Meeting Overview

MINUTES

ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS JULY 2, 2014

 

MEMBERS  PRESENT:

 

JOAN  SALOMON THOMAS  QUINN

LEONARD  FEROLDI,  ALTERNATE

DANIEL  SULLIVAN,   CHAIRMAN

 

 

 

 

ABSENT:

 

 

MICHAEL  BOSCO PATRICIA  CASTELLI

 

ALSO  PRESENT:

Robert Magrino, Esq. Ann Marie Ambrose, Deborah Arbolino

Deputy Town Attorney Official Stenographer Administrative Aide

 

 

 

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

 

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

 

 

 

APPLICANTS

 

 

CONTINUED ITEM:

PUBLISHED ITEMS DECISIONS

 

QUINN SPECIAL PERMIT

&PERFORMANCE STANDARDS

77.15 I 1I42;  CS zone

APPROVED

WITH CONDITIONS

ZBA#l4-43

 

 

NEW ITEMS:

 

PACQUING

77.06 I 1  I 37; R-15 zone

 

 

 

STEFANOVICH

74.14 I 2 I 26; R-15 zone

 

 

 

BOURKE

68.20 I 2 I 54; RG zone

 

 

 

OLIVER

68.20/ 2 I 41; RG zone

SIDE YARD, REAR YARD,                       ZBA#14-47

AND BUILDING HEIGHT

VARIANCES APPROVED

 

TOTAL SIDE YARD AND                          ZBA#l 4-48

DISTANCE BETWEEN STRUCTURES VARIANCES APPROVED

 

FLOOR AREA RATIO, BUILDING            ZBA#l4-49

HEIGHT AND ACCESSORY STRUCTURE VARIANCES APPROVED

 

FLOOR AREA RATIO, BUILDING            ZBA#14-50

HEIGHT AND ACCESSORY STRUCTURE DISTANCE VARIANCES APPROVED

 

 

BROWN 80.06 I 1  I 25; R-80 zone	SIDE YARD VARIANCE APPROVED	ZBA#14-51
KATZEN 70.09 I 3 I 60; R-40 zone	FRONT YARD VARIANCE APPROVED	ZBA#14-52
SMK HOMES 69.17 I 5 I 1.2; R-15 zone	FLOOR AREA RATIO, FRONT YARD, AND BUILDING HEIGHT VARIANCES	ZBA#14-53

APPROVED

 

Minutes

Page 2 of  2

 

In response  to requests  from the Orangetown   Planning  Board,  the Zoning  Board of Appeals:   RESOLVED,   to approve  the action of the Chairman,   Daniel  Sullivan,   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:

Rockland  Gaelic Athletic  Association  Centre of Excellence  Site Plan,  160  Old Orangeburg  Road,  Orangeburg,  N.Y.  73.12   / 1   / 1;    LIO zone;  and FURTHER RESOLVED,   to request   to be notified   by the Planning  Board of SEQ RA proceedings, hearings,  and determinations    with respect  to these matters.

 

 

 

 

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

 

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

There being no further business   to come before  the Board,  on motion  duly  made,

seconded  and carried,  the meeting  was adjourned  at  10:30  P .M.

 

Dated:    July 2,  2014

ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS TOWN  OF ORANGETOWN

 

 

By~n~

 

 

DISTRIBUTION: APPLICANT

TOWN  ATTORNEY

DEPUTY  TOWN  ATTORNEY TOWN  BOARD  MEMBERS

BUILDING   INSPECTOR    (Individual     Decisions)

Rockland  County Planning

Administrative     Aide

 

DECISION

 

 

SPECIAL PERMIT  (ONE YEAR)  & PERFORMANCE  STANDARDS REVIEW APPROVED

WITH SPECIFIC  CONDITIONS

 

To: Thomas  Quinn

54 Bennington  Drive

Tappan,  New York  10983

ZBA # 14-43

Date:  June  18, 2014

July 2, 2014

 

 

FROM:  ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS:  Town  of Orangetown

 

 

ZBA#14-43:  Application  of  Quinn Sheetmetal  & Mechanical  Design  for a Special

Permit pursuant  to Chapter  43 (Zoning)  of the Code of the Town of Orangetown,  Section

3.11,  CS District,  Column   3 # 8 (Other Retail/  Services)  and Section  4.1, Performance Standards  Review  for a sheetmetal  and mechanical  design  shop. The premises  are located at 64 Route 303, Tappan,  New York  and are identified  on the Orangetown  Tax Map as Section 77.15, Block  1, Lot 42; in the CS zoning  district.

 

 

 

Heard by the Zoning  Board  of Appeals  of the Town  of Orangetown  at  meetings  held on the following   Wednesdays,   June  18, 2014 and July 2, 2014 at which time the Board made the determination  hereinafter  set forth.

 

At the June  18, 2014 meeting,   Thomas  Quinn, Jr. and Donald  Brenner,  Attorney, appeared  and testified.

 

The following  documents  were presented:

 

1. Hand drawing  of the proposed  layout within building.
2. Survey of the property.
3. Performance  Standards  Resume  of Operations  and Equipment  form dated May 7,

2014 and signed by Thomas  Quinn Jr..

4. Fire Prevention  Supplement.
5. A letter dated May  16, 2014 from Bruce Peters,  P.E. for Joseph  J. Moran, P.E., Commissioner,   Department  of Environmental   Management  and Engineering, town of Orangetown.
6. A letter dated June  11, 2014 from the County of Rockland  Department  of

Planning  signed by Douglas  J. Schuetz,  Acting  Commissioner.

7. A memorandum   dated May  12, 2014 from Michael  B. Bettmann,  Chief Fire

Inspector,  Town of Orangetown.

8. A letter dated June  16, 2014 from the County  of Rockland  Department  of

Highways  signed by Sonny Lin, P .E ..

9. A letter dated May  16, 2014 from the State ofNew  York Department  of

Transportation   signed by Mary Jo Russo,  P .E., Rockland  County Permit  Engineer.

10. A letter from the County of Rockland Drainage  Agency  signed by Vincent  Altieri, Executive  Director.
11. A letter dated June 19, 2014 from the Department ofEnviromntntal    Management

and Engineering  signed by Joseph  J. Moran,  P .E. Commissioner.

12. A letter dated June 30, 2014 from Jacob Tanenbaum, 35 Livingston Street, Tappan.
13. A letter dated June 30 2014 from Andrea Siegel, PhD,  35 Livingston  Street,

Tappan,  New York.

 

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

“::l::U I :lO ~”H31Q N1\\0l

Donald  Brenner,  Attorney,  testitt~(! that 11e ts representing   L & G Realty, the landlord  for the property;  that many  year~o’thi~t~iI<fpglflfB     ~ti   to grow orchids;  that later it was

used for storage  for the beverlt~e-cenrer;  that11e understands  the concerns  of the neighbors  but would like to Il~};% ~~t:Oh~t(!~ .!1Sigh~O(S  were also extremely  concerned

 

Quinn

ZBA#14-43

Page 2 of  6

 

 

 

when the table tennis/pool  hall opened  and there has never been a noise complaint

Lodged  and that building  is set back the same distance  as this one; that he would  also like to point out that there is also a laundry  and restaurant  in the same area; that this business

is for custom made pieces;  that legally  a commercial  printer  could be installed  in the building  and that could be detrimental;  that the applicant  has to meet the sound requirements  for the town and they would like a continuance  to get the results  from the engineering  department.

 

 

 

Tom  Quinn, Jr. testified  that they are proposing  to use the freestanding  40′  by 80′  steel building  for a retail-service  business;  that Quinn  Sheetmetal  will design,  cut and bend sheet steel into usable  duct fittings  for HA VC use; that the business  will also sizeup and design A/C and heating  systems  for architects  and contractors;  that the building  would be I use between  7 am and 10 pm Monday  through  Saturday;  and open to customers

between  7 am and 6 pm Monday  through  Saturday;  that these customers  will be leaving plans,  drawings  and orders  for us to deliver;  that the expected  number  of customers

would be couple per hour;  that the closest similar  business  would be a custom upholstery

shop except this business  uses metal  s the product;  that they are expecting  small trucks routinely  and a metal delivery  truck once a month;  that there is more than enough  asphalt parking  and loading  area; that the noise would be contained  within the well insulated building  and no welding  or painting  would be done on premises.

 

 

 

Public  Comment:

 

 

Jacob Tanenbaum,  35 Livingston  Street, Tappan,  testified  that he is an abutting  property owner, that he protests  the noise of an electric  hammer  and cutting  equipment;  that he is a writer and needs quiet; that this sounds like manufacturing;   and the neighborhood  is peaceful  and quiet and this will negatively  affect his property  values.

 

Melissa  Derasmo,  29 Livingstone  Street, Tappan,  testified  that she is an adjacent  property owner; that she is up at 5:00 am for work and needs to sleep at night; that her bedroom window  is on the side of this building;  that she is concerned  with the hours and noise.

 

Rich Addessi,  13  Livingston  Street, Tappan  testified  that he works  from home;  that his office is in the rear of his house  and he is concerned  with noise; that he has a young son and worried  about his sleep being disturbed;  that the hours of operation  and resale values are a concern  that he shares with his neighbors.

 

Andrea  Siegel, 35 Livingston  Street, Tappan,  testified  that she moved  here from Queens to get away from manufacturing   noises;  that she is a writer  and needs quiet to

concentrate;  that this would destroy his writing;  and that the applicant  should  find an area zoned for manufacturing.

 

 

 

At the July 2, 2014 meeting,  the following  documents  were presented:

 

1. A letter dated June  19, 2014 from the Department  of Environmental   Management and Engineering,  Town  of Orangetown,  signed by Joseph  J. Moran, P.E., Commissioner.
2. A letter dated June 30, 2014 from Jacob Tanenbaum  with attachments.
3. A letter dated June 30, 2014 from Andrea  Siegel,  PHD with attachments.

 

Quinn

ZBA#14-43

Page 3 of 6

 

At the July 2, 2014 meeting, Donald Brenner, attorney, and Tom Quinn Jr. testified. Donald Brenner, Attorney testified that the building department found that this

application can operate in this location with a Special Permit and Performance Standards; that the code states what the noise can be at the property line; that this building was previously used as a machine shop for the hardware store and mowers and other

machines were repaired in it; that when he represented the landlord for the pool room the

neighbors came out in concern for the noise that would be generated by it; and there is no noise generated by it; that Mr. Quinn is respectful and knows his business; that this building is well suited for this business and they can limit the hours of operation to 7:00

A.M. to 9:00 P.M ..

 

Tom Quinn Jr. testified that they could limit the hours of operation from 7:00A.M to 9:00

P .M.; that they would be willing to come back one year from the issuance of the

Certificate of Occupancy to renew the Special Permit; and that if there is no problem with noise they would request that the Special Permit be continued because it is expensive to

move the equipment.

 

 

 

On advice of Robert Magrino, Deputy Town Attorney,  counsel to the Zoning Board of Appeals, Mr. Sullivan 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, and also seeks to construct or expand a primary or accessory/appurtenant, non-residential structure or facility 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; that the foregoing application is a Type IIaction  exempt

from the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA), pursuant to SEQRA Regulations §617 .5 (c)(7) &/or (28); which does not require SEQ RA environmental review. The motion was seconded by Ms. Salomon and carried as follows: Mr. Sullivan,

aye; Ms. Salomon, aye; and Mr. Feroldi, aye. Mr. Quinn recused himself. Mr. Bosco and

Ms. Castelli were absent.

 

Public Comment:

 

Melissa Derasmo, 29 Livingston Street, testified that this proposal is 56′ from her property line; that she has lived in her house for twenty years; that she is upset about the noise and the hours of operation; that the letter that Mr. Quinn sent the neighbors tells her to “get a lawyer”.

 

 

Janet Wheeler, 25 Livingston Street, testified that she has a question regarding the Route

303 Overlay and 25′ wide and 6′ high buffer and why that is not being addressed; and she is also concerned about the hours of operation 7 a.m. to 10 p.m., 6 days a week; and she struggles with the lack of protection for the residents.

 

Rich Addessi, 13 Livingston testified that he wishes the Quinn’s’  luck in another location; that this is a historical neighborhood and this business does not fit into it.

 

John Neill, 91  Oak Tree Lane, testified that he is a mechanical engineer and that this building is ill suited to his proposal; that VEC hearing protection is mandatory; that electrical in the floor for materials and this is making a lot of mistakes.

 

Rob Magrino, Deputy Town Attorney, stated that if the Building Department determined that the Route 303 Overlay applied to this application they would have referred it to the Board.

 

Quinn

ZBA#14-43

Page4   of   6

 

 

 

The eight points  the ZBA considers  in the granting  of a Special permit;  the Performance Standards  Resume  of Operations  and Equipment,  and the Fire Prevention  Supplement completed  by the applicant  were thereupon  reviewed  in detail.

 

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. 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:

 

The proposed  use as described  and represented  by the applicant:

 

 

1. Will be appropriately  located  with respect  to transportation,   water supply,  waste disposal,  fire and police protection  and other public  facilities.
2. Will not cause undue traffic  congestion  or create  a traffic hazard.
3. Will not create at any point  of determination   set forth in Zoning  Code §§4.16,

4.17 and 4.18 any more dangerous  and objectionable   elements  referred  to in §

4.11 than is characteristic  of the uses expressly  permitted  as of right in the same district.

4. Will not adversely  affect the character  of, or property  values  in, the area.
5. Will not otherwise  impair  the public health,  safety,  morals,  convenience,  comfort, prosperity  and other aspects  of the general  welfare  of the town.
6. Will comply with all other regulations  applicable  to such use.
7. Before  any Special  Permit  is granted,  the applicant  must secure approval  of a drainage  plan by the Town  Engineer  or the consulting  engineers  for the Town of Orangetown,  or said engineer’s   report that a drainage  plan is unnecessary.
8. The site development plan submitted  must show that concrete  sidewalks  and curbs, to be constructed  in accordance  with the specifications  of the Town  of Orangetown  are to be provided.
9. The Zoning  Board has waived  the sidewalk  and curbs requirement  (described  in

#8) because  there have never been  sidewalks  in this area and no construction  is taking place on the lot.

 

Quinn

ZBA#14-43

Page 5 of   6

 

 

 

10. Based upon the information contained in the applicant’s   Resume  of Operations and Equipment,  the Fire Prevention  Supplement,  the letter dated June  19, 2014 from Joseph  J. Moran,  P.E., Commissioner   of the Orangetown  Department  of Environmental   Management   and Engineering  (DEME)  concluding  that  there is

no reasonable  doubt  as to the likelihood  of applicant’s   conformance  to the Zoning Code § 4.1 Performance   Standards,  the memorandum   dated September  12, 2012 from Michael  B. Bettmann,  Chief Fire Inspector,  Town  of Orangetown  Bureau of Fire Prevention  (B.F.P.),  and the letter dated May  12, 2014; 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 the Performance   Standards  Conformance, pursuant  to Zoning  Code  § 4.1, is 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., letter dated May 12, 2014;  and the SPECIAL  PERMIT  §§4.16.

4.17 and 4.18   is GRANTED  for one-year  from the date of issuance  of the Certificate  of Occupancy  with hours of operation  limited  to 7:00A.M.  through   9:00 P.M. Monday through  Saturday;   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.

 

 

 

(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 Jilfri .S~e ji}(tgl”Be)1) ~f/~lbuilding   department,  be first complied  with as contemplated  hereunder.  Occupancy  will not be made until, and unless,

a Certificate  of Occupancy  i~suid     bMthe1~f~1ro~”Miiilding,   Zoning  and Planning

Administration   and Enforcement which  legally  permits  such occupancy.

N/i\01301′,JV~O   .:lO f-1/,\01

 

Quinn

ZBA#14-43

Page 6 of  6

 

 

 

(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,   and Special  Permit  § § 4.16,   4.17   and 4.18   for one year from the date of issuance   of the Certificate   of Occupancy;  with  hours of operation  limited   to 7:00

A.M.   to 9:00   P.M.,   Monday  through  Saturday;  was presented  and moved by Mr. Sullivan, seconded  by Ms.  Salomon   and carried  as follows:    Mr. Sullivan,    aye; Mr. Feroldi,   aye; and Ms.  Salomon,   aye.   Mr. Quinn recused  himself.   Mr. Bosco  and Ms.  Castelli were absent.

 

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

 

DATED:    July 2,  2014

 

 

DISTRIBUTION:

 

APPLICANT

ZBA MEMBERS SUPERVISOR

TOWN BOARD MEMBERS TOWN ATrORNEY

DEPUTY TOWN ATrORNEY OBZPAE

BUILDING  INSPECTOR-R.O.

 

ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS TOWN  OF ORANGETOWN

 

 

By                             .

Deborah  Arbolino

Administrative    Aide

 

 

TOWN CLERK

HIGHWAY   DEPARTMENT ASSESSOR

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

CHAIRMAN,   ZBA, PB, ACABOR

 

DECISION

 

 

SIDE  YARD,  REAR  YARD  AND BUILDING   HEIGHT  VARIANCES   APPROVED

 

To:  Jonathan  Hodash

60 South Main Street

New City, New York  10956

ZBA # 14-47

Date: July 2, 2014

 

 

FROM: ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS: Town of Orangetown

 

 

 

ZBA#14-47: Application of Patricia and Luis Pacquing for variances from Zoning Code (Chapter 43) of the Town of Orangetown Code, Section 3.12, R-15 District, Group M, Columns 9 (Side Yard: 20′ required, 15′ proposed), 11 (Rear Yard: 35′ required, 23.5′ proposed) and 12 (Building Height: 15′ permitted, 18.9′ proposed) for an addition to an existing residence.  The premises are located at 198 Western Highway, Tappan, New York and are identified on the Orangetown Tax Map as Section 77.06, Block 1, Lot 37; in the R-15 zoning district.

 

Heard by the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Orangetown at a meeting held on Wednesday, July 2, 2014 at which time the Board made the determination hereinafter set forth.

 

 

 

Patricia Pacquing and Jonathan Hodash appeared and testified. The following documents were presented:

1. Architectural plans dated 01/16/2014 with the latest revision date of 05/07/ 2014

signed and sealed by Jonathan Hodash, Architect. (14 pages)

2. A letter dated June 19, 2014 from the County of Rockland Drainage Agency signed by Vincent Altieri, Executive Director.
3. A letter dated June 20, 2014 from the County of Rockland Department of

Planning signed by Douglas J. Schuetz, Acting Commissioner.

4. A letter dated May 23, 2014 from the County of Rockland Department of Health singed by Scott McKane, P.E., Senior Public Health Engineer.

 

 

 

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

 

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

 

 

 

Jonathan Hodash testified that the existing house is an owner occupied two-family house; that they are before the Board for an addition of a master bedroom over the one car garage; that the family has two grown children that have moved back home with their children; that the parents are proposing the addition to have a space of their own; that the lot is oddly shaped like the letter T; and that they need minimal variances,

 

 

301J.:!O  SY~J310  NMOl

 

SC  ‘(   lJd    12  1nr  tilOZ

 

1

N N” l0 ..I_ 1  Cl•hi ·\-·” L‘0

.:.I .0  1″‘  1u. \ 0 .L

 

.:J \)                                 i~

 

 

Pacquing

ZBA#l4-47

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

Mr. Quinn 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 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.  Similar additions  have been constructed  in the area.

 

 

 

 

2. The requested 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.  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  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.

 

 

 

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.

 

 

 

Pacquing

ZBA#l4-47

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  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.

 

 

 

(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.

 

 

 

Pacquing

ZBA#14-47

Page  4 of  4

 

 

 

 

The foregoing  resolution  to approve  the application   for the requested  side  yard,  rear yard, and building   height  variances   were presented  and moved by Ms.  Salomon,   seconded  by Mr. Quinn and carried  as follows:    Mr. Feroldi,   aye; Ms.  Salomon,   aye; Mr. Quinn,   aye; and  Mr. Sullivan,   aye.  Mr. Bosco  and Ms.  Castelli  were absent.

 

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

 

DATED:    July  2, 2014

 

ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS TOWN  OF ORANGETOWN

 

DISTRIBUTION:

 

APPLICANT ZBA MEMBERS SUPERVISOR

TOWN BOARD MEMBERS

TOWN ATTORNEY

DEPUTY TOWN ATTORNEY OBZPAE

BUILDING  INSPECTOR-M.M.

Administrative   Aide

 

 

TOWN CLERK

HIGHWAY   DEPARTMENT ASSESSOR

DEPT. of ENVIRONMENTAL

MGMT. and ENGINEERING FILE,ZBA,  PB

CHAIRMAN,  ZBA, PB,  ACABOR

 

 

DECISION

 

TOTAL   SIDE  YARD  AND DISTANCE   BETWEEN    STRUCTURE    VARIANCES APPROVED

 

To: Jonathan  Hodash   (Stefanovich)

60 So. Main Street

New  City, New York  10956

ZBA#   14-48

Date:  July 2, 2014

 

 

FROM:  ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS:  Town  of Orangetown

 

 

 

 

ZBA#14-48:  Application  of Michael  Stefanovich  for variances  from Zoning  Code (Chapter  43) of the Town  of  Orangetown  Code,  Section  3.12, R-15 District,  Column  10 (Total  Side Yard:  50′ required,  48.27′  proposed)   and  from Section  5.153 (Distance between  structures:  15′ required,  13.2′  proposed  & existing) for an existing outdoor kitchen to and existing single-family residence. The premises are located at 5 East Lowe Lane, Orangeburg, New York and are identified on the Orangetown Tax Map as Section

74.14, Block 2, Lot 26; R-15 zoning district.

 

Heard by the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Orangetown at a meeting held on Wednesday, July 2, 2014 at which time the Board made the determination hereinafter set forth.

 

 

 

Jonathan Hodash, Architect, appeared and testified. The following documents were presented:

1. Architectural plans dated 05/16/2014 with the latest revision date of 05/12/ 2014 signed and sealed by Jonathan Hodash, Architect. (1 page)
2. A letter dated June 20, 2014 from the County of Rockland department of Planning signed by Douglas J. Schuetz, Acting Commissioner.
3. A letter dated June 19, 2014from the County of Rockland Drainage Agency signed by Vincent Altieri, Executive Director.
4. A letter dated May 23, 2014 from the County of Rockland Department of Health signed by Scott McKane, P.E., Senior Public Health Engineer.
5. A letter in support of the application signed by nine neighbors.

 

 

 

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

 

On advice of Robert Magrino, 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 requireSEQRA environmental review. The motion was seconded by Mr. Quinn and carried as follows: Ms. Salomon, aye; Mr. Feroldi, aye; Mr. Quinn, aye; and Mr. Sullivan, aye. Mr. Bosco and Ms. Castelli were absent.

Jonathan Hodash, Architect, testified that the application is before the Board to legalize and existing outdoor kitchen that was constructed without a permit and accessory structure distance; that the shed is too close to the outdoor kitchen; that the applicant was in court for v~olationst~at have.Reeq rec~~~~1l151tt~~pe~d to o?tain varianc~s in order

to get a permit  for the kitchen a~~HScPahd’        H1e proper inspections  and certificate of occupancy for them.                 SS   t  LJd   12  lDP  hlOZ

 

Nh\013 ~ [·~V·d 0  so Nh\01

 

 

Stefanovich

ZBA#14-48

Page 2 of  4

 

 

Public  Comment:

 

 

Paula Fasulo,  5 Heather  Lane, testified  that she has lived in her house  for 49 years; that she is the diagonal  back neighbor  to the applicant;  that when they installed  their pool in

2005 she got all the mud and dirt in her yard; that last year when the kitchen  went in she complained  and she put in thousands  of dollars  into  her  property  for berms  to direct water away; that she spoke to Ed McPhearson  in January  2013 and he said he would investigate;;  in February  she got additional  information  and in March,  she was told  a violation  letter was sent; but in April the letter had not been sent; that she has been ignored  and she wonders  how a pool can be constructed  in 2005 and not get a certificate of occupancy;  that she would  like an inspector  to inspect what was done and make sure no more water is directed  to her property.

 

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  total side yard and distance  between  structure  variances  will not produce  an undesirable  change  in the character  of the neighborhood  or a detriment  to nearby properties.  Similar  structures  have been constructed  in the area.

 

 

 

 

2. The requested total side yard and distance between structure variances will not have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. Similar structures 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 total side yard  and distance between structure 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.

 

 

 

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

4~) and is proposing a n~ag~~i~1~Hlj~”1PfilVements, so the alleged difficulty

was self-created, which conbcTeratiCiri·wareslevant to the decision of the Board of

Appeals, but did not, byg~el~ Ptif8lucip2h~Prafl{Ulogf the area variances.

 

Stefanovich

ZBA#14-48

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 and distance between  structure  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 Perrnit 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.

 

 

 

Stefanovich

ZBA#14-48

Page  4 of  4

 

 

 

The foregoing   resolution   to approve  the application    for the requested  total  side yard and distance between  structure  variances   was presented  and moved by Mr. Feroldi,   seconded by Mr. Quinn  and carried  as follows:     Ms. Salomon,   aye; Mr. Ferolcli,   aye;  Mr. Quinn, aye; and  Mr. Sullivan,   aye.  Mr. Bosco  and Ms.   Castelli  were absent.

 

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

 

DATED:    July 2,  2014

 

ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS TO\VN  OF ORANGETOWN

 

 

DISTRIBUTION:

 

APPLICANT

ZBA   MEMBERS SUPERVISOR

TOWN  BOARD  MEMBERS

TOWN  ATTORNEY

DEPUTY  TOWN  ATTORNEY OBZPAE

BUILDING    TNSPECTOR-8.vW.

By~~

Deborah  Arbolino

Administrative   Aide

 

 

TOWN   CLERK

HIGHWAY     DEPARTMENT ASSESSOR

DEPT. or ENVIRONMENTAL

MGMT.  and ENGINEERING

FILE,ZBA,    PB

CHAIRMAN,      ZBA,   PI3,   ACABOR

 

 

 

DECISION

 

FLOOR   AREA  RATIO,   BUILDING   HEIGHT   AND ACCESSORY    STRUCTURE DISTANCE   VARIANCES    APPROVED

 

To:  Ryan Bourke

141 Martin  Place

Pearl River, New York  10965

ZBA#   14-49

Date:  July 2, 2014

 

 

FROM:  ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS:  Town  of Orangetown

 

 

 

ZBA#14-49:  Application  of Ryan Bourke  for variances  from Zoning  Code (Chapter  43) of the Town of Orangetown  Code, Section  3.12, RG District,  Columns  4 (Floor Area Ratio:  .30 permitted,  .34 proposed)  and 12 (Building  Height:   20′  permitted,  25′ proposed)  and from Section  5.227 (Accessory  Structure  Distance  from lot line: 5′ required,  O’  existing)  for an existing  shed and an addition  to an existing  single-family residence.  The premises  are located  at 141 Martin  Place, Pearl River, New York and are identified  on the Orangetown  Tax Map as Section  68.20, Block 2, Lot 54; RG zoning district.

 

Heard by the Zoning  Board  of Appeals  of the Town  of Orangetown  at a meeting  held on Wednesday,  July 2, 2014 at which time the Board made the determination  hereinafter  set forth.

 

 

 

Ryan and Katherine  Bourke  appeared  and testified. The following  documents  were presented:

1. Architectural  plans  dated 09/13/2013  with the latest revision  date of 02/17 I 2014

signed and sealed by Barbara Hess, Architect. (1 page elevations)

2. Bulk Table signed and sealed by Barbara Hess, Architect.
3. Survey dated June 24, 2009 by Frank M. Hoens, L.S..

 

 

 

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

 

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

 

 

 

Ryan Bourke testified that the house is a small two bedroom cape; that the second bedroom is the upstairs attic space; that they would like to add a full second floor to the house and have three bedrooms and two bathrooms upstairs and tum the existing bedroom on the first floor into a family/ playroom; that they are ready to start a family and would like all of the bedrooms on one floor; that they are not proposing any change to the existing footprint; that the shed existed on the property as is when they purchased the house; that they realize that it is over the property line by 1.4′ but it is at least fifty years old and would probably fall apart if they tried to move it.

 

 

Bourke

ZBA#14-49

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, building  height,  and accessory  structure  distance variances  will not produce  an undesirable  change in the character  of the neighborhood or a detriment  to nearby  properties.  Similar  additions  have been constructed  in the area.

 

2. The Zoning  Board of Appeals  [or just  “Board”]acknowledges    the location  of the existing  shed and the Board does not authorize  the encroachment  onto the neighbors’ property  but grants a O’  setback.

 

 

 

3. The requested floor area ratio, building  height  and accessory  structure  distance variances  will not have an adverse  effect or impact  on the physical  or environmental conditions  in the neighborhood   or district.  Similar  additions  have been constructed  in the area.

 

 

 

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

 

5. The requested  floor area ratio, building  height  and accessory  structure  distance 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.

 

 

 

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.

 

Bourke

ZBA#14-49

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  floor area ratio, building height  and accessory  structuredistance   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.

 

Bourke

ZBA#14-49

Page  4 of  4

 

 

The foregoing  resolution  to approve  the application  for the requested  floor area ratio, building  height  and accessory  structure distance  variances  were presented  and moved by Mr. Quinn,  seconded  by Ms.  Salomon   and caniecl   as follows:    Mr. Ferolcli,  aye; Ms. Salomon,  aye;  Mr. Quinn,   aye; and  Mr. Sullivan,   aye.  Mr. Bosco  and Ms.  Castelli  were absent.

 

 

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

 

DATED:   July  2, 2014

 

 

ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS TOWN  OF ORANGETOWN

 

 

DISTRIBUTION:

 

APPLICANT ZBA MEMBERS SUPERVISOR

TOWN BOARD MEMBERS TOWN ATIORNEY

DEPUTY TOWN ATIORNEY OBZPAE

BUILDING  INSPECTOR-B.  vW.

By-4£.-(44~:..=.sL.L,..~~~ Deborah  Arbo ino Administrative    Aide

 

 

TOWN CLERK

HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT ASSESSOR

DEPT. of ENVIRONMENTAL

MGMT. and ENGINEERING FILE,ZBA,  PB

CHAIRMAN,   ZBA, PB,  ACABOR

 

DECISION

 

 

FLOOR AREA RATIO, BUILDING HEIGHT  AND ACCESSORY STRUCTURE DISTANCE VARIANCES APPROVED

 

To:  Rick and Elizabeth Oliver

134 Prospect Place

Pearl River, New York 10965

ZBA#  14-50

Date: July 2, 2014

 

 

FROM: ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS: Town of Orangetown

 

 

 

 

ZBA#14-50: Application of Rick and Elizabeth Oliver for variance from Zoning Code (Chapter 43) of the Town of Orangetown Code, Section 3 .12, RG District, Group Q, Column 4 (Floor Area Ratio: .30 permitted,  .302  proposed) and from Section 5.227 : (Accessory Structure Distance from property line: 5′ required, 1.8’existing & proposed

for side yard and 3′ existing for rear yard, 9″ proposed)  (Building Height: 15′ permitted,

15.4′ proposed)for an addition to an existing detached garage at an existing single-family residence. The premises are located at 134 Prospect Place, Pearl River, New York and are identified on the Orangetown Tax Map as Section 68.20, Block 2, Lot 41; RG zoning district.

 

Heard by the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Orangetown at a meeting held on Wednesday, July 2, 2014 at which time the Board made the determination hereinafter set forth.

 

 

 

Rick Oliver and Donald Brenner, Attorney, appeared and testified. The following documents were presented:

1. Architectural plans  labeled “Oliver Cabana Floor Plan, Front Elevation,& Right

Elevation” (3 pages)

2. Computer generated picture of the proposal.
3. Survey dated June 16, 1996 by William Youngblood, L.S ..
4. A letter in support of the application signed by six abutting property owners.

 

 

 

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

 

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

 

 

 

Donald Brenner, Attorney, testified that he is representing Mr. Oliver and not charging a fee; that the garage exists in the present location and the setbacks are not actually changing; that the property is well kept and the floor area ratio is a minimal increase.

 

Rick Oliver testified that he would like to add a second floor to the existing garage to use a pool cabana; that the garage is set low on the property and the second story will be used at the pool level of the property; that it will Pr?vide a c11W~ing area, bathroom and hang

out area for the pool; that there wiBl ~k’aiiC’e~’r~i~fbJiri! ~forage area for the patio

furniture and room for the pool e~~tnrnbd      12  1nr   hrn2

 

NfAOL:i D [j\f  u 0  .:i 0 Ni.\01

 

Oliver

ZBA#14-50

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

Mr. Quinn 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, building  height,  and accessory  structure  distance variances  will not produce  an undesirable  change in the character  of the neighborhood or a detriment  to nearby  properties.  The existing  garage is set low in the property  and the purposed  second story will appear like a single-story  building  from the street.

 

2. The pool cabana shall not be used as a dwelling  unit, or residential  apartment,  or for sleeping /living  quarters.

 

 

 

 

3. The requested floor area ratio, building  height  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 existing  garage is set low in the property  and the purposed  second story will appear like a single-story  building  from the street.

 

 

 

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

 

5. The requested  floor area ratio, building  height  and accessory  structure  distance 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.

 

 

 

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.

 

 

Oliver

ZBA#14-50

Page  3   of 4

 

 

 

7. DECISION: In view of the foregoing and the testimony and documents presented, the Board: RESOLVED, that the application for the requested floor area ratio, building height and accessory structure variances are APPROVED with the specific condition that the pool cabana shall not be used as a dwelling unit, or residential apartment, or for sleeping /living quarters; 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.

 

 

Oliver

ZBA#l4-50

Page  4 of  4

 

 

The foregoing   resolution  to approve  the application   for the requested   floor area ratio, building   height   and accessory  structure  distance   variances   with the specific  condition    that that the pool  cabana shall not be used as a dwelling  unit, or residential apartment, or for sleeping /living  quarters;  were presented and moved by Mr. Sullivan,  seconded by Ms. Salomon and carried as follows:   Mr. Ferolcli, aye; Ms. Salomon,  aye; Mr. Quinn,  aye; and Mr. Sullivan,  aye. Mr. Bosco and Ms. Castelli were absent.

 

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

 

DATED: July 2, 2014

 

 

ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF ORANGETOWN

 

 

DISTJUBUTION:

 

APPLICANT

ZBA MEMBERS SUPERVISOR

TOWN BOARD MEMBERS TOWN ATIORNEY

DEPUTY TOWN ATIORNEY

OBZPAE

BUILDING   INSPECTOR-M.M.

Administrative  Aide

 

 

TOWN CLERK

HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT ASSESSOR

DEPT. of ENVIRONMENTAL

MGMT. and ENGINEERING FILE,ZBA,  PB

CHAIRMAN,    ZBA,  PB,  ACABOR

 

DECISION

 

 

SIDE  YARD  VARIANCE   APPROVED    AS MODIFIED REAR  YARD  VARIANCE   REQUEST   WITHDRAWN

 

To:  Morrie Brown

57 Ludlow  Lane

Palisades,  New York  10964

ZBA # 14-51

Date: July 2, 2014

 

 

FROM: ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS: Town of Orangetown

 

 

 

ZBA#14-51: Application of Morrie Brown for variances  from Chapter 43 (Zoning) of the Code of the Town of Orangetown, Section 3.12, R-80 District, Group A, Columns 9 (Side Yard: 30′ required, 10′ proposed), and 11 (Rear Yard: 50′ required, 48.5′ proposed)  for a pool cabana at an existing single-family residence. The premises are located at 57 Ludlow Lane, Palisades, New York, and identified on the Orangetown Tax Map as Section 80.06, Block 1, Lot 25; R-80 zoning district.                                      ·

 

Heard by the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Orangetown at a meeting held on Wednesday, July 2, 2014 at which time the Board made the determination hereinafter set forth.

 

 

 

Morrie Brown and William Pfaff appeared and testified. The following documents were presented:

1. Site plan dated 04/03/2014 signed and sealed by Anthony R. Celentano, P.L.S.

 

 

 

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

 

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

 

 

Morrie Brown testified that they are in the process of installing their pool; that they are proposing the pool cabana on the second tier of the property; that they are adjusting the design to save a 150 year old oak tree; that they would like to move the cabana to have a

13 foot side yard setback and a 58 foot rear yard setback; that in order to save the tree they need to make the cabana smaller and that they will go back to the historic board for those changes.

 

Brown

ZBA#14-51

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  andas  generally  described  on the application.

 

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

Municipal  Law of New York was received.

 

 

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

Mr. Quinn 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  side yard variance,  as modified  to a 13′ setback,  will not produce  an undesirable  change in the character  of the neighborhood   or a detriment  to nearby properties.  Similar pools  and cabanas’  have been constructed  in the area.

 

2. The proposed  pool cabana shall not be used as a dwelling  unit, or residential apartment,  or for sleeping  /living  quarters.

 

3. The requested side yard variance,  as modified  to a 13 ‘setback,  will not have an adverse  effect or impact  on the physical  or environmental   conditions  in the neighborhood  or district.  Similar pools  and cabanas’  have been constructed  in the area.

 

 

 

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  side yard variance,  as modified  to a 13′ setback,  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.

 

 

 

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.

 

Brown

ZBA#14-51

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  side yard variance,  as modified  to a 13′ setback,  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.

 

Brown

ZBA#14-51

Page  4 of  4

 

 

The foregoing  resolution   to approve  the application  for the requested   side yard variance, as modified  to a  13’setback;    was presented  and moved by Ms.   Salomon,  seconded by Mr. Quinn  and carried  as follows:   Mr. Feroldi,  aye; Ms.  Salomon,    aye;  Mr. Quinn, aye; and  Mr. Sullivan,   aye.  Mr. Bosco and Ms.  Castelli  were absent.

 

 

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

 

DATED:    July 2,  2014

 

 

ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS TO\VN  OF ORANGETOWN

 

DISTRIBUTION:

 

APPLICANT

ZBA  MEMBERS SUPERVISOR

TOWN BOARD  MEMBERS TOWN ATTORNEY

DEPUTY  TOWN ATTORNEY OBZPAE

BUILDING    INSPECTOR-13.vW.

Deborah  Arbo lino

Administrative   Aide

 

 

TOWN   CLERK

HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT ASSESSOR

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

CHAIRMAN,     ZBA,  PB,  ACABOR

 

DECISION

 

 

FRONT   YARD  VARIANCE    APPROVED

 

To:  Rick Katzen

9 Colony Drive

Blauvelt,  New York  10913

ZBA#   14-52

Date:  July 2, 2014

 

 

FROM:  ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS:  Town  of Orangetown

 

 

ZBA#l 4-52: Application  of  Rick Katzen  for variances   from Chapter  43 (Zoning)  of the Code of the Town of Orangetown,  Section  3.12, R-40 District,  Group E, Column  8 (Front Yard:  50′ required,  43.75′  proposed)  for an addition  to  an existing  single-family

residence.   The premises  are located  at 9 Colony  Drive, Blauvelt,  New York,  and

identified  on the Orangetown  Tax Map as Section  70.09, Block 3, Lot 60; R-40 zoning district.

 

Heard by the Zoning  Board of Appeals  of the Town  of Orangetown  at a meeting  held on Wednesday,  July 2, 2014 at which  time the Board made the determination  hereinafter  set forth.

 

 

 

Rick and Celia Katzen  appeared  and testified. The following  documents  were presented:

1. Architectural  plans dated 05/28/2008  signed  and sealed by Margaret  Fowler, Architect.  ( 5 pages)

 

 

 

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

 

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

Sullivan,  aye. Mr. Bosco  and Ms. Castelli were absent.

 

 

 

 

Rick Katzen testified  that they did a lot of work  on the house in 2009 and at the time wanted to add a front porch but decided  that the scope of the work was large enough without  adding the porch  at the time; that they have since decided  to proceed  with the porch and are before the Board because  they need a front yard variance;  and that there are other houses  on the street with front porches.

 

 

Katzen

ZBA#14-52

Page2  of  4

 

 

Public  Comment:

 

 

No public  comment.

 

 

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

 

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

Municipal  Law of New York was received.

 

 

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

Ms. Salomon  and carried unanimously.

 

 

FINDINGS  OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS:

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

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

 

 

 

1. The requested  front yard variance  will not produce  an undesirable  change in the character  of the neighborhood   or a detriment  to nearby  properties.  Similar additions have been constructed  in the area.

 

 

 

 

2. The requested  front yard variance  will not have an adverse  effect or impact  on the physical  or enviromnental   conditions  in the neighborhood  or district.  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  a variance.

 

 

 

4. The requested  front yard variance  is 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.

 

Katzen

ZBA#14-52

Page  3   of  4

 

 

DECISION:  In view of the foregoing  and the testimony  and documents  presented,  the Board:  RESOLVED,  that the application  for the requested  front yard variance  is APPROVED;   and 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.

 

Katzen

ZBA#14-52

Page  4 of  4

 

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

Mr. Bosco and Ms.  Castelli  were absent.

 

 

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

 

DATED:   July 2, 2014

 

 

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.

By…’L…..lec.Li~~=-:.~~~ Deborah  Arbolino” Administrative   Aide

 

 

TOWN CLERK

HIGHWAY  DEPARTMENT ASSESSOR

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

CHAIRMAN,   ZBA, PB, ACABOR

 

DECISION

 

 

FLOOR AREA RATIO, FRONT YARD AND BUILDING HEIGHT  VARIANCES APPROVED

 

To:  Jay Greenwell (SMK Homes)

85 Lafayette Avenue

Suffern, New York 10901

ZBA # 14-53

Date:  July 2, 2014

 

 

FROM: ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS: Town of Orangetown

 

 

ZBA# 14-53: Application of  SMK Homes for valiances  from Chapter 43 (Zoning) of the Code of the Town of Orangetown, Section 3.12, R-15 District, Group M, Columns 4 (Floor Area Ratio: .20 permitted, .25 proposed) 8 (Front Yard: 30′ required, 29 .3′ proposed) and 12 (Building Height: 20.1 permitted, 26′ proposed) to complete construction of a single-family residence. The premises are located at 75 Mountain

View Avenue, Pearl River, New York, and identified on the Orangetown  Tax Map as

Section 69.17, Block 5, Lot 1.2; R-15 zoning district,

 

 

 

Heard by the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Orangetown at a meeting held on Wednesday, July 2, 2014 at which time the Board made the determination hereinafter set forth.

 

 

 

Jay Greenwell, Land Surveyor and Robert Hoene, Architect, appeared and testified. The following documents were presented:

1. Architectural plans dated  03/05/2013 with the latest revision date of 0610912014

signed and sealed by Robert  Hoene, Architect. (2 pages)

2. Plot plan for lot #2 Charles Subdivision dated 07/07 /05 with the latest revision date of 061051 2014 signed and sealed by Jay A. Greenwell, Land Surveyor.

 

 

 

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

 

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

Sullivan, aye. Mr. Bosco and Ms. Castelli were absent.

 

Jay Greenwell, Land Surveyor, testified that he was involved in this project when the subdivision was purposed; that it originates as the Charles Subdivision; that the person that purchased the lot did not follow the approved plan; that the foundation that he installed was larger than it was suppose to be; that the property was forclosed on and Mr. Keenan purchased it; that Mr. Hoene has been working with him to get an accurate as built on the foundation that was installed; that in order to proceed and correct the denuted lot they need the requested front yard, floor area ratio and building height variances; that the lot has been sitting in its present state for seven years and proceeding with

construction will improve the lot for Mr. Charles and stabilize his lot.

 

SMKHomes

ZBA#14-53

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, front yard and building height variances will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. The property has been cleared of trees and sitting in a horrible state of disrepair for years and granting the variances for the new owner to proceed with building will be a welcome improvement for the neighborhood.

 

 

 

 

2. The requested floor area ratio, front yard and building height variances will not have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. . The property has been cleared of trees and sitting in a horrible state of disrepair for years and granting the variances for the new owner to proceed with building will be a welcome improvement for 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.

 

4. The requested floor area ratio, front 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 .. The property has been cleared of trees and sitting in a horrible state of disrepair for years and granting the variances for the new owner to proceed with building will be a welcome improvement for 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.

 

·J    i·~i.\   –

38\.:L:lO  S\1.\-.1::-1 1″   !.tPQl

 

SMKHomes

ZBA#14-53

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  floor area ratio, front 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.

 

 

 

(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.

 

SMK Homes

ZBA#l4-53

Page 4 of 4

 

 

The foregoing resolution   to approve  the application   for the requested floor area ratio, front yard and building height  variances  were  presented and moved by Mr. Feroldi, seconded  by Ms.  Salomon   and  carried as follows:   Ms.  Salomon,   aye; Mr. Feroldi,  aye; Mr. Quinn,  aye; and Mr.  Sullivan,  aye. Mr. Bosco and Ms. Castelli were absent.

 

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

 

DATED:   July 2, 2014

 

ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF ORANGETOWN

 

DISTRIBUTION:

 

APPLICANT

ZBA   MEMBERS SUPERVISOR

TOWN  130ARD MEMBERS TOWN  ATTORNEY

DEPUTY  TOWN  ATTORNEY OBZPAE

BUILDING    INSPECTOR-B.vW.

 

Byr-‘…….,_,”-=–=o…L.<.Lf-w–:7’1’::,..LY Deborah Arbolrno

Administrative   Aide

 

 

TOWN   CLERK

HIGHWAY    DEPARTMENT ASSESSOR

DEPT.   of ENVIRONMENTAL

MGMT.  and ENGINEERING Fl LE,ZBA,   PB

CHAIRMAN,      ZBA,  PB,  ACABOR