HomeMy WebLinkAbout1969_02_26 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
OF THE TOWN OF MAMARONECK HELD FEBRUARY 26, 1969, IN THE COURT
ROOM OF THE TOWN OF MAMARONECK POLICE STATION, 11 EDGEWOOD
AVENUE, TOWN OF MAMARONECK.
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. Henry Mullick
Mr. Price H. Topping
Mr. Russell G. Pelton
Absent: Mr. E. Robert Wassman
Also present: Mr. James J. Johnston, Town Attorney
Mr. William Paonessa, Building Inspector
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The minutes of the meeting of November 21, 1968 were
presented and on motion duly made and seconded, ap-
proved as submitted.
PUBLIC HEARING
The Chairman declared the hearing open and the Sec-
retary presented for the record the affidavit of
publication of the notice of hearing.
The Chairman requested the Secretary to read the
first application.
APPLICATION NO. 1 - CASE 304
Application of Mr. J. M. Barrett for modification
of Article IV Section 410 Schedule of Residence Dis-
trict Regulations for an R-10 Residential District
(see Note"A") of the Zoning Ordinance so as to allow
the construction of a one story addition at the west-
erly side of the dwelling having a front setback
from Brookside Place of 18 feet instead of the re-
quired front setback on corner lots of 30 feet from
both streets on the premises located at 14 Rockland
Avenue and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the
Town of Mamaroneck as Block 222 Parcel 349 on the
grounds of practical difficulty and/or unnecessary
hardship.
Mrs. Barrett presented the Board with her applica-
tion. The applicant stated that their reason for
wanting this addition was to enlarge the present
kitchen and dining area so that the entire family
could eat at one time.
It was pointed out by the Board that the addition
was not going to project beyond the existing struc-
ture which is now a raised terrace. It was, also,
pointed out that the addition would be finished with
aluminum siding.
The Chairman asked if there was anyone else in favor
of the application. Mrs. Barrett had presented the
Secretary with a letter from Mrs. Nicholas F. Perrin
of 5 Rockland Avenue favoring the application and
Mrs. Lester Davies of 18 Rockland Avenue spoke in
favor the application. There was no opposition.
After a brief discussion the Board voted on the ap-
plication and the result was as follows:
Commissioner Eggers - Aye
Commissioner Mullick - Aye
Commissioner Topping - Nay
Commissioner Pelton - Aye
The application was therefore granted and the follow-
ing Resolution duly adopted:
WHEREAS, Mr. J. M. Barrett has submitted
an application for a building permit to
the Building Inspector for the construc-
tion of a one story addition at the west-
erly side of the dwelling together with
plans; and
WHEREAS, the Building Inspector has fefused
to issue such permit on the grounds that
the plans submitted failed to comply with
the Zoning Ordinance of the Town of Mama-
roneck with particular reference to Article
IV Section 410 Schedule of Residence Dis-
trict Regulations for an R-10 Residential
District (see Note "A") of the Zoning
Ordinance which requires a front setback
on corner lots of 30 feet from both streets
on the premises located at 14 Rockland
Avenue and known on the Tax Assessment
Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Block
222 Parcel 349; and
WHEREAS, Mr. J. M. Barrett has submitted
to this Board an application for a variance
on the ground of practical difficulty and/
or unnecessary hardship for the following
reasons:
1. Because of the size of the
family which now includes 5 chil-
dren it is not possible for the
entire family to eat together
( � 31
in the dinette area.
2. Because of the shape and size
of the lot the proposed site was
the only place to enlarge the
kitchen and dinette area.
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 grants the appli-
cation on the following grounds:
(a) That there are special cir-
cumstances and conditions apply-
ing to the land and/or building
for which a variance is sought,
which circumstances and/or con-
ditions are peculiar to such land
and/or buildings and do not apply
generally to the land and/or build-
ings 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 circum-
stances and/or conditions are
as follows:
1. The proposed addi-
tion will not extend
into the existing yards
any further than the
present terrace does.
2. Because of the
size of the family
it is necessary for
the applicant to en-
large the kitchen and
dinette area so the
family can all eat
together.
3. That said circum-
stances or conditions
are such that the par-
ticular application
of the Ordinance with
respect to Article IV,
/0 3�
Section 410 would de-
prive the applicant
of the reasonable use
of such land and/or
building and that for
these reasons the grant-
ing of the variance
is necessary for the
reasonable use of the
land and/or building
and that the variance
as granted by this
Board is the minimum
adjustment that will
accomplish this pur-
pose.
(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 Schedule of Residence Dis-
trict Regulations for an R-10 Residential
District (see Note "A") of the Zoning
Ordinance so as to allow the construction
of a one story addtion at the westerly
side of the dwelling on the premises lo-
cated at 14 Rockland Avenue 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.
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 con-
struction 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.
Thq Chairman requested the Secretary to read the
second application.
� b3
APPLCATION NO. 2 - CASE 305
Application of Mr. Irving Cook for modification of
Article IV Section 410, "Schedule of Regulations for
Non-Residential Districts" and Article IV Section
400.10 "Accessory Uses" so as to allow the construc-
tion of a one story addition and alteration to the
north and easterly side of the building, which will
reduce off-street parking facilities below minimum
requirements as maintained in a single common facility
on adjoining lots within 500 feet from the structure
on the premises located at 1265 Boston Post Road and
known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamar-
oneck as Block 412 Parcels 449 and 439 on the grounds
of practical difficulty and/or unnecessary hardship.
Mr. George P. Forbes, Jr. , an Attorney, of 7 Woodland
Avenue, Larchmont, New York represented the applicant,
Mr. Irving Cook.
Mr. Forbes presented members of the Board with a memo-
randum upon behalf of his client and stated that the
basis of the appeal was not so much for a modification
of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance but a request
for an interpretation of the applicable provisions
of the Ordinance. He stated that the applicant was
not seeking a variance but a determination by the
Zoning Board as to the interpretation of the provi-
sions involved.
Mr. Forbes contends that the Zoning Ordinance must
be strictly construed in favor of the property owner
and any doubt in meaning must be decided in favor
of the property owner. He, also, contends that the
Zoning Regulations cannot be extended specifically
nor by implication and may not be interpreted to pro-
hibit an otherwise lawful case.
Mr. Forbes stated that Mr. Cook is the owner of Block
412 Parcel 449 and leases Parcel 439 which contains
10,000 square feet. Parcel 439 is located at the
extreme northeast corner of the combined property
and is being presently used as part of the parking
area for the restaurant.
Mr. Forbes contends that despite the denial of the
application by the Building Inspector, Parcel 439
is properly a part of the lot in which the restau-
rant is located. Mr. Forbes states that Parcels 449
and 439 are one parcel of land and not divided by
streets occupied or to be occupied by a building,
buildings or accessory building together with such
open spaces as required under the provisions of this
Ordinance and in accordance with the provisions of
law to be adequate as a condition for the issuance
of a building permit for a building on such land.
(0
Mr. Forbes, also, stated that the lease in question,
dated March 29, 1966, is between Dan and Pearl Elkind
and Dorliz Land Corp. The applicant, Mr. Irving Cook,
is President of the Dorliz Land Corp. and executed
the lease which is for a term of 15 years from April
1, 1966 to March 31, 1981. The term of the lease
states that the lot is to be used for a parking lot
or any other lawful purpose in conjunction with the
operation of Cook's Restaurant and that the tenant
has the option to renew the lease for two renewal
terms of 15 years each which would take the renewal
lease to March 31, 2011.
The applicant contends that there is a question in-
volving the interpretation of the meaning of "space
devoted to patron's use" which requires one space
for each 50 square feet of floor space devoted to
patron's use. That although the Building Inspector
has made allowances for certain areas in the build-
ing such as storage and toilet facilities which are
not used by patrons for actual dining he has not con-
sidered the deduction of areas devoted to space in
and around counters and aisle space between tables.
The Building Inspector's interpretation of the appli-
cable provisions of the ordinance reveals that 79
parking spaces are required for the present building
and the proposed addition would have to provide an
additional 34 making a total of 113. The applicant
contends that according to their computation 74 park-
ing spaces are required and presently there are 110
spaces of which 31 are on the leased area. The appli-
cant further contends that the space where the patrons
walk back and forth in the existing or proposed build-
ing should not be computed and that the parking area
should be based upon the number of people who use
the restaurant on the basis of the area for tables
and chairs.
Mr. Eggers asked Mr. James Reville, a Professional
Engineer and the designer of the addition and alter-
ation for Mr. Cook what criteria he used for designing
the floor area per patron in dining rooms. Mr. Reville
stated that his method of computing the area is from
the State Manual prepared by the Department of Com-
merce in 1932. He stated that an average table set-
ting was 7'x7' which is approximately 50 square feet.
Mr. Eggers questioned as to whether the 50 square
feet included a circulation area. Mr. Reville pre-
sented to the Board a parking analysis plan showing
the proposed floor areas in the dining room of the
restaurant and pub which he explained to the members.
Mr. Eggers stated that the aisle leading to the game
room is 52' wide and is only used by customers. It
was, also, pointed out that the required area for
a parking space is 9'x20' .
Mr. Eggers asked Mr. Johnston, the Town Attorney,
r03s'
whether legally the leased land could be computed
in determining off-street parking areas with the
present parking area owned by Mr. Cook. Mr Johnston
stated that he would say yes. Mr. Topping asked
Mr. Forbes what would happen if the tenant defaulted
in rent. Mr. Cook, the applicant,of #1347 Flagler
Drive, Mamaroneck, answered by saying that the same
thing as would happen if you defaulted on your mort-
gage. The Board discussed the possibility of what
would happen if Mr. Cook were to sell the property
and whether or not his purchaser would succeed to
his benefits of the leased property.
After further discussion, the Chairman asked if there
was anyone else who wanted to speak in favor of the
application. Mr. Anthony Sansone, an Attorney, who
said he represents the Castro Convertible Company
said he had no comments. Mr. Scheuble an adjoining
land owner presented the Board with a letter opposing
the application. The letter was signed by Otto Scheuble,
Julius Anger and Kathryn Scheuble and stated that
"as immediate property owners they were concerned
about the increased health nuisance because of the
cooking with greases which produce an odor and in
warm weather attracts flies and mosquitoes". Mr.
Scheuble further pointed out in his letter that the
existing large exhaust fans on Cook's Restaurant
blow polluted air on the adjoining properties. He,
also, said that a larger building would mean more
business, more parking and more traffic on the al-
ready heavily traveled Boston Post Road and that
Mr. Cook is already in violation of the Zoning Ordi-
nance. When Mr. Cook had built his parking lot in
1966 he had not provided a 10 foot buffer strip as
required by the Zoning Ordinance.
Mr. Johnston questioned as to whether the present
building has the necessary parking area at the pre-
sent time and was informed that it does meet the
requirements. The Town Attorney then asked Police
Chief James O'Brien about the traffic,: situation
on the Boston Post Road and Chief O'Brien stated
that the traffic was heavy and stacks up. Mr. John-
ston questioned as to where a car coming from Cook's
parking lot would have to stop, if the terrace was
enclosed, to have a clear view of the traffic. The
Police Chief explained they would have to make a
stop at the sidewalk or practically at the curb.
Mr. Johnston, also, said he had hoped to have Fire
Chief Ralph Condro at the meeting but he had been
called out to a fire. The applicants brought up
the question as to whether the traffic was pertinent
to the case and Mr. Eggers stated that he felt safety
was very important.
Mr. Topping made the suggestion that he would like
to have time to read over Mr. Forbes' memorandum
1O36
and reserve his decision for another meeting.
Mr. Scheuble inquired as to whether or not Mr. Cook
would be required to put in the buffer zone and was
advised by the applicants that they would put the
buffer zone in.
After further discussion it was decided that the
Board would hold a Special Meeting on Saturday, March
1, 1969 at 9 a.m. to continue the case at which time
Mr. Paonessa was requested to present to the Board
computations on the existing and proposed floor areas
and aisle spaces.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before this
meeting it was adjourned at 10 p.m.
Rita A. Johnson, Secretary
C
1 o�7