Planning Board Meeting

February

• 24.

• Do we have the chairman joining us remotely? Or

We don't. He's not gonna able to join?

He I think he was gonna join.

Okay.

• Alright. So I'm, sitting in then, for Rob Lunce, and,

• we do have a quorum. So we're ready to roll. Our, first item on the agenda is new business,

• Temple Israel Northern Westchester

• seeking an amended site plan

• for a portico entry,

• to the new to their main entrance.

• So, what we can do here, the applicant told us they, would likely not be able to attend the meeting,

• and we have noticed it to the public that this was,

• gonna be on our agenda.

• So we'll open, the public hearing on this,

• tonight,

• and,

• and then we'll, postpone further discussion on this until our next scheduled meeting.

• So with that, a motion to open the public hearing.

Maybe just before I think you said you were recusing, so you should recuse or disclose. Thanks. I'd like give you a chance. But yes. So

Thanks to you. Before you call for the motion, I'm gonna recuse myself from this particular application going forward. Okay. Got you. Thank you. And Alright. We they're supposed to disclose just the reason for your Reasons being I'm recusing myself is I'm a member of Temple Israel and also involved in the design and application process. So it wouldn't be right for me to,

• be weighing in on anything. I'll sit here for the rest of the meeting that's anything else relevant on the agenda or or or not relevant, but anything else on the agenda and participate otherwise. Okay. And there's no discussion going on anyway, so but thank you for that. Yep.

Okay. We got a motion by John Giegen to open,

• the public hearing second.

• Alright. Second. All in favor?

• Right.

• Okay. So,

• like I just mentioned, we're gonna keep it open. Keep this public hearing open, and we will adjourn this matter to their next scheduled meeting,

• where we will bring it back up again,

• assuming the applicants are ready.

• Alright. Moving on.

• Our next matter of business

• is, these next two items are referrals from the board of trustees. So

• our action on these two will be to review these proposed local laws

• and then to respond back to the village board with our thoughts,

• our recommendations on these two

• proposed laws.

• So the first one is,

• local law number three,

• where we have,

• a number of updates to the zoning code

• to,

• correct inconsistencies,

• to update certain definitions,

• and to amend the number of foul permitted

• on residential properties.

• So with that,

• it's a 27 page document that was was sent to us along with

• as the showing the local showing changes to the local law.

• And

• what I did and passed out

• to you guys, this is my summary. It's not an official

• village document at all.

• But it's just me going through this 27 page document pulling out the highlights

• of of the changes.

• So it just gives us a starting point instead of trying to wade through this whole document ourselves. Thank you for going to all that trouble for for

all of us. Sure.

And then, you know, just to summarize what these changes are, and Vince might need some of your help with this.

• So, basically, what these what the cleanups are, there's a bunch around,

• transitioning

• the special permits

• from the village board to the planning board.

• We know about that because that local law was passed last year, transitioning it to us.

• And then there was a need to go back and

• further,

• amend the zoning code just to, bring it in conformance with that change to, the planning board for special permits. Those are bunch of changes throughout the document for that.

• There's also some changes around,

• tier four solar energy

• systems

• and tier two battery

• energy storage systems,

• and we'll go through those.

• A number of just small changes,

• throughout.

• And if you want, we can go through Vince, anything else you wanna highlight before we dig into this? Say blah blah blah? No. It's just cleaning up the code, making sure that it's consistent,

and

• all the code sections

• refer to you guys as being the ones issuing the special permits. Okay.

So if it sounds alright to you guys, we can go through this list of changes.

• And do you have anything you wanna comment, discuss? We can do that.

I have a couple of top of the trees questions just before we dig in as you put it.

• Vincent,

• do you or maybe Karen have any sense of

• how many special permits exist in real time right now? Are they a 100? Are they 20? Are they 10? Do do we have any sense of that?

I don't have a sense of that. Okay.

I'm just trying to get a sense of, you know, with this coming from

• being,

• put on us rather than the board of trustees,

• what we're dealing with quantitatively.

• And I don't have any sense of that. It it might be helpful. Is this something we're gonna be signing off on tonight? Do you expect Essentially,

we already signed off on the on the idea of us handling special Yes. We did. This is just to make the wording conform,

• in the zoning code. I guess what I'm asking is that your hope that we're gonna resolve all these, semantical issues tonight? We will make a recommendation to village board. If we see some things in there, we say, hey. You know, on page 22,

can you we'd we'd prefer you change this wording. Okay. We'll we'll try to get through it. Okay. We'll get through much I mean, just down the road, Vincent, just for knowing as opposed to not knowing, that might be helpful to understand.

• You know, is it 50? Is it a 100? Is it 200? I I think there are a lot, so I but I would like to have a sense of that. I'm not sure. There might be, like, this spreadsheet or something that someone else has, but I haven't seen any of Right. And it might be something that you wanna track going forward since they do come up for renewal, I believe, or some of them anyway. Yeah. And you're gonna wanna have a calendar system where, oh, the new spec you know, you don't wanna overlook something. Yeah. There's probably some spreadsheet that There must be. I'm sure Brian can also go in and pull from the old agendas Yeah. How many we would do per year kind of that's what you're Right. That it's exactly what I'm looking for. Thank you.

• And then maybe you know this.

• I just kinda approached the the topic. Do all special permits come up for renewal at some point or most? It would be my question.

You know, the other thing, though?

Typically, when you have a vested property, right, leave it alone. So the there are some places that have compliant checking compliance stuff, but that would usually go through the building department in terms of if they have to submit inspection reports for certain things. And not necessarily come back to the planning board. Not necessarily come back. Because some do come back to us for for renewal. And I wonder

maybe, Jeff, you might know the answer to this. The ones that were previously passed by

• the board of trustees,

• is it now our purview on those renewals?

• Whereas before, it was renewal, not they're coming to you. Right. So that's why some of this information would be helpful

• to know. As you said, we've already passed it, but just to know what we're in for. That's all. Mhmm.

• Okay. Thanks thanks, Jeff. That's that was the global stuff I wanted to cover.

Right. Anything else before we kinda dig in here?

• Alright.

• So, you know, just looking at these, the stock. Number one, you know, throughout, we mentioned this clarify special permits

• are now handled by the planning board.

• Number two is a tier four solar system

• and tier two battery added to R A 60,

• which is the biggest lots in Croton.

• So in other words, those those lots would now be able to do some of these larger,

• solar systems on their property, from my understanding. Same thing with the battery energy storage system, which is, I think, is a little beefier system.

• And

• then, yeah, after each one of these citations I mentioned, I I say what pages in the larger document this is on. Alright. Number three, we're consolidating

• zoning rules around a noncommercial

• swimming pool, the definition of that,

• just into a single paragraph. It just takes all the, there there's a it spread over a couple paragraphs. It it makes a it brings a new definition to noncommercial swimming pool.

Since we're sort of going through this document Sure. Page by page, which makes all the sense in the world,

• I have some notes. So I'm gonna ask a question on

• page three.

• Talks about Metro North in the second full paragraph.

• Is that a change? Or No. I I have a question. Okay.

• It it talks about

• the structures,

• having been subject to special permit previously by the board of trustees. So what I'm curious about,

• is did Metro North need permission or a special permit from the board of trustees for their new building, which never came before the planning board by rule of law. But

• does anybody know if

• the the if that applied to the board of trustees?

When did this occur?

Ten year seven or eight years ago they put up that building. Yeah. Pre COVID. Right? It went up. It looks like a five or six story,

maybe more building. I have no idea about the process, but I will say that

• when

• another

• state entity or another municipal

• organization

• or an act actor of the state has their own code enforcement division. I think we'll let Metro North does. And if they're on their property, they can do a Monroe hearing and subject themselves to their own jurisdiction as long as we don't object. I'm not saying that's what happened. I don't know if that's what happened, but it is possible.

• Mhmm. I mean, we could find out what what Do we have an estimate? Yes.

It's a long time ago. And I apologize. I forgot your first name. Joshua. Joshua.

• I'm curious because there's a whole section here about

• them needing to come for a special permit to us. But if the

• the Monroe rule or any state laws dictate that

• they don't,

• then it kinda makes this somewhat irrelevant.

• Or

• I don't know why it's there if they don't have to come to us. Often. You know, think they should consult the village in some capacity when they're doing a new building. That would be nice. We could probably

• add some intelligent

• feedback to them on it, but

• this might be moot.

• So that's my input.

No. I mean, that's fair. I think I think our input there is we just like some clarification on

• Metro North's responsibility

for seeking a special permit. Yeah. I'm sure it won't be the last building they'll ever need to erect in our lifetimes there. So Okay. It might be relevant going forward. That's good stuff.

Alright. Then moving on.

• Alright. So number four, where we talk about keeping a fowl, this mainly refers to chickens, I'm guessing.

• We added a table that

• states the maximum number of fowl

• is permitted and is

• based on lot size.

• So the bigger the lot size, essentially, the more foul you're allowed to have.

• Vince has got it up in the big screen there.

• So,

• that's something we really didn't have clarity around in the previous zoning code.

So is what was added

• that the

• that it's scaling up based on the size of your property? Yeah. Previously,

• anybody in Croatan could keep 25 file?

That's correct. And the language pertaining to where they could be penned was kinda confusing.

• So they made that clear by just saying no foul shall be penned or housed within 15 feet of any lot line.

• So that's clear. It's easy for, my department to administer that now.

Mhmm.

And what's the purpose of the setback,

the 15 feet? I guess so that there weren't chickens right on the proper line being penned, making noise, I guess.

Well, and there's fecal matter associated with chickens, and you probably don't want that right on your property line if you share

• border with a neighbor. A little smelly.

Right. Right. Yep.

A lot of times also, there are electric warmers that go.

• So you might have electric power. Mhmm. Interesting.

Well, that's another reason, I suppose. Alright.

Okay. So number five, it it has to do with the tier four solar energy again, and this is just to say these bigger systems

• are,

• not allowed in any district except RA 60.

• 6, we're now in a commercial district,

• C 1.

• The changes in the, proposed law say

• sidewalk displays of merchandise or sidewalk dining shall be permitted outside retail store, commercial establishment, or restaurant,

• and this is a change, subject to the conditions adopted from time to time

• by, resolution of village board of trustees.

• The code previously said it required a special permit,

• but Vince

• informed me that in practice,

• it's been handled

• since at least 1993

• by the village boards

• doing this by

• resolution.

That's correct. There is a resolution from 1993

• that,

• speaks on this. So that's what it's referring to in that section of the code.

Okay.

• Number seven. These are tier one battery storage systems.

• These are the the smaller. These could even be rooftop systems. Right, Vince? Two I believe so. Yeah.

• These are now

• allowed in waterfront

• commercial districts and parks, recreation, educational districts.

• Alright. Number eight, adds that the planning board has authority to require

• an applicant to provide a traffic impact study before just so we could require an applicant through

• guess, during the site plan,

• We could require an applicant to do a parking study, but this adds wording that we can require an applicant to do a traffic impact study. Alright.

Number nine. Wait. Wait. Wait. Wait. Go ahead. Wanna wanna go back slightly. Yep.

• This might be a housekeeping issue.

• Under on page 12,

• under

• a, Croton and Hudson's three gateway areas are,

• it starts off with number two, which should probably start off with

• is that a continuation of something else?

• Under Question. F special permit,

• or should that be number one?

Or is it just a minute because there wasn't a change?

• Pull up the code just to check.

Tell me again, Steve, what which you're referring to? It starts off with number two, and it maybe something got deleted. Page 12? I'm sorry. Page 12. Yes.

Okay.

Maybe

• it's a continuation of f from the page before. I don't know. But Alright. So we

can make that some of the feedback, Vance, if that was right now. Almost there. Okay.

Here's 20.2.

A is talking about Proto Hudson's three gateway areas are, I think Yeah. It just it only made change to number two. There's a one and a three before it and after it. So one is the Yeah. Arm in South Riverside,

and three is North End Of Village along Albany Post Road. And we're only covering changes, so that's why it starts off with two. Yeah. Yeah. That's fine. It right here. That's fine. Good question. Moving right along,

• And, actually, I mentioned this to Vincent at our WAC

• hearing the other day on page 14.

• In the middle of the the first cross out where it becomes a planning board.

• The planning board,

• as part of its special permit determination,

• shall have the authority to increase these parking requirements. I think we need to add increase or decrease.

• It's sort of tying our hands there, and we might be reviewing parking codes in the future. So we're gonna need that flexibility.

Well, if it so if the

• so I'm I'm just to understand, the board of trustees set a minimum for a district,

• and you wanna be able to waive

• the dish the the requirements. Is that what we're talking about?

I I want the flex Or you wanna be able to go down to what the board of down or up? I don't you know, depending on the situation, there's a lot of different parking

you know, but we scenarios.

• I assume the floor Vincent, just to be clear, the vent the floor is set by the billboard of trustees. Right? Like like a normal zoning requirement. Yeah. I would imagine. I believe so.

• So I don't think you could go lower than the floor.

If they if the applicant wants to go lower than the floor, would that go to the zoning board? Variance. That'd be variance. Yeah.

• We've You could increase it, I guess, as you have the power to increase the requirements.

If you wanna decrease something, you should just make a recommendation and the portrait sees might take it up. Like,

• you know, if you're sending a lot of parking variances to the zoning board and it's become a problem for you guys, you should definitely mention it.

Mhmm.

Right. But under the auspices of reviewing a special permit,

• are you telling me we have no authority to

• review a parking,

• stipulation and change it

• only to increase it? I mean, that that sounds a little restraining

to me. It does appear that's how it was written.

Okay. Well, then

• I would like to make recommendation back to the board of trustees that we have the flexibility to decrease it. I'm partly not trying to be difficult about this. The reason I'm bringing it up is,

• we've talked about this internally

• when we've reviewed site plans.

• And I believe,

• for and I've read up on this that,

• our parking codes are,

• dated.

• And Maple Commons is a perfect example of we approved

• I don't know. I know I'm gonna be off by a few. There's something like 40 spots, 38 spots, something like that, maybe more in that community.

• And I know it's affordable housing, so that skews the formula perhaps, but those

• that parking lot is never then more than about 35 to 40% full. I think we missed the mark there. And as we review

• larger developments, even this came up with lot a,

• I think down the road, we need to take a close look and do a study about parking codes and look at other municipalities

• and villages and see what they're doing. I don't think we need as many cars for people as we used to.

• Young people

• are using Zipcars.

• They're getting by on one car. They're using mass transit. They're using bicycles.

• You know, the the old adage of of a two family,

• two,

• you know, parents and children eating two cars, I think, is dated. And I would just like I'm I'm bringing this up because I would like to recommend to the board of trustees to specifically at least give us the flexibility there.

• And more globally,

• I'm not sure of the process. I'd like to review our parking code for future developments that are coming. There's a couple of potential

• there's several

• potentially sizable communities coming down the road, and parking's gonna be a big issue with every single one of them. So now would be a good time to start that process.

• Do you

agree, Jeff? Yeah. Well, I'm just trying to think of the scenario. So, Josh, let's just say we're we're going through a site plan for an apartment complex.

• Mhmm. And,

• based on,

• the zoning,

• that complex is required to have 50 parking spots.

• Mhmm. Okay? I'm just, you know, pulling out a number. And

• we see there's no no way they're gonna be able to accommodate 50 spots, that that they're gonna they only have room for 40.

Is that something that they would have had to have previously gone to the zoning board to get So, yeah, not like, for example, there's a ratio right above it where it says one parking space for each studio, one bedroom unit,

• and two spaces for each unit with two or more bedrooms.

• So you can increase that ratio,

• but you can't decrease that ratio

under this law. We have waived parking codes before many times. I mean, that's what I'm just I'm just telling, for instance, to bake by some gateway district

only. So this is this is this specific section,

• I believe, is only applicable to

• mixed residential in the gateway District.

• So

• am I correct on that, Vinny? I believe that's true. So that that's that's the context of what we're talking about with this paragraph.

Okay. Well,

• I mean, if you want

• this is just my opinion. I'm speaking for the entire planning board, but if we're gonna do our job

• thoughtfully

• going forward, I think we need flexibility

• on parking code regardless of where it is in the village. That's all I'm saying. And just to add, when we did I forget the address. It's where baked Susan is, for instance. You know, part of what we determined because she absolutely

• they rather did not have adequate parking on-site for,

• the retail establishments that are on the Ground Floor and the apartments that were upstairs.

• Part of our solution

• was to access the parking spots that are underutilized opposite ShopRite,

• opposite where Straddles is right now.

• I mean, it was a goofy solution in a way, but it worked, and it solved a parking challenge that we couldn't otherwise solve.

• And there are other instances instances where we've done that. We did it with Capriccio's

• with their new building.

• So it it's it's a routine issue for this planning board, and we need flexibility.

• That's all I'm saying. And so further in the paragraph, it says it a second time. I would also ask to in to add in

• or decrease in that next sentence, Joshua. Mhmm.

Yes. I think I I see the request. I mean, the just from my experience other other jurisdictions,

• even if if they were to allow a waiver of a certain parking requirement, usually, there's a limit on that waiver even in the most generous parking circumstances.

• Like, they'll say, you can waive 20%

• of the requirement,

• but no more than that. Like, I've seen that and then anything else is a variance.

• But, you know, I listen. I whatever the whatever the board of trustees wants to do on that, but I'm just telling you that that's the most aggressive I've generally seen elsewhere. We don't have that in our code. I'm not saying it's a bad idea, but we don't because we've had this situation

multiple times. So

Alright. So that would be our feedback, right, to

• give the planning

• board some flexibility and parking in all the districts, not just this gateway district,

• because we do run into this. And we I'm I'm pretty sure we have

• granted some leeway in the parking requirements in the past.

• Whether

We did it when it's just one, like, down on Yeah.

• Not Harrison Street, where the old bar was down there and those new houses got built there. Street. Yeah. Yeah.

• So

• further down that page,

• under number three

• now, Joshua, I'm going the other way.

• It says

• villages cross out. Number three, the planning board shall have the authority in conducting special permit review to reduce or waive yard setback requirements.

• Here, I think it should be to reduce,

• increase, or waive yard setback requirements.

• I just believe that if you're gonna have a planning board do

• proper analysis on what we're charged with doing, you can't handcuff us.

I I'm a little bit concerned about increasing the setback. Yeah. I'm not saying I'm That kinda opens a can of worm. I'm not advocating for that. Which one are we just talking about? Right. Right. Okay. Should be number 35 on

B3On14.

Okay. Can I please Page 14?

• I mean, typically, what we're asked to do is,

• hey. We wanna build closer to the property line. Right. So decrease the setback. Fine.

• Could a neighbor come to us and say, hey. I don't want this thing so close to my property. I I want I want to increase

• the setback, and you guys have the power to do that.

• That's that's gonna open up a can of worms.

• Yeah. I I wouldn't mind having the the ability to decrease in in a kind of real hardship case,

• but,

• you know, having the ability to increase it almost like there's no rules.

Well, then people don't have the have the right to use less of their life. We're we're taking away we'd be taking away their right to

use that I'm not arguing. I'm just looking for flexibility. Yeah. Yeah.

Vince, any thoughts?

No. Not really.

Okay.

• But certainly on the on the parking, the flexibility there, I think it's So this is really only

allowing it to facilitate parking.

• So if you read the rest of the code surrounding it, you can waive

• you and reduce the setback

• for the purpose of parking.

• It's not for it's not for just to do it for the site in general.

I that's I read it that way too.

So we're still in the context of a parking discussion. Yeah. Some of these things, since we're only editing the things that It's hard to know the context. Be picking it up unless you No. That's why I absolutely That's why I brought the code. Thank you.

Mean, some of these things are more global changes, which we could do different in at at a different time. But, you know, mostly, I think they're looking for the feedback on the changes that that are there. Okay.

Okay. Let's keep, plowing through.

• Round to number nine.

• This though, yeah, this removes some wording about the need to prioritize the construction of sidewalks in a couple areas of the town,

• and we were scratched out. And and that's because they we have built the sidewalks in those locations. But what did this

so I checked page 15. Yeah. I'm looking at it. This one's South

• Side.

• But I

• know that the village

• this isn't me talking. This is the board of trustees and and the bike and ped committee. I know that,

• I'm not sure the applicability. They wanna build a sidewalk

• on the north side

• of,

• municipal place

• Yeah. Between Riverside and,

• Maple. That's the dealer. We're the one of the dealers. Is that oh, that's in the next set. Okay.

Where were there?

Or even Bill. Oh, I see. So we've done those two.

• Alright.

• Forget it. Okay. Yep. Thank you.

Alright. Number 10.

• Oh, yeah. This is important.

• Page 22.

• We'll move on.

• We need to change

• just a definition or I'm sorry. We just a scratch

• out. Let's see.

• Where is this? Okay. If you go down to page 22 down to section 36 near the bottom the page,

• This talks about the process of how special permits would be handled.

• Application comes in the building department.

• The copies are made, distributed to the planning board.

• The application shall be

• it says distributed

• I'm sorry. It says referred.

• It shouldn't be referred. It should be distributed to the plant to the board of trustees.

What's the distinction?

• I'm sorry? What's the distinction?

So if we refer, that's just like we sent the village board for them to make a recommendation.

• Village board doesn't want to be involved in special permits.

• So what we're gonna do is when special permit request comes into us,

• we send them a copy, FYI,

• for them to to see this application

• as opposed to sending the village board,

• that applications and waiting for them to come back Mhmm. With a recommendation.

Got it.

That that will, streamline the process.

So so, Jeff, you mean where it's crossed out, distributed, and it says referred? Yeah. We

wanna keep distributed

• and

scratch out referred. Referred. Josh, is that is that right to you? Yeah. If you're gonna do that, do you wanna also take out by the planning board and you just wanna make it but the building department's distributing it? Okay. Yep.

• Is that is that the is that the suggested edit?

• Because that way that way you get a special permit. You send the copy to the board of trustees. Yeah. It's simple enough that way if that could work. Okay.

That's good. Good good catch.

• Alright.

• So we're going on to page 23.

• And,

• so planning the the planning board now is

• gonna handle site plan approval

• for several

• new things,

• a

• residential accessory

• building,

• tier three and four solar energy systems,

• tier two battery

• energy storage systems

• in these specific districts.

• So, Vince, any background on that at all, Ben?

I'm trying to see where we are right now. This

• is number 11 of your comment. Addition.

• The plan approved from the planning board is now required for residential accessory,

• building,

• and noncommercial swimming pool. Page 23.

• Yeah. So, like, if, they wanted to build a pool at, say,

• the

• the golf course, that would be a commercial

• swimming pool. So that would need to get approval from you.

• Is that what you're asking in regards to that? Yeah. So this site plan approval.

So in '23, letter a,

• site plan approval by the planning board shall be required in all districts.

• And then if you look at

• number four,

• we're adding tier three and tier four solar energy systems.

• For, number five, we're adding tier two

• battery energy systems,

• storage systems.

• There's some additional things that we would be responsible

in this. The the larger the larger systems would come to you in those zones Yeah. For a special permit. Okay.

And then similarly

• on,

• just down the same page, minor say site plan approval is now something the planning board handles

• for

• you'll see on on page 23 numbers

• six, seven, eight, nine down the bottom of those pages. So the noncommercial swimming pool, accessory building,

• walls retaining walls in excess of six feet.

• Retaining walls. Okay.

• Accessory cottages,

• but not accessory cottage apartments.

So accessory apartments

• no longer need a minor site plan approval, or do do they never do they never need it? I looked up the apartments.

Like, what are we doing if we're not doing minor site plans?

• And they got a an application

• process that they they go through to submit when they want an app when they want an accessory apartment.

• And

• the the upshot is that the process is very similar to minor site plan approval,

• which is what we do for cottages but not apartments. Is it

would you That's basically how I understand it as well.

• They still gonna have to come here for approval for the accessory apartments.

• They just wouldn't technically be minor k. Site plans.

Because it's not really a site plan that's changing as those are the apartments then The site is pretty much staying the same. Yeah. Yeah. Because the general Cottages are different. You know, they're building a new ADU and or accessory cottage. Plan approval is when you're altering the site. Yeah. So the I'm sorry. What did you ask, Eva? I couldn't hear. Site plan approval is for when you are altering a site? That that is Yes. That's pretty much what they were talking about is when you if you're a cottage, you're affecting the flow of of pedestrians

• on the site where things are are set up, where people are parking,

• whereas this is already an existing footprint when you're talking about an accessory apartment.

• So it's the footprint is staying the same. Nothing is really changing in in the footprint of the building. So at least that's what the thinking was. An ADU

is not a special permit situation.

Or we ever was. Not in the echo. So

when we talk about

• accessory cottages but not accessory apartments,

we're not talking about ADUs. Correct? ADUs encompass accessory apartments. ADU encompasses accessory apartments, accessory cottages.

• So there's two separate things that are both ADUs.

Okay. This One isn't a is isn't isn't a fixed footprint,

• which is the apartment.

• The the buildings are not, then there's no layout. There's no going, but but a cottage is separate, so

it affects the site layout. Yeah. There's two separate definitions in the code for the cottage and for the apartment.

• And, basically, the apartment's within a single family house, essentially, and then the cottage is essentially a garage or something. Guess trans

trans you're converting your garage or affecting the same. Alright.

And then lastly,

• and and on the last page of this 27 page document,

• we're adding four hours of professional training,

• required for the zoning board of appeals.

Was that not the case before? Apparently not. Really?

No. It it was. It was?

• That's what I'm Probably just wasn't in our code. It wasn't in the code, but because they also did it.

Okay. So we're codifying that.

But it was for planning board members.

You sure that's being added? It's not,

• on page 27?

• Is it it's new?

Yeah. It says it's here by added here by added three.

Oh, it does say that. Right.

• I see.

Yeah.

Yep. So any other feedback,

• before we go on to

• with the EAF and the CAF

• for this law?

• So, Karen, I hope you captured

• some of those things those many things.

• If you need any help, I'm sure Vince and Josh or myself can help you with it. Certainly. And Steve some of Steve's stuff as well.

• Okay.

• So finishing

• up this zoning changes thing, we part of our recommendation, we go through

• the short environmental assessment form

• and the coastal

• environment assessment form. These are really more relevant when you have,

• I don't know, a a a different sort of,

• use, a different sort of either a project.

• But in the case of like, a change in the law,

• the impact on the environment,

• is

• is not really something that's

• that we dig into.

• So looking at the short environmental assessment form first,

• you'll see that this is something the village fills out as part of their

• their proposal to put before us, this local law. They have to fill this out. This was filled out by

• by the village, and,

• you know, it's very light on what they're asking

• as you can see. And then

• it says

• number one.

• The one that has the chat. Yeah. Number one, it says,

• if the answer is no to number one, then continue to question two. Well, question two doesn't pick up to the very

the very end. Right? Well, you've checked you've checked yes, so you just have to go to a statement.

Check yes, so it goes to part two, which is,

• I don't even see it on this, actually.

I saw it.

Isn't that in your brief description above above it that would have been on the back? You don't think so? Probably. So

• Yeah. Because you checked yes, you wanna read this, Jeff. K.

So with that, you see that this is pretty straightforward.

• I don't know if there's anything

• to react to there.

Since it's so short, why don't you read the brief description of proposed action, Jeff?

Alright.

• The brief description of this proposed action, local law three, local law introductory

• three of 2026

• has been drafted

• to amend chapter two thirty,

• zoning of the village code to address various inconsistencies,

• update definitions,

• and amend the number of foul permitted

• on residential properties. The law has been drafted in coordination with the village staff, the village's planning consultant, the village attorney.

• Alright.

• So let's move on to the coastal assessment form.

Same thing there. What do you wanna vote on this? Or do we have to vote on this, Vincent? I mean

I mean, I I Individually?

• I don't it was there this is just a rec this is a referral for recommendation. So as long as So there's no votes agree on your your on what your recommendations are, there's no need for a vote or an action. Yeah. I think so. Go ahead.

Okay. Coastal assessment form,

• same thing filled out by the village.

• Description of this,

• reads

• local law introductory

• three of 2026 has been drafted to amend chapter two thirty, zoning, the village code to address various

• inconsistencies,

• update

• definitions,

• and amend the number of file permitted on residential properties.

• Law has been drafted in coordination with the village staff,

• the village planning consultant, village attorney. So, obviously, the same description.

• As far as the coastal impact of,

• of this,

• many of these questions are,

• not app applicable.

• So

• you see that's

• pretty light there.

• Okay. So that, you know, wraps up

• local law three.

• So I rec we'll make a recommendation to the village board

• with our feedback that we came up with tonight Mhmm. Including,

• flexibility and parking

• in in all

zoning districts. Right. Which which could be a separate law also, like, you know,

• hypothetically. But

• could that be rolled into these these changes? If the board of trustees wishes it to be, I mean, it it is kind of a separate matter. But yeah. Because it's these are we have noticed changes to these sections.

• So if you're asking about a global

• change, it would kinda be like a renotice, and I think there are some timing.

We do wanna get this in in place. Right. And I don't wanna impede that. What I'm asking for and maybe I wanna clarify a little bit. I'm asking for the flexibility and the language in this

• in these changes.

• But then separately, I'd like to request,

• if my colleagues agree,

• that we reexamine the overall,

• parking codes for the village in all areas. Mhmm.

If that helps language wise. I think that's fair. Yep.

Mhmm.

Thanks for the clarification, Joshua. And you and you understand it. Like, if we did do something like that, maybe it would be, like, a 20% type thing or something along those lines or, you know, that's what I've seen elsewhere

• where, you know, before before you send somebody for a a variance, maybe you, you know Exhaust that avenue first? Yeah. You know, this is you give the planning board a little discretion.

Yep.

I've seen that done.

Okay. Yeah. It seems very simple.

• Alright. Anything else needed on that item?

I think that's you guys had a lot of good comments on that. Picked up on a lot of things, though. So

• I think that's did a good job on that. Very good. Thank you. Alright.

Moving on to the next item on the agenda.

• The, again, a referral from the board of trustees. This is, draft law

• five

• of 2026,

• to amend provisions

• relating to affordable housing to allow certain occupational preferences.

• Okay. So this is, this is interesting.

• I'm gonna

• defer to Josh on some of these things because it does get really technical when when you talk about, preferences.

• But I can say that I've been to several,

• affordable housing conferences

• in base university and elsewhere. This is a big topic,

• where people, villages, communities

• want the ability to

• bring in certain professions,

• and and have

• affordable housing,

• work for some of these in need, professions in, communities.

• So it's been a hot topic. There the rules around,

• preferencing

• are very technical

• and,

• have very high standards to meet if you still want to receive your funding for an affordable housing project.

What do you mean by that?

So I'm gonna I'm gonna defer to Josh. You probably have a good good better handle on this than I do.

So,

• this is quite a I don't remember the exact year, but quite a few numbers of years ago, Westchester wasn't

• meeting its

• quota when it comes to affordable housing, and they were kind of

• segmenting

• in the affordable housing that it stock that they had into certain communities. And

• bunch of lawsuits, the county got sued. They entered into a a consent decree.

• But since then, the county is encouraged through the use of IMAs and other types of,

• intermunicipal

• agreements

• and other funding streams for various communities

• who

• don't have a certain threshold of affordable housing. I think you guys have it, but to in order to get money, you you have to kind of play by their rules and kind of have something approximating

• their their sample affordable housing law. Usually, within that and also involved with fair housing and

• there there's restrictions on

• not having

• certain types of of

• how do I say it?

• Preferences, that's the best word,

• for for housing because some of those preferences preferences might might

• skew to one demographic over another demographic,

• racial,

• ethnic, whatever you whatever you say.

• So

• with these ones, the the

• village has worked with a couple of housing authorities to really study a couple of these to make sure that they

• actually would not do that and they would not offend in terms of law, and they have now posited that and had a couple conversations with the county. So

• what I understand is the village would like to a lot of places would like to have preference. We would like to have the people who work in your community be able to live in your community and be able to serve your community without having to drive an hour to get there. A lot of villages

• and towns and all of that stuff would like to have it, but the county's pushed back against it.

• We're trying to see if this is something the county will go for.

• And it seems like they have a they have studies that support it.

• I would Does that make sense?

Yeah. Eva, go ahead. I was just I was curious about the emergency

• services,

• and I wonder your thoughts on this, John, since

• it's talking about professionals,

• employees.

• Right? We have volunteer

• fire department

• and

• other first

• responders. Right? But this so this would be

• prioritizing

• professional firefighters

• who wouldn't not be serving us.

• Correct?

Oh, I'm looking at the wrong law. I was like, where is the

• Where did it say that? Where did it say the professional?

• Occupational

• preferences.

Industry employee.

• I'm

• on page one. So it says emergency

• service industry slash

• Yeah. Employee. Right?

• Does that is I I read that to say

• to to meet professionals.

• But

I don't do you think it does not? Yeah. I don't think it just it said that. So it could be volunteers. It could be volunteers as far as I I see it. Yeah. I don't see anything that precludes volunteers.

Don't do our volunteers don't our volunteers already have to live here?

• No? Our volunteer firefighters don't have to live within the village? So there are some there are are certain exceptions when it comes to firefighters.

So

• if they don't, it depends on the district in which you're serving.

• So they have to live within that fire district generally, or they have to have some state enacting law to let them be outside of that. Mhmm.

• It's yes and no. But

additionally, additionally,

• whether they do or don't currently live within the village itself, this law would give them the ability to apply for the better

• for the affordable housing now that that they Assuming they meet the other assuming they meet all the other requirements. So they have that new avenue to, you know, fall under here. So it'd be a form of appreciation for what for what they do. Big time. Mhmm. And it

helps also people not get priced out of the community is the idea. Yep.

Broton has, I believe, two EMTs

• full time.

• I think one of them is from.

• He works here permanent. Mhmm.

• Nausea probably an resident.

He might be able to I think he might also apply I mean, fit this category.

• There's some other stipulations. I'm I'm sure they probably have, like, how much money they can make and things like that. Income requirements and all this other stuff. But this is once you are qualified

Mhmm.

• You know, the the the preferences apply. Yeah. And would that be pre lottery? So would they go in write in? They get pull from what my understanding is they get pull like, you have your lot the people who qualify within your lottery and then this the group that have preferences

go to the top of the list. Because the lottery was only triggered by the source of funding in that instance with Maple Comets

• because there was a certain entity that state law required to open up to all the residents of Lower Hudson Valley. That's why you had a lottery. This, as I understand it,

• would not would apply to other situations where

• we build, you know,

• 20 units,

• 10% are required to be affordable, so two of the units would start to fall under this category for application.

• The other thing I learned today,

• because I just sat through a with Stacy, a Waterfront Advisory Committee meeting.

• Part of the reason that

• this is we anticipate

• the village anticipates being acceptable to the county

• is because in their data studies,

• they've discovered that

• people that are employed

• under those categories and I don't have it in front of me because Mhmm. I disposed of mine earlier. Mhmm. But people that come under the categories of essentially,

• emergency

• responders,

• firefighters,

• EMT,

• as well as, medical, I think, is the other one. Right? That's right.

• Those are what was the phrase that was used? Majority,

• minority,

• so that you're

• skewing a little bit for,

• you know, people of color and people that in the past have been discriminated against in order to give them better opportunities

• for housing access.

• And that was,

• part of what, I got educated about earlier today. So that's part of what's behind this vis a vis the county wanting to support

• these measures.

• But when I asked the question about, well, why wouldn't, you know, teachers be a category? Well, they haven't done the data study on that to determine that that falls under the same

• results as these other two employment categories.

In fact, there was a language that was added that

• encourages

• the study of of educational

employees. Right. Which is what we talked about earlier.

• Yeah. So that just giving you more of my background knowledge on this. Right. Yep. Thank you. That's right. And the village reached out to

PACE Land Use Law Center,

• where you've been, Steve Mhmm. And,

• the Housing Action Council. These are people who are deeply involved in affordable housing,

• throughout Westchester County in the 99 county region.

• And they went off and looked at these professions Mhmm. In Westchester County and this adjoining 9 county region

• and looked at the racial makeup of

• of emergency services people, health care workers.

• And that's what they they came to that conclusion, that it it was majority minority.

• Right. So therefore, they can

• they can be included.

• And gonna look at teachers. Yeah.

• There is you're not allowed to preference

• just local people.

• You know, you

• that's that's not that's,

• something that's not allowed under fair housing, I guess.

• So the next step is to go into these occupational

• slices

• and and see

• what the racial makeup is with those.

Yeah. So, Jeff, question on that. So e even with,

• private developer comes in and wants to put up a building and it triggers, you know, two or three or four affordable housing units, even though it's being privately funded, funded, not through any state agencies or programs,

• the inability

• to preference local

• citizens is still in force?

So I I I can answer that. So Please. You you you'd be less likely to have standing in regards to a federal lawsuit,

• but it doesn't eliminate the the ability to have standing. So if you were to write a law that way, which I know one place that at least deigned to do so,

• you

• you are creating

• more risk when you do that.

If you did not if you tried to limit it to local citizenry?

• Yeah.

Okay. Well, we don't want lawsuits. That's for sure. Mm-mm. Hey. I've yeah. Okay. I've looked at it. Thanks for clarifying that. Can I It's a what the what this is less risky than that approach, for sure? Right. On on occupational

preferences

• Mhmm. Person who is United States veteran

• and might might twelve months and so on. What what is the veteran?

I mean You

I I know someone who's in the reserves.

• They've been overseas

• two different times,

• nine, ten months at a time,

• but he's not considered military

veteran. It says active military,

• naval, air,

• or space service of The United States

• and was discharged or released under conditions less, other than dishonorable.

• So that is the definition we're working on. The

not not talking politics or anything, but there was a recently,

• it was said on television that the members of the military

• are going to get a check for $776.

• And I told this to somebody, and they told me, no. They're not getting it

• because they're in the reserves.

So sometimes the reserves are called up to active military, so I guess that's what the term meaning, active military

Mhmm. Denotes.

• So it depends. Maybe we can get a better definition of that.

Was this person not even you guys wanna look at is to whether we are including reserves. We can make that recommendation to look at that. So it's a good point, John. Let's why don't we read through these definitions?

So if any peep people watching, they can, understand what these definitions are. And also know that there is a priority among these three definitions.

• First on the priority list would be the emergency service workers,

• followed by medical service industry, followed by veterans.

• That's the order in which those preferences play out.

• Right. So here's our definition of that we're working with of emergency service, industry slash employee.

• A person responsible

• for responding to emergencies and urgent situations

• to ensure public safety, health, and well-being.

• This includes first responders and agencies and organizations like fire departments, police forces,

• emergency medical services, EMS,

• and search and rescue teams.

• Alright. That's definition one. We can go back and

• if you guys have questions. Like, definition number two is occupational

• preferences for

• the the the the the

• A person who's

• who is a United States veteran or has been employed.

• That's not that's not what I'm looking for. Sorry.

• Medical. Next next definition is, medical service industry. Here we go. A person provides

• medical services or otherwise

• facilitate the provision of health care to patients.

• This definition shall include individuals acting as home health aids and pair, professionals

• who provide

• personal care and assistance

• with daily living activities to individuals in their homes, often elderly, disabled, or recovering from illness.

• So, you know, this is

• this is the medical service

• definition.

• Seems

• home health aids are

• a big part of that. And then, The United States veteran definition we just discussed, someone who has served an active military,

• naval, air, or space service of The United States who was discharged or released under conditions other than dishonorable.

• So,

• you know, that's

• those would be the three practices.

Can I ask about the home health aids? Would

• would these people have to work for an agency

• then in order to Good question. Yeah. Because I think there quite a lot of home health aides who They're just contractors who Yeah. Word-of-mouth.

Right? Is how they write their yeah. So that I think that'll be part of our feedback is,

• understanding more about the medical service industry employee.

• Can this home

• home health aide be a individual

• contractor,

or must they show proof of being with an agency? I don't know if that from my when when I draft I drafted that definition. So when I drafted that definition, I I was trying to be more inclusive. So I Yeah. I would on the side of leaving I don't think there was anything in there that would denote exclusion of that client. Alright. Right. Right. That's what I like about it. Right. Yes. So could this be part time then or full time? Right. It's

• gonna they have to still

• comply with the rest of the requirements

• whether Mhmm. Income, hours, AMI, all that other stuff that goes in here. But yes.

Can

I ask Oh, of course? Sure.

Hey. The chair, not me. Permanent marketing preference,

so on and so on.

• And it says person with an occupational preference defined herein

• shall be given first opportunity to rent or to purchase.

• And

• then

• the next paragraph,

• and those in the medical service industry shall have

• the medical service industry shall have first preference.

• Betterment shall have third preference.

• Paragraph before

• that they were given first opportunity to rent.

• One paragraph to give him the first opportunity to rent.

Oh, where where is this?

Yeah. This k. That's what you're saying, John. So down the bottom down my pages aren't numbered. But

• Second page. Letter k,

• penultimate

• sentence.

• Persons with an occupational preference defined herein shall be given first opportunity to rent or purchase an a a or AFF unit.

• And then,

• I think, John, what you're asking is

• the next group

• the next sentence really just defines within that group the order of,

• who goes first.

That would be the urgency industry.

Yeah.

Alright. I I just got confused over that because No. I think it's I think it's okay. First opportunity.

I think it's okay.

They're third now

• in the next next paragraph.

Did I read really read that wrong? Or is I I think it says that he fixed it. The first time it says people with occupational preference get first opportunity.

• And then within occupational

• preference group,

• you get those three

• industries,

• three professions,

• and

• we got we go one, two, three. Yeah.

Occupational

• preferences.

• A person who was a United States veteran or has been employed for at least twelve months

• He's third. He does cover

• he does get covered under that, doesn't he?

Shall have third preference.

He's covered, but he's third.

So first, Eva Eva,

you had something. I do. So

there's no expectation

• that the

• person who's selected continue in that occupation.

• Correct? There's no there's really no way of

• of doing that? So the

if you take a look at,

• n, there's gonna be an administrative monitoring agency,

• and they can appoint by resolution that monitoring agency. So if they wanted to to continue monitoring,

• which is pretty typical with these,

• you know, the these types of agreements, that's what they would be doing. So it depends on the type of housing unit also. Like, you you know, when you have

• for sale home with a set aside, it's different than an apartment

• with a set aside. So, usually, there'll be some type of affirmative marketing plan that's developed by that agency, which is somebody who housing count action council's been very involved and stuff like that and given advice and stuff like that. So I

• that I I wouldn't be surprised if that's what's coming. So that they would be expected to continue

with that work in order to continue

to be able to rent, you mean? I I would expect so. I mean, I think the one that's pretty permanent is the veterans one,

• but the other deal service is done. Yeah. Since the service has been completed.

• I mean but you never know. There has been some stuff in the news about that pretty recently.

• So

I think they do follow ups every whatever, a couple years or few years to make sure that the income you said you were making, in order to qualify to begin with, you have you don't exceed it now. And

• and therefore, you know, you're no longer eligible to be staying there. At the same time, maybe that they're checking that, they're also checking, are you still employed as a in health aide or whatever?

I think if you're meeting the income requirements, you're probably not gonna be dispossessed if you're no longer a health aid. Mhmm. But

• that being said,

• they are monitoring.

And what else

• on this before we go on to the CAFEAF?

• So this takes effect as soon as it's approved by the board.

• So it doesn't apply retroactively

• to Maple Commons or anything like that. As far as they they had a, what, a 6,000

• waiting

• waiting list.

• My understanding is this this only impacts going forward,

• and that's how this would be handled. And to Steve's point, it it not only a a full on affordable housing complex, but also

• a smaller

• development that has a set aside of just a few units for affordable housing would be covered by this.

That sound right, Josh? Yeah. And it's gonna and I assume the monitoring agency would be the ones who if

• if nominated by resolution, which is, I think, what would happen.

So, Josh, tell us where we are as far as Westchester County goes. Are a lot of communities looking at this right now? Is this gonna be something that everybody tries to do? I've seen some get away with veterans in other in other areas where, you know, this is a little bit more ambitious.

You know, I I think we have more data than all the places have. So

• see who we we're gonna have thirty days, and we're gonna see what the what the county comes back with. That's how quickly it'll get reviewed by the county once it passes the board? What it's they a referral from the first. So they're they're we're gonna we're we'll hear back from the county. Okay. They might hear back. We might hear back sooner. I don't know. Vincent,

• Karen, have you heard anything yet or no letters or anything?

So that would be a referral to the the planning board of West chester County or to who would it be? Just I guess. That's what I was told earlier in

our WAC meeting that it was going to planning board of the county. But are they, you know, are they looking at compliance with

planning and zoning laws and all that as opposed to funding

from a, you know, a federal agency and whether it's gonna fly with them. Well, they they they actually administer a lot quite a lot of the grant money.

• So it depends on what what you're talking about.

• And they also condition some of their discretionary

• funds, not all not their regular funds, but their discretionary funds

• Mhmm. On having

• affordable housing laws that that apply.

• So I don't think that I think if they were to come back and say that there's big issues here, I guess I can look at it. Yeah.

Alright.

• Anything else?

• K. Moving on to the CAF EAF for this.

• Let's do the coastal

• assessment form

• first.

• And

• same thing as the last one. I'll read the definition,

• local law introductory number five.

• Has been drafted to amend chapter

• two thirty zoning of the village code to implement occupational

• preferences

• for future affordable housing units. Specifically, village is seeking to allow preferences

• for emergency services workers,

• medical services workers, and veterans

• of the US Armed Forces.

• Okay. So that is the CAFEAF

• is

• exactly the same definition that I just read.

• Probably no need to reread that.

• And,

• again, this is kind of a formality document.

What's on the back of that one? Because,

Ashton just scrolled up. Yeah. So this this helps. So this has some more information back

• of the, EAF.

• Village court has been studying the possibility of adding occupational preferences for new affordable housing units to the village code for some time.

• The occupations that were studied were those in emergency services industry, medical service industry, and veterans of the united US Armed Forces.

• Working in tandem with the PACE Land Use Law Center and the Housing Action Council,

• data from the American Community Survey was analyzed.

• The data determined that subject occupations

• are majority minority,

• in parentheses, approximately 54%

• being a race other than white in Westchester and 70% being a race other than white in the nine county area.

• Based on the data, local law introductory number five has been drafted to amend,

• chapter two thirty of the, zoning code to enact these occupational preferences.

• Yeah. That's good. Thanks for pointing out, Steve.

That's I think Vincent, he scrolled to it. Yeah.

So any other feedback?

• Vince, anything to add to this at all? No. Nothing at all. Just to recapture,

we wanna make sure that there's commit con continuing monitoring of applicable preference. Right? Mhmm.

• And you wanted to make sure that reservists were covered

• in the veterans or no?

• That's all that's all of your comments. So I

have no objection.

• And the mod my my only comment on monitoring is I would wanna do what's,

• been typically

• passed

• in,

• you know, recent

• Mhmm. Codes of other villages and municipalities. I don't think I wouldn't wanna be inconsistent

• with our monitoring practice or lack thereof versus other communities that are seeking to pass these things. Okay. That's my opinion. I don't know if you guys agree.

It's good. Yeah.

And then I guess the comment with

• home health aids and paraprofessionals

• is that it

• I think that,

• like, that

• line of work can be sort of can can look like

• more different things than

• than the the emergency responders. It's pretty clear

• that somebody is one, right, and what they do, whereas the the

• the other

• can be

• this kind of a a a range of a range of what it looks like. So to have some some clarity in your minds about what you're looking for, what qualifies, and what does not. There's the question about full time versus part time, right, is an important one. And then

• can they be self can they be independent contractors,

• or do they have to work for a

work for a home health care agency? I think those are questions we have. I don't know that we have a strong feeling that it's can only be full time or, you know, it it can only be somebody who works for an agency. Right. I think we're just wondering, like,

how is it defined? I wanna add to that. Right. Right. I do have a strong feeling, and that is I really don't wanna limit it. You know, people that are working as a health aid for somebody,

• these people make nothing. Mhmm. They're they're

• Right. They're scraping by and probably working two other jobs. The last thing I wanna do is put any restrictions whatsoever

• on their ability to apply for affordable housing. So I really don't wanna add to that. The questions, I agree with it. It'd be useful to know, but I don't wanna put any guardrails on that. So maybe they the board ends up putting in it can be full time or part time, just to answer the question. That that's well put. Yeah. Yeah.

Can I just say something? Steve brought it up.

• If you're making a salary as a part time worker

• and you have a second job

There's income requirements, so it's what you're making.

In total? There's gonna be an AMI. In in total. Yeah. Right. I'm sorry, John? No. That that in second income can keep them from getting

with their professionals. But that's we can't change that. Right. Yeah. They're they're Which we'd like to. Either they're making the required AMI or they're not. Right. You know?

And, just as far as preference for, let's say, geography,

• a,

• professional firefighter in Kalamazoo

• who wants to apply here

• can make get on the preferential list. Yeah. As I as I understand it.

I'm sorry, Vincent? I can.

However,

• what's the practicality of their jobs in Kalamazoo?

• It'd be hard commute.

And we don't have we

• don't have a job for them here.

Now if they're applying and they're joining our fire department,

you know They have to become a volunteer.

I just wanted to say Kalamazoo. That's all. It

is a good word. Alright.

Alright. So that's that. Right? So I guess we'll move on to the minutes. Before we get to the minutes, can I ask a question?

Under, I guess, the engineer report category,

• Vincent, you had mentioned at the last meeting that there had been some movement on,

• the design center up the road.

• Is there any more information you can share with us on that? Last week,

I got an email copied on an email from Anne Doraleous,

• the head of DOT for this this area, and she confirmed

• she is waiting for a site plan from the applicant. They've been in discussions.

• So

• so it kinda seemed from the how I read her message that it wasn't, like, gonna come next week,

• but it's gonna come soon, like, maybe within a month or two. They're gonna have some plan of

• of trying to iron it out with DOT and the applicant.

• They're working hand in hand with themselves right now, it sounds like. Okay.

Thank you for that. I I recall that

• there had been an effort to submit a site plan

• going back a new site plan six months ago just

• for your information. So, I hope that's the case.

• It'd be nice to get some progress on that. Yeah. I hopefully, I got an update,

• before the next meeting. Great. Thank you for that.

• No problem.

Okay. Let's do the minutes.

• And then, Vince, you got anything else to fill us in? We can do that after

• we get done with the minutes. Mm-mm. I do not. Okay.

• Alright.

• The minutes from

• the last meeting, January 27.

They looked fine to me. They looked good.

On the bottom of I'll jump in, if I may. Yes. On the bottom of page one,

• would either give the planning board some latitude or they themselves modify the fees. I'd like to add the word structure.

Yeah.

The fee structure? Mhmm. The fee structure. Yeah. Yeah.

• Good.

• Because if it's a table, it's a structure. If it's just one amount, then it's a fee. Right.

• On page

• two,

• fourth line down, this is grammatical.

• The u and upon should be lowercase.

• I'm back in English class.

• On

• third paragraph, page two,

• can we chain? It says,

• reference

• for draft resolution, recreation fee, Luke Parkland. Again, it was discussed as recreation fee. It's significant in that the planning board did not have any I'd like to change the word leverage to flexibility.

Mhmm.

Alright. The same thing. Not really. I I said leeway, but then, you a good idea. Okay. Good. Great minds. Take a look. Great.

• And lastly,

• on page three,

• and Vincent can correct me if I'm wrong, but the very top line makes reference to the master plan. Is the correct term master comprehensive

• plan?

The full Better to say comprehensive.

• Then then let's just say don't know what you guys said. Plan. I've done pretty But that's kind of like the more in vogue statement is comprehensive. We go by comprehensive

plan. Let's do that then, please. Comprehensive plan of Proton on Hudson. Yeah. Then let's change master to be comprehensive. Yeah. Mhmm. That sounds Oh, there it is. Up on the screen. Good. You're going. Thank you. For all your great questions.

• That's all I had. Alright.

• That one? Yes, sir.

Page three, top first sentence

• to be done about Main Street.

• Where is Main Street?

That is what he said. He said Main Street. Okay.

• Alright. We we actually got a couple of them, but Doesn't mean you think they're existing for Oh, yeah.

• Yeah. Okay. Okay. Anything else?

Alright. Can you take a motion? Motion to approve the minutes. Motion to approve the minutes of January

• with the,

• changes we just went through. Second.

Alright. All in favor, aye. Aye. Okay.

• Vince has nothing else to report.

• Anybody have anything else?

• We're good?

• Okay.

Motion to adjourn.

• Oh.

• Wait.

Second.

Okay.

Thank you, everybody. Is going. Oh, no. Stacy's coming to me.