Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2024_05_24 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes 0(< 'Li MINUTES Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting 7,3 o / o April 24,2024 ~ Conference Room C, First Floor 7:00 PM FOUNDED 1661 PRESENT: Arthur Wexler, Board Chairman Jonathan Sacks, Board Member Randy Heller, Board Member Stephen Marsh, Board Member Arthur Katz, Alternate Board Member OTHERS PRESENT: Lisa Hochman, Counsel to the Board Richard Polcari, Building Inspector Jennifer Ransom, Zoning Board of Appeals Secretary ABSENT: Irene O'Neill, Board Member Carol Miller, Alternate Board Member Anant Nambiar, Town Board Liaison The meeting commenced at 7:01 p.m. Given the absence of Ms. O'Neill, Mr. Katz as second Alternate, assumed the role of Board Member. 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. ZBA-24-8 645 Forest Avenue—Carol Jordan—AC Condensers Motion: To open the public hearing Moved by: Arthur Wexler seconded by Randy Heller Action: Unanimously approved Carol Jordan, the applicant, addressed the Board to explain the application and the Board discussed the request. Mr. Sacks asked the Building Inspector if there had any complaints and he indicated no. There were no public questions or comments. Motion: To close the public hearing Moved by: Arthur Wexler seconded by Jonathan Sacks Action: Unanimously approved Zoning Board of Appeals April 24, 2024 Motion: To approve the requested variance Moved by: Jonathan Sacks seconded by Stephen Marsh Action: Unanimously approved RESOLUTION 645 Forest Avenue,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, with no abstentions. WHEREAS, Carol Jordan (the "Applicant")requested a variance for air conditioning condensers on the premises located at 645 Forest Avenue, Town of Mamaroneck, New York and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Section 1,Block 15,Parcel 143; and WHEREAS, the Building Inspector declined to issue such permit on the following grounds: "Existing A/C condensers have a rear yard setback of 16.0'where 25' is required, pursuant to 240-38 B (3); and further the improvements increase the extent by which the property is nonconforming pursuant to Section 240-69 for a building in an R-7.5 Zone 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 units are placed in an unobtrusive location and most other locations would require a variance. In addition, the Board noted that the units are maximum distance from the rear neighbor. Further, the units have been there since 2004 (perhaps longer) without complaint per the Building Inspector. 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 April 24, 2024 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 there is no other practical location and it would be unreasonably burdensome and unnecessary to re-locate the pre-existing, unobjectionable units. iii. Whether the area variance is substantial. The Board finds that the variance is not substantial because these types of units and encroachments are common throughout the Town and the units existed for more than twenty years without complaint. 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 impact to light, runoff and air and negligible noise. 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. 31 Zoning Board of Appeals April 24, 2024 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. 2 - Case No. ZBA-24-9 1 Daymon Terrace—Nancy Sagl-Abrams —As-built Addition, Deck, Bay Window Motion: To open the public hearing Moved by: Arthur Wexler seconded by Stephen Marsh Action: Unanimously approved Jim Fleming, the applicant's architect, and Mark Abrams, the applicant, addressed the Board to explain the application and the Board discussed the request. The applicant explained that they discovered that the survey was wrong, which only came to light during the legalization of the deck and further explained that the updated (more accurate) survey showed a small additional encroachment of the addition into the front yard setback. Three (3) letters of support from neighbors were presented to the Board and entered into the record, marked Exhibit A. There were no public questions or comments. Motion: To close the public hearing Moved by: Arthur Wexler seconded by Randy Heller Action: Unanimously approved Motion: To approve the requested variance Moved by: Stephen Marsh seconded by Randy Heller Action: Unanimously approved RESOLUTION 1 Daymon Terrace, 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,with no abstentions. WHEREAS, Nancy Sagl-Abrams (the"Applicant") requested a variance for an as-built addition,deck & bay Window on the premises located at 1 Daymon Terrace, Town of Mamaroneck, New York and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Section 1,Block 12,Parcel 648; and WHEREAS, the Building Inspector declined to issue such permit on the following grounds: "Addition has a front yard setback of 18.1' where 30' is required,pursuant to 240-39 B (1); Bay window has a front yard setback of 16.2'where 30' is required, pursuant to 240-39 B (1); Deck has a side yard setback of 4.7'where 8' is required, pursuant to 240-39 B (2)(a); and further the improvements increase the extent by which the property is 4IPage Zoning Board of Appeals April 24, 2024 nonconforming pursuant to Section 240-69 for a building in an R-6 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 front yard has a large right-of-way, making it feel considerably larger than the dimensions would indicate, mitigating the impact of encroachment by the addition and bay window into the front yard. The deck encroachment into the side yard setback is well screened by the house, a garage and large arborvitaes. Also, the addition and bay window encroachments were awarded variances in 2004 by a prior Town ZBA and have been there for 20 years without any 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 Board noted that the triangular shape of the lot severely constrains any as-of-right development. Regarding the front yard variances, any change to the front of the house would require a variance. In addition, the Board noted that the bay window is an architectural feature. There is no reasonable alternative for the encroachment created by the deck because it makes the most of an almost unusable space and it is the minimum size necessary to achieve functionality of the limited outdoor space. iii. Whether the area variance is substantial. The Board finds that the variance is not substantial because there is a school playground across the street(as opposed to residences), which minimizes any impact of the front yard encroachments and the deck adds no massing to the house, is well screened and encroaches no more into the side yard than the pre-existing garage. iv. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood. 5IPage Zoning Board of Appeals April 24, 2024 The Board finds that the variance will not adversely impact the local physical or environmental conditions because the front yard addition and the small bay window do not impact any nearby residences and the deck is a pervious, open rail structure which allows light, air and water to pass through. 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. MINUTES The draft minutes of March 27, 2024 were discussed. Motion: To approve the draft minutes Moved by: Jonathan Sacks seconded by Randy Heller Abstain: Stephen Marsh, Arthur Katz 6I Zoning Board of Appeals April 24, 2024 Approved by: Arthur Wexler, Jonathan Sacks, Randy Heller ADJOURNMENT After concluding all items on the agenda, the meeting was adjourned at 7:43 p.m. Minutes prepared by: Jennifer Ransom Zoning Board of Appeals Secretary 7I