Meeting Overview

MINUTES

ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS JULY2, 2013

 

MEMBERS  PRESENT:

DANIEL  SULLIVAN,  CHAIRMAN JOAN  SALOMON

NANETTE  ALBANESE

PATRICIA  CASTELLI

LEONARD  FEROLDI,  ALTERNATE

 

 

ABSENT:                                       MICHAEL  BOSCO

 

 

 

ALSO PRESENT:                   Dennis  Michaels,  Esq.

Latonya  Story, 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:

 

 

 

APPLICANTS

PUBLISHED  ITEMS DECISIONS

 

 

NEW ITEMS:

 

BECKERLE                               REARY ARD VARIAN CE

69.17 I 1I50;   R-15 zone                      APPROVED

ZBA#l3-50

 

 

 

 

49 SUNSET  HOT BOX                        POSTPONED

70.09 I 2 I 23.2; R-15 zone

ZBA#l3-51

 

 

 

O’BRIEN                                    FRONT  YARD  FENCE

77.08 / 3 / 3.2; R-15 zone        HEIGHT  VARIANCE  APPROVED

ZBA#l3-52

 

 

 

ARNOSUNROOM

68.15 I 5 I 33; CO zone

FLOOR  AREA  RATIO,  FRONT                       ZBA#l3-53

YARD,  SIDE YARD,  TOTAL  SIDE YARD, REARY ARD, BUILDING  HEIGHT  AND

• 9.32 VARIANCES APPROVED

 

 

 

 

BEITAL’S   AQUARWMS        PERFORMANCE   STANDARDS EMERGENCY   GENERATOR            APPROVED PERFORMANCE   STANDARDS

68,19 / 4 / 16; CO zone

ZBA#13-54

 

 

 

~I      W   Sl lDf ml

 

UOJ3fJNVHO  .:W  WlOl

 

Minutes

Page2

 

 

 

ADDITIONAL    BUSINESS:

 

 

In 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:  Levine Site Plan, 39 Tweed Boulevard,  upper  Grandview,  NY  71.09 I 1 I 40; R-22 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 7:45 P.M.

 

Dated: JULY 2, 2013

 

ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS

TUWN OF ORANGETOWN

 

 

 

DISTRIBUTION: APPLICANT

TOWN ATIORNEY

DEPUTY TOWN ATTORNEY

TOWN BOARD MEMBERS

BUILDING INSPECTOR(Individual Decisions}

Rockland County Planning

By~~

Deborah Arbolino

Administrative Aide

 

 

 

-“‘1·     r 1(1   l”~n310N.161    –

_:i,..;i;:;;::1V    :::>  i”

W }_ l!ld     Si  1W mt

 

~Ol35rfVBO    ;!0 NA\.tll

 

DECISION

 

REARYARD  VARlANCE  APPROVED

 

To: Michael  Beckerle

223 Blauvelt  A venue

Pearl River, New York  10965

ZBA # 13-50

Date:   July 2, 2013

 

 

FROM: ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS:  Town of Orangetown

 

 

ZBA#  13-50: Application  of  Michael  Beckerle  for a variance  from Chapter  43 (Zoning) Town of Orangetown,  Section  3.12, R-15 District,  Group M, Column  11  (Rear Yard:  35′ required,  1 O’ 4″ proposed)  for the installation  of a hot tub/pool  at an existing  single• family residence.  The premises  are located  at 223 Blauvelt  A venue,  Pearl River, New York  and are identified  on the Orangetown  Tax Map as Section  69 .17, Block  1, Lot  50; R-15 zoning  district.

 

 

Heard by the Zoning  Board  of Appeals  of the Town of Orangetown  at a meeting  held on Tuesday,   July 2, 2013 at which time the Board made the determination  hereinafter  set forth.

 

Michael  Beckerle  appeared  and! testified. The following  documents  were presented:

1. Site plan with hot tub placement  drawn  on it.
2. One page hot tub plan.

 

 

 

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 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. Albanese,  aye; Ms. Salomon,  aye;  Mr. Feroldi,  aye; Ms. Castelli, aye; Mr. Bosco,  aye; and  Mr. Sullivan,  aye.

 

Michael  Beckerle  testified  that the plan  is to install  a large  hot tub that sits 4 Yi’ high on a slab; that it is placed  north to south on the property  because  it fits the property better this way; that to the west is a large Oak tree and to the east is a patio; that to place the structure running  east to west would kill the tree and impede  on the existing  patio; that there are many  shrubs to the north and along the property  line that would be a natural screen for the hot tub.

 

 

3~i;!.::i0$>llEl1~Nfi\01

 

tttYd      ~n:Yml

 

~u.t3~~”~n:W~o N!iOl

 

Beckerle

ZBA#l3-50

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 ofNew  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  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 rear yard variance  will not produce  an undesirable  change in the character  of the neighborhood   or a detriment  to nearby properties.  The applicants’ property  is very sloped  and this area is the most level area to place the hot tub.

 

 

 

2. The requested rear yard variance will not have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. The applicants’ property is very sloped and this area is the most level area to place the hot tub.

 

 

 

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 rear yard variance, although somewhat substantial, afford benefits to

the applicant that arc not outweighed by the detriment, if any, to the health, safety and welfare of the surrounding neighborhood or nearby community.

 

 

 

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.

 

 

~·  1  Md   lll  ll1r mlZ

 

til\013~Hfvhl0 .:lO  ~f.\01

 

 

 

 

DECISION:  In view of the foregoing and the testimony and documents presented, the Board: RESOLVED, that the application for the requested rear 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 oftime  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 docs not constitute “substantial implementation” for the purposes hereof.

 

 

 

 

~”‘LI    l”)

c:)iH31D  Nm0-1

,:::;Jt….;i:~\j v

&£, }_  W  gt lit  tlttZ

 

Oo135’NVBO  30 aPAOi

 

 

The foregoing  resolution  to approve  the application  for the requested  rear yard variance was presented  and moved  by Ms. Albanese,  seconded  by Ms.  Salomon  and carried as follows:  Mr. Feroldi,  aye;  Ms. Albanese,  aye ;Ms. Castelli, aye; Ms. Salomon, aye; and Mr. Sullivan, aye. Mr. Bosco 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: July 2, 2013

 

ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF ORANGETOWN

 

 

 

DISTRIBUTION:

 

APPLICANT

ZBA MEMBERS SUPERVISOR

TOWN BOARD MEMBERS

TOWN ATTORNEY

DEPUTY TOVlN ATTORNEY OBZPAE

BUILDING JNSPECTOR-R.AO.

By—P…~~–=:::..<..!l””‘-‘–‘-~~”‘V~

Deborah Arbolino

Administrative Aide

 

 

TOWN  CLERK

HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT ASSESSOR

DEPT. ofENVIRONMENTAL MGMT. and ENGINEERING FILE,ZBA, PB

CHAIRMAN,  ZBA, PB, ACABOR

 

 

‘3!.Jl:BO  S’>li:.131~ NlM11

~·  J_ Ltci    Ht wmz

 

KA01.3~NvHO  .:W N.A\6:1

 

DECISION

 

FRONT YARD FENCE HEIGHT  VARIANCE APPROVED

 

To:    Daniel  and Charlene  O’Brien

4 Austin  Way

Tappan, New York  10983

ZBA#   13-52

Date:  July 2, 2013

 

 

FROM:  ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS:  Town  of Orangetown

 

 

ZBA#13-52:  Application  of Daniel and Charlene  O’Brien for a variance  from Chapter  43 (Zoning),  Section  3.12, RG District,  Section  5.226 (Front Yard Fence: 41/2′   permitted,

6′ proposed)  for the installation  of a six foot fence surrounding  an in-ground  pool at an existing  single-family  residence,  The premises  are located  at 4 Austin Way, Tappan, New York  and identified  on the Orangetown  Tax Map as Section  77.08, Block 3, Lot 3.2; RG zone.

 

 

 

Heard by the Zoning  Board  of Appeals  of the Town  of Orangetown  at a meeting  held on Tuesday,  July 2, 2013 at which  time the Board  made the determination  hereinafter  set forth.

 

 

 

Daniel  O’Brien  appeared  and testified. The following  documents  were presented:

1. Site plan showing  the placement  of the fence.

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

Daniel  O’Brien testified  that he found out that he needed  a variance  for the fence when the building  inspector  came out to the house  for the final inspection  of the pool; that he has installed  a six-foot  fence in the back  yard for the pool and found out after the fence company  installed  it that it should have been 4 Yi’ high; that his property  sits along

Austin  Way, which is a private road; that he has one neighbor  to the rear of him and they share the maintenance   of the private road, which  is more like a long driveway;  that the shed existed  when he moved  in and the fence does not interfere  with any sight lines for the road.

 

 

 

3ai.:HO S)!H31~NIA01

 

—

~   i  W   Si ltfml

.

 

O’Brien

ZBA#13-52

Page2   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 ofNew  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  front yard fence height  variance  will not produce  an undesirable change in the character  of the neighborhood   or a detriment  to nearby properties.

 

2. TI1e requested front yard fence height   variance   will not have an adverse  effect or impact  on the physical  or environmental   conditions  in the neighborhood  or district. The fence is 19′ back from the private road and does not obstruct  sight from the road.

 

 

 

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 fence height  valiance  although  somewhat  substantial,  afford 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.

 

 

 

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 variance.

 

 

 

3ni.:HO S)JH3l:J  N&Ol

 

~  _I_  W  &I  1Rr ml

 

N&Ol.3~NVHO   .:W NAlGJ.

 

 

ZBA#l3-52

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 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 oftime  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.

 

 

‘3~H.::IO  ~}!B31J MRtOl

~   t  Yd   s1-mrmz

 

N&Ol3~HfvlW .10 NiuUll

 

 

ZBA#13-52

Page  4 of  4

 

 

 

The foregoing  resolution  to approve  the application  for the requested  :front yard fence height   variance   was presented  and moved by Ms. Castelli, seconded by Ms. Salomon and carried as follows: Mr. Feroldi, aye; Ms. Albanese, aye ;Ms. Castelli, aye; Ms. Salomon, aye; and Mr. Sullivan, aye. Mr. Bosco 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:  July 2, 2013

 

ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF ORANGETOWN

 

 

DISTRIBUTION:

 

APPLICANT ZBA  MEMBERS SUPERVISOR

TOWN BOARD MEMBERS TO\VN ATTORNEY

DEPUTY TOWN ATTORNEY

OBZPAE

BUILDING iNSPECTOR~M.M.

Administrative Aide

 

 

TOWN  CLERK

HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT ASSESSOR

DEPT. ofENVIRONMENTAL MGMT. and ENGINEERING FILE,ZBA, PB

CHAIRMAN,  ZBA, PB, ACABOR

 

 

 

he  t  W   g1 1Hf ml

 

~!ifll3~NV’HO  .::10   N/1A01

 

DECISION

 

FLOOR AREA RATIO, FRONT YARD, SIDE YARD, TOTAL  SIDE YARD, REAR YARD, BUILDING  HEIGHT  AND§  9.34 VARIANCES APPROVED

 

To:  Andrew  Amo

16 N.  Serven Street

Pearl River, New York  10965

ZBA#   13-53

Date:   July 2, 2013

 

 

FROM:   ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS:  Town of Orangetown

 

ZBA#  13-53: Application  of  Andrew Arno for  variances  from Chapter43    (Zoning) Town of Orangetown,   Section  3.12,   CO District,  Columns  4 (Floor Area Ratio:   .20 permitted,   .52  existing,  .62 proposed),  8 (Front Yard:  30′  required,  lO’existing   & proposed),  9 (Side Yard:  35′ required,  l’  & 4′ 9″ existing,  6′ l” & 7’5″‘  proposed)  10 (Total  Side Yard:  90′ required,  5′ 9″ existing  & proposed),  9 (Rear yard: 50′ required,

37′ 4″ proposed)  and 12 (Building   Height: 6.4′ permitted, 19’  proposed)  and§  9.34

variance  for an addition  of a non-heated  sunroom  to an existing  single-family  residence. The premises  are located  at 16 N.  Serven Street, Pearl River, New York and are identified on the Orangetown  Tax Map as Section  68.15, Block  5, Lot 33; CO zone.

 

Heard by the Zoning  Board  of Appeals  of the Town of Orangetown  at a meeting  held on Tuesday,  July 2,  2013 at which  time the Board made the determination  hereinafter set forth.

 

Karl Ackermann,  Architect,  and Andrew  Amo  appeared  and testified. The following  documents  were presented:

1. 1. Architectural  plans  dated 04/20/ 2013 signed and sealed by Karl Ackermann, Arch

 

 

 

 

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

 

Karl Ackerman,  Architect,  testified  that this is a small lot that is across from  an RG zone;  that the deck exists and was given a certificate  of occupancy  for the RG zone; that when the application  to enclose  the deck with a  sunroom  was  submitted,  it was discovered  that the property  is in the CO district;  that they are planning  to re-do the

footings  and place  the sunroom  in the exact place  as the deck;  that the hardship  is that the property  is zoned CO and is undersized;  and that they have no objection  including  the variance  from Section  9 .34.

 

Andrew  Amo testified  that they are not planning  on heating  the room presently;  that they may eventually  add a pellet  or wood burning  stove to the room.

 

 

 

• ~ t  w a1w·mz

 

KJA0135’N\i~O    .:!O  N.~01

~

 

Arno

ZBA#l3-53

Page 2 of  4

 

 

 

 

Public  Cmmnent:

 

 

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.

 

 

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  floor area ratio, front yard, side yard, total side yard, rear yard, building  height,  and § 9 .34 variances  will not produce  an undesirable   change in the character  of the neighborhood   or a detriment  to nearby properties.  The proposed addition  is 306 sq. ft. and the residence  is in the CO zoning  district; which  is the reason  most of the variances  were necessary.

 

 

 

2. The requested  floor area ratio, front yard, side yard, total side yard, rear yard,

building  height,   and § 9 .34 variances  will not have an adverse  effect or impact  on the physical  or environmental   conditions  in the neighborhood   or district.   The proposed addition  is 306 sq. ft. and the residence  is in the CO zoning  district; which  is the

reason most of the variances  were necessary.

 

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  floor area ratio, front yard, side yard, total side yard, rear yard,

building  height,   and§  9.34 variances,  although  somewhat  substantial,  afford 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.

 

 

 

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.

 

 

 

 

3~H.:UO  S)H:GlG N!\Ol

11&  J~ tid  SI lt1r mi

 

IA0135’N’ilW  .::10  N~Ol

 

 

 

 

 

Amo

ZBA#l3-53

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  floor area ratio, front yard, side yard, total side yard, rear yard, building  height,  and § 9 .34 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  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 pm-poses hereof

 

3’m.:BO S)P.Efl{) M!l61

.t@   t  W  2I w·mt

;fU:Ql3fnf~HOso NMul

 

 

Arno

ZBA#l3-53

Page  4 of  4

 

 

 

The foregoing  resolution  to approve  the application  for the requested  floor area ratio, front yard, side yard, total  side yard, rear yard, building  height  and§  9.34 variances   was presented  and moved by Mr. Sullivan,  seconded by Ms. Castelli  and carried as follows: Mr. Feroldi,  aye;  Ms. Albanese,  aye ;Ms. Castelli,  aye; Ms.  Salomon,  aye; and Mr. Sullivan,  aye. Mr. Bosco  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:   July 2, 2013

 

ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS TOWN  OF ORANGETOWN

 

 

 

DISTRIBUTION:

 

APPLICANT ZBA MEMBERS SUPERVlSOR

TOWN BOARD MEMBERS

TOWN ATTORNEY

DEPUTY TOWN ATTORNEY

OBZPAE

BUILDING INSPECTOR-8.vW.

Administrative   Aide

 

 

TOWN  CLERK

HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT ASSESSOR

DEPT. of ENVIRONMENTAL MGMT. and ENGINEERING F!LE,ZBA, PB

CHAIRMAN, ZBA, PB, ACABOR

 

 

3’Qt:L:!O S)HG10 NJ.Di.

 

tit  l  \.Y    ff[ W mlZ

–  —

 

DECISION

PERFORMANCE STANDARDS   APPROVED

 

 

 

To:   Donald  Brenner   (Beital’s  Aquariums)

4 Independence  A venue

Tappan, New York  10983

ZBA#   13-54

Date:  July 2, 2013

 

 

FROM: ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS:  Town of Orangetown

 

 

ZBA#13-54:  Application   ofBeital’s  Aquariums  for review pursuant  to Chapter  43 (Zoning),  Section 4.1, Performance   Standards  for an emergency  generator.  The premises are located  at 73 Route 304, Pearl River, New York  and are identified  on the Orangetown Tax Map as Section  68.19, Block 4, Lot  16; CO zoning district.

 

 

 

Heard by the Zoning  Board  of Appeals  of the Town  of Orangetown  at a meeting  held on Tuesday,  July 2, 2013 at which time the Board made the determination  hereinafter  set forth.

 

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

1. Site plan.
2. Generator  Specification  sheets.
3. Performance  standards  resume  of operation  and equipment  form dated June 3,

2013.

4. Fire prevention  supplement  form.
5. A letter dated  June  19, 2013 from the Town of Orangetown,  Department  of Environmental  Management   and Engineering  signed  by Joseph J. Moran, P.E., Commissioner.
6. A letter  dated June 21, 2013 from the Town  of Orangetown,  Bureau  of Fire

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

 

 

 

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  based upon the testimon:L.fe~       _, by this Board,  and the facts as presented  in the application  submissions  and in th~ec~,          ~ since the application  entails the ZBA engaging  in a review  to determine  compliaeee  ~         z technical  requirements,   that the foregoing  application  is a Type  II action  exempt ‘:il•cnnlfue ~ State Environmental   Quality Review  Act (SEQ RA), pursuant  to SEQRA Regulaft©ns ~       o

• 617.5 (c) (28); which does not require SEQRA  enviromnental   review.  The mot~    was      ~

errn ~ 1 ~ “ r

seconded  by Ms. Castelli  and carried as follows:  Mr. Sullivan,  aye; Ms. Salommbay~        ~

Ms. Castelli,  aye; Mr. Feroldi,  aye; and Ms. Albanese,  aye. Mr. Bosco was abs                     md

Donald  Brenner  testified  that Beiltal Aquariums  recently  moved to the location  5P   .  ~  r         ~ Jefferson  and Route 304; that the emergency  generator  is needed  for the business;  that the fish tanks  need a constant  flow of oxygen  and the loss to the business  in the case of a

power  outage would be devastating;  that the proposed  emergency  generator  would be

installed  on the ground in the cove with the high wall behind  it; that it would be hooked up to a natural  gas line from the utility company;  and that it meets  all of the requirements of the Orangetown  Code.

 

 

 

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

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

 

Beital’s  Performance  Standards

ZBA#l3-54

Page2of4

 

 

 

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.

 

 

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  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  June  19, 2013 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 the Zoning Code§  4.1 Performance   Standards,  and the memorandum   dated June 21, 2013 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 date 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.

 

 

3~H.::W S)HHlQ MMOl

 

~tW       Si”V’tli!

 

U013fJNVti0   so NH\01

 

Beital’s  Performance   Standards

ZBA#13-54

Page 3  of 4

 

 

(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  oftime   following  the filing of this decision  and prior to undertaking any construction  contemplated   in this decision.  To the extent  any variance,  Perfonnacne 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  Permit  with respect  to construction

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

 

 

 

Beital’s  Performance   Standards

ZBA#l3-54

Page  4 of  4

 

 

 

 

The foregoing  resolution  to approve  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. Sullivan,  aye; Ms. Castelli,  aye; Ms.  Salomon,  aye; Mr. Feroldi,  aye;  and Ms. Albanese,  aye.  Mr. Bosco 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:   July 2,  2013

 

ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS

TOWN  OF ORANGETOWN

 

DISTRJBUTION:

Admin,,.istrative  Aide

 

APPLICANT

ZBA MEMBERS

SUPERVISOR

TOWN BOARD MEMBERS

TOWN ATTORNEY

DEPU1YTOWN ATTORNEY OBZPAE

BUILDING  INSPECTOR-B.vW.

 

TO\VN  CLERK

HJGHWA Y DEPARTMENT ASSESSOR

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

CHAIRMAN, ZBA, PB,  ACABOR