https://sleepyhollow.localarchives.org/files/original/101eb9754e5090bf569ff101988b03aa.pdf 8c54dada6c268e19a1ceb36e0f783de7 PDF Text Text VILLAGE OF SLEEPY HOLLOW ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MEETING -APPROVED March 21, 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 Diane Martello Linda Moiron Timothy Judge Absent : Eliot Martone Peter Koffler Also Present: Sean McCarthy (Village Architect/Village of Sleepy Hollow) Anthony DelVecchio (Recording Secretary) Agenda: 1) Approval of minutes from the February 2007 meeting 2) Nextel Elm Street 3) Taylor Guzman 9 Francis Street 4) Gian Zoppo 278 Harwood Avenue 5) Joan Waters & Pasquale Cusanelli 203 Webber Avenue 6) Sujata Vidyasagar 26 Merlin Avenue Wireless Comms Facility Alteration & Addition Alteration & addition Alteration & addition Enclose patio Announcements: None. 1) Minutes from the February 2007 meeting The minutes from the February 2007 meeting were reviewed. Linda Moiron made a motion to approve the minutes as submitted. Gordon Swartz seconded. It was unanimous (5-0). 2) Nextel (Elm Street - Wireless Comms Facility )The Chair stated that the Nextel application has been adjourned to the next meeting. He asked what Nextel was doing regarding the balloon test. Sean McCarthy responded that the applicant has noticed many of the immediate property notices as well as both Manor Associations, Village Hall and the library. The Board unanimously agreed that this application would be adjourned to the next meeting. �3) Guzman (9 Francis St. Alteration & Addition) This is a continuation from the last meeting. John Hughes is representing this application along with project architect, Robert Barstow. The Chair stated that the Board had received revised plans (drawings A1, A2, A3) dated March 5, 2007. He summarized the events from the last meeting. John Hughes stated that the lot is non-conforming. He stated that variances for building coverage and FAR are the only variances that are being increased. He stated that the other two required variances are beyond the applicants control since the lot is an existing non-conforming lot. He stated that there should be no harm to the community based on a 10-foot addition to the existing structure. He stated that the requested variances are also not significant. The Chair asked the applicant to describe the changes to the plans. Robert Barstow stated that the as-built floor plans are shown on drawing A-3. He spoke about the existing layout of the proposed structure. He stated that drawing A-2 shows the first floor extension to the rear with the revised deck. He stated that the revised deck will eliminate the need for the rear yard variance. He stated that drawing A-1 shows the revisions to the second floor. He stated that number of bedrooms is not increasing but a bathroom is being added on the second floor. Sean McCarthy stated that the second floor addition is a 13-foot increase as compared to the 10foot increase on the first floor. The Chair asked if the submitted zoning table is correct. Sean McCarthy responded that the lot coverage is shown as 44% and the Village has calculated it to be 54%. The Chair asked if the existing lot coverage is correct. Sean McCarthy responded that the existing lot coverage is correct at 33%. There was an open discussion on the accuracy of the proposed lot coverage. The Chair opened the public hearing. Since there were no public comments, Gordon Swartz made a motion to close the public hearing. Linda Moiron seconded. It was unanimous (5-0). The Chair asked if the Board had any questions. Gordon Swartz stated that the houses in this neighborhood are very close together. Robert Barstow submitted photos to the Board of other houses in the neighborhood. APPROVED - Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting, March 21, 2007 2 �The Chair stated that the proposed changes would not be out of character with the neighborhood. Sean McCarthy stated that the proposed lot coverage should be 46%. Gordon Swartz asked if the houses in the area are one-family. John Hughes responded that the houses in the area are one and two-family homes. Gordon Swartz stated that the applicant is not providing the required parking. He stated that increasing the dwelling size would increase the parking impacts in the area. The Chair stated that the new variances sought are the minimum variances sought that would make the structure a proper living area. He stated that the proposed changes would not adversely impact the neighborhood. Timothy Judge made a motion to approve the application as submitted. Diane Martello seconded. It was unanimous (5-0). 3) Gian Zoppo (278 Harwood Avenue - Alteration & addition)This is a request for an area variance to add to and alter an existing one-family residence where the proposal requires the following variances: Lot Width Existing lot width = 73.0 ft. Required lot width = 75.0 ft. Combined Side Yards Existing combined side yards = 23.9 ft. Minimum combined side yards = 25.0 ft. Proposed combined yard set back = 14.0 ft. Building Coverage Existing building coverage = 1,334 sq. ft. (12%) Maximum permitted coverage = 2,190 sq. ft. (20%) Proposed building coverage = 2,594 sq. ft. (24%) One Side Yard Existing one yard set back = 10.6 ft. Minimum required one yard set back = 10.0 ft. Proposed one yard set back = 4.0 ft. The Chair asked if the returns were received. Sean McCarthy responded yes. APPROVED - Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting, March 21, 2007 3 �The public notice was read aloud. Lorie Dexten is an attorney representing this application along with project architect, Joanne Tall and owner Gian Zoppo. Lorie Dexten stated that the plans have been revised to request fewer variances. She stated that the lot coverage variance has been reduced from 24% to 22% where 20% is required. She stated that the side yard variances are still required. She stated that the garage would be converted into a heated living space. She stated that the parking would be moved forward and provided under the existing driveway. She stated that the house is a pre-existing non-conforming structure as it relates to the lot width. The Chair asked how much of the proposal would need to be removed to make the property conforming. Lorie Dexten responded that the proposed lot coverage exceeds the zoning code by 238sf which is the equivalent of a 15’x15’ room. The Chair asked why the applicant needs a variance. Lorie Dexten responded that the existing rooms in the house are small. She stated that walls would be removed to combine living space. She stated that they are also adding a home office. Gian Zoppo stated that the main need is to reconfigure the current steepness of the driveway. He stated that this plan would create a more level driveway. He stated that the need is for a safer environment. The Chair asked why the proposed dwelling structure of 2,408sf is needed when only 2,100sf is allowed under the zoning code. Lorie Dexten responded that the neighbors have expressed concerns with the proposed bulk of the structure if the applicant was increasing the height of the existing house. She stated that the extension outward would address the neighbors concerns of increasing the bulk of the house. Joanne Tall stated that the new space is 892sf. She stated that the existing structure is 1088sf. She stated that the garage will be utilized to add the required additional space that the owners needed as well as correcting the driveway safety issues. The Chair stated that the Board has received the following: 1) Application dated March 8, 2007 2) Photos 3) Letter from Lorie Dexten 4) Building plans dated March 8, 2007 The Chair asked if the Board has any questions. There were none. The Chair opened the public hearing. APPROVED - Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting, March 21, 2007 4 �Chris Cummings (537 Bellwood Ave) stated that he was concerned with the new construction and the proposed sightline of the neighborhood. The Chair asked Chris Cummings to clarify the effected sightline since there is no front yard setback variance sought. Chris Cummings referred to his past application that focused around neighboring sightlines. The Chair asked about the existing front yard setbacks. Lorie Dexten responded that the existing structure is 60-feet from the rear yards and the garage is 51-feet from the front yard. She also stated that the proposed addition would still be in compliance with the front yard setback requirements. Karen Wompa (539 Riverside Drive) asked about the side yard setback. Lorie Dexten stated that the plans have been revised to reduce the setback. Karen Wompa stated that the applicant has a responsibility to stay within the required variances unless a special need exists. John Bogus (266 Harwood Ave) stated that he is concerned with his privacy. He asked if any engineering studies have been performed in the area of the proposed driveway. He stated that another neighbor is performing construction work on their property and as a result of the soil conditions, his garage is cracking. The Chair asked if any soil reports on the property have been done. Lorie Dexten responded no. Tim Murphy (131 Farrington Avenue) asked for clarification on the requested variances. Lorie Dexten described the proposed variances. Eric Blaha (representing John and Mary Ellen Joy – 533 Riverside Drive) stated that this application impacts the neighbors. He stated that the new construction on the east side will extend the impact to the side neighbor. He stated that the additional space could be placed on the rear of the property. He stated that there are reasonable alternatives to satisfy the applicant’s needs. He stated that the additional car should be placed inside of the garage. Gian Zoppo responded that the tandem parking set-up is difficult. Eric Blaha responded that the applicant bought the house in this condition. He stated that tandem parking exists in many homes in the neighborhood. He also stated that the applicant should provide additional information on the topography of the site to address why the sloped property needs to be changed. He stated that the living space would be doubled and that the applicant has not shown any reason why this variance is needed. He stated that the impacts to the neighborhood are great. Lastly, he stated that the revised application is substantially different than from what was noticed. The Chair stated that the public notice includes the side yard. There was an open discussion on the accuracy of the public notice. APPROVED - Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting, March 21, 2007 5 �It was determined that the public notice was issued in January but the applicant was not required to re-notice since the requested variances were less than what was originally proposed. Since there was no further public comment, Linda Moiron made a motion to close the public hearing. Gordon Swartz seconded. It was unanimous (5-0). The Chair stated that additional information needs to be provided on the site topography. He stated that more information should also be provided to address why the applicant will not build upwards. He stated that there are concerns that the applicant might have excavation issues with the driveway. He stated that the applicant should present some feasible alternatives to address some of the public’s concerns. Lorie Dexten responded that the applicant has evaluated numerous alternatives. Timothy Judge stated that the site topography should be provided. There was an open discussion on how the drawings were prepared without the topographical information. The applicant stated that the proposed garage was estimated based on existing site conditions. Gian Zoppo stated that the cost issues raised were resulted from the combination of adding an additional story and locating the proposed driveway that made the project cost prohibitive. Lorie Dexten stated that the application was not re-noticed since the variances were not larger than what was originally proposed. She stated that the requested information will be provided. The Chair stated that the applicant should investigate building upward to eliminate the lot coverage variance. The Board unanimously agreed to adjourn this to the next meeting. This was adjourned to the next meeting. 4) Joan Waters and Pasquale Cusanelli (203 Webber Avenue -Alteration & addition) This is a request for area variances to add to and alter an existing single-family residence where the following variances are required: One Side Yard Existing one side yard = 3.7 ft. Minimum side yard = 5.0 ft. Combined Side Yards Existing combined yards = 11.5 ft. Minimum side yard = 15.0 ft APPROVED - Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting, March 21, 2007 6 �The public notice was read aloud. The Chair asked if the returns were received. Sean McCarthy responded yes. Dorota Szwem is the project architect and is representing this application. The Chair stated that the Board had received the following: 1) application 2) zoning information sheet 3) plans dated January 23, 2007 Dorota Szwem stated that the structure is an existing non-conforming structure. She stated that building away from the existing variances would make the structure look awkward. She stated that the new sun room would be built inward and away from the side yard. Gordon Swartz asked about the neighboring structures. Dorota Szwem responded that the second story addition would put the new height above the neighboring structure. She stated that the proposed windows are placed to maintain privacy between the neighbors. She stated that efforts have been made to minimize the bulk. The Chair stated that the applicant would require a variance no matter how the addition was proposed. Sean McCarthy stated that the new sunroom still needs a variance since it would not comply with the side yard setback. Dorota Szwem described the location of the sun room. The Chair opened the public hearing. Margaret Fox (213 Webber Avenue) stated that she does not have any problems with the proposed application. David Starkey (199 Webber Avenue) stated that he does not have any problems with the proposed application. Since there were no further public comments, Gordon Swartz made a motion to close the public hearing. Linda Moiron seconded. It was unanimous (5-0). The Chair stated that the proposed changes are not out of character with the neighborhood. He stated that there is not a self-created hardship and that this is the minimum variance that can be approved that can achieve the owner’s needs. Linda Moiron made a motion to approve the application as submitted. Gordon Swartz seconded. It was unanimous (5-0). APPROVED - Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting, March 21, 2007 7 �5) Sujata Vidyasagar (26 Merlin Avenue - Enclose patio)This is a request for an area variance to enclose a flagstone patio on a single-family residence where the following variances are required: Front Yard Setback Existing front yard set back = 23.0 ft. Minimum front yard setback = 30.0 ft. Accessory Building Coverage Existing accessory building coverage = 36% Maximum accessory building coverage = 30% The public notice was read aloud. The Chair asked if the returns were received. Sean McCarthy responded yes. The Chair stated that the Board had received the following: 1) Application dated January 25, 2007 2) Short EAF 3) Survey dated May 10, 2004 Sujata Vidyasagar is the owner and is representing this application. Sean McCarthy stated that the existing principle building currently exceeds the front yard setback requirement. He also stated that the garage and existing tool shed bring the accessory structure over the allowed accessory structure. Sujata Vidyasagar stated that the front porch will be enclosed and converted into a sun room. Timothy Judge stated that the porch would not be extended but merely enclosed. Sujata Vidyasagar responded yes. The Chair stated that the applicant’s neighbor was granted a variance for an accessory coverage when they installed a pool. Timothy Judge asked the applicant if she spoke to her neighbors about the proposed work. Sujata Vidyasagar responded yes. The Chair asked if the Board had any questions. There were none. The Chair opened the public hearing. APPROVED - Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting, March 21, 2007 8 �Since there were no public comments, Gordon Swartz made a motion to close the public hearing. Linda Moiron seconded. It was unanimous (5-0). The Chair stated that the proposed changes are not out of character with the neighborhood. He stated that there is not a self-created hardship and that this is the minimum variance that can be approved that would meet the needs of the applicant. Timothy Judge made a motion to approve the application as submitted. Linda Moiron seconded. It was unanimous (5-0). Adjourned 10:20pm. APPROVED - Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting, March 21, 2007 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 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_2007-03-21 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