Minutes of the Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting held on July 23, 2014 at 7:30PM Present: Absent: Also Present:

Victor Ferrarelli, Chairman Kevin Abrams, Andrew Giacomazza, Joann Stabile and Karen Ungerer None Lisa Felicissimo, ZBA Attorney; Jessica McClennan, ZBA Secretary; Desiree Potvin, Village Clerk; Neil Crouse, Trustee

1. Executive Session: Chairman Ferrarelli requested that the executive session be moved to the end of the meeting. All Board members were in agreement.

2. Public Comment: Chairman Ferrarelli explained that if there is anyone here tonight who wishes to speak at this time regarding anything that is not on the agenda to come forth and do it at this time. No one wished to speak.

3. Approval and Acceptance of Previous Minutes: Motion was offered by K Abrams, seconded by J Stabile, to approve and accept the minutes of the meeting held June 11, 2014. Chairman Ferrarelli conducted a roll call of the Board which resulted in the motion being: ADOPTED AYES 5 Ferrarelli, Abrams, Giacomazza, Stabile, Ungerer NOES 0 4. New Business: Chairman Ferrarelli, announced that the board’s next regular meeting will be held on September 10, 2014 at 7:30 PM, and that the board has come to a decision regarding Schunnemunk Holdings.

5. Action of Decisions: Schunnemunk Holdings – The Board reviewed the decision for area variances and interpretation of certain proposed accessory uses. Said applicant proposes to renovate an existing vacant building to be used as a place of worship to include uses on the premises not clearly defined as accessary, such as private study rooms, library and dining area. An interpretation from the Board is required to determine if these uses are accessary to a place of worship pursuant to Section 310-49(c)(4). Additionally, pursuant to Section 310-6(B) and 310-7 (schedule of district regulations), the applicant requests a variance to allow a front yard setback of 41 feet whereas the Zoning Code requires a 50 foot setback. The applicant also proposes a reduction in paved parking to 15 spaces whereas, pursuant to Section 310-40, a total of 42 spaces are required. Said property is located in the R2A Zoning District at 406 Schunnemunk Road in Highland Mills, and is known on the Woodbury Tax Maps as Section 213, Block 1, Lots 4 and 5. Chairman Ferrarelli read the decision prepared by Attorney Felicissimo, as follows: “The Board hereby finds that the applicant has not sustained its burden of proof as required by both the Village Law of the State of New York and the Village of Woodbury Zoning Code with respect to its application for an area variance and with respect to its application for a parking variance for its property located at 406 Schunnemunk Road, Highland Mills, New York and denies the applicant’s request for a Page 1 – Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes - July 23, 2014

front yard setback variance which would allow a setback of 41 feet whereas the Village of Woodbury Zoning Code requires a 50 foot front yard setback for a proposed house of worship and denies the request for a parking variance which would have allowed parking spaces of 15 to be provided (a 64% reduction). This decision is based on submissions by the applicant and testimony placed on the record by the applicant concerning the intended uses of the property etc. Additionally, the Board takes the position that the variances sought were incorrect and that given the proposed uses as described by the applicant, the property appears to be used for a majority of the time as an educational building/school since the majority of the activity conducted therein consists of instructional learning. With respect to the three uses that were requested to be interpreted by the Building Inspector, the Board hereby finds that the private study rooms, library and dining areas as proposed by the applicant are not incidental to a place of worship but are more so incidental to an educational facility and/or school give the fact that the majority of time spent by the attendees is spent studying or in private or group instruction. This time spent in instruction far outweighs the time spent in formal religious service, the daily schedule as explained by the applicant resembles a yeshiva type of learning institution, the activity is limited to a small group of boys and men of a younger age and is not for general religious assembly. For all of the reasons set forth herein, the Board takes the position that the proposed uses are not accessory to a place of worship but are more so accessory to a school or educational facility.” Motion was offered by K Abrams, seconded by A Giacomazza, to adopt the decision has read denying the application (full decision is on file in the Office of the Village Clerk). Chairman Ferrarelli conducted a roll call of the Board which resulted in the motion being: ADOPTED AYES 5 Ferrarelli, Abrams, Giacomazza, Stabile, Ungerer NOES 0 6. Public Hearings: Cabela’s Wholesale, Inc. – A public hearing was continued from the June 11, 2014 meeting for area variances to permit the construction of a new commercial center. The applicant proposes a side yard of 35.3 feet, whereas pursuant to Section 310-7 of the Zoning Code requires a 43.9 foot is required. Section 310-7 also requires maximum lot coverage of 65% and the applicant proposes lot coverage of 68.9%. Furthermore, pursuant to Section 310-7, the maximum building height is 35 feet, whereas a portion of the proposed building height is 37.11 feet. Said property is located in the IB Zoning District at Locey Lane and Route 17/32 and is known on the Woodbury Tax Maps as Section 225, Block 1, Lots 34.1 and 34.2. The following comments were received: Steve Esposito, a representative for Cabela’s, explained where the site is located and that the entire parcel consists of two tax parcels, also the lands included in Locey Lane. The site is 13.5 acres. Mr. Esposito also stated that Cabela’s is a “new generation” store, and will consist of approximately 85,000 square feet. He also went on to describe the height and width of the store, including the size of the four roofs. He also stated that the applicant is proposing 634 parking spaces, instead of the 511 that are required. Cabela’s would like to have six spaces per 1,000 square feet, and that their main objective is to be part of the solution not the problem. Mr. Esposito, concluded his presentation by stating he has provided the five way test in which the board evaluates each request for relief. Attorney Felicissimo, stated that the board cannot make a decision, and requests that the board, table this issue until the SEQRA review and the DEIS statement are completed. Chairman Ferrarelli, thanked Mr. Esposito for his presentation, but stated that there is was no decision to be made, until the SEGRA review, comes in.

Page 2 – Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes - July 23, 2014

Motion was then offered by Chairman Ferrarelli, seconded by A Giacomazza, to continue the public hearing to September 10, 2014. Chairman Ferrarelli conducted a roll call of the Board which resulted in the motion being: ADOPTED AYES 5 Ferrarelli, Abrams, Giacomazza, Stabile, Ungerer NOES 0

McIntosh – A public hearing was held for a Special Permit pursuant to Section 310-35 of the Zoning Code to allow a second dwelling unit to be used for an additional family member within an existing single family dwelling. Said property is located in the R1A Zoning District at 232 Skyline Drive in Highland Mills and is known on the Woodbury Tax Maps as Section 208, Block 1, Lot 1.1. The following comments were received: J Stabile stated she is familiar with the home as former relatives of her used to live there. They each passed way six days apart from each other causing their children to settle the estate quickly. Attorney Felicissimo stated J Stabile should recuse herself from this application and should not comment further on the issue. Steven McIntosh stated the home is already setup as a mother/daughter and is requesting the permit be transferred into his name from the previous owners. He noted that everything is already constructed and installed. His mother, Marilyn McIntosh, will be living in the unit. Chairman Ferrarelli asked of the kitchen was fully functional and he was told it was. Attorney Felicissimo stated typically these permits do not carry over to a new owner. She suggested Mr. McIntosh inform this to a future owner should he sell the house. Mark Stomer does not understand why the Zoning Board is making the applicant “go through red tape”. He feels that times are hard and suggested that the applicant’s mother can help him financially. He feels there is “too much red tape in this town” and the applicant should be able to do what he wants to do. He feels he should be given the “American Dream”. Chairman Ferrarelli acknowledged receipt of a Short Environmental Assessment Form. He then noted that the ZBA will be Lead Agency on this issue and that the application will have no significant environmental impacts. The applicant was informed that the Zoning Code states a request for a second dwelling must be for a family member and a Special Permit must be renewed annually. Once the family member vacates the dwelling, the kitchen facilities must be removed. The Special Permit does not carry with the premises. The name of the additional family member is Marilyn McInosh, the applicant’s mother. With no further comments received, a motion was offered by K Abrams, seconded by A Giacomazza, to close the public hearing. Chairman Ferrarelli conducted a roll call of the Board which resulted in the motion being: ADOPTED AYES 4 Ferrarelli, Abrams, Giacomazza, Ungerer ABSTAIN 1 Stabile Chairman Ferrarelli noted the board will deliberate and make a decision later in the meeting.

Pucciarelli – A public hearing was held for a Special Permit pursuant to Section 310-35 to allow a second dwelling unit be added within the existing single family dwelling for an additional family member. Said property is located in the R2A Zoning District at 4 Dartmouth Road in Highland Mills and is known on the Woodbury Tax Maps as Section 245, Block 1, Lot 115. The following comments were received:

Page 3 – Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes - July 23, 2014

Joe Pucciarelli was present and is the owner of the property. This house has an existing finished basement and a second kitchen, which has a certificate of occupancy. Mr. Pucciarelli, would like to install a stove for his sons use. Chairman Ferrarelli stated he conducted a site visit and the applicant’s son is currently living in this space. Joanne Stabile stated that there was a “For Sale” sign in front of the property. Mr. Pucciarelli stated the property has been for sale for ten months and he is seriously considering removing it from the market since his son needs a place to stay while in college. Karen Ungerer asked if the area has its own walkout and she was told it does. Chairman Fererarelli acknowledged receipt of a short Environmental Assessment Form. Motion was then offered by Kevin Abrams, seconded by Andrew Giacomazza, to declare the Zoning Board of Appeals as Lead Agency for this application. Chairman Ferrarelli conducted a roll call of the Board which resulted in the motion being: ADOPTED AYES 5 Ferrarelli, Abrams, Giacomazza, Stabile, Ungerer NOES 0 Chairman Ferrarelli, then noted that the ZBA will be lead agency on this issue and that the Zoning Code states a request for a second dwelling must be for a family member and a Special Permit must be renewed annually. Once the family member vacates the dwelling, the kitchen facilities must be removed. The special permit does not carry with the house. The name of the additional family member is the applicant’s son Joseph M Pucciarelli. Chairman Ferrarelli noted the Board will deliberate and make a decision later in the meeting.

Baker – A public hearing was held for an area variance to permit the construction of a 30 foot, six and one-half inch by 30 foot addition to their existing single family dwelling leaving a side yard of 26 feet. Whereas, pursuant to Section 310-6 and 310-7 (Bulk Regulations), a 30 foot side yard is required. Said property is located in the R2A Zoning District at 24 Janice Drive in Highland Mills and is known on the Woodbury Tax Maps as Section 204, Block 1, Lot 88. The following comments were received: Frank Baker stated he has lived here for 30 years and would like to construct a 30 x 30 foot attached garage to his home. The setback requirements are 30 feet and he will be off by about 3 ½ feet in the rear and inches in the front. On the side there will be encroaching on his neighbor, Fred Hesari, but he has submitted a letter stating he has no objection to the garage. The house cannot be seen from the road due to foliage, except in the fall. Chairman Ferrarelli noted that letters were received from Clifford Ader, 12 Pheasant Run, and Fred Hesari, 26 Janice Drive stating they do not have any objection to the application. A letter was also submitted to the Board this evening from Mr. and Mrs. Anderson not objecting to the application. Chairman Ferrarelli asked if the addition will take on the same characteristics of the existing home and Mr. Baker stated it would. Chairman Ferrarelli asked how many cars will fit into the proposed garage and Mr. Baker stated two and a motorcycle. He noted the existing garage is currently being used for storage. Chairman Ferrarelli asked if the proposed garage would cause any drainage issues for the neighboring lots and Mr. Baker stated it should not as his property is located downhill from his neighbors. He stressed the existing garage will not become living quarters as he plans to install a quad lift in it to enable him to work on his equipment. Chairman Ferrarelli stated the plans show that the new driveway is being proposed and Mr. Baker stated the driveway was done 30 years ago. Chairman Ferrarelli acknowledged receipt of a Short Environmental Assessment Form. Motion was then offered by J Stabile, seconded by K Ungerer, to declared the Zoning Board of Appeals as Lead Agency for this application. Chairman Ferrarelli conducted a roll call of the Board which resulted in the motion being: Page 4 – Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes - July 23, 2014

ADOPTED

AYES 5 Ferrarelli, Abrams, Giacomazza, Stabile, Ungerer NOES 0 Motion was then offered by K Abrams, seconded by A Giacomazza, to state that this action will have no significant environmental impacts. Chairman Ferrarelli conducted a roll call of the Board which resulted in the motion being: ADOPTED AYES 5 Ferrarelli, Abrams, Giacomazza, Stabile, Ungerer NOES 0 With no further comments, a motion was offered by K Abrams, seconded by K Ungerer, to close the public hearing. Chairman Ferrarelli conducted a roll call of the Board which resulted in the motion being: ADOPTED AYES 5 Ferrarelli, Abrams, Giacomazza, Stabile, Ungerer NOES 0 Chairman Ferrarelli noted the Board will deliberate and make a decision later in the meeting.

Exclusive Motor Sports, LLC – A public hearing was held for area variances to permit the construction of a new mixed use structure, proposing 9,300 square feet of retail space and 16 apartments. The applicant proposes parking in the front yard, within 50 feet of a State Highway, whereas the Zoning Code requires that the initial 50 feet off a State Highway be unoccupied and prohibits parking in a required front yard in any district under Section 310-40. Additionally, the HB District requires a minimum of 6,000 square feet per residential unit, and 10,000 square feet for retail establishments. Section 310-7 also permits maximum lot coverage of 75% and the applicant proposes lot coverage of 100%. Furthermore, pursuant to Section 310-7, the maximum building height is two stories, whereas the application is proposing three stories. Said property is located in the HB Zoning District at 279 Route 32 in Central Valley and is known on the Woodbury Tax Maps as Section 230, Block 4, Lot 4.2. Chairman Ferrarelli stated the applicant has requested a postponement of the hearing to the next meeting. He stated if a member of the public wishes to speak this evening they can but the Board cannot comment. Attorney Felicissimo stated she needs to recuse herself from this application. With no comments received, a motion was offered by Keven Abrams, seconded by Joanne Stabile to continue the hearing to September 10, 2014. Chairman Ferrarelli Conducted a roll call of the Board which resulted in the motion being: ADOPTED AYES 5 Ferrarelli, Abrams, Giacomazza, Stabile, Ungerer NOES 0

7. Building Inspectors Report: No report was submitted. 8. Deliberations on Closed Public Hearings: McIntosh- the Board agreed that this application should be approved. Motion was offered by Kevin Abrams, seconded by Karen Ungerer, to authorize Attorney Felicissimo, to prepare a favorable decision. Chairman Ferrarelli conducted a roll call of the Board which resulted in the motion being: ADOPTED AYES 4 Ferrarelli, Abrams, Giacomazza, Ungerer ABSTAIN 1 Stabile

Page 5 – Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes - July 23, 2014

Puccarelli- The Board agreed that this application should be approved. Motion was offered by Kevin Abrams, seconded by Karen Ungerer, to authorize Attorney Felicissiomo to prepare a favorable decision. Chairman Ferrarelli conducted a roll call of the board which resulted in the motion being: ADOPTED AYES 5 Ferrarelli, Abrams, Giacomazza, Ungerer, Stabile NOES 0 Baker- The Board reviewed the following responses that were provided in the “Statement of Ownership and Interest” by the applicant for an area variance and the Boards decision on each question follows: 1. Will the granting of this variance produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or create a detriment to nearby properties? The applicant stated no and that most of the homes in this neighborhood are larger than theirs. The two car garage, besides permitting them to park indoors, will add a much nicer appearance to their property and the neighborhood. The Board was all in agreement. 2. Can the benefit you seek be achieved by some other feasible method other than variance? The applicant stated no and noted that if the garage were to be moved forward it would make their home look long with no style or dimension. With the garage setback, it would look better to them and the neighbors. The Board was all in agreement. 3. How substantial is the variance that you are requesting? The applicant stated it is approximately between three or four feet short on the left rear corner of the 30 feet required for a setback by the Zoning Code. The Board was all in agreement. 4. Will the granting of the variance have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district? The applicant stated it would not and added the addition of this garage would be built on a flat piece of ground on their already existing driveway. The Board was all in agreement. 5. Is the alleged difficulty self-created? The applicant stated yes because the left rear corner of the garage is between there or four feet under the 30 setback requirement. The board was all in agreement. Motion was then offered by Joanne Stabile, seconded by Andrew Giacomazza, to authorize Attorney Felicissimo to prepare a favorable decision. Chairman Ferrarelli conducted a roll call of the Board which resulted in the motion being: ADOPTED AYES 5 Ferrarelli, Abrams, Giacomazza, Stabile, Ungerer NOES 0

Executive Session: 8:32 PM Motion was offered by Andrew Giacomazza, seconded by Kevin Abrams, to enter into an executive session to discuss a matter pertaining to pending litigation. ADOPTED AYES 5 Ferrarelli, Abrams, Giacomazza, Stabile, Ungerer NOES 0 9. Adjournment: With no further business to discuss, a motion was offered by Kevin Abrams, seconded by Joanne Stabile, to adjourn the meeting at 8:44 PM. ADOPTED AYES 5 Ferrarelli, Abrams, Giacomazza, Stabile, Ungerer NOES 0 Page 6 – Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes - July 23, 2014

Respectfully Submitted,

__________________________________ Jessica C. McClennan, Secretary Woodbury Zoning Board of Appeals

________________ Date

Page 7 – Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes - July 23, 2014