HomeMy WebLinkAbout1981_06_24 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS OF
THE TOWN OF MAMARONECK HELD JUNE 24, 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. Peter G. Moore
Mr. Stephen K. Carr
Absent: Mr. Egbert R. Hardesty
Mr. Laurence G. Bodkin, Jr.
Also present: Mr. William Paonessa, Building Inspector
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The minutes of the meeting of May 27, 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 applications would have
to have an unanimous vote and they had the privilege
of postponing their applications to another meeting without
penalty. The applicants present agreed to have their
applications heard.
The Chairman asked the Secretary to read the first ap-
plication .
APPLICATION NO. 1 - CASE 563
Application of Dr. and Mrs . Salvatore Lomonaco for modi-
fication of Article VI Section 89-33 Subsection B (2)
(a) "Construction Requirements for an R-10 One Family
Residence District" which requires a minimum side yard
of 10 ft. to allow the construction of a 2nd floor addi-
tion at the rear of the dwelling maintaining an exist-
ing side yard of 8.2 ft. on the premises located at 36
Stoneyside Drive and known on the Tax Assessment Map
of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 212 Parcel 431 on
the grounds of practical difficulty and/or unnecessary
hardship.
Dr. and Mrs . Lomonaco appeared with their Architect,
Mrs. Stoll . Mrs . Lomonaco said that she is an Artist
and the addition will provide a work space plus a family
room. The applicant said that because of the rock slop-
ing and the nature of the house (stagger) there are limi-
tations to where they can go. Mrs . Lomonaco stated that
they do not have an eat in kitchen and they were also
increasing their living area. The applicant stated that
she had spoken to three of her neighbors who would be
most affected by the addition and they all felt there
would be no difficulty and they had no objections .
Mrs . Stoll , the Architect presented a model showing how
the house will look after the work has been completed.
After further discussion the Board decided to vote on
the application and the result was as follows :
Commissioner Boraczek - Aye
Commissioner Moore - Aye
Commissioner Carr - Aye
The application was therefore approved and the following
Resolution adopted:
WHEREAS, Dr. and Mrs . Salvatore Lomonaco have
submitted an application to the Building In-
spector to allow the construction of a 2nd
floor addition at the rear of the dwelling
maintaining an existing side yard of 8.2 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 Zon-
ing Ordinance of the Town of Mamaroneck with
particular reference to Article VI Section
89-33 Subsection B (2) (a) "Construction Require-
ments for an R-10 One Family Residence District"
which requires a minimum side yard of 10 ft.
on the premises located at 36 Stoneyside Drive
and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the
Town of Mamaroneck as Block 212 Parcel 431 ; and
WHEREAS, Dr. and Mrs . Salvatore Lomonaco have
submitted an application for a variance on
the ground of practical difficulty and/or un-
necessary hardship for the following reasons:
1 . Mrs . Lomonaco is an Artist and
needs a studio in her home.
2. The second story dormer addition
will provide the best light for the
studio.
3. The applicant's family is grow-
ing and they need additional space.
4. The nature of the house (stagger)
and the rock sloping up in the back
are limitations .
c
5. The first floor extension is as
far from the neighboring property
as is possible - as its in the mid-
dle.
6 . The property is pie-shaped which
contributes to the need for a vari-
ance.
7. The addition could not be in the
center as its a stagger and you cannot
add to the middle floor.
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 granted the appli-
cation on the following grounds:
(a) That there are special circum-
stances and conditions applying to
the land for which a 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 . The proposed addition
will provide a work space
plus a family room for the
applicants .
2. The proposed addition
will not encroach into the
side yard as far as the exist-
ing dwelling.
3. Because of the topography
of the lot the proposed lo-
cation is the most feasible.
4. That said circumstances
or conditions are such that
the particular application
of the Ordinance with res-
pect to Article VI Section
89-33 Subsection B (2) (a)
"Construction Requirements
for an R-10 One Family Resi-
dence District" would deprive
the applicant of the reason-
able use of the land and/or
building and that the vari-
ance as granted by this
Board is a minimal adjust-
ment that will accomplish
this purpose.
5. That the granting of
the variance is in harmony
with the general purposes
and intent of the Ordinance
and will not be injurious
to the neighborhood or other-
wise detrimental to the
public welfare; and it is
FURTHER RESOLVED, that a variance is hereby
granted and that Article VI Section 89-33 Sub-
section B (2) "Construction Requirements for
an R-10 One Family Residence District" be varied
and modified so as to allow the construction
of a 2nd floor addition having a side yard of
8.2 ft. in strict conformance with plans filed
with this application provided that the appli-
cant complies in all other respects with the
Zoning Ordinance and Building Code of the Town
of Mamaroneck.
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.
The Chairman asked the Secretary to read the next appli-
cation.
APPLICATION NO. 2 - CASE 564
Application of Mr. and Mrs. Frecerick Kriegel for modifi-
cation of Article VI Section 89-34 Subsection B (2) "Con-
struction Requirements for an R-7.5 One Family Residence
District" which requires a minimum side yard of 10 ft.
to allow the construction of a wood deck at the rear and
side of the existing dwelling having a side yard of 3'0"
on the premises located at 9 Birchfield Road and known
on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as
Block 115 Parcel 214 on the grounds of practical difficulty
and/or unnecessary hardship.
Mr. Kriegel presented his application to the Board and
said that the purpose of the proposed deck is because at
present their only access is through a narrow kitchen and
separate laundry area. Mr. Kriegel stated that the rear
property is a full level below the main floor making the
use of the back yard non-functional and the only access
out to the back is through an existing door at the rear
of the kitchen.
The applicant said that the present dwelling is only 6'2
ft. from their property line on one side but the neighbor's
house on that side is high .
Mr. Arthur Wexler, the applicant's Architect said that
the Kriegel 's hardship was because their only access out
of the house in the rear was through a very narrow kitchen
and laundry room. A question was asked as to what presently
exists over the garage and the applicant said the kitchen
and maid 's quarter. Mr. Kriegel said he has to manuever
his car to get it into the garage. Mr. Boraczek said he
was very concerned about the 3 ft. and the Board reviewed
the plan.
After further discussion the Board suggested that the ap-
plicants amend the plan by cutting off a corner of the
deck and the Chairman advised the Kriegel 's that at least
three of the members of the Board would go and look at
the interior of the house so as to better understand their
hardship as to access. Mr. Boraczek asked the applicants
to adjourn their application to the next meeting when they
can return with an amended plan to which they agreed.
The Chairman asked the Secretary to read the next appli-
cation .
APPLICATION NO. 3 - CASE 565
Application of Mr. and Mrs . David Tulchin for modification
of Article VI Section 89-34 Subsection B (1 ) & (2) "Con-
struction Requirements for an R-7 .5 One Family Residence
District" which requires a minimum front setback of 30
ft. and a minimum side yard of 10 ft. to permit the front
porch to be extended and enclosed and allow the construc-
tion of a new wood deck. The proposed front porch will
maintain a nonconforming front setback of 27 ft. and a
nonconforming side yard of 7.5 ft. and the proposed wood
deck at the rear of the dwelling will have a side yard
of 9.0 ft. on the premises located at 9 Lafayette Road
and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mama-
roneck as Block 133 Parcel 42 on the grounds of practical
difficulty and/or unnecessary hardship.
Mr. Tulchin presented his application to the Board and
said that the porch had been constructed with the roof
before they purchased the house and they wanted to enclose
it now to add additional living space to their small house.
Mr. Tulchin stated the porch is only 8 x 15 which isn 't
a very big room but there is no other place where they
can add on.
The applicant said they were not changing the present set-
backs as the screen porch is presently only 27 ft. from
the front line and the house is 7.5 ft. from the side line.
Mr. Tulchin further said that the purpose of the deck was
to have access from the main floor since presently the
only way to get out to the backyard is through the base-
ment and garage and the present rear porch is in bad shape
and needs to be repaired. The applicant in conclusion
said that he plans to build the deck of redwood which will
improve the appearance and he had spoken to some of his
neighbors who said they had no objection.
After further discussion the Board decided to vote on the
application and the result was as follows:
Commissioner Boraczek - Aye
Commissioner Moore - Aye
Commissioner Carr - Aye
The application was therefore approved and the following
Resolution adopted:
WHEREAS, Mr. and Mrs . David Tulchin have sub-
mitted an application to the Building Inspec-
tor to allow the enclosure of the front porch
maintaining a nonconforming side yard of 7.5
ft. and a nonconforming front setback of 27
ft. and the construction of a wood deck at the
rear having a side yard setback of 9.0 ft. to-
gether 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 Zon-
ing Ordinance of the Town of Mamaroneck with
particular reference to Article VI Section 89-34
Subsection B (1 ) & (2) "Construction Require-
ments for an R-7.5 One Family Residence District"
which requires a minimum front setback of 30 ft.
and a minimum side yard of 10 ft. on the pre-
mises located at 9 Lafayette Road and known
on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mama-
roneck as Block 133 Parcel 42; and
WHEREAS, Mr. and Mrs . David Tulchin have sub-
mitted an application for a variance on the
ground of practical difficulty and/or unneces-
sary hardship for the following reasons:
1 . The proposed front porch is nec-
essary and desirable as the house
is extremely small and the enclosed
room is a necessity for the applicant's
family.
2. The proposed deck will provide
a route from the main floor to the
backyard and substantially improve
the appearance of the house.
3. Neither change involves any change
in existing setbacks as the side is
already 7.5 ft. from the side line
and the porch is only 27 ft. from
the front line.
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 granted the applica-
tion on the following grounds :
(a) That there are special circum-
stances and conditions applying to
the land for which a 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 . The enclosure of the
front porch and the wood
deck at the rear of the
dwelling will not encroach
any further than the exist-
ing setbacks .
2. That the enclosure of
the front porch will pro-
vide additional living space
to a small house .
3. That the proposed deck
will provide access to the
rear yard.
4. That said circumstances
and/or conditions are such
that the particular appli -
cation of the Ordinance
with respect to Article
VI Section 89-34 Subsection
B (1 ) & (2) "Construction
Requirements for an R-7.5
One Family Residence Dis-
trict would deprive the
applicant of the reasonable
use of the land and/or build-
ing and that the variance
as granted by this Board is
a minimal adjustment that
will accomplish this purpose.
5. That the granting of
the variance is in harmony
with the general purposes
and intent of the Ordinance
and will not be injurious
to the neighborhood or other-
wise detrimental to the pub-
lic welfare; and it is
FURTHER RESOLVED, that a variance is hereby
granted and that Article VI Section 89-34 Sub-
section B (1 ) & (2) "Construction Requirements
for an R-7.5 One Family Residence District"
be varied and modified so as to permit the front
porch to be extended and enclosed maintaining
a nonconforming side yard of 7.5 ft. and to
allow the construction of a new wood deck at
the rear of the dwelling having a side yard
of 9.0 ft. 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.
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.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before this meet-
ing it was adjourned at 9 :15 P.M.
o
Rita . Johnso , Secretary
V LSD
I