https://sleepyhollow.localarchives.org/files/original/32e621ac03631481cf3e54387b0aa8fd.pdf 41b9142e68fa82a9e34323449d97c0eb PDF Text Text VILLAGE OF SLEEPY HOLLOW ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MEETING -APPROVED September 17, 2003 The meeting was called to order by Robert Anello, Chairman at 8:17 P.M. The Chair noted that a quorum was present. Present: Robert Anello, Chairman Linda Moiron Sean McCarthy Tom Capossela James Galgano Eliot Martone Absent : Peter Koffler Also Present: Robert Stiloski (Director, Department of Fire & Life Safety) Robert Ponzini (Gaines, Baker & Novick/Village Attorney) Anthony Del Vecchio (Recording Secretary) Agenda: 1) Cirillo Rodriguez 150 Cortlandt Street 2) Maria Graca 143 New Broadway 3) Marte Ruben 32 Kendall Avenue 4) Eulogio Grullen 196 Cortlandt Street 5) Vincent Shroba vacant lot, Webber Ave 6) Kyriakidis 17 Barnhardt Avenue 7) Carlos Panjon 34 Cedar Street 8) Gary Thaler 116 Rice Avenue 9) Michael Cammarota 263 Farrington Avenue 10) Minutes of the February and July 2003 meetings Announcements: None. 1) Cirillo Rodriguez This is a continuation from previous meetings. The Chair asked the applicant to summarize the application to date. Jeffrey Shumedja is the attorney representing this application along with project architect, Jon Turnquist. He spoke about the variances that are beyond the applicant’s control. �The Chair asked if the applicant had any new materials. Jeffrey Shumedja submitted photos. The Chair stated that all items should be submitted 15 days before the meeting. Jeffrey Shumedja showed a revised drawing of the building interiors. He stated that the exterior walls would have a 1-hour fire rating. Jon Turnquist stated that the drawing is only a preliminary drawing. Jeffrey Shumedja spoke about the secondary means of egress. He passed out a drawing showing the conversion of a bedroom into a dining room. The Chair questioned the use of the dining room. Jeffrey Shumedja spoke about the lot coverage allowed by Code. He also spoke about the similar lot coverages in the immediate area. The Chair asked how the calculations were obtained. Jon Turnquist responded that the calculations were performed via the tax maps. The Chair asked for the calculations to be submitted to the Board prior to the next meeting. Jeffrey Shumedja submitted a stamped document from Ward-Carpenter Engineers detailing the distances between the buildings in the area. He also submitted eight (8) photos of buildings in the area. The Chair asked if the Board had any questions. Tom Capossela asked if any further work has been performed. Jeffrey Shumedja responded no. The Chair asked if there were any public comments. There was none. Sean McCarthy made a motion to adjourn this application to the next meeting. He also stated that the applicant will provide written calculations and revised plans to the Board at least 15 days prior to the next meeting. Linda Moiron seconded. It was unanimous (6-0). 2) Maria Graca This is a continuation from previous meetings. Richard Blancato is the attorney representing this application along with architect, Robert Pollick. Tom Capossela and Eliot Martone recused themselves from this application. APPROVED - Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting, September 17, 2003 2 �Richard Blancato spoke about the changes to the drawings. He stated that the first floor could not be changed since it is existing. He stated that the proposed second-floor addition would comply with the zoning code. Richard Blancato spoke about the front yard setbacks. He read § 62-13 (b) (1), which spoke about aligning of the front yards of adjacent houses. He also reviewed a drawing that detained the proposed addition. He submitted photos showing other adjacent houses. There was an open discussion on the non-conformity of the existing structure. Sean McCarthy spoke about the parking layout. Richard Blancato stated that since the applicant owns the adjacent lot, an easement would be granted to allow access to the parking area. Sean McCarthy asked about the Floor-Area-Ratio (FAR). Robert Pollick responded that the FAR numbers would be added to the drawings. The Chair asked if there is any other reason why a variance should be granted. Richard Blancato responded that the proposed structure complies with the Village’s height requirements. He also stated that the proposed structure is not out-of-character with the neighborhood in terms of height and that the requested FAR numbers would be provided. The Chair asked if the Board had any questions. There was none. The Chair opened the public hearing. Walter Sacconi (147 North Broadway) spoke. He stated that he was concerned with the proposed driveway. He stated that the driveway should be 10-feet wide. He also asked how the second floor does not infringe on the 3-foot side yard setback. The Chair responded that the applicant is seeking a side-yard variance. There was an open discussion on the width of the existing driveway and the proposed driveway. It was determined that the applicant will sit with the Building Department and determine the requirements. Tom Capossela (5 Tappan Landing) spoke. He stated that the same application was denied by the Board 6-years ago. He asked the Board to deny the request for a variance. Baiha Rudzitis Pinnis (148 New Broadway) spoke. She read a prepared statement opposing the proposed variance. Bill Herlihy (140 New Broadway) spoke. He stated that parking is a problem in the area. He asked the Board to deny the request for a variance. APPROVED - Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting, September 17, 2003 3 �Lena O’Neil (134 New Broadway) spoke. She stated that she was concerned with parking in the area. Bill Herlihy (140 New Broadway) spoke again. He stated that there are two (2) A/C units in the front yard. Bob Stiloski responded that there is nothing in the Village Code concerning A/C units in the front yard. The Board adjourned the public hearing. The Chair spoke about whether or not the application should be adjourned or not. He spoke about the setbacks and the driveway issues. He stated that this is a self-created hardship and that the FAR information is not available. He also stated that granting an easement would not solve the problem with the side yard. Linda Moiron stated that the density in the area is an issue. She agreed that this is a self-created hardship. The Chair stated that no documentation was submitted on the side-yard being in character with the neighborhood. He stated that the side yards are out-of-character with the neighborhood. Jim Galgano stated that the variance is small but the impact to the community is large. Jim Galgano made a motion to deny the request for a variance. Linda Moiron seconded. It was unanimous (4-0). 3) Marte Ruben – This is an application for an area variance to construct a two-family residence where the proposed construction creates the following non-compliances: Proposed Rear yard is 21.0-feet Required Min. rear yard of 25-feet Lot size is 2500 SF Min. size required is 4,000 SF Lot Width is 25 feet Lot width of 40-feet is required. The side yard setback is 4-feet and the combined total is 9.0-feet Minimum side yard setback is 5-feet and a total (both sides) of 15feet The lot width is 25 feet Min lot width of 40 feet is required APPROVED - Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting, September 17, 2003 4 �Actual parking provided is two spaces in tandem Required parking is two spaces adjacent to one another Jon Turnquist is the project architect and is representing this application along with Marte Ruben. Jon Turnquist spoke about the proposed application and about the proposed variances needed. There was an open discussion on the public notices and returns. It was determined that the public notices and returns were sufficient. Jon Turnquist spoke about other multi-family houses in the area. Eliot Martone questioned the usability of the proposed tandem parking. Sean McCarthy stated that Village Code § 62-12 (b) only allows a one-family house on a non-conforming lot. The Chair stated that a 2-family house on the proposed lot is not practical. There was an open discussion on whether or not to withdraw the application of whether to just adjourn the application. The Chair opened the public hearing. Pat Eden (25 Kendall Ave) spoke. She stated that the requested variances are too great. She also stated that the lot is too small to accommodate the proposed structure. Gurette Crow (48 Kendal Ave) spoke. She stated that she is concerned with the risk for potential fires in the area. She stated that she opposed to a one-family residence on the lot. Ellen McDonough (23 Kendal Ave) spoke. She stated that the square footage on the public notice compared to the plans is incorrect. She also stated that parking is a problem. Bob Stiloski confirmed that the square footage on the plans is correct. Jon Turnquist stated that the applicant wishes to withdraw the application. 4) Eulogio Grullen This is an application for a variance to legalize an existing dining room with 12 tables and 44 seats where the proposed creates the following non-compliances: APPROVED - Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting, September 17, 2003 5 �Proposed usage Zoning Requirements Is within 200 feet of a restaurant, delicatessen and a bar Chapter 62.20.1 – “ No portion of a property used for a restaurant or food service establishment…shall lie within 200 feet in a straight line from any lot or parcel that is used for another restaurant or food service…” No parking is provided Chapter 62.14(e) – Parking for 9 cars is required. One space for each five seats. The public notice was read aloud. The Chair asked if the returns were received. Bob Stiloski responded yes. John Hughes is the attorney representing this application along with Eulogio Grullen. The Chair stated that the Board had received the following documents: 1) Public Notice 2) Application 3) Factual background 4) Building permit application 5) Letter from Jim Margotta denying the permit. 6) Pre-date letter 7) Lease 8) List of expenses and revenues John Hughes submitted photos of the property. He spoke about the history of the business. He stated that the owner intends to expand the business into the adjacent vacant space. The Chair asked if the adjacent space was restaurant in the past. John Hughes responded yes. There was an open discussion on the history of the business and of the property. Tom Capossela questioned the existing beer license. John Hughes responded that NYS does not check for compliance with the Building Code prior to issuing a license. The Chair asked if cooking equipment would be installed on the property. John Hughes responded yes. APPROVED - Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting, September 17, 2003 6 �Bob Stiloski spoke about the history of the property since the mid 1990’s. The Chair asked the applicant to justify to the Board why a variance should be granted. John Hughes responded that the proposed use is not out-of-character with the neighborhood. He stated that the 200-foot rule is not practical in this area of the Village. The Chair stated that other applicants are held to stringent parking requirements. He asked why the applicant should be granted such a large variance. John Hughes responded that customers would mainly be local residents who would be walking to the restaurant. The Chair asked if the Board had any other questions. Eliot Martone asked if there would be a waiter/waitress service. John Hughes responded yes. The Chair opened the public hearing. Since there were no public comments, Linda Moiron made a motion to close the public hearing. Sean McCarthy seconded. It was unanimous (6-0). Sean McCarthy asked if sprinklers are required. Bob Stiloski responded no. He stated that the proposal is for less than 50 occupants. Sean McCarthy asked if the applicant would be expanding the bathroom facilities. John Hughes responded that the applicant could possibly expand the bathroom facilities. John Hughes stated that the applicant could return with a scheme that reduces the number of seats thus reducing the number of required parking spaces. Eliot Martone stated that he would like to see a revised plan with reduced seating, proper egress, and reduced parking requirements. The Chair asked if the applicant could use the space for another permitted use. John Hughes responded yes. The Chair stated that he is concerned with the parking in the area. He stated that the applicant was deceived in the purchase of the business. He also stated that he is concerned with the danger of fires in the dense inner Village. John Hughes requested an adjournment to re-evaluate the proposal. Sean McCarthy made a motion to adjourn this application. Eliot Martone seconded. It was unanimous (6-0). APPROVED - Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting, September 17, 2003 7 �5) Vincent Shroba This is an application for an area variance to construct a two-story single-family residence where the proposed construction creates the following non-compliances: Proposed Rear yard is 5.0-feet Required Min. rear yard of 25-feet Front Yard is 5.0 feet Min. front yard of 20-feet The public notice was read aloud. The Chair asked if the returns were received. Bob Stiloski responded yes. Sean McCarthy recused himself from this application. Sean McCarthy is the project architect and is representing this application. He summarized the proposed project. He stated that the proposed structure would be a single-family house. He spoke about the property layout and the existing property restrictions. He superimposed the zoning requirements on the lot. He stated that based on the required zoning setbacks, the applicant could only build a house 13-foot wide on the lot. He stated that the proposed structure is 30-foot 6-inches wide by 46-foot long modular house. Sean McCarthy showed a drawing of the proposed structures appearance. He stated that the proposed structure is not detrimental to nearby homes. He stated that nothing could be built on the site without a variance. He stated that the variances are minimal. He also stated that construction would not affect environmental issues in the area. He stated that the parking requirements are met. Lastly, he stated that the lot is existing and that this is not a self-created hardship. The Chair opened the public hearing. Jim Hogan (192 Webber Ave) spoke. He stated that the request is not reasonable. He stated that the variances are too large. The Chair asked what would be reasonable. Jim Hogan responded that the variances should be lesser. John Arcate (10 Hemlock Drive) spoke. He stated that he is concerned with the height difference between Webber Ave and Sleepy Hollow Road. He stated that a retaining wall exists. He also stated that the applicant created this problem during the sub-division. Frank Occhipinti (18 Hudson Street) spoke. He stated that the public did not oppose the sub-division. APPROVED - Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting, September 17, 2003 8 �The Chair asked if the Planning Board minutes were available. Sean McCarthy responded that the minutes were not available. Steven Shroba (applicant) spoke. He stated that if the lot was a problem, why was the sub-division approved. The Chair responded that the Planning Board granted the sub-division. Shawn Tracy (229 Webber Ave) spoke. He stated that the impact to the neighborhood is too great. He stated that he rear yards of the properties should be examined. Paul Webb (191 Webber Ave) spoke. He stated that he is concerned with the house being so close to the road. He also stated that he is concerned with the removal of trees on the lot. The Chair responded that this Board does not address the removal of trees. Constance Montanaro (203 Webber Ave) spoke. She stated that the house would be an eyesore. She stated that the variance should be denied. Gary McLain (63 Sleepy Hollow Road) spoke. He stated that the property could have been sub-divided differently. Margaret Fox (213 Webber Ave) spoke. She opposed the variance. Since there were no further public comments, Eliot Martone made a motion to close the public hearing. Jim Galgano seconded. It was unanimous (5-0). Eliot Martone stated that the main opposition is the front yard setback. He stated that the house could be moved. The Chair stated that the proposed structure could be stick-built and not a pre-fabricated structure. The Chair stated that he would like to see the following: 1) Planning Board minutes approving the sub-division 2) Topography Sean McCarthy stated that many of the problems in the area would not be increased by the addition of a one-family unit. He requested an adjournment to the next meeting. Eliot Martone made a motion to grant an adjournment to the next meeting. Linda Moiron seconded. It was unanimous (5-0). APPROVED - Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting, September 17, 2003 9 �6) Kyriakidis There was an open discussion on the ability of the Board to review revised drawings for a previously approved parking lot. It was determined that since the variance was not effected, it was an enforcement issue for the Building Department. 7) Carlos Panjon This is an application for an area variance to install a parking space where the proposed construction creates the following non-compliances: Proposed Width is 7’-0” Required A width of 9’-0” is required. Length is 16’-0” A length of 18’-0” is required. The public notice was read aloud. The Chair asked if the returns were received. Bob Stiloski responded yes. Robert Barstow is the project architect and is representing this application along with Carlos Panjon. Robert Barstow stated that the applicant would like to construct a parking space on his property. There was an open discussion on whether or not this requires ZBA approval. Robert Barstow proceeded to explain the proposed parking space layout. Eliot Martone asked about the existing staircase. Robert Barstow responded that the staircase would be modified. Sean McCarthy expressed some concerns of placing a parking space so close to a neighbor’s garage, which is a wood frame structure. There was an open discussion on whether or not this is a parking space or a driveway. The Chair referred to a letter from Jim Margotta citing § 62-14 (a) (1). The Chair opened the public hearing. APPROVED - Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting, September 17, 2003 10 �Charles Ziekus (191 Depeyster Street) spoke. He stated that the size of the space limits the drivers’ ability to open the car door. Since there were no further comments, Eliot Martone made a motion to close the public hearing. Tom Capossela seconded. It was unanimous (6-0). Linda Moiron made a motion to adjourn this application. Eliot Martone seconded. It was unanimous (6-0). 8) Gary Thaler This is an application for an area variance to construct a double deck where the proposed construction creates the following non-compliances: Proposed Rear yard is 9.0-feet Required Min. rear yard of 25-feet Lot size not indicated on plans Min. size required is 4,000 SF Front Yard is 17.28 feet Min front yard of 20.0 is required. The public notice was read aloud. The Chair asked if the returns were received. Bob Stiloski responded yes. The Chair stated that the Board had received the following: 1) application 2) building plans 3) photos Robert Barstow is the project architect and is representing this application. Robert Barstow stated that this is an application to construct a 2-story deck in the rear of the property. He stated that the lot is irregular. The Chair asked what is behind the property. Gary Thaler responded that houses are behind his property. He also stated that some of the houses in the area have similar structures. The Chair opened the public hearing. Since there were no public comments, Linda Moiron made a motion to close the public hearing. Eliot Martone seconded. It was unanimous (6-0). APPROVED - Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting, September 17, 2003 11 �Robert Barstow stated that the deck size is 7’ x 14’. Jim Galgano made a motion to approve the variance as requested. Tom Capossela seconded. It was unanimous (6-0). 9) Michael Cammarota This is an application for an area variance to construct a two-story addition where the proposed construction creates the following non-compliances: Proposed Front yard is 59.9-feet Required Min. Front yard of 75-feet One side yard is 9.8 feet One side yard of 10-feet Both yards are 20.5 feet Both yards are 25 feet Min Lot area is 8,985 sq ft Min Lot area is 10,000 sq ft Jeffrey Shumedja is representing this application along with architect, James Garr. The public notice was read aloud. The Chair asked if the returns were received. Bob Stiloski responded yes. Jeffrey Shumedja explained the required variances. The Chair asked if the applicant was going to change the use. Jeffrey Shumedja responded no. James Garr reviewed the proposed changes. He stated that the windows, cornice, etc would be matched. He also stated that the proposed would not be visible from the street. He stated that the existing driveway would be re-aligned. Sean McCarthy asked about the additional square footage to be added. James Garr responded that the proposed addition is still under the lot coverage requirement. He stated that including the garage, the proposed additional would place the structure at 18 % coverage where the maximum is 20%. The Chair opened the public hearing. Mary Ellen Joy (533 Riverside Drive) spoke. She asked about the square footage. APPROVED - Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting, September 17, 2003 12 �James Garr responded that the addition would add about 800 square feet. John Susson (233 Harwood Ave) spoke. He asked if the addition would destroy the river view. James Garr responded that the addition would not disturb the views. Since there were no further public comments, Eliot Martone made a motion to close the public hearing. Linda Moiron seconded. It was unanimous (6-0). Eliot Martone made a motion to approve the variance as submitted. James Galgano seconded. It was unanimous (6-0). 10) Minutes of the February and July 2003 meetings - The minutes for February 2003 were reviewed. Linda Moiron made a motion to approve the minutes as submitted. The Chair seconded. It was unanimous (6-0). The minutes for July 2003 were reviewed. The Chair made a motion to approve the minutes as amended. Linda Moiron seconded. It was unanimous (6-0). Linda Moiron made a motion to adjourn. Tom Capossela seconded. It was unanimous (6-0). Adjourned at 11:42 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Anthony Del Vecchio APPROVED - Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting, September 17, 2003 13 � 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-2003 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_2003-09-17 Subject The topic of the resource Zoning Board Minutes & Resolutions-2003 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2003 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