Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011-04-05 - Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting Minutes VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK 938 King Street Zoning Board of Appeals April 5, 2011 Meeting at 8:00 p.m. AGENDA 1) #11-623 MR. JOSEPH BIONDO 10 Lawridge Drive Construct a one-story garage addition; rear two-story addition; rear second story addition; new rear deck; and new swimming pool with patio. 2) APPROVAL OF MARCH 1, 2011 ZONING BOARD SUMMARY BOARD: Don Moscato, Chairman Steve Berger Michele Fredman Andrew Kaminsky Joel Simon STAFF: Michael Izzo, Building Inspector Jennifer Gray, Esq., Village Counsel Fred Seifert, Public Access Coordinator BOARD OF TRUSTEE LIAISON: Trustee Jeffrey Rednick Mr. Don Moscato, Chairman, welcomed everyone to the April 5, 2011 Zoning Board of Appeals meeting. He called the meeting to order and introduced Village Staff and Counsel. He asked that individuals addressing the Board speak at the podium, state their names, application, position, and nature of the variance requested. Mr. Moscato called for the first item on the agenda: 1) #11-623 MR. JOSEPH BIONDO 10 Lawridge Drive Construct a one-story garage addition; rear two-story addition; rear second story addition; new rear deck; and new swimming pool with patio. Zoning Board of Appeals April 5,2011 Page 1 Mr. Brad DeMotte, R.A, architect, addressed the Board on behalf of the applicant. The applicant is before the Board requesting four (4) variances. The first is to exceed the maximum allowable gross floor area. The second is to exceed the maximum allowable main coverage (lot coverage). The third is to exceed the impervious coverage. The fourth is a reduction of the front yard setback. The house was built in 1960 and is a side-to-side split. There is a landing in front of the front door. It is now time to update the house. The first step will be to remove the rear deck in the rear of the house. The addition will be built in the place of the deck. A new deck will be constructed and there will be steps down to a grade level terrace and then the pool. Off to the right of the house will be the one-story garage addition. The last part of the construction is a canopy over the existing landing at the front door. He reviewed the sizes of each variance required. The applicant claims a hardship that relates to the property in that with a side-to- side split you end up with lower levels of the house that count toward the gross floor area. In a normal house the lower levels would be considered the basement. There are low ceilings in the lower levels, with some duct work below ceiling level. There is no storage space in this home. The garage is currently used for storage. There is a kitchen/breakfast area on the left side of the house, and the bedrooms on the right. When making the addition there will be space enclosed below that will be used for storage, which is included in the gross floor area calculation. Under the kitchen level the space below could have an 8' ceiling. The applicant is looking to increase the living space. The addition itself will be constructed in the rear of the house and , with the exception of the garage addition, the construction will not be visible from the street. The architect submitted a petition in support of the addition, and letters from several neighbors. Mr. Steve Berger noted that the additional space is being created, whether the applicant needs it or not. He stated that the variances requested were very large. Ms. Michele Fredman noted that the bedroom was 17 x 17 '/2 feet and there are probably two closets proposed plus a bathroom . The square footage of the master bedroom and closet space is at least 450 square feet, including the bathroom. Ms. Fredman asked for the impervious coverage of the deck, patio and pool. She noted that the new deck is 412 square feet, but the plans show a deck size of 24.6' x 16'. Applicant said that the new deck is replacing the non-conforming old deck, however, the new deck adds to the impervious surface coverage. The lot is 16,482 square feet. This is a 1/3 of an acre lot. Zoning Board of Appeals April 5,2011 Page 2 The architect noted that early on they considered a tear-down. The cost created a hardship. Jennifer Gray, Esq., Village Counsel, noted that a storm water management plan would need to be submitted by the applicant based on the proposed square footage. Mr. Moscato noted that there were drains shown around the property. Mr. Michael Izzo, Village Building Inspector, pointed out that there would need to be 100% storm water runoff being captured. There are some drains shown, but he needed further explanation. He questioned whether or not a comprehensive storm water plan could be created for this property. Attorney Gray noted that the drainage easement depicted on the plans originated from subdivision plans filed in 1964. Mr. Moscato stated that in his opinion the applicant was asking too much for a lot of this size. The plans must be scaled back. The question is how to meet the needs of the applicant without requiring such large variances. Mr. Berger agreed, as did Mr. Andrew Kaminsky. Mr. Kaminsky also asked where the drywells would fit in. He asked if there were any water issues on the applicants' or neighboring properties. Mr. Joseph Biondo, applicant, addressed the Board. He noted that there were some water problems but he installed some 10" catch basins which eliminated the problem. He also noted that he and his family really want to stay in this home. He asked what needed to be done in order to work with the Village. The response was that the plans would need to be scaled back. Although the style of the home brings about the need for some of the variances, the consensus of the Board was that the variances requested were too large. Mr. Moscato offered the applicant the option to adjourn. The applicant asked for the adjournment to review the plans and their options. The matter was adjourned to the Zoning Board's May meeting, noting that the applicant could request a further adjournment. 2) APPROVAL OF MARCH 1, 2011 ZONING BOARD SUMMARY Mr. Moscato noted that he made some changes to the summary. He reviewed the changes for the Board. Zoning Board of Appeals April 5,2011 Page 3 He called for a vote on the summary, as amended. Steve Berger Voting Aye Michele Fredman Voting Aye Andrew Kaminsky Voting Aye Joel Simon Voting Aye Don Moscato Voting Aye The summary was approved by a vote of five (5) ayes, and zero (0) nays. As there was no additional business before the Board, a motion and second was made to adjourn. Zoning Board of Appeals April 5,2011 Page 4