. I don't think a lot of our questions and the lead that we're asking you to follow have really been addressed.

Nanette Bourne: Don't forget that part of this public hearing process is for you to hear from the public what they think about the project and more importantly for you to really contemplate and consider the information that's in here, provide substantive questions that have to be answered by the applicant including perhaps some variations on alternatives; some different ways of treating steep slopes.

Ralph Vigliotti: Gentlemen, if you haven't acknowledged what this board has been asking you for the last six months to a year, it will be presented at this public hearing, and we may not have anyone in the public questioning you at all, but we will be doing more than questioning.

Kory Salomone: Absolutely. We've done what was asked of us for the scope, and during the public hearing; the DEIS process, we're moving forward. We're going to hear your comments, the public's comments, and we will adjust from there.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: The last time we were discussing this, we used that model. Would you be comfortable putting that model on the table with the public here now and saying this is the direction you're going, predicated on what you just heard from two of my colleagues?

Patrick Hewes: The proposed project is one of several alternatives in the DEIS. That model depicts the proposed project.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: But from what you heard from Mr. Hertz and Mr. Vigliotti, the changes; the issues about the height, the sidelines from Mountain Avenue looking up at the complex, the winding road; have you addressed any of those ongoing concerns at this point, so to be able to say that that model is not accurate anymore because we've made some changes predicated on listening to you, Mr. Planning Board?

Patrick Hewes: I would say that all of our work, up through today has been in furtherance of the scope's requirements, and all of the description of all of the alternatives full described in the PDEIS including the proposal alternative in that 3-D model are completely visible and illustrated and described. Debate and discussion of the substantive questions which you've raised over these months are certainly in our heads and certainly known to be of concern, but in terms of depicting and describing the proposed project and the alternatives that are in the document, is what we have today as a full preliminary DEIS.

Ralph Vigliotti: I just want to leave it at this. That's the original, the proposed. I'd like to see our alternatives in another model. This is a gigantic project for this Village, and as you had said. Our ideas, our suggestions; they are more than ideas and suggestions. They are in your head, but I want to make sure it's on paper, and I keep thinking in my head that you are going to keep presenting the original proposal and you're not going to move one iota. Gentlemen, I hope that's not the way we are going. Just be careful. We've made more than suggestions over the months, and I want to make sure they are not falling on deaf ears. I want to leave you with that.

Doug Hertz: The public hearing on the document; if we additionally contemplate steep slopes and wetlands, these can remain open while we explore whatever information we gather from the public hearing regarding the document, and then put them public?

Nanette Bourne: Right. You would typically at some point close the public hearing on the EIS so that you could put together the comments and issues raised by the public as well as the substantive issues that you raise. So you would close that. SEQRA does have time frames for you to close that. There is nothing to compel you to close the public hearing on the natural resource disturbance permits. You can keep that open as long as you want so that it can dovetail with your site plan review. Getting back to Ralph's point, one of the factors that really hasn't been attended to and could possibly create some changes to the site plan is that the Village engineer is going to be reviewing it. Once you include the requirements for storm water and make the modifications based on what is needed to properly engineer this site, it's conceivable that substantial site plan changes will be needed even to meet the development program that Patrick has spoken of that it part of the proposed plan.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: So, (I'm making it up) if we had a public hearing tomorrow, the environmentally sensitive area portion; we could address another day? In other words maybe split it or focus on the DEIS but as far as the permit for the sensitive areas, that can be left open and we could address that at a subsequent meeting if we wanted to?

Nanette Bourne: The most significant environmental impact is going to be site disturbance. So, whether you postpone a natural resource disturbance permit public hearing or not, you're going to want the same substantive presentation and analysis that is included in here and presented by the applicant to be combined. Because that really is the meat of this whole project. Whether or not you choose to hold open that public hearing on the resource disturbance is up to you. So you don't have to take an action on it, you don't have to render an opinion on it; your only obligation is to hold a public hearing on the EIS, close it pursuant to what SEQRA requires to assemble your substantive comments as well as any comments that the public might have, and there will be agency comments, most likely DEP.

Doug Hertz: Your feeling is that the environmental issues require basically the same presentation, so why not hold them together?

Nanette Bourne: Exactly. That's the big gorilla on this project.

Doug Hertz: As long as it doesn't prevent us from dealing with those issues as the project matures, which is my concern.

Nanette Bourne: In order to maintain the public hearing on the 25th, a revised document proof copy needs to be provided and enough copies for all of you to show all the changes, and Lead Agency comments need to go out by next week.

Anthony Oliveri: During that period we will do a more comprehensive review of the site. We've done some preliminaries on that so far, but at this point, we'll wait till it gets a little further to give some detailed type engineering review. You will be seeing that during that public review period. The applicant will get that, and as this evolves, we will incorporate those comments in.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: I know it's in the DEIS but I would like to repeat the one point, and that is we are going to really be looking for a lot of convincing evidence that the Village of Mount Kisco can adequately supply the necessary water for this project.

Patrick Hewes: Above and beyond what we've shown in the PDEIS?

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: No. It's in there now, but I'm just saying it's one of the important components that will be discussed.

Whitney Singleton: We are also going to have to make arrangements to have the DEIS available on the Village website.

Patrick Hewes: Absolutely. We are prepared to work with you on that.

Whitney Singleton: And also be aware of the public notice requirements for all of your permits.

Patrick Hewes: Yes.

Motion to Accept the Draft Environmental Impact Statement as Complete and as Conforming to the Scoping Document for Westchester Residence and Club, PB2006-19:

Motion: Stanley Bernstein

Second: Doug Hertz

Aye: Sol Gibbons

Aye: Ralph Vigliotti

Aye: Stanley Bernstein

Aye: Doug Hertz

Aye: Vice Chairman Sturniolo

Motion to Declare a Public Hearing on March 25, 2008 for the Public to Comment Upon the DEIS as Amended and Corrected and to Assess Steep Slopes and Wetlands or Environmental Disturbances for Westchester Residence and Club, PB2006-19:

Motion: Stanley Bernstein

Second: Doug Hertz

Aye: Sol Gibbons

Aye: Ralph Vigliotti

Aye: Stanley Bernstein

Aye: Doug Hertz

Aye: Vice Chairman Sturniolo

Formal Application:

333 North Bedford Road

PB2008-03

Present: Michael L. Gallin, Principal, Gallin Design Studio

Jim Diamond, Diamond Properties

John Collins, John Collins Engineering

Recused: Doug Hertz

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: We have in front of us an amended site plan application, the site plan itself, the full EAF, and two operational letters regarding The Wine Enthusiast and Safe Haven, which are dovetailed into the reason for the site plan modification. Maybe we could start with why the site plan is being amended and go from there.

Michael Gallin: When we submitted this application initially for the multi-tenant use of the warehouse with accessory office on the site, we made some presumptions on the size of the office to support the warehouse use. Subsequently, Jim and Diamond Properties have been aggressively working to lease the property to tenants that will have an appropriate impact as promised, honestly, throughout the entire review process to date, and that effort has resulted in a tenant mix that has different percentages of office versus warehouse than initially anticipated. In addition, that tenant mix has resulted in a self-storage use being occupied on the property that is going to take a significant portion of the space. So the immediate application is to cover the reality of the operations of the tenants that Diamond Properties has been able to solicit and attract to Mount Kisco. Most specifically, the tenants that are pushing us over the threshold and are triggering us to be here is “Wine Enthusiast Magazine”. Wine Enthusiast is a company that is currently based out of Elmsford. They have their facility split between several different warehouses that are separate from their office space, and they are attached to this facility because they are able to consolidate all of their distributions functions in a single facility as opposed to being in a series of different facilities. They are a high end company. Their primary ambition is to sell wine related products over the internet. Everything from wine coolers to corkscrews to wine racks to decanters, etc. They actually will do modular wine rack systems to fit out an entire wine cellar, but they also sell smaller things. In addition to the distribution and warehousing for primary internet sales business, the office functions to support that. They publish a magazine called “Wine Enthusiast Magazine” which promotes wine nationally to wine aficionados. There is a small component in the business called Wine Express which is also an internet based business that sells wine by the case via shipping. Now that use, which is 131,000 feet, has about 30,000 feet of accessory office associated to it. The other use, in particular, that's triggering us to come back here is the self-storage use. The self-storage use is in this area. The initial build out of the self-storage is in this location here, and it's proposed on two levels. They're going to be climate controlled self-storage units that are primarily marketed to residential home owners coming in, and there are very similar storage functions in the county already. The zoning code doesn't talk specifically about self-storage units, and in speaking to the consultants and considering how that use fits into the zoning code, it is our belief that it's distinct. It certainly fits into the guidelines of storage warehousing use, but it's also different than a conventional warehousing and distribution center where you have employees packing up boxes and shipping things out, trucks coming in and out. It's basically dead storage. That's the gist of why we're here today. We've provided an analysis of both parking and an analysis of the traffic implications of increasing the percentage of office use and the associated off set, in our opinion, that is inherent in the reduction in intensity of the self-storage use. One of the things that we're really positive about, about the continued evolution of the site; is that both of these uses will have the result of diminishing the overall truck impact on the Village. Public Storage has very few tractor trailers, if any. Potentially a moving company would come in, but the reality is if you're renting a 10 x 10 or 10 x 20 foot storage cubicle, you don't need to move it into a tractor-trailer. Usually smaller trucks are dealing with that. And, once it's in there, it's in there for a year or years.

Jim Diamond: A typical customer is a three year customer, on average. There is approximately between 2.5 and 3.5 percent customer turn over, so it's approximately three years that the customer is in the facility.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: Focusing on the self-storage, I had a conversation this afternoon with the building inspector and he wanted a couple of questions answered. Hopefully you could do it tonight and then follow it up on paper with him. Would you restrict what could be stored in there to a customer such as any kind of hazardous material?

Michael Gallin: Yes.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: Would you and/or your insurance company ban it?

Michael Gallin: Absolutely. We have no intention of turning this into an "H" use. If we did we'd have to deal with fire separations.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: And do you have logistical hours, days of operation?

Michael Gallin: We've submitted as part of the application, a letter describing the self-storage, and it does discuss the hours of operation, which are 8 AM to 5 PM Monday through Friday, 8 AM to 6 PM on Saturday and 11 AM to 4 PM on Sunday. If somebody needs to get into the facility off hours, it would be done on an appointment basis.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: When somebody comes in with a van what is the flow of traffic into the self-storage. Where do they stop, unload and how do they get it into their area?

Michael Gallin: The self-storage unit is here, there is a vehicular loading zone immediately in front. There are a series of two eight foot wide bi-folding doors that you can drive your car right up to. There are area bollards to keep you from driving into the building. You unload your stuff, you come in, there are two elevators right there, and a ramp that brings you to the two levels of the storage facility. You come in, you unload your stuff and you leave. We have room here for three trucks, vans or cars next to each other for the active loading. If somebody is going to be here for a longer period of time, I can't really imagine why they would be, but if they are they will obviously pull out into the parking spaces out here.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: So the three spaces would be the holding area while the stuff is being taken out?

Michael Gallin: Yes. We've created a screen here and a screen here. As we suggested in the past, our goal is to continue to beautify this end of the site and to soften it up and make it feel less industrial as we get more and more real tenants. So as part and parcel of that ambition, we're trying, wherever possible, to add greenery to soften up the façade.

Stanley Bernstein: In other words, they are not containers? They're permanent installation and it's not being moved on a tractor trailer or any other device?

Michael Gallin: No. They're rooms basically and everything's hand loaded or on dollies.

Stanley Bernstein: How many units?

Jim Diamond: I don't recall exactly. I think it may have been like 450 units, which range in size from a smaller spot 5 x 5 up to a 10 x 20, which is probably the largest unit.

Michael Gallin: Just as a side note, there have been discussions with the town as part of the original approval, to utilize some storage space on site, and as part of that agreement there was an intention that some of these units could be dedicated to that need if required.

Ralph Vigliotti: It sounds like a lot of units. The entrances join one another - this 450 unit self storage is next door to the race track, correct?

Jim Diamond: Yes, they are adjacent to each other.

Ralph Vigliotti: Why would you have a self-storage in the middle of all of this as opposed to the end? Where you have Wine Enthusiast, which is at the end, which would provide lots of movement of vehicles without it being an eyesore, for people that are going into the raceway, you have these trucks backing up and activity back and forth. 450 units sound like a lot of units. I don't know what the transient rate is, you said two or three percent a month. But it's like smack in the middle as opposed to kind of off on its own, out of the way and not part of this whole plan. Why there?

Jim Diamond: I think because self-storage gets very low utilization. There is typically one employee who is on staff who is working in the office which is right in the front, so there is very low employee count, so there are generally very few customers in the course of the day. Could be 10 to 15 customers maximum throughout the entire day; so it's relatively low utilization of a pretty large space. Lower than any other type of potential use.

Ralph Vigliotti: Have you done self-storage storage before?

Jim Diamond: We have. We actually own another facility in Elmsford, which is larger than this facility. I think it's somewhere around the range of 1,000 units.

Ralph Vigliotti: Jumping to the Wine Enthusiast. I can't go in there and purchase a case of wine. Is that correct or not?

Jim Diamond: That's correct. You cannot. You could order it on line and pick it up.

Ralph Vigliotti: So it's totally, unequivocally wholesale.

Jim Diamond: No, it's retail, but through the internet.

Ralph Vigliotti: I can't park my car there, walk in and purchase six cork screws?

Michael Gallin: There are two separate things. Most of this space is for the corkscrews and the wine coolers, etc. As part of the main office, on the inside this little square here is sort of a mock up showroom of their products, and this area here is where people answer the phone to take orders. They are immediately adjacent to the showroom and continually go back and forth to get products as part of the sales process.

Vice Chairman Sturniolo: When you say get products, they have a customer on the phone?

Michael Gallin: Yes. In addition, they have The Wine Enthusiast magazine and they produce mail-order catalogues. When they bring people in that may be advertising in this magazine or something, they use the showroom to showcase their products. The third thing is that you can actually buy something if you're there, but you would have to come into the office and they can accommodate somebody if they wanted to make a purchase. But it is in no way advertised on the outside of the building. There is no storefront into the showroom and in reality we have no glass into the showroom at all. So you can buy a corkscrew.

Ralph Vigliotti: I can buy a corkscrew but can't buy a bottle of wine? Can I buy a case of wine?

Michael Gallin: The second piece of this is Wine Express, which is this long skinny piece here, and that, because of New York State law has to be separated from the rest of the warehouse. As I understand it, the way New York State law works is they have to allow people who run this business to sell through the internet, they have to allow people to come in and pick up their wine. They can't do it any other way.

Lester Steinman: It's just not what the letter from The Wine Enthusiast says, there is a paragraph here that says that it's all shipped out from the warehouse to the user, and Wine Express does not operate as a retail walk in shop.

Michael Gallin: So they're not getting a liquor license.

Jim Diamond: That's correct. They do need to have a location somewhere, but they're planning on having it elsewhere.

Michael Gallin: They have to have a retail establishment. Originally I thought they were doing it here, I guess they're doing it somewhere else. So the answer to that is no, you cannot.

Ralph Vigliotti: You cannot what?

Michael Gallin: You cannot come in and buy a case of wine; you can come in and buy a corkscrew.

Ralph Vigliotti: So I'm not ordering through the internet and then going there to pick up six bottles or a case of wine.

Michael Gallin: Can't do that.

Ralph Vigliotti: Can't do that. But I can pick up a couple of corkscrews, coolers, ice buckets? Is it 98% wholesale, 2% you're here, you want to purchase?

Michael Gallin: 99% internet sales retail. I don't want to say wholesale, and then it's like Amazon.com.

Ralph Vigliotti: Okay, retail, shipped out, UPS, FedEx.

Michael Gallin: That's what they do.

Stanley Bernstein: Do they ship from this location?

Michael Gallin: They do, and that's the second reason why we think it's better here than on the south side because we have loading docks here, so the UPS truck would be here, and we think that is going to visually be more of an impact than putting it right here.

Stanley Bernstein: What about their catalogues? How do they get mailed to their subscribers?

Jim Diamond: I'm not sure. I don't believe from this site. I would imagine they are directly from the printer.

Michael Gallin: They are not printing them here. I can't imagine them mailing them here and then mailing them back out.

Ralph Vigliotti: I'm trying to make sure that we're not making a mistake, saying, "Oops, we've made a mistake. They are going to order through the internet, but golly gee, New York State is not allowing us to ship it; they have to come get it." Then you're going to come back to us. I just want to make clear, and I hope our representatives here are making it clear that there isn't an "Oops" kind of situation six months down the road, and then you're back.

Michael Gallin: They're doing it in Elmsford now and there is no store front, just shipping out of a warehouse. I presume they're doing it legally.