HomeMy WebLinkAbout1989_09_27 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
ZONING BOARD OF THE TOWN OF MAMARONECK
SEPTEMBER 27, 1989 IN THE COURTROOM, TOWN CENTER
740 WEST BOSTON POST ROAD
MAMARONECK, NEW YORK
Present: Joel Negrin, Chairman
Thomas E. Gunther
Patrick B. Kelleher
J. Rene Simon
Arthur Wexler
Also Present: Lee A. Hoffman, Jr. , Counsel
Norma Gatzimbide, Public Stenographer
Carbone, Kazazes & Associates
225 Mount Pleasant Avenue
Mamaroneck, NY 10543
Bonnie M. Burdick, Recording Secretary
CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order by Chairman Negrin at 8:17 PM. He
asked that Mr. Hoffman prepare a memo on the subject of the new Town of
Mamaroneck Environmental Quality Review Law comparing it with its State
counterpart. He also stated that the calendar was full for the session
and requested that those in the audience concerning the first four
applications, all of which had been before the Board previously,
confine their statements and questions to new aspects.
APPLICATION No. 1 - CASE 901
The Recording Secretary read the application as follows:
Application of Mr. and Mrs. H. Auffarth to allow the subdivision of a
parcel into two (2) lots where the parcel fronting on Edgewood Avenue
would have an area of 4,730 square feet where 6,000 square feet is
required as a minimum pursuant to Section 89-35A(1) ; a depth of 93.4
feet where 100.0 feet is required pursuant to Section 89-35 A(3) ; and a
rear yard depth of 21.0 feet where 25 feet is required pursuant to
Section 89-35B(3) and; Section 89-57 as the new lot and rear yard will
result in an increase by which the building fails to meet the district
requirements. Further, the Hillcrest Avenue parcel would have an area
of 4,282.6 square feet where 6,000 square feet is required as a minimum
pursuant to Section 89-35A(1) and a street frontage of 50.06 feet and a
width of 50.0 where 60.0 feet is required as a minimum width and
frontage pursuant to Section 89-53 A(2) and a depth of 85.0 feet where
100.0 feet is required pursuant to Section 89-35A(3) for the premises
located at 20 Edgewood Avenue and known on the Tax Assessment Map as
Block 123 Parcel 309.
The minutes of this meeting provide a summary of the discussion for
this application. The transcript of the Public Stenographer is a true
record.
September 27, 1989
-2-
Rita Gilbert, attorney, appeared on behalf of the application. She
stated that the Auffarths had supplied the Board with details
concerning the questions it had had about the application. These
concerns were: drainage, lack of topographical details on the
drawings, additional information needed for the EIS and certain precise
questions about the architecture. Ms. Gilbert stated that a house in
New Rochelle owned by the Auffarths which was mentioned by some of the
neighbors had been inherited by Mrs. Auffarth and that Mr. Auffarth was
not a real estate developer.
Also appearing was Howard Lieberman, P.E. , an engineer. He stated that
he had tested for below-ground rock and found no indication of any at
the site or in municipal records. Runoff from the roof would drain
into a dry well as would runoff from the yard. A drain would be placed
at the bottom of the driveway to catch water. Mr. Lieberman stated
that, in his professional opinion, the addition of a house would not
effect the environment.
Lawrence Gordon, architect, presented updated plans. He stated that
the height and design of the house would be in scale with the houses on
either side of the proposed lot.
Mr. Auffarth stated that 20 Edgewood Avenue was purchased with the
intent to subdivide for his daughter. He had submitted information
from his 1988 tax return and current facts showing the loss suffered in
owing this house. Mr. Auffarth enumerated the volunteer activities of
his family, gave personal information about himself and stated that he
would sell 20 Edgewood Avenue if the variance were not granted.
Those appearing in opposition were: Tom Wey, 18 Edgewood; Paul Martin,
62 Hillcrest Avenue; Anna Reisman, 24 Edgewood, Edward Lau, 42
Hillcrest Avenue and Sarah O'Rourke, 35 Hillcrest. They reiterated the
concerns expressed in the past: the hardship was self-imposed by the
applicant, and, in reality, would cause a hardship on the neighbors;
and the proposed house is larger than its neighbors; and overcrowding
and more traffic will result. To sustained applause, concern was
expressed about setting a precedent particularly as other possible
sites for similar subdivisions exist in the neighborhood.
Following the comments from the applicant, his lawyer and those in the
audience, the Board discussed the application.
On motion of Mr. Wexler, seconded by Mr. Simon, the Board 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 SEQRA.
September 27, 1989
-3-
Mr. Hoffman stated that it was his opinion that the new laws concerning
SEQRA necessitated calling the action an unlisted one. Therefore, on
motion of Mr. Negrin, seconded by Mr. Kelleher, it was unanimously
RESOLVED, that this is an Unlisted Action, which could require a
Negative Declaration to be issued by the Environmental Officer.
On motion of Mr. Kelleher, seconded by Mr. Negrin, the following
resolutions were unanimously adopted:
WHEREAS, Mr. and Mrs. H. Auffarth have submitted an application to
the Building Inspector, together with plans to allow the
subdivision of a parcel into two (2) lots on the premises located
at 20 Edgewood Avenue and known on the Tax Assessment Map as Block
123 Parcel 309; 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 as the parcel fronting on
Edgewood Avenue would have an area of 4,730 square feet where
6,000 square feet is required as a minimum pursuant to Section
89-35A(1) ; a depth of 93.4 feet where 100.0 feet is required
pursuant to Section 89-35 A(3) ; and a rear yard depth of 21.0 feet
where 25 feet is required pursuant to Section 89-35B(3) and; this
new lot and its rear yard will result in an increase by which the
building fails to meet the district requirements pursuant to
Section 89-57. Further, the Hillcrest Avenue parcel would have an
area of 4,282.6 square feet where 6,000 square feet is required as
a minimum pursuant to Section 89-35A(1) and a street frontage of
50.06 feet and a width of 50.0 where 60.0 feet is required as a
minimum width and frontage pursuant to Section 89-53 A(2) and a
depth of 85.0 feet where 100.0 feet is required pursuant to
Section 89-35A(3) .
WHEREAS, Mr. and Mrs. Auffarth 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. The applicants have not sufficiently sustained the grounds
for practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship which would
warrant granting a variance.
2. To the extent that practical difficulty and/or unnecessary
hardship was demonstrated, said practical difficulty and/or
unnecessary hardship was self-imposed.
September 27, 1989
-4-
3. The application sought a substantial reduction in lot
coverage.
4. As cited in similar cases of record, Scalifone and Graziano,
courts have found that variances of this type are not
warranted.
FURTHER RESOLVED, that this decision be filed with the Town Clerk
as provided in Section 267 of the Town Law.
APPLICATION NO. 2 - CASE NO. 910
The Recording Secretary read the application as follows:
Application of George & Edith Realty Corp. requesting a variance to
allow a subdivision of property, the resulting lot fronting Sherwood
Drive having a lot width and frontage of 67.5 feet where 75.0 feet is
required pursuant to Section 89-34 A(2) in an R-7.5 Zone District on
the premises located at 2434 Boston Post Road and known on the Tax
Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 503 Parcel 326.
This case was heard concurrently with
APPLICATION NO. 3 - CASE 911
The Recording Secretary read the application as follows:
Application of Hi-Tech Car Wash requesting variance from Section 89-28
B(7) to allow use of a car wash without the required gasoline filling
station operation; use of the rear yard for commercial purposes without
a 10 feet deep planting area for a landscaped buffer pursuant to
Section 89-41 B(3) and, further, the additions and awning proposed
would increase lot coverage to 38% where 25% is the maximum allowed
pursuant to Section 89-41 A(3) . Additional variances of the Sign Law
are needed for the erection of or refacing of signs as follows: A sign
of 80 square foot area and 20.0 feet above grade and a second sign of
75 square foot area and 17.5 feet above grade are proposed where only
one sign, no more than 30 square feet in area and 15 feet in height, is
allowed pursuant to Section 14-33 D and the 80 square foot sign as
proposed has exposed sources of illumination where only indirect
illumination is allowed pursuant to Section 14-35 E and the 75 square
foot sign has excessive lettering for the activity it represents and is
inappropriate to the surroundings pursuant to Section 14-30 D(1) and
(2) , in a B (Business) Zone District, on the premises located at 2434
Boston Post Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of
Mamaroneck as Block 503 Parcel 326.
Donald Mazin and Michael Poles, attorneys, represented High Tech and
George and Edith Realty respectively. Michael Gismondi, architect,
also appeared as did Stephen Bernard, owner of High Tech.
September 27, 1989
-5-
Mr. Hoffman stated that these applications had been before the Planning
Board previously. Said Board had completed the environmental processes
and had decided that with appropriate mitigating measures no adverse
environmental impact would occur.
Mr. Gismondi discussed the plans for the building lot on Sherwood
Drive. He showed a plan for a two story 2000 square foot house. The
buffer zone required between commercial and residential properties
would be placed at the back of this lot. A dense evergreen hedge would
be planted and 10 feet would be allotted for the buffer zone. A
45-foot rear yard would result where 25 feet is required. The
variances requested were for the side yards.
On motion of Mr. Negrin, seconded by Mr. Kelleher, the following
resolutions were unanimously adopted:
WHEREAS, George and Edith Realty has submitted an application to
the Building Inspector, together with plans to allow the
subdivision of a parcel into two lots on the premises located at
2434 Boston Post Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the
Town of Mamroneck as Block 503 Parcel 326.
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 as the resulting lot fronting
Sherwood Drive would have a lot width and frontage of 67.5 feet
where 75 feet is required pursuant to Section 89-34 A(2) ;and
WHEREAS, George and Edith Realty 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 variance granted is the minimum to alleviate the
practical difficulty detailed in the application.
2. 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
3. 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
September 27, 1989
-6-
FURTHER RESOLVED, that a variance is hereby granted and that Section
89-34 A(2) of the Zoning Ordinance be varied and modified so as to
allow the subdivison on the premises located at 2434 Boston Post
Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck
as Block 503 Parcel 326 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. The plans must meet the requirements of the Planning Board
of the Town of Mamaroneck under Section 89-41 B(3) .
2. A legal instrument shall be drawn and duly recorded for
the buffer zone between the two resulting lots - one
commercial, one residential. Said instrument will be
subject to the approval of the Counsel to this Board and
will determine the responsibility for the maintenance of
the buffer zone.
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. Mazin had a large display of photos showing views of the car wash
from both East and West on the Post Road and of the Post Road in both
directions from the car wash. The road curves at the car wash, and the
building is set back 60 feet from the road. Mr. Mazin stated that the
establishment is under new ownership which he commended. The proposed
canopies are for the safety of the workers and the customers. Mr. Mazin
stated that there is a competitor down the street and that the signage
must be large enough and high enough for potential customers to see well
in advance.
Mr. Bernard stated that he has installed canopies at other car washes
(He owns twelve. ) Hi-Tech will be well lit in Winter with the lighting
aimed to the ground. Mr. Bernard stated that the canopies will make the
business attractive and neat in appearance while protecting the public
from the elements. He stated that the "glitzy" current sign on the
building will be removed.
On motions by Mr. Wexler, seconded by Messrs. Gunther, Kelleher and Simon
the following resolutions were adopted:
September 27, 1989
-7-
WHEREAS, High-Tech Car Wash submitted an application to the Building
Inspector, together with plans, to operate a car wash without gasoline
tanks, to operate a commercial establishment contiguous to a
residential area with a rear yard without a buffer zone, to increase
lot coverage to 38% and to display over-sized signs; 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, which requires the operation of
gasoline tanks in order to maintain a car wash pursuant to Section
89-28 B(7) ; a ten foot deep planting area for a landscaped buffer area
between commercial and residential areas pursuant to Section 89-41
B(3) ; and the maintenance of a maximum 25% lot coverage, pursuant to
Section 89-41 A(3) . Further, the sign law allows the installation of
one sign 15 feet above grade measuring 30 square feet with indirect
illumination and lettering appropriate to the business' activity and
surroundings pursuant to Section 14-33 D, 14-35E and 14-30 D (1) and
(2) , and an 80 square foot sign 20 feet above grade with exposed
illumination is proposed, as well as a 75 square foot sign 17.5 feet
above grade with lettering of excessive size. The premises are located
at 2434 Boston Post Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map as Block
503 Parcel 3261; and
WHEREAS, High-Tech Car Wash submitted an application to this Board for
a series of variances 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 his 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 removal of the gasoline tanks is environmentally sound in
that said action removes a hazard and a visual pollutant and
does not adversely affect the property or the neighborhood.
2. Installation of the canopies with new lighting enhances the
safety of workers and customers.
3. The erection of an over-sized sign approximately 4 x 6 feet,
20 feet above grade (to the bottom of the sign) , and with
exposed illumination, is necessary because of the topography
of the location on the Boston Post Road and the existence of
other similar signs and telephone poles in the immediate
vicinity. This sign is consistent with other ones in the
neighborhood.
C
September 27, 1989
-8-
4. A 75 square foot sign, under the rear canopy, is
necessary to reasonably inform patrons of service
offered by the car wash. A smaller sign would impede
traffic flow on the site and create dangerous conditions
for pedestrians and other drivers on the site.
FURTHER RESOLVED, that a variance is hereby granted and that
Sections 89-28 B(7) , 89-41 A(3) & B(3) of the Zoning Ordinance and
Section Sections 14-33 D, 14-35 E and Sections 14-33 D (1) and (2)
of the Sign Law be varied and modified so as to allow the removal
of gas tanks at a car wash, the operation of a business next to a
residential area with no landscaped buffer zone and the erection
of two over-sized signs which exceed the height limitation with
one illuminated exteriorly and one with lettering excessive for
the business and its surroundings; on the premises located at 2434
Boston Post Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town
of Mamaroneck as Block 503 Parcel 326 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. The rear yard buffer zone between the commercial and
residential property shall be located on the rear ten feet of
the residential property. This buffer zone shall be
installed and maintained by the owner of the commercial
property. An easement shall be granted to the commercial
property so that it may maintain the buffer zone. The
residential property shall retain the right to maintain the
buffer zone in the event the commercial property does not.
The residential property shall have the right to charge the
commercial property for any maintenance performed by it.
Said easement shall be approved as to form and content by
counsel to the Board. The existence of the buffer zone shall
be noted on deed to the residential property and the easement
for maintenance shall be recorded by the owner of the
commercial property.
2. Two triangles of planting shall be installed and maintained
on the rear line 15 feet in from each corner and shall be at
least 10 feet deep along the side property line.
3. The height of the canopies shall not exceed 20 feet.
4. The second over-sized sign, which is not to exceed 75 square
feet or be installed more than 17.5 above grade and which
shall be located under the rear canopy, shall be subject to
further approval by this Board as to design and physical
layout.
September 27, 1989
-9-
5. The exposed source of illumination for the front canopy shall
be directed to the ground only and be recessed behind the
side and front of the canopy; 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
month 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 Section 267 of the Town Law.
Mr. Hoffman stated that, in his opinion, the Planning Board could now
act upon the applications for a Special Permit and a Site Plan for
these applicants.
RECESS
Mr. Negrin temporarily adjourned the meeting at 10:58 PM and reopened
it at 11:07 PM.
APPLICATION NO. 4 - CASE 925
The Recording Secretary read the application as follows:
Application of Mr. Joseph and Mr. Michael Mirabella to allow the
subdivision of a parcel into two (2) lots where the parcel with the
existing dwelling would have an area of 7,014.06 square feet where
10,000 feet is required pursuant to Section 89-33 A(1) ; a depth of 93.0
feet where 100.00 feet is required pursuant to Section 89-33 A(3) and a
street frontage and width of 75.42 feet where 85.0 feet is required
pursuant to Section 89-33 A(2) . The parcel to be created would have an
area of 5,555.94 square feet where 10,000 square feet is required
pursuant to Section 89-33A(1) ; a frontage and width of 57.0 feet where
85.00 feet is required pursuant to Section 89-33 A(2) and a depth 75.42
feet where 100.00 feet is required pursuant to Section 89-33 A(3) .
Further the proposed dwelling would have a rear yard of 18.42 feet
where 25.0 feet is required pursuant to Section 89-33 B(3) and a total
side yard of 20.0 feet where 25.0 feet is required pursuant to Section
89-33 B(2)(b) , in an R-10 Zone District, on the premises located at 27
Holly Place and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of
Mamaroneck as Block 221 Parcel 333.
These minutes are a summary of the proceedings. The transcript of the
Public Stenographer is the true record.
Richard E. Lanza, attorney, appeared on behalf of the Messrs.
Mirabella. He stated that there was a great deal of interest in the
immediate neighborhood concerning this case which had been before this
Board on August 23rd. Mr. Lanza stated that an area variance was being
sought and cited a case entitled Washburger as being relevant. Said
case, he stated, showed that a self-created hardship was not a complete
September 27, 1989
-10-
bar to an area variance. Mr. Lanza reiterated the aspects about the
Mirabella family situation. He stated that this lot would be a "clean"
lot and would have easily available utility hookups.
Jefferson Meighan, attorney, represented some of the neighbors to the
lot in question. He stated that a petition had been filed with this
Board in opposition signed by neighbors in 95 households. Mr. Meighan
stated that there are 14 neighborhood lots which could be similarly
broken up and that there had been estimates made that a 10 - 15 % loss
in property values would occur to neighboring houses should the
variance be granted. He stated that the house would be aesthetically
displeasing as it would be placed on 2300 square feet of land and would
be, in actuality, a "tight squeeze". Mr. Meighan stated that he was
concerned about the precedent-setting nature an approval would signal.
He warned the Board that it could be using "capricious abusive
discretion" and stated that it was his opinion that the applicant's
case did not meet the Washburger five-way test cited by Mr. Lanza. Mr.
Meighan had prepared a memorandum for the Board which will become a
part of the record.
Matthew Dollinger, attorney, represented Jonathan Richards of 2 Forest
Place. He stated that his clients had relied upon the rules,
regulations and codes of the Town when they bought their house and that
the Mirabellas, too, relied upon the same laws when they purchased
their house. Mr. Dollinger referred to the Graziano and Scalifano
cases cited previously during the Auffarth application. He stated that
they were recent decisions and that the cases were similar. Mr.
Dollinger stated that the fact that the Mirabellas were volunteer
fireman was irrelevant to the case at hand and that the hardship, which
was self-created, was one that should not be alleviated by placing a
burden on their neighbors.
Nina Rescio, 11 Holly Place, stated that once a variance is granted it
exists forever.
John Perry, an officer with the Town of Mamaroneck Fire Department,
stated that the Department, of which both of the applicants are
members, has approximately 80 members and is shrinking rapidly. Stuart
Strachen, 49 Sheldrake Avenue, questioned whether the Mirabella's Fire
Department membership was an important point.
Following the comments of the applicants, their lawyers and community
members, the Board discussed the application.
On motion of Mr. Kelleher, 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 an Unlisted Action which could
require that a Negative Declaration be issued by the Environmental
Officer.
On motion of Mr. Gunther, seconded by Mr. Wexler, the Board voted 4 -
1, Mr. Kelleher opposed, to adopt the following resolutions:
September 27, 1989
-11-
WHEREAS, Joseph and Michael Mirabella have submitted an
application to the Building Inspector, together with plans to
subdivide a parcel into two non-conforming lots; 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 A (1) , (2) & (3) , 89-33 B (2)(b) and 89-33 B(3) on
the premises located at 27 Holly Place and known on the Tax
Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 221 Parcel 333 ;
and
WHEREAS, the Messrs. Mirabella 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. The variance would have too severe an impact on zoning
and the community.
2. Practical difficulty was not demonstrated.
3. There are no special circumstances or conditions which
are peculiar to the land as it exists that would prevent
its reasonable use by the applicant.
FURTHER RESOLVED, that this decision be filed with the Town Clerk
as provided in Section 267 of the Town Law.
*****
APPLICATION NO. 5 - CASE 933
The Recording Secretary read the application as follows
Application of Mr. and Mrs. Joseph Weiner requesting a variance from
Section 89-67 to reduce the setback from the street line from
25.0 feet required to 20.0 feet for the proposed construction of an
off-street parking area and further requesting a variance from Section
89-33 B(3)(b) to reduce the rear yard from 5.0 feet required to 3.6
feet, in an R-10 Zone District, to retain a shed on the premises
located at 733 Forest Avenue and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the
Town of Mamaroneck as Block 220 Parcel 389.
Mr. Weiner appeared on behalf of his application. He stated that the
house had been built in 1923 and bought by him in 1984. In 1983 the
previous owner had added pavement to the driveway and erected a shed in
the back yard without proper permits. To obtain a Certificate of
September 27, 1989
-12-
Occupancy, said owner had removed the nonconforming driveway. The shed
remained although, it too does not conform to the Ordinance. Mr.
Weiner stated that the house has no basement and that the shed is
needed for storage of tools and garden accoutrements.
The larger driveway is a necessity as the turning radius is awkward.
Accidents have occurred to the house and car. Also, there is a rock
ledge near the driveway. Ice collects on this ledge causing dangerous
walking conditions. There are two driveways at this property as it is
a two-family, owner-occupied house
Mr. Weiner submitted a letter favoring the application which will
become part of the record.
On motion of Mr. Wexler, 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 SEQRA.
On motion of Mr. Simon, seconded by Mr. Gunther, the following
resolutions were unanimously adopted:
WHEREAS, Mr. and Mrs. Joseph Weiner have submitted an application
to the Building Inspector, together with plans, to construct an
off-street parking area and to allow the retention of a shed on
the premises located at 733 Forest Avenue and known on the Tax
Assessment Map of the Town of Mamroneck as Block 220 Parcel 389;
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 89-67 B and 89-33 B(3)(b) ; and
WHEREAS, Mr. and Mrs. Weiner 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 area of increased paving is well screened with
hemlocks from the side yard neighbor.
September 27, 1989
-13-
2. Said area is hidden from the street because it is more
than six feet above grade.
3. The shed has been in place for a number of years.
4. The variance requested for said shed is only 1 feet.
5. The variance granted is the minimum to alleviate the
practical difficulty detailed in the application.
6. The granting of the variance is in harmony with the
general purposes and intent of this Ordinance and will
not be injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise
detrimental to the public welfare; and
7. The strict application of the Zoning Ordinance and Town
Code would deprive the applicants of the reasonable use
of the land and/or building and that the variance
granted by this Board will accomplish this purpose; and
it is
FURTHER RESOLVED, that a variance is hereby granted and that
Sections 89-67 B and 89-33 B(3)(b) of the Zoning Ordinance be
varied and modified so as to allow the construction of an
off-street parking area and the retention of a rear-yard shed on
the premises located at 733 Forest Avenue and known on the Tax
Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 220 Parcel 389
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. 6 - CASE 937
The Recording Secretary read the application as follows:
Application of Mr. and Mrs. Frank Clemens requesting a variance from
Section 89-35 B (2)(a) and (b) to reduce the side yard from 8.0 feet
required to 6.93 feet and the total side yards from 18.0 feet required
to 14.47 feet for the proposed construction of a second floor dormer,
in an R-6 Zone District, on the premises located at 89 Colonial Avenue
and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block
• 112 Parcel 317.
September 27, 1989
-14-
Mrs. and Mrs. Clemens appeared on behalf of the application. Their
neighbors most affected by the variance - Mr. and Mrs. Skorny, 91
Colonial Avenue - appeared in opposition.
Mrs. Clemens stated that she had found a similar variance granted by
this Board two years ago. She stated that the Clemens were requesting
a minimal variance to accommodate a growing family. Their teenaged
daughter seeks privacy from younger siblings by having her own bedroom,
and said siblings are getting bigger physically. There is a need for
the proposed bedroom to be used often as a guest room for Mr. Clemens'
ailing mother who requires a wheel chair and breathing apparatus. The
elder Mrs. Clemens needs constant supervision and, therefore, visits
frequently.
Mrs. Clemens stated that the additional room will be built from a
storage space. A dormer would be added, but construction would be
within the existing footprint. She also stated that a tree limb had
fallen on the house doing damage to the roof and that the situation was
of some urgency.
Mrs. Skorny stated that the Clemens house was already nonconforming and
that the addition would cause a decrease in the value of her house.
The new addition, she declared, would impinge on her view, light and
air. Mrs. Skorny stated that the trees between the houses were
inadequate and that in 1978 a similar request had been denied. Mrs.
Skorny asked that the Board consider the aesthetics of the situation
and claimed that the new bedroom would overlook the master bedroom in
her house.
Mr. Skorny questioned the accuracy of the Clemens' survey. Mr. Negrin
stated that the Board had little option but to believe a licensed
professional. It was pointed out that there is just under 20 feet
between the two houses, and that the plan did not call for a window
overlooking the house Skorny's house.
Mr. Clemens stated that the application in 1978 was not similar.
to this one.
Mr. Wexler stated that the applicants were within their rights to use
the attic space as the house currently was technically a 1 story house
and that a window could legally be built. However, it was the sense of
the Board that it would be better to have no window on that side of the
house.
On motion of Mr. Wexler, seconded by Mr. Simon, it was unanimously
RESOLVED, that the Zoning Board of Appeals is the Lead Agency and
solely responsible for determining whether the proposed action may
have a significant impact on the environment; and it is
FURTHER RESOLVED, that this is a Type II Action having no
significant impact on the environment as determined by New York
State or corresponding local law, therefore requiring no further
action under SEQRA.
September 27, 1989
-15-
On motion of Mr. Wexler, seconded by Mr. Simon, the Board unanimously
adopted the following resolutions:
WHEREAS, Mr. and Mrs. Frank Clemens have submitted an application
to the Building Inspector, together with plans, for the proposed
construction of a dormer on the premises located at 89 Colonial
Avenue and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of
Mamroneck as Block 112 Parcel 317.
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 (2)(a) and (b) ; and
WHEREAS, Mr. and Mrs. Clemens 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 applicants have a legitimate hardship with the
current size of the house.
2. The footprint of the house will be the same as it is
now.
3. The room being constructed will be occupied frequently
by an ill, elderly family member.
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; 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 building and that the variance
granted by this Board will accomplish this purpose; and
it is
A., FURTHER RESOLVED, that a variance is hereby granted and that
Section 89-35 B(2)(a) & (b) of the Zoning Ordinance be varied
September 27, 1989
-16-
and modified so as to allow the construction of a dormer on the
premises located at 89 Colonial Avenue and known on the Tax
Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 112 Parcel 317
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 shall be attached to the
variance:
No new window shall be constructed on the side of the house
facing 91 Colonial Avenue; 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. 7 - CASE 938
The Recording Secretary read the application as follows:
Application of Dr. and Mrs. Steven Katz requesting a variance from
Section 89-44 D to retain a six (6) foot high fence [four (4) feet
height maximum permitted] , in a Residence Zone District, on the
premises located at 2 Split Tree Road and known on the Tax Assessment
Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 305 Parcel 1130.
Jack Harakal, landscape architect, appeared on behalf of the
application. He displayed pictures of the site and explained that the
layout of the neighbors' driveway and the Katz's swimming pool allowed
no privacy to the Katzes without a higher than allowed fence
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.
September 27, 1989
-17-
On motion of Mr. Kelleher, seconded by Mr. Simon, the following
resolutions were unanimously adopted:
WHEREAS, Dr. and Mrs. Steven Katz have submitted an application to
the Building Inspector, together with plans, to allow the
retention of a six-foot high fence which would exceed the
four-foot height limit allowable; and
WHEREAS, the Building Inspector has declined to issue such permit
on the grounds that the plans submitted failed to comply with the
Zoning Ordinance of the Town of Mamaroneck with particular
reference to Section 89-44 D which would exceed the four-foot
height allowance on the premises located at 2 Split Tree Road and
known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block
305 Parcel 1130; and
WHEREAS, Dr. and Mrs. Katz 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 there are special circumstances
and/or conditions applying to the land for which the variance is
sought on the following grounds:
1. The variance granted is the minimum necessary to relieve the
personal hardship of the applicants.
2. The fence is barely visible from the street; only from the
neighbors' driveway.
3. Because of the topography, a six-foot fence is needed to
provide privacy.
4. The fence is consistent with the design of the property.
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; and
FURTHER RESOLVED, that a variance is hereby granted and that
Section 89-44 D of the Zoning Ordinance be varied and modified so
as to allow the retention of a six (6) foot high fence on the
premises located at 2 Split Tree Road and known on the Tax
Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 305 Parcel 1130
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
September 27, 1989
-18-
FURTHER RESOLVED, that the applicant shall obtain a building
permit within six months of the filing of this Resolution with the
Town Clerk and in accordance with Section 89-73 of the Zoning
Ordinance, the building permit shall be void if construction is
not started within six months and completed within two years of
the date of said permit; and it is
FURTHER RESOLVED, that this decision be filed with the Town Clerk
as provided in Section 267 of the Town Law.
*****
ADJOURNMENT
On motion of Mr. Simon, seconded by Mr. Wexler, the meeting was
adjourned at 12:05 AM.
•
106Gt7?emub , 44
Bonnie M. Burdick