Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09 - May 4, 2026 - PUBLIC_RedactedRichard Fon Robyn A. Steinberg, AICP, CPESC Chairman Director of Planning TOWN OF YORKTOWN PLANNING BOARD Albert. A. Capellini Community and Cultural Center, 1974 Commerce Street, Yorktown Heights, New York 10598, Phone: (914) 962-6565, Fax: (914) 962-3986 PUBLIC MEETING AGENDA YORKTOWN TOWN HALL BOARD ROOM 363 Underhill Avenue, Yorktown Heights, NY 10598 v Crompond / Croton Heights / Huntersville / Jefferson Valley / Kitchawan / Mohegan Lake / Shrub Oak / Sparkle Lake / Teatown / Yorktown / Yorktown Heights May 4, 2026 7:00 PM 1. Correspondence 2. Meeting Minutes – April 20, 2026 REGULAR SESSION 3. Toll Brothers First 90-Day Time Extension Request Location: 35.12-1-2 & 35.08-1-45; 2302 & 2448 Catherine Street Contact: Zarin & Steinmetz, LLP Description: Subdivision plat previously approved by Planning Board Resolution #25-23. 4. Jacob Road Solar Adjourned Public Hearing Location: 35.16-1-4; 1805 Jacob Road Contact: Zarin & Steinmetz, LLP Description: Proposed site plan and special use permit to develop a 3.125 MW AC solar facility on a 15-acre portion on Lot 4 of the Colangelo Subdivision. WORK SESSION 5. Curry Honda Discussion Site Plan Location: 35.08-1-10; 3845 Crompond Road Contact: Architectural Visions, PLLC Description: Proposed relocation of a temporary shed to the rear of the building. New shed location to be shown on the site plan previously approved by Resolution #24-24. 6. York Farms Estates Discussion Amended Site Plan Location: 37.17-1-19; 1870 Baldwin Road Contact: Site Design Consulants Description: Proposed amendment to the York Farms Estates to legalize four additional units that were not previously approved by Resolution #96-12 dated May 13, 1996. Last revised: 5/1/2026 Correspondence Minutes Toll Brothers April 24, 2026 Ms. Mary Galasso, P.E. Office of the New York City Watershed Inspector General Environmental Protection Bureau The Capitol Albany, NY 12224 RE: JMC Project 23109 Fieldhome at Catherine Street 2302 & 2448 Catherine Street Town of Yorktown, NY Dear Ms. Galasso, We are pleased to provide the following responses to comments contained in a Memorandum from the Office of the New York City Watershed Inspector General, dated March 18, 2026. Accordingly, herein we have provided materials and responses for your consideration. Enclosed please find a copy of the below listed materials for your review: 1. Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Report, prepared by JMC, last revised 04/07/2026 2. JMC Drawings: Dwg. No. Title Rev. #/Date C-000 “Cover Sheet” 12 04/07/2026 C-010 “Overall Existing Conditions Map & Slope Analysis” 12 04/07/2026 C-011 “Existing Conditions Map (North)” 12 04/07/2026 C-012 “Existing Conditions Map (South)” 12 04/07/2026 C-020 “Overall Preliminary Tree Removal Plan” 12 04/07/2026 C-021 “Preliminary Tree Removal Plan (North)” 12 04/07/2026 C-022 “Preliminary Tree Removal Plan (South)” 12 04/07/2026 C-023 “Preliminary Tree Removal Table 1” 12 04/07/2026 C-024 “Preliminary Tree Removal Table 2” 12 04/07/2026 C-030 “Slope Analysis Map (0%-15%, 15%-25%, 25%-Greater)” 8 04/07/2026 C-100 “Overall Preliminary Site Layout Plan” 12 04/07/2026 C-101 “Preliminary Site Layout Plan (North)” 12 04/07/2026 C-102 “Preliminary Site Layout Plan (South)” 12 04/07/2026 C-110 “Fire Apparatus Turning Analysis” 12 04/07/2026 C-200 “Overall Preliminary Site Grading Plan” 13 04/07/2026 2 C-201 “Preliminary Site Grading Plan (North)” 12 04/07/2026 C-202 “Preliminary Site Grading Plan (South)” 12 04/07/2026 C-210 “Roadway Profiles” 01 04/07/2026 C-220 “Site Cross Sections” 07 04/07/2026 C-300 “Overall Preliminary Site Utilities Plan” 10 04/07/2026 C-301 “Preliminary Site Utilities Plan (North)” 17 04/07/2026 C-302 “Preliminary Site Utilities Plan (South)” 16 04/07/2026 C-310 “Water Main Profiles” 16 04/07/2026 C-320 “Sanitary Main Profiles” 10 04/07/2026 C-321 “Sanitary Main Profiles” 10 04/07/2026 C-330 “Stormwater Main Profiles” 10 04/07/2026 C-331 “Stormwater Main Profiles” 07 04/07/2026 C-332 “Stormwater Main Profiles” 07 04/07/2026 C-333 “Stormwater Main Profiles” 07 04/07/2026 C-334 “Stormwater Main Profiles” 07 04/07/2026 C-400 “Overall Preliminary Construction Phasing Plan” 07 04/07/2026 C-401 “Preliminary Construction Phasing Plan (North)” 12 04/07/2026 C-402 “Preliminary Construction Phasing Plan (South)” 10 04/07/2026 C-403 “Preliminary Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (Phase 1A)” 10 04/07/2026 C-404 “Preliminary Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (Phase 1B)” 11 04/07/2026 C-405 “Preliminary Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (Phase 2)” 11 04/07/2026 C-406 “Preliminary Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (Phase 3)” 11 04/07/2026 C-600 “Overall Preliminary Site Lighting Plan” 11 04/07/2026 C-601 “Preliminary Site Lighting Plan (North)” 12 04/07/2026 C-602 “Preliminary Site Lighting Plan (South)” 12 04/07/2026 C-900 “Construction Details” 12 04/07/2026 C-901 “Construction Details” 12 04/07/2026 C-902 “Construction Details” 12 04/07/2026 C-903 “Construction Details” 12 04/07/2026 C-904 “Construction Details” 11 04/07/2026 C-905 “Construction Details” 11 04/07/2026 C-906 “Construction Details” 08 04/07/2026 L-100 “Overall Preliminary Site Landscaping Plan” 02 04/07/2026 L-101 “Preliminary Landscaping Plan (North)” 13 04/07/2026 L-102 “Preliminary Landscaping Plan (South)” 12 04/07/2026 L-110 “Preliminary Typical Unit Landscaping Plan” 12 04/07/2026 L-120 “Wetland Mitigation Plan” 12 04/07/2026 L-900 “Landscaping Details” 10 04/07/2026 For your convenience, we have repeated your comments below with our response immediately following: 3 General Comments Comment No. 1 Comment 2 from the WIG August 2025 Comments discussed steep slope disturbance at the Site. The January 23, 2026 “Slope Analysis Map” (Drawing C-030) identifies existing slopes at the Site in various shades as between 0% and 15%, 15% and 25%, and slopes over 25%. This drawing was compared with Drawing C-200 “Overall Preliminary Site Grading Plan with the drawing entitled “Overall Existing Slope Disturbance and Proposed Grading Plan” prepared by Site Design Consultants dated March 3, 2022 with the latest revision date of August 20, 2024. Although JMC’s January 26, 2026 Letter states that development on steep slopes has been limited to the maximum extent practicable, regrading and building construction on the slope map indicates that approximately 73,747 square feet (about 1.7 acres) of slopes greater than 25% are proposed to be disturbed. This disturbance includes cut and fill to create embankments and building pads. Many units will be constructed where there are existing slopes greater than 25%. The WIG August 2025 Comments recommended that proposed units be reconfigured to eliminate disturbance on slopes greater than 25% to protect water quality from erosion and downstream sedimentation. According to the 2024 New York State Stormwater Management Design Manual (2024 Design Manual): Development on slopes with a grade of 15% or greater should be avoided, if possible, to limit soil loss, erosion, excessive stormwater runoff and the degradation of surface water. Excessive grading should be avoided on all slopes…, as should the flattening of hills and ridges. Steep slopes should be kept in an undisturbed natural condition to help stabilize hillsides and soils. On steep slopes, new development, re-grading, or stripping of vegetation must be minimized. Based on our review of the revised 2026 SWPPP and revised 2026 Site Plans, the proposed townhouse units that would disturb slopes exceeding 25% have not been reconfigured and are still on these very steep slopes. In addition to the existing steep slopes, the creation of over 2 acres of embankments with slopes of up to 50% are proposed to construct stormwater practices and level building pads for the townhouse units. The vague language describing proposed construction sequencing for these created embankments will make adequate phasing difficult to implement, which will pose significant potential for adverse water quality impacts to receiving waters. The WIG Office strongly encourages JMC to reconfigure the townhouse units proposed on slopes exceeding 25% to avoid disturbing these very steep slopes. If this cannot be accomplished, the WIG Office recommends these units be removed from the proposed development. If constructed as currently proposed and if erosion and sediment and/or stormwater controls prove inadequate, there is a significant potential for discharge of sediment from the Site resulting in violation of applicable water quality laws and regulations. 4 Response No. 1 On December 10, 2024, following an extensive SEQRA review process, the Yorktown Town Board adopted a Negative Declaration for the project upon a finding that the project would not result in any significant adverse impacts, including impacts related to steep slope disturbance. The project then underwent Site Plan review by the Planning Board, which granted approval of the proposed site layout and configuration of townhomes on November 10, 2025. A SWPPP and Erosion & Sediment Control Plan have been prepared for the project, which, when implemented, will result in the avoidance of any significant adverse water quality impacts both during and after construction. For example, the Erosion & Sediment control plan has been prepared in accordance with the New York State Standards and Specifications for Erosion and Sediment Control, and contains measures including erosion control matting, seeding, and mulching, that will mitigate potential impacts of steep slope disturbance. In addition, the overall grading design, including the incorporation of retaining walls, graded slopes, etc. has been prepared with consideration to the site’s steep slopes (many of which are man-made slopes created as part of the formation of the soccer field on the site). Accordingly, all applicable regulations and guidance have been incorporated, and any potential impacts will be avoided. We respectfully submit that reconfiguration of the project layout or removal of townhomes is not warranted under the circumstances. Comment No. 2 There are numerous locations on the plans where elevations and/or dimensions are not consistent with those incorporated in the hydrologic analysis in Appendix B of the SWPPP. Some examples include, but are not limited to: a. The structure chart for Detail 22 on Drawing C-901 specifies a weir width of 4 feet for BMH-A7, which is not shown in the detail. b. The outflow pipe diameter for BMH-C4 on the structure chart for Detail 22 on Drawing C-901is inconsistent with that which is modeled in hydrologic analysis. c. Not all dimensions are included in the structure chart for Detail 17 on Drawing C-901. d. Detail 20 on Drawing C-901 does not include dimensions for the bioretention practice outlet risers. e. The invert elevations for Infiltration Practices IS-1B and IS-2B in Details 55 and 56 on Drawing C-905 are inconsistent with the inverts which are modeled in the hydrologic analysis. All dimensions, structure invert elevations, etc., on the plans need to be revised for consistency with the design calculations. 5 Response No. 2 These revisions were incorporated into the drawing set and SWPPP as part of a previous submission made to the NYCDEP responding to their comments. Comment No. 3 Provide details for the Drainage Structures WQS-D5-1 and D5-2 and associated piping where this passes through the retaining wall and discharges to Bioretention Practice BR- 2D. See Drawing C-301. Response No. 3 These details were incorporated as part of a previous submission made to the NYCDEP responding to their comments. Comment No. 4 Proposed roadway stationing needs to be shown on all drawings for reference. Response No. 4 The proposed roadway stationing has been added to all overall drawings. Comment No. 5 The SWPPP needs to discuss the condition of the culverts under the Catskill Aqueduct that serve as design points for the project. Response No. 5 The hydrologic analysis demonstrates that the 1, 10, and 100 year peak runoff rates at each design point will be reduced under proposed conditions. Accordingly, the existing culverts that cross the aqueduct trail will convey less flow in the future once the project is built. There are no known problems with the culverts, and there are no indications that they are not functioning properly. Comment No. 6 Based on Drawing C-201, it appears the embankments for both Detention Basins DB-1 and DB-2 will be higher than 10 feet. Appendix A of the 2024 Design Manual incorporates New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) dam permit requirements. Written confirmation from NYSDEC must be provided confirming these embankments do not require dam permits from NYSDEC. Response No. 6 Based on the dam guidelines, a dam permit will not be required from the DEC. Written confirmation will be provided. 6 Erosion and Sediment Control / Construction Sequencing Comment No. 7 As discussed on page 4 of the WIG August 2025 Comments (See the opening paragraphs of the Erosion and Sediment Control/Construction Sequencing Section), the 2016 edition of the New York State Standards and Specifications for Erosion and Sediment Control (2016 Blue Book) Section 2: Erosion Control Planning and Site Management details planning and design steps to control erosion, including three stages of development for large residential projects: bulk grading, site improvements, and home construction. Each stage is unique with respect to erosion and sediment control, and consideration must be given to the physical conditions at the Site during each stage of development. The erosion and sediment control plan must specifically address the issues associated with each stage of development to demonstrate the project can be constructed without causing erosion and sedimentation. Response No. 7 Detailed erosion & sediment control plans have been prepared with considerations of each stage of the construction and are detailed in the JMC Site Plans. Comment No. 8 JMC’s January 26, 2026 Letter states that the entire project will be constructed in one phase. However, the sequence of construction outlined on Drawings C-400 through C-406 identifies four phases (1A, 1B, 2, and 3). Clarification needs to be provided as to how the multiple phases described on the Site Plans correspond to the single phase described in the January 26, 2026 Letter. The phases as delineated on the drawings are not realistic (See the opening paragraphs of the Erosion and Sediment Control/Construction Sequencing Section and the WIG August 2025 Comment 12). Disturbance associated with any given phase will exceed the limits noted on the drawings. This issue is acknowledged in JMC’s response to Comment 12 in the January 26, 2026 Letter. The sequencing and associated erosion and sediment controls need to be redesigned to demonstrate that construction can be completed at the Site without adversely impacting the surrounding environment and the NYC Watershed. Response No. 8 The project will not be phased in the traditional sense as it will be constructed in a single phase. With that said, construction sequencing plans have been developed showing multiple phases of construction as required by the NYSDEC General Permit and the NYCDEP. All proposed work areas have been kept under 10 acres to mitigate potential impacts associated with large disturbance areas. The details of the construction sequencing have been updated as part of a previous submission made to NYCDEP and are reflected in the materials included herewith. 7 Comment No. 9 Phasing limits shown on Drawings C-400 through C-406 need to be recalibrated throughout the design due to elevation differences at the intersection of various phases. Interim grading will be required beyond the designated phase limits to accommodate the differences in elevation. Thus, the limits of disturbance will be greater than those estimated for each phase. See WIG August 2025 Comment 12. According to JMC’s January 26, 2026 Letter, the entire project will be constructed in one phase. The letter also states that it is likely for construction of the next phase to occur before completion of the prior phase. In addition, grading at the Site will be advanced between phases as necessary, if previously disturbed areas have been sufficiently stabilized in a temporary or permanent fashion. This means the disturbance limits listed on Drawing C-400 (9.51 acres for Phase 1A, 8.4 acres for Phase 1B, 3.95 acres for Phase 2, and 7.61 acres for Phase 3) are unrealistic and the amount of disturbance at any given time in the construction process will exceed those which are proposed. Based on the sequence described on Drawing C-400 and the overlapping of phase disturbance implied in the January 26, 2026 Letter, it is not clear that areas within each phase will be stabilized prior to the commencement of the next phase. Some examples of issues that demonstrate the implausible nature of the phasing were itemized in the WIG August 2025 Comments. Those that are still relevant, along with several other examples, are presented below: a. Drawing C-403: Phase 1A meets Phase 1B near the southeast corner of the proposed area surrounding the pool complex. The existing elevation is 450’ and the proposed elevation is 442’. An 8-foot grade cut will require interim grading beyond the limit of Phase 1A. b. Drawing C-403: Where Phase 1A meets Phase 1B between proposed Units 13 and 14, the existing elevation is 416’ and the proposed elevation is 430’. Interim grading, needed to accommodate 14 feet of fill, will extend beyond the Phase 1A limits. c. Drawing C-406: Where Phase 2 meets Phase 3 between Units 93 and 105, the existing elevation is 478’ and the proposed elevation is 454’. A 24-foot grade cut will require interim grading beyond the limits of Phase 2. d. Drawing C-404: Where Phase 2 meets Phase 3 behind Unit 29, the existing elevation is 430’ and the proposed elevation is 450’. Interim grading to accommodate 20 feet of fill will extend beyond the limits of Phase 2. e. Drawing C-403: Drainage Structure OSC-A5 will be installed in Phase 1A, step 7. This structure has a grate (top) elevation of 443’ (See Drawing C-301), but grade at this location when it is installed will be at or near the existing elevation of 436’. Although rough grading of the roadway begins in Phase 1A, step 6, it is not clear from the proposed sequence that bulk grading in this area will be complete prior to installation of the drainage structures. The top of the structure could extend up to 7’ above existing grade when it is installed. The pipe from this structure to the next drainage structure (DMH-A4) will also be above grade until grading of the proposed roadway in this area is complete. It appears that the proposed haul route through the Site may cross this exposed piping. 8 f. Drawing C-403: Infiltration Practice IS-1B will be installed in Phase 1A, step 9. At this time, the infiltration practice will be partially above grade. Further, grading will be required immediately south of this practice to maintain the limits of disturbance for Phase 1A prior to beginning Phase 1B. a. The topsoil stockpiles for each phase as shown on Drawings C-403 through C-406 are in locations that will be regraded during the phase in which they are implemented. For example, the topsoil stockpile for Phase 1A is located in an area with existing grades of 440’ to 446’. See Drawing C-403. The proposed grade to be achieved in the Phase is 438’ at this location. The stockpile is in an area that will be cut to depths of 2 to 6 feet while the stockpile is in place. For Phase 1B, the proposed topsoil stockpile lies within the footprint of Units 14 through 16. See Drawing C-404. Basement elevation for these units is approximately 434’ and ground floor elevation is about 442’. Existing grades are 422’ to 426’. The stockpile is proposed in an area where fill depths greater than 8 feet will be installed while the stockpile is in place. For Phase 2, the topsoil stockpile is located in the footprint of Townhouse Units 29 through 31. Basement elevations are between 451’ and 455’ with ground floor elevations between 459’ and 463’. Existing elevations are about 432’ to 438’. Fill depths greater than 13 feet are proposed to be installed while the stockpile is in place. Response No. 9 The plans have been updated in coordination with Toll Brothers and the boundaries have been updated accordingly. The plans also include considerations for transitions and grading in between the various construction areas. Comment No. 10 Increasing the area of disturbance to more than 5 acres as proposed by the current phasing increases the potential risk of adversely impacting water quality during project construction, especially given the steep slopes on the Site. Drawings C-400 through C-406 detail the erosion controls and construction phasing proposed for the project. Four phases are proposed – 1A, 1B, 2, and 3. As noted in Comment 9 above, the amount of disturbance per construction phase is approximately 9.51 acres for Phase 1A, 8.40 acres for Phase 1B, 3.95 acres for Phase 2, and 7.61 acres for Phase 3. The disturbance area for Phases 1A, 1B, and Phase 3 exceed the 5-acre limit. The disturbances include locations with steep slopes which do not provide enough area for the installation of effective stormwater controls and heighten the potential for adverse impacts to water quality. To ensure that construction activities will not result in the destabilization of steep slopes and cause turbid water discharges from the Site, the amount of disturbance for each phase needs to be significantly reduced to 5 acres or less. If, contrary to the WIG Office’s recommendation, the development seeks to proceed with phases greater than 5 acres, then the Site Plans and SWPPP must include a significantly more detailed construction sequence with associated erosion and sediment controls. In addition, for construction phases exceeding 5 acres, Part I.E.6 of the New York State SPDES General Permit for Stormwater Discharges from Construction Activity GP-0-25-001 requires an “Authorization Letter to Disturb Greater 9 Than Five Acres” from NYSDEC or the Traditional Land Use Control MS4 Operator, here the Town of Yorktown, NY. Response No. 10 The construction sequencing has been updated based on the latest response to NYCDEP comments. In addition, authorization to disturb more than 5 acres at one time has been formally requested from the Town of Yorktown. All proposed work areas have been kept under 10 acres to mitigate potential impacts associated with large disturbance areas. Comment No. 11 Within the limits of each phase, there are grade change issues that are not addressed in the plans. See WIG August 2025 Comment 13. For example, the sequencing for Phase 1A on Drawing C-403 states that the area for proposed subsurface Infiltration System IS-1B will be cordoned off at the outset of the phase. This area is adjacent to the area that will be used as a haul road within the Site during the construction. The existing grade in the vicinity of the proposed infiltration system is between about 430’ and 436’, but the proposed grade is between 442’ and 444’. It is unclear how this area can be isolated to prevent compaction when the grade change will require 12 feet of fill, and when some fill must be compacted to support the proposed roadway. The WIG Office concludes the proposed phasing does not demonstrate the project Site can be adequately protected from erosion and sedimentation during construction. It is recommended that existing and proposed grades be further analyzed so that realistic and manageable limits of disturbance can be established in smaller phases which minimize the potential for erosion and discharges of turbid water. Response No. 11 The plans were previously updated in response to NYCDEP Comments and the sequencing now includes considerations for the grading and earthwork limits at the extent of each area. Hydrology/Water Quantity Comment No. 12 The hydrologic analyses in Appendices A and B of the SWPPP incorporate current Northeast Regional Climate Center (NRCC) rainfall data. To account for future climate change, the analysis uses the statistical upper confidence limits for the data rather than the mean value. See WIG August 2025 Comment 22. Upper confidence limits were used to model both existing and future conditions. It is understood that these values are meant to model higher rainfall amounts that climate models predict for the future, but it is unclear why these upper confidence limits were applied for existing conditions. Existing conditions are generally modeled using the current mean storm data. The January 26, 2026 Letter states that upper confidence limits were used for both pre- and post-development models 10 to provide an “apples to apples” analysis. Pre-development hydrology needs to be reflective of current climate conditions, not a future projection based on upper confidence limits, if construction is imminent (within the next few years). The SWPPP needs to be revised to account for differences in current pre-development climate conditions and future post- development climate conditions. Response No. 12 The proposed hydrologic modeling accounts for the potential increase in precipitation due to climate change by utilizing the upper confidence limits of the Extreme Precipitation Estimates from the NRCC rainfall data. There is generally an 8-20% increase in precipitation for the typically analyzed 1-, 10-, and 100-yr 24hr rainfall events when compared to the average value previously used. This increase results in systems being oversized during design by providing additional freeboard and storage volume so that they can accommodate a potential increase in rainfall depths in the future. It is our professional opinion that the additional storage volume and freeboard provided in the design by conducting the analysis in this way is more than adequate to account for any potential future increases in precipitation depth. This approach meets the goals stated in the Climate Change Resiliency Planning section of the NYS Stormwater Manual. Comment No. 13 To provide a comprehensive analysis of the impacts the project may have on Site drainage, both pre- and post-development drainage areas need to be accurately defined using existing and proposed topography, respectively. Property lines are not the limits of a drainage area unless supported by topographical features. See WIG August 2025 Comment 23. Drawings EDA-1 and PDA-1 in Appendix L of the SWPPP define the southern limits of the drainage areas as the southern property line, although the contours on the drawings indicate otherwise. For example, the contours along the southeastern section of Drainage Area EDA-2 indicate that additional land beyond the property boundary, as shown on Drawing EDA-1, is tributary to Design Point 2. To limit the size of the area to be analyzed, this drainage area and associated post-development drainage areas should be subdivided into smaller areas tributary to either Design Point 2, or to short design lines closer to the area to be developed. Similarly, contouring indicates that the southern portion of Drainage Area EDA-1 and the associated post-development drainage area are not tributary to Design Point 1, but instead discharge into Catherine Street. Response No. 13 Revising the extent of the hydrologic analysis and drainage areas would have no impact on the result of the analysis, given that the changes being suggested include areas where no work is proposed and the coverage characteristics will not change after construction. Comment No. 14 Comparing Drawing PDA-1 in Appendix L of the SWPPP and Drawings C-201, C-202, C- 301, and C-302, it appears that the drainage areas are incorrectly defined. For example: 11 a. The section of Drainage Area PDA-1B behind Units 60 through 63, including the patios for those units, appear to be part of Drainage Area PDA-1A. b. The section of Drainage Area PDA-1C behind Units 1 through 10, including the patios for those units, appear to be part of Drainage Area PDA-1D. c. The section of Drainage Area PDA-2D behind Units 14 through 24, and the patios for those units, appear to be part of Drainage Area PDA-2A. d. The section of Drainage Area PDA-2D behind Units 25 through 31, and the patios for those units, appear to be part of Drainage Area DB-2. The hydrologic model needs to accurately model all drainage areas. Runoff reduction or treatment must be provided for all proposed impervious surfaces. Response No. 14 The plans have been revised to incorporate grassed swales to capture the indicated areas and maintain the analyzed drainage areas. Comment No. 15 Sections 4.6, 4.7 and 4.8 of the 2024 Design Manual state that post development sheet flow lengths are limited to 100 feet unless the time of concentration (Tc) flow path is unchanged (undisturbed) from pre- to post development conditions. See WIG August 2025 Comment 27. The January 26, 2026 Letter states that Tc flow paths have been revised to be identical to predevelopment values where the beginning of the path has not been changed. PDA-1A includes 134 feet of sheet flow through woods, PDA-1B includes 150 feet of sheet flow through woods, and PDA-2C includes 122 feet of sheet flow through grass. Although the Preliminary Phasing Plans (Drawings C-400 through C-402) and Preliminary Erosion and Sediment Control Plans (Drawings C-403 through C-406) indicate that the upper reaches of drainage areas PDA-1A and PDA-1B are outside the limits of disturbance, the Landscaping Plan (Drawing L-100) indicates that there will be disturbance to plant shrubs and trees in these areas. Further, the upper reaches of Drainage Areas PDA-1A and PDA-1B are very small and immediately adjacent to townhouse units and/or areas where significant regrading will occur to meet existing grade. This implies that the upper reaches of these drainage areas are more likely to be cleared of trees and planted as grass. If so, they will not be unchanged, as stated, and the sheet flow lengths will be shorter as a result. Drainage Area PDA-2C does not include any areas that will remain unchanged. The sheet flow section of the Tc flow path is in an area that will be significantly regraded and subsequently vegetated with grass and shrubs at a slope of about 3.66%. A sheet flow length of 122 feet is inappropriate for PDA-2C based on the requirements of the 2024 Design Manual and proposed site conditions. The post-development analysis needs to be revised to accurately reflect the post-development land surface coverage and associated sheet flow lengths. Alternatively, the plans must be revised for consistency across each drawing, and to clearly support the use of the aforementioned sheet flow lengths in the modelling of these drainage areas. 12 Response No. 15 This item was addressed as part of a previous submission made to NYCDEP. Comment No. 16 The sheet flow section of the Tc for Drainage Area PDA-1C will not flow through woods as modeled in Appendix B of the SWPPP. The analysis needs to be revised accordingly. Response No. 16 This item was addressed as part of a previous submission made to NYCDEP. Comment No. 17 Clarify why pipe flow was used when modeling Tc in some drainage areas (PDA-1C), but not in others (PDA-1A and PDA-1B). Response No. 17 This item was addressed as part of a previous submission made to NYCDEP. Water Quality and Pollutant Loading Comment No. 18 The WIG August 2025 Comments requested that cross sections be provided for the proposed underground infiltration systems and the bioretention practices. The cross sections provided for infiltration do not include existing and proposed grades at the location of each practice. It appears that both infiltration systems are proposed to be located partially in cut and partially in fill. Section 6.3.1 of the 2024 Design Manual includes specifications for engineered fill which is to be used for infiltration practices. Those requirements must be included on the plans. Further, a detail needs to be provided for each infiltration system which (a) shows the cross section, (b) specifies the engineered fill to be used, and (c) indicates how the infiltration system will be constructed and maintained fully level across the practice, so that infiltration remains consistent. Response No. 18 This item was addressed as part of a previous submission made to NYCDEP. Comment No. 19 Since Bioretention BR-1C and BR-2D are to be constructed predominantly in fill, the plans need to include construction, inspection and maintenance criteria to ensure the practices will be maintained in a level condition. 13 Response No. 19 This item was addressed as part of a previous submission made to NYCDEP. Comment No. 20 Bioretention BR-2C is proposed to have a surface elevation of 438.5’ according to Drawing C-201. Based on Detail 20 on Drawing C-901, the area must be excavated to a depth approximately 3.5 feet deeper than the surface elevation of the bioretention practice to accommodate the stone layer, bioretention media layer and the upper mulch layer of the practice. Therefore, the excavation elevation for this practice must be 435’. Existing surface elevations in this area are between 441’ and 453’. This means that the area will be cut between 6 and 18 feet to install a level practice. Soil testing in this area did not extend deeper than about 7 feet below existing grade. Refusal was indicated for two test pits, and a separate test pit in the vicinity of BR-2C indicated mottling at a depth of 4’ 4”. Clarify whether blasting is anticipated for this practice. Detail 20 on Drawing C-901 needs to specify that a liner will be installed for this practice to eliminate the possibility of groundwater seepage into the practice. Response No. 20 This item was addressed as part of a previous submission made to NYCDEP. Comment No. 21 Additional soil testing needs to be conducted for Infiltration Systems IS-1B and IS -2B to comply with the requirements of Appendix D of the 2024 Design Manual. Table D.1 in that appendix specifies two test pits and three permeability tests for practices with surface areas of 2,500 to 5,000 square feet (SF). IS-1B has an area of 2,604 SF based on the hydrologic analysis in Appendix B of the SWPPP. Table D.1 in the 2024 Design Manual requires 3 test pits and 5 permeability tests for infiltration practices between 7,500 and 10,000 SF. IS-2B has an area of 7,679 SF. Response No. 21 This item was addressed as part of a previous submission made to NYCDEP. Comment No. 22 Infiltration testing in the vicinity of Infiltration System IS-1B was conducted at elevations 434’ and 432’. See WIG August 2025 Comment 34. Based on the hydrologic analysis in Appendix B of the SWPPP, the invert of this infiltration practice is at elevation 434’. Appendix D of the 2024 Design Manual states that field permeability testing (infiltration testing) shall be performed at a depth of two feet below the bottom of the proposed practice. Only one test was conducted at this depth, while three are required. See Comment 21, above. Additional testing at the appropriate depth is necessary. 14 Response No. 22 This item was addressed as part of a previous submission made to NYCDEP. Comment No. 23 Section 6.3.4.2 of the 2024 Design Manual outlines sizing criteria for infiltration practices. The minimum bottom area for underground infiltration practices is based on the storage volume within the practice, and not the infiltrative capacity of the underlying soil. Neither infiltration practice proposed for this project meets the criteria specified in Section 6.3.4.2 of the 2024 Design Manual. To meet the requirements of the 2024 Design Manual, Infiltration System IS-1B would require a storage volume of 52,632 cubic feet (CF), based on the hydrologic analysis in Appendix B of the SWPPP. However, only 34,183 CF of storage is provided. For IS-2B, the required storage is 17,283 CF, but the storage volume provided is only 9,048 CF. The design needs to be revised to meet the requirements of the 2024 Design Manual. Response No. 23 This item was addressed as part of a previous submission made to NYCDEP. Comment No. 24 Drawing C-302 indicates that Infiltration System IS-2B will be within the minimum separation distance of 25 feet to a sewer main. See Table 6.10 of the 2024 Design Manual. The location of the sewer main and/or the infiltration practice needs to be adjusted to maintain the minimum separation distance. Response No. 24 This item was addressed as part of a previous submission made to NYCDEP. Comment No. 25 Two of the proposed bioretention practices fail to meet the sizing requirements in Section 6.4.4.2 of the 2024 Design Manual. According to this section of the Design Manual, the minimum surface area for BR-1C should be 8,263 SF, but the hydrologic analysis in Appendix B of the SWPPP indicates that only 6,932 SF are provided. Similarly, for BR-2D, 7,542 SF of surface area is required, but only 6,940 is provided. The surface area of each practice needs to be increased to meet the requirements of the 2024 Design Manual. For BR-1C, an additional 1,331 SF is required. For BR-2D, an additional 602 SF is required. Response No. 25 This item was addressed as part of a previous submission made to NYCDEP. The minimum areas were calculated utilizing the NYSDEC sizing sheets and comply. 15 Comment No. 26 Table 6.14 in the 2024 Design Manual specifies that the maximum depth of ponding in bioretention practices for the 100-year storm is 18 inches (1.5 feet). The hydrologic analysis in Appendix B of the SWPPP shows that the ponding depth in Bioretention BR-2C will be 2.23 feet. The practice design needs to be revised to meet regulatory requirements. Response No. 26 This item was addressed as part of a previous submission made to NYCDEP. Comment No. 27 The hydrologic analysis (Appendix B of the SWPPP) indicates that a small amount of the runoff from the 1-year, 24-hour storm will flow into the outlet structure and therefore bypass filtration in each bioretention basin. See WIG August 2025 Comment 37. Therefore, the goal of treating the entire treatment volume is not met, and the design needs to be revised accordingly. The January 26, 2026 Letter states that the bioretention areas have been made as large as possible given site conditions. If the requirements for each treatment practice cannot be met under post-development site conditions, then the proposed development is too large for the given site and needs to be downsized. Response No. 27 This item was addressed as part of a previous submission made to NYCDEP. Comment No. 28 Clarification must be provided as to why exfiltration is modeled in cubic feet per second for Infiltration System IS-1B, but in inches per hour in Infiltration System IS-2B. See WIG August 2025 Comment 38. Response No. 28 This item was addressed as part of a previous submission made to NYCDEP. Comment No. 29 The New Croton Reservoir is a terminal reservoir in the NYC Watershed. An analysis of coliform runoff before and after land disturbance activity has been provided in accordance with Section 18-39 (c) (1) of the 2025 edition of the Rules and Regulations for the Protection from Contamination, Degradation, and Pollution of the New York City Water Supply and Its Sources (2025 WRR). An analysis of total phosphorus (TP) loading is also provided, as was requested. These pollutant loading analyses (PLA) use data published in 1996 by the Terrene Institute for both fecal coliform loading and total phosphorus loading as inputs for the unit area loading analysis. This means that the PLAs were based on data that are over 30 years old. More recent data is available from other sources such as the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) National Stormwater Quality 16 Database (NSQD) that shows some variation from the earlier published sources. Some sources publish pollutant loading data that can be input to a unit loading analysis while others use the data in a format that is used in different PLA methods, such as the “Simple Method,” or EPA models such as the Pollutant Load Estimation Tool (PLET). It is recommended the PLA be updated using more current data. If more recent data cannot be identified for input to a unit loading analysis, a different loading analysis method capable of incorporating more recent data should be used. Response No. 29 This item was addressed as part of a previous submission made to NYCDEP. Comment No. 30 The PLA provided assumes 100% removal for both fecal coliform and TP for infiltration practices, and 70% removal for each pollutant in bioretention practices. No data or publication are cited to support these removal rates and the removal rates are inconsistent with the removal data published by the International Stormwater Best Management Practice Database, or in the case of TP, the minimum removal rates included in Section 3.3 of the 2024 Design Manual. The PLA should be run again using removal rates from current published sources. Response No. 30 This item was addressed as part of a previous submission made to NYCDEP. Comment No. 31 The project is located within the New Croton Reservoir Basin. Table 2 of the June 2000 “Phase II Phosphorus Total Maximum Daily Loads for Reservoirs in the New York City Water Supply Watershed (Delaware, Dutchess, Greene, Putnam, Schoharie, Sullivan, Ulster, and Westchester Counties)” establishes New Croton Reservoir as phosphorus impaired. The June 2000 phosphorus load for New Croton Reservoir is 11,189 kilograms per year (kg/yr) and the available phosphorus load is 8,758 kg/yr. Since the current phosphorus load in the New Croton Reservoir exceeds the available phosphorus load, it must be reduced. Using the drainage area acreage, the imperviousness noted in the hydrologic analysis, and assuming that forest and lawn areas are 2% impervious, the WIG Office conducted a separate PLA for TP using the Simple Method, the applicant's land use areas, and the proposed treatment systems. Pollutant concentrations associated with land use areas were selected from Table 2 of the East of Hudson Watershed Corporation’s “Stormwater Retrofit Design Manual, Project Years 6 Through 10” (EOHWC Retrofit Design Manual). This analysis estimated a pre-development TP load of about 7.79 pounds. Post development, the load was estimated to be about 60.52 pounds without treatment. Section 3.3 of the 2024 Design Manual includes a list of stormwater practices acceptable for water quality treatment in New York State. Practices on the list must remove 40% or 17 more TP. A post-development, post-treatment load of about 36.59 pounds (more than four times the pre-development load) was estimated using this removal rate for each of the practices proposed (infiltration, bioretention, and Jellyfish Filters), and assuming an efficiency reduction for the second practice in series where applicable. Infiltration practices are generally understood to have TP removal rates much higher than 40%. Further, the manufacturer of Jellyfish Filters cites a removal rate of 64% for these practices, and the EOHWC Retrofit Design Manual cites a 65% removal rate for bioretention. Therefore, the post-development, posttreatment estimate was also conducted using removal rates of 100% for infiltration practices, 65% for bioretention practices, and 64% for Jellyfish filters. The post-development, post-treatment load using these removal rates was estimated to be about 12.06 pounds. This is more than one and a half times the estimated pre-development TP load. In summary, the WIG’s PLA determined that the proposed project in its present form would increase phosphorus pollution within the New Croton Reservoir drainage basin. The project needs to be modified to reduce post development TP levels to be equal to or less than pre-development levels. To achieve this, the project needs to be reduced in size, or additional stormwater treatment measures need to be implemented to reduce TP. If the TP load after project revisions still exceeds pre-development TP levels, offsite TP reductions need to be implemented within the New Croton Reservoir Basin to offset increases in TP that result from this project. Response No. 31 This item was addressed as part of a previous submission made to NYCDEP. We value your input, and appreciate your feedback on this exciting project, which will bring much needed housing to the deeply supply constrained market in Westchester County and, once realized, represent a small step toward furthering the Governor's Housing Initiatives ("The New York Housing Compact"). Should you have any questions or require additional information, please call our office at (914) 273-5225. Thank you. Sincerely, JMC Planning Engineering Landscape Architecture & Land Surveying, PLLC Paul Dumont Paul Dumont, PE Project Manager https://jmcpc.sharepoint.com/sites/23109/Shared Documents/Admin/ltGalasso_CommentResponse_2026-04-24.docx March 17, 2026 Ms. Mariyam Zachariah New York City Department of Environmental Protection 465 Columbus Avenue Valhalla, NY 10595 RE: JMC Project 23109 Fieldhome at Catherine Street 2302 & 2448 Catherine Street Town of Yorktown, NY Dear Ms. Zachariah: We are pleased to provide the following responses to comments contained in Memorandum from Town of Yorktown Planning Department, dated June 6, 2025. Accordingly, herein we have provided materials and responses for your consideration. Enclosed please find a copy of the below listed materials for your review: 1. Email Correspondence with NYSDEC regarding pretreatment devices, dated 06/26/2025 2. Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) Report, prepared by JMC, last revised 03/10/2026 3. JMC Drawings (signed and sealed): Dwg. No Title Rev.No. /Date C-000 Cover Sheet 11 03/10/2026 C-010 Overall Existing Conditions Map and Slope Analysis 11 03/10/2026 C-011 Existing Conditions Map (North) 11 03/10/2026 C-012 Existing Conditions Map (South) 11 03/10/2026 C-020 Overall Preliminary Tree Removal Plan 11 03/10/2026 C-021 Preliminary Tree Removal Plan (North) 11 03/10/2026 C-022 Preliminary Tree Removal Plan (South) 11 03/10/2026 C-023 Preliminary Tree Removal Plan Table 1 11 03/10/2026 C-024 Preliminary Tree Removal Plan Table 2 11 03/10/2026 C-030 Slope Analysis Map (0%-15%, 15%-25%, 25%-Greater) 7 03/10/2026 C-100 Overall Preliminary Site Layout Plan 11 03/10/2026 C-101 Preliminary Site Layout Plan (North) 11 03/10/2026 C-102 Preliminary Site Layout Plan (South) 11 03/10/2026 2 C-110 Preliminary Truck Maneuvering Plan 11 03/10/2026 C-200 Overall Preliminary Site Grading Plan 12 03/10/2026 C-201 Preliminary Site Grading Plan (North) 11 03/10/2026 C-202 Preliminary Site Grading Plan (South) 11 03/10/2026 C-203 Infiltration System Profiles 03/10/2026 C-210 Roadway Profiles 6 03/10/2026 C-220 Site Cross Sections 9 03/10/2026 C-300 Overall Preliminary Site Utilities Plan 15 03/10/2026 C-301 Preliminary Site Utilities Plan (North) 14 03/10/2026 C-302 Preliminary Site Utilities Plan (South) 14 03/10/2026 C-310 Water Main Profiles 8 03/10/2026 C-320 Sanitary Main Profiles 8 03/10/2026 C-321 Sanitary Main Profiles 8 03/10/2026 C-330 Stormwater Main Profiles 6 03/10/2026 C-331 Stormwater Main Profiles 6 03/10/2026 C-332 Stormwater Main Profiles 6 03/10/2026 C-333 Stormwater Main Profiles 6 03/10/2026 C-334 Stormwater Main Profiles 6 03/10/2026 C-400 Overall Preliminary Construction Phasing Plan 11 03/10/2026 C-401 Preliminary Construction Phasing Plan (North) 9 03/10/2026 C-402 Preliminary Construction Phasing Plan (South) 9 03/10/2026 C-403 Preliminary Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (Phase 1A) 10 03/10/2026 C-404 Preliminary Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (Phase 1B) 10 03/10/2026 C-405 Preliminary Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (Phase 2) 10 03/10/2026 C-406 Preliminary Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (Phase 3) 10 03/10/2026 C-600 Overall Preliminary Site Lighting Plan 11 03/10/2026 C-601 Preliminary Site Lighting Plan (North) 11 03/10/2026 C-602 Preliminary Site Lighting Plan (South) 11 03/10/2026 C-900 Construction Details 11 03/10/2026 C-901 Construction Details 11 03/10/2026 C-902 Construction Details 11 03/10/2026 C-903 Construction Details 10 03/10/2026 C-904 Construction Details 10 03/10/2026 C-905 Construction Details 7 03/10/2026 C-906 Construction Details 1 03/10/2026 L-100 Overall Preliminary Site Landscaping Plan 12 03/10/2026 L-101 Preliminary Site Landscaping Plan (North) 11 03/10/2026 L-102 Preliminary Site Landscaping Plan (South) 11 03/10/2026 L-110 Preliminary Typical Unit Landscaping Plan 11 03/10/2026 L-120 Wetland Mitigation Plan 9 03/10/2026 L-900 Landscaping Details 11 03/10/2026 For your convenience, we have repeated your comments below with our response immediately following: 3 A. General Comment No. 1 Include in the Existing Conditions or Proposed Conditions section, a description of any existing easements or easements created by this project and its owner. The relocation of the existing sewer main should be discussed and included in the construction sequence. Response No. 1 A brief description of the existing and proposed easements have been added to the SWPPP Report in the Existing Conditions and Proposed Conditions, respectively. The relocation of the existing sewer main has been discussed and included in the construction sequence. Comment No. 2 Call out the two headwalls/culvert systems on the plan and show the direction of flow to the west and east before exiting the site as noted on page 4 of the report. Response No. 2 JMC Drawings C-010, C-011, C-300, and C-301 have been revised to label the headwalls and to show the flow lines graphically. Comment No. 3 In the SWPPP narrative, explain the functional difference between the dry detention basin and dry extended basin and call out the type of detention basins proposed for the project. Response No. 3 There is no functional difference between them. To avoid confusion “dry extended detention” has been removed from the SWPPP narrative. Comment No. 4 Provide a construction detail for the proposed emergency access road. Response No. 4 The emergency access road is proposed to use the grass pave detail. The plans have been updated to reflect as much. Comment No. 5 In the SWPPP narrative, along with Table 3, cite the regulation stated in Section 18-39(c)(6) of the Watershed Rules & Regulations (WRR), which requires that for drainage areas with more than 20% 4 impervious cover, the SWPPP must provide stormwater runoff treatment using two different types of standard stormwater management practices in series, each sized for the full WQv. The design proposes utilizing a Jellyfish filter as the second practice in series for the two drainage areas. Describe all site constraints that would prohibit the use of a standard stormwater management practice and provide a technical equivalency statement demonstrating that this device provides equivalent water quality treatment. Demonstrate that both practices are sized to capture and treat the full WQv. Response No. 5 Table 3 has been updated to include a column labeled “Second Practice in Series” and the WRR section 18-39(c)(6) has been added to the narrative immediately after the table. The narrative also explains site constraints that prevent the use an infiltration practice. Comment No. 6 The fecal coliform analysis provided in the SWPPP report utilizes the unit-area loading method, which is the least likely to give accurate results. A more comprehensive assessment should be performed as the change in use is significant from pre- to post-development conditions. The three land use/groundcovers included in the assessment are “impervious”, “grass” and “forest”. The impervious surface cover includes roadways/parking lots and high density residential, which have varying fecal coliform loading rates. DEP recommends utilizing the Simple Method, which provides a more accurate and site-specific analysis. Response No. 6 The Pollutant Loading analysis provided in the SWPPP report has been revised to use the Simple Method recommended by DEP. The Land Use coverage type and pollutant concentrations utilized for the calculations were taken from the “Fundamentals of Urban Runoff Management” (2007). B. Hydrology Comment No. 1 Time of Concentration (Tc) flow paths of several drainage areas should have been initiated at highest elevation within the drainage area. Likewise, several drainage areas have pipe flow used in the Tc calculations although some with the pipe flows are not shown in the drainage area map (for example, PDA-1B & 1C) while some others are given direct entries in the model. Also, provide justification for utilizing a Tc flow path with direct entry. Some Tc flow paths are shown as not perpendicular to the contours. Review and revise Tc flow paths as necessary. Response No. 1 Time of Concentration flow paths and calculations have been reviewed and updated for existing and proposed conditions. All flow paths begin at high points and all paths that include pipe flow are illustrated as such. All areas that resulted in less than the minimum Tc have been inputted as 6 minutes since that is the minimum. 5 Comment No. 2 Provide the backup for the Tc calculations for all drainage areas. Response No. 2 The Drainage Area Maps have been updated to include descriptive labels for each segment of the Tc flow paths. These labels now also include surface material and other descriptive features. Comment No. 3 Verify the area of woods modelled for drainage areas PDA-1C and PDA-DB-2 and the grass coverage for PDA-1B. Although landscaping plans show some trees to be planted, the usage of “woods” as the land cover for the purpose of modelling does not seem realistic. Land coverages used to model the Tc flow paths must be verified based on real conditions. Response No. 3 The woods modelled for PDA-1C and PDA-DB-2 are consistent with existing conditions in areas not to be disturbed. Grass modelled in PDA-1B is located within proposed lawn areas between driveways and buildings. Comment No. 4 Verify the patios are accounted for in the hydrologic model for PDA-2C. Indicate what CN is assigned to the areas of stormwater basins in the different drainage areas. If nothing is assigned yet, provide a CN number for each of them. Response No. 4 Patios have been accounted for in the hydrologic model for PDA-2C. The curve number assigned to stormwater basins is open space, as there are no ponds proposed with permanent pools. Comment No. 5 Sheet flow is called out on the PDA-2D of post development drainage area map, but the HydroCAD model does not reflect it. Response No. 5 Errant labels have been removed, and drainage labels have been updated and added for additional clarity. 6 C. Conveyance Structures Comment No. 1 There appear to be several sections of drainage piping with low slope (less than 1%) and long runs (greater than 50 feet). The combination of these two factors can make construction of the sections of pipe difficult and may lead to negative slope drainage. Consider reducing the pipe lengths by adding manholes or increasing the slopes to mitigate this. Response No. 1 Where possible/practical, slopes were increased to greater than 1% and manholes added to reduce pipe lengths at low slopes. Limitations based on depth of practice, amount of nearby structures and water main infrastructure, and length required to convey stormwater are preventing more improvements to slopes. The pipes as proposed are within the tolerances of construction. Comment No. 2 Post development schematics should be corrected to BMHC6 instead of BMHC4 to be consistent with the plans. Response No. 2 The calculations have been revised to show BMH-C6, to be consistent with the plans. Comment No. 3 Where sewer mains cross over stormwater drainage piping and cannot maintain a vertical distance of 18 inches or more, DEP recommends that the sewer main be equipped with a watertight sleeve. Response No. 3 Watertight sleeves are not required as sanitary sewer pipes are required to be watertight and pressure tested prior to being put into service. Also, our office only specifies watertight storm pipes for construction of storm sewer conveyance lines. Comment No. 4 Label the roof and footing drains on the plans and show roof drains are directed towards the stormwater practices, and the footing drains are directed away from it. Response No. 4 Roof and footing drain line styles have been updated to more clearly distinguish them from other pipes. Roof drains are now presented as ‘RD’ line styles and footing drains as ‘FD’ line 7 styles. All roof drain lines are clearly shown to be directed towards stormwater practices while footing drains are directed away from the practices. Comment No. 5 The rip rap sizing calculations of some end structures are missing from the report. For example, HW- 1-1, ES-G-0 etc. are missing and upon verification, correctly display it on the table on detail 18 on C- 901 plan. For ES-B3, pipe diameter, Q (cfs) are used in the sizing seemed not consistent with the pipe sizing calculations. Do not just rely on the ones pointed out in the example rather verify all end structures calculations are provided in the Appendix/plans and must be verified for accuracy. Response No. 5 The rip rap / rock outlet protection sizing calculations have been revised for consistency and to show all end structures proposed on the plans. Comment No. 6 Different types of manhole details are provided on plan, C-900. Provide a legend on the utilities plan to indicate where each type will be placed. Response No. 6 The details describe when each type is required. Comment No. 7 Stormwater main profiles must be verified for consistency with the utilities plan as some of the elements are found missing. Include the cleanouts on the profiles. Response No. 7 Stormwater profiles have been verified for consistency and additional profiles have been added for the roof drain collector pipes. D. Stormwater Management Practices/RRv Practices/Alternative Practices Comment No. 1 Show the minimum runoff reduction volume calculations required per the 2015 DM at the two design points. The calculations provided in the report are not clear as the numbers are not consistent with the numbers from the HydroCAD model noted for the applicable drainage areas. Provide simple mathematical calculations for the provided RRv at the bioretention using formulas provided in the 2015 DM which are based on the soil type and presence of an underdrain at each practice. 8 Response No. 1 The naming convention for impervious areas in the HydroCAD model has been revised to simplify summing the total for each Design Point. A sheet showing the calculation of the minimum RRv is included in Appendix C of the report and the number has been revised for consistency with the HyrdoCAD model. The calculation utilizes the same equation as shown on page 4-6 of the 2015 DM. Comment No. 2 All three bioretention practices are designed to receive runoff via a storm drainpipe. As such, in accordance with the 2015 DM, these practices must be designed off-line and requires bypass of excess runoff from larger storms. The proposed design does not provide for bypass. Provide an upstream bypass structure before all hydrodynamic structures from the bioretention basins. Otherwise, please provide an acceptable justification for this deviation. Response No. 2 JMC is deviating from the 2015 DM and utilizing the 2024 DM to design the bioretention basins as online practices provided adequate measures are put in place to reduce velocities to be non-erosive. The design utilizes both a pretreatment device (hydrodynamic separator) and flow dissipator (rock outlet protection – sized for the 25 year storm event, which is above and beyond the noted 10 year storm event in the 2024 DM) to reduce velocities prior to entering the practice. Comment No. 3 Provide calculations showing the flow velocity entering the bioretention practices are reduced to non- erosive velocities. Response No. 3 Rip-rap / rock outlet protection has been designed in accordance with the requirement of the Blue Book and have been sized for the 25-year storm event (where the 10-year storm event is the minimum) to reduce the flow velocities entering the practices. The sizing calculations can be found in Appendix C of the SWPPP Report. Comment No. 4 While most proposed hydrodynamic structures contain an internal bypass structure, because these structures are constructed with only one (1) outlet pipe, the unfiltered runoff mixes with the filtered runoff prior to discharge. As the design intends to direct excess runoff to these practices, DEP recommends providing greater pre-treatment to prevent future system failure. 9 Response No. 4 The hydrodynamic separator structures have been sized to clean more than the required water quality volume. Larger storms bypassing will already be clean water as the water quality volume acts as a “first flush,” where dirt, garbage, and oils are cleaned/treated. Comment No. 5 No pretreatment is mentioned for BR-2C in the report for the online flow coming into it. Include the sizing calculations of the grass filter strip and gravel diaphragm in the report if they are meant to be used as pretreatment. Provide a call out for these features on relevant site plans with dimensions. Response No. 5 The gravel diaphragm and grass filter strip have been revised to be relocated adjacent to contributing patios/decks/sidewalks. A hydrodynamic separator pretreatment structure has also been added to the contributing pipe conveyance system prior to entering the bioretention. Comment No. 6 Provide a minimum of 1’ free board between the berm elevation and 100yr peak elevation for Bioretention basin, BR-2C. If that is not possible, provide a justification in report on why it is not possible or an alternative on how the runoff will be managed in case of flooding events. Response No. 6 The basins have been revised to ensure at least one foot of freeboard is provided during the 100-yr storm event. Comment No. 7 Provide sizing calculations in the report showing that each of the three practices can store 75% of the WQv before filter bed. Response No. 7 The filtration bioretention detail, on sheet C-901, has been updated to include two new columns in the table called “75% WQv” and “Storage Above Filter Bed.” Water quality volume calculations can also be found in appendix C and provided storage can also be found in appendix B. Comment No. 8 The Utilities Plan should call out the berm and emergency spillway elevation for all the proposed bioretention basins. The pipe diameter on riser R-E3 from BR-2C is not consistently shown on the utility 10 plan as modelled in Hydro CAD. The pipe size and elevation on the table for BR-2C in detail 39 for bioretention riser box should be checked for consistency with the HydroCAD model. Response No. 8 The Utilities Plans have been updated to provide this information. The plans and HydroCAD model have been updated and are consistent across all design documents. Comment No. 9 Bioretention detail 20 on C-901 should include the WQv, extreme flood elevations along with the inlet and outlet elevations. The berm and emergency spillway elevation for all the proposed bioretention basins be also added in the detail. Response No. 9 The filtration bioretention detail has been updated. The table values for WQv, 100-yr flood elevation, top of berm, and spillway elevation have been updated. Inlet and outlet elevation columns have been removed as the riser detail has been updated to include this information. See response D.7. for additional columns added. Comment No. 10 Maximize the flow paths between the inlet and outlet of the bioretention practice to avoid short circuiting of flows on the grading plan. Response No. 10 The bioretention risers have been relocated farther from the inlets to maximize the flow paths between the inlet and outlet of the practices. Comment No. 11 The report specifies that all three bioretention practices are designed with a 6” max ponding depth, but the site plan and HydroCAD model shows a 12” max pond depth, and that the practices were designed to meet all the requirements of 2024 DM. As previously mentioned, per the WRR, the SWPPP should meet requirements of the 2015 DM and any deviations must be justified. Response No. 11 The bioretention practices are designed with a 12” max ponding depth and 6” average ponding depth. This information is consistent throughout the design documents. Comment No. 12 Provide a construction detail for the two jellyfish filters. Show its bypass capacity and its maximum treatment flow rate. 11 Response No. 12 Construction details for the two jellyfish filters have been included as part of the plan set. Comment No. 13 The NJCAT documentation provided in the report for the manufactured treatment devices (MTD) is dated May 2020. The NJCAT laboratory testing protocols were revised and now requires that all sedimentation MTDs are retested every five (5) years. Provide an updated verification letter. Include the maximum treatment flow rate (MTFR) of each practice on its detail provided on the plan. Response No. 13 Please find email correspondence between JMC and DEC included. As stated in their email “All proprietary practices accepted for new development and/or redevelopment applications can also be used for pretreatment…” Also, as stated in the email “If a practice met “the required assessment protocol” of one of the third parties to be added to its list at some point in time, it can therefore be used for redevelopment in NYS if it can still meet the current Design Manual requirements.” As such, since the proprietary practices proposed for pretreatment can be used for redevelopment, they can also be used for pretreatment. Comment No. 14 Verify the outlet pipe elevation of WQS-A6 between the detail and plans provided. Response No. 14 The plans, details, and calculations have been reviewed for consistency. Comment No. 15 In Appendix C, verify the WQv flow used in the Jellyfish filter sizing calculation from BR-2D. Response No. 15 The WQv flow used for the jellyfish sizing calculation has been verified and revised for consistency with the HydroCAD model. Comment No. 16 A grass pave detail is included in the plan set. Callout on relevant site plans where this surfacing material is to be utilized. Response No. 16 The grass pave product is proposed for the maintenance access paths. Callouts have been added to the plans. 12 Comment No. 17 Call out all the newly proposed grass swales on the project, number each, and provide sizing calculations. Response No. 17 Calculations for the largest vegetated/grass swale have been provided in Appendix C of the SWPPP. It has been numbered and dimensions have been included on Detail No. 41. It must be noted that all other vegetated/grass swales have significantly less contributing area and shall be designed to the typical dimensions on the detail. Comment No. 18 The elevations in the columns A, C and the outflow diameter, D2 on the table provided for the bypass manhole, Detail 22, are inconsistent between the utility plan and pipe sizing calculations. Please revise. Response No. 18 The plans, details, and calculations have been reviewed for consistency. Comment No. 19 The legend on the landscaping plan is duplicated for the steep slope seed mix and basin seed mix. Please revise. Response No. 19 The pattern for the steep slope seed mix has been revised. Seed mix patterns within practices have been reviewed and updated where needed. Comment No. 20 All inlets and outlets related to the detention basins as well as the mottling elevation need to be shown in the respective profiles. Since mottling is noted on both basins, DB1 and DB2, DEP recommends providing some form of impermeable barrier beneath the basin bottom and along the sides, such as a clay barrier. Additionally, as the clay barrier will deteriorate over time, DEP would also recommend considering the use of a curtain drain upgradient of the basin to discharge away from the site. If this is not feasible, the HydroCAD model should include a permanent pool for each basin using the mottling elevation to verify adequate storage during times of high groundwater. Response No. 20 The detention basins have been designed as dry detention. The outlet is located at the bottom of the basin and as such, any seasonal high groundwater would not sit in the system. There will not be a permanent pool. The profiles have been revised to include the locations of the test pits performed and the depth to which mottling was observed. 13 Comment No. 21 Explain why the HydroCAD model includes a secondary outlet for both detention basins at the elevation of the top of embankment. By including this outlet, it appears that the design would allow for overtopping of the berm, which is not advisable. Response No. 21 The berm “outlet” was not used in any design storm. It has been removed. Comment No. 22 24-hour extended detention of the WQv must be provided to meet the CPv requirements. The HydroCAD model shows that the plug flow/center of mass detention times shown for the detention basins are between 1 to 2.6 hrs. Revise the design to meet the minimum of 24 hours extended detention of WQv. The CPv shown in table 9 of the report and the inflow volume to the detention basins in the model does not match and needs to be corrected. According to the explanation provided in the report, it is not clear from the model how the CPv is said to be released slowly but per the model it is being released quickly. Response No. 22 The design has been modified to release the 1-yr 24 hour storm event more slowly for both detention basins. The orifice size selected for both detention basins is 3 inches, which is the minimum size allowed by the 2024 manual and minimum size recommended in the 2015 manual. We advise against the use of a smaller than 3” orifice. In accordance with the 2024 manual, use of minimum orifice size, to control the entire 1-yr 24 hour storm event, allows CPv requirements to be waived. Comment No. 23 Provide the pond drain detail for the detention basins and include the details of required gate valve elements in the design per the 2015 DM. Both the WQv-ED outlet and the pond drain shall be equipped with an adjustable gate valve (typically a handwheel activated knife gate valve). Response No. 23 The detention basins are designed to be dry detention basins with an orifice at the bottom of the basin to ensure it empties out. As such the pond underdrains have been removed from the corresponding details. Comment No. 24 Clarify where the pipe under drain detail 23 is utilized. 14 Response No. 24 The pipe underdrain detail has been removed from the details set since it is not being utilized. Comment No. 25 A maintenance right of way or easement shall extend to the detention basins from a public or private road. The principal spillway shall be generally accessible from dry land. Response No. 25 There is a blanket access easement that will be provided to the town for general access and maintenance of stormwater facilities if needed. Comment No. 26 The legend for the retaining wall on the plans set is not consistent with what is shown on the plan. Provide the dimensions of each retaining wall and clarify all those proposed are per Detail 54 for cornerstone retaining walls. Show the weepholes and its drain discharge locations. Response No. 26 The detail provided is for typical finish only. The final design will be provided by a geotechnical or structural engineer prior to commencement of construction. The weep holes will discharge at the face of the walls and will route towards the drainage infrastructure outlined in the SWPPP for respective catchment areas. Comment No. 27 DEP has previously requested more soil testing to confirm that the 2015 DM vertical separation distance requirements from bedrock for the proposed infiltration systems are adequately met. Since additional testing was not conducted, provide a justification for this deviation based on site constraints. The justification that soil testing did not want to be performed is not sufficient. Likewise, in relation to the depth at which infiltration testing has been done, provide a technical equivalence for the infiltration test conducted at 4 feet below basin bottom to demonstrate how the additional 2 feet would not result in any measurable difference compared to the infiltration test to be conducted 2 feet below basin bottom per 2015 DM soil testing requirements. Response No. 27 In accordance with discussions with DEP on 10/29/2025, the two Infiltration systems have been redesigned to comply with design requirements of the 2015 DM. Where a deviation has been made, it has been noted in the SWPPP report. See JMC responses to DEP’s October 8, 2025 comment memorandum below for justifications on the proposed design: 15 Comment No. 2 Based on the noted existing grade and depth of bedrock observed at the test pit 7A, the proposed infiltration practice, I- 1B, does not meet the vertical separation distance to bedrock per the 2015 New York State Design Manual (DM). Adjust the design to achieve the clearance required. Response No. 2 Based on our discussion on 10/29/2025, Infiltration System IS-1B will be raised to have a bottom stone elevation of 434.00. The SWPPP report has been revised to include a narrative describing the material encountered in the test pits and how the design adheres to the design manual. See previous response below: It should be noted that the material encountered in test pit 7A was not bedrock, and the tests did not encounter refusal. The material that we see in this area is not uniform and is described as “cemented sands”. These are small pockets that the excavator was able to dig through while performing the test pit. Regardless, IS-1B can be raised, if needed, to have a bottom of stone elevation at 434.0 which would be 3 feet above the material indicated in the testing logs in accordance with the 2015 Design Manual. As you are aware, the 2024 Design Manual reduces the separation distance to only 2 feet. It should be noted that raising the infiltration system will put a portion of the proposed system in fill materials, which is allowed by the 2024 Design Manual but would be a deviation from the 2015 Design Manual. Comment No. 3 It appears that the infiltration testing conducted at the two proposed infiltration practices were performed at improper depths per 2015 DM. The bottom of stone elevation in the infiltration practice, I-1B and I-2B, is shown to be at el. 432.5 and 453.5 ft, respectively, but the tests were performed at el. 434 and 432 ft for the I-1B and 448 ft for I-2B. Infiltration testing must be conducted two feet below the bottom of the practice. Please contact the undersigned to schedule testing at your earliest convenience. Response No. 3 Based on our discussion on 10/29/2025, both infiltration practices have been redesigned to raise or lower them to meet the testing that was witnessed by DEP. See our previous response below: Both infiltration practices can be redesigned to raise or lower them to meet the testing that was witnessed by DEP, though we do not feel it is necessary given the extensive testing that has been performed to date. IS-1B (Northern System) The proposed infiltration system IS-1B has two infiltration tests that were performed within its footprint in accordance with the 2015 Design Manual. One test was performed approximately at the bottom of stone elevation of the system, and the other test was performed slightly higher. It should be noted that the material observed in the logs is consistent, and both infiltration tests were performed in the same soil layer. As stated above, Infiltration System IS-1B can be raised to 434.0 (bottom of stone), if needed, which would be 2 feet above the testing elevation of Test Pit B-7B, but at the same testing elevation of Test Pit B-7A. Given this potential elevation change, it should be noted that only one more test would be required to be compliant with the 2015 Design Manual. Though, given that the tests in the area were performed in consistent soil layers, the infiltration rates are expected to be similar at similar depths. As such, we do not believe additional testing should not be required for IS-1B. IS-2B (Southern System) 16 Infiltration System IS-2B can be lowered to 450.0, which would be 2 feet above the elevation the testing was performed in accordance with the Design Manual. The system was raised above the testing to accommodate earthwork associated with the overall property. The current design illustrates the system at a higher elevation and is located within the same area with consistent soils. The system can be dropped to be located 2 feet above the testing elevation; however, we felt it was more appropriate to maintain the system at a higher elevation since the material was generally consistent in the test holes. Accordingly, we do not believe that any additional testing is required for this area. Comment No. 28 No soil tests were provided in bioretention practice, BR-2D. Please justify. Response No. 28 Historical soil testing was conducted in the vicinity of the bioretention areas and have been provided. Additionally, see below correspondence and response to comments from the previous comment memo: Comment No. 1 Soil testing is required for the proposed bioretention basins BR-1C, BR-2D, and detention basins, DB-1 and DB-2, to verify the groundwater and/or bedrock clearance in the practice areas. A DEP representative must witness these soil tests. Please contact the undersigned to schedule testing. Response No. 1 Based on our discussion on 10/29/2025, additional testing is not required for Bioretention Basins BR-1C and BR-2D or Detention Bains DB-1 and DB-2. In addition, due to the 2’ separation to the anticipated depth of mottling, no liner is required for the Bioretention Basins. See previous response below: DEP witnessed soil testing in the general areas of BR-1C, BR-2D, DB-1 and DB-2 on 10/20/2023, which are now included on JMC sheets C-010 – C-012. These tests were conducted by Site Design Consultants and are located on the northern portion of the property. The test pits performed downhill of Bioretention areas BR-1C and BR-2D, in the area of Detention Basin DB-1, exhibited signs of mottling approximately 2.5 feet below existing grade. The two basins are proposed uphill of these testing locations where we would anticipate similar depths of mottling. With this assumption, the bioretention areas as designed would provide 2’ of separation to the groundwater elevation. Even if groundwater were to be encountered, the bioretention areas are being designed solely as filtration practices, and the 2024 Design Manual allows for impermeable liners in instances where separation distances cannot be achieved, which would be a deviation from the 2015 Design Manual. Based on the testing completed to date, a liner should not be required however based on our discussion, we can deviate from the 2015 manual by providing a narrative for review if needed. Comment No. 29 It appears that most of the infiltration systems, IS-1B & IS-2B, are in fill material. Provide a profile to verify. 17 Response No. 29 Profiles for the two infiltration systems have been added on JMC Drawing C-203. The design is consistent with the 2024 DM allowances for infiltration systems partially in fill. The notes from the 2024 DM regarding the required specifications for engineered fill under infiltration systems have been included on the plans and in the 2015 DM vs 2024 DM Requirements section of the SWPPP Report. Comment No. 30 The schedule of inverts table on Details 55 & 56 for the infiltration systems, IS-1B & IS-2B, do not match the elevations utilized in the HydroCAD model. Revise for consistency. On the details, label the inlet pipe elevation to each system. Response No. 30 All documents have been reviewed and corrected for consistency. Comment No. 31 The HydroCAD model shows that the outflow volume is more than the inflow volume for both infiltration systems, IS-1B & IS-2B. Please clarify. Response No. 31 The error in the HydroCAD model has been corrected and no longer shows outflow volume greater than inflow volume. Comment No. 32 Every possible measure be utilized to maximize the bypassing of higher storms away from both infiltration basins in particular, IS-2B. Response No. 32 The design has been revised to the extent practicable to maximize the amount of flow being bypassed for the higher than 1-year storm event. Accordingly, a table showing the flows bypassed for the 1-year, 10-year, and 100-year storm has been added to the SWPPP Report in the Proposed Conditions Section to illustrate the amount of volume being bypassed. E. Erosion and Sediment Control (ESC)/Construction Sequencing Comment No. 1 Clearly show the following on the erosion control plan: a. The extent of the roads constructed within each phase must be clear. 18 b. The utilities, drainage structures and pipes to be built c. Retaining walls. d. Ensure that there are adequate areas to store any cut materials. Topsoil stockpiles shall be separated. e. Establish methods of spoils disposal (on-site or off) for major cuts at each phase of work. It is recommended that the phasing be redesigned to balance the cut and fill in each phase. If that is not feasible, appropriate soil stockpile areas must be shown on the plans or the construction sequence must indicate that the excavated materials will be direct loaded for off-site disposal The vehicles access paths for transporting the materials are to be shown on the plans. f. Number all the buildings within each phase. g. Include winter stabilization as part of the sequence if the construction in each phase is more than one freeze thaw cycles. Response No. 1 a. The extents of roadway construction has been added to each phases’ sequence of construction. In addition, station markers have been added to the roadways. b. All utilities to be constructed in the phase have been added to the sequence and the plans. c. Retaining wall construction has been added to the sequence of Phase 1A, 1B and 3 d. Cut materials are to be used as fill as necessary if they are deemed to be suitable. Unsuitable material and excess to be exported off-site as required. Additional soil stockpile areas have been provided. e. See above response for disposal of spoils. Vehicle access paths will generally match roadway construction. Paths to the sediment basins have been added to the plan set. f. Building numbers have been added to all phase drawings. g. General winter stabilization notes have been added to each phase drawing. Comment No. 2 As required by the Blue Book, provide the following information for each of the temporary sediment basins/traps proposed: a. A detail of the sediment trap must be provided. b. The contributing drainage area to each sediment trap must be less than 5 acres. If the drainage area is greater than 5 acres, the practice must be designed as a sediment basin. c. Include a profile of the sediment basins/trap with all relevant elevations as well as the groundwater elevations. The primary outlet must be set above the groundwater elevation. d. A temporary plastic liner with its elevations for all sediment basins/trap, where groundwater intrusion is expected. e. Temporary riser and outlet detail should include individual dimensions and elevations for each sediment basin / trap. f. Include the sediment marker in each basin/trap. g. Provide a HydroCAD model for the temporary sediment basins and the sediment trap. Response No. 2 a. A detail for the stone outlet sediment trap has been added to JMC Sheet C-905 19 b. The proposed sediment trap has a drainage area of ±4.55 acres. c. Profiles for the detention basins and bioretention basins that are being used as sediment practices are included on JMC Sheets C-904 and C-906. The profiles have been revised to include groundwater information where applicable. Additional design data has been added to the labels on the ECP plans. d. The proposed stormwater management practices that are being used as sediment practices will be fitted with plastic liner to prevent groundwater from entering the practices throughout construction. During transition from temporary to permanent practice the plastic liner will be removed. e. Dimensions for the temporary riser and outlets have been added to the labels on the ECP plans. f. Sediment markers have been added to each of the sediment basins/traps. g. A HydroCAD report has been included for the temporary sediment basins and for the temporary sediment trap. Comment No. 3 The layout of some of the temporary swales shown on the ECP seems to make unrealistic wide turns which might not work in reality. Please adjust the layout to make sure all runoff is properly captured and directed to the appropriate sediment basins/traps. Response No. 3 The temporary diversion swales have been updated. All diversion swales have been reviewed to ensure they will function as intended. Comment No. 4 Show construction access paths to the temporary sediment traps and the maintenance access paths to the permanent stormwater management practices on the plan. Response No. 4 Construction access paths to the temporary sediment trap will be from the main roadway. Access to the sediment basins will be from the maintenance access paths. Maintenance access paths to the permanent stormwater management practices are shown on the plans. Comment No. 5 Provide a detail for the temporary grass swale and include its sizing calculations. Verify that the stone check dams spacing is based on the channel slope per the requirements in the NYSDEC Blue book. The ECP label should be corrected accordingly. Response No. 5 For sizing of the grassed swales on site refer to response D.17 above. 20 Temporary diversion swales are proposed and a detail, with dimensions for each diversion swale, are included on JMC Sheet C-903. The stone check dams proposed for the diversion swales and their spacing are designed in accordance with the NYSDEC Blue Book. Spacing information for the check dams have been added to the ECP labels and on the detail on JMC Sheet C-900. Comment No. 6 Sizing calculations of the temporary rock outlet protection (rip rap stabilizations) at the end of drainage swales be included and shown on the ECP. Response No. 6 Sizing Calculations for the rip-rap / rock outlet protection for the diversion swales discharging to the sediment basins / traps have been included on the detail and labels have been revised on the ECP Plans. Comment No. 7 Erosion control blankets should be biodegradable. Please specify. The boundaries for applying erosion control matting shall be demarcated on the erosion control plans. Response No. 7 Erosion control blankets have been specified to be a biodegradable product. The ECP plans have been revised to show the boundaries where the matting is required. Comment No. 8 A note should be added at the end of each construction phase that each of the phases must be fully stabilized before proceeding to the next phase. Response No. 8 A note has been added to the construction sequence of each phase stating that the phase must be fully stabilized prior to advancing to the next phase. Comment No. 9 Demolition of any existing structures, as applicable, shall be added on the sequence for the respective phase. Response No. 9 Existing utility structures on-site shall be removed. Line items for when the sanitary and water service shall be converted to the proposed systems have been added to the sequence. 21 Comment No. 10 Include a table on the plan with the required criteria, frequency and intervals in the Blue Book for the inspection/maintenance of all the temporary erosion control and permanent stormwater practices proposed. Schedule A in the draft maintenance agreement of Appendix K should include all permanent stormwater measures and its maintenance proposed. Response No. 10 The inspection / maintenance table for the temporary erosion control measures have been added to each of the ECP plans. The inspection / maintenance table for the permanent stormwater practices have been added to the overall utility plan. Comment No. 11 Please include a note in the sequence about the East of Hudson watershed soil stabilization requirement as specified in Part II.B.b of the SPDES General Permit GP-0-25-001. Accordingly, in areas where soil disturbance activity has temporarily or permanently ceased, the application of soil stabilization measures must be initiated by the end of the next business day. Response No. 11 A general note is included on all the plans stating that exposed slopes and graded/disturbed areas that will not be further disturbed for 14 calendars (7 days for sites in the watershed) shall be temporarily stabilized within 24 hours. Comment No. 12 Hydraulic lines on all construction equipment and vehicles must be checked at the end of each workday to minimize the possibility of accidental leakage of any hydraulic fluids. Please include this requirement in the SWPPP narrative and to the sequence in each phase. Response No. 12 A general note has been added to the ECP plans to state that all hydraulic lines on equipment and vehicles to be checked at the end of each workday. Comment No. 13 In accordance with Part II.D.3. of the General Permit, to disturb greater than five (5) acres of soil at any one time, the owner or operator must obtain written authorization from the MS4 prior to start of work. Please include notes provided in Part II.D.3 regarding construction work for over five (5) acres. Response No. 13 The above-mentioned notes have been added to the Notes section for each phase on the ECP plans. 22 Comment No. 14 The start and end dates anticipated for each phase should be noted on the sequence. Response No. 14 The anticipated durations of each phase have been added to the sequence. Comment No. 15 It appears that the space allocated for the soil stockpiles in each phase may not be adequate, especially when there is excess cuts during the excavation and grading operations. Indicate when the excess soils will be hauled in the sequence or if redistributed during earth work operations. Response No. 15 The sequence of construction of each phase has been updated to include when excess and/or unsuitable excavated material shall be exported off-site. In addition, suitable material shall be used as fill material where necessary to minimize stockpiles areas. Additional stockpile areas have been included in the plans. Comment No. 16 The following comments belong to the ECP for Phase 1A: a. The structures called out in step 8 of the sequence be verified for consistency as shown on the plan. Before beginning the construction of retaining walls and roadways, the drainage swales shall be installed. Step-by-step progress of its installation should be thought through and called out on the sequence. b. The bioretention basins must be plugged after it is built. c. Verify that all curbing and walkways are shown on the plan. d. Sediment trap can only be used provided the drainage area tributary to it is less than 5 acres. Show its sizing calculations accordingly. e. In the event of groundwater intrusion during excavation of sediment basins, or any other basins, the respective sequence should reflect that proper contingency measures be implemented such as dewatering pits, pumps and dirtbags etc. Provide a dewatering plan, including construction details for the pump. Dirt bag location be shown on the plan and it must be laid on a level ground. Response No. 16 a. The sequence has been revised for consistency. The sequence has also been revised to better reflect the order in which the sediment basins, retaining walls, roadway and diversion swales are to be constructed. b. The sequence of construction has been revised to state that the bioretention basins that are not being used as a sediment practice shall be plugged throughout construction until sufficient stabilization of the areas tributary to them is achieved. c. All curbing and walkways are shown on the plans. 23 d. This comment is noted. No sediment traps are proposed to be constructed during this phase. The label for the sediment trap to be constructed in Phase 1B has been revised to include sizing information. e. Dewatering the excavated sediment basins are included in the construction sequences. In addition, a dewatering pit detail has been added to the plan set. Comment No. 17 The following comments belong to the ECP for Phase 1B: a. Details of when all the drainage swales and its rip rap outlets are installed be called out in the sequence rather than stating as required. An approximate plan should be laid out in the sequence. b. All silt fences must be laid parallel to the contours. If it is not possible, short strips of it be applied and they must overlap in such a way that runoff will not escape through the gaps. c. Verify between step 6 & 7, the utilities meant to be installed are called out correctly in the sequence and displayed on the ECP. Include all utilities that are missing from the utilities plan within the phase boundary. d. Show where the soil stockpiles will be moved during the construction of the buildings, where it is currently shown to be placed. The plan of action should be in the sequence. Response No. 17 a. The construction sequence has been revised to include when/which diversion swales shall be constructed. b. Silt fence has been laid parallel to the contours and overlaps have been include to ensure water does not escape through gaps c. The construction sequence has been verified for consistency and all missing utilities withing the phase boundary have been added. d. The sequence of construction of each phase has been updated to include when excess and/or unsuitable excavated material shall be exported off-site. In addition, suitable material shall be used as fill material as necessary to minimize stockpiles areas. Comment No. 18 Verify the boundaries of Phases 2 & 3 as some steps in the sequence seem to be outside the limits shown. Foe e.g., the use of sediment basins and drainage swales are outside the limits shown and the sequences in these phases does not mention about how the runoff is captured to be managed. Response No. 18 The sediment basins and temporary diversion swales are clearly indicated on the plans and when to maintain or remove in the sequence of construction. Comment No. 19 The following comments belong to the ECP for Phase 2: 24 a. Verify the utilities called out in the sequence are shown on the EP and verify all the utilities to be installed in order it should be laid out be called out in the sequence. b. The drainage swales should be installed as soon as the rough grading is done. c. Show where the soil stockpiles will be moved during the construction of the buildings where it is currently shown. The plan of action should be in the sequence. d. There is significant grading involved in this phase resulting in deep cuts. How the spoils will be disposed of be on the sequence. It is recommended to produce an interim grading plan. e. Indicate which sediment basin /trap is utilized as part of the sequence. f. The management of runoff in the sediment basins outside of the limits of phase shown shall be called out on the sequence. Response No. 19 a. All utilities to be constructed in the phase have been verified and included in the sequence. b. The sequence has been revised to state that diversion swales shall be constructed after rough grading has commenced. c. The sequence of construction of each phase has been updated to include when excess and/or unsuitable excavated material shall be exported off-site. In addition, suitable material shall be used as fill material as necessary to minimize stockpiles areas. d. See above response. e. The diversion swale labels have been revised to state to which practice that they will eventually discharge. f. The management of runoff for sediment basins is now clearly indicated in the sequence of construction. Comment No. 20 The following comments belong to the ECP for Phase 3: a. Indicate which sediment basin/trap is utilized as part of the sequence. b. The drainage area shown for this phase is 9.6 acres. The Erosion Control Plan shows very few erosion control measures are installed. This phase must be further broken down to smaller drainage areas and provide new sediment traps as a runoff management device or explain how the trap in the previous phases will be utilized. The sediment trap can only be used provided the drainage area tributary to it is less than 5 acres. c. Two of the three drainage swales called out in this phase direct the flow to the nearest inlet protection. Specify the culmination of flow from these drain inlets and which sediment control basin receives the flow during the time work is being conducted. Response No. 20 a. Sediment basins and traps have been clearly indicated on the plans and in the sequence of construction. b. An additional sediment trap is proposed during this phase to aid the previous basins/trap in sediment control. Additionally, constructed stormwater infrastructure will be fitted with excavated drop inlet protection which is sized for a maximum of 1-acre of contributing area. The stormwater management practices downstream will be receiving treated flow. 25 c. See response to item 20.a. and 20.b. We trust that the above is sufficient to complete your review of this application. Should you have any questions or require additional information, please call our office at (914) 273-5225. Thank you. Sincerely, JMC Planning Engineering Landscape Architecture & Land Surveying, PLLC Diego Villareale Chris-David Fleurant Diego Villareale, PE Chris-David Fleurant, PE Principal Design Manager https://jmcpc.sharepoint.com/sites/23109/Shared Documents/Admin/ltZachariah - DEP Comment Response_2026-02-18.docx Jacob Road Solar From:Walt Daniels To:Robyn Steinberg Subject:Re: Jacob Road Solar Trail Date:Wednesday, January 21, 2026 5:50:17 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless yourecognize the sender and know the content is safe. Thanks for the update. John sent me the map last night and I have walked that route in the pastand it is technically not a problem building a trail there. Since there is 150' buffer there is plenty of room for a trail in the buffer and screening can be on either side of the the traildepending on what screening the neighbors want. The view for the hikers is either backyards or fence with screening on one side or the other. Walt Daniels On Wed, Jan 21, 2026 at 3:49 PM Robyn Steinberg <rsteinberg@yorktownny.gov> wrote: Walt, Attached is the revised plan that will be presented by Jacob Road Solar on Monday night. They relocated the trail to the west side of the array. We didn’t have it on this side becausethe neighbors did not want it there, so this layout will probably find more pushback from additional neighbors, but wanted to make you aware. Robyn ************************************************* Robyn A. Steinberg, AICP, CPESC Town of Yorktown Planning Department Albert A. Capellini Community & Cultural Center 1974 Commerce Street, Room 222 Yorktown Heights, NY 10598 Phone: 914-962-6565 Email: rsteinberg@yorktownny.gov Web: http://www.yorktownny.gov/planning David J. Cooper dcooper@zarin-steinmetz.com Phone: (914) 682-7800 Direct: (914) 220-9795 81 Main Street, Suite 415 White Plains, New York 10601 www.zarin-steinmetz.com April 22, 2026 Via Hand Delivery & Electronic Mail Hon. Richard Fon, Chairman and the Members of the Town of Yorktown Planning Board Albert A. Capellini Community & Cultural Center 1974 Commerce Street, Room 222 Yorktown Heights, NY 10598 Re: Jacob Solar 2344 NY, LLC Application for Site Plan & Special Permit Approvals 1805 Jacob Road, Yorktown, New York (“Property”) Dear Chairman Fon and Members of the Planning Board: This firm represents Jacob Solar 2344 NY, LLC (“Freestone” or “Applicant”) in connection with Freestone’s applications for Site Plan and Special Permit approval to facilitate its proposed development of a large-scale solar energy system on the Property (“Project”). We are writing to request placement on your Board’s May 4, 2026 agenda for continued review of this Project. At the March 23rd meeting, certain comments were raised by your Board and the public regarding potential views of the Project from homes on Dalton Drive, methods for maintenance of vegetation and screening, and the method for calculating the amount to be covered by a decommissioning bond. In addition, we were asked to evaluate emergency access to the Project site. Enclosed herein are materials that address each of those comments. First, we enclose a visual profile and photographs that demonstrate the Project is not visible from Dalton Drive due to the great distance, existing woods and topographical differences between the two locations. The closest point on Dalton Drive to the Project is the turnaround at the southern end of the street. This location is surrounded by tall trees, such that one cannot even view Jacob Road, let alone the Property, which is approximately 1,500 feet from the northern terminus of the solar array. Moreover, the closest home on Dalton Drive is approximately 1,300 feet from the closest panel in the solar array. Even if there were not hundreds of feet of wooded area between Dalton Drive and the Property, the Project is approximately 40 feet below the elevation at the end of Dalton Drive. Thus, the viewshed at Dalton Drive would be above the Project, and not visible even if not screened through dense woodlands. Second, we enclose an updated copy of the Operations & Maintenance Plan for the Project. As explained in Section 3.4 of the O&M Plan, grass and weeds will be controlled primarily by Yorktown Planning Board April 22, 2026 | Page 2 4900-3344-6307, v. 2 mowing. Neither pesticides nor herbicides will be used. As such, there will be no impacts resulting from potential herbicides or pesticides in stormwater runoff from the Project. Additionally, the screening would be inspected on a monthly basis for the first year, and then on an annual basis thereafter, with replacement trees planted as necessary during the next appropriate planting season. We submit that this inspection and replacement plan would be sufficient to ensure that screening continues to protect adjacent properties from panel visibility. Third, we enclose an updated Decommissioning Plan for the Project. Section 4 addresses the costs of decommissioning and the decommissioning bond. These amounts have not been – and cannot be – calculated at this time. In accordance with Section 300-81.4G of the Zoning Code, as amended by the Town Board in March 2026, the cost estimate is calculated based upon a variety of factors related to decommissioning and restoration of the site prior to the issuance of a building permit. This analysis cannot be completed until there is an approved Site Plan so the full costs can be confirmed. The cost of decommissioning (adjusted for inflation) will be determined, and a bond will be submitted, prior to issuance of a building permit, in accordance with Section 300-81.4G. Finally, we are pleased to report that the Freestone Team met with the Bureau of Fire Prevention earlier this week to go through the updated Site Plan. We reviewed the topographic conditions which prevent creating an access road for fire apparatus. Instead, Freestone was encouraged to include a pathway a quarter of the way into the Project that could facilitate access for emergency personnel responding to an emergency during the few times a year an employee is on site to check the panels. We will be updating the Site Plan this week to accommodate such a pathway. We respectfully submit that at this time, all comments from your Board, as well as Town Staff, have been addressed, and the record is complete. Accordingly, we ask that once the public hearing has been closed, your Board authorize Staff to prepare resolution(s) to adopt a Negative Declaration pursuant to SEQRA and approve Freestone’s applications. We thank the Board for its continued attention to this matter. If you have any questions or require any additional information, please do not hesitate to contact us. Respectfully Submitted, ZARIN & STEINMETZ LLP By:_____________________ David J. Cooper Jaclyn V. Cohen Encls. cc: Robyn A. Steinberg, AICP, CPESC Jacob Solar 2344 NY, LLC LaBella Associates Dalton Drive Profile Legend 0 ft Dalton Dr Feature 1 Feature 2 Feature 3 Field Street Park Parking lot Untitled Path Walter Panas High School 1000 ft N➤➤N Image © 2026 Airbus Image © 2026 Airbus Image © 2026 Airbus 1 | Page Jacobs Road Solar Farm: Operations, Maintenance, and Sustainability Plan Jacob’s Road Solar 1805 Jacob Road, Town of Yorktown, Westchester New York Prepared by: Freestone Renewables Date: 3/25/2026 2 | Page Contents Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 4 1. System Monitoring.................................................................................................................... 5 1.1 Purpose .............................................................................................................................. 5 1.2 Monitoring Infrastructure .................................................................................................... 5 1.3 Performance Metrics........................................................................................................... 5 1.4 Seasonal Considerations .................................................................................................... 5 1.4.1 Winter Operations ........................................................................................................ 5 1.4.2 Summer Operations ..................................................................................................... 5 1.5 Reporting ............................................................................................................................ 5 1.6 Escalation Procedures ........................................................................................................ 6 2. Operational Responsibilities ..................................................................................................... 6 2.1 Purpose .............................................................................................................................. 6 2.2 Preventive Maintenance ...................................................................................................... 6 2.3 Corrective Maintenance ...................................................................................................... 6 2.4 Fire Safety and Emergency Response Practices ................................................................... 6 2.4 Administrative Tasks ........................................................................................................... 7 2.5 Contractor and Service Provider Oversight ........................................................................... 7 3. Maintenance Plan .................................................................................................................... 7 3.1 Purpose .............................................................................................................................. 7 3.2 Preventive Maintenance ...................................................................................................... 7 3.3 Corrective Maintenance ...................................................................................................... 7 3.4 Vegetation Management ..................................................................................................... 7 3.5 Screening Maintenance ....................................................................................................... 8 3.6 Inspection and Testing ........................................................................................................ 8 4. Safety and Compliance ............................................................................................................ 8 4.1 Purpose .............................................................................................................................. 8 4.2 Personnel Safety ................................................................................................................. 8 4.3 Emergency Response .......................................................................................................... 8 4.4 Environmental Compliance ................................................................................................. 9 4.5 Site Access and Security ..................................................................................................... 9 4.6 Audits and Inspections ........................................................................................................ 9 5. Sustainability, Environmental Stewardship, and Decommissioning ............................................ 9 3 | Page 5.1 Purpose .............................................................................................................................. 9 5.2 Sustainability and Carbon Offsets ....................................................................................... 9 5.3 Biodiversity and Habitat Preservation .................................................................................. 9 5.4 Waste and Recycling ......................................................................................................... 10 5.5 Decommissioning and Site Restoration ............................................................................. 10 4 | Page Introduction The purpose of this Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Plan is to provide a comprehensive framework for the safe, efficient, and sustainable operation of the Jacobs Road Solar Farm. This document outlines the procedures, responsibilities, and strategies necessary to maintain optimal system performance, ensure compliance with safety and regulatory standards, and support the long-term sustainability of the facility. The O&M Plan is designed to guide all stakeholders involved in the project, including operations personnel, maintenance teams, and contractors, in the consistent execution of their duties. By adhering to the practices outlined herein, the solar farm will achieve its operational goals, contribute to renewable energy targets, and maintain positive relationships with the community and environment. This document emphasizes the importance of clear communication, structured procedures, and regular oversight to ensure that all aspects of the solar farm’s operation are effectively managed. By detailing actionable maintenance schedules, safety practices, and environmental stewardship initiatives, the plan serves as a practical tool for day-to-day operations and long-term planning. The plan is organized into five sections. Section 1 addresses system monitoring, including performance metrics and seasonal considerations. Section 2 outlines operational responsibilities, including preventive and corrective maintenance. Section 3 focuses on the maintenance plan, highlighting vegetation management, screening maintenance, and inspections. Section 4 covers safety and compliance measures, while Section 5 emphasizes sustainability, environmental stewardship, and decommissioning strategies. Together, these sections provide a holistic approach to operating and maintaining the Jacobs Road Solar Farm. 5 | Page 1. System Monitoring 1.1 Purpose The purpose of system monitoring is to ensure the solar farm operates efficiently and effectively by tracking energy production and system performance, detecting and resolving issues promptly, and supporting maintenance decisions and stakeholder reporting. 1.2 Monitoring Infrastructure The monitoring infrastructure will adhere to industry standards and consist of systems for real-time data collection, remote accessibility, and automated alert management. Real-time data collection will track energy output, and inverter performance, while environmental sensors measure irradiance, temperature, and wind speed. A cloud-based monitoring platform will provide secure remote access for the O&M team, with reliable data transmission supported by cellular and Ethernet connections. Automated alerts will be configured to notify the O&M team of performance deviations or equipment issues, ensuring prioritized responses to critical events. 1.3 Performance Metrics Key performance indicators to track include energy yield (kWh/kWp), performance ratio (PR) compared to design expectations, downtime and fault occurrence rates, discharge and charge patterns, and real-time inverter health and grid compliance. 1.4 Seasonal Considerations 1.4.1 Winter Operations Winter operations will involve snow removal conducted after snowstorms to ensure optimal system performance and safe access for maintenance personnel. Snow will be manually or mechanically removed from the face of the panels and around electrical equipment as needed to prevent shading and maintain functionality. Ice melt may be applied to gated entrances and areas frequently accessed by maintenance personnel to ensure safety and accessibility during operations. 1.4.2 Summer Operations Summer operations will primarily involve mowing to manage grass growth within the fenced area. When feasible, sheep grazing will be incorporated as a complementary method to maintain vegetation while supporting the natural landscape. Additionally, weed control methods will be applied to prevent the spread of noxious weeds, ensuring compliance with local regulations and maintaining the site’s aesthetics. All roadways within the fenced area will be maintained to ensure clear access for maintenance activities. 1.5 Reporting The internal reporting process will include daily automated logging of data and alert summaries, monthly performance summaries covering energy production, downtime, and maintenance activities, and annual comprehensive reviews that offer insights into compliance, financial performance, and system health. These reports will ensure transparency and keep all stakeholders informed of the system’s operational status. 6 | Page 1.6 Escalation Procedures Escalation procedures will involve a tiered response system to ensure timely resolution of issues. First-level responses will include O&M technicians inspecting and diagnosing problems promptly after receiving critical alerts. For more complex issues, specialized teams will be engaged to conduct repairs or recalibrations, with coordination initiated with ConEdison for grid-related concerns. In the case of critical failures, immediate notifications will be sent to site management and stakeholders, and backup systems will be deployed if necessary to maintain operations. 2. Operational Responsibilities 2.1 Purpose The purpose of outlining operational responsibilities is to ensure that all activities necessary for the proper functioning, safety, and performance of the solar farm are clearly defined and delegated. This will provide a framework for preventive and corrective maintenance as well as administrative tasks. 2.2 Preventive Maintenance Preventive maintenance will include regularly scheduled activities to minimize unexpected equipment failures and optimize performance. These activities will involve inspecting PV modules for damage, ensuring the proper functioning of inverters, removing debris from the site, and inspecting electrical connections and mounting systems. Semiannual checks will include inspecting screening and landscape health overall, inspecting and cleaning electrical equipment, adjusting system settings, and monitoring system performance to meet the required key performance indicators. 2.3 Corrective Maintenance Corrective maintenance will address unplanned equipment failures and performance issues. Repairs will be conducted promptly to minimize downtime, utilizing an inventory of spare parts and specialized service providers as needed. Criteria will be established to decide whether components should be repaired or replaced based on cost-effectiveness and performance impacts. 2.4 Fire Safety and Emergency Response Practices Fire safety is a critical component of operational responsibilities, particularly given the presence of electrical components and solar arrays that carry high electrical loads. All equipment and wiring will comply with the National Electrical Code (NEC) and other applicable safety standards to mitigate fire risks and ensure safe operation. Vegetation around electrical infrastructure will be carefully maintained to create a defensible space, minimizing the potential for fire spread and ensuring accessibility for emergency response efforts. The owner will coordinate closely with local fire departments to ensure they are familiar with the system design and response protocols. Site plans will be available on-site for local fire crews to reference in the event of an emergency. These plans will detail the layout of electrical components, shutoff points, and access routes. Emergency shutoff switches will be prominently marked and 7 | Page easily accessible to allow for rapid deactivation of the system when necessary. Fire extinguishers and firefighting tools will be strategically placed throughout the site to enable quick action during smaller incidents. Emergency response practices will include clear protocols for fire prevention, evacuation, and system shutdown procedures. Personnel will be trained in these measures during routine safety briefings, and reviews of the emergency response plan will be conducted to address any operational changes or new risks. 2.4 Administrative Tasks Administrative tasks will include maintaining comprehensive records of all maintenance activities, tracking warranty compliance, and ensuring contract obligations are met. These records will be updated in real-time using an online work order management system and will be auditable for transparency. 2.5 Contractor and Service Provider Oversight All contractors and service providers will be required to adhere to safety standards and industry certifications, such as NABCEP and OSHA requirements. Financial solvency, insurance coverage, and qualifications of these providers will be verified prior to engagement. 3. Maintenance Plan 3.1 Purpose The purpose of the maintenance plan is to ensure the solar farm operates at peak efficiency and reliability throughout its lifecycle. By implementing a structured and proactive maintenance plan, the risk of equipment failure, downtime, and performance degradation is minimized, while long- term system health is preserved. 3.2 Preventive Maintenance Preventive maintenance activities will follow a scheduled plan to ensure that all components function optimally. Key tasks will include regular inspections of PV modules for damage, array mounting system checks, and cleaning debris around the system to prevent shading and electrical issues. Inverters and electrical equipment will be inspected for proper operation, and any adjustments to settings or components will be made as necessary. 3.3 Corrective Maintenance Corrective maintenance will address unplanned events such as equipment malfunctions or performance deviations. Rapid response protocols will ensure that technicians can identify and resolve issues promptly to minimize downtime. Decisions to repair or replace components will be guided by cost-benefit analyses, ensuring that system reliability and operational efficiency are prioritized. 3.4 Vegetation Management Vegetation management will form a critical part of the maintenance plan. During the growing season, Mowing will be the primary method of controlling grass and weeds within the fenced area. 8 | Page With the intention to incorporate sheep grazing when possible. Supplementary mowing will be performed as needed to manage areas not adequately maintained by grazing. Seasonal cutting of growth surrounding the solar array will be performed to minimize shading and prevent interference with solar panel performance. 3.5 Screening Maintenance A landscaping plan is in place designed to maintain visual and environmental harmony with the surrounding area. This plan specifies the types of trees and shrubs to be planted and their location across the site. Monthly inspections may be conducted during the first year to assess the condition and effectiveness of the screening vegetation, transitioning to annual inspections thereafter. Any gaps or damaged plants identified during these inspections will be addressed with replacement planting as needed during the next appropriate planting season if it is determined the damaged plant will not recover. This ongoing commitment to screening maintenance ensures the solar farm upholds its aesthetic and regulatory responsibilities while supporting local biodiversity and preserving the site's visual integrity. 3.6 Inspection and Testing Regular inspections and system testing will verify compliance with operational standards. This will include testing inverters, combiner boxes, and transformers, as well as verifying the grounding system’s continuity. All findings from inspections and tests will be documented and used to guide future maintenance activities. 4. Safety and Compliance 4.1 Purpose The safety and compliance section ensures that all activities at the solar farm adhere to established safety standards and regulatory requirements. This framework aims to protect personnel, equipment, and the surrounding environment while maintaining operational integrity. 4.2 Personnel Safety All personnel working on-site will be trained in safety protocols and emergency response procedures. OSHA compliance will be mandatory, and certifications such as NABCEP (North American Board of Certified Energy Practitioners) will be required for specific roles. Personal protective equipment (PPE), including arc-flash-rated clothing, helmets, gloves, and safety harnesses, will be provided and mandatory for all site activities. Regular safety briefings and drills will be conducted to ensure personnel remain prepared for potential hazards. 4.3 Emergency Response An emergency response plan will be created following construction and prior to the commencement of operations. The plan will be maintained and kept up to date. This plan will include detailed procedures for addressing fires, medical emergencies, extreme weather, and other potential incidents. Coordination with local emergency services, including fire and medical teams, will ensure a rapid and effective response to any on-site emergencies. Clearly marked evacuation routes and assembly points will be established throughout the site. 9 | Page 4.4 Environmental Compliance The solar farm will comply with all local, state, and federal environmental regulations. This includes adherence to guidelines for vegetation management, waste disposal, and emissions control. 4.5 Site Access and Security To maintain safety and compliance, the solar farm will have controlled access points. Gates and fences will be inspected regularly to ensure they remain secure and functional. All visitors and contractors will be required to sign in and adhere to on-site safety protocols. Unauthorized access will be prevented to ensure the safety of equipment and personnel. 4.6 Audits and Inspections Regular audits and inspections will be conducted to ensure compliance with safety standards and regulatory requirements. This includes: • Safety audits to evaluate the effectiveness of training, equipment, and procedures. • Environmental inspections to confirm adherence to vegetation and waste management plans. • Compliance reviews to ensure alignment with local, state, and federal regulations. 5. Sustainability, Environmental Stewardship, and Decommissioning 5.1 Purpose This section ensures that the solar farm operates with a commitment to sustainability and environmental responsibility throughout its lifecycle, from active operations to eventual decommissioning and site restoration. The goal is to maximize positive environmental impacts while minimizing waste and disruption. 5.2 Sustainability and Carbon Offsets The solar farm will contribute to local and global sustainability efforts by offsetting carbon emissions through renewable energy production. Annual reports will quantify the greenhouse gas reductions achieved, helping demonstrate progress toward state and national renewable energy targets. Sustainable practices, such as grazing sheep for vegetation management and maintaining native plant species, will further reduce the farm’s environmental footprint. 5.3 Biodiversity and Habitat Preservation The farm will actively promote biodiversity by maintaining vegetation that supports local wildlife, including pollinator-friendly plants where feasible. Screening vegetation will also contribute to preserving the natural aesthetic of the area. These efforts align with local environmental regulations and sustainability goals. 10 | Page 5.4 Waste and Recycling Maintenance activities will include a commitment to reducing waste. Damaged solar panels and other components will be recycled or repurposed where possible, following industry best practices and recycling programs. 5.5 Decommissioning and Site Restoration A decommissioning plan will be enacted to responsibly remove infrastructure and restore the site. This plan will include: • The safe removal and recycling of solar panels, and inverters systems. • The removal of racking systems and other structural elements, with materials recycled wherever feasible. • Restoration of the site to its original condition, • Collaboration with local authorities to ensure all decommissioning activities meet or exceed regulatory requirements. 1 Jacob Road Solar Project Decommissioning Plan May 2026 Jacob’s Road Solar 1805 Jacob Road, Town of Yorktown, Westchester New York Prepared by: Freestone Renewables Date: 4/20/26 2 Contents 1. Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 3 2. The Project Developer ........................................................................................................... 4 3. Decommissioning of the Solar Facility ................................................................................... 4 3.1 Equipment Dismantling and Removal .................................................................................. 5 3.2 Environmental Effects ......................................................................................................... 6 3.3 Site Restoration .................................................................................................................. 7 3.4 Managing Materials and Waste ............................................................................................ 8 3.5 Decommissioning Notification ............................................................................................ 8 4. Costs of Decommissioning & Decommissioning Bond ........................................................... 9 5. Estimated Timeline ............................................................................................................. 10 Decommissioning Cost Analysis in progress ............................................................................... 16 3 1. Introduction Freestone Renewables proposes to build a ground-mounted photovoltaic (PV) solar facility (“Solar Facility”) in the Town of Yorktown, Westchester County, New York, referred to as the “Jacob Road Solar.” The Solar Facility is planned to connect to the Buchanan Network of Con Edison’s electrical grid and will have a nameplate capacity of 3,125.00 kilowatts (kW) alternating current (AC). The Solar Facility is proposed to occupy approximately 11 acres located at 1805 Jacob Road, Yorktown, Westchester County, NY (the “Facility Site”). This Plan assumes that the Solar Facility will have a useful life of thirty (30) years. Upon decommissioning, the Solar Facility will be dismantled, and the Facility Site restored to a state similar to its pre-construction condition as abandoned agricultural land. The Plan also accounts for the possibility of early abandonment of the Solar Facility, for any reason, prior to the project’s 30- year maturity date. It is designed to provide a level of financial protection for the Town of Yorktown. This Decommissioning Plan (“Plan”) provides an overview of activities during the decommissioning phase of the Solar Facility, including: • Restoration of land, • Management of materials and waste, • Projected costs, and • A decommissioning cost and surety bond. Decommissioning of the Solar Facility will include the disconnection of the Solar Facility from the electrical grid and removal of all Solar Facility components, including: • Photovoltaic (PV) modules, panel racking, and supports. • Inverter units, transformers, and other electrical equipment. • Roads within fenced areas of the solar facility, wiring cables, and perimeter fencing; and • Concrete foundations. This Decommissioning Plan is based on current best management practices and procedures and has been prepared in compliance with the most recent guidance provided in the NYSERDA "Solar Guidebook for Local Governments" on decommissioning solar panel systems. The plan incorporates recommendations for removing project components, restoring the site to its original condition, and ensuring appropriate financial mechanisms are in place to cover decommissioning costs. This plan is intended to evolve alongside advancements in decommissioning standards and best practices. Any future revisions to the plan will be subject to review and approval by the Town of Yorktown to ensure continued compliance with applicable guidelines and local requirements. 4 2. The Project Developer The owner of Jacob Road Solar Facility will manage and coordinate the decommissioning process. The project developer will ensure compliance with all applicable local, state, and federal regulations during the decommissioning process. The company is committed to maintaining the safety, health, and welfare of the hosting community throughout the project lifecycle and during decommissioning activities. The conditions and obligations outlined in this Decommissioning Plan shall be binding upon the owner of the Solar Facility. Contact Information: • Company: Freestone Renewables • Contact: Ryan Hutcherson • Title/Role: CEO • Address: 100 Fillmore St., 5th floor, Denver, CO, 80206 • Phone: (303) 968-1171 • Email: rhutcherson@freestonerenewables.com 2.1 Project Information: • Project Name: Jacob Solar 2344 NY, LLC • Address: 1805 Jacob Road, Yorktown, Westchester County, NY • Coordinates: 41.275597, -73.850042 • Tax ID: 35.16-1-4 • Project Size: 3.125 MW AC • Property Ownership: Lease agreement with Featherbed Properties, Inc. Freestone Renewables has secured a lease agreement with Featherbed Properties, Inc. to develop Jacob Road Solar Facility on approximately 52 acres of land. The property was historically used as agricultural land and is currently classified as vacant. 3. Decommissioning of the Solar Facility Decommissioning of Jacob Road Solar Facility may be initiated when the owner of the Solar Facility decides to decommission and retire the Solar Facility. To ensure funding is available for decommissioning, the owner of the Solar Facility will provide the Town of Yorktown with a financial guarantee before construction begins. This guarantee, in the form of a surety bond, will ensure decommissioning costs are covered, even in unforeseen situations requiring the Solar Facility to be decommissioned. The bond will be reviewed every 5 5 years and made available to any party, including the municipality or landowner, that may undertake the decommissioning. During the decommissioning process, all project infrastructure will be dismantled and removed from the site. Where possible, materials such as photovoltaic modules, racking systems, and inverters will be reused or recycled. The Facility Site will be restored to a condition comparable to its original state prior to construction, as detailed in the Site Restoration section. All work will comply with applicable regulations and manufacturer guidelines for safe removal. The owner will obtain the necessary permits and ensure adherence to State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQR) requirements during decommissioning. If the owner of the Solar Facility is unable to complete the decommissioning, the Town of Yorktown may access the financial guarantee to ensure the safe and proper removal of the Solar Facility and site restoration. The financial guarantee is intended to cover the full scope of decommissioning costs, providing security for the Town without additional burden on local resources. 3.1 Equipment Dismantling and Removal The decommissioning process for Jacob Road Solar Facility will generally follow a reverse order of the installation process. The steps include: 1. Stakeholder Notification: Notify all relevant stakeholders, including the Town of Yorktown, NYSDEC, US Army Corps of Engineers, and any other applicable authorities. 2. Grid Disconnection: Disconnect the Solar Facility from the utility power grid in coordination with the local utility provider. 3. Permits and Approvals: Obtain all required permits and approvals, including preparation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), if necessary. 4. Module Removal: Remove PV modules, ensuring they are collected and either sent to an approved solar module recycler or resold/reused in accordance with applicable regulations. Modules are expected to retain residual value, as they will likely still produce 80% of their original electricity output after 25 years. 5. Site Protection: Identify and mark areas requiring special care, such as wetlands, to ensure they are protected during decommissioning activities. 6. Erosion and Sediment Controls: Install temporary erosion and sediment control measures as required to prevent soil disturbance. 7. Above-Ground Electrical Components: Remove all above-ground electrical interconnection and distribution cables, poles, and associated equipment. These will be transported off-site to approved recycling or disposal facilities. 8. Underground Electrical Conduits: Underground conduits will not be removed by the owner and will remain in place as per the lease agreement. These conduits will become the property of the Landlord upon decommissioning. All conduits will be sealed or capped 6 following best practices to prevent any subsurface drainage issues and to ensure compliance with applicable regulations. The site will be restored to a reasonably level and stabilized condition, suitable for planting or reforestation, as specified in the lease. 9. Racking and Supports: Galvanized steel PV module support and racking system posts will be dismantled and sent to approved facilities for recycling or salvage. 10. Electrical Equipment: Transformers, inverters, switchgear, and other electrical equipment will be removed and recycled or disposed of in compliance with all applicable regulations. Any equipment not required for return to the utility will also be handled at approved facilities. 11. Concrete Foundations: Remove all concrete foundations and transport them off-site to approved disposal or recycling facilities. 12. Access Roads: Remove access roads, if required by the Town of Yorktown, and restore the land to its pre-construction condition. 13. Vegetative Screening: Remove any vegetative screening installed for the project. 14. Soil Restoration: Perform additional soil restoration as needed to ensure the land is suitable for its pre-construction use. 15. Seeding and Stabilization: Apply proper seeding, mulching, and fertilizing to stabilize the soil and encourage vegetation growth. 16. Erosion Control Removal: Remove all temporary erosion and sediment controls after site stabilization is achieved. 17. Fencing: Remove fencing and gates, transporting materials off-site for recycling or disposal. 18. Permit Closure: Close out all permits and provide the required documentation to the relevant authorities. These activities will adhere to applicable regulations and best management practices at the time of decommissioning. The sequence and methodologies may be updated to reflect advances in technology or changes in regulatory requirements. 3.2 Environmental Effects The decommissioning of Jacob Road Solar Facility has the potential to create environmental effects similar to those experienced during the construction phase. These may include ground disturbance, erosion and sedimentation, soil compaction, spills, and potential impacts to adjacent watercourses or significant natural features. To mitigate these effects, decommissioning activities will employ construction best management practices (BMPs) and mitigation measures. Temporary erosion and sediment controls will be installed in accordance with the latest New York State Department of Environmental Conservation 7 (NYSDEC) standards and specifications. These controls will remain in place until site stabilization is achieved, and vegetation or ground cover is successfully reestablished, minimizing erosion and runoff impacts to nearby natural features and water bodies. Additional potential environmental impacts include: 1. Road Traffic and Dust: There will be a temporary increase in road traffic due to the transportation of crews, equipment, and materials. This may also result in elevated levels of particulate matter (dust) in nearby areas. Dust suppression measures, such as water spraying, will be employed as necessary. 2. Noise: Elevated noise levels may occur temporarily from the use of heavy machinery and increased vehicle traffic. To mitigate this, all work will be conducted during daylight hours and will adhere to applicable noise restrictions or ordinances. 3. Solid Waste Management: Recycling of decommissioned components will be prioritized to minimize solid waste. Structural materials such as steel and aluminum, along with PV modules, inverters, and other equipment, will be reused or recycled where feasible. Throughout the decommissioning process, all activities will conform to applicable local, state, and federal regulations to ensure minimal disruption to the environment and the community. The implementation of these measures aims to restore the site while safeguarding nearby natural and community resources. 3.3 Site Restoration During the decommissioning phase, all components of the Jacob Road Solar Facility will be removed (refer to Appendix 1), and the Facility Site will be restored to a condition similar to its pre- construction state as vacant agricultural land. The pre-construction condition has been documented in the photos included in Appendix 2. The owner will collaborate with the landowner, the Soil and Water Conservation District, the New York State Department of Agriculture and Markets (NYSDAM), and other relevant authorities to ensure that site restoration adheres to applicable guidelines. This includes following the environmental monitoring and restoration requirements outlined in the NYSDAM guidelines (see Appendix 4). Key steps for site restoration include: 1. Soil Restoration: Disturbed areas, including locations where soil compaction has occurred, will undergo soil restoration in accordance with the most current NYSDEC standards. This may involve loosening compacted soil, adding amendments to improve fertility, and grading to restore proper contours. 2. Seeding and Stabilization: All disturbed areas will be re-seeded with appropriate vegetation to stabilize soil conditions, enhance soil structure, and increase fertility. Mulching and fertilizer applications will be employed as needed to support vegetation growth and site stabilization. 8 3. Access Road Removal: If access roads are removed as required by the Town of Yorktown, these areas will be restored to their original state with appropriate grading and soil treatment. 4. Environmental Safeguards: Any additional measures necessary to protect adjacent natural resources or wetlands will be implemented during site restoration. The goal of site restoration is to leave the land in a state suitable for its pre-construction use as agricultural land. The Owner will ensure compliance with all local, state, and federal requirements throughout the restoration process. 3.4 Managing Materials and Waste During the decommissioning phase, a variety of materials and waste will be generated as components of the Jacob Road Solar Facility are dismantled and removed (see Appendix 1). Many materials, such as steel, aluminum, and certain electronic components, are reusable or recyclable. Additionally, some equipment may fall under manufacturer take-back or recycling programs. Any remaining materials will be transported off-site for disposal at licensed and approved facilities. The owner will establish policies and procedures to maximize the recycling and reuse of decommissioned materials. The company will collaborate with manufacturers, local subcontractors, and waste management firms to sort materials for proper disposal, recycling, or reuse. Specific efforts will include: 1. Photovoltaic Modules: The owner will oversee the logistics of collecting and recycling PV modules, aiming to prevent them from entering the municipal waste stream. The company will adhere to any applicable manufacturer recycling programs or industry best practices available at the time of decommissioning. 2. Future Recycling Innovations: As the solar industry evolves, it is anticipated that recycling and reuse options for solar modules will expand. The owner will explore these opportunities to ensure environmentally responsible disposal or recycling of solar modules and other project components. 3. Coordination with Authorities: If any components require disposal at a municipal waste facility, the owner will coordinate with the Town of Yorktown to ensure proper handling and compliance with local regulations. The owner will be responsible for ensuring all materials and waste are managed in an environmentally responsible manner, with an emphasis on reducing landfill disposal and minimizing the overall environmental footprint of the decommissioning process. 3.5 Decommissioning Notification Decommissioning activities for the Jacob Road Solar Facility may necessitate stakeholder notification due to the scope and nature of the work at the Facility Site. The Town of Yorktown will 9 be informed prior to the commencement of any decommissioning activities. Additionally, the owner will notify the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) and other relevant agencies before decommissioning begins, especially if activities may impact nearby wetlands or other environmentally sensitive areas. Notification procedures will begin at least six months before decommissioning activities are scheduled to commence. Notifications may be delivered in writing via mail or email, or communicated verbally, depending on the circumstances and the preferences of each stakeholder. During this period, the owner will: 1. Update the list of stakeholders to ensure all relevant parties are identified. 2. Notify appropriate jurisdictions and overseeing agencies about planned decommissioning activities. 3. Engage with federal, state, county, and local authorities, as well as the utility company, to discuss necessary approvals and coordinate activities. Stakeholders to Be Notified: • Town of Yorktown Planning and Development Office • Property Owner (Featherbed Properties, Inc.) • Consolidated Edison (Con Edison) • Westchester County Sheriff’s Office • Local Fire Department The owner will ensure all communications are conducted in a timely and thorough manner, addressing any concerns raised by stakeholders to ensure a smooth decommissioning process. 4. Costs of Decommissioning & Decommissioning Bond The estimated cost to decommission the 3.125 MW Jacob Road Solar Facility has been calculated by the owners’ engineering consultants, following industry standards and guidance provided by NYSERDA. The estimated cost is $[ ] (see Appendix 3). This estimate reflects the best available information and draws on engineering expertise and demolition experience from similar projects. The calculation does not include potential salvage values for recyclable materials such as aluminum, steel, and copper, which may help offset decommissioning costs. The actual salvage value will depend on prevailing market rates at the time of decommissioning. To ensure sufficient funds are available for decommissioning, The owner will post a surety bond at the start of construction. The bond amount will be adjusted for inflation over the project’s lifespan and is expected to total approximately $ [ ] at the project’s 30-year maturity (see Appendix 3). This 10 financial guarantee provides security for the Town of Yorktown and ensures that the decommissioning process will be fully funded, regardless of circumstances. 5. Estimated Timeline Freestone Renewables has developed an estimated timeline for the major activities associated with the decommissioning of Jacob Road Solar Facility. As specific approvals and protocols may evolve by the time decommissioning is initiated, this timeline is based on the best available information and current industry practices: • Notifications to Stakeholders: Months 0 to 6 Stakeholders, including the Town of Yorktown, will be notified at least six months prior to the commencement of decommissioning activities. • Permitting and Environmental Review: Months 2 to 6 Necessary permits will be secured, and any required environmental reviews will be completed during this period. • Physical Decommissioning and Equipment Removal: Months 6 to 9 The dismantling and removal of project components, including PV modules, racking, inverters, and other equipment, will take place during this time. • Site Restoration: Months 6 to 15 (dependent on growing season) Restoration activities, such as soil remediation, re-seeding, and erosion control, will be conducted following equipment removal. The timing may vary depending on weather conditions and the growing season. 11 | Page APPENDIX A Means of Managing Excess Materials and Waste 12 | Page Materials/ Waste Means of Managing Excess Materials and Waste PV Modules If there is no possibility for reuse, the panels will either be returned to the manufacturer for appropriate disposal or will be transported to a recycling facility where the glass, metal, and semiconductor materials will be separated and recycled. Metal racking These materials will be disposed of off-site at an approved facility Transformers and substation components The substation transformers, step-up transformers and the inverter units will be transported off-site to be sent back to the manufacturer, recycled, reused, or safely disposed of off-site in accordance with current standards and best practices. Inverters, fans, switch gear and fixtures The metal components of the inverters, fans, and fixtures will be disposed of or recycled, where possible. The remaining components will be disposed of in accordance with the standards of the day. Gravel (or other granular) The material will be removed from the project location by truck to a location where the aggregate can be processed for salvage. It will then be reused as fill for construction or roads. It is not expected that any such material will be contaminated. Geotextile fabric It is assumed that during excavation of the aggregate, a large portion of the geotextile will be “picked up” and sorted out at the aggregate reprocessing site. Geotextile fabric that is remaining or large pieces that can be readily removed from the excavated aggregate will be disposed of off-site at an approved disposal facility. Concrete inverter and transformer foundations Concrete foundations will be broken down and transported by certified and licensed contractor to a recycling or approved disposal facility. Cables and wiring Underground conduits, conductors, and other facilities originally installed at less than 36” in depth will be removed and recycled or safely disposed of in accordance with current standards and best practices. Fencing Fencing will be removed and recycled at a metal recycling facility. Debris Any remaining debris on the site will be separated into recyclables/ residual waste and will be transported from the site and managed as appropriate. 13 | Page APPENDIX B Photo Documentation of Pre-Construction Conditions 14 | Page Photo 1: North of array (looking south) Photo 2: East of array (looking west) 15 | Page Photo 3: South of array (looking north) Photo 4: West of array (looking east) 16 | Page APPENDIX C Estimated Decommissioning Costs Decommissioning Cost Analysis in progress Call Before You DigWait The Required TimeConfirm Utility ResponseRespect The MarksDig With Care800-962-7962www.digsafelynewyork.comDigSafely.New YorkJACOB ROAD SOLAR 1805 JACOB ROAD, YORKTOWN, NY 10567 FREESTONE RENEWABLES PROJECT NO: 2231869 ISSUED FOR TOWN REVIEW APRIL 23, 2026PROJECT NO: 2231869FEBRUARY 23, 2024REVISED APRIL 23, 2026JACOB ROAD SOLAR1805 JACOB ROADYORKTOWN, NEW YORK 10567LOCATION MAPN.T.S.FREESTONE RENEWABLESDESCRIPTIONINDEX OF DRAWINGSCOVER SHEETG001C131SITE PLANSHEET NO.PAGE NO.REVDATE651342804/23/26EXISTING CONDITIONS PLANSITE PLANEXISTING CONDITIONS PLANEXISTING CONDITIONS PLANC100C101C102C1304 British American BoulevardLatham, NY 12110518-439-8235labellapc.com78910111213141516C132C140C141C142C150C151C152C530C550SITE PLANGRADING & DRAINAGE PLANGRADING & DRAINAGE PLANGRADING & DRAINAGE PLANEROSION & SEDIMENT CONTROL PLANEROSION & SEDIMENT CONTROL PLANEROSION & SEDIMENT CONTROL PLANSITE DETAILSEROSION & SEDIMENT CONTROL NOTES AND DETAILS17C180LANDSCAPING PLAN18C531FENCE DETAILSATTORNEY:SITE CIVIL ENGINEER, SURVEYOR, AND LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT:RECORD OWNER:APPLICANT:TOWN OF YORKTOWN ZONING DISTRICT: ONE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (R1-160)BULK TABLE:ZONING REQUIREMENTS:88888888888888888C170DRIVEWAY PLAN AND PROFILE198DEMOLITION PLANC120EXP: 6/30/202804/23/2604/23/2604/23/2604/23/2604/23/2604/23/2604/23/2604/23/2604/23/2604/23/2604/23/2604/23/2604/23/2604/23/2604/23/2604/23/2604/23/2604/23/26 YONATAN & MARIA COHENGLORIA SACCHINELLILUIS P. TUQUINAHUI-MAITAJASON ADAM LEVY &KAREN RESNIK LEVYCHRISTOPHER & NOELLEDUNDERDALEWETLAND 5C100EXISTING CONDITIONS PLANC1001EXISTING CONDITIONS PLANSCALE: 1" = 50'NLBANRJVRevisionsNO:DATE:DESCRIPTION:104/30/2024REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS207/30/2024REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS308/28/2024REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS408/22/2025REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS510/08/2025REVISED PER TOWN SOLAR LAW UPDATE601/12/2026ADJUSTED TRAIL LOCATIONNOT FOR CONSTRUCT IONDRAWING NAME:4/23/2026 12:20:39 PM DRAWING NUMBER:DATE:ISSUED FOR:DRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:© 2022 LaBella Associates\\cash.lab\U\Projects\Freestone Renewables LLC\2231869 - Jacob Rd Solar Yorktown NY\06_Drawings\Civil\01_C100_2231869_EXIST.dwg FREESTONERENEWABLES, LLCP.O. BOX 630678HIGHLANDS RANCH, CO 80163JACOB ROAD SOLAR1805 JACOB ROAD, TOWN OF YORKTOWN,WESTCHESTER COUNTY, NEW YORK2231869TOWN REVIEW02/23/2024It is a violation of New York Education Law Art. 145 Sec.7209 & Art. 147 Sec. 7307, for any person, unless actingunder the direction of a licensed architect, professionalengineer, or land surveyor, to alter an item in any way. If anitem bearing the seal of an architect, engineer, or landsurveyor is altered; the altering architect, engineer, or landsurveyor shall affix to the item their seal and notation"altered by" followed by their signature and date of suchalteration, and a specific description of the alteration.4 British American BoulevardLatham, NY 12110518-439-8235labellapc.comCERTIFICATE OF AUTHORIZATION NUMBER:PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING: 018281LAND SURVEYING: 017976GEOLOGICAL: 018750702/27/2026NEW TRAIL CONFIGURATIONEXP: 6/30/2028804/23/2026EMERGENCY ACCESS ROADNOTES:MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET C101 JOHN R. BECKERDAVID S. & LILIKASDANNUA & ADRIANADEDVUKAJANTHONY C. & PATRICIAMARTINEZBRIAN P. MAHONEYSTREAM 1WETLAND 4C101EXISTING CONDITIONS PLANC1011EXISTING CONDITIONS PLANSCALE: 1" = 50'NLBANRJVRevisionsNO:DATE:DESCRIPTION:104/30/2024REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS207/30/2024REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS308/28/2024REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS408/22/2025REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS510/08/2025REVISED PER TOWN SOLAR LAW UPDATE601/12/2026ADJUSTED TRAIL LOCATIONNOT FOR CONSTRUCT IONDRAWING NAME:4/23/2026 12:20:42 PM DRAWING NUMBER:DATE:ISSUED FOR:DRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:© 2022 LaBella Associates\\cash.lab\U\Projects\Freestone Renewables LLC\2231869 - Jacob Rd Solar Yorktown NY\06_Drawings\Civil\01_C100_2231869_EXIST.dwg FREESTONERENEWABLES, LLCP.O. BOX 630678HIGHLANDS RANCH, CO 80163JACOB ROAD SOLAR1805 JACOB ROAD, TOWN OF YORKTOWN,WESTCHESTER COUNTY, NEW YORK2231869TOWN REVIEW02/23/2024It is a violation of New York Education Law Art. 145 Sec.7209 & Art. 147 Sec. 7307, for any person, unless actingunder the direction of a licensed architect, professionalengineer, or land surveyor, to alter an item in any way. If anitem bearing the seal of an architect, engineer, or landsurveyor is altered; the altering architect, engineer, or landsurveyor shall affix to the item their seal and notation"altered by" followed by their signature and date of suchalteration, and a specific description of the alteration.4 British American BoulevardLatham, NY 12110518-439-8235labellapc.comCERTIFICATE OF AUTHORIZATION NUMBER:PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING: 018281LAND SURVEYING: 017976GEOLOGICAL: 018750702/27/2026NEW TRAIL CONFIGURATIONEXP: 6/30/2028804/23/2026EMERGENCY ACCESS ROADMATCHLINE - SEE SHEET C100MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET C102NOTES: KYLE M. & ANN MARIEBOHRINGERRAFAEL & MARLENE LOPEZWALLACK FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHIPMATTHEW S. & DANIELLE L. TARANGELOWETLAND 4WETLAND 3WETLAND 2WETLAND 1STREAM 3STREAM 4STREAM 2C102EXISTING CONDITIONS PLANC1021EXISTING CONDITIONS PLANSCALE: 1" = 50'NLBANRJVRevisionsNO:DATE:DESCRIPTION:104/30/2024REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS207/30/2024REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS308/28/2024REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS408/22/2025REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS510/08/2025REVISED PER TOWN SOLAR LAW UPDATE601/12/2026ADJUSTED TRAIL LOCATIONNOT FOR CONSTRUCT IONDRAWING NAME:4/23/2026 12:20:45 PM DRAWING NUMBER:DATE:ISSUED FOR:DRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:© 2022 LaBella Associates\\cash.lab\U\Projects\Freestone Renewables LLC\2231869 - Jacob Rd Solar Yorktown NY\06_Drawings\Civil\01_C100_2231869_EXIST.dwg FREESTONERENEWABLES, LLCP.O. BOX 630678HIGHLANDS RANCH, CO 80163JACOB ROAD SOLAR1805 JACOB ROAD, TOWN OF YORKTOWN,WESTCHESTER COUNTY, NEW YORK2231869TOWN REVIEW02/23/2024It is a violation of New York Education Law Art. 145 Sec.7209 & Art. 147 Sec. 7307, for any person, unless actingunder the direction of a licensed architect, professionalengineer, or land surveyor, to alter an item in any way. If anitem bearing the seal of an architect, engineer, or landsurveyor is altered; the altering architect, engineer, or landsurveyor shall affix to the item their seal and notation"altered by" followed by their signature and date of suchalteration, and a specific description of the alteration.4 British American BoulevardLatham, NY 12110518-439-8235labellapc.comCERTIFICATE OF AUTHORIZATION NUMBER:PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING: 018281LAND SURVEYING: 017976GEOLOGICAL: 018750702/27/2026NEW TRAIL CONFIGURATIONEXP: 6/30/2028804/23/2026EMERGENCY ACCESS ROADMATCHLINE - SEE SHEET C101NOTES: C120DEMOLITION PLANC1201DEMOLITION PLANSCALE: 1" = 100'N LBANRJVRevisionsNO:DATE:DESCRIPTION:104/30/2024REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS207/30/2024REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS308/28/2024REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS408/22/2025REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS510/08/2025REVISED PER TOWN SOLAR LAW UPDATE601/12/2026ADJUSTED TRAIL LOCATIONNOT FOR CONSTRUCT IONDRAWING NAME:4/23/2026 12:20:59 PM DRAWING NUMBER:DATE:ISSUED FOR:DRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:© 2022 LaBella Associates\\cash.lab\U\Projects\Freestone Renewables LLC\2231869 - Jacob Rd Solar Yorktown NY\06_Drawings\Civil\01_C120_223186_DEMO.dwg FREESTONERENEWABLES, LLCP.O. BOX 630678HIGHLANDS RANCH, CO 80163JACOB ROAD SOLAR1805 JACOB ROAD, TOWN OF YORKTOWN,WESTCHESTER COUNTY, NEW YORK2231869TOWN REVIEW02/23/2024It is a violation of New York Education Law Art. 145 Sec.7209 & Art. 147 Sec. 7307, for any person, unless actingunder the direction of a licensed architect, professionalengineer, or land surveyor, to alter an item in any way. If anitem bearing the seal of an architect, engineer, or landsurveyor is altered; the altering architect, engineer, or landsurveyor shall affix to the item their seal and notation"altered by" followed by their signature and date of suchalteration, and a specific description of the alteration.4 British American BoulevardLatham, NY 12110518-439-8235labellapc.comCERTIFICATE OF AUTHORIZATION NUMBER:PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING: 018281LAND SURVEYING: 017976GEOLOGICAL: 018750702/27/2026NEW TRAIL CONFIGURATIONEXP: 6/30/2028804/23/2026EMERGENCY ACCESS ROAD0'100'200'300' WETLAND 5LBANRJVRevisionsNO:DATE:DESCRIPTION:104/30/2024REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS207/30/2024REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS308/28/2024REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS408/22/2025REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS510/08/2025REVISED PER TOWN SOLAR LAW UPDATE601/12/2026ADJUSTED TRAIL LOCATIONNOT FOR CONSTRUCT IONDRAWING NAME:4/23/2026 12:21:16 PM DRAWING NUMBER:DATE:ISSUED FOR:DRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:© 2022 LaBella Associates\\cash.lab\U\Projects\Freestone Renewables LLC\2231869 - Jacob Rd Solar Yorktown NY\06_Drawings\Civil\01_C130_2231869_SITE.dwg FREESTONERENEWABLES, LLCP.O. BOX 630678HIGHLANDS RANCH, CO 80163JACOB ROAD SOLAR1805 JACOB ROAD, TOWN OF YORKTOWN,WESTCHESTER COUNTY, NEW YORK2231869TOWN REVIEW02/23/2024It is a violation of New York Education Law Art. 145 Sec.7209 & Art. 147 Sec. 7307, for any person, unless actingunder the direction of a licensed architect, professionalengineer, or land surveyor, to alter an item in any way. If anitem bearing the seal of an architect, engineer, or landsurveyor is altered; the altering architect, engineer, or landsurveyor shall affix to the item their seal and notation"altered by" followed by their signature and date of suchalteration, and a specific description of the alteration.4 British American BoulevardLatham, NY 12110518-439-8235labellapc.comCERTIFICATE OF AUTHORIZATION NUMBER:PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING: 018281LAND SURVEYING: 017976GEOLOGICAL: 018750702/27/2026NEW TRAIL CONFIGURATIONEXP: 6/30/2028804/23/2026EMERGENCY ACCESS ROADC130SITE PLANNC1301SITE PLANSCALE: 1" = 50'SITE LEGEND:MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET C131 WETLAND 1STREAM 1WETLAND 4LBANRJVRevisionsNO:DATE:DESCRIPTION:104/30/2024REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS207/30/2024REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS308/28/2024REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS408/22/2025REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS510/08/2025REVISED PER TOWN SOLAR LAW UPDATE601/12/2026ADJUSTED TRAIL LOCATIONNOT FOR CONSTRUCT IONDRAWING NAME:4/23/2026 12:21:19 PM DRAWING NUMBER:DATE:ISSUED FOR:DRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:© 2022 LaBella Associates\\cash.lab\U\Projects\Freestone Renewables LLC\2231869 - Jacob Rd Solar Yorktown NY\06_Drawings\Civil\01_C130_2231869_SITE.dwg FREESTONERENEWABLES, LLCP.O. BOX 630678HIGHLANDS RANCH, CO 80163JACOB ROAD SOLAR1805 JACOB ROAD, TOWN OF YORKTOWN,WESTCHESTER COUNTY, NEW YORK2231869TOWN REVIEW02/23/2024It is a violation of New York Education Law Art. 145 Sec.7209 & Art. 147 Sec. 7307, for any person, unless actingunder the direction of a licensed architect, professionalengineer, or land surveyor, to alter an item in any way. If anitem bearing the seal of an architect, engineer, or landsurveyor is altered; the altering architect, engineer, or landsurveyor shall affix to the item their seal and notation"altered by" followed by their signature and date of suchalteration, and a specific description of the alteration.4 British American BoulevardLatham, NY 12110518-439-8235labellapc.comCERTIFICATE OF AUTHORIZATION NUMBER:PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING: 018281LAND SURVEYING: 017976GEOLOGICAL: 018750702/27/2026NEW TRAIL CONFIGURATIONEXP: 6/30/2028804/23/2026EMERGENCY ACCESS ROADC131SITE PLANNC1311SITE PLANSCALE: 1" = 50'SITE LEGEND:MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET C132MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET C130NOTE: WETLAND 4WETLAND 3WETLAND 2WETLAND 1STREAM 3STREAM 4STREAM 2LBANRJVRevisionsNO:DATE:DESCRIPTION:104/30/2024REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS207/30/2024REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS308/28/2024REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS408/22/2025REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS510/08/2025REVISED PER TOWN SOLAR LAW UPDATE601/12/2026ADJUSTED TRAIL LOCATIONNOT FOR CONSTRUCT IONDRAWING NAME:4/23/2026 12:21:22 PM DRAWING NUMBER:DATE:ISSUED FOR:DRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:© 2022 LaBella Associates\\cash.lab\U\Projects\Freestone Renewables LLC\2231869 - Jacob Rd Solar Yorktown NY\06_Drawings\Civil\01_C130_2231869_SITE.dwg FREESTONERENEWABLES, LLCP.O. BOX 630678HIGHLANDS RANCH, CO 80163JACOB ROAD SOLAR1805 JACOB ROAD, TOWN OF YORKTOWN,WESTCHESTER COUNTY, NEW YORK2231869TOWN REVIEW02/23/2024It is a violation of New York Education Law Art. 145 Sec.7209 & Art. 147 Sec. 7307, for any person, unless actingunder the direction of a licensed architect, professionalengineer, or land surveyor, to alter an item in any way. If anitem bearing the seal of an architect, engineer, or landsurveyor is altered; the altering architect, engineer, or landsurveyor shall affix to the item their seal and notation"altered by" followed by their signature and date of suchalteration, and a specific description of the alteration.4 British American BoulevardLatham, NY 12110518-439-8235labellapc.comCERTIFICATE OF AUTHORIZATION NUMBER:PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING: 018281LAND SURVEYING: 017976GEOLOGICAL: 018750702/27/2026NEW TRAIL CONFIGURATIONEXP: 6/30/2028804/23/2026EMERGENCY ACCESS ROADC132SITE PLANNC1321SITE PLANSCALE: 1" = 50'MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET C131SITE LEGEND:NOTE: WETLAND 5∅∅LBANRJVRevisionsNO:DATE:DESCRIPTION:104/30/2024REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS207/30/2024REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS308/28/2024REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS408/22/2025REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS510/08/2025REVISED PER TOWN SOLAR LAW UPDATE601/12/2026ADJUSTED TRAIL LOCATIONNOT FOR CONSTRUCT IONDRAWING NAME:4/23/2026 12:21:42 PM DRAWING NUMBER:DATE:ISSUED FOR:DRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:© 2022 LaBella Associates\\cash.lab\U\Projects\Freestone Renewables LLC\2231869 - Jacob Rd Solar Yorktown NY\06_Drawings\Civil\01_C140_2231869_GRAD.dwg FREESTONERENEWABLES, LLCP.O. BOX 630678HIGHLANDS RANCH, CO 80163JACOB ROAD SOLAR1805 JACOB ROAD, TOWN OF YORKTOWN,WESTCHESTER COUNTY, NEW YORK2231869TOWN REVIEW02/23/2024It is a violation of New York Education Law Art. 145 Sec.7209 & Art. 147 Sec. 7307, for any person, unless actingunder the direction of a licensed architect, professionalengineer, or land surveyor, to alter an item in any way. If anitem bearing the seal of an architect, engineer, or landsurveyor is altered; the altering architect, engineer, or landsurveyor shall affix to the item their seal and notation"altered by" followed by their signature and date of suchalteration, and a specific description of the alteration.4 British American BoulevardLatham, NY 12110518-439-8235labellapc.comCERTIFICATE OF AUTHORIZATION NUMBER:PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING: 018281LAND SURVEYING: 017976GEOLOGICAL: 018750702/27/2026NEW TRAIL CONFIGURATIONEXP: 6/30/2028804/23/2026EMERGENCY ACCESS ROADC140GRADING & DRAINAGE PLANC1401GRADING & DRAINAGE PLANSCALE: 1" = 50'NGRADING & DRAINAGE LEGEND:MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET C141 WETLAND 1STREAM 1WETLAND 4∅LBANRJVRevisionsNO:DATE:DESCRIPTION:104/30/2024REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS207/30/2024REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS308/28/2024REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS408/22/2025REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS510/08/2025REVISED PER TOWN SOLAR LAW UPDATE601/12/2026ADJUSTED TRAIL LOCATIONNOT FOR CONSTRUCT IONDRAWING NAME:4/23/2026 12:21:46 PM DRAWING NUMBER:DATE:ISSUED FOR:DRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:© 2022 LaBella Associates\\cash.lab\U\Projects\Freestone Renewables LLC\2231869 - Jacob Rd Solar Yorktown NY\06_Drawings\Civil\01_C140_2231869_GRAD.dwg FREESTONERENEWABLES, LLCP.O. BOX 630678HIGHLANDS RANCH, CO 80163JACOB ROAD SOLAR1805 JACOB ROAD, TOWN OF YORKTOWN,WESTCHESTER COUNTY, NEW YORK2231869TOWN REVIEW02/23/2024It is a violation of New York Education Law Art. 145 Sec.7209 & Art. 147 Sec. 7307, for any person, unless actingunder the direction of a licensed architect, professionalengineer, or land surveyor, to alter an item in any way. If anitem bearing the seal of an architect, engineer, or landsurveyor is altered; the altering architect, engineer, or landsurveyor shall affix to the item their seal and notation"altered by" followed by their signature and date of suchalteration, and a specific description of the alteration.4 British American BoulevardLatham, NY 12110518-439-8235labellapc.comCERTIFICATE OF AUTHORIZATION NUMBER:PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING: 018281LAND SURVEYING: 017976GEOLOGICAL: 018750702/27/2026NEW TRAIL CONFIGURATIONEXP: 6/30/2028804/23/2026EMERGENCY ACCESS ROADC141GRADING & DRAINAGE PLANC1411GRADING & DRAINAGE PLANSCALE: 1" = 50'NGRADING & DRAINAGE LEGEND:MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET C142MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET C140 WETLAND 4WETLAND 3WETLAND 2WETLAND 1STREAM 3STREAM 4STREAM 2LBANRJVRevisionsNO:DATE:DESCRIPTION:104/30/2024REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS207/30/2024REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS308/28/2024REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS408/22/2025REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS510/08/2025REVISED PER TOWN SOLAR LAW UPDATE601/12/2026ADJUSTED TRAIL LOCATIONNOT FOR CONSTRUCT IONDRAWING NAME:4/23/2026 12:21:50 PM DRAWING NUMBER:DATE:ISSUED FOR:DRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:© 2022 LaBella Associates\\cash.lab\U\Projects\Freestone Renewables LLC\2231869 - Jacob Rd Solar Yorktown NY\06_Drawings\Civil\01_C140_2231869_GRAD.dwg FREESTONERENEWABLES, LLCP.O. BOX 630678HIGHLANDS RANCH, CO 80163JACOB ROAD SOLAR1805 JACOB ROAD, TOWN OF YORKTOWN,WESTCHESTER COUNTY, NEW YORK2231869TOWN REVIEW02/23/2024It is a violation of New York Education Law Art. 145 Sec.7209 & Art. 147 Sec. 7307, for any person, unless actingunder the direction of a licensed architect, professionalengineer, or land surveyor, to alter an item in any way. If anitem bearing the seal of an architect, engineer, or landsurveyor is altered; the altering architect, engineer, or landsurveyor shall affix to the item their seal and notation"altered by" followed by their signature and date of suchalteration, and a specific description of the alteration.4 British American BoulevardLatham, NY 12110518-439-8235labellapc.comCERTIFICATE OF AUTHORIZATION NUMBER:PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING: 018281LAND SURVEYING: 017976GEOLOGICAL: 018750702/27/2026NEW TRAIL CONFIGURATIONEXP: 6/30/2028804/23/2026EMERGENCY ACCESS ROADC142GRADING & DRAINAGE PLANC1421GRADING & DRAINAGE PLANSCALE: 1" = 50'NGRADING & DRAINAGE LEGEND:MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET C141 WETLAND 5LBANRJVRevisionsNO:DATE:DESCRIPTION:104/30/2024REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS207/30/2024REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS308/28/2024REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS408/22/2025REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS510/08/2025REVISED PER TOWN SOLAR LAW UPDATE601/12/2026ADJUSTED TRAIL LOCATIONNOT FOR CONSTRUCT IONDRAWING NAME:4/23/2026 12:22:13 PM DRAWING NUMBER:DATE:ISSUED FOR:DRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:© 2022 LaBella Associates\\cash.lab\U\Projects\Freestone Renewables LLC\2231869 - Jacob Rd Solar Yorktown NY\06_Drawings\Civil\01_C150_2231869_EROS.dwg FREESTONERENEWABLES, LLCP.O. BOX 630678HIGHLANDS RANCH, CO 80163JACOB ROAD SOLAR1805 JACOB ROAD, TOWN OF YORKTOWN,WESTCHESTER COUNTY, NEW YORK2231869TOWN REVIEW02/23/2024It is a violation of New York Education Law Art. 145 Sec.7209 & Art. 147 Sec. 7307, for any person, unless actingunder the direction of a licensed architect, professionalengineer, or land surveyor, to alter an item in any way. If anitem bearing the seal of an architect, engineer, or landsurveyor is altered; the altering architect, engineer, or landsurveyor shall affix to the item their seal and notation"altered by" followed by their signature and date of suchalteration, and a specific description of the alteration.4 British American BoulevardLatham, NY 12110518-439-8235labellapc.comCERTIFICATE OF AUTHORIZATION NUMBER:PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING: 018281LAND SURVEYING: 017976GEOLOGICAL: 018750702/27/2026NEW TRAIL CONFIGURATIONEXP: 6/30/2028804/23/2026EMERGENCY ACCESS ROADC150EROSION & SEDIMENTCONTROL PLANC1501EROSION & SEDIMENT CONTROL PLANSCALE: 1" = 50'NC150EROSION & SEDIMENTCONTROL PLANEROSION CONTROL LEGEND:MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET C151SEEDING NOTES: STREAM 1WETLAND 4LBANRJVRevisionsNO:DATE:DESCRIPTION:104/30/2024REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS207/30/2024REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS308/28/2024REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS408/22/2025REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS510/08/2025REVISED PER TOWN SOLAR LAW UPDATE601/12/2026ADJUSTED TRAIL LOCATIONNOT FOR CONSTRUCT IONDRAWING NAME:4/23/2026 12:22:19 PM DRAWING NUMBER:DATE:ISSUED FOR:DRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:© 2022 LaBella Associates\\cash.lab\U\Projects\Freestone Renewables LLC\2231869 - Jacob Rd Solar Yorktown NY\06_Drawings\Civil\01_C150_2231869_EROS.dwg FREESTONERENEWABLES, LLCP.O. BOX 630678HIGHLANDS RANCH, CO 80163JACOB ROAD SOLAR1805 JACOB ROAD, TOWN OF YORKTOWN,WESTCHESTER COUNTY, NEW YORK2231869TOWN REVIEW02/23/2024It is a violation of New York Education Law Art. 145 Sec.7209 & Art. 147 Sec. 7307, for any person, unless actingunder the direction of a licensed architect, professionalengineer, or land surveyor, to alter an item in any way. If anitem bearing the seal of an architect, engineer, or landsurveyor is altered; the altering architect, engineer, or landsurveyor shall affix to the item their seal and notation"altered by" followed by their signature and date of suchalteration, and a specific description of the alteration.4 British American BoulevardLatham, NY 12110518-439-8235labellapc.comCERTIFICATE OF AUTHORIZATION NUMBER:PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING: 018281LAND SURVEYING: 017976GEOLOGICAL: 018750702/27/2026NEW TRAIL CONFIGURATIONEXP: 6/30/2028804/23/2026EMERGENCY ACCESS ROADEROSION & SEDIMENTCONTROL PLANC1511EROSION & SEDIMENT CONTROL PLANSCALE: 1" = 50'NC151EROSION & SEDIMENTCONTROL PLANEROSION CONTROL LEGEND:MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET C152MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET C150SEEDING NOTES: WETLAND 4WETLAND 3WETLAND 2WETLAND 1STREAM 3STREAM 4STREAM 2LBANRJVRevisionsNO:DATE:DESCRIPTION:104/30/2024REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS207/30/2024REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS308/28/2024REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS408/22/2025REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS510/08/2025REVISED PER TOWN SOLAR LAW UPDATE601/12/2026ADJUSTED TRAIL LOCATIONNOT FOR CONSTRUCT IONDRAWING NAME:4/23/2026 12:22:25 PM DRAWING NUMBER:DATE:ISSUED FOR:DRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:© 2022 LaBella Associates\\cash.lab\U\Projects\Freestone Renewables LLC\2231869 - Jacob Rd Solar Yorktown NY\06_Drawings\Civil\01_C150_2231869_EROS.dwg FREESTONERENEWABLES, LLCP.O. BOX 630678HIGHLANDS RANCH, CO 80163JACOB ROAD SOLAR1805 JACOB ROAD, TOWN OF YORKTOWN,WESTCHESTER COUNTY, NEW YORK2231869TOWN REVIEW02/23/2024It is a violation of New York Education Law Art. 145 Sec.7209 & Art. 147 Sec. 7307, for any person, unless actingunder the direction of a licensed architect, professionalengineer, or land surveyor, to alter an item in any way. If anitem bearing the seal of an architect, engineer, or landsurveyor is altered; the altering architect, engineer, or landsurveyor shall affix to the item their seal and notation"altered by" followed by their signature and date of suchalteration, and a specific description of the alteration.4 British American BoulevardLatham, NY 12110518-439-8235labellapc.comCERTIFICATE OF AUTHORIZATION NUMBER:PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING: 018281LAND SURVEYING: 017976GEOLOGICAL: 018750702/27/2026NEW TRAIL CONFIGURATIONEXP: 6/30/2028804/23/2026EMERGENCY ACCESS ROADEROSION & SEDIMENTCONTROL PLANC1521EROSION & SEDIMENT CONTROL PLANSCALE: 1" = 50'NC152EROSION & SEDIMENTCONTROL PLANEROSION CONTROL LEGEND:MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET C151SEEDING NOTES: C170DRIVEWAY PLAN ANDPROFILEC1702DRIVEWAY PROFILESCALE: 1" = 40' HORIZONTAL1" = 8' VERTICALLBANRJVRevisionsNO:DATE:DESCRIPTION:104/30/2024REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS207/30/2024REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS308/28/2024REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS408/22/2025REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS510/08/2025REVISED PER TOWN SOLAR LAW UPDATE601/12/2026ADJUSTED TRAIL LOCATIONNOT FOR CONSTRUCT IONDRAWING NAME:4/23/2026 12:22:47 PM DRAWING NUMBER:DATE:ISSUED FOR:DRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:© 2022 LaBella Associates\\cash.lab\U\Projects\Freestone Renewables LLC\2231869 - Jacob Rd Solar Yorktown NY\06_Drawings\Civil\01_C170_223186_PLAN-PROF.dwg FREESTONERENEWABLES, LLCP.O. BOX 630678HIGHLANDS RANCH, CO 80163JACOB ROAD SOLAR1805 JACOB ROAD, TOWN OF YORKTOWN,WESTCHESTER COUNTY, NEW YORK2231869TOWN REVIEW02/23/2024It is a violation of New York Education Law Art. 145 Sec.7209 & Art. 147 Sec. 7307, for any person, unless actingunder the direction of a licensed architect, professionalengineer, or land surveyor, to alter an item in any way. If anitem bearing the seal of an architect, engineer, or landsurveyor is altered; the altering architect, engineer, or landsurveyor shall affix to the item their seal and notation"altered by" followed by their signature and date of suchalteration, and a specific description of the alteration.4 British American BoulevardLatham, NY 12110518-439-8235labellapc.comCERTIFICATE OF AUTHORIZATION NUMBER:PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING: 018281LAND SURVEYING: 017976GEOLOGICAL: 018750702/27/2026NEW TRAIL CONFIGURATIONEXP: 6/30/2028804/23/2026EMERGENCY ACCESS ROADC1701DRIVEWAY PLANSCALE: 1" = 40'N 0'40'80'120' C180LANDSCAPING PLANC1801LANDSCAPING PLANSCALE: 1" = 100'N LBANRJVRevisionsNO:DATE:DESCRIPTION:104/30/2024REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS207/30/2024REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS308/28/2024REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS408/22/2025REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS510/08/2025REVISED PER TOWN SOLAR LAW UPDATE601/12/2026ADJUSTED TRAIL LOCATIONNOT FOR CONSTRUCT IONDRAWING NAME:4/23/2026 12:23:10 PM DRAWING NUMBER:DATE:ISSUED FOR:DRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:© 2022 LaBella Associates\\cash.lab\U\Projects\Freestone Renewables LLC\2231869 - Jacob Rd Solar Yorktown NY\06_Drawings\Civil\01_C180_223186_LANDSCAPE.dwg FREESTONERENEWABLES, LLCP.O. BOX 630678HIGHLANDS RANCH, CO 80163JACOB ROAD SOLAR1805 JACOB ROAD, TOWN OF YORKTOWN,WESTCHESTER COUNTY, NEW YORK2231869TOWN REVIEW02/23/2024It is a violation of New York Education Law Art. 145 Sec.7209 & Art. 147 Sec. 7307, for any person, unless actingunder the direction of a licensed architect, professionalengineer, or land surveyor, to alter an item in any way. If anitem bearing the seal of an architect, engineer, or landsurveyor is altered; the altering architect, engineer, or landsurveyor shall affix to the item their seal and notation"altered by" followed by their signature and date of suchalteration, and a specific description of the alteration.4 British American BoulevardLatham, NY 12110518-439-8235labellapc.comCERTIFICATE OF AUTHORIZATION NUMBER:PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING: 018281LAND SURVEYING: 017976GEOLOGICAL: 018750702/27/2026NEW TRAIL CONFIGURATIONEXP: 6/30/2028804/23/2026EMERGENCY ACCESS ROAD0'100'200'300'PLANT LISTQTYSPACINGSIZECONDAVG GROWTH RATECOMMON NAMEABRVBOTANICAL NAMETREESNOTES:EVERGREEN PLANTING DETAIL NOTES:PAVEMENT SECTION DETAILSECTION PLANAANOTES:MATERIALS SPECIFICATION FOR BIORETENTIONTYPICAL BIORETENTION DETAILSECTION THRU OVERFLOW WEIRNOTES:PIPE TRENCH DETAIL (TYPICAL)TYPICAL HDPEEND SECTIONNOTES:ELEVATIONFRONTPLANTYPICAL END SECTION - HDPENOTESSECTIONPLANCATCH BASIN/MANHOLE DETAILPRECAST CONCRETECMP OR HDPE CEMENT GROUT SEAL JOINTPIPE CONNECTION TO DRAINAGE STRUCTURE-ACCEPTABLE MANHOLE STEPSSECTIONACOPOLYMER POLYPROPYLENE MH STEPPLAN VIEWNOTE:LEVEL SPREADER SECTION B-BABLEVEL SPREADER SECTION A-AABLEVEL SPREADER DETAILLBANRJVRevisionsNO:DATE:DESCRIPTION:104/30/2024REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS207/30/2024REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS308/28/2024REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS408/22/2025REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS510/08/2025REVISED PER TOWN SOLAR LAW UPDATE601/12/2026ADJUSTED TRAIL LOCATIONNOT FOR CONSTRUCT IONDRAWING NAME:4/23/2026 12:23:23 PM DRAWING NUMBER:DATE:ISSUED FOR:DRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:© 2022 LaBella Associates\\cash.lab\U\Projects\Freestone Renewables LLC\2231869 - Jacob Rd Solar Yorktown NY\06_Drawings\Civil\01_C530_2231869_SITE DETAIL.dwg FREESTONERENEWABLES, LLCP.O. BOX 630678HIGHLANDS RANCH, CO 80163JACOB ROAD SOLAR1805 JACOB ROAD, TOWN OF YORKTOWN,WESTCHESTER COUNTY, NEW YORK2231869TOWN REVIEW02/23/2024It is a violation of New York Education Law Art. 145 Sec.7209 & Art. 147 Sec. 7307, for any person, unless actingunder the direction of a licensed architect, professionalengineer, or land surveyor, to alter an item in any way. If anitem bearing the seal of an architect, engineer, or landsurveyor is altered; the altering architect, engineer, or landsurveyor shall affix to the item their seal and notation"altered by" followed by their signature and date of suchalteration, and a specific description of the alteration.4 British American BoulevardLatham, NY 12110518-439-8235labellapc.comCERTIFICATE OF AUTHORIZATION NUMBER:PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING: 018281LAND SURVEYING: 017976GEOLOGICAL: 018750702/27/2026NEW TRAIL CONFIGURATIONEXP: 6/30/2028804/23/2026EMERGENCY ACCESS ROADC530SITE DETAILSSTORM SEWER NOTES: "NAME"SOLAR ARRAYCOMPANY, LLC24HR EMERGENCY CONTACTNAME, PHONE, ADDRESSNOTRESPASSINGPRIVATE PROPERTY.UNAUTHORIZED ENTRY PROHIBITED.VIOLATORS WILL BE PROSECUTED UNDERAUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORKPENAL LAW SECTION 140.10NOTRESPASSINGPRIVATE PROPERTY.UNAUTHORIZED ENTRY PROHIBITED.VIOLATORS WILL BE PROSECUTED UNDERAUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORKPENAL LAW SECTION 140.10NOTICEIN CASE OFEMERGENCYCALL ( ) - -DANGERHIGHVOLTAGE.KEEP OUTWARNINGTHESE FACILITIES AREMONITORED BY VIDEO &ELECTRONIC SECURITYEQUIPMENTWARNINGANYONE DAMAGING, VANDALIZING, ORINTERFERING WITH THE OPERATION OFTHIS FACILITY IS IN VIOLATION OF TITLE18. UNITED STATES CODE SECTION 1366AND PUNISHABLE BY 10 YEARSIMPRISONMENT AND $50,000 FINE.NOTICEIN CASE OFEMERGENCYCALL ( ) - -WARNINGTHESE FACILITIES AREMONITORED BY VIDEO &ELECTRONIC SECURITYEQUIPMENTWARNINGANYONE DAMAGING, VANDALIZING, ORINTERFERING WITH THE OPERATION OFTHIS FACILITY IS IN VIOLATION OF TITLE18. UNITED STATES CODE SECTION 1366AND PUNISHABLE BY 10 YEARSIMPRISONMENT AND $50,000 FINE.DANGERHIGHVOLTAGE.KEEP OUTNOTRESPASSINGPRIVATE PROPERTY.UNAUTHORIZED ENTRY PROHIBITED.VIOLATORS WILL BE PROSECUTED UNDERAUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORKPENAL LAW SECTION 140.10NOTICEIN CASE OFEMERGENCYCALL ( ) - -WARNINGTHESE FACILITIES AREMONITORED BY VIDEO &ELECTRONIC SECURITYEQUIPMENTWARNINGANYONE DAMAGING, VANDALIZING, ORINTERFERING WITH THE OPERATION OFTHIS FACILITY IS IN VIOLATION OF TITLE18. UNITED STATES CODE SECTION 1366AND PUNISHABLE BY 10 YEARSIMPRISONMENT AND $50,000 FINE.DANGERHIGHVOLTAGE.KEEP OUT"NAME"SOLAR ARRAYCOMPANY, LLC24HR EMERGENCY CONTACTNAME, PHONE, ADDRESS7' TALL 24' WIDE VEHICLE GATE 7' TALL 6' WIDE PERSONNEL GATE 7' TALL CHAIN LINK SECURITY FENCE PERMANENT SIGNAGE DETAIL LBANRJVRevisionsNO:DATE:DESCRIPTION:104/30/2024REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS207/30/2024REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS308/28/2024REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS408/22/2025REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS510/08/2025REVISED PER TOWN SOLAR LAW UPDATE601/12/2026ADJUSTED TRAIL LOCATIONNOT FOR CONSTRUCT IONDRAWING NAME:4/23/2026 12:23:26 PM DRAWING NUMBER:DATE:ISSUED FOR:DRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:© 2022 LaBella Associates\\cash.lab\U\Projects\Freestone Renewables LLC\2231869 - Jacob Rd Solar Yorktown NY\06_Drawings\Civil\01_C530_2231869_SITE DETAIL.dwg FREESTONERENEWABLES, LLCP.O. BOX 630678HIGHLANDS RANCH, CO 80163JACOB ROAD SOLAR1805 JACOB ROAD, TOWN OF YORKTOWN,WESTCHESTER COUNTY, NEW YORK2231869TOWN REVIEW02/23/2024It is a violation of New York Education Law Art. 145 Sec.7209 & Art. 147 Sec. 7307, for any person, unless actingunder the direction of a licensed architect, professionalengineer, or land surveyor, to alter an item in any way. If anitem bearing the seal of an architect, engineer, or landsurveyor is altered; the altering architect, engineer, or landsurveyor shall affix to the item their seal and notation"altered by" followed by their signature and date of suchalteration, and a specific description of the alteration.4 British American BoulevardLatham, NY 12110518-439-8235labellapc.comCERTIFICATE OF AUTHORIZATION NUMBER:PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING: 018281LAND SURVEYING: 017976GEOLOGICAL: 018750702/27/2026NEW TRAIL CONFIGURATIONEXP: 6/30/2028804/23/2026EMERGENCY ACCESS ROADC531FENCE DETAILS NOTES:TEMPORARY SOIL STOCKPILE DETAILPLAN VIEWPROFILECONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE SPECIFICATIONS:STABILIZEDCONSTRUCTION ACCESS DETAILNOTES:SECTIONPERSPECTIVE VIEWSILT FENCE INSTALLATION DETAILNOTES:TEMPORARY TOPSOIL,FERTILIZER, SEED & MULCH DETAILSTONE APRON SIZING REQUIREMENT - TABLE "A"SECTIONPLANEND SECTION WITH STONE LINED APRON DETAILSECTION VIEWNOTES:PERMANENT GRASSLINED DIVERSION SWALE DETAILNOTES:CONCRETE WASHOUT AREA DETAILGENERAL EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL NOTES:MAINTENANCE OF EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURES:CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCING NOTES:TOPSOIL SPECIFICATIONS:SITE PREPARATION:TOPSOIL MATERIALS:APPLICATION AND GRADING:VEGETATIVE COVER SPECIFICATIONS:TEMPORARY VEGETATIVE COVER (DURING CONSTRUCTION):PERMANENT VEGETATIVE COVER (AFTER CONSTRUCTION):EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURES:SPDES GENERAL PERMIT GP-0-20-001 COMPLIANCE NOTES:’C550EROSION & SEDIMENTCONTROL DETAILSLBANRJVRevisionsNO:DATE:DESCRIPTION:104/30/2024REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS207/30/2024REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS308/28/2024REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS408/22/2025REVISED PER TOWN COMMENTS510/08/2025REVISED PER TOWN SOLAR LAW UPDATE601/12/2026ADJUSTED TRAIL LOCATIONNOT FOR CONSTRUCT IONDRAWING NAME:4/23/2026 12:23:37 PM DRAWING NUMBER:DATE:ISSUED FOR:DRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:PROJECT NUMBER:© 2022 LaBella Associates\\cash.lab\U\Projects\Freestone Renewables LLC\2231869 - Jacob Rd Solar Yorktown NY\06_Drawings\Civil\01_C550_2231869_EROS-DET.dwg FREESTONERENEWABLES, LLCP.O. BOX 630678HIGHLANDS RANCH, CO 80163JACOB ROAD SOLAR1805 JACOB ROAD, TOWN OF YORKTOWN,WESTCHESTER COUNTY, NEW YORK2231869TOWN REVIEW02/23/2024It is a violation of New York Education Law Art. 145 Sec.7209 & Art. 147 Sec. 7307, for any person, unless actingunder the direction of a licensed architect, professionalengineer, or land surveyor, to alter an item in any way. If anitem bearing the seal of an architect, engineer, or landsurveyor is altered; the altering architect, engineer, or landsurveyor shall affix to the item their seal and notation"altered by" followed by their signature and date of suchalteration, and a specific description of the alteration.4 British American BoulevardLatham, NY 12110518-439-8235labellapc.comCERTIFICATE OF AUTHORIZATION NUMBER:PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING: 018281LAND SURVEYING: 017976GEOLOGICAL: 018750702/27/2026NEW TRAIL CONFIGURATIONEXP: 6/30/2028804/23/2026EMERGENCY ACCESS ROAD Curry Honda John A. Tegeder, R.A. Rich Fon Director of Planning Planning Board Chairman TOWN OF YORKTOWN PLANNING DEPARTMENT Albert A. Capellini Community and Cultural Center, 1974 Commerce Street, Yorktown Heights, New York 10598, Phone (914) 962 -6565 Crompond / Croton Heights / Huntersville / Jefferson Valley / Kitchawan / Mohegan Lake / Shrub O ak / Sparkle Lake / Teatown / Yorktown / Yorktown Heights SIGNED SITE PLAN TRANSMITTAL Date: March 5, 2025 To: Assessor Building Inspector Town Engineer Planning Department File Applicant From: Planning Department Subject: Signed Site Plan – Curry Honda Renovation Plan Name: Curry Honda Renovation Tax ID: 35.08-1-10; 3845 Crompond Road ____________________________________________________________________________________ We are transmitting herewith the following: SIGNED SITE PLAN Assessor: PDF only Building Inspector: PDF only Town Engineer: PDF & Paper Copy Planning Department File: PDF & Paper Copy Applicant: PDF & Paper Copy John A. Tegeder, R.A. Director of Planning York Farms Estates LOCATION MAPNOT TO SCALESheet of Yorktown Heights, NY 10598 www.sitedesignconsultants.com Fax: (914) 962-7386 Land Planners Engineer: NYS Lic. No. 64431 Joseph C. Riina, P.E. 251-F Underhill Avenue, Civil Engineers (914) 962-4488 - DATE: SCALE: DRAWN BY: No. Revisions: Date Comments:0153060SCALE: 1"=30'-0"SITE DATA:OWNER / DEVELOPER:YORK ESTATES, LLC. 25 HILLSIDE AVENUEWHITE PLAINS, NY 10601PROJECT LOCATION: 1870 BALDWIN ROADYORKTOWN HEIGHTSEXISTING TOWN ZONING: R-3 RESIDENTIALTOWN TAX MAP DATA: SECTION 37.17, BLOCK 1, LOT 19SITE AREA : 7.84 ACRESSEWAGE FACILITIES: PUBLIC SEWERSWATER FACILITIES:PUBLIC WATER FACILITIESNOTE: UNAUTHORIZED ALTERATIONS OR ADDITIONS TO THIS DRAWING IS A VIOLATION OF SECTION 7209 (2) OF THE NEW YORK STATE EDUCATION LAW.NOTE:1.THIS IS NOT A SURVEY. ALL SURVEY INFORMATION SHOWN ON THIS PLAN HAS BEENTAKEN FROM SURVEY MAP PREPARED BY NAME OF SURVEYOR, DATED XX/XX/XX, LASTREVISED XX/XX/XX. THE ENGINEER ASSUMES NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR ITS ACCURACY.COPYRIGHT © 2020 BY SITE DESIGN CONSULTANTS, ALL RIGHTS RESERVEDSAFE DIGBefore You Dig, Drill or Blast!CALL US TOLL FREE 811 or 1-800-962-7962NY Industrial Code Rule 753 requires no lessthan two working days notice, but not morethan ten days notice.www.digsafelynewyork.com1" = 30' PROJECT # 1 Site Plan PREPARED FOR YORK FARM ESTATES AMENDED SITE PLAN 1870 BALDWIN ROAD Westchester County, NYYorktown Heights 3/02/2026 JCR 1 25-36 F:\2025\25-36 WESTCHESTER MGMT (BERGMAN) - YORK FARM ESTATES\ENGINEERING\CAD\C3D-25-36 WESTCHESTER MGMT (BERGMAN) YORK FARM ESTATES\DWG\25-36 YORK FARM ESTATES SITE PLAN 3-02-26.DWG 1/16/2017 3:19:52 PM ZONING SCHEDULE:OWNER: MR. HENRY VAN TONGERENSEC 9.3, BLOCK 15, LOT 5ZONING ANALYSIS FOR R-3 DISTRICT:PROPERTY TAX MAP DATA:1872 BALDWIN ROAD, YORKTOWN, NY, 10598EXISTING REQUIRED:PROPOSED:LOT AREA:NET AREA:LOT WIDTH:# OF UNITS PERMITTED:FLOOR AREA RATIO:BUILDING HEIGHT:BUILDING COVERAGE:BUILDING SEPARATION:YARD SETBACKS:PARKING REQUIREMENTS:7.84 ACRES7.84 ACRES7.32 ACRES7.32 ACRES150' MIN.83PROPOSED:40' MAX.20% MAX.50' MIN. BETWEEN BUILDINGS50' SETBACK FOR EACH125150' MIN.790.2040' MAX.20% MAX.50' MIN. BETWEEN BUILDINGS50' SETBACK FOR EACH174VARIANCE REQUIRED:NONENONENONENONENONENONENONENONENONENONEFLOOR AREA RATIO CALCULATIONSUNIT STYLEUNIT TYPEUNIT FLOOR AREA (SF)NUMBER OF UNITSTOTAL FLOOR AREAABCDEONE BEDROOMONE BEDROOMONE BEDROOM+DENTWO BEDROOMTWO BEDROOMPRE-EXIST BLDGSTWO BUILDINGS---------60230030093878424527155314,4483,00025,32614,3703,9202,55163,615SUBTOTALF.A.R.0.199ADDITIONAL UNITS REQUIRING AMENDED APPROVALUNIT NUMBERUNIT TYPEUNIT FLOOR AREA (SF)NUMBER OF UNITSTOTAL FLOOR AREA535464A76AONE BEDROOMONE BEDROOM5123925435311ONE BEDROOMONE BEDROOM1115123925435311,978SUBTOTAL65,593SUBTOTALCOMBINED F.A.R.0.206UNIT 53UNIT 54UNIT 64AUNIT 76AUNIT DESIGNATIONS:UNIT 6, UNIT 41, UNIT 52,UNIT 65, UNIT 76UNIT 11, UNIT 19, UNIT 25,UNIT 31, UNIT 59AFFORDABLE/HOUSINGASSISTANCE DESIGNATED UNITS:SENIOR DESIGNATED UNITS:1 03/12/2026 UNIT CHART