Planning Board - Regular Meeting

Okay, good evening. We're here. Uh, this is the planning board, Newcastle Planning Board for the evening of Wednesday, November 5. I see we have a quorum. Not by not by a lot, but we have a quorum. Is there a motion to open the meeting? Motion. Second. Second.

All in favor? I. Our first item is a continued public hearing on CG Homes. Uh I think we had um um readjusted delay last time around. CG Homes is uh 456 462 Armark Road. This is an application for preliminary subdivision plat approval application for storm water management and erosion and sedimentation control and true removal permit for construction of a four lot subdivision. [clears throat] Good evening. How are you?

For the record, Ralph Alonsetti, civil engineer for the project. Uh, do you want me to share my my put up plans? I'll just give a quick summary of of the project. Um, so, uh, it's an existing two lots, vacant, completely vacant. Um, there are, it's on the west side of Route 128. Uh, there's a wetland that runs down the center of the lots. Uh, we are proposing four or five lots. One of them is going to be a non-building lot, which is basically our storm water lot. That's on the upper part of the screen right there. Uh we are proposing one entrance to a common driveway that will service all four lots. Uh this is septic. This is well uh we are not encroaching into the 150 ft wetland buffer other than to take out an existing shed. Uh a dilapidated shed that's that's there. It's just non-compliant. We're just taking it down. Um, we've done testing for the storm water with uh town personnel witnessing it and New York City D. We've also done testing for the septics with uh Westchester County Department of Health. That's a quick general summary. I'm here to answer any questions.

Yeah, it's been a long process, but we've gone through it. Uh, this is now determined conservation development. So, a good deal of the land is going to be preserved in open space with conservation easement. So, the applicants work with us to come up with what we think is a pretty good plan uh for the property. So, um I guess I'll take comments from staff at this point. Sabrina, do you have any comments?

Um I do. I actually I only have a couple of comments really [clears throat] one that is substantive. Uh but it won't prevent from moving forward. Um I would just like to see some updated coverage calculation worksheets um based on the final design that we have before us right now. Everything else that I have um is um is satisfied and can be incorporated as conditions of approval if the board chooses to do so. Sabrina, do we have to take separate action at this point with a negative deck or is that something that

Yes, we do. We do. Unfortunately, I did not have time to prepare the neg for you tonight, but um it can be you can declare a negative declaration. Um and I can provide the paperwork for chairman signature after after um the fact. Okay. And your recommendation is that um we're we're all set. We can we can declare a negative declaration here. Yes, you absolutely can. There's um mitigation that the applicant is providing by conserving the area and doing negative plantings. It's all um all conducive to a negative declaration. Yes.

So, John, how do we do this? Do we just have a motion to adopt a standard negative negative declaration that we always use when we use that form? You would you would make a motion to issue a negative declaration and then the resolution would refund follow that. Yeah. Okay. Is there such a motion? Well, Mr. Chairman, you may want to hear from the rest of staff and and and if there's any public wanting to speak at the public hearing before you do that. Okay, good point. [snorts] Okay, good. Um just one question for Sabrina. On item four, when you say we'll hold this over till final subdivision approval, correct? What exactly does that mean?

You will need to return for final subdivision approval and at that time um you know the the agreements regarding the common driveway and maintenance and storm water infiltration can come to light. Thank you. So our process for subdivision is two steps. Preliminary approval and then final approval. We come back and do this all over again. No changes, right? Exactly. And if if you know, okay, if basically they come back with the same application, some minor tweaks, maybe they met the conditions, we should be in position just to adopt the final solution. That's the whole purpose of up fronting all the issues now. and and

right you'll go get your permits from from the other agencies as well and they may make changes that will need before you know they may change things which is why we then ask you to come back for final right okay um Bob you had some comments

uh yes Mr. chairman of the board. Thank you so much. Uh majority of my comments are uh items that pertain to agreements for the storm water for the sighteline which I think I just saw an email Mr. sent down to us for to John and Jeff and I to review. So that's a step in the right direction with the common driveway access utilities conservation needs an agreement site needs an agreement store agreement. A lot of my uh again conditions are formulated on that. Uh as said it needs third party approvals uh for the SWIP from D. It needs a DOT permit. Um and then I just have some minor comments with the MPT uh with the sequencing plan, but I have no objection to all of these items I have listed here. uh meeting conditions of approval for the planning board resolution for the preliminary subated application.

Right. Those are my comments for time, Mr. Chairman.

Great. And I and again for the benefit of the applicant, you know, whenever we see Bob's comments were it's recommended that we provide XYZ. Those are always endorsed by the board. So, it's something that satisfied. Okay. Um [clears throat] Okay. Dennis, you had some comments. All right. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh, for the record, uh, yes, the shed still does exist. I, uh, when I revisited this, I we have two old pieces of equipment that are separated by that null. So, when I, you know, connected the equipment, I go, wait, where did the shed go? So, that's associated with the other one. So, that's just to clarify that. Um,

so my memo's probably a little bit longer than everybody else's because this was the first opportunity to review the replacement plan. So that that's why. Um, so as I said, I did visit the site. Uh, so on page one just making some comments. Uh I understand why uh numerically why they thought those two trees were missing because how the numbering goes 165 and 166 are off on another part relative to the sequencing cluster of 160s which is one is nowhere near the other which which is fine. That's just how they did the survey. So I just wanted to um delete the asterisk uh because they are indeed existing. Then the second bullet is just a document that you know I actually did walk off the site and guess on the tree geek. So you just have to change those two uh two species for those numeric IDs. Um my general comments I guess you know you you have uh two calculation tables. One was submitted as part of the plan the other is on your plan as well. So I just need those tables to match at the end of the day in terms of what what those agreements are with respect to uh required replacement. Um again you know because of the area the way it is we we need to have some form of prepary protection for you know for the planting. So that's something that we you know we would want to see uh ultimately. Um now down to the I guess the mathematics of the calculation. Uh I just wasn't clear relative on the first bullet. Um when you did your deductions for what you said were invasive species. I couldn't tell if it was individuals diameter. Um, legis ask requested for some clarification on that. Uh, to define what an invasive species is, bullets two and three kind of help to flesh out. Yeah, I'll agree with Norway maple. Yes, we'll agree with tree heaven. Black locust is native but has

that special consideration per DEC's part 575 rags. So, uh, honestly, if you are removing those, those should be counted towards towards replacement. Um and the final bullet was just with respect to I think there was some aims at the bottom of of a table that were referring to certain columns. Uh in in that table I just need the asterisk to match to to the comments. Um now back to the invasive species discussion. So uh the improving authority ultimately which in this case is the planning board makes the decision uh as to whether you would or would not count um invasive species as part of the tree replacement requirements. Uh I felt that you know not just because of their numbers but you know the tree of heavens on on site um you know American fire over the last couple years has done a number on them. So they're not in great shape. So that was a longer thing that came out of the lantern employ visit. Uh but just to get an idea of magnitude of how many Norway maples were represented on the site um they came out to a total of 57. And so in calculating the diameter and you know the replacement diameter required and dividing that by 2.5 it comes out to an extra 151 trees that would potentially be replaced. And I know from from speaking earlier uh with Chairman Kirkwood, I did look and find uh with respect to Button Hook and it looks from like from looking at their resolution in March of 2019 and looking at their tree removal summary, the way they broke it down was they had uh sort of one category and then two subcategories. The two primary main categories uh were good or fair for a native species and

good or fair for an invasive species. And then the second sort of broad category was poor or dead for native species or poor or dead for invasive species. And it looks like they did not count as part of the replacement poor or dead regardless of nativity or not. But as far as good or fair, regardless of nativity, they counted both of those towards the replacement. So like the resolution uh mentioned 471 lb regulated trees per the regulated activity. This table I was looking at was at 458. So I'm not sure if this was the final, but they certainly didn't count the 174 in poor dead condition because the numbers would have been way off. So 458 and 471 makes sense that by the end that's that's what it turned out to be.

Just to clarify if they looked at the trees if they were healthy or not, right? Didn't make a difference if they were native or invasive. They just healthy tree versus so tree versus tree, right? Healthy tree versus sick tree. They didn't care if it was native or not at the time, right? They did break it down in terms of their but still if they were invasive they and they were healthy, they replaced them, right? It looks like the decision made per the resolution was Yes, they that that was a site that had very very heavy Norway maple uh growth. I I think [clears throat] it was more than 25%. It was it was I hear it's 20%.

I did I did the number it was 27.5%. That was the um just the good or fair that didn't count you know the the the additional poor debt. So the trees that quote unquote were regulated it was 27 and a half%. Right. In that particular case as I recall uh there was concern that the they were still performing a function in terms of

you know cloaking the uh the viewshed because there were hills there and so they're performing a function um which trees you know in addition to what trees always perform notwithstanding the fact that they're invasive and so there was reluctance not to count it. I I didn't recall whether we did a one to one or 50% or whatever. So I guess in this particular case, Dennis, um, what's your recommendation? What do you think the function? I mean, obviously they're trees and I think for the most part, these are considered healthy. We don't have very many dead trees on on on or poor trees in this in this area. Yeah. No, they were they were reasonable. Yes.

So the issue is what function they're performing. I think a lot of them are up toward the front toward 128 along the border. Some of those might have to be cut just for the the view for the Yeah. Yeah. You know, I think that represents uh a fair number of the trees that need to be removed cuz once you know, once the engineers get involved, the trees are coming down. That's just the way it is. They get in the way of everything. We could design anything. Don't worry about the water, the air. We'll we'll make it work. So, so Dennis, of the Did I just make a statement? I'm sorry about that. [laughter] Of the 57 Norway maples that are there, right? They're functioning in the forest. They're serving a role. Yeah. I mean, correct. Yeah, I mean insects, birds, mammals, shade, water filter.

And I would say that the way that they're oriented, if you think about it, the way this site is sort of the [clears throat] construct of it, they really do form like sort of this barrier [clears throat] from the roadway, like both visually um and even from like a wildlife perspective. It sort of nestles you more, you know, into the site and, you know, kind of has that barrier effect relative to the 128. If we had a site and if you have a site with 200 trees, 50 of them were Norway maples. Let's say those Norway maples weren't there. Would 50 other trees fill that void? 50 other naturally native trees, red maples, dog woods, whatever. Or would there not I'm trying to, you know, just because they're invasive,

would there be if they weren't there, would there still be a tree there in the forest? just not because if the invasive was away, it would give the opportunity for a native tree to grow, right?

I would say something would look to occupy that niche and it would really depend on what is the, you know, existing stand of trees, what is their species, you know, because other other things may try to sort of colonize the understory that may not be tree species. I mean, they could just be, you know, plants. They could be shrunks, you know, and and over time, uh, that could either become the new normal for the understory or eventually trees would, you know, co- sort of exist with that and then ultimately, you know, potentially out compete.

One of the issues here, Dennis, is that my recollection is they many of the Norways are along route 128 and yet the planting plan does not seem to be replacing any trees along 128. Most of the planting plan is up toward the homes along the the internal street. And I wonder whether or not actually there is some room to not just to fund the tree fund, but actually some room where we can have some trees albeit, you know, outside of the uh the traffic folk traffic people. Yeah. I think one one residence actually has the septic in front. Correct. Yes. Yeah. So that's a number of them.

Yeah. Yeah. So that that that's why like you know I mean this is the this is the fate to complete for human habitation at this point in a you know area that requires septic. So you know and then obviously you know the basin is required for storm water treatment. So um I mean to to their credit and I think I may comment later in the menu uh memo they um definitely included species as part of that expansion expansion. So a lot like along alongside the primary driveway those are the future expansions that come alongside it right not the primary fields.

They're both they have the primary and the expansion. Like would it wouldn't it be the ability to plant trees along that driveway? So as you're driving in you have just a treelined driveway with some nice oldfashioned maple, you know what I mean? Sugar maples. One, two, three sugar maples. One, two, three on each side or just something like that. Or even the the main driveway across the street from the homes that's outside the septic. Is [clears throat] there the opportunity that line that street or just along here which is where these maples are right now? Right. These might get into the viewact that I could definitely see why they kept away from here. That I get lot [clears throat] four and lot five we can put some trees along the uh common drive.

Um lot three it gets real tight with the septic and lot two we can put some around that turn around and in that area there. So according to Dennis, it could be 153 trees if we wanted to match up the caliber of the Norways that are coming out. Uh 151 151. So we could potentially ask for 151 new trees. Uh in addition to in addition to what has to be Yep. Okay. So let's try to be flexible, but we're trying to think of a dozen new trees and not 151 trees. Yeah. I mean, we can we can I think I think we there's some areas that we can put some that are not in the sight line and not in the septic area.

Perfect. And that would reduce your obligation under the tree fund if we go with the you know one for one reduction. Correct. I'm not going to fit 151. No. And I'm not we're not asking for 151. for the board's recollection, you know, you are further restricted for my request that don't plant any trees in the wetlands buffer because of the habitat that actually exist there. You don't want to convert it to to to something to but it does [clears throat] cuff them. Yeah. No, I hear you. So, can we get a reduction instead of 151?

Oh, no. No, it's not going to be 151. But that was [laughter] just that was just that was just a summary he did for the maximum that it could potentially go up to. So, well, do we have the ability, John, under our uh law that to to wave the one for one and just say in this particular case because you have to clear so many of these doorways for traffic reasons and the constraints that Dennis has imposed on your rear property to be fair, maybe we use a 50%, maybe a 25%, maybe the 75%.

Instead, uh it's that seems reasonable to me because we are imposing some constraints on you. Well, the highway people are putting the constraints on you. Uh we're doing that to preserve the meadow on the back. So what do you think Dennis? Does that sound something that you would support or can support? Yeah, I think it's reasonable. I mean that's why this was called out I think as a special consideration in the code. Right. Mr. Chairman, when we tonight if you direct a resolution to be prepared, we have to be very detailed because this happens in other subdivisions and you do not have a precedent of doing [clears throat] such a thing,

right? But there's a thing. Is it there isn't there the button hook president that replaced all of the evasives one for one? Yes. So yet yes in a way. But but keep in mind that it considered them and it separated them out. Live versus dead and and invasive native and invasive. So it didn't just say live versus dead. It said live and invasive live native. Agreed. At the end of the day, if you looked at where the statistics,

I think that this board can look at the nature of the invasive trees, the role they play, and your discretion will allow you to address what the code would seek in terms of mitigation, whether it's one for one or whether it's something less%. Yeah. But given the nature of what's being removed, the nature of the subdivision and all those factors considered, but it it really comes down to your discretion, right? But yes, I do believe you have the authority.

And to Sabrina's point, I think we if we go that route, we really have to document it very well in terms of what we were considering why we reached something other than one one, which is apparently something that we right. There is a code that specifies the mitigation ratio. I don't know that you can change that code without specific reasons. Right, Mr. Chairman, did but they just said it was out on discretion. Mr. Chairman. Yes. Yes, Bob.

I just I just want to be clear on the trees. Anything there's a section of code section 109 that that's pretty [clears throat] clear about safety and clear zones for trees. Um so really no tree should be within 10 ft of the travel lane. So keep that in mind, Dennis. Uh when you're when they're preparing this planting plan for the trees, if they plan on putting them in the rightway of that common access piece, they can't be any closer than 10 ft. Understood. Is that from backer curve? Yeah. That is from the edge of the travel lane which is the face of curb. Yes.

And that right away is only 40 ft. So they might have to be on private property. So, the only other additional comment I was going to make as a caveat, not not having the experience that the board has, do you recall, not for the reasons that Bob was stating, but for ecological reasons where you restricted any subdivision approvals that they couldn't plant somewhere because of the value of the area that happened to exist at that time? I I can't I had a feeling this might be kind of unique, too. So, it's it's it's a fairly unique property. Yeah. unique meadow. So I I can't recall that Dennis. Okay. Yep.

So that's not way the traffic issues we have all the time in terms what you have to clear and what you have to keep clear. But that that's a very interesting point. I don't think we've had that before. Can can some of this the area be utilized where uh do some additional planting if that's needed? I mean again around the um the storm water storm water treatment area like where it kind of gets dense enough that in here maybe yeah where you don't really even see it for that matter. I don't know that's where's that in between the basin and the road. Yeah, that's right.

Looks like you actually have some area in there that you could there could be some planting in there. Um it would be nice to cover up the basin too. They're not 100%. Well, the basin is kind of basin's going to be low compared to the roads. You won't even you won't see it. Um, you know, it gets steep in that area. We could put some trees there. Again, I think you should try and plant where you can plant, Ralph. um you know which will reduce your your payment requirement

and and you submit a a plan a revised planting plan that shows that so that you know we can come up with a with a an appropriate mitigation ratio if the board chooses to reduce it due the unique circumstances with the meadow or I guess we we could also kick the can down to the final and when you come back with a revised planting plan at that point we don't consider to be a material change but we can consider these planting issues and tree issues at that point and not hold you up at this point that would be appreciated and even on the issue of

yeah you know we can put in our resolution that we're considering we're we're thinking about a limitation um and u but not necessarily define it as 50% 75% or whatever at this point that makes sense and [clears throat] reasonable and acceptable Yeah, I you know I I think that we can um if the board chooses to have a resolution drafted we can work on the language to help move this forward without pulling you up.

Right. And again on that particular issue uh to Cananan's uh u point if if you show additional plantings there and Greg's point about something along the roadway and then something along what was it uh was it one and two u perhaps you got some room in there those areas. Uh and then if you come back and you know if if the number is 151 but we suddenly find that you found another place for 30 now the difference the delta is closed and and it's it's an easier thing I think for us to u to come up with you know [clears throat] a fair resolution to compromise. That makes sense.

I just a quick question Ralph. Um, are these areas all here? Is this all lawn or you or natural trees that you just didn't put in because there'd be too much? That's going to be long because septic areas are there. So, this is all septic along the street and this is all lawn for septic. Yes. I mean, there's some there's some buffer area outside, but yes, that's that's generally all lawn. Gotcha. So, he he will be limited with that. Yes. And I can't put a tree within 10 feet of septic. So, yeah. Yeah. We tell you. So in and that is septic and also the expanded areas as well. That's where the expansions will go. Yes. Okay. Can you put a tree in expansion just in the future they remove it? You can. It seems a shame. I mean

I not see you do it. I'm just asking. [clears throat] Hopefully none of us will be around or maybe hopefully I don't know whichever way you look at it. But uh that the expansion probably will not have to be built for a very very long time. Yeah. But it would be a shame to cut down that 50-y old maple tree. Exactly. The tree now. That's a better way of putting it rather than wishing for our death on I [clears throat] didn't mean that. [laughter] As I was saying it, it didn't really come out well. So, sorry about that. I actually hasn't been that bad in application. [laughter] No.

So, one of my questions was around [clears throat] the caliper uh size like can is that something you would consider like an older tree to be planted versus like a [clears throat] or not really. I'm just curious because we don't get involved. Uh so we don't we don't use caliber inches to try to reduce the number of replacement trees. Uh and I this was my interpretation. I always used the analogy if King Kong ran a nursery and you were able to buy a 60-in tree, it's just one tree. And I think there was a balance trying to be achieved between number of trees that actually end up on a site and they need to look like trees when they're planted. So I think that's why and also too there's like a survivability factor where

certainly smaller has an increased chance of survival, but as you get into the larger caliber inches, it's a little bit more care and a little bit more tricky in trying to get that tree to survive going forward. So there's all these considerations that came into why it kind of why it the math works out the way it does.

Yeah. The the only reason why I was thinking about it is like you know when I look at Chapa Crossing for instance it's the number of trees that were planted but over time when you see there is like a lot of loss in terms of like they just didn't take or something happened or you know too many people walked over certain area and so like you know it's not necessarily the number that might have been agreed to. So I was just wondering whether looking at it from like if it's older it stays longer but you're saying it's almost the opposite. So that's a totally different. Yeah because they've been cared for to that point you know and nicely in the nursery and now it's like okay now multiply you ain't got no more help from us you know

and when you transplant the smaller caliber ones they have a much better chance than the big ones and the big ones need a lot of tender loving care and if no one's doing it they they don't survive. Thank you. Are there any comments from the public on this application?

We have our hand raised. Do you see it? Can you bring it up? [clears throat] That would be on their end. You have to turn off the presentation. They'll pop up. They should pop up. Oh, Ralph, they're asking. Oh, they just did it. Oh, Victoria. Hi, it's Victoria. Hi. Can you hear me? Yes, we can hear you.

Greetings. Hi, Victoria Alp. I'm the chair of the conservation board in Newcastle. And um I should preface my comments by saying that um this application came up at our meeting on Wednesday night on Monday night. And the board was interested in making public comments. We did not think that tonight would be the close of public comment. So, we're hoping that uh the public comment period, the public hearing will stay open uh so that we can compile our commentary and submit it more officially to the board for your review. Uh that said, I would like to make a few comments right now just off the cuff from what I'm hearing and also ask a question. Um, my first question is, has the planning board done a site visit of this property?

Um, I don't know if we've done a group one, but I believe members have been out there individually.

Okay. Um, I'm asking because we actually did um I didn't think of it at the time, but asking for a joint site visit between the planning board and the conservation board, but a few of the members of the conservation board did go out with Dennis a few months ago. And there were some very striking um characteristics that we noticed. And of course our perspective is from a conservation standpoint uh from the habitat conservation [clears throat] preservation uh from wildlife experience and the value of these trees and you know as they relate to the entire area and to Dennis's credit he discovered as you know that the back end of the property is a wet meadow very rare wet meadow which is obviously really important to preserve and really gift um that he had the president's mind to see that and identify it. So, we're very glad that that's being preserved. One of the other pieces that we noticed, it really is along the roadway a bared woodland area. I mean, it's a pretty wide um area of trees, obviously about 200 trees or so. And one thing that we noticed is, you know, if you if you think about the meadow, yes, the meadow, you know, you think of it as where you see the plants relate to the the wetland area. Really, when you think of it more holistically and when you're there watching, like there was a lot of bird activity when we were there. And then you kind of start seeing that the area around the perimeter of the property uh where there trees and the fronts of the property the trees are coming out. They're kind of a container for this meadow. So there are a lot of unknowns about what will happen when these trees come down. So if you're a hawk and you're flying over this meadow, you're coming in to maybe go in, you know, bowl that you see or a mouse and you're coming up and you're looking also for a place to land around the perimeter. So

these trees in addition to nesting areas, in addition to you know various other habitat value that they provide, they're a landing point or a place for the birds to hide. They're you know they play a role related to the meta. So [clears throat] when we're talking about the value of these plants of these trees that are coming down, they play many roles um provide many functions on an ecological level. Um and again it's an unknown what will happen when these come down. So uh on one hand I really would encourage as you're kind of subjectively with this particular application looking at whether you should have a 1:1 ratio. Um my my gut reaction of course if you can kind of quantify this and write it up for you is it really should be a 1:1 ratio because these trees the you know the Norway maples are part of that forest that's coming down part of that woodland corer there and um and they're valuable in that respect. I think you asked earlier like would it would have been a tree in that case um and you know I was saying it's possible it is very possible that that would have been filled with other trees they the birds see it not necessarily as a native or non-native tree they see it as habitat a place to hide a place of [clears throat] etc. So um a place of land and perches. So, uh, we really would encourage you, uh, to think of it as long as one and use the criteria for other trees. Um, you know, we're talking about the traffic implications of the right away in the viewing. If this application never came to be, these trees would remain there. Um, so it's only because this application is being put up in front of you that this is even being considered to take down these trees. um and implicating and having a negative impact on their ability to provide ecological function for our communities and for our wildlife. So um so again I do hope that you'll keep the public hearing open that the board the entire

conservation board can weigh in because we we have um you know had our eye on when this is going to have a public hearing and I believe you know as much as I'm putting out my perspective as the chair. I would like the entire conservation board to have an opportunity to weigh in. So I have to keep the public hearing open please. Dennis, when does the conservation board next meet? First Monday in December, like the 1st through the 2nd.

Well, u this is not a new application. So, we've been through this thing for a couple of years. Uh I I certainly uh uh what we can do, I believe, is we can keep the public comment period open, can't we, John? after we close the public hearing. You can do that, but I I thought you were going to continue the public hearing anyway. Well, yeah. I'm saying I don't know if we go to December 2nd or and that's when they meet. So, then it's going to take some time for them probably to put together a memo. I mean, um yeah, you can you can extend the you can close the public hearing and before you do that, you can extend the public

and I think I think would be under the circumstances it's we're not losing any ground anyway. So we can keep the public hearing open and um start to work on the resolution and um see if we can get that information in as soon as possible. Dennis from and Victoria from uh your board. Um it's um you know it's a tough thing. Um I I think there have been past applications where um invasive uh clearing of invasive uh trees actually was not counted toward uh uh replacement. Um so we've I think we've done it both ways, but I think the board is is sensitive to um the function that is being performed here by these Norway maples. They're still trees, so they still do all the things that trees do. Um they may have a bad root system, etc., But uh there's still there's still trees. So we hear you and I I think we we agree but at the same token we have an application here. So uh we have obviously have got to react to that application. So um um just

okay any other comments from here? I just have one comment just regard to um those trees not being removed. Just want to reiterate this is there's existing two lots there as of right. That would mean two driveways going out to 128. The sight line, the site clearing would [clears throat] state DOT would most likely mean you would clear all those trees anyway just for those two driveways. So, I'm not sure if all those trees would remain,

right? We understand. And I don't think we disagree with you. I think you know you've gone through an awful lot with the u the sightelines and we've reduced it to just one cut with an eye toward uh limiting the impact one and doesn't the one cut save it some versus two it does seem it does save some but the the speed of the road dictates that that you have a a really wide um sight line in in both directions. So so the one cut is a better solution. It is a better solution. if I'm good to

and I and also you've moved the one cut to an area that is is better than what we've had before. So that was one of the the the the things that we did uh we did do here and I think we've identified some some additional spaces where you can um introduce more trees correct um and not just shrubs you know but goodiz trees to the conservation board's uh point and concern. So what we can do is uh excuse me are there any other comments public comments? There's another hand. there are. Okay. Okay. Great.

Yes. Um I am actually here as a member of the panel. I'm the landscape architect. I am not here for public comment. I'm here for reference and presenting should it be necessary. Okay. Okay. Okay. She's on our team. I didn't I did not see her name up there before. Perfect. [laughter] Are there any other comments or questions from members of the public on this? Okay. So, what's the pleasure of the board? Uh, I would recommend that we continue the public hearing to uh what will the next meeting be? The next meeting is um November 18th.

Would we move to have a resolution for that day? I think it's short and it's tight. I think what we should do is go toward the first December one, December 2nd. Yeah. And that would give you a little bit of time also for your team to uh give us some information about the additional trees. Okay. And we'll draft the negative declaration. Yeah. So that's the first meeting December. You have another hand raised. Okay.

Okay. Greetings again. It's Victoria one more time. Um, thank you by the way for your consideration around that. Then we will get a memo together as quickly as we can on the conservation board. The only other thing that I wanted to put onto the radar tonight is something again that the conservation board has talked about that I think they would want me to bring up if they were here, which is the um the question of building these homes using bird friendly glass. So, we had brought this up um at a previous application for building that was happening near Turner Swamp. Um because that new building, the new construction in a spot, you know, where we know there was a lot of bird activity um is almost kind of in we know that the birds will be more likely to hit the windows and we'll have more bird strikes that wind up in mortality of birds. And so this um near a meadow, you know, the proximity to the meadow um presents a similar um kind of vulnerability for the birds in the area. And we are hoping that um the the wildlife sensitive the bird uh [clears throat] sensitive precedent that was set with the the Turner swamp house um the building of the ter swamp house that we would hope that um the developer here would u and younger architects would please consider or identify bird friendly glass that would likely deter birds from flying into the windows of these homes. Um, and we know that there are some really wonderful, not predtorately expensive approaches

[clears throat] to doing this. Um, we know the architect in the Turner Lamp um building project was very amenable. Um, he was very open to doing that and immediately identified a doable or workable option for the windows and did implement, you know, that was part of the final plan. uh architectural plan. So in this case as well, especially because it hopefully will not be ownorous to the developer and the architect, we would ask please in light of the wildlife implications uh to please utilize bird friendly glass. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. That's something that's doable.

We may have to talk about it. Yeah, [clears throat] I don't know. I'm not sure actually I'm looking at it now. So that type of glass requires dots on the glass itself. That's not dope. That's just affects the quality of a building. Yeah. And you I think you want I don't want I don't think you any of you would want to have a glass with dots on it. I think though I think that the applicant is the applicant is the one she talked about on that was on the swamp with the with the lawn. Yeah. That house was Yeah, that house was a very high price range that home. Very high.

And they were doing but I don't think they I don't think they would be putting glass in it that just had dots random. I just Googled it quickly. But but there might be something else that she was referring to. Maybe. But before do some research please. I think that's the only alternative. I'm going to just say that in terms of the type of glass that at least that's what I remember Bach uh going through. It might be. I I haven't done any further research, but there might be more than one product. That's all. And you may hate them all, but I'm just saying there might be more than just Yeah. What kind of dots are they? Dark. I'm not going to commit to it, but we'll look into it. Yeah. Are they dark dots or something or seems I don't know. I mean, but birds have to be able to see them, right? Well, obviously better than we do. So,

very tiny. They're very tiny, but they're a lot. So it's just sort of like polyium. It's like plalism. Exact. Exactly. Okay. Exactly. Any answers? We'll look into it. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, bro. Any other questions, comments? Okay. Who? Victoria.

Hello. [clears throat] Yes. I just wanted to say that um we are very sensitive to uh the quality of life of the future applicants and we propose the bird friendly glass knowing that there are in fact options that are not visible would not in any way um have a any negative impact on the the resident's experience of the view of their you know glass in their houses. So we we are very sensitive to that and we really would as you encouraged um the applicants to please look at the options because we do believe that there are um affordable options that would help the birds uh prevent them from flying into the glass and having mortality and also not interfere with the enjoyment of the home. So it becomes a win-win for everyone. And we all know living in this very wooded region that it's a terrible feeling when you have a bird strike your glass and you see the bird fall to the ground um [clears throat] you know basically having a seizure with neurological damage. It's not something we want our kids to see either. Um so it really is a win-win for [clears throat] everybody.

So thank you so much. Would the board uh be able to uh supply for those uh that information all those alternatives in your memo? Yes. Absolutely. an appendix so that you can um help the applicant and uh in their consideration. Absolutely. And maybe if they look at options and we would also be happy to supply more information which would be really help them as well. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Anyone [clears throat] else? Okay. If not, is there a motion to adjourn the public meeting until December December? Did we say second? Second. Okay. Motion. Can I ask a quick question?

Sure. We couldn't make the 18th of November because why? Just uh you I think it'll be better if you have that information. We're not going to have the conservation board's memo at that point. Um not so sure we'll have a quorum tonight. We have some issues already. that I know of. So, um All right. Sorry. Y just ask. Okay. Okay. Great. Do we need to close? Well, we just motion to you. Wait. Yeah. Is Is there such a motion? Second. Motion. Second. All in favor? I

Okay. Okay. Thank you. Thanks. You have a good night. Yep. Good night. Thank you. We move now to our next item. This is a public hearing uh for the New York Metropolitan Reference and Research Library Agency. This is a continued public hearing. We've opened it last time around and um uh we asked the applicant to provide some additional details uh which I think they supplied off a lot of these and so eventually this is going to the the zoning board. Uh this really is just something that we're doing to to fix some old uh subdivision lines.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh Keith Patensky. I'm the attorney for the applicant. Um as you suggested last time, uh we met uh we walked the board through the lot line adjustment that was necessary in order to update the file map to be in accordance with the legal description in the deeds um in the subdivision. Uh since uh that meeting, we did file an updated subdivision plat in accordance with the town consultants comments. Um I understand that there are a few more comments, but we've spoken with our our surveyor and he said he can address them in short order and they have been inserted as conditions of approval in the draft resolution. So tonight we're asking the board to close the public hearing and vote on the draft resolution. Okay.

Thank you. Great. Sabrina, any comments?

Uh yes, Mr. Chairman. Um I have some comments that have been incorporated into the resolution of approval. Um they relate to addressing the area table. There's some changes that need to be made um regarding retitling of uh the table um including the tax ID numbers and um really differentiating between the existing uh should be changed to existing according to defiling. Um there is also um in uh changes that need to be made regarding the existing lot sizes. They should be the sizes as reflected in the last subdivision map that was filed, not the deeds that were filed. Um and then the last um that those are really the two major changes that I had requested um which are incorporated into draft resolution for the board's review. Okay. Any comments from Jeff, did you have any comments?

Uh, no. All the comments about the address. Thank you. Good. Dennis, any comments? No, I actually did have the opportunity to walk the uh weapon delineation line. They submitted the report. Everything looked uh looked fine to me. It's a It's a very unique site. Somebody played around at some point in the past and you know now you have what you have but they it's all good. It's all good. Okay. No issues. Great. Comments from board members thoughts? No. All good. Okay. Any comments from the public on this application?

Hands. Okay. Great. Not seeing any. Is there a um proposal to close the public hearing? Motion. Second. All in favor? I I I And we have a draft resolution in front of us. Any thoughts, questions, changes u on this? Okay. Is there a motion to adopt the resolution? Motion. Second. Second. All in favor? I. So, we're all set. Thank you very much. Hope to see you soon. Okay. Take care. Good night.

Okay. Okay, we moved to our next item. This is an informal appearance before the board. This is for no 121 Plainsbridgeidge Road. Application for a site development plan application and wetlands permit for construction of a driveway addition, stone patio, and deck replacement.

Good evening. My name is Jean Van with the site design consulting at Nemo [clears throat] Design. Uh we are representing Mandela on this project. Um we have uh received all comments back from uh from the board from the planning director and town engineer. Uh I believe we have addressed all of the issues and uh we actually finished documents this afternoon. I can bring them up on screening if you'd like or we can't read those at this point. Are there any do you have any questions or issues on any of them? Uh yeah, I do. I have two questions. Let me share my screen.

Okay, great. Thank you. [clears throat] You have to give me a minute. Can you see that now? Yes.

Okay. [clears throat] I I think uh we addressed the issue of the uh the area that was going to be in purchase. There was some questions on the zoning dash sheet and the uh paperwork. There was a conflict in the quantities when we addressed it. We adjusted all the area so that now the increase in impervious area is less than 1,000 square ft. It's 959 square ft. Uh there is also a uh almost 1500 square foot of land blocking or patio that is not considered impervious. It is impervious material. We make sure that that detail was included on the set of drawings. Uh the the issue right now becomes let me zoom in if I may.

[clears throat]

As you know, the the entire house is within the portion of the house is within 150 foot land back. Uh the contractor last year has started doing work in the back. Uh I'm sure you all excite. You can see that it's in a bit of disarray back there. Uh with that being said, we had two associates go out the wetlands which they did. uh it is also on the survey that we submitted along with our plans. The survey was completed by Ward Carpenter and the [clears throat] primary issue right now is the existing clearing and growing line. This is the existing clearing and welding line

right here. There's a lot of disarray back here. There's a pile of wood chips. There's [clears throat] some trenches that went up back here. So what we would like to do is request an extension of that clearing and robing line to approximately 40 ft beyond where it is now during construction in foresight that the contractor may disturb that soil a little bit more when it gets back there. That's the first issue. The second issue is like here and then subsequent when the construction is finished we would have a uh a clearing grading limit line that would be pulled back up toward um where

absolutely we could pull that back to its original location. I guess the question is how do we approach this? Is this a separate submission? Does this go to planning as part of this submission? Does this have to go to zoning? Does this go conservation? I guess we need a direction. You need to revise your plans according to staff memos and resubmit for the planning. We we did that. We we we understand why you're showing them now. We need them in in you know

I know that. Yes, I know that. That's why I guess I want to clarify this and then we'll resubmit everything tomorrow morning. Right. But you you should probably include some sort of description that that's what you're going to do that you want to access the area for construction and then you will pull it back and replant it. Okay. So that's that's what I wanted to clarify with you. So So in our submission back to our cover letter, we're going to request that we want to move that clearing and rubbing line back and clearing line. I [clears throat] apologize. Clearing the rating. I apologize for that. All right. So that's that's the the first issue and before we leave that issue before we leave that issue.

Yeah, before we leave that issue um you know that's more of an you know um incurrence into the um the buffer. Do you have any other places where you can stage soil? I mean can you keep some of the in the driveway for example? You know, we ask the contractor to stage the construction right now rather than go ahead and put in that uh prepare for the uh the voter land pavers that are going extend the driveway to stage up here. Right. And then access as close as we can to the bottom.

Right. Right. I think we would like to see that rather than you know going forward further into the the buffer and then later on afterwards after it's disturbed then we go back and you know resided or re you know receded etc or whatever is back there and and right so this is all on sewer so we don't have to worry about septic correct right y and I'm sure you visited the site you know everything was resided in the front everything was landscaped so we felt that the best thing was to do all the staging up here and then access the uh the lower portion of the yard right at the bottom of that hill.

Is that staging? Is that is that staging on the Macadam or is that beyond the mechanum? No, that's beyond the right now. That's lawn. So, it's lawn.

It's also in the buffer and then we'll prep this area for the uh for the land pavers there. That's that's the first issue. The second issue and again we tried to color code the best we can. Uh [clears throat] this red is the voter land that now goes beyond that clearing and rating line. So that that kind of adds to the request to move that line back. So this is within the uh clearing and rating line. This is within the clearing and grading line. the yellow, the blue, and the yellow, they would not interfere. They wouldn't go beyond that clearing and grading line. So, I just wanted [clears throat] to show this to you so they could see what we're doing.

Mr. Vron, I think it's really important on your mapping to make sure you identify the existing clearing and grading limit line very clearly. Okay. So, I mean, this is it here. That's your proposed That's our proposed. Yep. We need We need to know where the existing line is. It's right here. Right. Right here. Existing clearing. And again, I apologize. We're holding tip right here. Yeah. So, so, so that should be on all your plans. Yep. So, this one right here. [snorts] And this was the original survey that was provided to us by the town. So, we just put that up there as reference.

Right. But this [clears throat] this is the clearing and rubbing line right here. It's identified there and there I can make that a dark line if that that would be helpful identify that. Yeah, that would be helpful because it kind of contour line. Um yeah I yellow we did the zoning chart. We made sure that it aligned with the application all the numbers balance. Could you explain all the required notes? Could you explain Could you explain to us what the colors mean again? I'm sorry. Could you explain to us the yellow, blue, red, and green?

Okay, sure. Let me let me go here. Let me zoom out a little bit. Ah, there we go. Right, that helps. So, the blue that's impervious coverage within the existing clearing and should be grading line. Right.

Right. That's within line. The green is impervious coverage beyond the existing. That's that right. That's going to be the Cambridge papers. The yellow is the Florida land papers that are within the existing clearing rating line. And the blue is the proposed Cambridge papers that are within the existing clearing rating line. So the green and the red are beyond the existing clearing [clears throat] rating line. You know, at first we thought we would keep it as close as we can, but we went back out to the site today. We saw how what's going on in that backyard. We [clears throat] noticed there's a large pile of wood chips back here. I don't know where they came from. They weren't there the last time we were there. So, in an effort to, [clears throat] you know, keep everything safe. Uh we were hoping to move this clearing rating line as far back as we can and then as as you you mentioned we will then know [clears throat] that it's going to be replaced in existing location

if if that works to the board. What is in front in the front yard where you know Yeah. All on. It's all on. Maybe that's it's always it is now courtesy in the driveway. This thing has a driveway. These stairs are there. Stairs. There's a uh an [clears throat] old fireplace. That's uh this is what else would like to keep in that backyard. So that's why we put the boulder block of around it.

Right. So, so when we talk about a coverage map, we're asking you to identify the coverage for all of those features, not just what you're putting in, but for everything. I think we did, right? I haven't Yeah. Again, I I don't know if you don't have it again. Yeah, we finished this this afternoon. That's why I said [laughter] I think we wanted to clarify. We wanted to make sure we can move forward, but we don't know. We don't know. To be quite honest with you, we need to see what you're proposing and have [clears throat] time to review it for the board. As long as as long as we could show that line and request that, I think that's the next thing. I think you can request whatever you would like. [laughter]

Okay. Again, I'm I'm kind of looking for some guidance. All right. Right. I I I think that that if you are responsive to staff comments and we we address them all. Okay. Right. The board needs to understand what the what the original submission was and you know the fact that you've already addressed those comments. They may have additional comments for your consideration and then you will resubmission. [clears throat] Right. Okay. So can I submit these in tomorrow with Why don't we wait and hear what the board has to say because then ask you to do additional things. Absolutely. Absolutely. Thank you.

Yep. Sabrina, do you want to run through your comments? Sure. Um, for the board's information, this is a type two action. Um, it is located within conservation subdivision. um and it is uh an R2A zoning district, but there should be a footnote that it is a nonconforming lot area and width to the data table because when you when the planning board approved of this lot, it was nonconforming due to the conservation subdivision. So, that needs to be noted in accordance with the zoning table.

We we add it at the table. Yeah, the coverage um again, you know, it did include new impervious surface. Um they have to match their coverage calculation worksheets to the map. There's some differences there and we need a coverage map which identifies all impervious surfaces on the site. Um the plan should include the surrounding houses and their locations and uh they need to provide information regarding storm water controls. And they also need to propose mitigation for disturbance within the clearing grading limit line and quantify that disturbance within the clearing grading limit line. The applicant tonight is saying that they want to reestablish that line afterwards, but we need information as to what that reestablishment would look like. [clears throat]

Right. Okay. Great. Thank you. Jeeoff, you had some comments.

I did. Um you know most of them like there's you know obviously most of it was related to just we you know we need a little bit more information before we can uh you know really move too far forward. Um you know they've been said that they um have adjusted the application to not require uh storm water practice. and see what I had a threshold question for you, Jeff. Um, do these papers are these papers actually considered to be non um purgious working? Um,

yeah. Theoretically, yes. Um,

I've heard that for years that uh they were not given uh credit and that they were considered to be imperfect. So normally how we what we would do to calculate it would be to with the you know there's still a surface area that is impervious. We would basically that that you know let's just say it's 20% of the paper is considered um impervious that 20% it would get up 80% credit towards um you know towards impervious coverage in that area. Um so if it's 1,000 square ft of of this of this floor land paper and 20% of it is um impervious the top you know the top surfaces. So they would get a they would only have to account for 200 square ft in impervious coverage in the storm water.

So it's the actual product itself that is treated in a manner so it's it's not a hard surface. You know, I think of pavers. I think of it as almost like a tile uh product.

There are different ways that it's done. Um you know, some sometimes it's a system where uh the system is uh it uses an imperable paper and then it leaves gaps for water to pass through to a to a uh uh you know underlying storage area. Um and if they provide generally if you provide enough storage to store the storm water below that is your storm water practice. It's considered pre-treatment and and you know infiltration. Uh um there are others that the paper is actually permeable itself. So you you literally throw water on these papers and the water passes right through. And at that point we just take a look at the the uh the permeability [clears throat] of the paper itself. Um, but like I said, each each one is a, you know, they're all a little bit different. So, we just have to take a look at what, you know, what they're proposing and based on that.

We'll need to see what product they're proposing here. Uh, it's just not a generic word just to see what kind of credit uh, in fact for these, you know, it'll range. It could range anywhere from, you know, 10% credit to, you know, 100% credit. Again, it depends on the material that you're using, right? So, we'll we'll look at that. Okay. We added that detail to the plan also that's on there. Okay. But it's really hard. We can't look at the screen and say that we you know. No, of course I understand. But again, we I think we took all of your comments. We address them all.

Great. We submit. We appreciate all the time and effort that was put into this. Uh I apologize for the errors in math. Uh but we corrected that. make sure we stay under the uh the thousand square foot. [clears throat] Yeah. I mean I I I I we would I just to be sure that we we send we will need to get information about the product itself and and the installation. We we'll supply that. We'll supply that and and the details of how it's going to be um um put into place and if you have any examples of it in the area where we could see it, that'd be wonderful. Yeah.

If you have I believe that I believe that you may have this in somewhere in Newcastle. And I sort of remember when we had our initial review that someone mentioned that uh [snorts] you have had projects in the past where they have used the borderland product and it was accepted as a permeable paper. Okay, good. [clears throat]

I I don't recall myself. I'm sure that was probably at at the staff level. I can tell you that um I can't think of an application where uh an applicant received 100% credit uh on any paper that was proposed. I'll get all the data on that marginalized and very often um no credit was given and and we had arguments from applicants that oh we're not making it that tight we have sand in between and therefore I get credit and we've always said no you don't um based on product based on installation so we need to really have good good detail on

comment [clears throat] chairman Mr. Chairman, can I say something on previous? [laughter] I've been with the town 32 years. I've never seen one where we allow much credit for impervious papers. You need to determine it curve number which is manufactured by the by the manufacturer or it's at the determination of the town engineer. And if you're going to be using impervious papers, you should have to do the curve deep test holes and per holes. So you can't assume automatically it's impervious. Bob, the pavers are out of the border land. I I'll send you the literature. In my experience, you have to get an engineer

who would give us what he thinks the curve number is. And there's there's a lot of literature on it and it's only drops a little bit. Asphalt is 98. You might get a curve number on this 87. So, it's still going to produce runoff. You can't say it's grass. Grass there have to be all grass. Awesome. Bob, what are the papavers at Amsterdam Park? Oh, those pavers out there were done many, many, many, many years ago before they upgraded all the regulations with code, but uh they did allow some sort of percolation through those, but not much.

Not much. Those are very old. That was put in 15 20 years ago. Yeah, you know, my my biggest issue with that just sort of raise information. My biggest issue with with systems, you know, where you basically, you know, have a have a, you know, impermeable surface and, you know, certain percentable, especially it's a parking area, you know, you're going to have dirt, you're going to have grit, you're going to have stuff that gets into it and clogs it. And it when it's initially installed, it's it works great. And 20 or 30 years when it's everything's clogged with dirt, you get there's zero infiltration. So, you know, there might need to be a combination of of drains as well uh for that, you know, in 10 years and 20 years when nobody's doing maintenance on these joints and and water can't pass through that. The water can actually pitch to a drain and get into the the uh you know, the base material. So like we have to take a look at the exact material and Jeff's point I've seen a lot of engineers are very conservative they use 984 of those and they'll assume it's going to get clogged there's not going to be proper maintenance. So um

again this system I think when you see the literature the joint is not the permeable part it's the space between the joint that's per that gets caught gets caught. But you miss the whole point. This is still considered impervious and to a certain extent and you still got to consider that so regulations. It only has a lower curve number. So it's going to be over,000 square feet. That's my whole point. [clears throat] Okay. Good. Dennis, you had some comments. [clears throat] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Okay. Um,

my first comment, it looks like uh they provided that information. So, Tim Miller did the work. Okay. I'm familiar with him. Uh, assuming it was Steve Marino. Um, so I uh again through u Mr. Petron's explanation maybe that explains the discrepancy uh with the net increase of development coverage versus um the disturbance number which was higher. Uh so I guess that's uh you know physical disturbance as a result of you know the approach to the work stockpiling ingress etc. Um so to point out right this is in chapter 64 environmental protection overlay. So the wetlands uh buffer um that will be uh impacted uh as a result of the project and by impact you know I'm talking about new new disturbance to now existing if you want to use the phrase green space even if it's that's lawn shrubs whatever um whatever loss there is as a result of of this so here I used the number of 138 square ft uh just just based on what I saw far you're talking about over 1,700 square ft um that would would need to be mitigated and and that mitigation from a wetlands perspective wouldn't be the storm water that you're talking about capturing. That's another another category. it would be where where are you going to put provide you know I use the term functional uplift but I guess to make it simpler um if you have areas on the site that are of lower habitat quality like you know lawn is green pavement I like to refer to it so there there's opportunity to improve uh those areas um you know to make them you know better habitat-wise that's usually you know involving planting of of shrubs and and and whatnot um so you know we would need

to see a plan that uh you know addresses again whatever that number turns out to be, right?

Um we would need to see a plan as to what your proposal would be for mitigation and obviously that would have to occur within the with within the buffer. Um, and I just wanted to, you know, for clarification purposes because, um, again, this was under uh, the environmental coordinators authority, but you know, when the tree removal permit was issued for this property and there was a replanting plan, um, that plan is specific to that tree uh, permit. It doesn't get counted or can't be double counted as wetland mitigation. So you know there there needs to be you know another consideration in order to satisfy chapter 137 wetlands and then you know due to the increase uh from chapter 64 in terms of the mitigation ratio.

Thanks gentlemen my comments. Good Dennis will uh ERB be taking a look at this also if you want to refer it to them. Uh they certainly can. schedule's been light in 2025. So, well, they're getting paid, so you know, come on. [laughter] I mean, seriously, if they want to take a look at it, um, again, uh, you know, within a certain time frame, not to not to delay the applicant, but, uh, I think it could be useful. Okay. Yeah. I mean, I we need to obviously get a plan first. So, absolutely. Okay. Great. Thank you.

Okay. Um, Yep. Okay. Um, got it over there. Any comments from us? Comments? Anymore? Did you want to speak on these? I would like to. Great. Come on up. It's not a public hearing. No, it's okay. So, uh, hi, my name is We're going to take Kan's son next. Okay. [laughter] Hi. My name is My Nice to meet you. My name is Bernie Sawitz. I'm the next door neighbor to the property. Uh, I have a very good relationship with Marie next door. So this is not an a you know an aggressive discussion. I just want to bring forward some observations. So our house is um you know uh I could show you. May I show you?

Sure. So here is the this is her house and the plan. Our house is right next door. And all of these houses are set back quite a [snorts] bit from the street, but our house is really right level with the new construction that they're planning to build. Are you that close? I'm that close. Did you just have your driveway redone? I did. Okay. Okay. I did. I know the house.

You know the house. And so we're really very close. And we're both, you know, her driveway is very close to the property line. There's a a clearance line and our our driveway goes the other way. But um so and this is really the the the volume of um you know construction here. It's really the size of the house, right? It's a lot. It's a big area. So I just wanted to show you that. Here's some just some pictures what it looks like from my house. So she has built they have built up already. This is So this is a little hard to see, but this is the view from my backyard looking over. They've already they've built up a big area here. All of this is going to be the driveway extension. It's up on a raised up area. And then the construction is going to go from here's the house, here's that chimney, and the rest of the construction goes way out to here. All right. So when I'm looking at this is so this is viewed from my property and it's like right [snorts] here but you can see there's no tree coverage here and so this is another view of it and I've already cut down a tree. So one thing I thought could we have some trees in here to give us a little privacy and just to give you a sense of how close it is. This is taken this is on my porch on [snorts] my porch. So from my porch I have like a clear view of all of this um paving construction that's going to be there. So it's not nature, it's not trees, it's papers, right? So I just wanted to let you see how close it was to my house and you know how the you know having this whole area filled in with, you know, paving stones is going to be a very different view from my porch, from my windows, etc.

So is is that a pile of rocks? That's just a bunch. That's the some of the construction materials that they mentioned. But that looks like it's been there for a while, right? Yeah. And also they did construction. Could that be from the original? There's a pile of wood chips. No, there I think it wasn't. Well, it's it's so um I mean roughly I think right now the clearing gradient limit line's somewhere around here probably. Doesn't like Yes. The No, the gradient. So this is the side. The gradient limit line is back here. No, it's a wetland line, but clearing grading limit lines much closer into the house. They have some They have some flags. Yeah, the flags would be for the wetland. No, but they also have a a black area.

And this is all you This is sort of raised up. The other thing I would like to mention,

so one second. I had asked that several times. It was my understanding that there was already an existing and not so inconsequential violation of the clearing grading limit line. These pictures suggest that it's much more substantial than just what is being described as just a little bit on the driveway. I mean, there's construction debris dumped, uh, a raised area. So, there's been a fair amount of activity already within this clearing reading limit line. uh you know we we really need information on that because I think we have a situation where uh we we may have a violation and then a curing uh or or not depending upon what we do here.

The other thing I would like to mention is here are the two houses and in this area here we get um a lot of erosion from water. Is that the There isn't there there there there's there's a plan to build a to rroot the sewer line here. It'll go here and around here. That's a different Yeah. So I think is a sewer eent. Is that the sewer line from Amsterdam Park? Uh that's the proposed sewer line from Amsterdam Park. I think that's proposed. Okay.

Yeah. And but I should say that we get you know I have some big trees here and we get a lot of water erosion just you know whenever it rains we get riv you know we get a little river down there so it's not a wet land does it come down Pines bridge and then go down the driveway the water I think it goes down the driveway kind [clears throat] I think it's going in that direction. Yeah.

But there's a lot of you know if you come out there you can see there's a lot of the roots are bare etc. So I think that I just wanted to to I mean because we are so close you know I would like it would be it's and it it's big. I mean this is probably 25 by 30 and this is you know this is like the size of the house again and if it's all going to be like paving and whatever I would you know at least I would like to have some um screen plant screen plantings or something. Yep. And our house is quite high. So they have to be they can't be like little feetrubs [clears throat] little shrubs you know it has to be something you know in that area. So I'm happy to leave these photographs. I just give it to Felicia.

That's great. It's good to have the context. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you for letting me speak. Yes. You're welcome. Okay. So um Mr. Matrono. Um um if you've heard anything tonight that uh uh that you need to amend whatever you sent in or supplement what you've already sent in, then please do so. Staff will take a look at what's already come in. And um and uh I guess we'll I guess hear from staff in terms of when we scheduled this next when we're prepared.

Uh Mr. Mr. Chairman, if I might just add, um, you know, we may want to request an updated survey, a current survey, just based on I didn't see the photographs, but you said like the photographs may show um something that's inaccurate to what was um what was provided, not I'm not suggesting any uh anything intentional, but I think it might be worthwhile to to request [clears throat] an updated survey. Okay, fair enough, Jeff. Thanks. Good point.

And if you would ask that the driveways be put on that neighbor plan or at least submit an aerial photograph of the area. Sure. Jeff, we submitted a uh Miss Felos had a survey done June 12th, 2025 and we Well, I was just I would just again I didn't see the pictures. Uh

okay. But, you know, just when the chairman looked at it, he suggested that what's on the survey is not necessarily what's out there right now. So, it may have changed between June and now I don't know what's going on. But you can listen, I'll leave it to you to confirm and say, "Yes, this is accurate." And if you want to, you know, [clears throat] give us some kind of certification that says what's on the survey, what's out there, you know, I would be satisfied with that. you know, provide. Well, [clears throat] the only thing, Jeff, the only thing that may be there's no to on this survey. And again, when we when we came on to this project, that's what the property looked like,

you know. So, we we were actually retained to do a deck. And then from that, we found out that there was a stop order because the previous contractor had started digging up the backyard. So, we tried to incorporate that into our deck project and it's evolved into where we're at now. And again, this this survey is an accurate survey of all the hard surfaces that exist out there. This is on top. And I'll agree that right here, someone put back that was there when we started the project. There were trenches up back here. There's a big mound of wood chips back here.

So, [clears throat] possibly just on, you know, revise the site plan to show those those features where there was disturbance maybe just so we could have an accurate depends where there is obviously you can't you know I'm not asking to change survey but you could turn that survey into a site plan that shows that shows those features for Jeff for instance one of the photos shows probably 20 or 30 large boulders in the backyard [clears throat] which would not come up on a survey because they're just boulders that were probably as this gentleman said somebody started to excavate they could have you know dug them that should be put on your site plan. Yes, they are.

You want that? I mean, even though they're just loose rocks, it looks like he started excavating and then he just left it in there. That's what the looks like. I mean, I'll be more than happy to add that to the site plan. Yeah. And it's important to do so because again, it's it's it's we need the context of where we're starting from even though um it's not exactly what you know you you plan to do, but you know, we have to start with somewhere. And uh it seems to me that we already have a situation where the clearing grading limit lines have been uh you know violated and by by a fair amount and that just I agree I agree that's why I suggest that we even move that further back.

Well that's not usually how we resolve we don't usually expand so to accommodate the violations we work with the violation. So uh it's a different approach but we don't we don't we don't take that approach right Mr. You know, part part of this is to understand what has happened to that clearing grading limit line. What is quantified what the disturbance beyond that line has been in the past and what it looks like today and then what you want to do. And so there's kind of a a happy medium that the board tries to get to, but right now we don't have all the all the information

to tell us. Can I ask something? Is it possible to have a sitewalk to I mean, you know, just Yeah, we do that. These are conditions that exist before we even walk on this,

right? We need the context of of of what the conditions are right now. These would be what was approved by the planning board years ago and where we stand and what uh you know what is being asked for and and why and what was not asked for and and where we are. So it's it's it's part of the equation that we have to resolve with you. So I think once we have those up that updated information I think a site visit might be very appropriate from accept us penciling in where we feel that that they put in film at some point where they have stones

just pile there's probably a 20 foot high mound of wood chips back here that were here [laughter] and you know again everything is trenched back here. So he started to do something and I I'm assuming there was a stop order and that's when we were able to get the project. Y [clears throat] the one thing I can look in our records Mr. Chairman and see what happened on this property. Right. If we have anything.

Yeah had a question. Yeah, I was just wondering I I know the survey doesn't show any tobo lines, but just based on the photos we saw as well as the conversation about the easement for the sewer line and where the river almost like a gully of water flows through. I think too might be useful in making these decisions with the whole movement of the [clears throat] clearing grading limit line is my suggestion. I leave it to there. I saw topos on the site plans, just not on the survey, which is so bizarre. Like there there are topos on the site plans. Now, if they're existing or proposed, I don't recall. There we go.

Yeah, you're right. So then it should have been there as part of the survey or do you think that's that? I don't know. Yeah. Like typically it comes out of the survey when you're putting a drawing together. [laughter] So, and the areas that have been impacted or propo proposed to be impacted do not show, you know, the the topogs are covered. So, that's the I think you're going to need to to create a site plan on one piece of paper and not try and try to lay out what it looks like. You need an existing You need an existing site plan and a proposed site plan. Yep.

So, three different three different documents. Can I say something? Sure. Sure.

I mean, to this point, you got to show what was approved of the plan years ago when this was a single subdivision. More particularly, most importantly, the clear and then you got to go out there, take good measurements, put it on a CAD drawing, show all the dimensions, go along with photographs on what's there now. And then you want to show the board and Sabrina and everyone involved what you want to do with the clear integrity of the line at when you're done. So you need to show all three maps and I think that's going to let the board know what's going on. So is going to know what's going on and Jeff and it's going to be a lot easier to try to figure out what the end product wants to be which will ultimately be approved by the planning board. That's just my recommendation.

Yep. Oh, sure. I appreciate. Yeah, absolutely. Very good. Okay. So, uh we'll we'll wait for that additional information and we'll hear back from staff when we can schedule the next informal hearing and once we have that if um you know there's a need to go out for a site plan, a site visit, we'll we'll we'll set that up. Terrific. Okay. Thank you. Thank you for your time. I appreciate it. Very good. Um our next item is the minutes. Um, Sabrina, before I forget, this is uh highly inappropriate because I should have mentioned it before, but it is just, I think, the regulation, so it's no big deal. Um, remember in the subdivision, we have to deal with the recreation fees

from the applicant. I Ralph has not mentioned it. I don't want them to be shocked at the end, but you know, they have to. Yes, I will. I will I will I will include that in the resolution. Thank you. Okay, we have the minutes of October 21. I had no comments.

I have one little tiny thing. I'll just sit down. Any comments? Any substance changes? Now, uh, Kanan, can you vote on this? Yes, I think you can. You can. Yeah. Okay. Okay. Is there a motion then to adopt the minutes of October 21? Motion. Second. All in favor? I. So, that's all said. Um, you have next the tenative schedule for meetings for next year. Uh, you didn't revise it yet, right? So, it's I didn't revise it yet, but I will make that change.

Okay. The the the main change I screamed for consists with all my past years was um to uh not meet ever, you know, before Labor Day and truncate our our summer vacation earlier than usual. So, this was proposed to be September 1. I think Labor Day is September 7th or 8th this year. We this is like the long year. We get almost 100 107 108 days in summer.

So when I saw that it was just horrible. I I almost feel horrible. Anyway, when I get that first notice that summer's over and there's a planning board meeting and the materials are [laughter] ready. So uh what we were proposing is we uh bag the September 1 meeting and we just have the one September 13 meeting. No cutting pay. Well, I How come we only have one meeting in February? Just out of curiosity. Is that a calendar? Okay. So, the reason I did that is because it coincides with the uh school vacation holiday. So, we have Yeah. See, you're figuring most of us would be Yeah, exactly. It's virtually impossible to do it. Makes sense to me. I appreciate that.

If we can get this down to even fewer numbers, we'll [laughter] try. This is as low as I can get it. Hour meeting done. Exactly. So, do we need a motion on this to adopt the uh schedule? Okay. [clears throat] Okay. Second. Second. All in favor? I. All righty. Is there a motion to close the meeting? Motion. Second. Second. All in favor? I I Good night all. Thanks. [clears throat] Thank you. I got one item.