Planning Board - Regular Meeting

I'd like to bring this meeting of the Bedford Planning Board to order. The first item on our agenda is a public hearing to consider an application for a special use permit for an accessory structure and enclosed pickleboard court, the first pickleboard court that we've had to approve. historic, exceeding 2,500 square feet in size and 20 feet in height pursuant to Town Code 125-27D3 and site plan approval to said structure pursuant to Town Code 125-64. Is there someone here to speak to the applicant?

Yes. My name is Bill Spade. I'm with Sasaki Spade Architects. My partner Keiko is here. The property owners Matt and Evelyn are here with us tonight. So I have a quick presentation to go through. And forgive me if I fumble with any of the electronics here. the properties address at 270 Cantito Street. It's actually three parcels altogether. Does this? Of course not. The red dot doesn't show up on the plan, but I think you can see the three parcels are the wrap around from top to side. They're 266, 268, and 270 are the parcels that are part of what Matt and Evelyn own. Our proposal for this pickleball building is for the 270 lot, which is where the existing residence is and where the three-car garage and a pool house are. So this proposal is about that particular parcel. It's a 4.001 acre lot. Altogether, it's 12.3 acres for the three lots. As I mentioned, the house is up on the The top lot, you go up a significant hill to get to a level area where the house is. I'm sorry, my pointer doesn't get to where the house is. The driveway to the home circuits through the other two parcels to get up to that top parcel. So the other two parcels are unimproved other than for the driveway. um i show you this aerial also to point out the residences that surround them again i'm sorry um the property uh down below to the left uh to the west on along cantito street there's a house there the property just off the edge of the screen at the top there's a residence up there and then just off the screen or at the very bottom of the screen below is the other residence those are the three houses that surround this property And the closest is about 670 feet away. That downhill parcel and house is about 80 feet below the level of where we're proposing the building, where the existing residence is. It's all very heavily wooded, so there's no visibility from any of the surrounding residences to this part of the parcel or to the proposed building. I'll go through a couple of other quick slides here. This is an enlargement of that upper parcel. You can see, I guess I can use my mouse here. Here is the house at the top of the hill. There's a three-car garage just behind it. And our proposal for this new building is off to the north of the three car garage parcel. The driveway comes up in between right there and you park in front of the garage and walk over to the home there. There was also a pool and a pool house over on the south end of the property across a kind of level area. Move on to our I want to show you just some quick pictures of the existing conditions. This is an aerial view. Essentially, as the driveway comes up, the first two parcels, you see the driveway through there. The pickleball building portion is where it dashed in in red there. The house is over here. So you can see, again, this just illustrates the heavy vegetation, existing mature trees that cover the site. A couple other pictures here. This is the existing residence, a beautiful contemporary house, somewhat like a tree house. Matt and Evelyn bought it. It's kind of being advertised as like a tree house in the woods. And very elegant, very open to the environment. Lots of windows on the other sides. The front, they decided not to put many windows in. The prior owner and builder, but it's a beautiful house. This is the house from the driveway. And again, I just emphasize the vegetation, the mature trees and everything that are all around. This is the three-car garage on the other side of the house. I didn't mention the house was built in 1984. The pool and pool house was actually built before that, like 1982. Am I close to correct there? And then the garage was built in 2007, I believe it was. And those were all built by the prior owner of the property. This is the pool house. I'm trying to keep my cursor from bouncing around. This shows then the driveway coming up to the crest of the hill where the house is off to the right, the garage is off to the left, and our building site for the pickleball building. I'll describe more about that in a minute. is on the left side here it's a fairly level area and then the grade starts going up uh behind it and so we're we're placing this building at the back edge of this sort of level area just at the bottom of this rising grade um next picture i've kind of dashed in where this building is proposed you can see off the side there the red dashed lines the uh the main floor of the pickleball building will be equal to relatively the garage floor level and and we have to dig a bit into the rear corner rear right corner of the building and we're going to raise an equal amount on the front left corner so we're trying to balance out the grades uh as the building sits so it looks like it's sitting it's floating above the grade but it's essentially balancing in the midst of all the grades that are there a couple other photos of that that building site this is kind of looking straight onto that building site as you come with the driveway essentially this section of the property is where that building is proposed to go this fencing is for their electric panels. And so the building is located back behind that. And essentially from, you know, right from left to right across this view. I don't know why I did that, but let's see, hopefully let me enlarge these again. I apologize for the, my big thumb is not, uh, working the mouse as well as I would like. Come on, there we go. This shows, I think we're somehow going backwards, but I know why I'm doing that. I just finished a couple of photographs here. And then this is the view from the parking area in front of the house back towards that pickleball building site. These lower scale trees in front will remain and the building will be back behind those. So we're, we're attempting to keep as much mature trees as we can. There are 14 trees that we will need to take down. in spread through that disturbance area. I'll show you that on the plan. This is looking back, looking north, essentially, back behind the garage towards that building pad, or building site, you can see these are some of the trees that would come down in order to do the construction. But obviously, as I've indicated, there's significant trees, still significant number of trees still remaining. around that. That's the last of the photos I think to show you quickly. Here's the first sheet of site plan. rotated now uh 90 degrees so north is to your left this shows the three parcels the driveway as it circuits up through the the first two parcels to get to the top of the hill where the house is there is uh already some uh storm water treatments that have been done uh through the middle of this parcel is a kind of channel for um storm flow uh it's captured into an initial pond that's up here doesn't show in the survey and then through stone channels and the like it circles cycles through two lower ponds and then into a culvert that an underground pipe that as it cuts through this property and then flows out on the other side of, uh, Cantito street. Um, and you can see on here, the proposed, uh, building, uh, location, uh, an enlargement of that, uh, top parcel, uh, again, showing the, the existing house, uh, here, the three car garage there, and then the pickleball building, uh, location there. Um, enlarge this a bit to maybe see that a little more. So the pickleball building itself, I want to mention that Matt and Evelyn are avid pickleball players. Reason why they're proposing to do this building. It's essentially enclosing a pickleball court. And then also at the south end of the building, I'll show you a floor plan. there's some related spaces to the pickleball function, but it's essentially enclosing a standard pickleball court with standard boundary areas around it. I'll show you that plan. Go to, therefore here's the floor plan of the building. I'm gonna try to enlarge this a bit. Oh, too far. Sorry. Sorry. Slow response.

I'll probably go too fast.

So you see the principal part of the building is the pickleball court with the boundary areas. We're proposing some overhead fold-up garage doors to the west side of the building to open onto a patio area. So nice weather. The building can be opened up and nice fresh air for playing. As I mentioned, on the south end is a mechanical room, a little play area on this first level. And then we're also constructing a loft level above to overlook the courts. And it's sort of a second story portion of the building. You'll see the elevations in a moment. And this is an open loft area that'll have some exercise equipment and just a general kind of hangout area for those who are playing. No plumbing, no bathroom. Correct. The SEAF. Sorry?

The SEAF, is it correct?

The SEAF.

The short form?

Oh.

Environmental?

I thought I corrected that, but we'll make sure to change that.

It says you're connecting to private water source and private wastewater. Okay.

Yeah, we will change that. Yes, we found out after we did the initial plans that we couldn't do a bathroom, so we've removed that from the plan. Okay. So thank you. I'll make those changes. I would mention that the use of this is for Matt and Evelyn and their friends who play pickleball. There's not a public use of this intended, obviously just guests of theirs and their residents. A couple more. images to show you here. This is the essentially front elevation of it. You can see that the bulk of the building is the pickleball court with a gabled roof over it. And then at the south end of the building, we've done this second level with a loft area. The purpose of the pitched roof on this is to apply solar panels to the building. This is the south end. We'll get a nice exposure for that use. And so part of the architecture of it was to create that capability. I'll show you a couple more, just the other elevations of it. You're designing it to match the garage, essentially, correct?

I'm sorry? The aesthetic is designed to match the garage, correct?

I'll just show you a rendering. In a sense, yes, although the color pattern will be a little different, the color scheme. Here's the rear side. The grade rises up. Here's the north end of the building, providing windows into the space, into the court area. Next, I'll show you a couple of renderings. This is from the sort of residence end of the proposed building. The color scheme is intended to be a dark hardy plank siding around most of the building. And then that second story area be a wood colored wood material in the sort of grayish range, black frame windows, dark standing seam metal roof. So the primary goal is to really make this building recede in the context of the other buildings. If you remember, the existing house and the garage and the pool house are all this I call orange cedar. And so we're not matching that. We're doing something that will hopefully recede in this site. So we're very pleased with the appearance of it. The colors are just to try to do something fun with the supports for that overhang on the loft. Here's the view from the downhill, which is really the north end of the building. And you see the gable roof and how it sits within that very vegetated context. So that's the images. I'll mention that we require two approvals from you all. One is the square footage of the proposed building being essentially 2750 square feet for the footprint on the ground. Sorry, that exceeds the accessory building limitation and then also the height the peak of the main gable roof is about 21 feet the peak of that shed roof comes up to about 27 feet It's actually slightly shorter depending on average grade conditions. But we feel that we really want to take advantage of that southern exposure and get the solar exposure aspect to it. So felt that that height was justifiable to try to achieve that. One other thing about the building, we're going to do it in a very energy-efficient enclosure. So the exterior walls will be generally about 12 inches thick with close to an R50 insulation value. Code these days is an R25. actually R30 now for a standard wall. So we're almost twice what the code requires for the enclosure of it. The roof as well will be a thick enclosure. We do passive house types of projects, if you've heard that terminology, very energy efficient types of projects. And so we're proposing to do those measures here, even triple pane windows. And so this will be a very energy efficient building when it's enclosed and particularly wintertime is is the primary thought about that, this big space that we want to use a minimal amount to heat it. And so therefore making the enclosure as energy efficient as possible helps keep that load to a minimum. Summertime, obviously the idea is to open the doors and have it be just fresh air coming through the court. The other, so those two, I was just touching on the two, approvals we need from your board in terms of the height and the square footage. We also need a site plan approval. We have an engineer who's engaged to do the stormwater. There was some indication of stormwater system on the site plan, but our engineer will now develop that system, interact with Jim Hahn's office, who's your to finish out that plan and the goal would be to return to you with that fleshed out plan and hopefully that's sufficient for you all to see that we could move forward. We also though do need three zoning variances. The side yard, two side yards, and I could go back to the, just so you hear that explanation. The existing pool house was constructed 17 feet from 17.8 feet from the property line. It's over here on the right side. The way our building will, the proposed building fits in, it's about 58 feet from the, north side property line so those two side lots together are as about 77 feet 100 feet is required so we'll need a side yard variance from the zoning board for that we also have a development coverage and a building coverage that we exceed in terms of what the zoning uh limitations are so we'll need those three variances from the zoning board we're hoping to be in front of the zoning board on september 3rd and so you know have confidence that we'll get those variances. Um, so that's our presentation. I, maybe one point to, to, to end on again, in terms of proposing this building, um, those of you are familiar with pickleball, you know, outdoor pickleball is a bit of a noisier game than, uh, tennis even, and maybe some other, uh, sports and the, the sound of the ball. And there's also lighting things. And so proposing that this building be enclosed, we think is a, you know, sort of the best mitigation for proposing this kind of facility that it, you know, it's contained, the light is within a building, the noise stays within the building. So some of those other, you know, impacts, environmental impacts that you would consider for potentially an outdoor court certainly gets solved well by enclosing it. And, and again, the amount of vegetation around the property, the fact that this really can't be seen by any neighboring residences, we think is a benefit as well. So that's our short presentation, hopefully, any questions?

Well, this is a public hearing. So I think the first thing we should do is ask the public whether there's anyone who has any questions for the for the applicant, first of all, anyone in the courtroom? who would like to speak to this application. Is there anybody on Zoom that is interested in speaking? If you're interested in speaking, can they still raise their hand or do they? Yes.

Nobody said nobody.

Nobody's on. Okay.

I'm sorry, Evelyn probably would like to say a couple of comments. I meant to allow her to have her do that at the beginning. So go ahead.

Go ahead. And yes, of course, happy to answer any questions from the board or our neighbors after. Bill and Keiko had mentioned to us it would be helpful for you to get a sense of what this project means to us. So good evening. My name is Evelyn Chow. I'm joined by my husband, Matt Asher. We're the, I like to say, caretakers of this extraordinary property at 270 Cantito that we've been very lucky now to to have in our lives for the last four years. I think to give you a sense of why we're building a thing that this board has never seen before and what it means to us, we actually saw this property first two weeks before our wedding in 2022. And it really was love at first sight for us in the house. I think for the two of us, it took a few moments longer than that. And, you know, we thought When we looked at the place, it was going to be this really peaceful respite in nature that would allow us to disconnect from our very busy lives in the city. And I think one of the most positive surprises of our time in Bedford has actually been that this is a community that has allowed us to connect. And Pickleball is actually a really big reason behind that. i'm almost embarrassed to say most of our friends in the area are all very avid pickleball players like ourselves you know i think the sense of community camaraderie um kind of the joy of physicality that we found in pickleball has really added a lot to our lives and to the enrichment um of a lot of our friendships and so i think for us when we conceptualize what i admit sounds like a somewhat outlandish project i think it could be a very good gathering place for us for our community our friends um eventually the family that we hope to start and so that you know in a nutshell is the motivation behind the project thank you very much again for your time consideration i've heard much worse justifications that's one of the nicer ones i've heard

Although we are a very welcoming community, it's unusual to not have anybody speak against a project. So, but there doesn't seem to be any, not necessarily against any comments from the courtroom. One more try, is there any buddy on the Zoom? Doesn't seem to be. Could I have a motion to close the public hearing? So moved. Second. The motion is second. All in favor of closing the public hearing? Aye. The public hearing is closed. You've done a very thorough job of explaining the project. I just want to confirm on the lighting. all the lighting is inside the building. Correct. We technically don't allow lighted tennis courts outside. I presume we probably would not allow a lighted pickleball court either, but although we're not specific about that, we may have to consider this, but it's an indoor one anyway. Is there any possibility of a lot of light spillage when the big doors are open in the summer or...

i would say no because the lights are going to be up in the ceiling pointing down okay so they'll be down down lighting even though it's indoors correct correct okay yeah and probably no different than a residence i think the appearance will be very residential okay it's also not adjoining

True, but sometimes lighting is one of those things that penetrates very far and under peculiar situations.

By the way, we're also very cognizant of night sky requirements, so there's going to be an outdoor light by the doors. Those will all be downcast lighting, so no directly visible light bulbs.

That was my next question. Just lighting by the doors, no other lights, no spotlights on the corner of the building. Correct. Very good answer.

Okay, yes, this is like a comment, not a requirement at all, but in the loft area, the windows are large and lovely to let light in and you can see the trees reflecting and that's where you run into birds hitting. So just consider putting up some stickers or something. Good point.

Good point. Yeah. Thanks.

OK. In terms of seeker, this is a type 2, clearly. So there really isn't any motion that we have to take in terms of seeker unless someone feels that it's not a type 2. But it's pretty clear. I don't you're working with the town engineers. So you're getting that that part done. I don't actually think there's anything else that we can do for you tonight except refer you to the zoning board. You're already on your way to right. And once they've heard your case, if they if they give you the variance you're asking for, we'll see you back. Hopefully. well not enough in our september meeting no that that would be before the zoning board's meeting in september so it would be september at earliest for you okay yeah we're looking forward to it okay well good luck with it and uh we hope to see you again thank you for recently soon take care I have to ask a question about the second item. I've got two different agendas here. The one I downloaded from the town website a couple of days ago and another, which is?

145 Broadbrook was actually closed, the public hearing was, so it should be the most recent version that was posted online, where it has it as a continued application.

Okay, good.

Apologize for that.

that's okay so then the next item on our agenda is uh per to encode chapter 125-133 review of a referral from the town board for a proposed zoning petition and conceptual site plan for a mixed-use development and request for the planning board to conduct the required environmental review pursuant to the new york state environmental quality review act The owner of the property is Alchemy Bedford Tenant LLC. The applicant is LHP Old Post Road. The address is 633-647 Old Post Road in Bedford Village. and this is also known popularly in town as the project near the playhouse in bedford village this is a continuation of a public hearing but it is also a work session of the planning board we've continued the public hearing so so that people can comment on the parts of the uh part three for seeker that we that we go through as we go through them. So we'll be working on part three on a topic-by-topic basis. At the end of each topic, I'll ask if there are any comments from the audience, anybody who wants to disagree with things we've said as we work our way through the part three of Seeger. We got as far as groundwater studies in the previous go around, but I think we might want to go to some of the more substantive issues first before we continue in order. And one of the major issues that we have to consider has to do with the historic issues. And I think it would be well for us to discuss that. there are some people would argue that this is not an environmental issue because it's architectural and the planning board does not have any jurisdiction over architectural issues but this is also historic preservation which is explicitly discussed and carried by the SECA process. The federal government has issued the Secretary of the Interior's recommendations for historic preservation. Those have been adopted by New York State as the basis for analyzing and pursuing historic projects that involve properties that are listed on the National Register of Historic Places. And one of the things that we need to go through is to confirm that a project actually conforms to those specifications. So it's not as subjective as it may seem. It's not a question of Oh, I like that, but I don't like that. And it's not a question of, well, I like Victorian architecture, but I don't like Federalist architecture. What we like makes no difference at all. There is a set of pretty objective standards about how things are supposed to be considered. This historic district is quite precious to Bedford. It's quite important and we do have a historic district commission that has the say over this. And in a case like this, they are an involved agency that the planning board is very interested in hearing from. We've had a dissertation from them, but I believe that the chair of the commission is here to to speak to us and give us some guidance and some thoughts as we proceed to try to come to a conclusion about this issue.

Well, thank you, Deirdre, and planning board members. My name is Clayton Rose. I have lived in the historic district for nearly 20 years and have been on the Historic District Review Commission for 14 years, the last nine of which as chairman. We usually cover things like signage and mailbox colors. This certainly is not that. And if you've been through Bedford Village recently, you know there's a number of infrastructure issues that the district is facing, parking, water treatment, et cetera. And a project like this could provide help for that infrastructure effort. But for this review, we focused on, as Deirdre mentioned, historic preservation so i wanted to give a little bit of background on the district and our commission and responsibilities uh to begin with so this is from town code i just here i found it within the hamlet known as bedford village there's an area designated as a historic district and here after described which dates from the founding of the town in 1680 and contains a number of historic landmarks, including the green colonial graveyard, public and private buildings that display the architecture of the period from the late 1700s to the present. It is further found that this area has a historic value and interest by reason of historic events that have taken place within or near by age or association with historic or famed residents. and being illustrative of events or periods in the growth history of Bedford Village and the surrounding areas. It is also found that this area has a specific aesthetic value and interest by reason of being representative of a style or period in the architectural design of buildings or the landscaping and trees which form an integral part of the area's environment. In terms of what our commission is charged with, it shall be, and again, this is from Town Code, it shall be the duty of the review commission to maintain the character of Bedford Village Historic District and to regulate the construction of new buildings and the reconstruction, alteration, and demolition of existing buildings, including outbuildings, walls, fences, steps, and signs to ensure that construction or alterations are compatible with the historic district character. In maintaining this character, Bedford Village Historic District Review Commission shall consider architectural style, materials, color, and detail. So I just wanted to provide that for any newcomers or a refresher for those who have been here and are familiar with the review commission. So let's go from 1680 to today then. And the Bedford Planning Board has asked our review commission to conduct a preliminary review of the project. And I'm going to just talk about very quickly what we reviewed and then a summary conclusion. And then I'm going to pass it to one of our architects to talk a little bit more in detail about some of our recommendations. Specifically, the commission evaluated material submitted by the applicant, including a conceptual design, strategic presentation, conceptual rendering, and conceptual site plan. The commission also reviewed public comments and letters submitted from interested residents and reviewed the March and April planning board meetings. In addition, the Commission held a public meeting on April 13th, 2026, in which the developer of the project provided additional detail and answered our questions. Finally, we solicited input from the Bedford Historic Building Preservation Commission, as well as the Bedford Historical Society to gather additional expertise and context regarding historic preservation efforts within Bedford Village. in summary based on the material provided to us at present the commission would find that the current proposal lacks compatibility with the established character scale and material integrity of bedford village historic district however the commission is providing recommendations regarding aspects of the proposal that would better align with the historic character of the district THIS REVIEW LETTER SHOULD NOT BE TAKEN AS A DO NOT DISTURB SIGN WITH REGARDS TO DEVELOPMENT OF 633-647 OLD POST ROAD. COMMISSION LOOKS FORWARD TO REVIEWING ANY FUTURE PROVISED PROJECT PROPOSALS THAT MORE ACCURATELY REFLECT AND PRESERVE THE HISTORIC DISTRICT'S CONTEXT. A LOT OF Work went into this primarily from our team of architects. Stacey Albanese is going to speak briefly on some of the findings and recommendations that we have. Cynthia Philcoff, Craig Instarelli, critical members, George Ambrosio, a new member from the Bedford, on the board of the Bedford Historical Society and a key contributor to this effort. With that quick introduction, I'm going to turn it over to Stacey to run through some of the findings and some of the recommendations that we came up with.

Sure. Thank you, Clayton. Can you all hear me clearly? Yes. Great. So as Clayton mentioned, my name is Stacey Albanese. I am one of the commissioners on the Historic District Review Commission. I've been on the commission for about three years. I work in the field of historic preservation in New York and Connecticut and New Jersey, and sort of seconding what Clayton said in his opening remarks to say that Um, all of the members of the commission, um, have deliberated over this proposal, um, with great detail. And, um, we have had many discussions. We've looked through the lens of several, several different sort of approaches. Um, and we, uh, we take this assignment very seriously as Clayton said, typically it's signs and mailbox colors. So this is, uh, of a different order of magnitude in more ways than one for us. What I'd first like to do, and I will try to keep it very succinct, but what I'd like to do is share some of the context that framed our review of this proposal. And Chair Courtney Batson already mentioned the Secretary of the Interior's guidelines, but I just want to back up so that all are sort of clear what the framework was through which we approached our review. So Clayton explained to or described our mandate as the Historic District Review Commission. What I will do is just give you the briefest sort of overview of the Historic District, which was listed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1973. And when a district is listed, a nomination report, before it is listed, a nomination report is researched. vetted and then uh this this designation report narrative and photographs become the sort of defining document for why why this property is significant in terms of its architectural historical and cultural value the designation report is available online um at the National Park Service website. That link is embedded in the letter that we submitted about a month and a half ago. It's readily available to all. I'm just going to excerpt a couple of key points in that designation report from 1973 as a way to frame your thinking and certainly the way it framed our thinking about the value of Bedford Village Historic District is seen from an outside perspective. So now I'm reading a quote. Located in Westchester County near the Connecticut border, the Bedford Village Historic District embraces most of the original 1680 hamlet founded by settlers from the colony of Connecticut. The village was laid out according to the village green plan typical of New England settlements. Now I'm going to skip over some descriptive sentences about the individual buildings. South of the Green and along Pound Ridge Road are several late 18th and mid 19th century residences, all on large lots. Stylistically, these reflect the changing architectural tastes of the 19th century, either by their original form or by subsequent alterations. Large trees, primarily Naples, line Pound Ridge Road and surround the Green, the village's focal element. On the north side of the Green is the old burying ground flanked by an 1805 church, now we know it as Historical Hall. A small general store to the east of the Green is a short block of public and commercial buildings dominated by the courthouse constructed in 1787 and the Presbyterian church constructed in 1872. All of the buildings in the district are frame construction except the Stone Catholic Church, constructed in 1921, the Stone Jug Schoolhouse, constructed in 1829 on the Green, the Brick Firehouse, and a few commercial structures. Stylistically, these reflect the changing architectural taste of the 19th century. Either by their original form or by subsequent alterations, the few modern structures were designed in a basically neo-colonial style. So founded in 1680 as a Connecticut settlement, Bedford Village, and this is called the Statement of Significance. So this is the sort of summary statement about why Bedford Village is worthy of this sort highly regarded and important designation. Founded in 1680 as a Connecticut settlement, Bedford Village, despite the modern development characteristic of much of Westchester County, has survived with its original green intact and still bordered by vernacular architecture of the preceding two centuries. Encompassing the art of the old village, the historic district is illustrative of Bedford's history and architectural development from the last quarter of the 18th through the third quarter of the 19th century. The railroad and transfer of county government in 1870 combined after the third quarter of the 19th century to diminish the quantity of new construction with the result that the character of Old Bedford Village has endured. So sort of a happy accident really that the railroad skirted Bedford Village and the county government sort of quit Bedford Village in 1870. So we're left with this enduring sort of vestige of the original settlement. During the 20th century, the community was a center for owners of large country estates, but only within the two past decades has it begun to feel the pressure of the more common types of suburban sprawl. So I just wanted to sort of frame that. That's the defining document for the historic district. I also just want to say a few words about the federal guidelines that Chair Courtney Batson mentioned in her remarks. The Bedford Village Historic District joins nearly 14,000 other historic districts throughout the country that are listed on the National Register of Historic Places, which was authorized under the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966. and is administered by the National Park Service. While each historic district is unique, they have all been reviewed and determined to have met one or more of the criteria for significance to American history, architecture, or culture. Best practice in the field of historic preservation relies on a regulatory framework to guide work on historic buildings throughout the country known as the Secretary of the Interior Standard for Rehabilitation. The standards provide direction in making appropriate choices in planning the repairs, alterations, and additions that may be part of a rehabilitation project. These guidelines were formulated to guide work on public historic sites, but they provide useful advice to owners and professionals working on private historic properties as well. So that is the sort of framework for the district and the federal guidelines. I'm moving now into a sort of subsection of that rubric, which talks about new construction within a historic district. And it reads, new construction can quickly change neighborhood character. Guidelines can reinforce those aspects of historic character that the community considers most positive, such as its residential scale, appropriate building placement on the property, the ratio of built to unbuilt area on the site, the architectural style. Scale and placement are the most important characteristics to control for new buildings, stylistic, Details are secondary. New construction is subject to review with the goal of minimizing any potential disruption to the character of the district and designing buildings that are scaled to their neighbor and context. So there are several considerations when thinking about new construction that we factored in, you know, very intentionally in our review. the scale of nearby contributing, not just the adjacent building to the right or the left. And we know that the Playhouse is adjacent, but the Playhouse is an outlier to begin with. It was not cited as one of the defining features of this historic district in 1973. Um, citing new buildings so that they follow neighborhood patterns of lot placement with similar setbacks, the use of compatible materials, uh, respect for facade designs and rhythms of nearby structures, and really being intentional about not overwhelming the neighborhood, sorry, the neighboring buildings, um, with out of scale construction. A preserved 18th and 19th century village derives its character not from any single landmark building, but from a finely balanced whole. A modest scale of buildings and a continuity of materials and uses that have evolved gradually over centuries. Bedford Village has indeed involved with the fine grain mix of residential small scale commercial and civic functions layered incrementally over time. Introducing a large new construction multi-use building into such a setting risks disrupting that balance in ways that are difficult, if not impossible, to reverse. So that is the framework that we set for ourselves when we embarked on this review. And through that lens, we came up with a series of findings and I'll run through them and then I hope the other commissioners will chime in and add if they think I've left anything out or they want to add their own voice. But first and foremost, we found that scale, siting and massing, considerations of scale, siting and massing are paramount to any new construction within the historic district. village context in its 18th and 19th century historic buildings that do not exceed two and a half stories with small scale massing narrow frontages and human scale proportions the proposed monolithic structure is significantly broader and taller than any contributing building in the district as i said while the 1947 playhouse is adjacent to the proposed site, it's a documented outlier and does not establish a precedent for expanded scale or massing in the Commission's opinion. The organizing element in the village plan and in the present historic district is the village green, which provides a spacious setting and context for the assemblage of historic structures I've named several times now. These structures are readily discernible around the village green as a district for the homogeneity of materials, scale, and proportion, and for the absence of incompatible 20th century elements. We believe that the current proposal would dilute this character defining feature and the organizing principle being the green. There's the matter of precedence. Once the scale of large new construction is established, it can be difficult if not impossible to contain. One such building often invites others gradually shifting the threshold about what is appropriate. The introduction of a large multi-use building is not simply a matter of adding density. It's a fundamental alteration of scale, pattern, and identity. Preservation in such contexts depends not only on protecting individual buildings, but on sustaining the relationships between them. When those relationships are disrupted, the character of the village is at risk. The materials, the historic structures in the village are defined by their historic building fabric, their craftsmanship, and the material authenticity of natural materials, whether it's clobbered, field stone, cedar shingle roofs, slate, articulated with depth, irregularity, patina. They wear this sort of handmade craftsmanship, you know, with full evidence. The application that we reviewed does not specify that only natural materials will be used. And indeed, the general sort of stylistic presentation of the facades we felt was not was not appropriate to the architectural styles within the village. But again, the styles on the facades are sort of secondary to our concern. Our primary concern being the siting, the scale, and the massing of what reads as just a monolithic structure tacked on at the north end of the historic district. Finally, zoning. Compounding the application is the fact that multiple zoning maps exist, with one map showing the property split between the residential two-acre zoning district and the neighborhood business zoning district, and another map showing the property entirely within the neighborhood business zoning district. Regardless of a determination of which map is correct, the project would still require a variance for exceeding the two and a half story height limit pursuant to town zoning law. We believe that such a zoning variance would materially impact Bedford's historic character for both this application and any subsequent variance requests. So that's the conclusion of our remarks. It is not the entirety of our remarks. There is more detail, but I think for the purposes of this hearing, that's probably but we are happy to take questions or Clayton, if other commissioners want to join in, I welcome that.

Are there any members of the board that have questions? Does the applicant have any questions? Okay.

Craig or Cynthia, if you're on, do you have any comments?

And if not, that's fine, and we will wrap.

Hello?

Craig, you're on. Yes, we can hear you.

Hi. My name is Craig . I am commissioner of the Bedford Village Historic District Commission with Stacy and Clayton. And I want to thank both of them for contributing to this hearing. I think both Clayton and Stacy articulated very clearly what our commission has concerns about. And I guess one of my just pointed remarks is really just highlighting the scale of the proposal in the village and how something that can be approved today would become potentially a precedent for tomorrow, which is what you're seeing from one applicant looking at a proposal of the Playhouse, which our commission as guided by uh what both clayton stacy has illustrated tonight um our charge um it would just precipitate more potential um out of scale projects for the village but i want to thank both of our commissioners for being uh present this evening thanks craig

Anybody have anything else?

I have some comments, but let's save them until Okay, make sure that there's no more presentation.

No, we are done.

Yeah. The one thing that I take away from this, and I should say I have some background in historic preservation as well. I chaired the Katona Historic District Commission for a number of years. And I was going back through the Park Service website recently and was looking at the section that Stacey talked about when you're dealing with new, how do you handle new development in existing places? And I have two of the quotes that I thought are worth considering and that I think we have to consider. The massing, size, scale, and architectural features of new construction on the site of a historic building must be compatible with those of the historic building. And these sections apply as much to districts as to individual buildings. When visible and in close proximity to historic buildings, the new construction must be subordinate to these buildings. New construction should also be distinct from the old and must not attempt to replicate historic buildings elsewhere on site and to avoid creating a false sense of historic development. That passage does tell you how difficult this is, because there are two things in there. They say it's got to look different, but it shouldn't look too different. It's not easy being part of a commission that has to make these decisions, but that's because historic preservation is difficult. But You have to be trying to find that balance, and I have to admit I don't see in what we've seen so far that balance between those two issues. And then the other one was protecting the historic setting and context of a property, including the degree of open space and building density must always be considered when planning new construction on a historic site. This entails identifying the formal or informal arrangement of buildings on the site and whether they have a distinctive urban, suburban, or rural character. That's... One of the things that I found looking at it is that there seemed to be a fight between an urban character that the proposal had, which it takes from the 1947 playhouse, that fights with the really more rural agricultural character of the rest of the village. So right now, as things stand, I have a very difficult time trying to find something positive to say there. My colleagues have at times made some suggestions, and if they have the time right now, I know that you've articulated, Diane, about the need for some green spacing.

And I think, Jared, you had- I had just said I really feel like Bedford Village, while it's beautiful, is difficult to walk in as a community setting. And when Ojo converted the firehouse and they put the garden in the front and the green space in the front, it really helped increase the amount lingering and i think would be really great in a building like this rather can have than having green space facing the back parking area to have it welcoming in the entire town to you know especially to the bottom floors you know of commercial space but also to the area i think and that the sidewalk becomes more and more walkable um maybe more sidewalk yeah But I think they were happy with more sidewalk, but I think a treed sidewalk, a safe feeling sidewalk, not just a sidewalk.

And 1 other just point when you're driving from, or walking from the green up towards guard Hill, if you're going in that direction towards card Hill on the right, you have the playhouse and you have what is currently the site that is long and trees. And then shortly thereafter you have 3 older historic houses. So. It transitions nicely from the, you know, downtown sort of speak Hamlet center to green space to those houses. Um, but if you put the building released as designed, it's going to be too stark of a contrast between. You know, historic center, new building, 3 old, smaller historic houses. So. in whatever ultimately gets done, there would need to be, in my opinion, some relief and some greenery and some screening and things like that in order to ease the transition to, again, be consistent with the historic character of the area.

I think the problem that we're having is that there There's a lot of good in this proposal. Yes. And I'd even go so far as to say maybe some problems in the current state of the relationship between the Playhouse Building and the rest of the district. So it's not that what's there is sacrosanct and... can't be changed. I think change might well benefit it. But for us to give this an egg deck, we need to be able to say we're quite sure that the cure isn't going to be worse than the disease. And we're just not there yet for the reasons that I think that the Historic District Commission has articulated quite clearly. So to get back to what we would put down in a part three for this, I think it would have to be that we do not see a meeting of the Secretary of the Interior's guidelines

Well, the fact that it hits 3 of the 7 aspects of the national registries, evaluation, historic resources is kind of telling the integrity of the settings, the feeling of the setting and the association and setting a very primary points that. To date, we haven't seen anything that clarifies that. It's too ephemeral, I guess is maybe the right word. Um, I mean, I, I forget Mr and I think just commented earlier that, you know, is this setting precedent for down the road? I know there's not that much more green space that can be occupied, but. Depend upon how buildings can be expanded. That gives me some concern. I mean, there seemed to be a heavy reliance on that original rendering on, you know, like materials, traditional materials, but. still doesn't solve the fact of scale. And we all have to come to grips with that. And I'm currently working on two tier one buildings down in Pennsylvania that the National Registry is really pushing us on the specifics of what those buildings are and why they were actually approved as tier ones. And the setting is as important as The periphery of the project sites that we're dealing with and that. That's a focus that needs to be that needs to be dealt with. We're at least approached.

So, I think right right now, I think maybe the applicant would like to.

Good evening everyone. I'm P. Daniel Hollis. The attorneys for the applicant, Tom Kennedy, one of the Principles and members of the LLC, which is the applicant is here with me a little surprised about the. Not that the comments I've heard them before and I read the May 21st letter, which said the same thing essentially. But what I want to keep everybody's focus on is what we're here for what we're here for. is whether or not your board and reporting back to the town board on the rezoning and as lead agency under SECRA can discover or come to the conclusion that there are no significant adverse environmental impacts that can't either be mitigated or eliminated. And we've heard the conversations. And I had the same sort of interchange with SHPO. On March 2nd, SHPO wrote a letter to this board, which is part of the record, indicating in part, It's unclear from the submitted concept site plan how the proposed work will visually impact the historic district. To determine whether or not the proposed law new construction is compatible, submit plans, specifications, elevations, and renderings. Building design should be compatible with the surrounding national registered listed buildings and district and materials, color, scale, Massing setback from the street, fenestration pattern, and other properties. Preliminary or pre-final documents are preferred. That's the same thing that was just said here tonight, right? More or less. So I wrote back. I gave her the history, the person's name there. Very helpful, actually. Marianne Staines, Mariana Staines, up in Waterford, New York. I gave her the history of why we're here, the discrepancy in the maps, the need for the rezoning, and we're not here for site plan or at present. The rezoning has to take place, and that's what the secret is about, and that's what your recommendation is about. The question to answer today is not what the tone is or the scale or what the materials are, but are there any significant environmental impacts that we can eliminate or mitigate? And we've heard you. We've heard it loud and clear. We recognize. So let me go back to my letter, which I provided to Jessica, and hopefully you've had a chance to see it. So I continue writing in my letter back to her on July 2nd. If the zoning amendment is approved, a site plan application will be submitted to the Planning Board for site plan approval and to the Bedford Village Historic District Review Commission for a certificate of approval, both of which reviewing bodies will rigorously review the site plan to ensure that the proposed construction is in accordance with the Bedford Village Historic District Review Commission's enabling legislation with regard to massing scale, setback, materials, color, fenestration pattern, and the like. So essentially what I'm saying is that these comments essentially deal more with the Historic District Review Commission's certificate of approval process than they do with the secret process. And I don't want the board to get distracted or confused in the mission uh whether it's the law the military athletics you got to keep an eye on the mission and as the precedent issue i i think that's a red herring because i think all those great warriors from the revolutionary war who are resting forever up on the hill near historical hall will would raise as a one if there were any uh mass change in the character of Bedford Village. Let's face it, there are four properties that are subject to redevelopment. This one, the Playhouse Building, the Empire Building, and what we call the County Trust building, the bank building up on the hill. Those are the only buildings that would ever be able to get a demolition permit. There's no other building in Bedford Village in the historic district that could get a demolition permit to precipitate the mass precedent setting that is the fear of some of the members of the commission. And then going back to the enabling legislation of the commission itself. while I hate to be all lawyerly, it does say, in passing upon the appropriateness, the Bedford Village Historic District Review Commission shall consider, in addition to any other pertinent factors, the historical and architectural value and significance architectural style general design arrangement texture materials and color of the exterior architectural feature and related landscaping landscaping involved with the and the relationship thereof to the exterior architectural features of other structures in the immediate neighborhood. And that brings me back to the Secretary of the Interior's comments, not too much old and not too much new. Because I promise you that if the owners of the arcade building made an application today to build that building, or if the owner of the Playhouse in 1947 could bring himself into 2026 and apply to have that building approved, neither one would happen. they did happen. And so those architectural features are part of the present that we have to blend with those three houses to the north. So I just wanted to make the point that let's not get off target here. There's a time and a place for the concerns that the members of this commission who do great work can voice them. We've heard them. And we're working diligently. We're not at the point where plans to submit for a site plan or for their certificate of approval are appropriate. We have to get beyond this point for the rezoning. I just wanted to remind everyone of the mission.

And I appreciate that reminder of the mission. This is what's been haunting me with this, frankly. Because the But when we went into this, we were very aware that there was a specific proposal that went with the rezoning. This wasn't just a rezoning out in the blue somewhere like most rezonings. We weren't there for opening the door too broadly, opening the door to redevelopment. What worries me are a couple of things. One of them you actually identified when you talked about the the existence of the 1947 building and the other buildings as being now something that has to be blended in. I'm not so sure that's true because as you also pointed out, those are buildings that I can't actually imagine it happening to the Playhouse because the Playhouse has developed something of its own. historic role in Bedford, but the others are the ones that actually could possibly get a demolition permit, depending on what somebody wanted to put. There's one demolition permit that I'm aware of in the historic district that was granted or changed that was so dramatic that it was demolition permit. So whether you say, therefore, The Historic District Commission now has to be working to blend those buildings in as well. It leaves questions in my mind. But what I am more concerned about is that when you change the zoning from a resident purely residential zone to bring in commercial zone, you do change the economics of the situation and the kind of buildings and kind of scale that you potentially need. What I need to know is that if we recommend rezoning this this property, are we opening the town to the possibility of somebody coming in? Say something happens with this application and it goes away, but now we have rezoned it, even though this application isn't there anymore. Once we rezone it, we don't get to take it back.

Part of it's NB already. Part of it is NB. That's the problem. Part of it is NB and part of it is the residential.

And given my lack of a law degree, I'm not going to get in a debate with you about that.

No, you do pretty well as Madam Chairperson. I'm not worried about your understanding of it.

but it still leaves us open in a way that I'm uncomfortable with. So I want to see that door closed to have not necessarily a worked outside plan, but to have something that people are feeling, particularly people on the Historic Commission, but are feeling is going in the right direction. And I don't see that yet. And if it's not going in the right direction, there's only one other direction for it to go in. And I don't want to be the person responsible or one of the people responsible of opening the town to going in that kind of a direction where the Bedford Village Historic District is concerned.

Or in my humble opinion, I don't think a positive declaration requiring more study at this time solves the eventual problem.

I don't either, but I don't think a negative declaration does either.

Well, I don't think a negative declaration to allow it to go to a public hearing before the town board. Because by the time we got to that kind of a hearing in the fall, it's a very good chance having a negative declaration in hand, having heard all these comments. We've taken the May 21st submission by the Historical Preservation Commission to heart. The client with other professionals is reviewing how to change the look and the feel and the scale and the materials in such a way that would be easily approvable under the new zoning. They're not foolish people and they're not just going to throw things against the wall hoping that one of them will stick. We want to come back with a plan that's going to get approved by you at the site plan level. More importantly, the certificate of approval from the bedford village historic district review commission because you know absent that it dies on the vine after we've gone through a lot of work so why would we do all the work to to get there and not pay attention to what we've heard we're not we're not foolish people i have to see something that that backs up that sentiment that's um

I believe that you mean what you say. And I actually believe it's possible. But we don't sit on this board to make our decisions in regard to belief systems. We have to have some facts and some data or something to hold on to. And right now, I don't have it yet.

I understand your point.

I think it's possible for you to produce it, but I don't see it going anywhere.

Oh, dear.

Oh, okay. I'll try not to touch it. That may be a hint that I'm talking too much. No, I think it may be. It's time for me to Do we have anything more to say? Right now, that's where I am on the part three for this topic. I can't be more positive than that about it, on that issue. We still have traffic to look at, and we can't do that tonight. We still don't have the traffic. report change the town's consultants report is still outstanding yeah um we can continue to go ahead i think it's a little late but we could

My understanding on site plan approvals and in general is there's a lot of different approvals you need. And no site plan, if you have wetlands, if you have historic, if you have zoning questions, gets approved without those parties doing their due diligence on each of those items. There's DOT that's going to be involved here. There's a state road. Nothing will get approved without every party doing, and I love this town to death. I'm a member of the Historical Society. I want every single person, I'm a Green versus, I want every person to do their entire due diligence on this entire project. And my understanding for what I've been told from everybody involved is that will happen at the site plan approval process and that all of the things that were mentioned earlier, I want to mitigate all these things. I want to make sure all these things happen. You don't get the approvals of those bodies without mitigating. So that's where I'm at a little bit of a loss, like my attorney has said.

And I can understand your feeling of confusion because I do believe that you absolutely mean that. and are totally sincere with that. And we always say this, and it makes me feel so macabre saying it every time, that nobody knows what's going to happen next week to themselves or anybody else. And the approvals we give are approvals not to individual people. They're approvals that we give within the law. And I've been on this board long enough to have had applicants before me who I would not trust as far as I could throw them. I have had applicants who would sue the town tomorrow if it was going to get them a better buck. I know you do not fit into that category, but I don't get to make my decision on those kinds of bases. I have to decide that, I'm not going to go there. That gets too political. We have, think of some of the people who have been applicants before this board. And tell me I can trust everyone that comes before me.

Well, you can't.

So that's where that stands. Because if we don't have the right set of arguments, if one person has a better lawyer than we do, I can't imagine that happening.

Well, hold on now.

Thought you'd catch that one. I'm not trying to protect the town against the good guys, but I'm not naive enough to think there are no bad guys out there. So I'm kind of counting on your rescuing us from this by coming up with something really fast.

And even bad guys and good guys things aside. It's not a negative comment on you doing this project. I think. There's a lot of positive about you doing this project and a project of this nature going forward there. It's a matter of having it fit within the historic district and the start district commission review. That's crucial because it's such an important part of that. And that's why it's good that someone like you is doing that, but it's our responsibility to make sure that this doesn't get a neg deck without it getting into the historic district. That's not a negative comment. It's a drag to the developer because it takes time when time is money. You get that and I'm sorry, but it's really important to the town and it's why the project is so important.

Understood. I just didn't realize at this point in the process, the entire design of it.

Well, it doesn't have to be the entire.

It's not necessarily the design, right? We also have to talk about traffic.

There's a bunch of other things.

There's a bunch of other hosts. This is just the topic we're discussing at this point.

Right. And the whole discussion that you brought up again, that the chair commented on where I was, you know, jumped in was it is not. these, some of those buildings have been there, but they are not part of the reference point. And the historic commission, you know, explained that beautifully. And then you went and said, but it is, but no, it's not. And so rests on their shoulders because they've done a really thorough job with really strong knowledge of that. And our chair has such strong knowledge of that and realized that, This is really not a negative comment on your project. It's a negative comment and giving a neck deck to something that is not where it needs to be yet. And let's get it to where it is.

That's a different- When I brought that up, I brought it up in the context of the Secretary of the Interior's comments about the old and the new and the struggle. But that's a different, it's the reference point and the reference point is- Well, I just want to be clear because there are cases that say that the the reference point, it's not necessarily that we get to build the same as Playhouse 2, not at all. But you're somewhere in between the historical hall and the Playhouse building.

But that's what they're explaining, go back to the, that's not it.

Yeah.

The Playhouse is not a good historic reference point.

I said between the two.

But that's just showing how difficult the decision is.

I understand the point being made.

I think what I'm hoping for is being able to come up with something that's what we would call a condition negative. And the problem is, in order to do that, you have to know what the conditions are. You don't have to know what all the details are. You need to know what the big issues are. and that those are solvable, or that everybody's agreed that if those big issues aren't solvable, then everything stops. I don't think we're there. I DID SAY THAT IF MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WANTED TO COMMENT ON THIS, I'M GOING TO ASK YOU IF YOU'RE NOT GOING TO SAY SOMETHING ENTIRELY NEW, PLEASE. IT'S LATE AND WE'VE GOT OTHER AGENDA ITEMS. IT'S THE BOARD MEMBER, CRAIG. WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK?

Yes, thanks, Deirdre. I just wanted to highlight our commissions. We're not here to stop development, especially something that we see as that could be positive for the village. But in response to Mr. Hollis' comments about why we're here this evening, the rezoning of this lot really is quite, the crux of why our commission was asked to be a preliminary reviewer of it. It's really uncommon for our commission to review something without formal application, which we opened ourselves up to, and each member has worked many hours to produce the document that you heard this evening. I think it's important for the public to understand that the rezoning is really a difference between our residential zone and neighborhood development zone, which is quite a drastic development delta, which the neighborhood zone is about 80%, I believe, of development. Whereas a residential 2A is like 20%. So it really is impactful, which is why I believe our commission was brought in early to review this application. So I feel like if that is the real conversation this evening, that's why our commission has gone with a full throated response.

Thank you. Any other comments?

We could go through some of the other, but I think, yeah, no, we really, I think maybe we should drop this, not drop this for now. Put a pin. adjourn the public hearing until our next meeting, and we will talk about when the next meeting is.

Thank you very much. Make a motion to adjourn. Go ahead. Motion to adjourn the public hearing. To our next scheduled meeting.

Someone has seconds.

We have a motion and a second. All in favor? Aye. All opposed? On to the next item on our agenda, which is PB, Lupita D Montoya, Consider a site plan and Steve soaps application for the creation of 15 multifamily units three. PB, Lupita D Montoya, units with onsite parking and landscaping pursuant to 125 dash 86 and wanted to respectively. The property is located at 150 Bedford Road in Katona, and the owner is 150 Bedford Road, LLC, contract Vendee.

Good evening, Chair. Steven Helms with the Helms Group Architects, with my client Mark Pacucci with 150 Bedford Road, LLC. His partner is Jamie Provenzano. We have been before your board several times in the past year. And last week, last Thursday, we did obtain our variances for the project. We were successful in getting the two variances, the size of the footprint of the building, and we also were successful in getting the variance for the deficiency of two parking spaces. Subsequent to that, I believe our engineer, our site engineer, Ralph Mastromonaco, who is on the Zoom call tonight, had addressed HAN'S OFFICE ENGINEERING QUESTIONS. JESSICA, I BELIEVE THAT WAS, I CAN'T SEE YOU OVER THERE, BUT THAT WAS ADDRESSED, THE MEMO THAT HAN'S OFFICE CREATED AND HE ADDRESSED A LOT OF THE ITEMS. SO RALPH, ARE YOU ON THE ZOOM? MAYBE NOT. Nothing's changed. So we did just to give you a little history. We did get our approval from the fire department on this project. We had done some additional renderings. Different angles from the building. Parking isn't the rear of the property we did extending the sidewalk up front 3 trees that are there now are going to stay believe the red maples, which is further up North. Well. either stay or may have to come out for the new driveway, but the deciduous trees, which are pretty mature now, they're probably 15 feet high. Those will remain. And we'd like to get preliminary site plan approval for the project so we can continue with the project and move it forward. Our next step would be obviously construction documents and drawings. And if there's any open loose items, we can have them addressed. I know there was talk about light trespass light up front. Has a little trespass over the sidewalk, which our engineer says. It's not a bad thing to have it for security or safety. The light in the back, we can put a shield on it if needed. It does face north south parking lots. So it's not a residential district there. But if it's the code, we can adhere to that.

And part of the reason for the code is also that that helps maintain the dark skies issued if you control the fact that light can't escape onto other people's property. So we don't want to set the precedent of allowing.

And there was a thing, I believe, something submitted for the maneuverability on the property with respect to deliveries and things like that.

Could we see that?

Can I ask you a question first?

Absolutely.

On the 62 set of civil drawings that came in, it appears as if that The exterior access stair down to the lower level, the basement, has been removed because it's not in any of the plans. It's not in our plans.

We have the basement stairs on the south side. That will remain.

It's just not on the stairs.

Maybe not on engineers' drawings, but it's on our drawings. Okay. I don't know if this came in, but I'd like to see it.

Yeah, is that the garbage truck?

Yeah, it was very, that was for any maneuver.

Yeah, actually, is it a front loading container? Or are we anticipating manual load containers?

Three or four yard? Yeah, I mean, that that equates out to rough.

Yeah, that's about 500 600 pounds of material, right? So that's about 15 units. But if it's a liftover, how does he approach the actual refuse area? He's not. It's going to be a side, so it's going to be manual load. Right. Which is okay as long as you have enough room to do that.

Yeah.

But he's also grazing the sidewalks. Yeah, I mean, he's over.

It's tight.

They'll roll out from the enclosure.

Yeah, so it's a manual load. You're not going to have a front load where it's going to lift over the top of the truck. Oh, they're even doing that.

All right. A lot of the Amazon vans, it seems to be pretty popular. There's enough room on the north side of the building to park and and deliver packages. The rear, there will be assigned deliveries in the rear for them to maneuver.

So there's not going to be any problem with trucks parking on Bedford Road to deliver?

No, not like the trucks currently for Arroway when they used to.

No, it's because of those that were making it.

Not that type of operation. No, the ambulance building. Don't try and use them as a precedent for allowing. I don't anticipate any parking.

Yeah, the I'm trying to see on the landscape plan.

Ralph is on Zoom now.

Is there have you been able to put some greenery between the handicapped access and all of that and the the area next door that this what what we refer to as the sea of asphalt oh towards arrow towards arrow i mean on the drawing yeah this picture here uh yeah there's pavement there yeah no i know this pavement there i was wondering if there was some greenery there's no buffer between see on the on the drawing on the on the drawings there's there seems to be a line down there but i think it's green property oh they made the property line green that was very clever Okay. So there really is no.

140 gets developed. Obviously there will be an opportunity for us to create something. Same ownership under different LLC.

I think that you can count on being asked to do something there.

So the problem is you can't fit anything at all on the.

tight so tight it's a narrow lot uh we have to here towards that back there we have a 20 foot drive while you're with what do you what do you have in the front there are plantings there yeah we have there's like I mentioned the three trees and uh it's a whole host of we have a landscape key plan the the one to the sort of right in the center is the one that you're likely to lose correct These three trees will stay here. Red maples at the north end and come out to the tribal.

Yeah, so what will you put in their place? So what will replace the red maples?

Oh.

I'm going to ask you to look at that some more and see if you can come up with something more.

This is the curb cut for 140. Those two will probably come out for our driveway access.

But will there be replanted? Well, that's what I'm saying. Could something be replanted?

Mark, are you looking for that? Sure. Somewhere's on the site.

Oh, you're talking about replanting them, not putting something else in their place. I mean, on the drawings, it looks like there's still some green there, but you're saying there's just not enough green for us.

And you won't have the visibility.

What about on the... Well, that's what I was wondering. I mean... Why that might not be possible? Well, we might let you plant on town property. We've done that occasionally. Am I going to be in trouble for saying that? Okay, look into the possibility of at least giving us one trader.

landscaping only enhances the project. So I'm all for it.

We have to clarify the the fact that this project is in fact exempt from from seeker and we've our director of planning has worked out a question sheet for us okay to to go through um to decide that so that we have a record of of clarifying for in case people don't understand what i'm talking about there's a recent law that exempts certain housing projects from the requirements of seeker which overnight became law and stopped the process, the secret process for this property, because this one does appear to be exempt for the following reasons. Will the project be connected to an existing community or public water system at the commencement of habitation? Yes. It says yes. Will the project be connected to an existing public sewer system at the commencement of habitation? Again, because of the Katahna Bedford Hills sewer system, the answer is yes. Is the project located on a previously disturbed site and one that has been substantially altered by a current or previous improvement or use at least two years before submission of an application? Yes. And abuts or joins or is opposite from another parcel that is or has been occupied by an improvement or use older than an industrial, other than an industrial or agricultural use at least two years before the submission of an application. And is not located in a fema designated 100-year floodplain or special hazard area and has not been used for agricultural purposes in the immediately preceding two years or three of the last five years before submission of an application and will the project contain less than 20 commercial retail community facility or other non-industrial non-residential use measured by gross floor area. And we don't have the numbers for that or do we?

It's fully residential. That's right. It's all multifamily.

Gee, why didn't I think of that? Let me do those calculations quickly now. And are less than 100 dwelling units proposed? Yes, definitely less than 100 dwelling units proposed. Are any single-family homes proposed on land less than one acre in size? There are no single-family homes proposed. required for that. So I think that we've answered all the questions as they have to be answered to clarify that. Could I have a motion that we have determined that this application is exempt under the new laws?

So moved.

Second. Is there any further discussion? All in favor? Aye. All opposed? It is now officially exempt. This is a continuation of a public hearing. So before I go any further with this, I'm going to ask if there's anyone in the courtroom who has anything to ask about this application. Is there anyone on the Zoom who has questions about this application? In that case, I think we're at the point where it's time to close the public hearing. I don't think there's any value in continuing. Is there any further discussion? All in favor of closing the public hearing? Aye. All opposed? Public hearing is closed. I do think we're ready for preliminary at this point. We've talked about the issues last time. We've talked about scale and the zoning, this is a quite zoning compliant proposal, had minor, very minor variances, which have been taken care of. One of them actually is a piece of the law that I think we need to try and change. So what do the rest of you think?

I agree.

Agreed.

conditions would be the satisfaction of the engineering issues that you're going through. Consideration of trying to keep a tree and any other landscaping that you come up with. Have you actually put on the plans a demonstration that the the light is not trespassed? It doesn't get into the back. Can you at least come up with a shade?

Yeah, we can note that and call it out on our drawings. And coordinate with our electrical drawings and the engineers as well.

Yeah, and provide us with a specification for the shade that you'd be putting on to take care of that. Anything else that we would want to make conditions of preliminary? Oh, that's you're going to have an elevator. How high is the elevator going to go? Is it going to go up to the roof or just to the MR?

I think I made reference to it. It's an MRL. Yeah, type of elevator. So it won't exceed our height. Our height is under 40 feet.

Okay. And it is there is there going to be some sort of tap on the building that holds the elevator.

I have an architectural type element on the top there. But again, when we get into the construction, it's not going to exceed our height. Yeah, that's actually about the overrun.

I think it's 12 feet. You don't want the overrun to penetrate the roof. Yes. That's what the point is. Yeah, it's 12. Yeah, it won't. It will not.

It's like 12.6 on the third floor. And he's got a gambrel roof.

Okay.

It won't exceed it.

So is...

It's not going to be a bulkhead of like an elevator bulkhead.

Yeah, it's not going to be something that's going to appear that is not on the drawings today.

And it's not going to be something that you'll see from the outside. Yeah.

Okay. Now it's not as if this has never happened to us. That's one condition of final approval is going to be that if there is any exterior item added, that is not changed or changed. For example, are you going to have a generator?

Generator probably not all electric building. Yeah.

Well, if at some point you do have a generator. Yeah.

I think you've shown the air conditioning. Yeah. The units we did show them on the south side of the building.

Yeah.

As long as that doesn't change, that doesn't change the height is established.

But we're.

We could entertain some solar.

We might be very happy if you did, but we'd want to know about it before.

I know the code is solar ready at least, so it'll be wired for that.

But we still, we're really trying to get away from being surprised by solar. things that happen on sites that we weren't expecting. Since we're always going to get blamed for it, we might as well know that.

That particular client isn't here.

I'm sorry?

I'm just saying that was an unfortunate situation with another client that was out of my control. For the record.

I'm not aiming this at you. I'm aiming it at the process.

I have to drive by it, so I want to be proud of it. So does my client, so.

Okay, so we. The conditions you just outlined.

Yeah.

2nd, do we have to identify the affordable units?

Uh. I think we do have to identify them before we do final.

Before final. Did you note which units are going to be the affordable units?

Yeah, there will be one, I believe, on each floor level. The one-bedroom ones, the center ones. We did note it on our floor.

Yeah, that's what I thought you put.

We did designate that.

Okay.

They're one-bedroom. We're not going to allocate a two-bedroom for that.

it's an inside unit uh but that meets the latent ventilation so it's yeah and then there's nine one bedrooms and six two bedrooms so there will be three uh designated and they'll be specifically designated and there has to be um some things done with the lease and the rest that you're aware of oh yeah housing authority all that guidelines And we'll that was a condition of the as well.

Yeah, make sure that and there'll be a restrictive covenant as well. So that's something we can work on with your attorney and our attorney to make sure that's covered and satisfied. We're into town code. So we'll work on that in the background.

Yeah, it would be very nice if we could have that in time for final. I'm not saying it would be required, but yeah, before file.

I mean, this is preliminary.

Yeah, but I'm giving a little bit of lead time for the final.

Thank you.

Okay, now we've talked so much, have we taken the vote? I don't think so. Is there any further discussion?

You didn't second it yet. No, but I will second it.

It is getting late. Okay, we have a motion and a second. Any further discussions? all in favor aye all opposed you have preliminary great thank you very much thank you appreciate it i'm not sure if i'm on next or the number two on the application because we have uh 190. so the next item on our agenda is 6185 adam street bedford hills it is oops i'm sorry consider a preliminary site plan application and steep slopes permit for the development of the new 10 unit including two aa ffh units apartment building with on-site parking and landscaping pursuant to town code 125-86 and 102 respectively

Even for the record, Stephen Helms, the Helms Group Architects, Rick Bolander from KSCJ with us tonight. Jan is in Canada and Rick's taking over the lead here. And we're again, we're successful last Thursday with our ZBA for the variances on this project. We needed 4 variances, a front yard, a rear yard, parking deficiency, and a slight increase in building coverage. Couple of major things that subsequent to our initial meeting with your board was that the sidewalk was extended up and that's illustrated.

It's tough to see with the landscaping here, but comes up from around here and then terminates about that point.

About the middle of the building, which would provide for pedestrian access in and out with stone wall retaining wall on either side.

Yeah, we're going to plan on dressing that up a bit. I'm not sure if I'm familiar with the site right now. It's not the prettiest of sites. So the goal is to kind of beautify that whole frontage with landscaping. There will be a small retaining wall in front, but again, we're going to dress that up with stone and whatnot and landscaping.

Hopefully native plants.

Absolutely. Only native plants. Yes. Correct.

Okay. So now the front doors are actually going to be...

As well as a handicap ramp on the South side.

Again, just stating that the rendering is still misleading. I don't think it was corrected from the last meeting.

And we've been in contact with Kevin Wynn of the Highway Department. We've had two meetings with him and kind of hashed out this front area with him. Also talked about, if you're familiar, again, just for reference, this is south and then traveling north. Okay. East on Adams Street, there's parallel parking along that. So the road is a little wider than it necessarily needs to be. So we're kind of utilizing that for the sidewalk. So just to limit the amount of earthwork. So there will be no more street parking than allowed in the existing spots that will that will remain on street parking. Just it tapers off as it gets close to our site. So there's extra space there that we're going to utilize for that sidewalk. So the road wouldn't narrow at all.

now i think one of the things we have to go through um i think we have to go through our exemption issue uh because there is at least the possibility that this application is also exempt from seeker so will the product project be connected to an existing community public water system at the commencement of habitation yes Will the project be connected to an existing public sewer system at the commencement of habitation?

Yes.

Is the project located on a previously disturbed site and one that has been substantially altered by a current or previous improvement or use at least two years before submission of an application?

Yes.

And abuts, adjoins, or is opposite from another parcel that is or has been occupied by an improvement or use other than an industrial or agricultural use at least two years before the submission of an application?

Yes.

is not located in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain or special flood hazard area.

No wetlands, buffers, watercourses, or floodplains.

So it is yes that it has not. We've got a double negative here. Has not been used for agricultural purposes in the immediately preceding two years or three of the last five years before submission of an application. Yes, it has not been. Will the project contain less than 20% commercial retail community facility or other non-industrial or non-residential use measured by gross floor area? It's all residential.

All residential.

Are there less than 100 dwelling units?

Yes. Only 10.

10. And are any single family homes proposed on land less than one acre in size in this development? No. No. Could I have a motion that because no was not answered? We didn't say no to any of the questions. The project is exempt from CEQR. Is there a second? Second. Is there any further discussion? All in favor? Aye. All opposed? You are exempt. You, I don't think you've got the, you're working on the steep slopes.

And then addressing all the engineer's comments as well. We had spoken to him prior and kind of gave him a heads up and said, you know, we're looking at 60% drawings here. So we anticipated a lot of his comments. We've addressed them already. We're still working through that right now. But no problem addressing it anymore.

So I don't think there's anything else we can do tonight. But it's good to see that you're making progress on it.

Very good progress.

And when you come back to us, we'd like to see any lighting. Absolutely. And again, maybe a bit more on the landscaping and the use of native plants.

And we'll identify the plants we're using just to ensure native.

I don't think there's anything else that we can do tonight. Okay, thank you.

Thank you very much. Take care.

Thanks again for your time.

Okay. Next item on our agenda. Sorry. Next item on our agenda is to consider a steep slopes application for the construction of a new single family home with onsite septic landscaping and related appurtenances pursuant to Town Code 102. The address is Nottingham Road and the owner applicant is Edmondo Simone.

Good evening, my name is Peter Scott. I'm an architect and engineer. We're here presenting a project on Nottingham Road. We were also successful at the ZVA and we were given a rear yard variances for the house and a front yard variance for a covered porch. We also took care of all the comment letters from Hahn Engineering and the only items left are He wants it flagged, the pre-construction meeting, et cetera, standard boilerplate. So we addressed all those items. A revision we made for the ZBA is because of some concerns by the neighbors. We incorporated some stormwater management, even though we weren't required to. We did it anyway to address concerns. We added a rain collection tank behind a garage, and we also added a infiltration structure in the front of the property, the net result of that was we have no increase in volume of stormwater for a proposed project on either the catch basin to the east or the catch basin across the street, which are two separate discharge areas. So we have a zero increase in volume. Another thing we did is that we were asked by the ZBA to enhance some of the design work in terms of retaining wall in the back with stone cladding and a planter wall, which is shown on the plan. And we added some additional tree plantings in the front to augment some of the trees that we were removing to build the house. And we also ended up putting mixed species of evergreens in the rear. to mitigate the extent of our variance. So therefore, the proposed improvements within the setback are shielded with this mixed species of evergreens. The parcel is empty behind us, but we did it anyway to mitigate that one issue. And that was the extent of it.

Okay. This is, is this still an open hearing? No. Okay. So it looks like you've taken care of most of really all of what needs to be taken care of. Are there any questions from members of the board?

The only thing I had was rock crushing.

and timing that sort of protocol that's can you i can answer that yes um uh the town engineer requested that we put together a a protocol for that uh and we are limiting the hours to weekdays only uh and So we had to put in the hours of hammering and rock crushing, weekdays, 8 to 5 o'clock, Saturdays prohibited, Sunday prohibited. And that was included in this one documentation with all sorts of notes and required inspections that the engineer required.

And what's the duration? How long do you expect that period to take?

We're expecting about six months at the max. Mm-hmm. We did submit you a whole outline program with our initial submission. We described where it's going, location, scheduling, et cetera.

Now you're sure that there's not going to be any blasting?

We're not using blasting.

Okay. So we may make that a condition of approval.

Yes, that's correct.

Just so if something changes, you'd have to come back to us because there's a blasting protocol.

That's acceptable.

Okay. Anybody have anything else?

I will say that I still believe that the renderings should be slightly misleading in terms of the scale and the closeness to the road. So I just want to go on record and say, I don't believe the end result is going to look like the renderings are fading. And I do not believe that it is in keeping with the character of the immediate neighborhood.

I'm not too thrilled about six months of hammering and crushing.

Yeah, no.

Particularly starting at 8 o'clock and ending at 5 o'clock every weekday.

It is. I was sitting there feeling grateful for no Saturday or Sunday, but when you put it that way, it is pretty disturbing. I don't know what we can do about it, though.

I mean, I'm living right now at a well, our weekend home, they're putting in a tennis court. And for the past two months, they've been hammered on weekends to that happens to be the jurisdiction allowed it. It's not fun.

No, I did that.

We lost a fox nest.

But what can we do? I'm open to suggestions.

I'm loath to limit the time because it's going to take long.

Yeah.

I don't know if there is a solution.

If I may comment a couple things.

To go back to the nature of our improvement, the Zoning Board of Appeals required us to do an outline of how our building works with the grades and with the neighboring houses. And we have set the house at the same elevation as a neighbor to the north. And in addition, our relationship between the height of our house to that of the roadway is similar to the house on the right side of this illustration. So we moved everything to match the relationship between this house That house, and this is a flatter lot, but these two are the same elevation as depicted by these lines. And this is to scale, of course, what we're proposing. So we're not creating an edifice here. We blended it with the neighboring properties in terms of their scale. Also, the house is actually smaller than the houses on each side. As you can see by the footprints, we are narrower.

But I would stress that my colleague's point is not so much the design of the house as the 18-foot wall that does not exist in either of the other two houses.

yeah in regards to the walls as we described to the engineer we did file full plans for construction of the walls uh but if the uh rock faces are are um without fissures we want to eliminate the wall if we can but at this point in time i haven't excavated in the hill so i can't tell if we're gonna have fissures there or not but if we can leave that uh wall of rock open. At the base of it, we have a five-foot-wide bench, which is typical when you do stepped blasting or hammering at the rock. We have this lower planter, which is five feet wide, serves as a ledge and a stepped sort of application. So we're anticipating removing most of that upper wall. That was just the exposed rock. Again, we have overburden on the site. We did test holes. We have between four and five feet of overburden on the property, but dead center in the lot, there is a rock outcropping, but it's very easy for us to get there because our site already has a road that goes through it. There's actually a road that... That extends up the hillside. And that would take us, we can drive right up it right now. And we would just hammer the face of the rock in this area to achieve our relative grades. And we're not digging a hole in the ground. We're shearing off an open face, which is very easy to hammer, especially in this application. So we don't anticipate any problems with the hammering at all.

I suspect it's more the neighbors that are anticipating the problems with the hammering.

Yes, I mean, we're working on a hammering job right now in Sherman, Connecticut. We spoke to all the neighbors in that particular application. We are good neighbors. In fact, the homeowner who's going to live here is in the audience, and we've already spoken to many of the neighbors already. We're going to be transparent with them. We'll tell them when we're going to do things. We have a water truck anticipated to be on the site. If we create any dust, we'll water it down as we go. And we're doing everything we can to sort of mitigate that. And again, we did do test holes on this old roadway, and we were getting certain depths. But when we design, we have to be conservative in our approach, because I don't want to mislead anyone to say we're only reducing the amount of the walls versus increasing them for unforeseen circumstances. So we looked into all those various components and that was reviewed by the TAD engineer.

Okay, I think that it's time for a motion on this. Could I have a motion? This one was not, but we will let you comment. It's not a public hearing, so that's why I didn't announce it. But if you're here to comment on it.

My name is Bill McIntosh. I am immediately to the west where this house is being constructed. And am I led to understand that ZBA has approved this 18-foot retention wall?

Yes.

Which is three times the size of what the town code calls for. And you presented that to the town. Okay. Yes. I don't even know when that meeting took place, but I was not aware of it. Also, this is rather cavalier this 6 months of 5 to 8 o'clock to 5 o'clock removal of stone. That's egregious and I just want to go on record to saying that this is. If this is approved, you're going to have a lot of neighbors that are not going to be very happy with this. I'll leave it at that.

Thank you. Any other comments?

Thank you for your time and attention to this matter. We've been coming to meetings for this purpose, for the Zoning Board of Appeals and to this meeting because we all live in the neighborhood. We live on Robin Hood. My name is Anna Ribeiro. And I'm happy with what the mitigation that they have proposed for the water. But if you've walked the land like you, several members have said in the past that they've go to the sites. He's just proposed that the building is now on par at eye level with the houses adjacent to it. If you've been to the property, it's straight up an incline. That's why it's going to take six months of drilling because it's all rock. This building was never designed to have a property on it. It needed exemptions for the front. It needs exemptions for the back. It needs exemptions for the retaining wall. The reason why the house is smaller is because it does not have anywhere to put the septic fields because it feeds into wetlands, which our neighbor has come and shown you in the past just down the stream across from him into Robin Hood. There are many, many, many concerns with this, and we don't want to be bad neighbors. We all certainly would have better things to do with our Monday evenings than come and speak here. But this is egregious to the neighborhood, to what they're proposing to put there, as well as what it's going to impact with the character of the neighborhood, which we care about, with the... with the noise that is going to create, many people in the neighborhood work from home, including the person who's going to speak next. This is impossible to have so many things that need to be altered to allow for this property to be developed. So I ask you that you please look at all of these concerns because it really is quite egregious to the neighborhood and it alters the character completely. Thank you for your time.

Thank you.

Hi, there, uh, Jim Venner live across the street. Um, so I also spoke briefly last time. Uh, similarly, that wasn't an open hearing or whatever, but I was told this wouldn't be as well, but that there would be an opportunity to ask questions. So. In the documentation that was submitted, there's no specific, uh, addressing to my previous letters. So I just, and I don't know if it was taken into record. So I just wanted to make sure that you guys were taking into account a couple of things that I think are outstanding. The first is the septic system. You'll note that it changed. They flipped one being primary and one being reserve septic field. The reserve still discharges that 25th down gradient is an unlined storm drain. That discharges neighboring properties, and I understand there still has to be consistent rigor between the primary and the reserve. There's really no reason why it shouldn't be. And I haven't seen the proposal, the permit. Sorry. So, the swift proposal didn't include reference to the adjacent storm drain. So I'm assuming. The also didn't so I just want to make sure that you are looking at the proposed septic, both the primary and the reserve to make sure that they are not directly upgrade into an online storm drain. Which would be a problem.

Is there some way we can. Can I respond?

Sure.

The project has approvals from both the New York City DEP and the Department of health. And they went to the house sites and they inspected everything on the property. There is a potential infiltration pipe in the back of the house. And it has to connect to this storm drain on the street. If the infiltration structure that the neighbors have installed is not connected to that pipe, then it's in violation of health department of their own septic system. So we basically went over this with the health department. We have a permit in place. I have an approved permit for that. And that's how we address the issue with that. We did offer at a meeting at the ZBA that we could always switch, make this reserve and make this the primary. It really doesn't matter to us. And there seem to be a lot of issues about taking trees out in this part of the project. We don't mind making this the primary and that reserve. It doesn't matter. It's approved. I can pick and choose whichever one we want to utilize. And just to keep things neighborly, we are willing to switch the two. it's it's our prerogative with the health department uh so basically yes we have the permits in place uh for the project uh and again um like as a good neighbor we're trying to do whatever we can to keep it rolling beyond that uh it's pretty much stands alone what you see before you it's a house or a driveway

Can I ask a quick clarification? So, I obviously haven't seen the documentation, so I appreciate your responding it. So it's clear in the. Permanent applications that potentially 20 foot down gradient from the reserve septic system. There is an online storm drain.

That actually that the they're alluding to a discharge point here, which happens to be lined. No, I'm not.

It's a it's a 40 foot stretch of unpiped, unlined water course. Well, the wetlands is it's not a wetland.

It's a ditch. Does it exist?

It's an infiltration trench discharge from a piping behind the house to the west. And West Georgia County allows me to be within 20 feet of the ditch. They evaluated it.

Is the ditch part of the general drainage system of the property? I mean, just... But usually ditches are formed because they are part of naturally occurring drainage systems.

It was added by an infiltration trench behind a house. That's what's happening here. There's a pipe behind a house and there's a drain.

No, I understand that.

Is this property entering?

Is the drainage from this property entering into that

To be clear, I'm only referring to septic discharge. But I mean, but they typically subnet subsurface follows the surface discharge flow as well.

So, you're talking about the subsurface.

Yeah, that's what flagged it for me was that the septic system is 20 foot upgrade into Jason online storm.

And the health department approved it.

I think the only thing I can think of is that you have to discuss it with the health department. I mean, that's the way of finding out if they're aware of it, is to inform them of it.

I haven't seen any documentation, so.

We filed the permits with your department, the health department. Or CPA has them. Somebody has them. Town engineer has them.

for the application has been posted online. Anything submitted by me.

That definitely was not under the, well, I'm happy to follow up as needed.

You might have to go back a series of months we've been at this for, I don't know, five, six, seven, you've probably lost track.

Five months.

But if you don't mind, I can show this gentleman a copy of what you've provided to my office, which has been posted online if you're okay with that. Yes, we filed it. Yeah, we filed it. Yes. Yes. If you would.

Yes. It's in February of 2026. It's approved.

I don't think there's anything else we could do.

And the aesthetics, the same aesthetic points I made last time as well, they kind of went nowhere. I just want to make sure they found a home, whether you agree or disagree.

We listened. I understand, frankly, why you're not crazy about it. I'm not crazy about it either. One of the problems that we have is that it's quite possible that this is a lot that shouldn't have been approved years ago when it was approved. the laws change, the people doing the laws change. We can't go back and say, gee, that subdivision from 50 years ago that made this a separate lot should never have happened. We can say that, but we can't do anything about it. It was a buildable lot in the sense that the owner of that lot has been paying taxes. The owners of that lot have been paying taxes on that lot as if it was a buildable lot for all the years they've owned it. The town can't come along when somebody finally wants to develop it and say, oh, sorry, it's really not a buildable lot. So I don't think that we can do anything more of it. We've looked at the property. We looked at whether there were alternative locations. I know this is hard to believe, but that's probably the place where you'd have the least impact on the land. It's not a prime lot. I grant you that. But I don't think there's anything that we can do that met the engineering requirements for this. And that's really what it's about. We don't have aesthetic control over this. It's not like something in the middle of the historic district in Bedford Village. I know we talk a lot about aesthetics under those circumstances, but There's no place we can really go with with this 1.

Sure, the final word is the consistency with the other houses in the.

We don't have architectural review in this area. When you've heard us talking about consistency with other houses tonight, it's been with historic districts. And that's one of the things you exchange for being able to talk about the consistency of the houses is that every time you want to do anything on your own house, you also have to jump through hoops that the rest of the town doesn't have to jump through. It's something of a two-way street. So at least as far as things stand in Bedford these days, we do not have architectural view beyond our various historic districts.

Okay. Thanks for your time, and I'll follow up with the health department, I guess.

I would do that if I were you.

I just brought a picture of the adjacent homes. We have columns. They have columns on both sides of us. And there's a two-story house right down the end of the street.

Yeah, we'll keep away from that. You know that none of it has to do with the columns and that there is an 18-foot wall next to them that's what it's about. And I don't try our patience by pointing out that they all have columns.

Right. They're also half the size.

Yeah, it. I think it's time. It is an unlisted action to see her, so we need to do the. Part 1. Thank you. Okay, brief description, 3,000 square foot single family house, two stories, big bedroom. Everything looks fine on page one. Does anybody see anything they disagree with on page one?

No.

okay we have a correction on number two it did need an area variances so that was supposed to be yes not a no um committed use under zoning regs uh consistent with the adopted comprehensive plan yes and yes um um i would question number six frankly is the proposed action consistent with the predominant character of the existing builder natural landscape that should be no okay um Jessica, if I'm going to correct something on this, do you want me to do it on this paper? That's fine. OK. Can I borrow a pencil? Or I can do it after we're done. OK. Well, I would suggest in item 6 that we should be checking no. Is the site of the proposed action located in or does it adjoin a state critical environmental area? If yes, identify no. It won't change traffic or transportation services or pedestrian services. It meets the building energy.

It's going to be connected to an existing water supply.

It doesn't need a new well. Um, doesn't connect to existing wastewater utilities. It's going to do some service sewage disposal. It's not contiguous to us, uh, state historic preservation site, uh, or something sensitive to, um, archeology. I don't believe that that's actually, this is for things listed on the national or state register and cemeteries are generally not on the national register. Does any portion of the site of the proposed action or lands adjoining the proposed action contain wetlands or other water bodies regulated by the federal, state, or local agency? There are no wetlands on this site. Typical habitat types, checked forests and suburban. And that would appear to be it. Does the site of the proposed action contain any species of animal or associated habitats listed by the state or federal government as threatened or endangered? No, it's not in the 100-year floodplain. It will create stormwater discharge. The stormwater discharges will not flow to adjacent properties. they will be directed to establish conveyance systems. Does the proposed action include construction or other activities that result in impounding of water? No. Has the property been the location of an active or closed solid waste management facility? No. Has the site of the proposed action or an adjoining property been the subject of remediation? No. So that's the end of the part one. Now we have to do part two. And I believe I have a copy here.

Okay.

Will the proposed action create a material conflict with an adopted land use plan or zoning regulations? No. Will the proposed action result in a change in the use or the intensity of use of the land?

No.

No. Will the proposed action impair the character or quality of the existing community?

I put moderate to large impact.

Will the proposed action have an impact on the environmental characteristics that cause the establishment of a critical environmental area? No. Will the proposed action result in an adverse change in the existing level of traffic? No. Will the proposed action create an increase in the use of energy and it fails to incorporate reasonably available energy conservation? No. Will the proposed action impact existing public or private water supplies? No. Not wastewater treatment utilities either. Will the proposed action impair the character or quality of important historic, archaeological, architectural, or aesthetic resources? No. Will the proposed action result in an adverse change to natural resources? No. Well, the proposed action resulted in an increase in the potential for erosion, flooding or drainage.

No, I need trouble. We don't actually know as a result of the changing topography.

The engineering we have, we have to take that to account. We generally, I mean, in 1, since we never know that.

what the engineer has told us the systems are designed for.

I sympathize with your concern, but I think given the sign off of our engineer, he did ask for a substantial bond. Will the proposed action result in an increase in the potential for erosion, flooding, or drainage problems? No. Will the proposed action create a hazard to environmental resources or human health? No. And we're down to the part three, determination of significance.

Well, does there need to be a part three drafted for the one?

That's what we need to do right now, yes. We have the one that we've checked. Will the proposed action impair the character or quality of the existing community? They have added extra trees. Is there anything else that we would suggest could be done to improve the situation. The trees, I think, help. And I would specify the planting of the trees.

Well, there are trees on this map that aren't really showing the new trees, but there's other trees here, but they're tall and they can block the view of the picture. Well, that's... Tree preservation plan. There's trees remaining in the front. I didn't show them on this

Are you planning, do you have, so you have a map of the trees that are remaining? Yes. Would you, if we're going to use this as mitigation, then I think we would ask that if any of those trees die within a five-year period that they, completion of the project, that they would be replaced. if they're going to be part of the mitigation.

Well, one reason why we are hoping to make this reserve so we wouldn't have to cut the trees down because you only need a reserve if you have a failure of primary.

To be clear, the area you just pointed here is not actually shown in the renderings we were alluding to in the previous page.

That's correct. I'm not showing. I'm only looking at the picture of the house.

But are you implying that there's trees in front of the house that are going to remain?

Yeah, I mean, it's the house that to some extent is... We're keeping a bunch of big trees right in this area here.

Quantify a bunch.

there are one to four trees and one to 30 inch glasses. So we're not removing a 30, an eight, a 12. In this one area right here, we're keeping these large trees in that location. The site, they're 60 feet high, they're staying. But in terms of our imagery, we want to show up.

March on the primary. How many are you going to lose on the primary field?

If we switch the primaries up here, you know, the primary as you plan to do it.

As you plan to do it.

Yeah, so basically we're only in this area losing 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 10 here. And by doing the switch, we're saving 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13. About 30 treats. So it makes sense to split them.

So that makes sense, but this question is really about the impact of the house on the neighborhood. And so the relevant trees to this issue are the four or five that you talked about in front of the house, it seems to me. So back to my original question, are you willing to say that for the next five years, if anything happens to one of those trees, it gets replaced? Not in kind. I'm not saying that you have to take a 60-foot tree and replace it with a 60-foot tree. But if one of those trees dies.

I understand. Yes, we're willing to do that.

Okay, are you also in the front? Are you raising the power lines? Because I'm looking at the street to refresh my memory, but the power line sort of sag in front. Are you raising them in order to get. All your trucks and normal cars are going to be.

Yes, it's required by the utility company because they're insufficiently. They have to fix that for us.

So that's on the utility company. Not on you.

Okay, so have you got that condition down about the trees? Yes. That's, I think, the only medication we can offer and it speaks to what the issue was. So that should be part of part three is an explanation of the tree preservation issue, as well as the trees that have been planted as part of the landscaping.

On other projects we've done similar to this, we've had representative of the town come, we locate where we want to put the trees, but we're open to suggestions from local representatives of the town if it's a better place to move them. We're willing to work with you in terms of putting the trees on the site. Sometimes it's hard to put, we did show we love where we want to put them, but we're flexible to get the most bang for the buck if you put something in there. So I've done that in a lot of other

Let me ask the neighbors who've been concerned about that. Would you feel that having some voice in deciding where the trees that are going to be planted in front of the house go might be helpful? Are there particular sight lines that you'd like blocked with a tree or that kind of thing? Or do you think it doesn't make a difference?

between the front of the house and the street. So it's not, I think a different drawing shows where some trees are, but between the street and the front of the house.

We have a problem because you're not getting recorded on the, you have to talk into the mic, I'm sorry.

My interest is the trees between the street and the front of the house, because it looks so different from the rest of the community, as you emphasized. And from the drawing, especially the rendering, it shows zero trees in front from that really the one that looks like you're looking through a fisheye lens. So but then the picture, the schematic showing the trees, Looks a little different, so I just want trees between the street and the house to.

Well, that you think is sufficient then perhaps the offer of.

It stands happy to do that. Look at input or through representative the town together there locate trees. We have no problem.

You have to use the microphone, which you're talking to. I keep getting these motions from back of the room. So how would we do this? The applicant will check in with the planning department at the time the trees are planted and contact the neighbors.

Would one of you like to be on?

Why not? We've actually done that in the past. We've done a tree committee on the board for different projects. We don't usually take two of us, so it's not one by themselves. Do I have any volunteers to?

I'm around the corner.

Would I, could I get, okay. Jared and Michael will, um, volunteer to make contact with, with the neighbors and, and talk about the siting of the trees. And how many trees are involved that you're, that you're planting in the front? I wouldn't worry about the ones in the, in the back that, Okay, I think that's the best we can do. I know it's not, but it helps. I thank you for offering. I think that that's it could i have a motion to conclude that on the basis of this and with the exponent with the mitigation discussed with with the trees that there's not going to be a significant impact environmental impact from this proposal i'll make the motion is there a second i'll second I have a motion and a second. Is there any further discussion? All in favor?

Aye.

Are you sure you meant that? Okay. All opposed? Okay. You have the exact facts. Now, Could I have a motion to grant the steep slopes permit with the conditions listed in the engineer's memo? And I believe there was also a bond suggested.

125,000.

Yeah. So that- 125,000. It says if the planning board feels it's necessary for there to be a bond, I would say the planning board feels it's necessary for there to be a bond. Do we have to have a separate vote on that or just the fact that we make it part of the general? So I'll make the motion to approve the steep slopes permit with those conditions.

Second.

Any further discussion all in favor I all opposed. 3, 3 eyes in 1 day. Okay, so you've got it.

Thank you very much. Can I get a copy of the bond as well? I never got a copy of it from the town.

Well, it's, it's a. Okay. okay well thank you very much all right next item on the on our agenda is buried i always lose my agenda by the end of the meeting can you take this and get it back to jessica please ah Next item on our agenda is to consider an application for a special use permit for an accessory structure or barn greater than 20 feet in height and 2,500 square feet in size pursuant to Town Code Article III, Section 125-27 , for a special permit amendment for the boarding of more than 10 horses pursuant to Town Code Article III. Section 125-78, Enforced Special Permit for Landfilling Activity in Connection with the Creation of an Outdoor Riding Route Pursuant to Town Code, Chapter 125-67. The owner applicant is Taylor Marie Harris Trust, 2012, and the address is 145 Broadbrook Road, Bedford Hills.

Good evening, everyone. Good evening. I'm Jamie Splane of Hogan Rossi and Liguori. I have with me also Matt Bode, who is one of the owners of the property, Dave Zublin, who is the designer and contractor to build the buildings. And Dave Zublin is, I believe, available via Zoom if there's any engineering questions on this. And I commend you for your patience. Thank you. I commend you all for hearing these applications tonight and doing such a thorough review. So we were in front of the Zoning Board last Thursday and we had four variances granted.

It was a busy night on Thursday.

It was a busy night on Thursday. Before that, we were in front of you in May. At that time, the public hearing was closed. We had not received any comments at that time. I understand you got a letter today and that neighbor was at the ZBA and the ZBA did address some of her comments at that time. We have submitted a SWIFT plan to the town engineer and received comments, but he indicated that he was okay with the approval process moving forward and any comments could be addressed after approval in regards to the permitting process. I believe the engineer, as I said, is available, but they were all relatively minor comments on the farm application. This is a commercial boarding stable within the Westchester County Agricultural District. The plan here is to remove a number of buildings on the site. I'll go through this very briefly because I know it's been before you before, but it was a month ago. Currently, when you go onto the site, there is this very beautiful focal point building that has four stables in it, and then there's these piecemeal various barns with stabling in them. The plan is to remove a number of these buildings, this barn, this barn, and these shed row barns, and to put one centralized 20 stall barn. The only barn that's remaining is that four stall focal point barn when you enter and then there'll be a 20 stall barn here. There's also going to be some shed row added to the existing exercise barn in order to store equipment and different things that are used on the site because they're really at this point in time is no equipment storage available. The paddock area will be over here with an outdoor arena in the back and proposed grass derby. On this side of the site is 684. There's also proposed a gate to be added to the property as an entrance to the farm. Essentially, when you go onto this property off of Broad Rook Road, you first enter, you see the frame house on the site that Mr. Bodie and Teller Bodie, his wife, reside in with their son. Then now there'll be a gate in the back really for the safety of the horses and also to enter into that commercial equestrian operation in the back. keep it all centralized, and really create one flowing site plan as opposed to what previously existed, which was kind of a piecemeal situation. I believe, Chairwoman, you've been out to the site previously and you're pretty familiar with what is existing. There is a dumpster for manure storage proposed on this side of the property, which I believe was always an issue in the past, the dumpster storage location. We were in front of the zoning board for a coverage variance, which was approved, a variance for the size of the accessory structure, a variance to permit two one-half bathrooms in the barn structure, as well as a variance for the number of horses permitted onsite because of the way the code is written. So we are asking for a special permit from your board, but also needed to obtain a variance from the zoning board. I know that there was a question in the, though the public hearing was ended at the last meeting, there was a question about screening. I do have photos in my file if you'd like to see, but there is very clear screening currently existing. The neighbor has indicated that screening is on her property and a condition of the variance was that if any of those trees were to fall, that screening would be placed on the applicant's property in order to ensure that that screening line continues. And we have no issue with that condition, of course. We're happy to comply. We don't want any issues with screening for the existing buildings. The barn that is being proposed is actually further than the neighboring property's residence than what's currently in existence.

The letter that we got seemed to indicate that there was a planting plan associated with an earlier approval, 2008 or 2009, that had not been completed.

I saw that in the letter as well. I can't speak to a prior planting plan. It indicated also a picture of it, but there was nothing attached to it. Obviously, if there's any conditions that haven't been fulfilled, we're going to comply with anything that's in existence.

So we could refer back to those conditions?

Of course, yes, of any prior approvals.

Yeah. We just got the letter tonight, so there was no time to investigate what it said.

And I know there was also indication to drainage. Our engineer is present, but the engineer is working with the town attorney on any town engineer on the swap. There isn't an ongoing management plan proposed because of the fact that it's a agricultural structure with less than five acres of disturbance. However, he indicated to me that all grading that there would be grading done in the grading would be towards the east.

OK. So we've got two special permits and one amendment of the special permit, correct? Yes. Does anybody have any other questions? We did get the, uh, oh, one of the special permits is, is for bringing in Phil. And we got a, a memo from the engineer, uh, okaying that. So we have, I think we have everything we need to go forward with this. We do need to do seeker because it is a, it's a type two. A type two. It is a type two?

Yes, agricultural buildings.

Oh, that makes life easier. Yes, absolutely.

okay so well we usually don't we're not bothering with that um we've reached the consensus that is aside too um so we would do we did I, these combined special permits always drive me bonkers because I never know whether to do this three separate ones or two.

You could do, you might want to split this one into the special permit for the keeping of 10 or more horses, which was up to 24, I believe the variance. Yes. And then your special permits separately for the actual construction elements of the proposed farm stack those together with your site plan.

And then what do we do with the bringing in fill?

That'll go with the construction of the new barn as well.

Okay. All right. Let's start with the number of horses because that kind of controls all the others. Could I have a motion to approve a special permit for the 24 horses? I don't think any of the engineer's material really has to do with that.

And I would bring in the zoning board's approval.

So the conditions would be any conditions on the zoning board's approval, any conditions still not fulfilled by the earlier approval. I think that should go with the horses one. And then the conditions listed by the town engineer plus the standard conditions for the special permit. So you've moved, Michael, you seconded. Is there any further discussion? All in favor? Aye. All opposed? We've got that. Then for construction, we've got the special permit for the size of the barn and the height of the barn and the special permit for the bringing in a fill. There's the engineer's conditions, particularly for the fill. Any zoning board conditions? And I think I'll throw in any leftover conditions from the previous approval as well, which would be the same thing. Could I have a motion with those conditions?

Before you do, I just want to make sure the planning board saw that there was a recommendation for a performance bond.

Oh, yes. I just want to make sure that you want to include that as part of it. Yes.

Okay, great.

Yeah. so that's a condition so it's yeah with the conditions that you've just to remember correct is one of you going to say second okay hey we have a motion and a second any further discussion all in favor aye all opposed you've got it thank you very much I think we've done it all it's getting late and I'm not sure at this point Okay, next item on our agenda is to consider a minor amendment to a previously approved two lot subdivision. We've looked at this before. Is there anyone here for this applicant? Anybody on the zoom for this applicant?

Hi, Michael. Hi, how are you? Can you all hear me?

Yeah, talk a little bit louder.

Okay. Yeah, I'm sure you all remember me from... We remember you well. He's muted.

We may have just lost you, however.

No, no, I'm back. Zoom rebooted there for a second. Let me turn my video on as well. Now you might be able to see me. Hopefully you all remember me. Bedford Village. This is a small two lot subdivision. I went, the board's already seen this. You've approved it. You approved the final plat. I went to the health department and they wanted the septic information reformatted on the plat. So I did that. And then there was a minor clarification about the driveway and access to the town right of way. And I can show you though, let me just share my screen and I can show you the differences, which are in fact minor. Hopefully you can see this.

Got it.

Okay, great. Let me zoom in a little bit.

So this is the new version. So this is the chart for the health department. Again, all the numbers and all the values of percolation rates, et cetera, are all exactly the same. It's just a different format. And I can show you the previous version if you want to compare them. And then the other question was the, uh, at the end of the street here, uh, driveway access. Um, I think I had mentioned that, uh, the neighbor across the street is actually developing this piece of property down here and has now placed this, uh, this bit of road here. So the driveway extension that I propose, uh, would be, would connect right into the existing pavement. So those are the two changes. I can go to the old one if you want to see the comparison. But this is the version I'm hoping to approve.

Okay. This looks like you've accomplished what needed to be accomplished. An amendment would just be a type two. Could I have a motion to approve this amendment to the site plan? I don't. to the amendment to the plan. I don't think there should be any other conditions. Actually, it's an amendment to the subdivision, isn't it? So it's an amendment to the subdivision. Do I have a motion?

So moved.

Is there a second? Second. A motion and a second. Is there any further discussion? All in favor? Aye. Aye. All opposed? You have your amendments.

Great. Thank you. I did submit the final plot for signature, the Mylar. So it is there.

I will get it signed.

Excellent. Thank you very much. I appreciate it.

Okay. The next item on our agenda is consider a waiver of site plan application for a freestanding sign in the CB zoning district.

Hello. I'm John Oliva with C&M Signs. How is everyone? I think back in 2020, Paul tried to get a permit, or I think he went before the board. It was during the pandemic. I don't know if he ever actually...

I think we okayed the sign, I'm pretty sure.

Yeah, so I went to get a permit to replace with the new name, and I was told there's no site plan waiver for the signs at all. So that's why I'm here.

Are you doing 24 Woodsbridge or 14 Main Street?

24 Woodsbridge.

Yeah, it's a hanging sign.

There's two existing signs and I'm recovering both of them. They're within code for square feet. The heights vary.

Yeah, maybe. Yeah, that's now I wonder is the issue is the issue that the signs is just a sign permit. It's not a site plan. Because if they told you that you couldn't get a waiver.

But where was it? Nothing was on file. That's what I was told.

that nothing was on file.

So he had I had paperwork when Paulie took over the place. And he filled everything while we filled it out kind of together. And he was supposed to get it approved. So according to Angel and the building department, he never got it approved. But I can't approve. I can't prove or disprove that.

So but this is a new sign anyway, because we're changing the name.

But he's maintaining the same book.

I know.

You're essentially legalizing it.

Correct.

Yeah. I'm pretty sure I remember voting on that sign, but that's... Well, there's no record of it.

At least that's what I was told.

At this point, I could be making it up. I know we voted on the same plan.

I'm glad you saved the heaviest part for the end of the evening.

The sign looks just fine.

There's no change in size, and the letters conform to the code for height. And there's not much to say, really.

Could I have a motion? I have a motion and a second to approve the sign. I don't see any need for conditions on this. Is there any further discussion? All in favor. All opposed. You have your sign.

Thank you.

I hope it was worth waiting for. Okay, next item is another waiver site plan application for freestanding sign CB zoning district. This is located at 14 Main Street in Bedford Hills. The applicant is the collective Westchester LLC and the owner is Bristol Enterprises LLC. Is there someone on the Zoom to do this?

Hello.

Hello.

Good evening, everybody. My name is Brian Sabatis from sign works. And I'm here for the collective and their sign. So we have a Can everybody hear me?

Yeah, we can hear you.

Okay. So we have a freestanding sign. It's a new antique shop right at 14 Main Street. We put in for the paperwork for the permit application, and we're told that since it's a freestanding sign in the specific zone, we had to come before the planning board to get approval.

You were told correctly. Do you want to would you like to present and sign to us?

Sure. Can everybody see my screen?

Yes, now we can.

Okay, great. So it's just a very classic, basic woodcarve sign made of HDU high density urethane, inch and a half thick. It's got the scalloped corners, very classic look. It is in the range of the code with the distance from the ground at 12 inches. it's four foot by three foot in height it's carved filled black lettering with the white being the face with black painted posts cedar posts this is a rendering of what it would look like um i did go back and take more measurements because i think that it might look better over here where there's a bit of a gap So I actually, this was the survey showing that we would be over the 10 feet from the stone wall. But I did another rendering just to put it into that little gap area here where I think it looks a little bit, I don't know, I feel like it fits better.

I think I agree with you.

Right. And I think that the client really wanted it to be in this area so that they have the majority of this building. So that the traffic coming down the main street here can see the sign. And I also took photographs of the tape measure to show the exact placement of where it would be. And also showing how far it would be from the setback from the stone wall.

But I think that these are... And it makes all the setback.

Yes, it does. With plenty of room.

think it looks like a perfectly fine sign i prefer the option the second so yeah me too um yeah it just fits better in that little spot because there's a little gap where the hedges aren't there so it kind of now it also draws the eye to the building and it's a it's a lovely building too i think that's one of the historic buildings in in bedford hills

So building, I think they've done a beautiful job inside from what I've seen.

Could I have a motion? And I don't think there any. Yeah, yes.

Location.

Is there a second second, the motion a second to approve the sign in the second location that you proposed? Is there any further discussion? All in favor? Aye. All opposed? You have your sign. Thank you so much.

I appreciate it. I was actually at the zoning meeting on Thursday also. And that was interesting. I've learned a lot about horses.

Okay.

You guys have a great night. Thanks for hanging in there. Appreciate it.

Okay. Thank you.

Thank you.

Could I have a motion to adjourn the meeting? So moved. Is there a second?

Second.

All in favor? Aye.

All opposed?