HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004-07-06 - Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting Minutes VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK
Village Hall, 938 King Street
Rye Brook, New York
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
Tuesday, July 6, 2004
AGENDA
1. #04-335 Mr. & Mrs. Vincent A. Repaci, Jr.
199 Betsy Brown Road
Construct a two-story addition of a two-car garage with a bedroom and
study above
CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING
2. #04-340 Mr. & Mrs. Comstock
247 Betsy Brown Road
Construct a two-story rear addition with rear deck
3. #04-345 Mr. Dave Steinthal and Ms. Jen Schaefer
190 Betsy Brown Road
Enclose an existing first floor porch and construct a partial second floor
addition
3. Approval of June 1, 2004 Zoning Board Summary
PRESENT
BOARD: Mark Harmon, Chairman
Joseph Pellino
Dorothy Roer
Ronald Rettner (Arrived at 8:1 S p.in)
Excused: Salvatore Cresenzi
STAFF: Mr. Hector Boscarino, Code Enforcement Officer
Victor Carosi, Village Engineer
Paula Patafto, Meeting Secretary
Mr. Harmon welcomed everyone to the July 6, 2004 Zoning Board of Appeal meeting. He noted
that Mr. Salvatore Cresenzi was excused from the meeting due to a prior commitment. As Mr.
Ronald Rettner was not in attendance at the start of the meeting, Mr. Harmon noted that with
only three (3)members of the Board in attendance, the applicants would be given the opportunity
to adjourn to the next meeting, scheduled for August, when there would, hopefully, be more
members in attendance. He pointed out that it is the policy of the Board to advise applicants that
it would take three "yes" votes to grant a variance and, if there were only three Board members
present and a member voted no, the variance would be rejected. Mr. & Mrs. Repaci chose to
move forward with their presentation.
Zoning Board of Appeal
Tuesday,July 6,2004
Page 1
1. #04-335 Mr. & Mrs. Vincent A. Repaci, Jr.
199 Betsy Brown Road
Construct a two-story addition of a two-car garage with a bedroom and
study above
CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING
Mr. Harmon noted that this matter was before the Zoning Board at the June meeting. An
adjournment was granted in order to allow the applicant to respond to questions raised by
the Board. Mr. Repaci, Jr., the applicant, addressed the Board. He stated that at the prior
meeting the Board asked for proof that the home would not be out of character with other
homes in the neighborhood. Mr. & Mrs. Repaci presented photographs to the Board,
which were made part of the record. These photographs were of surrounding homes.
It was also noted that five properties abut his property. Four of these homes are over
3,000 square feet.
Mr. Repaci stated that he proposed the construction of a two car garage to the right of the
home. The existing front porch would be removed, and the two car garage would be
constructed. He pointed out that currently this home does not have a garage. In addition,
a bedroom and a study were proposed for the second floor, above the garage, with the
total square footage to be added to the home totaling 400 square feet. This home
currently has three (3) bedrooms, and with a growing family the additional bedroom and
living space was needed.
Mr. Repaci noted that the application complied with five out of six of the Village Code's
stipulations. He was in compliance with the following requirements: the footprint, the
height of the building, side setbacks, front and back setbacks, and the impervious surface
coverage. The only area that they required a variance for was bulk area coverage. Mr.
Hector Boscarino, Code Enforcement Officer, noted that the garage was included in the
calculations as it counts as living space.
Mr. Joseph Pellino pointed out that there was previous construction on the home,
completed within the last two years. Mr. Repaci stated that the roof to the rear of the
home was raised. This is the second part of the construction. It was noted that at the
previous meeting the Acting Building Inspector, Mr. Michael Izzo, was asked to advise
the Board whether or not this home required the installation of a sprinkler system. Mr.
Repaci stated that Mr. Izzo had advised him that a sprinkler system would be required.
The plans will be submitted to the Architectural Review Board at the next meeting.
Mr. Repaci noted that the second story adds two dormers, and the height will the same
height as the existing roof line. Without the dormer a minimal variance would be
required. Mr. Harmon called for members of the public wishing to address the Board in
support of this application.
Two neighbors, residing at 189 Betsy Brown Road, addressed the Board. They stated
that they were fully supportive of the application. They felt that the addition of the
garage would add value to their property.
Zoning Board of Appeal
Tuesday,July 6,2004
Page 2
Mr. & Mrs. Stevens, 47 year residents of Betsy Brown Road, addressed the Board. They
noted that many of their neighbors have converted their garages into living space, which
means more cars on the street. They were happy that the Repaci's were adding a garage,
and were pleased with the well thought out plans.
The residents of 182 Betsy Brown also noted that they were in favor of the application, as
were Mr. Dave Steinthal and Ms. Jen Schaefer of 190 Betsy Brown.
Mr. Harmon called for any members of the public wishing to address the Board in
opposition to the application. There being no one, and no further comments from Board
members, the public portion of the hearing was closed and the Board went into
deliberation. Upon the Board's return, Mr. Harmon read the following resolution:
RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, application has been made to the Zoning Board by Mr. Vincent A.
Repaci, Jr. for a variance of 671.18 square feet from gross floor area limitation in
connection with the proposed construction of a two-story addition of a two-car garage,
with a bedroom and study above, on property located at 199 North Ridge Street, in an R-
10 District, on the north side of Betsy Brown Road, approximately 465 feet from the
intersection of Betsy Brown Road and Knollwood Drive. Said premises being known
and designated on the tax map of the Village of Rye Brook as Section: 1, Block: 6, Lot
25A.1.
WHEREAS, a duly advertised public hearing was continued on June 1, 2004, and
continued to July 6, 2004, at which time all those wishing to be heard were given such
opportunity; and
WHEREAS the Board, from the application and after viewing the premises and
neighborhood concerned, finds:
1) Several affected neighbors have spoken in support of the application;
2) Applicants have demonstrated that the proposed addition is in character
with the surrounding neighborhood and will not adversely effect the
neighborhood; and
3) The addition of a garage will benefit the community and would require
only a de minus variance, the dormer addition being consistent with
current construction and, therefore,reasonable.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the application is hereby
granted on the following condition:
1) Construction shall begin within one year of the granting of the variance.
DATED: July 6, 2004
Mark Harmon, Chairperson
3 Ayes, 0 Noes
Zoning Board of Appeal
Tuesday,July 6,2004
Page 3
Mr. Harmon called for the second item on the agenda:
2. #04-340 Mr. & Mrs. Comstock
247 Betsy Brown Road
Construct a two-story rear addition with rear deck
Mr. & Mrs. Comstock addressed the Board with their architect, Timothy Wetmore of
Wetmore Associates LLC. Mr. Wetmore noted that the application was for a rear yard
addition of two-stories, which consisted of a master bedroom suite on the second floor, an
extension to the kitchen and family room on the first floor. The existing house is
currently 1,737 square feet. The proposed addition would add approximately 592 square
feet, for a total of 2,329 square feet. Part of the project involves the removal of a three-
season porch located at the rear of the house, which is in need of repair. Three variances
were required are as follows: Maximum gross floor area, side yard setback, and
maximum coverage of a main building on a building lot (in an R-10 District). Much of
the difficulty relating to this project stems from the fact that this is a non-conforming lot.
In addition, the lot is narrower in the rear than it is in the front. The existing lot is 6,127
square feet located in an R-10 zone, which requires 10,000 square feet.
Mr. Harmon noted that the Board was presented with a series of photographs which
were made part of the record.
Due to the location on the lot of the existing house, the portion of the property where the
construction will take place is over the setback requirement by 1'. The kitchen is very
narrow and losing any space would be impractical. Mr. Wetmore noted that if this
property were located in an R-5 or R-7 no variances would be required.
The maximum building coverage which includes the proposed construction is 21.3%. The
maximum gross floor area allowed for this property is 2,203 square feet, for an overage
of 276 square feet. The existing garage is included in the number. This is a corner lot,
which means that there is no place to build an accessory structure, which is allowed by
Zoning. No free-standing garage can be constructed on this property.
Mr. Harmon thanked Mr. Wetmore for his presentation. He called for members of the
public wishing to speak in support of the application.
Mr. & Mrs. Repaci of 199 Betsy Brown Road spoke in support of the application. As did
the residents of 189 and 182 Betsy Brown Road.
Mr. Harmon called for members of the public wishing to address the Board in opposition
to the application. There being no one, he turned to the Board for comments.
Mrs. Dorothy Roer asked for clarification on the removal of the three season porch. Mr.
Wetmore stated that the three-season porch would be removed and the rear addition
would extend beyond the footprint of the porch. All of the proposed construction is
proposed for the rear left hand corner of the home.
Zoning Board of Appeal
Tuesday,July 6,2004
Page 4
There being no further comments, the Public portion of the hearing closed at 8:35 p.m.
Upon the Board's return, at 8:40 p.m., Mr. Harmon read the following resolution:
RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, application has been made to the Zoning Board by Mr.& Mrs.
Comstock, for: 1) a variance of 276 square feet from the maximum gross floor area
limitation; 2) a 1.5' side yard variance; and 3) 1.3% maximum lot coverage all
connection with the propose construction of a two-story rear addition with rear deck, in
an R-10 District, on property located at 247 Betsy Brown Road, at the intersection of
Betsy Brown Road and Knollwood Drive, on the north side of Betsy Brown Road. Said
premises being known and designated on the tax map of the Village of Rye Brook as
Section: 1, Block: 6, Lot 25A21.
WHEREAS, a duly advertised public hearing was continued on July 6, 2004, at
which time all those wishing to be heard were given such opportunity; and
WHEREAS the Board, from the application and after viewing the premises and
neighborhood concerned, finds:
1) The lot is a legal non-conforming and irregularly shaped side lot;
2) The construction is in the rear of the house and will not affect the visual
impact of the house consistent with the intent of the gross floor area and
maximum lot coverage regulations;
3) Affected neighbors are in favor of the application; and
4) The purposed construction will not adversely impact the neighborhood.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the application is hereby
granted on the following conditions:
1) Construction shall begin within one year of the granting of the variance.
DATED: July 6, 2004
Mark Harmon, Chairperson
4 Ayes, 0 Noes
Zoning Board of Appeal
Tuesday,July 6,2004
Page 5
3. #04-345 Mr. Dave Steinthal and Ms. Jen Schaefer
190 Betsy Brown Road
Enclose an existing first floor porch and construct a partial second floor
addition
Steven Marchesani, architect, addressed the Board on behalf of the applicants. He began
his presentation by noting that this was a legally non-conforming lot. The proposal
before the Board was to enclose the first floor porch area, and add a bedroom to the
second floor. The house is currently a two-bedroom home. This is a corner lot, which
means there are essentially two front lots. The application requires a front yard variance.
Mr. Marchesani noted that the footprint will change, but the line of the existing setback
will be kept.
Mr. Harmon questioned whether or not any variances were required for the rear yard.
Mr. Marchesani stated that no variances were required.
Mr. Joseph Pellino began a discussion regarding how the decision was made in regard to
which was the front lot. Mr. Victor Carosi, Village Engineer, and Mr. Hector Boscarino,
Code Enforcement Officer, reviewed the section of the Village Code that pertained to this
matter. A call was also placed to Mr. Michael Izzo, acting Building Inspector, for his
input. The determination was that, for zoning purposes, an applicant can choose which of
the two side lots is the front yard in order to determine which will be the rear yard.
However, as two sides front streets, each is considered a front yard. The Board took a
brief recess to discuss this matter.
Upon the Board's return, Mr. Harmon called for members of the public wishing to
address the Board in support of the application. The residents of 189 Betsy Brown, the
home owners directly across the street from this property, felt that this was a great
addition, and was in character with the rest of the neighborhood.
The homeowners of 182 Betsy Brown, the adjacent neighbors, also address the Board in
support of this application, as did Mr. & Mrs. Repaci of 199 Betsy Brown Road.
The homeowners of 185 Betsy Brown questioned what the front of the home would look
like after construction. They suggested that the entire addition should be made to the rear
of the home, where it would not affect the character of the neighbor. Mr. Ronald Rettner,
agreed, and asked if the applicant considered an extension to the rear of the home versus
the side.
Mr. Marchesani presented the Board with photographs of the home, noting that the
adjacent home had basically the same set-up as proposed. He noted that the applicants
wanted to keep the bedrooms together and, because the existing second floor bedroom is
in the center of the house, the plan before the Board was the preferred plan. Mr. Rettner
restated that, in his opinion, there were other means by which to add the space required
without construction on the side of the home.
Zoning Board of Appeal
Tuesday,July 6,2004
Page 6
Mr. Harmon asked if other options had been reviewed. He noted that the part of the
Zoning Board's review includes looking at to what extent the applicant has sought to
minimize the variance required.
The Board stated that they needed additional information before making a decision in
connection with this application. The consensus of the Board was that better evidence
that one variance or another would be required in connection with this application needed
to be submitted. The applicant requested and was granted an adjournment to the August
meeting.
Mr. Harmon noted that if a different application was submitted, which required difference
variances, the matter would need to go through the notification process again. If the
applicant intended on returning with additional proof that this variance is required, then
all that would need to be done would be to re-install the sign with the correct date.
Mr. Harmon noted that the application of Mr.& Mrs. Jeffrey Weintraub, originally on the
agenda, was withdrawn at the applicant's request. The application would be re-noticed,
and placed on the agenda for the Board's August meeting.
Mr. Harmon called for the final item on the agenda:
3. Approval of the June 1, 2004 Zoning Board Summary
The summary was approved by a vote of 4 ayes to 0 noes.
Mr. Harmon noted that he was in receipt of e-mails from Mrs. Hendel of Charles Lane. This
information would be distributed, and he requested that all members of the Zoning Board read
through these e-mails and be prepared for discussion at the next meeting.
There being no further business before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 9:15 p.m.
Zoning Board of Appeal
Tuesday,July 6,2004
Page 7