https://sleepyhollow.localarchives.org/files/original/7270180f12ccc905950513da7d86c5b2.pdf 24744e3125f394f3fbd50e0fa8d9c91c PDF Text Text 9- NORTH TARRYTOWN, N.Y March 25, 1976 * 113 A public hearing was held before the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Village of North Tarrytown, N.Y. on the above date. Present James Friere, Chairman Peter Esteban James Margotta John Arcate Edward Swaby David J. Whelan, Counsel Chairman Friere called the meeting to order at 8:00 P.M., after which Clerk Fallacaro read the notice of hearing to consider the request of Karsten & Lillian Hess of 144 Highland Avenue, North Tarrytown, N.Y., for relief on appeal from a decision of the Building Inspector of the Village of North Tarrytown in denying a permit on applicants' proposal to erect a six ft. fence and for a variance from the provisions of Article IV, Section 62-13, paragraph F-2 of the Zoning Ordinance of the Village of North Tarrytown requirements that no wall or open or solid fence in excess of five (5) feet in height shall be erected along the side yards and rear yards in any residential district on property known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Village of North Tarrytown as Section 14, Block 21, Lot 4. Chairman Friere asked if there was anyone present who would like to address the Board on the request for a variance. Mr. Karsten Hess, 144 Highland Avenue, stated that;he was.in favor of the variance. He stated that the property is quite open on the south and west sides. There is no fence along the property line on either side, he said. There is no privacy in the back yard, he said, and that it would be desirable for them to have part of their backyard protected by a fence. He stated that trees growing or vegetation make it difficult for him to plant bushes. Mr. Rubin Singer, 474 Bellwood Avenue, stated that-he was here at the request of Mr. & Mrs. Potter and had urged Mr. Dahl hot to object to this request. He stated that we are obligated to'see that we do not infringe off other people. He stated that we should think in the objective of reaching harmony in the community and encourage the Hess' and not force them to live the life other than they choose and supports the request for a variance. Mr. Harry Dahl, 115 Palmer Avenue, stated thatihe lives to the ; rear of the Hess property. He,stated"that statements made in^ the appeal were not correct. Mr. Dahl stated that he had talked to two neighbors. One neighbor stated that he first objected to fences and then did not object. The 160 ft. of fence would obstruct the area, said Mr. Dahl. He asked that approval of the 6 ft. fence be denied. 't&sk^V-K ? .^^^A^^><^^^M^S-^^^^^^^^^^^^J^^d££ ^ �-2Mr. Kenison stated that he lives on the northwest corner of Highland Avenue. When he moved "iiiito the area in 1914 fences were highly restrictive. He pointed out that we are breaking down restrictions which were placed by the Board. He stated that he wants to live freely and independent on his own property. Mr. Hess-stated that the proposedsfence would J fall in line with the Potter's fence. He stated that the conditions in Dahl's yard remain the same and has requested that the Board visit the property to see what it looks like. This would be the only way to resolve the matter, said Mr. Hess. Mr. Hess stated that he delivered notices to the surrounding neighbors within 200 ft. which he submitted. Mrs. Dorothy Ballarino stated that her husband who is President of the Philipse Manor Improvement Association, could not be present this evening, but that she was present to listen to the facts and was not here to oppose or not oppose the variance. Mrs. Ballarino speaking for herself statedthat she lived oh Palmer Avenue and received many remarks from visitors about the condition of 115 Palmer Avenue. She stated that she did not see anything wrong with a fence. Mr. William Montero, 146 Palmer Avenue, stated that on behalf of his Mother, she> would be opposed to the building of a fence above five feet. A five ft. fence would provide adequate privacy, he said. On a question of Mr. Swaby of his reason for the variance, Mr. Hess answered, "For privacy". Mr. Swaby also inquired of Mr. Hess as to the condition of Mr. Dahl;s property now and was answered that the condition is the same as when he moved into the area. Mrs. Earl Roosa, 139 Palmer Avenue, stated that she thinks fences are esthetic, but when they get to be too high she does not think it should be at the expense of neighbors. She stated that although the fence will only benefit the Hess' , it will not be pleasing to her eye. She stated that she was sympathetic with the Hess *, but they should also consider the Roosas and Moriteros. Mr. Hess stated that the fence would be a natural redwood fence, not a stained or colored basketweave type. No other comments, James Mafgotta moved, seconded by Peter Esteban that the hearing be closed. Carried. EXECUTIVE SESSION Following a lengthy discussion as:to whether or riot a hardship was involved, James Mar gotta moved, seconded by Johri=Arcate that the application for a variance of Karsten and Lillian Hess be denied, :except : ..:. that a six ft. fence, 75 ft.- in length be permitted along!the?southerly property line of Hess as indicated on the survey submitted with the application for a variance, said variance is granted only to the present �property owner and is not transferable, said restriction pertaining to property known and designated on Village Tax Assessment Map as Section 14, Block 21, Lot 4, seconded by John Arcate. Motion carried while Edward Swaby voted "No". * Decision based on the following: The variance from the provisions of Article IV, Section 62-13, Paragraph F-2 of the Zoning Ordinance of North Tarrytown is denied, except to the.extent that a six ft. fence 75 ft. in lengthris permitted along the southerly property line of Hess as indicated on the survey submitted with the application for a variance, said variance is granted only to the present property owner and is not transferable, said restriction pertaining to property known and designated on Village Tax Assessment Map as Section 14, Block 21, Lot 4. This appeal by Karst en and Lillian Hess resulted from a decision of the Building Inspector dated March 7, 1976 denying the application of the aforesaid six ft. fenc e. The partial variance is granted upon the grounds of the existence of special circumstances and conditions. The decision is rendered upon hearing the interested persons at a public hearing and inspection of the premises of the appellants. The granting of the variance in part is intended to alleviate appellants from the unsightly condition of theadjoining property. Respectfully submitted, i4Aji<tU4U)L• Filomena Fallacaro Clerk �DISSENT OF EDWARD SWABY Re: The matter of the Appeal of Karsten § Lillian Hess from the Decision of the Building Inspector before the Zoning Board of North Tarrytown, New York, March 25, 1976. Objections to the majority opinion are based upon the following grounds (1) Appellants Hess in their Appeal to.the Board allege that a major, reason for their request for a six foot fence is the unsightly.. . appearance of the adjacent Dahl property. Karsten Hess in statements before the board acknowledges that the Dahl property was in essentially the same condition five years ago when Hess acquired the adjoining property. The Appellants Hess would then appear, to have been on notice on this ground-and are barred from raising the issue five years later as a hardship;, (2) Karsten Hess alleged in statements to the board that his property value had depreciated. When contradicted, on .this score by an adjoining property owner he acknowledged tha.t his property has never been offered for sale. This issue of economic loss has not been established. : W ',•'_. ""'*'-:. . --.-." • (3). Two of four property owners who- ,atmt:: the Hess property appeared and registered strong protests against granting a variance. (4) The majority's decision to confine the sought after variance to 75 feet along one property owner^ boundary, instead of the sought 160 feet: amounts to flagrant spot-zoning which is beyond the Board's powers. (5) No evidence has been presented to contradict the propriety of the actions of the Building Inspector. Nor has there been any - evidence produced that would fall within the reasons defined in Article )C, Paragraph 4^, Seasfiion C-l/ . (6) The issuance of a variance on such trivial grounds establishes a precedent for future abuse and will limit the Boards1 effectiveness in future appeals. Edward S. Swaby 12 Spruce Street North Tarrytown, New York Sinr MtJ'iJi.^v; i^'**r~SA%\ Aa ^^»4^63!^^»Sa^^tl*i^^^feif.ia£««i^fe&ai4S^ � 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-1976 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_1976-03-25 Subject The topic of the resource Zoning Board Minutes & Resolutions-1976 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1976 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