Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008-12-02 - Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting Minutes Village of Rye Brook 938 King Street ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS December 2, 2008 Meeting at 8:00 p.m. AGENDA 1) #08-541 Mr. Michael Cohen (Re Appearance) 36 Rockridge Drive Construct a second floor addition; a new rear deck; a rear enclosed porch; perform interior alterations and legalize the existing finished basement. 2) Approval of November 4, 2008 Zoning Board Summary BOARD: Michael Siegel, Acting Chairman Salvatore Crescenzi Don Moscato Jeffrey Rednick Excused: Mark Harmon STAFF: Michael Izzo, Building Inspector Paula Patafio, Meeting Secretary Michael Siegel, Acting Chairman, welcomed everyone to the December 2, 2008 Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting. He noted that Mr. Mark Harmon, Chairman, was excused from the meeting. As a result, there were only four members of the Board present and although there was a quorum it meant that the applicant would require a all four remaining members to vote yes in order for the application to be granted. The applicant was offered the option of adjourning to the next meeting or moving forward. Mr. Cohen, the applicant, stated that he was ready and asked to move forward with his presentation. Zoning Board of Appeals December 2,2008 Page 1 1) #08-541 Mr. Michael Cohen (Re Appearance) 36 Rockridge Drive Construct a second floor addition; a new rear deck; a rear enclosed porch; perform interior alterations and legalize the existing finished basement. Mr. Michael Cohen, the applicant, addressed the Board. He stated that he was responding to comments raised at the previous month's meeting concerning his application. He noted that he viewed the tape of the meeting and the minutes and prepared his responses in order to capture all of the questions raised by the Zoning Board members and Village Staff. He began his presentation by explaining the reasons behind the proposed construction. He noted that he lived in Rye Brook for 14 years, with the last nine on Rockridge Drive. About 11/z years ago his wife passed away, and things changed significantly for his family. He found that he needed to make changes to the home in order to stay in it and take care of his two children. The home is a three bedroom home and now they need additional living space to accommodate their new life style. Mr. Cohen noted that his work takes him out of town frequently and he needs to have someone stay with his children overnight. Therefore, there are relatives constantly staying at his homes. This includes grandparents, cousins, aunts and uncles. He noted that his mother and mother-in-law live in Florida and they are older. When they come to stay with him they need to have a bedroom on the first floor. In addition, there is a chance that one of them will be living with the applicant's family in the very near future. Mr. Cohen noted that his goal is to increase the size of the home to meet his family's needs, but not adversely affect the neighborhood. As previously stated, this change is critical for him and his family. To accomplish the goal with as small a variance as possible he and his architect have worked on the plans, however, if he is going to add rooms to the house the renovations should be done correctly. He stated that he and his architect have gathered information on the surrounding homes regarding square footage and levels of the homes. He noted that he was not over massing and the addition proposed for his home would be consistent with the other homes in the neighborhood. He pointed out that the proposed addition was less than 50% of the existing square footage. Mr. Cohen noted that the proposed addition would not change the footprint of the existing home. He presented the Board with four letters of support from adjacent neighbors who could not be at the meeting. The architect, Justin F. Minieri, AIA, addressed the Board. It was noted that he has created plans for several other homes in the area. He presented the Zoning Zoning Board of Appeals December 2,2008 Page 2 Board with photographs of surrounding homes in response to concerns expressed regarding the amount of additional gross floor area being proposed. The photos of the homes included homes from Rockridge Drive, and of homes as far as a block or two away. Mr. Minieri shared the square footage of these homes with the Board. He noted that although there are one story homes in the area, the majority are two story home and many of the two story homes have been before the Zoning Board of Appeals and have been granted variances. The applicant is looking to keep the second story addition centered on the existing home which minimizes the visual effect. Mr. Minieri noted that although the square footage of the homes was given to them by the Tax Assessor's office, many of the homes do not have updated information. He felt that in the spirit of what the F.A.R. is trying to accomplish the Board should view the photos versus checking the square footage of each home. He noted that one very large home on Paddock Lane, recently renovated, does not reflect that renovated/additional square footage on the Assessor's cards. He also noted that the home at 9 Eagles Bluff is listed on the Assessor's card as a home of 3,100 square feet, which clearly it is not. This is a full, massive, two story house. In addition, he pointed out that some of the smaller homes in square footage appear more massive than the larger homes because of the way that they were constructed. The majority of the homes in walking distance from Mr. Cohen's house are 4,000 square feet in size. There are many ranches, but there are an equal number of two story homes. Mr. Donald Moscato, board member, noted that he did not get the impression that there were this many two story homes in the immediate vicinity of the applicant's home. When looking at the streetscape it seems that the homes are smaller. It is understood that this is a transitional neighborhood—evolving from the one story to the story homes, but it is the objective of the Zoning Board to grant the smallest variance needed in order to accomplish the applicants' goals. Mr. Siegel called for members of the public wishing to address the Board in support or opposition to the application. Mr. Talmadge of 40 Rockridge Drive addressed the Board in support of the application. He noted that he has received many compliments on his home, for which Mr. Minieri was the architect. The renovations to his home blend in very well with the character of the neighborhood. No one wants to look at a big massive block house and Mr. Minieri's plans create homes without the massive impact. Zoning Board of Appeals December 2,2008 Page 3 Mr. Salvatore Crescenzi, Board member, noted that although the applicant was not increasing the size of the home more than 50% of the current square footage, the variance being requested was excessive. Mr. Minieri noted that 2,987 square feet is permitted. The current home is 2,788 and the proposed addition will add 1,256 square feet. The proposed addition complies with height and all other setbacks. The mass has been diminished by moving the addition further back from the street, and centering the addition on the home. Mr. Crescenzi noted that he had a concern regarding the gross floor area. He stated that he has been expressing his feelings about the Gross Floor Area law and that it needs to be amended. A lot of the homes in Rye Brook have been made non-conforming and when the law was changed these homes became legally non- conforming. The Zoning Board of Appeals must review variances, review the existing zoning code, and grant the least amount of variance needed for the homeowner to accomplish his goal. Mr. Crescenzi noted that the homes that Mr. Minieri was comparing the applicant's home to are legally non-conforming because of the change in the Zoning Code. Mr. Minieri noted he had no recollection of the Board requesting that the square footage be reduced. Mr. Crescenzi noted that two members of the Board expressed concern regarding the gross floor area and the substantial variance at the prior meeting. He felt that the applicant did not make an attempt to reduce the size of the variance. There isn't a magic number or a certain percentage of square footage that the application should be reduced by in order to be approved. Mr. Cohen stated that he has reviewed the plans several times and what was before the Board met his goals with what he felt was the smallest variance possible. Mr. Moscato noted that there is a finished basement in this home, and if you add this into the total square footage then you have a home that is over 4,700 square feet. Mr. Cohen noted that he wouldn't want anyone living in the basement. This is a true basement with a boiler room, a laundry room, small windows and flight of stairs. The basement is below grade and does not have egress to the rear yard, which is part of the Village's criteria for including the basement in the square footage of the home. Mr. Cohen noted that he reviewed the entire home prior to making the plans for the addition, and this included possibilities for the basement area. Mr. Minieri agreed with Mr. Cohen in that this is not a walkout basement. It is a basement with a few tiny windows and it contains storage, a laundry room, and a recreation room. This is truly what people refer to as a basement. Creating living spaces in the basement would not enhance the family's quality of life. Zoning Board of Appeals December 2,2008 Page 4 Mr. Siegel noted that there were no additional comments from the Board members, and that the public portion of the hearing would be closed at this time. Mr. Mimeri, after a brief discussion with the applicant, requested an adjournment so that they could make an effort to reduce the square footage of the proposed, and still meet the applicant's needs. They would review the plans and come back with the smallest variance possible. With the consensus of the Board, the application was adjourned to January 6, 2009. Mr. Michael Izzo, Building Inspector, asked the Board to take into consideration the lot sizes as well as the sizes of the homes. He felt that the comparisons presented to the Board this evening compared apples to oranges. He noted that the applicant's lot is approximately 100' x 130' and many of the homes presented to the Board this evening are on larger lots. He felt that when making a comparison it is important to include lot size information. Mr. Siegel called for the next item on the agenda. 2) Approval of November 4, 2008 Zoning Board Summary There were no comments or changes to the summary, and it was approved as submitted by a vote ayes of four to zero noes. Michael Siegel, Acting Chairman Voting Aye Salvatore Crescenzi Voting Aye Don Moscato Voting Aye Jeffrey Rednick Voting Aye There being no additional business before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 8:40 p.m. Zoning Board of Appeals December 2,2008 Page 5