Meeting Overview

 

 

MINUTES

TOWN OF O~i\NGETOWN

 

ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS   2015 NOV 2Y     PrJ  12 91

November 4, 2015

TOWN  CLEHi\S OFFICE

 

 

MEMBERS PRESENT:

 

 

DAN SULLIVAN PATRICIA CASTELLI JOAN SALOMON

LEONARD FEROLIDI,  ALTERNATE

THOMAS QUINN

ABSENT:

 

 

 

 

MICHAEL BOSCO

 

 

 

 

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.

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

 

 

 

PUBLISHED ITEMS

 

APPLICANTS NEW ITEMS:

ANDRIAN OS/MALOOF

46 Closter Road

Palisades, NY

80.05I1I20;  R-40 zone

DECISIONS

 

 

 

 

FLOOR AREA RATIO,                    ZBA#lS-92

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

AND GRAVEL DRIVEWAY VARIANCES APPROVED

 

PEARL RIVER DINER

84 North Middletown Road

Pearl River, NY

69.13I1I23;  CC zone

SIGN SIZE VARIANCE APPROVED

ZBA#lS-93

 

SCULLY

183 Oak Tree Road

Tappan,NY

77.15 I 1I32;  LIO zone

 

SHARRIN

95 South Magnolia Avenue

Pearl River, NY

68.19I3I14; R-15 zone

 

FITZPATRICK

55 South Middletown Road, Pearl River, NY

68.20 I 2 I 48; RG zone

 

319 BLAUVELT ROAD

319 Blauvelt  Road

Pearl River, NY

69.09 I 5 I 74; R-15 zone

FRONT YARD FENCE HEIGHT    ZBA#lS-94

VARIANCE APPROVED WITH SPECIFIC CONDITION

 

 

 

FLOOR AREA RATIO,                    ZBA#lS-95

LOT AREA, FRONT YARD, SIDEYARD,REAR     YARD,

AND BUILDING HEIGHT VARIANCES APPROVED

FRONT YARD, FRONT YARD      ZBA#lS-96

ACCESSORY STRUCTURE AND

FENCE HEIGHT VARIANCES APPROVED

 

 

 

LOT AREA & LOT WIDTH               ZBA#lS-97

VARIANCES APPROVED

FOR LOT #1; STREET FRONTAGE VARIANCE APPROVED FOR LOT #2

 

Minutes

Page2

 

 

 

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:

K & P Paving Corp.  Overnight Storage Site plan, 568 Route 303, Blauvelt, NY 70.14 I 4

I 19; LO zone;    and FURTHER RESOLVED, to request  to be notified by the Planning Board of SEQRA proceedings, hearings, and determinations with respect to these matters.

 

 

 

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

 

TI1e 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 cani.ed,  the meeting was adjourned at 10:00   P .M.

 

Dated:  November 4, 2015

 

 

 

DISTRIBUTION: APPLICANT

TOWN ATTORNEY

DEPUTY  TOWN ATTORNEY TOWN  BOARD MEMBERS

BUILDING    INSPECTOR   (Individual     Decisions) Rockland  County Planning

 

ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF ORANGETOWN

 

 

 

B~~

 

Deborah Arbolino,  Administrative Aide

 

 

 

3 Ol:J.:10  SY ‘!310  N!AOl

2~  ?! hld    hZ  noN  5W2

 

Nh1013DNl/;JQ    .:10  11/i\Ol

 

I                                                                                               DECISION                    TOWN  OF  ORM-JGETOWN

l                                                                                                                                                                                               7015  NOV  ?4  PPl  1?  92

FLOOR AREA RATIO, LOT AREA, LOT WIDTH, FRONT”YARD, SlDE YAitO,

I

TOTAL SIDE YARJ;>, REAR YARD, BUILDING HEIGHT  ~”BgHl\S          OFFICE

(CRUSHED STONE DRIVEWAY) VARIANCES APPROVED

I

l

To: Christopher Andrianos & Karla Maloof                      ZBA #15-92

46 Closter Road 1                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             Date: November 4, 2015

Palisades, New york 10964

I

FROM: ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS: Town of Orangetown

I

 

ZBA#15-92: Application of Christopher Andrianos  and Karla Maloof for variances from Zoning Code (Chapter 43) of the Orangetown Code, R-40 District, Group E, Section 3-12, Columns 4 (Floor Area Ratio: .15 permitted,  .16 proposed),  5 (Lot Area:

40,000 sq. ft. required,  18, 159 sq. ft. existing), 6 (Lot Width: 150′ required, 110.35′ existing),   8 (Front Yard: 50′ required, 44.3′ existing), 9 (Side Yard: 30′ required, 26.7

existing for house, 21!16′ proposed for house, and 10.5′ for proposed garage), 10 (Total

Side Yard: 80′ required, 61.7′ existing,  47.86′  proposed),  11 (Rear Yard: 50′ required,

10′ proposed for garage), 12 (Building Height: 14’2″ permitted for house, 16′ 10″ proposed for house: 7j permitted for garage, 15′ proposed for garage) and from Section

6.332 (Driveway requires asphalt, crushed stone proposed) for renovations and additions at an existing single-family residence.  The premises are located at 46 Closter Road, Palisades, New York bd  are identified on the Orangetown Tax Map as Section 80.05, Block 1, Lot 20; in th~ R-40 zoning district.

 

I

 

Heard by the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Orangetown at a meeting held on Wednesday, Novembbr 4, 2015 at which time the Board made the determination hereinafter set forth.

 

Christopher  Andrianos, Karla Maloof and Kier Levesque, Architect, appeared and testified.

 

The following documents were presented:

 

1. Site plan bas1 on survey by W.E. James Associates dated May 15, 2013 with the latest revision II.date of November 4, 2015 signed and sealed by Kier B. Levesque, Architect.
2. Architectural ~lans labeled “Andianos/Maloof Renovation”  dated August 24,

I

2015 signed and sealed by Kier B. Levesque, Registered Architect (6 pages).

3. A letter dated October 26, 2015 from the County of Rockland Department of

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

4. A letter dated!November 4, 2015 from the County of Rockland Department of

Highways signed by Sonny Lin, P.E..

I

 

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 ~chaels, 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 motionwas  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.

 

I

Karla Maloof testified that they are renovating the interior of the house to improve the

living space; that the~ are requesting the addition of a car port and a detached two-car

garage; that they are proposing improvements that will be in keeping with the historic nature of the area.

 

 

 

Andrianos/ Maloof

ZBA#lS-92

Page2 of 4

TOWN    OF   ORM1GETOWN

2015 NOU 2Y     PrJ  i2  92

 

TOWN    CLERKS   Of Ff CE

 

Kier Levesque, Architect, testified that the existing one car garage inside the house is being turned into living space and the existing porch is being enclosed as living

space; and that the change to the footprint of the house is for a proposed carport and a small front porch; that they are proposing a two-car detached garage in the rear of the

lot and that 23 out of 30 driveways in the area are gravel; and that many of the existing detached garages in the area are closer to the property line than they are

proposing.         t

l

i

Public Comment:

 

No public comment.

 

The Board members ~ade 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 Ne~ York was received.

 

Mr. Sullivan made a motion to close the Public Hearing which motion was seconded by

Ms. Castelli and carried unanimously.

I

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:

I

I

 

1. The requested floor area ratio, lot area, lot width, front yard, side yard, total side yard, rear yard, building height and § 6.332 (crushed stone driveway) variances will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. The only new variances being requested are for the proposed garage. Almost all of the variances listed are for pre-existing non-conforming conditions and th~ lot is undersized.

I

 

2. The Board passedladopted a motion to over-ride the 10/26/2015 Rockland County

Department of Planning comments #2, and #3.

 

3. The requested floor area ratio, lot area, lot width, front yard, side yard, total side yard, rear yard, building height and § 6.332 (crushed stone driveway) variances will not have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood ‘or district. The only new variances being requested are for the proposed garage. Almost all of the variances listed are for pre-existing non• conforming conditions and the lot is undersized.

I

I

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

I

l

5. The requested floor area ratio, lot area, lot width, front yard, side yard, total side yard, rear yard, building height and § 6.332 (crushed stone driveway) 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 only new variances being requested are for the proposed garage. Almost all of the variances listed are for pre• existing non-conforming conditions and the lot is undersized.

!

I

!

 

l

I

!

 

i

 

 

 

Andrianos/ Maloof

ZBA#lS-92

Page 3  of 4

TOVIN  OF  or.:\MGETOWN

 

Z015   NOU   2’1   Prl 12 92

 

TOWN  CLEFd\S   OFFICE

 

 

 

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.

 

 

 

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, front yard, side yard, total side yard, rear yard, building height and § 6.332 (crushed stone driveway) variances are APPROVED, and that the 10/26/2015

Rockland Couonty Department of Planning comments #2 & #3 are OVERRIDDEN, with the Specific Condition that the applicant must comply with the requirements of the County of Rockland Department of Highways letter of 11/4/2015 and obtain the

required permits; 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 deparbnent 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.

 

 

 

 

Andrianos/  Maloof

ZBA#l5-92

Page  4 of  4

TO~Vf~    0 F  0 ‘: ..i\N  G ETOWN

2015  NOU    2~     rn  12   Y2

TOWN   CLE!   ;:s  OFFICE

 

 

 

The foregoing  resolution  to approve  the application  for the requested   floor area ratio,  lot area, lot width,  front yard,  side yard,  total side yard,  rear yard,  building  height  and §

6.332   (crushed  stone driveway) variances  and to override  the  10/26/2015 Rockland

County Department  of Planning  comments  #2 & #3,   with the specific  condition  that the applicant  obtain the required  permits   from the Rockland  County Department  of Highways  letter  of 11/04/2015;      was presented  and moved by Ms. Castelli,   seconded by Ms.  Salomon   and carried as follows:   Mr. Feroldi,  aye;   Mr.  Qui1U1,  aye ;Ms. Castelli,

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

 

 

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

 

DATED:    November  4, 2015

 

 

 

 

DISTRIBUTION:

 

APPLICANT

ZBA   MEMBERS SUPERVISOR

TOWN BOARD   MEMBERS TOWN ATTORNEY

DEPUTY  TOWN ATTORNEY OBZPAE

BUILDING    INSPECTOR-G.M.

ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS TOWN  OF ORANGETOWN

 

By~fj)~ Deborah  Arbolino Administrative   Aide

 

 

TOWN  CLERK.

HIGHWAY   DEPARTMENT ASSESSOR

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

CHAIRMAN,     ZBA,  PB,  ACABOR

 

TO\’JN  OF CRM!GETOWM DECISION                      2015  NOU   2Y   Prl 12 92

SIGN VARIANCE APPROVED                                               TOWN  CLEHKS    OFFICE

 

 

To: Daniel Couto (Pearl River Diner)

49 South Manor Drive

White Plains, NY 10603

ZBA#lS-93

Date: November 4, 2015

 

 

FROM: ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS: Town of Orangetown

 

 

 

ZBA#15-93: Application of Pearl River Diner for variances from Zoning Code (Chapter

43) of the Orangetown Code, CC District, Column 5 paragraph 3 (Sign: 40 sq. ft. permitted, 59 sq. ft. proposed) for a new sign at a new business. The premises are located at 84 North Middletown Road, Pearl River, New York and are identified on the Orangetown Tax Map as Section 69.13, Block 1, Lot 23 in the CC zoning district.

 

 

 

 

Heard by the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Orangetown at a meeting held on Wednesday, November 4, 2015 at which time the Board made the determination hereinafter set forth.

 

Daniel Couto and Sandra Aceituno from the sign company, appeared and testified. The following documents were presented:

1. Computer generated picture of the proposed sign on the building.
2. Three pictures of the shopping plaza.
3. One page description of the sign with measurements and details.
4. A letter dated October 26, 2015 from the County of Rockland Department of

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

5. A letter dated November 4, 2015 from the County of Rockland Department of

Highways signed by Sonny Lin, P .E..

 

 

 

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 seeking area or bulk variances for construction or expansion of primary, or accessory or appurtenant, non-residential structures or facilities involving less than 4,000 square feet of gross floor area and not involving a change in zoning or a use variance and consistent with local land use controls; this application is exempt from the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA), pursuant to SEQRA Regulations §617.5 (c) (7); which does not require SEQRA enviromnental review. The motion was seconded by Ms.

Castelli and carried as follows: Ms. Castelli, aye; Ms. Salomon, aye; Mr. Quinn, aye; and

Mr. Sullivan, aye. Mr. Bosco was absent.

 

 

 

Daniel Couto testified that he is from the sign company and the owner of the new restaurant contracted him for the new sign; that the letters for the sign are the same height as the market, subway and Verizon but the name is longer; that the diner is taking over two store fronts and that all the signs are light box squares with individual letters.

 

Tovli“a‘J  O‘ F

 

Or..t~NGETOWN

 

 

 

 

Pearl River Diner Sign

ZBA#lS-93

Page2 of 4

Z015  NOU  2 Y     Pfl i2 ~2

 

TOWN   CLEhi\S      OFFICE

 

 

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 sign size variance will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. The applicant is renting two store fronts and if he had applied for two signs, he would have been permitted 40 sq. ft. per business, for a total of 80 sq. ft .. The proposed sign is 59 sq. ft..
2. A Rocldand County Highway Work Permit is required.

 

3. The requested sign size variance will not have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. The applicant is renting two store fronts and if he had applied for two signs, he would have been permitted 40 sq. ft. per business, for a total of 80 sq. ft .. The proposed sign is 59 sq.

ft ..

 

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 sign size variance, although somewhat substantial, affords 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 applicant is renting two store fronts and if he had applied for two signs, he would have been permitted 40 sq. ft. per business, for a total of 80 sq. ft.. The proposed sign is 59 sq.

ft ..

 

6. The applicant purchased the property subject toOrangetown’s Zoning Code (Chapter

43) and is proposing a new addition and/or improvements, so the alleged difficulty was self-created, which consideration was relevant to the decision of the Board of

Appeals, but did not, by itself, preclude the granting of the area variance.

 

7. The Board passed/adopted a motion to override the 10/26/2015  Rockland County

Department of Planning letter.

 

 

Pearl River Diner Sign

ZBA#lS-93

Page 3   of 4

TO~’/N GF cr.t-~MGETOWN

2015  NOU  2Y    PrJ i2 lJ2

 

TOWN CLEHKS  OFFICE

 

 

 

 

DECISION: Inview of the foregoing and the testimony and documents presented, the Board: RESOLVED, that the application for the requested sign size variance is APPROVED, and that the 10/26-2015 Rockland County Department of Planning

letter is OVERRIDDEN, with the Specific Condition that the applicant obtain a Rockland County Highway Work Permit; 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.

 

 

 

 

Pearl River Diner Sign

ZBA#15-93

Page  4 of  4

TO,’JN    OF  Of\M~GETOWN

 

Z015   NOU  2Y    Prl  12  ~2

 

TOWN  CLE!   KS  o;~·FlCE

 

 

 

 

The foregoing  resolution  to approve  the application  for the requested  sign  size  variance, and to over-ride  the Rockland  County Department  of Planning  letter dated October  26,

2015,   with  the specific  condition  that the applicant  obtain a Rockland  County Highway work permit,  was presented  and moved by Mr. Feroldi,  seconded  by Ms.  Castelli  and carried as follows:   Mr. Feroldi,  aye;  Mr. Quinn,  aye;  Ms.  Castelli,   aye; Ms.  Salomon, aye; and Mr. Sullivan,  aye. Mr. Bosco  was absent.

 

 

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

 

DATED:   November  4, 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      .£    ~~~~~~ Deborah  Arbolino Administrative  Aide

 

 

TOWN  CLERK

HIGHWAY    DEPARTMENT ASSESSOR

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

CHAIRMAN,     ZBA,  PB,  ACABOR

 

DECISION                                  TOWN   OF  ORANGETOWN

 

• 5.226FRONTYAimFENCEHEIGHTVARIANCEAPPROVEiP15 NOU  21.f     P/1112  ~2

WITH SPECIFIC  CONDITIONS                                                           TOWN CLEffr~S  OFfl~E

To: Walter Aurell (Neo Neo Inc.)                           ZBA #15-94

171 Kings Highway                                      Date: November 4, 2015

Orangeburg, N e’r York 10962

 

FROM: ZONING  BOIARD OF APPEALS:  Town of Orangetown

 

I I

 

ZBA#lS-94: Application of Sean Scully for a variance from Zoning Code (Chapter 43)

of the Town of’Orangetown Code, Section 5.226 (Front Yard fence: 4 Yl’ permitted,

6’proposed for front Y,ard fence  and  8′ proposed for rear yard) for a front yard at an existing business. Th~ premises are located at 183 Oak Tree Road, Tappan, New York and are identified on the Orangetown Tax Map as Section 77.15, Block 1, Lot 32; in the LIO zoning district. j

i

i

Heard by the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Orangetown at a meeting held on Wednesday, November 4, 2015 at which time the Board made the determination hereinafter set forth. f

Walter Aurell, Architect,  appeared and testified. The following docum~nts were presented:

I

1. Copy  of site plan labeled “Site Plan & Erosion prepared for NEO NEO, Inc.

dated August 8, 2013 with the latest revision date of 9/16/ 2015 signed and sealed

by Walter Autell, Architect.(1 page).\

2. A drawing of~ Galvanized Steel Posts and Mesh Driveway Gate not dated signed

 

and sealed by W’

alter Aurell, Archi.tect.

 

3. A computer gJnerated picture of the 8′ fence at 183 Oak Tree Road, Tappan, NY.
4. A letter dated !October 27, 2015 from the County of Rockland Department of

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

5. A letter dated.October 22, 2015 from the County of Rockland Drainage Agency signed by Vincent Altieri, Executive Director.
6. A memorandum dated November 3, 2015 from James Dean, Superintendent of

Highways, Tor    of Orangetown.

 

 

 

I

Mr. Sullivan, Chaijan,  made a motion to open the Public Hearing which motion was

seconded by Ms. Castelli and carried unanimously.

\

I

On advice of Dennis Michaels, Deputy Town Attorney, counsel to the Zoning Board of Appeals, Mr. Sullivarl moved for a Board determination that the foregoing application is seeking area or bulk variances for construction or expansion of primary, or accessory or appurtenant, non-residential structures or facilities involving less than 4,000 square feet

of gross floor area and not involving a change in zoning or a use variance and consistent

with local land use controls; this application is exempt from the State Environmental

I

Quality Review Act (~EQRA), pursuant to SEQRA Regulations  §617.5 (c) (7); which

does not require SEQRA environmental review. The motion was seconded by Ms.

Castelli and carried ~ follows: Ms. Castelli, aye; Ms. Salomon, aye; Mr. Quinn, aye; and

Mr. Sullivan, aye. Mrl Bosco was absent.

I

Walter Aurell, Archit~ct, testified that his client would like to secure the property with an

automatic gate and fence; that the lot is a flag lot approximately 350 feet from Oak Tree

Road; that the driveway curves and there is a landscape business there with equipment;

that the proposed fence would end at the existing PVC fence of the neighbor; that they

are requesting an ei~~ foot fence in the rear but they do not need a variance for that fence

 

I

 

 

Neo Neo Fence & Gate (Scully) ZBA#lS-94        l

Page2of 4

T 0 \’i N  0 F  0 R 1~J·l G ET 0 W N

 

2015  NOV 2Y      Prl 12 ‘i2

 

TOWN  CLEiiKS  OFFICE

 

 

 

because they have moved it two thirds the distance. from the property line to

I

accommodate the height; that the property is not visible from the road and the fence and

gate would protect against any vandalism; that the building is an artists’ studio and the proposed mesh fence will disappear into the landscape; that they are also proposing a key for emergency access and that they will satisfy all of the concerns expressed by Jim Dean, Orangetown Highway Department.

 

 

 

 

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.

r

I

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 neighb9rhood or community by such grant, for the following reasons:

 

 

 

1. The requested §5.226 front yard fence height variance will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. The front yard property line is set back 3 50 feet from Oak Tree Road and is not visible from’. the  road.

I

 

 

2. The requested §S.226 front yard fence height variance will not have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. . The front yard property line is set back 350 feet from Oak Tree Road and is not visible from the road.

 

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

I

 

i

4. The requested §5.226 front yard fence height variance, 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 front yard property line is set back 350 feet from Oak Tree Road and is not visible from the road.

I

;

 

5. The applicant purc’hased 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 riot, by itself, preclude the granting of the area variance.

I

I

I

 

 

 

 

Neo Neo Fence & Gate (Scully) ZBA#lS-94

Page 3   of 4

TOWN   OF  orH~NGETOWN

–

2015   NOU   2Y   rn 12 92

 

TOWN  CLEfH~S   OFFICE

 

 

 

DECISION: In view of the foregoing and the testimony and documents presented, the Board: RESOLVED, that the application for the requested §5.226 front yard fence height variance is APPROVED with the Specific Condition that the applicant address all of the concerns expressed by James Dean in his memorandum dated November 3,

2015; 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.

 

 

Neo Neo Fence & Gate (Scully) ZBA#15-94

Page  4 of  4

T 0 \’i r’I 0 F 0 ;\ !~. M G ET 0 W N

 

2015    NOV    2Y      Prl  12  92

TOW~J   CLEi{    .s  OFFICE

 

 

 

The foregoing  resolution  to approve  the application  for the requested  §5.226 front yard fence height variance,  with  the Specific  Condition  that the applicant  address  all of the concerns  expressed  by James Dean in his memorandum   dated November  3, 2015,   was presented  and moved by Mr. Quinn,  seconded  by Ms. Salomon  and canied  as follows: Mr. Feroldi,   aye; Mr. Quinn,  aye;  Ms.  Castelli,  aye; Ms.  Salomon,   aye; and Mr. Sullivan,

aye. Mr. Bosco was absent.

 

 

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

 

DATED:   November  4,  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-+-~=-=:……><::i-=–=–‘-“‘-= Deborah  Arbolino

Administrative   Aide

 

 

TOWN CLERK

HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT ASSESSOR

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

CHAIRMAN,    ZBA,  PB, ACABOR

 

DECISION                     TOWN   OF  OR.li.NGETOWN

 

FLOOR AREA RATIO, LOT AREA, FRONT YARD, sm~liA.~,~Awiviidj2

AND BUILDING  HEIGHT VARIANCES APPROVED      TOWN CLEHKS   OFFICE

 

To: Jane Slavin (Sharrin)

200 East Erie Street, Suite lE

Blauvelt, New York 10913

ZBA#15-95

Date: November 4, 2015

 

 

FROM: ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS: Town of Orangetown

 

 

 

ZBA#15-95:Application of Eric and Margaret Sharrin for variances from Zoning Code (Chapter 43) of the Town of Orangetown Code, R-15 District, Group M, Section 3.12, Columns 4 (Floor Area Ratio: .20 permitted, .30 proposed), 5 (Lot Area: 15,000 sq. ft. required, 8,500 existing), 8 (Front Yard: 30′ required, 11′ and 8.67′ existing, 19.2′ proposed) 9 (Side Yard: 20′ required, 3.4′ existing) 11 (Rear Yard: 35′ required, 14.7′ existing, 33.5′ proposed) and 12 (Building Height: 19.2′ permitted, 24.3′ proposed) for an addition to an existing single-family residence. The premises are located at 95 South

Magnolia Avenue, Pearl River, New York and are identified on the Orangetown Tax Map as Section 68.19, Block 3, Lot 74; in the R-15 zoning district.

 

 

 

Heard by the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Orangetown at a meeting held on Wednesday, November 4, 2015 at which time the Board made the determination hereinafter set forth.

 

Eric and Margaret Sharrin and Jane Slavin, Architect,  appeared and testified. The following documents were presented:

1. Copy of plot plan (1 page) dated 9/29/2015 signed and sealed by Jane Slavin.

Architect.

2. Architectural plans dated July 7, 2015 with the latest revision date of August 5,

2015 signed and sealed by Jane Slavin, Registered Architect (2 pages).

3. Two pictures of the subject house.
4. Four pictures of houses in the immediate area.
5. Copy of a tax map.
6. Rockland Base Map.
7. Two Google maps of the area.
8. A cover sheet explaining the lot and surrounding properties that received vanances.

 

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; Mr. Quinn, aye; and Mr. Sullivan, aye. Mr. Bosco was absent.

 

 

 

 

Jane Slaving, Architect, testified that they would like to expand the first floor to add a master bedroom suite; that the existing house is a 1  Yi story structure and they would like to reframe the roof to create eight foot ceiling heights; that the existing house is 1,715 sq. ft. and the proposed addition would be adding 443 sq. ft.; that the lot is undersized at

8,500 sq. ft. and the required lot size in the R-15 zone is 15,000 sq. ft.; that there is a very

small amount of houses in the R-15 district in the neighborhood and the rest of the houses

 

 

 

 

Sharrin

ZBA#lS-95

Page 2 of 4

TOWN  0 F 0 fV\!·1 G ETOWN

2015 NOV 2Y     rn  i2  92

 

TOWN  CLEhl\S     OFFICE

 

 

 

are in the RG zoning district; that this property is undersized for both districts; that it is the smallest lot in the area; that it the lot conformed to the R-15 District they would not need a floor area ratio variance and if it conformed to the RO District , they would be permitted 3,000 sq. ft.; that the height variance requested is created due to reframing of the roof of the existing 2nd floor  to allow for the standard 8′ ceiling height and is minimal at 5.1′ requested; that the development  in the area has resulted in a mix of single family houses; that various types of renovations and additions have been completed throughout the area; that variances have been granted for floor area, and height at 140 Fairview Avenue; that 133 Springsteen  received  a floor area and height variance and 98 Magnolia received a height variance; that the applicant has one of the smallest lots in the area and the proposed design is in keeping with the character of the neighborhood.

 

 

 

Public Comment:

 

 

 

Evelyn Beckerly, 6 Fairmont Avenue, testified that she is the neighbor directly opposite the Sharrin’ s; that she would like to thank the Board for the great work they do in preserving the character of the town; that she is speaking in support of the application; that Peggy and Eric are great neighbors and she is thankful that they are choosing to invest in their property because it increases the property value for everyone in the area; and she supports them in their effort to get the variances required for the project.

 

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, front yard, side yard rear yard and building height variances will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. Most of the variances requested are for pre-existing non-conforming conditions that are not being changed, such as the lot area, front yard, and side yard; and the other variances are necessary because the lot is almost half of the zones required size. Similar additions have been constructed in the neighborhood.

 

 

 

2. The requested floor area ratio, lot area, front yard, side yard, rear yard and building height variances will not have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. Most of the variances requested are for pre-existing non-conforming conditions that are not being changed, such as the lot area, front yard, and side yard; and the other variances are necessary because the lot is almost half of the zones required size. Similar additions have been constructed in the neighborhood.

 

 

 

 

Sharrin

ZBA#15-95

Page 3  of 4

TOWN   OF  OP.ld·J GE TOWN

20i5  NOU 2Y     Prl   i2  92

 

TOWN CLEf~!\S   OFFICE

 

 

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, front yard, side yard, rear 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. Most of the variances requested are for pre-existing non-conforming conditions that are not being changed, such as the lot area, front yard, and side yard; and the other variances are necessary because the lot is almost half of the zones required size. Similar additions have been constructed 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.

 

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, front yard, side yard, rear 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.

 

 

Shanin

ZBA#l5-95

Page  4 of  4

TC~’.’   j  Cr   O~Ar!GETO\VN

 

2015    NOU    2Y     PrJ 12  Y2

 

TOWN   CLEi1i·s     OFFICE

 

 

 

(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  Pe1111it  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  floor area ratio,  lot area, front yard,  side yard, rear yard and building  height  variances   was presented  and moved by Ms. Salomon,  seconded  by Ms.  Castelli   and carried as follows:  Mr. Feroldi, aye;   Mr.  Quinn,  aye ;Ms.  Castelli,  aye;  Ms.  Salomon,  aye;  and Mr.  Sullivan,  aye. Mr. Bosco was absent.

 

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

 

DATED:   November  4,  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~~

Deborah  Arbolino

Administrative  Aide

 

 

TOWN CLERK

HIGHWAY    DEPARTMENT ASSESSOR

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

CI-IAIRMAN,      ZBA, PB,  ACABOR

 

DECISION                                -1·c,11\1i•t1tV   er

\rJ‘i,,  ”’G..

cLTO\”/IJ<t

 

 

FRONT YARD, FRONT YARD FENCE HEIGHT, AND ACCJi~S()J.lt1\/ 2Y      PrJ  12  Y2

 

STRUCTURE IN THE FRONT YARD VARIANCES  APPROVEroDwwN

CLEfu,S   OFFICE

 

 

To:  Co1111ac  and Colleen  Fitzpatrick

55 South Middletown  Road

Pearl  River,  New York  10965

ZBA #15-96

Date: November  4,  2015

 

 

FROM:  ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS:  Town of Orangetown

 

 

 

ZBA#l5-   96:  Application   of Cormac Fitzpatrick  for a variance  from Zoning Code (Chapter 43)  of the Town of Orangetown  Code, Section 3.12,  RG District,   Group Q, Column  8  (Front Yard: 25′   required,  O’  proposed)  and from Section 5.227  (Accessory structure  not permitted  in front yard) and Section  5.226  (front yard fence: 4 W permitted,

6′ proposed)  for a deck and a fence at an existing  single-family  residence.    The premises are located  at  55 South Middletown  Road,  Pearl River,  New York and are identified  on the Orangetown  Tax Map as Section 68.20,  Block 2, Lot 48;  in the RG zoning  district.

 

 

 

Heard by the Zoning Board of Appeals  of the Town of Orangetown  at a meeting  held on Wednesday,   November  4, 2015   at which time the Board made the determination hereinafter  set forth.

 

Cormac and Colleen Fitzpatrick   and James  Henry appeared  and testified. The following  documents  were presented:

1. 1. Copy of site plan showing  proposed  deck and fence (1  page).
2. 2. Two drawings  of the proposed  deck and fence.

 

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 Attomey,   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 (SEQ RA), 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.

Quinn,  aye; and Mr. Sullivan,   aye.  Mr.  Bosco was absent.

 

 

 

Colleen Fitzpatrick  testified  that their property  is a corner lot on South Middletown  Road and Prospect;  that there is a  multi-family  residence  across the street and Middletown

road is very busy;  that they are requesting  the six-foot  fence for privacy  and they would also lit to get a dog and would  like to make sure it would be contained  in the yard and safe from traffic;  that the proposed  deck is on the ground at the property  line;   that she misunderstood  the information   she received   when she asked about needing  a permit;  she thought  she was  asking  about side  yard requirements   and did not realize that she had multiple  front yards; that she was asking about patios  and decks and that made the answers  even more unclear;   and that it was her fault  that  they started the project without the proper permits  and she would like to finish  the project properly.

 

Fitzpatrick

ZBA#15-96

Page2 of 4

TOWM  OF  or~.:\NG   ETOWN

 

2015   NOU  2~    Prl 12  93

 

 

Public Cotmnent:                                           TOWN  CLEi\i\S     OFFICE

 

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,§ 5.227 accessory structure in front yard, and§ 5.226 front yard fence height variances will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. The property is unique with access from both South Middletown Road and Prospect Street, with an apartment building across the street. The location of the proposed deck is the only area of the property that affords the applicant a semi-private outdoor space for gatherings.

 

 

 

2. The requested front yard, § 5.227 accessory structure in front yard, and § 5.226 front yard fence height variances will not have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. . The property is unique with access from both South Middletown Road.and Prospect Street, with an apartment building across the street. The location of the proposed deck is the only area of the property that affords the applicant a semi-private outdoor space for gatherings.

 

 

 

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,§ 5.227 accessory structure in front yard, and§ 5.226 front yard fence 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 property is unique with access from both South Middletown Road and Prospect Street, with an aparbnent building across the street. The location of the proposed deck is the only

area of the property that affords the applicant a semi-private outdoor space for gatherings.

 

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.

 

 

Fitzpatrick

ZBA#lS-96

Page 3   of 4

TOWN    OF  OfU\NGETOWN

2015   NOV  2Y    rn 12  lf3

 

TOWN CLU\1\S     OFFICE

 

 

DECISION: In view of the foregoing and the testimony and documents presented, the Board: RESOLVED, that the application for the requested front yard,§ 5.227 accessory structure in front yard, and§ 5.226 front yard fenceheight  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.

 

 

 

Fitzpatrick

ZBA#15-96

Page 4 of 4

TONN    OF  OG.1~.!~GETO\/N

ZD15   NOV    2Y    rn 12  Y3

 

TOWN     CLEh:\S     OFFiC   E

 

 

The foregoing resolution to approve the application  for the requested front yard, § 5.227 accessory  structure in front yard,  and§   5.226 front yard fence height variances was presented and moved by Mr. Sullivan, seconded by Ms.  Salomon and carried as follows: Mr. Feroldi,  aye;  Mr. Quinn, aye ;Ms.  Castelli, aye; Ms.  Salomon,  aye; and Mr. Sullivan, aye. Mr. Bosco was absent.

 

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

 

DATED:  November 4, 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.

Administrative Aide

 

 

TOWN  CLERK

HIGHWAY    DEPARTMENT ASSESSOR

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

CHAIRMAN,    ZBA,  PB,  ACABOR

 

TO’,’!N   0 F  0 0..l.N   G ETOWN

 

DECISION        Z015  NOV  21.\     Pf’l   12 93

 

LOT AREA & LOT WIDTH  VARIANCES  FOR LOTl#l.¥/~{i\j’R(i)N~AGE VARIAN CE FOR LbT #2 APPROVED

 

To: Donald Brenner (318 Blauvelt Road)

4 Independence ..f\venue

Tappan, New York 10983

ZBA#15-97

Date: November 4, 2015

 

 

FROM: ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS: Town of Orangetown

 

 

 

ZBA#lS-97: Application of319 Blauvelt Road Subdivision for variances from Zoning

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

3.12, Columns  5 (LotArea: 15,000 sq. ft. required, 13,531 proposed for lot #1), 6 (Lot

Width: 100′ required,181.35′  proposed for lot #1) and 7 (Street Frontage:  75′ required,

20.34′ proposed for lot #2) for a two-lot single-faniily subdivision. The premises are located at 319 Blauveit Road, Pearl River, New York and are identified on the

Orangetown Tax Map as Section 69.09, Block 5, Lot 74; in the R-15 zoning district.

 

 

 

Heard by the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Orangetown at a meeting held on Wednesday, November 4, 2015 at which time the Board made the determination hereinafter set forth. i

I

 

Joseph Rooney, Jay ‘.Theise,  Contractor, Donald Brenner, Attorney and Jay Greenwell, Land Surveyor, appeared and testified.

!

The following docurn~nts were presented:

i

 

1. Subdivision of Property for 319 Blauvelt Road dated 7/30/2015 with the latest revision date of 10/15/2015  signed and sealed by Jay A. Greenwell, Land Surveyor. (2 paI  ges).
2. A memorandum dated October 14, 2015 from John Giardiello, P.E., Director,

Office of Building, Zoning and Planning Administration and Enforcement, Town

of Orangetown.

3. Planning Boaid Decision #15-50 dated October 14, 2015.
4. Tax map of the area.

 

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 since the Planning board 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 Regulations §617.6 (b) (3); and since the Planning Board conducted a SEQRA review and on October  14, 2015, rendered an enviromnental determination of no significant adverse environmental impacts to result from the proposed land use action (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: Mr. Quinn, aye; Ms. Salomon, aye; Mr. Feroldi, aye; Ms. Castelli, aye; and Mr. Sullivan, aye. Mr. Bosco was

absent.

 

 

 

319 Blauvelt Road

ZBA#lS-97

Page2 of 4

TOV/il  n…   F  Ci •r:i•  ,A·-,I~’1 t“: ETOWNI

2015  NDU  2~    PrJ i2 93

 

TOWN  CLEHl\S    OFFICE

 

 

I

Joseph Rooney testified that his parents have been coming to his house for dinner every Sunday for the last twenty years; that they are getting older and he would like to pay forward all that they have done for him and his family and subdivide the property to build them a ranch style house.

t

 

Donald Brenner, Attorney, testified that the Planning Board already granted a preliminary approval and a neg dee for SEQRA; that the need has already been addressed and the layout is not negativel’y affecting the neighborhood and it is conforming with the

neighborhood.        !

 

Jay Greenwell, Land Surveyor, testified that the roadway widening is taking an additional

365 square feet away from the lot; that the lots behind this one on Douglas Court are undersized lots with anywhere from 9,150 sq. ft. to 13,950 sq. ft.; that there are three lots on the south side of Blauvelt Road that have been subdivided into flag lots that are almost identical to the request presently before the Board; that this proposal is in keeping with

the character of the neighborhood; and at the request of the Planning Board dense screening will be installed for the neighbor to the east.

 

Public Comment:

 

No public comment.  l

 

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 statemJnt in accordance with the provisions of Section 809 of the General

Municipal Law of New York was received.

l

Mr. Sullivan made a motion to close the Public Hearing which motion was seconded by

Ms. Castelli and carried unanimously.

!

I

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 lot area and lot width variances for lot #1, and street frontage variance for lot #2, will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. Similar subdivisions exist in the neighborhood.

 

 

 

2. The requested lot area and lot width variances for lot #1, and street frontage variance for lot #2, will not have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. Similar subdivisions 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.

I

 

 

 

319 Blauvelt Road

ZBA#lS-97

Page 3  of 4

TOV!N  OF  O~.’-\NGETOWN

2015   NOV   2 Y     Prl  iz ~3

 

TOWN CLEf\i(S  OFFlCE

 

 

4. The requested lot area and lot width variances for lot #1, and street frontage variance for lot #2, 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 subdivisions exist in the neighborhood.

 

 

 

5. Tue 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 lot area and lot width variances for lot #1, and street frontage variance for lot #2,  are APPROVED; and FURTHER RESdLVED, 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.

 

 

1

General Conditions:

I

 

(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.

I

 

 

(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 pennits 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.

 

 

 

319   Blauvelt  Road

TO\!.N

Of   or·'”~.

~GETOW_N

 

 

ZBA#l5-97

Page  4 of  4

ZtilS NGU   2L\   Prl iz L\3

_.. cc

T 0 W N  C LE r i,S  0 f r I     L

 

 

 

The foregoing  resolution  to approve the application  for the requested   lot area and lot width variances  for lot #1,   and street  frontage  variance  for lot #2,   was presented  and moved by Ms.  Castelli,   seconded  by Ms. Salomon   and carried as follows: Mr. Feroldi, aye;  Mr. Quinn,   aye ;Ms.  Castelli,   aye;  Ms.  Salomon,  aye;  and Mr.  Sullivan,  aye.  Mr. Bosco was absent.

 

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

 

DATED:   November  4,  2015

 

 

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,       ~’-“‘..::..:””—‘-L._/c_,,.L..-=-..!!’

Deborah  Arbolmo

Administrative   Aide

 

 

TOWN  CLERK

HIGHWAY   DEPARTMENT ASSESSOR

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

CHAIRMAN,      ZBA,  PB,   ACABOR