Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1994_10_28 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes ik-r. s At, 81* yn�j 4p ,�p K7 r MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE jkx ' ZONING BOARD OF THE TOWN OF MAMARONECK OCTOBER 28, 1994, IN THE COURT ROOM, TOWN CENTER 4 740 WEST BOSTCN POST ROAD '—Y MAMARONECK, NEW YORK Present: Thomas E. Gunther, Chairman Patrick J. Kelleher Nina Recio J. Rene Simon Arthur Wexler Also Present: Valerie Moore O'Keeffe, Town Councilwoman John Kirkpatrick, Counsel William E. Jakubowski, Building Inspector Lisa Parilla, Public Stenographer Kazazes & Associates 250 East Hartsdale Avenue Hartsdale, NY 10530 Bonnie M. Burdick, Recording Secretary CAI , TO ORDER Ce The meeting was called to order by Chairman Gunther at 7:30 PM. He announced that the first two matters had been adjourned again. APPLICATION NO. 3 - CASE 2133 The Secretary read the application as follows. Application of Ed and Betty Scanlon requesting variances from Section 89-34 B(2) (a) to construct a second-floor addition with a side yard of 3.0 ft. where 10.0 ft. is required and from Section 89-57 to increase the extent by which the building fails to meet such area requirements for a residence in an R-7.5 Zone District on the premises located at 12 Maplewood Street and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 118 Lot 359. Mr. and Mrs. Scanlon appeared with their architect, Chris Powell. They stated that they wanted to extend the master bedroom over the kitchen. The windows will be installed to match those on the other side of the house. Mr. Powell said that they were appropriate for an "arts and crafts" house like this one. Mrs. Scanlon submitted favorable letters from their neighbors. After review, on motion of Mr. Wexler, seconded by Ms. Recio 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; and it is Zoning Board of Appeals October 26, 1994 -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. Kelleher, seconded by Mr. Simon, the following resolution was ADOPTED unanimously. WHEREAS, Ed and Betty Scanlon have submitted an application to the Building Inspector, together with plans to construct a second-story addition on the premises located at 12 Maplewood Street and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 118 Lot 359; 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. and Mrs. Scanlon 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 proposed addition does not increase the footprint of the existing structure. 2. There is no further encroachment of the side lot line. 3. 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 October 26, 1994 -3- 4. 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. 5. 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 Ed and Betty Scanlon for variances from Sections 89-34 B(2) (a) and 89-57 for a side yard of 3.0 feet located at 12 Maplewood street, said premises being known and designated on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 118 Lot 359 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. ***** Ned Stowell, architect, appeared with the proposed planting scheme for 7 Meadow Place. Seven 4'6" arbor vitae, planted 3 foot on center was the suggestion. On motion of Ms. Recio, seconded by Mr. Kelleher, the landscape plan for Case 2130 was accepted and approved unanimously. ***** APPLICATION NO. 4 - CASE 2134 The Secretary read the application as follows. Application of Richard Hoyt and Milagros Sanchez-Hoyt requesting a reinstatement of a variance entered June 27, 1991 from Section 89-44 A to issue a Certificate of Occupancy to maintain a brick, paved terrace with a wall 0.96 ft. from the rear property line and 4.92 ft. from the side property line where 5.0 ft. is required for a residence in an R-6 Zone Zoning Board of Appeals October 26, 1994 -4- District on the premises located at 9 Dante Street and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 122 Lot 626. Mr. Hoyt appeared. He stated that he had neglected to file for a Building Permit after this Board had granted a variance in 1991 for a terrace which was incorrectly built in 1983. On motion of Mr. Gunther, seconded by Mr. Simon, the following resolution was ADOYrtD unanimously. WHEREAS, Richard Hoyt and Milagros Sanchez-Hoyt have submitted a request to the Building Inspector for a reinstatement of the variance entered June 27, 1991 for a Certificate of Occupancy for a terrace with wall on the premises located at 9 Dante Street and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 122 Lot 626; and WHEREAS, the Building Inspector has declined to issue such reinstatement on the grounds that he lacks authority to do so; and WHEREAS, Mr. and Mrs. Hoyt submitted an application for a reinstatement to this Board for the reasons set forth in such application; and WHETS, this Board has examined the plans, 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 reinstated and also finds as follows. 1. The variance requested - 1.04 feet from the back property line and .8 feet from the side property line - is of a de minimis nature in comparison to the variance granted in 1983. 2. There is a minimal portion of the terrace out of compliance with the original variance as the terrace is placed on the diagonal with respect to the property. 3. The applicant sited the terrace in good faith at the time of construction. 4. The granting of the Certificate 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 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. Zoning Board of Appeals October 26, 1994 -5- 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 the Certificate granted by this Board will accomplish this purpose; and it is NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the reinstatement, which was previously granted by Board Resolution entered on Jane 27, 1991, is continued to modify Section 89-44A of the Zoning Ordinance on the premises located at 9 Dante Street, said premises being known and designated on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 122 Lot 626 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; and it is 3. This decision be filed with the Town Clerk as provided in Section 267-a(2) of the Town Law. ***** APPLICATION NO. 5 - CASE 2135 The Secretary read the application as follows. Application of Edward and Jean VanValen requesting variances from Section 89-34 B(3) to maintain an addition converted from a greenhouse which is not in strict compliance with plans on file and with a rear yard of 16 ft. 62 in. where 25.0 ft. is required and from Section 89-57 to increase the extent by which the building fails to meet such area requirements in an R-7.5 Zone District on the premises located at 20 Hillside Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map as Block 128 Lot 162. Mr. Gunther and Ms. Recio stated that they were social friends of the VanValens but that the friendship would not bias their judgement. Mrs. VanValen stated that when they bought this house the greenhouse structure was in place and had been built with proper permits by a former owner. The windows were single paned, and the applicants found the room to be extremely cold and impractical. Without benefit of permits, the VanValens had installed structural headers, new doors and a new floor. After review, on motion of Mr. Gunther, seconded by Ms. Recio, 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 October 26, 1994 -6- 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 Ms. Recio, the following resolutions were ADOPTED unanimously. Wes, Edward and Jean VanValen have submitted an application to the Building Inspector, together with plans to maintain an addition converted from a greenhouse on the premises located at 20 Hillside Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 128 Lot 162; and Wes, 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) and 89-57; and WHEREAS, Mr. and Mrs. VanValen 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 change to the structure lessens its impact on the neighborhood and the community. 2. This addition is no closer to the rear lot line than the previous one. 3. 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. 4. 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. 5. The strict application of the Zoning Ordinance and the Town Code would deprive the applicants of the reasonable use of the land and/or buiq, and the variances granted by this Board will enable such reasonable use. Zoning Board of Appeals October 26, 1994 -7- NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that an application to the Board by Edward and Jean VanValen for variances from Section 89-34 B(3) and 89-57 for an addition with a 16 foot 62 inch rear yard located at 20 Hillside Road, said premises being known and designated on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 128 Lot 162 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. 7 - CASE 2137 The Secretary read the application as follows. Application of John Eckes and Penny Rosenberg requesting variances from Section 89-35 B(2) (a) and 89-35 B(2) (b) to construct a side addition with a side yard of 4.45 ft. where 8.0 ft. is required and a total side yard of 15.95 ft. where 18.0 ft. is required. Further, the addition increases the extent by which the building fails to meet such area requirements pursuant to Section 89-57, and a variance is requested fran Section 89-67 B for the required off-street parking space which would be 11.27 ft. fran the front lot line where 25.0 ft. is required for a residence in an R-6 Zone District on the premises located at 60 Hillcrest Avenue and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 123 Lot 423. Mr. Eckes and Ms. Rosenberg appeared with their builder, John Weiss. Mr. Eckes stated that the couple had looked at many houses and had determined that the best thing to do was to demolish their garage and add an extension to their existing house. The applicants submitted letters favorable to their plans, and Joan Clark of 57 Hillcrest and Joanne Reis of 53 Hillcrest appeared on behalf of the application. Mr. Eckes and Ms. Rosenberg felt that their garage is out of scale and is very small for current cars. They stated that two cars would fit the proposed off-street parking space. Mr. Eckes stated that the changes are comparable to other renovations on other buildings on the street. Mr. Weiss stated that other plans had been considered but that the one submitted was the most cost effective. Zoning Board of Appeals October 26, 1994 -8- Ms. Recio stated that she had a real problem with eliminating a garage, and Mr. Wexler stated that a lot of building was proposed for a little lot. Mr. Simon and Ms. Recio agreed. Mr. Wexler proposed moving the addition back so that it was 30 feet fran the property line. In response to comments about possible ownership of more cars in the future, Mr. Kirkpatrick explained to the applicants that a variance runs with the land not the applicants. Mr. Wexler stated that there were other solutions for this problem and that the applicants could solve it and still meet their goals. On motion of Mr. Wexler, seconded by Ms. Recio, 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. Mr. Gunther polled the Board. Mr. Kelleher and Mr. Simon favored the application; Ms. Recio and Mr. Wexler were opposed to it. Mr. Gunther stated that he was currently opposed but that he could favor the application if the roam was stepped back by 2 to 3 feet. On motion of Mr. Gunther, seconded by Mr. Simon, Case 2137 was adjourned to the next meeting. NEXT MEETING Because of Thanksgiving, the next meeting was scheduled for Tuesday, November 22, 1994 at 7:45. APPLICATION NO. 6 - CASE 2136 The Secretary read the application as follows. Application of Mary Ann Lamonaco requesting a variance from Section 89-44 D to construct a 5.0-ft. fence where 4.0 ft. is the maximum permitted for a residence in an R-10 Zone District on the premises located at 36 Stoneyside Drive and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 212 Lot 431. Mrs. Lomonaco appeared and explained that her fence was falling down. Her property is triangular - about 16 feet at the back - as are her neighbors', and the adjacent properties intersect at the back. She had spoken to her neighbors who were in favor of a new fence. Zoning Board of Appeals October 26, 1994 -9- After review, on motion of Mr. Gunther, seconded by Ms. Recio, 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; 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. Gunther seconded by Mr. Kelleher, the following resolutions were ADOYrwu unanimously. WHEREAS, Mary Ann Loanonaco has submitted an application to the Building Inspector, together with plans to construct a 5-foot fence on the premises located at 36 Stoneyside Drive and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 212 Lot 431; 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 D; and WHEREAS, Mrs. Lamonaco 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; and WHEREAS, the Board finds that the benefit to the applicant and the special circumstances and/or conditions applying to the land far outweighs any detriment to the neighborhood if the variance sought is granted and also finds as follows: 1. It appears that this house is on a grade 10 feet below the adjacent property. 2. The fence is 80 feet from the street and is relatively unobtrusive. 3. 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. 4. 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. Zoning Board of Appeals October 26, 1994 -10- 5. The strict application of the Zoning Ordinance and the Town Code would deprive the applicants of the reasonable use of the land/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 Mary Ann Lomonaco for a variance from Section 89-44 B for a 5.0-foot fence located at 36 Stoneyside Drive, said premises being known and designated on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 212 Lot 431 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 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. 9 - CASE 2139 The Secretary read the application as follows. Application of Terrence P. O'Keefe requesting variances frc*u Sections 89-34 B(1) and 89-34 B(2) (a) to construct a 2-story addition with a front yard of 22.0 ft. where 30.0 ft. is required and a side yard of 3.9 ft. where 10.0 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 82 Murray Avenue and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 126 Lot 1. Greg McWilliams, architect, appeared with Mr. and Mrs. O'Keefe. They proposed adding a 11,000 square foot addition with an eat-in kitchen and bedroom and bathroom upstairs. The front enclosure is being opened and reverted to its original open porch which will also wrap around one side of the house. The O'Keefes had filed an alternate kitchen plan which angles off from the building at 45°. They stated that this plan was their preferred one, but Mr.Wexler had questions about the roof design. He felt that the open porch enhanced the house immensely. The Building Inspector and Ms. Recio were concerned about the dilapidated buildings in the side yard and that the new driveway will harm the lovely, large oak tree. Zoning Board of Appeals October 26, 1994 -11- 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; 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. Simon, the following resolution was ADOYrED by a vote of 4 - 1, Mr. Wexler opposed. WfEREAS, Terence P. O'Keefe has submitted an application to the Building Inspector, together with plans to construct a two-story addition on the premises located at 82 Murray Avenue and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 126 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 89-34 B(1) , 89-34 B(2) (a) and 89-57; and WHEREAS, Mr. O'Keefe 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 proposed addition is a betterment to the structure and the neighborhood; the design is attractive. 2. The house is burdened by two front yards. 3. The side yard, at its closest point, is currently 3.9 feet. 4. 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. Zoning Board of Appeals October 26, 1994 -12- 5. 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. 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 Terence P. O'Keefe for variances from Sections 89-34 B(1), 89-34 B(2) (a) and 89-57 for a front yard of 22.0 feet and a side yard of 3.9 feet located at 82 Murray Avenue, said premises being known and designated on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 126 Lot 1 be and the same is granted, subject to the following conditions. 1. When constructing the new driveway, the large oak tree shall be preserved. 2. The large shed facing Edgewood Avenue shall be taken down prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. 3. The Building Permit shall be issued for the set of plans presented as an alternate first floor plan and with the second floor as originally presented. The applicant shall present a complete plan for the revised proposal prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy. If the addition is not built as approved by the Zoning Board, this Board will look highly unfavorably upon an application for a variance. 4. 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. 5. 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. 6. This decision shall be filed with the Town Clerk as provided in Section 267-a(2) of the Town Law. ***** APPLICATION NO. 10 - CASE 2140 The Secretary read the application as follows. Application of Abraham and Martha Veroba requesting variances from Section 89-35 B(1) to maintain a front entry deck and stairway with a front setback of 25.0 ft. where 30.0 ft. is required; and, further, the Zoning Board of Appeals October 26, 1994 -13- 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-6 Zone District on the premises located at 117 Harmon Drive and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 215 Lot 236. Edward Davidson, attorney, appeared with Martha Veroba. William O'Gorman, a longtime neighbor, accompanied them. Mr. Davidson stated that a deck had been built in 1972 which replaced a concrete platform from 1925. In 1992, a building permit had been incorrectly issued to replace the '72 deck. Recently, research was being done for a Letter of Compliance. When the mistake was discovered, the Certificate of Occupancy was revoked. 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; 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. Kelleher, the following resolution was ADOPTED unanimously. WHEREAS, Abraham and Martha Veroba have submitted an application to the Building Inspector, together with plans to maintain a front entry deck and stairway on the premises located at 117 Harmon Drive and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 215 Lot 236; 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(1) and 89-57; and WHEREAS, Mr. and Mrs. Veroba 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 Zoning Board of Appeals October 26, 1994 -14- outweighs any detriment to the neighborhood if the variances sought are granted and also finds as follows: 1. A cement platform had been there since 1925, and a replacement deck was built in 1972. 2. 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. 3. 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. 4. 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 Abraham and Martha Veroba for variances from Sections 89-35 B(1) and 89-57 for a platform and stairs with a front yard of 25.0 feet on the premises located at 117 Harmon Drive, said premises being known and designated on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 215 Lot 236 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. 8 - CASE 2138 As no one had appeared for this application, it was adjourned to the November meeting. Zoning Board of Appeals October 26, 1994 -15- POSSTT.F DISCUSSION Mr. Gunther and Ms. Recio suggested that at the next meeting the Board discuss the impact of zoning variances on the neighborhood and the community. The rest of the Board agreed. ADJOURNMENT On motion of Ms. Recio, seconded by Mr. Wexler, the meeting was adjourned at 10:25 PM. Bonnie M. Burdick