Mt. Kisco Task Force Looks to Streamline Development Approvals

An 11-person committee has released a series of recommendations in an effort to streamline the development approvals process in Mount Kisco.

The Task Force on the Permitting Process unveiled its report during a joint village board and planning board work session on March 30. The task force included Trustee Peter Grunthal, the group’s chair, Deputy Mayor Anthony Markus, Planning Board Chairman Joseph Cosentino and Vice Chairman Joseph Sturniolo.

Grunthal stressed that while the task force wants to make the process more efficient, it didn’t want boards to weaken standards for approvals. Many of the 23 recommendations would need village board approval, he said.

One recommendation was to “develop and maintain a joint vision for the village,” which would include a much-needed update of the village’s Master Plan; appoint a village trustee serve as a liaison to the planning board; and hold joint village board and planning board meetings twice a year.

Mayor Michael Cindrich said the village was seeking a grant to pay for part of the Master Plan update. Regardless of whether a grant is obtained, Cindrich said the Master Plan should be revised.

In response to cancellations of some recent planning board meetings due to lack of quorum, the task force has recommended the board be reduced from seven to five members, perhaps making it easier for only three members to attend. The group also suggested the planning board meet twice a month throughout the year, rather than schedule only one meeting in December and fewer meetings over the summer.

The village manager and building inspector should be given authority to digitize building department and tax assessment records, the task force stated.

A series of recommendations to modify the planning board approval process was also offered. There should be pre-submission meetings for developers before formal appearances with the planning board. In pre-submission meetings the building inspector would ensure applications are complete. Some applications could be approved by the building inspector if agreed to by the planning board chair, the task force also mentioned.

Another suggestion was to reduce the number of planning board appearances by a developer. After the first appearance, an applicant should meet with town staff to address issues raised during a meeting. This could help ensure requested information is ready for a subsequent meeting.

Village staff could also schedule weekly meetings with developers, the task force recommended.

For minor projects, such as simple modifications to existing structures that have little or no impact and single-family home projects, the building inspector can determine whether the application should be scheduled for planning board approval.

Recommendations regarding the “tone and conduct of planning board members” were also addressed after some people who were interviewed about making improvements raised the issue. Members should be respectful of applicants, provide only constructive criticisms, treat all applicants equally and bring concerns to the attention of an applicant early in the approval process.

There should be no private planning board meetings and planning board members should not attend village staff meetings. Board members should abandon the raised dais where they currently sit during public meetings. Furthermore, all planning board meetings should be televised (currently only village board meetings are televised) and planning, architectural review and zoning board agendas should be divided into time slots so developers know when their items are scheduled for discussion rather than having them sit through entire meetings.

Grunthal said the task force began working on its recommendations last fall and had conducted interviews, including discussions with developers and their representatives.

Cindrich suggested that there be a liaison from the zoning board to the planning board. The planning board should also have the opportunity to comment on a proposal before the ZBA takes action, he said.

Doug Hertz, a 17-year planning board member, said he appreciated the need to speed up the approval process. But Hertz said he and his colleagues must be diligent in their project reviews. If the planning board is unable to do a thorough review, “things will get missed,” he said.

Building Inspector Peter Miley said he agreed with having village staff regularly meet with developers on projects under planning board review. But he added that “we are not taking the place of the planning board.”

Cindrich said he would seek comments from the village board about the task force’s recommendations before any decisions are made.