Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1992_02_24 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes DRAFT MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ZONING BOARD OF THE TOWN OF MAMARONECK FEBRUARY 24, 1992, IN THE COURTROOM, TOWN CENTER 740 WEST BOSTON POST ROAD MAMARONECK, NEW YORK 4 Present: Joel Negrin, Chairman 'CE fl ED Thomas E. Gunther �� Patrick E. Kelleher 11M 17 1993 J. Rene Simon PATRICIA A.DiCIOCCIO Arthur Wexler TAMAR NECK MAMARONECK N 1. Also Present: Nancy Rudolph, Counsel William Jakubowski, Building Inspector Laurie Fletcher, Public Stenographer Kazazes & Associates 250 East Hartsdale Avenue Hartsdale, NY 10530 Bonnie M. Burdick, Recording Secretary CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Chairman Negrin at 8: 16 PM. APPLICATION NO. 1 - CASE 2047 The Secretary read the application as follows. Application of Carl Carilli, 59 West Garden Road, adjourned from January 27, 1993. William Widulski appeared with a third set of plans for the windows, second floor and third-floor dormers. He stated that the major change was a rear dormer with a window on the third floor to allow light for the second floor corridor and to provide room for a staircase for the attic which now has, in some places, headroom of seven feet. Mr. Widulski stated that the outside, front staircase is narrower than planned and the garage door is smaller. He explained the window changes for each elevation. Neighbors appearing were Glen Peck, 28 Fernwood Road, and John O'Neil, 32 Fernwood, appeared. They were surprised, given the neighborhood's disapproval last year, that a deviation from the approved plan was made. Messrs. Peck and O'Neil complained of the lengthy, noisy rock removal last summer. Mr. Peck noted that the morning sun was blocked at his house by the new structure and objected to a variance for a larger house. Messrs. Negrin, Wexler, Simon and Kelleher indicated that they did not like a window in the attic dormer or the placement of the windows in the side elevations. Mr. Gunther stated that he had stretched to approve the original application and that any new plan needed to be very close to the original plan for him to approve. Zoning Board of Appeals February 24, 1993 -2- On motion of Mr. Kelleher, seconded by Mr. Simon, with the approval of the applicant, this matter was adjourned to the March meeting. APPLICATION NO. 2 - CASE 2048 The Secretary read the application as follows. Application of Mr. and Mrs. Jay Waks requesting a variance from Section 89-33 B(3) to construct a rear deck with a rear yard of 14.0 ft. where 25.0 ft. is required. Further, the deck increases the extent by which the building fails to meet such area requirements pursuant to Section 89-57 for a residence in an R-10 Zone District on the premises located at 44 Eton Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 211 Lot 680. Leonard Weinberg, architect appeared. He stated that the deck was to be constructed to the rear in a sloping yard that was well-shrubbed and was being built to benefit an elderly, handicapped grandmother. On motion of Mr. Wexler, seconded by Mr. Simon, it was unanimously RESOLVED, that the Zoning Board of Appeals is the Lead Agency and solely responsible for determining whether the proposed action may have a significant impact on the environment; and it is FURTHER RESOLVED, that this is a Type II Action having no significant impact on the environment as determined by New York State or corresponding local law, therefore requiring no further action under SEQRA. After review, on motion of Mr. Wexler, seconded by Mr. Gunther, the following resolutions were proposed and adopted unanimously. RESOLVED, that the Zoning Board of Appeals is the Lead Agency and solely responsible for determining whether the proposed action may have a significant impact on the environment; FURTHER RESOLVED, that this is a Type II Action having no significant impact on the environment as determined by New York State or corresponding local law, therefore, requiring no further action under SEQRA. Zoning Board of Appeals February 24, 1993 -3- On motion of Mr. Wexler, seconded by Mr. Gunther, the following resolutions were adopted unanimously. WHEREAS, Mr. and Mrs. Jay Waks have submitted an application to the Building Inspector, together with plans to construct a rear deck on the premises located at 44 Eton Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 211 Lot 680; 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 Sections 89-33 B(3) and 89-57; and WHEREAS, Mr. and Mrs. Waks submitted an application for variances to this Board for the reasons set forth in such application; and WHEREAS, this Board has 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; WHEREAS, the Board finds that the benefit to the applicant and the special circumstances and/or conditions applying to the land outweighs any detriment to the neighborhood if the variances sought are granted and also finds as follows: 1. The rear yard is well-screened with large trees. 2. The yard is sloped in two directions thereby depriving the owner of full use of the rear yard. 3. The integration of the proposed deck conforms to other houses in the Town of similar design. 4. The proposed deck would be close to grade which should not result in a negative impact on the environment. 5. The existing screened porch already encroaches into the rear yard setback by almost two feet. The proposed deck will extend on average approximately nine feet beyond the furthest end of the screened porch. The design is unusual and is necessary to accommodate an existing area for trash collection. 6. The rear yard property owners most effected by the construction of this deck have not appeared before this Board to object. 7. The granting of these variances 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. 8. The variances are the minimum to alleviate the difficulty detailed in the application yet also preserve and protect the character of the neighborhood and the health, safety and welfare of the community. i Zoning Board of Appeals February 24, 1993 ® -4- 9. The strict application of the Zoning Ordinance and the Town Code would deprive the applicants of the reasonable use of the land and/or building, and the variance granted by this Board will enable such reasonable use. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that an application to the Board by Mr. and Mrs. Jay Waks for a variance from Sections 89-33 B(3) and 89-57 for a rear deck with a rear yard of 14.0 ft. on the premises located at 44 Eton Road, said premises being known and designated on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 211 Lot 680 be and the same is granted, subject to the following conditions. 1. The applicant shall obtain a building permit within six (6) months of the filing of this Resolution with the Town Clerk and in accordance with Section 89-73 of the Zoning Ordinance. 2. 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. 3. This decision shall be filed with the Town Clerk as provided in QSection 267-a(2) of the Town Law. APPLICATION NO. 3 - CASE 2049 The Secretary read the application as follows. Application of Mr. and Mrs. Pasquale DeGeorgio requesting a variance from Section 89-67B to obtain a Certificate of Occupancy for an existing circular drive 22.7 ft. from the front property line where 25.0 ft. is required for a residence in an R-20 Zone District on the premises located at 24 Kolbert Drive and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 308 Lot 48 Mr. DeGiorgio appeared. He stated that he had measured incorrectly from the street when he had obtained his permit and that he was aware of the Town's off-street parking regulations. After review, on motion of Mr. Gunther, seconded by Mr. Simon, the following resolutions were proposed and adopted unanimously. RESOLVED, that the Zoning Board of Appeals is the Lead Agency and solely responsible for determining whether the proposed action may have a significant impact on the environment; ® FURTHER RESOLVED, that this is a Type II Action having no significant impact on the environment as determined by New York State or corresponding local law, therefore, requiring no further action under SEQRA. Zoning Board of Appeals February 24, 1993 -5- On motion of Mr. Simon, seconded by Mr. Kelleher, the following resolutions were adopted unanimously. WHEREAS, Mr. and Mrs. Pasquale DeGiorgio have submitted an application to the Building Inspector, together with plans to obtain a Certificate of Occupancy for an existing circular driveway on the premises located at 24 Kolbert Drive and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 308 Lot 48; 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 89-67 B; and WHEREAS, Mr. and Mrs. DeGiorgio submitted an application for a variance to this Board for the reasons set forth in such application; and WHEREAS, this Board has 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; WHEREAS, the Board finds that the benefit to the applicant and the special circumstances and/or conditions applying to the land outweighs any detriment to the neighborhood if the variance sought is granted and also finds as follows: 1. The house is sufficiently set back from the street to allow for the proportions for this circular driveway. 2. Inadvertently, the driveway was constructed with a building permit but without the necessary variance; and it would present an undue financial burden to remove the asphalt. 3. The circular driveway allows the owner to park cars, temporarily, off the street during the day; and the owner acknowledges the Town's overnight parking restrictions on the circular driveway. 4. The variance requested is de minimis; it is approximately 2.7 feet to the center of the arc of the circular driveway. 5. 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. 6. The variance is the minimum 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. 7. The strict application of the Zoning Ordinance and the Town Code would deprive the applicants of the reasonable use of the land and/or building, and the variance granted by this Board will enable such reasonable use. Zoning Board of Appeals February 24, 1993 -6- e _ NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that an application to the Board by Mr. and Mrs. Pasquale DeGiorgio for a variance from Sections 89-67 B for a circular driveway with a front yard of 14.0 ft. on the premises located at 24 Kolbert Drive, said premises being known and designated on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 308 Lot 48 be and the same is granted, subject to the following conditions. 1. The applicant shall obtain a building permit within six (6) months of the filing of this Resolution with the Town Clerk and in accordance with Section 89-73 of the Zoning Ordinance. 2. 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. 3. This decision shall be filed with the Town Clerk as provided in Section 267-a(2) of the Town Law. APPLICATION NO. 4 - CASE 2050 The Secretary read the application as follows. Application of Mr. and Mrs. Thomas Auchterlonie, Jr. requesting variances from Sections 89-34 B (2)(a) and 89-34 B (3)) to maintain a deck with a side yard of 1.5 ft. where 10.0 ft. is required and a rear yard of 24.0 ft. where 25.0 ft. is required. Further, the addition increases the extent by which the building fails to meet such area requirements pursuant to Section 89-57 for a residence in an R-7.5 Zone District on the premises located at 54 Maplewood Street and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 118 Lot 318. John Perone, attorney, appeared on behalf of the Auchterlonies. He stated that Mr. Auchterlonie had built the deck to replace another, illegal deck. The piece of property is a very difficult corner lot, and the house and garage are very close to the property lines. Mr. Perone stated that the deck is esthetically pleasing and that the neighbors most effected by the deck had submitted favorable letters. After review, on motion of Mr. Wexler, seconded by Mr. Gunther, the following resolutions were proposed and adopted unanimously. RESOLVED, that the Zoning Board of Appeals is the Lead Agency and solely responsible for determining whether the proposed action may have a significant impact on the environment; 1411 FURTHER RESOLVED, that this is a Type II Action having no significant impact on the environment as determined by New York State or corresponding local law, therefore, requiring no further action under SEQRA. Zoning Board of Appeals February 24, 1993 -7- On motion of Mr. Negrin, seconded by Mr. Simon, the following resolutions were adopted unanimously. WHEREAS, Mr. and Mrs. Thomas Auchterlonie, Jr. have submitted an application to the Building Inspector, together with plans to maintain a deck on the premises located at 54 Maplewood Street and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 118 Lot 318; 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 Sections 89-34 B(2)(a), 89-34B(3) and 89-57; and WHEREAS, Mr. and Mrs. Auchterlonie submitted an application for variances to this Board for the reasons set forth in such application; and WHEREAS, this Board has 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; WHEREAS, the Board finds that the benefit to the applicant and the special circumstances and/or conditions applying to the land outweighs any detriment to the neighborhood if the variances sought are granted and also finds as follows: 1. The property has an irregular shape, and the dwelling sits at an angle on the lot. Further, there is a corner lot, burdened by two front yards of less than 90 degrees. 2. An existing garage to the rear of the dwelling covers a large portion of the rear yard; and, therefore, the one-foot variance for the deck in the rear yard is the minimum necessary to construct a practical deck. 3. The neighbors have been notified of the application and have not appeared to object; the three neighbors most closely impacted have supported the application. 4. It would present an undue financial burden to the applicant to remove the deck. 5. The deck has been in place for many years and replaced a prior deck which had been in place for many years. The current deck has been constructed closer to grade. 6. The location of the existing deck is the most practical location for the deck under the circumstances. 0 7. The granting of these variances 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. Zoning Board of Appeals February 24, 1993 -8- 8. The variances are the minimum 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. 9. The strict application of the Zoning Ordinance and the Town Code would deprive the applicants of the reasonable use of the land and/or building, and the variance granted by this Board will enable such reasonable use. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that an application to the Board by Mr. and Mrs. Thomas Auchterlonie, Jr. for variances from Sections 89-34 B(2)(a), 89-34 B(3) and 89-57 for a deck with a side yard of 1.5 ft. and a rear yard of 24.0 ft. on the premises located at 54 Maplewood Street, said premises being known and designated on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 118 Lot 318 be and the same is granted, subject to the following conditions. 1. The applicant shall obtain a building permit within six (6) months of the filing of this Resolution with the Town Clerk and in accordance with Section 89-73 of the Zoning Ordinance. 2. 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. 3. This decision shall be filed with the Town Clerk as provided in Section 267-a(2) of the Town Law. APPLICATION NO. 5 - CASE 2051 The Secretary read the application as follows. Application of Dr. James J. Simone, requesting a further extension of time for a variance granted June 26, 1991 and extended April 29, 1992 which permitted expansion of an existing professional office space. Said expansion requires, pursuant to Sections 89-65 and 89-66 A, two (2) additional parking spaces in an RTA Zone District on the premises located at 14 North Chatsworth Avenue and known on the Tax Assessment Map as Block 127 Lot 150.38. Dr. Simone appeared. He stated that he needed a further extension as the title to the apartment has not been transferred and that the case is in litigation. There is no other change to the application. After review, on motion of Mr. Gunther, seconded by Mr. Simon, the following resolutions were proposed and adopted unanimously. RESOLVED, that the Zoning Board of Appeals is the Lead Agency and solely responsible for determining whether the proposed action may have a significant impact on the environment; Zoning Board of Appeals February 24, 1993 -9- FURTHER RESOLVED, that this is a Type II Action having no significant impact on the environment as determined by New York State or corresponding local law, therefore, requiring no further action under SEQRA. On motion of Mr. Gunther, seconded by Mr. Simon, the following resolutions were adopted unanimously. WHEREAS, Dr. James J. Simone has submitted a request to the Building Inspector for extension of the period of time for a variance on the premises located at 14 North Chatsworth Avenue and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 127 Lot 150.38; 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 Sections 89-65 and 89-66A; and WHEREAS, Dr. Simone submitted an application for a extension of the variance to this Board on the grounds of practical difficulty and/or unnecessary hardship for the reasons set forth in such application; and WHEREAS, this Board has examined the plans, reviewed the application and has heard all persons interested in this application after 475 publication of a notice thereof; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that this Board finds that there are special circumstances and/or conditions applying to the land for which the variance is sought on the following grounds. 1. Through no fault of his own, the applicant has been unable to commence construction of the project. The seller of the apartment has defaulted in its obligation to the applicant, and the matter is now in litigation. 2. On two prior occasions, the applicant has sufficiently demonstrated his need for the variance and his need and the related circumstances are the same today. The applicant appears to be taking all reasonable efforts to complete the process. 3. The applicant has agreed to maintain two municipal parking permits as long as same are available. 4. The applicant has agreed to limit his practice to two dentists and the equivalent of four full-time employees. 5. The variance granted is the minimum to alleviate the practical difficulty detailed in the application. 6. The granting of the 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. Zoning Board of Appeals February 24, 1993 -10- 7. The strict application of the Zoning Ordinance and Town Code would deprive the applicants of the reasonable use of the land and/or building and that the variance granted by this Board will accomplish this purpose; and it is FURTHER RESOLVED, that a variance, which was previously granted by Board Resolution entered on October 30, 1991 and extended by Board Resolution entered on August 26, 1992, is extended and is continued to modify Sections 89-65 and 89-66 A of the Zoning Ordinance on the premises located at 14 North Chatsworth Avenue and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 127 Lot 150.38 in strict compliance with the plans filed with this application and with conditions set forth in the Certificates of Variance entered October 30, 1991 and August 26, 1992, which are incorporated by reference herein, provided that the applicant comply in all other respects with the Zoning Ordinance and Building Code of the Town of Mamaroneck; and it is FURTHER RESOLVED, that the applicant shall obtain a building permit within one year of the filing of this Resolution with the Town Clerk and, in accordance with Section 89-73 of the Zoning Ordinance, the building permit shall be void if construction is not started within six months and completed within two years of the date of said permit; and it is FURTHER RESOLVED, that this decision be filed with the Town Clerk as provided in Section 267 of the Town Law. APPLICATION NO. 6 - CASE 2052 The Secretary read the application as follows. Application of Mr. and Mrs. Robert Trenchard requesting variances from Sections 89-34 B(3), 89-34 B(2)(a) and 89-34 B(2)(b) to build a rear addition and a deck with a rear yard of 23.0 ft. where 25.0 is required. The deck would have a side yard of 7.55 ft. where 8.0 ft. is required, the addition would have a side yard of 7.8 ft. where 8.0 ft. is required, and the total side yard width is 15.35 ft. where 18.0 ft. is required. Further, the addition would increase the extent by which the building fails to meet such area requirements pursuant to Section 89-57 for a residence in an R-7.5 Zone District on the premises located at 27 Villa Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 111 Lot 99. Mr. Trenchard appeared. He stated that the addition would cause no addition in the height of his house and that it was needed to add a home office for him as well as room for a growing family. Mr. Trenchard had consulted his side neighbors; the rear neighbors are 150 feet away. After review, on motion of Mr. Gunther, seconded by Mr. Simon, the following resolutions were proposed and adopted unanimously. RESOLVED, that the Zoning Board of Appeals is the Lead Agency and solely responsible for determining whether the proposed action may have a significant impact on the environment; Zoning Board of Appeals February 24, 1993 -11- FURTHER RESOLVED, that this is a Type II Action having no significant impact on the environment as determined by New York State or corresponding local law, therefore, requiring no further action under SEQRA. On motion of Mr. Wexler, seconded by Mr. Kelleher, the following resolutions were adopted unanimously. WHEREAS, Mr. and Mrs. Robert Trenchard have submitted an application to the Building Inspector, together with plans to construct a rear addition and deck on the premises located at 27 Villa Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 111 Lot 99; 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 Sections 89-34 B(3), 89-34 B(2)(a), 89-34 B(2)(b) and 89-57; and WHEREAS, Mr. and Mrs. Trenchard submitted an application for variances to this Board for the reasons set forth in such application; and WHEREAS, this Board has 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; WHEREAS, the Board finds that the benefit to the applicant and the special circumstances and/or conditions applying to the land outweighs any detriment to the neighborhood if the variances sought are granted and also finds as follows: 1. The addition provides needed space for a growing family and the applicant's home office. 2. The deck provides for greater use of and easier access to the rear yard, which has difficult topography. 3. Both the deck and the extension as proposed will not extend into the side yard setback any farther than the existing house. 4. The variances requested are small and are the minimum necessary to accomplish the applicants' purpose; they do not cause a significantly different impact on the neighborhood. 5. The house of the rear yard neighbor most effected is represented to be 150 feet away. 6. The granting of these variances are 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. 7. The variances are the minimum to alleviate the difficulty detailed in the application yet also preserves and protects the Zoning Board of Appeals • February 24, 1993 -12- character of the neighborhood and the health, safety and welfare of the community. 8. The strict application of the Zoning Ordinance and the Town Code would deprive the applicants of the reasonable use of the land and/or building, and the variances granted by this Board will enable such reasonable use. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that an application to the Board by Mr. and Mrs. Robert Trenchard for a variance from Sections 89-34 B(3), 89-34 B(2)(a), 89-34 B(2)(b) and 89-57 for a rear addition and deck with a rear yard of 23.0 ft. with side yards of 7.55 ft. and 7.8 ft. and total side yard of 15.35 ft. on the premises located at 27 Villa Road, said premises being known and designated on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 111 Lot 99 be and the same is granted, subject to the following conditions. 1. The applicant shall obtain a building permit within six (6) months of the filing of this Resolution with the Town Clerk and in accordance with Section 89-73 of the Zoning Ordinance. 2. 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. 3. This decision shall be filed with the Town Clerk as provided in Section 267-a(2) of the Town Law. To expedite matters, Mr. Negrin reversed the order of the last two items. APPLICATION NO. 8 - CASE 2054 The Secretary read the application as follows. Application of the Town of Mamaroneck for an extension of the variances granted to construct apartments on the premises located at 1361 Boston Post Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 411 Lot 169. Mr. Jakubowski noted that, if the Board granted an extension, bids for the project will be let April 15th. Mr. Negrin stated that three neighbors requested a condition that no parking be allowed within 500 feet of the proposed apartments. Mr. Gunther noted that such a change would require a public hearing before the Town Board. On motion of Mr. Wexler, seconded by Mr. Kelleher, it was unanimously WHEREAS, The Town of Mamaroneck has submitted a request to the Building Inspector for extension of the period of time for a variance on the premises located at 1361 Boston Post Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 411 Lot 169; and Zoning Board of Appeals February 24, 1993 -13- 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 Sections 89-47.1 C(1)(d), 89-47.1 C(3)(b), 89-67 A and 89-70 C; and WHEREAS, The Town submitted an application for a extension of the variance to this Board on the grounds of practical difficulty and/or unnecessary hardship for the reasons set forth in such application; and WHEREAS, this Board has examined the plans, reviewed the application and has heard all persons interested in this application after publication of a notice thereof; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that this Board finds that there are special circumstances and/or conditions applying to the land for which the variances are sought on the following grounds. 1. The conditions of the application have not changed and are set forth in the prior Certification of variance, entered September 30, 1992, a copy of which is attached and incorporated by reference. 2. Financing for the public project is being arranged, and the Town of Mamaroneck Housing Authority is proceeding to prepare the site for construction. 3. The variances granted are the minimum to alleviate the practical difficulty detailed in the application. 4. The granting of the variances are 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. 5. The strict application of the Zoning Ordinance and Town Code would deprive the applicants of the reasonable use of the land and/or building and that the variances granted by this Board will accomplish this purpose; and it is FURTHER RESOLVED, that variances, which were previously granted by Board Resolution entered on September 30, 1992, is extended and is continued to modify Sections 89-47.1C(1)(d), 89-47.1 C(3)(b), 89-67A and 89-70C of the Zoning Ordinance on the premises located at 1361 Boston Post Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 411 Lot 169 in strict compliance with the plans filed with this application and with conditions set forth in the Certificate of Variance entered September 30, 1992, which are incorporated by reference herein, provided that the applicants comply in all other respects with the Zoning Ordinance and Building Code of the Town of Mamaroneck; and it is FURTHER RESOLVED, that the applicant shall obtain a building permit within one year of the filing of this Resolution with the Town Clerk; and it is Zoning Board of Appeals • February 24, 1993 -14- FURTHER RESOLVED, that this decision be filed with the Town Clerk as provided in Section 267 of the Town Law. APPLICATION NO. 8 - CASE 2053 The Secretary read the application as follows. Application of Frank Aurrichio requesting variances from Sections 89-28.1 B(2), 89-48 through 89-53 inclusive, 89-28.1 A(8), 89-66B, 89-66C and 89-70 C to construct a bus repair and outdoor storage facility where such use is not a permitted one, where the parking must be determined to be reasonable, where the mixed use of the parking area must be approved and where reasonable off-street loading must be provided in a SB Zone District on the premises located at 5 and 633-35 Fifth Avenue and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 132 Lots 609, 175 and 643. Robert Stanziale, architect, appeared on behalf of Mr. Aurrichio and Beechmont Bus Service. He stated that this application is before the Planning Board as well as the Zoning Board. Mr. Stanziale stated that Mr. Aurrichio is giving up his nursery business at 633-35 Fifth Avenue and that Beechmont Bus Service would like to lease the property, blacktop it and store its busses and vans there outside. Beechmont Bus will also use space at 5 Fifth Avenue to maintain the busses and will use that piece of property for egress. An office, with a real estate business on the second floor, will remain at 633-35 Fifth Avenue. Mrs. Rudolph noted that the application was for a use variance and reminded the Board that Mr. Aurrichio must prove that he had been deprived of all economic use of the property, that this use will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood and that the impact is not self-created. She stated that Mr. Aurrichio must submit financial information to this Board. ADJOURNMENT Mr. Negrin adjourned the meeting at 11:08 PM and reopened it at 11:15 PM Appearing in opposition were Sandy Longhi on behalf of her mother, Ann Pittara, 32 Lester Place; Sandra Trapp, 26 Lester Place; Thomas Carino, 35 Lester Place; Thomas McGory and Leah Gugliemo. They were concerned about busses being added to an already heavily-traveled street, about safety on Fifth Avenue particularly because of the curve of Fifth Avenue near Lester Place, the number of cars parking on Fifth Avenue now, the addition of cars from Collins Brothers employees (who had been parking at the site under consideration), and safety on the sidewalk. The four Board members remaining on the Board (Mr. Negrin had resigned) indicated that their minds were not closed but that they required additional information concerning the need for a use variance. Zoning Board of Appeals • February 24, 1993 -15- 411) On motion of Mr. Kelleher, seconded by Mr. Simon, with the consent of the applicant, the matter was adjourned until the March meeting. NEXT MEETING The next meeting of this Board will be March 24, 1993. COMMENDATIONS Councilwoman Elaine Price, on behalf of the Town Board attended the meeting to commend Mr. Negrin upon his resignation from the Board. She praised him for his fairness, intelligence and ability. Mr. Gunther, on behalf of the Board, thanked Mr. Negrin for a job well done. ADJOURNMENT On motion of Mr. Gunther, seconded by Mr. Kelleher, the meeting was adjourned at 12:13 PM. 41) Bonnie M. Burdick