Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2024_11_20 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes 04 - 47 MINUTES o? ` 7-53 Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting 1 / o November 20, 2024 Conference Room C, First Floor 7:00 PM • FOUNDED 1661 PRESENT: Arthur Wexler, Board Chairman Randy Heller, Board Member Jonathan Sacks, Board Member Stephen Marsh, Board Member Arthur Katz, Alternate Board Member OTHERS PRESENT: Lisa Hochman, Counsel to the Board Richard Polcari, Building Inspector (also acting as Board 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. Mr. Polcari 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. Applications No. 8 and 9 were switched to an earlier spot in the agenda at the suggestion of the Chair. Ms. Hochman stated that because these requests for extension were submitted prior to their expiration, a public hearing is not required. Application No. 8—Case No. 3361 - 110 Murray Avenue - Calogero/Kranz -Request for Extension The Building Inspector stated that the extension request was received prior to its expiration. This variance was originally granted on September 27, 2023, allowing the applicant 12 months to obtain a building permit after Planning Board approval of a residential site plan application. The Planning Board approved the site plan in December 2023. The Board discussed the request and determined it was reasonable to grant a six (6) month extension on the same findings, terms and conditions. Motion: To approve the requested extension Moved by: Jonathan Sacks seconded by Randy Heller Action: Unanimously approved Application No. 9 - ZBA-23-9 23 Alden Road—Sean Mulcahy—Request for Extension Zoning Board of Appeals November 20, 2024 The Building Inspector stated that the extension request was received prior to its expiration. This variance was originally granted on October 25, 2023 and then, on May 22, 2024 the Board granted a request to extend for six (6) months. The Board discussed the request and determined it was reasonable to grant a second six (6) month extension on the same findings,terms and conditions. Motion: To approve the requested extension Moved by: Jonathan Sacks seconded by Randy Heller Action: Unanimously approved Application No. 1 - Case No. ZBA-24-41 — 18 Wagon Wheel Road—Damian Shaible - HVAC Motion: To open the public hearing Moved by: Arthur Wexler seconded by Randy Heller Action: Unanimously approved Paul Semenza, the applicant's contractor, 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 Randy Heller Action: Unanimously approved Motion: To approve the requested variance Moved by: Stephen Marsh seconded by Randy Heller Action: Unanimously approved RESOLUTION 18 Wagon Wheel Road, 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, Damian Shaible (the "Applicant")requested a variance to legalize HVAC on the premises located at 18 Wagon Wheel Road, Town of Mamaroneck, New York and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Section 3 Block 34 Lot 14 .. / 1; and WHEREAS,the Building Inspector declined to issue such permit on the following grounds: As-Built HVAC compressors have a side yard setback of 10'where 15' is required, pursuant to 240-35 B (2)(a); for a building in an R-20 Zoning 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 2IPage Zoning Board of Appeals November 20, 2024 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 in a similar location as the existing units, which have been there over 20 years without complaint, with the same footprint and they are well screened from the neighbor to the left with tall arborvitae. 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 no other location would be reasonable because all wiring and refrigerant lines are set in place so the compressors should be replaced in the same location as those that were previously installed. iii. Whether the area variance is substantial. The Board finds that the variance is not substantial because the compressors are low to the ground, not visible from the street and not seen through the hedge of trees to the left. 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 compressors are replacing 24-year-old units with new,high efficiency,low dba compressors that will be quieter and likely to run less often, due to their efficiency. 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. 3IPage Zoning Board of Appeals November 20, 2024 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 (6) months of the filing of this resolution. 4. The building permit shall be void if construction is not started within (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. 2 - Case No. ZBA-24-47—2 Highridge Road—Dan Neeman -Addition Motion: To open the public hearing Moved by: Arthur Wexler seconded by Randy Heller Action: Unanimously approved Rosamund Young, the applicant's architect and Sharon Neeman 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 Randy Heller Action: Unanimously approved Motion: To approve the requested variance Moved by: Jonathan Sacks seconded by Stephen Marsh Action: Unanimously approved RESOLUTION 2 Highridge Road, Town of Mamaroneck,New York 4IPage Zoning Board of Appeals November 20, 2024 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, Dan Neeman (the "Applicant")requested a variance for an addition on the premises located at 2 Highridge Road, Town of Mamaroneck, New York and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Section 2 Block 13 Lot 538; and WHEREAS,the Building Inspector declined to issue such permit on the following grounds: Proposed one story addition (left) will have a front yard setback of 35.1' where 40' is required,pursuant to 240-36 B (1); Proposed one story addition (center)will have a front yard setback of 29.3'where 40' is required, pursuant to 240-36 B (1); Proposed second story addition will have a front yard setback of 29.3' (Highridge Road) where 40' is required, pursuant to 240-36 B (1); Proposed second story addition will have a front yard setback of 35.8' (mulberry Lane) where 40' is required, pursuant to 240-36 B (1); and further the improvements increase the extent by which the property is nonconforming pursuant to Section 240-69 for a building in an R-15 Zoning 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 house is going to be built within the footprint of the existing structure and the change in elevation triggers need for a variance, even though setbacks will remain the same. Further, the Board finds that the architectural designs improve the appearance of the house and, due to a large right of way,the distance to the curb will appear to comply with the required front yard setback. 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 pre-existing nonconforming and burdened by a fairly large right-of-way on both sides and the second story will be within the existing 5IPage Zoning Board of Appeals November 20, 2024 footprint. Further, the Board determined that the Applicant has gone to lengths to reduce visual massing in the front on one side, improving the overall appearance of the house. iii. Whether the area variance is substantial. The Board finds that the variance is not substantial because the encroachments into the required setbacks are the same as existing encroachments. 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 addition will not impact air, light nor runoff because the small increase in impervious surface will be addressed by the Town's erosion control requirements. 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 (6) months of the filing of this resolution. 4. The building permit shall be void if construction is not started within (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. 6I Zoning Board of Appeals November 20, 2024 Application No. 3 - Case No. ZBA-24-46 -40 Fernwood Rd. - Stephen Williamson - Generator Motion: To open the public hearing Moved by: Arthur Wexler seconded by Randy Heller Action: Unanimously approved Gino Frabasile, the applicant's engineer, and Stephen Williamson, the homeowner, addressed the Board to explain the application and the Board discussed the request. Two (2) photos showing the front exterior of the house marked Exhibit A, were presented to the Board and entered into the record. There were no public questions or comments. The applicant requested an adjournment. The public hearing remains open. Application No. 4 - Case No. ZBA-24-42 - 2 Carriage House Lane -Andrew Zimmerman -Addition Motion: To open the public hearing Moved by: Arthur Wexler seconded by Randy Heller Action: Unanimously approved Andrew Zimmerman the architect and owner, addressed the Board to explain the application and the Board discussed the request. A diagram showing the distance to the road marked Exhibit A, was presented to the Board and entered into the record. There were no public questions or comments. Motion: To close the public hearing Moved by: Arthur Wexler seconded by Jonathan Sacks Action: Unanimously approved Motion: To approve the requested variance Moved by: Jonathan Sacks seconded by Randy Heller Action: Unanimously approved RESOLUTION 2 Carriage House Lane, Town of Mamaroneck, New York After review, on motion of Jonathan Sacks, seconded by Randy Heller, the following resolution was proposed and unanimously ADOPTED by a vote of 5 to 0,with no abstentions. 7I Zoning Board of Appeals November 20, 2024 WHEREAS, Andrew Zimmerman (the"Applicant") requested a variance for an addition on the premises located at 2 Carriage House Lane, Town of Mamaroneck,New York and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Section 3 Block 40 Parcel 721 .. /1; and WHEREAS,the Building Inspector declined to issue such permit on the following grounds: Proposed addition will have a front yard setback of 35.6'where 40'is required, pursuant to 240-35 B (1); Proposed portico will have a front yard setback of 30.5'where 40' is required, pursuant to 240-35 B (1); Proposed steps will have a front yard setback of 30'where 40'is required, pursuant to 240-35 B (1); for a building in an R-20 Zoning 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 addition improves the aesthetic appeal of the house and is consistent with the character of nearby houses. Further, due to the large right-of- way, the portico will appear to comply with the front yard setback requirement. 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 portico is nonconforming and the Board finds that this is the least the applicant can do to increase living space, achieve a more functional bathroom on the second floor and add needed storage. The Board also notes that alternatives are limited because the lot is burdened with a large right-of-way. iii. Whether the area variance is substantial. The Board finds that the variance is not substantial because it is a relatively small amount of added square footage in relation to the size of the house and the large lot. 81 Zoning Board of Appeals November 20, 2024 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 any increase in impervious surface from the overhang is minimal and enough lot area to absorb water and will not impact air or light in the neighborhood. 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 (6) months of the filing of this resolution. 4. The building permit shall be void if construction is not started within (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. 5 - Case No. ZBA-24-14 -45 Cooper Lane - Melissa Kaplan-Macey— Subdivision — Return The application was adjourned at the request of the applicant. 9I n .. Zoning Board of Appeals November 20, 2024 Application No. 6 - Case No. ZBA-24-28 - 59 Myrtle Blvd. - FormTec USA/Michael Charitou—Addition- Return The public hearing remains open. Andrew Zimmerman, the applicant's architect, addressed the Board to explain the application and the Board discussed the request. The architect explained how the proposal has changed in response to comments by Board members and neighbors. The Building Inspector stated that lot coverage is pre-existing nonconforming for the current house and since they are reducing the nonconformity it does not trigger the need for a variance for lot coverage. Russell Columbo, the neighbor at 55 Myrtle Blvd, addressed the Board to express visibility concerns. Five (5) photos, marked Exhibits 1- 5,were presented to the Board and entered into the record. Chris Fathers, the neighbor at 38 Myrtle Blvd, addressed the Board to express concerns. 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: Arthur Wexler seconded by Jonathan Sacks Aye: Arthur Wexler, Jonathan Sacks, Stephen Marsh and Arthur Katz Nay: Randy Heller Action: Approved RESOLUTION 59 Myrtle Blvd., Town of Mamaroneck,New York After review, on motion of Arthur Wexler, seconded by Jonathan Sacks, the following resolution was proposed and unanimously ADOPTED by a vote of 4 to 1,with no abstentions. WHEREAS, FormTec USA/Michael Charitou (the "Applicant") requested a variance for an addition on the premises located at 59 Myrtle Blvd., Town of Mamaroneck, New York and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Section 1 Block 24 Lot 573; and WHEREAS,the Building Inspector declined to issue such permit on the following grounds: Proposed addition will have a front yard setback of 18.0'where 30'is required,pursuant to 240-39 B (1); Proposed front steps will have a front yard setback of 15' where 30'is required, pursuant to 240-39 B (1); Proposed rear deck will have a rear yard setback of 15.3' where 25' is required, pursuant to 240-39 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-6 Zoning 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 10IPage Zoning Board of Appeals November 20, 2024 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, Board members expressed concern about how the Town stormwater requirements would apply, given that the percentage of lot coverage has been reduced; and WHEREAS,the Building Inspector stated that the project would require a stormwater and erosion control permit through the Town's Engineering Department and that it would be advisable to capture downspouts into an onsite stormwater system (Cultecs) and/or the existing stormwater system; 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 front and rear yard setback encroachments will be less than what is there now and there will be no encroachment into required side yard setbacks. Further, the house is 23.5 feet to the vertical line of the building, which is almost in line with the neighbor to the left and the space between houses will remain the same. The Board noted that surrounding older homes are much smaller, however, homes on the same side of the street, which are more recently built, are of similar size and the character of the street seems to be moving in that direction. 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 this lot is unique because it is very wide with shallow, substandard depth. In response to comments from Board members and neighbors, the applicant has made many revisions,resulting in a house which meets nearly all zoning requirements, other than the front and rear yard setbacks. iii. Whether the area variance is substantial. The Board finds that the variance is not substantial because the house is in line with the adjacent homes and only encroaches into the required front yard setback and only the deck encroaches into the required rear yard setback. iv. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood. 11IPage Zoning Board of Appeals November 20, 2024 The Board finds that the variance will not adversely impact the local physical or environmental conditions because a Town stormwater and erosion control permit will be required due to the fact that there will be more than 100 square feet of disturbance. In addition, the applicant agreed to a condition that all downspouts will be captured into an onsite stormwater system (Cultecs) and/or the existing stormwater system. 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 (6) months of the filing of this resolution. 4. The building permit shall be void if construction is not started within (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. 7. To the satisfaction of the Town Engineer, all downspouts will be captured into an onsite stormwater system (Cultecs) and/or the existing stormwater system. This resolution is hereby certified and shall be filed with the Town Clerk. Application No. 7 - Case No. ZBA-24-21 -217 Hommocks Road - Hannah & Thomas Saujet—Return The public hearing remains open. 12 Zoning Board of Appeals November 20, 2024 Alec Gladd, the applicant's attorney, and Thomas Saujet, the homeowner, addressed the Board to explain the application and the Board discussed the request. The gates will be painted Gray—Benjamin Moore Windy City CSP-150. Four(4) Photos with renderings of the gates, submitted and marked Exhibits 1 —4, were presented to the Board and entered into the record. 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 Aye: Stephen Marsh, Randy Heller, Jonathan Sacks, Arthur Wexler Nay: Arthur Katz Action: Approved RESOLUTION 217 Hommocks Road, 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 4 to 1,with no abstentions. WHEREAS, Hannah & Thomas Saujet(the "Applicant") requested a variance for legalization of two gates on the premises located at 217 Hommocks Road, Town of Mamaroneck,New York and known on the Tax Assessment Map of the Town of Mamaroneck as Section 4 Block 17 Lot 1; and WHEREAS,the Building Inspector declined to issue such permit on the following grounds: Two gates having a height of 6.3' and 5.7' where 5' is permitted, pursuant to 240-52B; for a property in an R-50 Zoning District (the "Notice of Disapproval"); and WHEREAS,the Building Inspector clarified that the height of the first gate is 6.4' and the height of the second gate is 6.9'; 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 13I Page Zoning Board of Appeals November 20, 2024 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 applicant has agreed to paint the gates a specified gray color to soften their appearance from the street and blend better with surrounding stonework. Although Board members expressed more objection to the opaque nature of the gates, as opposed to their height, some Board members found this to be mitigated by the top one-foot lattice of each gate, which allows partial visibility. The Board notes that this situation is unique because the lot is very large, with one of the gates set so far back from the street that it is not visible unless viewed from directly in front of it and both gates are adjacent to large stone stanchions which mitigate the visual impact of the gates. Further, the property is at nearly the end of Hommocks Road, a dead-end street, so there will be few people passing by. Finally, there have been no objections from neighbors or residents and several neighbors have submitted letters of support. 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 removal and replacement of the gates was deemed by the Board to be unreasonable for several reasons. The Town made the initial mistake to approve the permit for the first gate, then once the mistake was corrected, the second gate was installed in error by the contractor. Further, the applicant has demonstrated that it would be very costly to remove and replace the gates and it is unclear whether the homeowner has a cause of action against the contractor. The Board notes that the applicant was responsive to Board concerns and has agreed to paint the gates with a color approved by the Board. iii. Whether the area variance is substantial. The Board finds that the variance is not substantial because there are other gates of similar height nearby, the one-foot lattice topper allows light and air to pass through and the gates are located near the end of a dead-end road, with no objections from neighbors or other residents. 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 by changing the paint color from white to gray, the visual impact is sufficiently softened and there are no other physical or environmental impacts. v. Whether the difficulty is self-created. 14IPage Zoning Board of Appeals November 20, 2024 The Board finds that because the Town erroneously approved the first gate, the difficulty is only partially self-created. Further, the Board finds 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 (6)months of the filing of this resolution. 4. The building permit shall be void if construction is not started within (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 anent. 7. Both gates shall be painted Benjamin Moore—Windy City (Gray) CSP-150. This resolution is hereby certified and shall be filed with the Town Clerk. MINUTES The draft minutes of October 23rd were discussed. Motion: To approve the draft minutes Moved by: Jonathan Sacks seconded by Randy Heller Approved by: Unanimously Approved The meeting was adjourned at 9:45 pm. 15I Page Zoning Board of Appeals November 20, 2024 Minutes prepared by: Richard Polcari Jennifer Ransom Building Inspector Zoning Board of Appeals Secretary 16IPage