https://sleepyhollow.localarchives.org/files/original/480601875c3505af25eb2a9915b882c9.pdf 6592139deac34236fed9f93e610c07dc PDF Text Text Village of Sleepy Hollow Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting October 18, 2023 Chairman Timothy Church called the meeting to order at 7:03 pm. Present: Timothy Church, Chairman Craig Lis Sandra Tripp Gorete Crowe Thomas Chang Also Present: Sean McCarthy, Village Architect Pamela Kroll, Secretary to the Zoning Board Absent: Margaret Rubick Carol Lyden Agenda: 1) Heidi Peguero, 88 Depeyster Street, Proposed one-story rear deck addition Public hearing 2) Approval of minutes, September 20, 2023 1. Heidi Peguero, 88 Depeyster Street, Proposed one-story rear deck addition- Public hearing Chairman Church read the public notice, listed the documents submitted with the application, and asked Sean McCarthy to confirm that the Building Department received the mailing receipts. Sean McCarthy stated that the Building Department received proof of the mailing. Chairman Church invited the applicant to present the application. Jorge Hernandez stated that he is the architect representing the applicant. Mr. Hernandez stated that the property is in the C-2 Zoning district and is an undersized lot. Mr. Hernandez stated that the applicant proposes to improve the driveway, build a retaining wall, and construct a deck in the rear yard. Mr. Hernandez stated that the applicant originally had a verbal agreement with the neighbor for a deck constructed over the property line. The applicant removed that deck and now seeks to construct a new one. Mr. Hernandez stated that the current rear yard setback is 6.10 feet from the property line. The application proposes constructing a deck that is 6 feet wide along the property line with a storage area underneath. Chairman Church asked Mr. Hernandez if the original deck received a variance for legalization. 1 (ZBA 10/18/2023) �Mr. Hernandez stated that a deck extended into the neighbor’s property and was removed. He is not aware of any variances or permits previously granted. Sean McCarthy stated that the deck structure was not legal and would have required a variance. Chairman Church asked Mr. Hernandez if he replied to the September 27, 2023, review letter from the Building Department. Mr. Hernandez stated that he did not submit responses to the Building Department letter. Mr. Hernandez stated that he is researching the use of 1-hour fire-rated intumescent paint for wood. Chairman Church asked Mr. Hernandez to provide details for the proposed retaining walls and fencing. Mr. Hernandez stated that the application proposes to construct a garden retaining wall. Mr. McCarthy stated that a variance is not required if the walls and fence are proposed in compliance with the maximum height requirements. Chairman Church asked Mr. Hernandez for the height of the proposed deck from the ground up, if the proposed deck would be enclosed or have a canopy, and if exterior stairs are proposed. Craig Lis asked Mr. Hernandez if the deck is accessible from the interior first floor and asked for the proposed deck dimensions. Mr. Hernandez stated the application proposes to construct a deck that is 6 feet wide by 22 feet and 6 inches long, and 4 feet off the ground along the property line with a retaining wall and storage area underneath. There will be a door from the first floor to access the deck, and there are stairs proposed along the side yard for exterior access. Sean McCarthy asked Mr. Hernandez to describe where the walls are proposed. Mr. Hernandez stated that the application is proposing a wall along the property line in the side yard, and they are proposing to rebuild the existing rock wall underneath the deck where the storage area is located. Chairman Church asked Mr. Hernandez if the deck would be visible from the street. Mr. Hernandez stated that 7 feet of the proposed deck and the stairs would be visible from the street. Sandra Tripp questioned why the plans say they propose replacing an existing deck. Mr. Hernandez stated that he is unsure if there was a permit issued, but the door leading to the rear yard suggests that there was a deck there previously. 2 (ZBA 10/18/2023) �Mr. McCarthy stated that the applicant received a Notice of Violation and a summons for constructing the deck structure, including the existing wall and a separate room. The applicants demolished the structures but neglected to remove the wall. The wall in the rear yard was part of the non-conforming work proposed in the application. Craig Lis asked if a fence separates the proposed 3-inch rear yard setback and the proposed deck structure. Mr. Hernandez stated that there is no fence between the applicants and the neighboring property at the proposed deck location. Mr. Hernandez stated that if they receive approval for a Building Permit, the applicant would be required to get an updated survey to show the footings are 3 inches from the property line. Chairman Church moved to open the public hearing. Moved: Church Seconded: Lis Vote 5-0 Chairman Church solicited comments from the public. There were no comments from the public. Chairman Church moved to close the public hearing. Moved: Church Seconded: Lis Vote 5-0 Chairman Church proposed granting the requested variance based on the following criteria: 1. The requested variances for the lot area, front and rear yard setbacks, and the existing building coverage are existing non-conforming lot conditions, and the proposed application will not increase the building coverage. The proposed deck will improve the character of the neighborhood and not cause a detriment to nearby properties. 2. The proposed deck size is appropriate for a compressed rear yard, and there is no other feasible method to build a rear yard deck. 3. The requested area variance for the rear yard setback is not substantial, as only the stairs and a small portion of the deck will be visible from the street. 4. Granting the area variances will not cause an impact on the physical or environmental conditions of the neighborhood, as the Building Department will ensure that stormwater is managed as required by the Code. 5. Although the requested variances are self-created, it is not the only factor the Board considers when granting a variance 3 (ZBA 10/18/2023) �Sandra Tripp asked Mr. Hernandez if the storage area below the deck would be open to views from the rear yard below the posts. Mr. Hernandez stated that they would agree to a condition to add lattice in the open areas below the deck. Chairman Church moved to approve the application with the condition to install aesthetic lattice material below the deck to conceal the storage area. Moved: Church Seconded: Chang Timothy Church, Chairman - yes Sandra Tripp - yes Craig Lis - yes Gorete Crowe - yes Thomas Chang - yes Vote 5-0 APPROVED 2. Approval of minutes, September 20, 2023 The Board tabled the September 20, 2023 minutes to the November 15, 2023 meeting. Chairman Church moved to adjourn the meeting at 7:25 p.m. Moved: Church Seconded: Lis Vote 5-0 Respectfully Submitted, Pamela Kroll Secretary to the Zoning Board of Appeals 4 (ZBA 10/18/2023) � 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-2023 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_2023-10-18_Approved ZBA Minutes Subject The topic of the resource Zoning Board Minutes & Resolutions-2023 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2023 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