Documents

local law 1 page

Also attached to this agenda item: CAF - LL Intro 12 of 2024 dated October 9%2C 2024 December 2nd Resolution 241-2024 Schedule PH LL Intro... LWRP LL Intro 12 of 2024 - To Be Completed by Board Local Law Intro 12 of 2024 Updated 2.0 11.12.2024 Memo on Zoning Code revised Memo from the Village Manager on Zoning Code Cleanup November 20th Resolution 221-2024 Scheduling a Public... Referral Review from the Waterfront Advisory Committee... Referral Review from the Westchester County Planning... SEAF Part I - LL Intro 12 of 2024 dated October 9%2C 2024

Members JOHN GHEGAN GEOFFREY HAYNES STEVEN KRISKY EVA THADDEUS Attorney LINDA WHITEHEAD Village Engineer DANIEL O’CONNOR, P.E. TO: Mayor Brian Pugh and the Village Board of Trustees FROM: Chairman Luntz, Planning Board RE: Recommendation to Village Board regarding Local Law Introductory 12 of 2024, amending the Zoning Law of the Village of Croton-on-Hudson, Chapter 230, to align the zoning regulations with current planning and development needs. DATE: November 8, 2024 At its regularly scheduled meetings on November 5th, 2024, the Planning Board reviewed the referral from the Village Board regarding Local Law Introductory 12 of 2024. In the proposed law, a boarder or roomer is defined as: “A person who permanently occupies a room in a single-family dwelling unit for sleeping purposes for which they pay compensation to the property owner.” Currently, under Village code, you can have up to three boarders in the RB district, and one boarder in other residential districts, with no permits required, and no oversight. The Planning Board had many questions, and wanted to clarify how the word “Permanently” will be determined. The Planning Board also had questions regarding a distinction between family members, such as adult children who move back in with their parents, or elderly parents who move in with adult children as they are in need of care. The Planning Board is looking for clarification on the boarder definition as well as the reason for this new local law. The Planning Board did not feel that the draft law was clear enough to make a proper recommendation, specifically regarding the definition of a Boarder. Other than the boarder section, the Planning Board had no objections with the other changes proposed in the law.