Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008-05-06 - Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting Minutes Village of Rye Brook 938 King Street ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Tuesday, May 6, 2008 Meeting at 8:00 p.m. AGENDA 1) #07-481 Ms. Laurie Kaufman (Re Appearance) 249 Tree Top Lane Partition off the existing garage to create a finished, heated storage space 2) #08-508 Ms. Lillian Albrecht (Re Appearance) 27 Hillandale Road Legalize the existing carport. 3) #08-518 Church of Our Lady of Mercy (Re Appearance) 319 South Ridge Street Construct an addition to the existing mausoleum and a new maintenance garage 4) #08-517 Ms. Maria Rusciano (Re Appearance) 4 Deer Run Remove and replace the existing wood deck. 5) #08-515 Mr. & Mrs. Eric Bittleman (Re Appearance) 28 Country Ridge Circle Construct a new front porch 6) 408-512 Ms. Cheryl Benson (Re Appearance) 4 Deer Run Remove and replace the existing wood deck. Zoning Board of Appeals May 6,2008 Page 1 7) #08-520 Mr. Steven Greenberg and Mrs. Hannah Strasser 12 Edgewood Drive Legalize the side, two-story addition 8) #08-521 Mr. & Mrs. Funtleyder 13 Beechwood Boulevard Construct a new single family dwelling with attached three-car garage and rear patio on grade 9) Approval of April 1, 2008 Zoning Board Summary BOARD: Mark Harmon, Chairman Salvatore Crescenzi Jeffrey Rednick Michael Siegel Absent: Don Moscato STAFF: Michael Izzo, Building Inspector Paula Patafio, Meeting Secretary BOARD OF TRUSTEE LIAISON: Trustee Dean Santon Trustee Paul Rosenberg Mr. Mark Harmon, Chairman, welcomed everyone to the May 6, 2008 meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals. He thanked former Board members Joseph Pellino and Ronald Retner for their service on the Zoning Board of Appeals, and welcomed Jeffrey Rednick and Don Moscato as the new members of the Board. It was noted that Don Moscato was excused from the meeting. Mr. Harmon called for the first item on the agenda: 1) #07-481 MS. LAURIE KAUFMAN 249 Tree Top Lane Partition off the existing garage to create a finished, heated storage space Zoning Board of Appeals May 6,2008 Page 2 Mr. Harmon noted that the applicant had requested a second adjournment, which would allow her the additional time to research a legal basis to support her application. This matter was referred to Village Counsel by the Zoning Board. The consensus of the Board was to grant the adjournment to the June meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals. Mr. Harmon called for item #2 on the agenda: 2) #08-508 MS. LILLIAN ALBRECHT (Re Appearance) 27 Hillandale Road Legalize the existing carport. It was noted that the applicant and/or her representative had not yet arrived at the meeting. Mr. Harmon stated that he would re-call the matter later in the meeting. Item #3 was called before the Board: 3) #08-518 CHURCH OF OUR LADY OF MERCY (Re Appearance) 319 South Ridge Street Construct an addition to the existing mausoleum and a new maintenance garage Daniel M. Laub, Esq. from the firm of Cuddy & Feder LLP, addressed the Board as the legal representative for the applicant. Mr. Harmon requested that the applicant give a brief overview of the project for the benefit of the new board members and residents that may not be aware of the project. Mr. Laub began by noting that St. Mary's Cemetery is located off of High Street and Ridge Street, with access to the Cemetery on High Street. The proposed addition to the mausoleum of approximately 700 square feet, would be constructed in the corner of the property, near the I287 bridge. The project would include a good amount of landscaping and screening. Mr. Laub presented the Board with a factual rendering of what the building would look like once it is completed. He noted that the means of ingress and egress will not change. When traveling up South Ridge Street the new addition will not be visible. The lighting will be shielded, and Mr. Laub stated that there would be no noise or lighting impacts. It was noted that the property line along South Ridge Street runs inward, although an Zoning Board of Appeals May 6,2008 Page 3 artificial property line makes it look like it is a straight line. A portion of this property was taken via eminent domain when I287 was constructed. There is no additional space remaining on the cemetery property. Mr. Laub noted that the building will be set back 20' from the side walk. What is being proposed would have been conforming were it not for the property line, therefore, the protection sought by the Code in terms of distance from the roadway is met here. However, as the Village's Code uses the property line to measure setbacks, and because the property line goes in and out, a variance is being sought. Mr. Laub noted that the proposed addition would be in line with the existing building. Pulling the building further away from the street causes the building to lose crypt spaces. Currently the cemetery's crypt space is filled to capacity, and that includes the building that was completed in 1996. Mr. Laub noted that the proposed construction size and number of crypts to be added was decided upon by the church based upon requests and inquiries. He also noted that any adverse impacts have been mitigated. The applicant contends that the addition causes minimal impacts, and Mr. Laub noted that a storm water management plan has been created. One of the key changes made to the plan based upon comments and recommendations by the Planning Board was a change to the fagade of the building. Originally the fagade was a flat facade. He presented the Board with artistic renderings of what the building would look like with the proposed change. Cutbacks were added to soften the appearance of the addition. It is important to note that the front of the addition, along South Ridge Street, is about 36' feet in width. The addition extends backwards onto cemetery property. Landscaping has been proposed that will offer screening. Mr. Harmon noted that there were several issues still outstanding from the last meeting. The Zoning Board is looking for evidence that there will be no noise impacts. Mr. Laub noted that the applicant retained an engineering firm and a study has been completed in connection with noise impacts. This firm has performed an analysis of sound to see if the traffic noises would be deflected, and the findings have been included in a written report that was completed earlier in the day. This study takes into account deflection, structures, change in elevations, etc. The study examined the geographic information and it was examined with and without the proposed addition. What was found was that at some locations there will be a decrease in noise levels, while other areas would see a decrease. Mr. Laub noted that he had copies of the study that was received earlier in the day, and presented them to the Board. Zoning Board of Appeals May 6,2008 Page 4 Mr. Harmon responded that it would have been preferable to review the study in advance of the meeting. He turned to the Board members for questions and comments. Mr. Laub noted one issue from the prior meeting was the information received from the Westchester County Planning Department. It was noted that the Mr. Christopher Bradbury, Village Administrator, has received a memorandum from Edward Buroughs, Deputy Commissioner of the County Planning Department. Mr. Harmon asked that it be made a part of the record. Mr. Laub reviewed the memo for the Board. Mr. Laub noted that in addition to the other information presented, a visual site plan has been submitted which clearly defines lighting. Mr. Harmon called for any comments from members of the public. A resident from Brookridge Court questioned the acoustics. Mr. Harmon pointed out that the applicant has conducted a study in connection with noise that would now be reviewed by Village Consultants and staff. The resident asked that the addition be constructed within the Village's Code. Mr. Harmon requested the written report on the sound be reviewed by the Village's Engineer and Consultants. In addition, he noted that he would also like to speak with Village Counsel regarding this matter. He also noted that there was an issue as to whether or not some portions of the existing mausoleum needed to be legalized. Mr. Michael Izzo, Village Building Inspector, commented that in regard to having the Village's Engineer review the noise impact study, it should be noted that he is a Civil Engineer. Mr. Harmon asked for information regarding the number of crypt spaces to be added. Mr. Laub responded that the size and number of the crypt spaces that are proposed are required. There is no way to know exactly how long the crypt spaces will last, but it is important to note that the cemetery is running out of space. This is the last area that can be used for expansion. People have been turned away because the mausoleum is full. Mr. Harmon closed the public portion of the hearing. He stated that because there were several outstanding issues, the matter would be adjourned to the next Zoning Board of Appeals meeting scheduled in June. Zoning Board of Appeals May 6,2008 Page 5 4) #08-517 MS. MARIA RUSCIANO (Re Appearance) 52 Hillcrest Avenue Construct an addition and perform interior alterations to convert the existing one-family house to a two-family dwelling Mr. Harmon noted that this matter would also be adjourned to the June Zoning Board meeting. Mr. Harmon recalled item #2 on the agenda: 2) #08-508 MS. LILLIAN ALBRECHT 27 Hillandale Road Legalize the existing carport. Steven Feinstein, Esq., legal counsel for the applicant, addressed the Board. He noted that at the prior meeting an issue came up regarding the as-built survey was discussed. The representative of Kirby and Sons was asked to attend this meeting, and to address the Board with an explanation of the differences between the two surveys. The representative for Kirby and Sons noted that he was responsible for the survey. He stated that a survey was done in 1967 by Kirby and Sons. The only change since that time was the carport and the rest of the house remained the same. In July of 2007 the applicant hired the company to update the survey. People were on vacation and because Ms. Albrecht-Sands was pushing, the survey was released without double checking it thoroughly. When hired a second time, on January 16, 2008, to do a topographic survey, the error was discovered. This final survey is the true and accurate survey. Mr. Michael Izzo, Building Inspector, noted that the carport is 11 feet wide, measuring the width from the house to the northern most point of the carport. The carport was built exactly to the specifications and it has not grown. Mr. Harmon asked the Board if they had known that the true distance from the carport to the property line was 1.3' and not 4' if the variance would have been granted. One member of the Board, Mr. Salvatore Crescenzi stated that it would have made a difference in the way that he voted. Mr. Harmon stated that it would not have made any difference to him because the carport is set below the Zoning Board of Appeals May 6,2008 Page 6 neighboring property and is heavily screened. In addition, it has been there for many years when it was replaced, and it was reduced in size. The existing carport was in need of repair, and the way that this home sits near the adjacent home is unique. The carport has been constructed and the only way to make it smaller would be to tear it down and start all over again. Mr. Scarlato, architect, noted that the applicant would be willing to agree that the carport would have to stay a carport and that this could be made a condition of the granting of the variance. The applicant built exactly what the applicant said would be built and the carport has been in existing since the 1940's. Mr. Harmon noted that the application was approved by a vote of 4 Ayes to 0 Nayes, with the condition that the applicant filed a statement accepting the aforementioned condition. As long as the carport is no closer than 1.3' from the property line, the variance is granted. Item #5 was called before the Board: 5) #08-515 MR. & MRS. ERIC BITTLEMAN 28 Country Ridge Circle Construct a new front porch Mr. John Scarlato, architect, addressed the Board. The applicant has failed to submit the required documentation and has requested an adjournment. The consensus of the Board was to adjourn this matter to the June meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals. Mr. Harmon called for the next item on the agenda: 6) #08-512 MS. CHERYL BENSON 4 Deer Run Remove and replace the existing wood deck. Mr. Izzo noted that he had not heard from the applicant. Mr. Harmon asked that the Building Inspector advise the applicant that the matter would be adjourned to June, but if the Village has not heard from her in advance of the June meeting the application will be considered abandoned. Zoning Board of Appeals May 6,2008 Page 7 Mr. Harmon called for item 97: 7) #08-520 MR. STEVEN GREENBERG & MRS. HANNAH STRASSER 12 Edgewood Drive Legalize the side, two-story addition The applicant, Mr. Steven Greenberg, addressed the Board. He noted that he was before the Zoning Board in order to legalize the side and two-story addition. Mr. Harmon called for members of the public wishing to address the Board in support or opposition to the application. There being no one, he turned to the Board for questions and comments. Mr. Harmon began the discussion by asking what happened to bring this to light. Mr. Izzo noted that the applicant applied for and was issued a building permit. As-built surveys are required at the completion. As with a prior application on the agenda, the house was built to plan, however, the as-built survey differed from the initial survey. Mr. Harmon noted a discrepancy in the Notice that was published by the Village in connection with this matter. Mr. Izzo noted that it was a topographic/addition error and was on the part of the Village, not the applicant. Mr. Harmon noted that the improper notification raised a problem in that if the variance was granted and someone years from now wanted to they could challenge the variance. The applicant was offered the opportunity to re-notice the matter and come back in June, or have the variance approved with the possibility that it could be challenged. A neighbor of the applicants' asked for clarification. It was noted that the difference between what was noticed and what actually exists was small. The public portion of the hearing was closed and Mr. Harmon prepared the resolution. Zoning Board of Appeals May 6,2008 Page 8 RESOLUTION WHEREAS, application has been made to the Zoning Board by Mr. Steven Greenberg and Mrs. Hannah Strasser for an .8' single side yard setback variance, in connection with the proposed legalization of the side, two-story addition, on property located at 12 Edgewood Drive in an R25 District on the north side of Edgewood Drive, 650 feet from the intersection of Beechwood Circle and Edgewood Drive. Said premise being known and designated on the tax map of the Village of Rye Brook as Section 135.28, Block 1, Lot 26. WHEREAS, a duly advertised public hearing was held on May 6, 2008, at which time all those wishing to be heard were given such opportunity; and WHEREAS the Board, from the application and after viewing the premise and neighborhood concerned finds: 1) The variance requested is deminimus and results from a re-survey of the addition built, which was constructed to plan; and 2) The variance will not result in, or have, an adverse impact on the neighborhood. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the said application is hereby granted. Dated: May 6, 2008 Ayes: 4 Mark Harmon, Chairman Nayes: 0 Zoning Board of Appeals May 6,2008 Page 9 Zoning Board of Appeals May 6,2008 Page 10 The Board took a short recess. Upon the Board's return, Mr. Harmon called for item #8: 8) #08-521 MR. & MRS. FUNTLEYDER 13 Beechwood Boulevard Construct a new single family dwelling with attached three-car garage and rear patio on grade Daniel Laub, Esq., from the firm of Cuddy and Feder, addressed the Board as the legal representative for the applicant. He was joined by the applicants, and the applicant's architect. Mr. Laub noted that there was a single variance that is required and that is in connection with the front yard setback. The setback is calculated by using the setback of properties on either side of the applicants' property. It was noted that this is a corner lot, located on the Hillandale Circle. The front of the home will face on Beechwood Boulevard and the proposed setback is 79.15 feet. This proposed construction will not compromise the character of the neighborhood. The lots in this area are deep, however this corner lot is shallow. An area map created by F.P. Clark & Associates was used for the applicants' presentation. It was noted that there is a wide range of setbacks in this area from 28' to 120'. Mr. Harmon stated that the Zoning Board was concerned with several issues. The first was maintaining the character of the neighborhood, and this means looking at the community as a whole. Everyone realizes that the Byram Ridge area is going to change because homes that were favorable twenty years ago are no longer favorable. People now look for larger homes. Since a larger home will be constructed, the Zoning Board must consider the impacts of a much larger home. Although the proposed construction is conforming except for the front yard setback, the variance being requested is substantial. The majority of the homes in this area are setback further from the street, and granting this 27.6' variance could set a precedence. Mr. Laub noted that when the Zoning Code is strictly applied, corner lots suffer a greater difficulty. Mr. Harmon stated that putting up a 7200 square foot house where a much smaller house existed creates a material difference. In addition, the closer to the street the house is constructed the larger the home appears. Mr. Harmon asked if the home was set back as far as possible. He also asked what efforts were made to build the home within the Code when the architect was designing the home. Zoning Board of Appeals May 6,2008 Page 11 Mr. Harmon noted that this matter has been before the Planning Board. He also noted that the considerations when reviewing an application are very different for the Planning Board and the Zoning Board of Appeals. The architect for the applicants addressed the Board. Mr. Izzo, Building Inspector, noted that a variance would be required in order to construct a second floor addition, but this is not just a second story addition. The house is being widened. He noted that the house could be designed so that it did not fill up the entire building envelope, and so that it would be setback further from the street. It was the consensus of the Board that the variance being requested was substantial. It was also noted that this is an area of a high water table. Mr. Harmon called for members wishing to be heard in support or opposition to the application. He noted that in his opinion the square footage of the home could be further reduced. The applicant, Mr. Funtleyder, addressed the Board. He noted that the house could be turned, but it would result in the need for a larger variance. A great number of changes have been made to the initial plan, the applicants adjusted their desires and needs, and the plan now before the Board is the best plan. The applicant has made many compromises, but additional changes to the design of the home would mean going back before the Planning Board. Mrs. Funtleyder noted that they have already removed several feet from each room. Mr. Harmon responded that the Board was appreciative of the efforts made by the applicant. Mr. Harmon noted that the Village understands that people are now looking for larger homes, but the property must be able to support the size of the house. With regard to this application, the Board understands that the house is totally conforming except for the front yard setback, however, the size of the variance being requested is considered substantial. Mr. Harmon called for members of the public wishing to be heard in opposition to the application. Dean Santon of Hillandale Road asked to be heard. Mr. Laub took issue with Mr. Santon in his roll as Trustee of the Village and Liaison to the Zoning Board. He asked that Mr. Santon recuse himself from commenting on and making recommendations and referrals to the Zoning Board members in connection with this application. It was noted that a liaison simply sits back, listens, and reports back to the Board of Trustees on the meeting. These are open meetings and everything is on the record. In addition, emails sent to the Board and Village by Mr. Santon are available to the applicant or would not be considered. Zoning Board of Appeals May 6,2008 Page 12 Trustee Dean Santon addressed the Board. He noted that this is a new modern home, but questioned why it needed to be the size that has been proposed. He felt that the applicant should review the topography of the land and then design the home to fit the parcel. He noted that the architect has designed another home in the area, and did a very good job. The home is modern and very attractive. Currently the home on the lot is a ranch that is 34' deep house. Increasing the front yard setback would maintain the special quality of the neighborhood. Just because the building envelope is large does not mean that the applicant would need to fill every inch of it. A 6600 square foot house is a very large house. Mr. Laub objected that Mr. Santon refused to recuse himself. Mr. Harmon noted that Mr. Santon spoke as a citizen, and questioned what other additional action the applicant wanted the Board to take. The applicant was offered the opportunity to adjourn the application to allow for modifications to the plans. It was noted that any changes to plans must be submitted to the Village and if they are submitted within the time constraints that the application could be heard again in June. 9) Approval of April 1, 2008 Zoning Board Summary Mr. Harmon called for questions or comments on the April 1st summary. There being none, the summary was approved as submitted. There being no further business before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 11:00 p.m. Zoning Board of Appeals May 6,2008 Page 13