Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991_10_30 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes ft MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ZONING BOARD OF THE TOWN OF MAMARONECK OCTOBER 30, 1991, IN THE SENIOR CENTER, TOWN CENTER ��� 740 WEST BOSTON POST ROAD IlEtqp MAMARONECK, NEW YORK4, T } Present: Joel Negrin, Chairman RECEIVED Thomas E. Gunther = ppR 2 1992 Patrick B. Kelleher PATRTOWN 10 CLERK� J. Rene Simon MAMARONECK Arthur Wexler N.Y. Also Present: Lee A. Hoffman, Jr. , Counsel William E. Jakubowski, Building Inspector Marci Dustin, 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. APPLICATION NO. 1 - CASE 1068 The Secretary read the application as follows: Application of Mr. Anthony Buccini requesting a variance to construct a shed which would not be located in the rear one-third of the lot as required by Section 89-33 B(2)(c) in an R-10 Zone District on the premises located at 56 Dillon Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 504 Lot 257. Anthony Buccini appeared. He stated that he had constructed his shed this summer and that there was no other place on his property to erect it. The back of his property is covered with rocks. Mr. Buccini stated that his house had been built in the twenties and that his garage was insufficient for his car let alone his outdoor tools. His basement is undersized also. 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. October 30, 1991 -2- On motion of Mr. Wexler, seconded by Mr. Simon, the following resolutions were unanimously adopted. WHEREAS, Anthony Buccini has submitted an application to the Building Inspector, together with plans, to erect a shed on the premises located at 56 Dillon Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 504 Lot 257; 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.-33 B(2)(c); and WHEREAS, Mr. Buccini 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 lot is burdened with irregular topography and large rock outcroppings. 2. It would be impractical to place the shed on top of the three-foot-high wall in the rear yard. 3. Only one-quarter of the yard is usable space. 4. On the north side of the property, this shed is adjacent to a shed in. the adjacent yard, making this property consistent with other properties on the street. 5. The one-car garage is unusuable for the storage of tools and the small basement space is not sufficient for a typical homeowners equipment 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 October 30, 1991 -3- 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 89-33 B(2)(c) of the Zoning Ordinance be varied and modified so as to allow the construction at a location other than in the rear one-third of the property on the premises located at 56 Dillon Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 504 Lot 257 in strict conformance 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. 2 - CASE 1069 The Secretary read the application as follows: Application of Mr. and Mrs. James Dixon requesting a variance to retain a converted garage. Said conversion has caused the location of the required parking space to be less than 25 ft. from the front property line as required by Section 89-67B in an R-7.5 Zone District on the premises located at 96 North Chatsworth Avenue and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 118 Lot 300. Marilyn Reader, attorney, appeared. She stated that Mr. and Mrs. Dixon had bought the house seven years ago with the garage converted to a playroom/family room. This room is important to the family as the house is a small one. Mrs. Reader stated that the driveway appears much longer as there is an unusually wide right-of-way from the curb to the property line. The Dixons wanted to be able to use the driveway for parking 2 cars as others do on the street, and Mrs. Reader stated that there would be no interference with traffic. On motion of Mr. Gunther, seconded by Mr. Wexler, 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 October 30, 1991 -4- 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 unanimously adopted. WHEREAS, Mr. and Mrs. James Dixon have submitted an application to the Building Inspector, together with plans, to retain a converted garage on the premises located at 96 North Chatsworth Avenue and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 118 Lot 300; 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 89-67B; and WHEREAS, Mr. and Mrs. Dixon 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 unique and special circumstances and/or conditions applying to the land for which the variance is sought on the following grounds. 1. The garage was converted to a room prior to the Dixon's purchase of the house, making the floor area of the house more consistent with other houses in the neighborhood. 2. The setback of the house from the street line is significantly more than the actual setback from the property line, softening the visual effect of the variance. 3. The position of the house on the property does not allow alternative access for cars. 4. The variance would not negatively impact the neighborhood. 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. October 30, 1991 -5- 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 is hereby granted and that Section 89-67B of the Zoning Ordinance be varied and modified so as to allow the required parking space within 10 feet of the front property line on the premises located at 96 North Chatsworth Avenue and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 118 Lot 300 in strict conformance 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. AAAAA APPLICATION NO. 3 - CASE 1065 The Secretary read the application as follows: Application of Mr. and Mrs. Ivan Lancaric requesting a variance to construct a second-floor addition which would have a front yard of 19.74 ft. where 30.0 ft. is required pursuant to Section 84-35 B(1) and, further, the addition increases the extent by which the structure is non-conforming pursuant to Section 89-57 in an R-6 Zone District on the premises located at 49 Edgewood Avenue and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 125 Lot 142. Ivan and Genevieve Lancaric appeared with their architect, Ethelind Coglin. They stated that the interior stairway to the second floor was narrow, twisting and dangerous. When the Lancarics came back to their house from abroad, they were forced to remove a window to transport furniture upstairs. Several alternative plans were devised. Ms. Coglin stated that the one presented to the Board was the most feasible but that the plan resulted in a major reduction of bedroom space. Therefore, the Lancarics also sought to enlarge the master bedroom. The proposed design for a master bedroom would allow insulation for the kitchen, which gets very cold in the winter. Mr. and Mr. Lancaric have elderly parents regularly in residence and three children. Ralph Bennett of 51 Edgewood Avenue accompanied the Lancarics and stated that he had no objection to the addition. October 30, 1991 -6- 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 corresoponding 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. Ivan Lancaric have submitted an application to the Building Inspector, together with plans, to construct a second-floor addition on the premises located at 49 Edgewood Avenue and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 125 Lot 142; 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 84-35 B(1) and 89-57; and WHEREAS, Mr. and Mrs. Lancaric 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 house is 80 years old. The interior staircase is inadequate and may be unsafe. 2. The proposed addition is on the second floor and will be no closer to the front property line than a previous first floor addition. 3. The applicant has considered alternative designs. 4. If the addition were placed in another logical place, it would encroach into the side yard. • 5. The variance granted is the minimum to alleviate the practical difficulty detailed in the application. October 30, 1991 -7- 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. 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 is hereby granted and that Section 89-35 B(1) of the Zoning Ordinance be varied and modified so as to allow a second floor addition with a 19.74 front yard setback and Section 89-57 of the Zoning Ordinance be varied and modified so as to allow a further non-conforming use on the premises located at 49 Edgewood Avenue and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 125 Lot 142 in strict conformance 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. ADJOURNMENT Mr. Negrin declared an adjournment at 9:30 PM and re-opened the meeting it at 9:47 PM. APPLICATION NO. 4 - CASE 1065 The application was noticed as follows: Application of Ten Grand, Inc. , 1330 Boston Post adjourned from the meeting of October 3, 1991. Donald S. Mazin, attorney, appeared with Richard Rheaume, SAIC engineer; Jack Riordan, Finast architect; Fred Coleman, consulting architect to Ten Grand, Inc. ; Pat Brown, Finast's director of operations for Westchester; and John Salcito, store manager. Mr. Rheaume explained the applicant's most recent submission and addressed the areas of concern previously expressed by members of the Board. The lights will be recessed in the canopy so that they do not shine into neighboring houses and will be extinguished after closing of the store. Those in the parking lot will October 30, 1991 -8- have timers; and after the store closes at night, the interior lighting will be reduced 50%. Store hours will remain the same: 7AM - 11 PM each day. The representatives of the applicant would not agree that the store hours could be a condition of the variance. Truck deliveries will be between 7:30 AM and 5 PM; and Mr. Salcito, the current manager, indicated consent to making delivery times a condition of approval. (Drivers of Finast-refrigerator trucks turn off the compressors in the lot. ) Mr. Kelleher stated that it was possible to construct gates and fences at the loading dock with electronically controlled locks and suggested that the applicant consult with the Building Inspector concerning access for the Fire Department and delivery trucks for the restaurant. Mr. Rheaume's company recomputed the parking lot use and found very similar figures. In the instances he cited, there were variances of one to two numbers from his previously submitted chart. He pointed out that the different stores in the shopping center have different peak parking hours. The Weaver Street entrance to the parking lot will be reconstructed to discourage left turns onto Weaver Street. Mr. Coleman, the coordinating architect for Ten Grand, Inc. , presented a landscape plan, a rendering of the center and demonstrated the building materials. He stated that the corporation is seeking to coordinate by design the two developed pieces of its property at this site ("Finast" and the former car dealership). The plan indicated 28 trees and 230 shrubs planted throughout the parking lot and as buffers between properties. The shopping center, to be called Ferndale Shopping Center, will have a red mansard roof, will be constructed of off-white brick; will have larger-diameter columns of concrete and dryvit; and will be faced with off-white aluminum siding. The majority of the lettering for the signs for the renovation will be red. One sign, which will list the names of the stores in the shopping center will have a green tree, as a logo for the shopping center. It will be placed on the mansard-shaped roof and face the Post Road. There will be another sign on the food store with the Finast logo in stylized, red, lower-case letters. This sign will face Weaver Street. Mr. Mazin enumerated justifiable reasons for granting the variance. The irregularly shaped lot causes problems. It was stated that there is no other similarly shaped lot in the zoning district. Expansion to a second floor is impractical for a food store. Mr. Mazin submitted a list of food stores in the vicinity with their square footage; said list will become a part of the record. He also gave a history of small food stores in the area. Some stores have closed and others have moved to increasingly larger sites. Also submitted by Mr. Mazin was an appraisal prepared by Doern Associates. The new interior plans were presented by Mr. Rheume and Mr. Brown. The aisles will be wider; there will be more areas for food reception, food storage and food preparation. Five check out counters will be added. This plan meets all standards for disabled workers as well as handicapped shoppers. October 30, 1991 -9- ADJOURNMENT Mr. Negrin temporarily adjourned the meeting at 11:25 PM and reopened it at 11:35 PM. Neighbors and interested residents appearing were Robert Lunde, 2 Ferndale Place; James Hemmert, Ferndale Place; Steven Kronenberg, 66 Howell Avenue; Gordon Oppenheimer, 50 Howell Avenue and Paul Donohue, 67 Sherwood Drive. They continued to question the necessity to enlarge the store; to disbelieve statements representatives of Finast made concerning truck-delivery hours and resulting noise, complain about lights and speculate about the legality of the use of the paper street. It was stated that the houses on Ferndale would depreciate in value and that moving the store entrance closer to that street will move the noise and air pollution closer to those residences. An objection was made that a representative of Doern Associates was not available for questioning. After the residents had spoken, Mr. Mazin pointed out that the leadership of the Howell Park Association had, on the record, expressed its approval of the plans for the shopping center when the applicant received SEQRA approval at the Planning. Board. A majority of the Board was not ready to vote on the variance, and Mr. Negrin sought a list of questions so that the applicant could answer at this meeting while so many of its experts were present, or prepare for the next meeting of this Board. In its brochure submitted to the Board, SAIC had enumerated points by numbered sections. Mr. Wexler sought elaboration on the argument presented on Page 10-3. Mr. Negrin wanted time to study the submissions presented at the meeting and requested further information concerning the difficulties in using the other space in the center. Mr. Gunther had several questions. He wanted more information about the operation of the trash compactor and its noise level, more information about the use of the parking lot in the summer compared to October, and quantifiable data concerning the claim of the unprofitability of the market. He sought either present numbers, as opposed to projected gains, and information concerning traffic volume and turnover. Mr. Gunther also felt that the information about the local markets was insufficient; data concerning markets in Harrison or Rye may not apply to Mamaroneck Town. With the consent of Mr. Mazin, on motion of Mr. Gunther, seconded by Mr. Wexler, this matter was adjourned to the next meeting of the Zoning Board, for which it will need a new notice. NEXT MEETING The next meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals will be Wednesday, December 4, 1991. October 30, 1991 -10- ADJOURNMENT On motion of Mr. Kelleher, seconded by Mr. Simon, the meeting was adjourned at 12:50 AM. Bonnie M. Burdick