Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014_03_26 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes THE MINUTES SOF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS OF THE TOWN OF MAMARONECK MARCH 26,2014 HELD IN CONFERENCE ROOM C,OF THE TOWN OF MAMARONECK 740 WEST BOSTON POST ROAD, MAMARONECK, NEW YORK APPROVAL OF MINUTES APPLICATION NO. 1 CASE NO. 2958 Verena Amabal and Brian Hennessey Application of Verena Amabal and Brian Hennessey requesting a variance to construct a portico by enclosing front porch and landing and to extend steps on the premises located at 99 N. Chatsworth Avenue and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Block 114, Lot 594. Roll Call. Present:Arthur Wexler, Chairman, Seth Marcus,Jeffery King, Also Present: Ronald Carpaneto, Building Inspector, Kevin G. Ryan, Counsel, Ernest Odierna,Town Board Liaison. Absent/Excused: Irene O'Neill, Evans Simpson. The chairman stated that there are only three (3) members are present at this time and that any applicant t would need at least three in favor to be approved. Mr. Wexler stated that if any applicant would like to adjourn the matter he or she may request to do so. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 8:14 P.M. MINUTES The minutes were not discussed Vu APPLICATION NO. 1 CASE NO. 2958 Verena Amabal and Brian Hennessey Motion:To open the public hearing Action:Approved 1 Moved by Seth Marcus, Seconded by Jeffery King. Ms. Amabal,the applicant, addressed the Board stating she is asking to improve the entrance to the house, over existing landing and build new landing and steps for access. The Board discussed the application. Elevations were discussed. The front wall of the house will not be changes. The front steps will be moved a few feet toward the street to accommodate the outward opening front door. The applicant attested that there have been no objections from any neighbors. There were no public questions or comments. Motion:To close the public hearing Action:Approved Moved by Arthur Wexler, Chairman, Seconded by Jeffery King. Motion: To approve the requested variance Action:Approved Moved by Seth Marcus, Seconded by Jeffery King. Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary:Yes=3). Yes:Arthur Wexler, Chairman,Jeffery King, Seth Marcus. After review, on motion of Mr. Baron, seconded by the following resolution was proposed and ADOPTED unanimously(4-0). Ayes: Wexler, Marcus, King Nays: None Absent/Excused: O'Neill, Simpson Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary:Yes=3). Yes:Arthur Wexler, Chairman,Jeffery King, Seth Marcus. WHEREAS, Verena Amabal and Brian Hennessey, requested a variance to construct a portico by enclosing existing front porch/landing and to extend the existing steps located at 99 North Chatsworth Avenue and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 114, Lot 594. 2 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 240-51A, 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 proposed steps have a front yard of 18 feet 8 inches and are 42.25 square feet where a front yard of 22 feet and a total of 40 square feet required pursuant to. The portico as proposed has a front yard of 25 feet 6 inches where 30 feet is required, and further,the addition increases the extent by which the building is nonconforming for a residence in an R-10 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. The proposed front portico addition will conform with what is typical in the neighborhood. There are other residence's in the vicinity that have similarly enclosed front porticos, e.g., one residence with enclosed porticos is on 100 N. Chatsworth and another at 92 N. Chatsworth. 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. The residence is already nonconforming any addition would require a variance. The applicant is using the existing front porch and stone landing, simply enclosing it and not otherwise extending or increasing the footprint of the structure other than a small modification to the steps. C. Whether the area variance is substantial. 3 The Board finds that the variance is not substantial; again they are simply enclosing an existing landing. It is modest compared to the structure and size of the property. D. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood. The Board finds that it will not have an adverse impact as the addition is on the existing footprint there will be no additional runoff no increased light or noise. 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. 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 Motion:To adjourn the meeting at 8:28 P.M. 4 Action:Approved Moved by Arthur Wexler, Chairman, seconded by Jeffery King. Minutes prepared by Francine M. Brill Zoning Board of Appeals Secretary 5