https://sleepyhollow.localarchives.org/files/original/eb09cdbb8bc7cf1d69499ac707633737.pdf 5c583d2069b9f9ddf826b23c1093fe97 PDF Text Text REGULAR MEETING A regular meeting of the Sleepy Hollow Architectural Reyjgw Board^was held on Wednesday, June 24, 1998, at 8:00 p.m. in the Village Hall, 2*oeekman Avenue^§leepy Hollow, New York 10591. / ^trPv PRESENT. James Nazemetz, Chair; Louis Falasca Sean McCarthy Rosari/^Piomelli Barbara Finpj Elvira Aloia Robert Barstow ALSO PRESENT: James Marfttta, Building Inspector Chair/Nazemetz called the meeting to order at 8:30 p.m. 1. Joanne Becker, 1Q2 Merlin Avenue - Replacement offence. Mrs. Becker presented the plans for a replacement fence. Having already been presented to the Zoning Board, variances had been applied for. Mrs. Becker stated she would be simply replacing the existing fence with an arbor and re-landscaping, commencing with the fence along Bellwood and replacing the rest of the fence at a later date. Mr. McCarthy moved, seconded by Mr. Falasca, to open the meeting for public comments. Carried. There being no public comments, Mr. McCarthy moved, seconded by Mr. Falasca, to close the me«*iin£ for nnhlic ^^mtnents. Carried. Discussion followed regarding the fence and the Board members stated they had reviewed the plans and found no objections. Mr. Falasca moved, seconded by Ms. FinA that the plans be approved as submitted. Carried. 2. Sleepy Hollow flank, 49 Beekman Avenue - Replacement of windows. Mr. Barstow presented the plans to the Board, stating that the Bank wished to replace the windows on the first floor, facing Beekman Avenue and on Washington Street, in a similar fashion to the existing windows, replacing the single glazing with double glazing and keeping the dividedlight appearance of the windows. Mr.Barstow explained that the windows would be kept the same 1 �size and proportion, that the windows would retain the same appearance, however they would not be ''true divided lights" Mr. McCarthy moved, seconded by Mr. Falasca, to open the meeting for public comments. Carried. Mr. Dennis Fitzgerald stated that he had an office on the second floor of the bank building and stated that the Bank has tried to maintain the building. He stated that if the windows were of good quality, he was in favor of replacing the windows. Mr. McCarthy moved, seconded by Mr. Falasca, to close the meeting for public comments. Carried. Mr. Barstow emphasized that the Bank was more inclined to renovate, that to totally . replace. He stated that the windows would be the exact same size, with applied grills in the same proportions as currently exist. There was much discussion concerning the mullions of the windows. Mr. McCarthy suggested that a "blank" be made by the manufacturer. Ms. Fwfit discussed the detail and integrity of the windows and expressed her concern that the applied grills would look artificial. Ms. Aloia agreed with Ms. Find Mr. Nazemetz moved, seconded by Ms. Fina to approve the application with the proviso that exterior grills will be provided. Carried. Mr. Barstow stated that if the Bank chooses not to go with the recommendation of the Board, he will reapply. 3. Miguel Jimenez. 85 Cortland! Street - Continued - Repair work Mr. Ronald Turnquist presented drawings regarding the repairs to the building's face as you come up Cortlandt Street from Tarrytown. At the first meeting there was concern and dtscvis«iicn whether to restore the brick. Mr. Turnquist stated that the owner wants to stucco the building. Mr. Margotta stated that he will not issue building permits on a piecemeal basis for this project and reminded Mr. Turnquist that he was to have provided a full set of drawings for the repairs. Mr. Turnquist stated that this was to be done in phases, the first being exploratory work and a floor and loadbearing wall were replaced. Mr. Margotta stated that was for safety purposes. The second was for structural repairs; the third was for new stairs as a means of egress; and the last phase for apartments. Mr. Margotta again stated that he wanted a full set of drawings for the whole building. Mr. Falasca stated that he wanted to see not just face drawings, but full drawings for the front and side of the building. �Mr. Tumquist requested that he be able to come back next month with drawings for the front, side and facade of the building, as part of the facade improvement program. Mr. Nazemetz reminded Mr. Tumquist that July 13 was the deadline for turning in drawings to the Board. Mr. Falasca moved, seconded by Mr. McCarthy, to continue the matter until next month. Carried. 4. 107 Devries Avenue - Continued. Mr. Fitzgerald represented the owners of 107 Devries Avenue. Mr. Fitzgerald stated that there is a five foot fence around the back of 107 Devries Avenue. He stated that he had observed upwards of 70 fences in Philipse Manor, of various types, including stockade fences, and had several photos he wished to have made as part of the application. He stated that since the fence had already been erected and since it was in keeping with the fences in Philipse Manor, it should be approved. Mr. Falasca moved, seconded by Mr. McCarthy, to open the meeting for public comments. Carried. Mr. Frank Bateman, a neighbor, stated that he was aesthetically opposed to the fence. He stated that there is a question of a survey; that the fence was jagged; not aesthetic. He stated that there were several pickets that were broken. He also stated that a dog is chained to a tree on the property line, and believed that the owners had shown a lack of respect by putting up this fence without going through the correct process. Ms. Joanne Becker, a neighbor, stated that she had followed all the regulations, had applied for zoning variances, gone before the tree commission and followed the public process. She stated that the contractor-owner of this property just did as he pleased without trying to build a consensus with the neighborhood and put up.an.ugly, fence, without following the public process. Mr. Bateman stated that neither the issue of variances or the tree ivtnoval permit had been addressed. Mr. Fitzgerald stated that there were no irregularities in the fence. He stated that there were some repairs to be made. Mr. Fitzgerald acknowledged that there had been no prior approval and that the owners did not do what was proper, but the issue, as he saw it, was whether the fence as it stands was 'approvable'. Mr. Fitzgerald also stated that there was no building permit, but pointed to the photos stating that the fence was in no way detrimental. As to the survey, he stated the property was surveyed upon purchase of the property by the corporation. Mr. Nazemetz moved, seconded by Mr. McCarthy, to close the meeting to public �comments. Carried. Ms. Fin#stated that the craftsmanship was careless, it was terrible, and it was designed poorly. The application did not go through the process - it was a done deal. She stated that a neighborhood gives and takes, and everything is considered in the process. This fence and the way it was done is completely unacceptable. Ms. Piomelli stated that the issue was not just the Code as interpreted by the consumer, and that is why there is an arbitration process. She stated that there is also an aesthetic concern which could not be addressed by the Code Book. Her opinion of the fence is that the construction is deplorable, there was no design involved, no attempt was made to make this fence gracious in any way, and that she could not approve this as it was done. Mr. McCarthy made suggestions to make this approvable by having the applicant do the following: correct the jagged top so that it meets the bottom properly; fix the pickets; where the fence meets the tree to step the fence back so that it stays on the client's property, and stain the fence gray or brown. Mr. Fitzgerald stated that lowering the fence to the lowest point on the property and scribing the fence to follow the property would mean a two foot drop or more, since the lowest point of the property is in the front, which would make this a three foot fence in the back. Making this a very low fence in the back and the way this fence was put up in sections, and the ground slopes in the front to the back. The fence has already weathered and is starting to look gray. Mr. Fitzgerald said he* could not recommend moving the fence back around the tree as it may cause the client title problems in the future. Mr. Nazemetz read into the record a letter from Robert and Julie Anello, which letter is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. Mr. Nazemetz made a motion? to approve »s submitted and built. .There wereJio seconds, Mr. Barstow stated that he believed that if the application had been properly submitted on drawings that the Board would not have been opposed to a stockade fence. The issue is not that this is a stockade fence, but there is an issue of workmanship. This fence could have been built better. It is a little haphazard. It could have been done better around the tree. The good side of the fence does nice the neighbors and they did not have to do that. Ms. Fin^stated that the Fremont fence, a white fence, was too high and had to be brought down and they put some shrubbery in front of it to disguise the "whiteness". The wrong thing was done and changes were made to make it better. Ms. Piomelli asked why couldn't the owner hire a professional to see what could be done to make this better. �MJ. rin^made a motion to deny the application, seconded by Mj$ NazemcLz. Carried. Mr. Margotta will send a 30-day notice to 107 Devries Corporation. MINUTES Mr. Nazemetz moved to approve the minutes of the meeting held on May 27,1998, by those members present. Ms. Aloia seconded. Motion carried. Mr. Nazemetz moved to approve the minutes of the field meeting held on June 2,1998. Ms. Aloi^Jseconded. Motion carried. Mr. Nazemetz stated that the next Regular Meeting of the Board would be held on July 22,1998, with the last date for submission of drawings to be July 13,1998. Carried. There being no further business to come before the Board, Mr. Nazemetz moved, seconded by Mr. Falasca, to adjourn. Carried. Respectfully submitted, Rhonda L. Bigford Acting Clerk /rib � 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 Architectural Review Board Minutes-1998 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_ARB_1998-06-24 Subject The topic of the resource Architectural Review Board Minutes-1998 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1998 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