Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Parking Height topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
CDRC flags parking, height and fire concerns for Congregation Astila expansion at 2 Beatrix Road
Summary
Committee members reviewed a proposal to convert and expand a residence into a freestanding place of worship at 2 Beatrix Road, directing the applicant to provide architectural plans and clarifying that parking calculations, building height relative to grade and rear-yard setback variances must be resolved before further review.
At the Village of Airmont Community Design Review Committee meeting Tuesday, committee members reviewed an application from Congregation Astila for an addition to an existing building at 2 Beatrix Road to be used as a freestanding place of worship and identified parking shortfalls, possible height and retaining-wall issues and required variances.
The committee’s review focused on circulation and site geometry, parking counts and building height given steep grade changes that could push portions of the proposed addition above 30 feet measured from adjacent grade. Planning staff and the building inspector told the applicant that precise architectural drawings and a corrected bulk table are needed to determine what variances will be required and whether the project can meet the village’s height and yard-setback rules.
The applicant described the project as an addition that would create a sanctuary and use the current top-floor open area as a women’s section; the submission listed a sanctuary size that led staff to a parking-requirement calculation of 54 spaces while the applicant said 22 spaces would serve weekday use and that holiday/Shabbos attendance relies on walking. The applicant also characterized the new addition as having one main sanctuary floor above an unfinished lower level; staff noted the steep grade on Smith Hill means the rear elevation may be high enough to trigger ladder-aerial access requirements.
Lou, the building inspector, walked through potential height and setback implications tied to the grade change and suggested the applicant discuss retaining-wall placement, raising parking-grade options and whether the parking lot elevation could be altered to reduce building height as measured from the driveway/parking elevation. Lou also reminded the applicant the village will decide which side of the lot is considered the rear yard for setback calculations and that the bulk table needs correction to reflect that determination.
The committee noted an existing mikvah at the site that had previously been installed without appropriate permit inspections; in the Astila discussion the applicant committed to regularizing that feature and replacing or reconstructing the mikvah inside the permitted work. Planning staff confirmed receipt of a signed Environmental Assessment Form (EAF) sent after the initial submission and said they needed full architecturals to assess egress, grade and height precisely.
Next steps: the committee asked the applicant to submit full architectural drawings, corrected bulk-table entries and clearer site sections showing grade and building-height calculations. Committee members indicated the application will return to CDRC for further review after the materials are revised and warned that several variances may be necessary.
