Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2023_02_22 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes 47 MINUTES Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting Wednesday, :. February 22,2023 Conference Room C,First Floor 7:00 PM [JLIN[JEL)1641 COUNCIL PRESENT: Arthur Wexler Irene O'Neil Randy Heller Arthur Katz COUNCIL ABSENT: Jonathan Sacks Stephen Marsh Carol Miller ALSO PRESENT: Lisa Hochman, Counsel to the Zoning Board Sabrina Fiddelman, Town Board Francine Brill, Board Secretary CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 7:02 P.M. Ms. Hochman asked Ms. Brill whether the documents to be discussed this evening have been posted on the Town web site 24 hours prior to the meeting. She answered yes. Ms. Brill also confirmed that all applications on for public hearing were duly noticed. Mr. Wexler stated that only three Board members are present and an approval requires an affirmative vote by three members. He said that applicants may request a non-binding straw poll and/or decide to adjourn their matter until next month's meeting. MINUTES The minutes of January 11, 2023 were tabled. APPLICATION NO. 1 -Case No. 3235/3325 -n Gjoko - 176 Myrtle Blvd. Ms. Brill stated the mailing was not done. Don Mazin, the applicant's attorney stated that the applicant appeared before the Board less than one year ago and he believes an additional mailing is not required. Ms. Hochman asked the date the applicant last appeared before the Board and Mr. Mazin said he needed to check. It was decided that the applicant would coordinate any necessary mailing with the Building Depailiiient. Fred Grippi, the applicant's architect,provided a brief explanation of the project. The matter was adjourned. APPLICATION NO. 2 - Case No. 3327 - Mayuk and Liora - 8 Bruce Road Motion: To open the public hearing Moved by Arthur Wexler, seconded by Irene O'Neill Action: Unanimously approved Joseph Carpanzano, of Reliable Fence, addressed the Board on behalf of the owners and explained the request to increase the height of the fence to eight feet. The Board discussed the requested variance. 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 fence variance Moved by Irene O'Neill, seconded by Arthur Wexler Action: Unanimously Approved RESOLUTION 8 Bruce Road, Town of Mamaroneck,New York After review, on motion of Irene O'Neill, seconded by Arthur Wexler, the following resolution was proposed and unanimously ADOPTED by a vote of 3 to 0,with no abstentions. WHEREAS, Mayuk and Liora Sukhatme (the "Applicant") requested a variance for a privacy fence on the premises located at 8 Bruce Road, Town of Mamaroneck, New York and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Section 3, Block 46, Lot 31; and WHEREAS,the Building Inspector declined to issue such permit on the following grounds: The fence as proposed in the rear yard will be 6 feet where 5 feet is permitted pursuant to 250-52A for a building in an R-20 Zone District (the Notice of Disapproval); and WHEREAS, during discussion it was stated that the fence would be 8 feet; and WHEREAS,the Applicant submitted to this Board an application for relief from the requirements from the 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 WHEREAS,the Zoning Board of the town of Mamaroneck makes the following findings as 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 fence is nearly invisible except to homeowners because it abuts the maintenance area of the adjacent golf course and is similar in height and color to the fence owned by the golf course. 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, given the purpose to deter errant golf balls as well as deer, this is the only suitable height and location for the proposed fence and, further, the height of the fence is influenced by the topography of the land. iii. Whether the area variance is substantial. The Board finds that the variance is not substantial because, although the height is substantial, there is no visual impact due to its location. 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 it has no visual impact, adds no bulk and generates no runoff. v. Whether the difficulty is self-created. The Board finds that the difficulty is self-created, but that this factor is not determinative under the circumstances presented. B. For the reasons stated above, 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 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. 3- Case No. 3328 - Site One Landscaping -5 Fifth Avenue Motion: To open the public hearing Moved by Arthur Wexler, seconded by Irene O'Neill Action: Unanimously approved. Jonathan Maurais and Brian Goncalo addressed the Board, stating they appeared before the Board of Architectural and received approval for the sign graffics but the sign is 10 inches taller than code allows. 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 Arthur Wexler Action: Unanimously approved RESOLUTION 5 Fifth Avenue, Town of Mamaroneck,New York After review, on motion of Arthur Wexler, seconded by Irene O'Neill, the following resolution was proposed and unanimously ADOPTED by a vote of 3 to 0, with no abstentions. WHEREAS, Site One Landscaping (the "Applicant") requested a variance for an as built wall sign on the premises located at 5 Fifth Avenue, Town of Mamaroneck, New York and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Section 1, Block 32, Lot 609; and WHEREAS, the Building Inspector declined to issue such permit on the following grounds: The wall sign as installed has a height of 42" where 32" is permitted pursuant to Section 175-11B for a building in an SB-R Zone District(the Notice of Disapproval); and WHEREAS,the Applicant submitted to this Board an application for relief from the requirements from the 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 WHEREAS,the Zoning Board of the town of Mamaroneck makes the following findings as 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 small sign fits well and blends in with the facia of the large building, further, it is consistent with this nearby properties in this area of the Town which is low scale industrial business,it has existed in the same size and location for many years without complaint and was approved by the Town's Board of Architectural Review. Furthermore, it doesn't extend over the height of the building and it is not illuminated. 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, given the shape and size of the facia of the building, the proposed sign is the correct dimension to indicate who is using this space. iii. Whether the area variance is substantial. The Board finds that the variance is not substantial because the sign itself is not large, it is below the allowable square footage and the letters are smaller than allowable. 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 it is relatively small, flush with the building and it is not illuminated. v. Whether the difficulty is self-created. The Board finds that the difficulty is self-created, but that this factor is not determinative under the circumstances presented. B. For the reasons stated above, 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 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. 3329 Julie Vaughn - 768 Forest Avenue Motion: To open the public hearing Moved by Arthur Wexler, seconded by Irene O'Neill Action: Unanimously approved Ms. Vaughn stated that they are trying to legalize the AC units because they are selling the house. She further stated the units were there when they purchased over 20 years ago and were replaced in 2008 when they did a renovation. the units are placed in an area that is well screened and not visible from the neighbors and street. Any other placement would be more invasive. 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 Arthur Wexler Action: Unanimously approved RESOLUTION 768 Forest Avenue,Town of Mamaroneck, New York After review, on motion of Irene O'Neill, seconded by Arthur Wexler, the following resolution was proposed and unanimously ADOPTED by a vote of 3 to 0, with no abstentions. WHEREAS, Julie Vaughn (the "Applicant") requested a variance for air conditioning compressors on the premises located at 768 Forest Avenue,Town of Mamaroneck,New York and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Section 2, Block 23, Lot 76; and WHEREAS,the Building Inspector declined to issue such permit on the following grounds: The air conditioning compressors will have a front yard setback of 15 feet where 30 feet is required pursuant to 240-37B(1) and further it increases the extent by which the building is nonconforming pursuant to Section 240-69 for a building in an R-10 Zone District (the Notice of Disapproval); and WHEREAS,the Applicant submitted to this Board an application for relief from the requirements from the 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 WHEREAS, the Zoning Board of the town of Mamaroneck makes the following findings as 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 compressors are well screened, not visible from the street or nearby properties and have existed for many years with no complaints. 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 and only 18 feet setback from the street and the proposed location is most logical place on the property with no impacts to neighbors. iii. Whether the area variance is substantial. The Board finds that the variance is not substantial because it is well screened and not visible from neighboring properties or the street. 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 is no visual impact because it is well screened with dense vegetation, no runoff and the 76 Dba will not be audible to others. v. Whether the difficulty is self-created. The Board finds that the difficulty is self-created, but that this factor is not determinative under the circumstances presented. B. For the reasons stated above, 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 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. Old Business Ms. Hochman stated that she prepared a draft resolution to be considered by the Board. Those present agreed it should be discussed when more Board members are present. Motion: To table the discussion to March 8, 2023 Moved by Irene O'Neill, seconded by Arthur Katz Action: Unanimously approved ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 8:45 P.M. Minutes prepared by Francine M. Brill, Secretary Zoning Board of Appeals