As recommended, the Planning Board has determined to abandon the previously adopted State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) determination of non-significance adopted in 2001 and restart the SEQRA review process. At this point, the Planning Board declared its intent to act as Lead Agency on January 24, 2007. The Planning Board has not received communication from an Involved Agency indicating that another Involved Agency wished to assume Lead Agency status. Therefore, the Planning Board may now declare itself Lead Agency and begin the environmental review process.
In an effort to help the Planning Board analyze any potential impacts associated with this project, it is recommended that the Applicant supplement the full EAF (it is noted that the Lead Agency has the responsibility for completing Parts II and III – not the Applicant) with a written narrative that includes a discussion of existing conditions, significant impacts associated with the Proposed Action, and mitigation measures designed to minimize the identified impacts for the following topics:
1. Geology and Soils
2. Groundwater Resources (impacts on protected or non-protected waterbodies, discharge permits required, aquifer impacts)
3. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Monitoring (discussion of NYSDEC Agreement of Consent to remediate the groundwater contamination and required approvals, provision for a soil vapor venting system, how contaminated soil will be removed, transported and disposed
4. Surface Water Resources/Stormwater Drainage
5. Vegetation (including visual impacts of vegetation removal, impacts upon historic district and viability of preserving trees on periphery of site, impacts upon off-site trees)
6. Wildlife (including presence of threatened, rare or endangered species on or near the subject site based upon existing available data and recent field inspection)
7. Traffic and Transportation
a. Summary of previously prepared traffic study
b. Impacts of proposed road through historic district
c. Status of signal at Kent Place
d. Review of NYSDOT comments on project
e. Discussion of parking district operation and regulations
f. Timing of Hickory & Tweed parking district improvements
g. Status of DOT approval of no-left turn on Main Street into Hickory & Tweed
h. Status of DOT approval relocation of crosswalk on Main Street
i. Discussion of installation of new crosswalk on Maple Ave
j. Status of Town-Board prohibition of on-street parking on Maple Avenue within at least 25 feet of the proposed access drive, both east and west of the proposed driveway.
k. Discussion of on and off site traffic and pedestrian circulation (including construction of sidewalks)
l. Discussion of landbanked parking
m. Discussion of location of entrances and exists
n. Discussion of requested parking reduction
o. Discussion of contribution toward off-site parking construction
8. Land Use and Zoning (surrounding land uses, zoning compliance, Middle Income Housing, merging of multiple tax lots into one single tax lot, discussion regarding consistency with Town Comprehensive Plan, Greenway Compact Plan, 2001 Armonk Main Street Planning and Design Study and Westchester County Patterns)
9. Community Facilities and Services
a. Schools (enrollment)
b. Open Space and Recreation
c. Police (increased demand, the designation of no-parking zones, emergency vehicle access or any other issued deemed important to providing emergency services)
d. Fire (increased demand, the designation of no-parking zones, emergency vehicle access or any other issued deemed important to providing emergency services)
e. Ambulance (increased demand, the designation of no-parking zones, emergency vehicle access or any other issued deemed important to providing emergency services)
f. Sewage (amount generated, is sewer district able to accommodate)
g. Water (amount proposed to be used, is water district capable of providing)
h. Solid Waste (amount generated, including discussion of proposed on-site collection points)
10. Historic, Archaeological and Cultural Resources (archaeological resource sensitivity study, description of historic district, impacts of proposed road, impacts of proposed building height, impacts of proposed architecture, comments and documentation from the New York State Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation Department - New York State Historic Preservation Office)
11. Visual Resources (impacts of development upon Main Street, Maple Avenue and Bedford Road, proposed signage, Documentation from ARB confirming plan complies with Section 213-23B of Town Code)
