Meeting Overview

MINUTES

ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS DECEMBER   3,  2014

 

 

MEMBERS  PRESENT:           JOAN  SALOMON DAN  SULLIVAN

LEONARD  FEROLDI,  ALTERNATE THOMAS  QUINN

PATRJCIA  CASTELLI  (Present  for last hearing  of the evening)

 

 

ABSENT:                                  MICHAEL  BOSCO

 

 

 

ALSO PRESENT:

 

I

I]

11′

Dennis  Michaels,  Esq. Ann Marie Ambrose, Deborah  Arbolino,

Deputy  Town Attorney Official  Stenographer Administrative   Aide

 

 

 

This meeting  was called to order at 7: 00 P .M. by Mr. Sullivan,  Chairman,

Hearings  on this meeting’s  agenda,  which  are made a part of this meeting,  were held  as noted below:

‘

 

 

PUBLISHED   ITEMS APPLICANTS                                         DECISIONS. NEW ITEMS:

SMITH                                       FRONT  YARD,  SIDE YARD,            ZBA#l4-84

90 Rockland  Road,  Sparkill     TOTAL  SIDE YARD  VARIANCES

78.08 / 1/39;   R-80 zone                      APPROVED

 

AERCO                                                   APPROVED PERFORMANCE   STANDARDS

100  Oritai’ii Drive, Blauvelt

70.06   / l / 1./13; LO zone

ZBA#l4-85

 

ZIMI’S  BAGEL  CAFE                         APPROVED PERFORMANCE  ST AND ARDS

38  N.  Middletown  Road,  Pearl River

69.13  / 1/8;  CC zone

ZBA#l4-86

 

CAMINEZ  CHIROPRACTIC             SIGN SIZE APPROVED

74.10/1/70;       CO zone                         AS AMENDED

60 Dutch Hill Road,  Orangeburg

ZBA#l4-87

 

 

 

 

SKAE  SIGN                                           SIGN LOCATION

78.09 / l / 26; CO zone                         VARIANCE APPROVED

348 Route 9W, Palisades

ZBA#14-88

 

25  RAMLAND ROAD

73.20 / 1  / 26;  LIO zone

25 Ramland  Road,  Orangeburg

OVER-NIGHT PARKING                   ZBA#14-89

OF VEHICLES  APPRO~,~          ~

WITH COND~$           ~’Jli.:i

~~mu

~,:nm  •9tt11Slll

a&–

 

~0.~3ilf1tii    l,@  ~

 

 

 

 

 

Minutes

Page 2 of2

 

 

 

THE DECISIONS RELATED TO THE ABOVE HEARINGS are inserted herein and

made part of these minutes.

 

TI1e verbatim minutes,  as recorded by the Board’s official stenographer for the above

hearings,  are not transcribed.

There being no further business to come before the Board, on motion duly made, seconded and carried, the meeting was adjourned at 9:45 P.M.

 

Dated:  December 3, 2014

 

 

DISTRIBUTION: APPLICANT

TOWN ATTORNEY

DEPUTY TOWN ATIORNEY TOWN BOARDMEMBERS

BUILDING INSPECTOR (Individual Decisions)

Rockland County Planning

 

ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF ORANGETOWN

By{)~

 

Deborah Arbolino,  Administrative Aide

 

UiJ:3;~NV~i d0 NA&!

 

 

.. ~-~··-··  ,,   “‘~                                        .-r·~-~·   ,,.

 

DECISION

FRONT YARD, SIDE YARD, AND TOTAL SIDE YARD VARIANCES APPROVED

i

 

I                         .

To: Donald and Jane Smith

90 Rockland Road

Sparkill; New York 1097 6

!

ZBA#l4-84

Date:  December 3, 2014

 

 

FROM: ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS: Town of Orangetown

I                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     i

I

I

ZBA#l4~84: !Application of Donald and Jane Smith for variances from Zoning Code (Chapter43)  :of the Town of Orangetown Code, Section 3.12,  R-80 District, Group A, Columns 8 (Front Yard: 50′ required, 26.11′  proposed), 9 (Side Yard:  30′ required, 17.4′ existing, 19.9′  proposed) and 10 (Total Side Yard: 80′ required, 61.65′ proposed) for a front porch addition to a single-family residence. The premises are located at 90

Rockland Ro1ad, Sparkill, New York and are identified on the OrangetownTax Map as

Section 78.05,  Block 1,  Lot 39; in the R-80 zoning district.

.                            l

l

Heard by the’Zoning Board of Appealsof the Town of Orangetown at a meeting held on

Wednesday, December 3, 2014 at which time the Board made the determination

hereinafter sJt forth.                                                                    ·

I

 

Jane Smith ~ppeared and testified.

I

The following documents were presented:

 

1. Architecturalplans  and site plan dated October 16, 2014  signed and sealed by

Kier Leveque,  Architect. (2 pages)                                 ‘.

2. 2. A copy of survey dated July 30, 2014 signed by Williruii James, P.E.,P.L.S ..
3. 3. An e-mail  correspondence   from the neighboracross the: street from the applicant

in support  of the application.                                          ·

 

 

 

Mr.  Sullivan; Chair, made a motion to open the Public Hearing whichmotion was seconded by Ms. Salomon and carried unanimously.

 

On advice of;Dennis Michaels, Deputy Town Attorney,  counsel to the Zoning Board of Appeals, Mr. Sullivan moved for a Board determinationthat the foregoing applicationis a Type II action exempt from the State EnvironmentalQuality Review Act (SEQRA), pursuant to SEQRA Regulations §617.5  (c) (9), (10), (12) and/or (13); which does not require SEQRA environmental review. The motion was seconded by Ms. Salomon and carried as follows: Mr. Feroldi, aye; Mr. Quinn, aye; Ms. Salomon, aye; and Mr. Sullivan, aye. Ms. Castelli  and Mr.  Bosco were absent.

I

 

 

 

 

Jane Smith testified that shewould like to add front porch to the house to provide a dry, safe, well lit area for her daughters to wait for the bus; that the porch would also provide a nice area for visitors to enter the house; that it would also help to eliminate stormwater from the basement; and thatthey have lived inthe house for three years.

 

Smith             . ZBA#14-84   !

Page 2 of  4

 

 

!

Public  Comment:

 

 

No public  colnment.

!

The Board members made personal  inspections of the premises  the week before  the meeting and found them to be properly posted  and as generally described  on the application.   :

.                                 i

A satisfactory  statement  in accordance  with the provisions of Section  809  of the General

Municipal Law ofNew York was received.

j

 

Mr. Sullivan.\made a motionto close the Public  Hearing  which motion  was seconded  by

Ms. Castelli  1and  carried unanimously,

1

FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS:

of

After personal observation of the property, hearing  all the testimony  and reviewing  all the documents submitted,  the Board  found  and concluded  that the benefits  to the applicant  if the variancets) are granted  outweigh  the detriment  (if any) to the health,  safety and welfare      th~ neighborhood   or community  by such grant, for the following  reasons:

I

 

1. 1. Tue requested front yard,  side yard and total  side yard variances  will not produce  an

undesirable change  in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment  to nearby

I

properties.  The side yard and total side yard variances are pre-existing  conditions  and

the slightlincrease  in the front yard to square  off the porch will be aesthetically pleasing..

 

 

 

 

2. The reqJested  front yard, side yard and total side yard variances   will not have an adverse effect or impact  on the physical  or envirorunental conditions  in the neighborhood or district.  The side yard and total side yard variances  are pre-existing conditions  and the slight increase  in the front yard to square off the porch will be aesthetically pleasing.

i

 

 

3,    The benefits sought by the applicant  cannot be achieved by other means  feasible  for

the applicant  to pursue  other than by obtaining variances.

!

I

 

4. 4. The requlsted  front yard variance   although somewhat  substantial, affords benefits  to the applicant  that is not outweighed by the detriment, if any, to the health,  safety and welfare of the surrounding neighborhood   or nearby  community.  The side yard and total side\yard   variances  are pre-existing   and not substantial.

 

I

5. The applicant purchased the property  subject to Orangetown’s Zoning  Code (Chapter

43) and i~ proposing  a new addition  and/or improvements, so :tQe alleged  difficulty was self-treated,  which  consideration wetsTelevanno-llie’de.Cision. of the Board  of

I                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           ‘

Appeals, fut did not, by itself, preclude  the granting of the areavariances.

!                                                                                               30!13’~ ~m~  ….

….     LJ.”98

 

g,Ql.3©;.N\1~0 3i  Mfi:Oo.i.

 

 

DECISION:   f1 view of the foregoing  and the testimony  and documents  presented,  the

Board:  RESGL VED,  that the application  for the requested  front yard, side yard and total

I

side yard variances   are APPROVED;   and FURTHER  RESOLVED,  that such decision

and the vote thereon  shall become  effective  and be deemed  rendered  on the date of adoption  by the Board  of the minutes  of which  they are a part.

 

 

 

 

General  Con~itions:

 

1

(i) The approval  of any variance  or Special  Permit  is granted by the Board in accordance

I

ot

with and subject  to those  facts shown  on the plans  submitted  and, if applicable,  as

amended  at     prior to this hearing,  as hereinabove  recited  or set forth.

1

(ii) Any approval  of a variance  or Special Permit  by the Board is limited  to the specific variance  or Special Permit requested  but only to the extent  such approval is granted

herein  and subject  to those conditions,  if any, upon which  such approval  was conditioned which  are hereinbefore   set forth.

i

 

 

(iii) The Bodrd gives no approval  of any building  plans, including,  without  limitation, the accuracy’and  structural  integrity  thereof,  of the applicant,  but same have been

submitted  to ‘the Board  solely for informational  and verification  purposes  relative  to any

 

var.iances bem.I

g requested.

 

(iv) A building  permit  as well  as any other necessary  permits  must be obtained  within  a reasonable  period  of time following  the filing  of this decision  and prior to undertaking any construction  contemplated  in this decision.  To the extent any variance  or Special Permit  granted herein  is subject  to any conditions,  the building  department  shall not be

obligated  to issue any necessary  permits  where  any such condition  imposed  should, in the sole judgment  of the building  department,  be first complied  with as contemplated hereunder.  Occupancy  will not be made until,  and unless,  a Certificate  of Occupancy  is iss~1ed  by thci Offic~ of Building,  Zoning  and Planning  Administration and Enforcement which legally permits such occupancy.

 

 

 

(v) Any foregoing  variance  or Special  Permit will lapse if any contemplated   construction of the project  or any use for which  the variance  or Special Permit  is granted is not substantiallyimplemented   within  one year of the date of filing of this decision  or that of any other board  of the Town  of Orangetown  granting  any required  final approval to such project,  whichever is later, but in any event within two years of the filing of this decision. Merely  obtaining  a Building  Permit   with respect  to construction  or a Certificate  of Occupancy  with respect  to use does not constitute  “substantial implementation” for the purposes  hereof.

 

 

 

The foregoing resolution  to approve the application for the requested front yard, side yard and total side. yard variances  was presented and moved by Ms.  Salomon,  seconded by

Mr. Quinn and carried as follows:   Mr. Feroldi, aye;  Mr.  Quinn, aye ;Ms.  Salomon, aye;

and Mr. Sullivan, aye. Ms. Castelli and Mr. Bosco were absent.

 

 

The Administrative Aide to the Board is hereby authorized,  directed and empowered to sign this decision and file a certified copy thereof in the office of the Town Clerk.

 

DATED: December 3, 2014

 

ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF ORANGETOWN

 

 

DISTRIBUTION:

 

APPLICANT

ZBA MEMBERS SUPERV1SOR

TOWN BOARD MEMBERS

TOWN ATTORNEY

DEPUTY TOWN ATTORNEY OBZPAE

BUILDING INSPECTOR-RAO.

Deborah Arbolino

Administrative Aide

 

 

TOWN  CLERK

HIGHWAY DEPART)V[ENT ASSESSOR

DEPT.  of ENVIRONMENTAL

MGMT. and ENGINEERING FILE,ZBA, PB

CHAIRMAN,   ZBA, PB, ACABOR

 

 

:.,.:•;w·.•

~:!~t  ~,.n,, ..-

~’.·”1f!    .L’!,il:’!(i!iH!l\d

~~:~·  .       Jllji-~~

 

-i~~}iV1’i0  ;ii   UtJA  .

 

DECISION

PERFORMANCE STANDARDS APPROVED

 

To:    Richard Neely  (Aerco)

745 West Nyack  Road

West Nyack, New York  10994

ZBA#   14-85

Date:   December  3, 2014

 

 

FROM:  ZONING BOARD  OF APPEALS:  Town  of Orangetown

 

 

 

ZBA#l 4-85:  Application of Aerco  for Performance   Standards  Review  pursuant  to

Zoning  Codei(Chapter  43) of the Town  of Orangetown Code,  Section 4.12 for an Organic

 

Rankine  Cycle (ORC) Power Plant  (energy recovery system)  at an existing business.  The building is located  at 100  Oritani  Drive, Blauvelt, New York and are identified on the

Orangetown Tax Map as Section  70.06,  Block  1,  Lot  1./13;   in the LO zoning district.

~

 

 

Heard by the Zoning  Board  of Appeals  of the Town  of Orangetown  at a meeting  held on Wednesday,  December  3,  2014 at which time the Board made thedetermination hereinafter  set forth.                                                                                ‘

 

Mark   Danielk,   Engineer   Manager,  and  Richard   Neely,   Vista  -Electrical    Contractors, appeared  and ‘testified.

 

 

The following  documents were presented:

i

 

1. 1. Site plan labeled  Bradley  Corporate Park with attachments’ (1) World  Best ORC Technology,   (2) Kaishan  Compressor,  Screw Expander  (70-1000  KW)- Organic Rankihe  Cycle ORC.                                                                  1
2. 2. Use Subject  to Performance   Standards  Resume  of Operations  and Equipment form dnd Fire Prevention Supplement  fo
3. 3. Zoning  Board  of Appeals  Decision  #14~12  dated February  19,  20
4. 4. A letter dated November 4, 2014 from the Town  of Orangetown, Department  of Environmental Management and Engineering signed  by Joseph Moran,  P.E., Commissioner.
5. 5. A letter dated November 25,  2014  from the Town  of Orangetown,  Bureau  of Fire

Prevention  signed by Michael  B. Bettmann,  Chief Fire Inspector.

6. 6. A letter dated November  21,  2014 from the County  ofRocl<land  Department  of

Planning  signed by Douglas  J. Schuetz  .Acting Commissioner of Planning.

 

 

Mr.  Sullivan,  Chairman,  made  a motion  to open the Public  Hearing  which motion  was seconded  by Ms.  Salomon  and carried unanimously.

 

On advice of  Dennis  Michaels,  Deputy  Town Attorney,   counsel  to the Zoning Board of Appeals,  Ms.  Castelli moved  for a Board determination   based upon the testimony  heard by this Board.land  the facts as presented in the application submissions  and in the record, since the application  entails the ZBA engaging in a review  to determine  compliance  with

technical requirements,  that the foregoing  application  is a Type II action  exempt  from the

State Environmental Quality Review  Act (SEQ RA), pursuant  to SEQRA  Regulations

• 617 .5 (c) (28); which does not require SEQ RA environmental review.  The motion  was seconded  by Ms. Salomon  and carried as follows:  Mr. Feroldi,  aye; Ms. Salomon,  aye;

Mr. Quinn,  aye; and Mr.  Sullivan,  aye.  Mr. Bosco  and Ms.  Castelli  were absent.

 

Pa.tNVli© :$0 11i11

 

Aerco Performance Standards

ZBA#14-85

Page2of4     1

 

 

 

Mark Daniels,  Engineer  Manager,  testified  that this system will take wasted heat and cool it, bringing  it back in to generate  power;  that it is capable of generating  95kw of power; that it will be used during work hours  and testing  sometimes  at night;  that it can save450 megawatts   a year;  that the company  makes boilers  and hot water heaters;  that this system

will help to recover  some of the heat generated  by this operation;   that the company  would

like to market  and sell this technology;  that it runs relatively  quietly at 70 decibels;  that it is approximately 300′ from the nearest  neighbor,  that is uphill  from the site; and that this is a unique  technology  for the U.S ..

 

 

 

The Performahce   Standards  Resume  of Operations  and Equipment,  and the Fire

Prevention  Supplement  completed  by the applicant  were thereupon  reviewed  in detail.

~

 

i

Public  Commbnt:

1

No public coihment.

!

The Board members  made personal  inspections  of the premises  the week before  the meeting  and found them to be properly  posted  and as generally  described  on the application.     i

.:

 

A satisfactory! statement  in accordance  with the provisions  of Section  809 of the General

Municipal  La~  of New York  was received.

 

 

Mr.  Sullivan made  a motion  to close the Public  Hearing  which  motion  was seconded by

Ms.  Salomon  and carried unanimously.

 

 

 

FINDINGS  OFF ACT AND CONCLUSIONS:

After personal  observation  of the property,  hearing  all the testimony  and reviewing  the documents  presented,  the Board found  and concluded  that:

 

Based upon the information  contained  in the applicant’s   Resume  of Operations and Equipment, the Fire Prevention   Supplement,  the letter  dated November  4,

2014  from Joseph J.  Moran,  P.E.,  Commissioner   of the Orangetown  Department

of Environmental   Management   and Engineering   (D.E.M.E.)   concluding  that  the applicant  conforms  to Orangetown  Zoning  Code § 4.1   Performance   Standards, and the memorandum  dated November  24, 2014 from Michael  Bettrnann,  Chief

Fire Inspector,  Town  of Orangetown  Bureau  of Fire Prevention  (B.F.P.);   the other documents  presented  to the Board  and the testimony  of applicant’s

representatives,  the Board  finds and concludes  that conformance  with the Performance   Standards  set forth in Zoning   Code Section 4.1  will result  sufficient to warrant  the issuance  of a Building  Permit  and/or Certificate of Occupancy, subject to compliance  with the orders,  rules and regulations  of the Orangetown Officeof  Building,  Zoning  & Planning  Administration   & Enforcement,  D.E.M.E., and Orangetown  B.F.P.,   and all other departments  havingjurisdiction   of the premises.

 

 

Aerco Performance   Standards

ZBA#l4-85     I

Page3of4        ;

i

 

DECISION:~     view of the foregoing  and the testimony  and documents  presented,  the Board:  RES(?L VED,  that the application  for  Performance   Standards   Conformance, pursuant  to Zoning  Code§  4.1,   is APPROVED   with the SPECIFIC  CONDITION   that the applicant  ‘adhere to all of the requirements   set forth by the Chief Fire Inspector,  Town of Orangetown  B.F.P.;     AND FURTHER  RESOLVED,  that  such decision  and the vote thereon  shall become  effective  and be deemed  rendered  on the date of adoption  by the Board  of the minutes  of which  they are a part.

 

 

i

General  Conditions:

I

(i) The approval  of any variance,  Performance   Standards,  or Special Permit  is granted by

the Board in Jccordance  with and subject to those facts shown on the plans  submitted and, if applicable,  as amended  at or prior to this hearing,  as hereinabove  recited  or set

forth.           ~                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        !

 

 

(ii) Any approval  of a variance,  performance   Standards,  or Special Permit  by the Board is limited  to the specific variance  or Special Permit  requested  but only to the extent such approval  is granted herein  and subject to those  conditions,  if any, upon which  such approval  was conditioned  which are hereinbefore   set forth.

 

 

 

(iii) The Boatd  gives no approval  of any building  plans,  including,  without  limitation, the accuracy  and structural  integrity  thereof,  of the applicant,  but same have been submitted  to the Board  solely for informational   and verification  purposes  relative  to any variances  bellig requested.

 

 

 

(iv) A building  permit  as well  as any other necessary  permits  must be obtained within  a reasonable  period  of time following  the filing  of this decision  and prior to undertaking any construction  contemplated   in this decision.  To the extent any variance, Performance Standards,  or Special Permit  granted  herein  is subject to any conditions,   the building

department shall not be obligated  to issue any necessary  permits  where  any such

condition  imposed  should,  in the sole judgment  of the building  department,  be first complied  with as contemplated  hereunder.  Occupancy  will not be made until,  and unless,

a Certificate  of Occupancy  is issued by the Office of Building,  Zoning  and Planning

Administration   and Enforcement  which legally permits  such  occupancy.

!

 

 

(v) Any foregoing  variance,  Performance   Standards,  or Special Permit will lapse if any contemplated   construction  of the project  or any use for which the variance  or Special Permit  is granted  is not substantially  implemented  within  one year of the date of filing of this decision  or that of any other board  of the Town  of Orangetown  granting  any required final approvalto  such project,  whichever  is later, but in any event within two years of the filing of this &cision.    Merely  obtaining  a Building  Permit   with respect  to construction

or a Certificate  of Occupancy  with respect  to use does not constitute  “substantial

implementation”  for the purposes  hereof.

 

Aerco Performance Standards

ZBA#14-85

Page 4 of 4

 

 

 

 

The foregoing Resolution to approve, with aforesaid Conditions,   the application for Zoning CodeS 4.1  Performance Standards Conformance was presented and moved by Mr. Sullivan, seconded by Mr. Quinn and carried as follows:   Mr. Feroldi,  aye; Ms. Salomon,   aye; Mr. Quinn, aye;  and Mr. Sullivan; aye. Mr. Bosco  and Ms. Castelli were absent.

 

 

 

The Administrative Aide to the Board is hereby authorized, directed and empowered to sign this decision and file a certified copy thereof in the offiee of the Town Clerk.

 

i

DATED:   December 3, 2014

 

ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF ORANGETOWN

 

DISTRIBUTION:

 

APPLICANT

ZBA MEMBERS

SUPERVISOR

TOWN BOARD MEMBERS TOWN ATTORNEY

DEPUTY TOWN ATIORN””EY OBZPAE

BUILDING INSPECTOR-B.vW.

Changed to R:A.O.

By~~4L-==”””-‘-~µ.,,..t:..Je:”

Deborah Arbolino

Administrative Aide

 

 

TOWN CLERK

HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT

ASSESSOR                                ,

DEPT. of ENVIRONMENTAL

MGMT. and ENGINEERING

FILE,ZBA, PB

CHAIRMAN, ZBA, .PB, ACABOR

 

DECISION

PERFORM~NCE   STANDARDS APPROVED

 

To: Harry Demakis  (Zimi’s)

38 N. Middletown Road

Pearl River, New York  10965

ZBA # 14-86

Date:  December  3,  2014

 

 

FROM:  ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS:  Town  of Orangetown’

j

I

ZBA#l 4-86:  iApplication of Zimi’s  Bagel  Cafe for Performance Standards  Review pursuant to Zoning  Code (Chapter  43) of the Town  of Orangetown Code, Section  4.12  for an emergency generator.  The building  is located  at 38 North Middletown Road,  Pearl River, New York and is identified  on the Orangetown Tax Map as Section 69.13,  Lot 1, Block  8; in tl~e CC Zoning  District.

 

Heard by the Zoning Board  of Appeals  of the Town  of Orangetown at a meeting  held on Wednesday, December 3, 2014  at which  time the Board made the determination hereinafter set forth.

 

Spylos Loukakos appeared  and testified.

j

 

The following  documents were presented:

;

 

1. 1. Plans labeled  Zimi Bagel Bakery  Cafe Generator  Installation shows the left side. and rear elevation  of the bui                                                                                  .
2. 2. Generac Guardian  Series  Standby  Generators  Liquid  Cooled  Gas Engines  ( 8

I                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              ,

pages).                                                                                           ,

3. 3. Use Subject  to Performance Standards  Resume  of Operations  and Equipment form a Fire Prevention Supplement  form.                          !
4. 4. A letter dated November 4, 2014  from the Town  of Orangetown, Department of Environmental Management and Engineering signed  by Joseph J. Moran, E., Commissioner,
5. A lett6r dated November  5, 2014  from the Town of Orangetown, Bureau  of Fire

Prevention signed by Michael  B.  Bettmann,  Chief Fire Inspector.

6. 6. A letter dated November  21, 2014  from the County of Rockland  Department  of

Planning signed by Douglas  J. Schuetz,  Acting  Commissioner of Planning.

 

 

 

Mr.  Sullivan,  Chairman, made  a motion  to open the Public  Hearing  which  motion  was seconded  by Ms. Salomon  and carried unanimously.

 

”

On advice  of Dennis  Michaels, Deputy  Town Attorney,  counsel  to the Zoning  Board of

Appeals,  Mr. Sullivan moved  for a Board determination based upon the testimony  heard by this Board,  and the facts as presented  in the application  submissions  and in the record, since the application  entails the ZBA engaging in a review to determine  compliance  with technical requirements, that the foregoing  application is a Type II action  exempt from the State Environmental  Quality Review  Act (SEQRA),  pursuant to SEQRA  Regulations

• 617.5 (c) (28.);  which does not require SEQRA  environmental  review.  The motion was seconded  by Ms. Salomon  and carried  as follows:  Mr. Feroldi,  aye; Ms.  Salomon,  aye;

Mr, Quinn,  ay;c; and Mr. Sullivan,  aye.  Mr. Bosco  and Ms.  Castelli were absent.

 

Sylas Loukakos testified  that the 60 kw generator will be placed  on the roof in the

“back  of the building; that there are parking lots on all four sides of the building; and

that they are getting reviewed by ACAB,9.~,~       c     ~      ••       »r->:»      •      ––         ••       —

• –    •.,…,.,• ~T ..  : ··· …~,.,~-,.

 

 

_                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             !SU!’& S-Jll!3it  ·   -liltV!

tl~ar;             _– –     .      –

The Per;[onnance  Standards  Resume of?P erati~~s.andEq–an~                the Fi~e        . Prevention  Supplement  completed  by                                                    -reviewed  m detail.

.;:;.           –

 

Zimi’s  Generator  Performance Standards

ZBA#14-86

Page2of4

 

 

 

Public  Comnient: No public  coriunent.

The Board members  made  personal  inspections  of the premises  the week before  the meeting  and found them to be properly  posted  and as generally described  on the application.     1

 

A satisfactory statement in accordance with the provisions  of Section  809 of the General

Municipal  Law ‘of New York was received.

1          ‘

Mr. Sullivan  made  a motion  to close the Public  Hearing  which motion  was seconded  by

Ms.  Salomon  and carried unanimously .

.;

i

 

 

FINDINGS  OF FACT  AND CONCLUSIONS:

After personal  observation  of the property,  hearing  all the testimony and reviewing  the documents  presented, the Board  found  and concluded  that:

\

Basedupon  the information  contained  in the applicant’s Resume  of Operations and Equipment, the Fire Prevention  Supplement,  the letter dated November 4,     .

2014 from Joseph  J.  Moran,  P.E.,  Commissioner of the Orangetown  Department of Environmental Management and Engineering (D.E.M.E.)   concluding  that  the applicant  conforms  to Orangetown Zoning  Code § 4.1  Performance Standards, and the memorandum dated November 5,  2014 from Michael  Bettmann,  Chief

Fire Inspector,  Town  of Orangetown  Bureau  of Fire Prevention  (B.F.P.);  the other

documents  presented  to the Board  and the testimony of applicant’s  representatives,   the Board  finds and concludes  that conformance  with the Performance   Standards  set forth in Zoning   Code  Section 4.1  will result sufficient to warrant  the issuance  of a Building  Permit  and/or Certificate of Occupancy, subject to compliance  with the orders,  rules  and regulations  of the Orangetown Officeof’Building,  Zoning  & Planning  Administration & Enforcement,  D.E.M.E., and Orangetown B.F.P.,   and  all other departments having jurisdiction   of the premises.

 

 

 

 

DECISION:  In view of the foregoing  and the testimony and documents presented,  the Boatd:   RESOLVED,  that the application  for  Performance Standards   Conformance, pursuant  to Zoning  Code  § 4.1, is APPROVED with the SPECIFIC  CONDITION  that the applicant  adhere to all of the requirements set forth by the Chief Fire Inspector, Town of Orangetown B.F.P.;    AND FURTHER RESOLVED,   that  such decision  and the vote thereon  shall become  effective  and be deemed rendered on the date of adoption  by the Board  of the minutes  of which  they are a part.

 

 

 

General  Conditions:

 

i

(i) The approval  of any variance,  Performance   Standards,  or Special Permit  is granted by the Board in accordance  with  and subject  to those  facts shown  on the plans  submitted and, if applicable,  as amended  at or prior to this hearing,  as hereinabove  recited  or set

forth.

 

~~:re S:~lf]’TI)   dffl

 

~-          l[J;&l·ll!

—

llJ.S13t};NV1i0.:!0 Mldirl

 

Zimi’ s Generator  P erfonnance Standards

ZBA#l4-86

Page 3of4

 

(ii) Any approval  of a variance,  performance   Standards,  or Special Permit by the Board is limited  to the ‘specific variance  or Special  Permit requested  but only to the extent such approval  is granted  herein and subject to those  conditions,  if any, upon which such approval was conditioned  which  are hereinbefore   set forth.

‘

 

(iii) The Board  gives no approval  of any building  plans,  including,  without  limitation, the accuracy  and structural  integrity  thereof, of the applicant,  but same have been

submitted  to the Board  solely for informational   and verification  purposes  relative  to any’ variances  being requested.

l

 

 

. (iv) A building  permit  as well  as any other necessary  permits  must be obtained  within  a reasonable  period  oftime   following  the filing  of this decision  and prior to undertaking any construction  contemplated   in this decision.  To the extent any variance,  Performance Standards,  or Special Permit  granted  herein  is subject  to any conditions,  the building department  shall not be obligated  to issue any necessary  permits  where  any such condition  imposed  should,  in the sole judgment  of the building  department,  be first

complied  with as contemplated  hereunder.  Occupancy  will not be made until,  and unless,

a Certificate  of Occupancy  is issued by the Office of Building,  Zoning  and Planning

Administration   and Enforcement  which legally permits  such occupancy.

 

 

!

(v) Any foregoing  variance,  Performance   Standards,  or Special Permit will lapse if any contemplated  construction  of the project  or any use for which the variance  or Special Permit  is granted  is not substantially  implemented  within  one year of the date of filing of this decision  dr that of any other board  of the Town  of Orangetown granting  any requited final approval  to such project,  whichever  is later,  but in any event within two years of the filing of this decision.   Merely  obtaining  a Building  Permit   with respect  to construction

or a Certificate  of Occupancy  with respect  to use does not constitute  “substantial

implementation”   for the purposes  hereof.

 

 

31tf3t  ,~1{¥1$ ··tamt

 

‘•mt•flll     ‘lil”:fll-111

—

U,Q!:3~NY>A0   .:£4>  U0J.

 

Zimi’s Generator Performance Standards

ZBA#l4-86

Page 4 of 4

 

 

 

 

The foregoing Resolution  to approve, with aforesaid Conditions, the application for Zoning Code ‘§  4.1  Performance Standards Conformance was presented and moved by Mr. Sullivan, seconded  by Ms. Salomon and carried as follows:   Mr. Feroldi, aye; Mr. Quinn, aye; Ms.  Salomon,  aye;  and Mr.  Sullivan aye, Mr. Bosco  and Ms.  Castelli were absent.

 

 

 

The Administrative Aide to the Board is hereby authorized, directed and empowered  to sign this decision and file a certified copy thereof in the office of the Town  Clerk

 

DATED:   December 3,  2014

 

 

DISTR!BlJTION:

 

APPLICANT

ZBA MEMBERS

SUPERVISOR

TOWN BOARD MEMBERS

TOWN ATTORNEY

DEPUTY TOWN ATTORNEY

OBZPAE              I

BUILDING INSPECTOR-R.A.0.

ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF ORANGETOWN

 

Bycd

Deborah Arbolino

Administrative Aide

 

 

TOWN CLERK

HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT ASSESSOR

DEPT. of ENVIRONMENTAL MGMT. and ENGlNEERING FILE,ZBA, PB

CHAIRMAN, ZBA, PB, ACABOR

 

I                                                                                                                         DECISION

SIGN AREA VARIANCE APPROVED WITH  SPECIFIC  CONDITION  TO REVERSE COLORS  ON SIGN

 

To:     Danielle  Hanken  (Caminez  Chiropractic)

27 North  Middletown  Road

Nanuet, New York  10954

ZBA#14-87

Date:  December  3,  2014

 

 

FROM:  ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS: Town  of Orangetown

 

I

ZBA#l4-87:   Application of Caminez Chiropractic for a variance  from Zoning  Code

(Chapter  43) of the Town of Orangetown Code,  Section  3.11,   Column  5 #6 (Sign Area:

12  sq. ft. permitted,  37.5  sq. ft. proposed)   for a proposed  sign to be installed  on the building.  The premises  are located  at 60 Dutch Hill Road,  Orangeburg, New York and are identified  on the Orangetown  Tax Map as Section  74.10,  Block  1,  Lot 70; CO zoning district.            i

 

 

Heard by the Zoning  Board  of Appeals  of the Town  of Orangetown  at a meeting  held on Wednesday, December 3,  2014  at which  time the Board made the determination hereinafter  Set ‘forth.                                                                                  I

 

.

George  Hanken and Danielle  Hanken, Signarama, appeared  and testified.

‘

 

The following documents were presented:

 

1. A computer generated picture  of the proposed  sign with measurements and a

computer  generated  picture  of the sign on the building.

2. A letterJ   dated November 24,  2014 from the County  of Rock’ land Department of

Planning signed by Douglas  J. Schuetz,  Acting  Commissioner   of Planning.

3. A letter dated November 24, 2014 from the County of Rockland  Department  of

Highways  signed by Sonny Lin,  P .E.                                        ‘

 

 

 

Mr. Sullivan,  Chair, made  a motion  to open the Public  Hearing  which motion  was seconded  by lv’!s.  Salomon  and carried unanimously.

 

On advice of Dennis  Michaels,  Deputy  Town Attorney,  counsel  to the Zoning  Board  of Appeals,  Mr. Sullivan   moved  for a Board  determination  that the foregoing  application is exempt  from the State Environmental Quality Review  Act (SEQRA),  pursuant  to SEQ RA Regulations  §617.5    (c) (7);  which does not require SEQRA  environmental review.  The motion  was seconded  by Ms.  Solomon  and carried as follows:  Mr. Feroldi,  aye; Ms. Salomon,  aye; Mr. Quinn,  aye; and Mr.  Sullivan,  aye. Ms.  Castelli   and Mr. Bosco were ab3ent.

 

 

 

George Hanken  testified  that the style of the sign is a light box similar  to the other signs on the building; that the size is also similar to the other signs 011 the building; that the customer  would  like the orange background  because  it is noticeable  from the road;  and that if they need to reverse  the colors to get the variance,  they can do that.

 

Danielle  Hanken testified  that the color of the sign is part of the logo of the business; that a black  and white sign is not part of the customers logo; that there are other colored signs on the building; and that they would like to keep the orange  color and will reverse it if need be.

 

Caminez Chiropractic

ZBA#l4-87

Page 2 of  4

 

 

 

 

Public Comment:

 

No public comment.

 

The Board members made personal inspections of the premises the week before ifo~~ meeting and found them to be properly posted and as generally described on the application.

 

A satisfactory statement in accordance with the provisions of Section 809 of the General

Municipal Law of New York was received.

 

Mr. Sullivan made a motion to close the Public Hearing which motion was seconded by

Ms.  Salomon’  and carried unanimously.

 

FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS:

After personal observation of the property, hearing all the testimony and reviewing all the documents submitted, the Board found and concluded that the benefits to the applicant if the variance(s) are granted outweigh the detriment (if any) to the health, safety and welfare of the neighborhood or community by such grant, for the following reasons:

 

 

1. The requested sign area variance as amended will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. The proposed size of the sign is in keeping with the other signs already in place on the

building and the applicant has agreed to reverse the colors of the sign, creating a sign with a white background and orange letters.                                ‘

 

 

 

 

2. 2. The requested sign area variance as amended will not have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or distri The proposed size of the sign is in keeping with the other signs already in place on the building and the applicant has agreed to reverse the colors of the sign, creating a sign With a white background and orange letters.

 

 

 

3. The benefits sought by the applicant cannot be achieved by other means feasible for the applicant to pursue other than by obtaining variances.

 

 

 

4. The requested sign area variance, as amended,  although somewhat substantial, affords benefits to the applicant that are not outweighed by the detriment, if any, to the health, safety and welfare of the surrounding neighborhood or nearby community. The proposed size of the sign is in keeping with the other signs already in place on

the building and the applicant has agreed to reverse the colors of the sign, creating a sign with a white background and orange letters,

 

 

 

• . —··           ..,………   1.•

 

5. 5. The applicant purchased the property subject to Orangetown’s Zoning Code (Chapter

43)  and is proposing_a  new a?dition a,n~or in,}p.!Q_ye~         so.ti:e alleged difficulty was self-created, which cons1deramlll~s~~~rt~t~ec1s1on  of the Board of Appeals,  but did not, by itself, prec   d  ;!    ; ..   —ea variances.

 

 

Caminez  Chiropractic

ZBA#l4-87

Page  3   of  4

 

 

DECISION:   In view of the foregoing  and the testimony  and documents  presented,  the Board:  RESOLVED,   that the application  for the requested  sign area variance  is APPROVED  with the Specific  Condition  that the colors  of the sign be reversed:  white background/  orange  letters;  and FURTHER RESOLVED,  that such decision  and the vote thereon  shall become  effective and be deemed rendered  on the date of adoption by the Board  of the minutes  of which  they are a part.

 

 

General  Conditions:

 

 

(i) The approval  of any variance  or Special Permit  is granted by the Board  in accordance with and subject to those  facts shown on the plans  submitted  and, if applicable,  as          ‘ amended  at or prior to this hearing,  as hereinabove  recited  or set forth.

 

.       (ii) Any approval  of a variance  or Special Permit  by the Board  is limited  to the specific variance  or Special Permit  requested  but only to the extent such approval  is granted herein and subject  to those  conditions,  if any, upon which such approval  was conditioned which are hereinbefore   set forth.

 

 

 

(iii) The Board  gives  no approval  of any building  plans,  including,  without  limitation, the accuracy  and structural  integrity  thereof,  of the applicant,  but same have been submitted  to the Board  solely for informational   and verification  purposes  relative  to any variances  being requested.

 

 

 

(iv) A building  permit  as well  as any other necessary  permits  must be obtained  within  a reasonable  period  of time following  the filing of this decision  and prior to undertaking any construction   contemplated  inthis decision.  To the extent any variance  or Special Permit  granted  herein  is subject to any conditions,  the building  department  shall not be

obligated  to issue any necessary  permits  where  any such condition  imposed  should,  in the sole judgment  of the building  department,  be first complied  with as contemplated hereunder.  Occupancy  will not be made  until,  and unless,  a Certificate  of Occupancy  is issued  by the Office of Building,  Zoning  and Planning  Administration  and Enforcement which  legally permits  such occupancy.

 

 

 

(v) Any foregoing  variance  or Special Permit  will lapse  if any contemplated  construction of the project  or any use for which the variance  or Special Permit  is granted  is not substantially implemented  within  one year of the date of filing  of this decision  or that of any other board  of the Town of Orangetown  granting  any required  final approval  to such project,  whichever  is later, but in any event within  two years of the filing of this decision. Merely  obtaining  a Building  Permit   with respect  to construction  or a Certificate  of Occupancy  with respect  to use does not constitute  “substantial  implementation”   for the purposes  hereof.

 

 

 

Caminez  Chiropractic

ZBA#14-87

Page  4 of 4

 

The foregoing resolution to approve the application for the requested sign area variance as amended by reversing the colors of the sign to a white background and orange letters; was presented and moved by Mr. Quinn, seconded by Ms.  Salomon   and carried as follows:   Mr. Feroldi,  aye;  Mr. Quinn,  aye ;Ms.  Salomon, aye; and Mr. Sullivan,  aye. Ms.  Castelli and Mr. Bosco were absent.

 

The Administrative Aide to the Board is hereby authorized,  directed and empowered to

sign this decision  and file a certified copy thereof in the office of the Town Clerk. DATED: December 3,  2014

ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS

TOWN  OF ORANGETOWN

 

 

DISTRIBUTION:

 

APPLICANT ZBA  MEMBERS SUPERVISOR

TOVIN BOAR,D  MEMBERS

TOWN ATTORNEY

DEPUTY TOWN ATTORNEY

OSZPAE

BUILDING INSPECTOR-B.vW.

Administrative  Aide

 

 

TOWN CLERIC

HIGHWAY DE}>ARTMENT

ASSESSOR

DEPT. of ENVIRONMENTAL MGMT. and ENGINEERING

FILE,ZBA,  PB

CHAIRMAN, ZBA, PB, ACABOR

 

 

~··S)tl!:i1~··–•

 

lllfl(aJ   Ja,8JtBI

~   –

a&J.:!~Vli0  :li  d~l

 

DECISION

SIGN SET BACK VARIAN CE APPROVED

 

To:     Donald  Brenner  (Skae  Sign)

4 Independence   A venue

Tappan,  New York  10983

ZBA#l4-88

Date:  December  3, 2014

 

 

FROM:  ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS:   Town  ofOrangetown

 

 

 

ZBA#l4-88:   Application  of  Skae for a variance  from Zoning  Code (Chapter  43) of the Town of Orangetown   Code,  Section  3.11, CO District,  Column  5 # 11 (Sign set back:  20′ required,  3′ proposed  N.Y.S.D.O.T.    right-of-way)  for the installation  of a sign.  The premises  are located  at 348 Route  9W, Palisades,  New York  and are identified  on the Orangetown  Tax Map as Section  78.09, Block  1~  Lot 26; in the CO zoning  district.

 

 

 

Heard by the Zoning Board  of Appeals  of the Town  of Orangetown  at a meeting  held on Wednesday,  December  3, 2014  at which  time the Board made the determination hereinafter  set forth.

 

 

Donald  Brenner,  Attorney,  appeared  and testified. The following  documents  were presented:

1. As  Built Survey  dated 4/15/2011  with the latest revision  date of 6/3/2014   by Atzl, Scatassa  & Zigler,  P.C ..
2. 2. A letter dated November  21, 2014 from the County  of Rockland  Department  of

Planning  signed by Douglas  J.  Schuetz,  Acting  Commissioner   of Planning.

 

 

 

Mr. Sullivan,  Chair, made  a motion  to open the Public  Hearing  which motion  was seconded  by Ms.  Salomon  and carried unanimously.

 

On advice of Dennis  Michaels,  Deputy  Town Attorney,   counsel  to the Zoning Board  of Appeals,  Mr. Sullivan   moved  for a Board  determination   that the foregoing  application  is a Type II action exempt  from the State Environmental  Quality Review  Act (SEQRA), pursuant  to SEQ RA Regulations   §617 .5 (c) (7); which  does not require  SEQRA environmental  review.  The motion  was seconded  by Ms.  Castelli  and carried as follows: Mr. Feroldi,  aye;  Mr.  Quinn,  aye; Ms.  Salomon,  aye; and Mr. Su11ivan,  aye. Ms.  Castelli and Mr. Bosco  were absent.

 

 

 

Donald  Brenner,  attorney  testified  that the owners  of the property  put the sign there thinking  that it was their property;  that the sign was placed  in the same spot that the previous  owner had a sign; that the sign would never be seen if it were placed  back the required  twenty  feet because  of the topography  in the area;  that the building  was built approximately   25 years ago and there has always been a sign in this location.

 

Skae Sign

ZBA#l4-88

Page 2 of  4

 

 

 

Public  Comment:

 

 

No public  comment.

 

 

The Board members  made personal inspections of the premises  the week before  the meeting  and found them to be properly  posted  and as generally  described  on the application.

 

 

A satisfactory statement in accordance  with the provisions  of Section  809 of the General

Municipal  Law of New York was received.

 

and

Mr. Sullivan  made a motion  to close the Public  Hearing  which motion  was seconded  by

Ms. Salomon          carried unanimously.                                               I

 

 

FINDINGS  OFFACT AND CONCLUSIONS:

After personal  observation  of the property,  hearing all the testimony and reviewing all the documents submitted, the Board found and concluded  that the benefits to the applicant if the variance(s)  are granted  outweigh the detriment  (if any) to the health,  safety and

welfare  of the neighborhood   or community by such grant, for the following  reasons:

 

 

 

1. 1. Tue requested  sign set back variance will not produce  an undesirable change in the character  of the neighborhood   or a detriment  to nearby properties.  The proposed location  of the sign is at the same location  that the previous  owner of the property  had a sign.  The topography of the area would  not allow the sign to be seen by passing motorists if the sign was set back twenty fee The building  and the signage has

existed  in the same location  for approximately 25 years without  incident.

 

2. 2. The requested   sign set back variance   will not have  an adverse  effect or impact  on the physical  or environmental  conditions  in the neighborhood  or dis  The proposed  location  of the sign is at the same location  that the previous  owner of the property  had a sign.  TI1e topography of the area would  not allow the sign to be seen  · by passing  motorists  if the sign was set back twenty  feet. The building  and the

signage has existed in the same location  for approximately 25 years without  incident.

 

 

 

3. 3. The benefits  sought by the applicant  cannot be achieved  by other means  feasible  for the applicant  to pursue  other than by obtaining variances.

 

 

 

4. 4. The requested  sign set back variance, although  substantial,  affords benefits  to the applicant  that are not outweighed by the detriment, if any, to the health,  safety and welfare  of the surrounding neighborhood or nearby  community.    The proposed location  of the sign is. at the same location that the previous owner of the property  had a sign.  The topography  of the area would  not allow the sign to be seen by passing motorists if the sign was set back twenty  fee The building  and the sign.age has

existed  in the same location  for approximately 25 years without incident.

 

 

5. 5. The applicant  purchased  the property  subject  to Orangetown’ s Zoning Code  (Chapter

43) and is proposing  a new addition  and/or  improvements,  so the alleged  difficulty

 

Appeals,  but did not, by  itself,  preclude the granting  of the area v~-~

-’11·  ·

.&~•J•

 

was self-creat~d, which  ~onsideration  was relev~t to the decision  of !he ~~~~~’t   mMI.

 

Skae Sign

ZBA#l4-88

Page  3   of  4

 

 

 

DECISION:  In view of the foregoing and the testimonyand documents presented,the Board: RESOLVED, that the application for the requested sign setbackvariance is APPROVED and the disapproval from the County of RocklandDepartment of Planning

is overridden; and FURTHER RESOLVED, that such decision and the vote thereon shall become effective and be deemed rendered on the date of adoption by the Board of the minutes of which they are a part.

 

 

 

 

General Conditions:

 

 

(i) The approval of any variance or Special Permit is granted by the Board in accordance with and subjectto those facts shown on the plans submitted and, if applicable, as          ; amended at or prior to this hearing, as hereinaboverecited or set forth.

 

!

(ii) Any approval ofa variance or Special Permitby the Board is limited to the specific

variance or Special Permit requested but onlyto the extent such approvalis granted herein and subject to those conditions, if any, upon which such approval was conditioned which are hereinbefore set forth.

 

 

 

(iii) The Board. gives no approval of any building plans, including,without limitation, the accuracy and structural integrity thereof, of the applicant, but same have been submittedto  theBoard solely for informational and verificationpurposes relative to any variancesbeing requested.

 

 

 

(iv) A buildingpermit as well as any other necessary permits must be obtained within a reasonable period of time following the filing of this decision and prior to undertaking any construction contemplated in this decision. To the extent any variance or Special Permit granted herein is subjectto any conditions, the building departmentshall not be obligated to issue any necessary permits where any such condition imposed should, in the sole judgment of the building department, be first complied with as contemplated hereunder. Occupancywill not be made until, and unless, a Certificate of Occupancy is issued by the Office of Building, Zoning and Planning Administration and Enforcement which legally permits such occupancy.

 

 

 

(v) Any foregoing variance or Special Permit will lapse if any contemplatedconstruction of the project or any use for which the variance or Special Permit is granted is not substantiallyimplemented within one year of the date of filing of this decision or that of any other board of the Town of Orangetown granting any required final approval to such project, whicheveris later, but in any event within two years of the filing of this decision. Merely obtaining a Building Permit  with respect to construction or a Certificate of Occupancy with respect to use does not constitute “substantial implementation”for the purposes hereof.

 

 

Skae Sign

ZBA#14-88

Page  4 of  4

 

 

 

The foregoing resolutionto approvethe applicationfor the requested sign set back variance  was presented and moved by Mr. Feroldi, seconded by Ms.  Salomon   and carried as follows:  Mr. Feroldi, aye;  Mr, Quinn, aye ;Ms. Salomon, aye; and Mr. Sullivan, aye. Ms.  Castelli and Mr. Bosco were absent.

 

The Administrative Aide to the Board is hereby authorized, directed and empowered to

sign this decision  and file a certified  copy thereof in the office of the Town Clerk.

 

 

DATED:   December  3,  2014

 

ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS TOWN  OF ORANGETOWN

 

DISTRIBUTION:

 

APPLICANT

ZBA  MEMBERS SUPERVISOR

TOWN BOARD MEMBERS

TOWN ATTORNEY

DEPUTY TOWN ATTORNEY

OBZPAE

BUILDING INSPECTOR-M.M.

Administrative Aide

 

 

TOWN  CLERK

HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT

ASSESSOR

DEPT.  ofENVIRONMENT  AL MGMT. and ENGINEERING FILE,ZBA. PB

CHAIRMAN,  ZI;IA, PB, ACABOR

 

DECISION

OVER NIGHT  PARKING VARIAN CE APPROVED

 

To:  Brian Levine  (25 Ramland  Road)

3 5 West Jefferson Avenue

Pearl  River, New York  10965

ZBA#l4-89

Date:   December 3, 2014

 

 

FROM:  ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS:  Town  of Orangetown

 

ZBA#14-89:  Application of  25 Ramland  Road  for a variance  from Zoning  Code (Chapter  43) of the Town  of Orangetown Code,  Section  3.11, LIO District,  Column  7 refers to LO District, Column  7, item 2 (All accessory  storage  shall be within  completely enclosed  buildings:  overnight  storage  of vehicles  proposed)   for overnight  parking in the parking lot. The premises  are located  at 25 Ramland  Road,  Orangeburg, New York  and are identified  on the Orangetown Tax Map as Section  73.20, Block  1,  Lot 26; in the LIO zoning  district.

 

 

 

Heard by the Zoning  Board of Appeals  of the Town  of Orangetown at a meeting  held on Wednesday,  December 3, 2014  at which time the Board  made the detemrination hereinafter set forth.

 

Brian Levine  and Robert  Lagana  appeared  and testified.

I

 

The following  documents were presented:

 

1. 1. Site plan dated  5112/1981    by Adler,  Caruso & Young, C..(l page)

 

Mr.  Sullivan.Chair, made  a motion  to open the Public Hearing  which motion  was seconded  by Ms.  Salomon   and carried unanimously.

 

On advice of Dennis  Michaels,  Deputy  Town Attorney,   counsel  to the Zoning Board  of Appeals, Mr. Sullivan   moved  for a Board determination   that the foregoing  application  is a Type II action exempt  from the State Enviromnental Quality  Review  Act (SEQRA), pursuant  to SEQ RA Regulations   §617 .5  (c) (7); which  does not require  SEQ RA environmental review. The motion  was seconded  by Ms.  Salomon  and carried as follows: Mr. Feroldi,  aye; Ms.  Salomon,  aye; Mr. Sullivan,  aye; and Mr.  Quinn, aye.   Mr.  Bosco and Ms. Castelli  were absent.

 

 

 

 

Robert  Lagana testified  that they just  moved the business  from Pearl River to the building at 25 Ramland  Road;  that they have leased the building;  that they are before  the Board for a variance  to park the delivery  vehicles  overnight  at the site; that they have between  15

and 20 box trucks; that hey start the day around  5:00  A.M.  and return around 5:00 P.M.;

that typically  they work Monday  thru Friday  and occasionally  on week-ends;  that hey

pull into the buildings to load the trucks;  that they have cable wire and equipment  to load; that they  are requesting  to park  overnight;  that some  of the vehicles  that will be stored overnight  are work vans;  and not all technicians start at 5:00 A.M.;

 

Brian  Levine  testified  that he has worked  for the company for over twenty-five  years and they were  good neighbors  when they were located in Nyack  and surrounded  by

residences  and they have been  good neighbors in Pearl River and will continue  to be good neighbors;   and that they can park  all of vehicles  with the headlights  facing the

building  so that the neighbors will not be disturbed  by car headlights in the morning .

..     ..,,          …. ,–~-·—- ……..   _.,~        …… . ._.      …  —  –

 

 

ZBA#l4-89

Page 2 of  4

 

Public  Comment

 

 

Ravi Ubriani,  146 Valley  Forge  Place,  testified that his parents own the house a little to the south of this proposal;  that they purchased the house  35 years ago; that the lights and noise  and fumes will be intrusive.

 

Pat Mcllrnurray, 138 Penn Court, testified  that he has had a number of communications with Subaru regarding noises  of the trucks  with the engines  idling while they are waiting to load; and the beeper  noises  that the trucks make when they are backing  up and

jockeying for position  to load; and that he would  request  limited  hours  of operation  and

1

asked how many bays.                                                                            I

 

Ramesh  Ubriani,  146 Valley  Forge Place, testified  that he lives behind  the parking  lot and is concerned  about noise  at night and early in the morning;  and that there was no complex behind  the house  when he purchased  the house.

 

 

 

 

The Board  members  made personal  inspections  of the premises  the week before  the meeting and found them to be properly  posted  and as generally described  on the application.

 

A satisfactory  statement in accordance with the provisions of Section  809 of the General

Municipal  Law of New York: was received.

 

Mr.  Sullivan made  a motion to close the Public  Hearing  which motion  was seconded  by

Ms.  Castelli   and carried unanimously.

 

 

FINDINGS  OF FACT AND  CONCLUSIONS:

After personal observation of the property, hearing all the testimony  and reviewing all the documents submitted, the Board found  and concluded  that the benefits  to the applicant  if the variance(s)  are granted  outweigh  the detriment (if any) to the health,  safety and welfare of the neighborhood   or community  by such grant, for the following reasons:

I

 

 

1. 1. The requested  overnight parking of vehicles  variance  will not produce  an undesirable change in the character  of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties.  The applicant has agreed to park  all of the vehicles  that will be stored overnight  with the headlights facing west (away  from the neighboring properties).

 

2. 2. The requested  overnight  parking  of vehicles  variance   will not have an adverse effect or impact  on the physical  or envirorunental conditions  in the neighborhood or distri The applicant has agreed to park  all of the vehicles  that will be stored overnight with the headlights facing west  (away from the neighboring  properties).

 

 

 

3. 3. The benefits  sought by the applicant  cannot be achieved by other means  feasible  for

the applicant  to pursue  other than by obtaining a variance.                                          .  -~-~~-  .. ‘

 

 

4. 4. The requested overnight parking  of vehicles  variance although  somewhat subs-~             !~          Rflll affordbenefits to the applicant  that are not outweighed by the detriment, if any, to the             .                                     ‘”.          .         . health,  safety  and welfare of the surrounding neighborhood   or nearby comm   ·    .·                  ,,J          .      ~–

The appli.cant has. agreed to park all of the ve?icles  ~at will be_ stored ovemigh   –      th       .       .          .                 .        .   ~

the headlights facing west  (away from the neighboring properties).                    ·     gcr:t.3$-NV~@ JO   ·     ·

 

 

ZBA#14-89

Page   3  of  4

 

 

 

5. 5. The applicant  purchased the property  subject to Orangetown’s  Zoning  Code (Chapter

43) and is proposing a new addition  and/or improvements, so the alleged  difficulty was self-created, which  consideration was relevant  to the decision  of the Board of Appeals,  but did not, by itself, preclude  the granting of the area variances.

 

 

 

DECISION:  In view of the foregoing and the testimony  and documents presented,  the Board: RESOLVED, that the application  for the requested  overnight parking  of vehicles variance  is APPROVED with the Specific  Condition  that all cars parked  overnight shall

be parked with the headlights facing west  (away from the neighboring properties); and FURTHER RESOLVED,  that such decision  and the vote thereon  shall become  effective and be deemed rendered  on the date of adoption  by the Board  of the minutes  of which they are a part.

 

 

 

 

General  Conditions:

 

(i) The approval of any variance  or Special Permit is granted  by the Board in accordance with and subject to those facts shown on the plans  submitted  and, if applicable,  as          ‘ amended  at or prior to this hearing,  as hereinabove recited  or set forth.

 

(ii) Any approval of a variance  or Special Permit  by the Board  is limited  to the specific variance  or Special Permit  requested  but only to the extent  such approval  is granted

herein  and subject  to those  conditions,  if any, upon which  such approval was conditioned which are hereinbefore  set forth.

 

 

 

(iii) The Board gives no approval  of any building plans,  including, without  limitation, the accuracy  and structural  integrity  thereof, of the applicant,  but same have been submitted to the Board  solely for informational and verification  purposes  relative  to any variances being requested.

 

 

 

(iv) A building permit  as well as any other necessary permits  must be obtained  within  a reasonable period  of time  following  the filing  of this decision  and prior to undertaking any construction contemplated in this decision.  To the extent any variance  or Special Permit  granted herein  is subject to any conditions,  the building department shall not be

obligated to issue any necessary  permits  where  any such condition  imposed  should, in the sole judgment  of the building department,  be first complied  with as contemplated hereunder.  Occupancy  will not be made until,  and unless,  a Certificate of Occupancy is· issued by the Office  of Building,  Zoning  and Planning  Administration and Enforcement which legally  permits  such occupancy.

 

 

 

(v) Any foregoing variance  or Special  Permit  will lapse if any contemplated construction of the project  or any use for which the variance or Special Permit  is granted is not substantially implemented within  one year of the date of :filing of this decision  or that of any other board  of the Town  of Orangetown  granting  any required  final approval to such project, whichever  is later, but in any event within  two years  of the filing ofthis decision. Merely  obtaining  a Building  Permit   with.respect-to-constructionor  aCertificate of

Occupancy  with respect  to use does not constitute “substantial  implementation” for the

purposes  hereof.

25 Rarnland  Road

ZBA#14-89

Page 4 of  4

 

 

The foregoing resolution to approve the application for the requested overnight parking of vehicles variance with the Specific Condition that all vehicles parked overnightmust  be parked  with the headlights facing west (away from the neighboring properties);  was presented and moved by Mr. Sullivan, seconded by Ms. Salomon  and carried as follows: Mr. Feroldi, aye;  Mr. Quinn, aye;Ms.  Salomon, aye; and Mr. Sullivan, aye. Ms. Castelli and Mr. Bosco were absent.

 

The Administrative Aide to the Board is hereby authorized, directed and empowered to

sign this decision and file a certified copy thereof in the office of the Town Clerk.

 

DATED: December 3,  2014

 

ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS TOWN  OF ORANGETOWN

 

 

DISTRIBUTION:

 

APPLICANT

ZBA MEMBERS SUPERVISOR

TOWN BOARDMEMBERS

TOWN ATTORNEY

DEPUTY TOWN ATTORNEY OBZPAE

BUILDING  INSPECTOR-RAO.

 

By—‘–A~+<—“‘—‘–~~~~- ~'{ De  orah Arbolino Administrative  Aide

 

 

TOWN  CLERK lilGHWAYDEPARTMENT ASSESSOR

DEPT. of ENVIRONMENTAL MGMT. and ENGINEERING

FlLE,ZBA, PB

CHAIRMAN, ZBA, PB, ACABOR