Meeting Overview

MINUTES

ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS

March 19, 2008

 

MEMBERS PRESENT:         PATRICIA CASTELLI

WILLIAM MOWERSON

NANETTE ALBANESE

JOHN DOHERTY

 

ABSENT:                              DANIEL SULLIVAN

 

ALSO PRESENT:                 Robert Magrino, Esq.             Deputy Town Attorney

Anne Marie Ambrose,               Official Stenographer

Deborah Arbolino,                   Administrative Aide

 

 

This meeting was called to order at 7: 00 P.M. by  Chairman William Mowerson.

 

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

 

PUBLISHED ITEMS

 

 

APPLICANTS                                               DECISIONS

 

CONTINUED ITEMS:

 

SMK RELD                                                     POSTPONED                             ZBA#08-12

69.10 / 2/ 71; R-15 zone

 

MACHKIN                                                      SIDE YARD                               ZBA#08-18

74.13 / 3/ 91; RG zone                                                AND TOTAL SIDE

YARD VARIANCES APPROVED

 

 NEW  ITEMS:

 

LA VALLE                                                      ACCESSORY STRUCTURE       ZBA#08-20

77.05  / 3 / 53;  R-15 zone                               DISTANCE VARIANCE APPROVED

 

WYSOCKI                                                        SIDE YARD, BUILDING                ZBA#08-21

77.10  / 3 / 89; R-15 zone                                HEIGHT VARIANCES APPROVED

 

SMITH                                                             SIDE YARD AND                        ZBA#08-22

77.11 / 2 / 43; R-15 zone                                 REAR YARD VARIANCES

APPROVED AS MODIFIED

 

LIEROW                                                          CONTINUED                               ZBA#08-23

69.18 / 1 / 73; R-15 zone

VALENTINE  COOK BUILDING                   POSTPONED                                 ZBA#08-24

74.07  / 1 / 13;  LIO zone

 

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: Doller Subdivision Lot #3; 154 Kings Highway, Orangeburg, New York , 74.16/3/3.3; R-40 zone; and FURTHER RESOLVED, to request  to be notified by the Planning Board of SEQRA proceedings, hearings, and determinations  with respect to these matters.

 

The foregoing resolution was presented and moved by Mr. Mowerson seconded by Mr. Doherty,  and carried as follows: Ms. Albanese, aye;  Mr. Mowerson, aye; Ms. Castelli, aye; and Mr. Doherty, aye.  Mr. Sullivan was absent.

 

 

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

 

The verbatim minutes, as recorded by the Board’s official stenographer for the above hearings, are not transcribed.

 

 

There being no further business to come before the Board, on motion duly made, seconded and carried, the meeting was adjourned at  9:00 P.M.

 

Dated: March 19, 2008

ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS

TOWN OF ORANGETOWN

 

Deborah Arbolino

DISTRIBUTION:                                          Administrative Aide

 

APPLICANT

TOWN ATTORNEY

DEPUTY TOWN ATTORNEY

ASSESSOR

HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT

SUPERVISOR

TOWN BOARD MEMBERS

BUILDING INSPECTOR (Individual Decisions)

DEPT. of ENVIRONMENTAL MGMT. and ENGINEERING

Rockland County Planning

 

 

 

 

DECISION

 

  SIDE YARD AND TOTAL SIDE YARD VARIANCES APPROVED

 

To: Ivan and Olga Machkin                                                      ZBA # 08-18

       36 Henry Street                                                                    Date: 3/ 19/ 08

Orangeburg, New York 10962

 

FROM: ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS: Town of Orangetown

 

ZBA#08-18 : Application of Ivan and Olga Machkin for variances from Chapter 43, Section 3.12, RG District, Group Q, Columns 9 (Side Yard: 10’ required, 8” proposed and existing) and 10 (Total Side Yard: 30’ required, 24.3’ proposed and existing) for an existing balcony at an existing single-family residence. The premises is located at  36 Henry Street, Blauvelt, New York,  and are identified on the Orangetown Tax Map as Section 74.13, Block 3, Lot 91;  RG zone.

 

Heard by the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Orangetown at a meeting held on Wednesday, March 19, 2008 at which time the Board made the determination hereinafter set forth.

 

 

Ivan and Olga Machkin appeared and testified.

 

The following documents were presented:

 

1. Plot plan dated 1/7/02 by Jane Slavin, R.A..
2. Two pages of hand drawings of the deck.

 

 

 

On advice of Mr. Magrino, Attorney to the Zoning Board of Appeals, Mr. Mowerson moved for a Board determination that the foregoing application is a Type II action under the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) Regulations which does not require SEQRA environmental review. The motion was seconded by Ms. Castelli and carried as follows:  Mr. Doherty, aye; Mr. Mowerson, aye; Ms. Castelli, aye; and  Ms. Albanese, aye.  Mr. Sullivan was absent.

 

 

Olga Machkin testified that the deck was built one year ago by her husband, Ivan; that the building permit is pending; that there are no windows in their master bedroom on that side of the house; that her husband added the door and deck; that he is a handy man and built the deck himself; that there is town owned property adjacent to the house on the side of the deck; that the deck is 8’x 12’; and that the closest house on that side of the property is between 200 and 250 feet away.

 

 

 

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.

 

 

FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS:

After personal observation of the property, hearing all the testimony and reviewing the documents presented, the Board found and concluded that the benefits to the applicant if the variance(s) are granted out weigh 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 and total side yard variances would not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. The deck has been constructed on the side of the house facing vacant land owned by the Town of Orangetown.

 

 

2. The requested side yard and total side yard variances would not have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district.

 

 

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

 

4. The requested side yard and total side yard variances are not substantial.

 

 

5. The applicant purchased the property so the alleged difficulty was self-created, which consideration shall be relevant to the decision of the Board of Appeals, but shall not necessarily preclude the granting of the area variance.

 

DECISION: In view of the foregoing and the testimony and documents presented, the Board: RESOLVED, that the application for the requested side yard and total side yard variances is APPROVED;  and FURTHER RESOLVED, that  such decision and the vote thereon shall become effective and be deemed rendered on the date of adoption by the Board of the minutes of which they are a part.

 

 

 

General Conditions:

 

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

 

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

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

 

(iii) The Board gives no approval of any building plans, including, without limitation,

the accuracy and structural integrity thereof, of the applicant, but same have been submitted to the Board solely for informational and verification purposes relative to any

variances being requested.

 

 

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

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

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

 

 

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

 

The foregoing resolution to approve the application for the requested side yard and total side yard variances was presented and moved by Ms. Albanese, seconded by Ms. Albanese, and carried as follows:   Mr. Mowerson, aye; Ms. Castelli, aye; Mr. Doherty, aye; and Ms. Albanese, aye. Mr. Sullivan was absent.

 

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

 

DATED:  March 19, 2008

 

ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS

TOWN OF ORANGETOWN

 

Deborah Arbolino

                                                                        Administrative Aide

DISTRIBUTION:

 

APPLICANT                                                             TOWN  CLERK

ZBA  MEMBERS                                                      HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT

SUPERVISOR                                                                          ASSESSOR

TOWN BOARD MEMBERS                                    DEPT. of ENVIRONMENTAL

TOWN ATTORNEY                                                                MGMT. and ENGINEERING

DEPUTY TOWN ATTORNEY                                                FILE,ZBA, PB

OBZPAE                                                                  CHAIRMAN,  ZBA, PB, ACABOR

BUILDING INSPECTOR –J.P.

 

 

 

DECISION

 

ACCESSORY STRUCTURE DISTANCE  VARIANCE APPROVED

 

To: Stanley LaValle                                                      ZBA # 08-20

       149 Liberty Road                                                     Date: 3/ 19/ 08

Tappan, New York 10983

 

FROM: ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS: Town of Orangetown

 

ZBA#08-20: Application of Stanley LaValle for variances from Chapter 43, Section 5.153, R-15 District,  (Accessory Structure Distance: 15’ required, 3’ existing) for an existing cabana/shed at a single-family residence. The premises is located at 149 Liberty Road, Tappan, New York,  and are identified on the Orangetown Tax Map as Section 77.05, Block 3, Lot 53;  R-15 zone.

 

Heard by the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Orangetown at a meeting held on Wednesday, March 19, 2008 at which time the Board made the determination hereinafter set forth.

 

 

Stanley LaValle appeared and testified.

 

The following documents were presented:

 

1. Architectural plans labeled LaValle House Deck and Cabana Additions,  with site plan dated December 26, 2007 signed and sealed by John Deans, Architect.

 

 

 

 

 

On advice of Mr. Magrino, Attorney to the Zoning Board of Appeals, Mr. Mowerson moved for a Board determination that the foregoing application is a Type II action under the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) Regulations which does not require SEQRA environmental review. The motion was seconded by Ms. Castelli and carried as follows:  Mr. Doherty, aye; Mr. Mowerson, aye; Ms. Castelli, aye; and  Ms. Albanese, aye.  Mr. Sullivan was absent.

 

 

Stanley LaValle testified that he built the cabana in 1974; that he came to the Building

Department and was told that he did not need a permit; that he was told that if the shed was under 100 sq. ft. he did not need a permit and the cabana is only 8’ x 10’; that he found out recently that he constructed it too close to the house and needs a variance for the distance; that he has had an electric inspection from the underwriters and Mr. John Deans certified the plans; that he wants to legalize the cabana because he wants to sell the house because it is too much to take care of now.

 

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.

 

 

FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS:

After personal observation of the property, hearing all the testimony and reviewing the documents presented, the Board found and concluded that the benefits to the applicant if the variance(s) are granted out weigh 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 accessory structure distance variance would not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. The shed has existed in this location since 1974 and similar conditions exist on other lots in the area.

 

 

1.  The requested accessory structure distance variance would not have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district.

 

 

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

 

1. The requested accessory structure distance variance although substantial has existed since 1974 without incidence.

 

 

1. The applicant purchased the property so the alleged difficulty was self-created, which consideration shall be relevant to the decision of the Board of Appeals, but shall not necessarily preclude the granting of the area variance.

 

DECISION: In view of the foregoing and the testimony and documents presented, the Board: RESOLVED, that the application for the requested accessory structure variance is APPROVED;  and FURTHER RESOLVED, that  such decision and the vote thereon shall become effective and be deemed rendered on the date of adoption by the Board of the minutes of which they are a part.

 

 

 

General Conditions:

 

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

 

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

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

 

(iii) The Board gives no approval of any building plans, including, without limitation,

the accuracy and structural integrity thereof, of the applicant, but same have been submitted to the Board solely for informational and verification purposes relative to any

variances being requested.

 

 

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

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

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

 

 

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

 

The foregoing resolution to approve the application for the requested accessory structure distance variance was presented and moved by Ms. Albanese , seconded by Ms. Castelli, and carried as follows:   Mr. Mowerson, aye; Ms. Castelli, aye; Mr. Doherty, aye; and Ms. Albanese, aye. Mr. Sullivan was absent.

 

 

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

 

DATED:  March 19, 2008

 

ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS

TOWN OF ORANGETOWN

 

Deborah Arbolino

                                                                        Administrative Aide

DISTRIBUTION:

 

APPLICANT                                                             TOWN  CLERK

ZBA  MEMBERS                                                      HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT

SUPERVISOR                                                                          ASSESSOR

TOWN BOARD MEMBERS                                    DEPT. of ENVIRONMENTAL

TOWN ATTORNEY                                                                MGMT. and ENGINEERING

DEPUTY TOWN ATTORNEY                                                FILE,ZBA, PB

OBZPAE                                                                  CHAIRMAN,  ZBA, PB, ACABOR

BUILDING INSPECTOR –J.P.

 

 

DECISION

 

 SIDE YARD AND BUILDING HEIGHT VARIANCES APPROVED

 

To:  Mark Wysocki                                                       ZBA # 08-21

       185 Old Tappan Road                                             Date: 3/ 19/ 08

Tappan, New York 10983

 

FROM: ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS: Town of Orangetown

 

ZBA#08- 21: Application of  Mark Wysocki for  variances from Chapter 43, Section 3.12, R-15  District, Group M, Columns 9  (Side Yard:  20’ required, 3.5’ existing and  proposed), 12  ( Building Height: 3.5’ permitted, 30.488’ proposed ) for the addition at an existing single-family residence. The premises are located at  185 Old Tappan Road, Tappan, New York,  and are identified on the Orangetown Tax Map as Section 77.10, Block 3, Lot 89;  R-15 zone.

 

 

Heard by the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Orangetown at a meeting held on Wednesday, March 19, 2008 at which time the Board made the determination hereinafter set forth.

 

 

Mark Wysocki appeared and testified.

 

The following documents were presented:

 

1. Architectural plans labeled “Proposed Addition for residence at 185 Old Tappan Road” dated August 1, 2007, signed and sealed by Leon Baron, Architect (13 pages).
2. Site Plan signed and sealed by Leon Baron, Architect.
3. A letter dated February 21, 2008 from the County of Rockland Sewer District

No. 1 signed by Joseph LaFiandra, Engineer II.

1. A letter from the County of Rockland Department of Highways dated February 7, 2008 signed by Joseph Arena, Principal Engineering Technician.
2. A letter dated February 13, 2008 from the County of Rockland Department of Planning signed by Salvatore Corallo, Commissioner of Planning.
3. A letter dated February 6, 2008 from the County of Rockland Drainage Agency signed by Edward F. Devine, Executive Director.

 

 

 

 

On advice of Mr. Michaels, Attorney to the Zoning Board of Appeals, Mr. Mowerson moved for a Board determination that the foregoing application is a Type II action under the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) Regulations which does not require SEQRA environmental review. The motion was seconded by Ms. Castelli and carried as follows:  Mr. Doherty, aye; Mr. Mowerson, aye; Ms. Castelli, aye; and Ms. Albanese, aye.  Mr. Sullivan was absent.

 

 

 

Mark Wysocki testified that his property is divided between New York and New Jersey; that the New Jersey property s landlocked; that the house is situated close to the Jersey line and this is what causes the need for the variances; that he has owned the house for two years; that there are four people in the family; that he shares a driveway; that he is proposing to add a second floor and expand into the rear by six feet; that the house does not have a basement; that there is a little less than three acres of property; that the original house was built in 1955; and if it were all on one lot he would not need a variance.

 

 

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.

 

 

FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS:

After personal observation of the property, hearing all the testimony and reviewing the documents presented, the Board found and concluded that the benefits to the applicant if the variance(s) are granted out weigh 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 and building height variances would not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. The property is divided between New Jersey and New York and this condition is the reason the application requires variances.

 

 

1. The requested side yard and building height variances would not have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district.

 

 

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

 

1. The requested side yard and building height variances although substantial is caused by the applicant owning property in New Jersey and New York. The New Jersey lot is landlocked.

 

 

1. The applicant purchased the property so the alleged difficulty was self-created, which consideration shall be relevant to the decision of the Board of Appeals, but shall not necessarily preclude the granting of the area variance.

 

DECISION: In view of the foregoing and the testimony and documents presented, the Board: RESOLVED, that the application for the requested side yard and building height variances is APPROVED;  and FURTHER RESOLVED, that  such decision and the vote thereon shall become effective and be deemed rendered on the date of adoption by the Board of the minutes of which they are a part.

 

 

 

General Conditions:

 

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

 

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

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

 

 

 

(iii) The Board gives no approval of any building plans, including, without limitation,

the accuracy and structural integrity thereof, of the applicant, but same have been submitted to the Board solely for informational and verification purposes relative to any

variances being requested.

 

 

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

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

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

 

 

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

 

The foregoing resolution to approve the application for the requested side yard and building height variance was presented and moved by Mr. Doherty, seconded by Ms. Castelli, and carried as follows:   Mr. Mowerson, aye; Ms. Castelli, aye; Mr. Doherty, aye; and Ms. Albanese, aye. Mr. Sullivan was absent.

 

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

 

DATED:  March 19, 2008

 

ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS

TOWN OF ORANGETOWN

 

Deborah Arbolino

                                                                        Administrative Aide

DISTRIBUTION:

 

APPLICANT                                                             TOWN  CLERK

ZBA  MEMBERS                                                      HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT

SUPERVISOR                                                                          ASSESSOR

TOWN BOARD MEMBERS                                    DEPT. of ENVIRONMENTAL

TOWN ATTORNEY                                                                MGMT. and ENGINEERING

DEPUTY TOWN ATTORNEY                                                FILE,ZBA, PB

OBZPAE                                                                  CHAIRMAN,  ZBA, PB, ACABOR

BUILDING INSPECTOR –B.vW.

 

 

 

DECISION

 

SIDE YARD AND REAR YARD  VARIANCES APPROVED AS MODIFIED

 

To: John and Katrina Smith                                                      ZBA # 08-22

       9 Carol Lane                                                                     Date: 3/ 19/ 08

Tappan, New York 10983

 

FROM: ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS: Town of Orangetown

 

ZBA#08- 22: Application of  John And Katrina Smith for  variances from Chapter 43, Section 3.12, R-15  District, Group M, Column 9  (Side Yard:  20’ required, 3’   proposed) and from Section 5.227 ( Rear Yard: 20’ required, 6’ proposed) for the installation of an above-ground pool at an existing single-family residence. The premises are located at 9 Carol Lane, Tappan, New York,  and are identified on the Orangetown Tax Map as Section 77.11, Block 2, Lot 43;  R-15 zone.

 

 

Heard by the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Orangetown at a meeting held on Wednesday, March 5, 2008 at which time the Board made the determination hereinafter set forth.

 

 

John Smith appeared and testified.

 

The following documents were presented:

 

1. Two Copies of survey dated 5/28/1981 by  Joseph Haler, P.L.S., with the pool drawn on it.

 

 

 

 

On advice of Mr. Michaels, Attorney to the Zoning Board of Appeals, Mr. Mowerson moved for a Board determination that the foregoing application is a Type II action under the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) Regulations which does not require SEQRA environmental review. The motion was seconded by Ms. Castelli and carried as follows:  Mr. Doherty, aye; Mr. Mowerson, aye; Ms. Castelli, aye; and  Ms. Albanese, aye.  Mr. Sullivan was absent.

 

 

 

John Smith testified that he re-measured after he submitted the plan to the building inspector and the side yard can be 6’ and the rear yard can be 10’; that the proposed pool is 18’ x 33’ oval above-ground pool; that he has an extended family living in the area that will also be using the pool; that his sister-in-law and in-laws live in the neighborhood; that he needs the pool to train for triathlons; that the yard is oddly shaped and there isn’t another place to put the pool; and that the house that the pool will be closest to also has a pool and there is a fence and row of arborvitae between the properties.

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.

 

 

FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS:

After personal observation of the property, hearing all the testimony and reviewing the documents presented, the Board found and concluded that the benefits to the applicant if the variance(s) are granted out weigh 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 and rear yard variances as modified to 6’ and 10’ respectively would not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. There is sufficient screening because of the existing fence and row of arborvitae between the properties on the side of the house where the proposed pool would be installed to alleviate any undesirable change in character to the neighborhood.

 

 

1.  The requested side yard and rear yard variances as modified to 6’ and 10’ respectively would not have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district.

 

 

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

 

1. The requested side yard and rear yard variances as modified to 6’ and 10’ respectively although substantial shall not have an adverse effect on the neighborhood.

 

 

1. The applicant purchased the property so the alleged difficulty was self-created, which consideration shall be relevant to the decision of the Board of Appeals, but shall not necessarily preclude the granting of the area variance.

 

DECISION: In view of the foregoing and the testimony and documents presented, the Board: RESOLVED, that the application for the requested side yard and rear yard variances as modified to 6’ and 10’ respectively is APPROVED;  and FURTHER RESOLVED, that  such decision and the vote thereon shall become effective and be deemed rendered on the date of adoption by the Board of the minutes of which they are a part.

 

General Conditions:

 

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

 

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

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

 

 

(iii) The Board gives no approval of any building plans, including, without limitation,

the accuracy and structural integrity thereof, of the applicant, but same have been submitted to the Board solely for informational and verification purposes relative to any

variances being requested.

 

 

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

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

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

 

 

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

 

The foregoing resolution to approve the application for the requested side yard and rear yard variances as modified to 6’ and 10’ respectively was presented and moved by Mr. Mowerson , seconded by Ms. Castelli, and carried as follows:   Mr. Mowerson, aye; Ms. Castelli, aye; Mr. Doherty, aye; and Ms. Albanese, aye. Mr. Sullivan was absent.

 

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

 

DATED:  March 19, 2008

 

ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS

TOWN OF ORANGETOWN

 

Deborah Arbolino

                                                                        Administrative Aide

DISTRIBUTION:

 

APPLICANT                                                             TOWN  CLERK

ZBA  MEMBERS                                                      HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT

SUPERVISOR                                                                          ASSESSOR

TOWN BOARD MEMBERS                                    DEPT. of ENVIRONMENTAL

TOWN ATTORNEY                                                                MGMT. and ENGINEERING

DEPUTY TOWN ATTORNEY                                                FILE,ZBA, PB

OBZPAE                                                                  CHAIRMAN,  ZBA, PB, ACABOR

BUILDING INSPECTOR –J.P.