Zoning Board of Appeals
Village of Tarrytown
July 9, 2012; 8:00 p.m.
PRESENT: Chairwoman Lawrence; Members Maloney, Jolly, Brown, Weisel; Counsel Shumejda; Village Engineer McGarvey; Secretary Bellantoni
APPROVAL OF THE MINTUES – June 11, 2012
Ms. Brown moved, seconded by Mr. Jolly, and unanimously carried, that the minutes of June 11, 2012, be approved as submitted. Motion carried.
CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING – Maceyak - 64 Sunnyside Avenue
Chairwoman Lawrence opened the hearing and gave a brief overview of the application as presented at the June meeting. She asked the applicant if he had any additional comments.
Mr. Maceyak said he met with his neighbor and they have come to an agreement regarding the issues discussed at the last meeting, the lowering of the deck and the removal of a window. Mr. Maceyak said with the addition, the house will conform to the rest of the neighborhood. The addition is necessary because of the size of the rooms.
Chairwoman Lawrence asked if they altered the original plans. Mr. Maceyak said no, they are going with the original plan.
Tom Ruth, 66 Sunnyside Avenue, stated that they are not against the addition and that they understand that the Maceyaks are going forward with the original plan. They will deal with the issues brought up at the last meeting if and when they arise with the use of landscaping.
Chairwoman Lawrence asked if there were any other questions. Chairwoman Lawrence read the following Environmental Review from Michael Blau, Environmental Review Officer, dated July 9 11, 2012:
“I have reviewed this application regarding a two-story addition in the rear of the existing house and determined the proposal appears to pose no significant adverse environmental impact."
Mr. Jolly moved, seconded by Mr. Maloney, and all in favor, that the Board determines there will be no significant adverse environmental impact as a result of granting the requested variance for 64 Sunnyside Avenue.
Ms. Lawrence moved, seconded by Mr. Jolly, to close the hearing; all in favor. Motion carried.
Mr. Maloney moved, seconded by Ms. Weisel, with the condition of approval by the Building Inspector and having arrived at the following Findings required by the ordinance:
1. That no undesirable change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood nor will a detriment to nearby properties be created by the gr anting of the area variance;
2. That the benefit sought by the applicant cannot be achieved by some method, feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance;
3. That the requested area variance is not substantial;
4. That the proposed variance will not have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district; and
5. That the alleged difficulty was not self-created which consideration shall be relevant to the decision of the Board of Appeals but shall not necessarily preclude the granting of the area variance.
Grants the requested variances as stated above for 64 Sunnyside Avenue.
All in favor; motion carried.
CONTINUATION OF A PUBLIC HEARING - Arduino - 75 Neperan Road
The Arduino, the applicant, appeared without his engineer or attorney. Ms. Lawrence asked if he had any comments regarding his application. Mr. Arduino said that he had no further comments.
Ms. Brown commented that she thought the sale of the property from the Village stated that no variances could be required in order to build.
Mr. McGarvey explained that when the FAR issue was brought before the Board of Trustees, they did not have a problem with it and agreed to grant a waiver as long as the Zoning Board approved.
Ms. Brown asked if the condition regarding variances was in the contract of sale. Mr. McGarvey said they did not close yet.
Chairwoman Lawrence asked if the contract had a caveat that there were to be no variances. Mr. Shumejda said yes, but the applicant asked the Board of Trustees to waive it. The Board of Trustees, because of the situation waived it, provided the Zoning Board approves.
Mr. Jolly asked if they went back to the Planning Board after the error was discovered. Mr. McGarvey stated that the house was original approved in 2009. A building permit application was submitted but the original owner backed out and the permit was never issued.
Mr. McGarvey said the new zoning code stated that no matter how large your property is in that zone, it cannot exceed 3,500 square feet of FAR. Sean McCarthy and I assumed that because it was already approved, it was ok; but Mr. Blau said it had to go back to the Board of Trustees. They said they would allow it provided that was the only variance required.
Ms. Brown said 3500 square feet is the maximum in the R-10 zone, what is allowed in the R-15 zone. Mr. McGarvey said 4350 square feet are allowed in the R-15 zone. Ms. Brown said so they would still need a very small variance. Mr. McGarvey said they could easily reduce the FAR if they were in an R-15 zone so that a variance would not be required.
Chairwoman Lawrence asked why the Board of Trustees made an exception. Counsel Shumejda said because of the way it happened. They were through all the processes before it was discovered and they were sympathetic to the situation.
Chairwoman Lawrence said she is also sympathetic but it concerns her that this is what exists now. It is what is on the books and has been in affect for three years. She asked when the current plans were accepted. Mr. McGarvey said in September 2011. Chairwoman Lawrence said we have the zoning requirements for a reason and we look at them very carefully.
Mr. Jolly asked if there were any Planning Board conditions placed on their approval. Mr. McGarvey and Counsel Shumejda said only the usually ones that are placed on all Planning Board approvals. Counsel Shumejda said he was sure that size was not a condition.
Mr. Maloney asked where he got the 4445 shown on the zoning chart as the maximum FAR. Mr. McGarvey said he came out of the old Zoning book.
Mr. Jolly said the Zoning Board will always try to work with the applicant by giving concessions; but the applicant has not given any concessions on his plan.
Ms. Brown said the Village does not have an option, they agreed to allow the Zoning Board to hear it and make a decision.
Ms. Lawrence read the following Environmental Review from Michael Blau, Environmental Review Officer, dated July 9 11, 2012:
“I have reviewed this application regarding the construction of a new 2-1/2 story single family residence and determined the proposal appears to pose no significant adverse environmental impact."
Mr. Jolly moved, seconded by Mr. Maloney, and all in favor, that the Board determines there will be no significant adverse environmental impact as a result of granting the requested variance for 75 Neperan Avenue Avenue. All in favor; motion carried.
Mr. Maloney moved, seconded by Mr. Jolly, to close the hearing. All in favor; motion carried.
Ms. Brown moved, seconded by Mr. Jolly that the Board votes on the granting of the variance for 75 Neperan Avenue.
Ms. Brown voted no
Mr. Jolly voted no
Chairman Lawrence voted no
Mr. Maloney voted no
Ms. Weisel voted no.
The requested variance was unanimously denied.
ADJOURNMENT
Chairwoman Lawrence moved, seconded by Mr. Maloney, and unanimously carried, that the meeting be adjourned – 8:25 p.m.
Dale Bellantoni
Secretary
| 
