Meeting Overview

MINUTES

ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS February 19, 2014

 

MEMBERS PRESENT:             JOAN SALOMON NANE’ITE ALBANESE PA TRICIA CASTELLI MICHAEL BOSCO

LEONARD FEROLDI, AL TERNA TE

 

ABSENT:                                    DANIEL SULLIVAN

 

ALSO PRESENT:               Dennis Michaels, Esq.

Melissa Pezzullo, Deborah Arbolino

Deputy Town Attorney Official Stenographer Administrative Aide

 

This meeting was called to order at 7: 00 P.M. by Ms. Castelli, Acting Chair.

 

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

 

 

APPLICANTS

PUBUSHED ITEMS DECISIONS

 

NEW ITEMS:

 

LIP POTH

69.05 I 4 I 25; R-15 zone

FRONT YARD FENCE                    ZBA#14-1  I

HEIGHT AND ACCESSORY

BUILDING IN FRONT YARD DENIED

 

 

 

 

AERCO EMERGENCY                    APPROVED GENERATOR PERFORMANCE

STANDARDS

70.06 I 1   I 1.12; LO zone

ZBAff.14-12

 

 

 

PAYNE                                  FRONT YARD V ARlANCE

69.20 I 1   I 68; R-15 zone                   APPROVED

ZBA#l4-13

 

 

 

LEAHY                                  FRONT YARD VARIANCE

69.05 I 2 I 41; R-15 zone                   APPROVED

ZBA#l4-14

 

 

3Q\.:L:!O   s;n:\310  Nfi\01

hC  s  lJ\-J     l   HHLl  hlGZ

. –           • ‘ ‘ ” ‘ Q      I Q   \,I /,\ Q 1

NM013~rH· w      .:i          ‘~‘

 

Minutes

Page 2of2

 

 

Tn  response    to requests  from the  Orangetown   Planning     Board,   the Zoning   Board of Appeals:    RESOLVED,    to  approve  the  action of the  Acting   Chairperson      executing    on behalf of the Board   its   consent  to the Planning    Board   acting    as Lead Agency    for the

State  Environmental     Quality    Review    Act (SEQRA)  coordinated    environmental      review   of

actions    pursuant     to  SEQRA  Regulations§      617.6   (b)(3)   the following     applications:      St. Thomas  College-Kraus  Fitness    Center   Site Plan;    125  Route  340,   Sparkill,    NY;  74.16    I I

I 1;  R-40 zone; Pfizer Subdivision    Plan;  401  Middletown   Road,  Pearl  River,  N.Y.  68.08  I

l  I 1;     Ll & LlO zone; Grace Tabernacle   Site Plan;   617   Main Street,  Sparkill,  N.Y. 77.08 I

5 I 41; CS zone;   and FURTHER RESOLVED,  to request   to be notified by the Planning Board of SEQRA proceedings,   hearings,  and determinations     with respect  to these matters.

 

THE DECISIONS   RELATED TO THE ABOVE HEARINGS  are inserted  herein  and made part  of these minutes.

 

The 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 9:00 P.M.

 

Dated:    February 19,  2014

 

DISTR113UTION: APPLICANT

TOWN  ATTORNEY

DEPUTY    TOWN  ATTORNEY TOWN  BOARD  MEMBERS

BUILDING    INSPECTOR    (Individual     Decisions)

Rockland   County  Planning

 

ZONING   BOARD   OF APPEALS TOWN OF ORANGETOWN

 

 

 

 

By—4-a.a.’–!,L!!.~~-#,,.LlL..>~~~–=–~

Deborah Ar 011110

Administrative      Aide

 

JOl.:!.:!O  S)!U318     Nt:10l

 

h£   6   lJB    L    HHLl  hl02

 

Nf,  Ol38i~’i”t.’.O    :lO  l’!f1\0l

 

DECISION

 

 

FRONT   YARD  FENCE   HEIGHTAND    FRONT   YARD  ACCESSORY STRUCTURE     VARIANCES     DENIED

 

To:  Roger Lippoth

25 Robertson  Drive

Pearl River, New York  10965

ZBA # 14-1 I

Date:  February 19, 2014

 

 

FROM: ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS: Town of Orangetown

 

 

 

 

ZBA#14-11: Application of Roger Lippoth for variances from Chapter 43 (Zoning) of the Code of the Town of Orangetown Section 5.226 (Front Yard Fence: 4 Yi’ permitted; 6′ proposed) and from Section 5.153 (Accessory Structure: no accessory structure is permitted in the front yard; shed is existing in front yard) at an existing residence. The premises are located at 25 Robertson Drive, Pearl River, New York and are identified on the Orangetown Tax Map as Section 69.05, Block 4, Lot 25; R-15 zoning district.

 

Heard by the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Orangetown at a meeting held on Wednesday, February 19, 2014 at which time the Board made the determination hereinafter set forth.

 

 

 

Roger Lippoth and William Gerard, Attorney, appeared and testified. The following documents were presented:

1. Copy of survey dated 05/14/2013 by Jay Greenwell, PLS.

 

 

 

Ms. Castelli, Acting 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, Ms. Castelli moved for a Board determination that the foregoing application is a Type IIaction exempt from the State Environmental Quality 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. Albanese and carried as foIIows: Ms. Salomon, aye; Mr. Feroldi, aye; Ms. Castelli, aye; and Mr. Bosco, aye. Mr. Sullivan was absent.

 

William Gerard, Attorney, testified that they are before the Board to legalize an existing front yard fence and shed; that these items have existed for about 18 years; that Mr. Lippoth has dogs and in 2008 one of the dogs was found to be a dangerous dog; that the court ordered items to be removed from the property and to make sure that the dog could not get out of the property; that the property has three front yards; and the shed in connection to the house is in the side yard but because of the three font yards, it is also a front yard; that Mr. Lippoth said he went through the process of getting a building permit for the shed and had several inspections but did not get the final inspection; that when it went through the process the problem of the three front yards was not picked up; that a portion of the shed and fence are in the Town right-of-way and they would be willing to get permission from the highway department; and that his client is trying to legalize these items.

 

Roger Lippoth testified that the shed has existed since 1996; that it is located in the side yard if you orient it to the front door on the house; that the posts for the fence are dug into

the ground at least two feet deep; that he is not well enough to move the ~enc8e,,·\~i~Ol’i)’}!o\ l

and that he loves his dog.                                                                  3 D \ .:! .:l 0    ·    ·    r: –

St    6   W’d      L      HHlJ  hlOZ

 

N·~tOl3~if\JuO  _jO  Nfi\01

 

 

Public Comment:

 

 

Janice Thom,  50 Robertson  Drive, testified  that she lives next door to the applicant, closer to Village  Drive; that she saw the shed being built ten years ago; that Rick Oliver and Paul Witte were contacted;  that the shed is taller rather than wide; that it is an eyesore;  that three years ago he was told to remove  it; that eight years later they are still trying to get rid of it; that the fence is in bad shape and would not hold back a small dog

if it wanted  to get out; that the applicant  has about eight dogs now; that he has tenants  and

there is a doggy door that allows  the dogs to go in and out as they please;  that there are many violations  on the property;  that the fence should be replaced  and moved back; that there are seven houses  on the street and this one is an eyesore;  and that there are many tickets issued for the shed and the height  of the fence.

 

Patricia  Scholz,  354 Erhardt  Road, next to the Medical  Arts Building,  testified  that she agrees with everything  her neighbor just  stated; that she has lived here for seventy  years; that this house  is a problem;  that there have been many complaints  about the dogs; that the applicant  should  have to construct  a new safer fence set back from the road; that she is afraid that one of the dogs will get out and hurt a child; and that there is an old school bus on the property  and cars.

 

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.

 

Ms. Castelli  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  do not outweigh  the detriment   to the health,  safety and

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

 

 

 

1. The applicant constructed  a six-foot  fence and an accessory  structure  in the front yard without  a building  permit  and both the fence  and the accessory  structure

have  caused an undesirable  change  in the character  of the neighborhood  and a detriment  to nearby  properties.

 

 

 

2. The front yard fence height  and front yard accessory  structure  have had an adverse  effect and impact  on the physical  and environmental   conditions  in the neighborhood  or district.
3. The applicant has been charged  with violations  of the Orangetown  Zoning  Code

for several  years and the non-conforming   fence and accessory  structure  should be

removed  or brought  into compliance.

4. The variances  sought  are somewhat  substantial,  but do NOT outweigh  the detriment  to the health,  safety and welfare  of the neighborhood  or community.
5. The Applicant’s  hardships  are self-created,   which  was a significant  factor

considered  by the Board.

 

3DL:L:W  s;P!31~  Nf·;\01 s£  5   \JB    l   HHLl  hlOl NM013~NV”-.10   .:10   NJ\\01

 

 

ZBA#l4-1 l

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 front yard fence height and front yard accessory structure variances are DENIED; 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 arc 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 heating, 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 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.

 

3D\.:l.:! o  s:n:r:n 8  Nt·.\Ol

st ~  LJ~       L     UH\J lilffl

 

N·~\Ol3~NVBO  .:10  Nlv\01

 

 

ZBA#14-11

Page  4 of  4

 

 

 

The  foregoing  resolution    to DENY    the application      for  the requested     front  yard fence height   and  front yard accessory   structure  variances     was presented     and   moved by Ms. Albanese,    seconded  by Ms.   Castelli    and  carried    as  follows:     Mr. Feroldi,    aye;  Ms. Castelli,    aye;  Ms. Salomon,    aye;Ms.   Albanese,     aye;   and  Mr.  Bosco,   aye.   Mr.  Sullivan was  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:   February    19,   2014

 

 

ZONlNG    BOARD    OF APPEALS TOWN  OF ORANGETOWN

 

DISTRIBUTION:

 

APPLICANT

Zl3A    MEMBERS SUPERVISOR

TOWN  BOARD   MEMBERS

TOWN  A’rrORNEY

DEPUTY  TOWN  ATTORNEY OBZPAE

13UILDING     INSPECTOR-13.vW.

By~~-y..V-‘-“‘-“‘”‘-L…:!£.f-‘,,µJL.IL=:~ Deborah   Arbolino

Administrative      Aide

 

 

TOWN   CLERK

lllGHWAY     DEPARTMENT ASSESSOR

DEPT.   or ENVIRONMENTAL

MGMT.  and ENGINEERING

l’ILE,Zl3A,     Pl3

CHAIRMAN,       Zl3A. rn,   ACAl30R

 

3 8 L:l .:! 0  S ~ ~  d 31 Q  N l’A 01 s£  6   lJU    L    HHLl  \ilUZ Nl\\Ol3Di’vUO     .:!O  Ni-.\01

 

DECISION

PERFORMANCE STANDARDS APPROVED

 

 

 

To:   Richard Neely (Aerco  Emergency  Generator)

745 West Nyack Road

West Nyack,  New York  10994

ZBA # 14-12

Date:  February  19, 2014

 

 

FROM:  ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS:  Town  of Orangetown

 

ZBA#l4-12:   Application  of Aerco  International  for a review  from Chapter  43 (Zoning)

of the Town  of Orangetown  Code, Section 4.12 Performance Standards  Review of a 150 kw natural gas emergency  generator.  The premises  are located  at 100 Oritani Drive,

Blauvelt,  New York and are identified  on the Orangetown  Tax Map as Section  70.06, Block  1, Lot 1.12 in the LO zoning  district.

 

 

Heard by the Zoning  Board of Appeals  of the Town  of Orangetown  at a meeting held on Wednesday,  February  19, 2014 at which  time the Board made the determination hereinafter  set forth.

 

 

Richard Neely  appeared  and testified.

 

 

The following  documents  were presented:

 

 

1. Aerco  International  Emergency  Generator  Location  plan labeled drawing  number

C-100 ( 1   page).

2. A generator  installation  site plan dated  12/06/2013  Vista Electrical  Contractors, Inc.
3. A color site plan of Bradley  Corporate  Park.
4. Generator  Specification  sheets  labeled Kinsley  Power Systems  dated November

12, 2013.

5. Performance  standards  resume  of operation  and equipment  form dated January  8,

2014.

6. Fire prevention  supplement  form,
7. A letter dated January  22, 2014 from the Town  of Orangetown,  Department  of Environmental  Management  and Engineering  signed   by Joseph J. Moran, P.E., Commissioner.
8. A letter dated January  16, 2014 from the Town of Orangetown,  Bureau of Fire

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

9. A letter dated February  7, 2014 from the County of Rockland  Department  of

Planning  signed by Thomas  B. Vanderbeek,  P.E., Commissioner  of Planning.

10. A letter dated January 17, 2014 from the County of Rockland  Department  of

Health signed by Scott McKane,  P .E., Senior Public  Health Engineer.

 

 

 

Ms. Castelli,  Acting  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,  Ms. Castelli  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;

Ms. Castelli,  aye; Ms. Albanese,  aye; and Mr. Bosco,  aye. Mr. Sullivan  was absent.                 ,  ~~      l

301.:!:!0 s;PBl  0 ~.1nO The Performance  Standards  Resume  of Operations  and Equipment,  and the ,Fire                   “”Ll h1GZ Prevention  Supplement  completed  by the applicant  were thereupon  revie~      ii} dhl\iil. L     un

 

N·~0~3~NV’d0    30 NfAOl

 

Aerco Emergency Generator Performance Standards

ZBA#14-12

Page 2of4

 

 

 

Public Comment:

 

No public comment.

 

 

The Board members made persona] inspections of the premises the week before the meeting and found them to be properly posted and as genera11y 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.

 

 

Ms. Castelli 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 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 January 22, 2014 from Joseph J. Moran, P.E., Commissioner of the Orangetown Department of Environmental Management and Engineering (D.E.M.E.) concluding that there is no reasonable doubt as to the likelihood of applicant’s conformance to

Orangetown Zoning Code § 4.1 Performance Standards, and the memorandum dated January 16, 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 Office of Building, Zoning & Planning

Administration & Enforcement, DEME, 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 Board: 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 elate of adoption by the Board of the minutes of which they are a part.

 

 

 

General Conditions:

 

(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.

 

 

 

30 l:.U  o s;.:}J 318  ~!1\\0l

 

SE   6   W\:!    l   HHhl  hlOZ

…

NM013~i ..iV~O  .:10  N1\\0l

 

Aerco Emergency  Generator  Performance  Standards

ZBA#l4-12

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.

 

 

 

(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 approval  to such project,  whichever  is later, but in any event within two years of the filing of this decision.   Merely obtaining  a Building  Penn it  with respect  to construction

or a Certificate  of Occupancy  with respect  to use does not constitute  “substantial implementation”   for the purposes  hereof.

 

 

30L:L:l0  S~lll310 NrAOl st  6   \JH    l   HHlJ  hlOZ NM013 e N\f ‘J 0  .:W  Nh\01

 

Aerco  Emergency    Generator    Performance     Standards

ZBA#l4-12

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 Ms.  Castelli,    seconded  by Ms.   Salomon    and   carried  as follows:      Mr.  Ferolcli,    aye;  Ms. Castelli,    aye; Ms.   Salomon,     aye;  Ms.  Albanese,     aye;   and    Mr. Bosco;  aye.  Mr.  Sullivan was  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:     February    19,   2014

 

 

ZONING    BOARD   OF APPEALS TOWN  OF ORANGETOWN

 

 

DlSTRIBUTION:

 

APPLICANT

ZOA  MEMBERS SUPERVISOR

TOWN  130ARD   MEMBERS TOWN  ATTORNEY

DEPUTY  TOWN  A’TTORNEY

013ZPAE

13UILDING     INSPECTOR    -R.A.0  ..

By~

Deborah Arbolino

Administrative   Aide

 

 

TOWN   CLERK

J-JIGJ-1\VAY    DEPARTMENT ASSESSOR

DEPT.  of ENVIRONMENTAL

MGMT.   and  ENGINEERING

rILE,ZJ3A,    PB

CHAIRMAN,     ZJ3A,   Pl3,  ACAl10R

 

 

381.:UO  S\~ !318 ~!.’601

SS   s  Llt!    L    HHlJ hlG2

 

NN\Ol3~i~·v”JO   .:lO  Ni.\Ol

 

DECISION

 

FRONT YARD VARIANCE  APPROVED

 

To: Shannon and Diane Payne

60 Cobble Place

Blauvelt, New York 10913

ZBA # 14-13

Date: February 19, 2014

 

 

FROM: ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS: Town of Orangetown

 

 

ZBA#14-13: Application of Shannon and Diane Payne for a variance from Chapter 43 (Zoning) of the Town of Orangetown Code, Section 3.12, R-15 District, Group M, column 8 (Front Yard: 30′ required, 27′ proposed) for an addition to an existing single• family residence. The premises are located at 60 Cobble Place, Blauvelt, New York are identified on the Orangetown Tax Map as Section 69.20, Block 1, Lot 68 in the R-15 zoning district,

 

 

Heard by the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Orangetown at a meeting held on Wednesday, February 19, 2014 at which time the Board made the determination hereinafter set forth.

 

 

 

Shannon and Diane Payne appeared and testified. The following documents were presented:

1. Architectural plans dated 10/08/2013 by  Harry J. Goldstein, Architect. (3 pages)
2. Plot plan with hand drawing of last addition.
3. Plot plan with hand drawing of proposed addition.

 

 

 

Ms. Castelli, Acting 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, Ms. Castelli 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 SEQRA Regulations §617.5 (c) (9), (10), (12) and /or (13); which does not require SEQRA environmental review. The motion was seconded by Ms. Castelli and carried as follows: Ms. Salomon, aye; Mr. Feroldi, aye; Ms. Castelli, aye; Mr. Bosco, aye; and Ms. Albanese; aye. Mr. Sullivan was absent.

 

 

 

 

Shannon Payne testified that they would like to add a one-story addition to the rear of the house; that they have owned the house for tweleve years; that there are four people in the immediate family; that the property is pie shaped and the house sits on an angle; that the lot is also a comer lot with two front yards; and that the addition is a great room for the family.

 

3Ql~.:l0 s;nr31Q NiAOl St   6   W\:!    L    H~lJ  h10l Nf~0~3~tfvtl0  =10   Nii\01

 

 

Payne

ZBA#14-13

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.

 

Ms. Castelli 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 front yard variance will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. The property has two front yards and similar additions have been constructed in the area.

 

 

 

 

2. The requested front yard variance will not have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. The property has two front yards and similar additions have been constructed in the area.

 

 

 

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. The requested front yard variance is not substantial.

 

 

 

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.

 

30\:l.:l  0  SY~J31 Q   N/l\01

 

St 6   lJB    L    “HY  hlUl

 

N·~Ol3t1N\/BO      ~O  Nh\Ol

 

 

ZBA#14-13

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  front yard variance  is 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  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 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.

 

30J:L:IO  S)!H31~   NMO!

 

SE    6    LJl:J    l   BHLJ  h102

 

NM013DNvL10  .:10   NN\01

 

 

ZBA#14-l     3

Page  4 of 4

 

 

 

The foregoing   resolution to approve   the application   for the requested    front yard variance was presented   and moved  by Ms. Albanese,   seconded  by Ms.  Salomon   and  carried  as follows:    Mr.  Feroldi,   aye; Ms.  Castelli,   aye;  Ms.  Salomon,   aye;  Mr.  Bosco,  aye;  and  Ms. Albanese,   aye.  Mr.  Sullivan    was 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:  February   19,  2014

 

ZONfNG BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF ORANGETOWN

 

DfSTRlBUTION:

 

APPLICANT

ZBA   MEMBERS SUPERVISOR

TOWN  BOARD   MEMBERS TOWN  ATTORNEY

DEPUTY    TOWN  ATTORNEY OBZPAE

BUILDING     INSPECTOR-B.vW.

Administrative    Aide

 

 

TOWN   CLERK

HIGHWAY      DEPARTMENT ASSESSOR

DEPT. of ENVIRONMENTAL MGMT.  and ENGINEERING l’I LE,Zl3A,    PB

CHAIRMAN,      ZBA,   1’13,    ACABOR

 

 

3:)\.:l.:W   s .~t\318    Ni:,01

 

S£   6   Llld    L    HHI~  hlGZ

 

Nfi\Ol3DM)~O    .::lO  N/.\Ol

 

DECISION

 

FRONT  YARD  VARIANCE   APPROVED

 

To:  Catherine  Leahy

96 Secor Boulevard

Pearl River, New York  10965

ZBA # 14-14

Date:   February  19, 2014

 

 

FROM:  ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS:  Town of Orangetown

 

 

ZBA#14-14:  Application  of Catherine  Leahy for a variance  from Chapter  43 (Zoning)  of the Code of the Town of Orangetown,  Section  3.12, R-15 District,  Group M, Column  8 (Front Yard:  30′ required,  29.1′  existing,  25.2′  proposed)  for a portico  at an existing single-family  residence.  The premises  are located  at 96 Secor Boulevard,  Pearl River, New York and are identified  on the Orangetown  Tax Map as Section  69.05, Block 2, Lot

41 in the R-15 zoning district,

 

 

Heard by the Zoning  Board  of Appeals  of the Town  of Orangetown  at a meeting held on Wednesday,  February  19, 2014 at which time the Board made the determination hereinafter  set forth.

 

 

 

Catherine  Leahy appeared  and testified. The following  documents  were presented:

1. Hand drawn plans of the proposed  portico.  (2 pages)
2. A copy of the survey  dated June 28, 1951 by Beckerle  Brown,  Inc.

 

 

 

Ms. Castelli,  Acting  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,  Ms. Castelli  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 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:  Ms. Salomon,  aye;  Mr. Feroldi,  aye; Ms. Castelli,  aye; Mr. Bosco, aye; and Ms. Albanese;  aye. Mr.  Sullivan  was absent.

 

 

 

 

Catherine  Leahy testified  that she would like to build a cover over the existing  front

stoop; that the existing  stoop measures  4′  x 8′;  that there have been much larger additions built in the neighborhood;   that the existing  front yard to the house is 29.1 ‘;that   the stoop was not counted  in that measurement  but when we add a roof over the stoop it will count for the front yard setback.

 

 

 

3 O \.:L:lO  s ;i’d 31 0  N n\ 0 l

5£ 5   lJ’d     L     HBlJ  hlGZ

NM 013 n H V ‘Ll 0  .:l 0  N fA 0 l

 

 

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 ofNew York was received.

 

 

Ms. Castelli 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 front yard variance will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. Similar additions have been constructed in the area.

 

 

 

 

2. The requested front yard variance will not have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. Similar additions have been constructed in the area.

 

 

 

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. The requested front yard variance is not substantial.

 

 

 

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.

 

301.:1.:10   S~U310 Nh\01

..

SE    6   hJH    l   HHlJ hl02

 

Nh\013~Nvci0 :lO  NMOl

 

 

DECISION:  In view of the foregoing  and the testimony  and documents  presented,  the Board: RESOLVED,  that the application  for the requested  front yard variance  is 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  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 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.

 

 

301:.UO  S’>ltl31Q  NMOl

 

9E    6   W\:!   l   HHlJ hl02

 

Nfl\Ol3DM’ici0   .:10   Nh\01

 

 

The  foregoing    resolution     to approve   the  application      for  the  requested     front  yard  variance was  presented    and  moved   by  Mr.  Bosco,   seconded   by  Ms.   Albanese     and  carried   as follows:      Mr.  Feroldi,    aye;   Ms.   Castelli,     aye;  Ms.   Salomon,     aye;   Mr.  Bosco,    aye;   and  Ms. Albanese,     aye.  Mr.  Sullivan     was  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:      February    19,   2014

 

ZONfNG    BOARD   OF  APPEALS TOWN   OF  ORANGETOWN

 

DlSTRTBUTION:	Administrative	Aide
APPLICANT Z13A    MEMl3ERS	TOWN   CLERK lllGHWAY     DEPARTMENT
SUPERVISOR TOWN  BOARD  MEMBERS TOWN  ATIORNEY	ASSESSOR DEPT.  of ENVIRONMENTAL MGMT.  and  ENGINEERING
DEPUTY    TOWN  ATIORNEY	l”‘I LE,Zl3A,    Pl3

 

013ZPAE

BUILDING      INSPECTOR-13.vW.

 

CHAIRMAN,      Zl3A,   P13,   ACMJOR

 

::IQ 1.::1.:I   O   S)I ‘131  Q  N!.\01

 

9£   6   lJ8    l   HHLl   hlDZ

 

Nf1\013vif1i’c.:lO    .:JO   ii]JOl