1 25 8 https://sleepyhollow.localarchives.org/files/original/03451581fa612cdc8fa76f57623205ea.pdf b82fa339875ae852f474eb4b29f41e61 PDF Text Text Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting March 5» 1979 - 8'P.M. fresent-Friere-Chairrnan Kargotta Ceconi Swaby Absent- Arcate - c " . ^ Also presenter. Page, Building Inspector t Mr. Ponzini, Village Attorney' Fir'st Hearings ^olari Letter addressed to Mr. Donald M, Walsh,Sr. read. i Mr. Walsh asked for adjournment because he had no plans to submit. He finds ifchat Fir. Solari can jput up the building he wants according to the laws of the village. Mr. V/alsh will have the plans at the next board meeting and plans will meet all the zoning laws. Margotta: We have to have some kind of a time table for this building. When will the building be put up? Reminds Mr. Walsh that a building permit is only good for one year, Mr. Solari has not complied;with past requirementsnow he wants another extension. These delayingWetic will delay a decision for a few more weeks, I would like to dispose of this item now, Swaby Kar gotta give us a time table. When is he going to submit the plans? If we keep putting his off, it v/ill go on for another year, Ceconi How can he build another building on this lot? Page Mr. Solari has four parcels of land (made a sketch) He has the square footage for a building if he maintains the set backs. �~2~ Swaby & Ceconi - what about parking spaces? We are not clear concerning the parking spaces created by Mr. Solari on his property. Page Margoft& * 1st building will eleminate front yard parking, Mr, Solari must have proper set back for drive way,etc. However, he finds there are no violations of the village code. If Mr, Solari has any violations now we can hold up his building plans, Ceconi I am under the impression that Mr, Solari has over built on his one piece of property and therefore cannot build on the other, Swaby lets look over the variances to see if they incorporate the k lots owned by Mr, Solari, Ceconi give this man time so that we can check up about these variances Swaby Shall we dispose of this by extending the Uime? Margotta I still want some kind of time table concerning these plans, Friere why not give him to the 1st, of April? Kargotta I would like to know when tiill he start building Solari I will submit my plans on March 14th, I can start right away - but I have trees to cut;. Walsh We will submit plans by March 15th, By the middle of April we will start to build. But weather is a factor concerning time, March 15- plans to be submitted to building inspector April 15 excavation unzini f in my judgement building of new house will clear up any existing violations �-3Geconi - Is it .true that Mr. Solari has three families on this property? Isn't this property zoned for two Families? I am under the impression, through the Webber Park Association that there are these violations, as well as, parking violations. I would like to look at the minutes of this board's meeting at the time of the granting of Mr. Solari's permit. Swaby Since there is no further discussion, I move to extend the time to I/jarch 14th for submitting plans. Grant building permit by April 15th - if building permit can be granted. Seconded by Margotta * t - -^ii : - c^<~r -4s. ^ E » i i i A i M S ^ �\*>t 2nd, Hearing Mallory Battery Order of the Zoning Board of Appeals read. £ Friere Asked for identification of speakers for Mallory Battery and since there are people in the audience they will be allowed to ask questions and speak if the y wish to do so, ftlargotta would like to know if the company as any master plan. What will you be doing six months from Mow? What is your square footage now? Kallory gave the total square footage of its present building. They do not have any other future plans, Tvlareotta describe they type of building you want to erect Kallory a cement block building - immediately behind the loading dock,, entrance outside of building Page the building would be in the area of the old filtering station, Swaby what will be stored in thei building? Mallory building will house 1,hydraulic pump 2,barrels 3.tank for our scrubbers. Scrubbers have a holding tank - we need one room for these, Sv/aby is there something of a factory addition here? Mallory No. Audience Is anything explosive going to be stored in the building? Is the building for storage or not? Ivlallory Hydraulic fluid is not Explosive, No one will be working htere, The 3rd, room will house the fluid. Audience What about noise? We hear noises in the middle of the night - why? t m Ssifisasseiai^ Hydraulic system is for the existing system �Margotta these people in the audience are people living near your plant and they have come here before with same complaints of noise - what are you going to do about that? These complaints are just a matter of housekeeping on your part, Mallory There should not be any noise. Margotta Your plant is in a residential area. You have a responsibility to take care of the compalints made by these peopleliving in the area, Audience when we have complaints conceErning the noise we have phoned the plant, Sometimes the people there hang up the phone on us-sometimes they don't seem to understand what we are talking about. The blowers go on - sometimes to 3A.M, Mallory the machines are to be turned off at 6?30 PtM. °ome machines are on the other side of the building where they should not annoy anyone. °ome equipment must be kept on, Swaby we get these applications periodically from you, V/e need some master £lan from hou. If we comtinue to grant one variance after another, we are upsetting the idea of the Planning Baord, Every corporation has some ideas of their future planning, I^argotta could t£is equipment you plan to put into this new building be put outside? f.Iallory yes it could - but this"would make for more noise, Kargotta (to the audience) would you rather have this exposed or cohered ? Audience we have no objection to a building - v/e just object to the noise, larp-otta Kallory should be aware of these compalints made by the residents of this area, . These compalints are a matter of housekeeping on Kaliory.'s part. �Mallory we will try to curb the noise and we want fehe residents to let us kmow of any violations, Ceconi asks fvlallory to work with these people (residents of the area) to work out ansv/ers to their complaints, Friere could machines have some kind of time clocks DUt on them? Kallory we will take action on these complaints and suggestions Margotta makes motion to grant variance. Seconded by Swaby, Passed by Ceconi, U bvJxJUCJ*-^ t(£ «^<-4_ �3rd. Hearing William Williams Ivkrch 5, 1979 Order of the Zoning Saard of Appeals read Lawyer for Mr. Williams read Mr. William's petition and described the property as unique. There was no building permit issued by the current building inspector, Mr. Williams was ill at the time the violation was issued by Mr. Page. Mr, Williams could not respond at that time. However, violations papers were picked up by Mr. William's daughter a few weeks after the papers were issued, The lawyer stressed the fact that all the neighbors "directly surrounding the property have -given their OK for the building. Swaby When you describe the p roperty as unique, don't you mean that it is non-conforming? Lawyer Variance requires a 20 ft. rear set back on the Property. However, the back of the house backs up to railroad ties, Swaby What happens if we grant this variance to Kr. Williams to change his buildings to meet these family ;~ ." needs and then he decides he no longer wants to live there? Lawyer His family now lives on the property with thesie. families, They would go on living there. Swaby Building on this p roperty has been going on for years Ceconi without building permits or variances. There have been building violations that Mr, Williams has ignored. Lawyer refered to letter Written by John Cavalieri stating he would have no objection to any further /building. (Mr. Cavalieri has property directly behind Mr. Williams*)' '~A'^->-'J^;wd?^faial&-3hi^BsSi^ r^ < �Swaby In 1978, it was discolored that a building was going on. Then it was a concrete block wall,. IT. "Williams wa^s notified that here could be no further ; '/building until he received a variance to build. After a short time building was resumed and then there was a second variance, I age John Cavalieri's letter gives permission for building repairs. These are not repairs but construction (non-conformity, 196*f ordinance) Denied permit according to the code of the village. .Vargotta we allowed the building of a ,[,. one story building. You now call it a playroom for his children. Lawyer Children are now adults.. This "playroom" is used to house expensive musical equipment.. lr Page This is not a ;"/playrooffl";but a bar", Additions are going on ,'.:;:,. with each hew variance. Buildings are going up without building permits Friere V/e are also concerned the the set-back of the property. Ilargotta There is also a three story building on the property with very little distance between the adjoining buildings or the property line. Should'v/e also be concerned with fire regulations? How would thesefpeople get out in case of fire? There are no fire escapes. Friere • I don't think it is our concern at this hearing about fire regulations The whole board agreed that ."the sketches submitted by li. Williams and his lawyer were very difficult to understand; V �3- Kargotta put off hearing, for a v/ee'k - or so- so that the board members can go to see this property and understand exactly v/hat is being built and what is being asked for Ceconi I don't like to see this open defi.ance of the lawthe law's and codes of this village. You must get a building permit and if necessary a variance from this board, I want a guarantee there W i l l be no work done until an inspection by the board. Seconded by Largotta Board will meet on Karen 21, 1979 (V/ednesday) at 7:30 P.M. Respectfully submitted, /*<^z*_£ lorence Kahe Acting Clerk � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Zoning Board Minutes & Resolutions-1979 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource MINS_ZONING_1979-03-05 Subject The topic of the resource Zoning Board Minutes & Resolutions-1979 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1979 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Village of Sleepy Hollow All Rights Reserved. Type The nature or genre of the resource Text https://sleepyhollow.localarchives.org/files/original/7ecf54fe432b84c2c00e76f47685d7fd.pdf b2f04f30916a898ceede0a3044250f91 PDF Text Text April 26, 1979 Zoning Board Hearing • Members Present: John Arcate Aldo Ceconi James Margotta Martin Ruane Victor Page - Building Inspector Robert Ponzini - Village Attorney Absent: Edward Swaby Short business meeting - John Arcate was elected permanent Chairman Edward Swaby was elected Vice Chairman Nomination made by James Margotta, seconded by Aldo Ceconi. Arcate: Resolution made to be included into the minutes of the meeting. Resolution attached to minutes. Motion made by.Margotta, seconded by.Ceconi. Robert Ponzini appointed counsel andfthe. Village Clerk to be Secretary (or whoever Village Clerk appoints as secretary in her absence.) Margotta: No member of this Board8 is to take minutes of the meetings. All members of this board, the trustees and the Village Clerk should be made aware of this. Ceconi: Under other business; welcome to Martin Ruane as a new member on the board. Hearings Mr. and Mrs. Robert A. Green to reclassify their property. Public Notice Read Audience: James Galgano: Just what does this hearing entail - a change from R3 to R5? Page: (gave background or history, of the,development of this property) Property, was used as a business as well as a family residence. Because of ill health, Mr. Green;closed the business but neglected to renew his variance. New variance has to be reapplied. Galgano: Was variance granted before? %?•• $ ^iC^^iA-s^^^JM^&Mi^Mi^A'^ki-, i&^ife^ifi^f^sMvfejk^^ �-2Page: Yes, Mr. Green wants to continue the multi-family area which is the three top floors of the Tower Building which had been a residence area. That variance has run out and-how Mr. Green would like to have a variance for five families. George Ellis: Introduced himself as representing the Green family and would answer any questions concerning the request. Arcate: What is the present occupancy of the building? Ellis: Top floor and 4th floor duplex apt,; 3rd floor - small 1 bedroom apt.,; 2nd floor - small 1 bedroom apt.; 1st floor, entrance and hallway, elevator, and a small office. 3 tenants now. Question: Is Mr. Green contemplating selling property if given variance? Ellis: Mr. Green wants to sell the property but has not been successful. He will ask for a sub-division of, the property-which will be % in 3 sections. Maybe these (sections) will again be sub-divided. Application now is for a permanent variance on the Tower Hill building. No construction is planned at the present time. Maximum usage is for apartments in the building. Walter ... t > Ceconi: Has building inspector examined this building for the proper entrances, exits, etc.? Page: The building.complies with all the qualifications for a multifamily building. Walter . ... Ceconi:What about fire;protection - can fire engines get in? What" about sewerage?' Mrs. Melavfcller I live on Maple Street and this past year we have had ••werage_problems. I am afraid a multi-family building would create more serious problems. Arcate: I appreciate your concern but I must remind you thst the only question before this board is whether we should give another variance to Mr. Green. Ellis: (gives more history concerning property). Explains pipe and sewerage 'system for existing buildings. Storm drains do empty into Maple Street. Question: ,; ; W .•--,.,. If this is made a multi-family property - cah other properties in the same vicinity be declared multi-family or 3 family? Arcate: We are only dealing with this one request* has declared an economic hardship. . -. Mr. Green also �3- Ellis: Property has been operating at a loss. Another alternate . is to take down the building and then take it off the tax rolls. All we want is fair treatment so that property can be sold. There are 3..6 :acres if sold these would be made into 3 parcels. Arcate: The only question now before us is that.the variance has expired and should the variance be reissued. Ellis: There have been variances issued on this property before. At one time there was a variance to conduct a business oh the property. Now we are asking for a variance to go with this building - from a one family to a multi-family. Arcate: I must remind you again that the question before the board is whether to issue a variance for that building for multifamily occupancy and for that situation only. Ellis: We would like 4 families in that building. Ruane: I would like to ask a question concerning the two stone buildings on the property next door (Webber Ave.) Are these buildings multi-family? Page: Yes - these were the old housekeepers cottages for the old property, now there are 5 or 6 families living in them. Arcate: Any sub-division would have to have a hearing before the Planning Board. Question: .. . -.; ; / , .*.•*.-; Why hasn't this property been re-classified before this? This has been going on for 4 years and hasn't been caught before this? Mrs. Linguardo: The Green building is unique. be torn down. We need the tax base. Building should not Arcate: We (the Board) are not interested in the sub-division of this property. We are only concerned with the building now. Ellis: We would like four families in this building - one on each floor. Arcate: The objections; seem toj be to/the language -; multi-dwelling. We-are.not changing the zoning. Just the building on 3.6 acres. The building not the land. The variance if granted would continue unless it falls.out of use-continuation of occupancy (if not*used after 12 months)* Variance would pass to new owner. �-H- * Ruane: I would like to ask, if we could make a variance with a time limit? Ellis: We would like to have a permanent variance until building is demolished. Arcate: Asks to have hearing closed. Ruane: So moves. Ellis: We would like a decision as soon as possible or at least in two weeks. Ruane: Makes motion"to grant Mr. Green this variance because we are in a land locked village and we need the tax base, Ceconi: Since these neighbors are in agreement, I would go along with the variance. Motion: Variance granted but the building is never to exceed 4 families. Margotta abstains. Vote passes. RECESS �BUSINESS MEETING Brendel Hearing Page: No hearing. the code. Fence was lowered. Mr. Brendel complied with Mr. William Williams request for a variance. Ceconi: Swaby, Margotta and the Village Attorney, including myself visited Mr. Williams' property one Saturday morning. Mrs. Williams showed us the property. I recommendirhat the building be taken down. Mr. Williams has defied the 2/aw time and again. The building was never given a permit in the first place. Page: There are several building violations such as no fire excapes. Asks Boards backing in having the building taken down. Motion: On appeal of the building inspector the building permit is denied. There is no hardship consistant with the requirements of the code. Motion by Ceconi Seconded by Margotta Passed Solari Property Page: Presented the history of the case. Ceconi: I have researched1 Mr, Solarifs request for his I have examined all.past board hearing minutes to 1975. Mr. Solari brought a 3rd family^into when this property is zoned for two families. his "parking lot" is illegal. Ponzini: A ruling on the height of fence and parking are what we are looking at now. Page: We are concerned with the "parking.lot". There are illegal curb cuts. Solari was told of this meeting tonight but chose not to appear. No variances were given to Mr. Solari to do this work. Motion: Mr. Solari is in violation. is no evidence of hardship. Motion passed. t property. going back the property I also think No variance is granted. There �. .'*« RESOLUTION: Be it Ae6olved by the Zoning BoaAd o^ Appeals, meeting in fcoAinal .SQs$$icn, that Ato.. JameA TAlcne be Aecogntzed and commended £cA hLb dedication and Ae-'ivice to the V.Mage o& Ho'ith ToAAijtortn OA ChaDunan oft thib, BoaAd. }An. tAieAe WOA appointed OJ> membeA and elected ah ChcuUimah tn 1960. He. AeAved continuously in ihij± capacity until Janua/iy u£ this yeaA. Throughout the-*>e ye.au he. WOA Aecogntzed as a judge, committed to \aJjtneAh AMI the. irvteApAetatlon and en^oAcement o£ the. ordinance to the. be.ne.iit o& the. ichole Village.. On behalf o& the Village., toe. expAQAA OUA appAectojtlon. Note.'- This 'resolution i*:a& ibiaiiimoiibly approved, by the. BoaAd at AX& meeting G£ ApAil 26th, 1979. The. lull text. ii> to be included in the minute* o& tSiis meeting and a copy o& *aid minutcA mailed to IW. TAieAe. �WESTCHESTER COUNTY PLANNING BOARD W I L L I A M N . CASSELLA. JR. D O B B S FERRY C H A I R M A N PRO T E M EDWARD J. MORTOLA BERTRAN F. WALLACE HASTINPS-ON-HUDSON J. BOYD HENSON WHITE PLAINS NEW CASTLE NORTH CA5TLE WARREN C. HUME WARREN T. LINDQUIST ROBERT A. DENNISON EX OFFICIO MRS. THOMAS M. WALLER EDWIN I. ZIEGLER PETER Q. ESCHWEILER. A.I.P. PEEKSKILL CHARLES E. POUND W I L L I A M G. B O R G H A R D COUNTY BEDFORD EX OFFICIO COMMR. OF PARKS. RECREATION ft CONSERVATION COMMR. O F P U B L I C W O R K S WESTCHESTER NEW ROCHELLE .EX OFFICIO COMMR. O F ENVIRONMENTAL FACILITIES DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING WHITE PLAINS, N. Y. 1 0 6 0 1 9 1 4 WHITE PLAINS 9 - 1 3 0 0 9 I O COUNTY OFFICE BUILDING COMMISSIONER JOSEPH R. POTENZA, A.I.P. DEPUTY C O M M I S S I O N E R April 13, 1973 Mr. James Friere, Chairman Board of Appeals Village of North Tarrytown 28 Beekman Avenue North Tarrytown, N. Y. 10591 Re: Mandatory Referral Procedure Dear Mr. Friere: Thank you very much for the opportunity of appearing before your Board last Tuesday night in the matter of the G.M.L. Section 239-k action on the Gasko driveway on Webber Avenue. I understand from the Public Works Department that the matter appears to be moving toward a satisfactory resolution. In the course of the discussion that evening, however, a point was made which I had not realized in our preparation for the meeting, and covers a matter about which you and your fellow Board members should be aware. It was mentioned by the applicant's attorney that he had previously applied to your Board for a variance of the front yard setback, which variance had been granted by your Board prior to the County's involvement in the matter of the driveway. Under Section 451 of the Westchester County Administrative Code, a request to a munici' pal Board of Appeals for a variance that reduces the front yard setback on any property abutting a State or County highway is one of a class of zoning matters that must be referred to the County Planning Department for an advisory opinion prior to the holding of the public hearing on the variance request. This is totally separate and distinct from the jurisdiction of the Department of Public Works under 239-k. Failure of a municipality so to notify the County Planning Board of such a hearing could constitute a legal flaw in the variance procedure. There have been several court cases in Westchester where a disgruntled neighbor or other adverse party of interest has subsequently taken a board's action to court, and the court has found that this flaw is a basis for overturning the variance and sending it back to the local board for rehearing. �Mr. James Friere April 13, 1973 -2- In order to assure that all municipal boards of appeal are familiar with this procedure, which has been in effect in Westchester County for over 12 years now, our Department has prepared a map showing the State and County roads and other lands in Westchester which fall under the jurisdiction of our Board under Section 451. I am enclosing a copy of the most recent version of this map, together with an excerpt of this section of the Administrative Code. If there is any further information on this procedure that we can provide, please do not hesitate to call upon us. Very-"trjtly yours* PQE:rwp Enclosures Peter Q. Eschweiler Commissioner �WESTCHESTER COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE CODE P R O V I S I O N S RELATING T O THE D E P A R T M E N T OF PLANNING �• ADMINISTRATIVE CODE TITLE D Title I) n.lilcd by Laws of 1961, Ch. 822 Note: Fanner Title D, §$451 and -152. provided for the organization of the department of planning and for reports and recommendations of the department, under the county planning commission, and was repealed by Laws of 1961, Ch. 822, §1. COUNTY PLANNING BOARD Section 451. Powers and duties of county planning board in relation to villages, cities and towns of the county. 452. Rights and duties of neighboring municipalities in planning and zoning matters. §451. Powers and duties of county planning board in relation to villages, cities ' and towns of the county. Except as specifically provided in this section with respect to certain zoning ordinance enactments or amendments, special permits, subdivision plats and official map amendments directly affecting the interest of the county, nothing contained in this title shall be deemed to limit the powers of any body, board, commission or other agency of any city, village or town, hereinafter called the municipal agency, with respect to the adoption, amendment, or repeal of any master plan, zoning regulation, subdivision regulation, or official map, or with respect to the administration of the same or of subdivision regulation authority, or with respect to any related matter. It is the particular purpose of this title to aid in maintaining a high level of effectiveness of municipal action in all such matters, and in coordinating such action as among the various municipalities in the county by means of procedures for bringing pertinent inter-community and county-wide considerations to the attention of such municipal agencies. Each city, village or town in the county shall give notice of any hearing .scheduled in said municipality by mailing a copy thereof at least ten days prior to such hearing to the county planning board when such hearing is in connection with (1) the proposed adoption or amendment of a zoning ordinance or the proposed issuance of a special permit or use permit changing the use classification of property located within such 'municipality, or a proposal decreasing the front yard set hack or the minimum street frontage or average width of any property abutting any stale highway, parkway or thruway, or any county road or parkway or state or county park within such municipality, (2) a subdivision plat involving a new street connecting-directly into any such state or county highway parkway, thrmvay or road, or involving drainage lines connecting directly into any channel lines established by the county commissioner of public works under the Westchester county stream control act. or (3) the proposed adoption or amendment of 'an official map affecting streets connecting directly into any such highway, parkway, thru way or road, or affecting drainage lin^s connecting directly into such channel lines. Such "mailing shall be deemed com^ pliance with any law requiring the giving of notice'of any such hearing to the county. The county planning board may appear at any such hearing and be heard and file a memorandum of its position. If the county planning board disapproves the proposal on which the hearing is held, or recommends changes or mixlifications thereof, the municipal agency having jurisdiction shall not act contrary to such disapproval or recommendation except by tlie adoption of a resolution of such agency, which action shall be subject to judicial review pursuant to ihc laws providing for the review of acts of such municipal agencies, commenced within thirty days of its adoption. (Added by Laws of 1961. Ch.. 822) �§452. Rights and duties of neighboring municipalities in planning and zoning matters. Each city, village or town in the county shall give notice of any hearing scheduled in said municipality in connection with (1) the proposed adoption or amendment of a zoning ordinance or the issuance of a proposed special permit or use permit changing the use classification of property located within five hundred feet of any abutting municipality in the county, (2) a subdivision, pi at relating to land within five hundred feet of any abutting municipality in the county, or (3) the proposed adoption or amendment of an official map, relating to any land within five hundred feet of any abutting municipality in the county, to such municipality. Such notice shall be given at least ten days prior to any such hearing by mail to the clerk of said abutting municipality affected. Such mailing shall be deemed sufficient service under this or any other law requiring notice of any such hearing. Such abutting municipality may appear and be heard at such hearing and may file thereat a memorandum of its position. If such abutting municipality disapproves the proposal on which the hearing is held, or recommends changes or modifications thereof, the municipal agency having jurisdiction shall not act contrary to such disapproval or recommendation except by the adoption of a resolution of the municipal agency, which action shall be subject to judicial review pursuant to the law providing for review of acts of such municipal agencies, commenced within thirty days of its adoption. (Added by Laws of 3961, Ch. 823) �8 June 1979 Mr. & Mrs. Robert A. Green c/o George Ellis = 177 White Plains Road Tarrytown, New York £ Re: Section 17-Blk 4-Lpt 12 Dear Mr. & Mrs, Green i At ;the Zoning Board hearing held on April%26, 197?, you were granted a pervnent - variance from the provisions of the , Zoning Ordinance of,the Village = of North Tarrytown to continue the multi-family area of the Tower Building, not to - exceed four families on your property known and designated on Village Tax Assessment Map as Section 17, Block V, Lot 12, 141 Webber Avenue, North Tarrytown,-N.If. Sincerely, Filomena Fallacaro Clerk � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Zoning Board Minutes & Resolutions-1979 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource MINS_ZONING_1979-04-26 Subject The topic of the resource Zoning Board Minutes & Resolutions-1979 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1979 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Village of Sleepy Hollow All Rights Reserved. Type The nature or genre of the resource Text https://sleepyhollow.localarchives.org/files/original/c9747e9e445cf2a324a226f07d5151fe.pdf 51d0b0b1f60fd8833174ca761bd786a5 PDF Text Text NORTH TARRYTOWN, N.Y. June 4, 1979 A hearing was held before the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Village of North Tarrytown, N.Y. on the above date. Present John Arcate, Chairman Edward Swaby Martin Ruahe James Margotta Aldo Ceconi Victor R. Page, Building Inspector Chairman Arcate called the meeting to order at 8:00 P.M. Clerk Fallacaro read the notice of hearing to consider the request of Mallory Battery Co., 60 Elm Street, for relief on appeal from a decision of the building inspector in denying a permit on applicant's proposal to install a bulk helium storage vehicle on Mallory property and for a variance from the provisions of Chapter 62, Section 13E, 2A, 2B in a residential zone and for a variance from the provisions of Chapter 62, Section 13F-1 to erect a ten ft. fence around said vehicle whereby the Zoning Ordinance requirements that no wall or open or solid fence in excess of three feet in height shall be erected along the side and rear yards in any residential district on property known and designated on Village Tax Assessment Map as Section 15, Block 3, Lot 3A. The application now pending will be to transform the temporary variance into a permanent variance. Chairman Arcate asked if there was anyone present who would like to address the Board. Miss Ellen McDonough, Kendall Avenue, complained about the noise eminating from the plant. The noise is getting annoying, she said. Mr. Margotta stated that two meetings were held with Mallory regarding noise complaints, however, not a single person came to the meeting. He stated that Mallory did a lot of cleaning around the area On a question to Miss McDonough by Messrs. Arcate and Swaby if she noticed any worsening of the situation due to the helium tank and any improvement, she answered that for a while there was some improvement. On a question of James Margotta if the Zoning Board has the authority to hire an independent company to check the fans to see how much noise they make, Counsel answered that there was no section in the code for this authority and it would be the prerogative of the Board of Trustees. Mr. Arcate suggested:to Miss McDonough to go before the Board of Trustees'about the noise. �.^ -2- On a-question of John Arcate if Mallory has conformed to past agreements, Miss McDonough answered in the affirmative. Mr. Page stated that people are only interested in the noise 'from the building and nothing else. He stated that the tank was installed very nicely and they erected a fence with a gate. There is no violation of any code, he said. They meet the terms of the variance. / Mr. Swaby suggested a temporary variance so that he could see a master plan of their'proposed changes in their building. ' Mr: Doyle, attorney for Mallory, stated that the master plan would not cover.any malfunctions of equipment. \ . . - -- ....•.• - Mr. Fehling'stated that the vehicle is constantly being inspected%and would be exchanged if necessary. He stated that the fans were turned and>faced away from Kendall Avenue and the noise was cut down substantially. Mr. Doyle stated that they would cooperate with the building inspector regarding the noise problems. Mr. Ruane inquired if there was any noise from the helium tank when they were drawing on it and Mr. Fehling stated that there was none. Mr. Arcate stated that the main concern of the neighbors in the immediate area was the noise, particularly at nigtit, and if Mallory could dispose of the noise everyone would be happier. No further business, Mr. Swaby moved, seconded by Mr. Margotta that the hearing be closed. Business meeting Mr. Ruane moved, seconded by Mr. Margotta that the Board go into session on the requested variance. Carried. Mr. Swaby stated that the variance should be limited to the Mallory Battery Company; not transferable to another tenant or owner, He stated that the fence should be used for no other purpose other than for the variance for which it is being granted. Mr. Swaby moved that a permanent variance be granted to Mallory Battery Company to erect a ten ft. fence under the same terms as the temporary variance was granted of July, 1978 primarily to enclose a helium tank, said use is for the Mallory Battery Company, seconded by James Margotta. Carried. With regard to the complaints about the noise, Mr. Page stated that he will contact the State and County agencies for any codes. • There being no further business to come before the meeting, James Margotta moved, seconded by Martin Ruane that the same be duly adjourned. Carried. it ted, Clerk � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Zoning Board Minutes & Resolutions-1979 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource MINS_ZONING_1979-06-04 Subject The topic of the resource Zoning Board Minutes & Resolutions-1979 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1979 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Village of Sleepy Hollow All Rights Reserved. Type The nature or genre of the resource Text https://sleepyhollow.localarchives.org/files/original/04cc34f1869f0216d9b16d4d50adec8a.pdf b7692d46ac2068faa9f6420b7c990d2c PDF Text Text JPUBLIC HEARING - JUNE 26, 1979 m Present E. A. M. J. Absent Swaby - Acting Chairman Ceconi Ruane Margotta J. Arcate - Chairman Two Hearings 8 p.m. Notice Read: Florence Kane ( acting clerk) Swaby: Is there anyone present who would like to speak? Page: I only turned down the request for this two room extention on the Annicchiarico property because of the present zoning law. I am personally in favor of granting the permit , but I would not issue the permit without the consent of this board. All the houses in this particular area are close to the property lines. Ceconi: Does this addition extend over any of the property lines? Page: No, the extension will be part of the property and will comply with all the other codes. Ma tta: Ceconi: Annicchiarico: This house is typical of all of the other houses in that part of town. Do your neighbors know what you intend to do and does anyone object? I have spoken to all of my immediate neighbors and no one objects, Clerk: Mr. Annicchiarico has submitted a list of all of his neighbors and all of them give their permission for this extension. (The clerk read all the signatures on the list - 15 names) Ceconi: I move that this extension be granted, Margotta: Seconds Swaby: Motion is passed. board. Mr. Annicchiarico will be officially notified by the Motion granted on the comments of the building inspector and with the facts preseeded the variance is granted permitting the extension based on the fact that the code requires a set back of 5ft. However, this construction would require a set back of not more than 1% ft. I W: ft- 'iJii-j. k&^iiaiL&ii^^l^^'&i^ �£ <2nd Hearing Notice read by acting clerk Page: The denial of the construction of this height fence is a situation going back to Urban Renewal. The 4 ft. high fence was denied because of the zoning law. Ceconi: Isn1t there already a fence in the back? Swaby: How many feet of fencing? Mr. Cray: The entire fence is 368 ft. in two streets. Swaby: Do you have anything else to add to this? Lawyer: We are only interested in this fence at the present time. We have met with the Village Police Department, and they are in favor of this fence since it would enable the police to protect the area in a better manner. Margotta: Who are you? Mr. Cray: I am one of the owners. Margotta: What have you done to clean up that parking lot? . Cray: * We are constantly cleaning up that area. Ceconi: Do you think a fence from 3 ft. to 4 ft. will make any difference? Mr. Cray: I do think a 4 ft. fence will do the trick. Swaby: What about a hedge? Page: They have tried to seed this particular area, but it is constantly destroyed. A fence is the only deterant. Ceconi: Can*t you do something to beautify the area. Mr. Cray: We are trying. Ceconi: We would like to see some beautification in that area. Margotta: I believe their intentions are good,.-and"! make a motion that we grant them this request. Seconded: Ruane Motion carried At least it is worth a try. Some planting. If this fence takes it might lead to other things. Hearing the remarks of the building inspector and the representative of 100 College Arms, and after reviewing the application before the Board and understanding the difficulties of maintaining their lot, the variance is granted to erect a 4 ft. chain link fence. Because of substantial comments on the appearance of this lot, we would hope that more landscaping will be planned in this near future. W >fc-V-' „«-; ^ * si&rSfc.vvi'..- za*fti6s«riiiaj» -^s^Mss&MA^eik-e^^^^J^^^M'M^SifAiM^i^^&ii^: '&i£&A � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Zoning Board Minutes & Resolutions-1979 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource MINS_ZONING_1979-06-26 Subject The topic of the resource Zoning Board Minutes & Resolutions-1979 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1979 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Village of Sleepy Hollow All Rights Reserved. Type The nature or genre of the resource Text https://sleepyhollow.localarchives.org/files/original/9ebd016fd3b9dc5edb9b140d2a5d71cc.pdf 25b4fc9d099f55b144d238f4aff29b18 PDF Text Text iNor.th Tarrytown, N. Y. August 9, 19 7 9 % A hearing was held before the Zoning Board of Appeals of North Tarrytown, New York, on the above date, PRESENT: John Arcate, Chairman Edward Swaby Martin Ruane James Margotta Aldo Ceconi Atty. Charles Palella, representing North Tarrytown Victor Page, Bldg, Insp. Chairman Arcate called the meeting to order at 8:00 P.M. Linda Fukuchi, read the notice of hearing to consider the request of Elias Tserkerides, 30 Elm Street, for relief oh an appeal from a decision of the Building Inspector in denying a permit for the construction of an addition to the second floor of the .owner's property. The request was for a variance from the provision of Section" 62-8B. Chairman Arcate the Board asked whether or not the proposed construction would "meet all other requisitions and were informed by Mr. Page that this was the case. Surrounding neighbors had been notified of the impending change. Enlargement was to be made elevating but not widening the building and there would thus be no plot change. l-.v A motion was made by Mr. James Margotta to grant the variance in accordance with the purposes as:stated .in the code, Section 62-2. The motion was seconded by Mr. Swaby, and carried by an unanimous vote from the Board. The next public notice to the people-of North .Tarrytown was then read. This is the appeal of Mr. Victor Zelig of 34 Miller Avenue,. Tarrytown, to obtain a permit to construct a single family dwelling at 17 Hemlock Drive, North Tarrytown and a variance from Section 62-8B-5 Mr. Lou Falasca, builder, representing Mr. Zelig, asked for a variance to be granted so that the construction oould get underway. Richard Spauldihg, 19 Hemlock Drive, questioned whether all other homeowners within 200 feet of the lot at 17.Hemlock DriveV-were advised a full ten days prior to public notification.. He'claimed the notice had not been posted a full ten days in advance, as required by the law. Mr. Zelig then responded, saying he had notified homeowners and the Sleepy Hollow Manor Taxpayers Inc. back in early July. «&:. i/V Mort Sillman, 20 Hemlock Drive,#objected, to the'].advance work of the trees having been cut down. He daid'the.cut wood, left outside, has had[a terrible smell, arid questioned if 1the "mess"- on'the lot pollutes the : air and environment, along with the beatuy of the area. m~j,'4s££.£i*i-=£%l^S"^ *-? -~-«" ^'l--.-;-. ,-te. 4?*.itiiei&-£i^k^^&iSiX.*. L^aiis^Siil^ �-2- Mrs. Otto Kraij, 15 Kirigsland Road,said she vzas promised a notice would be given to her before the trees were cut. But, she said, she was never so advised. Chairman Arcate asked the Zoning Board whether the question of notice would continue to be an issue? It was commented that the request was received by July 6th. Chairman Arcate questioned when the notice was posted on the property. Mr. Page said the sign had been posted by the Village Clerk thru the Highway Department, and that he felt the ten days'had been allowed, Robert Friou, H,Lakeyiew Ave., asked that it.be made clear that this meeting was only to;get a decision as to whether or not a house might be allowed to be built on the property. Chairman Arcate then called for a vote of the Board on the question of notice and enough time had been given, ten days, prior to the hearing. - Passed unanimously. Mr. Falasca answered a question re the size of the lot, and submitted to Chairman'Arcate that the total amount vzas "only 200 s q . f t . less than the 15,000 sq. ft. presently required by the zoning rules. Mr. Zelig then confirmed a question, saying the lot is owned by his daughter, who is over 18 years of age. Mr. Zelig acts as agent and payer of taxes for said lot. Mr. Page said it is not required that the owner of the lot be present and that an agent may act in.place of the owner. Mr. Margotta then asked whether tonight's meeting"should be ppotponed for one week, or ten days to make certain everything is legal, and also to allow the owner of 17 Hemlock Dr. to be present. Aldo Ceooni voiced a similar question. Mr. Stuart Levine, 63 Fremont Rd., said the notice'had not been received prior to August 1st, thus'not meeting the ten days requirement of posting the notice prior to the hearing. Mr. Margotta commented that he would like the builder to be able to proceed, but " should any legal problems arise he suggested, as earlier, to postpone tonight's meeting. Mr. Levine asked why no tape recorders were used to record the minutes. Chairman Arcate said minutes have always"been]takenvby the Clerk, and that in all the years he has been associated with 5 the^ Zoning Board no problem had ever arisen due to the lack of recording devices. " Chairman Arcate said that the Zoning; Board might\decide, pro : or'con, with Building Inspector Page, or grant a variance for the owner of said lot at 17 Hemlock Dr. Mr. Page made it known he had neither granted nor denied the building permit, '"->;- :.*'• , •-....•'';-. • -': �Chairman Arcate reminded all present that the issue is whether the lot at 17 Hemlock Drive is sufficient in spite of lacking 200 sq. ft., although it does meet requlations of width, Mr, Sillman asked Mr, Page if building plans are submitted to him when a vacant lot is to be built upon prior to approval being given. Mr. Page answered affirmatively. Chairman Arcate said the Building Inspector's duties enforce the Building Code (Village adopted New York State's Code). He then said the Zoning, however, is a local Village Code. He continued, noting that after 1964, the zoning in Sleepy Hollow Manor changed from R2 to R2A. In 1967 or,1968 the required area of a lot was from 10,000 to 15,000 sq. ft.. He noted that there have been many appeals for the granting of variances over the years. Mr. Friou reminded the Board that Boards's decisions can be knocked down in court, as the Zoning Board may not have final jurisdiction. Mr. Spaulding brought to attention Village Law #1, 1977, which requires the Village to take action re environmental factors. He noted several factors on the lot at 17 Hemlock Dr. -- the slope of the land, causing drainage problems airing of the lot danger of a house being built on such a sharp curve Mr. Spaulding also said that the Sleepy Hollow Taxpayers Association had not reviewed the situation in discussion. A July 27, 1979 letter was then shown and read by Mr, Page, This was from Curtis Heath the Zoning Chairman for the S.H.T.A. to Mr, Zelig and indicated that the plans for the proposed house are in the process of review. Otto Kralj, 15 Kingsland Rd., said he submitted a letter to be kept with' Mr. Page, In his letter, Mr, Kralj said the building of a new house at 17 Hemlock Dr. would cause a change in the V7 at erf low, and very possibly affect and harm their property. . • The various building code violations Mr. Kralj said,• would 'bocur if the house at 17 Hemlock Dr. were to be built, would not apply to a private dwelling. Articles 62/31 and 62/30-B which Mr. Kralj brought to attention, are -for changes needed when?changing a domestic site into a business one. This'was all mentioned^'by; Chairman Arcate. He also noted that Article 62/28, used by the Planning Board, is for changes related to change of use or': classification.' Mr. Friou said the Planning Board should report recommendations to the Zoning Board. The Zoning Board can freely agree or disagree, Mr. Kralj brought to attention Article 62-2D. Under the present "plan, the new house's backyard would be 40ft. from his. He said he tbuld lose this privacy if a variance were granted. He also objectsVto the plans that the nev? dwelling would be three stories above the; , ground; These factors make Mr, Kralj fear the value of his home would go down. -."._.-•. : �Mr, Fascala said there would be hushes and trees planted to give both privacy and beauty to the lot and the neighborhood. Mr. Kralj quoted Article 62-2B, saying he fears the exhaust fumes ~ from the car on the new lot would be directed at his house. He asked that the garage door be set parallell to the street, or else the fumes will come in his living room. He also noted Article 62-2E in regard to noise pollution the new house will bring about. Mr. Kralj fears future damage and flooding to his lot and home if the variance is granted, and the new house built. He asked that this be looked into. Mr. Page then asked Mr. Kralj if he presently has any water problems in his house. Mr. Kralj answered saying he once did, but no longer has a water problem since he had the situation rectified, Mr. Sillman wished to report for the record he would like to see documentation evidencing that N. Tarrytown's Environmental Board was aware of the situation. It was then said that this is out of their domain until Mr.Page either issues or denies a permit. The Village Oounsel was asked by Mr. Levine whether the Zoning Board can direct Mr. Page. Reply was negative. Under Articles 62/13 and 62/32, Mr. Page said he neither issued or denied a building permit due to these Articles. He asked for a ruling. At present he feels it is a non-conforming lot. Mr. Spaulding commented oh a 1972 ruling, when a building permit was previously denied on lot at 17 Hemlock Dr., Said/lot was non-builiable and the then owner went to the Supreme.Court in White Plains. (The lot became non-conforming in 1967 by the revision of the Zoning Ordinance.) Mr.Kralj gave pictures to the Chairman Arcate to pass aroun.d to the Board members, showing the slopes of the ground. Mr. Levine asked if Mr. Zelig*z daughter could be'present. He agrees with Mr. Zelig's"right'to build on land he owns-but does it have to be at the expense of the immediate neighbors. He asked should he and his family have to suffer their investments due to thecwooded lot that is now chopped down? Arid;what is the purpose of letting one lot make the rest of the neighborhood suffer? Chairman Arcate asked Mr. Page if he had considered1location of the driveway? Mr. Zeliz asked''why other people,; in the neighborhood^ had not complained? Marvin Smith^.17 Kingsland Rd., commented that the lot boarders His property too. He.would like the'Zoning Board to look into other small lots which are not .the right size;under present requirements, as he is concerned with the future of Sleepy Hollow Manor if such variances continue to he given. He submitted a letter to Chairman Arcate. �-5ourn the hearing was made by Mr. Ruane and seconded by The hearing adjourned at 11:00 PiM. Respectfully Submitted, Linda T. Fukuchi �'3*> -6- BUSINESS MEETING August 1979 Mr. Page read the letter from the Sleepy Hollow Taxpayers Association in its entirty to the Zoning Board, and submitted a" copy of such said letter. Mr. Margotta made the motion to grant the variance, adding that h e V would want bushes and shrubs on the lot at 17 Hemlock Dr. as soon as the new house is completed. Mr. Swaby agreed with Mr. Margotta. Mr.Ceconi said he would like the groups to get together and resolve their present differences. Chairman Arcate asked that if ..the Board defered it's, decision (for 30 days under the law) would the. two opposing sides negotiate their differences but was not agreeable to both sides. Mr, Margotta's motion was seconded by Mr. Ceconi, and carried by an unanimous vote. The variance was thus granted. The Board ;finds that there are practical difficulties in strict compliance with the ordinance arid that there are special circumstances in that the deficiency is deminimus and/that ba^ed uponTpast^precedent and Code Sections 62-2, 62-12B, and 62-40A,'this action was required. � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Zoning Board Minutes & Resolutions-1979 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource MINS_ZONING_1979-08-09 Subject The topic of the resource Zoning Board Minutes & Resolutions-1979 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1979 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Village of Sleepy Hollow All Rights Reserved. Type The nature or genre of the resource Text https://sleepyhollow.localarchives.org/files/original/d37e418f38475bd86549de24c18093f6.pdf 17b56cd2f54de08291ac59c8aee952ae PDF Text Text 4 '.oninp, Bo i r e of •!orth ?arrv-ov?.n, A u r u s t 2" ,~ 1379 Appfills i f D e c i a l b^< 3 h e l d on th*1 'ibrv^ 'ri '.rs . O t t o K r a i ] . : it t h e r e o u e s t .n Q c c o r c s r . c ? *;ith ';'ne n e a r i n n v;es ne_a OPH of their '.jnuer Section 7-712 or the Vill^.re Lav; to the Board of Zoninji Aore = l3 of -<orth Tarry tov*n, New York, for a reviev: of the action of v ictor R. ?aq;e, building Inspector, ^vi-iit v.'ho issued a building D^rni fo1 : h e c o n s t r u c t i o n of a o n e - f a m i l y h o u s e on t h - p r r n i s e s a t Ho. 17 KAr-lock " ' r i v e , l i o r t h ' T a r r y t o w n , iJev; York. •John A r e a t a , Ch = i r n a n James Marriott a Aldo C e c o n i A11 y . R o b e r t Fc n 7,1 p. i , • r e p r e s e n t i n g ]\<orth Tarrytown Victor R. Page, 31dj?. Insp. Chairman A r e a t a c a l l e d t h e r - e e t i n r t o o r d e r a t 8:15 F..>. F^FSE-IT: .GU, U Lake vie'.; Ave. : -GOerr # Board of Appeals, it he filed. •.:•'.- ...-.«> He Drotested tonight's hearing due to lack of notice. r e a s o n ^. T r-.v rroT-.-s' r a r e h a d c:~cJy.~d "O u .1 c !TJ e xne near?_nEi! rrior t o t h e Aueust Sth neetinr ~. r a n t e 'i. .e r J . a n n i n n o: Zoning afteruhich he suhnitted said letter and a3ked that ei^nT crrer.tir.r aloud to the _ r ~ Eoara n = d nc~ been a v a r i a n c e i?ouid o c c u r a t t h e Au.r:, 3t: edvisecvor - , o = v> -. tnis n o s >i>-le r.CT, a l o n g >-?itn a corrvent That the Board had "disregarded evidence of defective notice". 3. He claimed that Chairnan Arcate had authorized the issuance of a building D e m i t bv the u Building Inspector. Due to the issu .ance or a Building pernit, an2r chance to: , . •**. £ i * 0*^~t _ resc_ve t.aeir dirrerances * Sis*- ^ ^ i ^ ^ chained tne rvu2_j.Gir.tr Derr.it ".'as issu—c -&&-^.&&aa&£»&-^Vd&*^^ in accordance r.*itn ~htt �•t'<-*-*f:—* -2- orders improperly given "to the Building Inspector by the Chairman ^of the Zoning Board of Appeals. • 6. In spite of the Notice of Appeal, Mr. Friou claimed .Chairman Arcate asked Mr. Page to disregard said notice stating the variance and permit at the Aug. 9th hearing. Mr. Friou said Chairman Arcate dealt soley with the issue of a variance at that meeting. 7. He claimed the builder continued action on the plot when it was improper. - 8. He protested actions thus-far taken by taken by the Zoning Board, and said these actions were prejudicial towards others in the neighborhood. He then asked the Board to disqualify itself from this matter until a new board is created. (a) Chairman Arcate did not respond to Mr. Friou at this time as this portion of the hearing is for statements from the public, # Gregory Doherty, 115 Kelbourne Ave., serving as attorney for Mr.£Mrs. Otto Kralj, addressed the Board. Code was not honored. He stated^Section 7-7]2 of the Building He noted that the building on the lot at 17 Hemlock Drive continued in spite of the notice pursuant to Sec. 7-712. His main questions and concerns for his clients are issues of drainage and the siting of the building. Mr. Kralj said he had a land plan from R. Sigvard Johnson** Carchitect of the proposed house at 17 Hemlock Drive). Mr. Kralj said the land plan on said;lot showed no indication of any drainage plans. Mr. Kralj stated he had contacted the American Institute of Architects to find out what constitutes proper drainage. Due to lack of time, he was unable to get the information needed to present to the Board tonight. Mr. Kralj said he was not sure as to how the drainage might cause problems on his property, and thus wants a « definite land plan showing the drainage points. Board member James Margotta then asked Mr. Kralj what information.was I.:- obtained from the American Institute of Architects. �-3Mr. Falasca (builder of intended house at 17 Hemlock Drive) claims the ^ l a n d map does show drainage points and thus where water would flow. He commented on past leaking at the Kralj!s residence. - Mr. Kralj assured all that there is no leakage in his house any longer, and that he had solved his previous drainage problems. Copies of an updated plan of the lot were made and passed around to all Board members and to those.attending the hearing so that they might have a better understanding of the discussion. A copy was also submitted for the records, ^^ Mr. Friou stated he did not accept the plan as being valid. Mr. Falasca said it was the plan submitted to Mr. Page, and that he would have it notarized as soon as possible if such be the need. Mr. Doherty noted that such plan was attached to the letter written by Mr.Johnson on Aug. 2 7th to the Sleepy Hollow Manor Taxpayers, Inc. ^m Mr. Zelig then asked why there was such concern re the drainage. He said the Kralj's lot appears to be especially low, and that surely they have had drainage problems prior to this time. Mr. Kralj again said he needs plans showing how water will drain off from Mr. Z-elig's proposed house. Mr. Kralj said he had asked for such plans back in July, and again at the Aug. 9th hearing. i Mr. Margotta asked if the people have the right to "pick-^his plan ar-art" (Mr. Zelig's- plan) . Village Attorney Robert Ponzini replied that since the 3uilding Inspector had reviewed and approved the plan, sufficient evidence to the contrary must be provided to the Board to allow them to reverse his determination. Building Inspector Page went into great detail explaining how water will drain off Mr. Zelig's lot out into the street *nd not onto the -Kraljws' f r P *^t ' lot. He said he felt tonight's hearing was not needed, that it. is an issue between neighbors, and not one of the Board's need to act unon. �I I !l|-HH> -4- Chairman Arcate asked Mr. Page how much higher lot 7 (Mr. Zelig's) is than lot 6 (Mr. Kralj's). It was mentioned that lot 8 (Mr. Spaulding's) is higher than all other lots in the immediate area. Mr. Doherty asked that both land plans for lot 7 should be submitted for the record, as all attending tonight's hearing only have the revised version. The first plan was dated August 10th, 19 79. The revised plan shows August (no date), 1979, which is the plan both the Building Inspector and Board members have. Mr. Doherty asked for a clarification as to which is the right plan. C*". Chairman Arcate answered, saying the proper and correct plan is on a sheet of 8 1/2" by 11" paper, titled Zelig Property, August (no date), 1979, attached to a two page letter, dated August 27th, 1979* to S.H.M.T. Inc. Mr. Friou asked if Mr, Page had seen the letter and plan prior to tonights hearing, to which Mr. Page replied in the affirmative. • Mr. Friou then asked which plan Mr. Page had had prior to the revised plan, to which Mr. Page replied, "the one dated August 10th". Mr. Margotta stated*he had no objection to the drainage plans as indicated on the submitted plan. He added that he felt it might even;improve the drainage situation. Mr. Ceconi"addressed Mr. Kralj, asking if -there was anv objection oh his part to the updated plan. Mr. Doherty replied for Mr. Kralj, saying he would like to have additional time to discuss and go over the new plan with hin. Mr. Kralj said the initial plan showed hemlocks on the lot. plan says "hemlock screening as proposed". The updated Mr. Kralj wished to know how the henlocks are planned to be planted, how many hemlocks would there be, and of m W?/ ^ y - " ft~ - what height would the hemlocks be? Mr. Zelig reDlied there would be sufficient serpeninc t>rovided bv the - - . . - . - • - - . - - - - • - " . . — • _ hemlocks for the Kralj property to have substantial privacy. Tif^T-^%*^«~>i*8«^Si^ - . . . . . . . . . . �V||--jk!-_ m i Steven Salman, 3 Lakeview Ave. said the Sleepy Hollow Manor Taxpayers, ^ I n c . is concerned over the lot's plan for the location of the driveway on the property at 17 Hemlock D P . He said as the driveway will be on a blind curve, that the location could be very dangerous to the neighborhood. Mr. Page replied, quoting from Mr. Johnson's letter to the Sleepy Hollow Manor Taxpayers Inc. He quoted (see letter) "As to the site line from the driveway easterly; it is obsilcured by plantings on village property which may or may not have been planted by the previous owner of 6. Sleepy Hollow Manor might request the village to remove the obstruction". Chariman Arcate asked if Mr. Page can r?ccomend property owners to remove such circumstances, when needed9 as mentioned in Mr. Johnson's letter. Mr. Page replied affirmatively. Mr. Salman asked that if the plan is l~ft as is for the driveway, would that not be dangerous? J^B Mr. Hoy Nicholas, IB Hemlock Drive, commented on how people tend to race thru that section of Hemlock Drive, and that the driveway location on that plan, if -allowed, would add to the aforementioned' problem. Chairman ^ca.te asked if the subjectof the \ and others could be considered concurrentlv. \ ' . • driveway raised by Mr. Salman It was agreed i+ could. " ' --.Board member Mr. Ceconi spoke, advising th~ people at the 1 hearing that I • the zoning Bacrd of Appeals was limited to the provisions of tfie Zoning Ordinance, and that the Zoning Board could thus not satisfy all desires expressed at thahearing. The Zoning Board cannot preserve this property as - a'vacant lot, and the only way they could control what was done with the lot would be to have purchased the lot themselves. I Mr. Dohertv reSDonded bv reminding all Dresent that thev are not contesting the issuing of the variance, nor are they trying to question whethei $ the^construction can take Dlace-it can, and will. Ke asked that the build- .4. mzbf tr-e house comply with the building codes and have proper drainage. ie^S ,---.* -.>4- --"" '--'- ^- J =-*~*--r~^ ^,~ •:%£-„ *t*i.,s,^&J5^^1^4^^$S^ �W -6- ** ' - Mr. Margotta then addressed those at the hearing,;asking what did the people expect of the Zoning Board? Zoning Board?" And how can everyone "try to steer the He stated that this hearing was a repeat of the August 9th hearing and at thet date the granting of a variance had been acted upon. Mr. Kralj reminded all present that he had requested the land plans back in July, and that it was not until tonight's hearing that he had obtaineda. plan indicating the drainage sites. Mr. Doherty asked that the Board give his client, Mr. Kralj, time to assess the new land plans. ing he objected to the plans on behalf of his client. As of this even- If after looking over the new plans, and no objection is found, the issue will be dropped. Chairman Arcate asked .Mr. Page at what time in the building schedule were the drainage matters taken care of? Mr. Page, along with Mr. Zelig and his builder, Mr. Falasca, replied that this was done late in the building schedule of the house. Chairman Arcate advised Mr. Kralj that it would be helpful in considering his appeal if he could be mort specific. Chairman Arcate asked him what did he want, how much time would be needed, and for want purpose or to what end? Chairman Arcate asked if Mr. Kralj or Mr. Doherty could state their desired renedy, And will they have evidence to present to the Board? Mr. Kralj said he wants an engineer to have sufficient time to apnraise the land in question. Mr. Doherty further defined their need as one week, in which to obtain expert advice, to examine and assess the plans as to the adequacy of the heretofore mentioned drainage plan. If need b£, they could then seek any possible.changes in the plan. Mr. Falasca replied he had nothing against Mr. Doherty's request, but asked that he might continue building, as the drainage is towards the very end of the entire construction. 9 Chairman Arcate then offered to Mr. Doherty and Mr. Kralj -an opportur.iry for two weeks (rather than the one we^k requested) to consult with experts, until they conduct their appraisal of the drainage plan, as well �-7as any new thoughts on the driveway in said period. Chairman Arcate said that the Board could ask Mr. Page to-not grant Certificate of Occupancy for two weeks while the aforementioned appraisal takes place. Mr. Page agreed, saying he was always open to helpful suggest- ions, but reminded all that the plans he approved are in full accord with the Building Code. Chairman Arcate asked if anyone else wished to address the Zoning Board. No ooe indicated a desire to address the Zoning Board, and Chairman Arcate asked for a motion to close the hearing. A motion was made by Mr. Cecconi, and it was seconded by Mr. Margotta. Chairman Arcate stated that before action on the motion to close the hearing, he would like to make a statement responding to the charges made by Mr. Friou at the start of the hearing. Chairman A.rcate stated that these charges were unwarrented, unnecessary, -anc? untrue. The members of the Zoning Board of Appeals, individually and ^Blollectively, were not prejudiced or biased, and were not, before, during or1 since the August 9th hearing and they are not now. no. factual basis for his charge and there is none. Mr. Friou has presented The auestion at the August 9th hearing was solely the determination as to whether a one family house could be built on the lot. question. This hearing properly addressed this It received proper notice, both public and to adjoining property owners (see minutes of Aut. 9th hearing) and those who attended by viture of their preparedness with written statements gave evidence of this. Further, the hearing was conudcted in a. free and open manner. wishing to speak were recognized. All those The time allowed was unlimited and all matters presented by anyone were heard, including subjects which were be2/onc the score of the Zoning Ordinance and therefore beyond the power of the ZBA. '•-g^.t. or. ti-ri= were the nenbers of the Board argumentative or partisan nor was I;up ther sir- - claim's or charges to that effect at the August 9th hearing. �f | jj f FfV jfc I i v -*.-* •-'-••^Thfe hearing* toM^hVbias^bieen- h§ia4rt r&Bjk>TiBe = tO=%-he^^%^ ^^s stated in the begining of the hearing. The appellant agreed to this schedule and stated that no other notice was required. THE ZBA in being responsive and desirous of being helpful to all of the parties arranged for the hearing. Nevertheless it is the opinion of the ZBA that this hear- ing is duplicative of the August 9th hearing and in fact this hearing was not required and/or needed. Further,it is clear that the ZBA has no power to vary the Building Code, Chairman Arcate stated that the ZBA held the hearing in the hope that it would be useful to the parties in working out amicable agreements. He expressed the view that to the extent that the aforementioned drainage plan was available it was new information. Mr. Page indicated that this plan shows topographical lines which he requested. It was given to him early today before the hearing was scheduled and it is attached to a letter to leepy Hollow Manor Taxpayers Inc., dated today, with the understanding of the Zoning Board taht it was to.be discussed at a meeting between'SHM7 Inc. and Mr. Zelig that they had arranged. Hopefully, ths information will be helpful to Mr. Doherty and Mr. Kral3. Clearly, Mr. Friou's unsupported charges are counterpurposeful. Mr. Dbhe-rty expressed the view that the hearing had been both needed and helpful, and that he and his client would use the time unti^L September 18th, at the next meeting of the Zoning Board will hold (hearing for ohter purposes). '^. Friou stated that one person at the August 9th hearing had expressed dissatisfaction to him as to the way the hearing had been conducted. Chariman Arcate asked if he (Mr. Friou) was representing said person tonirht, to which Mr.Friou replied nICoM. _ T.„^_. Chairman Arcate then asked if M~. Friou was "iust presenting an anhonvnous ||v opinion. ifr Mr. Friou replied in the affirmative. Charimsn Arcate asked Mr. Friou if he had any applicaton or appeal ~ •-:'-^x~^ti-cJKidtr»i A^t»A:-*iifcij± iO^M^A^&miS^MmMiiizV^-M^^^^^^S^mej^&i �before the Zoning Board for the purpose of tonight's hearing, to which Ir. Friou replied "No". Mr. Page addressed Mrs. Ashley, President tf the Sleepy Hollow Manor Taxpayers Inc.. He asked for full cooperation from them, and to please return the plans to him within 10 days, Mrs. Ashley suggested that land owners consult Sleepy Hollow .Manor Taxpayers Inc. in the future, so that both sides can work toghther. There being no parties expressing a desire to be heard, the Zoning Board of ADPeals acted uDon the motion to adjourn. The motion was Dassed urA anircouslv, and the hearing closed at 9:50 P.M. Pespectfully yours, Linda-T. Fukuchi �W l S E H A R T , F R I O U 8C K O C H BAR BUILDING 3 6 WEST 4 4 « STREET N E W YORK,NEW YORK 10036 TELEPHONE (212) 7 3 0 - 0 0 4 4 August 28, 1979 Board of Zoning Appeals Village of North Tarrytown 28 Beekman Avenue Tarrytown, New York Re: Variance and Building Permit at 17 Hemlock Drive, North Tarrytown Gentlemen: I reside within 100 feet of the above premises. I was informed at 1:00 P.M. this afternoon that there would be a hearing tonight on appeal from a building permit issued by the village building inspector permitting the construction of a one-family-house on the undersized lot at 17 Hemlock Drive. I hereby protest the holding of the hearing by this Board. My reasons for the protest include, without limitation, the following: 1. This Board has amply demonstrated that it is hopelessly prejudiced in favor of granting of the variance and the building permit without due process. At the hearing on August 9, 1979, which was limited to the question of variance,one-or more board members specifically and positively announced in advance of hearing any evidence that the variance would be granted. That statement of position by Mr. Margotta was acquiesced in by the other members of the Board. 2. The Board at the August 9fhearing disregarded evidence of defective notice and there was no evidence in the record that notice or advertising had been completed in accordance with law. Furthermore there was no indication that the Planning Board had been advised of the application for the variance. 3. At"the hearing oh August 9, 1979 it was made very clear by the'Building Inspector that he had received no application for a building permit and he had not acted for or against a building permit and the Board made it clear �Board of Zoning Appeals - 2 - August 28, 1979 that it was not acting on the building permit. There were no plans available at the August 9 meeting. Nevertheless I am informed that at some time later, and before the minutes were available to the public, the Chairman of the Board ordered the Building Inspector to issue the permit. That action was improper and not within the jurisdiction of the Chairman of the Board of the Zoning Appeals. 4. In giving that order to the Building Inspector, the Chairman of the Board of Zoning Appeals knowingly preempted the possibility of amicable discussions between the builder and the neighbors for resolution of differences. The builder had agreed to have such a meeting but by his action in ordering the permit to be issued, the Chairman of the Board prevented the meeting from taking place. 5. After the Building Inspector had issued a permit in accordance with the orders improperly given to him by the Chairman of the Board of Zoning Appeals, a Notice of Appeal to the Board was served and filed pursuant to Village Law §7-712. The Notice of Appeal also notified the recipients that the automatic stays under that section of the law were applicable. 6. Notwithstanding the existence of a valid Notice of Appeal and the notification of the operation of the stays, the Chairman of the Board of Zoning Appeals, I am informed, then improperly instructed the Building Inspector to disregard the Notice of Appeal because the original hearing on August 9, 1979 had covered both the variance and the building permit. But the Chairman knew that the August 9 meeting only dealt with the variance. 7. Because of the improper interference by the Chairman of the Board of Zoning Appeals in the legal process, the builder continued to construct the home at 17 Hemlock Drive. In view of the prejudicial action of the Chairman of the Board of Zoning Appeals and the knowledge of the builder and owner that such actions were improper, the continued construction of the home by the builder can not be considered to build equities in his behalf, but on the contrary are further evidence, of his bad faith in dealing with the other taxpayers' concerrf^ith this matter in that the builder had promised to meet with neighbors but used that promise only to divert and delay them. 8. The actions to date of the Board of Zoning Appeals have been prejudicial to the existing interests of other taxpayers in the neighborhood and have unreasonably and arbitrarily • "-»..-a: a. isjrts. i--Si i-^w:««K-v&tSv>*S«^.-i^L«-3t-_^_~Jj-i^sa/r.^¥*^ �Board of Zoning Appeals - 3 - August 28, 1979 favored the interests of the owner and of the builder. Those actions of the Board include the secret interference by the Chairman (and possibly others) with orderly due process required by law to the detriment of myself and the other neighbors involved. The actions of the Board of Zoning Appeals in this matter have created an appearance of impropriety on its part. In these circumstances I protest the right and power of this Board to act further on this matter and I ask that the Board disqualify itself and adjourn this proceeding until a proper Board of Zoning Appeals can be constituted. It is not the function of this Board to serve only the interests of builders who wish to obtain variance. The neighboring property owners have rights on which this Board has trampled• Respectfully yours, Robert E. Friou REF:ag �f -,* n-2n -\ W Lo. •- r i -^-— ^ ^j .* / / • / i . <r m August 27, 1979 MEMO - Sleepy Hollow Manor Association FROM - R. Sigvard Johnson for Zelig I understand that a meeting of the 2BA has been called for this evening without prior notice or advertising. I had thought that by answering the full list of questions forwarded to me, in behalf of Mr. ZeHg, that that would be sufficient for communication in good faith. Everyone should be reminded of 62-12. 62-12 Area: B - Nonconforming lots - In any single family detached dwelling nonconforming lot, provided the yards ... shall comply with the for the district R-district only a may be erected on a front, side and rear normal requirements As to location - I have designed hundreds of houses for 30 years and feel quite equipped to site houses well. If the owner of lot 6 will note the set back line of S-2 (10 feet) could have been used quite legally. Lot 6 should be pleased with a set back of over ^0 feet rather than the permitted 10 feet to obviate a garage facing his terrace. The house was sited closer to lot 8, which is located at the minimum set back. As to the removal of trees impairing privacy; removed trees were toward the center of the lot rather than lot line trees which might impair ('privacy.11 One of the large trees removed was in a dangerous condition, and the hemlocks showed evidence of needle damage. Be that as it may, no amount of juggling would have saved those trees. Would that all of the virgin trees of the entire Manor area had been preserved. As it is, there remains over a dozen large oaks, a large hemlock and some dogwoods. As to the narrow dimension of the house facing the street rather than the large one, it would appear to me, that aside from relative impropriety of this question that much of Sleepy Hollow Manor might have been improved by this method of making larger the spaces between houses, witness the house being erected next to A9 Hemlock, for which approval must have been given. As to the site line from the driveway easterly; it ts obscured by plantings on village property which may or may not have been planted by the previous owner of 6. Sleepy Hollow Manor might request the village to remove the obstruction. t L ^^&-s-^^|a^ftS&^v--r« ^^;^^*^-,-:-^^^^r&l^^^*^^^^^^fc^^^|^^-% ^^^~^^^M^^^s^^^0^^^fi^^^f �«. « - ^ i , . # * -2* As to drainage; a heavy rain Saturday last did not show any evidence of drainage from lot 7 to lot 6. Drainage from lot 8 onto lot 7 was not analyzed. A rain water leader with an opened end discharging on 7 has been noted and should be removed. A swale will be placed at the easterly side of 7 to ensure no drainage from black top will reach lot 6. It is to be noted herein that lot 6 has a history of basement water problems. The soil is, with the exception of top soil, almost pure river bottom sand with no plastic fines. A dry well will be installed to intercept roof water. As to"screeningn to protect lot 6's terrace, Mr. Zelig has already noted a willingness to plant fast growing hemlocks at the easterly side of his property (or another species due to the danger of needle disease in hemlocks.) One would surmise that now that the 1501 side yard has been reduced to some 75 feet, that lot 6 might also contemplate further protection for itself as well as for lot 7» 62 - 3F2 (as amended 7~8~7*0 might be investigated as a k foot high fence in advance of the legal set back. As far as the location of the garage door is concerned, it may be of interest that some enlighteried communities bar front entrances to garages. (Kings Point.) I trust that this answers the specicivity requested by your telephoned list. Respectful ly, R. Sigvard Johnson c-ZSA Zel ig Falasca • 5&^ , s,-=s<: < * r t J>. ,-il».-/t-*.j*i ~s..: rf&'*^SS&rfS3BMiiit^*V.5SS'ii5£ ^*ifea^2i^^3B^6*£5fifesia&fel!^S£S �% £ „ STMLD\HS°. //pf* i'»c/^ nfMLOOC Cc /if c A v"{5 OKI YE AW ^ �m\ BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS VILLAGE OF NORTH TARRYTOWN COUNTY OF WESTCHESTER, STATE OF NEW YORK In the Matter of The Application of OTTO KRALJ and ALEXANDRA KRALJ, Petitioners, For a Determination Pursuant to Section 7-712 of the Village Law of the State of New York -againstVICTOR R. PAGE, as Building Inspector, on the Issuance of a Building Permit on the Application of VICTOR 7.F.LTG, NOTICE OF APPEAL Respondents. SIRS: PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that Otto Krajl and Alexandra Kralj, persons aggrieved, hereby appeal under Section 7-712 of the Village Law to the Board of Zoning Appeals of North Tarrytown, New York, for a review of the determination of Victor R, Page, Building Inspector, an adainistrative official of the Village of North Tarrytown, to issue a building permit for the construction of a one-family house on the premises at No. 17 Hemlock Drive, North Tarrytown, New York; and PLEASE TAKE FURTHER NOTICE that this appeal. stays all it proceedings in furtherance of the action under the issuance of such building permit, pursuant to the provisions of Section 7-712 of the Village Law. ^iteis^.^^M^^^^ g. �\ The Board of Zoning Appeals is requested to fix a reasonable time for the hearing of this appeal and to give due notice thereof to the parties hereto and to decide the same within sixty-two days after the final hearing. Yours, etc., GORY H. DOHERTY Attorney for Petitioners,Otto Kralj and Alexandra Kralj Office and Post_ Off ice Address 115 Kelburne Avenue North Tarrytown, New York 10591 Telephone: 631 1436 TO: Board of Zoning Appeals 28 Beekman Avenue North Tarrytown, NT 10591 Victor R. Page Building Inspector 23 Beekman Avenue North Tarrytown, NX 10591 Victor Zelig 34 Miller Avenue North Tarrytown, NY 10591 AUG 20 1979 ^^^^^SSA^^^Mfy^S^^SiiSi^Md^k~^^-J^I^SSMAi^f^S^M^^kSS^^^^^&^ �$ ^ )-? S3 W g >* o & a* p* < C3 £5 M £5 O «SJ o g o EH co X! +5 o U -p O W J2S Q> SB «H O 0) bO OS H H > <H O u Q> •P •P o {>» +> o o - Pi eti m Pi (V u Q> o *l-f O EH * -p E-t^a CO.-p Pi •« CO 0) XJ -p Ha '^isrsssps- *-<—***• <Hm OJ«4 oS •HP &• i • +>s t . ft <4'<cJ( «H bfc> Pi a •a o ««x> -a P O O r-fOJ H 'jl^^p* 3i ti 1' ©P*O I tod© -p ojpeud • CO O to u o P< to « O •H •P •H +> a) « •H WOffp © IX, (fl O *r!05 t»0 << - t f O af-Oih-M O - UJ g o ~vO o 5Q i- o) > H •p *> §Zu O r-J z o 0) a> © -^5 t£P«S H o •p •p UMOpC-4 H • > i i » 4 * - 9 « U r - a ^ ^ 5 S - g-^SmPlj^e-Kc 5ssj^rf^iKS^"- l ^ S ! , * ^ S i - ' en in >- p w ^ EHCft-td&3 od EH •P • -SSL 33 O^ ^ co Q> . *-^3L*-^*-" iB*TfflS*^W3 i-^S^l^-^^1'=*'J i&w»"'j*ie - ~-" ! ' - v 8 s '" i ^ = " ' P ^ r - ' - i=-V*--^**S-=' vf^r^ � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Zoning Board Minutes & Resolutions-1979 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource MINS_ZONING_1979-08-27 Subject The topic of the resource Zoning Board Minutes & Resolutions-1979 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1979 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Village of Sleepy Hollow All Rights Reserved. Type The nature or genre of the resource Text https://sleepyhollow.localarchives.org/files/original/2259ace720fe2529b7f7be5c9c61ce8f.pdf d80c9815ff509dc112d2f2f48fe724bb PDF Text Text North Tarrytown, N.Y. September 18, 1979 A hearing was held before the Zoning Board of Appeals on the above date, in the Village of North Tarrytown, N.Y. Present: John Arcate-Chairman Edward Swaby Martin Ruane James Margotta Victor R. Page-Bldg.Insp Robert Ponzini, Attorney ~ Absent: Aldo Ceconi Linda Fukuchi, clerk, read the notice of hearing to consider the request of Kevin and Bernice Donohoe, 141 Webber Ave., North Tarrytown, to permit an accessory use of their property by Lee Elliot and Elliot Organization, Inc. for a personal residence coupled with the business offices of said firm. Chairman Arcate then asked if anyone present at the hearing wished to address the Board. Demetrios Kringas, 149 Webber Avenue, asked whether all within 200 ft. of the Donohoe property had been advised of the notice. Thomas J. Lyden, representing the Donhoes, presented an affidavit of service by mail (exhibit A ) , showing a list of nineteen names and addresses, who had all been notified. He submitted said affidavit to the Board as evidence. Mrs. Faiola Andrycich, 143 Webber Ave., abutting property owner, said she was not notified of said notice, and wanted to know why her name had been omitted from Mr. Lyden's-list. Chairman Arcate reminded all present that the zoning rules clearly state that all owners within 200 ft. of the Donohoe lot must be advised a full 10 days prior to the hearing held here tonight . Mr. Lyden spoke, saying be had taken all addresses needed off the town map, with the attempt to contact all such parties, and certainly, with no intent to "leave anyone out". The Board asked if any how many trucks will the Elliot firm bring to the neighborhood? Mr. Lyden replied "none". Mr, Kringas asked if there will be any changes to the house. It was answered that the cosmetic appearance would not change, nor would the interior. Mrs. Andrycich said she has nothing against the Donhoe' s home being used as a business place, and that she is in favor; of such usage of the property and house. As her property and the Donohoes' "overlap" as far as entering and leaving their homes, she..wanted, to know if the granting of a variance could affect her homeowner's insurance. She offered a rough sketch of a map to Chairman Arcate, �-2- showing how the two homes. pieces of land use the same entrance road to their Mr. Lyden replied that insurance should be of no concern to Mrs. Andrycich, and that such matters will be well taken care of. Mr. Page brought to everyones attention how in prior records 141 Webber was never changed when the lot was split and divided into two lots; 141 Webber Ave., with 143 Webber Aven. being the new number designated to the lot after the subdivision. Chairman Arcate asked Mr. Lyden if all parties required by law had been notified. Mr. Lyden replied in the affirmative, at least as the records indicate. Mrs. Andycich noted that Samul McBride, of 149 Webber Ave., had not been notified. Mr. Page replied, explaining that the McBride lot was beyond the 200 ft. area which requires notice. It became apparent, however, that property owner Green required notice. Chair-man Arcate asked if anyone present wished to address the Board in regard to the issue of receiving notices? No one replied in the affirmative. t Board member Mr. Swaby asked if the use of the Donohoe property, as in being asked for, would end at the termination of the five year lease by Mr. & Mrs. Donohoe to Mr. Elliot. He then asked Mr. Elliot to state the nature of his business. Mr. Elliot replied be develops marketing plans for firms. Mr. Swaby then asked how many people he employs, to which Mr. Elliot replied, four people. Board member James Margotta asked Mr. Elliot what kind of work would be done on the premises. Mr. Elliot answered design and writing. Mr. Margotta then asked wehn the office would be open. Mr, Elliot stated 5 days a week, Monday thru Friday, with a typical 9:00 AM - 5:00 PM schedule. Mr. Swaby asked what area of the house will be Mr. Elliot replied about 25% of the residence. used by the firm? Mr. Swaby also asked if Mr. Elliot expected an increase in traffic load for the area. Mr. Elliot replied the increase would be minimal. Chairman Arcate asked Mr. Elliot about parking facilities, and how many vehicles could be expected on the property on a regular basis. Mr. Elliot said 10-20 vehicles, at the most, which would be parked in a separate lot from the Lowse's driveway. He then asked Mr. Elliot if any changes in the shrubbery in the area to provide parking for others, Mr. Elliot replied, saying that if any changes are to be made, it will be solely cosmetic, to improve and enhance the area. He also asked Mr. Elliot if he would be the sole tenant. The reply was in the affirmative. e: --;j^^^w^^^^.-,!isi«^^ �-3- • Chairman Arcate then asked if anyone else would like to bring up any ther issue before the Board concerning the hearing re the Donohoe property. There being no one wanting to address the Beard, a motion was made by Mr. Ruane to adjourn this hearing, which was seconded by Mr. Swaby. Linda Fukuchi then read the notice of hearing to consider the application of Eugene Buonanno for a variance to extend and enclose the first floor property line at 29 Gordon Avenue. Chairman Arcate let all present know that he had received a letter of notice to property owners within 200 ft., notorized by the Town Clerk, from Mr. Buonanno (see exhibit B) Mr. Buonanno addressed the Board, stating how he would like to enclose the front porch and furn it into an extra room for the house, he said as there are empty lots on both sides, so neighbors view would be obstructed. Mr. Swaby asked how far back the house will be. Mr.Buonanno said there would be no change as the enclosure he is asking for would not include an extension made back in 1971. Mr. Page questioned how the work to be done to enclose the porch can be done for only $250.00. Mr. Page went on to say that the building permit had been denied when he found out a variance would be needed, r. Page went back to comment that such work on a house might cost $4,000.00 by New York State's code. IK Chairman Arcate said there is an existing variance on this property so any structural change needs a variance. Mr. Swaby asked Mr. Page how much space is required for a setback from the front of the house, and how much further would it "stick out" compared to the neighbors homes? Mr. Page replied that one lot to the side of the Buonanno home is vacant and that the house on the other side of their property is 40 ft. away, and set at a different angle. Mr. Buonanno showed a drawing of his plans to enclose the house's porch The Board said a more detailed sketch would be needed. Chairman Arcate asked whether the Board felt it had sufficient information, along with Building Inspector Victor Page, to make a decision tonight. Mr. Page noted that the Building Code calls for a 20 ft. setback from the road. Mr. Buonanno said his house has 10ft. from his porch to the street. Mr. Page also noted, however, that the Buonanno house has always been that close to the road. There being no further comments, Mr. Ruane made a motion, which Mr. Margotta seconded, to close the hearing. �• Business Meeting Chairman Arcate called the meeting to order. Chairman Arcate said that in considering the matter at 141 Webber Rd.,the Donohoe house, that the Zoning Board has no power to grant a variance without complete notification of all neighbors. He said that they can submit proof of a waiver of notice.and avoid another hearing. He said Robert Green must let the Board know they have been notified of the Donohoe*s plans or the hearing will be extended 10 days from notice. Section 62-4 calls for a provision for notice thru registered mail to the Greens, which the Donohoes could do, and then submit a receipt to the Board. Mr. Lyden replied for the Donohoes, saying he would do so, and also submit a copy of the letter to the Greens to the Board. Mr. Margotta noted that pending a satisfactory agreement or waiver of notice from the Greens, a variance could possibly be granted Oct. 2, 1979. Chairman Arcate asked Village Attorney Robert Ponzini if a conditional decision could be made tonight. Attorney Ponzini replied that technically speaking, no, but that a decision can be structured, but not made. t Chairman Arcate then said the Zoning Board of Appeals will hold another meeting on Sept. 20th. Should a waiver be obtained by then, a decision will be made. The Chairman said that the matter of notice regarding Mrs. Andrycich of 143 Webber Ave. keeps the Board from making a decision tonight, as the 10-day period of notice had not been honored in her case. Mrs. Andrycich said that she had read the notice in the newspaper, and was aware of it, in spite of not having received her own notice. She stated that she waived the requirement in her case. The Board then deferred further discussion of this matter until the requirement of notice to property owner Green has been satisfied. The Board then addressed the request of a variance by Eugene Buonanno and suggested that Mr. Buonanno present Mr. Page with the more detailed drawing of his plans to enclose his house. The Board will consider a granting of a variance as long as Mr. Buonanno's plans are not interfering with his neighbors' lots and views, and will not obstruct. Board could defer a decision now and meet again, or a decision can be made, but one which would not empower Building Inspector Page for a permit, until Mr. Page, has all the technical information needed. If Mr. Page is satisfied by Mr. Buonanno' s supplying him with said needed information within 30 days a permit could be given. Such a variance was granted by the Board after finding special circumstances and conditions existed at 29 Gordon Ave., Mr. Buonanno's residence. Chairman Arcate then reminded the Board of the matter concerning Mr. Kralj, of Kingslands Rd., N. Tarrytown, who had been granted a 30 day period in which to obtain information re possible drainage problems he feared might occur if a house were built at 17 Hemlock Dr. Mr. Kralj �5cbntacted Chairman Arcate today, Sept. 18th, to let it be known he has no report yet. The delay on the Certificate of Occupancy ends with tonight's J k meeting. After a motion by Mr. Swaby was seconded by Mr. Ruane, the vote was unanimous to recess tonight's meeting. Respectfully yours, Linda Fukuchi �Continuation of September 18th's hearing held on Oct. 2, 1979 Present:John Arcate Martin Ruane James Margotta Aldo Ceconi Victor R. Page - Bldg. Robert Ponzini, Attorney Insp Benefit of time to complete notice has been given to all. (See minutes of September 18th) Mr. R. Page has certified letter dated Sept. 22 giving proof of 10 day notice to Green. No party required further discussion. Motion to close the hearing Martin Ruane. James Margotta seconded by Hearing closed. Business Meeting It is the intention of the Board of Trustees of the Zoning Board of Appeals in granting the requested variance to provide only that said residence (which will continue to be classified as R-3) with the permitted accessory condition ammended to include the proposed use by the petitioner on date of the lease's commencement. After hearing all presented by petition persuant to Section 62-4, the proposed use will include "similar and professional purposes." The applicant will be permitted said variance for the applicants use only during the term of the applicants residence and only as long as this tenant uses it as a dwelling and domicile. Should the petitioner fail to use the house as residence and domicile, said variance will also terminate. Motion to this effect by Mr. James Margotta seconded by Mr. Aldo Ceconi - carried unanimously- said variance granted. Mr. Page asked Board to sanction his action regarding a wall that caved in during rain and needed emergency action at 47 New Broadway; Mr. Enrico Solari Mr. J. Margotta said Mr. Page acted in good faith and made a wise decision as it was an emergency - confirmed by Board. Meeting Closed - � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Zoning Board Minutes & Resolutions-1979 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource MINS_ZONING_1979-09-18 Subject The topic of the resource Zoning Board Minutes & Resolutions-1979 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1979 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Village of Sleepy Hollow All Rights Reserved. Type The nature or genre of the resource Text https://sleepyhollow.localarchives.org/files/original/776fb34b8ebd4125cba8bddb2430ea6f.pdf a15e4a8ac9484e2c135987c800565660 PDF Text Text 1 Nortii Tarrytown, N.Y. October 16, 1979 IM^- Zoning Board Present: John Arcate, Chairman Edward Swaby Martin Ruane Aldo Ceconi James Margotta Robert Ponzini, Village Attorney Victor R. Page, Bldg. Insp. Chairman Arcate called the meeting to order at 8:00 P.M. Linda Fukuchi, acting clerk, read the Public Notice of hearing to consider the request of Mr. Rocco Buscetto, 123 Van Tassel Avenue, North Tarrytown, N.Y., for an appeal to obtain a permit for the construction of an addition within 1.6 ft. of the property line on the southerly side of his building located at the above address. Mr. Arcate asked if the Board had a list of residents who were notified as to said planned construction. (exhibit A) Mr. Buscetto presented a list of signatures of immediate surrounding neighbors who indicated their favor of said construction. • Chairman Arcate asked Mr. Buscetto what was the purpose of the construction at his house was for. Mr. Buscetto replied,, saying the purpose was so that each of his children could have their own bedroom, along with a playroom. Mr. Margotta asked the size of the lot. Building Inspector, Randy Page said Mr. Buscetto has three 60' x 20' lots. Mr. Ceconi asked if the plans meet the requirements for {the set back. Mr. Page answered, Mr. Buscetto has 7' - 6" on the north side. The rules call for a total of 12 feet for setback. There is a steep drop-off in the land on the north side however, he noted. Mr. Buscetto replied, saying that an increase in the length of the house would be far more costly. The plan he has shown, calling for an increase in the width of the house would cost far less. Chairman Arcate reminded all present that the code requires a minimnm side yard of 3 ft. on one side of a residence, but also a minimum of both side yards combined (both sides of a house) must be 12 ft. The code also requires no more than 35% utilization of the area of the lot. A motion to end the hearing was made by Mr. Ruane, and seconded by Mr. Margotta. Motion unanimously approved. --•>-• -,"-:; -.,--,, .^ ^si't^,^afe3i*._frS-- x&Uik&Lw- >":toAm^ii.i^uii^ �0 Page 2 Business Meeting The Board discussed the need to maintain a minimum 3' side yard, verses maintaining a 12' total for the two side yards combined. The regulations that 357o of a lot's area is the maximum lot coverage does not seem to be a serious problem as Mr. Buscetto has three lots and his planned use does not exceed the 35% limit by more than 30 square feet or less. Mr. Buscetto was asked by Chairman Arcate if he had any hardship (s) to claim, to which Mr. Buscetto expressed a desire to imporve his house at present, and to enable each child to have their own room. After thorough discussion of the case by the Board members, and realizing the difference in space that the rooms would have with the extra width, Mr. Ceconi said he would be willing to grant a variance. Mr. Ceconi commented, saying the size of the rooms would be very small without the granting of an extra 1% feet width(4%'less 3'). Chairman Arcate said Mr. Buscetto lacks use of the land on the north side due to the steep grade of the land. No further building would be possible on that side. The intent of the code is to provide separation, but on the northern side there would be no possible construction, nor any future problems for any prospective neighbors. Therefore the intent of the code would be met. Mr. Swaby suggested that Mr. Buscetto be able to use His property up to and within 3ft. of the southerly property line. The Board supported the action of Mr. Page in denying the building permit, but as a result of hearing Mr. Swaby made a motion, seconded by Mr. Ceconi, to sustain the 3 ft. nriiiimum but to grant a variance waiving the 12 ft. total width required and the small (if any) excess coverage over 35%. The motion carried unanimously. The Board also address the administration of official minutes. A motion was made by Mr. Ruane and Mr. Ceconi to find that all minutes from the start of this term to this date are correct and adopted. •.- -. Further, that all subsequent minutes shall be considered official two days following the date of mailing to the members. This will'permit. members to comment to the chairman if necessary and at the same time will authorize minutes prior to the next meeting. Adoption^of minutes will be confirmed at subsequent meetings. Motion approved unanimously. Mr. Ponzini rjfaise the question as to whether copies of all appeals were being sent to the Planning Board. The members agreed that this is what the code requires but that such distribution was a function of the Village Clerk and the Board did not know if it was being done. Mr. Ponzini offered to investigate the matter. There being no further business to discuss at the meeting, Board member Mr. Ruane made a motion, seconded by Mr. Swaby, to endtonight'smeeting, which carried .unanimously. �-2The variance was Rranted in' accord to Section 62-40C, paragraph 1-6, under which special permits may be granted under certain conditions. Section 62-40, paragraph C-l-b states where'"strict circumstances or conditions are such that the strict application of provisions of the ordinance would deprive the applicant of reasonable use of his land or building. I! Section 62-40, paragraph C-l-e, also allows the granting of variances where "such relief can be granted xizithout substantial detriment to the public and without substantial impairment ti There being no further hearings and/or business to attend, Mr Swaby made a motion to adjourn'the meeting at 7:55 P.M., which was seconded by Mr. Paolahtbnio and was carried unanimously. Respectfully submitted, Linda Fukuchi Acting Clerk � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Zoning Board Minutes & Resolutions-1979 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource MINS_ZONING_1979-10-16 Subject The topic of the resource Zoning Board Minutes & Resolutions-1979 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1979 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Village of Sleepy Hollow All Rights Reserved. Type The nature or genre of the resource Text