Planning Board - Regular Meeting

I'd like to bring this meeting of the Bedford Planning Board to order. Uh the first item on our agenda is a public hearing to consider an application for a special use permit for an accessory structure greater than 20 ft in height and 2,500 ft in size pursuant to town code article 3 of chapter 12527D3 for a special permit amendment for that for the boarding of more than 10 horses pursuant to town code article 3 section 12578 and for a special permit for landfilling activity in connection with the creation of an outdoor riding ring pursuant to town code section 125-67. Uh the property is located at 145 Broadbook Road in Bedford Hills and the owner applicant is Taylor Marie Harris Trust 2012. Is there someone to speak for the applicant? Good evening. James Splain of Hogan Ross and Lori. Uh here for the applicant. Here with me tonight is Dave Zublin who is the contractor on the project. He's the builder and also is responsible for um the creation of the beautiful plans that you've received uh for the buildings. Matthew Bod uh who is one of the owner occupants of the property. Uh, and I believe Dave Sessions might be also attending virtually. I'm not sure if he appeared yet, but he is our engineer on the project. So, this is an existing farm operation. It's been in operation for um as a commercial boarding stable or uh the boarding of horses for approximately 70 years. Uh I'm not sure if all the members of this board have been present previously when this farm that was previously known as Tanrakin Farm has been in front of the board uh over the years um for various site improvements. What the owners are

proposing at this time, they are new owners to the property and they are in the equestrian world, uh is to essentially take uh down a number of buildings that um have been built over the years uh and don't really function well as one farm operation and put one large stable. They're going to maintain a barn that's already there that's really the central center point when you come onto the farm. It's a four stall barn. They're just revamping it uh to fix some uh you know, it's it's an older building, so uh update it and and make it um a sound building, but also uh enhance the beauty of that when you're entering onto the farm. They also want to add a gate to the property uh so that the residential operations in the front are kind of uh separated from the farm operation in the back and also for the safety of the horses. So the horses aren't coming towards uh Broadbrook Farm, Broadbrook Road in the front of the property and it's uh will create a beautiful focal point coming from the residential tennis courts in the front of the property towards the farm operation in the back. Um this is a farm operation that's within the uh Westchester County a district. Uh arguably, you know, we don't necessarily need all the approvals that we are in front of you for. However, the applicants do want to work with the town. They are new to the area. They are residing on site. They will be in Florida during the winter months where they have their farm operation, but during the summer and during the season, they will be up in the Bedford area residing there. As I said, uh Matthew's here tonight um with his family. Uh and so they want to be good neighbors within the town of Bedford and work with the town in order to really revamp this farm uh for a beautiful farm operation. It is a 17 acre piece. uh for a number of years now it's been operating with a special permit for the keeping of 19 horses. There were stalls on the property that would have accounted for

around 24 uh but the approval was for 19 and at this point they are proposing 20 stalls in the new barn edition and the four stalls in the building that will be remaining. So a total of 24 stalls. There is a building with two grooms quarters that will be remaining on site and they are not planning on making any changes to those grooms quarters. Um, so I'm going to let Matt just give a little bit of background on his family and what their their uh use of the farm will be and then Dave can talk a little bit about the project. Okay. Thank you.

Uh, good evening. I'm Matthew Body. I'm uh very pleased to meet you all. Um, for the past uh 30 years, I've competed at the highest level of equestrian sport in the discipline of show jumping. Uh for the past 15 years I've been in the United States uh competing. I've worked for two of the largest stables in the United States. Uh both training and operating the barn. Um we've gone around the world competing at from novice horses to world championship level. I've been a Nations Cup member twice for my country. Um my wife uh is a uh another equestrian. She's competed at the highest level in the United States, too. We've been together. We've lived in the Westchester area for the past five years, and we've decided over time that we were going to settle in Bedford. We like the area. Uh we like to raise our son here with your great school system. And um our operation uh that we use uh we have our own uh owners and sponsors. We have our own horses. Uh we compete uh around the country around Europe uh and winter in Florida where the world's best go to compete at Wellington. Um our base of operations here is going to be um using our own horses and you know having some private client that wants to keep their horses with us and train with us you know for competitions. Um, we're going to live at the property. Um, and you know, like I said, raise my family there, take care of operations.

Is there anyone else who's going to speak for your application? Okay. I It It is your turn then. Good evening. I'm I'm Dave S. I'm a farm builder. um been doing it in um in Westchester, Greenwich, Platinum and Duchess since since 1982. I built a lot of the barns at uh Sunnyfield. I've been in in front of this board with um Mr. Jerry Nelson Senior, God rest his soul, many times. And that was always that was always fun. Um we tried

I build non-residential agricultural use farm buildings. I keep animals safe. I'm a professional keeping your horses safe. I have uh we've designed this barn with uh with a key barn that's staying on the property in mind, attaching it to the indoor exercise barn to keep a compacted space. We have a courtyard in the middle where a lot of our our uh the training the training uh uh there's a horse treadmill in the middle. The fio will access the groom stalls from the middle of the courtyard. It is a very comfortable professional stable. A lot of air flow. Every horse has outside air. Every horse has a neck yoke. He can stick his head outside in the sun or in the shade as the case may be. It's faced to the prevailing wind for the air. Um major pupils are not shown. There are going to be pupils on it, but they're not they're not shown. It's not part of a that's not a big appendage.

Full hail offs throughout. They should be able to to uh store all their bedding and all their all their full years of hay easily in the barn. Is that That's what I got. That's perfectly fine.

Thank you. Um, this is a public hearing, so I'd like at this point to open it to the the public to see if there are any questions or comments on this application. Is there anyone in the audience here that would like to comment or ask a question? Is there anybody on the Zoom that would Looks like we're the only ones on the Zoom. Okay, that being said, is there are there any questions or comments from members of the board? Okay, I understand you you need you do need some variances.

You tell us.

So, we need three variances. Um the first is for uh the for the maximum building coverage. Uh currently, what's permitted is 3%. there was a variance for up to 4% and what's proposed is 5.27%. Uh another for the accessory building height 20t is permitted 26.8T is proposed and the last is that um the code provides that a barn can have 1/2 bathroom. We are proposing two 1/2 bathrooms. Uh so there was there was some question by the building department whether or not we needed a variance but on on they suggested we uh obtain one just out of an abundance of caution. We don't have any issue doing that. So um given the size of the barn we think that is appropriate uh to have two 1/2 baths. So we have submitted for those variances. We would be in front of that board um in early June, the first week of June. And we would hope to be back in front of you that second meeting, the second week in in June uh hopefully to finish out our approvals on this process if the board is so inclined to vote at that point in time.

Kim, please. The haste stored in the barn with the horses, is there any fire suppression um proposed? No. Fire suppression pardon fire suppression is does not come into code. No, I'm not talking about code. I was just a question. It was not a requirement. It was because of there's no city water and there's no there's no fire hydrants or anything like that where you have enough volume of water to Yes, it it is standard practice to have the hay stored above uh and and it can so it can drop into the stalls,

right? Uh so that is standard practice in the equestrian facilities. Uh and of course there'll be adequate um fire alarm systems because um the value of these horses is such that uh the owner is not taking any chances with them. That is for certain.

I I of course meant life not financial. I I was wondering about one of the variances you had the the height on the accessory building. Is that a variance or is that uh yes? No, that's Oh, okay. So, we had submitted for three variances, but then it sounds like we only need two and we'll we'll be seeking that waiver from you. Yeah, it's it's not a waiver. It's a special permit technically. Okay. So, you need more special permits than you thought you did and fewer variances, which is probably a good thing. Yes. Yes, it is.

Um, I don't have any questions. Um, I don't know if if members of the board who haven't seen the property want to go see it. Um, I've been on the I've been there before. It's set back from the road along 684. From a visual impairment perspective, I think it's pretty sick and then back on. Yeah. No, it's And frankly, what you see is attractive. Yeah.

And that's part of the reason I'm sorry with the plans over there, it's hard to point and speak, but thank you. So, the gate I mentioned would be right here. And as you can see when you come into the property, it really is the residential aspect is all up front. So the gate would lead into the back where the farm operation is. Uh and that for safety of the horses. Uh but also it really lends to it being like a beautiful flow into the back property. And this initial barn right here is currently existing and it is beautiful. Um if you've been on the property, you've seen it. Uh it really is looks like a gateway in because it's open there and you could walk through the center of it. So they're just revamping that building and removing a back portion that really was kind of hodge podge put together and making it one clean operation that'll also have adequate access around it which was one of the issues with the prior constructions on the property. Uh, so it is going to be it's beautiful as is, but it's going to be even better and more efficient the way that they're proposing it.

If I may about the gates, the reason we set the there's two sets of gates. There's an internal farm gate and there's a gate at the main at the main entrance for the driveway. We set it back about 100 ft I think it is. So we if we have a tractor trailer coming in with horses or hay or shavings, they are not blocking the street. Good point. They can get off the street 100%. And that's Mhm. why I put it there. There's another gate further in. So, so horses can't get out into the yard if so effective.

Okay. Makes a lot of sense. Uh I don't think there's anything else we can do for you tonight. uh until you've visited the the zoning board, there is no speaker to do because this is a a type two because it's in the agricultural district. Let's close the public hearing. So, I think that was a motion to close the public hearing. Second. I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing. I don't think there's a point in adjouring it rather than closing it with no interest shown. Okay. So, any further discussion? All in favor? I

I All oppose. The public hearing is closed. Um, and we will look forward to seeing you again when you finish with the zoning board of appeals. Thank you very much. Thank you.

Okay. The next item on the agenda is a continuation of a public hearing to consider an amendment to a previously granted special use permit for an accessory structure exceeding 20 ft in height and 2500 square ft in size. uh to add a ventilated Koopa pursuant to town code section 125-27D3. The property is at 14200 Greenwich Road in Bedford. It's owned by ASG Northwest Properties LLC. Uh and this is uh for an amendment to that um special permit that we've already given. Is there someone here to speak to the application?

Yes. Good evening, Madam Chair. I'm Jerry Barrett. Can you hear me? Yes, we can hear you. Okay, good. Um, okay. Just trying to see this last note from the the panelist. Join as the panelist. Okay, let me see. Hello. Yes. Okay. Can you hear me, Madam Chair? Okay. I'm sorry. I'm having a little trouble with the uh technology.

Do you want to tell us what the

Yes. Yes. If I may. Uh I so last month we we discussed the Koopalof and the ventilator and why it was necessary and during that discussion um the neighbor to the north Mr. Kildoff he had um indicated that he was wondering why it was necessary to have lights on in the evening that he could see from his house. Um I had followed up with the property manager uh Jim Best and discussed this with him. Uh Jim then went and um had the electricians take the lighting that had been set up originally uh to go on on photo cells. In other words, it gets at dusk and the light turns on or a truck pulls up and the light goes on. And Jim has instructed the electrician to make everything switched. So in other words, you have to get out of the car now and go inside and turn the switch on to turn it on. That would prevent the lights from going on. In the evening, um he invited Mr. Kildoff to the site. uh they had a meeting and I think uh the issue has been resolved.

Yeah. What what the correspondence we have indicates the same thing although all of that correspondence is from your side. We don't have anything from the neighbor either way. That is correct.

And I and I did copy Mr. Kildov today on my email to the board um explaining this and and I'm not sure if he had a chance to see it yet. This is a public hearing. So, is there anyone in the audience who's here to speak to this application about this application? Is there anyone uh on the Zoom who would like to speak to this application? Now, I gather we're also amending it to um add a weather vein to it that was on the the drawings from the last one, but I don't think it was part of what we approved last time.

Yeah, whatever was on the drawings by um architect McDonald um is was proposed that has been it's in, you know, the building department has it. Whatever was on there. I'm not familiar. Uh, Madam Chair, with the with the weatherbait. Yeah, I'm just I'm just clarifying that that's actually what the amendment is about, not the Koopa. Well, the Koopa was was the original application, wasn't it? Yeah. Yeah. So, the weather.

Okay. If we were to uh grant this, given the issue with the lighting um and the fact that that is connected to to this change, um I would suggest that we we make a condition of the approval that the lighting system described at the meeting is the only lighting system that is approved for this building. that no other lighting will be added to it without returning to this ward. Does that make sense to people?

It is. It is. It I don't think it was a flood light. if it was the good. Okay. Yeah. Yeah. I can I can bring up a photo of No, no, we we're good. Okay. You good? Okay.

Okay. We we will throw in the the the notion that it is down lighting, but what I saw on the drawings was was a a typical shaded light that would that would meet our code. There I'll ask one more time about comments from members of the audience. Could I have a motion to close the public hearing? So moved. Is there a second? Second. Any further discussion? All in favor?

I I All opposed. Um the public hearing is closed. Again, this is an amendment to a special use permit. So So it's a type two action under secret. There's nothing no seeking for us to do on this. Um, do I have a motion to approve the the amendment with the condition uh about lighting? So moved. Is there a second? Second. Is there any further discussion? No. All in favor? I.

All opposed. You have the uh amendment to the special permit. Thank you very much. Good night. Good night. The next item on our agenda is a continuing application uh to consider an application for a special use permit for the conversion of a garage to a cottage pursuant to town code 125-79.1. Uh the property is located 333 Bedford Center Road in Bedford Hills and the owner applicant is Guy Wiser Pratt. Is there someone here to speak to the applicant?

Yes. I'm Darren Mercer. I'm the architect for the uh the owner of the property. Uh last week um I met with you back in in the March meeting and and was referred to the zoning board which I went last week and got the approval uh of the special or for the variance rather. Yeah. And what were the variances again? Remind us. Uh this is for an ADU um above an existing structure that was renovated. Um above would be a a a single unit dwelling unit for the owner's property manager. Right. But what what did you get a var what what part of it required a variance?

Uh because I was going for a special use permit and then so we had to go to the zoning board to get their approval first and then come back here. No, that's correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the structure wasn't in place prior to 1989. Yes. Yes. And therefore didn't meet the temporal aspects of the code. Okay. That that that was the variance you needed. Yes. Yeah. This the special permit is actually our special permit, right? That's why you're back here before us now. Right. So So the only variance it needed was the the timing and the the chronology. Correct.

Any questions from members of the board? What is the size of the apartment? Um, it's less than the uh maximum size of the department is seven up.

Okay, that definitely fits the application. Does anybody have any issues? See any issues with this? It seems straightforward to me. No concerns. Any conditions that we would consider? Could I have a motion for a uh a motion to to approve the special permit for a period of five years? We're still doing the the five year for a period of five years or as long as the property is

Do we need a motion that it's type two? I don't think we need a motion. I I think put it on the record that it is a type two action. So I move to approve um with standard conditions for a cottage um and ZBA. They have Did you get the ZBA approval? Yeah. So any any conditions that go with the ZBA varants would be included in in your motion as well I presume. And any standard special yeah conditions. So yeah. Do I have a second? Second.

We have a motion and a second. Is there any further discussion? All in favor? I. All opposed. You have it. Good luck. I should also have mentioned that this fits in with the desire of our town plan to to use ADUs as one approach to the housing issues. So, thank you.

Thank you very much. Uh, next item on our agenda is uh, a new application to consider a steep slopes application to remedy a violation related to trees that have been cut and removed on a regulated steep slopes area pursuant to town code section 102. Uh, the address is at 44 Crescent Terrace Bedford Hills and the owner applicant is Juny Nunes. This is someone here here to speak for the applicant. Good evening. Good evening.

This is Tracy Shalo speaking. I am a landscape architect based in Danbury, Connecticut. And tonight I'm representing Mrs. Nunees at 44 Crescent Terrace. Thank you.

Thank you. Um, if I may share my Okay. Is everyone able to view this? Uh Nelly Nally,

thank you for confirming that. Um yes, uh based upon um my site visit, I observed approximately 10 trees that had been removed. Um this was basically, you know, um me counting fresh stumps um to determine what may have been living um given that I was brought um to remedy this um after the fact. Uh my understanding is that the trees were um being compromised by vines and also that um there are trees growing within the vicinity of their overhead wires. In fact, a few years ago, they had a tree snap off and they are without power for a week, unfortunately. Um and also on the eastern side of the property, there are some trees overhanging the neighboring house, I was told. Um so no soil disturbance was observed. Currently there are piles of brush and fallen logs in place. Um this is of course you know within the steep slope area ranging from 15 to 25 and in excess of 25% in some areas. Um and sorry in excess of yeah 25%. Um, so the intention is any tree trunks that are still standing, they would be cut flush, but the stumps are to remain in place. They're not to be removed. They're not to be ground down. And this is because we don't want to cause soil disturbance. And to um restore the area and to increase um habitat value, 10 new native trees are proposed. A mix of canopy and understory trees. for examples um red maple, shad, eastern red cedar. So we also have some evergreen in here, white oak and northern red oak. So um the circles,

this symbol indicates understory trees and the simpler larger circles are the canopy trees and then the evergreens are indicated with this symbol here. Um, in the interest of helping to stabilize the hillside against erosion, especially once once the brush piles and and excess logs are removed, we'd actually like to sort of work with nature and utilize some of the logs and set them lengthwise across the slope to slow any water that might be coming down. And just over time, they're going to decompose and sort of um become one with the land and to stabilize against erosion. Prior to work beginning, silt fence would be installed at the toe of the slope. Any existing trees um would be protected. Any native vegetation would be worked around and not disturbed during the replanting. Um the planting would be done by hand. The minimum size of the deciduous canopy trees is 2 to 2 and 1/2 in caliber. Understory trees and evergreens are 8 to 10 feet upon planting. so they have, you know, some robustness to them when they go in and that should um help them compete with anything that might come up around them because there were some invasives growing throughout the area. Uh I did receive comments from the town consulting engineer, Mr. James Han. Uh the comments were dated April 9th, 2026. And I did prepare a response to those comments and revise the plan accordingly. The revisions are indicated with the clouds and the number one symbol here. It was asked that some notes be added.

Once this site is stable, the silt fence would be removed. But I don't expect that much erosion would occur given that we're just digging holes large enough to to get the trees in the ground a little bit wider than the root ball itself. The limit of disturbance is shown on here. And um I think that covers the the scope of the restoration work. So, I'd be happy to answer any questions the board might have. Thank you.

Um, you have no problem with the the following notes should be shown on the plans. The town engineer may require additional erosion control measures if deemed appropriate to mitigate unforeseen situation and erosion of disturbed soils. We're in agreement with that.

Yeah. Uh, one of the things that Mr. Han mentions at the outset is that the the planning board should determine if the proposed plantings are satis satisfactory mitigation. And I thought we should talk about that. I'm not sure that a one-on-one replacement for mature trees is is appropriate. I don't know what the trees were like beforehand, so it's hard to say. They're picking nice trees. I mean, I would um I was thinking 15 in my opinion.

No, no, no, no, no. I'm not saying that that's not a good thing. I'm just saying that the selection of trees is a good selection of trees. the size is appropriate to be substantial enough but get them actually to live. Um is there a commitment for any plantings these or any additional ones to be maintained for the first two years and replaced if there's a problem and maintained for two years by the time it's replaced? I think that's certainly a condition we should add to it. Yeah, cuz they're native trees, but they need to be watered, you know, till they're um grown in and acclimated.

Um then they should be absolutely fine. Okay. And they need to keep the invasives off of them if that's actually that's a a point. Are there still invasives in the in the area? Yes, there are invasive vegetation present. Um, then maybe rather than talking about doing more trees, we should talk about clearing the invasive since that's what damaged the other trees in the first place.

What are the major invasive species that are causing problems here? Um, I believe uh th this is from the home homeowner because I was actually there just after the snow had melted, so I wasn't able to observe much. Things hadn't leafed out, but it's my understanding that it was bittersweet and poison ivy. Um, I would have to

I I would have to speculate about what else may be there based on what I usually see at sites like this. So, I probably shouldn't guess, but I believe bittersweet and poison ivy. Um, let me see if I have any other notes. Poison ivy is native. Not fun, but native. And I don't think it actually trees and and birds like it, but homeowners often don't. Yeah. But I think bittersweet is a problem. Yeah. And and specifically they've said that the the vines were what were killing the trees. So planting young trees in a place that's infected with invasives that kill trees without How many acres is this?

How many are they talking? Nine. Nine. Nine T is the total property I believe.9 acres. Kristen, um if I may, I I believe um the homeowner homeowner let me know that um there was oriental bittersweet, English ivy, and wild grape. I mean, what I'm not sure of is whether clearing the what what's the best way to take care of invasives on a steep slope? Because clearing

this is arguable. I I can't give you a this um some people cut it and paint it so that there's no erosion. Some people pull it out. Um it depends how big it is. Pulling pulling out small bittersweet is not going to cause erosion. falling out major bittersweet is um so it's I it's sort of hard to give you a prescription

any suggestions for I'll leave that in your court I mean I think how does everybody think the sensible thing might be to remove invasives in the areas where the trees are being planted and make sure they don't recur there and and work on over time removing the worst invasives and vines from that area of the property. Okay. I I don't think it's realistic to say clear for a homeowner to clear the entire from an acre of property. I just

Yeah. No, I never even intended. Yeah, I just I mean it would be great, but I don't think you know Well, I don't even know if it would be great because of the steep slopes, right? It again, it depends with if you have someone that knows what they're doing doing it. They figure out which to cut and poison and which to pull and that's me who doesn't like to poison anything. Um so so so we've got the other thing is to burn the idea of um that the trees should be maintained for two years two years two years

and if one needs to be replaced then it needs to be maintained for two years after it's replaced. Yeah. Um is everybody satisfied that the one-on-one replacement is sufficient? Yeah. Yeah, tight spot. Is it? I Okay. Um, so I think if particularly if we're going to stay with the one-on-one, I I'd like us to at least also require the clearing of of invasives in the immediate vicinity of the newly planted trees and a a commitment to keep that area clear of

invasives. And then any the other conditions of of approval would be um uh Jim Han's comments. Um they sort of has left the performance bond up to us as well. Um, do we think a performance bond is necessary in in this?

Jessica, what's usual in customary here? How does the language read you? He said if required by the planning board, a performance bond in the amount of 6,000 should be established with the project. I He usually doesn't. It's almost always it's required by the planning board.

Yeah, it's it's often a requirement of the town engineer as well. But I'm particularly since I think I I do feel they're they're not exactly being tortured with the 10 replacement trees of the sizes they're talking about. That's a very from their point of view, it's a very reasonable request on the part of the town. I don't know what the prices are. I mean, it doubles the price of what they're doing at the moment. I don't know how much. Do you know like I know we put more trees and that on our little piece of property and we did not break the bank doing it.

No, that's what I'm saying. So, we're asking them for more cash in the performance bond than it takes to do the probably do this. And is is that what we want to do? I think that's usually the idea of the performance bond is it should cover cover any incentive and it's roughly what I what I think it would cost to do it. Okay. So, so let's do the take care of secret first and then come back to the question. That's right. We do have to do do we have the part one? Okay.

First, first should I have a a motion that this is a type an unlisted action under seeker? Second. All in favor? I I all opposed. Um why don't you go through the part one?

Oh, here we go. You want me to read it out or just page? Just just p pa by page by page. All right. First page. Don't see anything on it. I'm going to make a motion to you guys that a applicant adds a steep slopes permit is requested in the proposed action since that's what seeker is actually being based on too. I'm sorry, could you talk a little louder? In the brief description, the applicant needs to provide a description of the action which is a steep slopes permit requested. Okay.

Yeah. So, as written in the part one, it says removal of approximately 10 installation of erosion controls. We should add though that it is the replanting of one to one replacement. Yes. again.

Anything else on page one? No. No. Page two. Page two. I got a quick question just on process. They they have to obtain a steep slope permit and a tree permit. No. The steep slopes permit will trump any trade permit. Okay, that's what I thought. Well, you're talking he's talking about the retroactive tree permit and the they don't need a tree permit. They don't. Correct. The Steve's permit is what will grant them the activities with the trees. Okay. So, if they were to do something outside of this action, then yes, another

That's right. They wouldn't have needed a separate tree permit in the first place. They if they gotten the steep slopes permit. on their on their question too. They say that they need two different actions. One is a steep slope permit, one is a tree permit. So, we probably just want to remove that second one. Yeah, let's strike that. Yeah, that's actually a good catch. Thank you. Anything on page two? Yes. What? I don't think question 5B is answered. Yeah, at least my copy doesn't have it. Okay. I Why would it be not a not applicable? I think it should be yes. So do I.

And then just number seven by default the property is located over the principal aquifer. So it should be checked. Yes. Yes. Okay. Anything else? Nope. Page three.

Okay, let's do part two. You want me to read off part two? Yeah. All right. Will the proposed action create a material conflict with an adopted land use plan or zoning regulations? No. No. Will the proposed action result in a change in the use or intensity of use of land? No. No. Will the proposed action impair the character or quality of the existing community? No. Will the proposed action have an impact on the environmental characteristics that cause the establishment of a CA? No. No.

Will the proposed action result in an adverse change in the existing level of traffic or affect existing infrastructure for mass transit, biking or walking? No. Will the proposed action cause an increase in the use of energy and it fails to incorporate reasonably available energy conservation or renewable energy opportunities? No. No. Will the proposed action impact public or private water supplies? No. Public or private wastewater treatments? No. Will the proposed action impair the character or quality of historic uh important historic archaeological, architectural or aesthetic resources? No. No. Will the proposed action result in an adverse change to natural resources? No. No.

Will the proposed action result in increase in the potential for erosion, flooding, or drainage problems? No. Or small. Will the proposed action create a hazard to environmental resources or human health? No. All right. So for part three based on this we have determined um that the proposed action will not result in any significant adverse environmental impacts. Okay we have a proposal seconded. Is there any further discussion? All in favor?

I. All opposed they have it given an egg deck. Now back to did we actually have a motion on the floor? Not yet.

So we want to grant the steep slopes permit subject to the conditions in Jim Hans memo and to the condition that the trees be um that they be the they be the the trees that were discussed at the meeting that they be maintained for two years. uh and then if one of them dies within that two-year period, its replacement will be also maintained for two years. Uh the area around the newly planted trees will be cleared of invasives and kept clear of invasives. Anything else on the conditions? Okay.

Is that is that a motion? Second. Second. There we have a motion and a second. Is there any further discussion? All in favor of getting the steep slow privilege with with those conditions. I I All opposed. You have the steep slow. Thank you very much. Thank you. Have a nice evening. You too. Take care.

You too. The next item on our agenda is to consider a preliminary site plan application and Steve Slopes permit for the development of a new 10-unit including two AAF units apartment building with on-site parking and landscaping pursuant to co to town code 12586 and 102 respectively. Um, the address is 61-85 Adam Street in Bedford Hills. The owner applicant is 190 Realy Corporation. And I believe there is someone here to speak for the applicant. like to just put this in first if I could. I'll introduce myself. Good evening, Madam Chair, members of the planning board. Steven Helms with the Helms Group Architects representing Jonathan Nisman 190 Reality Corp. And I have Yan Johansson from KSCJ tonight with us. and uh he will explain the grading and the the uh steep slopes and all of that and I'll give a brief introduction on our project. Basically uh our clients owned the property since 2019, six, seven years ago. Uh it's been used as offices. It's consist of the building the drawing on the top left is the uh existing conditions. It's a elongated lot about 0.4 acres. Uh it's on the east side of Adam Street, the north end of the town. It's tied on a tired area right now. And uh the building on the left is a one-story concrete block building. And um the

building on the right is a twotory uh building that is an office. I don't know if you driven by the property, but like reference photographs of the site. Um, the NISMANS came to us to see what we can do to redevelop this property and uh we came up with a concept for a 10 unit apartment, twotory uh building, one building. Uh it's completely uh will be fire sprinkler and so forth. But the build the uh drawing on the top right is the proposed footprint uh that's shaded in blue. So it's again it's a twotory 10 units. The end units will be a duplex two bedrooms uh on the north and the south side and the middle section will consist of four onebedrooms on the first ground floor at ADA type units and four one bedrooms on the second floor. Uh we did reach out to DPW Mr. Kevin, when we presented this application back in back last summer, got his approval for the 10 for the 10 apartments. That was one of the first requirements. We also just recently uh had met with the Befford Hills Fire Department on site to review the project with respect to accessibility uh uh and where it is on the property and so forth. Uh Yan, you were at that site with us. Uh Jonathan, you were there and we did get a letter from the chief paterno. I believe it was sent into the planning board and I believe uh Jessica got one too that they have no problem with the application as it sits in design. Um uh we do need to seek some variances for this project. Uh we aware we have to go to the zoning board. Uh one variance is for the to allow the front covered porches which encroach into the 10-ft front yard setback almost six feet from the property line. So we need a variance for that. We need a rear yard variance and uh we slightly exceeding the

building coverage by less than a point. It's not much. Uh and our footprint is under the 4,000 for a single type of use. So with 3920, so we're under that number. And we also are seeking the variance for deficiency in off- streetet parking. We can accommodate 11 spaces on site and we need 16 based on the town of Befford code for apartments, one one bedroom and two bedroom. There is parking nearby. Uh we feel we can get the passes for the deficiency and uh I think it's be a nice asset to the town to uh bring in some housing. Uh great location, got a lot of restaurants nearby or there are going to be some more restaurants and I think it's a good use. the buildings are tired and we want to demo. We did look at this project where we'd retrofit the buildings, but the cost associated with doing two buildings, two sprinklers, it just got probably it got too costly. We may do modular design construction on this. Um I did a similar project on Railroad Avenue for the Antioch Baptist Church. Westchester Module was involved with that project. We reached out to them. We're talking to them. Maybe see most likely to go that route. like to turn my presentation over to Yan and he'll get into more of the engineering aspect.

Uh the the regulated steep slopes 25% greater shaded here in beige steep slopes behind the building. Yan, you need the mic.

Sorry. regulated uh steep slopes are shaded here in uh in beige 25% and greater. Um the the the site is a little bit challenging topographically uh in the existing condition. Um the existing parking area and driveway don't meet uh town standards in terms of um maximum grades of both the driveway and the parking area. So when we we apply the town requirements uh for 5% uh slope on on the the parking areas, 2% for the accessible parking spaces, we end up having to drop that parking lot down uh a few feet from what exists today. And in fact, um the proposed uh first floor elevation of the apartment building is about 3 ft lower in the proposed condition than the existing. Um and then we're to meet accessible requirements, we're providing a ramp up uh to the first floor. Uh so that requires us to to drop um drop the site down um approximately three feet for the building and uh install a retaining wall uh on the back side of the building. Um the again this is about 3 ft um lower than it is today. The maximum height of the retaining wall uh I think is 7 ft 8 ft. Retaining wall runs between 1 and 8 ft and we're disturbing approximately 3,50 square ft of steep slopes which is pretty much uh unavoidable. The nice thing is when this building drops down, it won't sit so high up off Adam Street and will sit uh closer to

the street, which will give a nice uh visual appeal. Uh we will likely um have some tree removal on the slope. We haven't done that evaluation yet. Uh but I did visit the site and because of the slope of of the property, a lot of those existing trees have exposed roots. They're not in great condition, but uh we will assess that. We'll try to save as many as we can for the uh construction of that retaining wall. Um we haven't done a cut fill analysis yet, but there will be a you know obviously a net a net cut uh removing um material from the property, but we will in future submissions include that um that cut fill map. But yeah, basically come in uh we have 10 parking spaces with a ramp up to um to the first floor. Uh water and sewer available at the street. There's a fire hydrant right in front of the building. Um so pretty pretty simple.

Just one more note to add there. Two of the units will be affordable affordable units 20%. So at 10 units we need two um and uh sidewalk The sidewalk ends here. It's been recently, I say, renovated. Um, there is not a current sidewalk in front of the building and there's really no destination beyond it. Um, so we weren't thinking of a sidewalk in front of the building. It wouldn't really lead anywhere.

Can you access the build? Can you access the sidewalk from the building or only to the parking lot? This is a This is a sidewalk here that you can then access uh the subject property, but you would probably want to extend it. I mean, the plan is eventually that you'd like things to be walkable. Yeah, it gets pretty commercial and industrial as you No, I understand. It would make sense to extend the sidewalk to at least the front door or doors or beyond except you'll have a retaining wall. I mean, acrosses the post office. We have a retaining wall in front of the building. It would be all right. you can't get up the only you it would not be accessible by any means in terms of handicap accessibility be too steep. That's why we have this this ramp.

So you're creating a situation where you're not going to be able to walk if you have an apartment in this building even if the town itself becomes more walkable in future. I'm saying that if if you if if the idea was to install a sidewalk in front of the building to get access to the first floor, this would not be how retaining wall and here it's about 2 to 3 ft. So is even though you're dropping grade 3 ft. Yes. As you drive by it's it's it's quite elevated up there. It it seems odd that the only access into the building is through the parking lot. That doesn't seem

agreed. Yeah, it would be to have like we had steps in the front. You could have steps to the front. Street trees would be sort of like what were Yeah. I mean, you know, of um a sidewalk and street trees or project I did on railroad had a handicap ramp, ADA ramp that's you have to go into the parking court then working really hard on on Bedford Hills right now. Yeah. And they just did a lovely tree planting project with, you know, Kevin Wyn and and uh Cornell and and um and Heather Langum worked with them.

I just I mean, you're show you're showing this lovely building with the doors in the front and Yeah, we have front doors all the doors facing in the front. Yeah. And uh if there were a sidewalk along along Adams, you would need you would need steps down to it. Where is the post office with respect to the front of this building? Right here. Well, the parking lot's here. The post office is down here. This is just south of that one-story boy scout building there. Um, could the could a walk be extended and just have steps? And you could have a walkway uh in the rightway. A sidewalk in the rightway. This is the property line. Mhm. And then there would be steps down to the sidewalk.

That would make more sense. Yeah. you probably end up with a Bedford Hills cuz as you yes it is you know that parking lot and so forth but then as you go down before there are residential properties back there for what it's worth show with some people walking good you'd probably end up extending a uh a retaining wall across the entire frontage um because it the slope goes right down to the street. So in order to get a sidewalk along the length of the frontage, you would end up having to extend the retaining wall, but not saying it's not possible.

Which has come up on the south side of the building with a without going into the parking to get steps up possibly. Yeah, that looks like it's right. Yeah. Right. But are you looking for a sidewalk along the entire frontage or just from the building down? No, the frontage so that everybody who has a front door actually has a use for the front door so that as more things start happening in town more of a walkable that we're headed in the direction of a walkable.

And to be clear, there is no back door. There are only the front doors. So it is it is very odd to have again you forced to go around the side and out this one little thing. It's going to feel too encroached. Especially because you have a cliff behind your

I'm not opposed to the porch steps. maybe two sets, but that's in the rightway. The sidewalk would would have to be in the rightway, but at least you'll have the entrances really compared to what they're Yeah. Yeah. It's I don't think we need steps in front of every entrance. No, just one communal set of steps down middle set of steps so people can walk off. Look into that. Yeah, we have the needs to be revised because it looks like the whole thing is level with a Yeah. Well, and here it's got the walkable sidewalk, but the there aren't doors there. Those are windows, right? I think. Well, it's hard to

look the steps up. Oh, okay. Maybe there this but no, it would be fine to have one central set of steps to a courtyard area. Think in terms of the doors should have a use. And yeah, it's a fairly simple thing. I mean there you understand there is a walkway across the front. So we'll extend a central set of steps down to another walkway to two parallel walkways, right? But one is a public sidewalk and the other is like a courtyard for the people that live there. And there might be some opportunity on the upper level to create some outdoor seating areas for the residents.

That's preferred. Sure. because there's no backyard. There's no really no that's it's quite a hill on the back. How far is it standing wall behind the building on the rear? It's probably about 10 ft plus or minus. How far away from the from the building to the edge of the wall? I'd say it's about 10 ft. I'll provide a dimension on the next drawing, but just scaling it 10 ft. But then there's no back door, correct? No back doors. No egress windows. There's a set of stairs down to a basement which is the utility room. Mechanical. Mechanicals.

Most of the building may be on a crawl space with the exception of one end of it will be uh possibly a basement for utility. Washer and dryers will be in each unit. Um but uh so you get better circulation in and out of the building. I'm not opposed to seeing if we can develop a set of steps facing the front to give access to the apartments without going into the parking lot. Yeah, we just continue. I think that would Jessica again if we're in the right town right away, that's the planning town board, correct? You would have to seek approval from them likely through a permanent. Okay.

Um but absolutely that can be part of the package plan that gets proposed to them specifically if it is in furtherance of creating a nice you know, walkable hamlet center. Um, and it's exactly ex right. So, planning board brings up a good point. Yan's office will prepare a landscape plan at the appropriate time as well to supplement our vacation and anything that that produces places where people can sit and and the rest is is favorable. Um

just uh kind of thinking about this uh on the fly. We would need a wall along this frontage for the sidewalk. Right now I have a wall up on this walkway. If we brought this walkway or this this um retaining wall into the right of way, we can combine that and give more of a terrace and planting area up top. But the wall would end up being in the right ofway. But without that, you'd have two two stacked walls. So I'm just

if the town wasn't opposed to bringing this wall into the right of way, I think we can make it look a bit better and provide some more landscaping functionality on top. It might be if it wouldn't be too difficult, you might want to supply the soundboard with the two alternatives. Sometimes if if you see that how much better one alternative looks than the other, if the one in the way looks a lot better than the other way of doing it, making that

otherwise you'd have like a tiered wall situation where you could bring one central wall. I think it would might have some benefits. Okay. Um, you're going to have a little bit of time to do this, I would say, because we have we have to do seeker and uh this is an unlisted action. Uh, and I believe the the planning board, if my colleagues agree, should declare ourselves lead agent or declare our intention to be lead agent. Mhm. For the review so we can start the 30-day period. So moved. Second. All in favor?

I. I. All opposed. So we're going to declare our intention to be lead lead agents. Um, we could add the town board to that. Great. And so we pro so it probably will be a little while before you get back back before us. Probably the July meeting rather than the June meeting. We can go to the zoning board or should we wait for the declared lead a de negative deck? Is that a negative type of debt?

Well, the the the lead agent the planning board is declaring their intent to be lead agency. So, there's a 30-day clock. If no one objects to it, then the planning board will serve as lead agency pursuant to seeker. But seeker must be completed in order to receive any actions from required approval agencies such as the zoning board. So, it may behoove you to actually wait um until that process is done. Otherwise, if you made an appearance before the zoning board, it can only be for discussion purposes. No action could be taken. Understood. Okay. So, we can discuss process after but but right now this is the action before the planning board and what needs to be done to move this application forward.

Uh they might all also think in terms of having a public hearing on on this. Uh I don't know that we can decide that now. Well, you would schedule that for the next time. who were lead agents. Yeah. Yeah. And also the applicant may have additional material to present. Yeah. And what's the reasoning it's got to go to MTA now? Why has that changed? That's been a recent request that MTA has asked for any um unlisted action or type one action to go to them for review. if there's a train station within your municipality,

huh? Within the municipality, specifically those that are within very close distance, but uh the tech memo, but the tech memo reads if it's within. So, so anything in the town of Bedford unlisted or type ones. What? Yeah, if you're doing coordinated review. Pardon me. If you're doing a coordinated review, so they just become an interested agency. Exactly. Does that mean they fix the bridge? It works like that. Did they respond in a timely manner or we don't know yet? No, that's the action that you're looking to do. So, they'll get a notification on this application. I don't think this is coming. So, we don't need them to

They don't have to approve anything. They just have to not object to our leader. Correct. Okay. So, I think we've done all we can do for tonight. We've declared ourselves lead agency and we have some comments and I think we're all giving you some that's in the works for this property that it's definitely going in the right direction. I would say and the permit the parking relief they could just buy the pass and the lot it immediately across the street. Correct. That's one avenue that the applicant can seek to explore. Yep. There's available parking spaces there are. Right. Good. Mhm. But that doesn't negate the fact that a variance need a variance, but it's good mitigation. Correct. Okay. So,

all right. I'll see you. Uh, can I say one one quick thing? Uh, sure. Just one that I appreciate the consideration and then I'm excited about bringing residential uh into the area. I'm happen to really like Bedford Hills quite a bit. Uh, I do a lot of work up here. Um, I'm always at the deli. There was a yoga studio we love to go to. There's a lot of great stuff that the town has to has to offer. So, I'm excited about this project and I think it'll be really beneficial for everybody to to work together to make this happen. It certainly does seem to fit in with our our new master plan

and it'll be nice to see that property used in a attractive and constructive way. I believe there's another proposal just south of this property. It's before your board. Speak up your own application. No, I just I mean, there's more housing coming in. Thanks. Well, I hope it's housing like this that really fits the zoning and car does is the kind of thing that we've been expecting and looking for. Yeah. So, thank you. Thank you, Jake. I just pulled this out and dropped it. Right.

It doesn't matter, right? Yeah. Okay, we have uh one more item on our agenda tonight uh which is to consider an application for steep slopes permit. I um which is identical to a steep slopes permit that has already been approved for the development of four town home styled units with on-site parking and landscaping. The property is located at 12 MLAN Street um in Mount Kiscoco and the owner is Blue Mountain Housing Development Corporation. The applicant is Benzene Goodri Development Group. Uh and as I understand it, let's see. We don't actually have anybody here to

Somebody's on Zoom. Somebody on Zoom. Ah, Mr. Goodrich, could you present, please? Uh, good evening, Madame Chair and and uh and board members. Uh, um, thank you for adding us to um to the agenda. So, this is a reapplication for uh steep slopes permit that um was renewed last December. Let me just uh see if I can get my camera going here. Not sure if I can get my camera going. Yeah. Can you hear me? We can hear you.

Okay. Um to join as a panelist. Uh good evening everyone. Uh thank you for um considering uh this this uh us for the agenda for um the steep slopes permit. So, we wanted to to to reapply for resolution number 2547 uh for the 4unit um 10-bedroom um uh all affordable housing uh on 12 MLAN. Uh we got this renewed last December. Um however the uh the the um steep soaps uh renewal expires in May and the HCR environmental process along with the uh the the environmental process for the county for home funds um uh is not going to be concluded until after May. So we kindly ask that you reconsider a new application for the same process. Nothing has changed on the site. So, um, we we respectfully ask that you would consider a new application for it for the site.

And as I understand it, because this is absolutely identical to what was passed before, we don't have to go through part one and part two again. We've done it already. Um, this is not the applicants doing. This is other agencies. I'm going to editorialize a little bit and say this is, you know, people were talk about wanting to that the secret process holds up applications and we should do away with the secret process. The secret process on this application has been long gone and it is not being this is not

as I remember and this this delay is not caused by that agencies uh just just in case anybody blames seeker for this we don't nor do we blame the applicant and could I have a motion to approve the steep slopes So, is there a second? Second. Okay. Can I just quick question? Oh, sorry. Yeah. I just happened to notice that I'm going too fast. I Sorry. I mean, I'm I'm supportive of the application. It's just there is a u a for sale sign on the property that just is that related to the closing that you're speaking about

or is that property and it just happens to be located right at the corner? Yeah, it's just located right at the corner. The property is not for sale. We we we secured the property. Uh it's owned by um Blue Mountain HDFC. Um so it's that yeah that that's just that that shouldn't be there. Could it is it possible that it has to do with that subdivision that was behind it? Yeah, it's possible that it that that it could be related to that. Um but it's not the the site itself. The site is we closed on this site um a while back. Over a year ago. Thanks for clarifying. I'm glad you brought that up. So back to I'm in favor as well. Um is there any further discussion? No.

All in favor? I All opposed. You have it. Thank you so much. Thank you. Thanks. Could I have a motion to close the meeting? Is there a second? Second. Second. All in favor? I I. All opposed. The meeting is closed.