Zoning Board of Appeals
Regular Meeting
February 2, 2010
8:00 p.m.
The Regular Meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Village of Briarcliff Manor, New York was held in the Village of Briarcliff Manor Village Hall, at 1111 Pleasantville Road, Briarcliff Manor, New York on the 2nd of February 2010 commencing at 8:00 p.m.
Present
Ronald Alenstein, Chairman
Nicholas Moraglia, Member
John O’ Leary, Member
Also Present
David Turiano, Village Engineer
Christine Dennett, Village Clerk
Absent
Christopher Bogart, Member
Hillary Messer, Member
V-1-2010 – Patrick & Karen Mauro – 49 Tuttle Road
A variance was requested, because a building permit to construct an addition to the first and second floors of an existing single family dwelling was denied due to nonconformity with Column 9, One Side Yard Dimension of Schedule 220:A5 and Column 10, Two Side Yards Combined Dimensions of Schedule 220:A5 of the Code of the Village of Briarcliff Manor.
The following items were marked as Board Exhibits:
- Code Compliance Worksheet dated January 7, 2010
- Application for a variance to the Zoning Board of Appeals by Pat Mauro
- Code of Ethics dated January 7, 2010 signed by Donato Pennella
- Affidavit of Publication dated January 14, 2010
- Survey of Property dated November 11, 2009
- Letter from Village Clerk to Patrick and Karen Mauro dated January 8, 2010
- Building Department letter of denial to Patrick and Karen Mauro dated January 5, 2010
- Architectural Plans from Donato Pennella, P.E. dated December 30, 2009
- 13 Certified Mailing Receipts
Discussion:
Mr. Donato Pennella explained the request for the variance on behalf of the Applicant. He stated they were looking for a variance for two side yard setbacks, one for a 1.8 feet and the other for 10.3 feet.
Chairman Alenstein asked what the actual requirement was.
Village Engineer Turiano stated it was his mistake and should have stated 50 feet.
Chairman Alenstein stated there was discrepancy with the address. He stated the application stated 45 and wanted assurance the address was 49 Tuttle Road.
Mr. Pennella stated the application was incorrect and the proper address was 49 Tuttle Road. He further stated they wanted to remove the roof of the existing garage, extend the side of the house, add a story, enclose the deck in the back and put in a master bedroom and bathroom. He stated they looked at other alternatives but the cost would be significantly higher (about 30%). He further stated the changes would not alter the views aesthetically and would be in line with the existing roof.
Chairman Alenstein stated the roof looked pitched and behind the existing.
Mr. Pennella stated it was essentially another roof because the garage did not run straight back.
Member Moraglia stated it appeared to have two ridge lines.
Mr. Pennella stated the same ridge line was carried across. He showed the new portion over the garage on the drawing to the Board.
Mr. Alenstein asked if the porch would remain.
Mr. Pennella stated it was the same wall line and would extend up in the rear and on the side and the roof shape would remain the same.
Member O’Leary asked what the height would be.
Mr. Pennella stated it would be three feet higher than the existing.
Member Moraglia asked if there were any proposed changes to the driveway or if the shrubs would be disturbed.
Mr. Pennella stated the driveway would remain the same and they would stay in the existing footprint to eliminate any excavation.
Member Moraglia asked if any machinery would be used to dig the foundation.
Mr. Pennella stated it could be dug by hand or by using small machinery.
Chairman Alenstein stated there was a row of trees close to the house and asked if the root system would be affected by the work.
Mr. Pennella stated they had nearly 20 feet of space to work with but would tie back the trees to prevent damage.
Member O’Leary asked when the applicant planned to do the work.
Mr. Mauro stated they planned to finish the work before they moved in May.
Public Comments:
There were no public comments.
Upon motion by Member O’Leary, seconded by Member Moraglia, the Board voted unanimously to close the public hearing.
Decision:
Member O’Leary stated assuming there was no opposition from the neighbors he didn’t have a problem with the application. He stated it was well below the Gross Floor Area, was a preexisting condition and the setbacks were already noncompliant. He further stated he didn’t think the neighbors would be impacted in any detrimental way and there was fairly substantial screening where the addition was proposed. He stated he would support the application and welcoming the Mauro’s to the Village.
Member Moraglia stated it was not a self created variance and had no adverse affects in terms of aesthetics. He stated it would be in line with the neighbors and he would be in favor.
Chairman Alenstein stated the one side yard setback wasn’t terribly substantial and the benefits would outweigh any detriment. He further stated he didn’t see any detriment to the neighborhood and it made sense to expand the home. He stated the proposed addition was the least intrusive and he would also be in favor of granting the variance.
Upon motion by Member Moraglia, seconded by Member O’Leary, the Board voted unanimously to grant the variance as requested.
Minutes
The minutes were tabled to the next meeting.
ADJOURNMENT
Upon motion by Member O’Leary, seconded by Member Moraglia, the Board voted unanimously to adjourn the meeting at 8:20 p.m.
Respectfully submitted by,
Christine Dennett
| 