Meeting Overview

MINUTES

ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS JANUARY  2, 2013

 

MEMBERS  PRESENT:

DANIEL  SULLIVAN JOAN  SALOMON PATRICIA  CASTELLI

MICHAEL  BOSCO,  ALTERNATE

NANETTE  ALBANESE

 

 

ABSENT:                                      NONE

 

 

 

ALSO  PRESENT:                   Dennis  Michaels,  Esq.

Ann Marie Ambrose, Deborah  Arbolino, Elizabeth  Decort,

Deputy  Town Attorney Official  Stenographer Administrative  Aide Clerk-Typist

 

 

This meeting  was called to order at 7: 00 P.M. by Ms. Castelli,  Acting Chairperson.

 

 

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

 

 

PUBLISHED   ITEMS APPLICANTS                                                      DECISIONS

NEW ITEMS:

 

 

 

GEHNA

74.10 / 1  I 14; RG zone

REAR  YARD                            ZBA#l3-0l

AND ACCESSORY   STRUCTURE DISTANCE   VARIANCES   APPROVED

 

SNAKE  HILL HOMES

77.10 I 3 I 54; R-15 zone

REAR YARD  VARIANCE APPROVED

ZBA#l3-02

 

70.14 / 4 I 14; LO zone     ANDEAN  BREWING  COMPANY       APPROVED       ZBA#13-04 PERFORMANCE   STANDARDS 65.18 I l I 5; LI zone WITH  CONDITIONS   LAMONT  DOHERTY  COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY   APPROVED WITH  CONDITIONS   ZBA#l3-05 PERFORMANCE   STANDARDS 80.10 / l I 2; R-80 zone

578 ROUTE  303

CONTINUED                                         ZBA#13-03

 

 

–                                     –

.  mJWD SJBTIG .·tra.

“~–c·?9~’B

.,··  -:

lfAW’E3′.l~’:!Q:~

 

Minutes

Page 2 of  2

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

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

 

 

 

There being no further business  to come before the Board,  on motion  duly made, seconded  and carried, the meeting  was adjourned  at  10:45 P.M.

 

Dated:  January  2~  2013

 

ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS TOWN  OF ORANGETOWN

 

 

 

DISTRIBUTION:

By~~

Deborah  Arbolino

Administrative   Aide

 

 

APPLICANT

TOVIN ATTORNEY

DEPUTY TOWN ATTORNEY ASSESSOR

H1GHWAY  DEPARTMENT

SUPERVISOR

TO\.VN  BOARD MEMBERS

BUILDfNG INSPECTOR (Individual Decisions)

DEPT. of ENVIRONMENTAL MGMT. and ENGINEERING Rockland County Planning

 

 

‘–:…..

 

 

 

.  ‘.Emf~lO SW31~•.Bm.

~                                            ‘t

12’88

 

lltfllfmYHQ  3:0 :ll\01.

 

DECISION

 

 

REAR YARD AND ACCESSORY  STRUCTURE  DISTANCE VARIANCES APPROVED

 

To: Mukhtar  Gehna

3 8 Dutch Hill Road

Orangeburg,  New  York  10962

ZBA # 13-01

Date:  January  2, 2013

 

 

FROM: ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS:  Town of Orangetown

 

ZBA#13-01:  Application  of  Mukhtar  Gehna for a variance  from Chapter  43 (Zoning), Section 3.12;  RG District;  Group  Q, Column  11 (Rear  Yard: 25′  required,  12.1′ proposed)   for a deck and from Section  5.153 (Accessory  structure  distance  from principal  building:  15′ required,  8.5’ existing  to an existing  shed)  at an existing  single• family residence.  The premises  are located  at  38 Dutch  Hill Road,  Orangeburg,  New

York and are identified  on the Orangetown  Tax Map as Section   74.10, Block  1, Lot  14 in the RG zoning district.

 

Heard  by the Zoning  Board  of Appeals  of the Town of Orangetown  at a meeting  held on Wednesday,   January  2, 2013 at which time the Board made the determination  hereinafter set forth.

 

 

 

Mazir Gehna and Mukatar  Gehna appeared  and testified. The following  documents  were presented:

1. Copy of site plan with proposed deck and existing  shed drawn on it.
2. Hand drawn  deck plans.

 

 

Ms. Castelli,  Acting Chairperson,  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,  Ms. Castelli  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. Albanese  and

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

 

 

Mazir Gehna testified  that they have an existing  deck that is in dis-repair  and would  like to replace  it with a slightly  larger deck; that they have grandchildren  and the larger deck would  be useful  for entertaining  family and watching  the grandchildren;  that they installed  a shed five years ago; that they were told that the shed needed  to be five feet

from each property  line and it is 6.6′  from each property  line; that they found out that it is

too close to the house when they  came in for the permit  for the deck; and that they would like to keep it in its present  location  because  it would  be costly to move  it.

 

 

 

• ::T;.

 

 

• B~· s:sram umt

~,.  a::llf<Bll

 

Dfi30iH~O   ·&O .RIMIL

 

 

 

 

 

Public Comment:

 

 

No public  comment.

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

 

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

Municipal  Law ofNew  York was received.

 

 

Ms. Castelli  made  a motion  to close the Public  Hearing  which  motion  was seconded  by

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   rear yard and accessory  structure  distance  variances   will not produce an undesirable  change  in the character  of the neighborhood   or a detriment  to nearby properties.  The applicants’   lot is a corner lot with two front yards. The shed has existed  in its present  location  for five years and the proposed  deck is not an  . unreasonable  size.

 

2. The requested  rear yard and accessory  structure  distance  variances  will not have an adverse  effect or impact on the physical  or environmental   conditions  in the neighborhood   or district.   The applicants’   lot is a corner lot with two front yards. The shed has existed  in its present  location  for five years  and the proposed  deck is not an unreasonable  size.

 

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   rear yard and accessory  structure  distance  variances  are not substantial.

 

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.

 

 

 

 

• !ma:.W··sJnr™ &M

~.–

.._       lillr’M

..;…

 

 

 

DECISION:  In view of the foregoing  and the testimony  and documents presented,  the

I

Board:  RESOLVED,  that the application  for the requested accessory  distance  and rear

yard variances  are APPROVED;.  and FURTHER  RE~OLVED,   that such decisioi;.  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

 

(i) The approval  of any variance  or Special Permit  is lranted 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.

I

(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 e~tent such approval is granted herein and subject to those conditions,  if any; upon which  such approval  was conditioned

which are hereinbefore   set forth.                                     I

 

I

(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

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 th~ extent any variance  or Special Permit  granted herein  is subject to any conditions,  the building  department shall not be

obli~ated  to issue any n~c~ssary permits  where any sl~ch.cond~tion  imposed  should,  in the sole Judgment  of the building  department,  be first corp.plied 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.                          I

 

l

 

 

(v) Any foregoing  variance  or Special  Permit will laJse 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, whi~h~ver is l~te:, but in ~y e:ent  within tv\l° years ?f the filing ~fthis de?ision. Merely  obtammg  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.                                                               I

 

 

 

 

I

The foregoing  resolution  to approve the application  fir the requested accessory  structure

distance  and rear yard variances  was presented  and moved  by Ms. Albanese,  seconded  by

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

 

 

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

‘

DATED:   January  2,  2013

 

 

DISTRI8UTION:

ZONING  BO~RD  OF APPEALS TOVIN OF <DRANGETOV!N

 

 

I

i

By~~_,,,_..~-<-L-/;7″‘””‘”—“•

~DeboraH Arbo lino

Administrative   Aide

i

 

APPLICANT

ZBA   MEMBERS SUPERVISOR

TOWN BOARD MEMBERS

TOWN ATTORNEY

DEPUTY  TO\VN ATl”ORNEY OBZPAE

BUILDING INSPECTOR-M.M.

TOWN  CLERK           , HIGHWAY   OEPARTl\.1ENT ASSESSOR                      I

DEPT  ofENVIRONM~NTAL MGMT. and ENGINE!RING FlLE,ZBA, PB

CHAIRMAN,  ZBA, P ·            , ACABOR

 

 

I

I

i

 

 

 

 

I

i

I

~ … ·.

• ~

 

DECISION

 

REARYARD  VARIANCE  APPROVED

 

To: Kenneth Hiep (Snake Hill Homes Inc.)

22 Snake Ifill Road

West Nyack, New York 10994

ZBA # 13-02

Date:  January 2, 2013

 

 

FROM: ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS: Town of Orangetown

 

ZBA# 13-02: Application of Snake Hill Homes Inc. for a variance from Chapter 43 (Zoning), Section 3.12,  R -15  District, Group M, Column  11    (Rear Yard: 35′ required,

28.8′ proposed) for a deck at an existing single-family residence. The premises are located at 45 Stephens Road, Tappan, New York and are identified on the Orangetown

Tax Map as Section 77.10,  Block 3, Lot 54; R-15  zoning district.

 

Heard by the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Orangetown at a meeting held on Wednesday, January 2, 2013 at which time the Board made the determinationhereinafter set forth.

 

 

 

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

1. 1. Copy of site plan with proposed deck drawn on

 

 

 

Ms. Castelli, Acting Chairperson, 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, Ms. Castelli moved for a Board determinationthat 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.  Salomon and

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

 

Donald Brenner, Attorney, testified that the property was acquiredby his client in poor shape; that his client has improved the property and would like to install a 12′  x 14′  deck in the rear yard; that the steps are shown incorrectly and will be on the left side of the deck; that there are other decks in the area; that the lot is a comer lot with two front

yards; and that the proposed deck is not large.                      ·

 

 

• ~ ‘   , ..  •     >   ..

 

Snake Hill homes Inc.

ZBA#13-02

Page 2 of 4

 

 

 

 

Public Comment:

 

No public comment.

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

application.

 

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

Municipal Law ofNew  York was received.

 

Ms. Castelli  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. l. The requested rear yard variance will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. The applicants’ lot is a comer lot and the proposed deck is twelve feet wide, which is the suggested width that would accommodatea table and chairs.

 

2. 2. The requested rear yard variance will not have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district.  The applicants’ lot is a corner lot and the proposed deck is twelve feet wide, which is the suggested width that would accommodatea table and chair

 

3. 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.

 

 

 

4. 4. The requested rear yard variance is not substantial.

 

5. 5. TI1e 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.

 

 

 

‘·   _,   –   ~-   –~ ..   ,,,     .•. ~   ~   -~    ,·..

 

. .                                                                                                                                                       .

-=···’-

,~.·~··tlfJ7!

 

 

 

-~rut\ftiO ;t(), .111’1

 

Snake Hill Homes,  Inc. ZBA#13-02

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  rear 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 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.

 

 

 

~~STam·~

 

::m   .&’.~-

–

cmm:B’t>!WHO 31J.·.gg

 

Snake Hill Homes  Inc. ZBA#13-02

Page  4 of 4

 

 

 

The foregoing resolution to approve the application for the requested rear yard variance was presented and moved by Ms. Salomon, seconded by Ms. Albanese and carried as follows: Mr. Sullivan, aye; Mr. Bosco, aye; Ms. Albanese, aye; Ms. Salomon, aye; and Ms. Castelli, 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:  January 2, 2013

 

ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF ORANGETOWN

 

 

DISTRIBUTION:

 

APPLICANT

ZBA  MEMBERS SUPERVISOR

TOWN BOARD  MEMBERS

TOWN ATTORNEY

DEPUTY TOWN A TIORNEY OBZPAE

BUILDING    INSPECTOR-B.vW_

AdministrativeAide

 

 

TOWN  CLERK

HIGHWAY   DEPARTMENT

ASSESSOR

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

CHAIRMAN.  ZBA, PB,  ACABOR

 

 

.-.. ·~·

 

DECISION

 

PERFORMANCE STANDARDS REVIEWAPPROVED WITHCONDITIONS

 

To:  Andean  Brewing  Company  Inc.

300 Corporate  Drive  Suite 2

Blauvelt,  New York  10913

ZBA#   13-04

Date:  January  2, 2013

 

 

FROM:  ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS:  Town  of Orangetown

 

 

 

ZBA#  13-04:Application   of  Andean  Brewing  Company   pursuant  to Section 4.12, Chapter  43 (Zoning)  Use subject  to Performance   Standards  Conformance  Review  with respect  to review  of a micro brewery.   The premises  are located  at 300 Corporate  Drive, Suite 2, Blauvelt,  New York and identified  on the Orangetown  Tax Map as Section

65.18, Block  1, Lot 5, in the LI zoning  district.

 

 

 

Heard  by the Zoning  Board  of Appeals  of the Town of Orangetown  at a meeting  held on Wednesday,  January  2, 2013 at which time the Board made the determination  hereinafter set forth.

 

 

 

Alireza  Saifi, President  Andean  Brewing,  Andria  Petito, Accounting  Operations

Manager  and Dan Mellin,  representing  Pontiac  Holdings,  appeared  and testified. The following  documents  were presented:

1. Building  layout  plan not signed or sealed, 2 pages.
2. Cover sheet explaining the detailed  description  of standard  brewing  operations and the equipment  used in production.
3. Brochure  for Ku.Kn beer.
4. Eighteen  pages of Material  Safety Data Sheets.
5. Performance  Standards  Resume  of Operations  and Equipment  form dated

December  4, 2012 and signed by Alireza  Saifi.

6. Fire Prevention  Supplement,
7. Two letters dated December  14, 2012 and January  11, 2013 from Joseph  J.

Moran, P.E.,  Commissioner,  Department  of Environmental   Management  and

Engineering,  Town of Orangetown.

8. A letter  dated December  17, 2012 from the County  of Rockland  Department  of

Highways  signed by Joseph  Arena,  Senior Engineering  Technician.

9. A memorandum  dated December  13, 2012 from Michael  Bettmann,  Chief  Fire

Inspector,  Town of Orangetown.

10. A letter dated December 12, 2012 from the County of Rockland  Department  of

Health,  signed by Scott McKane,  P.E.,  Senior Public  Health Engineer.

 

>·   .        :z

Ms. _Castelli, Acting Chairperson,  made  a motio_nto ope~1 the Public  Hearing .which I..·-.t~··  .           ~I’····.·..·.••·•.··         ~

motion  was seconded  by Ms. Salomon  and earned  unanimously.                       ,                .            ~

 

.:   .                  Q     ·,,,<‘    ~

On advice of  Dennis_Michaels,  Deputy  Town A~ion_iey, counsel to the Zo1:1?g Bo~    of~    :

~

Appeals,  Ms. Castelli moved for a Board  determination   based upon the testimony  h¢;a1rd  G         0

by this Board,  and the facts as presented  in the application  submissions  and in the r~rdl             ii:

since _th.e appl.i_cationenta• ils the ZBA c:igaging. in~ re:iew.to determ~e comp. l.1.· ance~. ·..·  “th…..··’….’ .. 1 E

techmcal  requirements,  that the foregomg  application  is a Type II action exempt  frol!th    -. :   “1

State Environmental   Quality  Review  Act (SEQ RA), pursuant  to SEQRA  Regulatiorii   ·    “‘· .     f     .·~

• 617.5 (c) (28); which does not require SEQRA  environmental  review.  The motion  was seconded  by Ms. Salomon  and carried as follows:  Mr. Sullivan,  aye; Ms.  Salemon,  aye; Ms. Castelli,  aye; Mr. Bosco,  aye; and Ms. Albanese,  aye.

 

Alireza  Saifi gave the Board  a brief history  of the business  and its operation.

 

 

Andean  Brewing  Company

ZBA#13-04

Page2 of 4

 

 

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

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

 

 

 

Public  Comment:

 

 

No public  comment.

 

 

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

 

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

Municipal  Law  ofNew  York was received.

 

 

Ms. Castelli made a motion  to close the Public Hearing  which  motion  was seconded  by

Ms. Salomon  and carried unanimously.

 

 

 

FINDINGS  OF FACT AND  CONCLUSIONS:

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

 

 

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

and Equipment,  the Fire Prevention  Supplement,  the letter dated January  11, 2013 from Joseph J. Moran,  P.E., Commissioner   of the Orangetown  Department  of Environmental  Management  and Engineering  (D.E.M.E.)  concluding  that  there is

no reasonable  doubt as to the likelihood  of applicant’s   conformance  to the Zoning

Code§  4.1 Performance   Standards,  and the memorandum  dated December  13,

2012 from Michael  Bettmann,  Chief Fire Inspector,  Town of Orangetown  Bureau of Fire Prevention  (B.F.P.);  the other  documents  presented  to the Board and the testimony  of applicant’s representatives,   the Board  finds and concludes  that conformance  with the Performance   Standards  set forth in Zoning   Code Section

4.1 will result sufficient  to warrant  the issuance  of a Building  Permit  and/or

Certificate  of Occupancy,  subject  to compliance  with the orders, rules, and

I! .      ~

regul~t~ons ~fthe  Orangetown   Office of Building,  Zoning  & Planning         ·..         .!l  S

Administration   ~  Ei:£o:ce:n~nt,  DEME,  an~ Orangetown  B.F.P.,  and all of=r    ~   ..             =;

departments  having jurisdiction   of the prenuses.                                         ·                        ~     ,

~ ii;   ‘”11

~e      ..

~

DECISION:  In view of the foregoing  and the testimony  and documents  presented, ft1       –   .                          0

Board:  RESOLVED,  that the application  for  Performance   Standards   Conforman~,    ii   a

pursuant  to Zoning  Code§  4.1  are APPROVED  with the SPECIFIC  CONDITIOI{irth            ~

the applicant  adhere to all of the requirements  set forth by the Chief Fire In~pector~o.           ~

of Orangetown  B.F.P.; the Department  of Environmental   Management  and Engin~n      ,.          z

Town of Orangetown;  and the Orangetown   Office of Building,  Planning  Zoning

RESOLVED,

Enforcement  and Administration,   Town  of Orangetown;     AND FURTHER .                ”

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,  Performance   Standards  Approval,  9r 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, Performance Standards Approval, 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, performance standards approval, 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, Performance Standards Review, 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.

 

 

 

:

.~.3:.16..~t!T.IO.D.lt .

.maa1vli~ :lo ,ltll)A.

 

 

 

The foregoing  resolution  to approve  the application  for  Zoning  Code  § 4.1 Performance Standards  Conformance  was presented  and moved  by Ms. Castelli,  seconded  by Ms. Salomon  and carried as follows:   Mr. Sullivan,  aye; Ms. Castelli,  aye; Ms.  Salomon,  aye; Mr. Bosco,  aye; and Ms. Albanese,  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:   January 2, 2013

 

 

ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS TOWN  OF ORANGETOWN

 

 

 

 

DISTRIBUTION:

 

APPLICANT

ZBA  MEMBERS SUPERVISOR

TOWN BOARD MElv!BERS TOWN ATTORNEY

DEPUTY TOWN ATTORNEY OBZPAE

BUILDING INSPECTOR-R.O.A..

By…..::….i.’.-{;.L..J~~=-.:.~~~~w~~~/?f

Deborah  Arbolino

Administrative   Aide

 

 

TOWN  CLERK

HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT ASSESSOR

DEPT. ofENVIRONMENTAL MGMT. and ENGrNEERING FILE,ZBA, PB

CHAIRMAN,  ZBA, PB, ACABOR

 

–

~’~~Di·’i

~·)·–,_~-EIZ 1~

 

• ·~·~;mllli

-:

-·-                 -~~                             –                                                                                                     .

 

DECISION

 

PERFORMANCE  STANDARDS REVIEW APPROVED  WITH CONDITIONS

 

To:   Patrick  O’Reilly,   P, E.

Lamont  Doherty  Earth Observatory

P.O.Box   1000

61Route9W

Palisades,  New York  10964

ZBA#   13-05

Date:   January  2, 2013

 

 

FROM:  ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS:   Town of Orangetown

 

 

 

ZBA#  13-05:Application   of  Lamont  Doherty  Columbia  University  Earth  Observatory pursuant  to Section 4.12,  Chapter 43 (Zoning)  Use subject  to Performance   Standards Conformance  Review  with respect to review  of interior  renovation  of laboratories  within Core Lab Building  built in 1963.    The premises  are located  at 61Route9W,   Palisades,

New York and identified  on the Orangetown  Tax Map as Section   80.10,  Block  1, Lot 2,

in the R-80 zoning district.

 

 

 

Beard  by the Zoning  Board of Appeals  of the Town  of Orangetown  at a meeting  held on Wednesday,  January  2,  2013 at which time the Board  made the determination  hereinafter set forth.

 

 

 

Patrick  O’Reilly,  Assistant  Director,  and Bob Carroll,  Architect  & Project  Manager, appeared  and testified.

 

The following  documents  were presented:

 

1. Site plan dated November 22, 2005 with the latest revision  date of 6 I 14/ 2006 signed and sealed by John R.  Atzl, N.Y.S.P.L.S   ..
2. 2. Project  narrative  with two computer  generated  pictures  of the proposed  lab space.
3. History  of Core Repository  (2 pages).
4. 4. LEED Waste  Management  Plan (3pages).
5. Short Environmental Assessment  Form.
6. 6. Core Lab Renovations  for Bio-Geochemistry   dated October  17, 2011(4  pages).
7. 7. CD of Material  Safety Data Sheets for Core Lab Renovations  for Bio

Geochemistry  at LDEO  dated October  31,  2012.

8. Seven pages  listing  all of the chemicals  used in the building.
9. 9. A book of the Material  Safety Data  Sheets.
10. 10. Performance Standards  Resume  of Operations  and Equipment  form dated

November  19, 2012 and signed by Patrick  O’Reilly.

11. 11. Fire Prevention  Supplement.
12. 12. Two letters dated December 14,  2012 and January  11,  2013 from Joseph

Moran, P.E.,   Commissioner,   Department  of Environmental Management  and

Engineering,  Town of Orangetown.

13. 13. A letter dated December   14,  2012 from the County  of Rockland   Department  of

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

14. 14. A memorandum  dated December  11,    2012 from Michael  Bettmann, Chief  Fire

Inspector,  Town of Orangetown.

15. 15. A letter dated  November  27, 2012  from the County of Rockland  Department  of

Health,  signed by Scott McKane,  P.E.,   Senior  Public  Health Engineer.

 

.•~-

Ms.  Castelli, Acting  Chairperson,  made a motion to open the Public  Ffearing  which motion was seconded  by Ms.  Salomo1} .. and carried unanimously.        ‘”‘

 

Slm3i

,. Bns!O.        t>. –

 

,

 

~’t~O:i1)1SD1

 

Lamont Doherty  Core Lab Renovation  Performance  Standards

ZBA#13-05

Page 2 of  4

 

 

 

On advice of  Dennis  Michaels,   Deputy  Town Attorney,   counsel to the Zoning  Board of Appeals,  Ms.  Castelli  moved  for a Board determination  based upon the testimony  heard by this  Board,  and the facts as presented  in the application  submissions  and in the record, since the application  entails the ZBA engaging  in a review to determine  compliance  with technical  requirements,  that the foregoing  application  is a Type II action exempt  from the State Environmental   Quality Review  Act (SEQRA),  pursuant  to SEQ RA Regulations

• 617.5 (c) (28); which  does not require  SEQRA  enviromnental review. The motion was seconded  by Ms. Salomon  and carried  as follows:  Mr. Sullivan,  aye;  Ms.  Salomon,  aye; Ms. Castelli,   aye; Mr.  Bosco,  aye; and Ms.  Albanese,  aye.

 

Patrick  O’Reilly,  Assistant  Director,   testified  that they  are modernizing  a core building that was constructed  in 1963;  that they received  a federal stimulus grant to do the project; that they are planning  to gut the existing  lab and modernize  it; that there are temporary lights  in the building  because  it is an active  construction  site; that the new lighting  that

will be installed  when the project  is complete will be sensor lighting  that will go off when there is no one in the room;  and the windows  will have shades;  that there are outdoor

lights  at the Warhol  building  which was constructed in 1927;  and the data center is the cause of some of the noise because  of the amount  of equipment  it takes to keep the computers cool;  that other equipment  is shut-off when the new equipment  is tested;  that the new units on this  building  will be tested and they intend to comply with the code; and that they will  comply  with the code in aggregate  testing  also.

 

 

 

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

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

 

 

 

Public  Comment:

 

Roger Hooker,  Attorney,   representing  Mrs.  Knowlton  and her neighbor,  testified  that there is an encroachment of light and sound at the property  line of these two neighbors; that the second floor of the Core building  has bright  lights  on twenty-four  hours  a day; that they are disturbing  at night and blinds  could solve this problem;  that the HV AC equipment  is very loud and the baffling  system that was installed  has made the problem worse;   that the noise bounces  off of the second floor windows  and goes right to their properties;  that the additional  equipment  befog proposed  for this  renovation  will only increase  the existing  problem;  that testing should be done on all of the accumulative installations  and not on the new installation   alone.

 

Grace Knowlton,  testified  that Dick Greco told  her that during this renovation  the sound apparatus  would be moved but that did not happen;  that the volume  of sound is unbelievable  and that she is the closest neighbor.

 

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.

 

Ms. Castelli  made a motion  to close the £ublic  Hearing  wluGh-motion.was    seconded  by

<-~

Ms.  Albanese  and carried unanimously.«.                                                        .,,,.

 

! !ll:WO SJ!3‘l0 &Ii. D@;.r,gawo·.&e·tatm.

 

 

 

 

‘       .~·-·       ••     ··-·’-“”-           -~—~•                   ••••’-‘-”-·            –                    ;”        •   L’-•”•”00–~-        ···-•-……..,’—-‘·”-

 

Lamont-Doherty      Core  Lab  Building   Performance     Standards

ZBA#l3-05

Page  3  of   4

FINDINGS    OF  FACT   AND   CONCLUSIONS:

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

 

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

and  Equipment,    the  Fire  Prevention    Supplement,    the  letter   dated  January   11, 2013 from  Joseph   J. Moran,  P .E., Commissioner   of the Orangetown  Department  of Environmental   Management  and Engineering  (D.E.M.E.)  concluding  that  there is no reasonable  doubt as to the likelihood  of applicant’s conformance  to the Zoning Code  § 4.1 Performance   Standards,  and the memorandum   dated December  11,

2012 from Michael  Bettmann,  Chief Fire Inspector,  Town of Orangetown  Bureau of Fire Prevention  (B.F.P.);  the letter dated December  14, 2012 from the County of Rockland  Department  of Planning  signed by Thomas  Vanderbeek, Commissioner   of Planning;  the other  documents  presented  to the Board  and the testimony  of applicant’s representatives,   the Board  finds and concludes  that conformance  with the Performance   Standards  set forth in Zoning   Code  Section

4.1 will result  sufficient  to warrant  the issuance  of a Building  Permit and/or,

Certificate  of Occupancy,  subject to compliance  with the orders, rules and regulations  of the Orangetown  Office  of Building,  Zoning  & Planning Administration   & Enforcement,  DEME,  and Orangetown  B.F.P., and all other departments  having jurisdiction of the premises.

 

 

 

 

DECISION:  In view of the foregoing  and the testimony  and documents  presented,  the Board:  RESOLVED,  that the application  for  Performance   Standards   Conformance, pursuant  to Zoning  Code  § 4.1  are APPROVED  with the SPECIFIC  CONDITION   that the applicant  adhere to all of the requirements  set forth by the Chief Fire Inspector,  Town of Orangetown  B.F.P.; the Department  of Environmental   Management  and Engineering, Town of Orangetown;  and the Orangetown   Office of Building,  Planning  Zoning Enforcement  and Administration,   Town of Orangetown;     AND FURTHER  RESOLVED, that  such decision  and the vote thereon  shall become  effective  and be deemed rendered

on the date of adoption by the Board  of the minutes  of which  they are a part.

 

General  Conditions:

 

 

(i) The approval  of any variance,  Performance  Standards  Approval,  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.

 

I

(ii) Any  approval  of a variance,  Performance   Standards  Approval,  or Special Permit by     gg

the Board is limited to 1J1e specific  variance  or Special Permit  requested  but only to tlJ!t    R

extent  such approval  is granted  herein  and subject  to those conditions,  if any, upon w~h    ~       Z.

such approval  was conditioned  which  are hereinbefore  set forth.                                     ~      ;    :      ~

 

~                           ;]>

.:11

‘1

:::c                    :::0 (iii) The Board gives no approval  of any building  plans,  including,  without  limitatiorP,>    t11   f; the accuracy  and structural  integrity  thereof, of the applicant,  but same have been       ~                e:I

sub.mitted == Board solely for informational  and verification  purposes  relative to~                1        ~

vanances bemg requested.                                                                                                       ~      AID     .z:

 

 

 

(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 undertalcing any construction  contemplated   in this decision.  To the extent any variance,  performance standards  approval,  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

 

Lamont  Doherty  Core Lab Building  Performance   Standards

ZBA#l3-05

Page4   of  4

 

 

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

 

 

 

The foregoing resolution to approve the application for  Zoning Code § 4.1 Performance Standards Conformance was presented and moved by Ms. Castelli, seconded by Ms. Salomon and carried as follows:  Mr. Sullivan, aye; Ms. Castelli, aye; Ms. Salomon, aye; Mr. Bosco, aye; and Ms. Albanese, 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: January 2, 2013

 

ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS

‘TOWN OF ORANGETOWN

 

 

 

By~

Deborah Arbolino

Administrative Aide

 

 

DISTRIBUTION:

 

APPLICANT

ZBA MEMBERS SUPERVISOR

TOWN BOARD MEMBERS TOWN ATTORNEY

DEPUTY TOWN ATTORNEY OBZPAE

BUILDING INSPECTOR-B.vW.

 

TOWN  CLERK

HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT ASSESSOR

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

CHAIRMAN, ZBA, PB, ACABOR

 

 

 

• ~· Slm9•.nml

 

~~-        .~tir·•

• · ~•DE’~l’DH.. :0!0.·.–