Meeting Overview

MINUTES

ZONING  BOARb   OF APPEALS OCTOBER  9, 2013

 

MEMBERS  PRESENT:

DANIEL  SULLIVAN JOAN  SALOMON NANETTE  ALBANESE PATRICIA  CASTELLI MICHAEL   BOSCO

LEONARD  FEROLDI,  ALTERNATE

 

 

 

ABSENT:

 

NONE

 

 

 

ALSO PRESENT:

Dennis  Michaels,   Esq. Melissa  Pezzullo,

Deborah  Arbolino

Deputy  Town Attorney Official  Stenographer Administrative   Aide

 

 

 

 

This meeting  was called to order at 7: 00 P.M.  by Mr. Sullivan,  Chairman.

 

 

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

 

 

 

APPLICANTS

 

POSTPONED   ITEM: MCNALLY

69.18   / 2 / 20; R-15   zone

 

 

 

CONTINUED   ITEM: FERMAINTT

77.06 / 2 / 45; R-15    zone

 

 

 

NEW  ITEMS:

PUBLISHED   ITEMS DECISIONS

 

 

 

 

 

 

FLOOR  AREA  RATIO,   SIDE YARD,               ZBA#13-72

TOTAL  SIDE YARD,   BUILDING

HEIGHT  AND  SECTION  5.153   VARIANCES APPROVED

 

 

 

 

CONTINUED                                                         ZBA#l3-23

 

 

BELLOSPIRITO                        SIDE YARD,   TOTAL  SIDE  YARD               ZBA#l3-74

77.10 I 3 I 76.2; R-15   zone      VARIANCES   APPROVED   Section  5.21   (c) applies

 

TU FENCE

69.13 I 4 I l;  R-15   zone

 

DONOHOE

69.1012   I 55;  R-15   zone

SECTION  5.226 SIX-FOOT  FRONT YARD  FENCE  APPROVED

 

TOTAL  SIDE YARD  VARIANCE APPROVED

ZBA#13-75

 

 

 

ZBA#13-76

 

 

 

a~t:L:W  S’>!.’831~   N:t~-01

hB  Z  tdd   sz l~-mll

 

N&Ol35NVliO  .:IO  ttMOi

 

Minutes

Page2

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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  11 :00 P .M.

 

Dated:   October  9, 2013

 

 

 

 

DISTRIBUTlON: APPLICANT

TOWN ATTORNEY

DEPUTY TOWN ATTORNEY TOWN BOARD  MEMBERS

BUILDING   INSPECTOR   (Individual   Decisions) Rockland County Planning

 

ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS TOWN  OF ORANGETOWN

By:Jkh/Y4w

DebDTailATbolino

Administrative Aide

 

 

 

 

33l:L-l0  S~H310   Nfl\01

 

W  Z·· Md    h2 1~  tmt

 

NM013~Hfifti0 .10 MJAOl

 

DECISION

 

 

FLOOR AREA RATIO, SIDE YARD, TOTAL  SIDE YARD,§ 5.153 ACCESSORY DISTANCE AND BUlLDING HEIGHT VARIANCES  APPROVED

 

To:    Michael  McNally

493 Gilbert  A venue

Pearl River,  New York  10965

ZBA # 13-72

Date:   October  9, 2013

 

 

FROM:  ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS:   Town of Orangetown

 

ZBA#l 3-72: Application  of Michael McNally   for variances  from Chapter  43 (Zoning), Section  3 .12,  R-15 District,  Group M,  Columns  4 (Floor Area Ratio: .20 permitted,  .259 existing,  .275 proposed),  9 (Side Yard: 20′ required,  10.8′ proposed),  10 (Total  Side Yard: 50′ required,  36.3′  proposed)  and 12  (Building Height:  10.8′  permitted,  25.4′ proposed)  and from Section  5.153   (Accessory  Structure  Distance:  15′  required, 10′

proposed)  for an addition  to an existing  single-family  residence,  The premises  are located at 493 Gilbert Avenue,  Pearl River, New York and identified  on the Orangetown  Tax

Map as Section  69.18,   Block 2, Lot 20; R-15   zone.

 

Heard by the Zoning Board  of Appeals  of the Town  of Orangetown  at a meeting  held on Wednesday,  October  9,  2013 at which time the Board made  the determination hereinafter set forth.

 

Michael  McNally   appeared  and testified. The following  documents  were presented:

1. Survey by Robert  Rahnefeld, P.LS  ..
2. 2. Architectural plans  dated August  1, 2013   by Harry  Goldstein,  Architect,

 

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

 

On advice of Dennis  Michaels,  Deputy  Town Attorney,  counsel  to the Zoning  Board  of Appeals,  Mr. Sullivan   moved  for a Board  determination  that the foregoing  application  is a Type  II action exempt  from the State Environmental Quality  Review  Act (SEQRA), pursuant to SEQRA  Regulations   §617.5   (c) (9), (10),  (12) and/or  (13); which does not require  SEQRA  environmental   review.  The motion was seconded  by Ms. Castelli  and

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

 

Mike McNally  testified  that he and his wife purchased the house  13 years ago;  that since the purchase  they have had four children,  ages 1 lyears to 5  years;  that the house is 1066 sq.  ft; that they love the neighborhood   and the schools;  that they do not want to sell the house;  that they  are proposing  the addition  so that they can stay in the house;  that they are proposing  to go out on the right side of the house to add a garage  and go up to add bedrooms  and bump out in the back  for a family room  and add a front porch;  that they cannot bump  out on the left side of the house because  there is a sewer easement there;

that they have  a pool in back yard;  that the architect  recommended   that the proposed garage be built  at 26′  wide but they cut it back to 24′  to· stay as far away from the

neighbors  property  line as possible;  that there were several  other houses  in the immediate area that were granted  variances  for their additions;  that the neighbor  at 501 Gilbert applied  for and received  a .25 floor area ratio and 26.11   building  height  variances.   538

Gilbert  got a .246 floor area ratio and a side yard and building  height;  that 523 Gilbert  got

a .2174 floor area ratio and 539 Gilbert  got a side yard and .264 floor area ratio; that there were also variances  granted  at 57 Mapleshade,  3 6 Cherry  Lane,  102  Wildwood  and two more houses  on M?untainview;.Q~t  th~ps~.f§1<bag(jit}tn  :’i~l be in keeping  with the

character of the neighborhood  a-it¥tfi<i\:l.f1e wifr’move the existing  shed to be  1 O;   from the house.                                             bi.  l. tad   hi 131 mi

 

N!ft013SNVBO    :.W  MlftGl

 

 

 

NcNally

ZBA#l3-72

Page 2 of  4

 

 

 

 

Public  Comment:

 

 

No public  comment.

 

The Board  members  made  personal  inspections  of the premises  the week before  the meeting  and found them to be properly  posted  and as generally  described  on the application.

 

A satisfactory  statement  in accordance  with the provisions  of Section  809 of the General

Municipal  Law of New York  was received.

 

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

Ms. Salomon  and carried unanimously.

 

 

FINDINGS  OF FACT AND  CONCLUSIONS:

After personal  observation  of the property,  hearing  all the testimony  and reviewing  all the

documents  submitted,  the Board  found  and concluded  that the benefits  to the applicant  if the variance(s)  are granted outweigh  the detriment  (if any) to the health, safety and welfare of the neighborhood or community by such grant, for the following reasons:

 

 

 

1. The requested floor area ratio, side yard, total side yard, building height and Section

5.153 variances will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. The addition is being proposed on the side of the house where the existing driveway is located, and the house cannot be

expanded on the other side because it contains a sewer easement. The side yard most affected by the proposed addition lines up with the neighbor’s driveway and garage and similar additions have been constructed in the area.

 

 

 

 

2. The requested floor area ratio, side yard, total side yard, building height and Section

5.153 variances will not have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. .  The addition is being proposed on the side of the house where the existing driveway is located, and the house cannot be expanded on the other side because it contains a sewer easement. The side yard most affected by the proposed addition lines up with the neighbor’s driveway and garage and similar additions have been constructed in the area.

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

4. The requested floor area ratio, side yard, total side yard, building height and Section

5 .153 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 addition is being proposed on the side of the house where the existing driveway is located, and the house cannot be

expanded on the other side b~~aus~it contai:r_is a sewe: easement. Th~4~.¥~r4;W©~1!J  Nb\01

affec~ed_by the ?~oposed addition Iines up w~th the neighbor’s driveway and garage, .        t   ·.. ·.  f.1Jfl

and similar additions have been constructed m the area.                     h6 i. hid   hZ .L~ij ~ ·                      ·

. ~;.·l~ :ie><N~1i0 so ~,&\01

riwu   ;:.avl

 

McNally

ZBA#13-72

Page  3  of  4

 

 

 

 

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,  side yard, total side yard, building  height  and§  5.153 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.

 

 

 

 

tin  z Yd     hZ   1;m  nnz

 

ih\Ol3eNVBO  .:W  NM.01

 

 

 

McNally

ZBA#13-72

Page  4 of  4

 

 

 

 

The foregoing  resolution  to approve  the application  for the requested  floor area ratio, side yard, total side yard, building height  and Section  5 .153 variances   was presented  and moved by Mr.  Sullivan,  seconded  by Mr. Bosco  and carried as follows:  Mr.  Bosco,  aye; Mr. Feroldi,  aye;  Ms.  Albanese,  aye ;Ms.  Castelli,  aye; Ms.  Salomon,  aye; and Mr. Sullivan,  aye.

 

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:   October  9, 2013

 

ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS TOWN  OF ORANGETOWN

 

 

 

DISTRIBUTION:

 

APPLICANT

ZBA MEMBERS

SUPERVISOR

TOWN BOARD MEMBERS TOWN ATTORNEY

DEPUTY  TOWN ATTORNEY OBZPAE

BUILDING INSPECTOR-R.A.0.

By~‘44.4U~~L-J.;M:IV-~

Deborah  Arbolino

Administrative   Aide

 

 

TOWN  CLERK

HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT ASSESSOR

DEPT.  of ENVIRONMENTAL

MGMT. and ENGINEERJNG FlLE,ZBA, PB

CHAIRMAN, ZBA, PB,  ACABOR

 

 

‘.3~.fl.1:10  S’>l’d310   Nii.01

• ha z W  kZ l3fJ ··mt

N’.£013t1N\H!O so NtllO:l

 

DECISION

 

FRONT YARD, SIDE YARD, TOTAL  SIDE YARD VARIANCES APPROVED SECTION  5.2l(c) UNDERSIZE  LOT APPLIES

 

 

To:   Robert  Bellospirito

19 Andre Hill

Tappan,  New York  10983

ZBA # 13-74

Date:   October  9, 2013

 

 

FROM:  ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS:  Town  of Orangetown

 

 

ZBA#  13-74: Application  of  Robert  Bellospirito  for a variances  from Chapter  43 (Zoning)  Town  of Orangetown,  R-15 District,  Group M, Columns  8 (Front Yard:  30′ required,  13.5′  existing),   9 (Side Yard:  Section  5.21 (c) applies:  15′ required,  12.33′ proposed  for left  side, 8′  existing  and 8′ proposed  for right  side); and 10 (Total  Side Yard:  30′ required,  20.33′  existing  and proposed)   for an addition  to an existing  single• family residence.  The property  is located  at 19 Andre  Hill, Tappan,  New York  and are identified  on the Orangetown  Tax Map as Section  77.10, Block  3, Lot 76.2; R-15 zoning

district.

 

Heard by the Zoning  Board  of Appeals  of the Town  of Orangetown   at a meeting  held on Wednesday,   October  9, 2013 at which  time the Board made  the determination  hereinafter set forth,

 

Robert  Bellospirito  and Robert Hoene,  Architect,  appeared  and testified. The following  documents  were presented:

1. Architectural  plans  dated 06/17/2013  with the latest revision  date of 07/16/2013

signed and sealed by Robert  Hoene, Architect.

2. A letter dated  September  24, 2013 from the County  of Rockland  Department  of

Planning  signed by Thomas  B. Vanderbeek,  P.E.,  Commissioner   of Planning.

3. A letter dated  September  16, 2013 from the County  of Rockland  Department  of

Highways  signed by Sonny Lin, P .E ..

 

 

 

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

 

On advice of Dennis  Michaels,  Deputy  Town Attorney,   counsel to the Zoning  Board  of Appeals,  Mr. Sullivan   moved  for a Board  determination  that the foregoing  application  is a Type  II action  exempt  from the State Environmental   Quality Review  Act (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. Albanese,  aye; Ms. Salomon,  aye;  Mr. Feroldi,  aye; Ms. Castelli, aye; Mr. Bosco,  aye; and  Mr. Sullivan,  aye.

 

 

 

Robert  Hoene, Architect,  testified  that they are proposing  to add 372 sq. ft. to the existing house;  that they  are staying  in line with the existing  house;  that there is a wrap around porch on the house  and the existing  set back is 8′  on the south  side and 12.33′  on the

north  side; that Mr. Bellospirito   owns the lot next  door that houses the detached  garage;

that the house presently  has  a galley  kitchen  and the interior  plan is to blow out the kitchen  and dining  areas  and make them more usable  for entertaining;  that there will be no change  to the existing  non-conforming   front yard.

 

 

 

Bellospirito

ZBA#13-74

Page 2 of  4

 

 

 

Public  Comment:

 

 

No public  comment

 

The Board  members  made personal  inspections  of the premises  the week before  the meeting  and found them to be properly  posted  and as generally  described  on the application.

 

A satisfactory  statement  in accordance  with the provisions  of Section  809 of the General

Municipal  Law of New York  was received.

 

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

Ms. Castelli  and carried unanimously.

 

 

FINDINGS  OF FACT  AND CONCLUSIONS:

After personal  observation  of the property,  hearing  all the testimony  and reviewing  all the documents  submitted,  the Board found  and concluded  that the benefits  to the applicant  if the variance(s)  are granted  outweigh  the detriment  (if any) to the health,  safety and

welfare  of the neighborhood   or community  by such grant, for the following  reasons:

 

 

 

1. The requested  front yard, side yard and total side yard variances  will not produce  an undesirable   change  in the character  of the neighborhood   or a detriment  to nearby properties.  The proposal  is for a one story addition  of 372 sq. ft., which is staying  in line with the existing  side yard and total side yard setbacks  of the house,  and similar additions  have been  constructed  in the area. The existing  front yard setback is not being  changed.

 

2. The requested front yard, side yard and total side yard variances  will not have an adverse  effect or impact  on the physical  or environmental   conditions  in the neighborhood   or district.   The proposal  is for a one story addition  of 372 sq. ft., which is staying  in  line with the existing  side yard and total  side yard setbacks  of the house, and similar  additions  have been constructed  in the area. The existing  front yard

setback  is not being  changed.

 

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

 

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

The front yard is not changing,  and the side yard and total side yard are existing conditions  that are being  expanded  slightly.

 

5. The applicant  purchased  the property  subject  to Orangetowri’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.

 

 

 

 

ha z. h\d   he  l;Jfi ~

 

r,i~Ol35rf1fl:j0 .:!O  N~Ol

 

 

 

Bellospirito

ZBA#l3-74

Page  3   of  4

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

General  Conditions:

 

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

 

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

herein  and subject  to those  conditions,  if any, upon which  such approval was conditioned

which  are hereinbefore   set forth.

 

 

 

(iii) The Board  gives no approval  of any building  plans, including,  without  limitation, the  accuracy  and structural  integrity  thereof,  of the applicant,  but same have been submitted  to the Board  solely for informational   and verification  purposes  relative  to any variances  being  requested.

 

 

 

(iv) A building  permit  as well as any other necessary  permits  must be obtained  within  a reasonable  period  of time following  the filing of this decision  and prior to undertaking any construction  contemplated   in this decision.  To the extent  any variance  or Special Permit  granted  herein  is subject  to any conditions,  the building  department  shall not be

obligated  to issue any necessary  permits  where  any such condition  imposed  should, in the

sole judgment  of the building  department,  be first complied  with as contemplated hereunder.  Occupancy  will not be made until,  and unless,  a Certificate  of Occupancy  is issued by the Office  of Building,  Zoning  and Planning  Administration   and Enforcement which  legally permits  such occupancy.

 

 

 

(v) Any foregoing  variance  or Special  Permit  will lapse if any contemplated   construction of the project  or any use for which  the variance  OT Special  Permit  is granted  is not substantially  implemented  within  one year of the date of filing of this decision  OT 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.

 

 

 

 

Bellospirito

ZBA#13-74

Page  4 of  4

 

 

 

 

The foregoing  resolution  to approve  the application  for the requested  front yard, side yard and total  side yard variances   was presented  and moved  by Mr. Sullivan,  seconded  by Ms. Salomon  and carried  as follows:  Mr. Bosco,   aye;  Mr. Feroldi,  aye;   Ms.  Albanese,  aye

;Ms.  Castelli,  aye;  Ms.  Salomon,  aye;  and Mr. Sullivan,  aye.

 

 

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:    October  9,  2013

 

ZONING  BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN  OF ORANGETOWN

 

 

 

DISTRIBUTION:

 

APPLICANT

ZBA MEMBERS SUPERVISOR

TOWN BOARD MEMBERS TOWN ATTORNEY

DEPUTY  TOWN ATTORNEY OBZPAE

BUILDING  INSPECTOR-B.vW.

Administrative  Aide

 

 

TOWN  CLERK

HIGHWAY   DEPARTMENT ASSESSOR

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

CHAIRMAN,    ZBA,  PB,  ACABOR

 

 

3~B:!O   snmo  N1i01

ha  Z  Yd   hZ .i»~i· W

 

DECISION

 

 

SECTION  5.226 (SIX-FOOT FENCE IN FRONT YARD) VARIANCE APPROVED

 

To:   Susan Tu and Simon Li

378 Blauvelt  Road

Pearl River, New York  10965

ZBA#   13-75

Date:   October  9, 2013

 

 

FROM:  ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS:  Town  of Orangetown

 

ZBA#  13-75: Application  of  Susan Tu and Simon Li for a variance  from Chapter  43 (Zoning)  Town  of Orangetown, R-15 District,  Group M, Section  5.226 (Front Yard Fence Height:  4 Yi’ permitted; 6′ proposed) for a fence in a front yard.  The premises  is located

at 378 Blauvelt Road,  Pearl River, New  York and are identified  on the Orangetown  Tax

Map as Section  69 .13,  Block 4, Lot  1;   R-15 zoning  district.

 

Heard by the Zoning  Board  of Appeals  of the Town  of Orangetown at a meeting  held on Wednesday,  October  9, 2013 at which time the Board made the determination hereinafter set forth.

Susan Tu appeared  and testi•fed.

 

The following  documents  were presented:

 

 

1. Site plan with the plabement of the proposed fence drawn on it.
2. Twenty three photo~phs  of the property.

 

 

 

Mr.  Sullivan,  Chair, made a ~otion  to open the Public  Hearing  which motion  was seconded  by Ms.  Salomon  ald carried unanimously.

 

On advice of Dennis Micha4s,  Deputy  Town Attorney,   counsel  to the Zoning  Board of Appeals,  Mr. Sullivan   mov9d for a Board determination that the foregoing  application  is a Type  II action  exempt  fr01y the State Environmental   Quality Review  Act (SEQRA), pursuant  to SEQRA  Regulations   §617.5   (c) (9), (10),  (12) and/or (13); which  does not require  SEQ RA environme   l al review.  TI1e motion  was seconded  by Ms.  Castelli  and carried as follows:  Ms. Alb    ese, aye;  Ms.  Salomon,  aye;   Mr. Feroldi,  aye; Ms.  Castelli, aye; Mr. Bosco,  aye;  and        .  Sullivan,  aye.

 

Susan Tu testified  that she h  s two front yards because  her property  is a corner property; that she lives close to the hi .           school  and kids use her yard as a cut through;  that she has two children  aged ei~t andleleven;   that she is proposing  to inst.all a six-foot  vinyl fence to stop cars from parking  o~ her property  and to afford some pnvacy;  and that the fence would keep garbage  off of the yard.

 

Tu & Li Fence

l

ZBA#l3-75                                  i

Page 2 of  4

 

I

I

I

 

I

Public  Comment:

 

I

Paul Witte,3 71  Blauvelt  RoadJ stated that he is an abutting  neighbor  across the street from the applicant;  that he agrees the fence is needed  because  there is an ongoing problem  of cars parking  of their property  and they have two young kids; and the fence is being  set back far enough  fr01f the road that it will not block  sight distances.

 

The Board members  made peisonal  inspections  of the premises  the week before the meeting  and found them to b~ properly  posted  and as generally  described  on the

application.                                 I

!

I

A satisfactory  statement in accordance  with the provisions of Section  809 of the General

Municipal  Law of New Yorkjwas  received.

I

I

i

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

Ms. Salomon  and carried  unaoimously.

!

!

FINDINGS  OF FACT AND ;coNCLUSIONS:

I

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

 

I’

1. The requested  six-foot  fence in a  front yard variance  will not produce  an undesirable

change in the character o.~the neighborhood   or a detriment  to nearby properties.  The

I

six foot fence on this property  will provide privacy,  it will keep kids from using the

yard as a cut-through and it will be placed  far enough back from Holt Drive that it will not interfere with the road.

I

j

I

2. The requested   six-foot fence in a  front yard variance   will not have  an adverse  effect

I

or impact  on the physical  or environmental   conditions  in the neighborhood  or district.

The six foot fence on th~s property  will provide  privacy,  it will keep kids from using

I

the yard as a cut-through  and it will be placed  far enough back  from Holt Drive that it

will not interfere  with tlie road.

 

 

 

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

I

 

i

4. The requested  six-foot  fence in a front yard 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.

l

 

I

5. 5. The applicant  purchased  the property  subject  to Orangetown’s  Zoning  Code (Chapter

43) and is proposing  a new addition  and/or  improvements,  so the alleged  difficulty was self-created,  which  consideration  was relevant  to the decision  of the Board of Appeals,  but did not, by itself, preclude  the granting  of the area variances.

 

 

}1       –

‘                                               3D\:l•.:i1 r\.–.;‘

<..:.:,’1’d”.i1~   NMJ)J.

 

t:J).  z  ttd  hZ 100 ·nDl

 

~~~~35tf’l’tl0  ;!0 NJA{}l

 

 

 

Tu & Li Fence

ZBA#13-75

Page  3   of  4

 

 

 

 

 

 

DECISION:  In view of the foregoing  and the testimony  and documents  presented,  the Board:  RESOLVED,  that the application  for the requested  front yard 6′ fence height variance  is APPROVED;   and FURTHER  RESOLVED,  that such decision  and the vote thereon  shall become  effective  and be deemed rendered  on the date of adoption  by the Board of the minutes  of which they are a part,

 

 

 

 

General  Conditions:

 

 

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

 

(ii) Any approval  of a variance  or Special  Permit by the Board is limited  to the specific variance  or Special  Permit requested  but only to the extent  such approval  is granted herein and subject  to those conditions,   if any, upon which  such approval  was conditioned which  are hereinbefore   set forth.

 

 

 

(iii) The Board gives no approval  of any building  plans, including,  without  limitation, the accuracy  and structural  integrity  thereof,  of the applicant,  but same have been submitted  to the Board solely for informational   and verification  purposes  relative  to any variances  being requested.

 

 

 

(iv) A building  permit  as well as any other necessary  permits  must be obtained  within  a reasonable  period  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.

 

 

 

 

3tll::t!O  s”Y.’tl31~  NfMll

~tl  z bl.J  hZ .15fl tlm

 

t{~0·~3tlN~tiO   :10 NA\Ol

 

 

 

 

Tu & Li Fence

ZBA#13-75

Page 4 of 4

 

 

The foregoing resolution to approve the application for the requested 6′ front yard variance was presented and moved by Ms. Castelli, seconded by Ms.  Salomon and carried as follows: Mr. Bosco, aye; Mr. Feroldi, aye; Ms. Albanese, aye ;Ms. Castelli, aye; Ms.  Salomon, aye; and Mr. Sullivan, aye.

 

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:  October 9, 2013

 

 

ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF ORANGETOWN

 

 

DISTRJBUTION:

 

APPLICANT

ZBA  MEMBERS SUPERVISOR

TOWN BOARD MEMBERS

TOWN ATTORNEY

DEPUTY  TOWN ATTORNEY OBZPAE

BUILDING !NSPECTOR~M.M.

Administrative Aide

 

 

TOWN  CLERK

HIGHWAY   DEPARTMENT ASSESSOR

DEPT. of ENVIRONMENTAL

MGMT.  and ENGINEERING

FlLE,ZBA, PB

CHAIRMAN,    ZBA, PB,  ACABOR

 

 

 

hll z. ·        Yd   h2 13fl. llltl

 

0013~riv~O  so  tiMOl

 

DECISION

 

 

TOTAL   SIDE  YARD  VARIANCE   APPROVED

 

To:   John  and Ann Marie Donohoe

49 Champ A venue

Pearl  River, New York  10965

ZBA#   13-76

Date:  October  9, 2013

 

 

FROM:  ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS:  Town  of Orangetown

 

 

ZBA#  13-76: Application  of  John  and Ann Marie Donohoe  for a variance  from Chapter

43 (Zoning)  Town  of Orangetown,  R-15 District,  Group  M, Column  10 (Total Side Yard:

50′ required,   40.70′  proposed)  for an addition  to an existing  single-family  residence.  The premises  are located  at 49 Champ  Avenue,  Pearl  River, New York  and are identified  on the Orangetown  Tax Map as Section  69.10, Block 2, Lot 55; R-15 zoning  district.

 

Heard by the Zoning  Board  of Appeals  of the Town of Orangetown  at a meeting  held on Wednesday,  October  9, 2013 at which  time the Board made the determination  hereinafter set forth.

 

John and Ann Marie Donohoe  and Robert Hoene,  Architect,  appeared  and testified. The following  documents  were presented:

1. Site plan.
2. Architectural  plans dated  12/21/2012  with the latest revision  date of 05/20/2013 signed and sealed by Robert  Hoene,  Architect.
3. A letter in support of the application  signed by three abutting  property  owners.

 

 

 

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

 

On advice of Dennis  Michaels,  Deputy  Town Attorney,   counsel to the Zoning  Board  of Appeals,  Mr. Sullivan   moved  for a Board  determination  that the foregoing  application  is a Type II action  exempt  from the State Environmental   Quality Review  Act (SEQRA), pursuant  to SEQRA  Regulations   §617.5 (c) (9), (10),  (12) and/or  (13); which  does not require  SEQRA  environmental   review.  The motion  was seconded  by Ms. Castelli  and carried as follows:  Ms. Albanese,  aye; Ms. Salomon,  aye;  Mr. Feroldi,  aye; Ms. Castelli, aye; Mr. Bosco,  aye; and  Mr. Sullivan,  aye.

 

 

 

Robert Hoene,  Architect,  testified  that the applicant  is seeking to add a second story to an existing  split level house;  that they are adding a master  bedroom,  bathroom  and a kid’s bedroom;  and that the deck is 20′  from the side yard.

 

 

 

3,0\.:UO S){‘831G  NF!Ul bO   2 Yd    bZ  I31J ·tmi RM.0135¥-fifHO .:HJ  NmOl

 

Donohoe

ZBA#l3-76

Page 2 of  4

 

 

 

 

Public  Comment:

 

 

No public  comment.

 

 

The Board members  made personal  inspections  of the premises  the week before  the meeting  and found them to be properly  posted  and as generally  described  on the application.

 

A satisfactory  statement  in accordance  with the provisions  of Section  809 of the General

Municipal Law of New York was received.

 

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

Ms. Salomon  and carried unanimously.

 

 

FINDINGS  OF FACT  AND CONCLUSIONS:

After personal  observation  of the property,  hearing  all the testimony  and reviewing  all the documents  submitted,  the Board  found and concluded  that the benefits  to the applicant  if

the variance(s)  are granted  outweigh  the detriment  (if any) to the health,  safety and welfare  of the neighborhood   or community  by such grant,  for the following  reasons:

 

 

 

1. 1. The requested  total side yard variance  will not produce  an undesirable change  in the character  of the neighborhood or a detriment  to nearby propertie  The total side yard is changing  because  the house  was built on an angle to the property  lines and the deck to rear changes  the total side yard. Similar  additions  have been  constructed  in the

area.

 

2. 2. The requested  total side yard variance   will not have an adverse  effect or impact  on the physical  or environmental   conditions  in the neighborhood   or distric  The total side yard is changing  because  the house was built on an angle to the property  lines and the deck to rear changes  the total side yard. Similar  additions  have been constructed  in the area.

 

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

 

 

 

4. The requested  total  side yard variance  is not substantial.  The house was constructed on an angle to the property  lines.

 

5. The applicant purchased  the property  subject to Orangetowns  Zoning  Code  (Chapter

43) and is proposing  a new addition  and/or improvements,  so the alleged  difficulty was self-created,  which  consideration  was relevant  to the decision  of the Board of Appeals,  but did not, by itself, preclude  the granting  of the area variances.

 

 

 

 

3’~H.:W  S)1’H31~   Nr!Ol SB  Z·  Yd   kl  l!l!all N.M0.13tHlvll0   .:W M.101

 

 

ZBA#l3-76

Page  3   of  4

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

General Conditions:

 

(i) The approval of any variance or Special Permit is granted by the Board in accordance with and subjectto 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 submittedto the Board solely for informational and verificationpurposes 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 subjectto 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 ofthis decision or that of any other board of the Town of Orangetown granting any required final approval to such project, whichever is iater, 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

 

 

ZBA#13-76

Page  4 of  4

 

 

 

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

 

 

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:   October  9, 2013

 

ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS TOWN  OF ORANGETOWN

 

 

 

DISTRIBUTION:

 

APPLICANT

ZBA MEMBERS SUPERV[SOR

TOWN BOARD  MEMBERS TOWN ATTOR.i”\IEY

DEPUTY TOWN  ATTORNEY OBZPAE

BU!LD)NG fNSPECTOR~M.M.

 

By~<….l.L.-=–~~.<-+l~=- Deborah  Arbolino Administrative   Aide

 

 

TOWN  CLERK

HlGHW  AY DEPARTMENT ASSESSOR

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

CHAIRMAN,    ZBA, PB,  ACABOR

 

3:)Bd0   S’fH31~  MHt.01

 

!0  Z  Md    h.2  l!l-3 fB2