Meeting Overview

MINUTES

ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS JUNE 3, 2015

 

 

MEMBERS PRESENT:

 

 

DAN SULLIVAN JOAN SALOMON

LEONARD FEROLDI, ALTERNATE PATRICIA CASTELLI

ABSENT:

 

 

MICHAEL BOSCO THOMAS QUINN

 

 

 

 

 

 

ALSO PRESENT:

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

 

 

 

CONTINUED ITEM:   O’SULLIVAN	SIDE YARD, TOTAL SIDE	ZBA#lS-39
34 Hawk Street,	YARD AND BUILDING HEIGHT
Pearl River, NY	VARIANCES APPROVED
69.18 / l / 63; R-15 zone
NEW ITEMS:
HELLER	FRONT YARD, SIDE YARD	ZBA#lS-43
125 S. Reld Drive,	ACCESSORY STRUCTURE

 

Pearl River, NY

69.10 / l /39; R-15 zone

 

MALLEY

27 Buttonwood Place, Blauvelt, NY

69.20 / l / 44; R-15 zone

IN FRONT YARD VARIANCES APPROVED

 

 

 

SIDE YARD, TOTAL SIDE YARD           ·       ZBA#15-44

AND BUILDING HEIGHT VARIANCES APPROVED

 

 

HOLT CONSTRUCTION                 FRONT YARD, SIDE YARD,          ZBA#l 5-44.

23 & 50 E. Washington Avenue,       TOTAL SIDE YARD, REAR YARD,

Pearl River, NY                                  §6.33 VARIANCES APPROVED

68.16 / 6 I 6 & 68.16 I 4 I 34; CS zone

 

BOWMAN BUILDERS

28 Center Street, Pearl River, NY

68.19 I 2 I 41; RG zone

FLOOR AREA RATIO, LOT AREA,  ZBA#lS-46

LOT WIDTH, AND §5.21e APPLIES APP!.~Y.fm>   S )! H 310 NM 01

so rr wl:l    s2  Nnr  sro2

 

NMOl3DNVHO  .:J0  NA\©l

 

Minutes

Page2

 

 

 

DOMINICAN   CONVENT                   APPROVED EMERGENCY   GENERATOR

PERFORMANCE  STANDARDS

175 Route 340

Sparkill,  NY

74.16  I 1I2.1;      R-40 zone

ZBA#15-47

 

SKAE348ROUTE9W                         APPROVED GENERATOR

PERFORMANCE   STANDARDS

348 Route 9W,  Palisades,  NY

78.09 I 1I26    & 27; LO zone

ZBA#15-48

 

 

OTHER  BUSINESS:

Proposed Local Law relating to Prohibited Uses Town wide§  10.5 Review

 

There were only four members  present  and the Board has requested  that the Town Board allow them more time to discuss the matter;  and that they will continue  the discussion

and try to have a response  before  the next Town Board meeting.

 

 

 

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 10: 10  P .M.

 

Dated:  June 3,  2015

 

ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS

TO~F ORANGETOWN

 

 

 

By~~

 

 

DISTRIBUTION: APPLICANT

TOWN ATTORNEY

DEPUTY  TOWN ATTORNEY TOWN BOARD   MEMBERS

BUILDING    INSPECTOR  (Individual    Decisions) Rockland County Planning

Deborah  Arbolino,  Administrative   Aide

 

 

301.:UO    S !~310    NMOl

99  I!  Wt!      sz  Nnr    S102

 

NM013DN\1UO   .:JO     Nr.\Ol

 

DECISION

SIDE YARD, TOTAL SIDE YARD AND BUILDING  HEIGHT VARIANCES APPROVED

 

To:     Sean and Susan O’Sullivan

4 Hawk  Street

Pearl River, New York  10965

ZBA#l5-39

Date:  May 20, 2015 &June 3, 2015

 

 

FROM:  ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS:  Town  of Orangetown

 

 

ZBA#15-39:  Application  of  Sean and Susan O’Sullivan   for  variances   from Zoning

Code (Chapter  43) of the Town  of Orangetown  Code, R-15 District,   Group M, Section

3.12, Columns  9 (Side Yard: 20′  required,  12.4′ proposed)  ,10 (Total   Side Yard:  50′ required,  39.6′  proposed))  and  12 (Building  Height:  12.4′ permitted,  21.8′  proposed)  for an addition  to an existing  single-family  residence.   The premises  are located  at 34 Hawk Street, Pearl River, New York and are identified  on the Orangetown  Tax Map as Section

69.18,  Block  1, Lot 63; in the R-15 zoning  district.

 

 

 

 

Heard by the Zoning  Board of Appeals  of the Town  of Orangetown  at  meetings  held on the following   Wednesdays,  May 20, 2015 and  June 3, 2015 at which time the Board made the determination hereinafter  set forth.

 

Sean and Susan Sullivan  and Cliff Herbst,  P .E., appeared  and testified  at both hearings. The following  documents  were presented:

1. Copy of site plan dated March  28, 2015 signed  and sealed by Clifford A. Herbst.,

P.E. (1 page).

2. Architectural  plans labeled  O’Sullivan   Residence  with the latest revision  date of

3/29/ 2015 signed and sealed  by Clifford  A. Herbst,  P .E ..

3. A petition  in support  of the application  signed by eight neighbors.

 

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

 

At the May 20, 2015 Zoning  Board  of Appeals  Hearing  and 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 folJQ.ws:–1

~ ~ :z (“) z 0 r- N “Tl

Mr. Quinn, aye; Ms. Castelli,  aye; Ms. Salomon,  aye; Mr. Feroldi,  aye; and M6suftiran~

aye. Mr. Bosco was absent on May 20, 2015.

 

 

rn   c.n    o

.>

:::v                       :::3

:;:;.’l:

At the May 20, 2015 meeting  concerns  were expressed  by members  of the Bo&11d  ~th~ applicant  may need more variances  than were published  and questioned  why 1We     ,._a  1                         rn application  was split into two permits.                                                                     ::::!       ..,…  ,            d

0       ·0·         :e

rn   en    :z:

Cliff Herbst,  P .E., explained  that they were told that a building  permit  was necessary  for

each structure  and that is why there are two permits  and that the accessory  structure has a permit  and they have started  construction  on it; and asked for a continuance  to get clarification  from the Building  Inspector.

 

At the June 3, 2015 meeting  Cliff Herbst  explained  that the floor area of the proposed

shed was included  in the calculations  for the addition;  that the rear comer  of the proposed addition  is the only section  of the proposal  that has a 12.4′  side yard because  the property line slopes in; that the front portion  f the addition  will have a 16.9′  side yard; that there is approximately  3 5 to 40 feet from the proposed  addition  to the neighbors’   house; that

 

 

ZBA#l5-39

Page 2 of 4

 

 

there is a fence along that property line; that there are other houses in the area that have constructed similar and larger additions; and that it would be difficult to reduce the 12.4′ side yard because of the slope of the property line.

 

Public Comment:

 

Dennit Fenlon, 2 Jay Place, stated that he is an adjoining neighbor and he does not object to the extension but he has a problem with the 12′ property line.

 

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 ofN ew 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:

 

 

 

1. The requested side yard, total side yard and building height variances 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 side yard, total side yard and building height variances 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 variances.

 

 

 

4. The requested side yard, total side yard and building height 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. The applicants’ property line slants in and the proposed addition starts out with a 16.9′ side yard and ends with a 12.4′ side yard because of the slope

to the property line. Similar additions have been constructed in the area.

 

 

 

 

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.:J.:10 S)!H31r>   NM©l

 

90 TI  LJH   S2  Nnr   5102

 

NM013~NV}J0      :JO NMOl

 

 

ZBA#lS-39

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 side yard, total side yard and building height 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 purposes hereof.

 

 

 

301:lH) S)fH310 NM01

 

9(l 1I lJl:J    S2   Nnr  5102

 

NM013~NVMO  :H)  NM@l

 

O’Sullivan

ZBA#lS-39

Page  4 of  4

 

 

 

 

The foregoing  resolution  to approve  the application  for the requested  side yard,  total  side yard and building  height  variances   was presented  and moved by Mr.  Sullivan,   seconded

by Ms. Salomon   and carried as follows:  Mr. Sullivan,   aye;  Mr. Feroldi, aye; Ms. Castelli,

aye; and Ms.  Salomon, aye. Mr. Bosco and Mr. Quinn 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: June 3,  2015

 

ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF ORANGETOWN

 

DISTRIBUTION:

 

APPLICANT

ZBA MEMBERS SUPERVISOR

TOWN BOARD  MEMBERS

TOWN ATTORNEY

DEPUTY  TOWN ATTORNEY OBZPAE

BUILDING    INSPECTOR-R.A.0.

By-r~t.L-L‘-=--==-=—>“‘-+,,r

Deborah Arbolino

Administrative Aide

 

 

TOWN CLERK

HIGHWAY    DEPARTMENT ASSESSOR

DEPT.  of ENVIRONMENTAL

MGMT.   and ENGINEERING FILE,ZBA,   PB

CHAIRMAN,      ZBA,  PB,  ACABOR

 

 

301.:1.::lO    S>!H310    NMOl

90  11  lJ8     sz Nnr   SIOZ

 

NM0130NV’UO    so Nh\01

 

DECISION

FRONT YARD, SIDE YARD AND ACCESSORY  STRUCTURE  IN FRONT YARD VARIANCES APPROVED

 

To: Laura Heller

125 South Reid Drive

Pearl River, New York 10965

ZBA#15-43

Date: June 3, 2015

 

 

FROM: ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS: Town of Orangetown

 

 

ZBA#lS-43: Application of Laura Heller for variances from Zoning Code (Chapter 43) of the Town of Orangetown Code, R-15 District, Section 3.12, Group M, Column  8 (Front Yard: 35′ required, 30′ proposed),  and 9 (Side Yard: 20′ required, 15′ proposed) and from section 5.153 (No accessory structure permitted in the front yard) for an above

-ground pool at an existing single-family residence. The premises are located at 125

South Reld Drive, Pearl River, New York and are identified on the Orangetown Tax Map as Section 69.10, Block  1, Lot 39; in the R-15 zoning district.

 

 

 

 

Heard by the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Orangetown at a meeting held on Wednesday, June 3, 2015 at which time the Board made the detemtlnation hereinafter set forth.

 

Laura Heller appeared and testified.

 

The following documents were presented:

 

1. Copy of survey with pool drawn in the proposed location. (1 page).
2. Pool Specs.

 

Mr. Sullivan, Chairman, made a motion to open the Public Hearing which motion was seconded by Ms. Castelli 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. Castelli, aye; Ms. Salomon, aye; Mr. Bosco, aye; and Mr. Quinn, aye; and Mr. Sullivan, aye.

 

 

Laura Heller testified that her house is on a comer lot and she has two front yards; that she is proposing to install the pool in her back yard but it is considered a front yard because of the comer lot; and that there is nowhere on her property that she could install

a pool without needing a variance and there are at least three other properties on. the block with above-ground pools.

 

 

301.:Lrn S)!H318  NM01

se 11  wH       s~  Nnr  s102

 

NM013~NVtJO .:19   Nh\01

 

Heller

ZBA#lS-43

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. 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:

 

 

 

1. The requested front yard, side yard and§ 5.153 (accessory structure in a front yard) variances will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. The applicant has a comer lot with two front

yards and the pool is proposed for an area that they utilize as a rear yard.

 

 

 

2. The requested front yard, side yard and§ 5.153 (accessory structure in a front yard) variances will not have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. The applicant has a comer lot with two front yards and the pool is proposed for an area that they utilize as a rear yard.

 

3. The benefits sought by the applicant cannot be achieved by other means feasible for the applicant to pursue other than by obtaining variances. The applicant has a comer lot with two front yards and the pool is proposed for an area that they utilize as a rear yard.

 

 

 

4. The requested front yard, side yard and§ 5.153 (accessory structure in a front yard) 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.

 

 

 

 

301.:1:16   S)nJ31~  NMfH

90 I I Wl:J      s z Nnr  5102

 

NM013DNVhlO  .:iG  NM©l

 

Heller

ZBA#l5-43

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, side yard and §

5.153 (accessory structure in a front 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 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.

 

 

souse S)HJ310  NM61

 

9D  11:  hJH    52  Nnr 5lOZ

 

N11\013CN’VUO  .:JQ   NM@l

 

 

Heller

ZBA#l5-43

Page  4 of  4

 

 

 

The foregoing  resolution  to approve  the application  for the requested   front yard,  side yard and § 5 .153   (accessory  structure  in a front yard) variances   was presented  and moved by Ms. Salomon,  seconded  by Ms. Castelli   and carried as follows:  Mr. Feroldi,. aye; Ms. Castelli,  aye; Ms.  Salomon,  aye;  and Mr.  Sullivan,  aye. Mr. Bosco and Mr. Quinn 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:   June 3,  2015

 

ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS TOWN  OF ORANGETOWN

 

 

 

DISTRIBUTION:

 

APPLICANT

ZBA   MEMBERS SUPERVISOR

TOWN  BOARD  MEMBERS TOWN ATTORNEY

DEPUTY TOWN ATTORNEY OBZPAE

BUILDING    INSPECTOR-G.M.

By…,£..4.D.4…:….=….~-=—+,;.L…W::~ Deborah  Arbolino Administrative   Aide

 

 

TOWN   CLERK

HIGHWAY   DEPARTMENT ASSESSOR

DEPT.  of ENVIRONMENTAL MGMT.  and ENGINEERING

FILE,ZBA,   PB

CHAIRMAN,     ZBA,  PB,  ACABOR

 

 

381.:!.:lO    S>HEll8   NMOl

SD 11  lJ8     sz Nnr  Sl02

 

NM013~N\fUO   .:W  Mh\Ql

 

DECISION

SIDE YARD, TOTAL SIDE YARD AND BUILDING HEIGHT  VARIANCES APPROVED

 

To:   Tim Malley

27 Buttonwood Place

Blauvelt, New York 10913

ZBA#15-44

Date: June 3, 2015

 

 

FROM: ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS: Town of Orangetown

 

 

ZBA#15-44: Application of Tim Malley for variances from Zoning Code (Chapter 43) of the Town of Orangetown Code, R-15 District, Group M, Section 3.12, Columns 9 (Side Yard: 20′ required, 1 O’ 4″ proposed),  10 (Total Side Yard: 50′ required, 41.5′ proposed) and 12 (Building Height:  10′ 4″ permitted, 23.33′ proposed) for an addition to an existing single-family residence.  The premises are located at 27 Buttonwood Place, Blauvelt,, New York and are identified on the Orangetown Tax Map as Section 69.20, Block 1, Lot 44; in the R-15 zoning district.

 

 

 

 

Heard by the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Orangetown at a meeting held on Wednesday, June 3, 2015 at which time the Board made the determination hereinafter set forth.

 

Tim Malley appeared and testified.

 

The following documents were presented:

 

1. Survey dated February 25, 2015 signed and sealed by Anthony R. Celentano, P.L.S.. (1 page).
2. Architectural plans dated 3/31/2015 by Paul Douglas Siebenaler, Architect (2

pages).

3. A letter dated May 18, 2015 from the County of Rockland Department of

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

4. A letter dated May 7, 2015 from the County of Rockland Department of Health,

signed by Scott McKane, P .E..

5. Three letters in support of the application.

 

Mr. Sullivan, Chairman, made a motion to open the Public Hearing which motion was seconded by Ms. Castelli 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. Castelli, aye; Ms. Salomon, aye; Mr. Feroldi, aye; and Mr.

Sullivan, aye. Mr. Quinn and Mr. Bosco were absent.                                -t        S  ~

co     c..n      ~

:E     e.,       .;;,

::z:        c::

z       Cl>

Douglas Seibenaler, Architect, testified that they are adding a garage to the l~  sitie)of,, the structure and expanding the second story to construct a usable second stc!)r; tin\l   g

presently the ceiling heights on the second  floor are only six foot; that the lo&is nauow~

and long which contributes to the need for variances; and that there are manE>thei3   ~

houses in the area that have done additions; that the house across the street ari!} b~   ‘     ci

OJ         z

houses on either side have done major additions/ alterations to the oriainal s~chas·.  :E

t:r              ~

 

Tim Malley testified that the existing house has two bedrooms and he and his wife have two children and another is due next month; and that the two sheds existed on the property when he purchased the house and one is 1 O’ x 1 O’ and the other is 6′ x 5 ‘.

 

Malley

ZBA#15-44

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. 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:

 

 

 

1. The requested side yard, total side yard and building height variances 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 side yard, total side yard and building height variances 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 variances.

 

 

 

4. The requested side yard, total side yard and building height 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. Similar additions have been constructed in the area.

 

 

 

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.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

301dd0 SY.H310  NMQ!

90 II (J~     s G Nnr   5102

 

NMOL30NV£JO .:JO   NA\Ol

 

Malley

ZBA#lS-44

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 side yard, total side yard and building height 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 purposes hereof.

 

 

301.:L:!O  S~~310 NMGl

90 rt lJH  s 2 Nnr SlOZ

 

NM013DNvU0 .:!O  Nh\©1

 

 

Malley

ZBA#lS-44

Page  4 of  4

 

 

 

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

by Ms. Salomon   and carried as follows:   Mr. Feroldi,   aye ;Ms. Castelli,  aye; Ms. Salomon,   aye;  and  Mr. Sullivan,  aye. Mr. Bosco  and Mr. Quinn 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:    June 3,  2015

 

ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS TOWN  OF ORANGETOWN

 

 

 

 

DISTRIBUTION:

 

APPLICANT

ZBA MEMBERS SUPERVISOR

TOWN BOARD   MEMBERS TOWN ATTORNEY

DEPUTY  TOWN ATTORNEY OBZPAE

BUILDING   INSPECTOR-R.A.O.

By…L..t;.’.~”–“-.=L.’–“~,_,.L-~ Deborah  Arbolino Administrative   Aide

 

 

TOWN   CLERK

HIGHWAY    DEPARTMENT ASSESSOR

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

CHAIRMAN,     ZBA,  PB,  ACABOR

 

 

301.:UO   S.   ‘~310   NMOl

90  11 Lll:J    sz  Nnr   srnz

 

NM013~NVUO    so NfAOl

 

DECISION

FRONT YARD, SIDE YARD, TOTAL SIDE YARD, REAR YARD,§ 3.11 NOTE

2 BUFFER AND§ 6,33 LOCATION  AND OWNERSHIP  VARIANCES APPROVED

 

To: John Atzl (Holt Construction)

234 No. Main Street

New City, New York 10956

ZBA#15-45

Date: June 3, 2015

 

 

FROM: ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS: Town of Orangetown

 

 

ZBA#lS-45: Application of Holt Construction Corporation Site Plan for variances from Zoning Code (Chapter 43) of the Town of Orangetown Code, CS District, Section 3.12, Group FF, Columns 8 (Front Yard: O’ or 45′ required, 31.6′ existing), 9 (Side Yard:

0/12′ permitted, 2.3′ proposed for new addition and 2.2′ existing for one story frame building, 1.5′ to existing storage shed),  10 (Total Side Yard: 0/25′ required, 3.7′

existing) and 11  (Rear Yard: 25′ required, 1. 7′ existing) for lot 68.16/ 61 6 and note 2 of the notes to use and bulk table states: Where a side or rear lot line of a lot in the CS adjoins or lies within 25 feet of any R District the following buffer shall be required,

lS’for side yard and 50′ for rear yard. The site plan has a 12′ proposed for the side

opposite East Washington Avenue and 0′ proposed for the side opposite North William

Street. Since this is a comer lot the applicant can choose the rear and side lot lines;

Section 6.33 ( Locations and ownership of required accessory parking facilities. Required accessory parking spaces, open or enclosed, may be provided upon the same lot as the

use to which they are accessory, or elsewhere, provided that all spaces therein are located within one thousand (1,000) feet walking distance of such lot. In all cases, such parking spaces shall conform to all the regulations for the district in which they are located, and·

in no event shall such parking spaces be located in any R District unless the uses to which they are accessory are permitted in such districts. Such spaces shall be in the same ownership as the use to which they are accessory and shall be subject to deed restrictions, filed with the County Clerk, binding the owner and his heirs and assigns to maintain the required number of spaces available either throughout the existence of such use to which they are accessory or until such spaces are provided elsewhere.) The properties are located at 23 & 50 East Washington A venue, Pearl River, New York and are identified

on the Orangetown Tax Map as Section 68.16, Block 6, Lot 6 & Section 68.16, Block 4, Lot 34 ; in the CS zoning district.

 

Heard by the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Orangetown at a meeting held on Wednesday, June 3, 2015 at which time the Board made the determination hereinafter set forth.

 

John Atzl, L.S., Jack Holt and Patricia Zugibe appeared and testified. The following documents were presented:

1. Plan labeled “Holt Construction Corp.” dated 2/19/2015 with the latest revision date of 4/23/2015 signed and sealed by John R. Atzl L.S., and Ryan A. Nasher, . P.E. (4 pages).

~       ~

2. A lett~r da!ed May 15, 2015 from the Coun~ of Roc~and Departmentpf  ~      o

Pf   ~

Plannmg signed by Douglas J. Schuetz, Acting Commissioner of Plamtmg. c:….        ~

3. A letter dated June 1, 2015 from the County of Rockland Department                 o

Highways signed by Sonny Lin, P .E..                                                    r       N        ,,

~  en  g

Mr. Sullivan, Chairman, made a motion to open the Public Hearing which m~n    mas  ~

seconded  by Ms. Castelli and carried unanimously.                                         o      ::3     ~

-i’1       f-‘l      ~

:::!:!          .,._.  ‘               0

On advice of Dennis Michaels, Deputy Town Attorney, counsel to the Zonin@o~of    :E

Appeals, Mr. Sullivan moved for a Board determination that since the Planning Board   :z:

noticed its intent to declare itself Lead Agency and distributed that notice of intention to all Involved Agencies, including the ZBA who consented or did not object to the Planning board acting as Lead Agency for this application, pursuant to coordinated

review under the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA), pursuant to

 

SEQRA Regulations §617.6 (b) (3); and since the Planning board conducted a SEQRA Holt Construction

ZBA#lS-45

Page2 of 4

 

 

 

review and, on April 22, 2015, rendered an environmental determination ofno  significant adverse environmental impacts to result from the proposed land use (i.e., a ”Negative Declaration” or ”Neg, Dec.”), the ZBA is bound by the Planning Board’s Neg. Dec. and the ZBA cannot require further SEQRA review pursuant to SEQRA Regulation§ 617.6 (b)(3). The motion was seconded by Ms. Castelli and carried as follows: Ms. Castelli, aye; Ms. Salomon, aye; Mr. Feroldi, aye; and Mr. Sullivan, aye. Mr. Bosco and Mr. Quinn were absent.

 

 

 

John Atzl testified that Holt Construction has been in this location for 90 years; that they are proposing a 1,334 sq. ft. one-story addition for office space; that this space was at one time used for mill work; that the majority of the variances are for existing conditions; that the additional lot is located diagonally across the intersection; that there was an illegal

two-family there; that they are planning to use that for parking and are having conversations with the neighbor regarding the landscaping; that they are proposing a fence and a buffer along the residential side of the property; that they are not presently expecting new employees but need the space for computers, smart desks and future growth; that they are required to have 43 parking spaces and will have 49; and they will use these spaces for monthly meetings when employees come from other sites.

 

 

 

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 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, side yard, total side yard, rear yard, § 3.11 Note #2 buffFr, ~	-f
	and § 6.33 (location and ownership) variances will not produce an undesirable c~g~	~
	in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. The majori~	:z:
	of the requested variances are for pre-existing non-conforming conditions. Tyi~	~

these two properties to each-other to gain more parking in the hamlet of Pearl ~er,~         ~ where parking is at a premium is good planning.                                            :::r.:                               l> en    ::o    z

(D        .  ::3     G”‘)

.,,        ……l     f’T.1

2. The requested front yard, side yard, total side yard, rear yard,§ 3.11 Note #2 b~~r:;:  ~ and § 6.33 (location and ownership) variances will not have an adverse effect oV’    ~      :z impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district.

The majority of the requested variances are for pre-existing non-conforming

conditions. Tying these two properties to each-other to gain more parking in the hamlet of Pearl River, where parking is at a premium is good planning.

 

Holt Construction

ZBA#IS-45

Page  3   of 4

 

 

 

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 front yard, side yard, total side yard, rear yard, § 3 .11 Note #2 buffer, and§ 6.33 (location and ownership) 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. The majority of the requested variances are for pre-existing non-conforming conditions. Tying these two properties to each-other to gain more parking in the hamlet of Pearl River, where parking is at a premium is good planning.

 

 

 

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 front yard, side yard, total side yard, rear yard, § 3.11 Note #2 buffer,  and§ 6.33 (location and ownership) 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 limitatio~    s  ;;; the accuracy and structural integrity thereof, of the applicant, but same have been    ::e    CJ””t            ~ submitted to the Board solely for informational and verification purposes relative to iiy   ~      2:

variances being requested.                                                                                   ~     “‘     ~

fri    (J1          0

7~                     ;;o

en      ::o    ~

(iv) A building permit as well as any other necessary permits must be obtained withtn a ::3     e:>

reasonable period of time following the filing of this decision and prior to undertak~  ~  .i       ~

any construction contemplated in this decision. To the extent any variance or Speci~  .   o  ,             ~

Permit granted herein is subject to any conditions, the building department shall not be -J         z

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.

 

Holt Construction

ZBA#15-45

Page 4 of  4

 

 

 

(v) Any foregoing variance or Special Permit will lapse if any contemplated constrnction 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 constrnction 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, total side yard,  rear yard,   §  3.11    Note #2 buffer, and§ 6.33   (location and ownership)  variances was presented and moved by Mr.  Sullivan,  seconded by Ms. Salomon    and carried as follows:  Mr. Feroldi,  aye;   Mr. Sullivan, aye ;Ms.  Castelli,   aye; and Ms. Salomon,  aye. Mr. Quinn 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:   June 3, 2015

 

ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF ORANGETOWN

 

 

 

 

DISTRIBUTION:

 

APPLICANT

ZBA   MEMBERS SUPERVISOR

TOWN BOARD  MEMBERS TOWN   ATTORNEY

DEPUTY TOWN ATTORNEY

OBZPAE

BUILDING   INSPECTOR-G.M.

By_c_'”‘–“”‘–=’—~~;:::._.1-.<‘.:–

Deborah Arbolino

Administrative Aide

 

 

TOWN   CLERK

HIGHWAY    DEPARTMENT ASSESSOR

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

CHAIRMAN,     ZBA,  PB,  ACABOR

 

 

 

 

301.:l.:!0  S)~~310    NMOl

LO 11  lJ8    sz Nnr  Sl02

 

NMOL3DN’fll0  .:10  NMOl

 

DECISION

FLOOR AREA RATIO, LOT AREA, LOT WIDTH AND BUILDING HEIGHT VARIANCES APPROVED:  SECTION 5.21e UNDERSIZED LOT APPLIED

 

To:    Jane Slavin (Bowman  Builders)

200 East Erie Street

Blauvelt,  New York  10913

ZBA#15-46

Date:  June 3, 2015

 

 

FROM:  ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS:  Town  of Orangetown

 

 

ZBA#l 5-46: Application  of  Bowman  Builders  for variances  from Zoning  Code (Chapter

43) of the Town  of Orangetown  Code, RG District,   Group Q, Section  3.12, Columns  4 (Floor area ratio:  .30 permitted,  .36 proposed),  5 (Lot Area:  10,000 sq. ft. required,  6,772 sq. ft. existing),  6 (Lot Width:  75′  required,  62.72′  existing)  and Section  5.21e (Undersized  Lot applies:  20′  permitted  for height,  22′  3″ proposed)  for the construction

of a new single-family  residence.  The premises  are located  at 28 Center Street, Pearl

River, New York  and are identified  on the Orangetown  Tax Map as Section  68.19, Block

2, Lot 41; in the RG zoning district.

 

 

 

Heard by the Zoning  Board of Appeals  of the Town  of Orangetown  at a meeting  held on Wednesday,  June 3, 2015 at which time the Board made the determination hereinafter  set forth.

 

Jane Slavin, Architect,  and Robert  Bowman  appeared  and testified. The following  documents  were presented:

1. Survey of property  prepared  for Bowman  Builders,  Inc. “Existing  Conditions”

dated March  18, 2015 signed  and sealed by Donald  R. Stedge, P .L.S.

2. Survey of property for Bowman  Builders,  Inc., “Plot Plan”  dated March  18, 2015 signed and sealed by Donald  R. Stedge, P .L.S ..
3. Architectural  plans dated February  9, 2015 with the latest revision  date of  March

27, 2015 signed  and sealed by Jane Slavin. Architect,  (3 pages).

4. A letter dated May  14, 2015 from the County  of Rockland  Department  of

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

5. A letter dated June  1, 2015 from the County of Rockland  Department  of

Highways  signed by Sonny Lin, P .E ..

6. Ten pages of pictures  and maps of the area submitted  at the hearing.

 

Mr. Sullivan,   Chairman,  made a motion  to open the Public Hearing  which motion  was seconded by Ms. Castelli   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  app~~~s          -f a Type II action exempt  from the State Environmental   Quality Review  Act (SE~)f:M        ~

pursuant  to SEQRA Regulations   §617.5 (c) (9), (10), (12) and/or (13); which d~    n~         :z

::o    .

require  SEQ RA environmental  review.  The motion  was seconded by Ms. Castelti>and2=    a carried as follows.:  Ms. Castelli,  aye; Ms. Salomon,  aye; Mr. Bosco,  aye;  Mr. ~i~              ;; aye; and Mr. Sullivan,  aye.                                                                                           :7::                  ~

en

:3      :z

Jane Slavin, Architect,  testified  that the existing house  on the lot is in great disr~aiq.that  ~

it is non-conforming   is its side yard and front yard setback;  that it is not worth Qiin~      ·                d ·

repair because  of the shape it is in; that they are planning  to demolish  the existiflg hoUSe   ~

and build a new house that conforms  to the front and side yard setbacks;  that the lot is undersized  by 33%; that they are proposing  2,075 sq. ft. of living space in the new house and a total of 2,453 sq. ft. with the garage and porch;  that if the lot conformed  they would be able to build a 3,000 sq. ft. house without  a variance;  that they also need a 2′ 3″ variance  for height but the style of the proposed  roof is in keeping  with the character  of the neighborhood;   and she submitted  pictures  to the Board  for their review  of the area

and comparable  houses  in the neighborhood.

 

Bowman Builders

ZBA#15-46

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. 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:

 

 

 

1. The requested floor area ratio, lot area, lot width and building height variances (§

5 .21 e undersized lot applies) will not produce an undesirable change in the character

of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. Similar size house exist in the neighborhood.

 

 

 

2. The requested floor area ratio, lot area, lot width and building height variances (§

5.21 e undersized lot applies) will not have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. Similar size house exist in the neighborhood.

 

 

 

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, lot area, lot width and building height variances (§

5.21 e undersized lot applies), 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. Similar size house exist in the neighborhood.

 

 

 

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.:L:JO   S){H31() NMGl LO  n LJ~     s 2   Nnr   SIOZ NM013DNV~O  .:10   NM©!

 

Bowman Builders

ZBA#lS-46

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, lot area,

lot width and building height variances(§  5.21 e undersized lot applies), 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

purposes hereof.

 

 

 

 

 

 

301.:l.:le)  S)IH31~ NM01

 

l~ I! (JI:}     S2  Nnr 5!02

 

NM013~NVUO  .:IQ  NMOl

 

 

Bowman  Builders

ZBA#15-46

Page  4 of  4

 

 

 

 

The foregoing  resolution  to approve the application  for the requested   floor area ratio,  lot area,  lot width and building  height  variances  (§  5.21   e undersized  lot applies), was presented  and moved by Mr. Feroldi,   seconded  by Ms.  Castelli   and canied  as follows: Mr.  Sullivan,  aye;  Mr. Feroldi,   aye;  Ms. Castelli,  aye; and Ms.  Salomon,  aye.  Mr.   Quinn 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:   June 3,  2015

 

 

ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS TOWN  OF ORANGETOWN

 

 

 

DISTRIBUTION:

 

APPLICANT

ZBA   MEMBERS SUPERVISOR

TOWN BOARD MEMBERS TOWN ATTORNEY

DEPUTY  TOWN ATTORNEY OBZPAE

BUILDING INSPECTOR-G.M.

By–Lf;~b’-“”‘-~-=–+-=.~ Deborah  Arbolino

Administrative   Aide

 

 

TOWN  CLERK

HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT ASSESSOR

DEPT.  of ENVIRONMENTAL

MGMT. and ENGINEERING FILE,ZBA,    PB

CHAIRMAN,     ZBA, PB,  ACABOR

 

 

301.:J.:W   S)HL310 NMOl

L9  I! !JI:!    S2   Nnr  SIOZ

 

NM013~NVUO     .:W  Ni,Wl

 

DECISION

PERFORMANCE  STANDARDS APPROVED WITH  CONDTIONS

 

To:  Thomas D. McMenamin

10 Sloane Court

Stony Point, New York 10980

ZBA#15-47

Date: June 3, 2015

 

 

FROM: ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS: Town of Orangetown

 

 

 

ZBA# 15-47: Application of Dominican Convent for review of the Performance Standards Zoning Code (Chapter 43) of the Town of Orangetown Code, R-40 District, Section 4.12 for an emergency generator located at 175 Route 340, Sparkill, New York and identified on the Orangetown Tax Map as Section 74.16, Block 1, Lot 2.1; in the R-40 zoning district.

 

 

Heard by the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Orangetown at a meeting held on Wednesday,  June 3, 2015 at which time the Board made the determination hereinafter set forth.

 

Thomas D. Mc Menamin, Engineer, and Sister Joanne Deas appeared and testified. The following documents were presented:

1. Plans labeled “Amendment to Site Plan-Proposed Two Emergency Generators”.

dated 1/20/2015, signed and sealed by Thomas D. McMenamin, P.E. (8 pages).

2. Warshauer Generator LLC specifications (16 pages).
3. Performance standards resume of operations and equipment dated April 30, 2015.
4. Fire Prevention Supplement.
5. Planning Board Decision #10-57 dated December 10, 2010.
6. Zoning Board Decision #11-07 dated January 19, 2011.
7. A letter dated May 22, 2015 from the Department of Environmental Management

and Engineering signed by Joseph J. Moran, P .E., Town of Orangetown.

8. A memorandum dated May 18, 2015 from Michael B. Bettmann, Chief Fire

Inspector, Town of Orangetown.

9. A Sound Test Results by Generac Industrial Power ( 5 pages ) with two pictures

attached of the landscaping around the larger generator that was installed previously.

 

Mr. Sullivan, Chairman, made a motion to open the Public Hearing which motion was seconded by Mr. Bosco 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, that since the application entails the ZBA engaging in a review to determine compliance with technical requirements  the 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. Castelli and carried as follows: Ms. Salomon, aye; Ms. Castelli, aye~	–1

Mr. Feroldi, aye; and Mr. Sullivan , aye. Mr. Bosco and Mr. Quinn were absent. ~     t;:;     0

:e   c.,        :E z  c::      z e.>        :z     G)

Thomas D. McMenamin, P .E., testified that the they are applying for two natural ®ts  ~   ~

fired emergency generators that would take of the north and south wings; that this;ls the     ~

residential section and it would supply power for the elevators and lights and all rife  ~      ~

safety issues for the building; that the first generator that was installed for the 2°d~oo…_. 1                   f’T1

infirmary and dining hall served well during super storm sandy and now they woiiJd ltlre ·                          ci

to install two more smaller generators to allow the sisters to stay in the north and’!bufG ·            ~

wings in case of another prolonged outage; and that he will see if there is a natural gas

detector in the unit.

 

Dominican Convent Performance Standards

ZBA#lS-47

Page2 of 4

 

Sister Joanne Deas testified that the generators are needed for the elevators and life safety issues because the sisters are aging.

 

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

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

 

 

 

Public Comment:

 

No public comment.

 

The Board members made personal inspections of the premises theweek 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. Castelli and carried unanimously.

 

 

 

 

FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS:

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

 

Based upon the information contained in the applicant’s Resume of Operations . and Equipment and the Fire Prevention Supplement; the report dated May 22,

2015 from Joseph J. Moran, P.E., Commissioner of the Town of Orangetown Department of Environmental Management and Engineering (D.E.M.E.) states that more information must be provided to show that the emergency generator conforms to Section 4.1 of the Orangetown Zoning Code; the report dated May

18, 2015 from Michael Bettmann, Chief Fire Inspector, Town of Orangetown Bureau of Fire Prevention (B.F.P.); the other documents submitted to the Board and the testimony of Applicant’s representatives, the Board finds and concludes that the application conforms with the Performance Standards set forth in Zoning Code Section 4.1, subject to compliance with the orders, rules and regulations of the Orangetown Office of Building, Zoning & Planning Administration & Enforcement, D.E.M.E., and B.F.P .,  and all other departments having jurisdiction of the premises.

 

 

301.:J.:J©   S)fH31~  NM01

l~    ~! fJ~    S2  Nnr  SIUZ

 

N-M0l3~NVMO   _jQ NMOl

 

 

ZBA#lS-47

Page  3   of 4

 

DECISION: Inview of the foregoing and the testimony and documents submitted, the Board RESOLVED that the Application for Performance Standards Conformance, pursuant to Zoning Code § 4.1, is APPROVED with the following SPECIFIC CONDITIONS: (1) that the Applicant adhere to all of the requirements set forth in the report by Chief Fire Inspector Bettmann, B.F.P., dated May 18, 2015; and (2) that the Applicant adhere to all of the requirements set forth by the report dated May 22, 2015 from Joseph J. Moran, P.E., Commissioner, DEME and submit more information to show that the standby generator conforms to Section 4.1 of the Orangetown Zoning Code.; 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.:l.:10   S>f H310 NM©l

l~ ~! LJH     sz Nnr srnz

 

NMOl30NVUO     .:l6l NM©l

 

 

ZBA#15-47

Page  4 of  4

 

 

 

The foregoing  resolution  to approve  the application   for Conformance  to Zoning  Code

• 4.1 Performance Standards  Review  with the Specific  Conditions  (a) that a report be provided  by the DEME  that the proposed  standby  emergency  generator  conforms  to Section  4.1   of the Orangetown  Zoning  Code and  (b) that the Applicant  adhere to all of the requirements   set forth in the report by Chief Fire Inspector  Bettmann,  B.F.P.,   dated May  18,  2015;, was presented  and moved  by Mr.  Sullivan,  seconded by Ms.  Castelli  and carried  as follows:   Mr.  Feroldi,  aye;   Ms. Castelli,  aye;  Ms.  Salomon,  aye; and Mr. Sullivan,  aye. Mr. Quinn 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:    June 3,  2015

 

ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS TOWN  OF ORANGETOWN

 

 

DISTRIBUTION:

 

APPLICANT

ZBA  MEMBERS SUPERVISOR

TOWN BOARD MEMBERS

TOWN ATTORNEY

DEPUTY TOWN ATTORNEY OBZPAE

BUILDING   INSPECTOR-G.M.

Administrative   Aide

 

 

TOWN  CLERK

HIGHWAY   DEPARTMENT ASSESSOR

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

CHAIRMAN,     ZBA, PB,  ACABOR

 

 

3C)U_j0    S’:HBlQ  NN\01

LO   11  wB    sz  Nnr  srnz

 

DECISION

PERFORMANCE  STANDARDS APPROVED WITH CONDTIONS

 

To: Donald Brenner (Skae generator)

4 Independence Avenue

Tappan, New York 10983

ZBA#15-48

Date: June 3, 2015

 

 

FROM: ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS: Town of Orangetown

 

ZBA#lS-48: Application of Peter Skae for review of the Performance Standards Zoning Code (Chapter 43) of the Town of Orangetown Code, LO District, Section 4.12 for a generator at a data processing building located at 348 Route 9W, Palisades, New York and identified  on the Orangetown  Tax Map as Section 78.09, Block  1, Lot 26 &27; in the LO zoning district.

 

 

Heard by the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Orangetown at a meeting held on Wednesday,  June 3, 2015 at which time the Board made the determination hereinafter set forth.

 

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

1. Plans labeled “Tax Lot: 78.09-1-26 & 27 Columcille Properties LLC & 348

Realty Associates LLC dated April 15, 2011 with the latest revision date of

11117/2014 signed and sealed by John R. Atzl, L.S. (1 page).

2. Generator specifications labeled” Enclosure and sound data sheet-diesel” (3

pages).

3. Performance standards resume of operations and equipment dated March 25,

2015.

4. Fire Prevention Supplement.
5. Zoning Board Decision $14-88 and Planning Board Decision #13-08.
6. A letter dated May 12, 2015 from the County of Rockland Deparbnent of

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

7. A letter dated May 8, 2015 from the Department of Environmental Management and Engineering signed by Joseph J. Moran, P.E., Town of Orangetown.
8. A memorandum dated June 1, 2015 from Michael B. Bettmann, Chief Fire

Inspector, Town of Orangetown.

 

Mr. Sullivan, Chairman, made a motion to open the Public Hearing which motion was seconded by Mr. Bosco 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, that since the application entails the ZBA engaging in a review to determine compliance with technical requirements  the 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. Castelli and carried as follows: Ms. Salomon, aye; Ms. Castelli, aye; Mr. Feroldi, aye; and Mr. Sullivan , aye. Mr. Quinn and Mr. Bosco were absent.

 

Donald Brenner, Attorney, testified that that this is a different kind of an emergency generator; that this is a data center and the emergency generator is essential in case of a power outage to kick in in order not lose any data; that this is a 500 kw diesel fuel generator; that it will enclosed in a tank cradle and will be used for the second floor data storage; that it will not exceed 70 Dec. and will run a test every Saturday for one

house.                                         301.:1.:l()   S)l}J310 NM0l

w n W\:J      sz Nnr  s102

 

NM013DNV~Q  .:10  NA\O!

 

Skae Performance Standards

ZBA#lS-48

Page2 of 4

 

 

 

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

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

 

 

 

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

Mr. Quinn and carried unanimously.

 

 

 

FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS:

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

 

Based upon the information contained in the applicant’s Resume of Operations

and Equipment and the Fire Prevention Supplement; the report dated May 8, 2015 from Joseph J. Moran, P.E., Commissioner of the Town of Orangetown

Department of Environmental Management and Engineering (D.E.M.E.); the report dated June 1, 2015 from Michael Bettmann, Chief Fire Inspector, Town of Orangetown Bureau of Fire Prevention (B.F .P. ); the other documents submitted to the Board and the testimony of Applicant’s representatives, the Board finds and concludes that the application conforms with the Performance Standards set forth in Zoning Code Section 4.1, subject to compliance with the orders, rules and regulations of the Orangetown Office of Building, Zoning & Planning Administration & Enforcement, D.E.M.E., and B.F.P., and all other departments having jurisdiction of the premises.

 

 

 

301.:J.:IO  S)!H310  NMOl

 

lO II (Jl:J   S2   Nnr   5102

 

NM0!3~NVhlQ  .:W  NMOl

 

Skae Performance Standards

ZBA#lS-48

Page  3   of 4

 

DECISION: In view of the foregoing and the testimony and documents submitted, the Board RESOLVED that the Application for Performance Standards Conformance, pursuant to Zoning Code § 4.1, is APPROVED with the following SPECIFIC CONDITIONS: (1) that the Applicant adhere to all of the requirements set forth in the report by Chief Fire Inspector Bettmann, B.F.P., dated June 1, 2015; and (2) that the Applicant adhere to all of the requirements set forth by the report dated May 8, 2015

from Joseph J. Moran, P.E., Commissioner, DEME.; 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 tothe 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.

 

 

 

301d.:IO  S)IH310  NM01

lID ii  lJE     s 2 Nnr  5102

 

NM0130N’V’hl0  .:10   N/A@l

 

Skae Performance   Standards

ZBA#15-48

Page  4 of  4

 

 

 

The foregoing  resolution  to approve  the application  for Conformance  to Zoning  Code

• 4.1 Performance   Standards  Review  with the Specific  conditions   that the applicant

adhere to all of the requirements  set forth  in the report  dated May 8,  2015   from Joseph J. Moran,  P .E.,  Commissioner  of the Town  of Orangetown  Department  of Envirorunental Management  and Engineering  (D.E.M.E.);    the report dated June  1,   2015   from Michael Bettmann,  Chief Fire Inspector,   Town  of Orangetown  Bureau  of Fire Prevention

(B.F.P.);,   was presented  and moved by Mr. Sullivan,  seconded  by Ms.  Salomon   and carried  as follows:  Mr. Feroldi,  aye;  Ms.  Castelli,  aye; Ms. Salomon,  aye;  and Mr. Sullivan,  aye. Mr. Quinn  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:    June 3, 2015

 

DISTRIBUTION:

 

APPLICANT

ZBA  MEMBERS SUPERVISOR

TOWN BOARD MEMBERS TOWN ATTORNEY

DEPUTY  TOWN ATTORNEY OBZPAE

BUILDING   INSPECTOR-RAO.

 

ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS TOWN  OF ORANGETOWN

 

By{)~~ Deborah  Arbolino Administrative   Aide

 

 

TOWN  CLERK

HIGHWAY    DEPARTMENT

ASSESSOR

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

CHAIRMAN,     ZBA,  PB, ACABOR