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 April 11, 2007
                                                        DRAFT FILED:  4/24/07



VILLAGE OF CROTON-ON-HUDSON ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MEETING MINUTES OF APRIL 11, 2007.



MEMBERS PRESENT:        Kathleen Riedy, Chairman
                                               Ruth Waitkins
                                               Witt Barlow


MEMBERS ABSENT:  Rhoda Stephens
                                                Doug Olcott

ALSO PRESENT:            Joseph Sperber, Code Enforcement Officer




The meeting came to order at 8:00 P.M.


Kathleen Riedy – Chairman of the Board – Stated to the applicants that there were only three members present this evening.  Although three members are considered to be a quorum, it would require a unanimous vote of all three members in favor of the application in order for the application to be approved.  Ms. Riedy further stated that it is the Boards usual policy to grant an adjournment to anyone who would like request one until the next meeting, when possibly all five members will be present.


Request for adjournment:


Kay Marron, 120 Mt. Airy Rd.  Located in a RA-40 District and is designated on the Tax Maps of the Village as Section 68.09 Block 3 Lot 2.  Request for a front yard variance with respect to a proposed roof to replace an existing canvas canopy.

Kay Marron, 120 Mt. Airy Rd. – Requested to adjourn the hearing until next month when possibly all five members will be present.



Adjournment granted.

                                                                        Page -2-
                                                                        ZBA Minutes
                                                                                                           4/11/07


Thomas Fallacaro, 3 Arrowcrest Drive.  Located in a RA-40 District and is designated on the Tax Maps of the Village as Section 67.15 Block 1 Lot 33.  Request for  a variance from Section 230-40(A)(1)(B) with respect to a retaining wall being built less than five feet from the side property line, and Section 230-40(b) with respect to a retaining wall being built in a front yard, and Section 230-40(A)(1)(a) with respect to a retaining wall being built higher than 15 ft. (Adjourned on 10/11/06) (11/07/06 Fax request to adjourn until (12/13/06), (12/6/07 requested to adj. until January 10, 2007), (1/3/07 request to adjourn until February 14, 2007). (2/13/07 -Applicant requested to adjourn until further notice).

Adjournment granted


HEARINGS:


John Brijeski, 55 Truesdale Drive.  Located in a RA-9 District and is designated on the Tax Maps of the Village as Section 68.09 Block 3 Lot 2.  Request for a lot width variance, a side yard and total side yard variance with respect to a proposed addition/alteration to a one family dwelling.


Michael Piccirillo, Architect for the applicants – The applicants have a substandard lot width.  It is non-conforming with respect to the side yard.  The renovations will take place in the rear of the house.  

Mr. Brijeski – The house is already legally non-conforming so we need a variance for the addition.  There is an “L” shape in the rear of the house.  We will be filling in the “L” shape to enhance the Tudor look of the house. We will also renovate the existing house to look like a Tudor.    The neighbor’s house to the rear is set on a hill and looks down on our property.   We do not feel our application request will have any negative impact on the neighbors.  The renovations will give the entire house a nice look.  All of the addition will be in the rear.  It will have no impact on the street side.

Reidy – Have you heard from any of your neighbors?

Mrs. Brijeski - Yes.  They are thrilled and wish us luck.  There is existing concrete in the area of the proposed addition. We will not be disturbing any trees.

Mrs. Brijeski - (referring to plans) In this location it takes in water and it seeps into our boiler room and we have sump pumps going when it rains.

Piccirillo - Architect- We will improve the drainage issues as well.

Mr. Brijeski- The house needs a lot of renovating and our family has grown.

Barlow – What is the reason for the addition?
                                                                        Page -3-
                                                                        ZBA Minutes
                                                                                                           4/11/07

Mr. Brijeski- We have two children and we are expecting our third.

Mrs. Brijeski - That is why we did not want to adjourn this hearing.  We need the bedroom space soon.

Barlow – How many bedrooms will there be?

Piccirillo – There will be a larger master bedroom and they will maintain the same number of existing bedrooms.  The second floor is where the master bedroom and a larger bathroom and closet will be.   The only difference is that we are adding a ? bathroom.

Discussion followed over plans.

It was noted by the Board that there was a typographical error on the plans.  The first floor plan noted a “Master Bedroom” when it is actually a family room.

Barlow – There is also an office and three other bedrooms?

Mr. Brijeski - Yes.

Piccirillo – We tried to maintain the existing size of the house.  The front elevation shows that the impact to the front will be minimal.

Discussion followed over plans.

Sperber – The existing bedrooms are probably small because the house was built prior to zoning.  

Mrs. Brijeski– I will soon have three children and they will need an area for toys.  Their bedrooms have just enough space for their beds and a dresser.  There is no area to play.  Extending that corner of the house will help to get a larger kitchen area and family room for the children so they can have room to play.
Reidy – Page A-3 of the plans – tell me what is in the upper left area.

Piccirillo – The left side shows the existing house that is not to be touched.  The right side shows the new side with the two story addition.  This (referring to plans) is the driveway side on the north side.
Barlow  – Truesdale Dr. is to the left as you look at that?

                                                                        Page -4-
                                                                        ZBA Minutes
                                                                                                           4/11/07


Piccirillo – Yes.

Barlow – (Referring to plans) Is that Truesdale Dr, to the other side?

Piccirillo  – Yes.  Truesdale Dr. would be to the right. The drawing on the upper right shows the existing house with the new roof line.

Barlow – What is the window on top? (referring to plans)


Mrs. Brijeski – That is the attic.  We use that for storage.  We have no basement.
Piccirillo – When we construct the new section we will try and go for a basement, if we don’t hit rock.

Mrs. Brijeski– There is an oil tank there now.  The garage is attached so behind it is were the oil tank is so we know there is depth there already.

Man – owner – we want to be able to have the oil tanks inside.

Mrs. – Right now we wouldn’t know if we had an oil leak unless we break the patio.


Reidy – Do your plans include an outside patio?

Piccirillo – That is on the side.  There is a bluestone patio.  That will stay.

Riedy – You are looking for a side yard variance?  Does your plan entail a side yard patio extending beyond the house?


Piccirillo – No just some steps.

Riedy – What about the exterior.  

Piccirillo – It will be stucco and trim.  We want it to blend with the existing stucco with timber trim. The intention is to capture the Tudor feel as much as we can with fake pegs.  

Barlow – To the north you own the next lot and then there is a small one story house beyond that?

                                                                        Page -5-
                                                                        ZBA Minutes
                                                                                                           4/11/07


Piccirillo - Yes.

Barlow – It looks like a lot of room now but what about the property to the south of you.

Mr. Brijeski– The Hunts. They have three lots.  When you are at their house they are looking down at our house.


Barlow – Is it buildable?

Mrs. Brijeski– I don’t know.

Sperber – I checked.  The property goes back to 1989.  That would not qualify as an existing small lot.

Barlow – So, a variance on that side is not much to think about then. What about the other side is that also another small lot?  That changes the request for me, knowing that lot is not a buildable lot.

Sperber – If you combine all three lots together it would be ok.  But, it is not individual and separate.  They are seeking a one foot encroachment on that side.

Piccirillo – it is the little bump off on the second floor that will encroach.  It is a second story encroachment actually.

Reidy – Page A-3 on the bottom shows the bump out.  What is the square footage of the existing house.

Piccirillo – 2,7425 Sq, Ft.

Reidy – The proposed is 3,485.1 Sq. Ft.

Waitkins – Where are you asking for the six feet?  There is nothing there only vacant land?   There is no direct neighbor on each side of them?

Piccirillo– To the south side of my clients house there is currently a vacant lot, but I have just been told it is actually part of three lots and it is not buildable and does not qualify as an existing small lot.

Barlow – That driveway is for your tenant?

                                                                        Page -6-
                                                                        ZBA Minutes
                                                                                                           4/11/07


Mrs. Brijeski– We park in front of our garage.  That driveway has always been there.

Discussion followed over plans with respect to the location of the garage.

Riedy – what would be the hardship if the application were denied?

Mr.  Brijeski- We would continue to have a flooding basement.

Mrs. Brijeski– There is no other place to build.  We can’t go off to the side and we do not want a railroad house, it would take away from the house.

Piccirillo – To try to maintain the legal limits it would be detrimental to the esthetics and would be an eye sore for the neighborhood.  We tried to keep it more compact and we are building in existing non-conforming areas but it is a better design and more useful for them and very attractive.

Barlow – Because of the existing non-conformity you really can’t do anything without needing a variance.

Piccirillo– Correct, unless we started from scratch.

Reidy – Any other questions?

There was no reply.


Hearing Closed.

Waitkins – Made Motion to grant the application according to plans submitted for a lot width side yard variance and total side yard variance and with the condition the applicant amend page A2 of the plans to read “Family Room” on the first floor plans instead of “Master Bedroom.”
Barlow – Second the Motion
Vote – 3-0 – In Favor

Respectfully submitted


Janice Fuentes
ZBA Secretary
4/11/07
                                RESOLUTION


John Brijeski has applied to the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Village of Croton-on-Hudson, for a lot width variance with a side yard variance and total side yard variance with respect to an addition/alteration.

The property, at 55 Truesdale Drive, is located in a RA-9, District and is designated on the Tax Maps of the Village as Section 79.09 Block 6 Lot 31.

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 or detriment to nearby properties.  The lot next door is not a buildable lot and the proposed construction will not have an affect on the neighbors.

There were no objections from the neighbors.  

The applicant’s request cannot be achieved by any other method.  The applicant’s house predates zoning and is legally non-conforming and would need a variance no matter what he was constructing.

The proposed variance will not have an adverse affect on the physical or environmental conditions of the neighborhood or district.




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

Waitkins – Made Motion to grant the application according to plans submitted for a lot width side yard variance and total side yard variance and with the condition the applicant amend page A2 of the plans to read “Family Room” on the first floor plans instead of “Master Bedroom.”
Barlow – Second the Motion
Vote – 3-0 – In Favor