Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1940_10_15 Town Board Minutes FM SPECIAL MEETING OF THE TOWN BOARD TOWN OF MAMARONECK, NEW YORK HELD OCTOBER 15, 1940 At the Town Offices, 158 West Boston Post Road, Mamaroneck, N.Y. The meeting was called to order by Supervisor McCulloch at 10:15 A.M. Present : Supervisor McCulloch Councilmen. Bates, Mandeville, Meginniss Absent: Councilman Griffin The presence was also noted of the Deputy Torun Clerk, Town Attorney Delius, Chief Yerick, Building inspector Cowham, Mr . A. Stirling Smith and Mr . Orson A. Raynor of the Board. of Appeals for Zoning. The Supervisor reviewed the developments in the matter of the permit granted by the Building Inspector for alterations on the house at 100 Murray Avenue . He explained that many of the neighbors near the property had objected to the changes being made; that on October 10, 1940, the Town Board at a special meeting had asked the Town Attorney if in his opinion the Building Inspector had erred in granting the permit and at that time he had stated that there were sufflcient grounds to cancel the permit . He said that in the meantime the Zoning Board. of Appeals , who also have the right to revoke building permits but with a hearing, had received a complaint from a taxpayer and they felt that there had been an error made in granting the permit , He stated that if the Town Board felt that the permit should not have been granted, then they should act on it rather than let the matter go to the Board of Appeals . Mr . Robert W. Crawford, attorney, who was present, stated that he represented. the owner of the premises at 108 Murray Avenue, but that he was not prepared to go ahead with a full discussion of the entire matter. He said that it was his understanding that the permit was issued to construct a garage under the porch and until the garage is used for business purposes, no violation of the Zoning ordi- nance exists . He stated that the work had been practically completed except for hanging the doors and that he felt that it would be unfair to revoke the permit now. He said that there was no intention On the part of Mr . De Bartolo to use the garage for business purposes . Mr . Raynor pointed out that it was not a question of whether the permit was issued improperly but a question of whether or not the ordinance is being violated, and it is the duty of the Town Board to revoke the permit if it is . He then reviewed the situation and ex- plained that the building was a non-conforming use, being within 30 feet of either of the tvvo streets which it faces, namely, Murray Avenue and Emerson Place . He stated that under the ordinance a non-conform- ing building may be reconstructed or structurally altered and the non- conforming use changed., provided the structural alteration shall not exceed twenty-five percent of its assessed value and the building shall not be enlarged, unless the use is changed to a conforming use. He contended that Mr. De Bartolo was continuing a non-conforming use and if the Building inspector had not interpreted the ordinance correctly, it vaas the duty of the Town Board to revoke the permit. He said that a. violation exists in fact, because the garage is within 30 feet of the street . Mr . Cravrford stated that the Town Board should not act on the mere statement that Subdivision 1 of Article 8 had been violated but should have proper proof submitted of what had been done . Mr . Raynor pointed out that the violation was a physical fact - a former stoop had been filled in with solid construction which is being used for a use which did not exist previously. Councilman Meginniss stated that the floor of the garage had not. been laid and that it was proposed that there should be an entrance from both Murray Avenue and Emerson Place . Supervisor McCulloch ewplained that a permit to go out on Emerson Place would be required from the Superintendent of Highways and gnat such a permit had not yet been granted. He stated further that he doubted if the owner of the property could secure such a per- mit and that he would. have to abandon the idea of going out on Emerson Place . Mr . Smith asked if the entrance On Emerson Place would be a traffic hazard. Chief Yerick stated that he felt that tine driveway leading to Emerson Place eras too close to the main thoroughfare on Murray Avenue and that such a permit had not even twenty two feet from the corner . Mr . Crawford requested the Town Board to postpone action on the matter until he had had time to inform himself concerning the facts in connection with it . Mr . Smith stated that the Board of Appeals was holding a meet- ing that night, which vrould undoubtedly be attended by many property owners, and that it , would be necessary to discuss the matter with them. Mr. Charles Silkworth, architect, who was present, stated that originally the space underneath the porch was three-quarters unexcavated and the porch was supported on stone piers with lattice work at the bottom. he said that the lattice work had been removed and solid con- struction erected in its place, but that the porch itself had not been enlarged. After further discussion and an examination of the permit go . 524 granted by the Building Inspector and the application for same with the plans filed by Charles Silkworth, architect, as agent for the owner, Maria de Bartolo, the Board requested the Building Inspector to appear, which he did. Town Attorney Delius thereupon questioned him as follo- Ts : Mr. Delius : So far as you know this house was constructed before the ordinance was adopted was it not? Cowham: Yes, and there is no permit on file in the office for this house . secured.? Mr . Delius : When was the permit for the alterations Mr . Cowham: on September 20, 1940, an application for a permit was made to construct the garage and permit No . 524 was issued. At that time plans were given to me and I have them here attached to the permit . at it? Mr. Delius : When this was done, did you go no and look at it? Mr . Cowham: No, I did not. Mr . Delius : These plans were submitted by Mr. Silkworth, were they not? were trey not? IAr . Cowhafa: They were . Mr . Delius : How near completion is the work? Mr . Cowham: The work is all done except lathing and plaster- ing, the ceiling and walls , putting in the floor and hanging the doors . rn Mr . Delius : You mean that it is completed to the extent only of laying the cement block enclosure . The plaster work is not done, the floor is not done and the doors are not hung. Mr . Cowham: Yes . The following resolution was introduced by Councilman. Mandeville and seconded by Councilman Bates : RESOLVED, that after hearing Mr. Charles E. Silkworth, Building inspector Cowham and Mr . Robert W. Crawford, who stated that he represented the owner of premises at 108 Murray Avenue, the Board pursuant to Section 16 of the Building Code hereby revokes permit No. 524 heretofore granted by the Building Inspector on the 20th of September, 1940, for the erection of a garage at the corner of Murray Avenue and Emerson Place to ,Iaria De Bartolo and Charles E. Silkworth in so far as the permit allows the construction of a two-car garage on the hurray Avenue side of the building, on the grounds that the structure so far as it is now completed fails to comply with the Zoning Ordinance of the Town of Mamaroneck; and be it FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Clerk is directed to send. a copy of this resolution to the owner, the contractor, Mr . Tony Garofalo, 707 Forest Avenue, Larchmont, Er . Robert A . Crawford and the Building inspector. The foregoing resolution was adopted by the following vote , AYES ; Supervisor McCulloch Councilmen Bates, Mandeville, .'reginniss NOES: None At 11 :15 A. M. the Board unanimously resolved to adjourn. Deputy Town Clerk