Village of Greenwood Lake Planning Board

11/02/2023 7:30PM

 

Bob Zimmer- Chairman –Present

Alyse Terhune- Attorney- Present

Jamison Zajac- Village Engineer – Present

John Tracy- Present

Jack Sirios- Present

Manny Tirado- Absent

Mariano Choconi– Present

Mark Palmieri- Present

Charles Pekarek (Alternate)- Present and standing in

Jennifer Lyons- (Alternate)- Present and standing in on Mark Palmieri’s application

Ed Mateo- Building Inspector- Present

Chad Sellier- Village Trustee- Absent

Danielle Mulqueen- Planning & Secretary– Present

 

 

Returning Applications:

  • 7 Waterstone Road/Benjamin’s- Public Hearing still open.
  • Karen’s Café- public Hearing open.
  • 6 Van Orden Ln.- Back after receiving ZBA variances.
  • 11 Co Hwy 5- Back after receiving ZBA variances.

 

 

New Applications:

  • 42 Linden Ave.- New Construction
  • 37 Oak St.- New apartment building

 

Applicant #1- 7 Waterstone Rd/Benjamin’s Steakhouse & Hotel:

 

Bob Zimmer- I don’t think we have a whole lot for you, if you could just bring us up to speed. Where we are at is doing the SEQR review but I don’t think we should spend time on that until you have your storm water management plan decided on.

 

Michael (Applicant Architect)- Sure so the stormwater management plan is 98% done, I think early next week we can submit that to the Village Engineer. And discuss it in more detail during next month’s meeting. We have also prepared a traffic scope even though it hasn’t been officially requested yet.

 

Bob Zimmer- Do we have to set a motion to officially request that?

 

Alyse Terhune- You can just ask as part of SEQR for it to be prepared.

 

Michael- I can briefly go over it now. We are going to look at three intersections, Waterstone and Windermere, Waterstone and Sterling and 17A and Ten Eyck. The four things we will be looking for are, estimated peak future traffic based on the proposed restaurant and hotel size.

 

Alyse Terhune- So you will prepare that and give that to Jamie and the Board, so that is in the record.

 

Some continued conversation regarding the traffic study and that the Village should have their own traffic expert to review.

 

Bob Zimmer- So the traffic study is officially requested from the board. What else?

 

Michael- We heard back from DOH this morning they have very minor comments that we will address and we are still waiting to hear back from DEC, on the septic system design. They asked to lower the trenches about 2 inches. And waiting for DEC comments on the boat slips as well.

 

Jamison- SEQR wise those are the big things needed.

 

Bob Zimmer- I am going to open the Public Hearing back open if there is anyone here from the public to speak on this application.

 

Public comments:

 

Steve Gross- 17 Colonial Ave. Warwick, NY. Stated that NYS Dept of Parks, Recreation and Historical Sites reversed their decision to consider the eligibility of the property to be listed as a historical site.

 

Bob Zimmer- So I followed up after the last meeting and when you read through the legislation it becomes clear that even if the site were to become eligible it is only listed if the property owner is the applicant. It also stated that even if it is listed if it is a privately owned building that can still demolish it.

I am going to again adjourn the Public hearing until next meeting.

 

Applicant #2- Karen’s Cafe:

 

Bob Zimmer- Returning application where we left off is we asked for some changes to the drawings and testing samples.

 

Karen- So we did get the testing done, it was done yesterday. About two a week turnaround plan. We submitted our septic to the DOH and they are reviewing everything. Goes over the changes to the plans that were made per the board’s request.

 

Alyse Terhune- Ed did we get a decision on whether or not that just eating outside is considered outdoor dining, or does it have to have table service in order to comply with special permit regulations?

 

Ed Mateo- No we have not.

 

Bob Zimmer- Didn’t we make notice for public hearing for the special permit tonight though?

 

Alyse Terhune- We did, didn’t we. OK so it doesn’t matter. But the type of approval…

 

Bob Zimmer- So we can move forward as if it was required because we have taken the proper steps. We got the 239 back from County there were no comments by the County. Anyone else have comments.

 

Jack Sirios- I think the only other thing we are waiting on is samples, other than that it looks good.

 

Bob Zimmer- I am inclined to let it move without that, and make that their informed decision.

 

Jack Sirios- We can move forward with it and we can pass it under the condition that the samples come back negative.

 

Bob Zimmer- I am going to open the Public Hearing regarding this application.

 

No Public Comments made.

 

Bob Zimmer- Okay I am going to close the Public Hearing.

 

Jack Sirios- Motion to close the Public Hearing.

 

Mark Palmieri- Second

 

All- Aye

 

Mariano Choconi- Motion to declare negative declaration on the SEQR review.

 

Jack Sirios- Second

 

All- Aye

 

Jack Sirios- Motion to accept the plans as given with the stipulation that the C.O. only be given until the test results come back clean.

 

Mark Palmieri- Second

All- Aye

 

Applicant #3- 6 Van Orden Ln:

 

Bob Zimmer- So we sent you to ZBA to get variances and we have copies of them. Variances were granted for lot coverage, rear yard setbacks and side yard setbacks.

 

Jack Sirios- Did you provide the Building Department with copies of new plans to give to us.

 

Eric Osborn (Applicant Architect)- No but we gave new copies to the ZBA.

 

Jack Sirios- We are not the ZBA

 

Overlapping conversation regarding the fact that the applicants only brought in two copies for the board to review. The board members attempt to share the copies in order to review the plans.

 

Eric Osborn- We have a letter from an engineer about the septic.

 

Bob Zimmer- Okay let’s see.

 

Eric Osborn- The basement is only 6’8”, or 7’.

 

Jack Sirios- You said 7’4” on the other drawings, you have to make up your mind.

 

Eric Osborn- 7’ I went out and I measured it again.

 

Bob Zimmer- Jack (Kowalczyk, home owner) in this letter from an engineer he made recommendations, are you going to follow these recommendations?

 

Jack Kowalczyk (Applicant)- Yes

 

Jack Sirios- They are not instructions?

 

Bob Zimmer- It just says recommendations. Recommends replacing the current 500 gallon, tank with a 1250 gallon tank.

 

Overlapping conversation while board attempts to review plans.

 

Jack Sirios- I wish we had gotten these plans ahead of time like we are supposed to so that we could review them properly.

 

Bob Zimmer- I want more time to go over these plans so I am going to postpone till our next meeting to give everyone a chance to look at the plans.

Overlapping conversation regarding the septic system.

 

 

Bob Zimmer- And really this important to you because you don’t want the septic system to fail. And whether the leach field in going to be adequate for the upgraded tank or not, depends on the use of it. If the use is going to increase you may want to consider upgrading the leach field as well.

 

Applicant #4- 11 Co Hwy 5:

 

Bob Zimmer- Okay Scott Lehr, another continuing application. When we left off with you, you were still deciding exactly what you want to do and you needed variances. You received the area variance you needed and the use variance granted was granted specific to it being for your personal use only. Which reduces the items we would need to consider.

 

Scott Lehr- So I went to ZBA and got those variances with the stipulation for the personal use only that I agreed to, and then I received some comments for the engineer.

 

Overlapping conversation…

 

Jamison Zajac- Goes over his comments (hard to hear on recording)

 

Scott Lehr- I have reached out to the DEC, I spoke with a Tracy O’mally she was very reluctant to give me any formal letter stating that the property was not in wetlands. She did check with the mapping department and confirmed that it is not of any concern for them, but she won’t give me any official response.

 

Jack Sirios- The only way to get anything out of New Paltz is to go there.

 

Scott Lehr- Okay, maybe I will pay them a visit.

 

Jamison Zajac- It is in the check zone. It is probably best to get something in writing. I am not concerned about it, but it is something required. Based on what is being proposed I don’t see it as a problem it in the very end of the check zone. Basically, there is a 100’ buffer close to wetlands.

 

Scott Lehr- I can keep trying to reach out to them (DEC) but if I can not get anything back from them if we could have some wiggle room in lieu of me driving up there, I will do it if I have to.

 

Bob Zimmer- We will come up with something.

 

Jack Sirios- We could say it is adjacent to but not in.

 

Alyse Terhune- Yeah, we could day that there is no wetland map that shows it, it is on the edge.

 

Jamison Zajac- Typically what would be done is that before a survey we would reach out to the DEC or a third party, wetland mitigation company and they would go out flag it and it would be picked up on the survey.

 

Unintelligible…

 

Bob Zimmer- Maybe if we reach out on our end? Assuming we get that far we can make that a conditional part of the approval.

 

Jamison Zajac- I see you got a letter of site plan approval form the Orange County Dept of Public Works, there only comment was that prior to construction you have to retain a Hwy work permit, the septic system that is proposed is within 10’ of that water line, you would need to incase that. The bigger problem I see is that it was designed for 20 employees, you should add a note. You are proposing a swail along the roadway this looks like a drainage swail, which dumps into the roadway swail, so the concern would be the disposal system is here in close proximity to that.

 

Scott Lehr- Okay, I will get clarification from my engineer on that.

 

Jamison- Based on the grading it does not look like the retaining wall is going to happen at that height.

 

Scott Lehr- I will get clarification from my engineer, but we are going to follow the grade with a 4’ wall.

 

Jamison- It will change the parking grades though. Explains that he will have to go over the property line of the neighboring property in order to build the retaining wall.

 

Overlapping discussion over building retaining wall, and possible need for temporary easement from neighbor during construction. And some other engineer’s notes.

 

Bob Zimmer- If you make these changes and get them in a pdf version we can jet it to Jamie so we can get you comments back before the next meeting so that hopefully we can streamline everything. And we will see you next month.

 

Scott Lehr- Okay, thank you.

 

Applicant #5- 42 Linden Ave:

 

Bob Zimmer- Reads application into the record. You were here a year ago for the dem permit and now are rebuilding. What is your vision for the property.

 

Brendon Nelson (Applicant/Architect)- We currently live next door and it would be great for my mother and father to live next door. So that is the reason there is a ground floor bedroom and a ramp up to the front, these things were thought of to make it easy for them. I did receive the engineer’s comments, we have responded to those including the septic and we responded to that as well.

 

Charles Pekarek- Can I ask what the reason for demolishing the house was?

 

Brendon Nelson- So the house before we bought it, unfortunately had a catastrophic fire and was beyond repair.

 

Charles Pekarek- So are you going to be using the same foundation?

 

Brendon Nelson- Well the foundation has changed, but the septic system remains and we have capped it and made sure it was safe.

 

Charles Pekarek- Did you increase the area of the usage?

 

Brendon Nelson- We didn’t increase the area we actually reduced the lot coverage and reduced the setbacks, so we have tried to make it more conforming. There is a note here about the engineer’s comments that the new building as far as lot coverage is over the allowable, but I have tried to reduce that from the previous structure. We have eliminated the setback issue.

 

Alyse Terhune- I would just not that, I appreciate your note referencing 120-13 €, but the problem is that, that house has been demolished, and E pertains to a house that is existing that if you want to make it larger, expand it, you can do that so long as it’s no more nonconforming, but the house was demolished this is a new structure.

 

Brendon Nelson- So we did have this conversation when we came to the board for the demo permit and the plan was always to come back within a year and there was a discussion that if the plans were filed within a year (which they were) from the issuance of the demo permit, that we could work within the footprints and allowances of the previous structure. But I have still tried to reduce the overages.

 

Carly Ebers (Applicant)- And the previous structure was a hazard to the community, so we wanted it to be down as soon as possible.

 

Jack Sirios- And that was all done within the year.

 

Bob Zimmer- And they got a permit from us to do so.

 

Alyse Terhune- Right, but I don’t think that the demolition permit speaks to that. But I would request the Building Inspector to make a formal determination on that.

 

Ed Mateo- I already have Alyse. We have been discussing this for so long with them, they met the requirement to get back in within the year.

 

Alyse Terhune- Okay, can you just send us a note for the file then.

 

Ed Mateo- Yes

 

Bob Zimmer- Do you have other comments Alyse?

 

Alyse Terhune- No

 

Discussion regarding stories of house and what constitutes a story, and applicants stated they would be sprinkling the entire house.

 

Applicant responded to all other comments from the engineer.

 

Mark Palmieri- Motion to approve

 

Jack Sirios- Second

 

All- Aye

 

Bob Zimmer- You are approved

 

Applicants- Thank you

 

Applicant #6- 38 Oak St:

 

Bob Zimmer- Reads application into record. Mentions that board member Mark Palmieri will now be appearing as an applicant. Jennifer Lyons will be standing in. We received an initial set of drawings with the application and then a new set last Friday.

 

Mark Palmieri- Yes, we submitted new plans per the village engineer’s comments.

 

Bob Zimmer- Start with describing what it is now and then what you are planning.

 

Mark Palmieri- Sure, so what it is now, is an unused restaurant space, the current occupancy allowed is a 51, seat restaurant, septic was built and revised in 2009 to withhold the 51 seat occupancy plus the apartment next door which is a two bedroom. The restaurant has been vacant since I have owned it and I bought it in 2018, nothing has ever been done in there, we have never cooked in there, we were going to use it as a catering facility but we didn’t need it and so we have just been renting out the apartment, I am not looking to open another restaurant or bar in Greenwood Lake. We believe in this area, especially the area where we are that it would be a wonderful space for some apartments. Upscale nicer apartments for an older couple senior citizens, or a younger couple to move to the area who can’t afford a house yet. So we are proposing to do three one bedroom apartments downstairs and three one bedroom apartments upstairs. With a total of six bedrooms.

 

Bob Zimmer- Okay, let’s start with board comments, like general comments..

 

Jack Sirios- Okay, general would be, should this become true that it is built the septic system that is there would have to be completely guarded and should be tested now and then be required to be tested after the fact.

 

Mark Palmieri- Yes

 

Discussion about manner of testing that could/should be done…

 

Applicant’s Engineer discusses when the system was designed and for what flow it was designed to handle, and also that the system was designed to be under the parking area.

 

Jamison- They have given the design plans that were submitted to DOH back then and approved. You can see the location and that it was designed to be under pavement. It is under gravel now but it was actually designed to be under pavement.

 

Mark Palmieri- Which is what we are proposing to do.

 

Jamison Zajac- That was my one concern which is why I asked for more information, and it was designed for that.

 

Bob Zimmer- Is it a tank and pump system? (Answered yes) So you will have to have a maintenance contract for that in place and provide proof to the Village that you have that contract.

 

Mark Palmieri- Yes

 

Jamison Zajac- So we can stay on the septic, I did look at what it was designed for, the percs were witnessed by DOH back in 2009, it was installed per plan according to DOH, I do agree the wastewater demand will be diminished on paper here, the new proposed use, so that is a plus, my one question in my email to you today, was that vent line?…

 

Applicant Engineer- Not sure…

 

Jamison Zajac- Okay, it should be answered and located on this plan. So right now there is a proposed vent line coming out of the system and it is not shown on the new plans and that would be one thing with an underground system like that, that I would want to see. I did ask them to add some notes that the contractor take care during construction…

 

Mark Palmieri- Yes, we do have a note on these plans tonight that shows that we will mark off…

 

Discussion about weight limitations, applicants agree and state they would prefer to stay off all together.

 

Jamison Zajac- Moving on to parking spaces, they provide 10 spaces including one handicap accessible space in an adjourning access aisle, the required number of off street parking is 12, but as the applicant notes there is street parking on the southside of Oak St.

 

Mark Palmieri- Are we wrong on the one and a half per bedroom being required?

 

Alyse Terhune- It is two per dwelling.

 

Jamison Zajac- So I know there have been times when the board is okay with including off street parking…

 

Bob Zimmer- So what you are saying is the required is 12 and they are providing 10 plus one handicap on site and count 2 as off, street parking?

 

Alyse Terhune- But these are apartments and that brings up a whole other issue about use variance but we will get to that in a minute. But, a residential use, if they get their use variance and people are living there, you are not going to count street parking, I don’t think. Right? Do you want to park on the street and then walk to your apartment? If they are going to go to the ZBA, which they are going to have to, they might as well ask for a parking variance.

 

Jack Sirios- Correct, so that you only go once there are going to be setback variances, you might as well as for the parking variance, you get everything done in one shot at ZBA.

 

Alyse Terhune- So Alex (Applicant’s Attorney), they are going to need two use variances, they are going to need, first of all this is a multifamily building which is not allowed anywhere in the Village, and residential use is not permitted in the CS district. So, when they go to the ZBA make sure that they ask for those two use variances otherwise it is not going to be clear.

 

Further discussion and clarification given about the uses and the variances needed.

 

Bob Zimmer- What are your neighbors?

 

Mark Palmieri- To the left of us we have the law office with an apartment upstairs, behind us id Murphy’s parking lot and to the right is a residence.

 

Alyse Terhune- So that will help with your ZBA variance but as you know Alex these variances are very difficult and the ZBA needs to understand that if they are going to grant these variances, they have to be very specific in why they are doing that. Otherwise, you will have a vulnerability if someone decides to sue. And the other thing there is no multifamily allowed, there might be multifamily that has been here for forever, but there is none allowed and that is an issue because if ZBA will be granting variances they need to be very specific about why they are doing it for this particular property, otherwise everyone is going to want a variance to put in an apartment building.

 

Bob Zimmer- You want to make sure that there is a vibrant discussion on it that ends with a specific reason, don’t let them just say sure, you want in the record that it was discussed thoroughly. Alyse is going to give you the specific references for those variances.

 

Alyse Terhune- So there is two variance one is for residential in a CS district, the second one you want to look at 120-13 (b), so what that says, a non-conforming lot, which this is, with a lot area of less than 20,000 sq ft can only be used for single family residences, so they will need that variance as well. And then the parking variance.

 

Overlapping conversation regarding setback variances needed…

 

Alyse Terhune- Take a look at the bulk requirements, and any questions you can give me a call.

 

Ed Mateo (Building Inspector)- In the CS district it is much more lenient than in R20.

 

Overlapping Conversation…

 

Jack Sirios- You may want to ask the Building Department if there is a fire code that would require sprinklers.

 

Mark Palmieri- It will be sprinkled.

 

 

Alyse Terhune- Also when you go to the ZBA this bulk table needs to be updated, it should show the bulk requirements for a small lot 120-13

 

Ed Mateo- Alyse, it is in the CS zone.

 

Alyse Terhune- Yes, but it is a small lot.

 

Ed Mateo- In the CS zone there is no side lot…

 

Alyse Terhune- Yeah, but he is putting residential, no forget the CS, he is putting in residential. So, wouldn’t the residential on small lots apply? It is in the CS zone but he is getting a variance from the CS zone…

 

Jack Sirios- So now it has to go to residential.

 

Ed Mateo- This conversation has come up before…

 

Applicant?- Is that a question for the ZBA?

 

Alyse Terhune- Well, I suppose?

 

Ed Mateo- I don’t know how we would say that, it is in the CS zone and these are the setbacks for CS.

 

Alyse Terhune- And what is the lot requirements in CS?

 

Ed Mateo- So the front yard is zero, the rear yard is 25’, one side yard and total side yards are none and lot coverage is 80 percent.

 

Alyse Terhune- But you are putting in a residential, not a commercial building, if they grant a variance to put in residential then why would you have zero lot lines?

 

Ed Mateo- Logically because of what it is nearby. A commercial enterprise would be more offensive than a residential enterprise.

 

Alyse Terhune- If I have an apartment building with a zero, side setback, that is going to be pretty offensive.

 

Ed Mateo- Well you could have a factory with zero, side setbacks that is commercial that would be more offensive.

 

Alyse Terhune- Yeah, that’s because it is supposed to be surrounded by commercial.

 

Overlapping conversation…

 

Bob Zimmer- But to look at the bigger picture they are looking for variances from the code, and really what you are talking about is a variance from either the commercial or the residential, they are going to build what they are going to build, and it is just whether it is a variance from one of those two things. We are not talking about building something different just either a variance from zero or a variance from 10’.

 

Alyse Terhune- I know, but it is important because when the ZBA makes it is decision it is going to grant a variance with a particular requirement and it is either going to be the CS requirements or the small lots.

 

Ed Mateo- The question is what is more important, the where or the what?

 

Alyse Terhune- Well I think that is a good question for the ZBA, so the ZBA will have to decide when it considers these matters. The first question will be are we going to allow residential in CS that is a use variance. Then the next question is if we allow residential use then which bulk requirements apply and what variances will be needed to be granted. And that is a decision that the ZBA can make. But it needs to be a clear decision on the record of what they are actually granting. So, I would say you ask them for that interpretation.

 

Overlapping conversation about apartments building possibly being considered commercial…

 

Alex (Applicant Attorney)- I think it is helpful to make that determination because the more specific they are if they give us the variance in the CS zone, that limits the multifamily use outside of that zone, which is obviously more limited than the rest.

 

Alyse Terhune- Yes, which is a good point.

 

Bob Zimmer- Jamie any other comments.

 

Jamison Zajac- My last one was just about the utilities the existing water and gas that they are going to reuse and overhead electric that comes off the street…

 

Alyse Terhune- Is this within 500’ of Windermere Ave.? (Answer yes). Okay then we will have to send a 239 to Orange County.

 

Alyse Terhune- Mr. Chairman, I also think honestly even if it is not a special use permit, actually if a variance is granted it is a special use permit so I will do a notice of Public Hearing, that is just the way it is, that is a law. I will prepare it for January’s meeting.

 

Mark Palmieri- Thank you guys, appreciate your time.

 

Bob Zimmer- Motion to close meeting.

 

John Tracy- Motion to close

 

Mark Palmieri- Second

 

All- Aye

 

Bob Zimmer- Meeting closed