Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1992_10_28 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes :1 ) MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ZONING BOARD OF THE TOWN OF MAMARONECK OCTOBER 28, 1992, IN THE COURTROOM, TOWN CENTER • 740 WEST BOSTON POST ROAD MAMARONECK, NEW YORK h Rt &iv& Present. Joel Negrin, Chairman Pill/e1,� Thomas E. Gunther p CA`��QCC/U Patrick E. Kelleher N4'FCY Arthur Wexler Absent: J. Rene Simon Also Present: Nancy Rudolph, Counsel Michelle Bonsteel, Assistant Building Inspector, Karen Brideau, 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 8:18 PM. He explained that, in Mr. Simon's absence, any vote needed three of the four members agreeing . The Secretary read the application as follows. APPLICATION NO. 1 - CASE 2023 Application of C.J. Renson, requesting a variance from Section 89-44 A to maintain a patio 1.7 ft. from the property line, from Section 89-44 D to maintain a six-ft. fence (four ft. permitted) and from Section 89-3 to maintain an off-street parking space 9 ft. by 15 ft. (9 ft. by 20 ft. required) for a residence in an R-A Zone District on premises located at 1088 Palmer Avenue and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 407 Lot 1. Mr. Renson appeared. He stated that his property was on a narrow piece of land in Elkan Park bordering the Central School. Several years ago, he had received permission from the School District to construct a six-foot fence along the school's access road. Mr. Renson then constructed the fence on which he now requests a variance. This fence aligns with the school's fence and is necessary for privacy since the neighboring houses are above grade. The patio, parking space and fence were built 5 years ago. Seventeen neighbors have signed a favorable petition for the patio, and Mr. Renson submitted pictures of the shrubbery which screens the fence. The parking space is smaller than required but abuts a porch easement, © creating additional paved area. On motion of Mr. Wexler, seconded by Mr. Gunther, the following resolution was 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 October 28, 1992 -2- 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 with a 3-1 vote, Mr. Gunther opposed. WHEREAS, C. J. Renson has submitted an application to the Building Inspector, together with plans, to maintain a patio, a six-foot fence and a 9 ft. by 15 ft. off-street parking space on the premises located at 1088 Palmer Avenue and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 407 Lot 1; 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 A, 89-44 D, 89-3; and WHEREAS, Mr. Renson 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 subject fence aligns visually with another side yard six-foot fence, which is two to three feet beyond the property line. 2. The fence affords privacy to a small lot and creates a desirable environment adjacent to a school property. 3. The fence is attractive and is well screened with shrubbery. 4. There is no detriment to the neighbors from this interior six-foot fence. 5. The parking area adjoins another paved, easement area. Should the parking area be required to be brought up to code, more paving would be required. Zoning Board of Appeals October 28, 1992 -3- 6. Less paved area, in this case, is more desirable. . 7. The patio is adjacent to the school yard and another fence. 8. The patio is on grade which causes less impact. 9. The patio allows the applicant to enjoy his back yard. 10. 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. 11. 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. 12. 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 C. J. Renson for variances from Sections 89-44 A, 89-44 D and 89-3 so as to allow to remain a patio 1.7 ft. from the property line, a six-foot fence and an off-street parking space 9 feet by 15 feet on the premises located at 1088 Palmer Avenue, said premises being known and designated on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 407 Lot 1 be and the same is granted, subject to the following conditions. 1. A finished side of the fence shall face toward the neighbor. 2. 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. 3. 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. 4. This decision shall be filed with the Town Clerk as provided in Section 267-a(2) of the Town Law. Zoning Board of Appeals October 28, 1992 -4- APPLICATION NO. 2 - CASE 2024 The Secretary read the application as follows. Application of Robert F. Presto requesting a variance from Section 89-35 B(3) to maintain a rear deck with a rear yard of 22.1 ft. where 25.0 ft. is required for a residence in an R-6 Zone District on the premises located at 130 Laurel Avenue and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 124 Lot 284. Robert Presto appeared. He stated that he had misbuilt his deck by about four feet, inadvertently. His rear yard faces 25-foot-high sound barriers constructed by the New York State Thruway. Mr. Presto felt that no neighbor is impacted by this encroachment. After review, on motion of Mr. Gunther, seconded by Mr. Wexler, the following resolution was 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. On motion of Mr. Kelleher, seconded by Mr. Gunther, the following resolutions were unanimously adopted. WHEREAS, Robert F. Presto has submitted an application to the Building Inspector, together with plans, to maintain a rear deck on the premises located at 130 Laurel Avenue and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 124 Lot 284; 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(3); and WHEREAS, Mr. Presto 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 outweigh any detriment to the neighborhood if the variances sought are granted and also finds as follows: 1. The variance applies to only a few square feet of the deck. Zoning Board of Appeals October 28, 1992 -5- 2. Eleven feet from the property line is a twenty-five-foot-high sound barrier bordering the New York State Thruway and the New Haven Railroad. 3. The deck allows the applicant to make better use of his back yard. 4. It would be an undue and unnecessary expense to the applicant to reconstruct the deck to make it conform. 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 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. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that an application to the Board by Robert F. Presto for a variance from Section 89-35 B(3) so as to allow to remain a wood deck with a rear yard of 22.1 feet on the premises located at 130 Laurel Avenue, said premises being known and designated on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 124 Lot 284 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. AAAA APPLICATION NO. 3 - CASE 2025 This is the application which will be heard in November. Two gentlemen, Paul Sciacca of 69 Edgewood Avenue and David Birch of 67 Edgewood Avenue made statements about the application. Mr. Sciacca stated that his house, an 1857 carriage house, is only 2 feet away from the rear property line of the subject application and that the site is very small. He was also concerned about the quality Zoning Board of Appeals October 28, 1992 -6- of the environment Mr. Birch was concerned about a decrease of light and air with an additional house. APPLICATION NO. 4 - CASE 2026 The Secretary read the application as follows. Application of Mr. and Mrs. Robert R. Thomma requesting a Certificate of Occupancy for an existing shed. The shed was determined, after survey, to have a side yard of 0.8 ft. where 2.12 ft. was previously granted pursuant to a variance granted 10/24/90 and pursuant to Section 89-34 B(3)(b) where 5.0 ft. is required for an accessory building in an R-7.5 Residence Zone District on the premises located at 1122 Palmer Avenue and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 406 Lot 319. Mr. Thomma appeared. He stated that a variance had been granted for the shed, but that when a new survey was made the mistake in placement was realized. Mr. Thomma stated that the garage on the neighboring property is 4 to 4Z feet away from his shed and that to move his shed would cause considerable difficulty as it weights 800 pounds. His shed is also located near another shed in a neighbor's yard. On motion of Mr. Wexler, seconded by Mr. Gunther, 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. Kelleher, seconded by Mr. Negrin, a resolution approving the application was proposed but on a two-to-two vote with Mr. Gunther and Mr. Wexler opposing failded to be carried. Mr. Negrin advised that Mr. Thomma could resubmit his application at the next meeting. AAAAA APPLICATION NO. 5 - CASE 2027 The Secretary read the application as follows. Application of Mr. and Mrs. Walter Levy requesting a variance from Section 89-33 B(2)(b) to construct a previously approved bath (said variance having expired) with a total side yard of 17.48 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-10 Zone District on the premises located at 35 Zoning Board of Appeals October 28, 1992 -7- Ellsworth Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 212 Lot 63. Mrs. Levy appeared. She stated that she had been unable to find a builder at the time of her variance and requested another one so that she could now get on with building the bathroom. After review, on motion of Mr. Gunther, seconded by Mr. Wexler, the following resolution was 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. On motion of Mr. Wexler, seconded by Mr. Gunther, the following resolutions were unanimously adopted. WHEREAS, Mr. and Mrs. Levy have submitted an application to the Building Inspector, together with plans, to construct a bath on the premises located at 35 Ellsworth Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 212 Lot 63; 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(2)b and 89-57; and WHEREAS, Mr. and Mrs. Levy 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 outweigh any detriment to the neighborhood if the variances sought are granted and also finds as follows: 1. The circumstances have not changed since earlier variances for the same plans were approved by the Board on November 28. 1990. 2. The applicant stated that more time was necessary to complete the construction; the earlier variance had therefore elapsed. 3. The addition is designed to be unobtrusive from the front and is hardly visible from the side. Zoning Board of Appeals October 28, 1992 -8- 4. The construction fulfills a family need. 5. 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. 6. 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. 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 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. Walter Levy for variances from Sections 89-33 B(2)(b) and 89-57 so as to construct a bath with a total side yard of 17.48 feet on the premises located at 35 Ellsworth Road, said premises being known and designated on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 212 Lot 63 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. AAAAA APPLICATION NO. 6 - CASE 2028 Application of Dr. and Mrs. David Benford requesting a variance from Section 89-67 B to maintain a doctor's professional office in a residence with five (5) off-street parking spaces. Three (3) of the spaces would be partly within twenty-five (25' ) ft. of a front lot line for a residence in a R-30 Zone District on the premises located at 45 Hommocks Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 414 Lot 262. James Fleming, architect, appeared with Mrs. Benford. He stated that the Benfords had been in their house for 27 years and understood the parking spaces were legal. The Benfords are in the process of selling their house, which is across from the Hampshire Country Club and near the back Zoning Board of Appeals October 28, 1992 -9- of the Hommocks School. Mr. Fleming noted that the property is well screened and that parking behind the house would have more impact on the neighbors. After review, on motion of Mr. Wexler, seconded by Mr. Gunther, the following resolution was 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. On motion of Mr. Gunther, seconded by Mr. Wexler, the following resolutions were unanimously adopted. WHEREAS, Dr. and Mrs. Benford have submitted an application to the Building Inspector, together with plans, to maintain a doctor's professional office in a residence with five (5) off-street parking spaces on the premises located at 45 Hommocks Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 414 Lot 262; 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, Dr. and Mrs. Benford 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 outweigh any detriment to the neighborhood if the variances sought are granted and also finds as follows: 1. The applicant could maintain parking spaces in other locations on the front and side yards of the lot which would be less desirable; i.e. , more visible from the street and from neighboring lots 2. This location for parking is partly screened and better screened than the alternatives. 3. The office with these off-street parking spaces has been in place for 27 years. Zoning Board of Appeals October 28, 1992 -10- 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 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. 6. 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 Dr. and Mrs. David Benford for a variance from Section 89-67 B so as to maintain a doctor's professional office in a residence with five (5) off-street parking spaces with three (3) spaces partly within twenty-five (25' ) feet of a front lot line on the premises located at 45 Hommocks Road, said premises being known and designated on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 414 Lot 262 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. AAAAA APPLICATION NO. 7 - CASE 2028 The Secretary read the application as follows. Application of Donald Beniamino requesting a variance from Section 89-34 B(2)(a) to reconstruct a porch with a side yard of 6.40 ft. where 10.0 ft. is required and to construct an addition to the second floor with a side yard of 6.53 ft. where 10.0 ft. is required. Further the addition and porch fail to meet such area requirements pursuant to Section 89-57 for a residence in an R-10 Zone District on the premises located at 2 Boulder Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 110 Lot 499. Michael Gismondi, the architect, appeared with Mr. and Mrs. Beniamino He stated that the footprint will not be expanded, and the second floor will Zoning Board of Appeals October 28, 1992 -11- have a dormer opened up which will increase the headroom by forty-four square feet. Seymour Katzman, 662 Forest Avenue, appeared. He stated that his backyard abuts the applicant's side yard and back yard and that he found the second-story addition a daunting proposal. The Beniaminos and Mr. Katzman agreed to a three-foot, six-inch high, opaque railing for the second floor porch to provide privacy for both families. Mr. Katzman was satisfied by this amendment to the plans. After review, on motion of Mr. Wexler, seconded by Mr. Gunther, the following resolution was 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. On motion of Mr. Kelleher, seconded by Mr. Wexler, the following resolutions were unanimously adopted. WHEREAS, Donald Beniamino has submitted an application to the Building Inspector, together with plans, to reconstruct a porch and construct an addition to the second floor on the premises located at 2 Boulder Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 110 Lot 449; 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) and 89-57; and WHEREAS, Mr. Beniamino 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 outweigh any detriment to the neighborhood if the variances sought are granted and also finds as follows: 1. There is no increase to the footprint of the house. 2. The first-floor porch, when enclosed, will remain unheated. 3. Raising the roof in the bedroom will not create any additional floor space. It will improve the headroom above approximately 44 square feet of floor area. PUBLIC NOTICE PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the Town of Mamaroneck Planning Board will hold Public Hearings, pursuant to Local Law #7-1986, and Local Law #3 - 1984 on December 9, 1992 at 8:15 PM in the Senior Center, 740 West Boston Post Road, Mamaroneck, NY, on the application of the Winged Foot Golf Club for a Fresh Water Wetlands and Water Courses Permit and Site Plan approval for the renovation of and addition to a service building on the premises located on Fenimore Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 344 Lot 9. TAKE FURTHER NOTICE that all persons present will be given an opportunity to be heard. Plans are on file in the Building Department of the Town of Mamaroneck at 740 West Boston Post Road and may be inspected during regular business hours. BY ORDER OF THE TOWN OF MAMARONECK PLANNING BOARD SANFORD A. BELL, CHAIRMAN Zoning Board of Appeals October 28, 1992 -12- 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 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. 6. 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 Donald Beniamino for variances from Sections 89-34 B(2)(a) and 89-57 so as to reconstruct a porch with a side yard of 6.40 feet and to construct a second floor addition with a side yard of 6.53 feet on the premises located at 2 Boulder Road, said premises being known and designated on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 110 Lot 499 be and the same is granted, subject to the following conditions. 1. On the second-floor porch, a 3-foot, 6-inch railing shall be constructed and maintained of an opaque material. 2. The light on the second-floor porch shall be placed perpendicular to the door wall and shall be directed down and not toward any neighbor's property. 3. 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. 4. 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. 5. This decision shall be filed with the Town Clerk as provided in Section 267-a(2) of the Town Law. APPLICATION NO. 8 - CASE 2030 The Secretary read the application as follows. Application of Mr. and Mrs. Joseph Gorman requesting a variance from Section 89-44 D to construct a ten-ft. fence (four ft. permitted) in an R-7.5 Zone District on the premises located at 15 Wildwood Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 116 Lot 402. Zoning Board of Appeals October 28, 1992 -13- He stated that after remodeling and landscaping his house he sought privacy and that he found the neighbor's garage to be unsightly. The proposal was for a ten-foot-high fence along the fourteen foot wall of the garage and a six-foot fence along the driveway. Mr. Gorman claimed that these neighbors were harassing him. ADJOURNMENT Mr. Negrin adjourned the meeting at 10:15 PM so that the Board members could inspect the documents submitted and reopened it at 10:22 PM. Mr. Gorman claimed that the survey of his neighbor, Mr. McLinden, was incorrect and stated that the McLinden garage is two and one-half feet from the property line. Mr. Negrin told Mr. Gorman that the Board is loath to grant a six-foot fence, and Mr. Wexler stated that the garage had a clean stucco wall. Mr. Kelleher suggested that the Gormans could plant evergreens and put a four-foot fence wall inside the shrubbery to contain their dog. Mr. Negrin read a letter against this proposal from John Ibelli of 15 Wildwood Road which mentioned a concern about precedents. After review, on motion of Mr. Wexler, seconded by Mr. Kelleher, the following resolution was 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. On motion of Mr. Wexler, seconded by Mr. Kelleher, the following resolutions were unanimously adopted. WHEREAS, Mr. and Mrs. Joseph Gorman have submitted an application to the Building Inspector, together with plans, to construct a ten-foot high (four-feet height maximum permitted) fence; 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 89-44 B on the premises located at 14 Wildwood Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 116 Lot 402; and WHEREAS, Mr. and Mrs. Gorman 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; Zoning Board of Appeals October 28, 1992 -14- WHEREAS the Board finds that the detriment to the health, safety and/or welfare of the neighborhood or community would outweigh the benefit to the applicant if the variance sought were to be granted and finds as follows: 1. There are ways to solve the problem in a far more sensitive manner. A four-foot fence can contain the dog, and plantings of sufficient height to give privacy and soften the view of the garage wall can be installed. 2. Neither a ten-foot fence, not the six-foot section, is the minimum to alleviate the difficulty. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that this Board hereby denies the application AND, IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED, that this decision, be filed with the Town Clerk as provided in Section 267 of the Town Law. ADJOURNMENT On motion of Mr. Kelleher, seconded by Mr. Gunther, the meeting was adjourned at 10:40 PM. Bonnie M. Burdick