Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1964_12_23 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS OF THE TOWN OF MAMARO- NECK HELD DECEMBER 23, 1964, IN THE COURT ROOM OF THE TOWN OF MAMARONECK POLICE STATION, 11 EDGEWOOD AVENUE, TOWN OF MAMARONECK. CALL TO ORDER The Chairman called the meeting to order at 8:07 p.m. PRESENT: Sydney D. Bierman, Chairman E. Robert Wassman Henry E. Mullick Richard Eggers Price H. Topping ABSENT: None ALSO PRESENT: William Paonessa, Building Inspector MINUTES The minutes of the meeting of November 18, 1964 were approved on motion duly made and seconded. HEARING: The Chairman declared the hearing open and the secretary presented the affi- davit of publication of the notice of the hearing in the official newspaper of the Town of Mamaroneck, The Daily Times, on December 17, 1964. The Chairman requested the secretary to read the first application. APPLICATION NO. 1 - CASE 200 Application of Ciro La Barbera d/b/a Minit Car Wash for modification of Article 1V, Section 410 in a "B" Business District, so as to allow the construction of a 40' x 60' addition to the rear of the existing building which will have a rear yard of 4.31-ft. , a side yard of 3.02 ft. , and a building coverage of 30.7% rather than the required minimum rear yard of 25-ft. , the required minimum side yard of 4-ft. and the allowable maximum building coverage of 25%; and in addition, modification of Article III, Section 340, Item 2, having to do with Lots in Two or More Districts, so as to allow said extension and use to come within approximately 32 ft. of Van Gilder Street rather than the 100-ft. required, on the premises located at 434 Boston Post Road and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 503, Parcel 326, on the grounds of practical difficulty and/or unnecessary hardship. For Appellant: William S. Brill, Attorney 7 Woodland Avemie Larchmont, N.Y. In Opposition: Mrs. Secondo Argenta 38 Hartung Street Larchmont, N.Y. Frank Umbrino 33 Hartung Street Larchmont, N.Y. Communications: None 613 Mr. Brill, representing Ciro LaBarbera, appeared and stated that upon the Building Inspector's denial, the application was presented to the Town Board on October 21, 1964, which Board referred it to the Planning Board on November 4, 1964. The Planning Board reported that it was the unanimous opinion of that Board that the subject application should properly be made to the Zoning Board of Appeals. Mr. Brill explained that the applicant wished to extend business use of his par- cel which is some 300 feet deep and lies one-half in business and one-half in resi- dential districts. It is operating under a 1950 variance which allowed an addition- al 100 feet beyond existing zoning in order to give access to the present car wash building. Mr. Bierman asked Mr. Brill if his application was based on a permitted princi- pal use in a business district or permitted special use in a business district. Mr. Brill was not certain whether this was a permitted principal or a permitted special use. Mr. Paonessa stated that, in his opinion, the present use and operation of busi- ness comes under Section 410, schedule of permitted special uses in a business district. Mr. Bierman then pointed out that the amendment to Section 449 of the Zoning Ordi- nance might be applicable. After some further discussion as to whether or not the proposed application for an addition to a a permitted principal use or a permitted special use, Mr. Brill pre- sented to the Board former zoning board applications made to the Zoning Board since 1950, and read a resolution, dated November 29, 1950, requesting that it be included in the record. The resolution referred to is as follows: RESOLVED, that the appeal of Sol Rosen, agent for Selig Rosen from the determination of the Building Inspector be allowed and the determination of the Building Inspector reversed and he here- by is directed to issue to the applicant, a building permit for the erection of a car washing plant with parking area for cars to line up before entering this washing plant, in accordance with plans and specifications submitted to the Building Inspector, on the ground of practical difficulty and unnecessary hardship because of the location of this property on the Boston Post Road which is zoned for business to a depth of 100 feet only and the fact that the proposed building and its use extend beyond the 100 feet, provided that in all other respects, the applicant abide by the provisions of said Ordinance and the Building Code of the Town of Mamaroneck. Referring to a diagram which he presented to the Board, Mr. Brill pointed out that the new Zoning Ordinance divided the property in two, with the front half on the Boston Post Road zoned "B" Business and the rear half zoned residential. Mr. Bierman asked if the property was used for parking other than traffic flow for the car wash building, to which Mr. Brill replied that there was no rental of parking spaces. Mr. Brill pointed out that although zoned residential, the rear portion of the property would never be so developed because it lies in a ravine and is surrounded by business. The property of the Loyal Inn Bowling Alleys, he stated, is adjacent to the west with the building thereon extending far beyond the line requested by the applicant for business use. The portion of Hartung Street, at the rear of the appli- 614 cant's property is an unimproved paper street, which will probably never be opened, and. the same applies to Van Gilder Street, also an paper unimproved street, which is the boundary on the east. Mr Brill stated that the percentage of land coverage by the proposed extension would be within the requirements, if business use is viewed as encompassing the area included in the 1950 variance and the same applies to the rear setback. The side setback of 3 rather than 4 feet is simply in line with the existing building. Mr. Bierman asked Mr. Brill whether lots 1, 2, and 3 were zoned residential .-nd if homes were built there whether or not the applicant would still have room on the property in question to have access to the new extension. Mr. Brill stated that the property at the rear, adjacent to Hartung Street, lacked all utilities needed for residential use, and that it lacked frontage, and further that lots 1, 2, and 3 could not be used for residential homes. After some discussion as to whether homes could be bullt on lots 1, 2, and 3 which would conform to the zoning, Mr. Brill went on to describe business opera- tions and the changing times and conditions which necessitated the proposed addition in order to house new and additional equipment. Mr. Bierman asked whether the lease covered the complete parcel or just the land used for business purposes. Mr. Brill replied that the lease covered the entire par- cel, submitting for examination to the board a photostatic copy of said lease, which expires February 28, 1977. Mr. Bierman inquired of Mr. Paonessa whether there were any contemplated im- provements to the unimproved streets in this area, or whether anything was pending before any town body. Mr. Paonessa replied that, as far as he knew, there were not. Mr. Bierman also stated that the Zoning Ordinance requires that the dividing line between business and residential districts provides for a buffer zone. He stated that this board has no power to rezone and asked if the applicant would con- sider redesign of operation. 4rs. Seconda Argenta and Frank Umbrino both voiced opposition on the ground that the extension of the building and business use would adversely affect the value of their residential properties. Mr. Bierman asked Mr. Umbrino, whose house is relatively new, if he had taken any steps t^ correct the "eyesore" condition on Van Gilder Street, and Mr. Umbrino,- replied that he had made many efforts, particularly to stop the dumping which takes place there. Mr. Bierman further stated that he would like time to consider a jurisdictional matter and confer with the Supervisor and the Town Attorney prior to the next meeting of the Zoning Board. He requested the applicant, following unanimous vote of the Board, to return on January 27th with an amended application describing permitted principal use and permitted special use. The applicant was further advised that no further publication need be made. The secretary was instructed to contact Mr. Johnston, the Town Attorney, and Mr. Burchell, the Supervisor, to arrange an appointment for the herein above meeting. 615 The Chairman requested the secretary to read the next application. APPLICATION NO. 2 - Case 201 Application of Dr. & Mrs. James Q. Haralambie for modification of Article IV, Section 410, Schedule of Residence District Regulations for an R-15 District of the Zoning Ordinance of the Town of Mamaroneck so as to allow an addition to the wester- ly side of the existing dwelling which will have a front set back of 23.1-ft. from Park Hill Lane rather than the required minimum front set back of 40-feet on the premises located at 32 Bonnie Way and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 104, Parcel 40, on the grounds of practical difficulty and/or unnecessary hardship. For Appellant: Peter Moore, Architect 124 Murray Ave. Larchmont,N.Y. In Opposition: None Communications: Mr. & Mrs. W. Yamajuchi 14 Bonnier Way Larchmont, N.Y. Robert Gibson 680 Fifth Avenue New York 19, N.Y. Frederick E. Landmann 7 South Ridge Road } Larchmont, N.Y. John Baity 19 Bonnie Way Larchmont, N.Y. Lee P. Gagliardi 26 Bonnie Way Larchmont, N.Y. Daniel T. McFadden 100 Park Avenue New York 17, N.Y. Joseph A. Salviolo, D.M.D. 8 Bonnie Way Larchmont, N.Y. Charles W. Martin 30 Bonnie Way Larchmont, N.Y. Irwin Guttag 1065 Nine Acres Lane Mamaroneck, N.Y. W. N. Brock 9 Bonnie Way Larchmont, N.Y. Walter E. Warner, Jr. 3 Briar Close Larchmont, N.Y. Anthony Gagliardi 20 Bonnie Way Larchmont, N.Y. D. H. Bissell 23 Bonnie Way Larchmont, N.Y. 616 William F. Hoffman r• 21 Bonnie Way Larchmont, N.Y. Mr. Moore, Architect for the applicants, appeared and reviewed for the benefit of Mr. Eggers who had been absent at the October 28th meeting, the decision of the Board at that time. He further explained that since the plea had failed on a tie vote, the Board at its November 18th meeting had granted the applicants request for rehearing this evening. Mr. Moore further stated that when Dr. Haralambie purchased the property in 1950, the land to the west of it was a single parcel and only subsequently had a street been created as a part of a subdivision with the result that the doctor's parcel had become a corner lot. If it were not a corner lot, no variance would be required for the addition. Mr. Moore also stated that the proposed addition would not affect any house built on Park Hill Lane, since the only available building lot was at the end of the cul-de-sac approximately 150 feet away there- fore providing adequate 1igbtu, air and privacy between dwellings. Mr. Moore pointed out that Dr. Haralambie had a great need for additional sppce for re- search and study which was not possible under the present arrangement of the house. Following a ten minute recess, Mr. Bierman announced that Mr. Eggers was associated with Mr. Moore, the architect representing Dr. Haralambie, in the firm of Eggers & Higgons, bug that the application is not involved in their association and ?tere€ere Mr.Eggers..,;fe1.t that he was qualified to vote in an unbiased manner. F; to.'" The Chairman called attention to the fact that 14 letters had been received in favor of this application which had been filed for the record. Following further discussion, a vote was taken resulting as follows and the following resolution was therefor declared duly adopted: Commissioner Bierman - Aye Commissioner Wassman - Aye Commissioner Eggers - Aye Commissioner Mullick - Naye Commissioner Topping - Naye WHEREAS, Dr. & Mrs. James Q. Haralambie have submitted an application for a building permit to the Building Inspector for the construction of a 16'x 20'two story addition to the westerly side of the existing building together with plans; and WHEREAS, the Building Inspector has refused to issue such permit on the ground that it does not comply with Article IV, Section 410, Schedule of Residence District Regulations for an R-15 District, which required a minimum front set-back of 40 feet from both streets. Proposed plan shows a set-back of 23.1 feet from Park Hill Lane; and WHEREAS, Dr. & Mrs. James Q. Haralambie have submitted to this Board an application for a variance on the grounds of practical difficulty and/or unnecessary hardship for the following reasons: �.� 1. - The property was not a corner lot when purchased in 1950 and until the creation of Park Hill Lane, two years ago, to build the addition would not have required a variance. 2. - Building to the rear of the house is precluded by the topography of t 617 the rocky parcel. 3. - Owner's profession makes it mandatory that a quiet place of study be available and the present house size and arrangement eliminate this possibility. WHEREAS, this Board has examined the plans and also has viewed the property and has heard all persons interested in this application after publication of a notice thereof, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that this Board finds the following: (a) That there are special circumstances and conditions applying to the land and/or building for which a variance is sought, which circumstances and/or conditions are peculiar to such land and/or building and do not apply generally to the land and/or buildings in the district, and which circumstances and conditions have not resulted from any acts of the applicant subsequent to the date of the Zoning Regulations appealed from. (b) That the aforesaid circumstances and/or conditions are as follows: 1. Additional space is required for a quiet place of study. 2. Addition wll not effect any privacy, light or air for dwellings along Park Hill Lane. (6) That the granting of this variance will be 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 to the applicants and that Article IV, Section 410 be varied and modified so as to allow the construction of an addition to the westerly side of the existing dwelling which will have a front set back of 23.1 ft. from Park Hill Lane, .on the premises located at 32 Bonnie Way and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 104, Parcel 40, in strict conformance with the plans filed with this application, and amended, provided that the applicants comply in all other re- spects with the Zoning Ordinance and Building Code of the Town of Mamaroneck and subject to the following conditions: None FURTHER RESOLVED, that in accordance with the Rules and Regulations of the Zon- ing Board where a variance is granted, the applicants shall obtain a building permit within three months of the filing of this resolution with the Town Clerk. A building permit shall be void if construction is not started within six months and completed within two years of said permit. C FURTHER RESOLVED, that this decision be filed with the Town Clerk as provided in Section 267 of the Town Law. The Chairman requested the Secretary to read the third application. 618 APPLICATION NO. 3 - CASE 202 Application of Benjamin L. DeVino for modification of Article IV, Section 400.1 Schedule of Residence District Regulations of the Zoning Ordinance of the Town of Mamaroneck so as to allow the construction of a one(1) family dwelling on_a lot hav- ing an area of 13,700 square feet within the Town instead of the required 20,000 sq. feet, and with the remainder of the building lot located in the Village of Mamaroneck and containing approximately 28,000 sq. ft. on the premises located at 6 Deerfield Lane and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 325, Par- cel 40, on the grounds of practical difficulty and/or unnecessary hardship. For Appellant: Benjamin L. DeVino 1042 East 23rd St. The Bronx, New York Communications: None In Opposition: Howard Barker 8 Deerfield Lane Mamaroneck, N.Y. Edwin Berliner Deerfield Lane Mamaroneck, N.Y. James Mullen 3 Deerfield Lane Mamaroneck, N.Y. Mr. DeVino, the applicant, appeared and submitted plans for constructing a one family dwelling at 6 Deerfield Lane. Mr. DeVino stated that the area, the portion of the lot located within the Town was not sufficient for a building lot. Mr. Bierman asked whether Mr. DeVino's house would comply with the village re- quirements. Mr. Paonessa, stated that, in his opinion Mr. DeVino complied with the Village requirements and that the lot is situated in two municipalities. Mr. Bierman then stated that a variance could be granted only conditioned upon the construction being strictly in accordance with the plans herewith presented and provided that said construction complied in all respects with the requirements of the Village of Mamaroneck Mr. Barker inquired since there would be 28,000 sq. ft. remaining in the village portion after construction, if Mr. DeVino sold this land could 5 houses be built in the Village portion. Mr. Bierman pointed out that access would have to provided for and that any street would have to be approved by the Village and Town Planning Boards. He then asked Mr. Paonessa if Deerfield Lane was a street, to which Mr. Paonessa replied that it was. Mr. Bierman further stated that any lot fronting on Deerfield Lane may be built upon provided it has the required street frontage. Mr. Barker further stated that it would lower the property values if more houses were built on this property. 619 Mr. Bierman suggested that Mr. Barker make his suggestions to the Village of Mamaroneck Planning Board so that the Village might consider an up-zoning of that portion of property which lies in the Village. Mr. Berliner stated that he was not aware that this was a contiguous property and withdrew his objection after an explanation by Mr. Bierman. Following some further discussion, a vote was taken which resulted as follows and the following resolution was therefore declared duly adopted by unanimous vote: Commissioner Bierman - Aye Commissioner Wassman - Aye Commissioner Mullick - Aye Commissioner Eggers - Aye Commissioner Topping - Aye WHEREAS, Benjamin F. DeVino has submitted an application for abuilding permit to the Building Inspector for the construction of a one family dwelling at 6 Deerfield Lane together with plans; and WHEREAS, the Building Inspector has refused to issue such permit on the ground that the plans submitted have failed to comply with Article IV, Section 410, Sehedule of Residence District Regulations for an R-20 District, which requires a building lot area of 20,000tsquare feet; proposed building site has approximately 13,700 square feet in the v Tawn ' Article IV, Section 400.1 requires that all buildings shall be erected in conformity with the District Regulations in which it is located within ® the Town; and WHEREAS, Benjamin L. DeVino has submitted to this Board an application for variance on the ground of practical difficulty and unnecessary hardship for the following reason: 1. Since the two portions of this parcel are contiguous and since together they comprise a conforming lot in either municipality- either municipality should issue a building permit considering the entire parcel as one. WHEREAS, this Board has examined the plans and heard all persons interested in this application after publication of a notice thereof, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that this Board finds the following: (a) That there are special circumstances and conditions applying to the land and/or building for which a variance is sought, which circumstances and/or conditions are peculiar to such land and/or building and do not apply generally to the land and/or buildings in the district, and which circumstances and conditions have not resulted from any acts of the applicant subsequent to the date of the Zoning Regulations appealed from. Q (b) That the aforesaid circumstances and/or conditions are as follows: 1. - Since the two portions of this parcel are contiguous and since together they comprise a conforming lot in either municipality 620 4. either municipality should issue a building permit consider- ing the entire parcel as one. (c) That the granting of this variance will be 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 to the applicant and that Article IV, Section 410 be varied and modified so as to allow the construction of a one family dwelling on a lot having an area of 13,700 square feet within the Town of Mamaroneck, and the remainder of the building lot located in the Village of Mamaroneck and containing approximately 28,000 sq. ft. on the pre- mises located at 6 Deerfield Lane and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block 325, Parcel 40, in strict conformance with the plans filed with this application, and amended, provided that the applicant complies in all other respects with the Zoning Ordinance and Building Code of the Town of Mamaroneck and subject to the following conditions: None FURTHER RESOLVED, that in accordance with the Rules and Regulations of the Zoning Board where a variance is granted, the applicant shall obtain a build- ing permit within three months of the filing of this resolution with the Town Clerk. A building permit shall be void if construction is not started within two years 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 read a communication from Richard F. Sheehan, dated December 22, 1964, in which he requested a postponement of his application until the January meeting. A communication was also read from Irving .B. Taub of 10 Copley Road in opposition to the application and ordered received and filed for the record, ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before this meeting it was adjpurned at 11:45 p.m. Le Esta E. Davis, Secretary 621