ZBA March 8, 2006
                                                                                                                                                         DRAFT FILED: 3/21/06
                                                        FINAL APPROVAL: 4/12/06



VILLAGE OF CROTON-ON-HUDSON ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MEETING MINUTES OF MARCH 8, 2006


MEMBERS PRESENT:        Kathleen Riedy, Chairman
                                               Ruth Waitkins
                                               Rhoda Stephens
                                               Paul Rolnick

MEMBERS ABSENT: Witt Barlow

ALSO PRESENT:           Joseph Sperber, Code Enforcement Officer


Meeting came to order at 8:00 P.M.

The Chairman of the Board announced the location of fire exits to all in attendance of the meeting.

HEARINGS:

James & Lucille Tuman, 70 Mt. Airy Rd.   Located in a RA-25 District and designated on the Tax Maps of the Village as Section 68.17 Block 1 Lot 6 & 7.  Request for a front yard variance with respect to a proposed ground floor and second story addition (Adj. on 2/8/06)

James Tuman – The hearing was adjourned on February 8, 2006, due to the Board’s request for revised plans with respect to the final placement of windows.  The new drawings that were submitted to you represent the final placement of the windows and also the Village Engineers comments were addressed.

Discussion followed over plans.

Tuman – From the street you do not see the bottom part of the house.  It is actually partially behind a retaining wall.

Rolnick – How high is the fence in relation to the first story windows?

Tuman – It is above them so you can’t see the first floor.  What you see outside the property line is above the ground floor.
                                                                        Page -2-
                                                                                                           ZBA Minutes
                                                                                                           3/08/06


Discussion followed over plans with respect to placement of windows and what windows will be removed on the left side of the elevation plans.

Riedy – Has the Village Engineer technically reviewed the plans?

Tuman – They have been reviewed based on his comments, but not finalized yet.

Rolnick - If you were to build on the side facing the tennis court….why do you not want to build there?

Tuman – In order to build a second floor the one option would be to build over the porch, but you would need to build up the roof in order to get a slope on it and it would change the whole scale of the entire house.

Discussion followed over plans.

Tuman - If I were to build there it would be a massive project and ruin the scale of the small house.  You would see more from the road.  Our neighbors who do not have a problem with our proposed plans would be able to see it more and would have a problem with it.  We are trying to keep the original scale of the house.

Waitkins – They will not see the house from Mt. Airy Rd.?

Tuman – You would see it a little, but the other way you would see it more.

Stephens – The shingles on the house will remain?

Tuman - There is siding and that will be removed and be replaced with new siding.  The original part of the house is the ground floor.  The top floor was added on in the fifties.  We will be residing in the whole house.

Rolnick – Would you object if we requested all siding to match?

Tuman – The existing siding is old and needs to be replaced.  I do not object to having a condition that requires all siding to match.

Riedy – When will you start construction?

Tuman- As soon as possible.

Rolnick – It will be three bedrooms?
Page -3-
                                                                                                           ZBA Minutes
                                                                                                           3/08/06

Tuman – There are three bedrooms upstairs and one downstairs.  It is a total of four bedrooms.

Discussion followed over plans.


Riedy – Anyone else like to comment on the application?

There was no reply.


Hearing Closed.


Rolnick – Made Motion to Grant a front yard variance of 35 ft. and according to plans submitted with the condition that the new siding will be consistent with the entire house and subject to the approval of the Village Engineer.

Waitkins – Second the Motion

Vote:  4-0 - In Favor - Rolnick, Waitkins, Riedy, Stephens



Amy Cotton, 111 Grand Street, Located in a C-1 District and designated on the Tax Maps of the Village as Section 67.20 Block 3 Lot 26.  Request to renew variances that were granted on March 12, 2001, to operate a business, which is for the resale of used items, collectibles and antiques and a variance from Section 230-35 of the Village Code with respect to off-street parking.

Cotton - I want to thank you.  I think it has been ten years since my first variance and almost five years since my last variance that needs to be renewed.  I would like to request renewal for another five years or longer, if possible.

Waitkins – Has it been five years since you have been before us?

Cotton – For this variance, yes.  I came before you a couple of years ago for an awning.

Stephens – You are asking for a variance with respect to off-street parking and the building being enclosed on all four sides?

Cotton – Yes.
Page -4-
                                                                                                           ZBA Minutes
                                                                                                           3/08/06

Riedy – Is your business the same as it was five years ago collectables and antique sales?

Cotton – Yes.

Stephens – Do you understand there are to be no displays on the public sidewalks?

Cotton – I do put a few things out, but I do not obstruct the sidewalk.

Rolnick – What exactly did you get a variance for?  Do you remember?

Cotton – Section 230-35 with respect to off-street parking spaces.

Sperber - The main issue was off street parking.  The other was for the use and the building not being enclosed on all four sides.

Rolnick – 230-16(B), I think that had to do with the garage door, so in affect we did say she needed it, just in case she needed it, she would have it.

Sperber – Yes, so it could apply for the fourth side of the building.  She is requesting a renewal of the variance she received on March 14, 2001.

Rolnick – I cannot seem to find this Section of the Code in our new Code.

Discussion followed over the new Code.

Sperber – Referred to Section 230-16(D) of the new Code.

Riedy – It also refers to special permits for displays on the sidewalk.

Rolnick - There is no use variance needed.  It is permitted.

Discussion followed over the correct Code to relate to.

Rolnick – Do you have a variance that allows displays on the sidewalk?

Cotton – I remember the previous Chairman saying not to put displays on the sidewalk, but my property comes out a little on the side.

Riedy – So you are saying your property extends beyond the building?

Cotton - I think so.

Page -5-
                                                                                                           ZBA Minutes
                                                                                                           3/08/06




Rolnick - So, it is an enforcement issue then.

Sperber - We are not enforcing outdoor displays and no one is asking us to.

Cotton – A special permit was issued in 1994.

Sperber – So the inclusion of a special permit for a display, does that make that permit null and void?  The Code was changed in 2004.

Riedy – This speaks to a Special Permit, but I do not think we have outdoor displays as Ms. Cotton is describing.  But, this is for outdoor display on Village property rather than private property.

Stephens – Referred to the New Code that states “Upon issuance of Special Permits sidewalk display of merchandise or dining shall be allowed outside retail stores or restaurants.

Discussion followed over current Codes and Codes that were in existence at the time the variance was granted and the need to see a survey with respect to property lines.

Sperber – Ms. Cotton says her displays are not in the way and it is a private sidewalk, not a public sidewalk, so she could exclude them from using it, if she wished to do so.  The Codes we should be referring to are 230-35 for off-street parking and 230-16(d).

Riedy – How many years have you operated that shop?

Cotton – April of 1997 we purchased it and we had the business there prior to that date.

Riedy – Your shop has been open for ten years?










Page -6-
                                                                                                           ZBA Minutes
                                                                                                           3/08/06


Cotton – Yes.

Riedy-Are there any other questions?


There was no reply.


Hearing Closed.

Rolnick – Made Motion to grant the variances requested with respect to Current Village Code, Section 230-35 for Off-Street Parking and Section 230-16(D) pertaining to uses, building enclosed on all four sides, and sidewalk displays of merchandise and according to the following condition:

1.      Business shall be limited to the re-sale of used items, collectibles and antiques.


Waitkins – Second the Motion

Vote:  4-0 - In Favor – Rolnick, Waitkins, Riedy, Stephens



Respectfully submitted,


Janice Fuentes
ZBA Secretary
3/8/06












                                RESOLUTION


Amy Cotton, has applied to the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Village of Croton-on-Hudson, requesting to renew variances that were granted on March 14, 2001, to operate a business, which is for the re-sale of used items, collectibles and antiques and a variance from Section 230-35 of the Village Code with respect to off-street parking.

The property, 111 Grand Street, is located in a C-1, District and is designated on the Tax Maps of the Village as Section 67.20 Block 3 Lot 26.

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


There has been a change in the Village Code (2004) since the previous variance was granted (2001).  Therefore, with respect to this application the Board will refer to Current Code Section 230-35 with respect to off-street parking and Section 230-16(D) with respect to uses, building enclosed on all four sides and sidewalk displays of merchandise.



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

Rolnick – Made Motion to grant the variances requested with respect to Current Village Code, Section 230-35 for Off-Street Parking and Section 230-16(D) pertaining to uses, building enclosed on all four sides, and sidewalk displays of merchandise and according to the following condition:

2.      Business shall be limited to the re-sale of used items, collectibles and antiques.


Waitkins – Second the Motion

Vote:  4-0 - In Favor – Rolnick, Waitkins, Riedy, Stephens



3/8/06


                                RESOLUTION


James & Lucille Tuman, have applied to the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Village of Croton-on-Hudson, for a front yard variance with respect to a proposed ground floor and second story addition.

The property, at 70 Mt. Airy Rd., is located in a RA-25, District and is designated on the Tax Maps of the Village as Section 68.17 Block 1 Lot 6 & 7.

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


There will be no undesirable change to the character of the neighborhood.

The neighbors who will be most affected did not object to the application.

The hardship is self created by purchasing a house that was too small.  However, the applicant purchased a house that he could afford.  The structure is old and needs updating and it pre-dates zoning.

The proposed variance will not have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district.




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

Rolnick – Made Motion to Grant a front yard variance of 35 ft. and according to plans submitted with the condition that the new siding will be consistent with the entire house and subject to the approval of the Village Engineer.

Waitkins – Second the Motion

Vote:  4-0 In Favor - Rolnick, Waitkins, Riedy, Stephens


3/8/06



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.”