Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991_06_26 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes ,,, i.) egE (7/23/?, MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ZONING BOARD OF THE TOWN OF MAMARONECK JUNE 26, 1991, IN THE SENIOR CENTER, TOWN CENTER 740 WEST BOSTON POST ROAD MAMARONECK, NEW YORK 11 Present: Joel Negrin, Chairman Alf Thomas E. Gunther 4 '' Patrick B. Kelleher 7:70 J. Rene Simon JArthur Wexler - PA1 Also Present: Lee A. Hoffman, Jr. , Counsel MAROLERK William E. Jakubowski, Building Inspector 7 N.Y. Karen Williams, Public Stenographer Carbone, Kazazes & Associates 111 North Central Avenue Hartsdale, NY 10530 Bonnie M. Burdick, Recording Secretary CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Chairman Negrin at 8:21 PM. Mr. Negrin stated that he had received a letter from Anita and Walter Levy of 35 Ellsworth Road concerning their border with 46 Fast Brookside Drive, the property of Leo Tcmczyk. Mr. Negrin stated that he had called the Levys and told them that determining property lines or settling disputes arising therefrom were not the purview of this Board. Mr. Hoffman offered to formally answer the letter. APPLICATION NO. 1 - CASE 1037 The Secretary read the application as follows: Application of Mr. M. Bluestone requesting a Certificate of Occupancy for an existing rear addition. The addition is required to have a side yard of 10.00 ft. and total side yard of 18.6 ft. pursuant to a variance granted March 25, 1981 and has an actual side yard of 9.31 ft. and total side yard of 17.87 ft. A side yard of 10.0 ft. and a total side yard of 25.0 ft. is required pursuant to Section 89-33 B (1) & (2) in an R-10 Zone District on the premi^c': located at 89 West Brookside Drive and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 219 Lot 423. Mr. Wexler stated that he was the architect for the original application and recused himself. Mr. Bluestone appeared on behalf of his application. He stated that the reason for the mistake was that the original survey from which the builder worked was incorrect. Mr. Bluestone submitted pictures, his original survey to Mr. Jakubawski for copying and a statement of his hardship in this matter. Said documents will become a part of the June 26, 1991 -2- record. Mr. Bluestone stated that he had contacted his neighbors and that they had not had any problem with this application. On motion of Mr. Gunther, seconded by Mr. Simon, by a vote of 4 - 0, 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. Simon, the following resolutions were adopted by a vote of 4 - 0. WHEREAS, Michael Bluestone has submitted a request for a Certificate of Occupancy, together with plans, for an existing rear addition which had been granted a variance from this Board on March 25, 1981 on the premises located at 89 West Brookside Drive and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 219 Lot 423; 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 (1) & (2) ; and WHEREAS, Mr. Bluestone 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 additional variance sought, l s than 1 foot, appears to be necessary because of an error which was caused by confusion aver survey interpretation. June 26, 1991 -3- 2. The applicant did seek a variance prior to construction and built in good faith. 3. Everybody who participated in the original process made an error. 4. The variance granted is the minimum to alleviate the practical difficulty detailed in the application. 5. The granting of the variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of this Ordinance and will not be injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. 6. The strict application of the Zoning Ordinance and Town Code would deprive the applicants of the reasonable uca 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 89-33 B (1) & (2) of the Zoning Ordinance be varied and modified so as to allow the retention of a rear addition and the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for said structure on the premises located at 89 West Brookside Drive and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 219 Lot 423 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 1038 The Secretary read the application as follows: Application of Mr. & Mrs. G. Marble requesting a variance to retain a rear deck in an R-6 Zone District. The deck has a rear yard of 18.9 ft. where 25.0 ft. is required pursuant to Section 89-35 B (3) and further, pursuant to Section 89-57 increased the extent by which the structure is non-conforming, on the premises located at 49 Myrtle Blvd and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 124 Lot 553. Mrs. Marble appeared accompanied by her attorney, Robert FUnicello. The house was moved to a non-conforming lot when the New England Thruway was June 26, 1991 -4- built. Mr. Funicello contacted the former owner, Mrs. Carrcitto, in Florida who stated that she did no know she needed a building permit when the deck was built. Mrs. Marble stated that she and George Marble bought the property in 1980, that she is a teacher at Murray Avenue School and that there was currently a proposed sale of the house under contract. The purchaser wanted to buy the house because of the deck. Mrs. Marble had contacted her neighbors and that they had said that they had no objection to the deck's continued existence. Mrs. Marble and Mr. Funicello demonstrated pictures showing the deck from the neighboring yards and the yards from the deck. Said pictures will become part of the record. This problem did not appear until a new survey was made prior to the sale. A survey reading at the time of purchase by the Marbles had not listed the deck. Mr. Funicello stated that the area was zoned R-6 after the house lots were created. 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. Simon, the following resolutions were unanimously adopted: WHEREAS, George and Helen Marble have submitted an application to the Building Inspector, together with plans, to retain a rear deck on the premises located at 49 Myrtle Blvd and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 124 Lot 553; 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 89-57; and WHEREAS, Mr. and Mrs. Marble 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 June 26, 1991 -5- sought on the following grounds: 1. The deck has been there for 17 years. The neighbors have been solicited for their opinion and no responses were received. 2. The house, deck and lot are in scale with the rest of the neighborhood. 3. The variance granted is the minimum to alleviate the practical difficulty detailed in the application. 4. The granting of the variance is in harmony with the general purpo=es and intent of this Ordinance and will not be injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. 5. The strict application of the Zoning Ordinance and Town Code would deprive the applicants of the reasonable use of the land and/or building and that the variance granted by this Board will accctplish this purpose; and it is FURTHER RESOLVED, that a variance is hereby granted and that Sections 89-35 B(3) and 89-57 of the Zoning Ordinance be varied and modified so as to allow the retention of a deck on the premises located at 49 • Myrtle Blvd and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Tawn of Mamaroneck as Block 124 Lot 553 in strict conformance with the plans filed with this application and any conditions set forth in theme 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 Tawn Clerk as provided in Section 267 of the Town Law. ***** CASE 3 - NO. 1039 The Secretary read the application as follows: Application Blasa and Vasantha Prasad requesting a variance from Section 89-31 B(3) to reduce the rear yard from 40 ft. required to 38.25 in an R-20 Zone District for the proposed construction of a sunroan on the O premisespremiseslocated at 38 Marbourne Drive and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 334 Lot 22. June 26, 1991 -6- Blasa Prasad appeared on behalf of his application. He stated that he bought his house from the builder who had been granted a Certificate of Occupancy Mr. Prasa wanted to enclose his deck with a totally glass structure. He discovered that the deck was built 1.75 feet longer than had been permitted. Mr. Prasad stated that the glass had been cut; a change to construct a smaller enclosure would cost $15,000. Also, a smaller structure would expose a pillar. Mr. Prasad stated that his nearest neighbors are 150 feet, 180 feet and 150 feet fran the deck. The height of the proposed porch would be 11 feet high at the house and 7 feet at the edge. 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 SE ZA. On motion of Mr. Simon, seconded by Mr. Gunther, the following resolutions were unanimously adopted: WHEREAS, Blasa and Vasantha Prasad have submitted an application to the Building Inspector, together with plans, to retain a deck and to construct a sunroan on the premisPs located at 38 Marbourne Drive and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Tawn of Mamaroneck as Block 334 Lot 22 ; and WHEREAS, the Building Inspector has declined to issue such permit on the grounds that the plans submitted failed to comply with the Tam of Mamaroneck Zoning Ordinance with particular reference to Section 89-31 B(3) ; and WHEREAS, Mr. and Mrs. Prasad 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 rear yard has hills and rocks which make passive, recreational-use difficult. June 26, 1991 -7- 2. The proposed roan is well screened from the three neighboring yards. All three of the neighboring houses are well over 100 feet from this house. 3. The variance granted is the minimum to alleviate the practical difficulty detailed in the application. 4. The granting of the variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of this Ordinance and will not be injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. 5. The strict application of the Zoning Ordinance and Town Code would deprive the applicants of the reasonable of the land and/or building and that the variance granted by this Board will accomplish this purpose; and it is FURTHER RESOLVED, that a variance is hereby granted and that Section 89-31 B(3) of the Zoning Ordinance be varied and modified so as to allow the retention of a deck and its enclosure as a sunroom on the premiccz located at 38 Marbourne Drive and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 334 Lot 22 in strict conformance with the plans filed with this application and any conditions set forth in these resolutions, provided that the applicants fly 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 1040 Application of Mr. and Mrs. P. DiNicola requesting a variance to retain a rear deck. The deck has a rear yard of 16.0 ft. where 25.0 ft. is required pursuant to Section 89-35 B(3) and a side yard of 3.0 ft. where 8.0 ft. is required pursuant to 89-35 B(2) (a) . Further, pursuant to Section 89-57, the deck increases the extent by which the structure is non-conforming in an R-6 Zone District on the premises located at 23 Alden Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 409 Lot 735. Mr. Simon recused himself as he knows Mr. DiNocola. William Wildulski, P.E. , appeared with Paul DiNicola on behalf of the application. Mr. Wildulski stated that the house in question, which has 5000 square feet, was built in 1925 with an addition in 1934 and is set back 44 feet. This placement caused a minimal rear yard which is made June 26, 1991 -8- awkward by a slope fram side to side. The grade differential is nearly 4 feet. Grass will not grow in the rear yard, and Mr. DiNicola has a five-year-old who needs a protected play space. Mr. DiNicola constructed a deck and walkways in or about 1985 without getting permission fran the Building Inspector. The garage and planting screen the deck from the neighbors. The deck railing is screened, too. Mr. DiNicola discovered his problems when he was selling the house. (The sale fell through because of the lack of proper documentation.) Mr. DiNicola will install aluminum siding on the side of the garage near the house and put in 5/8" sheetrock on its interior to promote fire safety. On motion of Mr. Gunther, seconded by Mr. Wexler, it was unanimously, by a 4-0 vote, 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. Wexler, seconded by Mr. Gunther, the following resolutions were adopt, 4-0. WHEREAS, Mr. and Mrs. Paul DiNicola have submitted an application to the Building Inspector, together with plans, to retain a rear deck on the premises located at 23 Alden Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 409 Lot 735; 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) ,89-35 B(2) (a) and 89-57; and WHEREAS, Mr. and Mrs. DiNicola 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 by being substandard. June 26, 1991 -9- 2. The house is so sited that it is set back 45% of the way into the lot; therefore, the rear yard is a minimal one. 3. The rear yard is burdened with a one-car garage. 4. The rear yard slopes from side-to-side with a grade differential of approximately 4 feet. 5. The deck enhances the rear yard given the juxtaposition of the garage and a one-story shed structure. 6. The deck is shielded from the neighbors by the garage, the grade and its location in relation to the northern property line from the neighbors on both sides and to the rear. 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 89-35 B(3) , 89-35 B(2) (a) and 89-57 of the Zoning Ordinance be varied and modified so as to allow the retention of a rear deck on the premises located at 23 Alden Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 409 Lot 735 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. 5 - CASE 1041 The Secretary read the application as follows: Application of Mr. & Mrs. S. Fnishtick requesting a variance for the proposed construction of a front entry and a rear deck. The entry as June 26, 1991 -10- proposed would have a front yard of 32.0 ft. where 40 ft. is required pursuant to Section 89-31 B(1) , and the deck would have a rear yard of 32.0 ft. where 40 ft. is required pursuant to Section 89-31 B(3) in an R-20 Zone District on the premises located at 3 Marbourne Drive and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 334 Lot 43. Appearing were Pierre LeVesque, architect, and Mr. and Mrs. Frushtick. Mr. LeVesque stated that the Frushticks wanted to add a vestibule as their living roam is cold in winter and a screen porch would be reached by a catwalk over a restored swale in the rear yard. The Frushticks wanted to avoid the risk of Lyme DispasP by having an elevated screen porch. Also, one child has a severe reaction to insect bites. The property backs up on the Saxon Woods Park. Mr. Wexler termed the plan for the entrance a "pavilion" and explained to Mr. LeVesque that the Zoning Board of Appeals is charged to allow the minimum necessary to alleviate a hardship when granting a variance. Mr. Hoffman stated that the New York Court of Appeals had upheld the denial of a variance for a 32 square foot front vestibule which intruded into the front yard. Mr. LeVesque stated that the house was massive and needed a large addition for esthetic reasons. Mr. Wexler had difficulty with the design for the porch, too. He stated that a structure 18 feet high would be built; rear porches of neighbors are 2 feet off the ground. Mr. Wexler stated that this porch would be "like a treehouse" and that it would be psible to build a porch within the building envelope. He stated that the plans for the porch were incamplete, lacking elevations, roof drawings etc. Mr. LeVesque stated that he had not contacted the Building Department for information about codes until he had designed the additions. He did contact Gary Trachtman, the Town's Consulting Engineer, concerning the restoration of the swale. Two dry wells would be installed to deal with the water retention. On motion of Mr. Gunther, seconded by Mr. Kelleher, 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 Ste. At the request of Mr. and Mrs. Frushtick, the Board considered each addition separately. On motion of Mr. Kelleher, seconded by Mr. Simon, the following resolutions were adopted 4-1, Mr. Gunther opposed. WHEREAS, Mr. and Mrs. Steven Frushtick have submitted an application to the Building Inspector, together with plans, to construct a front entry; and June 26, 1991 -11- 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(1) on the premises located at 3 Marbourne Drive and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 334 Parcel 735; and WHEREAS, Mr. and Mrs. Frushtick 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 hereby denies the application on the following grounds: 1. This plan does not represent the minimum encroachment to alleviate the hardship and practical difficulty. FURTHER RESOLVED, that this decision be filed with the Town Clerk as provided in Section 267 of the Town Law. On motion of Mr. Kelleher, seconded by Mr. Simon, the following resolutions were adopted, 3-1-1, Mr. Gunther opposed, Mr. Wexler abstaining. WHEREAS, Mr. and Mrs. Steven Frushtick have submitted an application to the Building Inspector, together with plans, to construct a rear porch; and WHEREAS, the Building Inspector has declined to issue such permit on the grounds that the plans submitted failed to caanply with the Town of Mamaroneck Zoning Ordinance with particular reference to Section 89-31 B(3) on the premi-r:, located at 3 Marbourne Drive and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 334 Parcel 735; and WHEREAS, Mr. and Mrs. Frushtick 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 June 26, 1991 -12- RESOLVED, that this Board hereby denies the application on the following grounds: 1. This plan does not represent the minimum encroachment to alleviate the hardship and practical difficulty. FURTHER RESOLVED, that this decision be filed with the Town Clerk as provided in Section 267 of the Town Law. Mr. Hoffman stated that, by law, the Frushticks may not bring new plans for these additions to this Board for six months. Members of the Board indicated to the Frvshticks and their architect their reasons for rejection. Mr. Kelleher felt that the plans were not the minimum necessary and did not agree with the Gr-al a argument, Mr. Negrin did not ^cry a need for a vestibule and Mr. Simon did not see any hardship and felt that the porch could be built closer to the house. Mr. Wexler told the Frushicks and Mr. LeVesque that in the Town of Mamaroneck getting a front yard variance is very difficult. In a new subdivision such as this one, the Board would be extremely sensitive to encroachment into front yards. ***** APPLICATION NO. 6 - CASE 1042 The Secretary read the application as follows: Application of Mr. & Mrs. K. Dolan requesting a Certificate of Occupancy for an existing rear deck. The deck is required to have a rear yard of 20.0 ft. pursuant to a variance granted June 20, 1990 and has an actual rear yard of 18.96 ft. where 25' is required pursuant to Section 89-32 B (3) in an R-15 Zone District on the premises located at 19 Mohegan Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 208 Parcel 505. Mr. Dolan appeared on behalf of his application. He stated that he hired a reputable engineer and a trustworthy builder but both disavowed the error. The house is now under a contract of qale, and the buyer has indicated that the sale would not go through without the deck. Richard Seltzer of 77 Mohegan Road appeared in opposition. He stated that the deck was a serious invasion of his family's privacy as it is close to their house and the property line. Mr. Seltzer stated that , when the original variance was sought, he had not wanted to cans problems between neighbors. He now accused Mr. Dolan of building his deck in order to sell his house. Mr. Dolan stated that he was moving because his wife was expecting their fourth child. The members of the Board rejected Mr. Seltzer's idea of requiring Mr. Dolan to plant a tree to screen the deck. 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 June 26, 1991 -13- 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. Kevin Dolan have submitted an application to the Building Inspector, together with plans, for a Certificate of Occupancy for an existing rear deck on the premises located at 19 Mohegan Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Mown of Mamaroneck as Block 208 Lot 505; and WHEREAS, the Building Inspector has declined to issue such permit on the grounds that the plans submitted failed to comply with the Down of Mamaroneck Zoning Ordinance with particular reference to Section 89-32 B (3) ; and WHEREAS, Mr. and Mrs. Dolan 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 applicant was granted a variance for the construction of a deck. 2. this application is needed because of an error in siting the deck. 3. The applicant is not responsible for the error; he thought the deck was being built to plan. 4. Being required to remove the nonconformng part of the deck would be a hardship to the applicant. 5 The error is so small that it is of a de minimus nature. 6. The variance granted is the minimum to alleviate the practical difficulty detailed in the application. 7. The granting of the variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of this Ordinance and will not be injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. June 26, 1991 -14- 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 89-32 B (3) of the Zoning Ordinance be varied and modified so as to allow the retention of a rear deck and of issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for said structure on the premises located at 19 Mohegan Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 208 Lot 505 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. Mr. Negrin stated that the opposition to this application was a good reminder that this Board acts on behalf of neighbors who do not want to oppose an application. ***** APPLICATION NO. 7 - CASE 1043 The Secretary read the application as follows: Application of Dr. J. Simone requesting a variance to expand an existing professional office space. Said expansion requires, pursuant to Sections 89-64 and 89-66 A, two (2) additional parking spaces in an RTA Zone District on the premises located at 14 North Chatsworth Avenue and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 127 Lot 150.38, Joseph DiSalvo represented Dr. Simone. Dr. Simone and Dr. Feurbach have been in a dental practice which has been in existence in the Town for 30 years. They proposed expanding into another apartment in their building which is in an RTA zone. Their original space predates the parking requirements so that, Mr. DiSalvo argued, their addition will require only 2 parking spaces The new space will not be for working with more patients but for an expanded waiting roam and more office space. After exhausting many possibilities, the dentists have obtained parking permits for themselves and their employees from the Village of Larchmont at the train station and from the Town for Lot No. 2 both of which are near their office. June 26, 1991 -15- 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 SDQRA. On motion of Mr. Kelleher, seconded by Mr. Simon, the following resolutions were unanimously adopted. WHEREAS, Dr. J. Simone has submitted an application to the Building Inspector, together with plans, to expand an existing professional office space on the premises located at 14 North Chatsworth Avenue and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 127 Lot 150.38; 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 89-65 and 89-66A; and WHEREAS, Dr. Simone 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 applicant has made a good effort to ameliorate the condition by providing parking permits in the municipal lots for himself, his partner and two full-time employees. 2. The variance granted is the minimum to alleviate the practical difficulty detailed in the application. 3. 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. 4. The strict application of the Zoning Ordinance and Town Code would deprive the applicants of the reasonable 11CP of the land and/or building and that the variance granted by this Board will accomplish this purpose; and it is June 26, 1991 -16- FURTHER RESOLVED, that a variance is hereby granted and that Sections 89-65 and 89-66 A of the Zoning Ordinance be varied and modified so as to allow the expansion of an existing professional office space on the premises located at 14 North Chatsworth Avenue and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 127 Lot 150.38 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 this variance: 1. Four municipal parking permits shall be maintained as long as they are available. 2. The practice shall be limited to two dentists and the equivalent of four full-time employes. FUG 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 1044 Application of Mr. H. Wexler requesting a variance to retain a rear metal-roof over a patio. The roof has a rear yard of 17.5 ft. where 25.0 ft. is required pursuant to 89-33 B(3) . Further, pursuant to Section 89-57, the roof increases the extent by which the structure is non-conforming in an R-10 Zone District on the premises located at 146 Valley Stream Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 210 Lot 638. Hannan Wexler appeared on behalf of his application. He stated that the patio roof has existed as long as anyone can remember, at least since 1943. The property to the rear is 70 feet or more from the patio. 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 SEQPA. June 26, 1991 -17- On motion of Mr. Wexler, seconded by Mr. Simon, the following resolutions were unanimously adopted. WHEREAS, Hannan Wexler has submitted an application to the Building Inspector, together with plans, to retain a rear metal-roof over a patio on the premises located at 146 Valley Stream Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 210 Lot 638; 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(3) and 89-57; and WHEREAS, Mr. Wexler 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. There would be a practical difficulty to remove the roof which has been there for at least 48 years. 2. The variance granted is the minimum to alleviate the practical difficulty detailed in the application. 3. 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. 4. The strict application of the Zoning Ordinance and Town Code would deprive the applicants of the reasonable nsP 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 89-33 B(3) and 89-57 of the Zoning Ordinance be varied and modified so as to allow the retention of a rear metal-roof over a patio on the premises located at 146 Valley Stream Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 210 Lot 638 in strict conformance with the plans filed with this application and any conditions set forth in th&Ge 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 June 26, 1991 -18- FURTHER RESOLVED, that the following condition shall attach to the variance: Permission for this roof is limited to the life of the roof. 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. ***** APPROVAL OF MINUTES On motion of Mr. Gunther, seconded by Mr. Wexler, the minutes for April 24, 1991 were approved. On motion of Mr. Simon, seconded by Mr. Kelleher, the minutes for March 28, 1991 were approved. ADJOURNMENT On motion of Mr. Kelleher, seconded by Mr. Gunther, the meeting was adjourned at 11:20 PM. Bonnie M. Burdick