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