HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014_09_17 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS OF THE TOWN OF MAMARONECK
SEPTEMBER 17, 2014 HELD IN CONFERENCE ROOM C, OF THE TOWN OF MAMARONECK
740 WEST BOSTON POST ROAD, MAMARONECK, NEW YORK
Roll Call.
Present:Arthur Wexler, Chairman, Irene O'Neill, Evans Simpson,Jonathan Sacks,Alternate.
Also Present: Lisa Hochman, Counsel
Absent/Excused: Seth Marcus,Jeffery King, Ronald Carpaneto, Building Inspector, Kevin G. Ryan,
Counsel, Ernest Odierna,Town Board Liaison.
CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order at 7:51p.m.
Mr. Wexler, Chairman explained that at this time there are only four members present and stated that
the applicant would need three votes in favor to be approved. If any applicant would like to adjourn the
matter he or she may request to do so.
APPLICATION NO. 1 CASE NO. 2964 36 Harrison Drive Anthony Lobel
The applicant requested an adjournment.
APPLICATION NO. 2 CASE NO.2966 2 Hillside Road Hans-Joseph &Wendy Thiele
Public hearing continued
Wendy Thiele addressed the Board and gave an original plan Exhibit 1; survey Exhibit 2, photos Exhibit 3.
Motion:To close the public hearing
Action:Approved
Moved by Arthur Wexler, Chairman, Seconded by Irene O'Neill.
Motion:To approve the requested variance
Action:Approved
Moved by Evans Simpson, seconded by.
Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary:Yes=4).
Yes:Arthur Wexler, Chairman, Evans Simpson, Irene O'Neill,Jonathan Sacks,Alternate.
Absent:Jeffery King, Seth Marcus.
1
After review, on motion of Evans Simpson, seconded by Irene O'Neill the following resolution was
proposed and ADOPTED unanimously(4-0).
Ayes: Arthur Wexler, Irene O'Neill, Evans Simpson,Jonathan Sacks
Nays: None
Absent/Excused: Seth Marcus,Jeffery King
WHEREAS, Hans-Josef and Wendy Thiele, requested a variance to install an air conditioning
condenser unit on the premises at located at 2 Hillside Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map of
the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 128, Lot 193.
WHEREAS,the Building Director 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
Sections 240-38B.(2)(a) and 240-69,
WHEREAS,the applicant submitted an application for a variance to this Board for reasons set
forth in such application,the air conditioning condenser units as proposed has a side yard of 5 feet
where 10 feet is required and further the addition increases the extent by which the building is
nonconforming for a residence in an R-7.5 Zone District.
WHEREAS,the 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 public hearing
thereon.
WHEREAS,this is a Type II action having no significant impact on the environment pursuant to
6NYCRR§617 et, seq. and, accordingly, no further action under SEQRA is required; 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 the benefit to the applicant from the 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. Whether an undesirable change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood
or detriment to nearby properties will be created by granting of the variance.
The Board finds that granting the variance will not produce an undesirable change in the
character of the neighborhood or detriment to nearby properties because the proposed
design is similar to surrounding homes.
B. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some method feasible
to the applicants other than an area variance.
2
The Board finds that the benefit sought by the applicant cannot be achieved by some
method feasible to the applicant not requiring a variance because,given the
requirements of the compressor, the location of the windows and fresh air
requirements,the placement of the unit anywhere but in the general area described is
not feasible.
C. Whether the area variance is substantial.
The Board finds that the variance is fairly substantial given that the required set back is
10 feet and the applicant is asking for 6 feet 6 inches which is approximately 2/3 of the
requirement. However,the Board finds that this is not determinative.
D. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse impact on the physical or
environmental conditions in the neighborhood.
The Board finds that there will not be an adverse impact on the physical or
environmental conditions in the neighborhood because the applicant has chosen an air
conditioning unit that is very quiet and fairly compact.
E. Whether the difficulty is self-created.
The Board finds that the difficulty is self-created, but that this factor is not
determinative under the circumstances presented.
2. For the reasons stated above, the granting of this variance is in harmony with the general
purposes and intent of the Town of Mamaroneck Zoning Ordinance and will not be injurious
to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare.
3. For reasons stated above,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.
NOW,THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED, that the subject application is and the same is GRANTED, subject to the following
conditions:
GENERAL CONDITIONS:
1. This variance is limited to the construction shown on the submitted plans as conditioned
and/or modified in accordance with the direction of the Board as agreed to by the Applicant.
2. The Applicant shall submit plans reflecting any conditions or modifications as above for the
review and approval of the Director of Building prior to the granting of the building permit.
3
3. The Applicant shall obtain a building permit within (6) months of the filing of the Resolution.
4. The Building permit shall be void if construction is not started within (6) months.
5. Construction shall be in compliance with the plans submitted in connection with this
application, as conditioned or modified pursuant to the direction of the Board.
This decision shall be filed with the Town Clerk as provided in Section 267-a (2) of the Town Law.
APPLICATION NO. 3 CASE NO.2968 1262 Boston Post Road Jersey Mike's
Motion:To open the public hearing
Action:Approved
Moved by Arthur Wexler, Chairman, Seconded by Irene O'Neill.
Kory Salomone, of Veneziano &Associates, the applicant's attorney, addressed the Board requesting an
interpretation and/or variance to open Jersey Mike's Sub shop on the premises located at 1262 Boston
Post Road. He requested the Board to interpret that the establishment is considered a luncheonette
under Town Code.
The Board discussed the request.
Troy Davidson for Jersey Mikes addressed the Board and gave a brief history stating it started as a deli in
New Jersey and there are now 800+ locations. He added that everything is made to order and handed
to the customer at the counter; hot food will be brought out from the kitchen to the table if the person
is dining in. The typical hours are 10AM until 9:00 P.M. daily.
The Board discussed the differences between deli and luncheonette, as well as the 300-foot limitation
and requested background information as to why the Town Board passed the relevant Code provisions.
Ms. Hochman requested legislative history.
Public questions and comments
Donald Sweeter stated that Cozi is a luncheonette,with limited table service.
Donald Mazin, an attorney, stated he is here to bring to attention legal issues that allowing this would
cause hardship to nearby businesses because Jersey Mikes would be in direct competition with 4
neighboring establishments. Mr. Mazin read a letter into the record Marked Exhibit 7. He also entered
documents into the record labeled Exhibit 1-6.
Mr. Wexler stated that if the Zoning Board was to determine that it is a deli or take-out then the
applicant must seek a variance, and go to the Planning Board for a Special Use permit.
4
Mr. Wexler asked for photos and dimensions of existing establishments, and questioned whether there
would be drive thru windows.
The matter was adjourned to October 22, 2014.
APPLICATION NO.4 CASE NO.2969 11 Devon Road Mr. &Mrs.Voelker
Motion: To open the public hearing
Action:Approved
Moved by Arthur Wexler, Chairman, Seconded by Evans Simpson.
Mike Csenge,the applicants, architect addressed the Board explained the plan, stating the roof projects
only as far as the landing. There will be a trellis over the top.
Mr. Simpson asked why the applicants would want a deck in their front yard and Mr. Csenge responded
that the rear yard is fairly steep and the sun is better in the front, also there are other front decks across
the street in the Village.
Ms. Hochman, read Section 240-50 of the code regarding terraces and porches.
The Board discussed the application.
There were no public questions or comments.
Motion:To close the public hearing
Action:Approved
Moved by Arthur Wexler seconded by Jonathan Sacks, Alternate
Motion: To approve the requested variance
Action:Approved
Moved by Arthur Wexler, Chairman, Seconded by Irene O'Neill.
Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary:Yes=4).
Yes:Arthur Wexler, Chairman, Evans Simpson, Irene O'Neill,Jonathan Sacks,Alternate.
Absent:Jeffery King, Seth Marcus.
IVu
5
After review, on motion of Arthur Wexler, seconded by Irene O'Neill the following resolution was
proposed and ADOPTED unanimously(4-0).
Ayes: Arthur Wexler, Chairman, Irene O'Neill, Evans Simpson,Jonathan Sacks,
Alternate.
Nays: None
Absent/Excused: Jeffery King, Seth Marcus
WHEREAS, Mr. and Mrs. Markus Voelker, requested a variance to construct an open wood
porch/deck with open trellis over located at 11 Devon Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map of
the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 404, Lot 85.
WHEREAS,the Building Director 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
Sections 240-36B (1) and 240-69,
WHEREAS,the applicant submitted an application for a variance to this Board for reasons set
forth in such application,the porch/deck as proposed has a front yard of 31 feet 1 inch where 40 feet is
required and further the porch/deck increases the extent by which the building is nonconforming for a
residence in an R-15 Zone District.
WHEREAS,the 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 public hearing
thereon.
WHEREAS,this is a Type II action having no significant impact on the environment pursuant to
6NYCRR§617 et, seq. and, accordingly, no further action under SEQRA is required; 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 the benefit to the applicant from the 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. Whether an undesirable change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood
or detriment to nearby properties will be created by granting of the variance.
The Board finds that granting the variance will not produce an undesirable change in the
character of the neighborhood or detriment to nearby properties because the scale of
the porch is in character with the house,the house is on a small lot in an R-15 zone and
the house sits on road that faces the Village of Larchmont and most of the homes across
6
the street are rear-facing. The Board further found that the application is consistent
with existing houses on the street.
B. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some method feasible
to the applicants other than an area variance.
The Board finds that the benefit sought by the applicant cannot be achieved by some
method feasible to the applicant not requiring a variance because the applicant would
like to locate the porch in the front of the house to enjoy the street life.
C. Whether the area variance is substantial.
The Board finds that the variance is substantial because it seeks a front yard setback of
31 feet as opposed to 40 but noted that although the property is in an R-15 Zone, the
size of the house and property relates more like a R-7-5 Zone where only 30 feet is
required for front yard setback. The Board further found that the variance will not
appear substantial in the context of neighboring houses in the Village of Larchmont.
D. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse impact on the physical or
environmental conditions in the neighborhood.
The Board finds the open deck/porch will not have an adverse impact because it will not
give rise to any visual impacts nor will there be any increase in water runoff as water will
go through the slats of the deck.
E. Whether the difficulty is self-created.
The Board finds that the difficulty is self-created, but that this factor is not
determinative under the circumstances presented.
2. For the reasons stated above, the granting of this variance is in harmony with the general
purposes and intent of the Town of Mamaroneck Zoning Ordinance and will not be injurious
to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare.
3. For reasons stated above,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.
NOW,THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED, that the subject application be and the same is GRANTED, subject to the following
conditions:
GENERAL CONDITIONS:
7
1. This variance is limited to the construction shown on the submitted plans as conditioned
and/or modified in accordance with the direction of the Board as agreed to by the
Applicant.
2. The Applicant shall submit plans reflecting any conditions or modifications as above for
the review and approval of the Director of Building prior to the granting of the building
permit.
3. The Applicant shall obtain a building permit within (6) months of the filing of the
Resolution.
4. The Building permit shall be void if construction is not started within (6) months.
5. Construction shall be in compliance with the plans submitted in connection with this
application, as conditioned or modified pursuant to the direction of the Board.
CONDITION that the fascia will be integrated to match the house.
This decision shall be filed with the Town Clerk as provided in Section 267-a (2) of the Town Law.
APPLICATION NO. 5 CASE NO.2970 276 Rocking stone Avenue Marc Fried
Mr. Wexler recused himself.
Marc Fried stated that he can't put the unit on the left of the house because of windows, doors and ac
units. They are planning an extension in the rear of the house.
The distance from the property line was discussed as well as the possibility of the placement of a fence
in the future making it difficult to pass the unit in case of an emergency.
Mr. Simpson stated the applicant must show why the unit couldn't be placed any place else.
Ms. O'Neill stated the applicant could defer the generator until the addition is done and other locations
are checked.
The applicant requested an adjournment.
APPLICATION NO. 6 CASE NO.2971 14 Harmony Drive Patrick Haggerty
No one appeared.
APPLICATION NO. 7 CASE NO.2972 107 Laurel Avenue Antonio Nues
8
Mike Csenge,the applicants, architect addressed the Board stating this is to legalize an existing wood
deck on the rear and side; it is not overly large only 8 X12,
Mr. Neus stated that the old deck was rotting and was replaced in February the same as was there
originally when he bought the house in the 70's.
The Board discussed the application.
There were no public questions or comments.
Motion: To close the public hearing
Action:Approved
Moved by Arthur Wexler, Chairman, Seconded by Evans Simpson. IVu
Motion: To approve the requested variance
Action:Approved
Moved by Irene O'Neill, Seconded by Arthur Wexler, Chairman.
After review, on motion of Irene O'Neill, seconded by Arthur Wexler the following resolution was
proposed and ADOPTED unanimously(4-0).
Ayes: Arthur Wexler, Chairman, Irene O'Neill, Evans Simpson,Jonathan Sacks,
Alternate.
Nays: None
Absent/Excused: Jeffery King, Seth Marcus
WHEREAS,Antonio Nues, requested a variance to legalize an elevated wood deck at the rear of
the dwelling located at 107 Laurel Avenue and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of
Mamaroneck as Block 124, Lot 453.
WHEREAS,the Building Director 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
Sections 240-39B(2)(a), 240-39B.(3) and 240-69,
WHEREAS,the applicant submitted an application for a variance to this Board for reasons set
forth in such application,the deck as built has a side yard of 6 feet 1 inch where 8 feet is required, has a
rear yard of 12 feet 6 inches where 25 feet is required and further the deck increases the extent by
which the building is nonconforming for a residence in an R-6 Zone District.
WHEREAS,the 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 public hearing
thereon.
9
WHEREAS,this is a Type II action having no significant impact on the environment pursuant to
6NYCRR§617 et, seq. and, accordingly, no further action under SEQRA is required; 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 the benefit to the applicant from the 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. Whether an undesirable change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood
or detriment to nearby properties will be created by granting of the variance.
The Board finds that granting the variance will not produce an undesirable change in the
character of the neighborhood or detriment to nearby properties. Because this deck has
been in place for many years and has been replaced with the current deck which is the
same dimensions as the previous deck. The Board further finds that along Laurel
Avenue nearly every house has a deck of similar height and proportions and this deck is
consistent with existing conditions in the neighborhood.
B. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some method feasible
to the applicants other than an area variance.
The Board finds that given the size of the lot and the location of the house on the lot,
any deck in the year yard would require a variance;therefore,the benefit sought by the
applicant cannot be achieved by some method feasible to the applicant not requiring a
variance.
C. Whether the area variance is substantial.
The Board finds that the variance is substantial considering the size of the back yard but
it is not determinative.
D. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse impact on the physical or
environmental conditions in the neighborhood.
The Board finds that the existence of the deck and very similar decks in every back yard
on the street will not cause an adverse impact on the environmental conditions. The
deck will not cause any more runoff then currently exists.
E. Whether the difficulty is self-created.
The Board finds that the difficulty is self-created, but that this factor is not
determinative under the circumstances presented.
10
2. For the reasons stated above, the granting of this variance is in harmony with the general
purposes and intent of the Town of Mamaroneck Zoning Ordinance and will not be injurious
to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare.
3. For reasons stated above,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.
NOW,THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED, that the subject application be and the same is GRANTED, subject to the following
conditions:
GENERAL CONDITIONS:
1. This variance is limited to the construction shown on the submitted plans as conditioned
and/or modified in accordance with the direction of the Board as agreed to by the Applicant.
2. The Applicant shall submit plans reflecting any conditions or modifications as above for the
review and approval of the Director of Building prior to the granting of the building permit.
3. The Applicant shall obtain a building permit within (6) months of the filing of the Resolution.
4. The Building permit shall be void if construction is not started within (6) months.
5. Construction shall be in compliance with the plans submitted in connection with this
application, as conditioned or modified pursuant to the direction of the Board.
This decision shall be filed with the Town Clerk as provided in Section 267-a(2) of the Town Law.
APPLICATION NO.8 CASE NO.2973 5 Sheldrake Avenue Beth Feldman
Motion:To open the public hearing
Action: Open Public Hearing
Moved by Arthur Wexler, Chairman, Seconded by Irene O'Neill.
Donald Schweter, the applicant's architect, addressed the Board stating this is a small nonconforming lot
and the L shaped addition will actually reduce lot coverage because they are removing the asphalt
driveway.
Mr. Ortiz stated the applicant must go before the Planning Board because the house is in the wetland
buffer zone.
Mr. Lotto will do erosion calculations.
11
Elevations were discussed.
Mr. Wexler asked what flood zone the property is in and Mr. Schweter responded he will get that
information from FEMA.
Mr. Schweter stated he is raising the ceiling height of the first floor, adding second floor and attic
covered with a metal roof and aluminum clad windows. All mechanicals will be moved to the attic. He
added that the property is in an R-10 zone and even the R-6 calculations do not work.
There were no public questions or comments.
The matter was adjourned to October 22, 2014.
The matter was referred to the Planning Board and Coastal Zone Management Commission.
APPLICATION NO. 9 CASE NO.2974 61 Maple Hill Road Scott Robinson
Motion:To open the public hearing
Action:Approved
Moved by Arthur Wexler, Chairman, Seconded by Irene O'Neill.
Mr. Robinson,the applicant, stated that he looked and couldn't find a spot that would not require a
variance on his property. He further stated that the most effected neighbor wrote a letter in support of
unit.
Mr. Sacks stated that the proposed location is a significant distance from the neighbor's house.
Mr. Wexler stated that the lot has two front yards; nothing works here.
The Board discussed the application.
There were no public questions or comments.
Motion:To close the public hearing
Action:Approved
Moved by Arthur Wexler, Chairman, Seconded by Jonathan Sacks, Alternate.
Motion: To approve the requested variance
Action:Approved
Moved by Arthur Wexler, Chairman, Seconded by Irene O'Neill.
12
Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary:Yes=4).
Yes:Arthur Wexler, Chairman, Irene O'Neill, Evans Simpson,Jonathan Sacks, Alternate.
After review, on motion of Arthur Wexler, seconded by Irene O'Neill the following resolution was
proposed and ADOPTED unanimously(4-0).
Ayes: Arthur Wexler, Chairman, Irene O'Neill, Evans Simpson,Jonathan Sacks,
Alternate.
Nays: None
Absent/Excused: Jeffery King, Seth Marcus
WHEREAS,Scott Robinson, requested a variance to install an emergency stand by generator
located at 61 Maple Hill Drive and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as
Block 119, Lot 304.
WHEREAS,the Building Director 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
Sections 240-38B(1)and 240-69,
WHEREAS,the applicant submitted an application for a variance to this Board for reasons set
forth in such application,the generator as proposed has a front yard of 20 feet where 30 feet is required
and further the generator increases the extent by which the building is nonconforming for a residence in
an R-7.5 Zone District.
WHEREAS,the 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 public hearing
thereon.
WHEREAS,this is a Type II action having no significant impact on the environment pursuant to
6NYCRR§617 et, seq. and, accordingly, no further action under SEQRA is required; 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 the benefit to the applicant from the 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. Whether an undesirable change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood
or detriment to nearby properties will be created by granting of the variance.
The Board finds that granting the variance will not produce an undesirable change in the
character of the neighborhood or detriment to nearby properties because the generator
13
is small in size with the proper distance from the side property line, elevated up from
the street and is set behind a fence. The Board further found that noise impacts will be
negligible because the generator will only run 5 minutes every week or during
emergencies and the noise level is low.
B. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some method feasible
to the applicants other than an area variance.
The Board finds that because the house is burdened on all sides,the benefit sought by
the applicant cannot be achieved by some method feasible to the applicant not
requiring a variance.
C. Whether the area variance is substantial.
The Board finds that the variance is not substantial,given the size of the generator as
compared to the house and the lot.
D. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse impact on the physical or
environmental conditions in the neighborhood.
The Board finds that the noise created by the testing is minimal, and the unit is not
visible from the street.
E. Whether the difficulty is self-created.
The Board finds that the difficulty is self-created, but that this factor is not
determinative under the circumstances presented.
2. For the reasons stated above, the granting of this variance is in harmony with the general
purposes and intent of the Town of Mamaroneck Zoning Ordinance and will not be injurious
to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare.
3. For reasons stated above,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.
NOW,THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED, that the subject application be and the same is GRANTED, subject to the following
conditions:
GENERAL CONDITIONS:
1. This variance is limited to the construction shown on the submitted plans as conditioned
and/or modified in accordance with the direction of the Board as agreed to by the Applicant.
14
2. The Applicant shall submit plans reflecting any conditions or modifications as above for the
review and approval of the Director of Building prior to the granting of the building permit.
3. The Applicant shall obtain a building permit within (6) months of the filing of the Resolution.
4. The Building permit shall be void if construction is not started within (6) months.
5. Construction shall be in compliance with the plans submitted in connection with this
application, as conditioned or modified pursuant to the direction of the Board.
This decision shall be filed with the Town Clerk as provided in Section 267-a(2) of the Town Law.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 10:13P.M.
Minutes Prepared by
Francine M. Brill
Zoning Board of Appeals Secretary
15