village of pleasantville
TRANSCRIPT
Village ofPleasantville
Building Department
80 Wheeler Avenue / Pleasantville, New York10570
(914) 769-1926 Fax: (914) 769-5519
PLEASANTVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
To: Planning Commission Members: There will be a meeting of the Pleasantville Planning Commission on Wednesday,October 13, 2021, at 8:00 PM, at Village Hall, 2nd Floor 80 Wheeler Avenue,Pleasantville, New York.
AGENDA
1. Meeting [email protected] is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting. Topic: Planning CommissionTime: Oct 13, 2021 08:00 PM Eastern Time (US and Canada) Join Zoom Meetinghttps://zoom.us/j/95509123254?pwd=MzBCS1NMYXpPUHcvczgxTDJ0OCthUT09 Meeting ID: 955 0912 3254Passcode: 016627One tap mobile+16465588656,,95509123254# US (New York)+13017158592,,95509123254# US (Washington DC) Dial by your location +1 646 558 8656 US (New York) +1 301 715 8592 US (Washington DC) +1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago) +1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma) +1 346 248 7799 US (Houston) +1 669 900 9128 US (San Jose)Meeting ID: 955 0912 3254Find your local number: https://zoom.us/u/acFYA3c6Bg
2. APPLICATIONS SPECIFIC TO PLANNING COMMISSION3. 385 Bedford Road
385 Bedford Road - Henry Leyva - Proposed re-subdivision - shifting of rear property line
between 385 Bedford Road and 11 Rebecca Lane within the R-PO Zoning District - Contreview - app back from ZBA
4. 270 Marble AvenueZwilling JA Henckels - 270 Marble Ave - Proposal to amend the previous approved siteplan for a permanent on-site generator - change of natural gas to diesel fuel - Cont review
5. APPLICATIONS SPECIFIC TO THE BOARD OF ARCHITECTURALREVIEW
6. 121 Bedford Road121 Bedford Road - Gibson Craig - Proposal to install a private utility pol for new servicewithin the Special Character Overlay District - New application
7. Minutes of MeetingMeeting of September 22, 2021
Very truly yours Robert HughesBuilding Inspector
Meeting [email protected] is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting. Topic: Planning CommissionTime: Oct 13, 2021 08:00 PM Eastern Time (US and Canada) Join Zoom Meetinghttps://zoom.us/j/95509123254?pwd=MzBCS1NMYXpPUHcvczgxTDJ0OCthUT09 Meeting ID: 955 0912 3254Passcode: 016627One tap mobile+16465588656,,95509123254# US (New York)+13017158592,,95509123254# US (Washington DC) Dial by your location +1 646 558 8656 US (New York) +1 301 715 8592 US (Washington DC) +1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago) +1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma) +1 346 248 7799 US (Houston) +1 669 900 9128 US (San Jose)Meeting ID: 955 0912 3254Find your local number: https://zoom.us/u/acFYA3c6Bg
APPLICATIONS SPECIFIC TO PLANNING COMMISSION
385 Bedford Road385 Bedford Road - Henry Leyva - Proposed re-subdivision - shifting of rear property line between 385Bedford Road and 11 Rebecca Lane within the R-PO Zoning District - Cont review - app back from ZBA
ATTACHMENTS:Description Type Upload DatePreliminary Plat Backup Material 10/8/2021Initial overview letter Backup Material 10/8/2021
N/F
Nel
la M
atra
Iron PinFound
UPol
eC
oncr
ete
Cur
b
BE
DFO
RD
RO
AD
Asp
halt
Pave
men
t
RE
BE
CC
A L
NA
spha
lt Pa
vem
ent
UPole
Concrete C
urb
Con
cret
e W
alk
Concrete W
alk
Concrete
ConcreteWalk
Stone Retaining Wall
StoneRetaining
WallWallOn Line
Stockade Fence
AsphaltCurb
HandicapParkingSign
Drain InletRim=89.27
Dead EndSign
Sign
TownParking
Sign
ConcreteCurb
Drop
Curb
Dead EndSign
2 StoryFrame
Residence#11
Wire FenceWire Fence
Dro
pC
urb
Asph
alt C
urb
ManholeRim=89.90
Row of Pines
Edge
of A
spha
lt
Edge of Asphalt
Edge
of A
spha
lt
Asphalt Parking Area Asphalt Parking Area Asphalt Parking Area
Tax Lot 67.1Part of F.M Lot 4
Volume 4, Page 29
Area = 9778.73 Sq. Ft. = 0.224 Acres
NEW Tax Lot 67.1NEW Area = 10,660.64 Sq. Ft.
= 0.245 Acres
Con
cret
e W
alk
Picket Fence
Fenc
eG
ate
FenceGate
Picket Fence
Pick
et F
ence
AsphaltDrive
AsphaltDrive
Brick Walkway
Step
ping
Sto
nes
StoneRetaining Wall
Wood DeckCovered
Woo
d D
eck
Cov
ered
2 12 StoryFramed Residence
#385
OverhangFrame
FlagstoneWalkway
ConcreteRetaining Wall
StoneStepsWood Deck
CoveredWood Steps
Stone Steps
Ston
e C
urb
FlagstonePatio
PlayArea
Ston
eC
urb
FlagstoneStep
Picket FenceStockade Fence
Stockade Fence
Stone Wall
ConcreteRetaining Wall
AC Unit
Gravel Area
13.62'
41.07'
26.79'
Row
of P
ines
106.06-2-66N/F Corp Bai Ji
106.06-2-11N/F Village of Pleasantville
N 20° 04' 10" W
132.85'
N 6
5° 0
3' 4
5" E S
urvey74.4
1'
S 20° 03' 48" E
130.96' Survey
S 6
3° 36' 3
7" W
74.5
8'
ConcreteShed
Con
cret
e C
urb
Con
cret
e C
urb
Residence
Asphalt Driveway
BOUNDARY LINE AGREEMENTAS PER
CONTROL NUMBER 461440844
Fence North12.92'
Fence & Stone Wall North12.67'
130.35' Deed
N 6
5° 0
4' 2
9" E D
eed
39.77'
Concrete Curb Concrete Curb Concrete Curb
ShedWest 2.74'
N 20° 04' 10" W 162.72'
N 6
7° 0
6' 4
0"E
74.2
5'
S 20° 03' 48" E 160.06'
LOT LINE TO BE ABANDONEDUPON FILING OF THIS PLAT
NEW LOT LINEUPON FILING OF THIS PLAT
10.39'
13.40'
Tax Lot 67.2Part of F.M Lot 4
Volume 4, Page 29
Area = 11,967.55 Sq. Ft.= 0.27 Acres
NEW Tax Lot 67.2NEW Area = 11,085.64 Sq. Ft.
= 0.255 Acres
RE
BE
CC
A L
NA
spha
lt Pa
vem
ent
Edge
of A
spha
lt
106.06-2-11N/F Village of Pleasantville
106.06-2-12N/F Leonardo Dececchis
N 62° 12' 53" E74.73'
146.66'
152.33'143.24'
144.36'
WoodDeck
Flagstone andConcrete Platform
and Steps
Conc. Slab
Conc. Walk
Flag. andConc. Steps
ConcreteRet. Wall
Asphalt Drive
AsphaltDrive
Utility EasementAs Per Old Survey
Approximate Locationof Sanitary Line
As Per Old Survey
8.10
'
63.35'
17.4
6'38.01'
PRELIMINARYLOT LINE CHANGE PLAT
PREPARED FORHENRY LEYVA AND JOAN
JACOBSONSITUATE IN THE
TOWN OF MOUNT PLEASANTVILLAGE OF PLEASANTVILLE
WESTCHESTER COUNTY, NEW YORK
SCALE: 1" =15'
Drawn By:BJC
Project: 19-345Job: 21-100
Checked By:SG/BFC
APField Survey By:
Unauthorized alteration or addition to a survey map bearing a licensedLand Surveyors seal is a violation of Section 7209, Subdivision 2 of theNew York State Education Law.
Possession only where indicated.
Adjacent property lines and easements not surveyed or certified.Access to adjacent rights of way, easements and public or private landsnot guaranteed or certified.
Underground utilities shown hereon are approximate and should beverified before excavating.Additional underground utilities are not shown or certified.Encroachments and structures below grade, if any, not shown or certified.
Subject to covenants, easements, restrictions, conditions and agreementsof record.
TAX LOT 67.2
Premises shown hereon designated on the Village of Pleasantville TaxMaps as: Section 106.6, Block 2, Lot 67.2.
Property Address: 3 Rebecca Lane, Pleasantville, NY, 10570
TAX LOT 67.1
Premises hereon being Part of Lot 4 as shown on a certain mapentitled, "Land of Samuel Shapter Etc."Said map filed in the Westchester County Clerk's Office, Division ofLand Records December 6, 1870, in Volume 4 page 29.
Surveyed in accordance with Deed Control Number 461440844.
Premises shown hereon designated on the Village of Pleasantville TaxMaps as: Section 106.6, Block 2, Lot 67.1.
Property Address:385 Bedford RoadPleasantville NY, 10570
Vicinity Map
SITE
Westchester County Department of HealthNew Rochelle, New York
This map does not constitute a subdivision as defined by Chapter 873, Article X of theWestchester County Sanitary Code. Permission is hereby granted for the filing of thismap in the Office of the Westchester County Clerk, Division of Land Records. Theappearance of the signature of the Commissioner of Health on this plat is not anendorsement and does not in any way indicate conformance with the Department's Rulesand Regulations pertaining to water supply and sewage disposal.
Each purchaser of property shown hereon shall be furnished a true copy of this plat showingthis endorsement. Any erasures, changes, additions or alterations of any kind, except theaddition of signatures of other approving authority and the date thereof made on this planafter this approval, shall invalidate this approval.
Date .Approved by the Assistant Commissioner of Health on Behalf of the Department of Health
394 BEDFORD ROAD ● PLEASANTVILLE ● NY 10570 (914) 769-8003 ● (203) 622-8899
TC MERRITTS LAND SURVEYORS
Total Area = 21,746.28 Sq.Ft.= 0.50 Acres
The undersigned owner(s) do hereby consent to the filing of this map.
Owner - Gino Busi Date
3 Rebecca Lane, Pleasantville, NY, 10570Address
Owner - Henry Leyva Date
385 Bedford Road, Pleasantville, NY, 10570Address
Owner - Joan Jacobsen Date
385 Bedford Road, Pleasantville, NY, 10570Address
All taxes due to date have been paid.
Receiver of Taxes Date
Approved for filing by Resolution of the Pleasantville Village PlanningCommission dated __________.
Chairman - Russel Klein Date
I,Scott B. Gray, Licensed Land Surveyor, who made this map dohereby certify that the survey upon which this map is based was completedMarch 22, 2021 and that this map was completed on June 22, 2021Map Revised: June 23, 2021 Map Revised: July 14, 2021Map Revised: July 20, 2021
By: Scott B. Gray New York State Licensed Land Surveyor No.050672
Westchester County Index System: Sheet 113, Block 8307
LAND AREA SCHEDULE
TAX LOT 67.1
PROPOSEDEXISTING9,778.73 Sq. Ft.
0.225 Acres10,660.64 Sq. Ft.
0.245 Acres
TAX LOT 67.2 11,967.55 Sq. Ft.0.275 Acres
11,085.64 Sq. Ft.0.255 Acres
CHANGE+ 881.91 Sq. Ft.
0.020 Acres- 881.91 Sq. Ft.-0.020 Acres
REQUIRED
MIN. PRINCIPAL BUILDING SETBACKS5,000 SF
8' / 20'30'
25'REAR YARDSIDE YARD (LEAST/TOTAL)FRONT YARD
MIN. LOT AREA
ZONING - R-PO ZONE
MAX % BUILDING COVERAGE20%
July 20, 2021 Russ Klein And commissioners Pleasantville Planning Commission Pleasantville, NY Dear Commissioners, As a result of a recent survey of our property, we became aware that the existing physical rear boundary between our property at 385 Bedford Rd and our neighbor directly to our north, Gino Busi, 3 Rebecca Lane, does not match the property line as drawn on existing plats of both properties. When we purchased our home in 2006, there was an existing tree line between the two properties which we believed to be set on the property line between our backyard and Mr. Busi’s backyard. As such, within the first couple of years of moving in we added trees to the tree line, put in fencing, built a small stone retaining wall for a planting bed and placed a swing set in this area between our yards. Upon our recent discovery, we immediately reached out to Mr. Busi to inform him of what we had learned, as well as to propose to him a lot change that would more accurately represent the physical boundary between our two properties. We have agreed to a new line that follows the tree line and will allow us and Mr Busi to maintain both sides of the property line exactly as they are now. So, if approved, there will be no physical change whatsoever to either side of the property line. The only other point worth mentioning is that because Mr Busi’s home is a multifamily property, and is subject to a 25% FAR, the land that he is transferring over to us in re-drawing the boundary will put him slightly over the 25%, thus creating a non-conforming situation for Mr. Busi. To his credit, Mr Busi fully supports the new boundary, as long as we are able to obtain a variance. We do hope you will give our proposal full consideration. Sincerely, Henry Leyva 385 Bedford Rd. Pleasantville, NY
270 Marble AvenueZwilling JA Henckels - 270 Marble Ave - Proposal to amend the previous approved site plan for apermanent on-site generator - change of natural gas to diesel fuel - Cont review
ATTACHMENTS:Description Type Upload DateOverview letter dated 10.5.21 Backup Material 10/12/2021Proposed site plan dated 10.11.21 Backup Material 10/12/2021Proposed details 10.11.21 Backup Material 10/12/2021Aerial - tree plantings Backup Material 10/12/2021Resolution draft Backup Material 10/13/2021
October 5, 2021
Mr. Robert Hughes and Members of the Planning Board
Village of Pleasantville
80 Wheeler Avenue
Pleasantville, New York 10570
RE: JMC Project 21018
Proposed Generator
Zwilling J.A. Henckels
270 Marble Avenue
Village of Pleasantville, New York
Dear Mr. Hughes:
On behalf of Zwilling J.A. Henckels, we are pleased to provide the below
additional information as requested by the Village’s Planning Commission, in
support of our amended approval for the above captured project.
As discussed at the Planning Commission’s September 22nd, 2021 meeting, we
were asked to provide additional information relative to providing propane
powered standby generator. Also, we were asked to expand on the list of
installed diesel generators located in the Metro North to add whether any of
those generators were installed as emergency generators.
A. Emergency vs. Standby Generators:
We have reached out to the generator vendor we have been using on this
project, Huntington Power who generated the list of installed diesel
generators to ask them which of the generators installed were installed as
emergency generators and they have stated the following:
“That nearly all of them (generators) are capable/suitable for either
standby or emergency operation. The only real difference between
emergency & standby is if the emergency lights are powered by the
generator or not, so the difference is in the installation, not the equipment.”
According to our conversations with the generator provider, it is safe to
assume that the larger generators 300kW to 800kW will be addressing
more than basic life safety operations. Our experience with essential
service operations (municipal, educational, senior services, medical and
certain industries operate on standby, providing full operational power, for
24 hours or greater).
B. Propane Option:
As far as propane is concerned, Huntington Power, the distributor of
Generac generators, does not sell a propane option at 500kW. Below is
what they have stated:
“Generac does not have a single unit propane option at 500kW because of
the inefficiency of propane generators at that size. We (a licensed vendor)
could use another manufacturer, but that would require an 800kW natural
gas (NG) generator that de-rates down to 475kW on liquid propane (LP).
The 800kW is nearly double the price and takes up double the area of the
500kW; this is the reason that Generac does not offer such a machine.”
“Generac does offer a paralleled solution consisting of four (4) 130kW LP
(liquid propane) generators and the pricing would be within striking
distance of the 500kW natural gas unit. The drawback to this solution
would be the physical space required to accommodate the four (4) 130kW
units.”
“With either the 800kW NG that de-rates to 475kW on LP or the four (4)
130kW solution, they would need approximately 3,000-4,000 gallons of
liquid propane to support a 24hr runtime, which may present even more
logistical complications.”
“Based on these factors, we do not recommend the liquid propane solution
since it is the least cost effective and takes up the most space of the 3
options.”
C. Size of Propane Tanks for Gas Storage:
Sizing of liquid propane (LP) tanks has also led to several issues. It would
take four (4) 1,000-gallon horizontal upright units that are 15 feet 10 inches
by 3 feet 5 inches. The second option would be one (1) 4,000-gallon tank
which is sized at 24 feet by 5 feet 4 inches, but this tank requires that it is
set 6 feet under the ground. It also needs to be set 10 feet from any
building as well 10 feet from roadways. Neither option is feasible as our
client’s site isn’t big enough to house all the equipment and tanks.
D. Response to an email asking if a switch can happen when natural
gas becomes available:
Huntington Power stated the following:
“Diesel generators cannot be converted to natural gas.” The operator
would be required to purchase a second generator at an additional
cost of approximately $232,000.
E. Response to adding additional Trees to Offset Pollution
generated by the Generator:
Attached please find an Aerial Plan “Aerial with Proposed Tree Plantings”,
dated 10/11/2021, that depicts the location of (12) twelve new deciduous
trees to be planted in the surrounding area of the facility. We propose to
plant 9 trees around the parking lot across the street from Village Lane and
3 trees on the south side of the building adjacent to Castleton Street.
F. Response to Provide a Section/Elevation of the Proposed Fence
and Standby Generator:
On JMC Figure S-2 “Proposed Details”, last rev. 10/11/2021, we have
provided an elevation that illustrates the relationship between the
proposed standby generator sitting behind the proposed privacy fence.
In addition to the above noted revisions, 3 new lighting bollards have been shown
along the western side of the west sidewalk from the proposed standby
generator. Zwillings J.A. Henckels feels the need to provide the additional lighting
along the sidewalk to keep the area well lite to promote safety.
We trust that the above and enclosed information and drawings satisfactorily
addressed the Planning Commissions concerns and look forward to our continued
discussions regarding this matter at the October 13th, 2021, Planning Commission
meeting. Should you have any questions, or require any additional information,
please do not hesitate to contact us at (914) 273-5225.
Sincerely,
JMC Planning Engineering Landscape Architecture & Land Surveying, PLLC
James A. Ryan James A. Ryan, RLA
Principal
p:\2021\21018\admin\lthughes 10-05-2021.docx
EVERGREEN TREES QTY BOTANICAL / COMMON NAME SIZE ROOT COND. REMARKSTOH 3 Thuja occidentalis `Holmstrup` / Holmstrup Arborvitae 4` - 5` HT. B & B
DECIDUOUS TREES QTY BOTANICAL / COMMON NAME SIZE ROOT COND. REMARKSCC 1 Cercis Canadensis / Eastern Redbud 9`-10` HT. 2" - 2 1/2" CAL
ANNUALS/PERENNIALS QTY BOTANICAL / COMMON NAME SIZE ROOT COND. REMARKSHO 14 Hemerocallis x `Oriental Ruby` / Daylily 2 gal.
DECIDUOUS SHRUBS QTY BOTANICAL / COMMON NAME SIZE ROOT COND. REMARKSSG 11 Spiraea x bumalda `Goldflame` / Goldflame Spirea 1` - 1 1/2` HT
PLANT SCHEDULE
FIG
UR
E: S
-1
DAT
E: 0
5/06
/202
1, R
EV. 0
6/09
/202
1, R
EV. 0
6/10
/202
1, R
EV. T
O A
DD
800
GAL
. FU
EL T
ANK
09/2
0/20
21, R
EV. 1
0/11
/202
1
270
MAR
BLE
AVEN
UE
RE
VIS
ED
PR
OP
OS
ED
GE
NE
RA
TO
R L
OC
AT
ION
PLA
N
PLEA
SAN
TVIL
LE, N
Y
SCAL
E: 1
" = 2
0'
JMC
PR
OJE
CT:
210
18
PR
OP
OS
ED
GE
NE
RA
TO
R S
ITE
PLA
N12
0 BED
FORD
RD
ARMO
NKNY
1050
4
(914
) 273
-522
5fax
273
-210
2
JMCP
LLC.
COM
COPY
RIGH
T ©
2021
by JM
C Al
l Righ
ts Re
serve
d. N
o par
t of th
is do
cume
nt ma
y be r
epro
duce
d, sto
red i
n a re
trieva
l sys
tem, o
r tra
nsmi
tted i
n any
form
or by
mea
ns, e
lectro
nic, m
echa
nical,
photo
copy
ing, r
ecor
ding o
r othe
rwise
, with
out th
e prio
r writt
en pe
rmiss
ion of
JMC
PLAN
NING
,EN
GINE
ERIN
G, LA
NDSC
APE
ARCH
ITEC
TURE
& LA
ND S
URVE
YING
, PLL
C | J
MC S
ITE
DEVE
LOPM
ENT
CONS
ULTA
NTS,
LLC
| JOH
N ME
YER
CONS
ULTI
NG, IN
C. (J
MC).
Any
mod
ificati
ons o
r alte
ratio
ns to
this
docu
ment
witho
ut the
writt
en pe
rmiss
ion of
JMC
shall
rend
er th
em in
valid
and u
nusa
ble.
FIG
UR
E: S
-2
DAT
E: 0
5/06
/202
1; R
EV. 1
0/11
/202
1
270
MAR
BLE
AVEN
UE
PR
OP
OS
ED
DE
TA
ILS
PLEA
SAN
TVIL
LE, N
Y
SCAL
E: N
.T.S
.
JMC
PR
OJE
CT:
210
18
PR
OP
OS
ED
GE
NE
RA
TO
R S
ITE
PLA
N12
0 BED
FORD
RD
ARMO
NKNY
1050
4
(914
) 273
-522
5fax
273
-210
2
JMCP
LLC.
COM
COPY
RIGH
T ©
2021
by JM
C Al
l Righ
ts Re
serve
d. N
o par
t of th
is do
cume
nt ma
y be r
epro
duce
d, sto
red i
n a re
trieva
l sys
tem, o
r tra
nsmi
tted i
n any
form
or by
mea
ns, e
lectro
nic, m
echa
nical,
photo
copy
ing, r
ecor
ding o
r othe
rwise
, with
out th
e prio
r writt
en pe
rmiss
ion of
JMC
PLAN
NING
,EN
GINE
ERIN
G, LA
NDSC
APE
ARCH
ITEC
TURE
& LA
ND S
URVE
YING
, PLL
C | J
MC S
ITE
DEVE
LOPM
ENT
CONS
ULTA
NTS,
LLC
| JOH
N ME
YER
CONS
ULTI
NG, IN
C. (J
MC).
Any
mod
ificati
ons o
r alte
ratio
ns to
this
docu
ment
witho
ut the
writt
en pe
rmiss
ion of
JMC
shall
rend
er th
em in
valid
and u
nusa
ble.
MARBLE AVEN
UE
VILLAGE LANE
CAST
LETO
N STR
EET
Zwillings J.A.Henckels
270 Marble Avenue
ApproximateLocation ofPermanent
Stand-ByGenerator
Aerial with Proposed Tree PlantingsProposed Standby GeneratorZwillings J.A. Henckels270 Marble AvenuePleasantville, New York October, 11 2021
Proposed Tree Plantings(12 Trees Total)
Proposed Tree Plantings(12 Trees Total)
RESOLUTION
ZWILLING J.A. HENCKELS LLC – 270 MARBLE AVENUE
APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN AMENDMENT APPROVAL
After due discussion and deliberation, on motion by _____, seconded by _____ and
carried, the following resolution was adopted:
WHEREAS, application has been made to the Planning Commission of the Village
of Pleasantville for approval of a site plan amendment as depicted on a plan entitled
“Proposed Generator Site Plan,” last revised 10/11/21, prepared by JMC, PLLC, said
property being approximately 360,138 square feet in area and located at 270 Marble Avenue
in the Medium-Density Residence/Office “RO-3” and Planned Light Manufacturing “M-1”
Zoning Districts and designated on the tax map of the Village of Pleasantville as Section
2, Block 57, Lots 2 and 3 and Section 2, Block 51, Lots 30B and 38 (designated on the tax
map of the Town of Mount Pleasant as Section 106.10, Block 1, Lots 47, 48, 53, 54 and 57);
and
WHEREAS, on July 25, 2012 the Planning Commission approved a site plan
amendment for the subject property involving the demolition of an existing residential home
(2,158 square feet) on the subject property, the reconfiguration and expansion of the existing
mixed-use building, paving repairs to and a new striping layout for the parking spaces
located in the northern parking lot (Lot 57), and paving repairs to and a new striping layout
as well as landscaping and lighting improvements in the southern parking lot; and
WHEREAS, on January 23, 2013, the Planning Commission approved a site plan
amendment for the subject property involving additional loading bays for the building, the
relocation of the dumpster area, increase in the width of the driving aisles, lowering the roof
height on the office portion of the building, a pitched, gable roof for the warehouse portion
of the building; and
WHEREAS, on November 27, 2013, the Planning Commission approved a site plan
amendment for the subject property involving the removal of planting islands in the parking
lot, a reduction in the height of the cantilevered second floor by one (1) foot and a reduction
in coverage by one (1) foot on the east and south elevations, and the roof area between the
second floor office and the warehouse being partially filled to accommodate bathrooms for
the second floor office; and
WHEREAS, on May 27, 2021, in Case No. 2021-7, the Village of Pleasantville
Zoning Board of Appeals approved an area variance from § 185-48.A(1) of the Village
Zoning Law, to allow an accessory structure (permanent, stand-by generator) to be
located nearer to the street line than the principal building located on the same lot; and
2
WHEREAS, on June 23, 2021, the Planning Commission approved a site plan
amendment for the subject property involving the installation of a permanent, stand-by,
natural gas-powered generator and associated fence and landscaped screening; and
WHEREAS, due to a moratorium on new connections to natural gas by Consolidated
Edison, the previously approved generator could not be installed; and
WHEREAS, the Applicant has submitted the following materials, among others
for the Planning Commission’s review:
• An Application for Site Plan approval;
• A letters to Robert Hughes and the Planning Comission from JMC Planning
Engineering Landscape Archtecture & Land Surveying, PLLC dated August 13,
2021, September 20, 2021 and October 5, 2021;
• A generator specification sheet for Generac SG-500 diesel powered generator;
• A specification sheet for a Level 2 sound Attenuated Enclosure;
• A specification sheet for Statement of Exhaust Emissions 2021 Perkins Diesel
Fueled Generator;
• An email from John Torre, OLA Engineering dated August 3, 2021;
• A copy of a document entitled, “United States Environmental Protection Agecy
2021 Model Year Certificate of Conformity with the Clean Air Act;”
• A document entitled, “NY Diesel List in Metro North;”
• A plan entitled “Generator Concrete Pad” prepared by HPE, last revised May 4,
2013;
• A plan entitled “Proposed Details” last revised October 11, 2021, prepared by
JMC, PLLC;
• A plan entitled “Aerial with Proposed Tree Plantings, Proposed Standby
Generator,” dated October 11, 2021; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission is familiar with and has inspected the
premises; and
WHEREAS, on October 13, 2021, the Planning Commission reaffirmed that the
3
Proposed Action is a Type II Action that requires no further processing under the New
York State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) regulations; and
WHEREAS, on September 22, 2021, the Planning Commission determined that,
since the improvements to the site only involve minor revisions to the site and the site is not
located in a residential area, the scheduling of a public hearing on this application is not
necessary; and
WHEREAS, based on concerns raised by the Planning Commission regarding the
emissions associated with diesel-fueled generators, the Applicant offered to provide twelve
deciduous trees to be planted on the Applicant’s property to off-set pollution generated by
the generator; and
WHEREAS, under the Village Law the approval of said site plan amendment by this
Planning Commission does not affect the power of the Village to change zoning regulations
nor act as an assurance of the granting of any building permits.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the application for site plan
amendment approval, as depicted on a plan entitled “Proposed Generator Site Plan,” last
revised 10/11/21, prepared by JMC, PLLC, be and it is hereby approved, subject to the
following conditions and modifications:
1. The bollard detail shall be revised to match the existing bollards on the Site. The
detail shall also be revised to provide the photometric information for the bollard.
2. The size and species of the twelve (12) deciduous trees shall be noted on the plans to
the satisfaction of the Village Planner.
3. All references to “the Applicant” shall include the Applicant’s successors and
assigns.
4. Compliance with all applicable local laws and ordinances of the Village of
Pleasantville and any conditions attached to the permits issued thereunder.
5. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, payment of all fees for the cost of
engineering, planning, environmental, or other technical services required in
connection with the review of this application shall be required.
6. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Compliance, an as-built survey shall be
submitted to the Building Department for review.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that pursuant to Section 185-50F(11) of the Code
of the Village of Pleasantville, this site plan amendment approval shall expire one
hundred and twenty (120) days from the date of signing of the final site plan by the
4
Planning Commission Chairman, unless a building permit has been issued or an
extension has been granted by the Planning Commission as permitted by the Village
Zoning Law; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that, except as otherwise expressly amended herein,
all other terms, provisions and conditions of the Planning Commission Resolutions of
Approval entitled “Zwilling J.A. Henckels LLC – 270 Marble Avenue, Application for Site
Plan Amendment Approval,” adopted by the Planning Commission on July 25, 2012,
January 23, 2013 and November 27, 2013, are incorporated herein by reference and shall
remain in full force and effect; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that if said conditions be not fully complied with,
that said site plan shall be deemed in violation and subject to the Applicant being brought
back before the Planning Commission.
VOTE: Ayes –
Noes –
Abstentions -
Absent –
DATE:
CERTIFICATION:
_________________________________
Russell Klein, Chairman
Village of Pleasantville Planning Commission
APPLICATIONS SPECIFIC TO THE BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW
121 Bedford Road121 Bedford Road - Gibson Craig - Proposal to install a private utility pol for new service within the SpecialCharacter Overlay District - New application
ATTACHMENTS:Description Type Upload DateProject overview letter dated 10.5.21 Backup Material 10/8/2021ARB Petition Backup Material 10/8/2021Existing front view - no pole Backup Material 10/8/2021Proposed front view with pole Backup Material 10/8/2021
October 5, 2021
Pleasantville Architectural Review Board 80 Wheeler Avenue Pleasantville, NY 10570
Dear Architectural Review Board Members,
We are pleased to introduce ourselves to you while having the opportunity to renovate and preserve
the once elegant but currently neglected house at 121 Bedford Road. Our intention is to bring this old
house up to current standards, and preserve the architecture that has existed since the 1800’s.
We are in the process of converting this house from being an uninsulated gas heated house to a fully
insulated, high efficiency electric heat pump and solar panel fueled home. As part of this process, we are
required to increase and upgrade the existing electrical service. The increased service requires a review
by Consolidated Edison (ConEd) and they have determined we require a customer pole in the front yard.
ConEd’s requirements are that the primary service does not (aerially) cross our neighbor’s property, that
the connection to the house does not occur within 10’ of a relatively flat roof, and certain clearances
over Bedford Road (State Road) are maintained.
We propose to install this pole at the north-east corner of property 1’-0” clear from both the northern
and eastern property lines. This location is not near our driveway, our neighbor’s driveways, and is the
furthest possible location from any of our neighbor’s homes. This location also preserves the view of
the historic home we are working to preserve.
We humbly ask your approval on a proper location of this service pole and look forward to presenting
you with our color choices for the house at a later date .
Sincerely,
The Craig Family
Village of Pleasantville * Building Department
80 Wheeler Avenue * Pleasantville, NY 10570 Phone (914) 769-1926 * Fax (914) 769-5519 www.pleasantville-ny.gov
Petition to Architectural Review Board
NOTE: Six (6) copies of all pertinent information must be submitted with Petition a minimum ten (10) days in advance of scheduled ARB meeting date
* See attached submission requirements for additional information *
Section I – Project Address:
Section II – Contact Information: (Please print clearly. All information must be current)
Applicant:
Address:
Phone: Cell: Email:
Tenant:
Address:
Phone: Cell: Email:
Section III – Type of Application [ ] Building Review [ ] Sign Review
Submitted Information (check all that apply)
[ ] Floor Plans [ ] Site Plan [ ] Existing Rendering / Photos [ ] Scaled Detailed Elevations
[ ] Proposed Renderings / Photos [ ] Materials [ ] Samples [ ] Color Swatches [ ] Plantings
[ ] Lighting Fixtures [ ] Other Pertinent Information
Section IV – Landlord / Building Owner’s Consent
Note: Written consent required; application will not be accepted without it, no exceptions
Owner’s Name:
Owner’s Signature:
Section V – Permit Fees: $75 application fee
Page 1 of 2
121 BEDFORD RD, PLEASANTVILLE NY 10570
GIBSON CRAIG
121 BEDFORD RD, PLEASANTVILLE NY 10570
914.589.8213 [email protected]
N/A
N/A
N/A N/A N/A
GIBSON CRAIG
Village of Pleasantville * Building Department
Section VI – Contact Information: (Please print clearly. All information must be current)
Architect/Eng:
Address:
Phone: Cell: Email:
Designer:
Address:
Phone: Cell: Email:
Contractor:
Address:
Phone: Cell: Email:
Electrician:
Address:
Phone: Cell: Email:
Section VII – Applicant Certification
I hereby certify that I have read the instructions & examined this application and know the same to be true & correct. All provisions of laws & ordinances covering this type of work will be complied with whether specified herein or not. The granting of a permit does not presume to give authority to violate or cancel the provisions of any other state or local law regulating construction or land use or the performance of construction. Signature: Date:
OFFICE USE ONLY – DO NOT WRITE BELOW THIS LINE
Zone: Section: Block: Lot:
Additional Board / Dept. Approvals Required:
[ ] Zoning [ ] Planning [ ] DPW / Engineering [ ] WCDOH [ ] Wetlands [ ] Flood Dev
Building Department Checklist:
[ ] App Fee ___________________ [ ] Required documents [ ] Six (6) sets of docs & pertinent info
[ ] Check #: _________________________________ [ ] Cash
Name on check: _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
BLDG. INSPECTOR sign off: Date: ARB Meeting Results:
[ ] Approved As Submitted [ ] Approved As Noted [ ] Denied
Comments: ______________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Members in Attendence:: (check box & note initials)
[ ] Chairman ________ [ ] Member # 1 ________ [ ] Member # 2 ________ [ ] Member # 3 ________ [ ] Member # 4 ________
Page 2 of 2
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
10/6/2021
Minutes of MeetingMeeting of September 22, 2021
ATTACHMENTS:Description Type Upload DatePC minutes 9.22.21 Backup Material 10/8/2021ARB meeting 9.22.21 Backup Material 10/8/2021
Pleasantville Planning Commission
September 22, 2021
The Pleasantville Planning Commission meeting was called to order by Russell Klein, Chairman,
at approximately 8 pm on Wednesday, September 22, 2021. Attending the meeting were Russel
Klein, Chairman; Erik Brotherton, David Keller, Henry Leyva, James MacDonald, Philip Myrick
and Anjali Sauthoff, Commissioners, Sarah Brown, Planning Consultant, Robert Hughes, Building
Inspector and Mary Sernatinger, Secretary.
1) Bedford Road and Clark LLC -245 Bedford Road. Proposed three (3) lot subdivision
involving the creation of two (2) new single-family parcels where the existing single-
family dwelling structure will remain on the third parcel within the R-2A Zoning District.
Present: Dan Merritts and Kory Salomone. Continued Public Hearing.
Mr. Salomone reported that as the Commission requested, they moved the house on lot two further
back from Clark Street and created a plan that shows the adjacent houses. They also showed a
trench drain for the driveway on lot one.
He said the house on lot two was moved back five feet so that it is now 35 feet from the right-of-
way and 47 feet from Clark Street curbing. Setbacks of adjacent properties on the west side are 52
and 59 feet and setbacks on the east side of the street range from 27 to 39 feet, which is more
similar to the proposed properties on the west side.
The number of parking spaces on Clark Street remains at eight, which is the same as previously
presented. The loss of two spaces is due to the curb cuts for the driveways. The “no parking” sign
note has been removed from the plan.
Mr. Salomone said he reached out to Mr. Econom and was told that a trench drain would not be
necessary on lot one. They can just take the water off the driveway and direct it into the grass of
lot one. They can’t have more run-off after development than existed prior.
Ms. Brown said they applicant had covered everything, and she had no further issues. Mr.
Salomone, referring to lot two, said that by moving the house back only five feet they would be
able to save the grove of trees and also maintain a backyard.
Mr. Klein pointed out that there is quite a wall of vegetation between lot two and the property to
the north, the Vedovino property, 22 Clark Street. The screening prevents one from noticing that
Pleasantville Planning Commission
September 22, 2021
2
the setbacks of these houses is different from other houses on that side. Mr. Salomone said they
do not have any intentions of removing that vegetation. Mr. Klein noted it is possible the vegetation
would not provide as much screening in the winter months.
Mr. Myrick said there is a push and pull. Setting back the house on lot two by five additional feet
would be more like the other houses, but if it were pushed back further, the maples would be lost.
Mr. Klein was not sure that pushing the house back five additional feet would make a difference.
Mr. Myrick questioned whether the maple trees would outlast the house. He said was leaning
toward pushing the house back even further so that it would fit in better with the neighborhood.
Mr. Salomone said it wouldn’t be possible to move the house back far enough to be in line with
the other homes. They want to make sure there is a backyard. He pointed out that the house is in
compliance with zoning regulations.
Mr. Klein suggested moving the house on lot two to the south. In that case, Mr. Salomone said
they would lose the tree and be closer to utilities. It was noted utilities would be underground. Mr.
Myrick suggested going a little further south and further back and that would end up being closer
to matching the neighbors’ setback.
Mr. Leyva said his own property is the result of a subdivision which gave him a modest backyard.
The house next to lot two has a deeper lot, which allows them a larger back and front yard. He
believes that for a future resident, it would be nice to have a fairly good size backyard, especially
since they are conforming with zoning.
Mr. MacDonald didn’t think that pushing the house back five feet was significant. Also, once
construction starts, it is unlikely that all four of the trees would survive. He would like the house
to be shifted further back and a little way to the south as well. He believes there is a compromise
to be had. Also, Mr. MacDonald thinks the house on lot one is too close to the corner and that
putting it there to save trees is not realistic.
Pleasantville Planning Commission
September 22, 2021
3
Mr. Klein wondered if it would be possible to shift the driveway on lot one to the south into the
area where there is ‘no parking here to corner’ so they could gain an addition parking space on the
street. Ms. Brown said she didn’t think a parking space so near to the intersection would be
considered safe, so Mr. Klein then abandoned the idea.
There were no further comments from the public.
On a motion by Mr. Leyva, seconded by Mr. Brotherton and unanimously carried, the Public
Hearing was closed.
Mr. MacDonald said he didn’t think the Planning Commission had been presented with the options
that were asked for at the last meeting. Mr. Myrick agreed, noting that this is the historic district
and although a backyard is nice, it should not override the public good. He would like to see a
different version. Ms. Sauthoff and Mr. Keller agreed.
Mr. Keller suggested the Planning Commission require plants to be maintained on the northern
property line (Vedovino) to make sure screening is there throughout the year.
Mr. Klein noted that it would be impossible to meet the same setback as the Vedovinos, adding
that the Vedovino house was much grander than those that would be built on the new lots.
The Commissioners agreed that it would not be good to push the homes closer to Bedford Road in
a way that they would be squeezed next to the existing home.
For Mr. Leyva, the relationship between the two new homes was important. Mr. Brotherton agreed
that they couldn’t be aligned with the homes on that side of Clark Street and would always look
misaligned, no matter where they were placed. It would not be a good idea to squeeze the new
house too close to the main (existing) house.
Pleasantville Planning Commission
September 22, 2021
4
Mr. Salamone maintained that it is important to provide a backyard. He said it would be arbitrary
and capricious to deny their application when it meets zoning. They are 100% zoning compliant.
Mr. Klein said he would almost prefer to see the two new houses lined up because five feet
wouldn’t make a difference. He thought the best option would be to slide the house down to save
the four maples and lose the 12-inch tree. Mr. Merritts said they would be okay with that.
Mr. Keller said he would be fine with losing the 12-inch tree, but he would still like to add better
screening on the side by the Vedovino’s property. Mr. Brotherton said he would be okay with the
currently proposed location or shifting it south a bit.
Mr. MacDonald said they were not being arbitrary and capricious, explaining the Planning
Commission is supposed to take specifically consider proposed new homes in the context of the
neighborhood. He knows that building on the lots is the right of the applicant, but it is problematic
for him.
Mr. MacDonald said pushing things farther back would be beneficial. If you push back the house
on lot two, it would give them a backyard similar the backyard on lot one.
Mr. Leyva said moving the house away from the north property line would be acceptable, but he
didn’t want the house on lot one to be any closer to Bedford Road. He also did not want to impact
the driveway in any way that would result in losing a parking space.
Ms. Sauthoff said she didn’t mind losing the 12-inch tree to save the other four. She understands
that the proposal meets zoning, but she feels the Commission should give some weight to concerns
of the neighbors who came out two weeks ago.
Mr. Myrick said it may be an ARB issue, but he feels the context with the neighborhood and
aesthetics are important. He reiterated that five feet wouldn’t make much of a difference, but
maybe another five feet would be better in context with Clark Street. He noted that there are a lot
Pleasantville Planning Commission
September 22, 2021
5
of tools to assess, such as 3D massing diagrams. Still, Mr. Myrick complimented the applicant for
dividing the property into only two lots and believes it is just a matter of finessing the aesthetic
aspects.
Mr. Klein noted that if the Planning Commission approves the application now, only a substantial
deviation from the plan would cause the application to return to the Commission for further review.
Mr. Salomone said the footprints of the homes would not be shown on the plats that would be
shown to the County; they will be shown on the site plan that is approved.
Mr. Klein asked if the houses could be removed from the site plan. Ms. Brown said typically it is
not done that way. Including house footprints shows that a property being sub-divided can
accommodate a building envelope. She said the Commission needs to know that a house can be
built there and should see screening and landscaping, etc. Mr. Klein asked if the Commission could
grant the subdivision and then pass the burden of the house placement to the person who is going
to build on the lot.
Ms. Brown said the Planning Commission could grant the subdivision with a condition requiring
individual site plans to be brought to the Commission for house placement. That would also
include driveway, vegetation, etc.
Both Mr. Merritts and Mr. Salomone agreed to that approach, to pass along house siting to the
buyer.
Mr. Keller asked Mr. Hughes to make sure that all final approvals would be in the property file
and to include Planning Commission minutes where this matter was reviewed. He didn’t want to
have to start from scratch, and the minutes would remind the Commission what was discussed.
Mr. MacDonald and Ms. Sauthoff said that they were fine with the discussed approach.
Pleasantville Planning Commission
September 22, 2021
6
Ms. Brown clarified that when the homes on lot one and two are being developed, the property
owners will have to come back to the Planning Commission.
In the resolution Mr. Hughes added that a condition should specify that an applicant would have
to go back to the Planning Commission for site plan approval.
Ms. Brown said the resolution could also include a statement that this applicant is not building the
houses and because of the unique characteristics of existing vegetation on the property, he did not
choose house footprint locations as part of the subdivision, preferring that the people who are going
to build present their desired house placements to the Planning Commission.
In addition, Mr. Hughes said that subdivision and new houses on subdivisions must go before the
Architectural Review Board.
Ms. Brown said she would amend the resolution to add Condition #1 stating that the building
footprints would be removed from the plan because the Planning Commission was only approving
the subdivision lines.
On page four of the draft Resolution, Ms. Brown said she would remove the last ‘Be it Further
Resolved’ regarding site plan approval.
Condition #5 would be revised to say: ‘At the time of building permit application, the lot owner
or applicant shall return to the PC for finalizing the location of the building footprint, driveways,
landscaping and other site features.”
Mr. MacDonald stated for the record that the applicant is saving and renovating an historic home,
and he is to be commended. He said it was a positive development for the Village.
A motion to approve the resolution as amended was made by Mr. Leyva and seconded by Mr.
Keller. VOTING took place as follows:
Pleasantville Planning Commission
September 22, 2021
7
Ayes - 7 (Messrs. Klein, Brotherton, Keller, Leyva,
MacDonald, Myrick and Ms. Sauthoff)
Noes - 0
Abstain - 0
Absent - 0
2) Zwilling JA Henckels – 270 Marble Avenue. Proposal to amend the previous approved
site plan for a permanent on-site generator. Change from natural gas to diesel fuel.
Continued review. Present: James Ryan, Anthony Nestor and Deborah Correia of Henckels.
Mr. Ryan said they were originally approved for a generator that would run on natural gas but then
learned they would not be exempt from Con Edison’s Moratorium. The new proposal is for a
diesel-fueled generator. There is a bladder tank underneath the unit that makes it 32-36 inches
higher. They went back to the generator provider and were told they could do a side tank, which
would make the height the same as what was originally approved with the natural gas generator.
The tank on the side is 4.5 feet high. Mr. Ryan showed an image of the generator with a side tank.
It would still be in the setback.
Regarding noise, the decibel level would be 75 decibels at 23 feet from the source without any
abatement. They proposed a Sim Tek sound-absorbing fence to the east, which will limit the noise.
Mr. Ryan said the noise would not travel to the street. Residential houses are 225 feet from the
source.
The generator will have to be exercised once a month for 30 minutes.
Mr. Ryan acknowledged the pollution from a diesel generator is greater than from natural gas. He
had provided a list of more than 400 locations where diesel generators were in use, which included
Briarcliff School, nursing homes and senior facilities.
Regarding battery storage units, Mr. Ryan said they can only store for a limited period of time.
This is a large facility that might need the generator for an extended period. Also, battery storage
units are costly, and they have ruled them out as an option.
Pleasantville Planning Commission
September 22, 2021
8
Propane was also ruled out because propane-operated generators consume more fuel. Propane is
also less available to facilities like this.
Mr. Ryan reminded the Commission that the generator was for emergency purposes and would
seldom be used.
The only other option would be to bring in a roll-up generator with an automatic transfer switch.
Mr. Nestor said the overall height would be nine feet instead of 12 feet, or the same height as the
original gas generator. He added that it is the same generator, but with a different fuel source.
One of the problems with propane is that it requires larger space for storage. Mr. Ryan said an area
measuring 20 x 25 feet would be needed to store 2,000-gallon tanks underground. The tanks would
be 4.5 feet high. Also, propane needs more special attention and is flammable.
Mr. Myrick said he would be interested in learning more about propane. Mr. Ryan said it is not
considered a reliable option for a building of this size. It is problematic, not as efficient as diesel,
and consumes more kilowatt hours than diesel.
Mr. Keller noted that the list of facilities that have diesel generators seemed to be using them for
life safety and security. Henckels’s plan is to use the generator for other purposes. He would like
more information about where the other diesel generators are located and what they are being used
for. For example, what is Henckels using the generator for and what are other facilities using their
generator for? Mr. Ryan explained that Henckels wants a generator so that they can stay in
operation.
Mr. Keller said he is not comfortable with the fumes that would be generated from a diesel operated
generator in our small community for days at a time. He said that he was happy that Henckels was
Pleasantville Planning Commission
September 22, 2021
9
here, but the Planning Commission must protect the community. Ms. Sauthoff said she considers
noise to be less important than the exhaust, which is carcinogenic.
Mr. Ryan said the generator could run 36-48 hours. He was not sure if they would be able to get a
truck to come refill it with diesel fuel if it ran out. If they used propane, it would have to be
replenished more frequently.
Ms. Sauthoff said the pollutants with propane are less than with diesel.
Mr. MacDonald said he would be concerned about burying a propane tank, which could pollute
ground waters if it leaked. He pointed out that the context of the area includes the regular presence
of diesel-operated garbage trucks, school busses and tree-trimmer trucks. In comparison, the
proposed generator would be used on a limited basis, and he was okay with it.
Ms. Sauthoff repeated that she hoped propane would be fully explored.
Mr. Leyva asked how many times Henckels had lost power and for how long. Ms. Correia said she
had been at the location for six years, and power was lost three times. The first two power outages
were for less than 24 hours. The most recent one lasted for three days. They lost all operations and
their server, and she said it was a real mess. They had no way to bring power in. She preferred
natural gas. but ConEd will not allow it. Ms. Correia is not an advocate for burying a propane tank
in the ground, which raises many concerns.
Henckels’ hours of operation are from 8am to 5pm for the office with the warehouse active from
8 am – 4 pm and 4 pm-12 midnight. If power was lost, Ms. Correia said they would at least want
to keep operations going in the office from 8 am-5 pm and in the warehouse from 8 am-4 pm.
Mr. Leyva asked if they would plant additional trees to help oxygenate the area. He acknowledged
that trees were planned to screen the generator but would also like full-sized deciduous trees to be
Pleasantville Planning Commission
September 22, 2021
10
planted nearby to mitigate pollution. Ms. Correia said she was sure that would be okay. Mr. Klein
added that the trees could be a condition in the resolution.
Mr. Keller recalled that at the original (and current) location proposal for the natural gas generator
was preferred because it was closer to the electrical hook-up in the building. He asked if it would
be possible to move it closer to the Saw Mill River Parkway. Mr. Ryan said the proposed location
was most appropriate because it is near the mechanical rooms with lines running to the interior of
the building. It would also be more expensive to move it further away.
Mr. Ryan said he could get more information about how diesel-operated generators are used
elsewhere. He said they could plant a dozen or so large canopy trees around the property.
Mr. Klein believed the applicant was acting in good faith and did originally plan to use natural gas.
The Commission is very concerned about the environment. The additional trees will help and
exercising the generator once a month for ½ hour isn’t a lot. On balance Mr. Klein said he was
okay with the proposal.
Mr. Myrick said if they are trying to limit pollution overall, everything should be considered and
he would like to see more information about propane and why it is not an ideal option.
Mr. Keller said he voted in favor of the natural gas generator, but he is not okay with diesel,
especially being so close to Marble Avenue. Mr. Klein said he was not sure if propane would be a
good alternative.
Ms. Sauthoff had previously provided a comparison of pounds of CO2 emitted per million Btu’s
of energy for various fuels: natural gas (117), propane (139) and diesel fuel and heating oil (161).
Coal ranged from 214-229.
Mr. Leyva said it was difficult to demonstrate the difference considering that more propane would
be needed.
Pleasantville Planning Commission
September 22, 2021
11
Mr. Ryan said he would not be able to install propane underground in such a large area in this
location.
Mr. Hughes said the Village does not have any prohibitions against diesel generators.
Mr. Brotherton said he wished that there was a different way but thinks it is responsible of
Henckels to ask for a generator, and diesel seems to be the only source right now.
Mr. Klein said the results of the straw poll just taken seemed to be 4 to 3 in favor.
Mr. Ryan said he would get more information to compare diesel with propane and will show
locations for the trees.
Regarding location, Ms. Correia said there is really no room behind the building, which includes
the receiving area. They had originally considered placing the generator there but the area is only
4-5 feet wide.
Ms. Brown said in order to prepare a draft Resolution she would need to receive the revised plan
with additional landscaping. Mr. Ryan said he would get it to her right away. He believed the
Resolution would be the same as the one for the natural gas generator, just a larger location. He
will also submit elevations.
Mr. Klein said that the Commission could ask the Planning Consultant to prepare a resolution as
long as the applicant understood that it might need to be revised.
Mr. Ryan said at the last Zoning Board meeting there was a Public Hearing and no one attended.
The Commissioners did not feel it was necessary to hold a Public Hearing.
Pleasantville Planning Commission
September 22, 2021
12
On a motion by Mr. Myrick, seconded by Ms. Sauthoff and unanimously carried, the Public
Hearing was waived.
On a motion by Mr. MacDonald, seconded by Mr. Brotherton and unanimously carried, the
Commission requested the Planning Consultant to prepare a resolution.
3) TAV Associates, LLC - 26 Bedford Road. Proposal to amend a site plan from a
previously approved subdivision due to changes to the new single-family dwelling
structure location and effect on-site – Continued review & resolution draft. Present
Michael Doebbler.
Mr. Doebbler said he revised the site plan to show the driveway at ten feet wide, and he reduced
the apron to lessen the amount of pavement. The plan also shows specifics about landscaping and
provides a schedule of trees and shrubs. Mr. Klein noted that narrowing the driveway was also to
prevent front yard parking.
Mr. Keller suggested the driveway could be curved more. It seems to bulge out. Mr. Doebbler said
they could make that minor adjustment. He said he would taper the driveway back to the 12-inch
oak tree.
Ms. Brown said there was a typo on the plan: It says the zoning area is R-20 A, which should be
corrected to RR.
Mr. Leyva noted that the driveway cuts across the front and asked if it could be curved back to
make a horseshoe type driveway, angled away from the road. Mr. Doebbler said they were trying
to limit the amount of disturbance in the front between Bedford Road and the driveway to create
more of a buffer. They want a solid natural landscape buffer and are limited as to area. Placing the
driveway further from the road helps to achieve the natural buffer.
Ms. Brown said this is a Type II Action under SEQRA, and the Public Hearing was waived at the
last meeting.
Pleasantville Planning Commission
September 22, 2021
13
To the draft Resolution Ms. Brown said she would add a condition after #1 stating that the
pavement shall be reduced in the drive aisle near the turnaround by the 12-inch oak to preserve the
tree and have less impervious surface, to the satisfaction of the Building Department.
Mr. Klein asked Mr. Doebbler to submit a revised plan to the Building Department. Mr. Doebbler
said he will pull the driveway back 10-12 feet, at the discretion of the Building Department.
A motion to approve the resolution was made by Mr. Myrick and seconded by Ms. Sauthoff.
VOTING took place as follows:
Ayes - 7 (Messrs. Klein, Brotherton, Keller, Leyva,
MacDonald, Myrick and Ms. Sauthoff)
Noes - 0
Abstain - 0
Absent - 0
Minutes
On a motion by Mr. Keller, seconded by Mr. Leyva and unanimously carried, the minutes of the
September 8, 2021 Planning Commission meeting were approved with corrections from Mr. Klein
and Mr. Keller.
The Planning Commission portion of the meeting was adjourned at approximately 10 pm.
Respectfully submitted,
Mary Sernatinger
Secretary
Pleasantville Architectural Review Board
September 22, 2021
The Pleasantville Architectural Review Board was called to order by Russell Klein, Chairman, at
approximately 10 pm on Wednesday, September 22, 2021. Attending the meeting were Russel
Klein, Chairman; Erik Brotherton, David Keller, Henry Leyva, James MacDonald, Philip Myrick
and Anjali Sauthoff, Commissioners; Robert Hughes, Building Inspector and Mary Sernatinger,
Secretary.
1) TAV Associates, LLC – 26 Bedford Road. Proposed new single-family dwelling structure
as part of an approved subdivision – Continued review. Present: Robert Zumwalt, architect.
Mr. Zumwalt said as requested by the Board, he added shutters on the sides of the house and has
shown the deck on the rear elevation. The extent of the retaining wall is also shown on the rear
elevation.
There were no further comments from the Board.
A motion to approve the application was made by Mr. Myrick and seconded by Ms. Sauthoff
VOTING took place as follows:
Ayes - 7 (Messrs. Klein, Brotherton, Keller, Leyva,
MacDonald, Myrick and Ms. Sauthoff)
Noes - 0
Abstain - 0
Absent - 0
Minutes
On a motion by Mr. Keller seconded by Mr. Leyva and unanimously carried, the minutes of the
Planning Commission and Architectural Review Board Meetings of September 8, 2021 were
approved.
On a motion by Mr. Leyva, seconded by Mr. Brotherton and unanimously carried the meeting was
adjourned at 10:08 pm.
Respectfully submitted,
Plesantville Architectural Review Board
September 22, 2021
2
Mary Sernatinger
Secretary