Meeting Overview

Meeting  of April 22, 2015

Town  of Orangetown  Planning   Board

 

MEMBERS  PRESENT:   Kevin Garvey,  Chairman;   Robert Dell Michael   Mandel;   Bruce Bond;  William Young,  Stephen  Sweeney and Thomas Warren

 

MEMBERS ABSENT:  None

 

ALSO PRESENT:  John Giardiello,   Director, Department   of Building,   Zoning, Planning  Administration and Enforcement;  Robert Magrino,   Deputy Town Attorney;  Ann Marie Ambrose,  Stenographer   and Cheryl  Coopersmith,

Chief Clerk

 

Kevin Garvey, Chairman,   called  the meeting to order at 7:30  p.m.

Mr. Garvey read the agenda.   Hearings as listed on this  meeting’s  agenda  which are made  a part of these minutes were held  as noted below:

 

ContinuedItem from March 11,    2015 Meeting:

Anellotech Inc. Site Plan                                                                   PB #15-13

Addition  to Building 123                       Final Site Plan Approval

Final  Site  Plan  Review                              Subject to Conditions

68.08/1/1;     LI zoning district                       Reaffirmation  of SEQRA

 

 

 

New Item:

Holt ConstructionCorporation Site Plan                                       PB #15–20

Prepreliminary/    Preliminary Site  Plan      Preliminary  Site Plan Approval

and SEQRA   Review                                 Subject to Conditions/  Neg. Dec.

68.16/6/6  & 68.16/4/34;   CS zoning district

 

Continued Item from February  25, 2015 Meeting: Merritt SubdivisionPlan

PB #15-10

 

Prepreliminary/ Preliminary

Subdivision    Plan  and  SEQRA

64.18/1  /78.1   and

78.3;   R-15  zoning district

Preliminary Approval

Subject to Conditions/  Neg.  Dec.

 

 

The decisions   of the April  8,  2015   Planning   Board  Meeting  were reviewed, edited,   and approved.    The motion  for adoption  was made and  moved by Michael   Mandel   and seconded   by Bruce  Bond  and carried as follows:

William  Young,  aye;  Kevin Garvey,  aye, Thomas Warren,   aye,  Robert Dell,  aye;

Bruce Bond,   aye;  Stephen  Sweeney,  aye and Michael  Mandel,  aye.

 

The Decisions   of the above hearings,  as attached  hereto,   although   made by the Board before the conclusion   of the meeting   are not deemed  accepted  and adopted by the Board  until  adopted  by a formal  motion  for adoption  of such minutes by the Board.  Following  such  approval  and  adoption  by the Board, the Decisions   are mailed   to the applicant.  The verbatim  transactions   are not transcribed,   but are available.

 

Since  there was no further  business  to come before the Board,   a motion  to adjourn  the meeting was made  by Bruce Bond  and seconded   by William   Young and agreed  to by all in attendance.   The meeting   was adjourned  at 12:00  p.m. The next Planning  Board  meeting  is  scheduled  for May 13,   2015.       ” ;(}

UW~            T  .

DATED:  April 22,  2015            0   d “~‘  &o !)PJSit~

Cheryl Coopersmith

Chief Clerk Boards and Commission

 

3~1.:UO   S)H:/310   NMBl

£r ?! Wd   er ~Hw  srnz

 

NMOl3DN\1d0    .:JO    Nlr\Ol

 

PB #15-13: Anellotech  Site Plan –  Final Site Plan Approval  Subject to

Conditions,  Reaffirmation  and Amendment  to Negative Declaration

 

Town of Orangetown  Planning  Board Decision

April  22, 2015

Page 1of22

 

TO:

 

FROM:

Marc Schneidkraut,  401 Middletown  Road, Pearl River, New York 10965

Orangetown  Planning  Board

 

 

RE:                 Anellotech,  Inc. Site Plan: The application  of Anellotech,  Inc., applicant,  for Pfizer,  Inc. owner,  (Donald  Brenner,  attorney  for the applicant)  for Final Site Plan Review,  at a site to be known as “Anellotech,   Inc. Site Plan”, in accordance  with Article  16 of the Town  Law of the State of New York, the Land Development  Regulations  of the Town of Orangetown,  Chapter  21A of the Code of the Town  of Orangetown  and to determine  the environmental   significance  of the application  pursuant  to the requirements  of the New York State

Environmental  Quality  Review Act. The site is located  at 401 North Middletown Road, Pearl River, Town of Orangetown,   Rockland  County,  New York, and as shown on the Orangetown  Tax Map as Section  68.08,  Block 1, Lot 1   in the LI zoning district.

 

Heard by the Planning  Board of the Town  of Orangetown  at meetings  held Wednesday,  March 11  and April 22, 2015, the Board made the following determinations:

 

March 11, 2015

David Sudolsky,  Charles  Sorensen,  Rachel  Barese,  Marc Schneidkraut,  Libby

Bowen and Donald  Brenner  appeared  and testified  for the applicant.

 

The Board received the following  communications:

1. A Project Review Committee Report dated March 4, 2015.
2. An interdepartmental memorandum  from the Office of Building,  Zoning, Planning  Administration   and Enforcement,  Town of Orangetown,  signed  by John Giardiello,  P.E., Director,  dated  March 11, 2015.
3. An Interdepartmental memorandum  from the Department  of Environmental Management  and Engineering  (DEME),  Town of Orangetown,  signed  by Bruce Peters,  P.E., March 5, 2015.
4. A letter from Brooker Engineering, signed  by Kenneth  DeGenarro,  P.E., dated

March  11, 2015.

5. A letter from Rockland County  Department  of Planning;  signed  by

Douglas  Schuetz,  Acting  Commissioner   of Planning  dated  March 4, 2015.

6. A letter from the Rockland County Department  of Health, signed  by

Scott McKane,  P.E., Senior  Public Health  Engineer,  dated

February  6, 2015.

7. An email from Jennifer Clark, New York State  Department  of Transportation, dated September  15, 2014.
8. A letter from the Town of Clarkstown Planning Board, signed  by

Shirley Thormann,  Chairwoman,  dated  February  27, 2015.

9. A copy of a letter with attachments to James Lansing,  Jr. P.E., Regional Materials  Management  Engineer,  New York State  Department  of Environmental Conservation,  from Zarin & Steinmetz  signed  by Daniel  M. Richmond,  dated February  20, 2015.

 

 

 

 

301.:J.:JO  S)!H31~  NMOl er ?.I. ·Wd     SI    ~BlJ  SIUZ NMOl3t)N\f’10     .:JO  N/v\Ol

 

PB #15-13: Anellotech  Site Plan –  Final Site Plan Approval  Subject to

Conditions,  Reaffirmation  and Amendment  to Negative Declaration

 

Town of Orangetown  Planning  Board Decision

April  22, 2015

Page 2 of 22

 

 

 

10. Copies of the following Board Decisions: ZBA#14-81, Performance

Standards Approved with Conditions, dated January 21, 2015; ACABOR #14-41, Approved Subject to Conditions, dated November 20, 2014 and PB #14-37,

Preliminary Site Plan Approval Subject to Conditions, dated September 10, 2014.

11. Site Plan prepared by Civil Tee Engineering & Surveying PC, dated June 17,

2014, last revision date of January 29, 2015

12. Architectural Plan prepared by Matthew Oscar, R.A., dated June 19, 2014, last revision date of January 29, 2015.
13. A letter from Anellotech, Inc. signed by Marc Schneidkraut, P .E., dated

January 30, 2015, with the following attachments:

• Letter from the Division of Environmental Permits, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation to John Giardiello, P.E., Director, Office of Building, Zoning, Planning Administration and Enforcement, Town of Orangetown, signed by Joseph R. Murray, Environmental Analyst, dated January 15, 2015
• Letter from Trinity Consultants to John Giardiello, P.E., Director, Office of Building, Zoning, Planning Administration and Enforcement, Town of Orangetown, signed by Elizabeth Gorman, Senior Consultant dated January 21, 2015
• Report from Triumvirate Environmental, dated January 21, 2015
• Letters from the Rockland County Department of Health, signed by Scott McKane, P.E., Senior Public Health Engineer, to the Town of Orangetown Zoning Board of Appeals, dated December 3, 2014 and December 1,

2014, Judith Hunderfund, P.E., Director, Environmental Public Health, attachment of a letter from Environmental Management, LTD, dated November 24, 2014

• A Letter from the Rockland County Department of Health, signed by Scott McKane, P.E., Senior Public Health Engineer, to the Town of Orangetown Planning Board, dated July 23, 2014
• Letters from the Town of Orangetown Department of Environmental Management and Engineering signed by Joseph Moran, P.E., Commissioner, dated October 8, 2014
• A letter from David Sudolsky, President and CEO, Anellotech, Inc. to Andrew Stewart, Supervisor, Town of Orangetown and Alexander Gromack, Supervisor, Town of Clarkstown, dated January 8, 2015

14. A letter prepared by Anellotech, signed by March Schneidkraut, P.E., dated

February 27, 2015.

15. Copies of emails from the New York State Department of Environmental

Conservation, to Denise Schorn and Heather Hurley, dated February 28, 2015.

 

~Sl.:l:lO  S)IH31a  NMOl er ~~ lJd    er  ~HlJ swz NMOl3DN\ftJO  :JO NMOl

 

PB #15-13: Anellotech  Site Plan –  Final Site Plan Approval  Subject to

Conditions,  Reaffirmation  and Amendment  to Negative Declaration

 

Town of Orangetown  Planning  Board Decision

April 22, 2015

Page 3 of 22

 

 

 

16. Copies of correspondence/emails to the Planning Board Office: Thomas Sullivan, Pearl River, February 13, 2015

Amy Wertheim, Pearl River, February 20, 2015

Thomas Sullivan, March 1, 2015

Darren Finch, Pearl River, March 2, 2015

Veronica Corbiere, Pearl River, March 2, 2015

Debbie Donohue, March 2, 2015

Mary Geday, Pearl River, March 2, 2015

Dolores Vento, Nanuet, March 2, 2015

Kenneth Cully, Nanuet, March 2, 2015

Nancy Caruso-Prestipono, West Nyack, March 2, 2015

Denise Anselmi, Pearl River, March 2, 2015

Allison McKenna, dated March 2, 2015

Kathleen Kelley, March 2, 2015

Jean Davan, Pearl River, March 2, 2015

Joe Schorn, Pearl River, March 3, 2015

Wendy O’Reilly, Pearl River, March 3, 2015

Heather Hurley, March 3, 2015

Denise Schorn, Pearl River, March 3, 2015

Sarah Nittoli, Pearl River, March 3, 2015

1. Syran, March 3, 2015

Karen Toye-Mulvihill, Pearl River, March 3, 2015

Thomas Sullivan March 6, 2015

Heather Hurley, March 6, 2015

John Pousette-Dart, March 6, 2015

Heather Hurley, March 8, 2015

MZA37, March 8, 2015

Margaret Smith, March 8, 2015

Thomas Sullivan March 8, 2015

John Tomey, March 8, 2015

Debra Fried, March 9, 2015

Tracy Nelson, Pearl River, March 9, 2015

Denise Davey, March 9, 2015

Jean Gunn, March 9, 2015

Corrine McElderry, March 9, 2015

Christopher Day, Palisades, March 10, 2015

Heather Hurley, (2 emails) March 10, 2015

Scott Paness, March 10, 2015

Jeanie Paquale, March 10, 2015

Denise Schorn, undated

17. Email from Andy Stewart, Town of Orangetown Supervisor, dated

March 5, 2015.

18. Copy of Petition in Opposition; hand signed and typed, submitted on

March 2 & 10, 2015.

 

 

301.::l.:lO   S~H310 NMCH

c;~ ?! Wd   8!   ~uw  SIDZ

 

NMOl3DNvUO       .:JO   NMOl

 

PB #15-13: Anellotech  Site Plan –  Final Site Plan Approval  Subject to

Conditions,  Reaffirmation  and Amendment  to Negative Declaration

 

Town of Orangetown  Planning  Board Decision

April  22, 2015

Page 4 of 22

 

 

 

 

19. Letter signed by Town of Orangetown Town  Board  Members  Tom  Diviny, Denis Troy,  Paul Valentine  and Tom Morr, dated  March  10, 2015.
20. Email from Marc Schneidkraut dated  March  11, 2015.
21. An information flyer submitted at the meeting  by Kathy Kelly from the World

Health Organization,  dated 2010.

 

 

The hearing was then opened  to the Public.

 

 

Public   Comment:

James  Reily, Pearl River, opposed  the project,  legally challenging  the Negative Declaration.        He believed  that the Board should  rescind the Negative  Declaration since it was premature  and they should  have requested  the applicant  to submit a Full Environmental  Assessment   Form.

 

Rodger Scheiber,  Blue Hill Plaza, Rockland  Business  Association,  supported  the project, and held that it was critical to the development  of the Pfizer site, Pearl River and Nanuet School  Districts, jobs .and future  economic  development  of Rockland  County.

 

Les Neuman,  9 Woodland  Drive, New City, representing  Clean  Incubation  New

York, supported  clean technology  research  as part of “Start-Up  New York”.

 

 

Jose Simoes,  Town  Planner, Town of Clarkstown,  raised concerns  that the applicant’s  projection  of chemicals  and resulting  air quality needs to be

monitored.   He restated the letter submitted  to the Board on behalf of the Town of

Clarkstown  Planning  Board.

 

Andy Stewart,  Town of Orangetown  Supervisor,  raised concerns  regarding  the Negative  Declaration,  requesting  the Board to rescind the Negative  Declaration determination.       He requested  that the Board set up some type of pollution monitoring  process.

 

Amy Wertheim,  111 South  Main Street,  Pearl River, requested  that the Negative

Declaration  be rescinded.   Ms Wertheim  read a letter from Christopher  Day.

 

Bruce Cowen,  119 Center Street,  Pearl River, raised concerns  regarding  the highly toxic materials  that would  be produced  from the site.  He was concerned about emissions  into the air and the safety of the transport  of chemical  samples traveling  on the local roadway.

 

Nancy Caruso  Prestipino,  Nanuet, wanted  the Board to consider  the cumulative effects of the chemicals  on the community’s  health.   She also noted that it was deceptive  to call a company  putting chemicals  into the air a “green” company. Ms Caruso wanted  to have a definition  of what “safe” is; safe for an adult could

be different  for a child.  Finally,  she stated that final approval  of the project would

draw similar companies  to the Pfizer site.

 

 

 

 

301.:J:Je) S)lH310 NM<H sr ?! lJd    BI  AHW  5IUZ NMOl35N’VHO   :JO NMOl

 

PB #15-13:  Anellotech    Site  Plan –  Final  Site  Plan Approval   Subject   to

Conditions,    Reaffirmation    and  Amendment    to  Negative   Declaration

 

 

Town  of Orangetown    Planning   Board  Decision

April  22, 2015

Page 5 of 22

 

Helen Shaw,  Pearl River, noted that in her field of financial  investment,  she would  be very concerned  regarding  the investment  strategy  of this business.

She discussed  the history of site selection  and the risks to the new communities. She thought  that to an investor,  it seems  like a lousy investment.  Ms Shaw questioned  if R & D was just a “label”.

 

Heather  Hurley,  Pearl River, noted that there was a united voice opposing  the expansion,  and that the Public wants Anellotech  to answer  all of the questions asked of them.   She held that the Board needs all questions  answered  before making a determination.   Ms Hurley questioned  the pounds of hazardous  waste to be generated  at the site.  In seeking  information  about organic  materials  to be used by the applicant,  she discussed  her correspondence   with Anellotech  and other companies.

 

Kathrine  Kelly, Pearl River, raised health concerns  regarding  the use of the site by the applicant.   She wanted  the Board members  to have all available information  prior to making their final decision.

 

Elizabeth  Dudley, Orangeburg,  requested  the applicant  to provide all information to the Board prior to the Board Decision.   She believed  that the project did not belong  in the middle of a residential  neighborhood  with large trucks traveling  on local streets.

 

Mark Donnelly,  Laurel  Road, Pearl River, noted that the same issues were raised with Lederle  Laboratories  25 years ago.

 

Denise Schorn,  Pearl River, requested  that the Negative  Declaration  be rescinded.   She wanted  several  questions  answered:  Is the company  safe, how big is the vent pipe, where  is the location  of the bio mass on site, is the bio mass unadulterated,  where  is the BTX stored, what is wood waste.

 

Larry Aufiero,  Nanuet,  held that if the business  meets all requirements,  it should be approved,  but should  be monitored.   Other businesses  in Rockland  have far greater  risks; however there  is no public outcry.   Companies  should  be monitored,  but not turned  away.  Rockland  needs the tax base.

 

Joe Shorn,  Pearl River, quoted from the Town of Orangetown  Town Zoning

Code, Section  4.42 and 4.41,  requesting  clarification.

 

Ken Cully, Nanuet,  raised concerns  regarding  the size of the vent pipe and the need to return to ACABOR  for review.   Mr. Cully also requested  information regarding  the companies  that the applicant  plans on purchasing  its raw materials.

 

Tom Sullivan,  Pearl River, raised concerns  regarding  the safety of the project. The Board should take a step back and review their actions.

 

Wendy  O’Reilly,  Pearl River, raised concerns  regarding  the impact to the health of the community.   There  is a potential  for disaster  in the Town with hazardous materials  trucked  along Town  roads.   How would  a disaster  be handled and who would  pay for Hazmat training.   The Board needs to review this information.

3Dl:1:10  S)nJ310 NMOl

£.~ ~! lJd    8! ~UlJ SIUl

 

NMOl3DNV’hlO   :10 Nh\01

 

PB #15-13: Anellotech  Site Plan –  Final Site Plan Approval  Subject to

Conditions,  Reaffirmation  and Amendment  to Negative Declaration

 

Town of Orangetown  Planning  Board Decision

April 22, 2015

Page 6 of 22

 

 

Eileen Larkin, Palisades, questioned the Board regarding the process of how the wood becomes “wood flour”.  Mrs. Larkin questioned if the wood flour comes from China.

 

Laura Woodward, East Carroll Street, Pearl River, discussed the history of the Lederle Laboratory site, how the residents fought against the use of the site and past safety issues. Ms Woodward wanted to know how the applicant would be monitored and if there was a disaster plan in place.

 

John Antoneli, Nanuet, raised concerns regarding the safety of the chemicals produced on the site. He noted that Christy Todd Whitman told people that the

9-11 Ground Zero was safe, and that was a lie.  Mr. Antoneli hoped that he is not being lied to again.

 

Fran Reinstein, Tappan, discussed that people should be civil with one another when discussing the issues.

 

Pat Maroney, Rockland County Legislator and resident of Pearl River, requested that the Board continue the item until the County Legislator had a chance to discuss the item at its March 31st meeting.

 

Pat Nealon, Blauvelt, Pearl River, raised concerns regarding the decrease in property values due to the operation of the new business at the Pfizer site.

 

Mary Geday, Railroad Avenue, Pearl River, stated that the site was in close proximity to two elementary schools and that the chemicals would greatly impact the children.

 

Brian Condon, Nanuet, Attorney for Stop Anellotech, stated that there are currently two pending law suits against this project. The applicant should complete the Full Environmental Assessment Form.

The applicant  requested  a CONTINUATION. April 22, 2015

Marc Schneidkraut, Melanie Golden, Charles Sorensen, Donald Brenner, and

David Sudolsky and appeared and testified.

 

3Dl:J:JO  S)IH31a NMOl er ?_~  LlcJ     st AHLJ  srnz NM013:)NV~O       .:JO   NMOl

 

PB #15-13: Anellotech  Site Plan –  Final Site Plan Approval  Subject to

Conditions,  Reaffirmation  and Amendment  to Negative Declaration

 

Town of Orangetown  Planning  Board Decision

April 22, 2015

Page 7 of 22

 

 

 

The Board received the following  communications:

1. A Project Review Committee Report dated April  15, 2015.
2. An interdepartmental memorandum  from the Office of Building,  Zoning, Planning  Administration   and Enforcement,  Town of Orangetown,  signed  by John Giardiello,  P.E., Director,  dated April 22, 2015.
3. An Interdepartmental memorandum  from the Department  of Environmental Management  and Engineering  (DEME),  Town of Orangetown,  signed  by Bruce Peters,  P .E., dated April  16, 2015.
4. A letter from the Rockland county Drainage  Agency,  signed  by Shajan

Thottakara,  P.E., CFM, dated  March 20, 2015.

5. A letter from the Town of Clarkstown, Department of Planning,  signed  by Jose

Simoes,  Principal  Planner,  dated  March  17, 2015.

6. Letters to the Planning Board from Charles Sorensen,  PhD, P.E., Anellotech, Entitled Anellotech  Site Plan & Bahary Letter, and Anellotech  Site Plan, both dated April 21, 2015.
7. The Full Environmental Assessment   Form Part 1  –  Project and Setting,

signed  by David Sudolsky,  dated April 2, 2015.

8. An interdepartmental memorandum  from the Office of Building,  Zoning, Planning  Administration   and Enforcement,  Town of Orangetown,  signed  by John Giardiello,  P.E., Director,  dated April 21, 2015, with attachments  of Proposed  Parts 2 and 3 of the Full EAF for Anellotech.
9. Summary of Anellotech Discussion  Rockland  County  Legislature  Planning  & Public Works  Committee  Meeting  March 31, 2015, submitted  by the Rockland County  Legislature.
10. A copy of a letter from Robert Magrino, Deputy Town Attorney,  Town of

Orangetown  to Brian Condon  dated April  13, 2015.

11. A copy of a letter from Brian Condon, Condon & Associates,  to Robert  Magrino,  Deputy Town Attorney,  Town of Orangetown,  dated April 2, 2015.
12. A copy of a letter from Robert Magrino, Deputy Town Attorney,  Town of

Orangetown  to Brian Condon  dated April 22, 2015.

13. A copy of a letter from Brian Condon, Condon & Associates,  to Robert Magrino,  Deputy Town Attorney,  Town of Orangetown,  dated April  15, 2015.
14. A copy of a letter to Dan Richmond, Esq., Zarin & Steinmetz,  from the New York State  Department  of Environmental   Conservation  {NYS  DEC), signed  by Zackary  Knaub,  Regional  Attorney,  dated April 16, 2015.
15. A letter from Zarin & Steinmetz, signed by Daniel  Richmond,  dated

April 22, 2015.

 

30ld:JO S)!H310 NM61

 

&I  2!  lJd   B!  AHW  5102

 

NM013~NVHO  .:W  NMO!

 

 

 

PB #15-13: Anellotech  Site Plan –  Final Site Plan Approval  Subject to

Conditions,  Reaffirmation  and Amendment  to Negative Declaration

 

Town of Orangetown  Planning  Board Decision

April 22, 2015

Page 8of22

 

 

 

16. A report entitled In the Matter of the application of Anellotech. Inc.

April 22. 2015 Planning Board Meeting, submitted by William S. Bahary, Ph.D., submitted April 15, 2015.

17. An Argument in Opposition to the Proposed Anellotech Project Respectfully Submitted to the Planning Board For its Review and Consideration Submitted by James K. Riley, Town of Orangetown Earth Day April 22, 2015, submitted

April 15, 2015.

18. A copy of the Anellotech Regional Council New York State Consolidated Funding Application, Application Number 42716, file created June 25, 2014, submitted April 17, 2015.
19. A letter from the Office of the County Executive, Edwin Day, County

Executive, dated April 1, 2015.

20. Submitted at the meeting by Scott Paness and Justin Devendorf, District Representative, a letter from David Carlucci, Senator, 38th District Senate, State of New York, dated April 22, 2015.
21. Copies of correspondence/emails to the Planning Board Office: Heather Hurley, March 23, 2015 (4 emails)

Heather Hurley, March 24, 2015

Amy Wertheim, Pearl River, March 24, 2015

Heather Hurley, March 27, 2015

Heather Hurley, March 30, 2015

Amy Wertheim, Pearl River, April 2, 2015

Heather Hurley, April 2, 2015

Debbie Donohue, April 3, 2015

Amy Wertheim, Pearl River, April 3, 2015

Veronica Corbiere, Pearl River, April 3, 2015

Kathryn Syran, Pearl River, April 4, 2015

Joanne McElligott, Pearl River, April 6, 2015

Heather Hurley, April 6, 2015

Kate McFarland, April 6, 2015

Bethany Cumberworth Savino, April 6, 2015

Amy Wertheim, Pearl River, April 7, 2015

Heather Hurley, April 8, 2015

Cindy Davin, Pearl River, April 8, 2015

Heather Hurley, April 9, 2015

Denise Finnegan-Schorn, April 9, 2015

Heather Hurley, April 10, 2015

Denise Finnegan-Schorn, April 12, 2015

Scott Paness, April 14, 2015

Heather Hurley, April 15, 2015 (3 emails) Cindy Davin, Pearl River, April 15, 2015

Teresa Paness, Nanuet, April 15, 2015

 

3al.:l:JO   S)H131a  NMEH g,{  2 r IJd   8 r AUIJ   SIOZ NM013DNVhlO  .:10  Nlv\Ol

 

PB #15-13: Anellotech  Site Plan –  Final Site Plan Approval  Subject to

Conditions,  Reaffirmation  and Amendment  to Negative Declaration

 

Town of Orangetown  Planning  Board Decision

April 22, 2015

Page 9 of 22

 

 

 

Denise Finnegan-Schorn, April 16, 2015

Laura Woodward, April 20, 2015

Heather Devantier, April 21, 2015

Heather Hurley, April 22, 2015

Scott Paness, April 21, 2015

 

Public Comment:

David Medenhall, Parkside Court, Pomona, a Chemist, noted that BTX and

benzene were dangerous chemicals, however concentration put out by this company is considered under the “Humbug” factor;  the actual physical effects is equal to the effects of worrying about it.

 

Brian Condon, Attorney for Stop Anellotech, discussed the zoning of the site and disagreement regarding the uses in the zone.  He discussed the ZBA process

,    involving the Chairman, the consultants and the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation; Letter or Report. Mr. Condon noted that the Town of Orangetown Zoning Code was drafted in the 1950’s and 1960’s and did not anticipate the type of uses of today.

 

William Bahary, North Middletown Road, Pearl River, Chemist, discussed that benzene and BTX were not “green”, but toxic materials.  He also noted that the physical appearance of the building impacts the neighborhood. Mr. Bahary discussed the report that he submitted entitled In the Matter of the application of Anellotech. Inc. April 22. 2015.

 

Emil Bahary, North Middletown Road, Pearl River, stated that the project is bad for our health and property values. Converters are not safe and strong orders will decrease the property values in the area.

 

James Riley, Franklin Avenue, Pearl River, raised concerns regarding benzene, since it causes leukemia and is toxic.  Mr. Riley believed that no research use should be allowed in this zone, that the project is against the character of the community and requested that the project be referred back to the Town Board.

 

Kathy Kelly, Van Buren Street, Pearl River, expressed concerns regarding what is coming out of the stack on site and monitoring process. She discussed 9-11 exposure to benzene and all of the resulting cancers. Ms Kelly noted that benzene is heavier than air and would fall to the ground and that the children playing on the grass would come in contact with chemicals. She question where the closest monitoring station is in Rockland County, answering herself with “Pomona.”

 

3D/:l:JO  S’>IH31a NM@l er ~I /Jd     er dHIJ sroz NMOl3DNV’~o :lO NM01

 

 

 

PB #15-13:  Anellotech Site Plan –  Final Site Plan Approval Subject to

Conditions, Reaffirmation   and Amendment to Negative  Declaration

 

 

Town of Orangetown  Planning  Board  Decision

April 22, 2015

Page 10 of 22

 

 

 

Amy Wertheim, 111 South Main Street, Pearl River, noted that the day was Earth Day. She opposed the project and raised concerns with the applicant’s plan to build the project. Ms Wertheim requested each Board Member to give their reason of understanding of what Anellotech’s end product will be.

 

Heather Hurley, Hobart Street, Pearl River, requested that all questions be answered by Anellotech not consultants, before the Board makes a decision. The Board should review the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Permit before a decision is rendered. This document was recently submitted to the State for review.

 

Denise Schorn, Pearl River, discussed the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Permit Application.  She noted that Anellotech has changed their story to fit its audience.  Ms Schorn requested the Board to wait to make its decision until the public gets to review the Permit Application.

 

Joe Schorn, Pearl River, discussed the Town of Orangetown Town Code 4.42 and 4.41, offering his interpretation of the code.  Mr. Schorn stated that the applicant keeps changing their story regarding what products they are using on site. Also the new business would be creating 13 new jobs and only paying

$58,000.00 in taxes to Orangetown.

 

Andy Stewart, Town of Orangetown Supervisor, requested that the Negative Declaration be rescinded since a lot of environmental information has come out at a late date and there is more information coming out. He requested that the project be continued. Mr. Stewart also requested more information about the monitoring system to be set up.  He noted that the Board should address the concerns and anxieties of the Community.

 

Joanne McElligott, Quake Lane, Pearl River, read a letter to the Journal News Newspaper regarding the location of the project at the Pfizer site. The article discussed the hazards of exposure to benzene.

 

Joe Simoes, Town Planner, Town of Clarkstown, stated that he was glad to hear that the applicant agreed to monitoring and discussed the April 2, 2015 letter from Brian Condon to Robert Magrino, Deputy Town Attorney, Town of Orangetown. Mr. Simoes requested that the Negative Declaration be rescinded.

 

Alex Gromack, Town of Clarkstown Supervisor, raised concerns regarding the environmental review process.  He stated that the use is incompatible with adjacent neighboring uses and threatens the health of the area residents. Mr. Gromack requested that the applicant provide additional information regarding the chemical processes that they will be using at the site.  He requested that the Board begin a new SEQRA process.

 

 

301:1.:lO  S)lH310 NMOl

&~ ?! Wd   BI  AHW SIUZ

 

NM013~NVHO  .:JO   NMOl

 

PB #15-13:  Anellotech  Site Plan –  Final Site Plan Approval Subject to

Conditions,  Reaffirmation  and Amendment  to Negative  Declaration

 

 

Town of Orangetown  Planning  Board  Decision

‘     April 22, 2015

Page 11of22

 

 

 

 

Helen Shaw, Central Avenue, Pearl River, discussed Anellotech’s payment of taxes to the Town of Orangetown verses the impact of the chemicals to the environment.

 

Peggy Powers, South Middletown Road, Pearl River, opposed the project. Ms Powers noted that she has been to Town Board meetings for 33 years and continues to be disappointed. She requested that the Town Boards wake up and that the People of Orangetown have spoken; the applicant does not belong in Orangetown.

 

Ken Cully, Nanuet Avenue, Nanuet, noted that BTX is found on the shelves in

our stores, but not in our neighborhoods under pressure and in the air.  Mr. Cully raised concerns regarding the safety of a project that requires continuous monitoring.

 

Wendy O’Reilly, Turner Road, Pearl River, opposed the project, stating that she wanted to drink clean water and breathe clean air.  She has decided to move if the project is approved and that other people will move away from Pearl River if the Board does not support them.

 

Frank O’Reilly, Turner Road, Pearl River, opposed the Anellotech project. Finn Painter, opposed the Anellotech project.

Fran Reinstein, Tappan, noted that it was Earth Day. She held that there is a need to be best neighbors, outcome aside, because who wants to come to Orangetown or Rockland County because of threats on the Internet and media. We should be more collaborative with one another.  Ms Reinstein stated that it is not about Pearl River, it’s about the loss of benefits to us all.

 

Scott Paness, Grandview Avenue, Nanuet, submitted a letter from Senator

Carlucci.  He discussed the poisonous impact of benzene on humans.

 

Tricia Reilly, Apple Court, Nanuet, a nurse working in pediatric cancer, discussed benzene, causes of cancer and effects of stem cell formation.

 

Mark Donnelly, Laurel Road, Pearl River, noted that 30 years ago, Lederle Laboratories tried to do the same thing.  The neighborhood does not want Anellotech.

 

Tom Sullivan, Highland Avenue, Pearl River, discussed Jim Reilly’s white paper that was submitted to the Board. The Board should say No to the project since it is impossible to believe the applicant.  Mr. Sullivan requested the Board to rescind the Negative Declaration or hold off its decision for this evening.

 

 

331.:1.:JO  S)H1310   NMOl

s~  ~-! Wd      8 r ~HlJ  5IOZ

 

NMOl3fJlfVlJO       :JO Nh\Ol

 

PB #15-13: Anellotech  Site Plan –  Final Site Plan Approval  Subject to

Conditions,  Reaffirmation  and Amendment  to Negative Declaration

 

Town of Orangetown  Planning  Board Decision

April 22, 2015

Page 12 of 22

 

 

 

 

Justin  Devendorf,  Franklin Street,  Nyack,  representing  Senator  Carlucci,  read a letter from the Senator  and provided  it to the Board.

 

Barbara  Seidel,  Sandra  Lane, Pearl River, discussed  cancer  rates among young adults that she has experienced,  since she was a nurse practitioner  at Sloan Kettering  Cancer Center in New York City.

 

Kathrine  Spadt,  Pearl River, opposed  the project.

 

John Finuchane,  a retired firefighter,  has lung damage  and noted that there are a lot of retired firefighters  in Pearl River.  He opposed  the project.

 

Daniella  O’Connell,  Rolling Hills Drive, Pearl River had Lung cancer due to chemical  exposure.   She doesn’t  want anyone to suffer like she has.

 

Robert Tompkins,  Gilbert Avenue,  Pearl River, discussed  the applicant’s  effort to help the United States addiction  to petroleum  verse the public concerns  over safety.   He tried to place himself  as a Planning  Board  Member  and has

concluded  that the Board should collect all relevant  information  and draw its own conclusion  of what is best for the community  and country.

 

Andy  Kolbrenner,  Valentine  Avenue,  Sparkill,  discussed  the Planning  Board’s process;  weighing  the cons and pros of the project.   He requested  that the Board review what the community  wants  and vote “No” to this project.

 

Eileen Larkin,  Palisades,  opposed  the project.   She requested  information regarding  the construction  of the building  and if it is visible  off of the Pfizer Campus.  Ms Larkin discussed  the selection  process  of the Land Use Board Members  by the Town  Board and concerns  for the community  rather than developers.

 

Laura Woodward,  Pearl River, noted that she understood  that the Pfizer Campus needs to be developed  but proposed  that the uses should  not cause fear to the neighborhood.    She wanted  more independent  studies of the site and its impact on health.

 

Peter O’Brian,  Franklin Avenue,  Pearl River, an electrician  and certlfled  asbestos handler,  said he chooses  to place himself  in a situation  with hazardous  materials and know how to handle the material.  He questioned  the Board regarding  a possible  accident  and if there was a plan for that occurrence.    Mr. O’Brian  also wanted  more information  on why the project was only for three years.

 

Janette  Mahoney,  Margaret  Keohon  Drive, Pearl River, does not want to expose her family to chemicals  and wanted  the Board to vote No.

 

301.:ldO S)fH310  NMOl

 

£! 2!   LJd   8!    AHlJ   SIU2

 

NM0130N\1HO .:IQ  N/t\01

 

PB #15-13: Anellotech  Site Plan –  Final Site Plan Approval  Subject to

Conditions,  Reaffirmation  and Amendment  to Negative Declaration

 

Town of Orangetown  Planning  Board Decision

April  22, 2015

Page 13 of 22

 

 

 

Ray Prucher, Railroad Avenue, Pearl River, urged the Board to vote No and to keep Anellotech out of Pearl River and Rockland County.  He stated that he understood looking for alternatives to fossil fuels, noting that there is plenty of wind and sun that we can invest in instead of burning chemicals.  Mr. Prucher stated that he moved to Pearl River over other locals because it was not impacted by environmental harmful uses.

 

Max Aurebach, May Road, Pearl River, a relative passed away from Brain cancer and he does not want anyone else to die from cancer.

 

Pam Aurebach May Road, Pearl River, asked the Board to vote No for the children of Pearl River.

 

Jim Flynn, Pearl River, supported the project, noting that the house next to him burns wood and puts out more pollution that Anellotech would. The project is a start-up of the Pfizer campus.

 

Manny Larenas, Pearl River, expressed concerns that the applicant’s project would cause cancer. There is a lack of leadership in Orangetown which is the real problem. He believed that people should no longer roll over for developers.

 

Tom O’Connell, Palisades, stated that the production of benzene is illegal in the

Town of Orangetown Town Code and the Board should say No.

 

There being no one else to be heard from the Public, a motion was made to close the Public Hearing portion of the meeting by Robert Dell and seconded by Thomas Warren and carried as follows: Kevin Garvey, aye; Bruce Bond, aye; Michael Mandel, aye, William Young, aye; Robert Dell, aye; Stephen Sweeney, aye and Thomas Warren, aye.

 

Reaffirmation  and Amendment  to Negative Declaration

Based upon all of the information submitted, both prior to and during the public hearing on September 10, 2014 (PB #14-37)  as well as prior to and during the

public hearing on March 11, 2015, and the information submitted prior to and during the public hearing at the April 22, 2015 public hearing, the Board made a

motion to re-affirm and amend the previously issued Negative Declaration to incorporate all of the environmental considerations that were addressed before the Board with respect to the project, including but not limited to the Full Environmental Assessment Form, which has been reviewed and accepted by the Planning Board as part of this process, the motion was made by William Young and seconded by Stephen Sweeney and carried as follows: Kevin Garvey, aye; Bruce Bond, aye; Michael Mandel, nay, William Young, aye; Robert Dell, nay; Stephen Sweeney, aye and Thomas Warren, aye.

 

301.:J.:JO   S~H310 NMGl

 

&I  2~  Wd   Bt AHlJ  5102

 

NM0130N\1HO  .:JO   Nlr\01

 

PB #15-13: Anellotech  Site Plan –  Final Site Plan Approval  Subject to

Conditions,  Reaffirmation  and Amendment  to Negative Declaration

 

Town of Orangetown  Planning  Board Decision

April 22, 2015

Page 14 of 22

 

 

 

DECISION: In view of the foregoing  and the testimony  before the Board, the application  was GRANTED A FINAL SITE PLAN APPROVAL SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:

 

1. The following note shall be placed on the Site: “At least

one week prior to the commencement of any work, including the installation of erosion control devices or the removal of trees and vegetation, a

Pre-construction meeting must be held with the Town of Orangetown

Department of Environmental Management and Engineering, Superintendent of Highways and the Office of Building, Zoning and Planning Administration and Enforcement. It is the responsibility and obligation of the property owner to arrange such a Meeting.”

 

2. Stormwater Management Phase 11 Regulations: Additional certification, by an appropriate licensed or certified design professional shall be required for all matters before the Planning Board indicating that the drawings and project are in compliance with the Stormwater Management Phase II Regulations.

 

3. The Maximum Allowable Height for the building extension is approximately

97.5 feet and the Maximum Allowable Height for the vent pipe is approximately

117.5 feet based on the setback to the Town of Orangetown boundary line. Please verify and correct these values in the Zoning Bulk Table.

 

4. The drawing shall show how the runoff from the proposed impervious areas shall “enter” the proposed stormwater facilities.

 

5. A revised SWPPP shall be submitted for review by DEME.

 

6. Soil erosion and sediment control devices shall be shown for the proposed realignment of the existing rip rap swale.

 

7. The applicant’s engineer shall look into moving the proposed drywalls away from the existing utility pole.

 

8. The Drainage Consultant to the Planning Board, Brooker Engineering, found the application shows potential significant impacts with respect to stormwater runoff can be mitigated. The consultant therefore recommends that the Anellotech Site Plan be approved for drainage subject to the following project comments.

 

301.::JdO   S~H310 NMO!

£~ ?! lJd   8 I AHW  5IUZ

NM0.139NV~O  so NMOl

 

PB #15-13: Anellotech  Site Plan –  Final Site Plan Approval  Subject to

Conditions,  Reaffirmation  and Amendment  to Negative Declaration

 

Town of Orangetown  Planning  Board Decision

April 22, 2015

Page 15 of 22

Continuation  of Condition  #8 … Project    Description

This is the second drainage review report to the Planning Board for this

project; the last review was dated September 8, 2014. The project consists of the construction of a 46′ x 49′ building extension and paved driveway and loading area. The area slopes downhill in a westerly direction and there is an existing riprap swale along the downhill limit of

land disturbance. The applicant is proposing two drywalls and a rain garden to provide stormwater mitigation.

 

 

Project    Comments

1. The drainage calculations mitigate for an increase of volume for 810 cubic feet based on the existing and developed condition hydrographs; they do not address increases to peak runoff rates shown on the hydrographs. Routing calculations shall be provided that demonstrate peak runoff rates do not increase for proposed conditions.
2. The existing utilities on the plan shall be clearly labeled. It appears there are existing utilities running parallel to the edge of pavement in front of the building; the proposed rain garden is located over these utilities. The rain garden shall be relocated away from the utilities.
3. A detail for the rain garden shall be provided and it shall be clearly demonstrated how runoff from the new driveway will enter the rain garden. Proposed grading shall be shown for the rain garden.
4. It appears that the front loading area does not have a roof; proposed spot grades shall be added that shows runoff in this area is directed away from the building. The method for collecting runoff from the front and rear loading areas and directing it to the drywalls shall be shown on the plan. Remove the proposed contours from the front loading area.
5. The drywalls shall be separated by at least the diameter of the drywall.

Inverts of the drywalls shall be shown on the plan. Pipe inverts and diameters shall be added to the plan. Volume below the elevation of the outlet pipe shall not be included in the available storage calculations. The drywalls shall be relocated away from the existing utility pole and overhead wires.

6. Revise the grading in the rear of the addition to show that stormwater runoff is directed away from the building.
7. Show the existing storm drain pipes on the plan, including the outlet of the catch basin that receives the overflow from the drywalls.
8. As per our September 8, 2014 report, add a map note indicating the maintenance plan for the drywalls. Include in the plan that the receiving

field inlet is to be cleaned as well.

 

301.:L:!O  S’>fH310 NM61

sr 2! lJd    8!   ~HlJ   5102

 

NM0130NVhlO     .:JO   Nf,\Ol

 

PB #15-13:  Anellotech Site Plan –  Final Site Plan Approval Subject to

Conditions, Reaffirmation   and Amendment to Negative  Declaration

 

 

Town of Orangetown  Planning  Board  Decision

April 22, 2015

Page 16 of 22

 

 

 

9. Rockland County Department of Planning had the following comments which are incorporated herein as conditions of approval:

• An updated review shall be completed by the New York State Department of

Transportation and any required permits obtained.

o An updated review must be completed by the County of Rockland Department

of Highways and all required permits obtained.

• An updated review must be completed by the County of Rockland Drainage

Agency and all required permits obtained.

e By State Law, the applicant must register with the local fire inspector, using

Form 209U for the proposed chemical bulk storage materials – and –  Under SARA – Title 3, the applicant must register with the Rockland County Office of Fire & Emergency Services.

• As indicated in the February 6, 2015 letter from the Rockland County

Department of Health, an application must be made to them for review of the stormwater management system to ensure compliance with the County Mosquito Code.

e As indicated in the January 15, 2015 letter from the New York State

Department of Environmental Conservation (NYS DEC), all additional information provided must be provided, all applicable permits must be obtained, and all conditions met.

e  The Town of Clarkstown is one of the reasons this proposal was referred to

Rockland County Department of Planning for review.  The municipal boundary is along the  northern property boundary of the  site.    New York  State General Municipal Law states that the purposes of Section 239-1, 239-m and 239-n of the law shall be to bring pertinent intercommunity and countywide planning, zoning, site   plan  and  subdivision  considerations  to   the   attention  of   neighboring municipalities and agencies having jurisdiction.   Such review may include inter• community and county -wide  considerations in respect to the compatibility of various land uses with one another; traffic generating characteristics of various land uses in relation to the effect of such traffic on other land uses and to the adequacy of existing and proposed thoroughfare facilities; and the protection of community character as regards predominate land uses, population density, and the relation between residential and nonresidential area.   In addition, Section

239-nn was recently enacted to encourage the coordination of land use development and regulation among adjacent municipalities, so that, as a result, development occurs in a manner that is supportive of the goals and objections of the general area.   The Town of Clarkstown must be given the opportunity to review the proposal and its impact on community character, traffic, water quantity and quality, drainage stormwater runoff and sanitary sewer service. The areas of countywide concern noted above that directly impact the Town of Clarkstown must  be  considered and  satisfactorily  addressed,  as  well  as  any  additional concerns about the proposal.

 

301.:J.:JO  ~)IH310 NM©!

 

&I 2!   Wd   Bt ~UlJ   5102

 

NMOl3DNVhlO  .:10  NM0l

 

PB #15-13: Anellotech  Site Plan –  Final Site Plan Approval  Subject to

Conditions,  Reaffirmation  and Amendment  to Negative Declaration

 

Town of Orangetown  Planning  Board Decision

April 22, 2015

Page 17 of 22

 

Continuation  of Condition  #9 …

 

e  Prior to any grading or construction on the site, a soil and erosion control plan shall be developed that meets the New York State Guidelines for Urban Erosion and Sediment Control.

e  There shall be no net increase in peak rate of discharge from the site at all

design points.

e The drawings and the referral form from the Town of Orangetown refer to this

parcel as being Section 68.08-1-1B. This is the umber that was assigned by the applicant during the subdivision process; it is not an official tax parcel number. Since this building is part of the larger parcel, the correct tax parcel number should be 68.08-1-1. The other parcel formed from the subdivision will be 68.08 -1-5.

The application form and the site plan must be correct to reflect the correct tax parcel.

e The title block for the site plan refers to an address, 401 North Middletown

Road, and a building number, Building 1 ?0A.  However, the title under the drawing on the same page refers to building 123.  It is not clear if building 1 ?0A is for mailing purposes only, or if this building number is in error. Please clarify, and/or correct.

 

10. Based on the information provided, the Rockland County Department of Health (RCDOH) noted that application is to be made to RCDOH for review of the system for compliance with the County Mosquito Code.

 

11. Based upon the plans and information received, the Rockland County Highway Department finds that the proposed action should have a minimum adverse impact upon county roads in the area. A Rockland County Highway Department Work Permit will be required for the proposed development and must be secured prior to the construction on site.

 

12. Rockland County Drainage Agency (RCDA) had the following comments (Note that all drawings and calculations/ analysis submitted in support of the application must be dated, signed and stamped or sealed by a Professional Engineer of a Registered Architect licensed in the State of New York):

 

1. “Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan” with stormwater calculations submitted is not bound and not signed and stamped or sealed. Please provide the RCDA with bound report signed and stamped or sealed by a Professional Engineer or a Registered Architect licensed in the State of New York, as required.
2. The Site Plan drawing title block indicates a drawing scale of 1 “=20′; however, the drawing submitted does not appear to be to the scale as indicated. Please provide the RCDA with scaled and legible drawings signed and stamped or sealed by a Professional Engineer or a Registered Architect licensed in the State of New York, as required.

 

 

 

 

 

3®1.:1.:10 S)f H313 NM&l

 

h~  ~-~ lJd   BI AHW 5IOZ

 

NMOl3DNVhlO :JO  NMOl

 

PB #15-13: Anellotech  Site Plan –  Final Site Plan Approval  Subject to

Conditions,  Reaffirmation  and Amendment  to Negative Declaration

 

Town of Orangetown  Planning  Board Decision

April 22, 2015

Page 18 of 22

 

Continuation  of Condition  #12 …

 

 

 

3. The Site Plan indicates proposed locations of silt fence within the project area; however, please revise the silt fence location so it is downgrade of all proposed disturbed areas, including areas of the proposed drywells, rain garden and rip rap swale relocation.
4. Revise the “Precast Drywells Detail” to indicate the size and location of

connector pipe between drywalls.

5. “Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan” (SWPPP) indicates that the proposed driveway runoff will be directed to the proposed rain garden;

however, based on the proposed contour lines on the Site Plan, the runoff from the driveway appears to bypass the rain garden area.  Please review and revise the Site Plan as necessary to direct runoff from the driveway to the proposed rain garden and to be consistent with the SWPPP.

6. In accordance with Chapter 846, Rockland County Stream Control Act, please provide the RCDA with an environmental impact statement for the

proposed project that provides sufficient information and details of the upstream and downstream impact of the proposed project with respect to the impact on aquatic life and habitat, fauna, biota, vegetation and wetlands. The environmental impact statement should also identify and

describe any mitigating measures that will address the potential environmental impacts of the proposed project. The environmental impact statement submitted does not address the impact of the proposed project on aquatic life and habitat, fauna, biota, vegetation and wetlands.

7. Provide the certification issued by the Floodplain Administrator for the

Town of Orangetown indicating that the proposed construction is in compliance with the floodplain regulations of the Town of Orangetown and the Federal Emergency Management Agency.

8. Please have your Engineer provide the RCDA with an estimate of cost of construction for the proposed storm drainage improvements, detention/ storage facilities, and soil erosion and sediment control measures for the required performance Bond. As indicated in the Rockland County Stream Control Act Permit Application rules and regulations, a performance bond for the proper performance of all work affecting County streams is required.
9. A “Notice of Application” to be published by the applicant was forwarded to you by the RCDA on March 9, 2015. The last day to receive public comment was indicated as April 17, 2015 in the “Notice of Application.” Please request the newspaper publisher to provide you with an Affidavit of Publication for the notice when published and forward it to the RCDA for filing with your application.

 

13. New York State Department of Transportation (NYS DOT) reviewed the submitted information and had no comments on the proposed project and there is no NYSDOT Highway Work permit required for the proposal.

 

 

 

 

301.:ldO S>1H310 NMO!

h~ z~ lJd      Br ~UlJ  SIUZ

 

NMOl3~NVtJO         =10 Nh\Ol

 

PB #15-13: Anellotech  Site Plan –  Final Site Plan Approval  Subject to

Conditions,  Reaffirmation  and Amendment  to Negative Declaration

 

Town of Orangetown  Planning  Board Decision

April 22, 2015

Page 19 of 22

 

 

 

 

14. The Town of Clarkstown had the following recommendations:

• Require Anellotech to post funding in escrow with the Town of Orangetown to cover the cost of periodic air quality monitoring in the area of the project, to ensure harmful emissions are not being produced at the site.
• Provide information on the anticipated shipping routes for materials being

transported to and from the site.

• A plan detailing the procedure for accidental spillage of the materials being produced at the site or on route to another location.

o      A definitive answer should be obtained from the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation regarding any permits required for the operation of the facility, particularly whether a Part 360 permit will be required for solid waste handling on the site.

 

15. The applicant shall submit to monitoring and/or periodic testing by Trinity Consultants or such other independent air emissions consultant as required by The Town of Orangetown Office of Building, Zoning and Planning Administration and Enforcement (OBZPAE). This monitoring and testing shall be in addition to monitoring as required by New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYS DEC) and shall be conducted on a semi-annual basis commencing one month after the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy to the premises, and every six months thereafter, or as otherwise determined by the Director of OBZPAE to be appropriate and necessary to ensure the public health, safety and welfare. A formal Monitoring Agreement shall be established, to the satisfaction of OBZPAE and the Town of Orangetown Town Attorney’s office for review and approval, in content and form. The agreement shall contain an

Escrow Account to cover the cost of periodic air quality monitoring in the area of the project. The Escrow Account shall be established before any Certificate of Occupancy is granted for the building. The amount of escrow shall be replenished by the applicant, its successors or assigns, whenever the escrow is accessed for payment of monitoring pursuant to this decision and as otherwise required by OBZPAE. The monitoring shall measure emissions to ensure that the actual emissions do not substantially deviate from the current models provided by the applicant in this application and as analyzed and determined by the consultants and NYS DEC referenced herein. To the extent that the current models change resulting in a substantial deviation in emissions from that which has presented herein, any such change must be reviewed and approved by the Planning Board as part of the site plan approval (and Certificate of Occupancy) and Zoning Board of Appeals for performance standards, Such determination as to whether there is a substantial deviation shall be made by the Director of OBZPAE, in consultation with the air emissions consultant.

 

3®l:J:JO S)JH318  NMOl h~ 2.! IJd     8I  ~HlJ SIUZ NM013f.>NV’UO  .:W NIAOl

 

 

 

PB #15-13: Anellotech  Site Plan –  Final Site Plan Approval  Subject to

Conditions,  Reaffirmation  and Amendment  to Negative Declaration

 

Town of Orangetown  Planning  Board Decision

April 22, 2015

Page 20 of 22

 

 

 

16. As indicated in the April 16, 2015 letterfrom the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC), the applicant intends to apply for Research, Development and Demonstration Permit pursuant to 6 N.Y.C.R.R.

• 360-1.13, in order to undertake certain activities at a proposed facility in the Town of Orangetown, Rockland County. It is DEC’s understanding, based on materials submitted to DEC and its pre-application meeting of March 19, 2015, that this permit is required to undertake the proposed activities. The applicant shall comply with any required permits and requirements established by DEC.

 

17. The Town of Orangetown Bureau of Fire Prevention reviewed the plans and offered the following comments.

 

• Extend Fire Sprinkler coverage from the main building to the addition.
• Extend Fire Alarm coverage from the main building to the addition.
• Provide a description of operations to include:

o   Hazardous material storage and use, processes, etc.

 

Please note that further comments from the Bureau of Fire Prevention cannot be made without the above information.

 

18. All reviews and approvals from various governmental agencies must be obtained prior to stamping of the Site Plan.

 

19. The applicant shall comply with all pertinent items in the Guide to the

Preparation of Site Plans prior to signing the final Site Plan.

 

20. All of the conditions of this decision, shall be binding upon the owner of the subject property, its successors and/or assigns, including the requirement to maintain the property in accordance with the conditions of this decision and the requirement, if any, to install improvements pursuant to Town Code §21A-9. Failure to abide by the conditions of this decision as set forth herein shall be considered a violation of Site Plan Approval pursuant to Town Code §21A-4.

 

21. TREE PROTECTION: The following note shall be placed on the Subdivision

Plan:

The Tree Protection and Preservation Guidelines adopted

pursuant to Section 21-24 of the Land Development Regulations of the Town of Orangetown will be implemented in order to protect and preserve both individual specimen trees and buffer area with many trees.  Steps that will be taken to reserve and protect existing trees to remain are as follows:

1. No construction equipment shall be parked under the tree canopy.

 

301.:J.:JO S)nl310 NMOl h~  ~! lJd    8! AHlJ  SIUZ NMOl3~NV~O    .:10  Nh\Ol

 

 

 

 

PB #15-13: Anellotech  Site Plan –  Final Site Plan Approval  Subject to

Conditions,  Reaffirmation  and Amendment  to Negative Declaration

 

Town of Orangetown  Planning  Board Decision

April 22, 2015

Page 21of22

 

Continuation  of Condition  #21 …

 

1. There will be no excavation or stockpiling of earth underneath  the trees.
2. Trees designated to be preserved shall be marked  conspicuously  on all sides at a 5 to 10 foot height.
3. The Tree Protection Zone for trees designated  to be preserved  will be

established  by one of the following  methods:

– One (1) foot radius from trunk  per inch DBH

– Drip line of the Tree Canopy.  The method  chosen  should  be based on providing the maximum  protection  zone possible.  A barrier of snow fence or equal is to be placed and maintained  one yard beyond the established tree protection  zone.  If it is agreed that the tree protection  zone of a selected  tree must be violated,  one of the following  methods  must be employed  to mitigate the impact:

– Light to Heavy Impacts  –  Minimum  of eight inches of wood chips

installed  in the area to be protected.   Chips shall be removed  upon completion  of work.

– Light Impacts  Only –  Installation  of%  inch of plywood  or boards, or equal

over the area to be protected.

The builder or its agent  may not change  grade within the tree protection zone of a preserved  tree unless such grade change  has received final approval  from the Planning  Board.  If the grade level is to be changed

more than six (6) inches, trees designated  to be preserved  shall be welled

and/or  preserved  in a raised bed, with the tree well a radius of three (3)

feet larger than the tree canopy.

 

22. All landscaping shown on the Site plans shall be maintained in a vigorous growing  condition  throughout  the duration  of the use of this site.  Any plants not so maintained  shall be replaced  with new plants at the beginning  of the next immediately  following  growing  season.

 

23. Prior to the commencement  of any site work,  including  the removal of trees, the applicant  shall install the soil erosion  and sedimentation   control as required by the Planning  Board.   Prior to the authorization  to proceed  with any phase of the site work, the Town of Orangetown   Department  of Environmental

Management  and Engineering  (DEME)  shall inspect the installation  of all required  soil erosion  and sedimentation   control  measures.   The applicant  shall contact  DEME at least 48 hours in advance  for an inspection.

 

24. The contractor’s trailer, if any is proposed,  shall be located as approved  by the Planning  Board.

 

301.:1.:10 S)lH31() NM01 h~  ?! Wd  BI  AULJ  SIUZ NM013~NV’UO  .:IQ  NMOl

 

 

PB #15-13:  Anellotech    Site   Plan –  Final   Site Plan Approval   Subject to

Conditions, Reaffirmation  and Amendment  to Negative  Declaration

 

Town  of Orangetown    Planning   Board  Decision

April  22, 2015

Page 22 of 22

 

 

 

25. If the applicant, during the course of construction,   encounters such conditions as flood areas,  underground water,  soft or silty areas,  improper drainage,  or any other unusual  circumstances  or conditions that were not foreseen  in  the original planning,  such  conditions shall be reported immediately  to DEME. The applicant shall   submit their  recommendations as to the special  treatment to be given  such areas to secure adequate,  permanent  and satisfactory construction.    DEME  shall investigate the condition(s),  and shall  either  approve the applicant’s Recommendations  to correct the condition(s), or order a modification   thereof.   In the event of the applicant’s disagreement with the decision of DEME,  or in the event of a significant  change resulting  to the site plan  or any change  that  involves a wetland  regulated area, the matter shall be decided  by the agency  with jurisdiction in that area (i.e. Wetlands – U.S.  Army Corps of Engineers).

 

26. Permanent vegetation cover of disturbed areas shall be established  on the site within thirty (30) days of the completion of construction.

 

27. Prior (at least 14 days) to the placing of any road sub-base, the applicant shall provide the Town of Orangetown Superintendent of Highways and DEME with a plan and profile of the graded  road to be paved  in order that these departments may review the drawings conformance to the approved construction plans   and the  Town Street Specifications

 

28. 28. The Planning Board shall retain jurisdiction over lighting,  landscaping,   and signs  and refuse cont

 

29. 29. The applicant shall  comply with all  applicable conditions   of previous  Board Decisions: ZBA#14-81,  Performance Standards Approved with Conditions,  dated January 21,  2015; ACABOR #14-41,  Approved Subject to Conditions,  dated November 20,  2014 and PB #14-37, Preliminary  Site Plan Approval  Subject to Conditions,  dated September 10,  2014.

 

The foregoing Resolution was made and moved by Thomas Warren and seconded  by Bruce Bond  and  carried as follows:   Kevin  Garvey,  aye;  Bruce Bond, aye;  Michael Mandel,   nay;  William Young,  aye;  Stephen Sweeney, aye;

Robert Dell,  nay and Thomas  Warren,  aye.

 

The Clerk to the Board is hereby authorized, directed and  empowered to sign  this

DECISION and  file a certified copy in the Office of the Town Clerk and the

Office of the  Planning Board.

 

Dated:  April  22, 2015,   Cheryl  Coopersmith, Chief  Clerk Boards   and Commissions attachment

 

301.:UO   S)HJ310     NM01

h ~  ?!  LJd    8 I ~Hw   srn2

 

N!~Ol3vN\1t!O      .:JO  NA~Ol

 

 

Attachment    1

 

 

 

TOWN  OF ORANGETOWN

 

 

STATE  ENVIRONMENTAL    QUALITY  REVIEW

AMENDED NEGATIVE DECLARATION

NOTICE OF DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE

 

 

 

April  22, 2015

 

Lead Agency:

The Planning Board of the Town of Orangetown

Town of Orangetown Building Department

20 South Greenbush Road

Orangeburg, New York 10962

 

This Notice is issued pursuant to Part 617 of the implementing regulations of Article 8 (State Environmental Quality Review) of the Environmental Conservation Law.

 

The Lead Agency has determined that the proposed action described below will  not  have a  significant effect  on the  environment.   This  Negative Declaration Amends the previous Negative Declaration by the Planning Board issued on September 10, 2014 pursuant to 6 NYCRR 617.7(e)(1) based upon substantive new and additional information received by the Planning Board with respect to this project.  A copy of the original Negative Declaration of September

10, 2014, which is hereby re-affirmed, is annexed hereto and incorporated by

reference herein.

 

Title  of  Action:     Anellotech  Site  Plan, Addition  to  Building  123 at 401  N. Middletown Road, Pearl River, NY for a Research and Development facility to study the  production  of  organic  chemicals  from  sustainable  and  renewable biomass.

 

SEQR Status:         Unlisted Action

 

Description  of the Action:

The proposed action, entitled “Anellotech Site Plan”, involves an application for a Site Plan Approval from the Planning Board for an addition to Building 123 at 401 N. Middletown Road, Pearl River, NY for a Research and

Development facility to study the production of organic chemicals from sustainable and renewable biomass. The footprint of the addition is approximately 2,254 sq. feet (49 feet by 46 feet) and the total acreage of the site of the proposed action is approximately one half (0.5) acre.

 

 

 

Location:

The proposed action will be located in at Building 123 located on what is known as the Pfizer Campus, owned by Wyeth Holdings Corp. on a portion of

401 North Middletown Road, Pearl River, New York on property bearing Tax Map designation Section 68.08,  Block  1,   Lot  1     on  the Tax  Map of the  Town  of

Orangetown.

 

 

 

–

3~1d.:IO  S)f H310 NM01

ht   ?! Wd      BT   AHlJ  SI02

NM013~NV’UO   so Nh\01

 

 

 

TOWN  OF ORANGETOWN

STATE  ENVIRONMENTAL    QUALITY  REVIEW

AMENDED NEGATIVE DECLARATION

NOTICE OF DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE Anellotech

April 22, 2015 page 2 of 9

 

 

REASONS SUPPORTING THIS DETERMINATION

 

1. Information   Reviewed  and Relied Upon With  Regard to Issuance  of

Negative Declaration  on 9/10/2014

 

In making its determination, the Planning Board, acting in its capacity as

Lead Agency, considered the following:

 

(1)              The  application  of  the  Applicant  to  the  Town  Planning Board, including a Project Narrative and proposed site plan maps;

 

(2)              Site Plan prepared by Civil Tee Engineering &  Surveying, P.C., dated 6/17/2014, last revision date of 7/11/2014

 

{3)               Short  Form  Environmental Assessment  Form  dated  7/10/2014 signed by David Sudosky, President, Anellotech, Inc.;

 

(4)           A copy of PB#14-29, Pfizer Subdivision, Final Approval Subject to

Conditions, dated 6/25/2014;

 

(5)           A project review committee report dated 09/03/2014;

 

{6)              An  interdepartmental memorandum from the  Office of  Building, Zoning, Planning Administration and Enforcement {OBZPAE), signed by John Giardiello, P.E., Director, dated 9/10/2014;

 

{7)                An     interdepartmental    memo    from    the     Department    of Environmental              Management   and    Engineering    (DEME),    Town   of Orangetown, signed by Bruce Peters, P .E, dated 9/4/2014;

 

(8)                A letter from Brooker Engineering, signed by Kenneth DeGenarro, P.E., dated 9/8/2014;

 

(9)                Letters from the Rockland County Department of Planning, signed by Arlene Miller, Deputy Commissioner, dated 8/4/2014 and from Doug Schuetz, Acting Commissioner of Planning dated 8/12/2014;

 

 

:z     :::r

:3:    ‘.,…..’

~

0        ·N

w    I   ,-.f C!)         e:: z      a…

<‘(

c:::

(10)         Letters from the Rockland County Department of Health signed by

~   Scott McKane, P.E., Senior Health Engineer, dated 7/23 and 7/24/2014;

Li::

~ 1 )               A letter from the Rockland County Department of Highways signed

w   by Sonny Lin P.E., dated 9/5/2014;

~

0::

 

0

LL.

.e..x..>..

~ 2)         A  letter from the  Rockland County Drainage Agency, signed by

 

z      e::

0         :>- cc:

;::    ..,.,

0          ~

~      c~:::)

0        Vincent Altieri, Executive Director, Dated 8/27/2014;

z

3:

:e13)        A  letter from  Rockland County  Sewer  District  No.  1    signed  by

Joseph La Fiandra, Engineer II, dated 8/13/2014;

 

{14)           An interdepartmental memo from the  Bureau of Fire Prevention, Town      of   Orangetown,   signed   by   Michael  Bettmann,   Chief,  dated

8/28/2014;

 

 

 

TOWN OF ORANGETOWN

STATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY REVIEW

AMENDED NEGATIVE DECLARATION

NOTICE OF DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE

Anellotech

April 22, 2015 page 3of9

 

 

 

 

(15)         A letter from the Town of Clarkstown Planning Board signed by

Rudolph Yacyshyn, Vice Chairman, dated 7/28/2014;

 

(16)           A letter from the Town of Orangetown Zoning Board of Appeals, signed by Daniel Sullivan, Chairman, dated 7/16/2014;

 

( 17)         Comments and submissions made by applicant and the public at

Hearing held on   9/10/2014.

 

 

 

1. Substantive New Information   Reviewed  and  Relied  Upon  to  Amend

Negative Declaration

 

(18)         Town    of    Orangetown    ACABOR    approval    decision    dated

11 /20/2014;

 

(19)           Town of Orangetown Zoning Board of Appeals approval decision dated 01 /21 /2015 regarding Performance Standards;

 

(20)         Letter  from   Mark  Schneidkraut,   P.E.,  Anellotech,   Inc.,  dated

01 /30/2015; containing the following information:

1. a) Letter from NYS Department of  Environmental Conservation, Division of Environmental Permits, signed by Joseph Murray,

Environmental Analyst, dated 1 /15/2015

1. b) Letter from Trinity Consultants, signed by Elizabeth Gorman, Senior Consultant, dated 1/21/2015
2. c) Letter from Triumvirate Environmental dated 1/21/2015
3. d) Letter from Rockland County of Health signed by Judith

Hunderfund, P.E., Dated 12/1/14

1. e) Letter from Rockland County of Health signed by Scott

McKane, P.E. dated 12/3/2014.

1. f) Letter from  Orangetown  DEME  signed  by  Joseph  Moran, Director, dated 10/08/2014
2. g) Letter from Anellotech, signed by David Sudolsky, dated

01/08/2015.

 

(21)        Letter from Veolia Environmental Services dated 1/16/2015;

 

 

 

·~·

:z     I.JO

3:

 

 

LU

(.;)

(22)         Letter  from   Mark  Schneidkraut,   P.E.,  Anellotech,   Inc.,  dated

2/27/2015;

 

f-

0        :     (\J

e:

LlJ     :.-1

C!)

:z     a_

<(

cc:

1. C) co

u_       r-t

:::>-

0

::z:      ea::

t;: (23)         Letter from  Rockland  County  Dept.  of  Health  signed  by  Scott

o         McKane, P.E. dated 2/6/2015;

(4)

~·.a:::

~  (24)         Letters  from  NYS  Department  of  Environmental  Conservation,

(3      Division of  Materials  Management  signed  by Thomas  Rudolph,  P.E.,

z         Regional Engineer dated 02/28/2015;

3:

 

0==

…._.,..,    0

 

f-        es

1-   (25)         E-Mail  from  Jennifer  P.  Clark,  P.E.  Resident  Engineer,  NYS

Department of Transportation dated 09/15/2014;

 

(26)         A project review committee report dated 03/04/2015;

 

 

TOWN  OF ORANGETOWN

STATE  ENVIRONMENTAL    QUALITY  REVIEW

AMENDED NEGATIVE DECLARATION

NOTICE OF DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE Anellotech

April 22, 2015 page 4of9

 

 

(27)           Letters,  E-Mail  Correspondence,  Submissions  and  Petitions  in opposition to the project as more fully contained in the Planning Board File;

 

(28)           Two  interdepartmental  memoranda from  the  Office  of  Building, Zoning,  Planning Administration and Enforcement (OBZPAE), signed by John Giardiello, P.E., Director, dated 03/11/2015 and 04/22/2015

 

(29)           An interdepartmental memo from the Department of Environmental Management and Engineering (DEME), Town of Orangetown, signed by Bruce Peters, P.E, dated 03/05/2015;

 

(30)         Letter from the Rockland County Department of Planning signed by

Douglas Schuetz, P.E., Acting Commissioner, dated 03/04/2015;

 

(31)         Letter from Town of Clarkstown Planning Board signed by Shirley

Thormann, Chairwoman, dated 02/27/2015;

 

(32)           Letter from Zarin &  Steinmetz to  NYS DEC regarding permitting dated 02/20/2015;

 

(33)         Letter from Brooker Engineering, PLLC dated 03/1112015signed by

Kenneth DeGennaro, P.E.;

 

(34)         E-Mail from Mark Schneidkraut, P .E. dated 03/1112015 to Cheryl

Coopersmith;

 

(35)           Comments, Email correspondence and submissions received from the public prior to and at the Public Hearing held on 03/1112015;

 

(36)           Letter  dated  03/17/2015  from  Jose  Simoes,  Principal  Planner, Town of Clarkstown;

 

(37)           Letter  dated  03/20/2015  from  Shajan  Thottakara,  P.E.,  CFM, Rockland County Drainage Agency;

 

(38)         Letter  dated  04/01/2015  from   Edwin  Day,  Rockland  County

Executive;

 

(39)           Letter dated 04/02/2015 from Brian Condon, Esq. and responsive letter from Robert V. Magrino, Deputy Town Attorney dated 04/13/2015;

 

~40)           Letter dated 3/17/2015 from Jose Simoes, Principal Planner, Town

G:       of Clarkstown;

I.&..

a

~ ( 41)         Letter  dated  3/20/2015  from  Shajan  S.  Thottakara,  PE,  CFM,

0:::             Rockland County Drainage Agency;

w

-.J

~  (42)          An interdepartmental memo from the Department of Environmental

3::          Management and Engineering (DEME), Town of Orangetown, signed by

;:=          Bruce Peters, P.E. dated 04/16/2015;

 

(43)         Submission  by  James  K.   Riley,  Esq.,  undated  but  received by

Building Department on 04/15/2015;

 

 

 

TOWN OF ORANGETOWN

STATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY REVIEW

AMENDED NEGATIVE DECLARATION

NOTICE OF DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE Anellotech

April 22, 2015 page 5of9

 

 

 

 

(44)           Letter dated 04/15/2015 from William  S. Bahary, PhD. Chemist, noting his objection to the project;

 

( 45)         Letter  dated  04/15/2015  from   Brian  Condon,  Esq.  (received

04/21/2015); Responsive letter dated 04/22/2015 from Robert V. Magrino, Deputy Town Attorney;

 

(46)          Letter dated 04/16/2015 from Zackary Knaub, Regional Attorney for

NYS DEC;

 

(47)           Letter dated  04/21/2015 from  Charles Sorensen,  PhD,  P.E., on behalf of Anellotech;

 

(48)           Letter dated 04/22/2015 from Daniel M. Richmond, Esq., Zarin & Steinmetz, attorneys for Anellotech;

 

(49)          Comments, Email correspondence and submissions received from the public prior to and at the Public Hearing held on 03/1112015;

 

(50)           Full  Environmental  Assessment   Form,  Part   1       completed  by applicant; Parts 2 and 3 prepared by John Giardiello, PC, Director, OBZPAE and adopted by Planning Board.

 

In addition to the aforesaid, the Planning Board has also considered all submissions and comments of the public prior to and at the Public Hearings conducted on the application.

 

Ill.        Familiarity  with the Site

 

The members of the Planning Board, in general terms, are familiar with the  location  of  the  proposed  action,  including  its  proximity  to  the  nearby roadways, neighborhoods and other development in the area.

 

1. Potential  Impacts Considered  and Determined  Not to Be Significant

 

The Board has considered the following issues and potential impacts, and has concluded that neither individually nor cumulatively will they have a

significant impact on the environment, as set forth herein and more fully in the

Full EAF that has been adopted and incorporated by reference herein:

 

 

1}  Impact on Land

 

1.a) Ground water >11 feet as per soil borings. (No impact).

1.b) 8% of active site on slopes 15% or greater. (Small impact).

1.c) Bedrock> 25 feet as per soil borings. (No impact).

1.d) No large excavation. (No impact).

1.e) 6 – 9 month construction period. (No impact).

1.f) Erosion and sediment control measures will be implemented. (No impact).                                                                       3~1.:l.::lO   s~

1.g) No coastal erosion. (No impact).                        .                                 ~.  tl3lO  NM~l

sr ~.~  IJd    er AUIJ  SIOZ

 

NMOl3~NV’tJO  .:10 NM0l

 

 

TOWN  OF ORANGETOWN

STATE  ENVIRONMENTAL    QUALITY  REVIEW

AMENDED NEGATIVE  DECLARATION

NOTICE  OF DETERMINATION   OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE

Anellotech

April 22, 2015 page 6of9

 

 

 

 

2)   Impact on Geological  Features

 

 

No geological  features.  (No impact).

 

3)  Impact on Surface Water

 

Pest management  Practices  used and pesticides  not stored on site. (See

Anellotech  letter of April  15, 2015).  (No impact)

No encroachment  on water  bodies or wetlands.  (No impact)

Erosion and sediment  control  measures  will be implemented.  (No impact).

 

4)  Impact on Groundwater

 

Sanitary  wastewater  to Orangetown  Sewage  Treatment  Plant –  300 gal/day.  (No impact).

Hazardous  wasted  stored  in Department  of Transportation   drums with

secondary  containment.  (Small  impact)  (See Anellotech  letter of April  15,

2015).

Hazardous  waste will be transported  offsite.  (See Veolia  Environmental

Services  letter January  16, 2015).  (Small  Impact)

New York State  Department  of Environmental   Conservation  will regulate the facility  as a solid waste facility.  (No impact).

 

5)  Impact on Flooding

 

Not in a 100 year flood zone as per Flood Insurance  Rate Maps, map number  36087C0159G,    panel  159 of 207, effective  date March 3, 2014. (No impact).

 

6)  Impact on Air

 

 

Process  emissions,  which  have been identified  as benzene/toluene/xylene (BTX) will be mitigated  by air pollution  control  equipment  and are far below New York State  Department  of Environmental   Conservation  and United States  Department  of Environmental   Protection  guidelines.   (See New

York State Department  of Environmental  Conservation  letter of January

15, 2015; See independent  reviews  by: Trinity  Consultants  letter of January  21, 2015; Triumvirate  Environmental   letter of January  21, 2015). It should  be noted the Board also received  and reviewed  a letter from William  S. Bahary,  Ph.D, a chemist  and citizen activist  opposed  to the project dated April 15, 2015, which  outlined  his grave concern  of the production  and/or emission  of BTX at this site, noted his objection  to the project  because  it involves the production  of benzene  and toxic and carcinogenic  substances,  and noted it is too risky for the Town.

Methane  will be converted  to C02  and H20  emissions.  Air emissions  for the listed items in 6 a. were submitted  by the applicant  and are much less than the thresholds  listed by the NYSDEC.  (See Anellotech  letter of April

20, 2015).

 

 

301:1.:lO S>!H310   NM01

sr ?! Wd   sr ~Hw  sro2

N/r\Ol3DNV~O .’.:10   NMOl

 

 

TOWN OF ORANGETOWN

STATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY REVIEW

AMENDED NEGATIVE DECLARATION

NOTICE OF DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE Anellotech

April 22, 2015 page 7of9

 

 

As set forth in the letter from Trinity Consultants, “Emissions from the proposed project are less than all regulatory thresholds, and the ambient air quality impact screening analysis conducted by Anellotech and reviewed by NYSDEC and Trinity demonstrates that the ambient impacts of the emissions from the project are well below health based acute or chronic exposure limits published by the NYSDEC.”

The applicant will monitor and keep track of emissions and has agreed to an independent third party sampling schedule as acceptable to the Planning Board and to be reported to and overseen by the Town Director

of Office of Building, Zoning, Planning, Administration and Enforcement

(OBZPAE).

(Small or no impact).

 

7)  Impact on Plants and Animals

 

Deer, rodents, rabbits and birds present. No loss of flora or fauna. (No impact).

 

8)  Impact on Agricultural   Resources

 

No farmland. (No impact).

 

9)  Impact on Aesthetic  Resources

 

No scenic resources on site.

Publicly accessible resources are within five miles but proposed project is

not visible from resources. (No impact).

 

10) Impact on Historic  and Archeological   resources

 

Some archeological and historic sites are in town but none known at the project site. (See Anellotech letter of April 15, 2015).  (No impact).

 

11) Impact on Open Space and Recreation

 

No recreation or open space at the project site. (No impact).

 

12) Impact on Critical  Environmental  Area

 

Not in or adjacent to the Critical Environmental area. (No impact).

 

13) Impact on Transportation

 

No change to existing transportation system. (No impact).

 

14) Impact on energy

 

Incremental electricity demand handled by existing infrastructure. (No impact).

 

301.:l:lO  S)IH310 NM01 sr ~~ lJd     8 r ~YlJ  SIOZ NMOl3~NvHO        .:10 NMOl

 

 

TOWN OF ORANGETOWN

STATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY REVIEW

AMENDED NEGATIVE DECLARATION

NOTICE OF DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE Anellotech

April 22, 2015 page 8of9

 

15) Impact on Noise, Odor and Light

 

Potential odors to be emitted as a result of the project include benzene, methane, carbon dioxide (odorless), and water (odorless), but any such odors will be far below the thresholds as set forth in Town Code Section

4.182. (See Anellotech letter dated April 20, 2015). See Response to Item

6 above. (Small or no impact).

 

16)1mpact on Human Health

 

The Applicant must obtain a Research, Development and Demonstration Permit pursuant to 6 NYCRR §360-1.13 for solid waste management facilities, which will include requirements as the DEC determines necessary to protect human health and the environment, including but not

limited to monitoring and such requirements as the DEC deems necessary regarding testing and providing information to the DEC about the

operation of the facility. See New York State Department of Environmental

Conservation letter of January 15, 2015); (See New York State

Department of Environmental Conservation Letter of April 16, 2015

Hazardous waste will have secondary containment on site and all Hazardous waste and materials will be removed from site by hauler. (See Veolia letter dated January 16, 2015).

See also, Response to Item 6, above. (Small or no impact).

 

 

 

17)Consistency  with Community  Plans

 

The proposed action is consistent with adopted land use plans.  It is noted that objections to the project have been raised by some community members, while other community members have expressed support for

the project.

The project is located in an LI zone district (Light Industrial) on the Pfizer campus formerly American Cyanamid/Lederle Laboratories. American Cyanamid had their main manufacturing and research facilities located at this site. (No impact).

 

18)Consistency  with Community  Character

 

The proposed project is consistent with the existing community character since it is located in an LI zone district, which permits all manufacturing uses, including Laboratory and Research Facilities and Light Manufacturing. (See Town Code §11.2). The project site is located on a

203 acre existing light industrial campus and the proposed building

addition is similar in appearance to other buildings on the campus. See also Response to Item 17, above. (No impact).

 

 

 

 

 

3Df.1:JO  S)!H31~ NM01 st ?! Wd   er AHW  srnz NMOl3~NVUO       .10  NMOl

 

 

TOWN  OF ORANGETOWN

STATE  ENVIRONMENTAL    QUALITY  REVIEW

AMENDED NEGATIVE DECLARATION

NOTICE OF DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE Anellotech

April 22, 2015 page 9of9

 

 

 

 

1. Further Comments and Findings

 

The Board originally issued a Negative Declaration on or about September

10, 2014, a copy of which is attached hereto for reference.   During the course of further proceedings on the matter, substantive new and additional information was presented to the  Board.   As a result of the  new information, the Board requested that  a Full EAF be provided for further  environmental review and consideration.   Based upon the  information provided in the  Full EAF and all submissions that constitute a part of the Planning Board file in this matter, as well as  information received during  public  hearings referenced  herein, the  Board decided to amend the negative declaration to include this new and additional information.

 

As set forth more fully in the Full EAF, which is incorporated by reference herein,  much  of  the  substantive  new  information  pertained to  the  potential emissions as well as the storage and   transport of hazardous waste and the process which the applicant intends on implementing at the site.  These issues were a cause of  public concern as expressed at the  public hearings and  in submissions received by the Board.  In particular, concerns over the use, storage and/or emission of benzene, toluene and xylene were raised and considered. The Board has looked at these issues and was assisted in analyzing the potential impacts by way of two independent reviews referenced herein, as well as input from the NYS DEC, the Town Department of Environmental Management and Engineering, and all submissions received by the Board in consideration of the matter.

 

The Board determined this amended Negative Declaration is in order as the proposed emissions are well below the NYS DEC and Federal EPA standard limits (see NYS DEC Letter dated 01/15/2015; see also Trinity Consultants Letter dated 1/21/2015; see also Triumvirate Environmental Letter dated 1/21/2015), and the Full EAF annexed hereto.  The Board was also satisfied that NYS DEC permitting for transporting and storing of materials and waste would ensure that any potential environmental impacts are minimal.

 

The Board determined therefore that the previously issued Negative Declaration was properly issued and that same be re-affirmed and amended by this Amended Negative Declaration, to include all of the information contained within the Full EAF.

 

 

 

In summary, after evaluating all of the  potential environmental impacts relating to the proposed actions, the Town Board concludes that there will be no significant environmental effect caused thereby.

 

For Further Information, Contact:

 

John Giardiello, P.E., Director OBZPAE Town Hall, Town of Orangetown

20 Greenbush Road South Orangeburg, New York 10962 (845) 359-8410

Email:OBZPAE@Orangetown.com

 

 

301.:1.:10  S>lH310   NMO!

S~  ?! LJd   BI  ABlJ  SID2

 

NMOl3~NVt30        .:10 Nh\Ol

 

Attachment  2

 

PB #14-37: Anellotech  Site Plan –  Preliminary  Approval  Subject to

Conditions/  Neg. Dec.

 

Town of Orangetown  Planning  Board Decision

September  10, 2014

 

NEGATIVE DECLARATION

Notice of Determination  of Non-Significance

 

This notice is issued pursuant to Part 617 of the implementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 (State Environmental Quality Review Regulation) of the Environmental Conservation Law.

The PLANNING BOARD, TOWN OF ORANGETOWN, as Lead Agency, has

determined that the proposed action described below will not have a significant impact on the environment and a Draft Environmental Impact Statement will not be prepared.

NAME OF ACTION: Anellotech  Site Plan –  Preliminary  Approval  Subject to

Conditions/  Neg. Dec.

SEQR STATUS:     Type I                                             Unlisted XXXXXX

CONDITIONED NEGATIVE DECLARATION: Yes                No  XXXXXX

 

DESCRIPTION OF ACTION: Site Plan Review

LOCATION: The site is located at 401 Middletown Road, Pearl River, Town of Orangetown, Rockland County, New York, and as shown on the Orangetown Tax Map as Section 68.01, Block 1, Lot 1   in the LI & LIO zoning districts.

 

REASONS SUPPORTING THIS DETERMINATION:

The Orangetown Planning Board, as Lead Agency, determined that the proposed action will not have a significant impact on the environment and a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) will not be prepared. The reasons supporting this determination are as follows:

The project will not have a significant impact upon the environment and a DEIS need not be prepared because the proposed action does not significantly affect air quality, surface or ground water quality, noise levels or existing external

traffic patterns. In addition, it will have no impact upon the aesthetic, agricultural or cultural resources of the neighborhood. No vegetation, fauna or wildlife species will be affected as a result of this proposed action. The proposed action is consistent with the Town of Orangetown’s Master Plan and will not have any adverse economic or social impacts upon the Town or its businesses or residences.

If Conditioned Negative Declaration, the specific mitigation is provided on an attachment.

For Further Information contact:

John Giardiello, P.E., Director, Office of Building, Zoning and Planning

Administration and Enforcement

Town of Orangetown

20 Greenbush Road

Orangeburg, NY 10962

Telephone Number: 845-359-5100

For Type I  Actions and Conditioned Negative Declarations, a copy of this notice is sent: – Commissioner, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, – Region 3 Headquarters, NYSDEC, – Town Supervisor, Applicant, Involved Agencies

 

 

30l.:f.:10  S~H310 NM01

 

Si  21 lJd   81  ~HlJ  Sl02

 

NM0130N’1HO  ::10  Nh\01

 

PB #15-18: Holt Construction   Corporation  Site Plan: Preliminary  Site Plan

Subject to Conditions/  Neg. Dec.

 

Town of Orangetown  Planning  Board Decision

April 22, 2015

Page 1of12

 

TO: FROM:

John Atzl, 234 North Main Street, New City, New York

Orangetown  Planning  Board

 

 

RE:                 Holt Construction  Corp. Site Plan: The application  of Holt Construction  Corporation,  applicant,  for John F. Holt, owner,  (Patricia  Zugibe, attorney  for the applicant),  for Prepreliminary/   Preliminary  Site Plan Review, at a site to be known as “Holt  Construction   Corp. Site Plan”, in accordance  with Article  16 of the Town  Law of the State of New York, the Land Development Regulations  of the Town of Orangetown,  Chapter  21A of the code of the Town of Orangetown.  The site is located on the 23 & 50 East Washington  Avenue,  Pearl River, Town of Orangetown,  Rockland  County,  New York, and as shown on the Orangetown  Tax Map: Section  68.16,  Block 6, Lot 6 & Section  68.16,  Block 4,

Lot 34; CS zoning district.

 

 

Heard by the Planning  Board of the Town of Orangetown  at a meeting  held

Wednesday, April 22, 2015, the Board made the following  determinations:

 

 

John Atzl, William  Holt and Patricia Zugibe  appeared  and testified. The Board received  the following  communications:

1. Project Review Committee Report dated April 15, 2015.
2. An interdepartmental memorandum  from the Office of Building,  Zoning, Planning  Administration   and Enforcement,  Town of Orangetown,  signed  by John Giardiello,  P.E., Director,  dated April 22, 2015.
3. An Interdepartmental memorandum  from the Department  of Environmental Management  and Engineering  (DEME),  Town of Orangetown,  signed  by Bruce Peters,  P.E., dated April  16, 2015.
4. A letter from Brooker Engineering, signed  by Kenneth  DeGennaro,  P.E., dated

April 21, 2015.

5. A letter from the Rockland County Department  of Planning,  signed  by

Douglas  Schuetz,  Acting  Commissioner   of Planning,  dated  March 30, 2015.

6. Letters from the Rockland County Department  of Health, signed  by

Scott McKane,  P.E., Senior  Public Health  Engineer,  dated  March 10, 2015.

7. A letter from Rockland County Sewer  District  No.1, signed  by Rory Tinstone, Engineer  I, dated  March 25, 2015.
8. A letter from the New York State Department of Transportation,  signed  by

Akhter  Shareef,  Senior Transportation   Analyst,  dated  March 20, 2015.

9. A letter from the Town of Orangetown Zoning Board of Appeals,  signed  by

Dan Sullivan,  Chairman,  dated  March 4, 2015.

 

331.:1:10   S)!H310 NM0l

s~ ?! lJd    8 r ~HIJ   SIOZ

 

NMOl3DN’thlO          .:10  N!v\Ol

 

PB #15-16:  Holt  Construction     Corporation    Site  Plan:  Preliminary    Site  Plan

Approval   Subject   to Conditions/    Neg.  Dec.

 

 

Town  of Orangetown    Planning   Board  Decision

April  22, 2015

Page 2of12

 

 

 

10. A Narrative Summary, prepared  by Atzl, Nasher  & Zigler  P.C., dated

February  19, 2015.

11. A Short Environmental Assessment  Form, signed  by John Atzl, dated

February  19, 2015.

12. A Stormwater Management Design  Report prepared  by Atzl, Nasher & Zigler

P.C., dated  February  19, 2015.

13. Holt Construction Corp. Site Plans, prepared  by Atzl, Nasher & Zigler  P.C. dated  February  19, 2015:

Drawing  1   of 8:

Drawing 2 of 8:

Drawing 3 of 8: Grading  and Utilities & Erosion  Control  Plan

 

 

The Board reviewed  the plan and photographs. The hearing was then opened  to the Public.

Public Comment:

Thomas  O’Brian,  East Washington  Avenue,  Pearl River raised concerns  with the lot becoming  a parking  lot.

 

Sandra  O’Brian,  East Washington  Avenue,  Pearl River, noted that the proposed exist could interfere with her driveway  access  and requested  that all driveways around the site be noted on the plan.

 

The proposed  action  is classified  as an “unlisted  action” as defined  by Section

617.2 (ak) of the New York State  Environmental   Quality  Review  Regulations (SEQRR).  No agency,  other than the Orangetown  Planning  Board will have any significant  involvement  in the review process,  pursuant  to Section  617.6 of SEQRA.  On motion  by Michael  Mandel and seconded  by Thomas  Warren  and carried  as follows:  Kevin Garvey,  aye; Bruce Bond, aye; William  Young,  aye; Robert  Dell, aye; Michael  Mandel,  aye; Stephen  Sweeney,  aye and Thomas Warren,  aye, the Board declared  itself Lead Agency.

 

Pursuant  to New York Code,  Rules & Regulations  (NYCRR)  Section  617.7, the Town of Orangetown  Planning  Board, as lead agency,  for the reasons articulated in this Board’s  analysis  of all of the submissions  by the applicant,  interested agencies,  departments  and the public, with respect to this project including  the Environmental  Assessment   Form, which  reasons  are summarized  in the motion, hereby determines  that the proposed  action will not have a significant  impact on the environment  and a Draft Environmental   Impact Statement  (DEIS) will not be prepared.

 

After having identified  the relevant  areas of environmental   concern,  namely drainage,  surface water runoff,  land clearing,  vegetation,  fauna, traffic  and noise levels, and after having taken  a hard look at said environmental   issues,  and after having deliberated  regarding  such concerns,  and having  heard from the

 

301.:1.:10   S)fH31Q   NMOl

 

St ZI    Wd     8!    AHW 5102

 

NM013DNVHO .:IO  N/r\01

 

PB #15-16: Holt Construction   Corporation  Site Plan: Preliminary  Site Plan

Approval  Subject to Conditions/  Neg. Dec.

 

Town of Orangetown  Planning  Board Decision

April 22, 2015

Page 3of12

 

 

applicant,  the applicant’s  professional  representatives,   namely John Atzl, of Atzl, Nasher & Zigler and the Town  of Orangetown’s   Drainage  Consultant,  Brooker Engineering,  and having heard from the following  offices,  officials  and/or Departments:  (Town of Orangetown):   Project  Review Committee,  Office of Building,  Zoning,  Planning  Administration   and Enforcement  and Department  of Environmental   Management  and Engineering;  and having heard from the following  involved  and interested  agencies:  Rockland  County  Department  of Health,  Rockland  County Sewer  District  No.1, New York State  Department  of Transportation   and having reviewed  a proposed  Site Plan by prepared  by Atzl, Nasher & Zigler, a summary  of the reasons  supporting  this determination  are, and the Planning  Board finds that the proposed  action:

 

• Will not significantly affect existing air quality or noise levels;
• Will not significantly affect existing surface  water  quality or quantity  or drainage;

eWill not significantly  affect existing  ground  water quality or quantity;

• Will not significantly affect existing traffic levels;
• Will not create a substantial increase  in solid waste  production;

eWill not create a potential for erosion,  flooding,  leaching  or drainage  problems; eWill not have a significant  adverse  impact on the environmental   characteristics of our critical environmental  area or environmentally   sensitive  sites or features;

• Will not have an impairment of the character or quality of important  historical,

archeological  or architectural  resources;

• Will not have an impairment of the character or quality of important  aesthetic resources;

eWill not have an impairment  of existing  community  or neighborhood  character;

• Will not remove or destroy  large quantities  of vegetation  or fauna;
• Will not remove or destroy  large quantities  of wildlife  species  or migratory  fish;
• Will not have a significant adverse  impact to natural  resources;
• Is consistent with the Town of Orangetown’s   Comprehensive/Master    Plan;
• Will not have adverse economic or social  impacts  upon the Town;
• Will not create a hazard to human health; and

eWill not create a substantial  .change in the use of land, open space or recreational  resources.

 

On motion by Bruce Bond and seconded  by William  Young and carried  as follows:  Kevin Garvey,  aye; Bruce Bond, aye; William  Young,  aye; Robert Dell, aye; Michael  Mandel,  aye; Stephen  Sweeney,  aye and Thomas  Warren,  aye, the Board made a Negative  Declaration  pursuant  to SEQRA.

 

‘.301.:L::IO   S~H310 NMO!

St    zr  Wd     8t    ~HlJ ·5102

 

NM013~NVtlO   .:IO  NMOl

 

PB #15-16: Holt Construction   Corporation  Site Plan: Preliminary  Site Plan

Approval  Subject to Conditions/  Neg. Dec.

 

Town of Orangetown  Planning  Board Decision

April 22, 2015

Page 4of12

 

 

DECISION: In view of the foregoing  and the testimony  before the Board, the application  was GRANTED A PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN APPROVAL SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:

 

1. The following note shall be placed on the Site Plan: “At least

one week prior to the commencement of any work, including the installation of erosion control devices or the removal of trees and vegetation, a

Pre-construction meeting must be held with the Town of Orangetown Department of Environmental Management and Engineering, Superintendent of Highways and the Office of Building, Zoning and Planning Administration and Enforcement. It is the responsibility and obligation of the property owner to arrange such a Meeting”.

 

2. Stormwater Management Phase II Regulations: Additional certification, by an appropriate licensed or certified design professional shall be required for all matters before the Planning Board indicating that the drawings and project are in compliance with the Stormwater Management Phase II Regulations.

 

3. The Site Plan shall note all existing driveways on adjacent lots on the plan

 

4. The Site Plan shall note the location of the pedestrian crosswalks.

 

5. The following variances need to be sought from the Town of Orangetown

Zoning Board of Appeals:

 

Lot 68.16-6-6

• A) Minimum Side Yard Setback is 0/12 feet and 2.3 feet is proposed for the new addition and 2.2 feet is existing for the existing 1 story frame building.  Please note 1.5 feet exists for the existing storage shed at the rear of the property.

 

• B) The Total Side Yard Setback is 0/25 feet and 3. 7 feet is existing.

Please amend the Bulk Table under “Required” to read “0/25” for the minimum Total Side Yard.

 

• C) Minimum Rear Yard Setback is 25 feet and 1. 7 feet is existing.

 

301.:ldO S)JH31D NMO!

 

SI 21 lJd   B! ~HW  5102

 

NM013~NVHO   so NMOl

 

PB #15-16: Holt Construction   Corporation  Site Plan: Preliminary  Site Plan

Approval  Subject to Conditions/  Neg. Dec.

 

Town of Orangetown  Planning  Board Decision

April 22, 2015

Page 5of12

Continuation  of Condition  #5 … Lot 68.16-4-34

• A) Note 2 of the Use and Bulk Table states: “Where a side or rear lot line of a lot in CS adjoins or lies within 25 feet of any R district the following buffer shall be required, 15 feet for side and 50 feet for rear.” The Site Plan has 12 feet proposed for the side opposite East Washington Avenue and zero feet proposed for the side opposite North William Street. Since

this is a corner lot, the applicant can choose the rear and side lots. Please label the rear and side lot lines on the Site Plan.

 

• B) Please note lot coverage is 100% for properties in the CS zone; thereby the only restriction applicable is the buffer. Please revise the “maximum development coverage” required to 100%.

 

6. Section 6.33 of the Town of Orangetown Zoning Code is applicable and reads: Location and ownership of required accessory parking facilities. Required accessory parking spaces, open or enclosed, may be provided upon the same lot as the use to which they are accessory, or elsewhere, provided that all spaces therein are located within one thousand (1,000) feet walking distance of such lot. In all cases, such parking spaces shall conform to all of the regulations for the district in which they are located, and in no event shall such parking spaced be located in any R District unless the uses to which they are accessory are permitted in such districts. Such spaces shall be in the same ownership as the use to which they are accessory and shall be subject to deed restriction, filed

with the County Clerk, binding the owner and his heirs and assigns to maintain the required number of spaces available either throughout the existence of such use to which they are accessory or until such spaces are provided elsewhere. (Amended 10-15-70 by L.L. No. 12, 1970)

 

7. The application shall appear at the Town of Orangetown Architecture and

Community Appearance Board of Review.

 

8. Please indicate if any lighting is proposed for the parking lot on

Tax Lot 68.16-3-34.

 

9. Signage restricting the use of the parking lot to Holt Construction shall be noted on the Site Plan.

 

10. The Short Environmental Assessment Form appears to be in order.

 

301:1.:lO  S)f H310 NM01

9~ ?! lJd   St  ABlJ  SIOl

 

NMOl3DNVhlO .:JO  NA\Ol

 

PB #15-16: Holt Construction   Corporation  Site Plan: Preliminary  Site Plan

Approval  Subject to Conditions/  Neg. Dec.

 

Town of Orangetown  Planning  Board Decision

April  22, 2015

Page 6of12

 

11. The Stormwater Management Design Report is under review, however,

page 2, Section 4.1 “existing conditions” states that the drainage area delineation is shown on map E-1 (of the drainage report) but there is no clear delineation of the drainage areas on said map. This shall be corrected. Also, perc tests and soil tests shall be performed in the areas of the proposed infiltration system, to ensure the adequacy of the design. The design storm numbers used in the design report shall coincide with the new New York State Stormwater Management Design Manual – January 2015 (i.e. 1 yr. – 2.8, 1 Oyr.-5.2. 1 OOyr. –

9.2)                                                                                      .

 

 

12. Trench drains shall be depicted at both driveway locations, to prevent sheet flow from entering North William Street and East Washington Avenue.

 

13. The driveway location along East Washington Avenue is too close to the intersection of North William Street and East Washington Avenue. The driveway is supposed to be at least 50 feet from the intersection. It is understood that moving the driveway entrance along East Washington Avenue 50 feet to the west may not be possible, therefore, in an effort to gain more distance from the intersection, both driveway entrances shall be reduced to 12 – 15 feet wide.

Also, the driveway along North William Street shall be signed and marked

(painted arrow) as entrance only, the driveway along East Washington Avenue shall be signed and marked as exit only.

 

14. There is currently a striped crosswalk in front of the proposed parking lot

(running north to south) across East Washington Avenue. This shall be shown

on the drawings. The driveway entrance into the proposed parking lot appears to be “in-line” with this existing cross walk. The applicant will work with the Orangetown Highway Department to alter/ relocate this crosswalk.

 

15. Curbing shall be provided along the west side of North William Street, along the entire “Parking Lot” site.

 

16. The location of all existing utilities that service the exiting house (on the parking lot site), shall be shown. Also, the sanitary sewer house connection shall be labeled to be cut and capped.

 

301.:1.:10   S)IH310 NM01

 

91 21 lJd   81  AHLJ 5102

 

NM013~NVHO  .:10   NMO!

 

 

 

PB #15-16: Holt Construction   Corporation  Site Plan: Preliminary  Site Plan

Approval  Subject to Conditions/  Neg. Dec.

 

Town of Orangetown  Planning  Board Decision

April 22, 2015

Page 7of12

 

 

 

17. The location of the existing sanitary building  connections  (in the building  lot), shall be shown on the drawing.   A sanitary  building  connection  shall be shown for the proposed  addition,  if applicable.

 

18. Post construction Stormwater Maintenance  Agreements  shall be provided for the proposed  stormwater  facilities.   These  shall be submitted  to DEME and the Town of Orangetown  Town Attorney’s  office for review and approval,  in content and form.

 

19. The soil erosion and sediment  control  plans and details  are under review by

DEME.

 

20. The Drainage Consultant to the Planning  Board,  Brooker  Engineering reviewed  the application  and found the application  has provided  support information  to demonstrate  mitigation  of increases  to peak stormwater  runoff rates can be achieved  and therefore  recommends  that the Holt Site Plan be approved  for drainage  subject to the following  comments:

 

Project Description:

This is the Drainage  Consultant’s  first drainage  review report to the Planning  Board for this project. The project contains  two parcels; the first is located  at the corner of North William  Street and East Washington Avenue  and the second  is located on the south side of East Washington Avenue,  just east of the North William  Street  intersection.  Each parcel

flows  downhill  in a southeasterly  direction.  The North William  Street parcel contains  an existing  dwelling  to be removed  and replaced with a new parking  lot. The East Washington   parcel contains  an existing  office

building  and parking and a new 1334 square feet building  addition  is proposed  at the southwest  corner of the site. For ease of construction, stormwater  runoff from the existing  building  on the north side of the East Washington   Parcel is proposed  to be intercepted  and directed  to the new detention  system.  This is an acceptable  and conservative  methodology. Each parcel proposes  independent  stormwater  detention  areas to mitigate against  increases  in stormwater  runoff as a result of the new impervious areas from the proposed  construction.

 

Project Comments

1. Show proposed grading  on the west side of the new building. The natural drainage  pattern  is for off-site  runoff to flow in a southeasterly  direction toward  the new building;  the new building  may impede the existing flow of stormwater  runoff. Proposed  grades  shall be added that show runoff directed  away from and around the building without  negatively  impacting the neighboring  properties.

 

3Sl.:H0 S)!H310  NM01 sr ?! lJd    8 I   AYlJ  5IOZ NM013~NVCJO  .:lO Nh\Ol

 

PB #15-16: Holt Construction   Corporation  Site Plan: Preliminary  Site Plan

Approval  Subject to Conditions/  Neg. Dec.

 

Town of Orangetown  Planning  Board Decision

April  22, 2015

Page 7of12

 

Continuation  of Condition  #20 …

 

 

2. The drywell detail shows a solid cover. Show the overflow exit for the drywalls  and the overland  flow path. Show that the overland  flow pattern will not be directed  to the property to the east. Drywalls  shall be separated by at least the diameter  of the drywalls.
3. Show the first floor elevation on the new building.  Show either a basement with a footing  drain or a slab on grade construction.   Provide  proposed grades with positive  drainage  away from the building  in all directions.
4. Show the drainage basins to be directed  to the detention  system on the North William  Street. The drainage  report assumes  this area as WS#1 ; however,  the grading  indicates  most of the runoff from the parking lot will bypass the catch basin and the detention  basin will not function  as designed.  The single cross sloped  parking  lot will allow most runoff from

the parking  lot to bypass the proposed  basin in the southeast  corner of the lot and enter East Washington  Avenue  directly.  Additional  drainage structures  or modified  proposed  grading  at the North William  Street entrance  shall be provided  to show that runoff from the high point in the northern  portion of the parking  lot will not directly  enter  North William

Street; the single catch basin on the south side of the new entrance  will

not intercept  the amount  of surface  runoff as assumed  by the proposed drainage  basin. For ease of inspection  during  construction,  include the two watersheds  intended  to be directed  to the catch basins on the Grading

and Drainage  Plan.

5. WS #2 is incorrectly labeled WS #1 on the page 8 of the drainage  report.
6. The available storage  in the detention  systems  will only store  1.3 inches of rainfall over the new impervious  area for WS#1  and 1.0 inches of rainfall

for WS#2.  The volume  of storage  shall be increased  and/or an alternate

hydrologic  method  shall be used to show a routing of peak flows. Currently,  the basins will fill quickly  and then  inflows will leave via the overflow  pipe  and no reduction  in peak flows will occur during the design storms.  The  Drainage  Consultant  believes  an increase  in volume  size can accommodate   mitigation  against  potential  adverse  impacts with respect to stormwater  runoff.

7. Stone volume below the drywell  invert shall not be included  in the available  flood  storage  volumes.
8. Provide a sump in the catch basin detail with a hole in sump to dewater the basin and a hood over the outlet  pipe.
9. The curbline along the west side of the North William  Street  Parking  lot is on the property  line; the existing  off site building  is close to the property line as well. Add more spot grades  in this area to demonstrate  the new curb will not impact the existing  building  and runoff can continue  to be directed  away from the existing  off site building.  Demonstrate  car overhang  in the parking  stalls will not impact the off-site  building or encroach  over the property  line.

 

3t1)1:J.:IO   S){H31~  NM81

 

9t  2 I  lJd    8 I  AHlJ  5102

 

NM013~NVhlO  .:10   NA\01

 

PB #15-16: Holt Construction   Corporation  Site Plan: Preliminary  Site Plan

Approval  Subject to Conditions/  Neg. Dec.

 

Town of Orangetown  Planning  Board Decision

April 22, 2015

Page 9of12

 

21. Rockland County Department of Planning had the following comments which are incorporated herein as conditions of approval:

 

• A review must be completed by the Rockland County Highway Department and any required permits obtained.

 

e  As indicated in the March 10, 2015 letter from the Rockland County Health Department, an  application  must  be  made to  for  review  of  the  stormwater management system to ensure compliance with the County Mosquito Code.

 

e  All proposed signage shall be indicated on the Site Plan and shall conform to the Town of Orangetown sign standards.

 

o Prior to any grading or construction on the site, a soil and erosion control plan shall be developed that meets the New York State Guidelines for Urban Erosion and Sediment Control.

 

e There shall be no net increase in the peak rate of discharge from the site at all design points.

 

• The Rockland County Department of Planning requests the opportunity to review any variances that may be requested from the Town of Orangetown Zoning Board of Appeals in order to implement the revised Site Plan, as required by New York State General Municipal Law, Section 239-m, (a)(v).

 

22. The Rockland County Department of Health (RCDOH) reviewed the plan and offered the following comments:

• Application is to be made to the RCDOH for review of the storm water management system for compliance with the County Mosquito Code.

 

23. The Rockland County Sewer District #1 does not object to the plan as shown. This project does not affect any sanitary sewers within the District and request no future correspondence for this site.

 

24. The New York State Department of Transportation reviewed the information and offered the following comment:

• The proposed addition to the building and access reconfiguration will not impact the existing State Highway System, and NYSDOT does not have additional comments to offer at this time.

 

25. The following agencies do not object to the Town of Orangetown Planning

Board assuming responsibilities of lead agency for SEQRA purposes:

-Town of Orangetown Zoning Board of Appeals

– Rockland County Department of Health

– Rockland County Sewer District No. 1

– New York State Department of Transportation

 

301=1.:W   S)!H31Q NMO!

 

91 21 IJd   81  AHlJ   5102

 

NM013~NVHO   so NMOl

 

PB #15-16: Holt Construction   Corporation  Site Plan: Preliminary  Site Plan

Approval  Subject to Conditions/  Neg. Dec.

 

Town of Orangetown  Planning  Board Decision

April  22, 2015

Page 10of12

 

 

 

26. The applicant shall comply with all pertinent items in the Guide to the

Preparation of Site Plans prior to signing the final plans.

 

27. All reviews and approvals from various governmental agencies must be obtained prior to stamping of the Site Plan.

 

28. TREE PROTECTION: The following note shall be placed on the site plan: The Tree Protection and Preservation Guidelines adopted pursuant to Section

21-24 of the Land Development Regulations of the Town of Orangetown will be implemented in order to protect and preserve both individual specimen trees and buffer area with many trees. Steps that will be taken to preserve and protect existing trees to remain are as follows:

1. No construction equipment shall be parked under the tree canopy.
2. There will be no excavation or stockpiling of earth underneath the trees.
3. Trees designated to be preserved shall be marked conspicuously on all sides at a 5 to 10 foot height.
4. The Tree Protection Zone for trees designated to be preserved will be established by one of the following methods:

 

• One (1) foot radius from trunk per inch DBH.

 

• Drip line of the Tree Canopy. The method chosen should be based on providing the maximum protection zone possible. A barrier of snow fence or equal is to be placed and maintained one yard beyond the established tree protection zone. If it is agreed that the tree protection zone of a selected tree must be violated, one of the following methods must be employed to mitigate the impact:

 

• Light to Heavy Impacts – Minimum of eight inches of wood chips installed in the area to be protected. Chips shall be removed upon completion of work.

 

• Light Impacts Only – Installation of% inch of plywood or boards, or equal over the area to be protected.

 

The builder or its agent may not change grade within the tree protection zone of a preserved tree unless such grade change has received final approval from the Planning Board. If the grade level is to be changed

more than six (6) inches, trees designated to be preserved shall be welled and/or preserved in a raised bed, with the tree well a radius of three (3)

feet larger than the tree canopy.

 

301.:l.:lO S>IH310   NM0l

SI  ?! Lld   8 I ~HLJ 5I02

 

NMOl3~NV~O     .:lQ NMOl

 

PB #15-16: Holt Construction   Corporation  Site Plan: Preliminary  Site Plan

Approval  Subject to Conditions/  Neg. Dec.

 

Town of Orangetown  Planning  Board Decision

April 22, 2015

Page 11  of 12

 

 

29. All landscaping shown on the site plans shall be maintained in a vigorous growing condition throughout the duration of the use of this site. Any plants not so maintained shall be replaced with new plants at the beginning of the next immediately following growing season.

 

30. Prior to the commencement of any site work, including the removal of trees, the applicant shall install the soil erosion and sedimentation control as required by the Planning Board. Prior to the authorization to proceed with any phase of the site work, the Town of Orangetown Department of Environmental Management and Engineering (DEME) shall inspect the installation of all required soil erosion and sedimentation control measures. The applicant shall contact DEME at least 48 hours in advance for an inspection.

 

31. The contractor’s trailer, if any is proposed, shall be located as approved by the Planning Board.

 

32. If the applicant, during the course of construction, encounters such conditions as flood areas, underground water, soft or silty areas, improper drainage, or any other unusual circumstances or conditions that were not foreseen in the original planning, such conditions shall be reported immediately to DEME. The applicant shall submit their recommendations as to the special treatment to be given such areas to secure adequate, permanent and satisfactory construction. DEME shall investigate the condition(s), and shall either approve the applicant’s recommendations to correct the condition(s), or order a modification thereof. In the event of the applicant’s disagreement with the decision of DEME, or in the event of a significant change resulting to the subdivision plan or site plan or any change that involves a wetland regulated area, the matter shall be decided by the agency with jurisdiction in that area (i.e. Wetlands – U.S. Army Corps of Engineers).

 

33. Permanent vegetation cover of disturbed areas shall be established on the site within thirty (30) days of the completion of construction.

 

34. Prior (at least 14 days) to the placing of any road sub-base, the applicant shall provide the Town of Orangetown Superintendent of Highways and DEME with a plan and profile of the graded road to be paved in order that these departments may review the drawings conformance to the approved construction plans and the Town Street Specifications

 

35. The Planning Board shall retain jurisdiction over lighting, landscaping, signs and refuse control.

 

301.:l.:!O  S~~310 NM01

 

9:I  Z 1:  lJd    81  AHlJ  5102

 

NM013~Nvhl0 .:10  NMOl

 

PB #15-16:   Holt Construction  Corporation   Site Plan:  Preliminary   Site Plan

Approval  Subject  to Conditions/   Neg.   Dec.

 

 

Town  of Orangetown  Planning    Board  Decision

April 22, 2015

Page 12of12

 

36. 36. All of the  conditions  of this decision,  shall be binding upon the owner of the subject property, its successors and /or assigns,  including the requirement  to maintain the property in accordance with the conditions of this decision  and  the requirement,   if any, to install improvements pursuant to Town Code 21.    Failure to abide by the conditions   of this  decision as set forth herein shall  be considered a violation  of Subdivision Plan Approval pursuant  to Town Code §21  and  §6A.

 

The foregoing Resolution  was made and  moved by Thomas Warren and seconded  by William Young and carried as follows:  Kevin Garvey,  aye;  Bruce Bond,  aye;  William Young,  aye; Robert Dell,  aye,  Michael   Mandel,  aye,  Stephen Sweeney and  Thomas Warren,  aye.

 

y~µA~

The Clerk to the Board is  hereby authorized,  directed and empowered to sign this DECISION and  file a certified  copy in  the Office of the Town Clerk  and the Office of the Planning   Board.                                                                        ~

 

Dated:April22,2015

Cheryl Coopersmith                                                     f

Chief Clerk Boards and Commission

Attachment

 

 

3~1.:LlO   S~Hf318   NMOl

 

91: 21  lJd    8 t ~HlJ  Sl02

 

NM013DN’11t!O    JO   N.M01

 

Town of Orangetown  Planning  Board

NAME OF ACTION: Holt Construction   Corp Site Plan: Preliminary  Site Plan

Approval  Subject to Conditions

April  22, 2015

 

SEQR STATUS:       Type  I                                           Unlisted   XXXXXX

CONDITIONED   NEGATIVE   DECLARATION:    Yes                   No   XXXXXX

 

DESCRIPTION OF ACTION:  Site Plan Review

 

LOCATION:  The site is located  on the 23 & 50 East Washington  Avenue,  Pearl River, Town of Orangetown,   Rockland  County,  New York, and as shown on the Orangetown  Tax Map: Section  68.16,  Block 6, Lot 6 & Section  68.16,  Block 4, Lot 34; CS zoning district.

 

REASONS  SUPPORTING  THIS  DETERMINATION:

The Orangetown  Planning  Board, as Lead Agency,  determined  that the proposed action will not have a significant  impact on the environment  and a Draft Environmental   Impact Statement  (DEIS) will not be prepared.   The reasons supporting  this determination   are as follows:

The project will not have a significant  impact upon the environment  and a DEIS

need not be prepared  because  the proposed  action does not significantly  affect air quality,  surface  or ground water quality,  noise levels or existing  external

traffic  patterns.  In addition,  it will have no impact upon the aesthetic,  agricultural or cultural  resources  of the neighborhood.   No vegetation,  fauna or wildlife species will be affected  as a result of this proposed  action. The proposed  action is consistent  with the Town of Orangetown’s   Master  Plan and will not have any adverse  economic  or social impacts  upon the Town or its businesses  or residences.

If Conditioned  Negative  Declaration,  the specific  mitigation  is provided  on an attachment.

For Further  Information  contact:

John Giardiello,  P.E., Director,  Office of Building,  Zoning  and Planning

Administration   and Enforcement

Town of Orangetown

20 Greenbush  Road

Orangeburg,  NY 10962

Telephone  Number:  845-359-5100

For Type  I  Actions  and Conditioned  Negative  Declarations,  a copy of this notice is sent: – Commissioner,   New York State  Department  of Environmental Conservation,  – Region 3 Headquarters,   NYSDEC,  – Town Supervisor,

Applicant,  Involved Agencies

 

301.:L:JO   S)lH31D NMG1

 

SI  21 lJd   81 AUIJ Sl02

 

NM0!3t)NV~O     .:JO   NA\01

 

PB #15-10: Merritt Subdivision  Plan-  Preliminary  Subdivision  Plan

Approval  Subject to Conditions/  Neg. Dec.

 

Town of Orangetown  Planning  Board Decision

April 22, 2015

Page 1of12

 

TO: FROM:

Edward Merritt, 9 Merritt Drive, Nanuet, New York

Orangetown  Planning  Board

 

 

RE:               Merritt Subdivision Plan: The application of James and Edward Merritt, owners, for Prepreliminary/ Preliminary/ Final Subdivision Plan Review, at a site known as “Merritt  Subdivision   Plan”, in accordance with Article 16 of the Town Law of the State of New York, the Land Development Regulations of the Town of Orangetown, Chapter 21 of the Code of the Town of Orangetown and to determine the environmental significance of the application pursuant to the requirements of the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act. The site

is located on Merritt Drive, Pearl River, Town of Orangetown, Rockland County,

New York, and as shown on the Orangetown Tax Map as Section 64.18, Block 1, Lot 78 in the R-15 zoning district.

 

Heard by the Planning Board of the Town of Orangetown at meetings held Wednesday,  February 25 and April  22, 2015, the Board made the following determinations:

 

February 25, 2015

William Johnson, Thomas Ryan and Edward Merritt appeared and testified.

The Board received the following communications:

1. Project Review Committee Report dated February 18, 2015.
2. An interdepartmental memorandum from the Office of Building, Zoning, Planning Administration and Enforcement, Town of Orangetown, signed by John Giardiello, P.E., Director, dated February 25, 2015.
3. An Interdepartmental memorandum from the Department of Environmental Management and Engineering (DEME), Town of Orangetown, signed by Bruce Peters, P.E., dated February 20, 2015.
4. Letters from Brooker Engineering, signed by Kenneth DeGennaro, P.E., dated

February 16 and 25, 2015.

5. A letter from the Rockland county Department of Highways, signed by

Sonny Lin, P.E., dated February 25, 2015.

6. Letters from the Rockland County Department of Health, signed by

Scott McKane, P.E., Senior Public Health Engineer, dated February 5, 2015.

7. A letter from Rockland County Sewer District No.1, signed by Joseph

LaFiandra, Engineer II, dated February 5, 2015.

8. A letter from the Town of Clarkstown, Department of Planning and Planning

Board, signed by Shirley Thorrnann, Chairwoman, dated February 12, 2015.

9. A letter from the Town of Orangetown Zoning Board of Appeals, signed by

Dan Sullivan, Chairman, dated February 4, 2015.

 

3~1.:l.:10  S)lB310 NMOl

st zt lJd   81 bHlJ   SlOZ

 

NM013DNVUO   .:lO  NMOl

 

PB #15·1O:  Merritt Subdivision  Plan-  Preliminary  Subdivision  Plan

Approval  Subject to Conditions/  Neg. Dec.

 

Town of Orangetown  Planning  Board Decision

April 22, 2015

Page 2of12

 

 

10. A letter from Sparaco & Youngblood,  PLLC, signed  by William  Johnson, Senior  Staff Engineer,  dated January  15, 2015.
11. Response letter to Correspondence  from Sparaco  & Youngblood,  signed  by

Steve Sparaco,  P.E., dated  February  25, 2015.

12. A Short Environmental Assessment  Form, signed  by Steven  Sparaco,  P.E., dated January  15, 2015.
13. Copies of the following Board Decisions:  PB #05-106,  Final Subdivision

Approval  Subject  to Conditions,  dated August  10, 2005; ZBA #05-41,  Use Variance  Granted for Lots #3 and % and 280A for Lots #2 and #3, dated May 8, 2005; ACABOR  #04-91,  Approved  Subject  to Conditions,  dated

October  19, 2004 and PB #03-7 4, Preliminary  Approval  Subject  to Conditions, dated June 25, 2003.

14. Merritt Minor Subdivision Plans for Sparaco  and Youngblood,  PLLC, dated

January  15, 2015:

Drawing  1   of 8: Minor Subdivision  Plat

Drawing 2 of 8: Planimetric  Plan

Drawing 3 of 8: Grading,  and Utilities & Erosion Control  Plan

Drawing 4 of 8: Private  Road Profile Drawing  5 of 8: Existing Conditions Drawing  6 of 8: Details

Drawing  7 of 8: Details – 2

Drawing  8 of 8: Details – 3

 

 

The Board reviewed the plan and photographs. The hearing was then opened  to the Public.

Public Comment:

Mr. Bartell, 38 Van Zandt  Drive, Pearl River; questioned  the Board regarding  the type of housing  proposed  for the new lots.

The applicant  requested  a CONTINUATION April 22, 2015

Steven  Sparaco,  Thomas  Ryan and Edward  Merritt appeared  and testified.

The Board received the following  communications:

1. Project Review Committee Report dated April 15, 2015.
2. An interdepartmental memorandum  from the Office of Building,  Zoning, Planning  Administration   and Enforcement,  Town of Orangetown,  signed  by John Giardiello,  P.E., Director,  dated April 22, 2015.
3. An Interdepartmental memorandum  from the Department  of Environmental Management  and Engineering  (DEME),  Town of Orangetown,  signed  by Bruce Peters,  P.E., dated April  17, 2015.

 

 

 

 

 

 

301.:l.:lO   SJ!t!310     NMOl

st zt lJd    8 t hHld   SlOZ

 

NM013~NVtl0 .:IO   NMOl

 

PB #15-10: Merritt Subdivision  Plan-  Preliminary  Subdivision   Plan

Approval  Subject to Conditions/  Neg. Dec.

 

Town of Orangetown  Planning  Board Decision

April 22, 2015

Page 3of12

 

4. A letter from Brooker Engineering, signed by Kenneth DeGennaro, P.E., dated

April 22, 2015.

5. A letter from the Rockland County Department of Planning, signed by

Douglas Schuetz, Acting Commissioner of Planning, dated February 25, 2015.

6. A letter from the Rockland County Department of Highways, signed by

Sonny Lin, P.E., dated February 25, 2015.

7. A letter from Rockland County Drainage Agency, signed by Vincent Altieri, Executive Director, dated March 13, 2015.
8. An interdepartmental memorandum from the Bureau of Fire Prevention, Town of Orangetown, signed by Michael Bettmann, Chief Fire Inspector, dated

April 21, 2015.

9. Merritt Minor Subdivision Plans for Sparaco and Youngblood, PLLC, dated

January 15, 2015, last revision date of March 14, 2015: Drawing 1   of 10: Minor Subdivision Plat

Drawing 2 of 10: Planimetric Plan

Drawing 3 of 10: Grading and Utilities & Erosion Control Plan

Drawing 4 of 1 O:  Tree Protection & Planting Plan

Drawing 5 of 10: Road Profile Drawing 6 of 10: Drainage Profiles Drawing 7 of 10: Existing Conditions Drawing 8 of 1 O:   Details

Drawing 9 of 1 O:   Details – 2

Drawing 10 of 10: Details – 3

 

Public Comment:

Mary Wholey, area property owner, raised concerns regarding the impact of the development on the drainage to her property.

 

There being no one else to be heard from the Public, a motion was made to

close the Public Hearing portion of the meeting by Michael Mandel and seconded by Thomas Warren and carried as follows: Kevin Garvey, aye; Bruce Bond, aye; Michael Mandel, aye, William Young, aye; Robert Dell, aye; Stephen Sweeney, aye and Thomas Warren, aye.

 

The proposed action is classified as an “unlisted action” as defined by Section

617.2 (ak) of the New York State Environmental Quality Review Regulations (SEQRR). No agency, other than the Orangetown Planning Board will have any significant involvement in the review process, pursuant to Section 617.6 of SEQRA. On motion by Michael Mandel and seconded by Thomas Warren and carried as follows: Kevin Garvey, aye; Bruce Bond, aye; William Young, aye; Robert Dell, aye; Michael Mandel, aye; Stephen Sweeney, aye and Thomas Warren, aye, the Board declared itself Lead Agency.

 

301.:l.:lO  S)lH310 Nh\01

st Z t Wd     B t AHlJ SlOl

 

NM013~NVhl0   .:IO  NMOl

 

PB #15-1 O:  Merritt Subdivision  Plan-  Preliminary  Subdivision   Plan

Approval  Subject to Conditions/  Neg. Dec.

 

Town of Orangetown  Planning  Board Decision

April 22, 2015

Page 4of12

 

Pursuant to New York Code, Rules & Regulations (NYCRR) Section 617.7, the Town of Orangetown Planning Board, as lead agency, for the reasons articulated in this Board’s analysis of all of the submissions by the applicant, interested agencies, departments and the public, with respect to this project including the Environmental Assessment Form, which reasons are summarized in the motion, hereby determines that the proposed action will not have a significant impact on the environment and a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) will not be prepared.

 

After having identified the relevant areas of environmental concern, namely drainage, surface water runoff, land clearing, vegetation, fauna, traffic and noise levels, and after having taken a hard look at said environmental issues, and after having deliberated regarding such concerns, and having heard from the applicant, the applicant’s professional representatives, namely Sparaco and Youngblood and the Town of Orangetown’s Drainage Consultant, Brooker Engineering, and having heard from the following offices, officials and/or Departments: (Town of Orangetown): Project Review Committee, Office of Building, Zoning, Planning Administration and Enforcement and Department of Environmental Management and Engineering; and having heard from the following involved and interested agencies: Rockland County Department of Health, Rockland County Sewer District No.1, Rockland County Department of Highways, Town of Clarkstown and Town of Orangetown Zoning Board of Appeals and having reviewed a proposed Site Plan by prepared by Sparaco and Youngblood, a summary of the reasons supporting this determination are, and the Planning Board finds that the proposed action:

 

• Will not significantly affect existing air quality or noise levels;
• Will not significantly affect existing surface water quality or quantity or drainage;
• Will not significantly affect existing ground water quality or quantity;
• Will not significantly affect existing traffic levels;
• Will not create a substantial increase in solid waste production;

eWill not create a potential for erosion, flooding, leaching or drainage problems;

• Will not have a significant adverse impact on the environmental characteristics of our critical environmental area or environmentally sensitive sites or features;
• Will not have an impairment of the character or quality of important historical, archeological or architectural resources;
• Will not have an impairment of the character or quality of important aesthetic resources;
• Will not have an impairment of existing community or neighborhood character;
• Will not remove or destroy large quantities of vegetation or fauna;
• Will not remove or destroy large quantities of wildlife species or migratory fish;
• Will not have a significant adverse impact to natural resources;
• Is consistent with the Town of Orangetown’s Comprehensive/Master Plan;
• Will not have adverse economic or social impacts upon the Town;
• Will not create a hazard to human health; and
• Will not create a substantial change in the use of land, open space or recreational resources.

 

 

 

301.:l.:10  S)!8310 NM01

st ZL lJd   8!   AHlJ   SIOZ

 

Nh\013~NVbJO .:10  NMOl

 

PB #15-1O:  Merritt Subdivision  Plan-  Preliminary  Subdivision   Plan

Approval  Subject to Conditions/  Neg. Dec.

 

Town of Orangetown  Planning  Board Decision

April  22, 2015

Page 5of12

 

 

 

 

On motion by Stephen Sweeney and seconded by Thomas Warren and carried as follows: Kevin Garvey, aye; Bruce Bond, aye; William Young, aye; Robert Dell, aye; Michael Mandel, aye; Stephen Sweeney, aye and Thomas Warren, aye, the Board made a Negative Declaration pursuant to SEQRA.

 

DECISION: In view of the foregoing  and the testimony  before the Board, the application  was GRANTED A PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION PLAN APPROVAL SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:

 

1. The following note shall be placed on the Subdivision Plan: “At least

one week prior to the commencement of any work, including the installation of erosion control devices or the removal of trees and vegetation, a

Pre-construction meeting must be held with the Town of Orangetown Department of Environmental Management and Engineering, Superintendent of Highways and the Office of Building, Zoning and Planning Administration and Enforcement. It is the responsibility and obligation of the property owner to arrange such a Meeting.”

 

2. Stormwater Management Phase II Regulations: Additional certification, by an appropriate licensed or certified design professional shall be required for all matters before the Planning Board indicating that the drawings and project are in compliance with the Stormwater Management Phase II Regulations.

 

3. The applicant is creating 4 new lots from 2 existing lots. The proposed private road extension of Merritt Road to Ehrhardt Road is acceptable to the Planning Board.

 

4. The private road extension shall be built to Town Road Specifications. The Board noted that the road width was acceptable since all properties owners abutting the roadway were related.

 

5. The sight distances at the entrance onto Ehrhardt Road shall be provided on the plan.

 

6. The plans shall indicate trees to be saved and removed.

 

7. The direction of drainage flow across proposed lots 5A and 5B shall be shown on the plan by arrows indicating the direction of flow

 

8. The Short Environmental Assessment Form appears to be in order.

 

301.:L:!O  S)f H310 NMO!

9l  Z1  LJd   St AHlJ  SIOZ

 

NM013~Nv}J0 .:IO  NlAOl

 

PB #15·10: Merritt Subdivision  Plan-  Preliminary  Subdivision  Plan

Approval  Subject to Conditions/  Neg. Dec.

 

Town of Orangetown  Planning  Board Decision

April 22, 2015

Page 6of12

 

9. The following variances need to be sought from the Town of Orangetown

Zoning Board of Appeals:

 

• Lots 3A, 38 and 3A will require a 280-A Exception since they do not front on a Town road.

 

• Lots 3A, 38 and 5A require 75 feet of street frontage and zero feet is proposed.

 

• Lot 38 requires a Minimum Front Yard of 30 feet and 22 feet is proposed

 

• The Maximum Building Height allowed is 1 foot per 1  foot from a property line. Therefore the maximum height allowed for Lot 3A is 20.3 feet; for Lot 3B is 22 feet, for Lot 5A is 30 feet and for Lot 5B is 20.3 feet. Please give the maximum building heights proposed for the above lots.

 

10. The applicant still needs to comply with PB #05-106, Condition 4 (each lots deed shall contain covenant that roadway is to be private.)

 

11. The revised SWPPP that has been submitted is under review by DEME.

 

12. The northerly end of the proposed private driveway currently is depicted as turning on a point to change direction, this is not acceptable. The private driveway shall be realigned to meet the existing Merritt Road in more “in-line” configuration. (i.e. either there must be a horizontal curve proposed or the change in horizontal direction must start further south along the proposed road.)

 

13. A note shall be added to the plans stating that the proposed private access driveway shall remain forever private. This is necessary due to the fact that the access driveway being proposed does not meet the Town standards for a Town Street.

 

14. The proposed 15 foot wide drainage easement, through lots 1 and 2 shall state who the easement is to (i.e. who will own easement once filed).

 

15. Profiles for all of the proposed storm drainage lines and sanitary house connections shall be added to the drawings.

 

16. The SESC plan is under review, however a stabilized construction entrance shall be added to the plans. Also, erosion control measures shall e depicted for each of the lots/ proposed homes/ driveways.

 

17. The page and liber or instrument number, as well as ownership for all easements/ dedications shall be given on the plans.

 

30l.:L710  S)\H310 NMOl

 

St  Z! \ild   S”(  hY\il Sl.02

 

NM~~3Dl’Wbl0 ::10  NMOl

 

 

PB #15-10:  Merritt Subdivision Plan-  Preliminary Subdivision Plan

Approval Subject to Conditions/ Neg. Dec.

 

Town of Orangetown  Planning  Board  Decision

April 22, 2015

Page 7of12

 

 

 

 

18. The Drainage Consultant to the Planning Board, Brooker Engineering reviewed the application and found the application sufficiently demonstrates that adverse impacts with respect to drainage can be mitigated. The consultant therefore recommends that the Merritt subdivision be approved for drainage subject to the following comments:

 

ProjectDescription

This is our first drainage review report to the Planning Board for this project. The project consists of a four lot subdivision of two existing lots in

an R-15 zone at a property located on the east side Ehrhardt Road, at the

end of Merritt Drive. There

 

This is the Drainage Consultant’s third drainage review report to the

Planning Board for this project; the last review was dated February 25,

2015. The project consists of a four lot subdivision of two existing lots in an R-15 zone at a property located on the east side Ehrhardt Road, at the end of Merritt Drive. There are four clay tennis courts, an office building, and a residential structure that are proposed to be removed in order to build four single family residential structures on the new building lots. Runoff flows downhill in a southeasterly direction towards the developed lots along Villa Drive. An existing driveway connecting Merritt Drive to Ehrhardt Road is proposed to be widened and regraded to serve as a private drive for the new residences. Three separate underground detention structures are proposed to mitigate against increases in stormwater runoff due to additional impervious areas.

 

The underground detention discharges to a swale along the east side of the property adjacent to the subdivision (tax lot 64.18-1-78.4), which is under the same ownership as the applicant. This swale then flows due south along existing off-site residential lots. There is a proposed drainage easement to construct the outfall from the detention basin to tax lot 64.18-

1-78.4. The proposed drainage easement overtax  lots 64.18-1-78.4 and

78.5 should be limited to one of the lots instead of straddling the property line.

 

Review of AdditionalInformation

The revised drainage report extends the design points of interest to the swale east of the site and extends the study to approximately 200 feet

downstream of the site. The drainage report indicates a reduction of peak discharges at these locations. The consultant has reviewed the drainage calculations and are in agreement that proposed stormwater detention can mitigate against potential significant adverse impacts with respect to stormwater runoff. The consultant will review the drainage report in more detail and issue specific comments if required at a later date.

 

3:Jl.:J:JO S>IH310  NMOl l~ ~I IJd    er  ~YIJ SlOl NMOl3~N\ilJO      :10  NIAOl

 

PB #15-10: Merritt Subdivision   Plan-  Preliminary  Subdivision  Plan

Approval  Subject to Conditions/  Neg. Dec.

 

Town of Orangetown  Planning  Board Decision

April  22, 2015

Page 8of12

 

 

 

19. Rockland County Department of Planning had the following comments which are incorporated herein as conditions of approval:

 

• A review must be completed by the Rockland County Highway Department and any required permits obtained.

 

• As indicated in the February 5, 2015 letter from the Rockland County Health Department, an application must be made to them for review of the stormwater management system to ensure compliance with the County Mosquito Code.

 

• As required by the Rockland County Stream Control Act, the subdivision plan must be reviewed and signed by the Chairman of the Rockland County Drainage Agency before the County Clerk can accept and the plan to be filed.

 

• The map note for the  proposed 27′ wide  ingress/egress easement for the private road over lots 3 and 5 refers to lots 1   and 2.  It is not clear which lots are

1    and 2, as the plans are labeled as lots 5A, 58, 3A and 38.   This must be clarified.  This easement must also be provided in a covenant to the deed for each lot. A maintenance agreement shall also be provided so that it is clear who

is responsible for the upkeep of the private road.

 

e   The  plans still  illustrates a  t-turnaround  area  at  the  northern end  of  the proposed private road, though the minutes from the August 10, 2015 meeting indicate that the applicant has proposed to remove this t-turnaround. What is the purpose for this turnaround area.  Will the road be available for automobile use from Merritt Road through Ehrhardt Road, or will access to the private road be blocked at some point. These issues shall be clarified and appropriate language provided on the plans.

 

• Water is a scarce resource in Rockland County; thus proper planning and phasing of this project are critical to supplying the current and future residents of the Villages, Towns, and County with an adequate supply of water. In any public water supply improvements are required, engineering plans and specification or these improvement shall be reviewed and approved by the Rockland County Department of Health prior to construction in order to ensure compliance with Article 11, Drinking Water Supplies of the Rockland County Sanitary Code and Part 5 of the New York State Sanitary Code.

 

• For installation of a sanitary sewer system, engineering plans and specifications shall be reviewed and approved by the Rockland County Department of Health prior to construction.

 

30!.:1.:10  ~){H310    NM01

 

lI  Z1  Wd   B!  AHW 5102

 

NM013~N’1lJO  :JO  NMOl

 

PB #15-10: Merritt Subdivision   Plan-  Preliminary  Subdivision  Plan

Approval  Subject to Conditions/  Neg. Dec.

 

Town of Orangetown  Planning  Board Decision

April  22, 2015

Page 9of12

 

Continuation  of Condition  #19 …..

 

 

 

• Prior to any grading or construction on the site, a soil and erosion control plan shall be developed that meets the New York State Guidelines for Urban Erosion and Sediment Control.

 

• The Rockland County Department of Planning requests the opportunity to review any variances that may be requested from the Town of Orangetown Zoning Board of Appeals in order to implement the revised Site Plan, as required by New York State General Municipal Law, Section 239-m, (a)(v).

 

20. The Rockland County Department of Highways reviewed the plans and offered the following comments:

• The access point for this development should be specified as from

Ehrhardt Road only.

• A Rockland County work permit is required for the proposed development and must be obtained prior to any construction on site.

 

21. The Rockland County Sewer District #1 does not object to the plan as shown. This project does not affect any sanitary sewers within the District and request no future correspondence for this site.

 

22. The Rockland County Department of Health (RCDOH) reviewed the plan and offered the following comments:

• Application is to be made to the RCDOH for review of the storm water management system for compliance with the County Mosquito Code.

 

23. Based upon Rockland County Drainage Agency (RCDA) evaluation of available mapping and information submitted, it has been determined that the proposed activity is outside the jurisdiction of the RCDA. Therefore, a permit from the RCDA pursuant to the Rockland County Stream Control Act, Chapter 846, is not required based upon its review of the information provided. However,

the Rockland County Stream Control Act, Chapter 846, requires that all subdivision maps must be signed by the Chairman of the Rockland County Drainage Agency before the County Clerk can accept same for filing.

 

24. The Town of Clarkstown Planning Board reviewed the information submitted and deeded the matter for local determination.

 

301.:l.:JO  S)!H310 NM<H zr ~! lJd     sr  AHIJ 5IOZ NMOl3DNYLJO    :10  NMOl

 

PB #15-10: Merritt Subdivision  Plan-  Preliminary  Subdivision  Plan

Approval  Subject to Conditions/  Neg. Dec.

 

Town of Orangetown  Planning  Board Decision

April 22, 2015

Page 10of12

 

 

 

25. The Town of Orangetown Fire Prevention Bureau  had the following comments:

 

1) All roadways,  turnarounds,  etc …. must provide a proper turning  radius to accommodate   a 55 foot long pierce of fire apparatus  with a wheelbase  of 254 inches.  Where  private  roadway  meets  Merritt Drive, there  is a t-shaped  tum around  shown,  if the private roadway  terminates  at Merritt Drive, then the turnaround  must comply with Section  FD103 of the New York State Fire Code and be shown in compliance  on the site plan.

 

2) All roadways  must be a minimum  of 20 feet in width with vertical  clearance  of

13 feet, 6 inches, and able to support fire apparatus  weighing  up to 75,000  lbs.

 

 

3) Bridges,  culverts,  elevated  surfaces  shall comply with the following:  Where  a bridge or an elevated  surface  is part of a fire apparatus  access  road, the bridge shall be constructed  and maintained  in accordance  with AASHTO  Standard Specification  for Highway  Bridges.   Bridges  and elevated  surfaces  shall be designed  for a live load sufficient  to carry the imposed  loads of fire apparatus. Vehicle  load limits shall be posted at both entrances  to bridges when  required  by the Fire Inspector.   Where  elevated  surfaces  designed  for emergency  vehicle  use are adjacent  to surfaces  which  are not designed  for such use, approved  barriers, approved  signs or both shall be installed  and maintained  when  required  by the

Fire Inspector.

 

26. The following agencies do not object to the Town of Orangetown  Planning

Board assuming  responsibilities   of lead agency for SEQRA  purposes:

– Town of Orangetown  Zoning  Board of Appeals

– Rockland  County  Department  of Health

– Rockland  County Sewer  District  No. 1

– Rockland  County  Department  of Highways

 

 

27. The applicant shall comply with all pertinent items in the Guide to the

Preparation  of Subdivision  Plans prior to signing the final plans.

 

 

28. All reviews and approvals from various governmental   agencies  must be obtained  prior to stamping  of the Subdivision  Plan.

 

301.::1.:10   S)fH310  NMO!

li  21 wd   sr AHLJ s102

 

NM013DNVhlO  ~O Nh\01

 

PB #15-1 O:  Merritt Subdivision   Plan-  Preliminary  Subdivision  Plan

Approval  Subject to Conditions/  Neg. Dec.

 

Town of Orangetown  Planning  Board Decision

April 22, 2015

Page 11 of 12

 

 

 

29. TREE PROTECTION: The following note shall be placed on the site plan: The Tree Protection and Preservation Guidelines adopted pursuant to Section

21-24 of the Land Development Regulations of the Town of Orangetown will be implemented in order to protect and preserve both individual specimen trees and buffer area with many trees. Steps that will be taken to preserve and protect existing trees to remain are as follows:

1. No construction equipment shall be parked under the tree canopy.
2. There will be no excavation or stockpiling of earth underneath the trees.
3. Trees designated to be preserved shall be marked conspicuously on all sides at a 5 to 10 foot height.
4. The Tree Protection Zone for trees designated to be preserved will be established by one of the following methods:

 

• One (1) foot radius from trunk per inch DBH.

 

• Drip line of the Tree Canopy. The method chosen should be based on providing the maximum protection zone possible. A barrier of snow fence or equal is to be placed and maintained one yard beyond the established tree protection zone. If it is agreed that the tree protection zone of a selected tree must be violated, one of the following methods must be employed to mitigate the impact:

 

• Light to Heavy Impacts – Minimum of eight inches of wood chips installed in the area to be protected. Chips shall be removed upon completion of work.

 

• Light Impacts Only – Installation of% inch of plywood or boards, or equal over the area to be protected.

 

The builder or its agent may not change grade within the tree protection zone of a preserved tree unless such grade change has received final approval from the Planning Board. If the grade level is to be changed

more than six (6) inches, trees designated to be preserved shall be welled and/or preserved in a raised bed, with the tree well a radius of three (3) feet larger than the tree canopy.

 

30. All landscaping shown on the site plans shall be maintained in a vigorous growing condition throughout the duration of the use of this site. Any plants not so maintained shall be replaced with new plants at the beginning of the next immediately following growing season.

 

301.-:1.:10 S)f tl310  NM6l

• ·l~ ?! Wd er AHW  swz

 

NMOl3~NVHO   :JO  NMOl

 

PB #15-10:    Merritt  Subdivision    Plan-   Preliminary    Subdivision    Plan

Approval   Subject   to Conditions/    Neg.   Dec.

 

 

Town  of Orangetown    Planning   Board  Decision

April  22,  2015

Page  12  of 12

 

31. 31. Prior  to the commencement   of any site work,  including the removal of trees, the applicant  shall  install the soil  erosion and sedimentation  control as required by the Planning  Boar   Prior to the authorization   to proceed with any phase  of the site work, the Town of Orangetown  Department  of Environmental Management and Engineering   (DEME)  shall  inspect  the installation  of all

required  soil erosion and  sedimentation  control  measures.   The applicant shall

contact DEME at least 48 hours in advance for an inspection.

 

32. The contractor’s trailer, if any is  proposed,  shall  be located  as approved by the Planning  Board.

 

33. 33. If the applicant, during the course of construction,  encounters such conditions as flood areas, underground water,  soft or silty  areas, improper drainage,  or any other  unusual  circumstances  or conditions  that were not foreseen in the original planning,  such  conditions   shall  be reported   immediately  to DEME.   The applicant shall  submit their  recommendations  as to the special  treatment to be given such areas to secure adequate, permanent   and satisfactory construction.    DEME  shall investigate the condition(s),   and shall  either  approve the  applicant’s recommendations  to correct the condition(s),  or order a modification  In the event of the applicant’s   disagreement with  the decision of DEME,  or in  the event of a significant   change  resulting to the subdivision   plan  or site plan or any change  that involves  a wetland  regulated  area, the matter shall   be decided by the agency with jurisdiction   in that area (i.e. Wetlands  – U.S. Army Corps of Engineers).

 

34. 34. Permanent vegetation cover of disturbed  areas shall  be established on the site within  thirty (30) days of the completion   of construction.

 

35. 35. Prior (at least 14  days) to the placing  of any road sub-base, the applicant shall  provide the Town of Orangetown Superintendent  of Highways  and DEME with a plan  and  profile of the  graded road to be paved in order that these departments  may review the drawings conformance  to the approved construction plans and  the Town Street Specifications

 

36. The Planning Board shall  retain jurisdiction  over lighting,  landscaping,   signs and  refuse control.

 

37. 37. All of the conditions of this decision,   shall  be binding  upon the owner of the subject property, its successors   and /or assigns,  including   the  requirement  to maintain the property in accordance with the conditions   of this  decision and the requirement,   if any,  to install improvements  pursuant  to Town Code 21.  Failure to abide by the conditions  of this decision  as set forth herein shall  be considered a violation of Subdivision    Plan  Approval pursuant to Town Code §21 and §6A.

 

The foregoing  Resolution was made and  moved by Bruce Bond and seconded by Michael  Mandel  and carried as follows: Kevin Garvey, aye; Bruce Bond,  aye; William   Young, aye; Robert Dell,  aye,  Michael  Mandel,  aye,  Stephen Sweeney

and  Thomas Warren,  aye.

 

The Clerk to the Board is  hereby authorized,  directed  and empowered to sign this

{!,,

DECISION  and file a certified  copy in the Office of the  Town Clerk  and  th   Office

~p   ‘ ·

of the Planning  Board.                  /l /                             _3   9  0 §~H.’110   NMOl

Dated:   April  22,  201s                ~.C »:                                        !IJd   BI ~HlJ   5!U2

Cheryl   Coopersmith,   Chief  Clerk  Board/a~     CommissionsAttachment

NM 0 l 3 0 N \11.:l 0 .:l 0  N /II 0 l

 

Town of Orangetown  Planning  Board

NAME OF ACTION: PB #15-10: Merritt Subdivision  Plan-  Preliminary

Subdivision  Plan Approval  Subject to Conditions/  Neg. Dec.

 

Town of Orangetown  Planning  Board Decision

April 22, 2015

SEQR STATUS:     Type I                                             Unlisted XXXXXX

CONDITIONED NEGATIVE DECLARATION: Yes                 No  XXXXXX

 

DESCRIPTION OF ACTION:  Subdivision   Plan Review

LOCATION: The site is located on Merritt Drive, Pearl River, Town of Orangetown, Rockland County, New York, and as shown on the Orangetown Tax Map as Section 64.18, Block 1, Lot 78 in the R-15 zoning district.

 

REASONS SUPPORTING THIS DETERMINATION:

The Orangetown Planning Board, as Lead Agency, determined that the proposed action will not have a significant impact on the environment and a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) will not be prepared. The reasons supporting this determination are as follows:

The project will not have a significant impact upon the environment and a DEIS

need not be prepared because the proposed action does not significantly affect air quality, surface or ground water quality, noise levels or existing external traffic patterns. In addition, it will have no impact upon the aesthetic, agricultural or cultural resources of the neighborhood. No vegetation, fauna or wildlife species will be affected as a result of this proposed action. The proposed action is consistent with the Town of Orangetown’s Master Plan and will not have any adverse economic or social impacts upon the Town or its businesses or residences.

If Conditioned Negative Declaration, the specific mitigation is provided on an attachment.

For Further Information contact:

John Giardiello, P.E., Director, Office of Building, Zoning and Planning

Administration and Enforcement

Town of Orangetown

20 Greenbush Road

Orangeburg, NY 10962

Telephone Number: 845-359-5100

For Type I  Actions and Conditioned Negative Declarations, a copy of this notice is sent: – Commissioner, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, – Region 3 Headquarters, NYSDEC, – Town Supervisor, Applicant, Involved Agencies