Meeting Overview

MINUTES

ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS MAY21.2014

 

MEMBERS  PRESENT:

JOAN  SALOMON

PATRICIA  CASTELLI  (Present  for last two hearings) THOMAS  QUINN

LEONARD  FEROLDI,  ALTERNATE

MICHAEL  BOSCO

DANIEL  SULLIVAN,  CHAIRMAN

 

ABSENT:

 

 

NONE

 

ALSO PRESENT:

Dennis  Michaels,  Esq. Jennifer Johnson, 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: EICHNER

68.16 I 5 I 21; RG zone

 

 

 

 

HOLIHAN

74.14 I 2 I 36; R-15 zone

 

NEW ITEMS: FITZGERALD

69.05 I 4128; R-15 zone

 

HAYES

69.18 I 4 I 58; R-15 zone

 

 

 

MCKENNA

77.06 I 3 I 31; R-15 zone

 

CIGANEK

77.07 I 1I3;  R-15 zone

PUBLISHED ITEMS DECISIONS

 

 

LOT AREA, FRONT YARD,                       ZBA#14-02

SIDE YARD, TOTAL SIDE YARD,

AND BUILDING HEIGHT VARIANCES APPROVED

 

INTERPRETAION DENIED                        ZBA#14-10

 

 

• 3.11, COLUMN 2 #7 ZBA#14-33

647 SQ. FT. APPROVED

 

FLOOR AREA RATIO,                                ZBA#14-34

AND TOTAL SIDE YARD VARIANCES APPROVED

 

FLOOR AREA RATIO, LOT AREA,          ZBA#14-35

LOT WIDTH, STREET FRONTAGE, FRONT YARD, SIDE YARD,  TOTAL

SIDE YARD, AND BUILDING HEIGHT VARIANCES APPROVED §521 APPLIES

 

INTERPRETATION GRANTED                 ZBA#l4-36

IN FAVOR OF APPLICANT

 

VERIZON WIRELESS         SECTION 4.1 GRANTED PERFORMANCE STANDARDS

68.20 I 1  I l ./30;LI zone

ZBA#14-37

 

CORNIELLE AMENqM)2~~ ~Q~REA         RATIO

74.17 I 3 I 42; R-i9 k:bAQ   ~– ,:      ::i AMENDMENT APPROVED

hi:  11  wtJ   21  Nnr  hl02

ZBA#14-07A

 

 

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 heatings,  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  10:00   P .M.

 

Dated:  May 21,   2014

 

DISTRIBUTION: APPLICANT

TOWN  ATTORNEY

DEPUTY   TOWN  ATTORNEY TOWN  BOARD  MEMBERS

BUILDING     INSPECTOR   (Individual     Decisions) Rockland   County Planning

 

ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS TOWN  OF ORANGETOWN

Bykt~~

Deborah  Arbolino

Administrative     Aide

 

 

DECISION

 

 

FLOORAREARATIO,LOT      AREA, FRONTYARD,SIDE    YARD, TOTAL SIDE YARD AND BUILDING HEIGHT  VARIANCES APPROVED

 

To: Louis and Tracey  Eichner

15 5 Braunsdorf  Road

Pearl River, New York  10965

ZBA#   14-02

Date:  January  8, 2014

May 21, 2014

 

 

FROM:  ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS:  Town  of Orangetown

 

 

Original Application:

 

 

ZBA#  14-02: Application  of Louis and Tracey  Eichner  for variances  from the Zoning Code (Chapter  43) of the Town of Orangetown  Code, Section  9.34 (extension  of non• conforming  use:  one time expansion  of not more than 50% permitted;  283 % expansion proposed)  which would require  a use variance;  and from Section  3 .12, CC District, Column  4 (Floor Area Ratio:  .30 permitted,  ,425 proposed)  8 (Front Yard:  O’ or 45′ permitted;  27.3′  existing;  19.9′ proposed)  9 (Side Yard:  O’ or 12′ permitted;  10.1′ existing  on left side;  14.8′  existing  on right side and 7.2′  proposed)  and 10( Total  Side Yard:  O’ or 25′  required;  24.9′  existing;  16.9′  proposed)  for an addition  to an existing single-family  residence.  Premises  are located  at 155 Braunsdorf  Road, Pearl River, New York  and are identified  on the Orangetown  Tax Map as Section  68.16, Block  5, Lot 21; CC zoning  district.

 

Heard by the Zoning  Board of Appeals  of the Town  of Orangetown  at meetings  held on the following  Wednesdays,  January  8, 2014 and May 21, 2014 at which time the Board made the determination  hereinafter  set forth.

 

Louis and Tracey  Eichner  and Kier Levesque,  Architect,  appeared  and testified  at the

January  8, 2014 hearing.

 

 

The following  documents  were presented:

 

1. Architectural plans dated 05/30/2013  signed  and sealed by Kier Levesque, Architect.  (4 pages)
2. Survey  dated 05/17/2013  signed and sealed by John A. Loch, P .E.

 

 

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

 

Dennis  Michaels,  Deputy  Town Attorney  advised  the applicant  that the requested variances  would require  a use variance,  which  is extremely  difficult  to make  a case for; and the Zoning board  advised  the applicant  to petition  the Town Board for a zone change for several  lots that border  the RO and CS zones. At this time the applicant  asked for a continuance.

 

The applicant  received  a zone change  from the Orangetown  Town  Board “Local  Law No.

5, 2014 Chapter 43, §2.2 of the Zoning  Law of the Town  of Orangetown  to change the Zoning  District  of certain properties  in the Hamlet  of Pearl River”  and a new referral  to the Zoning  Board was published.

Revised  Application:

 

ZBA#  14-02: Application  of Louis and Tracey  Eichner  for variances  from Chapter  43, Zoning  Code of the Town  of Orangetown,  Section  3 .12, RG District,  Columns  4 (Floor Area Ratio:  .30 permitted,  ,425 proposed),  5 (Lot Area:  I 0,000 sq. ft. required,  8,520 sq. ft. existing),  8 (Front Yard:  25′  required,;  27.3′  existing;  16.9′ proposed)  9 (Side Yard:

1 O’ required,;  10.1′  existing  gQ) J~:fl ©icfe’;11l4J.8t)e&U~ii\lg   on right side and 7.2′  proposed)

and 10( Total  Side Yard:  30′  re~ired;  24.9′  existing;  16.9′ proposed)  and 12 (Building

 

 

Height: 9.12′ permitted, 20′ existing, 25′ proposed) for an addition to an existing single• family residence. Premises are located at 155 Braunsdorf Road, Pearl River, New York and are identified on the Orangetown Tax Map as Section 68.16, Block 5, Lot 21; RG zoning district,

 

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

aye; and Mr. Bosco, aye. Ms. Castelli was absent for this hearing.

 

At the May 21, 2014 hearing Louis and Tracey Eichner and Kier Levesque, Architect, appeared.

 

Kier Levesque, Architect, testified that since the January meeting, the Eichners’ have been granted a zone change for 155 Braunsdorf Road; that the zone was changed from CS to RG and they are back to ask for variances from the RG residential zone; that the application has not changed; that the variances are different because of the zone change; that they currently have 1,294 sq. ft. ofliving space; that the current second floor does not count in the floor area ratio because of the ceiling height; that they are proposing to

add a porch  and living area to the front of the house and to add a full second floor above the entire house; that they will end up with four bedrooms and a master bedroom suite; that the lot is undersized; that the first floor addition would be 482 sq. ft.; that the house has no basement or crawl space; that they are extending out front to accommodate

upstairs bedroom and that similar additions have been constructed in the neighborhood.

 

Tracey Eichner testified that presently the four kids are in one bedroom upstairs; that when they are finished with the construction, if approved, they will have four bedrooms and a master bedroom all on the second floor; and that presently there are six in the family.

 

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.

 

Eichner

ZBA#l4-02

Page  3   of  5

 

 

 

 

FINDINGS  OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS:

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

 

 

 

1. The requested floor area ratio, lot area, front yard, side yard, total side yard and building height variances will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. The applicant recently received a zone change from CS to RG; that the lot is undersized for the RG zone. Because

the zone change was just granted the referral from the Building Department did not

consider the undersize lot in its referral and similar additions have been constructed in the area.

 

 

 

 

2. The requested floor area ratio, lot area, front yard, side yard, total side 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 applicant recently received a zone change from CS to RG ; that the lot is undersized for the RG zone. Because the zone change was just granted the referral from the Building Department did not consider the undersize lot in its referral and similar additions have been constructed in the area.

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

4. The requested floor area ratio, lot area, front yard, side yard, total side 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 applicant recently received a zone change from CS to RG ; that the lot is undersized for the RG zone. Because the zone change was just granted the referral from the Building Department did not consider the undersize lot in its referral and similar additions have been constructed in the area.

 

 

 

 

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

43) and is proposing a new addition and/or improvements, so the alleged difficulty

was self-created, which consideration was relevant to the decision of the Board of

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

 

 

DECISION:  In view of the foregoing  and the testimony  and documents  presented,  the Board: RESOLVED,  that the application  for the requested  floor area ratio, lot area, front yard, side yard. total side 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.

h1: 11 lJtl    Zl Nnr hlUZ

 

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

 

 

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:    May 21,   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.

Administrative    Aide

 

 

TOWN CLERK

HIGHWAY   DEPARTMENT ASSESSOR

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

CHAIRMAN,  ZBA, PB,  ACABOR

 

 

DECISION

 

 

INTERPRETATION   UPHOLDS EXISTING  CERTIFICATE   OF OCCUPANCY

 

To:  Dwight  Joyce (Holihan)

2 Joyce Plaza

Stony Point, New York  10980

ZBA # 14-10

Date: January  22, 2014

May 21, 2014

 

 

 

 

FROM:  ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS:  Town  of Orangetown

 

 

 

 

ZBA#  14-10: Application  of Richard  and Regina  Holihan  for an interpretation  and/or amendment  to ZBA Decision# 86-20 dated April  16, 1986 (as originally  requested  by Applicants),  then, subsequently,  Applicants  revised/  changed  their application  so as to request the ZBA to amend  a Certificate  of Occupancy,  dated 09/23/1987,  and not the

04/16/1986  ZBA Decision,   for property  located  at 19 Lowe Lane, Orangeburg,  New

York  and identified  on the Orangetown  Tax Map as Section  74.14, Block 2, Lot 36;  R-

15 zoning  district.

 

Heard by the Zoning  Board of Appeals  of the Town  of Orangetown  at meetings  held on the following  Wednesdays,   January  22, 2014 and May 21, 2014 at which time the Board made the determination  hereinafter  set forth.

 

At the January  22, 2014 meeting  Dwight  Joyce,  Attorney,  appeared  and testified. Members  Present:  Daniel  Sullivan,  Joan Salomon,  Patricia  Castelli,  Leonard  Feroldi.

Michael  Bosco  and Nanette  Albanese  were absent. The following  documents  were presented:

1. A certificate  of occupancy  dated September  23, 1987 signed by Leonard  Post, Director,  Office of Building,  Zoning  and Planning  Administration   and Enforcement,  Town of Orangetown.
2. Zoning  Board Decision# 86-20 dated April  16, 1986 signed by Robert  Hunt, Clerk.
3. Publication  notice for April  16, 1986 Zoning  board  of Appeals.

 

 

 

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

 

At the meeting  held on January  22, 2014 and 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  requests  an interpretation  of an existing

code, rule or regulation,  and this type of application  is exempt  from the State Environmental   Quality Review  Act (SEQ RA), pursuant  to SEQ RA Regulations  §617 .5 (c) (31); 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; and Mr. Sullivan,  aye. Mr.  Bosco and Ms. Albanese  were absent.

 

 

 

Dwight  Joyce,  Attorney,  testified  that they are appealing  the denial by Mr. Giardiello  for a certificate  of occupancy  for premises  located  on Lowe Lane back in 1986; that the ap~licant has ~o   stm~tures  ~none  lot each c~ntai~i~~~lesidence;     that he has the public

notice that was issued m Apnl  19~5 \&.~l!~hsBaP1t\:-Cffie’ newspaper  that shows that the applicant  was requesting  a variance  rrom three secq~     ~f(!!ie zoning  code; that an

 

application  was made by Richardt,~dU\ei!\Jl    Hi>lt~”ito~rect    a detached  garage with a second dwelling  unit on the lot in1lhe  R..:2~ ~~~~~g ~~6sWH~M1at  the applicants’  requested

N ;:\ 0 l :l\;I’ l   .,    u   v   _.I

 

 

a use variance  from section  3 .11, R-15 district,  column  2 refers back to R-80 district, allowed  use, single-family  detached  residence  and two detached  structures  each with a single-family  residence  are proposed;  and they requested  a variance  from paragraph  2, section  1.26 defined words,  lot, not more than a single family dwelling  is permitted  on any one lot and a second  dwelling  unit is proposed  on a single residential  lot; and the decision  reads: in view of the foregoing  and the testimony  before  this Board, the application  for the use variance  be and herby is approved;  and Robert  Hunt signed the minutes  dated April 30, 1986; that the certificate  of occupancy  was issued by Lenny Post and he is no longer here; that there was testimony  regarding  the mother-in-law  but it was not part of the approval;  that the building  department  doesn’t  have the power to overrule the Zoning  Board of Appeals  that gave the variance  in the first place; that the variance

ruins with the land; and that he is appealing  the denial of the building  inspector’s   decision

not to change the certificate  of occupancy  to comply  with the 1986 zoning board decision.

 

Dennis  Michaels  stated that Mr. Joyce is saying,  and asked Mr. Joyce to correct him  ifhe was wrong, that the ZBA’ s 1986  use variance  Decision  says what it says, and Mr. Joyce wants you to interpret  it in a manner  that should be reflected  in a corrected  certificate  of occupancy  that is not conditioned  or restricted  to an immediate  family member.

 

Dwight  Joyce  continued:  to interpret  it another  way would be to allow the Board, to allow people to construct  a separate  dwelling  unit for one specific person;  that if that person passes  away, then the building  becomes  uninhabitable?;   that this almost defies logic to

say the life of  unit is only as long as a person  lives; that the applicants  are not selling the property;  that an issue came up with the building  department  and they are looking  to get it straightened  out; that they probably  will rent out the unit; that even though  the mother

is mentioned  in the findings  of fact; the actual conclusion  they reached  is that they are approving  the variance  granted  and they did not provide  a limitation  in the decision;  that he believes  that one of the neighbors  has a separate  dwelling  unit on their property  that is rented out; that he believes  there is a “for rent sign” on the property;  that they are not trying to change  anything  that is existing;  that two structures  have existed  since  1986 and he has applied  to get the documentation   corrected  or modified;  that I am asking the Board to say that the decision  of the Zoning  Board back in 1986 permitted  the use as two

separate  detached  structures  without  limitation  put on the building  department  at that time; that he has no problem  with the Zoning  board  of Appeals  Decision  and doesn’t want that amended  or changed  and that he would  like to request  that the certificate  of

occupancy  be changed  to reflect the decision;  that Mr. Giardiello  did not want to go back

and try to rethink why it was done back in 1986, why the limitation was put back in 1986, so he asked that we come here; and that he would like to request a continuance for a full board.

 

No public comment.

 

 

 

Meeting of May 21, 2014

 

Present: Dan Sullivan, Joan Salomon, Michael Bosco, Thomas Quinn, Leonard Feroldi. Patricia Castelli was not present for this hearing.

 

Additional information provided to the Board:

 

1. Transcript from the Zoning Board meeting held on January 22, 2014.
2. Building permit application dated 10/01/1985 signed by Regina Holihan.
3. Application of certificate of occupancy dated June 4, 1986 and dated December

26, 1986 signed by Richard Holihan.

 

Dwight Joyce appeared and testified.

3 Q l _j :.! o   s ~~n-131  Q  MA\ 01

hi  1 i: wH   21  Nnr hlU2

 

N f i\ 0 l :l~Hl V CJ  0  .:! O   N iJ\ O l

 

 

 

 

Dwight  Joyce,  Attorney  for the applicant,  testified  that he could recap from the last hearing;  stating that the Holihan’s   were granted  a use variance  in  ZBA#86-20  dated April  16, 1986 for a second  dwelling  unit on a single lot in the R-15 zoning  district; that

the applicants  requested  a use variance  for two detached  dwellings  on a single lot and the use variance  was granted;  that the Building  Department  issued a certificate  of occupancy which  limited  the use by stating ” garage with dwelling  for immediate  family (mother)”; that the variance  approval  did not have a limitation;  that Mr. Giardiello  would not change the certificate  of occupancy  and sent the application  to the Board for interpretation;  that he is not seeking to amend the use variance,  just  the certificate  of occupancy;  that there was testimony  regarding  the mother  living in the garage structure  but it would be

unreasonable  to think that a structure  would be created  for one persons  life expectancy;

and that he is seeking to amend the certificate of occupancy.

 

 

 

Public Comment:

 

No public comment.

 

The Board members made personal inspections of the premises the week before the hearings 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.

 

Dan Sullivan moved to remove the immediate family (mother) restriction added to the

Certificate of Occupancy because it contradicts the 1986 ZBA Decision, and that the

1986 ZBA Decision was granted with an unconditional approval, which motion was seconded by Tom Quinn, but did not carry.

 

 

 

 

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 intent of the ZBA to restrict the use and occupancy of the dwelling unit above the garage limited to the Applicants’ mother was in the Findings of Pact of the ZBA Decision dated April 16, 1986, (ZBA#86-20), which states ”there is no other way that the applicant’s mother could afford to remain local. Both the Building Permit, dated

06/04/1986, signed by Applicant Regina Holihan, and the Application for Certificate of Occupancy, signed by Richard Holihan on December 26, 1986, state “for (immediate family Mother)”.

 

DECISION:  In view of the foregoing  Findings  of Fact and conclusions,  and the testimony and documents  presented,  the Board RESOLVED   that the application  for the requested interpretation  to amend the existing  Certificate  of Occupancy,  dated September  23, 1987, is DENIED;  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 proposed  resolution  to approve  the application  for the requested  amendment  to the Certificate  of Occupancy  dated September  23, 1987  was presented  and moved  by Mr. Sullivan,  seconded  by Mr. Quinn and FAILED  to carry  as follows:   Ms. Salomon,  nay; Mr. Bosco, nay; Mr. Fero~~,  111~~  ~~-~q~l~land             Mr. Sullivan,  aye. Ms. Castelli

was absent for this hearing.    .:i ….

h11L  WH   21   Nflr   hl02

 

NIA 013  Cl i’~ VU 0  .J 0   N l.\ 01

 

 

The foregoing Resolution   to Deny the application   for the requested interpretation  to amend  the Certificate  of Occupancy,   dated   September 23,   1987,  was presented and moved by Ms. Salomon,   seconded  by Mr. Bosco and carried as follows: Ms.  Salomon, aye; Mr. Bosco,  aye;  Mr. Feroldi,  aye; Mr.  Quinn,  nay;  and   Mr. Sullivan,  nay.  Ms. Castelli was absent for this  hearing.

 

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: May 21,   2014

 

ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF ORANGETOWN

 

 

DISTRIBUTION:

 

APPLICANT ZBA  MEMBERS SUPERVISOR

TOWN BOARD MEMBERS

TOWN ATTORNEY DEPUTYTOWN ATTORNEY OBZPAE

BUILDING INSPECTOR-

By~,L-<.-<Y-“:….=.\.’-<-‘-~…..,.£–=:…:: Deborah Arbolino Administrative   Aide

 

 

TOWN CLERK

HIGHWAY   DEPARTMENT ASSESSOR

DEPT. of ENVIRONMENTAL

MGMT. and ENGINEERING FILE,ZBA, PB

CHAIRMAN,    ZBA, PB, ACABOR

 

 

DECISION

 

ZONING   CODE§  3.11, COLUMN   2 #7, AND   § 4.5 (SINGLE-FAMILY CONVERSION) VARIANCES  APPROVED

 

To: John and Margaret Fitzgerald

30 Robertson Drive

Pearl River, New York 10965

ZBA#  14-33

Date: May 21, 2014

 

 

FROM: ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS: Town of Orangetown

 

ZBA#14-33: Application of John and Margaret Fitzgerald  for valiances from Zoning Code (Chapter 43) of the Town of Orangetown Code, R-15 District, Section 3.11, Column 2 refers to R-80 District, Column 2 #7 (600 sq. ft. permitted, 647 sq. ft. existing) for an existing second dwelling unit in an owner occupied two-family residence (Local Law 7). The premises are located at 30 Robertson Drive, Pearl River, New York and are identified the Orangetown Tax Map as Section 69.05, Block 4, Lot 28; in the R-15 zoning district.

 

 

 

Heard by the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Orangetown at a meeting held on Wednesday, May 21, 2014 at which time the Board made the determination hereinafter set forth.

 

 

 

John and Margaret Fitzgerald appeared and testified. The following documents were presented:

1. Partial Architectural plans showing the existing apartment signed and sealed by

Barbara Hess, Architect.

 

 

 

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. Bosco and

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

and Mr. Sullivan, aye. Ms. Castelli was absent for this hearing.

 

 

 

John Fitzgerald testified that the apartment has existed since they purchased the house; that they have always rented the apartment; that over the years they have had four different long term tenants; that they pay taxes for a two-family residence; that the rent pays the taxes on the property; and that they would like to get a certificate of occupancy for an owner-occupied two-family residence.

 

Fitzgerald

ZBA#14-33

Page2of   4

 

 

Public  Comment:

 

 

No public  comment.

 

 

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

 

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

Municipal  Law of New York was received.

 

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

Ms. Castelli  and carried unanimously.

 

 

FINDINGS  OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS:

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

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

 

 

 

1. The requested  §3.11 Column  2 #7  variance  permitting  647 sq. ft. accessory  dwelling (Zoning  Code § 4.5 -Single-Family    conversion)   will not produce  an undesirable change in the character  of the neighborhood   or a detriment  to nearby properties.  The apartment  has existed  since  1986 without  incident.

 

 

 

 

2. The requested §3.11 Column  2 #7  variance  permitting  647 sq. ft. accessory  dwelling (Zoning  Code§  4.5 -Single-Family    conversion)will   not have an adverse effect or impact on the physical  or environmental   conditions  in the neighborhood  or district. The apartment  has existed  since  1986 without  incident.

 

 

 

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  §3.11 Column  2 #7  variance  permitting  647 sq. ft. accessory  dwelling

(Zoning  Code§  4.5 -Single-Family    conversion)   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.

 

Fitzgerald

ZBA#14-33

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  Zoning  Code §3.11 Column  2

#7  variance  permitting  647 sq. ft. accessory  dwelling  (Zoning  Code § 4.5 -Single-Family conversion)                       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.

 

 

£1:  11  wti   21   Nnr   ttrnz

 

Fitzgerald

ZBA#14-33

Page  4 of  4

 

 

The foregoing  resolution   to approve  the application  for the requested  Zoning  Code §3.11

Column  2 #7  variance  permitting 647 sq. ft. accessory dwelling (Zoning  Code §  4.5  – Single-Family conversion)   was presented and moved by Mr. Bosco,  seconded by Mr. Quinn and carried as follows:   Mr. Feroldi,  aye; Ms.  Salomon,  aye; Mr. Bosco,  aye; Mr. Quinn, aye; and Mr. Sullivan, aye. Ms. Castelli was absent for this hearing.

 

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:   May 21,  2014

 

 

ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS TO\VN OF ORANGETO\VN

 

DISTRIBUTION:

 

APPLICANT ZBA  MEMBERS SUPERVISOR

TOWN BOARD MEMBERS TOWN ATTORNEY

DEPUTY TOWN ATTORNEY OBZPAE

BUILDING   INSPECTOR-RAO.

By~~

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   AND TOTAL   SIDE  YARD  VARIANCES    APPROVED

 

To:  Michael  and Bernadette  Hayes

571 Gilbert  Avenue

Pearl River, New York  10965

ZBA#   14-34

Date:  May 21, 2014

 

 

FROM:  ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS:  Town  of Orangetown

 

 

 

 

ZBA#14-34:  Application  of Michael  and Bernadette  Hayes  for variances  from Chapter

43 (Zoning)  of the Orangetown  Code,  Section  3.12, Group M, Columns  4 (Floor Area ratio:  .20 permitted,  .22 proposed},  and 10 (Total  Side Yard:  50′ required,  47.5′

proposed)  for an addition  to an existing  single-family  residence.  The premises  are located at 571 Gilbert Avenue,  Pearl River, New York  and are identified  on the Orangetown  Tax Map as Section  69.18, Block 4, Lot 58; R-15 zoning  district.

 

Heard by the Zoning  Board  of Appeals  of the Town  of Orangetown  at a meeting  held on Wednesday,  May 21, 2014 at which  time the Board made the determination  hereinafter set forth.

 

 

 

Michael  and Bernadette  Hayes and Barry Terach,  Architect,  appeared  and testified. The following  documents  were presented:

1. Architectural plans dated 04/ 02 /2014  with the latest revision  date of 04/08/ 2014 signed and sealed by Barry Terach,  Architect.  (5 pages)
2. A letter dated May  16, 2014 from the County  of Rockland  Department  of

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

3. A letter dated May 21, 2014 from the Rockland County Highway Department signed by Sonny Lin, P.E.
4. A letter in support of the applicant signed by three abutting 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 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. Bosco and carried as follows: Ms. Salomon, aye; Mr. Feroldi, aye; Mr. Bosco, aye; Mr. Quinn, aye; and Mr. Sullivan, aye. Ms. Castelli was absent for this hearing.

 

 

 

 

Barry Terach, Architect, testified that the Hayes family has owned the house for fourteen years; that they need a little more space; that they are proposing to add more living space to the first floor of the home and a new bedroom and bath to the second floor; that they have shown the plans to the neighbors and there are no objections; that they have a small lot for the neighborhood and that there are many houses in the neighborhood that have similar additions.

301.:UO SY\~318  N/,\01

B~rnadette Hayes testified thJlt,i~. fWt si~ ip.t~~,l~llUl.Y and that her mom is moving in with them; that they are not ~Hirlg’:a4l~ona lk1Nmed1Wt they need more space.

 

N/AOl::Jvr-J’v’UO   ..:lO   NA\01

 

 

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 varianceis) 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 and total side 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 floor area ratio and total side 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 floor area ratio and total side yard variances are not substantial.

 

 

 

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

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

 

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

 

 

 

 

General  Conditions:

 

 

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

 

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

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

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

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

obligated  to issue any necessary  permits  where  any such condition  imposed  should, in the sole judgment  of the building  department,  be first complied  with as contemplated hereunder.  Occupancy  will not be made until,  and unless,  a Certificate  of Occupancy  is issued by the Office of Building,  Zoning  and Planning  Administration   and Enforcement which legally permits  such occupancy.

 

 

 

(v) Any foregoing  variance  or Special  Permit will lapse if any contemplated construction of the project or any use for which the variance 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 and total side yard variances   was presented  and moved  by Ms.  Salomon,   seconded  by Mr. Bosco  and carried  as follows:    Mr. Feroldi,   aye;  Ms.  Salomon,   aye; Mr. Bosco,  aye;  Mr. Quinn,  aye; and  Mr.  Sullivan,   aye.  Ms.  Castelli  was absent  for this hearing.

 

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:    May 21, 2014

 

 

ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS TOWN  OF ORANGETOWN

 

 

 

DISTRIBUTION:

 

APPLICANT

ZBA MEMBERS SUPERVISOR

TOWN BOARD MEMBERS TOWN AlTORNEY

DEPUTY  TOWN AlTORNEY OBZPAE

BUlLDlNG INSPECTOR-M.M.

By~’..:.b.L=–=-~~Lf-}…,,L’-“=V

Deborah  Arbolmo

Administrative   Aide

 

 

TOWN  CLERK

HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT ASSESSOR

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

CHAIRMAN,      ZBA,  PB,   ACABOR

 

 

DECISION

 

 

FLOOR AREA RATIO, LOT AREA, LOT WIDTH, STREET  FRONTAGE, FRONT YARD, SIDE YARD, TOTAL SIDE YARD, AND BUILDING HEIGHT VARIANCES  APPROVED   (SECTION  5.21 UNDERSIZED LOT APPLIES)

 

To: Chris McKenna

12 Schreiber Street

Tappan, New York 10983

ZBA # 14-35

Date: May 21, 2014

 

 

FROM: ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS: Town of Orangetown

 

 

 

ZBA#14-35: Application of  Chris McKenna for variances from Chapter 43 (Zoning) of the Town of Orangetown Code, R-15 District, Group M, Columns 4 (Floor Area Ratio:

.20 permitted, .28 existing, .308 proposed), 5 (Lot Area: 15,000 sq. ft. required, 6113 sq. ft. existing), 6 (Lot Width: 100′ required, 50′ existing), 7 (Street Frontage: 75′ required,

50′ existing), 8 (Front Yard:  30′ required, 25.6′ existing), 9 (Side Yard: 15′ required,

10.6′ existing), 10 {Total Side Yard: 30′ required, 23.9′ existing) and 12 (Building Height: 20′ permitted, 21.5′ existing) (note: section 5.21 undersized lot applies) for an addition to an existing single-family residence. The premises are located at 12 Schreiber Street, Tappan, New York and are identified on the Orangetown Tax Map as Section

77.06, Block 3, Lot 31; R-15 zoning district.

 

Heard by the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Orangetown at a meeting held on Wednesday, May 21, 2014 at which time the Board made the determination hereinafter set forth.

 

 

 

Chris McKenna and Jane Slavin, Architect, appeared and testified. The following documents were presented:

1. Architectural plans dated 10/21/2013 with the latest revision date of 03/04/ 2014 signed and sealed by Jane Slavin, Architect. (2 pages)
2. Site plan dated 12/03/2013  based on survey by Robert Sorace, dated November

29, 2013 signed and sealed by Jane Slavin, Architect.

3. Three pictures of the house and the area were submitted.
4. A letter dated May 6, 2014 from the County of Rockland Department of Planning signed by Thomas Vanderbeek, P .E., Commissioner of Planning.
5. 5. A letter dated May 21, 2014 from the Rockland County Highway Department signed by Sonny Lin, P .E ..
6. A letter dated from the Rockland County Health Department signed 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 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 SEQ RA Regulations §617 .5 (c) (9), (10), (12) and /or (13); which does not require SEQRA environmental review. The motion was seconded by Mr. Bosco and

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

and Mr. Sullivan, aye. Ms. Castelli was absent for this hearing.

 

 

Jane Slavin, Architect, testified that all but one of these variances are existing; that they are proposing to !~~~4′ t~  R~fWt~~\J;>athroom   at the rear of the .e~ist~ng second floor; that the lot is 40%’ strtallJr1ti{an ~        ired; that the proposed addition is 168 sq. ft.;

that this is the S~!ll~~ mse2~twnr1iy~zand     there is no increase in the footprint.

 

N /.1013 D fff  U 0   .:J 0  l·UA 0 l

 

McKenna

ZBA#14-35

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, lot area, lot width, street frontage, front yard, side yard, total side yard and building height variances will not produce an undesirable change

in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. The lot area, lot width, street frontage, front yard, side yard, total side yard and building height variances are being acknowledged as existing conditions; the proposed addition is

168 sq. ft.; and similar additions have been constructed in the area.

 

 

 

 

2. The requested floor area ratio, lot area, lot width, street frontage, front yard, side yard, total side 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 lot area, lot width, street frontage, front yard, side yard, total side yard and building height valiances are being acknowledged as existing conditions; the proposed addition is 168 sq. ft.; and similar additions have been constructed in the area.

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

4. The requested floor area ratio, lot area, lot width, street frontage, front yard, side yard, total side yard and building height variances, although somewhat substantial, afford benefits to the applicants that are not outweighed by the detriment, if any, to the health, safety and welfare of the surrounding neighborhood or nearby community.

The lot area, lot width, street frontage, front yard, side yard, total side yard and

building height variances are being acknowledged as existing conditions; the proposed addition is 168 sq. ft.; and similar additions have been constructed in the

area.

 

 

 

5. The applicant purchaie~1fife0pto~~Ji~ub}~’c~to Orangetown’s Zoning Code (Chapter

43) and is proposingei-in~aP.’Aliticre-fifl{Wlffiprovements, so the alleged difficulty was self-created, wlucti COflStderattonwas refevant to the decision of the Board of Appeals, but did notN-JNd~~l{f,rPTC!oJiug@t~/gt!lntingof the area variances.

 

 

Mc Kenna

ZBA#14-35

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, lot area, lot width,  street frontage,  front yard, side yard, total side 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

 

McKenna

ZBA#14-35

Page  4 of  4

 

 

The foregoing  resolution   to approve  the application  for the requested  floor area ratio,  lot area, lot width,  street frontage,  front yard,  side yard,  total  side yard and building   height variances   was presented  and moved by Mr.  Feroldi,   seconded  by Ms.  Salomon  and carried  as follows:    Mr.  Feroldi,   aye;  Ms.  Salomon,   aye; Mr.  Bosco,   aye;  Mr. Quinn, aye; and  Mr. Sullivan,   aye.  Ms.  Castelli  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:    May 21,   2014

 

ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS TOWN  OF ORANGETOWN

 

DISTRIBUTION:

 

APPLICANT ZBA MEMBERS SUPERVISOR

TOWN BOARD MEMBERS TOWN AHORNEY

DEPUTY TOWN AHORNEY OBZPAE

BUILDING INSPECTOR-B.vW.

BYX!L(A{J~~~~&Y’–c..-‘~

Deborah  Arbolino

Administrative    Aide

 

 

TOWN CLERK

HIGHWAY   DEPARTMENT

ASSESSOR

DEPT. or ENVIRONMENTAL

MGMT. and ENGINEERING

f’ILE,ZBA,   Pl3

CHAIRMAN,  ZBA, PB,  ACABOR

 

DECISION

 

 

CERTIFICATE  OF  OCCUPANCY    ISSUED  JANUARY   6, 1956 DOES  NOT SPECIFY   OWNER   OCCUPANCY    IS REQUIRED    OF EITHER   THE RESIDENTIAL     UNIT  OR THE  PROFFESSIONAL      OFFICE,   AND IS

SUFFICIENT    FOR  THE  PRESENT   USE

 

To:  Walter  Sevatian  (Ciganek)

3 Main Street Suite  1

Nyack, New York  10960

ZBA#   14-36

Date:  May 21, 2014

 

 

FROM:  ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS:  Town  of Orangetown

 

ZBA: #14-36:  Application  of Sadie Ciganek  for an interpretation  pursuant  to Chapter 43 (Zoning)  of the Town of Orangetown  Code, Section  10.331 “General  Powers,”  hearing  a matter referred  to it by the Building  Inspector  for an interpretation  of an existing Certificate  of Occupancy  regarding  the premises  located  at 100 Route  303, Tappan,  New

York,  and identified  on the Orangetown  Tax Map as Section  77.07, Block  1, Lot 3; R-15  . zoning  district.

 

Heard by the Zoning  Board of Appeals  of the Town  of Orangetown  at a meeting  held on Wednesday,  May 21, 2014  at which time the Board made the determination  hereinafter set forth.

 

 

 

Walter  Sevatian,  Attorney,  and Sadie Ciganek  appeared  and testified. The following  documents  were presented:

1. A letter dated March 31, 2014 from John Giardiello, P.E., Director, Office of

Building, Zoning and Planning Administration and Enforcement, Town of

Orangetown requesting an interpretation.

2. Certificate of Occupancy dated January 6, 1956.

 

 

 

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 requesting interpretation of an existing code, rule or regulation, this application is exempt from the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA), pursuant to SEQRA Regulations §617.5 (c) (31); 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. Bosco, aye; Mr. Quinn, aye; and Mr. Sullivan, aye. Ms. Castelli was absent from this hearing.

 

 

 

Walter Sevatian testified that they are here for an interpretation of the existing certificate of occupancy to permit what has been going on for the last 40 or 50 years; that the certificate of occupancy says “New one-family dwelling containing office space for professional offices incidental to residence of premises”; that there has been an attorney in the office space for many years; that in 1980 the Stebbins’ tried to  get a zone change for the property from residential to commercial and were turned down; that presently there is an insurance agent; that he put a sign up and drew the attention of the Code Enforcement Officer and that is how they ended up here; that the Webster dictionary clearly states that “incidenialf’.:ldacS~sS’ory~rl..W~dinate to; that if there is any ambiguity it should be re~Q].v~in favor_of the applicant; and that they would like the

Board to find the 1956 c~kida~Wtioc~rAill~ ihlm compliance with the existing

occupancy.

 

Ciganek

ZBA#14-36

Page 2 of  4

 

 

 

Sadie Ciganek  testified  that she is the owner of the property  and that the office has been occupied  by several  different  attorneys;  that she has never lived in the building  and has always rented out the residential  space;  and that since her ex-husband’s   death both portions  of the building  have been occupied  by tenants.

 

Dennis  Michaels,  Deputy  Town Attorney,  answered  a question  posed by Ms. Salomon concerning  pre-existing  non-conforming   use and Mr. Michaels  explained  that this is not a pre-existing  non-conforming   use situation  because  there is an existing  certificate  of occupancy  and that is why the matter  is before the Board  for an interpretation.

 

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 present  use is found to be in compliance  with the 1956 Certificate  of Occupancy, outweigh  the detriment  (if any) to the health,  safety and welfare  of the neighborhood  or community  by such grant, and answered  John Giardiello,  P.E.’s  (Director  of OBZPAE) ZBA referral  inquiries  set forth in his March  31, 2014 letter to the ZBA, and rendered  the following  interpretation,   for the following  reasons:

 

 

 

1. The Board  found that the Certificate  of Occupancy,  issued on January  6, 1956, does not require  owner occupancy  of either the residential  dwelling  unit or the professional  office portions  of the building.
2. The professional  office space is incidental  to the residence  on the premises.
3. The existing  tenants  are in compliance  with the Certificate  of Occupancy  issued on January  6, 1956.

 

Ciganek

ZBA#l4-36

Page  3  of  4

 

 

DECISION:  In view of the foregoing  and the testimony  and documents  presented,  the Board RESOLVED  that the application  which  was a referral  from John Giardiello,  P .E., Director  of OBZPAE,  via his letter of March  31, 2014, is answered  by the ZBA’s interpretation  that the Certificate  of Occupancy,  issued  01/06/  1956, is consistent  with the existing  uses,  and the owner of the property  does not need to occupy the professional

office or  the residential  dwelling  unit,  and the professional  office space is incidental  to the residence;  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.

 

Ciganek

ZBA#l4-36

Page  4 of  4

 

The foregoing  resolution   to approve  the application  the application  which was a referral from John Giardiello,    P.E.,   DirectorofOBZPAE,     via his letter of March  31,  2014,  is answered  by the ZBA’ s    interpretation  that the Certificate  of Occupancy,  issued  01 /06/

1956,   is  consistent  with the existing  uses, and the owner of the property  does not need to occupy  the professional   office or  the residential   dwelling unit,  and the professional   office space is  incidental  to the residence;  was presented  and moved by Mr. Quinn,   seconded  by Mr. Bosco and carried  as follows:    Mr. Feroldi,   aye; Ms.   Salomon,   aye;  Mr. Bosco,  aye; Mr. Quinn,  aye; and  Mr. Sullivan,  aye.

Ms.  Castelli was absent for this hearing.

 

 

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:   May 21, 2014

 

 

ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS TOWN  OF ORANGETOWN

 

DISTRIBUTION:

 

APPLICANT

ZBA MEMBERS SUPERVISOR

TOWN BOARD MEMBERS TOWN ATTORNEY

DEPUTY  TOWN ATTORNEY OBZPAE

BUILDING   INSPECTOR   -J.G.

By~~-“--=-=~.._.,_-‘-‘<-..0

Deborah Arbolino

Administrative Aide

 

 

TOWN  CLERK

HIGHWAY    DEPARTMENT ASSESSOR

DEPT.  of ENVIRONMENT   AL MGMT. and ENGINEERING FILE,ZBA,    PB

CHAIRMAN,    ZBA, PB,  ACABOR

 

 

DECISION

PERFORMANCE STANDARDS APPROVED

 

 

 

To:   Leslie Snyder  (Y erizon Wireless  Generator)

94 White Plains Road

Tarrytown,  New York  10591

ZBA # 14-37

Date:  May 21, 2014

 

 

FROM:  ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS:  Town  of Orangetown

 

 

ZBA#14-37:  Application  of Verizon  Wireless  pursuant  to Chapter  43 (Zoning)  of the Town  of Orangetown  Code,  Section  4.1 Use Subject to Performance  Standards  review with respect to an emergency  generator.   The property  is located  at 60- 70 West Dexter Plaza, Pearl River, New York and are identified  on the Orangetown  Tax Map as Section

68.20, Block   1, Lot  1./30; LI  zone.                                                                          ·

 

 

Heard by the Zoning  Board of Appeals  of the Town  of Orangetown  at a meeting  held on Wednesday,  May 21, 2014 at which  time the Board  made the determination  hereinafter set forth.

 

Michael  Sheridan,  Attorney,  and Anthony  Beta, P .E., Tectonic  Engineering,  appeared and testified.

 

The following  documents  were presented:

 

 

1. Plans prepared by Tectonic  Engineering  and Surveying  Consultants,  P .C. last revised  04/02/ 2014 signed and sealed by Antonio  Alberto  Guiltier,  P.E. ..
2. Summary  narrative.
3. Manufacturer  specification  sheet for the generator.
4. Performance  standards  resume  of operation  and equipment  form dated April 9,

2014.

5. Fire prevention  supplement  form,
6. A report dated April 9, 2014 from Tectonic  (8 pages)  signed by Tammy  L. Nosek, Senior Project  Manger.
7. A cover latter dated April  11, 2014 from Snyder  & Snyder, LLP signed by Leslie,.
8. Snyder (2 pages)
9. A letter dated  April  16, 2014 from the Town of Orangetown,  Department  of Environmental   Management  and Engineering  signed  by Joseph  J. Moran,  P .E., Commissioner.
10. A letter dated May  12, 2014 from the Town  of Orangetown,  Bureau of Fire

Prevention  signed by Michael  B. Bettmann,  Chief Fire Inspector.

10. A letter dated May 8, 2014 from the County of Rockland Department of Planning signed by Thomas  Vanderbeek,  P.E., Commissioner   of Planning.
11. A letter dated May 21, 2014 from the County of Rockland Department  of

Highways  signed by Sonny Lin, P .E ..

12. GM S.OL Genset Airborne Noise Analysis  (5 pages)  as requested  by Board member  Michael  Bosco.

 

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

 

Michael  Sheridan,  Attorney,  testified  that they applied  for a permit  for an emergency generator  at a co-location  for antennas;  that they were referred  to the Zoning  Board for performance  standards  review;  that the generator  will be located  at the base and have buildings  on three sides and the fourth  side with have equipment;  that the area that the work is being performed  is small when compared  to the size of the lot; that he does not think he will need a permit  from the Highway  Department  but he will comply with all of

the letters.                                               301.:L-rn  SY~1310    N!AOl

 

ZBA#14-37

Page2 of4

 

 

Anthony Botta, P .E., stated that the sound attenuation tests were performed and he will submit the generator specs for the record to back up the Tectonic letter.

 

On advice of Dennis Michaels, 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, 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) (28); which does not require SEQRA environmental review. The motion was seconded by Ms. Castelli and carried as follows: Mr. Sullivan, aye; Ms. Salomon, aye; Ms. Castelli, aye; Mr. Quinn, aye; and Mr. Bosco, aye.

 

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

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

No public comment.

 

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

 

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

Municipal Law 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 the documents presented, the Board found and concluded that:

 

Based upon the information contained in the applicant’s Resume of Operations and Equipment, the Fire Prevention Supplement, the letter dated April 16, 2014 from Joseph J. Moran, P .E., Commissioner of the Orangetown Department of Environmental Management and Engineering (D .E.M.E.) concluding that there is no reasonable doubt as to the likelihood of applicant’s conformance  to  Zoning Code§ 4.1 Performance Standards, and the memorandum dated May 12, 2014 from Michael Bettmann, Chief Fire Inspector, Town of Orangetown Bureau of

Fire Prevention (B.F.P.); the letter dated May 21, 2014 from the County of

Rockland Department of Highways signed by Sonny Lin, P .E., stating that the applicant must obtain a Rockland County Highway Department Work Permit before any construction on site; 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 Rfli’-Rl<J.iUw  Zoning & Planning

Administration & Enforcement, DE~,.:  anti  0rdngdtav~MW.t.P ., and all other departments having jurisdiction of t1f Pff1l1ftjs. 2 I Nnr hID.7,

 

 

ZBA#l4-37

Page 3of4

 

 

 

DECISION: In view of the foregoing and the testimony and documents presented, the Board: RESOLVED, that the application for Performance Standards Conformance, pursuant to Zoning Code § 4.1, 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 .; Rockland County Department of Highways; County of Rockland

Department of Planning; 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, 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, 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, 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.

 

 

 

ZBA#14-37

Page 4 of 4

 

 

(v) Any foregoing variance,  Performance Standards, 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,  with aforesaid conditions, the application   for Zoning Code § 4.1  Performance Standards Conformance was presented and moved by Mr. Sullivan,  seconded by Ms.  Castelli and carried as follows:   Mr. Sullivan,   aye; Ms. Castelli,   aye; Ms. Salomon,  aye;  Mr. Quinn,  aye;  and Mr. Bosco;  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:   May 21,   2014

 

 

ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF ORANGETOWN

 

DISTRIBUTION:

 

APPLICANT ZBA  MEM!3ERS SUPERVISOR

TOWN BOARD MEMBERS

TOWN ATTORNEY

DEPUTY TOWN ATTORNEY OBZPAE

BUILDING   INSPECTOR-R.  0.

By—‘:.L.LJL=—-=—=_:_i._~,,.L.J~ Deborah Arbolino Administrative   Aide

 

 

TOWN CLERK

HIGHWAY  DEPARTMENT ASSESSOR

DEPT. of ENVIRONMENTAL MGMT. and  ENGINEERING FILE,ZBA,  P!3

CHAIRMAN,   ZBA,  PB, ACA!30R

 

DECISION

 

 

AMENDMENT TO ZBA #14-07 FLOOR  AREA RATIO APPROVED

 

To:  Jorge and Elba Comielle

102 Princeton  Drive

Tappan, New York  10983

ZBA#   14-07A Date:  May 21, 2014

 

 

FROM:  ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS:  Town  of Orangetown

 

 

ZBA #14-07A:  an amendment  to ZBA #14-07:  Application  of Jorge and Elba Comielle, which  granted  a floor area ratio variance  of .238 and the applicant  is increasing  the floor area ratio to .246 by adding  an additional  100 sq. ft. to the upstairs  dormer, The premises are located  at 102 Princeton  Drive, Tappan,  New York and are identified  on the Orangetown  Tax Map as Section  74.17, Block 3, Lot 42; R-15 zoning  district.

 

 

 

Heard by the Zoning  Board  of Appeals  of the Town  of Orangetown  at a meeting  held on Wednesday,  May 21, 2014 at which time the Board made the determination  hereinafter set forth.

 

 

 

Jorge and Elba Comielle  appeared  and testified. The following  documents  were presented:

1. Architectural  plans showing just the front elevation  and the area of the proposed

changes.

2. A letter dated May 8, 2014 from Bert von Wurmb  regarding  the changes to the plan.
3. A letter from the applicant requesting  the additional  100 sq. ft. of space.

 

 

 

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. Bosco and

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

and Mr. Sullivan,  aye.

 

 

 

Elba Comielle  testified  that they realized  when they started  the second  floor expansion  to the bathroom  that they should have taken the advice from the Board at their hearing  and added onto the bedroom  at the same time; that they are back to make that request  now because  it will look better  from outside  keeping  the addition  balances  and they really can use that extra space.

 

 

 

Cornielle ZBA#14-07A Page 2 of 4

 

Public Comment:

 

No public comment.

 

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

 

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

Municipal Law ofNew York was received.

 

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. The applicant is seeking to add an additional 100 sq. ft. to the second floor dormer which will balance the proposed addition.

 

 

 

 

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. The applicant is seeking to add an additional 100 sq. ft. to the second floor dormer which will balance the proposed addition.

 

 

 

3. The benefits sought by the applicant cannot be achieved by other means feasible for the applicant to pursue other than by obtaining an amendment to the previously granted floor area ratio variance.

 

 

 

4. The requested amendment to the previously granted floor area ratio 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.

 

 

Comielle ZBA#14-07A 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  amendment  to the 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.

 

 

Corniel1e ZBA#l4-07A Page  4 of 4

 

The foregoing resolution  to approve the application   for the requested floor area ratio variance was presented and moved by Ms.  Salomon,  seconded by Ms.  Castelli and

canied 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:   May 21,   2014

 

 

ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF ORANGETOWN

 

DISTRIBUTION:

 

APPLICANT

Zl3A  MEMBERS SUPERVISOR

TOWN BOARD MEMBERS TOWN ATIORNEY

DEPUTY TOWN ATIORNEY OBZPAE

BUILDING  INSPECTOR-B.vW.

 

ByL….l.!=t.&’-=—‘=–=(-l,L..~~ Deborah Arbo ino

Administrative   Aide

 

 

TOWN CLERK

HIGHWAY   DEPARTMENT ASSESSOR

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

CHAIRMAN,    ZBA,  PB, ACABOR