https://sleepyhollow.localarchives.org/files/original/041fab76162bf5ec9bac8f7431dc02b8.pdf 211145ca203a8b3396e099235b84c6ca PDF Text Text NORTH TARRYTOWN, N.Y. December 10, 1984 ^ A meeting was held before the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Village of North Tarrytown, N.Y. on the above date. Present John Arcate, Chairman Aldo Ceconi, Frank Paolantonio Martin Ruane James Margotta, Building Inspector Robert Ponzini, Counsel Chairman Arcate called the meeting to order at 8:15 P.M., stating thatthis was a continuation of the Board's last session on November 13, 1984. At that time, Mr. Ponzini had been asked to check the code and laws pertaining to the nonconforming use of residential property for commercial purposes by the William Smith Memorial, Inc. on Dell Street, owned by Mr. Minozzi and his brother. Their attorney, Mr. Litt, had asked the Board to rule there is a nonconforming use of the residential portion of their property. Building Inspector Margotta had ruled to deny use of the premises in that Section 62-8B of the Zoning Code had been violated. Chairman Arcate asked if anyone present wished to ask Mr. Ponzini any questions. Mr. Ruane asked Mr. Ponzini to elaborate on his findings for the Board. Mr. Ponzini said the issue before the Board is not a variance, but for a clarification of what the use of the Minozzi's property is for. Several points were made for the Board to consider: 1. Nonconforming this lot, the only business Ponzini said the neighbor's helped show what the land's use of property, and what that means. For use has been for making monuments. Mr. testimony and the applicant's testimony nonconforming use has been in the past. 2. This raises a question - was the nonconforming use of the property extended for a greater and/or different use than it was originally used for? And if so, were these uses of the nonconforming property permissable? 3. Has any nonconforming use of the property been abandoned? 4. Split-zoning, such as on the Minozzi's lot, with both\ residential and commercial portions and whether it should or should not be allowed to remain zoned this way, is not an issue in front of the Board. It is a question of facts as towhether the nonconforming use exists, what it is, and if it is!being violated. The Board should ask what was the use of the land prior to the leasing to Edward Monks, Inc.? Has the use of the land been extended or changed? If so, then the nonconforming use of the lot can be made to conform. Chairman Arcate said Board members should ask if the notice issued �by the Building Inspector was a proper one. Mr. Ponzini said the applicant wanted to know what he would be allowed to do with and on his land in the future. Mr. Ruahe said if the owners of the property would operate as Mr. Smith had, little, if any furor would be caused for the neighbors. Mr. Ponzini stated that any subsequent owner of the lot can use the property as Mr. Smith had with his business when the Zoning Code went into effect in 1964. A nonconforming lot that existed prior to the code should be allowed to remain that way. Chairman Arcate noted a possible remedy would be to have the residential portion changed to a commercial portion so that the entire lot would be commercial. Mr. Ceconi asked, if the property wasn't used for 12 months as the land had originally been used, couldn't the nonconforming use be taken away and hot allowed to resume again? Mr. Paolantonio said he felt the time period of 12 months (the land was leased to Edward Monks, Inc. for 13 months) and the alteration in how the land was then used would apply so that the nonconforming use of the residential portion could no longer be used for business. He read from the Zoning Code, "any future use must be in conforming". The land was leased to a business not related to that of monuments, roofing is not the same business. Mr. Ruane said the research had been very good. leasing the property goes against the zoning code. He too, said that Chairman Arcate asked if the Board's decision could be divided, as there are really two issues before the Board: 1. Is the present use of the property with a roofing contractor leasing land proper? 2. What would be considered as "proper use" of the property? Mr. Paolantonio asked if the Building Inspector wasn't seeking to stop business on the residential portion of the lot. Chairman Arcate said Mr. Margotta was seeking to stop the leasing of the land to a nonconforming business. Mr. Ponzini said if the land were to become a^conformirig lot, it would become a residential lot,:and no business could take place on said property. But as long as the use of the land does not change, the nonconforming use for the monument-business can continue as in the past. Chairman Arcate stated that the intent of the Zoning Board is not to destroy property and what it is used for. A motion was then made by Mr. Paolantonio that the Zoning^ Board find the Building Inspector's decision proper, and should be upheld; that the existing tenant is violating the code to extension and change of the code �The motion was seconded by Mr. Ceconi, and unanimously carried. Chairman Arcate then asked the Board to consider what is "proper use" of the property in question, and what can it be used for? Did the owners interrupt this use of their nonconforming property? Was this use ever interrupted before leasing their rear lot to a tenant? Mr. Ceconi said he was in favor of having this property zoned as entirely residential. Chairman Arcate asked what would be the impact on the Village if it 5 forced the business to leave? He said this property which is split has the residential section of the lot that serves as a buffer zone for the neighborhood. Should the Board decide to rule the entire lot as residential, the buffer zone might be gone. Mr. Ceconi said he was.against having anymore commercial property in a residential area. Chairman Arcate noted that would not be within the Zoning Board's power anyway. Mr. Ponzini said the residential portion of the lot as it is now serves as a buffer between the monument business and the neighborhood. Also, if the business were to be abandoned and the lot became purely residential, another house might be built on the lot. Mr. Ceconi said he didn't feel there was enough land to build another house on, and asked Building Inspector Margotta if this was a possibility. Mr. Margotta said hypothetically, no, as there is too much land erosion. Mr. Ceconi noted that at present there is an apartment above, could another apartment be built in the future? Mr. Ponzini said no, that such would not be allowed by today's code. Chairman Arcate reminded all that the Zoning Code promotes the orderly development of businesses. The use of the Minozzi' s property has always been for the nonconforming use of the monument business, no other business has taken place on this property. Thus, no change or ruling is needed by the Zoning Board. This would leave the property as it was prior to the tenants. The only use of the land can be for the monument business. Mr. Ruane Made a proposal that business on this nonconforming lot remain as it was previously used,before 1973. Only businesses associated with the monument business maty use this nonconforming lot for commercial purposes. Mr. Paolantonio seconded the motion. Chairman" Arcate asked if there were any questions. There being none, the motion passed with a unanimous vote. Chairman Arcate asked if there was any further business for the Board to consider. There being none, the meeting was adjourned at 8:55 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Linda T..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-1984 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_1984-12-10 Subject The topic of the resource Zoning Board Minutes & Resolutions-1984 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1984 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