Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003_02_26 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ZONING BOARD OF THE TOWN OF MAMARONECK February 26, 2003, IN THE SENIOR CENTER, TOWN CENTER 740 WEST BOSTON POST ROAD MAMARONECK, NEW YORK Present: Thomas E. Gunther, Chairman Linda S. Harrington Jillian A. Martin Arthur Wexler Paul A. Winick Also Present: Judith M. Gallent, Counsel Ronald A. Carpaneto, Director of Building Nancy Seligson, Liaison Denise Carbone, Public Stenographer Carbone&Associates, LTD. 111 N. Central Park Avenue Hartsdale, New York 10530 Absent: Marguerite Roma, Recording Secretary CALL TO ORDER APPLICATION NO. 1 —CASE 2540 (adjourned 10/24/01;11/28/01; 12/19/02; 4/4/02; 4/24/02; 5/22/02; 6/26/02; 7/23/02; 8/7/02; 9/25/02; 11/20/02; 12/18/02; 1/22/03) Application of Fred Friedman/Ann M. Woods requesting a variance to construct a fence at the rear of the property on the premises located at 4 High Ridge Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 213, Lot 552. The rear yard as proposed has a height of 13.5 ft. where a maximum of 5 ft. is permitted pursuant to Section 240-52 fro a rear yard fence in an R-15 Zone District. APPLICATION NO. 2—CASE 2540 (adjourned 12/18/02; 1/22/03) Application of Bruce Robinson requesting a variance to construct a variance to maintain a fence in the rear and side yards on the premises located at 83 Lookout Circle and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town Of Mamaroneck as Block 117, Lot 84. The fence as proposed has a total height of 7 ft. 2 in where 5 ft. is permitted pursuant to Section 240-52A for a rear and side yard fence in an R-7.5 Zone District. Bruce Robinson appeared and addressed the Board. Mr. Robinson stated that he is asking that the Board not so much approve the fence, as much as to approve leaving the rock where it is. If the rock is removed, then the fence is legal. Mr. Wexler stated that the house is so overpowering in that back yard, that the fence did not seem offensive to him. David Riessen, of 46 Echo Lane, appeared and said he has two issues he's concerned about. He wants a white picket fence for aesthetic purposes to cover that fence. He informed the Board he has an application for a 6 ft. fence and explained the only reason for a 6 ft. fence is to cover how high that fence is. The Board discussed this application. On motion made by Mr. Gunther, seconded by Mr. Mr. Winick, it was unanimously RESOLVED, that the public Hearing of case#2540 be, and herby is, adjourned to the next Zoning Board Meeting. Mr. Gunther made a motion to adjourn the David Riessen case as follows: APPLICATION NO. _CASE NO. 2551 Application of David Riessen requesting a variance to erect a 6 ft. high fence in the rear yard on the premises located at 46 Echo Lane and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town Of Mamaroneck as Block 117, Lot 119. The fence as proposed in the rear yard has a height of 6 ft. where 5 Ft. is required pursuant to Section 240-52A for a fence in a rear yard in and R-7.5 Zone District. On a motion made by Mr. Gunther, seconded by Mr. Winick, it was unanimously RESOLVED, that the public Hearing of case#2551 be, and herby is, adjourned to the next Zoning Board Meeting. APPLICATION NO. 3—CASE NO. 2548 Application of Ann and Greg Lundberg requesting a variance to legalize an existing paved area on the edge of the driveway on the premises located at 19 Cresent Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town Of Mamaroneck as Block 220, Lot 35. James Fleming (applicant's architect)appeared and addressed the Board. Mr. Fleming stated that the area in question is used as a turn around and not as a parking space. The Board discussed this application, and they suggested that they reapply requesting two things. One appealing the Building Departments determination and the other is a request for a variance. After further discussion, on a motion made by Mr. Gunther, seconded by Mr. Winick, it was unanimously RESOLVED, that the Public Hearing of case#2548 be, and hereby is, adjourned to the March 26, 2003 Zoning Board meeting, to allow for a corrected public notice to be published and the appropriate radius renoticed. After review,on motion of Mr. Gunther, seconded by Ms. Martin, the following resolution was proposed and ADOPTED unanimously, 5-0. RESOLVED, that this is a Type II action having no significant impact on the environment pursuant to 6 NYCRR§617 et seq. Accordingly, no further actin under SEQRA is required. On motion of Mr. Winick, Seconded by Mr. Gunther, the following resolution was ADOPTED: WHEREAS, Ann and Greg Lundberg have submitted an application to the Building Inspector, tighter with plans appealing the Director of Building's interpretation that the 11.8 ft. by 19 ft. paved area located in the front yard of the premises located at 19 Crescent Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 220, Lot 35, is a parking area within the meaning of Section 240-4. RESOLVED, that for reasons set forth below, the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town Of Mamaroneck agrees with the Building Inspector's determination that the paved area at issue is a "parking" area within the manting of Section 240-4 Section 240-4 defines a parking space as "an off-street space available for parking of one motor vehicle on a transient basis having dimensions of not less than 9X20 ft. exclusive of passageways and driveways appurtenant thereto and giving access thereto and having direct usable street access to a street...". The area at issue complies with this definition. Specifically, it is off street, it is available for parking, it is appurtenant to the driveway of the home at 19 Crescent Road, there is access to the driveway from the paved area, which provides direct street access. The applicant also indicated that the area is intended to be used to leave a car in while other cars are pulled in and out of the driveway. Consequently, it is a parking space. Although the area at issue is slightly smaller in one dimension than the minimum dimension provided for in the Code, it is nonetheless a parking space (albeit substandard in size) because that is its function. The Board does not believe that the minimum dimensions set forth in the Code can be used offensively to shield what is functionally a parking space from being so categorized. Rather, the Board believes that the minimum dimensions are included in the definition as a standard to be followed when creating a parking space. It should be noted that the arealt is wider than many driveways in the Town and longer than many cars. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT for the reasons set forth above, the Board UPHOLDS the Building Inspector's interpretation that the paved area at issue is a parking space within the meaning of Section 240-4. This decision shall be filled with the Town Clerk as provided in Section 267-a(2)of the Town Law. APPLICATION NO. 1 —CASE 2540 (adjourned 10/24/01;11/28/01; 12/19/02; 4/4/02; 4/24/02; 5/22/02; 6/26/02; 7/23/02; 8/7/02; 9/25/02; 11/20/02; 12/18/02; 1/22/03) Application of Fred Friedman/Ann M. Woods requesting a variance to construct a fence at the rear of the property on the premises located at 4 High Ridge Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 213, Lot 552. The rear yard as proposed has a height of 13.5 ft. where a maximum of 5 ft. is permitted pursuant to Section 240-52 fro a rear yard fence in an R-15 Zone District. The Board discussed the fact that the applicant has not shown up and that if he does not appear next month the Board will make a motion to withdraw or deny the application. APPLICATION NO. 4—CASE 2549 Application of Mr. & Mrs. John Ortiz requesting a variance to modify a variance granted December 19, 2001 case#2483, to construct a one-story rear addition , a second floor addition and to extend a front porch on the premises located at 7 York Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town Of Mamaroneck as Block 228, Lot1. The front porch to be extended has a front yard of 38.7 ft. where 40 ft. is required pursuant to Section 240-35B(1)for a residence in an R-20 Zone District. Mike Csenge (applicant's architect) appeared and addressed the Board. The Board discussed the application and found that the Notice of Disapproval is wrong. After further discussion, on motion made by Mr. Gunther, seconded by Ms. Harrington, it was unanimously RESOLVED, that the Public Hearing of case#2549 be, and herby is, adjourned to the March 26, 2003 Zoning Board meeting to allow the matter to be correctly noticed and the appropriate radius be presented. APPLICATION NO. 5—CASE 2550 Application of David and Carly Ann Hirsch requesting a variance to legalize an existing garage extension on the premises located at 14 Maple Hill Drive and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 122, Lot 468. The garage extension as built has a side yard of 6 ft. where 8 ft. is permitted pursuant to Section 240-39(2)(a); a total side yard of 14.27 ft. where 18 ft. is permitted pursuant to Section 240-39B(2)(b); and further, the addition increases the extent by which the building is nonconforming pursuant to Section 240-69 for a residence in an R-6 Zone District. James Fleming (representing the former owner) appeared and addressed the Board. Mr. Fleming estimated that the garage extension has been in that location about forty to fifty years. The extension was questioned eight months ago when the new owners applied for a mortgage. The Board discussed this application, and its findings revealed that there w Poll Board Board Member Yes/No/Abstained Thomas E. Gunther, Chairman Yes Linda S. Harrington Yes Jillian A. Martin Yes Arthur Wexler Yes Paul A. Winick Yes After review, on motion of Mr. Gunther, seconded by Ms. Martin, the following resolution was proposed and ADOPTED unanimously, 5-0. RESOLVED, that this is a Type II action having no significant inpact on the environment pursuant to NYCRR§617 et seq. Accordingly, no further action under SEQRA is required. On motion of Ms. Martin, seconded by Mr.Winick, the following resolution was ADOPTED. WHEREAS, David and Carly Ann Hirsch have submitted an application to the Building Inspector, together with plans requesting a variance to legalize an existing garage extension on the premises located at 14 Maple Hill Drive and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town Of Mamaroneck as Block 122, Lot 468. The garage extension as built has a side yard of 6 ft. where 8 ft. is permitted pursuant to Section 240-B(2)(a); a total side yard of 14.27 ft. where 18 ft. is permitted pursuant to Section 240-39B(2)(b); and further, the addition increases the extent by which the building is nonconforming pursuant to Section 240-69 for a residence in an R-6 Zone District; and WHEREAS, the Building Inspector has declined to issue such permit on the grounds that the plans submitted failed to comply with the Town Of Mamaroneck Zoning Ordinance with particular reference to Section 240-39B(2)(a), Section 240-39B(2)(b), Section 240-69; and WHEREAS, David and Carly Ann Hirsch submitted an application for a variance to this Board for the reasons set forth in such application; and WHEREAS, this Board examined the plans, inspected the site, reviewed the application and has heard all persons interested in this application after publication of a notice thereof and a hearing thereon; and WHEREAS, the Zoning Board of the Town Of Mamaroneck makes the following findings as required by New York State Town Law§267-b: 1. The Board finds that the benefit to the applicant from granting of the variance outweighs any detriment to the health, safety and welfare of the neighborhood or community. In reaching this conclusion, the Board considered the following factors: A. There has been no undesirable change produced in the character of the neighborhood or detriment to nearby properties. This garage extension, as built, has existed on the property for many years without complaints. B. The Board should not find that there is a reasonable alternative for the applicant in this instance. The building, as it stands, is nonconforming. The addition of this very small storage area to the back of the garage, which is in line with the front of the house, is consistent with the structure as it really already exists and would not be able to be built except for the issuance of an area variance. C. It is not a substantial variance. This is a very small construction. D. There is no adverse impact on the neighborhood or the physical and environmental conditions in the neighborhood. This garage extension is used for storage. There will not be any additional noise or other detriment to the neighborhood with the use of this area. E. While legalization is a self created difficulty, in this instance that should not be determinative of the Board granting this application. F. The granting of this variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of this Ordinance and will not be injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. G. The variance is the minimum necessary to alleviate the difficulty detailed in the application yet also preserves and protects the character of the neighborhood and the health, safety and welfare of the community. H. The strict application of the Zoning Ordinance and the Town Code would deprive the applicants of the reasonable use of the land/or building, and the variance granted by this Board will enable such reasonable use. NOW, THERFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, hat the subject application be and the same is GRANTED, subject to the following conditions: 1. This variance authorizes the construction as shown on the plans presented and no other. 2. The applicant shall obtain a building permit within six (6) months of the filing of this Resolution. 3. The building permit shall be void if construction is not started within six (6) months and completed within two (2)years of the date of said permit. 4. Construction shall be in substantial compliance with the pains submitted in connection with this application. This decision shall be filed with Town Clerk as provided in Section 267-a(2)of the Town Law. APPROVAL OF MINUTES There was no discussion ADJOURNMENT Prepared by Francine M. Brill