Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1974_03_27 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS OF THE TOWN OF MAMARONECK HELD MARCH 27, 1974, 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. Richard F. Eggers, Chairman Mr. E. Robert Wassman Mr. Andrew W. Boraczek Mr. Lawrence G. Bodkin, Jr. Absent: Mr. Egbert R. Hardesty Also present: Mr. William Paonessa, Building Inspector APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minutes of the meeting of November 28, 1973 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. Eggers asked the Secretary to read the first appli- cation. APPLICATION NO. 1 - CASE 399 Application of Mr. and Mrs. Ronald Weiss for modification of Article IV Section 410 Schedule of Residence District Regulations for an R-10 Residential District so as to allow the construction of a one story addition at the rear of the dwelling having a rear yard of 20 ft. and a side yard of 6 ft. instead of the minimum required rear yard of 25 ft. and a minimum required side yard of 10 ft. on the premises located at 5 Woody Lane and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaro- neck as Block 224 Parcel 185 on the grounds of practical difficulty and/or unnecessary hardship. Mr. Weiss presented his application to the Board and stated that his reason for wanting the addition was to enlarge his kitchen and provide an eating area in the kitchen. The applicant said that at present there is no space for a table in the kitchen and it is necessary to have all their meals in the dining room. Mr. Weiss said they intended to place all the utilities on one wall including the washer and dryer which at pre- sent are in the basement. The Chairman questioned about the door being added and Mr. Weiss explained that at pre- sent in order to reach his patio it is necessary to walk all the way around the house to the side where the patio is located. It was pointed out that the house was built under the previous zoning and the side yard will not extend any further than it does presently. The Chairman also asked if Mr. Weiss had considered any other solution and the applicant said he had inquired from four or five contrac- tors and the proposed plan was the best they could decide on. After further discussion a vote was taken on the appli- cation and the result was as follows: Commissioner Eggers - Aye Commissioner Wassman - Aye Commissioner Boraczek - Aye Commissioner Bodkin - Aye The application was therefore approved and the following Resolution duly adopted: WHEREAS, Mr. and Mrs. Ronald Weiss have submitted an application for a building permit to the Build- ing Inspector to allow the construction of a one story addition at the rear of the dwelling having a rear yard of 20 ft. and a side yard of 6 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 IV Section 410 Schedule of Residence District Regulations for an R-10 Residential District which requires a minimum rear yard of 25 ft. and a minimum side yard of 10 ft. on the premises located at 5 Woody Lane and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 224 Parcel 185; and WHEREAS, Mr. and Mrs. Ronald Weiss have submitted to this Board an application for a variance on the ground of practical difficulty and/or unnec- cessary hardship for the following reasons : 1 . To expand the kitchen and allow all applicances to be installed on one wall allowing more usable liv- ing and dining space. 2. To give the feeling of roominess to a small home. WHEREAS, this Board has examined the plans, reviewed the application and has heard all per- ( \ � t . 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 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 . The house at present does not provide for an eating area in the kitchen. 2. The addition will not extend into the side yard any further than it does at present. 3. That the proposed ad- dition would not extend into the rear yard any further than the rear of the adjacent dwelling. (c) That the granting of this 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 it is FURTHER RESOLVED, that a variance is hereby granted to the applicant and that Article IV Section 410 Schedule of Residence District Reg- ulations for an R-10 Residential District so as to allow the construction of a one story addition at the rear of the dwelling having a minimum rear yard of 20 ft. and a minimum side yard of 6 ft. on the premises located at 5 Woody Lane and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 224 Par- cel 185 in strict conformance with the 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. The Chairman asked the Secretary to read the second ap- plication. APPLICATION NO. 2 - CASE 400 Application of Dr. Joseph M. Roth for modification of Article IV Section 410 Schedule of Permitted Uses in a Residence District (Permitted Accessory Uses) which restricts the use of the dwelling by the inhabitant thereof for professional office with not more than one non-resi- dent employee or associate so as to permit the applicant to have two associates on the premises located at 1271 Palmer Avenue and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 401 Parcel 52 on the grounds of practical difficulty and/or unnecessary hard- ship. Dr. Roth presented his application to the Board and stated that his request was different from most cases. The applicant stated that he wanted to add another associate to his practice and that his role in the office was of a general practitioner.Dr. Roth said that his present associate specializes in the care of children with learn- ing disabilities because of visual problems and is in the office on a part time basis three days a week attend- ing the College of Optomery at other times. The appli- cant said he would now like to add another associate, also, on a part time basis to deal with patients who are classified as low vision or partially sighted and even though Dr. Roth is experienced in this field his other duties are so demanding he cannot devote sufficient time to this need of his many patients. Dr. Roth fur- ther stated that there was a need for this additional service in the community as at present the only referral centers are in New York City. The applicant, also, said that because both associates were part time it could be construed as one full time associate and he did not think it was in violation of the zoning law. Dr. Roth, also, statedthat he did not feel the addition would in any way change the present character or use of the pro- perty nor would it adversely affect the neighborhood in any way. Mr. Eggers questioned as to what guarantee Dr. Roth could ! � �l `1 give that he would not have two full time associates and the applicant said it would be physically impossible to accommodate two full time associates without expand- ing his office. Mr. Boraczek questioned as to whether Dr. Roth would need any special equipment and if there was ample space for additional equipment. Dr. Roth said he had room for any additional equipment that was needed. Mr. Wassman asked about the parking and Dr. Roth said he presently has space for four cars. The Chairman stated that when he had inspected the site there were 7 cars on the street and only one car in the parking area. A ques- tion was raised as to traffic and Mr. Eggers stated that if a new service was being offered it would automatically be assumed there would be new patients. Mr. Bodkin asked Dr. Roth if he had a Secretary and the applicant said his wife is his Secretary. The Chairman then asked if there was anyone else in favor of the ap- plication and Mr. Boraczek read a letter from Dr. Ploumis approving the request. Mr. Kenneth J. Nixon of 74 Howell Avenue who said he represented the Howell Park Association stated he wasn 't either for or against but they were more concerned as to whether should the variance be granted if the use of the property could be continued by a new owner. Mr. Eggers asked Mr. Paonessa what the ruling on that par- ticular point would be and the Building Inspector said the variance would remain. Mr. Bodkin questioned as to whether if the variance was granted a condition could be attached that the variance would be discontinued if the property changed hands. Mr. Peter Fousek of 1294 Palmer Avenue said as a resi- dent of the neighborhood he was opposed to the applica- tion and Mr. Lionel Marks of 75 Howell Avenue expressed his disapproval of the request stating he did not see Dr. Roth's reasons of hardship. Mr. William Meister of 9 Hawthorne Road and Mr. Alan Murray of 116 Carleon Avenue both agreed with Mr. Nixon. After further discussion a vote was taken on the appli- cation and the result was as follows : Commissioner Eggers - Nay Commissioner Wassman - Nay Commissioner Boraczek - Nay Commissioner Bodkin - Nay The application was therefore denied and the following Resolution duly adopted: WHEREAS, Dr. Joseph M. Roth has submitted an application to the Building Inspector to per- mit the accessory use of the structure (Profes- sional Office) for more than one associate; and WHEREAS, the Building Inspector has refused to issue such permit on the grounds that the application submitted failed to comply with the Zoning Ordinance of the Town of Mamaroneck with particular reference to Article IV Section 410 Schedule of Permitted Uses in a Residence District (Permitted Accessory Uses) which re- stricts the use of the dwelling by the inhabi- tant thereof for professional office with not more than one non-resident employee or assoc- iate on the premises located at 1271 Palmer Avenue and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 401 Parcel 52; and WHEREAS, Dr. Joseph M. Roth has submitted to this Board an application for a variance on the ground of practical difficulty and/or un- necessary hardship for the following reasons : 1 . Because of the specialties within the profession of optometry it is im- possible for one or two individuals to be expert to care for patients with special visual problemsand a third Doctor is required. 2. The applicant said that since both associates were part time it could be construed as one full time associate. 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 denied the applica- tion on the following grounds: 1 . That the applicant failed to show that the accessory use of the property by more than one associate or non- resident employee, would not create additional vehicle traffic and park- ing in the area. 2. That the present off-street park- ing facilities on the property, would only accommodate four spaces. 3. That the applicant failed to show that the proposed accessory use of the dwelling would not require addi- tional office facilities and change the character of the dwelling to a use not permitted in a residential district. 4. That there were 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. 5. That the facts and circumstances claimed by the applicant to entitle him to the variance are not such as would deprive him of the reasonable use of the land. 6. That the granting of the variance would not be in harmony with the gen- eral purposes and intent of this Ordi- nance and would be injurious to the neighborhood and detrimental to the public welfare. FURTHER RESOLVED, that this decision be filed with the Town Clerk in accordance with 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. ita . Jo ns Secretary I