Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1981_08_26 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS OF THE TOWN OF MAMARONECK HELD AUGUST 26, 1981 , IN THE COURT HOUSE, 1201 PALMER AVENUE, TOWN OF MAMARONECK, LARCHMONT, NEW YORK. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by the Chairman at 8: 15 P.M. ROLL CALL Present: Mr. A. William Boraczek, Chairman Mr. Egbert R. Hardesty Mr. Peter G. Moore Absent: Mr. Laurence G. Bodkin, Jr. Mr. Stephen K. Carr APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minutes of the meeting of July 22, 1981 were presented and on motion duly made and seconded, approved as submitted. PUBLIC HEARING The Chairman declared the hearing open and the Secretary presented for the record the affidavit of publication of the notice of hearing. Mr. Boraczek explained to the applicants that since only three members were present their application would have to have an unanimous vote and they had the privilege of postponing their applications to another meeting without penalty. The Chairman asked the Secretary to read the first appli- cation which had been held over from the last meeting. APPLICATION NO. 1 - CASE 567 Application of Mr. H. Watson Paddock for modification of Article VIII Section 89-44 D "Walls and Fences" which restricts the height of fences in a residential district to 4 ft. to permit the installation of 81 lin. ft. of 6 ft. high wooden fence along the westerly side of Weaver Street on the premises located at 80 Howell Avenue and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 405 Parcel 390 on the grounds of practical dif- ficulty and/or unnecessary hardship . At the previous meeting the applicant had said that there had been an error in the application that they were only requesting 28 lin. ft. of 6 ft. high fence. It was pointed out that at the last meeting the survey had been incor- rectly marked and the corrected survey that they presented at this meeting shows 21 lin. ft. of fence to be an ex- tension of the fence for which the Whelans whose property o� �7v adjoins the applicants had received a variance several months ago. Mr. Paddock said that their reasons for wanting the fence was to prevent the use of the property as a short cut to and from Weaver Street and the fence will match the one to be installed by the Whelans . After further discussion the Board decided to vote on the application and the result was as follows : Commissioner Boraczek - Aye Commissioner Hardesty - Aye Commissioner Moore - Aye The application was therefore approved and the follow- ing Resolution adopted: WHEREAS, Mr. H. Watson Paddock has submitted an application to the Building Inspector to al- low the installation of 81 lin. ft. of 6 ft. high wooden fence along the westerly side of Weaver Street together with plans; and WHEREAS, the Building Inspector has refused to issue such permit on the grounds that the plans submitted failed to comply with Article VIII Section 89-44 "Walls and Fences" which restricts the height of fences in a residential district to 4 ft. on the premises located at 129 Carleon Avenue and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 405 Parcel 390; and WHEREAS, Mr. H. Watson Paddock has submitted an application to this Board for a variance on the ground of practical difficulty and/or unnec- essary hardship for the following reasons: 1 . To block sound and sight from heavy traffic on Weaver Street. 2. To prevent the use of the appli- cant's property as a "short cut" to and from Weaver Street. 3. To match in height and appearance the fence along Weaver Street of the applicant's neighbor to the south of his property. WHEREAS, this Board has examined the plans, re- viewed the application and has heard all persons interested in this application after publication of a notice thereof, and WHEREAS, this applicant has amended the survey to show where the fence is to be erected and requesting 21 lin. ft. of 6 ft. high wooden fence instead of the 81 lin. ft. , NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that this Board granted the applica- tion on the following grounds : (a) That there are special circum- stances and conditions applying to the land and/or building for which a variance is sought, which circum- stances and/or conditions have not resulted from any acts of the appli - cant subsequent to the date of the Zoning Regulations appealed from. (b) That the said circumstances and/ or conditions are as follows : 1 . That the topography of the land adjacent to Weaver Street is such that a four foot high fence would not deter vandals from enter- ing the property. 2. That the proposed 6 ft. fence will be an exten- sion of a fence to be con- structed on the adjoining property for which a vari- ance has been granted. 3. That said circumstances and/or conditions are such that the particular appli- cation of the Ordinance with respect to Article VIII Section 89-44 "Walls and Fences" would deprive the applicant of the reason- able use of such land and/ or building and that for these reasons the granting of the variance is neces- sary for the reasonable use of the land and/or build- ing and that the variance as granted by this Board is the minimum adjustment that will accomplish this purpose. (c) That the granting of the vari- ance will be in harmony with the gen- eral purposes and intent of this Ordi- nance and will not be injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detri- mental to the public welfare; and Cit is FURTHER RESOLVED, that a variance is hereby granted and that Article VIII Section 89-44 D "Walls and Fences" be varied and modified so as to allow the installation of 21 lin. ft. of 6 ft. high wooden fence along the westerly side of Weaver Street on the premises located at 80 Howell Avenue and known on the Tax Assess- ment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 405 Parcel 390 in strict conformance with plans filed with this application as amended provided that the applicant complies in all other res- pects with the Zoning Ordinance and Building Code of the Town of Mamaroneck. FURTHER RESOLVED, that this decision be filed with the Town Clerk as provided in Section 267 of the Town Law. The Chairman asked the Secretary to read the next appli- cation . APPLICATION NO. 2 - CASE 573 Application of Mr. Denis A. Rocchio for modification of Article VI Section 89-33 Subsection B (2) (a) & (b) "Construction Requirements for an R-10 One Family Resi- dence District" which requires a minimum side yard of 10 ft. and a total of both side yards of 25 ft. to al- low the construction of a two story addition at the rear of the dwelling having a minimum side yard of 6 '0" and a total of both side yards of 16'0" on the premises lo- cated at 29 Briarcliff Road and known on the Tax Assess- ment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 220 Parcel 237 on the grounds of practical difficulty and/or un- necessary hardship. Mr. Denis Rocchio presented his application to the Board and said that they needed additional living space . The applicant said they have no eat in kitchen or family room and the present bedrooms are small . The Board ques- tioned the applicant as to the size of the addition as they felt it was almost as large as the existing dwell- ing and if the addition couldn 't be placed in a different location . The Chairman expressed concern about the addition being so close to the existing garage and the possibility of the danger if there was a fire. The Board, also, asked Mr. Rocchio about the use of the garage and the appli- cant said they had tools , bikes, etc. in there and they had two cars . The Board, also, questioned the applicant as to how long they had lived there and Mr. Rocchio said nine years al : l .hs and he now has three children . The applicant further said that there is rock at the rear of his property. After further discussion the Board decided to vote on the application and the result was as follows: Commissioner Boraczek - Nay Commissioner Hardesty - Nay Commissioner Moore - Nay The application was therefore denied and the following Resolution adopted: WHEREAS, Mr. Denis A. Rocchio has submitted an application to the Building Inspector to allow the construction of a two story addition at the rear of the dwelling having a minimum side yard of 6 '0" and a total of both side yards of 16 '0" together with plans; and WHEREAS, the Building Inspector has refused to issue such permit on the grounds that the plans submitted failed to comply with the Zoning Ordi - nance of the Town of Mamaroneck with particular reference to Article VI Section 89-33 Subsection B (2) (a) & (b) "Construction Requirements for an R-10 One Family Residence District" which requires a minimum side yard of 10 ft. and a total of both side yards of 25 ft. on the pre- mises located at 29 Briarcliff Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mama- roneck as Block 220 Parcel 237; and WHEREAS, Mr. Denis A. Rocchio has submitted an application for a variance on the ground of prac- tical difficulty and/or unnecessary hardship for the following reasons : 1 . The existing dwelling is too small for the increased size of family (3 children) . 2. There is no family room or eat in kitchen. 3. The existing bedrooms are too small . WHEREAS, this Board has examined the plans , reviewed the application and has heard all per- sons interested in this application after pub- lication of a notice thereof, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that this Board denies the applica- tion on the following grounds: ,)7 '02.7 6 1 . That the applicant failed to show that the addition could not C be placed in another location which would be more suitable. 2. That there are no special cir- cumstances or conditions applying to the land for which the variance is sought, which circumstances or conditions are peculiar to such land and which do not apply generally to land in the district. 3. That the facts and circumstances claimed by the applicant to entitle him to the variance are not such as would deprive him of the reason- able use of the land. 4. That the granting of the variance would not be in harmony with the general purposes and intent of this Ordinance and would be injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. FURTHER RESOLVED, that this decision be filed with the Town Clerk as provided in Section 267 of the Town Law. The Chairman asked the Secretary to read the next appli- cation. APPLICATION NO. 3 - CASE 574 Application of Mr. and Mrs. Jonathan Tiefenbrun for modi- fication of Article VI Section 89-30 Subsection B (2) (a) "Construction Requirements for an R-30 One Family Residence District" which requires a minimum side yard of 20 ft. to allow the construction of an addition at the northerly side of the dwelling creating a side yard of 13 ft. on the premises located at 62 Country Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 305 Parcel 802 on the grounds of practical dif- ficulty and/or unnecessary hardship. Mr. Jonathan Tiefenbrun appeared before the Board with his Architect, Mr. Manousoff who said he had built several houses in the area and the problem is "rock". Mr. Manousoff said the house sets on rock and because of the topography and access from the existing house the proposed location is the only area that the solar efficient greenhouse can be placed. Mr. Boraczek asked what they intended to put in the green- house and Mr. Tiefenbrun said mainly plants . The Board pointed out that the greenhouse would be on two levels and one side faces the applicant's bedroom window. Mr. Moore questioned as to how the applicant intended to make use of the energy since the greenhouse is built with masonry and how they intended to bring the sun into the house. Mr. Manousoff said that in the winter they would have to make other arrangements . The Board, also, questioned a notation on the plan show- ing a "hot tub" and the applicant said possibly they might have a "jacuzzi ". Mr. Tiefenbrun said he had spoken to his neighbors and they all agreed it was the best location. Mr. Hardesty pointed out that it would be difficult to build on the lot and the proposed location was the most pleasing and that the addition would be 75 to 80 ft. away from the adjoining property and would not be in the direct line of their vision . After further discussion the Board voted on the applica- tion and the result was as follows: Commissioner Boraczek - Nay Commissioner Hardesty - Aye Commissioner Moore - Nay The application was therefore denied and the following Resolution adopted: WHEREAS, Mr. and Mrs . Jonathan Tiefenbrun have submitted an application to the Building Inspec- tor to allow the construction of an addition at the northerly side of the dwelling creating a side yard of 13 ft. together with plans; and WHEREAS, the Building Inspector has refused to issue such permit on the grounds that the plans submitted failed to comply with the Zoning Ordi- nance of the Town of. Mamaroneck with particular reference to Article VI Section 89-30 Subsection B (2) "Construction Requirements for an R-30 One Family Residence District" which requires a minimum side yard of 20 ft. on the premises located at 62 Country Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 315 Parcel 802; and WHEREAS, Mr. and Mrs . Jonathan Tiefenbrum have submitted an application for a variance on the ground of practical difficulty and/or unneces- sary hardship for the following reasons : 1 . Due to the irregular site, topo- graphy and access from the existing house the solar efficient greenhouse can only be placed on this side of the house. 2 . Appropriate location requires a 7 ft. variance. 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 denies the applica- tion on the following grounds: 1 . That the applicant failed to show that the proposed addition could not be constructed due to the topo- graphy of the lot without an area variance. 2. That there are no special cir- cumstances or conditions applying to the land for which the variance is sought, which circumstances or conditions are peculiar to such land and which do not apply generally to land in the district. 3. That the facts and circumstances claimed by the applicant to entitle him to the variance are not such as would deprive him of the reason- able use of the land. 4. That the granting of the vari- ance would not be in harmony with the general purposes and intent of this Ordinance and would be injur- ious to the neighborhood or other- wise detrimental to the public wel- fare. FURTHER RESOLVED, that this decision be filed with the Town Clerk as provided in Section 267 of the Town Law. The Chairman asked the Secretary to read the next appli- cation. APPLICATION NO. 4 - CASE 575 Application of Mr. Michael J . Harrington for modification of Article VI Section 89-35 A (2) "Construction Require- ments for an R-6 One Family Residence District" which re- quires a minimum lot width and street line frontage of 60 ft. to permit the construction of a one family residence on a proposed lot subdivision creating a building lot hav- ing a lot width and street line frontage of 50 ft. on the premises located at 36 Colonial Avenue and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 120 Part of Parcel 253 on the grounds of practical difficulty tr and/ or unnecessary hardship. Mr. George P. Forbes, Jr. represented the applicant, Mr. Michael J. Harrington. Mr. Forbes said he applied to the Planning Board at their meeting of June 10, 1981 for a subdivision of a lot owned by his client. Mr. Harrington wants to sell the vacant lot and the proposed parcel will have a frontage of 50 ft. instead of the required 60 ft. The Planning Board had advised Mr. Forbes that they could not grant a variance and it would be necessary for him to apply to the Zoning Board for a variance. The Board decided that they should get a judgment from the Town At- torney as to whether they could hear the application before final approval is given by the Planning Board for the sub- division. The Board asked Mr. Forbes if he would return next month at which time they will have received advice from the Town Attorney. APPLICATION NO. 5 - CASE 576 The Secretary presented the Chairman with a letter she had received from the Attorney who represented the appli- cant North Star Electrical Contracting Corp. (contract vendee) . The letter was read by Mr. Boraczek and in the letter, Mr. Bobrow, the Attorney, advised the Board that he was withdrawing the application on the grounds that the North Star Electrical Contracting Corp. was no longer a contract vendee. The Board decided that since Mr. Hardesty would not be available on the 23rd of September which would be the date of the next scheduled meeting it would be held on Septem- ber 30th instead. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before this meet- ing it was adjourned at 9: 15 P.M. itaohnso , Secretary