https://sleepyhollow.localarchives.org/files/original/cde04b6ecef0752adc020dcc64d616da.pdf c42232f8e7550a2e440226bbbb2b9b2e PDF Text Text VILLAGE OF SLEEPY HOLLOW ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD MEETING January 23, 2008 The meeting was called to order by David Pysh, Chairman at 8:11 p.m. The Chair noted that a quorum is present Present: David Pysh, Chairman Sandra Tripp Ana Maria McGinnis Pat Piereson Absent: Carter Sackman Also Present: Sean McCarthy (Village Architect/Village of Sleepy Hollow) Anthony DelVecchio (Recording Secretary) Donato Pennella (Charles A. Manganaro/Village Engineer) Announcements: The Chair amended the agenda to include the operating procedures of the Board. David Pysh proposed that the Board hold a work session from 7:30pm to 8:00pm before every Board meeting. There were no comments on the proposed work session. Agenda 1) Matthew Linn 12 Fremont Road 2) Lansch 30 New Broadway 3) Schroedel 487 Munroe Avenue 4) Zifchock 15 Pine Street 5) Smith 85 Merlin Avenue 6) KWD Realty 309-313 North Broadway 7) Philipsburg Manor 381 North Broadway 8) Kennedy Pokahoe Drive 9) Minutes for November 2007 Replace walkway Exterior renovations Fence Fence Walkway, walls Signage Signage Amended approval 1) Matthew Linn Replace walkway– 12 Fremont Road This is a continuation from the previous meeting. The Chair asked if the mailings were received. Sean McCarthy responded yes. Ana Maria McGinnis recused herself from this application. �Matthew Linn is the owner and is representing this application. Matthew Linn stated that the existing walkway will be changed to improve the aesthetics. He presented photos of the existing walkway. He stated that the new walkway will have 3 steps added to reduce the existing pitch. He also stated that the walkway will be widened by 1-foot. He spoke about the proposed landscaping improvements. Sandra Tripp asked if a railing is required. Sean McCarthy responded that a railing is needed under the new building code. The Chair asked if the Board had any questions. There were none. The Chair opened the public hearing. Since there were no public comments, the Chair closed the public hearing. There was an open discussion on the required railing. Matthew Linn stated that the railing would not be very visible. The Chair made a motion to approve the application as submitted with the condition that the risers shown from the driveway to the main entrance be adjusted to eliminate the railing. A wrought iron railing can be installed for the front of the entranceway. Pat Piereson seconded. It was unanimous (3-0) McGinnis abstained. 2) Lansch 30 New Broadway Exterior renovations - Joe Paiva is the project architect and is representing this application along with the owners James and Fanny Lansch. The Chair asked if the mailings were received. Sean McCarthy responded yes. Joe Paiva gave an overview of the proposed project. He submitted photos to the Board. He stated that the gable window would be replaced. He stated that two dormers would be added in the attic space since the attic space is habitable. The Chair asked if the roof was being raised. Joe Paiva showed where the roof was being raised on the presented plan. Ana Maria McGinnis asked how the brick would be matched once the dormers are added. James Lansch responded that the brick would be matched. Architectural Review Board Meeting, January 23, 2008 2 �The Chair asked if the chimney is new. Joe Paiva responded that the chimney is existing. Ana Maria McGinnis stated that the entire plan needs to be presented to the Board. The Chair stated that the roof plan is needed to fully understand the extent of the addition. The Chair asked if the Board had any other questions. Pat Piereson stated that the new dormer window should be squared off. The Chair opened the public hearing. Since there were no public comments, the Chair closed the public hearing. The Chair asked if there were any other approvals required. Sean McCarthy responded no. Pat Piereson stated that the Board wants to have final plans as well as material samples in order to make a decision. Joe Paiva responded that the presented drawing is to demonstrate design intent. Ana Maria McGinnis made a motion to adjourn this application to the next meeting. Pat Piereson seconded. It was unanimous (4-0). The Board provided more clarification on exactly what material should be submitted to the Board for the next meeting. This was adjourned to the next meeting. 3) Schroedel 487 Munroe Avenue Fence - David Schrodel is the owner and is representing this application. The Chair asked if the mailings were received. Sean McCarthy responded yes. David Schrodel submitted a package to the Board. It included a site survey with the fence shown on it. He also submitted photos of the existing house to show where the fence would be installed. Ana Maria McGinnis asked if the fence would be seen from the Munroe Avenue side since there is an existing landscape hedge. Architectural Review Board Meeting, January 23, 2008 3 �David Schroedel responded that the fence would not be shown. He gave an overview of where the proposed gates would be installed. Sean McCarthy stated that the fence needs to be installed 30-feet back from the front yard. He stated that this property has two front yards since it is located on a corner. The Chair asked if the Board had any other questions. Pat Piereson stated that the new window should be squared off. The Chair opened the public hearing. Mario Schapini (owns the house behind the applicant) stated that there are trees that are on the property line. He asked where the fence will be installed. David Schroedel responded that the fence will be installed 1.5-feet from the rear property line. He stated that the fence will not harm the trees. Mario Schapini stated that he has an existing fence that will be installed next to the proposed fence. He stated that the vegetation between the fences will not be maintained. He asked for a survey to be performed showing the location of the fence line. Pat Piereson stated that the Board has also received a letter from the adjacent neighbor expressing a concern about the installation of the fence and the existing vegetation. Since there were no further public comments, the Chair closed the public hearing. The Chair made a motion to approve the application as submitted using the black painted aluminum fence and with the conditions: On the west edge, the fence will be installed 18” from the existing chain link fence. On the south edge, the fence will be installed 18” from the property line. In the front yard, the fence will be installed at the rear façade line of the house. The north edge will have the fence installed 15-feet from the rear property line. Pat Piereson seconded. It was unanimous (4-0). 4) Zifchock 15 Pine Street Fence - Jeremy Zifchock is the owner and is representing this application. The Chair asked if the mailings were received. Sean McCarthy responded yes. Jeremy Zifchock stated that he has a small child as well as 2 dogs. He would like to install the proposed fence to keep everyone within the property bounds. He submitted photos of the existing property to the Board. Sandra Tripp asked the owner to show where the fence would be installed. Architectural Review Board Meeting, January 23, 2008 4 �Jeremy Zifchock showed where the proposed fence would be installed. Pat Piereson stated that the fence does not seem strong enough. Jeremy Zifchock responded that the dogs are not large dogs and they do not expect them to get out. Ana Maria McGinnis stated that the fence does not look aesthetically appealing. Jeremy Zifchock responded that he is open to suggestions. There was an open discussion on what could be installed. The Chair opened the public hearing. Since there were no public comments, the Chair closed the public hearing. Ana Maria McGinnis made a motion to approve the application with the condition that the section between the house and the garage would be a wood picket fence to match the pickets on the front porch and the remaining fence be a post and rail fence. The Chair seconded. It was unanimous (40). 5) Smith 85 Merlin Avenue Walkway, walls - Ty Carsto is representing this application on behalf of the owners. The Chair asked if the mailings were received. Sean McCarthy responded yes. Ty Carsto stated that the owners currently have tandem parking. He stated that the existing large retaining walls would be lowered and tiered in order to add some landscaping. He presented a sample of the proposed stone that would be used for the new retaining walls. He stated that the existing flagstone walkway would be renovated to include larger pieces of bluestone. He stated that the existing railing style will be extended. Sandra Tripp asked if the plan could be reworked to eliminate the railing. Ty Carsto responded that he does not think that the plan can be re-worked to eliminate the railing. The Chair asked if the Board had any other questions. Ana Maria McGinnis asked about turning the stairs. Ty Carsto responded that the location of the stairs were difficult. There was an open discussion on relocating the steps. Architectural Review Board Meeting, January 23, 2008 5 �The Chair opened the public hearing. Since there were no public comments, the Chair closed the public hearing. The Chair stated that the front base wall could be moved to the property line. He also stated that front steps and the wall should be integrated. The Chair asked about the fence. Ty Carsto responded that the fence is exiting. The Chair asked if any other approvals are required. Sean McCarthy responded no. The Chair made a motion to approve the application with the condition that the retaining wall nearest the sidewalks to the west of the front steps will be eliminated and the retaining wall to the west of the walk near the residence will be installed to eliminate the front jog. The wall will integrate with the front steps. Pat Piereson seconded. It was unanimous (4-0). 6) KWD Realty 309-313 North Broadway Signage - Karl Dibble is the owner and is representing this application. The Chair asked if the mailings were received. Sean McCarthy responded yes. Karl Dibble stated that this application is to add a privacy fence as well as some additional signs and a small roof alteration. He spoke about the proposed signs. Sean McCarthy stated that the original application included gates that were previously approved by the Board. He wants to change the type of the gate from wrought iron to tubular steel. He also stated that the office roof will be changed to cedar shakes. He stated that the roof will match the roof over the sign. The Chair asked if the Board had any comments. Ana Maria McGinnis stated that the proposed sign above the gate is not attractive. Sean McCarthy stated that the Board would have to grant a variance if they approve the sign. The Chair asked about the privacy fence. Karl Dibble responded that the fence is a PVC privacy fence. He asked the Board if they Were in favor of the fence, he could re-appear for the fence. He stated that the fence is intended to promote sales. Architectural Review Board Meeting, January 23, 2008 6 �The Chair opened the public hearing. Don Catano (43 Lawrence Ave) stated that there are too many signs on this property. He stated that Village Ordinances were changed to limit the amount of signs on commercial properties. He stated that a dangerous precedent might be sent. Sean McCarthy stated that every commercial property can have one commercial sign and a secondary sign. He stated that this is a large piece of property and the size of the property needs to be taken into consideration. He stated that the size of the sign cannot exceed 20-feet. Karl Dibble stated that there are 3 pieces of property and 3 businesses operating at this location. He stated that the Board should review the wood carved signs first and leave the signs on the gates to last. The Chair stated that the application needs to be reviewed as a whole. Pat Piereson stated that the carved signs could be reviewed first and the number of signs should be reviewed second. She stated that she does not have a problem with the secondary sign but she wondered if they could be combined. Karl Dibble responded that there are different businesses operating at this location and each business does different things. Sandra Tripp agreed. She stated that there are too many signs proposed. She stated that the number of signs should be reduced. Pat Piereson stated that although the applicant wants to advertise his business, too many signs can confuse the public. The Chair stated that the current fence is better than what is proposed. Pat Piereson stated that the existing open fence is acceptable for the proposed use. Don Catano asked if there are 3 different properties or is this parcel one property. Sean McCarthy responded that this is one property. Since there were no further public comments, the Chair closed the public hearing. Ana Maria McGinnis stated that a secondary sign can be installed. Karl Dibble asked if the Board could approve the existing steel tube fence, office roof structure and signs for the site development and stone landscaping businesses. The Chair stated that the applicant can add wood panels onto the existing tubular steel fence to soften the aesthetics. The Chair stated that he does not have a problem with the proposed 3 signs. Architectural Review Board Meeting, January 23, 2008 7 �Ana Maria McGinnis stated that the sign over the garage bay needs more information for the Board to make a decision. Sean McCarthy stated that if the Board approves the hanging sign, a variance needs to be granted. The Chair stated that more information is needed on the signs in order to make a decision. He made a motion to adjourn this application to the next meeting. Pat Piereson seconded. It was unanimous (4-0). 7) Philipsburg Manor 381 North Broadway Signage - Tom Danaker is representing this application along with Chris O’Hara. The Chair asked if the mailings were received. Sean McCarthy responded yes. Tom Danaker stated that this application is proposing to replace the existing sign at the Philipsburg Manor Restoration. He stated that the new sign will include the address. He reviewed the additional signs for overview parking as well as the new sign proposed on Route 9. He stated that the signs on the flagpole will be removed and replaced with a new sign. He submitted renderings to the Board of all of the proposed signs. Pat Piereson asked about the size of the signs. Sean McCarthy responded that the proposed signs are too big. Chris O’Hara responded that the proposed signs are approximately the same size as the existing signs. Sean McCarthy stated that the Board can consider a variance for this application. Ana Maria McGinnis asked about special events. Tom Danaker responded that for special events a banner is used for the event. Sandra Tripp asked about the proposed colors of the signs. Chris O’Hara responded that the colors are highway approved colors. He stated that the colors were selected to minimize confusion. The Chair opened the public hearing. Since there were no public comments, the Chair closed the public hearing. The Chair asked for clarification on the proposed variance. Architectural Review Board Meeting, January 23, 2008 8 �Sean McCarthy responded that the variance is needed for the sign on Route 9 only. He read the sections of the Board’s jurisdiction applicable to variances. Ana Maria McGinnis asked for the dimensions of the existing sign. Chris O’Hara responded that the sign is 40” tall and 128” wide. The Chair made a motion to approve the application as submitted. He stated that the proposed signs will be reducing the amount of signage on Route 9. He stated that this application is a unique case. He made a recommendation to grant the variance. Ana Maria McGinnis seconded. It was unanimous (4-0). 8) Kennedy Pokahoe Drive Amended approval - Emilio Escalades is the project architect and is representing this application. Emilio Escalades stated that this project is already completed. He gave an overview of the proposed changes and how they differed from the original approval. The Chair asked if the mailings were received. Sean McCarthy responded no. The Board agreed that no action can be taken unless the public is noticed. 9) Minutes for November 2007 The minutes will reviewed at the next meeting. Adjourned at 10:51 p.m. Architectural Review Board Meeting, January 23, 2008 9 � 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-2008 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_2008-01-23 Subject The topic of the resource Architectural Review Board Minutes-2008 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2008 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