[00:00:01]
SORRY[ TOWN OF GREENBURGH ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS GREENBURGH TOWN HALL FINAL AGENDA THURSDAY, July 15, 2021 – 7:00 P.M. ]
FOR THE DELAY.THIS IS A TRULY A MOMENTOUS OCCASION THAT WE ARE IN PERSON AGAIN, SEEING EACH OTHER.
SOMETHING'S WRONG WITH OUR SPEAKER SYSTEM HERE THEN.
UH, THE MEETING FOR THE ZONING BOARD, THE TOWN OF GREENBURG.
WE'LL COME TO ORDER AT THIS TIME.
WE HAVE NINE CASES SCHEDULED ON TONIGHT'S AGENDA, HOWEVER, CASE 2103 AND 2104 WERE CLOSED FOR DECISION ONLY.
PLEASE NOTE THAT THE ZONING BOARD WILL HAVE OUR NEXT REGULAR MEETING ON THURSDAY, AUGUST 19TH.
TO SAVE TIME, WE WILL WAIVE THE READING OF THE PROPERTY LOCATION AND THE RELIEF SOUGHT FOR EACH CASE.
HOWEVER, THE REPORTER WILL INSERT THIS INFORMATION IN THE RECORD.
THIS INFORMATION ALSO APPEARS IN THE AGENDA FOR TONIGHT'S MEETING AFTER THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR TONIGHT'S CASES, THE BOARD WILL MEET IN THE CONFERENCE ROOM BEHIND US TO DISCUSS THE CASES.
WE'VE HEARD THIS THIS EVENING.
EVERYONE HERE IS WELCOME AT THAT TIME TO LISTEN TO OUR DELIBERATIONS, BUT THE PUBLIC WILL NOT BE PERMITTED TO PARTICIPATE OR SPEAK AT THAT TIME.
AFTER DUE DELIBERATIONS, WE'LL COME BACK TO THIS ROOM TO ANNOUNCE THE BOARD'S DECISION FOR THE FORMAL RECORD AND FOR IT TO BE BROADCAST TO THE COMMUNITY.
IF YOU'RE GOING TO SPEAK TONIGHT, YOU MUST COME UP TO THE MICROPHONE TO CLEARLY STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS OR YOUR PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATION.
IF YOU'RE NOT A NAMED APPLICANT, PLEASE SPELL YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD.
WE HAVE HEARD TESTIMONY ON SOME OF THE CASES PRIOR TO, UH, PRIOR MEETINGS, AND ANY PRIOR TESTIMONY IS ALREADY IN THE RECORD AND SHOULD NOT BE REPEATED.
TONIGHT'S FIRST CASE TO BE HEARD IS CASE 2109 HAMPSHIRE MANAGEMENT AT 2 15, 3 0 5 NORTH CENTRAL AVENUE.
BEFORE I GO FORWARD, I WANT TO MAKE EVERYONE AWARE THAT WE ONLY HAVE FOUR BOARD MEMBERS HERE THIS EVENING.
THAT MEANS THAT IF WE DO NOT, IF WE ARE NOT UNANIMOUS IN ANY DECISIONS, PARTICULARLY FAVORED DECISIONS, WE CANNOT GIVE, GIVE, GIVE, UH, UH, DECISIVE VOTE, VOTE.
IF ON THE OTHER HAND, TAKING THE OPPOSITE, IF THERE ARE ANY DECISIONS THAT WE ARE, WE ARE IN FAVOR OF NOT GRANTING AND ALL FOUR IN FAVOR, THEN THERE WOULD BE A DENIAL.
SO I JUST WANT YOU TO BE AWARE THAT BECAUSE WE DO NOT HAVE A FULL BOARD AT THIS TIME, THOSE ARE SOME OF THE CONCERNS THAT IF YOU WISH TO AND YOU WISH TO ASK FOR AN ADJOURNMENT BECAUSE THIS MIGHT IMPACT YOU, YOU CAN CERTAINLY ASK FOR THAT AT THIS TIME, SEEING NO HANDS BEING RAISED, I GUESS WE'LL PROCEED.
UH, MR. DECANE, DID YOU WANNA COMMENT ON THE FACT THAT WE SWITCHED SO SUDDENLY FROM THE VIRTUAL TO THE IN-PERSON AND HOW THAT AFFECTS PERHAPS SOME OF THE INDIVIDUALS WHO MIGHT HAVE THOUGHT THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO GO ONLINE AND PARTICIPATE THIS EVENING? YEAH, SURE.
UM, THROUGHOUT THE PANDEMIC, OBVIOUSLY WE'VE USED THE ZOOM VIDEO CONFERENCE AND, UM, YOU KNOW, IT IS GREAT MANY ADVANTAGES FOR RESIDENTS THAT ARE UNABLE TO, UH, YOU KNOW, MAKE IT OUT AND HAVE MOBILITY ISSUES.
SO, UM, WE ARE IN THE PROCESS AS A TOWN OF WORKING OUT OUR, OUR VIDEO AUDIO SYSTEM SO THAT WE CAN ENABLE THE HYBRID MODEL, WHICH WE'LL HAVE ZOOM.
SO, UM, WE'RE WORKING ON THAT.
IN THE INTERIM, UH, I WILL BE MONITORING, UH, THE EMAIL, PUBLIC HEARING@GREENBURGNY.COM.
SO IF YOU'RE HOME WATCHING THE APPLICA, THE, THE, UH, Z B A MEETING RIGHT NOW, AND YOU HAVE A COMMENT ON AN APPLICATION THAT YOU'D LIKE TO RAISE TO THE ZONING BOARD, UH, WHEN THAT APPLICATION IS HEARD, YOU CAN SEND AN EMAIL IN AND I WILL BE HAPPY TO RECITE IT.
I WOULD JUST ASK THE PEOPLE PUT THEIR NAME AND, UH, ADDRESS TIED TO THE EMAIL AND, UH, SO I WILL ALERT THE Z B A IF THAT OCCURS.
ALRIGHT, CASE 2109, HAMPSHIRE MANAGEMENT COMPANY.
WE WERE GOING TO, WE HAVE GOTTEN A REQUEST ON CASE 2103.
UM, WE WILL CONSIDER THAT REQUEST, HOWEVER, WE WILL DO THAT AT THE TIME THAT, UH, WE HAVE FINISHED THE OTHER, THE OTHER CASES THAT ARE ON OUR AGENDA FOR THIS EVENING.
UNLESS, UNLESS THERE'S A WISH TO BE HEARD AT THIS POINT AS TO WHY WE SHOULD CONSIDER GRANTING THAT AT THIS TIME.
IS THERE ANYONE, PARDON? EXCUSE ME.
IS THERE ANYONE THAT WAS PREPARED
[00:05:01]
TO DO THAT AT THIS TIME? ALRIGHT, THEN WE WILL PROCEED.GOOD EVENING'S, THE, THE AUDIO VOLUME IN.
YES, I'M CHRIS LARNER, GENERAL COUNSEL FOR HAMPSHIRE MANAGEMENT.
UH, I'M HERE WITH, UM, GREG PETRILLO OWNER, UH, AS WELL AS MICHAEL SANTO OF SANTA AWNINGS, ALSO HERE ON BEHALF OF HAMPSHIRE MANAGEMENT.
WE ARE RETURNING HERE FOR HAMPSHIRE'S VARIANCE REQUEST IN CONNECTION WITH A PROPOSED REPLACEMENT YARD SIGN AT HAMPSHIRE'S SHOPPING CENTER PROPERTY, WESTCHESTER SQUARE, UH, LOCATED AT TWO 15 THROUGH 3 0 5 NORTH CENTRAL AVENUE IN PARTICULAR, WE'RE, WE'RE BACK HERE, UH, IN CONNECTION WITH THE BOARD'S REQUEST FOR SOME ADDITIONAL INFORMATION WITH RESPECT TO THE DIMENSIONS OF EXISTING SIGNAGE AND SOME OTHER PROPERTIES IN THE AREA, UH, WHICH WE'VE DONE.
UH, SO BEFORE I TURN THINGS OVER TO MIKE, HE'S A DEEPER DIVE.
HE'S GOT SOME, SOME LONGING, SOME PHOTOS.
UH, I JUST WANNA POINT OUT TWO THINGS.
ONE, IN, IN LOOKING AT THOSE DIMENSIONS FOR THE EXISTING
WE ARE CONSISTENT, UH, WITH EXISTING SIGNAGE IN TERMS OF WIDTH.
UH, AND THE OTHER THING I DID WANT TO POINT OUT, THERE ARE SOME PARTICULAR CHARACTERISTICS TO THE WESTCHESTER SQUARE PROPERTY, UH, THAT DO REDUCE VISIBILITY FROM CENTRAL PARK AVENUE AS COMPARED TO SOME OF THE OTHER SHOPPING CENTERS.
AND THAT IMMEDIATE CORRIDOR IN PARTICULAR, IT'S THE GREEN SPACE THAT THAT REALLY IS ON THE, THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY.
SO WE BELIEVE THAT THE PROPOSED SIGNAGE HERE REALLY DOES STRIKE THAT RIGHT BALANCE BETWEEN VISIBILITY AS THE SIGNAGE NEEDS, BUT WITHOUT CREATING A DISTRACTION FOR, UH, MOTORISTS ON CENTRAL AB, WHICH WE KNOW IS AN IMPORTANT FACTOR FOR THE BOARD TO CONSIDER.
SO WITH THAT, I'LL TURN THINGS OVER TO MIKE.
MICHAEL SANTA, S A N T OIU IO SAND SIGNS AND
UH, WE'RE BACK BEFORE YOU TONIGHT, AND IF I MAY, CAN I SHARE A FLASH DRIVE THAT YOU GUYS COULD PUT SOME ADDITIONAL PHOTOS AS I GO THROUGH A PRESENTATION WHEN HE RETURNS
SO AT OUR LAST MEETING, THE BOARD REQUESTED THAT WE MAKE SOME DESIGN CHANGES AND CONFIRM THE DALE WOOD SIGN SIZES COMPARED TO OUR SIGN.
WE DID NOT CHANGE THIS PROPOSED SIGN FROM LAST MEETING TO THIS MEETING, BUT WE DID MAKE SEVERAL DESIGN CHANGES WITHIN THE FONTS AND THE COLORS TO MAKE IT MORE READABLE AND MORE FUNCTION.
UM, THE RENDERING UP THERE IS NOT PROPER BECAUSE WE REMOVED THE ART DECO FEATURES ON BOTH POLES WAS SOME BROUGHT UP BY ONE OF THE BOARD MEMBERS.
UM, OUR SIGN MEASURES 20 FEET TALL IS 12 FEET WIDE, WHEREAS THE DALE ROAD PROPERTY SIGNAGE IS 25 FEET TALL.
AND AS YOU CAN SEE, WE WANNA MAKE, WE WANNA MAKE SURE THAT YOU STAY ON THE MIC SO THAT IT'S BEING PICKED UP FOR THE RECORDING.
AS YOU CAN SEE, WE SUPERIMPOSED OUR SIGN RIGHT NEXT TO THE DALEWOOD SIGN, AND YOU CAN SEE IT'S FIVE FEET SHORTER, WHICH IS QUITE SUBSTANTIAL.
THEIR SIGN IS A HUNDRED SIXTY SIXTY FOUR SQUARE FEET, WHERE OUR SIGN IS ONLY 138 SQUARE FEET, WHICH IS 26 SQUARE FEET DIFFERENCE.
THE WIDTH OF OUR PROPOSED SIGN IS 12 FEET, WHICH IS THE SAME SIZE AS THEIR SIGN.
I ALSO WANT TO NOTE THAT UNDER SECTION 2 85 DASH 29.1 B A B ONE, THE ADDRESS PORTION OF THE SIGN, WHICH ACCOUNTS FOR TWO FOOT TWO INCHES OF THE TOTAL HEIGHT AND THE SIGN 24 SQUARE FEET OF AREA, SHOULD NOT BE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF THE SIGN.
SO IN ALL ACTUALITY, OUR SIGN REQUEST IS ONLY FOR 114 SQUARE FEET.
CAN I GIVE YOU A FLASH DRIVE TO SHARE SOME PICTURES? YES.
UH, WERE THEY, IF THEY WERE SUBMITTED, I MAY HAVE THEM, BUT IF IT'S DIFFERENT, I, I ADDED AND I CLEANED IT UP INTO FOLDERS.
[00:10:17]
OKAY.UM, WHICH ONE? NOW? SUPPORTING IMAGES, IF, IF, IF YOU CAN GO TO YES PODIUM, YOU CAN GO TO THE, THE COMBINED DOCS.
SO FOR THIS PRESENTATION BOARD, YOU, YOU'LL SEE THIS PRESENTATION, YOU CAN OPEN THAT UP SECOND ONE DOWN.
YOU'RE NOT PICKING THAT UP EVEN WHEN THEY'RE THERE.
IF HE WANTS TO STAND THERE TO POSTER, HE NEEDS TO PICK THE MIC UP OFF THE PODIUM AND HE CAN STAND THERE TO POSTER.
SO AS YOU CAN SEE IN, WITHIN THIS PAGE HERE, YOU CAN SEE A COMPARISON BETWEEN OUR SIGN AND THE DALEWOOD SIGN, WHICH AS WE STATED PRIOR IS FIVE FEET SHORTER AND SUBSTANTIALLY LESS THAN SQUARE FOOTAGE.
THE DELLWOOD SIGN IS A LOT CLOSER TO THE ROADWAY, WHEREAS OPPOSED TO OURS, WE, IF ANYBODY WANTS TO TURN, WE COULD SEE THAT THE, THE SIGNS ARE NEXT TO EACH OTHER WITH SIZE DIFFERENCES CLEARLY INDICATED.
NOW, ONE OF THOSE REASONS BEING IS THAT THE SKILL WOULD SIGN IS EIGHT SIX ABOVE GRADE BECAUSE THERE'S A LINE OF SIGHT ISSUE AND WE MUST MAKE, THEY MUST MAKE SURE THAT PEDESTRIANS DON'T HIT THEIR HEAD ON THE SIGN.
THIS DOES NOT GO AHEAD AND AFFECT US BECAUSE WE HAVE ALL THAT GREEN SCAPE AND PLANTERS, SO PEOPLE DON'T WALK THERE AND OUR SIGN IS SET BACK SUBSTANTIALLY FURTHER FROM THE SIDEWALK.
IF YOU COULD GO TO THE SURROUNDING PHOTOS.
SO THIS IS A ONE PAGE P D F, UM, THEN THERE'S THIS, WHICH IS A ONE PAGE P D F.
THERE WAS ANOTHER FOLDER THAT HAS SAID SUPPORTING IMAGES.
I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S THE ONE YOU WANT.
YEAH'S, LOOK AT DALEWOOD PHOTOS TO START.
SO, AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THE DALEWOOD PHOTOS, THERE IS NO GREENERY.
NOT ONLY IS THE PYLON SIGN THAT MUCH TALLER THAN OURS, WE COULD READ ALL OF THE BUILDING SIGNS WHERE, AS OPPOSED FROM OUR PROPERTY, AND YOU COULD SCROLL THROUGH AS WE GO.
WHEREAS OPPOSED IN OUR PROPERTY, THERE'S CLEAR VISIBILITY ON DALEWOOD FROM CENTRAL AVENUE.
I'M FACING NORTH, I'M 500 FEET AWAY FROM THE BUILDING, I CAN STILL READ THAT.
THAT'S MANDARIN CHINESE RESTAURANT.
YOU KEEP SCROLLING THROUGH, KEEP GOING.
AND THE NEXT NEXT FOLDER WILL SHOW YOU THE HAMPSHIRE MANAGEMENT PROPERTIES.
WHICH WILL SHOW ALL THE GREENERY.
SO YOU COULD SEE THAT THERE'S NO VISIBILITY EVEN OF OUR SIGN FROM THIS PARTICULAR LOCATION.
IF YOU SCROLL THROUGH, YOU'LL SEE HOW THAT GREENERY GOES ALL THE WAY ACROSS AND BLOCKS EVERY SIGN ON OUR STOREFRONT, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF BEST BUY AT ONE POINT OR ANOTHER ON CENTRAL AVENUE.
SO NOT ONLY ARE IS THE DALEWOOD SIGNS, WHICH YOU GUYS HAVE APPROVED WARRANTS BEFORE, LARGER THAN OURS.
EACH TENANT SIGN IS ALSO LARGER.
THE LETTERING IS LARGER UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE PROPOSED SIGN.
AND COMPARED TO SIGNAGE THE OTHER PROPERTIES, THEREBY IT STRIKES INAPPROPRIATE BALANCE BETWEEN PROPERTY VISIBILITY WHILE NOT CREATING DISTRACTION OR OTHER NEGATIVE IMPACTS ON TRAFFIC SAFETY ON CENTRAL PARK AVENUE, CURRENTLY WITH LETTER HEIGHTS PROPOSED THAT THREE INCHES ON OUR DRAWING, WHICH IS REFERENCED.
SORRY, GO BACK ONE, GO BACK, GO BACK ONE, SORRY.
WE HAVE 10 TENANTS WITH A 10 INCH PANEL.
THE SMALLEST LETTERING THERE IS THREE INCHES.
THREE INCHES IS VISIBLE FROM 40 FEET.
WE SIT BACK OVER 40 FEET FROM NORTHBOUND CENTRAL AVENUE CENTER LANE.
ANYTHING SMALLER WITH THIS SIGN WOULD MAKE IT UNFUNCTIONAL.
UM, IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'LL BE ANY QUESTIONS, I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER THEM.
ANY QUESTIONS? I JUST HAVE ONE.
[00:15:01]
DALEWOOD SIGNS THAT YOU'RE REFERRING TO ARE, ARE THEY IN WHITE PLAINS OR ARE THOSE, THEY'RE RIGHT NEXT DOOR.BUT ARE THOSE TECHNICALLY WHITE PLAINS OR GREENBURG? THAT'S GREENBERG GREENBERG.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE WANNA ADDRESS THIS MATTER? I SEE A HAND RAISED COME UP, SIR AL SAMIS, I'M SORRY.
AL, AL H A AL SAMIS, S A M I SS NORTH WASHINGTON.
UH, THERE BEFORE YOU SEEKING A SIGN FIVE TIMES LARGER THAN THE EXISTING SIGN, YOU'RE SEEKING A VARIANCE FROM THE ZONING CODES DO SO APART FROM MAKING A MOCKERY OF THE ZONING CODE, THE IDEA THAT WE SHOULD FOLLOW IN THE FOOTSTEPS OF OTHER SIGNS IN THE AREA BOTHERS ME SOMEWHAT.
YEARS AGO, FRANCIS SHEHAN, WHEN HE WAS SITTING ON THIS ZONING BOARD, MADE A STATEMENT IN A SIMILAR SITUATION.
AND HIS STATEMENT WAS, WHEN I'M DRIVING ON CENTRAL AVENUE, I CAN TELL THE DIFFERENCE WHEN I'VE LEFT GREENBERG AND ENTERED YONKERS.
AND WHAT HE WAS SAYING WAS, THE SIGNAGE IN YONKERS IS MUCH MORE PERMISSIVE TOWARDS THE OWNERS.
GREENBERG HAS ALWAYS HELD OUT AGAINST SUCH PRESSURE IN THE PAST, ASKED HAMPSHIRE, MANAGEMENT COMES BEFORE YOU AS THE OWNER OF THE SHOPPING CENTER.
UNFORTUNATELY, THEY'RE NOT A GOOD NEIGHBOR, WHICH MAKES ME LESS DISPOSED TO HEAR THEIR PLEA FOR A LARGER SIGN.
AT ONE POINT IN TIME FOR 14 YEARS, THERE WAS A WALKTHROUGH ON THE FENCE, WHICH MEANT IF YOU WERE WALKING FROM THE APARTMENTS, BUILDINGS, THREE OR FOUR OF THEM ALONG NORTH WASHINGTON AVENUE AND YOU WANTED TO ENTER THE PREMISES, YOU WERE ABLE TO DO IT AT A SHORTER POINT BY UTILIZING THE WALKTHROUGH WITHOUT ANY EXPLANATION.
AND IT EX EXISTED THAT WAY FOR AT LEAST 14 YEARS WITH NO EXPLANATION TO THE PUBLIC.
AND IF I BELIEVE GARRETT, NO EXPLANATION TO GARRETT EITHER, THEY CLOSED THAT WALKTHROUGH.
THAT MEANS IF YOU GO TO TRADER JOE'S, WHICH IS THE OBJECTIVE OF EVERY LANDLORD, TO HAVE HIS TENANTS PROSPER ON FOOT, WHICH IS NOT SO MUCH AGAINST THE IDEA GENERALLY OF HEALTH AND NOT USING GAS, BUT IF YOU GO THERE ON FOOT, YOU ARE GOING TO BE PURCHASING ITEMS CERTAINLY IN TRADER JOE'S, WHICH ARE PROBABLY HEAVY.
SO ANY REASON TO MAKE TENANTS, UH, PEDESTRIANS GO FURTHER SEEMS ODD.
PERHAPS THEY WERE DOING IN RETALIATION BECAUSE THEY ONCE WERE BEFORE THE PLANNING BOARD SEEKING TO BUILD AN OFFICE BUILDING NEXT TO THE TRADER JOE'S PROPERTY AND GOT TURNED DOWN.
SO TO ALL INTENTS AND APPEARANCES, THIS LOOKS LIKE RETALIATION.
NOW, IF YOU WANNA GO INTO THE SHOPPING CENTER ON FOOT, YOU HAVE TO WALK TO CENTRAL AVENUE, WHICH IS FURTHER AWAY.
THEN CROSS THAT GREEN SPACE THAT THEY REFERENCE TO GO TO TRADER JOE'S DURING WINTER.
WHEN IT SNOWS, THEY CLEAR THE PARKING LOT AND THEY PUT THE SNOW FROM THE PARKING LOT ONTO THE ADJACENT AREA, WHICH IS THE GREEN AREA.
THAT MEANS YOU CAN'T EVEN ACCESS IT WHEN THERE'S SNOW ON THE GROUND.
SO IF YOU CAME FROM NORTH WASHINGTON AVENUE, ANY OF THOSE FOUR APARTMENT COMPLEXES ALONG THAT ON FOOT, YOU HAVE TO WALK TO THE MAIN ENTRANCE ON CENTRAL A AVENUE, WALK BACK TO TRADER JOE'S, AND THEN REPEAT BACK TO THE MAIN ENTRANCE AND THEN BACK INTO PASSING AGAIN.
TRADER JOE'S REALLY NOT A TERRIBLE THING.
THERE'S NOT MANY PEOPLE WALK, BUT IN TERMS OF GOOD NEIGHBORSHIP AND IN TERMS OF WHAT THEY'RE SEEKING BEFORE THIS
[00:20:01]
BOARD SEEMS TO ME IN CONTRAST TO WHAT WOULD BE AN IDEAL RELATIONSHIP, THEY WANNA PUT A SIGN IN, WHICH IS A LOT LARGER THAN WE PERMIT.THEY WANNA BECOME ANOTHER PRECEDENT THAT THE NEXT GUY ALONG THE ROAD WILL SAY, LOOK AT THEIR SIGN, LET'S MAKE OUR SIGN BIGGER.
AND THEY'RE NOT DOING IT AS GOOD NEIGHBORS WHERE THEY COULD EXPECT, YOU KNOW, ONE HAND WASHING THE OTHER.
AND IT'S BEEN TROUBLESOME OVER THE YEARS.
AS, AS GARRETT KNOWS THAT THEY'VE NEVER EVEN BOTHERED TO GIVE AN EXPLANATION FOR WHY THEY'VE CLOSED THIS WALKTHROUGH.
ON THE DALEWOOD A ROADSIDE, THERE'S ALWAYS BEEN A WALKTHROUGH AND THE ENTIRE FRONTAGE ON CENTRAL AVENUE IS OPEN.
SO WHEN THEY PUT THIS NEW PIECE OF FENCE IN TO CLOSE OFF THE WALKTHROUGH, THEY ALSO PUT A SMACK UP AGAINST AN OLD RUSTED SECTION OF FENCE, WHICH GOES FROM THE NEW FENCE TO THE COUNTY APARTMENTS NEXT NEXT DOOR.
IT'S TURNED OUT AT THE BOTTOM.
DANGEROUS TO YOUNG CHILDREN WHO WOULD BE RUNNING BY ON THE SIDEWALK.
AND PROBABLY PEOPLE DON'T LIVE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT THERE'S LOTS OF PEOPLE WHO WALK ON THESE SIDEWALKS WITH STROLLERS.
NOT SO MUCH PEOPLE WITH, UH, WHEELCHAIRS.
BUT I ASK YOU TO USE SOME RATIONALE WHETHER THEY SHOULD BE GIVEN THE PRIVILEGE OF HAVING A SIGN IN EXCESS OF WHAT'S REQUIRED BECAUSE THEY HAVEN'T EARNED THE RESPECT OF THE COMMUNITY.
I LIVE IN, I DIDN'T HEAR YOUR NAME, SIR.
BEG PARDON? I DIDN'T HEAR YOUR NAME.
SIZE IS GOOD COMPARED TO THE OLD ONE.
COMPARE THIS SIGN TO THE ONE THAT'S, UH, ON 5 55 TAX THE ROAD WHEN IT SAYS CITY MET UP THERE, THAT EVERYBODY IN A THROUGHWAY HAS TO SEE ALL THE TIME.
AND YOU'RE WONDERING IF A CONVENIENT SIGN LIKE THIS HAS A PROBLEM AND NOT ANOTHER SIGN THAT THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE ARE GONNA SEE EVERY DAY.
IT'S PURELY AN ADVERTISING SIGN, AND THAT'S OKAY.
THE TYPEFACE ARE GOOD, THE COLORS ARE GOOD, THE SHAPE IS GOOD.
SOMEBODY SAID RECENTLY AT ONE OF THESE BOARD MEETINGS, THERE'S NO DECENT CONSTRUCTION BETWEEN WHITE PLAINS AND YONKERS.
YOU KNOW WHY? DIFFICULT TO GET ANYTHING LOGICALLY DONE IN THIS BOARD, IN THIS TOWN.
PAUL FINE SAID THAT IF I WANTED TO SIT WITHOUT A MASK, SIT IN THE BACK OF THE ROOM.
SO I DID HIM, CHANGED THE RULES TODAY CALLED THE CHIEF OF POLICING.
AND TO TELL ME I HAD TO WEAR A MASK IF I WANTED TO STAY IN THE ROOM, I HAD TO PROMISE HIM THAT I'D WEAR A MASK AS LONG AS I'M IN THE ROOM.
IF THAT ISN'T THE HEIGHT OF IDIOCY, I DON'T KNOW WHAT IT IS.
I BE THE SAME AS EVERYBODY ELSE DOES.
BUT WHAT DOES THAT HAVE TO DO WITH THIS CASE THAT'S IN FRONT OF THE BOARD RIGHT NOW? I JUST GOT UPSET BY THE FACT THAT WHAT THEY DID TO ME TODAY, WE NEED TO LISTEN TO YOUR I DON'T, I APOLOGIZE, SIR.
YES, WE KNOW THAT YOU'RE MAKING IT VERY APPARENT.
ARE YOU FINISHED WITH YOUR COMMENTS ABOUT THIS CASE? YES.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE? I REALIZE THAT IT'S BEEN A LONG TIME AND A DIFFICULT SITUATION THAT WE'VE ALL ENDURED AND WE HAVEN'T HAD A CHANCE PERHAPS TO EXPRESS OURSELVES AS WE HAD IN THE PAST.
AND THERE HAVE BEEN SOME THINGS THAT HAVE PERHAPS BEEN UPSETTING US, BUT THIS IS THE ZONING BOARD.
WE ARE TRYING TO ADDRESS ZONING ISSUES.
SO I WOULD APPRECIATE IT IF YOU COULD CONFINE THAT TO WHAT WE ARE ABOUT AND WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO THIS EVENING.
[00:25:01]
DO HAVE A COMMENT BECAUSE THERE WAS A TERM USED CALLED RETALIATION, AND I COULDN'T HELP BUT FEEL AS IF THE LAST SET OF COMMENTS THAT I HEARD WAS ALL ABOUT RETALIATION AND NOT ABOUT THE MERITS OF THIS CASE IN FRONT OF THE BOARD.SO CAN WE ALSO TRY AND KEEP TO WHAT IS IN FRONT OF US RIGHT NOW, SIR, WE HAVE NO, NO FURTHER COMMENT.
IF THE BOARD DOESN'T HAVE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS, DO WE HAVE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? NO.
AND THE NEXT CASE ON TONIGHT'S AGENDA IS CASE 2111.
AMIR SHOCKLA CROSS, UH, CERTAINLY DRIVE.
WE HAVE BEEN WAITING FOR, FOR QUITE SOME TIME.
WELL, I'M SORRY TO SAY THAT YOU MAY HAVE TO WAIT A LITTLE BIT LONGER BECAUSE, WELL, FIRST LET ME PUT MY NAME ON THE RECORD.
I'M SORRY, I CANNOT HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
CAN YOU SPEAK INTO THE MICROPHONE PLEASE? CERTAINLY.
MY NAME IS DENISE DAMBROSIO, UM, COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT IN THIS MATTER.
MY ADDRESS IS 2 0 2 NIC AVENUE, SUITE 6 0 1 WHITE PLAINS.
UH, DURING THE LAST PRESENTATION, THE APPLICANT, UM, GOT THE OPPORTUNITY TO CONFER WITH, UH, COUNSEL, MYSELF AND THE ARCHITECT.
AND AT THIS TIME WE'D LIKE TO ACCEPT YOUR OFFER TO PUT THE MATTER OVER GIVEN THE NUMBER OF MEMBERS OF THE BOARD THAT ARE HERE TONIGHT.
I'M SORRY I DIDN'T RAISE MY HAND EARLIER, BUT WE DIDN'T GET AN OPPORTUNITY TO CONFER.
ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
UH, MADAM CHAIR, I JUST DID WANNA NOTE THAT THERE WAS SOME CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED AND, UH, WE WILL ENSURE THAT THE ZONING BOARD GETS THAT AND IT BECOMES PART OF THE RECORD, BUT IN LIGHT OF THE FACT THAT I BELIEVE THIS MAY BE ADJOURNED, UH, PROCEDURE MAY STIPULATE THAT THOSE AREN'T READ TONIGHT, SIR.
ALRIGHT, SO WE DO HAVE ONE MOMENT, PLEASE.
WE DO HAVE SOME WRITTEN COMMENTS THAT HAD BEEN SUBMITTED TO US, AND AS YOU JUST HEARD MR. DUCA SAY THERE ARE SOME ADDITIONAL THAT THOSE WILL BECOME PART OF THE RECORD.
AND SINCE THEY HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED AND SINCE THEY WERE DONE IN THE MANNER IN WHICH THEY WERE, WE WILL READ THEM INTO THE RECORD AT THE TIME THAT THIS CASE IS, UH, IS, IS FULLY UM, PUT BEFORE THE BOARD.
SO IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK TONIGHT, IF THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, I JUST WANNA KNOW HOW MANY AJOUR YEAH, THIS IS THE THIRD ONE.
YOU HAVE ANY ADJOURNMENT? I I CAN'T, I CAN'T ANSWER THAT TONIGHT.
THE ADJOURNMENT IS DUE TO THE FACT THAT, UH, WE HAD SOME CHANGES IN OUR BOARD THROUGH NO FAULT OF OURS OR ANYONE ELSE'S.
AND WE ARE SHORT MEMBERS THIS EVENING.
SO WE
WELL, WE PLAN ON PUTTING IT ON THE AGENDA THEN.
UNLESS THERE'S A REASON WHY WE SHOULD NOT, WHEN WE HAVE OUR DISCUSSIONS, WE WILL, WE WILL MAKE THAT DETERMINATION.
SO AS OF RIGHT NOW, IT'S NOT OKAY.
I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW WHO YOU ARE AND YOU'RE NOT ON THE RECORD, SO I DON'T WANNA KEEP HAVING THIS DIALOGUE THAT THE PUBLIC IS ONLY LISTENING TO WHAT I'M SAYING AND OBVIOUSLY NOT WHAT YOU ARE SAYING.
SO IT, IT, IT DOESN'T REALLY, YOU KNOW, MAKE FOR SOMETHING THAT IS HELPFUL AT THIS POINT.
ALRIGHT, I JUST WANT TO KNOW WHEN THIS WILL, WHAT AGENDA THIS WILL BE ON THE NEXT ONE IN AUGUST.
OR YOU'LL DETERMINE THAT IN YOUR MEETING.
WE'LL DETERMINE IT IN OUR MEETING BECAUSE WE ALSO HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE A QUORUM FOR OUR NEXT MEETING.
I JUST WANTED TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT I DID GET TWO LETTERS EMAILED TO ME TODAY, IF THOSE ARE THE SAME ONES THAT YOU ARE REFERRING TO.
AND THEN AN ADDITIONAL EMAIL WAS RECEIVED, UM, A FEW MOMENTS AGO, SO I'LL BE SURE TO, UH, SEND THAT TO YOU AS WELL.
AND THE NEXT CASE TO BE HEARD TONIGHT IS CASE 2117.
KATHLEEN NICOLA PROPERTY AT 20 KALO COURT GOING 2117.
MADAM CHAIR AND BOARD MEMBERS, MY NAME IS KEVIN HOLMAN, H O L M A N.
SHE SHOULD BE HERE IN JUST A FEW MOMENTS.
[00:30:01]
CAMELOT COURT FOR 20 YEARS IN THE DELMAR SUBDIVISION, WE'RE REQUESTING A PERMIT TO REMOVE THE 282 SQUARE FOOT CONCRETE PATIO AND REPLACE WITH A 491 SQUARE FOOT DRY LAID PERMEABLE PAVER PATIO DUE TO SUBSOIL SETTLEMENT AND CONCRETE, CONCRETE CRACKING THE EXISTING PATIO WALKWAY DRAINS, UH, TO THE HOUSE FOUNDATION.THE NEGATIVE GRADE SLOPE HAS CAUSED FOUNDATION PROBLEMS AS WELL AS BASEMENT FLOODING.
THE RESIDENCE IS LOCATED ON A PERIMETER LOT IN THE VALLA MAR SUBDIVISION.
THE H O A OWNS ALL THE PERIMETER COMMON AREAS AS WELL AS CONSERVATION EASEMENTS.
A SIGNIFICANT PORTION OF THE RESIDENCE SITS IN A HUNDRED FOOT WETLANDS AND WATERCOURSES REGULATED BUFFER ZONE.
THE PROPOSED PAVER PLAN ALSO COMPLIES WITH THE ALLOWABLE IMPERVIOUS SURFACE REGULATIONS.
THE PROPOSED PROJECT HAS BEEN APPROVED BY THE H O A ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD.
UH, THE VAL MAR CHART CHARTER STATES.
THE H O A ONLY APPROVES PATIOS IN THE REAR OF THE HOME.
MOUNT CALVARY CEMETERY AND 10 ADJACENT BELMAR NEIGHBORS HAVE APPROVED THE PROJECT.
THE H O A A ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD HAS CONFIRMED THAT THERE WILL NEVER BE ANY ADDITIONAL BUILDING BEHIND, EXCUSE ME, PERIMETER LOTS OR IN COMMON AREAS AND CONSERVATION EASEMENTS.
THE NEW PATIO WOULD, UH, REQUIRE 10 FOOT REAR SETBACK TO BE WAIVED OR RELAXED.
IN THIS CASE, WE DO NOT THINK THE SETBACK SERVES A PURPOSE.
THE EXISTING PATIO AND SIDEWALK AS BUILT IN 2001 VIOLATE THE SETBACK.
AND GARRETT, CAN YOU BRING UP SOME SLIDES PLEASE? SURE.
UM, I ALSO WANT TO STATE THAT H O A IS THE HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION.
WHEN, WHEN YOU USE THE TERM, UH, APPROVED, DO YOU MEAN THEY'RE NOT OPPOSED OR DO YOU ACTUALLY MEAN APPROVED, SUPPORTIVE? PROBABLY WOULD'VE BEEN A BETTER WORD.
UM, THE, I WE HAVE BEEN APPROVED BY KATONAH MANAGEMENT, THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION.
SO I, IF YOU LET ME KNOW WHERE YOU'D LIKE, DO I OKAY.
IF YOU CAN GO TO, UH, SLIDE A.
UH, THERE'S SEVERAL DIFFERENT SURVEYS OUT THERE.
UM, THIS IS THE ONE THAT WAS INVOLVED.
IT'S THE EMBOSSED ONE THAT WAS INVOLVED IN THE HOUSE CLOSING.
UM, THE G I S MAP THAT, UH, YOU CAN GET FROM THE TOWN OF GREENBURG WEBSITE IS INCORRECT.
AND THE SURVEY THAT'S ON FILE IS INCORRECT.
HAVE YOU TRIED TO CORRECT THAT? YEAH, I TALKED WITH AARON SCHMIDT ABOUT IT WHEN WE FIRST STARTED THIS PROCESS, AND HE SAID THE G I S THING HAS BEEN THAT WAY FOR QUITE A WHILE AND FOR SOME REASON THEY CAN'T FIGURE IT OUT.
WE'LL, WE'LL GET TO THAT SLIDE AND YOU'LL SEE THAT THE CUL-DE-SAC IS INSIDE MY HOUSE ON PAPER ANYWAY.
OKAY, SO THIS IS A, A CORRECT SURVEY IF YOU TAKE MEASUREMENTS.
IS THIS THE PERSON YOU'VE BEEN WAITING FOR? THAT IS HER.
IT'S KATHLEEN, NICOLA, ANNIE, K O L A.
I WAS HOME BABYSITTING THE PUPPY
AND THIS IS THE LOWEST LOT IN THE VAL MAR SUBDIVISION DUE TO SETTLING AROUND THE PERIMETER OF THE HOUSE.
UH, AS I MENTIONED EARLIER, THE CONCRETE PATIO WATER AND THE CON CONCRETE WALKWAY WATER DRAINS TOWARD THE HOUSE.
IT'S, UH, CERTAINLY CAUSED PROBLEMS AND, UH, CAUSED THE FLOOD.
LET'S GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, WHICH IS D THIS AGAIN IS THE EXISTING SURVEY.
UM, YOU CAN SEE THE GREEN THING IS THE TREE, WHICH WE LOVE.
AND, UH, WE WON'T AFFECT IT AT ALL.
THE TREE AND ROOT STRUCTURES ARE NOT IMPACTED BY THIS PROJECT.
IF YOU LOOK OVER THERE, UPPER LEFT, YOU'LL SEE THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR THE NEIGHBOR PATIO THAT'S RAISED SIX FEET AND ISN'T REALLY CONDUCIVE TO, UM, PRIVACY.
THIS IS THE PROPOSED PATIO, AND WE ARE USING A ENVIRONMENTALLY FRIENDLY PAVER PATIO, UM, WHERE THE WATER PERCOLATES THROUGH THE JOINTS AND INTO
[00:35:01]
COLLECTION UNDERNEATH.F IS WHAT WE NEED TO EXPAND THIS.
I MEAN, IT PROBABLY IS CONSIDERED AN AREA OF VARIANCE.
UH, MIGHT BE A SPECIAL PERMIT.
WE BELIEVE THAT THE SETBACK SHOULD BE WAIVED.
ONCE AGAIN, THE H O A OWNS A COMMON AREA AND CONSERVATION EASEMENT PROPERTY AND NOTHING WILL EVER BE BUILT ON THAT PROPERTY.
AND IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, JUST STOP ME.
UH, THE NEXT SLIDE, G IS WHAT WE PUT TOGETHER FOR WETLANDS AND WATERCOURSE.
AND YOU CAN SEE THAT A SIGNIFICANT PORTION OF THE HOUSE IS BUILT IN THE A HUNDRED FOOT CONSERVATION EASEMENT.
YOU'LL SEE ALL THESE PERIMETER HOUSES HERE.
THEY HAVE THE PATIOS ON THE BACKSIDE.
UH, SOME OF THESE HAVE INCREASED IN SIZE SINCE THEY'RE PUT IN.
AND UH, THERE'S MORE GOING IN.
SLIDE EYE IS JUST THE TOP VIEW OF THE HOUSE AND THE WONDERFUL TREE.
YOU CAN SEE WHERE THE EXISTING PATIO IS AND UH, WHERE WE'D LIKE TO BRING IT AROUND BACK.
SLIDE J IS HOW THE PERMEABLE PAVER SYSTEM WORKS.
WE SPEND A LOT OF TIME FIGURING THAT OUT.
AND IF YOU GO TO SLIDE K, YOU'LL SEE WHAT THE PROPOSED PATIO WILL LOOK LIKE.
YOU CAN GO TO L THERE'S QUITE A FEW OF THESE GO TO M, N, AND O.
IF YOU GO TO P THERE'S EXAMPLES OF ON THE LEFT IS PERMEABLE AND YOU CAN SEE THE JOINTS ARE MUCH WIDER.
THREE EIGHT INCH CHIP STONE OR ON THE RIGHT SIDE, THE UNILOCK BEACON HILL SMOOTH.
YOU CAN DO THE PERMEABLE THING WITH SMALLER JOINTS AND STILL WORK.
AND THEN THE LAST SLIDE, Q IS THE G I S MAP THAT I WAS SPEAKING OF EARLIER.
YOU SEE HOW THE HOUSES ARE BASICALLY IN THE ROADS AND THAT'S THE THING THAT AARON SAID, THEY HAVEN'T FIGURED OUT HOW TO MAKE IT WORK YET.
ANY QUESTIONS? WHAT IS THE REASONING BEHIND THE ADDITIONAL SQUARE FOOTAGE? BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY IT'S A FAIRLY, UH, EXPANSIVE INCREASE IN SQUARE FOOTAGE.
THE CURRENT PATIO IS VERY SMALL.
UH, WE'D LIKE A BIGGER ONE AND BECAUSE THERE'S NOTHING GOING ON BACK THERE, WE DON'T THINK THAT IT IMPACTS THE SURROUNDING AREA OR CHARACTERISTICS AT ALL.
SO THE OVERALL SQUARE FOOTAGE IS HOW MUCH AGAIN? IT'S, RIGHT NOW IT'S 2 82 AND WE'LL GO TO 4 91.
AND ANY QUESTIONS BOARD? DO YOU REALLY NEED TO GO TO TWO FEET AWAY FROM THE PROPERTY LINE BY MAKING IT 12 FEET DEEP? WELL, YES.
UM, THE H O A WE HAVE TO BE TWO FEET FROM A PROPERTY LINE, SO THAT MEANS 12 FEET IS ALL I CAN GET.
IF YOU HAVE A SIX FOOT ROUND TABLE WITH CHAIRS AND PEOPLE, THAT PRETTY MUCH SOAKS UP 12 FEET.
I JUST WANTED TO HEAR YOU SAY IT.
IS THERE ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WANTED TO COMMENT ON THIS CASE? ANYTHING YOU WANT TO ADD, MA'AM, SINCE YOU, UH, MISS
WE BOTH, UH, FOR THE LAST 16 MONTHS HAVE BEEN WORKING FULL-TIME
[00:40:01]
FROM HOME.SO THE ADDITION, YOU KNOW, WE'VE BEEN MOVE CLOSER TO THE MIC FOR THE PAST 16 MONTHS.
WE'VE BOTH BEEN WORKING FROM HOME.
SO THE ADDITIONAL, UM, AREA TO, TO WORK FROM RATHER THAN AN OFFICE OR A BASEMENT, UM, CERTAINLY WOULD IMPROVE SORT OF THE QUALITY OF LIFE.
AND THE NEXT CASE ON TONIGHT'S IS CASE 2118 ANNIE LEONE, GUTTER LIVING TRUST PROPERTY AT 25 BRADLEY AVENUE.
MY NAME IS SCOTT O'NEILL WITH, UH, STO DESIGNS, UM, O N E I L L.
SO TONIGHT WE'RE, UH, PRESENTING A, WE'RE PROPOSING TO DO A SECOND STORY EDITION ABOVE A NON-CONFORMING, UH, STRUCTURE.
UM, WE'RE ALSO ASKING FOR A FRONT YARD SETBACK.
UM, UH, THAT IS CURRENTLY 22.9.
AND THEN WE WANT TO GO TO, UM, 21.33 FEET.
THAT'S, UM, RIGHT NOW 25 FEET IS REQUIRED.
UM, ANYTHING WE DO TO THIS HOUSE IS GONNA HAVE TO GO IN FRONT OF THIS BOARD, UM, BECAUSE IT'S A NON-CONFORMING STRUCTURE.
UM, SO WE'RE JUST BASICALLY ADDING A SECOND STORY.
UM, AND WE'RE GONNA CANTILEVER 18 INCHES ON THE SECOND FLOOR, UM, TO THE FRONT.
WE'RE NOT CHANGING ANY OF THE EXISTING FOOTPRINT.
THE FOOTPRINT IS REMAINING THE SAME.
UM, WE BELIEVE THAT, YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT GONNA CAUSE AN UNDESIRABLE CHANGE OR THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, THIS NEIGHBORHOOD IS A GROWING NEIGHBORHOOD.
UH, THERE ARE HOUSES THAT ARE BECOMING LARGER.
UM, SO THAT'S BASICALLY, THAT'S BASICALLY IT.
DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? ANY QUESTIONS? SO LITERALLY, THE ONLY REASON WHY YOU'RE IN FRONT OF THE BOARD IS BECAUSE THERE'S AN OVERHANG THAT YOU'RE PROPOSING ON THE SECOND FLOOR THAT'S 18 INCHES.
WELL, IT'S A PROTRUDES PROTRUDES 18 INCHES BEYOND THE EXISTING FOOTPRINT.
AND WE'RE ALSO ENLARGING A NON-CONFORMING STRUCTURE.
THE FRONT YARD SETBACK IS CURRENTLY 22.9 AND IT'S, UM, 25 FEET IS REQUIRED.
WHICH FEES? IT'S ALREADY NONCONFORMING.
AND THAT WAS BECAUSE ACCORDING TO YOUR PROPOSAL, AN APPLICATION, THE EXISTING STRUCTURE STRUCTURE WAS BUILT TOO CLOSE TO THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE.
AND WHEN WAS THAT, IF YOU KNOW THE HOUSE WAS BUILT? UM, I BELIEVE IN THE FIFTIES.
ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE WANNA COMMENT ON THIS CASE? OKAY, THANK YOU.
AND THE NEXT CASE ON TONIGHT'S AGENDA IS CASE 2119.
SARAH AND STEVEN WESTROM PROPERTY AT 40 WALBROOK ROAD, PLEASE.
UH, MY NAME IS BILL WITT, UH, W I T T.
I'M THE ARCHITECT FOR THIS PROJECT.
I'M HERE TONIGHT WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER, STEVEN STROM OF 40 WALBROOK ROAD IN SUPPORT OF HIS APPLICATION FOR AN AREA VARIANCE.
UH, BASICALLY WHAT WE HAVE ON THE REAR OF THIS PROPERTY IS AN EXISTING COVERED PORCH.
UH, THERE ARE SOME PHOTOS ON ZBA ONE SHEET WHERE YOU CAN ACTUALLY SEE THE EXISTING STRUCTURE.
UM, IT'S A VERY CUTE ONE STORY, UH, PORCH.
UM, HOWEVER, MY CLIENTS HAVE NO MUD ROOM.
AND, AND IF YOU ARE ABLE TO LOOK AT THE EXISTING FLOOR PLAN OF THIS HOUSE, YOU WILL SEE THAT AS THEY ENTER THE HOUSE AT THAT PORCH, THEY ARE IMMEDIATELY MET WITH STEPS GOING UP TO THE FIRST FLOOR KITCHEN AND STEPS GOING DOWN TO THE BASEMENT.
SO IT'S A BIT OF A DANGEROUS SITUATION FOR HIS FAMILY WHEN THEY COME HOME.
UH, HIM, HIS WIFE, HIS TWO KIDS TRYING TO ENTER INTO THE HOUSE.
[00:45:01]
SO WHAT WE'D LIKE TO DO IS TAKE THIS EXISTING PORCH AND ENCLOSE IT AND ESSENTIALLY CREATE A MUDROOM.UM, IT'S NOT GONNA GROW IN SIZE, IT'S NOT GONNA GROW IN HEIGHT.
IT'S A SMALL ONE STORY STRUCTURE IN THE BACK OF THE HOUSE.
UM, I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO ADD THAT THE STRUCTURE AS IT EXISTS NOW AND AS IT WAS PROPOSED, IS WELL HIDDEN FROM THE STREET AS THERE'S A ROW OF, UM, NOT ARBOR VARIETY.
WHAT DO WE HAVE ON THAT PROPERTY ROAD DOWN, UH, A, A ROAD LARGE LOAD OF DUNS THAT BLOCKED THE VIEW FROM THE, THE, THE STREET.
AND IN THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY, AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE'S A SIX FOOT HIGH FENCE THAT SEPARATES FROM THE NEIGHBORS.
THE STRUCTURE ITSELF IS ONLY SLIGHTLY OVER EIGHT FOOT.
SO THIS IS NOT SOMETHING, AND AGAIN, WE'RE NOT MAKING IT ANY LARGER THAN WHAT IS CURRENTLY EXISTING.
UM, UH, AND AS I SAID, THE REAL NEED FOR THIS IS THAT AS THEY ENTER THE HOUSE, AND IF YOU LOOKED AT THE FLOOR PLAN, I BELIEVE THAT'S SHEET 1 0 2, UM, YOU'LL SEE HOW THE EXISTING DOOR ENTERS THE HOUSE.
UM, LEMME SHOW 1 0 2, YOU'LL SEE THE EXISTING ENTRY.
AND AS YOU COME INTO THE HOME, AS I SAID EARLIER, THERE'S JUST A SET OF STEPS LEADING DOWN TO THE BASEMENT AND A SET OF STEPS LEADING UP TO THE KITCHEN.
SO IT'S JUST TOO TIGHT FOR THEM TO FUNCTION.
UH, CURRENTLY THEY COME IN UNDER THAT ROOF TO TRY AND TAKE THEIR SHOES OFF.
UH, BUT IT'S JUST TOO DIFFICULT FOR THE WHOLE FAMILY TO GET INTO THE HOUSE SAFELY.
SO BY ALLOWING US TO CONVERT THIS EXISTING COVERED PORCH INTO A MUG ROOM, IT REALLY SOLVES THAT NEED THAT THEY HAVE.
UM, AND I THINK THE LAST THING I'D JUST LIKE TO STATE IS THAT SINCE THIS IS A CORNER OF PROPERTY, UM, ON THE CORNER OF ROXBURY AND, UM, EXCUSE ME, UH, WALBROOK, IF WE HAD LISTED WALBROOK AS THE FRONT OF THE YARD, INSTEAD OF WALBROOK THIS HOUSE AS IT, EXCUSE ME, ROXBURY WOULD MEET ALL THE ZONING REQUIREMENTS.
IT DOES HAVE TWO FRONT YARDS BECAUSE OF THE CORNER PROPERTY.
AND IF WALL BROOK WAS THE, THE LISTED FRONT, WE WOULDN'T BE REQUIRING A SETBACK VARIANCE HERE BECAUSE IT WOULD BE CONSIDERED A SIDE INSTEAD OF A REAR.
SO I, I'M NOT SUGGESTING THAT IT'S JUST SEMANTICS.
I KNOW THEY COULD EXIST FOR REASONS, BUT THERE ARE OTHER HOUSES IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD THAT ARE ON CORNERS WHERE, UM, BECAUSE OF THAT DESIGNATION, THEY'RE MUCH CLOSER TO THAT SIDE SIMPLY BECAUSE IT'S BEING GIVEN A SIDE YARD STATUS VERSUS A REAR YARD STATUS.
THE EXISTING HOUSE ITSELF IS TWO AND A HALF STORIES.
IT'S ABOUT 23 FOOT FROM THAT REAL YARD SETBACK OR THAT REAL YARD.
THE EXISTING PORCH IS 20 FOOT FIVE, EXCUSE ME, 20 FOOT SIX INCHES FROM THAT REAR YARD.
AND OUR PROPOSED, UM, STRUCTURE, AS IN SINCE IS NOT INCREASING THE SIZE WILL BE THE SAME 20 FEET, SIX INCHES FROM THE EXISTING REAR YARD.
SO AS LENGTH, THE PREVIOUS CASE, THIS IS ALSO AN EXISTING NON-CONFORMING STRUCTURE AND YOU'RE JUST, UM, IN FRONT OF THE BOARD BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO BE BECAUSE IT'S EXISTING NON-CONFORMANCE Y YES.
UH, AND I SAY THAT NOT KNOWING THIS HOUSE WAS BUILT IN 1919, I'M SORRY, WHEN, UH, 1919.
AND FOR, FOR ALL S 70 YEARS? NO, 102 YEARS.
WHY YOU HAVE IT HERE OVER 70 YEARS.
SO I'M JUST GOING BY WHAT YOU'RE WELL, YOU KNOW WHAT, THAT MAYBE THAT'S WHEN THE GARAGE WAS BUILT.
I APOLOGIZE IF THERE'S A MIX OF ANY HOUSING, BUT THE HOUSE ITSELF WAS BUILT IN 1919.
UM, I SUPPOSE THE ZONING CODES MAY HAVE BEEN SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT BACK THEN.
I'M ALSO NOT SURE IF WHEN THIS HOUSE WAS CONSTRUCTED, IF THEY CONSIDERED ROXBURY AS THE FRONT.
AGAIN, IF ROXBURY WAS THE FRONT ON THIS PROPERTY, THEN WHAT I'M CALLING A BACKYARD WOULD ACTUALLY BE CONSIDERED A SIDE YARD WHERE THE, WHERE THE SETBACK WOULD ONLY BE REQUIRED TO BE 10 FEET.
ALRIGHT, I DIDN'T MEAN TO INTERRUPT YOU FURTHER.
UM, NO, YOU ANSWERED MY QUESTION.
I GUESS I'LL PUT MY STANDARD PHRASE ON FOR THE EVENING.
AND THE EXISTING STRUCTURE WAS BUILT TOO CLOSE TO THE FRONT YARD PROPERTY LINE, CORRECT? UH, NO, THAT IS NOT CORRECT.
THAT'S NOT CORRECT? NO, THE HOUSE IS WELL WITHIN THE FRONT.
WHY DO WE HAVE THAT IN HERE? THERE'S TWO FRONT YARDS, SO, UM, IT'S SUBSTANTIALLY FURTHER AWAY FROM THE STREET AND IS REQUIRED.
IT'S SIDE YARDS ARE SUBSTANTIALLY LARGER THAN, THAN IS REQUIRED.
THE ONLY SITUATION IS THIS, UM, LABORED REAR YARD BECAUSE THE CORNER LOCK DESIGNATION CALLING WALBROOK THE FRONT.
I WAS LOOKING AT SOMETHING ELSE.
I BELIEVE IT'S 40 FEET FROM WALBROOK AND NEARLY 30 FROM ROXBURY.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD? ANYTHING FROM THE AUDIENCE ON THIS CASE?
[00:50:01]
OKAY, ANY CLOSING REMARKS? I THINK YOU'VE COVERED IT ALL.STEVE, DO YOU HAVE ANY? DID I MISS ANYTHING? NO,
THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
OKAY, NEXT CASE IS CASE 2120 BA LEASING B S C L L C PROPERTY IS AT 7 7 7 OSMO RIVER ROAD.
SO GOOD EVENING CHAIRWOMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE BOARD FOR THE RECORD.
I'M A PARTNER WITH DELBELLO DANELLE AND WEINGARTEN WISE AND WHITAKER.
AND I'M HERE THIS EVENING ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT IN THIS MATTER, WHICH IS A SUBSIDIARY FULLY, UH, OWNED SUBSIDIARY OF REGENERON PHARMACEUTICALS.
UM, JOINING ME THIS EVENING, OUR PROJECT ARCHITECT FROM J M C, STEVE SPINA, OUR PROJECT ARCHITECT, LIAM LOWRY FROM FLAT ARCHITECTS AND, UH, BEN SUZUKI WHO IS WITH, UH, REGENERON IN THE REAL ESTATE FACILITIES MANAGEMENT, UM, DIVISION OF THE COMPANY.
SO, UH, WE'VE GOT TWO APPLICATIONS BEFORE YOU THIS EVENING.
WE THINK THAT IT MAKES SENSE TO TAKE BOTH OF THEM TOGETHER.
OBVIOUSLY WE KNOW YOU NEED TO CONSIDER THE MERITS OF EACH OF THE APPLICATIONS SEPARATELY, BUT THEY'RE REALLY VERY SIMILAR IN NATURE.
UM, SO I WANTED TO TAKE, SO SO YOU'RE REFERRING TO CASE 2121, THAT'S ALSO ON OUR AGENDA.
YES, THEY'RE NINE ITEMS. NINE AND 10.
UM, SO, UH, ONCE AGAIN, THANK YOU FOR HAVING US THIS EVENING.
EIGHT, NINE, I'M SORRY, NOT NINE AND 10.
SO, UM, SO ONCE AGAIN, UH, THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME.
I'M SO HAPPY TO SEE EVERYBODY IN PERSON.
UM, UNFORTUNATELY THE MASKS ARE A LITTLE BIT OF AN IMPEDIMENT, BUT I RECOGNIZE, YOU KNOW, THE REASON FOR THAT.
UM, SO ONCE AGAIN, THANKS FOR HAVING US HERE AGAIN ON BEHALF OF REGENERON PHARMACEUTICALS IN CONNECTION WITH THEIR, UH, PROPERTIES LOCATED AT BOTH 5 5 5 OLD SAWMILL, UH, ROAD AND 7 7 7, UH, SAWMILL RIVER ROAD.
UM, SO A LITTLE BIT ABOUT REGENERON PHARMACEUTICALS.
THEY'RE THE BIG STAR OF THE TOWN OF GREENBURG.
THEY'RE LEADING SCIENCE BASED PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANY.
UH, THE DISCOVER, INVENT, DEVELOP, MANUFACTURE AND COMMERCIALIZED MEDICINES FOR THE TREATMENT OF SERIOUS MEDICAL CONDITIONS.
THEY WERE FOUNDED MORE THAN 30 YEARS AGO.
THEY'RE ONE OF THE GREAT SUCCESS STORIES, NOT ONLY, UH, OF THE TOWN OF GREENBURG, BUT THE STATE OF NEW YORK.
AND, UH, THEIR SCIENCE DRIVEN APPROACH HAS RESULTED IN NINE F D A APPROVED MEDICINES, INCLUDING TREATMENT FOR BLINDNESS CAUSING EYE DISEASES.
I'VE SAID BEFORE AT OTHER BOARDS, I'M ESPECIALLY GRATEFUL FOR REGENERON.
UH, THEY HAVE, UH, DEVELOPED A MEDICINE WHICH HAS ALLOWED MY MOTHER, WHO SUFFERS FROM AGE-RELATED MACULAR DEGENERATION TO MAINTAIN HER VISION.
MY GRANDMOTHER WASN'T AS LUCKY, SO I'M VERY GRATEFUL FOR THEM.
UM, THEY, UH, IN ADDITION TO DEVELOPING, UH, THE, THE MEDICINES THAT THEY HAVE DEVELOPED, THEY'VE ALSO BEEN CONSISTENTLY RECOGNIZED FOR THEIR INNOVATION.
UH, NOT ONLY FOR THEIR COMMITMENT TO THEIR EMPLOYEES, BUT ALSO FOR THEIR, UH, CORPORATE CULTURE.
THEY'RE CONSISTENTLY RANKED AS THE NUMBER ONE BIOPHARMA EMPLOYER BY SCIENCE MAGAZINE.
AND THEIR CONTINUED GROWTH AND EXPANSION ARE A TESTAMENT TO THEIR STRONG SCIENTIFIC FOCUSED CULTURE IN STEADFAST COMMITMENT TO ITS PATIENTS.
THEY ARE NOW THE LARGEST BIOTECHNOLOGY COMPANY IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK, AND THEY ARE AMONG THE 10 LARGEST PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANIES IN THE UNITED STATES.
SO, UH, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANNA FLIP TO THE NEXT SLIDE.
SO JUST A LITTLE BIT ABOUT, UH, THEIR CAMPUS.
THEY ARE LOCATED IN THE TOWN OF GREENBURG ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF OLD SAWMILL, UH, RIVER ROAD.
THEY ALSO OWN PROPERTY ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THAT, UH, ROAD, WHICH IS IN THE TOWN OF MOUNT PLEASANT.
AND THIS IS THEIR HEADQUARTERS.
SO WHAT YOU SEE, UH, IN THE YELLOW, UM, FORGET WHAT I'VE GOT HERE, WHICH IS THE SAME, UM, I'M SORRY, 7 7, 7 OLD SAWMILL RIVER ROAD LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF OLD SAWMILL RIVER ROAD.
AND THAT, THAT IS THE PARCEL THAT YOU SEE THERE IN YELLOW.
IT CONSISTS OF APPROXIMATELY 65.64 ACRES AND IS LOCATED IN THE OB DISTRICT OF THE TOWN.
THE OTHER APPLICATION THAT'S BEFORE YOU IS THE PROPERTY THAT'S SHOWN IN GREEN ON THAT MAP.
THAT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 5 5 5 5 SAWMILL RIVER ROAD AND IT IS APPROXIMATELY 60 ACRES.
AND THAT IS LOCATED IN THE P E D DISTRICT.
I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANNA FLIP TO THE NEXT
[00:55:01]
SLIDE.UH, SO OVER THE COURSE OF THE LAST DECADE, REGENERON HAS SIGNIFICANTLY GROWN, AS I MENTIONED IN ITS OPERATIONS.
THERE HAS BEEN THE CONSTRUCTION ON THE CAMPUS OF THREE NEW BUILD TO SUIT BUILDINGS FOR REGENERON.
UM, BACK IN 2014, THE APPLICANT'S PREDECESSOR AND INTEREST RECEIVED APPROVALS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT THEN OF A FOUR STORY 129,000 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING TOGETHER WITH RELATED PARKING AND INFRASTRUCTURE ON A PORTION OF THE PROPERTY THAT WE REFER TO AS PARCEL D.
THE REASON THAT WE REFER TO IT AS PARCEL D IS BECAUSE THE FIRST THREE BUILT TO SUIT BUILDINGS THAT I JUST MENTIONED TO YOU WERE REFERRED TO AS BUILDINGS A, B, AND C.
THAT FOURTH BUILDING THAT RECEIVED APPROVALS BACK IN 2014 WAS REFERRED TO AS BUILDING D.
AND WE CALL THE AREA IN WHICH IT WAS TO BE LOCATED PARCEL D, BUT IN FACT THE ENTIRE, UH, PARCEL D UM, IT IT'S ONE BIG LOT, WHICH WAS THAT YELLOW COLOR THAT, UH, I SHOWED YOU ON THE PREVIOUS SLIDE.
UM, SO BACK IN 2014, WE RECEIVED APPROVALS FROM THE TOWN, UH, SITE PLAN APPROVAL FROM THE TOWN BOARD, STEEP SLOPES AND WETLANDS APPROVALS FROM THE PLANNING BOARD AND AREA VARIANCES FROM THIS BOARD IN CONNECTION WITH THAT PRIOR, UM, APPLICATION.
SO AT THAT TIME WE RECEIVED VARIANCES FROM THIS BOARD FOR AN INCREASE IN F A R TO ALLOW THAT BUILDING AND A, UH, HEIGHT VARIANCE TO ALLOW AN INCREASE IN HEIGHT FROM I BELIEVE 74 FEET TO, I THINK IT'S 93 FEET.
SO IN 2017, UH, REGENERON ACQUIRED THIS PROPERTY AND SINCE THAT TIME THEY'VE BEEN EVALUATING THEIR NEEDS.
THE APPROVALS FOR THAT PREVIOUSLY APPROVED BUILDING ARE STILL VALID.
UM, BUT WHAT THEY'VE DETERMINED IS THAT THAT BUILDING DOESN'T MEET ITS NEEDS AGAIN.
IT WAS, UH, IT GOT APPROVALS, UH, IT WAS APPROVED BY, UH, REGENERON PREDECESSOR AND INTEREST AT THE PROPERTY AND IT DOESN'T MEET REGENERON NEEDS.
SO WHAT THEY'VE DONE IS THEY'VE GONE BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD.
AND I'LL INTRODUCE STEVE AGAIN IN JUST A MOMENT AND HE CAN TALK YOU THROUGH THE DETAILS OF, UM, THE, THE PROJECT A LITTLE BIT MORE.
BUT WE'VE GOTTEN, UM, WE'VE COME BACK TO THE TOWN BOARD WITH AN APPLICATION FOR A MODIFIED PROJECT.
UM, AND YOU CAN SEE THE FOOTPRINT OF THE PROPOSED BUILDING THERE.
IT NOW CONSISTS OF A TWO STORY BUILDING OF APPROXIMATELY 207,000 SQUARE FEET.
IT'S A LOT SHORTER THAN THE BUILDING THAT WAS PREVIOUSLY APPROVED, BUT BECAUSE IT'S SHORTER AND SPREAD OUT A LITTLE BIT MORE AND IT'S A LITTLE BIT BIGGER, UM, THE BUILDING WILL BE USED BY REGENERON PRIMARILY FOR PRECLINICAL MANUFACTURING AND PROCESS DEVELOPMENT.
I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANNA SWITCH TO THE NEXT SLIDE.
I THINK THAT THERE'S A SLIDE ABOUT P M P D AND THAT BUILDING WILL CONNECT TO THE EXISTING BUILDING FOUR ON THE GROUND LEVEL, THE ADJACENT BUILDING SEVEN, AND THEN THE PROPOSED ACCESSORY PARKING STRUCTURE THAT WILL BE CONSTRUCTING AS PART OF THIS PROJECT, PROVIDED THAT WE OBTAIN ALL OF THE NECESSARY APPROVALS FROM THE TOWN.
SO I DON'T KNOW, GARRETT, IF YOU WANNA FLIP TO THE NEXT SLIDE.
THESE ARE JUST SOME OF THE, UH, RENDERINGS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT.
WE ARE ALSO PROPOSING A, UH, SEVEN LEVEL SIX STORY PARKING STRUCTURE, WHICH IS GOING TO CONTAIN APPROXIMATELY 1,189 PARKING SPACES.
UM, SO WE ARE HERE FOR THE VARIANCES IN CONNECTION WITH THAT PARKING STRUCTURE.
UM, IT IS A, BECAUSE WE ARE PROPOSING OR CONSIDERING THE, UM, ADDITION OF SOLAR PANELS ON THE ROOF OF THAT STRUCTURE OVER WHAT WOULD BE THE PARKING AREA.
THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT HAS DETERMINED THAT THAT'S CONSIDERED A SEVENTH STORY AND THOSE SOLAR, UH, STRUCTURES WOULD EXCEED THE PERMITTED HEIGHT.
AND SO WE ARE SEEKING A VARIANCE FOR HEIGHT AND STEVE CAN TALK TO YOU A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THE DETAILS AND THE DIMENSIONS OF THOSE THINGS.
IN ADDITION, UH, BECAUSE THE BUILDING IS 207,000 SQUARE FEET, WE EXCEED THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED F A R.
I THINK WHAT WE HAD ORIGINALLY APPROVED WAS, UH, UH, 0.305 AND WE ARE LOOKING AT 0.337.
SO A MINOR INCREASE IN PROPOSED F A R ON THE PRO ON THE PROPERTY.
UM, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANNA FLIP TO THE NEXT ONE.
WE HAVE ANOTHER, UH, SLIDE OF RENDERINGS.
SO THOSE ARE THE VARIANCES THAT WE'RE REQUESTING IN CONNECTION WITH WHAT I JUST REFERRED TO AS PARCEL D.
WE'RE ALSO SEEKING IN THE NEXT APPLICATION, UM, A VARIANCE WHICH IS RELATED AS PART OF THE PROJECT FOR PARCEL D WE'RE PROPOSING THE CONSTRUCTION OF A BRIDGE OVER THE ROAD THAT WE REFER TO AS THE LOOP ROAD.
THAT ROAD WILL CONNECT THE EXISTING BUILDING ON, UH, THE SOUTH SIDE TO
[01:00:01]
THE PROPOSED NEW BUILDINGS, I'M SORRY, ON THE, ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF LOOP ROAD.BUT THE BUILDING THAT IT'S GOING TO CONNECT TO IS THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE EXISTING CAMPUS, BUT THE NORTH SIDE OF, UH, LOOP ROAD.
YOU MIGHT REMEMBER IN 2017, WE RECEIVED APPROVALS FROM THE TOWN BOARD AND PLANNING BOARD FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF NINE BUILDINGS IN A NEW CAMPUS ON THAT LOOP ROAD PROPERTY, UM, 60 ACRES.
SO IN CONNECTION WITH THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE FIRST BUILDING THERE, UH, WE ARE PROPOSING THIS LOOP ROAD BRIDGE THAT WILL GO OVER THE ROAD AND IT'LL ALLOW PEOPLE TO STAY INSIDE AND BE ABLE TO GO FROM THE EXISTING CAMPUS ON THE NORTH SIDE TO THE NEW CAMPUS THAT WILL END UP BEING CONSTRUCTED ON THE SOUTH SIDE.
SO THE VARIANCES THAT WE'RE SEEKING RELATED TO THAT BRIDGE ARE ZERO LOT LINE, UH, VARIANCES FOR BOTH SIDES OF THAT STREET.
AND THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE WITH THE SECOND APPLICATION 'CAUSE WE WANNA BE ABLE TO CONSTRUCT THAT BRIDGE.
UM, AND THAT REQUIRES A FRONT YARD SETBACK ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE STREET.
IT REQUIRES A REAR YARD SETBACK.
SO THAT'S THE APPLICATION, UH, IN A NUTSHELL.
HE CAN TALK TO YOU A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THE DETAILS AND GO THROUGH THE REST OF THE POWERPOINT WITH YOU, AND THEN WE CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE.
UH, THIS IS, UH, STEVE SPINA FROM J M C.
WE'RE THE SITE CIVIL ENGINEER AND, UH, WE DESIGNED THE ENTIRE PROPERTY, UH, TRAFFIC, STORM WATER, UM, LIGHTING, LANDSCAPING.
UH, WE WERE ALSO INVOLVED IN THE PRIOR APPLICATION THAT WAS APPROVED IN 2014.
SO WE HAVE THE HISTORY ON THE SITE HERE AS WELL.
AND, UM, THE, THE RENDERINGS THAT YOU SEE ARE, ARE, ARE, ARE VERY BEAUTIFUL AND REGENERON OBVIOUSLY TAKES GREAT PRIDE IN WHAT THEY PROPOSE.
AND, UM, AND, AND A LOT OF CAREFUL PLANNING WENT INTO THIS.
SO, UH, THE NEXT SLIDE DOWN, I'LL JUST QUICKLY GO THROUGH THE PROJECT FACTS.
JANET, UH, ALREADY DISCUSSED A LOT OF THESE, BUT IT'S A TWO STORY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT BUILDING BUILDING AND IT HAS AN ENCLOSED MECHANICAL PENTHOUSE ON TOP TO HOUSE ALL THE EQUIPMENT.
THE PRIOR APPROVAL ALSO HAD A MECHANICAL PENTHOUSE AS WELL.
UM, THERE ARE CONNECTIONS TO THE ADJACENT BUILDINGS.
UH, REGENERON IS VERY COGNIZANT TO TRY TO KEEP THAT CONTINUITY THROUGHOUT THE CAMPUS SO THAT YOU CAN MOVE FROM ALL THE WAY IN MOUNT PLEASANT TO ALL THE WAY IN GREENBURG WITHOUT EVEN GOING OUTSIDE.
SO, UH, THERE'S A LOT OF MOBILITY AND CONNECTIVITY THROUGHOUT THE CAMPUS.
AND THE NEW BUILDING ALSO PROPOSES THOSE CONNECTIONS.
THERE'S THE PARKING GARAGE AS WELL.
SO INSTEAD OF PROPOSING LARGE PARKING LOTS ON THE SURFACE, REGENERON ALWAYS LIKES TO CONSOLIDATE AND PROPOSE PARKING STRUCTURES TO, UH, UH, MINIMIZE THAT IMPERVIOUS AREA.
SO, UM, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CODE, WE'RE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF PARKING SPACES AND, UH, WE ARE DOING SO.
UH, THERE'S ALSO SOME, SOME GREAT FEATURES AS WELL TO HIGHLIGHT.
THERE'S A REALLY NICE PLAZA AMENITY SPACE THAT YOU MIGHT'VE NOTICED ON, UH, ONE OF THE PRIOR RENDERINGS.
UH, REALLY GREAT COURTYARD WITH LANDSCAPING BENCHES.
UH, JUST A NICE OUTDOOR SPACE, UH, THAT THEY, UH, THEY WANT TO KIND OF, THE, THE ONE THEY HAVE ON THE MOUNT PLEASANT SIDE HAS BEEN SUCH A GREAT SUCCESS.
THEY WANT TO BRING ANOTHER ONE ON, ON THE GREENBURG SIDE AS WELL.
WE'RE ALSO PROPOSING SOME SPORTS AND RECREATIONAL AREAS, UH, NORTH OF THE PARKING GARAGE, SOME VOLLEYBALL, BASKETBALL, TENNIS COURTS.
AND THEN OF COURSE, LASTLY, THE FUTURE BRIDGE TO THE LOOP ROAD HOLDINGS PROJECT.
AGAIN, KEEPING WITH THAT THEME OF, OF, UH, CONNECTIVITY, UH, THE RIGHT SIDE JUST HIGHLIGHTS, UH, SOME OF THE APPROVALS WE NEED.
AND WE'LL GET A LITTLE BIT MORE INTO THE VARIANCES SPECIFICALLY ON THE NEXT SLIDE.
SO WE'RE HERE FOR ESSENTIALLY FOUR VARIANCES OR FOUR TYPES OF VARIANCES, FLOOR AREA RATIO.
UH, THIS JUST GIVES YOU A, AN IDEA OF WHERE, WHAT THE PERMITTED AMOUNT IS, WHAT WE WAS PREVIOUSLY APPROVED AND WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR.
AND THAT INCLUDES THE LOOP ROAD BRIDGE ITSELF ON THAT SOUTH CAMPUS PARCEL D LOT.
'CAUSE HALF OF THE BRIDGE, OR MOST OF THE BRIDGE IS ON THAT SIDE OF, UH, OF THE LOOP ROAD.
THERE'S ALSO THE SETBACKS, AS JANET MENTIONED.
SO BECAUSE THE, THE BRIDGE CROSSES A LOT LINE, THERE'S A SETBACK FROM ONE SIDE AND IT SAT BACK FROM THE OTHER SIDE.
SO IT'S REALLY TWO VARIANCES, BUT FOR ONE PURPOSE.
AND THEN OF COURSE, THE BUILDING HEIGHT AND THE STORIES FOR THE PARKING GARAGE.
UH, THE, THE REASON WHAT TRIGGERED THAT, AS JANET MENTIONED, WAS BECAUSE OF COURSE REGENERON WITH THEIR SUSTAINABLE CONSCIOUSNESS IS GOING TO PROPOSE, UH, A NICE SOLAR ARRAY ON TOP OF THE PARKING GARAGE IN THE FUTURE.
SO WE'RE PLANNING FOR THAT AND, UH, THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT FELT THAT TRIGGERED THE NEED FOR A VARIANCE, UH, FOR THAT TO, TO ADD THAT IN.
SO WE'RE TRYING TO BE PROACTIVE AND ACHIEVE THAT VARIANCE.
[01:05:01]
UH, THE NEXT SLIDE WE'LL JUST TAKE YOU THROUGH A QUICK COMPARISON.SO THE APPROVED DESIGN FROM 2014 WAS A FOUR STORY SMALLER FOOTPRINT BUILDING.
UM, AND IT HAD A MECHANICAL, UH, PENTHOUSE ON TOP.
SO IT WAS A TALLER BUILDING, WHICH WE RECEIVED THE VARIANCE FOR, FOR 93 FEET.
THE NEW BUILDING IS ONLY TWO STORIES AND IT'S, UH, I BELIEVE IT'S ABOUT 70 FEET.
SO THE NEW BUILDING CONFORMS WITH THE HEIGHT.
UM, THE, THE PRIOR BUILDING ALSO REQUIRED WETLAND AND STEEP SLOPES, UH, PERMITS, WHICH WERE ISSUED.
UH, THE NEW DESIGN ALSO REQUIRES WETLANDS AND STEEP SLOPES, PERMITS, UH, AND, AND WE'RE, UH, BEFORE THE BOARD'S REQUESTING THOSE AS WELL.
AND THEN OF COURSE, THE BRIDGE, UH, THAT I MENTIONED THAT, UH, GOES TO THE LOOP ROAD PROJECT IS, IS PART OF THE NEW DESIGN THAT WAS NOT PRIOR.
SO THIS IS THE OLD PLAN, THE APPROVED PLAN.
AND UH, THE TAN IS THE BUILDING ON THE LEFT THERE.
THAT'S THE FOUR STORY MECHANICAL PENTHOUSE.
YOU CAN SEE THE TWO LITTLE, UH, STEMS COMING OFF OF THAT OR THE CONNECTION BRIDGES TO THE ADJACENT BUILDINGS.
SO, SO, UH, THAT, THAT, THAT DESIGN HAD THOSE BRIDGES AS WELL.
AND THEN THE, UH, THE, UH, LARGER AREA TO THE RIGHT, THE DARKER, UH, COLOR IS THE PARKING GARAGE.
SO PREVIOUSLY IT WAS A LARGER FOOTPRINT PARKING GARAGE, BUT NOT AS TALL.
THIS SLIDE SHOWS THE NEW DESIGN.
SO THE TAN, UH, LARGE BUILDING IN THE MIDDLE, IT'S KIND OF A, A Z SHAPE THERE.
IT'S A LARGER FOOTPRINT, BUT SMALLER HEIGHT.
UH, IT IS CONNECTED TO THE ADJACENT BUILDINGS.
AGAIN, IT'S ALSO CONNECTED TO THE PARKING GARAGE, SOMETHING THE PRIOR DESIGN DIDN'T HAVE.
SO NOW WE HAVE A SMALLER COMPACT PARKING GARAGE, BUT IT'S CONNECTED WITH A BRIDGE.
AND THEN OF COURSE ON THE LEFT SIDE YOU HAVE THAT FUTURE, UH, LOOP ROAD BRIDGE THAT GOES OVER TO THE LOOP ROAD HOLDINGS PROJECT.
AND THIS IS JUST, JUST, THIS JUST KIND OF ZOOMS IN ON THAT BRIDGE TO THE LOOP ROAD HOLDINGS PROJECT.
SO THE GREEN LINE IN THE MIDDLE IS THE PROPERTY LINE, THE LOT LINE BETWEEN THE TWO PROPERTIES THAT REGENERON OWNS NORTH.
THE SOUTH CAMPUS IS THE UPPER PIECE AND THE LOOP ROAD HOLDINGS LOT IS THE LOWER PIECE OF THAT GREEN LINE.
THE RED LINES JUST ILLUSTRATE THE SETBACKS.
SO IN THE UPPER PORTION IT'S A DIFFERENT ZONING DISTRICT, WHICH HAS THE 150 FOOT SETBACK.
AND THE LOWER PORTION IS A DIFFERENT ZONING DISTRICT, WHICH ONLY HAS A 25 FOOT SETBACK.
OBVIOUSLY THE BRIDGE CROSSING THE LOT WOULD GO OVER BOTH OF THOSE SETBACKS BY VIRTUE OF A BRIDGE.
UH, THIS IS JUST A NICE RENDERING THAT THE ARCHITECTURAL TEAM PUT TOGETHER, JUST SHOWING IT FROM A SIDE VIEW.
SO THE GREEN LINE AGAIN, IS YOUR PROPERTY LINE.
LEFT SIDE IS LOOP ROAD, RIGHT SIDE IS PARCEL D.
UM, YOU CAN SEE THE TWO SETBACK LINES.
UH, IF YOU WERE TO DRAW VERTICALLY.
THIS ILLUSTRATES THE PROPOSED PARKING GARAGE FOR THE PARCEL D PROJECT.
SO THAT, UH, COMPACT, DARKER BROWN BOX THAT WAS ON THE, UH, PLAN A FEW SLIDES AGO.
THESE ARE JUST THE ELEVATIONS.
UH, IT, IT, IT'S, UH, A TYPICAL PARKING GARAGE.
BUT, UH, SPECIAL THING ABOUT IT IS IT WILL, UH, IT WILL, IT'S BEING PLANNED FOR FUTURE SOLAR PANELS ON TOP.
AND IT'S A LITTLE DIFFICULT TO SEE, BUT THERE'S FADED DASH LINES ON TOP OF EACH ONE, RIGHT.
THOSE ARE THE, THOSE ARE THE TOPS OF THE FUTURE SOLAR ARRAYS.
AND, UH, THAT, THAT'S THAT HEIGHT.
AND, UH, AND THE PRESENCE OF THE SOLAR ARRAY IS WHAT TRIGGERED, UH, THAT ROOF TO BE A STORY.
AND IT'S JUST ANOTHER SKETCH THAT WAS INCLUDED IN THE SUBMISSION TO THE BOARD.
UM, THE HEIGHT IS BASED OFF THE GRADE PLANE, THE AVERAGE ELEVATION AROUND THE, AROUND THE PARKING STRUCTURE.
SO THAT'S THE LOWER RED LINE CROSSING THROUGH THE SCREEN AND IT'S 87 FEET HIGH UP TO THE TOP OF THE SOLAR ARRAY.
SO THAT'S HOW WE ARRIVED AT OUR, OUR HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING, UH, PER PER TOWN CODE, WHICH IS GREATER THAN ALLOWABLE.
UH, THIS IS A NICE RENDERING THAT WE, THAT WAS PUT TOGETHER TO, UH, ILLUSTRATE THE VIEW SHED.
SO THIS IS A VIEW, THE, THE LEFT IMAGE.
THERE IS A VIEW LOOKING FROM OLD SAWMILL RIVER ROAD LOOKING SOUTH TOWARDS THE GREENBURG CAMPUS, AND YOU COULD SEE THE PARKING GARAGE BEHIND SOME OF THOSE LARGE MATURE TREES.
OF COURSE, REGENERON VERY, UH, COGNIZANT OF, OF THE IMAGE AND, AND, UH, AND, AND WANTING TO DO THE RIGHT THING.
UH, YOU KNOW, HAD THE TEAM PUT TOGETHER, UH, IMAGES TO SHOW WHAT IT WOULD LOOK LIKE FROM, NOT ONLY FROM THE ROAD, BUT DIFFERENT ANGLES ON CAMPUS.
UM, THE, THE IMAGES ON THE RIGHT ARE JUST THE STREET VIEW, UH, FROM GOOGLE THAT, UH, JUST SHOWS US A LOT OF TREES.
AND, UH, THERE IS A, THERE, THERE IS ALREADY A LOT OF SCREENING ON THE CAMPUS.
UH, SO WE FEEL THAT THE PARKING GARAGE WILL NOT BE, UH, UH, WILL NOT HAVE AN IMPACT FROM VIEWS, UH, FROM THE ROADWAY OR, OR OTHER LOCATIONS AROUND THE SITE.
AND THAT'S, UH, THAT'S ALL FOR OUR, FOR OUR PRESENTATION.
AND IF THERE'S ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, UH, WE'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER THEM.
AND BOTH OF OUR APPLICATIONS CONTAIN OUR STATEMENT OF PRINCIPLE POINTS, WHICH GOES THROUGH THE STANDARD OF REVIEW AND OUR REASON REASONING WHY WE BELIEVE WE MEET THAT
[01:10:01]
STANDARD OF REVIEW.UH, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT STEVE MENTIONED, AND I JUST WANTED TO REITERATE AGAIN, IS THAT THE PREVIOUSLY GRANTED VARIANCES, UH, IN 2014 INCLUDED A HEIGHT VARIANCE TO, UH, 92 AND A HALF OR 93 FEET IN CONNECTION WITH THAT FOUR STORY BUILDING.
IN FACT, THE PARKING STRUCTURE THAT WE ARE PROPOSING, UH, IS, IS LOWER THAN WHAT WAS PREVIOUSLY APPROVED BY THE BOARD.
AND THEN THE INCREASE IN F A R, UH, IS IN FACT BECAUSE OF THE BRIDGE THAT WE'RE PROPOSING OVER LOOP ROAD TO BE ABLE TO CONNECT THE PROPERTIES.
UM, THEY ARE THEIR ONLY NEIGHBORS.
SO THERE'S REALLY NO, UH, DETRIMENTAL IMPACT, UH, VISUALLY OR OTHERWISE TO, UH, ANY OF THE OTHER SURROUNDING PROPERTIES.
SO WE BELIEVE THAT THE, UH, BENEFIT TO THE APPLICANT IN THIS INSTANCE CERTAINLY OUTWEIGHS ANY DETRIMENT TO THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITY.
I JUST WANTED TO, JUST TO, SO I, TO CLARIFY THE, UM, SO THE SETBACKS, SO FOR THE, THE APPLICATION, UM, NOT THE BRIDGE, BUT THE OTHER ONE MM-HMM.
SO YOU CAN SEE AS, UM, GARRETT'S POINTING TO THE TAN BUILDING.
THE PROPERTY LINE IS THE GREEN LINE THAT GOES THROUGH, UH, THE, THE MIDDLE OF THAT PROPOSED BRIDGE.
AND BECAUSE BOTH OF THE PROPERTIES ARE OWNED BY SUBSIDIARIES OF REGENERON, UM, BUT BECAUSE THAT STRUCTURE APPROACHES THE PROPERTY LINE OR, OR GOES OVER THE PROPERTY LINE, IT'S DIFFERENT.
IT REQUIRES A VARIANCE FROM THE BOARD, FROM BOTH SIDES.
SO ON ONE PROPERTY IT'S A REAR YARD VARIANCE.
ON THE OTHER PROPERTY IT'S A FRONT YARD VARIANCE, AND BECAUSE THEY'RE IN TWO, UH, THE, THE, THE, UH, PROPOSED P M P D BUILDING, WHICH WE CAN REFER TO AS PARCEL D, THAT'S LOCATED IN THE OB DISTRICT OF THE TOWN THAT HAS A REAR YARD SETBACK OF I BELIEVE 150 FEET.
AND THEN THE, UH, THE PROPERTY TO THE SOUTH, WHICH IS THE LOOP ROAD HOLDINGS PROPERTY WE CALL IT, UM, IS UH, IS LOCATED IN THE P E D DISTRICT.
AND THAT HAS A MUCH, UH, MUCH SMALLER REQUIRED FRONT YARD SETBACK.
I THINK IT'S 50 FEET, 25, 25 FEET.
AND THAT'S ALSO THE REASON FOR THE F A R, THE ADDITIONAL F A R IS PRIMARILY DUE TO THE BRIDGE.
THAT BUILDING, THAT, THAT BRIDGE IS CONSIDERED A STRUCTURE AND THE SQUARE FOOTAGE IN THAT IS INCLUDED IN THE F A R.
THE BRIDGE IS A SMALL CONTRIBUTION OF THE F A R VARIANCE? YES.
AND ONE OF THE THINGS I WANTED TO MENTION TO THIS BOARD, AND I KNOW THAT YOU KNOW YOUR ZONING BOARD AND YOU'RE REALLY LOOKING AT THE DETAILS OF THE ZONING CODE AND OTHER THINGS, BUT, UM, YOU KNOW, WITH REGENERON, AS STEVE HAD MENTIONED, THEY'RE VERY ENVIRONMENTALLY CONSCIENTIOUS.
UM, AND SO EVERYTHING THAT THEY DO IS DESIGNED WITH, UH, THE ENVIRONMENT IN MIND.
SO THE PROPOSED P M P D BUILDING THAT YOU SEE THERE IS INTENDED TO BE, I THINK IT'S LEADS SILVER CERTIFIED.
UM, AND EVERYTHING THAT THEY'VE DONE HERE HAS BEEN DESIGNED TO BE ENVIRONMENTALLY CONSCIENTIOUS.
UM, I'M NOT SURE IF THIS REALLY HAS ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE VARIANCES, BUT CAN YOU EXPLAIN WHY THE BUILDING THAT WAS A, THE FOUR STORY BUILDING THAT WAS APPROVED IN 2014 WAS NOT CONSTRUCTED.
IT WAS, UH, THE APPROVALS FOR THAT BUILDING WERE OBTAINED BY REGENERON PREDECESSOR AND INTEREST IN THE PROPERTY.
IT WAS BUILT AT THAT TIME FOR OFFICE AND R AND D AND OTHER MIXED USE.
UM, AND, UH, WHEN REGENERON PURCHASED THIS PROPERTY IN 2017, THAT PROPOSED BUILDING OR THAT APPROVED BUILDING DIDN'T MEET REGENERON NEEDS.
BETWEEN 2014 AND 2017, THE PREDECESSOR AND INTEREST DIDN'T BUILD THAT BUILDING.
TYPICALLY, YOU WOULDN'T BUILD A BUILDING UNLESS YOU HAVE A TENANT FOR THAT BUILDING.
UM, AND THEN, SO AS I MENTIONED IN 2017, UH, REGENERON ACQUIRED THE PROPERTY.
THE, THE APPROVED BUILDING DOES NOT MEET ITS NEEDS.
I, I, I WAS THERE FOR THAT AND IF I RECALL CORRECTLY, IT WAS A, A PROPOSED BUILDING BECAUSE THEY, WHOEVER THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY WAS AT THAT TIME HAD A VISION OR ENVISION THAT IT WOULD BE USED FOR LABORATORIES AND RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT AND WHATEVER.
AND THEY, WE, I THINK WE APPROVED IT WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT THEY WERE, WE WERE BUILDING IT BASED UPON HAVING A TENANT.
[01:15:01]
SO, SO THEY DIDN'T GET A TENANT.OBVIOUSLY SINCE YOU, WE'VE ACTUALLY EXTENDED THOSE APPROVALS, THEY ARE STILL VALID TODAY.
UH, BUT AS I MENTIONED THAT THAT PROJECT DOESN'T MEET THE NEEDS OF REGENERON TODAY.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? YES, UH, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, GARRETT, THE SECRET'S NOT DONE ON THIS YET.
SO YOU WON'T BE VOTING ON THIS TONIGHT BECAUSE THE APPLICATION'S NOT TECHNICALLY COMPLETE UNTIL THERE'S A SECRET DETERMINATION.
THERE IS A COORDINATED REVIEW BEING CONDUCTED.
THE TOWN BOARD IS THE LEAD AGENCY AS THEY'RE THE APPROVING AUTHORITY FOR THE SITE PLAN APPROVAL AND THE TREE REMOVAL PERMIT.
UH, WE'RE ALSO BEFORE THE PLANNING BOARD FOR STEEP SLOPES AND WETLANDS, UH, PERMITS IN CONNECTION WITH THAT AS WELL.
UH, SO BOTH THIS BOARD AND THE PLANNING BOARD OR INVOLVED AGENCIES, WE ANTICIPATE THAT THE TOWN BOARD WILL UH, CONCLUDE ITS SECRET REVIEW SOMETIME, UH, DURING THE MONTH OF AUGUST.
AND SO WE HOPE TO BE ABLE TO BE BACK BEFORE YOU IN AUGUST SO THAT YOU CAN MAKE A DECISION ON THE APPLICATIONS THEN.
THANK YOU FOR THAT INFORMATION AND IF YOU HAVE ANY MORE QUESTIONS YOU CAN THINK OF, WE CAN BRING THEM UP AT THAT TIME.
IS THERE ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WANTED TO COMMENT ON THIS MATTER? ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU.
IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU'RE RUNNING ENOUGH.
OKAY, SO WE'RE GONNA CONCLUDE PORTION.
SO SET UP, WE'LL ADJOURN NOW FOR OUR DELIBERATIONS AND AS WE INDICATED, YOU'RE WELCOME BACK TO LISTEN, BUT NOT TO PARTICIPATE AT THAT TIME.
AND WE ARE BACK WITH OUR DELIBERATIONS.
UM, IN THE FIRST CASE, UM, WE HAVE ON OUR AGENDA IS CASE 2103, TOWN OF GREENBURG PLANNING BOARD, WHICH WAS REQUESTING AN INTERPRETATION OF THE GREEN BOARD ZONING ORDINANCE.
AND WHEREAS THE GREENBURG Z B A HAS REVIEWED THE ABOVE-REFERENCED APPLICATION WITH REGARD TO SECRET A COMPLIANCE, AND WHEREAS THE GREENBERG E V A HAS DETERMINED THE APPLICATION WILL NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT NOW, THEREFORE IT BE, IT RESOLVED THAT THE SUBJECT APPLICATION IS A TYPE TWO ACTION REQUIRING NO FURTHER SECRET A CONSIDERATION.
LET ME PREFACE MY REMARKS WITH RESPECT TO 2103 AND THAT IS THAT THE, UM, PLANNING BOARD HAD REQUESTED, UH, THAT THE BOARD CONSIDER REOPENING THE, UM, APP THEIR APPLICATION BECAUSE THEY HAD MADE AN ARGUMENT THAT THEY WERE NOT REALLY SEEKING AN INTERPRETATION, BUT THAT THEY WERE SEEKING AN APPEAL.
WE HAVE, UM, HAD REVIEW THE ABILITY TO REVIEW ARGUMENTS THAT HAD BEEN PRESENTED TO US, UH, IN EMAILS AND WERE PREPARED TO ALLOW THEM TO ADDRESS US THIS EVENING TO SUPPORT WHAT, UH, THEY, THEY WANTED TO RELY UPON TO PERSUADE US TO REOPEN, UH, THEIR CASE.
HOWEVER, NOT HEARING ANYTHING FURTHER THIS EVENING, WE DID, UM, MAKE A DETERMINATION THAT WE WOULD NOT ENTERTAIN REOPENING THE MATTER AND THEREFORE I WOULD MOVE THAT WE DENY ANY APPLICATION TO DO THAT.
THAT HAS BEEN MADE TO US BY THE TOWN OF GREENBURG, UH, PLANNING BOARD.
THEREFORE, MOVING TO WHAT HAD BEEN BEFORE US AND WHAT WE HAD CONSIDERED, I MOVE THAT THE PLANNING BOARD'S REQUESTED, WE REQUEST AN INTERPRETATION OF SECTION 22 2 85 10 A FOUR B OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO THE EFFECT THAT A PROPOSED BATTERY STORAGE SYSTEM ON THE SITE OF THE NORWOOD COUNTRY CLUB DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A PUBLIC UTILITY STRUCTURE AS THAT TERM IS DEFINED IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE BE GRANTED.
DO I HAVE A SECOND ON THAT MOTION?
[01:20:01]
SECOND.I WILL NOT READ THE FINDINGS THIS EVENING DUE TO THE LATENESS OF THE HOUR BECAUSE THEY ARE QUITE EXTENSIVE.
HOWEVER, THEY WILL BE PUT IN THE RECORD AND THEY WILL BE AVAILABLE TO ANYONE WHO CHOOSES TO, UM, HAVE THE INFORMATION AND BE ABLE TO, UH, READ AND SEE WHAT OUR FINDINGS ARE.
MOVING ON TO OUR NEXT CASE, WHICH IS CASE 2104, IN WHICH THE APPLICANT IS THE COUNCIL OF GREENBURG CIVIC ASSOCIATIONS WHO IS HAD MADE AN APPEAL TO THIS BOARD FROM A DETERMINATION OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR AND WHEREAS THE GREENBERG Z B A HAS REVIEWED THE ABOVE-REFERENCED APPLICATION WITH REGARD TO C A COMPLIANCE AND WHEREAS THE GREENBERG Z B A HAS DETERMINED THE APPLICATION WILL NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE SUBJECT APPLICATION IS A TYPE TWO ACTION REQUIRING NO FURTHER SEEKING CONSIDERATION.
I MOVE THAT THE APPEAL IN CASE 2104 BE DENIED? DO I HAVE A SECOND? SECOND.
CAN I JUST ASK SOMETHING BECAUSE YOU'RE ALL WEARING MASKS AND EVERYBODY'S SPEAKING AT THE SAME TIME.
IS EVERYBODY SAYING AYE TO EVERY ONE OF YOU? YES.
WE COULD RAISE OUR HANDS TOO IF THAT WOULD HELP YOU.
UM, AND FINDINGS ARE THAT THE APPLICANT COUNCIL OF GREENBURG CIVIC ASSOCIATIONS C G C A AS IT IS ABBREVIATED YES.
IS APPEALING TO THIS BOARD FROM A DETERMINATION OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR THAT AN ELECTRIC BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEM CALLED A BEST B E S S FACILITY PROPOSED BY EAGLE ENERGY STORAGE FOR A SITE WITHIN THE NOEL WOOD COUNTRY CLUB, CONSTITUTES A PUBLIC UTILITY STRUCTURE PERMITTED BY TOWN BOARD SPECIAL PERMIT PURSUANT TO SECTION TWO EIGHTY FIVE TEN FOUR B OF THE TOWN OF GREENBURG ZONING ORDINANCE.
ACCORDING TO ITS WEBSITE, THE C G C A IS A NON-PARTISAN UMBRELLA ORGANIZATION WHOSE PURPOSE IS TO PROVIDE INFORMATION AND TO ADVANCE THE COMMON INTEREST OF MEMBER CIVIC GROUPS IN IMPORTANT TOWN AFFAIRS.
THE CORPORATE PURPOSES SET FORTH ON ITS WEBSITE, OR IN ITS WEBSITE I SHOULD SAY, ARE AS FOLLOWS.
ONE TO OPT TO OBTAIN AND DISSEMINATE INFORMATION CONCERNING TOWN AFFAIRS THAT IS OF COMMON INTEREST TO THE MEMBER ASSOCIATIONS.
TO FOSTER PUBLIC INTEREST IN BETTER GOVERNMENT.
THREE, TO ASSIST IN MAINTAINING A GOOD MUTUAL UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN RESIDENT RESIDENTS AND TOWN OFFICIALS.
TO PROMOTE PUBLIC KNOWLEDGE AND APPRECIATION OF PUBLIC PROBLEMS THROUGH NON-PARTISAN PUBLICITY AND TO ALERT PUBLIC INTEREST TOWARDS THEIR SOLUTION.
TO STUDY TOWN POLICIES, PLANNING PROCEDURES, ORGANIZATIONS, STAFFING, FINANCES AND LIKE MATTERS.
TO COOPERATE WITH OTHER LOCAL COUNTY, STATE AND NATIONAL GROUPS HAVING SIMILAR PURPOSES.
TO PROMOTE CONCERTED AND INTELLIGENT ACTION IN ANY MANNER AFFECTING COMMON INTEREST OF MEMBER ASSOCIATIONS.
TO ENCOURAGE AND ASSIST IN THE FORMATION OF ENLIGHTENED PUBLIC OPINION AND INCREASED GENERAL ACTION IN PUBLIC AFFAIRS AFFECTING THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF GREENBURG NINE.
TO FOSTER COOPERATION AND MUTUAL ASSISTANCE AMONG MEMBER ASSOCIATIONS OF THE UNINCORPORATED AREA AND TO ASSIST IN THE EFFECTIVE REPRESENTATION OF THEIR VIEWS AND THOSE OF THE COUNCIL BEFORE GOVERNMENTAL AND PRIVATE ENTITIES AND PUBLIC AND GENERAL PUBLIC.
BEFORE ADDRESSING THE MERITS OF THE CGCAS APPEAL, WE MUST FIRST ADDRESS WHETHER THE C G C A HAS STANDING TO APPEAL THE DETERMINATION OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR STANDING IS A THRESHOLD JURISDICTIONAL ISSUE.
IF A PARTY LACKS STANDING, HIS HER APPLICATION MUST BE DENIED.
EVEN IF WE MAY AGREE WITH THE PARTY'S POSITION ON THE MERITS OF THE QUESTION BEING RAISED IN THIS MATTER, WE RELUCTANTLY FIND THAT THE C G C A LACKS STANDING TO BEGIN WITH.
CG C'S OWN REPRESENTATIVE STATED TO US THAT QUOTE, A CIVIC GROUP LIKE THE C G C A HAS TO
[01:25:01]
SHOW THAT THEY ARE AGGRIEVED IN ORDER TO HAVE STANDING.THAT ISSUE GOES TO WHETHER THE C G C A IS SPECIFICALLY AGGRIEVED TO BE ABLE TO FILE THIS APPEAL.
AGGRIEVE IN THIS CONTEXT MEANS THAT IT OR ANY OF ITS CONSTITUENT MEMBERS WOULD BE ADVERSELY IMPACTED BY THE PROPOSED BEST FACILITY TO A DIFFERENT OR GREATER DEGREE THAN WITH MEMBERS OF THE GENERAL PUBLIC.
THIS BURDEN IS OFTEN SATISFIED BY SHOWING THAT A PARTY OWNS OR OCCUPIES PROPERTY ADJACENT IN OR IN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO THE SITE OF THE PROPOSED FACILITY.
ANOTHER INDICIA OF STANDING RECOGNIZED BY THE COURTS IS WHETHER A PARTY RESIDES SO CLOSE TO THE SITE IN QUESTION THAT THEY ARE ENTITLED TO RECEIVE LEGAL NOTICE OF THE HEARING ON THE APPLICATION.
C G C A DID NOT MAKE A CASE ON THE RECORD BEFORE US TO ESTABLISH THAT IT OR ANY OF ITS MEMBERS ARE AGGRIEVED AT THE ONSET.
IT WAS ESTABLISHED THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD CLOSEST TO THE SITE OF THE PROPOSED FACILITY IS WITHIN THE AREA REPRESENTED BY THE MAYFAIR NORWOOD CIVIC ASSOCIATION.
CGCAS WEBSITE LISTS THE CIVIC ASSOCIATIONS THAT HAVE JOINED THE C G C A.
ITS MEMBER ASSOCIATIONS THAT IS MAYFAIR NORWOOD IS NOT ONE LISTED AS ONE OF THEM.
THUS IT WAS NOT ESTABLISHED THAT C G C A HAD AUTHORIZATION TO PRESENT MAYFAIR NORWOOD THE HEREIN.
WE ALSO ASKED IF THE C G C A COULD POINT TO ANY INDIVIDUAL MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OR THE PUBLIC IT IS REPRESENTING WHO ARE THREATENED WITH A INJURY IN FACT BY THE PROPOSED FACILITY.
THE ONLY NAME MENTIONED WAS AN INDIVIDUAL WHO LIVES 1,200 FEET FROM THE SITE OF THE PROPOSED FACILITY AND WHO THEREFORE WAS NOT ENTITLED TO RECEIVE NOTICE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING IN THIS MATTER.
AND EVEN IF HE WAS ELIGIBLE TO RECEIVE SUCH NOTICE THIS INDIVIDUAL DID NOT APPEAR BEFORE THE BOARD AT THE PUBLIC HEARING NOR DID HE OR THE C G A PROVIDE ANY WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION FOR THE C G C A TO REPRESENT HIM.
FINALLY, AN EXAMINATION OF THE CORPORATE PURPOSES OF THE C G C A FAILS TO DEMONSTRATE THAT IT IS AUTHORIZED TO FILE THE APPEAL HEREIN WITHOUT PROOF OF REPRESENTATION OF MEMBERS WHO DO HAVE STANDING THE CORPORATE PURPOSES SET FORTH IN ITS WEBSITE.
TALK ABOUT COURT FOSTERING PUBLIC ASSISTING IN MAINTAINING GOOD MUTUAL AND UNDERSTANDING, PROMOTING PUBLIC KNOWLEDGE AND APPRECIATION OF PUBLIC PROBLEMS, ENCOURAGING AND ASSISTING THE FORMATION OF ENLIGHTENED PUBLIC OPINION AND QUOTE, PROMOTING CONCERNED AND INTELLIGENT ACTION.
QUOTE, FOSTERING QUOTE, ENCOURAGING QUOTE, STUDYING, QUOTE, AND EVEN PROMOTING QUOTE ACTION BY OTHERS IS A FAR CRY FROM BRINGING AN APPEAL AND APPEARING BEFORE A BOARD OF THE TOWN ON ITS OWN BEHALF.
WE DO NOT THINK THAT THE PURPOSE IS SO DESCRIBED, AUTHORIZED THE APPEAL BEFORE US HEREIN WITHOUT PROOF OF REPRESENTATION OF AN INDIVIDUAL OR MEMBER CIVIC ASSOCIATIONS IN THAT AREA.
IN THAT YES IN THAT AREA THAT WOULD BE ADVERSELY IMPACTED BY THE PROPOSED FACILITY.
WE ARE THEREFORE CONSTRAINED TO DENY CGCAS APPEAL FROM THE DETERMINATION OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR AUTHORIZING THE BEST APPLICATION TO PROCEED TO THE TOWN BOARD FOR SPECIAL PERMIT CONSIDERATION WITHOUT REQUIRING A USE VARIANCE.
THEREFORE, IN DOING SO, WE NOTE THAT A COMPANION APPLICATION FROM THE PLANNING BOARD SEEKING FAMILIAR RELIEF CAN AND IS GOING FORWARD.
AND NEXT WE HAVE WHY DO I ALWAYS LOSE THE AGENDA? I HAVE IT, IT'S RIGHT HERE OF CASE 2109 HAMPSHIRE MANAGEMENT COMPANY AND WHEREAS THE GREENBERG Z B A HAS REVIEWED THE ABOVE REFERENCED APPLICATION WITH REGARD TO C A COMPLIANCE AND WHEREAS THE GREENBERG C B S DETERMINED THE APPLICATION WILL NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE SUBJECT APPLICATION IS A TYPE TWO ACTION REQUIRING NO FURTHER SECRET A CONSIDERATION.
AND DO I HAVE A MOTION? YES, I MOVED AT THE APPLICATION IN CASE NUMBER 2109.
I CAN'T SAY SPEAKING, I'M SORRY.
I MOVED AT THE APPLICATION
I WE, WE ALWAYS PRINT, WE PRINT THEM OUT AND GIVE THEM TO YOU ALSO.
[01:30:01]
THE APPLICANT OBTAINED ALL NECESSARY APPROVALS AND FILE SAME WITH THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT.CONSTRUCTION SHALL BEGIN NO LATER THAN 12 MONTHS AFTER THE GRANTING OF THE LAST APPROVAL REQUIRED FOR THE ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT AND PROCEED DILIGENTLY THEREAFTER IN CONFORMITY WITH THE DOCUMENTS RECEIVED AND STAMPED JULY 9TH, 2021.
SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF THIS APPLICATION OR AS SUCH, PLANS MAY BE HEREAFTER MODIFIED BY ANOTHER APPROVING BOARD OR AGENCY OR OFFICER OF THE TOWN.
PROVIDED THAT SUCH MODIFICATION DOES NOT REQUIRE A DIFFERENT OR GREATER VARIANCE THAN WHAT WE ARE GRANTING HEREIN THE VARI.
THE VARIANCES BEING GRANTED ARE FOR THE IMPROVEMENTS SHOWN ON THE PLAN SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF THIS APPLICATION.
ANY FUTURE OR ADDITIONAL CONSTRUCTION THAT IS NOT IN CONFORMITY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE SHALL REQUIRE VARIANCES EVEN IF THE CONSTRUCTION CONFORMS TO THE HEIGHT, SETBACK OR OTHER VARIANCES WE HAVE APPROVED HEREIN.
AYE UH, FINDINGS IN GRANTING THIS APPLICATION, THE ZONING BOARD HAS WEIGHED THE BENEFIT TO BE DERIVED BY THE APPLICANT FROM THE PROPOSED VARIANCE AGAINST THE IMPACT THAT THE VARIANCE WOULD HAVE ON THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD.
WE HAVE FOUND THAT GRANTING THE VARIANCE WILL NOT RESULT IN A DETRIMENT TO NEARBY PROPERTIES AND WILL NOT ADVERSELY IMPACT THE CHARACTER OR PHYSICAL OR ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR DISTRICT BECAUSE THE PROPOSED PYLON SIGN IS SIMILAR TO MANY EXISTING PYLON SIGNS ALONG CENTRAL AVENUE AND IS IN FACT SMALLER THAN THE EXISTING PYLON SIGN TO THE NORTH OF THE SITE AT THE DALEWOOD SHOPPING CENTER, WHICH MEASURES 25 FEET IN HEIGHT AND HAS A SQUARE FOOTAGE OF 280 SQUARE FEET.
THE PROPOSED SIGN REPRESENTS A VISUAL IMPROVEMENT OVER EXISTING CONDITIONS, PARTICULARLY IN TERMS OF THE DESIGN FONT AND SPACING OF TENANT NAMES.
IT INCLUDES A MONUMENT BASE FOR SHRUBS AND IDENTIFIES ALL EXISTING TENANTS.
THERE ARE NO SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES ON THE SITE.
UH, THERE WAS ONE OBJECTION MADE TO THIS APPLICATION, BUT THIS PERTAINED TO A NOW CLOSED PASSAGEWAY OR PASS THROUGH FROM A NEIGHBORING RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT.
UH, THIS ISSUE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS APPLICATION FOR A PYLON SIGN AND THEREFORE THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS CANNOT ADDRESS IT.
UH, THE GOAL OF THE APPLICANT CANNOT BE ACHIEVED BY SOME OTHER FEASIBLE MEANS WITHOUT REQUI.
THE OTHER SIGNS DON'T HAVE ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
ALSO, UM, GOING BACK TO NUMBER ONE,
SO THAT IS, UM, ANOTHER DISTINGUISHING FACTOR.
UH, THE GOAL OF THE APPLICANT CANNOT BE ACHIEVED BY SOME OTHER FEASIBLE MEANS WITHOUT REQUIRING THE VARIANCE WE ARE GRANTING NOW BECAUSE THE PYLON SIGN IS ALREADY NON-CONFORMING, SO THERE IS NO OTHER WAY TO CREATE A LARGER SIGN WITHOUT A VARIANCE.
UM, ALSO THERE ARE 16 TENANTS IN THE SHOPPING CENTER.
UM, SO A LARGER SIGN WITH GREATER SQUARE FOOTAGE IS NECESSARY SO THAT ALL THE BUSINESSES CAN BE REPRESENTED AND EASILY SEEN FROM THE STREET, WHICH HAS A LOT OF GREENERY AND TREES BLOCKING THE SIGN AND THE VISUAL IMPACT, UH, THE REQUESTED VARIANCES ARE SUBSTANTIAL IN RELATION TO THE REQUIREMENTS SOUGHT TO BE VARIED, UM, AS FOLLOWS, MAXIMUM PERMITTED SQUARE FOOTAGE IS 30 SQUARE FEET COMPARED WITH 144 SQUARE FEET PROPOSED A 380% INCREASE.
HOWEVER, THIS INCREASE IN SQUARE FOOTAGE ENABLES ALL EXISTING TENANTS TO BE REPRESENTED ON THE SIGN, PROVIDES BETTER, UH, VISIBILITY FROM THE STREET.
UM, THE MAXIMUM PERMITTED HEIGHT IS 12 FEET COMPARED WITH 20 FEET PROPOSED A 67% INCREASE.
HOWEVER, THE EXISTING SIGN IS ALREADY 20 FEET IN HEIGHT.
UH, THE MAXIMUM PERMITTED WIDTH IS SIX FEET COMPARED TO 12 FEET.
PROPOSED A 100% INCREASE, UM, AND THE MAXIMUM PERMITTED CLEARANCE UNDER A SIGN IS SIX FEET COMPARED TO 3.58 FEET PROPOSED A 40% DECREASE.
HOWEVER, THE CLEARANCE BELOW THE SIGN IS NOT AN ISSUE AT THIS LOCATION BECAUSE THE SIGN
[01:35:01]
IS SUFFICIENTLY SET BACK FROM THE SIGNALED INTERSECTION OR INGRESS EGRESS OF THE, THE DRIVEWAY AND DOES NOT IMPEDE THE DRIVER'S SIGHT LINE WHEN EXITING THE SITE.UH, THE CLEARANCE ALSO PERMITS THE PLANTER TO BE INSTALLED BELOW IT.
THE APPLICANT'S NEED FOR THE VARIANCE WAS SELF-CREATED BECAUSE HE PURCHASED THE PROPERTY WITH KNOWLEDGE OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE.
HOWEVER, THE FACT THAT AN APPLICANT'S NEED FOR AN AREA OF VARIANCE IS SELF-CREATED DOES NOT BY ITSELF REQUIRE US TO DENY AN AREA OF VARIANCE.
ALRIGHT, AND THE NEXT CASE ON TONIGHT'S AGENDA IS CASE 2109.
HOW DID I HAD THESE ALL IN ORDER, HUH? OH, NO, NO, I HAD THESE ALL IN ORDER.
YOU THAT'S BEING YOUR ADJOURNED.
20 21 11 IS BEING ADJOURNED AS OF RIGHT DUE TO THE LIMITED NUMBER OF BOARD MEMBERS THAT WERE PRESENT AT THE MEETING THIS EVENING AND, UH, THAT THAT WAS AT THE REQUEST OF THE APPLICANT AND IT WOULD BE, UM, MOVED TO THE MEETING OF AUGUST 19TH AND THE NEXT CASE IS 2117.
AND WHEREAS THE GREENBERG Z B A HAS BU HAS REVIEWED THE ABOVE-REFERENCED APPLICATION WITH REGARD TO SECRET COMPLIANCE AND WHEREAS THE GREENBERG Z B A HAS DETERMINED THE APPLICATION WILL NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE SUBJECT APPLICATION IS A TYPE TWO ACTION REQUIRING NO FURTHER SECRET CONSIDERATION.
ALL IN FAVOR AND THE CHAIR VOTES? AYE.
AND DO I HAVE A MOTION? UM, I DO.
I MOVE THAT THE APPLICATION IN CASE NUMBER 21 DASH 17 BE GRANTED PROVIDED THAT THE APPLICANT OBTAINED ALL NECESSARY APPROVALS AND FILE SAME WITH THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT.
THAT CONSTRUCTION SHALL BEGIN NO LATER THAN 12 MONTHS AFTER THE GRANTING OF THE LAST APPROVAL REQUIRED FOR THE ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT AND PROCEED DILIGENTLY THEREAFTER IN CONFORMITY WITH THE PLANS DATED MAY 17TH, 2021 SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF THIS APPLICATION OR AS SUCH, PLANS MAY BE HEREAFTER MODIFIED BY ANOTHER APPROVING BOARD OR AGENCY OR OFFICER OF THE TOWN.
PROVIDED THAT SUCH MODIFICATION DOES NOT REQUIRE A DIFFERENT OR GREATER VARIANCE THAN WHAT WE ARE GRANTING HEREIN.
THE VARIANCES BEING GRANTED ARE FOR THE IMPROVEMENTS SHOWN ON THE PLAN SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF THIS APPLICATION.
ANY FUTURE OR ADDITIONAL CONSTRUCTION THAT IS NOT IN CONFORMITY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE SHALL REQUIRE VARIANCES EVEN IF THE CONSTRUCTION CONFORMS TO THE HEIGHT, SETBACK OR OTHER VARIANCES WE APPROVED HEREIN.
DO I HAVE A SECOND? SECOND, SECOND.
CHAIR VOTES AYE UH, FINDINGS IN GRANTING THIS APPLICATION, THE ZONING BOARD HAS WEIGHED THE BENEFIT TO BE DERIVED BY THE APPLICANT FROM THE PROPOSED VARIANCE AGAINST THE IMPACT THAT THE VARIANCE WOULD HAVE ON THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD.
WE HAVE FOUND THAT GRANTING THE VARIANCE WILL NOT RESULT IN A DETRIMENT TO NEARBY PROPERTIES AND WILL NOT ADVERSELY IMPACT THE CHARACTER OR PHYSICAL OR ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR DISTRICT BECAUSE THE REDUCTION IN THE REAR YARD SETBACK FROM 10 FEET TO TWO FEET OCCURS ALONG THE EXISTING CONSERVATION EASEMENT AND WOULD THEREFORE HAVE NO VISUAL IMPACT ON AN ADJACENT NEIGHBOR.
THE NEW PATIO WAS ALSO APPROVED BY THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION.
THE H O A ALSO ALLOWS THE PATIO, IF IT IS MADE OF NATURALLY COVERED OF NATURALLY COLORED CONCRETE STONE OR BRICK AND IS SET A MINIMUM OF TWO FEET FROM AN ADJOINING PROPERTY OR PROPERTY LINE.
THE GOAL OF THE APPLICANT CANNOT BE ACHIEVED BY SOME OTHER FEASIBLE MEANS WITHOUT
[01:40:01]
REQUIRING THE VARIANCE WE ARE GRANTING BECAUSE THE AREA TO THE REAR IS FREE AND CLEAR OF TREES AND OTHER OBSTRUCTIONS, WHEREAS A SIDE YARD HAS A 12 INCH CALIBER TREE THAT THEY DO NOT WISH TO DISTURB.THE NEW PATIO ALSO, UH, WAS ALSO TO CORRECT A GRADING ISSUE THAT DRAINED RAINWATER TOWARDS THE HOUSE INSTEAD OF AWAY FROM THE HOUSE.
THE NEW PATIO MATERIAL WILL ALSO INCREASE PERMEABILITY AND INCREASE DRAINAGE CAPABILITIES.
THE REQUESTED VARIANCE IS SUBSTANTIAL IN RELATION TO THE REQUIREMENTS SOUGHT TO BE VARIED AND THAT THE REQUESTED RELIEF IS TWO FEET COMPARED TO 10 FEET REQUIRED, WHICH IS A 80% INCREASE.
THE APPLICANT'S NEED FOR THE VARIANCE WAS SELF-CREATED BECAUSE THEY PURCHASED A PROPERTY WITH THE KNOWLEDGE OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE.
HOWEVER, THE FACT THAT AN APPLICANT'S NEED FOR AN AREA OF VARIANCE IS SELF-CREATED DOES NOT BY ITSELF REQUIRE US TO DENY AN AREA OF VARIANCE.
AND THE NEXT CASE ON OUR AGENDA IS CASE 2118.
ANNIE LEON SCUDDER LIVING TRUST AND WHEREAS THE GREENBERG Z B A HAS REVIEWED THE ABOVE REFERENCED APPLICATION WITH REGARD TO SECRET A COMPLIANCE AND WHEREAS THE GREENBERG Z B A HAS DETERMINED THE APPLICATION WILL NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE SUBJECT APPLICATION IS A TYPE TWO ACTION REQUIRING NO FURTHER SEEKING CONSIDERATION.
ALL IN FAVOR A AYE CHAIR VOTES.
DO I HAVE A MOTION? YES, I HAVE A MOTION.
I MOVE THAT THE APPLICATION IN THE CASE NUMBER 21 DASH 18 BE GRANTED PROVIDING THAT THE APPLICANT WILL OBTAIN ALL NECESSARY APPROVALS AND FILE SAME WITH THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT.
THAT CONSTRUCTION BEGIN NO LATER THAN 12 MONTHS AFTER THE GRANTING OF THE LAST APPROVED APPROVAL REQUIRED FOR THE ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT AND PROCEED DILIGENTLY THEREAFTER.
IN CONFORMITY WITH THE PLAN DATED MAY 17TH, 2021 SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF THIS APPLICATION, THE VARIANCES BEING GRANTED ARE FOR THE IMPROVEMENT SHOWN ON THE PLAN SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF THIS APPLICATION ONLY.
ANY FUTURE OR ADDITIONAL CONSTRUCTION THAT IS NOT IN CONFORMITY WITH THE, THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE ZONE ORDINANCE SHALL REQUIRE VARIANCES EVEN IF THE CONSTRUCTION CONFORMS TO THE HEIGHT, SETBACK, OR OTHER VARIANCES WE HAVE APPROVED HEREIN.
ALL IN FAVOR A AYE CHAIR VOTES.
IN GRANTING THIS APPLICATION, THE ZONING BOARD HAS WEIGHTED THE BENEFIT TO BE DERIVED BY THE APPLICANT FROM THE PROPOSED VARIANCE AGAINST THE IMPACT THAT THE VARIANCE WOULD HAVE ON THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD.
WE HAVE FOUND THAT GRANTING THE VARIANCE WILL NOT RESULT IN A DETRIMENT TO NEARBY PROPERTIES AND WILL NOT ADVERSELY IMPACT THE CHARACTER OR PHYSICAL OR ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS IN THE NIG NEIGHBORHOOD OR DISTRICT PROVIDED THE CONDITIONS.
CONDITIONS ARE FULLY COMPLIED WITH BECAUSE THE HOME IS IN A NEIGHBORHOOD WHERE THERE ARE MANY TWO STORY HOMES, THE BUILDING IS A NON-CONFORMING STRUCTURE AND THE OWNER IS NOT SUBSTANTIALLY REDUCING THE CURRENT FRONT YARD CENTER.
UH, THE GOAL OF THE APPLICANT CANNOT BE ACHIEVED BY SOME OTHER FEASIBLE MEANS WITHOUT REQUIRING A VARIANCE.
WE ARE GRANTING BECAUSE THE EXISTING STRUCTURE IS A NON-CONFORMING STRUCTURE WITH A 22.9 FOOT FRONT YARD SETBACK.
WHILE THE REQUIRED SETBACK IS 25 FEET, THE REQUESTED VARIANCE IS NOT SUBSTANTIAL IN RELATION TO THE REQUIREMENT SOUGHT TO BE VARIED IN THAT THE REQUESTED RELIEF IS 21.33 FEET COMPARED WITH 22.9 EXISTING AND 25 FEET REQUIRED.
THIS IS A 15% DECREASE OVER A REQUIREMENT AND 7% OVER EXISTING.
THE APPLICANT'S NEED FOR THE VARIANCE WAS SELF-CREATED BECAUSE THEY PURCHASED THE PROPERTY WITH KNOWLEDGE OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE.
HOWEVER, THE FACT THAT AN APPLICANT'S NEEDS FOR AN AREA OF VARIANCE IS SELF-CREATED DOES NOT BY ITSELF REQUIRE US TO DENY THE AREA OF VARIANCE.
AND THE NEXT CASE ON TONIGHT'S AGENDA IS CASE 2119.
[01:45:01]
PROPERTY AT 40 WALBROOK ROAD AND WHEREAS THE GREENBURG Z B A HAS DETERMINED THAT THE ABOVE REFERENCED APPLICATION IS WITH REGARD TO HAS REVIEWED THE ABOVE REFERENCED APPLICATION WITH REGARD TO SECRET A COMPLIANCE AND WHEREAS THE GREENBERG Z B A HAS DETERMINED THE APPLICATION WILL NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE SUBJECT APPLICATION IS A TYPE TWO ACTION REQUIRING NO FURTHER SECRET CONSIDERATION.AND I MOVE THAT THE CASE IN, IN CASE NUMBER 2119 BE GRANTED PROVIDED THAT THE APPLICANT WILL OBTAIN ALL NECESSARY APPROVALS AND FILE SAME WITH THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT.
THAT CONSTRUCTION BEGAN NO LATER THAN 12 MONTHS AFTER THE GRANTING OF THE LAST APPROVAL REQUIRED FOR THE ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT AND PROCEED DILIGENTLY THEREAFTER IN CONFORMITY WITH THE PLANS DATED, RECEIVED JUNE 16TH, 2021 SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF THIS APPLICATION OR AS SUCH, PLANS MAY BE HEREAFTER MODIFIED BY ANOTHER APPROVING BOARD OR AGENCY OR OFFICER OF THE TOWN.
PROVIDED THAT SUCH MODIFICATION DOES NOT REQUIRE A DIFFERENT OR GREATER VARIANCE THAN WHAT WE ARE GRANTING HEREIN, THE VARIANCES ARE BEING GRANTED FOR THE IMPROVEMENT SHOWN ON THE PLANS ADMITTED IN SUPPORT OF THIS APPLICATION.
ANY FUTURE OR ADDITIONAL CONSTRUCTION THAT IS NOT IN CONFORMITY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE SHALL REQUIRE VARIANCES EVEN IF THE CONSTRUCTION CONFORMS TO THE HEIGHT, SETBACK, OR OTHER VARIANCES WE HAVE APPROVED HEREIN.
A AND I VOTE AYE ALTHOUGH I'M SORRY.
AND THE FINDINGS IN GRANTING THIS APPLICATION, THE ZONING BOARD HAS WEIGHED THE BENEFIT TO BE, BE DERIVED BY THE APPLICANT FROM THE PROPOSED VARIANCE AGAINST THE IMPACT THAT THE VARIANCE WOULD HAVE HAD ON THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD.
WE HAVE FOUND THAT GRANTING THE VARIANCE WILL NOT RESULT IN A DETRIMENT TO NEARBY PROPERTIES AND WILL NOT ADVERSELY IMPACT THE CHARACTER OF PHYSICAL OR ENVIRONMENT CONDITIONS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OF DISTRICT BECAUSE THE REQUESTED IMPROVEMENT IS AN ADDITION OF A 45 SQUARE FOOT MUDROOM TO ADDRESS AND FACILITATE A SAFE ENTRY INTO THE HOME ON THE REAR OF THE STRUCTURE WHERE THE STEPS WERE WERE BUILT IN A MANNER THAT IS UNDESIRABLE IN AN UNDESIRABLE MANNER OR CONFIGURATION.
THE GOAL OF THE APPLICANT CANNOT BE ACHIEVED BY SOME OTHER FEASIBLE MEANS WITHOUT REQUIRING THE VARIANCE WE ARE GRANTING BECAUSE THE HOME WAS BUILT IN 1919 PRIOR TO THE ZONING CODE AS IT IS TODAY, AS, AS, AS, AS THE CODE IS TODAY AND THEREFORE IS A NON-CONFORMING STRUCTURE.
SO ANY IMPROVEMENT TO THE STRUCTURE REQUIRES A VARIANCE AS IT, AS IT GEEZ, I WISH I COULD READ MY WRITING
ALTHOUGH THE IMPROVEMENT WAS, WAS MERELY OF A REPLACEMENT OF A REAR PORCH, UM, WITHIN THE SAME FOOTPRINT AS THE PROPOSED MUDROOM, THE REQUESTED VARIANCE IS NOT SUBSTANTIAL.
WELL I GUESS IT IS SUBSTANTIAL IN RELATION TO THE REQUIREMENTS OUGHT TO BE VARIED AND THAT THE REQUESTED RELIEF IS 20.5 COMPARED TO 2026 OR REQUIRED, WHICH IS A AND I DON'T HAVE THE PERCENTAGE 'CAUSE I MESSED IT UP, I'LL FIX IT.
WHICH IS A A, AN INCREASE THE APPLICANT'S NEED FOR THE VARIANCE WAS SELF-CREATED BECAUSE IT WAS PURCHASED WITH THE PROPERTY KNOWLEDGE, PURCHASED THE PROPERTY WITH KNOWLEDGE OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE.
HOWEVER, THE FACT THAT AN APPLICANT'S NEED FOR AN AREA OF VARIANCE IS SELF-CREATED, DOES NOT BY ITSELF REQUIRE US TO DENY AN AREA OF VARIANCE.
ALRIGHT, MY COM MY PHONE DIED ON ME.
NEXT, OUR LAST CASES WE HAVE ARE CASE 20 20 21 20 AND 21, 21, WHICH ARE BEING CONSIDERED, UH, JOINTLY BECAUSE THEY AFFECT THE SAME PROPERTIES AND THAT IS THE, UH, B A B S C L L LEASING AT 7 7 7 AL RIVER ROAD AND THE LUKE ROAD HOLDINGS, WHICH IS AT 5 5 5 SOMO RIVER ROAD, WHICH IS PART OF THE REGENERON PROCESS, UH, BECAUSE THEY HAVE NOT YET GOTTEN, UM, THE SEEKER, UM, CONSIDERATION COMPLETED.
WE WILL BE ADJOURNING THOSE CASES TO AUGUST 19TH AND THEREFORE WE HAVE COMPLETED OUR CASES THAT WE HAVE ON OUR AGENDA FOR THIS EVENING.
[01:50:01]
IT IS GLAD TO BE BACK IN TOWN HALL, ALTHOUGH IT CAME AS SOMEWHAT OF A SHOCK DOING THIS IN THE MIDDLE OF THE SUMMER WITH US STILL HAVING MASKS ON.BUT WE ARE HERE AND WE WILL BE TURNING ON AUGUST 19TH AND HOPE THAT THINGS WILL BE IN AT LEAST A VERY STABLE AND INCREASINGLY STABLE SITUATION WITH REGARD TO THIS COVID, WHICH HAS CAUSED US TO BE WHERE WE ARE TODAY.
21% IS FOR THE, UH, INCREASED WITH RESPECT TO CASE 29, 21 19.
A REDUCTION, I'M SORRY? 2119 REDUCTION IN THE SETBACK? CORRECT.
WITH THAT, I SHALL GO BACK TO WORK AND WE SHALL GO HOME.