Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1992_01_29 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ZONING BOARD OF THE TOWN OF MAMARONECK JANUARY 29, 1992, IN THE COURT ROOM, TOWN CENTER 740 WEST BOSTON POST ROAD MAMARONECK, NEW YORK Present: Joel Negrin, Chairman Patrick E. Kelleher J. Rene Simon RECEIVED Absent: Thomas E. Gunther APR 2 1992 PATM MA k DOOMM Arthur Wexler TOWN CLERK MAMARONECK N.Y. Also Present: Nancy Rudolph, Counsel William E. Jakubowski, Building Inspector Karen Brideau, Public Stenographer Carbone, Kazazes & Associates 225 Mount Pleasant Avenue Mamaroneck, NY 10543 Bonnie M. Burdick, Recording Secretary CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Chairman Negrin at 8:33 PM. APPLICATION NO. 1 - CASE NO. 1071 The Secretary read the application: Application of Clocktower Associates, 3-5 Byron Place adjourned from December 4, 1991. Howard Lieberman, P.E. appeared on behalf of the applicant and stated that he has been working with the architect, Lawrence Gordon. He stated that Clocktower Associates wants to demolish a derelict house on Byron Place and build a parking lot. Mr. Lieberman had written to Mr. Silverberg requesting that the tests determining the condition of the soil and its percolation rates which were requested by Mr. Trachtman be postponed. He stated that such tests would be difficult to do prior to demolition and that the corporation had a contract of sale pending. Mr. Lieberman agreed to conduct the tests, and suggested that the issuance of a building permit be conditioned on tests satisfactory to the Town Engineer. The applicant had not made Mr. Lieberman's letter available to this Board, and it had neglected to answer this Board's legal question concerning the type of variance requested - use or area. Mr. Negrin asked that the above-mentioned letters be submitted to this January 29, 1992 -2- Board prior to its next meeting, that the question of the type of variance be addressed in writing, prior to that meeting and that an explanation be given for proposing that 2 separate parking lots with the same ownership be built next to each other. He stated that No. C-4 on the Environmental Assessment Form had been answered incorrectly and that the answer should be B-MUB. On motion of Mr. Wexler, seconded by Mr. Simon, with the consent of the applicant, this matter was adjourned to the next meeting of this Board. APPLICATION NO. 2 - CASE 1072 The Secretary read the application: Application of Ms. Linda Caigan, 22 Althea Lane, adjourned from December 4, 1991. Susan Cherbuliez, landscape architect, appeared with Mrs. Caigan. She stated that Mrs. Caigan. She stated that in the approximately 20 years that Mrs. Caigan has lived in the house the noise and traffic has become very bothersome. It is not pleasant to open a window or sit on the terrace. Ms. Cherbuliez stated that the value of the property has been diminished. The fence would be 12 feet high in some places, and would be screened with extensive, fairly tall cedars, ilexes and rhododendron. These plantings will be done irrespective of the result of this application. Mr. Wexler stated that the drawings were incomplete; no topographic information was submitted. He would like to know the elevation of the terrace, particularly its relation to grade and to Weaver Street. Mr. Negrin stated that he could envision a corridor of fences from Scarsdale to the Post Road and questioned the uniqueness of the applicant's situation. It was suggested that Mrs. Caigan install the plants as densely as possible and stake out a proposed fence-plan before bringing this application to a vote. Mrs. Caigan withdrew her application without prejudice. APPLICATION NO. 3 - CASE 1075 The Secretary read the application as follows: January 29, 1992 -3- Application of Mr. and Mrs. P. Paterno, 9 Wagon Wheel Road adjourned from December 4, 1991. Mark Mustacato, architect, appeared on behalf of the application. This Board had requested that he redesign the screened porch and sunroom with. smaller dimensions. Mr. Mustacato stated that the rear setback for the new design is proposed to be increased from 20 feet to 22.5 feet and that the width has been reduced from 35 feet to 21 feet. He stated that certain considerations have been made to adjust the windows and the rafter. The sunroom and screened porch will be unheated, and Mr. Mustacato reminded the Board about Mrs. Paterno's allergy to bee venom. Mr. Negrin noted that the design was about half its original size and that the distance from Doris Lane is nearly 60 feet. The addition is close to one neighbor, but it impacts his garage. Mr. Mustacato noted that said neighbor was in favor of the original design. 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. On motion of Mr. Wexler, seconded by.Mr. Simon, the following resolutions were unanimously adopted. WHEREAS, Mr. and Mrs. P. Paterno have submitted an application to the Building Inspector, together with plans, to construct a rear sunroom on the premises located at 9 Wagon Wheel Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 333 Lot 1480; 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 89-31 B(3); and WHEREAS, Mr. and Mrs. Paterno submitted an application for a 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; January 29, 1992 -4- • • 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. This lot is on a corner. • 2. The lot is- irregularly shaped. - 3. The house is sited obliquely -on the lot. 4: Building an addition would be difficult to accomplish in any other part of the lot. • 5. The proposed addition is considerably smaller than the prior request. This plan has reduced mass and improves the rear • yard and Doris Lane setback. 6. The variance granted is the minimum to alleviate the practical difficulty detailed in the application. 7. 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. 8. 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 is hereby granted and that Section 89-31 B(3)- of the Zoning Ordinance be varied and modified so as to allow a rear sunroom and screened porch with a rear yard setback of 22.5 feet on the premises located at 9 Wagon Wheel Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 333 Lot 1480 in strict compliance with the plans. filed with this application and any conditions set forth in these resolutions, 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 following condition shall attach to the " variance. - The size of the addition shall be no greater in dimension than is shown on the plans dated January 8, 1992. FURTHER RESOLVED, that the applicant shall obtain a building permit within six months 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 January 29, 1992 -5- FURTHER RESOLVED, that this decision be filed with the Town Clerk as provided in Section 267 of the Town Law. APPLICATION NO. 4 - CASE 1077 Application of Carl Carilli requesting a variance from Section 89-35 A-2 to construct a new dwelling with a frontage of 50.1 feet and 50.0 feet width where 60 feet is required for both in an R-6 Zone District on the premises located at 59 West Garden Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 218 Parcel 46. William Widulski, engineer, appeared with the owner of the lot, Carl Carilli. He stated that this application was for an interpretation of the variance. This lot, No. 46, was separately owned at the time of the adoption of the Ordinance, June 1959, and No. , 35 was separately owned from 1952-1960. Carmen VanRavensway purchased Lot 36 with its house in 1959, and in 1961 she purchased Lot 46. Mr. Carilli bought Lot 46 in 1983 with the understanding that it was a separate buildable lot. He stated that he had been told by the Town that the property was buildable and that he had been paying taxes on the unimproved lot. Mr. Widulski stated that the lot has 6500 square feet which, as Mr. Negrin noted, is nearly 10% more than the required 6000 square feet. Mrs. Rudolph stated that according to case law the lots in question would be considered as one lot. Title search would shown one lot. Only for taxing purposes would the property be considered as two lots. Mr. Widulski stated that treating the property as one lot would cause a "confiscation of value of land without due process". A number of neighbors appeared in connection with this application. They were John O'Neil, 32 Fernwood Road; Richard Tortorella, 61 West Garden Road; Avery Gonzalez; Glen Peck 28 Fernwood; Hilary Parkhurst, 81 West Garden; Bernice Munson, 66 West Garden; Harriet Tuck, 76 West Garden; Roy Sundin, 77 West Garden; and Philip Strenger and Sharon Holbert, 62 West Garden. They were concerned about blasting, as there have been problems with sewer work at the Brook in the past, and they believe many of their houses are on the same rock ledge. Also, another house would further congest the neighborhood. Mr. Peck stated that those neighbors who are adjacent to the property in question are interested in buying it. Mr. Wexler stated that the concerns about blasting can be dealt with fairly easily as the type of rock removal would not be similar to blasting rock for trenching. Mr. Negrin requested an opinion from Mrs. Rudolph about the separated-lot question. He also asked for plans of the side and back yards from Mr. Widulski. With the consent of the applicant, on motion of Mr. Wexler, seconded by Mr. Simon, this matter was adjourned to the next meeting. ADJOURNMENT Mr. Negrin temporarily adjourned the meeting at 10:55 PM and reopened it at 11:03 PM. January 29, 1992 -6- APPLICATION NO. 5 - CASE 1078 Application of-M-r. and-.Mrs. Jeffrey Fiddelman-requesting a variance to amend a previously approved plant• construct a rear family room. Said extension would have a side yard of 6.1 ft. where 8.0 ft._ is required pursuant to Section 89-35 B(2)(a) and a rear yard of 20.0- ft. where 25 ft. is required pursuant to Section 89-35 B(3). Further, the addition increases the extent by which the structure is nonconforming pursuant to Section 89-57 for a residence in an _R-6 Zone District on the premises located at 24 Home Avenue and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 120 Lot 73. John Peron, attorney, appeared with Howard Raabe, architect. He stated that the applicants had decided that the planned extension was not large enough to meet the family's needs - their furniture did not fit. the request is for five additional feet. Mr. Perone stated that the Fiddelman's neighbors do no object. There is a high fence in place on one side; the addition will be well screened. 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 On motion of Mr. Wexler, seconded by Mr. Simon, the following resolutions were unanimously adopted. WHEREAS, Mr. and Mrs. Jeffrey Fiddelman have submitted an application to the Building Inspector, together with plans, to amend a previously approved plan on the premises located at 24 Homer Avenue and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 120 Lot 73; 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 89-35 B(2)(1), 89-35 B(3) and 89-57; and WHEREAS, Mr. and Mrs. Fiddelman submitted an application for a 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; January 29, 1992 -7- 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. This addition will be no closer to the property line than the previously approved addition. 2. The house, with its addition, is similar to the other houses in the neighborhood. 3. The variance granted is the minimum to alleviate the practical difficulty detailed in the application. 4. 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. 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 variance granted by this Board will accomplish this purpose; and it is FURTHER RESOLVED, that a variance is hereby granted and that Section 89-35 B(2)(a), 89-35 B(3) and 89-57 of the Zoning Ordinance be varied and modified so as to allow a side yard of 6.1 feet and a rear yard of 20.0 on the premises located at 24 Homer Avenue and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 129 Lot 73 in strict compliance with the plans filed with this application and any conditions set forth in these resolutions, 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 six months 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 1079 Application of Mr. A. Soghomonian requesting a variance to construct a rear kitchen addition which would have a side yard of 6.7 ft. where 8.0 ft. is required and a total side yard of 13.2 ft. where 18.0 ft. is required both pursuant to Section 35 B(2) (a&b). Further, the addition increases the extent by which the structure is non-conforming pursuant to January 29, 1992 -8- Section 89-5 for a residence in the R-6 Zone District on the premises located at 114 Harmon Drive and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the town of Mamaroneck as Block 215 Lot 143. Mr. Soghomonian appeared on behalf of the application. He stated that his family needed a larger kitchen. Mr. Negrin noted that the extension would be no closer to the rear or side lot line than other parts of the house. He also noted that the extension is less than 7 square feet. 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. On motion of Mr. Simon, seconded by Mr. Wexler, the following resolutions were unanimously adopted. WHEREAS, Mr. A. Soghomonian has submitted an application to the Building Inspector, together with plans, to construct a rear kitchen addition on the premises located at 114 Harmon Drive and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 215 Lot 143; 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 35 B(2)(a&b) and 89-57; and WHEREAS, Mr. Soghomonian submitted an application for a 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 variance is sought on the following grounds. 1. This addition is no closer to the property lines than the rest of the house. 2. This addition makes the house similar to other houses in the neighborhood. January 29, 1992 -9- 3. This addition brings the house more into conformance with the Zoning Code. 4. The variance granted is the minimum to alleviate the practical difficulty detailed in the application. 5. 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. 6. 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 is hereby granted and that Sections 89-35 B(2)(a&b) and 89-57 of the Zoning Ordinance be varied and modified so as to allow a rear kitchen addition with a side yard of 6.7 feet and a total side yard of 13.2 feet on the premises located at 114 Harmon Drive and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 215 Lot 143 in strict compliance with the plans filed with this application and any conditions set forth in these resolutions, 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 six months 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. 7 - CASE 1081 The Secretary read the application as follows. Application of Dr. and Mrs. J. Schwartzman requesting a variance to replace a pergola in the northeastern area of the lot which would have a front yard of 9.8 ft. where 30.0 ft. is required pursuant to Section 89-34 B(1). Further, an accessory structure is required to be located in the rear one-third of the lot, 70.0 ft. set back from a front property line, pursuant to Section 89-34 B(3)(b) in an R-7.5 Zone District, on the premises located at 145 North Chatsworth Avenue and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 114 Lot 168. Dr. and Mrs. Schwartzman appeared on behalf of the application. their pergola had blown down in a hurricane leaving an unattractive concrete slab. The slab has become an attractive nuisance for children. The January 29, 1992 -10- Schwartzmans submitted petitions from their neighbors favoring the application. 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. On motion of Mr. Wexler, seconded by Mr. Simon, the following resolutions were unanimously adopted. WHEREAS, Dr. and Mrs. J. Schwartzman have submitted an application to the Building Inspector, together with plans, to replace a pergola on the premises located at 145 North Chatsworth Avenue and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 114 Lot 168; 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(1) and 29-34 B(3)(b); and WHEREAS, Dr. and Mrs. Schwartzman submitted an application for a 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 variance is sought on the following grounds. 1. This lot is irregularly shaped. 2. The rock outcroppings in the yard make passive use difficult. 3. The lot is burdened by two nonconforming front yards. 4. The pergola proposed is as it had existed. 5. The structure was destroyed by natural forces. January 29, 1992 -11- 6. Because of the open quality of the pergola, there is no sense of mass. 7. The neighbors have agreed that the proposed structure is not inconsistent with the surrounding houses. 8. The variance granted is the minimum to alleviate the practical difficulty detailed in the application. 9. 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. 10. 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 is hereby granted and that Section 89-34 B(1) and 89-34 B (3)(b) of the Zoning Ordinance be varied and modified so as to allow a replacement pergola with an .8 foot front yard placed on the front yard on the premises located at 145 North Chatsworth and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 114 Lot 168 in strict compliance with the plans filed with this application and any conditions set forth in these resolutions, 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 six months 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. 8 - CASE 1082 Application of Ms. Joesette Nelson requesting a variance to construct two bay windows which would have a 33.9 front yard setback where 38.0 ft. is allowed and which would have a total width of 16.0 ft. which exceeds one-fourth of the 48.0 ft. wall. Both requirements are pursuant to Section 89-44 B; and, further, the extension will increase the extent by which the building is nonconforming pursuant to Section 89-56 for a residence in an R-15 Zone District on the premises located at 1 Country Lane and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 320 Lot 46. January 29, 1992 -12- Dr. Nelson appeared on behalf of the application. The Nelsons need more light in their common living areas, as there is a second floor overhang at the front of the house. This overhang causes the nonconformity and makes the bay windows less obtrusive. 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. On motion of Mr. Simon, seconded by Mr. Wexler, the following resolutions were unanimously adopted. WHEREAS, Joesette Nelson has submitted an application to the Building Inspector, together with plans, to construct two bay windows on the premises located at 1 Country Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 320 Lot 46; 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 89-44 B and 89-56; and WHEREAS, Ms Nelson submitted an application for a 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 variance is sought on the following grounds. 1. The encroachment into the front yard is very slight. 2. Bay windows make a minor intrusion. 3. The cantilevered second floor causes these windows to be less obtrusive. 4. The variance granted is the minimum to alleviate the practical difficulty detailed in the application. 0 Pace Hiss 'Ing