https://sleepyhollow.localarchives.org/files/original/20c54237bf91730c755f6080a33a6ab1.pdf a05bcacc3a80aca81a7ace7002c2fa35 PDF Text Text VILLAGE OF SLEEPY HOLLOW ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MEETING -APPROVED February 26, 2007 The meeting was called to order by Robert Anello, Chairman at 8:04 pm. The Chair noted that a quorum was present. Present: Robert Anello, Chairman Gordon Swartz Eliot Martone Linda Moiron Diane Martello Timothy Judge Peter Koffler Absent : None Also Present: Sean McCarthy (Village Architect/Village of Sleepy Hollow) Anthony DelVecchio (Recording Secretary) Agenda: 1) Piscopiello 69 College Ave 2) Guzman 9 Francis Street 3) Nextel Elm Street 4) Approval of minutes from November 15, 2006 5) Other Addition Alteration & Addition Wireless Communication Facility Announcements: The Chair noted that the Yozzo application would not be on the agenda this evening. The Chair noted that there are two new Board members. He swore in Timothy Judge. The Chair noted Jim Galgano’s dedication and service to the Board and to the Village. There was a moment of silence. 1) Piscopiello (69 College Ave – Addition)– This is an application for area variances to construct a one story addition to the rear of an existing three-family residence where the proposal requires the following variances: Front yard set back Existing = 19.95 ft. Required = 20.0 ft. �Accessory building coverage Existing = 88% (1.108 s.f.) Maximum permitted = 30% (375 s.f.) Distance of accessory building to rear lot line Existing = 0.0 ft. Required = 3.0 ft. Distance of accessory building to side lot line Existing = 0.0 ft. Required = 3.0 ft. Lot Coverage Existing = 40.8% Maximum = 35% Lot Coverage Existing lot coverage = 2,554 sq. ft. (40.8%) Proposed lot coverage = 2,609 sq. ft. (41.7%) Maximum permitted coverage = 2,188 sq. ft. (35.0%) The public notice was read aloud. The Chair asked if the returns were received. Sean McCarthy responded yes. The Chair noted that the Board had received the following: 1) Application 2) Zoning compliance form 3) Letter to Sam Vieira denying the building permit. 4) Letter to ZBA addressing the needs for a variance. 5) Building plans dated 9-18-06 Sam Vieira is the project architect and is representing this application of behalf of the owners. Sam Vieira stated that the owners want to create a bathroom near the bedroom to assist the owner’s needs. The Chair asked if there are any rear neighbors. Sam Vieira responded that he is the rear neighbor and he has no objections to the proposed work. He stated that this proposal would have the least impact on the neighborhood. He stated that the lot coverage would have less than a 1% increase. The Chair asked if there was any other way to accomplish the proposed need. APPROVED - Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting, February 26, 2007 2 �Sam Vieira responded that adding the bathroom would take away from some of the living space. Gordon Swartz asked if there is another bathroom in the apartment. Sam Vieira responded that there is another bathroom on the lower level. He stated that the owners need a bathroom closer to the master bedroom. The Chair asked if the property currently has a parking variance. Sam Vieira responded yes. Sean McCarthy asked how the apartments are split up since it is a 3-family house. Sam Vieira responded that there is a rear basement tenant and another tenant on the first floor apartment. Sean McCarthy asked about the number of bedrooms. Sam Vieira responded that the owners have 2-bedrooms. The Chair opened the public hearing. Since there were no public comments, Eliot Martone made a motion to close the public hearing. Linda Moiron seconded. It was unanimous (7-0). The Chair stated that this application is the minimal variance that can be granted. He also stated that this would not be out-of-character with the neighborhood. Linda Moiron made a motion to approve the application as submitted. Gordon Swartz seconded. It was unanimous (7-0). 2) Guzman (9 Francis St. Alteration & Addition) This is an application for area variances to add to and alter an existing single-family residence where the following variances are required: Lot Area Existing lot area = 2,087sf Minimum lot area = 4000sf Lot Width Existing lot width = 25.0-ft Minimum lot width = 40=ft One Side Yard Existing one side yard = 0.6-ft Minimum one side yard = 5.0-ft APPROVED - Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting, February 26, 2007 3 �Combined yards Existing combined yards = 3.4-ft. Minimum combined yards = 15.0-ft Front Yard Existing front yard = 6.3 ft Minimum front yard = 20.0-ft Building Coverage Existing building coverage is 700 sq. ft. (33.5%) Maximum building coverage is 750 sq. ft. (35%) Proposed building coverage is 1,127 sq. ft. (54.0 %) Floor Area Regulations Existing floor area ratio = 1,043 sq. ft. (.50) Maximum permitted floor area ratio = 1,294 sq. ft. (.62) Proposed floor area ratio = 1,544 sq. ft. (.74) Supplementary Regulations. 1 parking space is required. No parking spaces exist. No parking spaces are proposed. The public notice was read aloud. The Chair noted that the Board had received the following: 1) Application 2) Zoning compliance form not fully filled out 3) Survey dated Oct 20, 1999 4) Building plans dated June 1, 2006 Taylor Guzman is the owner and is representing this application. The Chair asked if the returns were received. Sean McCarthy responded yes. Taylor Guzman stated that he wants to extend the bathroom on the second floor and extend the kitchen and dining room. He stated that he has 4 kids and needs the additional room. The Chair asked about the size of the addition. Taylor Guzman responded that the extension is 10-feet. The Chair noted some difficulties reading the zoning compliance form. APPROVED - Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting, February 26, 2007 4 �There was an open discussion on the required variances. It was agreed that the proposed deck counts towards the setback variance but not towards the lot coverage. The Chair asked the applicant why the variances are needed. Taylor Guzman responded that 6 people are using one bathroom. He stated that the additional bathroom is a necessity. The Chair asked about the need for the deck. Taylor Guzman responded that the deck would be a nice addition but it is not necessary. The Chair asked about the size of his house relative to the neighborhood. Taylor Guzman responded that his house is relatively small to other house in the neighborhood. Taylor Guzman stated that the addition is a 2-story addition. He stated that he wants to extend the kitchen and dining room on the first floor and add a bathroom and closets on the second floor. He stated that only one bedroom currently has a closet. The Chair asked about the size of the house. Taylor Guzman responded about 1000sf. Sean McCarthy responded that the proposed addition would make the house 1500sf. There was an open discussion on the existing layout of the house. The Chair opened the public hearing. Since there were no public comments, Eliot Martone made a motion to close the public hearing. Peter Koffler seconded. It was unanimous (7-0). Eliot Martone stated that the submitted plans are insufficient to properly demonstrate the proposed work. Peter Koffler stated that the applicant should return with reasons why the variance should be granted. The Chair stated that the applicant needs to address the reasons for granting the variance as described in the statute. Timothy Judge stated that the provided information is incomplete. Gordon Swartz stated that the applicant should provide photos of the current house to show the existing conditions. APPROVED - Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting, February 26, 2007 5 �Taylor Guzman requested an adjournment to the next meeting so that the additional information can be provided. The Board unanimously agreed that this application be adjourned to the next meeting. 3) Nextel (Elm Street – Wireless Comunication facility)– The public notice was read aloud. The Chair asked if the returns were received. Sean McCarthy responded yes. The Chair stated that the Board has received the following: 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) Application 1-22-2007 Zoning compliance form Resolution authorizing the mayor to enter into a lease Building plans Memorandum with attachments A letter dated 2-12-07 from local residents (totaling 95 signatures) opposing the tower. Cara Bonomolo is the attorney representing this application. Cara Bonomolo stated that this site is an alternative to the original location on top of Village Hall. She stated that the Planning Board suggested that the applicant follow the locations described in the Wireless GEIS. She stated that this facility would provide coverage is a needed area of coverage in the Village. The Chair asked if a balloon test had been performed. Cara Bonomolo responded that a balloon test had not been performed. The Chair asked if the Waterfront Advisory Committee had reviewed this application. Cara Bonomolo responded that the Waterfront Advisory Committee had found the application consistent with the LWRP. Peter Koffler asked if the additional 10-feet will provide service that the allowed 82-feet would not provide. Cara Bolomolo responded that the proposed facility is a flagpole. She stated that the antennas are stacked on top of each other. She stated that the additional height is needed to accommodate the flag. She showed a rendering of the flagpole at a height of 80-feet. The rendering was prepared by the Village in the GEIS. Peter Koffler stated that the applicant is using the public utility standards to request the variance. Cara Bonomolo responded that NY case law is consistent that cellular providers are treated as APPROVED - Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting, February 26, 2007 6 �public utilities and the zoning variances required should be weighed against the need of the community. Gordon Swartz stated that the flagpole would be seen from the lighthouse. He stated that this flagpole would be visible from many areas of the Village. Cara Bonomolo stated that the Village considered aesthetics in the preparation of the GEIS. The Chair stated that Barnhardt Park is already elevated about the waterfront. The Chair asked about other options besides a flagpole. Cara Bonomolo responded that there are no other structures available. Timothy Judge stated that the coverage map show coverage into Rockefeller State Park. He questioned the need to have coverage in the park. Cara Bonomolo provided a copy of a supplemental affidavit that was prepared to answer questions from the Planning Board. She referred to coverage maps of the area with differing tower elevations. She referred to exhibit E which showed the coverage for an 80-foot pole. She stated that lowering the height would reduce the ability of co-locating another carrier at this location. Eliot Martone asked if another carrier has approached Nextel about occupying this site. Cara Bonomolo responded no. Gordon Swartz asked about the previous locations studied. Cara Bonomolo responded that 95 Beekman Avenue was presented but the Planning Board directed the applicant to follow the guidelines in the GEIS. She stated that the ambulance building was also evaluated. She stated that Barnhardt Park was the preferred location of the Village. Gordon Swartz stated that there is a financial benefit to the Village by locating it on Village property. He stated that according to the documents, the location would bring in $30,000/yr to the Village. The Chair asked when a balloon test could be performed. Cara Bonomolo responded that a balloon test could be scheduled. The Chair questioned how the Waterfront Advisory Committee made a determination of being consistent with the LWRP without a balloon test. The Chair asked if the Village has an engineer to review the documents particularity the height. Cara Bonomolo responded that the Village RF consultant (Mike Musso from HDR-LMS) has reviewed the documents. The Chair responded that the Board would like access to the engineer in order to review the reports. APPROVED - Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting, February 26, 2007 7 �Timothy Judge asked about the reasons why Nextel needs to provide coverage in this area. Cara Bonomolo responded that the Nextel facility to the South has exceeded its capacity. She stated that as a result, the signal coverage in this area is not reliable. She stated that this proposed facility would provide additional capacity to that facility. The Chair opened the public hearing. Since there were no public comments, Eliot Martone made a motion to close the public hearing. Gordon Swartz seconded. It was unanimous (7-0). Eliot Martone asked if the residents have been properly noticed. Sean McCarthy that the Village places the public notice is put in the newspaper. He stated that 14 residents have been individually noticed. The Chair stated that the broadest notice possible should be used. He stated that the potential impacts to the Village could be great. Cara Bonomolo responded that the applicant is willing to perform the balloon test. She also stated that the petition submitted shows that the residents are aware of the application. Diane Martello stated that she lives near the proposed facility and she did not know about this application. Linda Moiron responded that she lives 1 ½ blocks away and she did not know about the application. Cara Bonomolo stated that Nextel should not be held to a different standard than other applicants that appear before this Board. She stated that the applicant would be willing to provide notice of 400-feet as required by the Planning Board. The Chair stated that past notices were insufficient. He stated that with all of the time being spent on the GM property, the Village residents might be very upset with the erection of this very visible structure. He stated that the applicant should provide a proposal as to how the public would be adequately noticed. Cara Bonomolo stated that the required variances are created based on the size of the property. She requested that the Planning Board should be informed that this test will be performed since the Planning Board will be issuing the special use permit. The Chair asked for the Village Attorney to address if this applicant should be treated as a public utility and be held under a different standard than a regular applicant. The Chair asked about the available notice provisions. Cara Bonomolo asked if the balloon test and public notices can be addressed through the Building Department or does the applicant need to return to the next meeting. APPROVED - Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting, February 26, 2007 8 �The Chair stated that if the applicant could accomplish scheduling the balloon test and provide a sufficient notice plan to the Village, then the test can proceed. He stated that the notice should state the date of the balloon test and the date of the Board’s next meeting. Cara Bonomolo responded that she will coordinate the date of the balloon test with Sean McCarthy. She stated that the balloon test would be held for 8-hours. She stated that photos would be taken from several different areas of the Village. The Board provided some guidance regarding the photos. The Board asked about the proposed height at St. Theresa’s church and 95 Beekman Ave. Cara Bonomolo responded that she would provide this information. Linda Moiron made a motion to adjourn this application to the next meeting. Eliot Martone seconded. It was unanimous (7-0). 4) Approval of minutes from November 15, 2006 The November 2006 minutes were reviewed. Eliot Martone made a motion to approve the minutes as amended. Linda Moiron seconded. It was unanimous (7-0). 5) Other Sean McCarthy provided an update on the parking on the Thai restaurant. He stated that the owner has corrected the outstanding issues. He stated that the property is now in compliance. Sean McCarthy provided an update on the Citgo station compliance. He stated that there were conditions that were not met. He stated that some of the work started and was not completed. He stated that the approvals have expired and the applicant needs to start all over again. The Chair stated that the food businesses are operating in violation of Village law. The Chair asked all of the members provide a phone number and e-mail address so that members can communicate. The Chair asked about the Samaras application. Sean McCarthy responded that the application has been withdrawn. APPROVED - Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting, February 26, 2007 9 �The Chair asked about the Castro application. Sean McCarthy responded that the traffic study should be completed soon. Linda Moiron asked about the 4-hour training requirement. Sean McCarthy responded that the Village is trying to arrange some training at Village Hall. Adjourned 10:02pm. APPROVED - Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting, February 26, 2007 10 � 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-2007 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_2007-02-26 Subject The topic of the resource Zoning Board Minutes & Resolutions-2007 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2007 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