Zoning Board of Appeals
Village of Tarrytown
Regular Meeting
May 9, 2011 8:00 p.m.
PRESENT: Members Maloney, Jolly, Brown, Weisel; Counsel Shumejda; Secretary Bellantoni
ABSENT: Chairperson Lawrence; Assistant Village Engineer Pennella
APPROVAL OF THE MINTUES – April 11, 2011
Ms. Brown moved, seconded by Ms. Weisel, and unanimously carried, that the minutes of April 11, 2011, be approved as submitted. Motion carried.
Mr. Maloney called the meeting to order.
PUBLIC HEARING – 31 Stephen Drive – Conklin Residence
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, May 9, 2011 in the Municipal Building, One Depot Plaza, Tarrytown, New York to hear and consider an application by
Cornelia Conklin
31 Stephen Drive
Tarrytown, NY 10591
for a variance from the Zoning Code of the Village of Tarrytown for property located at the above address regarding the construction of a covered entry in the front of the house requiring a variance to encroach into the front yard setback as follows:
• Minimum Front Yard (FT): Required: 40 ft.
Existing: 30.1 ft
Proposed: 25.8 ft.
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 29A, Block 97, Lot 10 and is located in an R-60 (Residential) 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.
By Order of the Zoning Board of Appeals”
Mr. Maloney read the following environmental review from Michael Blau, Environmental Review Officer:
“I have reviewed this application regarding the construction of a portico over the front steps of the house which requires a minor front yard variance and determined the proposal poses no significant adverse environmental impact.”
Certified receipts were received.
The sign was posted.
The Board visited the site.
Steven Secon, Architect for the Conklins introduced himself and gave a brief description of the project. He stated that the Conklins’ house, which was built sometime in 1960’s, presently has uncovered steps leading into the front of the house, which extends into the front yard setback approximately 12.19’. They would like to construct a 4’ x 7’ covered entryway which will encroach into the front yard setback slightly more than the present steps do. Most of the houses in the neighborhood have site encroachments. This covered entryway would provide a small amount of coverage from the elements as well as add curb appeal to the house. He felt there will be no adverse affects to the neighborhood.
Mr. Secon explained that the Conklins did not realize that they had to go before the Zoning Board and did go before the Architectural Review Board already and received their approval.
Mr. Maloney asked if the present steps encroach into the setback and Mr. Secon responded, yes. Mr. Maloney asked how much more would the new steps encroach. Mr. Secon said approximately an additional two feet, for a total of 14.19’.
Mr. Maloney asked if anyone had any questions or comments.
Mr. Jolly asked if most of the present owners have the same encroachment. Mr. Secon said they had similar encroachments and showed photos of several homes in the neighborhood.
Mr. Jolly moved, seconded by Ms. Weisel, to close the hearing.
Ms. Brown moved, seconded by Mr. Jolly, and unanimously carried, that the Board determines there will be no significant adverse environmental impact as a result of granting the requested variance for 31 Stephen Drive.
Mr. Jolly moved, seconded by Ms. Brown, and unanimously carried, that the hearing be closed and the Board having arrived at 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, with a condition of approval by the Building Inspector, a variance of 14.19’ encroachment into the front yard setback for 31 Stephen Drive.
Motion Carried.
PUBLIC HEARING – 124-134 Wildey Street – Acadia Realty Trust
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, May 9, 2011 in the Municipal Building, One Depot Plaza, Tarrytown, New York to hear and consider an application by
Acadia Realty Trust
1311 Mamaroneck Avenue, Ste. 260
White Plains, NY 10605
for a variance from the Zoning Code of the Village of Tarrytown for property located at 124-134 Wildey Street, Tarrytown, New York regarding additional parking for a storefront to be used for a restaurant, which formerly had a retail use, as follows:
• 305-63 (D) (1) Off Street Parking and Loading
o Permitted: 10 Spaces
o Existing: 10 Spaces
o Proposed: 23 Additional Spaces
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 2, Lot P-25 and P-25B and is located in an RR (Restricted Retail) 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.
By Order of the Zoning Board of Appeals”
Certified mailing receipts received
Sign posted
John Kirkpatrick, attorney for Acadia Realty Trust, introduced himself and explained the project. Mr. Kirkpatrick said his clients have a tenant for an empty location in the shopping center. The tenants would like to put a Hibachi Restaurant in that location. In order for them to do so, they will need a variance for additional parking. Mr. Kirkpatrick said that most of the parking in that area is short-term, expect for the Laundromat which requires longer-term parking. He said that the parking lot is pretty much deserted most of the time and feels there is more than enough parking.
The prospective tenant would like to get starting working on the interior by the middle of June; however, they must go before the Planning Board first, which is a two-meeting process, and then come back to the Zoning Board for approval, which will bring them into July. Mr. Kirkpatrick asked if the Board could approve this variance conditioned on the Planning Board approval. He stated that we are all aware of today’s economy; and as such, tenants are hard to come by. His client would like to accommodate the prospective tenant if possible, so as not to lose him.
Mr. Kirkpatrick said this is not a substantial variance. There is more than enough parking. It is not going to have an adverse impact on anyone. The parking lot was already there.
Mr. Maloney asked how many space are in the lot now. Mr. Kirkpatrick stated that there are 179 spaces.
Ms. Brown asked to clarify the additional 23 spaces. Are they going to have re-align the existing spaces to add 23 more spaces? Mr. Kirkpatrick stated that they now have 10 parking spaces, but the restaurant needs an additional 23 according to the zoning code formula. There is plenty of parking, but they would need a variance for the restaurant to have additional spaces then are allowed by the code.
Ms. Weisel asked where the 10 spaces were. Mr. Kirkpatrick explained that they are not reserved; but according to the Planning Board approval, using the square footage of that location, it was allotted 10 spaces in the lot.
Ms. Brown asked if it would be a take-out restaurant or would it have seating. Mr. Kirkpatrick said it would be a sit-down restaurant.
Mr. Kirkpatrick showed the Board the planned layout for the restaurant.
Ms. Brown asked Mr. Shumejda if they could approve conditioned upon Planning Board approval. Mr. Shumejda said legally they could, but the Village has always let the Planning Board take the lead.
Mr. Kirkpatrick said they have not set a public hearing and asked Mr. Shumejda if they could waive the hearing. Mr. Shumejda said they could not waive it but perhaps they could have the preliminary hearing at the Planning Board’s next staff meeting and set the public hearing for the May meeting.
Mr. Kirkpatrick asked the Board if they had any objections. All members were in favor of the restaurant if the Planning Board approved.
It was agreed that we would try to get the Planning Board public hearing set for the May 23, 2011 meeting and come back to the Zoning Board on June 13, 2011 for their approval. The board said they would visit the site before that meeting.
Mr. Jolly moved, seconded by Ms. Weisel, and unanimously carried to continue the hearing at the June 13, 2011 Zoning Board meeting.
ADJOURNMENT
Ms. Weisel moved, seconded by Ms, Brown, and unanimously carried, that the meeting be adjourned – 8:30 p.m.
Dale Bellantoni
Secretary
| 
