Skip Navigation
This table is used for column layout.
Welcome to the website for the Village of Croton on Hudson, New York

Contact Us
Subscribe to News
Spacer
On Our Site

Click to Search
Village Seal

Village of Croton-on-Hudson
1 Van Wyck Street
Croton-on-Hudson, NY 10520

Phone: 914-271-4781
Fax: 914-271-2836


Hours: Mon. - Fri., 8:30 am - 4 pm
 
ZBA July 14, 2004
DRAFT FILED:  7/26/04
FINAL APPROVAL:  10/13/04


VILLAGE OF CROTON ON-HUDSON, N.Y.
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
MEETING MINUTES OF JULY 14, 2004


MEMBERS PRESENT:        Don Sapir, Chairman
                                Rhoda Stephens
                                Paul Rolnick

ALSO PRESENT:            Joseph Sperber, Code Enforcement Officer

MEMBERS ABSENT: Ruth Waitkins
                                Witt Barlow


Meeting came to order at 8:15 P.M.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES:

6/09/04 –       Stephens – Motion to accept as corrected
                Rolnick – Second the Motion
                Vote – 3-0 – Sapir, Stephens, Witt
5/12/04 Stephens – No motion made to accept minutes; changes need to be made
and determination will be made in September.

HEARINGS:

Caryl Bogardus Mooney, 30 Young Avenue, located in a RA-5 District and designated on the Tax Maps of the Village as Section 79.13 Block 2 Lot 52.  Request for a side yard variance with respect to a proposed deck.

Speaker:  Dan Guggenberger, Contractor for the applicant, 4624 Broadway Street, Allentown, P.A.;

Mr. Guggenberger:  I am asking for a continuance of the variance to add on an 8’ x 10’ deck.

Sapir:  Will this deck come closer to the side yard limits when the original variance was granted?

Mr. Guggenberger:  No.  This will be an exposed patio deck.   The condition for granting us the variance months ago is because we would put up lattice around the deck.  We will continue to put lattice around.

Sapir:  And the rest of this submission is the same?

Mr. Guggenberger:  Yes, the 15’ x 10’ that has already been granted will hold the patio room, which will stay the same.

                                                                        Page – 2-
                                                                        ZBA Minutes
7/14/04

Stephens:  Is 2.86 ft. what you need?

Mr. Guggenberger – Yes

Sapir:  This is the new application?

Mr. Guggenberger:  Yes, when I filled out the application, I overlooked to incorporate the whole property.

Sapir:  Any other questions?

Barlow:  Will there be any lights on the deck?

Mr. Guggenberger:  No, I don’t think so.

Barlow:  Do you have any direct comments from your neighbors?

Mr. Guggenberger:;  Yesterday, I spoke with the neighbor; they did not have any negative comments to say.

(Mr. Guggenberger presented a letter of approval to the board from the neighbor, discussion followed)

Hearing Closed

Motion: Stephens motioned to grant a 2.86 ft side yard variance with condition that
lattice will be continued under deck and will be constructed according to
plans submitted with the condition that no lighting will be included.

Barlow: Second the motion.

Vote:           In Favor 3-0 – Sapir, Stephens, Barlow



Aaron & Nina Gershowitz – 103 Truesdale Drive, Located in a RA-25 District and designated on the Tax Maps of the Village as Section 79.05 Block 2 Lot 13.  Request for a Lot width and Lot depth variance with respect to a proposed construction of an addition and retaining wall.

Speaker:  Jean Vetrano with Sal Mansini Associates – Architect for Mr. Gershowitz.

Mr. Vetrano:  The agenda only asked for the Lot width and Lot depth variance.  I am also asking for an area variance.  The existing area is 1,244 square feet.  We need 2,500 square feet.  We propose to maximize the footprint on the right side of the house, taking out the bluestone and redoing the wall.  We want to go an additional 2 to 3 feet.  We have a letter from the neighbor on the left side in support of the variance.

(Mr. Vetrano presented the board with the letter)
Page – 3-
                                                                        ZBA Minutes
7/14/04


Sapir:  We will make this letter part of the record.  Can you describe what will be built?

Mr. Vetrano:  Part of the wall will be the foundation.  The foundation will become a retaining wall.  The wall had deteriorated, so we will continue the foundation wall and reset the bluestone.  If you require a drywell, we will put it in the plans.

Sapir:  What is the benefit the application seeks?

Mr. Vetrano:  The entire home is less than 1,500 square feet.  The kitchen is 8 x 12 ft. and the dining room is 8 x 10 ft.  The Gershowitz’s are a growing family.  We plan on taking out a wall that is presently between the kitchen, dining room and covered patio to create one open space.

Sapir:  How many square feet?

Mr. Vetrano:  282 square feet.

Sapir:  When was the house built?

Mr. Vetrano:  In the 60’s.  It has met all codes.  RA-25 zone.

Sapir:  Will the architectural style change?

Mr. Vetrano:  Yes, the house is contemporary.  (Mr. Vetrano then showed the board the plans)

Sapir:  Will the front stay the same?

Mr. Vetrano:  Yes.

Stephens:  What kind of finish will the house have?

Mr. Vetrano:  Siding and new Anderson windows.

Sapir:  What is behind the house?

Mr. Vetrano:  A fairly steep slope.

Sapir:  Any questions from the members of the board?

There was no reply.

Hearing Closed

Motion: Stephens motioned to grant variance for lot area of 12,961 square feet; lot
width of 25 ft; lot depth of 35.22 ft for an addition for plans submitted with
condition that siding match siding on existing structure.
Barlow: Second the motion.
Vote:           In Favor 3-0 – Sapir, Stephens, Barlow
Page – 4-
                                                                        ZBA Minutes
7/14/04

Tracy and Steven Dorien, 2 Elm Street, located in a RA-5 District and designated on the Tax Maps of the Village as Section 79.05 Block 2 Lot 13.  Request for a front yard variance with respect to a proposed addition.

Speaker:  Tracey Dorien:  Homeowner

Ms. Dorien:  We are requesting a 4-foot front yard variance mainly to do a new entryway and to allow better traffic flow.  Right now, we have no dining area and we are a family of six in a 9’ x 10’ kitchen.

Sapir.  What will the kitchen be like after the addition?

Ms. Dorien:  Basically the kitchen will stay the same.  The addition would be an eating area and a mudroom.

Sapir:  You gave us something your neighbors signed?

Ms. Dorien:  Yes, they have no objection.

Barlow:  What is the existing square footage of the house?

Ms. Dorien:  1,600 square feet, which includes the basement.

Sapir:  Is it a finished basement?

Ms. Dorien:  Partially finished.

Sapir:  Are the elevations going to be done by your architect?

Ms. Dorien:  Yes, he will be doing the drawings.

Sapir:  What will the front of the house look like?  Will it come out 4-feet?

Ms. Dorien:  Yes.

Stephens:  Is the entrance on Elm or Hudson?

Ms. Dorien:  Elm.

Barlow:  Will the stairway move to another location?

Ms. Dorien:  No. (Mr. & Mrs. Dorien presented the architectural plans to the board)

Sapir:  Will you have an overhang?

Ms. Dorien: I requested an overhang, but the architect did not draw it.
Page – 5-
                                                                        ZBA Minutes
7/14/04

Sapir:  This does not accurately show us what it will look like.  (Looking at plans)

Stephens:  Looking at the plans, it looks as though the roofline is higher.

Ms. Dorien:  The way my architect explained it to us, it will be the same height as the roof, even though it does not look like that in the plans.

Sapir:  Was there any way you could do the kitchen without a front yard variance?

Ms. Dorien:  No. I only need a 4-foot variance.

Sapir:  How many square feet are you adding?

Ms. Dorien:  26 x 10.  I’m not sure if 8 square feet or 10 square feet according to the plans.


Barlow:  The architect should redo the plans.

Ms. Dorien:  Okay.

Stephens:  (Looking at the plans)  Looking at the whole elevation, what will be underneath?

Ms. Dorien:  A crawl space.

Stephens:  Will it be completely closed in?

Ms. Dorien:  Yes.

Ms. Dorien:  (asking the board) In order for us to go ahead with the proposed 10 ft., do we need to revise the drawing?

Sapir:  I think that you can do the drawing yourself.  Just draw out a line.  We will put your matter aside for now and come back to you at the end of the hearings

Mr. Dorien – Returned to the hearing and submitted the plans with drawn lines as requested and submitted it to the Board.

Hearing Closed

Motion: Sapir motioned to grant the application for a 4 ft front yard variance to
permit a new addition with a new entryway in accordance with plans
submitted with condition that applicant may construct addition according to
its original plans before the amendment.  Further condition that the addition
have siding and roof to conform to the existing siding and roof.

Barlow: Second the motion.

Vote:           In Favor 3-0 – Sapir, Stephens, Barlow

Page – 6-
                                                                        ZBA Minutes
7/14/04


David Bauder, 46 Farrington Road.  Located in a RA-5 District and is designated on the Tax Maps of the Village as Section 79.05 Block 2 Lot 13.  Request for a side yard variance with respect to a proposed deck and existing deck.

Speaker:  Ken Bingham, Architect with SMA Architect in Croton-on-Hudson, speaking for Mr. Bauder.

Mr. Bingham:  We are requesting a side yard variance of 2.5 feet for a walkway that goes from the front of the house to the kitchen door and to the decks in the back.

Barlow:  Is the existing deck going to be replaced?

Mr. Bingham:  No.  One of the decks will be modified.

Sapir:  When were the decks built?

Mr. Bingham:  I believe the two decks in the back were built in the 1960’s.  I don’t have any evidence other than a site plan and survey that was filed with the town.

Stephens:  Will the walkway be above ground?

Mr. Bingham:  Yes.

Stephens:  How high?

Mr. Bingham:  From the front, approximately 4-feet high, that is where the first floor level is.

Sapir:  Is the purpose for an easy access to the deck?

Mr. Bingham:  Yes, we need access to the decks from the kitchen for eating and entertaining.

Sapir:  What is the access to the deck now?

Mr. Bingham:  There used to be a walkway and steps to the deck from the back yard.  We are replacing what was there, but making it smaller because of the addition.

Barlow:  What will the area underneath the deck be used for?

Mr. Bingham:  The decks now?  They have lattice.  It’s not being used for anything.

Barlow:  How about the deck?

Mr. Bingham:  It won’t be used for anything.  There is only gravel underneath now.

Stephens:  Do you have lattice under the old decks?

Mr. Bingham:  Yes.
Page – 7-
                                                                        ZBA Minutes
7/14/04





Sapir:  Will you continue the lattice along the walkway?  That would be an improvement if you did.  It would protect the area from children.

Stephens:  Let’s make a contingency to continue the lattice up the walkway.

Mr. Bingham:  We also have a letter from two neighbors that have no objections.

Barlow:  Which neighbors?

Mr. Bingham:  The one’s across the street, and one neighbor on the same side as the deck.

Barlow:  Will there be any lights on the walkway?

Mr. Bingham:  No.

Sapir:  What would be the hardship if this is not granted?

Mr. Bingham:  We would not be able to get to the kitchen without` going through the basement doors, or we would have to go out the front door and around the property.

Sapir:  Any other questions?

No Answer.

Hearing Closed

Motion: Sapir motioned to grant the application variance of 2.5 ft side yard for
walkway to connect the decks according to plans submitted with condition
that lattice under decks to be continued under walkway.

Stephens:       Second the motion.

Vote:           In Favor 3-0 – Sapir, Stephens, Barlow














                                Page – 8-
                                                                                ZBA Minutes
7/14/04



Elton Robinson, Nordica Drive, Located in a RA-25 District and designated on the Tax Maps of the Village as Section 79.14 Block 1 Lot 11.  Request for a proposed parking area with respect to Section 230-33 and Section 230-51 (b) of the Village Code.  (Adjourned on 6/9/04)

Motion: Sapir motioned that parking area is appropriate and does not require a
variance.

Stephens:       Second the motion.

Vote:           In Favor 3-0 – Sapir, Stephens, Barlow

Hearing closed.


Respectfully submitted


Mona Senik
Acting as ZBA Secretary
5/12/04



RESOLUTION


Caryl Bogardus Mooney, has applied to the Zoning Board of Appeals in the Village of Croton-on-Hudson, request a side yard variance with respect to a proposed deck.

The property at 30 Young Avenue is located in a RA-5 District and is designated on the Tax Maps of the Village as Section 79.13 Block 2 Lot 52.

A public hearing having been held after due notice, this Board from the application and after viewing the premises and neighborhood concerned, finds:

-       The applicant’s need for the improvements is evident.

-       There will be no detriment to the neighborhood or environment.

-       The variances requested are not substantial.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the application is hereby GRANTED as follows:

Motion was made by Stephens to GRANT the variances as follows:

-       2.86 ft. for side yard variance with the condition lattice will be continued up walkway and no lights to be included.


Barlow –        Second the Motion

Vote -  3-0 – all in favor – Sapir, Stephens, Barlow


7/14/04


According to Section 230-76 (D), “Unless work is commenced and diligently prosecuted within one (1) year of the date of the granting of a variance or special permit, such variance or special permit shall become null and void”.



RESOLUTION


Aaron & Nina Gershowitz, has applied to the Zoning Board of Appeals in the Village of Croton-on-Hudson, request for a Lot width and Lot depth variance with respect to a proposed construction of an addition and retaining wall.

The property at 103 Truesdale Drive, Located in a RA-25 District and designated on the Tax Maps of the Village as 79.05 Block 2 Lot 13.

A public hearing having been held after due notice, this Board from the application and after viewing the premises and neighborhood concerned, finds:

-       The applicant’s need for the improvements is evident.

-       There will be no detriment to the neighborhood or environment.

-       The variances requested are substantial.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the application is hereby GRANTED as follows:

Motion was made by Sapir to GRANT the variance as follows:

-       Motion to grant variance for Lot area of 12,961 square feet, Lot width of 25 feet, Lot depth of 35.22 feet for an addition according to plans submitted with condition that siding match siding on existing structure.


Stephens  –     Second the Motion

Vote -  3-0 – all in favor – Sapir, Stephens, Barlow


7/14/04


According to Section 230-76 (D), “Unless work is commenced and diligently prosecuted within one (1) year of the date of the granting of a variance or special permit, such variance or special permit shall become null and void”.



RESOLUTION


Tracey & Steven Dorien, has applied to the Zoning Board of Appeals in the Village of Croton-on-Hudson, request for a front yard variance with respect to a proposed addition.

The property at 2 Elm Street, Located in a RA-5 District and designated on the Tax Maps of the Village as Section 79.09 Block 1 Lot 65.

A public hearing having been held after due notice, this Board from the application and after viewing the premises and neighborhood concerned, finds:

-       The applicant’s need for the improvements is evident.

-       There will be no detriment to the neighborhood or environment.

-       The variances requested are not substantial.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the application is hereby GRANTED as follows:

Motion was made by Sapir to GRANT the application as follows:

-       4 ft. front yard variance according to the plans submitted and amended for a new addition with a new entryway and with the condition that the siding and roof of the new addition conform to the existing siding and roof.



Rolnick –       Second the Motion

Vote -  3-0 – all in favor – Sapir, Stephens, Rolnick


7/14/04


According to Section 230-76 (D), “Unless work is commenced and diligently prosecuted within one (1) year of the date of the granting of a variance or special permit, such variance or special permit shall become null and void”.



RESOLUTION


David Bauder, has applied to the Zoning Board of Appeals in the Village of Croton-on-Hudson, request a side yard variance with respect to a proposed deck.

The property at 46 Farrington Road., Located in a RA-5 District and is designated on the Tax Maps of the Village as Section 79.05 Block 2 Lot 13.

A public hearing having been held after due notice, this Board from the application and after viewing the premises and neighborhood concerned, finds:

-       The applicant’s need for the improvements is evident.

-       There will be no detriment to the neighborhood or environment.

-       The variances requested are not substantial.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the application is hereby GRANTED as follows:

Motion was made by Stephens to GRANT the application as follows:

-       2.5 ft. for walkway to connect to decks according to plans submitted with condition that lattice under decks to be continued under walkway.


Barlow  –       Second the Motion

Vote -  3-0 – all in favor – Sapir, Stephens, Rolnick


7/14/04


According to Section 230-76 (D), “Unless work is commenced and diligently prosecuted within one (1) year of the date of the granting of a variance or special permit, such variance or special permit shall become null and void”.


RESOLUTION


Elton Robinson, has applied to the Zoning Board of Appeals in the Village of Croton-on-Hudson, request a side yard variance with respect to a proposed deck.

The property at Nordica Drive, Located in a RA-25 District and designated on the Tax Maps of the Village as Section 79.14 Block 1 Lot 11.

A public hearing having been held after due notice, this Board from the application and after viewing the premises and neighborhood concerned, finds:

-       The applicant’s need for the improvements is evident.

-       There will be no detriment to the neighborhood or environment.

-       The variances requested are not substantial.



NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board made the following decision.

Sapir – Made Motion to determine that the parking area is appropriate and does not require a variance.

Stephens – Second the Motion

Vote -  3-0 – all in favor – Sapir, Stephens, Rolnick


7/14/04


According to Section 230-76 (D), “Unless work is commenced and diligently prosecuted within one (1) year of the date of the granting of a variance or special permit, such variance or special permit shall become null and void”.