Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2023_12_20 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes O� �y MINUTES 02 ` Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting o December 20, 2023 _ fd1 n Conference Room C, First Floor 7:00 PM FOUNDED 1661 PRESENT: Arthur Wexler, Board Chairman Irene O'Neil, Board Vice Chair Randy Heller, Board Member Stephen Marsh, Board Member Jonathan Sacks, Board Member Carol Miller, Alternate Board Member A Arthur Katz, Alternate Board Member B OTHERS PRESENT: Lisa Hochman, Counsel to the Board Richard Polcari, Building Inspector Jennifer Ransom, Zoning Board of Appeals Secretary The meeting commenced at 7:04 p.m. Ms. Ransom stated that all items on the agenda for public hearing had been properly noticed and all documents to be discussed this evening had been posted on the Town website at least 24 hours prior to the meeting. Application No. 1 - Case No. 3364/ZBA-23-13 — 1370 Boston Post Road—UBX Boxing ADJOURNED Application No. 2 - Case No. 3366/ZBA-23-4 — 1 Well House Lane—Liming Zhao Motion: To open the public hearing Moved by Arthur Wexler seconded by Irene O'Neill Action: Unanimously approved Liming Zhao, the applicant and homeowner, addressed the Board to explain the application and the Board discussed the request. There were no public questions or comments. Motion: To close the public hearing Moved by Arthur Wexler seconded by Irene O'Neill Action: Unanimously approved Motion: To approve the requested variance Zoning Board of Appeals December 20, 2023 Moved by Jonathan Sacks seconded by Stephen Marsh Action: Unanimously approved RESOLUTION 1 Well House Lane,Town of Mamaroneck, New York After review, on motion of Jonathan Sacks, seconded by Stephen Marsh, the following resolution was proposed and unanimously ADOPTED by a vote of 5 to 0. WHEREAS, Liming Zhao (the"Applicant") requested a variance for a fence on the premises located at 1 Well House Lane, Town of Mamaroneck,New York and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Section 3 Block 40 Lot 630; and WHEREAS, the Building Inspector declined to issue such permit on the following grounds: The proposed fence height in the front yard will be 6 feet where 4 is permitted pursuant to Section 240-52A; for a residence in an R-20 Zone District(the "Notice of Disapproval"); and WHEREAS, the Applicant seeks to legalize a pre-existing four-foot-high fence with a one-foot topper; and WHEREAS, the Applicant submitted to the Zoning Board of the Town of Mamaroneck(the "Board") an application for relief from the requirements from the Town of Mamaroneck Zoning Code; and WHEREAS, the Board examined the plans, inspected the site, reviewed the application and has heard any and all persons interested in this application after publication of a notice thereof and a public hearing thereon; and WHEREAS, this is a Type II action having no significant impact on the environment pursuant to 6 NYCRR§ 617 et. seq. and accordingly, no further action under SEQRA is required, and A. The Board finds that the benefit to the applicant from the granting of the variance outweighs any detriment to the health, safety and welfare of the neighborhood or community. In reaching this conclusion, the Board considered the following factors. i. Whether an undesirable change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood or detriment to nearby properties will be created by granting of the variance. The Board finds that granting the variance will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or detriment to nearby properties because it would legalize a fence that has been in place for at least 15 years, without complaint, it is partially screened by trees and shrubs and sits about 15 feet away from the curb and inside the property line. ii. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some means feasible to the applicants other than an area variance. 2IPage Zoning Board of Appeals December 20, 2023 The Board finds that the benefit sought by the applicant cannot be achieved by some method feasible to the applicant not requiring a variance because the house is on a corner lot and the portion of the property at issue is characterized as a front yard under the Town Code, but it functions as a side yard and a fence is the only way to properly screen and protect the property along Old White Plains Road, a busy street that runs into the Village of Mamaroneck. iii. Whether the area variance is substantial. The Board finds that the variance is not substantial because fences of similar height and design on busy roads are common within the Town. iv. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood. The Board finds that the variance will not adversely impact the local physical or environmental conditions because the fence generates no runoff and has no impact to light or air. v. Whether the difficulty is self-created. The Board finds that the difficulty is self-created, but this factor is not determinative under the circumstances presented. B. For the reasons stated above, the Board finds that the granting of the variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the Town of Mamaroneck Zoning Ordinance and will not be injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. C. For reasons stated above, the Board finds that the variance is the minimum necessary to alleviate the difficulty detailed in the application yet also preserves and protects the character of the neighborhood and the health safety and welfare of the community. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED,that the subject application be and the same is GRANTED, subject to the following conditions: 1. This variance is limited to the construction shown on the submitted plans as conditioned and/or modified in accordance with the direction of the Board as agreed to by the Applicant. 2. The Applicant shall submit plans reflecting any conditions or modifications as above for the review and approval by the Building Inspector prior to the granting of the building permit. 3. The Applicant shall obtain a building permit within six (6) months of the filing of this resolution. 4. The building permit shall be void if construction is not started within six (6)months. 3I Pag : Zoning Board of Appeals December 20, 2023 5. Construction shall be in compliance with the plans submitted in connection with this application, as conditioned or modified pursuant to the direction of the Board. 6. Prior to certificate of occupancy, the Applicant shall submit a final as-built survey to the Town Building Department. 7. The fence shall be limited to five feet in height (including the topper) and the length shall be no greater than what is shown on the submitted survey. This resolution is hereby certified and shall be filed with the Town Clerk. Application No. 3 - Case No. ZBA-23-11 —22 Villa Road—Bryan Mitchell Motion: To open the public hearing Moved by Arthur Wexler seconded by Irene O'Neill Action: Unanimously approved Gregory Lewis, the applicant's architect and Bryan Mitchell, the homeowner, addressed the Board to explain the application and the Board discussed the request. There were no public questions or comments. Motion: To close the public hearing Moved by Arthur Wexler seconded by Irene O'Neill Action: Unanimously approved Motion: To approve the requested variance Moved by Irene O'Neill seconded by Jonathan Sacks Action: Unanimously approved RESOLUTION 22 Villa Road, Town of Mamaroneck, New York After review, on motion of Irene O'Neill, seconded by Jonathan Sacks, the following resolution was proposed and unanimously ADOPTED by a vote of 5 to 0. WHEREAS, Bryan Mitchell (the "Applicant")requested a variance for a stoop and steps on the premises located at 22 Villa Road, Town of Mamaroneck,New York and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Section 1 Block 11 Lot 191; and WHEREAS, the Building Inspector declined to issue such permit on the following grounds: the proposed front stoop and steps will have a front yard setback of 22' where 30' is required, pursuant to 240-38 B (1); Proposed improvements will have a lot coverage of 39.6% where 35% is permitted,pursuant to 240- 4IPage Zoning Board of Appeals December 20, 2023 38 F; and further the improvements increase the extent by which the property is nonconforming pursuant to 240-69 for a building in an R-7.5 zoning district(the"Notice of Disapproval"); and WHEREAS, the Applicant submitted to the Zoning Board of the Town of Mamaroneck(the "Board") an application for relief from the requirements from the Town of Mamaroneck Zoning Code; and WHEREAS, the Board examined the plans, inspected the site, reviewed the application and has heard any and all persons interested in this application after publication of a notice thereof and a public hearing thereon; and WHEREAS, this is a Type II action having no significant impact on the environment pursuant to 6 NYCRR§ 617 et. seq. and accordingly, no further action under SEQRA is required, and A. The Board finds that the benefit to the applicant from the granting of the variance outweighs any detriment to the health, safety and welfare of the neighborhood or community. In reaching this conclusion, the Board considered the following factors. i. Whether an undesirable change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood or detriment to nearby properties will be created by granting of the variance. The Board finds that granting the variance will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or detriment to nearby properties because the proposed steps and stoop will enhance the front appearance of the house and the design is consistent with architectural features of nearby properties. ii. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some means feasible to the applicants other than an area variance. The Board finds that the benefit sought by the applicant cannot be achieved by some method feasible to the applicant not requiring a variance because the topography is extremely steep and underlying rock elevates the height of the property making it steeper than nearby properties and the homeowner wants to improve safety due to the bad condition of the existing steep stairs and add a platform to stand by the front door. iii. Whether the area variance is substantial. The Board finds that the variance is not substantial because square footage will increase only minimally, and the lot coverage will be reduced because of changes to the walkway on the left side of the house. iv. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood. The Board finds that the variance will not adversely impact the local physical or environmental conditions because there will be no change to light, runoff or noise. v. Whether the difficulty is self-created. 51 Zoning Board of Appeals December 20, 2023 The Board finds that the difficulty is self-created, but this factor is not determinative under the circumstances presented. B. For the reasons stated above, the Board finds that the granting of the variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the Town of Mamaroneck Zoning Ordinance and will not be injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. C. For reasons stated above, the Board finds that the variance is the minimum necessary to alleviate the difficulty detailed in the application yet also preserves and protects the character of the neighborhood and the health safety and welfare of the community. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED,that the subject application be and the same is GRANTED, subject to the following conditions: 1. This variance is limited to the construction shown on the submitted plans as conditioned and/or modified in accordance with the direction of the Board as agreed to by the Applicant. 2. The Applicant shall submit plans reflecting any conditions or modifications as above for the review and approval by the Building Inspector prior to the granting of the building permit. 3. The Applicant shall obtain a building permit within six (6)months of the filing of this resolution. 4. The building permit shall be void if construction is not started within six (6) months. 5. Construction shall be in compliance with the plans submitted in connection with this application, as conditioned or modified pursuant to the direction of the Board. 6. Prior to certificate of occupancy, the Applicant shall submit a final as-built survey to the Town Building Department. This resolution is hereby certified and shall be filed with the Town Clerk. Application No. 4- Case No. ZBA-23-16 - 97 Madison Avenue—Kasile & Jeremy Goldberg Motion: To open the public hearing Moved by Arthur Wexler seconded by Irene O'Neill Action: Unanimously approved Joseph Guglielmo, the applicant's architect and Kasile & Jeremy Goldberg, the homeowners, addressed the Board to explain the application and the Board discussed the request. There were no public questions or comments. Motion: To close the public hearing 6I Zoning Board of Appeals December 20, 2023 Moved by Arthur Wexler seconded by Irene O'Neill Action: Unanimously approved Motion: To approve the requested variance Moved by Stephen Marsh seconded by Randy Heller Action: Unanimously approved RESOLUTION 97 Madison Avenue, Town of Mamaroneck,New York After review, on motion of Stephen Marsh, seconded by Randy Heller, the following resolution was proposed and unanimously ADOPTED by a vote of 5 to 0. WHEREAS, Kasile & Jeremy Goldberg (the "Applicant") requested a variance for a front portico on the premises located at 97 Madison Avenue, Town of Mamaroneck,New York and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Section 1 Block 30 Lot 181; and WHEREAS, the Building Inspector declined to issue such permit on the following grounds: the proposed front portico will have a front yard setback to the facia of 25.9' where 30' is required,pursuant to 240-38 B (1); and further the improvements increase the extent by which the property is nonconforming pursuant to 240-69 for a building in an R-7.5 zoning district(the"Notice of Disapproval"); and WHEREAS, the Applicant submitted to the Zoning Board of the Town of Mamaroneck(the "Board") an application for relief from the requirements from the Town of Mamaroneck Zoning Code; and WHEREAS, the Board examined the plans, inspected the site, reviewed the application and has heard any and all persons interested in this application after publication of a notice thereof and a public hearing thereon; and WHEREAS, this is a Type II action having no significant impact on the environment pursuant to 6 NYCRR§ 617 et. seq. and accordingly, no further action under SEQRA is required, and A. The Board finds that the benefit to the applicant from the granting of the variance outweighs any detriment to the health, safety and welfare of the neighborhood or community. In reaching this conclusion, the Board considered the following factors. i. Whether an undesirable change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood or detriment to nearby properties will be created by granting of the variance. The Board finds that granting the variance will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or detriment to nearby properties because the proposed front covered entrance and porch enhances the appearance of the house and is consistent with design elements in the neighborhood, especially the house to the right. 7IPage Zoning Board of Appeals December 20, 2023 ii. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some means feasible to the applicants other than an area variance. The Board finds that the benefit sought by the applicant cannot be achieved by some method feasible to the applicant not requiring a variance because adding a covered entrance of any size would encroach into the required front yard setback, which would require a variance. iii. Whether the area variance is substantial. The Board finds that the variance is not substantial because due to the massive right-of-way, there is an extra 24 feet between the road and the front of the house. iv. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood. The Board finds that the variance will not adversely impact the local physical or environmental conditions because given the large right away, there is ample distance between the front of the house and the road. v. Whether the difficulty is self-created. The Board finds that the difficulty is self-created, but this factor is not determinative under the circumstances presented. B. For the reasons stated above, the Board finds that the granting of the variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the Town of Mamaroneck Zoning Ordinance and will not be injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. C. For reasons stated above, the Board finds that the variance is the minimum necessary to alleviate the difficulty detailed in the application yet also preserves and protects the character of the neighborhood and the health safety and welfare of the community. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED,that the subject application be and the same is GRANTED, subject to the following conditions: 1. This variance is limited to the construction shown on the submitted plans as conditioned and/or modified in accordance with the direction of the Board as agreed to by the Applicant. 2. The Applicant shall submit plans reflecting any conditions or modifications as above for the review and approval by the Building Inspector prior to the granting of the building permit. 3. The Applicant shall obtain a building permit within six (6)months of the filing of this resolution. 4. The building permit shall be void if construction is not started within six (6)months. 81 Zoning Board of Appeals December 20, 2023 5. Construction shall be in compliance with the plans submitted in connection with this application, as conditioned or modified pursuant to the direction of the Board. 6. Prior to certificate of occupancy, the Applicant shall submit a final as-built survey to the Town Building Department. This resolution is hereby certified and shall be filed with the Town Clerk. Application No. 5 - Case No. ZBA-23-12—22 Rockridge Road—Seth Schafler Motion: To open the public hearing Moved by Arthur Wexler seconded by Irene O'Neill Action: Unanimously approved Gregory Lewis, the applicant's architect, and Seth Schafler, the homeowner, addressed the Board to explain the application and the Board discussed the request. There were no public questions or comments. Motion: To close the public hearing Moved by Arthur Wexler seconded by Irene O'Neill Action: Unanimously approved Motion: To approve the requested variance Moved by Randy Heller seconded by Irene O'Neill Action: Unanimously approved RESOLUTION 22 Rockridge Road, Town of Mamaroneck, New York After review, on motion of Randy Heller, seconded by Irene O'Neill, the following resolution was proposed and unanimously ADOPTED by a vote of 5 to 0. WHEREAS, Seth Schafler (the "Applicant")requested a variance for a front portico on the premises located at 22 Rockridge Road, Town of Mamaroneck,New York and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Section 4 Block 12 Lot 152; and WHEREAS, the Building Inspector declined to issue such permit on the following grounds: the proposed front portico will have a front yard setback of 26.4' where 30' is required,pursuant to 240-38 B (1); and further the improvements increase the extent by which the property is nonconforming pursuant to 240-69 for a building in an R-7.5 zoning district(the "Notice of Disapproval"); and WHEREAS, the Applicant submitted to the Zoning Board of the Town of Mamaroneck(the "Board") an application for relief from the requirements from the Town of Mamaroneck Zoning Code; and 9IPage Zoning Board of Appeals December 20, 2023 WHEREAS, the Board examined the plans, inspected the site, reviewed the application and has heard any and all persons interested in this application after publication of a notice thereof and a public hearing thereon; and WHEREAS, this is a Type II action having no significant impact on the environment pursuant to 6 NYCRR§ 617 et. seq. and accordingly, no further action under SEQRA is required, and A. The Board finds that the benefit to the applicant from the granting of the variance outweighs any detriment to the health, safety and welfare of the neighborhood or community. In reaching this conclusion, the Board considered the following factors. i. Whether an undesirable change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood or detriment to nearby properties will be created by granting of the variance. The Board finds that granting the variance will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or detriment to nearby properties because the addition of a portico will improve the appearance of the house. ii. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some means feasible to the applicants other than an area variance. The Board finds that the benefit sought by the applicant cannot be achieved by some method feasible to the applicant not requiring a variance because the existing platform outside the front door is entirely exposed and a portico is needed to provide protection from the elements. iii. Whether the area variance is substantial. The Board finds that the variance is not substantial because it encroaches only 4 feet 8 inches into the required front yard setback. iv. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood. The Board finds that the variance will not adversely impact the local physical or environmental conditions because negligible impact because the portico extends only 4 feet, 8 inches into the required front yard setback. v. Whether the difficulty is self-created. The Board finds that the difficulty is self-created, but this factor is not determinative under the circumstances presented. B. For the reasons stated above, the Board finds that the granting of the variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the Town of Mamaroneck Zoning Ordinance and will not be injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. 10IPage Zoning Board of Appeals December 20, 2023 C. For reasons stated above, the Board finds that the variance is the minimum necessary to alleviate the difficulty detailed in the application yet also preserves and protects the character of the neighborhood and the health safety and welfare of the community. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED,that the subject application be and the same is GRANTED, subject to the following conditions: 1. This variance is limited to the construction shown on the submitted plans as conditioned and/or modified in accordance with the direction of the Board as agreed to by the Applicant. 2. The Applicant shall submit plans reflecting any conditions or modifications as above for the review and approval by the Building Inspector prior to the granting of the building permit. 3. The Applicant shall obtain a building permit within six (6) months of the filing of this resolution. 4. The building permit shall be void if construction is not started within six (6)months. 5. Construction shall be in compliance with the plans submitted in connection with this application, as conditioned or modified pursuant to the direction of the Board. 6. Prior to certificate of occupancy, the Applicant shall submit a final as-built survey to the Town Building Depai intent. This resolution is hereby certified and shall be filed with the Town Clerk. Application No. 6- Case No. ZBA-23-14—833 Fenimore Road—Debra Braun & Peter Smedresman Motion: To open the public hearing Moved by Arthur Wexler seconded by Irene O'Neill Action: Unanimously approved Gregory Lewis, the applicant's architect, and Deborah Braun &Peter Smedresman, the homeowners, addressed the Board to explain the application and the Board discussed the request. There were no public questions or comments. Motion: To close the public hearing Moved by Arthur Wexler seconded by Irene O'Neill Action: Unanimously approved Motion: To approve the requested variance Moved by Jonathan Sacks seconded by Stephen Marsh Action: Unanimously approved 11IPage Zoning Board of Appeals December 20, 2023 RESOLUTION 833 Fenimore Road, Town of Mamaroneck,New York After review, on motion of Jonathan Sacks, seconded by Stephen Marsh, the following resolution was proposed and unanimously ADOPTED by a vote of 5 to 0. WHEREAS, Braun Smedresman (the "Applicant") requested a variance for a car port on the premises located at 833 Fenimore Road, Town of Mamaroneck,New York and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Section 3 Block 20 Lot 479; and WHEREAS, the Building Inspector declined to issue such permit on the following grounds: the proposed car port will have a front yard setback to the facia of 21.5' where 40' is required, pursuant to 240-36 B (1); for a building in an R-15 zoning district(the "Notice of Disapproval"); and WHEREAS, the Applicant submitted to the Zoning Board of the Town of Mamaroneck(the "Board") an application for relief from the requirements from the Town of Mamaroneck Zoning Code; and WHEREAS, the Board examined the plans, inspected the site,reviewed the application and has heard any and all persons interested in this application after publication of a notice thereof and a public hearing thereon; and WHEREAS, this is a Type II action having no significant impact on the environment pursuant to 6 NYCRR§ 617 et. seq. and accordingly, no further action under SEQRA is required, and A. The Board finds that the benefit to the applicant from the granting of the variance outweighs any detriment to the health, safety and welfare of the neighborhood or community. In reaching this conclusion, the Board considered the following factors. i. Whether an undesirable change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood or detriment to nearby properties will be created by granting of the variance. The Board finds that granting the variance will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or detriment to nearby properties because the carport will be rebuilt in the same location at the same size and appearance as was there for 40 years, without complaint. ii. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some means feasible to the applicants other than an area variance. The Board finds that the benefit sought by the applicant cannot be achieved by some method feasible to the applicant not requiring a variance because the property is burdened by unique topography with a lot of rock and a steep hill, so the proposed location is the only feasible location. iii. Whether the area variance is substantial. 12I Page Zoning Board of Appeals December 20, 2023 The Board finds that the variance is not substantial because the car port is well setback and above the existing street line and partially screened within a large open area. iv. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood. The Board finds that the variance will not adversely impact the local physical or environmental conditions because the car port will have no greater impact to runoff, light or air than what was already legally there. v. Whether the difficulty is self-created. The Board finds that the difficulty is self-created, but this factor is not determinative under the circumstances presented. B. For the reasons stated above, the Board finds that the granting of the variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the Town of Mamaroneck Zoning Ordinance and will not be injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. C. For reasons stated above, the Board finds that the variance is the minimum necessary to alleviate the difficulty detailed in the application yet also preserves and protects the character of the neighborhood and the health safety and welfare of the community. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the subject application be and the same is GRANTED, subject to the following conditions: 1. This variance is limited to the construction shown on the submitted plans as conditioned and/or modified in accordance with the direction of the Board as agreed to by the Applicant. 2. The Applicant shall submit plans reflecting any conditions or modifications as above for the review and approval by the Building Inspector prior to the granting of the building permit. 3. The Applicant shall obtain a building permit within six (6)months of the filing of this resolution. 4. The building permit shall be void if construction is not started within six (6)months. 5. Construction shall be in compliance with the plans submitted in connection with this application, as conditioned or modified pursuant to the direction of the Board. 6. Prior to certificate of occupancy, the Applicant shall submit a final as-built survey to the Town Building Department. This resolution is hereby certified and shall be filed with the Town Clerk. 13 Zoning Board of Appeals December 20, 2023 Application No. 7 - Case No. ZBA-23-15 -22 Vine Road—Vine Road Realty Motion: To open the public hearing Moved by Arthur Wexler seconded by Irene O'Neill Action: Unanimously approved Eliot Senor, the engineer and Dean Scampone, the original builder, addressed the Board to explain the application and the Board discussed the request. David Sklarew addressed the Board for his mother, Toby Sklarew who resides at 8 Vine Road, to state they have no objection to the proposed patio. Motion: To close the public hearing Moved by Arthur Wexler seconded by Irene O'Neill Action: Unanimously approved Motion: To approve the requested variance Moved by Stephen Marsh seconded by Jonathan Sacks Action: Unanimously approved RESOLUTION 22 Vine Road, Town of Mamaroneck, New York After review, on motion of Stephen Marsh, seconded by Jonathan Sacks, the following resolution was proposed and unanimously ADOPTED by a vote of 5 to 0. WHEREAS, Vine Road Realty(the "Applicant")requested a variance for a patio on the premises located at 22 Vine Road, Town of Mamaroneck, New York and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Section 1 Block 7 Lot 302; and WHEREAS, the Building Inspector declined to issue such permit on the following grounds: the proposed patio will have a front yard setback of 16' where 30' is required, pursuant to 240-38 B (1); for a building in an R-7.5 zoning district(the "Notice of Disapproval"); and WHEREAS, the Applicant submitted to the Zoning Board of the Town of Mamaroneck(the "Board") an application for relief from the requirements from the Town of Mamaroneck Zoning Code; and WHEREAS, the Board examined the plans, inspected the site, reviewed the application and has heard any and all persons interested in this application after publication of a notice thereof and a public hearing thereon; and WHEREAS, this is a Type II action having no significant impact on the environment pursuant to 6 NYCRR§ 617 et. seq. and accordingly, no further action under SEQRA is required, and 141Pag Zoning Board of Appeals December 20, 2023 A. The Board finds that the benefit to the applicant from the granting of the variance outweighs any detriment to the health, safety and welfare of the neighborhood or community. In reaching this conclusion, the Board considered the following factors. i. Whether an undesirable change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood or detriment to nearby properties will be created by granting of the variance. The Board finds that granting the variance will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or detriment to nearby properties because the patio will be built on-grade and will not be visible from the street or nearby properties. ii. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some means feasible to the applicants other than an area variance. The Board finds that the benefit sought by the applicant cannot be achieved by some method feasible to the applicant not requiring a variance because the house is on a corner lot, burdened by two front yards and the patio will be built in an area that functions as a side yard, which is an appropriate location for usable outdoor space. iii. Whether the area variance is substantial. The Board finds that the variance is not substantial because the patio will utilize permeable pavers and will be flat to the ground. iv. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood. The Board finds that the variance will not adversely impact the local physical or environmental conditions because permeable pavers will allow water to drain and there are no adverse visual impacts since the patio will be on-grade. v. Whether the difficulty is self-created. The Board finds that the difficulty is self-created, but this factor is not determinative under the circumstances presented. B. For the reasons stated above, the Board finds that the granting of the variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the Town of Mamaroneck Zoning Ordinance and will not be injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. C. For reasons stated above, the Board finds that the variance is the minimum necessary to alleviate the difficulty detailed in the application yet also preserves and protects the character of the neighborhood and the health safety and welfare of the community. 15I Page Zoning Board of Appeals December 20, 2023 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED,that the subject application be and the same is GRANTED, subject to the following conditions: 1. This variance is limited to the construction shown on the submitted plans as conditioned and/or modified in accordance with the direction of the Board as agreed to by the Applicant. 2. The Applicant shall submit plans reflecting any conditions or modifications as above for the review and approval by the Building Inspector prior to the granting of the building permit. 3. The Applicant shall obtain a building permit within six (6) months of the filing of this resolution. 4. The building permit shall be void if construction is not started within six (6)months. 5. Construction shall be in compliance with the plans submitted in connection with this application, as conditioned or modified pursuant to the direction of the Board. 6. Prior to certificate of occupancy, the Applicant shall submit a final as-built survey to the Town Building Department. This resolution is hereby certified and shall be filed with the Town Clerk. MINUTES The draft minutes of October 25, 2023 were discussed. Motion: To approve the draft minutes Moved by Randy Heller seconded by Irene O'Neill Abstain: Jonathan Sacks Action: Unanimously approved ADJOURNMENT After concluding all items on the agenda, the meeting was adjourned at 8:20 p.m. Minutes prepared by: Jennifer Ransom Zoning Board of Appeals Secretary 16IPage