Planning Board - Regular Meeting

bring this this meeting of the Bedford Planning Board to order. The first item on our agenda is to consider an application for the renewal of a special use permit for a customary home occupation pursuant to Town Code 125-28. Is this a public hearing? Uh, is there someone here to speak for the applicant? Do we pick this up? Um, do we touch this? I don't think so, unless

Okay. Hi. So, uh, I'm Alicia. This is my wife, Maria. We first came before the this board in 2006. This is our sixth time asking for a renewal. Uh the last time was for seven years. Nothing's changed other than the fact that we're older. We work less. Um we also now have fewer people who come into our office in the home because of the influence of COVID and introduction of Zoom. Uh and so we're here for renewal, but we're also asking uh we're we're old. Uh I'm 81, Marie's 82. I don't know how many years we're going to be working, but we would like, if possible, to get a permit for an extended period of time so we don't have to keep coming before the board.

Okay. Um, as far as I know, before I open the the room to the to the public, the the meeting to the public, uh, there have been no violations on the property. We have not had any uh complaints about it. No complaints. No changes. No changes. Nothing other than what I said, which is we have less traffic.

And usually people don't tell us about that. So there's no evidence on the before us to indicate that there are any problems whatsoever. However, this is a public hearing. Um, are there any comments or questions from members of the public concerns? Uh, on the Zoom, is there anyone on the Zoom who has any questions or concerns about this application? I think we are of no interest anyone.

I wouldn't put it that way. Um, it seems to me that since there are no questions or comments from members of the public, I will open it to um, members of the board. Do you have any questions or comments? No questions. No, I I will let the thunder speak for itself. Yeah. Anybody? Diane, Michael. In that case, could I have a motion to close the public hearing? So moved. Second. All in favor? I

I. All oppose. The public hearing is closed. Um I think the request for a longer than than usual uh permit at this point makes a lot of sense. Um the last one was seven years. Seems to me 10 years might be enough time. I mean, although we'd be very impressed if it would be nice. I mean, actuarially, not likely, but who knows? You think 10 years might do the the trick. 10 years might might take care of I I think it should be Who knows, right? You never know. How How do members of the board feel about that?

No objection. Agreed. No objection. Yeah. It just seems like a reasonable thing. Um in that case um first of all to think in terms of seeker this is a type two or action I believe is could I have a motion that it is a type two action? So moved. Is there a second? Second. Any further discussion? All in favor of it being a type two. I

I. All opposed. It is indeed a type two action. Um, if we were to approve this, um, we would have the general conditions for the special use permit. I'm not going to go through them in detail. um and all of the conditions that have been consistently on the the application. Uh I don't see any reason to add anything new given that there's been no evidence of any change. Does anybody else have anything to add? No.

Could I have a motion to approve this special use permit for a 10-year period with the conditions that we've specified? So moved. Is there a second? Second. Is there any further discussion? All in favor? I I. All opposed. You have it. Thank you. Take care and good luck with it. Maybe we'll see you in 10 years. That would be nice.

Okay. The next item on our agenda, good night. The the next item on our agenda is uh also a public hearing uh to consider an application for a special use per permit for an accessory apartment in an existing single family home pursuant to town code 125-79. Uh the home is located at 75 Edgemont Road in Katona. Uh the owner is Sally Aldridge. Uh and the applicant is Scott Aldridge. And is there someone here to speak for the applicant? Um yes. So if you'd go up to the microphone, please.

Yes. I'm um the son of Sally Aldrich and I have power of attorney for her. She's currently has dementia. She's living in the house and we're seeking to have the third floor um as a residential apartment to bring some extra income in. I see you have a an architect with you. I do. Is is he prepared to go through? Yeah, I'm prepared to go through. This is the the drawing here. My name is William O'Neal. Uh I'm an architect. Could you can you hear me? Um I I can hear you, but I don't know if anybody on Zoom would.

So I have in front of us on the easel over there a drawing that shows the existing conditions. Uh there's two drawings. There's an existing condition drawing and then there's a drawing that shows one room converted to a kitchen. Um the the bathroom is existing, the bedroom's existing, there's uh an existing stair and that's what I've detailed is the stairway up. And I also have with me in response to Jeff Ferrell's uh comments that we got a zoning table that has not been submitted yet, but I have data that reference that refers to the the questions that he had. Yeah. Do you have copies of that? I do. Is there one? I think I have Even if you even if you get us two that we could share.

I have only two copies. I I made seven of them and left them on the printer. I apologize. Okay. Well, we can Okay. So, the ones that the apartment areas,

the apartment area we're in compliance with, it's 600 square ft. It's less than uh 25% it's 20% approximately of the total floor area of the house. Um, the place where we have a little bit of a conflict is that the house is pre-existing non-conforming with regards to lot size, front yard, sideyard. We're we're over on the rear yard, but in the other yards, we're we're not compliant. Um, but we are under by in some cases 12 on the lesser sideyard. We have the highest de deficit of uh a little over 17.5%. But that's the difference between 12.37 ft and 15 ft which is required.

Yeah. I think the position we've taken in the in the past is that so long as the special permit use was not expanding those dimensional requirements we haven't made people go for variance because everything in Kona falls into that category that there is no building I I do not believe there is a building in the center of Kona right the the minimum lot size is 10,000 f feet and the lot that exists is 8,750 ft. So it's it's it's undersized by 12 and a half%.

But it's a lot that was laid out with the rest of Katona and it pre-exist. So and you're not increasing you're not doing anything that increases the not changing. Yeah. No, we're not nonconformity that's being increased. Therefore, that's fine to have substandard lot sizes. I sometimes the zoning board wants to see it simple because there's something wrong. But if you could but I believe that in this case this law that Jeff was marking on allows you discretion up to I think it's 25%. I think it's actually well there's two different ones. I think the um it's a it's a third of

it's one third. I'm sorry. You're right. It is one third. I'm sorry. We were always under 25%. It says the lot must meet the area. Planning board may reduce these requirements by not more than one/3. Exactly. Yes. And I see she does know the code better than I do. I told you she did. And I think you meet those that criteria. We do. We are less than onethird out of compliance. Yeah. And even though our worst one is only 17%. So yeah. So so that shouldn't be a problem. Um, are there any questions or comments from members of the audience?

Any questions or comments from anyone on the Zoom? Concerns on the board? Questions or comments? So, this is I'm just trying to understand the plan exactly. So, you have an external staircase that's going up to the third floor. That's going to be No, it's an internal staircase. There's a door in the back of the house and you come into if you look at I'm sorry. If you look at this plan here, you can just take that. I'm not used to the rockstar thing, but Okay. So, here um there's an entry here. Yep. And you go up this this stair and that brings you up. That's the rear

and there and up to there. Okay. I was just confused because shown on the third floor. Uh, well, yeah, it is. The stair comes here. That's the interior staircase. So, that's different. That's the only staircase there is is an interior stair. I'm sorry. Did I Did I misspeak? Okay. So, there's no exterior entrance to the accessory apartment. Just at the base. There's there's a there's an entrance from the outside here in the back. Oh, because the lot up. Excuse me? Because the land slopes up the great. You're saying the third floor in the back. No, no, there isn't. Not at the third floor level. This is at the grade level, ground floor level. I This This plan here represents a partial first floor plan.

Okay, I understand. Okay. The kitchen's going out to an open deck. Okay. Not an access point into it, right? No, that's there's a there's a because this section here exists only as a first and second floor. Okay, that's when you get up to the third floor, you go out to this open deck. You're on the roof of that extension in the back of the building. Understood. Okay. Sorry. But essentially the back door serves as the as the primary entrance for the apartment. In that little vestibule there's there are there's a door into the kitchen. There's a door into the basement and then you can turn up uh up the stair and that brings you up to through this laundry area and then up to the apartment. Mhm. Got it.

And that's a laundry area for the for the apartment. You correct? That's correct. Okay. And that laundry area has been figured into the square footage of the apartment then. Um, no actually I did not include that in the square footage of the apartment. But you can see it's quite small. It's quite small. 800 ft. We we won't even if you included the whole stair we don't include stairs. Okay. So So this is you know I don't know 25 ft something like 30 ft. It's very small. It's just laundry in the basement. Yeah. There's there's there's two machines and you walk past it to the stair. So on the second floor rather it it doesn't make any difference because it's it doesn't add it doesn't add enough to put we would not add enough to get over the 800 ft.

And I believe you have some discretion on that as well. Yeah, we usually don't do go further than 10% but you're you're not even getting we're not even close into into that. um might get close on the 25% part, but we also have that discretion on the 25%. Okay. Um well, well, if you didn't No, we're actually Oh, well, we're at 20% right now. So, um it you're not you're not beyond our ability to wave it. Okay.

And just so that the planning board's aware that any um interior work that has to be done that requires a building permit from the town of Bedford building department will have additional plan and details that have to be provided. So some of these smaller um you know refinements and details that you're going through will be reviewed by our building inspector or assistant building inspector to ensure compliance with state and uh local codes as well. Um but what the applicant had provided was enough to meet the minimum requirements of the special permit just so you guys could see if they were meeting the minimum thresholds. Have we has the build do we have an inspection from the building department yet? Yes. So that's what the um was included in your packets and posted online. Um this is what's provided in black and red text that the applicants architect referred to as barrel. That was the report.

Correct. Correct. The responses from the assistant building inspector are in red. Okay. Um so at that time that this was done um last week on 78 uh these were the responses that were provided. Um so some additional information has been updated. We just none of us have seen it. Yeah. I didn't realize that that was the the report from the visit. And of and of course Al won't look at anything we're doing until this board approves it. So and and then of course we go through his review and he'll rake us over whatever calls he thinks we need to be raked over. Yes. That is that is the standard.

Yes, of course. I I I And look, I love Al. He's a great guy. I'm not I'm not complaining. I just know that he's going to he's going to make us do whatever we need. Let's let's move on. Um one more time, any comments or questions from members of the audience or from the Zoom? Could I have a motion to close the public hearing? Is there a second? Uh all in favor? I all oppose the the public hearing is closed. Um in terms of seeker, this is I I believe also a type two action under seeker. Could I have a motion? Is there a second? Second.

Any further discussion? All of in favor of it being a type two action under seeker. I I

All opposed. Um so the the question is how we feel about this. I will say that I think this is um essentially a slam dunk of an application in that you meet as you say very often there's one reason or another some people do have to go to the zoning board. It's actually fairly rare not to but you don't you really do not need to. Um, and more than that, this is exactly the kind of situation that that this whole special permit for ADUs is most designed to alleviate. So, um, personally, I think this meets both the spirit and the and the letter of the town code and deserves to our approval.

Comments from Agreed. Agreed. Yeah. Is that a motion that somebody just made? So moved. Um if we were to any conditions. Yeah. Um I don't see any special any need for special conditions on this particular application again because they meet so many of they they meet the requirements so well. Um but I would say the standard conditions of the special use permit and special and the special conditions of the um ADU permit. Sounds perfect. So motion includes those conditions conditions. Is there a second?

Second. We have a motion and a second. Is there any further discussion? All in favor? I I. All opposed. You have it and good luck with it. Thank you very much. Good luck. Thanks very much.

Okay. The next item on our agenda is the continuation of a public hearing uh to consider a steep slopes application pursuant to town code 102 in connection with the construction of a new residence with a storm water pollution prevention plan pursuant to town code 103. Uh the uh the property is located at 48 Hillside Avenue and the owner applicant is Wolf Lucarath. And is there someone here to speak for the applicant? Good evening. Teo Sigua. I am the architect for our client, Mr. Lucarat who's here with us tonight and um we're coming back to show you the updates that we have done. Um good evening board members. I will make an attempt in here to Thank you. Uh, how do I share the screen here? Miss,

you're good.

We're good now. Great. Yeah. Well, um first I wanted to start showing you the the zoning chart to illustrate that we have in here a four uh one acre uh lot in a quarter acre district. uh where we can also see that the the building coverage and the side coverage actually it's a it's generous it fits well where where the impervious we are 40% allowable and we are only using 15%. And on the building coverage we're 20% allowable and we are using 10% of the coverage. It's um single family residents. One story is for their use. They are the end user. It's not for a development. It's not a a rental unit. Um in here, I wanted to illustrate in here the the fact that we have moved the house towards the the rear. And I will again make an attempt to zoom in here. Yeah. Okay. Here probably close here. Yeah. Uh you can see in the diagram here that the the red line represents the previous application that we had presented to you and we have reduced the the size of the house in the two directions. You can see here in this direction we have shifted like about 15 ft. Reduce the house in size to achieve a larger yard that will allow us to do uh a better planting to m

the house and to uh shield somewhat of the structure to the neighbors. The so the house has become smaller farther to the ups slope up the up the hill. And uh you can actually see here on the building elevations that uh you know basically in elevation the the the structure has shifted as you can see here in the initial layout. The red is the line that we had first presented to you. And um the black lines are basically the new layout and an illustration of the uh landscaping which will be a lot of foundation planting and some trees that will be saved, others that will be planted and said will illustrate that in in more detail. the the by going up the slope the house as well uh it gets gets more nestled into the the natural grade where basically there's no uh walk out anymore. Before we were the first floor was a walk out. Now as as you can see here the great elevation actually is right below the window in the basement level. The basement level is a is a a part story because it only uses 40% of of the or 50% of the basement footprint. The house is a one level residence and the the upper areas of the house is just an attic. You know, the house meets with the with the building height quite ample. You know, uh there's no use in the attic except for mechanical spaces. There are windows

showing there just for architecture to to make the house look good. Uh I I think it will be a nice home. Uh I think it will be an asset to the neighborhood. Um I will also show you the the site in question just to give you an over an overview. Um we we we have the aerial view here you know uh bird's eye of the site and the residences that which are surrounding the the this proposal. Uh we have in here coming down the slope homes which are about similar scale and uh coming around the bend down in hillside. Uh the the these are some of the the houses. This one will be the one right across the the home which has been shifted farther to the back. And uh this is another residence that is across as well. Uh these are the turning around the the homes. The I believe for the planting plan to be uh illustrated by by Seth Clay couldn't join us tonight but uh We don't miss you.

Good evening. My name is Seth Tyers with Benedict and Tyers Landscape Architects. Um so the changes to the architecture have helped us tremendously with the planting plan. Um specifically on the south side of the house. So first of all, we were able to preserve six trees that were previously scheduled to be removed. Also, we show foundation plantings along the base of the house as well as evergreen trees in select locations. On the west side of the house, uh we're showing two sugar maples that will flank the driveway as well as American holl that will screen the garage.

Sure, go for it. As well as American Holl that will screen the garage from Hillside Avenue. Thanks, Tail. Um the north side of the house includes a variety of shrubs which will be located adjacent to the house as well as the proposed stone wall. So all of the plants shown on the planting plan consist of native plants which will provide interest to the property but also soften the house from the neighboring properties. Um one more thing that I want to mention is these evergreen trees that are located on the south side of the house. have been relocated as per um the consulting engineer's request in his memo. He wanted to make sure that all the trees were located at least 8 ft away from the water man. So we have shifted those trees as requested. Um next I'll have Nick come on up.

Good evening. Nicholas Cabri um Bibbo Associates. I'm here filling in for Tim Allen who couldn't make it tonight. He's in a meeting in North Castle, but um he brought me up to speed with the plans and the projects. So, I'll give you a brief overview of the engineering plans. Um, as Teao and Seth mentioned, the house has been shift shifted um away from the south side of the property. And essentially, um, what our office has done is updated all the other odds and ends associated with degrading, drainage, um, storm water utilities, um, that, uh, also had to shift with that house. So, we've updated the steep slopes plans, the zoning schedules, and the drainage reports all to match the new house location. And um all that has been reviewed by the town engineer who has now issued a new memo which um appears to be in support of the approval of the project. So, I believe we've answered all his questions and we can answer his final odds and ends that he needs to uh get the final approval done and uh we open it up to the board and the public's uh questions and comments. Okay, since this is the continuation of a public hearing. Thank you. Um, are there any questions or comments from members of the audience? Any comments or questions from anyone on the Zoom?

Uh, just one question. Sure.

It's Paul Chambers, 51 Hillside Avenue. Uh just to review uh oh first of all it's very gracious of Lucaraths to set the house back a little bit so it's not overlooking so close to the roads and I appreciate that. Uh just to go back to the issue with the the road itself and the drainage and the maintenance. Has that all been cleared up? that's been cleared up in the course of the subdivision approval and all of the conditions connected to the subdivision approval will be carried over and connected to this approval if we if we proceed to approve this.

Okay, thank you. Is are is that

okay? Are there any other questions from the Zoom or from members of the audience? Questions from members of the board or comments? Just about the clearance on the north side we raised last meeting. Just curious how you get a vehicle back there if you needed to to the back of the house in the 15t sideyard. So, uh, for the construction access, um, we've come off the road on the southern side of the property. So, really there's limited access on the north side of the house. Um, obviously with the way the house has been shifted towards that property line, it kind of reduces that access, but we've created a construction access path off the existing roadway up to the rear pool yard area, uh, which could provide future maintenance or construction or repairs for that pool, um, as the town engineer had requested.

Got it. Thanks.

Yeah, I mean, that that was my question still was trying to figure out how are we going to service the pool. Um, I do appreciate and respect the fact you've shrunk the footprint a little bit from a elevation location perspective. Um, so I know it's a it's a hard site in terms of the fact that the road, you know, encroaches on the the property side and the slope. Any [Applause] other questions, comments from um I'd like to also add my approval of the fact that you that you listened to us when we talked about um how close things were and the problems with the plantings. Um, and I think you've come up with a not a perfect solution because there are no perfect solutions, but um, you've done a very good job of rethinking uh, the the proposal and and trying to accommodate the concerns of both the town and the neighbor and I appreciate that very much. Are there one one last time any further comments from members of the audience or from the zoom? In that case, since I hear nothing. Um,

yeah. Hello. Oh, yes. Yeah. Hi, George. I just had wanted some clarification if you could please. You said that uh the roadway, the maintenance, the drainage, and all that was going to be contingent to to fall a fall back to what was already agreed upon. Could you explain exactly what the agreement was and what is going to happen with that road if everything gets uh to done to everyone's satisfaction here? Uh

I can read you what is in the resolution if you give me a chance to bring the resolution up. if anybody else has it more quickly than I do. Uh, please feel free to thought I had it picked out here. I have it. Where do you want it? You have it? Yeah. Um there's a section of it that that deals with the um with the roadway

modificate the the existing gravel driveway which shall have the following language added. I think that's it. I've got it too now. Hold on a minute. Yeah. Modifications to the final subdivision plan. Yes. Why don't you

uh the existing gravel driveway shall have the following language added. The town shall have the right but not the obligation to perform limited maintenance on the area known as the quoteunquote gravel drive. Limited maintenance shall consist of plowing, salting, sanding, vegetation maintenance, and dirt road grading. It does not include asphalt patching, road restoration, or paving. The town may discontinue such limited maintenance at any time. In the event such limited maintenance is discontinued, the property owner may limit or discontinue public use of the gravel drive subject to providing any necessary easements to any existing residences requiring access over the gravel drive. And I think the there's also um for the small port

for the f small portion of land to be dedicated to the town of Bedford, the label road taking parcel shall be removed and replaced with land to be dedicated to the town of Bedford. Square footage and acreage shall remain. The note shall be added that a survey with a meets and bounds description will be prepared by the applicant and filed with the Westchester County Clerk Division of Land Records. Similarly, add text regarding this transaction to the notes section. And then it talks about the drainage improvements. A future easement agreement shall be filed with the Westchester County Clerk Division of Land Records as acceptable to the town attorney between the owner applicant and the town of Bedford for the proposed drainage infrastructure to be installed by the applicant and owned and maintained by the town of Bedford. The applicant shall conduct a geographic survey with a needs and bounds description of the new drainage infrastructure and include with um include it with the easement filing. All recordings, surveys, meets and balance descriptions shall be shown on any updated town tax map section, lot and lot designation once assigned and approved. And has that work been done yet prior to the

the water um infrastructure easement has been filed? It's control number 630 39356 with one Westchester County. I'm sorry I don't have the other one off the top of my in my notes. Um but they both were filed and will be continued from the subdivision application as they were um approved as those conditions into this approval as well.

Yeah. Um and then the next thing is as shown on engineering drawings in direct connection with the project add the proposed drainage infrastructure add a note that a survey and meets and bounds description will be prepared and filed with the Westchester County Clerk Division of Land Records. And then there's also some discussion of utilities um that aren't that don't directly uh deal with the road that will still be carried over. Um do you want me to read all of those or or have I covered the things that you're concerned about? The only concern I uh just created here was if you're maintaining it says the town's going to maintain this drainage that the property owner is putting in. Is that at the discretion of the town to stop also if they're going to maintain?

I don't believe so. Um, and then why would they stop one and not the other is I guess is my question.

Because the the drainage serves the entire town um in a significant way. The the drainage systems in the town are all interconnected and depend on on each other working. The road maintenance is something that can be done by individual property owners to their own standards to some extent. So it falls into a different category. The drainage really is is really a safety issue as much as it keep the road from washing out.

But they're going to maintain they're going to maintain the drainage system to keep the road from washing out. But if they're not going to, you see the little conundrum here. You you got to you're putting in drainage to make keep the road from washing away. Then you're going to stop maintaining the road. Well,

the drainage, I believe, is for the the storm water runoff that's coming off of the property. It may collect some of the roadway as well, but was proposed as part of the original plans that the planning board had looked at for subdivision um approval and steep slopes approval several years ago. And it's although one of the one of the purposes of a drainage system is to keep roads from washing out, it's also to keep people's basements from flooding. It's to keep uh water damage from occurring elsewhere in town. Uh so I don't think the conundrum does exist.

So in in the town's mind, then they're two separate issues. I would say that they're they're although they are connected issues, they are indeed separate issues. And I will will point out that the the um the discussion doesn't say the town is going to abandon the road. The discussion says that the town is holding on to its right to abandon the road, which to some extent is a protection is in there as a protection to the taxpayers of the town of Bedford. Um, and also a a cautionary measure because we don't know what what is going to happen in the future.

All right. And did I understand that my needed rightaway is protected regardless? Yes, the right am I said that very definitely. I'm going to check with our director of planning, but the way I read it, it's the the town's driving is No, no, they their their property is their property and their their access easement rights over that road.

Whatever. Right. whatever the attorneys had settled previously, uh the town was very confident in filing what it needed to go around. Um not everyone was privy to every conversation. So, we maybe can't provide you the specifics you're looking for, but that uh extensive consideration was granted or was given to um this tricky situation um to make sure that the best possible solution was brought forth. I'm sorry, I can't hear the lady. Could you either read just somebody summarize what you said or speak it up please? Sure. I'm happy to repeat it. Oh, thank you.

So, at at the time of this original approval, there had been extensive conversations between the attorneys involved as which also included the town attorney as well as our uh DPW supervisor um to ensure that the best outcome was brought forth um for the applicant as well as the residents on the road. Um so, those in this room um were not privy to a majority of those conversations. So we cannot provide you some of the details that you likely are seeking. Um but do know that there had been considerable effort to make sure again that this was the right outcome for the project that was proposed at the time. And and I would point out that one of the things that is said is that in in the case where where the town decides to discontinue the limited maintenance, um the property owner can limit or discontinue the public use of the gravel drive, but that's subject to providing any necessary easements to any existing residences requiring access over the gravel drive. So that does seem to to protect your your rights of access to your property.

Okay. Yeah. I I guess I don't without my hesitation at the second is is the previous speaker mentioned that all these considerations were taken into account but I have a a document that says that I have them right away and and I was never contacted or nothing was ever asked of me. was my you know in what way was my situation protected or represented at this meeting when everything was decided?

I I don't know what else what else I can can say. I've read you the the section which reads to me as if it protects your your rights. Uh on the other hand, I'm not an attorney and you of course are are free to consult an attorney. um about the issue if you remain concerned about it. But I think that and is that not already that that horse has left the barn, isn't he? That's that's beyond my pay grade to tell you. Attorneys have been thoroughly through this.

Yes.

And and looking out for all parties. No, this is this has been through the hands of quite a lot of attorneys. On the other hand, I also understand sometimes people feel their own attorney is the only attorney that will count, but this is a something that was discussed in detail um for months before this board. there have been quite a lot of opportunities to bring issues up and I think there's been a real effort to take a very difficult situation uh and try and deal with it fairly from everybody's point of view. Um and everybody is has been free to question that in any way that they chose. I thank you for your time.

Thank you for your comments. Any other qu comments or questions from members of the audience uh or from anyone on the Zoom? Could I have a motion to close the public hearing? Some moved. Is there a second? Second. Is there any further discussion? All in favor? I. All opposed? Public hearing is closed. Um, if we're going to take action tonight, we first have to do seeker. Uh, there is a a part one EAF. Does somebody want to volunteer to read it or do you would you do?

Yeah. Okay. Diane, if you would go through the part one.

Um, let's see. Project approval and permitting information. Um, they have the storm water and slip approval, Westchester County Department of Health, SHIPO's approval. Um, minimum require, let's see. Okay, here we go. Brief description of the proposed action is single family residents with pool property be served by an um OWTS on um site waste treatment center um system and town water. Um, does the proposed action um only involve the legislative adoption of a plan, local law, um, ordinance, administrative rule, or regulation? Um, no. Does the proposed action require a permit, approval, or funding from any other government agency? Um, if yes, and the answer is yes. Yes. List um the agencies by name and um permit approval. Westchester County Department of Health um needs to approve the um site waste treatments um system. Um three, the total acreage is 1.04 04 acres to be disturbed physically disturbed 0.7 and um total acre acreage project site and contiguous properties owned or controlled by the applicant just 1.04 4 the this site um check all

land use that occurs on or adjacent to uh the proposed action. Um they have checked commercial. No, that's not right. Is it Oh, I'm sorry. They checked residential. That confused me outside of the It's the form. They they're checking residential,

which makes much more sense. Yes. Um, in is the proposed action A a permitted use under the zoning regulations? Yes. Um, and B consistent with the adopted comprehensive plan? Yes. Six, is the proposed action consistent with the predominant character of existing buildings or natural landscape? Yes. Um is seven is the proposed action located in or does it join a state um listed critical environmental area? Um name the geographical overlying area um aquifer um exceptional or unique character agency or recreation area of town Bedford. Yes, identify. Um, and the answer is yes. And that is

it's the area overlaying an aquifer is the CA.

So, and um eight, will the proposed action result in a substantial increase in traffic? No. Um, are public transportation services available um at or near the site? Um, yes. And are any pedestrian accommodations or bicycle routes available on or near the site of the proposed action? Yes. Does the proposed action meet or exceed the state energy code requirement? Yes. Um if the proposed action will exceed, describe the design features and technology. Um that is not it's not exceed. Um, will the proposed action connect to an existing public or private water supply? Um, yes. Town of Bedford water. Will the proposed action um connect to existing wastewater utilities? No. There will be a non-white site waste treatment um system. 12A. Does the project site contain or is substantially contiguous to a building, archaeologic site, or district which is on the national or state register of historic places or that has been determined by the commissioner of New York State Office of Parks, Recreation, and Historic Preservation to be eligible for listing on the state historic state register of historic places? Um, and the answer is yes. Are they talking about the proximity to the Katona Historic District? I'm not sure it's close enough to

it. It could be remember it's a what? Oh, it's it does it up by automatic. That's right. So, that must be I didn't understand it first either. Thank you. It's a little close, but I mean it's a little far away, but I I can get

um 13. 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 or state agency? No. Would the proposed action physically alter encroach into any existing wetland or water body? No. Um 14. Identify the typical habitats that occur on or are likely to be found on the project site. Um they checked forest. Um, okay. I don't think there's anything else. Suburban.

I I don't know how important it is, but [Applause] leave it. It's not a poor school, per se, right? That's why I'm saying, should we also check suburban? I check.

Okay. Um, thank you. 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. Is the project site like located in a 100redyear flood plane? No. Will the proposed action create storm water discharge either from point or non-point sources? Um, yes. Will um will the storm water discharges flow to adjacent properties? Yes. Will storm water discharges be directed to establish conveyances? Um, no. Does the proposed action include construction or other activities that would result in the empoundment of water or other liquids, i.e. a retention pond? No.

Technically, they're building a pool in other towns. I've noted the poll there. I don't actually that is true. I don't think that's what the seeker handbooks agree with that you've got to the secret. I I I'm not sure that I would I think that that built environment rather than impounding flow of water.

But I'm fine if everybody feels otherwise. Um, has the site of the proposed action or the adjoining property been the location of an active or closed solid waste management facility? No. Has a site or of the proposed action or adjoining property been the subject of remediation um for hazardous waste? And it says yes. No records were found in a search of nice Jack environmental database. So why is it show showed up as yes in the EF mapper but they they must have consulted the DC directly.

So does that that stays just the way it is? I I I I wouldn't I we we can take uh No, I'm just take this under advisement but I don't think they need to revise the form. Okay. Okay, thank you. And um and that is part one. Okay, having done part one, we now have to having read read part one and not made any significant changes in it, we now have to do part two, which is our responsibility. Does somebody want to take on the reading of that one? Do you want me to do it? I mean, sure.

No, let's let's let's give sure. Yeah. Will the proposed action create a material conflict with the adopted land use plan or zoning regulations? No.

Will the proposed action result in a change in the use or intensity of use of land? No. Or small. Will the proposed action impair the character or quality of the existing community? No. Will the proposed action have an impact on the environmental characteristics that cause the establishment of a critical environmental area? No. Will the proposed action result in an adverse change in the existing level of traffic or affect existing infrastructure for mass transit, biking or walk walkways? Uh, no. Will the proposed action create an increase in the use of energy and fail to incorporate reasonably available energy conservation or renewable energy opportunities? No. Will the proposed action impact existing public private water supplies or wastewater treatment facilities? No. 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 the natural resources? No. 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. So I move that we find that this uh project proposed action would not result in any significant adverse environmental impacts

based on the answers to to part two and the information in part one indeed. Is that a motion? It is second. Is there any further discussion? All in favor? I. All opposed. We have given this project a negative declaration. Then if we were to approve this um Steve Slopes application and site plan approval tonight, what conditions would we put on it? It's one approval for both.

I think we can I we would normally do this as one approval for both, I believe. Yes. You're just approving steep slopes and it's uh like coordinated as a site plan all at the same time. Yeah. So, it's just one one vote and one one resolution. Yep. Yeah. So, yes, we we're just doing the one um obviously we would we would uh look at all of the standard conditions for for steep slopes. Um, there's also Hansmo.

Hans Hans's memo. The the unanswered parts of Hans's memo. Uh, anything else that Oh, everything that's in the original subdivision resolution. the condition particularly the conditions having to do with the um the road right and the water main control me also yeah so all of those conditions and and I'll get from the town attorney the actual control number for that so we can have that as part of the record as well

that that would be helpful anybody got anything else that should be conditioned agreed with all those conditions I'm sorry. Agreed. Agreed with all the conditions. Oh, the other that uh no no trees that had been identified as as being kept should be taken down without the town being consulted about it. I think I would put that for the Well, yeah.

I don't know if we should put a time limit on that. Would you like to just say in compliance with the tree removal plan and then that way things are outside of they would have to pull additional tree removal permits because it would be outside of the developed uh approved area.

I like that solution. Thank you. So, the subdivision resolutions we've done. Oh, in compliance with the filed water water main um easement agreements and the utility easements utility easement agreements. I think that covers all of the the conditions. So, was your motion Diane? Did you make a motion or did I'm happy to make it.

We have a motion here. I'm happy to make a motion to approve. It's all yours, Dr. Please. Oh, go ahead, Nylus. Where you going? I approve to I I I moved that we uh approve the application with the conditions that were affirmentioned. Okay. And you second that. Okay. We have a motion and a and a second. Are there any fur further discussions? Um, I simply will add one more time that I do appreciate the fact that you've been willing to make changes and to uh adapt the the plan on on a difficult property. Um, all in favor? I I

All opposed. You have it. Thank you so much. Thank you for bearing with us. Okay. I appreciate it. Have a nice even now. Go off and do a good job with it.

Okay. The next item on the agenda, let me find my agenda here. The next item on the agenda is the discussion of a continued application uh but no longer a public hearing. Uh, it's to consider an application for a steep slopes permit pursuant to town code 102 in connection with the construction of a new single family home, recreation bar, pool, driveway, and storm water management pursuant to town code 103. Um, what you forgot the bond on the last one

in the town engineers. Okay, there's Thank you. Yeah, usually we don't put the amount in the resolution, just the the the recognition is to a specific memo with a specific feed. Yeah. Correct.

Okay. The um the owner applicant is 20 Binville LLC and the address is 725 Croin Lake Road, Bedford Hills. Good evening. Yan Johannes, KSCJ Consulting on behalf of 20 Mountainville LLC. Uh we've been before the board, I think on two occasions since uh we've had our sitewalk with the board. We've responded to comments from fire department. We've made our submissions to Shipo and received positive uh uh letter from them. Um, we've responded to An's last memo and uh we have uh some odds and ends that need to be uh resolved prior to the issuance of a building permit. Some uh mainly to do with the SWIP um and the retaining wall, but um I think we had a positive memo from Han and I think that's what the board was waiting for the last time we met. Yes, he he has told us in his latest memo that he has no objection to our approving the steep slopes and we can't move without that.

Right. So that's great. Okay. Any comments or questions from members of the board? This one's been before us for for quite some time. Most of the negotiation has occurred among the engineers and and the rest. Um and I'm just happy to hear that some solutions have been reached. Mhm. Happy to move forward.

Um I don't think that we have a lot more to talk about and this is not a public hearing that's been been held. So I think perhaps it's time for us to conduct the secret review of it. We were really just holding off to get that final memo from from Jim Han. So, part one of this needs to be gone through and maybe I'll do this one for once if I can get to it quickly enough. Okay. So the first page is the the standard. Uh the brief description of the action is the construction of a single family residence pool, accessory building, driveway, septic system, portable well and storm water management facilities on an 84.84 acre parcel within the R4A zoning district. Um it does it involves a good deal more than just the legislative adoptions of a plan. It does require permits uh from other government agencies including New York City D uh New York State DEEC, Westchester County Health, Town Highway Department, and the building department. Total acreage is 84.84 acres of which 5.458 458 acres will be disturbed and 84.84 acres is the number of acreage the amount of acreage that the applicant holds in total. The land uses that occur on or adjoining the proposed action are forest, non-aggricultural, rural and

residential. I think that really covers covers it. Uh this oh they did not um check whether it was a permitted use under the zoning regulations. It is revise that but it but it is not checked. So you can can supplement that. Yeah. Uh and also it is consistent with the comprehensive plan. This is not checked on the copy I have. It's their original. Oh that's interesting. It might be a PDF problem. Yeah, I think it may be because I it won't let me check it either.

It's I can Okay. How about the um one about it being consistent with the predominant character of the existing builder natural landscape? Yes,

that's checked too. Okay, that wasn't wasn't checked on mine as well. Is the site of the proposed action located in or a join a state listed CA? The answer is no. Will it increase traffic? No. Um there are no public transportation services available near it. Uh and there is no pedestrian accommodation or bicycle routes available on or near the proposed action. Um does the proposed action meet or exceed state energy code requirements? Again, I have a blank here. Is there a check on? Yes, was checked with um

just meeting but it will meet the building requirement energy code. It will meet the meet but not exceed. Um they're not claiming it. You're not claiming and exceeding. You you can still exceed it if you decide to. Correct. We we won't complain.

Will the proposed action connect to an existing public private water supply? No. Uh will it connect to existing wastewater utilities? No. Um it says it is near something uh that is that is eligible for listing on the national register. um because it is located within the area known as the Wood Pile and is adjacent to Stone Crest which uh the State Historic Preservation Office has evaluated.

Well, not just evaluated, that one is on the National Register. Correct. But that we we made a submission to to Shipo on visibility of both those resources. Right. and and and Shipo has has uh said that there will be no impact. Correct.

Yes. It is not an area designated as sensitive for archaeological sites. Does any portion of the site uh or lands adjoining the proposed action contain wetlands or other water bodies that are regulated? Yes. Will it will it fill it physically alter or encroach encroach into any existing wetland or water body? No. Uh the t the type of hab habitats that occur here are forest, agricultural grasslands, uh early midsuccessional and They did say there were wetlands on the property even though they're not impacted. So, I would think that wetland should be checked as well, wouldn't it? What do the rest of you think?

Anybody? Does it impact it if it's not near they're not ADA? Well, it's identifying that occur on or likely to be found on the project site and the 84 acres is the project site. No, I Okay, so that's I could see checking that boxite. Y yeah, I've always thought it would be.

Does the site of the proposed action contain any species of animal or associated habitats listed on the on the state or federal government is threatened or endangered? No. Is it located in the 100redyear flood plane? No. Uh will it create storm water discharges? Um nothing is checked on this one. Um, yes, it's checked. That seems to make sense to me. Will storm water discharges flow to adjacent properties? No. Will storm water discharges be directed to established conveyance systems? Again, I've got a blank on the form.

The applicant provided yes and stated that storm water runoff will be directed to proposed on-site storm water management infiltration systems.

Okay. And that statement actually does appear on on the copy that we have. It's just this odd thing with the check marks. Does the proposed act proposed action include construction or other activities that would result in the empowerment of water? No. Um, does the proposed action or an adjoining property been the location of an active or closed solid waste management facility? No. Is the site of the proposed action or an adjoining property um the subject of remediation ongoing and and completed for hazardous waste? It says yes, but again it's it now says yes. Response is autogenerated by the EAF map or the DEEC remediation datab database provides no remediation incidents within the town of Bedford on Groen Lake Road. Two spill incidents occurred on Groten Lake Road in 2008 and 2012, both of which are closed. So that may be what the connection is. I have to just say I find the the DEC mapper to be a real problem because I think it it makes it almost impossible for those questions to be seriously considered in the environmental review because you never know whether you've got the right answer or not

and it doesn't allow you to uncheck it once it's checked by the program. You can't modify it. Yeah. So that's why sometimes I'll just put a note. The notes frankly are very helpful. Keep doing it. at least for us. Uh, and that's the the end of the part one. So, on to part two. Who would like to volunteer? Cuz you've heard me, Jonah. Uh, will the proposed action create a material conflict with an adopted land use plan or zoning regulations? No.

No. Will the proposed action result in a change or uh in the use or intensity of the use of land? No. Or small. Will the proposed action impair the character or quality of the existing community? No. Will the proposed action have an impact on the environmental characteristics that cause the establishment of a critical environmental area? No.

No. Will the proposed action result in an adverse change in the existing level of traffic or affect infra existing infrastructure for mass transit, biking or walkway? No. Will the proposed action cause an increase in the use of energy and it fails to incorporate incorporate reasonably available energy conservation or renewable energy opportunities? No. Will the proposed action impact existing public or private water supplies? No. or p public or private wastewater treatment utilities? No. Will the proposed action impair the character or quality of important historic, archaeological, architectural, or aesthetic resources? No. Will the proposed action result in adverse change in natural resources? No. 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. Uh therefore based upon that for part three I would motion that uh we've determined based on the information and analysis and any supporting documentation that the proposed action will not result in any significant adverse environmental impacts.

Second. We have a motion and and a second. Is there any further discussion? I would have to agree that that we have not identified any significant impacts. If there's no further discussion, all in favor? I

I all opposed. Uh you have a negative negative declaration. If we were to uh approve this tonight, uh we would have the standard steep slopes approvals as on our previous application. Um and the standard special permit requirements. Um, we would have Jim Han's latest memo as a as a requirement and that does include a a bond figure. Um, the adherence to the tree removal plan should be a um a condition Did the fire department in their in their letter, I'm trying to remember, um ask for any in particular?

They did. They asked for three items which have been incorporated into the plan. They asked for a uh underground water tank orn uh which we provided a 10,000galon tank at the top of the driveway. They asked that the driveway be widened to 14 ft, which we did. and they asked for a fire apparatus turnaround at the top of the driveway which we incorporated. Okay. I think those three things should be referenced in in the conditions. Certainly they have already been made part of the plan but absolutely and I think that that sort of covers everything. Is there anything we've left out, Jessica? No, that covers it.

Anything that has come up tonight that any of you feel that we should include? Okay. Could I have a resolution either declining this application or passing this application with the um conditions that have been listed? I move that we approve the application with the conditions listed. Is there a second? Second. We have an application of a resolution and a second. Uh is there any further discussion? All in favor?

I. All opposed. You have it. Great. Thank you everybody. Good night. Good night and good luck with it. Thank you.

The next item on our agenda is Whoops. to consider the ex an extension of a previously approved site plan for the continued use of an outdoor pizza oven in connection with a previously approved cafe and retail establishment. Um the owner applicant is well the applicant is Oho Botanicals Limited and the owner is Ivanho Firehouse LLC. So where do we stand?

So we were asked after our last meeting to continue to take water readings by our um engineer and we did so until mid August at mid mid-March sorry and then we lost contact with them for about 6 weeks um only to be notified that Ed Delaney has passed away from Bibbo. And so the application to the engineering department was not submitted during that time. And Tim Allen who is trying to pick up our application is doing his best but has not been able to prioritize our project over other projects that he is working on. Um Joe Thompson, our architect, and I discussed appointing a new engineer. Um but that is not something anyone thinks is realistically going to speed up the time frame. Um we are back Tim's now asked for an additional study because he can't connect the previous work. So we're in the process of doing that. Um so that's where we are. I just to add Tim did email and say he is not hopeful that the health department will be fast either in reviewing the application when it eventually gets submitted due to being deeply underresourced.

How long does he think it's going to take? hasn't said hasn't been willing to Well, s certainly the the the very sad and tragic passing Yeah.

of Mr. Delaney is nothing you could have done anything about and um I think I think it's going to be incumbent on us to to extend the time. I would like to get some report on how things have gone during that period. I think you did send us something. I'm actually looking through but perhaps you could s summarize.

So we've now submitted another second set of readings to Tim from the last eight weeks from when he where he is trying to put it together. He has promised to give us an update as to when he can get the engineer report submitted. we were under the impression it have been submitted. So there's been a bit of confusion there. Um and we will provide you an update as soon as we can on that basis, but that's all he's been able to tell us at the moment. Um we had given you a number of conditions. Um yes,

I guess we would call them conditions about events and the and the rest. Could you tell us how that has worked out? Uh, yes. We haven't I don't believe I've provided a list of events for you to review um that have been or activities have been happening at the firehouse. Um, there are under six per month and I don't believe any of them apart from one outdoor indoor event. Well, none of them exceed the capacities that you set. I'm trying to But if you have any questions on any of them, I'm happy to answer them.

Did Did anybody have any questions? I'm trying to get mine up. Uh I did have one. We we um did get a copy of the um the health department approval for the the pizza pizza ladies. Yes. Um there's been a report to us that that they did have piles of pizza boxes at the um at their at at the oven. Yeah.

And that's a little confusing because there's not supposed to be takeout. So what are the pizza boxes being used for? Lots of people have leftover pizza that they take out with them. Happens all the time. So people don't just order a slice, they order the whole pizza. Yes. You don't get it by the bite. Yeah. Or is that you can you can't order it by the slice? Wouldn't be a very big slice. They're small times and often like at the table there will be a lot of different flavored pies.

We also created the pizza boxes as a sort of branding thing. It's not, you know, necessarily to encourage takeout, but if people do, you know, they have kids with them and they leave a lot, we have boxes for people to take away. Yeah. It it runs it runs so contrary to everything the town has been doing about packaging and and everything else. Um well everything is compostable. They're I mean they're cardboard. They're not So I I don't think it's that different compared to some of the other

No, I'm not saying it's out in town. I don't think it's different at all, but we've been kind of hard on some of the other takeout issues. So, any other pizza place that has the boxes except the other pizza places are not forbidden from having takeout. There's it's it's again it's it's this difficult fitting. It's not just fitting a square peg into a round hole. We're sort of trying to fit a peg of entirely indeterminate shape into a round hole. It's

well, I think if there are other uses for that building that you can advise to, then I I guess we would love to hear them. But I want to I just want to make put on the record that the takeaway component is just to take the food you've ordered. Correct. It's not take away as in you're trying to order for takeaway like you would at a attorney's restaurant or something. I just want to make the distinction for Yeah. No, and that's a good decision. I've never seen people driving up and lining up like at some of the restaurants. It is in fact. So people do at least start sitting. They at least start on the pizza while they're in the correct

in the store. Okay. Should you come and visit us? I probably should. I I do drive by frequently and observe many pedestrians exiting with five, six, seven boxes at a time. So, I mean, I'm a little I'm a little skeptical of the uh of the statement, but um I I also don't see it as an impediment to considering the the application.

No, it's just a matter of making sure that what we say is done is done or are changing what we say. If we if we think it's not a reasonable thing to to require them not to have takeout, then we shouldn't be requiring them not to have takeout. We shouldn't be saying no takeout, but it's okay if they have take out, right? the takeout component is because of the parking situation, I believe. So, I believe that was wrapped into the original

board. I just as as this application has gone on and as it continues to go on, I think we're going to have to begin to think in those terms. Um that it is possible that some of our conditions are not reasonable rather than saying therefore don't worry about those conditions but repeating them is um it's not a healthy way to do planning. If there's conditions we feel are unreasonable, we should say, you know, we made a mistake. We should change that condition, right? I mean, that

um I'm not saying that that's the the case with this. But I think that's um if you're wondering why I want to talk about this kind of thing, it's because I think that kind of consistency um is is important and it's important to the credibility of the town. But I I sorry. Yeah. I see. And I also don't see a problem with her saying, you know, maybe we weren't being reasonable with this in one case or another. If we believe that if we do believe we're being reasonable, then we should say, "No, look, I'm sorry."

Makes a lot of sense. I mean, Jessica, have you had complaints? Has the town gotten complaints as far as the parking and access with people going in and out? I don't believe anything's been filed since the original kind of discussion surfaced. Um but again, my department doesn't receive the complaints. It is the building doesn't mean but I personally haven't heard anything of monumental nature that um had needed to be communicated to this board.

Well, we also heard in the last meeting and I I'll just restate some of my comments. I mean, I believe that what the the fundamental nature of what the business is trying to do is in align with our comprehensive plan. Um, we heard from other businesses in the last being during the public hearing that they've actually been an incredible, should I say, anchor tenant in the town bringing other people around the business. So, I it it frustrates me quite honestly that we're talking about pizza boxes. I mean, I understand where the town code is and maybe it's a town code that needs to modernize to meet the new lifestyle needs that we're putting forward. You know, we're going to hear another application a couple minutes about another establishment that's looking to add uh more life into that part of town. So to me I I think it's important that you know we we ensure that we are in line with what we said we were and you know obviously making sure that it's meant to be an eat in not an takeout sort of establishment is important but I think it's also important that we recognize that when businesses are doing well in a part of town that is of utmost importance to our community that we ensure that we continue making our town pro businesses a way that is creating the life that our residences want to have and it are bringing people from other parts of the town that keeps tax revenue here and doesn't send it to other parts of the town. So I I just want to go on record again uh and say similar sentiments to what I said last time that what this business is doing and what it's inspiring other businesses to do in that part of town should be welcome and not something that we try to regulate out.

And what what I would say is I actually agree with everything you say but I don't think in any given case we can reach that conclusion without talking about it. Um, so if we never raise the issue, it's a it's a problem. And there and if we do begin to change the rules about what's allowed under certain circumstances and we often should change those rules um we have to consider the law of unex uned consequences so that things that work in one place um need to be able to work anywhere or they need to be um limited to to certain places. Um the whole idea of an outdoor um ancillary food preparation place um is is a new one. It's different. It's something we haven't done. I will tell you that several years ago when somebody tried to bring a truck in, one one business in the middle of Katona brought a food truck in and a in a situation that really was in many ways quite comparable. All hell broke loose

within the commercial district. Um, so I think in many ways that was probably because it was a different economic time. It was also residential. It was near residential property. I believe it's a different this isn't a commercial. Anyway, I believe your premise that it needs to be discussed and approved. Yeah. But as you and as you were saying, I thought perhaps do would it be helpful to have approvals for takeout? Is that something

I mean it's not something we advertise. It's not something we you know people come in sometimes they shop they have some drinks. They might take some pizzas home for their kids but I don't think we're sort of saying here's a pizza takeout restaurant. Um we're not allowed any cutlery because we don't have water usage. We're not allowed any um so we have to find ways to package the product. I wouldn't have gone as far as to say we didn't believe we were allowed for you to both come and have a coffee and then take a couple of pizzas home for your kids. That that was breaking a takeout rule. So I again I don't know how detailed we you know how restrictive you want to try and make things but you know we obviously respond accordingly to what you're asking us to do but you know people sly might come have a meeting hang at the far house and then be like oh I'm here I'll take a couple of pizzas for the kids we don't say I'm so sorry we can't accommodate that so I think

but I think that's if you're saying I see people come out with boxes that's probably why I think what you're saying is not to berict ive but to be descriptive. Yes. So that the approval actually explains what's going on. It's not restricting it. It's saying what's actually happening, what needs to happen, what do you want to happen so that can get an approval. It's not I I appreciate that. But if I was coming to I totally appreciate that, but if I was applying to be a pizza takeout restaurant, then I would apply for a very different set of circumstances. And I think it's really what you want to focus on. I mean, I'm I'm I'm just here to answer your question. Can I just add Sorry, it also evolves as well, right?

Last year we want to do takeout. You were on parking, but as it happens, we've had no complaints in the last year. No, no, that's what we're saying. We want to be descriptive and not restrictive. So, it's appropriately approved for what's actually happening. Not, oh no, you shouldn't be doing this. Like, oh, this is great. This is happening. How do we have the verbiage around what's actually happening in the approval so that that's consistent with what we're doing in all the other businesses where they have to do what's approved. It's not like this.

We have we have said we can't participate in vegan week because we can't be considered a food establishment. We've shut down many opportunities to support the community because we're restricted on numbers. I mean, we say no to everything. I mean I you know please do tell us what you would like us to do and we will obviously try and accommodate. No I I think what right now what we need you to do and what you what you seem to be doing is answer our questions for sure. Um

tell us what works and what doesn't work about what we're we're saying and be upfront about that. Um but also under understand that there's a bit more need for precision than I think my colleagues are completely thinking about at the moment because there are different applicants because whatever we allow one person to do we have to have very good reasons not to allow somebody else to do. So some of these things seem ridiculously complicated. It's you can say quickly, well that's different because they're near residential properties. If you don't say something about that in the law when you write it, if you don't think about that, then what happens um near near residential properties is no different than what happens elsewhere. We had that for years. We we never worried about um the obvious, the drive-thru 24-hour AMT in a bank. Seemed like such a wonderful idea until the banks that were bordering the residential properties decided they wanted to put in 24-hour drive-thru ATMs. And all of a sudden, something that was this tremendously convenient thing elsewhere became hell on wheels for families that now had bright lights required by New York State law near ATMs on all night shining in their bedroom windows and and cars driving through at 3:00 in the morning to to get um to get serviced. So, that's a solvable problem. We didn't do away with

um all it ATMs, but we did do away with them next to residential situations. And that's that's why when we talk about something new like this, we we actually have to try to be cautious about it. that you're you're here before us right now because about 5 years ago we said that our uh food use ordinances were much much too restrictive. U and I actually helped to write the cafe ordinance. Um and it's still flawed. It still needs work. But if we hadn't if the planning board hadn't said frankly that we were tired of turning down things that we knew people wanted but the the law didn't allow. Um if if the planning board hadn't had that discussion, we'd still be saying a business like you're you're doing now is simply not allowed in in the town of Bedford. That might be what you ultimately have to decide for businesses like ours not to exist and the firehouse could potentially change your building.

You're not getting the the the the point I'm saying. I'm saying that the pro the process may actually go in exactly the opposite direction. It's gone. But if we don't talk about it at all, then everything stays as it is. I

and and we don't change. Um, so when I raise the issues to talk about, it's the only way we can figure out that something needs to be changed. If we It's really tempting sometimes, uh, particularly when you're sitting up here when something's going on that everybody kind of likes, but it doesn't fit into what we do, it's really tempting just to let it go. Let it go. It's It's a good thing. it's doing fine. And that's fine till about 6 months later when somebody else who is um not as cautious of their neighbors or who's in a different situation or something else proceeds to do what seems like the same thing on paper but is not the same thing in reality at all. And then people people get hurt and

I I totally understand. I just I don't know how what else I can I can add to that. Well, what I'm saying on us then to that's not our that's not for us to comment on. And that's for you to decide and I you know just

but I'm just trying what I what I'm trying to to to say is don't misinterpret our asking questions and and posing um dilemas if if you will. Uh because we have to judge how how businesses operate and yet we're not business people. If we can't ask you questions or challenge you, then we can't learn. Um, if we if we sit up here assuming we know it all, um, then we're not going to do our job jobs well and things may not go the way the town wants them to. So, every time we ask a question, don't don't assume. uh and I actually will say this to my colleagues as well. Don't assume that because one of us asks a question about something we want to kill something. We want to understand it. We want to understand whether it makes a difference or not. Um, I for one don't want to assume that because I like a particular thing that it necessarily will be good for everything, but I certainly don't want to assume that even though I like something, it will be bad. I just want to consider what the downsides may be rather than ignore what's going on. And and to be clear, I'm supportive of this this use uh and this application. Uh I want to make sure that we have an honest exchange. So when the board is asking if there's any takeaway, the explanation you gave just now was very helpful. So I appreciate that.

Um and by the way, I raised it because the issue was raised with me. You know, nobody's complaining all that much and yet people noticed. I don't know what all these pizza boxes are about. It was somebody who was disgruntled about it. So, which by the way wasn't me. I I suppose in a in a cafe mixed use, are you not allowed to are people not allowed to take out? There's no specific uh regulation within the cafe um use that's currently established, which I think is the chair is driving to. I'm just curious. Yeah. No, you you can do takeout in

in our in our approval for the the use in the space, the retail and cafe allowance. That was a condition of that approval. Not that that's not a condition of the pizza oven approval that's before us tonight. And I don't have any problem moving forward with the pizza oven extension. I just want to make sure that we're all open and honest about uh how this facility operates so that we can make sure that its land use is rectified and brought into conformance. And I'm not making any allegations that it's not I'm not suggesting there's any violations that should be issued. Um, you're just asking the question.

I'm observing that we've as we have for the last what is it a year with this application that there's a mismatch between our existing land use framework and how the facility operates and we need to rectify them.

Yeah. And that's basically what I'm saying as well. And that's um I know it's pain to to come here, but I think I started this discussion by giving giving away the fact that I actually support extending your um your use at the moment. And I think that in the process we need to to seriously consider spend the next six months. So I think we're doing a six-month extension on it. Next six months defining this this use a bit more carefully. um to see how among other things to see what what we think we are going to do if the health department doesn't work things out. Where are we going to go with this?

Y so I would be happy to uh support a six-month extension on the pizza oven application. Is that a first I'll I'll I'll make a motion that we find that it's a type two action. Yeah, that's is there for once I'm going to second the the notion that it is a type two. Is there any further discussion of whether it is a type two or not? All in favor? I I all oppose it is a type two action. the extension. Um, you've made the the motion to extend it.

Sure. Um, could I presume that that is with the same conditions that have existed in the previous extensions in the in the resolution that we passed previously? Yes. Um, I'm wondering if I might want to put in something to to clarify the takeout issue. I mean, it's not it's not directly related to this application, so I could understand not doing that. Um, it's just something to keep in mind, you know, as as as we advance the discussion with the Department of Health from my perspective. So maybe keep it in mind, but don't act on it tonight. That may make sense.

Yes. Um, and I might ask you in the in the course of things to look at it from a different perspective. Um, and see does does it look like takeout? Because takeout might not necessarily be a problem. Well, it's a problem as a retailer because obviously that's not what we're trying to promote. So, it's not something we are advocating because if you're taking out and picking up Moho at the curb, which is not something we let people do, you're not coming in to shop in our retail environment. So, it's countered to everything

we're trying to do with having coffee and pizza available. So, it is um a little foxing to me that you would think we'd be running some subdiv pickup service when it just is so the antithesis of everything we're trying to promote for. Well, no, I think what what I'm what I'm thinking is that part of what I'm hearing is that your your customers may actually want something that you're not inclined to give them at the moment. and well

and and we're not in a pizza restaurant or in the pizza making business but the purpose of the business is to bring people in and use it as a community meeting gathering shopping spot. When people are there, they may say, "Well, I have someone else that's at so and so location. I want to take one to go." So, they're not first and foremost, you know, calling up and say, "Great, pizza's ready in 20 minutes. Come and pick it up." You can't order on the phone. Correct. You have to go inside and go to the counter and place orders. So I Okay, that's an interesting They're not on any of the delivery apps, right? Can't I can't Door Dash it.

Okay. So So advertise the pizza separately at all. I mean, it's not like you can look up pizza. What I'm going to try and get you guys to concentrate on in this is that if we're going to talk about coming up with new standards for things, we have to think about what those standards should be and we have to ask the the exact questions that you're But that's the are important distinctions because these are these run counter to a traditional sort of takeout restaurant. And arguably the pizza girls are not running this any differently than they're running it at Ro Shambo where again you can't call up you can't order online but I can drive by Rosh Shambo and I can eat it there or I can

and you've just come up with a couple of excellent things. What would it be would it make sense to make that distinction by by not rather than saying you can't do takeout? Well, there's a couple that that you can't making it a rule that you can't call in or that you you can't be that that might make more sense and clarify and clarify rule rather than this is how they're do running their business. Do do does that have to be a rule? Well, we're trying to No, I understand that. That's Does that apply to this application? No, they're only going for a signal. Well,

yeah. Um, I I think these are I think it's an important conversation questions and they're good and I think this gives it the opportunity to to discuss some of the questions. Um, but I think these questions are apply more to a larger rule change, not a six-month extension of an operation. That's my

Yeah, I agree that about that, but I also felt that we had a little bit of time tonight and an opportunity to discuss something that could come up. And it's um and sometimes it's better to have begin to have these discussions before they become I don't want to say an emergency, but before it becomes something that has to be settled right now. So, I'm not going to apologize for bringing it up. It's tough if you're uncomfortable with it. Um because I think we do have to talk about these things for all the reasons that we've been saying. The business is changing and changing in ways that I think are difficult. No, all business is changing.

Right. I was going to say I don't think we have changed what we presented initially at all. No, no, no. I'm not I'm not I'm saying as a as a general rule. Yes, I see what what businesses is changing. We have now just done a comprehensive plan that talks about encouraging that kind of change and recognizing that kind of change. If at the same time we take the position that we cannot talk about these things or argue about these things um or even question some of these things, then I don't think we're ever going to get where we have to to get. So, of course,

I don't I don't quite see where why it's problematical to discuss. I have a good pin to put in this if we can move forward with the application hands. I know we have a Okay, so we've got a resolution and I believe we have some conditions on that resolution, the same ones. And have we had a second?

Not yet. I will second the the resolution just to make things interesting for once. Uh is is there any further discussion? The resolution, if anybody's forgotten, is to give an another six-month extension. Uh but this will have to be the last extension. If we go past this, we have to look for other alternatives because we can't keep doing this on a hopefully hopefully there'll be progress with the Department of Health and the water report and it will settle. It will be settled. So, uh any further discussion? All in favor?

I I all opposed. You have the six-month extension under all the same criteria that that you had previously. And I'm sorry if you feel that that we're not understanding where you're coming from, but to some extent that's true. We just know we're not understanding it, and we're trying to find it find a way of of keeping it as part of the the bigger picture.

And no, I I don't think that at all. So, good luck and uh keep us informed and and if there are any new and exciting ideas coming by and talking to the planning department about it is a good idea before you do it. It's I don't have any ideas for the for Beford. Thank you so much. Take care. Good night.

Okay. Next item on our agenda is to consider a site plan application for a new restaurant establishment pursuant to town code 125-3. Um the uh owner is Benchmark Bedford Retail LLC and the applicant is 625 629 Oldpost Road, Bedford. That is also the location of the operation. Good evening. Good evening.

I'm uh Jordan Vogel. I'm the owner of 629 Old Post Road. I'm also hoping to open and be the owner of a bar called The Oak. We want to open uh the buildings for retail locations. Vincent Whitmore occupied the corner, which was a re real estate brokerage office. They went out of business in February. And uh and I'm hoping to open a high-end bar and pub. I think that this project will uh fit very well with the Bedford comprehensive plan. Uh it's a small bar. It's about 700 square ft. We only have 12 seats that will fit at the bar. So I don't believe that this will be a big imposition to the town. I'm also making it very mature. So I this is not a place for college kids to come get drunk. This is for people our age to go have a proper cocktail. I happen to own the building right next door, 633 Old Post Road, which is uh where the Bedford Playhouse is located. We have a uh 37 car parking lot directly behind that building. And then to the north of that, I have another 31 car parking lot. So unlike other applicants that have trouble with parking, we have plenty of parking. Now, this building has on the site has four parking spots. Um, but they're currently being used by mast when I uh lease them the space. I met with zoning last week and they one of their conditions to approval was uh for me to sign a uh lease in perpetuity between 633 Old Post Road. giving for as long as this bar is in existence that I

will give seven parking spots forever to uh to be used for this parking for for this establishment. Uh which I said of course that's condition was fine with me. Um that also allows for us to have a loading zone for uh for the bar. And so we have nine retail stores along uh Old Post Road. Lots of them have been there for a very long time. Well, before I owned the building, I've had I've always had a strict rule that there's no loading or unloading allowed on Route 22 on Old Post Road. Um, just because it would create a havoc. Uh, and so we have a strict rule that all loading and unloading happens in the parking lot and then it's very easy with a with a cart to be able to roll the uh any materials up onto into the store. The I think that this is going to be really good for the town. It's we're not looking for to do late hours. I mean, this is a town that I happen to live 0.9 miles from the building and um I love this town and so this this isn't no which way looking to open a rowdy dive bar that's going to be, you know, causing havoc at 1 in the morning. We're uh we're planning that our hours will will end at 11:00 p.m. Although quite frankly, I don't think we'll have enough customers and it's probably going to be more like a 7 to9 type crowd. Um, do you have a lighting plan for your

We're not doing any exterior lights. No exterior lights. Okay.

And then the other thing I should mention is uh I only found this out a few months ago, but there's no designation in the zoning code for a bar or a pub. And so the choice was should we apply for a cafe license or should we apply for a restaurant license? And my view was if I applied for a cafe license it would be misleading. And so I think if you approved you would all come and say I don't know why I'm ordering a martini in a cafe. So we're applying for a restaurant even though we are not looking to have guests or uh or exhaust. There's not going to be any cooking there. We are planning on having, you know, light bites, appetizers, you know, tapa style, and those will all be made in a convection oven and a panini press.

So, even though the applicant application says a restaurant, it's uh it's going to it's going to be a bar with with light bites, which makes a lot of sense to me actually. And I think you you're wise to I think it fits better into the restaurant category than into the cafe category because it's the other thing about a cafe is it's really ancillary to another retail use and that's not what you're doing. Correct. Um and New York state law requires you to have some sort of food in a bar anyway.

Absolutely. So, um I have no problems with it being a restaurant, particularly since you can you can make the requirements of a for a restaurant. What's the use for upstairs? I saw you have an office. Is that just for ownership? There's no public access upstairs? No. Okay. Is food prepared upstairs or heated upstairs and brought down? Cuz it looked like there were coffee or something up there. There'll be storage up there. Food will be prepared behind the bar

and that will be storage but only for employees. Mhm. Uh in terms of the food preparation, are you limited in what you do in terms of food preparation by the department of health or is this just a selflimitation?

It's a selflimitation. We haven't will of course have to apply to department of health. I put a new septic tank in the for this building at the end of last year. And so my hope is with a brand new system that that will work. If that doesn't work, I have a water treatment facility at 633 Old Post Road. That's quite frankly, it's large enough to to handle the entire village. And now I'm talking to the public school, the elementary school about tapping into our system. So, in the event Department of Health does not is not happy with our brand new septic system, then we have plan B, which we could tap

629 Old Post Road into the water treatment facility of 633 Old Post Road. I'm not sure particularly given some of what we've talked about that that it makes sense for us to get into the issue of what exactly how you cook what you what you prepare. Um, so although you're you're specifying that that you're just going to use a convection oven or that I don't know that it makes sense for us to make that kind of a thing part of the approval. Um, I think that might pave the way for the kind of confusions that we're having elsewhere. I don't see anything wrong with a bar being able to cook something on a stove if the health department approves of it.

So what? Yeah. Two store friends down or four store friends down is one of those. So but it's not our job to change the the nature of competition in the business world. Is it I mean No. No. My point is I I don't see an issue if they choose to not serve food if we're approving it for them being able to serve food. But if the building has limitations that prevents the preparation of food, but we're approving it for a full-on restaurant knowing that there's also restaurants in the immediate vicinity, I have no issue with that.

Oh, I see what you're saying. Okay. No, I we can't if the health department says they can't prepare food, then what we've said is is is useless. So obviously a condition of approval would be health department approval but I'm saying that that would be as far as I'm concerned the only condition in terms of of the the um the food and as for what what New York State will accept basically New York State will accept cheese and crackers. Can I bring my leftover oho pizza though? That's the question. Mhm.

So, I I'll I'll tell you a little bit more about the menu, mainly because it's fun and we're all going to be there.

The uh with with uh SLA, the uh state liquor authority, you could get away with crackers and so lots of bar owners will just have crackers or maybe you switch it up one night and have pretzels. The we live in a small town and so everyone talks and everyone knows everything. So the last 6 months I've been anyone that stops me on the street has chimed in with their ideas and it seems like people in the town want to have more sustenance and so there's a fine line. So we're going to create the greatest grilled cheese you've ever had. We're going to have uh tapas type items. It's going to be the type of place that if you go in for a drink and it's to meet a friend at 6:00 at 700 p.m. we don't want you to have to go to De Chico's and make a whole big meal if you want to get two or three appetizers and that holds you through dinner. But, you know, we're doing a lot of this is I'm sure you could hear from my enthusiasm. I'm spending much more time on this uh than I should compared to my my full-time business of real estate, but it's because I care about the community and this is uh this is something that I truly believe fits perfectly in the comprehensive plan. Um it's been very very well thought out because I didn't want to come to you with a plan that was going to uh not conform with parking requirements, not conform with the loading loading zone. I've spoken to other people in the town who are terrified about underage drinking and I've joked that if you're under 40, you're probably going to feel awkward coming into my bar. And so we're creating this for us. That's what that's what I'm trying to do. And and I think it's going to be really good for the community.

No, it it actually sounds sounds like a good idea. I just think you should not not go telling people it's not a restaurant. You don't have to say it is a restaurant. You just I understand it. Um because you you may actually find that a lot of people when they go out on a a Friday night just want tapas. Agreed.

If if the approvals are if the building is suitable for restaurant, it can get the approvals. I mean that that none of the issues we were dealing with in the prior application are relevant here. So yeah, that's a good situation. So I it it's a cleaner application. Uh the one thing I will ask you um one of the conditions I put on is is if if a change in the the type of cooking you're doing involves exterior changes to the building that you'll come back for approval of of that. Absolutely. U for example some some kinds of cooking involve much more elaborate vent systems. of course

and um that's something we would like to be able to review. There have been some interesting developments here and there over that. Understood. Um chair, may I make three comments? Yes, please. Um two questions actually for the applicant. First, just to make sure everyone's on the same page. Um at this time, you are still not proposing outdoor seating, correct? Correct. Okay. You're also not proposing any exterior changes to the building say for a sign. Could you repeat the question? You're you're not going to propose any exterior changes to the building except for a new sign. That's correct. Okay. And so for that, you do know that your sign permit application goes through the building department, but also review through the historic district review commission.

I understand. Perfect. And I do see the chair is is on board. Um so if there were any additional exterior changes, um that you would also have to be reviewed by the by the historic district. Yeah, that's a good point. Yeah. And you're not proposing any changes in the light in lighting? Exterior. Exterior. Okay. I'm intimately familiar with uh the historic and Bedford Village. We're going to look for a white sign with black letter. Okay. I like it. Um what what were the conditions that the zoning board put on your

they wanted to make sure because right now I I own both buildings and so their concern with parking is if I sold the larger building with the parking then there then there would be a parking problem. Mhm. And so their requirement was a lease in perpetuity for the length of time that this space uh is approved as or operating as a a bar/rest and a condition of getting a final CEO would be to present that that lease in perpetuity to the town which I uh gladly accepted. Okay.

And that was for seven off street parking and one off street loading I believe. Correct. Okay. So that would also be a condition of our approval in that case. Um so signage has to be approved by the historic district. Lighting is not an issue. Um department of health approval is is an issue. Um, did the Did you apply to SLA yet? We did. You did?

There will for now because you're not talking about outdoor seating, we we will make a condition that there is is no outdoor seating, but that doesn't preclude you from coming back to us. Correct. to to talk about my long-term plan will be to have outdoor seating. I would um but the I want to do it as phase one, phase two, so get approved, open, have the operation running smoothly and then I would hope to come back maybe in spring of 26 so we could open for summer of 26. But I fully understand that we'd have to come back and present the case to you guys.

Okay, that sounds like a very good plan to me. Uh, let's see. Have we We've done so many secret type twos this this time. I can't remember whether we've done the secret type two on this one yet. Not yet. Um, I move that we find this is a type two action. Second. We have a motion and a second that this is a type two action. Any further discussion? All in favor? I

I All opposed. It is deemed a type two action. Um I get the feeling that that most members of of the board are as comfortable with this as I am. Um could I have a motion with the conditions that we've talked about? So, sorry. Before we take a vote, is there any desire by the applicant to have um like private events being held in your space? No. Okay.

We're actually pretty keen on not having our friends in the community stop by the bar and it says closed for a private event. So, it's going to be open. Okay. Six nights a week to the public. Okay. Thank you. Mhm. If that should change, it would be helpful if you came back to discuss it. I understand. Thank you. So, I second Dr. Lewis's motion. So, we have a motion and a and a second. Is there any further discussion? All in favor? I

I all opposed. You have your application. Um and we look forward to seeing how it goes. Great. Thank you very much. I appreciate it. Thank you. Okay. Next item on the agenda. Is to consider an extension request for a previously approved subdivision affecting two lots. This is um the owner applicant is Glen Arbor Golf Club.

Hi, good evening. Uh Nicholas Gabry, Bibbo Associates Engineering again, filling in for Tim Allen, who's the engineer on the project. Um Tim brought me up to speed on the Glen Arbor extension. Uh my understanding is that it's caught up at the health department like many other projects that we're dealing with. So um we require this extension just to finish the review and approval with the health department. um of the plan. Mhm. Um there really isn't any reason not to give you an extension at this point. Um could I have a motion? Motion to grant this a motion to grant a six to grant. Is it a 60-day extension or 90day?

How long? Six month. It's a six month. Six month. I believe it's a six-month extension. It is a sixmonth. Okay. So, it's a six-month extension, correct? Second. We have a motion and a second. Um, should mention that this is a type two action under seeker. Let's table the motion for a minute. It's a Could I have a motion that it's a second? I I move that we find it's a type two action. Second. All in favor? I. All opposed. back to the motion on the on the table. Uh, all in favor? I I All opposed. You've got it. Thank you. Have a good evening.

You, too. Okay. And I believe that that is the last item on our agenda. No, we should have one more. There's the subdivision. Another repeat customer. Skully. Oh, that's not on my copy of the agenda. It's not on our agenda. [Applause] The applicant's also not here. Maybe because it's not on the agenda. No, no, they are fully aware. They were supposed to be present.

Oh, I see. It's It's on your notes, but it's simply not on the agenda. Um, it's on It's on the website. Yeah. Oh, it is on the website. Uh, yep. Oh, yeah. It's uh listed as consider application for a 90-day extension to a previously approved subdivision. Uh, owner is Richard and Gail Sporn. Applicant is James Scolley uh on Hickory Lane. Okay. The applicant doesn't have to be present for a for an extension. Um, I would move that this is a type two action under seeker. Second. We have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? I

Well, all in favor say I. All opposed. All right. It's type two action under secret. Do we have a motion to uh approve a 90-day extension? Some moved. Is there a second? Second. All in favor? I. All oppose. We have a 90-day extension.

There's no announcement. I'm just realizing that this should have been with the conditions of the previous. I would have captured that for you, but yes. Okay. Have to close the meeting. So, could I have a motion to close the meeting? So, moved. Is there a second? Second. All in favor? I. All opposed. The meeting is now closed.