Meeting Overview

MINUTES

ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS JUNE  18, 2014

 

MEMBERS  PRESENT:

JOAN  SALOMON PATRICIA  CASTELLI THOMAS  QUINN

LEONARD  FEROLDI,  ALTERNATE DANIEL  SULLIVAN,  CHAIRMAN

 

ABSENT:

 

 

MICHAEL  BOSCO

 

ALSO PRESENT:

Dennis  Michaels,  Esq. Ann Marie Ambrose, Deborah  Arbolino

Deputy  Town Attorney Official  Stenographer Administrative   Aide

 

 

 

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

 

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

 

 

 

APPLICANTS

 

 

NEW  ITEMS:

PUBLISHED   ITEMS DECISIONS

 

QUINN                                       CONTINUED PERFORMANCE   STANDARDS

77.15 I 1I42;  CS zone

ZBA#14-43

 

SHEELEY

70.10 I 2 I 3; R-15 zone

 

 

 

HOLMES

77.10 I 2 I 82; R-15 zone

 

 

MURPHY

69.14 I 3 I 38; R-15 zone

TOTAL SIDE YARD AND                          ZBA#14-44

REAR AYRD VARIANCES APPROVED

 

 

 

 

FLOOR AREA RATIO VARIANCE           ZBA#14-45

APPROVED

 

 

FLOOR AREA RATIO, FRONT YARD,     ZBA#l 4-46

SIDE AYRD, TOTAL SIDE YARD, BUILDING HEIGHT,§ 4.52 AND§  3.11,

COLUMN 2 #7 VARIANCES APPROVED

 

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  9:25   P.M.

 

Dated:    June  16,   2014

ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS TOWN  OF ORANGETOWN

 

 

DISTRIBUTION: APPLICANT

TOWN  ATTORNEY

DEPUTY    TOWN  ATTORNEY TOWN  BOARD  MEMBERS

BUILDING     INSPECTOR    (Individual      Decisions) Rockland   County Planning

By~

Deborah  Arbolino

Administrative    Aide

 

 

DECISION

 

 

TOTAL SIDE  YARD  AND REAR  YARD  VARIANCES    APPROVED

 

To:  Barry Terach  (Sheeley)

8TumerRoad

Central Valley, New York  10917

ZBA # 14-44

Date:  June  18, 2014

 

 

FROM:  ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS:  Town  of Orangetown

 

 

ZBA#14-44:  Application  of  Michael  and Ann Marie  Sheeley  for variances  from Zoning Code (Chapter  43)  of the Town  of Orangetown  Code,  Section  3.12, R-15 District, Columns  10 {Total Side Yard: 50′  required,  48.1″  proposed)   and 11  (Rear Yard: 35′ required,  31.4′  proposed)  for an addition  to an existing  single-family  residence.  The premises  are located  at 12 Garber Hill Road, Blauvelt,  New York  and are identified  on the Orangetown  Tax Map as Section  70.10, Block 2, Lot 3; R-15 zoning  district.

 

 

 

 

 

Heard by the Zoning  Board of Appeals  of the Town  of Orangetown  at a meeting  held on Wednesday,  June  18, 2014 at which  time the Board made the determination  hereinafter set forth.

 

 

 

Michael  and Ann Marie  Sheeley  and Barry Terach,  Architect,  appeared  and testified. The following  documents  were presented:

1. Architectural  plans dated April 24, 2014 signed  and sealed by Barry Terach, Architect.  (4 pages)
2. A letter dated June  17, 2014 from the County of Rockland  Department  of

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

3. A letter dated May 23, 2014 from the County of Rockland  Department  of Health signed by Scott McKane,  P .E., Senior Public  Health Engineer.
4. A letter dated June  16, 2014 from the County  of Rockland  Department  of

Highways  signed by Sonny Lin, P .E ..

 

 

 

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

 

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

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

 

 

 

 

Barry Terach  testified  that the applicant  would  like to enhance  the existing  spaces and

add a master  suite, mudroom,  laundry  room and bathroom;  that the property  is pie shaped and the house  is located  toward the rear of the property;  that the rear yard is not large;

that there are four in the family; that the existing  rear yard deck is 26 Yi’ from the rear

property  line and the proposed  rear addition  will be 31.4′  from the rear property  line; that

31

they cannot see a pool from their deck and that the neighbors  might be mixing  tJYB   ~, 1     \i      Q    N fAo 1

property  up with a different  lot.                                                                           3 ~.n .:i-       ..,   · ·      ···

 

 

Sheeley

ZBA#14-44

Page2  of  4

 

 

Public  Comment:

 

 

Paul Markatos,  90 Yale Terrace,  testified  that he would like to make three points,  (1)

there is a drainage  problem  in the area and he would  like to request  that the application  be reviewed  by the DEME to ensure no increase  in run-off;  (2) the addition  is jutting  very close to the location  of his pool and he would  like to request  that some planting  be done between  the properties  for privacy;  and that if not greenery  a fence be constructed.

 

Sandra Markatos,  90 Yale Terrace,  testified  that she is concerned  about how close the addition  will be to their existing  pool and about privacy.

 

Matthey  Levy, 8 Garber Hill, testified  that his home is two houses  away from the property;  that he is in favor of this improvement;  that presently  the drainage  runs down the driveway  across the cul-de-sac  into the storm drain.

 

The applicant  and the concerned  neighbors  had a private  conversation  and the Markatos’ withdrew  their concern because  the subject property  is not abutting  them.

 

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

 

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

Municipal  Law of New York was received.

 

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

Ms. Castelli  and carried unanimously.

 

 

FINDINGS  OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS:

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

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

 

 

 

1. The requested  total side yard and rear yard 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 total side yard and rear yard 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   total side yard and rear yard 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 surroun~netgHbbtR&oef  8t0dearby community.

 

ZBA#l4-44

Page  3   of  4

 

 

 

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

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

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

General  Conditions:

 

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

 

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

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

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

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

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

sole judgment  of the building  department,  be first complied  with as contemplated hereunder.  Occupancy  will not be made until,  and unless,  a Certificate  ofOccupancy   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.

 

ZBA#14-44

Page  4 of  4

 

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

 

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:    June  18,  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.

By-L.~..v-i-~<!…L_L.£.t-~~ 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  RA TIO  VARIAN CE   APPROVED

 

To:  Eric Holmes

12 Central Avenue

Tappan,  New York  10983

ZBA # 14-45

Date:  June  18, 2014

 

 

FROM:  ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS:  Town of Orangetown

 

 

ZBA#14-45:  Application  of  Eric Holmes  for a variance  from Chapter  43 (Zoning)  of the

Code of the Town of Orangetown,  R-15 District,  Group M, Column  4 (Floor Area Ratio:

.20 permitted,  .29 proposed)   (Section  5.21 undersized  lot applies)for  an addition  to an existing  single-family  residence.  The premises  are located  at 12 Central Avenue,  Tappan, New York and are identified  on the Orangetown  Tax Map as Section  77.10, Block 2, Lot

82; R-15 zoning  district.

 

 

 

Heard by the Zoning  Board of Appeals  of the Town of Orangetown  at a meeting  held on Wednesday,  June  18, 2014 at which  time the Board made the determination  hereinafter set forth.

 

 

 

Eric and Rosary Holmes  appeared  and testified. The following  documents  were presented:

1. Architectural  plans dated 03/05/2013  with the latest revision  date of04/25/ 2014 signed and sealed by Robert   Hoene,  Architect.  (2 pages)
2. A letter dated June  11, 2014 from the County  of Rockland  Department  of

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

3. A letter dated County  of Rockland  Department  of Highways  signed by Sonny Lin, P.E ..

 

 

 

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

 

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

 

Eric Holmes  testified  that they purchased  the house  in 2008; that they have three

children;  that they are proposing  to add a master  bedroom  and bathroom  at the rear of the house; that the addition  is approximately  450 sq. ft.; that they will have four bedrooms when the construction  is done and the girls will not have to share a room.

 

Public  Comment:

 

 

No public  comment.

 

 

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

 

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

Municipal  Law of New York was received.

 

 

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

Ms. Castelli  and carried unanimously.

 

 

FINDINGS  OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS:

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

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

 

 

 

1. The requested  floor area ratio 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 floor  area ratio variance  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  a variance.

 

4. The requested  floor area ratio variance,  although  somewhat  substantial,  affords benefits  to the applicant  that is 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.

 

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

 

 

 

 

General  Conditions:

 

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

 

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

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

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

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

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

 

 

 

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

 

The foregoing  resolution  to approve  the application  for the requested  floor area ratio variance   was  presented  and moved by Mr. Feroldi,  seconded  by Ms.  Salomon   and canied  as follows:    Ms. Castelli,   aye;  Ms. Salomon,  aye;  Mr. Feroldi,  aye; Mr. Quinn, aye; and  Mr. Sullivan,   aye.  Mr. Bosco  was absent.

 

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

 

DATED:    June  18,   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.

By~.:f£…l..<.=i,.’-=–“””‘:L-“”~..a_..~ 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  RA TIO,  FRONT   YARD,  SIDE  YARD,  TOT AL SIDE  YARD, BUILDING   HEIGHT,  § 4.52, § 3.11, COLUMN   2 #7  VARIANCES   APPROVED;

• 4.54 VARIANCE IS NOT  NECESSARY

 

To:  Michael  Murphy

86 Buchanan  Street

Pearl River, New York  10965

ZBA # 14-46

Date: June 18, 2014

 

 

FROM: ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS: Town of Orangetown

 

 

ZBA:l4-46: Application of Michael Murphy for variances  from Chapter 43 (Zoning) of the Code of the Town of Orangetown, R-15 District, Group M, Columns 4 (Floor Area ratio: .20 permitted, .25 proposed), 8 (Front Yard: 30′ required, 29′ existing & proposed), ((Side Yard: 20′ required, 6.5′ proposed), IO{TotalSide Yard:  50′ required, 29.l’ existing, 15.6′ proposed), 12 (Building Height: 6.5′ permitted, 20′ proposed) and from Sections 4.52 (No exterior change within the past 10 years to create an additional

dwelling unit), 4.54 ( only one front entrance permitted, two front entrances proposed) and from Section 3.11, Column 2 #7 (unit limited to 600 sq. ft., 806 sq. ft. proposed) for an addition to an existing single-family residence. The premises are located at 86

Buchanan Street, Pearl River, New York, and identified on the Orangetown Tax Map as

Section 68.14, Block 3, Lot 38; R-15 zoning district.

 

 

 

Heard by the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Orangetown at a meeting held on Wednesday, June 18, 2014 at which time the Board made the determination hereinafter set forth.

 

 

 

Michael and Jane Murphy and Lisa Mecurio, Designer, appeared and testified. The following documents were presented:

1. Architectural plans dated 07/13/2013 with the latest revision date of 04/16/ 2014 signed and sealed by Bart Rodi, P.E.. (3 pages)
2. Survey dated March 20, 2014 signed and sealed by Robert Sorace, PLS.
3. A letter dated June 17, 2014 from the County of Rockland Department of

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

4. A letter dated June 16, 2014 from the County of Rockland Drainage Agency signed by Vincent Altieri.
5. A letter dated May 23, 2014 from the County of Rockland Department of Health signed by Scott McKane, Senior Public Health Engineer.
6. Nine computer generated pictures of house in the area with additions.

 

 

 

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 Ms. Castelli and

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

and Mr. Sullivan, aye.

 

 

3 Cl I .:L:l 0  SY T:11 Cl  N A\ 0 l LO   2   lJd    0 8  Nnr    hlOZ Nh\013 ~HJV2 0  .:W  l·L\01

 

 

Michael  Murphy  testified  that they are proposing  the addition  to accommodate  his in• laws; that his father-in-law  is 82 and uses a wheelchair;  that they presently  live in a basement  apartment  and it is getting  very difficult  to navigate;  that they are very nervous being in the basement  apartment  since super storm sandy; that they are requesting  a larger apartment  than is permitted  to accommodate  the handicap  access;  that the hallways  and bathroom  are mush larger to accommodate  the wheelchair;  that they have Iived in the house for seventeen years and have three children.

 

Jane Murphy testified that she visited her friends house in Pearl River and looked at the apartment that her mom lives in, which is the required 600 sq. ft.; that the apartment is fine for a single person that does not require a wheelchair but it would be too small to accommodate two people and a wheelchair; and that she would like her parents to be comfortable in the house.

 

Lisa Mecurio, Designer; testified that they tried to be respectful of the neighborhood character in the design; that the size can’t be down sized too much because of the required widths of the hallway and doorways to accommodate the wheelchair; that they stepped the addition back and put the door on the side of the wrap around porch to be able to accommodate a handicap entrance; that the existing house drops by a story and there is a full walkout basement at the rear of the property; that there will be little to no impact at the street level; and she submitted pictures of other houses in the area.

 

The Board discussed the comment from Rockland County Planning regarding structures being places on adjoining properties and commented to the applicant that they would need to remove those structures if the property owner complained.

 

Public Comment:

 

No public comment.

 

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

application.

.

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

Municipal Law ofNew York was received.

 

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

Ms. Castelli and carried unanimously.

 

FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS:

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

 

 

 

1. The requested floor area ratio, front yard, side yard, total side yard, building height, and Zoning Code § 4.52,  § 3.11, Column 2 #7 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. The requested variance from Zoning Code Section 4.54 for a second front door is not necessary because the second door is on the side of the wrap around porch.

 

2. The requested  floor area ratio, front yard, side yard, total side yard, building  height, and Zoning  Code § 4.52, §  3 .11, Column  2 #7 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. The requested  variance from Zoning  Code Section 4.54 for a second  front door is not necessary  because  the second door is on the side of the wrap around porch.

 

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  floor area ratio, front yard, side yard, total side yard, building  height, and Zoning  Code§  4.52,   § 3.11, Column  2 #7 variances,  although  somewhat substantial,  affords benefits  to the applicant  that are not outweighed  by the detriment, if any, to the health,  safety and welfare  of the surrounding  neighborhood  or nearby community ..  The requested  variance  from zoning  Code Section 4.54 for a second front door is not necessary  because  the second door is on the side of the wrap around porch.

 

5. The Board  acknowledged  the additional  comment  from the Rockland  County Planning  Department  regarding  the trampoline,  fence and shed being located  on the adjacent  parcel to the south, however  they did not condition  the variances  on their relocation.  The applicant  acknowledged  that the fence, trampoline  and shed are located  on property  that they do not own.

 

 

 

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

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

 

 

 

DECISION:  In view of the foregoing  and the testimony  and documents  presented,  the Board: RESOLVED,  that the application  for the requested   floor area ratio, front yard, side  yard, total side yard, building  height,  and Zoning  Code  §  4.52, §  3.11, Column  2 #7 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.

 

 

 

8 1,~               0

(iii) The Board gives no ap?rova~of any building plans? including, without lim!t~tio~,  c \!  v “=\.,         h\   l the accuracy and structural mtegnty thereof, of the apphcant, but same have beew l .::! =~  0  .., , ·        ·- –  1

sub~itted to.the Board solely for informational and verification purposes relatcy~tot°~d    OE   NOP  h10Z

vanances bemg requested.                                                                                   ~ ~   . 1

 

Murphy

ZBA#14-46

Page  4 of  4

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

The foregoing  resolution  to approve  the application  for the requested  floor area ratio, front yard,  side  yard,  total side yard,  building  height,  and Zoning Code  § 4.52,  § 3.11, Column  2 #7 variances  was presented  and moved  by Ms.  Castelli,   seconded   by Ms. Salomon  and carried as follows:   Ms. Castelli,  aye;  Ms. Salomon,  aye;  Mr. Bosco,   aye; Mr. Quinn,  aye;  and Mr. Sullivan,   aye.

 

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

 

DATED:   June  18,    2014

 

ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS TOWN  OF ORANGETOWN

 

 

DISTIUBUTION:

 

APPLICANT

ZBA  MEMBERS

SUPERVISOR

TOWN BOARD MEMBERS

TO\VNATTORNEY

DEPUTY TOWN ATTORNEY

OBZPAE

BUILDING  INSPECTOR-B.vW.

 

0

Administrative   Aide

 

 

TOWN CLERK

HIGHWAY   DEPARTMENT ASSESSOR

DEPT. of ENVIRONMENTAL

MGMT. and ENGINEERING

FILE,ZBA,  PB

CHAIRMAN,    ZBA,  PB, ACABOR