Meeting Overview

MINUTES                                                                 r-….:>            -;

 

 

ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS

–f

0

,c..:.:_::,>.

CJ’1

_,…

 

October  7, 2015                                                  :.E

(=:)

-<!:

 

z       c-:>     2:

 

 

 

 

MEMBERS  PRESENT:           DAN  SULLIVAN

0          –i          C:> r       N         -:i rn      CD        0

:::J

x

;:;t.                          _..:•

C’J       -u     :;:

 

JOAN  SALOMON                                                         0          3        C)

-r1     t-‘:        rn

N

LEONARD  FEROLDI,  ALTERNATE                        ‘Tl                        -i

0

THOMAS  QUINN                                                         0         w:    :E

 

 

PATRICIA  CASTELLI MICHAEL  BOSCO

 

ABSENT:                                   NONE

 

 

 

 

ALSO PRESENT:                     Dennis  Michaels,  Esq.

Ann Marie Ambrose, Deborah  Arbolino,

rn     CA)          z

 

 

 

 

 

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:

 

 

 

PUBLISHED   ITEMS

 

APPLICANTS     KELLY	DECISIONS     REAR YARD	ZBA#15-80
186 Center  Street,	VARIANCE  APPROVED
Pearl River, NY 68.15 I 3 I 3; R-15 zone
STEINBERG	SIDE YARD  AND	ZBA#15-81

 

10 Murphy  Court

Blauvelt,  NY

70.14 I 2 I 47.9; R-15 zone

REARY ARD VARIANCES   APPROVED

 

GUARINO

223 Old Tappan  Road

Tappan,NY

77.10 I 3 I 3; R-15 zone

FLOOR  AREA  RATIO,                       ZBA#15-82

REARY ARD, AND BUILDING  HEIGHT VARIANCES   APPROVED

 

 

LEE 54 Marycrest  Road West Nyack,  NY	FLOOR  AREA  RA TIO VARIANCE  APPROVED	ZBA#l 5-83
69.06 I 2 I 36; R-22 zone
VALERIO	FLOOR  AREA  RA TIO,	ZBA#l 5-84
174 Rutgers  Road East	AND REARY ARD VARIANCES
Or5angeburg,  NY 74.13 I 2 I 61; R-22 zone	APPROVED

 

 

SUPERIOR  CRANE  RENTALS

375 Western  Highway

Tappan,NY

74.18 I 3 I 32; LI zone

(ABOVE  GROUND  STORAGE         ZBA#15-85

OF PETROLEUM)   § 4.44 AND

• 8.10 STORAGE WITHIN 150′ OF LOT LINE VARIANCES   APPROVED

 

Minutes

Page2

 

SUPERIOR  CRANE  RENTALS PERFROMANCESTANDARDS

375 Western  Highway

Tappan,  NY

74.18   I 3 I 32;  LI zone

PERFORMANCE   STANDARDS       ZBA#l5-86

REVIEW  APPROVED

 

 

 

OTHER   BUSINESS:

 

In response  to requests  from the Orangetown   Planning  Board,  the Zoning Board of Appeals:   RESOLVED,   to approve  the action of the Acting Chairperson  executing  on behalf  of the Board  its  consent  to the Planning   Board acting  as Lead Agency   for the State Environmental  Quality Review  Act (SEQRA)  coordinated  environmental   review  of actions  pursuant  to SEQRA  Regulations§    617.6   (b)(3) the following  applications:

7 Welles  Lane Site Plan,  Critical  Environmental  Area Site Plan  for Pool (258  South

Boulevard  Subdivision),Nyack,   NY;  66.17 I 1   I  25.2; R-22 zone;     and FURTHER RESOLVED,  to request   to be notified  by the Planning  Board  of SEQ RA proceedings, hearings,  and determinations    with respect  to these matters.

 

 

 

 

 

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

 

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

 

There being no further business  to come before  the Board,  on motion  duly made, seconded  and carried,  the meeting  was adjourned  at 10:30   P.M.

 

Dated:  October  7,  2015

 

 

 

DISTRIBUTION: APPLICANT

TOWN ATIORNEY

DEPUTY TOWN ATIORNEY

TOWN BOARD MEMBERS

BUILDING    INSPECTOR   (Individual     Decisions) Rockland  County Planning

 

ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS

::~

Deborah  Arbolino,   Administrative   Aide

 

 

 

3 81.J::W   S )1 }~  318    NA\ 01

 

£C 21  lJd    62   180  Sl02

 

NM013   0 NVU 0  ;J 0  f”.l  1\\0l

 

DECISION

 

 

REAR  YARD  VARIANCE   APPROVED

 

To:  James and Mary Kelly

186 Center Street

Pearl River, New York  10965

ZBA #15-80

Date: October  7, 2015

 

 

FROM:  ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS:  Town  of Orangetown

 

ZBA#15-80:  Application  of  James  and Mary Kelly  for a variance  from Zoning  Code (Chapter  43) of the Town  of Orangetown  Code,  Section  3.12, R-15 District,   Group M, Column   11  (Rear Yard:  35′ required,  29.5′  existing)   for an existing  deck at  an existing single-family  residence.  The premises  are located  at 186 Center  Street, Pearl River, New York and are identified  on the Orangetown  Tax Map as Section  68.15, Block 3, Lot 3; in the R-15 zoning  district.

 

 

 

Heard by the Zoning  Board of Appeals  of the Town  of Orangetown  at a meeting  held on Wednesday,  October  7, 2015 at which time the Board made the determination  hereinafter set forth.

 

James Kelly appeared  and testified.

 

The following  documents  were presented:

 

 

 

1. Architectural  plans labeled  “Kelly  Deck”  dated  September  9, 2015 signed and sealed by John Anthony  Ferraro  P.C., Registered  Architect  (1 page).

 

 

 

 

Mr. Sullivan,   Chairman,  made a motion  to open the Public Hearing  which motion  was seconded  by Ms. Castelli   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. Castelli,  aye; Ms. Salomon,  aye; Mr. Bosco,  aye;  Mr. Quinn,

aye; and Mr. Sullivan,  aye.

 

 

 

James Kelly testified  that 27 years ago he replaced  the existing  deck and enlarged  it a little bit without  getting  a permit;  that he did not realize  he needed  a permit because  he was replacing  the deck boards  and only making  it slightly  larger; that they found out that it was too large and needed  a variance  because  they are in the process  of selling the house.

 

 

 

 

3~L:L:JO SYH310    N/~\01

£~  ?! (Jd   62  180 5102

 

 

 

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  rear yard variance  will not produce  an undesirable  change in the character  of the neighborhood   or a detriment  to nearby  properties.  The deck has existed in its present  location  for many years without  incident.

 

 

 

2. The requested rear yard variance  will not have an adverse  effect or impact  on the physical  or environmental   conditions  in the neighborhood  or district. The deck has existed in its present  location  for many years 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.  The deck has existed in its present  location  for many years without  incident.

 

 

 

4. The requested  rear yard variance  is not substantial.

 

 

 

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

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

 

 

 

3~1.:UO  S’n~31~ NMOl

 

EC 21  Wd   62  180  5102

 

NM 0 l ::1 D  NV U 0   .:i 0  NA\ 01

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

General  Conditions:

 

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

 

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

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

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

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

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

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

 

 

 

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

 

 

301.:UO  s;P131~ NMOl

 

EC 21: LJd   62   l~O  Sl02

 

NM013~r~VJ  0 so NiAOl

 

 

 

 

Kelly

ZBA#15-80

Page  4 of  4

 

 

 

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

 

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

 

DATED:    October  7,  2015

 

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–1£.(,.L><–“‘-”-“”–“”-l-‘.1-=- Deborah  Arbolino Administrative   Aide

 

 

TOWN  CLERK

HIGHWAY    DEPARTMENT ASSESSOR

DEPT.  of ENVIRONMENTAL

MGMT. and  ENGINEERING FILE,ZBA,   PB

CHAIRMAN,     ZBA,  PB,  ACABOR

 

 

 

 

3 o \.:l.:I  o  S”. :~ 318  NfAOl

££  zr Lld    62  180 SlOZ

 

N                                   .:JO  N1\  01

!.AQ    1    :;’l:J\i’.JJ

ffl     –   -1  V   I  i     v

 

DECISION

 

SIDE YARD AND REAR YARD VARIANCES APPROVED

 

To:  Ira and Viki Steinberg

10 Murphy  Court

Blauvelt,  New York  10913

ZBA #15-81

Date: October  7, 2015

 

 

FROM:  ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS:  Town of Orangetown

 

 

 

ZBA#15-81:  Application  of  Ira and Viki Steinberg  for  variances  from Zoning  Code (Chapter  43) of the Town  ofOrangetwn   Code, R-15 District,  Section  3.12,Group  M, Columns  9 (Side Yard: 20′  required,  10′ proposed)  and from Section  5.227 (Rear Yard:

20′  required,  11′ proposed)  for the installation  of an in-ground  pool at an existing  one• family residence.  The premises  are located  at 10 Murphy  Court, Blauvelt,  New York and are identified  on the Orangetown  Tax Map as Section  70.14, Block 2, Lot 47.9 in the R-

15 zoning district.

 

 

 

Heard by the Zoning  Board of Appeals  of the Town  of Orangetown  at a meeting  held on Wednesday,  October  7, 2015 at which time the Board made the determination  hereinafter set forth.

 

Ira Steinberg  and Mike  Insignares,  Cool Pool, appeared  and testified. The following  documents  were presented:

1. Copy of site plan (1  page)  showing  the proposed  placement  of the pool.

 

 

2. A picture  of the proposed  pool imposed  onto the property.

 

 

 

Mr. Sullivan,   Chairman,  made a motion  to open the Public Hearing  which motion  was seconded  by Ms. Castelli   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. Castelli,  aye; Ms. Salomon,  aye; Mr. Bosco,  aye; Mr. Quinn, aye; and Mr. Sullivan,  aye.

 

 

 

Ira Steinberg  testified  that he would  like to install the pool in the rear yard because  he had a nine year old son and a four year old daughter  that would use the pool all season;  and that he has a small  ~ acre lot that is very heavily  landscaped  on the left side of the property.

 

Mike Insignares,  Cool Pool, testified  that the rear yard has a significant  slope in the rear; that there is approximately   11 ‘ difference  from one side to the other; that they placed the proposed  pool on the most level section of the yard that would also permit  a small green are next to the pool for a recreational  space; that the pool s 12’ from the raised wooden

deck; and the entire yard is very well screened.                           3 a J .~ .:f O   S )! H 31 a  N /1\ O I

£~  ~! lJd    62  lDO 5102

 

NM0130N\1u0  dO Nl.\Gl

 

Steinberg

ZBA#15-81

Page 2 of  4

 

 

 

 

Public  Comment:

 

No public  comment.

 

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

 

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

Municipal  Law of New York was received.

 

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

Ms. Castelli   and carried unanimously.

 

 

FINDINGS  OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS:

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

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

 

 

 

1. The requested  side yard and §5.227 rear yard variances  will not produce  an undesirable  change in the character  of the neighborhood   or a detriment  to nearby properties.  Similar pools have been constructed  in the area. The entire rear yard is well screened  and the pool is being constructed  on the most level section of the yard.

 

 

 

2. The requested side yard and §5.227 rear yard variances  will not have an adverse effect or impact on the physical  or environmental   conditions  in the neighborhood  or district.   Similar pools have been constructed  in the area. The entire rear yard is well screened  and the pool is being  constructed  on the most level section of the yard.

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

4. The requested  side yard and  §5.227 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 surrounding  neighborhood  or nearby community.      Similar pools have been constructed  in the area. The entire rear yard is well screened  and the pool is being constructed  on the most level section of the yard.

 

 

 

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.

 

 

 

3 81.:l :1 0   S ~!~El 18 NA\ 0 l

 

8C 21  lJd    62  180  5102

 

NM013DN’v’:Jo  :JO  NA\Ql

 

 

ZBA#lS-81

Page  3   of  4

 

 

 

DECISION:  In view of the foregoing  and the testimony  and documents  presented,  the Board: RESOLVED,  that the application  for the requested  side yard and§  5.227 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  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.

 

 

 

301.::1.::10   S:lt!31Q   NMOl

 

£C 21  lJd    6 2  180  5102

 

NMOl::l~NVuO   JO Nh\01

 

 

ZBA#15-81

Page  4 of  4

 

 

 

 

The foregoing  resolution  to approve  the application  for the requested   side yard and §

5.227 rear yard variances    was presented  and moved by Ms.  Salomon,   seconded  by Ms. Salomon   and carried as follows:  Mr. Bosco,   aye;  Mr. Quinn,  aye ;Ms.  Castelli,  aye;  Ms. Salomon,  aye; and Mr. Sullivan,  aye.

 

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

 

DATED:    October  7,  2015

 

 

ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS TOWN  OF ORANGETOWN

 

 

 

DISTRIBUTION:

 

APPLICANT

ZBA   MEMBERS SUPERVISOR

TOWN BOARD MEMBERS TOWN ATTORNEY

DEPUTY TOWN ATTORNEY

OBZPAE

BUILDING   INSPECTOR-R.A.0.

By.L_~IL…\<‘.:..=!L!..J..4–~~~ Deborah  Arbo mo Administrative    Aide

 

 

TOWN CLERK

HIGHWAY   DEPARTMENT ASSESSOR

DEPT. of ENVIRONMENTAL

MGMT. and ENGINEERING FILE,ZBA,   PB

CHAIRMAN,    ZBA, PB,  ACABOR

 

 

::i o 1.::J so  s \I ~131  o  NM o 1

 

h8  21  Lld    62  180    Sl02

 

N h-\ 013 ~H \i u 0 .:l 0 N ft\ 0 l

 

DECISION

 

• 5.12 (LOTS DIVIDED BY DISTRICT BOUNDARY), FLOOR AREA RATIO, REAR YARD AND BUILDING HEIGHT  VARIANCES APPROVED

 

To:  John Guarino

223 Old Tappan  Road

Tappan,  New York  10983

ZBA#15-82

Date: October  7, 2015

 

 

FROM:  ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS:  Town  of Orangetown

 

 

 

ZBA#l 5-82: Application  of John Guarino  for variances  from Zoning  Code (Chapter  43)

of the Town  of Orangetown  Code,  Section  5.12 (lots divided by district boundary applies)  Section  3.12, R-15 District,  Group M, Columns  4 (Floor Area Ratio:  .20 permitted,   .25 proposed),   11  (Rear  Yard:  35′  required,   8.5′  existing,  19.9′ proposed), and 12 (Building  Height:  19.9′ permitted,  24.5′  proposed)  for an addition  to a single• family residence.  The  premises  are located  at 223 Old Tappan  Road, Tappan,   New York and are identified  on the Orangetown  Tax Map as Section   77.10, Block 3, Lot 3; in the

R-15 zoning  district.

 

 

 

 

Heard by the Zoning  Board of Appeals  of the Town of Orangetown  at a meeting  held on Wednesday,  October  7, 2015 at which time the Board made the determination  hereinafter set forth.

 

John Guarino,  Melissa  Lopez and Carmen  Delacruz,  Architects,  appeared  and testified. The following  documents  were presented:

1. Copy of site plan based  on survey prepared  by Jack D. Boswell  & Associates

dated  10/2/1975  and signed  and sealed by Jorge L Lopez,  R.A. dated 8/12/2015  (1 page).

2. Architectural  plans labeled  “Proposed  Addition  & Renovation  for Mr. & Mrs.

Guarino”    dated April 25, 2014 with the latest revision  date of August  10, 2015 signed and sealed by Jorge  L. Lopez, Registered  Architect  (6 pages).

3. A letter dated  September  28, 2015 from the County  of Rockland  Department  of

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

4. A letter dated September  9, 2015 from the County  of Rockland  Department  of

Health  signed by Scott Mc Kane, P .E ..

 

 

 

Mr. Sullivan,   Chairman,  made a motion  to open the Public  Hearing  which motion  was seconded  by Ms. Castelli   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  applica~n  i~       -i a Type II action exempt  from the State Environmental   Quality  Review  Act (SEQ~,       tr;    ~

pursuant  to SEQRA  Regulations  §617.5 (c) (9), (10), (12) and/or (13); which  doesibt      g    z

require  SEQRA  environmental   review.  The motion  was seconded  by Ms. Castelli  and       ,      .,

 

carried as follows:   Ms. Castelli,  aye; Ms. Salomon,  aye; Mr. Bosco,  aye; Mr. QuiJ;ri:,,  a~

and Mr. Sullivan,  aye.                                                                                                        ,,.   .

0

::·_1

 

en      -u     :2:

0         3       G•.)

.,,            ~i               rn

11       Nr       -i

0

0          <:.-:):      =I:

rn     -e:     :z

Carmen  Delacruz,  Architect,  testified  that they are proposing  to keep the foundation  and they are raising  the roof for a second  story and adding a garage  and about seven feet around the house;  that they spoke to the building  inspector  in Northvale  and he said they have no comment  on work being done in New York;  and that no one is living in the house presently.

 

Guarino

ZBA#15-82

Page 2 of  4

 

 

 

 

Public Comment:

 

 

No public  comment.

 

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

 

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

Municipal  Law of New York was received.

 

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

Ms. Castelli   and carried unanimously.

 

FINDINGS  OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS:

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

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

 

 

 

1. The requested §5.12 (lots divided by district boundary), floor area ratio, rear yard and building height variances will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. Similar additions have been constructed in the neighborhood, and the non-conforming bulk is mainly due to the property being split by the State Line.

 

 

 

2. The requested §5.12 (lots divided by district boundary), floor area ratio, rear yard and building height variances will not have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district.  Similar additions have been constructed in the neighborhood, and the non-conforming bulk is mainly due to the property being split by the State Line.

 

3. The benefits sought by the applicant cannot be achieved by other means feasible for the applicant to pursue other than by obtaining variances. Similar additions have been constructed in the neighborhood, and the non-conforming bulk is mainly due to the property being split by the State Line.

 

 

 

4. The requested §5.12 (lots divided by district boundary), floor area ratio, rear yard and building height variances, although somewhat substantial, afford benefits to the applicant that are not outweighed by the detriment, if any, to the health, safety and welfare of the surrounding neighborhood or nearby community.

 

 

 

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

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

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

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

 

 

30Jdd0 S~~~L318  NMOl hC  2I   Wd   62   180  SIOZ NM013 D N’iU  0  .:10 N/rHH

 

 

 

 

Guarino

ZBA#15-82

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  §5.12 (lots divided by district boundary),  floor area ratio, rear yard and building  height variances  are APPROVED;   and FURTHER  RESOLVED,  that such decision  and the vote thereon shall become  effective  and be deemed  rendered  on the date of adoption  by the Board of the minutes  of which they are a part.

 

 

 

General  Conditions:

 

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

 

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

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

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

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

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

 

 

 

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

 

30LLW s:nJ31Q NMOl

 

hC  21  Wd   62  180  5102

 

Nh\Ol3DNVUO   so Nft\01

 

 

 

Guarino

ZBA#15-82

Page  4 of  4

 

 

 

 

The foregoing  resolution   to approve  the application  for the requested  §5.12   (lots divided by district  boundary),   floor area ratio,  rear yard and building  height  variances   was presented  and moved by Ms.  Castelli,   seconded  by Ms.  Salomon   and carried as follows: Mr. Bosco,   aye;  Mr. Quinn,  aye ;Ms.  Castelli,   aye;  Ms.  Salomon,  aye; and Mr. Sullivan, aye.

 

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

 

DATED:   October  7,  2015

 

ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS TOWN  OF ORANGETOWN

 

 

 

DISTRIBUTION:

 

APPLICANT

ZBA  MEMBERS SUPERVISOR

TOWN BOARD MEMBERS

TOWN ATTORNEY

DEPUTY  TOWN ATTORNEY OBZPAE

BUILDING  INSPECTOR-M.M.

Administrative   Aide

 

 

TOWN CLERK

HIGHWAY  DEPARTMENT

ASSESSOR

DEPT.  of ENVIRONMENTAL

MGMT. and ENGINEERING FILE,ZBA,   PB

CHAIRMAN,   ZBA, PB, ACABOR

 

 

hC 21  tJd    62 180  SIOZ

 

NA\Ol::l~HJVuO    .:JO  Nf,\Ol

 

DECISION

 

 

FLOOR   AREA  RA TIO  VARIAN CE APPROVED

 

To:   Robert  Lee

54 Marycrest  Road

West Nyack, New York  10994

ZBA #15-83

Date: October  7, 2015

 

 

FROM:  ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS:  Town  of Orangetown

 

ZBA#l 5-83 :Application  of  Robert  Lee for a variance  from Zoning  Code (Chapter  43) of the Town of Orangetown  Code, R-22 District,  Group  I, Section  3.12, Column  4 (Floor Area ratio:  .20 permitted,  .24 existing)  for a basement  that was finished  without  a permit

at an existing  single-family  residence.  The premises  are located  at 54 Marycrest  Road, West Nyack,  New York  and are identified  on the Orangetown  Tax Map as Section  69.06, Block 2, Lot 36; in the R-22 zoning  district.

 

 

Heard by the Zoning  Board of Appeals  of the Town  of Orangetown  at a meeting  held on Wednesday,  October  7, 2015 at which time the Board made the determination  hereinafter set forth.

 

Robert  Lee and Min Park appeared  and testified. The following  documents  were presented:

1. Copy of site plan (1  page).
2. Architectural  plan labeled  Basement  plan not signed  or sealed and not dated.
3. A letter dated  September  21, 2015 from the County  of Rockland  Department  of

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

 

 

Mr. Sullivan,   Chairman,  made a motion  to open the Public Hearing  which motion  was seconded  by Ms. Castelli   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. Castelli,  aye; Ms. Salomon,  aye; Mr. Bosco,  aye; Mr. Quinn, aye; and Mr. Sullivan,  aye.

 

 

 

 

Min Park testified  that they purchased  the house in 2002 and did not realize that the existing  finished basement  did not have a certificate  of occupancy;  that they are in the process  of selling the house  and found out that they need a certificate  of occupancy  for the basement;  that there is a bathroom  in the basement  but no kitchen.

 

 

 

3Dl~.:!O  s;n_~318  NMOl h~ 21  Wd   62  180  SlOZ NM013f>NV(J0   .:10  Nh\01

 

Lee

ZBA#lS-83

Page 2 of  4

 

 

 

 

Public Comment:

 

No public  comment.

 

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

 

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

Municipal  Law of New York was received.

 

 

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

Ms. Castelli   and carried unanimously.

 

 

FINDINGS  OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS:

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

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

 

 

 

1. The requested  floor area ratio variance  will not produce  an undesirable  change in the character  of the neighborhood   or a detriment  to nearby  properties.   Other houses  in the area have finished  basements.

 

 

 

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.  Other houses in the area have finished  basements.

 

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.  Other houses  in the area have finished  basements.

 

 

 

4. The requested  floor area ratio variance,  although  somewhat  substantial,  afford benefits  to the applicant  that are not outweighed  by the detriment,  if any, to the health,  safety and welfare  of the surrounding  neighborhood   or nearby  community.

 

 

 

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

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

 

 

3QL:Jj0   5;.~1J310NMOl

h£  21. LJd   62   130  SlOZ

 

NA\Ol3DHV’JO     .:10  Nh\Ol

 

 

Lee

ZBA#15-83

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 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.

 

 

381::1.:10  SY.lEi18  Nh\01

 

hC  21  LJd   62   180  Sl02

 

 

 

Lee

ZBA#lS-83

Page  4 of  4

 

 

 

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

 

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

 

DATED:   October  7, 2015

 

ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS TOWN  OF ORANGETOWN

 

 

DISTRIBUTION:

 

APPLICANT

ZBA  MEMBERS SUPERVISOR

TO\VN BOARD MEMBERS

TOWN ATTORNEY

DEPUTY TOWN ATTORNEY

OBZPAE

BUILDING  INSPECTOR-G.M.

By-<-¥-“-£_—=–==”-‘—‘LL-f-‘-+ Deborah  Arbolino Administrative   Aide

 

 

TOWN CLERK

HIGHWAY  DEPARTMENT ASSESSOR

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

CHArRMAN,  ZBA, PB, ACABOR

 

 

381.:l.:lO   s \}JT1Cl   Nh\01

hE  Zl  lJd    62 180   SlD2

 

NM013~N\iu0     :10    ~lh\01

 

DECISION

 

 

FLOOR   AREA  RATIO   AND REAR  YARD  VARIANCES    APPROVED

 

To:  Bart Valerio

17 4 East Rutgers  Road

Orangeburg,  New York  10962

ZBA#15-84

Date: October  7, 2015

 

 

FROM:  ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS:  Town  of Orangetown

 

 

 

ZBA#15-  84: Application  of  Bart and Helene  Valerio  for variances  from Zoning  Code (Chapter  43) of the Town  of Orangetown  Code,  Section  3.12,  R-22 District,  Group I, Column  4 (Floor Area Ratio:  .20 permitted,  .23 proposed)  and 11   (Rear Yard: 45′ required,  40.8′  proposed  to deck and 39.l’   to stairs) for an existing  deck/ screened  in porch  at an existing   single-family  residence.   The premises  are located  at 174 Rutgers Road East, Orangeburg,  New York  and are identified  on the Orangetown  Tax Map as Section 74.13, Block 2, Lot 61; in the R-22 zoning  district.

 

 

 

Heard by the Zoning  Board of Appeals  of the Town  of Orangetown  at a meeting  held on Wednesday,  October  7, 2015 at which time the Board made the determination  hereinafter set forth.

 

Bart Valerio  and Karl Ackerman  appeared  and testified. The following  documents  were presented:

 

1. Architectural plans labeled  ” Proposed  Screened  Porch for Valerio  Residence” dated August  9, 2015 with the latest revision  date of August  31, 2015 signed and sealed by Karl Ackerman,  Registered  Architect  (2 pages).

 

 

 

Mr. Sullivan,   Chairman,  made a motion  to open the Public  Hearing  which motion  was seconded  by Ms. Castelli   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. Castelli,  aye; Ms. Salomon,  aye; Mr. Bosco,  aye; and Mr. Quinn, aye; and Mr. Sullivan,  aye.

 

 

 

Bart Valerio  testified  that they have lived in the house  for 40 years; that the deck existed when they purchased  the house;  that he enclosed  part of it and added to the deck and extended  the stairs.

 

 

 

 

Karl Ackerman  testified  that the structure  has been certified  safe and inspected;  that the rear yard is 20’8″  to the deck and 39/1′  to the stairs; and that the room is not heated  and is a three season room.

 

 

 

 

 

301.:J,jO  s~nEll!J  NMOl

 

h£  21  LJd   62  l~O  Sl02

N/t\013 e N ‘1~ 0  .:! 0 NA\01

 

 

 

Valerio

ZBA#lS-84

Page2  of  4

 

 

 

 

Public  Comment:

 

No public  comment.

 

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

 

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

Municipal  Law 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 and rear yard variances  will not produce  an undesirable change in the character  of the neighborhood  or a detriment  to nearby properties.  The screened  in porch  and deck have existed  for many  years without  incident.

 

 

 

2. The requested floor area ratio and rear yard variances   will not have an adverse  effect or impact  on the physical  or environmental   conditions  in the neighborhood   or district. The screened  in porch  and deck have existed  for many years 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  variances.  The screened  in porch  and deck have existed  for many years without  incident.

 

 

 

4~   The requested  floor area ratio 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 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.

 

 

 

381.:!.:lO S~lU31~   N/~\Ol h& 2i Wd     s2  1no stol NM013~Nvtl0     :HJ N.1\01

 

Valerio

ZBA#lS-84

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 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 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.

 

 

 

3 Q L:L:! O   S)PJ 31 ~  N/1′.01

hC  at Wd   62  180 SlOZ

 

 

 

Valerio

ZBA#15-84

Page  4 of  4

 

 

 

 

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

 

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

 

DATED:    October  7,  2015

 

ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS TOWN  OF ORANGETOWN

 

 

 

 

DISTRIBUTION:

 

APPLICANT

ZBA   MEMBERS SUPERVISOR

TOWN BOARD  MEMBERS

TOWN  ATTORNEY

DEPUTY  TOWN  ATTORNEY

OBZPAE

BUILDING    INSPECTOR-G.M.

By~q,..e.y..:::~:::….:….!~’..:,.L:.~ Deborah  Arbolino Administrative   Aide

 

 

TOWN  CLERK

HIGHWAY    DEPARTMENT ASSESSOR

DEPT.   of ENVIRONMENTAL

MGMT. and  ENGINEERING FILE,ZBA,   PB

CHAIRMAN,     ZBA,  PB, ACABOR

 

 

 

381.:!.:lO  S\!~318   NMOl

hf:  21  Lld    62  180 srnz

 

NtfiOlJ~N·7~0   .:lO  NiAOl

 

DECISION

 

 

BULK  STORAGE   OF  PETROLEUM    ABOVE  GROUND   AND STORAGE   OF COMBUSTIBLE    MATERIALS    WITHIN   150′  OF LOT  LINE  VARIANCES

APPROVED

 

To:  Ken DeGennaro  (Superior  Crane) Brooker  Engineering,  PLLC

7 6 Lafayette  A venue

Suffern, New York  10901

ZBA #15-85

Date: October  7, 2015

 

 

FROM:  ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS:  Town  of Orangetown

 

ZBA#15-  85: Application  of Superior  Crane Rentals   for a variance  from  Zoning  Code (Chapter  43) of the Town  of Orangetown  Code, LI District,   Section 4.44 (Bulk Storage of petroleum  products  above ground  is prohibited)  and Section  8.10 paragraph  c (Storage of any combustible  materials  within  150′ of any lot line is prohibited)   for a 550 gallon fuel tank and equipment  storage. The premises  is located  at 375 Western  Highway, Tappan,  New York and are identified  on the Orangetown  Tax Map as Section   74.18, Block 3, Lot 32; in the LI zoning  district.

 

 

 

Heard by the Zoning  Board of Appeals  of the Town of Orangetown  at a meeting  held on Wednesday,  October  7, 2015 at which time the Board made the determination  hereinafter set forth.

 

Brian and Dave Marcason  and Ken DeGennaro,  P .E.,  appeared  and testified. The following  documents  were presented:

1. Copy of site plan labeled ” Superior  Crane commercial  subdivision  Plat, tenant site plan”  (1 page).
2. A cover letter dated August  2, 2015 from Kenneth  DeGennaro,  P.E., Brooker

Engineering,  P.L.L.C ..

3. Zoning  Board Decision#    14-18 dated March  19, 2015.
4. A letter dated September  21, 2015 from the County of Rockland  Department  of

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

 

 

Mr. Sullivan,   Chairman,  made a motion  to open the Public Hearing  which motion  was seconded  by Ms. Castelli   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 since the Planning  Board noticed  its intent to declare itself Lead Agency  and distributed  that notice of intention  to all Involved  Agencies,  including  the ZBA who consented  or did not object to the

Planning  Board  acting as Lead Agency  for the Miele Commercial  Subdivision  and Miele

Site Plan application  (which included  the subject  Applicant’s   site and its potential  uses), pursuant  to coordinated  review  under the State Environmental   Quality Review  Act (SEQRA),  pursuant  to SEQRA  Regulations   §617.5 (b) (3) and since the Planning  Board conducted  a SEQRA  review,  and on March  13, 2013, rendered  an environmental determination  of no significant  adverse  environmental   impacts  to result from the proposed  land use action (i.e., “Negative  Declaration”   of “Neg. Dec”), the ZBA is bound by the Planning  board’s  Neg. Dec. and the ZBA cannot require  further  SEQRA  review pursuant  to SEQRA  Regulation  §617.6 (b) (3); Alternatively,    since this Application

9

seeks to construct  or expand  a primary  or accessory/  appurtenant,  non-residential                   “‘-)

structure  or facility involving  less than 4,000  square feet of gross floor area and not    ci   ~

 

:z

involving a change in zoning or a use variance and consistent with local land use

=E       c:::>        :;;

C”:>

 

controls, this Application is exempt from environmental review under the State          o       —t Environmental Quality Review Act pursuant to SEQRA Regulations §617.5 (c)(7); w~ch  N motion was seconded by Ms. Castelli and carried as follows: Ms. Castelli, aye; Ms.  ~·~         c.o Salomon, aye; Mr. Bosco, aye; and Mr. Quinn, aye; and Mr. Sullivan, aye.                 c:n        ~

.,

 

.-.._.,.

 

0          -:;;J                    C)

-r:-1         ~      !             fi1

-,,       N    r          –4

0       “CA.):      :e

0

,,,        -C         :z

 

Superior  Crane Rentals

ZBA#15-85

Page2  of  5

 

Ken DeGennaro,  P .E., testified  that the parcel  is part of the Miele Subdivision;  that the variance  required  is for the Bulk storage  of diesel fuel above ground  and its location  is too close to the property  line; that the property  line is at the rear of the Miele  subdivision that abuts the railroad  tracks;  that the applicant  must meet all the requirements   from the Health Department,  Fire Inspector,  Department  of Environmental   Management   before they could move forward;  that the next application  is for Performance  Standards  review for the tank; that this application  is for the location  of the proposed  above-ground  tank;

that they cannot meet the requirements  of the code unless  they placed  the tank in front of

another tenants building;  and that they would not be permitted  to place anything  on another tenants  property.

 

 

 

Brian Marcason  testified  that many of the other business’s   leasing property  on the site have above-ground  fuel tanks; that they are doing everything  right and getting all the necessary  approvals;  that the tank is double-walled   and self- contained  and supplied  by SOS Fuel for as long as they purchase  fuel from them;  and that he has a pallet  of blankets and pads that could be used to contain  any spill.

 

 

 

Dave Marcason  testified  that he needs to have the above ground  storage  on site because

he is paying  high salaries  to his crane operators  and would like to be able to fuel them on site instead  of paying top dollar for them to fuel up elsewhere;  and that the trains going

by in the rear of the property  are carrying  millions  of gallons  of diesel fuel. Public  Comment:

Vicky  and Norman  Cooper,  owners  of 350 Western  Highway,  Tappan,  testified  that they own the three-family  residence  across the street from the Miele property  and they are concerned  about the hazards  of above-ground  fuel storage  so close to the railroad  tracks; that it will have an adverse  effect on their property;  that flammable  material  above – ground is dangerous  and the loss of property  value is a concern;  and that things  can go wrong.

 

 

 

Heather  Hurley,  202 Hobart  Street, Pearl River, testified  that she was looking  at the plans and she did not see a gate to enter the property;  that there are houses  and businesses

across the street that would be effected by an explosion;  that she would like to know if one person would be in charge of the fueling;  that she has concerns  about an accident  or train derailment;  that she would like to know who regulates  the station and monitors  it and how often is fuel delivered;  and how does this tank relate to other sites in the area such as the welder  next door; and what is the revision  date since the denial?

 

 

 

Ken DeGennaro,  P .E. testified  that the tank is 440 feet away from W estem  Highway  and it is 40 feet lower than the three family house  on Western  Highway;  that it cannot be seen from the street; that there are regulatory  agencies  that are involved  in the installation  of the take; that the tank has to meet the requirements   of these agencies  and he does not remember  all of the questions.

Brian Marcason  testified  that the tank will be fences and under surveillance  cameras     s

which will be connected to his cell phone; that there is no welding done outside b~is    c..n

neighbor; that they have seven vehicles that hold about 1 OOto 150 gallons of fuel; ffiat ~ SOS is there every day on the Miele property filling up other tanks.                       ~     N

rn     CD

…..

The Board members made personal inspections of the premises the week before t~

meeting and found them to be properly posted and as generally described on the   o

 

 

 

–

-I

G

-f::

..,

0

::0

>

z

 

application.                                                                                                               ~

I-‘   r              rn

~.         -I

0

 

0       -~,           :E

rn     ..c:     :z

 

Superior  Crane Rentals

ZBA#15-85

Page  3   of  5

 

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§   4.44 Bulk Storage of petroleum  above ground,  and §8.10 par. c Storage of combustible  materials  within  150′ lot line, variances  will not produce  an undesirable  change in the character  of the neighborhood  or a detriment  to nearby properties.  The lot lines are within  an existing  commercial  lot and the distance  to other residential  and commercial  properties  outside  of the commercial  lot is 400′  and greater.

 

 

 

2. The requested § 4.44 Bulk Storage of petroleum  above ground,  and §8.10 par. c Storage of combustible  materials  within  150′ lot line, variances   will not have an adverse  effect or impact  on the physical  or environmental   conditions  in the neighborhood   or district.  The lot lines are within  an existing  commercial  lot  and the distance  to other residential  and commercial  properties  outside  of the commercial  lot is 400′  and greater.

 

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   § 4.44 Bulk Storage of petroleum  above ground,  and §8.10 par. c Storage of combustible  materials  within  150′ lot line, 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 lot lines are within  an existing  commercial  lot and the distance  to

other residential  and commercial  properties  outside  of the commercial  lot is 400′  and greater.

 

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   § 4.44 Bulk Storage of petroleum  above ground,  and §8.10 par. c Storage  of combustible  materials  within  150′

lot line, 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.

 

 

 

301.:HO  S>!T:JlO  NMOl

 

h8  21  LJd   62   180  5102

 

NM013Di’J\iUO  so Nh\@l

 

Superior  Crane Rentals

ZBA#lS-85

Page  4  of  5

 

 

 

 

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.

 

 

301.d.:!O  SYH:318 N/AOl

 

hC  21  Wd   62   l~O    5102

 

Nh\013  ~NV~ 0 .:l 0  N!v\01

 

 

Superior  Crane

ZBA#15-85

Page  5 of  5

 

 

 

The foregoing  resolution  to approve  the application  for the requested   § 4.44 Bulk Storage of petroleum  above ground,  and §8.10 par. c Storage of combustible  materials within  150′  lot  line, vaiiances   was  presented  and moved  by Mr. Sullivan,  seconded  by Mr. Quinn  and carried as follows:   Mr. Bosco,  aye;  Mr. Quinn,  aye;  Ms.  Castelli,   aye; Ms.  Salomon,   aye;  and Mr. Sullivan,   aye.

 

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

 

DATED:    October  7, 2015

 

ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS TOWN  OF ORANGETOWN

 

 

 

DISTRIBUTION:

 

APPLICANT

ZBA MEMBERS SUPERVISOR

TOWN BOARD MEMBERS

TOWN  ATTORNEY

DEPUTY TOWN ATTORNEY OBZPAE

BUILDING   INSPECTOR-G.M.

B

Deborah  Arbolino

Administrative   Aide

 

 

TOWN CLERK

HIGHWAY   DEPARTMENT ASSESSOR

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

CHAIRMAN,    ZBA, PB, ACABOR

 

 

 

301.:l.:lO   S”}l310   Ni\~01

 

hC  ZI lJd    62   180  Sl02

 

NM0130H\’LO       .:JO   N/\01

 

DECISION

 

 

PERFORMANCE     STANDARDS   COMPLIANCE     APPROVED

 

To:  Ken DeGennaro  (Superior  Crane) Brooker  Engineering,  PLLC

7 6 Lafayette   A venue

Suffern, New York  10901

ZBA#15-86

Date: October  7, 2015

 

 

FROM:  ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS:  Town  of Orangetown

 

 

 

ZBA#15-  86: Application  of Superior  Crane Rentals  requesting  approval  of Performance Standards  pursuant  to  Zoning  Code (Chapter  43) of the Town of Orangetown  Code, LI District,   Section 4.1 Performance   Standards  review  of a 550 gallon fuel tank and equipment  storage. The premises  is located  at 375 Western  Highway,  Tappan,  New York and are identified  on the Orangetown  Tax Map as Section   74.18, Block 3, Lot 32; in the LI zoning  district.

 

Heard by the Zoning  Board of Appeals  of the Town  of Orangetown  at a meeting  held on Wednesday,  October  7, 2015 at which time the Board made the determination  hereinafter set forth.

 

Brian Marcason  and Ken DeGennaro,  P .E.,  appeared  and testified. The following  documents  were presented:

1. Copy of site plan labeled ” Superior  Crane commercial  subdivision  Plat, tenant site plan”  (1 page).
2. A cover letter dated August 2, 2015 from Kenneth DeGennaro, P.E., Brooker

Engineering, P.L.L.C..

3. Zoning Board Decision# 14-18 dated March 19, 2015.
4. Performance Standards Resume of Operations and Equipment dated 9/18/2015.
5. Fire Prevention Supplement.
6. Hazardous Material Permit Application material list (2 pages)
7. A letter dated September 21, 2015 from the County of Rockland Department of

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

8. A Memorandum dated September 22, 2015 from the Orangetown Fire Inspector

Michael Bettmann with attachments.

9. A letter dated October 6, 2015 from Joseph Moran, P.E., Commissioner, Department of Environmental Management and Engineering, Town of Orangetown with an attachment dated September 22, 2015 from Bruce Peters, P.E., Engineer Ill, DEME, Town of Orangetown.

 

 

 

Mr. Sullivan, Chairman, made a motion to open the Public Hearing which motion was seconded by Ms. Castelli 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, based upon the testimony heard by this Board and the facts as presented in the application submissions and in the record, that since the application entails the ZBA engaging in a review to determine compliance with technical requirements the 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: Ms. Salomon, aye; Mr. Bosco, aye; Mr. Quinn, aye; Mr. Sullivan , aye; and Ms. Castelli, aye.

 

 

3 81.:L:W S)n~31  Q   NMO!

 

hC  21  LJd   6 2  180  Sl02

 

NMOl3DNVuO  .:W  Nh\01

 

 

ZBA#l5-86

Page 2 of5

 

 

The applicant  had two applications  before the Zoning  Board  and the testimony  for both applications  overlapped  each other:

 

 

Ken DeGennaro,  P .E., testified  that the parcel  is part of the Miele  Subdivision;  that the variance  required  is for the Bulk storage  of diesel fuel above ground  and its location  is too  close to the property  line; that the property  line is at the rear of the Miele subdivision that abuts the railroad  tracks; that the applicant  must meet all the requirements  from the Health Department,  Fire Inspector,  Department  of Environmental   Management   before they could move forward;  that the next application  is for Performance  Standards  review for the tank; that this application  is for the location  of the proposed  above-ground  tank; that they cannot meet the requirements  of the code unless  they placed  the tank in front of another tenants  building;  and that they would not be permitted  to place anything  on another tenants  property.

 

 

 

Brian Marcason  testified  that many of the other business’s   leasing property  on the site have above-ground  fuel tanks; that they are doing  everything  right and getting  all the necessary  approvals;  that the tank is double-walled   and self- contained  and supplied by SOS Fuel for as long as they purchase  fuel from them;  and that he has a pallet  of blankets and pads that could be used to contain  any spill.

 

 

 

Dave Marcason  testified  that he needs to have the above ground  storage  on site because

he is paying high salaries  to his crane operators  and would  like to be able to fuel them on site instead  of paying  top dollar for them to fuel up elsewhere;  and that the trains going

by in the rear of the property  are carrying  millions  of gallons  of diesel fuel.

 

Public  Comment:

 

 

Vicky  and Norman  Cooper,  owners  of350  Western  Highway,  Tappan,  testified  that they own the three-family  residence  across the street from the Miele property  and they are concerned  about the hazards  of above-ground   fuel storage  so close to the railroad  tracks; that it will have an adverse  effect on their property;  that flammable  material  above – ground is dangerous  and the loss of property  value is a concern;  and that things  can go wrong.

 

 

 

Heather  Hurley,  202 Hobart  Street, Pearl River, testified  that she was looking  at the plans and she did not see a gate to enter the property;  that there are houses  and businesses

across the street that would be effected by an explosion;  that she would like to know if one person would be in charge of the fueling; that she has concerns  about an accident  or train derailment;  that she would  like to know who regulates  the station and monitors  it and how often is fuel delivered;  and how does this tank relate to other sites in the area such as the welder next door; and what is the revision  date since the denial?

 

 

301.i.:!O  S)!T31 o  N/AOl

 

hC 21  lJd    62  l~O 5102

 

Nh\013 D NVJ 0 .:l 0  M/~\01

 

 

ZBA#15-86

Page3  of  5

 

 

 

Ken DeGennaro,  P .E. testified  that the tank is 440 feet away from Western  Highway  and it is 40 feet lower than the three family house  on Western  Highway;  that it cannot be seen from the street; that there are regulatory  agencies  that are involved  in the installation  of the take; that the tank has to meet the requirements  of these agencies  and he does not remember  all of the questions.

 

Brian Marcason  testified  that the tank will be fences and under  surveillance  cameras which will be connected  to his cell phone;  that there is no welding  done outside  by his neighbor;  that they have  seven vehicles  that hold about  1 OOto  150 gallons  of fuel; that SOS is there every day on the Miele property  filling up other tanks.

 

 

 

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

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

 

 

 

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

 

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

Municipal  Law ofNew  York was received.

 

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

Ms. Salomon  and carried unanimously.

 

 

 

 

FINDINGS  OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS:

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

 

Based upon the information  contained  in the applicant’s   Resume  of Operations and Equipment  and the Fire Prevention  Supplement;  the report dated October  6,

2015 from Joseph  J. Moran,  P.E., Commissioner   of the Town  of Orangetown

Department  of Environmental   Management  and Engineering  (D.E.M.E.)  with the attachment  dated  September  22, 2015 from Bruce Peters, P.E., Engineer  III; the memorandum   of Michael  Bettmann,  Chief Fire Inspector,  Town of Orangetown Bureau  of Fire Prevention  (B.F.P.)  dated September  2, 2015; the other documents submitted  to the Board  and the testimony  of Applicant’s   representatives;   the

Board  finds and concludes  that the application  conforms  with the Performance Standards  set forth in Zoning   Code Section 4.1, subject to compliance  with the orders, rules and regulations  of the Orangetown  Office of Building,  Zoning  & Planning  Administration   & Enforcement,  D.E.M.E.,  and B.F.P.,  and all other departments  having jurisdiction   of the premises.

 

 

 

3 01.:1.:l   O   S ~rn 31D  NM 01

 

SC 21  LJd   62   180  5102

 

NM013DNVciO  .:IQ  Nl-1\Ql

 

 

ZBA#lS-86

Page  4  of  5

 

 

 

 

DECISION:  In view of the foregoing  and the testimony  and documents  submitted,  the Board RESOLVED  that the Application  for  Performance   Standards   Conformance, pursuant  to Zoning  Code  § 4.1, is APPROVED  with the following  SPECIFIC CONDITIONS:   (1)  the Applicant  shall adhere to all of the requirements  and/or conditions  that may be required   by Chief Fire Inspector  Bettmann,  B.F.P.;  and  (2)  the Applicant  shall adhere to all of the requirements   set forth in the report dated October  6,

2015 from Joseph J. Moran,  P.E., Commissioner,   DE~.~;.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.

 

 

 

 

381.:UO  SY~~31G Nh\01

 

SC 21  lJd    6 2   l~O   Sl02

 

NM013~NVJO   ~O Nh\01

 

 

ZBA#l5-86

Page  5  of  5

 

 

 

The foregoing  resolution   to approve  the application  for Conformance  to Zoning  Code

• 4. l Performance Standards  Review  with the Specific  Conditions  that (a) the Applicant adhere to all of the requirements   and/or conditions  that may be required by Chief Fire Inspector  Bettmann,  B.F.P.;(b)  the Applicant  adhere to all of the requirements  set forth by the report dated October  6,  2015 from Joseph J. Moran,  P.E.,   Commissioner,   DEME; was  presented  and moved  by Mr. Sullivan,  seconded  by Mr.  Bosco   and carried  as follows:   Mr. Quinn,  aye;   Mr. Bosco,   aye;  Ms. Salomon,  aye; Mr.  Sullivan,   aye;  and Ms. Castelli,  aye.

 

 

 

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

 

DATED:    October  7, 2015

 

ZONING  BOARD  OF APPEALS TOWN  OF ORANGETOWN

 

 

 

DISTRIBUTION:

 

APPLICANT

ZBA   MEMBERS

SUPERVISOR

TOWN  BOARD  MEMBERS TOWN ATTORNEY

DEPUTY  TOWN ATTORNEY

OBZPAE

BUILDING   INSPECTOR-G.M.

 

By_L…J.{.J.L_”‘-=-=-=~_,  ,_:..=i.~ Deborah  Arbolino Administrative   Aide

 

 

TOWN CLERK

I-IIGI-IWAY   DEPARTMENT ASSESSOR

DEPT.  of ENVIRONMENTAL

MGMT.  and ENGINEERING FI LE,ZBA,   PB

CHAIRMAN,     ZBA,  PB,  ACABOR