On November 19, 2024 the Town Board introduced yet another new local law with no explanation and no supplemental information and scheduled a public hearing for 12/10/2024 at another “Special Meeting” on a Tuesday instead of a Wednesday at the same time as a regularly scheduled Planning Board meeting.
The proposed new Local Law includes six (6) sections of amendments of Town of Ramapo Zoning Code that impact multiple areas of Town Code. The two of six sections reflect a 12 changes to definitions. Some of the definition changes have little to no impact and make the Town of Ramapo code conform more closely to NYS Building Code; however, a number of proposed changes do impact what can be built under Ramapo code in ways that could result in increased development density and intensity and thus population. The analysis below highlights those more impactful changes with a ⚠️ symbol.
ROSA plans to recommend the Town Board table consideration of the new local law and to incorporate updates to zoning code into its Comprehensive Plan update process.
All documents supporting this local law were requested under FOIL and nothing was found.
ROSA asks supporters to support its call to the Town to provide documents explaining and supporting the proposed changes in their public comments or emails.
PUBLIC HEARING 12/10
Please pay attention to the Ramapo.org website. Share this information with friends and neighbors and encourage them to sign up for the ROSA Email List.
What?
- Notice of Public Hearing for Proposed Zoning Amendments Local Law
- Current Draft of Proposed Local Law
When?
- Tuesday December 10, 2024 at 7:00 pm
Where?
- Town of Ramapo Town Hall – 237 Rt 59
- Comments can be emailed to osherovitzs@ramapo.org.
If you email comments remember to include in the subject line: Comments on Zoning Amendments Local Law and include your name and address. Please consider cc’ing rosa4rockland@gmail.com.
WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED?
The following is a compilation of the existing code and the proposed changes with some very preliminary comments to help the public better understand what is being proposed.
Section 1: Legislative Purpose
This section is supposed to explain to the reader what is changing and the intent and findings regarding the changes proposed. Here while the changes are numerous with different impacts and purposes, as currently drafted it only contains an extremely vague statement of purpose stating
“The primary purpose of this local law is to adopt zoning amendments to provide for more efficient and effective administration and enforcement of the zoning code.”
However, there is no explanation as to how and why the proposed changes make the zoning code more “efficient” or “effective”. None of the proposed changes apply to procedural aspects of the code and all changes apply to what can be built. The Town Board should provide a more comprehensive explanation by section of the intent of each proposed change. In fact, the Town would probably be better served by breaking up this local law into 6 local laws where the intent of each proposed change could be better explained and analyzed. Some of the changes are far more impactful than others.
SECTION 2: THE MEAT AND POTATOES
This is the section with the list of amendments. Sections 3, 4, and 5 are general boilerplate provisions for which there will be no comments.
Section 2 is broken down into 6 subsections as follows.
Section 2 (I) – Change to 11 Definitions
There are 11 definitions that are vaguely introduced. The sections suggests that each of these definitions exist in the current code but this is not accurate.
2(1).1 Building Height
Currently there is no existing definition of “Building Height” in Town code. There is a definition for “Height” but as written this definition would not be overwritten so this might be a mistake in the drafting.
Current Definition for “Height“
“The vertical distance from the average elevation of the proposed finished grade along the wall of a building (or adjacent to the side of a nonbuilding use) to the highest point of the roof for flat roofs and to the mean height between eaves and ridge for gable, hip and gambrel roofs of such building (or non building uses), except as specifically exempted in § 376-60.
Proposed new Definition for “Building Height”
Building Height – The vertical distance from grade plane to the average height of the highest roof surface.
Comment on “Building Height“
🙂 This new definition is consistent with NYS Building Code and is a beneficial change for consistency with fire code compliance rules related to building height.
😕 Another related term is basement which refers to “story above grade plane” which is a term in NYS Building Code but not in Ramapo code.
😕 The new code changes fail to address the difference in definition for other related terms that relate to building height like “story” and “story above grade plane.” The Town should be more comprehensive in its changes and consider these for inclusion in the local law.
😕 The definition of “basement” is defined as “See “basement” as defined in the NYS Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code.” Why aren’t the new definitions that are designed to match NYS code being similarly redefined?
2(1).2 CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY
Current
Certificate of Occupancy – Official certification that a building or structure conforms to this chapter and the New York State Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code, as may be amended.
Proposed
Certificate of Occupancy – A document issued by the authority having jurisdiction certifying that a building or structure conforms to this chapter and the New York State Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code and certifying that the building or structure complies with the approved construction documents that have been submitted to and approved by the authority having jurisdiction, indicating it to be in a condition suitable for occupancy.
Comment
🙂 This expanded definition is more closely aligned with New York State Building Code 2020 definition which makes sense.
2(1).3 COURT
Current
An unobstructed open area bounded on three or more sides by the walls of a building or buildings. It does not include any such area with no windows opening upon it, except windows on a stairway. An “outer court” extends to a street or yard; an “inner court” does not.
Proposed
Court – An open, uncovered space, unobstructed to the sky, bounded on three or more sides by exterior building walls or other enclosing devices.
Comment
🙂 This new definition is consistent with NYS Building Code and is a beneficial change for consistency with building/fire code compliance rules related to a “court”.
2(1).4 DORMITORIES
⚠️ There is no current definition for “Dormitories” but there is a current definition for “Dormitory”, this is apparently a mistake that should be corrected in a future draft.
Current
Dormitory – A building or part of a building containing private or semiprivate rooms which open to a common hallway, which rooms are sleeping quarters for administrative staff, faculty or students, along with bathroom, dining, cooking, laundry, lounge and recreation facilities, as required. Dormitory rooms shall not contain separate cooking, dining or housekeeping facilities, except that one dwelling unit with complete housekeeping facilities may be provided for use of a superintendent or supervising staff for every 50 dormitory rooms, or major part thereof. No more than one communal dining room shall be provided in the building or structure used for dormitory purposes. Single-family, two-family and/or other multiple residential facilities, other than that described above, are not to be considered as dormitories. Private rooms may be occupied by no more than one person and semiprivate rooms by no more than four persons.
[Amended 1-25-2012 by L.L. No. 1-2012]
Proposed
Dormitories – A space in a building where group sleeping accommodations are provided in one room, or in a series of closely associated rooms, for persons not members of the same family group, under joint occupancy and single management, as in college dormitories or fraternity houses.
Comment
🙂+⚠️This change in definition represents a significant change in definition to the definition in NY State Building Code. While it is a positive change to align Ramapo Code with state code, in this case the current definition includes restrictions that are being eliminated in the process and as such the elimination of these restriction should be analyzed further and modifications to the section of code that regulates Dormitories §376-121 should be considered to reflect the restrictions being removed from the definition.
Additionally, NY State code uses the singular term Dormitory not Dormitories. As the Town is cleaning up code to align with state code it should consider shifting the term throughout code from “Dormitories” to “Dormitory”.
2(1).5 DWELLING UNIT
Current
A building or entirely self-contained portion thereof containing complete housekeeping facilities for only one family, including any domestic servants employed on the premises, having no enclosed space (other than vestibules, entrances or other hallways or porches) or cooking or sanitary facilities in common with any other dwelling unit. A house trailer, boarding- or rooming house, convalescent home, dormitory, fraternity house, hotel, inn, lodging, nursing or other similar home or other similar structure shall not be deemed to constitute a dwelling unit.
Proposed
Dwelling Unit – A single unit providing complete, independent living facilities for one or more persons, including permanent provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cooking and sanitation.
Comment
🙂 The new definition is the same as NYS Building Code.
2(1).6 Grade Plane
⚠️ Current – There is NO existing definition of “GRADE” or “GRADE PLANE” in Town Code.
Proposed
Grade Plane – A reference plane representing the average of finished ground level adjoining a building at exterior walls. When the finished ground level slopes away from the exterior walls, the reference plane shall be established by the lowest points within the area between the building and the lot line or, where the lot line is more than 6 feet (1829 mm) from the building, between the building and a point 6 feet (1829 mm) from the building.
Comment
🙂+⚠️ Adding a definition for “grade plane” is long overdue. The new definition is nearly identical to that found in NY State Building Code. The word “When” should be changed to “Where” to make it identical. As the intent appears to be to conform to NYS code the definition should make this clear that the current NYS code overrides the Ramapo definition where it is intended to do so.
Importantly, while “grade plane” is a term that does no currently appear in Ramapo Town code, the term “grade” appears throughout Town Code and there is also no definition of that term. This is important to address in connection with this local law.
2(1).7 Mezzanine
⚠️⚠️There is NO existing definition of “Mezzanine” in Town Code and there is no Town of Ramapo code that refers to that term. Town Code already encompasses NYS Uniform Code so why is this being added now?
Current – nothing.
Proposed
Mezzanine – An intermediate level or levels between the floor and ceiling of any story and in accordance with Section 505 of the Uniform Code.
Story – That portion of a building included between the upper surface of a floor and the upper surface of the floor or roof next above (see “Basement”, “Building height”, “Grade plane” and “Mezzanine”). A story is measured as the vertical distance from top to top of two successive tiers of beams or finished floor surfaces and, for the topmost story, from the top of the floor finish to the top of the ceiling joists or, where there is not a ceiling, to the top of the roof rafters.
2(1).8 Story
Current
STORY – That part of any building, exclusive of cellars but inclusive of basements, comprised between the level of one finished floor and the level of the next higher finished floor or, if there is no higher finished floor, then that part of the building comprised between the level of the highest finished floor and the top of the roof beams. Each 10 feet or fraction thereof of height shall be deemed a story in absence of finished floors.
Proposed
Story – That portion of a building included between the upper surface of a floor and the upper surface of the floor or roof next above (see “Basement”, “Building height”, “Grade plane” and “Mezzanine”). A story is measured as the vertical distance from top to top of two successive tiers of beams or finished floor surfaces and, for the topmost story, from the top of the floor finish to the top of the ceiling joists or, where there is not a ceiling, to the top of the roof rafters.
Comment
🙂 The new definition is the same as NYS Building Code. However, again it is unclear as to why this new term is being introduced at this time in this way.
Currently Town Code 376-141 documents that the “New York State Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code and the State Energy Conservation Construction Code are hereby adopted and recognized as the official Building Construction Codes of the Town for purposes set forth therein and as it may be amended from time to time.”
ROSA recommends a more comprehensive comparison of Town Code to state code and a change in wording to make it clear that Town Code is intended to reflect state code.
2(1).9 Structure
Current
Structure – A combination of materials constructed, assembled or erected on, above or below the ground or attached to something having location on, above or below the ground, including but not limited to buildings, fences, tanks, towers and swimming pools.
Proposed
Structure – That which is built or constructed.
Comment
🙂 The proposed definition matches the definition found in NYS Building Code.
⚠️ This term is regularly used throughout NYS Building Code with the term “buildings” which is defined differently in Ramapo Code from NYS Building Code. It seems that if there is a goal of synchronizing terminology/definitions between Ramapo Code and NYS Building Code then this piecemeal attempt is rather incomplete.
2(1).10 Swimming Pool, Private
Current
SWIMMING POOL, PRIVATE
A. IN-GROUND POOL
An artificial pool or structure intended for wading, bathing or swimming purposes made of concrete, masonry, metal or other impervious material and which is an accessory use to a residence and for the exclusive use of the occupants of the residence and their guests.
B. ABOVEGROUND POOL
An artificial pool or structure which is so constructed as to be above grade and which has a ladder or steps in order to obtain access to the pool and which is an accessory use to a residence for the exclusive use of the occupants of the residence and their guests.
Proposed
Swimming Pool, Private – Any structure, basin, chamber or tank which is intended for swimming, diving, recreational bathing or wading and which contains, is designated to contain, or is capable of containing water more than 24 inches (610 mm) deep at any point. This includes in-ground, above ground, and on-ground pools, indoor pools, hot tubs, spas and wading pools.
Comment
The new proposed definition matches the NYS Building Code definition other than the term including the word “private”.
Nowhere in Town Code is the term Private Swimming Pool found so dropping the word private would make sense. Therefore, it is recommended that “Swimming Pool, Private” be replaced with simply the term “swimming pool” and that either a separate definition for “pool” be added or that this term be expanded elsewhere in the code from “pool” to swimming pool.
2(1).11 Townhouse
Current
Townhouse – A dwelling unit sharing a common side or rear wall or walls with another dwelling unit, but occupying the entire volume within its portion of the building from the lowest level to the roof and having its own separate entrance or entrances to the outside
Proposed
Townhouse – A single-family dwelling unit constructed in a group of three or more attached units in which each unit (1) extends from the foundation to roof, (2) has open space on at least two sides, and (3) has a separate means of egress.
Comment
🙂 This definition matches the NYS Building Code which is a positive step.
⚠️ However, as the definition now includes the provision that a townhouse is a single family dwelling unit, the rest of Town code must be re-evaluated in light of that change. Such an action appears to be reflected in the change proposed in Section 2(V).
Section 2 (II) – Another Definition Change
This subsection also describes a change in definition but fails to reference Section 376-5. This subsection II should be merged with subsection I.
This change calls for replacing paragraph A(1) of the definition of Gross Floor Area.
Current Definition paragraph A:
The sum of the gross horizontal area of every floor of a building measured from the inside perimeter of the exterior walls of the building or from the inside perimeter of the exterior walls to the interior of the party walls separating the two buildings, including:
Current paragraph A(1)
(1) Basement space, but excluding nonhabitable space below grade (subbasement) devoted to mechanical equipment, or accessory storage.
Proposed paragraph A(1)
(1) Basement space, but only 50% of the basement floor area may be counted in determining the Floor Area Ratio of the building.
Comment
⁉️ This is a fundamental and pervasive change in definition without any explanation which may limit increased development in some cases and may increase it in others. Examples and analysis from the Town are needed as to how this will work.
The gross floor area figure is used in the calculation of floor area ratio (FAR) which is designed to limit the overall volume/capacity of a building relative to lot size.
‼️ To the extent that builders claim that basement space will not be lived in, the clear inclusion of 50% of basement space is better than playing a game; however, as the vast majority of development being proposed is designed to be habitable, and the building inspector is supposed to be including all habitable space in the calculation, overall this new definition appears enable more habitable space that is not reflected in the FAR calculations and will lead to larger homes.
Section 2(III) – Completely replace Section 376-64, titled “Swimming pools”
The Town proposes a complete replacement of the swimming pool section and as written this does not appear to expand the uses or intensity of the uses and this appears to reference more current standards.
Current
No person shall maintain a swimming pool unless the safeguards set forth herein are observed:
A. All in-ground swimming pools shall be encompassed within a permanent protective fence so that the entire perimeter of the swimming pool shall be surrounded thereby. The fence must be structurally sound, durable and maintained in such condition, not less than 48 inches in height, with spaces not exceeding three inches between the planks or linkage. The entrance gate or gates shall have a self-latching device located at the top of the fence and, except for ingress to and egress from the swimming pool area, must be kept closed at all times.
B. Aboveground pools need not be fenced, provided that the pool itself is so constructed that when not attended by a person of suitable age that the steps or ladder to the pool shall be removed or raised in such fashion so that access cannot be gained.
C. All fences and other safeguards referred to herein must be approved in writing by the Building Inspector of the Town of Ramapo.
Proposed
§376-64. Swimming pools.
No person shall maintain a swimming pool unless the safeguards set forth herein are observed:
A. It shall be used only as a accessory use to a dwelling or as an accessory use to a special permit use in a residence district for the private use of the owner or occupant of such dwelling or building or his or her family, guests or employees.
B. All swimming pools must have the required enclosure as specified in the New York State Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code, and such enclosures shall be maintained as long as the pool exists.
C. All pools shall be maintained in a manner sufficient to meet the bacterial standards established by the provisions of the New York State Sanitary Code relating to public swimming pools.
D. All pools shall be equipped with an integral filtration system and filter pumps and may be equipped with other electrical or mechanical devices, including lighting and loudspeakers, all of which shall be so located and constructed or operated as not to interfere with the peace, comfort and repose of the occupant of any adjoining property.
E. The Building Inspector may request a statement by a professional engineer, licensed by the State of New York, that provisions for the drainage of the swimming pool are adequate and will not interfere with the public water supply or existing sanitary facilities and that adequate ground fault circuitry will be installed as specified by the National Electric Code.
Comment
🫤 Residential home swimming pools appear to be subject to the 2010 Property Maintenance Code of New York State whereas Chapter 31 of the Building Code of New York State contains code for public swimming pools. We have received questions on this that we cannot answer. The public should be asking questions to the Town so that that anything new is self explanatory.
Section 2(IV) – IV Modify Section 376-65 “Accessory apartments subsections B, C, E, and G.
ROSA had intended to suggest change of this section of code during the Comprehensive Plan update process. The 2004 Comprehensive Plan recommended allowing small accessory apartments as a way to create affordable rentals for singles, seniors, small families and the like; however subsequent removal and lessening of restrictions couples with the ability to resell the accessory apartments have completely changed the entire landscape of development in the Town. The Town should be revisiting its accessory apartment code overall to align it with the original intent and do this in conjunction with developing better definitions for its housing. Currently the Town allowing for the creation of condominium buildings that don’t appear to be defined under Town Code at all and this should be addressed more comprehensively.
Current Paragraph B
B. Entrance(s) for the accessory apartment must be on the side or rear of the principal dwelling. However, if more than one accessory apartment is permitted in a three-family dwelling, then an additional front entrance may be permitted if the Community Design Review Committee, acting as the Architectural Review Board, pursuant to Article X of this chapter, determines that the appearance of the building will not materially differ from that of a three-family residence without accessory apartments by use of common entrances or design features.
[Amended 4-25-2007 by L.L. No. 1-2007]
Proposed Paragraph B
B. Entrance(s) for the accessory apartment should generally be placed on the side and rear of the principal dwelling with final placement of entrances subject to the review and approval of the Community Design Review Committee, acting as the Architectural Review Board, pursuant to Article X of this chapter.
Comment on Paragraph B
⁉️ The proposed change takes a clear rule with specific standards and simply softens it so much it is unclear as to how and why the CDRC would ever have reasoning to disapprove. As stated above, there should be an overhaul to zoning code related to “accessory” apartments and condominium buildings.
Current Paragraph C
C. An accessory apartment can be up to 1,500 square feet and cannot exceed 50% of the principal dwelling.
[Amended 4-25-2007 by L.L. No. 1-2007; 1-25-2012 by L.L. No. 1-2012; 2-13-2019 by L.L. No. 4-2019]
Proposed Paragraph C
C. The floor area of an accessory apartment shall not exceed 1500 square feet.
Comment on Paragraph C Change
See introductory comment. The concept of what is a principal dwelling and what is accessory is a muddled issue in Ramapo where the vast majority of “accessory” apartments are turned into condominium units. The time is long overdue for the Town to address the way in which small lot subdivisions and condominiums are being planned and developed.
Current Paragraph E
E. Any exterior building alteration is subject to architectural review pursuant to Article X.
Proposed Paragraph E
E. Any exterior building alteration that expands the existing building foundation, alters the exterior site area(s) or results in a requirement to obtain variance(s) is subject to architectural review pursuant to Article X of this chapter.
Comment on Paragraph E
What does “alters the exterior site area(s)” even mean?
⁉️ Also, since the the placement of doors is subject to CDRC review shouldn’t that be reflected here? It seems that any addition of a an accessory should thus be subject to Architectural review but how can the CDRC review such placement if the application is no longer required?
Current Paragraph G
G. Three-family residences.
[Added 4-25-2007 by L.L. No. 1-2007]
(1) In the R-15C District, three-family detached residences constructed in which each dwelling unit extends from foundation to roof (townhouse style) are permitted to have one accessory apartment per each dwelling unit.
(2) In the R-15C District, three-family semiattached residences constructed in which each dwelling unit extends from foundation to roof (townhouse style) and which are located on lots with a minimum width of 75 feet are permitted to have one accessory apartment per each dwelling unit.
(3) Three-family residences, either detached or semiattached, not constructed as set forth above are permitted to contain only one accessory apartment for the entire three-family residence.
Proposed Paragraph G
G. Three-family residences. Within the R-15C District, each principal dwelling unit is permitted no more than one accessory apartment
Proposed on Paragraph G
⁉️ This proposed change appears to lift restrictions the maximum number of dwelling unit restriction on certain lots from 4 to 6 (1 per 3 building to 1 per building) which is an increase of 50%. This change coupled with other proposed changes are likely to lead to more complete redevelopment of new condominiums units and less incremental development of accessory units for rent.
The Town should identify examples of how this change will impact what can be built and where it can be built to determine whether the substantial increase in dwelling units is supportable.
Section 2 (V) – Another change to 376-65 “Accessory Apartment”
This section eliminates subsections A and D in the same section of code affected by Section 2 (IV). It is not clear why these revisions were not combined into a single section for clarity.
A. The owner of the dwelling units need not reside in either of the dwelling units.
D. The location of the accessory apartment may not extend beyond the footprint of the principal dwelling.
Comment
🙂 Paragraph A appears to be a statement and not a restriction and removing it does not appear to have an impact.
⁉️ However, the removal of paragraph D can change what can be built; the question is how does this matter? The Town must explain the potential impact of this change.If you have an existing home and want to build an extension for an accessory apartment onto the back of the existing building such an addition would be restricted under the existing code but not under new code.
This change in conjunction with the proposed change to Paragraph G will enable the type of massive expansions described in the Paragraph G comment above.
What was the purpose of the original paragraph? The Town needs to provide analysis and support of some form of findings with respect to the environmental impact of the proposed changes on infill development unlocked through these changes.
Section 2 (VI) – Changes to the Table of Bulk Requirements Part I is for Use Group ‘d’
‼️ Use Group ‘d’ is applies to a large number of Planning Board special permit uses in the majority of Ramapo zoning districts. As this use group can be placed throughout all residential districts this modification is a pervasive and expansive change that require analysis to determine what is impacted. There should be a clear explanation of intent for this proposed change which allows for buildings that are 4 stories tall, and 3.5 times the volume to cover 3 times the land and to be significantly closer to adjoining properties.
‼️ The proposed changes to bulk regulations for use group ‘d’:
- Side Setback (feet) – reduce from 100′ to 50′
- Total Side Setback (feet) – reduce from 200′ to 100
- Maximum Height (feet) – increase from 35′ to 45′
- Development Coverage – increase from 10 % to 30%
- Floor Area Ratio (FAR) – increase from .20 (20%) to 0.75 (75%)
Use group ‘d’ is currently listed in column C-1 of the Bulk Requirements Table that relates to those uses allowed for via a Planning Board Special Permits and is found in the RR-160/RR-80 district for uses 1-Public utility buildings or structures, 3-Outdoor recreation facilities, 4- Accessory to outdoor recreation facilities uses(such as rest rooms, locker rooms, shelters and clubhouses for membership clubs), 10 – Libraries, Museums and Art Galleries, and 20 – Volunteer ambulance service facilities (not clear from existing use table), and Town Board Permits for 2- Nursing Homes. The special permit uses 1, 3, 4, 10, 20; 2 are also allowed according to the same requirement in districts: R-50 , R-40, R-40-A, R-35, R-25, R-15, R-15A, R-15C, RSH and a couple are allowed in other districts as well like: MR-16/MR-12/MR-8 (1), NS/CS/PO/LO/PI (Wireless Communications Facilities).
‼️ The implications are that a 2-acre lot (or assemblage of lots that could be merged into a single lot of that size) in the middle of a low density residential neighborhood could be purchased for a private community center or an ambulance building or recreation facility and instead of a smaller building being proposed more centrally located on the lot at 3 stories or less, the new code would enable 4-story buildings being proposed significantly closer to neighboring lots and the volume of the buildings could be 3.5 larger in size.
Such a change in applications would be very significant and must be considered in a GEIS.