Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2018_01_17 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ZONING BOARD OF THE TOWN OF MAMARONECK HELD IN CONFERENCE ROOM "C" OF THE TOWN CENTER 740 WEST BOSTON POST ROAD, MAMARONECK, NEW YORK JANUARY 17, 2018 ROLL CALL Present: Arthur Wexler, Chair, Irene O'Neill Evans Simpson, Jonathan Sacks, Jeffery King, Stephen Marsh Also Present: Ralph Tarchine, Building Inspector, Lisa Hochman Counsel to Zoning Board CALL TO ORDER The Meeting was called to order at 7:45PM 1. Case #3094 - LRC Investment Holdings - 1 Kenmare Road Public Hearing Continued Liam Winters, the applicant's new architect, presented a new proposal to the Board. He stated that he looked at neighboring houses to achieve a design compatible with the surrounding area. The existing footprint is nonconforming. He further stated that he checked with the Village of Larchmont regarding the strip of land on Devon Road and learned that the Village has no interest in the curb area. The shared driveway and proposed parking area was discussed. Mr. Wexler asked if there was an easement for the shared driveway. Mr. Winter stated that the shared driveway can't be eliminated even if the driveway is moved to Devon. Mr. Wexler stated that the proposed parking spot may need a variance. Section 240-79B was discussed. It was suggested that the parking pad not be considered tonight. Elevations were discussed. Mr. Wexler asked for comparisons to the previous application. Mr. Winters stated he is trying to lower the roof height. Mr. Wexler asked for street elevations to see if it fits with the neighborhood. Mr. Winter entered photos into the record marked Exhibit 1. The Board discussed whether the proposal is in keeping with neighborhood. It is a small lot with a proposed 2000 square foot house. The front elevation on Devon was discussed as there is no buffer there. Mr. Wexler asked if the dormer and gable can be recessed back a bit to break up the massing on Devon. Coverage calculations were discussed and questioned. The Board requested changes to the plan. 1 Mr. Winters will resubmit as all driveways count towards lot cover whether or not they are pervious. The property owners were present and stated that the house is currently not habitable and they believe this would be a great improvement and would not be as large as some of the neighboring houses. The matter was adjourned. 2. Case # 3099 - Timothy McCarthy - 8 Nancy Lane Motion: To open the public hearing Action: Approved Moved by Arthur Wexler, seconded by Irene O'Neill George Hodosh, the applicant's architect, addressed the Board seeking to add a deck in the rear and a porch in front. The Board discussed the rear deck and noted that the applicant's back yard is underutilized because of the shape and topography of the lot. Mr. Wexler asked if the deck could be redesigned to lessen the variance request. Mr. Hodosh stated they would rather make the porch less deep then change the rear deck Mr. Hodosh entered photos into the record marked Exhibit 1. The front porch was discussed. Mr. Marsh stated that a portico would be a better option. Mr. Sacks voiced concerns regarding the proximity to the neighbor's driveway. Mr. Wexler suggested options be shown to lessen the variance request as the Board doesn't like the corner of the porch so near the neighbor's driveway. Mr. Hodosh stated he would show options. Mr. Wexler requested the deck and porch be staked. The matter was adjourned to February 28, 2018. 3. Case # 3100 - Jared Kutzin and Melissa Leber - 6 Sacket Drive Motion: To open the public hearing Action: Approved Moved by Arthur Wexler, seconded by Irene O'Neill Josepha Moliar, the applicant's architect stated they are asking for a modest variance. The house is existing nonconforming and they are creating a rear mud room. The entrance from the garage to the mud room is as small as possible but still requires a variance. The Board discussed the request. 2 There were no public questions or comments. Motion: To close the public hearing Action: Approved Moved by Arthur Wexler, seconded by Evans Simpson Motion: To approve the requested variance Action: Approved Moved by Jeffrey King, seconded by Irene O'Neill Ayes: Arthur Wexler, Chairman, Irene O'Neill, Evans Simpson, Jeffery King, Jonathan Sacks Nays: None RESOLUTION 6 Sackett Drive WHEREAS, Jared Kutzin and Melissa Leber, (the "Applicant") requested a variance for an addition of a mud room on the premises located at 6 Sackett Drive and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Section 1, Block 6, Lot 610; and WHEREAS, the Building Inspector declined to issue such permit on the following grounds: the mud room as proposed has a rear yard of 23 feet 11 inches where 25 feet is required pursuant to Section 240-36B(3), and further the addition increases the extent by which the building is nonconforming pursuant to Section 240-69 for a building in an R-15 Zone District (the "Notice of Disapproval"); and WHEREAS, the Building Inspector stated at the public hearing that the requested variance is actually two feet less than that stated in the Notice of Disapproval; and WHEREAS, the Applicant submitted to this Board an application for relief from the requirements from the Zoning Code; and 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; and WHEREAS, this is a Type II action having no significant impact on the environment pursuant to 6NYCRR§ 617 el. 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; and 3 1. The Board finds that 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 addition is to the rear of the house and in line with existing structures so it has negligible visual impact to neighboring properties. B. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some means 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 there is no other place on the house to put a mudroom and the location of the house on the lot necessitates a variance. C. Whether the area variance is substantial. The Board finds that the variance is not substantial because it is in line with the rear setback and the encroachment is minimal. D. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood. The Board finds that the variance will not adversely impact the local physical or environmental conditions because the encroachment is minimal and will generate no negative impacts with respect to stormwater runoff, light or air. 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 the 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: 4 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 Building Inspector prior to the granting of the building permit. 3. The Applicant shall obtain a building permit within (6) months of the filing of this 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. 6. Applicant shall submit to the Town Building Department a foundation survey prior to framing. MINUTES Motion: To approve the minutes of November 29, 2017 Action: Approved Moved by Evans Simpson, seconded by Arthur Wexler Ayes: Arthur Wexler, Chairman, Irene O'Neill, Evans Simpson, Jeffery King, Jonathan Sacks Nays: None ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 8:45PM Prepared by Francine M. Brill Zoning Board of Appeals Secretary 5