Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991_07_16 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ZONING BOARD OF THE TOWN OF MAMARONECK JULY 16, 1991, IN THE COURTROOM, TOWN CENTER 1. 1 F; 740 WEST BJS'TON POST ROAD . MAMARONECK, NEW YORK 47 47 RECEIVED Present: Joel Negrin, Chairman Thomas E. Gunther AUG 12 1991 Patrick B. Kelleher �=` PUMA CCIO E. J. Rene Simon Arthur Wexler NAM N YNE Also Present: Lee A. Hoffman, Jr. , Counsel William E. Jakubowski, Building Inspector Eilccn Agnoletto, Public Stenographer Carbone, Kazazes & Associates 250 Fast Hartsdale Avenue Hartsdale, NY 10530 Bonnie M. Burdick, Recording Secretary CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Chairman Negrin at 8:20 PM. APPLICATION NO. 1 - CASE 1045 Application of Mr. and Mrs. R. Agnew requesting variances to retain a carport/pergola. The pergola for nsP as a plant support and carport has a front yard of 6.25 feet when accessory structures are required to be in the rear one-third of the lot and 5.0 feet fLum the property line, both pursuant to Section 89-35 B(3) (b) , and further the development of an unenclosed off-street parking space 6.25 feet from a lot line is prohibited as a 25.0 feet setback is required pursuant to Section 89-67 B, in an R-6 Zone District, on the premises located at 13 Kenmare Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 409 Lot 40. Mr. and Mrs. Agnew appeared on behalf of the application. They brought a heavy, dead branch to demonstrate the need for the structure under which they park their car as a garage, prior to their ownership, had been made into a laundry room. They stated that limbs fall from a neighbor's tree frequently, that pine tar eats into the car's paint and that there is no other place on this property to park a car. The car in question is relatively new as a previous one was stolen front the driveway; the structure as proposed would include anti-theft devirps. Mrs. Agnew stated that plans call for a canvas above the structure and plants growing upon it. She stated that the carport/pergola enhances the property as it is open. Mr. Agnew stated that he had consulted the three neighbors most impacted by the structure and that there was no objection to it. Steven Circilli, 9 Harmony Drive, by letter, objected to the structure. He wantPri to retain as much open space as possible and to preserve the neighborhood as it is. Mr. Circilli stated that allowing July 16, 1991 -2- the retention of the carport/pergola would set a precedent. Said letter will become a part of the record. 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 SERA. On motion of Mr. Wexler, seconded by Mr. Simon, the following resolutions were unanimously adopted. WHEREAS, Mr. and Mrs. R. Agnew have submitted an application to the Building Inspector, together with plans, to retain a carport/pergola on the premises located at 13 Keimiare Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 409 Lot 40; 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) (b) and 89-67 B; and WHEREAS, Mr. and Mrs. Agnew 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 a substandard one for its zone - 4700 square feet rather than 7000 square feet. 2. There is minimal space in either side yard for transit to the rear. July 16, 1991 -3- 3. The structure enhances the property. It has a transparent feeling. 4. There is no garage. This structure protects the applicants' car. 5. Because of the topography of the lot, it is not practical to build a garage. 6. The variance granted is theminhmln 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 Sections 89-35-B(3) (b) and 89-67 B of the Zoning Ordinance be varied and modified so as to allow the retention of a carport/pergola on the premises located at 13 Kennare Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 409 Lot 40 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 following conditions shall attach to the variance: 1. The structure shall be maintained as presented to this Board with the addition of a dark green canvas roof. 2. No lights shall be placed on this structure; 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 campleted 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. ***** July 16, 1991 -4- APPLICATION NO. 2 - CASE 1046 The Secretary read the application as follows: Application of Mrs. C. Ohm requesting a variance from Section 89-31 B(3) (b) to retain a tennis court. The tennis court as erected for an accessory structure is not located in the rear one-third of the property and has a setback of 40.8 feet where 104.0 feet is required, in an R-20 Zone District, on the premises located at 27 Carriage House Lane and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 341 Lot 29. Jefferson Meighan, attorney, appeared on behalf of Mrs. Ohm. He stated that the Ohms had purchased the property in the '70's. There had been a notice of violation for the tennis court at that time, but the lender and title company did not make an issue of it. Mr. Meighan submitted letters from the three neighbors most impacted. Said letters will become a part of the record. Mr. Meighan had contacted Winged Foot Golf Club as well but had not received an answer. Mr. Meighan stated that the tennis court was an allowable structure placed incorrectly and that it would be a burden to remove. If the tennis court were placed on the property in the correct place, it would be unattractive according to Mr. Meighan. There is a drop of 25-27 feet on the lot. 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 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 SEQPA. On motion of Mr. Kelleher, seconded by Mr. Simon, the following resolutions were unanimously adopted. WHEREAS, Mrs. C. Ohm has submitted an application to the Building Inspector, together with plans, to retain a tennis court on the premises located at 27 Carriage House Lane and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 341 Lot 29 ; 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) (b) ; and WHEREAS, Mrs. Ohm 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 July 16, 1991 -5- 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 TT 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. Removing the court would be a significant personal hardship. 2. The adjacent neighbors have written letters agreeing to the past use and future use. 3. The tennis court is nit obtrusive from the street and adjacent properties as it is screened. The fence on Gate House Lane is lower that the rear fence. 4. The tennis court is a singles one. 5. There is no residence to the rear. There is a golf course with open space. 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 purpoccs 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) (b) of the Zoning Ordinance be varied and modified so as to allow the retention of tennis court on the premises located at 27 Carriage House Lane and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 341 Lot 29 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 following condition shall attach to the variance: No lights shall be allowed on the tennis court; 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 July 16, 1991 -6- 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. 3 - CASE 1047 The Secretary read the application as follows: Application of Mr. & Mrs. S. Navarro requesting a variance from Section 89-32 B(1) to reduce, on the side of the house as constructed but in the front yard as defined in the Zoning Ordinance for a corner lot, the front yard setback from 40.0 feet required to 16.3 feet to enclose an existing porch which would increase the extent by which the structure is nonconforming pursuant to Section 89-57, in an R-15 Zone District, on the premises located at 2 Carleon Avenue and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 404 Lot 346. Dennis Cuchinello of Dart Graphics appeared with Mr. and Mrs. Navarro. He stated that the Navarros wanted to enclose a dilapidated porch and place a railing on its roof for decorative purposes. The ceiling, walls and floor need repair as do the lattice below the porch and the clapboard. Mr. Cuchinello submitted favorable letters from two neighbors. Mr. Negrin was concerned that the porch was extremely close to Palmer Avenue - a sensitive area, but it was realized that several houses in the area have similar yards and that the street may have been widened since 1918 when the house was built. 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 FURPHER RESOLVED, that this is a Type II Action having no significant impact on the environment as determined by New York State or corresponding local law, therefore requiring no further action under SEQRA. On motion of Mr. Gunther, seconded by Mr. Simon, the following resolutions were unanimously adopted: WHEREAS, Mr. and Mrs. Navarro have submitted an application to the Building Inspector, together with plans, to enclose an existing porch on the premises located at 2 Carleon Avenue and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 404 Lot 346; and July 16, 1991 -7- 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 89-32 B(1) and 89-57; and WHEREAS, Mr. and Mrs. Navarro 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 substandard for the zone. It is 9800 square feet rather than 15,000. 2. The variance is the minimum needed to use an existing portion of the house. 3. The footprint of the house will not be enlarged. 4. The setback on Palmer Avenue is similar to other houses on Palmer Avenue. 5. This lot requires ires two front yards; the 16.5 setback is more than sufficient as a side yard requirement. 6. The house is on a heavily traveled commercial street and has a bus stop adjacent to it. 7. The variance granted is the minimum to alleviate the practical difficulty detailed in the application. 8. 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. 9. 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 89-32 B(1) and 89-57 of the Zoning Ordinance be varied and modified so as to allow the enclosure of an existing porch on the premises located at 2 Carleon Avenue and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 404 Lot 346 in strict conformance July 16, 1991 -8- 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. 4 - CASE 1048 The Secretary read the application as follows: Application of Mr. and Mrs. G. Scutaro requesting a variance frarm Section 89-34 B(3)to reduce the rear yard from 25.0 feet required to 7.5 feet for the proposed construction of an attached garage, in an R-7.5 Zone District, on the premises located at 2 Lundy Lane and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 502 Lot 84. Mr. Scutaro, appearing on behalf of his application, stated that the variance granted on July 25, 1990 had expired and that he had modified his request. He sought a smaller variance because of the large expense of rock removal and because this new design allowed better use of his backyard. 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. Negrin, seconded by Mr. Negrin, the following resolutions were unanimously adopted. WHEREAS, Mr. and Mrs. G. Scutaro have submitted an application to the Building Inspector, together with plans, to construct an attached garage on the premises located at 2 Lundy Lane and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 502 Lot 84; and WHEREAS, the Building Inspector has declined to issue such permit on the grounds that the plans submitted failed to cxanply with the Tawn July 16, 1991 -9- of Mamaroneck Zoning Ordinance with particular reference to Section 89-34 B(3) ; and WHEREAS, Mr. and Mrs. Scutaro 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. A rock outcropping on the property limits construction. 2. The property is unusually configured giving the applicants no better option. 3. The applicant has explored other options; this is the best available. One option was given a prior variance, it was implemented, and the applicant ran into a problem. 4. The garage will be relatively inobtrusive. 5. The Board realizes that this is a substantial variance, but grants it due to the extraordinary facts found to exist in this particular case. 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 purpo.co 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 89-34 B(3) of the Zoning Ordinance be varied and modified so as to allow the construction of an attached garage on the premises located at 2 Lundy Lane and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 502 Lot 84 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 July 16, 1991 -10- FURL ER 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 awn Clerk as provided in Section 267 of the Town Law. ***** APPLICATION NO. 5 - CASE 1049 The secretary read the application as follows: Application of Mr. and Mrs. Prager requesting variances for the proposed construction of a detached deck with a gazebo. The deck and gazebo would be located 43.0 feet fros a front lot line when 143.2 feet is required for the accessory structure to be located in the rear one-third of the lot, pursuant to Section 89-30.1 B(2) , and further a front yard setback of 50.0 feet is required pursuant to Section 89-30.1 B(1) , in an R-30 Zone District, on the premises located at 9 Fenbrook Drive and ]mown on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 309 IDt 5. Mark and Elaine Prager appeared on behalf of the application. They stated that their house was sited dangerously as. there is wooded slope which drops off 10-15 feet next to the house. They wanted to provide a safe environment for their children and guests while keeping trees between their house and their neighbors' proprety. . Mr. and Mrs. Prager wanted to build a unevenly -shaped deck out over the slope with access from the grass next to their house. The proposed deck would end in a roofed gazebo placed on a large rock which would extend into the front yard. The deck would have wooden supports under it. Mr. Wexler stated that he lacked a drawing showing elevations and Mr. Negrin stated that the gazebo would be ten feet high which would be very obtrusive from the neighbors' houses. Mr. Prager stated that he did not want to install a fence as the yard is steep and narrow and that he would leave trees on the slope and would plant shrubs at the underside of the deck in the Spring. Mrs Prager explained that the deck would be flush with the ground next to the house. On motion of Mr. Gunther, 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. July 16, 1991 -11- Because of the lack of all necessary drawings, with the approval of the applicants, on motion of Mr. Gunther, seconded by Mr. Kelleher, the Board voted unanimously to adjourn the matter to the next meeting, which would be held July 23, 1991. ***** APPLICATION NO.6 - CASE 1050 The Secretary read the application as follows: Application of Mr. J. Avelino requesting variances for the proposed construction of an addition, deck, bay window and enlarged platform, on a corner lot. The addition and deck would have a front yard of 16.96 feet where 30.0 feet is required pursuant to Section 89-33 B(1) , a rear yard of 15.74 feet where 25.0 feet is required pursuant to Section 89-33 B(3) and a side yard of 7.35 feet where 10.00 feet is required pursuant to Section 89-33 B(2) (a) . Additionally, the bay window will have a side yard of 5.35 feet where 8.0 feet is required pursuant to Section 89-44 B and the platform will have a side yard of 4.02 feet where 10.0 feet is required pursuant to Section 89-33 B(2) (a) . Further the additions will increase the extent by which the building is nonconforming pursuant to Section 89-57, in an R-10 Zone District, on the premises located at 124 East Garden Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 214 Lot 280. Mr. Simon recused himself because of a personal and professional relationship. Appearing on behalf of the applicant were Donald S. Mazin, attorney, and Mark Mustacato, architect Mr. Mazin stated that the applicant, 74 years of age, has had to leave Colonial Road in the Bay Ridge section of Brooklyn because of unsafe streets and moved to Iarchnont to be near a son. Mrs. Avelino likes to cook and wants a larger kitchen and dining room; Mr. Avelino suffers from depression and has had a stroke. The proposed plan would leave 10 pine trees in place which would screen the new addition. Said addition would be built over the patio; the deck would be repaired. Mr. Mazin maintained that other houses in this neighborhood are one-on-tap of another. This house is on a substandard, corner lot. A slope restricts an addition to the right. (Mr. Negrin noted that this slope was not shown on the drawings.) Mr. Mazin stated that the variances requested were minimal and that the property placed constraints. He conceded that his clients were too hasty in their desire to leave Brooklyn when choosing the house which they immediately determined was too small As Mr. Avelino is ill, it is likely that he will need an attendant who might need to live-in creating a need for another roam listed as a study. Mr. Mazin, having claimed there were two bedrooms, corrected himself and stated that one room upstairs was used as a sitting roam which Mrs. Avelino used in order to avoid climbing stairs. July 16, 1991 -12- • Mr. Negrin stated that the house had been built with a variance. Mr. Jakubawski stated that the house was built before 1959, at which time major changes to the Zoning Code were made. He also stated that there had been a front yard variance from the aspect of Fast Garden Road. Mr. Hoffman stated that variances had been also granted in 1950 and 1955 . An encroachment was made into a side yard; the other variance was for a porch sized 8' by 41'. ADJOURNMENT Mr. Negrin adjourned the meeting at 10:20 PM and reopened it at 10:30 PM. He read a letter from Mr. and Mrs. Walter Levy of 30 Ellsworth Road opposed to the application. They stated, among other points, that the request was inappropriate in this real estate market. The letter will became a part of the record. Neighbors appearing against this application were Mr. and Mrs. Michael O'Reilly, 126 Fast Garden Road; Robert Conkling, 130 Fast Garden Road; Frank Hart, 115 Fast Garden Road; Allen Wolf, 10 East Brookside Drive; and Marshall Horwitz, 127 East Garden Road. Mr. Conkling and Mr. O'Reilly had called on Mrs. Avelino. Mr. Conkling stated that such an addition would add 9% to the house and that it was hard to understand a hardship occurring so soon after purchase. Other neighbors gave information concerning several larger families who had occupied the house. Mr. Wolf stated that there is a special ambiance in living on the Brook. Many sacrifice living space to be there. He saw no need for the Avelino's to expand the house and felt that a larger house would change the character of the neighborhood Those opposing the construction were concerned with its effect on their property values. Mr. Mazin stated that a use variance, one that was self-created, was being sought on the basis of practical difficulty. Mr. Hoffman disagreed. Mr. Mazin reiterated that a large amount of planting would be on the site and stated that a house built in the '20's is inappropriate for a '90's lift-style. Mr. Wexler stated that there were other areas in the house to add a 10' by 20' room such as the front. Mr. Conkling stated that he thought that the Avelinos, whose son is a builder, wanted to expand the house for speculative purposes. Mr. Mazin requested an adjournment, and Mr. Mustacato stated that he would make an alternative plan and cli scs1ss it with the neighbors. Therefore, on motion of Mr. Kelleher, seconded by Mr. Wexler, this matter was unanimously, 4-0, adjourned to August 21, 1991. ***** APPLICATION NO. 7 - CASE 1051 The Secretary read the application as follows: Application of Mr. and Mrs. W. Okun requesting a variance from Section 89-31 B(2) (a) .to reduce the side yard from 15.0 feet required to 11.6 feet for the proposed construction of a family roan, in an R-20 Zone July 16, 1991 -13- District, on the premises located at 17 Country Club Drive and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 229 Lot 263. Mr. Wexler stated that Mr. and Mrs. Okun are members of his temple but that he saw no conflict. Arnold Weil, architect, appeared on behalf of the application along with Mr. Okun. He stated that the Okuns wanted to add a family roan to their house A corner of the proposed roan encroaches He had considered every possibility. One possibility was eliminated because it would take away the use of the back yard which has a big hill. The amount of land which would be encroached with this plan is about ten square feet. Mr. Okun stated that he had spoken with the closest neighbor who had no objection. On motion of Mr. Gunther, 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. W. Okun have submitted an application to the Building Inspector, together with plans, to construct a family roan on the premises located at 17 Country Club Drive and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 229 Lot 263; 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(2) (a) ; and WHEREAS, Mr. and Mrs. Okun 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 irregularly shaped and has a difficult topography. July 16, 1991 • -14- 2. The encroaching area is minimal and is in scale with the addition. 3. The addition cannot be sited differently because of the kitchen door. 4. The addition is in harmony with the structure. 5. The addition will be well screened fran the neighbors by mature hemlocks. 6. The variance granted is the minimim, 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(2) (a) of the Zoning Ordinance be varied and modified so as to allow the construction of a family roan on the premises located at 17 Country Club Drive and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 229 Lot 263 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. 8 - CASE 1052 The Secretary read the application as follows: Application of Mrs. T. Lasser requesting a variance from Section 89-33 B(2) (a)&(b) to reduce the side yards from 10.0 feet required to 6.1 feetand 4.7 feet and to reduce the total side yard fran 25.0 feet required to 10.8 feet to retain a screened porch which increased the extent by which the bulding is nonconforming, in an R-10 Zone District, July 16, 1991 . -15- on the premises located at 24 Barnum Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 211 Lot 345. Joseph DeSalvo, attorney, appeared on behalf of Mrs. Lasser. He presented a petition of approval signed by seven neighbors and stated that Mrs. Lasser had lived in this house since 1946. At that time there was an open porch. Approximately 10 years ago, Mrs. Lasser added the roof. Mr. DeSalvo stated that the porch was still within the building envelope and that the lot was triangularly shaped and had bad topography. 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 'Ripe 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 resolutions were unanimously adopted. WHEREAS, Mrs. T. Lasser has submitted an application to the Building Inspector, together with plans, to retain a screened porch on the premises located at 24 Barnum Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 211 Lot 345; 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) (a)&(b) ; and WHEREAS, Mrs. Lasser 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 a difficult, oddly shaped one. 2. The porch is still within the footprint of 1924. 3. There were no objections from the neighbors. 4. The variance granted is the minimum to alleviate the practical difficulty detailed in the application. July 16, 1991 -16- 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 Section 89-33 B(2) (a)&(b) of the Zoning Ordinance be varied and modified so as to allow the retention of a screened porch on the premises located at 24 Barnum Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 211 Lot 345 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 campleted 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 ***** APPROVAL OF MINUTES On motion of Mr. Simon, seconded by Mr. Kelleher, the minutes of May 29, 1991 were unanimously approved. ADJOURNMENT On motion of Mr. Wexler, seconded by Mr. Negrin, the meeting was adjourned at 11:52 PM. Bonnie M. Burdick