Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1988_07_12 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ZONING BOARD OF THE TOWN OF MAMARONECK JULY 12, 1988, IN THE COURTROOM, TOWN OFFICES 740 WEST BOSTON POST ROAD MAMARONECK, NEW YORK CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Chairman Negrin at 8:25 P.M. ROLL CALL Present: Joel Negrin, Chairman Thomas E. Gunther Patrick B. Kelleher J. Rene Simon Arthur Wexler Also Present: Edward M. Lieberman, Town Counsel William E. Jakubowski, Building Inspector Phyllis Wittner, CZMC Richard Young, CZMC Susan Peterson, Court Stenographer 53 Hamilton Place Tarrytown, New York Bonnie M. Burdick, Recording Secretary lbw APPLICATION No 1 - CASE 841 The Recording Secretary read the application as follows: Application of Hory Chevrolet Inc. , appealing the decision of the Building Inspector that the sale of new boats is neither a permitted principal use nor accessory to the sale of automobiles, pursuant to Section 89-28 A(5) and C(1) , or, in the alternative, requesting a use variance pursuant to Section 89-77 B (2) to permit the sale of new boats at the premises located at 1340 Boston Post Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 410 Parcel 268. Thomas Keane, Attorney; Thomas Hory, President; Mrs. Thomas Hory, Vice-President; and William Weiss, General Manager; appeared on behalf of the application. At its meeting of June 7, 1988, the Board had issued a negative declaration for this application under SEQR, had denied applicant's request for a use variance and denied applicant's appeal that the sale of boats is accessory to the sale of automobiles. In addition, the Board had voted 2-2 on applicant's appeal that the sale of new, inboard motor boats is a permitted principal use under 82-28 A at said meeting, when Mr. Simon was absent. Therefore, the discussion was on this last remaining aspect of the application. (The Public Stenographer's transcript had been made available to Mr. Simon prior to the meeting, and Mr. Simon indicated that he had reviewed it prior to this meeting) . July 12, 1988 Page 2 Letters favoring the Hory application were received from six residents: Mrs. R.J. Schaefer, Felix E. Larkin, Frederick V. Powers, William J. O'Hara, Bruce Beringer, and Alfred J. Moccia. Mr. Keane read Mrs. Schaefer's letter for the record. It and the other five were made part of the permanent file for the applicationas was the report of the CZMC opposing the application. Carl Oddoluccia, of the audience, stated that he was a 28 year resident and that he thought the sale of the boats at the dealership would contribute to the congestion at the corner of Weaver Street and the Post Road. Patricia Flint, also in attendence, stated that she would like to see boats on the Post Road. She said that boats would show that Larchmont is a waterfront community. On motion by Mr. Gunther, seconded by Mr. Negrin, the following resolutions were adopted with a vote of 3-2. Mr. Simon joined Messrs Gunther and Negrin in voting to approve the application, while Mr. Kelleher and Mr. Wexler voted against approval, as follows: WHEREAS, Hory Chevrolet Inc. , has submitted an application to the Building Inspector, together with plans to permit the sale of new inboard motor boats; 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 (1110 particular reference to Section 89-28 A (5) and C (1) on the premises located at 1340 Boston Post Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 410 Parcel 268; and WHEREAS, Hory Chevrolet Inc. submitted an application for an interpretation under Section 89-77 B (1), or, in the alternative, 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, referred the application to Coastal Zone Management Commission for review 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 the sale of new, inboard motor boats is a permitted use under Section 89-28 (A) of the Zoning Ordinance. FURTHER RESOLVED, that the following condition shall attach to the finding: 1. The ownership of the paper street between Hory Chevrolet Inc. , and the shopping center next door July 12, 1988 Page 3 shall be determined and the survey filed with the (mv, Assessor's Office of the Town of Mamaroneck; and 2. Pending such determination, the area of such paper street shall not be used for the sale or display of motor boats. FURTHER RESOLVED that this decision be filed with the Town clerk as provided in Section 267 of the Town Code; and it is FURTHER RESOLVED that the CZMC be advised in writing of this decision and our reasons therefor as requried by the Town's consistency law. ***** APPLICATION NO. 2 - CASE 842 The Recording Secretary read the application as follows: Application of Mr. John Kluge appealing the decision of the Building Inspector that applicant is not entitled to a building permit pursuant to Section 89-58 (A) of the Zoning Ordinance ("Undersize lots") , or, in the alternative, requesting a variance from Section 89-30 A in order to construct a house on a 33,415 square foot parcel where 50,000 square feet are required in an R-50 Zone District, a variance from Section 4119 89-30 B (2) to reduce a side yard from 35.0 ft. required to 24.0 ft. , and a variance of Section 280-a of the Town Law and Section 89-14 of the Zoning Laws of the Town of Mamaroneck requiring that the parcel front on a public street on the premises located at Premium Point Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 508 Parcel 30. Appearing on behalf of the applicant were Geoffrey Young, attorney; his associate, Joann Rosenstrach; William Maker, Jr. , the attorney who represented the applicant before the Coastal Zone Management Commission; Edward Hanington, P.E. of Edward Hanington Engineering Consultants; and Bruce Donohue, Environmental Consultant of Environmental Design Consulting. Mr. Young reviewed the history of this application which had been before the Board since April 27, 1988. The Zoning Board had declared itself the lead agency, referred the matter to the CZMC informally and, upon receipt of an oral report from CZMC on May 24, requested a more complete review by CZMC. Said review had been made and will become part of the record. To avoid conflict of interest, considering the status of Mr. Young as a Village of Larchmont Trustee, the applicant had retained Mr. Maker to represent him before the CZMC. Mr. Maker reviewed the response by CZMC, with input from Mr. Donohue. They stated that the site could maintain a foundation without piles, was adequate for a septic system, could contain a house in compliance with the revised July 12, 1988 Page 4 flood law and would not have a negative impact on endangered species. Much of the rationale for these statements was that no specific plans 'to"' for a house have been made and that it would be likely that such plans would cause review by appropriate agencies because of the site's proximity to a Critical Environmental Area. The applicant agreed to amend the answer to two parts of the Environmental Assessment Form - impact on land and visual impact - from "none" to "slight to moderate". Mr. Maker stated that a letter had been received by the Board from the Premium Point Association - its members are the neighbors of the site - in favor of the application. Mr. Lieberman reviewed with the Board the steps in the SEQRA and Zoning Board approval process. He discussed the possible implications of the types of declarations which could be made. Mr. Negrin responded to the concerns expressed in the CZMC's letter point by point. He stated that the evidence did not support their concerns about tidal wetlands, wildlife, siting and proximity to a Critical Environmental Area and that he did not have any basis to differ with the applicant's answers to the EAF. Mr. Negrin stated that he disagreed with CZMC's interpretation of the request for a use variance. He stated that the problems with the application were problems which, if any, could be solved by adding conditions to the variance at the discretion of the Board. Mr. Negrin stated that he was most appreciative of CZMC's efforts and legitimate concerns. He stated that this application is unique and that he believes a "bandwagon effect" would not occur. Mr. Negrin requested that Mr. Lieberman prepare a letter of response to CZMC which the Board will review at its next meeting. On motion of Mr. Negrin, seconded by Mr. Gunther, it was unanimously RESOLVED, that this Board determines that the identified environmental impacts of this proposal will not be significant. At the suggestion of Mr. Kelleher, the Board decided to adjourn and then to hear the rest of the agenda before resuming the discussion of the Kluge application. The meeting was temporarily adjourned at 10:38 P. M. and re-opened at 11:00 P.M. APPLICATION NO. 3 - CASE 846 The Recording Secretary read the application as follows: Application of Mr. Brad Eric Scheler requesting a variance from Section 89-35 B(3) to reduce the rear yard from 25.0 ft. required to 10.5 ft. , 1 AP in an R-6 Zone District, for the proposed construction of a stairway July 12, 1988 Page 5 and 3.5' x 4.0' platform on the premises located at 32 Maple Hill Drive and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 122 Parcel 430. Mr. Scheler appeared on behalf of his application. He stated that through an oversight on his part the notice for his application at the last meeting had neglected to mention the stairway from the screened porch. He stated that said stairway encroaches to the same extent that an existing stairway does. Mr. Jakubowski stated that this application was consistent with the plans previously filed by Mr. Scheler. On motion by Mr. Wexler, seconded by Mr. Gunther, it was unanimously 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 SEQR. Therefore, on motion by Mr. Simon, seconded by Mr. Gunther, the following resolutions were unanimously adopted: WHEREAS, Mr. Brad Eric Scheler has submitted an application to the Building Inspector, together with plans to construct a stairway and a 3.5 ft. x 4.0 ft. platform with a 10.5 ft. rear yard setback; 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 89-35 B (3) on the premises located at 32 Maple Hill Drive and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 122 Parcel 430; and WHEREAS, Mr. Scheler 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: July 12, 1988 Page 6 1. The encroachment of this stairway is comparable to that of a similar existing stairway. Ilkaw 2. The variance granted is the minimum possible 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; and 4. 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 5. All affected neighbors are on record in support of the application; and, it is, FURTHER RESOLVED, that a variance is hereby granted and that Section 89-35 B (3) of the Zoning Ordinance be varied and modified so as to allow the construction of a rear deck on the premises located at 32 Maple Hill Drive and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 122 Parcel 430 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 aplicant shall obtain a building permit with 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 Code. APPLICATION NO. 4 - CASE 825 The Recording Secretary read the application as follows: Application of Mr. and Mrs. Robert DiBiccari adjourned from the meeting of June 22, 1988. t July 12, 1988 Page 7 Michael D. Blutrich, attorney, and Michael G. Calvi, architect, appeared with Mr. DiBiccari in connection with the application. This matter had been adjourned from the Board's meeting of June 22, 1988. Because of the proximity of the property to a Critical Environmental Area, it was referred to the Coastal Zone Management Commission which had responded to the application by letter dated July 5, 1988. Mr. Blutrich stated that new plans had been submitted to the Board to address the CZMC's concern about the elevation of the deck above sea level. The new plans for the deck indicate 14.15 feet above sea level, where 14 feet are required by Federal regulations. On motion of Mr. Wexler, seconded by Mr. Simon, it was unanimously RESOLVED, that this is a Type I Action having no significant impact on the environment as determined by New York State or corresponding local law, therefore requiring no further action under SEQR. On motion of Mr. Gunther, seconded by Mr. Simon, the following resolutions were adopted unanimously: WHEREAS, Mr. and Mrs. Robert DiBiccari have submitted an application to the Building Inspector, together with plans, to construct a new front addition with a 10.9 feet front yard setback; 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 (1) and 89-57 on the premises located at 23 Dillon Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamroneck as Block 505 Parcel 210; and WHEREAS, Mr.and Mrs. DiBiccari 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, referred the application to the Coastal Zone Management Commission which has responded that the proposal would not be inconsistent with Local Waterfron Revitalization Plan policies, and has heard all persons interested in this application after publication of a notice thereof; 1 July 12, 1988 Page 8 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that this Board finds that there al circumstances and/or conditions applying to the land for which the variance is sought on the following grounds: 1. This property is bisected by a right-of-way which makes construction into other parts of the yard impossible. 2. The front of the house is the area farthest away from the Critical Environmental Area. 3. The variance granted is the minimum possible 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; and 5. The resulting front yard is similar to those of nearby properties; and 6. The strict application of the Zoning Ordinance and Town Code would deprive the applicants of the reasonable use of the land and/or buildingand that the variance granted by this Board will accomplish this purpose; and it is FURTHER RESOLVED, that the following condition shall attach to the variance: Leaders shall be constructed on the porch to meet the satisfaction of the Building Inspector. FURTHER RESOLVED, that a variance is hereby granted and that Section 89-33 B (1) and 89-57 of the Zoning Ordinance be varied and modified so as to allow the construction of a front addition on the premises located at 23 Dillon Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 505 Parcel 210 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 with six months of the filing of this Resolution with r � July 12, 1988 Page 9 the Town Clerk and in accordance with Section 89-73 of the L 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 Code ***** APPLICATION NO. 5 - CASE 855 The Recording Secretary read the application as follows: Application of Mr. and Mrs. Jeffrey Kass requesting variances from Section 89-34 B(2)(a) and Section 89-57 to reduce the side yard from 10.0 feet required to 6.7 feet, in an R-7.5 Zone District, to allow to remain an enclosed porch, which increased the extent by which the existing structure fails to meet the side yard requirements, on the premises located at 44 Glenn Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 114 Parcel 520. Mr. and Mrs. Kass appeared on behalf of their application. A front porch had been enclosed in the 1940's. The applicants needed a variance so that a Certificate of Occupancy could be issued in connection with the sale of the house. Mr. Kass stated that they were CIO not abandoning the neighborhood, - in fact, they are moving across the street - and submitted a favorable letter from a long-time neighbor of the house who resides at 42 Glenn Road. On motion of Mr. Gunther, seconded by Mr. Wexler it was unanimously 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 SEQR. On motion of Mr. Kelleher, seconded by Mr. Simon, the following resolutions were unanimously approved: WHEREAS, Mr. and Mrs. Jeffrey Kass have submitted an application to the Building Inspector, together with plans, to allow to remain an enclosed entrance porch with a 6.7 feet side yard setback; 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 89-34 B (2)(a) and Section 89-57 on the premises located at 44 Glenn Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamroneck as Block 114 Parcel 520; and ® WHEREAS, Mr. and Mrs. Kass submitted an application for a variance to this Board on the grounds of practical difficulty July 12, 1988 Page 10 and/or unnecessary hardship for the reasons set forth in such appication; 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 enclosed entryway with powder room, vestibule and closet has been in existence since the 1940's. 2. The variance granted is the minimum possible 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; and 4. The strict application of the Zoning Ordinance and L 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 (2) (a) and Section 89-57 of the Zoning Ordinance be varied and modified so as to allow to remain the existing entrance with powder room, vestibule and closet on the premises located at 44 Glenn Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 114 Parcel 520 in strict conformance with the plans filed with this application 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 with 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 Code 46 ***** July 12, 1988 Page 11 APPLICATION NO. 6 - CASE 862 *lo' The Recording Secretary read the application as follows: Application of Mr. Carl J. Tortorella requesting variances from Section 89-20 A(1) , Section 89-34 A (1) and Section 89-66 A to respectively use the premises as a two (2) family use where only one (1) family dwellings are permitted; to allow two (2) dwelling units on 7,500 square feet of lot where 15,000 square feet are required and to allow one (1) off-street parking space where two (2) 9' x 20' spaces are required in an R-7.5 Zone District on the premises located at 11 Leafy Lane and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 126 Parcel 477. Mr. Simon announced that he was abstaining from the discussion and vote as he knew the applicant as a friend and had done work for him. James Capacella, attorney, appeared on behalf of the applicant. He stated that Mr. Tortorella had helped to build the house in 1938 and was aware that it had been used as a three-family house from the time of said construction. Mr. Tortorella purchased the house in 1969 and continued using it as a three-family house until a year ago. The Town had assessed the house as a three-family house. In 1980 Mr. Tortorella applied for a variance before this Board in order to build an addition. At that time the Board determined that the house was a non-conforming three-family house and denied the variance, declining to Clir extend the non-conformity. Mr. Capacella stated that applicant has suffered a loss of $2500 - 3000 during the year that the building has been used as a two-family house and has been unable to sell the house because it does not easily lend itself to conversion to a one-family house. The house has been on the market for more than a year. The Board requested proof of such losses. Applicant did not produce such proof and declined the Board's offer of an adjournment to provide such proof. Mr. Wexler pointed out that the plans show the house as a one-family house. Mr. Capacella agreed and stated that the Certificate of Occupancy listed it as a one-family house, too. Olympia Rossheim, a real estate agent, spoke in favor of the application. She stated that Mr. Tortorella had compromised by seeking a variance for a two-family house, that he had not made a great deal of money from the rentals and that there was no buyer for the house as a one-family house. There were a large number of people in the audience interested in this application. Several of them spoke. They were: Michael and Susan Levine, 5 Leafy Lane; Robert Barber, 7 Leafy Lane; Jean Putnam, 10 Leafy Lane; George Gold, 8 Leafy Lane; Dr. Edwin Ladin, 2 Leafy Lane; and Al Cadeno, 1 Leafy Lane. They were all opposed to the application July 12, 1988 Page 12 and detailed the history of their opposition to multi-family use which dated back to at least 1976. They stated that the street was small - 9 'taw houses - and that there were difficulties with cars, particularly for Mr. Barber, Mr. Tortorella's next-door neighbor. Currently no members of the Tortoralla family live in the house, and the neighbors asked that the house be used as the one-family house it is legally supposed to be. Mr. Negrin informally polled the Board for their views about the matter. The four members polled all were in opposition to granting the variance. In view of that determination, on motion of Mr. Gunther, seconded by Mr. Kelleher, with Mr. Simon abstaining, it was unanimously 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 SEQR. Thereafter, on motion of Mr. Gunther, seconded by Mr. Kelleher, with Mr. Simon abstaining, the following resolutions were unanimously adopted: WHEREAS, Mr. Carl J. Tortorella has submitted an application to the Building Inspector, together with plans to respectively use the premises as a two (2) family use, to allow two (2) dwelling units on 7,500 square feet of lot and to allow one (1) off-street parking space; 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 89-20 A (1) , Section 89-34 A(1) and Section 89-66 A on the premises located at 11 Leafy Lane and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 126 Parcel 477; and WHEREAS, Mr. Tortorella 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 r July 12, 1988 Page 13 RESOLVED, that this Board hereby denies the application on the following grounds: 1. No legal rights have been earned by the 50 years of unlawful use of the structure as a multiple dwelling. 2. Special circumstances do not exist sufficiently to allow a variance from the one (1) family district. 3. No exceptional physical conditions were described to warrant a variance. 4. No evidence in support of the allegation of economic hardship was offered, despite express request for information in support of such allegation; 5. No evidence was adduced that the property could not be used as a single family dwelling, 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. 7 - CASE 863 This application was not heard because the applicants were no longer in attendance. Due to the late hour, the matter was adjourned to the next meeting and will be placed at the beginning of the agenda. TEMPORARY ADJOURNMENT The Chairman announced a brief adjournment at 12:38 A.M. RECALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order again at 12:50 A.M. in order to resume deliberation on Application No. 2 - Case 842 - the application of John Kluge. Geoffrey Young, attorney, reiterated the circumstances of this case - two parcels being merged into one corporate name, the change of zoning from R-35 and R-50 and the difference in possible sale prices if the property is re-divided. Mr. Young stated that there were many special circumstances that would not cause a precedent - 1) the time frame with respect to the zoning change is unique; 2) Premium Point in itself is unique and its character would not change; 3) the Premium A Point Association is in favor of the application; 4) the application is in harmony with the intent of the Zoning Ordinance; 5) there is no adjoining street 6) denial of the variance will result in a financial loss to the applicant of between $300,000 - 900,000, according to an July 12, 1988 Page 14 appraisal submitted by the applicant; 7) open space will be maintained in view of the fact that the new lot is bounded by open beach areas on two sides; and 8) six of the seventeen properties in R-50 districts are non-conforming. Phyllis Wittner of the CZMC stated the Commission's viewpoint. Twenty-three residents had spent three years writing the revision to the Zoning Ordinance. One purpose of the re-zoning of certain areas was to prevent property owners from sub-dividing their property. This property is close to the Premium Salt Marsh which is a Critical Environmental Area, and New York State has upheld the concept of waterfront revitalization. Mr. Kelleher stated that there had been a house on the property for 57 years and that he felt that the applicant was caught in a "Catch 22" situation. The other members of the Board expressed sympathy with the applicant's situation. Therefore, on motion of Mr. Wexler, seconded by Mr. Simon, the following resolutions were unanimously adopted: WHEREAS, Mr. John Kluge submitted an application to the Building Inspector, together with plans to construct a house on a 33,415 square foot lot with a side yard of 24.0 feet on a non-public street; and 1 L 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 89-58 A, Section 89-30 B (2) , Section 289-14 and Section 280-a of the Town Law on the premises located at Premium Point Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamroneck as Block 508 Parcel 30; and WHEREAS, Mr. Kluge 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, referred the application to the Coastal Zone Management Commission and received a response, 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: I July 12, 1988 Page 15 1. The property had been merged in 1986 in response to a condition imposed by this Board on a previous application for an addition which was never built. 2. Prior to said merger, the property existed as proposed -- as two separate parcels, with houses thereon -- for some 57 years. 3. Thus,the application before us is to restore the status quo ante, which existed for many years. 4. The applicant will suffer a substantial financial hardship if the application is not granted. 5. There is no feasible alternative for the applicant to pursue, other than the variance requested, which would avoid the financial difficulty mentioned above. 6. In view of the above, the variance will not adversely affect the character of the neighborhood, which contains many parcels rendered non-conforming by the re-zoning of the area in 1986. 7. The effect of the increased density in population created by the probable addition of one additional 060, house as a result of this variance, will not create an undue burden on available governmental services and facilities -- especially since the new house, if and when built, will merely replace a former residence which was in existence until 1986. 8. The proposed new lot will front on Premium Point Road, a private road which is maintained by the Premium Point Association, which has and will afford suitable access by emergency vehicles; 9. Many of the concerns expressed by the Coastal Zone Management Commission are premature in that no structure is presently proposed, and can be addressed when a building permit is applied for. Other concerns have been addressed in our response to the Commission which response is made a part hereof; and 10. The strict application of the Zoning Ordinance would deprive the applicant of the reasonable use of his land and/or building; 11. The variance will not be otherwise injurious to the public health, safety and welfare for the reasons stated above; and it is July 12, 1988 Page 16 FURTHER RESOLVED, that a variance is hereby granted and that Sections 89-58 A, 89-30 B (2) and 89-14 of the Zoning Ordinance and Section 280-a of the Town Law be varied and modified so as to allow the construction of a house on the premises located at Premium Point Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 508 Parcel 30, provided that the applicants comply in all other respects with the Zoning Ordinance and Building Code of the Town of Mamaroneck, subject to the following conditions: That any building permit appication which results from the variance be referred to the Coastal Zone Management Commission for its review; and it is FURTHER RESOLVED, that 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 Code. ***** NEXT MEETING The Board set its next meeting for Tuesday, August 16, 1988 at 8:15 P.M. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 2:13 A.M. Bonnie M. Burdick Recording Secretary