HomeMy WebLinkAbout1986_05_28 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS OF THE TOWN OF MAMARONECK
MAY 28, 1986, IN THE COURTROOM, TOWN OFFICES,
740 WEST BOSTON POST ROAD, MAMARONECK, NEW YORK
CALL TO ORDER
The Chairman called the meeting to order at 8:15 P.M.
ROLL CALL
Present: Mr. A. William Boraczek, Chairman
Mr. Patrick Kelleher
Mrs. Elaine Price
Mr. J. Rene Simon
Mr. Arthur Wexler
Also Present: Mr. Lee Hoffman, Town Counsel
Mr. William Paonessa, Building Inspector
Ms. Jean A. Marra, Recording Secretary
APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES
The Chairman stated that the minutes of the April 30,
1986 meeting would be approved at the next meeting.
SCHEDULING
The Chairman stated the next meeting of the Zoning
Board of Appeals would be held on June 25, 1986.
PROCEDURE
The Chairman stated that each Board member was present
and he then proceeded to introduce the newest member,
Mr. Arthur Wexler, who was welcomed by all. He also
announced that this would be his last official meeting
as he, himself, was retiring from the Board.
May 28, 1986
APPLICATION NO. 7 - CASE 738 - FALB
The Chairman stated that this matter would be held over
until June.
APPLICATION NO. 1 - CASE 726 - HEIN
The Recording Secretary explained that a letter was
received from the applicant, Mr. Richard Hein, wherein
he withdrew his application.
APPLICATION NO. 2 - CASE 731
The Chairman read the application as follows:
Application of Mr. and Mrs. M. Klein for modification
of Article VI Section 89-31, Subsection B (1)
"Construction Requirements for R-20 One Family
Residence District" which requires a minimum front yard
setback of 40 ft. from both streets to allow the con-
struction of a wood deck at front of dwelling having a
front yard set back of 32 ft. from Stonewall Lane on
the premises located at 23 Stonewall Lane and known on
the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as
Block 333 Parcel 723 on the grounds of practical
difficulty and/or unnecessary hardship.
The applicant, Mr. Michael Klein, appeared and
presented a proposed change to the plans which were
submitted to the Board last month.
The Chairman noted that the revised plans indicated a
decrease in the size of the proposed deck area.
There being no further questions or continents Mrs. Price
moved that this be considered a Type II action,
requiring no further environmental review. Mr.
Kelleher seconded the motion and it was unanimously
approved by the Board.
Thereafter, on motion by Mr. Kelleher, seconded by Mr.
Wexler, the Board unanimously approved the following
resolution:
- 2 -
May 28, 1986
WHEREAS, Mr. and Mrs. Michael Klein submitted an
application to the Building Inspector to allow the
construction of a wooden deck at front of dwelling on a
corner lot having a front yard setback of 32 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 Ordinance of the Town
of Mamaroneck with particular reference to Article VI
Section 89-31, Subsection B (1) "Construction Require-
ments for R-20 One Family Residence District" which
requires a minimum front yard setback of 40 ft. from
both streets on the premises located at 23 Stonewall
Lane and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of
Mamaroneck as Block 333 Parcel 723; and
WHEREAS, Mr. and Mrs. Klein have submitted an
application for a variance to this Board on the grounds
of practical difficulty and/or unnecessary hardship for
the following reasons:
1. That the applicants just moved from the city and
the proposed deck would enhance country living for
them.
2. The design of the deck would be an attractive
addition to the home.
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 grants the application on
the following grounds:
(a) That there are special circumstances and
conditions applying to the land for which the
variance is sought, which circumstances and/or
conditions have not resulted from any acts of the
applicant subsequent to the date of the Zoning
Regulations appealed from.
(b) That the said circumstances and/or conditions are
as follows:
- 3 -
May 28, 1986
1. That said circumstances or conditions are
such that the particular application of the
Zoning Ordinance with respect to Article VI
Section 89-31 Subsection B (1) "Construction
Requirements for an R-20 One Family Residence
District" would deprive the applicant of the
reasonable use of the land and/or building
and that the variance as granted by this
Board is a minimum adjustment that will
accomplish this purpose.
2. That the proposed addition is a moderate
request.
3. That any lighting, which may be installed in
conjunction with the deck, be low, subtle and
unobtrusive and point in toward the house,
away from the property line.
4. That 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 it is
FURTHER RESOLVED, that a variance is hereby granted and
that Article VI Section 89-31 Subsection B (1) "Con-
struction Requirements for an R-20 One Family Residence
District" be varied and modified so as to allow the
construction of a wooden deck at front of dwelling on a
corner lot having a front yard setback of 32 ft.
instead of the required 40 ft. from both streets on the
premises located at 23 Stonewall Lane and known on the
Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block
333 Parcel 723 in strict conformance with plans filed
with this application, provided that the applicant
complies in all other respects with the Zoning
Ordinance and Building Code of the Town of Mamaroneck;
and it is
FURTHER RESOLVED, that in accordance with the Rules and
Regulations of the Zoning Ordinance where a variance is
granted, the applicant shall obtain a building permit
within three months of the filing of this Resolution
with the Town Clerk. 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 be it
FURTHER RESOLVED, that this decision be filed with the
Town Clerk as provided in Section 267 of the Town Law.
- 4 -
May 28, 1986
APPLICATION NO. 3 - CASE 734
The Chairman read the application as follows:
Application of Mr. and Mrs. Herbert Brooks for
modification of Article XI Section 89-67-B "Layout of
Off-Street Parking Facilities" which requires that
off-street parking shall not be developed within five
(5) feet of side lot line to allow the construction of
an off-street parking area at the westerly side of
dwelling having a side yard set-back of 7 1/2 inches
instead of the required minimum side yard of 5 feet on
the premises located at 14 Dillon Road and known on the
Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block
504 Parcel 296 on the grounds of practical difficulty
and/or unnecessary hardship.
The applicant appeared and stated that his driveway
runs along his neighbor's property for 30 feet and he
would like to continue it down another 20' to meet the
requirements of off-street parking.
Mr. Lee Bloom, 22 Myrtle Blvd., appeared in favor of
the application and requested that the Board allow more
lenient standards in order to accommodate the
off-street parking issue.
Mrs. Price moved that this be considered a Type II
action, requiring no further environmental review. Mr.
Simon seconded the motion and it was unanimously
approved by the Board.
Thereafter, Mr. Simon moved, that the variance be
approved. Mrs. Price seconded the motion and the Board
unanimously approved the following resolution:
WHEREAS, Mr. and Mrs. Herbert Brooks submitted an
application to the Building Inspector to allow the
construction of an off-street parking area at the
westerly side of dwelling, 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 Ordinance of the Town
of Mamaroneck with particular reference to Article XI
Section 89-67 B "Layout of Off-Street Parking
Facilities" which requires that off street parking
shall not be developed within five (5) feet of side lot
line on the premises located at 14 Dillon Road and
known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of
Mamaroneck as Block 504 Parcel 296; and
- 5 -
May 28, 1986
WHEREAS, Mr. and Mrs. Brooks submitted an application
for a variance to this Board on the grounds of
practical difficulty and/or unnecessary hardship for
the following reasons:
1. That additional parking is needed because of the
number of cars in the family.
2. The proposed parking area is necessary in order to
conform to the off-street parking requirement.
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 grants the application
on the following grounds:
(a) That there are special circumstances and
conditions applying to the land for which the
variance is sought, which circumstances and/or
conditions have not resulted from any acts of the
applicant subsequent to the date of the Zoning
Regulations appealed from.
(b) That the said circumstances and/or conditions are
as follows:
1. That said circumstances or conditions are
such that the particular application of the
Zoning Ordinance, with respect to Article XI
Section 89-67 B "Layout of Off-Street Parking
Facilities", would deprive the applicant of
the reasonable use of the land and/or
building and that the variance as granted by
this Board is a minimum adjustment that will
accomplish this purpose.
2. That 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 it is
- 6 -
May 28, 1986
FURTHER RESOLVED, that a variance is hereby granted and
that Article XI Section 89-67 B "Layout of Off-Street
Parking Facilities" be varied and modified so as to
allow the construction of an off-street parking area to
the dwelling on the premises located at 14 Dillon Road
and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of
Mamaroneck as Block 504 Parcel 296 in strict
conformance with plans filed with this application,
provided that the applicant complies in all other
respects with the Zoning Ordinance and Building Code of
the Town of Mamaroneck; and it is
FURTHER RESOLVED, that in accordance with the Rules and
Regulations of the Zoning Ordinance where a variance is
granted, the applicant shall obtain a building permit
within three months of the filing of this Resolution
with the Town Clerk. 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.
FURTHER RESOLVED, that this decision be filed with the
Town Clerk as provided in Section 267 of the Town Law.
APPLICATION NO. 4 - CASE 735
The Chairman read the application as follows:
Application of Mr. and Mrs. Edward Holcomb for
modification of Article XI Section 89-67 B "Layout of
Off-Street Parking Facilities" which requires that
off-street parking shall not be developed within five
(5) feet of side lot line to allow the construction of
an off-street parking facility having a side yard
setback of 0 feet from the westerly side property line
instead of the required minimum side yard of 5 feet on
the premises located at 12 Myrtle Blvd. and known on
the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as
Block 217 Parcel 342 on the grounds of practical
difficulty and/or unnecessary hardship.
Chairman Boraczek stated that he is associated with Mr.
and Mrs. Holcomb and would step down if requested and
Mr. Hoffman suggested that Mr. Boraczek excuse himself
if he felt it would interfere to which Mr. Boraczek
offered that he felt it would not interfere and
proceeded.
The applicants, Mr. and Mrs. Holcomb, appeared and
stated that the request for an additional parking
facility is made in order to comply with the off-street
parking requirements and added that they have a shared
driveway with their neighbors.
- 7 -
May 28, 1986
Mr. Boraczek presented a letter which was signed by the
residents of 14 Myrtle Blvd. and 10 Myrtle Blvd.,
wherein it was stated that they had no objection to the
enlargement of the driveway and the granting of a
variance to the residents of 12 Myrtle Blvd.
Mr. Bloom appeared in favor of the application and
elaborated on the nice work the Holcombs have done in
fixing up the house and haw it has enhanced the entire
neighborhood.
There being no further questions, Mrs. Price moved that
this be considered a Type II action, requiring no
further environmental review. Mr. Wexler seconded the
motion and the Board accepted it unanimously.
Thereafter, Mr. Wexler moved that the application of
Mr. and Mrs. Holcomb be approved on the grounds of
practical difficulty and/or unnecessary hardship. Mr.
Kelleher seconded the motion, and the Board unanimously
approved the following resolution:
WHEREAS, Mr. and Mrs. Edward Holcomb submitted an
application to the Building Inspector to allow the
construction of an off-street parking area at the
westerly side property line, 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 Ordinance of the Town
of Mamaroneck with particular reference to Article XI
Section 89-67 B "Layout of Off-Street Parking
Facilities" which requires that off street parking
shall not be developed within five (5) feet of side lot
line on the premises located at 12 Myrtle Blvd. and
known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of
Mamaroneck as Block 217 Parcel 342; and
WHEREAS, Mr. and Mrs. Holcomb submitted an application
for a variance to this Board on the grounds of
practical difficulty and/or unnecessary hardship for
the following reasons:
1. That additional parking is needed.
2. The proposed location is the only feasible one.
3. The proposed parking area is necessary in order to
conform to the off-street parking requirement.
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,
- 8
May 28, 1986
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED, that this Board hereby grants the application
on the following grounds:
(a) That there are special circumstances and
conditions applying to the land for which the
variance is sought, which circumstances and/or
conditions have not resulted from any acts of the
applicant subsequent to the date of the Zoning
Regulations appealed from.
(b) That the said circumstances and/or conditions are
as follows:
1. That said circumstances or conditions are
such that the particular application of the
Zoning Ordinance, with respect to Article XI
Section 89-67 B "Layout of Off-Street Parking
Facilities", would deprive the applicant of
the reasonable use of the land and/or
building and that the variance as granted by
this Board is a minimum adjustment that will
accomplish this purpose.
2. That 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 it is
FURTHER RESOLVED, that a variance is hereby granted and
that Article XI Section 89-67 B "Layout of Off-Street
Parking Facilities" be varied and modified so as to
allow the construction of an off-street parking area on
the westerly side property line of the premises located
at 12 Myrtle Blvd. and known on the Tax Assessment Map
of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 217 Parcel 342 in
strict conformance with plans filed with this appli-
cation, provided that the applicant complies in all
other respects with the Zoning Ordinance and Building
Code of the Town of Mamaroneck; and it is
- 9 -
May 28, 1986
FURTHER RESOLVED, that in accordance with the Rules and
Regulations of the Zoning Ordinance where a variance is
granted, the applicant shall obtain a building permit
within three months of the filing of this Resolution
with the Town Clerk. 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 be it
FURTHER RESOLVED, that this decision be filed with the
Town Clerk as provided in Section 267 of the Town Law.
APPLICATION NO. 5 - CASE 736
The Chairman the application as follows:
Application of Mr. Raymond Haas for modification of
Article VI Section 89-55 B (2) (a) and B (3)
"Construction Requirements for R-10 One Family
Residence District" which requires a minimum side yard
of 10 feet and a minimum rear yard of 25 feet to allow
the construction of an addition at northeasterly side
of dwelling for a family room and laundry which will
maintain existing non-conforming side yard of 7.0 feet
and a nonconforming rear yard of 17± feet on the
premises located at 26 Rockland Avenue and known on the
Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block
222 Parcel 430, on the grounds of practical difficulty
and/or unnecessary hardship.
The application was presented by Mr. and Mrs. Raymond
Haas and their representative, Mr. Frank Rogers of
Remodeling Consultants, Architects, 545 Fenimore Road,
Mamaroneck, NY. Mr. Hass stated that this request was
made in order to make their home more comfortable.
The Recording Secretary read a letter from Charles and
Barbara Flynn, 28 Rockland Avenue, wherein it was
stated that they were happy to support the proposed
remodeling and addition for the Haas family.
There being no questions, Mrs. Price moved that this be
considered a Type II action, requiring no further
environmental review. Mr. Simon seconded the motion,
and it was unanimously approved by the Board.
Thereafter, the Chairman moved that Application #736 be
approved. Mr. Kelleher seconded the motion and the
Board unanimously adopted the following resolution:
- 10 -
May 28, 1986
WHEREAS, Mr. Raymond Haas submitted an application to
the Building Inspector to allow the construction of an
addition at the northeasterly side of dwelling which
will maintain existing nonconforming side yard of 7.0
feet and a nonconforming rear yard of 17+ feet,
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 Ordinance of the Town
of Mamaroneck with particular reference to Article VI
Section 89-55 B (2) (a) and B (3) "Construction
Requirements for R-10 One Family Residence District"
which requires a minimum side yard 10 feet and a
minimum rear yard of 25 feet on the premises located at
26 Rockland Avenue and known on the Tax Assessment Map
of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 222 Parcel 430; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Haas submitted an application for a
variance to this Board on the grounds of practical
difficulty and/or unnecessary hardship for the
following reasons:
1. That the addition of a family room and a laundry
room is a needed for everyday living comfort.
2. The proposed addition is located to have access to
the dining room and kitchen.
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 grants the application
on the following grounds:
(a) That there are special circumstances and
conditions applying to the land for which the
variance is sought, which circumstances and/or
conditions have not resulted from any acts of the
applicant subsequent to the date of the Zoning
Regulations appealed from.
(b) That the said circumstances and/or conditions are
as follows:
- 11 -
May 28, 1986
1. That said circumstances or conditions are
such that the particular application of the
Zoning Ordinance with respect to Article VI
Section 89-55 Subsection B (2) (a) and B (3)
"Construction Requirements for an R-10 One
Family Residence District" would deprive the
applicant of the reasonable use of the land
and/or building and that the variance as
granted by this Board is a minimum adjustment
that will accomplish this purpose.
2. That 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 it is
FURTHER RESOLVED, that a variance is hereby granted and
that Article VI Section 89-55 B (2) (a) and B (3) "Con-
struction Requirements for an R-10 One Family Residence
District" be varied and modified so as to allow the
construction of an addition at northwesterly side of
dwelling which will maintain existing nonconforming
side yard of 7.0 feet instead of the required minimum
of 10 feet and a minimum rear yard of 17+ feet instead
of the required minimum of 25 feet, on the premises
located at 26 Rockland Avenue and known on the Tax
Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 222
Parcel 430 in strict conformance with plans filed with
this application, provided that the applicant complies
in all other respects with the Zoning Ordinance and
Building Code of the Town of Mamaroneck; and it is
FURTHER RESOLVED, that in accordance with the Rules and
Regulations of the Zoning Ordinance where a variance is
granted, the applicant shall obtain a building permit
within three months of the filing of this Resolution
with the Town Clerk. 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 be it
FURTHER RESOLVED, that this decision be filed with the
Town Clerk as provided in Section 267 of the Town Law.
- 12 -
•
May 28, 1986
APPLICATION NO. 6 - CASE NO. 737
The Chairman read the application as follows:
Application of Mr. and Mrs. Cotturone for modification
of Article VI Section 89-33 Subsection B (3) "Con-
struction Requirements for R-10 One Family Residence
District" which requires a minimum rear yard of 25 feet
to allow the construction of a second story addition at
northerly side of dwelling which will maintain existing
nonconforming rear yard setback of 9.85 feet on the
premises located at 415 Weaver Street and known on the
Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block
107 Parcel 719, on the grounds of practical difficulty
and/or unnecessary hardship.
Mr. and Mrs. Cotturone and their attorney, Joseph
Notaro, 100 Mamaroneck Avenue, White Plains, New York,
and Edward B. Rallantyne, 200 Mamaroneck Avenue, White
Plains, New York, their architect, appeared in favor of
the application.
Mr. Notaro indicated that the proposed addition did not
diminish the rear yard set back; it was only for a
second-story addition to build a master bedroom and
bath over the existing kitchen and dining room.
Mrs. Cotturone offered that the addition is needed in
order to accommodate her family when they come to visit
because the existing home has only one bathroom and two
bedrooms.
Mrs. Price concerned herself with the configuration of
the window placement and Mrs. Cotturone related that
the plans only called for one window in the back.
The Chairman read a letter from Herbert and Susan
Levitt, 280 Murray Avenue, Larchmont, wherein it was
requested that their names be removed from a petition
they signed because the proposed addition would
directly affect their backyard view and increase the
proximity of the two homes.
Mr. Boraczek proceeded to read another communication
from Nanda Cotturone which was accompanied by a
petition in favor of the application and signed by the
residents of: 430 Weaver Street, 434 Weaver Street,
425 Wever Street, 435 Weaver Street, 296 Murray Avenue,
294 Murray Avenue, 292 Murray Avenue, 288 Murray
Avenue, 411 Weaver Street, and 280 Murray Avenue.
- 13 -
May 28, 1986
Mr. Notaro stated that the Cotturones also have termite
damage and requested permission to remove the existing
building wall in the kitchen and extend it slightly
when it is replaced.
The Chairman announced that there were two more letters
in opposition to the zoning variance. The first
communication, from Steven J. and Pamela H. Rago,
wherein it was stated that their rear property line is
only 9.85 feet from the Cotturones rear westerly wall
and that construction of the addition would dominiate
their backyard and sharply reduce privacy and alter the
character of the neighborhood by diminishing the amount
of openness now available to them.
Mr. Boraczek presented the next communication in
opposition from Richard Beninati, 272 Murray Avenue,
wherein it was stated that the granting of a variance
would further close in the properties and diminish
privacy, air and light space in an area which is
already very closed in.
Mrs. Levitt, 280 Murray Avenue, appeared in opposition
to the application and stated her property was lower
than the Cotturones and feared for losing her privacy
if the addition were allowed as well as feeling very
closed in and Mr. Steven J. Rago, 274 Murray Avenue,
appeared and stated he was vehemently opposed to the
granting of any variance.
Mr. Ballantyne then explained the proposed addition and
window placement to Mrs. Levitt and Mr. Rago, and Mrs.
Levitt offered that now she was not adamantly opposed
to it since it has been explained but added that she
just might feel a little more closed in.
Mr. Rago voiced that the addition of height up to the
peak of the roof would add significant bulk to the
house and he would face a 2 and 1/2 story wall. He
added that the exisiing shrubbery was his and some of
it had to be removed so that it could not be relied on
to act as a screen.
Mr. Rago then requested the Chairman to repeat what
letters were received in favor of the application as
well as those in opposition together with the addresses
and Mr. Boraczek complied with this request.
Mrs. Price asked how this addition would affect Mr.
Rago's view to which he replied that there was open
space now but if the addition were allowed, it would
look like a billboard and be all closed in.
- 14 -
May 28, 1986
Mr. Wexler added that the addition would unify the
house and if a smaller addition were added, it might
not be as nice looking but Mr. Rago stood on what he
said.
Mrs. Levitt told the Board that she really was against
it because she does spend a considerable amount of time
in her home.
Mr. Hoffman submitted that Mr. Rago made an issue of
the height of the proposed addition but that his house
actually stands higher than the Cotturones.
Mr. Kelleher stated that if a variance were granted, it
would not change the application and added that if the
variance was denied, the Cotturones could still go to
the building department and obtain a building permit.
Mr. Wexler explained that this particular area is a
very unique part of town in that it has tight spaces
which adds to the neighborhood's character. It was his
opinion that the addition would enhance the appearance
of the house.
Mr. Boraczek asked Mr. Wexler and Mr. Simon, as
architects, their thoughts on how it could possibly
affect the neighbors and Mr. Wexler stated that if
you're looking to solve a problem, the solution that
was presented would be better than what is allowed
zoning-wise and Mr. Simon stated that he was in
complete agreement.
Mr. Kelleher added that if the applicants were denied
the application and diverted to another plan, the
neighbors could be faced with something less pleasing
when it was finally built but added that you had to
respect the feelings of those objecting to it.
Mrs. Price stated that she thought the plans were done
well and added that there should not be a problem
because of the window placement. She stated, however,
that she would like to reserve decision in order to
view the subject property again for further
clarification.
Mr. Wexler said that he viewed the property and in his
opinion the only one that he saw who could possibly be
affected by it would be Mrs. Levitt.
Mr. Rago stated that he would appreciate it if Mr.
Wexler thought of himself as a resident, not as an
architect, and then determine how these plans would
affect the character of the neighborhood and how the
neighbors would feel about it.
- 15 -
: 1
May 28, 1986
Mr. Wexler said that the case was presented as a
practical difficulty and unnecessary hardship and that
the final product is very important insofar as the
family's comfort is concerned.
Mr. Notaro offered that there is case law which states
that expansion of a family constitutes a practical
difficulty.
Mr. Boraczek suggested that the architect make up an
"as-of-right" sketch showing what can be done legally
and what exactly is being applied for in order to
appease those concerned but Mr. Notaro did not know
what lot depth was needed in order to erect an addition
without having to be granted a variance.
The Building Inspector, Mr. William Paonessa, stated
that if the property legally met the front, rear and
side yard setback requirements, a variance was not
needed.
(At this time Mr. and Mrs. Cotturone conferred with
their attorney.)
Mrs. Price moved that this be considered a Type II
action, requiring no further environmental review. Mr.
Simon seconded this motion, and the Board accepted it
unanimously.
Mr. Wexler moved that the proposed application of Mr.
and Mrs. Cotturone to add a master bedroom and bath be
approved on the grounds of practical difficulty and/or
unnecessary hardship. Mr. Simon seconded the motion
with Mr. Kelleher voting nay, Mrs. Price abstaining,
and Mr. Boraczek voting nay.
Mr. Hoffman stated that at this point there was a no
action as it required three votes to approve or deny an
application.
Mr. Boraczek explained that this case would be post-
poned until next month in order to give Mrs. Price an
opportunity to view the subject premises once more and
at that time, it will be voted on again.
At this time, Mr. Lester Bloom appeared and thanked Mr.
Boraczek for the fine job that he did and for the many
years of effort, frustration, devotion and energy that
he devoted to the Zoning Board of Appeals of The Town
of Mamaroneck.
- 16 -
May 28, 1986
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the
Board, the Chairman moved to adjourn, Mr. Kelleher
seconded this motion, and the meeting was unanimously
adjourned at 10:15 P.M.
Jean A. Marra
Recording Secretary
- 17 -