Zoning Board of Appeals
Village of Tarrytown
Regular Meeting
January 14, 2008 8 p.m.
PRESENT: Chairwoman Lawrence; Members Jolly, Brown, Maloney; *Alternate
Member Merrill Verma (late)
ABSENT: Ms. James
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Mr. Maloney moved, seconded by Mr. Jolly, that the minutes of December 10, 2007, be approved as submitted. Messrs. Jolly, Maloney and Ms. Brown assented. Ms. Lawrence abstained. Motion carried.
PUBLIC HEARING – STRAUCH – 99 DEERTRACK LANE
The Secretary read the following Notice of Public Hearing:
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Village of Tarrytown will hold a public hearing at 8:00 p.m. on Monday, January 14, 2008, in the Municipal Building, 21 Wildey Street, Tarrytown, New York to hear and consider an application by
Andrew A. and Gizella Strauch
99 Deertrack Lane
Irvington, New York 10533
for their property in Tarrytown located at the above address to allow for removal of existing one-car garage at lower level and deck at upper level and new garage and deck to be built requiring the following variances from the Tarrytown Zoning Code:
1. Increase in the degree of existing non-conformities: (§305-18A(1))
A. Minimum lot width required is 100 ft. and 57 ft. exists
B. Minimum street frontage is required to be 100 ft. and 89 ft. exists
C. Minimum single side yard required is 12 ft. and 11.7 ft. exists
D. Minimum two side yards required is 26 ft. and 22.4 ft. exists
E. Maximum gross floor area (F.A.R.) permitted is .35 and .376 exists
2. Minimum single side yard required is 12 ft. and 6.42 ft. is proposed (§305-9)
3. Minimum two side yards required is 26 ft. and 18.92 ft. is proposed (§305-9)
4. Maximum gross floor area (F.A.R.) permitted is .35 and .385 is proposed.
(§305-9)
Documents are available for inspection in the Planning and Zoning Office at Tarrytown Village Hall. The property is shown on the Tax Maps of the Village of Tarrytown as Sheet 29B, Block 127, Lot 37 and is located in an R-10 (Single-Family) zone.
All interested parties are invited to attend and be heard. Access to the meeting room is available to the elderly and the handicapped. Signing is available for the hearing impaired; request must be made to the Village Clerk at least one week in advance of the meeting.
The certified mailing receipts were submitted.
Board members visited the property.
Mr. Manuel Quezada, architect, stated they are proposing an addition to an existing one-car carport and removal of the upper level deck. The existing carport is too narrow and too low. They are proposing to add 5 ft. 6 in. to what is there now. The architecture will match the house. A new deck will also be built.
Upon inquiries, Mrs. Strauch stated they have lived in the house for fifteen years. The existing carport is too small to use and they have a rodent problem, which is why they want a usable enclosed garage.
Mr. Quezada stated the deck in the back is being squared off and the existing sliding glass doors will remain.
*Ms. Merrill Verma arrived.
Upon inquiry from Ms. Brown, Mr. Quezada stated he did not believe any trees would need to be removed. If it is felt during construction that the rhododendron would be in danger, it will be transplanted on the property.
Mr. Steve Kasoff, 105 Deertrack Lane, next door neighbor, stated he could not visualize how close to his lot line this addition would be. Chairwoman Lawrence stated she would like to see the proposed addition staked out since she also was having difficulty visualizing it. Board members agreed stating another site visit should be scheduled for next month after the proposed addition is staked out.
All agreed to continue the public hearing at their next meeting.
PUBLIC HEARING – BECKER/SWIBOLD – 29 INDEPENDENCE STREET
The Secretary read the following Notice of Public Hearing:
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Village of Tarrytown will hold a public hearing at 8:00 p.m. on Monday, January 14, 2008, in the Municipal Building, 21 Wildey Street, Tarrytown, New York to hear and consider an application by
Jordan Becker and Katharine Swibold
29 Independence Street
Tarrytown, New York 10591
for their property located at the above address to allow for first and second floor additions and alterations to the existing residence requiring the following variances from the Tarrytown Zoning Code:
1. Increase in the degree of existing non-conformities: (§305-18A(1))
A. Minimum lot size is required to be 7,500 sq. ft. and 5,550 sq. ft. exists
B. Minimum lot width required is 75 ft. and 50 ft. exists
C. Minimum street frontage is required to be 100 ft. and 89 ft. exists
D. Minimum single side yard required is 10 ft. and 5 ft. and 7.1 ft. exist
E. Minimum two side yards required is 22 ft. and 12.1 ft. exists
F. Minimum distance from accessory building to side lot line is required to be
10 ft. and 2 ft. exists
G. Minimum distance from accessory building to rear lot line is required to be 10 ft. and 2 ft. exists.
2. Principal building coverage permitted is 24% and 26.9% is proposed. (§305-9)
3. Total coverage for all buildings permitted is 30% and 30.14% is proposed.
(§305-9)
4. Total gross floor area (F.A.R.) permitted is 2,150 sf and 2,153.5 sf is proposed.
(§305-9)
5. Impervious surface permitted is 40.75% and 43.7% is proposed. (§305-9)
Documents are available for inspection in the Planning and Zoning Office at Tarrytown Village Hall. The property is shown on the Tax Maps of the Village of Tarrytown as Sheet 16A, Block 90, Lot 1 and is located in an R-7.5 (Single-Family) zone.
All interested parties are invited to attend and be heard. Access to the meeting room is available to the elderly and the handicapped. Signing is available for the hearing impaired; request must be made to the Village Clerk at least one week in advance of the meeting.
The certified mailing receipts were submitted.
Board members visited the property.
Mr. Richard Swibold, architect, stated the lot and the house are tiny. They tried to propose an addition within the existing footprint. The entranceway is being extended 6 inches on each side. They are extending the 12 ft. deck to 16 ft. and making that a screened-in porch. Some walls are being moved out and the kitchen will have an island where the dining room was and there will be French doors leading to the screened-in porch. There will be a powder room off the back, which is convenient to the porch. On the second floor they moved the bathroom and extended it to 8 ft. x 10 ft. Closet space has been added in the bedrooms. A study has been added which will also increase storage space. On the new south elevation a new sheltered entranceway has been added.
Mr. Swibold stated the addition will not impact neighbors’ views and the new variances being requested are small. The addition will improve the quality of life for the owners. Mr. Swibold stated the house needs tender loving care and his daughter and son-in-law are proposing to do that.
Ms. Swibold submitted the following letter from Frederic and Marie Louise Welsh, 25 Independence Street:
“Upon reviewing the plans for Swibold/Becker home renovation with Katharine Swibold, we have no objections to the planned work. We support them in their request for the building permits to be authorized by the Tarrytown Planning Board.”
Upon Board inquiry, Mr. McGarvey stated if some of the impervious surface currently on the property were replaced with porous material, the variance for impervious surface would not be necessary. The applicants stated they would be willing to do that.
Chairwoman Lawrence questioned whether anyone wished to address the Board on this matter.
Mrs. Brenda Fracaroli, 24 Independence Street, submitted the following letter dated January 14, 2008, on behalf of she and her husband:
“I am asking the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Village of Tarrytown to deny the appropriate variances applied for on the property at 29 Independence Street because of the following reasons:
1. The proposed addition onto the front of the house impairs westbound driver visibility of traffic coming around the curve at the bottom of the street where Independence and Miller Avenue intersect. (This street is graded downhill toward the train.) This is a very dangerous corner for driving and the addition onto the front of the house will compromise the safety and welfare of the community.
2. Both the proposed extended additions to the front and rear of the house obstruct Hudson River views of all properties east of 29 Independence Street.
3. The character of the street needs to be preserved. No other house on Independence Street has an addition to the front of the house. The property frontage needs to be preserved. Also, this house is already out of code for the front property setbacks. I do not want any building closer to my house. I want to maintain the front yards. The second floor addition protruding out the front is architecturally out of character with our neighborhood and to me presents an eyesore that I will have to view everyday as I look out my window. Also, any noise generated from this part of their house impacts my property since it is proposed to be closer.
4. The house at 29 Independence Street is already too large for the lot and not adding on is not presenting any hardship to the owners.
Once again, I am asking the Zoning Board to deny any variances based on the reasons I have detailed above.”
Upon Board inquiry, Mrs. Fracaroli stated she lives diagonally across the street from this house.
Mrs. Fracaroli stated she really objects to the addition coming off the front. The west view is very elongated. There is a study currently on the first floor of this house so there is no need to add one on the second floor. “I don’t know why the whole addition can’t be off the back. People in the neighborhood will lose their river views with the way the addition is proposed.”
Mr. Jordan Becker stated the Fracarolis’ views will not be affected by this addition. Maybe a house up the street will be slightly affected but the people who live right next door have indicated they don’t have a problem with it. No one else on their side of the street has come in. The addition will also not have any affect on the sight lines turning from Independence to Miller.
Upon Board inquiry, Mr. Becker stated there is a vacant lot between their house and Miller Avenue.
Mr. Becker stated they are not requesting a variance for the front yard setback. The proposed addition will eliminate what is now an eyesore. The house will have cedar siding. “I don’t think we are doing anything to affect the Fracarolis’ property except to improve the house.”
Mr. Roger Smith, 16 Park Avenue, stated he is concerned with variances being granted on Independence Street and Park Avenue. “I think the Board should do more due diligence before approving changes in these neighborhoods.”
Mr. Swibold stated the reason they are before the Board is because the deck is becoming a screened-in porch, which means it now must be included in impervious surface and F.A.R. calculations.
No one further appeared to speak on this application.
Upon inquiry from Board members about the existing street frontage which was listed in the public notice as required to be 100 ft. and 89 ft. exists, Mr. McGarvey stated 75 ft. is actually required and 50 ft. exists.
Ms. Brown stated the F.A.R. variance being requested is very small. She felt inclined to grant the application with the elimination of the variance for impervious surface because the applicants could replace some impervious surface with pervious material.
The Board reported receipt of the following memo, dated January 14, 2008, from Kathleen D’Eufemia, Designated Environmental Review Officer:
“Swibold/Becker – 29 Independence Street – I have reviewed this application for new roof, siding, front portico and screened porch in rear of property with bathroom above and determined the proposals appear to pose no significant adverse environmental impact. Should the Board agree, you may make a negative declaration under SEQRA.”
Mr. Jolly moved, seconded by Mr. Maloney, and unanimously carried, that the Board determines there will be no significant adverse environmental impact from the proposed project.
Ms. Brown moved, seconded by Mr. Maloney, and unanimously carried, that the hearing be closed and the Board having arrived by the findings required by the ordinance:
1.That the benefit to the applicant outweighs any detriment to the health, safety, and welfare of the neighborhood
2.That the proposed variance will not create an undesirable change to the neighborhood or detriment to the neighborhood
3.That the benefit the applicant seeks to achieve cannot be achieved by any other feasible method
4.That the variance is not substantial in the Board’s judgment
5.That the variance would not have an adverse environmental impact on the
neighborhood
6. That the variance is the minimum one deemed necessary and will preserve and
protect the character of the neighborhood and the health, safety and
welfare of the community
grants the following variances for the property at 29 Independence Street:
1.Increase in the degree of existing non-conformities: (§305-18A(1))
A. Minimum lot size is required to be 7,500 sq. ft. and 5,550 sq. ft. exists
B. Minimum lot width required is 75 ft. and 50 ft. exists
C. Minimum street frontage is required to be 75 ft. and 50 ft. exists
D. Minimum single side yard required is 10 ft. and 5 ft. and 7.1 ft. exist
E. Minimum two side yards required is 22 ft. and 12.1 ft. exists
F. Minimum distance from accessory building to side lot line is required to be
10 ft. and 2 ft. exists
G. Minimum distance from accessory building to rear lot line is required to
Be 10 ft. and 2 ft. exists
2. Principal building coverage permitted is 24% and 26.9% is proposed. (§305-9)
3.Total coverage for all buildings permitted is 30% and 30.14% is proposed.
(§305-9)
4.Total gross floor area (F.A.R.) permitted is 2,150 sf and 2,153.5 sf is proposed.
(§305-9)
subject to:
1. Approval of plans by the Building Inspector
2. Approval of plans by the Architectural Review Board
3. Obtaining a building permit for the project within two years.
MEETING ADJOURNED 9 p.m.
Kathleen D’Eufemia
Secretary
| 
