Meeting Overview

MINUTES

ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MARCH 16, 2016

 

 

 

MEMBERS PRESENT:          DAN SULLIVAN THOMAS QUINN

LEONARD FEROLDI, ALTERNATE MICHAEL BOSCO

 

 

 

ABSENT:                   PA TRICIA CASTELLI JOAN SALOMON

 

 

 

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

NEW  ITEMS:

 

PFIZER SIGNS                     SIGN VARIANCES APPROVED

401 North Middletown Road

Pearl River, N.Y.

68.08  I 1  I 5; LI & LO zone

ZBA#16-18

 

 

 

KARAVANI

40 Home Tooke Road

Palisades, NY

80.05 I 1  I 5; R-40 zone

FRONT YARD VARIANCE APPROVED

ZBA#16-19

 

 

 

VERIZON WIRELESS         PERFORMANCE STANDARDS PERFORMANCE ST AND ARDS     APPROVED

2000 Corporate Drive

Orangeburg, NY

73.15 I 1  I 19; LIO zone

ZBA#l6-20

 

20 zt lJd   11  HdtJ   SlUZ

 

N h\ 0 l;   =  ~;  ,;  -_ ~       =     .:  :     : : .: C _’._

 

Page 2

 

 

OTHER   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:    The Club  at Pearl River Sign,   Veterans  Memorial  Drive & Blue Hill South Road,   Pearl  River, NY; 73 .10 I 1  I 4;  OP zone;   The Club  at Pearl River  Sign-Temporary   Leasing,   Veterans Memorial   Drive  & Blue  Hill South Road,   Pearl River,  NY; 73.10   I 1I4;    OP zone; The Saloon   Roof Plan-  Building   Expansion,   45-49 West Central Avenue,  Pearl River,  NY;

68.16/   1/  9; CC zone; and FURTHER  RESOLVED,   to request   to be notified by the Planning  Board of SEQ RA 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  8:30   P.M.

 

Dated:   March  16,   2016

 

 

DISTRIBUTION: APPLICANT

TOWN  ATTORNEY

DEPUTY   TOWN  ATTORNEY TOWN  BOARD  MEMBERS

BUILDING    INSPECTOR   (Individual     Decisions)

Rockland   County Planning

ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS TOWN  OF ORANGETOWN

 

 

 

Deborah  Arbolino,  Administrative    Aide

 

 

-11”         I!•~         (‘”\l:l~.'”\        ’11.”‘Qi

.:Iv’.:..:_           •                            I    ··’        –

 

 

~.    ·-···  …….

 

DECISION

 

 

NUMBER   OF SIGNS,  SIZE  OF  SIGNS,  AND LOCATION    OF SIGNS VARIANCES   APPROVED

 

To: Pfizer Inc. (Donn McMullen)

401 N. Middletown  Road

Pearl River, New York  10965

ZBA #16-18

Date: March  16, 2016

 

 

FROM:  ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS:  Town of Orangetown

 

 

ZBA#l 6-18: Application  of Pfizer for variances  from Zoning  Code (Chapter  43) of the Town of Orangetown  Code, LI District,  Section  3.11, Column  5, # 6 referred  to LIO District  Section 3.11, Column  5 referred  to LO District,  Column  5, Item #11:( one (1) sign permitted:  Two (2) signs proposed;  60 sq. Ft. permitted:  70 sq. ft. proposed;  and 20′ setback from lot line required:  14′ proposed]  for signs at an existing  Research  and Development  property  located  at 401 North  Middletown  Road, Pearl River, New York and are identified  on the Orangetown  Tax Map as Section   68.08, Block  1, Lot 5; in the LI zoning  district.

 

Heard by the Zoning  Board of Appeals  of the Town  of Orangetown  at a meeting held on Wednesday,  March  16, 2016 at which time the Board made the determination  hereinafter set forth.

 

Donn McMullen  appeared  and testified. The following  documents  were presented:

1. Copy of site plan signed and sealed by Craig Lapinski,  P.E. dated January  2016.(1 page)
2. Color pictures  of the proposed  signs by Fast Signs dated 08/14/2015  (3 pages).
3. A letter dated March 4, 2016 from the County  of Rockland  Department  of

Planning  signed by Douglas  Schuetz,  Acting  Commissioner   of Planning.

4. A letter dated March  16, 2016 from the County  of Rockland  Highway  Department signed by Sonny Lin, P .E..
5. A letter dated February  11, 2016 from the Town  of Clarkstown  signed by Shirley

Thonnann,   Chairwoman,  Clarkstown  Planning  Board.

 

 

 

 

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  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) (7); which  does not require  SEQRA environmental  review.  The motion  was seconded  by Mr. Quinn and carried as follows:

s  –·

Mr. Feroldi,  aye; Mr. Bosco,  aye; Mr. Quinn,  aye; and Mr. Sullivan,  aye. Ms. Castelli  and

Ms. Salomon  were absent.                                                                                            -1                        1

0           OJ             C)

 

Donn McMullen testified that last year the property was subdivided and 22.9 a~s   ~e      c) sold for R& D; that Pfizer’s remaining property needs to be designated; that theyar~       -~1 trying to make to the main entrance to the facility be from Crooked Hill Road ijld tlnt     r-·:· newly named Pfizer Way; that they would like a sign at this entrance and if it ~    setu     …. back the required twenty feet it would not be noticed when you were driving down  ::3      ~:~

Crooked Hill Road; and this sign would be double sided for designation from tfi¢ e~    ·                    c;

and west of Crooked Hill Road; that the next sign is inside of the property on a tier  a       :::

planting and is one- sided to help designate the interior parking lot; that the rest’Clftlfe’

signs would be on every other row of the parking lot to clearly designate that this is

parking for Pfizer; that these signs would be two-sided and located on the lamp posts; and

that these signs will be necessary to designate parking when the other property is fully

 

 

 

 

utilized.

 

 

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

Mr. Bosco  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 number  of signs, and location  and size of signs, variances  will not produce  an undesirable  change  in the character  of the neighborhood  or a detriment  to nearby properties.  The property  has recently  been  subdivided  and new signs are necessary  to direct people  to the proper  facility  and the size of the proposed  signs are reasonable  for the size of the lot.

 

 

 

2. The requested number  of signs, and location  and size of signs, variances  will not have an adverse  effect or impact  on the physical  or environmental  conditions  in the neighborhood  or district.  The property  has recently  been  subdivided  and new signs are necessary  to direct people  to the proper  facility  and the size of the proposed  signs are reasonable  for the size of the lot.

 

 

 

 

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  number  of signs, and location  and size of signs, 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 property  has recently  been  subdivided  and new signs are necessary  to direct people  to the proper  facility  and the size of the proposed  signs are reasonable  for the size of the lot.

 

 

 

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-creat~d, which ~ons~q~fa~i,<n1~     ~~~~15~t to the decision ~f the Board of

Appeals, but did not, by .:ilSet-f.f preclude Hie granting of the area vanances.

20 2 “L  Wd      11 Hdl:J 9lUZ

 

 

 

DECISION:  In view of the foregoing  and the testimony  and documents  presented,  the Board: RESOLVED,  that the application  for the requested  number  of signs, and location  and size of sign,  variances  are APPROVED,   and a motion  was made to

over-ride  the letter from the Rockland  County Department  of Planning  dated March

4, 2016;  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.

 

 

 

 

-;r,r      1          ,~,    r·,,1,1;;1″\            ‘l!.'()l

.::!  .._,·;   .~:  :…     ;          .   .                          -:   :   ._/       •; ;;   \  ·v-

 

20   21   lJd     11   Hd8  srnz

 

..

• ”•,A:

–    ”         ‘,  ‘···’  .,’;

 

 

 

 

 

Pfizer Signs

ZBA#16-18

Page  4 of  4

 

 

 

The foregoing  resolution   to  approve  the application   for the requested  number  of signs, and size  and location   of signs,  variances  and to override  the Rockland  County Department   of Planning’s   letter  dated March  4,  2016;    was presented  and moved by Mr.

Quinn,  seconded  by Mr. Bosco   and carried as follows:   Mr. Bosco,  aye;  Mr. Feroldi,  aye;

Mr. Quinn,  aye ; and Mr. Sullivan,   aye.  Ms.  Castelli   and Ms.  Salomon 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:   March  16,  2016

 

 

ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS TOWN  OF ORANGETOWN

 

 

DISTRIBUTION:

 

APPLICANT

ZBA MEMBERS SUPERVISOR

TOWN BOARD MEMBERS TOWN ATTORNEY

DEPUTY TOWN ATTORNEY OBZPAE

BUILDING  INSPECTOR-N.A.

By~~

Deborah  Arbolmo

Administrative   Aide

 

 

TO\VN CLERK

HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT ASSESSOR

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

CHAIRMAN,   ZBA,  PB,  ACABOR

 

 

J8L :D  S’l’t318      .lf,\01

20 Zl  lJd   u Hd8  grnz

 

 

Hi.·\ 0 i =1  ~ : t·

….    –   1

_”)i.””‘·01

~    –       ..   ‘”

 

DECISION

 

 

FRONT YARD VARIAN CE APPROVED  (SEE ADDITIONAL  EXCEPTIONS)

 

To:  Laina Karavani

40 Home Tooke Road

Palisades, New York 10964

ZBA #16-19

Date: March 16, 2016

 

 

FROM: ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS: Town of Orangetown

 

ZBA#16-19: Application of  Laina Karavani for a variance from Zoning Code (Chapter

43) of the Town of Orangetown Code, R-40 District, Section 3.12, Group E, Column 8 (Front Yard: 50′ required, 42.71’ proposed) for an addition to an existing single-family residence. The premises are located at 40 Home Tooke Road, Palisades, New York and are identified on the Orangetown Tax Map as Section 80.05, Block 1, Lot 5; in the R-40 zoning district.

 

Heard by the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Orangetown at a meeting held on Wednesday, March 16, 2016 at which time the Board made the determination hereinafter set forth.

 

Laina Karavani and Joshua Vaughn appeared and testified. The following documents were presented:

1. Architectural plans with site plan with the latest date of 10/27 /2015 (3 pages) not signed or sealed by Robert Hoene, Architect.
2. A letter dated February 9, 2016 from the County of Rockland Division of Environmental Health signed by Scott McKane, P .E., Senior Public Health Engineer.
3. A letter dated March 3, 2016 from the Rockland County Department of Planning

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

4. A letter dated March 16, 2016 from the Rockland County Highway Department signed by Sonny Lin, P .E ..

 

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

 

On advice of Dennis Michaels, Deputy Town Attorney,  counsel to the Zoning Board of Appeals, Mr. Sullivan moved for a Board determination 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 Mr. Quinn and carried as follows: Mr. Feroldi, aye; Mr. Bosco, aye; Mr. Quinn, aye; and Mr. Sullivan, aye. Ms. Castelli and Ms. Salomon were absent.

 

 

 

Laina Karavani testified that she needs to add a master bedroom, with a master bathroom that is handicap accessible; that she is adding the minimal amount possible to achieve these goals; that the house is situated on a comer lot which means that she has two front yards and because of the location of the existing plumbing she is adding on behind the existing kitchen; that ideally she would have liked to go straight back with the existing

line of the house but she didn’t want to ask to increase the non-conforming front yard and

doing this would increase it slightly because of the curve of the property; and that she appreciates the Board considering this because it would allow for a comfortable hallway and bathroom.

 

Karavani

ZBA#l6-19

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 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 front yard variance will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. The house is on a comer lot that has two front yards and the applicant needs to have handicap accessibility.

 

2. The Board is allowing the applicant to submit revised plans that would allow a wider hallway and larger handicap accessible bathroom that would create no less than a 35′ front yard setback from the northeast comer of the proposed addition.

 

 

 

3. The requested front yard variance will not have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. The house is on a comer lot that has two front yards and the applicant needs to have handicap accessibility.

 

4. The benefits sought by the applicant cannot be achieved by other means feasible for the applicant to pursue other than by obtaining a variance.

 

 

 

5. The requested front yard variance is not substantial. The house is on a comer lot that has two front yards and the applicant needs to have handicap accessibility.

 

 

 

6. 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.

 

 

 

 

 

 

20 2i. lJd   H H2.l:I   Slfil

 

 

ZBA#l6-19

Page  3  of  4

 

 

 

 

 

 

DECISION:  In view of the foregoing  and the testimony  and documents  presented,  the Board: RESOLVED,  that the application  for the requested  front yard variance  is APPROVED;  and, alternatively,  Resolved  to approve  the Home  Took Road Front Yard setback  of no less than 35′  at the northeast  comer  of the proposed  addition, subject to the Applicant  submitting  a revised  Site Plan, Bulk Table and Architectural elevations  (if applicable)  depicting  this 35′  setback  in form satisfactory  to the

Building  Inspector;  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.

 

 

‘”lAI      It.”‘,      ‘~-:

• ‘, ‘   1’…., , ;   •·r)v   ~_1,,;,,•, 0 -\

 

=.. J ,:::  ::: ·.1                                   –      •

20 21 lJd   re H2td 9rnz

.   ‘ .. ,~  :

:_~    _,;         ·~ –    •    ,;  ‘,  ––.  ‘ ...1   •••

 

 

ZBA#16-19

Page  4 of  4

 

 

 

The foregoing  resolution  to approve  the application  for the requested  front yard  variance as requested  and submitted;  and,  alternatively,   to approve  the Home  Took Road Front Yard setback  of no less  than 35′  at the northeast  comer  of the proposed  addition,  subject to the Applicant   submitting   a revised  Site  Plan,  Bulk Table and Architectural  elevations

(if applicable)   depicting  this 3 5′  setback in form satisfactory   to the Building  Inspector;

was presented   and moved by Mr. Bosco,   seconded   by Mr. Quinn   and carried as follows: Mr. Bosco,   aye;  Mr. Feroldi,   aye;   Mr. Quinn,  aye;  and Mr. Sullivan,   aye. Ms.  Castelli and Ms.  Salomon  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:    March  16,  2016

 

 

ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS TOWN  OF ORANGETOWN

 

DISTRJBUTION:

 

APPLICANT

ZBA   MEMBERS SUPERVISOR

TOWN  BOARD  MEMBERS TOWN ATIORNEY

DEPUTY   TOWN ATTORNEY OBZPAE

BUILDING    INSPECTOR-G.M.

By-¥–~~~””—‘~~:£LL’~· Deborah  Arboli   o

Administrative   Aide

 

 

TOWN  CLERK

1-llGHWA  Y DEPARTMENT

ASSESSOR

DEPT. of ENVIRONMENTAL

MGMT. and  ENGINEERING FILE,ZBA,   PB

Cl-IAIRMAN,      ZBA,  PB,  ACABOR

 

 

zo Zl   lJd     1 T  ~28   9102

 

 

• 1nr;l_…C”!,

.,   .….

,_, ‘·)      ·t.1l•.‘••

nv––1

 

i\  r.1′   — :J ._, •      ·.                    –

 

DECISION

 

PERFORMANCE STANDARDS APPROVED

 

To: Donald  Brenner  (Verizon)

4 Independence  A venue

Tappan,  New York  10983

ZBA#16-20

Date: March  16, 2016

 

 

FROM: ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS:  Town of Orangetown

 

 

ZBA#16-20:  Application  of Verizon  Wireless  Fuel Storage Plan for Performance

Standards  from Zoning  Code (Chapter  43) of the Town  of Orangetown  Code, LIO District,  Group CC, Section 4.1 for an additional  fuel storage tank.  The facility is located at 2000 Corporate  Drive,  Orangeburg,  New York and is identified  on the Orangetown

Tax Map as Section  73.15, Block  1, Lot 19; in the LIO zoning  district.

 

 

 

Heard by the Zoning  Board of Appeals  of the Town  of Orangetown  at a meeting  held on Wednesday,  March  16, 2016 at which time the Board made the determination  hereinafter set forth.

 

Donald  Brenner,  Attorney,  Rich  Buckley,  P .E., and Joe Modaferri,  P .E., appeared  and testified.

 

The following  documents  were presented:

 

 

1. Plans labeled  “Verizon  Wireless  Furl Storage Expansion”  signed and sealed by

Richard  Jon Pearson,  P.E., (25 pages).

2. Performance  Standards  Resume  of Operation  and Equipment  form.
3. Fire Prevention  Supplement  dated 02/11/2016.
4. Material  Safety Data Sheets  (12pages).
5. A letter dated March  11, 2016 from the County  of Rockland  Department  of

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

6. A memorandum   dated March  9, 2016 from Michael  B. Bettmann,  Chief Fire

Inspector,  Town  of Orangetown.

7. A letter dated March  16, 2016 from the Department  of Environmental

Management  and Engineering,  Town  of Orangetown,  signed by Joseph J. Moran, P.E., Commissioner;  with an attachment  dated February  23, 2016 from Bruce Peters, P .E., Engineer  III, Town of Orangetown.

 

Mr. Sullivan,   Chairman,  made a motion  to open the Public Hearing  which motion  was seconded  by Mr. Quinn   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 entails the ZBA engaging  in a review  to determine  compliance  with technical requirements,  this application  is exempt  from the State Environmental   Quality  Review Act (SEQRA),  pursuant  to SEQRA  Regulations  §617.5 (c) (28).  The motion  was seconded  by Mr. Quinn and carried  as follows:   Mr. Feroldi,  aye; Mr. Bosco,  aye; Mr. Quinn, aye; and Mr. Sullivan,  aye. Ms. Salomon  and Ms. Castelli were absent..

 

 

 

Donald  Brenner  testified  that the application  has been before  the Planning  Board and ACABOR;  that the prior decision  of the Zoning  Board  approved  a diesel tank; that they have no objections  to the comments  from Michael  Bettmann  or DEME,  however  he knows  that the sewer pipe was installed  in 1936 and that it was not used since  1942 and he doesn’t  know if it is still there but he will show it on the plans.

 

 

 

 

 

lO  21  Wd   11  H&J   9102

:·.!/1\Cl::JOr·:·.·~:-~1                    .. .:               ::::.01

 

Verizon  Performance   Standards

ZBA#16-20

Page2  of  4

 

 

 

 

Rich, Buckley,  P .E., testified  that the tank is a 30,000  gallon tank; that it will be in compliance  with all the EPA regulations;  that the tank is located  on the north side of the building  and the day care center is located  on the south side of the building;  that this will be the main tank and it will be filled and from there it is pumped  to the existing  double walled belly tanks; that there are submersibles  in the main tank and overflow  tanks per containment  area; that there is a control failure  and it can’t  go back from over flow to belly; that it is automated  and redundant;  that the bypass  is also redundant  and they are not adding by overflow’  the foot valve maintains  prime  to pump and the procedure  will be updated  when the new tank is added.

 

The Board reviewed  the Performance  Standards  and Fire Supplement  forms. 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

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 March  16,

2016 from Joseph  J. Moran,  P.E., Commissioner   of the Orangetown  Department

of Environmental   Management  and Engineering  (D.E.M.E.);  the memorandum dated February  23, 2016 from Bruce Peters,  P.E.,  Engineer  III, (D.E.M.E.);the report  dated March  9, 2016 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 Orangetown B.F.P., and all other departments having jurisdiction of the premises.

 

 

 

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, Town of Orangetown B.F.P., dated March 9,

2016; and (2) that the Applicant adhere to all of the requirements set forth by the report

dated March 16, 2016 from Joseph J. Moran, P.E., Commissioner, D.E.M.E.; and (3) the

attachment  dated February  2jbfJ~~ ff’H~~~c~L~81.frs, P.E., Engineer III, D.E.M.E.

 

£0  21 lJd   1 T  HdU   9lUZ

 

Verizon Performance Standards

ZBA#l6-20

Page 3  of 4

 

 

 

Town of Orangetown; 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.

 

 

£0  21  lJd   11  Hdtl 9102

 

Verizon  Performance  Standards

ZBA#16-20

Page  4 of  4

 

 

 

 

The foregoing   resolution   to approve  the application  for the requested  conformance  to Performance    Standards    was presented   and moved  by Mr. Sullivan,   seconded  by Mr. Quinn   and carried as follows:   Mr. Bosco,   aye;  Mr. Feroldi,   aye;   Mr. Quinn,   aye;   and Mr. Sullivan,   aye.  Ms.  Castelli   and Ms.  Salomon   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:    March  16,  2016

 

ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS TOWN  OF ORANGETOWN

 

 

 

DlSTRJBUTION:

 

APPLICANT

ZBA MEMBERS SUPERVISOR

TOWN BOARDMEMBERS TOWN ATTORNEY

DEPUTY TOWN ATTORNEY OBZPAE

BUILDING  INSPECTOR-G.M.

 

By~v.u~~C!::’.’.~~ Deborah  Arbolino

Administrative   Aide

 

 

TOWN CLERK

HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT ASSESSOR

DEPT. of ENVIRONMENTAL

MGMT. and ENGINEERING FILE,ZBA,  PB

CHAIRMAN,   ZBA,  PB, ACABOR